PUBLIC INPUT REPORT 2018 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE
APRIL 26, 2017
Page intentionally left blank
Imagine Lexington Public Input Report
Table of Contents Executive Summary .......................................................... 3 Introduction........................................................................ 7 Methodology ...................................................................... 8 Input & Outreach Methods............................................... 10 Public Input Findings ....................................................... 17 1. Growth...................................................................... 18 2. Transportation .......................................................... 33 3. Greenspace .............................................................. 42 4. Public Outreach ........................................................ 51 5. Employment ............................................................. 58 6. Issue Specific ........................................................... 65 7. Other ........................................................................ 72 Conclusion and Next Steps ............................................. 79 Appendix A. 79 Initial Themes Graphic ........................................ 80 B. Imagine Lexington Public Input Form ....................... 81 C.Emerge Conference Live Poll Results ...................... 87 D.Community Organization Input ................................. 89
Page | 2
Imagine Lexington Public Input Report
Executive Summary INTRODUCTION
Public input is a crucial part of any planning process and is exceedingly important for comprehensive planning, which sets the vision for future development. The Imagine Lexington process takes this to heart, with a robust public input strategy utilizing new methods and partnerships to put a finger on the pulse of Lexington citizens. The information gathered will help to inform decision makers as they consider the Goals & Objectives of the current 2018 Comprehensive Plan update, and will continue to be useful throughout the update process. Over 11,000 individuals participated in one of the many available opportunities, contributing around 10,000 comments to the conversation. These comments and general public input originated from various opportunities including:
On the Table, a massive collaborative effort between the Division of Planning, the Blue Grass Community Foundation, Leadership Lexington and Fayette County Public Schools Five public input meetings with numerous ways to participate Public Input Form distributed at the meetings and available online Community Organization Meetings, offering an opportunity for organizations to present focused input Emerge Conference and Survey, hosted by Commerce Lexington which included almost 400 emerging leaders and young professionals
This Public Input Report will provide the reader with a summary of all the input and outreach opportunities, the methodology by which they were analyzed, and the findings which outline the broad results via themes revealed through analysis. The input gathered and presented in this report was extracted through a variety of methods, which are not statistically significant, but rather present a snapshot of those who wished to participate in the process, and desired to reveal their comments in the specified ways. The information presented within this report is offered without commentary and is simply an account of what the public shared with the Division of Planning throughout the public input phase of the Goals & Objectives
METHODOLOGY
In order to make use of the high volume of comments within a short timeframe, a strategy was created which employed the entire Division of Planning staff. Ultimately all comments were aggregated and categorized within one of the seven general categories; Growth; Transportation; Greenspace; Public Outreach; Employment; Issue Specific; and Other. From there, the comments were subcategorized into more specific groupings. The number of subcategories per category was dependent upon the comments in each general category. Of these subcategories, themes emerged, which are the ultimate takeaways from the findings presented in this report. A good way to think of this is a consistent boiling down or reduction of the raw comments. There are certainly limitations to the information, as it does not account for each individual comment, but as the information was not extracted in a purely scientific manner it is not appropriate to draw conclusions simply based on the number of times a particular topic or position was mentioned. Staff concluded the methodology described here would be the best possible way to draw useful conclusions, given less than a month and a half to digest the large amount of data gathered through the public input process.
Page | 3
Imagine Lexington Public Input Report
Public Comment
General Category
Subcategory
Theme
FINDINGS
Growth – 1,619 comments Subcategories: Urban Service Area Boundary Infill and Redevelopment Affordable Housing and Gentrification; Downtown Growth Strategies Horse Farms Process Density PDR Regional Planning Public Outreach The Urban Service Area Boundary was the most discussed issue from the Growth Category, with the majority of participants advocating for not expanding its limits. However, there were a few comments supporting a limited expansion. Infill and redevelopment were also heavily discussed, as was affordable housing and gentrification. Transportation – 1,654 comments Subcategories: Public Transit Traffic/Congestion Connectivity/Accessibility Bike/Pedestrian/Trails Safety; Parking Maintenance Other Multi-modal transportation options were a popular topic of conversation, with the bike/pedestrian/trails subcategory logging the most comments submitted. Public transit and general traffic and congestion concerns were also prevalent. Greenspace – 1,777 comments Subcategories: Parks and Gathering Spaces Farms, Landscapes and Rural Assets Nature Areas and the Environment Trees Downtown Greenspace Greenspace, General Access to Greenspace
Page | 4
Imagine Lexington Public Input Report Parks and gathering spaces were the most popular topics of discussion; the general consensus from the comments is that the public has a strong attachment, appreciation and understanding of all things green. Public Outreach – 660 comments Subcategories: Intercommunity Interaction Government Communication and Community Interaction Government Transparency Other Government communication was listed as key to maintaining a healthy relationship with the public. Some skeptisicm was shown on the part of participants, but overall they seemed engaged and excited by new and innovative public outreach techniques. Employment – 386 comments Subcategories: Business and Industries Farm-toTable Equine Jobs Training and Education Business Infrastructure Wages Land Though this category was not among the largest recipients of comments, those who did address this issue primarily focused on specific employment sectors like high-tech and manufacturing. Some did discuss a need for more employment opportunities across the board, as well as focused training and education efforts. Issue Specific – 1,321 comments Subcategories: Homelessness Education Drugs/Crime Safety Social Services/Government Services Philanthropy Other This category included many social-related issues such as homelessness, panhandling, the heroin/opiate epidemic, and many other difficult topics. The comments included highlighting the issue and taking aim at possible solutions and improvements to social services to help address the underlying issues. Other – 1,834 comments Subcategories: Diversity Livability and Quality of Life Downtown Events, Activities and Things to Do Page | 5
Imagine Lexington Public Input Report Lexington Branding University Arts and Culture Other Cities Even as somewhat of a catch-all category, this had more comments than any other. The majority of responses categorized, and the most popular subcategory in this Report, was Livability and Quality of Life. Overwhelmingly, participants expressed contentment with Lexington’s quality of life, and generally want to see current efforts expanded. Most of the responses in this category were positive.
CONCLUSION
This comprehensive analysis of every public comment the Division of Planning has received from all sources is meant to provide context and aid in the drafting of the Goals and Objectives of the Comprehensive Plan over the next few months. Attempts have been made to fairly and accurately convey the broad sentiments of the public as they have provided them through public meetings and questionnaires. This process provided multiple opportunities and methods for giving input on this step of the planning process, and, in many ways, was an unprecedented effort at reaching out to the public. This public input data is extremely dense and this reporting strives to bring some order to what is an extremely copious amount of commentary. For the most part, attempts have been made to refrain from drawing conclusions from the data and comments provided. Instead, staff wanted to convey the topics most on the minds of Lexingtonians. From those topics, the goal was to broadly present their sentiments without making it simply a straw poll type of analysis. As for the next steps, after the Planning Commission has completed the Goals and Objectives, the expectation is that this report and its foundational raw data will be used by other divisions in government in drafting their own plan updates, as well as other by community organizations in targeting their efforts and spending. The data, and the Division of Planning’s work organizing it, will be made wholly public for anyone to use. In short, this massive, collaborative public input process is a foundation for others in the community to build on, a resource that will inform any civic organization or individual that wants to help address community needs, not just the government.
Page | 6
Imagine Lexington Public Input Report
Introduction Public input is a crucial part of any planning process and is exceedingly important for comprehensive planning, which sets the vision for future development. The Imagine Lexington process takes this to heart, with a robust public input strategy utilizing new methods and partnerships to put a finger on the pulse of Lexington citizens. The information gathered will help to inform decision makers as they consider the Goals & Objectives of the current 2018 Comprehensive Plan update, and will continue to be useful throughout the update process. Over 11,000 individuals participated in one of the many available opportunities, contributing around 10,000 comments. The Division of Planning is incredibly pleased with the success and participation in this phase of the plan and believes it illustrates an active and engaged population desiring to do their part to build community. A large number of these participants were involved in On the Table, a massive collaborative effort between the Division of Planning, the Blue Grass Community Foundation, Leadership Lexington and Fayette County Public Schools, resulting in informal conversations taking place all over the city. The participants contributed written comments, filled out a survey to be analyzed in the future, and generally created an atmosphere of community and comradery. The information gleaned from this brand new format was plentiful, enlightening, and useful. The hope is that not only will the city be able to use the data in the policymaking arena, but by getting the conversation started amongst neighbors and friends, more grassroots efforts will follow. On the Table was a large contributor to our process, but several other public input mechanisms generated large numbers of comments as well. Open house public meetings, public input forms, a young professional conference, and many other opportunities were key to completing the public input strategy. Both traditional and new/experimental techniques contributed to the fullness of the input received. This report will provide the reader with a summary of all the input and outreach opportunities, the methodology by which they were analyzed, and the findings which outline the broad results via themes revealed through analysis. The input gathered and presented in this report was extracted through a variety of methods, which are not statistically significant, but rather present a snapshot of those who wished to participate in the process, and desired to reveal their comments in the specified ways. The breadth of the input strategy and the number of citizens reached helps to paint a clear picture, an indication of the public’s opinion; but, as with most outreach approaches, there are some populations who are not represented. Additionally, it is important to stress that the information presented within this report is offered without commentary and is simply an account of what the public shared with the Division of Planning throughout the public input phase of the Goals & Objectives. The data and analysis within will be incredibly useful in the preparation of these Goals & Objectives and will be one of many inputs considered. The Division is also excited about the usefulness of this information for various other citizen organizations and governmental entities.
Page | 7
Imagine Lexington Public Input Report
Methodology The volume of information supplied by the public input methods above provided a challenge for the Division of Planning staff to distill the comments and data into meaningful and actionable information in a short timeframe. While it was undoubtedly a wonderful problem to have, illustrating an engaged citizenry and productive outreach effort, it required a methodology capable of a quick turnaround while ensuring the voices of those who chose to participate were given due consideration. Step one to organizing the information, originating from multiple sources in different variations, was to set a common framework applicable to all comments, allowing them to be aggregated across the board. It was determined that each individual thought should be considered a separate comment, and that each of these should be recorded based upon its applicability to one of seven general categories:
Employment (jobs, wage issues, siting of employers, etc.) Greenspace (neighborhood parks, downtown public spaces, rural land, etc.) Growth (regionalism, infill, density, preservation, urban service area, etc.) Issue Specific (location-specific concerns, public health/social issues, community services, etc.) Other (livability, education, diversity, etc.) Public Outreach (meeting formats, input gathering mechanisms, online presence, etc.) Transportation (public transportation, bike/ped systems, traffic management, etc.)
Planning staff from across the division were given packets of comments, approximately 20 pages long, with specific instructions on how to categorize the comments. Though they were working from a standard set of rules, inevitably there was some variation amongst the participants. However, given the short timeframe, this was the best possible solution to maximize the manpower. In addition to categorizing the comments, staff was also tasked with extracting recurring themes and big ideas from each individual packet. The purpose of this exercise was to draw out initial themes and ideas to give the Planning Commission and the public an early look at the content of the public input before the full report. This process revealed 79 initial themes that covered a wide range of topics. A graphic of these initial themes is included in the appendix. It was clear from the initial categorization of the individual comments that a lot of work still remained to dig deeper into the data. The most general categories, Issue-Specific and Other, resulted in the highest number of comments, and though some themes emerged, it was obvious a more specific categorization of the comments would yield even more pointed results. Long-range planning staff set about breaking each of the seven initial categories down into more specific subcategories. The starting point for this endeavor was the initial categorization of the On the Table comments, to which comments from the Public Input Form and other input methods (described in the subsequent section) were added. Staff typed in the majority of the around 10,000 comments; individual spreadsheets were created for each of the seven categories, and those spreadsheets were reviewed by staff members. Upon initial reading of the comments, staff created unifying subcategories they felt would capture the essence of most of the comments in their general category. Each singular comment Page | 8
Imagine Lexington Public Input Report was then either marked as meeting one or more of the subcategories created and/or flagged as needing to be moved into another general category. It is important to note that each raw comment listed in a general category could be accounted for in multiple subcategories within that category, as well as subcategories in other categories. In these instances these raw comments could account for multiple “comments” within this report. Staff thought this was important as some raw comments spoke to multiple issues. After subcategories had been identified, and comments marked, each subcategory was then examined by staff for common themes. These themes were not identified via any scientific approach, but true to the rest of the process, are reflective of the individual lens reviewing the comments. No tallies were recorded for these themes and they were identified by the reviewer by simply looking through comments, which they were very familiar with by this time. These themes provided the most useful expression of the full complement of comments provided by all individuals who participated in the Imagine Lexington public input process. A good way to think of this is a consistent boiling down or reduction of the raw comments. This process was designed to provide some useful and tangible takeaways from the massive quantity of data. There are certainly limitations to the information, and they do not account for each individual comment, but as the information was not extracted in a purely scientific manner it is not appropriate to draw conclusions simply based on the number of times a particular topic or position was mentioned. Staff concluded the methodology described here was the best possible way to draw useful conclusions given less than a month and a half to digest the large amount of data gathered through the public input process. The raw data, upon which this analysis is based, is fully available to the public in a separate document.
Public Comment
General Category
Subcategory
Theme
Page | 9
Imagine Lexington Public Input Report
Input & Outreach Methods WEBSITE
The Comprehensive Plan relies heavily on public input, so it can be a plan of and for the citizens it serves. In order for the people to understand the background and process of the Comprehensive Plan, The Division of Planning staff created a website, www.imaginelexington.com. This website contains data on Lexington’s comprehensive planning history, resources for the public to learn more about the Imagine Lexington process, and information regarding how they can get involved. Additionally, in an attempt to increase transparency and accessibility, all data given to the planning commission during work sessions, as well as all presentations and educational materials distributed, are available and downloadable. In order to make the website friendly and approachable, staff has incorporated numerous photos and graphics so it provides a useful and enjoyable experience for the public.
SOCIAL MEDIA
In order to further reach out to the public, The Division of Planning staff created three social media accounts for Imagine Lexington – Facebook, Twitter and Instagram. The intent of these accounts is threefold. First, planning staff wished to be accessible to the public so that, if there are questions or concerns, citizens can approach staff directly. Second, the Division of Planning wanted to make the comprehensive planning process as transparent as possible. Social media accounts allow for easy sharing of photos and information, letting the public stay up-to-date and current with progress and happenings relating to Imagine Lexington. Finally, the Division of Planning desired to reach all generations, including those who may not typically attend public input meetings. Inclusiveness is incredibly important to ensure all voices are heard and incorporated into the Comprehensive Plan.
Page | 10
Imagine Lexington Public Input Report
IMAGINE LEXINGTON PUBLIC INPUT MEETINGS
Lexington-Fayette Urban County Government’s Division of Planning hosted five public input meetings in February 2017, in addition to the other public input opportunities outlined here, and the Planning Commission’s forthcoming public hearings on Imagine Lexington, the 2018 Comprehensive Plan Update. Lexington has a rich history of progressive planning, and staff knows the value of public input both to shape the plan and to provide community buy-in into the final product, therefore staff attempted to provide as many opportunities for public input as possible. At the five meetings, geographically scattered throughout Lexington, there were approximately 200 members of the public in attendance. Staff even hosted a meeting during normal business hours at the new Lexington Senior Center, so people with non-traditional work hours could attend.
Page | 11
Imagine Lexington Public Input Report Staff advertised these meetings in a variety of ways, including traditional media and the Imagine Lexington Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram accounts. The Herald Leader ran a couple of stories with the times and locations of the meetings, and a legal ad was placed in the newspaper as well. Additionally, staff placed physical flyers at dozens of locations around town, including restaurants, coffee shops, community centers and more. The Division of Planning structured these meetings in an open house format, with a group introduction at the outset. This introduction included an explanation of the history and purpose of the Comprehensive Plan, as well as discussion about the future population and demographic projections expected for Lexington in the next 20 years. Following the presentation, attendees were encouraged to explore stations based on each of the 2013 Comprehensive Plan’s themes, and ask staff any questions they may have. These meetings also incorporated additional opportunities for public input, which are detailed below.
IMAGINE LEXINGTON ARROWS
As members of the public walked in the door to the Public Input Meetings, they were given an opportunity to answer the prompt, “I imagine Lexington…” on a colorful cutout arrow bearing the Imagine Lexington logo. The arrows were left open-ended to provide for genuine responses, as staff did not want to lead responses in any particular direction. At the end of the five public input meetings, staff received 59 arrows with varying stories and opinions voiced. This data is included within this Public Input Data Report.
