MECKLENBURG - UNION TECHNICAL COORDINATING COMMITTEE Summary Meeting Minutes

Charlotte-Mecklenburg Government Center Innovation Station, 8th Floor

October 5, 2006 Voting Members: Jim Humphrey (CDOT-TCC Chair), Bill Coxe (Huntersville-TCC Vice chair), Jonathan Parker (NCDOT-Transportation Planning Branch), Leon Howe-alt. for Jim Keenan (Charlotte EP&M), Susan Habina (Indian Trail), Lee Bailey (Mint Hill), Ken Tippette (CDOT), Leslie Rhodes (LUESA), Desmond Cole (LUESA), Jonathan Wells – alt. for Debra Campbell (CMPC), Jim Lloyd-alt. for Wayne Herron (Monroe), Kevin Icard (Pineville), Shannon Martel (Weddington), John Rose – alt. for John Muth (MTC/CATS), Jay Camp-alt. for Bill Sherrill (Matthews), Amy Helms (Union County), Lauren Blackburn (Davidson) Other Staff: Robert Cook (MUMPO), Tim Gibbs (CDOT), Barry Mosley (MUMPO), Norm Steinman (CDOT), Andy Grzymski (CDOT), Stuart Basham (MUMPO), Rick Mason (NCDOT-Div. 10), Derrel Poole (Charlotte E&PM), Crissy Huffstickler (CMPC), Julie Clark (Meck County Park & Rec), Mike Davis (CDOT) Guests: Steve Blakley (Kimley-Horn), Richard Rubin (Charlotte Observer), Julia Oliver (Charlotte Observer) Eddie Knox (Knox Law Firm), Mr. & Mrs. William McKee, Marty Davis (representing Sarah Belk Gambrell)

Chairman Jim Humphrey called the TCC meeting to order at 10:00 AM. Mr. Humphrey asked for any additions or changes to the agenda. Mr. Cook stated that Mr. Bill Coxe had a thoroughfare project that he would like to talk about the Town of Huntersville’s Thoroughfare Amendment. Mr. Humphrey asked if it would be OK if we moved the Dixie River Road Thoroughfare Plan Project to immediately after the minutes.

1. Consideration of September 2006 Minutes Presenter: Jim Humphrey Summary/Requested Action: Chairman Humphrey asked for any changes to the September 2006 minutes. There were none. A motion was made and a seconded to approve the meeting minutes as presented. The minutes were approved unanimously. 2. Dixie River Road Thoroughfare Plan Projects Presenter: Jim Humphrey, Derrel Poole Summary / FYI: Mr. Humphrey stated that, at its September meeting, the MPO asked whether the TCC had looked at two new proposed alignments (known as #6 and #7) and if the Charlotte City Council had reviewed them. The answers to both questions was no, therefore the MPO asked the TCC to review the new alignments and to make a recommendation based upon reviewing the two new proposed alignments. He also noted that the MPO had considered a special October meeting to make a decision on this matter, but decided not to hold a meeting because the three parties involved made it known that they were attempting to develop a solution. Mr. Humphrey asked that the property owners meet prior to the TCC’s November meeting and stated that he hoped the TCC could endorse what they developed. Eddie Knox, representing Mr. & Mrs. William McKee, noted the McKee’s willingness to accept alignment #6 and that if an agreement cannot be reached, that he would like to come to the TCC with the option of the TCC recommending #6.

