Route 250 Bypass

From Cvillepedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

The Route 250 Bypass is the largely limited-access portion of U.S. Route 250 north of the business route. The four-lane highway runs east-west through the city of Charlottesville between Hydraulic Road and the Albemarle County boundary at Free Bridge.

History

Planning

Early planning (1934-1945)

The first survey for a highway through Charlottesville was made in 1934, commencing at the eastern city limits and extending westward across Locust Avenue, Park Street, up Rugby Avenue, across Rugby Road, and down Barracks Road to Route 29.[1] In January 1935, City Council instructed the city manager to authorize the State Highway Department to proceed with construction of the first section, from Free Bridge to Locust Avenue; this section is still known as Long Street. The city then acquired several properties for the project: the Sinclair property at the southwest corner of Park Street and Rugby Avenue for $2,000 in January 1936; property at the southwest corner of Locust and Watson Avenues for $1,100 in September 1936; and in November 1936, a 50-foot strip of land approximately 1,700 feet long running eastward from Park Street toward Locust Avenue, along with an 80-foot parcel on Park Street for an entrance.

The bypass reemerged as a topic of discussion after World War II. At a Rotary Club meeting on July 26, 1944, F.R. "Butch" Slaughter listed "good by-pass for Route 250" among other postwar improvements.[2]

On November 6, 1945, City Manager Seth Burnley presented City Council with two routing options: the route along Rugby Avenue and Barracks Road for which a survey had already been made, and an alternate plan "calling for a by-passing of the city completely by a swing of the road north of the city from Free Bridge, across Route 20 to a point on the present road at the second underpass west of the city."[3] Councilman William S. Hildreth mentioned plans to request a dual-lane highway from Shadwell to Monticello and across the south side of the city to connect with the University. Council authorized Burnley to consult with state officials on the various plans.

Advocacy and survey (1946-1948)

On October 19, 1946, the City Planning Commission approved a recommendation for a bypass that would relieve the city of through traffic on both Routes 29 and 250.[4] The Charlottesville and Albemarle Chamber of Commerce highway committee listed the bypass as its top priority for the upcoming State Highway Commission hearing, noting that existing facilities hampered truck traffic through the city, particularly due to low overhead bridges such as the one at Fourteenth and West Main Streets.[5]

At a regional State Highway Commission hearing on October 23, 1946, City Manager Seth Burnley presented the case for a bypass, describing truck traffic through Charlottesville as "increasing, giving rise to a situation which is growing worse from day to day."[6] He cited three recent accidents, including two involving gasoline spills from tank trucks and a third in which a truck loaded with explosives failed to clear the Fourteenth Street overhead bridge. Gilbert S. Campbell, chairman of the Chamber's highway committee, introduced Burnley at the hearing. However, the commission's tentative allocations for 1947-48 included only $50,000 for Albemarle County, earmarked for improvements near Scottsville, with nothing for the bypass.

By October 1947, the State Highway Department had expressed interest in building a bypass, and both City Council and the Chamber of Commerce had approved the project.[7] That year, the City Manager requested the State Highway Department to survey a bypass route around the city entirely to the north; this survey was completed in 1948 but was not favored by the department due to its cost, estimated at over $2 million.[1] A separate survey under R. Cary Ambler, resident engineer for Albemarle and Greene counties, began in March 1948 and was completed in May, covering approximately 7.5 miles.[8][9]

A survey undertaken by the Chamber of Commerce around this time was sent to 175 businesses and only 75 responded. Of these, 41 were opposed to the bypass and 34 were in favor.[10]

Route debate (1949-1950)

In 1949, the City Manager requested a new survey for a route leaving the city at McIntire Park and skirting the northern city limits to meet Route 29 just north of the Meadow Creek sewage disposal plant.[1] This left two northern routes under consideration: the original "inside" route along Rugby Avenue and Barracks Road, and the new "outside" route that would follow Long Street from Free Bridge to Locust Avenue, run south of Watson Avenue to Park Street, tunnel under Park Street to Rugby Avenue, then bear north at the Southern Railway bridge near McIntire Park to skirt the city limits. If approved, the new bypass would replace the existing Route 250 alignment along Free Bridge Road, High Street, Preston and Grady Avenues, Rugby Road, and University Avenue.[11]

