Georgia coastal comprehensive plan

October 19, 2007
GEORGIA COASTAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
Assessment-Draft
Photos Courtesy of the Georgia Department of Economic Development

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Executive Summary ................................................................................................................... 1 Potential Issues and Opportunities ............................................................................................ 5 Analysis of Regional Development Patterns............................................................................ 31 Consistency with Quality Community Objectives .................................................................... 43 Supporting Analysis of Data and Information........................................................................... 49
Population........................................................................................................................... 52 Economic Development...................................................................................................... 56 Housing .............................................................................................................................. 59 Community Facilities and Services..................................................................................... 61 Transportation .................................................................................................................... 63 Natural Resources.............................................................................................................. 65 Historic Resources ............................................................................................................. 70 Land Use ............................................................................................................................ 71 Intergovernmental Coordination ......................................................................................... 76
Appendix: Detailed Data and Information ............................................................................... 79 Data ........................................................................................................................................ 80
Population........................................................................................................................... 81 Economic Development...................................................................................................... 83 Housing .............................................................................................................................. 89 Community Facilities and Services..................................................................................... 92 Natural Resources.............................................................................................................. 93 Historic Resources ........................................................................................................... 107 Land Use .......................................................................................................................... 114 Maps ...................................................................................................................................... 119

Georgia Coastal Comprehensive Plan October 19, 2007 Draft

i

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Georgia Coastal Comprehensive Plan October 19, 2007 Draft

1

Executive Summary
Introduction
Georgia's coast is home to abundant natural resources, which attract visitors and new residents every day. These visitors and new residents fuel a strong economic engine. But, their continued interest in the coast threatens the very natural resources that attracted them here.
The population of the coastal region is projected to grow by close to 50% by 2030. Unless the residential, commercial and industrial development is guided by quality growth principles, we will lose our rural and maritime character to suburban-style sprawl, congested roads and fragmented greenspace. Fragile coastal resources can still be protected, if we plan for it now. Rapid population growth and residential development--and all the infrastructure and services they require--are proceeding without regard for the ability of local governments to provide those services. While no hurricanes have struck coastal Georgia in recent years, it is almost inevitable that we will be hit. Increasing residential development and decreasing forests and wetlands compromise our ability to withstand the effects of major storms, and exacerbate the effects of climate change and sea level rise.
The inevitable manmade storm can be managed through the identification of priorities, and empowerment of the implementation team. The Executive Order that initiated this process was the first step.
The Coastal Plan
The Governor ordered "that all state departments, agencies, boards, bureaus, commissions, authorities, councils and corporations that exercise programmatic or regulatory functions within the coastal region shall work together with the Department of Community Affairs in a spirit of mutual cooperation in the preparation and eventual implementation of this plan".
The plan shall: Build on the current Coastal Management Program, as well as relevant local and regional comprehensive plans. Develop an infrastructure review. Identify a course of action to resolve the competing interests of tourism and industrial development, housing and transportation, natural and cultural resources and land use.
Local comprehensive plans from the six coastal counties were used as reference material in the preparation of this Assessment. The Georgia Planning Act of 1989 requires that each local government must prepare, adopt and maintain a comprehensive plan that meets the Local Planning Requirements. The most current versions of the following local comprehensive plans were used in the preparation of the Georgia Coastal Comprehensive Plan: Bryan County; City of Pembroke; City of Richmond Hill; Camden County and Cities of Kingsland, St. Marys, and

Georgia Coastal Comprehensive Plan October 19, 2007 Draft

2

Woodbine Joint Comprehensive Plan; Chatham County; City of Pooler; City of Port Wentworth; City of Thunderbolt; City of Tybee Island; City of City of Vernonburg; City of Garden City; Glynn County; City of Brunswick; Liberty County and Cities of Allenhurst, Flemington, Gum Branch, Hinesville, Midway, Riceboro and Walthourville Joint Comprehensive Plan; and, the McIntosh County and City of Darien Comprehensive Plan.
The Process
Regular meetings of the Coastal Comprehensive Plan Advisory Committee (CCPAC), stakeholders and the Technical Advisory Committees have yielded a wealth of information on issues and opportunities facing coastal community. Rising quickly to the surface were widespread concerns about the decline of indigenous industries (fishing), the effects of development near the marshes and in wetlands, public access to water resources, loss of cultural resources, under-prepared workforce--and the related problem of inadequate knowledge-based employment opportunities--affordable housing, lack of a regional transportation system, water--both quality and quantity--and the perception that competing, redundant efforts by local governments preclude a regional approach. Related to these issues are the opportunities that await us if we embrace quality growth, celebrate traditional industries, protect coastal and water resources for enjoyment by all, invest in education, welcome a variety of housing options, and demand cooperation and coordination among the many government agencies operating on the coast .
The Possibilities
Three development scenarios were presented to the CCPAC: 1. Current approach (regulations often amended by variances or not enforced adequately), 2. Current regulations with strict enforcement, and 3. Development according to quality growth principles.
A clear preference emerged for scenario three, as it showed that the projected population growth could be accommodated with a much reduced impact on open space, the transportation network and other infrastructure. This preference was underscored by the results of the Community Choices survey. Good design is important; development must look "right" and fit in.
Quality Growth Audit
Development regulations in all coastal jurisdictions were assessed for consistency with the Quality Community Objectives, to identify deficiencies as well as models. The audit will provide a roadmap for the implementation team as they seek to reward high performers and assist "needs help" governments. Technical assistance--coordinated among state agencies--will be the outcome of this endeavor.
Conclusion
The Assessment portion of the Coastal Plan provides a great deal of information. Without the concerted--and cooperative--efforts of local government officials, state agencies and non profit

Georgia Coastal Comprehensive Plan October 19, 2007 Draft

3

organizations, this plan will fail to fulfill its promise. The Governor's directive to "work together... in a spirit of mutual cooperation in the preparation and eventual implementation of this plan" will not be easy. Organizational procedures will have to bend and change; additional financial resources will have to be found for infrastructure and service upgrades. Ultimately, coastal residents will be reminded that our coast is a public resource and that the privilege of living here comes with the responsibility to sustain the coastal system.

Georgia Coastal Comprehensive Plan October 19, 2007 Draft

4

POTENTIAL ISSUES AND OPPORTUNITIES

Georgia Coastal Comprehensive Plan October 19, 2007 Draft

5

Potential Issues and Opportunities
The identification of issues and opportunities is a required first step in preparing the Community Assessment. This exercise is intended to yield an all-inclusive list of issues and opportunities to be addressed in subsequent steps of the planning process. A comprehensive review of local and regional plans resulted in the list below. This list was further refined by the Coastal Comprehensive Plan Advisory Committee and through public involvement.

Issues

Opportunities

Economic Development

Employment:

Employment:

Too high proportion of low-paying jobs.
The community has seen a shift from higher paying manufacturing jobs to lower paying service jobs.
The region lacks sufficient jobs or economic opportunities for local residents.
The community does not have many jobs for skilled labor.
The community has few jobs for unskilled labor.

Need to strengthen and enhance the local economic base.
Need to develop more high value, environmentally sound industry of all types.
Enhancement of the intensity of training and numbers of persons trained for high-skill levels of occupations would greatly strengthen the marketability of the community's labor force, especially for industries requiring large numbers of highly trained employees.

Education:
Lack of labor skills to support a diverse group of industries.
Perception of public school systems as underperforming can detract from economic development efforts.
The long history of low educational attainment for local residents in Coastal Georgia creates difficulties in raising expectations for local school systems.

Education: Need to provide a quality education system world class universities and training.
Healthcare university research
Growth of population of engineering students at Georgia Tech.
Partner with local community colleges and technical colleges to provide satellite classes and courses for local citizens.

There is a good supply of professionals, technical information, and expertise available in the region.

Business: Small and minority businesses are only a small portion of local economies.
Lack of communication between

Business: Competitive tax and utility rates.
The regions high quality of life is a positive attraction to highest

Georgia Coastal Comprehensive Plan October 19, 2007 Draft

6

Issues

Opportunities

Economic Development

governments, authorities, businesses and citizens in planning and implementing economic development plans.
There has been a shift from locally owned retail stores to regional shopping centers, which has diminished the viability of many downtowns.
The region has a reputation among some developers as a tough place to do business.

concentrations of high income households in the region making it an ideal location for high-end retail.
Utilize the local chambers of commerce to promote the area's towns, counties, and local businesses.
Utilize airport, transit system, and other regional transportation initiatives to attract businesses to the area.

The existing economic development program(s) do not have an entrepreneur support program.

Coastal Georgia faces competition from South Carolina and Florida to attract desired businesses.

Fisheries Industry:
Declining coastal commercial fisheries industry: Jobs and livelihoods dependent upon the coastal fisheries industry are susceptible to a variety of factors from global economics to local droughts.

Fisheries Industry:
Seek state and local support for programs to maintain a viable coastal fisheries industry.

Silviculture Industry:
The traditional silviculture industry is threatened both from global economic factors to anti-forestry attitudes.

Silviculture Industry:

Manufacturing:
Decline of manufacturing industry: Many jobs have been lost due in part to competition with lower labor costs, lower taxes, and relaxed environmental regulations available in foreign countries or other states. This competition often translates to lower taxes and regulation important for local and regional quality of life.

Manufacturing:
Conversion of existing heavy industry; re-use and re-development of existing land uses.
Recruitment of growth industries that can use the skills of workers in declining industries: One possible opportunity to help stabilize the declining paper industry is the development of ethanol as an alternative fuel.

Job training: Provide support for programs that help build the skills of workers in declining industries to

Georgia Coastal Comprehensive Plan October 19, 2007 Draft

7

Issues

Opportunities Economic Development
transition to industries being recruited.

Tourism:
Lack of corridor management on I-95 and its interchange gateways: Neither state nor local governments have adequate resources to fund the landscaping or litter management programs necessary to maintain the scenic quality of corridors at levels that are maintained in Florida and parts of southern South Carolina. The difference in aesthetic character is becoming increasingly evident and threatens to place Georgia at a competitive disadvantage in its appeal to the subset of tourists for whom aesthetics and perceived quality of life are an important consideration in their decision-making about where to spend their time and money.
Lack of coordinated way-finding signage: Informational and directional signage along important corridor and gateway routes in the coastal region seems to lack the kind of deliberate visitor-friendly design that has been employed in neighboring Florida and Beaufort County, SC. Also, street signs, even at major intersections are small and difficult to read, especially at night.
Lack of funding to develop alternative scenic routes to I-95 for Florida-bound tourists: The East Coast Greenway and US 17 (Southern Passages: the Atlantic Heritage Coast) provide an opportunity to showcase the Georgia coast to the subset of tourists who have the time and money to spend in sightseeing. Yet state and local governments lack funding to pursue the development of these corridors and are falling behind neighboring Florida in the development of these attractions.

Tourism:
Tourist development can help tax collections and funding without new state and local tax increases.
Prioritize spending: Focus limited financial resources toward infrastructure improvements to sidewalks, lighting, and crosswalks along critical gateway intersections and corridors.
Partner with universities, DOT, or other entities to design a regional wayfinding master plan.
Focus limited financial resources toward infrastructure improvements to sidewalks, lighting, and crosswalks along critical gateway intersections and corridors.
Promote the use and development of alternative routes through coordination of marketing for festivals and events related to the important natural, historic, and cultural resources of the coast.
Pursue funding support for implementation of the East Coast Greenway and Southern Passages development plans: The East Coast Greenway is a route that would have strong appeal to tourists who have leisure time and who are likely more able to spend time and money than the average tourist. A gateway to Georgia from Florida at St. Marys via passenger ferry service from Fernandina Beach would help form strong first and/or last impressions of Georgia that could translate to greater investment in Georgia.
Develop and adopt regulations that will create a level playing field for the development of all new billboards and

Georgia Coastal Comprehensive Plan October 19, 2007 Draft

8

Issues

Opportunities

Economic Development

Outdoor Advertising: Billboards and signs provide an important service for tourists and residents. They also provide jobs within the outdoor advertising industry. Yet, a relative lack of billboard and signage regulation by local governments in Georgia compared to neighboring cities and counties in Florida and Beaufort County, SC again threatens to place Georgia at a competitive disadvantage in benefiting from spending and investment decisions of tourists and business and industry recruits for whom character and aesthetics of development are important.

signs that avoid placing the local governments and their businesses of coastal Georgia at a competitive disadvantage with those of neighboring states.
Seek methods to help the industry phase out non-conforming billboards, especially along critical corridors.

Miscellaneous:
Regional leadership:
Water consumption limits on industry, commercial, forestry, residential pose constraints for growth and development.
Similar limits on processing waste water can be a deterrent to economic growth and development.
"Me" people vs. "We" people: There is a general lack of community vision among local governments of the region and strategic plans for economic development that help guide growth in a manner that is mutually beneficial to all coastal Georgians.
Lack of access to undeveloped barrier islands constrains tourism potential.

Miscellaneous: Regional Leadership: Support programs that encourage participation in existing regional leadership programs.
"We" people vs. "Me" people; "Big" Picture vs. "My" Picture: Develop effective public relations and public involvement to include all stakeholders in a way that promotes consensus building.
Marsh and barrier islands still preserved but enjoyed.
Barrier islands nationally recognized for pristine nature.
Access without automobiles to barrier islands.
Water taxis from St. Marys, Darien, etc. to barrier islands.

Creative and innovative access programs: Develop programs that facilitate a Cumberland Island type of access to other islands but limited to individuals who earn rights to such access via resource appreciation coursework available through curriculum offered in school, college,

Georgia Coastal Comprehensive Plan October 19, 2007 Draft

9

Issues

Opportunities
Economic Development
and continuing education venues. Such unique approach to access to the protected barrier islands would foster a greater understanding and appreciation of the resource while providing a way for all people to enjoy the resource.
Develop or enhance collaboration between local economic development agencies and community based organizations.
Improve overall quality of life by preserving rural character, open space, developing greenways, and improving healthcare and education.
Downtown revitalization and infill.
Capture more of the retirement community.
Capitalize upon and enhance the natural environment.

Georgia Coastal Comprehensive Plan October 19, 2007 Draft

10

Issues

Opportunities

Natural and Cultural Resources

Marshlands:
Impacts from upland development: An increasing desire for unobstructed views of coastal marshlands and waterways is causing waterfront property owners to remove natural vegetation that buffers marshlands from the impacts of non-point source pollution from fertilizers, pesticides, oils and greases associated with upland development.
Impacts from erosion: Increased recreational boating activity threatens to damage or destroy marshland through wake-related wave erosion, particularly in the exposed marsh beds where marsh die-off was severe during the drought of 2004-05.
Impacts from dock construction: An increasing desire for private docks is causing damage from construction activity in the marsh, as well as subsequent impacts caused by shading of marsh grasses. The increased demand is also creating political pressure to relax protective regulatory measures established by the state's coastal marshlands protection legislation.

Marshlands:
Education about the value of marshlands for sustaining quality of life including their role as nurseries for healthy sea life and the industries that depend on sea life; as well as their role in the production of oxygen.
Education about the economic value of buffers: It is possible to have both marsh views and buffers. In fact the market for buffered views may exceed that of un-buffered views, because a view of a buffered edge on the other side of the marsh can often be more valuable than a view of an un-buffered edge.
Local marsh edge buffer incentives: Create adequate incentives within the local development process for the preservation or creation of natural vegetated buffers along marsh edges.
Boater education.
Boating licenses.
Contractor Education.

Undeveloped Barrier Islands/Hammocks:
Impacts from unmanaged access: Recreational boaters are landing on the undeveloped islands and hammocks and creating unnecessary impacts that include leaving litter and debris that is both harmful to wildlife and inconsiderate of others who will follow. There are also reports of a growing practice of illegal harvesting of sea turtle eggs for black market trade.

Undeveloped Barrier Islands/Hammocks:
Provide incentives for local governments to adopt regulations consistent with the recommendations of the Coastal Hammocks Advisory Committee.
Maintain natural state of undeveloped barrier islands and hammocks through conservation easements or acquisition.

Increasing pressure to relax regulation of development of hammocks: Market demand for coastal properties is raising

Georgia Coastal Comprehensive Plan October 19, 2007 Draft

10

Issues

Opportunities

Natural and Cultural Resources

development pressures in coastal Georgia for any available properties on barrier islands and hammocks.

Impacts from invasive exotic plants and animals: Port-related activity worldwide poses a growing concern for the impacts from non-native plant and animal life into environments that provide no natural predators to manage the population of such species. A recent example in Georgia is the introduction via packing material at Port Wentworth of the Ambrosia Beetle from Asia, that has nearly extirpated Red Bay, arguably one of the region's most beautiful evergreen trees.

Developed Barrier Islands/Hammocks:

Developed Barrier Islands/Hammocks:

Pressure to increase density and intensity of use: Increasing demand for coastal property is creating pressure to relax height and mass restrictions that help maintain the bucolic character of our developed barrier islands. Older smaller residences are being torn down for larger structures, often with multiple units.
Impacts to protective coastal dunes: Erosion in various places due to both natural and manmade causes threatens dunes from the ocean side of our protective dune systems at a time when property values are fostering development to encroach upon the dune systems from the other side.
Impacts of development on sea turtles: Lighting from development can disorient hatchling sea turtles and decrease their survival rates in the critical minutes between their hatching on the beach and reaching relative safety in the ocean. Also, sand materials used for beach re-nourishment that differ from original sand materials can impair sea turtle nesting.

Identify the types of existing units that merit protection for their consistency with the desired community character, and provide incentives that direct redevelopment activity to other properties.
Provide incentives for local governments to adopt night lighting ordinances that shine lights away from the beach, during sea turtle nesting season.
Provide incentives for the local governments involved in beach renourishment to require the use of beach materials that are similar to original beach materials.
Provide incentives for local governments to adopt regulations consistent with the recommendations of the Coastal Hammocks Advisory Committee.

Georgia Coastal Comprehensive Plan October 19, 2007 Draft

11

Issues

Opportunities

Natural and Cultural Resources

Impacts from development of hammocks: Unregulated development of hammocks can impact numerous environmentally sensitive resources uniquely associated with coastal hammocks, including the adjacent protected marshlands.

Estuarine/Tidal Rivers and Streams:
Impacts of pollution from septic tanks associated with residential development: Much of the growth in the coastal region is occurring along the borders of estuarine/tidal rivers and streams, away from cities and/or developments that provide public sewer systems. The proliferation of private septic tanks used to support this pattern of growth increases the risk of pollution and threatens the quality of water for swimming as well as for fishing and the entire commercial fisheries industry.

Estuarine/Tidal Rivers and Streams:
Develop incentives and disincentives to direct growth toward planned developments served by public water and sewer systems.
Clean marina program: Create incentives for all local governments adjacent to coastal waters to adopt standards consistent with the CRD's clean marina program [need to verify whose program that is].
Education programs for school-age children and recreational boaters.

Impacts of pollution from recreational boating: Increased boating and marina activity on coastal tidal waters increases the amount of oils and greases, sewage, and litter that enters our estuarine waters, affecting the health of marine fisheries and other marine life important for regional and global quality of life.

Incentives for speed limits on estuarine waters.

Impacts to endangered species from boating activity: Increased port traffic, as well as increasing recreational boating activity is threatening the survival of endangered and beloved species such as the North Atlantic Right Whale and the West Indian Manatee. Meanwhile there is political resistance by many recreational boaters for boating regulation.

Freshwater Wetlands:
Development in Wetlands: The economics of development often value wetlands low enough to make them

Freshwater Wetlands:

Georgia Coastal Comprehensive Plan October 19, 2007 Draft

12

Issues

Opportunities

Natural and Cultural Resources

affordable for such land uses as auto and auto-related salvage yards, or other activities that can harm the environment and overall quality of life. Such activities are so prevalent that there is political resistance to regulate such activity, especially at the local level in the areas where this is a problem. Tires are a breeding ground for mosquitoes.

Local governments, where local land use decision-making authority resides, often leave wetland protection to state and federal governmental agencies. These agencies are not able to reject uses that are inherently harmful to wetlands, but that local governments do not prohibit in wetlands. [need a DNR expert's perspective here]

Freshwater Rivers and Streams:
Water quality and quantity.
Impacts from inter-basin transfers: Population growth in the northern metro Atlanta region is creating demand for inter-basin transfers that can damage our environment and inhibit growth.

Freshwater Rivers and Streams:
Educational programs for school age students and for recreational boaters.

The economics of the timber industry is encouraging the harvesting of river bottom timber in a process that threatens to harm water quality and damage critical environmental resources on which many coastal ecosystems depend.

Impacts from exotic invasive species: Increased recreational boating activity increases the threat of the transport of harmful exotic plants and fishes (e.g., hydrilla, water hyacinth, and others identified at http://www.fws.gov/invasives/Index5A.h tml) into coastal waters.

Groundwater/Aquifer Resources: Impacts from saltwater intrusion:

Groundwater/Aquifer Resources: Revise comprehensive plans to reflect

Georgia Coastal Comprehensive Plan October 19, 2007 Draft

13

Issues

Opportunities

Natural and Cultural Resources

Increases in population and growth of water-consuming industries in the coastal region creates a political environment of competition and conflict among local governments, all of which works against the ability to coordinate the wise use of the region's groundwater resources for the benefit of all.
Impacts from point and non-point source pollution: There is a lack of capacity within many local governments of the region to regulate potentially harmful land use activities within the zones of influence of public groundwater wells.
Risks to private water wells: Local governments lack adequate capacity to regulate activities that can impact private wells, for which there a variety of contaminants that do not affect taste or odor. (e.g., Lead scavengers, etholene dibromide (EDB)).

the policy recommendations of the Sound Science Initiative (http://ga2.er.usgs.gov/coastal/) and create incentives for compliance with the recommendations.
Wellhead Protection: Revise comprehensive plans to identify zones of influence to public wells and develop wellhead protection standards for the protection of all groundwater resources used for potable water.
Increase education available to about the information provided by such entities as the National Groundwater Trust (www.agwt.org/watertest.htm).
Require that such practice be done or not done consistent with the results of sound science analysis.

Risk of contamination from aquifer injection: There is a market for a growing practice of injecting treated water into aquifers for storage for future withdrawal. This practice has been used in Florida and proposed in Georgia.

Clean Air:
Various industries within the coastal region emit each year into the atmosphere tons of chemical pollutants that can be dangerous to health of coastal residents, and that often detract from the bucolic characteristics that make the region attractive to quality growth and development. As pillars of many local economies, there is widespread political resistance to local and state regulation, or even to attempts at seeking win-win solutions that protect jobs and profits while

Clean Air : Maintain and improve air quality. No paper mill smells.

Georgia Coastal Comprehensive Plan October 19, 2007 Draft

14

Issues

Opportunities

Natural and Cultural Resources

mitigating the negative impacts.

Historic Resources:
"Tear-down" and/or "extreme makeover" redevelopment in neighborhoods that potentially qualify for historic designation.

Historic Resources: Well-developed natural and historic resources.
Context Sensitive Design.

Impacts to scenic roadways from modern DOT standards: Canopied roads and landscaped memorial drives that define the character of many coastal communities are threatened by modern DOT design standards that preclude the ability to maintain the canopies and landscaping of these scenic drives.

Cultural Resources:
Protection of culturally significant communities: Increasing value of coastal property is causing residents of communities such as Hog Hammock to divest their properties into the hands of people and developers who have little or no connection to the historic communities.

Cultural Resources:
Develop an Integrated Cultural Resources Management Plan (ICRMP).
Seek support for preservation through development of a coastal heritage museum.

