Corridor H

[froggie]

Construction money comes out of ARC funds.

Which, BTW, no longer exists.  ADHS funding was eliminated in MAP-21.  What's likely funding recent corridor projects (including Corridor H) is NHS funding, since most (if not all) ADHS corridors are also on the NHS.  MAP-21 also allowed states to use 100% federal funding on ADHS corridors...in other words, not requiring a local match.

[seicer]

The federal government is not financing all of the project as the segments prior to 2012 used 80% federal funding and 20% state funding (traditional ADHS funding). The United States Surface Transportation bill (MAP-21) passed in 2012 increased the federal funds to 100% - which will last until 2021.

The first segment of the Karens to Parsons corridor (7.5 miles) is using the P3 Public-Private Partnership financing method to expedite construction - the only segment that's currently planned that remained unfunded. The completion of that segment will bring Corridor H to 87% of its original goal (absent the connection to Virginia).

The goal is to expedite final planning and construction on any remaining segments as funding becomes available to take advantage of the bill before it expires in 2021.

[SP Cook]

I'm not sure why states are so adverse in even looking at cheaper options - especially in a state that is facing massive deficits (for reasons that is not on topic here). Corridor D/US 19 remained two lanes north of the New River Gorge Bridge for decades and was only recently widened in the late 1990's when traffic levels rose enough to warrent an extra carriageway.

You mean Corridor L, Corridor D is US 50.  Anyway, the 2-lane section of Corridor L was a huge mistake on two levels.  As it forms a short cut of about 40 miles, it always received the majority of the traffic off 79 as it is the logical part of the Toronto-Buffalo-Pittsburgh route to Florida.  With just 2 lanes, it quickly became a deathroad, with very high accident rates.  And, since a 4 lane ROW was not acquired, the state had to go back and buy it at its market value as being beside a major highway, rather than the useless woodland it mostly was when the first 2 lanes were constructed. 

WV is now in the same perdicament with the northern edge of US 52.  That route was build in the early 70s on what was then mostly a dirt road in the middle of nowhere.  Now it needs to be 4 lane and the state has to acquire ROW for what the area is today, which is very valuable industrial land. 

While it can, sometimes, be OK to buy a 4 lane ROW and only build 2 lanes, it really does not save that much, particularly if you are in the mountains and blasting for 4 lanes anyway, it is never a good idea to just buy a 2 lane ROW.

[seicer]

Yes, thanks for the correction.

US 52's new alignment was formerly County Route 1. There is a great Library of Congress photo set of a historic bridge that was on that route, now removed. As remote as that area was back then, it would have been great to reserved the ROW but hindsight is something we all don't have.

I actually forgot about the Turnpike being two-lanes as well. It was an incredibly dangerous route in its later years until it was widened at great expense.

[SP Cook]

I actually forgot about the Turnpike being two-lanes as well. It was an incredibly dangerous route in its later years until it was widened at great expense.

Much of the Turnpike's current problems, which is to say the very dangerous northern third of it, with no median and a 60 SL, with truck wrecks shutting it down for hours every couple of weeks, is traceable to the cheap-a**ed 4 lane upgrade.  It really does not traverse terrain all that much different than any other road in Appalachia.  The difference is that the other roads were built on virgin land, with the crews free to blast the s*** out of places when necessary.  The turnpike tried to squeeze in two more lanes without buying more ROW and then compounded that because the blasting had to be limited because of the existing highway.  There is no real engineering reason that the turnpike's northern third is not the same as any other rural mountain country interstate. 

I'm old enough to remember driving on the 2-lane turnpike.  It was a certified deathroad.  Once the other interstates connected to it and increased the traffic volume, it was just inadequate.  You felt lucky every time you survived it.

[cpzilliacus]

It was mentioned during the meet that Virginia's opposition to finishing Corridor H might be softening due to the retirement of an anti-H politician whose name I cannot recall. Also, didn't the feds up their portion of the funding to encourage Virginia to finish its part?

U.S. Congressman Frank Wolf (R-Virginia 10th), retired after the 2014 elections.

[cpzilliacus]

The blunt point is there is not developable land for manufacturing.   

Not so sure I agree with that assertion.

There is the Mountaintop Industrial Park (apparently no Web site, but marked by a large sign) along the north side of Corridor H (U.S. 48) just across from the Dominion Virginia Power (DVP) Mount Storm Generating Station in western Grant County.  This PowerPoint describes it in some detail.

