News:

Thanks to everyone for the feedback on what errors you encountered from the forum database changes made in Fall 2023. Let us know if you discover anymore.

Main Menu

Corridor H

Started by CanesFan27, September 20, 2009, 03:01:17 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

NE2

Quote from: Kein Mitleid on September 15, 2011, 07:58:38 PM
I like highways as much as the next guy on here, and I agree that the road is very scenic. However, it's a monumental waste of money that connects nowhere to nowhere. Correct me if I'm wrong.

You're right. Corridor H could be useful as a shorter route from DC to the Ohio Valley, but US 220 south of Cumberland really serves only local-regional traffic, with the biggest cities to benefit from an upgrade probably being Elkins and Buckhannon (anyone going west of Buckhanon will simply use I-68 to I-79). Spot improvements on the 220-972-50-93-42 corridor should be enough.
pre-1945 Florida route log

I accept and respect your identity as long as it's not dumb shit like "identifying as a vaccinated attack helicopter".


mtfallsmikey

First: I like the corridor C alternative, would run entirely thru the valleys.

Second: I just drove on Corridor H to the "new" end last month, nice drive, especially seeing all of the windmills on the mountain, they estimate the next section being built to be the most expensive, close to $23M/mile.

Third: Unless Rt. 55 from Wardensville/Va. border becomes "unserviceable" or money comes in to build w/definite timeline (this per original agreement) to finish, or stimulus money gets allocated in the future (was rerouted to other projects in W.V.) or they attempt again to mooch money from DHS (escape route from D.C.) to finish it,the last W.V. section may not be done in my lifetime to Strasburg. W.V. is trying hard to get the $$ to finish it by 2020, or it will be 2030 before it is done. :banghead:

mtfallsmikey

Anybody been up there lately? Was wondering how the construction was going.

froggie

Was up there a couple weekends ago. Biggest item of noteis that grading/bridgework for a new interchange where Corridor H crosses WV 93 west of Bismark is underway. I saw no discernable work westof there towards David, however.

CVski

An update at the Corridor H website has 4 new milestones:  Knobley Rd to Rt 93, fall of this year; up to the 93/42 crossing under the windmills, end of 2013; to the intersection with Rt 93 just north of the dam, spring of 2014; and to the intersection with Rt 32 at Davis, fall of 2014.

http://www.wvcorridorh.com/route/map4.html
   

mtfallsmikey

Thanks for the update, that's a pretty ambitious schedule for completion across that mtn., hope they make it.

hbelkins

Quote from: CVski on January 09, 2012, 11:22:04 AM
An update at the Corridor H website has 4 new milestones:  Knobley Rd to Rt 93, fall of this year

That will make the route really usable. Right now it's a pain to take Greenland Gap or WV 42 to Knobley to access the route. The WV 93 crossing is very close to the WV 42 intersection.

Quote from: CVski on January 09, 2012, 11:22:04 AM
and to the intersection with Rt 32 at Davis, fall of 2014.

That should be a really easy upgrade, as most of it west of the lake should be just adding two lanes to existing WV 93.


Government would be tolerable if not for politicians and bureaucrats.

froggie

#157
QuoteRight now it's a pain to take Greenland Gap or WV 42 to Knobley to access the route.

Matter of opinion.  I've had no problem taking Greenland Gap.

QuoteThe WV 93 crossing is very close to the WV 42 intersection.

Not really "very close".  It's 2 miles.  The entirity of the Greenland Gap detour (Knobley Rd/Greenland gap Rd/Scherr Rd) is 5.3 miles.

QuoteThat should be a really easy upgrade, as most of it west of the lake should be just adding two lanes to existing WV 93.

About 5 miles worth...mostly the westernmost leg...will be a twinning of existing WV 93.  The remainder will be new alignment for all 4 lanes.  In particular, the sharper curve about halfway between Davis and the lake will be bypassed.


Also, because of the backtracking involved, the extension to WV 93 will only save about 2 minutes over the existing "detour" through Greenland Gap.  Significant for trucks since they can't use Knobley Rd or Greenland Gap Rd to begin with.  But less significant for regular vehicles.  The BIG significance will be late next year when they get it finished up to the top of the hill at Mt. Storm.

hbelkins

http://maps.google.com/?ie=UTF8&ll=39.191154,-79.160872&spn=0.030866,0.054846&t=h&z=14&vpsrc=6

If there is an intersection with Scherr Road (CR 1) that would be really handy, as that is practically adjacent to the WV 42/WV 93 intersection.


