HomeMy WebLinkAbout20120285_07_DEISGaston_Ch7_Indirect&Cumulative_20101222
APRIL 2009 GASTON EAST-WEST CONNECTOR DEIS
7-1
CH. 7 INDIRECT AND CUMULATIVE
EFFECTS
7.1 DEFINITIONS AND ANALYSIS METHODOLOGY
This chapter is a summary of the Indirect and Cumulative Effects Assessment for the Gaston
East-West Connector (Louis Berger Group, Inc., March 2009), incorporated by reference, and
available on the NCTA Web site (www.ncturnpike.org/projects/gaston). This qualitative
assessment was performed in accordance with North Carolina Department of Transportation
(NCDOT) guidance titled, Assessing Indirect and Cumulative Effects of Transportation Projects in
North Carolina (November 2001), referred to in this chapter as the ICI Guidance.
7.1.1 DEFINITIONS
The following is a listing of definitions as accepted by the NCDOT in their ICI Guidance, which
follow the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) definitions as well as the Code of Federal
Regulations (40 CFR 1500-1508).
Direct Effect. Direct effects are caused by the proposed action and generally occur at the same
time and place as the project.
Indirect Effect. Indirect effects “…are caused by the action
and are later in time and farther removed in distance, but must
be reasonably foreseeable.” Indirect effects “may include
growth-inducing effects and other effects related to induced
changes in the pattern of land use, population density or growth
rate, and related effects on air and water and other natural
systems, including ecosystems” (40 CFR 1508). The terms
effects and impacts are used synonymously in the CEQ
regulations (40 CFR 1508.8(b)).
Cumulative Effect. Cumulative effects are “environmental effects resulting from the
incremental effects of an activity when added to other past, present and reasonably foreseeable
future activities regardless of what entities undertake such actions. Cumulative effects can
result from individually minor but collectively significant activities taking place over time and
over a broad geographic scale, and can include both direct and indirect effects.” (40 CFR 1500-
1508).
It is important to emphasize that indirect effects considered during the National Environmental
Policy Act (NEPA) process must be reasonably foreseeable; not every conceivable scenario should
be evaluated (Dubois v. US Department of Agriculture, 102 F.3d 1273, 1286 [1st Circuit 1996]).
Chapter 7 describes a qualitative assessment of potential indirect and cumulative land use changes and environmental
effects associated with the Detailed Study Alternatives. The assessment was conducted in accordance with North
Carolina Department of Transportation guidance.
Indirect Effects
Indirect effects considered
during the NEPA process
must be reasonably
foreseeable. Not every
conceivable scenario should
be evaluated.
INDIRECT AND CUMULATIVE EFFECTS Chapter 7
APRIL 2009 GASTON EAST-WEST CONNECTOR DEIS 7-2
7.1.2 ANALYSIS METHODOLOGY
The general approach to defining indirect and cumulative effects is defined by the ICI Guidance
(November 2001), the CEQ (Considering Cumulative Effects Under NEPA, 1997), National
Cooperative Highway Research Program Reports 403 and 466 (2001 and 2002, respectively),
state/federal regulations, and past case law.
This qualitative analysis was undertaken in five steps based on the NCDOT guidance, including:
• Definition of Indirect and Cumulative Effects (ICE) Study Areas (Step 1)
• Identification of the ICE Study Area’s Direction and Goals (Step 2)
• Inventory of Notable Features (Step 3)
• Identification of Impact-Causing Activities (Step 4)
• Identification and Analysis of Potential Indirect and Cumulative Effects (Step 5)
A quantitative assessment, involving Steps 6-8 in the ICI Guidance, would be conducted on the
Preferred Alternative following the approval of the Draft Environmental Impact Statement
(Draft EIS) if it is determined by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and the North
Carolina Turnpike Authority (NCTA) that such analysis is needed.
To aid in defining the scope of the ICE assessment, meetings were offered with the following
agencies: FHWA, NCTA, North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT), US Army
Corps of Engineers (USACE), US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), NC Wildlife Resources
Commission (NCWRC), US Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), North Carolina
Department of Environment and Natural Resources - Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ), State
Historic Preservation Office (HPO), Gaston Urban Area Metropolitan Planning Organization
(GUAMPO), and Mecklenburg-Union Metropolitan Planning Organization (MUMPO). The
USFWS, NCWRC, and NCDWQ offered assistance. Representatives from the FHWA, NCTA, and
NCDOT met with representatives from US Fish and Wildlife Service and NC Wildlife Resources
Commission (NCWRC) on June 29, 2007 (meeting minutes included in Appendix A-5). The
purpose of the meeting was to collaboratively identify the sensitive resources, identify the study
methodologies, define the ICE study area boundaries, and confirm the timeframe for the
assessment. Based on input from the NCWRC, the ICE assessment includes a section addressing
potential indirect effects on upland wildlife habitat, including habitat fragmentation.
A similar scoping meeting was held with North Carolina Department of Environment and
Natural Resources - Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ) on July 26, 2007 (meeting minutes
included in Appendix A-5). NCDWQ agreed with the proposed multi-county qualitative
approach of assessing potential ICEs associated with the proposed project, and the boundaries
based on local watersheds.
Interviews also were held with local agency staff and local experts to gather information on
notable features considered in this ICE assessment. They included representatives from
GUAMPO, City of Gastonia Planning Department, Town of Belmont Planning Department,
Gaston Economic Development Commission, Bessemer City Planning Department, Gaston
County Chamber of Commerce, Charlotte-Mecklenburg Planning Department, Charlotte-Douglas
International Airport, York County, Real Estate and Building Industry Coalition, Catawba
Riverkeeper, Crowders Mountain State Park, and Allen Tate Realty. Interview summaries are
INDIRECT AND CUMULATIVE EFFECTS Chapter 7
APRIL 2009 GASTON EAST-WEST CONNECTOR DEIS 7-3
included in Appendix C of the Indirect and Cumulative Effects Assessment for the Gaston East-
West Connector (Louis Berger Group, Inc., March 2009).
7.2 STUDY AREAS FOR INDIRECT AND CUMULATIVE
EFFECTS (STEP 1)
Three types of geographic study areas (ICE Study Area,
Districts, and Interchange Areas) and one temporal
study area were identified to describe indirect and
cumulative effects of the proposed Gaston East-West
Connector. These are described below. The geographic
ICE Study Areas also are shown in Figure 7-1a-b.
It should be noted that in addition to the three basic
types of geographic study areas, there are also some
discussions of effects at the county level of geography,
as well as for the Detailed Study Alternatives (DSAs).
ICE Study Area. The ICE Study Area includes most of Gaston and parts of Cleveland,
Mecklenburg, and York (South Carolina) counties (Figure 7-1a). The purpose of the ICE Study
Area was to provide a basic level of geography that would encompass any reasonably foreseeable,
potential indirect effects stemming from the proposed Gaston East-West Connector project. The
ICE Study Area served as the basis for collecting data that was used later to refine the
qualitative impact assessment study areas and impact assessments. The potential
transportation impact causing activities would fall within a portion of the ICE Study Area, and
are more sharply described at the District and Interchange Areas levels.
Districts. The ICE Study Area was divided into ten districts (Districts 1 through 10) to facilitate
discussions with local experts during interviews, as well as to provide a level of geography that
would better describe potential indirect and cumulative effects that were more localized in
nature. The District boundaries follow major roadway features as well as political boundaries to
facilitate policy differentiations among the various units of government that were examined.
Interchange Areas. The Interchange Areas are the third (and smallest) study area type used to
assess the unique changes that would potentially be produced by increasing accessibility in the
immediate vicinity of proposed interchanges with the Gaston East-West Connector
(Figure 7-1b).
The sizes and shapes of the Interchange Area boundaries were determined by considering the
level of increased accessibility afforded by existing streets that would interchange with the
proposed Gaston East-West Connector. Hence, if a proposed interchange was in an area with a
good level of street connectivity, the influence of the accessibility that the new interchange would
afford increased or "stretched" the shape of the Interchange Area boundary.
