Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
f <br /> 6 <br /> The relatively-poor potential of Triassic soils for <br /> groundwater does not indicate that these soils cannot be used <br /> for wells (individual or community) . It does indicate that <br /> the yield in these areas will be less than average, and that <br /> most of the available groundwater will be found in the upper <br /> layers of regolith. <br /> One question relating to groundwater and the Rural Character <br /> development proposals stands out: What is the potential for <br /> significant "drawdown" on the groundwater supply from open- <br /> space developments with community wells? <br /> Although the answer cannot be definitively stated, it is <br /> possible to draw limited, qualified conclusions . <br /> 1. in 95% of the New Hope Creek basin, the use of <br /> appropriately permitted and designed community wells <br /> should not cause significant depletion of groundwater <br /> beyond that which would occur under the current <br /> development pattern. The adequate availability of <br /> groundwater resources in this area, coupled with the <br /> ease of replenishment in interconnected rock strata, <br /> should provide adequate groundwater as long as the <br /> overall low density of development is maintained and <br /> regional drawdown does not increase significantly. <br /> 2. In the "Southern Triangle" and in the area near Erwin <br /> Road, the Triassic soils and their shallow groundwater <br /> availability will require that well-siting be more <br /> precise as to location. In these areas, community wells <br /> could have a localized effect on groundwater supplies, <br /> although this would likely be short-term until aquifers <br /> are recharged. Protection of recharge areas, while <br /> important in all areas, takes on increased importance in <br /> the Triassic areas. <br /> It terms of the open-space development options proposed, it <br /> should be noted that these Triassic areas are: <br /> 1) in areas which are largely "undevelopable" (Corps of <br /> Engineer land, flood-prone soils) ; and <br /> 2) not in corridors which would appear to be suitable for the <br /> potential development of Rural Villages (as per the Rural <br /> Character Study Committee's recommendations) . <br /> In summary, this brief report does not attempt to assess the <br /> long-term and regional implications of the increased use of <br /> 2 <br />