EPA-456/R-06-001 

November 2006 

SEQL in the Greater Charlotte Bi-State Region: 

Tackling Environmental Challenges


In a Growing Metropolitan Area


United States Environmental Protection Agency 

Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards 

Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711 

Centralina Council of Governments 

1300 Baxter Street 

Charlotte, North Carolina 28204 

Catawba Regional Council of Governments 

215 Hampton Street 

Rock Hill, South Carolina 29731 
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 

Sustainable Environment for Quality of Life, or SEQL, is a federal-state-local partnership 

designed to enhance the quality of life for residents in the fifteen-county Greater 

Charlotte-Rock Hill-Gastonia-Concord Bi-State Region in North Carolina and South 

Carolina (Greater Charlotte Bi-State Region). Through SEQL, local officials have worked 

with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the states of North Carolina 

and South Carolina to help support ongoing efforts to make the Greater Charlotte Bi-State 

Region environmentally cleaner, more livable for its residents, and a more attractive area 

for businesses to locate. 

A key aspect of the SEQL effort is helping incorporate environmental concerns in local 

decision making throughout the region. Through the leadership of Centralina and 

Catawba Regional Councils of Governments, elected officials, citizens, and businesses are 

working together to address a range of issues associated with rapid growth and urban and 

suburban sprawl. SEQL also has helped bring federal and state resources to bear in 

helping local officials address environmental challenges. It has proven to be a model that 

other areas can adopt as they confront quality of life and environmental challenges 

associated with rapid growth. This report provides a step-by-step guide for establishing a 

SEQL program in any area. 

Rapid Growth in Metropolitan Areas: A Quality of Life Challenge 

Rapid growth in metropolitan areas has presented local governments across the nation 

with an array of new challenges. According to the U.S. Census Bureau, U.S. population is 

growing by more than 2.5 million people annually. This is roughly the equivalent of 

adding a city the size of metropolitan Denver to the U.S. every year. This trend is 

expected to continue until 2050. From 1982 to 2002, total land developed increased by 

almost fifty percent, while total cropland acreage declined by about twelve percent, 

according to a U.S. Department of Agriculture survey. And the American Farmland Trust 

reports that sprawl claims an estimated 1.2 million acres of farmland each year. 

By 2030, the nation will need about 427 billion square feet of “built space” to 

accommodate projected population growth. Half of that space has yet to be built, 

according to a Brookings Institution report. Land use issues are local decisions. If local 

governments meet this demand with the type of development seen in recent years, sprawl 

is likely to continue. This sprawl can contribute to a cascade of problems, including 

increases in the number of cars on the road, distances traveled, demand for paved roads 

and parking lots, and air quality and water-quality problems. 

Sprawl also has economic consequences. Traffic delays resulted in $72 billion in wasted 

fuel and lost wages in 1997 alone, according to the Federal Highway Administration. 

Unless governments take action now to prevent sprawl, these traffic delays will become 

a daily fact of life for millions more Americans in the future. This rapid growth has 

often left local governments struggling to find effective solutions to these regional 

problems that are often beyond their control. Without a consensus-based approach to 

address these concerns on a regional basis, local governments in many areas of the 
country have been left to act independently. The resulting fragmentation often leaves 

scores of local communities in a given region trying to manage growth from the lowest 

possible level of government. 

Federal and state governments can help. Federal and state agencies offer a wide array of 

programs to support local efforts in improving quality of life and the environment. 

However, locating these programs and navigating through the process and paperwork 

necessary to qualify for and receive these funds can be daunting for local communities. 

Moreover, while national and state pollution control rules have helped improve air and 

water quality to the point that the nation’s air and water is cleaner than it has been at any 

time over the past thirty-five years, these rules cannot completely solve local 

environmental and quality of life problems. For example, automobile emission standards 

in place today result in new cars that are 99 percent cleaner for smog-producing pollutants 

than those built in 1970. However, the growth in vehicle miles traveled (VMT) and 

associated emissions threaten to erode those gains. It is not difficult to imagine a day in 

the future when commuters are driving zero-emission vehicles (and air quality has, 

therefore, improved), but those vehicles are stuck in frequent traffic jams. Ultimately, 

issues like VMT growth that are connected to land use are better addressed locally 

because, of course, land use decisions are primarily local. 

Greater Charlotte Bi-State Region: A Growing Area 

Charlotte is the largest city in North Carolina and a major economic center for both North 

Carolina and South Carolina. The city is the country’s second largest financial center, 

with nine Fortune 500 firms headquartered in the region. Charlotte is a hub for U.S. 

Airways, home to professional football and basketball franchises, and supports the largest 

public arts campaign in the country. 

At 7,300 square miles, the bi-state area is larger than the State of Connecticut. It spans 

two states, with eleven counties in North Carolina and four in South Carolina. 

The Greater Charlotte Bi-State Region has experienced explosive growth. Its population 

has nearly doubled since 1980, and the area is ranked twenty-sixth among the top one 

hundred fastest growing metropolitan areas, based on 1990-2000 U.S. Census data. The 

current population of 2.3 million is projected to nearly double again by 2030. 

This growth has come at a price. Charlotte area drivers spend an average of forty-three 

hours a year in traffic, up from ten hours in 1982, according to the 2005 Urban Mobility 

Study by the Texas Transportation Institute. Based on this increase, Charlotte ranks 

nineteenth in traffic delays among urban areas nationwide. 

To successfully address the economic, environmental, and lifestyle-related issues 

associated with the growth anticipated in the Greater Charlotte Bi-State Region, local 

elected officials must work closely together. This presents its own set of challenges. No 

one governmental body controls the entire area, which contains over 125 political 

jurisdictions with staggered elections for governing boards. A regional initiative requires 

long-term commitment, the involvement of local organizations, the business community 

3 
and citizens across the region, as well as a continual process of educating elected officials 

and bringing them together. 

SEQL: How it Works and What it Has Accomplished 

Recognizing the potential impact of rapid growth on regional livability, in 2001 

Charlotte Mayor Pat McCrory and Mecklenburg County Commission Chairman Parks 

Helms brought together elected officials from across the region. The group identified a 

set of steps local governments could take to improve air and water quality and/or 

encourage sustainable growth. With the support of EPA and the states of North and 

South Carolina, and with facilitation provided by the Centralina Council of 

Governments, the chief elected officials from twenty-six jurisdictions agreed to a set of 

twenty-five action items for local consideration and implementation. These measures 

included incentives to encourage vanpooling, carpooling and mass transit; local 

government energy plans; planning for greenways and open space; sedimentation and 

erosion control; and pedestrian-friendly streetscapes. 

Building on this effort, Mayor McCrory and other local officials decided to encourage 

local communities to adopt the action items across a broader region. This effort was 

managed by Centralina Council of Governments (COG) in North Carolina, which 

contracted with Catawba Regional COG in South Carolina, to include the fifteen counties 

that now form the SEQL region. These two COGs work with jurisdictions in thirteen of 

SEQL’s fifteen counties. 

Under SEQL, the Centralina and Catawba COGs developed a set of “how-to” documents 

that explain how to implement each of the action items identified. Each document 

describes the action, explains its impact, costs and benefits, and provides a step-by-step 

guide for implementing the measure. The COGs made this information available to local 

jurisdictions via notebooks, CDs and the SEQL website. 

EPA, North Carolina and South Carolina provided technical and monetary support for 

special projects through grants. The COGs provided additional resources to support SEQL 

outreach. The COGs also worked with EPA and the states to identify a range of additional 

measures to improve the environment. These include diesel retrofit, truck stop 

electrification, lawn mower rebates, gas can trade outs, auto body shop pollution 

prevention training, and energy efficient coatings for heating and air conditioning units, 

among others. As of April 2006, eighty-six jurisdictions had reported adopting and 

implementing more than 750 action items. 

SEQL also provided a forum for elected officials, city and county managers, business 

leaders, and citizen groups to meet regularly to discuss regional quality-of-life issues. The 

meetings were designed to help build a strong regional ethic across the fifteen counties, 

discuss ways to improve public health and the environment, and keep the Greater 

Charlotte Bi-State Region a place where people want to live and businesses want to locate. 

At the meetings, officials discussed how to implement specific actions in their own 

communities, with an emphasis on those that would produce multiple environmental 

benefits. 

4 
Local leaders established a Project Management Advisory Council to manage the SEQL 

effort. Composed of officials from the COGs, local governments, the two states and EPA, 

the Council met periodically to discuss progress and plan new efforts. 

Under the SEQL umbrella, the Charlotte region initiated a “visioning process” for the 

region. Rather than starting from scratch, as is typically done in visioning projects, the 

COGs used an innovative approach that culled shared values from adopted jurisdictional 

visions and plans. This process revealed a remarkable degree of consensus on these shared 

values in a very cost-effective manner. Future phases of the visioning process will make 

use of an EPA tool designed to develop and analyze growth scenarios. The EPA’s 

Regional Vulnerability Assessment tool allows local governments to examine the longterm potential environmental and lifestyle impacts of various development decisions. (For 

more information, visit www.epa.gov/reva.) 

SEQL: A Model for the Nation 

SEQL is one of a number of similar efforts under way around the nation. One of the most 

comprehensive is Envision Utah, a private/public partnership that guides the development 

of a broad, publicly supported, Quality Growth Strategy for Utah’s Greater Wasatch Area. 

Envision Utah has used regional visioning and citizen involvement to develop alternative 

future scenarios for addressing rapid development and population growth. (For more 

information, visit www.envisionutah.org.) 

Other metropolitan areas can replicate both Envision Utah and SEQL to address growth 

and quality of life-related problems. Communities around the Southeast have already 

looked to the SEQL process and adopted similar measures. SEQL’s website outlines the 

twenty-five action items and describes the costs, impacts and benefits, and the time it 

takes for implementation. Each item includes a step-by-step action plan and provides 

contacts for additional information. (For more information, visit www.seql.org or 

www.centralina.org.) 

The Key Components of Success for Regional Initiatives 

Based on the SEQL experience, local communities interested in developing regional 

environmental programs should consider: 

1.	 Identify a Local Champion: Political leadership at the local level is critical to the 

success of a SEQL-like initiative. Such initiatives can be difficult to maintain without 

a prominent political leader, or leaders, who can bring together the elected officials 

necessary to develop solutions to regional problems. Bipartisan leadership is ideal. 

While leaders from the business community assume key roles in many metropolitan 

organizations, support and participation from local elected officials is critical. 

2.	 Engage a Respected Regional Organization to Manage the Effort: The regional 

organization must be respected and acceptable to all key players, because it will 

handle funding, organize meetings, provide a source of staffing, etc. In the SEQL 

initiative, local elected officials determined that the two COGs were the appropriate 

organizations to serve in this role. Other initiatives have established private-public 

5 
partnerships or steering committees comprised of local and state government officials, 

business leaders, developers or community leaders. 

3.	 Develop a Multi-Year, Reliable Source of Funding: Funding is critical. Key 

sources include foundations, federal or state grants, direct support from local 

governments, and contributions from local corporations or the business community. 

SEQL has succeeded partly due to steady, dedicated funding for ongoing activities, as 

opposed to project funding. Without a multi-year, reliable source of funding from year 

to year, regional efforts will not succeed. Multiple sources help ensure that the project 

is continually funded as sources become exhausted over time. EPA provided a 

majority of the SEQL funding over the first four years of the pilot project to the 

Centralina COG, which allocated a portion to the Catawba COG. This helped cement 

the EPA/COG partnership and enabled the allocation of local funds by the COGs to 

implement SEQL. EPA also provided North Carolina and South Carolina with some 

separate resources to support SEQL. 

4.	 Be Prepared for a Long-Term Commitment: The growth challenges facing 

metropolitan regions across the nation cannot be solved with a two- or three-year 

effort. Given the short terms of most local officials and frequent changes in local 

leadership, maintaining longer-term efforts, however, can often be difficult. The 

COGs have used various approaches to sustain SEQL, including sponsoring events to 

generate support and maintain momentum, providing an interactive map on the SEQL 

website, and tallying the number of actions communities have taken to improve air, 

water, and land. 

5.	 Develop a Regional Vision: Growth is inevitable. The question is: “how do we want 

to grow?” Bringing the public into the process to identify a long-term regional vision 

is critical to answering this question. This is particularly important in large, fastgrowing regions, where residents in rural counties may have a very different vision of 

the future than those living in suburban or urban areas. This input can be used to 

develop or evaluate future scenarios and can serve as the foundation for the entire 

initiative. SEQL includes a visioning and scenario-evaluation component that helps 

the program influence planning practices across the region. 

6.	 Celebrate Early Successes: Identifying early successes is critical. It takes time to 

establish a process, obtain a steady stream of funding, initiate regional meetings, and 

develop visions and future scenarios. Ideally, these are on-the-ground projects that 

can give the public, elected officials, and funding sources a tangible sense of success. 

