20050732 Ver 01_Public Comments_20051005

Good evening. My name is Ken Boggs and I live at 371
River Road, here in Chatham County.
I am very concerned with the impact that the Briar Chapel
development will have fo,r the following reasons:
1. The hearings and reviews of the Briar Chapel
development have followed the model of Ready, Fire,
Aim. As a consequence, there are inadequate plans,
inadequate enforcement plans, and inadequate funding
and staffing to perform enforcement. Last there are
inadequate penalties for the Briar Chapel, developer for
their non-performance.
2. My home depends on well water. This well was
expensive far me to put in. I don't want to see my
investment destroyed by inadequate quality controls
with the Briar Chapel development. I don't have any
alternative to well water as the county does not have
county water available in my area.
3. I'm concerned with hidden, undiagnosed water
pollution. Where this kind of thing happens, it takes
years for the culprits to be proven and by that time the
people in the area affected has been damaged beyond
repair. The Briar Chapel developer is not a local firm,
nor a North Carolina firm and as such has no continuing
sustained interest in protecting our water quality. If
something should go wrong, it will be the residents of
Briar Chapel who Newland will point to as responsible
and not themselves. This will pit neighbor against
neighbor unconstructiveiy as it has already happened in
North Raleigh. We can do better than this.
Thank you for the opportunity t e
i

-, ~
Mitch Baryon's Hearing Remarks
Briar Chapel -Chatham County
Public Hearing on Briar Chapel's 401 Certification
GOOD EVENING. MY NAME IS MITCH BARRON OF NEWLAND
COMMUNITIES. I AM THE FOR THE BRIAR CHAPEL
DEVELOPMENT. NEWLAND IS COMMITTED TO ENSURING THAT THE
VARIOUS DESIGN ELEMENTS OF BRIAR CHAPEL MEET AND -WHERE
POSSIBLE -EXCEED WHAT IS REQUIRED BY LOCAL ORDINANCE AND
STATE AND FEDERAL LAWS AND REGULATIONS TO PROTECT WATER
QUALITY. THE MEASURES WE ARE IMPLEMENTING TO ENSURE THAT
WATER QUALITY AND THE ENVIRONMENT ARE PROTECTED INCLUDE THE
FOLLOWING:
• WASTEWATER WILL BE TREATED TO REUSE STANDARDS AND
TREATMENT WILL INCLUDE ADVANCED NITRATE/NITROGEN AND
PHOSPHORUS REMOVAL, WHICH IS NOT REQUIRED BY THE REUSE
RULES
• THE DEVELOPMENT WILL BE ABOUT 56% OPEN SPACE WHICH
MINIMIZES THE AMOUNT OF IMPERVIOUS SUFACES AND IN TURN,
STORMWATER RUNOFF.
• NEWLAND'S STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN MEETS
CHATHAM COUNTY ORDINANCE REQUIREMENTS BY PROVIDING
STORMWATER DETENTION SUCH THAT PEAK FLOW RATES IN THE
1-YEAR, 24-HOUR STORM DO NOT EXCEED PRE-DEVELOPMENT
CONDITIONS
• STORMWATER DISCHARGE VOLUME CONTROLS ARE DESIGNED
TO CAPTURE/RELEASE OR INFILTRATE THE FIRST INCH OF
RUNOFF FROM THE DEVELOPED AREAS OVER A 2 TO 5 DAY
PERIOD
• NEWLAND'S STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN EXCEEDS LOCAL
ORDINANCE REQUIREMENTS BY PROVIDING ADDITIONAL
DETENTION AND TREATMENT FOR RUNOFF IN THE COMERCIAL
AREAS. AT LEAST 25% OF THE NITROGEN AND 85% OF THE TOTAL
SUSPENDED SOLIDS WILL BE REMOVED FROM STORMWATER
RUNOFF IN THE COMMERCIAL AREAS BEFORE IT EXITS THE
DEVELOPMENT
• CONSTRUCTION OF BRIAR CHAPEL WILL BE IMPLEMENTED
UNDER A EROSION AND SEDIMENTATION CONTROL PLAN
APPROVED BY THE DIVISION OF LAND RESOURCES -BEST
MANAGEMENT PRACTICES WILL BE INSTALLED THAT CONTROL
SEDIMENTATION FROM THE PEAK RUNOFF GENERATED BY THE
10-YEAR STORM

~..
• SEDIMENT BASINS WILL BE DESIGNED ACCORDING TO DLR
CRITERIA FOR USE IN AREAS DESIGNATED AS HIGH QUALITY
WATERS
• BRIAR CHAPEL WILL HAVE AT LEAST 50 FOOT BUFFERS ON ALL
EMPHEMERAL STREAMS AND 30 FOOT BUFFERS ON ALL OTHER
STREAMS -MORE THAN WHAT IS REQUIRED BY LAW -WHICH
WILL DECREASE THE LIKELIHOOD THAT SEDIlVIENT WILL ENTER
THE STREAM SYSTEM
• THE PROPOSED BUFFERS MEET OR EXCEED THE EMUS BUFFER
REQUIREMENTS FOR LOCATING SPRAY FIELDS - SPRAYFIELDS
ARE AT LEAST 100 FEET FROM ANY WELL, 50 FEET FROM ANY
PROPERTY BOUNDARY, AND OUTSIDE OF ANY STREAM BUFFER
• NEWLAND WILL BE CONDUCTING BOTH GROUND AND SURFACE
WATER MONITORING AT THE BRIAR CHAPEL DEVELOPMENT TO
ENSURE WATER QUALITY IS PROTECTED
NEWLAND HAS PROVIDED DETAILED WRITTEN RESPONSES TO COMMENTS
SUBMITTED TO THE CORPS BY CHATHAM COUNTY CITIZENS FOR
EFFECTIVE COMMUNITIES, THE HAW RIVER ASSEMBLY, AND THE
FEARRINGTON HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION. WE ARE NOT HERE TONIGHT
TO LISTEN TO ANY ADDITIONAL CONCERNS THAT MAY BE EXPRESSED.
