Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
49 <br /> 11/23/15 Page 3 of 4 <br /> BOCC Effects of SL 2015-286 (HB 765) on Orange Co. <br /> 5. [POTENTIAL ORANGE COUNTY UDO TEXT AMENDMENT REQUIRED] <br /> Session Law 2015-286 (HB 765) removes the previously allowed latitude of local <br /> stormwater management programs to "exceed" the requirements of the model <br /> program adopted by the Commission and requires Orange County to submit our <br /> current or revised stormwater management program to the Environmental <br /> Management Commission (EMC) by March 1, 2016. The EMC will then review <br /> and approve, approve with modifications, or disapprove our revised stormwater <br /> management program by December 1, 2016. <br /> The EMC reviewed and approved Orange County's stormwater management <br /> program in January of 2012; however, it must be stated that the focus of the <br /> EMC at that time was compliance with the Falls Lake Rules. Due to the fact that <br /> Orange County is about 45% Falls Lake watershed and 50% Jordan Lake <br /> watershed (and about 5% Hyco Creek watershed), our presentation was an <br /> overview of our entire UDO regulations, with a focus on how they pertain to the <br /> Falls nutrient strategy. It is hard to predict the outcome of this 2016 review, <br /> as the focus appears to be on excessive differences (i.e. where Orange <br /> County is more restrictive). These regulations are extremely detailed and it <br /> appears Orange County has incorporated most of the nutrient limitations <br /> verbatim from both the Falls and Jordan nutrient strategies. Orange <br /> County's mix of watersheds caused us to be conservative in trying to make the <br /> stormwater regulations consistent across the entire county. Other reasons for <br /> Orange County's more restrictive regulations are less obvious to those of us <br /> without the benefit of historic context. In discussing this matter with Current <br /> Planning, it is our joint opinion that "stormwater program" could and probably will <br /> be interpreted in a broad manner. We expect it will encompass built-upon area <br /> (BUA) limitations, as defined in the Fresh Surface Water Quality Standards for <br /> Class WS-II through IV Waters, 15A NCAC 02B .0214 through .0216. <br /> Using this broad interpretation, Orange County's "stormwater program" <br /> differences appear to be primarily in the areas of impervious surface (built- <br /> upon area) allowances and riparian buffers (both of which are enforced by <br /> Current Planning), where Orange County approaches these limitations in a <br /> manner different than that outlined in the North Carolina Administrative <br /> Code (NCAC). The EMC may find that UDO revisions are required. <br /> 15A NCAC 02 .0262 Jordan Water Supply Nutrient Strategy <br /> 15A NCAC 02 .0275 Falls Nutrient Strategy <br /> 15A NCAC 02 .0233 Neuse River Basin- Nutrient Sensitive Waters <br /> Management Strategy- Protection and Maintenance of Existing Riparian Buffers <br /> 15A NCAC 02 .0267 Jordan Water Supply Nutrient Strategey: Protection of <br /> Existing Riparian Buffers <br /> 15A NCAC 02 .0214 Fresh Surface Water Quality Standards for Class WS-II <br /> Waters <br /> 15A NCAC 02 .0215 Fresh Surface Water Quality Standards for Class WS-III <br /> Waters <br /> 15A NCAC 02 .0216 Fresh Surface Water Quality Standards for WS-IV Waters <br /> SA2 Boards\BOCC\2015 Public Hearings\Nov QPI-nWork Session Iterns\2015 Session LaNvEtfects�Att2-ImpactsOt5L2015-286(HB765)EC-SW-ProgramOfOC-111215.doc <br />