The State Highway Department favored the inside route as shorter, but City Manager James E. Bowen and other city officials opposed it, believing it would hurt property values along Rugby Avenue and that the cost of acquiring right-of-way through developed residential areas would be prohibitively high.[12] Critics also argued that residents deserved to be spared heavy day-and-night truck traffic. Under the proposed cost-sharing arrangement, the federal government would pay half the construction cost, with the city and state splitting the remainder equally; right-of-way costs would be shared equally among all three.[11]

On December 30, 1949, the State Highway Department announced that Route 250 bypass construction was slated for 1950, with a federal administrator asked to study both routes.[11] By June 1950, the state and federal governments had approved the first leg of the outside route to McIntire Park, estimated to cost $312,000, of which the city's share would be approximately $85,000.[13] However, city officials expressed hesitancy about beginning the project without a guarantee that the entire bypass would be completed. On June 30, 1950, City Manager Bowen, five members of Council, and Randolph H. Perry, executive secretary of the Chamber of Commerce, met in Richmond with General James A. Anderson, chairman of the State Highway Commission, to resolve this impasse.

The Young Men's Business Club unanimously endorsed the outside route on July 14, 1950.[14] Councilman-elect William R. Hill explained the plan and dismissed a southern bypass recently proposed by opponents, saying it would not have state support and would cost much more to construct. State Senator Edward O. McCue Jr. addressed concerns about the proposed routing near McIntire High School, assuring that sidewalks and other safety facilities would be provided.

Proposed route of the Route 250 Bypass as presented at the July 17, 1950 public hearing

A public hearing on July 17, 1950 drew approximately 30 organized opponents, some of whom proposed a southern bypass as an alternative.[1] No such route had ever been surveyed. Following the hearing, City Council instructed City Manager Bowen to request a formal response from the State Highway Department.

Burton Marye, assistant chief engineer, replied in a detailed letter explaining the route selection process.[15] He explained that a traffic survey had analyzed origin and destination patterns for through traffic, traffic with one end in the city, and intra-city traffic. The survey found that approximately 400 vehicles per day traveled east-west on Route 250 without stopping, while another 400 interchanged between Route 250 west and Route 29 north — four times the number interchanging with Route 29 south. The inside route along Rugby Avenue and Barracks Road would serve the most traffic but had high right-of-way costs. Construction costs for the inside alignment were estimated at $1.6 million for a 20-year benefit of $2.47 million, whereas the recommended outside alignment had construction costs estimated at $1.65 million against 20-year benefits of $2.3 million — comparable benefits to the inside route at lower total cost once right-of-way acquisition was factored in.

As for a southern bypass, Marye wrote that while no detailed field surveys had been conducted, inspection of the ground and topographic maps indicated such a route would either follow a circuitous route through the city, or require constructing new crossings over the Rivanna River and C&O Railway to bypass the city entirely to the south, making it much longer and more expensive than the northern route. The latter route was also judged only useful for through traffic, providing "no value to traffic having both ends of its trip within Charlottesville, or to traffic having one end" in the city.[15]

Final design (1951)

In January 1951, city officials conferred with the State Highway Department and Federal Public Works Administration on preliminary plans for overpasses and underpasses at the Long Street-Locust Avenue and Park Street-Rugby Avenue intersections.[16] By this time the route had been approved by city, state, and federal agencies, with intersection designs the only remaining issue. Proposals included a tunnel under Locust Avenue to address grade issues on Long Street, and a tunnel under Park Street at Rugby Avenue to eliminate a hazardous intersection.

On January 24, 1951, the Chamber of Commerce highway committee recommended extending the bypass from its planned terminus at Route 29 north all the way to Route 29 south, creating a complete bypass of the city.[17][18]

Construction

Right-of-way and contracting (1951-1953)

In early 1951, construction of the first leg of the bypass was scheduled to begin that year. Burton Marye reported that money was on hand and a final survey had been received, with work to begin as soon as plans were approved by city, state, and federal agencies.[19] However, by April, highway officials informed City Manager Bowen that final plans had not been completed and would not be ready for several months due to a shortage of labor.[20]

Final right-of-way plans were received in April 1952, and acquisition of the 23 parcels needed for the highway began.[21] On July 9, 1952, City Council met in special session for nearly eight hours to discuss rights of way and approve offers for the needed properties.[22] Council designated the bypass a limited access highway, meaning it would be accessible only at certain points, with parallel service roads providing access to adjacent properties; the State Highway Department had already designated the portion outside the city as limited access.

