Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda - 08-17-1993 - VIII-H 1 ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Meeting Date: August 17, 1993 Action Agenda Item # V,-1-1 SUBJECT: Falls Lake Watershed Management Program DEPARTMENT: PLANNING PUBLIC HEARING Yes x No ATTACHMENT(S): INFORMATION CONTACT: Letter from Triangle J Council Mary Willis Extension 2583 of Governments TELEPHONE NUMBERS: Hillsborough-732-8181 Durham -688-7331 Mebane -227-2031 Chapel Hill -967-9251 PURPOSE: To indicate whether or not Orange County is supportive of the concept of the development of a Falls Lake Management Program and formation of a Falls Lake Management Association. BACKGROUND: At a meeting of the Falls Lake Workgroup on June 22, 1993, the possibility of taking the following steps in addressing water quality in Falls Lake was discussed: - conducting a focused study of water quality concerns in the Falls Lake Watershed; - developing a management program for the watershed; and - forming a watershed management association that could guide any additional analysis or management program. Before the workgroup meets again, it would like to know if the Orange County Board of Commissioners supports these steps. The Triangle J Council of Governments has requested comment from Orange County (see attached correspondence). There is no obligation or commitment implied by endorsement of these steps. RECOMMENDATION: If the Board of Commissioners supports the above-mentioned steps, the Administration recommends that the Board of Commissioners authorize the Chair to sign the attached Letter of Support for the proposed steps to address water quality in Falls Lake. • r;. 3 TRIANGLE J COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS W o r l d 100 Park Drive,P.O. Box 12276 C l a s s Research Triangle Park, NC 27709 R e g i o n July 1, 1993 919.549.0551 i rsx 919.549 9390 Mr, Moses Carey, Chairman Orange County Board of County Commissioners 344 Warren Way Chapel Hill, North Carolina 27516 Dear Mr. Carey: At a meeting of the Falls Lake Working Group on June 22, three possible steps in addressing water quality in Falls Lake were discussed. Before our next meeting, it would be helpful to know if the Orange County Board of County Commissioners supports, in concept, any or all of these steps. These steps are: • a focused study of water quality concerns in the Falls Lake watershed, • a proposal for a management program for the watershed, and • a proposal for a watershed management association that could guide any additional analysis or management program. Please keep in mind that none of these steps necessarily precludes any of the other steps. For example, the proposal for a management program assumes some group to guide the program, which might be the watershed management association. Or, following the completion of a focused study of the Falls Lake Watershed, a management association could implement the expert recommendations from the study. Focused Study of the Upper Falls Lake Watershed House Bill 878 would provide $150,000 to the Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources to undertake a study that would recommend best management practices for the protection of the Falls Lake Watershed. A copy of the proposed bill is enclosed. Falls Lake Management Program Dr. David Moreau, Director of the Water Resources Research Institute, proposed a management program for the watershed that would: • track development and other activities that pose a risk to water quality, • monitor water quality in the Lake and pollutant loads from selected tributaries, • conduct inspections and assessments of activities that discharge pollutants or pose a threat of spills, and • report findings to participating units of government. A copy of Dr. Moreau's proposal is enclosed. A Falls Lake Watershed Association Mayor Upchurch of Raleigh proposed that a Falls Lake Management Association be formed. The purpose of the association would be to preserve the Falls Lake as a major water resource which provides water supply, recreation, water quality, and flood control benefits thorough collaborative actions of its membership. The association could collect and analyze information, identify problems and develop cost-effective solutions, and secure and pool financial resources and expertise. A copy of the proposal is enclosed. Action Requested -- Would you 'lease •resent these •ro•osals to the Orange County Board of Coun Commissioners by September 1. We are interest-. in w e er the • ange County oar. of Co unty ommissioners is supportive of the general concepts; the details of any studies, management programs, or a watershed association would still need to be worked out. I have enclosed a sample letter of support for your information. Please feel free to use this format or another format with which you are more comfortable. Please send a copy of any action the Orange County Board of County Commissioners takes to John Hodges-Copple at the Triangle J Council of Governments. I am also enclosing a summary of the meeting on June 22. If you have any questions, please call John at 919-549-0551. Thank you for your assistance in this important matter. Sincerely, 9114.-yCk Mary Cates, Vice Chair Triangle J Council of Governments cc: Orange County Manager Orange County Planning Director enclosures: House Bill 878 Proposal for a Falls Lake Watershed Management Program Proposal for a Falls Lake Watershed Association Sample Letter of Support Summary of June 22, 1993 meeting of the Falls Lake Working Group 5 Sample Letter of Support for Steps to Understand and Protect the Falls Lake Watershed 1. The Orange County Board of County Commissioners supports, in concept, a focused study that would recommend best management practices for the protection of the Falls Lake Watershed. 