Corridor H

[hbelkins]

I drove it eastbound last week. I still don't understand why parts of it are on a completely new alignment, while others will use the existing WV 93 as the westbound Corridor H lanes.

Some have mentioned increased law enforcement along the route. I didn't see any -- only a local law enforcement officer having someone stopped on the access road from US 220 to US 48 at Moorefield, and said stop would not have been initiated on Corridor H.

[Bitmapped]

It also seems that West Virginia is switching to snowplowable recessed markers by installing a groove 8' in length to hold two markers. (Very similar to what Kentucky is now doing after numerous tests over the past few years: http://uknowledge.uky.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1310&context=ktc_researchreports). The new markers were very effective at night and in the rain on my last trip.

I also noticed plowable RPMs in recessed grooves on a newly resurfaced section of US 33 at Allegheny Mountain this past weekend. This is a brand new practice for WVDOH. Hopefully itwill help the markers last longer as WV has never been good about replacing damaged pavement markers and they tend to put the blade directly on the surface when plowing.

[oscar]

Just got back from an afternoon tour of the newest Corridor H section.

There's still no US 48 signage at the WV 32 junction. Indeed, for the 0.8 mile east of that junction, no obvious improvements have been made nor are any under construction. For the next seven miles or so, there's two lanes of concrete pavement (both directions of traffic two-way on what will become the EB roadway). For the parallel future WB roadway under construction, about half is unfinished concrete pavement and the rest is only graded.

The old WV 93 roadway west of the Tucker/Grant county line, that had carried traffic around the new segment while it was u/c, has now been closed off at both ends. All WV 93 traffic west of the county line is now on the new roadways, signed as US 48/WV 93. WV 93 traffic was also moved off fragments of old WV 93 roadway west of the new US 48 segment, to the future US 48 EB lanes, due to curve straightening.

I'll add more later after reviewing my photos. You can also read more (mostly GPS reads and other boring stuff, to get the new segment added to the Travel Mapping highway database) at the Clinched Highway Mapping forum, http://clinched.s2.bizhat.com/viewtopic.php?t=2332&start=15&mforum=clinched

[hbelkins]

There's really no reason that West Virginia can't extend the US 48 designation to at least the US 219 intersection at Thomas.

[oscar]

There's really no reason that West Virginia can't extend the US 48 designation to at least the US 219 intersection at Thomas.

Other than WVDOT's apparent preference for not extending the US 48 designation westward except for segments upgraded to "corridor" standards (at a minimum, four lanes divided, perhaps also with limited but not necessarily controlled access).

I think the designation is far less important than the improved road, so it's OK to tie the two. But it would be nice to at least extend the designation to WV 32, since the road has been at least partially upgraded except for that last 0.8 mile to the WV 32 junction.

[cpzilliacus]

Just got back from an afternoon tour of the newest Corridor H section.

There's still no US 48 signage at the WV 32 junction. Indeed, for the 0.8 mile east of that junction, no obvious improvements have been made nor are any under construction. For the next seven miles or so, there's two lanes of concrete pavement (both directions of traffic two-way on what will become the EB roadway). For the parallel future WB roadway under construction, about half is unfinished concrete pavement and the rest is only graded.

The old WV 93 roadway west of the Tucker/Grant county line, that had carried traffic around the new segment while it was u/c, has now been closed off at both ends. All WV 93 traffic west of the county line is now on the new roadways, signed as US 48/WV 93. WV 93 traffic was also moved off fragments of old WV 93 roadway west of the new US 48 segment, to the future US 48 EB lanes, due to curve straightening.

I'll add more later after reviewing my photos. You can also read more (mostly GPS reads and other boring stuff, to get the new segment added to the Travel Mapping highway database) at the Clinched Highway Mapping forum, http://clinched.s2.bizhat.com/viewtopic.php?t=2332&start=15&mforum=clinched

I drove it this past Black Friday.  The section of old W.Va. 93 just west of the Tucker County/Grant County border has been blocked-off  with Jersey barriers and barrels, and is probably waiting to be torn-out. 