On August 29, 1952, Council awarded the construction contract to the Faulconer Construction Company and S.L. Williamson Company, both of Charlottesville, who submitted a joint bid of $652,204.54.[23] The first phase would run the eastern end to the northern city limits west of the Southern Railway tracks. With engineering and contingencies, the estimated cost was $717,425, plus approximately $175,000 for right-of-way acquisition. The federal government would pay half the construction cost, with the city and state each paying one quarter; the city also bore sole responsibility for relocating public utilities. Council appropriated $176,500 toward the project, having already appropriated $76,500.[24]

Construction on the city section was underway by March 1953.[25] That month, the State Highway Department advertised bids for the second link, a 1.14-mile segment entirely in Albemarle County running from the city limits to the connection with Route 29 north.[26] The connection with Route 29 would be temporary until a planned extension could carry the bypass west to Route 250 and possibly south to Route 29. On April 29, 1953, the same two firms won the county link contract with a joint bid of $221,950, covering 1.14 miles of 24-foot roadway including a bridge to carry St. Anne's Road over the bypass at Meadowbrook Heights.[27] The city link, then under construction, extended 1.22 miles and included bridges at Locust Avenue, Park Street, and over the Southern Railway in McIntire Park, at a cost of $716,650.

Opening (1954)

The initial segment ran from Free Bridge on Route 250 east of the city to an intersection with Route 29 north of the city limits.[28] The bypass was four lanes wide from Free Bridge to the Southern Railway crossing at McIntire Park, and two lanes (with provisions for future four-laning) from there to its junction with Route 29.[29]

A dedication ceremony was held on July 15, 1954 near the Locust Avenue viaduct, where State Highway Department officials turned the city section of the bypass over to the city.[30] All barricades were removed and the traffic light at the western terminus on Route 29 was activated by noon on July 16, 1954. The same day, a 2.65-mile stretch of dual highway on Route 29 north of the city also opened to regular traffic.[30]

Beautification

In February 1954, Peoples National Bank announced it would fund approximately $7,500 for landscaping along the new bypass.[31] The planting scheme, developed by the landscape division of the State Highway Department, included approximately 1,000 white dogwood, 30 pink dogwood, over 1,000 multiflora and Wichuriana roses, 250 rhododendron, 250 pines, 175 American redbud, and 525 mountain laurel. The city parks department handled planting within the city limits while the highway department planted in the county.

Western extension

At the time of the 1954 opening, plans called for extending the bypass from Route 29 to Route 250 west of the city, and ultimately to connect with Route 29 south of the city.[28]

Route of the Route 250 Bypass extensions from the April 29, 1961 Daily Progress

In March 1955, the State Highway Commission made its first allocation toward the extension: $200,000, not enough to complete the project.[32] A second $200,000 allocation followed in March 1956, bringing the total to $400,000.[33] W.W. Shields, resident highway engineer for Albemarle and Greene counties, said $400,000 was "probably far short of the amount necessary" because the extension would require grade separations at Barracks Road and the Chesapeake and Ohio Railway west of the city, as well as cloverleaf interchanges at each end. Route 250 was on the National Interstate Highway System, and federal highway aid legislation was pending in Congress.[33] Randolph H. Perry, executive secretary of the Chamber of Commerce, commented that "the full function of the bypass is not served as long as traffic from it is diverted back into the city at its present western terminus."[33]

On May 18, 1956, Perry led a Chamber delegation to the State Highway Commission hearing in Richmond, asking the commission to make its tentative allocations permanent and to complete the bypass extension as soon as possible.[34] The delegation warned that some property along the proposed route was being developed, and any delay would result in greatly increased right-of-way costs. Accompanying Perry were Delegate Henry B. Gordon and R.E. Bibb; Gilbert S. Campbell, chairman of the Chamber's highway committee, could not be present.[34]

In June 1957, the State Highway Department announced right-of-way plans for the extension.[35] The new link would be approximately 1¾ miles long, beginning where the bypass ended at Route 29 north of the city and ending about one-quarter mile south of Route 250 west. No requests were received for a public hearing on the plans. The department noted that future plans called for extension of the bypass to Route 29 south of the city.[35]

Right-of-way acquisition proceeded through 1958. The Bartholomew master plan, released in May 1958, noted that the State Highway Department was obtaining rights-of-way for the extension, which was eventually to be continued from Route 250 west to Route 29 south, completing the bypass. The plan also recommended widening the existing bypass to four lanes between High Street and St Clair Avenue and between Rugby Avenue and Route 29 north.[36]