ONCE THE COMMENT PERIOD CLOSES AND ALL COMMENTS ARE
RECEIVED, WE WILL RESPOND IN WRITING TO TONIGHT'S COMMENTS AND
ANY ADDITIONAL WRITTEN COMMENTS SUBMITTED DURING THE PUBLIC
COMMENT PERIOD.
THERE IS ONE SPECIFIC ISSUE THAT WE WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK TO
TONIGHT. OUR COMMUNICATIONS WITH. THE CITIZENS GROUPS INDICATE
THAT THERE IS PARTICULAR CONCERN ABOUT NEWLAND'S PROPOSED
STREAM RESTORATION SITE TO MITIGATE FOR IlvIPACTS RELATED TO
BRIAR CHAPEL -HARPERS CROSSROADS. FOR THIS REASON, RICH
MOGENSEN OF [EARTHMARK] IS HERE TO PROVIDE SOME INFORMATION
ABOUT THE SITE SELECTION PROCESS AND THE HARPERS CROSSROADS
SITE ITSELF.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR THE TIME AND ATTENTION YOU HAVE
GIVEN OUR APPLICATION AND FEEL FREE TO CALL ME OR ANY OF
NEWLAND'S CONSULTANTS AS YOU PERFORM YOUR REVIEW.

~}~.~.~-- 3° ~
~~+~jL`
l~e.u9g ~- 6~5 1N,p-TEE~WAYS 1~ TI°IE WAY I ~ 1~~~° ~~ `~ . ,
{ 'T,~~ +~r~?""r"R'*t tt'~
~-'•~ "~ ~- f A
~ ,:~< t tj~ r c yy.. ~ S
d Y}•~r~ E 'fi c $1 ~ t?,-'T'^~F'~,5~•`-"-,~^^^
vs~ t ~t R f' 1P' ~ r_ --s-° ,z
~ ~ l/.tl S
j 1R.
~
_-.::~F.y~t:x7 ~~~°'., < ,,{{ ~~ ~-- ~ ti's ~p `Y ~..
~''~~' 'T`r.-~ ~~,-~.~ v ~ ~~... "`:a_Z..a~ `~_ ~
~?L' ~a3P~.o .n',1~~`_ 9
b "f
., ~'_'/r ~s:< -
- ~ v°i
i%Y •,~
~t i.~ ~,
' ~~'` ~. ~ r.~,.
}
.i.~ a .
e ~ ~ ~~~~
~`a; '. ~ a
,;, <'
~~~.
i
d. _.,
Muddy water from Dry Creek, right, flows into the Haw River. Sediment runoff is recognized by the Environmental Protection Ag----
significant water pollutant. Heavy loads of clay and other sediments damage streams by blocking sunlight, smothering mussels
PHOTO BY JERRY MARKATOS FOR THE NEWS & OBSERVER

y
Heavy loads of clay and other sediments can....
' ... carry pollutants, such as~

Chatham County development spurs concerns for quality phosphorus and toxic
chemicals, downstream into ~~
lakes a
d
l
t
t
n
coas
a
wa
ers

BY L~sA HOPPENJANS
new homes are expected to be
subject to things of this nature
,~ . - .,
`~
STAFF WRITER built iri the next decade in this happening. YOU try t0 d0-tile best t
BYNUM -For 23 years, Elaine county of nearly 60,000 residents .you canto avoid [them]." ~~ ~
hiosso has worked to guazd the -the county's waterways have Abridge over Dry Creek on s .~.
;-~`-=~-°-7°""
]smile Haw River and its trio- been a rallying point. To those Old Graham Road lies just past ;~ ,,~~ , i
, ` .,
taxies from Forsyth to Chatham who want a tighter rein on devel- the •mounds of red clay and ~
_~ ~,,
ounty. opment, the recent spill at the site blown-up photos of golfer Fred '
~} ~ '~
So it has been particularly hard. of the Chapel Ridge golf course Couples that mark an entrance to ~ '
~~
it her to watch -the clear wa- community, which left as much the nearly 800-acre Chapel ~~
``~. ' ~ _
~
~
~
ors of Dry Creek, the tributary as six inches of sedunent at spots Ridge.. There, the creek is a milky
• `'`
"'°
`'~~~~,,, -~~ ~
~.
Par her back yard, turn muddy
rown as d
l
t
i along the cxeek's bottom, is the lat
t
l caramel color, with a thin layer
' '~ a
° ''
~
"
~
~
eve
opmen
s r
se es
examp
e of the failure to pre- . ofrust-colored mud
coveringits ,~., ._... ~
.
'
r
'
.ong its banks.
"It seems to me that some serve Chatham's waterways.
But oth
th
i
id
t rocks and banks.