1

3. CMAQ Project C-4949, Truck Stop Electrification Presenter: Leslie Rhodes Summary/Requested Action: Ms. Rhodes stated that the truck stop electrification project is no longer viable because the vendor has deemed the proposed site inappropriate for such an undertaking. Land thought to be under the control of the Pilot truck stop at I-85 and Statesville Avenue is not under its control. In addition, she noted that no other sites in the MPO’s planning area are suitable. Because of this, Mecklenburg County Air Quality staff proposes to use the C-4949 funds for the Clean Air Works project which was funded in FY 06 and 07 as C-4959. Ms. Rhodes asked that this matter be directed to the CMAQ Project Selection subcommittee for consideration. Jonathan Parker asked in what years did the County wish to see the funds reprogrammed. Ms. Rhodes stated it would be FY 07 and possibly FY 08. No action was taken at this meeting, but Mr. Humphrey directed the CMAQ Project Selection subcommittee to consider the County’s request and to return to the TCC in November with a recommendation. 4. Davidson Thoroughfare Plan Projects Presenter: Lauren Blackburn Summary/Requested Action: Ms. Blackburn stated that Davidson adopted a circulation plan in 2003 and that some of the recommendations of that plan conflict with MUMPO’s Thoroughfare Plan. She also noted that this issue had been discussed at a Transportation Staff meeting and the recommendation from that group was to form a subcommittee to examine the issue. The request before the TCC was to form the subcommittee. Motion: A motion was made by Bill Coxe and seconded by Jonathan Wells to form a subcommittee that will review the two plans and return to the TCC with a course of recommended action. The motion was approved unanimously. Participants will include: Lauren Blackburn; Bill Coxe; Tim Gibbs; MUMPO staff; a Cornelius representative. Others may be added to the group. 5. Moores Chapel Road Thoroughfare Plan Amendment Presenter: Stuart Basham Summary/FYI: Mr. Basham filled in for Mark Cook. Mr. Basham stated that a major development is taking place along Wilkinson Boulevard near the existing alignment of Moores Chapel Road. The development will allow for Moores Chapel Road to be realigned to intersect with Wilkinson Boulevard opposite Old Dowd Road. A future effort will formally amend the Thoroughfare Plan to show the new alignment along with an upgrade to Old Dowd Road to minor thoroughfare status. Barry Mosley asked if the developer was participating. Mr. Basham stated that the developer would be responsible for building the part of the alignment on its property. 6. Monroe Bypass Presenter: Jonathan Parker Summary/FYI: Mr. Parker stated that a North Carolina Turnpike Authority (NCTA) meeting would be held in October where that agency is expected to formally accept the Monroe Bypass/Connector as

2

one of its projects. He also noted the recommendation from BOT member Helms at the MPO’s September meeting that a committee develop a locally preferred option for the Bypass/Connector. Mr. Parker recommended that this be discussed with the NCTA. Mr. Humphrey reminded the TCC that the MPO discussed quickly eliminating from further discussion those alignments known to be unfeasible. Mr. Parker stated that discussions with NCTA staff indicate that they too wish to eliminate unfeasible alignments as quickly as possible. Susan Habina asked how it can be ensured that there will be local involvement in the NCTA’s decision-making process. Bill Coxe suggested that the TCC consider adding an NCTA representative as a member. 7. HOV/HOT/Managed Lanes Study

Presenter: Tim Gibbs Summary/FYI: Mr. Gibbs provided the TCC with an update on the status of the proposed study and provided a handout noting what had been done to date. The study will be done as a joint effort by the region’s MPOs, NCDOT, CATS, etc. He stated that one of the important next steps in the process will be to finalize the scope of work and the multi-party agreement. It is expected that the study will be presented to the TCC in November with a request that it be formally recommended to the MPO for approval.

8. Draft 2007-2013 TIP Presenter: Bob Cook Summary/Requested Action: Mr. Cook gave an overview of the Draft TIP with a presentation and a handout to everyone. Mr. Cook gave a break down of the Loop Funds and the DA funds. With the acknowledgement of the earmarks, Mr. Bill Coxe stated he would like to establish whether or not any other funding was going to be needed on the projects that were listed in the earmarks, if so how much, and if they are or not subject to the equity formula. Mr. Cook covered all of the items that were represented in the handout. It was determined that the Wednesday Transportation Staff meeting would be the venue for discussing the draft TIP. Mr. Humphrey asked that the discussions avoid specific projects, and instead focus on policy level matters. 9. Rea Road Extension Presenter: Shannon Martel Summary/Requested Action: Ms. Martel discussed the letter from the Town of Weddington (included in the agenda packet) that states what the town board wants the MPO to do in order for it to rescind its January resolution requesting removal of the Rea Road Extension from the Thoroughfare Plan. The board wants the following to occur: • The project limits for U-3467 must be extended to Waxhaw-Indian Trail Road • Funding in the TIP for U-3467 must be sufficient to construct the road from NC 16 to Waxhaw-

Indian Trail Road (this includes widening and the part on new alignment) • Funding in the TIP for U-3467 must be sufficient to construct the extension of Cox Road • Funding must be secured for a traffic circle/roundabout at the intersection of NC 84 and

Weddington-Matthews Road (the Town's letter states "if feasible" but I can't remember how things were expressed at the TCC meeting)

• If any of the above does not take place, or is not implemented, the Town will not protect the corridor for the part of U-3467 on new alignment

If the above requirements are not addressed, the town will not support the project as it is currently described in the draft 2007-2013 TIP (U-3467). Mr. Humphrey stated that the town was asking for a