2. The Orange County Board of County Commissioners supports the idea of a management program for the Falls Lake watershed that would: •track development and other activities that pose a risk to water quality, • monitor water quality in the Lake and pollutant loads from selected tributaries, • conduct inspections and assessments of activities that discharge pollutants or pose a threat of spills, and • report findings to participating units of government. 3. The Orange County Board of County Commissioners supports the idea of a Falls Lake Watershed Association that could preserve the Falls Lake as a major water resource which provides water supply, recreation, water quality, and flood control benefits thorough collaborative actions of its membership. The association could collect and analyze information, identify problems and develop cost-effective solutions, and secure and pool financial resources and expertise. 6 FALLS LAKE WORKING GROUP June 22, 1993 NC Supercomputing Center AGENDA 1 . Welcome and Introductions Mary Cates, Raleigh City Councillor and Vice Chairman of TJCOG, opened the meeting and welcomed the guests. Harry Rodenhizer asked that all governmental agencies with land in the Falls Lake Watershed be invited to these meetings. He asked to look at more than the Falls Lake watershed. Ellen Reckhow said Durham officials are concerned about Jordan Lake also. Avery Upchurch noted that it is important to look both at the basin above Falls Lake and the flow of the Neuse River below Raleigh. John Hodges-Copple noted that if this approach to Falls Lake proved worthwhile, a similar effort could be undertaken for Jordan Lake. 2 . Selection of Working Group Chairperson Mary Cates suggested that this item be done later in the meeting because elected officials were coming in late from other meetings. 3 . Display Map of Falls Lake Watershed Falls Lake Watershed extends into six counties. Anne Franklin asked about the watershed regulations passed in other counties. Granville County has defined the critical area as a little larger than 1/2 mile. Ed Holland asked the group to consider the protection the sub-basins above Falls Lake create in terms of trapping pollution and thus keeping it out of the Lake. Ellen Reckhow asked for additional information about Person and Granville County. Mr. Stonebraker said that sewage from an industrial park is pumped north and goes into a treatment plant in the Kerr Lake watershed. He said that stormwater run off is taken care of. Dr. Moreau noted that the scientific literature does not support fine distinctions between how, say, 1/2 acre versus 1 acre lots affect water quality. 4 . Discussion of Options for Watershed Management Dr. David Moreau recommends a watershed management program that goes beyond the State's minimum requirements. He suggests (1) tracking the development in the watershed; (2) begin monitoring the non point source pollution coming into the lake; (3) monitor the lake itself; and (4) add an inspection program for small wastewater dischargers. Dr. Moreau recommends programs to increase the data collection that would increase information for local government. Jon Howes said the Department of Environment, Health & Natural Resources has the statutory responsibility to assure clean drinking water across the state. He stated that the Department is prepared to work with local governments. Senator Lubeke has introduced legislation that if passed would have $150,000 for a watershed study of Falls Lake. Vernon Malone asked if this were enough and questioned where any additional funds would come from to fund such a study. Secretary Howes said that $150,000 would not be enough for a comprehensive watershed study, but could be used for a focused set of studines. Secretary Howes added that the Department would want to see evidence of local commitment, but can not require it. He noted that a monitoring program would still be important even if studies are conducted. Becky Heron said she hoped the $150,000 would be used to study the upper Falls basin to determine what kind of development can and should take place there. Ms. Heron listed numerous studies and EIS's related to the Falls Lake watershed and suggested that data from these studies should be analyzed and addressed by this group. She suggested that a good first step would be to scope out the particulars of a study, based on what is already known. Terry Rolan said the Triangle Area Monitoring program monitors the water in Falls Lake. Ed Holland 7 noted that this project (1) looks for long term trends in water quality; (2) looks for differences between watersheds; and (3) looks for trace amounts of toxic materials in the water, Dr. Moreau said this monitoring program does not monitor non-point pollution from particular areas nor does it examine wet-weather flows. Mary Cates asked if new federal stormwater management requirements would relate to this effort. Terry Rolan responded that some wet-weather monitoring would be required. He cautioned that sophisticated monitoring is expensive; the current program costs approximately $500,000 per year in combined federal, state, and local funds and in-kind contributions. Becky Heron noted the success of the watershed studies for Lake Michie and Little River, with the involvement of all the affected jurisdictions, and how its recommendations have become the "bible" for development in the watersheds. Mary Watson Nooe felt-that the question of whether a study was needed had not been answered. Anne Franklin said she was slow to warm to the