Th
'
" ~ =~`°
~ ~"~
` '
,
ers say.
e
nc
en
; e stream wasn
t
crystal x
~ -
]vices azegoing to have to be
tade if we want to have any while regrettable, is a bump on
the road to progress. clear" before, Chiosso said. It
had problems. with sediment > ..,smother fish eggs;' ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ • ~ °. -
water insect larvae ~ °~` `
ean creeks leftanywhere,"said "I'm sure, you know, that it starting•in the 1990s, but you and fresh water mussels ~~
hiosso, the executive director
f the Haw Ri
er A
bl wasn't an intentional act, but new
h
l
h
d
m
o
" could always see the.two to three `~ ~ ti ~~"
~
s
ssem
y. ert
e
ess t
e
a
age is d
ne, feet to its bottom, she said. ' ~
In the battles that have played
~lt over Chatham County's rapid County Commissioner Tommy
Emerson said. "Any time we have Leafy tree branches forma soy«e: env~ronmentai oerense rand, ' :,~'
~ N.C. Division of water (?uality ;
:velopment'-.more than 6,800 development and people, we're SEE SEDIMENT, PAGE 4B . woos,

•
~„ . l ~CState~
G ~

CONTINUED FROM PAGE 1B ~~~~ ~, .~ii~., s ' ~~~ ~ '` ~ ~~
~
ver the stream that keeps - °7 ~ ~r'` ~ ~`; c ~~ ~ `
,,
~
°
'
. cool enough to sustain a - ` ~ ; ~`~
-
~ organisms: lsass, drag- ~=
- mussels among them. , ~ .. ~
.
~
`_ ~ r ~~
~ ~
~
The Environmental Protection
..
•
~,
,
'~.
o~ ~ ``" a
"
•ecognizes sediment run- ~ •
~ ~ I ~ s ~'
•- ~ single most significant

~

~ Chapel Ridge j R . - 5~~!
r
~llutant. Heavy loads of '~~ _._,,
~, ~
'~ developmont;
_
other sediments damage ~
~' ~'
~.
~ ~
by, blocking the sunlight

ices aquatic plants, smoilr• ~ ~
r

~ ,, ~* ~~~ "
~.~ ~'

f; z ~
~ ~ g

•_~
~ a e u s
~
Bring filter-feeders such as mus- ~~~ `"~' ~t ~.,~
-,; 1
.~
~
..~ - ~
~ ~~~?~~
sels and clogging the gills of fish. .
The state's Division of Water ~:_~__..._: ~.'~.~.~.__.. ~:.._.:~~.~ .fw__., ..:W_~ ' .~...:..~. ,.. ~,W _ __ ~~.._;.;
'
~0`'"
Quality and Division' of Land
Quality have cited Chapel Ridge's Workers fill a sand trap at Chapel Ridge Golf Course. Erosion
s
-
t
t
t ~~
.
~ TneNews&observer
developer, Bluegreen Corp. of from the fairway, background, s .
erway
o wa
in
ent sedimen

Boca Raton, Fla., for violating.. STAFr PHOTO BY HARRY LYNCH
to stop construction.
rules against sediment pollution. Programs such as those already
John Holley, a regional engineer . .type people," Emerson said. "On county's watershed regulations in Wake; Orange and Durham
far the Division of Land Quality,:. the other hand, we've got people ' already are more stringent than counties can allow for closer molt i
said that any time there's Bevel- that would prefer it to stay in its the state's. Megginson said that itoring of sites and faster re-
opment ° near a creek, it's ex- current condition." the county ordinances go beyond sponses to problems.
pected that there will be some -~ state requirements for stream Byron Brady, manager of Wake
~ muddy water, but this case is ~'®u~(~~r P11~@S ~1'~tpBSird , buffers in many cases and that .
' County's sedimentation and era
.more severe. s density requirements
,the county sion program, said engineers
Basins designed to catch sedi-. A coalition of resident groups -for land near rivers are stricter. there visit all new projects twice
ment from the site were down• recently proposed changes to the . The county also applies state a month. Once a site is stabilized,.
sized too early and overflowed, . _ county water ordinance that standards for land near water that he said, they visit once a month.
sending large amounts of sedi- would make.ittougher to build feeds into drinking supplies - Seth Reice, an associate pro•
ment into the creek. alongtlie county's rivers in certain about half the land in Chatham fessor of biology and ecology at
Steve Levitas; a lawyer for Blue- ~ circumstances. The proposal was . - to all the land in the county. UNC•Chapel Hill, studied water
green, said the site had been in- a response to a decision by the ~ Megginson and Emerson, how- quality regulation at sites moni-
spected on three occasions; most commissioners to let the Bevel- ever, agree that better enforce- toted by local programs, which
recently June 28, and no viola- oper of a 1$5-home subdivision went is needed. The county is es- can enact their own tougher re-
tions were found. The corpora- on the Haw. River use "density tablishing its own sedimentation strictions, and sites monitored by.
tion will correct its violations and averaging," allowing more homes -and erosion control program to the state. He said the study found
submit a restoration proposal to to be built closer to the river if improve monitoring of construe- enforcement ofregulations= in-
the Division of Water Quality, fewer were built in areas farther tion sites. eluding how often sites are vis-
l.evitas said. away, Holley's division has the equiv- ited and how often penalties are
Chiosso said the county cannot 'The commissioners unanimous- alent of four full-time inspectors assessed -was. more important
', continue to approve large Bevel-, ly rejected the proposal. to cover 16 counties. Each site than the regulations themselves,
opments near water sources and River watchers worry also about -must be inspected at least once, Meanwhile, ui Chatham County,
expect to maintain water quality. the county considering new reg- and on average sites are inspected the pace of development contin-
A second development, on` the ulations that would allow more every three to six months. ues to rise. In 2004, Honey's office
other side of the area known as impervious surfaces incertain ar- "But it is largely complaint- approved plans for 33 projects.
Buck Mountain, already has been Bas of the watershed. They say.. driven," Holley said. This year, his office has already
approved. The Meadowviewsub- that an increase in buildings and The state uses grants to en- approved plans for 40 projects.
