HomeMy WebLinkAboutPopulationLandCover10.1
NC
D
W
Q
B
R
O
A
D
R
I
V
E
R
B
A
S
I
N
P
L
A
N
:
P
o
p
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
&
L
a
n
d
C
o
v
e
r
2
0
0
8
La n d Co v e r
The Broad River Basin is located on the edge of the mountain region closest to the piedmont. Most of this basin is cover
in forested and agricultural lands. As shown in Figure x-1 and x-2, the forested areas are being converted to agriculture
as well as urban areas. Much of the urban development has centralized around interchanges of major US and State
highways. Population growth is also booming in these areas. With this growth comes increased pressure on the natural
environment. Every person living in or passing through a watershed creates water quality impacts. If water pollution
is to be reduced, each individual must be aware of these contributions and take actions to reduce them. The following
paragraphs discuss the most common impacts of human activity and offer suggestions to lessen those impacts
Po P u l at i o n & la n d Co v e r Ch a n g e
Legend
Water
Urban
Forest
Pasture
RowCrop
Shrub/Wetland
2001 2001 Land Cover
1%9%
61%
2%
27%
0%
Water
Urban
Forest
Shrub/Wetland
Pasture
Row Crop
Fi g u r e 10-2: la n d Co v e r P a t t e r n s a n d P e r C e n ta g e s in t h e Br o a d ri v e r Ba s i n F o r 2001
Source: Multi-Resolution Land Characteristics Consortium http://www.mrlc.gov/
Note: Due to sampling and classification differences, data from 1992 and 2001 cannot be compared directly. These maps are prepared here to
qualitatively demonstrate general land cover patterns.
Legend
Water
Urban
Forest
Pasture
RowCrop
Shrub/Wetland
1990 1992 Land Cover
0%4%
72%
1%
13%
10%
Water
Urban
Forest
Shrub/Wetland
Pasture
Row Crop
Fi g u r e 10-1: la n d Co v e r P a t t e r n s a n d P e r C e n ta g e s in t h e Br o a d ri v e r Ba s i n F o r 1992
1992
10.2
NC
D
W
Q
B
R
O
A
D
R
I
V
E
R
B
A
S
I
N
P
L
A
N
:
P
o
p
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
&
L
a
n
d
C
o
v
e
r
2
0
0
8
Im pa C t s f r o m po p u L a t I o n Gr o w t h a n d La n d Co v e r Ch a n G e s
ra P i d ur B anization
Population growth results in dramatic impacts on the natural landscape. The most obvious impact is the expansion of
urban and suburban areas. New stores, roads, and subdivisions are products of growing populations. What is not so
obvious is the astonishing rate at which rural landscapes are converted to developed land. Between 2000 and 2007, the
states population rate has increased by 12.6 percent, which is almost double the national growth rate of 7.2 percent.
During this time period, North Carolina became the 6th fastest growing state in the US and passed New Jersey to become
the 10th most populated state (http://www.ncatlasrevisited.org/homefrm.html). Some of this growth can be seen in the
Broad River Basin. See Tables 10-1 and 10-2 for details.
Fi g u r e 10-3: Po P u l at i o n g r o w t h B e t w e e n 1990 a n d 2000. ea C h d o t r e P r e s e n t s 100 P e o P l e .
Out of the three major counties in the Broad River Basin (Rutherfordton, Polk and Cleveland), Polk County has seen the
most growth with an estimated 24.4 percent growth by 2030. Other surrounding counties are seeing growth estimates
up to 38.5 percent. Municipalities in this basin have experienced a combined population growth of 32 percent between
2000 and 2005. As more people move into this area and build second homes as predicted by the US Census Bureau, there
will be a significant threat to water quality that will mirror an increase in impervious surfaces.
Impervious surfaces are materials hat prevent infiltration of water into the soil and include roads, rooftops, and parking
lots. These surfaces that prevent the infiltration of water into the ground alter the natural hydrology and concentrate
the flow of stormwater over the landscape. In undeveloped watershed, stormwater filters down through the soil, pulling
out pollutants, and replenishing the groundwater which may then be harvested through a homeowners well.
Vegetation holds down the soil, slows the flow of stormwater over the land, and as larger pollutants are trapped by the
soil, the roots absorb the other smaller pollutant particles. As a watershed becomes more impervious, stormwater that
can no longer soak into the ground is forced downhill where chances of flooding then become significantly increased.
This greater volume leads to greater flows which increase chances of gathering pollutants and transporting sediment. If
stormwater is not given a chance to slow down and allow pollutants to settle out, the pollutants will be carried directly
to streams and drinking water supplies. Reducing the amount of stormwater infiltrating into the ground decreases the
availability of aquifers, streams and rivers for drinking water supplies (Kauffman and Brant, 2000) It is well established
that stream degradation begins to occur when 10 percent or more of a watershed is covered with impervious surfaces.
