Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[seicer]

I was looking through their 2040 planning document (http://www.kyovaipc.org/KYOVA_2040_Integrated_MTP_Complete.pdf) and came across some interesting tidbits starting around page 74 (3-29):

- Project CB1, the proposed OH 7 - WV 193 east Huntington bypass bridge, which would tie into an existing four-lane highway to Interstate 64 at Merritts Creek and to the still-not-complete Chesapeake-Proctorville bypass. The bridge would cost $100 million.
- Project CB2, which is the replacement of the West 17th Street Bridge which carries US 52 over the Ohio River between Chesapeake, Ohio, and Huntington, W. Virginia. I'm not sure this one is needed from a structural point of view; it's still in good condition. But it is two lanes and over capacity.
- Project CR12, which is the Hal Greer Blvd/WV 10 project in Huntington, W. Virginia. This is a corridor-long project that will refresh the roadway south of the CSX tracks; narrow the roadway to three lanes through the underpass and by Marshall University; add a cycle track and wider sidewalks throughout; and extend corridor improvements to Interstate 64.
- Projects CR13 and CR14, which is the widening of I-64 between US 52 in Huntington and Hal Greer Blvd/WV 10, and from the Huntington Mall eastward.
- Projects CR8 and CR9, which is a corridor-long project to refresh 3rd and 5th Avenues through downtown and by Marshall University. I've long wanted to see these four-lane racetracks narrowed down - there just isn't the traffic to justify all of the (narrow) traffic lanes and speed limits are way too high in densely populated areas. The roadways are also just not very attractive.
- Project CR19, which is the widening of WV 2 east/north of Huntington.
- Project LR1, which is the completion of the Chesapeake bypass from OH 527 east to Proctorville.
- Project LR4, which is a OH 7-US 35 connector. This is the first I've seen or heard of this which would duplicate a very empty OH 7 along the Ohio River.
- Project WR1, which is a bridge for Interstate 73/74 between Interstate 64 in Ceredo, W. Virginia and US 52 near South Point, Ohio. This is the first I've seen of this and I'm not sure it's needed if they plan on replacing the W. 17th Street bridge.
- Projects WR5-9 are projects to support the widening of US 52 south of Ceredo, W. Virginia.
- Projects WR12-13 are projects to widen WV 152 south of I-64. This road has a high accident rate and hasn't been improved essentially since it was first improved some 70 years ago.

There are various projects listed for Kentucky. If you scroll further down the document, each project is broken out into their own pages.

[Bitmapped]

I was looking through their 2040 planning document (http://www.kyovaipc.org/KYOVA_2040_Integrated_MTP_Complete.pdf) and came across some interesting tidbits starting around page 74 (3-29):

- Project CB1, the proposed OH 7 - WV 193 east Huntington bypass bridge, which would tie into an existing four-lane highway to Interstate 64 at Merritts Creek and to the still-not-complete Chesapeake-Proctorville bypass. The bridge would cost $100 million.
- Project CB2, which is the replacement of the West 17th Street Bridge which carries US 52 over the Ohio River between Chesapeake, Ohio, and Huntington, W. Virginia. I'm not sure this one is needed from a structural point of view; it's still in good condition. But it is two lanes and over capacity.
- Project CR12, which is the Hal Greer Blvd/WV 10 project in Huntington, W. Virginia. This is a corridor-long project that will refresh the roadway south of the CSX tracks; narrow the roadway to three lanes through the underpass and by Marshall University; add a cycle track and wider sidewalks throughout; and extend corridor improvements to Interstate 64.
- Projects CR13 and CR14, which is the widening of I-64 between US 52 in Huntington and Hal Greer Blvd/WV 10, and from the Huntington Mall eastward.
- Projects CR8 and CR9, which is a corridor-long project to refresh 3rd and 5th Avenues through downtown and by Marshall University. I've long wanted to see these four-lane racetracks narrowed down - there just isn't the traffic to justify all of the (narrow) traffic lanes and speed limits are way too high in densely populated areas. The roadways are also just not very attractive.
- Project CR19, which is the widening of WV 2 east/north of Huntington.
- Project LR1, which is the completion of the Chesapeake bypass from OH 527 east to Proctorville.
- Project LR4, which is a OH 7-US 35 connector. This is the first I've seen or heard of this which would duplicate a very empty OH 7 along the Ohio River.
- Project WR1, which is a bridge for Interstate 73/74 between Interstate 64 in Ceredo, W. Virginia and US 52 near South Point, Ohio. This is the first I've seen of this and I'm not sure it's needed if they plan on replacing the W. 17th Street bridge.
- Projects WR5-9 are projects to support the widening of US 52 south of Ceredo, W. Virginia.
- Projects WR12-13 are projects to widen WV 152 south of I-64. This road has a high accident rate and hasn't been improved essentially since it was first improved some 70 years ago.

