www.SSCCA.ORG
Sudley
Springs Catharpin Civic Association, Virginia
An
organization created to give the residents of the Sudley
Springs and
Hit Counter
There are 2 important issues, 1) Battlefield Bypass, and 2) Tri County Parkway. Both are linked. Pubic Comment Period Ends June 6. More Facts & contact Information HERE.
Battlefield Bypass
Someone was listening to our proposal, not the Commonwealth Transportation Board – they supported ‘D’.
See the “Modified ‘G’” here.
In a mailbox near you
... 
See the proposed SSCCA alternative to "G",
We don't stop at saying what we do not want, we offer constructive suggestions for improvement!
Read the Letter to the community, here.
Battlefield Bypass the top threat to the neighborhood
"D" alternative worst of all, by all accounts.
1) Friends of Manassas National Battlefield Park Oppose "D" http://fmnbp.org/friends/bypass/BypassLogic.htm
2) Pat Bradburn writes in Gainesville Times "D" is Dumb! http://www.timescommunity.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=13832483&BRD=2553&PAG=461&dept_id=507243&rfi=8
3) Heritage Hunt is planning an article for their community news magazine that identifies the Battlefield website for the EIS Study, stresses the impacts of a D decision on HH, and suggests that HH residents express their opinions in writing to Jack Van Dop and in person at the public hearing.
4) PW Conserve http://www.pwconserve.org/issues/transportation/Battlefield%20Bypass/index.html
Visit the Bypass official site: www.battlefieldbypass.com
Bull Run Observer Story download
Sudley Springs History by Keith Knoke page 1 page 2 page 3 page 4
Common Links
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/SSCCA-L/
http://EvergreenManorHouse.org/
Additional Material:
"Here, take $100M to get you into the parking lot on I66 a lot faster!, " said the Mother Of All Proffers to Prince William. What about some speculative office space in the wonderful Innovation @ Prince William? Why can't we build high end jobs, office space rather than more houses? If we build jobs in PWC then maybe we wouldn't have to get on I66 in the first place!
____________________________________________________________________________________________
Dear
The
news is out, soon to be announced…“D” is the ‘Preferred’ bypass route,
see enclosed map (Fig. 1) or go to www.BattlefieldBypass.com be
alert for the mailing, and announcement of a public hearing date. Alternatives “A”, “B”, and “C” – all northern
bypasses - were, rightly, depreciated and must remain so. The choice of
“D” – a northern bypass through wetlands and neighborhoods - is still
neither best solves our transportation problems nor preserves ‘neighborhood
cohesion’ for the Rural Crescent, nor protects historical assets of the
Manassas National Battlefield Park.
Everyone agrees, we need transportation improvements, this study will not impact only the Park, these bypasses can help fix our transportation problems. Please refer to the attached assessment of why we believe that the wrong decision is being made.
Our
Recommended Position: A modified “G”
- a new Rt. 29 parallel to and north of I66 with improvements to
Alternative Position: If a neighborhood solution as described in this letter cannot be reached, “No Action” or “No Bypass” is suggested for this study outcome. Rather, necessary modifications to existing roads, including adding turn lanes and added capacity to existing roads, should be adopted. No one wins if nothing is done as a result of this study, the Park, the commuters, and taxpayers all lose.
· Submit written comments and speak at the public hearing. We want a modified version of “G” that improves east-west traffic, north-south traffic to I66, and capacity of the I66 corridor. Make it work! “Dump D, Fix G”
· Write and call our public officials, including Mr. John Stirrup and Mr. Sean Connaughton.
While
“No Northern Bypass and Co-Locate Rt. 29 on I66” is now a tough sell due to
VDOT and CTB objections, a modified “G” will put Rt. 29 in the same corridor,
beside I66 if not literally co-located on I66 – effectively instantly
widening I66. Please support either a
modified “G”, or NO BYPASS - improve EXISTING Park roads. “Dump
D, Fix G”
Sincerely,
Greg Gorham
SSCCA, President
The Top 10 Reasons to Dump
D and Fix G:
10. “D” Takes Too
Much
9. “D” does NOTHING to improve
east-west traffic! Anything that is going to cost this much had
better improve things! “D” changes a
trip from Heritage Hunt to
- “G” is a fast track directly east or west along I66 - with minimal distance change, potentially removes an intersection from the route, and
- “G” gives local drivers more
north-south options to get onto I66 at
- “G” preserves easy Park visitor access.