IMAGINE LEXINGTON DOLLARS
While visiting the Jobs & Prosperity station at the public input meetings, members of the public had an opportunity to “vote” for the type of future jobs they would like to see in Lexington. Each member of the public was given an Imagine Lexington Dollar, on which they could write their desired job and place it in one of the following boxes; 1) manufacturing, construction, transportation and warehousing 2) accommodations, retail, food services, entertainment, recreation and arts, 3) agriculture, local, state and federal government, 4) professional, technical and personal services, and 5) healthcare, social assistance and education. In total, 34 Imagine Lexington Dollars were placed in the boxes; this data is included within this Public Input Data Report.
Page | 12
Imagine Lexington Public Input Report “EXPRESS YOURSELF” MAP
The Express Yourself Map was created in order to draw from the public what they like and dislike about Lexington. Members of the public were directed to place happy or angry smileyface stickers over specific parts of town to indicate their feelings about various aspects of the city. The stickers were a great visual but did not tell the whole story, so pieces of paper were situated next to the Express Yourself Map to give those who placed stickers on the map the ability to detail why they placed their stickers where they did and what makes them feel happy or angry about that particular location. There were eighty-seven stickers placed on the Map, with fifty comments written comments. This data is included within this Public Input Data Report.
“WHERE ARE YOU FROM?” MAP
So that The Division of Planning Staff could better learn how to reach the people of Lexington, and especially, to know which neighborhoods were not being represented, the Where Are You From? Map was set up so that members of the public could place a pin over their home. A total of fifty-seven pins were placed in the map.
PUBLIC INPUT FORM
Also available at all five of the Public Input Meetings, as well as online, the Public Input Form included twelve questions based on themes from the 2013 Comprehensive Plan. Imagine Lexington’s Public Input Form was available online from the beginning of February 2017 through the end of March 2017, and 219 individual responses were gathered, accounting for thousands of individual comments on a broad range of topics. The online version of the form was hosted on Google Forms and recorded not only the long-form responses, but also a couple of additional questions, including whether or not the respondents have participated in previous comprehensive plans. Have you been engaged in Lexington’s comprehensive planning process before?
A staggering 78% of those who responded said they have not participated in the Comprehensive Planning process before. A variety of conclusions could be drawn by this figure, but it undeniably shows there is interest in Imagine Lexington from outside the standard groups who typically contribute to comprehensive plan updates year after year. This Public Input Form, combined with the non-traditional On the Table event that occurred March 15, 2017, ensure this plan is well-informed, and planning staff see this as an exciting opportunity to hear fresh ideas and perspectives from previously untapped sources. Over half of the respondents to the Public Input Form heard about the input opportunity through some type of electronic method (email, Facebook, Twitter, email); still more probably heard about it via another electronic source, and were part of the 26.8% who responded with “other”. Page | 13
Imagine Lexington Public Input Report Only 12.9% of those who filled out the form stated they heard it from either print media or via flyer. All the Public Input Form data is included within this Public Input Data Report, and a copy of the form is included in the appendix.
EDUCATIONAL VIDEOS
Early in 2017, the Division of Planning staff developed a three-part educational video series with the assistance of GTV3. These simultaneously released videos tackle the components of a community, is the definition of a comprehensive plan, and the reasons why the public should get involved in the Imagine Lexington process. Each plays upon a food theme that complements the On the Table initiative (see below). “What makes a Community?” compares a community to a pizza, likening each of the ingredients to specific parts of a community. “What is a Comprehensive Plan?” compares a comprehensive plan to a community cookbook that contains the recipes for success. And “Why Should I Get Involved?” stresses that individual voices matter, showing images of a lively and inviting dining scene. Each video was hosted on the website and social media; replayed continually on GTV3; was part of the public input meetings; and was prominently featured at “Lead the Table,” the On the Table kickoff event.
COMMUNITY ORGANIZATION INPUT
The Division of Planning staff offered meeting sessions for organizations wanting to give their input. The goal of these sessions was to provide a spokesperson or a small group with ample time to present information they felt was important to the Goals and Objectives of the Comprehensive Plan, on behalf of a larger constituency. Staff offered more than sixty meeting times over the course of three weeks to a mailing list that included contacts from all organizations staff previously worked on projects with, as well as a comprehensive listing of land use attorneys. This opportunity was also shared on our website, www.imaginelexington.com. As these meetings were an extension of the Public Input Process, the Division of Planning made it clear that all information from these sessions would be publicly shared, as is input received from individual members of the public. The data collected from the participating organizations is included in the appendix. Page | 14
Imagine Lexington Public Input Report ON THE TABLE
In partnership with The Blue Grass Community Foundation, Leadership Lexington and Fayette County Schools, the Division of Planning hosted the inaugural On the Table initiative in Lexington on March 15th, 2017. Originating from a concept first imagined in Chicago, Illinois, On the Table was a one-day opportunity that enabled people from every community and walk of life to take time to gather around tables and have real conversations about what is important to them, including issues big and small. This initiative was entirely grant-funded with the exception of several private donations and sponsorships coordinated by the Leadership Lexington team. A grant from the John S. and James L. Knight Foundation provided the majority of the funding and support for this initiative, and On the Table is part of a grander ten-city Knight replication effort to build on what Chicago started. Additionally, a grant from the Kresge Foundation provided for the hiring of S & A Strategies consultants, which provided targeted outreach to specific under-resourced populations and neighborhoods. On the Table was kicked off with an event at Keeneland called “Lead the Table,” organized by Leadership Lexington. Approximately 300 table hosts attended this celebration/orientation event which featured speakers including Mayor Jim Gray; Cheryl Hughes, the originator of the On the Table idea from the Chicago Community Trust; Manny Caulk, the Superintendent of Fayette County Public Schools; Chris Woodall Long-Range Planning Manager for the Division of Planning; Lisa Adkins, President and CEO of the Bluegrass Community Foundation; and Jamie Rodgers, representing Leadership Lexington.
At this event, materials were distributed to the hosts, and they received an explanation about how to conduct the conversations. Each received a host toolkit (which was also available at the Bluegrass Community Foundation or online for those who could not attend) that outlined the process step-by-step. It included a series of conversation starters discussing, among other topics, what you would say if you were bragging on Lexington, what the biggest issues in the community are, how we can work together to improve our neighborhoods, and how we can continue to grow as a city, yet preserve our signature rural landscape. These were starting points for conversations that would happen throughout the community. Page | 15
Imagine Lexington Public Input Report The On the Table event included approximately 11,000 people around Lexington, participating in organic conversations across the city. Participants were provided with a notetaking page, on which they could record primary topics and big ideas that emerged from their conversations. Many took advantage of this page and their direct access to the Division of Planning, and emailed their notes to the prescribed email address at the bottom of the page. The Division of Planning Staff has since categorized and performed an in-depth analysis of all comments and ideas expressed within the almost 500 pages of notes received. This analysis is included within this Public Input Data Report and accounts for a high volume of the overall comments contributed. In addition to this analysis, a post-conversation survey was emailed out to all of the participants, which is in the process of being reviewed and analyzed by the University of Illinois at Chicago’s Institute for Policy and Civic Engagement. It is anticipated a report documenting the results of that survey will be available late summer of 2017. This additional information, along with this Public Input Report, will continue to inform the Imagine Lexington process.
EMERGE CONFERENCE
Hosted by Commerce Lexington on March 28th, 2017, the Emerge Conference was a full-day event attended by almost 400 people, focusing on bringing together entrepreneurs, emerging leaders, business professionals and community members for networking, education, collaboration and plugging into community-based opportunities. The conference incorporated two different ways for the attendees to give their input on Lexington. The first was available all day and allowed attendees to share their vision for Lexington’s future via post-it notes stuck to a giant letters spelling “L-E-X”. The second was an online live poll conducted during one of the panel discussions. Questions asked related to Lexington’s growth, and attendees were able to respond via their mobile device. Commerce Lexington shared the post-it note responses and that information has been incorporated into this Public Input Report. The online live poll data is included in the appendix.
Page | 16
Imagine Lexington Public Input Report
PUBLIC INPUT FINDINGS
Page | 17
Imagine Lexington Public Input Report
Growth Category – 1,619 comments The Growth category was a major subject of discussion received from the public input efforts. The Urban Service Area Boundary (USAB) showed up in about one-third of all Growth comments. Of the USAB expansion status comments, the vast majority were not in favor of expansion. Infill and Redevelopment comments made up the second largest subcategory. These comments usually indicated either the need to use infill and redevelopment as a tool to avoid expansion of the USAB, or desires that these developments include greenspace in their designs. Affordable Housing and Gentrification were also frequent concerns, and were linked to worries about the effects of redevelopment on long-time residents and seniors, as well as the need for fair landlords. Upon reviewing Growth comments, 11 subcategories resulted: Urban Service Area Boundary Infill and Redevelopment Affordable Housing and Gentrification Downtown Growth Strategies Horse Farms Process Density PDR Regional Planning Public Outreach
Page | 18
Imagine Lexington Public Input Report
URBAN SERVICE AREA BOUNDARY – 529 COMMENTS Themes: Want No Expansion of USAB Build up not out Keep the USAB where it is to protect the farmland Expand but very strategically Limited expansion but only for industrial development Balance greenspace with growth on the inside of the USAB What is the USAB and what does it mean “Protecting the urban service boundary and maintaining our irreplaceable farmland. Our city is unique because of the beautiful farms surrounding our vibrant city. By maintaining the urban service boundary, we can maximize urban "infill" and neighborhood redevelopment.” (Public Input Form) “to conserve our horse industry, we should build up instead of expand outwards” (On the Table)
Page | 19
Imagine Lexington Public Input Report “Fund PDR and protect the urban services boundary! Both are issues that would inform how I vote, and I've never owned a horse in my life.” (Public Input Form) Many of the comments about not expanding the Urban Service Area Boundary stressed the importance of protection of Lexington’s identity as Horse Capital of the World; the equine industry; horse farms; greenspace; soils; and/or the community’s character. It was noted many times that the USAB and the Rural Service Area are what make the city unique. While many of the comments advocating against expansion gave very detailed reasons, justifications, and alternatives to expanding, there were many curt responses that simply stated in a few words “Do not expand” or “build up not out” or “Keep the urban service boundary where it is!!” “Grow vertically. Build owner-occupied, higher-density, multi-family dwellings (designed by architects, so these are functional and attractive, worthy of owning)… (Public Input Form) “We can grow vertically rather than horizontally. Downtown is full of blocks that were built in the 80s. If we increased the height and made them technology friendly than we can have more businesses being more competitive.” (Public Input Form) “Keep the borders of the urban service boundary contained while preserving parks and greenspace within the city.” (Public Input Form) Those not in favor of expanding the Urban Service Area boundary made it clear they were advocating building up not out. They want to grow vertically within the current USAB, but with intentional design that provides residents with amenities and greenspace, making neighborhoods walkable, bike and transit friendly, with modern technology to attract businesses. Using infill and redevelopment was a common recommendation to avoid expanding. There was concern that the infill and redevelopment should be designed in keeping with the character of the existing neighborhood, and that sufficient greenspace and parks should be a part of the design. Many comments recommended increasing density, using architectural techniques and sustainable design to blend with existing neighborhoods, and including enough greenspace to make it desirable. “The issues neighborhoods and citizens are experiencing with infill will not be solved by expansion. Our most pressing housing needs will not be solved by expansion. Young people like to live in town near their friends and businesses where they can socialize. Elders like to be able to walk or ride bikes to the pharmacy or church or to visit grandchildren...” (Public Input Form) Several participants stated they liked how older areas were being revitalized, without using more vacant land. They also want to maximize urban infill and neighborhood redevelopment, while ensuring it is “good” infill. They stated they didn’t want “cookie cutter developments,” but desired more sustainable models of development. “Very, very, very limited expansion long term - only in areas where the agriculture land is not high quality or is already compromised by existing development, such as along I-75/I-64 corridor. Put protections in place for rich agriculture land in Fayette County.” (Public Input Form) “ … Maintain an exceptionally high standard of "proof of need" for expansion of the UrbSA, recognizing that the Rural Service Area (RSA) land is Lexington's most valuable scenic asset, and the key to its present identity….” (Public Input Form) Page | 20
Imagine Lexington Public Input Report
“… I would support limited expansion for smart industrial development with low environmental impact that creates high wage jobs. This should be a partnership between the city and economic developers in Commerce Lexington and their SBDC and UK partners.” (Public Input Form) The smaller number of comments advocating for expansion recommended limited expansion, after careful consideration and justification of need. Some commenters wanted expansion purely for jobs, while some indicated a need for both residential and jobs land. Some comments in favor of expansion simply said “Needs to be expanded!!” Some comments recommended locations where expansion could be appropriate, such as Richmond Road and Winchester Road, while avoiding areas – “where soils are ‘Prime Farmland’ or there is ‘Farmland of Statewide Importance’. “needs to expand some. vacant land that is remaining will get too expensive to develop. we will lose prospective employers and will increase the commuters living in adjacent cities causing pollution.” (Public Input Form) “expanding urban service boundary protecting green space while still providing enough affordable housing” (On the Table) “I think it is wonderful that we have protected our farm land in Central KY. But, housing, especially affordable housing, is a big issue. We have landlocked ourselves by creating this USB, and limited the supply of housing. As demand increases and supply stays the same, prices rise. Even if we expand USB, new construction is upwards of $300k in Fayette County which is not affordable either. We are seeing these price increases all over the country as folks are valuing more to be in "urban" or walkable communities. I think we have to expand the boundary as our population increases, but we have to figure out how to do it responsibly and to serve a portion of the population that is being squeezed out of housing opportunity in the current market.” (Public Input Form) A number of comments in favor of expanding the urban service area boundary gave reasons for a need for affordable housing, and housing in general to meet population growth. One noted a concern that the limited supply of available housing has resulted in an increase in housing prices. Other comments asked that zoning be upheld to ensure the land is developed at a density that is planned, so that new USAB land is used efficiently. “Explain what an expansion of the urban service boundary would mean for property taxes and property values. ” (Public Input Form) “What is the "Urban Services boundary" - every person has an idea but not sure” (On the Table) A few of the USAB comments didn’t address the issue of expansion. Some of these were unsure what the USAB was or what expansion would mean with regard to taxes, while others referred to the need for balance urban and rural. A number of comments noted that Lexington is a ‘small big city’ or ‘small city, big town’. One comment noted the USAB was the “hard limit for utility improvements,” while another indicated a need for improved internet services outside the USAB. One comment (shown below), while simply stated, is thought provoking, in that the location of the USAB, whether it stays the same or is expanded, will have an effect on the future of Lexington. Page | 21
Imagine Lexington Public Input Report “It will determine how and where Lexington grows.” (Public Input Form)
INFILL AND REDEVELOPMENT – 260 COMMENTS Themes: Greenspace in redevelopment Infill and Redevelopment design and uses Revitalization and rejuvenated neighborhoods Historic Preservation “Urban infill, investments in public transportation infrastructure, and creating a vibrant green space would preserve the signature landscape by opening development opportunities near the city center.” (Public Input Form) “as much greenspace as there is building” (On the Table) “Infill has to be smarter and we have to be more serious about protecting green space, creating greenways, parks, and trails inside the USB…” (Public Input Form) Greenspace was a frequent consideration for infill and redevelopment. Participants were clear that they want it to be an integral consideration for any infill and redevelopment project. One comment remarked, “The frenzy for filling every inch of land within the Urban Service Boundary takes complete precedence over the preservation of greenspace…” and that the “land should have been set aside for a city park…” Many comments referenced adding small parks, pocket parks or community gardens where small vacant/abandoned lots exist. The amount of greenspace seemed to be one of the most important aspects of redevelopment design, followed by amenities such as public transit, grocery, businesses, and schools within walking distances. “Better infill & redevelopment planning - perhaps more incentives for developers but only if their projects are not as profitable as "typical" project; more creative designs for vertical housing providing some of the same desirable attributes currently only found in single-family house (eg., outdoor space)” (Public Input Form) “Increased infill and mixed use developments so residents don't have to drive long distances to stores.” (Public Input Form) “There is ample room for redevelopment and infill. The trend is for smaller housing for the younger generations and the "boomers." (Public Input Form) “Plan development to age well - Southland, Meadowthorpe” (On the Table) Many of the Infill and Redevelopment comments focused on varying housing type and providing a mixture of residential and non-residential uses, as well as walkable neighborhoods and transitoriented sustainable development. Connecting old and new developments within the Urban Page | 22
Imagine Lexington Public Input Report Service Area with bicycle and walking trails was noted often for its importance and the public’s desire that it be incorporated into new and redevelopment designs. “By not expanding the Urban Services Boundary we have encouraged infill redevelopment which has rejuvenated some of our interior neighborhoods. This strategy is just now starting to pay off with new developments along the Jefferson Street corridor, in the NoLi neighborhood, and along Midland. We should not change course on this right as it is starting succeed. We should not expand the Urban Service Boundary.” (Public Input Form) Several comments applauded the redevelopment of the Distillery District and Southland. Additionally, downtown was referred to as “vibrant;” there is a desire for the downtown district to expand its footprint, and for the downtown revitalization to continue. Comments also expressed excitement about the Town Branch Trail and the prospects that will bring. The 21C Hotel was complimented as a great historic preservation project downtown, while other areas, such as the Jefferson Street corridor and NoLi, were noted positively for the rejuvenation of interior neighborhoods. The CentrePoint site was the subject of many negative comments, stating that something needed to be done with “the pit”. And, “finish CentrePoint!” Many comments stated there should be something done to prevent similarly long project delays in the future. Some comments just said fix or do something with the “hole”. It was described as an eyesore. “Participants agreed that cities with strong intact historic fabric (examples were Charles, Savannah, New Orleans, Asheville) are much more appealing and have a better quality of life we need to preserve what's left of Lexington's historic remnants.” (On the Table) “Love of old houses, excited to see them being renovated” (On the Table) “…Provide incentives for people to rehabilitate older buildings! Invest in the public schools in the urban areas! (Public Input Form) Historic preservation of downtown buildings was noted repeatedly and favorably. There were also comments about desiring the renovation and/or repurposing of older buildings instead of building new ones, especially old structures that have been abandoned or unused. Incorporating historic buildings was mentioned many times with regard to redevelopment design.
AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND GENTRIFICATION – 189 COMMENTS Themes: More Affordable housing Displacement of long term residents Creative Class and college student housing Aging population
Page | 23
Imagine Lexington Public Input Report Ways to insure there is affordable housing “…I invite you to drive down 7th street and see how people are allowed to live in 2017. Affordable housing in the city is a need crying for relief.” (Public Input Form) “… We do not owe it to the developers to make it as cheap as possible for them to build. They aren't doing anything to increase affordable housing, anyway.” (Public Input Form) “more affordable housing spread out through the entire city with services and public transportation” (On the Table) “Bragging on Lex: affordability to live here” (On the Table) Some of the affordable housing comments were emotional expressions of need in our community and many were simple, straightforward statements. “Need affordable housing”, “more affordable housing”, and “affordable housing,” were common refrains, though some remarked that Lexington is an affordable place to live. This shows disparity in people’s perceptions about affordable housing. Comments revealed that “gentrification” means different things to different people. Some comments indicated that gentrification was a concern, while one commenter opined that “gentrification is good, it’s the displacement that is the problem”. Sometimes, redevelopment of an area or neighborhood comes with an increase in property values. Increased code enforcement pressure on existing buildings and the ending of leases for a structure to be razed or renovated. These situations can cause a loss of housing, increases in rents, or the need for repairs of existing structures, etc. Sometimes long-term residents can’t afford the increase in rent, or the cost to make repairs to the home they have owned for decades. Displacement of these residents changes the demographics of the area, resulting in gentrification. Gentrification concerns were dispersed throughout this subcategory. One comment recommended focusing on one area at a time because gentrification is “squeezing residents out [to another area] as area becomes more desirable.” “Reduce gentrification in the North and East End by ensuring that developers in the neighborhood are developing responsibly rather than flipping houses at exorbitant prices/providing incentives for businesses that value local residents & places.” (Public Input Form) Some ideas were offered about how to prevent displacement of long-term residents when an area begins redeveloping. These included public housing programs, grants, or loans to help homeowners financially to improve their own property without having to sell out to absentee owners. was Another comment suggested the use of “special taxes/fees for flippers or breaks for long-time residents.” “Lexington is becoming an attractive city for the so-called 'creative class', which is a good thing, but must be tempered by developing responsibly in ways that don't displace long-time (and often poorer) residents.” (Public Input Form) Page | 24
Imagine Lexington Public Input Report
“UK - high cost of living on campus so students live off campus” (On the Table) Comments mentioned that on-campus housing cost is high, so the students are finding more affordable places to live off-campus. One comment indicated that landlords were flipping houses that aren’t suitable for families and renting them to college students. “Affordable senior housing is going to become a much larger problem. With 30,000 more seniors projected to move into Lexington by 2035, something needs to be done. We have the buildings to house them, but they are not affordable. HUD subsidized housing is affordable for lower income; however do not offer services. Those that offer services are $3,000/month.” (On the Table) “Most important things discussed: affordable senior housing (On the Table) “Do a better job of publicizing aging-in-place services while expanding that effort to include yard work assistance.” (On the Table) A number of suggestions on how to achieve affordable housing included incentives for affordability; addressing higher property tax for low income residents; finding alternative housing types; and/or mandating a percentage of affordable units with each new development. Addressing affordable senior housing was also a primary topic, with participants noting the projected increase in this demographic.
DOWNTOWN – 147 COMMENTS Themes: Vibrant CentrePoint Aesthetics and Infrastructure Need more housing options Need a grocery, drug store, shopping, and entertainment “It has a great young workforce that is increasingly diverse, the downtown is becoming vibrant and brought back to life again becoming the strong heart of the city, it offers opportunities for just about everyone from different walks of life, urban infill has continued to make Lexington more walkable.” (Public Input Form) “Changing quickly - but growing organically. Downtown has become alive” (On the Table) A number of comments collected mentioned downtown being vibrant and alive. There were comments about maintaining and encouraging activities and reasons to go downtown. Thursday Night Live was positively referenced as a driving downtown activity. Page | 25
Imagine Lexington Public Input Report
“Green spaces, good public transportation, less filth and get rid of the downtown hellhole. The pit is an insult to all residents of KY. This should NEVER be allowed to happen again. Developers must not control the growth of Lexington and Fayette County.” (Public Input Form) “fill the hole in the middle of our city”, “Don’t like the Big Pit”, “City Center HOLE!” (On the Table) Most of the negative comments about downtown were regarding the CentrePoint site. People want it completed or made into a park, but they don’t want a hole anymore; most indicated displeasure that the project is taking so long to be built. “Incorporate more greenspace into downtown….” (Public Input Form) “Need better lighting in neighborhoods and downtown” (On the Table) “More benches downtown, like the ones outside KY theatre” (On the Table) “Better signage downtown” (On the Table) “Plant thousands of multiplying daffodils in the small rain gardens along Main and Vine and anywhere. Like in Triangle Park, just more!” (On the Table) “Downtown public restrooms” (Emerge) Downtown aesthetics and infrastructure were prevalent comments. Respondents provided comments about addressing trash, keeping the Christmas lights on trees year round, moving wires underground, and preserving historic buildings. “downtown living - better core amenities, more mid-market housing” (On the Table) “housing is either large two stories in the suburbs or extremely low accessibility downtown - will be a huge issue for aging population” (On the Table) Comments about housing downtown indicated a desire for more medium-priced units, more lower-income/affordable units and additional housing-type choices. Building more vertical or high-rise housing options was mentioned. “Build a large grocery downtown.” (Public Input Form) “revitalizing downtown (utilities and services needed, ex. Grocery store)” (On the Table) Comments were made about adding a grocery store, drug store, shopping, and other amenities for people living downtown. The comments indicated that this would revitalize downtown.
Page | 26
Imagine Lexington Public Input Report GROWTH STRATEGIES – 135 COMMENTS Themes: Incorporating greenspace, trees, parks Walkability, trails, sidewalks More housing options, including vertical Diversity Space for amenities but small town feel Regional Planning Aging in Place “More/better street planting (especially trees) and care, better walkability and access to public resources, such as bike trails, walking paths and parks …. A greener, more lush environment at the "entrances" to the city would demonstrate a better harmony between urban development/living and the environment.” (Public Input Form) “with growth continue walking trails & parks – greenspaces” (Imagine Lexington Arrow) “streetscape where pedestrians feel safe and separated from vehicle traffic with green space and trees and setbacks that are proportional to the cross section allowing a feeling of relaxation not confinement or claustrophobia… Walkable amenities such as parks, neighborhood businesses, schools, etc. Fresh air, not stench from a nearby sewage treatment plant or industry.” (Public Input Form) The first two themes listed, “greenspace, trees, parks” and “walkability, trails, sidewalks” were paired together in so many comments that it is obvious they are desired to be incorporated into new and existing developments. “create and use design standards - quality housing” (Imagine Lexington Arrows) “… houses that meet the market demand and are affordable at differing segments allowing the owner to be able to maintain and enhance the home and yard. brick, stone, and other quality, durable materials on the structures that will hold up over time, side yards that are wide enough to allow for privacy and drainage between houses/structures….” (Public Input Form) “We must identify areas of the city that support more vertical housing options to avoid destroying every inch of green space with the USB. We must determine how much more development is actually needed and stop saying "yes" to every development proposal, needed or not. We must do a better job of identifying underused properties in areas that are already paved over or contain empty, underused buildings rather than destroying areas like the Peninsula.” (Public Input Form) Page | 27
Imagine Lexington Public Input Report
Housing was listed along with walkable amenities, greenspace, etc., in the comments above, which demonstrate a specific focus on housing. They state a desire for a variety of quality housing options at varying price points, while utilizing and reserving greenspace within the Urban Service Area. Diversity in people, and housing options and opportunities. Green space. Closeness to groceries and entertainment. (Public Input Form) Diversity of home sizes and an architectural identity that reinforces good design and community engagement (porches, landscape, etc), walkability, access to parks and services. (Public Input Form) The comments reflected a desire for diversity, both in urban design and population in general. They also expressed a desire for amenities for all demographics and all neighborhoods. “Lex is big enough for great culture but small enough that you can pass the mayor in the street” (On the Table) “Lexington has a great small town feel for a city of its size” (On the Table) Participants commented that they like the big city/small town feel of Lexington and the fact that you can be, “barely outside city and [it] feels like the country – don’t want to lose that beauty or uniqueness.” “need to work with surrounding communities that are expanding like crazy with no planning to agree to a regional plan where we centralize things and group together” (On the Table) “It should be expanded to better interconnect with surrounding counties, hopefully leading to more regional planning in the future. A multi county MPO in the future would be a huge step towards better regional transportation, which is critical for job creation in the bluegrass area.” (Public Input Form) Regional planning with surrounding counties was suggested in several comments with regard to growth, with some commenters advocating an expanded MPO. “Lexington, and Central Kentucky, is lacking in senior active adult housing, such as a Del Web property.” (Public Input Form) “Universal design features, bathrooms, few ranches available - having the resources to remodel - getting ordinances for universal design features; not forced on builders - one opinion. Tax credit incentive for retrofitting home for aging. Education around these. Homeowners tax credit for elderly whose neighborhoods have gentrified” (On the Table) “more $ for Aging in Place” (On the Table) “housing is either large two stories in the suburbs or extremely low accessibility downtown - will be a huge issue for aging population” (On the Table) With the projections of an increased population of senior citizens in Lexington, aging-in-place housing comments were also included in Growth Strategies, since accessible housing types for Page | 28
Imagine Lexington Public Input Report seniors may require unique buildings and land usage. Comments included remodeling of existing homes, funds for assistance, and a lack of housing options.
HORSE FARMS – 114 COMMENTS Themes: Protect the Horse Farms/farmland Identity, Uniqueness Support for New and Existing Farms “We should preserve our gorgeous farmland. I work in the tourism industry and cannot count the times folks have gushed to me, ‘This is the most beautiful city I've ever seen! Those gorgeous farms!’ We should complete the Town Branch project and the Legacy Trail.” (Public Input Form) “I value our world famous greenbelt of farmland. It's the goose that lays the golden eggs and we shouldn't turn more of it into urban area.” (Public Input Form) “The majority of the equine industry is struggling. The upper end is doing fine, but the other horse farms are barely making it. The struggling farms could be a part of the available land or play a more active part in our economy with the possibility of hosting weddings, events, bird watching, etc. These owners who struggle have deteriorating farms, which are not a part of the landscape that Lexingtonians and visitors have come to love. (On the Table) Of the comments about the horse farms/farmland, almost all indicated a desire to protect/preserve/keep this important resource that is unique to this area.. There were only a few comments in the Horse Farm/Farmland subcategory that weren’t about preserving farmland, and those pertained to encouraging economic support for farms. Suggestions included tax breaks; start-up assistance for new farmers; programs to help young farmers acquire farms; and having weddings, ecotourism, agritourism, and events at struggling farms.
PROCESS – 90 COMMENTS Themes: Public Participation and Support Getting Plans through Process Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map “Have more public meetings that affect the citizens where planning changes are being projected. “ (On the Table)
Page | 29
Imagine Lexington Public Input Report “Engage neighborhood associations and the FNC on every proposed planning issue. Enforce existing density designations. Citizens are letting you know how they feel- …. The LFUCG brags that it is non-partisan, but there appears to be a severe division of thought on business vs. citizens in planning decisions…. The Councils allegiance should be to the citizens, not a special interest group of developers and realtors.” (Public Input Form) “Community benefit agreements for new developments or zone changes, particularly for predominantly lower neighborhoods” (On the Table) A request for the community voice to be heard in zoning and development was consistently repeated. Comments expressed concern over the lack of neighborhood support on zone changes and development plans, and asked for things such as “soliciting input from community members”, and for developers to provide copies of development plans to the neighborhood associations. A couple of comments referred to concerns about the city taking responsibility for sewer overflows, and stopping additions exceeding 50% of original footprints, which can cause more water problems in older neighborhoods. “ombudsman for redevelopment/infill to help walk projects through the government process” (On the Table) “It is very difficult to develop projects to move Lexington forward. We need a "sherpa for developers" (On the Table) There were a number of comments about helping shepherd projects through and streamlining the regulatory process; improving city processes in general; and that the, “architectural review process needs better oversight”. “There are a lot of people who don't understand the comprehensive plan fully …”(On the Table) “would like to see land use maps return” (On the Table) “Recognize that the G&O are only part of the process -- the real meat is in developing the policies associated with the plan, and citizens are critically important for that.” (Public Input Process) A number of the comments stated the Comprehensive Plan should be closely adhered to by the Planning Commission and Council, while others referred to a desire to return to the Comprehensive Plan land use map strategy.
DENSITY – 85 COMMENTS Themes: Increase density inside USA More greenspace, infrastructure, and amenities for high density
Page | 30
Imagine Lexington Public Input Report
“less sprawl better infill” (Imagine Lexington Arrow) “Grow vertically. Build owner-occupied, higher-density, multi-family dwellings (designed by architects, so these are functional and attractive, worthy of owning). Position new housing, office space, and commercial development together in a functional, visually pleasing manner, on vacant or underutilized land within the Urban Service Area.” (Public Input Form) “apartment complexes tend to concentrate too many people” (On the Table) Many comments advocated building in higher density patterns, especially in the urban core, noting the need for smart growth and less sprawl. One comment specifically requested that accessory dwelling units be permitted on existing lots. Some negative comments were about single family homes being constructed in cookie-cutter fashion; about homes in new developments being too close to each other to allow proper drainage and privacy; too many apartments; and too many people together in high-density arrangements. However, the majority of the comments were to increase density in order to avoid sprawl protect agriculture, but to do so with enough greenspace, transportation, and other walkable amenities to make it sustainable. “roof top gardens, green roofs, rapid bus transit, electronic rail to neighboring cities, bike lanes off road separate from vehicles, bee sanctuaries/farms, pollinator reserves where pesticides are not allowed, solar power for KAWC water treatment, solar panels on buildings, more neighborhood parks especially in high density residential sites.” (Public Input Form) “High density apartments are being built in areas where infrastructure is lacking (schools, traffic)” (On the Table) Along with increased density, there was an overwhelming desire for high density development to include greenspace, infrastructure such as bike lanes and rapid transit, and schools and parks nearby. There was criticism of some of the existing high density areas for lacking amenities and greenspace; a desire for green technology such as solar energy and rooftop gardens was also expressed.
PDR – 36 COMMENTS Themes: Continue the PDR Program Expand the PDR Program PDR criticism “Fund PDR and protect the urban services boundary! Both are issues that would inform how I vote, and I've never owned a horse in my life.” (Public Input Form) Most of the comments regarding PDR recommended continuing the PDR program. A small number of them recommended increasing the number of allowable uses in PDR easements, and financial programs to encourage farmers to continue farming. Page | 31
Imagine Lexington Public Input Report
“strengthen PDR program, assist and protect agricultural work force. allow some ag related commercial uses (but the scale has to [be] small), get taxes right” (Public Input Form) “…Continue and perhaps expand the Purchase of Development Rights (PDR) program. Explore possibilities for financial assistance to Fayette County farmers that would encourage them to continue farming (e.g., no-interest loans; farming "reverse mortgages", etc.). Pursue reduced business taxes for merchants that sell locally-produced agricultural products.” (Public Input Form) Three of the comments criticized the PDR for: hampering infrastructure improvements on a nonPDR protected farm; hindering the sales of adjacent non-PDR farms; and random distribution of PDR funds without thoughts for the future of the program.