Miscellaneous:
Protection of environmentally sensitive resources crucial to long term quality of life is inconsistent from one local government to another.
Competition among local governments for opportunities to grow their tax bases creates a natural disincentive for any one local government to adopt regulations that would drive developers to a neighboring jurisdiction.

Miscellaneous: Develop a regional GIS/mapping system.
Educational improvements can lead to general improvements.

Georgia Coastal Comprehensive Plan October 19, 2007 Draft

15

Issues

Housing

Affordable Housing

Increasing land values in coastal



counties are precluding the ability to

develop affordable housing for low and

moderate income workers. The costs, both in money and time, of



transportation to inland areas where

affordable workforce housing exists

often offset or exceed the savings due

to the lower costs of the inland area

housing.

The proliferation of single use developments lacking the pedestrian friendly connections with existing adjacent development or opportunities for connections with future development increase the proportion of income that must be devoted to private transportation, especially in rural and suburban areas not served by public transportation.

The housing market is dominated by multi-family housing and high-end single family homes and land values are significantly higher than in surrounding areas, leaving few options for homebuyers.

The high cost of housing compared to surrounding jurisdictions has led to a shortage of homes for young professionals, middle-income families, and "empty-nesters".

There is some community opposition to higher density and affordable housing.

There is a need for low to moderate income housing opportunities.

Financial Assistance
Lack of sufficient financial assistance programs to assist first time home buyers.

Special needs Escalating land values are precluding

Opportunities
Thriving older communities, live/work centers, technical centers within each community.
Modify the local planning and zoning regulatory framework of local governments within the region to foster the development of neo-traditional, mixed use developments that incorporate affordable workforce housing into the site plans via garden level or carriage house apartments, apartments above street-level retail and office etc., consistent with successful, traditional examples within the coastal Georgia region.

Georgia Coastal Comprehensive Plan October 19, 2007 Draft

16

Issues
Housing the ability to develop housing for people with special needs.
Lack of special needs housing (elderly, handicapped, etc).

Opportunities

Substandard Housing
Rehabilitation of properties is often hindered by heirs rights issue.
Lack of neighborhood design often creates subdivisions that do not have the qualities that foster re-investment throughout the housing life cycle.

Continue to utilize existing development regulations and procedures to implement safe, healthy and varied housing opportunities to the community.

Lack of adequate housing ordinances and regulations.

Poor maintenance of some housing in the downtown residential areas, especially among older renter-occupied units, as well as in some rural pockets.

Many community neighborhoods are in need of revitalization.

Manufactured Housing
There are numerous areas containing abandoned or substandard manufactured housing units that create nuisances and safety hazards, and that, in turn discourage investment and reinvestment.

Manufactured Housing
Liberty County has developed a program that may serve as a model for the region.

Manufactured housing is susceptible to damage and destruction from storm events that are common in the coastal Georgia region.

Miscellaneous:
Many existing and new residential developments lack modern equivalents of the characteristics of neighborhood design and architectural style that have fostered reinvestment in neighborhoods and rehabilitation of housing units within many neighborhoods of the region that have the traditional versions of these characteristics.

Miscellaneous:
Partner with University System and private colleges and universities to develop standardized designs for residential development that is affordable across the spectrum of regional income levels and that consistent with and contains modern equivalents to traditional characteristics that have proven to foster reinvestment and appreciation

Georgia Coastal Comprehensive Plan October 19, 2007 Draft

17

Issues

Opportunities

Housing

Gentrification: increasing property values in the region, and especially within older neighborhoods of the region's historic districts threatens to foster gentrification.

of long term value of housing.
Maintain economically and multiculturally diverse neighborhoods.
Reduce costs of transportation for workforce demographic by requiring pedestrian connectivity of new development with adjacent existing or planned developments.

Provide incentives that help transform single use developments to mixed-use neighborhoods by locating small stores, such as local markets, within easy walking distance of residences.

Create rehabilitation programs, incentives programs for affordable infill housing, and readily available homebuyer education programs.

Georgia Coastal Comprehensive Plan October 19, 2007 Draft

18

Issues

Opportunities

Transportation

Highway

Highway

Lack of coordination of right-of-way acquisition.
Lack of coordination between land use and transportation: (see Land Use/Miscellaneous).

Develop transportation concurrency management programs to manage potential impacts.
Improve east-west transportation routes

Impacts from capacity expansion: Increased development creates the need for capacity expansion, which often damages or destroys the character and quality of neighborhoods and historic streetscapes. (e.g., Tybee Road/Victory Drive, Frederica Road).

Parking garages: Replace surface lots with garages in downtowns and at regional activity centers.
Corridor Management: (see Economic Development/Tourism).

Hurricane evacuation: Growth creates a need for capacity expansion to accommodate hurricane evacuation, and these expansions often foster overdevelopment that absorbs the excess capacity and fuels a new round of capacity expansion. In addition, Florida evacuees often clog Georgia evacuation routes and prevent safe evacuation of Georgians.

Lack of adequate planning for parking: Historic districts developed before the automobile have too few parking spaces, while suburban malls often have too many parking spaces on too much asphalt.

Unattractive corridors: (see Economic Development/ Tourism).

Rail

Rail

Non-signaled rail crossings: The number of accidents at such intersections is increasing. There are many substandard crossings in the coastal region. Local governments lack resources to provide adequate signalization.

Passenger service is limited and threatened by federal budget cuts that reduce quality of service and further

Georgia Coastal Comprehensive Plan October 19, 2007 Draft

19

Issues

Opportunities

Transportation
discourage the development of rail capacity for the region. Because freight transportation is more lucrative than passenger service, railroads are disinclined to accommodate the schedules of passenger trains.

Rivers/Sea
Impacts of port development on natural resources: The economics of shipping is creating larger and larger ships, which in turn increases pressure on ports to accommodate the larger ships, often to the detriment of the local environment. In Georgia, the deepening of shipping channels poses threats to many sensitive resources important to coastal Georgia's quality of life.

Rivers/Sea
Bulk freight to Andrews Island leaving downtown Brunswick full of mixed use development
Ports expansions including military port at Kings Bay all with good ratings

Impacts of port development on highway infrastructure.

Lack of adequate cruise ship terminal(s): The cruise ship industry offers the potential for economic growth in tourism, as well as some potential negative impacts.

Miscellaneous: Lack of a regional transportation system.
Lack of adequate mass transit.

Miscellaneous: Improve east-west corridors.
System of ferries from Jacksonville to Charleston to attract tourism.

Centers of density, nodes of development, public transportation options to include trams.

Interstates continue to be important.

Mass transit is here!

Monorail along I-95 corridor.

Transportation corridors are different not like today.

Opportunities to address gridlock due to growth.

Georgia Coastal Comprehensive Plan October 19, 2007 Draft

20

Issues
Facilities and Services
Potable Water
Development outside the service boundary of public or private water systems requires a lower density than what is optimal for minimizing the costs of providing and maintaining public service to these areas at build out.

Opportunities

Sewerage
Development outside the service boundary of public sewer systems or private package treatment plants requires a lower density than what is optimal for minimizing the ultimate costs of providing and maintaining public service to these areas at a future date.

Sewerage
Regional water/sewer authorities can reduce the cost to local governments to create and support their own, smaller systems.

Parks
Development often excludes adequate provision for parks and open space.

Escalating land values make open space less affordable for developers.

Schools
Coordination of school facilities is not a part of the state's comprehensive planning program.

Lack of coordination between local governments and school boards: Decision-making about sites for new schools is often kept secret, even from local governments that are expected to provide services to the facilities. The price of land often causes school boards to locate new schools away from the population centers where children are located.

Georgia Coastal Comprehensive Plan October 19, 2007 Draft

21

Issues

Facilities and Services

Opportunities

Miscellaneous:
Funding of infrastructure: Local governments lack the ability to pay for the infrastructure needed to accommodate current growth patterns.

Miscellaneous:
Defray the costs of service provision and maintenance through the adoption of impact fees, tap-on fees, etc.

Concurrency management: Consider adoption of local programs to require that water and sewer facilities necessary to maintain adopted levels of service be available at the time of the impacts of development.

Georgia Coastal Comprehensive Plan October 19, 2007 Draft

22

Issues

Opportunities

Land Use

Agriculture/Silviculture:

Agriculture/Silviculture:

Timberland conversion: A downturn in the economics of the paper industry is causing much timberland to be divested, often in parcels of less than 100 acres that are developed in single use developments that have little or no connectivity or planned continuity with adjacent land uses. Resulting development patterns often fail to provide adequate consideration and planning for the cumulative impacts of development at ultimate build-out with regard especially to the protection of environmental resources and optimal use of community infrastructure.
Contemporary timber harvesting equipment and land clearing practices often damage or destroy the pastoral and natural characteristics of the land that attract visitors and prospective residents to coastal Georgia. Much of the native vegetation that enhances the aesthetic appeal of and forms much of the basis of the attraction for the region's most valuable real estate is being extirpated by such harvesting and land clearing activities.

Recruit country's best developers
Learning from best practices from national and international developers
Foster win-win partnerships between owners of large tract timber holdings and development companies that follow state-of-the-art quality growth principles in the development of large tracts. Examine and improve upon the examples of the Chattahoochee Hill Country villages in southwestern Fulton County and St. Joe Communities in the Florida panhandle.
Identify critical corridors important to both quality growth and environmental sustainability and provide increased incentives for land owners and developers in these areas to use the above-referenced Silviculture BMPs.
Modify Silviculture BMPs and provide regional incentives to plan for future development and conservation of the appropriate areas of each timber tract.

Contemporary timber harvesting practices often lead to the clearing of wetland areas that provide important habitat for endangered species of plants and animals, as well as other species that provide biological and ecological diversity critical to the region's quality of life.

Georgia Coastal Comprehensive Plan October 19, 2007 Draft

23

Issues

Opportunities

Land Use

Residential Development:

Residential Development:

Long term fiscal sustainability: Tax revenues generated by all but the highest price levels of residential development often fail to cover the costs that local governments must bear to provide the range of services required to support such development.

Analyze for the coastal region the current and projected levels of density for each price range of housing required to reduce the per unit costs of infrastructure and services to levels that will optimize the long term fiscal health of communities.

Quality/Character of development: Much of our new residential development is based on designs that come from catalogs that often do not relate well to or complement the traditional or historic styles of architecture along the coast. Also, much of the built environment has been shaped or formed by contractors who have little formal education or training in land development BMPs.
Site Planning: The economics of the development process often discourage or preclude preservation or conservation of on-site features of natural and environmental or historical and cultural resources.

Encourage local governments to adopt policies that foster such densities for each price range of residential development.
Also encourage the adoption of policies that foster site designs and architectural style for each type of density for new developments that will encourage long-term reinvestment and rehabilitation of the residential properties. Look to the successful examples of reinvestment and rehabilitation associated with the densities of development and community site design of various historic districts in the coastal region from St. Augustine to Charleston.

Modern construction equipment used for residential development often damages or destroys the pastoral and natural characteristics of the land that attract visitors and prospective residents to coastal Georgia. Much of the native vegetation that enhances the aesthetic appeal of and forms much of the basis of the attraction for the region's most valuable real estate is being extirpated by the development of residential subdivisions, often replacing native vegetation with non-native species that do not relate well or complement the traditional coastal landscape.

Foster mixed use development.
Ambiance of mainland and inland counties blends with coastal flavor: clean, green space, well-planned, streetscapes.
Old European style development on Sea Island attractive designs.
Increase education opportunities for members of the development community to learn about land development BMPs and provide incentives for the use of such BMPs
Modify the development process within as many local governments in the region as possible to create the opportunity for local TDR and PDR programs. Partner with existing local and regional industrial development authorities to create mixed-use parks

Georgia Coastal Comprehensive Plan October 19, 2007 Draft

24

Issues

Opportunities

Land Use

that would be the receiving areas of transferred development rights.

Provide sufficient tax or regulatory incentives for the development community to consider conservation easements a viable option.

Encourage local governments to adopt land development regulations for Low Impact Development.

Encourage local adoption of tree regulations applicable to residential and commercial development requiring protection of native vegetation or replacement of mature specimens with approved native species or species that promote the traditional coastal landscape.

Commercial and Office Development:
Auto-dependent development patterns: The conventional development process that began after WWII and continues in many areas of the region today fosters the separation of land uses and does not accommodate nor plan for future accommodation of pedestrian or automobile connectivity with adjacent land uses.
Redevelopment of aging urban areas.

Commercial and Office Development:
Develop state incentives to encourage local adoption of land use policies and regulation of site plan design that foster pedestrian and auto connectivity. Rural areas without zoning may look to DCA's Model Code.
New re-development of existing areas can enhance older communities and preserve currently undeveloped land.

Urban Sprawl: Many corridors have developed into strips or ribbons of commercial sprawl with characteristic impacts related to traffic congestion, pedestrian safety, urban blight, etc.
Anywhere USA: The proliferation of corporate franchise and big box development, pre-fabricated metal buildings, auto sales lots, and outdoor billboard advertising has diminished the unique characteristics that distinguish the coastal Georgia region from anywhere else.

Corridor rejuvenation: Develop strategies for corridor rehabilitation to include grayfield redevelopment tools with maximum setback regulations for new development, guidelines for architectural style consistent with traditional coastal character, rear-lot or shared parking facilities, etc. [Exhibit]
Design Guidelines: Partner with public and private colleges and universities or other entities to create coastalspecific architectural design guidelines and/or blueprint catalogs for various types of commercial uses typically found along any commercial corridor. Encourage local governments to adopt

Georgia Coastal Comprehensive Plan October 19, 2007 Draft

25

Issues

Opportunities

Land Use the guidelines for high profile corridors.

Industrial Development:
Impacts on water and sewer infrastructure: Many communities in the region lack the capacity to analyze the fiscal impacts that prospective industries will have on infrastructure capacity that may ultimately costs taxpayers more than they receive in tax revenues and payroll benefits. This may be especially problematic for local governments in the highly competitive race to attract the jobs and tax revenues associated with industrial growth.

Industrial Development:
Location criteria: Include steps in the land use decision-making process to consider potential impacts to coastal environment and quality of life when identifying future areas where industrial activity can be accommodated. Provide adequate incentives to draw industry to these preferred sites, and disincentives for location outside these areas.
Buffers regulations/incentives for industrial development

Impacts on environmental resources: Many communities in the region lack the capacity to analyze the impacts of industry on environmental resources and long term costs that taxpayers must pay for cleanup and restoration. Local governments often fail to consider in their decision-making process the potential threat of contamination from accidents related to flooding and storm surge.

Impacts on transportation infrastructure: The trucking activity associated with industrial uses, but particularly portrelated development is generating congestion and other along coastal Georgia highways, at highway interchanges, as well as within neighborhoods and communities throughout our coastal region.

Impacts to coastal character and scenic vistas: Industrial activity can detract from or conflicts with the scenic character that is the engine for tourism and quality growth in the region stretching from Charleston to St. Augustine. One example is the developing liquefied natural gas storage complex on Elba Island and its impacts on scenic views from US 80. Other

Georgia Coastal Comprehensive Plan October 19, 2007 Draft

26

Issues

Opportunities

Land Use
examples are the paper mills visible from I-95 both at Brunswick and at Riceboro.

Brownfield Redevelopment: Costs of environmental cleanup are a deterrent to re-investment. Smaller local governments lack the expertise to negotiate redevelopment plans to the best advantage of the community.

Recreation:
Increasing costs of land for recreation: The escalating cost of land in the coastal region inhibits local government investment in recreation facilities and related services.

Recreation:
Levels of service: Consider creating regional levels of service for recreation that local governments can adopt and require as part of the development approval process.

Impact fees: Consider impact fees as a mechanism for the provision of adequate recreation facilities and services.

Concurrency management: Consider adoption of local programs to require that recreation facilities necessary to maintain adopted levels of service be available at the time of the impacts of development.

Conservation and Open Space:
Planning for Conservation and Open Space: The escalating cost of land creates a strong disincentive for the conservation of land.
Local governments lack the expertise to negotiate with developers for lands that can be devoted to conservation and opens space.

Conservation and Open Space:
Develop capacity to identify land to preserve.
Develop programs to advocate for well-planned green space infrastructure.
Direct more of the projected growth to PUDs, where conservation and open space can be incorporated into planning requirements.

Develop programs to encourage local government use of such tools as conservation easements and land banks for conservation and open space.

Georgia Coastal Comprehensive Plan October 19, 2007 Draft

27

Issues

Opportunities

Miscellaneous: Reactive vs. Proactive

Land Use Miscellaneous: Proactive vs. Reactive

Accelerated Growth can bring issues such as changes in traditional uses (forestry, agriculture, hunting).
Competition for development perceived to be necessary for building tax base inhibits local governments from adopting ordinances that are more stringent than neighboring local governments.
The intangible value of environmentally sensitive areas is not a factor in the development process.
The development process contains insufficient incentives to foster development that is consistent with local government comprehensive plans, the implementation of which often raises concerns about takings and private property rights.
Most local governments lack adequate planning and zoning expertise to manage the negative impacts of growth.
Alteration of Natural Hydrology: Development projects in the coastal region often include the construction of canals and ditches that alter the natural hydrology needed for biological and ecological diversity. Such practices are intended to alleviate the potential for flooding over the developed areas of the properties, but they in fact do not alleviate the potential for flooding but reduce the duration of the period of flooding.
Land use policies that foster rural and urban sprawl [see Transportation also]: Individuals and developers often seek and local governments permit the subdivision of property adjacent to rural state- or county-maintained roads and highways. State law, in turn, allows (or prohibits the denial of) access for each

Accelerated growth has potential to bring benefits.
Seek region-wide support for regulations that protect all local governments experiencing similar levels of growth and similar types of impacts.
Develop programs that analyze the value of resources typically overlooked in the development decision-making process and establish mechanisms to factor costs associated with the impacts to these resources into the development process.
Develop effective public relations and public involvement that includes all stakeholders at appropriate stages of the decision-making process.
Consider development of programs that analyze the savings to taxpayers that can be realized by developing the community in a manner consistent with the comprehensive plan. Create incentives that pass these savings to developers based on the degree to which their developments are consistent with the comprehensive plan.
Projected growth rates translate into predictable numbers of housing units and square footage of commercial and office space that could be directed into planned developments that optimize both fiscal sustainability of local governments and developer profits.
Tighten the coordination between the review processes for 404 wetland permitting and local land use decisionmaking processes. Establish a Model Code ordinance that local governments can use. Create incentives for local adoption of such

Georgia Coastal Comprehensive Plan October 19, 2007 Draft

28

Issues

Land Use

lot along such roadway. This practice

encourages residential development along rural two-lane roadways and



highways that at the time of initial

development function much like

collector streets of a neighborhood or

town, but that eventually transform with

growth of the community into major

arterials. This transformation creates

stresses and pressures on the

residential properties to convert to



commercial or office uses for which

they were not designed, often resulting

in the inefficient, inappropriate

development pattern known as ribbon

commercial sprawl.



Opportunities
ordinances.
Create incentives for TDRs and PDRs that allow development to be directed to areas away from wetlands. Also create incentives for development to be directed to large tract PUDs where wetlands can be included in conservation areas of the development.
Encourage local governments to prohibit or provide disincentives for the subdivision of properties adjacent to rural roads and highways, and instead require or provide incentives for such subdivisions of property to be accomplished through a Planned Unit Development process.
Create good balance between secondhome owners and full-time residents.
Region-wide Live Oak preservation ordinance.

Georgia Coastal Comprehensive Plan October 19, 2007 Draft

29

Issues

Opportunities

Intergovernmental Coordination

Home rule: Despite all its benefits, home rule can create a competitive disadvantage for local governments that do not spend the extra money to plan for and/or regulate the impacts of development.
Different levels of current planning, regulation and resources.
Cities and counties often conflict over annexation issues due to revenue distribution and service delivery issues.
Land use issues among local governments with different or conflicting development regulations (or limited regulations) undermine the ability for all governments to effectively regulate development patterns.
The perceived idea that design or environmental regulations will drive away new development has limited the political will for such regulation.
As communities grow they may expand beyond their jurisdictional boundaries. The limited incentive for intergovernmental cooperation hinders development and can force disjointed land use patterns.
Limited incentives for cooperation reduce the effectiveness of multijurisdictional cooperation in order to conserve important historic, cultural and natural resources and remain fair to local landowners.
Competition among local governments for limited state and federal grant monies often fosters a competitive nature rather than cooperative.

Cooperation between municipalities can provide the basis for reducing public costs (and taxes), sharing revenues, protecting environmentally sensitive areas, managing economic opportunities, maintaining local control of growth and development.
Intergovernmental agreements on issues of greenspace and open space can enhance nature-based tourism efforts around the region.
A unified corridor management plan along I-95 can provide opportunities for local governments to influence the coastal look of this important transportation route.
Multi-jurisdictional involvement is already underway for the Highway 17 corridor (Southern Passages) and can serve as a model for other assetbased cooperation.
The East Coast Greenway plan offers opportunities for intergovernmental cooperation in providing for recreational opportunities along the entire Georgia Coast.
The Coastal GA RDC provides regular opportunities for local elected officials to meet and consider regional approaches. Several existing standing committees (historic preservation, environmental protection, tourism development) provide vehicles for expanded cooperation across the region.

Intergovernmental disputes over Service Delivery issues have created an atmosphere of conflict in some coastal communities.

Georgia Coastal Comprehensive Plan October 19, 2007 Draft

30

ANALYSIS OF REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT PATTERNS

Georgia Coastal Comprehensive Plan October 19, 2007 Draft

31

Analysis of Regional Development Patterns

In order to more fully understand the implications of coastal growth, three future development scenarios were created for the six-county area included in the Coastal Comprehensive Plan area. These development scenarios were used to inform the decision-making process and to more fully understand the implications of growth on land consumption, resource and fiscal impacts, and quality of life. The three scenarios included:

Scenario 1: Projection of existing trends to illustrate what the region would look like if the existing development patterns continue as they are today

Scenario 2:

Projection of growth based on the existing local regulations and ordinances to illustrate what the region would look like if the existing development patterns were constrained by the local ordinances and there were no variances

Scenario 3:

Projection based on quality growth principles to illustrate what the region would look like if development patterns were based on the principles of quality growth. These principles included the clustering of development in nodes, particularly around existing communities, development occurring with existing infrastructure, buffer areas around sensitive environmental features, and a focus on increased densities and infill development.

These development scenarios were developed on both a regional (macro) scale for the sixcounty region as well as on a local (micro) scale to convey the various approaches of the scenarios. The regional scenarios were developed utilizing the methodology described below. Then, micro-scale scenarios were developed in order to identify the infrastructure needed for each scenario, cost estimates, and identification of impacts. Data generated from the analysis of the micro-scale scenarios was then extrapolated out to the regional scale to more fully understand implications for the region.

Georgia Coastal Comprehensive Plan October 19, 2007 Draft

32

Regional Development Scenarios Methodology
The following steps describe the methodology used for the development of the future scenarios, which were developed using a combination of Geographic Information Systems and visual surveys using aerial photography. The base map illustrating existing conditions is shown below.

The existing population was identified to determine the existing densities within the region. The projected population growth for each county was identified. These population projections were collected from the population forecasts completed by Georgia Tech. The same population projections for each county, and therefore also the region as a whole, were used for all three scenarios.