The stream is significantly degraded when imperviousness reaches 30 percent of the watershed (Schueler, 1995). If
development of this nature continues, many more streams will become impaired by 2030 unless bold and comprehensive
measures are taken immediately to protect water quality. New technologies and plans for urban design are available
to help prevent such imperviousness. Some of which are explained in the Stormwater Design Manual. The following
discussion provides a general overview of potential solutions that must be catered to suit individual communities.
20001990
10.3
NC
D
W
Q
B
R
O
A
D
R
I
V
E
R
B
A
S
I
N
P
L
A
N
:
P
o
p
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
&
L
a
n
d
C
o
v
e
r
2
0
0
8
Fi g u r e 10-4: im P e r v i o u s Co v e r a n d su r F a C e ru n o F F (ePa, 2003)
P o P u l at i o n gr o w t h a n d im P a C t s o n aq u a t i C re s o u r C e s
Urbanization poses one of the greatest threats to aquatic resources. For example, a one-acre parking lot produces 16
times more runoff than a one-acre meadow (Schueler and Holland, 2000). A wide variety of studies over the past decade
converge on a central point: when more than 10 percent of the acreage in a watershed is covered in roads, parking lots,
rooftops, and other impervious surfaces, the rivers and streams within the watershed become seriously degraded. Brown
trout populations have been shown to decline sharply at 10 to 15 percent imperviousness. If urbanized area covers more
than 25 percent of a watershed, these studies point to an irreversible decline in ecosystem health (Beach, 2002 and Galli,
1991).
Greater numbers of homes, stores, and businesses require greater quantities of water. Growing populations not only
require more water, but they also lead to the discharge and runoff of greater quantities of waste and pollutants into the
state’s streams, rivers, lakes and groundwater. Thus, just as demand and use increases, some of the potential water
supply is lost (Orr and Stuart, 2000).
As development in surrounding metropolitan areas consumes neighboring forests and fields, the impacts on rivers,
lakes, and streams can be significant and permanent if stormwater runoff is not controlled (Orr and Stuart, 2000). As
watershed vegetation is replaced with impervious surfaces, the ability of the landscape to absorb and diffuse the effects
of natural rainfall is diminished. Urbanization results in increased surface runoff and correspondingly earlier and higher
peak streamflows after rainfall. Flooding frequency also
increases. These effects are compounded when small
streams are channelized (straightened) or piped, and
storm sewer systems are installed to increase transport
of stormwater downstream. Bank scour from these
frequent high flow events tends to enlarge streams and
increase suspended sediment. Scouring also destroys
the variety of habitat in streams, leading to degradation
of benthic macroinvertebrate populations and loss of
fisheries (EPA, 2003).
Ke y el e m e n t s o F a Co m P r e h e n s i v e
w at e r s h e d Pr o t e C t i o n st r at e g y
Extensive research on the impacts of development and
sobering population growth projections make it clear
that comprehensive land use planning is necessary to
protect aquatic resources. In order for land use planning
to effectively protect watersheds in the long-term, tools
Fi g u r e 10-5: im P e r v i o u s Co v e r a n d st r e a m
de g r a d a t i o n
10.4
NC
D
W
Q
B
R
O
A
D
R
I
V
E
R
B
A
S
I
N
P
L
A
N
:
P
o
p
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
&
L
a
n
d
C
o
v
e
r
2
0
0
8
and strategies must be applied at several scales. Effective implementation will require commitment ranging from the
individual citizen to the state government. A comprehensive watershed protection plan should act on the following
elements:
Basin Scale (Implemented by Town, County, and State Governments)
1. Characterize the watersheds within a basin as developed or undeveloped, identifying the watersheds that are
currently less than 10 percent impervious and those that are more than ten percent impervious.
2. Focus new construction projects to the already developed watersheds first. Then assign any construction that cannot
be accommodated in developed watersheds to a limited number of undeveloped watersheds. The watersheds to be
developed should be determined by their ecological importance and by other regional growth considerations, such
as the value of terrestrial ecosystems, the economic development potential as determined by proximity to roads
and rail lines, and the disposition of landowners in the area toward land preservation and development.
3. Adopt policies that maintain impervious surfaces in undeveloped watersheds at less than ten percent. These can
include private conservation easements, purchase of development rights, infrastructure planning, urban service
boundaries, rural zoning (20-200 acres per unit, depending on the area), and urban growth boundaries.
4. Ensure that local governments develop land use plans to provide adequate land for future development within
developed or developing watersheds.