• division is slated. to have 715 paved parking lots means an in- courage local governments to The office has issued six notices of
homes: crease in contaminated runoff as establish their own programs. Lo- violation in the county this year.
"We've got people that are water picks up oil and trash and cal programs have the same pow-
wanting to move here and have chemicals that cover them. ers as the state to require im- Staff writer Lisa Hoppenjans
homes, and they're good people. But Keith Megginson, the, . -provements, levy fines and, in can be reached at 932-2014 or ,
They're good, working, family- county planning director; said the extreme cases, seek court orders Iisa.hoppenjansC~newsobservercom.

Cape Fear Shiner
What is a Cape Fear shiner?
The Cape Fear shiner (Notropis mekistocholas) is a small, moderately stocky minnow, rarely exceeding
2.5 inches in length. The fish's body is flushed with a pale silvery yellow, with somewhat pointed
yellowish fins, and a black band that runs along the sides of its body. During the spawning season, the
yellowish golden body color is intensified in the males, and the females take on a silvery cast. This
species is distinguished from similar species by the black upper and lower lips.
Unlike most other members of the genus Notropis, the Cape Fear shiner's diet primarily consists of plant
material. Spawning occurs in early spring when the water temperature begins to warm; a secondary
spawning may occur during the late summer. Additional information is presently being collected on the
species' breeding behavior, ecology, and life history. Preliminary results of such research indicate that
the species survives about two to three years in the wild, but may live up to six years in captivity.
Where does the Cape Fear shiner occur?
The Cape Fear shiner, as its name implies, is endemic to the Cape Fear River basin in the east-central
Piedmont region of North Carolina. The species is found only in Randolph, Moore, Lee, Harnett, and
Chatham counties. All populations are known from the main stem reaches of, and tributaries to, the
Deep, Haw, and Cape Fear Rivers. The largest population is located around the confluence of the
Rocky and Deep Rivers. The Cape Fear shiner may use smaller tributaries of the river during the winter
months or when unfavorable water conditions exist in the main stem of the river. Total numbers are
unknown, but all populations appear to be small.
The Cape Fear shiner inhabits slow pools, riffles, and runs with gravel, cobble, and boulder substrates,
often around beds of aquatic vegetation. The Cape Fear shiner is typically associated with schools of
other related species, but it is never the dominant species.
Is the Cape Fear shiner protected?
To help secure the future of the Cape Fear Shiner, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service added this fish as
an endangered species to the Federal Endangered and Threatened Species List on September 25,
1987. The United States Congress, recognizing that many of our Nation's valuable plant and wildlife
resources have been lost and that others are imperiled, passed the Endangered Species Act in 1973 to
provide a means to help preserve species and their habitats for future generations. An "endangered"
species is one that is in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its range. A
"threatened" species is one that is likely to become endangered in the foreseeable future.

Why was it listed as Endangered?
The Cape Fear shiner may have always existed in low numbers. However, dam construction in the
Cape Fear River system has probably had the most serious impact on the species. Dams change the
flow of water from afree-flowing stream -the species' preferred habitat - to an impounded or flooded
stream, thereby isolating populations from one another. These small isolated populations are now very
vulnerable to habitat degradation (decreases in water quality associated with run-off from road,
residential, agricultural, and silvicultural activities, toxic chemical spills, etc.) and reduce the chance for
recovery without our help.
Why should you be concerned about the loss of species?
Extinction is a natural process. Normally, new species develop through a process known as speciation
at about the same rate that other species become extinct. However, because of air and water pollution,
over-hunting, extensive deforestation, the loss of wetlands, and other man-induced impacts, extinctions
are now occurring at a rate that far exceeds the speciation rate, thus diminishing the diversity and
complexity of life on Earth. The loss of a single species may seem insignificant; however, all life on
Earth is interconnected. If enough "living connections" are broken, entire ecosystems could fail and the
balance of nature could be forever altered.
What can you do to help the Cape Fear shiner?
• Support land-use planning that overtly maintains vegetated riparian buffers and water quality. Plant
and maintain native vegetation along streams and creeks. These "vegetated buffers" prevent the
erosion of soil and sediments into the water after heavy rains, keeping the stream clear and clean.
• Be careful using and disposing of toxic substances such as motor oil, pesticides and fertilizers, and
other chemicals near creeks and streams. Always follow the instructions for chemical use, and properly
dispose of any remaining material and the container.
• Keep livestock out of rivers and streams. Livestock can damage the stream banks by eating the bank
vegetation and by causing erosion of the bank. Livestock and their waste can also pollute the water.
• Watch for fish kills, illegal dumping of waste, unusual water color or smell, and other changes in the
river's condition. Report environmental emergencies (e.g., fish kills, oil or chemical spills) affecting
water resources to the North Carolina Division of Emergency Management by calling 1-800-858-0368.
Conservation Partners of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in Cape Fear Shiner Recovery:
NC Wildlife Resources Commission
NC Zoological Park
Conservation Fisheries, Inc.
NC Division of Parks and Recreation
Haw River Assembly
Triangle Land Conservancy
Citizens like you!!!
For more information, visit our website at http://nc-es.fws.gov, or contact:
David Rabon
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
[phone] ext. 16
david_rabon Cfws.gov
Ryan Heise
NC Wildlife Resources Commission
[phone]
ryan.heiseC~1 ncwildlife.org
"+~~" Prepared (5/04) by:
~,~/ U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Raleigh Field Office, Post Office Box 33726, Raleigh, NC 27636-3726
Telephone: [phone] FAX: [phone] Website: http://nc-es.fws.gov

Stephen Metelits
77 Fearrington Post
Pittsboro, NC 27312
[e-mail]
Our land abuts the Briar Chapel land. In theory, there is a 200 foot buffer between us. We
thought that meant 200 feet of undisturbed woods. However, that buffer isn't really a buffer.
