Planning Commission Considering Ordinance That Would Stifle Public Input, Impede Future Distinctive Local Developments

​In response to a state law, Lexington’s planning staff is proposing an ordinance that would add cost and bureaucracy to the planning process. This proposed ordinance, which is currently being considered by the Planning Commission on April 10 before going before the Council, would impede future distinctive local developments similar to Southland Drive, the Distillery District, Turner Commons and National Avenue.
 
Commerce Lexington is joining with other business associations to oppose the current 50+ page draft of the HB 443 Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment (PLN-ZOTA-25-00001).  This proposal far exceeds the legislative intent of HB 443, enacted during the 2024 Regular Session of the Kentucky General Assembly.  HB 443 aimed to streamline local development processes by removing subjective standards, thereby simplifying compliance for employers and developers. 

---

Rather than enhancing efficiency, the HB 443 ZOTA imposes new regulations that increase costs, add bureaucratic obstacles, and hinder economic progress. These changes threaten to delay infill business development projects, stifle job creation, and potentially limit residents’ access to essential services like banks and pharmacies—outcomes that harm businesses, developers, and the broader community.
 
Lexington’s existing 360+ page regulatory framework already poses significant challenges. A 2023 Planning and Development Approval Process Study revealed that it takes over twice as long to navigate the development process here compared to the national average. For example, subdivision plan approvals in Lexington average 523 days, while our peer city, Greenville, S.C., completes the same process in just 45 days. Far from addressing these inefficiencies, the HB 443 ZOTA exacerbates delays and extends timelines.
 
We are particularly concerned about the following provisions:

• New regulatory requirements for commercial access standards, vehicular use areas, pedestrian facilities, bike parking, private roads, and parking lots (Article 16).
• Revised standards for waivers, including eligibility, filing requirements, and notice obligations, while explicitly excluding development cost considerations (Article 21).
• Stricter regulations on drive-up windows and drive-thru facilities, jeopardizing their feasibility (Article 16).
• Additional restrictions targeting larger retail businesses (Article 12, Sec. 12-9).
• Increased procedural and approval requirements for development plans (Article 21).

 
Our coalition urges the Planning Commission to revise the HB 443 ZOTA, limiting it to non-controversial policy updates that align with HB 443’s intent to improve efficiency. Major regulatory changes, such as those listed above, warrant separate consideration by the Planning Commission and Urban County Council, with robust input from the business and development community to assess impacts and prevent unintended consequences.
 
To communicate your opposition to the HB 443 ZOTA, please email Planning Commission members and Urban County Councilmembers.