3

lot and noted that a question was asked at the September MPO meeting about how the project was added to the draft TIP and no one knew how it happened. 10. Towards Possible New Roles, Responsibilities and Revenues Presenter: Norm Steinman Summary/Requested Action: Mr. Steinman provided an overview of City of Charlotte efforts to implement its Transportation Action Plan (TAP). A handout was provided to the TCC members. 11. Huntersville Thoroughfare Plan Studies Update Presenter: Bill Coxe Summary/Requested Action: Mr. Coxe provided an update on Huntersville’s efforts to define corridors for three roadways: Prosperity Church Road Extension; Asbury Chapel Realignment; Verhoeff Drive Extension. He stated that a presentation was made to the town’s Planning Board which recommended that Prosperity Church Road’s extension consist of a single, multi-lane roadway that begins at Eastfield Road and connects at NC 73 at Davidson-Concord Road. In addition, the Planning Board recommended that a two-lane road be added to the Thoroughfare Plan which is from Poplar Tent Church Road to give a little relief for the main road aligned form the north to south area. Regarding Asbury Chapel Road, the recommendation was for the realignment to be located to the west of its current location on the Thoroughfare Plan. Regarding Verhoeff Drive, the recommendation was to extend it to connect with Highland Creek Parkway at Eastfield Road. The Town’s current schedule is for the Town Board to make a recommendation at an October meeting that will be considered by the TCC and MPO at their November meetings. 12. Adjourn The meeting adjourned at approximately 12:10 PM.

4

RESOLUTION

ENDORSING THE BICYCLE & PEDESTRIAN PLANNING GRANT PROPOSAL OF THE TOWN OF INDIAN TRAIL

A motion was made by ___________ and seconded by MPO Member ___________ for the adoption of the resolution, and upon being put to a vote was duly adopted. WHEREAS, the North Carolina Department of Transportation has issued a call for projects for the 2007 Bicycle & Pedestrian Planning Grant Initiative; and WHEREAS, the rules associated with the Program require MPO endorsement of proposals in urban areas; and WHEREAS, the Town of Indian Trail has prepared a proposal to fund a project under the Program; and WHEREAS, the Mecklenburg-Union Metropolitan Planning Organization has consistently supported bicycle and pedestrian planning initiatives; and WHEREAS, the Technical Coordinating Committee reviewed the proposal and recommended that it be endorsed by the MPO. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Mecklenburg-Union Metropolitan Planning Organization that it endorses the Bicycle & Pedestrian Planning Grant proposal of the Town of Indian Trail on this the 15th day of November 2006. ************************************************************************************ I, Patrick T. Mumford, Chairman of the Mecklenburg-Union Metropolitan Planning Organization, do hereby certify that the above is a true and correct copy of an excerpt from the minutes of a meeting of the Mecklenburg-Union Metropolitan Planning Organization, duly held on November 15, 2006. ________________________ ______________________ Patrick T. Mumford, Chairman Robert W. Cook, Secretary

October 23, 2006 David Joyner Turnpike Authority Mail Service Center 1578 Raleigh, NC 27699-1578 Subject: Request Turnpike Authority Assistance for MUMPO Projects Dear Mr. Joyner: The Mecklenburg-Union Metropolitan Planning Organization (MUMPO) requests that the

Turnpike Authority work with MUMPO staff to review projects to determine opportunities for

advancing schedules, reducing costs or reserving rights of way for potential tolled or managed

lane projects. We would also like your assistance in planning a system of

HOV/HOT/toll/managed lanes for our area.

The MUMPO and other transportation entities will be preparing a regional HOV/HOT/Toll/

Managed Lane Study that will commence in early 2007. That study will define priorities for a

system of potential projects in the 8 County bi-state region which surrounds Charlotte. We would

like to ask that a representative of the Turnpike Authority staff be designated to serve on the

technical committee overseeing that planning project.

We are aware that several projects in the recently published draft TIP are in likely high priority

HOV/Toll/Managed Lanes Corridors. Examples include STIP Project #U-209B (Independence

Boulevard between Sharon Amity Road and Conference Drive), STIP Project #I-3803B (I-85

widening in Mecklenburg and Cabarrus Counties (NOT SURE IT IS APPROPRIATE FOR US

TO IDENTIFY A PROJECT IN ANOTHER MPO), STIP Project #I-3311C ( I-77 HOV Lanes-

5th Street to I-85), STIP Project #3311E (I-77 Widening-Brookshire Freeway to I-85) and STIP

Project #R-4902 (I-485 between Johnston Road and I-77). The I-485 project will add two lanes

to I-485, but not widen the road for longer term needs. We would like to gain the Turnpike

Authority’s assistance in analyzing those projects so that the appropriate guidance to the

NCDOT can be provided regarding planning and design. Some of these projects are identified

for construction funding as early as 2010, so there is some urgency to a review of those projects.

