Stormwater proposals worry CAMA counties

By Jason King
Assistant Communications Director

Twenty North Carolina coastal counties will sustain huge hits to their tax bases, and residential and commercial development will slow considerably if amendments to the state Coastal Stormwater Rule are adopted as proposed, Carteret County Manager John Langdon told members of the Environment Steering Committee on Feb. 25.

Langdon, representing a group of concerned coastal county officials, requested the Association’s assistance in opposing further stormwater regulations unless sufficient impact analyses are performed. The steering committee took no action but decided to revisit the issue during its March 31 meeting in order to present a recommendation to the NCACC’s Board of Directors on May 14.

The proposed amendments represent a much stricter version of North Carolina’s Phase II stormwater regulations that currently affect three coastal counties: Brunswick, New Hanover and Onslow. Staff from the NCACC and N.C. League of Municipalities met earlier in February with managers and representatives from coastal counties and municipalities to discuss the proposed rule amendments, which would affect the 20 counties currently subject to the Coastal Area Management Act (CAMA).

“I’m not here to try to convince you that we don’t need effective stormwater management,” Langdon said. “I’m not here to try to convince you that what we are doing now is adequate.

“We can do better on rules that would be more effective.”

Langdon, Pamlico County Commissioner Christine Mele and Pamlico realtor Missy Baskervill represented coastal counties at the steering committee meeting and told attendees that building a home in the 20 CAMA counties will become unaffordable for all but the wealthy under the proposed rules, which were adopted by the Environmental Management Commission on Jan. 10.

Once the proposed rule amendments garner the approval of the state’s Rules Review Commission, the agency must receive 10 letters of objection in order for the issue to go to the General Assembly for review. If the General Assembly takes no action in 30 days, the set of proposals will go into effect at the conclusion of the session.

“This is certainly going to the General Assembly this year,” said Langdon, who added that legislative leadership has made it clear that some form of rule changes will pass. “So the real issue is: what’s going to pass?”

According to Langdon, the proposed rule amendments are not appropriate for rural areas because they virtually eliminate low density projects. For all new projects within one-half mile of shellfish waters, the low density threshold would be reduced from 25 percent to 12 percent. For example, a 0.25-acre lot with no setback requirements could have a maximum area of impervious surface (rooftop, driveway, patio, etc.) of a little more than 1,300 square feet.

Any wetlands will not be allowed to be included in the calculation used to determine impervious surface density. The vegetative setback for new development – regardless of location in a county – will increase from 30 feet to 50 feet, and any non-residential development that disturbs more than 10,000 square feet (roughly 0.23 acres) of land cannot be classified as low density.

All high density projects require engineered stormwater controls, such as detention ponds.

Mele said most of the vacant land in Pamlico would become unbuildable and lose its tax value, reducing the county tax base by roughly 81 percent.

“What about people who bought lots five to 10 years ago?” she asked. “They won’t be able to build on it – and they don’t even know it yet.”

Mele and Baskervill offered an example of a typical vacant lot in the Town of Oriental. The lot, which is less than half a mile from shellfish waters, is 4,464 square feet in area. The new rules would allow a maximum impervious surface area of just under 535 square feet. The town does not allow on-street parking and requires two off-street parking spots for building. This requires roughly 360 square feet of parking area, meaning the structure will realistically have to be built on a second level, above the parking spots. A 10-by-15 foot driveway reduces the home size to less than 386 square feet. Take away a 1 foot roof overhang and six inches of wall thickness around the house, and you’re left with a home that has less than 277 square feet of living space.

During the public comment period for the proposals in 2007, the Association argued that the proposed rule amendments do not strike a balance between economic development and environmental interests.

“I think we have to have a sanity check,” Langdon said.

Union pushes for new authority on reclaimed water

Steering committee members unanimously supported a resolution from Union County requesting that the Legislature grant counties the explicit authority to operate reclaimed water systems.

Union, the nation’s 15th-fastest growing county from 2000-06 according to the U.S. Census Bureau, has been under Stage III mandatory restrictions since early November 2007. Among other restrictions, the ordinance prohibits watering lawns; washing vehicles, public buildings, sidewalks and streets; and using water for dust control – all potential uses for reclaimed water, according to Assistant County Manager Matthew Delk.

Reclaimed water systems treat wastewater so that it can be reused for “non-potable” purposes. Treating the water is expensive, but county governments need the future option considering the current drought and projected strain that growth would place on North Carolina’s water supply.

The resolution also seeks to change G.S. 153A-331 to give counties the subdivision authority to enable developers to install reclaimed water pipes (so-called “purple pipes”) through the subdivision approval process.

The steering committee also heard but did not act on a second resolution from Union County that asks the Legislature to grant counties and/or county health departments the authority to regulate the use of groundwater during times of drought.

Committee addresses flaws with tipping tax allocation formula

Steering committee members also unanimously voted to support a change in the statewide $2 per ton tipping tax allocation formula set in S1492, the Solid Waste Management Act of 2007.

The fee is estimated to generate $22 million annually. The state receives 50 percent. Counties and cities that provide solid waste management services split 37.5 percent of the revenue, and 12.5 percent goes into the Solid Waste Management Trust Fund.

The formula distributes the county share based on a county’s population that does not reside within the limits of a municipality, rather than by gross county population. The allocation formula is unusual and not supported by the Association, since counties also provide services to citizens who live in a municipality.

Under an allocation formula that distributes money to counties based on gross population, Mecklenburg County, for example, would receive $384,920. Under the current allocation, Mecklenburg nets just $49,541.

Committee members recognized the controversial nature in seeking a change in the formula, since some counties will stand to lose money from what is currently written. NCACC Executive Director David F. Thompson said that not seeking a correction in the allocation formula would set a dangerous precedent, a sentiment echoed by steering committee co-chairs Chuck McGrady of Henderson County and Jimmy Clayton of Person County.

“We would hate to see this formula be applied to other areas – such as health departments,” McGrady said.

In other steering committee news from February:

• Kendall Jordan, Director of Public Policy Research for the Public School Forum of North Carolina, reviewed the highlights of the 2007 Local School Finance Study for Public Education Steering Committee members during their Feb. 12 meeting. According to the study, released in each of the past 20 years, the 10 wealthiest counties spent an average of $2,255 per student in 2005-06, with Orange County leading the way at $3,586 spent per student.
• The Agriculture Steering Committee met Feb. 13 and heard from Dr. Ryan Boyles, director of the State Climate Office of North Carolina at N.C. State University. Boyles told attendees that despite the drought it could be a good year for crops that do not require irrigation, depending on late spring and summer rainfall. Crops that require irrigation are in jeopardy, however.
• The Intergovernmental Relations Steering Committee met Feb. 18 to begin development of the Association’s policy on transportation in the short session. The committee planned to meet again via teleconference March 20 to finalize a recommendation for the Board of Directors for consideration at its May 14 meeting.