Bluffton planning commission recommends UDO wetland, stormwater edits to town council

The Town of Bluffton Planning Commission recommended approval of proposed amendments to Article 5 (design standards/stormwater) and Article 9 (definitions) of the Unified Development Ordinance on May 27, forwarding the measure to Town Council for first reading.

Staff planner Andrea told the commission the edits refine the interim wetland ordinance, add resilience language, incorporate a town wetland-mapping tool for applicants, clarify UDO administrator authority, and add or tighten definitions including who may provide a wetland delineation. "The 50 foot buffer does not apply" inside PUDs where development agreements establish vegetative setbacks, Andrea said, and staff said it may honor state permits while reserving discretion to request additional protections such as enhanced buffers or reforestation when mitigation credits alone are insufficient.

The amendments were the subject of public comment. Mike Hughes, who identified himself as "Mike Hughes with Thomas Dunn," said he had been addressing the wetland ordinance in its various forms for more than two years and urged care before adding local restrictions where federal and state protections already apply: "I feel that I've been up here speaking about the wetland ordinance now... for 2 years in its different forms," he told the commission, asking whether buffers would encroach on private lots and whether state and federal permits would be honored.

Commission discussion focused on three practical points: whether the proposed rules apply inside planned unit developments; how the town will review and verify wetland delineations without an on‑staff wetland scientist; and whether routine uses of waivers for foreseeable conditions should instead be written into the code. Andrea said the mapping tool is live for internal staff review and will be made public after second reading, and she confirmed staff can outsource technical delineation reviews when necessary. On the question of waivers, commissioners argued for codifying predictable exceptions rather than relying on waiver processes intended for unforeseen circumstances.

After discussion a motion to recommend approval to Town Council was made and seconded. The motion carried by voice vote with one abstention; staff said the item will go to Town Council for first reading next month and a second reading in July.

What happens next: Planning Commission’s recommendation is advisory; Town Council holds the final decision at its upcoming readings. Staff encouraged written follow-up from the public and applicants and said technical clarifications (for example, the precise qualifications required of a wetland delineator) can be refined before council consideration.