Rural Nelson Presents
An Informational Forum
Hamner Theater,
Agenda
Rockfish Valley/Wintergreen
Mountain Water Source and Capacity Study
Mike Larson (Senior Project Manager)
Draper Aden Associates
At the request of the
Nelson County Service Authority and Wintergreen Resort, Draper Aden Associates
has recently completed a short term and long term water needs study for
the
Regional Water Use Planning for Nelson and
Surrounding Counties
Mike Lawless (Environmental Program Manager)
Draper Aden Associates
Virginia Department of
Environmental Quality regulations have established a planning process and
criteria that all local governments must use in the development of a local or
regional water plan. The purpose of this planning process is to ensure
that adequate and safe drinking water is available to all citizens; encourage,
promote, and protect all other beneficial uses of water resources; and
encourage, promote, and develop incentives for alternative water sources.
Strategies for Protecting
Local Waters from Pollution
Chuck
Frederickson (James Riverkeeper)
James
River Association
The James
Riverkeeper is a full-time on-the-water advocate to protect and defend the
===========================================================================================================
Report
Rockfish
Valley/Wintergreen Mountain Water Source and Capacity Study
Mike Larson (Senior Project Manager)
Draper Aden Associates
Don Burland introduced Mr. Mike Larson, Senior Project
Manager for Draper Aden Associates. Mr. Larson reviewed the Rockfish
Valley/Wintergreen Mountain Water Source and Capacity Study, done at the
request of the Nelson County Service Authority and Wintergreen Resort. He noted that there are two water systems in
the Wintergreen area, one on the mountain and one in the valley at Stoney
Creek. In 2002 there was a drought of record, prompting a study of the
capacity of source water. Wintergreen
and Stoney Creek rely on Lake Monocan and wells and Mr. Larson noted that the
capacity limit came way down as the wells were producing less and less and
there was competition for the use of the existing water. Wells on the
mountain have continued to decline in output. Mr. Larson said that the
Wintergreen community is so dependent on the surface water that it came down to
a permitting crunch on the part of the Health Dept. as to how much water they
needed to preserve for all uses.
It was obvious that a study was needed if the county were
to extend new public water services throughout the Rockfish Valley. Mr.
Larson noted that short-term needs are projected to be 612,000 gallons a day at
build out for Wintergreen with 58 million gallons needed in useable storage,
while the golf course and snowmaking will need 40 million gallons of usable
storage. He reported that at a bare minimum there will be a need for 35
million gallons of ADDITIONAL total storage. Even at moderate growth
rates, there will be an urgent need for more water in the near future according
to Mr. Larson.
The study looked at many different options with a lake at
Rodes Farm as the
most cost effective option considered. The lake could provide 52 million
gallons at a project cost of $7.4 million. Mr. Larson presented another
option of a smaller storage tank up the mountain at a project cost of $4.4
million.
Mr. Larson said that long-term options would need to be
reviewed if the county wants to pursue development along the Rt. 151
corridor. At Wintergreen build out, the need for water will be between .6
and 2.4 million gallons with the only viable source being the Rockfish
River. He noted that groundwater is not practical for these
demands. It is practical for small individual units with dug wells
only. He said that various reservoir sites were identified with cost
estimates between $23 and $89 million.
Mr. Larson explained that lakes needed for storage are very expensive
and said that additional study is needed as well as public input and
acceptance.
Question and Answer Session for Mr. Larson
Mr. Larson was asked to what extent climate change had been factored into their study since one prediction of climate change projects that the southeast will have only 80% of normal rainfall in the future.
Mr. Larson said that climate change was not factored in.
He was then asked why the study had not looked at widening and deepening Lake Monocan and removing the silt to increase the carrying capacity of the lake.
Mr. Larson responded that the size of the lake cannot be increased due to surrounding development and bedrock.
Another audience member asked how a water impoundment at Rodes Farm would be financed.
Mr. Larson said that since the county will not participate in the construction it will have to be funded privately.
Mr. Larson noted that the Stoney Creek development is a
smaller system. Although it
is a part of Wintergreen it is completely different geologically from the mountain. He said that of 20 wells on the mountain only 4 are still functioning. Mr. Larson said that the valley system is supplied completely by the groundwater of five wells and that the demand (for irrigation) in the valley has increased, therefore restrictions have been put on water use for Stoney Creek due to the current drought. Mr. Larson said that the system was designed for build out, including the add-on, and should be adequate.