The first condemnation suit was completed on January 23, 1959, when a five-man commission awarded Camman C. Duke $6,590 for 1¾ acres of his property on Barracks Road needed for a bridge.[37] Duke had asked $14,000 to $20,000, noting that while the road would pass close to his home, the bridge would have no access to Barracks Road, providing no benefit to his property. The Highway Department had offered $5,025. Three property owners had already settled, while a suit had been filed against William H. Faulconer for land at the proposed Route 250 west intersection. Highway officials said condemnation proceedings would probably be necessary against Lester Cooper, Dr. McLemore Birdsong, W.C. Dorsey, the P.H. Faulconer estate, Mr. and Mrs. David Gibson, Belfield School, and Bellemead Development Corporation.[37]

On January 28, 1959, the State Highway Department opened bids for the extension. Faulconer Construction Company of Charlottesville submitted the low bid of $988,507 for construction of the 2¼-mile segment.[38] Plans called for the roadway to pass over Barracks Road without providing access, and to continue under Old Ivy Road, the Chesapeake and Ohio Railway tracks, and Route 250, ending in a half-cloverleaf on the south side of Route 250 near the entrance to Commonwealth Courts.[38] The extension would be two lanes wide except at the Route 29 and Route 250 intersections, where it would widen to four lanes. In February 1959, the contract was awarded at $988,538.[39]

Construction began in March 1959.[40] By December 1959, five condemnation suits had been completed, with ten remaining.[41]

The final condemnation was completed on July 12, 1961, when commissioners awarded J. Deering Danielson $69,176 for 22.88 acres south of Route 250 between Commonwealth Courts and the Bellair subdivision.[42] The half-cloverleaf interchange had been built on this property, which fronted 1,032 feet on Route 250 and extended 3,500 feet to the south. Resident Highway Engineer H.W. Runkle said the bypass link would be opened to traffic before the end of the month. E.V. Walker, one of the attorneys acquiring property for the Highway Department, said he had not yet been instructed to acquire property for the next link to Route 29 south, but expected instructions soon.[42]

Representatives of the State Highway Department and the U.S. Bureau of Public Roads conducted a final inspection on July 24, 1961.[43] The extension was just over two miles in length and had a two-lane, 24-foot roadway with design provisions for future four-laning.[29] At the west end, where the bypass crossed Old Ivy Road, the C&O Railway, and Route 250, three-tenths of a mile was built as divided highway in preparation for future four-laning. Where the bypass crossed Barracks Road, parallel bridges would be built later when the road was widened.[29]

The western extension opened to traffic at 4:30 p.m. on August 2, 1961, originally having been scheduled for completion in fall 1960.[39] The opening had been delayed to await painting of the centerlines.[39] With land acquisition, the total cost came to $1,253,000.[39] Chamber of Commerce President Gilbert S. Campbell and Executive Secretary Randolph H. Perry were present at the northern end of the bypass for the opening.[44] Completion of the bypass was expected to relieve traffic on Emmet Street and Ivy Road, and permit highway engineers to proceed with plans for widening Emmet Street from the north city limits to the Chesapeake and Ohio Railway bridge near the entrance to Copeley Hill.[39]

Southern extension

In May 1960, the Chamber of Commerce requested a "token allocation" to extend the bypass from Route 250 west to Route 29 south of the city, but the State Highway Commission denied the request.[45] As of 1961, state planners envisioned this third and final link passing between the Bellair subdivision and two small mountains at the western edge of the city: Observatory Hill, home to the McCormick Observatory, and Lewis Mountain.[40] The State Highway Department allocated $225,000 for preliminary work on the segment. City, county, and University of Virginia officials urged the state to build the final link as quickly as possible, since heavy traffic continued at the Route 250-29 intersection near the Lady Astor tennis courts, and Route 29 traffic still passed through the University grounds on Emmet Street.[40]

In March 1962, the State Highway Commission allocated an additional $250,000 for the extension, bringing the total to $475,000.[46] The Highway Department had originally estimated the project would cost $700,000 to $1 million, but revised its plans to proceed with the funds available; an elaborate interchange at Route 29 would not be built immediately. A Daily Progress editorial called the bypass "the most urgently needed improvement to U.S. 29," noting that its completion would "eliminate the worst remaining bottleneck for through traffic on the whole length of the highway between Fairfax County and the North Carolina line."[46] By May 1962, no public hearing had been requested on the proposed route, which would extend the bypass from Route 250 approximately 1.5 miles to the south.[47]

