Vegetated riparian buffers and buffer ordinances

[From the U.S. Government Printing Office, www.gpo.gov]

Vegetated Riparian Buffers
And Buffer Ordinances

7-7'

J -0,
r7

. . . . . . . . . . .

A 1@

I Ao@

Table Of Contents

Recommendations for Vegetated Buffers and Buffer
Ordinances in South Carolina .....................................................................................2
1. Facts About Buffers ...............................................................................................3
A. Advantages of Buffers ......................................................................................3
1. Water Quality and Aquatic Habitat Improvement ........................................3
2. Flooding, Drought, and Erosion Prevention ................................................4
3. Wildlife Habitat Protection ..........................................................................4
4. Financial Benefits .......................................................................................4
5. Recreational Opportunities and Improved Aesthetics .................................5
B. Conditions Affecting Buffer Performance .........................................................5
1. Slope ............................................................................................................5
2. Vegetation ....................................................................................................5
3. Soil Type ......................................................................................................6
4. Buffer Width .................................................................................................6
5. Buffer Design ...............................................................................................7
6. Buffer Management .....................................................................................9

11. Problems and Solutions for Buffers and Buffer Ordinances ..................................9
A. Make the Buffer Ordinance Flexible to Protect the Rights of the Property
Owner ..............................................................................................................9
1 . BufferAveraging ....................................................................................... 10
2. Density Compensation ............................................................................. 10
3. Conservation Easements ......................................................................... 10
4. Purchase of Development Rights ............................................................. 10
5. Variances .................................................................................................. 10
6. Selective Pruning and Clearing to Provide a View Corridor ..................... 11
B. Print Buffer Boundaries on Development Plans ............................................. 11
C. Actively Manage Buffers ................................................................................ 12
D. Minimize Crossings and Disruptions to the Stream Network ......................... 12
E. Do not Rely Upon the Buffer as the Sole Stormwater Management Tool ...... 13

111. Examples of Existing Buffer Ordinances ............................................................. 14

Vegetated Riparian Suffers and Wfier @Ordina@nces@

Recommendations for Vegetated Buffers and Buffer Ordinances in South
Carolina

1. Establish a buffer with a minimum average width of 50 feet. The inner (streamside) zone of 25 feet
(approximately two mature trees deep) needs to be left pristine and forested. A width of 50 feet plus 25 feet
of turf (residential backyard) before reaching the first pavement or structure is preferable, while a width of
100 feet (75 feet plus 25 feet of turf) is optimum and should be attempted where possible.
A. Attempt to make two-thirds of the vegetated buffer at least 75 feet wide. Consider incentives to
developers (e.g. density bonuses elsewhere or property tax exemptions) for providing buffers of 75 or
100 feet. See Figure 1 for the recommended three-zone riparian buffer design.
B. Do not allow the buffer to become too fragmented. Continuity is as important as buffer width. Do not
allow more than 10% of the buffer to be less than 33 feet (10 meters) wide.

11. Establish specific water quality and habitat goals for the outer, middle, and strearnside zones of the buffer.
Adopt a vegetative target for the buffer based on the native, predevelopment plant community. Allow
property owners to prune some vegetation in a portion of the buffer on their property so that they may
establish a view of the water from their home.

111. Make the buffer ordinance flexible. The use of buffer averaging, density compensation, conservation
easements, and/or variances can ensure the rights of the property owner are protected.

IV. Actively manage buffers with annual buffer walks to ensure no improper encroachment by residents.
Inform developers, builders, and residents on the location of and reason for the buffers. Make the
boundaries of buffers visible before, during, and after construction with posted signs that describe
allowable uses.

V Print buffer boundaries on all development and construction plans, plats, and official maps.

V1. Limit the number and conditions for stream buffer crossings (e.g. roads, bridges, and underground utilities).
All footpaths running through the buffer to the water (perpendicular to the buffer) should be covered by
nonelevated wooden boardwalks to prevent the channelization of stormwater runoff caused by dirt
footpaths.
V11. Do not rely on vegetated buffers as the sole stormwater management tool.

The purpose of this pamphlet is to provide basic
::'WAROAN AREAS. The term "riparian" information on riparian buffers. It is also intended as
"refers, to the area of land along a stream, a general resource for local policy makers who are
,river,. marsh, or shoreline. considering the creation of buffers or greenways in
their communities. It includes an annotated reference
list for those interested in pursuing the topic in more
detail.
2 Vegetated Riparian Buffers and Buffer Ordinances

