Charlotte City Council
Transportation & Planning Committee
Meeting Summary for October 31, 2013
COMMITTEE AGENDA TOPICS
I.
Subject:
Noise Walls and the I-77 Managed Lanes Project
Action: For information and recommendation to extend the timeframe for
making the final decision on both the location and design of the walls.
COMMITTEE INFORMATION
Present:
Time:
David Howard, John Autry, Warren Cooksey, Mayor Kinsey
12:00 pm – 1:30 pm
ATTACHMENTS
Handouts
Agenda
DISCUSSION HIGHLIGHTS
Committee chair Howard called the meeting to order at 12:02 and asked everyone in the room to
introduce themselves.
I.
Noise Walls and the I-77 Managed Lanes Project
Campbell: Louis Mitchell is here from the NCDOT and he will start off the presentation to
provide you with an update in terms of the project. This item reached the Committee because of
some concerns citizens raised regarding the voting process, the time given to neighborhoods that
abut this project to make decisions about whether to have a wall or not as well as the design,
color, and texture of the walls. We are happy to report that we have been working with the State,
and they have agreed to extend the time for some of these decisions. I want to remind the
Committee that we don't need any formal action; we just want to make you all aware of where
we are with the next steps. Also, you will see a lot of activity among City staff working in
coordination with the State as well as with the neighborhood organizations that abut the corridor.
With that, I will turn it over to Mr. Mitchell, and following Mr. Mitchell we will have Ed
McKinney who will talk about the next steps for the City of Charlotte staff and how we’ll be
working with the neighborhoods along the corridor.
Transportation & Planning Committee
Meeting Summary for October 31, 2013
Page 2 of 8
Mr. Mitchell started the presentation with slide 2. (see attached slide presentation)
Howard: I want to know the thoughts about whether or not the aesthetic walls stay if you add
noise walls (see slide 10)?
Mitchell: Good question. We'll get to that later.
Mr. Mitchell resumed the presentation with slide 12.
Autry: With our technological capabilities, why aren't noise walls aesthetically pleasing and why
aren’t aesthetically pleasing walls capable of suppressing noise?
Mitchell: Noise walls are becoming more palatable with the options we have to choose from
going forward.
Mr. Mitchell resumed the presentation with slide 13.
Howard: What about people who live in the middle of where the noise walls are and what about
maintenance?
Mitchell: We’ll talk about that shortly.
Mr. Mitchell resumed the presentation with slide 16.
Campbell: The Fourth Ward is a locally designated historic district. Louis, can you explain why
that area isn’t treated the same way that the national register areas are?
Mitchell: We do recognize locally historic areas. In this case, I-277 does not rest in the boundary
of the actual Fourth Ward footprint, so when it came to aesthetic choices, the Fourth Ward did
not qualify for input. They do get to vote on whether or not they want the walls, but they don’t
get to vote regarding texture. That part of the decision will be afforded to the Council.
Kinsey: I did the Fourth Ward with five other people in the early 1970s, and it’s my
understanding that it goes up to I-277.
Mitchell: I don't have expertise on that and will have to consult with others. I’m not sure how
any change will affect our going forward.
Campbell: We wanted to make sure that you are all aware of some of the outstanding issues. City
staff is going to be engaging the community so that we can have dialogue around these issues.
Kinsey: Fourth Ward would probably be eligible to be listed on the national register.
Mitchell: Mayor, if you would like for us to get our Planning & Development staff down here, I
will certainly facilitate that. That’s not an area that I have a purview over.
Transportation & Planning Committee
Meeting Summary for October 31, 2013
Page 3 of 8
Kinsey: I understand. We just need to do it.
Cooksey: I can appreciate how there are standards in existence that others may not have been
aware of that lead to potentially contradictory results. If the Fourth Ward neighborhood doesn't
meet whatever the existing standard is, what that means is that instead of the neighborhood
directly telling NCDOT about texture, the Council has that authority. It doesn’t take much for
Council to say, “We’re going to do what the Friends of the Fourth Ward asks us to do, and cut
through all the issues about definition, boundary, and who says what’s historic. That’s all you
have to do to solve that.
Howard: Since this is a State organization and they have say so, does that mean that you will
spend money on this more readily than if the City tells you to do something different?
Mitchell: No. We're spending money on it regardless. It’s just, who gets input on what it actually
looks like.
Howard: For instance, if they say they prefer a brick motif, does that mean the State will do that
or will they come back to ask the City to participate?
Mitchell: As you will see in the slides, it will only look like brick; they are not actually brick
walls. We're committed to paying for it already.
Howard: The City had to participate in paying for brick walls that are there now, so I want to
make sure there is no difference in the neighborhood choosing and City Council choosing.
