Corridor H

[hbelkins]

I concur. Great photos. They'll have to tide me over until I can make it back up that way.

[cpzilliacus]

TheInterMountain.com: RCDA supports Corridor H partnership plan

ELKINS - The Randolph County Development Authority board voted unanimously Monday to support a Corridor H Authority resolution pushing for a public/private partnership to help complete the highway by 2020.

RCDA Executive Director Robbie Morris read the resolution, which stated the partnership is vital to the growth of Randolph County.

Morris said a recent study on the completion of Corridor H by 2020 - instead of the projected completion date of 2036 or after - suggests a positive economic impact of at least $1.254 billion in income for the state.

Morris said the completion of the section of Corridor H from Kerens to Parsons will mean the entire highway is 87 percent complete.

"The public/private partnership is authorized by the 2013 Legislative session that allows the Department of Highways to enter into contacts for private funding for state projects," Morris said. "Basically the construction company will finance the project and the state will pay them back. The law went into effect July 1, and is basically like a mortgage."

[hbelkins]

http://www.connect-clarksburg.com/connect.cfm?func=view&section=News&item=County-Commission-Offers-Support-For-Corridor-H-Completion-2790&fb_source=message

I don't recall ever hearing that one proposed eastern terminus was New Market.

And is it definite that Virginia will build its portion?

[NE2]

I don't recall ever hearing that one proposed eastern terminus was New Market.

https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=1665.msg252922#msg252922
http://www.corridorh2020.com/History.html claims it too.

[cpzilliacus]

http://www.connect-clarksburg.com/connect.cfm?func=view&section=News&item=County-Commission-Offers-Support-For-Corridor-H-Completion-2790&fb_source=message

I don't recall ever hearing that one proposed eastern terminus was New Market.

Harrisonburg, following U.S. 33, was discussed at some point.  But I think that went away when Corridor  H was re-routed to the north to not run near Seneca Rocks in West Virginia.  I don't recall ever seeing that the eastern terminus was to be New Market.

And is it definite that Virginia will build its portion?

Not according to what is online in VDOT's Six Year Improvement Program (often just called the "six year plan"). I just checked it again for Shenandoah and Frederick Counties, and there is nothing that mentions even preliminary engineering for U.S. 48 and/or Va. 55.

Both counties are in VDOT's Staunton District.

[froggie]

Despite what some in West Virginia are saying, I doubt it's a "definite" that Virginia will build their portion.  After an hour-long search this afternoon, I've found only two references to Corridor H or its completion within Virginia.  The only reference specifically mentioning this supposed 2026 completion comes from an ADHS Completion Plan Report dated last September.  The presumption many are making is that VDOT provided the date to the Appalachian Regional Commission.  I've also noted some conflicting discrepancies regarding dates within this document (Mississippi Corridor V, for example, which lists "June 2014" as a completion date but also notes plain as day that completion plans for Corridor V are on hold due to lack of funding).  So without verification elsewhere (and given Virginia's history with Corridor H), I take this 2026 date with a large grain of salt.

Corridor H is also mentioned in this CTB presentation from a year ago.  It only mentions that "Corridor H is a commitment after Corridor Q is completed".  Nothing else, and no dates.

[cpzilliacus]

Despite what some in West Virginia are saying, I doubt it's a "definite" that Virginia will build their portion.

I think that Virginia will get around to it eventually, but it may be many years before they even get Corridor H to the preliminary engineering (PE) stage. 

If West Virginia wants Virginia to move this up on the priorities list and get it into the Six Year Plan, then I suspect that West Virginia Gov. Earl Ray Tomblin will need to pick up the phone and call Virginia's new Gov. Terry McAuliffe [perhaps when the Elk River environmental disaster is sufficiently remediated so that people can bathe in their homes] offer congratulations on McAuliffe's inauguration and then talk about Corridor H.

Virginia's new Secretary of Transportation, Aubrey Lane, appears from his online bio to have spent much of his professional life in the Hampton Roads area (and Virginia Beach in particular), so he may not be personally familiar with Corridor H, though I assume that some members of the Commonwealth Transportation Board are.

After an hour-long search this afternoon, I've found only two references to Corridor H or its completion within Virginia.  The only reference specifically mentioning this supposed 2026 completion comes from an ADHS Completion Plan Report dated last September.  The presumption many are making is that VDOT provided the date to the Appalachian Regional Commission.  I've also noted some conflicting discrepancies regarding dates within this document (Mississippi Corridor V, for example, which lists "June 2014" as a completion date but also notes plain as day that completion plans for Corridor V are on hold due to lack of funding).  So without verification elsewhere (and given Virginia's history with Corridor H), I take this 2026 date with a large grain of salt.

