HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda - 10-06-1997 - 10d 1
ORANGECOUNTY
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT
Meeting Date: October 6, 1997
Action Agenda
Item # /0
SUBJECT: Report on Proposed OWASA Revisions to the University Lake Water and Sewer
Extension Policy
DEPARTMENT: Planning PUBLIC HEARING Yes x No
BUDGET AMENDMENT Yes x No
ATTACHMENT(S): INFORMATION CONTACT:
Mary Willis
Staff Summary of County Regulations Extension 2583
and OWASA Policy(pp. 3-5) TELEPHONE NUMBERS:
Maps(pp. 6-9) Hillsborough 732-8181
Correspondence Re: Brookfield Drive Area(pp. 10-16) Durham 688-7331
OWASA Proposal and Related Correspondence(pp. 17-24) Mebane 227-2031
State Legislation(p. 25) Chapel Hill 967-9251
County Regulations(pp. 26-29)
PURPOSE: To report on a request by OWASA to comment on proposed revisions to its
University Lake Water and Sewer Extension Policy.
BACKGROUND: The Orange Water and Sewer Authority has requested comments on a proposed
change to its policy on water and sewer extensions in the University Lake
Watershed. The current policy allows extension of services into the watershed
for reasons generally related to alleviating existing health hazards. The
proposed policy would expand those reasons include alleviating situations
which are expected to cause health hazards in the future.
The policy change was proposed by OWASA after receiving a petition from
homeowners in the Brookfield Subdivision requesting extension of sewer
service to remedy failing septic systems. (Seepages 10-16 of this agenda for
documentation related to Brookfield septic failures.)
OWASA had started developing plans for sewer extension to the Brookfield
area when it was pointed out by Orange County that the current OWASA
policy, as well as the proposed revisions, were inconsistent with the Orange
County Zoning Ordinance. Watershed protection regulations applicable in the
University Lake Watershed do not allow water and sewer extensions for any
reason.
2
On September 18, 1997, Commissioners Brown and Halkiotis, Paul Thames
(County Engineer), Ron Holdway (Environmental Health) and Mary Willis
(Planning Department) met with several residents at the subdivision and
observed a number of the problems referenced in the attached letters from
Environmental Health.
This report is being provided to the Board of Commissioners at this time as
preparation for the October 21, 1997 Work Session with OWASA.
RECOMMENDATION: The Administration recommends that the Board receive this report and
consider the following additional future actions to address issues which
have been raised:
• Address inconsistencies in County ordinances and policies as related to
public water and sewer extensions;
• Determine what triggers the necessity of public water and sewer service
to areas outside of Transition Areas; and
• Reaffirm that only Orange County Environmental Health and the
County Engineer are empowered by the Board of Commissioners to
determine what triggers the necessity of public water and sewer service
to areas outside of Transition Areas.
3
STAFF SUMMARY OF COUNTY REGULATIONS AND OWASA POLICY
CONCERNING WATER AND SEWER EXTENSIONS
IN UNIVERSITY LAKE WATERSHED
September 25, 1997
COUNTY REGULATIONS
The Water and Sewer Policy, Zoning Ordinance and Subdivision Regulations all contain provisions
related to the extension of public water and sewer service. Excerpts from each of these documents are
attached. Key provisions are summarized below.
1. WATER AND SEWER POLICY
Goal 3 - Development Patterns of the Orange County Water and Sewer Policy allows public
water and sewer extensions as follows:
a) Outside of Transition Areas
• may serve an essential public facility
• may -correct a public health emergency not otherwise correctable
b) In Rural Buffer
• must be sized to address only the concern for which the system is extended
• written water and sewer service agreements valid prior to April 3, 1989 may be
honored
2. ZONING ORDINANCE
Article 6.23.8 (Watershed Protection Overlay Districts) allows only the use of individual on-site
septic systems or individual on-site alternative disposal systems in the University Lake
Watershed.
3. SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS
Section IV-B-6 of the Subdivision Regulations (Interim Development Standards) states that
public water and sewer may be extended into University Lake Watershed to remedy a public
health emergency identified by Environmental Health.
The interim development standards were initially adopted in 1989 and were last revised in 1991,
during the development of regulations in response the University Lake Watershed Study prepared
by Camp, Dresser and McKee in 1987. The interim standards were intended to apply only until
permanent regulations were put into place. Permanent regulations were adopted on January 1,
1994, when regulations pertaining to Orange County's ten protected watersheds were revised to
reflect State-mandated watershed protection requirements. Also at that time zoning regulations
were applied to Little River and Cedar Grove Townships. Since all of Orange County's planning
jurisdiction was then subject to the Zoning Ordinance, regulations pertaining to watershed
4.
protection were eliminated from the Subdivision Regulations, and all watershed protection
requirements were incorporated into the existing Article 6.23 of the Zoning Ordinance.
Because the interim development standards are contained in the subdivision regulations rather
than the zoning ordinance, they only apply in the context of subdividing property. They are not
applicable in the case of extending public facilities to serve and existing development.
