Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1957-01-28
State Plan to Extend
Shirley Highway Hit
Virginia Group
Would Prefer
Separate Road

A proposed route for an extern
sion of Shirley highway has
drawn opposition from the
Northern Virginia Planning and
Economic Development Commits
sion.
In a report released today by
Charles Robinson, executive di-
rector, the commission went on
record for a highway completely
separated from existing U. S.
Route l and running several
miles to the west.
A report by a State Highway
Department consulting firm re-
commended a route that would
cross existing Route / in two
places between Fairfax County
and the southerly boundary of
Prince William County, the end
OF the Northern Virginia COM
missions jurisdiction. The pro-
posed route runs close to Route 1
Throughout its length.
The superhighway is part Of
the 1,012 miles of limited-access
expressway to be built in Vir-
GINA under the new Federal aid
program.
Proposed Route Traced
The route proposed by the
State Highway Departments
consulting firm begins at the
intersection of Shirley highway
and Route / in Fairfax County
just north of Woodbridge. Going
south. it bypasses Woodbridge to
the west, crosses Route below
woodbridge, parallels Route /
to the east for about six miles.
recrosSes between Dumfries and
Triangle, parallels the existing
road to the west to just below
Fredericksburg and then crosses
Route l again and continues to
Richmond on the east side Of
the present highway.
i The Northern Virginia Com.
missions report said that it
"disagrees strongly with the con-
sultant'S recommendation" and
suggests a separate road for four
primary reasons.
1 Costs of right-of-way and con.
struction would be less, traffic
capacity would be greater, it
would be better civil defense
planning and it would strengthen
the economy of the commercial
development along existing
Route /.
The planning commission 8
tentative route would vary from
about two to several miles west
!. of Route l with no crossings Of
the existing highway.
"Right-of-way costs along and
across Route / versus several
miles to the west would be prob
ably 20 to l." the report said.
The western location would in.
volve less excavation and drain.
age expenditures" The commits
sion said the consultant's route
,goes through considerable"
swampy terrain which could be
aYoided farther west.
The report said the crossing
and recrossing of Route / is
unnecessary and unwise" from
"a standpoint of overpass costs
and disruption of traffic on
Route /.
Rise in Traffic Seen
A great increase in traffic Is
predicted in the area involved.
A superhighway entirely di-
vorced" from Route would have
ia greater capacity, the report
said.
In the event of disaster, sabo-
tage or military action, two roads
entirely separated would provide
alternate facilities" for evacua-
ton, the report says. Sabotage
to either of the consultant's pro-
posed grade separation structures
could possibly knock out both
roads"
The commission said that the
farther the new location is sep
arated from the existing Route ],
the less effect it will have upon
the existing commercial develop
ment along the present road"
The commission said Route 1
would continue to get the local
traffic if it is separated entirely
from the new highway, but the
new road would tend to get
nearly all of the traffic if it is
close to the existing road.
~