Grant County Meeting Minutes

RT 50 ASSOCIATION

MEETING MINUTES

MAY 18, 2005

HERMITAGE RESTAURANT

PETERSBURG, WV 26847

PRESENT:

Grant County Commission President Charles L. Goldizen, Jr. welcomed those in attendance to Grant County. Introductions of representatives and their interests were presented.

Dr. Spiggle reminded the group of the history associated with the formation and subsequent mission of the Rt. 50 association. On a small scale, this organization is cooperating with the “WV Vision Shared” program and the wishes of Governor Joe Manchin to promote regional networks to address issues.

REGIONAL REVIEW:

HAMPSHIRE COUNTY- Hampshire County reported a fatal traffic accident on Rt. 50 south of the US 29 intersection. This is an area that has been identified as problematic. Mr. Brian Carr, WVDOH, stated that the accident reporting data used by DOH is based on a three (3) year cycle. This data would not include this most current tragedy due the timing of the report cycle.

Hampshire County reported that there will be an increase of over 400 jobs in the Industrial Park at Capon Bridge. This will increase traffic along that section of Rt. 50.

The representation from Hampshire County introduced the topic of a name for Rt. 50. They would like to see the route named the North Western Turnpike. The facilitator asked that this issue be deferred for discussion as a separate agenda item.

MINERAL COUNTY-A school bus in Mineral County nearly missed a collision on Rt. 50 in Mineral County recently due to heavy fog.

GRANT COUNTY- Grant County has no significant information to report.

GARRETT COUNTY-There have been no recent accidents in Garrett County. Maintenance along Rt. 50 continues with no major projects anticipated for this year,

PRESTON COUNTY- Mr. Arvin Harsh appeared before the association regarding his concerns that overhanging trees pose high accident potentials. He circulated photos showing shadowing, overhanging limbs, and tree at dangerous fall angles. At a prior Association meeting Senator Mike Ross stated that areas of potential tree impact should be reported to the local department of highways for review. B. Carr explained that the local DOH is the correct route for these concerns and that this agency would review the impact removal and or trimming of the trees will have on the overall safety of the road.

TAYLOR COUNTY- No report.

BUSINESS MEETING:

FUNDING-The Rt. 50 Association revisited the general funding for State Roads. Unfortunately the needs of Rt. 50 exceed the amount of available. The WVDOH is still very uncertain about the share of Federal dollars that will be received for projects within West Virginia. A list of cost estimates for the identified improvements for Rt 50 had been given to Mr. Carr. He presented the costs determined to date for all projects except the passing lane near the Rt. 29 S intersection. The preliminary estimate, prepared on the suggestions given by the Rt. 50 Association, exceeds 30 million dollars. Mr. Carr explained that the WVDOH is presently compiling a six (6) year plan for improvements and repairs to state roads. This plan will prioritize projects based on several factors including usage and funds available. This is a work in progress and there is no order yet established. He also reminded everyone that Federal funds obtained must be matched by State dollars. This shrinks the pool of funds budgeted for projects as each Federal match is required. Representatives from Hampshire County were given the Rt. 50 improvement estimate to present for Federal funding. Mr. Carr suggested that the association review this list and prioritize the projects in relationship to merit for each county in terms of safety and capacity. Presently Rt. 50 averages a 5-6,000 traffic count with Hampshire County reaching 10-11,000 in some areas.

CURRENT PROJECTS APPROVED-Mr. B. Carr informed those present of two (2) projects that are currently underway along Rt. 50.

(1) Pruntytown Center Turn Lane- Some right-of-way issues are holding up progress but construction is expected to be complete by late summer of early fall.

(2) Taylor County-Construction along the Belgian Hill area has been funded but construction is expected to be delayed until 2008.

