20061214 Ver 1_More Info Received_20060823

oLo-~a~y
August 3, 2006
Mr. Chris Flowers
Soil and Environmental Consultants
11010 Raven Ridge Road
Raleigh, NC 27614
RE: Wildacre
W&R No.: 0204232
Dear Mr. Flowers:
At your request we are providing additional justification information for the Holly Springs Road
access point across from the existing Sunset Fairways Drive. This roadway crossing is associated
with Feature 0 and Impact 12 in the wetlands permit application. We are providing the following
information to supplement the previous information sent in our July 14, 2006 letter:
Exhibit 1 is from the North Carolina Department of Transportation Policy on Street and Driveway
Access in North Carolina Highways. It states that opposite side roadways or drives be aligned
directly across from existing side streets.
Exhibit 2 is taken from the Median Crossover Guidelines section of the NCDOT Roadway Design
Manual. The highlighted section indicates that crossovers shall not be spaced any closer than 1200
feet apart on divided highways. The alternate access location that aligns with Lassiter Road and
runs through the Progress Energy substation site is 1100' from Sunset Lake Road and did not meet
these spacing guidelines to allow for a median break at this point. Therefore, full movement access
would not be provided to Wildacre from Holly Springs Road unless the entrance was relocated
further to the south. In order to satisfy both of these requirements, the proposed road was located
as currently shown in the drawings.
The Developer had also contacted the property owners for the roadway right-of--way that would
be required between the Progress Energy substation and Holly Springs Road for the alternate
alignment. This property owner was unwilling to negotiate terms for this right-of--way. The
Developer, therefore, can not obtain this property rendering this alternative unfeasible. We hope
that this additional information will be beneficial to NCDENR-DWQ in their review of our
proposed wetland permit.
Please advise if you require additional information or have any questions.
Sincerely,
WITHERS ~ RAVENEL, INC.
)im Canfield, PE
ja •~ ~4' J ~5'
Attachments
,, ~
AU
~~.r~~. ,
Srh~ } ~1.J~11v.P'R' i yl~y... •.

PG ~~~.
POLICY ON STREET AND DRIVEWAY ACCESS
TO NORTH CAROLINA HIGHWAYS
Published by the
North Carolina Department of Transportation
Division of Highways
)Uly 2003

P~~- ~
Policy On Sheet And Driveway Access to North Carolina Highways
Adjacent property owners are encouraged to construct a shared driveway by
written mutual agreement to serve both properties. Joint Access provides
improved internal circulation and parking capabilities, as well as reduces conflict
points and increases distance between driveways. Shared driveways are subject to
ail requirements of the "Policy on Street and Driveway Access to North Carolina
.Highways" except that the edge clearance dimension will not apply.
Care should be taken to avoid creating incorrectly offset left turn conditions.
Opposite side drives should be aligned directly across from existing/proposed
opposite side streets and driveways. When it is necessary to offset driveways or
streets, care should be taken to provide adequate separation for vehicular
storage/queuing and maneuvering between access points.
Page 40 July 2003
Encourage Joint & Cross Access

~k~~-~- ~r z.
ROADWAY DESIGN MANUAL PART I
MEDIAN CROSSOVER GUIDELINES continued ___ 1-6)
Divided Highways without Full Control Access:
(Posted speeds of greater than 45 mph)
On highways with higher traveling speeds, the potential for more severe crashes is greater.
Also, on high-speed facilities, development is usually not as concentrated as on lower speed
facilities. In order to maximize the safety of these facilities, crossover spacing is critical.
All-movement crossovers shall not be any closer than 2000 feet apart on divided highways.
However, spacing alone is not justification for a crossover. It must be determined that a
crossover addition is needed to meet the operational requirements of the facility. Where this
spacing requirement is not met and there is a defined need for left-turn access, then a
directional crossover will be considered. However, the general guidelines must be met in
order for the directional crossover to be added.
Divided Highways without Full Control Access:
(Posted speeds of 45 mph and Less)
There is usually more demand for median crossovers and the speed limit is lower. Because
of the density of the development and lower traffic speeds, it is acceptable to provide a
closer spacing of median crossovers. However, the availability of adequate spacing alone is
not justification for a crossover. Crossovers must be justified to meet operational and
access needs that the existing facility cannot adequately serve. Only the type of crossover
that meets the operational, access and safety needs of the facility shall be added.
Directional crossovers are preferred where they meet the operational and access needs of the
roadway.
The spacing of crossovers will be largely dependent upon the need for adequate storage for
left turning vehicles/U-turn vehicles at intersections. A crossover shall not be placed
where it interferes with the storage requirement for existing intersections.
All-movement crossovers shall not be spaced anv closer n 1200 feet apart n„ ~ivider~
h~hwavs with posted speed of 45 mph and less. Where this spacing requirement is not met
and there is a defined need for left-turn access, then a directional crossover will be
considered. However, the general guidelines must be met in order for the directional
crossover to be added.
Responsibility of Locating Crossovers on Active Roadway Design Projects:
While a project is in design and during the life of the construction of the project, the Project
Engineer and Project Design Engineer in the Highway Design Branch will locate the
crossovers for the highway. Only crossovers at arterials, major collectors, and major traffic
Effective 1/1/2004
Revision 3

08/14/06_ 09:21 FAX 919 6i7 8600 PRIiS'1'ON DIiYELOPMENT CO. 01002
f
TRi SOU'G'H DEVELI~PMENT
GUMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE AND DEVELAPMENT
August 9, 2006
Mr. Karl Blackley __ .. _
I-lolly Springs Investors, LLC
l00 Weston Estates Way
Cary NC 27513
Re: Property of Gladys Adams at 9900 Holly Springs Road
Dear Karl:
In conjunction with Tommy Drake of Drake Properties I have several times visited
personally with Mrs. Adams over the past few months about the possibility of purchasing
her property or enough property to provide for the extension of Lassiter Road in
accordance with the long range thourghfare plans of the Town of Holly Springs. Going
back over a period of several years I assembled property adjacent to her and I have
attempted multiple times to purchase her property.
Consistently over the past three or four years, Mrs. Adams and her adult son who lives
with her have declined my offers. Her property is the remaining portion of family land
owned by her late father. Other circumstances include another son who lives next door
and reluctance at her age to find and move to a new home.
At this time I have no reason to believe that the property could be purchi;<sed. Certainly
my efforts over a long period of tune have failed.
Sincerely
•~~~~~ •
~ ~,~
Bill Shankle'
Tri South Development •
P O BOX 17133 ~` RALEIGH NC 27619 " 919 SS 1 2066