Celebrating those successes and working with the media to publicize them also helps 

maintain momentum. 

7.	 Develop a Marketing Strategy and Maintain Community Involvement: If the area 

is large like the Greater Charlotte Bi-State Region, considerable outreach may be 

necessary to engage elected officials, citizens, community groups, and businesses. In 

addition to working with local media, a marketing strategy should include visits to 

local governments, chambers of commerce, and local organizations. The COGs 

initiated and attended gatherings of a number of groups, including Parent Teacher 

Associations, local media meteorologists and environmental organizations. EPA and 

the COGs also have helped SEQL get national exposure through presentations at 

national meetings, a satellite broadcast and other means. 

8.	 Develop Partnerships: Partnerships are critical. They help spread the message, 

leverage resources and increase the level and diversity of program activity. In the case 

of SEQL, the emphasis is on government partnerships. Three levels of government – 

6 
local, state, and federal – worked together toward the common goal of empowering 

local governments to take action to improve air and water quality. Partnerships with 

businesses and citizen groups are also important for advancing the projects goals and 

for achieving environmental results. SEQL worked very effectively with several 

groups, including the Carolinas Clean Air Coalition. 

9.	 Enhance Participation by Providing Options for Involvement: Finding the most 

effective way to engage stakeholders will vary from area to area. Providing choice 

was particularly effective for the Charlotte region. By providing numerous options for 

participation, SEQL was able to engage local governments and different groups 

effectively in various projects, such as implementation of the environmental action 

items from the toolbox. Leaders in the Charlotte region reacted very favorably to this 

approach, much more positively than they would probably have responded to a “one 

size fits all” approach. Once the COGs were able to interest a local government or 

group in a SEQL project, then the discussion focused on project expectations and what 

SEQL participation entailed. 

10. Identify and Develop Staff Who are Committed to Action:	 Elected and high-level 

officials come and go fairly regularly so it is very important to develop staff within 

both the sponsoring organization and participating jurisdictions and agencies who are 

essential for successful implementation of a regional project. Professional staff 

generally turn over less frequently and are, therefore, more likely to remain long 

enough to ensure the project is implemented over the long term. Key professional 

staff must not only have (or develop) subject area knowledge, but must also be 

committed to inclusive processes and integrated planning. SEQL relied upon such 

professional staff within participating local governments (and COGs) to look for 

environmental improvement opportunities in every part of their jobs. This ongoing 

education helped create a cadre of “doers” who can spread SEQL-type thinking into 

longer-term activities, plans, and programs. Ultimately, this has proven to be one of 

SEQL greatest challenges and successes. 

How This Report is Organized 

This report is organized into four sections. Section 1 provides background and history on 

SEQL, and the region’s environmental challenges. Section 2 provides an overview of 

SEQL’s phases and major activities, and Section 3 describes what SEQL has 

accomplished in the Greater Charlotte Bi-State Region. Section 4 highlights eight areas 

of key lessons learned. The document also includes SEQL’s management structure, a 

detailed timeline of SEQL activities, profiles of leadership, the SEQL resolution, and a 

CD containing SEQL details. 

7 
TABLE OF CONTENTS 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ....................................................................................... 2


Rapid Growth in Metropolitan Areas: A Quality of Life Challenge..................................................... 2


Greater Charlotte Bi-State Region: A Growing Area ........................................................................ 3


SEQL: How it Works and What it Has Accomplished....................................................................... 4


SEQL: A Model for the Nation .......................................................................................................... 5


The Key Components of Success for Regional Initiatives................................................................. 5


How This Report is Organized........................................................................................................... 7


TABLE OF CONTENTS ........................................................................................ 8


FIGURES............................................................................................................. 10


TABLES .............................................................................................................. 11


SECTION 1. SEQL BACKGROUND AND HISTORY ........................................ 12


1.1 SEQL and the Greater Charlotte Bi-State Region..................................................................... 12


1.2 Air and Water in the Greater Charlotte Bi-State Region ........................................................... 13


1.3 SEQL Starts as an EPA Sustainability Project .......................................................................... 14


1.4 SEQL’s Beginnings.................................................................................................................... 15


1.5 EPA Pursues Expanded Pilot Project in Charlotte Region........................................................ 15


1.6 EPA’s Examination of Air Quality Management in the United States........................................ 16


1.7 Urban Sprawl and Population Growth Across the United States .............................................. 16


1.8 Need for Tailored Air Quality Solutions ..................................................................................... 17


1.9 Governmental Institutions and Problem Misalignment .............................................................. 18


1.10 Recommendations of Air Quality Management Examination .................................................. 18


1.11 Implementation of Recommendations by Expanding EPA Sustainability Project in Charlotte,


NC.................................................................................................................................................... 18


1.12 EPA Approaches Charlotte to Expand Sustainability Project.................................................. 19


SECTION 2. WHAT SEQL IS ABOUT ............................................................... 20


2.1 SEQL’s Goals ............................................................................................................................ 20


2.2 The Transition to SEQL ............................................................................................................. 20


2.3 Addressing the Challenges Facing the Greater Charlotte Bi-State Region .............................. 21


2.4 Phase 2: Early Successes........................................................................................................ 23


2.5 Phase 3: Long Term Integrated Planning................................................................................. 28


8 
2.6 The Key Components of Success for Regional Initiatives ........................................................ 33


SECTION 3. SEQL ACCOMPLISHMENTS........................................................ 37


3.1 Overall SEQL Results................................................................................................................ 37


3.2 Air Quality Action Items ............................................................................................................. 37


3.3 Sustainable Growth Action Items .............................................................................................. 38


3.4 Water Quality Action Items ........................................................................................................ 38


3.5 Additional Emission Reduction Measures ................................................................................. 39


3.6 Successful Outreach and Collaboration .................................................................................... 41


3.7 Common Information Resources or Database .......................................................................... 42


3.8 Regional Scenarios and Vision.................................................................................................. 42


3.9 Integrated Planning ................................................................................................................... 42


SECTION 4. KEY LESSONS LEARNED ........................................................... 44


4.1 Need Local Champions ............................................................................................................. 44


4.2 Identify Successes by Early Adopters ....................................................................................... 44


4.3 Focus on Action through Choice ............................................................................................... 45


4.4 Connect People ......................................................................................................................... 45


4.5 Communicate, Communicate, Communicate............................................................................ 46


4.6 Funding...................................................................................................................................... 47


4.7 Be Aware of Many Factors Affecting Community Participation................................................. 47


4.8 Technical Issues to Consider .................................................................................................... 48


ATTACHMENT 1: MANAGEMENT STRUCTURE............................................. 49


ATTACHMENT 2: DETAILED TIMELINE OF SEQL ACTIVITIES ..................... 50


ATTACHMENT 3: PROFILES OF LEADERSHIP ............................................. 51


ATTACHMENT 4: SEQL RESOLUTION OF SUPPORT ................................... 54


ENDNOTES ......................................................................................................... 55


9 
1

2

3

4

5

6

Figures 

Figure : Greater Charlotte Bi-State Region ..............................................................................12


Figure : Catawba-Wateree River System .................................................................................13


Figure : Yadkin River Basin.......................................................................................................13


Figure : Location of the Greater Charlotte Bi-State Region ...................................................18


Figure : As Is, Only Better Scenario .........................................................................................32


Figure : Compact Centers Scenario .........................................................................................32


10 
Tables


Table 1: Change in the U.S. Population and U.S. Land Developed .........................................17


Table 2: SEQL Timeline of Events ..............................................................................................21


Table 3: SEQL Overview ..............................................................................................................36


Table 4: City of Concord (Cabarrus County) Air Quality Measures ........................................37


Table 5: Examples of Air Measures from Select SEQL Areas .................................................37


Table 6: Examples of Sustainable Growth Measures from Select SEQL Areas ....................38


Table 7: Examples of Water Measures from Select SEQL Areas ............................................38


Table 8: Examples in Select SEQL Areas of Development Policies that Consider


Environment..................................................................................................................................40


11 
SECTION 1. SEQL BACKGROUND AND HISTORY 

1.1 SEQL and the Greater Charlotte Bi-State Region 

In many respects, the Charlotte region has 

provided an ideal location for a pilot for 

exploring how to protect the environment 

while growing a sound economy and 

providing a high quality of life. Among 

the top one hundred fastest growing 

metropolitan areas in the U.S., the region 

is ranked twenty-sixth based on 1990-

2000 U.S. Census data.1 It has a thriving 

economy and leadership that recognizes 

the need to address the environmental and 

quality of life challenges posed by 

growth. Located in the heart of the 

Southeast, the region straddles the North 

Carolina/South Carolina border, containing over 

125 political jurisdictions, including 

fifteen counties (eleven in NC and four in SC) (Figure 1). Mecklenburg is the region’s 

most populous county and contains the City of Charlotte. At 7,300 square miles, the bistate area is larger than the State of Connecticut.2

 Over two million people call the region 

home, a number which is expected to nearly double by 2030.3 

This growth has come at a price. For 

example, Charlotte area drivers spend an 

average of forty-three hours a year stuck 

in traffic, up from ten hours in 1982. This 

increase has led to Charlotte’s ranking as 

the second-worst, nationally, among thirty 

“medium” size urban areas, and 

nineteenth, nationally, among all urban 

areas for traffic delays.4 

The Charlotte region, once a center for 

furniture and textile manufacturing, has 

now shifted to high-tech, banking, and 

service industries. Charlotte is the second 

largest financial center in the U.S and is home Figure 1: Greater Charlotte Bi-State Region 

to the headquarters of nine Fortune 500 firms.5 

Thirteen of the fifteen SEQL counties are contained within two convening councils of 

governments: the Centralina Council of Governments (COG) in North Carolina and the 

Catawba Regional COG in South Carolina. The two COGs lead SEQL in partnership. 

12 
The region does not have a formal regional authority or body, although it cooperates on 


many issues and programs, including SEQL. 


1.2 Air and Water in the Greater Charlotte Bi-State Region 

As in many U.S. metropolitan areas, the Charlotte region’s rapid growth has contributed


to air and water concerns. In 1991, EPA designated the Charlotte area as


“nonattainment” because its ozone air quality violated EPA’s one-hour ozone standard,


which it then met four years later.6, 7 In 1997, EPA issued a more protective ozone


standard that covered an eight-hour period. In 2004 EPA designated the Charlotte area


as nonattainment for that standard.8 In North Carolina, the nonattainment area


encompasses all of Cabarrus, Gaston, Lincoln, Mecklenburg, Rowan, and Union


Counties. The area also includes part of Iredell County and part of York County in


South Carolina. Under the Clean Air Act, both states are required to develop plans to


bring the area into attainment for ozone by 2010.


The Charlotte region contains two major river basins: the Catawba-Wateree and the


Yadkin-Pee Dee. These basins face both water quality and water quantity issues. 


The Catawba River basin, along with the Broad 

River basin, forms the headwaters of the SanteeCooper River system, which flows through South 

Carolina to the Atlantic Ocean (Figure 29

). The 

river basin is the eighth-largest in North Carolina 

and encompasses all or part of twelve counties in 

the state. The headwaters of the Catawba River 

are in the mountains, where many of the streams 

have excellent water quality. As the basin enters 

the Piedmont, land use shifts from forest to 

agricultural and urban uses. Nonpoint runoff Figure 2: Catawba-Wateree River System 

from agriculture, urban runoff, and other sources 

have caused nutrient enrichment and 

sedimentation problems in the streams, rivers, and 

lakes. In this lower region, urban growth in the 

Charlotte metropolitan area has affected the water 

quality of the lakes and rivers.10 

The Yadkin River basin is the second-largest basin in 


North Carolina, flowing through twenty-one counties. 


The Yadkin River originates in the North Carolina


Mountains, flows northeasterly for one hundred miles


and then flows southeasterly until it joins the Pee Dee


River (Figure 311). Water quality concerns in the


basin include increasing nutrient enrichment, 


increasing urbanization and suburbanization, 


sedimentation from nonpoint sources, and the Figure 3: Yadkin River Basin 

13 
impacts of permitted municipal and industrial dischargers. Most of the monitored 

reservoirs, including municipal drinking water supplies, have excessive algal growth and 

associated concerns with dissolved oxygen and pH. These problems were caused by low 

flow, sedimentation, nutrients, and toxicants.12 

The majority of streams in the SEQL area are on the Clean Water Act section 303(d) list


of water bodies not meeting quality standards or which have impaired uses, either for


specific pollutant such as fecal coliform, or for biological impairment. Total Maximum


Daily Loads or TMDLs are required on some, but not all, of these waters; the extent to 


which they are in place varies greatly.13


Until the recent past, the region had no water quantity issues. However, a severe five-year 

drought several years ago nearly depleted the water supplies of a number of cities. Highgrowth counties that do not border a river large enough to serve as a drinking water source 

are faced with buying water from their neighbors, which is becoming increasingly difficult 

as the population increases throughout the region. Furthermore, aging infrastructure in a 

number of communities has resulted in a loss of treated water, according to a recent study 

by the North Carolina Rural Economic Development Center. The same study assessed a 

$1.2 billion need for water and sewer infrastructure improvements through 2030 for all of 

the Charlotte metropolitan region. This need is driven not only by infrastructure 

maintenance costs, but also because population growth is driving up the demand for 

14 water. 