Instead, it is a spray area for Briar Chapel's effluent. That means the woods aren't undisturbed
and neither are we. Spraying in the woods behind our house can have serious effects on us.
First is the possibility of odor. Then there is the potential for mist to reach our yard. If we are
sitting on our porch sipping iced tea when the wind carries an unnatural smell or, worse, a fine
mist of droplets to us, we will have to move inside and shut up the house.
There should be restrictions on the spraying. Our choice would be that no spraying would occur
in the buffer. If that is something that cannot be changed, then there should be some restrictions
on the conditions under which spraying can be done.
The weather must be taken into account. During a period of heavy rain, the ground won't absorb
the spraying, and it will just runoff into our streams. If the wind is right, we may be the
recipients of unwanted organisms in our air.

I don't know the technical details that should go into the restrictions that would keep out the
unwanted side-effects (no pun intended) of spaying effluent on what was supposed to be a buffer
area. We rely on more knowledgeable folks to protect us.

DECEMBER 13~ PUBLIC HEARING - Briar Chapel
My name is Rita K. Spina; 12 Matchwood, Pittsboro. Thank you for agreeing to
hold this meeting. I am an abutter to the Briar Chapel property, so I am speaking
for myself as well as for Chatham Citizens for Effective Communities.
We have been fortunate as abutters, to date, to discuss with Newland Communities
our concerns and needs, and to a very great extent, they have been listening and
agreeable. We need now, however, to get to the specifics of those things we had not
previously considered as problems affecting us for the longer term. This area of the
county is suffering from the pangs of rapid growth. We estimate over 10,000 new
homes from 35 major residential developments, along with several new commercial
developments within the next few years. All of this development activity is seriously
impacting our streams, ponds and wetlands. Most developments have their own
wastewater treatment plant with spray irrigation which impacts the entire area by
the sheer volume of water, let alone its content.
When Fearrington's streams and pond problems arose as a result of the 15-501
construction, I was alerted to a larger picture. The stream had been diverted from
its normal course, filled with silt and flooded out in various areas. Trees died and
debris and silt filled the previously pristine pond. There is standing water all
around the stream area now. Mitigation for this damage is only partly being paid by
the DOT, and as a homeowner, the remainder of that cost will eventually fall on me.
Outside of Fearrington ,the Department of Water Quality has issued Notices of
Violation for several of the newly developing developments to date. There has been
damage to streams and wetlands due to construction. Other developments have
incurred citizen complaints and these are under consideration. With Briar Chapel
directly abutting us on the east side of 15-501 and uphill properties from both the
east and west areas that are in direct proximity to us, the cumulative impacts from
all of this surrounding construction must betaken into consideration. Care and
supervision need to be associated with any certification to prevent similar problems
from occurring.
As we all know, Jordan Lake, the source of our drinking water, is impaired.
Although Briar Chapel will be exceeding state standards in their reduction of the
nutrients which are causing this damage to the lake (and they should be commended
for that) additional run off from construction and storm water management
operations are of serious concern. The water from their streams and wetlands which
they will impact, will all flow downhill into the lake and tributaries of the Haw
River. This flow does not stop at an imaginary boundary called 15-501. The
activities on the western side of 15-501 will impact the eastern side in addition to
those planned for the 60 acres on the eastern side.

The impact of the additional water from the spraying of effluent from the
wastewater treatment plant, in the buffer area abutting my property, is of concern
as well. In addition to potential disease causing organisms, odors and spray
schedules, Mother Nature has been known to add a large amount of water in a very
short time to our streams. As an example, during October 2-8 of this year, we had
between 1 and 2 inches alone and just in the past two weeks we have had significant
rainfall. When the aquifier becomes saturated, I already get standing water. I am
not in a flood prone area, but I see this standing water for many days until the red
clay soil can absorb the extra amount. There are areas in this part of Fearrington
where the ground just does not perc. (I know of one piece of property that has not
sold as it is not able to drain water away, and I suspect that some of the Fearrington
Homeowner Association properties in this area of the community are those that
were deemed unbuildable for the same reason.) None of us wish to become greater
holding areas for water that comes from above us.
I believe that the concerns that all of us have in~,,~~t,,~~is roo to i ht are~~e~~' basic. We
are asking the DWQ to protect our properties""aric~perso~s an abutter, to
add conditions to this 401 certificate which will prevent a significant deterioration of
the state of my property.
Thank you,
Rita K. Spina, PhD
Property abutter #12 Matchwood
Vice-President, CCEC
919.932.3132
[e-mail]

~ .-._
r°
REMARKS OF RICH MOGENSEN
BRIAR CHAPEL -CHATHAM COUNTY
PUBLIC HEARING ON THE 401 CERTIFICATION
GOOD EVENING, MY NAME IS RICH MOGENSEN OF MID-ATLANTIC
MITIGATION, A DIVISION OF EARTHMARK COMPANIES. WE
SPECIALIZE IN PROVIDING STREAM AND WETLAND RESTORATION
PROJECTS FOR THE NCEEP. IN THE FALL OF 2003, MID-ATLANTIC
MITIGATION AND MULKEY ENGINEERS AND CONSULTANTS
CONDUCTED A COMPREHENSIVE SEARCH FOR SUITABLE STREAM
RESTORATION SITES IN THE CAPE FEAR 03030002 WATERSHED -WHERE
BRIAR CHAPEL IS LOCATED - IN RESPONSE TO REQUESTS FOR
PROPOSALS BY THE NC ECOSYSTEM ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM. I AM
HERE TONIGHT TO TALK ABOUT THE DIFFICULTY OF LOCATING AN
APPROPRIATE AND AVAILABLE MITIGATION SITE IN THIS WATERSHED
AS WELL AS THE HARPERS CROSSROADS STREAM RESTORATION SITE
THAT WAS CHOSEN BY SOIL AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS
AND NEWLAND COl~~IlVIUNITIES TO MITIGATE BRIAR CHAPEL'S STREAM
IMPACTS.