Temporal Boundary. A timeframe for analysis spanning from 1989 to 2030 was established for
the ICE analysis. This temporal boundary is intended to encompass other past, present, and
reasonably foreseeable future actions that could incrementally contribute to substantial changes
in land use, in combination with the proposed project. The year 1989 is the year the Gaston East-
West Connector concept was first identified on the Gaston Urban Area Thoroughfare Plan. The
ICE Study Areas
Three geographic study areas were used.
The largest, the ICE Study Area includes
most of Gaston County and parts of
Mecklenburg, Cleveland and York counties.
The ICE Study Area was divided into ten
Districts to better describe impacts. The
smallest study areas were Interchange
Areas, used to describe changes that may
occur in the immediate vicinity of new
access points created by the project.
INDIRECT AND CUMULATIVE EFFECTS Chapter 7
APRIL 2009 GASTON EAST-WEST CONNECTOR DEIS 7-4
year 2030 is the horizon year for the Gaston Urban Area Metropolitan Planning Organization
(GUAMPO) 2030 Long Range Transportation Plan (2030 LRTP) (May 2005), and the
Mecklenburg-Union MPO (MUMPO) 2030 LRTP (Amended September 2005).
7.3 DIRECTIONS AND GOALS FOR STUDY AREAS FOR
INDIRECT AND CUMULATIVE EFFECTS (STEP 2)
In order to determine study area directions and goals, plans adopted by the local jurisdictions
were reviewed. Reviews also were conducted of development policies, guidelines, utility
provisions, and other actions that specifically provide information on the approach that local
governments take toward managing growth. Meeting minutes from Planning Commissions,
Boards of Commissioners, and City and Town Councils were reviewed and considered as well.
Jurisdictions in the ICE Study Area include four counties and four municipalities:
• Gaston County • Mecklenburg County
• City of Gastonia (Gaston County) • City of Charlotte (Mecklenburg County)
• City of Bessemer City (Gaston County) • Cleveland County
• City of Belmont (Gaston County) • York County, SC
Gaston County. Gaston County, like its major city Gastonia, strives to accommodate land use
growth and development through planning, policy, ordinances and utility infrastructure
practices. The County has a Unified Development Ordinance (UDO - a combined subdivision and
zoning ordinance) establishing goals and objectives to manage existing and anticipated
development. Much of the new growth in Gaston County is occurring in the south and southeast
portions of the county, near the South Fork Catawba River and Catawba River. The growth has
led to the conversion of farmland and forested areas to more urbanized land uses.
The goals and objectives of the GUAMPO 2030 LRTP are consistent with development and
growth desires for the jurisdictions that comprise GUAMPO. According to the 2030 LRTP, the
Gaston East-West Connector is considered to be the most significant infrastructure project
currently under consideration in Gaston County. GUAMPO has consistently supported the
project’s concept since its inception around 1989.
City of Gastonia. Gastonia markets a “pro-business” permit process for new subdivision and
commercial properties. The City uses the UDO to manage existing and anticipated development.
The City of Gastonia regularly extends utilities in an attempt to meet the needs of new
development. According to the GUAMPO, the majority of proposed projects scheduled for
completion over the next 10-20 years are to be located in unincorporated areas of Gaston County
that currently are not served by public water and sewer infrastructure.
To address development activity and improve quality, Gastonia recently created a Resource
Guidebook for Residential and Commercial Development (August 2007) to provide guidance to
developers and staff on aesthetic and design treatments. Gastonia has taken other proactive
steps to manage development, such as agreeing to create a Phase II stormwater management
ordinance as part of their Phase II National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES)
program, which will affect all new developments. This ordinance establishes minimum
INDIRECT AND CUMULATIVE EFFECTS Chapter 7
APRIL 2009 GASTON EAST-WEST CONNECTOR DEIS 7-5
requirements and procedures to control the adverse effects of stormwater runoff associated with
new development.
City of Bessemer. According to the City, the 1995 Land Use Plan is obsolete and outdated
(Telephone interview, City of Bessemer Planning Director, July 12, 2007). The City is working on
an update to its plan, which is scheduled to be completed in late 2009 (Telephone interview, City
of Bessemer Planning Director, October 2, 2008). Bessemer City is actively embracing
residential, commercial, and industrial development, and like most municipalities in Gaston
County, they follow the land use ordinance of the UDO.
City of Belmont. The City of Belmont currently is in a mode of residential and commercial
growth. To better manage this growth, Belmont adopted the City of Belmont Comprehensive
Land Use Plan in August 2007, and they adhere to the UDO. The City has extended water
service along NC 273 to the south end of the Belmont peninsula in order to serve new
subdivisions. Other areas along the peninsula can tap into the new line if they are annexed into
the City.
Mecklenburg County and City of Charlotte. Mecklenburg County is in the midst of a
tremendous growth cycle. Mecklenburg County’s 2015 Plan, Planning for Our Future
(November 1997) predicts that by the year 2015, most available land within Mecklenburg County
will likely be annexed by the City of Charlotte and other municipalities. The western portion of
the County is currently experiencing land use changes in the vicinity of the Charlotte-Douglas
International Airport as the airport continues with its expansion. The completion of the I-485
Outer Loop in western Mecklenburg County has also precipitated growth in the ICE Study Area,
particularly waterfront properties near the Catawba River and its tributaries.
Cleveland County. Growth and development in Cleveland County is most noted in the
municipal areas of the county. The largest category of land within Cleveland County is
undeveloped property and farmland. The County’s goals and policies regarding land use seem to
be rooted in improving the quality of life for current land owners, with a focus on existing towns,
cities, and villages, as well as attracting business entities that would support economic
development.
York County, SC. York County has experienced continued growth and economic vitality,
particularly along the I-77 commuting corridor. Over the past decade, York County has
experienced unprecedented suburban sprawl characterized mainly by a pattern of low-density
residential development. Residential growth is disproportionately outpacing commercial and
industrial growth. Most of York County’s recent employment growth has been in logistics and
warehousing.
York County has proposed to adopt an Adequate Public Facilities Regulation Ordinance to better
control residential growth in the County. To facilitate the management of projected land use
change and population growth, York County has developed the York County 2025 Comprehensive
Plan (April 2004), with goals and strategies that are based broadly on quality of life issues;
managed and sustainable growth; balanced transportation and public facilities priorities; and
excellence in government.
INDIRECT AND CUMULATIVE EFFECTS Chapter 7
APRIL 2009 GASTON EAST-WEST CONNECTOR DEIS 7-6
7.4 INVENTORY OF NOTABLE FEATURES (STEP 3)
A variety of third-party data resources was used to gather information on notable features
considered in the qualitative assessment of ICEs. Notable features is a broad term that describes
characteristics of the environment that society would like to protect, emphasizing characteristics
such as (1) recovery time from disturbance/destruction, (2) sensitivity to disruption, and (3)
vulnerability to changes directly, indirectly, or cumulative induced by the project (ICI Guidance
Volume II, NCDOT, November 2001).
The types of data used to help define notable features included information on data elements
such as land cover and land use, designated growth areas, wildlife corridors, wetlands,
floodplains, watersheds and water resources, impaired waterways, water quality, Natural
Heritage Program elements, threatened and endangered species occurrences, open spaces,
parks/recreational areas/tourist attractions, infrastructure (including roads, airports, railroads,
and utilities), community facilities (including schools, churches, hospitals, etc.), locations of
minority and low-income populations, farmland, historic resources, and areas designated as
nonattainment or maintenance for the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS).
The Indirect and Cumulative Effects Assessment considered and assessed a wide range of notable
features, including growth and land use, wildlife habitat, water resources, protected species,
farmland, noise, air quality, and cultural resources. As part of that analysis, the Indirect and
Cumulative Effects Assessment included a detailed table that summarized the potential indirect
and cumulative effects of each DSA, based on sixteen separate factors. A copy of this table from
the ICE assessment is included in Appendix P. In that table, the potential indirect and
cumulative effects of each DSA were rated from "very weak" (or none) to "very strong" with
regard to each of the sixteen factors. These ratings are measures of the DSAs’ potential to have
or influence an effect, not a measure of the severity of the effect or the sensitivity of the resource.
