- 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: "Inner Loop" being studied, Mayor has a mad legislature wasn't clued in
Posted on 3/27/14 at 10:13 am to Catman88
Posted on 3/27/14 at 10:13 am to Catman88
quote:i'd like to see it too, but from what i just read, there is no plan yet. there's $3.5B allocated to study it, which is about 3X less than what was allocated to study the BR Loop
I just really need to see the plan for that.
quote:now we're going in circles. people keep correcting you on this. no one is saying it's being made a toll road entirely. in fact, jindal said the exact opposite. see my previous post to you. also, we're all theorizing that there would be overpasses specifically to not "cut BR in half."
If you made Airline a toll road entirely just because you add a couple of lanes then you just cut BR in half. How is that a good thing?
3
Posted on 3/27/14 at 10:17 am to LSU-MNCBABY
quote:
May be a dumb question and I know it involves building another bridge, but wouldn't a mirror image of the proposal in the OP work better? Would avoid the in city traffic all together
Most think it would be really REALLY expensive to create a southern bypass and also the gains would be diminished because more trucks roll through i12 since that's what out- of-state traffic uses.
i49 is being built which will offer a new route for trucks from New Orleans to the west which helps i10 up till the split.
Posted on 3/27/14 at 10:17 am to link
Looks clear in the article that existing capacity that public funding has already paid for would not be tolled.....just a new freeway route.
They may not be able to make the new toll route into a true interstate-grade road with generous shoulders, but they could probably make a decent turnpike without traffic lights and at-grade rail crossings.
They may not be able to make the new toll route into a true interstate-grade road with generous shoulders, but they could probably make a decent turnpike without traffic lights and at-grade rail crossings.
This post was edited on 3/27/14 at 10:19 am
Posted on 3/27/14 at 10:18 am to link
Maybe Im confused how you can have a toll road alongside a non-toll road and one road goes faster than the other but both have the same traffic lights. If there is no money to build traffic light bypasses then is the plan to shorten cross street traffic lights? Without a bypass of the lights what exactly is someone paying for by taking the toll road instead of taking "free" airline?
Posted on 3/27/14 at 10:19 am to link
The big loop still needs to occur. And I am one of the biggest opponents to it as it stands. Not because I'm a NIMBY, I can always sell and move if I dont like it. But there was so many people in Livingston and Central who tried to explain that if they were to go north from I-12 about five miles east of Walker and follow the path of hwy 63, there is hardly any development out there. Its mostly wooded areas and sand/gravel pits. It would only extend the road an additional five miles and go North of all the newly developed areas. there was never a good reason given why they couldnt do that. It would have saved a ton of dollars from buying out neighborhoods full of people with the route they were planning.
Posted on 3/27/14 at 10:20 am to Catman88
quote:
Posted by Catman88 Maybe Im confused how you can have a toll road alongside a non-toll road and one road goes faster than the other but both have the same traffic lights. If there is no money to build traffic light bypasses then is the plan to shorten cross street traffic lights? Without a bypass of the lights what exactly is someone paying for by taking the toll road instead of taking "free" airline?
They do this in other parts of the country. The toll lanes elevate over the intersections.
Posted on 3/27/14 at 10:20 am to Catman88
Look at Beltway 8 in Houston as an example. Existing at-grade roads with traffic lights and no tolls are built with a toll freeway in the median.....you can use the toll road to avoid traffic lights or stay on the surface lanes to avoid tolls.
The tolls would be used to pay for bonds that would finance the construction of the new and expanded sections- including overpasses where needed.
This has been done before in many places including Houston. I'm actually shocked it hasn't been considered for Airline in Baton Rouge until now.
The tolls would be used to pay for bonds that would finance the construction of the new and expanded sections- including overpasses where needed.
This has been done before in many places including Houston. I'm actually shocked it hasn't been considered for Airline in Baton Rouge until now.
This post was edited on 3/27/14 at 10:26 am
Posted on 3/27/14 at 10:20 am to Asgard Device
quote:
The toll lanes elevate over the intersections.
But it has been discussed already that there is no money to do this.
quote:
No, not elevate. Widen US 61 and build frontage roads alongside US 61. There would be connectors at the ends of the project that would link the Airline corridor to I-10 west and east of the river.
Did I misread this?
This post was edited on 3/27/14 at 10:22 am
Posted on 3/27/14 at 10:24 am to Catman88
Frontage roads are often times lower speeds than their parent freeway. You know this, come on.
Posted on 3/27/14 at 10:24 am to Catman88
quote:i appreciate you not being as combative and defensive as you have been in past loop threads. i'll be happy to explain my understanding of it. when we talk about "limited access" or "control of access", imagine what an interstate is like. you can only get on and off at designated interchanges. no roads or driveways or anything can connect to it, and at intersections with major streets, there is an overpass or elevated section so there is no stopping. for this application, the toll road would be somewhere alongside existing Airline going non-stop with overpasses or interchanges, and existing Airline would remain as-is with signals and access to all the same streets that connect today.
