Candidate Questionnaire, Tina Bryson

Tina Bryson

Housing

Studies show Lexington needs about 22,500 new housing units across all types to fill the housing gap in our city, but 75% of the needed units are at or below 80% of the Area Median Income (AMI).

What strategies and locations do you believe Lexington should prioritize for housing growth in order to address these needs?

• Answer:

Lexington’s housing shortage is real, and the greatest need is for homes that working families, seniors, and young people can afford. If we truly want to address that gap, we must focus on how many units we build, as well as where and how we build them so housing growth truly serves the people who already call Lexington home.

In order to successfully address the housing gap in Lexington, we should focus on areas with existing infrastructure through infill and redevelopment, but we have to be honest about the challenges that can come with that approach. Too often, new development is concentrated in older, downtown adjacent neighborhoods where lower income and minority residents already live, creating real risks of displacement and rising costs. Growth should strengthen neighborhoods, not push people out of them. That requires community input and an understanding of how development affects everyday life.

We also need a mix of housing options across the city so people at different stages of life and income levels can stay connected to opportunity. Supporting our workforce depends on it. Done right, housing growth helps people stay rooted, protects existing neighborhoods, and keeps Lexington a place where families can build stable lives now and for generations to come.

Expansion

The Lexington-Fayette Urban County Council recently adopted the Preservation and Growth Management Program, which created a data-driven method for considering future expansions of the Urban Service Boundary (USB).

What factors do you believe are most important to consider if an expansion of the Urban Service Boundary was proposed to the Council during your term?

• Answer:

If an expansion of the Urban Service Boundary were proposed during my term, the most important consideration would be whether it truly serves the long term interests of the Lexington community. Any proposal should clearly explain why expansion is being considered and whether growth inside the current boundary is being used responsibly and effectively.

It would also be important to consider the impact on farmland, existing neighborhoods, and public infrastructure. Because Lexington’s farmland is central to our economy, growth decisions should reflect how changes to the Urban Service Boundary would affect everyday life, including traffic, public services, and the community we are shaping for future generations.

I would also advocate for a transparent and inclusive process. While data should inform decisions, listening to residents, farmers, planners, and stakeholders across Lexington matters just as much.

Agricultural Preservation

Agricultural industries, and the farmland that supports them, have an economic impact of $2.6 billion every year on Lexington-Fayette County’s economy and support more than 16,000 jobs across all twelve council districts.

What policies do you support that promote Lexington’s iconic and productive farmland and protect it from irresponsible future development?

• Answer:

Lexington’s farmland is a defining part of who we are and a major contributor to our local economy. I believe protecting it requires thoughtful, balanced decision making that respects both our agricultural heritage and the needs of Lexington as the city grows.

As a councilmember, I would ask thoughtful questions, listen closely to experts and stakeholders, and support land use decisions that reflect community benefits for the long term. I support planning approaches that recognize farmland as an economic and environmental asset.

It’s important to approach growth responsibly by encouraging development that makes efficient use of existing areas, while being mindful of the impact decisions can have on surrounding rural land.

It is important to steward our land by working collaboratively with farmers, residents, planners, and fellow councilmembers to ensure future decisions reflect Lexington’s values and preserve this resource for generations to come.

Transit

Land use policy and public transit are closely linked. How do you think Lexington can prioritize transit oriented development moving forward and what strategies do you support to improve our city’s public transit system?

• Answer:

Land use and transportation planning should work together. I support encouraging transit-oriented development along major corridors and in areas where existing infrastructure can support additional housing, businesses, and services. This approach can help create more walkable neighborhoods, expand housing choices, reduce congestion, and protect Lexington’s Rural Service Area from unnecessary sprawl. As a council member, I would support updating zoning regulations along key transit corridors to encourage mixed-use and higher-density development where it makes sense and where public transit service already exists or is planned.

To improve public transit, Lexington should focus on increasing route reliability and frequency, expanding access to underserved areas, and making it easier and safer for residents to reach transit through investments in sidewalks, crosswalks, bike connections, and bus stop improvements. I would also support prioritizing transportation funding for these first- and last-mile connections because transit is only effective if people can safely and easily get to it. A stronger transit system connects people to jobs, education, healthcare, and other opportunities while supporting sustainable growth across our city.

Downtown Area Master Plan

LFUCG recently adopted a new Downtown Area Master Plan. As the community works to increase the vibrancy of our downtown while also creating new housing opportunities, which implementation items from the Plan would you like to see prioritized and why?

• Answer:

I would prioritize implementation strategies that increase housing opportunities downtown while creating a more walkable, connected, and vibrant urban center. I would encourage a mix of housing types, including workforce housing, to help more people live near jobs, restaurants, entertainment, and services while making better use of existing infrastructure. As a council member, I would support zoning and development incentives that encourage housing on underutilized downtown properties, including upper-story residential conversions and mixed-use redevelopment projects that add housing while strengthening downtown businesses.

