Lexington’s Preservation & Growth Management Program

The Lexington Preservation and Growth Management Program will guide growth decisions around the Urban Service Boundary and must be formalized by August 31, 2026.

Update | January, 2026

The Lexington Preservation & Growth Management Program will be on the agenda for a presentation and a potential vote to pass the item to a first reading at the Council Work Session on Tuesday, January 20th, 2026 at 3:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers.

• Remember: This issue has been discussed in the General Government and Planning Committee of the Council, and was forwarded to review by the full Council this month.

• More Details: The Council will get an update on the newest drafts of the program and ordinance and get an opportunity to share their thoughts.

If the Council votes to pass the item at the January 20th meeting, a first reading of the ordinance may take place as soon as the Council Meeting on Thursday, January 22nd, 2026. Two readings are required to ultimately pass an ordinance, after which it would immediately go into effect.

Get Involved

In Person

Community members will have the opportunity to make public comment on the program at the beginning of the meeting at City Hall.

Online

If you can’t attend in person, please consider writing to the Councilmembers about these policies before to the meeting. Because there may be a first reading of the draft ordinance the same week as this meeting, it is critical the Council consider your comments prior to the meeting if possible.

Next Steps

This process is still ongoing, and the next important step to finalizing the Lexington Preservation & Growth Management Program is taking place next week at City Hall on Tuesday, January 20th at 3 p.m. at the Council Work Session.

• Remember: Public comment will take place at the very beginning of the meeting on this issue.

It’s vital to make your voice on this process heard to the full Council before they vote to approve this as a local ordinance.

• Important: The LP&GMP could shape Lexington’s future for decades to come — that’s why it is imperative we get this right.

We encourage you to make your voice heard at the public input session on Tuesday, or via email to the Councilmembers and Planning Staff on these issues, so the final draft reflects the best possible process for our future.

Draft Details

The latest version of the LP&GMP includes several improvements that we are happy to see included.

Most importantly, the draft calls for developing an annual growth report and data center that will keep centralized information on growth trends: jobs, residential, and commercial data. Additionally, infill and redevelopment will continue to be prioritized before considering expansion of the Urban Service Boundary.

Since the last draft of the LP&GMP, changes we are particularly happy to see include:

• Focus on infill and redevelopment first: Before expanding the Urban Service Boundary, the city will prioritize building on land already inside the boundary.

• Clearer roles and duties: The draft explains the responsibilities of the Council, Planning Commission, and a special Subcommittee that will look at possible areas for expansion if data indicates it may be necessary to meet 20 year housing needs.

• Limits on land expansion: There will be a cap on the number of acres that can be added for housing needs.

• Focus on importance of agricultural land protection: Language was added to emphasize why responsible growth is critical in our community and criteria were added to ensure considerations of future land for development include proximity to conserved lands, soil quality, agricultural operations, and more.

4 Areas of Concern

The city’s planning staff have been very diligent in outlining best-practice growth decisions within the Preservation and Growth Management Plan, and we are thankful for their thoughtful and important work.

As the draft plan continues to move forward, we hope to see the following areas of concern addressed.

Right now, the plan proposes that only empty/vacant land be considered to meet housing needs — leaving out existing redevelopment opportunities inside the Urban Service Boundary.

Our research shows that redevelopment could meet housing needs equal to the most recent expansion.

• We recommend: Including redevelopment in evaluations to ensure future housing assessments reflect all available opportunities and development realities, and establishing a target number of acres for infill and redevelopment to absorb housing growth before looking at vacant land as the sole solution.

The most recent changes to the draft shorten the timeframe of appointing a subcommittee to review applications if an expansion of the USB is considered, which is alarming in light of the critical role this group will play in evaluating and making decisions about the future growth of the community. In addition, there are no stakeholders identified that would be required to be part of this process, nor interests identified that would have an objective role in the same.

• We recommend: Specific stakeholders be identified as groups which should be included in this Subcommittee, similar to the make-up of the Rural Land Management Board, which consists of stakeholders from the following groups:
  • Farm Bureau representative
  • Historic Preservation representative
  • Homebuilders representative
  • Commerce Lexington representative
  • Fayette Alliance representative
  • Land Conservation group representative
  • Fayette County Neighborhood Council representative
  • Kentucky Thoroughbred Association representative
  • LBAR representative
  • USDA Soil Scientist representative

We applaud Planning Staff and Councilmembers for considering our recommendations that more criteria be included when considering potential future areas for expansion of the USB, specifically related to ongoing conservation and preservation efforts.

One piece missing from this analysis is a consideration of the fiscal impact of infrastructure improvements to any potential growth area. While basic physical infrastructure like roads and sewer systems may be paid for by a developer, the fiscal impacts of extending urban services like waste collection, police, fire, EMS services, and more that fall to the taxpayers are not currently factored in.

Research is clear that residential development does not pay for itself.

• Data: University of Kentucky figures demonstrate that for every $1.00 generated by residential development, it costs the city $1.69 — and the community needs to understand the true cost of different models of growth before committing to them.

• We recommend: Including a provision that requires analysis and evaluation of fiscal impacts of extending urban services including EMS, fire, police, and more to any proposed location for potential future areas of expansion for consideration by the Subcommittee and other decision makers.

This draft of the LP&GMP removes land for jobs and economic development from the housing discussion.

• What’s concerning: It instead allows Council to set aside acreage for “special economic development” at any time.

Without proper guardrails, this proposal risks undermining the concept of our Urban Service Boundary.

• We recommend: The safeguards included in the Economic Development special needs section of the draft proposal be upheld to ensure any decision to move forward on this section of the ordinance is data-driven and responsible. In addition, the same locational criteria outlined in Section 5 of the proposed ordinance should apply to this type of development as well.

These steps will strengthen accountability and ensure Lexington grows responsibly while protecting its unique identity.

Position Statement

After extensive review of the most recently proposed draft, Fayette Alliance has finalized its full position statement on the current Lexington Preservation & Growth Management Program draft.

There is a lot to love about the proposed draft, and we are thankful for the work both Planning Staff and Council have put into this proposal to give our community the data-driven growth process it deserves.

• However: While we support many aspects of the proposed draft, some aspects still remain concerning.

History of the USB

Lexington was the first city in the United States to formally adopt an Urban Service Boundary in 1958.

• We believe this forward-thinking decision demonstrates our community’s historical commitment to being good stewards of our finite land.

Since 1958, other cities have followed our lead and adopted Urban Growth Boundaries to balance urban growth with their natural landscapes — Portland, OR; Boulder, CO; and Fresno, CA to name just a few.

• However: While we initially set the standard for stewardship, other cities have implemented formalized data-driven decision-making processes for guiding growth.

• Factors that guide expansion decisions for other cities include population and economic growth; land supply analysis, including examining the density of existing development and identifying potential infill and redevelopment opportunities; environmental impacts of expansion; and more.

While Lexington’s USB has changed, expanded, and shrunk throughout the years, we have not formalized an expansion process since the USB was established in 1958.

• That means our community is aiming to adopt a process that is nearly 70 years in the making.

We have to get this decision right.