Home
Storm Water Projects
Drainage & Flooding
Pollution Prevention
Fees & Billing
Volunteer
Storm Water A-Z
Print this PageSite Feedback
Andover Phase III Public Meeting Minutes

April 25, 2006

Public Meeting Minutes:                                                                   

Start Time: 7:10 p.m.

I.      Welcome and Introductions

a.       Kate Labadorf started the Andover Phase III Storm Drainage Improvement Project public meeting by welcoming and thanking the residents who were in attendance. She asked that those in attendance please sign in as it helps Storm Water Services communicate with the residents in the project area. She asked the residents to locate their property location on the exhibits by placing red stickers which are available at the sign-in desk.

b.      Kate Labadorf introduced herself, Kristie Kennedy, Pete Goss Dean Smith all from the City of Charlotte and Keith Pickett from Wray Right of Way Services, Inc.

c.       Kate Labadorf introduced Andrew Martin, Bob Spalding and Brad Ross from The Isaacs Group.

II.      Meeting Purpose

a.       Kate Labadorf stated that the purpose of the public meeting was to inform the residents in the Andover Project area on the progress of the Andover Phase III Storm Drainage Improvement Project since the last public meeting in May of 2005. She pointed out that this public meeting is the opportunity for the citizens to see the design plans for the project and see the changes to the design since the last public meeting. She stated that the changes resulted from comments from the residents since the last public meeting. She also stated that this design is at the 70% level and not a final design. Additionally, she pointed out this public meeting is for starting the easement acquisition process.

III.      Review Storm Drainage Issues

a.       Andrew Martin stated that the project has had three phases with this being the final phase. Phase I was completed several years ago and is located approximately in the middle of the project area. Phase II was completed last month and is made up of improvements from the downstream end of Phase I to the outlet of the project area into Briar Creek.  Phase III is the area to be discussed this evening and is located on the upper end of the project area above Phase I. He pointed out on an exhibit the areas of flooding within the project area and the levels of flooding impacting the residents of Phase III.

IV.      Proposed Improvements and Current Design Status

a.       Andrew Martin explained Phase III starts at the existing headwall near Danbury Street and continues upstream to a point just beyond Cheltenham Road at the Cotswold Condominiums. He indicated on the exhibits the storm drainage improvements and design changes made since the last public meeting along the main channel of the storm drainage system. He stated that there is an area of proposed channel stabilization at 1500 Coventry Road and additional storm drainage was added along Andover Road to address an issue identified by residents at the last public meeting. He stated that the storm drainage improvements at Randolph Road have been scaled back and are no longer included in the design. This was done to reduce project cost, to reduce impacts to the residents and to the public traveling along Randolph Road. He pointed out that the proposed design provides a similar level of service.

b.      Andrew Martin focused next on the Coventry system and the storm drainage improvement proposed for this area. He stated that most of the improvements will be constructed in the street, as much as possible, due to the concerns from the residents on the disturbance of landscaped areas along Coventry Road. 

c.       Andrew Martin pointed out that changes have been made to the storm drainage improvements along Exeter Road and Audubon Road. In an effort to reduce costs and neighborhood impacts, a reduction in the storm drainage improvements has been proposed. The modified system provides a level of service similar to the original design. He pointed out that in these areas flooding complaints have not been received from residents.

d.      Andrew Martin explained that during construction in the Coventry Road and Ferncliff Road areas utility work will be conducted and residents can expect temporary outages as work is completed. He stated that the storm drainage improvements along Ferncliff Road are similar to the previous design that was shown at the previous public meeting with only minor modifications.

e.       Andrew Martin concluded the review of the storm drainage issues and turned the meeting over to Kate Labadorf.

V.      What Happens Next?

a.       Kate Labadorf stated that easement acquisition is the next step. She explained that several different easements allow the City access on property for specific purposes such as for storm drainage, sanitary sewer, water line, guy wire and temporary construction. The temporary construction easements are not permanent and go away once construction for the project is completed. She pointed out the different easement areas on the exhibits.

b.      Kate Labadorf explained that for this project, property owners may have already participated in the easement acquisition process and may have signed and had easements recorded for their property. She stated that for the property owners who have already signed and recorded easements, the permanent storm drainage easements are valid, but the temporary construction easements are assumed to be  invalid. The temporary construction easements will be subject to the easement acquisition process again.

c.       A property owner asked what the implications are if the previous property owner signed the easement agreement. Kate Labadorf stated that the easements are valid if the property owner signed the easement agreement and it was recorded at the register of deeds prior to the sale of the property. The easement agreement should have been disclosed at the sale of the property.

d.      Kate Labadorf explained that there are three scenarios that a property owner may face with easement acquisition. One, a property owner may have a signed and recorded easement agreement and the project does not require any additional easement area. Two, a property owner may have a signed and recorded easement agreement and the project does require additional easement area on the property. Three, a property owner has not previously signed an easement agreement and easement area is needed. She stated that the easement information will be sent to each property owner and a contact person with the City's Real Estate team will be listed. This person will work with each property owner to work out issues and come to an agreement for their property on easement areas. She pointed out that when arranging for a meeting to discuss easement issues, please explain in as much detail as possible the issues to be discussed so that the City may be prepared to discuss and answer as many of the questions as possible at the meeting.

e.       Kate Labadorf explained the permitting needed to construct the project. She stated that a water quality permit will be sought from the Corp of Engineers and the State of North Carolina. The permit issued depends on the scale of the project and this project will need an individual permit. The Corp of Engineers or the State of North Carolina could disapprove the permit, requiring changes in the design. We have a strong case for the storm drainage improvements, so the likelihood of disapproval is small.