Therefore, a "strong" rating does not necessarily imply that there would be a large or severe
impact on the resource. The table in Appendix P was used to help draw conclusions regarding
the potential indirect and cumulative effects on a wide range of notable features.
Based on the information in Appendix P, interviews with representatives from local
governments and agencies, and input received from resource and regulatory agencies in the
scoping process (described in Section 7.1.2), FHWA and NCTA decided to highlight three notable
features in this chapter of the Draft EIS: (1) growth and land use, (2) habitat fragmentation, and
(3) water quality and aquatic habitat. These features each encompass several of the factors
covered in the table in Appendix P. Brief summaries of these features are provided in
Section 7.4.1 (Growth and Land Use), Section 7.4.2 (Wildlife Habitat), and Section 7.4.3
(Water Resources). Details on all the evaluated notable features and the assessments of indirect
and cumulative effects to these features are included in the Indirect and Cumulative Effects
Assessment for the Gaston East-West Connector (Louis Berger Group, Inc., March 2009).
The direct and indirect impacts of the DSAs on notable features included in the Indirect and
Cumulative Effects Assessment for the Gaston East-West Connector are addressed in
Chapters 3-6 of this Draft EIS (air quality, cultural resources, noise, farmland, known
populations of protected species, water quality, etc.). Table S-2 in the Summary section of this
Draft EIS is a summary of the environmental impacts.
INDIRECT AND CUMULATIVE EFFECTS Chapter 7
APRIL 2009 GASTON EAST-WEST CONNECTOR DEIS 7-7
7.4.1 GROWTH AND LAND USE
Demographics of the ICE Study Area. Table 7-1 provides information on the historical and
projected populations and employment figures of the counties included in the ICE Study Area.
Details on the demographics of Gaston and Mecklenburg counties also are provided in
Section 3.2.1.
TABLE 7-1: Population of Counties Included in the ICE Study Area
County Employment
1990
Employment
2000
Employment
Projection
2030
Change
(1990‐
2030)
Population
1990
Population
2000
Population
Projection
2025
Change
(1990‐
2025)
Mecklenburg 362,936 514,223 948,291 161%511,163 695,454 1,328,298 160%
Gaston 79,434 77,176 96,753 22%175,104 190,365 229,967 31%
Cleveland 36,219 37,310 39,962 10%84,702 96,287 99,040 17%
York, SC 47,983 60,749 119,161 148%131,4978 164,614 253,760 93%
Four‐County Total 526,572 689,458 1,204,167 129%902,466 1,146,720 1,910,795 112%
Sources: 2000 data ‐2000 US Census; 2007 data – ESRI Business Center (data service license maintained by The Louis Berger Group,
Inc.); Employment Projection: Metrolina Regional Travel Demand Model Traffic Analysis Zones, 2006 ; North Carolina State Office of
Budget and Management, Projected Annual County Population Totals 2020‐2029, Web
site:www.osbm.state.nc.us/ncosbm/facts_and_figures/socioeconomic_data/population_estimates/demog/cpa2020p.html; South
Carolina Office of Research and Statistics, South Carolina State and County Population Projections 2020‐2025,
Web site:www.sccommunityprofiles.org/census/proj2025.php
Within the ICE Study Area, the largest percentage increases in population in recent years
(between 2000 and 2007) occurred in York County; followed by the southern portions of Gastonia
along the edge of the municipal limits, the southeast and southwest sections of Gaston County,
and the southern portions of Mecklenburg County. Much of the growth in Gaston and York
counties is believed to be related to the proximity of these counties to Charlotte.
Gaston County. Land use mapping of Gaston County reveals a pattern of development along
major roadway corridors with infill development between the roads. Residential growth
continues to occur in southern Gaston County. In particular, the southeastern portion of the
County is projected to see a higher percentage of Gaston County’s growth over the next
10-20 years. Large subdivisions with one acre or larger lots are being developed, and most of
these developments do not have public water and sewer services.
Several municipalities in Gaston County, including Belmont, Cramerton, Gastonia, and Mount
Holly have excess wastewater treatment capacity. However, many areas in the County that are
not incorporated do not have access to municipal wastewater services (Cleveland-Gaston
Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy, Lawrimore Communications, Inc. and the
Corporation for Enterprise Development, July 2003, pg. 19). As shown in Figure 4-4, sewer
and/or water service is planned to be extended into the area around Linwood Road in
southwestern Gaston County, south of the Gastonia Municipal Airport in south-central Gaston
County, and the Belmont peninsula in southeastern Gaston County.
The City of Gastonia. Future growth in Gastonia is anticipated to be a mix of residential,
commercial, and industrial uses. A site visit to downtown Gastonia indicated that the central
business district is in the early stages of redevelopment, with the City investing an increasing
amount of resources to see the area redevelop faster. Areas around the outskirts of Gastonia are
relatively rural and characterized by low-density residential and agricultural areas. Areas in or
INDIRECT AND CUMULATIVE EFFECTS Chapter 7
APRIL 2009 GASTON EAST-WEST CONNECTOR DEIS 7-8
adjacent to the city limits of Gastonia are characterized by moderate- to high-density residential
areas or areas of small businesses.
The City of Belmont. Belmont is located in the eastern portion of Gaston County. Although
some growth is possible to the north between McAdenville and Mount Holly, the predominant
future growth is anticipated to take place to the south, along the peninsula formed by the
Catawba and South Fork Rivers. Future growth is anticipated in Belmont with the proposed
Gaston East-West Connector (Gaston County Hazard Mitigation Plan, Appendix E – Government
Profiles, Gaston County, December 2004).
The City of Bessemer City. Bessemer City is located in west central Gaston County, primarily
north of I-85. Although there is room for some expansion by annexation in most directions, a
large portion of Bessemer City is currently undeveloped. Future growth is anticipated to be a
mix of residential and industrial/commercial (Gaston County Hazard Mitigation Plan, Appendix
E – Government Profiles, Gaston County, December 2004).
Mecklenburg County. Mecklenburg County, as it has done for several years, continues to
develop at a fast pace, which includes a greater proportion of infill development as the outer
limits of the county are being reached. Historically, the west side of the County has been the
slowest to develop. Recently, however, the Southwestern District of the County has been
experiencing rapid growth. According to Mecklenburg County’s 2015 Plan, Planning for Our
Future (November 1997), much of this development is thought to have been spurred by the
construction of the I-485 Outer Loop. Problems associated with suburban sprawl are the primary
focus in this area.
York County, SC. Approximately 80 percent of York County’s unincorporated land remains as
agricultural land, or developed land at very low intensities as agricultural residential use (York
County 2025 Comprehensive Plan, York County, April 2004). Residential growth is
disproportionately outpacing commercial and industrial growth despite efforts to diversify the
employment base (York County Industry Cluster & Target Market Study, Whittaker Associates,
Inc., February 2006).
Also evident in the County’s land use patterns are the extent of sprawl and the fragmented
pattern of population growth in the rural area, typified by small, low-density residential
subdivisions scattered county-wide. According to the York County 2025 Comprehensive Plan, it is
this development pattern which represents the greatest threat to the county’s future
sustainability, ever-increasing demand for public services in remote rural locations, as well as the
continued displacement of farmland.
In northern York County, the 2025 Comprehensive Plan’s 2025 Land Use Map shows most of the
area bordering the North Carolina/South Carolina state line retained as agricultural and rural
residential. Denser land uses are shown around existing municipalities.
Currently, water and sewer service in York County is provided by municipalities and private
water service providers (York County Web site:
www.yorkcountygov.com/Departments/DepartmentsNZ/PublicWorks/Divisions/WaterandSewer/t
abid/159/Default.aspx) in and around municipalities and developments, including the Town of
Clover. Future expansions would occur outward from these systems.
