Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Stormwater topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Nags Head unveils stormwater master plan prioritization; Ramp 1 outfall tops list
Summary
Staff presented a stormwater master plan and prioritized CIP of 22 project areas, ranking the Ramp 1 outfall highest (64 points) and identifying Soundside Road phases and a $1.8M pump station as major components. Presenters said scoring considered flooding frequency, residents affected, system condition and potential water‑quality benefits.
Town staff presented the Stormwater Master Plan framework and a prioritized list of 22 stormwater project areas to the Board of Commissioners on Aug. 5, citing flooding frequency, number of residents affected and project cost as primary scoring criteria.
The town used a 0–75 scoring matrix that considered flooding frequency and impact, system condition, water‑quality benefits, maintenance needs and number of residents affected. David (project presenter) said the Ramp 1 outfall in South Nags Head ranked highest with 64 points and an estimated cost of about $85,000 because it serves a large number of residents, addresses frequent flooding and is relatively low‑cost compared with other options.
Major projects in the prioritized list include a higher‑cost Soundside Road trunk network (Phase 1 estimated at $750,000) and a Soundside pump station (Phase 3), which staff estimated could cost about $1.8 million but would connect other phases and materially improve system performance. Staff emphasized that several projects score closely and that sequencing and grant opportunities will influence final CIP inclusion.
Commissioners and staff discussed how water‑quality benefits were scored (treatment and infiltration vs. conveyance/backflow prevention), the role of overwash/tidal influence in some project areas and whether certain phases need to be built together for full effectiveness. David noted that some projects provide limited water‑quality benefit unless paired with infiltration or a pump/phase that enables treatment.
The presentation also included data on recent heavy rainfall and groundwater impacts. David said, “We saw the water table rise 2.5 feet over that period,” and staff linked high groundwater and frequent rain events to reduced infiltration performance, increasing the need for conveyance and pump solutions in some neighborhoods.
Next steps: staff will refine priorities based on board feedback, align stormwater projects with other CIP work, pursue grant opportunities (especially where water‑quality benefits improve competitiveness) and return a final report for board consideration in November.
