Section 24-89 Floodplain Storage Code Discussion

Recommended

Staff (Planner Jamieson) presented proposed new code language carving ICW-adjacent properties out of the no-net-loss requirement.

Debated

Staff was tasked from prior meetings to develop a legislative change to Section 24-89 because the code wasn't clearly indicating floodplain storage requirements — especially for areas subject to the Intracoastal Waterway system. The proposed distinction: ICW-adjacent properties flood by tidal inundation, not upstream riverine flow, and because the ICW is a very large water body, small residential fill does not measurably affect the 100-year flood elevation. Member Haynie flagged the proposed clause "and for drainage ditches or canals that do not discharge to the intracoastal waterway" as potentially confusing — he wanted to know if those ditches were also supposed to be excluded from the no-net-loss requirement. Chair Hansen concluded there was consensus the board was on the right track but that changes were needed so the language would be understandable on first reading, rather than requiring multiple passes to parse the negatives.

Decided

Discussion only — no vote taken; board reached consensus that language needed clarity revisions before advancing.