Regional
Water Use Planning for Nelson and Surrounding Counties
Mike Lawless (Environmental Program Manager)
Draper Aden Associates
The second speaker was Mr. Mike Lawless, Environmental
Program Manager with Draper Aden Associates and the chief geologist for a
long-term regional study which extends from Bedford County in the south to
Nelson County in the north. Mr. Lawless reported that the study is
focused on determining where the water is, how to get it to the growth areas,
and/or how to change the growth areas in order to have adequate water supply
for that growth. He noted that this region’s plan will be submitted to
DEQ in 2009 and that all the regional plans will be amalgamated into a state
plan. Mr. Lawless said that each locality in a region is required to
participate in a study, either locally or regionally.
Mr. Lawless said that the ultimate goal is to ensure
adequate water supplies in part by looking at alternative sources, such as
interconnection of existing systems, and conservation and water reuse. He
said that the study is to determine a 50-year growth projection with the
resulting plan reviewed and updated every five years to adjust for changing
circumstances in the region. The study encourages public input and
includes data on both private and public water sources. Mr. Lawless
reported that the groundwater component is, for the first time, being
critically studied, as more wells are not the answer for heavy
development. He said that the consultants are trying to factor in how
increased emphasis on conservation may change need.
Mr. Lawless reported that the alternatives they are looking
at are numerous - water demand management (using meters), groundwater,
reservoirs, stream and river
intakes, interconnections of existing sources, and recycling and reuse. He said that they are utilizing existing
information sources, and are taking advantage of studies already made locally
plus historical records of stream flow and will plan conservatively. With
GIS (Geographic Information Systems), they can produce maps that make all the
varied data visible in a form that will be usable to those making
recommendations and decisions.
Mr. Lawless noted that they are looking
at flow in the James River. Right now the
flow is augmented with releases from Lake Moomaw, which in turn is fed by the
Jackson River. He said that some of the elements being studied are the
following - amount and reliability of water flow, potential environmental
impacts, potential human impacts, relative costs and availability based on
property and permitting constraints. Mr. Lawless said that when they rank
these a visual presentation will be created to make the data more useful.
He said that the consultants are close to finishing the intake of data and will
hold a series of stakeholder workshops; the first one being late January
2008. The second will be in mid-April and a third is planned for mid-June
for presentation of the draft plan.
Question and Answer Session for Mr.
Lawless
An audience member asked whether any localities require drilling permits for well drillers. Mr. Lawless said that it is already being done east of I-95. He said that his guess is that it will be a statewide requirement in ten years.
Strategies
for Protecting Local Waters from Pollution
Chuck Frederickson (James Riverkeeper)
James River Association
Chapin Wilson introduced Mr. Chuck Frederickson, James Riverkeeper for 340 miles of the James River from Lake Moomaw to the Chesapeake Bay. Mr. Frederickson works with the James River Association and who spoke on strategies for protecting local waters from pollution. He noted that the James River is the primary source of water in its 10,000 square mile watershed and makes up 50% of the Chesapeake Bay. Mr. Frederickson said that, overall, the river's depth is 11 feet, although in many places, especially near the bay, it has 100-foot holes. He said that there used to be sturgeon in the river that helped sustain the colony at Jamestown and that there were so many oysters that they were a threat to navigation. Mr. Frederickson reported that oysters are down 95% over their historic highs and there are 41 threatened plants and animals in the watershed. He said that in the 1960's, you might have concluded that industry caused the degradation of the James but in the forty years since then, the problems have become much more complex including algae blooms and sediment plumes that block the sunlight to underwater grasses which support species that clean the river. Mr. Frederickson noted that the bottom is now murky and the clarity of the water is poor. He said that the algae blooms are caused by excess nutrients in the water and sediment plumes are primarily caused by erosion.
Mr. Frederickson said that when The James River Association
considered how to reduce the harmful substances that are going into the river,
it decided to focus on sediment and look for a dedicated source of funding for
non-point source pollution. He said the organization is trying to
increase enforcement of existing erosion and sediment control laws with a third
focus on revising local codes and ordinances related to development. Mr.
