Sound wall construction next to a South Salem neighborhood paralleling Interstate 5 is leaving some residents feeling deceived after an 8-year long process.

Betty Buholts built her house in 2000 on the 5000 block of Southbend Drive SE. Buholts said she was initially thrilled to learn in 2012 about the proposed wall along Interstate 5, which is just behind her backyard.

"We signed all the (land easement) paperwork in February 2016, received payment from the state for allowing them access to our property to build this much-needed wall. Perfect, right?" Buholts said. "A short time later, (ODOT) tell us we no longer will benefit from this wall and in fact, the wall will not be built behind our property, but will begin next door."

She is one of the four residents whose land is being utilized for building the wall between Kuebler Blvd SE. and Battle Creek Road even though it will not now border their property.

The agency decision to change the length of the wall was made after last minute noise studies and ODOT topographic survey model runs were analyzed.

But by then, Buholts and other property owners had been compensated for access to prepare for wall construction.

Both said they believed the land easement agreement guaranteed they would benefit from the sound wall if they signed over their land to the state.

The "greater accuracy" of the survey data proved the natural topography of the terrain paired with private retaining walls were shielding some residences from highway noise, and some of those homes at the northern end of the proposed wall no longer were considered to be impacted by the noise, according to ODOT.

In order to be considered an impacted receiver and benefit from the sound wall, noise levels must be at 65 decibels or higher. The sound wall would have to reduce noise by five decibels in order to justify the wall be built behind a residence.

Buholts' residence measured at 64 decibels.

Julie Ganung, the ODOT sound wall project leader, said the sound wall would only reduce noise at her residence between one and two decibels. The smallest change perceived by the human ear is a 3-decibel difference, according to a 2011 ODOT Noise Manual.

Ganung said crews realized that even if they did continue with the initial wall design, it would not reasonably reduce noise for those residents.

"I think it's common when you start a process, you don’t have statistics on private properties, so sometimes you obtain more data to ensure that," Ganung said.

ODOT initially contracted SLR Consulting to conduct the original noise analysis for the Kuebler Interchange Project in April 2012.

Lou Torres, ODOT Marion County spokesperson, said ODOT used the Traffic Noise Model, a computer model approved by the Federal Highway Administration to predict current and future noise levels with and without a prospective highway project - in this case, the project being the sound wall.

The computer model is used to record noise levels at different times in the day, and a noise specialist generally collects noise data on-site to merely verify the computer model's data - typically in 15-minute intervals.

"The noise report shows that we don’t have to monitor every house though because the analysis is pretty accurate," Ganung said.

By February 2016, ODOT crews started to realize another round of noise analysis was required to determine noise levels at potentially affected residences.

While ODOT was scrambling for additional noise data analysis to determine noise levels at four northern residences, the department was in the process of acquiring land easements needed to construct the sound wall and maintenance road on resident's private property.

Barbara Fear, one of the four residents no longer benefitting from the sound wall on Southbend Drive SE, said she received a letter on February 25 from ODOT requesting 900 square feet of temporary easement of her property.

Buholts also signed a temporary easement agreement for ODOT to acquire 659 square feet of her property and received a state check in the amount of $3,321 for the use of her land for up to three years.

Fear received a check for roughly $5,000 in the mail after agreeing to the temporary land easement as compensation in early May.

"You would assume that once we get our checks, that the project was completed," Fear said. "How can you tell someone they're going to benefit from a sound wall, get their land, and then determine you no longer benefit?"

Ganung said it wasn't until late April 2016 that ODOT obtained noise data from its noise consultants and simultaneously completed the right-of-way acquisition phase with residents.

"We were still waiting for some noise data until the end of April 2016, but we did have that discussion internally in regards to whether we still need that property, and if it's too late to change the easements," Ganung said. "If we stopped the process at that point though, there would be no way to keep the project on schedule."

Ganung said an internal agreement was made at some point in May that ODOT could not justify building a wall to its original length. The agency determined continuation of the wall would not result in a significant noise reduction or benefit given its latest noise analysis.