REGIONAL PLANNING – 29 COMMENTS Themes: Planning with surrounding counties “It should be expanded to better interconnect with surrounding counties, hopefully leading to more regional planning in the future. A multi county MPO in the future would be a huge step towards better regional transportation, which is critical for job creation in the bluegrass area. “ (Public Input Form) “Regional planning commission (multi-county) will be necessary to preserve horse farms and rural areas” (On the Table) Most of the regional comments referred to the need to plan for Fayette and surrounding counties,, incorporating a regional plan and/or creating a regional planning commission. “People moving to surrounding areas and commuting in” (On the Table) Two of the comments were about the growing number of commuters between Fayette and other counties.
PUBLIC OUTREACH – 5 COMMENTS “develop sustainability indicators with public participation” (On the Table) “Need vision of downtown as whole - publicize details about river running thru town - where is plan? Where does water go?” (On the Table) There were only a handful of comments included in the public outreach section, but staff felt they warranted discussion. They included ideas and suggestions such as: developing sustainability indicators; utilizing the media to spread information; education on planning topics like the USAB and its implications; and creating a vision for downtown and the Town Branch creek that runs under it, and how that affects the Town Branch Trail.
Page | 32
Imagine Lexington Public Input Report
Transportation – 1,654 comments Transportation was a popular topic of discussion throughout the public input process, with comments ranging from the standard, “avoid Nicholasville Road at all costs,” to the nontraditional, “flying cars; raised highways; tunneled intersections”. Even bovine transportation entered the equation with an, “underground tunnel needed for cows” comment. Obviously a wide range of topics were discussed, but several key themes continued to rise to the top throughout. Some comments were very specific, addressing concerns with solutions, yet many others simply highlighted transportation issues throughout Fayette County with a word or two. Evident throughout were the multi-modal considerations of the public while discussing transportation options. Among the most talked about were walkability, accessibility to goods/services/employment/parks, biking and trails, public transit options, regional issues, and general traffic congestion and safety. It is obvious those participating in our public input methods have an understanding of the comprehensive nature of the transportation systems throughout Fayette County and desire to improve the non-single-occupancy vehicle modes of transportation (public transit and bicycle/pedestrian options). The majority of comments related more to these modes than to traffic and congestion issues themselves. Additionally, regionalism found its way into many of the transportation comments, with public input participants acknowledging the reality much of the Lexington’s daily traffic comes from outlying counties. This was identified in a number of ways throughout the comments where some made suggestions about transit options such as park-n-rides, light rail, and bus rapid transit systems, and others just acknowledged the condition and cited it as a transportation concern. Upon detailed exploration of the 1,654 comments, eight unifying subcategories were identified: Public Transit Traffic/Congestion Connectivity/Accessibility Bike/Pedestrian/Trails Safety Parking Maintenance Other Page | 33
Imagine Lexington Public Input Report
PUBLIC TRANSIT – 284 COMMENTS Themes: Improve bus stops/shelters Improve efficiency/reliability/frequency Better connect people to destinations (tourism, parks, etc.) Reliable/affordable transportation for elderly, disabled, and needy More electric busses Generally improve public transportation Improve marketing and image (get rid of public transit stigma) Bus Rapid Transit Trolley Decentralize the bus system More bus stops
Page | 34
Imagine Lexington Public Input Report Regional transit (light rail, park-n-ride, etc.) “More public transit” (Imagine Lexington Arrow) Public transit was evidently on the minds of participants, as many expressed a desire for expanded and improved systems to handle the mass movement of citizens from place to place. The majority of comments focused on improving the efficiency, reliability, and frequency of service while others suggested better marketing and education strategies might raise the profile, and help overcome negative perceptions of transit and those who utilize it. “Transportation for people with disabilities in evenings and on weekends, as well as for seniors who no longer drive at night” (On the Table) Additionally, many expressed a desire to ensure transit is connecting riders to the correct destinations, (tourist locations, parks, jobs, etc.) and that it is accessible to everyone. In particular a need was articulated for reliable and affordable transportation for the elderly, disabled, and under-resourced. “Regional transportation plan is necessary to provide transit system between Lexington and neighboring cities” (On the Table) Also among the many findings, the need for regional transit to accommodate employees commuting in from outlying counties was identified. With the latest figures showing over half of Fayette County’s employees commute from outside the county, public input participants highlighted this need and suggested solutions such as light rail, bus rapid transit, park-n-rides, and monorails.
TRAFFIC/CONGESTION – 281 COMMENTS Themes: Signal timing New development increasing traffic (Summit, etc.) Improve roadways Utilize multi-modal means to reduce traffic Commuters causing congestion Traffic congestion (too much or relatively light) Incentivize carpooling (HOV lanes)
Page | 35
Imagine Lexington Public Input Report “I live in Lexington and hate the traffic” (Public Input Form) “Easy to get around” (On the Table) There were diverging opinions when it came to the issue of traffic in Lexington; some considered it a significant problem and impediment to quality of life, and others thought of it as manageable as compared to other cities. Those who were concerned with it cited issues such as the “wheel and spoke” layout, increased commuters from outside the county (also identified in public transit), localized issues specific to certain roadways, and new development (specifically the Summit on Nicholasville Road). “Improve ease of getting around with traffic signals that are programmed to move traffic more efficiently” (On the Table) Several of those who identified traffic as an issue indicated that traffic signals are not operating in the most efficient manner and/or roads should be widened to handle increased traffic loads. These citizens indicated operations and traffic engineering methods can help to solve congestion issues. “Lexington is too focused on vehicle accessibility” (On the Table) Many of the comments categorized as traffic concerns are related to reducing automobile traffic through other means. This includes increasing public transportation, improving bicycle and pedestrian facilities, and incentivizing carpooling through methods like HOV (high-occupancy vehicle) lanes.
CONNECTIVITY/ACCESSIBILITY – 221 COMMENTS Themes: Accessibility of goods & services/parks/employment to neighborhoods Accessibility of downtown Neighborhoods should be connected Regional transportation network Connect UK to downtown Trail connectivity [Successful neighborhoods have] reasonable proximity to some retail; walkability within the neighborhood at least, preferable intra-neighborhood (Public Input Form) Originally this category was simply defined as “connectivity,” but it was quickly revealed that accessibility was a large part of the desire to obtain connectivity. Commenters were concerned not only about having interconnected transportation networks, but also about the destinations these networks connect. Access to parks was mentioned a number of times, as were access to Page | 36
Imagine Lexington Public Input Report goods & services and employment. Pedestrian connectivity was considered to be very important as well. “Bike trails all over the city and that all lead into downtown” (On the Table) “Connect UK & downtown: better walking relationship” (On the Table) Accessing downtown via trails, and improving the walkable connections between downtown and the University of Kentucky, were also common themes related to connectivity. The connection of bicycle trails came up as a topic of discussion, as did extending them into the rural areas. [Successful neighborhoods are] laid out so residents can walk, bike within the neighborhood and to nearby schools and amenities like shops and restaurants. Also important is when neighbors know each other, can talk about their neighborhood, and can share thoughts, ideas and concerns. (Public Input Form) It was suggested by a number of participants that interconnected neighborhoods are very important. It was evident that this was intended to be not only from a physical layout standpoint, but also to extend into the community-building aspects of connecting neighborhoods on a social level as well.
BICYCLE/PEDESTRIAN/TRAILS – 458 COMMENTS Themes: Sidewalks (wider/connected/condition) Cyclist and Pedestrian Safety Bike paths & lanes (separated/dedicated/protected) Walk/bike to destinations (parks, goods, schools) More trails General walkability General bike-ability Cyclist/driver education Too vehicle focused Roadways too wide (too many lanes) Walkable/bike-able downtown
Page | 37
Imagine Lexington Public Input Report “Streets are our most common public space but currently serve only one function. Allowing streets to become multifunctional/multipurpose will benefit the city” (On the Table) There were more comments reported that related to pedestrian and bicycle transportation and facilities (including trails) than any other subcategory in the ‘Transportation’ category. As noted above, this illustrates that more and more engaged citizens are starting to desire multi-modal transportation options and see them as a viable possibility. “More sidewalks” (On the Table) Sidewalks were commonly mentioned throughout the volume of transportation comments and were typically paired with words like, “wider,” “more,” “connected,” or “fix”. Pedestrian infrastructure is highly valued by participants, and they are undoubtedly interested in seeing the network improved and expanded. “Improve safety for bikers & pedestrians - safer paths, education on rules of the road” (On the Table) Safety for cyclists and pedestrians was mentioned numerous times and took various forms. Some of the representative remarks were calls for bike lanes and paths that are separated or protected, improved and properly marked crosswalks, driver/cyclist educational efforts, and reduced crossing distances via narrower street widths. “The Town Branch and Legacy trails are excellent projects” (Public Input Form) Bicycle and pedestrian trails were also prominently featured throughout the discussion. The discussion of trails reinforced the interconnected nature of the transportation comments and included a number of crossover themes which have already been mentioned, including connectivity and accessibility. The ability to reach downtown and various other destinations around Lexington was discussed throughout. These comments reinforced the desire for alternative transportation modes, and recreational activity as well.
SAFETY – 104 COMMENTS Themes: Poor driving Bicycle and pedestrian safety Traffic speed General traffic conditions Traffic signals
Page | 38
Imagine Lexington Public Input Report “Teach college students how to use crosswalks, make them enforce no jay walking” (On the Table) “Police should cite cyclist who don't follow road laws” (On the Table) “Bicyclists and pedestrians face perilous conditions” (Public Input Form) Though there were comments about the ability of users of all modes of transportation to follow the rules, regulations, and laws, the most common thread was that bicycle and pedestrian users feel the most threatened by their conditions. Again, this is a crossover theme mentioned previously. “Make the rotation of traffic at intersections the same throughout the county to relieve the drivers from making false starts, and/or movements, such that accidents may, and do, happen just because they do not know when lights will turn!!” (On the Table) In addition to intermodal safety, there were several automotive-specific safety concerns noted, related to varying topics such as traffic signal timing, signage, intersection operations, and speed limits.
PARKING – 86 COMMENTS Themes: Downtown parking Reduce parking Park-n-ride Parking on campus “Traffic and parking was one of the biggest issues that came up over and over and over. Parking pertained to downtown, and outlying areas. Some people said they are deterred from going places because they know they won't be able to park” (On the Table) The majority of parking comments pertained to a lack of free, accessible, and available parking spots downtown. Many felt the options available to them were inadequate and some went so far as to say that it was a deterrent to them visiting downtown and patronizing the businesses. Additionally, a significant number of contributors felt parking at the University of Kentucky campus was problematic. “Reduce parking requirements for development near public transit” (Public Input Form) Though the majority of the participants discussing parking were doing so with negative connotations, some offered alternative solutions to help solve some of the issues. These included park-n-ride arrangements to reduce the number of automobiles downtown, improving underground and structure parking to improve efficiency and not expand the footprint, and reducing parking requirements near public transit. Page | 39
Imagine Lexington Public Input Report MAINTENANCE – 96 COMMENTS Themes: Signage (more/better/more visible) Bicycle & pedestrian infrastructure maintenance General infrastructure concerns Widen roads Road condition “Continue maintaining and upgrading local infrastructure” (On the Table) General infrastructure concerns were prevalent throughout the comments flagged as relating to transportation maintenance issues. The consensus seemed to be that Lexington should be striving to ensure our existing infrastructure is maintained as the community continues to grow. Many of the comments related to roadways in general as well as specific facilities. “Public funds used to maintain infrastructure, and increased accessibility via foot traffic and bike traffic” (Public Input Form) There were also many crossover themes listed here that pertain to bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure maintenance, which related to the safety, mobility, connectivity, and accessibility of those systems. The conditions of some of the facilities were noted as an issue for some of the participants.
OTHER – 123 COMMENTS Themes: Airport General concern about our transportation system and planning Green transportation concepts Regionalism “Better interconnect with surrounding counties, hopefully leading to more regional planning in the future” (Public Input Form) Regionalism has been touched upon by numerous other themes listed in the transportation section and is indeed a crossover theme. Many participants noted the ease of interregional travel via the convenient access to I-64 and I-75 interstates. Some cited commuters venturing Page | 40
Imagine Lexington Public Input Report into Lexington on a daily basis for employment and suggested we ought to improve our road system or look at regional transit opportunities noted earlier. Also, a well-connected trail system was brought up by a number of participants, with an eye toward greater regional connectivity. “Bluegrass Airport is very convenient” (Public Input Form) Bluegrass Airport connects Lexington to the region and the nation, offering flights to numerous destinations. Most of the comments made were positive, noting the ease of travel or the beautiful approach, though some did note that more carriers or direct flights would be nice. “Love the electric buses!!!” (On the Table) Several of the transportation comments were related to green or sustainable concepts, including reducing pollution and emissions via reducing automobile trips, championing green infrastructure, or utilizing electric busses and vehicles. “Good transportation is critical – we need to work on that” (On the Table) In addition to all the directly pointed and specific comments captured as part of this input gathering undertaking, there were a number of comments simply stating transportation is an area Lexington needs to continue to work on. These highlighted an area of concern for the participants and were fleshed out by many of the other supportive responses received throughout this endeavor.
Page | 41
Imagine Lexington Public Input Report
Greenspace – 1,777 comments Through the public input process, it is apparent that greenspace is an important element in the lives of Fayette County citizens. From large greenspaces to small, residents expressed a strong attachment, appreciation and understanding of all things green. Clearly, they see the importance of greenspace to our community’s identity, livability and economy. As one resident wrote: The absence and poor care of greenspaces is the canary in the coal mine for social wellbeing in a city; and from another participant: Make sure to anchor the community through greenspace. During the On the Table event, greenspace received many “likes”, and the 1700+ comments were consistently favorable. Above all, commenters want what greenspace we have protected, and they want more of it. People enjoy being outdoors--whether playing sports, attending events or driving through the rural countryside. They grasp the importance of the horse industry, urban forestry and natural resource protection. Numerous comments were about access to greenspace. To explore commonalities among the comments, seven subcategories were identified. They include: Parks and Gathering Spaces Farms, Landscape and Rural Assets Nature Areas and the Environment Trees Downtown Greenspace Greenspace, General Access to Greenspace
Page | 42
Imagine Lexington Public Input Report
PARKS AND GATHERING SPACES – 473 COMMENTS Themes: Like, want more, keep, maintain parks Like, want more park facilities Want more outdoor gathering space As one person commented: “Great cities have great park systems.” The public voiced that they like the large community parks (especially Jacobson); and, they indicated neighborhood parks are very important and should be abundant, visible and accessible. Full integration of people and place: local parks and greenspace More undeveloped areas for play within neighborhoods Identify options of additional parks Parks are underfunded. We need more of them and more investment in them Continue to support parks, recreation, pools, basketball courts, etc. Interesting observations, ideas or recommendations for parks included the following: When we shut down community pools and small parks we push kids & trouble onto private property Make parks a priority Parks are infrastructure that promotes community, bring stuff into parks Incorporate parks, trails & greenspaces into any new development Page | 43
Imagine Lexington Public Input Report Turn vacant or disused parks into pocket parks Small “resting” parks Improve parks equity Older neighborhoods have better parks Almost half of the comments for parks included residents’ thoughts about specific types of park / recreational facilities. The largest numbers (1/3) were about nature in parks, including how much they enjoy Raven Run and McConnell Springs and their wish to have more nature in parks. Next most mentioned were comments for additional swimming pools, liking the Arboretum and additional dog parks; then, wanting more/liking playgrounds and walking trails. Additional facilities mentioned: More greenspace (lands, open space) Trees Shade Gym Programs for kids Youth activities Places for families Canoeing Fishing Running trails Conservatory Fountains Ball courts Pickleball Athletic field Splash pad Water park A significant number of residents see a need for more safe, walkable and plentiful outdoor gathering spaces. These public spaces may or may not be in parks. Comments were divided between those describing places for people to come together to socialize and those for outdoor things to do. As one person said: “If Lexington can increase cultural activities and recreational sports activities, we can create a core vibrant community that will attract more jobs”. Gathering Spaces: Bring neighborhoods together Sense of community Place to hang out; meet-up Spend time with friends Place to connect and provide a common touchpoint for a neighborhood Fun places to gather Places for people to come together such as parks Special events Cultural activities Enjoy Thursday Night Live, Live Green Lexington events Festivals Outdoor recreational facilities Outdoor physical fitness
Page | 44
Imagine Lexington Public Input Report
Things to do: Clubhouse Center Meeting space for civic clubs Tables, chairs, umbrellas Benches Outdoor seating In small empty spots, create small green areas with benches to sit & relax Development: foster community with parks, public spaces Water feature: open hydrants and close streets occasionally Innovative activities Performance pavilion Amphitheater Larger stage for performing arts
FARMS, LANDSCAPE, RURAL ASSETS – 378 COMMENTS* *The number of comments for rural could be higher since many people said they like ‘greenspace’, which in many cases, could have referred to rural greenspace. These comments were placed under Greenspace, General.