I would also prioritize investments in pedestrian safety, street improvements, and public spaces that make downtown more inviting for residents and visitors. A successful downtown is not just a place people work; it’s a place people want to live, gather with friends and family, and create lasting memories. I would support also prioritize investments in pedestrian safety, sidewalk improvements, safer street crossings, better lighting, and public spaces that make downtown more inviting for residents and visitors. By expanding housing opportunities and improving the downtown experience, Lexington can accommodate growth while preserving neighborhood character and protecting the Rural Service Area.

Data Centers

Lexington currently has a moratorium on data centers until October 31, 2026. How do you think Lexington should address the growing demand for data centers?

• Answer:

Lexington should put people first as it considers the growing demand for data centers. Before lifting the moratorium, we need clear standards addressing location, energy and water use, noise, infrastructure demands, and proximity to homes. We must also evaluate the cumulative impact on communities already carrying a disproportionate share of industrial development. No neighborhood should be expected to bear most of the burden, and residents’ health, safety, and quality of life must come first. Given what we know today, I remain opposed to hyper-scale data centers in Lexington.

Any framework should protect the Rural Service Area and the agriculture, equine, and other industries that drive Lexington’s economy. Data centers should be located only where infrastructure can support them without shifting costs to taxpayers or harming surrounding communities and businesses. Economic growth matters, but it must be responsible, transparent, and consistent with Lexington’s long-term land-use and economic priorities.

Renewable Energy

What policies would you support to increase urban renewable energy development, like commercial and industrial rooftop solar, in Lexington-Fayette County’s built environment?

• Answer:

I support making it easier for homeowners, businesses, schools, and nonprofits to install rooftop solar because reducing energy costs should be a priority for Lexington families. One specific proposal is to streamline permitting and review processes for rooftop solar projects so residents and businesses face fewer barriers and lower upfront costs. We should focus renewable energy development on existing rooftops, parking areas, and developed properties rather than consuming farmland or encouraging sprawl.

For many families, the value of solar is simple: lower monthly utility bills and greater protection from rising energy costs. I support expanding opportunities for rooftop solar while ensuring that these investments are practical, cost-effective, and accessible. By putting underused roofs to work, we can help residents save money, strengthen energy resilience, and support a cleaner future without sacrificing the land and resources that make Lexington the special place it is.

Student Housing

As enrollment at the University of Kentucky expands, Lexington neighborhoods are feeling the pressure of increased demand for student housing. What growth strategies would you support to balance the need for student housing with the concerns of longtime residents?

• Answer:

As UK continues to grow, Lexington needs a more collaborative approach to student housing that recognizes both the needs of students and the concerns of longtime residents. I support establishing a formal University-City Housing Partnership that brings LFUCG, UK, neighborhood representatives, and housing stakeholders together to plan for enrollment growth, housing demand, infrastructure, and neighborhood impacts. Student housing should be directed to areas that can support higher density and are well connected to campus, rather than allowing historic neighborhoods to absorb the majority of the growth pressure.

We must also ensure that growth does not displace longtime residents or erode the character of established neighborhoods. As student-oriented development occurs, there should be parallel investments in the surrounding communities, including infrastructure, public safety, housing preservation, and neighborhood amenities. Lexington and UK should be planning together, not reacting to problems after they occur. A coordinated strategy can help meet student housing needs while protecting existing residents and neighborhoods.

Urban Service Boundary

Lexington’s historic and productive agricultural lands feel more pressure each year for development of all kinds. Why do you think it is important to protect our Rural Service Area, and what policies do you support (in addition to the PDR program, vital for conservation) or would you like to see implemented to continue safeguarding it?

• Answer:

The Rural Service Area is one of Lexington’s greatest assets. It protects world-renowned farmland, supports our equine and agricultural industries, preserves our natural resources, and is a key part of what makes Lexington unique. Once farmland is lost to development, we cannot get it back. Protecting the Rural Service Area is important not only for conservation, but also for preserving the industries and landscapes that drive our economy and quality of life.

In addition to supporting the PDR program, I would prioritize policies that direct more growth and redevelopment into the Urban Service Area. As a council member, I would support zoning and land-use reforms that encourage infill development, adaptive reuse of underutilized properties, and higher-density housing in appropriate locations where infrastructure already exists. I also support regular reviews of vacant and underutilized land within the Urban Service Area before considering expansion pressures on the Rural Service Area. If we are serious about protecting farmland, we must be equally serious about creating more housing and redevelopment opportunities inside our existing growth boundary.