Mitchell: No difference.
Mr. Mitchell continued the presentation with slide 17.
Howard: So, the neighborhood has an option? There isn't a federal highway requirement that you
do some type of noise mitigation (see slide 25)?
Mitchell: Yes, they have an option. It is a little weighted the way we do it. The way we vote is if
100% of residents are eligible to vote, the wall will go in unless 50% of residents tell us they
don’t want a wall. The vote can become a tough item as well, because if the home is rented, then
the vote is split between the owner and the renter with the owner getting 2/3 of the vote and the
renter getting 1/3. That can become a little complicated.
Campbell: One more thing: if you do not return the ballot, it's a yes vote.
Mitchell: That is correct.
Cooksey: That's an extraordinarily sensible way of doing the vote.
Mr. Mitchell resumed the presentation with slide 26.
Transportation & Planning Committee
Meeting Summary for October 31, 2013
Page 4 of 8
Campbell: There are existing walls in some places along the corridor. The challenge will be the
introduction of a new element to the skyline near the center city where there are no walls (see
slides 29 & 30).
Mr. Mitchell resumed with slide 29.
Howard: Why do you need a wall at all where there is no housing (see attachment
RECOMMENDED NOISE BARRIERS ALTERNATIVE 2, FIGURE 6a)?
Kinsey: That totally blocks the City.
Mitchell: Do you see the blue dots? They are benefited by the wall (see attachment
RECOMMENDED NOISE BARRIERS ALTERNATIVE 2, FIGURE 6a).
Howard: Do they decide?
Mitchell: Yes, sir.
Kinsey: Have they seen this?
Mitchell: No. We had an outreach effort led by Fred Johnson of the Fourth Ward, but we didn’t
have visualizations at that time.
Cooksey: For reference, on figure 6b at 11th St. and N Poplar St., that’s the yellow line that
shows what they are taking about.
Howard: The problem is that on the other side of that wall, the view of downtown has been
blocked.
Cooksey: For whom?
Howard: For the people on the freeway.
Mitchell: I’m glad you mentioned that, Councilman Howard, about the freeway. This is actually
at I-277 and Church (see slide 32). This is what you'll actually see looking into the Center City
coming down off of the flyover bridge.
Howard: Do the people that live there get to decide whether or not that happens or is that a City
option?
Mitchell: The locations denoted with blue dots on the map are the ones that receive the ballots.
Howard: I know the view is not for the people on the freeway, but it’s still part of the allure of
coming into the Center City. This takes the experience away from the people on the freeway
altogether. What are your thoughts, Debra?
Transportation & Planning Committee
Meeting Summary for October 31, 2013
Page 5 of 8
Campbell: We share similar concerns about the visual impact of this project. That’s why we want
to actively engage with the Fourth Ward community and with Charlotte Center City Partners,
have design charettes and see if there is a better way to address the issue of noise mitigation.
Howard: I would argue that the people that live there already moved there with the
understanding that the noise would be part of their experience. How do you guys take that into
consideration?
Mitchell: Unfortunately, Councilman, we have three sub-areas we look at. We look at the
feasibility and reasonableness of installing a wall. We have an eleven page policy that the Board
of Transportation approved, and the Feds concur. The policy does not take into consideration
urban versus non-urban settings, but only decibels.
Campbell: I want clarification for both Council and staff for this portion of the project, because
there was a miscalculation at the interchange at I-277 that the Fourth Ward will have another
opportunity to vote or re-vote on this portion, and if they vote NO on the wall, there is no wall.
Mitchell: That’s correct.
Howard: I want to make it clear we should have say-so about anything that might block the
skyline.
Mitchell: The Secretary was here a few weeks ago and he talked with your City Manager about
it. The Secretary is well aware of this issue and he supports a revote. The State is put in a
precarious situation here as we try to accommodate the goals and objectives of all the
stakeholders. We want the federal funding.
Cooksey: Didn’t we say Council would vote for Fourth Ward?
Mitchell: The Fourth Ward votes on whether or not to have a wall or not and Council will vote
on the texture if they do vote for a wall.
Cooksey: Thank you. I appreciate you thinking that people move to a city and think that noise is
okay, even people who moved to Fourth Ward knowing there is a train and a grist mill there still
want to shut them down sometimes. If the rules are that the individuals who are directly
impacted are who gets to vote on the noise walls, we may have to live with that, because that’s
what is fair.
Howard: We should be in the room when those decisions are made so we can make sure they see
this from the standpoint that we’re looking at it from.
