The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutAgenda - 10-21-2003-10aORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Meeting Date: October 21, 2003 Action Agenda Item No. ~Q~_ SUBJECT: Upper Neuse River Basin Association's (UNRBA) Upper Neuse Watershed Management Plan DEPARTMENT: Planning and Inspections PUBLIC HEARING: (Y/N) N ATTACHMENT(S): Sections of Upper Neuse Watershed Management Plan Specific to Orange County INFORMATION CONTACT: Craig Benedict., Planning Director, ext. 2592 Tom Altieri, Planner III, ext. 2579 TELEPHONE NUMBERS: Hillsborough 732-8181 Chapel Hill 968-4501 Durham 688-7331 Mebane (336)227-2031 PURPOSE: To receive a report from Mr. Chris Dreps of the Upper Neuse River Basin Association (UNRBA) on the Upper Neuse Watershed Management Plan and the recommendations for the portion of Orange County that lies within the Neuse River Basin. BACKGROUND: Orange County is a member of the UNRBA with Commissioner Barry Jacobs serving as the County's representative on the Board of Directors. The Watershed Management Plan is a joint effort between the State of North Carolina and the regional local governments. The County's Comprehensive Pllan Land Use Element update strongly considers water quality as a linchpin of land use planning. Following is a list of topics that will be covered during Mr. Dreps' presentation: • Upper Neuse Watershed Management Plan Planning Process • Implementation • Key Findings • Upper Neuse Basin and Sub-Watersheds • Full Implementation of Existing Regulations • Drinking Water Quality Impacts • Water Quality Impairment: Chlorophyll a • Recreation and Habitat Impacts • Impervious Cover: Existing, Year 2025, and at Buildout • Location of Impaired Waters • What is the Plan? • 5 Watershed Management Techniques 2 • New Development Site Management -Overarching Strategy • Strategies Recommended for Orange County • Additional Considerations for Orange County The Upper Neuse Watershed Management Plan strongly supports the County Planning and Inspection Department's proposed Land Use Element density adjustments. The following table provides a comparison between densities recommended in the Upper Neuse Watershed Management Plan (UNWMP) and densities that Orange County Planning Staff is pursuing as part of the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Element Update: Watershed UNRBA Density Recommendation OC Staff Proposed Density Recommendation 1 du per 2* ac (first 10 West Fork Eno (Northwest Upper Eno, ac) and then 5 ac Part 1 du er 5 ac thereafter 1 du per 2* ac (first 10 No change ac) and then 5 ac Lake Oran a Northeast U er Eno, Part recommended 1 thereafter 1 du per 2* ac (first 10 ac) and then 5 ac Cor oration Lake U er Eno, Part 1 du er 5 ac thereafter 2 1 du per 2* ac (first 10 Lake Ben Johnston (Upper Eno and ac) and then 5 ac Sevenmile Creek 1 du er 5 ac thereafter 2 Lake Michie Flat River 1 du er 5 ac 1 du er 5 ac *May contain up to, but no more than, 5 lots with a density of 1 du/2ac. The 6th and all subsequent lots must not exceed a density of 1 du/sac. [1]Existing minimum density requirement: In Critical Area - 1 du per 2ac; In Protected Area - 1 du per 1 ac [2]With the exception of the Efland transition area, 1 du per 0.5 ac Following is a link to a copy of the complete Plan: Full Report: http://www.unrba.org/projact.htm If you have difficulty accessing the Plan, lease contact Tom Altieri direct) for a co at 245-2579. Orange County, Hillsborough, and the remaining 5 counties, 7 Who's Involved: municipalities, and local Soil and Water Conservation Districts in the watershed FINANCIAL IMPACT: None. RECOMMENDATION(S): The Manager recommends that the Board receive as information and provide any comments. Upper Neuse Watershed Management Plan Appendix A Development Ordinance Changes Recommended for Orange County's subwatersheds Orange County's jurisdiction within the Upper Neuse Watershed covers portions of six upland drinking water supply watersheds; this land area constitutes approximately 25 percent of the Upper Neuse Watershed. For each drinking water supply watershed, you will find a brief description of the land area, existing regulations, and recommended changes to the development ordinance. First, there are two important notes: The TAC recommended testing two alternative management scenarios: 5-acre lot zoning and 3- acre lot zoning with a small village allowed per township. A village was defined as a 50-acre area developing under a high density option (up to 70 percent imperviousness). Although the 5-acre lot zoning was the only scenario that absolutely met the non-degradation target (except for the Lake Orange subwatershed where existing zoning is sufficient), for two subwatersheds (West Fork Eno Corporation Lake, and Little River) the 3-acre lot zoning with village exceeded the water quality target by only 1 to 2 µg/I of chlorophyll a which was deemed adequate to address the target. Therefore, both are listed as meeting the target for these two subwatersheds. 2. Modeling demonstrated that Lake Ben )ohnston is more sensitive to alternative management options. The Lake Ben Johnston subwatershed includes the West Fork Eno, Lake Orange, and Corporation Lake subwatersheds and can therefore potentially be impacted by activities that increase loading in those drainages. The West Fork Eno and Lake Orange reservoirs have more storage than Corporation Lake and thus provide more nutrient trapping than Corporation Lake. The trapping allows for different options to be selected for the West Fork Eno and Lake Orange subwatersheds, while still protecting the downstream waters. However, if Orange County wishes to meet the non-degradation target for the Lake Ben )ohnston drinkingwater supply, the remaining drainage in the Corporation Lake subwatershed (i.e., the area below the West Fork Eno and Lake Orange subwatersheds) and the direct drainage to Lake E3en Johnston should be zoned at 1 unit per 5 acres and 5 percent maximum impervious area for new development, or should meet the nitrogen loading performance standard of 1.7 Ibs/ac/yr and phosphorus loading performance standard of 0.3 Ibs/ac/yr, rather than zoning for 1 unit per 3 acres with villages. Northwest Upper Eno Area in Orange County: 9.5 sq. mi. 2.4 percent of land area of Orange County Existing development regulations: ORANGE • 1 unit per 2 acres in Critical Area COUNTY • 1 unit per acre and 12 percent impervious surface area maximum in Protected Area • Stream buffer approximately 100 feet UNRBA May 2003 A-5 4 Upper Neuse Watershed Management Plan Development regulation changes required to meet non-degradation target: Habitat Requirement Enhanced peak flow management for any new developments >10 percent imperviousness Options for Managing Water Quality 1. 