quote:
Although all 10 of the current bridge locations are pretty bad (there are better options that would also have less of an impact on river navigation as these 10 options)

Sounds like someone should let the Corps of Engineers, river pilots, and levee districts know - since they eliminated over half of the proposed bridge locations due to levee impacts or navigational issues.

1 ...

Report Post

Posted by Gauge

Member since Mar 2014

56 posts

Posted on 4/26/22 at 11:43 am to lostinbr

Just because they said they eliminated a route because of "navigational issues," doesn't mean they were correct.

See the bridge location that I have added in red to the image below. This potential crossing location was removed from consideration because the entire width of the river in this location is a "no bridge pier zone." Meaning you can't put a support pier for a bridge IN THE RIVER in this location. However, you CAN put piers on the land just outside the boundaries of the river in this location. Also, the width of the river in this location just so happens to be significantly shorter here than in any other place that is under consideration. Specifically, the width of the river in this location is approximately 1,900 feet. Meaning, you could put the bridge piers on land only (i.e. not in the river at all -- thereby avoiding any impact to navigation whatsoever) and still have a main span distance of less than the other locations that are under consideration. This shorter bridge distance also means this location would be significantly cheaper to build than the other locations.

This location would also provide a more natural southeast to northwest direction of travel (as well as a shorter travel distance) for people trying to bypass Baton Rouge. This means more traffic would be diverted off of the current Horrace Wilkison bridge, and toll revenue generated by this new bridge would be much higher since more travelers would use the new bridge. So this location creates a viable Baton Rouge bypass for I-10 through travelers, while also still being close enough to Baton Rouge to provide a very attractive alternate route for local commuters who live in EBR/Ascension and work on the west side.

So this location is the cheapest to build, improves traffic around Baton Rouge the most, gets the most usage, and generates the most toll revenue. All with zero impact to river navigation. But instead, this location was eliminated simply because someone saw "no bridge pier zone" on a map and mistakenly figured "oh well, I guess we can't build a bridge there."