AARoads Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

New rules to ensure post quality. See this thread for details.

Author Topic: US 35 in West Virginia  (Read 42783 times)

hbelkins

  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 17505
  • It is well, it is well, with my soul.

  • Age: 60
  • Location: Kentucky
  • Last Login: May 15, 2022, 08:09:45 PM
    • Millennium Highway
Logged


I identify as vaccinated.

Alps

  • y u m
  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 14909
  • Elimitante the truck trarffic,

  • Age: 39
  • Location: New Jersey
  • Last Login: May 15, 2022, 11:07:14 PM
    • Alps' Roads
Re: US 35 in West Virginia
« Reply #1 on: October 21, 2013, 08:32:00 PM »

US 35 ends at I-64. What's the fuss?

hbelkins

  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 17505
  • It is well, it is well, with my soul.

  • Age: 60
  • Location: Kentucky
  • Last Login: May 15, 2022, 08:09:45 PM
    • Millennium Highway
Re: US 35 in West Virginia
« Reply #2 on: October 21, 2013, 09:53:23 PM »

That two-lane section between Buffalo and Henderson that hasn't been replaced/bypassed yet.
Logged


I identify as vaccinated.

SP Cook

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2447
  • Last Login: May 13, 2022, 12:02:14 PM
Re: US 35 in West Virginia
« Reply #3 on: October 22, 2013, 07:27:51 AM »

The 12 mile gap in 35 is a deathroad.  The issue is that WV saw this coming for decades and did nothing.  If you look at a map of Ohio, you see that three four lane routes eventually funnel into Point Pleasant, and end up on the 2 lane of 35, going down to 64 and then south on 77.  Plus you have the issue of the massive Toyota plant, served by the road.  Anyone could see this coming as the various roads in Ohio were completed in the 90s and the traffic volumes grew and grew. 

Meanwhile the state government fiddled.  Building, under one governor from Fairmont, a total rebuild of that dying town's interstate access; and now under another from Logan, a four lane to absolutely nowhere from one dying town in Logan county to the next.  Plus Corridor H, which, while important, will never have the traffic volumes of 35. 

So tons of tourists and tons of trucks end up on a rural 12 road designed for local traffic only, and used by farmers on tractors.    Massive numbers of accidents.

When the turnpike tolls were (illegally) continued on the paid off turnpike back in the 80s, the local state senator (then a very powerful pol) was told that the excess would be spent on 35 (of course, they instead did all of the things outlined in the devastating Legislative Auditor's report of that corrupt agency).  Then a few years ago there was a crazy (and probably illegal) idea to finish the 12 miles and toll the whole 40 miles (which would place a toll on a road build from general gas tax money) which almost went through, until the turnpike's $150K/year manager overplayed his cards and announced the toll, which was ridiculously high.  Toyota killed that one by itself.

The answer is, of course, to simply build the road.   Free, and with the regular gas tax money currently used on other, far less important projects.


 
Logged

NE2

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 14292
  • fuck

  • Age: 14
  • Location: central Florida
  • Last Login: May 15, 2022, 10:27:41 PM
Re: US 35 in West Virginia
« Reply #4 on: October 22, 2013, 08:58:05 AM »

If you look at a map of Ohio, you see that three four lane routes eventually funnel into Point Pleasant,
You're right:

Oopsie, I made a strawman. US 33 feeds into I-77 and Corridor D feeds into Corridor D. And it's not like Corridor D empties a bunch of traffic onto US 35 at Jackson; on the contrary, there's more traffic on US 35 northwest of Jackson than on the part leading up to the bridge in either state. (The bridge itself has more, but that's expected because bridges are choke points.)
Logged
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".

I agree to indemnify Belkin against unauthorized use of its MiniVak vacuum.

Alps

  • y u m
  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 14909
  • Elimitante the truck trarffic,

  • Age: 39
  • Location: New Jersey
  • Last Login: May 15, 2022, 11:07:14 PM
    • Alps' Roads
Re: US 35 in West Virginia
« Reply #5 on: October 22, 2013, 07:33:13 PM »

That two-lane section between Buffalo and Henderson that hasn't been replaced/bypassed yet.
Well the article misled me, then. Now it makes sense.

hbelkins

  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 17505
  • It is well, it is well, with my soul.

  • Age: 60
  • Location: Kentucky
  • Last Login: May 15, 2022, 08:09:45 PM
    • Millennium Highway
Re: US 35 in West Virginia
« Reply #6 on: October 22, 2013, 08:42:14 PM »

If you look at a map of Ohio, you see that three four lane routes eventually funnel into Point Pleasant,
You're right:

Oopsie, I made a strawman. US 33 feeds into I-77 and Corridor D feeds into Corridor D. And it's not like Corridor D empties a bunch of traffic onto US 35 at Jackson; on the contrary, there's more traffic on US 35 northwest of Jackson than on the part leading up to the bridge in either state. (The bridge itself has more, but that's expected because bridges are choke points.)