- “G” will put traffic where
traffic should be, near these businesses and in an upgraded I66 east-west
corridor.
8. “G” does more to
help Prince William commuters, Gainesville District commuters, and is least
negative impact on Prince William and Gainesville District. Our Board and Supervisor can spend political
capitol on our behalf. These
Bypasses will be 90% within
7. “G” preserves
citizen investment while improving Park visitor experience AND commuter
experience. With “G”, we can get
land within the Park for added capacity if we improve existing perimeter
roads. Why close a road when we need
improvements so desperately? Fact: Rt. 234 and Rt. 29 within the Park will
never be widened. Many, including
our
6. “D” dumps all
Loudoun traffic on the
5. Problems with “G” are not insurmountable: Highway engineers have to realize they cannot get everything they want. The old days of promising everything and delivering nothing are over. “G” has solvable engineering problems. The costs of “G” and “D” are comparable when you look at total wetlands, total bridge construction and total right of way acquisition costs. If engineers are inclined to do so, they can engineer any solution they want to, they just have to WANT to make “G” work. “G” can work. Generally, “G” upgrades existing roads, a section of Pageland Lane that is south of Rt. 29 - parallel to I66, (possibly not on Bulloch Drive with proper design), Battleview Parkway, Vandor Lane, and Bull Run Post Office Road. In fact, “G” was the design originally intended to take traffic out of the Park.
4. “D” ruins
virgin view-sheds, “G” is against I66 already. Historic assets of the Park should have
highest priority. The Bypass Study is
intended to help the Park, that means protecting their
assets. “G” uses a route that already
has view-shed damage along I66, the power-lines, and the quarry in
3. Any major
2. Fixing the “G”
timeline can save
- When ‘lines are drawn on the map,’ the purchase of right-of-ways must happen instantly to protect homeowner investments.
- Add critical safety features
to
- And, if there is money, and
if the ‘purpose and need’ remains after the
These conditions will allow the study group to “plan for the closure of 234 within the Park,” as the 1988 legislation mandates. These conditions are less costly – realistic – commuter relief
1. The number one reason to
pick “G” over “D” is … Over 80% of Gainesville District voted to change
direction in 2003 – rejecting this legacy developer driven dictate is necessary
to finish that job.
|
Mr. Jack Van Dop Phone: 703-404-6282 Fax:
703-404-6217 |
Dr. Robert Sutton Manassas, VA 20109 Phone: 703-754-1861 Fax: 703-754-1107 |
Mr. John T. Stirrup, Jr. |
Mr. Sean T. Connaughton |
Planning Maps for
Alternatives D and G
.
Figure 1 The Study Group
preference, Alternative "D"
Figure 2 The better alternative for PWC, Alternative "G"
Download the original SSCCA Bypass Letter page 1 page 2 page 3 page 4
SSCCA Proposed "G"
(click on an image to view higher resolution - larger file)
Here are sections of a proposal, you may download the larger images but understand they may take a while to download.
We have invested many hours and days in this proposal, we think it is better to provide a solution rather than only say what we do not like.
Pageland has several approaches,
the Study versions all are less useful than our SSCCA-Pageland-A shown
here. This intersection is a "T", through traffic does not
stop, EVER. Most directions have minimal ramps. All travel directions are
preserved and the design does not fail with higher traffic loads as the
at-grade intersections do. Bridge costs are cut in half because only one
direction is lifted, this design is used extensively
in
Note the Pageland connection on the north, it is
2-lanes. It is phased construction, there CAN be 4-lanes there in the
future when demand warrants but we ask for a time delay until AFTER the
Also, to minimize future threat to the Park viewshed, the right of way along Pageland will be encased in easements, irrevocable easements that will not allow density increases and will not allow future curb cuts, it is a limited access road forever. (download)
An additional ramp can be added, shown here in lower right
hand side blue highlight, to ease access from the south to the north along the
new Rt. 29 Bypass toward the proposed TCP in
Pageland must be protected. This study should not enable or make the Pageland corridor more likely to be made into 4-lanes. In fact, the Study claims the Pageland corridor will be built regardless of the outcome of this Study. If that is so, why does this plan have to stipulate it will be 4-lanes? Are they independent or are they not?
