Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
130 <br />Michael Harve <br />From: Ed Sirgany <ed.sirgany @summitde.net> <br />Sent: Tuesday, November 14, 2017 2:25 PM <br />To: Chuck Edwards Contact <br />Cc: Michael Harvey; 'Bunting, Clarence B'; 'Sorrell, Charles V; 'Ishak, Doumit Y; 'Jones, <br />DeAngelo Y <br />Subject: RE: Proposed Settlers Pointe- Revised Access Configuration and Revised Traffic Analysis, <br />Chuck, <br />Thank you, and Congestion Management for following up with the review of the revisions we made to the original TIA, <br />and turning this around so that your response and recommendations are available for the Commissioners meeting <br />tonight. <br />Edward W. Sirgany, PE <br />Traffic & Technology Engineer <br />Phone: (919) 732 -3883 x3139 <br />Fax: (919) 732 -6676 <br />ed.siLrganyt@summitde.net <br />SU1141LIT <br />DESIGN AND ENGINEERING SERVICES <br />Creatively Inspired — Technically Executed <br />www.summitde.net <br />M V461 <br />Edwards, Charles N [mailto:cnedwards @ncdot.gov] <br />Sent"111IIIiii,esday, November 14, 2017 2:12 PM <br />-- <br />A I:C <br />At �- <br />C Cr SC <br />ENGINU RINC <br />I'IiUP1 E's CI I010 <br />EXC H I ENC E <br />AWARD WINNER <br />AWAR1)W1\\I-.R <br />2015 <br />2015 <br />To: Ed Si y <ed.sirgany @summitde.net> <br />Cc: Michael ey (mharvey @orangecountync.gov) <mharvey @orangecountync.gov >; Bunting, Clarence B <br /><cbunting @ncdo v>; Sorrell, Charles V <csorrell @ncdot.gov >; Ishak, Doumit Y <dishak @ncdot.gov >; Jones, DeAngelo <br />J <djjonesl @ncdot.go <br />Subject: Proposed Settlers te- Revised Access Configuration and Revised Traffic Analysis, <br />Ed, <br />I'm writing in follow up to our recent meeting een you and District and Congestion Management staff to discuss <br />alternate access arrangements for the above projec . ou recall Congestion Management had previously reviewed <br />the original TIA and had included in their recommendatio new access road serving the industrial element with a <br />new intersection on Old NC 86 that would provide more appro ' e intersection spacing relative to the interstate <br />interchange and adjacent proposed accesses. This would require tha Applicant obtain additional property which <br />may not be feasible or possible. During our meeting we identified alterna cess configurations utilizing the frontage <br />currently controlled by the Applicant that would be expected to provide accep a operation and intersection spacing <br />in accordance NCDOT requirements. District and Congestion Management staff ha viewed your analysis for the <br />revised scenario and, based on the information provided, we find the proposed alterna be conceptually acceptable. <br />