Planning Commission continues Distillery District plan amid floodplain, truck-storage concerns

The Lexington City Planning Commission on Feb. 13 continued consideration of an amended development plan for Distillery District West Unit 1, citing unresolved floodplain issues and questions about proposed overnight parking of rental trucks on site.

The commission continued PLN MJDP 24-10 to the March 13 meeting so the applicant can pursue a CLOMR (Conditional Letter of Map Revision) with FEMA, finalize engineering sign-offs and proceed through the Floodplain Appeals Committee review required for storage and work within the floodplain. Chris Cheney, planning services staff, presented the application and noted the plan proposes a 4,500-square-foot building and associated parking on property that is partly in the floodway and partly in the floodplain. Cheney also flagged Article 19 of the zoning ordinance as the regulatory standard for floodplain uses and noted staff had revised recommended conditions for the proposal.

Jihad Halani, with Vision Engineering, the applicant’s engineer, described the proposal as an elevated building with on-site parking intended to include U-Haul truck and trailer parking. He said the applicant plans to request a FEMA map amendment and then pursue a special-use permit and Floodplain Appeals Committee review. “We have to go to FEMA requesting an amendment of the FEMA map through a process of CLOMR, and then also we have to come back and apply for [a] special use permit,” Halani said. He told the commission engineering had reviewed drainage materials and indicated engineering was comfortable moving the plan to the next steps if the commission approved the layout for further review.

Residents and nearby property owners pressured the commission for more analysis before approval. Amy Clark, of 628 Castle Road, urged postponement and said the Town Branch watershed in the area is “perhaps the most challenged” in Lexington-Fayette County. Clark said the plan calls for “very substantial fill” and that the proposal lacked sufficient technical demonstrations showing the work would be approvable. Zina Merkin, of 120 Victory Avenue, raised concerns about streambank stability and the potential for displaced flood waters to affect nearby historic buildings and businesses.

Division of Engineering staff made clear the storage proposal would not meet Article 19 as presented and that the Floodplain Appeals Committee would have to consider exceptions. Josh Desarn, division of engineering, told the commission that a guardrail or similar mitigation to contain vehicles in a flood event would require an appeals review because it would not comply outright with Article 19. “It’s not something that would comply with Article 19,” Desarn said. “So that would prohibit us from issuing a special use permit. It would need to go through an appeals process.”

Commissioners expressed deep reservations about relying on a guardrail to contain trailers and trucks in a flood. Commissioner Penn said he was “startled” and later added, “I just don’t think it’s good planning” to approve a design that depends on a guardrail to prevent floating trailers from entering the stream. After discussion the commission voted unanimously to continue the item to the March 13 meeting and to leave intact the staff recommendation package (19 conditions as presented on the staff sheet) so the applicant can complete the FEMA and floodplain-appeals steps before returning.

The continuation does not approve construction; staff and the applicant agreed additional reviews and approvals — including engineering sign-off on CLOMR materials and Floodplain Appeals Committee findings — must occur before a land disturbance permit or construction can begin.

Votes at a glance PLN MJDP 24-10 Distillery District West Unit 1 — Continued to March 13, 2025 for further floodplain and engineering review (continuance motion passed unanimously).