MID-ATLANTIC MITIGATION AND ITS SUBCONTRACTOR, MULKEY
ENGINEERS & CONSULTANTS, SPENT SEVERAL MONTHS SEARCHING
FOR AN APPROPRIATE STREAM RESTORATION SITE IN BRIAR CHAPEL'S
WATERSHED. THE WAY WE SEARCHFOR THESE MITIGATION SITES IS
TO REVIEW LAND USE AND SOIL MAPS AS WELL AS INTERPRETING
AERIAL PHOTOS TO IDENTIFY POTENTIAL SITES. IN THIS CASE, WE
LIMITED OUR SEARCH TO SITES THAT WOULD YIELD AT LEAST 1500
LINEAR FEET OF STREAM RESTORATION AND 5 ACRES OF WETLANDS.
THEN WE VISIT THE SITES TO DETERMINE WHETHER OR NOT THEY ARE
APPROPRIATE RESTORATION PROJECTS. ONCE THEY'RE DEEMED
ACCEPTABLE, WE CONTACT ALL THOSE WHO OWN LAND IN THE
POTENTIAL PROJECT AREAS. AT THIS POINT MANY OF THE POTENTIAL
PROJECTS ARE REALLY ELIMINATED BECAUSE WE HAVE TO GET THE
LANDOWNER'S CONSENT TO PURCHASE EITHER A CONSERVATION
EASEMENT OR THE FEE SIMPLE TITLE TO THE LAND TO CARRY OUT
THE PROJECT.
MULKEY'S MAP REVIEW AND GROUND-TRUTHING REVEALED 12 SITES
THAT MET OUR CRITERIA. AFTER CONTACTING - OR ATTEMPTING TO
CONTACT -EACH LANDOWNER INVOLVED, NONE OF THE 12 SITES
WERE DETERMINED TO BE SUITABLE AND/OR AVAILABLE STREAM
RESTORATION SITES. THE PRIMARY REASON SITES WERE ELIMINATED
WAS BECAUSE THE LANDOWNER OR OWNERS AT A POTENTIAL SITE
WERE NOT INTERESTED IN SELLING A CONSERVATION EASEMENT OR
FEE TITLE TO THE PROPERTY.

.. Li . -.
WHILE THE HARPERS CROSSROADS PROJECT IS NOT IN THE SAME SUB-
WATERSHED AS BRIAR CHAPEL, IT IS IN THE SAME RIVER BASIN -THE
UPPER CAPE FEAR RIVER BASIN. IN FACT, GEOGRAPHICALLY IT IS
CLOSER TO THE BRIAR CHAPEL IMPACTS THEN MOST OF THE CAPE
FEAR 02 WATERSHED.
THE HARPERS CROSSROADS PROJECT IS A DEGRADED TRIBUTARY TO
BEAR CREEK AND IS EXPECTED TO YIELD APPROXIMATELY 2200
LINEAR FEET OF STREAM RESTORATION. THE PROPOSED SITE
CONSISTS OF TWO SECTIONS OF STREAM CHANNEL LOCATED ON
EITHER SIDE OF SILER-CITY GLENDAN ROAD. BOTH REACHES ARE
CLASSIFIED AS PERENNIAL, POOR QUALITY STREAMS THAT HAVE BEEN
NEGATIVELY IMPACTED BY CATTLE OPERATIONS.
THE STREAM WILL BE RESTORED USING NATURAL CHANNEL DESIGN
METHODS. STREAM RESTORATION WILL INCREASE THE SINUOSITY OF
THE STREAM AND PROVIDE A MORE STABLE CHANNEL WHICH
RESULTS IN FAVORABLE INSTREAM HABITAT FOR AQUATIC LIFE. MID-
ATLANTIC MITIGATION, ON BEHALF OF NEWLAND, WILL PLANT A
BOTTOMLAND HARDWOOD COMMUNITY ON BOTH SIDES OF THE
RESTORED CHANNEL. NEWLAND WILL ALSO ESTABLISH A 50-FOOT
BUFFER ON EITHER SIDE OF THE NEW CHANNEL THAT WILL BE
PLANTED WITH NATIVE WOODY SHRUBS AND HARDWOOD TREES.
THESE BUFFERS AND PLANTINGS WILL HELP REMOVE NUTRIENTS IN
STORMWATER RUNOFF BEFORE THE WATER REACHES THE RESTORED
CHANNEL. CATTLE WILL ALSO BE FENCED OUT OF THE EASEMENT
AREA TO PROTECT WATER QUALITY.
AFTER THE STREAM IS RESTORED, MID-ATLANTIC WE WILL MONITOR
THE HARPERS CROSSROADS PROJECT TO ENSURE LONG-TERM
SUCCESS. MONITORING WILL CONTINUE FOR AT LEAST FIVE YEARS OR
UNTIL THE SUCCESS CRITERIA ARE SATISFIED. THESE SUCCESS
CRITERIA INCLUDE STREAM STABILITY, VEGETATIVE SUCCESS, AND
THE RESTORATION OF ECOLOGICAL FUNCTION. NEWLAND WILL
SUBMIT A MONITORING REPORT TO THE CORPS AND DWQ EACH YEAR
THAT ADDRESSES THE PROJECT'S PROGRESS TOWARD MEETING THE
PROJECT GOALS AND.ANY REMEDIAL ACTION NECESSARY. THE
EMPHASIS ON DETERMINING PROPER MITIGATION SHOULD BE BASED
ON A WATERHED CONTEXT AND THE HARPERS CROSSROADS
RESTORATION PROJECT WILL UNDOUBTEDLY HELP IMPROVE THE
WATER QUALITY, WATER STORAGE AND WILDLIFE HABITAT
FUNCTIONS IN THE CAPE FEAR RIVER BASIN.
THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK WITH YOU TODAY.

Ladies, Gentlemen and fellow citizens:
My name is John Heuer. For the past 25 years I have worked at the UNC Chapel Hill department
of Architectural & Engineering Services. I have been a Chatham County resident since 1976.
For the past three years my son and I have lived at 13 Matchwood on the west edge of
Fearrington Village. Our home abuts 60 acres owned by Newland Properties, situated to the east
of highway 15-501. My understanding is that this 60 acre parcel will be developed for a
professional office park and as a spray field for septic effluent originating in the Briar Chapel
development.
It is incongruous that this parcel was ever included in the Briar Chapel application to Chatham
County under the Compact Community ordinance, since these 60 acres are not contiguous with
the residential development, and it is separated by our new 41ane divided highway. Apparently,
Briar Chapel needed the extra acreage, even if it is remote from the proposed residential
development, in order to comply with spray field effluent requirements.
In regard to the proposed development of professional offices, Newland Properties has negotiated
indirectly, through the good offices of Fearrington resident Bob Eby, in regard to setback and
buffers in order to preserve some of the green spaces which are such a joy to my neighbors and
me. These negotiations have been conducted with the appearance of good faith. It would
certainly be a good business strategy for Newland to be perceived as a good neighbor to
Fearrington residents.
While I remain concerned about traffic, noise, nighttime light pollution and the destruction of
green space, my greatest concerns have to do with the protection of my neighbor's ground and
surface water, and our air quality. My definition of neighbor is inclusive to those residents,
including the non-human variety, that inhabit our Jordan Lake and Cape Fear River watershed.
While it is always a developer's stated intention to comply with environmental regulations,
Chatham County residents have recent examples in which developers' practices have not lived up
to intentions. Therefore I present three questions to the Chatham County Commission and our
representatives from the Department of Natural Resources:
1. Will the environmental regulations now in place appropriately guide this
development?
2. Does the State of North Carolina and Chatham County have the enforcement
resources in place to assure compliance?
3. What recourse will my neighbors and I have if the unthinkable happens, and we
suffer the degradation of our air quality or quality of ground or surface water, despite
the best intentions of all parties?
Thank you for listening.
Respectfully,
John Heuer,

My name is Mary Bastin. I live at 22 Benchmark in Fearrington
Village. My property is adjacent to the property owned by Newland
Communities as part of the Briar Chapel Development.
I am a member of the Haw River Assembly, a member of the
Friends of the Rocky River and I am on the Board of Directors of the
Cape Fear River Assembly.
Thank you to Joe Hackney for making this hearing possible.
Thank you to the member of the North Carolina Department of
Environmental and Natural Resources for their continued interest in
our concerns for our creeks, rivers and lakes in Chatham County.
Thank you especially for the interest Alan Clark, Jim Meade,
Susan Read and others have shown in protecting the Rocky River.
I, and many others applaud the work you did creating the Cape
Fear River Basin-Wide Plan. The way you involved all stakeholders in
the process was commendable and I am very hopeful that as steps are
taken to implement the plan- citizens, businesses, industry, developers
and governments can begin to work together to protect our natural
resources.
Many of us in Chatham County care passionately about our
environment and consider Jordan Lake, our rivers and creeks to be
treasures that belong to future generations as much as they belong to us.
Our good stewardship of these treasures is the responsibility of every
person in this room. It is the responsibility of every government official
and every citizen of Chatham County.
There must be a way to bring all the stakeholders to the table to plan
for the best possible outcomes for everyone. We look to DENR for
leadership, support and continued involvement in what happens in
Chatham County.
Here we have stream crossings to be made by Newland Company in
their Briar Chapel Project. One concern I had from the beginning is
that I could see no evidence that the engineers looked at the property
and tried to create a plan that would cause the least impact on the
creeks and wetlands on the property.

i.
v
~.r~.
L
Page 2-
Now, however, we have their plan and it will be built as they have
designed it. There is not much we can do about it, but I look to DENR
to help us protect the plant life, animal life and water quality to the
fullest extent possible.
This plan we are looking at is piece-meal. We have no idea what the
impact will be on the creek that flows into Fearrington Village that is
already impaired. No plan has been submitted for the area on the east
side of 15/501.
And this plan is piece-meal because no one is looking at Briar Chapel
as a part of the larger development that has already been approved on
creeks and rivers that flow into Jordan Lake.
Piece-meal is not wise. The Basin-wide Plan is about to go down the
drain right here within a few miles of Jordan Lake before it ever gets off
the paper. We look to you for the leadership to carry out the visionary
plan you have made.
Thank you.

Scott & Lunn Fer ug_son / 23 Benchmark / Pittsboro, NC 27312
Welcome and we thank you for the opportunity to address the
Division of Water Quality on this important issue of altering
stream flow and the use of spray irrigation.
We are a Fearrington Village abutting resident to the 60 acres
located on the east side of 15-501. We have been concerned from
the beginning of the Briar Chapel project, because the county
officials do not seem to understand the impact that this
development will have on the surrounding community.