Mitchell: We have another outreach session regarding the Beatties Ford Corridor vote, and we’re
trying to collaborate with your staff for another outreach for Fourth Ward to provide
visualization and explain the re-vote. We are re-voting because of the change of the wall height
from 25 feet to 10 feet on the bridges, which affects the number of people it will impact.
Transportation & Planning Committee
Meeting Summary for October 31, 2013
Page 6 of 8
Howard: What was the result of the first vote?
Mitchell: There weren't that many ballots returned.
Howard: So, the default was “yes” because they weren’t returned?
Mitchell: Yes.
Howard: Oh, heck no. Debra, can we get Kim to get the word out to the neighborhood? Also, can
Center City Partners help us get the word out through their network?
Campbell: Absolutely.
Howard: Louis, you mentioned the silos; I hear the grade separation project is not going to
happen the way we thought. Debra, can we make sure we get an update on that as well? I keep
hearing we may be losing money to other parts of the State.
Mitchell: The monies have been repurposed for the mainline grade separation. Some of it is
staying here, but some isn’t. No one told us, but Council needs an update on that.
Campbell: Bob Cook will be giving a presentation to the Charlotte Regional Transportation
Planning Organization on that, so we’ll schedule one for the Council.
Mitchell: If seeing the skyline from the freeway is that important to Charlotte, the conversation
needs to be elevated; when we choose to accept federal money going forward, that needs to be in
the equation.
Howard: Can we talk about going to the Government Affairs Committee?
Kinsey: Will the Fourth Ward see what we've seen here today?
Mitchell: Yes, mam.
Cooksey: Specifically, will the voters in Fourth Ward see the wall, not just from their perspective
but from the perspective of someone on I-277?
Mitchell: We’ll share every piece of electronic medium we have with anyone. It’s all public
information.
Howard: Tell me what those who represent the blue dots on the map said in regards to what they
want (see attachment RECOMMENDED NOISE BARRIERS ALTERNATIVE 2, FIGURE 6a).
Mitchell: There were very few who voted for a wall. We did not give the ballots back in the
Center City Area. We had no responses in the Beatties Ford Area. The blue dots have now
changed because the wall is lower. There will be less blue dots going forward.
Transportation & Planning Committee
Meeting Summary for October 31, 2013
Page 7 of 8
Howard: So everyone all the way out to the Brookshire Freeway get another shot at voting?
Mitchell: Each wall itself is intended to benefit a different group. It’s not all of Center City that
votes on all the walls. They vote on each separate wall.
Howard: Which means you can have this snaggletooth thing going on down the freeway?
Mitchell: Yes.
Howard: We have to get our hands around this.
Campbell: That is exactly why we are here, and why we want to bring those sections together so
that they think holistically rather than in sections.
Howard: Okay, regarding FIGURE 6f (see attachment RECOMMENDED NOISE BARRIERS
ALTERNATIVE 2, FIGURE 6f), there are homeless people down in the old landfill area. Who
maintains the overgrowth that gives them places to hide?
Mitchell: We try to maintain about a 12 foot area around the walls, because vegetation can be
detrimental to the structural integrity of the wall. We cannot likely keep the whole thing clear.
Howard: The Greenway is supposed to run the length of this as well. Did you know that?
Mitchell: No.
Howard: The homeless can get in and stay if they want.
Mitchell: We’ll have gates.
Howard: That makes me feel better.
Campbell: Ed McKinney with the Planning Department will talk about the next steps.
Mr. McKinney went over the NCDOT City of Charlotte Noise Wall Update (see attachment).
Howard: What was the decision in the Historic West End Neighborhood (see attachment)?
McKinney: The decision was for walls.
Howard: What was the turnout?
Mitchell: We have those numbers and we can provide those to you. But I can tell you from our
outreach with them, a predominant number of the folks were in support of the noise wall.
Howard: I would like to see those numbers.
Mr. McKinney resumed covering the NCDOT City of Charlotte Noise Wall Update (see
attachment).
Transportation & Planning Committee
Meeting Summary for October 31, 2013
Page 8 of 8
Cooksey: A missing element in this conversation is the involvement of the current District
Representative and the District Representative elect.
Kinsey: The District Representative could get out and make sure people totally understand what
this is about.
Campbell: We appreciate your attention, and we will be working really hard over the next couple
of months. The only other thing we have is the next scheduled meeting. I don’t think there is a
reason to have the November 11 meeting as we have no agenda items.
The Committee unanimously voted to cancel the November 11 meeting.
The meeting adjourned at 1:33.