I suspect US 23 is the other route he's referring to, since it intersects 35 at Chillicothe. I haven't compared mileage and travel times between Charleston and Columbus lately, but my first instinct would be 64 to 35 to 23 over 77 to 33.

Of course I never really thought that 77 to 271 to 90 would be a better route from Charleston to Erie than staying on 79 the whole way.
Logged


I identify as vaccinated.

SP Cook

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2447
  • Last Login: May 13, 2022, 12:02:14 PM
Re: US 35 in West Virginia
« Reply #7 on: October 23, 2013, 01:08:45 PM »

Of course people that don't just want to argue understand that 23 to 35 is the link from Columbus; 35 from Dayton, and 32 to 35 from Cincinnati.  Three four lanes with massive truck traffic dumping onto an inadequate rural 2 lane with deadly consequences.

Perhaps the relatives of those killed will see the humor in your posts, I really don't.
Logged

agentsteel53

  • invisible hand
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 15374
  • long live button copy!

  • Age: 40
  • Location: San Diego, CA
  • Last Login: November 21, 2016, 09:58:39 AM
    • AARoads Shield Gallery
Re: US 35 in West Virginia
« Reply #8 on: October 23, 2013, 01:27:29 PM »

Perhaps the relatives of those killed will see the humor in your posts, I really don't.

won't someone please think of the children!?
Logged
live from sunny San Diego.

http://shields.aaroads.com

jake@aaroads.com

NE2

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 14292
  • fuck

  • Age: 14
  • Location: central Florida
  • Last Login: May 15, 2022, 10:27:41 PM
Re: US 35 in West Virginia
« Reply #9 on: October 23, 2013, 01:37:12 PM »

Of course people that don't just want to argue understand that 23 to 35 is the link from Columbus
Ever hear of US 33?

32 to 35 from Cincinnati.
Sup AA Highway.

Perhaps the relatives of those killed will see the humor in your posts, I really don't.
Perhaps those killed are in heaven right now laughing because there's nothing better to do in that hellhole.


Anyway, you should probably be complaining about Porkidor H in reference to funding for US 35.
Logged
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".

I agree to indemnify Belkin against unauthorized use of its MiniVak vacuum.

Buck87

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1347
  • Aesculus glabra

  • Age: 34
  • Location: Bellevue, Ohio
  • Last Login: May 15, 2022, 07:23:44 PM
Re: US 35 in West Virginia
« Reply #10 on: October 23, 2013, 02:31:15 PM »

Of course people that don't just want to argue understand that 23 to 35 is the link from Columbus
Ever hear of US 33?

That's what I was thinking. Though FWIW, a general "Columbus, OH to Charleston, WV" Google directions search lists 35 as the top choice for being all of 1 mile and 2 minutes shorter than 33. Of course it depends on which part of Columbus or Charleston you're going to/from.   

I know 33 would be my choice. While it has more miles of 2 lane than 35, it's much better quality 2 lane than what this 12 mile section of 35 sounds like. Plus 23 from Chillicothe to Columbus has a lot of lights and the speed trap known as South Bloomfield.
Logged

hbelkins

  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 17505
  • It is well, it is well, with my soul.

  • Age: 60
  • Location: Kentucky
  • Last Login: May 15, 2022, 08:09:45 PM
    • Millennium Highway
Re: US 35 in West Virginia
« Reply #11 on: October 23, 2013, 03:27:55 PM »

32 to 35 from Cincinnati.
Sup AA Highway.

Two lanes for most of its length, a lot hillier, traffic lights around Maysville and a speed trap that's signed only for a 55 mph maximum.

Quote
Anyway, you should probably be complaining about Porkidor H in reference to funding for US 35.

It's 80 percent federally funded vs. mostly state funding for US 35, hence the former toll proposal that got shot down.

I don't know why the local lawmakers objected to tolls. Most local traffic is going to use old 35 instead of the new road. Trucks would be the primary toll-payers.
Logged


I identify as vaccinated.

froggie

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 12260
  • Location: Greensboro, VT
  • Last Login: May 15, 2022, 11:44:34 PM
    • Froggie's Place
Re: US 35 in West Virginia
« Reply #12 on: October 25, 2013, 04:33:48 PM »

Quote
Two lanes for most of its length, a lot hillier, traffic lights around Maysville and a speed trap that's signed only for a 55 mph maximum.

Perhaps, but well-engineered for a 2-lane highway.  Plus as I recall it has a few hill-climbing lanes.

Quote
It's 80 percent federally funded vs. mostly state funding for US 35, hence the former toll proposal that got shot down.