PURPOSES OF A PUPAMAM BUFFER: 1. Facts About Riparian
� reduces erosion and stabilize stream Buffers
banks
� encourages infiltration of stormwater Riparian buffers, or buffer zones, are corridors
runoff of vegetation along rivers, streams, and tidal wetlands
controls sedimentation which help to protect water quality by providing a
� reduces the effects of flood and drought transition between upland development and adjoin-
� provides forest areas to shade streams ing surface waters. Vegetated riparian buffers filter
and encourages desirable aquatic urban stormwater runoff from impervious areas
species before it reaches the waterbody (U.S. EPA, 1993,
� provides and protects wildlife habitat pp. 4-47). Buffers also provide important wildlife
� offers scenic value and recreational habitat, reduce flood and drought conditions, and
opportunity create recreational opportunities.
� restores and maintains the chemical,
physical, and biological integrity of water
resources ADVAMTAGES OF BUFFERS
� minimizes public investment in waterway
restoration, stormwater management, El Water Quality and Aquatic Habitat
and other public water resource Improvement
endeavors
Schueler, WPT Summer 1995 Many chemicals easily adsorb, or attach to,
individual sediment particles, so the sediment
particles frequently carry pollutants and nutrients,
Nonpoint source (NPS) pollution from such as nitrogen and phosphorus, into streams. An
stormwater runoff is a growing problem in South overabundance of nutrients in a waterbody causes
Carolina's coastal areas. The water quality of algae blooms; as the excess algae dies and decom-
rivers and streams frequently becomes impaired in poses, oxygen is consumed, which kills plants, fish,
urbanized watersheds or where riparian corridors are and other aquatic life (Horton and Eichbaum, 1991).
altered by such human activities as development or In addition, the sediment itself can be a pollutant since
agriculture (WPT June 1997, pp. 490-491). The it can impair the feeding and reproduction of many
movement of rainfall over urban and agricultural land- forms of aquatic life (Anderson and Masters, 1993).
scapes flushes pollutants such as oil, gasoline, Buffers act as filters by reducing the amount of sedi-
sediment, metals, and fertilizer into rivers, creeks, and ment reaching the water. By slowing the movement
estuaries. These pollutants: of stormwater runoff, buffer vegetation allows more
0 degrade water quality; time for sediment contained in the stormwater to settle
0 alter natural habitats for fish and other wildlife; out (Castelle et aL, 1994).
0 lead to excessive algae growth, which depletes When rainwater collects on roofed and paved
the oxygen needed by fish; areas it is heated by sunlight. This heated runoff raises
0 allow chemicals to accumulate in fish and the temperature of the receiving waterbody, which
shellfish, which ultimately affects can limit fish spawning and also cause excessive al-
consumers. gal growth. The tree canopy of a riparian buffer shades
the land below it and the receiving waterbody to limit

Vegetated Riparian Buffers and Buffer Ordinances 3

animals either live in the riparian area or use the buffer
as a travel corridor. For example, colonial waterbirds
need buffers along the marsh-upland shoreline to
protect roosting and foraging sites (Dodd, 1998).
Wildlife diversity within a buffer is linked to a buffer's
size; i.e., wider buffers support a greater variety and
number of species. A continuous buffer is of
particular value in protecting amphibians, waterfowl,
and coastal fish spawning and nursery areas (WPT
June 1997, pp. 471-472).

A50'buffer to protect the pondfrom residential development. 2 FinancW Benefits
heating. One researcher found that shading of small 1. Minimized Property Damages
streams was adequate with a 50-foot wide forested Buffers mitigate property destruction by
buffer (Baltimore Buffer Subcommittee Recommen- maintaining some undeveloped land along
dations). waterways and keeping developing areas away
RT Nooding, Drought, and Erosion from floodwaters, storin surges, and extreme high
Prevention tides (VBCZ, p. 29).
2. Decreased Public Investment Needs
Vegetated buffers reduce downstream flooding by By reducing flooding, erosion, and sedimen-
slowing stormwater velocity, storing some water in tation, vegetated buffers minimize public
soils, and allowing more water to percolate to the investment in stormwater management and
water table. Riparian buffers are useful also for flood waterway protection and restoration (Baltimore
zone management, keeping development back from Buffer Subcommittee). Buffers can also reduce
the immediate banks of waterways and out of most the number of drainage complaints received by
floodways. local publicworks departments.

Riparian buffers reduce channelized flow 3. Increased Property Values
erosion from stormwater runoff and stabilize In a national study of ten programs that
streambanks. The slow release of stored groundwa- diverted development away from flood-prone
ter from saturated soils in riparian areas helps areas, researchers discovered that land next to
maintain streamflow between storms and reduce protected floodplains had increased in value by
drought conditions (Anderson and Masters, 1993). an average of $10,427 per acre (Burby, 1988). In
Leaves and grass on the ground act like a sponge by another national study, buffers were thought to
absorbing water and then releasing it over time. Such have a positive or neutral impact on adjacent
organic debris also covers the soil, preventing splash property values in 32 out of 39 communities
erosion, and maintains infiltration capacity. surveyed (Schueler, 1995). Homes located near
seven California stream restoration projects had
W I
L

R1 WiNlife Habitat Protection a 3 to 13% higher property value than similar
homes located on unrestored streams (Streiner and
Streams and the surrounding riparian areas Loomis, 1996).
provide habitat for a diverse group of wildlife. These

4 Vegetated Riparian Buffers and Buffer Ordinances

"When managed as a 'greenway,' stream 0 Buffeir MOPS
buffers can expand recreational opportunities and
increase the value of adjacent parcels." (Flink and Several researchers have concluded that the slope
Searns, 1993) Several studies have shown that of a buffer should not exceed fifteen percent (Schueler
greenway parks increase the value of homes ad- et al., 1992). Above fifteen percent, the velocity of
jacent to them ...... (WPT, June 1997 pp. 471-472) runoff becomes too fast, and sediment particles will
4. Reduced Maintenance Costs not have time to settle out. Runoff is likely to
"Corporate landowners can save between become concentrated and channelized, rendering the
buffer much less effective (Baltimore Buffer Subcom-
$270 to $640 per acre in annual mowing and mittee). Shallower slopes allow for longer residence
maintenance costs when open lands are managed time, slower flow, and are more effective at remov-
as a natural buffer area rather than turf." (Wild- ing sediment and pollutants from the runoff.
life Habitat Enhancement Council, 1992 - as cited
in WPT June 1997, pp. 471-472) "Use near construction sites and agricultural fields
that yield heavy sediment loads requires a buffer slope
0 Recrsadona@ OpporWnK@az and greater than I % or the sediment deposits may need to
@rnpmved Asztheftz be removed or spread after each heavy rainfall. A
temporary silt fence could also be installed and the
Many urban areas are combining the habitat and deposits removed at the end of construction or the
water quality benefits of buffers with the farming season. After construction and where sedi-
recreational and transportation advantages of ment loads from existing urban developments are
greenways. Trail systems provide an alternate means moderate, buffer slopes may be as low as 0.5% and
for people to travel and can be a principle place for still only require normal annual maintenance... [L]and
recreation. Greenways serve to make communities slopes average 0.2% in the Cooper, Wando, and
more attractive places to live and tend to boost local Ashley river basins, and near the wetland margins tend
economies. Quality of life can be an important factor to steepen to 0.5% to 1%." (McCutcheon et al., 1999)
in many corporate relocation decisions. "If sediment buildup is not expected, the shallower
slopes (<0.5%) can be even better for removing
COMMON AFFECYNG BUFFER nutrients and fine sediment. Longer residence and
PERFORDWAMCIE greater infiltration will remove more of the pollut-
ants." (McCutcheon fax to Debra Hernandez)
The effectiveness of a buffer in achieving water
quality benefits depends on several conditions, 0 vegstaVon
including:
0 buffer slope Native vegetation capable of withstanding local
0 vegetation water, climate, soil, and pest conditions is preferred.
0 soil type For the creation of new buffer areas, or for supple-
0 buffer width mental planting in natural areas, native plants that
0 buffer design establish rapidly and are suitable for flood zone
0 buffer management conditions (where relevant) should be used. Native
plants that have an extensive root system work best
to stabilize the soil and take up nutrients.