In January 1963, the State Highway Department announced it would request bids on the extension during the first half of the year.[48] The approximately 1.2-mile link would run from the half-cloverleaf on Route 250 west of the city to Route 29 south of the new city limits, intersecting Route 29 north of the Moore's Creek crossing.[48][49] As with the western extension, the roadway was planned as two lanes, with only the original section from Free Bridge to McIntire Park built as a four-lane divided highway. The southern terminus would have a simple intersection with Route 29, suitable for later replacement with bridges to separate traffic lanes.[48]

In February 1963, the Albemarle County Planning Commission was asked to reapprove University Heights, a 21-lot subdivision between Bellair and University property on Observatory Hill that had been approved in 1958 but never recorded.[50] The county planners "reluctantly" approved the subdivision but instructed that the owners be notified formally that the bypass would cross the area.[50] The subdivision, for which Peoples National Bank served as trustee, fell within the city's three-mile extraterritorial jurisdiction; two weeks later, the Charlottesville Planning Commission delayed its decision pending a legal opinion from the city attorney.[51] In April, the city commission rejected the subdivision; highway contracts were due to be advertised the following month.[52]

In May 1963, the State Highway Commission allocated an additional $325,000 for the bypass link.[53] In June, bids were tentatively scheduled for October 2, 1963, with all projects in the final stages of planning and right-of-way acquisition.[49]

By August 1963, land acquisition had begun for the ten pieces of property needed for the link.[54] Condemnation commissioners were to be named in Albemarle Circuit Court for the University Heights land, owned by Mrs. Angelica Hildreth and held in trust by Virginia National Bank (formerly Peoples National Bank) for the children of her husband William S. Hildreth—who, as a councilman in 1945, had been among those discussing possible bypass routes.[54] The State Highway Department already owned the needed right-of-way for some distance south of the Route 250 terminus. Land south of the terminus at modern-day Fontaine Avenue was also being acquired for a future cloverleaf intersection, though the first stage of construction was planned to end with a simple intersection.[54]

Coordination with Interstate 64

Map published in the Daily Progress on December 7, 1963, showing proposed alignments for Interstate 64 through Charlottesville. The bypass extension is visible as "Proposed 29-A" running south from Route 250 to Route 29.

The southern extension was planned simultaneously with Interstate 64, and the two projects were explicitly coordinated. At the time, Route 29 south of Charlottesville ran along what is now Fontaine Avenue Extended. The original plan called for the bypass to meet Route 29 at this location with a simple intersection, to be replaced later by a cloverleaf.[48][54] However, highway officials were already incorporating "preliminary plans for a further extension of US 29-A to a point of connection with US 29 farther south."[55]

In December 1963, a consultants' report by Hayes, Seay, Mattern and Mattern of Roanoke recommended routing Interstate 64 south of Charlottesville, noting that the interstate would cross "the proposed US 29-A (Bypass)" then under development.[56][55] City Council endorsed this route on December 10, 1963, citing in part that it would "complete a bypass around the entire City."[57] Bids on the bypass extension were expected on February 5, 1964, with the final interchange design depending on the I-64 routing decision.[58]

The bypass was ultimately extended south to meet Interstate 64, with a cloverleaf interchange at that junction. A diamond interchange was built where the bypass crossed the old Route 29 alignment (now Fontaine Avenue Extended), while the bypass assumed the Route 29 designation. Today this segment is signed as U.S. Route 29 rather than Route 250, with the former Route 29 alignment through the University grounds designated Route 29 Business.

The southern extension was completed in 1966.[59]

Later improvements

The Long Street section was widened in the early 1990s. City Council considered purchasing some of the homes that were purchased by the Virginia Department of Transportation for the widening.[60] Three homes that had been taken through eminent domain by VDOT were later deemed to be habitable. There was a proposal to use these as rental houses for families with moderate incomes. Access would have to travel through Burnley-Moran Elementary School.[61]

This is the 250 bypass today with the median running next to St Clair Ave on both sides of the highway. Before the 1990s the highway was an open intersection. In 1993 a median would be put up dividing the highway.

A project to replace Free Bridge was undertaken in the early 1990s.[62] For most of the 20th Century up until the early 1990s there was a highway intersection that occurred along St Clair Ave and went across the 250 bypass. This intersection ran perpendicular to what is now Long Street. Cars from both sides of St Clair would be able to cross the Highway as an intersection. It was not until around 1993 that a median would be put up dividing the highway.

