Noise Wall Public Preference Balloting: North Carolina’s Experiences
TRB ADC40 Summer MeetingJuly 25, 2016
Gregory A. Smith, LG, PETraffic Noise & Air Quality Group
Transportation
Noise Wall Public Preference Balloting
2
• Past History of NCDOT Public Preference Balloting
• Recent Events
• More Recent Balloting Modifications
• Current Status
Transportation
Noise Wall Public Preference Balloting
3
1990 Noise Abatement Guidelines
A determination of Reasonableness should include items such as follows:
5. There is documented support of the benefited residents (4 dBA or more reduction) for placement of abatement measures
Transportation
Noise Wall Public Preference Balloting
4
1996 Traffic Noise Abatement Policy
Reasonableness:
Opinions of impacted residents - Support for the proposed sound barrier by design receptors ("first row" residents) must be documented. Noise barriers will not be constructed without support from 51% or more of the first row residents within a given area. The opinions of design receptors will be requested at formal and informal meetings and/or by mail depending upon the scope of the project.
Transportation
Noise Wall Public Preference Balloting
5
2004 Traffic Noise Abatement Policy
Reasonableness:
Opinions of impacted residents - Support for the proposed noise barrier by front row receptors must be documented due to the visual effect of the proposed measures. The Department will solicit the opinions of these receptors and a majority of these receptors must support the construction of the noise abatement measure.
Transportation
Noise Wall Public Preference Balloting
6
2011 Traffic Noise Abatement Policy
Reasonableness:
Viewpoints of the property owners and residents of all benefited receptors shall be solicited. One owner ballot and one resident ballot shall be solicited for each benefited receptor. Points per ballot shall be distributed in the following weighted manner:
- 3 points/ballot for benefited front row property owners- 1 point/ballot for all other benefited property owners- 1 point/ballot vote for all residents
Consideration of the noise abatement measure will continue unless a simple majority of all distributed points are returned that indicates the balloted voters do not want the abatement measure.
Transportation
Noise Wall Public Preference Balloting
7
I-77 Express Lanes Project
• Charlotte to Mooresville
• Approximately 28 miles
• 23 Originally-ProposedNoise Walls
• 2 Declined by Public Balloting
• 2 Later Added
Transportation
Noise Wall Public Preference Balloting
8
I-277 Charlotte Downtown Loop
• 2 Noise Walls Proposed
• Original Public Balloting in 2013 • 161 Pts Distributed• 24% Response – 15% For, 9% Against
• Design Changes New Balloting
• Revised Public Balloting in 2014
• 153 Pts Distributed• 69% Response – 16% For, 53% Against• Very Contentious Balloting Experience
Transportation
Noise Wall Public Preference Balloting
9
Balloting Validation
NCDOT Contracted with Consultant for Defensibility
• Verified All Benefited Receptor Addresses• GIS• County Tax Files• Door-to-Door
• Verified Rental Status of Benefited Properties• Management Companies
• Verified Occupancy of Rental Properties• Management Companies• Door-to-Door• Left Door Hangers
• Reissued Ballots to Non-Responders• Provided Final Results in Memorandum
Transportation
Noise Wall Public Preference Balloting
10
Remaining 21 Walls on I-77
2250 pts Distributed
820 pts Returned (36%)
2% Against Walls
Very Little Public Inquiry
Transportation
Noise Wall Public Preference Balloting
11
Early 2015
FHWA Required NCDOT to Re-Ballot
• All 22 Proposed I-77 Walls
• To Ensure Equitable Public Outreach Effort For All Balloted Receptors
Transportation
Noise Wall Public Preference Balloting
12
Re-Balloting of 22 Walls on I-77
2344 points Distributed
831 points Returned ( 35 %)
7% Against Walls
Again, Very Little Public Inquiry
Irritation Expressed for Need to Recast Ballots
Transportation
Noise Wall Public Preference Balloting
13
Enhanced Public Outreach
• Greater Initial Effort to Verify Addresses/Ownership• Consultant Validation• Public Noise Meetings
• Notices Sent to Benefited Receptors• All Things Noise
• Pre-Ballot Postcard Notification• Ballot Packages Improved
Well-Marked Envelopes“Noise Wall Ballot Enclosed”More Readable Details LetterAerials With Wall LocationsIdealized Wall Aesthetics, When Known
Transportation
Noise Wall Public Preference Balloting
14
FHWA FAQ Published in 2015
G7. Whom does the state DOT survey to obtain viewpoints?
“... highway agencies should only consider votes that are submitted, and should not assume a "no response" is a vote for or against the noise abatement.
Clearly, NCDOT’s 2011 Policy did not follow this FHWA position
No vote cast is the same as a vote “For” a particular noise wall
Transportation
Noise Wall Public Preference Balloting
15
2016 Traffic Noise Abatement Policy (Still a Draft)
Reasonableness:
Property owners and tenants of all benefited receptors shall be solicited to obtain their preferences for or against a proposed noise wall. No tenant ballots are distributed for vacant rental property. Points per ballot shall be distributed in the following weighted manner:
5 points/ballot for adjacent property owners who reside at property4 points/ballot for adjacent property owners who rent property3 points/ballot for all non-adjacent property owners who reside at property2 point/ballot for all non-adjacent property owners who rent property1 point/ballot vote for all tenants of rental property
Owners of multi-unit rental locations will receive the applicable number of owner points for each individual benefited receptor (rental unit) owned.
Transportation
Noise Wall Public Preference Balloting
16
Adjacent Property is property that is immediately connected to highway right of way along property lines. Figure 1 provides graphic examples of Adjacent Property.
Transportation
Noise Wall Public Preference Balloting
17
If 50% or greater of all possible voting points from benefited receptors for each noise wall are received on the first solicitation, a simple majority of voting points cast will be used to determine if the proposed noise wall will be constructed.
If less than 50% of all possible points for each noise wall are received on the first solicitation, a second solicitation will be sent to benefited receptors who did not respond to the first solicitation.
If a second solicitation is conducted and 50% or greater of all possible voting points for each noise wall are received after the second solicitation, a simple majority of voting points cast will be used to determine whether or not the proposed noise wall will be constructed.
If less than 50% of total possible points for a noise wall are received after the second solicitation, the noise wall will not be constructed.
Transportation
NCDOT Traffic Noise Abatement Policy
18
Transportation
Noise Wall Public Preference Balloting
19
Draft Policy is Awaiting FHWA Approval
Transportation
Questionsand Discussion