Government would be tolerable if not for politicians and bureaucrats.

froggie

There isn't.  Except for 1 or 2 immediate-parcel access points, there will be no intersections between Knobley Rd and the WV 93 connector.

hbelkins

Odd, since there are several at-grades along the current section east of Knobley Rd.


Government would be tolerable if not for politicians and bureaucrats.

froggie

Not really odd, if you factor in topography.  CR 1/Scherr Rd is in a valley in that location, while Corridor H will be riding the top of the ridge...hence the extra-long (and extra-high) bridge in that location.  Also the reason why Corridor H needs a connector to WV 93 instead of intersecting more directly.  That and there's basically nothing to intersect between Scherr Rd and Knobley Rd.

cpzilliacus

Quote from: froggie on January 12, 2012, 09:38:10 PM
Not really odd, if you factor in topography.  CR 1/Scherr Rd is in a valley in that location, while Corridor H will be riding the top of the ridge...hence the extra-long (and extra-high) bridge in that location.  Also the reason why Corridor H needs a connector to WV 93 instead of intersecting more directly.  That and there's basically nothing to intersect between Scherr Rd and Knobley Rd.

I have driven that segment of road that's multiplexed as W.Va. 42/W.Va. 93 between Scherr Road and the point where 42 continues north to U.S. 50 and 93 heads west in the direction of the Mount Storm coal-fired electric generating station and Davis. 

A very scenic drive, though challenging when headed south and east in the direction of Scherr, especially in bad weather.  So Corridor H will provide a better road for most.

The images currenrly online from Google Maps show that most of the right-of-way from the current terminus of Corridor H at Knobley Road almost to the line of windmills has been cleared. 
Opinions expressed here on AAROADS are strictly personal and mine alone, and do not reflect policies or positions of MWCOG, NCRTPB or their member federal, state, county and municipal governments or any other agency.

cpzilliacus

Quote from: mtfallsmikey on September 29, 2011, 07:08:02 AM
Third: Unless Rt. 55 from Wardensville/Va. border becomes "unserviceable" or money comes in to build w/definite timeline (this per original agreement) to finish, or stimulus money gets allocated in the future (was rerouted to other projects in W.V.) or they attempt again to mooch money from DHS (escape route from D.C.) to finish it,the last W.V. section may not be done in my lifetime to Strasburg.

There has been a lot of NIMBYist opposition to Corridor H in Virginia. 

U.S. Rep. Frank Wolf (R-Va. 10th) locked horns with the late Sen. Robert C. Byrd (D-W.Va.) over Corridor H (Wolf opposed, Byrd in favor) in the 1990's. 

USEPA Region III Administrator (and former congressman) Peter Kostmayer was fired by the Clinton Administration in 1995 in part for opposing Corridor H (and Kostmayer may have been funding groups opposed to the project with federal taxpayer dollars, a no-no).  A friend of mine who was with a different federal agency at the time told me that Kostmayer instructed his staff at Region III that his highest policy priority was to get any and all proposed highway projects in the Region III states (Pa., Del., Md., Va., W.Va. and D.C.) cancelled for environmental reasons.
Opinions expressed here on AAROADS are strictly personal and mine alone, and do not reflect policies or positions of MWCOG, NCRTPB or their member federal, state, county and municipal governments or any other agency.

hbelkins

Quote from: cpzilliacus on January 13, 2012, 12:38:57 AM
USEPA Region III Administrator (and former congressman) Peter Kostmayer was fired by the Clinton Administration in 1995 in part for opposing Corridor H (and Kostmayer may have been funding groups opposed to the project with federal taxpayer dollars, a no-no).  A friend of mine who was with a different federal agency at the time told me that Kostmayer instructed his staff at Region III that his highest policy priority was to get any and all proposed highway projects in the Region III states (Pa., Del., Md., Va., W.Va. and D.C.) cancelled for environmental reasons.

At the risk of going off-topic, this is one of the things that irritates me most about government.