Neighborhood Scale (Implemented by Town and County Governments)
1. Allow residential densities that support transit, reduce vehicle trips per household and minimize land consumption.
The minimum density for new development should be seven to ten net units per acre.
2. Require block densities that support walking and reduce the length of vehicle trips. Cities that support walking
and transit often have more than 100 blocks per square mile.
3. Connect the street network by requiring subdivision road systems to link to adjacent subdivisions.
4. Integrate houses with stores, civic buildings, neighborhood recreational facilities, and other daily or weekly
destinations.
5. Incorporate pedestrian and bike facilities (greenways) into new development and ensure these systems provide for
inter-neighborhood travel.
6. Encourage and require other design features and public facilities that accommodate and support walking by creating
neighborhoods with a pleasing scale and appearance. (e.g., short front-yard setbacks, neighborhood parks, alleys,
and architectural and material quality)
Site Scale (Implemented by Individual Property Owners, Developers, and Town and County
Governments)
1. Require application of the most effective structural stormwater practices, especially focusing on hot spots such as
high-volume streets, gas stations, and parking lots.
2. Establish buffers and setbacks that are appropriate for the area to be developed – more extensive in undeveloped
watersheds than in developed watersheds. In developed watersheds, buffers and setbacks should be reconciled to
other urban design needs such as density and a connected street network.
3. Educate homeowners about their responsibility in watershed management, such as buffer and yard maintenance,
proper disposal of oil and other toxic materials, and the impacts of excessive automobile use (Beach, 2002).
fo C u s ar e a s fo r ma n a G I n G th e Im pa C t s of po p u L a t I o n Gr o w t h
The elements of watershed protection listed in above are intended to guide land use planning and population density
decision-making. This section discusses specific concepts necessary to reduce the impacts of population growth.
Co n t r o l st o r m w a t e r ru n o F F a n d Po l u t t i o n
Stormwater runoff is rainfall or snowmelt that runs off the ground and impervious surfaces (e.g., buildings, roads, parking
lots, etc.). Because urbanization usually involves creation of new impervious surfaces, stormwater can quickly become
a major concern in growing communities.
The porous and varied terrain of natural landscapes like forests, wetlands, and grasslands traps rainwater and snowmelt
and allows them to filter slowly into the ground. In contrast, impervious (nonporous) surfaces like roads, parking lots,
and rooftops prevent rain and snowmelt from infiltrating, or soaking, into the ground. Most of the rainfall and snowmelt
remains above the surface, where it runs off rapidly in unnaturally large amounts.
10.5
NC
D
W
Q
B
R
O
A
D
R
I
V
E
R
B
A
S
I
N
P
L
A
N
:
P
o
p
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
&
L
a
n
d
C
o
v
e
r
2
0
0
8
Common Pollutants in Stormwater
Storm sewer systems concentrate runoff into smooth, straight conduits. This runoff gathers speed and power as it travels
through the pipes. When this runoff leaves the storm drains and empties into a stream, its excessive volume and power
blast out streambanks, damaging streamside vegetation and destroying aquatic habitat. These increased storm flows
carry sediment loads from construction sites and other denuded surfaces and eroded streambanks. They often carry
higher water temperatures from streets, rooftops, and parking lots, which are harmful to the health and reproduction of
aquatic life. The steep slopes and large elevation changes in western North Carolina intensify this effect as water rushes
downhill.
Storm sewers should not be confused with sanitary sewers, which transport human and industrial wastewaters to a
treatment plant before discharging into surface waters. There is no pre-treatment of stormwater in North Carolina.
Uncontrolled stormwater runoff has many impacts on both humans and the environment. Cumulative effects include
flooding, undercut and eroding streambanks, widened stream channels, threats to public health and safety, impaired
recreational use, and increased costs for drinking and wastewater treatment. For more information on stormwater
runoff, visit the DWQ Stormwater Permitting Unit at http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/su/stormwater.html or the NC Stormwater
information page at http://www.ncstormwater.org/. Additional fact sheets and information can also be found at http://
www.stormwatercenter.net/intro_factsheets.htm and www.bae.ncsu.edu/stormwater/index.html.
Controlling Stormwater Runoff and Pollution
Many daily activities have the potential to cause stormwater pollution. Any situation where activities can contribute
more pollutants to stormwater runoff is an area that should be considered for efforts to minimize stormwater impacts.
A major component in reducing stormwater impacts involves planning up front in the design process. New construction
designs should include plans to prevent or minimize the amount of runoff leaving the site. Wide streets, large cul-
de-sacs, long driveways, and sidewalks lining both sides of the street are all features of urbanizing areas that create
excess impervious cover and consume natural areas. In many instances, the presence of intact riparian buffers and/or
wetlands in urban areas can reduce the impacts of urban development. Establishment and protection of buffers should
be considered where feasible, and the amount of impervious cover should be limited as much as possible.