Georgia Coastal Comprehensive Plan October 19, 2007 Draft

33

Georgia Coastal Comprehensive Plan October 19, 2007 Draft

34

Scenario 1
The first step in the development of the Scenario 1 was the identification of the developable land. Conservation areas, military installations, and the marsh areas were excluded from the developable land, although parcels adjacent to water bodies that were not identified wetlands were included as developable. This data was collected from existing land use information. In addition, approved DRIs were also included in the analysis.
In this scenario, the existing densities were held into the future and matched with the population forecasts. This analysis determined if all of the developable land in the area was consumed. A hierarchy of developable land was identified as to which area would develop first, based on existing trends. The hierarchy included: 1) DRIs 2) Existing large parcels (ex. timber company holdings) 3) Land in proximity to water 4) Land in proximity to existing development 5) Land in proximity to existing infrastructure

Georgia Coastal Comprehensive Plan October 19, 2007 Draft

35

Scenario 2
Scenario 2 used the same base information as Scenario 1, as well as the same hierarchy of developable land. The local regulations and ordinances were reviewed and any required buffers, density requirements, or other regulatory constraint was applied to the developable land. The population projections were again applied to the developable land along with the regulatory constraints. The results of this scenario did not differ significantly from the results of Scenario 1.

Georgia Coastal Comprehensive Plan October 19, 2007 Draft

36

Scenario 3
As with the other two scenarios, the third alternative used the developable land and the population projections. However, in this scenario, quality growth principles were applied as the constraint. Critical environmental areas and resources were identified and buffered from development. Areas with existing infrastructure and those areas that already had development activities, such as crossroads communities were identified. Densities were allowed to increase within the growth centers and decreased outside of those areas. The hierarchy of developable land in this scenario included:
1) DRIs 2) Land in proximity to existing development 3) Land in proximity to existing infrastructure

Georgia Coastal Comprehensive Plan October 19, 2007 Draft

37

Site-specific Development Scenarios Methodology
As indicated on the regional maps, Scenario1 and Scenario 2 produced very similar results. However, Scenario 3 projects a lower level of land consumption over the next 20+ years. In order to more fully understand the implications of these development patterns, site-specific plans for Scenario 1 and Scenario 3 were developed. Each of the site-specific plans equal units of development, which includes:
Residential, including detached single-family, townhomes, and rental units Commercial, including retail and office Parking Stormwater management facilities
Scenario 1 illustrates conventional auto-oriented suburban development, with separate and discreet uses. There are numerous access points with a lack of connectivity in both commercial and residential areas. Stormwater is managed through independent stormwater detention ponds. Community open space is not provided.

Georgia Coastal Comprehensive Plan October 19, 2007 Draft

38

Scenario 3 illustrates quality growth principles through a pedestrian-oriented setting which includes mixed uses, a well-connected network for people, cyclists, and vehicles, and community open space. Low Impact Development (LID) stormwater management techniques such as bioretention areas in the parking lots and between buildings provide infiltration of stormwater. A regional stormwater pond is also provided to accommodate overflow for major storm events.

In addition to the differences from a site plan perspective, Scenario 1 and Scenario 3 also produce two very different street-level perspectives, as indicated below. In Scenario 1, the buildings are separated from the street by large expanses of parking placed directly in front of the stores. Scenario 3 brings the buildings closer to the street to enhance pedestrian accessibility and frame the street. On-street parking provides convenient access. Additional parking is provided through smaller lots and organized to provide shared parking resources.

Georgia Coastal Comprehensive Plan October 19, 2007 Draft

39

Scenario I: Street-Level Perspective
In addition to the differences from a site plan perspective, Scenario 1 and Scenario 3 also produce two very different street-level perspectives, as indicated. In Scenario 1, the buildings are separated from the street by large expanses of parking placed directly in front of the stores. Scenario 3 brings the buildings closer to the street to enhance pedestrian accessibility and frame the street. On-street parking provides convenient access. Additional parking is provided through smaller lots and organized to provide shared parking resources. Scenario III: Street-Level Perspective

Georgia Coastal Comprehensive Plan October 19, 2007 Draft

40

After development of the site-specific scenarios, each scenario was evaluated in terms of impacts on land use, transportation, and fiscal impacts. The results are shown below.

Land Use Parameter Land Consumed Approximate Density Configuration
Public Greenspace Stormwater Management

Scenario 1 120 acres 2 units per acre Separated uses Auto-oriented Not provided Individual detention

Scenario 3 78 acres 4 units per acre Mixed use Pedestrian-oriented 3.25 acres Infiltration & regional detention

Transportation

A connectivity index quantifies connections in the street network by polygons to provide a

measure of accessibility throughout the site. This analysis indicates that Scenario 1 results in a

congested system, while mobility is maintained in Scenario 3.

Parameter

Scenario 1

Scenario 3

Connectivity Index

0

24

Modal Networks

Auto only

Multi-modal

Congestion Factors

No multi-modal networks

Multi-modal networks

available

Auto trips only viable option Opportunities for pedestrians,

cyclists, vehicles, transit, etc.

No interparcel connections

Interconnected parcels

No access management

Controlled access points

Georgia Coastal Comprehensive Plan October 19, 2007 Draft

41

Fiscal Impacts Each scenario was analyzed to develop a comparison of the cost to develop each scenario. This analysis is intended to provide a baseline comparison and does not necessarily include all development costs. Cost estimate parameters evaluated were land, public water, public sewer, roads, sidewalks, and parking. Infrastructure costs were based on information from the 2006 RS Means Guide for Construction Cost Data.

Scenario 3: Site-Specific Impacts

Scenario 1

Land Consumed

(Acres)

Single-Family 29

Multi-Family 19

Commercial 64

TOTAL

112

Cost (Per unit)
$ 17,522 per unit $ 6,757 per unit $13,722 / 1,000 sq. ft.
$7,720,047

Scenario 3 Land Consumed (Acres) 15 13 50 78

Cost (Per unit)
$ 13,742 per unit $ 6,435 per unit $10,593 / 1,000 sq. ft.
$6,190,396

By analyzing the current land use in the region, the per unit costs were extrapolated to the

regional level to create estimates of land consumed and the cost of development for the

implementation of each scenario in 2030. Overall land consumption also included provisions for

the development of support infrastructure, such as regional transportation systems, and

industrial development. As of 2006, existing development in the region consumed 226,000

acres. Scenario 1 consumes an additional 330,000 acres; scenario 3 consumes an additional

225,000 acres.

Scenario 1: Regional Impacts

Scenario 1

Scenario 3

Total Land Consumed (Acres)

Cost (in millions)

Total Land Consumed (Acres)

Cost (in millions)

Single-Family

$ 4,550,000

$ 4,680,000

Multi-Family

$ 2,910,000

$ 2,760,000

Commercial

$ 4,610,000

$ 3,100,000

TOTAL

556,000

$12,707,000

451,000

$10,540,000

During the comparative analysis of the scenarios, parameters regarding the total amount of development (i.e., number of units, square footage of commercial, etc.) were kept at a constant for the site-specific developments. This constant was carried forward on a regional basis to correlate with the population projections used for the regional scenarios. Due to the more compact development style of Scenario 3, less land is consumed for development both on a local scale and across the region. The site-specific plans represent an urban/suburban context which is not intended to be the only model for the region. However, demographics do support that an increasing percentage of the population is living in this setting than a rural setting, so this model was utilized to demonstrate the general growth patterns as discussed.

Georgia Coastal Comprehensive Plan October 19, 2007 Draft

42

CONSISTENCY WITH QUALITY COMMUNITY OBJECTIVES

Georgia Coastal Comprehensive Plan October 19, 2007 Draft

43

Consistency with Quality Community Objectives

Introduction
A Quality Growth Audit was performed for each of the jurisdictions in the six-county coastal region. The primary purpose of the audit was to assess how well each jurisdiction incorporates quality growth principles into their land use regulations. The audit included questions from a broad range of planning and development issues related to land use, natural resources, transportation, housing, intergovernmental coordination, and community character. The results of the audit were also compared with select draft performance standards developed for the Coastal Comprehensive Plan to assess how each government would currently measure up to those regional minimum standards the relate to land development (specifically the zoning ordinance and subdivision regulations). Through this analysis, the audit provides a measure for achieving consistency and clarity in regulating development across the coastal region.
Methodology
The Quality Growth Audit was conducted for the six counties and twenty-two cities included in the planning area. The methodology was structured so that the audit could be easily expanded to other jurisdictions as well.

Ordinance & Regulation Review Database

Figure 1

The initial phase of the Quality Growth Audit consisted of cataloguing zoning ordinances and subdivision regulations from each jurisdiction, with special attention given to items that contribute positively or negatively to quality growth. The data gathered from each of the ordinances was organized and stored in an Access template that includes a hyperlinked electronic file of the regulation (Figure 1). The catalog of ordinances contained in these files became the primary focus of the audit.

Figure 2

Within the software, the review catalogues each component of the ordinance needed (Figure 2). The interface prompts the reviewer to capture all of the relevant information, including the local government entity responsible for the implementation of that article. The ordinances are catalogued by issue category. Then a summary is provided, and quantifiable information, such as distance, number of units, etc. can be included where applicable. Items supporting quality growth are flagged as well. Finally, the information is linked back to the original source document for easy reference.

Georgia Coastal Comprehensive Plan October 19, 2007 Draft

44

Local Government Interviews
In addition to the review of ordinances, the project team also conducted a series of local government interviews with representatives from each of the jurisdictions. City and county managers, planning directors and zoning administrators were interviewed regarding planning and implementation processes to supplement the review of the ordinances. Questions were related to development patterns, housing, natural resources, transportation, growth preparedness, and other relevant topics.
Audit Process
The format of the audit consists of a questionnaire, based primarily on Smart Growth Audits (Planning Advisory Service Report #512, 2002), published by the American Planning Association. These questions are adapted as needed for our region and supplemented with information based on two quality growth certification programs, LEED-ND (Leadership in Energy and Environmental DesignTM Neighborhood Development), administered by the U.S. Green Building Council, and EarthCraftTM Coastal Communities, administered by Southface. The questions also incorporate recommendations identified in the Green Growth Guidelines, published by the Coastal Resources Division of Georgia Department of Natural Resources. Together, these resources provide evaluative and objective criteria with which to conduct the audit. The audit assigns one or two points for the fulfillment of minimum criteria. Two points are awarded for especially effective quality growth measures. The audit also recognizes that quality growth is also frequently encouraged by innovative approaches and therefore provides points for innovation as well. The list of criteria, along with the points received by this jurisdiction, is located at the end of this document.
Points were awarded only for requirements which are included in the local government's ordinance; points were not awarded for policies, as policies can be more difficult to legally enforce. Local governments who do encourage quality growth through policy are therefore encouraged to codify these practices into their ordinances. Within the zoning ordinance reviews, points were awarded for criteria if they were included in at least one zoning district. However, future audits may more closely evaluate if relevant criteria are required uniformly. This audit focused specifically on land development regulations and does not cover all minimum standards recommended in the Coastal Comprehensive Plan. The Coastal Regional Council will expand future audits to incorporate additional performance standards identified in the plan.
Performance Standards
During the development of the Coastal Comprehensive Plan, the Coastal Comprehensive Plan Advisory Committee (CCPAC) provided feedback on the development of performance standards for use by local governments. These standards were in an early draft format when the audit was concluded. The audit questions were cross-referenced with the latest available version of the performance standards relating to land development (specifically the zoning ordinance and subdivision regulations) to identify the criteria consistent with both minimum standards and excellence standards. Based on this cross-reference, local governments which

Georgia Coastal Comprehensive Plan October 19, 2007 Draft

45

scored a minimum number of points were consistent with the draft standards relating to land development. A score of 32 points is consistent with the minimum standards. A score of 38 points or more is consistent with excellence standards.
Quality Assurance/Quality Control
The audit process began with the collection of the local government ordinances in 2006 so the CCPAC could be informed early in the planning process about the status of land use regulations in the region. The audit itself was conducted in 2007, once the draft performance standards had been developed. In order to maximize the quality of information received in the audits, the project team met again with each local government to review their draft quality growth audit and receive information about any new ordinance which had been adopted since 2006. Many local governments had in fact adopted new ordinances in this time frame, so the final scores were modified to reflect these changes. For the purposes of the final audit, local governments received credit for all ordinances which had been formally adopted by December 31, 2007.
The Results
The results of the audit are shown on the following pages. The column on the far right indicates how the score of each local government compares with the performance standards. For those local governments which do not yet meet the minimum standard, the number indicates how far below the standard they currently rank.
Each local government is provided with a copy of their quality growth audit, which includes the list of specific criteria and how that jurisdiction scored. Some criteria may not be applicable, including those relating to specific coastal features such as beaches. If the criterion is not applicable, this is reflected with an "N/A" in the "Points Awarded" column.

County

Zoning Ordinance

Subdivision Regulations

Total

Performance Standard Ranking*

Chatham County

29

17

46

Excellent

Bryan County

18

25

43

Excellent

Glynn County

34

9

43

Excellent

Liberty County

18

19

37

Meets

Camden County

21

6

27

-5

McIntosh County

18

9

27

-5

Average Score

23

14

37

* Provides a preliminary indication of consistency with draft performance standards relating

to land development only. Negative numbers indicate point below minimum standard.

Georgia Coastal Comprehensive Plan October 19, 2007 Draft

46

Municipality

Zoning Ordinance

Subdivision Regulations

Total

Performance Standard Ranking*

Hinesville

32

24

56

Excellent

Darien

33

19

52

Excellent

Savannah

32

18

50

Excellent

Port Wentworth

25

21

46

Excellent

St. Mary's

24

20

44

Excellent

Midway

24

19

43

Excellent

Kingsland

25

16

41

Excellent

Richmond Hill

20

19

39

Excellent

Brunswick

26

12

38

Excellent

Tybee Island

28

10

38

Excellent

Allenhurst

18

19

37

Meets

Gum Branch

18

19

37

Meets

Riceboro

18

19

37

Meets

Walthourville

18

19

37

Meets

Flemington

16

13

29

-3

Pembroke

17

11

28

-4

Bloomingdale

14

12

26

-6

Thunderbolt

12

11

23

-9

Pooler

9

12

21

-11

Garden City

11

9

20

-12

Woodbine

11

5

16

-16

Vernonburg

6

2

8

-24

Average Score

20

15

35

* Provides a preliminary indication of consistency with draft performance standards relating to land development only. Negative numbers indicate point below minimum standard.

Quality Grow th Audit Results: Counties

Quality Points

50 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10
5 0
Chatham County Bryan County

Minimum Standard

Glynn County Libert y Count y C o unt ies

Camden County M cIntosh Count y

Georgia Coastal Comprehensive Plan October 19, 2007 Draft

47

Quality Points

Quality Growth Audit Results: Cities
60
50
40
Minimum Standard
30
20
10
0 Hinesville DarieSnaPvaonrtnWahentworStht. Mary'sMidwKaiyngRsilcahnmdond HBirllunsTwyibckee IslanAdllenhGuurmst BrancRhiceWboarlothourvFillleemingtPoenmBblroookmeingdTahleunderbolt PoGolaerrden CWityoodbVienrenonburg
Citie s
A total of eighteen (18) jurisdictions meet or exceed the draft minimum standards. These are the cities of Hinesville, Darien, Savannah, Port Wentworth, St. Mary's, Midway, Kingsland, Richmond Hill, Brunswick, Tybee Island, Allenhurst, Gum Branch, Riceboro, Walthourville and Chatham, Bryan, Glynn and Liberty Counties. All of the jurisdictions will receive an individual report so that their elected officials and staff can interpret the strengths and weaknesses of their development policies for themselves. As a part of the Georgia Coastal Comprehensive Plan, this Quality Growth Audit will help give a fuller understanding of how local governments can work collectively to promote the region's sustainable future.
Conclusion
Many local governments in coastal Georgia are making great strides in implementing quality growth in their communities. This intention of this quality growth audit was not only to evaluate the current regulatory environment, but also to work with local governments in helping to provide tools which can be used to educate and inform elected and appointed officials, staff, and the public. In future years, it is anticipated that the Coastal Regional Council will continually refine and advance the audit in order to promote the goals and intent of the Georgia Coastal Comprehensive Plan.

Georgia Coastal Comprehensive Plan October 19, 2007 Draft

48

SUPPORTING ANALYSIS OF DATA AND INFORMATION

Georgia Coastal Comprehensive Plan October 19, 2007 Draft

49

Supporting Analysis of Data and Information
Introduction
This Analysis is an introduction to Georgia's coastal region; it provides information about the challenges related to planning, land use, geography, demographics and the environment that the region faces. The Coastal Comprehensive Plan covers Georgia's six coastal counties: Bryan, Camden, Chatham, Glynn, Liberty and McIntosh. These counties comprise a major portion of the Coastal Georgia Regional Development Center's (CGRDC) ten-county region. This Analysis consists of relevant excerpts from the 2004 update of the Coastal Georgia Regional Plan, the current Coastal Management Program document, and other sources. There are sections devoted to population, economic development, housing, community facilities and services, transportation, natural and historic resources, land use, and intergovernmental coordination.

Source: Georgia Department of Community Affairs

Georgia Coastal Comprehensive Plan October 19, 2007 Draft

50

This Analysis charts the changing landscape of the coastal region and the rise, and projected growth, of the coastal population. It also explores the reasons behind the recent surge in development, including: expansion of operations at ports and military bases, more favorable climate than neighboring states, low cost of living. Few of these conditions are subject to local control. However, the regulation of land use is almost exclusively a local control issue, and is therefore given a great deal of attention in the Regional Development Patterns and Quality Community Objective (local government development regulation audit) sections.
The objective nature of the data in the Analysis, which is drawn from existing reports, plans and databases and detailed in the Supporting Data section, provides a framework for analysis of the remainder of the document. In particular, the Issues and Opportunities identified by the Coastal Comprehensive Plan Advisory Committee (CCPAC), as well as input derived during stakeholders' meetings, should be viewed as a subjective "reality check".
Objective data sources (e.g., Census and Georgia Tech Population Study) smooth over the unique characteristics, niche markets and population segments indigenous to the coastal region. Information derived from local sources, such as residents and local government representatives, paints a more nuanced picture of the coast. It is a place where seasonal visitors, military personnel, and year-round residents all celebrate the natural and cultural characteristics, while each impacts the land use patterns, infrastructure, and economy at a different level. However, even different levels or intensities of use still demand basic infrastructure such as roads, water and stormwater management. It is these universal issues that receive the most attention in the plan.

Georgia Coastal Comprehensive Plan October 19, 2007 Draft

51

Population
The coastal region's population has been increasing at a higher rate than the surrounding regions, the state of Georgia, and the United States. This is expected to continue. The high growth rate can be explained by the region's quality of life: the coastal natural resources, warm climate, and the wide range of employment opportunities (see Map A-1).
Continuing Growth
The coastal region's population rose by 18% (from 326,382 to 386,415) during the 1980s and by 14% (from 386,415 to 439,154) during the 1990s. As shown in Table A-1 and in the figure below, every county gained population during both decades.
250,000

200,000

Population Growth

150,000 100,000

1980 1990 2000

50,000

0 Bryan Camden Chatham Glynn

Liberty McIntosh

The region is projected to grow by 20% by 2010 and an additional 11% by 2020. By 2030 the growth rate is expected to slow to 8% (see Table A-2). Some counties gained at a faster rate than others, and the bar chart below illustrates that it has been the less populated counties that have grown most rapidly, at least in terms of percentage growth. The projections up to 2030 suggest that this pattern will continue, with the highest growth rates expected in the suburban and rural counties.

Georgia Coastal Comprehensive Plan October 19, 2007 Draft

52

Population Growth Rate

140% 120% 100%
80% 60% 40% 20%
0%

1980 to 1990

1990 to 2000

Bryan Camden Chatham Glynn Liberty McIntosh Region State

The rate of growth illustrated by the 2001 - 2006 U.S. Census estimates shown in Table A-3 is at variance with the projections developed in 2006 by the Center for Quality Growth and Regional Development (CQGRD) at the Georgia Institute of Technology. CQGRD projects that by 2030 the region's population will reach 633,000 as a result of in-migration.
The Maturing Population
The coastal region has been attracting retirees who are flocking to coastal Georgia from colder climates, or places with less appealing scenery or a lesser quality of life. Others are relocating from Florida to take advantage of a lower cost of living, fewer recent hurricanes, less traffic, and/or milder summer temperatures.
As shown in Table A-4 and the graph below, the percentage of residents age 65 and over has increased region-wide (at least from 1980 to 1990). Such a trend has implications for the region with regard to health care and other services such as recreation. The low figures for Liberty County from 1980 to 2000 and Camden County from 1990 to 2000 are attributable to the growing military presence.

Georgia Coastal Comprehensive Plan October 19, 2007 Draft

53

Percent of population age 65 and over

16% 14% 12% 10%
8% 6% 4% 2% 0%
Bryan Camden Chatham Glynn Liberty McIntosh Region

1980 1990 2000

Hispanics
Hispanics are the nation's largest and fastest growing minority group, growing from 22.4 million in 1990, to 42.7 million in 2005. According to the Census, Hispanics comprised just 1.7% of Georgia's population in 1990, and reached 5.3% (total: 435,227) in 2000. Census figures indicate that the growth in Georgia reached 17% between 2000 and 2002. As shown in Table A5, the Hispanic population grew in Glynn and Chatham Counties by 13% and 30%, respectively, between 2000 and 2005.
Coastal Counties
Bryan County
The population of Bryan County stood at 23,417 at the 2000 census, having risen from 15,438 in 1990. The 2006 Census estimate places the population at 29,648. A population study performed by Georgia Tech indicates that the county's population is projected to expand rapidly by 96% to 45,986 people by 2030. Migration from Chatham County will drive much of this growth, especially in Richmond Hill. The city's population has increased in spectacular fashion, from 1,177 in 1980 to 6,959 in 2000. The city is largely a bedroom community, dependent on Chatham County and Savannah for employment and urban resources.
Camden County
Very rapid growth has taken place in Camden County, with a massive 126% rise in population during the 1980s and a 45% rise during the 1990s. The figures for the 1980s are largely attributable to the 1979 opening of the naval base, which brought in over 10,000 jobs as it

Georgia Coastal Comprehensive Plan October 19, 2007 Draft

54

expanded during the decade. According to the U.S. Census, the 2000 population of 43,664 rose to just 45,118 by 2006. The Georgia Tech study indicates that the county's population could rise to 70,997 by 2030.
Chatham County
By far the most populous, historically established and highly developed county in the coastal region is Chatham County, with a population of 241,411 as of 2006. Chatham County is home to Savannah, the region's major city. Savannah is a hub of business and culture, with a population of 131,510. The other cities in the county, which are fairly small in comparison, are Bloomingdale, Garden City, Pooler, Port Wentworth, Thunderbolt, Tybee Island and Vernonburg. The county's population grew by 15% from 1980 to 2000, but it is expected to rise slightly more quickly over the next 20 years or so. Most of this growth is expected to occur in newly-annexed portions of Savannah and Pooler.
Glynn County
Growth in Glynn County has been slow relative to most of the coastal region but is still fairly strong, with a rise in population from 54,981 in 1980 to 67,568 in 2000 and 73,630 in 2006. Much of the county's growth has been driven by the in-migration of retirees, often to residential developments targeted to them. Brunswick's port continues to grow, and this economic catalyst could redefine population trends in the county. It is projected that the county's population will rise at a slightly faster rate in the future, reaching 100,483 by 2030.
Liberty County
The most dynamic population growth in Liberty County actually took place during the 1970s, when its population exploded by 114%. During the 1980s the population rose 40% and during the 1990s growth slowed to 17%. As of 2000, the county's population is 61,610 and Hinesville's population is 30,392. The bulk of the county's growth can be attributed to the presence of Fort Stewart, but retirees are also increasingly moving in. The Georgia Tech study indicates that the county's population will grow steadily to reach 89,163 by 2030.
McIntosh County
The smallest of the coastal counties in terms of population, McIntosh County does not possess any major employment generators. Infrastructure is generally lacking, there are large expanses of wetlands and forest, and the islands are not developed. However, the development of an outlet mall at I-95 has generated revenue and jobs for the county. In addition, the county has been receiving a significant influx of retirees. After growing fairly modestly during the 1980s, the county's population rose more briskly in the 1990s at a 26% rate to reach a figure of 10,847 as of 2000 and 11,248 by 2006. The Georgia Tech study indicates that the county's population will increase to 18,626 by 2030. The county's only city is Darien, the county seat, whose small population has held steady over the years.

