Orange County NC Website
14 <br /> would delete the land use category "Water Quality Critical Area" <br /> adjacent to University Lake. In itsplace, the entirety of the <br /> watershed in Orange County's planning and zoning jurisdiction would be <br /> denoted. <br /> A. Amend Section II Natural Environment by rewriting the subsection <br /> entitled "B. Water Resources" to read as follows : <br /> Residents of southeast Orange, County obtain water from two <br /> sources: groundwater (wells) or reservoirs. However, the most <br /> reliable source of water for urban use is a reservoir. Until <br /> recently, Chapel Hill, Carrboro, and the surrounding areas relied <br /> exclusively on University Lake. That source was recognized as <br /> inadequate as a long-term water source, and Cane Creek reservoir <br /> west of the Joint Planning Area has been constructed and is now <br /> operational. The two reservoirs should provide a raw water supply <br /> adequate for the next 20 years . In addition, the Land Use Element <br /> of the Orange County Comprehensive Plan has identified possible <br /> future reservoir sites to the north of Chapel Hill. <br /> The link between land use planning and water resources in the <br /> Joint Planning Area lies in protecting water quality by limiting <br /> development in University Lake watershed. In 1988, the Orange <br /> Water and Sewer Authority commissioned a study to develop a range <br /> of options for protecting the University Lake watershed. The <br /> consulting firm of Camp, Dresser and McKee (CDM) , nationally <br /> recognized experts in watershed evaluation, completed the study in <br /> March, 1989 . Because the consultants did not find improving water <br /> quality to be a practical objective, they recommended preventing <br /> significant future water quality deterioration in University Lake <br /> as a primary goal. <br /> The CDM report presented two fundamental ways of meeting the <br /> University Lake water quality goal. Nonstructural management <br /> practices, such as controlling land use through local zoning and <br /> subdivision regulations, could reduce the pollution generated from <br /> future development by controlling the amount and location of <br /> impervious surfaces and other pollution-causing activities. <br /> Structural practices, such as stormwater detention ponds, would <br /> not reduce the amount of pollution generated but prevent <br /> substantial portions of it from reaching University Lake by <br /> trapping pollutants near their point of origin. <br /> The report recommended nonstructural methods as the preferred <br /> approach to watershed protection. Basic elements of the proposed <br /> nonstructural plan included large lot (five-acre) residential <br /> zoning, limits on impervious surfaces, and the preservation of <br /> stream buffers along, streams . The advantages of the nonstructural <br /> approach included the lower amount of pollution generated and its <br /> reduced risk of entering the lake, the elimination of construction <br /> and maintenance costs for stormwater devices, and the ability to <br /> provide wastewater disposal through individual septic systems <br /> rather than risky community wastewater systems . <br />