INDIRECT AND CUMULATIVE EFFECTS Chapter 7
APRIL 2009 GASTON EAST-WEST CONNECTOR DEIS 7-9
7.4.2 WILDLIFE HABITAT
Over the large four-county ICE Study Area, upland wildlife habitat was identified as forest cover
and grassland/shrub areas. Data on these land cover types was obtained from the National Land
Cover Database 2001 (US Geological Survey Web site:
http://landcover.usgs.gov/natllandcover.php). The forested layer from this database was updated
using aerial photographs from 2005 for Gaston and Mecklenburg counties and 2006 for York and
Cleveland counties. The updates took into account new development that had occurred between
the original National Land Cover Database satellite images to the date of the newer aerial
photographs.
A map showing the forested and grassland/shrub areas is included as Figure 12.16 in the Indirect
and Cumulative Effects Assessment for the Gaston East-West Connector (Louis Berger Group, Inc.,
March 2009). Approximately 40 percent of the land area in Gaston County and the southwestern
portion of Mecklenburg County remain undisturbed as forest or grassland/shrub.
Habitat fragmentation occurs when intact forest landscapes are divided into smaller pieces.
Upland wildlife habitat in the Project Study Area has been fragmented by development,
easements, and roadways. Existing fragmentation in the Project Study Area occurs within the
developed, municipal areas of Gaston County.
7.4.3 WATER RESOURCES
The ICE Study Area is within the Catawba River Basin. The Catawba River is composed mainly
of a series of impoundments (the Catawba chain lakes), which are managed by Duke Energy
Corporation for the purposes of hydropower generation. Lake Wylie and Mountain Island Lake
also are designated water supplies.
Lake Wylie’s water quality is being threatened due to numerous sources of non-point pollution
that have contributed to water quality degradation in the main stem of the river and its
tributaries. The primary sources of pollution are urban runoff and wastewater treatment plant
discharges (Protecting Our Lake Watersheds, Mecklenburg County Land Use and Environmental
Services Agency, January 2004).
Section 303(d) of the Clean Water Act requires states to develop a list of waters not meeting
water quality standards or which have impaired uses. There are six streams in the ICE Study
Area in North Carolina and two in South Carolina listed as having impaired biological integrity
on the states’ 303(d) lists. In North Carolina, these streams are Abernethy Creek, McGill
Branch, Crowders Creek, Sugar Creek, Dallas Branch and Catawba Creek (Final 2006 303(d) list,
NCDWQ Web site: http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/tmdl/documents/303d_Report.pdf). In the ICE Study
Area, the Draft 2008 303(d) List for North Carolina also includes the Catawba River and South
Fork Catawba River (NCDWQ website:
http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/tmdl/documents/B.Draft2008303dList.pdf). In South Carolina, the
listed streams include Crowders Creek and Lake Wylie (South Carolina 2008 303(d) List, SC
Department of Health and Environmental Control Web site:
http://www.scdhec.net/environment/water/tmdl/docs/tmdl_08-303d.xls).
The Catawba River is considered to be a nutrient sensitive management river basin, and riparian
buffer rules apply (Section 6.4.2 and Section 6.4.4.2). New development must either treat the
INDIRECT AND CUMULATIVE EFFECTS Chapter 7
APRIL 2009 GASTON EAST-WEST CONNECTOR DEIS 7-10
runoff from new impervious areas to remove nitrogen to specified levels, or design stormwater
discharge outside of a 50-foot riparian buffer so the stormwater flow will not re-concentrate
pollutants before entering the stream.
The NPDES program, administered by the US Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), was
created to control the discharge of pollutants into Waters of the United States (USEPA NPDES
Program Web site: www.epa.gov/npdes). Under Phase I, NPDES permits cover storm sewer
systems located in incorporated places or counties with populations of 100,000 or more. Phase II
NPDES permits cover certain small municipal storm sewer systems in urbanized areas and on a
case-by-case basis outside of urbanized areas (USEPA Web site:
http://cfpub.epa.gov/npdes/stormwater/swphases.cfm).
The State of North Carolina is authorized to administer the program for the USEPA. Gaston
County is a Phase II stormwater community under the NPDES program. This means that all
water from proposed developments must be collected by drains or pipes and discharged into
vegetated areas and/or silt basin where pollutants are filtered out naturally before entering
streams. Gaston County’s Stormwater Ordinance (adopted April 12, 2007) establishes minimum
requirements and procedures to control the adverse effects of stormwater runoff associated with
new development.
Because it has more than 100,000 residents, the City of Charlotte obtained a Phase I NPDES
permit in 1993 to manage stormwater in the City. Mecklenburg County and its other
municipalities were granted a NPDES Phase I permit in 2005 to manage stormwater outside of
the Charlotte City limits. In addition, the Mecklenburg County Surface Water Improvement and
Management Ordinance establishes buffer requirements along streams.
York County is a federally-designated NPDES Phase II community and received its Individual
Stormwater Permit August 1, 2008 from the South Carolina Department of Health and
Environmental Control (Certificate #SCR039104) (York County Web site:
www.yorkcountygov.com).
7.5 IDENTIFY IMPACT-CAUSING ACTIVITIES AND
IDENTIFY POTENTIAL INDIRECT AND
CUMULATIVE IMPACTS FOR ANALYSIS (STEPS 4
AND 5)
The indirect and cumulative impacts discussion below is divided by county: Gaston County
(Section 7.5.1), Mecklenburg County (Section 7.5.2), Cleveland County (Section 7.5.3), then
York County, SC (Section 7.5.4). Section 7.5.5 is an overall summary of indirect and
cumulative effects. Each section provides findings on a county level, District Area level, and
where applicable, on Interchange Area levels, and by DSA. Differences between the DSAs are
noted where applicable, and the Draft EIS section where the corresponding direct impacts are
addressed also is referenced.
The notable features described in Section 7.4 are the focus of this summary. Additional details
on the indirect and cumulative impacts on these and other notable features are addressed in the
Indirect and Cumulative Effects Assessment for the Gaston East-West Connector (Louis Berger
Group, Inc., March 2009).
INDIRECT AND CUMULATIVE EFFECTS Chapter 7
APRIL 2009 GASTON EAST-WEST CONNECTOR DEIS 7-11
The notable features are discussed at the applicable geographic study area level (or levels). The
potential for accelerated growth or changes in land use is addressed at the ICE Study Area level,
District level, and Interchange level. Habitat fragmentation is addressed at the ICE Study Area
level and the District level (where differences in DSAs are noted). Water resources are addressed
at the ICE Study Area level, and by specific major water resource (e.g., Lake Wylie, Crowders
Creek, etc.) since these water resources may cross County and District lines.
Projects and activities that were considered in the cumulative effects discussed below include:
• Charlotte-Douglas International Airport third runway project (Mecklenburg County).
• Major transportation projects planned and programmed in the NCDOT 2009-2015 STIP
and/or included in the GUAMPO 2030 LRTP and the MUMPO 2030 LRTP.
• Residential, commercial, and light industrial developments in Gaston County,
Mecklenburg County, and York County, South Carolina. These include recently
constructed or approved residential developments near the waterfront and coves of the
Catawba River and South Fork Catawba River, and light industrial development planned
near Bessemer City.
• Water and sewer infrastructure expansion plans in Gaston County, Mecklenburg County,
and York County, South Carolina.
In analyzing the potential for indirect and cumulative land use effects, a number of information
sources were considered, including local expert interviews, local land use policies, the inventory
of notable features, and spatial grid analysis and mapping. The spatial grid analysis, created
using GIS, aided in addressing two key elements of indirect and cumulative effects: sensitivity of
the human and natural environment to change and cumulative potential for future growth. A
brief summary of the components of the spatial grid mapping is provided below. A detailed
technical discussion of the spatial grid analysis methodology and data is included in the Indirect
and Cumulative Effects Assessment for the Gaston East-West Connector (Louis Berger Group, Inc.,
March 2009).