Georgia Coastal Comprehensive Plan October 19, 2007 Draft

55

Economic Development
Georgia's coastal counties have experienced remarkable improvements in recent years in terms of the level and diversity of economic activity, due to the region's many assets for economic development, which include:
Deepwater ports Major highway and rail facilities Industrial park sites served by water, sewer, rail and major highways Labor supply and job training Unique natural and historic features (beaches, shores, colonial history) Abundance of undeveloped land Reasonable housing costs Education and health facilities
Employment by Sector As shown in Table B-1, growth in employment has varied widely among economic sectors.
Tourism and Travel
Tables B-6 and B-7 and the graph below show that travel in the coastal region generates expenditures of approximating $1.39 billion annually. It contributes $372 million to payroll, accounts for 16,600 jobs, and generates $58 million in state tax revenue and $42 million in local tax revenue.

Georgia Coastal Comprehensive Plan October 19, 2007 Draft

56

6.00%

Travel-Generated Employment as a Percentage of the Population

5.00%

4.00%

3.00%

2.00

1.00%

0.00%

Bryan Camden Chatham Glynn

Liberty McIntosh Region Georgia

Source: is 2005 Travel Profile Georgia State, Visitors' Statistics & Travel Economic Impact, Regional Analysis, Travel Industry Association of America for the GA Department of Economic Development.

Tax Credit Tiers
The six counties span the economic spectrum as reflected in their Job Tax Credit levels, which are based on unemployment rate; per capita income; and % residents with income below poverty level: Bryan (Tier 1); Camden, Chatham and Glynn (Tier 3), McIntosh (Tier 2) and Liberty (Tier 1).
Downtown Development
The downtowns of Pembroke, Darien, Brunswick and Woodbine all participate in the Main Street program. The Savannah Development and Renewal Authority (SDRA) focuses on the enhancement and improvement of both the business and the aesthetics downtown.
Impact of Retirees and Second Homes
The region has become attractive to retirees and second-home owners. The developed islands attracted the bulk of this in-migration, but Camden and McIntosh counties are gaining retirees as well. Real estate is the industry most directly affected by incoming retirees and second-home owners, but the service and health sectors also gain greatly.
Manufacturing

Georgia Coastal Comprehensive Plan October 19, 2007 Draft

57

Though still an important part of the region's economy, manufacturing has declined somewhat, and is projected to continue to decline. Future manufacturing employment is expected to be oriented toward assembly, fabrication, and light industry, rather than basic production functions.
Military Facilities
Among the region's strongest economic engines are its military facilities, which bring in large numbers of residents and have positive impacts on local economies. Fort Stewart is the largest in the region, but Hunter Army Airfield (HAAF) and Kings Bay Naval Submarine Base are also important. In a proactive effort to improve relations among Fort Stewart/HAAF and neighboring jurisdictions, a Joint Land Use Study (JLUS) was initiated in 2004. The report identifies areas where development is unfavorable from the military's perspective, and also conservation and other options for affected landowners. A follow-up report on Economic Diversification identified strategies that Bryan County can pursue to reduce dependence on the base.
Earnings by Sector
Table B-2 shows the earnings for each sector of employment, illustrating which sectors provide major contributions to the coastal economy. While the service sector makes the biggest impact, a thoughtful comparison of Table B-1 with Table B-2 makes it clear that wages in that sector are significantly lower than in most others.
Ports and Logistics
The economic activities of ports and logistics are sizeable and growing. They provide some of the highest paying blue-collar jobs and are catalysts for a variety of indirect business activity, thus contributing to further economic diversification. In 2006, the ports supported approximately 275,968 jobs (7% of Georgia's jobs), and contributed $10.8 billion in income, $35.4 billion in sales and $1.4 billion in state and local taxes.
Regionally Significant Employers
Table B-3 lists manufacturing concerns employing more than 200 people, as well as military installations. The importance of the military bases, law enforcement training, aeronautics and paper production are clear. CGRDC's Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy provides further insights into the region's economy and the diverse nature of the components of the economic engine.
Forestry
Although forestry itself is a relatively small employer, the manufacture of paper and other forestry products employs over two thousand workers in six plants scattered along the coastal region. Many areas of timberland are converting to residential or commercial uses, often with extremely large developments planned (see Tables F-5 and F-6).
The Knowledge Economy

Georgia Coastal Comprehensive Plan October 19, 2007 Draft

58

The region's economy has traditionally been in fairly basic "blue-collar" industries and sectors, such as manufacturing, tourism, ports, timber, fishing, the military, etc. This is not necessarily a good preparation for the burgeoning knowledge-based economy. However, the region has a reputation for a high quality of life, and Savannah is well-known for its culture and distinctive character. These factors could attract companies and entrepreneurs based in the high-tech or creative fields. The Creative Coast Initiative, a public-private nonprofit based in Savannah and founded in 2003, seeks to build upon this possibility.
Income
Both per capita and median household incomes have increased substantially over time in the coastal area, as indicated in Tables B-4 and B-5. However, this is true for the state of Georgia and the nation as well. Significant pockets of poverty remain in the region, particularly among racial minorities and female-headed households (see Map B-1).
Economically Disenfranchised Groups / Underemployed Military Spouses
One unique group of the underemployed consists of the spouses of those assigned to military installations. A study funded by the Cooperative Extension Service, the U.S. Army, and the Georgia Research Alliance investigated the feasibility of implementing a telecommunicationsbased back-office industry for the Hinesville area near Fort Stewart. As the study makes clear, there are ample opportunities for data processing businesses in the area, and these could provide employment for military spouses among others.
Housing
Housing Types
Single-family units predominate throughout the region, while multifamily units constitute a higher percentage of the total units in the more urbanized counties. Tables C-1 and C-2 and the graph below illustrate the growth in the housing sector between 1980 and 2000.

Georgia Coastal Comprehensive Plan October 19, 2007 Draft

59

120,000

100,000

80,000 60,000 40,000

Households (1990) Households (2000) Housing units (1990) Housing units (2000) Units built in last 10 years (1990) Units built in last 10 years (2000)

20,000

0
Bryan Camden Chatham Glynn Liberty McIntosh

Age and Condition of Housing
The counties undergoing the most rapid growth have the highest amount of relatively new housing. Condition varies throughout the region (see Tables C-2 and C-3).
Housing Values and Rents
The coastal communities have seen substantial increases in housing value, as can be seen in Table C-4.These increases, coupled with increases in property tax assessments, make existing housing far less affordable. The rising home values are accompanied by an equally steep rise in rents, as shown by Table C-5. High rents, like high house prices, reduce the supply of workforce housing. While high house prices and rents are to some extent a reflection of the real estate market, they are also caused by exclusionary zoning practices. The zoning codes in the coastal region often prevent houses from being built on small lots, and often limit multifamily construction.
Issues with Mobile and Manufactured Homes
Mobile or manufactured housing creates several problems. They are often built in unincorporated areas not served by public water and sewer systems, and this is potentially risky for both residents and the environment. In addition, most manufactured homes are taxed as personal property, at a rate that is substantially less than that of property appraised and taxed as real property. The cost of the services these residents require exceeds what they pay in taxes, which of course requires others to pay higher taxes.

Georgia Coastal Comprehensive Plan October 19, 2007 Draft

60

Significant Housing Trends
Housing projections may be altered by a variety of intervening events such as changes in the troop strength at the region's military installations and economic changes that affect construction or financing for housing (see Table C-6).
Housing Authorities
Regionwide, affordable housing is provided by the Housing Authorities of Savannah, Brunswick and Hinesville. The Housing Authority of Savannah, the largest of the three, provides roughly 1,800 units for about 7,000 people, and also administers Section 8 payments to many more. The authority is currently working on the Fellwood Homes site, an ambitious mixed-income project occupying approximately 26 acres in west Savannah. The redevelopment project will incorporate sustainability principles in the approximately 200 mixed-income units and retail component. The Brunswick Housing Authority maintains several buildings of affordable housing and is involved with Section 8 assistance as well. The Hinesville Housing Authority maintains about 200 units

Georgia Coastal Comprehensive Plan October 19, 2007 Draft

61

Community Facilities and Services
Water Supply and Treatment
The supply of water is a major issue along the coast, and new restrictions on municipal and private use of the Floridan Aquifer are imminent. This could limit development in general, and will probably restrict large-scale manufacturing in particular. Average per capita water use in the region is significantly lower than the state average, but industrial and recreational uses still consume a large portion of the permitted capacity drawn from the aquifer.
The most comprehensive public water supply and treatment facilities are in Chatham, Glynn and Liberty counties. In Chatham County, water is provided by the City of Savannah and other municipal and privately-owned systems. Glynn County provides water to Saint Simons Island and parts of the unincorporated area, the City of Brunswick serves the city and much of the county, and the Jekyll Island Authority serves the island. In Liberty County, the Development Authority and the City of Midway have worked to coordinate water service delivery to new commercial development, the City of Hinesville serves the adjacent city of Flemington, the City of Allenhurst is served by Walthourville, and Riceboro maintains its own facilities. Both McIntosh County and the City of Darien provide water service. Bryan County has an agreement with the City of Savannah to provide water in selected unincorporated areas, and the cities of Pembroke and Richmond Hill both provide water within their boundaries and to some unincorporated areas. In Camden County, public water service is limited to the municipalities, while the unincorporated areas rely on private systems and wells (see Map D-1).
Due to the 2006 Coastal Georgia Water and Wastewater Permitting Plan for Managing Salt Water Intrusion, coastal counties and cities are faced with the need to identify alternative sources for potable water and landscape irrigation. One promising approach is "purple pipe" systems, which promote conservation by utilizing treated recycled water for various outdoor uses, including irrigation.
Sewer Service
Chatham and Glynn counties operate sewer systems that serve portions of each county. In Chatham County sewage treatment is also provided by several municipal and private systems. Glynn County is also served by municipal and private systems. In Liberty County, the City of Hinesville serves Walthourville, Allenhurst and Flemington (see Map D-2).
Solid Waste Collection and Disposal
Solid waste disposal in the coastal region is proportional to that of the state. Table D-1 shows the current waste reduction goals by waste category. This approach is expected to allow local governments to target their recycling efforts more effectively.

Georgia Coastal Comprehensive Plan October 19, 2007 Draft

62

Regionally Significant Recreational Facilities
The coastal region is home to several state and federal parks, numerous historic sites, and beaches, which provide miles of scenic public recreation. In addition, the extensive river network that empties into the Atlantic provides inland water-related recreational opportunities.
Ultimately, outdoor recreation has an enormous economic impact in Georgia--and particularly on the coast. Anglers, boaters, beachgoers and those visiting historic and cultural sites all contribute to local economy, while the presence of significant outdoor resources (i.e., parks and other natural resources) can have a positive impact on property values and local revenue.
Regionally Significant Educational Facilities
Growth in the region has caused overcrowding and other problems in the public schools. Some local governments have adopted special purpose local option sales taxes for education, or "ESPLOSTs".
The region is making efforts to keep up with rising student numbers (see Tables E-1 and E-2) The higher figure for the state's funding per student is perhaps partly due to the distorting statistical effect of the Atlanta area, but it also reflects the need for coastal local governments to dedicate more resources to their schools. Many areas receive high growth because of their low taxes and natural resources. However, new residents put new strains on community facilities in general--and schools in particular--and thus create a need for higher taxes in the long.
The coastal region, at present, is adequately served by several institutions of higher education. Savannah is home to Savannah State University, Savannah Technical College (STC), Savannah College of Art and Design, and Armstrong Atlantic State University (AASU). STC has an additional campus in Liberty County near Hinesville. The Coastal Georgia Community College (CGCC) is a two-year college based in Brunswick, with a smaller satellite campus known as the Camden Residence Center located in Kingsland. The Brunswick Center of CGCC is a collaborative effort between CGCC, Georgia Southern University and AASU; it offers several bachelors and master's degrees.
Regionally Significant Libraries and Cultural Facilities
Existing library facilities are adequate to meet the present needs of the region, though future growth may strain their capabilities. Within the six coastal counties--with the exception of the Savannah area--there are few cultural facilities for theater, ballet, concerts, lectures, art galleries and museums. Georgia Southern University offers a full season at its Performing Arts Center, which draws attendees from a wide area, including coastal Georgia and South Carolina. Many of the coastal counties' comprehensive plans state the need for an auditorium to hold cultural and civic events. The cost of constructing and managing an auditorium has presumably prevented most of these local governments from meeting this need, so perhaps there is an opportunity to create regional facilities for this purpose.

Georgia Coastal Comprehensive Plan October 19, 2007 Draft

63

Transportation
Road Network and Highway Corridors
There has been a substantial expansion of the road network in coastal Georgia, beyond what most other parts of the state have experienced. Statewide, the average number of road miles per county increased by 22 miles between 1994 and 2003. The increase in total road miles per coastal county was closer to 89 miles, with the majority of the region's new roads in recentlybuilt subdivisions. Costs for road maintenance put a substantial burden on local governments.
There are two major highways in the coastal region, Interstates 16 and 95. Of the two, I-95 has the greater impact, passing as it does through all six counties and ultimately connecting the entire East Coast.
Public Transportation
The largest provider of public transportation in the region is the Chatham Area Transit (CAT) authority, which runs buses and shuttle services throughout that county. In addition, McIntosh County utilizes a private contractor, Silverhair Transportation, to provide public transit oriented primarily to the elderly. No other jurisdictions offer public transit; the problem may best be dealt with on a regional scale.
Airports
The region is currently served by seven airports that provide a variety of private and commercial aviation services. The Savannah-Hilton Head International Airport is the area's major airport, and is served by national and regional carriers. Glynco Jetport in Brunswick is served by Delta, and offers daily service to Atlanta. Jacksonville International Airport, though outside the region, is close enough to be used frequently.
Ports
The Georgia Ports Authority (GPA) operates facilities at Savannah and Brunswick. The Port of Savannah, by far the larger of the two, focuses on container shipping and is now one of the major ports of the East Coast. The Port of Brunswick concentrates on automobiles and wood products. Both have grown rapidly over the years, thanks to investments such as replacement of the Talmadge Bridge (Savannah) and Sidney Lanier Bridge (Brunswick), extensive modernizing efforts, and the continuing expansion of global trade networks. The success of the ports has inevitably placed additional stress on the region's roads and railroads.
Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway
The mainland areas of the six coastal counties are bordered on the east by the Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway (ICW). The ICW serves as an inland water route and a connector to the Atlantic Ocean for recreational and commercial boaters and fishermen, commercial barge traffic,

Georgia Coastal Comprehensive Plan October 19, 2007 Draft

64

ferry operations, military boats and submarines. Running between Port Royal Sound, South Carolina, and Fernandina Beach, Florida, the ICW provides for a channel twelve feet deep at mean low water mark, and a bottom width of at least ninety feet. There are numerous tributary channels to the ocean. Anchorages and facilities exist along the waterway at wharves operated by the GPA and other terminal operators.
Railways
All of the coastal counties, except McIntosh, have access to freight rail. Railways in coastal Georgia are closely networked to ports and military installations. The region is served by the CSX (Seaboard Coastline), Norfolk Southern and Central of Georgia Railroads. Several small railways link industrial facilities to major railroads; these include the St. Marys Railroad connecting the Durango Paper Company (Gilman) site to the CSX corridor, and the Colonel's Island Railway connecting the Port of Brunswick to the CSX railway. With regard to passenger rail, Amtrak only provides service within the six counties to Savannah. However, there is an Amtrak station at Jesup in nearby Wayne County that is convenient to Glynn.
Evacuation
The Georgia Emergency Management Agency (GEMA) has primary responsibility for planning and coordinating an evacuation in the event of a major storm or hurricane (see Map F-8), and local government officials hold both the authority to order an evacuation and the responsibility for carrying it out. In the event of a major storm or hurricane, GEMA is to work with other state agencies, and with Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), in the overall coordination and oversight of the evacuation. Local government officials hold both the authority to order an evacuation and the responsibility for carrying it out.
Three interstate highways have lane-reversal plans: I-95, I-75 and I-16. The lane reversal on I16 expedites the evacuation of the Georgia coast, while the northbound interstates will support evacuations from Florida. The lane reversals on I-16 run from milepost 162 near downtown Savannah to milepost 52 in Dublin, a distance of 125 miles.
Sidewalks and Bike Lanes
The coastal region is sorely lacking in sidewalks, bike lanes and jogging paths. As such, residents and visitors are forced to use cars for even short trips. The resulting traffic congestion has a negative effect on public health, and reduces transportation and recreation options. The Coastal Regional Bike and Pedestrian Plan identifies potential routes, and advocates for the Coastal Georgia Greenway have garnered support for a bike path spanning the coastal counties from Savannah to St. Marys. With the success of many such bike trails nationwide and in Georgia--in particular the Silver Comet Trail in northwest Georgia--the economic tourismrelated potential of such a route has become evident. The Coastal Georgia Greenway would tie into local paths as well (see Map E-1).

Georgia Coastal Comprehensive Plan October 19, 2007 Draft

65

Natural Resources
Climate
The coastal region is classified as subtropical. It is favored by both latitude and proximity to the Atlantic Ocean, resulting in a moderate climate, though summer days can be extremely hot and humid. Winter temperatures are in the 50s during the day and the 40s at night, while summer temperatures are usually in the 80s - 90s during the day and the 70s at night. The temperature exceeds 90 degrees about 75 days a year, while freezing temperatures occur about 20 days a year and last only a few hours. Humidity is high, generally between 60% and 75%. Conditions are more moderate closer to the ocean--slightly cooler in summer and warmer in winter.
Annual rainfall is 50 inches, with slightly higher levels inland. Snow is rare and short-lived, although hail and freezing rain are not uncommon. Seasonally, rainfall is greatest between June and September, and as a result of this pattern there is a seasonally high water table in October, when the surficial aquifer is at its highest level. Surficial aquifers are recharged locally as the water-table fluctuates in response to drought or rainfall. There are about 75 days a year in which more than one-tenth of an inch of rain falls in the coastal counties.
Due to the contours of its shoreline, Georgia is relatively protected from the open ocean and has recently experienced less hurricane impacts than many other coastal areas. However, global climate change may increase the frequency and violence of storms and hurricanes. In addition, melting polar icecaps and sea level rise will have an impact on Georgia's forested coastal wetlands, due to the inland movement of salt water. The conversion of coastal forested areas to salt marsh would mean the loss of the pollutant filtering and fisheries-support currently provided by these areas. Most significantly, coastal forested wetlands reduce the energy of hurricane winds and wave action that damage both marsh systems and inland development.
Geology & Topography
The geological history of the region has created the string of ocean barrier islands, and marsh hammock islands (see Map F-3). The region is very flat, with minor exceptions, having the typical topography of the coastal plain found throughout the southeastern United States. The only notable exceptions are the dune ridges and river bluffs, where elevations may reach thirty feet or more above mean sea level. Elevations gradually increase inland, and the only natural contours are the remnants of prehistoric sea levels and associated movement of materials caused by ice formation and thawing. Due to the area's relative flatness, its rivers tend to meander, with many miles of bending and winding ox-bows.
Barrier Islands and Coastal Resources
All 100 miles of Georgia's ocean beaches are on the seaward faces of barrier islands; Table F-1 lists the approximate acreage and beach length of the largest islands. Given their attraction for commercial and residential uses, it is fortunate that ten of the eighteen major barrier islands are

Georgia Coastal Comprehensive Plan October 19, 2007 Draft

66

in public ownership. Except for Jekyll Island in Glynn County, none of these publicly owned islands are accessible by car from the mainland. Jekyll Island is owned by the State of Georgia, and is operated as a state park (see Table F-15). By law, 65% of the island shall remain in its natural and undeveloped state, and accessible to all Georgians. The remaining undeveloped islands are designated for wildlife management, environmental research, and/or undeveloped recreational uses. Of the total land area of the fifteen largest barrier islands, about 65% is in public ownership (36% state and 29% federal).
Floodplains
Most of the coastal land area is within the 100-year floodplain, as determined by FEMA (see Map F-1) and depicted on the Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs). Most coastal jurisdictions participate in FEMA's National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP). The cities of Pembroke in Bryan County, and Gum Branch and Walthourville in Liberty County are currently not participating in the NFIP and have not had areas of Special Flood Hazard identified.
GDNR/EPD - Water Supply and Treatment
The 2006 Coastal Georgia Water and Wastewater Permitting Plan for Managing Salt Water Intrusion was developed by the Environmental Protection Division (GDNR/EPD). The plan emphasizes water conservation, water reclamation and reuse, and wastewater management, and will continue to guide the GDNR/EPD water management strategy until the adoption of the Comprehensive Statewide Water Management Plan. Implementation of the plan means that local governments must require all new all new developments to incorporate reuse water lines ("purple pipe"). The Cities of Hinesville and Midway have already implemented this requirement.
Soils
Most of the region's soils have been sampled, analyzed, and classified by the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS). According to NRCS findings, the majority of the coastal area is either poorly-suited or only marginally-suited for development, due to the drainage characteristics of soil types. Recent research at the University of Georgia's Department of Crop and Soil Science on the extent of soils suitable for septic systems is illustrated in Table F-2, with additional information in Maps F-6 and F-7.
Plant and Animal Habitat
The coastal region has an abundant marsh, estuarine, riverine and forest habitat that is home to diverse flora and fauna. A number of the region's native plants and animals are endangered or threatened at the state and/or federal levels. Table F-3 shows the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's current list of threatened and endangered species in Georgia.
Scenic Areas, Major Parks, and Recreation Areas
There are many areas in the coastal region that contain important natural resources or scenic beauty and therefore have been protected in some fashion. Map F-4 shows the location of

