The amended superior design ordinance adds buffers to federal wetlands where they were not required before, specifies where homes should be placed to reduce environmental impact and requires 40 percent of open space be contiguous.

But, as county officials are quick to point out, the devil is in the details when it comes to working out the nuances of amended ordinances.

After meeting for nearly four hours, it may seem hard to focus on anything. Maybe that’s why the Sussex County Planning and Zoning Commission struggled over defining the difference between a setback and a buffer contained in the proposed amendment.

After five long public hearings on Thursday, Nov. 20, the commission grappled with upgrades to the superior design regulations required for all cluster subdivisions. The features are required over and above regular subdivisions.

In cluster subdivisions, developers are permitted to build on smaller lots in an effort to create a village-like setting, but they must provide more open space than in traditional subdivisions – at least 30 percent – and offer better design features than are required in standard subdivisions.

But first, commissioners had to get past section 4 of the proposed amendments as read by Lawrence Lank, director of planning and zoning. The amendment calls for minimum 25-foot permanent setbacks around tidal wetlands; for nontidal waters and wetlands; a 50-foot permanent setback is required.

Commissioners questioned the wording because they wanted buffers to be included as part of superior design. “It’s confusing. Is it a setback or a buffer?” asked Commissioner Michael Johnson.

“The way it’s written - we would have no buffers,” added Commission Chairman Robert Wheatley.

Carol Bason, representing the Center for the Inland Bays, said the organization supports the concept of the ordinance, but until the inconsistency in the wording is corrected the organization could not endorse the ordinance.

Gary Cuppels, president of Engineering Consultants International LLC, agreed with Bason. “There is a significant difference between setbacks and buffers,” he said.

“There needs to be some clarification.”

After much discussion, it was decided that the word setback should be changed to buffer.

Cuppels questioned another proposed section requiring 40 percent of open space to be located on one contiguous tract of land. Under the ordinance, one street and bodies of water can separate the tract.

Cuppels said this section might be too aggressive and too restrictive for developers. He said it might force developers to forgo cluster subdivisions and superior design.

Wheatley wondered why the proposed regulations were restricted to cluster subdivisions. “Why is this being limited to clusters? Should it be extended to other parts of zoning? Why has AR-1 become the dumping ground?” he asked.

The commission recommended approval of the amended ordinance with the change in wording and urged the county council to take the comments from Cuppels and Bason under advisement. The council will have a public hearing on the ordinance at 7:30 p.m., Tuesday, Dec. 9.