Themes: Love beautiful rural landscape, horse farms and community identity Recognize the relationship between the city and rural landscapes Protect farms and landscape Residents of Fayette County recognize the importance of its farmland and rural landscapes. They remark on agriculture, horse farms, the unique geology, topology, Boone Creek and nature. They used the words signature, iconic and beautiful when referring to the landscape. Residents love driving along country roads to view the beautiful scenery. Several respondents commented on how striking it is to fly into our airport over this beautiful and unique countryside. While most of the comments centered on the “local pride” for the scenic and archetypal views which produce the community’s identity, one person said: With a growing world population and declining farmland to produce food, it would be the worst sin for our community to be responsible for destroying the rarest and more valuable farmland in the world The life force of the county, which is the green rolling hills that surround us It’s the goose that lays the golden eggs and we shouldn’t turn more of it into urban area I love the horse farms, agriculture country roads, local markets and eateries that are out in the country Don’t build on signature landscapes Tremendous asset The rural landscape, especially the horse farms Page | 45
Imagine Lexington Public Input Report Airport is the most beautiful entry into the city When responding to what they like about Lexington, the public recognized the unique relationship between the city and rural landscape. They like the exposure to the Bluegrass beauty and unique interaction of city and county that is a wonderful blend of the two energies. Surrounding rolling hills and horse farms make it more livable and attract people Greenspace is beautiful – mixed city and countryside Nice when urban & country mix A vibrant urban core surround by a world class rural landscape Urban and rural Balance of urban life and natural resources Farms right outside city Greenbelt of farms surrounding Lexington Over a third of the comments about farms, landscape and rural assets included language for their protection and preservation. This only included comments explicitly expressing the sentiment; it could be argued that all 300+ “likes” would also want the rural greenspace preserved if asked. Many further offered their thoughts on the impacts of growth, expansion, infill, PDR and tourism with regard to rural protection. Preserve what makes our city great & unique The green belt is critical to Lexington’s identity and must be preserved Need balance between greenspace & growth Growth can be positive, but not unfettered Farmland doesn’t ever come back Do not expand the USB We can responsibly accommodate future population growth inside the current USB Keep expanding the PDR program Horse Country and tourism are key Expose citizens to county
NATURE AREAS AND THE ENVIRONMENT – 233 COMMENTS Themes: Like, keep, protect, want more natural areas Protect natural resources Citizens understand the importance of nature in the health and well-being of people and the importance of healthy natural ecosystems. The highest number of comments were about engaging with nature, especially nature in parks and access to water (creeks, streams, river, waterways, lakes, reservoir). Residents talk about “natural beauty” and “protection of natural assets”. They mentioned nature in the context of greenways, neighborhoods, rural, downtown and the Palisades. Like sanctuary areas (Raven Run, Floracliff, McConnell Springs, etc.) Creeks and streams (they could be cleaner, but I value their presence) Page | 46
Imagine Lexington Public Input Report Where people can connect with nature Hiking trails We need nature in cities Bring into the built environment The natural environment is largely missing from the urban core Residents also want natural resources to be clean and protected. Citizens are “concerned about the effects of growth on the environment”. Clean water Clean air Protect the environment and wildlife Our soils and farmland are our most valuable natural resource It takes commitment from the city to put dollars where they need to be to protect the natural environment Smart planning that takes into account the environmental impact of development
TREES – 182 COMMENTS Themes: Like, want more, protect and care for trees People commenting about trees are passionate about them. “People living in cities really enjoy parks and trees.” They appreciate tree covered paths and streets; and, they visit the Arboretum. Residents care about trees because of the many benefits derived from them, such as adding beauty to streets and yards, shade and environmental services. One person commented that pedestrians perceive they are safer from vehicular traffic when streets are lined with trees; and another person mentioned how street trees are a traffic calming device. Citizen input shows that they want more trees planted and cared for by developers, LFUCG and their neighbor. The public wants strong restrictions to protect trees and they call for support for a healthier urban forest. Like mature trees Sidewalks shaded by mature trees Tree maintenance a priority Educate public on how maintaining a strong tree canopy which improves quality of life Educate public on proper tree pruning Proper placement More aggressive actions to get dying trees replaced Trees are aging out Aggressively work to increase tree canopy Maintain high quality street trees More diverse species Plant more groves of trees Plant trees where there are none
Page | 47
Imagine Lexington Public Input Report
Interesting observations, ideas and recommendations for trees included: Need stronger tree ordinance Include natural economics accounting in planning; include carbon counting in project approval process Make sure new subdivisions have trees Disturb as little as possible Beautification of Man O’ War Blvd – attention to appearance of streets seems to stop at New Circle Rd Tax incentive for homeowners to keep big trees
DOWNTOWN GREENSPACE – 93 COMMENTS Themes: Need more greenspace downtown Like proposed Town Branch Trail/Commons and accessible water feature Residents are happy about the revitalization of downtown, and believe that downtown greenspace is tied to “quality of life” and the “urban fabric”. They call for more and expanded greenspace and parks downtown. “There should be an effort to “green up” Lexington’s downtown”. They want greater investment into parks and amenities, foreseeing places to gather, a dog park, more benches and landscaping. Numerous people wanted Centrepoint made into a greenspace. Create downtown place where citizens could meet, see friends, socialize Need more pocket parks that can be event and cultural hubs The city still needs more amenities to encourage more people to live and work downtown Continue to incorporate nature aspects into downtown Children’s park downtown NY hi-line Fill the hole and make it into greenspace Make it open space for events People are “excited about Town Branch Trail through the heart of downtown and creating a more inviting and walkable green corridor connecting either side of town”. About Town Branch Commons, one person said: “These are kinds of things that similarly placed cities do, and it shows results. It’s not hard to look around the country and see park projects that have totally transformed cities, and created environments for huge investment”. There were references about the stream being daylighted. San Antonio River Walk Open up creek Want water feature Looking forward to accessible water at Town Branch Commons Lexington is to be applauded for recognizing the value of a linear park system and investing in the design
Page | 48
Imagine Lexington Public Input Report GREENSPACE, GENERAL – 335 COMMENTS Themes: Like, want more, keep, preserve greenspace Want more landscaping throughout city Incorporate greenspace into development Many people responded that what they like about Lexington is “greenspace” and that it should be protected. More specifically, there were comments about community gardens, greenways, landscaping and development. Greenspace & quality of life must be protected People need greenspaces to relax, walk, meet-up and enjoy their down-time Preserve greenspace for healthier environment and beauty – good mental health too Typical comments about community gardens and greenways included: Convert vacant lots in to community gardens! We need more community gardens so that neighbors get to know each other and kids help and learn about eating healthy food that they have grown Use greenways to bring people together Lots of greenways Make sure that developers adhere to greenway plans & that these are not in name only but are something to cherish & will entice people out to use them Citizens want more landscaping throughout the city, including public spaces, streets, neighborhoods and businesses. “Give us more green “lungs” in town. Good for body and soul.” Maintain landscaped/floral display areas and educate the public on how this improves quality of life Integrate plants into the urban environment More gardens Roof top Rain Japanese Community cutting garden Front yards Utility Strip Neighborhoods should be well-landscaped Architectural identity that reinforces good design and community engagement (porches and landscaping) Too much concrete in shopping areas Outside spaces for restaurants as well as general greenspace with trees and flowers
Page | 49
Imagine Lexington Public Input Report Several citizens were frustrated by the inability to protect existing or designate new greenspace through the planning process. They encourage greenspace preservation as part of comprehensive planning Require more greenspace with every development Not every acre inside the USA needs to be developed Greenspaces and wooded areas add to livability More residential density if more common open space (HOA) is provided. (carrot/stick) More greenspace and public space in the urban core along with dense neighborhoods surrounding these spaces Underdeveloped and vacant properties can be used for infill and/or greenspace Allow future growth without reducing the greenspace
ACCESS TO GREENSPACE – 83 COMMENTS Themes: Want access to greenspace Often, the desire for more greenspace was described as access to it, with words including near, connect, close, walkable. Residents want access to parks, natural areas and rural land. Several envisioned trails connecting greenspaces together. Better walkability and access to public resources, such as parks Access to parks…within a few minutes of all residents Easy access to parks and nature We are deficient on PUBLIC ACCESS to natural resources Proximity to Raven Run Accessible to water features In our specific neighborhood wish natural resources were more accessible to walk Equitable access to greenspaces is needed Greenspace accessible to people of all incomes residing in all neighborhoods Interconnect greenspaces and parks Green paths to connect greenspace Link all parks, or as many as feasible, with bike trails that are away from the road. Have the major parks on bus routes A connected park system would allow for wildlife to take shelter, along with a pedestrian network of trails, there would be an opportunity for valuing natural resources Trail ways are key to fostering respect of the farmland while providing access Quick access to open space and agriculture areas Love that countryside is close, can drive to it Popularizing agritourism/ecotourism seems to be working in other areas and could help provide additional sources of income to farms Connecting city residents with the farms through visits, local foods Maintain connection to landscape
Page | 50
Imagine Lexington Public Input Report
Public Outreach – 660 comments Discussion of public outreach is meant to provide guidance for government leaders on how to more effectively communicate with the public, solicit information, and encourage participation in planning processes and other civic engagement opportunities. As the public input mechanisms employed for Imagine Lexington have drawn from many citizens who have never contributed to a comprehensive plan before, it is important to gain an understanding of their perceptions and understand where the Division of Planning and other governmental agencies can improve their engagement techniques. Participants in the On the Table process seemed to rally behind the concept and enjoyed the opportunity to engage in conversations they saw as meaningful; however, they were quick to point out their desire to see evidence their input is being heard. “Share feedback on this inaugural ‘On the Table’ conversation” (On the Table). This report is an initial response to that request. This theme of the government readily sharing information was also evident in calls from some participants for transparency. “There needs to be transparency & more community involvement in re-zoning & planning for new development” (On the Table). This message, combined with an indicated need for improved communication, is important as governmental agencies strive to build trust and partnership with the community. This content also provides an introspective look by the public. It gives an indication of how they perceive their community-building responsibilities and provides insight into their ideas for grassroots initiatives that might improve the quality of life for those around them. Upon detailed exploration of the 660 comments, four unifying subcategories emerged: Intercommunity Interaction Government Communication and Community Interaction Government Transparency Other
Page | 51
Imagine Lexington Public Input Report
INTERCOMMUNITY INTERACTION – 202 COMMENTS Themes: More community-minded activities Encourage community activism & build community Utilize community leaders to reach target populations Bring together diverse groups of citizens - inclusiveness Build university-community engagement Reach out to those in need/under-represented Engage all age groups (youth, seniors, in-between) Create community webpages and utilize social media Organize volunteer groups Create partnerships (religious organizations, universities, HOAs, non-profits, government, etc.)
Page | 52
Imagine Lexington Public Input Report Get to know neighbors Continue On the Table conversations Individual efforts to spread the word about community engagement Engage in smaller, more focused talks on specific topics Religious groups to provide where the government can't “Encourage community action groups - facilitate involvement on a small scale” (On the Table) The Intercommunity Interaction subcategory encompasses the ways in which the public itself can be involved in affecting change in their community. Participants were clear in their enthusiasm for mobilizing and engaging in these types of activities and expressed a desire for additional community events. Building diverse partnership and coalitions throughout Lexington were among the strategies listed to assist in these efforts. “Continue the conversation” (On the Table) On the Table was seen as an exciting and energizing starting point to address many of Lexington’s social and planning-specific issues. It was evident that participants were under no illusion these conversations would solve the plethora of topics discussed, but it did appear to ignite a desire for continued action. Many suggested follow-up conversations or continued iterations of On the Table annually to create action plans and ensure progress was occurring. Contributors indicated these conversations could either be in a similar format and general in nature, or driven by a more singular topic of discussion. “Ask underrepresented minorities to participate. Make sure we go out of our way to be inclusive” (On the Table) Inclusion – that theme was interwoven throughout this subcategory. Many participants noted involving citizens of different races, ages, incomes, religions, etc., was crucial, and expressed a desire to have all voices represented in decision-making processes and direction-setting conversations. In many instances, intentional outreach was suggested for these groups who may not be currently plugged into the process. “We could have get-togethers like one called "Food Among Friends" - where people gather in small groups to make new friends, meet their neighbors” (On the Table) Individual responsibility for making a difference in one’s community was noted in suggestions that citizens should do more to spread the word amongst people within their sphere of influence. Engaging with and getting to know neighbors were also common refrains throughout the comments. Commenters also suggested groups could connect through social media websites, or specific volunteer groups as ways to foster community and spark change.
Page | 53
Imagine Lexington Public Input Report GOVERNMENT COMMUNICATION & COMMUNITY INTERACTION – 387 COMMENTS Themes: Advertise public services (homeless resources, transit, veteran resources, police/fire services, etc.) Utilize social media Actively solicit information from all citizens Advertise public outreach opportunities Report the On the Table data received and individual experiences Two-way communication b/t community leaders and citizens Create partnerships (neighborhoods, churches, government, non-profit, etc.) Create a centralized websites for volunteer opportunities Convey next steps to the citizens General importance of communication Communicate decision-making processes clearly Provide the input data collected to the citizens Engage in more police outreach to citizens Improve city marketing Better notification of PC meetings and more accessible times Encourage neighborhood engagement Educate the public on laws and regulations Educate citizens on planning topics (urban service boundary, sustainability, etc.) Hold more public input sessions
Page | 54
Imagine Lexington Public Input Report “Communication, communication, communication” (On the Table) Communication is a two-way street and requires both listening and responding. Several respondents noted that communication is key to maximizing the impact of this public input, by making the public feel involved and invested in the process. It was also specified that government leaders should be very accessible and that the lines of communication should be prominent and clear. “Keep advertising opportunities for input; inform people to the time and place of serious planning meetings at which decisions are made” (Public Input Form) Building on the theme of communication, many participants expressed a desire for the Division of Planning and the government to spread the word on opportunities for public input as well as for available services and resources. There were several suggested methods for doing this, including utilizing social media and ramping up the City’s marketing efforts. Additionally, some advocated for more accessible times for public meetings, so a broader representation of the population would be able to contribute. “If you want input, then you have to show that it is used” (Public Input Form) The Imagine Lexington public input process has been robust and has employed new methods such as On the Table to gather responses. These efforts provided a wealth of information and exceeded expectations for participation; however, to build upon this momentum, many participants stressed that citizens require evidence their voices have actually been heard. As stated above, this report is an attempt to respond to that request and compile the information in a digestible manner. Many also requested regular updates on the public input received, and a desire to know what the next steps are in terms of their participation and the planned government action to address concerns. “The [On the Table] group focused on the importance of coming together and communicating at all levels, from individual neighborhoods to local, state and Federal governments. We, as citizens, have a responsibility to determine what we want in our institutions and to communicate with our elected officials regularly to work toward those goals. Increased dialogue leads to better solutions” (On the Table) Partnerships and engagement with neighborhoods were also points of emphasis for several of the contributors. Realizing the impact of the collective is greater than the individual, calls for the government to build and nurture these relationships was a theme throughout the comments. Additionally, whether created by the government, non-profits, or other organizations, there was an expressed desire for a centralized website or app that could serve as a clearinghouse for volunteer opportunities throughout Lexington. “More outreach and education to all citizens [to assist in] understanding local government!!!” Public Input Form In addition to desiring their voices to be heard, the public also acknowledged that they could use some education on many aspects of local government. These areas include educating the public on planning topics such as the urban service area, sustainability, etc., but also general education on laws, regulations, and ordinances. Engagement by the police throughout the community was also mentioned by several participants. Page | 55
Imagine Lexington Public Input Report GOVERNMENT TRANSPARENCY – 29 COMMENTS Themes: Transparency in zoning process Perception developers have too much power General transparency Comp Plan process transparency Perception of “good ole boy” system “Reach out and be transparent and welcoming” (Public Input Form) The 29 comments focusing on government transparency are a reminder of the obligation public servants have to the citizens to be forthcoming and open about the decision-making process. Though many efforts have been made by Lexington’s government officials to continue to provide as much information as possible, there are still lingering perceptions of inherent bias built into the system. “This year it seems as if there is less time to be involved in the Comp Plan process. It seems as if there is less transparency within the system” (Public Input Form) “More transparency about zoning” (On the Table) Some of the comments were pointed squarely at Planning for both the Comprehensive Plan and zoning processes. There seems to be a lingering skepticism from a few folks about the legitimacy and transparency of these procedures. Some of the same folks also believe the developers have too much power when it comes to land use decisions being made, and feel as if there is a “good ole boy” system at play. “Citizens feel that information is not made as widely available as it should be and what is shared is often downplayed” (On the Table)
OTHER – 42 COMMENTS Themes: General positive comments about outreach Regionalism Media
Page | 56
Imagine Lexington Public Input Report “Thank you for the expanded opportunities this year to be part of planning” (Public Input Form) Though there was some skepticism regarding the transparency of the process (see above), there were also many who expressed a general gratitude for the opportunity to participate in the comprehensive planning process. “Get central KY together to discuss needs” (On the Table) Though there were only a couple of comments regarding regionalism in this public outreach category, it still underscores the crossover theme prevalent throughout the public input comments. “Getting input from residents who are not participating in your survey that are overworked overstressed or disengaged is difficult. Perhaps better prime time TV coverage on the network channels (if you can convince them to take a break from their "bad news sells" frame of mind), or some form of social media?” (Public Input Form) Media coverage was something mentioned several times by participants as a way to reach those who may not be very plugged-in to the planning process or civic engagement in general. However, there were also those who stressed that the local news media is too concentrated on the negative and are not proactively involved in community building.