1.3 SEQL Starts as an EPA Sustainability Project 

Many areas across the country are experiencing 

environmental issues similar to those in Charlotte. 

Urban growth patterns negatively impact air quality, 

water quality and quantity, habitat, and biodiversity. 

Growth has a significant impact on EPA’s ability to 

achieve its mission to protect public health and the 

environment. Historically, EPA has fulfilled that 

mission through the implementation of environmental 

laws in partnership with state environmental agencies. 

In the late 1990s, however, EPA realized that some of 

the largest threats to the environment and public health 

were resulting from urban growth. Yet responsibility 

for growth management lies primarily with local 

officials and is largely outside of EPA’s regulatory 

domain. EPA, therefore, decided to support the 

Sustainability Project in Charlotte, SEQL’s precursor, 

as a way to demonstrate an integrated approach for a 

region managing its own growth. 

14 
1.4 SEQL’s Beginnings 

The EPA Sustainability Project was started in 

the fall of 2000 under the leadership of 

Charlotte Mayor Patrick McCrory and 

Mecklenburg County Commission Chairman 

Parks Helms. Under an EPA cooperative 

agreement and with support from Centralina 

COG staff, the city brought together the 

region’s chief elected and appointed officials Mayor Patrick McCrory Chairman Parks Helms 

from twenty-six of the largest jurisdictions to 

learn about air quality, water resources and land-use issues. Additionally, Centralina 

Council of Governments staff and subject matter experts from Mecklenburg County and 

the State of North Carolina developed a set of three action item toolboxes for air, water 

and land use. These toolboxes were presented to elected officials at seven regional 

networking lunches. The officials and managers involved identified twenty-five air, water 

and land use action items from the 

toolboxes, by consensus, for 

consideration at the local level. These 

were measures they believed would 

work best for their communities. The 

Sustainability Project was a success, and 

helped foster a collective sense that 

more work needed to be done as a 

region by successfully engaging key 

officials and bringing them “up to 

speed” on critical environmental issues. 

The decision to invite chief officials 

from the largest jurisdictions was based 

on the belief that they would be most Christine Todd Whitman, Former EPA Administrator, 

able to act on the consensus achieved. If Chairman Parks Helms and Mayor Patrick McCrory 

the largest jurisdictions adopted the 

twenty-five measures, it would be more likely that smaller jurisdictions would follow. 

Inviting elected officials versus a broad group of stakeholders was also a conscious 

decision: if governments could demonstrate that they could work together across the 

region to implement environmental action items, again, others would follow. 

1.5 EPA Pursues Expanded Pilot Project in Charlotte Region 

In 2001, EPA’s headquarters office in Research Triangle Park, NC undertook a long-range 

examination of the national air quality program, including how the program was managed. 

The EPA included an assessment of the direction in which air quality management is 

likely to head in the next ten years, development of a vision for where air quality 

15 
management should head over that same 

period, and recommendations on how to bring 

air quality management on board with this 

vision. 

1.6 EPA’s Examination of Air Quality 

Management in the United States 

In the thirty years since Congress passed the Clean Air Act, the nation has made 

tremendous progress in cleaning up air pollution. Despite this progress, significant air 

quality management challenges remain. For example, many areas face nonattainment 

status for the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone and particulate 

matter (PM). Efforts to address these air quality concerns will be significantly influenced 

by at least three factors: 

• Land use patterns associated with continuing population growth. 

• Need for tailored solutions to address air quality problems. 

• The alignment between the geographic scope of the responsibility of governmental 

institutions and the geographic scope of the air quality problems at issue. 

1.7 Urban Sprawl and Population Growth Across the United States 

Urban sprawl associated with population growth is a significant contributor to air quality 

problems. To an increasing extent, 

population-related activities such as 

transportation, land use, commercial 

activities, and individual behaviors 

influence air quality. Mitigating the 

effects of this growth will greatly 

influence the ability to attain air 

quality standards. 

Overall, sprawl in most U.S. 

metropolitan areas is occurring faster 

than in the past.15 A major result of 

the expansion of these lower-density cities has been the urban development of areas that 

had been farmland, forests, and fields. From 1982 to 2002, the nation’s cropland acreage 

declined about 12 percent; the net decline between 1992 and 2002 was about 3 percent. 

According to the American Farmland Trust, sprawl claims 1.2 million acres of farmland 

annually. From 1982 to 2002, the population grew nearly 25 percent, while total land 

developed increased by almost 50 percent, supporting the contention that metropolitan 

areas across the country are developing land much faster than they are adding 

people.16, 17, 18 

16 
19,

20

The U.S. population is growing by more than 2.5 million people annually,21 roughly the 

equivalent of adding a city the size of metropolitan Denver to the U.S. every year.22 By 

2030, the nation will need about 427 billion square feet of “built space” to accommodate 

growth projections, about 50 percent of which will 

have to be constructed between now and then.23 If 

this demand is met through the kind of development 

that we have seen over recent years, the result is 

likely to be more sprawl. This, in turn, generally 

means a continued increase in the number of cars on 

the road and in the number of vehicle miles traveled 

(VMT).24 In 1997, for example, traffic delays 

resulted in $72 billion in wasted fuel and lost 

25 wages. More driving also means more smog and 

haze. Additional sprawl means more highways, roads, parking lots, and pavement; this, in 

turn, brings an array of water quality-related problems, including polluted runoff into 

streams and waterways. 

Sprawling growth corresponds to a shift in the 

pattern of ozone violations in the U.S. Cities in the 

south, southwest and west have begun to displace 

northeastern and midwestern cities on the list of 

areas with the greatest number of days above the 

eight-hour ozone standard. Nine of the top ten 

ozone nonattainment areas for the number of days 

above the eight-hour ozone standard for 2003– 

2005 are located in the south, southwest or west. 

26 

1.8 Need for Tailored Air Quality Solutions 

Some areas of the country continue to have air quality problems, the sources of which can 

vary greatly from city to city. For these areas, the federal role is less clear and the 

pollution implications are potentially significant. While certain national actions will help 

address these problems, some areas will require more local, customized solutions. 

17 
1.9 Governmental Institutions and Problem Misalignment 

The governmental institutions that work to ensure clean air – primarily EPA and the states 

– often do not match the geographic scope of the air quality problem. For example, state 

and federal solutions are often difficult to implement in growing cities that may cross state 

boundaries and face environmental challenges largely outside of EPA and state regulatory 

control, such as VMT growth. 

1.10 Recommendations of Air Quality Management Examination 

In response to the findings described above, EPA’s air office made several 

recommendations: 

1. Focus on an integrated, problem-based 

approach for both criteria and toxic air 

pollutants. This should be accompanied 

by conscious efforts to respond on different 

geographic scales to multiple pollutant 

problems in specific locations or regions. 

2.	 Become a “catalyst for clean air 

solutions” on local, regional, and 

international levels. The future of air 

quality management is likely to rely less on 

federal regulation of sources and more on 

EPA’s serving as a catalyst to empower 

state, local, and tribal governments, and 

others, to tackle difficult problems through 

regulatory and nonregulatory means. EPA 

should focus on preventative programs to 

help areas take action to avoid air 

pollution. 

3. Make partnerships a priority in a broad 

array of geographic areas and stakeholder groups, fostering accountability 

through local stewardship, outreach, and education. EPA should target 

stakeholder development efforts to those problems that offer the greatest potential 

for environmental benefit, and find new partnerships in areas where it has not 

traditionally had partners. 

1.11 Implementation of 

Recommendations by Expanding 

EPA Sustainability Project in 

Charlotte, NC 

EPA decided to implement the above 

recommendations, in part, by creating a 

pilot project in a selected area to 

demonstrate: 

Figure 4: Location of The 

Greater Charlotte Bi-State • An approach to increase Region integration across the criteria 

18 
pollutant and air toxics programs; 

• Empowerment of local officials to take ownership of air quality and action to 

improve it; and 

• Partnerships with local governments to improve air quality. 

EPA selected the Charlotte, NC, bi-State region (see Figure 4) as a pilot for several reasons: 

• EPA was already supporting the Sustainability Project, so effective working 

relationships with key individuals and offices in the region were already 

established. 

• The region was highly motivated to address growth issues and already had several 

groups and initiatives focused on these concerns. 

• The region possesses many desirable 

characteristics which made it an ideal 

setting for a pilot. It is experiencing rapid 

growth, has water quality and quantity 

concerns, and has less severe air quality 

problems, which can be addressed through 

local action with state and federal support. 

• EPA’s offices in Research Triangle Park, 

NC are close to Charlotte, which facilitates 

an even stronger partnership between EPA 

and Charlotte. 

1.12 EPA Approaches Charlotte to Expand Sustainability Project 

In 2001, EPA approached Charlotte and other local governments and the States of North 

and South Carolina about expanding the established partnership, the Sustainability Project, 

into an integrated approach to address air 

quality, transportation, land-use planning, 

energy and economic development, and other 

environmental issues. On October 30, 2002, 

EPA Administrator Christine Todd Whitman 

visited Charlotte to celebrate the closure of the 

Sustainability Demonstration Project and to 

announce the continued EPA partnership with 

the governments of the Charlotte metro area, 

established through a three-year cooperative 

agreement with Centralina COG. Centralina, 

sub-contracting with its South Carolina 

counterpart, Catawba Regional Council of Governments, officially launched SEQL in 

March 2003. 

19 
SECTION 2. WHAT SEQL IS ABOUT 

2.1 SEQL’s Goals 

SEQL is a bi-state, fifteen-county partnership 

across three levels of government with the 

goals of helping the Charlotte region achieve 

a clean environment, high quality of life, and 

a thriving economy. SEQL’s leaders are 

achieving these goals in three ways: 

1.	 Implementing regionally endorsed 

environmental initiatives. The 

Council of Governments are 

encouraging local governments, schools, and others to adopt the twenty-five action 

items identified from the Sustainability Project, along with other measures. To 

help with this effort, they are providing technical assistance and sharing best 

practices. The COGs are encouraging local demonstrations of measures to serve as 

examples of innovation, and are recognizing those local actions with cumulative 

impacts and collaboration on specific projects. 

2.	 Engaging local government officials in integrated environmental planning. By 

promoting integrated environmental planning, SEQL seeks to help local 

governments both to realize the multiple benefits of environmentally-based actions, 

and to reduce the number of unintended negative consequences of local decisions. 

3.	 Finding ways to “institutionalize” environmental considerations into decision 

making processes. SEQL seeks to incorporate environmental considerations into 

local and regional decision making across the region. 

EPA’s goals include helping local governments to better address a wide range of 

environmental issues. Improving air quality requires action at three levels of government: 

federal (EPA), state, and local. For example, national rules make cars, trucks, and off-road 

equipment cleaner, while national and state strategies reduce air quality impacts from power 

plants and other sources. EPA also supports SEQL as a national model for integrated 

regional planning. Air pollution problems are traditionally addressed through separate 

pollutant plans. SEQL engaged local governments to address air quality, land use, energy, 

transportation, and economic development in an integrated manner. 

2.2 The Transition to SEQL 

When the COGs assumed leadership of the 

Sustainability Project, they faced several 

challenges: 

1.	 While the initial phase of the project


successfully oriented one or two key


leaders in each of twenty-six


communities, these persons did not


represent the local legislative majorities


20 
needed to implement changes in ordinances or policies at the local government 

level. More elected officials would need to be brought on board. 

2.	 Simply declaring in Phase 1 that “we should do this” was not alone sufficient to 

produce action item implementation in an environment of tight staff resources, 

tight money, and competing priorities. 

3.	 The project’s strong local government focus did not adequately recognize local 

groups with strong environmental interests. 

4.	 Several local and regional “opinion leaders,” with influence critical to the adoption 

of growth management policies and ordinances, needed to be brought into the 

process to support elected leadership. 

5.	 A number of smaller communities and outlying counties impacted by the region’s 

growth and environmental change were not yet involved. 

6.	 Finally, the Centralina COG identified a need to develop a methodology of 

evaluating alternative development scenarios and analyzing their impact on air 

quality and other planning elements in order to provide a strong technical 

foundation for local planning and decision making. 

