Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
4a-13 <br />~. In ,~~7{9}, Table ~f ~Jses, "v~ildlife passage„ is considered an Al[awable Use in the <br />riparian buffer only if a determination of no practical alternatives is made. "~Il~ildlife <br />passage" is not domed ~n .0~6~{~}, if "wildlife passage" is the maintenance of a forested <br />ar other natural corridor connecting natural areas has the #erm is used in conservation <br />biology, why is it considered ~ land use impacting the riparian buffer to the extent that a <br />determination of no practical alternatives is necessary <br />~ 5A NCAD o~~~a~~s: ~iT~ATION FAR R[PARIA~I ~uFFER~ <br />No comments. <br />~5A NCA~C O~~,O~G~: ~PTl~NS FAR ~FFSETTiN NUTRIENT LADS <br />Na comments. <br />15A NDAD ~~B.~~~Q: wAETEwATER DISCHARGE REQUIREMENTS <br />No comments. <br />~5A NCAC ~8,027~ ~ STORMI~ATER REC~UIRE~ENTS FAR STATE AND FEDERAL <br />ENTITIES <br />The requirements and schedule for the state and federal agencies need to be identical to those <br />for local government. The state agency implementation schedule appears to lag local <br />government by 18 months. Further, comparable requirements fio those contained in <br />§.0266(3)(o-e) for local governments appear to be missing for non-DOT agene~es. <br />~ 5A NDA~ ~~8.4~~~: RIPARIAN SUFFER ~11TATION FEES <br />Na carnrnents, <br />~ 5A NCAC q2B~~~~ ~ : CAPE FEAR RAVER BASIN <br />No comments. <br />FISCAL ANALYSIS <br />~ . The Fiscal Analysis includes na new costs to the Division to implement these rules Mpg. <br />xviii~, which is not realistic. <br />~. To avoid complexity, cast calculations were carried out at the scale of the entire vuatershed <br />Mpg. xx}. This likely greatly overestimates oasts far those in the Lower New Hope Arm <br />subwatershed, somewhat overestimates costs for the Have Arm, and underestirr~ates casts <br />for those in the Lipper New Haile Arm. This is attributable to the significantly greater <br />amount of nutrient reduction that must be achieved in the Upper New Haile Arm. The <br />Fiscal Analysis needs to provide more realistic cost analyses forthe separate <br />subwatersheds. Further, the estimated costs for each local government should be <br />identified. <br />At the arrboro public hearing, same Hauv dischargers asser#ed that they will be required <br />to remove closer to 20°lo in ar~er to meet the ~°la nitrogen reduction at the lake because of <br />Page ~ of 9 <br />