“Good housekeeping” to reduce the volume of stormwater leaving a site and reducing the amount of pollutants used in
our own backyards can also minimize the impact of stormwater runoff. DWQ has published a pamphlet entitled Improving
Water Quality in Your Own Backyard: Stormwater Management Starts at Home. The pamphlet provides information on
how homeowners and businesses can reduce the amount of runoff leaving their property and how to reduce the amount
and types of pollutants in that runoff. This document is available on-line at http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/nps/documents/
BackyardPDF.pdf or by calling (919) 733-5083 ext. 558.
Preserving the natural streamside vegetation (riparian buffer) is one of the most economical and efficient BMPs. In
particular, forested buffers provide a variety of benefits including filtering runoff and taking up nutrients, moderating
water temperature, preventing erosion and loss of land, providing flood control and helping to moderate streamflow, and
providing food and habitat for both aquatic and terrestrial wildlife (NCDENR-DWQ, 2004). For more information or to
obtain a free copy of DWQ’s Buffers for Clean Water brochure, call
(919) 733-5083, ext. 558.
P r o t e C t i n g he a d wat e r st r e a m s
Many streams in a given river basin are only small trickles of water
that emerge from the ground. A larger stream is formed at the
confluence of these trickles. This constant merging eventually forms
a large stream or river. Most monitoring of fresh surface waters
evaluates these larger streams. The many miles of small trickles,
collectively known as headwaters, are not directly monitored and
in many instances are not even indicated on maps. These streams
account for approximately 80 percent of the stream network and
provide many valuable services for quality and quantity of water
delivered downstream (Meyer et al., 2003). However, degradation
of headwater streams can (and does) impact the larger stream or
river.
There are three types of headwater streams: 1) perennial (flow
Fi g u r e 10-6 di a g r a m o F he a d wat e r
st r e a m s within a wat e r s h e d Bo u n d a r y
10.6
NC
D
W
Q
B
R
O
A
D
R
I
V
E
R
B
A
S
I
N
P
L
A
N
:
P
o
p
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
&
L
a
n
d
C
o
v
e
r
2
0
0
8
year-round); 2) intermittent (flow during wet seasons); and 3) ephemeral (flow only after precipitation events). All types
of headwater streams provide benefits to larger streams and rivers. Headwater streams control flooding, recharges
groundwater, maintain water quality, reduce downstream sedimentation, recycle nutrients, and create habitat for plants
and animals (Meyer et al., 2003).
In smaller headwater streams, fish communities are not well developed and benthic macroinvertebrates dominate aquatic
life. Benthic macroinvertebrates are often thought of as “fish food” and, in mid-sized streams and rivers, they are critical
to a healthy fish community. However, these insects, both in larval and adult stages, are also food for small mammals,
such as river otter and raccoons, birds and amphibians (Erman, 1996). Benthic macroinvertebrates in headwater streams
also perform the important function of breaking down coarse organic matter, such as leaves and twigs, and releasing fine
organic matter. In larger rivers, where coarse organic matter is not as abundant, this fine organic matter is a primary
food source for benthic macroinvertebrates and other organisms in the system (CALFED, 1999). When the benthic
macroinvertebrate community is changed or extinguished in an area, even temporarily, as occurs during land use changes,
it can have repercussions in many parts of both the terrestrial and aquatic food web.
Headwater streams also provide a source of insects for repopulating downstream waters where benthic macroinvertebrate
communities have been eliminated due to human alterations and pollution. Adult insects have short life spans and
generally live in the riparian areas surrounding the streams from which they emerge (Erman, 1996). Because there is little
upstream or stream-to-stream migration of benthic macroinvertebrates, once headwater populations are eliminated,
there is little hope for restoring a functioning aquatic community. In addition to macroinvertebrates, these streams
support diverse populations of plants and animals that face similar problems if streams are disturbed. Headwater
streams are able to provide these important ecosystem services due to their unique locations, distinctive flow patterns,
and small drainage areas.
Because of the small size of headwater streams, they are often overlooked during land use activities that impact water
quality. All landowners can participate in the protection of headwaters by keeping small tributaries in mind when making
land use management decisions on the areas they control. This includes activities such as retaining vegetated stream
buffers, minimizing stream channel alterations, and excluding cattle from streams. Local rural and urban planning
initiatives should also consider impacts to headwater streams when land is being developed. For a more detailed
description of watershed hydrology and watershed management, refer to EPA’s Watershed Academy website at http://
www.epa.gov/OWOW/watershed/wacademy/acad2000/watershedmgt/principle1.html.
re d u C t i o n im P a C t s F r o m st e e P sl o P e di s t u r B a n C e
Dramatic elevation changes and steep slopes define mountain topography. Building sites perched along mountainsides
provide access to unparalleled vistas and are a major incentive for development. However, construction on steep slopes
presents a variety of risks to the environment and human safety. This is of particular interest to communities in the
northwestern portiong of the Yadkin-Pee Dee river basin, where second home development is increasing along mountain
ridges.