VegetatedRiparlan BuKers and Buffer Ordinances

soils may be most effective in removing sediments
and sediment-bound pollutants, but only marginally
effective at removing soluble forms of pollutants.

0 Buffer Ndth

The ability of a buffer to provide multiple
benefits is closely linked to width. A national survey
of 36 local buffer programs found a range in width
from 20 to 200-feet on each side of the stream, with a
median of 100 feet. The buffer programs surveyed
A vegetative bufferprovides addedprotection to marshfrom generally incorporated the 100-year floodplain and
upland development. some included adjacent wetlands, steep slopes or
If runoff is allowed to "short circuif' a buffer by critical habitat areas. In most regions of the country,
concentrating and forming channels or rivulets, the 100 feet translates to three to five mature trees deep
chance for filtration of runoff is greatly reduced. The on each side of the stream (WPT Summer 1995,
more dense the vegetation is in a buffer, the better it p. 157). The only types of development allowed in
will filter runoff. these areas are usually limited to those structures
needed to allow reasonable use of the property, such
If the intended use of a buffer is solely for as docks (U.S. EPA, 1993, pp. 4-47).
stormwater filtration, grasses work best, because trees
and shrubs allow more channelization of runoff Table I lists several methods suggested for
(McCutcheon et al., 1999). However, grasses do not determining appropriate buffer widths. The methods
provide the habitat of forested buffers. In addition, listed have been used by many municipalities.
removing trees and shrubs along a streambank to
create a grassed buffer can erode the streambank.
Grassed buffers also require mowing two or three
times annually to prevent the natural succession of N
bushes and trees (McCutcheon et al., 1999), and they
provide no shade for the land or the waterbodies. 50 ft. + 4-5 ft. for every 1% increase in slope
(Trimble and Schwartz, 1957; Aucella, 1989).
9 SCH Type 75 ft. for slopes less than 10%. Additional width
may be added for steeper slopes (Carter, 1988).
Medium-fine textured soils, such as loams and
silt loams, work best to establish plants, filter pollut- 3 times the maximum height of the tree canopy
ants, retain surface water, and increase groundwater (Palfrey and Bradley, 1982).
discharge to streams. Highly permeable soils, such
as coarse-textured sandy soils, may percolate water
so rapidly that little uptake of excess nitrogen occurs. The Environmental Protection Agency
Well-drained soils are only half as effective at remov- recommends a 100-foot minimum buffer of native
ing nitrogen as poorly drained soils. The saturated, vegetation landward from the mean high tide line in
organically rich soils typically found in salt marshes, coastal areas to help remove or reduce sediment, ex-
wetlands, and wet forests are useful in the removal of cess nutrients, and toxic substances entering surface
both soluble and sediment-bound pollutants. Sandy waters (MWCOG, 199 1). Amain difference between

Vegetated Riparian Buffers and Buffer Ordinances

tidal creeks and freshwater streams is that research- The size of a buffer also depends significantly
ers recommend bigger buffers for bigger freshwater upon the desired function of the site. One buffer width
streams, but the opposite is true for tidal creeks. Since may be effective for improving water quality but may
small tidal creeks are critically important spawning not be significant enough to provide functional
and nursery areas, bigger buffers are recommended wildlife habitat. Wildlife requirements range
for small tidal creeks. Tributaries of non-tidally according to the desired type and quantity of species.
influenced freshwater streams have not been shown A Charleston Harbor Project researcher recommends
to be as important to freshwater stream ecosystems. a buffer zone of 100 feet along the marsh-upland
shoreline to protect roosting and foraging sites for
In a University of Washington study, "twenty-two colonial wading birds (Dodd, 1998).
small-stream watersheds [were] chosen to represent
a range of development levels from relatively Table 2 presents a generalized overview of
undeveloped (reference) to highly urbanized. In this pollutant removal effectiveness and wildlife value
study, the streambank stability [was found to be associated with various buffer widths.
directly related] to the width of the riparian buffer
and inversely related to the number of breaks in the 0 Suffer DLWgn
riparian corridor." (WPT June 1997, pp. 488-489) This
study found that "wide, continuous, and mature-for- The riparian buffer design favored by the j ournal
ested riparian corridors appear to be effective in miti- Watershed Protection Techniques involves the
gating at least some of the cumulative effects of adja- creation of three management zones within a buffer
cent basin development... [Results of the study (Figure 1). Each zone has preferred target vegetation
suggest that] enhancement and mitigation efforts and allowed uses. The inner (streamside) zone con-
should be focused on watersheds where ecological tains the most natural vegetation target and most
function is impaired but not entirely lost ...... (WPT restricted uses (WPT 2/94, p. 19).
June 1997, pp. 490- 491) The study made several
recommendations to maintain existing natural stream The streamside buffer zone extends a minimum
quality: of 25 feet from the stream bank (about the distance
of one or two mature trees) and serves to protect the
1. "Ensure that at least 70% of the riparian corridor physical and ecological integrity of the stream
has a minimum buffer width of 30 m [approx. ecosystem. A mature riparian forest is the desired
100 ft.] and utilize wider (100m) buffers around vegetation because it provides shade, leaf litter and
more sensitive or valuable resource areas [A woody debris, and erosion protection. Reforest it if it
buffer width of less than ten meters (approxi- is now grass. Allow only very restricted uses such as
mately thirty-three feet) is generally considered foot paths and utility rights of way.
functionally ineffective (Castelle et al., 1994)].
2. Limit encroachment of the riparian buffer zone The middle buffer zone must be at least 50 feet
through education and enforcement [<I 0% of the wide and composed of managed forest with some
riparian corridor should be allowed to have a clearing allowed. Its size depends on the stream order,
buffer width <10m (approx. 33 ft.)] the extent of the 100-year floodplain, adjacent steep
3. Actively manage the riparian zone to ensure a slopes, and protected wetland areas. Allow some rec-
long-range goal of at least 60% of the corridor as reational uses, stormwater BMPs, bike paths, and tree
mature, native ... forest." (WPT June 1997, removal (WPT Summer 1995, p. 157). Sediment and
p. 492) nutrients are also removed by this multi-purpose land use.