We do not begrudge the owner of land to develop it but right from
the start this deal has had a stench. The project was slated for
around 1800 homes and with no warning the County gave their
approval to increase the build out of the development to 2300
homes. Something smells with that deal. Then in the continuing
permitting process suddenly the 60 acres popped into the picture.
Could it be that because the footprint of homes on the original plan
increased by 500 homes they now needed some other place to
move their affluent? It looks like that move is the 100 acres at 15-
501 of which 60 of those acres abut 27 Fearrington Village
residents and will effect the streams and Beaver Pond that are
already in fragile condition due to the construction work on 15-
501.
The topographic location of both the 60 acre tract and the
additiona140 acres on the western edge of 15/501 which run nearly
parallel with the 60 acres is such that run-off from the full 100
acres travels down hill into the Fearrington tract where
considerable damage is already evident.
We want the DWQ to understand the topography of this tract and
see that the use of spray irrigation is detrimental to these properties
as well as to the Beaver Creek and Pond areas. Moreover, we
underline the obvious fact that any peripheral buffer, especially in
this case where the buffer is directly related to the abutting
Fearrington and other residential property, should be left in its
original condition and not be degraded by the spray of treated
effluent.

F ~^
s`
Briar Chapel Project Impacts of Water and Wastewater Management on
Fearrington Village
Francis A. DiGiano, PhD, PE, DEE
1184 Fearrington Post
Pittsboro, NC 27312
My name is Francis A. DiGiano. I have 37 years of experience as a
university professor in the field of environmental engineering, first at the Univ. of
Massachusetts for 12 years and then at the Univ. of North Carolina, Dept. of
Environmental Sciences & Engineering for the last 25 years. My fields of
research are water and wastewater treatment technologies, water reuse and
water quality in distribution systems. I have conducted numerous research
projects in cities and towns in North Carolina. I served for four years on the NC
Water Treatment Operators Certification Board and I am a registered
professional engineer.
I speak not only as an experienced professional in the environmental
engineering field but as a resident of Fearrington Village who cares deeply about
protecting our water resources in the face of growing urbanization. DENR has
had in place for quite some regulations for "waste not discharged to surface
waters" and in particular "spray irrigation systems." Provisions for reclaimed
water are included. To date, reclaimed water for golf courses has been a
convenient way for developers to satisfy the land requirement for spray irrigation
in Chatham County and elsewhere. However, this concept of reclamation is far
too narrow in my view and unsustainable if considered for nearly every new
development.

While I understand from reading of the regulations that more advanced
treatment is only needed when the project includes reclamation, I was surprised
to learn that a 1 mgd tertiary treatment facility is being required of Briar Chapel,
which has not proposed reuse. Certainly additional treatment is welcomed but I
would like to know the reason for this decision as well as to know the technology
to be used for nutrient control and for disinfection.
In my opinion, alternatives to spray irrigation should be promoted. Such
a disposal practice, with or without golf courses, may have been acceptable in
the past for isolated developments in rural settings. However, the number of
these developments is increasing very rapidly in Chatham county and elsewhere.
The character of the land is changing from rural to urban. Treatment by natural
systems cannot be relied upon when population densities increase and there is
too little land to serve as a buffer. We should be concerned about continued
permitting of spray irrigation systems for every development not only given the
poor draining soils, but also uncertainties in establishing an accurate water
balance to design storage facilities, relatively low treatment technology and
relatively little oversight of the entire treatment and disposal process.
Although some environmentalists would argue against a treatment
technology linked to a NPDES permitted point discharge, I would prefer this
option. A well treated point source of wastewater effluent will have less negative
impact on the water environment than dispersing less well treated effluent into a
poorly drained soil, relying upon uncertain natural removal mechanisms that are
beyond our control and risking surface runoff into streams.
2

.__.~
I would encourage DENR to promote proven alternatives to spray
irrigation such as membrane bioreactor technology. My experience indicates that
the process is very. easy to maintain. Moreover, it produces a far superior
effluent quality to conventional treatment that would have little negative impact on
receiving waters.
An even greater advantage of membrane bioreactors is that a reclaimed
water is produced directly and can be used for many non potable uses. A unique
opportunity exists in all new developments to plan at the outset for separate
reclaimed water lines to serve each building and this fits perfectly with membrane
bioreactor technology. Reclaimed water can be used for toilet flushing in homes
and schools, and landscape irrigation for homes and for public spaces.
Even more futuristic is use of elevated storage tanks of reclaimed
wastewater for fire protection. This is being done already in at least one
community in Australia. Water for fire demand is not a large percentage of water
use. But the point is that a large savings in water distribution costs because pipe
diameters can be much smaller once the need for fire fighting water is removed
and met instead by less expensive reclaimed wastewater lines. There are also
benefits to drinking water quality by use of smaller pipe diameters in residential
areas because water stays a much shorter time within the distribution system.
My most optimistic view that alternative treatment technologies such as
membrane bioreactors would be proposed by developers and accepted by DENR
in the future stills leaves open the question of what to do in the near term.
Undoubtedly, land irrigation systems will continue to be approved for some time
3

to come. The increased density of these systems demands that DENR be
diligent in monitoring their performance so as to assure those citizens living in
development and in abutting communities that DENR regulations are met by the
treatment process and that water quality is not impaired in nearby surface waters.
The timing of monitoring should include events where excess runoff is possible.
Finally, while not a DENR responsibility, Chatham county needs to
explore a regional wastewater management plan rather than approving of land
irrigation systems for each small development. The county is rapidly urbanizing
and this demands more attention to centralized solutions to waste management
that are safe and reliable and that are operated by a well trained technical staff.
4