idea of a study; we do not need a broad, general study that tells us what we already know, but we must first determine what questions jurisdictions want answered. Avery Upchurch presented a proposal to form an association with the six counties and the five municipalities in the Falls Lake Watershed to analyze all the data, identify problems and find solutions. Most of the local officials said their governments would approve this proposal. Vernon Malone cautioned against forming a body that would duplicate action being done by any other group in the region. Bill Bell said he needed to be pragmatic since counties must adopt watershed ordinances by the end of the year and asked if this association would help or hinder Durham County in formulating its watershed regulations. Harry Rodenhizer noted that the association would probably move more slowly and would not help or hinder local governments getting watershed ordinances passed. Avery Upchurch noted that Raleigh may, for example, need to buy easements along streams in Person County to protect the water in Falls Lake. Jon Howes said the association was a desirable group for the State to work with and Triangle J should staff the association. Vernon Malone said supporting both organizations will be difficult. Becky Heron said Triangle J should organize and staff this association. Ellen Reckhow said that any association would be menaingful only to the degree it sets goals and objectives. Mary Watson Nooe said we seem to want an answer, but she does not think there is a single answer. 5 o Decision of Which Options to Pursue Vernon Malone said that Wake County was more than wiling to participate but wanted to know what would be involved other than taking? Avery Upchurch said that the governing boards that are directly involved need to come together. Jon Howes said that the DEHNR needs some group it can turn to for guidance on the study if it is funded. He felt the less formal any group was, the better at this stage. Vernon Malone suggested that managers and planners could be on the association and report to the elected officials when policy matters are discussed. Anne Franklin said that policymakers need to be kept informed. Mary Watson Nooe moved that Triangle J send Mayor Upchurch's proposal to all of the governments in the Falls Lake Watershed and ask them to review it and notify Triangle J by September 1 of their position on the proposal. Harry Rodenhizer seconded the motion and it passed unanimously. Secretary Howes said he would be involved in the association. Hearing no further business, Mary Cates adjourned the meeting. i 8 GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF NORTH CAROLINA SESSION 1993 H I HOUSE BILL 878 - Short Title: Falls Lake Watershed Study/Funds. (Public) Sponsors: Representati\es Luebke; Ellis, Fussell. Gottoyi, Hackney, Hensle■ , Kuczmarski, Michaux, B. Miller, G. Miller, Miner, and Stamen. Referred to: Appropriations, April 12, 1993 1 A BILL TO BE ENTITLED 2 AN ACT AUTHORIZING THE DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT. HEALTH, 3 AND NATURAL RESOURCES TO CONDUCT A STUDY OF THE FALLS 4 LAKE WATERSHED AND APPROPRIATING FUNDS TO IMPLEMENT THIS 5 ACT. 6 The General Assembly of North Carolina enacts: 7 Section 1. The Department of Environment, Health, and Natural 8 Resources shall conduct a study of the Falls Lake watershed with regards to eater 9 ,quality and water supple purposes. 10 Sec. 2. There is appropriated from the General Fund to the Department 11 of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources the sum of one hundred lift■ 12 thousand dollars (S150,000) for the 1993-94 fiscal sear to implement the pro\ isions of 13 this act. 14 Sec. 3. This act becomes effective July 1, 1993. t I North Gro,,a Star UoPerr� • 9 hoz751,Jordan HZ Raleigh,North Cavils=27695-?912 919/515-Z15 WiterRecource5RcseanthIns/u of beUith y jAbrthGa To: Brad Barker, Executive Director, TJCOG From: David H. Moreau, Director \` " Date: May 25, 1993 The purpose of this memorandum is to outline an option for continuing management of the Falls Lake watershed. Regardless of the outcome of the present local government debates over rules that are to be adopted in Falls Lake watershed, considerable uncertainty about the future quality of water in the lake will remain. Although a comprehensive watershed study might shed some light on the decision now before local governments, several factors will limit the credibility of such a study. First, there is a lack of site-specific nonpoint source load data in the Falls Lake area. Results from numerous studies in other locations are available to estimate "before" and "after" nonpoint loads that can be expected when watersheds are converted from one general class of use to another where those classes are broadly defined as "low-density residential", "high-density" residential, "central business district", "agricultural", or "industrial". However, the absence of primary data from this area will limit the credibility of such estimates. Second, the literature does not provide sufficient detail to distinguish loads from watersheds with modest differences in densities such as the difference between one house per acre and two houses per acre. Two watersheds with these densities would fall within the same general category, yet the rules under discussion are making distinctions at that level of detail. Third, even for watersheds with similar land uses and development densities there are watershed-to-watershed variations that may cause significant differences in nonpoint source loads. Finally, conditions will change over time, and estimates made today . may become obsolete within a