Georgia Coastal Comprehensive Plan October 19, 2007 Draft

67

major conservation areas, and Table F-4 identifies the Heritage Trust Preserves, the State Wildlife Management Areas and State and Federal Parks and Historic Sites.
Additional Areas
Agriculture
Prime agricultural land has always been a scarce commodity in the coastal region, as the high water table and wetlands that exist in so many areas are not conducive to farming. Table F-5 shows the changes in the number of farms over time in the coastal counties, while Table F-6 shows changes in the acreage devoted to farming in the coastal counties.
A sharp decline in the number of farms is noted in all six coastal counties during the years 1978 to 1987, with a slight upswing during the period 1987 to 1997. This may be due to the 1991 introduction of the Georgia Conservation Use Assessment program (see Supporting Data: Reference, CUA), which provided a tax incentive for the retention of farmland. Another drop in the number of farms is evident during the period 1997 to 2002 for Camden (-24.19%) and Bryan (-17.72%) counties. This is in stark contrast to increases in Chatham (16%), Glynn (9.26%), Liberty (19.30%) and McIntosh (18.18%) counties. Over the same period, the number of farms in the state decreased by 0.06%.
Forestry
Coastal Georgia has an enormous area of land used for commercial forests. Much of the region is ideal for forestry for the very reason it is not suitable for farming: high water levels. Table F-7 shows the acreage of timberland in major landowner categories for each coastal county and for the state in 2004. Bryan, Camden and Liberty counties are the leaders in terms of acreage, but it is actually Bryan County that has the highest percentage of its land dedicated to forestry. Only Chatham has less than 50% forested. Over one third of the forested land in Bryan County is federally-owned, while the remainder is in private hands. However, in the remaining counties, private ownership is by far the largest category. In addition to all of this commercial timberland, local governments and the state and federal government hold 13% of the land and 23% of forested land in the coastal counties.
Table F-8 shows the change over time (1989-2004) of the percent of forested land in the coastal counties and the state. There has been a slow decline in timber acreage during the study period. The coastal counties' acreage devoted to timber and forestland constitutes just 4.6% of the state's total.
Impact of Hazardous and Toxic Waste
Table F-9 shows the volume of toxic chemicals released, as well as the proportionate share by population of the number of coastal county sites listed on the GDNR/EPD Hazardous Site Inventory. The region's share of the state's total environmental burden, when measured in terms of the release of toxic chemicals compared to population, is almost two times its share of the

Georgia Coastal Comprehensive Plan October 19, 2007 Draft

68

population. In terms of the number of sites, the region has more than two times the number of sites compared to its share of the state population (see Table F-10).
Impact of Solid Waste
Efforts to reduce the risk of ground water contamination by landfills are supported by "Subtitle D" regulations implementing the Federal Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). The risks from solid waste are especially troubling in the coastal region, where high water tables, vast areas of wetlands interlacing uplands, and numerous abandoned wells create a potential for contamination of both ground and surface water. As shown by Table F-11, solid waste generation has risen significantly in the region, more or less in parallel with population growth. This will probably continue, though recycling may mitigate the situation somewhat. Table F-12 lists currently operating landfills in the coastal counties, Table F-13 shows closed landfills and Table F-14 shows Inert Landfills operating in the coastal counties.
Impact of Port and Channel Maintenance
Shipping channels and harbors serving the world-class ports in Savannah and Brunswick require extensive dredging in order to achieve the depths required to accommodate increasingly large oceangoing vessels. The millions of cubic yards of material removed in these operations are placed in spoil areas approved by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.
Dredging and the depositing of discarded dredge materials have raised concerns about various environmental consequences, especially because of toxic industrial pollutants that are sometimes found in the dredged sediments. Another concern is the effect that significantly deepened channels have on conditions in adjacent shore and water-bottom areas. Changes in the hydraulics of water movement created by dredging are alleged to cause significant increases in the scouring effects that produce erosion of both shorelines and the bottoms of nearby rivers and creeks. These changes in water movement and salinity can also affect marine and estuarine habitat.
Impact of Water Access, Boating and Commercial Fishing
The recreational use of coastal waters for boating and fishing appears to be increasing at a much faster rate than population growth. Table F-16 shows the increase over time in registrations. There are many ways that these activities cause harm to environmental resources, including contamination from motor lubricants, increased shoreline erosion caused by vessels, and damage to marine or estuarine habitat due to the construction and use of dock facilities.
Commercial fishing activities, primarily shrimping, disturb water bottoms in near-shore areas through the use of trawl nets that destroy vegetation and increase turbulence. These effects are considerably less significant, however, than those caused by port and channel dredging and maintenance.

Georgia Coastal Comprehensive Plan October 19, 2007 Draft

69

Coastal Management Program
The Georgia Coastal Zone Management Program (CZMP) is a coordinated framework to address environmental issues in the coastal region. In general it does not consist of additional regulations, but rather seeks to provide technical assistance, public education and monitoring. The state joined the Federal Coastal Zone Management Program in 1998, thus the Georgia CZMP is federally-approved, enabling it to qualify for certain grants and other funding. This also allows the program to administer certain projects, officially monitor particular conditions, and carry out some regulations. The program applies to eleven coastal counties (the six that this document addresses, and also Brantley, Charlton, Effingham, Long and Wayne) and is administered by the DNR/CRD.
The Georgia CZMP is engaged in several activities at present: water quality monitoring (including the National Shellfish Sanitation Program for the state), technical assistance to local governments and other entities (including information on Best Management Practices), carrying out the Coastal Incentive Grant (CIG) program, reviewing federal permits, licenses and projects, issuing marsh permits and shore permits, executing leases for state-owned water bottoms, supporting the control of nonpoint source pollution (as part of the federal Coastal Nonpoint Source Program), and engaging in general outreach and education.

Georgia Coastal Comprehensive Plan October 19, 2007 Draft

70

Historic Resources
The historic and cultural resources along the coast reflect the almost 300 years of growth and development since the first settlement. In November 1732, Oglethorpe and 114 men, women and children boarded the good ship Anne for their voyage to the new world. After brief stops in Charleston and southern South Carolina, Oglethorpe and his followers landed at Yamacraw Bluff on February 12, 1733, and there established their new town. The General had laid this town out with precision, in a pattern of streets interspersed with public squares. Savannah thus became the first planned community in Georgia, if not the nation.
The influence of Oglethorpe and the Trustees waned over the next few years, and by 1750, they returned their charter to the King, making Georgia a royal colony, under the rule of the King, until the colony declared its independence along with its 12 sister colonies at the beginning of the Revolution in 1775. Georgia's coastal communities have played important roles throughout not only the State's history, but also nationally as reflected by the many historic and cultural resources that are to be found in all six counties. Tables G-1, G-2, G-3 and G-4, as well as Map F-5, all show historic resources across the region.
It is these resources, plus the many others that have not yet received any sort of designation, that are vital pieces of the region's history and that create the strong heritage tourism industry along the Georgia Coast. As a group, they provide the basis for a region-wide tourism program within several historic contexts: from Colonial times through early settlements, and into the 19th and 20th centuries. Heritage tourism provides a large part of the economic base of each of the counties and the region as a whole, particularly in Chatham and Glynn counties. By marketing these resources, whether in historic downtowns or neighborhoods and house museums or landscapes, communities can enhance their appeal to tourists.
Tourism and Coastal Resources
Tourism creates a powerful incentive to protect and maintain the natural and historic resource of the coast, for it is these resources that draw visitors to the region in the first place. Tourism is a vital component of the coastal economy, and therefore one should not perceive environmental protection and economic development as inevitably being in conflict. Rather, in this case they are mutually supporting; if the region's vibrant natural and historic resources were to be damaged or diminished, tourism would be reduced dramatically. This linkage between resources and tourism has always existed, but at present it is even more pronounced because popular awareness of the environment has grown. Special niches such as "eco-tourism" and "heritage tourism" now also exist.

Georgia Coastal Comprehensive Plan October 19, 2007 Draft

71

Land Use
Bryan County
Much of Bryan County's recent growth is a result of migration from Chatham County. Bryan County does not have any barrier islands, and thus lacks true oceanfront beaches. The county is physically divided by the property of Fort Stewart. The northwestern part of the county, centered on the county seat of Pembroke, is growing slowly. The southeastern portion, centered on Richmond Hill, has largely become a "bedroom community" for people who work in Chatham County. The industrial park at Pembroke is a relatively small site, while the much larger Interstate Centre, straddling I-16 is home to large manufacturing and warehousing concerns. Richmond Hill also receives some tourism, as a result of its location near Fort McAllister and historic resources related to Henry Ford. In addition, the city enjoys the benefit of its location on I-95 and U.S. 17; the former is, of course, the more important transportation corridor, but a portion of the latter was recently widened to four lanes. Land use in the coastal counties is illustrated in Maps G-2 and G-3.
Camden County
Camden County is undergoing rapid residential development, mainly due to the Kings Bay Naval Submarine Base. The three cities of St. Marys, Kingsland and Woodbine have been expanding their boundaries through annexation. Spillover growth from the Jacksonville metropolitan area, just over the border in Florida and accessible via I-95, is also a factor. In recent years, the county learned a lesson on the importance of economic diversification when Durango Paper Company (formerly known as Gilman Paper Company), once the county's largest employer, ended its operations. This unexpected event left many local residents seeking employment elsewhere in the county and beyond. Nevertheless, growth continues largely unabated; in fact, the county was for a brief period one of the fastest growing counties in the nation. In a proactive planning effort, several Camden County organizations commissioned an Economic Diversification Study - Infrastructure Management Report that reviewed the county's infrastructure, with particular emphasis on water/wastewater, transportation and stormwater. The report emphasizes the importance of considering countywide needs and the cumulative effects of planning decisions on infrastructure (see Supporting Data: References, Economics).
Chatham County
Chatham County is, by most measures, the most important county in the coastal region. The City of Savannah, the dominant metropolis of the Georgia coast, is primarily urban; while the county's other municipalities are essentially suburban. The county is the most highly populated of the coastal counties, and it is also the largest in terms of land area. Much of Chatham County's importance is due to excellent transportation facilities such as I-95 and I-16, Savannah International Airport, the Georgia Ports Authority, and freight and passenger rail services. The county also possesses higher educational institutions such as Savannah State University,

Georgia Coastal Comprehensive Plan October 19, 2007 Draft

72

Savannah College of Art and Design and Armstrong Atlantic State University. Savannah is justly renowned for its historic and cultural character, but it also uses aggressive economic development incentives to attract business and industry. These factors have dictated much of the land use in the county.
Glynn County
Glynn County is the second-largest of the six coastal counties in terms of population, and possesses a strong tourism, manufacturing and industrial base. The county has a Chamber of Commerce, Convention & Visitors Bureau, and Development Authority. A strong economic factor in the county is the tourism industry, driven primarily by Jekyll Island, St. Simons Island and Sea Island. The county has two large industrial parks: Colonel's Island Industrial Park, the primary activity of which is automobile processing, is a 6,500 acre facility served by rail and shipping and is immediately adjacent to I-95; and Naval Air Station (NAS) Glynco, which is home to high tech industries and the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center (FLETC), which is the largest such training center in the U.S. Brunswick, the county's only city, is home to a growing port, which is operated by the Georgia Ports Authority.
Liberty County
Liberty County, and its county seat of Hinesville, has seen rapid growth due to the expansion of the 3rd Infantry Division (Mechanized) at Fort Stewart. The fort consists of approximately 275,000 acres and is the largest military base east of the Mississippi River in terms of land area. The population of Hinesville is about 31,000, making it the second largest city in the region after Savannah. Of the county's other municipalities, Midway, Riceboro and Walthourville are growing at a modest rate, while Allenhurst, Flemington and Gum Branch remain steady. The land use and development patterns of Midway and Riceboro are influenced by their proximity to I-95, while Walthourville has grown by providing affordable housing to Fort Stewart enlistees. The Liberty County-Hinesville Chamber of Commerce and the Industrial Development Authority have done an excellent job of recruiting industry and business, including warehouse and distribution centers, diversifying the economic base of the community so that it does not rely entirely on the military base.
McIntosh County
McIntosh County is experiencing growth and development, particularly around the outlet shopping mall at Hwy 251 and I-95. The fishing industry, which has historically been a mainstay in McIntosh County, also generates income and employment. Due to the seasonal nature of the fishing industry, however, the shrimp fleet out of Darien does not offer high-paying long-term employment. Many county residents are employed by business and manufacturing facilities located in Glynn County. Recently the areas in and around Darien have become a "bedroom community" to some extent, due to the city's unique image as a small fishing village and its convenient access to I-95 and U.S. 17.

Georgia Coastal Comprehensive Plan October 19, 2007 Draft

73

Regionally Significant Developments
There are a substantial number of regionally significant residential and industrial developments currently projected or underway in the coastal area. These will put further stress on the environmental resources, transportation networks, and community facilities of the counties where they are located. Such projects are known as Developments of Regional Impact (DRI), a technical term for projects above a certain size for which a regional review is conducted (see Table H-1 and Map G-1).
Conversion of Forest Land to Residential, Commercial and Industrial Uses
Over half of the coastal region is classified as commercial forestland (see Table F-7). Some of this land is held by small private landowners who sell their timber to pulp and paper companies, while vast acreage is owned by major paper manufacturers. Much of the land is being converted to other uses (usually residential but also commercial and industrial), which is a major shift in the existing patterns of land use.
Public Ownership of Coastal Lands
With two military bases, several wildlife management areas, a National Seashore and vast areas of state-managed tidal wetlands, public areas constitute approximately 34% of the region's total land area. The proportion varies significantly from county to county.
Development Constraints on Barrier Islands
Only three of Georgia's eight largest barrier islands are accessible by land via causeways. The remaining five islands are either publicly owned or are managed by various public agencies while remaining privately owned. State and national research and wildlife protection being carried out on these islands make them unique and significant, with an active constituency among naturalists, environmentalists and university research proponents, as well as their counterparts in state and federal agencies. Furthermore, federal law now discourages further development of barrier islands by restricting the use of federal subsidies (grants, loans and flood insurance protection) for the construction of roads, bridges and residential and commercial buildings on previously undeveloped islands.
Housing Quality
Many newer residential developments, especially in areas adjacent to Richmond Hill, Savannah and Brunswick, are targeted to the retirement and second-home markets. Much of the older housing, meanwhile, is in need of repair or simply substandard; this is especially the case in rural unincorporated areas. Many low-to-moderate income households are unable to acquire or retain ownership in conventional housing, and thus are turning to the manufactured housing market, particularly in McIntosh County. Some such households alternately choose to deal with the issue by moving further inland, resulting in longer commutes and greater congestion.

Georgia Coastal Comprehensive Plan October 19, 2007 Draft

74

Development of Land Closer to Industrial Uses
As available buildable land becomes more scarce, marginal industrial land--areas that builders, developers and consumers previously avoided--tends to be developed. This has already occurred in Chatham County, where prime buildable land is in short supply and development is taking place on the western edge of the metropolitan area, formerly considered too close to industry for other uses.
Sprawl and "Leap-Frog" Development in Metropolitan Areas
Land development for non-industrial uses near metropolitan areas sometimes fails to happen on large buildable parcels that are ideal for the purpose, because they are being held for price speculation or because of exclusionary zoning. Extending public water supply, sewerage systems, and other public services to the more distant sites is often difficult and expensive. When private systems are substituted, their operating standards may not match the higher standards of public systems, and community health and environmental quality often suffer.
Smaller Lot Sizes and Fewer Amenities
The proliferation of residential DRIs is an indication of not only the desirability of the coastal region, but also of an expansion of moderately-priced, workforce housing. These developments are mainly located in close proximity to the Savannah job market (Pooler, Port Wentworth, South Effingham County and Richmond Hill), and often feature smaller lot sizes and fewer amenities. The result has been the development of a variety of lower-cost housing types built at a higher density, such as townhouses, patio homes, and zero-lot line houses. These styles are also popular with many seniors and second-home owners.
Mobile Homes and Manufactured Homes
A large segment of the region's housing stock is mobile or manufactured homes (see Table C-1 and C-6). However, resistance to these housing types is increasing. Reasons for this include the limited property taxes they generate and the negative image many people have of them. Since manufactured homes are the most affordable option in the region, such resistance to them may help push the coast's workforce housing further inland.
More Large-Scale Mixed-Use Developments
As real estate values and building costs continue to rise, the economies of scale for large land developments become more evident, and it is in the best interests of the community for such projects to be mixed-use. These usually have a positive effect on local infrastructure. An increasing number are planned to allow for public amenities such as schools and recreation. In addition, the placement of commercial uses close to residential dwellings can decrease traffic congestion and promote walking or biking. As with the workforce housing, these developments are often located in close proximity to Savannah (New Hampstead), Hinesville (Independence) and Richmond Hill (Genesis Pointe).

Georgia Coastal Comprehensive Plan October 19, 2007 Draft

75

Resort-Style Development
Affluent retirees and second-home owners are increasingly coming to the Georgia coast. Resort-style developments have capitalized on that demand, but these often have a negative impact on the environment. In addition, the rising demand has reduced the affordability of housing in the region, driving out some longtime residents and making the economic situation more difficult for those that remain.

Georgia Coastal Comprehensive Plan October 19, 2007 Draft

76

Intergovernmental Coordination
There are certain problems and issues confronting the coastal region that can best be dealt with in a coordinated manner, rather than by individual governments or entities acting in isolation. By the same token, many opportunities exist that can best be grasped by cooperative action as opposed to separate efforts. In some cases, local governments already work together, either on an informal basis or through jointly-controlled agencies. In other cases, the state or federal government formulates regulations and standards, which may be recommended or mandatory depending on the situation. In addition, there are many governmental agencies and authorities that act on a regionwide basis. All of these approaches fall under the broad category of intergovernmental coordination.
"Leap-Frog" Growth
"Leap-frog" development is often caused by the differing policies of various local governments, as suburbs close to a city choose to restrict growth while those further out seek to encourage it. The result is often an illogical pattern of development that causes environmental harm and traffic congestion. A more consistent approach, in which local government policies work in harmony throughout an entire region or metropolitan area, can yield better results.
Protection of the Environment
Environmental problems are another challenge that often requires regional action to be dealt with successfully. Otherwise polluters or noxious land uses will migrate to those areas where standards are lowest. Because ecosystems such as watersheds do not respect local government borders, the need for coordination is especially acute.
Coastal Management Program
The Georgia Coastal Management Program is administered by the GDNR/CRD. It is a coordinated effort to deal with environmental issues in the coastal region, and thus works extensively with local governments, other local actors, various state agencies, and the federal government. Among other activities, the program provides technical assistance, engages in outreach and education, performs monitoring, and administers federal grants.
Economic Development
Cooperation is also important in promoting economic development. Local governments often lack the resources to promote their economic potential on a nationwide or global basis, but a larger entity can do so. Tourism is the most relevant example of this for the coastal region. Local governments can also partner effectively so as to create the framework for economic development, such as by building a business park or improving an educational institution. Acting alone, small local governments generally lack the resources to carry out such projects. All six of the counties' development authorities participate in joint development authorities (JDA):

Georgia Coastal Comprehensive Plan October 19, 2007 Draft

77

Chatham, Bryan and Liberty counties are members of the 16-county Middle Coastal Unified Development Authority (MCUDA). Camden, Glynn and McIntosh counties are members of the 6-county Southeast Georgia JDA.
Coastal Georgia Greenway
Coordination is vital in planning, developing and maintaining community facilities that serve the residents of more than just one locality. The Coastal Georgia Greenway will stretch along the entire Georgia coast, linking to networks in Florida and South Carolina. Obviously such a challenge can only be met by a tremendous amount of local cooperation, action at the regional level, and coordination between local and regional actors.
Hurricane Evacuation
In the event of a hurricane or major storm, significant intergovernmental coordination is necessary. GEMA has the main responsibility for planning and coordinating evacuations, but local governments must handle most of the actual work. Federal, state, and local agencies coordinate through all phases of the evacuation process. The Federal Highway Administration works regionally with GDOT, GEMA, and their counterparts in other affected states as the Evacuation Liaison Team (ELT). This work is disseminated to local jurisdictions through conference calls. The State Operations Center decides when to deploy the Evacuation and Reentry Branch (ERB), which is composed of representatives of a number of state agencies. The ERB coordinator works with the local Emergency Operations Centers.
Ports
The investment required for operations, maintenance and expansion of the ports of Savannah and Brunswick is tremendous, and necessitates an overarching Port Authority. The orchestration of port-related activity requires a regional approach, in which the authority, as well as the state and local agencies, have common goals. Indeed, intergovernmental coordination can cross state lines. In March of 2007, the governors of Georgia and South Carolina jointly announced the plan to form a bi-state port authority that would build a port just north of Savannah, in Jasper County, South Carolina.
Military Bases
There are two important military bases in the coastal region, Fort Stewart/HAAF and Kings Bay Naval Submarine Base, both of which have a tremendous impact on land use, economics, transportation and demographics in the entire region. Local governments and the military must make extra efforts to work together, because the issues they face are often interlinked and decisions made by one group can have a large effect on the other. Implementation of the JLUS by affected local governments is just one way of strengthening the relationship.

Georgia Coastal Comprehensive Plan October 19, 2007 Draft

78

Service Delivery Strategy
The service delivery strategy is a document that all the local governments of a particular county must agree upon. The strategy simply specifies how certain services and related facilities are provided over the entire area of the county, including both incorporated and unincorporated areas. Services that are commonly included in the strategy include water, sewer, solid waste, road maintenance, jails, police, fire, E-911, EMS, economic development, animal control, etc. The strategy is where intergovernmental coordination and cooperation--whether formal or informal--is often specified and described.

Georgia Coastal Comprehensive Plan October 19, 2007 Draft

79

APPENDIX: DETAILED DATA AND INFORMATION

Georgia Coastal Comprehensive Plan October 19, 2007 Draft

80

Appendix: Detailed Data and Information
Introduction
The purpose of this appendix is to present extensive data, in the form of tables and maps, as an additional resource to readers of this document. These tables and maps would be too burdensome if shown in the body of the document, as they would interfere with the flow of the text, but they are constantly referenced there so that the reader has the option of turning to this document and examining them. The detail and precision of this document are essential to the overall document, providing the basis upon which analysis, comprehension, ideas and proposals are built upon.

Georgia Coastal Comprehensive Plan October 19, 2007 Draft

81

Population Data Tables

Table A-1: CQGRD Population Projections

Population

1980

1990

2000

2010

2020

2030

projection projection projection

Bryan Camden Chatham Glynn Liberty McIntosh

10,175 13,371 202,226 54,981 37,583
8,046

15,438 30,167 216,935 62,496 52,745
8,634

23,417 43,664 232,048 67,568 61,610 10,847

35,203 58,251 262,138 81,368 75,656 14,262

41,746 65,453 286,869 92,121 82,856 16,939

45,986 70,997 307,472 100,483 89,163 18,626

Region

326,382 386,415 439,154 526,878 585,984 632,727

Source: Georgia Coast 2030: Population Projections for the 10-County Coastal Region (Center for Quality Growth and Regional Development at the Georgia Institute of Technology, 2006), http://www.coastalgeorgiardc.org/docs/cgrdc_population_report_101806.pdf

Table A-2: CQGRD Projected Growth Rates

1980 - 1990 1990 - 2000 2000 - 2010 2010 - 2020 2020 - 2030

Bryan

52%

52%

50%

19%

10%

Camden

126%

45%

33%

12%

8%

Chatham

7%

7%

13%

9%

7%

Glynn

14%

8%

20%

13%

9%

Liberty

40%

17%

23%

10%

8%

McIntosh

7%

26%

31%

19%

10%

Region

18%

14%

20%

11%

8%

Source: Georgia Coast 2030: Population Projections for the 10-County Coastal Region (Center for

Quality Growth and Regional Development at the Georgia Institute of Technology, 2006),

http://www.coastalgeorgiardc.org/docs/cgrdc_population_report_101806.pdf

Georgia Coastal Comprehensive Plan October 19, 2007 Draft

82

Table A-3: Census Estimates 2001 - 06

Population Bryan Camden Chatham Glynn Liberty McIntosh

2001 24,246 44,477 233,126 68,500 59,775 11,072

2002 25,071 45,203 234,981 69,233 60,681 10,943

2003 26,138 44,300 235,624 70,068 59,510 10,971

2004 27,468 44,973 237,705 70,696 60,320 11,066

2005 28,575 45,751 238,039 71,639 60,688 11,000

2006 29,648 45,118 241,411 73,630 62,571 11,248

Region

441,196 446,112 446,611 452,228 455,692 463,626

Source: U.S. Census: American Factfinder, T1. Population Estimates (2006 Population Estimates).