And of course there was room for the DVP plant there too - I believe that has been there since the 1960's or maybe early 1970's, built to be near many coal deposits nearby, though I believe most of the coal that it consumes is now transported to the plant on rail via CSX.

Speaking of industry, there's also the matter of the Virginia Inland Port, located a short drive from the proposed eastern end of Corridor H in Warren County, Virginia on U.S. 340/U.S. 522.  Corridor H will improve truck access to the Inland Port from its entire length, as well as from the I-79 corridor, and will permit some truck trips headed there to avoid crowded I-81 between I-64 and I-66.

[cpzilliacus]

Much of the Turnpike's current problems, which is to say the very dangerous northern third of it, with no median and a 60 SL, with truck wrecks shutting it down for hours every couple of weeks, is traceable to the cheap-a**ed 4 lane upgrade.  It really does not traverse terrain all that much different than any other road in Appalachia.  The difference is that the other roads were built on virgin land, with the crews free to blast the s*** out of places when necessary.  The turnpike tried to squeeze in two more lanes without buying more ROW and then compounded that because the blasting had to be limited because of the existing highway.

You remind me of a question regarding Corridor H with your words above. 

There's a short section of Corridor H that has a narrow median with just a Jersey barrier separating the eastbound and westbound lanes - in Grant County from the cut across the New Creek Mountain ridge to Knobley Road.  The rest of the road has a wide(r) median, but not there.  Was that to reduce right-of-way take or to (slightly) reduce the amount of rock that had to be blasted away?

[hbelkins]

You remind me of a question regarding Corridor H with your words above.

Also, another question regarding the abandoned Corridor H "racetrack" on US 33 east of Elkins...

There is what appears to be a cave or tunnel on the left side of the road as you're heading west. What's that for? It doesn't appear to be an old railroad tunnel or water diversion channel.

[cpzilliacus]

You remind me of a question regarding Corridor H with your words above.

Also, another question regarding the abandoned Corridor H "racetrack" on US 33 east of Elkins...

There is what appears to be a cave or tunnel on the left side of the road as you're heading west. What's that for? It doesn't appear to be an old railroad tunnel or water diversion channel.

Excellent question.  I have wondered about that since I first drove the "racetrack" westbound.

[cl94]

You remind me of a question regarding Corridor H with your words above.

Also, another question regarding the abandoned Corridor H "racetrack" on US 33 east of Elkins...

There is what appears to be a cave or tunnel on the left side of the road as you're heading west. What's that for? It doesn't appear to be an old railroad tunnel or water diversion channel.

Excellent question.  I have wondered about that since I first drove the "racetrack" westbound.

From what I can find online, it's a man-made entrance to Bowden Cave. The spot along US 33 was once a quarry, but almost everything past the entrance is natural. Cave system is several miles long.

[cpzilliacus]

You remind me of a question regarding Corridor H with your words above.

Also, another question regarding the abandoned Corridor H "racetrack" on US 33 east of Elkins...

There is what appears to be a cave or tunnel on the left side of the road as you're heading west. What's that for? It doesn't appear to be an old railroad tunnel or water diversion channel.

Excellent question.  I have wondered about that since I first drove the "racetrack" westbound.

From what I can find online, it's a man-made entrance to Bowden Cave. The spot along US 33 was once a quarry, but almost everything past the entrance is natural. Cave system is several miles long.

Consistent with what I was able to find online here.

Front 200 feet is private, but should be considered closed since only the entrance area isn't owned by the USFS. Vast majority of cave is USFS-owned and is closed due to WNS. All back entrances are USFS-owned and are closed. Area along road may be posted.

EDIT:  Note: WNS is White Nose Syndrome, a disease that sickens and kills bats (details here).

[Bitmapped]

At best you are looking at some tourism and making money off what truck traffic does pass through.

Starting from central DC, going to Columbus via Corridor H is 21 miles longer than I-68.

Part of the reason why having a high-quality road is important. Get through traffic to take Corridor H instead of the Pennsylvania Turnpike, for example, and you could put people to work at hotels and truck stops. Not glamorous living, but for many people, a job is better than no job.

Nobody is going to take Corridor H instead of the Pennsylvania Turnpike. I-68 exists. Traffic is never going to be high enough along this corridor to support truck stops or hotels for through travelers, anyway.

I take Corridor H instead of the Turnpike if I'm going to Columbus or points west.

Going from DC to Columbus, Corridor H is 21 miles long than I-68.

