To the Editor:
I disagree with Mr. Spiegel's expressed concerns [Letter, “Decision on Re-Paving,” April 7] about road resurfacing in the Ft. Hunt area. There's no need to "speculate" about how the decision was made — Scott Surovell outlined the reasons why this resurfacing is long overdue in his comments in May 2015 which was widely distributed throughout the district. http://scottsurovell.blogspot.com/2015/05/weekly-column-major-paving-operations.html
The county (and the state) invested too little in road repairs in the recent past.
I appreciate that professionals at VDOT were able to make the decision to resurface our streets rather than having it be decided by the local (or state) legislature. Mr. Spiegel seems to be concerned that having professionals do their job is somehow a bad thing — I do not.
Upkeep of infrastructure is vitally important. We owe it to those whose taxes paid for our roads (in some cases 50-plus years ago) to take care of them. We also owe it to ourselves and our neighbors to take care of common areas. It's hard to imagine a more cost-effective infrastructure maintenance procedure than road milling and resurfacing (which reuses the recycled asphalt). I'm no expert, but it seems obvious to me as I walk our neighborhood that patching and tar are not appropriate for road surfaces that often have cracks every 6 inches or less. Areas that have been recently milled often have potholes and large cracks penetrating deep into the substrate which seems to indicate the maintenance resurfacing may have already been delayed too long. Rebuilding roads from the ground up is far more expensive than periodic maintenance.
There's a well-known aphorism about being "penny-wise and pound foolish." One could make the case here, I think, that arguing against necessary road resurfacing is penny foolish, especially given the small amount that we each pay as citizens and property owners for this vital upkeep.
D.S. Katzer
Stratford Landing