There are various projects listed for Kentucky. If you scroll further down the document, each project is broken out into their own pages.

I wouldn't put a lot of stock in the list. They're basically a formality. WVDOH's own internal plans are what matter. They are notorious for going to MPO's and basically forcing them to rewrite their own documents to conform to what the state wanted to do anyway.

[vdeane]

They are notorious for going to MPO's and basically forcing them to rewrite their own documents to conform to what the state wanted to do anyway.

That's quite a lot of power WV has over the MPOs.  I can't even imagine something like that happening here in NY! 

[hbelkins]

They are notorious for going to MPO's and basically forcing them to rewrite their own documents to conform to what the state wanted to do anyway.

That's quite a lot of power WV has over the MPOs.  I can't even imagine something like that happening here in NY! 

MPOs (and in Kentucky, area development districts) can wish-list to their heart's content. The state controls the purse strings and the legislature decides what gets built and what doesn't.

Looking at the WV list, there's plenty of ROW for a widening of WV 2 up to about the Cabell-Mason county line. And on the Ohio side, finishing the OH 7 bypass should be the top priority. I can't see building a new "I-73/I-74" bridge and also building a new US 52 bridge, especially since there will never be an interstate between Mt. Airy (or Bluefield, if you prefer) and Cincinnati.

[froggie]

MPOs (and in Kentucky, area development districts) can wish-list to their heart's content.

Well they can, and at the same time they can't.  Federal law requires all MPO long-range transportation plans to be fiscally constrained.  They can include unfunded wish lists, but the core of the plan needs to fit within the funding forecast.

The state controls the purse strings and the legislature decides what gets built and what doesn't.

Also a yes-and-no.  Legislatures as a general rule decide what gets funded and what doesn't, and in some states projects may require legislative approval.  But not all states have that requirement.  But any project in an MPO involving Federal funds is required by Federal law to be approved by that MPO and be listed on the MPO's STIP and long range plan.  This is where the aforementioned DOT strong-arming the MPO comes into play.

[Bitmapped]

I can't see building a new "I-73/I-74" bridge and also building a new US 52 bridge, especially since there will never be an interstate between Mt. Airy (or Bluefield, if you prefer) and Cincinnati.

Agreed - these two projects would be redundant. My gut says the 4-lane replacement for the US 52 bridge is the better project. The existing bridge is 53 years old, so it would probably be up for replacement within the planning scope they're looking at anyhow.

[seicer]

Would it be, though? Kentucky plans on keeping the 89-year-old Ohio River crossing at Henderson for another 50+ years. It would only be replaced if it needed widening, which I think is the overriding motive.

[Rothman]

They are notorious for going to MPO's and basically forcing them to rewrite their own documents to conform to what the state wanted to do anyway.

That's quite a lot of power WV has over the MPOs.  I can't even imagine something like that happening here in NY! 

Depends on the MPO.  Whoever signs off on the STIP has control; DOTs will never chance yanking funds from an MPO due to the subsequent uproar, so that threat is nonexistent.  There was a particular blunder in NYSDOT's MO about a decade ago when a couple of MPOs came crying for control of the STIP -- notably after a couple of RPPMs moved on and green newbies were in -- and NYSDOT handed it over.