We also have a number of projects in our Candidate project list for which we are actively

seeking funding that will likely be in high priority corridors, specifically along north and south I-

77. We also know that after all loop-funded projects on I-485 are completed, we will be

challenged to find further funding for additional widening that will be necessary.

Please let me or Jim Humphrey, chair of the MUMPO Technical Coordinating Committee, know

if you will be willing to assist. My telephone number is 704-374-3238 and Jim’s is 704-336-

3883.

Thank you in advance for your consideration of our request. Sincerely, Patrick Mumford Chair, MUMPO

c: MUMPO members Jim Humphrey Robert Cook

M E C K L E N B U R G – U N I O N

METROPOLITAN PLANNING ORGANIZATION 600 East Fourth Street

Charlotte, North Carolina 28202-2853 704-336-2205 www.mumpo.org

CHARLOTTE TO: MPO Members CORNELIUS

DA

HU

IND N TRAIL

MA

MECKLENBURG COUNTY

MINT HILL

MONROE

NCDOT

PINEVILLE

STALLINGS

UNION COUNTY

WAXHAW

WEDDINGTON

WESLEY CHAPEL

WINGATE

VIDSON MUMPO Secretary NTERSVILLE DATE: September 15, 2006 IA SUBJECT: Dixie River Road Thoroughfare Plan Amendment TTHEWS

FROM: Robert W. Cook, AICP

Attached is the background information on the Dixie River Road Thoroughfare Plan amendment to be discussed at the September 20 MUMPO meeting. At the July MPO meeting you were told that the Charlotte City Council had approved the amendment and directed staff to work with affected citizens to determine the alignments exact location at its intersection with Steele Creek Road. The MPO deferred its action on this matter until the September meeting. Since that time, City of Charlotte staff has met with the affected property owners to develop a consensus on the alignment; however, no consensus was reached. The following material is attached:

• Dixie River-Shopton Road West Thoroughfare Alignment Map • Public Meeting #3 Summary-April 27, 2006 • Development of Recommended Alternatives and Alignments Report, dated

July 6, 2006 • Power Point Presentation to the Charlotte City Council dated July 17, 2006 • Alignment 2C, Options 6 & 7 Maps

You will be asked to consider approving Alignment 2C as presented at the July MPO meeting and as recommended by the TCC.

Roundabout

NC 160

Shopton Rd West

Shopto

n Rd W

est

Steele

Creek

Rd

Steele C

reek Rd

Existing Thoroughfare Plan Alignment Dixie River Rd ProposedThoroughfare Plan Alignment

Shopton Rd W. ProposedThoroughfare Plan Alignment

BEAV

ERDAM C

REE

K

Dixie River Road

Dixie River Road

Dixie River Road

Brown-Grier Rd

I-485 Hy

Steele Creek R

d

Shopto

n Rd West

Steele Creek R

d

I-485 Hy

Dixie River Rd

Berewick C

omm

ons Py

Berewick Commons P

y

Dixie River Rd

Dixie River Road & Shopton Road WestThoroughfare Plan Amendment

Information presented on this document is for general reference purposes only. Charlotte Dept. of Transportation is not responsible for providing updates of this

document to any agency or persons. CDOT assumes no legal responsibility for the information shown on this map.

Thoroughfare Plan Alignments

Prepared by: Charlotte Department of TransportationTransportation Planning Division - GIS

June 15, 2006L:\GIS\Thoroughfares\Projectfiles\DixieRiver_ShoptonWest.mxd

±Existing AlignmentProposed AlignmentChanges

0 0.1250.0625Miles

Dixie River Road Realignment – Public Meeting 3

LOCATION: Steele Creek Masonic Temple

9424 Steele Creek Road Charlotte, North Carolina

TIME: April 27, 2006, 6:00 PM – 8:00 PM PURPOSE: Present the selected alignment alternative for the Dixie River Road

Realignment project, seek public input, and propose an amendment to MUMPO thoroughfare plan.

