Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Floodplain topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning staff propose Article 19 floodplain updates, including ban on new residential parcels in floodplain
Summary
Senior planner Eve Miller outlined proposed revisions to Article 19 to modernize floodplain definitions and maps, prohibit future residential parcels in floodplain within expansion areas, and incorporate updated NFIP maps; commissioners pressed staff to avoid unintended environmental harms such as culverting or excessive fill.
Eve Miller, senior planner in Lexington’s long‑range planning team, introduced a project on Feb. 19 to update Article 19 of the city’s zoning ordinance, which governs floodplain review. Miller said Article 19 dates to 1983 and has been amended several times (1987 for National Flood Insurance Program conformity, 2005 and 2016 for definition and stormwater manual alignment) and that the city wants to modernize definitions, adopt current flood maps and strengthen implementation consistent with best practices.
Miller said staff are proposing several policy changes, including updated definitions for floodway, manufactured home standards, special flood hazard areas and substantial improvement thresholds, and the incorporation of the most recent FEMA flood insurance rate maps and flood boundary products. "We're looking to just incorporate that so we can use whatever map is most recently available to us in our floodplain review," Miller said.
The proposal would also add specific prohibitions and implementation items: Miller said staff intend to add "no dumpsters" as a prohibited use in floodplain and to require that no future residential parcels be established on the floodplain — a change staff said would have the most impact on new Urban Growth Master Plan areas. She also noted that implementing mitigation best practices could reduce NFIP premiums for residents by 5%–45%, a benefit Miller cited as part of the motivation for modernizing regulations.
Commissioners asked how stricter floodplain rules might create perverse incentives — for example, developers placing fill, culverting streams or otherwise reengineering hydrology to avoid floodplain designation. Commissioner Mickler warned that overly restrictive requirements can push applicants to alter natural features in ways that create longer‑term harm. Miller acknowledged the concern and said staff will work closely with engineering, water quality and the urban county engineer to craft standards that reduce unintended consequences.
Planning staff emphasized the technical nature of the forthcoming work. Miller said the Division of Engineering and Water Quality will help draft the technical manuals and that a Floodplain Appeals Committee process and Robert's Rules language will be reviewed. No ordinance text was presented for adoption at the work session; staff said they will return with draft language later this year and begin public outreach and education in the spring.
The commission did not take action; it directed staff to coordinate with engineers and to pay particular attention to preventing mitigation that merely relocates flood risk downstream or increases channelization.