OWASA'S UNIVERSITY LAKE WATER AND SEWER EXTENSION POLICY
1. CURRENT POLICY
Extensions and connections may be granted to:
a) Alleviate an existing or impending health hazard;
b) Alleviate existing conditions that will jeopardize the quality of water in University Lake;
C) Protect the health, safety and welfare of the general public;
d) Provide service to certain lots in Rangewood Subdivision;
e) Provide service for a change in use, if the structure is increased by no more than 50% and
the use does not constitute an increased hazard to the watershed.
2. PROPOSED POLICY REVISIONS
Extensions and connection would also be allowed to:
a) provide service to developed lots with failing wells or septic systems; or
b) provide service to developed lots close to those in a) above if wells or septic systems are
"reasonably likely to fail within the near future"; or
C) provide service to developed or undeveloped lots existing before 4/3/87 which are adjacent
to lines constructed for a)and b)above.
Developed lots larger than 3.9 acres would be limited to one connection. Additional connections
would not be allowed in the future if the land was subdivided.
Developed lots 3.9 acres or smaller could not be further subdivided due to zoning restrictions,
thus there would be no potential for any connections other than that for the existing use.
Undeveloped lots smaller than four acres which were created before April 23, 1987 could be
served only upon certification by Orange County Environmental Health that the lot could be
permitted for an on-site system.
COMPLIANCE WITH COUNTY REGULATIONS
1. ZONING ORDINANCE
The current OWASA policy is not consistent with the Orange County Zoning Ordinance, which
allows only on-site individual water supply and waste disposal systems.
2. WATER AND SEWER POLICY 5
The current OWASA policy and the Orange County Water and Sewer Policy are somewhat
consistent in that both provide for extension of services into the Rural Buffer to address public
health emergencies. The policies are not identical however, and neither policy contains all of the
elements and details of the other.
For example, the Orange County policy specifies that lines be sized to address only the concern
for which the system is extended. There is no such provision in the OWASA policy.
3. SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS
The OWASA policy is generally consistent with the content of the Interim Development
Standards of the Subdivision Regulations. However, the University Lake interim development
standards have not been applicable since adoption in of permanent watershed protection
regulations in 1994. They were applicable when the OWASA policy was initially adopted.
6
As 3
CL v c ^'vti
>,
ca
t'^ y r\`
l lip
P-� �a
l ` X
\ s '
�.. �•-� i ! t<J 'X11
t
A$ am.01V
� - � � �, , ��`�— •►.yam -:wi+:.!
J 7 w
'' - ,ice-_"_° . Fri•
7
177-1 •4O � ``•-�'
yq�
�IyFY ��d o
1 W
Ll-
...........
1ERRACE ..• j .
YIEW DR.
�.
0
•C
Z
1
9
T
G
z
0
3
8Ra7KF Fl
�4
1 S
GiR
4
..
f �..
C
54
4
G
h
Y
ti
0
l
01 �
0
w
cr
CARL. !A
2007
4
a `• :r:
D. ..4
oft-� aA
w tree K
eviIle
-
i
Zpq3
t
S 4 �
O \
/��
'WD 919 988 4484 o
p8.19
o
� � A
�d
o �o o
~ d
Y V f
(� ,�tL\ 5tL'1 LC1L4 y o
A-) ouoZ k4lowt1 0 @ Q
c
0 c
4 V
d y,
U-1 `A
{ �Q Pt °o�9
V
OA
�
O
V,
In ` o .
Pooh 10-t1 Q p
.� w
sots
a
a
�y
00 0,
0
7
Us
t L
t
in /
t
� 1
Ip
M
1
d
10
Daniel B. Reimer, MPH, Director
°�
ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH DIVISION c°°rir Betty Borland Ron Holdway, RS
P.O. Box 8181 -306-C Revere Road a° , ' Jim Brown, RS Jan Jackson, RS
Hillsborough, NC 27278 u sz Perry Bums, RS Tom Konsler, RS
FAX#919-644-3006 �: Greg Grimes, RS Barbara Patterson
David Hecht, RS Alan Clapp, RS, LSS
Ron Hedrick, RS Wendy Thigpen, RSI
Hillsborough Chapel Hill Mebane Durham
919-732-8181 x2360 919-968-4501 x2360 910-227-2031 x2360 919-688-7333 x2360
i
1
MEMORANDUM
To: Margaret Brown
From: Tom Konsler %/C
I
Date: September 2, 1997
Re: On-site Septic Systems in the Brookfield Drive Area
Cc: Paul Thames
Ron Holdway
I hope to provide a little background on the Brookfield Drive are with regard to the proposed extension of
sewer service to the area. I would estimate that most of the houses in that area were built in the 1960's when
the criteria for installing a septic system were minimal. At that time, the"perc"test was used to determine
suitability of a lot. Depending on the time of year and soil wetness conditions,the perc test was variable and
could result in septic approval in soil that would not meet the criteria other times of the year. As a result,
many sites were approved for installation of septic systems in very poorly drained soils that do not properly
function during the wetter winter months.