Frederickson said that, unfortunately, in many instances, local ordinances
prohibit some of the development models that can reduce erosion and runoff,
noting cluster developments as an example.
He reported that impervious surfaces have major impact on our water,
both in the amount and quality of storm water runoff. The impact of development on wildlife is significant. He
said that as the amount impervious surfaces increases the number and diversity
of aquatic species goes down. Mr. Frederickson noted that at the moment,
Nelson County has fewer impervious surfaces than most localities and fairly
good water quality but that as the amount of impervious surfaces increase,
water quality will go down.
He reported that the James
River Association has done a vulnerability analysis for the entire James River
Watershed and created five classifications.
These are (with examples of each): rural protected (Bath County), rural
unprotected (Nelson), urbanizing (Hopewell area), urbanizing rapidly
(Goochland) and urban impacted (Richmond). Mr. Frederickson said the
Association has identified strategies that would help in each type of
area. He noted that revision of the
codes and ordinances on development in each area is needed to effect
changes. He said that buffers and strong erosion and sediment laws are an
example and that planning ahead is necessary. Mr. Frederickson noted that
once development starts, it's hard to pass the requisite ordinances. He said
that each area is given a score on how well it is planning ahead and dealing
with development.
Question and Answer Session for Mr. Frederickson
An audience member asked whether phosphorus is the biggest pollutant in the James River.
Mr. Frederickson said that the most significant pollutant now is nitrogen.
He was then asked the Association's view about sludge use in the state of Virginia.
He responded that the Association has not taken a stand against sludge if it is applied correctly. He said it is the same with lawn fertilizer - just don't put more on than you need to achieve the desired results.
Mr. Frederickson was asked what could have been done to alleviate the problems of the stream that is covered by an impervious surface (a large parking lot shown in a photograph earlier).
He said that today pervious surface concrete would most likely be used for such a project.
Another audience member said that not long ago, the last dam was removed on the Tye River and asked what the chances are of more dams being removed on all our rivers.
Mr. Frederickson said that he didn't know, but was hopeful more dams would be taken out.
He was then asked whether the Association has looked at poor forestry practices as a source of unwanted sediment and he said that they are looking at it and trying to do something about it.
Conny
Roussos thanked our speakers for informative presentations and thanked
Don Burland and Chapin Wilson for planning the meeting. He recognized
Connie Brennan who is running for the state legislature. Joyce, our
treasurer, asked for volunteers to help at Oak Ridge on Saturday, October 27th
from 9am-1pm or 1pm-4:30pm. Conny also recognized Kim Cash, our field
officer, for all the reports she generates which are immediately available on
our website.
Conny and Joyce both pointed out that this meeting, the Rural Nelson website and email reports on all county meetings are funded by Rural Nelson through its generous donors and encouraged the audience to review the website (www.RuralNelson.org) and consider making a donation to Rural Nelson.
Chapin Wilson then opened the floor for discussion and final questions.
Question: A Stoney Creek resident asked how the plans
for Wintergreen water would affect their taxes.
The answer was there are no plans to integrate the Stoney Creek water system
into the county system so there would be no impact on their taxes.
Question: What is the process for decision-making regarding water options for Wintergreen?
Mr. Larson said that the study has been done and submitted to the Wintergreen Board. He said that the next step would be to plan new studies necessary before action is taken, with the reservoir planning based on data taken during droughts of record.
Question: Is Paul's Creek part of the intake for this planned reservoir?
Mr. Larson said that it is not as it is in a different watershed.
Question: How long will it take to fill the Rodes Farm reservoir?
Mr. Larson responded that it depends on the weather and how often it rains.
Question: What will the size of the reservoir be? Has the geology been studied in the area?
Mr. Larson said that he is not sure of the exact size although it is in the report, and no studies have yet been made of the geology of the area.
Question: Where would the reservoir be at Rodes Farm?
Mr. Larson said that it would be in the big field at the Rodes family farm.
Question: Would it be diverting water from other areas?
Mr. Larson said that this reservoir would only be taking in
water when local streams were running full.
Meeting adjourned.