Friends Ask — The Manassas Battlefield Park or Parkway?
By Friends of Manassas Battlefield
July 2005
MANASSAS, V.A.— Once again the Manassas Battlefield is under siege and in peril. The ongoing problem is the debilitating through traffic on the two active commuter routes that intersect at the heart of the park. Every weekday, over 28,000 vehicles queue up at the traffic light intersection of these two-lane roads.
Most are frustrated motorists just trying to get somewhere else. But ensnared in the through traffic are the equally frustrated visitors who had hoped to relive a few moments of history on the hallowed ground where that history was made, or to commemorate those who had sacrificed for beliefs held long ago.
Most visitors choose not to challenge the intimidating gridlock, not to even attempt to visit the interpretive sites of Second Manassas. Relatively few venture beyond the Visitor Center on Henry Hill where First Manassas was decided, and they will have hiked only a few of the park’s 5,000 acres when they depart for more hospitable attractions.
Those who do seek out the historic interpretive sites find that frequently these locations are inundated by the sight and sound of modern traffic.
The integrity of the Manassas Battlefield has been thoroughly compromised by the excessive through traffic, and this integrity must be restored before the park can be fully appreciated.
In 1988, federal law directed the Secretary of the Interior to conduct a study to identify viable alternate routes for the segments of US 29 and Rte 234 that intersect within the battlefield. That study (the Battlefield Bypass Study) is finally nearing completion, and will submit a final recommendation of either No Action or one of five build alternatives in a few months.
It is the No Action recommendation that the Friends fear most, for that decision would virtually end any hope of closing the roads in the park to through traffic. We expect it would only be a matter of time before commuters, frustrated by this two-lane bottleneck choking a fou-r and six-lane highway, would force the widening of US 29 to four lanes through the very heart of the Manassas Battlefield.
In short, we regard the Battlefield Bypass Study as the last opportunity to restore the integrity of the Manassas Battlefield.
The Study’s preferred build alternative is critically flawed. The US 29 bypass is nearly twice as long as the original route, and would replace the one existing traffic light intersection with three. This proposal would violate the pristine and historic northeast corner of the Manassas Battlefield to preserve a privately owned recreational park, and would compromise several other historic sites.
As one of four build option designs that would relocate US 29 north of the park, the preferred alternative would encourage extensive area commercial and residential development.
By contrast, the only remaining bypass proposal south of the park would be located in viewsheds that are already corrupted by development and I-66, and it would consequently have minimal additional adverse impact. The Study’s southern bypass proposal is totally dysfunctional, but the Friends have submitted modifications that would transform their design disaster into the most efficient alternative traffic mover.
The entire US 29 bypass can be a four-lane limited access highway free of intersections and traffic lights. We are trying to win support for this modified southern route as the best solution for both of the two major problems facing the park: where to relocate the through traffic devastating the park without causing additional problems, and how to provide the most efficient traffic mover past the battlefield.
We invite the reader to learn more about this issue by visiting the Friends’ Web site at www.fmnbp.org, and exploring the links in the Battlefield Bypasses section.
Parkway Study
There is a second transportation study that bodes even more dire consequences for the Manassas Battlefield. Virginia’s Tri-County Parkway (TCP) Study is maturing at the same time (the Bypass Study was delayed for months to facilitate their simultaneous debuts).
The TCP Study is tasked with defining the exact route of a major, and controversial, north-south commuter/trucking corridor that will connect Northern Virginia’s major highways, planned industrial centers, and Dulles International Airport’s air freight terminals. The TCP Study appears to focus on an alignment east of the Manassas Battlefield, but an alternative also under review would locate the corridor within the western border of the park.
Once authorized by Virginia, this new highway project will be a done deal only requiring funding for completion. The public hearings have all been held and the public comment period has expired. The TCP’s final act will be to provide the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the project.
Actually, Virginia and the involved counties have planned for this highway for decades. Land has been acquired and segments constructed since 1980 when the National Park Service was coerced into ceding right-of-way on the Manassas Battlefield for the project. Now there only remains connecting the completed segments over a few miles of Virginia piedmont, a few miles that includes the Manassas Battlefield.
There are cynics who believe that the only reason the Battlefield Bypass Study was resurrected after nearly 15 years on the shelf, was to provide the EIS required by federal law.
Virginia would have incited a heated controversy had it announced a study to complete this particular highway, with national outrage focused on locating that highway on a National Battlefield Park. But if the study were conducted by the feds as part of a project to “preserve the integrity of the battlefield…” an EIS produced by the Battlefield Bypass Study may be adopted by Virginia without additional public hearings, and a No Action recommendation would actually expedite its implementation.
The Friends are indebted to the Civil War Preservation Trust for citing the enveloping sprawl and commuter traffic within the Park when they named the Manassas Battlefield to their list of 10 most endangered battlefields.
The opinions and observations expressed in this article and on our Web site are the sole responsibility of the Friends of Manassas National Battlefield Park, and do not reflect the positions or policies of the National Park Service.