Many sections of old W.Va. 93 in Tucker County (closer to Davis) have been ripped-out down to the subgrade. Long sections of the westbound lanes have been paved, and will presumably be opened sometime in calendar year 2016 (no lines have been painted or pavement markers placed). 

Closer to the juvenile jail outside Davis, it appears that the new westbound lanes will be built next year (looks like subgrade has yet to be placed, and that may be waiting for the 2016 construction season).

For the first time ever, I saw a West Virginia trooper car out on a traffic stop between the juvenile jail and the Grant County line. 

Previously, I had seen West Virginia troopers on patrol along eastern Corridor H, but not on traffic stops (I had seen the Hardy County and Grant County deputies on traffic stops). I have seen them stopping drivers along western Corridor H.

[CVski]

Two lanes in each direction are now open from A-Frame Road eastward.  That merge point is just about 1 mile east of the entrance to the Mettiki coal mine, and ~8.7 miles east of the intersection with WV32. 

The blue ARC mile markers are not quite all in place to that point yet; (I think the first one I noticed may have been MM 76.5, and spaced every 0.5 mile), but if they were, A-Frame Rd would be at about ~72.7.  The exit at Wardensville is at about ~128.2 miles. 

So there are now ~55.5 miles of continuous four lane Corridor H highway open through Tucker, Grant, and Hardy counties, and all of it is posted at 65 MPH.

I also found a WVDOT District 8 Work Zone status page that indicates the entire WV93 segment is due for completion on 9/1/2016. 

Here's the link:  http://www.transportation.wv.gov/highways/districts/district-eight/Pages/work-zones.aspx




 

[cpzilliacus]

WVDOT has received bids on the section of Corridor H from Kerens to a new connector road to U.S. 219 south of Parsons. 

The apparent low bidder is Kokosing Construction Company, Inc. of Westerville, Ohio

From poking around on the BidX site (here), it appears little work will start until relatively late in calendar year 2016, so there may not be that much to see during the Corridor H meet in May.

According to the WVDOT documents on that site, the contractor has to have the project complete by April 2019.

[cpzilliacus]

Thanks to all that attended the Corridor H meet.  Final meet notes are here.

A few observations from the meet. 

Not much has happened since April along the new construction work that will extend western Corridor H from Kerens into Tucker County between the Tucker County/Randolph County line and the unincorporated community of Moore.

The area of land that had been cleared beyond the bridges that mark the current end of western Corridor H did not appear to have been touched. H. B. suggested (and I agree with him) that the contractor may have to wait until fall to start clearing and grubbing work along this section of Corridor H.

At the far western end of the eastern section of Corridor H (near Davis), the last several miles are something like a Super-2 highway.  All traffic is using the eastbound lanes.  Some of the new westbound lanes have been poured (all of it will apparently be concrete), but the last few miles approaching the interim western end of eastern Corridor H are not completely graded yet, with the exception of the bridge near the juvenile facility over Beaver Creek (at least that is what Google calls it), which is complete for both directions (but all traffic is using the bridge for eastbound movements).

[hbelkins]

The area of land that had been cleared beyond the bridges that mark the current end of western Corridor H did not appear to have been touched. H. B. suggested (and I agree with him) that the contractor may have to wait until fall to start clearing and grubbing work along this section of Corridor H.

Kentucky is restricted to tree-cutting during winter months (I think November to March) because of requirements that bat habitat not being disturbed. We have one project on which clearing and grubbing will be delayed until this fall because of delays in awarding the contract caused the tree-cutting window to be missed.

[Jmiles32]

That's great, I support corridor H and hopefully when it's finshed will help basically revive West Virginia's economy. I have no doubt that this is road will probably be completed in WV in 15 years. The problem though is the section in VA form the boarder to I-81. Were there any updates on this section? I can't see Vdot building this section using it's own money since it means everything to WV and really doesn't impact VA at all. A similar problem occurred on the WV/VA route 9 corridor in the DC region. WV put all this money in to upgrading their portion of it to VA line to help their DC commuters. The problem is VA isn't upgrading their section because VA people don't use it. So the highway turns into a little farm road. Basically somebody throw WV a bone whether it be VA or the Feds.