Some of the sites in this area were so bad that even the perc test would not allow system installation. At least
four of the homes use sand filter systems which discharge partially treated sewage effluent to ditches and
' drainageways. Some of the older sand filter systems do not have disinfection or chlorination components on
them. Others that have had chlorinators added,are not maintained properly and the effluent does not receive
disinfection before it is discharged to the ditch. These types of systems are currently under the jurisdiction of
the Division of Water Quality(DWQ) at the State/Regional level. The DWQ has recently issued one Notice
of Violation for illegal discharge from an unpermitted sandfilter, and has put two others under notice to
obtain a permit for the systems to be upgraded and/or permitted. If you would like to see the paperwork on
these, I can provide copies of that documentation.
Very few, if any of the lots in the development would be approvable for on-site systems by today's
standards. As these existing systems fail,they do not have an on-site repair option that could be expected to
function properly. The only repair options would be off site. Either connection to a sewer collection system
or to request permits from DWQ for the installation of more discharging systems to replace the failing septic
Page 2.
11
systems. One concern that Environmental Heven the recent sand filter permits is that they do not require the
use of"state-of-practice" systems. Current day enhancements such as recirculating sand filters, free access
filters, and pressure distribution are not required. The result is that a sand filter system permitted today, if
DWQ would even approve one, would not likely achieve an acceptable level of treatment before the effluent
is discharged.
At the request of Amy Black with OWASA, we surveyed some of the neighboring lots which adjoin the
proposed service area. This information was provided to them to make them aware of the conditions of the
soil and existing septic systems in the area immediately adjacent to the Brookfield Drive properties. I have
attached the results of that survey for you to review.
I understand from Paul Thames that we may be meeting about this issue sometime this week. Please let me
? know if I can answer any questions you have or provide more information about this. Thank you for your
interest.
Ouug,e 66aey 'Weda Vqzairmcar 12
Daniel B. Reimer, MPH, Director `
ntr of
ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH DIVISION �'' °•. Betty Borland Ron Holdway, RS
P.O. Box 8181 -306-C Revere Road a° �° Jim Brown, RS Jan Jackson, RS
Hillsborough, NC 27278 u Perry Bums, RS Tom Konsler, RS
FAX#919-644-3006 Greg Grimes,RS Barbara Patterson
David Hecht, RS Alan Clapp, RS, LSS
Ron Hedrick, RS Wendy Thigpen, RSI
Hillsborough Chapel Hill Mebane Durham
1 919-732-8181 x2360 919-9684501 x2360 910-227-2031 x2360 919-688-7333 x2360
s
I
August 7, 1997
Amy Black
Orange Water& Sewer Authority
400 Jones Ferry Rd.
Carrboro, NC 27510
Fax: 968-4464
Dear Ms. Black:
At your request, we conducted a wastewater system survey of the properties adjoining the Brookfield Drive
neighborhood which will be served by a sewer extension. The following is a summary of the observations
made during these inspections.
T. Rider 1207 Timothy Lane-Septic system appeared to be malfunctioning,no suitable soils for repair
A. Treimel 1215 Timothy Lane-High weeds and brush over the system,questionable operation
1219 A& B -Duplex,High weeds and brush over the system, questionable operation
R.Keller 427 Hwy 54-appears to be a non-permitted sandfilter with a discharge,Unsuitable soil and
topography for an on-site system or repair.
1226 Hatch Rd. -No evidence of system-�mal ction,repair area limited or unavailable
13,ec.K V�3 P '64
Ward 1208 Hatch Rd. -Location of system questionable with respect to pond drainage, no apparent
system malfunction,repair area questionable.
1116 Hatch rd. -Three structures on property,one appears vacant,no apparent system
malfunction.
D. Stickel 1201 Hatch Rd. - Septic system has been repaired in last 18 months using an unsuitable site.
Owner is interested in sewer for future home.
13
J Roberts [behind Stickel] System appears to be malfunctioning. 11�-1 t-14EcS� 1�
C Read 1207 Hatch Rd. - Has had septic system malfunction due to poor soils and topography.
I hope that these results are beneficial to your study of the area. Please be aware that no in-depth
investigations were conducted in this survey. These are observations that were made based on visual
inspection of the sites and systems. Also be aware that the functionality of septic systems can be adversely
affected with wet seasonal weather. But given the recent prolonged dry spell that we have experienced, these
systems are probably at their operational best right now.
Please let me know if we can be of further assistance.
Sincerely,
Tom Konsler, R.S.
Environmental Health Supervisor
cc: Jim Brown
Oftange County 54edtk Depotment
Daniel B.Reimer,MPH, Director 14
ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH DIVISION teen« at G PERSONAL HEALTH DIVISION
ANIMAL CONTROL DIVISION �i� DENTAL HEALTH DIVISION
?I P.O.Box 8181,3060 Revere Rd. d° t I, P.O.Box 8181,300 W.Tryon St.
