Agenda 5-a - Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) Text Amendments – Enforcement of Nutrient Standards within the Jordan Lake Watershed

Browse Search

7 Approved 2.6.19 111 and second, updates outdated terminology. There have been changes in the names of state departments that 112 regulate this and there has been a change in nomenclature referring to stormwater features. These were formerly 113 known as Best Management Practices or(BMPs). They are now referred to as Stormwater Control Measures or 114 (SCMs). In the(UDO), all(BMPs)have been changed to(SCMs). Mr. Harvey advised that the text amendment has 115 been reviewed by the County Attorney's Office and by the Development Advisory Committee with no issues and the 116 staffs recommendation is to approve the Statement of Consistency as attached in Attachment(1) and to approve the 117 actual amendment itself as contained in Attachment(2). 118 119 Mr. Harvey welcomed any questions. 120 121 Paul Guthrie questioned who had the ultimate final jurisdiction on Lake Jordan. 122 123 Michael Harvey replied that the state and the Army Corp of Engineers. 124 125 Paul Guthrie asked whether or not it was still a possession of the Army Corp of Engineers. 126 127 Michael Harvey responded that it is a water body of the U.S. meaning the Army Corp has jurisdiction, but the state is 128 addressing nutrient issues through the adoption of stormwater rules. This process means the state is working with 129 multiple entities. 130 131 Paul Guthrie commented as long as the Clean Water Act keeps that definition. 132 133 Michael Harvey confirmed to his knowledge the answer is yes. 134 135 Alex Gregory questioned whether the standards were being released as a best practice as they are currently being 136 studied and decided. 137 138 Michael Harvey stated,the state was re-evaluating the standards and attempting to develop new best practices with 139 respect to nutrient reduction. Mr. Harvey said he believed there is supposed to be an update to the General 140 Assembly in 2020. He added there is no estimated completion on the study or its submittable rules, and what we 141 know right now is that there are standards in the UDO that are unenforceable and need to be removed. 142 143 Kim Piracci mentioned that she had read something that said these rules are supposed to be passed, but aren't 144 passed and asked whether this is a regulation that is going to be passed or is passed. 145 146 Michael Harvey clarified that the General Assembly has eliminated local government's authority to enforce the 147 nutrient standards relating to water quality issues into a river basin. He reiterated that these are unenforceable 148 standards that will need to be removed from the UDO as the enforcement of same cause litigation concerns. 149 150 Lydia Wegman questioned whether the rules still apply in the Neuse River Basin. 151 152 Michael Harvey confirmed that enforcement of nutrient reduction standards within the Neuse has not been altered by 153 the state. He reminded the board that there are still stormwater regulations in the Cape Fear River Basin,just not 154 water-quality standards, but reasserted that there are water-quantity standards local development is still required to 155 abide by. He stated,for a lot of you that does not address the nutrient concerns you have, but hopefully, it is 156 resolved in the next year or two. Once the state adopts a final nutrient reduction strategy,the county will be able to 157 amend the UDP incorporating these new standards and enforce them. 158 159 Alex Gregory expressed that it seemed as though the current regulation was more about keeping water from flowing. 160 Water level like previously mentioned versus silt runoff, or something from disturbing the land. 161 162 Michael Harvey confirmed. 163 164 Alex Gregory commented that we would usually require a regulation on that, but now it's just don't block the water. 165