The spatial grid mapping divided the study area into a grid (each square one mile per side), and
the grid cells were used to summarize various data layers to capture sensitivity and cumulative
growth potential. Data layers for human and natural environment sensitivity represented
aspects of the community to which negative impacts should be minimized (for example: schools,
churches, historic sites, low-income areas, minority population areas, floodplains, wetlands, etc).
In total, there were 17 data layers combined to develop this aspect of the spatial grid. Data
layers for cumulative, general growth potential (not specifically related to the proposed project)
included availability of public water and sewer, the amount of developable land, projected
population growth, presence of major roadways, and the age of nearby development. Other layers
representing the potential for growth specifically or indirectly related to the proposed project
included results from interviews and modeled reductions in future travel times. Overall, growth
potential in areas farther from the proposed project was more influenced by the data related to
general growth potential.
INDIRECT AND CUMULATIVE EFFECTS Chapter 7
APRIL 2009 GASTON EAST-WEST CONNECTOR DEIS 7-12
7.5.1 POTENTIAL INDIRECT AND CUMULATIVE EFFECTS IN GASTON COUNTY
Indirect Effects. All DSAs would provide equal access across the Catawba River in the
southeast portion of Gaston County, potentially facilitating faster growth and different kinds of
development in the southeast and southern portions of Gaston County than under the No-Build
Alternative. The project also would provide better access to the west and northwest portions of
Gaston County, potentially changing the existing primarily residential and commercial growth
pattern to more light industrial growth. The No-Build Alternative would not offer any
accessibility benefits for Gaston County.
Figure 7-2 shows the average travel time savings in 2030 that may result from the proposed
project compared to the No-Build Alternative. These values were generated from the Metrolina
Regional Travel Demand Model as average changes in travel times within each modeled traffic
analysis zone (TAZ). To calculate the average travel time savings for a TAZ, the travel times for
all trips originating in a TAZ were calculated by the model under two scenarios: with the project
(the Build scenario) and without the project (the No Build scenario). The average travel time
difference for each trip was then calculated, and the differences between the Build and No-Build
travel times were then averaged across all trips. The result was a calculation of the average
travel time savings for all trips in each TAZ. All trips in each TAZ were included when
determining this average, regardless of whether the trip included travel on the Gaston East-West
Connector. For example, the availability of the Gaston East-West Connector could increase or
decrease travel times for trips on existing roads: differences in travel times for those trips were
included when computing the average travel time savings depicted in Figure 7-2.
The calculations of average travel time savings provide a basis for assessing the overall effects of
the project on travel times in each TAZ within the ICE Study Area. The travel time savings
experienced by individual drivers for specific trips could be greater or less than the average travel
time savings shown in Figure 7-2. The average travel time savings were used in this analysis
because they help to show the locations in the ICE Study Area that would experience increased
mobility. They do not represent travel time savings for specific origins and destinations.
Estimated travel time savings for specific origin/destination pairs with and without the Gaston
East-West Connector are discussed in Appendix C, Section C.2.
As shown in Figure 7-2, average travel time savings would be greatest for areas immediately
surrounding the project in Gaston and Mecklenburg counties, then areas extending south into
York County. Please note that travel time effects are likely overstated in York County somewhat
since this area is located at the limits of the Regional Travel Demand modeled area.
The Gaston East-West Connector is consistent with the stated need in the GUAMPO 2030 LRTP
to provide substantial infrastructure in Gaston County to accommodate existing and future
growth. The proposed Gaston East-West Connector is included in Gaston County’s
Comprehensive Plan (July 2002) and is consistent with land use strategies to manage existing
and anticipated new growth in the county. However, as the county population continues to grow,
there will be more of a burden placed on local school systems and emergency management
services.
Habitat fragmentation within the ICE Study Area is anticipated to continue correspondingly
with land use change. Each DSA has the potential to indirectly affect terrestrial communities
through fragmentation. The degree of effect would vary depending upon the various species-
specific factors, including their modes of mobility and range of habitat. Fragmentation is
INDIRECT AND CUMULATIVE EFFECTS Chapter 7
APRIL 2009 GASTON EAST-WEST CONNECTOR DEIS 7-13
anticipated to be the product of road construction and associated land use change. The degree of
effect associated with fragmentation is based upon the amount of habitat edge added to an intact
forest landscape. Introduction of additional habitat edge may alter the composition of natural
communities and the wildlife species that inhabit those communities. While the alteration of a
forest landscape may benefit some species, it can be detrimental to other species and may lead to
the loss of foraging and breeding habitats. Effects are anticipated to be both long term and short
term. The proposed project and indirect development are anticipated to affect terrestrial
communities to a greater degree than what would be expected to occur with the No-Build
Alternative. Direct impacts to natural communities and wildlife are discussed in Section 6.3.
DSAs using Corridor Segments H1C, J1c, K1A, and K4A (DSAs 5, 23, 27, 58, 64, 68, 77, and 81)
have a greater potential to indirectly affect upland species due to habitat fragmentation in that
these corridor segments are located the farthest distance away from previously fragmented
forestland. DSAs 4, 9, 22, and 76, would have comparable levels of lesser indirect effects due to
existing habitat fragmentation.
Indirect effects to water resources and water quality in Gaston County may occur from any of the
DSAs, since all cross numerous streams. These indirect impacts, and mitigation measures, are
discussed in Sections 6.2.3 and 6.2.4. Direct impacts to wetlands, streams, and Catawba River
buffers are discussed in Section 6.4.4.
The potential indirect land use effects in each District in Gaston County (Districts 2, 3, 4, 7,
and 8) (Figure 7-1a-b), with and without the proposed project, are discussed below. Direct
impacts to land uses are discussed in Sections 3.1.4, 3.2.3, 3.2.4, and 3.2.6.
District 2 (north of I-85, including Bessemer City) is an area characterized by high residential
and commercial development. Gaston County’s Economic Development Council is currently
working with Bessemer City to attract light industry to the area. Construction of the proposed
project would benefit Bessemer City’s attempts to attract industrial growth in the Bessemer City
by improving access to the Charlotte region.
Future growth patterns in Bessemer City in the absence of the proposed project would likely
follow existing patterns and consist of mixed residential and commercial growth, particularly in
the Edgewood Road area.
District 3 (north of I-85, including Lowell, McAdenville, Ranlo, and Spencer Mountain) has high
residential potential, especially in the vicinity of Spencer Mountain. The proposed Gaston East-
West Connector may influence more development in this District to locate in the areas
immediately surrounding I-85 and US 29-74. Future residential growth patterns in this district
in the absence of the proposed project would likely occur adjacent to access roads north and south
of I-85.
District 4 (north of I-85 and west of the Catawba River) has existing mixed use residential and
commercial development. Future growth in this district is constrained due to current sewer
capacity issues. Construction of the proposed project is anticipated to have negligible effects on
this District.
District 7 (south of I-85 and west of the Catawba River, including Belmont and Cramerton) is
experiencing rapid residential growth, especially near the waterfront and in coves of the Catawba
River and South Fork Catawba River. The proposed Gaston East-West Connector would improve
INDIRECT AND CUMULATIVE EFFECTS Chapter 7
APRIL 2009 GASTON EAST-WEST CONNECTOR DEIS 7-14
access to developable land in this District and provide travel time savings for those wanting to
live in Gaston County and commute to the Charlotte region. The anticipated growth in this
District would be predominantly residential, but there is some opportunity for commercial and
light industry as well. Future growth in this District is relatively constrained due to the need for
utility infrastructure expansion and the need for more schools. This area is anticipated to
continue to grow without the construction of the proposed project, but not as rapidly.
District 8 (south of I-85, east of Crowders Mountain State Park and south of Bessemer City) is
experiencing rapid residential growth. Industrial or commercial growth in this area is unlikely
due to the proximity of Crowders Mountain State Park and the desire of community leaders to
keep this area more pristine. Other natural resources in this area include Crowders Creek, a
Section 303(d)-listed stream, and wetlands which could restrict future development. This area is
anticipated to continue to grow without the construction of the proposed project, but not as
rapidly.
