Minutes - 19900402 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

The Thirteen Point Agreement will be referred to as the Thirteen Point Recommendation from hence forward. The text of the amendments is listed below: A. Amend Section II Natural Environment by rewriting the subsection entitled "B Water Resources" to read as follows: Residents of southeast Orange County obtain water from two sources: groundwater (wells) or reservoirs. However, the most reliable source of water for urban use is a reservoir. Until recently, Chapel Hill, Carrboro, and the surrounding areas relied exclusively on University Lake. That source was recognized as inadequate as a long-term water source, and Cane Creek reservoir west of the Joint Planning Areas has been constructed and is now operational. The two reservoirs should provide a raw water supply adequate for the next 20 years. In addition, the Land Use Element of the Orange County Comprehensive Plan has identified possible future reservoir sites to the north of Chapel Hill. The link between land use planning and water resources in the Joint Planning Area lies in protecting water quality by limiting development in University Lake watershed. In 1988, the Orange Water and Sewer Authority commissioned a study to develop a range of options for protecting the University Lake watershed. The consulting firm of Camp, Dresser and Mckee (CDM), nationally recognized experts in watershed evaluation, completed the study in March, 1989. Because the consultants did not find improving water quality to be a practical objective, they recommend preventing significant future water quality deterioration in University Lake as a primary goal. The CDM report presented two fundamental ways of meeting the University Lake water quality goal. Nonstructural management practices, such as controlling land use through local zoning and subdivision regulations, could reduce the pollution generated from future development by controlling the amount and location of impervious surfaces and other pollution-causing activities. Structural practices, such as stormwater detention ponds, would not reduce the amount of pollution generated but prevent substantial portions of it from reaching University Lake by trapping pollutants near their point of origin. The report recommended nonstructural methods as the preferred approach to watershed protection. Basic elements of the proposed nonstructural plan included large lot (five- acre) residential zoning, limits on impervious surfaces, and the preservation of stream buffers along streams. The advantages of the nonstructural approach included the lower amount of pollution generated and its reduced risk of entering the lake, the elimination of construction and maintenance costs for stormwater devices, and the ability to provide wastewater disposal through individual septic systems rather than risky community wastewater systems. The CDM report did'find that the water quality goal could be achieved through adopted land use plans and regulations (two-acre zoning) and the construction of a significant number of stormwater detention ponds. While the approach would provide for continued growth in the watershed, the high public and private costs associated with a system of 72_ larger regional detention ponds or an indeterminate number of smaller individual-development-detention ponds and intensive on-going maintenance requirements were noted as disadvantages. In addition, there would be no way to convert back to a nonstructural control strategy if a structural program resulted in unsatisfactory watershed protection. B. Amend Section V Joint. Planning Operating Principles by deleting the following wording from the subsection entitled "Initial List of Principles - University Lake Watershed": C. Amend Section V Joint Planning Operating Principles by deleting the table which