relatively short period of time as conditions of the watershed change. One option to consider is the formation of a more-or-less permanent watershed oversight group with sufficient authority and funding to conduct continuing assessments of conditions in the lake and the watershed. Although a wide range of authorities could be delegated to such a group, it would need to perform at least four basic functions to be effective. They are: 7b y9` Cantata • scargxerl 9rthesteam pubic sznix 6r ahhats to Path Catri6s2 10 1) tracking development and other activities that pose a risk to the quality of the lake; 2) monitoring of both water quality in the lake and loads from selected tributaries to the lake; 3) conducting periodic inspections and assessments of activities that either discharge to stream in the watershed or pose a threat of spills that could reach the lake (what used to be called sanitary surveys) ; and 4) reporting findings periodically to the participating units of governments. Tracking of development could be done conveniently and at modest expense with a desktop GIS system. Initial data for the system could be compiled from the 1990 census, the post-census TIGER files, other geographic files maintained by local governments, building permits, windshield surveys, sediment control plans, subdivision plans, hazardous materials plans, etc. Such a system has been constructed for University Lake and Cane Creek watersheds that are used by OWASA. These sources of data and other transactional proce ses could be tapped to maintain an up-to-date tracking and reporting system for activities in the watershed that pose a threat to water quality. The existing monitoring project being supported by local governments in the region could be adapted to the purposes of this program. Greater attention would have to be given to the monitoring of selected streams during storm events. Criteria for selecting the streams would include: (1) relative risks posed by the activities in each watershed; and (2) characteristics of the watersheds that would permit generalizations about effects of different types of development. Local inspection pr � already in lace ° � for small wastewater dischargers are P in Wake and Mecklenburg Counties in North Carolina. Those pis operate under memoranda of understanding with the NC Division of Environmental Management. The scope of the program under discussion in this memo should cover not only NPDES permit holders, but it should extend to all activities from which a spill could have a significant impact on the lake. The scope should include manure ponds, dairies, and other animal operations; facilities that store or process significant chemicals and petroleum products; of p °duck% landfills; transportation corridors. The structure for governing this group is important. It would certainly include representatives of participating State participation is also a possibility,is of local if state funds or technical services are to be provided. A stable funding base for the group is also necessary. Funding could be provided through regular state and local government budgeting processes or by some alternative mechanism like a set-aside charge on water and sewer w services in the watershed. 11 Proposal For a Falls Lake Watershed Association Avery C. Upchurch As the discussions in various public settings continue on the issue of Falls Lake Watershed protection, it is important that local governments express their continued support for effective watershed management while acknowledging that we have to work within a regional context. We have to acknowledge the following realities that affect our watershed protection efforts: 1. There are a number of independent local governments with land use planning responsibilities for the watershed of Falls Lake. 2. The state has established a series of minimum standards for local governments to follow. 3. We have to be willing to work within this intergovernmental network if we desire to establish watershed protection levels which exceed the state's minimum criteria. 4. We need to keep a Falls Lake Basin wide perspective as this is the key to the long range protection of Falls Lake. In the debate about improving watershed protection, we should remind ourselves of how far we have progressed in the past 5 years. The proposal for having watershed wide land use standards received its greatest push from the Raleigh City Council when we asked the Wake Delegation to the General Assembly to introduce a watershed protection bill in 1987. We did not succeed that year, but the General Assembly created a study committee which provided the background for the subsequent watershed legislation adopted in 1989. As with legislation of such magnitude, it has been subject to criticism from both sides: Those who oppose new rules, and those who want more regulations. However, we now have statewide water supply watershed legislation and administrative standards. The state rules have to apply to diverse communities ranging from highly rural mountain and coastal areas to the urbanizing centers. As such, it is realistic that there be minimum requirements. We in local government often complain that the state mandates too much for us and leaves us too little flexibility to address our problems. This is often an accurate assessment of state policy. However, the watershed protection effort gives us in local government the opportunity to enter into collaborative efforts which establish standards that are attuned to specific geographic areas and exceed the minimum statewide criteria. During the last 5 years, we have become more knowledgeable about our region's water supply sources as a result of the area-wide water monitoring program. This effort came out of the initial World Class Region Conference held in 1987. This program was created by a voluntary association of public water system operators and is funded by that group. It is a model example of how local governments can come together and develop focused programs to help each other. The City of Raleigh was one of the organizing entities in this project. As a result of this multi year program, we receive annual reports on the water quality conditions and trends in our key watersheds of this region. We are finding that our area's water quality is relatively good, and meet federal and sate standards for water supply systems. 