Table A-4: Maturing Population

Percent of population age 65 and over Bryan Camden Chatham Glynn Liberty McIntosh

1980
7.4% 8.3% 10.4% 11.1% 3.5% 11.2%

1990
7.2% 5.1% 12.8% 13.9% 3.7% 12.8%

2000
7.3% 5.2% 12.8% 14.4% 3.9% 11.8%

Region Source: U.S. Census

9.6%

10.9%

10.8%

Table A-5 Hispanic Population

2000

2005

% change

Bryan

465

*

Camden

1,585

*

Chatham

5,403

6,098

13%

Glynn

2,019

2,899

30%

Liberty

5,022

*

McIntosh

99

*

Source: U.S. Census. * 2005 data not available for this geography

Georgia Coastal Comprehensive Plan October 19, 2007 Draft

83

Economic Development Data Tables

Table B-1: Regional Employment by Sector 2001 2006

2005

2010

2020

Sector

1980

1990

2000 projection projection projection

Farm Forestry, Agricultural Services, Other Mining Construction Manufacturing Trans., Comm. & Public Utilities Wholesale Trade Retail Trade Finance, Insurance & Real Estate Services Federal Civilian Government Federal Military Government State & Local Government

699

432

362

2,164 64
9,249 26,199

1,955 75
16,009 25,393

2,789 122
15,203 23,247

11,517 5,928
26,482

12,593 6,980
38,387

13,497 7,597
49,881

10,353 31,421

10,600 53,015

13,814 76,541

6,509 9,495 9,410

21,570 21,343 26,490

18,841 22,557 27,670

351
2,906 128
15,760 22,567
13,675 8,048
53,463
14,478 84,998
9,623
26,900
29,340

335

305

3,004 134
16,093 22,125

3,241 143
16,757 21,823

13,813 8,380
57,270

14,048 9,127
65,268

15,176 94,188

16,768 114,739

9,828

10,177

27,228

27,597

30,977

34,444

Total

170,996 218,834 266,623 282,237 298,551 334,437

Source: Woods and Poole Economics, Inc. Adapted from CGRDC (Coastal Georgia Regional Development Center) Regional Plan Update 2004 to include six coastal counties

Georgia Coastal Comprehensive Plan October 19, 2007 Draft

84

Table B-2: Regional Earnings by Sector 1980 2020

Sector

1980 (000)

1990 (000)

2000 (000)

Farm Forestry, Agricultural Services, Other Mining Construction Manufacturing Trans., Comm. & Public Utilities Wholesale Trade Retail Trade Finance, Insurance & Real Estate Services Federal Civilian Government Federal Military Government
State & Local Government

$7,665 $30,159 $13,518 $246,634 $970,694 $363,625 $173,351 $400,501 $146,941 $589,387 $273,632
$663,183
$433,629

$3,484 $30,818
$578 $473,479 $1,020,837 $435,422 $215,627 $524,999 $209,673 $1,217,571 $407,115
$746,026
$634,617

$2,502 $44,501
$2,206 $435,804 $1,205,084 $511,507 $270,454 $748,352 $343,730 $1,873,633 $503,712
$1,101,103
$889,697

Total

$4,312,920

$5,920,251

$7,932,277

Source: Woods and Poole Economics, Inc. Adapted from CGRDC Regional Plan Update 2004 to include six coastal counties.

2005 projection
(000) $2,581
$48,327 $2,330
$462,452 $1,251,796
$537,757 $293,801 $820,983 $381,071
$2,213,460
$535,681
$1,169,203
$973,249
$8,692,687

2010 projection
(000) $2,602
$52,046 $2,447
$483,292 $1,305,735
$563,653 $313,142 $899,808 $420,644
$2,603,548
$568,889
$1,237,252
$1,059,139
$9,512,203

2020 projection
(000) $2,682
$60,789 $2,682
$526,861 $1,437,319
$616,626 $356,297 $1,072,855 $511,167
$3,557,171
$636,875
$1,370,806
$1,249,722
$11,401,850

Georgia Coastal Comprehensive Plan October 19, 2007 Draft

85

Table B-3: Major Employers of 200 or more Employees (2007)

County

Employer

Type of Business

# Employees

Education and

Board of Education

Bryan

Administration

797

Board of Commissioners

Government

460

Camden

(3) Kings Bay Naval Base Lockheed

Military Defense High-Tech Defense

12,500 440

(3) Hunter Army Airfield

Military Defense

4,891

Gulfstream Aerospace

Aircraft Manufacture

5,000

International Paper

Paper; corrugated products

970

Great Dane Trailers, Inc.

Transportation Equipment

675

Brasseler

Dental Instruments

400

Chatham

Derst Baking Georgia Pacific

Baking Plywood & Paneling

434 1,420

Global Ship Systems

Yachts

390

JCB

Excavators & Loaders

360

Savannah Morning News

Newspaper

418

Savannah Sugar

Sugar/Molasses

377

Tronox

Titanium Dioxide, Gypsum

314

Koch Cellulose

Pulp & Paperboard

806

Sea Island Company

Resort

937

Glynn

King & Prince Seafood

Seafood Processing

582

(3) FLETC

Law Enforcement

673

Liberty

Fort Stewart Army Base Hysil Manufacturing

Military Defense Gift Wrap

Mil - 22,000 Civilian - 3,356
200

Interstate Paper

Kraft Linerboard

249

McIntosh None over 200 employees

Source: Georgia Manufacturing Directory, http://www.georgiafacts.net/net/location/statefacts.aspx?s=3014.0.5.3013; The Center for Land Use Interpretation (GA), http://ludb.clui.org/tag/Military/GA/; and Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy - 2005, CGRDC. Adapted from CGRDC Regional Plan Update 2004 to include six coastal counties.

Georgia Coastal Comprehensive Plan October 19, 2007 Draft

86

Table B-4: Per Capita Income Trends

1970

1980

1990

2001 2002 2003 2004

Bryan

$2,486 $5,214 $13,015 $25,732 $25,885 $26,323 $27,566

Camden

$2,785 $7,707 $11,875 $21,789 $22,578 $23,392 $24,231

Chatham

$3,481 $8,432 $17,664 $28,526 $29,116 $30,146 $31,691

Glynn

$3,316 $8,798 $17,478 $29,259 $29,629 $30,210 $32,049

Liberty

$2,564 $7,046 $8,257 $17,818 $18,154 $20,045 $21,471

McIntosh

$2,089 $5,087 $10,884 $18,253 $19,125 $19,597 $20,725

Region

$2,717 $6,748 $12,698 $23,563 $24,081 $24,952 $26,289

Source: 2001-2004 from 2007 Georgia County Guide. Georgia Statistics System: Cross Sectional

Analysis - http://www.georgiastats.uga.edu/crossection.html, "Economics, "Per Capita Income". 1970-

1990, CGRDC.

Adapted from CGRDC Regional Plan Update 2004 to include six coastal counties.

Table B-5: Median Household Income

1999

2003

Bryan

$48,345 $51,620

Camden

$41,056 $43,164

Chatham

$37,752 $36,775

Glynn

$38,765 $38,742

Liberty

$33,477 $34,019

McIntosh

$30,102 $29,912

Region

$38,250 $39,039

Georgia

$42,433 $42,421

Adapted from CGRDC Regional Plan Update 2004 to include six coastal counties. Source: 2007 Georgia County Guide. Georgia Statistics System: Cross Sectional Analysis http://www.georgiastats.uga.edu/crossection.html, "Economics, "Per Capita Income".

Georgia Coastal Comprehensive Plan October 19, 2007 Draft

87

Table B-6: Economic Impact of Domestic Travel in Georgia - 2005

Bryan Camden Chatham Glynn Liberty McIntosh

Travel Expenditures
$29,430,000 $67,960,000 $920,500,000 $290,500,000 $74,410,000 $11,460,000

TravelGenerated
Payroll $6,610,000
$14,630,000 $256,450,000
$80,350,000 $11,040,000
$2,640,000

Travel-Generated Employment
(number of people) 340 800
10,930 3,800 550 140

Travel-Generated Employment as %
of Population 1.45% 1.83% 4.71% 5.62% 0.89% 1.29%

State Tax Revenue Generated
$1,150,000 $2,610,000 $38,590,000 $12,160,000 $2,630,000
$440,000

Local Tax Revenue Generated
$880,000 $2,030,000 $27,800,000 $8,780,000 $2,220,000
$340,000

Region Total

$1,394,260,000

$371,720,000

16,560

N/A $57,580,000

$42,050,000

Region Average

$232,376,667

$61,953,333

2,760

3.77%

$9,596,667

$7,008,333

Georgia Total $16,572,500,000 $6,158,400,000

217,000

N/A $779,100,000 $498,100,000

Georgia

Average

$104,229,560

$38,732,075

1,365

2.65%

$4,900,000

$3,132,704

Source: is 2005 Travel Profile Georgia State, Visitors' Statistics & Travel Economic Impact, Regional Analysis, Travel Industry Association of America for the GA Department of Economic Development.

Georgia Coastal Comprehensive Plan October 19, 2007 Draft

88

Table B-7: Employment in the Leisure and Hospitality Sector

Bryan Camden Chatham Glynn

Liberty McIntosh Region

1990

385

965

11,378

5,923

848

247

19,746

1991

412

1,036

11,003

5,755

1,013

220

19,439

1992

427

1,160

11,622

5,005

1,018

198

19,430

1993

442

1,310

12,153

5,041

1,054

196

20,196

1994

509

1,330

12,713

5,389

1,089

193

21,223

1995

629

1,378

13,882

5,782

1,068

279

23,018

1996

698

1,393

14,496

5,936

1,120

314

23,957

1997

662

1,598

14,701

5,543

1,166

556

24,226

1998

621

1,702

15,303

6,001

1,275

399

25,301

1999

719

1,665

15,634

6,032

1,512

421

25,983

2000

680

1,760

16,137

6,326

1,442

403

26,748

2001

660

1,798

15,568

6,522

1,476

437

26,461

2002

647

1,932

16,056

6,552

1,571

569

27,327

2003

633

2,174

16,349

7,888

1,519

556

29,119

2004

675

2,142

16,520

7,807

1,755

603

29,502

2005

746

2,338

17,165

8,220

1,645

422

30,536

Source: is the Georgia Statistics System, drawing upon the data of the Georgia County Guide (available online at http://www.georgiastats.uga.edu/timeseries1.html)

Georgia Coastal Comprehensive Plan October 19, 2007 Draft

89

Housing Data Tables

Table C-1: Type of Housing

1990 Households Total Units Single family Multifamily Mobile home/other 2000 Households Total Units Single family Multifamily

Bryan 5,070 5,549 63% 5% 32%

Camden 9,459
10,885 57% 20% 23%

Chatham 81,111 91,178 64% 29% 7%

8,089 8,675
65% 9%

14,705 16,958
63% 18%

89,865 99,683
68% 27%

Glynn 23,947 27,724
66% 21% 14%

Liberty 15,136 16,776 46% 25% 28%

McIntosh 3,186 4,276 57% 3% 40%

27,208 32,636
64% 22%

19,383 21,977
55% 20%

4,202 5,735
53% 3%

Region 137,909 156,388
62% 25% 13%
163,452 185,664
65% 23%

Mobile home other

25%

19%

6%

13%

25%

44%

13%

Source: U.S. Census of Population and Housing, 2000: SF1-H1, SF3-P15 & SF3-H30.Adapted from CGRDC Regional Plan Update 2004 to include six coastal counties.

Table C-2: Age of Housing 1990 - 2000

1990

Bryan

Camden Chatham Glynn Liberty McIntosh Region

Total Units One year old 2 - 5 years old 5 10 years old 11 20 years old 21 30 years old 31 40 years old 41 50 years old over 50 years old
2000

5,549 7%
23% 14% 24% 12%
7% 5% 7%

10,885 13% 28% 20% 16% 8% 7% 3% 3%

91,178 2%
11% 10% 19% 15% 18% 12%
9%

27,724 3%
11% 14% 23% 19% 15%
9% 8%

16,776 5%
20% 23% 32%
9% 5% 4% 2%

4,276 5%
10% 11% 32% 17% 12%
6% 4%

156,388 4%
14% 13% 21% 15% 15% 10%
7%

Total Units

8,675 16,958 99,683 32,636 21,977

5,735 185,664

One year old

7%

4%

3%

4%

3%

4%

3%

2 - 5 years old

17%

17%

7%

11%

18%

14%

11%

5 10 years old

20%

22%

8%

8%

16%

13%

11%

11 20 years old

25%

32%

18%

21%

30%

24%

22%

21 30 years old

14%

10%

17%

18%

21%

19%

17%

31 40 years old

6%

6%

13%

15%

7%

12%

12%

41 50 years old

3%

5%

15%

12%

3%

7%

11%

over 50 years old

8%

5%

19%

12%

3%

8%

14%

Source: U.S. Census of Population and Housing, 1990: SF3-H1; SF3-H25. 2000 Census: SF1-H1; SF3-

H34Adapted from CGRDC Regional Plan Update 2004 to include six coastal counties.

Georgia Coastal Comprehensive Plan October 19, 2007 Draft

90

Table C-3: Condition of Housing

1980

Bryan Camden Chatham Glynn Liberty McIntosh

Total Units Units w/o plumbing Units w/o kitchen Units w/o heat Units served by shallow 1990

3,511 8% 7% 1% 8%

5,380 6% 6% 1% 3%

77,485 2% 2% 0% 1%

22,358 2% 2% 0% 1%

Total Units Units w/o plumbing Units w/o kitchen Units w/o heat Units served by shallow 2000

5,549 3% 2% 1% 5%

10,885 1% 1% 0% 3%

91,178 1% 1% 0% 1%

27,724 0% 0% 0% 2%

Total Units Units w/o plumbing Units w/o kitchen Units w/o heat

8,675 1% 1% 1%

16,958 2% 2% 0%

99,683 1% 1% 0%

32,636 1% 1% 0%

Units served by shallow

well

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

Source: U.S. Census of Population and Housing, 2000:; SF3-H40, SF3-H47. "N/A": means information not available.

10,800 6% 5% 0% 5%
16,776 0% 0% 0% 3%
21,977 1% 1% 1%
N/A

3,643 11% 9% 1% 11%
4,276 2% 2% 0%
11%
5,735 2% 1% 1%
N/A

Region
123,177 3% 3% 0% 2%
156,388 1% 1% 0% 2%
185,664 1% 1% 0%
N/A

Table C-4: Median Property Value

Median Property Value

1980

1990

2000

County
Bryan Camden Chatham Glynn Liberty McIntosh
Georgia

Value Rank Value Rank Value Rank

$30,000 4 $70,200 1 $115,600 1 $28,900 5 $66,700 3 $85,300 4 $36,100 3 $63,300 4 $95,000 3 $36,700 2 $67,200 2 $114,500 2 $36,900 1 $60,400 5 $79,800 6 $19,000 6 $37,500 6 $81,700 5

$36,900

$71,300

$111,200

Source: U.S. Census of Population and Housing, 2000: SF3.Adapted from CGRDC Regional Plan Update 2004 to include six coastal counties

Georgia Coastal Comprehensive Plan October 19, 2007 Draft

91

Table C-5: Median Rent

Median Rent

1980

1990

2000

County

Rent Rank Rent Rank Rent Rank

Bryan Camden Chatham Glynn Liberty McIntosh

$108

5 $226

5 $450

3

$142

2 $352

1 $462

2

$133

4 $296

3 $475

1

$141

3 $295

4 $417

5

$185

1 $345

2 $428

4

$101

6 $170

6 $274

6

Georgia

$153

$344 -

$505

Source: U.S. Census of Population and Housing, 2000: SF3, H56. Adapted from CGRDC Regional Plan Update 2004 to include six coastal counties

Table C-6: Projected Type of Housing

Year 2020

Bryan Camden Chatham Glynn Liberty McIntosh Region Georgia

Households 14,127 25,197 107,373 33,730 27,877

6,234 214,538 3,929,140

Units

14,927 29,104 116,693 42,460 32,379

8,653 244,216 4,568,375

Single Family 10,057
(SF)

19,652

86,175 26,765 20,635

4,158 167,442 3,173,101

SF % of units 67%

68%

74%

63% 64%

48%

69%

69%

Multifamily (MF)

1,830 4,683 26,130 10,261 4,928

292 48,124 836,093

MF % of units 12%

16%

22%

24% 15%

3%

18%

18%

Mobile

home/other

3,040 4,769

4,388 5,434 6,816

4,203 28,650 559,181

(MH)

MH % of units 20%

16%

4%

13% 21%

49%

12%

12%

Source: U.S. Census of Population and Housing, 2000: SF3-H1; SF3-H30; SF1-P15. Household numbers (1990-2020) supplied by Woods & Poole. Adapted by the Coastal Georgia RDC from Woods & Poole and U.S. Census data

Georgia Coastal Comprehensive Plan October 19, 2007 Draft

92

Community Facilities and Services Data Tables

Table D-1: Per Capita Municipal Solid Waste (MSW) Disposal Rate/MSW Reduction Goal

Commodity Actual 2004 Projected 2012

Lbs/Person Lbs/Person

Glass

0.153

0.140

Paper

1.181

1.000

Metal

0.228

0.198

Plastic

0.663

0.560

TOTAL

2.23

1.99

Source: DCA Office of Environmental Management

Projected % 2012 8% 15% 13% 16% 11%

Projected 2017 Lbs/Person 0.140 0.850 0.186 0.530 1.71

Projected % 2017 8% 15% 18% 20% 23%

Table E-1: Student Teacher Ratio

Student-Teacher Ratio

Bryan

15.7

Camden

14.7

Chatham

13.9

Glynn

14.1

Liberty

15.5

McIntosh

15.9

Coastal 6 Total

12.4

State

15

Sources: NCES/CCD, 2004-5 data, http://nces.ed.gov/ccd/districtsearch/

Table E-2: Spending per Student

Per FTE Instruction

Bryan

$4,569

Camden

$5,414

Chatham

$5,529

Glynn

$6,082

Liberty

$5,170

McIntosh

$4,979

Coastal 6 Total

$2,705

State

$5,415

Sources: GA Dept. Education, 2006 Financial Data Collection System; http://app.doe.k12.ga.us/owsbin/owa/fin_pack_revenue.entry_form

Georgia Coastal Comprehensive Plan October 19, 2007 Draft

93

Natural Resources Data Tables

TableF-1: Barrier Islands
Island
Tybee Little Tybee Wassaw Ossabaw St. Catherine's Wolf Island + (Egg and Little Egg) Blackbeard Sapelo Little St. Simons Sea St. Simons Jekyll Little Cumberland Cumberland

Approximate Acreage
1,500 1,600 2,500 11,800 7,200 5,126 3,900 10,900 2,300 1,200 12,300 4,400 1,600 15,100

Approximate Miles of Beach
3.4 3.0 6.0 9.5 11.0
7.5 5.6 6.5 3.8 3.8 8.0 2.4 16.9

Total Source: Coastal Zone Management Program.

81,426

88.3

Table F-2: Acreage Suitable for Septic Systems

Bryan and Non- Liberty and Non-

Camden and Non-

Chatham

urban

Long

urban McIntosh

Glynn

urban

Acres %

% Acres % % Acres % Acres % %

Conventional 34,464

6.3 7.7 69,805 11.9 11.9 16,470.00 6.1 20,098.00 2.9 3.0

Drip

39,173

7.1 8.7 114,311 19.5 19.6 28,102.50 10.3 49,566.25 7.3 7.3

Mound

118,538

21.5 26.4 39,961 6.8 6.8 18,418.50 6.8 123,134.10 18.1 18.1

Unsuitable

256,799

46.7 57.2 360,534 61.5 61.7 208,789.00 76.8 487,066.40 71.4 71.6

Urban

101,257

18.4 -----

1,373 0.2 ----- ----- ----- 1,991.25 0.3

Total

550,230 100.0 100.0 585,984 100.0 100.0 271,780.00 100.0 681,856.00 100.0 100.0

Source: Department of Crop and Soil Science, University of Georgia

Georgia Coastal Comprehensive Plan October 19, 2007 Draft

94

Table F-3: Endangered Species
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Mammal Northern Right whale (Eubalaena glacialis) E/E Humpback whale (Megaptera novaeangliae) E/E West Indian manatee (Trichechus manatus) E/E Round Tailed Muskrat (Neofiber alleni) */T

Bryan Camden Chatham Glynn Liberty McIntosh

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

Bird

Bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) T/E

X

X

X

Bachman's Warbler (Vermivora bachmanii) E/E

X

X

X

Wood stork (Mycteria americana) E/E

X

X

X

Piping plover (Charadrius melodus) T/T

X

X

X

Red cockaded woodpecker (Picoides borealis) E/E

X

X

X

Gull-billed Tern (Sterna nilotica) */T

X

X

Kirtland's Warbler (Dendroica kirtlandii) E/E

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

Invertebrate

Altamah spinymussel (Elliptio spinosa) #/E

X

Reptile

Eastern indigo snake (Drymarchon corais couperi) T/T X

X

X

Loggerhead sea turtle (Caretta caretta) T/T

X

X

X

Hawksbill Sea Turtle (Eremochelys imbricate) E/E

X

X

X

Kemp's Ridley sea turtle (Lepidochelys kempii) E/E

X

X

X

Green Sea Turtle (Chelonia mydas) T/T

X

X

X

Leatherback sea turtle (Dermochelys coriacea) E/E

X

X

X

Gopher tortoise (Gopherus polyphemus) */T

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

Amphibian

Flatwoods Salamander (Ambystoma cingulatum) T/T

X

X

X

X

Fish Shortnose sturgeon (Acipenser brevirostrum) E/E

X

X

X

X

X

X

Plant

Georgia plume (Elliottia racemosa) */T

X

Narrowleaf Obedient Plant (Physostegia leptophylla) */T X

X

X

X

Pondspice ( Litsea aestivalis) */T

X

X

X

X

Ball-moss (Tillandsia recurvata) */T

X

X

Climbing Buckthorn (Sageretia minutiflora) */T

X

X

X

X

Hartwrightia (Hartwrightia floridana) */T

X

Wagner spleenwort (Asplenium heteroresiliens) */T

X

Pondberry (Lindera melissifolia) E/E

X

Buckthorn (Sideroxylon thornei) */E

X

Source: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Georgia Ecological Services Field Office,

http://www.fws.gov/athens/endangered/counties_endangered.html

Federal/State; * - No Federal Status; # - Candidate Species; E - Endangered list; T - Threatened list

Georgia Coastal Comprehensive Plan October 19, 2007 Draft

95

Table F-4: Preserves, WMAs and State and Federal Sites

Heritage Trust Preserve

Location

Ossabaw Island

Chatham County

Richmond Hill Wildlife Management Area

Liberty, Bryan and McIntosh counties

Wormsloe Historic Site

Chatham County

Little Tybee Island/Cabbage Island

Chatham County

Altamaha River Corridor

McIntosh, Wayne and Long counties

Wildlife Management Areas

Location

Altamaha WMA

McIntosh County

Richard J. Reynolds WMA

McIntosh County

Ossabaw Island WMA

Chatham County

Paulk's Pasture WMA

Glynn County

Richmond Hill WMA

Bryan and McIntosh counties

Sansavilla WMA

Glynn County, also Wayne County

State / Federal Parks and Historic Sites

Location

Crooked River State Park

Camden County

Fort McAllister Historic Site

Bryan County

Skidaway Island State Park

Chatham County

Fort King George Historic Site

McIntosh County

Hofwyl-Broadfield Plantation Historic Site

Glynn County

Fort Morris Historic Site

Liberty County

Richmond Hill State Park & Fort McAllister Bryan County

State Historic Site

Sapelo Island Reserve and Reynolds McIntosh County

Mansion

Cumberland Island National Seashore

Camden County

Fort Pulaski National Monument

Chatham County

Fort Frederica National Monument

Glynn County

Georgia Coastal Comprehensive Plan October 19, 2007 Draft

96

Table F-5: Number of Farms

# of Farms, # of Farms, # of Farms, # of Farms, # of Farms, %

County 1978

1987

1997, rev. 2002

Change 1997-2002

Bryan

109

62

79

65

-17.72%

Camden

61

54

62

47

-24.19%

Chatham

86

51

50

58

16.00%

Glynn

62

48

54

59

9.26%

Liberty

62

41

57

68

19.30%

McIntosh

34

23

33

39

18.18%

GEORGIA

51,405

43,552

49,343

49,311

-0.06%

Source: 2007 Georgia County Guide and the 2006 Farm Gate Survey http://www.georgiastats.uga.edu/crossection.html, "Agriculture, "Farm Characteristics".

