Corridor H

[bubbamcgee]

I did not know that Corridor L had been built as a two lane road originally.

All based on sharp-pencil estimates that failed to take into account the use of the road as a logical route from Toronto-Buffalo-Pittsburgh to central Florida.  The road became very dangerous and then the state had to go back and do it correctly.

Sadly, this corridor is in need of some major upgrades (elimination of traffic lights in Summersville, Fayetteville/Oak Hill and close to Beckley) for safety reasons alone.  But, there appears to be nothing in the "Roads to Prosperity" bond proposal for these upgrades.  Personally, I would love to see US19 upgraded to interstate standards from 79 down to the turnpike.  Don't think I will ever see that happen in my lifetime.

Back on topic (Corridor H), the DOH has released a spreadsheet identifying all of the projects in the bond proposal.  The only item for Corridor H is the connector to the new interchange with 72 in Parsons.  Too bad they are not allocating additional funds to get this finished across the Blackwater to Thomas.  Instead, it looks like several smaller pork projects tacked in to appease local politicians (i.e. New River Parkway, Rt 2 in Wetzel County, etc.).  Here is the link to the latest article in the Charleston Gazette.  http://www.wvgazettemail.com/article/20170828/GZ0101/170829613 and here is the Roads to Prosperity Highway Project List.

[cpzilliacus]

The NIMBYs and the environmentalist groups (sometimes the same people, other times not), raised the cost of the project due to increasing the mileage involved and orphaning 8 miles of already completed road east of Elkins.  I remember around the time my wife and I married, some of her family lived in Grant County.  There was hootin' and hollerin' by some about the road going through there, in which it was to go near Harman and around Petersburg.

Yes, re-routing Corridor H may have left Petersburg (and possibly Franklin as well) to "die on the vine" with much less through traffic than they would otherwise have had. U.S. 33 east of Elkins is a pretty deserted road (though the steep grades do not encourage through trips). 

Nevermind that it was a much straighter route, some of the road was done, and would have been a big plus for their tourism business (Caverns and Seneca Rocks) plus some other small industry... they pushed it away, and it took over a decade for the updated plans to go through to reroute the road north of Elkins to its current plan.

It has never been clear how much planning and preliminary engineering work had been done on the "old" Corridor H  alignment that was ultimately a waste of resources.

[cpzilliacus]

Back on topic (Corridor H), the DOH has released a spreadsheet identifying all of the projects in the bond proposal.  The only item for Corridor H is the connector to the new interchange with 72 in Parsons.

If it extends Corridor H beyond Moore (where there will be a connection to present-day U.S. 219, presumably as part of the contract with Kokosing to build the section from Kerens to Moore) to Parsons, all the better. 

Too bad they are not allocating additional funds to get this finished across the Blackwater to Thomas.  Instead, it looks like several smaller pork projects tacked in to appease local politicians (i.e. New River Parkway, Rt 2 in Wetzel County, etc.).  Here is the link to the latest article in the Charleston Gazette.  http://www.wvgazettemail.com/article/20170828/GZ0101/170829613 and here is the Roads to Prosperity Highway Project List.

I do not know enough about those other  projects to speak to their usefulness.  I do know that Corridor H will make highway access easier to the various resorts and parks near Thomas  and Davis, presumably having a favorable economic benefit to that area (it's a long way from the Corridor H/I-79 interchange at Weston to Thomas as it is (especially in winter conditions), and the part of the trip beyond Kerens is on "old" U.S. 219, not the greatest of roads).

[bubbamcgee]

I do not know enough about those other  projects to speak to their usefulness.  I do know that Corridor H will make highway access easier to the various resorts and parks near Thomas  and Davis, presumably having a favorable economic benefit to that area (it's a long way from the Corridor H/I-79 interchange at Weston to Thomas as it is (especially in winter conditions), and the part of the trip beyond Kerens is on "old" U.S. 219, not the greatest of roads).

Yes, getting Corridor H to Parsons will be great, no doubt about that!  The drive from Kerens to Parsons can be a drag, especially if stuck behind some trucks.   I'm just disappointed to see several non-essential projects on the list that could have been allocated to push Corridor H further towards it's goal of Thomas/Davis; which has always been one of the toughest stretches to cover.

[Beltway]

^ It's easy for you to deride that group as a BANANA group and mix a few of the typical stereotypes in there, but from what I recall of their website, there were a couple good ideas that the state could have considered for Corridor H:
- Given low traffic volumes (even with the supposed "development" that the corridor would induce), they could have saved some money by going with an improved 2 lane route instead of a full 4 lane corridor.  This also would've gotten it built somewhat quicker.

Network redundancy.  There's no good (high-speed east-west highway across the mountains between the I-79  and I-81 corridors except I-68 to the north and  I-64 to the south.
Even had the road been built as an  upgraded 2-lane road, it would have had to be  three or four lanes in many places because of the steep uphill (and maybe downhill) grades.
Remember that one of the goals of ADHS is to induce demand.  For that reason, four divided lanes is better than two, even as a Super-2 type of road.

