- 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: 20-25 million dollars to fix Washington street exit
Posted on 8/4/16 at 2:34 pm to SG_Geaux
Posted on 8/4/16 at 2:34 pm to SG_Geaux
I drive this every day coming from downtown Baton Rouge. There are two problems that are caused by the Washington Street exit, but I think there is an easy alternative to closing it.
Problem #1: drivers merging from 110 to get off at Washington interfere with traffic coming from the bridge.
Problem #2: for whatever reason many, many vehicles (mostly 18wheelers) immediately merge from the one Lane coming from i-10 into the two lanes coming from 110. They do so at the earliest possible moment, often coming to a standstill to do so. There is no reason for that and it's a large reason why traffic from 110 is impeded. I think some people mistake the Washington exit only signage as telling them the one Lane from i-10 ends.
Temporary solution : some type of barrier and signage telling drivers from i-10 to Stay in Lane past the Washington Street exit. That will keep traffic moving better on 110 for longer by decreasing the number of drivers who feel the need to immediately merge and prevent people from crossing several lanes of traffic to exit at Washington Street without closing the exit.
Problem #1: drivers merging from 110 to get off at Washington interfere with traffic coming from the bridge.
Problem #2: for whatever reason many, many vehicles (mostly 18wheelers) immediately merge from the one Lane coming from i-10 into the two lanes coming from 110. They do so at the earliest possible moment, often coming to a standstill to do so. There is no reason for that and it's a large reason why traffic from 110 is impeded. I think some people mistake the Washington exit only signage as telling them the one Lane from i-10 ends.
Temporary solution : some type of barrier and signage telling drivers from i-10 to Stay in Lane past the Washington Street exit. That will keep traffic moving better on 110 for longer by decreasing the number of drivers who feel the need to immediately merge and prevent people from crossing several lanes of traffic to exit at Washington Street without closing the exit.
0
Posted on 8/4/16 at 2:35 pm to SG_Geaux
quote:=/=
TX Contractor
quote:
Texas' DOTD
Posted on 8/4/16 at 2:40 pm to Korkstand
quote:
Considering the left lane coming from 10 only has 500' as it is to move over to give the right lane room to merge, I think doubling that to 1000' would do wonders.
It wouldn't though. The road is far past peak operating ability at its current AADT.
quote:
much runway do you think is required to eliminate that bottleneck? Half a mile? A mile?
It needs a lane from the bridge until it merges into the 4th lane that picks up at college drive. So about 3 miles? Any other solution would be a waste of money because you aren't fixing the problem. You aren't alleviating the problem either. You're just moving it.
Posted on 8/4/16 at 2:47 pm to PhiTiger1764
quote:You don't think? Do you think shortening the 500' would exacerbate the problem? Almost certainly, wouldn't you say?
It wouldn't though.
quote:How much could it possibly cost to close an exit, put up a few signs, and paint some new lines? A couple hundred k? You don't think that would pay off in 5-7 years if it only increases throughput by 1%?
It needs a lane from the bridge until it merges into the 4th lane that picks up at college drive. So about 3 miles? Any other solution would be a waste of money because you aren't fixing the problem.
quote:I disagree. The problem is people panic trying to merge in such a short span and end up stopping. Doubling the merge length absolutely has to alleviate the problem to some degree.
You aren't alleviating the problem either. You're just moving it.
Posted on 8/4/16 at 3:07 pm to Korkstand
If 150,000 cars are going through there a day, then that doesn't change by just restriping and extending a merge lane. You still need to get those cars through. All your solution would do is move the bottleneck. To have any positive effect at all on "throughput" you'd need less vehicles on the road, or more lanes.. which means at an absolute minimum, the lane would need to extend to the dalrymple exit. And it's not like tens of thousands are getting off there during rush hour, so that wouldn't be much of an improvement either.
Your solution would actually make the problem slightly worse in my opinion, because you would still have all 150,000 on the road plus the few who exit at Washington would now need to merge as well.
Your solution would actually make the problem slightly worse in my opinion, because you would still have all 150,000 on the road plus the few who exit at Washington would now need to merge as well.