I got the impression that the states in the Appalachian Regional Commission footprint were given a directive by the federal government to come up with completion dates for the ARC corridors within their borders, and Virginia did so - probably because they had to supply some sort of date.

Corridor H is also mentioned in this CTB presentation from a year ago.  It only mentions that "Corridor H is a commitment after Corridor Q is completed".  Nothing else, and no dates.

Since Corridor Q is still under construction, it makes sense for VDOT to get it all under contract for construction.  But it seems to me that they could be doing some PE for Corridor H (though it's clear from the Six Year Program that there is no funding for any PE contemplated right now).

[NE2]

What are the deficiencies in Virginia, given that a two-lane road can handle the traffic?

[froggie]

If West Virginia wants Virginia to move this up on the priorities list and get it into the Six Year Plan, then I suspect that West Virginia Gov. Earl Ray Tomblin will need to pick up the phone and call Virginia's Governor [several years after the Elk River environmental disaster is sufficiently remediated so that people will have forgotten about it] and offer to pay for Corridor H with West Virginia funds.

FTFY.

I got the impression that the states in the Appalachian Regional Commission footprint were given a directive by the federal government to come up with completion dates for the ARC corridors within their borders, and Virginia did so - probably because they had to supply some sort of date.

Probably, but as I noted there are noticeable disparities in the dates listed in the ARC report, so I'd take anything in that report with a large grain of salt.

What are the deficiencies in Virginia, given that a two-lane road can handle the traffic?

Mainly just a lack of shoulders and turn lanes.  I have long said (including earlier in this thread) that spot improvements to VA 55 would be more than adequate to handle current and future traffic volume.  To be perfectly fair, it's not like we haven't had 2-lane ARC corridors before (or even presently...there's a couple in Tennessee IIRC)

[mtfallsmikey]

I'll agree with that. The W.V. side of 55 going down North Mt. into Wardensville needs to be widened/straightened. Not many in Va. are even remotely interested in Corridor H.

[hbelkins]

Mainly just a lack of shoulders and turn lanes.  I have long said (including earlier in this thread) that spot improvements to VA 55 would be more than adequate to handle current and future traffic volume.  To be perfectly fair, it's not like we haven't had 2-lane ARC corridors before (or even presently...there's a couple in Tennessee IIRC)

And a lot of two-lane ARC corridors in Kentucky, too. I think that some minor widening and straightening of the existing US 48/VA 55 route, and the addition of a passing lane here and there, would certainly help the existing road. I don't think it's a bad drive at all; certainly as it exists now it's a lot better than many of the roads connecting county seats in eastern Kentucky.

[Alps]

Not many in Va. are even remotely interested in Corridor H.

VA has plenty of economic generators. WV, not so much.

[hbelkins]

To tie this discussion into the one about the proposed Mountain Parkway widening project in Kentucky, the two-lane segment of the Mountain Parkway is considered an ARC corridor (I can never remember the letter designation) even though it wasn't built with ARC funds. So there's a two-lane corridor.

[BrianP]

To tie this discussion into the one about the proposed Mountain Parkway widening project in Kentucky, the two-lane segment of the Mountain Parkway is considered an ARC corridor (I can never remember the letter designation) even though it wasn't built with ARC funds. So there's a two-lane corridor.

I looked it up.  There are two corridors involved with the Mountain Parkway: I & R.  Both include two lane sections. 

I see there is new aerial imagery of Corridor H.  I see the new western end of the highway as well as some of the construction progress west of there.  There's a curious gap along the route where no work has started.

[froggie]

There's a curious gap along the route where no work has started.

If you're referring to along WV 93 east of Thomas, I noticed that too in the field a couple months ago.

[mtfallsmikey]

 Took a ride to Mt. Storm yesterday, will upload pics as soon as I figure out how to get them from Photobucket to here...

[1995hoo]

Took a ride to Mt. Storm yesterday, will upload pics as soon as I figure out how to get them from Photobucket to here...

The easiest way to do it is to click on the image in Photobucket, then look for the box of links on the right. Select the one that contains the "IMG" code.

[cpzilliacus]

WBOY-TV: Corridor H Update Presented at Quarterly Meeting of Elkins-Randolph Chamber of Commerce

"It's beautiful road, and there's lot of great terrain that's available for development all along Weston to Wardensville then into Virginia, there's just great possibilities," said Robbie Morris, executive director of Randolph County Development Authority.

Virginia is wanting to complete its 10 percent portion of highway by 2026.