The potential indirect effects in each Interchange Area (Figure 7-1a-b) along the DSAs, with and
without the proposed project, are discussed below. Local agencies and local experts interviewed
for this study did not provide much distinction between interchanges for each DSA in most cases,
which allowed for the grouping of interchanges when assessing potential effects. The potential
indirect effects associated with the proposed interchanges follows, from west to east.
• Interchange Area A (I-85 interchange). This area has some existing commercial land
use and areas that are being redeveloped. If the proposed project is constructed, this
interchange area is anticipated to develop more commercially than it is currently.
• Interchange Area B (US 29-74 interchange). This interchange has experienced some
recent residential development. The Gaston East-West Connector could change land use
in the future from predominantly residential to more commercially-oriented land use.
Construction of an interchange in this area may affect water resources, including wetland
areas and Crowders Creek, a Section 303(d)-listed stream. Section 6.4.4 provides a
summary of the estimated direct impacts to wetlands and streams surrounding the
proposed US 29-74 interchange.
• Interchange Area C (Linwood Road interchange). This interchange has some
residential development and adequate utility infrastructure. It is unlikely that any
development other than residential will occur here in the future due to these interchange
areas being a part of the scenic landscape of Crowders Mountain State Park.
Construction of the proposed project may hasten the rate in which residential
development occurs due to improved access. Construction of an interchange in this area
would improve access to Crowders Mountain State Park.
• Interchange Area D (Lewis Road interchange – DSAs 58, 64, and 68 only). This
interchange has high-end residential development. Much of the developable land is zoned
residential due to its proximity to Crowders Mountain State Park. Construction of the
proposed Gaston East-West Connector may hasten the rate in which residential
development occurs due to improved access, and it would improve access to Crowders
Mountain State Park.
INDIRECT AND CUMULATIVE EFFECTS Chapter 7
APRIL 2009 GASTON EAST-WEST CONNECTOR DEIS 7-15
• Interchange Area E (US 321 interchange). The land use in this interchange area
consists of some single family residential developments, numerous mobile home parks,
and industrial development, with much of the existing development adjacent to US 321.
Areas in the vicinity of the proposed Gaston East-West Connector/US 321 interchange
south of Gastonia are suitable for infill development and redevelopment that enhances
existing industrial uses. New development that includes a variety of office, distribution,
and light industrial space could strengthen this area as an employment center. County
officials indicated during interviews that there was a planned mobile home park near the
interchange area. Construction of the proposed Gaston East-West Connector may
accelerate the rate in which development occurs due to improved access.
• Interchange Area F (Robinson Road interchange). This interchange is located
amongst developable land parcels. The potential for residential development is moderate
due to sewer pumping issues, which may limit residential and commercial development.
Construction of the proposed Gaston East-West Connector may accelerate the rate in
which residential development occurs due to improved access.
• Interchange Area G (Bud Wilson Road interchange). This interchange area is
sparsely developed for residential use. Development in the future, with or without the
Gaston East-West Connector, is limited due to difficulty in getting public water and
sewer services provided in the area.
• Interchange Area H (NC 274 [Union Road] interchange). This interchange is
experiencing rapid growth with mixed use, including residential and commercial land
uses. Gaston County recently approved a large site plan (residential) in the proposed
DSAs. The development trend is anticipated to continue in the future with or without the
proposed project.
• Interchange Area I (NC 279 [New Hope Road] interchange). This interchange is
experiencing a notable amount of new residential development, especially adjacent to
NC 279. A small portion of this development is believed to be in anticipation of the
proposed East-West Connector. According to the interviewees, the recent residential
development trends in this area have been partly spurred by other transportation
improvements, such as the recent completion of I-485 in western Mecklenburg County.
Future development with or without the project is anticipated to be mixed use, residential
and commercial, although the proposed project would hasten the rate of development in
this interchange area. Construction of an interchange in this area would improve access
to Daniel Stowe Botanical Garden. Construction of an interchange in this area also has
the potential to affect water resources, including wetland areas and Catawba Creek, a
Section 303(d)-listed stream.
• Interchange Area J (NC 273 [Southpoint Road] interchange). This area is
experiencing rapid residential development adjacent to NC 273. With or without the
Gaston East-West Connector, future development is anticipated to be mixed-use.
Cumulative Effects. The northwest, south, and southeast portions of Gaston County have
historically grown in a low-density development pattern branching out from the City of Gastonia.
Recent growth along NC 273, NC 274 and NC 279 provides evidence of this pattern. Residential
development has been relatively strong near the waterfront and coves of the Catawba River and
South Fork Catawba River. In addition to the availability of developable land, an important
INDIRECT AND CUMULATIVE EFFECTS Chapter 7
APRIL 2009 GASTON EAST-WEST CONNECTOR DEIS 7-16
generator of cumulative effects in Gaston County is its proximity to the Charlotte region and the
Charlotte-Douglas International Airport. The proposed project would improve accessibility to
potentially developable land in the southern and western portions of Gaston County. If
constructed, the Gaston East-West Connector would substantially reduce travel times from those
potentially developable parcels of land to the Charlotte region, and hence is anticipated to attract
more residential development to Gaston County.
The effect of growth and development is putting increased pressure on the county’s water and
sewer infrastructure and school system. According to planning officials, Gaston County is
currently looking at potential sites for at least one new school in the southern portion of the
county (Section 3.2.2.3).
Actions including residential and infrastructure improvements in Gaston County have the
potential to cumulatively impact water quality through erosion and stream sedimentation.
Increasing levels of non-point source pollution associated with increasing impervious surfaces
and land disturbing activities are anticipated with the construction of the proposed project.
Direct impacts to water resources are discussed in Sections 6.2 and 6.4.
Water resources having the potential to be cumulatively affected by non-point source pollution
include the Catawba River, South Fork Catawba River, Abernethy Creek, Catawba Creek,
Crowders Creek, and Blackwood Creek. However, these effects can be minimized through
implementation of local stormwater ordinances and Best Management Practices (BMP).
DSAs 58, 64, 68, 76, 77, and 81 would have comparable levels of indirect and cumulative effects to
water quality and aquatic habitat as a result of induced development. DSAs that use Corridor
Segments H2A, H3, and H2B (DSAs 4, 5, 9, 22, 23, and 27) would be expected to have the
greatest amount of stormwater runoff effects due to their proximity to Crowders Creek.
Construction of the proposed project also has the potential to add to cumulative forest
fragmentation and wildlife habitat loss and disturbance in the southern and western portions of
Gaston County. Other actions contributing to cumulative habitat loss and fragmentation include
development, timber harvesting, and agricultural conversion.
Future growth in the ICE Study Area has the potential to convert farmlands to non-agricultural
uses. These effects are projected to occur with or without the DSAs, but at a higher rate with the
DSAs. Direct impacts to farmland are discussed in Section 4.3.4.
7.5.2 POTENTIAL INDIRECT AND CUMULATIVE EFFECTS IN MECKLENBURG
COUNTY
Indirect Effects. Mecklenburg County, as it has done for several years, continues to develop at
a fast pace, which includes a greater proportion of infill development as the outer limits of the
county are being reached. Historically, the west side of the county has been the slowest to
develop, in part due to the presence of the Charlotte-Douglas International Airport. Growth
induced from the Gaston East-West Connector is expected to be very minimal, although the
roadway would potentially accelerate non-residential construction plans, again, most particularly
in the area of the airport.
INDIRECT AND CUMULATIVE EFFECTS Chapter 7
APRIL 2009 GASTON EAST-WEST CONNECTOR DEIS 7-17
The proposed Gaston East-West Connector is consistent with Mecklenburg County’s 2015 Plan,
Planning for Our Future (November 1997) and 2008-2010 Strategic Business Plan in that it will
contribute to the accommodation of transportation needs that are anticipated with expected
growth in the western portion of the county, including non-residential construction plans.
