MEETING MINUTES DATE: TIME: LOCATION: TOPIC: PRESENT: November 14, 2011 7:00 ‐ 9:00 pm Forest Hill Church 7224 Park Road Charlotte, NC 28210 First Public Meeting ‐ Existing Conditions Analysis Sunnyvale‐ Chandworth Storm Drainage Improvement Project Charlotte Mecklenburg Storm Water Services (CMSWS) Jackie Bray (JB), Amy Bice (AB), Chad Nussman (CN), David Perry (DP), Harold Smith (HS) Dewberry Chris Fleck (CF), Emily Powell (EP), Jonathon Drazenovich (JD), John Gyllenswan (JG), John Keene (JK), Rick Shmurak (RS) The City Project Manager presented the meeting, as outlined below.  (JB) Charlotte‐Mecklenburg Storm Water Services (CMSWS) Summary: Storm water items that do and do not quality for service, goals of the storm water department, and components of the storm water program.  (JB) Project Selection and Citizen Involvement: Project selection based on citizen input from 311 requests, deteriorating infrastructure, CMSWS watershed ranking, and larger watershed‐wide drainage issues. Citizen involvement includes citizen input from 311 requests and citizen questionnaires, feedback on existing drainage issues not previously reported, areas of roadway or structural flooding within the project limits, and support for the project's future phases.  (CF) Existing Conditions Analysis Overview: Dewberry indicated that a detailed survey of the existing topographic and storm water system information has been completed. The existing conditions have been analyzed, evaluated against nearly 50 criteria and combined with citizen reported data as summarized on the maps (A‐E) in the presentation. CF reviewed the order of magnitude of the study and the results of the analysis including almost 5 miles of deficient pipes, over 3 miles of deficient channel, 189 deficient inlets, 160+ buildings that are potentially flood prone and 18+ street areas that are potentially flood prone. CF indicated that these areas were studied in detail for existing conditions and will be studied further to determine potential improvements. Page 1 of 3 Sunnyvale‐Chandworth Public Meeting Minutes November 21, 2011 Page 2 of 3 CF reviewed the presented maps A‐E [note the presented maps matched the maps on display for the breakout sessions]. CF noted overview of typical deficiencies noted on each map: Map A – Open Channel deficiencies, potential structural flooding, rear yard flooding, deficient pipes & culverts Map B ‐ Open Channel deficiencies, rear yard flooding, deficient pipes & culverts, maintenance team projects Map C ‐ Open Channel deficiencies, street flooding, deficient pipes & culverts, maintenance team projects Map D ‐ Open Channel deficiencies, rear yard flooding, deficient pipes & culverts, maintenance team projects Map E – Mostly closed (piped) deficiencies, some open Channel deficiencies, rear yard flooding, street flooding, deficient pipes & culverts, maintenance team projects  (JB) Future Project Milestones Planning  Survey (completed)  Existing Conditions (completed)  City Design Standard Analysis (in progress)  Alternatives Analysis  Selected Alternative‐Future Public Meeting (TBD in 2012) Design (estimated 2 year duration) Real Estate / Easement Phase & Permitting (estimated 1 year duration) Bid (estimated 6 month duration) Construction (estimated 2 year duration per phase) General Questions / Comments / Concerns  Question ‐ Citizen indicated telephone notification of public meeting was not made to cell phones.  Question ‐ Citizen asked about the issue of trees falling into and across channels due to channel erosion, potential City responsibility for these trees, and process for resolution. Answer ‐ City referred citizen to the City's Risk Management group, 311 to resolve tree issues if the tree is blocking a culvert or channel flow, and potential meeting with the City's Arborist to resolve property owner specific issues / concerns.  Question ‐ Citizen asked about factors in determining phases for construction. Answer ‐ City indicated improvements would generally be constructed downstream to upstream in the project watershed. Sunnyvale‐Chandworth Public Meeting Minutes November 21, 2011 Page 3 of 3 
Question ‐ Citizen asked if survey stakes may be removed. Answer ‐ Dewberry confirmed these can be removed. 
Question ‐ Citizen asked why there are so many deficient systems. Answer ‐ Dewberry discussed the aging storm water infrastructure, increased flows due to development, and large number of criteria evaluated during the existing conditions assessment. 
Question ‐ Citizen indicated they are located in a cul‐de‐sac with another cul‐de‐sac adjoining in the rear yards that is currently or planning on being developed into multiple properties. Citizen asked if the increase in impervious area is being accounted for with this project. Answer ‐ Dewberry confirmed that the analysis we have performed does account for these increases in impervious area based on City zoning. 
Question ‐ Citizen asked about differences in existing storm water inlets in the project area versus new storm water inlets that may be proposed. Answer ‐ Dewberry indicated that while existing and potentially proposed inlet structures are similar, there are options such as open throat structures that may be utilized to minimize clogging. Additional structures will likely be proposed, however the roadway will look the same once construction is complete (a majority of the piped system will be underground). 
Question ‐ Citizen asked if maps will be available on the website. Answer ‐ City indicated maps and presentation will be available. 
Question ‐ Citizen towards the end of Chandworth Rd indicated that he experiences water to the top of his fence approximately once a year. Citizen asked about the schedule, phasing, and expressed concern of the time for improvements to be constructed and problems resolved. Answer ‐ City indicated we understand these problems and are being aggressive in our project schedule. Also, the intent of phasing construction is to minimize disturbance to smaller areas of the project. The goal will be to phase the project only in construction and maintain the same project schedule otherwise. 
Question ‐ Citizen asked if the deficiencies are worse in the open (channel) or closed (pipe) systems. Answer ‐ Dewberry indicated both types of system have substantial deficiencies.