[codyg1985]

I think it would actually help Virginia in that it would take some traffic off of I-81 between US 48 and I-64.

[froggie]

Not enough to be worthwhile.  Despite the congestion, trucks will stick to I-81 because A) lacks the traffic signals along both the western part of Corridor H and along US 19 (between Beckley and I-79), B) is less hilly and a gentler grade than dipping into West Virginia, and C) is less mileage than dipping into West Virginia.

Regarding Jmiles' comment, I believe it was discussed up-thread (probably a ways back), but VDOT considered their portion but pulled the plug.  Not just because of NIMBYs, but because the benefit of the route to Virginia was far less than the cost of constructing it.  Nevermind that, aside from the need for spot improvements here and there, the existing route is not that bad of a route.  I would certainly push for spot improvements along VA 55 (sic US 48), namely shoulder/bridge widening, a few left turn lanes, and perhaps a passing lane or two (especially on the westbound uphill towards the state line), but a full 4-lane corridor is not necessary.

[seicer]

Corridor H will not revive the economy. The highlands was wholly dependent on timbering and coal mining, both of which are or have declined. Timbering started to drop off by the early 20th century as the original growth stands were depleted. Coal has begun its drastic decline in this century and is not expected to recover (for a variety of reasons that's not on topic here).

For that area, tourism is the best bet and a growth industry. Corridor H improves access to the Mon National Forest, numerous state parks, several wildernesses, a few ski resorts, and rail excursions (Elkins, Durbin, and Cass). It won't bring back that area's population - and nor should it. Those towns were considered "boom and bust" communities and lived and died by one (sometimes two) industry.

[SP Cook]

Sheman is pretty much right.  This is really a different economy than most of WV.  After you get east of the continental divide, you are out of coal country.  There is not that displaced "excess" polulation that used to mine coal.  Grant and Hardy counties' peak population is, umm, currently.   Very different from coal counties (including those further west on H).  The blunt point is there is not developable land for manufacturing.   Nor is there an economic system nor an educational infastructure to support manufacturing.

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

[cl94]

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

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.

[Bitmapped]

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

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.

[seicer]

I-68 exists for those looking to "shunpike" Pennsylvania. To the south, I-64 exists, and even then, AADT is now under 10,000. It looks like WVDOH may have been using a formula with prior AADT's as the new numbers are much more precise.

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.

[cpzilliacus]

I-68 exists for those looking to "shunpike" Pennsylvania. To the south, I-64 exists, and even then, AADT is now under 10,000. It looks like WVDOH may have been using a formula with prior AADT's as the new numbers are much more precise.

I-68 was not built as a route to shunpike the Pennsylvania Turnpike (but as Pennsylvania has raised (and will keep raising) tolls to subsidize transit all around the state, it has become an increasingly attractive route for some trucks).  The Maryland part of I-68 was built as a way to increase highway connectivity between its two western counties (Garrett and Allegany) and the rest of the state, and to make those counties more attractive to tourist traffic from places to the east (Maryland and elsewhere).

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.?

[cpzilliacus]

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.

But they will take it if Corridor H is shorter than I-68 (Corridor E), and perhaps more-direct (and no tolls) than using I-64.  Even though Corridor H is not a freeway-class road, its expressway-type design is plenty good enough for truck traffic.

The present U.S. routes (33, 50, and 250) that cross the Alleghenies near Corridor H are not practical for most trucks (and for drivers without the experience on such roads), and I suspect that most trucking company managers actively discourage or forbid their drivers from using them.

[1995hoo]

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

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.

[CVski]

  The blunt point is there is not developable land for manufacturing.   Nor is there an economic system nor an educational infastructure to support manufacturing.