Hillsborough,N.C.27278 Hillsborough,N.C.27278
b7 52
s
fey
HILLSBOROUGH CHAPEL HILL e�te��ee MEBANE DURHAM
(919)732-8181 (919)967-9251 (919)227-2032 (919)668-7333
MEMORANDUM
TO: Tony Laws
FROM: Ron Holdway
DATE: June 13, 1990
RE: Brookfield Drive Survey
Recently, Tom, Greg, and I surveyed the Brookfield Drive area
to determine the extent of septic systems malfunctions. This
survey was conducted =- at the request of Everette Billingsley,
Executive Director of OWASA.
Twenty two systems (twenty one homes and one gas station/food
stand) were surveyed in this exercise. Since many of the home
owners in the area were not at home during the initial survey
and in subsequent visits, in depth questioning of the residents
was not possible. In these situations, visual inspections of
the field area were the only assessment we were able to do.
Of the systems surveyed, seven ( 32%) had definite malfunctions
of either surfacing effluent, straight pipes from washing
machines or sinks, or both. Four (18%) of the systems were
listed as questionable because there was evidence of possible
failure or discharge pipes of unknown origin. Eleven (500) of
the systems had no apparent malfunction or evidence of any past
malfunction.
Mr. Billingsley asked for our opinions concerning onsite and
community repair options for the area. I believe onsite
options will be limited due to the size of the individual lots
and also because of the soils and drainage problems in the
neighborhood. The possibility of a community system in the
area is extremely remote, also because of the soils and
drainage conditions along Hatch Road. It must also be noted
that the system serving the gas station/food stand was one of
the malfunctioning systems. If the system cannot be suitably
repaired, the permit to operate the food stand will be in
jeopardy of being revoked.
Please advise me on how we should proceed in this matter.
SOUTHERN ORANGE OFFICE Carr MITI Mall, Sulto W. 100 N.Greensboro SL, Carrboro,N.C.27510, (919)942-4168
bhange County '34eaQth Tl epakment
Daniel B.Reimer,MPH, Director 15
ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH DIVISION tousrr of 0 PERSONAL HEALTH DIVISION
ANIMAL CONTROL DIVISION �i
� � DENTAL HEALTH DIVISION
P.O.Box 8181,306C Revere Rd. d° + ! P.O.Box 8181,300 W.Tryon St.
Hillsborough,N.C.27278 Hillsborough,N.C.27278
u s2
HILLSBOROUGH CHAPEL HILL `�� MEBANE DURHAM
(919)732-8181 (919)967-9251 Sri C��x` (919)227-2032
(919)668-7333
i
June 20, 1990
Mr. Everett Billingsley
Orange Water and Sewer Authority
400 Jones Ferry-Road
P.O. Box 366
Carrboro, North Carolina -":2.7510
Dear Sir:
Enclosed is a copy of a memo to me from Ron Holdway concerning a
sewage disposal system survey that our staff conducted in the Meadow
Brook Estates area. The memo indicates that there is a high rate of
failure with very little chance of on-site repair.
We will be glad to meet with you and/or Ed Holland to discuss this
situation at your convenience. Meanwhile, if you have any questions
concerning the exact location of the failures or need additional infor-
mation, please let me know.
Sincerely,
arlton A. Laws , R.S.
Environmental Health Supervisor
CAL/ 1 j
Enclosure
cc: Ed Holland
Ron Holdway-. .
Dan Reimer
SOUTHERN ORANGE OFFICE Carr Mill Mad, Suite 225. 100 N.Greensboro St„ Carrboro.N.C.27510, (919)942-4168
Orange Water and Sewer Authority 16
OWASA 400 Jones Ferry Road
P.O. Box 366
Carrboro, NC 27510
(919) 968-4421
August 8, 1997
William L. Crowther, Chairman
County of Orange
200 South Cameron
Post Office Box 8181
Hillsborough,NC 27278
Dear Chairman Crowther:
The OWASA Board will discuss proposed revisions to the University Lake water and sewer
extension policy at its August 14 meeting, although no action is contemplated until September
25. A copy of our agenda item is attached so that you may bring it to your Board's attention.
The need to change OWASA's existing policy has been highlighted recently by a petition from
homeowners in the Brookfield subdivision for an extension of OWASA sewer service to remedy
seriously failing septic systems in the University Lake watershed. Our recently completed
Unsewered Area Study assigned the highest priority ranking in OWASA's entire service area to
this neighborhood, so there is little question of the need for service at failing sites.
OWASA's existing policy for University Lake provides little or no guidance regarding additional
properties that may or may not be included in an assessment project, and the attached draft would
provide such guidance while imposing strict limits on the extent of an extension project. The
proposed revisions would clarify the following:
• That, as a matter of policy, the extension of OWASA service is not intended to facilitate
the development of undevelopable land in the University Lake watershed.
• That extension projects in the watershed may be initiated by the OWASA Board of
Directors as well as by property owners,but that such projects be strictly delineated as
described in the attachments.
For example, service would not be available to any undeveloped lots created after April 23, 1987
(the date of OWASA's original moratorium on extensions to the watershed). Undeveloped lots
created before that date could be included in an OWASA project and allowed to connect only if
they could be permitted for an on-site system by the Health Department. In other words,no
property that was otherwise undevelopable due to site and soil limitations would be made
developable by the extension project.