Vegetated Riparian Buffers and Buffer Ordinances

Table 2: A summary of pollutant removal effectiveness and wildlife habitat value of Vegetated buffers
according to buffer width (1 meter=3.28 feet) (Source: Desboronnet et al. 1994)._

Buffer Width Pollutant Removal Effectiveness Wildlife Habitat Value
5 meters Approximately 50% or greater Poor habitat value; useful for temporarty
(approx 16.5 ft.) sediment and pollutant removal. activities of wildlife.
10 meters Approximately 60% or greater Minimally protects stream habitat; poor
(approx 33 ft.) sediment and pollutant removal. habitat value; useful for temporary activities of wildlife.
15 meters Greater than 60% sediment and Miinimal general wildlife and avian
(approx 50 ft.) pollutant removal. habitat value.
20 meters Approximately 70% or greater Minimal wildlife habitat value; some
(approx 66 ft.) sediment and pollutant removal. value as avian habitat.
30 meters Approximately 70% or greater May have use as a wildlife travel
(approx 100 ft.) sediment and pollutant removal. corridor as well as general avian habitat.
50 meters Approximately 75% or greater Minimal general wildlife habitat value
(approx 165 ft.) sediment and pollutant removal.
75 meters Approximately 80% or greater Fair-to-good general wildlife and avian
(approx 248 ft.) sediment and pollutant removal. habitat value
100 meters Approximately 80% or greater Good general wildlife value; may
(approx 330 ft.) sediment and pollutant removal. protect significant wildlife habitat.
200 meters Approximately 90% or greater Excellent wildlife value; likely
(approx 660 ft.) sediment and pollutant removal. to support a diverse community.

Compost
ile
P

Fence

Posting
Bike path

Foot ath

INN RE MIDDLE CORE OUTER CORE
Stream

WATER SOURCE STREAMSIDE ZONE MIDDLE ZONE OUTER ZONE
water quality & 25 ft. wide; 50+ ft. wide; 25+ ft. wide;
aquatic habitat mature forest; managed forest; forest or turf;
enhanced. very restricted uses. restricted uses. few restrictions.
Sou rce: Schueler, WPT 2/94, p. 19 (Grapqhic Courtesy of the Center for Watershed Protection)

Vegetated Riparian Buffers and Buffer Ordinances

The outer buffer zone must be a minimum of 25 11. Problems and
feet wide and composed of forest or turf. It is the Solutions for Buffers
buffer's buffer, an additional 25-foot setback from the
outward edge of the middle zone to the nearest per- and Buffer Ordinances
manent structure. It is usually a residential backyard.
The only major restrictions are no septic systems, no
new impervious surfaces, and no new permanent Mv AKE THE BUFFER ORIMMANCE FLEMBLE
structures (WPT Summer 1995, p. 157). TO PROTECT THE RMHTS OF THE
PROPERTY OWNER

0 Buffer Sys@sm ManagemeM Since in most watersheds a 100-foot buffer
ordinance will take about 5% of the total land area
Buffer management is covered in depth in the out of development consideration, many communi-
following section. ties are concerned that stream buffer requirements
could represent an uncompensated taking of private
property. This situation can be mitigated by making a
buffer ordinance more flexible (WPT Summer 1995,
P. 162).

To address the concern that stream buffer require-
ments could represent an uncompensated taking of
private property, a community can incorporate
several simple measures to ensure fairness and
flexibility when administering its buffer program
(WPT Summer 1995, p. 162).

A buffer between a golf course and tidal creek. "Buffer ordinances that retain property in private
ownership generally are considered by the courts to
avoid the takings issue, as buffers provide compel-
ling public safety, welfare, and the environmental
benefits to the community that justify partial
restrictions on land use. Most buffer programs meet
the 'rough proportionality' test recently advanced by
the Supreme Court for local land use regulation.
[S]trearn buffers are generally perceived to have a
neutral or positive impact on adjacent property value.
The key point is that the reservation of the buffer
cannot take away all economically beneficial use for
the property." Six techniques described below can
N t,@
ensure that the interests of the property owners are
A buffer between an agriculturalfield and a waterbody. protected (WPT Summer 1995, p. 162)(Also see
Wenger and Fowler, p.21).