2.3 Addressing the Challenges Facing the Greater Charlotte Bi-State Region 

To address the challenges of continuing the initiative started by Mayor McCrory and 

Chairman Helms, the COGs decided to structure SEQL in three phases: 

1.	 Phase 1: EPA Sustainability Project— Introduction to Environmental 

Measures: The initial phase focused on education and identification of 

environmental action items. It laid out the framework for a broader regional effort 

at integrating 

environmental and growth 

planning, while creating a 

sense of collaboration and 

unity to permit follow up 

on toolbox 

implementation. 

2.	 Phase 2: Early 

Successes: Phase 2 

demonstrated early SEQL 

successes of Phase 1 

action item 

implementation. All of 

the participants were 

involved to ensure 

implementation of the 

Phase I toolbox 

commitments. SEQL also 

expanded from twenty-six 

initial jurisdictions to over 125, conducted additional outreach to many additional 

stakeholders on SEQL issues and worked to promote enhanced decision making at 

the local level and encourage participation in voluntary environmental projects. 

21 
3.	 Phase 3: Long Term Integrated Planning and Institutionalization: In the final 

phase, SEQL is developing mechanisms for integrating environmental and air 

quality issues into collaborative decision making on land use and transportation 

planning on a regional basis. It also focuses on integrating across sectors 

(transportation, land use, air quality) in an “institutionalized” manner so that 

integrated planning becomes not an additional process, but a part of local 

government planning at the local level. 

Phase 1 had a discrete beginning and end – March 2001 to October 2002. Phases 2 and 3 

started in February 2003 and 2004, respectively, and will continue beyond 2006 under 

non-EPA funding sources. 

The COGs created a management structure to lead SEQL 

(see Attachment 1). SEQL is administered by the 

Centralina COG in cooperation with the Catawba COG. 

The project was overseen by the SEQL Project 

Management Advisory Committee, which met quarterly for 

the duration of the project. Membership on the committee 

consisted of: 

• Executive Directors from both COGs 

• Representatives of local governments from around 

the region, including the City of Charlotte; City of 

Belmont, Union County, NC and York County, SC 

• Mecklenburg County, NC environmental officials 

• Representatives from NC Department of Environment and Natural Resources and 

SC Department of Health and Environmental Control 

• EPA 

The project’s management structure also included an informal technical committee, which 

focused on the development and evaluation of future regional growth scenarios. 

Political leadership is the key to the success of an 

effort like SEQL. The program has allowed 

elected officials to champion specific 

environmental issues and then to relate those 

improvements to broader environmental and 

growth issues. Charlotte Mayor Patrick 

McCrory and Mecklenburg County Chairman 

Parks Helms played vital roles in launching 

SEQL’s first phase, and in supporting the 

program over time. The Chairman of the COG Harold Shapiro, Executive Director, Catawba COG,


Boards also gave considerable support to SEQL, and H.C. Starnes, Mayor, Great Falls, SC


including promoting specific SEQL action items. 


“Coach” Joe White served as Centralina COG Board Chairman in 2003, while also 


occupying a seat on the Charlotte’s City Council. As a strong advocate for SEQL, he


22 
promoted the use of alternative fuels for local government and private fleets. Leda Belk, 

Chairman White’s successor, also served as a Rowan County Commissioner. She 

advocated for the implementation of many SEQL action items, and led the effort to bring 

truck stop electrification and school bus diesel retrofits to her county. Dumont Clarke, 

current Centralina Chairman, is a strong advocate for open space preservation and 

greenways. Eldridge Emory, a South Carolina State Representative, also served as Chair 

for the Catawba COG. He has been a consistent supporter of SEQL and greatly concerned 

about water quality issues (see Attachment 2 for profiles of SEQL’s political leadership). 

In addition to local leadership, state and EPA leadership 

has also played an important role. State participants 

include Bill Ross, Secretary of North Carolina’s 

Department of Environment and Natural Resources; and 

Lewis Shaw, former Deputy Commissioner for 

Environmental Quality Control in the South Carolina 

Department of Health and Environmental Control 

(SCDHEC); and his successor, Bob King. Three EPA 

Al Sharp, Executive Director, Centralina Administrators also have visited the Charlotte region to COG, and Mike Rowe, Director of Research 

and Planning, SCDHEC	 participate in SEQL events and to voice their support. 

The Centralina and Catawba Regional COGs also provided essential leadership. 

Centralina Executive Director A.R. Sharp, Jr., Catawba Regional Executive Director 

Harold Shapiro, Rebecca Yarbrough, SEQL Project Manager, and Wendy Bell, Senior 

Planner at Catawba COG, all provided knowledge based leadership to the SEQL team. 

None of this team was new to the region covered by SEQL. Collectively they had over 80 

years of experience working with local governments in the area, giving them a 

fundamental understanding of the region. SEQL engaged the active contribution of other 

staff members working in the areas of information technology, transportation, planning, 

public information and outreach and design. 

2.4 Phase 2: Early Successes 

Goals of Phase 2: 

• Expand the number of SEQL communities to include smaller jurisdictions whose 

participation is important for a seamless planning framework; 

• Introduce environmental, business, and community stakeholders to integrated 

planning processes; 

• Engage nongovernmental stakeholders in an integrated planning process, both to 

foster their interest and commitment to environmental improvements and to tap 

their energy in supporting local governmental actions; 

• Ensure implementation of Phase 1 toolbox items by providing technical support, 

while deepening the understanding of local elected bodies about the need to 

integrate local planning; and 

• Design of a regional database and data management system for improved analysis 

of project impacts and enhanced decision making. 

23 
To implement these goals, the COGs engaged in several activities in Phase 2: 

Kick-off Meeting: SEQL officially opened Phase 2 in March 2003 with a luncheon 

meeting. Over 80 local and state officials attended from the fifteen-county region and the 

States of North and South Carolina. The COGs unveiled the logo and theme for SEQL to 

the meeting participants with the following message: 

We’re in this together... As a region, we are at a critical moment regarding longterm quality of life and economic viability. Rapid growth and expanding land use 

is threatening our air quality and water resources. We must take action now to 

impact the future and preserve quality of life for the citizens of tomorrow. Today, 

we must begin to build our legacy. ... it starts today. 

The COGs invited the meeting participants to become involved in SEQL, offering 

additional information and on-site visits to brief staff and elected officials. They provided 

specific suggestions on follow-up actions meeting 

participants could take, ranging from visiting the 

SEQL website to implementing some of the 

twenty-five action items for air quality, water 

quality, and land use. 

Jurisdictional Visits: Following the kickoff, the 

COGs visited over sixty jurisdictions. They met 

with key staff and elected officials, provided 

background on SEQL, discussed the twenty-five 

action items, and explored what technical 

assistance was needed. These visits took place at regular governing body meetings or 

work sessions, in order to maximize the number of elected officials and key staff exposed 

to SEQL, and to demonstrate the COGs’ commitment to providing implementation 

assistance. 

Because of the nature of their work, the COG staff 

is routinely in contact with a number of 

jurisdictions throughout the region, and naturally 

tend to view issues through a regional lens. The 

staff was, therefore, effectively able to promote 

SEQL concepts through these existing contacts 

with elected and appointed leadership. Moreover, 

the broadly representative Boards of the COGs 

provided ready access to all communities in the 

region, which facilitated getting information out 

to elected officials in over 125 jurisdictions. 

Subregional Meetings: To seek firmer commitments from jurisdictions on action item 

implementation and a better understanding of the issues involved, the COGs held a series 

of five subregional meetings in August and September of 2003. Meeting participants 

24 
included elected officials, planners, and city and county managers. The COGs structured 

the meetings to acquaint everyone with SEQL’s purpose. Professional facilitators assisted 

participants in choosing priority action items for their communities, and obtained the 

commitment to undertaking those actions. Additionally, participants provided input on 

other air quality action items in addition to the initial twenty-five items identified in Phase 

1. Over 320 people from almost sixty jurisdictions participated in the five meetings. 

Resolutions: During all of the SEQL 

interactions with local governments, the 

COGs promoted adoption of the SEQL 

support resolution, a non-binding commitment 

to participate in SEQL and to work on 

implementing those actions that were feasible 

in a given area (see Attachment 3). As of July 

2006, seventy jurisdictions have adopted the 

SEQL resolution. 

Action Item Notebooks: To facilitate 

implementation of the action items, the COGs developed straightforward “how-to” guides, 

which were made available on the SEQL website and on CD. The initial guides covered 

nineteen action items – thirteen air quality and six land use (water quality documents were 

developed later under a separate EPA cooperative agreement). The COGs are developing 

additional action items for the water-related action items and for the additional action 

items discussed immediately below. The manuals were designed to get the attention of 

busy elected officials by making the case for why they should implement the action item 

in their jurisdiction. The notebooks included: 

• Action item description 

• Information on the shared impact and 

benefits of the action items, including an 

introduction to the concept of integrated 

planning 

• Length of time to implement and cost 

• The benefits of implementing the action 

• Who needs to be involved in 

implementation 

• Action steps 

• Available resources 

• Who else has implemented the action item 

• Frequently asked questions 

• Co-benefits and mutually reinforcing aspects of the action items 

Finally, to track progress on action item implementation, the COGs asked the jurisdictions 

to notify them when they had implemented an action. 

25 
Additional Action Items: In addition to the twenty-five action items, the COGs decided 

to pursue the eleven additional action items, many of which were identified in partnership 

with EPA and some of which were supported with EPA resources: 

• Diesel retrofit programs 

• Truck stop electrification 

• Lawn mower rebates and gas can trade


outs


• Idle reduction policy 

• Air quality education for educators 

• Design for the Environment’s program


for auto body shop pollution prevention 


• High-performance building techniques 

• Brownfields redevelopment 

• Promotion of infill development 

• Pervious pavements 

• Energy-efficient coatings for HVAC units 

More details about each measure can be found in the CD attached to this document. The 

COGs also developed “how-to” documents for these measures and are working with a 

number of jurisdictions to implement them. 

Regional Data System: When SEQL started, the Charlotte region lacked a data system 

that supported integrated local and regional decision making, making it difficult to assess 

impacts and make informed decisions. The combined development of a data system and 

the collection of existing baseline data from quality-assured sources was an important 

element of Phase 2. 

This process began with identification of the local and regional data needed to support the 

use of the Regional Vulnerability Assessment (ReVA) tool and for other regional planning 

purposes. The next step was an inventory of 

current data – its sources, formats, 

availability – and an evaluation of its quality 

and validity. From this, a list of new data 

needs and indicators for regional 

sustainability was developed, in collaboration 

with the Urban Institute at the University of North Carolina at Charlotte and Voices and 

Choices, a local non-governmental organization engaged in the production of a “State of the 

Region” report. 

Concurrently, Centralina COG was awarded a U.S. Geological Survey National Spatial Data 

Infrastructure grant to explore the concept of centralized versus distributed databases. As a 

result of this project, the COGs worked with the Urban Institute to design a system for data 

collection, use, maintenance and sharing, including quality assurance standards for data. 

Staff collected existing baseline data. With the exception of land use, no new data were 

26 
developed through this process, both for cost savings and because there were already huge 

amounts of data already being collected by other parties that had not been available in one 

place. The data are now housed at the Centralina COG, at the Urban Institute, and at EPA 

and serve as the foundation for using ReVA. However, the comprehensive maintenance and 

update of this information will require funding that needs to be secured. 

This objective was critical to beginning the “regional capacity building” in Phase 3 and for 

future decision making in post-EPA project years. The region’s decision makers had to 

have access both to data and analyses in order to be informed of economic and 

environmental impacts and trade-offs. 

Development of Marketing and Communications Materials: In Phase 2, the COGs 

developed marketing materials, including a logo to help brand SEQL. They received 

training from a consultant on how to work with the media and developed a press kit for 

events. Staff also visited the editorial staff of each major print outlet to describe SEQL’s 

concept and mission and to alert them to upcoming SEQL events. 

Early in the process Centralina COG established the SEQL website (www.seql.org) and it 

was later enhanced under a Foundation for the Carolinas grant. SEQL staff also 

implemented quarterly newsletters highlighting 

regional accomplishments and a monthly enewsletter that captured more current news. 

Together, these communications continue to reach 

over 2,400 elected officials; local, state, and federal 

staff members; interested environmental and 

community groups; businesses and Chambers; and 

interested individuals. 

In Phase 2, SEQL identified target groups for 

outreach in Phase 3, including school-aged 

children, parents, and school transportation officials. The message to these groups 

focused on children’s health as impacted by poor air quality. In 2005, Centralina COG 

received funding from the Duke Power Foundation to implement the “Clear the Air for 

Kids!” program in cooperation with the Carolinas Clean Air Coalition. 