More like 100% vs 80%.  Recent Federal law changes allow the states to use Federal funds 100% for ARC corridor projects.  Meanwhile, US 35 is on the National Highway System so WVDOH could use Federal NHS funds to pay for 80% of US 35 projects.
Logged

keithvh

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 161
  • Location: Broomfield, CO
  • Last Login: April 30, 2022, 08:51:11 PM
Re: US 35 in West Virginia
« Reply #13 on: November 13, 2013, 06:54:31 PM »

32 to 35 from Cincinnati.
Sup AA Highway.

Two lanes for most of its length, a lot hillier, traffic lights around Maysville and a speed trap that's signed only for a 55 mph maximum.


Yes.  You are exactly correct.  I do the Cincinnati (living in the eastern Suburbs) to Charleston, WV drive a handful of times per year.  The AA has its own issues .... much as I despise the section of 35 in WV, it's still a case where 32 to 35 is preferable to the AA. 

US-35 in WV from Point Pleasant to Buffalo simply needs to be upgraded to 4 lanes.  It is what it is.  High traffic corridor and it's particularly dangerous as it is now.
Logged

bugo

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 6470
  • Age: 48
  • Location: Tulsa
  • Last Login: May 15, 2022, 12:56:03 PM
    • No Frills Blog
Re: US 35 in West Virginia
« Reply #14 on: November 13, 2013, 09:05:50 PM »

Quote
Two lanes for most of its length, a lot hillier, traffic lights around Maysville and a speed trap that's signed only for a 55 mph maximum.

Perhaps, but well-engineered for a 2-lane highway.  Plus as I recall it has a few hill-climbing lanes.
[/quote]

Meh.  I'd rather go out of the way to be able to cruise at a steady 70-75 MPH than to have to worry about getting behind slow traffic, trucks, traffic lights, low speed limits, etc of the shorter road.
Logged

bugo

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 6470
  • Age: 48
  • Location: Tulsa
  • Last Login: May 15, 2022, 12:56:03 PM
    • No Frills Blog
Re: US 35 in West Virginia
« Reply #15 on: November 13, 2013, 09:07:48 PM »

32 to 35 from Cincinnati.
Sup AA Highway.

Two lanes for most of its length, a lot hillier, traffic lights around Maysville and a speed trap that's signed only for a 55 mph maximum.


Yes.  You are exactly correct.  I do the Cincinnati (living in the eastern Suburbs) to Charleston, WV drive a handful of times per year.  The AA has its own issues .... much as I despise the section of 35 in WV, it's still a case where 32 to 35 is preferable to the AA. 

US-35 in WV from Point Pleasant to Buffalo simply needs to be upgraded to 4 lanes.  It is what it is.  High traffic corridor and it's particularly dangerous as it is now.

It sounds like it is a lot like the busy US highways of the past like the infamous US 66 and other highways that were later bypassed by freeways: way too much traffic for capacity.  The roads were choked with traffic back then, and they were not fun at all.
Logged

froggie

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 12260
  • Location: Greensboro, VT
  • Last Login: May 15, 2022, 11:44:34 PM
    • Froggie's Place
Re: US 35 in West Virginia
« Reply #16 on: November 20, 2013, 10:22:58 AM »

35 isn't "choked with traffic" per se.  It's traffic volumes are well within the capacity range of a 2-lane road.  The problems are the higher-than-normal volume of trucks and the horrid safety record of the existing road.
Logged

Bitmapped

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 922
  • Location: Morgantown, WV
  • Last Login: Today at 12:32:34 AM
Re: US 35 in West Virginia
« Reply #17 on: November 20, 2013, 10:41:45 PM »

Other than the apparent issue with the curve at the WV 869 bridge, there really aren't any major geometric deficiencies with the existing 2-lane US 35.  The road is basically flat and straight.  Widening the shoulders, building some turn lanes, and perhaps including a narrow like 4-foot median could probably address all of the major issues with the current road.  The problem is basically with people making ill-advised passes and pulling out in front of other cars.

To be frank, I'm not sure why WVDOH doesn't just dualize on the existing alignment north of the WV 869 bridge.  It seems like it would be a lot cheaper than building in the hills further in from the river like the other new 4-lane parts.
Logged

hbelkins

  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 17505
  • It is well, it is well, with my soul.

  • Age: 60
  • Location: Kentucky
  • Last Login: May 15, 2022, 08:09:45 PM
    • Millennium Highway
Re: US 35 in West Virginia
« Reply #18 on: November 21, 2013, 12:06:28 PM »

To be frank, I'm not sure why WVDOH doesn't just dualize on the existing alignment north of the WV 869 bridge.  It seems like it would be a lot cheaper than building in the hills further in from the river like the other new 4-lane parts.