Then again, ECTC and Watertown?  Not much MPO power there.

(personal opinion emphasized)

[Bitmapped]

They are notorious for going to MPO's and basically forcing them to rewrite their own documents to conform to what the state wanted to do anyway.

That's quite a lot of power WV has over the MPOs.  I can't even imagine something like that happening here in NY! 

Depends on the MPO.  Whoever signs off on the STIP has control; DOTs will never chance yanking funds from an MPO due to the subsequent uproar, so that threat is nonexistent.  There was a particular blunder in NYSDOT's MO about a decade ago when a couple of MPOs came crying for control of the STIP -- notably after a couple of RPPMs moved on and green newbies were in -- and NYSDOT handed it over.

Maybe that's the case with NYSDOT, but that's not how WVDOH operates with MPOs. They just yanked a $100M northern bypass of Morgantown that was promised under the Roads to Prosperity bond amendment. The dollars are gone and being spent elsewhere in the state.

[Rothman]

They are notorious for going to MPO's and basically forcing them to rewrite their own documents to conform to what the state wanted to do anyway.

That's quite a lot of power WV has over the MPOs.  I can't even imagine something like that happening here in NY! 

Depends on the MPO.  Whoever signs off on the STIP has control; DOTs will never chance yanking funds from an MPO due to the subsequent uproar, so that threat is nonexistent.  There was a particular blunder in NYSDOT's MO about a decade ago when a couple of MPOs came crying for control of the STIP -- notably after a couple of RPPMs moved on and green newbies were in -- and NYSDOT handed it over.

Maybe that's the case with NYSDOT, but that's not how WVDOH operates with MPOs. They just yanked a $100M northern bypass of Morgantown that was promised under the Roads to Prosperity bond amendment. The dollars are gone and being spent elsewhere in the state.

Bond?  That sounds like borrowed state funding.  MPOs only have jurisdiction over federal funds.

[seicer]

https://sports.yahoo.com/northern-bypass-used-push-roads-050100675.html (you know, from Yahoo Sports)

"Of the $273 million in projects dangled before voters in the run up to the Oct. 7, 2017 special election, $100 million was earmarked for a new I-79 connector, or "northern bypass, " which would provide an alternative to the congested portions of W.Va. 705 and Monongahela Boulevard and access a new interchange on I-79, north of the existing Exit 155.

Roughly 80 % of Monongalia County voters supported the constitutional amendment allowing for the sale of up to $1.6 billion in bonds for road repair and construction.

The first red flag went up in August 2020, when the project was pulled from the Roads to Prosperity line-up as it wouldn't be ready in time for bonding. Instead, it would be the target of federal transportation dollars."

I learned something new about the project today.

[Dirt Roads]

https://sports.yahoo.com/northern-bypass-used-push-roads-050100675.html (you know, from Yahoo Sports)

"Of the $273 million in projects dangled before voters in the run up to the Oct. 7, 2017 special election, $100 million was earmarked for a new I-79 connector, or "northern bypass, " which would provide an alternative to the congested portions of W.Va. 705 and Monongahela Boulevard and access a new interchange on I-79, north of the existing Exit 155.

Roughly 80 % of Monongalia County voters supported the constitutional amendment allowing for the sale of up to $1.6 billion in bonds for road repair and construction.

The first red flag went up in August 2020, when the project was pulled from the Roads to Prosperity line-up as it wouldn't be ready in time for bonding. Instead, it would be the target of federal transportation dollars."

I learned something new about the project today.

Gosh, this has been needed since the "new" Mountaineer Field first opened in 1980.  I was disappointed that the DOH took the short route to connect the Mon-Fayette to I-68 when they desperately needed a new route across the northern part of Morgantown to relieve both Mountaineer Field traffic and provide northeast access to the Coliseum and the Evansdale Campus.