Challenges to speed limit (2012)

The speed limit on the road is sign-posted at 35 miles per hour. In the spring of 2012, six motorists who received speeding tickets filed a motion to have their violations dismissed because the speed limit is artificially low. The plaintiffs want to be able to see a copy of a 1967 engineering study which was conducted in order to have the speed limit set at 35 mph as opposed to the 55 mph the road is designed for.[63]

Interchanges and intersections

From west to east, access to the bypass is from the following exchanges:

References

  1. ↑ 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 Web. Bypass Action Slated Tuesday, Daily Progress Digitized Microfilm, Lindsay family, 1950-07-31, retrieved 2026-01-14. Print. page 1,3.
  2. ↑ Web. Need Of Postwar Planning Urged, Daily Progress Digitized Microfilm, Lindsay family, 1944-07-26, retrieved 2026-01-14. Print. page 3.
  3. ↑ Web. Council, Daily Progress Digitized Microfilm, Lindsay family, 1945-11-06, retrieved 2026-01-14. Print. page 9.
  4. ↑ Web. Through Traffic By-Pass And New Streets Urged, Daily Progress Digitized Microfilm, Lindsay family, 1946-10-19, retrieved 2026-01-14. Print. page 1.
  5. ↑ Web. Chamber Plans 5 Road Requests, Daily Progress Digitized Microfilm, Lindsay family, 1946-10-22, retrieved 2026-01-14. Print. page 1.
  6. ↑ Web. 250 Bypass And Scottsville Road Urged At Hearing, Daily Progress Digitized Microfilm, Lindsay family, 1946-10-23, retrieved 2026-01-14. Print. page 1.
  7. ↑ Web. Advantages Of A By-Pass, Daily Progress Digitized Microfilm, Lindsay family, 1947-10-22, retrieved 2026-01-14. Print. page 4.
  8. ↑ Web. Work on Bypass Survey to Begin, Staff Reports, Daily Progress Digitized Microfilm, Lindsay family, March 10, 1948, retrieved December 12, 2016 from University of Virginia Library. Print. March 10, 1948 page 3.
  9. ↑ Web. Bypass Survey Work Completed, Daily Progress Digitized Microfilm, Lindsay family, 1948-05-10, retrieved 2026-01-14. Print. page 1.
  10. ↑ Web. Alternate Street Bus Stops Urged, Staff Reports, Daily Progress Digitized Microfilm, Lindsay family, March 26, 1948, retrieved December 23, 2016 from University of Virginia Library. Print. March 26, 1948 page 3.
  11. ↑ 11.0 11.1 11.2 Web. Route 250 Bypass Slated For Construction Next Year By Virginia Highway Department, Daily Progress Digitized Microfilm, Lindsay family, 1949-12-30, retrieved 2026-01-14. Print. page 1.
  12. ↑ Web. Which By-Pass Route?, Daily Progress Digitized Microfilm, Lindsay family, 1949-06-11, retrieved 2026-01-14. Print. page 4.
  13. ↑ Web. City Officials Will Discuss Rt. 250 Bypass With Anderson, Daily Progress Digitized Microfilm, Lindsay family, 1950-06-29, retrieved 2026-01-14. Print. page 1.
  14. ↑ Web. YMBC Endorses Rt. 250 By-Pass, Daily Progress Digitized Microfilm, Lindsay family, 1950-07-14, retrieved 2026-01-14. Print. page 1.
  15. ↑ 15.0 15.1 Web. Engineer Replies To Inquiry Concerning Southern By-Pass, Daily Progress Digitized Microfilm, Lindsay family, 1950-07-31, retrieved 2026-01-14. Print. page 2.
  16. ↑ Web. Rt. 250 Bypass Discussed Here, Daily Progress Digitized Microfilm, Lindsay family, 1951-01-10, retrieved 2026-01-14. Print. page 3.
  17. ↑ Web. C. of C. To Push Bypass Project, Daily Progress Digitized Microfilm, Lindsay family, 1951-01-24, retrieved 2026-01-14. Print. page 1.
  18. ↑ Web. Road Projects, Daily Progress Digitized Microfilm, Lindsay family, 1951-02-07, retrieved 2026-01-14. Print. page 15.
