Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Floodplain Management topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning commission votes to deny U‑Haul storage plan at Distillery District over floodway concerns
Summary
The Lexington planning commission disapproved a final development plan (PLN MJDP 24‑10) to pave and use a Distillery District lot for U‑Haul storage or long‑term vehicle parking after members said the proposal would intensify use in a FEMA floodway and pose public‑safety risks.
The Planning Commission voted 7‑2‑1 to disapprove PLN MJDP 24‑10, Distillery District West Unit 1, a proposal that would pave a gravel parking area adjacent to Town Branch and construct a small U‑Haul service building with associated parking in an area substantially within the FEMA floodplain/floodway.
Staff reminded the commission that some surface parking has historically existed on the gravel lot but that the zoning ordinance and Article 19 (floodplain provisions) prohibit the storage of trailers and certain equipment in the floodplain. Staff explained that constructing a new building in the floodplain would require a CLOMR/LOMR (FEMA map revision process), Corps of Engineers and U.S. Fish & Wildlife coordination, Floodplain Appeals Committee review, and potentially a special use permit from Division of Engineering before any building could be constructed.
The applicant’s representative, Jihad Halani of Vision Engineering, said the footprint largely follows the existing compacted gravel parking area, that the proposed small building would be elevated about two feet above the floodplain and that pre‑fabricated water‑quality devices and other stormwater controls would be used. Halani said the applicant would remove trailers from overnight storage on site and could add interior landscaping and move some driving aisles 24 feet away from the creek.
Public commenters and several commissioners expressed concern about paving and storing vehicles and equipment in a known floodway. Multiple speakers and staff noted enforcement challenges for prohibitions on storage and the risk that stored vehicles could float and create hazards or impede flows.
Commissioner Nicholl moved approval of the plan but that motion failed (3‑6‑1). Commissioner Owens then moved to disapprove PLN MJDP 24‑10, citing three reasons: the plan facilitates outdoor equipment and vehicle storage prohibited in the floodplain (Article 19), the plan presents a threat to public health and safety because of its floodway location, and the intensification of development increases risk of flood damage that outweighs development benefits. Commissioner Molly Davis seconded. The motion to disapprove passed 7‑2‑1.
Staff will not certify the plan as submitted; the applicant may pursue the federal and state floodplain processes (CLOMR/LOMR, Corps, USFWS) and Floodplain Appeals Committee review if they wish to adjust the proposal, but commissioners were clear that overnight storage of trailers or equipment within the floodway is not allowed under current local rules and FEMA processes.