Vegetated Riparian Bufters and Buffer Ordinances

No buffer between development and the water A consistent buffier between development and the water

1. BufferAverag@ng 3. Conservation Easements

Buffer averaging permits the buffer to become "[An] easement conditions the use of the buffer,
narrower at some points along the stream, as long as and can be donated to a land trust as a charitable con-
the average width of the buffer meets the minimum tribution that can reduce an owner's income tax bur-
requirement. However, buffer narrowing must be den. Alternatively, the conservation easement can be
limited, so that the strearnside zone is not disturbed donated to a local government, in exchange for a re-
and no new construction is allowed within the duction or elimination of property tax on the parcel."
100-year floodplain. Since continuity in the buffer is (WPT Summer 1995, pp. 162-163)
as important as width, do not allow more than 10%
of the buffer to be less than 33 feet (10m) wide (WPT 4. Purchase Of Deve@Opment Rights
Summer 1995, p. 162).
Purchase of development rights could be consid-
2. Density CompensaVon ered by local governments if a proposed buffer would
encompass all or nearly all of a property owner's de-
"This scheme grants a developer a credit for velopable land. It is "a tool that achieves some of the
additional density elsewhere on the site, in compen- same goals as conservation easements, in that another
sation for developable land that has been lost due to landowner may purchase the rights to develop a prop-
the buffer requirement.... Credits are granted when erty from the owner. When the land is sold or inher-
more than 5% of developable land is consumed. The ited, it retains the prohibition against development."
density credit is accommodated at the development (WPT June 1997, p. 479)
site by allowing greater flexibility in setbacks, front-
age distances or minimum lot sizes to squeeze in 'lost 5. Vailances
lots.' Cluster development also allows the developer
to recover lots that are taken out of production due to "The buffer ordinance should have provisions that
buffers and other requirements. The intent of stream enable an existing property owner to be granted a
buffers is to modify the location but not the intensity variance or waiver, if the owner can demonstrate
of development." (WPT Summer 1995, pp. 162-163) severe economic hardship or that unique circum-
stances make it impossible to meet some or all of the

Vegetated Riparian Buffers and Buffer Ordinances

buffer requirements. The owner should also have PMMT BUFFER BOUMDAMES ON ALL
access to a defined appeals process should the DEVELOPMENT PLANS
request ... be denied." (WPT Summer 1995, p. 163)
Buffer boundaries are often invisible to property
(B. s(MOCUve Flrun@ng and Ueallng owners, developers, and even local government
@a Prov@da a Mww Carildor officials. Without defined boundaries, urban buffers
are subject to encroachment and incompatible uses.
Allow property owners to prune vegetation in a Landowners are more often unaware of buffers than
portion of the buffer on their property to afford them deliberately violating buffer boundaries.
a view of the water, a "view corridor." Keep such
corridors either 75 feet wide or one-third the width of Over 60 percent of the local governments
each lot, whichever is less. A landowner should also surveyed in a national survey of 36 local buffer
have the option to submit a selective clearing and land- programs (Heraty, 1993) indicated that most
scaping plan for the view corridor. Such a plan must individual property owners were unaware of either
leave or replace enough vegetation in the corridor to the boundary or the purpose of a buffer. One-time
maintain the value of the buffer. To prevent conver- legal disclosures, such as notes on the deed of sale,
sion of the area to turf, do not allow pruning below a were usually the only notification given to property
height of three feet. owners about buffer limits. Local governments need
to record the buffer boundaries on their own official
maps. Such buffer maps are necessary so local
governments can inspect and manage their network
of buffers and evaluate the potential impact of new
� View corridor to be maintained by pruning brush to a development at specific sites in the buffer network
height of 3' (VvTT 2/94, pp. 19-20).
� View corridor at shore = 3371 00'of buffer length at
coastal feature = 33% In a study of 21 buffers in Seattle ranging from
Drivewal two to eight years old, ninety-five percent had been
visibly altered, including tree removal, conversion into
lawns, and erosion by stormwater runoff. In one
Dwelling hundred percent of the residential lots located within
narrow buffer networks, natural vegetation had been
cleared and replaced by lawns. Encroachment into
Lawn Lawn riparian buffer zones is extremely difficult to control.

-
Vi (WPT 2/94, pp. 20-21). Having boundaries for
Corridor ffer area vegetated buffers printed on all development plans
Buffer a@rea delineates the limits of disturbance during construc-
<-- to remain 4'wide remain
undisturbed walkover undisturbed 50' buffer
<-- 33' '100, lot tion, decreasing the likelihood that contractors will
width at encroach or disturb the buffer (WPT February 1994,
edge of P. 19).
r area

marsh
-uffa
to remain
un, turbed

___@Edge of marsh

Edge of creek
FD.ck]

Vegetated Riparian Buffers and Buffer Ordinances

the entry of construction equipment and
stockpiling;
0 Mark the buffer boundaries with permanent
signs that describe allowable uses;
0 Conduct annual bufferwalks to check on
encroachment;" (WPT Summer 1995,
pp- 160-162)
0 Inform buffer owners using pamphlets,
- ----- interpretive buffer-walks, and meetings with
homeowners associations;
0 Ensure new property owners are made aware
A buffer and woodenfootpath to nfini'nuze erost.on. of the buffer limits/uses when property is sold
or transferred;
0 "[S]ome kind of limited enforcement
ACT@VELY MANAGE BUFFERS program may be necessary. This usually
involves a series of correction notices and site
Due to staff constraints, in almost every jurisdic- visits, with civil fines used as a last resort....
tion surveyed in the Seattle study, only one inspec- Some buffer ordinances have a further
tion of property within buffer zones is performed, enforcement option, whereby the full cost of
usually at the end of construction. Subsequent buffer restoration is charged as a property
post-construction "bufferwalks" are rare or nonexist- lien." (WPT Summer 1995, p. 162)
ent (WPT 2/94, p. 20). However, after requiring WMIMVE BUFFER CROSMNGS AND
buffers during development review, local
governments must also make the effort to manage D@SRUPT@ONS TO THE STREAM NETWORK
buffers after they become established. Render the "Fragmentation of the riparian corridor in urban
buffers visible to contractors, users, and property
owners before, during, and after construction. Install watersheds can come from a variety of human
silt fencing outside the limit of the buffer to keep silt impacts; the most common and potentially damaging
out of the buffer. Buffer education and enforcement being road crossings. [In a University of Washington
are also needed to protect buffer integrity (WPT 2/ study], the number of stream crossings (roads, trails,
94, p. 21; WPT Summer 1995, p. 157). and utilities) increased in proportion to
development intensity.... In general, the more
Additional recommendations for buffer fragmented and asymmetrical the buffer, the wider it
management: needs to be to perform the desired functions (Barton
Verify the stream delineation in the field; et al., 1985)," (WPT June 1997, p. 486).
"Mark buffer limits on all plans used during
construction (i.e., clearing and grading plans, 1. Develop performance criteria to specifically
and erosion and sediment control plans), plats, describe the conditions under which the stream
and other official maps; or its buffers can be crossed with linear forms of
Conduct a preconstruction stakeout of buffers development, such as roads, bridges, and under-
to define limits of disturbance; ground utilities. -
Mark the limits of disturbance with silt or "Crossing width: Minimum width to allow for
snow fence barriers, and signs to prevent maintenance access.