Additional Outreach: During Phase 2, the COGs linked SEQL to multiple initiatives in 

the region by engaging with many additional stakeholders on SEQL issues, including 

several nongovernmental organizations. The Centralina COG invited the Carolina Clean 

Air Coalition to the SEQL kick-off and engaged them in an in-depth review of the action 

item “how-to” documents. The COG also invited the Trust for Public Land (TPL) and the 

Catawba Land Conservancy (CLC) to participate in discussions of open space 

preservation. Greenways planners from throughout the region participated in a greenways 

focus group and listserve, and their work was later provided to TPL and the CLC as they 

initiated planning for a fifteen county trail network. A non-profit group, Voices and 

Choices, was engaged to help develop baseline indicators for SEQL as part of their own 

Edward Munn, City Manager, Gastonia, NC, and 

Jennie Stultz, Mayor, Gastonia, NC 

27 
“State of the Region” report on the environment. American Forests, a national tree 

advocacy group, collaborated with the COGs to produce a regional tree canopy inventory. 

The Charlotte region’s Transportation Conformity Working Group helped identify 

potential futures scenarios for evaluation and to discuss how SEQL’s voluntary actions 

could be translated into measurable reductions. 

The COGs also reached out to the business community through meetings and workshops 

with the Chambers of Commerce in Gaston 

County, the southern part of Iredell County, 

and Charlotte. These meetings were primarily 

introductory, although the South Iredell 

workshop did produce a commitment to 

develop a SEQL business action plan. In the 

meetings, the Centralina COG introduced the 

themes of integration and interdependency and 

discussed how business activities and SEQL’s 

environmental actions intersect. The COG also 

identified how these intersecting interests could 

be used to create “win-win” situations for	 Polly Jackson, Former Chairman, Lancaster County 

Council, SC economic growth and environmental 

sustainability. The Gaston County meeting 

was particularly helpful at defining the concerns of the local business community. 

Participants discussed concerns about the cost of environmental protection, the degree to 

which they already feel heavily regulated, and the need for government to set an example 

for businesses and others by taking action on the environment first. The frank exchange 

helped SEQL to engage with a broader business community across the region. 

Finally, the COGs introduced SEQL to other groups in many forums, including the 

Environment Committee of the North Carolina Bar Association, at the annual meeting of 

planners in the Charlotte region, and to the Senior Tarheel Legislative Delegation to the 

NC legislature. The COGs met with select groups to determine what those groups felt 

they could offer and how they could be most effectively engaged in SEQL. During this 

process, the COGs actively promoted SEQL as a means of engaging new stakeholders in 

accomplishing mutually beneficial goals. 

2.5 Phase 3: Long Term Integrated Planning 

Goals for Phase 3: 

1.	 Build longer-term capacity at the local and regional level for coordinated, 

integrated planning and decision making through best practices site visits and 

technical workshops; 

2.	 Develop and implement additional toolbox items and regional programs, policies 

and legislative/regulatory agendas; 

3.	 Strengthen local and regional decision making through visioning and scenario 

analysis to show the impact of various decisions; 

28 
4.	 Implement comprehensive public education efforts aimed at engaging the general 

public and specific groups in behavioral changes that support improved 

environmental and air quality; 

5.	 Focus on coordinated, integrated planning as a means of improving air quality 

through concurrent review of issues related to ozone, particulate matter, and air 

toxics, and through related scenario evaluation; 

6.	 Develop and adopt a regional vision which provides a foundation for future action 

to support integrated planning; 

7.	 Implement regional actions to promote environmental sustainability; and 

8.	 Institutionalize environmental sustainability as a priority to be considered in 

ongoing local and regional decision making through development of a supportive 

framework of non-governmental partners and the public. 

To implement these goals, the COGs engaged in several activities in Phase 3: 

Institutionalizing Integrated Planning and Environmental Concerns: The COGs


sought to institutionalize integrated planning and environmental concerns into local and 


regional decision making through several activities. 


Initially, the COGs approach was to raise awareness of the need for planners to work 

together across programs and departments to ensure coordinated and integrated planning. 

The COGs did this by holding a series of subregional meetings in which they introduced the 

concept of a feedback loop, to show the 

interconnectedness of different local policies. 

For example, a tree ordinance in a community 

can impact issues like walkability by making 

streets more attractive. Trees can also help air 

quality by reducing surface temperatures. By 

highlighting these connections, the COGs hoped 

to stimulate different interests to work together. 

John Marshall, Former Mayor, Statesville, NC The COGs used the example of planners working 

together across departments in Gaston County. 

This initiative, called G-Camp, later developed into a work group that crafted Gaston 

County’s multi-jurisdictional unified development ordinance (UDO), which became another 

SEQL action item. COG staff promoted the G-Camp idea to bring together planners in 

other counties in the region. The idea has caught on, and similar groups have formed in 

other counties. In addition to the G-Camp idea, Cleveland County has written the need for 

integrated planning into their land use plan, which was adopted in 2005. 

The first round of subregional meetings was followed by a number of workshops. For 

example, in collaboration with the Carolinas Clean Air Coalition and the Charlotte Medical 

Clinic Foundation, Centralina COG invited Dr. Richard Jackson to speak (at a luncheon for 

over 100 planners and local government officials) about the link between the built 

29 
environment and public health. The session explored ways for audience members to apply 

what they had learned in the local context, particularly in the area of urban planning. 

The COG staff has also taken the SEQL message to older adults. In cooperation with the 

Charlotte Area Agency on Aging, 

Centralina launched “SEQL Silver,” 

which focuses on the impact of land 

use decisions on seniors’ ability to 

live independently and remain 

mobile and connected to the 

community, as well as air quality and 

health issues. The senior community 

is now exploring collaboration with 

Partners for Livable Communities, as 

well as seeking funding to initiate a 

program that looks at land use, 

transportation integration and 

walkability. 

SEQL has also encouraged local government staff and others to work collaboratively 

toward addressing environmental concerns in connection with projects and initiatives 

whose goals may not be directly or overtly environmental. This aspect of SEQL is more 

difficult to measure, but is having an impact. Encouragement to do this occurs first with 

COG staff working on a broad range of technical assistance projects in the region and then 

extends to the local planning, transportation, and 

environmental communities. 

There are several examples of how this 

encouragement is paying off. Communities doing 

pedestrian plans are looking at how their land use 

policies promote walkability, which can reduce 

automobile dependence. Communities planning 

major road improvement projects are looking at not 

only requirements for buffers to protect endangered 

species, but also at community amenities that can be 

gained from such projects, including conservation 

easements that can produce wider buffering and 

greenway potential. Finally, even simple land use 

plans to address zoning classifications are increasingly shifting to a focus on the 

development of “comprehensive plans.” Under a new North Carolina law, this shift means 

that, when local governments make incremental land use decisions, they must make a 

finding as to whether the proposed decision conforms to the more comprehensive plan. 

Visioning and Scenario Development: The COGs felt that the Charlotte region was 

“visioned out” as a result of a number of past visioning efforts that had not produced 

widespread adoption or action. The region has never had a vision broadly adopted at the 

30 
local level So, rather than develop a new vision through an elaborate stakeholder process, 

the COGs decided to develop a consolidated vision based on the over seventy-five visions 

that had been conducted around the region by various entities, ranging from chambers of 

commerce to local governments. This innovative approach was intended to fast-track the 

process and to avoid duplication of valuable local government work on visioning. 

To accomplish this, the COGs engaged ACP Visioning & Planning to analyze the existing 

visions for common values and goals, which are intended to form the basis for a 

consolidated regional vision and a long-term framework for sustainability. The COGs 

formed a thirty seven member citizen task force to vet the consultant’s findings and to 

recommend how a broader group of stakeholders and local governments should be 

engaged in crafting a final vision. The consultant’s work revealed a truly remarkable 

degree of consensus on not only values found 

in the plans, but also in the policies through 

which those values were to be realized. Over 

thirty shared values were identified. The task 

force selected six of those as core values 

around which the vision should be built. The 

emerging regional vision will, therefore, link 

directly to those of individual jurisdictions, 

which should help create buy-in from local 

governing bodies. The vision consolidation 

and development process has received strong 

interest and support at the local level. 

One of the frequent questions asked in visioning and other planning processes is, “What 

differences do development patterns make to the environment? What is the likely impact 

on a jurisdiction’s bottom line?” This question is important in providing local elected 

officials and planning staffs with the data to help guide and support decisions that produce 

sustainable environmental outcomes. For this reason, scenario development is becoming 

increasingly used as a tool to evaluate visions. To assist with scenario development, in 

2003 EPA offered the ReVA program to the COGs as a resource to help develop an 

integrated assessment for the SEQL region. The ReVA program will be used by the COG 

in the next phase of the visioning process to visually demonstrate future development 

impacts on area-wide environmental and social issues. By providing this type of 

information, the COG hopes to help individual decision makers better understand the 

necessity of working together to meet the needs of the region. 

To help address the complex issues facing the SEQL region, ReVA developed a webbased environmental decision tool (EDT). The web-based EDT allows visualization and 

integration of user-selected data sets, as well as an option to weight variables or decision 

criteria in order to evaluate different possibilities. The EDT is set up to provide 

information for the needs of three different users: 

• Policymakers or elected officials 

• Planners 

31 
• Data managers 

Combining the ReVA process with an EDT will allow decision makers to put their 

increasingly complex environmental problems in a spatial context, and to compare 

alternative management options. 

ReVA is working with the COGs, the States of NC and SC, planners, and transportation 

experts to: 

• Develop protocols for realistic future scenarios 

• Refine models of NPS water pollution 

• Develop models to estimate vehicle miles traveled 

• Generate emissions using MOBILE 6.2 

• Explore indicators of fiscal impacts and quality of life 

Figure 5: As Is, 

One of the region’s biggest challenges has been to 

redistribute population into alternative development 

patterns, and to translate those patterns into projections 

of land cover for environmental analyses. ReVA and 

the COGs have translated alternative development 

densities and patterns into a visual spatial form using 

Geographic Information Systems. Data from the 

alternative scenarios is being evaluated in terms of air 

and water quality, amenities associated with 

development patterns, and probable related economic 

changes. Results of these changes will be incorporated 

into the EDT and made available to decision makers to 

consider, weigh, and negotiate trade-offs. Only Better Scenario 

There are three development 

conditions: 

• Current Condition (2001) 

• 2030 projected As Is, Only Better Scenario 

• 2030 projected Compact Centers Scenario 

The As Is, Only Better Scenario (Figure 5) is growth 

that continues according to current patterns of 

development, but at a greater density. This is 

beginning to be seen in urbanized areas today as 

land prices increase. This scenario takes current 

population and housing growth projected by the 

Regional Traffic Demand Models and distributes the 

data into a 30m gridded format within each Traffic Figure 6: Compact Centers Area Zone. The 2030 residential, industrial and non- Scenario 

industrial development density (highest to lowest) 

32 
was allocated based on five densities of development zones. 

The Compact Centers Scenario (Figure 6) is a growth projection study for the fifteencounty, bi-state SEQL region for the target year 2030. The purpose of this scenario is to 

explore the feasibility of growth primarily directed toward higher density “centers” (and 

corridors in urban areas) rather than growth that 

continues according to current patterns of sprawl. 

The centers include existing municipalities, with a 

few additional “crossroads” and other areas where 

significant growth is deemed likely within the 

projected period. 

A third scenario, a less dense version of the As Is, 

Only Better Scenario, will be developed to reflect 

the possibility of a slowdown in urban 

redevelopment and will represent more of a 

William G. Ross, Secretary, NCDENR continuation of past land development patterns. 

Implementation of Additional Action Items: The focus of this phase was on measures 

that achieve direct emissions reductions, and thus air quality improvements. The COGs 

pursued six measures: 

1. Diesel emissions reduction programs 

2. Truck stop electrification 

3. Lawnmower rebates and gas can trade-outs 

4. Idle reduction policy 

5. Adsil coatings to improve energy efficiency of A/C units 

6. Design for the Environment for auto body shops 

The results from the implementation of the measures are described in Section 3 below. 

2.6 The Key Components of Success for Regional Initiatives 

Based on the SEQL experience, local communities interested in developing regional


environmental programs should consider:


1.	 Identify a Local Champion: Political


leadership at the local level is critical to the


success of a SEQL-like initiative. Such 


initiatives can be difficult to maintain without a


prominent political leader, or leaders, who can 


bring together the elected officials necessary to 


develop solutions to regional problems. 


Bipartisan leadership is ideal. While leaders


from the business community assume key roles


in many metropolitan organizations, support


and participation from local elected officials is critical.


33 
2.	 Engage a Respected Regional Organization to Manage the Effort: The regional 

organization must be respected and acceptable to all key players, because it will 

handle funding, organize meetings, provide a source of staffing, etc. In the SEQL 

initiative, local elected officials determined that the two 

COGs were the appropriate organizations to serve in this 

role. Other initiatives have established private-public 

partnerships or steering committees comprised of local 

and state government officials, business leaders, 

developers or community leaders. 