Poorly controlled erosion and sediment from steep slope disturbance negatively impact water quality, hydrology, aquatic
habitat, and can threaten human safety and welfare. Soil types, geology, weather patterns, natural slope, surrounding
uses, historic uses, and other factors all contribute to unstable slopes. Steep slope disturbance usually involves some
form of grading. Grading is the mechanical excavation and filling of natural slopes to produce a level working surface.
Improper grading practices disrupt natural stormwater runoff patterns and result in poor drainage, high runoff velocities,
and increased peak flows during storm events. There is an inherent element of instability in all slopes and those who
choose to undertake grading and/or construction activities should be responsible for adequate site assessment, planning,
designing, and construction of reasonably safe and stable artificial slopes.
In cases where construction activities occur on steep slopes, slope stabilization should be mandated through a Site
Grading Plan and/or Site Fingerprinting. Site Grading Plans identify areas intended for grading and address impacts to
existing drainage patterns. They identify practices to stabilize, maintain and protect slopes from runoff and include
a schedule for grading disturbance as well as methods for disposal of borrow and fill materials. Site Fingerprinting is
a low-impact development (LID) best management practice (BMP) that minimizes land disturbances. Fingerprinting
involves clearing and grading only those onsite areas necessary for access and construction activities. Extensive clearing
and grading accelerates sediment and pollutant transport off-site. Fingerprinting and maintenance of vegetated buffers
during grading operations provide sediment control that reduces runoff and off-site sedimentation (Yaggi and Wegner,
2002).
Local communities also have a role in reducing impacts from steep slope development. These impacts can also be
10.7
NC
D
W
Q
B
R
O
A
D
R
I
V
E
R
B
A
S
I
N
P
L
A
N
:
P
o
p
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
&
L
a
n
d
C
o
v
e
r
2
0
0
8
addressed through the implementation of city and/or county land use and sediment and erosion control plans. Land
use plans are a non-regulatory approach to protect water quality, natural resources and sensitive areas. In the planning
process, a community gathers data and public input to guide future development by establishing long-range goals for
the local community over a ten- to twenty-year period. They can also help control the rate of development, growth
patterns and conserve open space throughout the community. Land use plans examine the relationship between land
uses and other areas of interest including quality-of-life, transportation, recreation, infrastructure and natural resource
protection (Jolley, 2003).
Sediment and Erosion Control Plans are a regulatory approach to reducing the impacts of steep slope development and
ensure that land disturbing activities do not result in water quality degradation, soil erosion, flooding, or harm to human
health (i.e., landslides). The Division of Land Resources (DLR) Land Quality Section (LQS) has the primary responsibility for
assuring that erosion is minimized and sedimentation is reduced during construction activities. Under the Sedimentation
Pollution Control Act, cities and counties are given the option to adopt local ordinances that meet or exceed the minimum
requirements established by the State. Local programs must be reviewed and approved by the NC Sedimentation Control
Commission. Once approved, local staff performs plan reviews and enforces compliance. If for some reason the local
program is not being enforced, the NC Sedimentation Control Commission can assume administrative control of the local
program until the local government assures the State that it can administer and enforce sediment and erosion control
rules. The Sedimentation and Pollution Control Act as well as an example of a local ordinance can be found on the DLR
website (http://www.dlr.enr.state.nc.us/pages/sedimentation.html).
The requirements outlined in the Sedimentation Pollution Control Act were designed to be implementable statewide and
may not fully capture the needs of mountain communities. For example, only projects disturbing more than one-acre
of land are required to produce a sediment and erosion control plan. Many small construction projects fall below this
threshold. In steep mountainous terrain, even these small disturbances can produce an astounding volume of sediment
runoff. DWQ strongly encourages local governments to adopt Sediment and Erosion Control ordinances that exceed the
State’s minimum requirements.
th e ro L e of Lo C a L Go v e r n m e n t s
re d u C i n g im P a C t s F r o m existing urBanization
Below is a summary of management actions recommended for local authorities, followed by discussions on large,
watershed management issues. These actions are necessary to address current sources of impairment and to prevent
future degradation in all streams. The intent of these recommendations is to describe the types of actions necessary
to improve stream conditions, not to specify particular administrative or institutional mechanisms for implementing
remedial practices. Those types of decisions must be made at the local level.
