Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Wetland Buffer topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Staff propose 35‑foot minimum wetland buffer for new Hardeeville developments
Summary
City planning staff recommended adding a 35‑foot minimum non‑disturbance buffer for jurisdictional wetlands to the land development regulations (MZDO), with exceptions narrowly defined for utilities and limited replanting/recreation; staff plan to forward a draft to the Planning Commission for public input and then to council.
City planning staff presented a proposed wetland buffer ordinance on Feb. 24 recommending a fixed 35‑foot minimum non‑disturbance buffer for jurisdictional wetlands (no averaging) to be added to the Land Development Regulations (the MZDO). The proposal would apply to new master plans and development permits; approved master plans would be grandfathered.
Katie, leading the presentation, said the 35‑foot figure is grounded in a review of buffer science and local peer ordinances: "The 35‑foot buffer, not averaged, is coming out of this science. The buffers over 30 feet will remove pollutants more consistently, and that's where we're going for it." Staff emphasized the buffer is intended to protect wetlands, reduce runoff and flooding risk, and preserve wildlife habitat.
Staff said permitted limited activities inside the buffer would be narrowly defined, and replanting with native species and low‑impact recreation would be allowed where appropriate. Utilities and regional service providers (for example, water and sewer authorities) would not be allowed to use the buffer for developer stormwater infrastructure; staff expect to include narrowly written exceptions for necessary utility easements so public infrastructure can be served without enabling routine developer disturbance.
The proposed change will be administered through the staff review committee as part of land development regulations, not as a zoning change. Staff plan to draft the ordinance and send it to the Planning Commission for review; planning commission review and public input are the next steps before forwarding to council (staff indicated Planning Commission and then council hearings could occur in March/April, depending on timing).
Council members said they support a stronger standard and urged staff not to delay adoption because a gap could allow pre‑emptive development approvals. Staff noted they will also review related buffer and setback standards so the wetland buffer sits more coherently within the broader MZDO framework.
No ordinance was adopted at the workshop; staff will return with a draft for Planning Commission review and public hearings.