[Bitmapped]

Corridor H west of Elkins has areas under 9,000 AADT, with some areas jumping to over 12,000 AADT (closer to Weston). North of Elkins, the route has less than 2,500 AADT (17% trucks). WV 93 east of Thomas/Davis (soon to be four-lane Corridor H) has less than 2,000, with 28% of that trucks. Not too long ago, traffic levels were under 1,000 - for what was essentially a new terrain route built in the late 1960's. The newer segments in the east carry less than 2,000 AADT. East of Moorefield, it goes to over 5,000 before declining to 4,000 at its eastern terminus.

That's hardly any justification for a four-lane route. I wonder how much money could have been saved with a two-lane variant on a four-lane ROW similar to US 19? After all, WV 93 east of Thomas/Davis was more than adequate for traffic.

Ever driven some of the grades on the roads that have been replaced by (or will be replaced by) Corridor H?

Like Va. 55; W.Va. 55; U.S. 50; W.Va. 42/W.Va. 93 (consider the winding and steep road up the Allegheny Front from Scherr to Bismarck); W.Va. 32; U.S. 33 and U.S. 219 (Kerens to Thomas/Davis)?

The AADT numbers that you cite are current, but are they accurate for the future, with a continuous Corridor H from I-79 at Weston, W.Va. to I-81 at Strasburg, Va.?

I don't see traffic between Elkins and Moorefield ever getting to the point where 4 lanes will be needed. 2 lanes plus climbing lanes would likely be adequate for the foreseeable future.

At the very least, WVDOH should have focused on constructing the Elkins-Parsons-Davis section of Corridor H rather than Davis-Bismarck where WV 93 was already a good high speed road.

[Thing 342]

It seems like Corridor H would have been more useful if its western end tied into Corridor D / US-50 at Clarksburg. Does anyone know why it went to Weston?

[1995hoo]

At best you are looking at some tourism and making money off what truck traffic does pass through.

Starting from central DC, going to Columbus via Corridor H is 21 miles longer than I-68.

Part of the reason why having a high-quality road is important. Get through traffic to take Corridor H instead of the Pennsylvania Turnpike, for example, and you could put people to work at hotels and truck stops. Not glamorous living, but for many people, a job is better than no job.

Nobody is going to take Corridor H instead of the Pennsylvania Turnpike. I-68 exists. Traffic is never going to be high enough along this corridor to support truck stops or hotels for through travelers, anyway.

I take Corridor H instead of the Turnpike if I'm going to Columbus or points west.

Going from DC to Columbus, Corridor H is 21 miles long than I-68.

And it was still faster, even the time we took a detour past Seneca Rocks.

[Bitmapped]

It seems like Corridor H would have been more useful if its western end tied into Corridor D / US-50 at Clarksburg. Does anyone know why it went to Weston?

There's nothing of much consequence east of Clarksburg and I-68 is nearby east of I-79. Routing along US 33 provides access to larger towns (Buckhannon and Elkins) and better access to the Potomac Highlands region of West Virginia.

[cpzilliacus]

It seems like Corridor H would have been more useful if its western end tied into Corridor D / US-50 at Clarksburg. Does anyone know why it went to Weston?

There's nothing of much consequence east of Clarksburg and I-68 is nearby east of I-79. Routing along US 33 provides access to larger towns (Buckhannon and Elkins) and better access to the Potomac Highlands region of West Virginia.

Agreed that U.S. 33 was probably the best routing east of I-79.  U.S. 50 between I-79 and the Maryland border crosses a lot of rough terrain.  Using the routing that Corridor H was built on,  that rough terrain was mostly avoided between Weston and Kerens. 

Corridor H will also provide improved and faster access to the West Virginia and U.S. Forest Service resort and recreation areas in Tucker County (like this and this) from both I-79 and I-81 (and I-66) corridors.  This is the kind of "induced" traffic that is good for everyone.

[Mapmikey]

It seems like Corridor H would have been more useful if its western end tied into Corridor D / US-50 at Clarksburg. Does anyone know why it went to Weston?

.

If the original corridor route had been built following US 33 to Seneca Rocks, the optic of how H would look might reduce the likelihood of this question being raised.

Regardless, my guess would be that West Virginia was hoping to connect the northeastern part of WV more directly to Charleston which might be more beneficial to WV than having a seamless corridor across its northern tier that would be useful for longer through traffic...

[hbelkins]

Keep in mind that Corridor H was originally planned to roughly follow US 33 and intersect I-81 farther south than Strasburg, probably near Harrisonburg. Hence the "racetrack" section east of Elkins that predates everything except the portion between Weston and Buckhannon.