Districts 5 and 6 are both in Mecklenburg County. District 5 is north of I-85 and US 29-74 and
District 6 is south of I-85 and US 29-74. District 5 was cited as an area of current rapid
residential and commercial growth, sponsored not by any anticipation of the proposed project, but
by other roadway improvements well to the north of the proposed Gaston East-West Connector.
District 6 is dominated by the Charlotte-Douglas International Airport. However, the demand
for homes on the east side of the Catawba River has increased, which may contribute more to
stormwater runoff contributions in this watershed.
Interchange Area K includes the Dixie River Road interchange and I-485 interchange. The
interviewees did not provide much distinction between the interchange options for each DSA;
however, the additional access clearly would serve non-residential development beginning to
occur in the area, as well as the high-end housing that is starting to appear around the
waterfront areas.
Cumulative Effects. The western side of Mecklenburg County has been growing rapidly in
recent years, as other parts of the county (particularly the north and southeast) have reached
near-capacity for the preferred type of single-family, detached dwelling units; and demand for
moderately-priced housing has pushed growth to the formerly slow-growing west side. An
important generator of cumulative effects is the Charlotte-Douglas International Airport, which
is currently expanding roadway access points; adding a third runway on the west side of the
facility; and creating a new intermodal (rail switching area) facility on the existing airport site.
Additionally, new storage, flex-space, and distribution facilities will be added with or without the
presence of the Gaston East-West Connector, contributing to passenger and freight traffic;
associated emissions; secondary support employment opportunities; and demand for moderately-
priced housing and retail shopping opportunities.
Actions including the airport expansion, residential and commercial development, and
infrastructure improvements in Mecklenburg County have the potential to cumulatively impact
water quality through erosion and stream sedimentation, although there are stormwater
management programs in place to help minimize these effects. Construction of the proposed
project also has the potential to add to forest fragmentation and wildlife habitat disturbance in
the southwest section of Mecklenburg County.
7.5.3 POTENTIAL INDIRECT AND CUMULATIVE EFFECTS IN CLEVELAND
COUNTY
Indirect Effects. Rates of development in Cleveland County are not anticipated to change as a
result of the construction of the proposed Gaston East-West Connector. There are no
distinguishable differences in development rates anticipated between the construction of any one
of the proposed DSAs and the No-Build Alternative. No notable indirect effects are expected in
Cleveland County as a result of the proposed project.
District 1 is in Cleveland County. The DSAs’ proposed interchanges are too distant to have much
influence on land use in District 1, yet they may offer somewhat more in regards to accessibility
INDIRECT AND CUMULATIVE EFFECTS Chapter 7
APRIL 2009 GASTON EAST-WEST CONNECTOR DEIS 7-18
than the No-Build Alternative. The level of traffic modeling conducted under the scope of the
qualitative ICE assessment did not indicate any conspicuous differences between the proposed
DSAs, yet it is reasonable to assume, due to proximity, that DSAs 58, 64, 68, 76, 77, and 81 may
have the potential to influence perceived accessibility, followed by DSAs 4, 5, 9, 22, 23, and 27.
These small improvements in accessibility are not expected to induce growth or land use changes
in Cleveland County.
Cumulative Effects. The proposed project, under any of the DSAs, is not anticipated to
contribute to cumulative effects in Cleveland County. Interviewees did not expect the project to
induce growth, there are low growth rates in Cleveland County, and there is low potential for
new growth associated with the proposed project.
7.5.4 POTENTIAL INDIRECT AND CUMULATIVE EFFECTS IN YORK COUNTY,
SOUTH CAROLINA
Indirect Effects. The potential for the project to influence the rate of land development in
Districts 9 and 10 in York County were estimated to be low/moderate primarily due to the
moderate potential for travel time savings. On a more local level, the DSAs’ proposed
interchanges are too distant to have influence in York County. The project has potential to
influence regional travel times in some areas with time savings in excess of ten minutes. The No-
Build Alternative would not offer any travel time savings nor improve accessibility for those
traveling from or to portions of York County included in the ICE Study Area.
However, those interviewed in York County generally stated the project was not expected
substantially alter the pace or character of development, even though regional travel times may
improve. York County staff noted that other roadway projects, such as improvements to US 321
and SC 49 in South Carolina, were more responsible for influencing and contributing to
secondary development in the area. A surplus of water and sewer capacity has focused the
location of growth into the few areas where public utilities are available (e.g., Clover, SC). Other
attractors of growth noted included York County’s low tax rate and quality of life aspects.
Indirect impacts to water quality may occur in York County. The proposed DSAs cross streams
that flow into South Carolina. The proximity of Corridors Segments H3 and H2B-H2C to
Crowders Creek (DSAs 4, 5, 9, 22, 23, and 27) may result in greater indirect effects to water
quality in York County than DSAs using Corridor Segments H1A-H1B-H1C (DSAs 58, 64, 68, 76,
77 and 81) from stormwater runoff. Likewise, DSAs that use Corridor Segment K4A across the
Catawba River (DSAs 5, 23, 64, and 77) are closer to York County than the other DSAs. The
proposed project will include stormwater management and control features, and during
construction, BMPs will be implemented to control erosion and sedimentation. As discussed in
Section 7.4.3, York County, Gaston County, and Mecklenburg County have stormwater
programs in place to manage sediment and flooding from development.
Cumulative Effects. Large areas of undeveloped land in York County could receive large
quantities of new residential development, but the potential for the DSAs to contribute to a
cumulative effect on new development is curtailed based upon the distance from the Gaston East-
West Connector. The Gaston East-West Connector has a low to moderate potential (due to
increase accessibility and travel time savings) to influence growth in York County, SC. York
County’s average travel time savings is occasionally greater than 10 minutes with the proposed
project in place. However, other data gathered from local sources did not indicate a significant
INDIRECT AND CUMULATIVE EFFECTS Chapter 7
APRIL 2009 GASTON EAST-WEST CONNECTOR DEIS 7-19
anticipated influence from the Gaston East-West Connector on growth and land use changes.
The potential for cumulative effects in York County, SC are primarily due to planned provisions
for water and sewer service and residential development anticipated with or without the project.
Cumulative effects to water quality in York County are anticipated to be greater with the
construction of any one of the proposed DSAs than with the No-Build Alternative. However,
Gaston County, Mecklenburg County, and York County have stormwater management programs
that would help minimize impacts. The longevity of indirect impacts that contribute
cumulatively to water quality degradation in York County, when considered with other actions, is
dependent on the magnitude and duration of upstream hydrologic events including sediment
inputs (minimized through implementation of local stormwater ordinances and BMPs), flooding,
land use change (including changes in land use regulations) and, ultimately, watershed stability.
There has been water quality degradation in the portions of York County that have been included
in the ICE Study Area, as evidenced by the amount of Section 303(d)-listed water resources that
have the potential to be affected by this proposed project.
Water resources having the potential to be cumulatively affected by non-point source pollution
occurring upstream of and within York County include Crowders Creek and Lake Wylie, which
are Section 303(d)-listed streams in South Carolina. The kinds of development that would
produce non-point sources vary to some degree in each of the four counties considered, with the
predominant land use type being scattered residential subdivision development already occurring
and expected to continue to occur in many parts of the ICE Study Area.
Regarding the differentiation of impacts from individual DSAs, DSAs 58, 64, 68, 76, 77, and 81
would have comparable levels of indirect effects and cumulative effects to water quality and
aquatic habitat in York County as a result of induced development. These potential effects would
be greater than those associated with the No-Build Alternative, but less than potential effects
associated with DSAs 4, 5, 9, 22, 23, and 27. DSAs 4, 5, 9, 22, 23, and 27 are closer to Crowders
Creek upstream of York County, and would be expected to have a greater amount of stormwater
runoff effects. However, these can be minimized through implementation of local stormwater
ordinances and BMPs.
