"Does this site need a rezoning before KHC will accept the application, or can I still be waiting on one when the technical submission deadline hits?"
The three-way zoning threshold
KHC's 2027 Multifamily Programs Guidelines set a threshold that applies to every project: "All projects must submit evidence that the project site is: a. Properly zoned for the type of proposed project; b. Does not currently have the proper zoning, but a rezoning application has been submitted to the local jurisdiction; or c. There is no local zoning for the site location." All three answers are treated as valid ways to clear the threshold -- it is not a pass/fail test that only option (a) satisfies.
This threshold is checked at two separate points in the process. At full application, the applicant submits evidence supporting whichever of the three answers applies. If the answer is (b) -- a pending rezoning -- confirmation that the project is allowed under the final zoning outcome must be submitted no later than the Technical Submission deadline, meaning a rezoning can still be genuinely unresolved when KHC issues its preliminary award, as long as it resolves before that later date.
What KHC wants as proof, at each stage
| Stage | What KHC requires |
|---|---|
| Full Application | A letter from the local zoning board or governing authority stating the type of zoning in place, or a letter from the county judge or mayor stating no zoning is present; a description of all zoning requirements and/or restrictions affecting the design or building location; and a local zoning map showing the proposed site, its classification, and neighboring sites. If not properly zoned, evidence that a rezoning application has already been submitted. |
| Technical Submission | If the site was not properly zoned at the time of application, evidence that it is properly zoned (or otherwise confirmed allowed) as of the Technical Submission deadline. |
The guidelines' own choice of words for who can attest that no zoning exists is specific: "a letter from the county judge or mayor" -- "county judge" being Kentucky's shorthand for the county judge/executive, a county's chief elected administrative officer, distinct from a judicial office despite the name.
Kentucky's zoning landscape: opt-in planning, home rule, and why "no zoning" is a real answer
Kentucky's planning and zoning framework is generally understood to run through KRS Chapter 100, the Commonwealth's planning and zoning enabling statute, which lets individual cities and counties -- separately or through joint city-county planning commissions -- adopt planning and zoning authority rather than imposing it statewide, and lets home-rule cities exercise zoning independently of their county. This description reflects general, well-established knowledge of Kentucky's planning-enabling framework rather than a statutory text pulled fresh in this research pass: the two Kentucky legislative bill documents retrieved for this research turned out to be unrelated to zoning (HB 583, an affordable-housing loan-pool-fund bill, and HB 757, a tax-revenue measure), so KRS Chapter 100's current text was not independently re-verified here. This framing should be confirmed against the current statute before being treated as authoritative in the platform's own zoning logic.
Because zoning adoption in Kentucky happens jurisdiction by jurisdiction rather than statewide, the actual zoning status of a given site has to be confirmed locally during screening and due diligence -- no statewide zoning GIS layer was referenced in, or implied by, any of the KHC materials reviewed for this research, and none was independently identified.
Zoning is a threshold, not a scored criterion -- but it can overlap with points elsewhere
KHC's QAP does not award New Supply Selection Criteria points for having site control or zoning/entitlement approval in place at application -- both are threshold ("all projects must") requirements that gate a complete application, not scoring categories that differentiate competing applications. That's a contrast with the Revitalization Plans criterion (Urban set-aside only, covered in Phase 1: Site Sourcing and Screening), which does award points and requires a site to sit within the target area of a formally adopted revitalization or economic-development plan. In practice that kind of plan is often produced through the same local planning apparatus that adopts zoning and comprehensive plans, even though the QAP does not require the revitalization plan and the zoning ordinance to be the same document, and satisfying one has no bearing on the other.
KHC's Administrative Waivers policy states directly: "Applicants may not request a waiver to any threshold requirement." Because the zoning proof-of-compliance items are thresholds, a site that cannot clear one of the three zoning states by the Technical Submission deadline has no administrative waiver path available from KHC on this specific point, unlike other non-threshold requirements where a paid waiver request process exists.
What this research could not confirm
No Kentucky statewide preemption of local zoning for affordable housing -- such as a mandatory by-right approval pathway or a "builder's remedy"-style override -- was found in the QAP, the Multifamily Guidelines, or the statutes reviewed for this research. That is an open item, not a confirmed "no": it should be checked directly against current Kentucky Revised Statutes before the platform states a position either way.
No connection between Appalachian Regional Commission (ARC) county economic-status designations and any KHC scoring, threshold, or entitlement provision was found in the materials reviewed (the same gap noted in Phase 1: Site Sourcing and Screening).
The specific procedural mechanics of KRS Chapter 100 -- board of adjustment appeal procedures, the formation of joint city-county planning commissions, and home-rule cities' zoning authority under KRS 82.082 -- were not independently re-verified against current statutory text in this research pass, as noted above; treat the general framing here as directional rather than citation-grade until that verification happens.
Where this goes wrong
- Treating "no local zoning" as a special-case fallback rather than a legitimate, guidelines-listed answer -- KHC lists it as one of three equally acceptable threshold states, not an exception process requiring extra justification.
- Assuming a pending rezoning application satisfies the threshold indefinitely -- KHC requires confirmation the project is allowed no later than the Technical Submission deadline; a rezoning still pending at that point is a threshold failure, not just a scoring reduction.
- Requesting a waiver for the zoning threshold -- not available; KHC's guidelines bar waivers for any threshold requirement outright, and zoning proof is explicitly a threshold item.
- Submitting a letter from the wrong local official -- KHC's guidelines specifically name the local zoning board or governing authority, or the county judge or mayor (for a no-zoning attestation), not planning department staff or a private attorney.
- Assuming the Revitalization Plans scoring criterion functions as a zoning-status test -- it is a separate, points-based, Urban-set-aside-only criterion tied to a formally adopted revitalization or economic-development plan, independent of the site's underlying zoning ordinance.
- Assuming Kentucky has (or lacks) a statewide affordable-housing zoning preemption without checking current KRS text -- this research did not confirm either the existence or the absence of such a provision.
- Building a Kentucky screening tool on an assumed statewide zoning GIS layer -- Kentucky's opt-in, jurisdiction-by-jurisdiction zoning adoption means no such single normalized dataset was identified in this research pass.
- Treating ARC "distressed county" status as a KHC zoning or entitlement factor -- no such link was found in the QAP or Multifamily Guidelines reviewed.
- HUD
- LIHTC
- State QAPs
- IRS § 42
- Housing Finance Agencies