I originally was a big proponent of building 2 lanes on a 4-lane R/W in many places even on the rural Interstate system where it could have easily handled the traffic for 10 to 20 years, thus saving money that could be spent accelerating other new Interstate projects.  Build the parallel roadway in the future.

I abandoned that idea around 1985 or so when it became apparent that most 2-lane freeways have very high head-on collision fatality rates.  Why?  Because even with the safety factor of being a freeway, such a high speed regime is not conducive to safe passing.

A 2-lane expressway like Corridor L north of US-60, would have the same safety issues.

[Roadsguy]

I don't know about other states, but at least in Pennsylvania, two-lane expressways are only ever given a 55 mph speed limit. What makes that any more dangerous than an equivalent surface road? Now, if said two-lane expressway were posted at 65-70, then that's just silly.

[hbelkins]

Some observations on the most recent discussions here:

Kentucky has built at least one two-lane route while grading four lanes in the last few years, that being KY 67 (Industrial Parkway) between I-64 and US 23. This seems to have worked well. There are passing lanes on the hills, which helps. I think it will be many years before the route will be four-laned with paving done and bridges built along the unbuilt side. I don't remember if the two-lane portion of US 19 north of Summersville had passing lanes on the hills or not. I'm not sure that I ever drove the route before it was four-laned.

The entire WV 2 corridor needs to be four-laned. Right now, the best route along the river involves crossing back and forth between WV and OH at several times.

West Virginia seems to be committed to building all of its ARC corridors as four-lanes, as opposed to Kentucky and Tennessee, which have a lot of two-lane mileage.

[Beltway]

I don't know about other states, but at least in Pennsylvania, two-lane expressways are only ever given a 55 mph speed limit. What makes that any more dangerous than an equivalent surface road? Now, if said two-lane expressway were posted at 65-70, then that's just silly.

If the plan and profile is built to Interstate standards, then many go a lot faster than 55, especially when passing.  Not sure of all the reasons, but this why they never gained much popularity.

Statistically they may not be unsafe, but a few spectacular head-on collisions get widespread publicity.

[rickmastfan67]

I don't remember if the two-lane portion of US 19 north of Summersville had passing lanes on the hills or not. I'm not sure that I ever drove the route before it was four-laned.

It did at least going SB up the major hill coming out of Birch River.  Still have memories of going along there while they were upgrading it and being super close to those monster dump trucks.

[cpzilliacus]

Statistically they may not be unsafe, but a few spectacular head-on collisions get widespread publicity.

I-95 from Bangor, Maine to Houlton was originally a Super-2.  Very lonely road then, and even now, the AADTs there are less than  10,000.  It was made a conventional 4-lane divided freeway in large part because of the head-on crashes (even though there were many signs warning and reminding drivers that they were on a 2 lane undivided highway).

[Beltway]

Statistically they may not be unsafe, but a few spectacular head-on collisions get widespread publicity.

I-95 from Bangor, Maine to Houlton was originally a Super-2.  Very lonely road then, and even now, the AADTs there are less than  10,000.  It was made a conventional 4-lane divided freeway in large part because of the head-on crashes (even though there were many signs warning and reminding drivers that they were on a 2 lane undivided highway).

1991

After a brief roadside ceremony, a new four-lane divided highway with a grassy median opens on U.S. Route 58 replacing the dangerous "Suicide Strip" , a 22-mile undivided highway from Courtland to Emporia. The undivided highway averaged one accident every six days between 1970 and 1990 with 107 deaths and more than 1,000 injuries. The $42.9 million road widening project follows years of pressure from local residents. The stretch of roadway is a vital east-west trade route that carries an estimated 7,355 vehicles a day, many of them heavy trucks. Before the median was built, trucks and cars routinely collided head on.

https://pilotonline.com/news/local/history/back-in-the-day/back-in-the-day-april/article_7d943007-f522-5c1f-b9c9-b533ccb20a04.html

Not a freeway but a high-quality high-speed 2-lane highway.

[cpzilliacus]

wvmetronews.com: Corridor H, long a work in progress, is showing its promise

ELKINS, W.Va. – Corridor H, with an original estimated completion date of 2036, may be farther along than many West Virginians realize.

And the possibility of more immediate funding if state residents pass a road bond on Oct. 7 could bring completion of the Appalachian highway even closer to striking distance.

"It's important to remember Corridor H has been waiting 50 years or a little over,"  said Robbie Morris, president of the Corridor H Authority. "It's the last of the Appalachian Highway system in West Virginia. For West Virginia – the region of the state and really the whole state – it's important to get it finished now."

The highway, which runs between central West Virginia and northern Virginia, was one of the main topics of discussion this past week during Gov. Jim Justice's "Roads to Prosperity"  tour of West Virginia communities in support of the road bond vote.

[cpzilliacus]

theet.com: DOH to break ground on Corridor H's Kerens to Parsons Section Thursday

West Virginia Gov. Jim Justice, along with Transportation Secretary Tom Smith, and other state and local leaders will be on hand to break ground on the first section of the Kerens to Parson section of Corridor H in Randolph County. The event will take place at 2 p.m. Thursday. The public is invited to attend.