On a similar note, it still amazes me that much of the main access to Mountaineer Field isn't designated with a state route number.  I always thought the DOH should have multiplexed the WV-705 designation with US-119 along the Mileground and then continue on Cheat Road (LSR-857) to the Pierpont Road exit (Exit 7 of I-68).  At least these days the signs are marked "To WV-705". 

[seicer]

Is there a map of the proposed bypass?

[hbelkins]

Would it be, though? Kentucky plans on keeping the 89-year-old Ohio River crossing at Henderson for another 50+ years. It would only be replaced if it needed widening, which I think is the overriding motive.

Of course, the difference is the assumption that the new I-69 bridge will divert most of the traffic off US 41, while a new four-lane US 52 bridge could be very easily incorporated into a full four-lane freeway without the need for a separate interstate bridge.

[Bitmapped]

They are notorious for going to MPO's and basically forcing them to rewrite their own documents to conform to what the state wanted to do anyway.

That's quite a lot of power WV has over the MPOs.  I can't even imagine something like that happening here in NY! 

Depends on the MPO.  Whoever signs off on the STIP has control; DOTs will never chance yanking funds from an MPO due to the subsequent uproar, so that threat is nonexistent.  There was a particular blunder in NYSDOT's MO about a decade ago when a couple of MPOs came crying for control of the STIP -- notably after a couple of RPPMs moved on and green newbies were in -- and NYSDOT handed it over.

Maybe that's the case with NYSDOT, but that's not how WVDOH operates with MPOs. They just yanked a $100M northern bypass of Morgantown that was promised under the Roads to Prosperity bond amendment. The dollars are gone and being spent elsewhere in the state.

Bond?  That sounds like borrowed state funding.  MPOs only have jurisdiction over federal funds.

As noted in the article seicer shared below, it was to be state bond dollars, then it was going to be paid for with federal funds, then it went poof altogether. The Roads to Prosperity bonds were supposed to be large projects (like Corridor H and the Coalfields Expressway) that were going to be paid for entirely with state dollars. What's ended up happening is that a lot of stuff got shifted to federal dollars instead, some money never was really there because they lowballed estimated and overpromised relative to available dollars, and a lot of the bond money has been eaten up with run-of-the-mill resurfacing projects.

Is there a map of the proposed bypass?

See https://www.wvnews.com/statejournal/morgantown-s-long-range-plans-envision-new-bridge-over-the-mon/article_d1edc3ad-3ab8-5295-ba3c-292cc3312e57.html

To be honest, it was a dumb project to begin with. It didn't tie back to I-68 on the east end and would only divert a minimal amount of traffic off WV 705 because you'd have to go way out of your way to get to it. Converting WV 705 to a Superstreet-like corridor would be a much more appropriate project IMO.

[wriddle082]

I can definitely see a need for a new US 52 bridge or at least a twin.  I do remember back in the late 80’s when it was in absolutely horrible shape prior to its early 90’s rehabilitation.  US 52 from Coal Grove to Chesapeake is the shortest/most efficient way to get from Ashland to Huntington and I-64 heading east towards Charleston.

As for the I-73/74 bridge at Ceredo, in a perfect world it could get built, since it lines up with the improvements that WVDOH is trying to make with US 52 south of Ceredo.  Obviously they need to come up with a true plan for the rest of the highway first, then worry about Ohio River bridges later.  The US 52 bridge location wouldn’t work that well for 73/74 on the WV side since the current I-64 interchange is up against a giant hillside to its south.  Might work out on the OH side though, since I think you could build a new path north of the current US 52/OH 7 trumpet interchange.

I only read about half of the document since it was very long, but at one time I remember KYTC studying a possible “Ashland Urban Penetrator” which I assume would better connect either I-64 or KY 67 with Downtown Ashland.  Is this still being discussed?

-Billy Riddie, who attended Grades 1-7 in Ashland, and still has relatives and friends in the area.

[seicer]

I haven't heard of anything about the urban "penetrator" (that would make for a great roadway name) other than an article here-and-there about long-shot KYOVA plans. I think that the KY 67/Industrial Parkway relieved some traffic from US 60. The development of the Parkway is probably the reason why we aren't hearing of any need for an Ashland bypass, too.

