Editorial

Editorial

f: '»-y >

Bypass Again

Little of the very strong opposition to the Sperryville bypass is opposition to the bypass itself.

^Rather it is opposition to an increase in truck traffic and eventual four-laning of U.S. 522 and possibly Route 231. These are seen by ' opponents as inevitable results of a Sperryville bypass, but they can - be tackled as separate issues.

The Rappahannock News received, too late for publication in this issue, a Letter to the Editor opposing the proposed four-laning of U.S. 522. There is no proposal for four-laning U.S. 522, but that js an indication of how confused the issues have become. , , Suppose the Board of Supervisors told VDOT it would favor the bypass only if through truck traffic were banned from Route 231. Unlike 522, Route 231 is not a U.S. numbered highway. Rather it is a state primary highway, but it is also a “scenic” road. It would be far more scenic without trucks. *■ *•« This would require cooperation with Madison County, but if it * !£pan be done, it would do far more to postpone the four-laning of »U.S. 522 than opposing a Sperryville bypass.

With trucks banned frdtn Route 231, U.S. 522 will not be a logi££al truck route from Winchester and Front Royal to Charlottesville. ~tThe southern part of U.S. 522 in Rappahannock County will not ;*even be a logical way to get to Culpeper from Winchester or Front pRoyal. Far more logical would be a route to Massies Comer, down »jj.S. 211 to Route 229 to Culpeper. « ’• Far into the 21st Century VDOT will have calls On its funds that ‘'’preclude four-laning U.S. 522. With trucks banned from Route 231, •Tour-laning that road will be precluded indefinitely.

In the meantime a bypass could improve life in the village of ^Sperryville. Far too many properties in the village are on the market "and not selling. Sperryville’s economy is indeed fragile. Through ^traffic, both truck and automobile, makes the village undesirable as *a place to live and shop. r Putting in a bypass is hardly likely to bring to Sperryville county 1 offices, a bank or the equivalent of The Inn at Little Washington,' but | it could enable the village to grow and thrive in its own unique way. ! Another large piece of the opposition to the bypass is opposition ! to what some perceive as J. Clifford Miller Ill’s plans for land his | family owns around Sperryville. At the VDOT meeting there was ! discussion of low-cost and subsidized housing. ! Mr. Miller has never proposed subsidized housing. Rather he has • offered to discuss with people in the community “affordable” hous! ing, affordable to people already living in the county who do not ! want or cannot afford 25 acres for a house site. ' Currently there is no proposal for lands owned by the Miller ! family except VDOT’s proposal to study alternate routes for a ! bypass. It is unfortunate that project has become so clouded with I unrelated issues.