Because of uncertainties regarding how individual remedial actions cumulatively impact stream conditions and in how
aquatic organisms will respond to improvements, the intensity of management effort necessary to bring about a particular
degree of biological improvement cannot be established in advance. The types of actions needed to improve biological
conditions can be identified, but the mix of activities that will be necessary – and the extent of improvement that will be
attainable – will only become apparent over time as an adaptive management approach is implemented. Management
actions are suggested below to address individual problems, but many of these actions are interrelated (NCDENR-DWQ,
2003).
Actions one through five are important to restoring and sustaining aquatic communities in watersheds, with the first three
recommendations being the most important.
(1) Feasible and cost-effective stormwater retrofit projects should be implemented throughout the watershed to
mitigate the hydrologic effects of development (e.g., increased stormwater volumes and increased frequency and
duration of erosive and scouring flows). This should be viewed as a long-term process. Although there are many
uncertainties, costs in the range of $1 million per square mile can probably be anticipated.
(a) Over the short term, currently feasible retrofit projects should be identified and implemented.
(b) In the long term, additional retrofit opportunities should be implemented in conjunction with infrastructure
improvements and redevelopment of existing developed areas.
(c) Grant funds for these retrofit projects may be available from EPA initiatives, such as EPA Section 319 funds,
or the North Carolina Clean Water Management Trust Fund.
(2) A watershed scale strategy to address toxic inputs should be developed and implemented, including a variety of
10.8
NC
D
W
Q
B
R
O
A
D
R
I
V
E
R
B
A
S
I
N
P
L
A
N
:
P
o
p
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
&
L
a
n
d
C
o
v
e
r
2
0
0
8
source reduction and stormwater treatment methods. As an initial framework for planning toxicity reduction
efforts, the following general approach is proposed:
(a) Implementation of available best management practice (BMP) opportunities for control of stormwater volume
and velocities. As recommended above to improve aquatic habitat potential, these BMPs will also remove
toxics from stormwater.
(b) Development of a stormwater and dry weather sampling strategy in order to facilitate the targeting of
pollutant removal and source reduction practices.
(c) Implementation of stormwater treatment BMPs, aimed primarily at pollutant removal, at appropriate
locations.
(d) Development and implementation of a broad set of source reduction activities focused on: reducing non-
storm inputs of toxics; reducing pollutants available for runoff during storms; and managing water to reduce
storm runoff.
(3) Stream channel restoration activities should be implemented in target areas, in conjunction with stormwater
retrofit BMPs, in order to improve aquatic habitat. Before beginning stream channel restoration, a geomorphologic
survey should be conducted to determine the best areas for stream channel restoration. Additionally, it would
be advantageous to implement retrofit BMPs before embarking on stream channel restoration, as restoration is
best designed for flows driven by reduced stormwater runoff. Costs of approximately $200 per foot of channel
should be anticipated (Haupt, et al., 2002 and Weinkam, 2001). Grant funds for these retrofit projects may be
available from federal sources, such as EPA Section 319 funds, or state sources including North Carolina Clean
Water Management Trust Fund.
(4) Actions recommended above (e.g., stormwater quantity and quality retrofit BMPs) are likely to reduce nutrient/
organic loading, and to some extent, its impacts. Activities recommended to address this loading include the
identification and elimination of illicit discharges; education of homeowners, commercial applicators, and others
regarding proper fertilizer use; street sweeping; catch basin clean-out practices; and the installation of additional
BMPs targeting biological oxygen demand (BOD) and nutrient removal at appropriate sites.
(5) Prevention of further channel erosion and habitat degradation will require effective post-construction stormwater
management for all new development in the study area.
(6) Effective enforcement of sediment and erosion control regulations will be essential to the prevention of additional
sediment inputs from construction activities. Development of improved erosion and sediment control practices
may also be beneficial.
(7) Watershed education programs should be implemented and continued by local governments with the goal of
reducing current stream damage and preventing future degradation. At a minimum, the program should include
elements to address the following issues:
(a) Redirecting downspouts to pervious areas rather than routing these flows to driveways or gutters;
(b) Protecting existing woody riparian areas on all streams;
(c) Replanting native riparian vegetation on stream channels where such vegetation is absent; and
(d) Reducing and properly managing pesticide and fertilizer use.
re d u C i n g im P a C t s o F Fu t u r e ur B anization
Proactive planning efforts at the local level are needed to assure that urbanization is done in a manner that maintains
water quality. These planning efforts will need to find a balance between water quality protection, natural resource
management, and economic growth. Managing population growth requires planning for the needs of increased population,
as well as developing and enforcing environmental protection measures. These actions are critical to water quality
management and the quality of life for the residents of the basin. Public education is also needed in the Savannah River
basin so that citizens can learn and understand the value of urban planning and stormwater management.
