June 20, 2012 - Fauquier County
Peter Eltringham recommended the committee read “Stonewall Jackson Day by Day”. 4. Proposed Transportation Network & Compatibility with Preservation Effort Pending Grants: Bishops Run and Ted’s Tack Shop Properties Ms. McMasters indicated the ABPP issues Civil War Battlefield Land Acquisition Grants and Land & Water Conservation Fund Grants with a 50% match of funds. They usually acquire land by buying easements and can buy fee simple. She continued that Both Ted’s Tack Shop and Bishops Run tracts were awarded grants this year and will be placed under easement. Questions/Answers Session 1. Are the Route 29 Study (Dane Ismart document) and the Committee’s proposed network more compatible with the Buckland Races Battlefield core area than the currently adopted NBSD Transportation Plan? Ms. McMasters replied it was much less impactive than widening and adding an interchange. 2. As recommended in the proposed NBSD Transportation network, Is a context sensitive designed “Continuous Green Tee” intersection at the Route 29/Route 215 intersection a compatible alternative for the core area? Allows signal controlled left turns from Rt. 29 and Rt. 215, while allowing continuous flow on the southbound lanes. Ms. McMasters felt some impacts will be minor damage and some widening will require mitigation. Signaled lights would impact more. Mr. Painter commented how the two ridges are safety issues. Ms. McMasters indicated there were many issues such as safety, preservation, aesthetic, economics and convenience. She added that there needs to be a holistic look at the whole battlefield. Erich Meding asked about the effect of two extra lanes proposed in the past. Ms. McMasters agreed it was a good question and needs to be explored. 3. For public streets located in the core area, what general types of improvements are considered appropriate by the National Park Service? Staff explained that it expected the battlefield core location to limit Route 600, between its intersections with Rt. 793 and Route 215 to remain as prescriptive r-o-w and limited to safety improvements that improve line of site, shoulders and drainage, and upgrade existing lanes to public street standard widths. We need to know if that type of enhancement is consistent with the battlefield core. Ms. McMasters replied it depends. Enhancements and safety improvements should minimize changes that would have an impact on the interpretation of the battlefield. The most significant part of this battlefield is if one came from a time past, they could still recognize the landscape. 4. She considered and recommended Riley Road as the hard line for the battlefield preservation. Is the intent to discourage or oppose new street alignments, as proposed in the VHEDA & Brookside Rt. 793 extended “concepts”, through Bishops Run and connecting to Rt. 676?
Ms. McMasters is not supportive of the blue road. The ABPP would never have gotten involved if a road was going thru. Green is best and red would still likely have an impact on the battlefield property. 5. Next Meeting: July 11 th from 7:00 – 9:00 p.m. at the Brookside Community Center