3.	 Develop a Multi-Year, Reliable Source of Funding: 

Funding is critical. Key sources include foundations, 

federal or state grants, direct support from local 

governments, and contributions from local corporations 

or the business community. SEQL has succeeded 

partly due to steady, dedicated funding for ongoing Stephen L. Johnson, EPA Administrator activities, as opposed to project funding. Without a 

multi-year, reliable source of funding from year to year, regional efforts will not 

succeed. Multiple sources help ensure that the project is continually funded as 

sources become exhausted over time. EPA provided a majority of the SEQL funding 

over the first four years of the pilot project to 

the Centralina COG, which allocated a portion 

to the Catawba COG. This helped cement the 

EPA/COG partnership and enabled the 

allocation of local funds by the COGs to 

implement SEQL. EPA also provided North 

Carolina and South Carolina with some 

separate resources to support SEQL. 

Michael O. Leavitt, Former EPA 4. Be Prepared for a Long-Term Commitment: Administrator The growth challenges facing metropolitan 

regions across the nation cannot be solved with 

a two- or three-year effort. Given the short terms of most local officials and frequent 

changes in local leadership, maintaining 

longer-term efforts, however, can often be 

difficult. The COGs have used various 

approaches to sustain SEQL, including 

sponsoring events to generate support and 

maintain momentum, providing an interactive 

map on the SEQL website, and tallying the 

number of actions communities have taken to 

improve air, water, and land. 

5.	 Develop a Regional Vision: Growth is 

inevitable. The question is: “how do we Christine Todd Whitman, Former EPA Administrator, 

want to grow?” Bringing the public into the and Alan Powell, EPA Region 4 

process to identify a long-term regional 

vision is critical to answering this question. This is particularly important in large, 

fast-growing regions, where residents in rural counties may have a very different 

vision of the future than those living in suburban or urban areas. This input can be 

34 
used to develop or evaluate future scenarios and can serve as the foundation for the 

entire initiative. SEQL includes a visioning and scenario-evaluation component that 

helps the program influence planning practices across the region. 

6.	 Celebrate Early Successes: Identifying early successes is critical. It takes time to 

establish a process, obtain a steady stream of funding, initiate regional meetings, and 

develop visions and future scenarios. Ideally, these are on-the-ground projects that 

can give the public, elected officials, and funding sources a tangible sense of success. 

Celebrating those successes and working with the media to publicize them also helps 

maintain momentum. 

7.	 Develop a Marketing Strategy and Maintain Community Involvement: If the area 

is large like the Greater Charlotte Bi-State Region, considerable outreach may be 

necessary to engage elected officials, citizens, community groups, and businesses. In 

addition to working with local media, a marketing strategy should include visits to 

local governments, chambers of commerce, and local organizations. The COGs 

initiated and attended gatherings of a number of groups, including Parent Teacher 

Associations, local media meteorologists and environmental organizations. EPA and 

the COGs also have helped SEQL get national exposure through presentations at 

national meetings, a satellite broadcast and other means. 

8.	 Develop Partnerships: Partnerships are critical. They help spread the message, 

leverage resources and increase the level and diversity of program activity. In the case 

of SEQL, the emphasis is on government 

partnerships. Three levels of government 

– local, state, and federal – worked 


together toward the common goal of


empowering local governments to take


action to improve air and water quality. 


Partnerships with businesses and citizen 


groups are also important for advancing


the projects goals and for achieving


environmental results. SEQL worked 


very effectively with several groups, 


including the Carolinas Clean Air Coalition. 


9.	 Enhance Participation by Providing Options for Involvement: Finding the most 

effective way to engage stakeholders will vary from area to area. Providing choice 

was particularly effective for the Charlotte region. By providing numerous options for 

participation, SEQL was able to engage local governments and different groups 

effectively in various projects, such as implementation of the environmental action 

items from the toolbox. Leaders in the Charlotte region reacted very favorably to this 

approach, much more positively than they would probably have responded to a “one 

size fits all” approach. Once the COGs were able to interest a local government or 

group in a SEQL project, then the discussion focused on project expectations and what 

SEQL participation entailed. 

10. Identify and Develop Staff Who are Committed to Action: Elected and high-level 

officials come and go fairly regularly so it is very important to develop staff within 

both the sponsoring organization and participating jurisdictions and agencies who are 

essential for successful implementation of a regional project. Professional staff 

generally turn over less frequently and are, therefore, more likely to remain long 

enough to ensure the project is implemented over the long term. Key professional 

staff must not only have (or develop) subject area knowledge, but must also be 

35 
committed to inclusive processes and integrated planning. SEQL relied upon such 

professional staff within participating local governments (and COGs) to look for 

environmental improvement opportunities in every part of their jobs. This ongoing 

education helped create a cadre of “doers” who can spread SEQL-type thinking into 

longer-term activities, plans, and programs. Ultimately, this has proven to be one of 

SEQL greatest challenges and successes. 

In summary, here are SEQL’s overall phases and timeframes: 

36 
SECTION 3. SEQL ACCOMPLISHMENTS


3.1 Overall SEQL Results 

SEQL has achieved significant results. As of 

April 2006, sixty-seven jurisdictions have 

become formal SEQL partners, and eighty-six 

jurisdictions across the fifteen county regions 

had self-reported implementation of 758 actions 

in four areas: 

• Air quality 

• Water quality 

• Sustainable growth 

• Other environmental measures 

The Centralina and Catawba Councils of 

Government jointly developed “how-to” 

guidance documents to implement these action 

items. The notebooks were well- received 

across the Charlotte region and used elsewhere 

in the Southeast. 

3.2 Air Quality Action Items 

In air quality, 314 actions have been taken by municipalities on the following twelve 

measures: 

• Open burning limits 

• Designated local experts on air quality 

• Flexible work schedule 

• Smoking vehicles 

• Tax-free commuter benefits enforcement 

• Tree planting standards 

• Carpooling/vanpooling 

• Clean cities program 

• Enhanced ozone awareness 

• Local government energy plan 

• Air awareness programs 

• MPO/RPO coordination 

37 
3.3 Sustainable Growth Action Items 

In sustainable growth 184 actions have 

been taken on the following six measures: 

• Annexation agreements 

• Connectivity for multi-modal transit 

• Efficient parking 

• Greenways and open space 

• Multi-jurisdictional land use


regulations


• Pedestrian friendly streetscapes 

Additional actions are being completed on 

urban infill and mixed or multi-use 

development in many places around the 

region. 

3.4 Water Quality Action Items 

In water quality 191 actions have been taken on 

the following six measures: 

• Natural buffer zones 

• Sedimentation and erosion control 

• Wastewater treatment plans 

• Wastewater treatment programs 

• Watershed impact 

• Water supply plans 

38 
3.5 Additional Emission Reduction Measures 

The COGs have also supported the implementation of other emission-reduction 

measures, many of which EPA helped support through funding and other resources. 

Sixty-nine actions have been implemented across the region for the following eleven 

measures: 

• Diesel retrofit programs 

• Truck stop electrification 

• Lawn mower rebates and


gas can trade outs


• Idle reduction policy 

• Air quality education for


educators


• Design for the


Environment’s program for


auto body shop pollution 


prevention 


• High-performance building


techniques


• Brownfields redevelopment 

• Promotion of infill development 

• Pervious pavements 

• Energy-efficient coatings for HVAC units 

Under a diesel school bus retrofit program, thus far, 408 buses have been outfitted with 

diesel oxidation catalysts (DOCs) in Iredell, Mecklenburg, and Rowan Counties, 

achieving emission reductions for volatile organic compounds (VOCs), particulate matter 

(PM) and carbon monoxide (CO). Rowan County has also installed diesel emission 

control devices on twenty-three buses. Mecklenburg County operates forty buses using 

ultra low diesel fuel with diesel particulate filters and eight buses on natural gas. 

Cabarrus, Lincoln and Gaston Counties are 

planning to retrofit 187 buses in the summer 

of 2006 using DOCs through a North 

Carolina Mobile Source Emissions Reduction 

(MSER) Grant. Mecklenburg also received 

MSER funds and will outfit buses with 

Global Positioning System devices to monitor 

idling and other route activity. Gaston 

County has also produced over 13,000 

gallons of biodiesel from used cooking oil 

and uses a diesel/biodiesel mixture in its 

buses. They have equipment and plans in 

place to more than double the production of biodiesel in 2007. 

39 
South Carolina received an EPA Clean School Bus grant to help school districts in the 

South Carolina portion of the SEQL region retrofit approximately 197 buses with DOCs 

and crankcase filters, replace up to twelve 

older diesel school buses, and conduct pilot 

programs to produce biodiesel fuel and 

reduce idling. Both COGs are seeking 

supplementary funding for other counties in 

the ozone non-attainment area. 

In addition, the Centralina COG received an 

EPA grant to serve as a down payment to 

electrify a truck stop in Rowan County. 

Instead of idling their trucks, truckers can 

hook up to an electric system that provides 

all of the energy they need when resting or 

spending the night, without the local emissions. Initially fifty spaces will be electrified, 

with more spots possible in the future. The remainder of the funding for the fifty spots 

will come from Congestion Mitigation for Air Quality funds. This initiative will achieve 

reductions of nitrogen oxides, VOCs, CO and PM. Soon, truckers will be able to drive 

almost the entire stretch of I-85, from central Georgia through North Carolina, without 

having to idle, as six sites will eventually be available along that route. Centralina is now 

negotiating with FHWA to determine the 

eligibility of an additional truck stop in 

Rowan County for funds under the 

Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality 

Improvement Program. 

EPA provided funding to support a


regional project to coat air conditioner


(A/C) units with an innovative coating 


called Adsil. When applied to A/C


units, studies have shown that Adsil can


bring the unit’s efficiency virtually back


to that of a new unit, as well as prevent


age-related efficiency loss due to the


deterioration of heat transfer surfaces,


saving both electrical power and early


replacement costs. The ability to model


expected energy savings with


widespread use of Adsil is transferable


to other communities nationwide.


Energy savings reduce costs, limit the


need for new generating capacity, and


could, under certain circumstances,


benefit air quality. Quantifiable air


quality benefits depend on the amount


40 
of energy savings and the extent to which, and where, fossil fuel-fired power plants 

reduce emissions as a result of those energy savings. The Adsil coating was applied to 

150 HVAC units in 28 buildings in 13 jurisdictions. Adsil improved the energy 

efficiency of those units by 12.3%, resulting in projected annual savings of 461,400 

kilowatt hours and over $37,000.27 (For more information, visit: 

http://www.epa.gov/ttn/catc/products.html#aptecrpts.) 

EPA also provided funding for an auto body shop pollution prevention initiative to 

encourage auto refinishing shops to implement best practices that reduce emissions from 

diisocyanates, organic solvents, and other toxics. A contractor did before-and-after visits 

to eight shops, recommending work practice changes to shops to reduce emissions. These 

were quantified and implemented by the shops. (For more information, visit: 

http://www.epa.gov/dfe/pubs/projects/auto/index.htm.) 

The Charlotte region has also been active in lawnmower and gas can exchanges. York 

County, SC has held two gas can exchanges, in which 275 gas cans were exchanged. The 

SEQL region is gearing up for a lawnmower trade-out in the spring of 2007. 

In addition to these measures, communities across the Charlotte region have begun to 

integrate environmental considerations into local policy and regional documents in 

several areas: 

• Anti-idling policies 

• Land use plans 

• “General development policies” 

• Visioning 

They have also begun to adopt specific tools into ordinances for land use regulation, such 

as connectivity in subdivisions, sidewalks, and trees. 

3.6 Successful Outreach and Collaboration 

SEQL serves as a model of collaboration 

across the local governments in the 

Charlotte/Rock Hill region and across three 

levels of government – federal, state and 

local. SEQL has been successful at breaking 

down stovepipe mentalities and creating 

communication and collaboration channels 

across programs, governments and 

organizations. 

Through extensive outreach, the COGs 

successfully forged partnerships with environmental, civic, and business stakeholders by 

first orienting them to SEQL and then bringing them in as partners on SEQL projects. 

41 
3.7 Common Information Resources or Database 

One of SEQL’s goals has been establishing a common database for the region to support 

development and evaluation of future regional scenarios. Meeting this goal was especially 

challenging, given that each government is responsible for maintaining their own data in a 

format and design of their own choosing. Despite these hurdles, the COGs, working with 

the University of North Carolina at Charlotte and EPA’s ReVA program, successfully 

created a regional data system framework designed to support baseline and ongoing data 

collection. Baseline data are in place and work is continuing to develop funding for 

maintenance that will permit impact analyses for implementation of both toolbox items 

and other environmental initiatives, and allow modeling and analysis of the impacts of 

various programs and decisions on transportation and air quality on an ongoing basis. 