DISCUSSION ON NAMING RT 50- The WV Statewide Mapping and Addressing Council is requiring all counties within the state to name roadways. Dr. Spiggle addressed the issue of different areas assigning different names to Rt. 50. Hampshire County has chosen to name the road the North Western Turnpike. The counties of Garrett and Preston have names their portion of the road the George Washington Highway. Grant County has received comment from residents in the Mt. Storm area wanting the name to be George Washington Highway. Discussion occurred regarding the various historical reasons behind each name. The ultimate decision resides with the County Commissioners in each County. Those present agreed that the naming of Rt 50 would be decided on the individual County level.

NEXT MEETING: The next meeting of the Rt. 50 Association will be held on Wednesday, July 20, 2005 at the Coca-Cola plant in Romney.

Garrett County Meeting Minutes

Rt. 50 ASSOCIATION MEETING

7-21-04 at 1 pm

Penn Alps, Grantsville, MD

Garrett County Commissioner Dave Beard welcomed the group to his home

county and gave a quick verbal tour.

Introductions and Agenda

Wayne Spiggle as facilitator made the introductions and introduced the

agenda.

Minutes

The group approved the minutes from the May 19, 2004 meeting.

New Members

Spiggle led conversation about increasing the group to include Barbour

County, WV who has not had any representation until this point.

Naming of 2-state portion of Rt. 50

Naming of the 2-state portion of Rt. 50 was discussed extensively.

Northwestern Turnpike, George Washington Highway and Rt. 50 were

suggested. It was also noted that this group was not a democracy and

was ruled by consensus. Commissioner Dave Beard made a motion to table

this issue, Les Shoemaker seconded and the group agreed.

Scenic By-way Task Force

Deb Clatterbuck reported that the Scenic Byway Task Force had met on

July 14th and discussed the Federal Scenic Byways program. The most

significant benefit in being a Byway is the 80/20 match of funds from

the federal government. There are strict sign regulations such as been

brought to light by the George’s Creek Coal Heritage Trail. The Task

Force recommends tabling this issue until dual lane and alternate

routes can be reviewed which may leave portions of the original

roadbeds to be designated as Scenic By-ways.

The Task Force then discussed the need to lobby the politicians on

state ands federal levels to gain support for our project at this

crucial political time. The group decided to change the Scenic Byway

Task Force to the Rt. 50 Federal Liaison Committee to gather political

support for initiatives and future funding. Deb Clatterbuck will chair

this committee.

Rt. 50 Study

Discussion was led by Brian Carr, WVDOT, on the 3 layers of roadway

enhancements. Traffic dictates improvements; decisive factors are

accidents, passing problems, bridges, straightening curves, high volume

intersections and turn lanes. A 3-tier goal system in more successful.

Smaller projects like turning and passing lanes seem to be more

immediate. Mid-grade projects such as realignment of roadways and

bridges take more time and money. High level projects like 4-lane

roadways require the most planning.

Senator Jon Hunter and Taylor County DOT Larry Weaver pointed out that

building roadways does not always bring growth. Western West Virginia

still hosts a 4-lane section that has not been developed. Grady

Bradfield suggested using existing road as 2-lane in one direction and

building a second parallel roadway for opposing traffic.

Brian Carr stated there was a need to gather info including roadway

classifications, arterial route priorities, design criteria, expected

level of service opportunities, effects of Corridor H, highway capacity

analysis, high hazard study, 20 years of traffic reports and the impact

on Economic Development along the route.

Dave Moe made a motion that the group support a long term goal for a

4-lane roadway that would meet or exceed the existing plan for the

multi-state area of Maryland, Virginia and West Virginia. Grady

Bradfield seconded and it carried.

Next Meeting

The next meeting will be held on Wednesday, September 15, 2004 in

Romney, WV at the Coca Cola Plant.

Adjournment

Wayne Spiggle adjourned the meeting at 2:25 pm

Mineral County Meeting

ROUTE 50 ASSOCIATION MEETING

MAY 19, 2004

POLISH PINES RESTAURANT, KEYSER, WV

County Commissioner Cindy Pyles opened the meeting by welcoming attendees to Mineral County. She noted that the group’s efforts to improve U.S. Route 50 is extremely important to supporting economic growth IN THE REGION.