[cpzilliacus]

Kokosing has mobilized its workforce and equipment, and dirt (and rock) are being moved on the roughly 7 or 8 mile section between Kerens in Randolph County and Moore in Tucker County.

[cpzilliacus]

Times.News.com: Officials see importance of U.S. 220, Corridor H project

Officials said Thursday they recognize the importance of connecting U.S. Route 220 to Corridor H.

"Everybody recognizes that it needs to be built all the way to Corridor H right now,"  Joseph Romano, senior project manager at Skelly and Loy, said during The Greater Cumberland Committee meeting at Garrett College on Thursday.

Skelly and Loy, an engineering and environmental consultant, completed the Tier I Environmental Impact Study for the U.S. Route 220 project.

Connecting U.S. 220 to Corridor H is part of a larger effort to establish a major north/south highway that includes Interstate 68 and U.S. Route 219.

[NE2]

What's the point? Cumberland-Strasburg traffic has 68-522-81 and Cumberland-Weston traffic has 68-79.

[Life in Paradise]

What exactly is their thinking of connecting US 220 to Corridor H?  Would they veer off of the current US 220 onto WV 93 to connect with Corridor H north of Scherr, or would they just follow along the current US 220 routing to meet up at Moorefield?  I would think the WV 93 route would cost less to upgrade, since it's shorter. 

I would agree that if you were just looking at getting access to Strasburg and then I-66, then the current roadway system from Cumberland would appear to do just fine.  If the purpose is to have an eastern N/S route in West Virginia, then US 220 is probably a better route (due to the valley) than US 219, although with 220 you don't serve much of WV after Moorefield and Petersburg, each being a growing megalopolis.

[Bitmapped]

This is really more about corridor improvement along US 220 rather than improve Cumberland's connectivity. US 220 has quite a bit of traffic (7500+ VPD) between US 50 and I-68 now. It's pushing 17,000 VPD north of MD 956. There's more than enough traffic to support a relocation or widening.

I believe the idea is to follow WV 93 from US 50 to Corridor H. Personally, I'd route it onto Corridor H and then Patterson Creek Road and WV 42 into Petersburg, where it joins up with US 220. The rest of the alignment through Moorefield can just be WV 28.

[epzik8]

I found myself looking at Corridor H on Google Maps today going around parts of West Virginia. Did I say I didn't like U.S. Route 48? What I meant to say is I'm eager to get the chance to drive it sometime.

[seicer]

Photos from Greenland Gap and New Creek Mountain heading west to Bismark along the Allegheny Front - east of Davis. These were taken back in 2013 and rediscovered these while cleaning my Imgur account.





























--

I can vouch that biking Corridor H is fun as hell. Might be a bit boring at times, but the downhills and views from the bridges makes it worthwhile.

[VTGoose]

Photos from Greenland Gap and New Creek Mountain heading west to Bismark along the Allegheny Front - east of Davis. These were taken back in 2013 and rediscovered these while cleaning my Imgur account.

Nice bridge -- but I wouldn't want to hit that when it is snow covered before the salt truck gets there. Between the curves and banks, someone is going to find one of those walls pretty quickly. We have a curved banked bridge like that on U.S. 460 just south (east) of the N. Franklin St. exit and there is at least one wreck there whenever it snows.

Bruce in Blacksburg

[cpzilliacus]

Nice bridge -- but I wouldn't want to hit that when it is snow covered before the salt truck gets there. Between the curves and banks, someone is going to find one of those walls pretty quickly. We have a curved banked bridge like that on U.S. 460 just south (east) of the N. Franklin St. exit and there is at least one wreck there whenever it snows.

There are many such bridges on eastern Corridor H (currently Davis, W.Va. to Wardensville, W.Va.).

[sparker]

Nice bridge -- but I wouldn't want to hit that when it is snow covered before the salt truck gets there. Between the curves and banks, someone is going to find one of those walls pretty quickly. We have a curved banked bridge like that on U.S. 460 just south (east) of the N. Franklin St. exit and there is at least one wreck there whenever it snows.

There are many such bridges on eastern Corridor H (currently Davis, W.Va. to Wardensville, W.Va.).

Given the terrain, it's not surprising to find a substantial amount of bridge curvature; however, it looks like the bridges have ample room for shoulders/breakdown lanes, which should, if striped properly, allow some room for error.  At least they had the good sense to specify pre-oxidized Cor-ten steel for the superstructure; it should withstand the onslaught of rainy and foggy weather intrinsic to that region.

[hbelkins]

Anyone who drives too fast for pavement conditions deserves to meet a bridge wall up close in personal, IMHO. If I'm driving that road and it's snowy, I'm not doing over 35.

[cpzilliacus]

Anyone who drives too fast for pavement conditions deserves to meet a bridge wall up close in personal, IMHO. If I'm driving that road and it's snowy, I'm not doing over 35.

Yes, that's probably good advice.  65 MPH is fine when things are warm and especially dry. 

WVDOT/DOH seems to have maintenance bases of a temporary-looking nature along Corridor H (perhaps for staging winter maintenance equipment and materials).

There are two that I am aware of, one north and east of Elkins here and one near Forman at the CR3 (Knobley Road) underpass here.

There may be others that are not as obvious beyond those two.