Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Water Supply topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Johnston County staff urge start of design for $400M-plus Lower Neuse water project as peak demand nears
Summary
County utilities staff told commissioners that regional interconnections will not meet long‑term demand and recommended beginning design of a staged 'Lower Neuse' water-supply project that could cost hundreds of millions and raise typical residential bills under a worst‑case financing scenario.
County public‑utilities staff told the Board of Commissioners on April 6 that Johnston County needs to accelerate planning and design for a major new water‑supply program or else face mandatory restrictions on hot, dry peak days by about 2030.
At a lengthy presentation, the utilities presenter outlined a staged approach centered on an intake near Richardson Bridge and an off‑stream reservoir adjacent to an abandoned quarry. "The new intake is expected to cost $120 million, the new treatment plant $280 million, and all of new finished‑water transmission over $200 million," the presenter said, noting those are planning estimates for a full build‑out rather than the initial phase.
The staff recommended starting a design bid‑build for a 6 million‑gallon‑a‑day (MGD) initial plant at the quarry site while continuing to pursue progressive design‑build for the complex raw‑water intake and pipeline. The proposal would allow the county to stage construction and seek grants, low‑interest loans, and partner buy‑in before issuing major revenue debt.
Why it matters: utilities staff said the county can already buy roughly 10–11 MGD from regional partners in good conditions but cannot rely on leased water for long‑term capacity or during simultaneous regional droughts. The presentation warned that without a new local source, routine water restrictions and supply shortfalls are likely as the system approaches projected 2030 peak demands.
The financial outlook: staff presented a worst‑case financing scenario that assumes revenue bonds and elevated construction costs. Under that projection, a typical household using 4,000 gallons per month could see a bill rise from about $46 today to roughly $63 by 2031. "This is our worst‑case scenario," staff said, and they emphasized grants, federal appropriations, partner pre‑purchases of capacity, and lower‑cost loans would reduce the rate impact.
Options and next steps: staff proposed to (1) begin design work paid from ARPA and system development fee funds, (2) seek federal and state grants and SRF loans, (3) continue negotiations to increase temporary leased supplies (for example, upgrading an agreement with Raleigh from 2.5 to 4.5 MGD), and (4) pursue regional partner agreements that would buy capacity up front to lower county borrowing needs.
Commissioners asked about drought modeling, permit limits from the Neuse River, and the feasibility of an on‑stream reservoir. Staff said on‑stream reservoirs face significant permitting hurdles and that the Richardson Bridge intake plus off‑stream storage is the practicable regional option; staff also described a potential initial reservoir of about 0.8 billion gallons and a second nearby site that could add roughly 2.1 billion gallons for long‑term resiliency.
The board did not vote on construction today but gave staff direction to return with specific design contracts, updated capital improvement plans, and funding packages. Utilities staff said they would present more detailed cost models and policy recommendations at future meetings.