Along with the water quality permit an erosion control permit is required. We will wait to submit for this until closer to construction.  This permit process is straight forward and not time consuming.

f.        Kate Labadorf stated The Isaacs Group will be finalizing the design plans along with the project special provisions in the coming months. In this time, property owners should identify any irrigation systems, invisible fences and any underground facilities that may impact construction so these items may be included in the design plans and project special provisions.

g.       Kate Labadorf explained once permits and easements are acquired and design plans completed, the bid phase for the project will be next. The lowest qualified responsible bidder wins the contract. City council must approve before construction can begin. Once the contract is awarded, a construction manager and inspector are assigned to the project. The City inspector is the on-site person for the property owners to contact if any issues arise during construction. The inspectors contact number will be provided to the property owners in the project area.  Also, she explained that regular updates on the progress of construction and any anticipated utility interruptions will be provided via e-mail for those who wish to receive them.

h.       Kate Labadorf stated the start date for construction most likely will be late summer or early fall of 2007. The duration for the project will be approximately two years. However, the length of time the contractor can spend in one area will be limited and outlined in the bid documents. She stated the contractor may not take two years to complete the project but plan for two years.

VI.      Questions and Comments

Question:    What is the timeline for the project and order it will be constructed?

Response:   Kate Labadorf – Construction will begin downstream at the headwall of Phase I. The contactor will have the option to work n two areas concurrently. The Andover to Tyng system may be constructed at the same time as the Coventry system. The systems are not dependent upon each other.

Question:    If one or the other can be started which one will be constructed first?

Response:   Andrew Martin – It will be the contractor's decision.

Response:   Kate Labadorf – My preference is for the contractor to start with the Andover-Tyng system. We can specify this in the bid documents.

Question:    There is flooding on Exeter Road. It is at Coventry Road and Exeter Road intersection and goes across the road. Are you aware of this?

Response:   Andrew Martin – Yes, we have placed 4-5 more inlets along Coventry Road to address this issue.

Response:   It scared me when it was stated that storm drainage had been removed.

Question:    It floods two houses up from the Coventry Road-Exeter Road intersection at McCoy and comes down the road.

Response:   Kate Labadorf – We will look at this issue.

Question:    Will you go over the different easements and colors shown on the maps? Is an easement forever?

Response:   Kate Labadorf – Yes, orange is existing permanent storm drainage easement, purple is temporary construction easement and yellow is proposed permanent storm drainage easement. We already have some easement on your property.

Question:    Yellow is for what is needed or wanted?

Response:   Kate Labadorf – Yes. 

Question:    Does the permanent storm drainage easement restrict the property owner?

Response:   Kate Labadorf – It restricts the property owner from building any permanent structures in the easement area.

Question:    Unless it is currently grandfathered in?

Response:   Kate Labadorf – In cases where structures exist in an easement that will be negotiated on a case by case basis.

Question:    If the easement continues along the channel to the property line beyond the storm drainage structures, why do you need this easement and can we build in it?

Response:   Kate Labadorf – Some easements are needed for the work to be completed. If there are any issues with the easements we will discuss with you try to come to an agreement.

Question:    What is your plan for the existing pipes?

Response:   Kate Labadorf – If the existing pipe is in the area of the proposed pipe it will be removed. In some cases, pipes left in the roadway will be filled. Pipes in yards will be plugged on the up stream end rather than filled. This is to prevent blocking any existing pipes or drains going to these pipes that we do not know exist. This will also avoid tearing up yards and landscaped areas.

Question:    What is your plan for the pipe if it is failing or if there are sink holes?

Response:   Kate Labadorf – If the existing pipe is failing we will work with you to determine the appropriate plan whether filling the pipe or removing the pipe.

Question:    It appears items are replaced that are not near the proposed pipes?

Response:   Kate Labadorf – The construction for the pipe may tear up a part of the drive and our preference is to replace the drive to the first joint.  This may be more of the drive than is disturbed but it provides for a clean transition. 

Question:    Is the curb replaced all of the way? Will there be a bump at the drive?

Response:   Andrew Martin – Yes, the curb will be of the same type as is there now and will be replaced at your drive. The design of the curb does not allow for a smooth transition so there may be a bump, as is typical in most subdivisions.

Question:    Paving on Andover Road for Phase I was completed in a patch work manner. Will it happen here?

Response:   Kate Labadorf – We replaced the areas that were impacted by the work that we did. There have been several projects going on in the Andover area such as the water line replacement that has impacted paving on Andover Road. We try not to patch if possible.

Kate Labadorf thanked the residents for attending and concluded the meeting.

 

Back to Andover Phase III Storm Drainage Improvement Project page