First time I was ever on the route was back in the early 1980s (when the Vandenburg and Quiet Riot debut albums came out, because "Wait" and "Metal Health" were getting heavy play on a Harrisonburg station when we stopped for the night, and I bought those cassettes at a K-Mart in Harrisonburg so I could listen to them on my Walkman instead of having to buying vinyl and having to wait until I got home to record the albums onto cassette) on a family vacation that had the twin goals of visiting the town bearing my family name and driving the Blue Ridge Parkway. At the time, the only four-lane portions were the "racetrack" and a portion east of Weston. We had to take the old route through downtown Buckhannon and all the way to Elkins.

[Mapmikey]

I've been trying to find the actual 1965 bill with no luck but I did find the 1964 report it was based on.  Pdf page 5 has a map of proposed corridors.

H always went to Strasburg, though a separate corridor was envisioned to connect from near Elkins to Staunton.  Another was envisioned to go from Beckley northeast to Elkins then follow US 219 to US 22.

http://www.arc.gov/noindex/aboutarc/history/parc/PARCchp4.pdf

[CanesFan27]

The blunt point is there is not developable land for manufacturing.   

Not so sure I agree with that assertion.

There is the Mountaintop Industrial Park (apparently no Web site, but marked by a large sign) along the north side of Corridor H (U.S. 48) just across from the Dominion Virginia Power (DVP) Mount Storm Generating Station in western Grant County.  This PowerPoint describes it in some detail.

And of course there was room for the DVP plant there too - I believe that has been there since the 1960's or maybe early 1970's, built to be near many coal deposits nearby, though I believe most of the coal that it consumes is now transported to the plant on rail via CSX.

Speaking of industry, there's also the matter of the Virginia Inland Port, located a short drive from the proposed eastern end of Corridor H in Warren County, Virginia on U.S. 340/U.S. 522.  Corridor H will improve truck access to the Inland Port from its entire length, as well as from the I-79 corridor, and will permit some truck trips headed there to avoid crowded I-81 between I-64 and I-66.

Large/heavy manufacturing won't really be attracted to the area (utilities excluded) because there really isn't a network of good north-south connections from corridor H - except for the terminal points.  That's why I believe the North-South (US 220) connector from Moorefield to Cumberland would actually have greater impact on the area than H.  I'd have to research the status of it.

Now as for the business industrial park - light manufacturing, distribution centers, and companies that support the power plant and other industries nearby.  H does bring a great east west route into the area and it's needed to connect to the Inland Port in Front Royal - (As an aside I would bring imported spruce boards into Norfolk and then to Front Royal for it to be broken from the container, primed, placed back onto trucks and sent to our dc in Raleigh.)  And you are right - H will certainly be great from a supply chain and logistics perspective from any operations out of Front Royal.

H is not a cureall (and I think CPZ you pointed out to a study about I-68 and it's impact to Western Maryland in the past) but it may bring some regional and local companies to build distribution centers or service storefronts in the area.  Moorefield will most likely see some positive impact because of the intersection with US 220 - this would be hotels, restaurants and the such.  It also will benefit from residents of the much smaller towns being able to get their quicker for shopping etc.

I could see a gas station or two elsewhere along the route but that's it - but that's immediately off the highway.  The towns, industries, attractions that are five to ten miles down the road from H will benefit as it is quicker access in and out of there town to the rest of the region and possibly beyond. That's why like it or not Interstate status is important to so many groups because it's not the service industries immediately off the exits, it's the businesses and towns 5, 10, 15 miles from the highway that benefit.  H will do some of that; however, the full benefit of H will be improvements to the roads connecting to it between 79 and 81.  A four lane US 220 going north to I-68 in Cumberland will open up the region to distribution and manufacturing (albeit light - think steel fabricators) by solidifying the road network and becoming more attractive logistically to various companies.  For example Food Lion has flirted with the western maryland and parts of PA and WV for sometime.  Because of H and US 220, it may be not a bad site for a distribution center and allow them to better service the area and possibly open additional stores.  Same for Dollar General, Family Dollar, Wal-MArt and other retailers found in the area.   

[hbelkins]

Speaking of Dollar General, they have undertaken a massive retail expansion effort in my area. A number of new DG stores have opened up in this part of Kentucky, and I noticed several locations that appeared to be fairly new in some communities in rural areas of West Virginia.