Buholts and Fear were informed in June that they would no longer benefit from the sound wall.

Ganung said ODOT did not share its new observations of the initial sound wall plan in February 2016, or its final runs of noise analysis in April 2016 because the department does not practice sharing "half-done research" with the community.

"We don't inform them during internal analysis," Ganung said. "We like to do our research first before sharing information. We want to share the most accurate information."

Torres said while the sound wall is located on state property, the wall is close enough to private property that land easements were required. In order to allow room for construction workers to build the wall, ODOT needed temporary easements.

Torres said the determination and payment for easements was based on the original design of the sound wall, which did not take into account the final noise analysis done during the easement process.

Buholts and Fear said they believed the land easement phase was a contractual agreement that suggested if they signed over their land to the state, they would benefit from the sound wall.

Torres, however, said the language used in the acquisition phase was general and merely said temporary easement request was 'the right to occupy the property for construction purposes."

"Look at it this way: we are essentially renting the property during construction," Torres said.

Ganung acknowledged a disconnect during ODOT's analysis phase, resulting in the last-minute noise analysis and design change. But ODOT did not mislead residents, she said.

"As far as lessons learned, we talked about getting surveys earlier on in sound wall projects, especially with slopes and retaining walls," Ganung said. "Obviously, we don't want to change things that late in the game ... It's a good takeaway for the team."

Ganung said ODOT now aims to obtain as much survey data as possible early on in the design phase and develop a tool that would allow civil engineers to see terrain and look at noise data in order to accurately represent the project area.

The proposed wall design in 2012 stated the wall would vary in height from 8 to 16 feet and would have been 3,280 feet long.

Now, the wall will range between 10 and 16 feet at different locations, and be 3,047 feet long and will run adjacent to backyards of properties along Southbend Drive SE and Landon Street SE.

If the wall were to be extended to the north to cover the properties no longer included in the sound wall project, Torres said it would cost $486,000 to cover the 342 feet cut from the design. Torres said the wall costs roughly $1,420 per foot.

"Cost wasn’t necessarily the reason we didn’t extend the sound wall," Torres said, referring to the noise analysis. "We could not justify spending the extra hundreds of thousands (of dollars) it would have cost."

The final design plans, specifications, and estimate milestone were delivered to the Office of Project Letting on October 24, 2016. The sound wall will cost roughly $2.6 million.

Crews started clearing Buholts' and Fear's bushes and trees as part of the clearing portion of the project last month. The clearing portion of the project was done early in order to abide by the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, which prohibits disturbing bird nests.

The residents say the noise level from the highway has increased since crews cut down trees lining the backyards.

"Those trees were our natural sound barrier and visual buffer," Fear said. "They’ve taken our sound barrier away, and they told us we’re not getting a wall."

Fear said she is forced to yell while having conversations with other people in her backyard, and the noise even seeps into her upstairs bedroom.

Ganung, however, said trees are only considered to be noise barriers when there is 100 feet or more of dense forest.

She said there were no areas in the project area with vegetation that could be considered to be a natural barrier and therefore, not included in the noise analysis.

"There is a psychological feel of trees, but it is not one that we can measure, unless it's such a density to mitigate noise," Ganung said.

The Federal Highway Administration doesn't consider planting a dense forest to mitigate highway noise, said Ganung, but there are plans to replant trees on the slope behind the housing properties upon completion of the sound wall.

That will be final step for the project.

Information compiled by Oregon Department of Transportation

Salem: 3 sound walls in total 

Woodburn: 5 sound walls in total, as part of Woodburn Interchange Project

Newberg: 3 sound walls in construction as part of the Newberg-Dundee Bypass Project, Phase 1.

A close look at 'eyesore' properties in Salem

Lawmakers eye Oregon homeowner tax breaks for budget fix

Gov. Kate Brown says GOP health proposal would be harmful

Proposed bill in Oregon legislature tackles police profiling, drug sentencing