7.5.5 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
Table 7-2 presents an overall summary of the potential for indirect and cumulative effects to
occur in Gaston County, Mecklenburg County, Cleveland County, and York County, SC as a
result of the Gaston East-West Connector. Table S-2 in the Summary section of this Draft EIS
compares the DSAs in relation to direct impacts, indirect, and cumulative effects.
In Table 7-2, the column describing the potential for the project to improve mobility, access, and
connectivity relates to travel time savings that would occur as a result of any of the DSAs. The
column describing the potential for indirect effects relates to the potential for the project to
influence growth rates and types and to affect notable features in the portions of each County
that are part of the ICE Study Area. The column describing the potential for cumulative effects
relates to how much the project would contribute to the overall factors that would drive land use
change. For example, in York County, SC, growth and land use would be more heavily influenced
by availability of water and sewer service and by implementation of their land use plans, than it
would be by the project. Therefore, the potential for the project to contribute to cumulative
INDIRECT AND CUMULATIVE EFFECTS Chapter 7
APRIL 2009 GASTON EAST-WEST CONNECTOR DEIS 7-20
effects related to land use change was rated low for the York County, SC portion of the ICE Study
Area.
TABLE 7-2: Summary of Potential for Indirect and Cumulative Effects by County
Portion of
County in ICE
Study Area
Potential for Project
to Improve Mobility,
Access and
Connectivity*
Potential for
Accelerated Growth
and Other Indirect
Effects as a Result of
the Project*
Potential for Project
to Contribute to
Cumulative Effects
Related to Land Use
Change*
DSAs which Contribute to
Indirect and Cumulative
Effects
Gaston High High Moderate All DSAs (4, 5, 9, 22, 23,
27, 58, 64, 68, 76, 77, 81)
Mecklenburg High Moderate Moderate All DSAs (4, 5, 9, 22, 23,
27, 58, 64, 68, 76, 77, 81)
Cleveland Low Low Low None
York, SC Low/Moderate Moderate Low All DSAs (4, 5, 9, 22, 23,
27, 58, 64, 68, 76, 77, 81)
Source: Indirect and Cumulative Effects Assessment for the Gaston East‐West Connector, Louis Berger Group, Inc., March 2009
* Low – there would be some change from current or expected future No‐Build condition, but the change would be minor and likely not
noticeable.
Moderate – there would be a noticeable change from current or expected future No‐Build conditions.
High – there would be a substantial change from current or expected future No‐Build conditions.
There are some minor differences between the DSAs, but overall there are no significant
differences between the DSAs in terms of their general potential for indirect and cumulative
effects to all the notable features assessed at the ICE Study Area level, District level, and
Interchange level (Gaston and Mecklenburg Counties only).
The following sections summarize the indirect and cumulative effects on the three notable
features that have been highlights in this chapter; growth and land use, habitat fragmentation,
and water quality and aquatic habitat. Discussions of the indirect and cumulative effects to all
notable features assessed are included in the Indirect and Cumulative Effects Assessment for the
Gaston East-West Connector (Louis Berger Group, Inc., March 2009).
Indirect and Cumulative Effects on Growth and Land Use (ICE Study Area). As shown
in Table 7-2, the Gaston East-West Connector has a low potential to cause indirect or cumulative
effects in Cleveland County. As shown in Figure 7-2, average travel time savings would be
small for areas in Cleveland County. There would be no distinguishable differences in
development rates in Cleveland County anticipated between the construction of any one of the
proposed DSAs and the No-Build Alternative.
There is a low/moderate potential for the project to improve mobility and access in York County,
SC. York County’s average travel time savings is occasionally greater than 10 minutes with the
proposed project in place. However, other data gathered from local sources did not indicate a
significant anticipated influence from the Gaston East-West Connector on growth and land use
changes. Therefore, the potential for accelerated growth and indirect effects to notable features
in York County as a result of the project are moderate. The potential for cumulative effects in
York County, SC are primarily due to planned provisions for water and sewer service and
residential development anticipated with or without the project.
Gaston County has a high potential to experience accelerated growth and indirect effects to
notable features as a result of the project, and Mecklenburg County has a moderate potential.
Both Gaston County and Mecklenburg County have a moderate potential to experience
INDIRECT AND CUMULATIVE EFFECTS Chapter 7
APRIL 2009 GASTON EAST-WEST CONNECTOR DEIS 7-21
cumulative effects related to land use changes as a result of the project. In addition, Gaston and
Mecklenburg counties have a high potential to experience improved mobility, access and
connectivity, which is the purpose and need of the project. Growth and land use changes, along
with the proposed project, are anticipated in the Gaston County Comprehensive Plan (July 2002)
and Mecklenburg County’s 2015 Plan: Planning for Our Future (November 1997) and 2008-2010
Strategic Business Plan.
The additional new runway at Charlotte-Douglas International Airport will increase that
facility’s passenger and freight capacities, as well as increase rail shipping capacity at this
location and in the eastern section of the ICE Study Area. Residential development in western
Mecklenburg County and throughout southeastern and south-central Gaston County, with some
mixed uses, will be the predominant form of future development. Interchanges with the Gaston
East-West Connector are physically within both Gaston and Mecklenburg counties, and notable
for development potential during the analysis were the interchanges at US 321 and NC 274 (both
in Gaston County). The cumulative impact of these activities will depend in part on local
planning and policy guidelines, such as the Phase II water quality standards that are being
considered in Gaston County.
Additionally, cumulative effects from increased residential and retail-oriented development are
expected to continue in the attractive areas around the Catawba River (for example, in the River
Bend and South Point Townships). Many of these homes are large, single-family detached units
on one acre or more of land without public water/sewer connections. Unique descriptions of
development activities within each of the small towns in Gaston County are provided in the
Indirect and Cumulative Effects Assessment for the Gaston East-West Connector (Louis Berger
Group, March 2009).
The indirect and cumulative effects associated with the DSAs may vary somewhat in regards to
effects on habitat fragmentation and water quality and aquatic habitat. These potential effects
are summarized below. A more detailed table listing specific indirect and cumulative effect
factors at the DSA level, and the differences amongst the DSAs, is provided in Appendix P. The
table in Appendix P is a summary of a variety of factors used to draw conclusions regarding
notable features. For additional information regarding Appendix P, refer to Section 7.4.
Indirect and Cumulative Effects on Habitat Fragmentation (Gaston County and
Mecklenburg County). All DSAs would have the potential to add to forest fragmentation and
wildlife disturbance in the southwest section of Mecklenburg County. DSAs using Corridor
Segments H1C, J1c, K1A, and K4A (DSAs 5, 23, 27, 58, 64, 68, 77, and 81) have a greater
potential to indirectly affect upland species in Gaston County due to habitat fragmentation
because these corridor segments are located the farthest distance away from previously
fragmented forestland. DSAs 4, 9, 22, and 76, would have comparable levels of lesser indirect
effects due to existing habitat fragmentation. Direct impacts to natural communities are
discussed in Section 6.3.6.
Indirect and Cumulative Effects on Water Quality and Aquatic Habitat (ICE Study
Area). Regarding the differentiation of impacts from individual Detailed Study Alternatives,
DSAs 58, 64, 68, 76, 77, and 81 would have comparable levels of indirect effects and cumulative
effects to water quality and aquatic habitat as a result of induced development. These potential
effects would be greater than those associated with the No-Build Alternative, but less than
potential effects associated with DSAs 4, 5, 9, 22, 23, and 27. DSAs 4, 5, 9, 22, 23, and 27 are
closer to Crowders Creek, and would be expected to have a greater amount of stormwater runoff
INDIRECT AND CUMULATIVE EFFECTS Chapter 7
APRIL 2009 GASTON EAST-WEST CONNECTOR DEIS 7-22
effects. However, these can be minimized through implementation of local stormwater
ordinances and BMPs. Direct and indirect impacts to water quality and water resources would
occur in Gaston and Mecklenburg counties and these are discussed in Sections 6.2.2 and 6.2.3.