As for a route from Cumberland to Corridor H, It seems to me that much of US 220 in Maryland could be widened without major issues. However, getting from Keyser to Moorefield is a bit trickier. WV 93 wouldn't be too hard to widen between US 50 and Corridor H, but the US 50/220 concurrency is both fairly crooked and hilly, and built up. I haven't been on 220/28 between 50 and 48 in several years to remember much about that route.

[cpzilliacus]

Large/heavy manufacturing won't really be attracted to the area (utilities excluded) because there really isn't a network of good north-south connections from corridor H - except for the terminal points.  That's why I believe the North-South (US 220) connector from Moorefield to Cumberland would actually have greater impact on the area than H.  I'd have to research the status of it.

I have no problem with improving U.S. 220 (and, for that matter, U.S. 219) from Corridor H at least to I-68. Maryland was looking at plans to bypass downtown Oakland with U.S. 219, but that study was shut-down on orders of then-Gov. Parris Nelson Glendening about 2000 or 2001.

Now as for the business industrial park - light manufacturing, distribution centers, and companies that support the power plant and other industries nearby.  H does bring a great east west route into the area and it's needed to connect to the Inland Port in Front Royal - (As an aside I would bring imported spruce boards into Norfolk and then to Front Royal for it to be broken from the container, primed, placed back onto trucks and sent to our dc in Raleigh.)  And you are right - H will certainly be great from a supply chain and logistics perspective from any operations out of Front Royal.

Another business that might connect well to the Inland Port is the (adaptive) re-use or recycling of shipping containers - bring them to Front Royal and them truck them to a site along Corridor H.  Or send them by rail all the way to Mountaintop since CSX has a spur to the Mount Storm generating station already, even though it's a long and twisting trip.  This could also be a good place for Baltimore to send such containers by railroad.

H is not a cureall (and I think CPZ you pointed out to a study about I-68 and it's impact to Western Maryland in the past) but it may bring some regional and local companies to build distribution centers or service storefronts in the area.  Moorefield will most likely see some positive impact because of the intersection with US 220 - this would be hotels, restaurants and the such.  It also will benefit from residents of the much smaller towns being able to get their quicker for shopping etc.

Might also increase the number of chickens and turkeys grown in the Potomac Highlands of West Virginia.

I could see a gas station or two elsewhere along the route but that's it - but that's immediately off the highway.  The towns, industries, attractions that are five to ten miles down the road from H will benefit as it is quicker access in and out of there town to the rest of the region and possibly beyond. That's why like it or not Interstate status is important to so many groups because it's not the service industries immediately off the exits, it's the businesses and towns 5, 10, 15 miles from the highway that benefit.  H will do some of that; however, the full benefit of H will be improvements to the roads connecting to it between 79 and 81.  A four lane US 220 going north to I-68 in Cumberland will open up the region to distribution and manufacturing (albeit light - think steel fabricators) by solidifying the road network and becoming more attractive logistically to various companies.  For example Food Lion has flirted with the western maryland and parts of PA and WV for sometime.  Because of H and US 220, it may be not a bad site for a distribution center and allow them to better service the area and possibly open additional stores.  Same for Dollar General, Family Dollar, Wal-MArt and other retailers found in the area.

The gas stations that are near Corridor H appear to be adequate for now, though that Sheetz in Moorefield is frequently extremely busy (but I do not know how much of that is due to Corridor H travel).  A manager at the Sheetz told me that Corridor H has saved her 20 to 25 minutes - each way - over the "Old Route 55" route from her home near Lost River or Baker. 

Any business that needs a lot of land - cheap land - with some workforce and lack of excessive NIMBYism that is associated with places closer to Washington, D.C. will find Corridor H to be an attractive place to locate.  There appears to be a fair amount of  vacant land in Hardy County along U.S. 220 north and south of H that could be  put to good use.

[Mapmikey]

Speaking of Dollar General, they have undertaken a massive retail expansion effort in my area. A number of new DG stores have opened up in this part of Kentucky, and I noticed several locations that appeared to be fairly new in some communities in rural areas of West Virginia.

As for a route from Cumberland to Corridor H, It seems to me that much of US 220 in Maryland could be widened without major issues. However, getting from Keyser to Moorefield is a bit trickier. WV 93 wouldn't be too hard to widen between US 50 and Corridor H, but the US 50/220 concurrency is both fairly crooked and hilly, and built up. I haven't been on 220/28 between 50 and 48 in several years to remember much about that route.

You could widen the WV 972 corridor plus WV 93 to reach Corr H and avoid the 50-220 overlay entirely.

A new terrrain route from the eastern 50-220 jct northwest back to US 220 south of MD 956 also looks non-imposing...