HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda - 03-19-2002 - 9c 1
ORANGE COUNTY
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT
Meeting Date: March 19, 2002
Action Agenda
Item No. —
SUBJECT: Proposed Joint Grant Application to NC Clean Water Management Trust Fund
– Upper Eno Watershed Protection
DEPARTMENT: Environment and Resource PUBLIC HEARING: (Y/N) No
Conservation
ATTACHMENT(S): INFORMATION CONTACT:
Concept Proposal for Grant Application David Stancil, 245-2590
CWMTF Grant Evaluation Guidelines Rich Shaw, 245-2591
Map of Upper Eno Watershed
TELEPHONE NUMBERS:
Hillsborough 732-8181
Chapel Hill 968-4501
Durham 688-7331
Mebane 336-227-2031
PURPOSE: To consider submitting a joint grant application with the Eno River
Association to the North Carolina Clean Water Management Trust Fund (CWMTF)for
voluntary protection of high priority resource lands in the Upper Eno Watershed.
BACKGROUND: In the fall of 2001, ERCD staff and representatives from the Eno River
Association (ERA) informally discussed a proposal to submit a joint County-ERA
application for funds from the NC Clean Water Management Trust Fund to acquire land
(riparian buffers) and conservation easements in the Upper Eno watershed.
The objective would be to further protect water quality and wildlife habitat in the critical
area of the Upper Eno Protected Watershed. Conserving these lands will help ensure the
long-term viability of the Eno River as a public water supply and high-quality habitat for
aquatic organisms and other wildlife that exist within the riparian corridor. A secondary
purpose is to protect known and potential archaeological sites (historic and prehistoric)
that are likely to exist within this corridor.
The proposed application would build upon prior County efforts for watershed protection,
as well as a previous CWMTF grant to the Eno River Association for identification and
prioritization of riparian lands within the Upper Eno Watershed. That project resulted in an
Eno River Riparian Corridor Conservation Design (August 2000) prepared by Piedmont
Planning Associates. One of the purposes of the CWMTF grant was to assist in the
selection of future projects for funding within that watershed.
2
The anticipated timetable for the project would be to a) identify high-priority parcels
[March/April 2002], b) contact landowners to discuss landowner interests and conservation
options [March/April], c) develop potential conservation strategies for interested
landowners [April/May], and d) submit the grant application [June 1]. If the state proceeds
with the grant cycle, the awarding of grant would be in October 2002.
ERCD staff proposes submitting an application despite the uncertainty of state funding
availability to the grant program. Governor Easley recently froze more than $20 million of
the CWMTF's $40 million budget to help cover the state's projected $900 million budget
shortfall. Thirty-nine grants approved by the CWMTF board in November, 2001 may now
be at risk because of the freeze. On February 18, the CWMTF board of trustees
announced that grant applications would be accepted for its next funding cycle. The
deadline for applications for that cycle is June 1, 2002. The CWMTF board also stipulated
that potential grant applicants be made aware that future approvals will be based on
availability of funds.
As shown on the attached concept proposal, staff and ERA propose a grant submittal for
$1 million — using some portion of the Lands Legacy Fund as a match (please see below).
It is worth noting that CWMTF grant funds and County matching funds toward this project
could serve a dual purpose—acquiring conservation easements on farmland in the
watershed, as well as protecting riparian buffers.
If grant funds are not awarded for this project, a secondary approach may be to evaluate
acquisitions/easements for the highest-priority lands using funds from the County's Lands
Legacy Fund (including proposed alternative financing for conservation easements).
Acquisition of high-priority lands in the Upper Eno Watershed is identified in the 2001-
2002 Lands Legacy Annual Action Plan.
The ERA Board of Directors will meet on March 14 to consider whether ERA would like to
proceed with a joint grant application. The ERA's Land and Stewardship Committee is
expected to recommend that they support this proposal.
FINANCIAL IMPACT: The proposed grant application is expected to be in the range of
$1,000,000. The specific dollar amount will depend on the number of landowners express
their interest (by June 11) in pursuing a possible conservation agreement on their property.
Although no funding match is required, the likelihood of grant approval is greater if
significant matching funds are offered. Matching funds for this project in the amount of
$300,000 could be available from Orange County Lands Legacy Fund (current pay-as-
you-go funds and proposed alternative financing for conservation easements), and
potentially augmented by the 2001 County parks and open space bond funds for Lands
Legacy. The total project cost would be, therefore, around $1,300,000.
