Fayette Alliance urges Lexington to require redevelopment target, infrastructure-cost analysis in urban service boundary ordinance

Britney Rothmeier, speaking for the Fayette Alliance during public comment, urged the Lexington-Fayette Urban County Council to strengthen a proposed ordinance that will guide future decisions about the city’s urban service boundary.

Rothmeier asked the council to incorporate two specific requirements into the ordinance: a target that 30% of future housing growth be accommodated through redevelopment of existing properties rather than greenfield development, and a requirement that the city analyze the full cost of infrastructure and ongoing operations and maintenance needed to serve any proposed growth areas. "Impact or privilege fees are not wealth. They're one-time cash payments to fund construction, but they do not fund sustainability," Rothmeier told the council, adding that operations, maintenance and eventual replacement costs typically fall to taxpayers and local government.

The request came immediately before the council’s second reading of several ordinances, including one described by the clerk as creating a preservation and urban growth management chapter to the Lexington-Fayette Urban County code. Council proceeded to second reading on zoning and code amendments listed by the clerk later in the meeting.

Why it matters: The ordinance will shape where Lexington allows future development to occur. Rothmeier framed the change as a push for data-driven planning that weighs not only initial construction costs but also the long-term fiscal impact of extending roads, utilities, emergency services and other public infrastructure.

Council reaction and next steps: Rothmeier’s remarks were the only public comment on the item. The council moved the listed ordinances to second reading and approved the items on second reading during the meeting. Council members did not adopt Rothmeier’s two specific edits on the record during the meeting; staff and committee review were referenced elsewhere in the agenda materials. The council’s further consideration of amendments or the adoption of additional requirements would depend on subsequent committee work or an explicit motion to change the ordinance text.

Context: Rothmeier cited research and the group Strong Towns to argue that one-time fees often fail to pay for long-term service needs. She asked the council to require a cost analysis for infrastructure and community services for any proposed future growth area and to set a redevelopment target to reduce pressure to expand into vacant land.

What’s next: The ordinance was on the meeting docket for second reading; any formal change to the ordinance language would appear in later committee reports or future council action.