[froggie]

It's beautiful road, and there's lot of great terrain that's available for development all along Weston to Wardensville then into Virginia, there's just great possibilities," said Robbie Morris, executive director of Randolph County Development Authority.

There's so much topographically/environmentally wrong with this, I don't even know where to begin...

Virginia is wanting to complete its 10 percent portion of highway by 2026.

Again, I have not seen anything within VDOT or CTB literature to verify this.  As before, it's probably a "placeholder" date that VDOT submitted to the annual AHDS report.

[seicer]

Robbie Morris was an advocate of the dam that would have flooded Canaan Valley, the highest elevation valley in the eastern United States - and one of the most biodiverse region in the United States. To him, it's all development and industry at whatever cost. The only jobs that are out that way in the industrial park on WV 93 is some small shops that employ less than 100 total and a jail.

[cpzilliacus]

It's beautiful road, and there's lot of great terrain that's available for development all along Weston to Wardensville then into Virginia, there's just great possibilities," said Robbie Morris, executive director of Randolph County Development Authority.

There's so much topographically/environmentally wrong with this, I don't even know where to begin...

Environmentally wrong because some groups want no economic development along Corridor H?

Remember that one of the ideas behind the ADHS is to "induce" demand through economic development.

Virginia is wanting to complete its 10 percent portion of highway by 2026.

Again, I have not seen anything within VDOT or CTB literature to verify this.  As before, it's probably a "placeholder" date that VDOT submitted to the annual AHDS report.

2026 is a few years beyond the planning horizon that VDOT uses for its Six Year Program.

On the other hand, Rep. Frank Wolf (R-Va. 10th) is retiring, and he was one of the more-vocal opponents of Corridor H on the Virginia side of North Mountain.

[1995hoo]

....

Virginia is wanting to complete its 10 percent portion of highway by 2026.

Again, I have not seen anything within VDOT or CTB literature to verify this.  As before, it's probably a "placeholder" date that VDOT submitted to the annual AHDS report.

I would not be terribly surprised if he's talked to a single individual within one of those entities who supports the project and is misleadingly imputing that person's statements to "Virginia" as a whole. That sort of thing is hardly uncommon.

[Mapmikey]

VA 55 west of I-81 does not seem to appear in VTrans 2025, VTrans2035 (2010) or the VTrans2035 update (Apr 2013).

The 2035 update contains a graphic within the linked document below that shows a service level for trucks still quite good on VA 55 in the year 2035...

At the end of the document is a list of highway projects considered "key" and VA 55 isn't there either...

http://www.vtrans.org/resources/VSTP/VSTPUpdate_FinalReport_AccessibleFinal_cChap345App.pdf

Apparently work is starting on VTrans 2040 soon.  Maybe it will be there...

Mapmikey

[froggie]

Environmentally wrong because some groups want no economic development along Corridor H?

Environmentally wrong because A) clear-cutting of forests (one of the things some want to do) basically eliminates wildlife habitat, especially in acidic soil such as what they have.  This is an ongoing issue in those areas where lumber/timber is a big business.  But because it's a big business and because of the demand for wood, it isn't going away anytime soon.  B) massive cuts/fills, necessary for large development in mountainous areas, changes drainage patterns significantly, usually resulting in some area or another experiencing higher flood risk.

Induced demand/development may have been all the rage 50 years ago when the ADHS was created.  But I'd like to think that we've gotten wiser to the environmental ramifications of such unchecked development since then.  Apparently I was wrong.

[cpzilliacus]

Environmentally wrong because some groups want no economic development along Corridor H?

Environmentally wrong because A) clear-cutting of forests (one of the things some want to do) basically eliminates wildlife habitat, especially in acidic soil such as what they have.  This is an ongoing issue in those areas where lumber/timber is a big business.  But because it's a big business and because of the demand for wood, it isn't going away anytime soon.  B) massive cuts/fills, necessary for large development in mountainous areas, changes drainage patterns significantly, usually resulting in some area or another experiencing higher flood risk.

Much of the land along Corridor H between Kerens and the crest of the Allegheny Front is:

(1) owned by the USDA U.S. Forest Service; or
(2) mined-out coal deposits that have been burned in the Mount Storm Generating Station.

Now the USFS does not always operate rationally, but I don't think it generally allows clear-cutting of forests (and some parts of the Monongahela National Forest are designated as "wilderness," which means no mechanized harvesting of timber at all).

Induced demand/development may have been all the rage 50 years ago when the ADHS was created.  But I'd like to think that we've gotten wiser to the environmental ramifications of such unchecked development since then.  Apparently I was wrong.

How much induced demand do you estimate will occur if and when Corridor H is completed?