Streams in areas adjacent to high growth areas of the basin are at a high risk of loosing healthy aquatic communities. These
biological communities are important to maintaining the ecological integrity in the Savannah River basin. Unimpacted
streams are important sources of benthic macroinvertebrates and fish for reestablishment of biological communities in
nearby streams that are recovering from past impacts or are being restored.
To prevent further impairment to aquatic life in streams in urbanizing watersheds local governments should:
(1) Identify waters that are threatened by construction activities.
10.9
NC
D
W
Q
B
R
O
A
D
R
I
V
E
R
B
A
S
I
N
P
L
A
N
:
P
o
p
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
&
L
a
n
d
C
o
v
e
r
2
0
0
8
(2) Protect existing riparian habitat along streams.
(3) Implement stormwater BMPs during and after construction.
(4) Develop land use plans that minimize disturbance in sensitive areas of watersheds.
(5) Minimize impervious surfaces including roads and parking lots.
(6) Develop public outreach programs to educate citizens about stormwater runoff.
(7) Enact a Stormwater Control Ordinance. EPA offers a model ordinance at: http://www.epa.gov/nps/ordinance/
stormwater.htm
For more detailed information regarding recommendations for new development found in the text box, refer to EPA’s
website at www.epa.gov/owow/watershed/wacademy/acad2000/protection, the Center for Watershed Protection
website at www.cwp.org, and the Low Impact Development Center website at www.lowimpactdevelopment.org. For an
example of local community planning effort to reduce stormwater runoff, visit http://www.charmeck.org/Home.htm.
th e ro L e of ho m e o w n e r s an d La n d o w n e r s
te n si m P l e st e e P s t o re d u C i n g Po l u t i o n F r o m in d i v i d u a l ho m e s
1. To decrease polluted runoff from paved surfaces, households can develop alternatives to areas traditionally
covered by impervious surfaces. Porous pavement materials are available for driveways and sidewalks, and native
vegetation and mulch can replace high maintenance grass lawns.
2. Homeowners can use fertilizers sparingly and sweep driveways, sidewalks, and roads instead of using a hose.
3. Instead of disposing of yard waste, use the materials to start a compost pile.
4. Learn to use Integrated Pest Management (IPM) in the garden and on the lawn to reduce dependence on harmful
pesticides.
5. Pick up after pets.
6. Use, store, and dispose of chemicals properly.
7. Drivers should check their cars for leaks and recycle their motor oil and antifreeze when these fluids are
changed.
8. Drivers can also avoid impacts from car wash runoff (e.g., detergents, grime, etc.) by using car wash facilities that
do not generate runoff.
9. Households served by septic systems should have them professionally inspected and pumped every 3 to 5 years.
They should also practice water conservation measures to extend the life of their septic systems.
10. Support local government watershed planning efforts and ordinance development.
ta B l e 10-1: Po P u l at i o n B y Co u n t y in t h e Br o a d ri v e r Ba s i n
Co u n t y
% o F
Co u n t y in
Ba s i n
2000
es t i m at e d
Po P u l at i o n
2010
% Ch a n g e
2000 t o
2010
es t i m at e d
Po P u l at i o n
2020
% Ch a n g e
2010 t o
2020
es t i m at e d
Po P u l at i o n
2030
% Ch a n g e
2020 t o
2030
Buncombe 6.25 206,299 234,697 13.8 262,838 12.0 289,908 10.3
Cleveland 99.4 96,284 97,155 0.9 101,157 4.1 104,933 3.7
Gaston 3.0 190,310 205,489 8.0 216,097 5.2 224,946 4.1
Henderson 29.0 89,204 107,680 20.7 126,163 17.2 144,989 14.9
Lincoln 6.6 63,780 76,958 20.7 89,825 16.7 102,567 14.2
McDowell 14.1 42,151 45,143 7.1 48,747 8.0 52,144 7.0
Polk 99.9 18,324 19,721 7.6 21,982 11.5 24,223 10.2
Rutherford 99.9 62,901 63,610 1.1 65,571 3.1 67,149 2.4
10.10
NC
D
W
Q
B
R
O
A
D
R
I
V
E
R
B
A
S
I
N
P
L
A
N
:
P
o
p