ATTENDEES:

PUBLIC: Approximately 80 people were in attendance. (See attached sign-in sheet) Lake Wylie Pilot – newspaper reporter STAFF: Derrel Poole – City of Charlotte Engineering & Property Management

Jim Keenan – City of Charlotte Engineering & Property Management Mike Davis – City of Charlotte Department of Transportation Kent Main – Charlotte-Mecklenburg Planning Commission

Rob Hume – Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. Ben Taylor – Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. Melinda Dyk – Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. John Townsend – Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. Jennifer Roy - Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.

AGENDA: A presentation was made outlining the project goals and objectives, progress to date, the selected alignment alternative (2C), and the proposed interim solution for the existing intersection. Immediately following the presentation, residents were given the opportunity to ask questions or voice concerns regarding the project. The remainder of the meeting was an open house during which residents could view the selected alignment alternative and direct any comments/questions to the project representatives.

EXHIBITS: 1) Mecklenburg-Union Metropolitan Planning Commission Organization

(MUMPO) Thoroughfare Plan 2) Tentative Project Schedule (24x36) 3) Dixie Berryhill Strategic Plan/Land Use Plan 4) Alternative 2C overlaid on aerial map (36x48) (3 copies) 5) Typical Section for Dixie River Road (22x34) 6) Typical Section for Shopton Road West (22x24)

COMMENTS: Q&A: A general summary of the questions/concerns raised within the presentation is

included below. • What modifications will be required to accommodate the temporary traffic

signal? Will additional land surrounding the intersection need to be acquired?

• Where will Shopton Road West tie into Steele Creek Road? Will it be close to Riverdale Drive?

• Will you move fences before you just come through there? Will you let me know before you come so I can get my cows out?

• What is the schedule for this project? • Where will the traffic signal be placed at the existing intersection considering

the extreme curve on Steele Creek Road at Shopton Road West? • Is it possible that the alignment of Dixie River Road could be changed in the

final analysis? Right now, the way that 2C is shown, Dixie River Road cuts right down the middle of my property and I only own 6.5 acres.

• If Dixie River Road intersected Steele Creek Road approximately 100 feet farther north and ran straight west, there would be much less property impacts to developed land than what is shown on the current 2C. The land in that area has not been developed for at least 50 years. This would straighten out the road, be much cheaper, and minimize impacts. Was this ever considered and if not, why was it not considered?

• Does the land owner have any impact on the final alignment of Dixie River Road?

• Do we have any recourse with you in the long range about your alignment proposition? {The attendee was told he could attend City Council on Monday nights to express his concern regarding the property impacts in front of the Mayor and other City Council members.} Would I be better off if I was represented by an attorney?

• What is the timeframe for installing the temporary traffic signal? • What does “restricting left-turn movements” for the interim solution involve? • There may be school buses that make a northbound left-turn at Shopton Road

West/Steele Creek Road (which may create a problem if left-turns are restricted).

• School buses have, at times, stopped southbound Steele Creek Road traffic to allow vehicles to make a left-turn from Shopton Road West onto Steele Creek Road.

• Have the number of driveways that will be allowed been determined yet?

WRITTEN: Written comments were received at the meeting on the attached sample comment form and will be compiled with those received by mail and fax to be recorded with the project records. Written comments received to date are included as attachments and are generally summarized below.

• Moving Dixie River Road 100 yards to the left on Steele Creek Road so as

not to cut Mr. McKee’s 5+ acres in half needs to be reconsidered; no one has lived on the adjacent property for 50+ years. This change would make Dixie River Road straighter and less costly, unless Pappas Properties wants the McKee’s land. The McKees could be buffered into Berewick.

• Notification of the meeting could be improved; a lot of people who live off of Dixie River Road were not aware of this project. Signs could be posted a few miles out in a circle around the project area and this may be cheaper and easier than a big mailing.

• I agree with the man who suggested moving Dixie River Road up a bit on NC 160 and going through the vacant land and not disrupting someone’s life. The road would be straighter and not have so much of a curve in it.

• I am happy that Alternative C is the chosen solution, as this seems to be the safest and best long term approach. Hopefully, you are able to get this done sooner rather than later.

• One half mile from the current intersection of Shopton Road West and NC 160 and if you are traveling on Shopton Road West away from NC 160, there is no street sign letting those not from this area of Charlotte/anyone know they are about to enter a traffic circle. While traveling on Shopton Road West towards NC 160, there is a sign prior to entering the traffic circle.

• In the Stowe Creek development (Beazer and McCar Homes), the metal street sign for Green Mountain Road and Chapeclane Road needs to be permanently reattached to the pole.