We have one agency trying to keep another agency from doing something that would be a benefit to the public.  That is a total waste of money and time and effort.


Government would be tolerable if not for politicians and bureaucrats.

froggie

To be fair, it's both a benefit AND a detriment to the public.

cpzilliacus

Quote from: hbelkins on January 13, 2012, 02:20:29 PM
Quote from: cpzilliacus on January 13, 2012, 12:38:57 AM
USEPA Region III Administrator (and former congressman) Peter Kostmayer was fired by the Clinton Administration in 1995 in part for opposing Corridor H (and Kostmayer may have been funding groups opposed to the project with federal taxpayer dollars, a no-no).  A friend of mine who was with a different federal agency at the time told me that Kostmayer instructed his staff at Region III that his highest policy priority was to get any and all proposed highway projects in the Region III states (Pa., Del., Md., Va., W.Va. and D.C.) cancelled for environmental reasons.

At the risk of going off-topic, this is one of the things that irritates me most about government.

We have one agency trying to keep another agency from doing something that would be a benefit to the public.  That is a total waste of money and time and effort.

H.B., I strongly agree.

Kostmayer also did his best to kill Maryland's InterCounty Connector project.  At the time, Maryland DOT was in the early stages of preparing a draft environmental impact statement (which was destined to be spiked by then-Gov. Parris Glendening in 1999 for political reasons, after spending millions of dollars on that DEIS), and Kostmayer's EPA Region III staff made demands (in about 1993 or 1994) that certain possible alignments for the highway (including the one that had been on the planning maps since the 1950's, and where the completed highway now runs) should be excluded from any consideration, even before alternatives were analyzed.  That's not how the environmental impact statement process, as mandated by the National Environmental Policy Act, is supposed to work.

Supposedly Region III had "serious concerns" about the self-reproducing brown trout population in the Paint Branch of the Anacostia River (never mind that the brown trout are not native to Maryland, but were introduced from Germany many years before - and as an alien species, get no protection under the Clean Water Act and other federal environmental laws).

I also believe (but cannot prove) that Kostmayer held private meetings with opponents of both Corridor H and ICC to work out strategies for getting them cancelled.  In the judicial branch, that's called ex-parte communication and is not allowed.  Because EPA was working in a quasi-judicial role in reviewing environmental documents for both projects, I think it's high time that such meetings (with any advocate, pro- or con-) be held on-the record or forbidden entirely (ideally, advocates for or against a project under EPA review should be required to submit comments in writing and the comments should go on the public record for all interested parties to read).
Opinions expressed here on AAROADS are strictly personal and mine alone, and do not reflect policies or positions of MWCOG, NCRTPB or their member federal, state, county and municipal governments or any other agency.

SP Cook

The EPA exists to provide cover for politicians to acomplish via regulatation things that they cannot come right out and say.  A politican that actually came out and said "I have mine and I really don't care about everybody else." would lose 95-5.  But you can, via environmental regulation, acomplish that selfish and self-centered goal. 

The answer, of course, is a "notwithstanding" clause.  Congress should appropriate funds to improve the lives of Earth's most important species "notwithstanding" any environmental regulation. 

NE2

Quote from: SP Cook on January 14, 2012, 08:22:32 AM
The EPA exists to provide cover for politicians to acomplish via regulatation things that they cannot come right out and say.  A politican that actually came out and said "I have mine and I really don't care about everybody else." would lose 95-5.  But you can, via environmental regulation, acomplish that selfish and self-centered goal. 

The answer, of course, is a "notwithstanding" clause.  Congress should appropriate funds to improve the lives of Earth's most important species "notwithstanding" any environmental regulation. 

You're about as right as pooing is uncool.
pre-1945 Florida route log

I accept and respect your identity as long as it's not dumb shit like "identifying as a vaccinated attack helicopter".

cpzilliacus

Quote from: SP Cook on January 14, 2012, 08:22:32 AM
The EPA exists to provide cover for politicians to acomplish via regulatation things that they cannot come right out and say.  A politican that actually came out and said "I have mine and I really don't care about everybody else." would lose 95-5.  But you can, via environmental regulation, acomplish that selfish and self-centered goal. 