RECOMMENDATION(S): The Manager recommends that the Board authorize the joint
submittal of a grant application to the NC Clean Water Management Trust Fund prior to
the June 1, 2002 deadline.
Draft March 11,2002
Conceptual Proposal 3
Joint Orange County/Eno River Association Application
NC Clean Water Management Trust Fund
Orange County ERCD and the Eno River Association staff propose submitting a joint
County-ERA application for funds from the NC Clean Water Management Trust Fund to
acquire land (riparian buffers) and conservation easements in the Upper Eno watershed.
The objective would be to help protect water quality and wildlife habitat in the critical
area of the Upper Eno Protected Watershed'. Conserving these lands would help
ensure the long-term viability of the Eno River as a public water supply and high-quality
habitat for aquatic organisms and other wildlife that exists within the riparian corridor. A
secondary purpose is to protect known and potential archaeological sites (historic and
prehistoric)that are likely to exist within this corridor. [Note— the primary objective of the
CWMTF is to protect water quality.]
Funds to match the CWMTF grant would be available from Orange County Lands
Legacy program (perhaps augmented by the 2001 County parks and open space bond).
At this time, it is estimated that the application request $1,000,000 in state funds to be
matched with $300,000 in local match for a total project cost of$1,300,000. The specific
dollar amounts will depend on which landowners express interest (by June 1S) in
pursuing a possible conservation agreement on their property.
Proposed Timetable:
• Seek approval from the ERA Board of Directors and Orange County Board of
Commissioners [March 2002]
• Identify high-priority parcels using the Eno River Riparian Corridor Conservation
Design (August 2000) prepared by Piedmont Planning Associates for the Eno River
Association and funded by the CWMTF [March/April 2002]
• Develop potential conservation options for high-priority parcels [March/April]
• Contact landowners; discuss landowner interests, conservation options and potential
conservation/financial benefits; request easement donations or options to purchase
[April/May]
• Develop more specific conservation strategies for interested landowners [April/May]
• Apply for CWMTF by June 1, 2002 [Awards announced by October 2002]
• Pursue acquisition/easements with combination of County/CWMTF funds
' Lands within the Upper Eno Protected Watershed (map attached)are subject to an additional
layer of subdivision regulations imposed by Orange County to protect existing or potential
drinking water rivers and reservoirs (e.g., use limitations,wider stream buffers, density limits,
impervious cover limits). Still further restrictions are imposed on lands within the"critical area,"
defined as lands"One-half mile from the normal pool of Lake Orange, Corporation Lake, and
potential reservoir sites on the West Fork or the Upper Eno and Seven Mile Creek, or to the
ridgeline of the watershed,whichever is less."
VMTF Grant Guidelines http://www.cwmtf.net/guide.html .
4
deanwater
MANAGEMENT TRUST FUND -
CLEAN WATER MANAGEMENT TRUST FUND (CWMTF) GRANTS GRANT
EVALUATION GUIDELINES
These guidelines can be downloaded as a Text file (.txt) or a Rich Text File (.rtf).
NOTE:Rich Text Format can be used by Microsoft Word or Wordperfect.
A. Eligible applicants for CWMTF grants.
(a)Any of the following are eligible to receive a grant from CWMTF for the purpose of protecting or
enhancing water quality:
1. A State agency
2. A local government or other political subdivision of the state or a combination of such entities.
3. A nonprofit corporation whose primary purpose is the conservation, preservation and restoration
of our State's environmental and natural resources.
(b)No match is required; however,Trustees may choose to fund projects at less than 100% of the
application request.
B. CWMTF purposes:
(a) Grant monies from CWMTF may be used for any of the following purposes:
■ Acquire land for riparian buffers for environmental protection fo
surface waters or urban drinking water supplies, or for establishing a
network of greenways for environmental, educational or recreational uses.
■
drinking water supplies.
■ Coordinate with other public programs involved with lands adjoining
water bodies to gain the most public benefit while protecting and improving
water quality.
■ Restore degraded lands for their ability to protect water quality.
■ Repair failing waste treatment systems: if(i) an application to the
Clean water Revolving Loan and Grant Fund has been submitted and denied
in the latest review cycle; (ii)repair is for a reasonable remedy to an
existing waste treatment problem; and(iii)the repair is not for the purpose
of expanding the system to accomodate future anticipated growth of a
community. Priority shall be given to economically distressed units of local
government.