Page | 57
Imagine Lexington Public Input Report
Employment – 386 comments With only 386 comments in total, Employment was not as popular a topic of discussion as some of the other categories. However, a considerable amount of noteworthy comments were received. The comments focused mostly on types of businesses and industries, as well as, jobs. Small businesses and locally owned businesses were frequent subjects, as were high tech and manufacturing industries. The Farm-to-table movement and horse industry also received a number of comments. The majority of job comments were about the need for jobs to meet specific niches in our demographics and for jobs paying a living wage. Comments on Training and Education showed a clear need for a variety of programs that would help fill these niches of employment. After thorough review of the 386 comments, two major subcategories, four lesser subcategories, and two subsets were determined. All of the subcategories and subsets are interdependent upon each other and work together to strengthen the economy. Businesses and Industries Farm-to-Table Equine Jobs Training and Education Business Infrastructure Wages Land
Page | 58
Imagine Lexington Public Input Report
BUSINESSES AND INDUSTRIES – 146 COMMENTS Themes: Small Businesses and Locally Owned Businesses High tech and professional firms Manufacturing Grocery stores in parts of town not served More downtown shops and businesses Tourism More restaurants shopping within walking distance of neighborhoods Agricultural Processing, vegetable crops and pharmaceuticals “…government/administration focused on manufacturing, but small businesses/startups may be more realistic growth opportunity and provide a broader range of jobs for different skillsets.” (On the Table) According the U.S. Census Bureau’s 2015 County Business Patterns, about half of Fayette County workers are employed by businesses employing 100 employees or fewer. With that Page | 59
Imagine Lexington Public Input Report much of our economy coming from small businesses, it is no surprise that numerous comments were received about supporting small businesses, doing more for locally owned businesses, and attracting entrepreneurship. Comments clearly show the small and locally owned businesses are well liked and that there is a desire for more support through start-up assistance, tax breaks, and incentives. “Emphasize bike tourism so that cyclists would come here to bike (and eat, shop, spend the night $$$)” (On the Table) Many comments focused on the Tourism industry. Comments ranged from providing museum and Lexington history tours to building more tourism in the popular bourbon, horse, and winery industries. One comment even suggested offering a city-wide or regional “pass for attractions”! There were also favorable comments about the Distillery District revitalization, and one stating they liked it but “…would like to see more work on the Northside.” “More light manufacturing and more high tech employment” (Imagine Lexington Dollar) Among comments discussing specific businesses and industries participants would like to see more of, high tech and manufacturing were at the top of the list. Comments called for “…enticement for tech companies to come to Lexington” and “grants to attract … high tech jobs.” Additionally, one comment suggested enticing more “flagship companies like Alltech” to Lexington. Agribusiness, agricultural processing and partnering with UK on research and Biotechnology were also noted.
FARM TO TABLE – 31 COMMENTS Themes: Farmers Markets Kentucky Proud and value added agriculture Support local farmers Promote using local ingredients at restaurants, CSAS, and farmers markets Provide opportunities for young farmers Year round farmers market Addressing food deserts “The city has done a good job with having farmers markets at 5/3 Pavilion and South Broadway. Continue this in outlying areas and consider having a full time covered market.“ (Public Input Form) “Encourage new small scale farming for a new generation of farmers, by connecting local businesses with small farmers to produce high end vegetables, fruits and grains to be served and eaten locally.” (Public Input Form) Page | 60
Imagine Lexington Public Input Report
As a subset of Businesses and Industries, Farm to Table had numerous comments in praise of what has been accomplished so far with the Farmers Markets, local food in restaurants and grocery stores, and the local agricultural economy, and the public wants more of it. A permanent year-round farmers market facility is desired as are more community gardens. Other comments were in support of community supported agriculture (CSA), Kentucky Proud valueadded agriculture, local producers, encouraging organic farming practices, and for developing programs to help young farmers acquire or lease land to get started.
EQUINE – 18 COMMENTS Themes: Thoroughbred Industry Keeneland World Equestrian Games Horse Farms and Tours Horse Tourism “…The thoroughbred industry is world renowned and contributes a healthy proportion of our economy…” (Public Input Form) Comments in this subset generally reflected this comment ““horses=brand - protect brand” (On the Table). The comments were about capitalizing on economic development from Lexington’s horse industry: Keeneland, horse farm tours, tourism, hospitality, World Equestrian Games, as well as addressing the low wages of those working in the horse/hospitality industries in Fayette County. And one comment mentioned protecting the soils that are the “underpinning of the successful growth of horses due to the limestone under layer” (Public Input Form).
JOBS – 75 COMMENTS Themes: Need more jobs Not enough professional jobs for college grads Need jobs for seniors and youth Need jobs for blue collar workers Need jobs for workers with no car and/or park and rides
Page | 61
Imagine Lexington Public Input Report Unemployment is low “We put out far more college degrees from UK, Transy, BCTC, etc. than are used here in Lexington…We need to put our college grads to work in higher paying jobs because our talent will leave” (Public Input Form) Even with low unemployment in Fayette County, the majority of job comments were about the need for more jobs, and the second most prevalent job comment was about there not being enough professional jobs for college grads. The need for jobs to meet certain niches was common too, such as for seniors, youth, blue collar, those with criminal records, and for workers with transportation needs. “Economic empowerment - address middle, moderate, and lower income jobs” (On the Table) There were comments requesting a variety of jobs and income levels including more career/professional jobs, industrial jobs, higher income jobs, jobs in the arts, blue collar jobs, jobs for our creative class, and jobs for putting our college grads and experienced senior citizens to work.
TRAINING AND EDUCATION – 44 COMMENTS Themes: Partnerships between Colleges and Vocational Training and Employers to place talent in jobs Need for workforce training programs Job placement for homeless, disabled, and language barrier - mentoring programs “Community-based trade school, that can train unskilled, possibly lower economic status workers to do hands on trades (metal work, concrete, mechanics) that local businesses can hire so they aren't subcontracting in form other places…” (On the Table) Workforce training for vocational, technical, and trade specialty jobs was a common comment to meet the need for not only high school students but also for those unable to go to college, disabled, homeless, and others. Mentoring and organizational partnerships were noted to meet the need for job readiness and for matching education and training resources to businesses and their workforce needs.
Page | 62
Imagine Lexington Public Input Report BUSINESS INFRASTRUCTURE – 33 COMMENTS Themes: High Speed Internet Tax and Payroll incentives for small businesses and startups Lack of direct flights at the Bluegrass Airport “…hard to bring businesses to Lexington, hampered by slow internet, no fiber, high land cost, small amount of industrial areas” (On the Table) “airport lacks direct flights which makes Lexington inaccessible to business, needs to expand to allow more direct flight” (On the Table) The majority of the comments in this subcategory were the need for high speed internet, seconded by a need for tax and/or payroll incentives for small businesses and new business startups. Lastly, a need for more direct flights at the Bluegrass Airport was expressed.
WAGES – 25 COMMENTS Themes: Low wages, living wage Need higher paying jobs “Since 2015 to 2016, Lexington has lost 4,600 high wage jobs in Business and Professional Services, but are up 3,000 lower wage jobs in tourism.” (On the Table) The comments show a concern for low-income workers and a desire for living-wage jobs. Comments show the concern for the low minimum wage and the numerous service oriented jobs in Lexington.
LAND – 14 COMMENTS Themes: Need land for economic development/jobs Sites where employment has left
Page | 63
Imagine Lexington Public Input Report “We need economic development land for jobs - many projects that should have located in Lexington are in surrounding counties. Example given of Woodford County - has been closed for business, but in the past year has landed three major economic development projects.” (On the Table) “What special care are you giving to major sites where employment has left? i.e. Shriners, GE Light Bulb, Herald Leader, Lexmark. This is our ED land and should be targeted for jobs. Major impact on surrounding neighborhoods” (Imagine Lexington Dollar) The comments stated a need for more employment and industrial land. Concerns were expressed about the loss of payroll tax and the lack of available, affordable and developable vacant industrial land. One comment made note of large sites where employment has left leaving land and buildings that should be considered for economic development and/or the impact on the surrounding neighborhoods.
Page | 64
Imagine Lexington Public Input Report
Issue Specific – 1,321 comments As the staff began the work of organizing the public comments, it was apparent that many things citizens had to say went beyond simple philosophical topics, much less items related to planning topics. These issues were also extremely wide ranging, from very broad to incredibly specific. Many comments were intensely personal, dealing with day-to-day fears of localized crime in their neighborhoods and the quality of their children’s education. After a thorough review of the 1,321 comments, seven subcategories were identified: Homelessness Education Drugs/Crime Safety Social Services/Government Services Philanthropy Other
Page | 65
Imagine Lexington Public Input Report
HOMELESSNESS – 150 COMMENTS Themes: Panhandling Homeless Facilities Lack of resources “Commission a study on homeless and panhandling - why are they doing it; what rehab and training do they need?” There is a strong perception that Lexington’s homeless population and those panhandling are two distinctly different groups. It’s very difficult to verify or substantiate those groups, but there is no ambiguity in the fact that panhandling has taken hold as a prominent fixture in Lexington. While many want to see the organized panhandling strictly curtailed, there is also overwhelming support for providing the resources that the homeless population needs. “Homelessness is a problem that will only get larger. It's a shame that our mental health system has changed - no longer have halfway houses like we used to have. Don't have enough. This has led to more drug users and homelessness.” There was a common expressed that a decline in the availability of the mental health resources that has increased the homeless population steadily over the last two decades. Solutions to these types of comments obviously step well beyond the ability of the Comprehensive Plan to Page | 66
Imagine Lexington Public Input Report address, but there is considerable concern in the community about how to address these issues. “Response to panhandlers - especially as it influences feeling of safety and public perception of safety” Probably the most common comment on this subcategory was the relationship of panhandling and its effect on visitors to downtown. Again, the distinction between interacting with the homeless and interacting with those soliciting donations is important. There is a strong desire to assist those who need help, but not at the expense of the downtown economy or in ways where people feel their safety is compromised.
EDUCATION – 150 COMMENTS Themes: School equality Overcrowding Better vocational options “schools are segregated according to economics no choice except for special programs” “Provide more education and opportunities for urban areas” “want FCPS to deliver on the promise - need to support excellence at Bryan Station - need experienced strong leaders who want to be there” “it should not matter where a child lives, all must have high quality education” There is concern that the quality of education that a child in Fayette County receives is far too dependent on where that child lives. Citizens want to see the same resources and attention paid to all schools across the district. While many of the themes in this subcategory deal with Fayette County Public schools, some speak directly to how segregated our residential development has been, and the resulting large pockets of low socio-economic population condensed into certain schools. Housing policy has a disparate impact on the appearance of school quality, since school “performance” is largely just an indicator of the socio-economic makeup of the district from which it pulls. “Public schools are at capacity. There are 700 additional kids in the system each year, which is the equivalent of one new elementary school. Once a new school is built, it is already full before it opens.” “need more schools, lower class to teacher ratios, superintendent is great” Several of those who identified traffic as an issue indicated a desire to see more schools constructed to address overcrowding and in anticipation of Lexington’s growth, rather than
Page | 67
Imagine Lexington Public Input Report waiting for it to happen and then trying to react. Many wish to see FCPS become more proactive in planning for growth and where schools will be located. “Lexington and schools in Fayette County can help better provide for our diverse population by offering a serious alternative to pursuing a university degree. A "trade track" system of vocational training already exists in the Fayette County schools, and this approach to adult life can be improved/enlarged by requiring all students to explore this path by taking at least one or two "vocational" courses before graduation from high school. These courses should be complemented by a "co-op" experience in the area of study, as a way of introducing the students to a real-life application of their studies.” “Locust Trace is a good school/program. Have all students take classes there, or do internships in a farm/ag job or environmental protection job. Make opportunities for kids to experience the rural areas in a tactile way. A lot of people view the rural area as nothing more than a rich person's retreat from poor people. It emphasizes differences in class instead of bringing people together. Create opportunities to allow the public access to these resources on their own terms. Why would the average person want to protect a rich person's rural land?” “too much emphasis on diploma over skills, diploma can be faked, skills cannot” These comments on the need to better address vocational opportunities speak to the high costs of college education and the fact that many of our trade fields are in need of employees. There exists a path to a strong career through these fields, yet there is concern that FCPS is not doing enough to make those opportunities clear and offering programs to transition non-college students into trade skill training.
DRUGS/CRIME – 131 COMMENTS Themes: Drug Use Police Resources “Incredible, overwhelming concern for the heroin epidemic affecting our community” There were numerous comments regarding the increase in heroin and opiate use, their ready availability, and the impact they are having on once-stable neighborhoods and families. This was the overwhelming theme in this subcategory. “Lexington is divided into three police sectors, one all the way from Dunbar to the north end. Seems like a lot of area to cover.” “Concerned about the size of police districts. Seems like a lot of area to cover!” People in areas affected by neighborhood crime mentioned the need for an increased police presence, more police sectors, and in general, additional staff to help address their issues. While many residents mentioned that Lexington was a low crime place to live, it was clear many
Page | 68
Imagine Lexington Public Input Report other residents were feeling that problems in their neighborhoods will require additional resources.
SAFETY – 85 COMMENTS The comments about safety were largely in response to the On the Table prompts regarding “What Do You Like About Lexington?” and our public input questionnaire prompt “What makes a great neighborhood?” While a handful of commenters felt there were safety issues that needed addressing, mostly in relation to the drug issue noted above, most commenters felt that Lexington on the whole is a safe place to live, which makes it a desirable community. “A sense of safety, serious walkability, access to parks and necessary retail, as well as public transportation, within a few minutes of all residents. Good neighborhood organization. Trees, ample and in the right places. Frequent events that engage neighbors and build pride.” “Safety and invested property owners.“ “A safe place with a sense of community.
“
“A safe neighborhood that I feel comfortable in, even at night.“ “Safety and community amongst neighbors”
SOCIAL SERVICES/GOVERNMENT SERVICES – 282 COMMENTS Themes: Homeless facilities Drug rehab services Workforce development Children’s Programming “We're fortunate to have Ronald McDonald House in our community and St. Agnes House (hopefully it will be back up and running). Attempts to provide for our homeless. Several churches in town try to provide for our homeless individuals. Room At The Inn is a great resource. Other churches involved in this program. Sundays has Church Under the Bridge is provision. Embrace provides meals for low-income, homeless individuals. North Broadway Christian, Grace Baptist...the list goes round-and-round. This is one of the greatest challenges that Lexington has in taking care of the homeless population.” "At day shelters, you have to be in line by 6:30 am to get in and then you may wait in line an hour and there isn't enough room for you." As noted before, the strong concern for Lexington’s homeless population produced a large number of comments for the community to provide more accommodations and services. Citizens noted how churches struggle to meet the demand, lack the expertise, and are often Page | 69
Imagine Lexington Public Input Report simply treating the symptoms of the greater problems. Many feel the government has an obligation to provide assistance to help this population reenter the workforce and be able to support themselves. “Create a safe environment outside of downtown Lexington (i.e.) farm type location where people are taught skills, self-sustaining, for homeless/drug rehabs facility on site, physicians volunteer and visit “ “more rehabs in Lexington and more funding” The next two themes go directly to the heart of addressing the homelessness issue. It’s these two themes that identify what is largely the root of the problem. The opiate abuse issue, including heroin, is affecting many communities, so Lexington is not unique in this regard. Comments indicated a tremendous sympathy for addicts and a strong desire to provide health services for people who need them. “The community should be expanding programs to help individuals with disabilities re-enter the work force. Or provide skills training for individuals looking to enter a different career. It should be looking to attract innovative companies that with strong social values that will contribute to the community.” “better wages, workforce training. Better urban design with affordable housing, etc., in urban” “neighborhoods. (Paradox of infill/redevelopment: redevelopment can price younger people, start-ups, etc. out of the neighborhoods they want to be in.)” In addition to the drug issue, many in the community felt that people who are looking to reenter the workforce are facing a skill deficit that keeps them from being able to find jobs with wages that will support even a minimal household. There was broad support for providing additional workforce development funds as a method of economic development. “Teenage Recreation facilities (age group 17 to ??) with security and parking: local bands (nights); dance hall (nights); club meetings (nights); grill/tvs and bar like atmosphere (nonalcoholic); garage bands practice (day time); video games; career resources (day time); Uber services” “used to have micro city government - more activities - summer activities, pools, sports, clubs” “most sports @ YMCA stop at age 14” Many people felt that a good portion of the nonviolent crime in the community is committed by children without enough activities in their neighborhoods to keep them out of trouble. In more affluent neighborhoods, parents are able to afford the more expensive after school activities that keep kids busy. However, there is support for additional Parks Department programming funds for recreational sports and arts activities.