  19. ↑ Web. Road Funds, Daily Progress Digitized Microfilm, Lindsay family, 1951-02-23, retrieved 2026-01-14. Print. page 5.
  20. ↑ Web. Route 20 Plans Not Completed, Daily Progress Digitized Microfilm, Lindsay family, 1951-04-13, retrieved 2026-01-14. Print. page 5.
  21. ↑ Web. Bypass Right of Way Sought, Daily Progress Digitized Microfilm, Lindsay family, 1952-04-23, retrieved 2026-01-14. Print. page 3.
  22. ↑ Web. Bypass Designated Limited Access Road, Daily Progress Digitized Microfilm, Lindsay family, 1952-07-10, retrieved 2026-01-14. Print. page 1.
  23. ↑ Web. Bypass Contract Approved By Council, Daily Progress Digitized Microfilm, Lindsay family, 1952-08-29, retrieved 2026-01-14. Print. page 3.
  24. ↑ Web. Council Appropriates Bypass Funds, Daily Progress Digitized Microfilm, Lindsay family, 1952-09-03, retrieved 2026-01-14. Print. page 1.
  25. ↑ Web. Board Asks New Truck Route Link, Daily Progress Digitized Microfilm, Lindsay family, 1953-03-28, retrieved 2026-01-14. Print. page 1.
  26. ↑ Web. State Asks Bids On Bypass Link, Daily Progress Digitized Microfilm, Lindsay family, 1953-03-27, retrieved 2026-01-14. Print. page 1.
  27. ↑ Web. Local Firms Win Bypass Project, Daily Progress Digitized Microfilm, Lindsay family, 1953-04-29, retrieved 2026-01-14. Print. page 3.
  28. ↑ 28.0 28.1 Web. Bypass Opens For Regular Use, Daily Progress Digitized Microfilm, Lindsay family, 1954-07-13, retrieved 2026-01-14. Print. page 2.
  29. ↑ 29.0 29.1 29.2 Web. New Bypass Link to be Opened Next Week, Daily Progress Digitized Microfilm, Lindsay family, 1961-07-29, retrieved 2026-01-17. Print. page 13.
  30. ↑ 30.0 30.1 Web. Rt. 250 Bypass Opens Officially, Daily Progress Digitized Microfilm, Lindsay family, 1954-07-16, retrieved 2026-01-14. Print. page 5.
  31. ↑ Web. Elaborate Plans Are Revealed For Beautifying Bypass Road, Daily Progress Digitized Microfilm, Lindsay family, 1954-02-17, retrieved 2026-01-14.
  32. ↑ Web. Road Funds Are Marked For 29 South, Bypass Extension, Daily Progress Digitized Microfilm, Lindsay family, 1955-03-25, retrieved 2026-01-17. Print. page 1.
  33. ↑ 33.0 33.1 33.2 Web. $200,000 Marked For 250 Bypass, Daily Progress Digitized Microfilm, Lindsay family, 1956-03-30, retrieved 2026-01-17. Print. page 1.
  34. ↑ 34.0 34.1 Web. Funds To Finish Bypass Urged, Daily Progress Digitized Microfilm, Lindsay family, 1956-05-18, retrieved 2026-01-17. Print. page 1.
  35. ↑ 35.0 35.1 Web. No Hearing Asked On Bypass Link, Daily Progress Digitized Microfilm, Lindsay family, 1957-06-21, retrieved 2026-01-17. Print. page 13.
  36. ↑ Web. East-West, Daily Progress Digitized Microfilm, Lindsay family, 1958-05-05, retrieved 2026-01-17. Print. page 14.
  37. ↑ 37.0 37.1 Web. Condemnation Suits Begin For Bypass, Daily Progress Digitized Microfilm, Lindsay family, 1959-01-24, retrieved 2026-01-17. Print. page 3.
  38. ↑ 38.0 38.1 Web. Faulconer Submits Low Bid on Bypass, Daily Progress Digitized Microfilm, Lindsay family, 1959-01-29, retrieved 2026-01-17. Print. page 17.
  39. ↑ 39.0 39.1 39.2 39.3 39.4 Web. Bypass Link Will Be Open Late Today, Daily Progress Digitized Microfilm, Lindsay family, 1961-08-02, retrieved 2026-01-17. Print. page 13.
  40. ↑ 40.0 40.1 40.2 Web. New Bypass Link Opens Next Month, Daily Progress Digitized Microfilm, Lindsay family, 1961-06-17, retrieved 2026-01-17. Print. page 11.
  41. ↑ Web. Ten Condemnation Suits for Land Taken for the Construction, Daily Progress Digitized Microfilm, Lindsay family, 1959-12-09, retrieved 2026-01-17. Print. page 19.