An Equal Opportunity Employer
University Lake Extension Policy 17
August 8, 1997
Page 2
Any comments should be submitted to OWASA before September 25 or may be presented
verbally at our September 25 Board meeting. Please feel free to contact our staff in the
meantime if you have any questions about these materials.
Sincerely,
Barry cobs
Chai Board c rs
attachments
cc: Board of Directors
ITEM
AGENDA ITEM 18
• PROPOSED REVISIONS TO UNIVERSITY LAKE WATER AND SEWER
EXTENSION POLICY
PURPOSE
• To consider changes to the University Lake water and sewer extension policy to better
accommodate projects that will remedy public health and/or water quality risks caused by
failing on-site systems.
BACKGROUND
• During the July 17, 1997 discussion of the Brookfield Drive petition, it was pointed out
that the existing policy does not adequately address extensions made under assessment
projects, and that provisions were needed for properties within an assessment area that are
not experiencing septic problems, but could reasonably be expected to fail in the future.
• Additional wording to the policy is proposed that would address extensions allowed
under an assessment project. Staff believes that such modifications will enhance
OWASA's responsiveness to future service petitions without compromising its
commitment to watershed protection.
• The attached revisions, which are indicated by underscore and strike thfeugh text, were
developed by OWASA staff and counsel and incorporate comments from the July 31
Natural Resources and Technical Systems Committee meeting.
ACTION NEEDED
• Discussion of attached resolution and revised policy. No further action is in order until
Carrboro, Chapel Hill,and Orange County elected officials have had an opportunity to
comment.
STAFF RECOMMENDA'T'ION
• Staff recommends that the Board receive comments from the Towns and County and
schedule the revised policy for action at the September 25 OWASA Board meeting.
August 14, 1997
S. I
Orange Water and Sewer Authority 19 "
OWASA 400 Jones Ferry Road
P.O. Box 366
Carrboro, NC 27510
(919) 968-4421
MEMORANDUM
TO: Ed Kerwin
FROM: Ed Holland
DATE: August 8, 1997
SUBJECT: Proposed Revisions to University Lake Water and Sewer Extension Policy
Attached are proposed revisions to the Board's Policy Regarding Extension of Water and Sewer Lines or
Connections Thereto in the University Lake Watershed.
During the July 17, 1997 discussion of a petition from 15 property owners for sewer service in the
Brookfield Drive subdivision, it was pointed out that the existing policy does not adequately address
extensions made under assessment projects,and that provisions are needed for properties within an
assessment area that are not experiencing septic problems,but could reasonably be expected to fail in the
future. The proposed revisions,which are shown as underscore or st-ile dffeugh text,would clarify the
following:
• That,as a matter of policy,the extension of OWASA service is not intended to facilitate the
development of undevelopable land in the University Lake watershed.
• That extension projects in the watershed may be initiated by the OWASA Board of Directors as
well as by property owners,but that such projects be strictly delineated to include only:
1. Lots with failing systems;
2. Adjacent or nearby lots with systems that are likely to fail in the near future;
3. Adjacent undeveloped lots that are smaller than 4 acres in size,which existed before
April 23, 1987,and could be permitted for on-site systems.
These revisions have been carefully worded to ensure that extension projects do not facilitate any
development in the watershed that would not otherwise occur. These changes would not provide service
to any undeveloped lots created since April 23, 1987(the date of OWASA's original moratorium on
extensions to the watershed);would not provide for the development of lots that are otherwise
undevelopable due to site and soil limitations;and would not allow more than one connection per lot to
the OWASA system,regardless of lot size.
In order for the Brookfield project to proceed without delay,amendments to the current policy should be
adopted no later than the September 25, 1997 Board meeting. This should allow sufficient time to notify
and receive comments from Carrboro,Chapel Hill,and Orange County.
PROVIDE TO-BWD-OF
APP ' 9� _
Edward A. Holland, AICP – —
Director of Planning and Development
attachment
An Equal Opportunity Employer
F
20
RESOLUTION AMENDING POLICY FOR THE EXTENSION OF WATER AND
SEWER LINES OR CONNECTIONS THERETO IN THE UNIVERSITY LAKE
WATERSHED
WHEREAS,Orange Water and Sewer Authority has adopted and abides by a policy
prohibiting extensions of new water or sewer service lines, or new connections to water or sewer
lines already existing, in the University Lake watershed; and
WHEREAS,that policy was amended on April 26, 1990 and November 10, 1994 to
allow, as exceptions listed therein, certain extensions or connections necessary to alleviate or
prevent severe public health or environmental consequences; to recognize certain properties
previously benefited by OWASA utility lines; to be able to respond to circumstances which the
Board of Directors finds result in an imminently impending health hazard(whether or not the
Orange County Health Department has formally declared the existence of such a hazard); and
to allow certain properties to connect subject to direct findings of documentary fact without first
conducting a public hearing;and
WHEREAS,the Board has determined that furthewq ifi ns are needed to address
circumstances when extensions are allowed under pro', vitiated WASA, and that such
modifications to the current policy will enhance the A" respo ness to future service
petitions without compromising its commitm waters ed protection.