Page | 70
Imagine Lexington Public Input Report PHILANTHROPY – 41 COMMENTS “incentivize volunteerism - encourage employee matching, i.e. volunteer 4 hours, match w/$10 per volunteer hour” “We need more database & oversight group to collaborate with all charitable and non-profit organization to increase efficiency of services” “Need a good centralized source for finding out about volunteering possibilities” “lack of large corp philanthropy” While there aren’t an overwhelming number of comments on this topic, it was distinct enough from the other subcategories that it needed to be called out on its own. The comments didn’t range enough to provide multiple themes, but there is something to be noted in the consistency of what was said. Those who mentioned philanthropy did so by noting that Lexington has a strong volunteer spirit, but lacks the overall organizational infrastructure to rally our volunteers around larger projects. Some great comments were made about non-profits working together to pull off more ambitious plans, similar to what On The Table was able to do. Citizens clearly want a resource to turn to when they are looking to volunteer; there are many available resources, and residents are often unsure how they can be of help. A central volunteer database and/or coordinator would be very useful in trying to match people up with organizations that could use them.
OTHER – 291 COMMENTS “outlaw plastic shopping bags” “need a zoo or aquarium” “More ethnic restaurants” “My coal powered electricity bill” “I am a long term resident and extremely interested in the future of Lexington.” Issue Specific Concerns was already a catch-all category. The majority of the most broadly covered themes were reported on; however, in a public input scenario such as the one offered over the last few months, invariably there will be a number of comments that just can’t necessarily be categorized. As you can see above, there are lots of suggestions that people have for Lexington, some of them very interesting and no less valid or useful than the others. All have been read and attempts have been made to report them out with the proper context. Additionally, some may have been picked up by other categories.
Page | 71
Imagine Lexington Public Input Report
Other – 1,834 comments The Other category was created with recognition that many comments would not fit perfectly into the other seven categories, although, many of the comments were interrelated. Participants extensively discussed how they want the community of Lexington to be (known, celebrated and grow—this needs to be rephrased somehow—needs to have tense agreement). The comments recorded showed great affection for Lexington, a sense of pride for how it has grown and developed thus far, and a vision for its future. Upon detailed exploration of the 1,834 comments, eight subcategories were identified: Diversity Livability and Quality of Life Downtown Events, Activities and Things to Do LEX Branding University Arts and Culture Other Cities
Page | 72
Imagine Lexington Public Input Report
DIVERSITY – 211 COMMENTS Themes: Lexington is welcoming and encouraging of diversity Lexington’s cultural events and festivals Diversity in schools and businesses “The unusual diversity of the city with a welcoming attitude toward refugees and international people.” (On the Table) Overall, participants found Lexington welcoming and encouraging of diversity, and they would love to celebrate it more. People see the diversity of Lexington as a unique feature of the Bluegrass and want to raise awareness of its presence. “Cultural festival – at a school park, invite different cultures, schools, neighborhoods to participate.” (On the Table) Lexington’s exiting cultural events and festivals are popular, based upon contributors’ comments, but they also indicated a desire for an increased number of them, specifically festivals celebrating all cultures. They stated that festivals bring the community together and can become an attraction for others to visit Lexington and get a sense for its values. “Glendover Elementary is a great example of a school that embraces its diversity and has their students celebrate their origins. They even have an assembly where native foods and dress are showcased.” (On the Table)
Page | 73
Imagine Lexington Public Input Report Many participants expressed a desire for diversity in their schools and neighborhoods as well as diverse businesses throughout the community. They see its value and wish to have future generations grow up with an appreciation for diversity so it becomes a natural part of the community.
LIVABILITY AND QUALITY OF LIFE – 843 COMMENTS Themes: Lexington is beautiful, vibrant, safe, clean and affordable People of Lexington are welcoming, diverse and friendly Lexington has many amenities and opportunities due to the universities and downtown Family-friendly, varied housing options, walkability, safety, parks and public art create desirable neighborhoods Kenwick, Southland, Ashland Park and Chevy Chase are desirable Lexington neighborhoods “The community (for its size) has an exciting and growing urban core that offers many of the things young professionals are looking for in a city - great food, etc. Cost of living here isn't as high as most urban areas and that helps with confidence for start-ups. Lexington is a beautiful place in a beautiful setting, and being here, you get the feeling it is growing, with some focus on density (which is critical - because that ensures the open spaces stay protected).” (Public Input Form) Participants found Lexington full of many amenities and opportunities due to the presence of UK and the revitalization of downtown. They see Lexington as an integral part of the fabric of the Bluegrass and love the attention it receives for its progress and growth. It was also noted that Lexington is beautiful, vibrant, safe, clean and affordable, especially for how large it is as a city. Many feel it is exciting to be a part of and an enjoyable and comfortable place to live, bring up their families and retire. “A sense of safety; well-maintained sidewalks; green spaces for the public; hubs - like schools, churches, coffee shops - places where people can meet.” (Public Input Form) “Yes, we as a city have many safe, clean neighborhoods with good schools, parks and good people.” (Public Input Form) Desirable neighborhoods were described as family friendly with many housing options, walkability, safety, and parks and public art integrated in the fabric of the community. They see the value in a self-sustaining neighborhood and desire for their own neighborhoods to function in this manner. They also love that their neighbors and fellow Lexingtonians are welcoming, diverse and friendly, which, they voiced, is the icing on top of a good neighborhood. They feel that neighborhoods which are set up intentionally cultivate a sense of place and create conversations amongst neighbors, furthering the sense of community. Participants found Lexington’s Kenwick, Southland, Ashland Park and Chevy Chase neighborhoods desirable, and indicated that those areas reflect their desires for a walkable, safe, and well laid-out community. Page | 74
Imagine Lexington Public Input Report DOWNTOWN – 65 COMMENTS Themes: Vibrant, revitalized, thriving, living, young, attractive and walkable Thriving business, restaurants and store scene; want continual growth Year-long events and activities, especially family and teenager-friendly activities Public art Triangle Park, Jefferson Street and North Limestone “Downtown used to be dead in the 70s - not anymore-we now have thriving downtown.” (On the Table) When contributors discussed downtown, they used the following words: vibrant, revitalized, thriving, living, young, attractive and walkable. Most see downtown as a main attraction for Lexington and consistently bragged about its success. They enjoy seeing Lexington known for more than just bourbon, basketball and thoroughbreds. Participants expressed their appreciation for the current public art installations throughout downtown and wish to see it continue to grow, viewing it as one of the key identifiers of downtown. They voiced that public art makes a space interesting, approachable and furthers its efforts to become a destination. “There seems to be a lot of positive growth downtown with life coming back to some areas that have been neglected. Bike paths, parks with walking trails, encouragement of festivals, music, art, and pop up activities brings people out of their homes to enjoy all Lexington has to offer.” (Public Input Form) Though many expressed an affinity for downtown, some also voiced wishes for downtown to host more events and activities year-round, especially family and teenager-friendly activities. A lack of affordable or free activities geared toward teenagers and young adults was also pointed out as a concern. Participants talked frequently about the numerous businesses, restaurants and stores downtown and their desire to see a thriving downtown with flourishing amenities. Participants noted three specific areas of downtown that are valuable and key to the identity of downtown: Triangle Park, Jefferson Street and the North Limestone corridor. With all that is currently occurring downtown, participants are invested in its future and suggested many ways in which it can serve all people of Lexington.
EVENTS, ACTIVITIES AND THINGS TO DO – 249 COMMENTS Themes: Downtown offers a lot of events, activities and things to do Affordable, family and teenager-friendly events, activities and things to do are needed
Page | 75
Imagine Lexington Public Input Report “Fun things like fairs, festivals, parades, good shopping and dining out, affordable housing (meaning a range of housing options and prices), cultural activities, UK football and basketball games, events coming to Lexington Center, Rupp Arena and the Opera House.” (Public Input Form) Current entertainment options such as Lexington’s sporting events; festivals; restaurants and shopping; the Farmers’ Market; and Thursday Night Live received a great deal of praise from contributors. They did not solely focus on downtown events, but noted activities all around Lexington that are taking place and drawing people in. They enjoy all that downtown has to offer but want to ensure these events, activities and things to do are readily available to all Lexingtonians. “I would like to see a family attraction like a complex composed of a small zoo, a water park, an outdoor theater, mini golf, etc.” (Public Input Form) Participants expressed the desire for more entertainment, especially family-friendly options, in downtown and throughout Lexington. As previously mentioned, they expressed the desire for these entertainment options to be free or affordable to meet the needs of all families. Suggestions for activities included a history museum; expanded children’s museum; zoos; and aquariums. Participants also indicated that more outdoor/public spaces should be accessible and affordable for families’ entertainment.
LEXINGTON BRANDING – 121 COMMENTS Themes: Lexington has many attractive components that draw people to tour, visit and live here “Bragging: arts are growing, weather/climate, beautiful, hospitable, located to larger cities, health care, Keeneland, historic aspect, close to mountains (Red River Gorge), two interstates, UK and other colleges.” (On the Table) Unique elements of Lexington, that draw people in to visit and live here, were cited by many participants. Besides the well-known elements of bourbon, horses and basketball, participants identified Lexington’s culture, landscape, downtown and friendly people as key elements to making the community an attractive destination. They also called attention to the rising arts and culture scene, which has begun to draw more interest and people to Lexington.
UNIVERSITY – 80 COMMENTS Themes: Universities bring in many resources, such as people and private businesses Universities play a significant role in the community “Lexington doesn't just attract job creators and workforce, it creates it. UK is Lexington's anchor, and the high-wage R&D and health care industries that have grown up around it mean Lexington will have a 21st century economy for many years. Keeping graduates in town Page | 76
Imagine Lexington Public Input Report (thereby attracting job creators that aren't developed here) requires a focus on livability for the next generation of Lexington leaders. I'm here still because of the improvements in our community.” (Public Input Form) Participants recognized that universities are an integral part of Lexington’s community, because they produce many jobs and attract creators, talents and unique resources, as well as cultivating a large healthcare field for Lexington. They drew attention to the fact that university students are a great resource, and there should be a desire for them to stay in Lexington after graduation. Students not only play a unique role in Lexington’s identity, but they also have potential to become a part of the workforce and future of Lexington. Participants also drew attention to the fact that universities play a significant role in the community and should be used as community-building resources. In general, they voiced that universities are a key resource and that the city government and other community groups should utilize this resource as much as possible. The universities are invested in this community and should be used to further research and projects alike.
ARTS AND CULTURE – 184 COMMENTS Themes: The arts have a strong, admired presence in Lexington More venues for public arts consumption are desired “Everyone was in agreement that we have a thriving art scene! Whether galleries, theatre music, local talent, or national talent, there is always something exciting going on in Lexington. We love the murals around town and free concerts that pop up in warmer months.” (On the Table) The desire for the arts to be celebrated and fostered within the Lexington community was noted many times. Contributors want to see more events and opportunities to get involved in the creation of the arts in Lexington. The art scene makes Lexington unique and allows for the community to express itself and share its identity and values with those who visit, tour and live here. “The need for a performing arts venue in Lexington - a place where numerous arts and music organizations can perform and work. Sharing facilities and resources!! Thus being able to bring the highest quality product of music and art to the community of Lexington.” (On the Table) Participants also expressed a need for more public art and music venues – such as amphitheaters, street-corner musicians, and outdoor speakers --throughout downtown. They state that they want Lexington to be celebrated for all that it is – a progressive, entertaining and creative place to call home.
Page | 77
Imagine Lexington Public Input Report OTHER CITIES – 81 COMMENTS Themes: Asheville, Savannah, Charlotte, Charleston, Nashville, Boston, Chicago, New Orleans, San Francisco, Louisville and Cincinnati were top valued cities to visit Night life, music and arts scene, diverse population and businesses, myriad of activities and celebrated histories were listed as memorable aspects of other cities “Love these things about those cities: public transportation, walkable, weather (for some), accessibility, street performers and art, lively downtowns, ample parking.” (On the Table) Participants listed many cities that they enjoy visiting. Participants listed the following aspects of other cities that they value and find memorable: a vibrant night life, a strong arts scene, diverse population and businesses, a myriad of activities, a presence of music and celebrated history. These aspects make cities memorable for a reason; they entertain and connect people with the city, its history and its landscape, making the city a destination.
Page | 78
Imagine Lexington Public Input Report
Conclusion & Next Steps This comprehensive analysis of every public comment the Division of Planning has received from all sources is meant to provide context and aid in the drafting of the Goals and Objectives of the Comprehensive Plan over the next few months. Attempts have been made to fairly and accurately convey the broad sentiments of the public as they have provided them through public meetings and questionnaires. This process provided multiple opportunities and methods for giving input on this step of the planning process, and, in many ways, was an unprecedented effort at reaching out to the public. This public input data is extremely dense and this reporting strives to bring some order to what is an extremely copious amount of commentary. While it would have been preferable to have presented this information sooner, it’s fair to say that the number of comments received far exceeded Planning’s expectations. In order to give proper attention to the input that was solicited through a very vocal social media campaign, it required substantial effort from the entire planning staff to organize and put into a presentable format. For the most part, attempts have been made to refrain from drawing conclusions from the data and comments provided. Instead, staff wanted to convey the topics most on the minds of Lexingtonians. From those topics, the goal was to broadly present their sentiments without making it simply a straw poll type of analysis. As for the next steps, after the Planning Commission has completed the Goals and Objectives, the expectation is that this report and its foundational raw data will be used by other divisions in government in drafting their own plan updates, as well as other by community organizations in targeting their efforts and spending. The data, and the Division of Planning’s work organizing it, will be made wholly public for anyone to use. In short, this massive, collaborative public input process is a foundation for others in the community to build on, a resource that will inform any civic organization or individual that wants to help address community needs, not just the government.