3.8 Regional Scenarios and Vision 

Drawing on visions developed by numerous entities for different parts of the 

Charlotte/Rock Hill region, the COGs are developing a unified vision for the region that is 

expected to have buy-in from the majority of local governments. It will involve 

stakeholders across the region and will reflect a shared vision for how they want their 

communities to grow. The baseline document for the visioning process also will identify 

areas where no consensus exists, or partly exists, and where the vision is not supported by 

local policies or practices. This will provide the region with a basis for continuing 

discussions about growth and sustainability beyond SEQL. This approach to visioning has 

strong local government, business sector, environmental, and civic organization support 

because it clearly values the work that has happened in individual jurisdictions before this 

time, and because it is viewed as highly cost-effective. 

The ReVA scenarios that are being completed will help to relate environmental and 

fiscal impacts to various development forms. While the regional vision will not depend 

on the ReVA outputs, it will inform the process and should indicate actions in the 

appropriate directions. 

3.9 Integrated Planning 

SEQL has raised awareness among 

governmental and nongovernmental 

partners on the utility of coordinated, 

integrated planning, and identification of 

intersecting interests that will support 

elected officials in implementing SEQL 

initiatives. The COGs have made great 

strides in promoting regional integrated 

planning so that it becomes an ongoing 

and customary activity. Specifically, the 

COGs significantly increased local and 

regional capacity for integrated 

environmental planning through “best practices site visits,” technical workshops, and by 

continually working with people and organizations committed to SEQL. Integrated 

42 
planning is beginning to find its way into how regional plans are produced and how 

decisions are made. For example, Charlotte-Mecklenburg’s Environmental General 

Development Policies require that development planning consider long term impacts on 

air quality through VMT reduction. Cleveland County’s inclusion of an integrated 

planning staff-level committee in its Land Use Plan is another example. 

43 
SECTION 4. KEY LESSONS LEARNED 

As SEQL developed, its leaders learned from experience and made adjustments 

accordingly. The SEQL initiative provides valuable lessons that others can benefit from 

as they develop similar programs. 

4.1 Need Local Champions 

For efforts like SEQL to succeed, local 

champions are essential; individuals and 

organizations make the initiative happen. More 

specifically, SEQL-type projects need: 

• Strong, supportive political leadership. 

• Strong, steady institutional support and 

leadership from an organization that is 

regionally respected, such as the 

Centralina and Catawba Regional COGs, 

and that is willing to persevere with 

communities that might initially be unresponsive to playing a role in SEQL. 

• Local champions who are willing to partner and share success. 

• Additional champions beyond the main organization driving the effort. This 

includes the development of local air quality commissions or sub-committees as 

both policy and program implementers, and as a way of creating a permanent 

authority to integrate environmental factors into local decision making. 

• A “staff champion” is essential to ensure that technical staff continue working 

collaboratively on SEQL-type regional work. 

4.2 Identify Successes by Early Adopters 

SEQL’s ability to get underway was made possible by people who were willing to play an 

active role early on in the process. They helped create momentum through several early, 

public successes, which built a foundation for more comprehensive and time-consuming 

efforts later on. To make this happen, leaders of SEQL-type projects need to: 

• Seek to identify a few leading jurisdictions who see the benefits of an integrated 

approach and who are willing to act publicly with specific actions. 

• Stay focused initially, and then diversify. Begin simply, with a limited number of 

jurisdictions, while avoiding the impression of excluding other jurisdictions or 

elected officials. 

• Facilitate public recognition of success and the local people who made it happen. 

This makes it easier for others to join the process, and to gain political and 

financial support. Each new member of the team needs to be nurtured and 

carefully listened to in order to understand their motivations for continuing 

involvement. 

44 
4.3 Focus on Action through Choice 

Central to SEQL’s success was the emphasis on action through choice. SEQL provided 

local governments with a menu of air, water and land use measures from which to select 

specific actions that appealed to local officials and which would work in particular 

communities. Many officials commented that it is far easier to take action when there is 

choice, versus being told, “You must do this.” This approach also enabled local officials 

to branch out later to action items that initially were not so appealing, but that appeared 

more relevant after they saw the fruits of the early actions. 

4.4 Connect People 

Under SEQL, a considerable amount of the COGs’ time was spent connecting people and 

encouraging collaboration across 

departments, agencies and organizations to 

produce action. This approach had several 

features: 

• Nontraditional stakeholders must be


included. In addition to 


approaching “the usual suspects,”


the COG tried to include new


people with different perspectives. 


• The COGs spent considerable time


seeking commitment from local


elected officials and finding ways to 


keep them engaged. They
 Joe White, Former Member, Charlotte, NC City encouraged small and large Council, and Julie Burch, Assistant City Manager, 

jurisdictions to participate, and actively Charlotte, NC 

sought to involve local groups from 

different sectors. They found that local elected officials generally perceived 

environmental actions as favorable if they had good information, public and peer 

support, and a clear sense of the multiple benefits. 

• SEQL enjoyed good working relationships with federal, state and local officials, 

which helped the COGs to overcome the silos and to identify and seek additional 

SEQL resources and support. 

• Keeping commitment is an ongoing process. As participants come and go, it is 

necessary to constantly check in to ensure support. 

• Stakeholders must be met on their home ground, both physically and 

philosophically. The COGs’ offices are located in central cities, but staff 

frequently travels to localities across the region to listen to concerns. This process 

was labor intensive, but crucial to the success of a broad-based project. 

• A continuing relationship with stakeholders and partners, as well as a broad view 

of project interests is essential to success. COGs’ staff are often ideally suited to 

promote this approach, because COG membership embraces the entire region, and 

COG staff routinely engage local officials on a variety of projects – most of which 

touch on SEQL goals. 

• With so many interests involved, SEQL identified participatory roles for each, 

45 
while respecting existing structures and relationships. For example, Charlotte 

immediately saw the benefits of participating in SEQL and was an early adopter, 

while some of the other governments were less inclined to participate early. 

Nevertheless, it was crucial that those governments be acknowledged and 

supported at even the most preliminary level. 

• From the beginning, it was critical to seek the involvement of state-level officials. 

Local jurisdictions were reluctant to make commitments before the states had 

taken a position. 

• If the SEQL message was not well received in a particular area, the COGs sought 

to better understand the attitudes, values and behaviors of that jurisdiction. They 

then revised the message in light of this new understanding and tried again to bring 

that previously hesitant area to the table. 

4.5 Communicate, Communicate, Communicate 

The importance of communication cannot be overemphasized. It has many facets: 

• The program must develop communication tools for different target audiences, 

including local and state-level elected 

officials, local and state-level 

employees, general and targeted 

businesses, school teachers, general 

public, financial institutions and 

specific non-profit organizations. To be 

successful, each audience needs to be 

understood in terms of where they are, 

what their interests and values are, and 

how they see themselves as part of the 

broader region. 

• The challenge is to develop meaningful 

and accurate explanations of the relevant scientific underpinnings for the various 

proposed actions and requirements. At the same time, these tailored 

communication tools must contain a consistent message. When scientific and 

technical confirmation cannot be readily translated for the general public, 

acceptance of the information will weaken and may not stimulate action. 

• The need to communicate broadly and deeply and to diversify target audiences 

beyond chief elected officials is important. Turnover of elected officials is high, so 

information must reach the career staff in the organization. Even at the senior 

management level, there may be frequent personnel changes. For this reason, it is 

important to reach as many people as possible within each organization. A broad 

and deep communication strategy will target a jurisdiction’s professional staff, 

elected officials, appointed boards and commissions, and other key decision makers. 

• Don’t over-promise or under-deliver. Be sure everyone understands and agrees on 

the expectations that have been set, and then work jointly to meet them. 

• Follow the “no surprises” rule. The goal of the communications system should be 

that no one in the system gets belated information and no one is surprised when 

others know something that they do not know. When everyone is informed, 

individuals can then decide what they want to do with the information. 

• Communicate frequently. For a significant paradigm shift and the behavior 

46 
changes SEQL sought, frequent communication and repetition of the same basic 

message was key. The website, printed newsletter and especially the e-newsletter 

were key to continued outreach to the varied stakeholders. 

4.6 Funding 

SEQL succeeded because the COGs were able to secure base funding from EPA and their 

own budgets, and secure project funding from EPA and several other sources. 

Several lessons learned on funding include: 

• For an effort like SEQL that addresses air and water quality, future funding must 

be available for integrated, cross-media activities. One of the limits of the base 

project funding was that it had to be used for air quality work. The importance of 

water, brownfields and other media were recognized, but the funding for pilot 

projects and involvement of other offices must be present to support broader 

activities. It is important to understand the critical link between connecting people 

and funding. If the right people are introduced to, and committed to, the goals, 

funding can follow. 

• Funding processes take longer than may be originally envisioned. Leaders of 

SEQL-type projects need to either have a back-up plan or accept the consequences 

of these delays. Everyone needs to be open and honest about what is happening 

throughout the process. Turn-around time can take years and, therefore, thorough 

planning is a fundamental requirement. 

• COGs are a unit of local government rather than a section 501(c)(3) entity. This 

proved to be an obstacle to obtaining private foundation funding. Centralina COG 

later established a 501(c)(3) entity which could apply for this funding. The COG’s 

501 (c)(3) arm successfully applied for, and received, grants from the Duke Energy 

Foundation and the Foundation for the Carolinas, and has since applied for 

additional foundation grants. 

• From the outset, COG staff decided that in order to have ongoing local support 

after EPA funding terminates, local governments needed to be financially 

committed to the process. The COGs, therefore, did not fund the implementation 

of action items by local governments using SEQL funds. COG staff assisted local 

governments with grant applications for funding from outside sources, but local 

governments were responsible for matching any grants received. 

4.7 Be Aware of Many Factors Affecting Community Participation 

Leaders of SEQL projects need to understand that jurisdictions will more readily take risks 

when they are experiencing growth and general economic prosperity. Other pressures 

facing each locality may influence reluctance, or seeming resistance, to participate. In 

SEQL localities trying to recover from drought and significant employment layoffs, 

environmental protection measures, even modest ones, were difficult to promote. In areas 

with few air quality problems, leaders focused on water quality. In areas not experiencing 

growth, open space preservation was generally not a priority. The message was to focus 

on the environmental issue of greatest concern to the community as a means of gaining 

that community’s support and commitment to the program. 

47 
4.8 Technical Issues to Consider 

In the technical aspects of SEQL, two lessons were learned: 

• Local and state agencies may be reluctant to share the data necessary to perform 

the desired analyses because of several concerns. These include the intended use 

of the data, the possibility that it might be taken out of context, or that it may be 

inappropriately used by 

other parties. The agencies 

are also concerned about 

using different sources of 

data. For example, if the 

state uses one data set for 

regulatory purposes, they 

want to ensure that any 

effort that uses a different 

data set does not result in 

the release of seemingly 

conflicting information or 

results. Furthermore, the use of different models is challenging because modelers 

whose results are used for regulatory purposes may be concerned that modeling 

done for planning purposes will yield different results. Communication about any 

type of data use, and joint planning for how modeling results will be framed and 

shared, is critical. 

• Communicating technical information to non-technical audiences is a challenge, 

especially for modeling that address air and water issues, and when elected 

officials receive technical input from several experts who traditionally do not 

communicate with each other. Part of the process may involve simplifying certain 

aspects of the technical program or avoiding detailed explanations about certain 

technical tools. It is critical to make sure the audience is aware of any 

simplifications and of the uncertainties associated with scientific research and 

models. Technical experts dealing in various fields need to work together to craft 

a mutual solution so that data will be useful. 

48 
Attachment 1: Management Structure


49 
Attachment 2: Detailed Timeline of SEQL Activities


50 
Attachment 3: Profiles of Leadership


These are some of the key leaders who have led and supported SEQL. An effort like 

SEQL would not succeed without this leadership. They are listed in alphabetical order. 

Leda Belk. Leda Belk, former Rowan County Commissioner, served as Chairman of 

the Centralina Council of Governments Board of Directors during the initial stages of 

the SEQL program. A native of Rowan County, Leda has taught in the CharlotteMecklenburg Schools and Rowan County Schools. She continues to teach drivers 

education classes and serves as a substitute teacher in Rowan County. Leda is a strong 

believer that in order to grow a community you must grow the quality of life. 

“Businesses aren’t going to come unless we do right by the environment,” she says. She 

serves as a member of the Board of Directors for Smart Start Rowan, Rowan County 

Parks and Recreation Department and is an active member of the Altrusa Club. She 

received her undergraduate degree and masters degree in educational counseling from 

UNC-Charlotte. 