NOW THEREFORE BE SO
1. That the Board o O ge Water and Sewer Authority hereby amends
its Policy for the Extens' t Ines or Connections Thereto in the University
Lake Watershed last ted o r 10, 1994 per the document attached hereto.
2. That as m e Policy shall in no way be construed as a diminution of the
Authority's commitment to protection of its water supply sources,and shall continue in fill
force and effect until later amended or rescinded by this Board.
3. That copies of this Resolution-and attachment be transmitted to the governing
bodies of Carrboro, Chapel Hill,and Orange County.
Adopted the 25th day of September 1997.
Barry Jacobs, Chairman
ATTEST:
Dan C. VanderMeer
Secretary-Treasurer
5.3 -.
21
ORANGE WATER AND SEWER AUTHORITY
POLICY FOR THE EXTENSION OF WATER AND SEWER LINES OR
CONNECTIONS THERETO IN THE UNIVERSITY LAKE WATERSHED
Purpose
This policy sets forth principles and guidelines for the extension of the Authority's water and
sewer facilities and services or connections thereto in the University Lake watershed.
Background
In 1987 Orange Water and Sewer Authority commissioned the Camp resser& McKee
University Lake Watershed Study to provide the Board of Direct d local governing bodies
with a reliable basis for implementing land management con elp assure short and long
term protection of the University Lake water supply. O 23, , the Authority initiated a
moratorium on water and sewer extensions into the a The orium was maintained
while the study was conducted and its recommendatio eing co idered by the local
governing bodies.
The study, which was completed ' 198 a range of development scenarios and
utility service options, and dete ed low ity residential development served by
individual wells and septic e e least overall risk to University Lake water
quality. Many of the reco endations were incorporated into local land
management plans,d pme es, and regulations amended by the Orange County
Board of Commissione d ro Board of Aldermen in April and May, 1990. Among the
standards for new develo ere 5-and 2-acre minimum lot requirements, impervious
surface limits, and revised eam buffer setbacks.
Additionally, Carrboro and Orange County prohibited community alternative wastewater
treatment and disposal systems,as.well as public water and sewer service,except to correct
officially declared health hazards. The County adopted additional language allowing
reconsideration of its utility restrictions after special studies that the County expected to be
completed by April 30, 1991. Although Chapel Hill has no planning and zoning jurisdiction in
University Lake watershed,the Town Council has maintained a consistent policy against the
extension of public water and sewer service into the watershed.
Orange Water and Sewer Authority's Mission and Goals Statement(December, 1988) includes a
commitment"to be guided by the land management plans approved by the govemment units in
the area the Authority serves.
f
4.
5. �
22
Policy Regarding Extension of Water and Sewer
Lines or Connections Thereto in the
University Lake Watershed
Page 2
Policy
Consistent with findings of the Camp Dresser&McKee University Lake Watershed Study, and
in accordance with positions adopted by Carrboro, Chapel Hill, and Orange County, the Orange
Water and Sewer Authority will not permit the extension of water and sewer facilities and
services under its control or connections thereto in the University Lake watershed, except on a
casesite by caseske basis as described below. The utility service limitations imposed by this
policy are intended to apply primarily to new, rather than existing, development in the watershed.
ExcaMions described below are not intended to facilitate the development of properties on which
development has been heretofore precluded by on-site water supply or wastewater disposal
limitations.
Petitions to t w the extension of water or sewer the fiver i
Lake w atershed may be submitted by My 12ro_ gy owner4i;9kiensiaMer na
also it e WASA Board of 12ire e ' ion to ve or disapprove any
petitions v a property owner submitted under conditi 2,D or .5_B below. or to
undertake iv
all be made by the Authority's
Board of Directors after conductin 'c clusions of the Board shall state the
findings upon which the decisio b sions to approve or disapprove petitions
submitted under conditio or uire a public hearing and may be made by
Authority staff.
L Petitions for se ext ons and connections may be granted when the Board
determines that pe for such extensions or connections have established to the
satisfaction of the B
1. That such connection or extension is necessary io alleviate existing circumstances
or conditions the Board finds are causing an existing or impending health hazard;
or
2. That such connection or extension is necessary to alleviate existing conditions that
will significantly jeopardize University Lake quality; or
3. That such connection or extension is necessary to respond to an existing hardship
that is materially adverse or catastrophic to the health,safety and welfare of the
general public.
4. Any lots in the Rangewood subdivision that were benefited by the Authority's
previous water and sewer extension project, or any lots within the designated
5s
23
Policy Regarding Extension of Water and Sewer
Lines or Connections Thereto in the
University Lake Watershed
Page 3
benefitinv-area of an OWASA assessment proiect and which appear on OWASA's
Final Assessment Roll for that project, may be connected to the Authority's water
and/or sewer lines as long as all assessments, fees, and charges have been paid or
are up to date. Such connections may be made without meeting the conditions of
L 1,L2 or L3 above, and such permission may be granted by Authority staff
without conducting a public hearing.