[Dirt Roads]

- Project CB2, which is the replacement of the West 17th Street Bridge which carries US 52 over the Ohio River between Chesapeake, Ohio, and Huntington, W. Virginia. I'm not sure this one is needed from a structural point of view; it's still in good condition. But it is two lanes and over capacity.
- Project WR1, which is a bridge for Interstate 73/74 between Interstate 64 in Ceredo, W. Virginia and US 52 near South Point, Ohio. This is the first I've seen of this and I'm not sure it's needed if they plan on replacing the W. 17th Street bridge.

I can definitely see a need for a new US 52 bridge or at least a twin.  I do remember back in the late 80’s when it was in absolutely horrible shape prior to its early 90’s rehabilitation.  US 52 from Coal Grove to Chesapeake is the shortest/most efficient way to get from Ashland to Huntington and I-64 heading east towards Charleston.

As for the I-73/74 bridge at Ceredo, in a perfect world it could get built, since it lines up with the improvements that WVDOH is trying to make with US 52 south of Ceredo.  Obviously they need to come up with a true plan for the rest of the highway first, then worry about Ohio River bridges later.  The US 52 bridge location wouldn’t work that well for 73/74 on the WV side since the current I-64 interchange is up against a giant hillside to its south.  Might work out on the OH side though, since I think you could build a new path north of the current US 52/OH 7 trumpet interchange.

There's only one place near Ceredo that makes any sense to cross the Ohio River, and that is straight over top of the strangely-named Kanawha River Coal Terminal.  This also just happens to be between Ceredo and the Kellogg section of West Huntington, which is only about 1-1/2 miles west of the West Huntington Bridge.  I agree that this is an either-or option between CB2 and WR1.

For curiosity sake, Kanawha River Terminal is the name of the company that has been gobbled up by SunCoke Energy.  Kanawha River also operated another coal terminal at Quincy, which is located just across the (you guessed it) Kanawha River from the Chelyan exit of the West Virginia Turnpike (Exit 85).  There's also a coal port on the Chelyan side (operated by a different company) that is located directly across from the Quincy Terminal.

[hbelkins]

I haven't heard of anything about the urban "penetrator" (that would make for a great roadway name) other than an article here-and-there about long-shot KYOVA plans. I think that the KY 67/Industrial Parkway relieved some traffic from US 60. The development of the Parkway is probably the reason why we aren't hearing of any need for an Ashland bypass, too.

There's still discussion of an extension of KY 67 that would tie in to US 23 at KY 645. That would be a very wide bypass of Ashland but would probably be faster for through traffic heading north of Ashland and the Russell/Flatwoods area toward Portsmouth.

I'm a fan of the Industrial Parkway. If I ever had reason to go to Columbus ever again, I won't be going through Cincinnati. And the Portsmouth Bypass will make the trip even faster.

[oscar]

I haven't heard of anything about the urban "penetrator" (that would make for a great roadway name)

Reminds me of kurumi's remark about the I-194 Penetrator in Battle Creek, Michigan, "which thankfully has not been used for the name of a breakfast cereal".

What drew me here, though, is the weird "KYOVA" name of the organization behind the report being discussed here, which has no connection to Virginia, only West Virginia. Yeah, "KYOWV" doesn't roll off the tongue as easily, but would be less confusing about its geographic focus.

[Bitmapped]

What drew me here, though, is the weird "KYOVA" name of the organization behind the report being discussed here, which has no connection to Virginia, only West Virginia. Yeah, "KYOWV" doesn't roll off the tongue as easily, but would be less confusing about its geographic focus.

The Kyova name is sometimes used to refer to the Huntington-Ashland area, including being used by a dead mall outside Ashland. There is also a town named Kenova in West Virginia that is immediately adjacent to the KY/OH/WV tripoint.

