Plan to identify future growth areas in Fayette is ‘fundamentally flawed.’
The Goal 4 Work Group has attempted to identify future growth areas within the Rural Service Area. Their recently released report is fundamentally flawed and based on outdated sewerability information and inadequate public input.
The proposed map largely mirrors the sewerability map included in the 1999 Rural Land Management Plan. An updated sewerability study is needed to determine the cost and feasibility of sewering proposed growth areas. It is irresponsible to propose large areas for future growth without fully understanding the cost of providing public services to those areas. The sewerability maps in the Rural Land Management Plan distinguished between sewerability categories 1, 2, 3, and 4 in recognition of the different degrees of difficulty and expense in sewering various areas. The Group 4 map paints the areas with too broad a brush.
The report seeks to identify areas for permanent preservation without the careful analysis included in the Purchase of Development Rights ordinance. The PDR program is our community’s primary tool for conserving farmland. The program ranks farms based on a variety of factors including soil quality, size, and proximity to the urban service boundary. The PDR program contemplates future growth through its ranking criteria. The report’s proposed process for including properties in the Urban Service Boundary opens up the possibility for leap frog growth by allowing landowners in any of the designated growth areas to apply for inclusion into the Urban Service Area regardless of their proximity to the boundary. Leap frog growth is more expensive to service and conflicts with our community’s longstanding commitment to compact contiguous growth.
The Goal 4 Work Group Report earmarks 20,000-plus acres of farmland for future growth. The report was developed without the input of landowners in the proposed growth areas. Many landowners in these areas have voluntarily placed conservation easements on their farms through the PDR program or the Bluegrass Land Conservancy. Our community and our federal and state funding partners have spent millions of tax dollars to protect these farms. The report and attached map put that investment at risk by potentially surrounding eased properties with development and creating isolated islands of permanently conserved farms.
Identifying vast areas of farmland for future growth without a demonstrated need for that land use sends the wrong signal to our agricultural community. Farmers who feel threatened by future growth will not continue to invest in their agricultural businesses. Why is the Work Group proposing to develop large areas of prime farmland when our rural lands produce high quality livestock and equine athletes that literally bring the world to our doorstep through events at the Kentucky Horse Park or events like the Breeders Cup at Keeneland? Our prime soils are a finite resource that we should seek to conserve for use by our signature agricultural industries, not squander with sprawl. Farms are not land just waiting to be developed. They provide food, jobs and attract tourism.
The 20,000-plus acres of land earmarked for future growth is nearly four times the amount of land included in the Urban Service Area in 1996. The report provides no justification for designating this amount of land for urban use. By designating this much land for future growth, the report encourages land speculation and changes the community’s land use focus from infill and redevelopment to sprawl. Seventeen thousand acres of vacant or underutilized land remain within the existing Urban Service Boundary. We should seek to maximize the use of the land within the Urban Service Boundary before expanding beyond the boundary.
The process to develop the Goal 4 Work Group Report did not involve substantial community input or include all relevant stakeholders. When we worked to establish the Purchase of Development Rights program, all the various stakeholders were at the table: developers, farmers, neighborhood advocates, planners etc. A decision as important as this one determining how, when and where we grow as a community deserves a healthy debate among all the parties. Our nation was built on lively debate; community wide discussions are valuable and should be encouraged.
Margaret Graves is a member of the Fayette County Rural Land Management Board.