5. A. Structures that existed before April 23, 1987 and that are located on lots
that existed before April 23, 1987 and adjacent to OWASA water or sewer.
lines installed before April 23, 1987, may be connected to the line to
which they were adjacent on April 23, 1987 without meeting the
conditions of Ll,L2 or L3 above and such permission may be granted by
Authority staff without conducting a public}hearing.
B. A legal change in property use sh t imp a approval of such
connections unless the structure ncr ed in by more than 50
percent,or unless the pro osed titutes increased hazard to the
watershed.
�_. Extensions.Qf water or se—AradiftE r ' ak w ma e
undertaken by e W > t n a deterrninadgnIviLe at
criteria the located
v tVKthat-sTch extensions shall limited as fbllgwL.
DeveloXas VI currently failing water wastewater
the Miect a=
2 Developed lots located adjacent to or in close proximity to the foregoing with
water&Mly or wastewater disposal systems which. in the judgment of a qualified
soil or a undwater exvert.are reasonably likely to fail within the near future may
be included within the proiect area.
I Developed or undeveloved lots which existed before April 23. 1987 and are
located adjacent to lines constructed to serve lots included in the project under
criteria III or H.2 may be included in the 12Miect area provided that such lots
also meet the criteria specified in IIJ or R.S.
4 Developed lots larger than 3.9 acres which are included in the proiect area shall be
limited to one connection to the OWASA system eR r lot.
5.
24
Policy Regarding Extension of Water and Sewer
Lines or Connections Thereto in the
University Lake Watershed
Page 4
5. Llndeveloped lots smaller than 4 acres, which existed before April 23. 1987 may
be included within an extension project area and allowed to connect to the
extended OWASA water or sewer line only upon certification by the Orange
ouM Health Department to OWASA at the time of the adoption of the
Preliminary Assessment Roll for the proiect that such lots could be permitted for
on-site water supply(in the case of a water extension proiect) or on-site
wastewater disposal systems(in the case of a sewer extension project) under
regulations in effect at that time.
Authorization
The Executive Director is authorized and empowered to formulate an application, notification,
or other administrative procedures needed to implement this polic j
Reviewed by General Counsel:
Vim
General Counsel
Adopted by the Boaz -
Date Clerk to the Board
5.7
25
f GENERAL ASSEti1BLY OF NORTH CAROLINA
1991 SESSION
RATIFIED BILL
CHAPTER 631
`E SENATE BILL 360
AN ACT TO CHANGE THE DEFINITION OF "IMMINENT HAZARD" AS IT
APPLIES TO CHAPTER 130A OF THE GENERAL STATUTES.
The General Assembly of North Carolina enacts:
• Section 1. G.S. 130A-2 reads as rewritten:
"§ 130A-2. Definitions.
i The following definitions shall apply throu€hoot this Chapter unless otherwise
specified:
(1) 'Commission* means the Commission for Health Services.
2) 'Department' means the Department of Environment. Health, and
Natural Resources.
(3) 'Imminent hazard' means a situation which is likely to cause an
immediate threat to human life an immediate threat of serious
physical iniurv, an immediate threat of serious adverse health
effects, or a serious risk of irreparable damage to the environment
if no immediate action is taken.
(4) 'Local board of health' means a district board of health or a
county board of health.
(3) 'Local health department' means a district health department or a
county health department.
(6) 'Local health director' means the administrative head of a local
health department appointed pursuant to this Chapter.
(7) 'Person' means an individual, corporation, company, association,
partnership, unit of local government or other legal entity.
(8) 'Secretary' means the Secretary of the Department of
Environment, Health, and Natural Resources.
(9) 'Unit of local government' means a county, city, consolidated
city-county, sanitary district or other local political subdivision,
authority or agency of local government.
(10) `Vital records' means birth, death, fetal death, marriage, annulment
and divorce records registered under the provisions of Article 4 of
this Chapter."
26
(FROM ORANGE COUNTY WATER AND SEWER POLICY) �`.
development project is authorized by any water -- ,
management plan and discharge permit in effect at
the time of approval.
Following review and approval of preliminary plans
as described above, the board of directors or
governing board of the municipality, association or
authority must have approved, through formal
resolution or other agreement, the provision of
water and/or sewer service to the development
project.
3 . Outside of Transition Areas, extensions of water or
sewer systems will only occur to provide service to
an essential public facility, such as a school, or
to remedy a public health emergency not otherwise
correctable, such as a failing septic tank or
failing package treatment plant.
Generally, system extensions into areas outside of
Transition Areas shall be sized according to the
policies of the utility providing the water or
sewer service. However, system extensions into and
within the Rural Buffer and Water Quality Critical
Areas shall be sized to address only the concern
for which the systems are extended.
Valid written water and/or sewer service agreements
for locations in the Rural Buffer and Water Quality
Critical Areas which were valid prior to April 3 ,
1989, and in which a municipality (including Orange
County) or a water/sewer authority is a party and
is the water/sewer provider may be carried out to
the level of service for which the agreements were
originally written. However, the water and/or
sewer service established by such an agreement
shall be extended only for uses and densities
permitted'by the Orange County Zoning Ordinance.