  42. ↑ 42.0 42.1 Web. Final Bypass Property Suit Completed, Daily Progress Digitized Microfilm, Lindsay family, 1961-07-13, retrieved 2026-01-17. Print. page 21.
  43. ↑ Web. Final Inspection of Bypass Link Scheduled, Daily Progress Digitized Microfilm, Lindsay family, 1961-07-24, retrieved 2026-01-17. Print. page 13.
  44. ↑ Web. Bypass Opening, Daily Progress Digitized Microfilm, Lindsay family, 1961-08-03, retrieved 2026-01-17. Print. page 21.
  45. ↑ Web. Token Allocation For Bypass Denied, Daily Progress Digitized Microfilm, Lindsay family, 1960-05-27, retrieved 2026-01-17. Print. page 15.
  46. ↑ 46.0 46.1 Web. Welcome Highway News, Daily Progress Digitized Microfilm, Lindsay family, 1962-03-22, retrieved 2026-01-19. Print. page 4.
  47. ↑ Web. No Public Hearing On Bypass Requested, Daily Progress Digitized Microfilm, Lindsay family, 1962-05-05, retrieved 2026-01-19. Print. page 13.
  48. ↑ 48.0 48.1 48.2 48.3 Web. State To Ask Bids on Final Bypass Link, Daily Progress Digitized Microfilm, Lindsay family, 1963-01-14, retrieved 2026-01-19. Print. page 13.
  49. ↑ 49.0 49.1 Web. Highway Bids To Be Asked In This Area, Daily Progress Digitized Microfilm, Lindsay family, 1963-06-28, retrieved 2026-01-19. Print. page 17.
  50. ↑ 50.0 50.1 Web. County Approves Three Subdivisions, Daily Progress Digitized Microfilm, Lindsay family, 1963-02-06, retrieved 2026-01-19. Print. page 19.
  51. ↑ Web. Planning Body Delays Action On Subdivision, Daily Progress Digitized Microfilm, Lindsay family, 1963-02-20, retrieved 2026-01-19. Print. page 15.
  52. ↑ Web. Subdivision In Bypass Path Is Rejected, Daily Progress Digitized Microfilm, Lindsay family, 1963-04-11, retrieved 2026-01-19. Print. page 28.
  53. ↑ Web. McCue Urges Attendance From Area At Highway Commission Hearing, Daily Progress Digitized Microfilm, Lindsay family, 1963-05-21, retrieved 2026-01-19. Print. page 13.
  54. ↑ 54.0 54.1 54.2 54.3 Web. Bypass Link Acquisition of Land Begins, Daily Progress Digitized Microfilm, Lindsay family, 1963-08-17, retrieved 2026-01-19. Print. page 9.
  55. ↑ 55.0 55.1 Web. General Descriptions Of Proposed Interstate 64 Routes, Daily Progress Digitized Microfilm, Lindsay family, 1963-12-13, retrieved 2026-01-19. Print. page 14.
  56. ↑ Web. Council Expected to Back Southern Route, Daily Progress Digitized Microfilm, Lindsay family, 1963-12-09, retrieved 2026-01-19. Print. page 17.
  57. ↑ Web. Route South Of City Endorsed by Council, Daily Progress Digitized Microfilm, Lindsay family, 1963-12-10, retrieved 2026-01-19. Print. page 13.
  58. ↑ Web. Bypass Bids On Extension To Be Asked, Daily Progress Digitized Microfilm, Lindsay family, 1963-12-12, retrieved 2026-01-19. Print. page 21.
  59. ↑ Web. Mapmikey's South Carolina Highways Page, April 26, 2005
  60. ↑ Web. Charlottesville City Council meeting minutes, .pdf, Council Chambers, City of Charlottesville, April 15, 1991.. . Also available in older archive.
  61. ↑ Web. Charlottesville City Council meeting minutes, .pdf, Council Chambers, City of Charlottesville, May 20, 1991.. . Also available in older archive.
  62. ↑ Web. Charlottesville City Council meeting minutes, .pdf, Council Chambers, City of Charlottesville, June 17, 1991.. . Also available in older archive.
  63. ↑ Web. Accused speeders demand to see city study that set speed limit, Daily Progress Staff Reports, Daily Progress, Lee Enterprises, April 4, 2012, retrieved April 10, 2012.
Retrieved from "https://cvillepedia.org/index.php?title=Route_250_Bypass&oldid=83081"