ORAL: Based on discussions between staff members and the public throughout the

meeting, a general summary of the key issues raised by the public is included below. • Many attendees had questions regarding the installation of a temporary

traffic signal at the existing intersection including schedule, implementation, potential restriction of left-turns, etc.

• Mr. Freeman requested a cattle pass be constructed on his property based on the proposed alignment of Shopton Road West.

• Many attendees expressed concerns regarding individual property impacts related to fences, ROW, etc.

• An attendee inquired whether there would be another public meeting. • An attendee commented that Steele Creek Road needs to have more lanes. • An attendee suggested teeing Shopton Road West into Dixie River Road.

• An attendee encouraged limiting or restricting commercial driveways along Steele Creek Road, especially between Dixie River Road and Shopton Road West.

• Many attendees questioned consultant staff regarding the level of influence and coordination between Pappas Properties (Berewick) and the Dixie River Road Realignment Project.

FOLLOW-UP ITEMS:

1) Determine whether left-turns at Shopton Road West and Steele Creek Road should be restricted during peak hours when temporary signal is installed; accordingly, determine if school buses make this movement.

Dixie River Road Project

Development of Recommended Alternatives and Alignments July 6, 2006

Overview This report summarizes the relationship of the City’s Dixie River Road / Steele Creek / Shopton Road West project to the proposed Berewick development, and details the steps taken by City staff to develop a preferred alignment for the proposed new Dixie River Road. Figure 1 is a map showing the existing and proposed zoning petition boundaries and their associated proposed roadways.

Figure 1 – Existing and Proposed Zoning Boundaries with Existing and Proposed Roadways

Project Inception The Dixie Berryhill Strategic Plan, adopted April 2003, recommended the construction of two new roads between existing Dixie River Road and Shopton Road West in order to provide better access and connectivity for the land uses proposed by the plan. One of these roads was proposed to intersect Shopton Road West at its intersection with Steele Creek Road, and the other to intersect further west along Shopton Road West (a portion of which has now been constructed by Pappas Properties departing from the roundabout on Shopton Road West). In July, 2001 City Council approved a conditional zoning plan that proposed construction of these two roads in conjunction with a mixture of land use types under petition 01-030, also called Berewick. Figure 2 shows the land uses and roadway network for this approved plan.

Figure 2 – Approved Conditional Zoning Plan 01-030

The July, 2001 plan called for Pappas Properties to construct Berewick Commons Parkway, which would become is the north-south road connecting between existing Dixie River Road and Shopton Road West at the new roundabout. The zoning plan did not require the construction of the new Dixie River Road between Berewick and Steele Creek Road, marked on the map as “Proposed Thoroughfare Road Extension.” In November, 2004 Charlotte voters approved a bond referendum that included $5 million for the Dixie River Road Project. The primary goals of this project were to fix the poor geometry of the Shopton Road West / Steele Creek Road intersection, and extend Dixie River Road on new alignment to connect with the roadways in the Berewick development. The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) contributed

$200,000 to the planning phase for this project since both Shopton Road West and Steele Creek Road (NC 160) are State-maintained roadways. Traffic Analysis In February, 2005 the City hired Kimley-Horn and Associates (KHA) to perform planning and design services for the Dixie River Road project. As part of their evaluation, KHA reviewed existing traffic counts and projections of traffic flows based on both the Berewick traffic impact study (prepared by a consultant under contract to Pappas Properties) and the Metrolina Regional Model (maintained by the Charlotte Department of Transportation with collaboration from NCDOT and other regional partners). The traffic forecasts were consistent in their predictions that the heaviest movements through the proposed intersection of Steele Creek with Shopton Road West and New Dixie River Road would be vehicles continuing along Steele Creek Road. If this were to be a four-legged intersection, this would mean that the heaviest movements would be northbound right-turns from Steele Creek Road onto Steele Creek Road, and southbound left-turns from Steele Creek Road onto Steele Creek Road. Figure 3 shows a graphical representation of the peak traffic movements projected for the intersection in a four-legged configuration, where 41% of the movements in the intersection are associated with vehicles choosing to remain on Steele Creek Road. Providing adequate capacity for an intersection with traffic volumes so heavily skewed towards these turning movements could require two northbound right-turn lanes and three westbound left-turn lanes. These lane configurations were not acceptable to the City.

Figure 3 – Projected percentages of peak hour turning movements as a four-legged intersection

Based on this information, KHA recommended reconfiguring the proposed intersection to preserve Steele Creek as the through movement roadway and separate the intersections with Shopton Road West and Dixie River Road. Figure 4 shows a graphical representation of the peak traffic movements under this proposal.