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
&
L
a
n
d
C
o
v
e
r
2
0
0
8
ta B l e 10-2: Po P u l at i o n B y muniCiPality in t h e Br o a d ri v e r Ba s i n
muniCiPality Co u n t y aP r i l 2000 Ju l y 2005 % Ch a n g e
BELWOOD CLEVELAND 962 1,010 5.0
BOILING SPRINGS CLEVELAND 3,866 3,997 3.4
BOSTIC RUTHERFORD 328 321 -2.1
CASAR CLEVELAND 308 305 -1.0
CHERRYVILLE GASTON 5,361 5,563 3.8
CHIMNEY ROCK RUTHERFORD 175 182 4.0
COLUMBUS POLK 992 1,060 6.9
EARL CLEVELAND 234 234 0.0
ELLENBORO RUTHERFORD 479 473 -1.3
FALLSTON CLEVELAND 603 606 0.5
FOREST CITY RUTHERFORD 7,549 7,283 -3.5
GROVER CLEVELAND 698 694 -0.6
KINGS MOUNTAIN CLEVELAND, GASTON 9,693 10,606 9.4
KINGSTOWN CLEVELAND 845 826 -2.2
LAKE LURE RUTHERFORD 1,027 1,066 3.8
LATTIMORE CLEVELAND 419 440 5.0
LAWNDALE CLEVELAND 642 638 -0.6
MOORESBORO CLEVELAND 314 314 0.0
PATTERSON SPRINGS CLEVELAND 620 608 -1.9
POLKVILLE CLEVELAND 535 539 0.7
RUTH RUTHERFORD 329 323 -1.8
RUTHERFORDTON RUTHERFORD 4,131 4,151 0.5
SALUDA POLK, HENDERSON 575 573 -0.3
SHELBY CLEVELAND 19,477 20,876 7.2
SPINDALE RUTHERFORD 4,022 3,916 -2.6
TRYON POLK 1,760 1,771 0.6
WACO CLEVELAND 328 327 -0.3
10.11
NC
D
W
Q
B
R
O
A
D
R
I
V
E
R
B
A
S
I
N
P
L
A
N
:
P
o
p
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
&
L
a
n
d
C
o
v
e
r
2
0
0
8
re f e r e n C e s
Allen, J., and K.S. Lu. 200. Modeling and Predicting Future Uurban Growth in the Charleston Area. Strom Thurmond
Institute, Clemson University, Clemson, South Carolina. 24 Sept. 2001. http://www.charleston.net/org/greenbelt/
method.html
Beach, D. 2002. Coastal Sprawl: The Effects of Urban Design on Aquatic Ecosystems in the United States. Pew Oceans
Commission, Arlington, Virgina.
EPA. Protecting Water Quality From Urban Runoff EPA 841-F-03-003. United States Environmental Protection Agency,
Washington, D.C. Feb. 2003. www.epa.gov/nps
Galli, J. 1991. Thermal Impacts Associated with Urbanization and Stormwater Management Best Management Practices.
Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments, Maryland Department of Environment, Washington, D.C..
Haupt, M., J. Jurek, L. Hobbs, J. Guidry, C. Smith and R. Ferrell. 2002. A Preliminary Analysis of Stream Restoration
Costs in the North Carolina Wetlands Restoration Program. Paper presented at the conference Setting the Agenda
for Water Resources Research. April 9, 2002. Raleigh, NC.
Kauffman, G.J., and T. Brant. The Role of Impervious Cover as a Watershed-based Zoning Tool to Protect water Quality
in the Christina River Basin of Delaware, Pennsylvania, and Maryland. University of Delaware, Institute for Public
Administration, Water Resources Agency. 2000.
NRI. 2001. National Resources Inventory. Natural Resources Conservation Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture,
Washington, D.C. 20 Dec. 2001. http://www.nhq.nrcs.usda.gov/NRI/1997
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources (NCDENR). DWQ. February 2004. Buffers for Clean
Water. Raleigh, NC.
Orr, D.M., Jr. and A.W. Stuart. 2000. The North Carolina Atlas. The University of North Carolina Press. Chapel Hill,
NC.
Schueler, Thomas. 1995. Site Planning for Urban Stream Protection. Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments:
Washington D.C.. 1995
Schueler, T.R. 1992. Mitigating the Adverse Impacts of Urbanization on Streams: A Comprehensive Strategy for Local
Government. Watershed Restoration Sourcebook. Publication #92701 of the Metropolitan Washington Council of
Governments, edited by
P. Kumble and T. Schueler.
Schueler, T., and H.K. Holland. 2000. The Practice of Watershed Protection. Center for Watershed Protection,
Ellicott City, Maryland.
U.S. Census Bureau. 2000. United States Census 2000. 9 Jan. 2002. http://www.census.gov/population/projections/
nation/summary/np-tl.txt
Yaggi, M.A. and W. Wegner. 2002. /Steep Slope Development and How It Effects the Environment/. Concerned Citizens
of Southeast; Brewster, NY.