I-77 HOT Lanes
Louis Mitchell, PE
Division Engineer
NC Department of Transportation
Road Map
• Current Project Status
• Proposed Noise Walls
Construction Considerations
• Wall Aesthetics
• Council Actions/Decisions
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
STIP Project Numbers:
• I-3311C
• I-5405
• I-4750AA
Proposed Action: Improve 26 miles of I-77
from I-277 (Brookshire Freeway – Exit 11)
in Mecklenburg County to NC 150 (Exit 36)
NC Department of Transportation
I-5405 , I-4750 HOT, I-3311C
I-77
• From Brookshire Freeway to
West Catawba – 2 x HOT
• From West Catawba to
NC 150 – 1 x HOT
• $170M/$550M P3 potential
• Let January 2014Commercial Close May 2014
Existing I-77 South
Configuration
Proposed I-77 South
Configuration
I-277 Direct Connect
Not actual concept
Construction Considerations
I-77
I-85
LaSalle St.
I-277
Proposed Noise Wall
Locations
Between I-277 & I-85
Construction Considerations
• Existing Privacy Walls
- Dual Walls
- Partial Removal
• Future Maintenance
- Accessibility/Vegetation
Control
- Wall Gaps
Construction Considerations
Construction Considerations
Existing I-77@ Sunset
• Do we( City) continue with the same style?
• Do we mix styles?
• Do we have a preference in color?
How Noise Walls Work
Flat Area Example
How Noise Walls Work
Hilly Area Example
Project Plan Handouts
• I-85 North to Lakeview
• I-277 Interchange to I-85
• I-277 Area to include 4th Ward
Noise Wall Aesthetics
• Aesthetics Considerations
- SHPO Coordination
Maintain Brick Motif
- Corridor Visual Continuity
- Future Maintenance
- Recommendations
- Community Input(Oaklawn,
McCrorey Heights, Dalebrook)
Community Input
• Community ballot of those
receiving >5dB noise reduction
• Residents determine texture on
community side(Historic only)
• City / County determines texture on
highway side
Previous
Standard NCDOT Noise Wall
Standard NCDOT Noise Wall With
Concrete Columns
City of Charlotte – Texture Options
City of Charlotte – Color Options
Historic Options
Wall Panel Textural Options
Letter From NCDOT
Letter From NCDOT (Options)
Letter From NCDOT (Ballot)
Ballot due August 23rd.
New Textured Wall Statesville
Unstained
Historic Options Brick
Historic Options Smooth
I-277
12th @ Brevard
I-277
12th @ Brevard- Revised
I-277
11th @ Poplar
I-277 @ Church
Important Dates
ƒ July 18th Environmental Doc Public
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
Hearing
August 1st- Beatties Ford Corridor-HOAs
and Sherell Hampton- Wall/texture
separated
Aug 20th 4th Ward –Greg Johnson and
CCP- St Peters Episcopal
August 23rd Original Ballot due date
Oct 18th Adjusted Ballot/Decision Date
Important Dates
ƒ October 23rd- 10 foot wall restrictionƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
bridges
November 12th Historic HOAs/ Mrs.
Hampton-Texture clarification and ?’s
Nov ? 4th Ward Outreach- Wall mod.
December 6th Adjusted Selection date
January 3rd-Revised due date to
accommodate Wall constraints and
political change-over.
What does this all mean to
Council?
ƒ Wall decisions?
ƒ Wall textures?
ƒ I-277 area considerations?
ƒ Beatties Ford Corridor(aesthetic w/new)
ƒ North of I-85 exiting with new?
NC Department of Transportation
Highway Division 10
Transportation & Planning Committee
Thursday, October 31, 2013
12:00 – 1:30 p.m.
Charlotte-Mecklenburg Government Center
Room 280
Committee Members:
David Howard, Chair
Michael Barnes, Vice Chair
John Autry
Warren Cooksey
Patsy Kinsey, Mayor
Staff Resource:
Debra Campbell, Interim Assistant City Manager
AGENDA
I.
Noise Walls and the I-77 Managed Lanes Project– 60 minutes
Staff Resource: Danny Pleasant, Transportation
Guest and Presenter: Louis Mitchell, NCDOT
The City Manager referred to the Transportation and Planning Committee the topic of noise walls
related to the I-77 managed lanes project. Stakeholders along I-77, between I-277 and I-85, and
those representing Fourth Ward interests along I-277 have expressed a desire for more dialogue
about the noise walls. Staff from NCDOT, CDOT, and Planning will discuss the status of the project
and plans for additional community engagement.
Action: For information and recommendation to extend the timeframe for making the final
decision on both the location and design of the walls.
Next Scheduled Meeting: To Be Determined in 2014
Distribution:
Mayor & City Council
Transportation Cabinet
Ron Carlee, City Manager
Danny Pleasant
Leadership Team
Louis Mitchell