Vegetated Riparian Buffers and Buffer Ordinances

0 Crossing angle: Use direct right angles to cross Use the stream buffer as a stormwater filtering
streams since they require less clearing in the system only "if basic maintenance can be assured,
buffer than oblique crossing angles. such as routine mowing of the grass filter and annual
0 Crossing frequency: Allow only one road cross- removal of accumulated sediments at the edge of the
ing within each subdivision impervious areas and the grass filter." (WPT
0 Crossing elevation: All roadway crossings and Summer 1995, p. 160)
culverts should be capable of passing the ultimate
100-year flood event, and, where feasible, lower Constructing stormwater ponds on or near the
one culvert below stream invert to ensure water stream provides treatment of the greatest possible
during low-flow periods ...... (WT Summer 1995, drainage area, making construction easier and cheaper.
pp. 158-159) In some areas, ponds and wetlands "require the dry
2. Reduce road right-of-way in buffer zone, with weather flow of a stream to maintain water levels and
utilities under pavement. prevent nuisance conditions. Lastly, ponds and
3. Avoid crossing stream with mainline sewer. wetlands add a greater diversity of habitat types and
4. Site sewers out of buffers (WPT Summer 1995, structure and can add to the total buffer width in some
p. 159).
5. Use buffers to minimize the impact of golf courses
on streams:
a. Construct all fairway crossings perpendicu-
lar to the stream.
b. Allow no more than one golf fairway
crossing for every 1,000 feet of buffer.
c. Protect all wetlands with an extra buffer.
d. Treat outflow with a combination of
vegetative BMPs (filter, swale, wetland)
(adapted from Powell and Jolley, 1992) (WPT
Summer 1994, p. 74; WPT Summer 1995,
p. 158).
Boardwalks over buffers prevent channelization of runoff
00 MOY RELY UPOM THE BUFFER AS THE caused by dirtfootpaths.
SOLE STORNWATER MANAGEMEMY TOOL

The capacity of vegetated buffers to remove
pollutants in urban stormwater is fairly limited. In
urban watersheds rainfall is rapidly converted into
concentrated flow. If flow is allowed to concentrate,
it forms a channel that effectively bypasses a buffer.
As much as 90% of urban runoff concentrates before
it reaches a buffer, ultimately crossing it in a channel
or stormwater drain pipe. Therefore additional
structural BMPs are usually needed to remove
pollutants from runoff before they reach a stream
(WPT Summer 1995, p. 155).

Vegetated Riparian Buffers and Buffer Ordinances

cases. On the other hand, placing a pond or wetland 111. Examples of Existing
in the buffer can create environmental problems,
including the localized clearing of trees and stream Buffer Ordinances
wanning ...... (WPT Summer 1995, p. 160) Therefore,
it is useful to consider possible performance criteria Numerous states and communities have imple-
that restrict the use of ponds or wetlands: mented requirements for various types and sizes of
buffers. Some examples are given below (contact the
1. "A maximum contributing area (e.g. 100 state or individual community for more detailed in-
acres); formation).
2. Clearing of the strearnside buffer zone only
for the outflow channel (if the pond is dis- Brunswick, Maine
charging from the middle zone into the The city adopted 125-300 foot buffers from mean
stream); high water within the Coastal Protection Zone. The
3. Use ponds only to manage stormwater exact width is determined by the slope of the buffer,
quantity within the buffer." (WPT Summer as designated on the town's land use map (USEPA,
1995,p.160) 1993, pp. 4-48).
Buffer Design in Relation to Pavement: Chesapeake Bay
The states of Maryland and Virginia have buffer
"When the buffer receives flow directly from an programs in effect to protect the Chesapeake Bay.
impervious area, design curb cuts or spacers to spread Both states require a 100-foot vegetated buffer along
runoff evenly over the buffer strip. Locate the buffer the shoreline of the Bay and its tributaries. In Mary-
3 to 6 inches below the pavement surface to prevent land, the buffer requirement is only applicable to new
sediment deposits from blocking inflow to the buffer. development; however, the requirement may be
A narrow stone layer at the pavement edge can serve waived if "good conservation practices" are utilized
this purpose." (WPT Summer 1995, p. 160) at the shoreline. Virginia's Chesapeake Bay Preser-
vation Act does provide for limited use within the
buffer, generally allows for marinas and docks within
the buffer, and can grant variances for utilizing land
within the buffer area; however, no variance will re-
sult in a vegetated buffer of less than 50 feet (except
for agricultural uses) (Desbonnet et al., 1994).

