- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: How many of you baws went to the public meeting last night about the new bridge?
Posted on 4/26/22 at 9:11 am to The Boat
Posted on 4/26/22 at 9:11 am to The Boat
quote:
The I-10 bridge bottleneck is caused by people trying to get from LA-1 to the east side of the river.
The bottleneck is caused by poor planning and politics/money in the past.
Look at what neighborhoods the interstate avoided by turning so sharply coming off the bridge and which ones it cut through.
LA-1 and I-10E traffic are a mess in the evenings. A lot of that having to do with the interstate going from 3-ish lanes to 1-ish lanes almost immediately after crossing the bridge.
Poor planning was not expecting future volume coming through the city and not leaving much room for expansion.
This post was edited on 4/26/22 at 9:13 am
2
Posted on 4/26/22 at 9:14 am to Sasquatch Smash
All that bitching about past planning doesn’t change the problems we have now and the action needed to fix it. Which is widen I-10 through Br which they’re gonna take the next 10 years to do and build a build south of Br
Posted on 4/26/22 at 9:16 am to titmouse
quote:
Bluebonnet does which is why it makes the most sense (and it's the only one that's actually straight e-w.
It's the least shitty option imo
Look at a map. Bluebonnet turns NNW and then to NNE eventually connecting to 10.
The mall traffic on Bluebonnet is 44,000 vehicles per day. Add in a bridge abd the subsequent traffic and its gridlock on steroids.
Posted on 4/26/22 at 9:19 am to The Boat
quote:
The I-10 bridge bottleneck is caused by people trying to get from LA-1 to the east side of the river. Many of them to Ascension Parish because of the population boom there. Build a bridge around Plaquemine and you take a TON of traffic off the I-10 bridge.
If you go to the bridge website they predict how much 10 traffic will be diverted depending on each SBR location. Good stats there.
Posted on 4/26/22 at 9:25 am to crewdepoo
quote:
With the bluebonnet one you guarantee a widening of la 30 to 4 lanes, where eventually they will put a light at u club
EBR voters already voted to widen 30 from LSU to the parish line.
After that it’s on someone else.
Posted on 4/26/22 at 9:27 am to doubleb
quote:
EBR voters already voted to widen 30 from LSU to the parish line.
After that it’s on someone else.
My man. People in here like to complain about ignorant people at these public meetings while people ignorant in this thread.
Posted on 4/26/22 at 9:28 am to Slippy
Tying the Newer Bridge into Bluebonnet would be a mistake of greater Epic proportion than the Washington St. exit.
Wherever the Newer Bridge goes someone will be put out ,this is why BR has never gotten a Loop.
Bullfrog and T are correct in their proposals. Once the elevated section across Spanish Lake ties in with I-10 a new route from I-10 along the intersection of LA928/427 should be built to intersect I-12 just east of Walker. This would give BR a southern loop.
Wherever the Newer Bridge goes someone will be put out ,this is why BR has never gotten a Loop.
Bullfrog and T are correct in their proposals. Once the elevated section across Spanish Lake ties in with I-10 a new route from I-10 along the intersection of LA928/427 should be built to intersect I-12 just east of Walker. This would give BR a southern loop.
This post was edited on 4/26/22 at 9:36 am
Posted on 4/26/22 at 9:39 am to GetBackToWork
quote:
What seems to be missing from all of these proposals is a large reduction in pass through traffic traveling through Baton Rouge.
You get it. Please go work for the bridge morons. People who do not live and/or work in BR should not need to drive through it to get to their next destination. Our current traffic situation is maddening. The Bluebonnet "solution" is almost laughable.
It's like the powers that be in BR want every area of our city to be crappy. Can't have anything nice. And as much as y'all hate on the U Club crowd, the truth of the matter is that area of town is becoming a very popular place to live. The Wampold development at Bluebonnet and Nicholson will make it that much nicer.
But we just can't have that, now can we. Let's create a parking lot of 18 wheelers and shove them right through a residential area that's already overburdened with traffic because nobody can plan anything in this city.
I mean at this point, why don't we just connect at Brightside and send that traffic straight up Lee to College. Why not? It'll be fun.
Posted on 4/26/22 at 9:46 am to Slippy
Locating the bridge at Bluebonnet would gridlock traffic not just on Bluebonnet, but in all of south Baton Rouge. I realize this is a regional project and not just a Baton Rouge project, but improving traffic in Baton Rouge is in fact one of the goals of this bridge. Locating the bridge at Bluebonnet would significantly worsen traffic for a large portion of Baton Rouge, and therefore it should not be an option.
Posted on 4/26/22 at 9:48 am to Sasquatch Smash
quote:
LA-1 and I-10E traffic are a mess in the evenings. A lot of that having to do with the interstate going from 3-ish lanes to 1-ish lanes almost immediately after crossing the bridge.
This will literally be fixed within 5-10 years. I-10 is being rebuilt and will be 3 lanes from the bridge to Acadian.
