I have regular use of the 18-105mm (although it's not mine) and I find it suffers from terrible barrel distortion at the wide end of the focal range. If I were choosing from the lenses you listed in the OP, I'd go for the 35mm prime and the 55-300mm. That way, you have a good sharp wide angle (you can move if you want to get closer or further away from your subject!) and great reach with the zoom.
I don't understand these distortion complaints with respect to these consumer kit lenses. It's even more silly when you consider that, with one click and and the use of a slider, the distortion is largely taken care of:
Uncorrected:
Corrected in Capture NX2:
The cost of a lens without distortion at the wide end is far more than the cost of a cheaper lens plus software that can be used for ALL lenses to correct distortion, as well as process in other ways.
There is no perfect lens.
You want to complain about something, complain about uncorrectable CA in $1200 fast prime.
Also, opinions differ of course, but 35mm is not very wide on a DX body - in fact it's down right normal. People need to be able to get wider. That's why kit lenses are 18-xxx mm. At a later date, they may decide that they don't shoot wide, but I would lose my mind if the widest I could go was 35mm on a DX body.
I thought you might like to see what the $1300 Nikon 17-55mm f/2.8 does at 17mm:
And corrected. Same button click (no slider though). Color distortion was also corrected by same click - boy the 17-55 REALLY sucks! Who knew?