12 During the past 2 years, Raleigh and Wake County worked together to commission an independent study of the Bartons Creek basins on the South side of Falls Lake. These areas are most subject to urban development due to their proximity to the North Raleigh urban area. As a result of this work, the County and City have developed a coordinated approach to the land use in the Bartons Creek basins. The two governments were able to work together in this special effort. Now, we have to address ourselves to the question of future water quality in Falls Lake. In thinking about this task, I have drawn on my many meetings at the state and regional level, but equally as important, I have reflected on my direct conversations with individuals in Person and Granville Counties. The Falls Lake watershed will be subject to pressures in the future from urbanizing activities as well as from the continuation of agricultural activities. As a result of the recently completed Neuse River Basin Study by the state, we are reminded of the wide range of activities which can adversely affect water quality. In the Falls Lake Watershed, there are 494,000 acres. Approximately 2/3 of the area is considered in agricultural or forest use. The Neuse River Basin Study identified problem conditions affecting lake water quality from both agricultural and urban activities. Proposal There are 6 counties and at least 5 municipalities which are directly involved in the land use management for the Falls Lake Watershed. It is proposed that these local governments be asked to create a Falls Lake Watershed Association. The membership in this group would be voluntary and would also be open to private companies which have active wastewater discharge permits from the state. The purpose or goal of this group would be to preserve the Falls Lake as a major water resource which provides water supply, recreation, water quality, and flood control benefits through collaborative actions of its membership in the following types of activities (and others the group may determine): - Collection and analysis of water quality data; - Identifying water quality problems for the watershed and developing cost- effective approaches to their solution; - Securing and pooling of financial resources and expertise to address the work program of the association. If this association is created, it will provide the forum for the local governments to discuss problems affecting the entire Falls Lake and offer the opportunity for developing work programs which are supported by affected local governments. The key points would be: A focus on the watershed as a whole: development of tasks to address water quality problems: collaborative decisions and execution of the tasks by those involved. There is an underlying belief that each local government in the Falls Lake Watershed wants to participate in efforts to protect and improve the quality of this significant regional resource. We have the state's minimum standards on which to build a program which can do this job. ORANGE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS P.O. Box 8181 HILLSBOROUGH, N.C. 27278 Moses Carey,Jr, 732-8181 Alice M. Gordon 968-4501 Stephen H. Halkiotis 688-7331 Verla C. Insko 227-2031 Don Willhoit 644-3004 (Fax) September 20, 1993 Mary Cates, Vice Chair Triangle J Council of Governments 100 Park Drive, PO Box 12276 Research Triangle Park, NC 27709 Dear Ms. Cates: At its meeting on August 17, 1993 , the Orange County Board of Commissioners considered the concepts proposed by the Falls Lake Workgroup concerning the water quality within the Lake and offers the following comment: 1. The Board supports, in concept, a focused study that would recommend best management practices for the protection of Falls Lake Watershed, distributed regional economic development activities to minimize density in critical watershed areas and the concept of equity -- that the beneficial users of the water should assist in putting in the watershed protection measures. 2 . The Board supports the idea of a management program for the Falls Lake Watershed that would: - track development and other activities that pose a risk to water quality; - monitor water quality in the lake and pollution loads from selected tributaries; - conduct investigations and assessment of activities that discharge pollution or pose a threat of thrills; and - report findings to participating units of government. YOU COUNT IN ORANGE COUNTY Mary Cates, Vice Chair September 20, 1993 Page 2 The Board supports the idea of a Falls Lake Watershed Association that could preserve the Falls Lake as a major water resource which provides water supply, recreation, water quality, and flood control benefits through collaborative actions of its membership. The association would collect and analyze information, identify problems and develop cost-effective solutions, and secure and pool financial resources and expertise. Sincerely, oses Carey, Jr. , air Board of Commissioners