4. Development projects outside the Rural Buffer
portion of the Joint Planning Area and outside a
Water Quality Critical Area may access water or
sewer service when existing water or sewer service
is contiguous to the site. However, any such
development project will only be approved at
densities permitted by the Orange County Zoning
Atlas and consistent with the Land Use Element of
the Comprehensive Plan.
"Development project" refers to any place of
residence, business, industry, or assembly, and any
major or minor subdivision, special use or planned
development which requires the approval of Orange
County through administration and enforcement of
the N.C. State Building Code or its Zoning and
Subdivision Regulations.
-7-
27
6.23.8 WATER SUPPLY/SEWAGE DISPOSAL FACILITIES (FROM ORANGE COUNTY
*Amended ZONING ORDINANCE)
1-17-95
F ISTRICT WATER SUPPLY/SEWAGE DISPOSAL
A Water supply and sewage treatment systems shall be limited
to individual wells and on-site septic tanks systems or
-PW individual on-site alternative disposal systems.
CANE-CA
U-ENO-CA
All Watershed Overlay No new treatment system will be permitted where effluent
Districts disposal occurs on a separate lot from the source of
i wastewater generation. '
3
Repair systems are permitted on a lot other than the Iot which
is the source of wastewater generation provided that the
Orange County Health Department certifies that:
1. The residence or use has a failing system, AND
there is not a suitable location for a repair system on
the same lot as the residence or use, or
2. In the case of an unimproved lot created by recorded
deed, valid probated will or recorded plat prior to
6115191 for UNIV-CA and UNIV-PW, and 1/1/94 for
all other watershed overlay districts, there is not a
suitable location for a repair system on the same lot as
the residence or use.
UNIV-CA New septic tanks and their nitrification fields shall be located
outside of any stream buffers, or 300 feet from a reservoir or
perennial or intermittent stream as shown on the USGS
Quadrangle maps, whichever is further.
CANE-CA New septic tanks, pump tanks and their appurtenances shall
U-ENO-CA be located outside of any stream buffers and at least 100 feet
from a perennial or intermittent stream as shown on the
USGS Quadrangle maps, and at least 150 feet from a
reservoir.
New nitrification fields shall be located outside of any stream
buffers and at least 100 feet from a perennial or intermittent
stream as shown on the USGS Quandrangle maps, and at least
1.300 feet from a reservoir.
L
6-43
FROM ORANGE COUNTY SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS
28
*IV-C. Interim Development Standards
w -' *Amended For the purpose of restricting further development in an area where
-- 10/2/89 land use plans are being prepared for the preservation of natural
resources, such as water supplies, and/or development standards are
being considered with which to implement such plans, interim
development standards may be established which permit development to
proceed which is in accord with the contemplated plans and/or
standards. Except as provided herein, the establishment of interim
development standards shall be governed by the procedures contained in
Section VII-D of this Ordinance.
*IV-C-1. Form and Content - Interim Development Standards
*Amended Interim development standards enacted pursuant to this section shall be
10/2/89 temporary measures established in accordance with the following
criteria:
a. The standards shall be in effect only for the period of time
necessary to achieve the purposes of the contemplated plan
anther its implementing mechanisms;
b. The standards shall limit development to the type that would be
permitted under the existing standards contained in this
Ordinance and/or to that which is in accord with the
contemplated plan or its implementing mechanisms;
C. The standards may be in effect only in the area affected by the
contemplated plan and/or in which its implementing mechanisms
will apply; and
d. The standards may limit the nature and type of development
applications and projects which are approved throughout the
duration of the standards.
lv-C-2. bnterbn Development Standards Approved
*Amended The following interim development standards have been enacted and
10/2/89 shall remain in full force and effect until the termination date specified
2/5/90 herein. Thereafter, the standards are void and of no effect.
4/2/90
9/3/91 a. University Lake Watershed
1. Area Affected - These standards shall apply to the
University Lake watershed.
2. Nature and Duration of Standards - The following
f interim development standards shall apply:
66
J
29
a) Community alternative treatment and disposal
systems as well as public water and sewer service F
will not be permitted in the University Lake _
watershed except
(1) to address a public health emergency as
determined by the Orange County Health
Department or
(2) when a valid written service agreement for
public water and/or sewer existed prior to
April 3, 1989, and is one in which a
municipality (including Orange County) or
a water/sewer authority is a party and is
the water/sewer provider.
b) By April 30, 1991, studies will be conducted to
determine the advisability of making public water
and sewer services available within the watershed.
-M In addition, a pilot program for monitoring and
inspecting alternative treatment and disposal
systems as operated by the Orange County Health
Department will be evaluated to determine the
advisability of permitting such systems in the
watershed.
c) Following receipt and review of the above
mentioned studies, a decision will be made
regarding the use of alternative treatment and
disposal systems and the availability of public
water and sewer services in the watershed.
66-a