Wendy Bell. Bell serves as Senior Planner for the Catawba Regional Council of 

Governments and as Coordinator for the Palmetto State Clean Fuels Coalition. Bell has 

spent over twenty years working with local government issues. Prior experience includes 

serving as Planning Director for Lancaster County, S.C. Her educational background 

includes a Masters of City and Regional Planning from Clemson University. 

Dumont Clarke. Centralina Council of Governments Chairman, Clarke is serving 

his third term on the Mecklenburg Board of County Commissioners. He is an attorney 

who concentrates his practice in corporate finance with the law firm of Moore and Van 

Allen PLLC. He is a former member – as a liaison from the Charlotte-Mecklenburg 

School Board – of the Mecklenburg County Citizens Capital Budget Advisory Committee, 

which helps the Board prioritize its capital spending. Clarke serves on a legislative study 

commission established by the North Carolina General Assembly on conflict resolution 

between boards of education and county commissions. From 1990-1993, he was an 

Assistant Professor of business law at the Belk School of Business at UNC-Charlotte. 

Clarke is active in the community. He is a native of Buncombe County in western North 

Carolina, where he grew up on a dairy farm. He graduated from Vassar College in 1974 

with a Bachelor of Arts degree in History and he earned his law degree four years later at 

the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. 

Eldridge R. Emory. Catawba Regional Council of Governments Chairman and native 

of Lancaster South Carolina, Emory received his Bachelor of Arts degree from Wingate 

College in 1958. Emory currently is a member of the South Carolina General Assembly 

representing House District 45. Representative Emory is assigned to the committees on 

Labor and Commerce and Industry. Representative Emory serves on the Catawba 

Regional Development Corporation Board of Directors. Prior to his service in the 

51 
General Assembly, Representative Emory served on the Lancaster County Council for 

twenty years, four of which as Council Chairman. He is retired from Founders Federal 

Credit Union. 

Parks Helms. Helms is serving his seventh consecutive term on the Mecklenburg Board 

of County Commissioners. Helms was a member of the North Carolina House of 

Representatives from 1974-1984 and was ranked one of the ten “Most Effective House 

Members” by the NC Center for Public Policy Research for three consecutive sessions. 

He is an attorney and president of the law firm of Helms, Henderson & Associates, P.A. 

He has served as vice president of the North Carolina Bar Association (NCBA), as well as 

a member of several NCBA committees. Helms serves on the board of directors of the 

Arts & Science Council and Charlotte Center City Partners. He serves on the board of 

advisors of the Dowd YMCA. He is also on the board of directors of Sykes Enterprises, 

Incorporated. A Charlotte native, he is a graduate of the University of North Carolina at 

Chapel Hill. 

Polly C. Jackson. Member of Catawba Regional Council of Governments Board of 

Directors and a native of Lancaster, South Carolina, Polly Jackson graduated from 

Winston Salem State University, B.S. degree; the University of Hartford, M.Ed. degree; 

and Winthrop University, M.Ed., specialist degree. She is a retired educator. Jackson 

served on the Lancaster County Council for twelve years, two of which as Council 

Chairman. She also served as President of the South Carolina Association of Counties in 

1999-2000. She presently serves as Vice Chairman of Springs Memorial Hospital Board 

of Trustees, a member of the Friends of the Medford Library Board, the Lancaster County 

FEMA Board, J. Marion Sims Foundation, Inc. Board of Directors, and The Foundation 

for The Carolinas Board of Directors. 

Patrick McCrory. In December 2005, Mayor Pat McCrory became the first six-term 

Mayor in the history of the City of Charlotte. Mayor McCrory has distinguished himself 

as a leader in the areas of public safety, economic development, housing, and 

transportation. He has been recognized nationally for his leadership in developing 

Charlotte’s twenty-five year transportation and land-use plan. Mayor McCrory is 

involved in many national organizations. He serves as President of the Republican 

Mayors and Local Officials organization, is the Chairman of the U.S. Conference of 

Mayors Environment Committee, and has been a member of the Homeland Security 

Advisory Committee since October 2003. Recognizing the need for coordinated lobbying 

among North Carolina’s twenty-five largest cities, he was the founder and inaugural 

Chairman of the North Carolina Metropolitan Coalition. 

The Mayor has testified before Congress on environmental issues, transportation policy, 

and privatization initiatives and has been a guest on several national media broadcasts. 

Mayor McCrory graduated from Catawba College in 1978 with a B.A. degree in Political 

Science/Education. He currently sits on the Board of Trustees for Catawba College and 

received an Honorary Doctorate degree from the school in 2001. Since graduation, he has 

held several management positions with Duke Energy Corporation. 

52 
Harold Shapiro. Shapiro has served as Executive Director of the Catawba Regional 

Council of Governments for the past fifteen years. Prior to that, at the Catawba COG, he 

also served as planner and planning director. His educational background includes a 

Masters of Regional Planning from the University of British Columbia, as well as training 

in public finance. 

Al Sharp. Sharp has served as Executive Director of the Centralina Council of 

Governments since 2002. He has nine years of experience in international public 

management consulting on local government issues and fifteen years of county 

management experience. Sharp has taught, managed and consulted extensively in 

organization change and development. He graduated from Pennsylvania State University 

with a Bachelor of Arts degree in Political Science and holds an Master of Arts in 

Management Change and Development from the University of Kentucky. He is an 

International City Management Association Certified Manager. 

Joe White. Coach Joe White was elected as an at-large member and Chairman of the 

Board of Education in 2003. He has over thirty-five years of experience working with 

and for students and parents in the public school system. White began his career in 

Wilson, North Carolina, before going on to teach and coach at North Mecklenburg High 

School. He also served as the first football coach and athletic director at Olympic High 

School. In addition, White worked as a Charlotte-Mecklenburg School (CMS) 

administrator for sixteen years and served two terms as a member of the Charlotte City 

Council. He earned a Bachelor of Science degree from Wake Forest University, a 

Master of Arts degree from East Carolina University, an Education Specialists degree 

from Appalachian State University and is a graduate of the United States War College. 

White is retired from the CMS system and served as Centralina Council of 

Governments Chairman. 

Rebecca Yarbrough. Yarbrough has served as Centralina COG Regional Initiatives 

Program Administrator since 1979, developing regional programs to address multijurisdictional needs ranging from Emergency Medical Services and 911 call centers to 

environmental issues through SEQL. She also facilitates visioning, land use planning and 

strategic planning and her passion is bringing people together to solve problems. She 

holds a Bachelor of Arts degree summa cum laude from Queens University and has 

completed the County Administration Program of the School of Government at UNCChapel Hill. 

53 
___________________________________ 

Attachment 4: SEQL Resolution of Support


A RESOLUTION OF SUPPORT 

BY THE

WHEREAS, the __________________________________ is keenly aware of the importance of 

natural resource protection and enhancement within our community; and 

WHEREAS, the degradation of natural resources, including air and water pollution and the 

rampant consumption of open space does not recognize political boundaries; and 

WHEREAS, intergovernmental cooperation, on a regional basis, is essential to any effort to 

protect and preserve the natural environment; and 

WHEREAS, the protection and preservation of natural resources within __________ 

___________ and the greater region are essential to the general health, safety, and welfare of 

community and regional residents; and 

WHEREAS, improper management of natural resources is contrary to the ideals of a healthy, 

economically vital and aesthetically pleasing community and region; 

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the __________________________ 

_______________________ adopts this resolution in support of SEQL: Sustainable Environment 

for Quality of Life; and 

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the _____________________________ through its 

comprehensive and all other planning efforts, will seek to implement sound environmental 

planning principles in a manner that furthers the efforts of SEQL to the benefit of 

_______________ and regional citizens. 

Adopted this _________________ day of _____________________, 2003. 

 Chief Elected Official 

54 
Endnotes 

1 Ranking Tables for Metropolitan Areas: Population in 2000 and Population Change from 1990 to 2000 

(PHC-T-3), U.S. Census Bureau, Washington, DC, http://www.census.gov/population/www/cen2000/phct3.html, April 2, 2001. 

2 About Connecticut: General Description & Facts, State of Connecticut, Hartford, CT, 

http://www.ct.gov/ctportal/cwp/view.asp?a=843&q=246434. 

3 “Draft for Review: Land Use and Socio-Economic Data and Projections for the Greater Charlotte Region,” 

University of North Carolina at Charlotte, Charlotte, NC, March 2005. 

4 Tim Lomax and David Schrank, “The 2005 Urban Mobility Report,” Texas Transportation Institute, Texas 

A&M University System, College Station, TX, http://mobility.tamu.edu/ums/report/, May 2005. 

5 Charlotte Regional Information, Charlotte Regional Partnership, Charlotte, NC, www.charlotteusa.com. 

6 “Designation of Areas for Air Quality Planning Purposes; Final Rule,” Federal Register, 56 FR 56694, 

Washington, DC, www.epa.gov/oar/oaqps/greenbk/fr_11_6_1991_40cfr81_designations.pdf, November 6, 

1991. 

7 “Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans and Designation of Areas for Air Quality Planning 

Purposes; State of North Carolina; Final Rule,” Federal Register, 60 FR 34859, Washington, DC, 

www.epa.gov/oar/oaqps/greenbk/6034859.html, July 5, 1995. 

8 “Air Quality Designations and Classifications for the 8-Hour Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards; 

Early Action Compact Areas With Deferred Effective Dates; Final Rule,” Federal Register, 69 FR 23858, 

Washington, DC, http://www.epa.gov/oar/oaqps/greenbk/6923857.pdf, April 30, 2004. 

9 “Basinwide Assessment Report: Catawba River Basin,” North Carolina Department of Environment and 

Natural Resources, Raleigh, NC, http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/esb/Basinwide/Catawba%202003%20Report.pdf, 

June 2003, p. 11. 

10 Ibid. 

11 ”Basinwide Assessment Report: Yadkin River Basin,” North Carolina Department of Environment and 

Natural Resources, Raleigh, NC, http://www.esb.enr.state.nc.us/bar.html, June 2002, p. 15. 

12 Ibid. 

13 “North Carolina Water Quality Assessment and Impaired Waters List (2006 Integrated 305(b) and 303(d) 

Report; Public Review Draft),” North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Raleigh, 

NC, http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/tmdl/General_303d.htm#Downloads, February 2006. 

14 “Water 2030: Water, Sewer and Stormwater Capital Needs,” North Carolina Rural Economic Development 

Center, Raleigh, NC, http://www.ncruralcenter.org/water2030/index.html, 2006. 

15 William Fulton, et al, “Who Sprawls Most? How Growth Patterns Differ Across the U.S.,” Center on Urban 

& Metropolitan Policy, The Brookings Institution, Washington, DC, 

http://www.brookings.edu/es/urban/publications/fulton.pdf, July 2001. 

16 Issues and Programs, American Farmland Trust, Washington, DC, 

http://www.farmland.org/programs/default.asp. 

17 International Database, U.S. Census Bureau, Washington, DC, 

http://www.census.gov/ipc/www/idbprint.html. 

18 2002 Annual National Resources Inventory, Natural Resources Conservation Service, United States 

Department of Agriculture, Washington, DC, http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/technical/land/nri02/nri02lu.html. 

55 
19 International Database, U.S. Census Bureau, Washington, DC, 

http://www.census.gov/ipc/www/idbprint.html. 

20 2002 Annual National Resources Inventory, Natural Resources Conservation Service, United States 

Department of Agriculture, Washington, DC, http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/technical/land/nri02/nri02lu.html. 

21 International Database, U.S. Census Bureau, Washington, DC, 

http://www.census.gov/ipc/www/idbprint.html. 

22 Data Center: Demographics, Metro Denver Population, Metro Denver Economic Development 

Corporation, Denver, CO, http://www.metrodenver.org/dataCenter/Demographics/population.icm. 

23 Arthur C. Nelson, “Toward a New Metropolis: The Opportunity To Rebuild America,” The Brookings 

Institution, Washington, DC, http://www.brookings.edu/metro/pubs/20041213_rebuildamerica.htm, December 

2004. 

24 “Smart Growth in Texas: TTI Researchers Examine Strategies and Potential Benefits,” Texas 

Transportation Researcher, Volume 39, No. 2., College Station, TX, http://tti.tamu.edu/researcher/ , 2003, 

pp. 12-13. 

25 Traffic Congestion and Sprawl - Press Club Event, Federal Highway Administration Office of Operations, 

U.S. Department of Transportation, Washington, DC, http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/congestion/congpress.htm. 

November 19, 2002. 

26 Aerometric Information Retrieval System, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, 

NC, http://www.epa.gov/ttn/airs/airsaqs/. 

27 “Evaluation of Savings from the Application of AdsilTM in the NC/SC Charlotte Area,” EPA-453/R-05-003, 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, 

http://www.epa.gov/ttn/catc/products.html#aptecrpts, November 2004, pp. v-vi. 

56 
United States Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards Publication No

Environmental Protection Research Triangle Park, NC November 2006 Agency