Alexandria, Virginia
The city requires buffers in all designated
Resource Protection Areas (RPAs). Buffer must re-
duce 75% of sediments and 40% of nutrients. Buff-
ers of 100 feet are considered adequate to achieve
this standard, and smaller widths may be allowed if
they can be proven to meet sediment and nutrient re-
moval requirements. "Indigenous vegetation removal
is limited to that necessary to provide reasonable sight
lines, access paths, general woodlot management, and
BMP implementation." (USEPA, 1993, pp. 4-48)

Vegetated Riparian Buffers and Buffer Ordinances

Queen Annes County, Mapyland Beaufort's Buffer Regulations:
The county has a standard shoreline buffer of 300
feet from the edge of tidal waters or wetlands, with at "[A] buffer strip of existing or planted vegeta-
least 50 percent forested (USEPA, 1993, pp. 4-48). tion is established within the District, extending fifty
feet perpendicular to and in a horizontal plane from
Illinois the OCRM critical line. The purpose of this buffer
The state has adopted a five-sixths property tax strip is to:
exemption for vegetated buffers managed in accor- 1. provide a natural filtration system for runoff
dance with a plan approved by the county conserva- from adjoining development that may enter
tion district. The protected zone must be at least 66 the waters;
4 feet wide and "contain vegetation that 'has a dense 2. minimize erosion and help stabilize the
top growth, forms a unifonn ground cover, [and] has streambank;
a heavy fibrous root system."' (NPSN 4/5 1998, 3. provide a natural habitat for the flora and
P. fauna that exist in this important transition
area between wetland and upland areas.... The
Massachusetts entire buffer must be maintained as an
The state's new Rivers Protection Act establishes undeveloped landscaped area.
a 200-foot wide buffer zone along the state's peren-
nial rivers and streams (NPSN 4/5 1998, p. 11). No development is permitted in the buffer with
the exception of the following six uses:
North Carolina
The state has adopted a 50-foot protected, veg- 1. Pedestrian and/or vehicular access ways
etated zone on each side of the Neuse river (NPSN 4/ leading to docks, fishing piers, boat
5 1998, p. 11). In North Carolina's coastal zone man- landings ... provided that only permeable ... or
agement program, the portion of the coastal zone that semi-permeable materials ... are used for
lies within 75 feet of the water's edge is subject to vehicular access ways...
permit approval for development purposes. 2. [the structures that the vehicular access ways
lead up to]
Beaufort, South Carolina 3. Use of grassed swales rather than drainage
To protect water quality and habitat, "a buffer strip pipes is required...
of 50 feet from the OCRM critical line was estab- 4. Approved flood control and erosion control
lished in 1995 on all waterfront property. The buffer devices...
strip must be maintained as an undeveloped landscape 5. Utility lines serving approved water/marsh
or undisturbed natural area with some restricted uses uses or crossing the water/marsh...
allowed in the area. The River Quality Overlay 6. Installation of playground equipment or
District also establishes development setbacks of 50, benches, picnic tables or other similar
100, and 150 feet from the OCRM critical line, outdoor furniture.
depending on the intended development." (NPSN 4/
5 1998, p. 11) Roads leading to bridges that cross the waterway
[are allowed] provided the roads are placed approxi-
mately perpendicular to the line of the buffer and pro-
vided all shoulders are grassed.

Vegetated Riparian Buffers and Buffer Ordinances

The following uses within the River Quality Over-
lay District shall be set back a minimum of fifty feet
from the OCRM critical line: agricultural uses... regu-
lation golf courses ... recreational parks and
playgrounds ... drainage systems and retention ponds.

The following require a one hundred-foot setback:
detached single family residential units, multi-fam-
ily and attached residential units, parking areas and
driveways, garages, [civic buildings] not larger than
four thousand square feet, parking lots with no more
than [6 spaces or 1000 square feet], ... and ROW
[right-of-way] of two-lane road." (Beaufort County
River Quality Overlay District Ordinance, pp. 3-6).
Any uses not specified in the River Quality Overlay
District must be set back a minimum of one hundred
fifty feet.

CONCLUSION

Vegetated riparian buffers along urban
waterbodies have proven to be effective against pol-
luted runoff, flooding, and erosion while protecting
aquatic and terrestrial habitats. However, scientific
research often supports the use of buffers that are
wider than what many communities are willing to
accept. After informing citizens of the need for buff-
ers and receiving public input, community leaders
must decide on buffer widths that both afford a mea-
sure of protection for riparian zones and are accept-
able within the community (politically feasible). Use
the information presented in this document as a guide
for establishing appropriate buffers and for resolving
any conflicts that may arise from a proposed buffer
ordinance.