As for the new bridge -- Here is the recently updated page on the bridge website:
https://www.mrbsouth.com/_files/ugd/0c090a_d354fdd74a7f4a3b88d4ff5a2763f21c.pdf
This post was edited on 4/26/22 at 9:56 am
Posted on 4/26/22 at 9:51 am to Slippy
i moved to baton rouge 22 years ago from texas( don't ask me why i did this i dont have a good reason). I have heard about the need for a loop and a bridge since i moved here. It's LOL that baton rouge doesnt have a loop. It doesnt have a loop because livingston parish and ascension parish shot down proposed loop ideas that came thru thier parishes. I remember the reasonings being very stupid. now all these years later we are still at the same point.
Posted on 4/26/22 at 9:54 am to crewdepoo
quote:
poor planning by u club
U Club has been around 20 years, and in that time Ascension Parish has gained about 50,000 residents. In addition, many neighborhoods in Iberville didn't even exist at the time it was built. Traffic was just much different then. But, you're right that it never should have been built with a single entry/exit.
Posted on 4/26/22 at 9:56 am to HouseMom
quote:
Traffic was just much different then. But, you're right that it never should have been built with a single entry/exit.
Bingo
There should be a ordinance in EBR that a development should have a second entrance if it has over 75 homesites. Three or more if you have 250-300 homesites.
Posted on 4/26/22 at 9:58 am to Upperdecker
quote:
And the current projections have Bluebonnet getting an additional 24k vehicles per day if that bridge is added and connected to bluebonnet.
Current bridge has over 100k vehicles per day
So they expect the new bridge being built to by pass BR (while spitting it into south BR) to only draw 25% of the traffic?
This post was edited on 4/26/22 at 10:02 am
Posted on 4/26/22 at 9:59 am to Slippy
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), the four crossings south of Bayou Paul road and just north of St. Gabriel (on the east side) and just south of Plaquemine (on the west side) are the best of these bad options. These four locations are far enough north to still provide a viable bypass for I-10 through traffic, and far enough south that they will avoid significantly worsening traffic in south Baton Rouge.
This post was edited on 4/26/22 at 10:01 am
Posted on 4/26/22 at 10:07 am to Gauge
Maybe it’d be easier to leave the bridges as they are but actually connect them with interstate level roads. We’d have a loop then. A giant loop but still a loop.
Posted on 4/26/22 at 10:21 am to biglego
quote:the options north of plaquemine are best for this. La 1 is already a 4 lane undivided hwy, with frontage roads from this point. La 30 has room to become similar. Won’t be an interstate but close.
Maybe it’d be easier to leave the bridges as they are but actually connect them with interstate level roads. We’d have a loop then. A giant loop but still a loop.
Posted on 4/26/22 at 10:24 am to Slippy
quote:
Judy Eits said she is bothered that the bridge may be constructed too far south, to get traffic to New Orleans. Eits said lots of traffic on the current bridge near Port Allen, especially 18-wheelers, is trying to get to I-12 on the way east and those drivers want to avoid New Orleans. "I don't know that is our big problem," she said, meaning making it easier for motorists to get to eastbound I-10.
Oh FFS the media picks this idiot to quote?
There is not a single location that's possible that won't upset somebody. But they have to get moving on this whole endeavor and make a selection if they want a prayer in ever getting this funded and built. And they need to do it quickly.
My advice would be to pick the location that will attract the most vehicular traffic and use tolls to pay for as much of it as possible.
Posted on 4/26/22 at 10:29 am to Slippy
quote:
This will literally be fixed within 5-10 years.
The I-10 widening in Baton Rouge is going to absolutely suck during construction, but the finished result should be awesome.
The preliminary layouts that I saw posted on LADOTD's website look very good. This is actually a well thought out design. Hopefully they don't cock it up during construction.
This post was edited on 4/26/22 at 10:30 am
Posted on 4/26/22 at 10:43 am to GetBackToWork
quote:
What seems to be missing from all of these proposals is a large reduction in pass through traffic traveling through Baton Rouge.
None of these options will eliminate the freight trucks traveling cross country on I-10/12.
None of these options will provide a true bypass.
There are 112,000 vehicles crossing the I-10 bridge every day, but only 50,000 vehicles per day on I-10 between the Lobdell and Grosse Tete exits. In other words, more than half of the vehicles crossing the bridge are entering and exiting the interstate in Port Allen. Only about 25% of the eastbound traffic from the bridge continues to I-12. There is no silver bullet that magically cuts I-10 bridge traffic in half.
It’s just funny to me how so many people completely dismiss a Plaquemine bridge because “it’s not a north loop, so it’s a waste of money.” We can build a bridge to the south and divert, I don’t know, maybe 20-25% of the current I-10 bridge traffic. That bridge can be partially financed via tolls. Or we can build a north loop that would also divert 20-25% of the bridge traffic, but cost 5x as much. Also, you can’t finance it with tolls because you are targeting pass-through traffic which is far less likely to use a toll road.
This idea that we need to get freight traffic off of the main interstate route to make way for commuters is a huge part of the reason Baton Rouge traffic is so fricked up in the first place - the entire mentality is backwards. The city has become WAY too reliant on the interstate for local traffic.
Page 3 of 6
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News