Posted on 8/4/16 at 3:10 pm to PhiTiger1764
I will fix it for under 5K
Close Washington street ramp
Re stripe 110 to merge into I10 which is the reverse of what we have now
That will cost about 2K- the rest is for the politicians to go to Ruth Chris and take credit for it
Close Washington street ramp
Re stripe 110 to merge into I10 which is the reverse of what we have now
That will cost about 2K- the rest is for the politicians to go to Ruth Chris and take credit for it
Posted on 8/4/16 at 3:11 pm to Korkstand
quote:technically having no merge at all would be the way to do it because any amount of extra length only moves the bottleneck further upstream. 110 has about 90k vehicles/day and needs its 2 lanes, and 10 has about 110k vehicles and needs its two lanes (probably more), so any reduction in the number of lanes anywhere after the split will cause the backup we're seeing now starting from there. 500 feet, 1000 feet, a mile, whatever.
how much runway do you think is required to eliminate that bottleneck? Half a mile? A mile?
quote:cheap, yea. i just don't agree it'll be much, much better. i think it'll be the exact same but starting 500' further.
but much, much better. And cheap.
Posted on 8/4/16 at 3:19 pm to Tigerpaw123
Close it to vehicular traffic coming from 10 with a 12 foot wall but leave the ramp in place. Ramp will then become approved protest grounds where the police can just stand at the bottom.
Posted on 8/4/16 at 3:27 pm to PhiTiger1764
quote:You're looking at this like someone fresh out of school. You are not accounting for the way drivers actually react to situations on the road. Instead, you see it as simply a math problem. You aren't thinking about the actual process of merging. You aren't thinking about the domino effect that occurs when one single car has to move TWO lanes over in only a 500' window in order to hit that exit. Do you know how slow people have to drive on the INTERSTATE in order to pull that off? And that one vehicle has to slow what was TWO LANES OF INTERSTATE TRAFFIC down to that same speed.
If 150,000 cars are going through there a day, then that doesn't change by just restriping and extending a merge lane. You still need to get those cars through. All your solution would do is move the bottleneck. To have any positive effect at all on "throughput" you'd need less vehicles on the road, or more lanes..
I think you need to study some actual traffic patterns instead of just trying to calculate how many lanes might be needed for a particular number of cars.
quote:Your opinion would be dead wrong. Most people taking that exit are coming from 110, not 10. It creates a whole lot of criss-crossing on a goddamned interstate highway.
Your solution would actually make the problem slightly worse in my opinion, because you would still have all 150,000 on the road plus the few who exit at Washington would now need to merge as well.
Posted on 8/4/16 at 3:35 pm to Korkstand
How stupid is it that after all these decades we still have not corrected this problem 
Posted on 8/4/16 at 3:46 pm to link
quote:It moves the bottleneck further upstream AND AT FASTER SPEEDS. That part is important.
technically having no merge at all would be the way to do it because any amount of extra length only moves the bottleneck further upstream.
quote:A single-lane highway could easily carry 80k vehicles/day at 65mph with no tailgating, ASSUMING NO EXITS OR MERGES. Exits and merges are a motherfricker. Even if exiting or merging vehicles slow traffic by only 10mph, that domino effect will be felt for miles on a road near capacity. Drivers at the tail end of it will likely come to a dead stop.
110 has about 90k vehicles/day and needs its 2 lanes, and 10 has about 110k vehicles and needs its two lanes (probably more)
quote:No, the backup we're seeing now is due to a merge and exit on top of one another. Eliminating one variable AND lengthening (speeding) the other would help, a lot.
so any reduction in the number of lanes anywhere after the split will cause the backup we're seeing now starting from there. 500 feet, 1000 feet, a mile, whatever.
Posted on 8/4/16 at 4:41 pm to waiting4saturday
quote:Damn right!
If I was Governor, I would fire every DOTD employee and contract Texas' DOTD to do all of our shite.
Posted on 8/4/16 at 4:51 pm to waiting4saturday
quote:
If I was Governor, I would fire every DOTD employee and contract Texas' DOTD to do all of our shite. They'd have that exit fixed in 4 months and a new bridge in a year and probably be 1/2 the price.
And yet they would still have to deal with LA politicians.
Get rid of the "yes men" at DOTD and keep politician involvement to a minimum would go a long ways to fixing things.
Page 4 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News