The answer, of course, is a "notwithstanding" clause.  Congress should appropriate funds to improve the lives of Earth's most important species "notwithstanding" any environmental regulation.

S.P., I am no fan of what the EPA (and other federal environmental regulators, including the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the Fish and Wildlife Service) have repeatedly done to obstruct needed improvements to the transportation system.

But some things that the EPA has done, including greatly improved vehicle emission controls and reformulated motor fuels (including ultra-low-sulfur Diesel fuel) have done much to improve air quality (without social engineering schemes, like attempts to force people to use mass transit).
Opinions expressed here on AAROADS are strictly personal and mine alone, and do not reflect policies or positions of MWCOG, NCRTPB or their member federal, state, county and municipal governments or any other agency.

hbelkins

Quote from: froggie on January 13, 2012, 03:28:06 PM
To be fair, it's both a benefit AND a detriment to the public.

How is Corridor H a detriment to the public?


Government would be tolerable if not for politicians and bureaucrats.

NE2

Quote from: hbelkins on January 15, 2012, 01:21:11 AM
Quote from: froggie on January 13, 2012, 03:28:06 PM
To be fair, it's both a benefit AND a detriment to the public.

How is Corridor H a detriment to the public?

Surely you, as a conservative, realize that government spending is a detriment :)

(Of course there are other (often secondary) effects, but the party of "me" doesn't care about those.)
pre-1945 Florida route log

I accept and respect your identity as long as it's not dumb shit like "identifying as a vaccinated attack helicopter".

SP Cook

Corridor H is really no different from any other road in Appalachia.  It just has bad timing.  The other interstates and corridors in WV were finished earlier for various political and social reasons.  By the time it was Corridor H's "turn" the state was bankrupt and they BANANAs had theirs and wanted no one else to have anything.

Really, you can be 2 miles from Corridor H and be unaware of its existance.  Its environmental impact (I use the common term the EPA uses, of course, nothing man does can have any real environmental impact, as man is a part of the environment) is really so near zero as to be not worth considering.


NE2

Quote from: SP Cook on January 15, 2012, 07:37:53 AM
nothing man does can have any real environmental impact, as man is a part of the environment
Wow.

Volcanos have environmental impact. Beaver dams have environmental impact. Swarms of locusts have environmental impact.
pre-1945 Florida route log

I accept and respect your identity as long as it's not dumb shit like "identifying as a vaccinated attack helicopter".

cpzilliacus

Quote from: SP Cook on January 15, 2012, 07:37:53 AM
Corridor H is really no different from any other road in Appalachia.  It just has bad timing.
Correct.

QuoteThe other interstates and corridors in WV were finished earlier for various political and social reasons.  By the time it was Corridor H's "turn" the state was bankrupt and they BANANAs had theirs and wanted no one else to have anything.

Also correct. I understand that much of the opposition to Corridor H comes from people with money (frequently from places near Washington, D.C.) who have moved to the Potomac Highlands of West Virginia to "get away from it all," and absolutely do not want the (desirable) induced traffic that will result from a completed Corridor H. Because they have money, they have no interest in the economic benefits of the highway.  And never mind the safety benefits of a modern highway.

Maryland DOT/State Highway Administration went through similar controversies when it was building the (mostly uncompleted) segment of Corridor E (I-68 today, f/k/a U.S. 48) between Cumberland and Hancock.  But I understand that there were enough people in Allegany County (especially) that understood that upgrading from the (old and twisting) U.S. 40 would have economic and safety benefits.

QuoteReally, you can be 2 miles from Corridor H and be unaware of its existance.  Its environmental impact (I use the common term the EPA uses, of course, nothing man does can have any real environmental impact, as man is a part of the environment) is really so near zero as to be not worth considering.

I strongly agree.  The same is true for I-68.  Hence "serious concern" about air quality and "induced" traffic from groups like the Sierra Club. Never mind that air quality has improved, and is forecast to continue to improve in the coming years.
Opinions expressed here on AAROADS are strictly personal and mine alone, and do not reflect policies or positions of MWCOG, NCRTPB or their member federal, state, county and municipal governments or any other agency.



Opinions expressed here on belong solely to the poster and do not represent or reflect the opinions or beliefs of AARoads, its creators and/or associates.