(ED Vegetated Riparian Buffers and Buffer Ordinances

WORKS CITED

Anderson, S. and R. Masters. 1993. Riparian forest buff- Dodd, Mark. 1998. A Summary of Management Recom-
ers. Division of Agriculture Sciences and Natural Re- mendations for Colonial Waterbirds in the Charleston
sources. Oklahoma State University. Cooperative Exten- Harbor Estuary.
sion Service. Fact sheet No. 5034.
Flink, C., and R. Seams. 1993. Greenways - A Guide to
Aucella, S.M. 1989. The use of buffer strips in environ- Planning, Design and Development. The Conservancy
mental planning. Dept. of City and Regional Planning, Fund. Island Press. Washington, D.C. 338 pp.
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. Chapel Hill,
NC. Heraty, M. 1993. Riparian buffer programs: a guide to de-
veloping and implementing a riparian buffer program as
Baltimore Buffer Subcommittee Recommendations. an urban stormwater best management practice. Metropoli-
Report to Director Robert W. Sheesley, Baltimore tan Washington Council of Governments U.S. EPA Office
County Dept. of Environmental Protection and Resource of Oceans, Wetlands, and Watersheds. 152 pp.
Management.
Horton,T. and W.M. Eichbaum. 1991. Turning the Tide:
Barton, D.R., W.D. Taylor, and R.M. Biette. 1985. Dimen- Saving the Chesapeake Bay. Chesapeake Bay Foundation.
sions of riparian buffer strips required to maintain trout Washington, D.C.
habitat in southern Ontario streams, North American Jour-
nal offisheries Management. Vol. 5, pp. 364-378. McCutcheon, S.C., J.C. Hayes, C.A. Williams, C.P.
Weisskopf, and S.J. Maine, 1999. Evaluation of Vegeta-
Beaufort County River Protection Overlay District Ordi- tive Filter Strips to Control Urban Runoffinto Charleston
nance. Harbor Project Reportfor the Charleston Harbor Project,
Charleston, South Carolina.
Burby, R. 1988. Cities Under Water: A Comparative Evalu-
ation of Ten Cities'Efforts to Manage Floodplain Land McCutcheon, Steven, fax to Debra Hernandez, February
Use. Institute of Behavioral Science #6. Boulder, CO. 250 11,1999.
PP.
MWCOG: Metropolitan Washington Council of Govern-
Carter, W.R. 1988. On the necessity of maintaining unde- ments, Washington, DC. 199 1. Coastal Urban NPS Man-
veloped areas and reforesting cleared landsfor the main- agement Measures-Draft Report.
tenance ofecosystemfunction. Maryland Dept. of Natural
Resources/Tidewater. NPSN 4/5 1998: Nonpoint Source News-Notes April/
May 1998, p. 11.
Castelle, A.J., A.W. Johnson, and C. Conolly. 1994. Wet-
land and stream buffer size requirements-a review. Jour- Powell, R.O. and J.B. Jollie. 1993. Environmental guide-
nal ofEnvironmental Quality, Vol. 23. linesfor the design and maintenance ofgo@(courses. Bal-
timore County Department of Environmental Protection
Desbonnet, A., P. Pogue, V. Lee and N. Wolff. 1994. Veg- and Resource Management. 22 pp.
etated Buffers in the Coastal Zone - A Summary Review
and Bibliography. Coastal Resources Center Technical Schueler, T.R., P.A. Kumble, and M.A. Heraty. 1992. A
Report No. 2064. University of Rhode Island Graduate current assessment of urban best management practices:
School of Oceanography. Narragansett, RI 02882. 72 pp. techniques for reducing nonpoint source pollution in the

Veagetalied Ripirian Buffers and Buffer Ordinances

coastal zone. Metropolitan Washington Council of Gov- Volume 1, No. 1, February, 1994, Schueler,
emments. Washington, D.C. Thomas R., Invisibility of StreamlRetland Buffers: Can
Their Integrity Be Maintained?, pp. 19-2 1.
Schueler, T.R., 1995. Site Planning for Urban Stream Pro-
tection. Center for Watershed Protection. Metropolitan Volume 1, No. 2, Summer, 1994. Schueler,
Washington Council of Governments. Silver Spring, MD. Thomas R., Minimizing the Impact of Golf Courses on
222 pp. Streams, pp. 73-75.

Trimble, G.R., Jr. and R.S. Schwartz. 1957. How far from Volume 1, No. 4, Summer, 1995. Schueler,
a stream should a logging road be located. Journal ofFor- ThomasR., The Architecture of Urban Stream Buffers,
estry, Vol. 55. pp. 155-163.

U.S. EPA. 1993. Guidance specifying management Volume 2, No. 4, June, 1997 Schueler, Thomas
measurefor sources of nonpoint pollution in coastal R., The Economics of Watershed Protection, pp 469-
waters. Office of Water. EPA Doc # 840-13-92-002. 482; May, CW., R.R. Homer, J.R. Karr, B.W. Mar, E.B.
Washington, DC. 740 pp. Welch. Effects of Urbanization on Small Streams in the
Puget Sound Lowland Ecoregion, pp. 483-494.
VBCZ: Vegetated Buffers in the Coastal Zone. Coastal
Resources Center, Rhode Island Sea Grant, University of
Rhode Island, July 1994.

Wenger, Seth, and Laurie Fowler. 1999. Guidebookfor
Developing Local Riparian Buffer Ordinances. Institute
of Ecology, University of Georga. Athens, GA. 44 pp.

Wildlife Habitat Enhancement Council. 1992. The Eco-
nomic Benefits of Wildlife Enhancement on Corporate
Lands. Silver Spring, MD. 22 pp.

WPT: Watershed Protection Techniques Center for
Watershed Protection, Thomas R. Schueler, editor in
chief.

Vegetated Riparian Buffers and Buffer Ordinances

ACKNOWLEDGMENUS

Project Publication Coordinator April Turner, SCDHEC/OCR1\4-
Planning Division
Editorial content Ward Reynolds, Debra Hernandez,
provided by and Lisa HaJar, SCDHEC/OCRM -
Planning Division
Art Director Cristi Home, SCDHEC

Photography OCRM

Printing Sun, Inc.
Orangeburg, SC

For questions about this booklet or for additional information, please contact the Planning Division
of SCDHEC/OCRM at (843) 744-5838.

Vegetated Riparian Buffers and Buffer Ordinances @9

NOTES

The photographs on pages 4, 6, 12, and 13
were taken at Dewees Island.

N COASTAL SSERVICC CTR LIBRA
AA RY

6668 141 4043 6

OFFICE OF D H E C
OCEAN AND COASTAL
RESOURCE MANAGEMENT 9

SOLIth Carolina Department of Health
and Environmental Control PROMOTE PROTECT PROSPER

Printed November 1999
ES

------------------

In accordance with Proviso 129.55 of the fiscal 1993-94 Appropriation Act,
the following information is provided regarding this publication:
Total Printing Cost - $3,600.00
Total Number of Documents Printed - 5,000
Cost Per Unit - $0.72
printed on recycled paper