Page | 79
Imagine Lexington Public Input Report
Appendix A 79 INITIAL THEMES GRAPHIC
Page | 80
Imagine Lexington Public Input Report
Appendix B IMAGINE LEXINGTON PUBLIC INPUT FORM
Page | 81
Imagine Lexington Public Input Report
Page | 82
Imagine Lexington Public Input Report
Page | 83
Imagine Lexington Public Input Report
Page | 84
Imagine Lexington Public Input Report
Page | 85
Imagine Lexington Public Input Report
Page | 86
Imagine Lexington Public Input Report
Appendix C EMERGE CONFERENCE LIVE POLL RESULTS
Which of the following are your top priorities for improving Lexington? (Select up to three) 133 responses Protect the environment .........................................................................................................24% Preserve Lexington's cultural and historical heritage ..............................................................38% Promote well-designed neighborhoods with expanded housing choices ................................50% Expanding employment & housing opportunities for low-income residents.............................20% Support the agriculture industry & protect the rural landscapes ..............................................25% Expanding transportation options ...........................................................................................34% Identifying & improving under-performing areas .....................................................................41% Encourage diverse businesses & employment opportunities ..................................................47% Lexington's Urban Service Boundary helps control & focus growth. By 2035, about 80,000 more people are anticipated to locate here. Roughly 1 of every 10 acres is currently considered vacant. Are you in favor of maintaining the current boundary? 131 responses Yes ........................................................................................................................................65% No ..........................................................................................................................................35% If yes, are you willing to accept the increased density within the Urban Service Boundary that will accompany this growth, possibly near areas where you live? 116 responses Yes, happily ...........................................................................................................................57% Yes, reluctantly ......................................................................................................................30% No ..........................................................................................................................................13% Page | 87
Imagine Lexington Public Input Report
Which is more important to you? Shopping, restaurants, places of employment, greenspace & parks, arts/culture within… 134 responses Walking distance of where you live. .......................................................................................58% Convenient driving distance of where you live. .......................................................................42% Which of the following best describes Lexington currently? 136 responses A small town ............................................................................................................................1% A college town..........................................................................................................................9% A large small town ..................................................................................................................39% A small city.............................................................................................................................26% A medium-sized city ...............................................................................................................24% A large city ...............................................................................................................................1% Which best describes Lexington as you'd like to see it in the next 20 years? 136 responses A small town ............................................................................................................................0% A college town..........................................................................................................................1% A large small town ..................................................................................................................15% A small city.............................................................................................................................26% A medium-sized city ...............................................................................................................49% A large city .............................................................................................................................10%
Page | 88
Imagine Lexington Public Input Report
Appendix D
COMMUNITY ORGANIZATION INPUT PACKET
Page | 89
2018 Comprehensive Plan Organizational Input Process In the weeks after we hosted our large public input meetings and prior to On the Table, Planning offered meeting sessions for organizations wanting to give their input. The goal of these sessions was to provide a spokesperson or a small group with ample time to present information they felt was important to the Goals and Objectives on behalf of a larger constituency. We offered a set of over 60 meeting times over 3 weeks to a mailing list that included our contacts from every organization we have worked with on projects in the past, as well as our listing of land use attorneys. We also shared this opportunity on www.imaginelexington.com. Since these meetings were an extension of our public input process, our office made it clear that all information from these sessions would be publicly shared the same as all citizen input we have received. The following groups scheduled meetings: •
•
•
•
•
•
Walt Gaffield - Fayette County Neighborhood Council o Issues focused on a desire for better communication between developers, Planning staff and citizens. Also discussed was the shift to a policy based plan and how it has been difficult for neighborhoods to use to their advantage. We talked about ways to improve the goals and objectives to provide better guidance for all parties. Rick Clewett - Central Kentucky Council for Peace and Justice o Mr. Clewett discussed a number of issues including affordable housing, homelessness, equitable development, and green infrastructure. He called for a plan evaluation process to measure the effectiveness of our Comprehensive Plan and to identify indicators of success or failure to increase accountability. Richard Murphy o Mr. Murphy spoke on behalf of four clients wishing for their property to be included into the urban service area. While no specific data or information was given that answered the question central to this phase of the Comprehensive Plan of whether or not the boundary should be expanded, their input was accepted and included in the packet accordingly. Scotty Baesler/The Gibson Company o Discussed the need for industrial land within closer proximity to the interstate. Shared information regarding missed opportunities for business location in Fayette County due to a lack of developed industrial sites. Of particular interest was growth of the Blue Sky area. Susan Speckert - Fayette Alliance o Fayette Alliance discussed work they had done internally to attempt to model Lexington’s underutilized property. This work was not submitted to the Division of Planning and is therefore not attached. We are still working with Fayette Alliance to make that information available to the Planning Commission. Lexington Board of Realtors o After a close working relationship through the housing market demand study, LBAR elected to simply submit a letter which is enclosed to outline their position on meeting housing demand.
Central Kentucky Council for Peace and Justice Housing Justice Project Dear Mayor Gray and members of the Lexington/Fayette Urban County Council;
1) Whereas, according to the CZB study commissioned by the city in 2014, our basic affordable housing shortage was about 6,000 units at that date i while the study projected that Lexington would lose around 400 more units of affordable housing annually in the near future; 2) And whereas the Office of Affordable Housing, established by the city in 2014, is currently facilitating the building or rehabilitation of 400-500 affordable units a year; 3) And whereas that number of new or rehabbed affordable housing units brought on line annually only roughly equals the number lost annually and still leaves the city at least 6,000 affordable housing units short; 4) And whereas according to an August 29th 2016 Herald-Leader article, the population of Lexington is expected to grow by more than 81,000 over the next 20 years, or 26%, a population increase that will put additional pressure on area housing prices and affordable housing availability; 5) And whereas a number of large affordable rental complexes are scheduled to “age out” of their HUD subsidy restrictions and an appreciable percentage of these will be turned into market rate units and, thus, lost as affordable housing; Therefore, the undersigned organizations and individuals strongly urge that you double the amount of funding allocated to the city’s Office of Affordable Housing to $4 million annually. •
•
This is the amount proposed for this purpose in the original 2010 proposal and it is a sum validated by an independent study commissioned from Commonwealth Economics by the city at that time. As the 2014 CZB study made clear, increasing the allocation for the Office of Affordable Housing by $2 million annually will not close the city’s affordable housing gap; that would require a much larger commitment. However, it is a valuable step in that direction and a useful means of highlighting the continuing need for affordable housing creation.
Central Kentucky Council for Peace and Justice Housing Justice Project Adopting this measure would continue the progress the city has made by establishing the Office of Affordable Housing and the Office of Homelessness Prevention and Intervention and by incrementally raising the minimum wage. Therefore, we the undersigned ask that LFUCG increase the funding for the Office of Affording Housing to $4 million annually.
The following organizations have endorsed this proposal and asked that their names to be added to this document to signify that fact: Central Kentucky Council for Peace and Justice Community Action Council Community Ventures East End Community Development Corp Central Kentucky Housing and Homelessness Initiative (CkHHI) Lexington NAACP Lexington Fair Housing Council Lexington Human Rights Commission Lexington Community Land Trust Kentuckians for the Commonwealth The Justice Ministry Team of Second Presbyterian Church Nia Urban Ministries Inc. Temple Adath Israel Urban League of Lexington Catholic Action Center Institute for Compassion in Justice Kentucky Equal Justice Center Habit for Humanity Catholic Diocese of Lexington Fayette Alliance
Central Kentucky Council for Peace and Justice Housing Justice Project
“Roughly 15,000 low income households need housing in Lexington. Of them about 9,000 now receive assistance or are accommodated by the private market. This leaves about 6,000 households, most of whom include at least one worker, unable to find decent housing on the open market in Lexington at rates considered affordable…. Consequently, these 6,000 working households either overpay or live in substandard conditions.” Another way of viewing the need for affordable housing in Lexington is that adopted by the five-year Consolidated Plan, which forms the basis for LFUCG’s application for federal Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Community Block Grant funds. It defines the effects of our affordable housing shortage in the following way: i
Approximately 18,000 households are severely cost burdened, meaning that they pay greater than 50% of their income for housing, and most of these households are at or below 30% of area median income. The programs funded with the HUD grant are largely designed to ameliorate this problem, but they are on much too small a scale to do more than nibble at its edges. The Mosaic Consulting report “2016-2021 Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice” urges LFUCG to begin doing truly integrated planning to meet the city’s affordable and fair housing needs. It also makes clear that the city will need to dedicate more of its own money to solve its problems. Doubling the amount available to leverage and subsidize the construction and rehabilitation of affordable housing is something we can do now to increase the rate at which we eat into our affordable housing gap while we are in the process of creating the commission and doing the long term, comprehensive study called for in the Mosaic report.
Questions Concerning the Planning Process and Comments on the 2013 Comprehensive Plan Intended to help LFUCG Produce an Optimal 2018 Comprehensive Plan and More Integrated City Planning For presentation to LFUCG Planners, March 8th, 1:00 P.M. By Rick Clewett Professor Emeritus at EKU, Chair NAACP Housing Committee, Chair, CKCPJ Housing Justice Project
Questions •
•
• •
•
•
What is relationship of the Comprehensive Plan to Social Service’s planning and their process of prioritizing purposes for which grants are allocated to local social service NGOs? More generally, is there a truly comprehensive planning process in LFUCG that transcends the silos of the Planning Department, Social Services, the Office of Grants and Special Services, etc. It seems as if more integration, or at least communication, sharing ideas, etc. across bureaucratic lines, would be productive. What is the path in the comprehensive planning process for getting from themes and objectives to specific targets and allocations? Given that the Comprehensive Plan deals primarily with land use and physical structure, in what ways does/could the plan promote things like a greater sense of community coherence, trust, and good will between different parts of the community? While there are some universal descriptive claims (describing aspects of the city) and norms in the plan, the actual proposals and plans deal mostly with new and proposed development. o What elements of the 2013 plan benefit areas dominated by existing and older neighborhoods and structures other than the local area plans? What is the Planning Department’s evaluation of the usefulness of the local area plans? • Problems in funding and implementation? o What more could be done on this front? Recent studies (including the study just issued by the Lexington Fair Housing Council) show that pockets of poverty (and wealth) and pockets of concentrated minority population have increased. o What does (can) the plan do to mitigate this problem? o There is language about spreading mixed use development including affordable housing units throughout the county, but
• •
What actual incentives (facilitating provisions) does the plan contain? Does/should the plan and the city’s thinking include inclusive zoning (as recommended by the Mosaic report released in September) or ways to encourage or require landlords to accept Section 8 housing vouchers (The Human Rights Commission is considering proposing this)? What more could be done in the plan you are developing to advance this goal? What is the relationship between the 20123 Comp. Plan and the 2016 draft (implementation) plan? Plan Evaluation Process o What efforts are made to evaluate the effectiveness of the 2013 Plan and its implementation, in terms of making progress toward achieving the goals (themes) of the plan? Do you employ quantitative targets, qualitative measures? o Put another way, what are your indicators of success (or failure) that serve as accountability and course-correction tools?
Points •
•
Emphases on green infrastructure principles and maintaining the urban service boundary are good and important o We don’t want to locate affordable housing off in isolated locales. o Importance of contiguous natural areas that allow for movements of plants and animals o Large areas of mown grass (golf courses, etc.) serve some but far from all of the basic green infrastructure goals. o A strong, vibrant natural component to the urban environment is vital to the physical, emotional and even spiritual wellbeing of Lexingtonians—that includes those who are poor as well as those who are wealthy. Homelessness o Visible homelessness can be seen as a “problem,” something that detracts from the “pleasantness” and draw for tourists and for middle and upper-middle class people. The temptation is to try to outlaw it or tweak the physical environment so as to drive the homeless out of down town and the nicer or heavily tourist-frequented parts of the city. o The more humane and (long-term) effective approach is to work on the root causes of homelessness and to work vigorously to house and “rehabilitate” (though not by coercion) the currently homeless. (The Housing First program works toward this goal. Is there a connection
•
between the Comp. Plan and the efforts of the Office of Homelessness Prevention and Intervention?) Question of tone (level of boosterism or “happy talk” appropriate in a document such as the Comprehensive Plan. o Question of the audience(s) for which the plan is intended. To some extent the Plan is intended for public consumption and to reassure/impress that audience and companies or individuals thinking of locating in Lexington. o To what extent is it also designed as a serious document that gives clarity and guidance to the actual planning process and its implementation? o To the extent that it is intended to serve both purposes, how do you keep the one from getting in the way of the other? o Take as example the beginning of the section on “Growing Successful Neighborhoods,” pp. 44-45 Lexington’s neighborhoods are lively and diverse places with histories, personalities, stories, famous residents, unique businesses, local restaurants and ethnicities. People choose their neighborhood for many reasons, including housing affordability and the test scores of nearby schools. They may buy a house for investment reasons. People may identify with their neighborhood because their parents lived there, and they hope their children will too. To them, their neighborhood defines who they are; it is part of their heritage. When people move into a neighborhood, they inherit the pride and identity associated with it that has been established over generations. In new neighborhoods, people have the opportunity to create their own history. Neighborhoods are the environments in which our children grow and thrive. They are where we live our lives. Neighborhoods that have a lot of people walking and people moving around, access to greenspace, and a strong social network are the kinds of places that build physical, social, mental and emotional health and wellbeing. The physical layout and visual cues that make a neighborhood unique start with its form. The ideal structure of a neighborhood is composed of places to reside, work, shop, learn and play. How these spaces are organized and relate to one another influences public health, cultural expression, environmental health, safety and economic vitality. It takes a community effort to build and maintain a successful neighborhood. The effort is heightened when a neighborhood has declined, is experiencing loss, or is no longer attracting new residents and investment. At its core, the 2013 Comprehensive Plan promotes neighborhood prosperity and success. It provides
the tools to ensure that all neighborhoods - old and new, thriving and in decline - are given full access to paths to success. • Notice the consistently boosterish and idealized tone until the second sentence of the last paragraph above, where you have a brief gesture toward the reality that not all neighborhoods can be described using superlatives.
Proposal of a new Theme and Comments on Specific Section of 2013 Plan New Theme: Encouraging/facilitating the development of a more coherent (cohesive, humane, equitable) community Goal 1: Seek out and pursue measures that build understanding and trust between different ethnic, religious and economic sections of the community Goal 2: Work to build a civic culture that recognizes the different needs of different sections of the community and seeks to meet them using the framework of equity, and not the framework of equal treatment or “one size fits all.” Goal 3: Seek ……
Comments on sections of the 2013 Comprehensive Plan Theme A: Growing Successful Neighborhoods Goal 1 Expanding Housing Choice • Pursue incentives and regulatory approaches that encourage creativity and sustainability in housing development o This should include well thought out zoning policy that allows for higher density developments surrounded by more communal green space and zoning that permits or encourages the development of shops interspersed with or close to housing to encourage walking and a sense of local cohesion. • Plan for housing that addresses the market needs for all of Lexington-Fayette County’s residents, including, but not limited to, mixed-use and housing near employment and commercial sites.
o What is missing from this statement is the concept of affordable housing (as HUD defines it). -The city needs to think beyond market needs and for-profit construction and rental in order to meet the needs of those who need affordable housing. The research indicates that below market level rents that meet the needs of people with modest means can only be provided by non-profit development corps or with subsidies.
o If there are models/arrangements that allow for-profit builders to build and operate reasonable quality affordable housing fine, but usually when mixed-use developments are built by for-profit developers, they contract with a non-profit to manage the affordable housing units. The city can’t rely too much on profit-driven construction and management, • Plan for safe, affordable, and accessible housing to meet the needs of older and/or disadvantaged residents. How? • Create and implement housing incentives that strengthen the opportunity for economic development, new business, and jobs, including, but not limited to higher density and housing affordability. How?
Goal 3: Provide well designed neighborhoods and communities • Enabling existing and new neighborhoods to flourish through improved regulation, expanded opportunities for neighborhood character preservation, and public commitment to expanded options for mix-use and mixed-type housing throughout Lexington-Fayette County. In terms of neighborhood character preservation, how do you curtail gentrification that simply dislodges current residents and obliterates/ transforms the neighborhood? This might seem to call for inclusive zoning, such is called for in the Mozaic study issued in September • Strive for positive and safe social interactions in neighborhoods, including, but not limited to, neighborhoods that are connected for pedestrians and various modes of transportation. •
A comprehensive or serious consideration of factors that improve the safety of “social interactions in neighborhoods” would include not only transportation infrastructure and policing but the quality of life of the people living in the neighborhood. Neighborhoods characterized by housing stock that is dilapidated and significantly controlled by absentee slum landlords undermines the physical and mental wellbeing of the people who live in it. The erosion of hope and motivation resulting from such living conditions and a scarcity of jobs, particularly ones that pay a living wage gives rise to homelessness, on the one hand, and street crime, especially drug-related crime.
Theme C: Creating Jobs and Prosperity Goal 1 Support and showcase local assets to further the creation of a variety of job opportunities that lead to prosperity for all.
• Strengthen efforts to develop a variety of job opportunities that lead to prosperity for all. How? The majority of jobs being created recently (numerically) are low paying service jobs that often do not provide the basis for a decent quality of life. This problem is exacerbated by the success Lexington has had in attracting higher paying, more professional jobs, a success that has led to a widening gap between the “haves” and the “have nots” and a rapid increase in the cost of housing, rendering very little housing affordable to people with modest incomes according to HUD standards. (See CZB, Mosaic, and just released Fair Housing studies)
Goal 2: Attract the world’s finest jobs, encourage entrepreneurial spirit, and enhance our ability to recruit and retain a talented, creative workforce by establishing opportunities that embrace diversity with inclusion in our community. See above. The goal articulated in the first part of this sentence is to some extent being achieved, but it is not at all clear how that is being brought about by embracing “diversity with inclusion in our community,” or exactly what that phrase means. There is a relatively large immigrant population in Lexington. Some of these people are doctors and IT people, but many more are relatively unskilled and, many have at best a modest command of English. We need to provide jobs for them which will support decent lives, but this is more a matter of steps like raising the minimum rage and improving the social services system than pretending that the entire workforce can be part of the professional/entrepreneurial class.