Maybe Im confused how you can have a toll road alongside a non-toll road and one road goes faster than the other but both have the same traffic lights.
Posted on 3/27/14 at 10:25 am to Catman88
quote:
Did I misread this?
No. I don't think they've put that much thought into it. Theres a politician from Gonzales that wants to get some publicity and theres some other legislators that enjoy giving out contracts to generous companies like ABMB for studies.
Posted on 3/27/14 at 10:27 am to link
Jesus. Is it really difficult for people to grasp the concept of Earhart expressway?
except with tolls.
except with tolls.
Posted on 3/27/14 at 10:28 am to link
You are correct.
Before they can do this, I think they'll have to move the lanes of Airline to the edge of the right of way to accommodate a freeway in the median.
They might be able to pull that off without elevating the entire freeway section or expropriating a lot of private property. Airline is on a very wide strip of right-of-way.
If that's the plan, and they want to use the toll revenue to pay for bonds that finance the freeway (which will need overpasses and a couple of interchanges), then it's the best plan so far IMO. Think of it like the West Bank Expressway in New Orleans to some degree, with the freeway section being tolled.
Before they can do this, I think they'll have to move the lanes of Airline to the edge of the right of way to accommodate a freeway in the median.
They might be able to pull that off without elevating the entire freeway section or expropriating a lot of private property. Airline is on a very wide strip of right-of-way.
If that's the plan, and they want to use the toll revenue to pay for bonds that finance the freeway (which will need overpasses and a couple of interchanges), then it's the best plan so far IMO. Think of it like the West Bank Expressway in New Orleans to some degree, with the freeway section being tolled.
This post was edited on 3/27/14 at 10:34 am
Posted on 3/27/14 at 10:31 am to magildachunks
If Beaumont is able to have a limited access highway you would think we could figure it out.
Posted on 3/27/14 at 10:32 am to panterica
quote:
The program sends experts to provide pro bono consulting expertise on the most critical issues facing communities. In the case of Baton Rouge, the focus will be on traffic.
This is really going to frick with the politicians that initiate studies just to pad their friends wallets.
Posted on 3/27/14 at 10:35 am to Asgard Device
quote:that's misleading. the contract to study the BR loop was given to a team of consultants from ABMB, HNTB, and other acronym-laden companies. it was a joint effort between the most experienced consultants from the most experienced firms in the area. it's a smart, fair way to divide the funds.
some other legislators that enjoy giving out contracts to generous companies like ABMB for studies.
Posted on 3/27/14 at 10:35 am to link
So limited elevation at the lights. There was earlier talk in this thread that the tollway would stop at traffic lights. I must have missed where it was stated that wouldnt occur.
Posted on 3/27/14 at 10:36 am to Catman88
Google map the West Bank expressway in New Orleans or Beltway 8 in Houston.....imagine that but the freeway is tolled and isn't elevated except over grade-separated intersections. There is still an existing surface route that has at-grade intersections that won't be tolled, and there will be controlled access to the tolled section.
The tolls collected for cars using the freeway will back bonds used to pay for the new infrastructure.
The tolls collected for cars using the freeway will back bonds used to pay for the new infrastructure.
This post was edited on 3/27/14 at 10:41 am
Posted on 3/27/14 at 10:40 am to dewster
quote:
except over grade-separated intersections
So why was there talk by AJF about this not occuring?? This has been written in stone since the start of this thread?
quote:
I don't think they'd eliminate signals. Maybe some smaller ones. But the major ones would have to remain. The operations would change...like, Michigan left turns, etc.
This post was edited on 3/27/14 at 10:42 am
Posted on 3/27/14 at 10:42 am to Catman88
Because Airline itself probably isn't going to change other than shifting the lanes to the edge of the right-of-way. It will still have traffic lights and you'll still be able to go to businesses along that route.
They'll just have a freeway in a new, wider median....which will need some viaducts and elevated sections over the big intersections.
By freeway, I don't mean interstate-grade roads with wide shoulders and deliberate slopes. I mean it will likely be physically separated from Airline and limited access without traffic lights with controlled points for toll booths.
This would be a great setup to eventually turn Florida Blvd west of Airline into a freeway, and to expand surface routes into Central, Watson, Zachary, etc.
They'll just have a freeway in a new, wider median....which will need some viaducts and elevated sections over the big intersections.
By freeway, I don't mean interstate-grade roads with wide shoulders and deliberate slopes. I mean it will likely be physically separated from Airline and limited access without traffic lights with controlled points for toll booths.
This would be a great setup to eventually turn Florida Blvd west of Airline into a freeway, and to expand surface routes into Central, Watson, Zachary, etc.
This post was edited on 3/27/14 at 10:47 am
Page 5 of 7
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News