Last year the Georgia Supreme Court threw the policy into confusion when it declared that the buffer only applies when “wrested vegetation” (permanent vegetation) is present along rivers and streams. This effectively means that the buffer could apply and then not apply every few feet along a single river. For example, if a property owner has a lot that abuts a river, the rule may apply for the first two feet where vegetation is present then not apply along the next 15 feet if no vegetation is present… and then apply again along the next 30 feet where vegetation is present. This clearly creates a confusing and somewhat silly situation….So the Georgia House took up HB-966 to declare once and for all that the buffer applies along all state rivers and streams regardless of whether vegetation is present.
Last summer the Georgia Supreme Court severely restricted the application of a buffer rule along all state streams – a buffer seemingly designed to protect water quality. The Georgia Erosion and Sedimentation […]
Case Watch: Georgia’s Waters May Get a Bit Murky Thanks to Poor Statute Writing by the Georgia Legislature
State water could soon get quite murky thanks to a new ruling by the Georgia Supreme Court. Several month ago we highlighted Turner v. Georgia River Network as a case to watch since […]
Last week didn’t deliver the expected buzz surrounding the Transportation Funding Act (TFA), but it did deliver the introduction of two noteworthy bills and dramatic and profound statements about Atlanta from a prominent rural […]
Case Watch is a new piece that will highlight ongoing legal battles over land use, environmental, and development issues in Georgia (and occasionally throughout the country). What’s the point of the controlling sedimentation and […]