By Raquel Carter, Lexington For Everyone Board Member
A proposed ordinance being considered by the Planning Commission would stifle community input, add cost and bureaucracy to the planning process, and impede future distinctive local developments similar to Southland Drive, the Distillery District, Turner Commons and National Avenue. Lexington already has a 363-page document that determines how our community is developed.
And the city’s own study of the planning process, which is just sitting on a shelf and cost taxpayers $135,000, shows that it takes more than twice as long to get through the development process here than the national average. For subdivision plans, it’s even worse. It takes 523 days for approval here vs. 45 days in our peer city of Greenville, S.C.
Here are three reasons why this ordinance should be rejected:
- It would prohibit citizens from initiating a request for the Planning Commission and Council to amend the planning process. That change would rewrite more than 50 years of established process and take away a guarantee in Section I of the Kentucky Constitution to petition all governing authorities. Zoning regulations are by nature a restriction on property rights. Under this existing right, citizens are merely asking the Commission and Council to consider amending a zoning regulation.
- Instead of acting on the recommendations of the study that it commissioned and funded, the Planning Commission has decided to consider more than 60 pages of additional red tape to the planning process. That isn’t going to help us build the 22,000 housing units that Lexington is lacking.
- The proposed restrictions, if they had been in place at the time of development, would prohibit local neighborhood gems such as restaurants on Rosemont Garden because of a prohibition of parking spots where cars must back out onto a street; or Turner Commons, National Avenue and the Distillery District because they are within 100 feet of a railroad. Southland’s busy shopping district wouldn’t include a bank because of the drive-through restrictions. It’s these types of unintended consequences that must be considered through thoughtful deliberation rather than a rush to pass unnecessary bureaucracy.
The commission is set to vote on these new impediments at the end of the month. The draft was just made public at the end of January. Some will say that it’s in response to House Bill 443, which passed last year and goes into effect in July. Ironically, it was meant to cut down on subjective and burdensome bureaucracy that exceeded the scope of the comprehensive plan. Instead, Lexington is attempting to circumvent the requirement and double down on bureaucracy. That’s why no other city in the commonwealth is making changes because of HB 443. The 363-page Comprehensive Plan should be enough.
We say we value community input. We claim we want infill and redevelopment. But these actions tell a different story.
Let’s implement the action items from the city’s own study and slow down before adding bureaucracy to ensure that the planning process is more efficient and actually reflects the values we espouse.
Raquel Carter, a board member of Lexington for Everyone, is also chair of the Board of Adjustments.