Dr. Wayne Spiggle reviewed the minutes of the March 17, 2004 meeting noting some of the comments received from the counties regarding needed improvements within their respective jurisdictions. The following items from the prior meeting were also discussed.

• Communication from Bill Wood, WVDOH, indicating that DOH would begin collecting information on road and bridge conditions, traffic counts and accident information in an effort to prepare a study of needs on Route 50 from I-79 east to the Virginia state line. Comments and concerns generated through this Association would be incorporated into the study. The report is expected to take up to one year to complete.

• Memorandum of Understanding ­ A draft memorandum of understanding was given to each county commission. The memorandum sets forth the purpose of the Association and establishes the mechanism for each commission to officially recognize and participate in its activities. Any changes to wording should be provided to Michael Bland, Mineral County Coordinator.

• Naming of U.S. Route 50 ­ Discussion indicated the most likely name would either be the George Washington Highway or Northwestern Turnpike. No final consensus was obtained.

Dr. Spiggle welcomed Richard Hartman and Mike White, WVDOH, who would participate later in the meeting.

David Sypolt, Preston County Surveyor, History of U.S. Route 50 ­ Mr. Sypolt gave an excellent presentation on the history of the Northwestern Turnpike which later became the basic route for U.S. Route 50. An outline of the presentation is attached.

Richard Hartman, WVDOH, reviewed the major points of the Federal By-Way Program.

• Application is first made to the State. State must approve by-way designation before it can be considered for Federal designation.

• Designation is requested by the local group based on the intrinsic qualities of the route being promoted (i.e. historic, cultural, scenic, recreational, etc.). The naming of the by-way would normally be tied to the identified qualities.

• Once approved, DOH would sign route.

Local group requesting designation is responsible to manage.

• WV received approximately $500,000 annually for the by-way program.

Funds may be used for signage, scenic easements, scenic pull-offs and management. Funds are not used for general road improvements or maintenance.

• Designation does not help or hurt monies available for maintenance.

• Designation prevents any additional roadside signage for commercial advertisement and business. Businesses along the route would be restricted to a sign at their place of business.

• By-way projects approved last year have not yet been funded.

• Designated by-way name does not impact 911 or local addressing.

• Advised that the Route 50 Association needed to develop a unified strategy and speak as a single group.

Frank O’Hara, Mineral County, made a brief presentation on existing accident data and safety concerns on Route 50. Statistics included factors related to the accident including driver age, weather conditions, time of day and location. Mineral County has the highest mortality rate in the State based on percentage of accidents and Hampshire County is 5th.

David Moe, Garrett County, Update on North-South Corridor Study ­ In fiscal year 2003, Congress appropriated $2 million to study the U.S. Route 220 corridor. The purpose of the study was to develop a recommended north/south connection between I-68 in Maryland and Corridor H in West Virginia. Initial funding provided $1.5 million to West Virginia and $0.5 million to Maryland. Congress appropriated an additional $1 million for Maryland in fiscal year 2004, however those funds have not fully authorized.

A memorandum of understanding outlining the conditions and parameters for the study has been prepared and approved by West Virginia.

Maryland has not approved the memorandum to date. A meeting between West Virginia and Maryland to include discussion of the memo is scheduled for May 26, 2004.

Once a route is determined, an additional factor will be the construction standards for the highway. The four-lane would either be built to Appalachian Highway Standards or Interstate Standards. The Interstate Designation would be important to economic development for its significance to industry looking for new sites.

Dr Spiggle concluded the meeting with discussion on the following:

• Route 50 Association ­ Is intended to be a partnership with DOH in promoting improvements to the route.

• Route 50 Yard Sale ­ May 21 ­ 23, 2004 ­ Additional information available on internet at www.highway50.com/yardsale.

• Deb Clatterbuck will chair a committee on whether by-way designation should be pursued for U.S. Route 50. Persons interested in participating in those discussions should contact her.

The next meeting is scheduled for July 21`, 2004 at the Penn Alps Restaurant, Grantsville, Maryland. Lunch at 12:00 noon, followed by the business meeting at 1:00 PM.