Table F-6: Acreage in agriculture; Land in Farms

Acres,

Acres,

% total

% Change 1997-

County 1992

1997, rev Acres, 2002 Land, 2002 2002

Bryan

15,948

29,744

17,155

6.07%

-42.32%

Camden

17,944

21,224

12,389

3.07%

-41.63%

Chatham

8,518

9,393

9,080

3.24%

-3.33%

Glynn

9,681

10,323

7,594

2.81%

-26.44%

Liberty

15,583

23,085

15,935

4.80%

-30.97%

McIntosh

8,003

5,757

11,306

4.08%

96.39%

GEORGIA 10,025,581 11,262,838 10,744,239

28.99%

4.60%

Source: 2007 Georgia County Guide and the 2006 Farm Gate Survey http://www.georgiastats.uga.edu/crossection.html, "Agriculture, "Farm Characteristics".

Georgia Coastal Comprehensive Plan October 19, 2007 Draft

97

Table F-7: Forest Land and Ownership, 2004

County Bryan

Forest Acreage
(000) 218.3

% of Total Land Area
77.2

Total Land Area (000)
282.7

Other Federal,
Acres (000) 83.8

State, Acres (000)
.

Local & Municipal, Acres (000)
.

Private, Acres (000) 134.6

Camden

263.7

65.4

403.1

4.9

.

.

Chatham

96.8

34.5

280.4

.

19.4

5.2

Glynn

138.8

51.4

270.3

.

1.1

5.1

Liberty

234.6

70.6

332.2

108.6

.

.

McIntosh

166.7

60.1

277.4

5

22.2

.

GEORGIA 24,151.00

65.2 37,059.80

688 311.1

226.2

Source: 2007 Georgia County Guide and the 2006 Farm Gate Survey http://www.georgiastats.uga.edu/crossection.html "Natural Resources", "Land Area, Forestland".

258.7 72.2
132.6 126
139.5 22064.8

Table F-8: % Forest Land over Time

County % of all land 1989 % of all land 1997 % of all land 2004 # acres (000), 2004

Bryan

82.7%

78.3%

77.2%

218.3

Camden

76.7%

68.7%

65.4%

263.7

Chatham

34.2%

32.2%

34.5%

96.8

Glynn

58.5%

55.2%

51.4%

138.8

Liberty

74.1%

71.6%

70.6%

234.6

McIntosh

62.8%

60.9%

60.1%

166.7

GEORGIA

65.10%

65.90%

65.20%

37059.8

Source: 2007 Georgia County Guide and the 2006 Farm Gate Survey http://www.georgiastats.uga.edu/crossection.html, "Natural Resources", "Land Area, Forestland".

Georgia Coastal Comprehensive Plan October 19, 2007 Draft

98

Table F-9: Hazardous Waste Sites (2006) and Permitted Toxic Chemical Release (2004)

1- Hazardous Site 2 - Toxic Chemical

County

Inventory

Release (lbs/day) 3 - Population

Bryan

1

63

29,648

Camden

2

161,884

45,118

Chatham

43

7,084,636

241,411

Glynn

15

2,363,605

73,630

Liberty

3

711,584

62,571

McIntosh

2

498

11,248

Region

66

10,322,270

463,626

State

454

118,864,819

9,363,941

Region's %

Share

8.59%

8.68%

4.95%

Source: Adapted from CGRDC Regional Plan Update 2004. 1-2006 EPD Hazardous Site Inventory; 2 The 2006 Georgia County Guide; 3 U.S. Census, 2006 Estimates.

Table F-10: Hazardous Site Inventory (HIS), July 2007

HSI ID SITE and NAME

Bryan

10646 Bryan Co. US 280 Mill Creek MSWLF

Camden

10093 U.S. Naval Submarine Base, Kings Bay 10647 Camden County Vacuna Road LF

Chatham

10003 CSX Transportation - Savannah

(Tremont Road)

10415 Savannah Electric - Plant Kraft

10018 Atlantic Wood Industries

10434 Savannah Paint Manufacturing

10045 Colonial Terminals, Plant #1

10440 Blue Ribbon Dry Cleaners

10091 Travis Field/Savannah International

Airport

10464 Vopak Terminal Savannah

10095 Central of GA RR/Bernuth-Lembcke Site 10497 Southeastern Family Homes, Inc.

10098 Colonial Terminals, Plant #2

10521 Hunter Army Airfield - MCA Barracks

10101 CSX Transportation - Powell Duffryn

10553 Georgia Air National Guard/Savannah/Site 8

10105 Hunter Army Airfield

10555 Georgia Air National Guard/Savannah/Site 10

10114 Union Camp Corp - Former Amoco

Property

10579 Abercorn & Largo Development

10128 Atlanta Gas Light Company - Savannah 10590 Central of Georgia Railroad Company -

MGP Site

Battlefield Park

10162 Ashland Chemical Company

10591 Southern Motors of Savannah, Inc.

Georgia Coastal Comprehensive Plan October 19, 2007 Draft

99

HSI ID SITE and NAME

10600 Colonial Terminals, Inc.- 1100 West Lathrop

10179 Kerr McGee - Deptford Tract

Property

10208 139 Brampton Road

10611 CSXT Depriest Signal Shop

10241 Union Camp Corp - Allen Blvd Landfill 10641 Kerr McGee Pigments, Inc.

10255 Union Camp Corp - Hwy 17 Disposal

Site

10649 Chatham County Landfill

10351 ARAMARK Uniform Services

10696 Hercules, Inc.

10364 Circle K Store #7703 (Former)

10698 Natrochem, Inc. - Central of Georgia

10371 Southern States Phosphate & Fertilizer

Co.

10764 Martha's Dry Cleaner

10372 Truman Parkway, Phase II

10788 Southside Cleaners

10395 Hunter Army Airfield, Fire Training Area 10789 Dry Clean, USA

10406 McKenzie Tank Lines, Inc.

10820 Abercorn Common

10849 Toto Distribution (Former)

Glynn

10006 Hercules 009 Landfill - NPL Site

10251 Chemresol

10028 Escambia Treating Company -

Brunswick

10282 4th Street Landfill (Brunswick Airport)

10058 Hercules Inc.

10317 T Street Dump

10069 Atlanta Gas Light Company - Brunswick

MGP Site

10587 STSE, Inc.

10619 Georgia Pacific - Former Chlorate Plant,

10144 LCP Chemicals - NPL Site

Brunswick

10156 Federal Law Enforcement Training

Center

10665 Glynn Co. - Cate Road C&D MSWLF

10242 Terry Creek Dredge Spoil Area

10769 Lanier Shopping Plaza

10804 Cork's Fabricare

Liberty

10420 Daniels Cleaners

10708 Busby Cleaners

10672 Liberty County - Limerick Road MSWLF

McIntosh

10325 Butler Island

10675 McIntosh County - King Road MSWLF

Source: EPD - http://www.gadnr.org/epd/Files_PDF/gaenviron/hazwaste/listco.pdf

Georgia Coastal Comprehensive Plan October 19, 2007 Draft

100

Table F-11: Solid Waste Generation 1992-2002 (Tons per Year)

County

1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 Increase

Bryan Camden Chatham Glynn Liberty McIntosh

12,046 30,603 401,748 66,280 29,452 11,291

12,548 32,453 416,478 73,577 34,071
1,135

13,043 34,727 431,304 78,592 36,381 11,657

13,544 36,135 460,163 81,325 38,690 11,779

14,046 36,823 460,990 84,058 41,000 11,900

14,675 37,336 475,874 86,384 43,310 12,162

21.8% 22.1% 18.5% 30.3% 47.1%
7.7%

Region

551,420 570,262 605,704 641,636 648,817 669,741 21.5%

Adapted from CGRDC Regional Plan Update 2004. Original source was Coastal Georgia Regional Solid Waste Management Plan (1994)

Table F-12: Landfills operating in Coastal Counties (FY 2006)

Facility Name

Remaining

Capacity Average Rate Of Fill Years

Dominion (CY)

Daily Tons (CYD) Remaining

Camden

Camden Co-SR110 MSWL

P

Camden Co - S.R. 110 C/D/I

Waste Landfill

P

Savannah-Dean Forest Rd (SL) P

Chatham Co-Thomas Ave (L) P

Superior Landfill & Recycling

Center

PC

Savannah Regional Industrial

Landfill, Inc

CI

1,761,903 23,031,586
2,121,158
3,959,727 3,423,179

223

447

14.0

666

740

100.0

352

704

10.0

1220

1627

9.0

876

1298

9.0

Chatham

Eller-Whitlock Ave (L)

PC

US Army - Ft Stewart Main

Cantonment (SL)

P

US Army-Ft Stewart Main

Cantonment (L)

P

78,358 862,832 117,728

13

27

9.0

47

94

33.0

0

0 1,280.0

McIntosh Liberty Glynn

McIntosh Co - King Rd (SL)

P

669,281

Source: DCA Office of Environmental Management. P Public; PC Private Commercial; CI - Commercial Industrial

53

106

20.0

Georgia Coastal Comprehensive Plan October 19, 2007 Draft

101

Table F-13: Closed landfills

Facility Name Bryan
Bryan Co - US 280/Mill Creek (SL) Bryan Co - SR 144 Spur Ph 1 (L) Bryan Co - SR 144 Spur Ph 2 (L)
Camden US Navy - King Bay Ph 1 (L) Camden Co - Vacuna Rd Ph 2 (SL) US Navy - Kings Bay Ph 3 (L)
Chatham Savannah - Bacon Park (L) Chatham Co - Chevis Rd (L) Chatham Co - I 16 Bloomingdale (L) Superior Sanitation - Little Neck Rd (SL) Port Wentworth - Augustine Creek (L) Tybee Island - Polk Ave/Van Horne Dr (L) Chatham Co - Sharon Park (L) Chatham Co - SR 367 Wilmington Island Ph 2 (L) Carter - Quacco Rd (L) Crosby - Quacco Rd (L)
Glynn Jekyll Island Auth - Old Plantation Rd (L) Glynn Co - Cate Rd (SL) Glynn Co - Frederica Academy SSI (L) Brunswick - Dolphin St (L) Hutcheson - Petersville Rd (L) Merritt - SR 303/US 341 (L) Glynn Co - Cate Rd (L)
Liberty Liberty Co - Limerick Rd (SL) Liberty Co - CR 194 #3 (L) Liberty Co - Limerick Rd (L) Liberty Co - Wells Rd (L)
McIntosh Darien - SR 251 W (L) DNR - Sapelo Island #2 (L) Source: DCA Office of Environmental Management.

Date Ceased Accepting Waste
04-Apr-94 24-Aug-89 13-Oct-95
07-Dec-87 27-Sep-92 01-Apr-92
29-Dec-87 13-Sep-00 08-Apr-94 09-Jun-95 21-Jul-88 03-Feb-88 20-Apr-99 08-Apr-94 30-Nov-87 30-Oct-90
01-Jul-91 07-Nov-97 28-Oct-87 16-Mar-87 25-Oct-90 20-Jul-88 07-Nov-97
30-Sep-93 02-Jun-88 23-Dec-98 18-Jun-91
29-May-79 01-Mar-88

Georgia Coastal Comprehensive Plan October 19, 2007 Draft

102

Table F-14: Inert Landfills

Permit Number
PBR-015-08IL PBR-015-01IL PBR-015-04IL PBR-015-05IL PBR-015-06IL PBR-015-07IL PBR-015-03IL
PBR-020-01IL

Facility Name Bryan R. B. Baker Construction, Inc Charles L. Stafford Us17/Ga144 Bryan Co Commission Board R.B. Baker Construction, Inc. #1 R. B. Baker Construction Inc Raybon Kangeter, Private Il Bryan County Board Of Commissioners Camden Naval Submarine Base

PBR-020-03IL
PBR-020-04IL PBR-020-06IL PBR-020-02IL
PBR-025-33IL PBR-025-12IL PBR-025-13IL PBR-025-14IL PBR-025-15IL PBR-025-18IL PBR-025-19IL PBR-025-23IL PBR-025-11IL PBR-025-34IL PBR-025-32IL
PBR-025-43COL PBR-025-36IL PBR-025-27IL PBR-025-24IL PBR-025-28IL PBR-025-31IL PBR-025-39IL PBR-025-35IL PBR-025-02IL 025-056D(L) 025-051D(SL) PBR-025-45IL PBR-025-04IL

City Of Kingsland Refuse Rd./Louis Williams Ave.
Luther Marion Lambert Old Jefferson Road Timothy Norton Rhone-Poulene Ag Company
Chatham Wilson Machinery Devory Dowdy Staley Avenue
Neal A. Wittkamp Rose Dhu Road Joe Rowland/Clark Hughes Millard And/Or Jewel Wheeler Jewell G. Wheeler Simon Holdings, Inc. City Of Tybee Island A.L. Wilkes Mohawk Street R.B. Baker Construction, Inc. Norfolk-Southern Corp.-Real Estate Development
Windsor Forest Wastewater Treatment Plant Quick Lock Center Harry L. King City Of Tybee Island Inert Landfill-Walter Brown Lackerson Theodore Gordon Skidaway Island State Park Porter Contracting Co. Inc City Of Tybee Island - Robinson Ave. Chatham Co Thomas Ave City Of Savannah Dean Forest Road Hunter Army Airfield W.J. Bremer, Jr. East President Street

Georgia Coastal Comprehensive Plan October 19, 2007 Draft

103

Permit Number PBR-025-05IL PBR-025-06IL PBR-025-07IL PBR-025-08IL PBR-025-09IL PBR-025-10IL
PBR-063-231IL PBR-063-22IL PBR-063-32IL PBR-063-31IL
PBR-063-26IL PBR-063-20IL PBR-063-16IL
PBR-063-30IL
PBR-063-03IL PBR-063-20IL-A PBR-063-06IL PBR-063-04IL PBR-063-02IL PBR-063-07IL PBR-063-08IL PBR-063-09IL PBR-063-10IL PBR-063-11IL
PBR-063-15IL PBR-063-05IL
PBR-089-03IL-A PBR-089-13IL PBR-069-33IL PBR-089-16IL PBR-089-15IL PBR-089-12IL PBR-089-10 OSTT PBR-089-09IL PBR-089-04IL
PBR-089-02IL
PBR-089-05IL PBR-089-03IL

Facility Name James H. Wrenn GA Highway 204 APAC Georgia, Inc. SR204 Shuman Construction Co., Inc. US 17 S The Branigar Organization, Inc. Georgia Ports Authority Hutchinson Island Inert David C. Mark East 64th Street
Glynn Daniels Construction And Demolition, Inc. Vernon D. Taylor Jekyll Island Authority #1 Jekyll Island Authority #2
Quality Development & Rentals Co. Inc. Oyster Shell Construction Dan O'Quinn
Drigger's Construction Company
Calsilite Manufacturing Corp., Inc. Line St. Bert Branson Glynn Co-Glynco Jetport Glynn Co-Anderson Daniels Construction & Demo Anderson Glynn Co-Brunswick Glynn Co-Merritt Glynn Co-Sears, SR 27 (L)
Campbell's Clearing And Equipment Co.
Seaboard Construction Company Brunswick Pulp & Paper
Liberty GA Power Co/Operating Dept R. B. Baker Construction, Inc. Margaret Road Fort Stewart Rubble Fort Stewart Yard Waste Midway Equipment Rental (Coastal Excavators, Inc.) Interstate Paper LLC David McDonald Rentals Paul Krebs Construction Co. SR 119
B M &J Contractors -Shaw Road
Jack P. Morgan-Hornes Subdivision Fort Stewart

Georgia Coastal Comprehensive Plan October 19, 2007 Draft

104

Permit Number

Facility Name

PBR-089-32IL

Fort Stewart 3rd Infantry Division

McIntosh

PBR-098-03IL

Rowe's Land Clearing And Paving

PBR-098-01IL

McIntosh Co-King Rd

098-011(L)

McIntosh Commission Board King Road

Source: DCA Office of Environmental Management.

Georgia Coastal Comprehensive Plan October 19, 2007 Draft

105

Table F-15: Coastal Resources

Location Jekyll Island
Gray's Reef

Description A state-owned and managed by the Jekyll Island Authority. It is the sixth largest of Georgia's barrier islands. With about 4,400 acres of uplands, the island is maintained and protected from development by state legislation passed in 1950. State law requires that it be maintained as 35% developed and 65% undeveloped. The island is used for a variety of active, passive, residential, recreational and educational purposes. In 1978, the Jekyll Island Club Historic District was designated a National Historic Landmark The Sanctuary is a seventeen square (nautical) mile section of Gray's Reef. Established under Title III of the Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act of 1972, it was designated a National Marine Sanctuary in January 1981. Gray's Reef lies 35 miles northeast of Brunswick in waters ranging from 50 to 72 feet deep. It is one of the largest, near shore, livebottom reefs on the nation's east coast, with an unusual mixture of tropical and temperate species. The reef serves research, educational, and recreational fishing functions.

The Sapelo Island National Estuarine Research Reserve

Created in 1972 and received its designation in 1976, the second in the nation. Approximately 6,000 acres in area, the reserve occupies almost one-third of the island, which is the fourth largest of Georgia's barrier islands and one the most pristine. The reserve includes unspoiled coastal salt marsh, maritime forest, tidal creeks, beach and dunes within the Duplin River estuary. The property is used for basic research as well as public education and compatible low-impact recreation. The University of Georgia's Marine Institute operates a major research center open to qualified scientists from throughout the world who study both biological and geological processes.

Altamaha River, a Nature Conservancy, "bioreserve" project

This entails detailed study, inventory and assessment of resources, land ownership and activities. The efforts of the Nature Conservancy will result in a management plan and a conservation program, with special attention to the most important and/or threatened resources within the corridor. The organization is working with landowners to implement improved methods for resource management, including the protection of land through conservation easements.

Georgia Coastal Comprehensive Plan October 19, 2007 Draft

106

Table F-16: Boat Registration

% Increase

% Increase

County

2000 2001

2002 2003 2004

2005 2006 2007 2000-07

* ALT-2007 2000-07

Bryan

2,638 2,685 2,825 3,005 3,081 3,111 3,176 3,199

21.27%

3,486 32.15%

Camden

2,416 2,535 2,560 2,723 2,750 2,869 2,865 2,795

15.69%

3,291 36.22%

Chatham

13,079 13,145 13,112 13,435 13,245 12,856 12,532 11,938

-8.72%

13,673

4.54%

Glynn

5,323 5,459 5,578 5,757 5,761 5,712 5,605 5,420

1.82%

6,261 17.62%

Liberty

2,160 2,199 2,266 2,360 2,416 2,416 2,452 2,357

9.12%

2,690 24.54%

McIntosh

1,738 1,903 2,005 2,108 2,105 2,147 2,132 2,072

19.22%

2,368 36.25%

Region

total

27,354 27,926 28,346 29,388 29,358 29,111 28,762 27,781

1.56%

31,769 16.14%

Source: Data from boat registration history table; * - Data from current (Summer 2007) boat registration table, Department of Natural ResourcesWildlife Resources Conservation Center.

