The town of Union, located on U.S. 42 a few miles south of sprawling Florence, hasn’t changed much in the last few decades.
While development has swallowed nearly every acre of available property to the north, Union’s rolling hills and horse farms are sectioned by white fences and trees. Residents in the city of 1,700 still identify parts of town by who owns the closest farm.
But now a new state road is being prepared for the middle of the city, and the last of Florence’s vacant land is disappearing, pushing the potential for development profit closer to Union’s hills.
Boone County identified Union as a planning priority in the county’s 1990 comprehensive plan update, rewritten every five years. But no formal work began until early 1998, when the county hired a planning consultant.
Many small towns in Union’s position have been developed in a typical suburban style — subdivision by subdivision, with little foresight into providing services such as schools, police and fire protection. Farmers approaching retirement sell to retailers who build boxlike outlets with football-field sized parking lots. The state and the county address the increased traffic by widening two-lane country roads into thoroughfares unfit for walking or cycling.
State, county and city planning — or lack of it — dictate this pattern of development.
But Boone County planners, backed by residents, didn’t want to see the town disappear under a row of haphazard strip malls and cul de sacs.
“We have enough big boxes with the Florence Mall,” said Union City Commissioner Wayne McClellan. “We don’t need that in Union.”
Instead, planners wanted to maintain the rural feel of Union while accommodating a few thousand new residents and the businesses they will demand. The goal was to build a unique city that felt a little like Mariemont, a place where people could walk comfortably on tree-lined streets.
The planning consultant, Myers Schmalenberger Meisner Inc., presided over several public meetings and workshops in early to mid-1998 attended by hundreds of citizens and major land owners. Based on that input, the consultant devised a plan to:
· Limit low-density development.
· Create a town center with a variety of businesses.
· Use zoning to prevent long stretches of commercial development on the current and future U.S. 42, which will parallel the old road for 2.9 miles.
The plan also included strict architectural restrictions, housing setbacks and mandatory green space on certain property.
A key to the plan was a new, divided U.S. 42 to be built by the Kentucky Department of Transportation, with one lane passing several hundred feet east and west of the town center, and a small network of streets handling town center traffic instead of a few main roads. The new U.S. 42 also included bike paths and sidewalks.
Not everyone, however, was enthralled by the Meisner plan. The plan’s zoning called for one house per 5 acres on some land, with homes set back at least 600 feet from U.S. 42 in order to preserve the area’s rural feel. That distance made installing utility lines much more expensive than usual, which restricted the land’s value, and did nothing to curb low-density development, argued some property owners.
“It just meant that there would be no development there,” said Dave Schneider, an attorney for a property owner with land adjacent to the new and old U.S. 42.
The plan also required new housing to be built in pre-1940s Victorian design without vinyl siding and required permanent green space on certain land, which violates state law, according to Schneider. Kentucky planning laws permit government to reserve land for public use for two years and then the reservation expires, he said.
“We got a little too detailed,” McClellan said.
There were signs of discontent before the final public hearing in October 1998, but they went unheeded, according to Dave Geohegan, director of planning services for the Boone County Planning Commission. Geohegan said the consultant felt really good about the plan, and Union Mayor Warren Moore wanted the plan to pass before the November elections.
During that public hearing, Union land owners, backed by the Kentucky League of Property Owners, riddled the plan with questions that Meisner couldn’t answer, according to James Daugherty, an accountant who owns a 125-acre farm near Union’s proposed city center.
“As somebody reaches for your purse, you’re going to find a way to protect your purse,” Daugherty said.
“It was all one-sided,” Geohegan said. “They just blasted the plan. We totally got nailed.”
It wasn’t adopted. But that wasn’t the end for the town plan. Moore established a 15-member Union Steering Committee a few months later to sort through the several unresolved issues and come up with recommendations. For example, would businesses be allowed outside of the town center, and how could the city use incentives rather than zoning to guide development?
The committee, which included residents, politicians and land owners, met more than a dozen times during 1999 but was able to reach a consensus only on a couple of the issues, one by default: The split U.S. 42 design was abandoned by the Kentucky Department of Transportation (KDOT). Part of the problem might have been the lack of a local consensus on the town plan, according to Geohegan. Some property owners thought a split U.S. 42 would restrict the commercial value of their property, he said.
Moore pushed the steering committee with a letter pledging to bring back the old town plan for a second attempt if the committee didn’t make more progress, according to Geohegan.
The revised plan still requires property owners to set aside green space, but not at specific points. And instead of strict architectural standards, the plan uses incentives to developers to built what Union wants. For example, instead of two or three units per acre, developers who build in a “neo-traditional” style — that is, blocks of attached homes with rear alleys and streets connected to a grid — can built 10 units per acre.
Also, in an attempt to create a smaller scale in the town center, no building can have more than 150 feet of street frontage and 80 percent of parking spaces must be located in the back or side, according to John Huth, a Boone County planner involved with the town center plan.
The town center has been divided into two phases, with the southern portion to be developed first and the northern section to be done when needed. Most commercial development is planned for the town center, with a few small offices along the new U.S. 42 and some stores on the northern edge of town near an existing Kroger store.
The steering committee seemed satisfied with the new plan at a Jan. 20 presentation of its details. That includes Daugherty, a committee member.
“As near as I can tell, this makes a lot more sense …,” Daugherty said.
“Nobody got exactly what they wanted,” said McClellan, who is on the steering committee. “But nobody got hurt either.”
So is there enough support to pass the plan this time?
“I don’t know why not,” said McClellan, adding that 400 people have contributed opinions to the plan. “I think it can set a precedent for not only the state but also the nation.”
Schneider said he hasn’t closely examined the new plan but plans to in coming months.
Of course, some questions still need answers. Will Union’s Ryle High School be able to handle the influx of new families? When and where are new elementary schools needed? Will one be built in the town center?
And will planners be able to create a pedestrian-friendly town center with a five-lane road running through its middle? Planners are hoping they can convince KDOT to build pedestrian paths crossing under the new U.S. 42. Planners would also like to see Mt. Zion Road relocated just south of the existing one, with the old road becoming part of the downtown street grid, but the state has no such project on the drawing board yet.
Finally, will developers agree the plan is the best thing for their bottom lines?
“They’re not real thrilled with doing something different, because they don’t feel the buyers are,” Geohegan said. “We’re trying to demonstrate that you can do things a little nicer … and everyone will come out ahead.”
“I know we can’t make everybody happy, but we want to go as far toward that as we can,” Huth said.
Geohegan hopes the unresolved issues will be ironed out during public workshops in February and public hearings in March and April, with final votes from Union and Boone County possibly in June.
“It’s not done by any means,” Geohegan said. ©
This article appears in Jan 26 – Feb 1, 2000.