The Durham City Council struggled this afternoon through a development ordinance revision that brings Durham's law on stream buffers into line with the state's Jordan Lake regulations.

Most of the struggle involved council members' attempts to understand three versions of the proposed ordinance, each 41 pages long, and city-county planners' attempts to explain them.

"That's an awful lot to comprehend, for me," said Mayor Bill Bell during the council's work session.

The ordinance had been deferred from Monday's regular council meeting, after council members wanted the language revised to delete any provisions that exceeded state requirements.

"Why should this council go beyond what the state was mandating?" said Councilman Eugene Brown. "Some people were saying we need to demonstrate or show, raleigh especially, that we were serious about ... water quality and so on"

then he pointed out that, on Monday night, the Raleigh City Council rejected an ordinance to restrict building in floodplains.

Durham already restricts floodplain development, which can aggravate water pollution by erosion and stormwater runoff.

"A floodplain," Brown said, "is a natural stream buffer."

Revising the original revision was easier said than done, though. The state's Environmental Management Commission has a model riparian-buffer ordinance that local jurisdictions may adopt as a stand-alone ordinance, planner Aaron Cain said.

Durham's planning department, however, was incorporating the state rules into the comprehensive development ordinance. That required revisions in multiple places to avoid the UDO contradicting itself.

"I feel a little isolated on this issue," said Councilman Eugene Brown. "We're trying to negotiate the more important issue of Falls Lake and Jordan Lake, and the water-purity issue and the buffer issue should be part of all that."

Implementing the new regulations for reducing pollution in Jordan Lake, and upcoming rules for Falls, are anticipated to cost Durham taxpayers more than $1 billion over the next 30 to 35 years. Falls Lake has been a point of contention between Durham and Raleigh, since the lake supplies Raleigh's drinking water but most of its water flows into the lake through Durham County.

Paul Wiebke of the city's public works department got to give the City
Council its update on the Jordan and Falls lake cleanup rules
yesterday. He was on the council work session agenda two weeks ago, but
other weighty matters ran the council out of time.

Bull's Eye reported Wiebke's report back then, based on the prepared
presentation he kindly made available. In case you missed it then, here
it is again (a link to the full presentation is below):

The City Council ran out of time in its work session today before it heard a planned update on the Jordan and Falls lake cleanup rules.

But council member Mike Woodard, who got the update at a committee meeting Wednesday, told his colleagues, "You need to hear this."

The gist of the update, though, is not new: the rules are going to cost Durham taxpayers a lot of money.

Recent findings by the state water-quality division indicate Falls
is more polluted than rule-makers expected, particularly the Durham
County arm west of Interstate 85.

More than 50 percent of water samples from three western sites
exceeded pollution levels allowed by federal clean-water standards; the
rate at an Ellerbe Creek site was 84 percent.

"The western side of the lake is in poor condition," Raleigh Mayor Charles Meeker said Tuesday.

Regulations to clean and protect polluted Jordan Lake passed the state House by a vote of 108-9 Monday night. Following last week's 47-0 approval in the Senate, the once-controversial legislation is on its way for Gov. Bev Perdue's signature.

“That means fewer fish kills and algae blooms," said Elizabeth Ouzts, director of the conservation group Environment North Carolina, "and better drinking water for hundreds of thousands of Triangle residents."

The Jordan Lake rules passed the state Senate this afternoon, clearing the last major hurdle before going into law.
 
Because of some technical changes, the rules must be re-approved by the state House, which voted 106-8 in favor last month.

The bill, "Restore Water Quality in Jordan Reservoir," sets out measures for cleaning up and better protecting the lake, which is deemed "impaired" under the federal Clean Water Act due to excess nitrogen and phosphorus.

It mandates stricter pollution-control measures for agriculture, highways and developers, and sets timetables and standards for improving controls on development already in place.

The bill was scheduled for a Senate vote last week, but delayed by state DOT concerns over how it would be affected. Those issues were resolved by Tuesday.

The rules have been in development since 2003.

“No one who drinks water from lake; no one who visits the lake for fishing, swimming, and canoeing—wanted any more delay on restoring it,” said Elizabeth Ouzts, director of the conservation group Environment North Carolina.

The Jordan Lake rules won approval from the state Senate environment committee today, according to Environment North Carolina director Elizabeth Ouzts.

With that action, the rules move to the Senate floor, where a vote could come as soon as tomorrow, Ouzts said.

The rules are meant to cut pollution flowing into the Jordan reservoir and protect its water quality in the future. Pollution in the lake is at levels at which state and federal law require cleanup measures.

The state house passed the measure 106-8 last month. After that vote, some developers had indicated they would seek changes to the rules covering new development, but did not testify before the committee today.

The City of Durham and environmental interests have come to a meeting of the minds on the contentious Jordan Lake rules, according to Environment North Carolina Elizabeth Ouzts.

"We feel pretty good," she said.

With even its sponsor admitting its imperfections, the House Environment and Natural Resources Committee voted today to send a revised version of the bill to "Restore Water Quality in Jordan Reservoir" one step farther toward approval.

"This is one of those things you just got to hold your nose and move it on down the road a little bit and hope it'll get better," said Rep. Pryor Gibson of Anson and Union counties, who sponsored the bill along with Reps. Lucy Allen of Halifax, Nash and Franklin counties and Alice Bordsen of Alamance.

For more on the committee's action, see www.newsobserver.com/news/story/1514924.html 

Durham's City Council members really aren't against the environment. They want to see Jordan Lake's water quality improved and protected. It's just some proposed rules they have problems with.

"We have to be careful," said councilman Eugene Brown, that the council's position doesn't come across to the public as "anti-environmental."