[seicer]

I haven't heard of anything about the urban "penetrator" (that would make for a great roadway name) other than an article here-and-there about long-shot KYOVA plans. I think that the KY 67/Industrial Parkway relieved some traffic from US 60. The development of the Parkway is probably the reason why we aren't hearing of any need for an Ashland bypass, too.

There's still discussion of an extension of KY 67 that would tie in to US 23 at KY 645. That would be a very wide bypass of Ashland but would probably be faster for through traffic heading north of Ashland and the Russell/Flatwoods area toward Portsmouth.

I'm a fan of the Industrial Parkway. If I ever had reason to go to Columbus ever again, I won't be going through Cincinnati. And the Portsmouth Bypass will make the trip even faster.

That's where I looked at the roadway plans online (thanks to KYTC) and found that the I-64 interchange's awkward design is because of that proposed extension southward.

[Tom958]

- Project CB2, which is the replacement of the West 17th Street Bridge which carries US 52 over the Ohio River between Chesapeake, Ohio, and Huntington, W. Virginia. I'm not sure this one is needed from a structural point of view; it's still in good condition. But it is two lanes and over capacity.
- Project WR1, which is a bridge for Interstate 73/74 between Interstate 64 in Ceredo, W. Virginia and US 52 near South Point, Ohio. This is the first I've seen of this and I'm not sure it's needed if they plan on replacing the W. 17th Street bridge.

I can definitely see a need for a new US 52 bridge or at least a twin.  I do remember back in the late 80’s when it was in absolutely horrible shape prior to its early 90’s rehabilitation.  US 52 from Coal Grove to Chesapeake is the shortest/most efficient way to get from Ashland to Huntington and I-64 heading east towards Charleston.

As for the I-73/74 bridge at Ceredo, in a perfect world it could get built, since it lines up with the improvements that WVDOH is trying to make with US 52 south of Ceredo.  Obviously they need to come up with a true plan for the rest of the highway first, then worry about Ohio River bridges later.  The US 52 bridge location wouldn’t work that well for 73/74 on the WV side since the current I-64 interchange is up against a giant hillside to its south.  Might work out on the OH side though, since I think you could build a new path north of the current US 52/OH 7 trumpet interchange.

There's only one place near Ceredo that makes any sense to cross the Ohio River, and that is straight over top of the strangely-named Kanawha River Coal Terminal.  This also just happens to be between Ceredo and the Kellogg section of West Huntington, which is only about 1-1/2 miles west of the West Huntington Bridge.  I agree that this is an either-or option between CB2 and WR1.

I'd cast my vote for the Ceredo bridge, hoping and believing that it'd divert enough traffic from the US 52 bridge to ease any congestion there. That said, I find it regrettable that there's no bridge splitting the eleven-mile distance between the Ashland and US 52 bridges. Ceredo is four miles downstream from US 52, not ideal in that regard but a definite improvement, plus it's the best place to connect I-64 and US 52 along the river.

It's way too late now, but I wish that there had been an original Interstate along US 23 from Asheville, NC to Findlay, OH, and I still idly imagine upgrading the entire corridor to something approaching controlled access. A Ceredo bridge would be a valuable element of such a corridor.

[Buck87]

There's still discussion of an extension of KY 67 that would tie in to US 23 at KY 645. That would be a very wide bypass of Ashland but would probably be faster for through traffic heading north of Ashland and the Russell/Flatwoods area toward Portsmouth.

Interesting. How serious is that talk?

As the crow flies that would be 48 miles, which is about 3 times the length of the existing Industrial Parkway.

[hbelkins]

There's still discussion of an extension of KY 67 that would tie in to US 23 at KY 645. That would be a very wide bypass of Ashland but would probably be faster for through traffic heading north of Ashland and the Russell/Flatwoods area toward Portsmouth.

Interesting. How serious is that talk?

As the crow flies that would be 48 miles, which is about 3 times the length of the existing Industrial Parkway.

It will be interesting to see what funding for such a project is included in the budget the Kentucky General Assembly is considering.

KYTC recently released its suggested six-year plan but I haven't looked at it yet.