Figure 4 – Projected percentages of peak hour turning movements as a pair of three-legged intersections with a continuous Steele Creek Road.

Building two separate intersections would require building fewer lanes and would also provide opportunities to extend fourth legs to each intersection for additional land development potential on the east side of Steele Creek Road. After City staff concurred with KHA’s findings and recommendations the staff and consultants developed three new project alternatives for further study. Alternative 1 was the original 4-legged concept. Alternative 2 creates two three-legged intersections with variations A, B, and C proposing different locations for each intersection. Figures 5-8 show these proposed alternatives.

Figure 5 – Alternate 1

Connect new Dixie River Road as a fourth leg to the existing intersection and replace Steele Creek

Road curve with a right-angle turn.

Figure 6 – Alternate 2A Improve existing curve in Steele Creek Road, relocate Shopton Road West to the south, and

extend New Dixie River Road on new alignment.

Figure 7– Alternate 2B

Improve existing curve in Steele Creek Road, improve connection of Shopton Road West to

Steele Creek, and extend New Dixie River Road on new location to the north.

Figure 8– Alternate 2C Improve existing curve in Steele Creek Road,

relocate Shopton Road West as proposed in 2A, and construct New Dixie River Road as proposed

in 2B.

Evaluation of Alternatives At approximately the same time that Alternative 2 was developed, D.R. Horton submitted a single-family subdivision plan called Shopton Point Phase 1 for review to the City. This subdivision to be located along existing Shopton Road West and would prevent implementation of Alternates 2A and 2C. On November 7th, 2005 the project team presented the results of the evaluation of alternatives 2A, 2B, and 2C to the Key Business Executives (KBE’s) of CDOT, Planning Commission Staff, Engineering and Property Management, and CATS, with representatives from the City Manager’s Office and Pappas Properties in attendance. In this meeting, the KBE’s demonstrated a preference for project alternatives that kept the intersections as small as possible, while accommodating future traffic flows, and also maximized access to adjacent parcels of land. Pending additional public input, 2C was tentatively chosen as the preferred alternative, primarily because alternates 2A and 2B provided too little separation between Shopton Road West and Steele Creek Road to provide good access to abutting property from Steele Creek Road. On November 17, 2005 the project team hosted its second of three public meetings to present Alternatives 2A, 2B, and 2C and seek input from area residents. This meeting, as with the other two meetings, was well attended, largely due to strong interest in resolving existing safety and congestion concerns over the existing Shopton Road West / Steele Creek Road intersection. A review of public comments made during the meeting and from the comment cards revealed that while many citizens recognized the value of keeping Steele Creek as a continuous road, they made little distinction and stated no strong preferences between the variations A, B, or C. After additional evaluation of the benefits and impacts of the alternatives and further discussions with representatives of D.R. Horton and Pappas Properties, the project team confirmed 2C as the preferred alternative. Revised Rezoning Plan After the City selected Alternate 2C as a preferred alternative, Pappas Properties acquired the Steele Creek Masonic Lodge property and the Steele Creek Baptist Church property along Steele Creek and Shopton Road West, and submitted a second rezoning request on March 27th, 2006, that is now under review by the City. Figure 9 shows the revised conditional zoning plan (petition 06-078) that incorporates the additional property and changes in road configurations proposed under Alternate 2C.

Figure 9 – Proposed Rezoning Plan 06-078 with Alternative 2C

Thoroughfare Plan Change With the new transportation and land use plan for this area, two sets of changes are needed to the MUMPO Thoroughfare Plan:

- The City’s Transportation Project proposes to reconfigure the previously proposed four-legged Steele Creek / Shopton Road West / New Dixie River Road intersection into a pair of three-legged intersections. This change has is being recommended by the Technical Coordinating Committee (TCC) of MUMPO based on the results of the technical analysis and public review process.

- The proposed rezoning for Berewick includes the planned relocation of the

alignment of New Dixie River Road so as to intersect existing Dixie River Road further to the east. This change will be communicated by City staff to directly affected property owners and presented to the TCC on July 6th. This thoroughfare plan change is not required for this rezoning, but is required for subdivision approvals that would follow the rezoning.

Alignment Variations for New Dixie River Road The preferred alternative 2C proposes that new Dixie River Road connect to Steele Creek to the north of Shopton Road West. The general location for the new road needs to be far enough from the intersection of Shopton Road West so that NCDOT would allow median openings for both now and in the future on Steele Creek Road, and far enough from I-485 to not interfere with the interstate ramps. NCDOT has approved this general location, but is concerned that it not be shifted by any significant distance to the north.