Protect Pageland by doing this
leg of "G" last, allow time to pass and build the TCP in
(Once Heathcoat has been constructed to
An alternative that has been receiving positive reaction
is not connecting Pageland to the 234 Bypass. Nowhere in the study is
that connection required if the study is about relocating traffic from 234 and
29 within the Park. The costs of this version do not include new ramps
from I66. Traffic flows easily from
Here is a SSCCA-Pageland-B drawing: (download)
A major hurdle the Study group ran into regarding
"G" is the congestion it creates at 234 Business and Battleview/Bulloch. This new intersection is too
close to the existing I66. Solution: Use the
The aerial photo version. (Download this image in the original scale and you can zoom in very close.)
East west through traffic does not stop from the either end, something impossible in the Park today on existing roads!
The Park and VDOT state that the Rt. 234 and Rt. 29 within the Park will never be widened, period. Well, what about the public investment in those roads and why are we not forcing the Park to give up lane to widen those roads? Answer, the SSCCA Fixed "G" proposal does use existing roads within the Park, Pageland goes all the way around the southwest corner - co-located along I66 corridor to Groveton and Vandor goes along I66 co-located in that corridor. The Park, in this case IS GIVING UP LAND to 'widen Rt. 29 and Rt. 234'. It is a win-win. Park gets roads closed and preserves the historic two lane design, public gets faster east-west and north-south roads and additional lanes which would have never been available without the change. For the Park this option has least negative impact on virgin scenery and for neighbors this has least impact on property. (download)
West ramps
Center ramps 234 Business and I66 (download)
East ramps
An end to end picture without aerial photo. (download)
The ramps at either end can be under only one side of the road to cut costs....the west side may be best with a ramp under both directions since the road is elevating there already.
This higher resolution photo proves again that 4 lanes
will fit on the
Yes, it is possible to get no closer to Bull Run Estates
than any other alternative gets to any other
This proposal has been submitted to the Study group as part of the public comment provision of this study.
Tri County Parkway
Public Comment Period for TCP ends May 21
Support "Comprehensive Plan CBA"
ALERT Linton Hall/Vint Hill/Manassas
Which route will help your commute, a "road to Leesburg" or a "road to Fairfax and Dulles Corridor"?
Original Study Map download here (pdf)
Virginia DOT official site here
Download the flyer... a "road to Leesburg" or a "road to Fairfax/Dulles"?
You decide,
pick, speak at hearing, write the study group promoting "TCP Comprehensive Plan Candidate Build Alternative (CBA)
Last chance to
send this message is Monday, June 6.
Support “Fixed G”
For Commuters ---
Make the 234/29 intersection nightmare STOP!
· Bypass Alternative “Fixed G” will speed you through the Manassas Battlefield
WITHOUT a 30 minute delay at the 234/29 intersection!
·
“Fixed G” is
‘ramp access’, non-stop, 4-lanes east/west on existing
upgraded
- Commuters come FIRST “Fixed G” will help
commuters BEST
- STOP the “D” alternative NOW, “DUMP D” Today we
determine the best alternative of the routes
- Today is not a funding decision point, tomorrow we determine how it ranks with other
critical road proposals.
- “No
Action” leaves commuters with a MESS if the Park fights widening existing
234/29 forever.
- The Park is cooperating with “Fixed G” we can
fight the issue forever or get the commute through the Park fixed.
- If Alt. “D” is selected, your commute around the
Park will DOUBLE in length!
Call, Write, Phone, Fax, E-Mail the decision makers
before June 6:
|
FHWA, PROJECT DIRECTOR |
NPS, PARK SUPERINTENDENT |
NPS, NATIONAL CAPITAL REGION |
PARSONS TRANS. GROUP, PROJECT MANAGER |
|
Occoquan Supervisor |
PWC
Board Chairman
Sean T. Connaughton |
Brentsville Supervisor |
Neabsco Supervisor |
Coles Supervisor |
|
|
|
|
|
Frank
Wolf Congress http://www.house.gov/wolf |
|