1 unit per 5 acres and 5 percent impervious surface area maximum or 2. 1 unit per 3 acres plus 1 village per township or 3. Performance standards for all new developments: maximum nitrogen and phosphorus surface loading of 1.7 Ibs/ac/yr and 0.3 Ibs/ac/yr, respectively. See Chapter 4 for other recommended actions related to monitoring and enforcement, education, point source controls, and stream/wetland restoration. Northeast Upper Eno (Lake Orange) Area in Orange County: 9.1 sq. mi. 2.3 percent of land area of Orange County D Existing development regulations: ORANGE • 1 unit per 2 acres in Critical Area COUNTY • 1 unit per acre and 12 percent impervious surface area maximum in Protected Area • Stream buffer approximately 100 feet Development regulation changes required to meet non-degradation target: Habitat Requirement Enhanced peak flow management for any new developments >10 percent. imperviousness Options for Managing Water Quality Existing regulations meet targets See Chapter 4 for other recommended actions related to monitoring and enforcement, education, point source controls, and stream/wetland restoration. A UNRBA May 2003 A-6 Upper Neuse Watershed Management Plan Appendix A Upper Eno (Corporation Lake) Area in Orange County: 41.4 sq. mi. 10.3 percent of land area of Orange County Existing development regulations: • 1 unit per 2 acres in Critical Area • 1 unit per acre and 12 percent impervious surface area maximum in Protected Area • Stream buffer approximately 100 feet Development regulation changes required to meet non-degradation target: ORANGE COUNTY Habitat Requirement Enhanced peak flow management for any new developments >10 percent: imperviousness Options for Managing Water QualitX 1. 1 unit per 5 acres and 5 percent impervious surface area maximum or 2. 1 unit per 3 acres plus 1 village per township or 3. Performance standards for all new developments: maximum nitrogen and phosphorus surface loading of 1.7 Ibs/ac/yr and 0.3 Ibs/ac/yr, respectively. See Chapter 4 for other recommended actions related to monitoring and enforcement, education, point source controls, and stream/wetland restoration. Upper Eno and Sevenmile Creek (Lake Ben Johnston) Area in Orange County: 60.2 sq. mi. 15.0 percent of land area of Orange County Existing development regulations: • 1 unit per 2 acres in Critical Area • 1 unit per acre and 12 percent impervious surface area maximum in Protected Area • Stream buffer approximately 100 feet Development regulation changes required to meet non-degradation target: r r; z r;.~~:.: ~.g ORANGE COUNTY Habitat Requirement Enhanced peak flow management for any new developments >10 percent imperviousness UNRBA May 2003 A-7 Upper Neuse Watershed Management Plan Appendix A Options for Managing Water Quality 1. 1 unit per 5 acres and 5 percent impervious surface area maximum or 2. Performance standards for all new developments: maximum nitrogen and phosphorus surface loading of 1.7 Ibs/ac/yr and 0.3 Ibs/ac/yr, respectively. See Chapter 4 for other recommended actions related to monitoring and enforcement, education, point source controls, and stream/wetland restoration. --- ---- Little River Reservoir Area in Orange County: 62.2 sq. mi. 15.5 percent of land area of Orange County j Existing development regulations i ORANGE • 1 unit per 2 acres and 6 percent impervious surface area maximum ` COUNTY ~' • Stream buffer approximately 100 feet `L_.____ J Development regulation changes required to meet non-degradation target: Habitat Requirement Enhanced peak flow management for any new developments >10 percent: imperviousness 1 unit per Options for Managing Water Quality 1. 5 acres and 3.5 percent impervious surface area maximum or 2. 1 unit per 3 acres plus 1 village per township or 3. Performance standards for all new developments: maximum nitrogen a.nd phosphorus surface loading of 1.7 Ibs/ac/yr and 0.3 Ibs/ac/yr, respectively. See Chapter 4 for other recommended actions related to monitoring and enforcement, education, point source controls, and stream/wetland restoration. Flat River (Lake Michie) Area in Orange County: 7.1 sq. mi. 1.8 percent of land area of Orange County Existing development regulations: • 1 unit per acre • 12 percent impervious surface area maximum • Stream buffer approximately 100 feet ORANGE COUNTY UNRBA May 2003 A-8 7 Upper Neuse Watershed Management Plan Appendix A Development regulation changes required to meet non-degradation target: Habitat Requirement Enhanced peak flow management for any new developments >10 percent imperviousness Options for Managing Water Quay 1. 1 unit per 5 acres and 5 percent impervious surface area maximum (for all County jurisdictions) or 2. Performance standards for all new developments: maximum nitrogen and phosphorus surface loading of 1.7 Ibs/ac/yr and 0.3 Ibs/ac/yr, respectively, or 3. Durham builds upland lake and Orange County regulations are unchanged. See Chapter 4 for other recommended actions related to monitoring and enforcement, education, point source controls, and stream/wetland restoration. UNRBA May 2003 A-9