■ Repair/eliminate failing septic tank systems, to eliminate illegal
drainage connections, and to expand waste treatment systems if the system
is being expanded as a remedy to eliminate failing septic tank systems or
illegal drainage connections. Priority shall be given to economically
�f 3 3/4/2002 4:14 PM
CWMTF Grant Guidelines http://www.cwmtfnet/guide.html
distressed units of local government. 5
• Improve stormwater controls and management
• Facilitate planning that targets reductions in surface water pollution.
C. CWMTF Objectives and grant application evaluation and prioritization.
(a) Grant applications will be quantitatively evaluated upon their contribution toward achieving the
principal objectives of the fund: (1)restoration of degraded waters, (2)protection of unpolluted
waters, and(3) establishment of riparian buffers. A numeric scoring system will guide the Board and
the applicants in prioritizing prospects for funding. The following evaluation and scoring system will
be applied to all applications:
1 --Principal Objectives
a--Restoration of degraded waters (Point Range: 0-45)
as impaired,preferred projects will(1) reduce the pollutant identified as the cause of water quality
impairment, (2) restore wetland functions, (3) improve aquatic habitat, and/or(4) restore flood
plain functions adjacent to impaired waters).
OR b -- Protection of unpolluted waters
(Explanation:Protection projects will target specific waters that have not been indentifted by
NC-DWQ as impaired;preferred projects will(1) restore or maintain the natural hydrologic flow
patterns or other water quality enahncing functions of adjacent lands (e.g. nutrient reduction
processes), (2) maintain streambank stabalization reducing potential for sediment erosion, and/or(3)
avoid, reduce or eliminate discharge of pollutants).
AND/OR c -- Establishment of riparian buffers or greenways (Point Range: 0-10) 2-- Additional priorities
a-- Consistency with NC-DWQ Basinwide Management Plan (Point Range: 0-20)
(Explanation:In the event that the plan for the subject basin has not been formally adopted, the
project should be articulated with reference to the current DWQ draft plan for that basin). Preferred
proposals will identify the waters that will be enhanced, restored, or protected by said project.
PNAs, Critical Habitats for endangered aquatic species, Water Supply watershed). Proposals should
demonstrate integration with other water quality programs or strategies in the sub-basin).
b--Provide measurable/enduring outcomes (Point Range: 0-20)
c--Provide other resources (Point Range: 0-20)
d--Applicant's qualifications (Point Range: 0-10)
(Explanation:Preferred applicants will demonstrate: (1) their ability to ensure any long time
management required by the project, (2)fiduciary responsibility, (3) likelihood of success for
their performance on those projects will be considered.
e--Develop riparian buffer greenways serving environmental, educational or recreational uses. (Point
Range: 0-10)
f-- Target environmentally sensitive waters, including(1)high quality waters (e.g.water supply,
ORWs, HQWs etc.), or(2) severely degraded waters (e.g. waters noted on DWQ's 303 (d) list) (Point
2 of 3 3/4/2002 4:14 PM
WMTF Grant Guidelines http://www.cwmtfnet/guide.,html .
t
Range: 0-10) 6
g-- Contribute toward integrated ecological network. (Point Range: 0-5)
h-- Employ innovative procedures or techno. (Point Range: 0-5)
i--Provide public education uses (Point Range: 0-5)
JPreserve waters having special economic or recreational uses. (Point Range: 0-5)
(b)The Board will also be guided by the following non-quantitative criteria in making final funding
decisions:
1-- Applications for projects which are mandated by legislation or regulation may be funded but are
not preferred. The CWMTF is not available for compensatory mitigation projects.
2-- Projects eligible for funds from other state or federal grant programs will be considered,but will
not be preferred unless significant matching resources are provided.
3-- To the extent practicable, grant awards will be distributed geographically across the state. At least
20% of annual allocations will be targeted to each of three geographic regions of the state: mountain,
piedmont and coastal.
4-- The scope and benefits of the project will be evaluated relative to the amount of the requested
grant:
5--The Board may award grants on a limited basis for(1)projects which facilitate planning that
targets reduction in surface water pollution or protection of unpolluted waters; or(2) coordination
with other public programs to gain the most public benefit while protecting and improving water
quality; even though such applications may not score well on our measures of quantitative criteria
above.
6-- The Board may award grants to applicants for projects which the Board finds are uniquely
different than the quantitative criteria anticipate and are exceptional opportunities for restoration or
preservation.
Back to Home
of 3 3/4/2002 4:14 PM
,mi;.
kuy
r �
� ! �T7