- 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
Why Not Tunnels?
Posted on 7/24/18 at 9:02 am
Posted on 7/24/18 at 9:02 am
Are there any civil engineers or other similarly informed individuals in the OT who can talk about why tunnels aren’t being discussed as an alternative to a new bridge to solve Baton Rouge’s traffic problems? I’m sure it’s been considered and eliminated as a possible solution for good reason, but I’m curious to know why. Prohibitive cost comes most immediately to mind, but....
The George Wallace Tunnel (GWT) in Alabama was finished in ‘73 at a cost of $50M, which is $293.7M in today’s dollars. The GWT is 3,000 feet long. From one side of the Mississippi River to the other where the current bridge is built is about 2,700 feet. What I know is that we have many different considerations here that they may not have there such as levees and boat traffic depth which would likely drive up the cost, but would those things drive it up THAT much? $293.7M is about 1/4th the amount of the most recent bridge estimate I saw of $1.2B. For that amount, without any more information, it seems like you could build multiple tunnels for the price of a bridge. Also, I’m sure the Corp would have something to say about a Mississippi River tunnel.
I’m sure I’m missing something (if not multiple things) here. I know nothing about engineering, just curious. Please school me. Thanks.
The George Wallace Tunnel (GWT) in Alabama was finished in ‘73 at a cost of $50M, which is $293.7M in today’s dollars. The GWT is 3,000 feet long. From one side of the Mississippi River to the other where the current bridge is built is about 2,700 feet. What I know is that we have many different considerations here that they may not have there such as levees and boat traffic depth which would likely drive up the cost, but would those things drive it up THAT much? $293.7M is about 1/4th the amount of the most recent bridge estimate I saw of $1.2B. For that amount, without any more information, it seems like you could build multiple tunnels for the price of a bridge. Also, I’m sure the Corp would have something to say about a Mississippi River tunnel.
I’m sure I’m missing something (if not multiple things) here. I know nothing about engineering, just curious. Please school me. Thanks.
29
Posted on 7/24/18 at 9:03 am to Marineaux
Imagine another 2016 flood.....with tunnels
Posted on 7/24/18 at 9:04 am to Marineaux
What’s the difference in sea level?
Posted on 7/24/18 at 9:04 am to Marineaux
Have you never driven through Mobile? Frick tunnels and every moron who hits their brakes to go through them. Also, if you honk while driving through, I hope you DIAF.
This post was edited on 7/24/18 at 9:07 am
Posted on 7/24/18 at 9:04 am to Marineaux
Pretty sure it’s because the ground / soil is unstable here.
Posted on 7/24/18 at 9:05 am to Marineaux
It isn't that water that is worry some for tunnels in LA. It is the crappy soils we have. Louisiana Currently has 3 tunnels. And the state hates them.
Posted on 7/24/18 at 9:05 am to Marineaux
Why not just build lanes on top of the current interstates that don't let you exit until denham/prairieville
Posted on 7/24/18 at 9:06 am to Marineaux
have you ever seen a picture of the pipelines that run through South LA? There's also salt caverns all over the west side of the river in Baton Rouge.
Posted on 7/24/18 at 9:06 am to Marineaux
More expensive, less efficient
Posted on 7/24/18 at 9:07 am to Marineaux
SUCKAS
Posted on 7/24/18 at 9:08 am to Marineaux
quote:
The George Wallace Tunnel (GWT) in Alabama
is a complete fricking cluster frick. Every day from 4-6 pm traffic gets backed up for 2+ miles with 2+ hour delays. Wrecks all the time from people not knowing how to drive.
Mobile has been researching building a bridge to eliminate the tunnel for some time now, and construction has actually begun I believe. Won't be ready til like 2020 or so.
So no, tunnels suck arse
Posted on 7/24/18 at 9:09 am to Marineaux
Tunnels aren't cheap and we can't "import" Chinamen to build them anymore.
Posted on 7/24/18 at 9:09 am to Marineaux
When the river is at 29’ and you see 25-30’ water columns shoot up through the ground you’ll know why.
Posted on 7/24/18 at 9:10 am to Marineaux
Boston's Big Dig fiasco is a perfect example of why not.
The tunnels are nice now, but that was an expensive clusterfrick.
The tunnels are nice now, but that was an expensive clusterfrick.
Posted on 7/24/18 at 9:20 am to Marineaux
quote:
Are there any civil engineers or other similarly informed individuals in the OT who can talk about why tunnels aren’t being discussed as an alternative to a new bridge to solve Baton Rouge’s traffic problems? I’m sure it’s been considered and eliminated as a possible solution for good reason, but I’m curious to know why. Prohibitive cost comes most immediately to mind, but....
The George Wallace Tunnel (GWT) in Alabama was finished in ‘73 at a cost of $50M, which is $293.7M in today’s dollars. The GWT is 3,000 feet long. From one side of the Mississippi River to the other where the current bridge is built is about 2,700 feet. What I know is that we have many different considerations here that they may not have there such as levees and boat traffic depth which would likely drive up the cost, but would those things drive it up THAT much? $293.7M is about 1/4th the amount of the most recent bridge estimate I saw of $1.2B. For that amount, without any more information, it seems like you could build multiple tunnels for the price of a bridge. Also, I’m sure the Corp would have something to say about a Mississippi River tunnel.
I’m sure I’m missing something (if not multiple things) here. I know nothing about engineering, just curious. Please school me. Thanks.
I'd rather the US spend more time on creating a fully autonomous highway system. The human aspect of driving is a major factor in traffic jams.
From crashes, to tailgating, to simply not having every vehicle travel at a uniform speed. If we fully automate the interstates, we would see far less rush hour delays.
Posted on 7/24/18 at 9:24 am to Marineaux
There are currently 3 tunnels in LA. All have substantial maintenance issues and costs. LA soils do not lend themselves to tunnels at all.
Where did you get your conversion for 1973/$50M to 2018/$293M?
Where did you get your conversion for 1973/$50M to 2018/$293M?
Posted on 7/24/18 at 10:19 am to Marineaux
Trust me, you don't want tunnels.
Posted on 7/24/18 at 11:59 am to Marineaux
Pie in the sky I know, but if the state wanted to open up BR for expansion they'd do what NY/NJ did with the Hudson and put in tunnels for autos and trains.
Run train lines in parallel with the 110 on the BR side from the airport to the LSU campus, and parallel to 10 out to the Lobdell exit in the west.
Run train lines in parallel with the 110 on the BR side from the airport to the LSU campus, and parallel to 10 out to the Lobdell exit in the west.
Posted on 7/24/18 at 12:09 pm to Marineaux
Why not utilize the new St. Francisville bridge, expand Louisiana State Hwy. 10 through Jackson, Clinton, Greensburg, north of Covington all the way to I-59?
Leave BR to the Broome and Gravy folks, leave AP and LP to the mosquitos and floods, move the productive population up to the beautiful rolling hills of the Felicianas.
Sure, it would take a while for the migration to happen. But if this were Texas, State Hwy. 10 would already look like an interstate. (Of course, if this were Texas, I-10 in BR wouldn't be the eternal clusterfrick that it is today.
Leave BR to the Broome and Gravy folks, leave AP and LP to the mosquitos and floods, move the productive population up to the beautiful rolling hills of the Felicianas.
Sure, it would take a while for the migration to happen. But if this were Texas, State Hwy. 10 would already look like an interstate. (Of course, if this were Texas, I-10 in BR wouldn't be the eternal clusterfrick that it is today.
Page 1 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News