There's certainly available land and there's also an underutilized workforce, and within those two, some basis for economic growth.  Get to know the good folks of the highland counties of WV (Tucker, Randolph, Pocahontas to name just three) and you hear a familiar tale running through the last three or four generations.  Their kids grow up, get their educations, (sometimes very good ones), and then they move away, far from home. 

Take a drive through the US 550 or 340 corridors from Winchester/Stephens City to Front Royal (some of you just did), and see the manufacturing and transportation complexes, the expanding communities, the opportunities for economic growth.  Contrast and compare with the highland counties of WV.  The missions of the ARC and ADHS may not be any more relevant anywhere else.

How strong were Winchester and Front Royal's infrastructures before I-81 and I-66 came through?   In 1950 or 1960, how did folks from the east describe the economic potential of Virginia's northwestern counties?  What do we think today?

[hbelkins]

I-68 was built using the same funding mechanism that's building US 48 -- ADHS funding.

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?

I had mentioned last fall that Moorefield has grown since Corridor H opened. And that was just what I observed right at the intersection of Corridor H and US 220/WV 28. On my way from Weston to Front Royal Saturday, I opted to follow my GPS' suggested routing to go from Elkins via Harman, Seneca Rocks and Petersburg to get to Moorefield. This was my first time to travel through downtown Moorefield on US 220 in several years. While Petersburg was always bigger than Moorefield in terms of the number of businesses, Petersburg appears to have stagnated. Moorefield, on the other hand, has grown on the other end of town opposite Corridor H as well as around the interchange. And I understand there are new businesses on the north side of Corridor H that I didn't see.

[seicer]

I-68 exists for those looking to "shunpike" Pennsylvania. To the south, I-64 exists, and even then, AADT is now under 10,000. It looks like WVDOH may have been using a formula with prior AADT's as the new numbers are much more precise.

I-68 was not built as a route to shunpike the Pennsylvania Turnpike (but as Pennsylvania has raised (and will keep raising) tolls to subsidized transit all around the state, it has become an increasingly attractive route for some trucks).  The Maryland part of I-68 was built as a way to increase highway connectivity between its two western counties (Garrett and Allegany) and the rest of the state, and to make those counties more attractive to tourist traffic from places to the east (Maryland and elsewhere).

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've driven all of those roads plenty of times - and plenty of unpaved roads in that area as well (if you think that I am un-credible in that sense). I've spent more time in that part of West Virginia than any other part of the state backpacking, exploring the wildernesses, skiing, fly fishing...

And while it is understood that I-68 was not built to "shunpike" the PA Turnpike, it carries a significant amount of traffic whose sole purpose is to divert around the increasingly unaffordable turnpike. I have a decent paying job, but even the tolls are starting to pinch into my wallet, considering the routes I take to get to the central part of the state. Lately, I've been "shunpiking" and finding alternate routes that only add 30 minutes to an hour, which is acceptable. I can't imagine what it's like for a trucker - many of who are now contractors that don't even make minimum wage. (The Atlantic did a fantastic article on this in May: http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2016/05/truck-stop/481926/)

And while it is understood that Corridor H's traffic levels will undoubtly increase, to what levels is still unknown. Absent of the mandate that interstates be four-lanes, if we looked at figures for I-64 in southern West Virginia, most segments could be just fine with two lanes with passing corridors. Corridor H goes through just as remote of an area and would have satisfactory levels of service with two lanes and climbing lanes where needed. It has excellent sight distances that passing zones would be exceptional.

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. Portions of the King Coal Highway/US 52 are being built with two lanes. And in other states, like Kentucky, the state has done "value engineering" to reduce the number of lanes on many of its projects - like KY 67, the Maysville/US 68 bypass, while leaving the ROW intact, to save money.

[cl94]

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. Portions of the King Coal Highway/US 52 are being built with two lanes. And in other states, like Kentucky, the state has done "value engineering" to reduce the number of lanes on many of its projects - like KY 67, the Maysville/US 68 bypass, while leaving the ROW intact, to save money.

Because, in the case of Corridor H, the federal government is paying for it. Construction money comes out of ARC funds.