Georgia Coastal Comprehensive Plan October 19, 2007 Draft

107

Historic Resources Data Tables

Table G-1: Coastal Georgia National Register of Historic Places listings

Resource Name
Bryan County Courthouse Fort McAllister Glen Echo Kilkenny Old Fort Argyle Site Pembroke Historic District Richmond Hill Plantation Seven Mile Bend Strathy Hall
Camden County Courthouse Crooked River Site (9CAM118) Duck House Dungeness Historic District Greyfield High Point-Half Moon Bluff Historic District Kingsland Commercial Historic District Little Cumberland Island Lighthouse Main Road McIntosh, John Houstoun, Sugarhouse Orange Hall Plum Orchard Historic District Rayfield Archeological District

Address BRYAN
College St., Pembroke 10 mi. E of Richmond Hill via GA 67 2 mi. (3.2 km) E of Ellabelle on GA 204 E of Richmond Hill on Kilkenny Rd. Address Restricted (Savannah) Centered on US 280 and Main St., Pembroke E of Richmond Hill on Ford Neck Rd. Address Restricted (Richmond Hill) SE of Richmond Hill
CAMDEN 4th and Camden Aves., Woodbine Address Restricted, St. Marys Cumberland Island, St. Marys Address Restricted, St. Marys Cumberland Island, Camden County NE of St. Marys on Cumberland Island, St. Marys Area surrounding S. Lee St., between King and William Sts., Kingsland N end of Little Cumberland Island, St. Marys Cumberland Island, St. Marys Ga. Spur 40, 6 mi. N of St. Marys 311 Osborne, St. Marys Address restricted, St. Marys Address Restricted, St. Marys

Listed
6/14/1995 5/13/1970
1/9/1978 2/14/1979 3/31/1975 12/8/2004 1/30/1978 4/11/1972 1/21/1979
9/18/1980 12/23/1985
2/13/1984 2/13/1984 7/24/2003 12/22/1978 3/17/1994 8/28/1989 2/13/1984
4/2/1992 5/7/1973 11/23/1984 2/13/1984

Georgia Coastal Comprehensive Plan October 19, 2007 Draft

108

Resource Name
St. Marys Historic District Stafford Plantation Historic District Table Point Archeological District Woodbine Historic District
Ardsley Park-Chatham Crescent Historic District Bethesda Home for Boys Bonaventure Cemetery Central of Georgia Depot and Trainshed Central of Georgia Railroad: Savannah Shops and Terminal Facilities Central of Georgia Railway Company Shop Property Charity Hospital CSS GEORGIA (ironclad)
Cuyler--Brownville Historic District
Daffin Park--Parkside Place Historic District Davenport, Isaiah, House Drouillard--Maupas House
Eastside Historic District Federal Building and U.S. Courthouse First Bryan Baptist Church Lebanon Plantation Fort Pulaski National Monument
Fort Screven Historic District

Address Roughly bounded by Waterfront Rd., Norris, Alexander, and Oak Grove Cemetery, St. Marys Address Restricted, St. Marys Address Restricted, St. Marys Jct. of Bedell Ave. and 3rd and 4th Sts., Woodbine
CHATHAM Roughly bounded by Ardsley Pk., Chatham Crescent, Bull St., Baldwin Pk. and Ardmore, Savannah S of Savannah at Ferguson Ave. and Bethesda Rd., Savannah Bonaventure Rd., 1 mi. N of US 80, Savannah W. Broad and Liberty Sts., Savannah
W. Broad St. and Railroad Ave., Savannah
Between W. Jones St. and Louisville Rd., Savannah 644 W. 36th St., Savannah Address Restricted, Savannah Roughly bounded by Anderson Ln., W. 31st St., Montgomery St., Victory Dr., Ogeechee Rd., and Hopkins St., Savannah Bounded by Victory Dr., Waters Ave., Bee St. and 51st Street Ln., Savannah 324 E. State St., Savannah 2422 Abercorn St., Savannah Roughly bounded by E. Broad, Cedar, Gwinnett and Anderson Sts., Savannah Wright Sq., Savannah 575 W. Bryan St., Savannah SW of Savannah 17 mi. W of Savannah, Cockspur Island Tilton, Butler, Van Horn, Railroad and Alger Aves., and Pulaski Rd., Tybee Island

Listed
5/13/1976 11/23/1984 11/23/1984
5/12/1999
8/15/1985 9/12/1973
2/2/2001 12/8/1976
6/2/1978
3/5/1970 5/2/1985 2/10/1987
2/13/1998
5/12/1999 9/22/1972 5/13/1991
11/7/2002 6/7/1974
5/22/1978 11/29/1979 10/15/1966
5/25/1982

Georgia Coastal Comprehensive Plan October 19, 2007 Draft

109

Resource Name
Gordonston Historic District Green-Meldrim House Hill Hall at Savannah State College Hodgson, W. B., Hall
Isle of Hope Historic District Laurel Grove-North Cemetery Laurel Grove-South Cemetery Savannah Victorian Historic District Low, Juliette Gordon, Historic District Massie Common School House Mulberry Grove Site New Ogeechee Missionary Baptist Church Nicholsonville Baptist Church
Ossabaw Island Owens-Thomas House

Address
Roughly bounded by Skidaway Rd., Goebel Ave., Gwinnett St., and Pennslyvania Ave., Savannah Macon and Bull Sts., Savannah Savannah State College campus, Thunderbolt 501 Whitaker St., Savannah
Roughly bounded by Skidaway River, Parkersburg Rd., Island, Cornus, and Noble Glen Drs., Savannah W. Anderson St., Savannah 37th St., Savannah Roughly bounded by Gwinnett, Price, Anderson, and Montgomery Sts. 10 Oglethorpe Ave., E., 330 Drayton St., 329 Abercorn St., Savannah 207 E. Gordon St., Savannah Address Restricted, Port Wentworth 751 Chevis Rd., Savannah White Bluff Rd.
7 mi. S of Savannah, bounded by the Atlantic Ocean, Bear R., Ogeechee R., and St. Catherine's Sound, Savannah 124 Abercorn St., Savannah

Savannah and Ogeechee Canal
Savannah Historic District Savannah Victorian Historic District (Boundary Increase) Scarbrough, William, House Sea View Apartments Slotin Building St. Bartholomew's Church St. Philip AME Church Sturges, Oliver, House Telfair Academy

Roughly along I-95, between the Savannah and Ogeechee Rivers Bounded by E. Broad, Gwinnett, and W. Broad Sts. and the Savannah River
Bounded by Gwinnett, Anderson and 31st Sts., Savannah 41 W. Broad St. 7 18th St., Tybee Island 101 W. Broad St., Savannah Cheves Rd., Chatham 613 W. Broad St., Savannah 27 Abercorn St., Savannah 121 Barnard St., Savannah

Listed
10/11/2001 1/21/1974 4/23/1981 3/25/1977
9/7/1984 8/4/1983 9/6/1978 12/11/1974 10/15/1966 4/13/1977 7/17/1975 8/8/2001 5/22/1978
5/6/1996 5/11/1976 8/11/1997
11/13/1966
5/20/1982 6/22/1970 4/22/2003 3/24/1983 6/17/1982
8/2/1984 7/14/1971 5/11/1976

Georgia Coastal Comprehensive Plan October 19, 2007 Draft

110

Resource Name
Thomas Square Streetcar Historic District Two Pierpont Circle Tybee Island Back River Historic District Tybee Island Strand Cottages Historic District U.S. Customhouse Vernonburg Historic District Wild Heron Wormsloe Plantation
Ballard School Brunswick Old Town Historic District Colored Memorial School and Risley High School Faith Chapel Fort Frederica National Monument Hamilton Plantation Slave Cabins Hofwyl-Broadfield Plantation Horton-duBignon House, Brewery Ruins, duBignon Cemetery Jekyll Island Club King and Prince Hotel
Needwood Baptist Church and School Rockefeller Cottage St. Simons Lighthouse and Lighthouse Keepers' Building

Address Roughly bounded by Anderson Ln., 42nd St., Victory Dr., E. Broad St., and Martin Luther King, Jr. Blvd., Savannah 2 Pierpont Cir., Savannah Along Chatham Ave., from Tybee River to Venetian Dr., Tybee Island Along Butler Ave., between 12 St. and 14th St., Tybee Island 1--3 E. Bay St., Savannah Dancy Ave., Rockwell Ave. and S. Rockwell Ave., Vernonburg 15 mi. SW of Savannah off U.S. 17, Savannah Isle of Hope and Long Island, Savannah
GLYNN 323 Old Jesup Hwy., Brunswick Roughly bounded by 1st, Bay, New Bay, H and Cochran Sts., Brunswick
1800 Albany St., Brunswick Old Plantation Rd., Jekyll Island 12 mi. N of Brunswick Address Restricted, St. Simons Island N of Brunswick on U.S. 17
Riverview Dr., Jekyll Island Between Riverview Dr. and Old Village Blvd., Jekyll Island 201 Arnold Rd., St. Simons Island US 17, 1 mi. S of Hofwyl-Broadfield Plantation State Historic Site., Brunswick 331 Riverview Dr., Jekyll Island
600 Beachview Dr., St. Simons Island

Listed
7/29/1997 4/4/1990 8/5/1999 4/2/1999
5/29/1974 6/22/2000 12/16/1977 4/26/1973
10/27/2004 4/26/1979
11/7/2002 7/14/1971 10/15/1966 6/30/1988 7/12/1976
9/28/1971 1/20/1972 1/12/2005
12/17/1998 7/14/1971
4/13/1972

Strachan House Garage

414 1/2 Butler Ave., Glynn

7/3/1997

US Coast Guard Station--St. Simons Island 4201 First St., St. Simons Island

4/1/1998

Georgia Coastal Comprehensive Plan October 19, 2007 Draft

111

Resource Name
Bacon-Fraser House Bowens, Eddie, Farm Cassel's Store Dorchester Academy Boys' Dormitory Flemington Presbyterian Church Fort Morris Liberty County Courthouse Liberty County Jail Midway Historic District Ripley, Sam, Farm
St. Catherine's Island Woodmanston Site
Behavior Cemetery D'Antignac House First African Baptist Church at Raccoon Bluff Fort Barrington Fort King George Hog Hammock Historic District Ridge, The Sapelo Island Lighthouse Vernon Square-Columbus Square Historic District West Darien Historic District

Address LIBERTY
208 E. Court St., Hinesville 660 Trade Hill Rd., Seabrook Off U.S. 82, McIntosh 8787 East Oglethorpe Highway (US 84), Midway Off Old Sunbury Rd., Flemington Address Restricted, Midway Courthouse Sq., Hinesville 302 S. Main St., Hinesville Jct. U.S. 17 and GA 38, Midway 1337 Dorchester Village Rd., Midway
10 mi. off the GA coast between St. Catherines Sound and Sapelo Sound, South Newport SW of Riceboro off Barrington Rd., Riceboro
MCINTOSH S end of Sapelo Island, 1.25 mi W of Hog Hammock Address Restricted, Crescent E side of Sapelo Island, approximately 2 mi. N of Hog Hammock NW of Cox E of U.S. 17, Darien E side of Sapelo Island, Hog Hammock Old Shell Rd. GA 99, Ridgeville S end of Sapelo Island, S of University of Georgia Marine Institute
Roughly bounded by Market, Trumbull, Rittenhouse and Ft. King George Dr., Darien Bounded by 8th St., US 17, Darien River, and Cathead Creek,

Listed
4/18/1985 10/25/2004
8/5/1983 6/23/1986 6/17/1982 5/13/1970 9/18/1980 8/18/1992
3/1/1973 10/27/2004
12/16/1969 6/18/1973
8/22/1996 12/16/1977
9/6/1996 9/27/1972 12/9/1971
9/6/1996 4/18/1985 8/26/1997
3/14/1985 9/17/2001

Georgia Coastal Comprehensive Plan October 19, 2007 Draft

112

Table G-2: Listing Of National Historic Landmarks in coastal counties

Landmarks Central Of Georgia Railroad Shops/Terminal Dorchester Academy Boys' Dormitory Fort James Jackson Green- Meldrim House Jekyll Island Low, Juliette Gordon, Historic District Owens Thomas House St. Catherine's Island Savannah Historic District Scarbrough, William, house Telfair Academy Of Arts And Sciences

Location Savannah, Chatham County Midway, Liberty County Savannah, Chatham County Savannah, Chatham County Jekyll Island, Glynn County Savannah, Chatham County Savannah, Chatham County Liberty County Savannah, Chatham County Savannah, Chatham County Savannah, Chatham County

Table G-3: National Register listings with National Significance

Site Woodmanston Site at the LeConte Plantation Riceboro; Fort Barrington in McIntosh County
Old Fort Argyle Site CSS Georgia

Period of Significance (1750 to 1824)
(1750 to 1874 with particular significance during the War of 1812) (c1700 until 1749) Ironclad used during the War Between the States.

Georgia Coastal Comprehensive Plan October 19, 2007 Draft

113

Table G-4: Historic Properties

State owned historic sites in region
Federal historic properties State parks w/historic associations

Fort King George- Darien (SP) Fort McAllister- Richmond Hill (SP) Fort Morris- Midway (SP) Hofwyl-Broadfield Plantation- Brunswick (SP) Wormsloe Savannah Sapelo Island Reserve and Reynolds Mansion Cumberland Island National Seashore Fort Pulaski National Monument Fort Frederica National Monument Fort King George- Darien Fort McAllister- Richmond Hill

Georgia Coastal Comprehensive Plan October 19, 2007 Draft

114

Land Use Data Tables

Table H-1: Proposed Developments of Regional Impact (DRI) from July 2004 - June 2007

Project Name

Type

Jurisdiction

Residen tial
(Units)

Commercial (Acres)

Commercial (Sq. Ft.)

Orafol

I

Bryan

Hidden Creek

H

Bryan

140

Belfast Lake Subdivision

H

Bryan

180

Tivoli Estates

H

Bryan

145

Georges Bluff Subdivision H

Bryan

490

Interstate Centre South

I

Bryan

South Bryan County WWTP

WWT

P

Bryan

River Marsh Marina

MU Bryan

185

NorthPoint-Bryan Co

W&D Bryan

Interstate Center II

I

Bryan

Daniel Siding Development MU Bryan

Interstate center Expansion I

Bryan

JF Gill Tract

H

Bryan

BLT Project

MU Bryan

Blichton Crossing

MU Bryan - Pembroke

Love's Travel Stop (8 diesel

pumps and 85 truck spaces)

TS

Bryan - Richmond Hill

White Oak Village

H

Bryan - Richmond Hill

224

Ford Park of Commerce

C

Bryan - Richmond Hill

63

Elbow Swamp Subdivision H

Bryan - Richmond Hill

500

Industrial Date (Sq. Ft.) Initiated

220,000

4/22/05 7/19/05 7/19/05 8/9/05 9/14/05 9/16/05

400,680 5,300,000

1/17/06 3/8/06 4/12/05 11/21/06 1/26/07 2/20/07 5/21/07 5/21/07 12/8/06

1/26/05 2/7/05
4/15/05
6/2/05

Georgia Coastal Comprehensive Plan October 19, 2007 Draft

115

Project Name

Type

Jurisdiction

Elbow Swamp Subdivision H

River Place Plantation

H

Riverfront Estate

H

Tuscan Landing

H

River Place Plantation Subdivision (resubmitted) H

Bridge Pointe at Jekyll

Sound

MU

The Landings

MU

Timberland Estates

H

Maiden Creek Landing

H

Timberland Estates

H

Lakes at Spring Bluff

H

Riverfront Estates

H

Lake Oleander West

H

Lake Forest Phase IV

H

Bay Tree Plantation

H

Laurel Landing

H

Harriet's Bluff

H

Westhaven Subdivision

H

Fiddler Cove

H

Waters Edge

H

Winding Cove

H

Marsh Landing @ Crooked

River

H

Lake Victoria

H

Scrubby Bluff

H

Bryan - Richmond Hill Camden Camden Camden
Camden
Camden Camden Camden Camden Camden Camden Camden Camden Camden - Kingsland Camden - Kingsland Camden - Kingsland Camden - Kingsland Camden - Kingsland Camden - Kingsland Camden - Kingsland Camden - Kingsland
Camden - Kingsland Camden - Kingsland Camden - Kingsland

Residen tial
(Units)

Commercial (Acres)

Commercial (Sq. Ft.)

450

294 125
154
1,000 5,600
232 318 100 1,045

10

180

250,000

164

391

1,102

1,310

730

644

68

159

254

249
230 1,007

Industrial (Sq. Ft.)

Date Initiated
8/15/05 9/16/04 9/16/04 9/17/04
12/20/04
6/3/05 7/28/05 10/11/05 1/5/06 2/14/06 9/22/06 12/5/06 12/21/06 12/10/04 5/25/05 6/2/05 6/2/05 7/14/05 7/27/05 9/19/05 10/26/05
12/7/05 12/14/05 1/31/06

Georgia Coastal Comprehensive Plan October 19, 2007 Draft

116

Project Name

Type

Jurisdiction

Bay Tree Cypress Point Kingsland West Waters Edge Kingsland Plantation South Grove Multifamily Development Driggers Kingsland Southern Tract Winding River Kings Bay Pro 3 Townhomes The Paddocks Cannon Forrest Timucua/Tamarac Osprey Cove Durango Sail Cove Satilla River Bluffs NorthPort Hutchinson Island Silo Quacco Rd Newton Tract Pilot Travel Center Wynn-Capallo Tract Savannah Quarters LogistiCenter Wal-Mart & Lowes Dean Forest Business Park

H H H H H
H
MU H
H H H MU H MU C MU W&D H H H TS MU MU W&D C I

Anderson Tract

W&D

Camden - Kingsland Camden - Kingsland Camden - Kingsland Camden - Kingsland Camden - Kingsland
Camden - Kingsland
Camden - Kingsland Camden - St Marys
Camden - St Marys Camden - St Marys Camden - St Marys Camden - St Marys Camden - St Marys Camden - St Marys Camden - St Marys Camden - Woodbine Chatham Chatham Chatham Chatham Chatham Chatham - Pooler Chatham - Pooler Chatham - Pooler Chatham - Pooler Chatham - Pooler Chatham - Port Wentworth

Residen tial
(Units)
312 273 236 159

Commercial (Acres)

Commercial (Sq. Ft.)

Industrial (Sq. Ft.)

Date Initiated
6/15/06 6/15/06 6/15/06 8/31/06 2/9/07

3/29/07

5/29/07

572

3/31/05

250 477 391 312 181 3,020

2,546

500 426 800

800

70

3,600

450

425,000 250,000 586,200

4,104,000 1,000,000

12/2/05 8/29/05 10/31/05 3/28/06 6/30/06 7/6/06 3/2/07 8/29/05 4/6/05 5/16/05 5/23/06 11/10/06 6/25/07 1/21/05 2/23/05 8/28/06 4/26/07 6/16/07

2,000,000 10/28/04

Georgia Coastal Comprehensive Plan October 19, 2007 Draft

117

Project Name

Type

Jurisdiction

Southern Region Industrial Realty
Wentworth Station
Newport
Rice Creek

W&D MU H MU

Chatham - Port Wentworth Chatham - Port Wentworth Chatham - Port Wentworth Chatham - Port Wentworth

New Hampstead

MU Chatham - Savannah

McGregor Park Spivey Tract Hutchinson Isl.

H

Chatham - Savannah

MU Chatham - Savannah

Trade Port Johnson-Tennenbaum Tract

W&D Chatham - Savannah W&D Chatham - Savannah

Belford

MU Chatham - Savannah

Tradeport (see 952)

W&D Chatham - Savannah

Sustainable Fellwood

MU Chatham - Savannah

Ft Argyle Village Calvary Campus & Community Bradley park Hermitage Island
Exit 29 WWTP

MU Chatham - Savannah

MU
MU H WWT P

Chatham - Savannah Chatham - Savannah Glynn
Glynn

Residen tial
(Units)

Commercial (Acres)

Commercial (Sq. Ft.)

Industrial (Sq. Ft.)

Date Initiated

103 842 545 8,500 626 1,900
2,210

1,250

12

1,000,000 200,000 1,120,000 30,000
196,900

4,212,500
749,050 1,512,500 126,200

1/25/05 7/13/05 4/13/06 7/17/06 1/25/05 10/12/05 10/17/05 11/7/05 11/9/05 2/12/06 8/2/06 1/29/07 4/5/07 4/5/07 6/20/07 8/16/05 8/30/05

Georgia Coastal Comprehensive Plan October 19, 2007 Draft

118

Project Name

Type

Jurisdiction

Hopewell Creek Satilla Forest Liberty Harbor CAP Brunswick Crossgate RAF Project (Target) Liberty Gateway at Martin Plantation Independence WWTP Hinesville Dryden & Zechman Project Fraser Master Plan Midway Ready Mix

MU MU H C H W&D
MU MU MU MU MU CP

Glynn Glynn Glynn - Brunswick Glynn - Brunswick Guyton Liberty
Liberty Liberty - Hinesville Liberty - Hinesville Liberty - Hinesville Liberty - Hinesville Liberty - Midway

Residen tial
(Units) 1,900 3,100 1,800
129

Commercial (Acres)
110

Commercial (Sq. Ft.)
200,000 100,000 300,000 550,000

Industrial (Sq. Ft.)
1,530,722

Date Initiated
3/23/06 9/15/06 9/8/05 11/8/05 6/29/06 7/16/04

956 10,800
41

6,000 2,000,000

11/13/06 11/30/04 3/3/06 8/22/06 8/22/06 4/21/05

Q: Quarries, Asphalt & Cement Plants

TS: Truck Stop

WHF: Waste Handling Facility

H: Housing

I: Industrial

WWTP: Waste Water Treatment Plant

MU: Mixed use

CP: Cement Plant

W&D: Wholesale & Distribution

C: Commercial

Source: Georgia Department of Community Affairs (http://www.dca.state.ga.us/DRI/Submissions.aspx

Georgia Coastal Comprehensive Plan October 19, 2007 Draft

119

Supporting Data: Maps
Map A-1: Population by Block Group Dot Density Map (2000 Census)

Source: Georgia Department of Community Affairs (http://www.georgiaplanning.com/coastal.htm)

Georgia Coastal Comprehensive Plan October 19, 2007 Draft

120

Map B-1: Percent below Poverty by Block Group (2000 Census)

Source: Georgia Department of Community Affairs (http://www.georgiaplanning.com/coastal.htm)

Georgia Coastal Comprehensive Plan October 19, 2007 Draft

121

Map D-1: Public Water Systems

Source: Georgia Department of Community Affairs (http://www.georgiaplanning.com/coastal_map.htm)

Georgia Coastal Comprehensive Plan October 19, 2007 Draft

122

Map D-2: Public Sewer Systems

Source: Georgia Department of Community Affairs (http://www.georgiaplanning.com/coastal_map.htm)

Georgia Coastal Comprehensive Plan October 19, 2007 Draft

123

Map E-1: Existing and Planned Bicycle/Pedestrian Facilities

Existing and Planned Bicycle Facilities Shared Use Paths and Trails
Source: Coastal Georgia RDC (http://www.georgiaplanning.com/coastal_map.htm)

Georgia Coastal Comprehensive Plan October 19, 2007 Draft

124

Map F-1: FEMA Flood Zones

Source: Georgia Department of Community Affairs (http://www.georgiaplanning.com/coastal_map.htm)

Georgia Coastal Comprehensive Plan October 19, 2007 Draft

125

Map F-2: Wetlands

Source: Georgia Department of Community Affairs (http://www.georgiaplanning.com/coastal.htm)

Georgia Coastal Comprehensive Plan October 19, 2007 Draft

126

Map F-3: Barrier Islands and Hammocks

Source: Georgia Department of Community Affairs (http://www.georgiaplanning.com/coastal.htm)

Georgia Coastal Comprehensive Plan October 19, 2007 Draft

127

Map F-4: Conservation Areas (Existing)

Source: Georgia Department of Community Affairs (http://www.georgiaplanning.com/coastal.htm)

Georgia Coastal Comprehensive Plan October 19, 2007 Draft

128

Map F-5: Historic Sites

Source: Coastal Georgia RDC (http://www.georgiaplanning.com/coastal_map.htm)

Georgia Coastal Comprehensive Plan October 19, 2007 Draft

129

Map F-6: Soil Suitability for Septic Systems

Source: Georgia Department of Community Affairs (http://www.georgiaplanning.com/coastal_map.htm)

Georgia Coastal Comprehensive Plan October 19, 2007 Draft

130

Map F-7: Hydric Soils

Source: Georgia Department of Community Affairs (http://www.georgiaplanning.com/coastal_map.htm)

Georgia Coastal Comprehensive Plan October 19, 2007 Draft

131

Map F-8: Tropical Storm Surge Zones

Source: Georgia Department of Community Affairs (http://www.georgiaplanning.com/coastal_map.htm)

Georgia Coastal Comprehensive Plan October 19, 2007 Draft

132

Map G-1: Proposed Developments of Regional Impact (DRI) from 2001 to 2006

Source: CGRDC (http://www.georgiaplanning.com/coastal_map.htm)

Georgia Coastal Comprehensive Plan October 19, 2007 Draft

133

Map G-2: Existing Land Use

Source: Georgia Department of Community Affairs (http://www.georgiaplanning.com/coastal.htm)

Georgia Coastal Comprehensive Plan October 19, 2007 Draft

134

Map G-3: Character Areas

Source: Georgia Department of Community Affairs (http://www.georgiaplanning.com/coastal_map.htm)

Georgia Coastal Comprehensive Plan October 19, 2007 Draft

135

This plan was funded in part by a grant from the Coastal Management Program of the Georgia Department of Natural Resources (DNR) and the U.S. Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA).
This report was prepared by the Georgia Department of Community Affairs under award #NA05NOS4191212 from the Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management, National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. The statements, finds, conclusions, and recommendations are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of DNR or
NOAA.
Plan development assistance provided by Lott + Barber Architects and Reynolds, Smith & Hills, Georgia Conservancy and Coastal Georgia Regional Development Center.
Many thanks to the Georgia Electric Membership Corporation for their assistance throughout this planning process. Facilitation services provided by Pat Merritt, Community Development
Manager, Georgia EMC.
Cover photos Courtesy of the Georgia Department of Economic Development.

Georgia Coastal Comprehensive Plan October 19, 2007 Draft

136