Wake County Stormwater Management Task Force Meeting

1
Wake CountyStormwater Management Task
ForceMeeting 5July 20, 2006
2
Identify and Prioritize Citizen Issues
Expected Outcomes
Issues

• Define selection and prioritization criteria
• Prioritize issues that the Task Force wishes to
  consider
• Identify additional data needed by the Task Force
  to prioritize issues

Meeting 5 July 2006
3
Meeting Agenda

• Dinner and Welcome
• Kenn Gardner, Wake County
• Special Topics
• Lake Wheeler Water Quality Monitoring
• WRAL Nuisance Flooding Story
• Work Group Process Reporting
• Wrap-Up Path Forward

4
Lake Wheeler Water Quality Monitoring
Swift Creek Pump Station Spill estimated at 7.9
million gallons
5
Fecal Coliform Sampling _at_ Lake Wheeler
6
E. Coli Sampling _at_ Lake Wheeler
7
Dissolved Oxygen Sampling _at_ Lake Wheeler
8
WRAL Nuisance Flooding Story

• Property owner indicates that stream behind
  property floods frequently
• Opposes rezoning of OI property upstream to
  high-density residential
• Total upstream drainage area 220 acres

9
(No Transcript)
10
Meeting Agenda

• Dinner and Welcome
• Kenn Gardner, Wake County
• Current Events
• Secondary Cumulative Impacts
• Work Group Process Reporting
• Wrap-Up Path Forward

11
National Environmental Policy Act of 1969

• Prepare environmental documents that examine
  environmental impacts of major federal actions
• Include alternatives analysis
• Avoid and minimize impacts
• Address direct, indirect (secondary), and
  cumulative impacts

12
State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) Requirements

• Must document predicted environmental effects of
  projects
• Discussion should center on direct, indirect
  secondary, and cumulative impacts the project
  will have on

Direct Impacts addressed in EISSecondary and
Cumulative Impacts addressed in SCI Master
Mitigation Plans
13
Secondary Impacts 15A NCAC 01C .0103 (20)

• indirect impacts caused by and resulting from
  a specific activity that occur later in time or
  further removed in distance than direct impacts,
  but are reasonably foreseeable.
• Indirect impacts may include growth inducing
  effects and other effects related to induced
  changes in the pattern of land use, population
  density or growth rate, and related effects on
  air and water and other natural systems,
  including ecosystems.

14
Cumulative Impacts 15A NCAC 01C .0103 (3)

• mean environmental impacts resulting from
  incremental effects of an activity when added to
  other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable
  future activities regardless of what entities
  undertake such other actions.
• Cumulative impacts are the reasonably
  foreseeable impacts from individually minor but
  collectively significant activities.

15
Typical EIS Comments from State Agencies

• To prevent continued degradation in streams, each
  municipality implement protective measures that
  exceed those stipulated by State and Federal
  programs.
• Encourage each municipality to require stormwater
  treatment when imperviousness approaches 10 or
  6 in watersheds with federally listed aquatic
  species.

16
Typical EIS Comments from State
Agencies(continued)

• Encourage each municipality to prohibit
  development within the 100 year floodplain.
• Encourage each municipality to maximize buffer
  widths and increase the restrictive zones within
  buffers. Recommended buffer widths are 100 ft on
  perennial streams and 50 ft on intermittent
  streams.

17
Conditions for EIS Approval at the D.E. Benton
Water Treatment Plant

• Additional water quality sampling throughout the
  City of Raleigh
• Field observation and photo documentation of
  selected stream corridors (geomorphology)
• Additional stream gauging downstream of plant
• Benthic and fish community sampling
• Mussel surveys

NC DENR is requiring the City of Raleigh to
summarize and report collected data. If negative
trends are identified, the City will work with NC
DENR to implement solutions for areas of concern.
18
Meeting Agenda

• Dinner and Welcome
• Kenn Gardner, Wake County
• Special Topics
• Lake Wheeler Water Quality Monitoring
• WRAL Nuisance Flooding Story
• Work Group Process Reporting
• Wrap-Up Path Forward

19
Work Group Process

• Four groups based on case studies from last
  meeting
• Each group will be asked the same four questions
• Why do you believe this issue is important to our
  community (i.e. public health, cost impacts,
  etc.)?
• What are the primary causes of this issue?
• How would you define a level of service
  expectation for this issue?
• What other information do you need to prioritize
  these issues

20
Work Group Process (continued)

• For questions 1 2, you will also be asked to
  rank the responses
• Groups will report out to the Task Force
• Other task force members will have an opportunity
  to weigh in on each topic

21
Meeting Agenda

• Dinner and Welcome
• Kenn Gardner, Wake County
• Current Events
• Secondary Cumulative Impacts
• Work Group Process Reporting
• Wrap-Up Path Forward

22
Review and Discuss Issues and Concerns
Expected Outcomes
Issues

• Obtain adequate answers to each question posed by
  the Task Force
• Finalize list of prioritized issues and concerns
• Introduce peer counties

Meeting 6 September 2006
23
Select Tools and Strategies to Address Issues and
Concerns
Expected Outcomes
Tools Strategies

• Present information on current, county-wide
  stormwater programs and activities
• Present data from peer county review

Meetings 7 October 2006
24
Thank You For Your Time And Interest!