Figure 10 shows several potential alignments for Dixie River Road, labeled 1 through 5.

Figure 10 – Possible Alignments for New Dixie River Road under Alternate 2C

The following advantages and disadvantages have been identified by the project team for each of the identified alignments. All of the alignments are acceptable from an engineering standpoint.

Alignment Advantages Disadvantages

#1 Provides access opportunities for three properties (Pappas, McKee, Gambrell) Preserves existing house on McKee Property

Requires the most use of McKee property Alignment runs closer to existing house than alignment #5

#2 Avoids impacts to McKee property Provides no access opportunity to Pappas property near Steele Creek Vertical alignment (profile) requires more fill Intersection would be located closer to I-485 ramps than other alignments

#3 Provides access opportunities for three properties (Pappas, McKee, Gambrell)

Alignment runs closest to existing house on McKee property Vertical alignment (profile) requires more fill

#4 Provides access opportunities for three properties (Pappas, McKee, Gambrell)

Requires removal of house on McKee property

#5 Requires little impact to McKee property Intersection would be located farthest from I-485 ramps

Provides no access opportunity to Gambrell property near Steele Creek

The project team is currently recommending alignment #1 because it provides access opportunities for each of the three affected properties, and as compared to alignments #3 and #4, provides the most separation between the proposed road and the existing house (McKee). Next Steps The proposed thoroughfare plan amendment is scheduled to be voted on by MUMPO on July 19th. If the thoroughfare plan is amended as proposed by the City, the project team will continue with design of alternative 2C. The pending rezoning petition 06-078 can receive approval by City Council on July 17th without the proposed thoroughfare amendment. An approval by MUMPO of the proposed thoroughfare plan changes will enable subsequent subdivision plan approvals proposed as part of Berewick.

1

Proposed Thoroughfare Plan ChangesDixie River Road & Shopton Road West

1. Background2. CIP Transportation Project3. Current Rezoning Petition (06-078)4. Requested Thoroughfare Plan Changes

Outline

Background

Existing Thoroughfare Plan

2

Background

Petition 01-030 – Approved July 2001

CIP Transportation ProjectProject Goals1. Improve Safety and Operations of Existing Shopton Road

West / Steele Creek Road Intersection

3

CIP Transportation ProjectProject Goals2. Connect New Dixie River Road from Berewick to Steele

Creek Road

CIP Transportation ProjectProject Budget1.$5 Million from November 2004 Bond

Referendum

2.$200 Thousand from NCDOT for project planning

3.Additional $5 Million funding proposed for 2006 Bond Referendum

4

CIP Transportation Project

Project Planning• Consultant began analysis in February, 2005

• Three Public Meetings held with average of approximately 80 citizens per meeting

• Public expressed interest in a traffic signal as an interim measure; A signal is scheduled for installation in the Fall

• Evaluated existing traffic volumes and future traffic projections and recommended an alternative to proposed 4-Legged intersection

CIP Transportation Project

Study Area

5

CIP Transportation Project

Traffic Analysis – Alternate 1

CIP Transportation Project

Traffic Analysis – Alternate 2

6

CIP Transportation Project

Project Alternatives

1 2A

2B 2C

CIP Transportation Project

Preferred Alternative

2CBenefits

1. Improves existing Shopton Road West / Steele Creek intersection

2. Two intersections would operate more efficiently with fewer lanes

3. Preserves Steele Creek (NC 160) as the “Through Movement Roadway”

4. Maximizes separation between Shopton Road West and New Dixie River Road

5. Provides adequate separation between New Dixie River Road and I-485 Ramps

6. Provides access opportunities for additional development on East Side of Steele Creek Road

7

Current Rezoning Petition

Petition 06-078

Requested Thoroughfare Plan Changes

Areas Included in Petition 01-030 Only

Areas Included in both Petition 01-030 and Petition 06-078

Areas Included in Petition 06-078 Only

8

Requested Thoroughfare Plan Changes

Requested Action

To direct vote of City of Charlotte’s MUMPO representative to amend Thoroughfare Plan to include realignment of Dixie River Road and Shopton Road West.

9

End of Presentation

Additional Information

10

Additional Information

Additional Information

Alternative 2C - Alignment Option 6SCALE: 1 IN = 200 FT

AUGUST 1, 2006

Alternative 2C - Alignment Option 7SCALE: 1 IN = 200 FT

AUGUST 1, 2006