1. NUTRIENT RUNOFF EFFECTS ON JORDAN LAKE Brianna Young, Jennifer Jackson and Emily Nurminen

3. Jordan Lake Stats  Man-made reservoir initially created as a flood control  Now serves as a water source for many surrounding cities such as: Durham, Cary, Apex, Morrisville, RTP, and Chatham County  Is located within the New Hope and Haw River watersheds

4. Jordan Lake Stats  Project started in 1945 and was finally flooded in 1983  Surface area: 13,940 acres (56.4 km 2 )  Primary source: Haw River  Standard elevation: 216 ft (66m) above sea level

5. Water Problems  J. reservoir has had very nutrient rich waters since the time of its impoundment  Excessive algal growth  Reservoir has been designated as “impaired”  1983- NC Envt’l Management Commission designate J. Lake as “Nutrient Sensitive Water” (NSW)

6. Jordan Lake Rules!  June, 2007- New rules for future construction – these were the strictest rules for watersheds in NC’s history  Major Rules: 1.)reduce annual average N and P loads to the lake from all sources 2.)J. Lake is divided into 3 arms (2 New Hopes and Haw River) 3.)each arm of lake will meet its respective nutrient requirements

7. Why Do We Give a Hoot?  Important water source  Build-out increasing  Effects of build-out on nutrient loading  Effects of moving build-out further upstream  J. Lake is NSW  Increasing dependence on J. Lake  Diverse wildlife

8. Location of the Legacy at Jordan Lake

9. The Legacy  Construction began 2006  Located along the western shore of J. Lake within the New Hope Basin  Residential community with total of 436 lots covering 628 acres (including golf course)  3 phases of construction

10. Phase I of Build Out

11. Phase I  3 sub-phases:  Legacy Falls (26 lots)  Legacy Hills (34 lots)  Legacy Park (43 lots)  Total: 105 lots, 238 acres

12. Phase II & III  Phase II  Avg lot size: 23, 681 ft 2  82.52 acres  54 lots  Phase III  Avg lot size: 25,633 ft 2  83.01 acres  60 lots

13. Location of The Legacy at Jordan Lake

15. GIS Aspect We used GIS to extract the watershed basin we were going to focus on so that we could obtain the NLCD landcover data for the catchments the development was going to be in.

16. Catchments of Interest

17. The Process  Clipped Haw River and New Hope watersheds from a file containing the entire water network for the Southeast U.S.  Overlaid NHD water body to locate Jordan Lake  Overlaid files for primary, secondary, and local roads to get an exact location  Overlaid catchment data  Added NHD flowline attributes data table  Overlaid NED file for the area to view the elevation of catchments

18. The Process  Joined catchment shapefile with NLCD flowline attributes to get CUMNLCD  Used identify function to select catchment of interest and obtain information about landcover  Compiled data to get total values

19. NLCD Classifications  11 Open Water  12 Perennial Ice/Snow  21 Developed, Open Space  22 Developed, Low Density  23 Developed, Medium Density  31 Bare Rock/Sand/Clay  32 Quarries/Strip Mines/Gravel Pits  33 Transitional  41 Deciduous Forest  42 Evergreen Forest  43 Mixed Forest  51 Shrub  61 Orchards/Vineyards/Other  71 Grassland/Herbaceous  81 Pasture/Hay  82 Row Crops  83 Small Grains  84 Fallow  85 Urban/Recreational Grasses  91 Woody Wetlands  92 Emergent Herbaceous Wetlands

20. COMID 8897386COMID8897026 NLCD #% of landcover Land Area (km^2)% of landcover Land Area (km^2) Total Land Area (km^2) 11Open Water0.1640.005300 31 Bare Rock/Sand/Clay0.0360.001200 33Transitional1.470.047400 41Deciduous Forest62.04257.440.5622.562 42Evergreen Forest21.460.69215.630.1530.845 43Mixed Forest12.160.39226.840.2630.655 81Pasture/Hay1.440.04600 82Row Crops0.150.004800 91Woody Wetlands0.960.0310.090.000880.03188 92 Emergent Herbaceous Wetlands0.110.003500 Total Area:3.226Total Area:0.9794.202

21. L-THIA Steps

25. SUMMARY OF SCENARIOS State: North Carolina County: Chatham Land UseHydrologic Soil Group Current acres Scenario 1Scenario 2 ForestA607.1602567 AgriculturalA800 Grass/PastureA6.900 Water/WetlandsA6.000 Low Density ResidentialA02661 RUNOFF RESULTS Avg. Annual Runoff Volume (acre-ft) Land UseCurrentScenario 1Scenario 2 Forest3.022.992.82 Agricultural1.8000 Grass/Pasture0.1400 Water/Wetlands000 Low Density Residential02.586.07 Total Annual Volume (acre-ft)4.975.588.89 Avg. Annual Runoff Depth (in) Current Scenario 2Scenario 3 0.090.100.17

26. NONPOINT SOURCE POLLUTANT RESULTS Nitrogen (lbs) Land UseCurrentScenario 1Scenario 2 Forest555 Agricultural2100 Grass/Pasture0.28300 Water/Wetlands000 Low Density Residential01230 Total 26.2831735 Phosphorous (lbs) Land UseCurrentScenario 1Scenario 2 Forest0.0820.0810.076 Agricultural600 Grass/Pasture0.00400 Water/Wetlands000 Low Density Residential049 Total 6.0864.0819.076 Suspended Solids (lbs) Land UseCurrentScenario 1Scenario 2 Forest887 Agricultural52600 Grass/Pasture0.40500 Water/Wetlands000 Low Density Residential0289678 Total 534.405297685

27. What’s In Store? How will the nutrient runoff rates be affected if we move the development farther upstream?