It's been awhile since I have been on that stretch, but how much would ROW acquisition and relocation costs, plus utility relocation costs, impact a financial decision vs. buying mostly wooded, unoccupied tracts and building there? Plus, there would either have to be a series of frontage roads built, or the road would not be "partially-controlled access" like most of the other modern four-lanes in West Virginia since there would be private access drives for homes and businesses. And I'd guess the speed limit would be 55, not 65, on such a road.
Logged


I identify as vaccinated.

Bitmapped

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 922
  • Location: Morgantown, WV
  • Last Login: Today at 12:32:34 AM
Re: US 35 in West Virginia
« Reply #19 on: November 22, 2013, 10:10:37 AM »

To be frank, I'm not sure why WVDOH doesn't just dualize on the existing alignment north of the WV 869 bridge.  It seems like it would be a lot cheaper than building in the hills further in from the river like the other new 4-lane parts.
It's been awhile since I have been on that stretch, but how much would ROW acquisition and relocation costs, plus utility relocation costs, impact a financial decision vs. buying mostly wooded, unoccupied tracts and building there? Plus, there would either have to be a series of frontage roads built, or the road would not be "partially-controlled access" like most of the other modern four-lanes in West Virginia since there would be private access drives for homes and businesses. And I'd guess the speed limit would be 55, not 65, on such a road.
There's some stuff along the road, but most of it is farmland.  A lot of the rest is small houses or trailers you could buy out fairly cheaply.

I've seen in some places where WVDOH has built tiny stubs that basically just serve to give a driveway access to the highway along Corridors G and L.  As long as there aren't a ton of them in an area, I don't think it would affect the speed limit.  If you had a cluster of homes to save, build a single access road.

While the land further inland is cheaper, it's fairly rugged.  The earthmoving and bridge costs more than eat up anything saved in RoW costs.
« Last Edit: November 22, 2013, 07:48:53 PM by Steve »
Logged

codyg1985

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2168
  • Age: 36
  • Location: Huntsville, AL
  • Last Login: May 13, 2022, 01:10:57 PM
Re: US 35 in West Virginia
« Reply #20 on: November 26, 2013, 01:04:35 PM »

It appears a Public Private Partnership will be used to finish US 35: http://www.wvgazette.com/News/201311260023 (h/t Bitmapped).
Logged
Cody Goodman
Huntsville, AL, United States

Bitmapped

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 922
  • Location: Morgantown, WV
  • Last Login: Today at 12:32:34 AM
Re: US 35 in West Virginia
« Reply #21 on: November 26, 2013, 09:51:24 PM »

It appears a Public Private Partnership will be used to finish US 35: http://www.wvgazette.com/News/201311260023 (h/t Bitmapped).

The road is not going to be tolled.  I haven't seen any specific details but based on what's been said previously, it seems the deal is going to be for the private partner to build and finance the highway in exchange for fixed payments from WVDOH.  The Corridor H 2020 people want the same arrangement used on that highway.

WVDOH used GARVEE bonds to pay for the rest of US 35 but I believe the state has tapped out its allocation.
Logged

Bitmapped

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 922
  • Location: Morgantown, WV
  • Last Login: Today at 12:32:34 AM
Re: US 35 in West Virginia
« Reply #22 on: November 26, 2013, 10:01:07 PM »

FWIW, WVDOH says there is no funding deal or specific plans to start construction as of yet. http://www.wvgazette.com/News/201311260023
Logged

SP Cook

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2447
  • Last Login: May 13, 2022, 12:02:14 PM
Re: US 35 in West Virginia
« Reply #23 on: November 27, 2013, 07:56:47 AM »

Note the original link now contains a totally different story, more accurate than the one that appeared in the print edition and was contained in the original link.

All that happened was the Putnam County Commission, which has no authority over the matter, passed a resolution supporting the idea and the paper's reporterete lacked the basic civics knowledge to understand that and they went with a "US 35 construction starts in April", which got picked up by the rest of the state's media.  Such as here:

http://wvmetronews.com/2013/11/26/putnam-commission-funding-plan-for-u-s-route-35/

Reality is its just a resolution from a powerless body "supporting" the idea.  The DOH, which has the jurisdiction, quickly corrected the story.

The bill in question authorizes the state, more or less, to build roads on credit.  A contractor and a bank can make a proposal to build a road, which the state can accept or reject.  The state would then repay the bank with interest.  No proposal has been made, let alone accepted.  And the bill would probably be subject to state Constitutional challenge, as the state is not permitted to borrow money.

Logged

Crazy Volvo Guy

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 516
  • Turbo Volvo Hotrodder

  • Age: -7523
  • Location: Moline, IL
  • Last Login: October 12, 2021, 04:44:24 PM
Re: US 35 in West Virginia
« Reply #24 on: March 28, 2015, 12:20:32 AM »

Picture relevant.

Logged
I hate Clearview, because it looks like a cheap Chinese ripoff.

I'm for the Red Sox and whoever's playing against the Yankees.

 


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.