- 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: BR architect: close the washington st exit
Posted on 11/26/19 at 11:10 am to Boudreaux35
Posted on 11/26/19 at 11:10 am to Boudreaux35
I-110 is 2 lanes through the split, why not make that go to one lane and have 2 continuous lanes for I-10, maybe we need a study for that
0
Posted on 11/26/19 at 11:10 am to kingbob
The building for Chelsea’s is available. One of them could move down the block to there.
Posted on 11/26/19 at 11:12 am to kingbob
quote:
The businesses everyone seems concerned about are Ivar’s, Duvic’s, the Overpass Merchant, and George’s
I was under the impression from the initial plans that only Overpass Merchant was going to be demolished, and they were already promised space where the to-be demolished I-10 Perkins exit/entrance is located.
Posted on 11/26/19 at 11:13 am to cgrand
He is partially right. History here and in most other urban areas shows that adding more highway capacity in cities just adds more cars to the roads and doesn't help with peak traffic demand. Repairing/replacing existing infrastructure is one thing and very important. But if nothing else changes (i.e. no new river crossing) and this project is complete within 10 years, nothing will really change, there will just be more cars on I-10 at peaks times occupying more lanes.
It happens everywhere, over the past 30 years we've widened I-12 all the way from the split to Denham Springs and beyond and at peak times traffic still sucks. Its not like Ascension and Livingston are going to stop growing (unless this sewer stuff doesn't get addressed and people can't flush their toilets), and more infill in the city limits doesn't seem to be happening right now.
It happens everywhere, over the past 30 years we've widened I-12 all the way from the split to Denham Springs and beyond and at peak times traffic still sucks. Its not like Ascension and Livingston are going to stop growing (unless this sewer stuff doesn't get addressed and people can't flush their toilets), and more infill in the city limits doesn't seem to be happening right now.
Posted on 11/26/19 at 11:20 am to NOLALGD
The key is keeping local traffic off of the interstate. For example it is not meant for people that live in cedar Crest to use the interstate system to get to southdowns. I have a disdain for people that would even consider doing that.
If you are going less than say 30 miles, you should never have to get on an interstate. If your commute in and out of work ever revolves getting on an interstate twice a day, you need to relocate.
If you are going less than say 30 miles, you should never have to get on an interstate. If your commute in and out of work ever revolves getting on an interstate twice a day, you need to relocate.
Posted on 11/26/19 at 11:21 am to NOLALGD
Gentrification and infill development as opposed to urban sprawl would go a long way toward relieving traffic... but that's racist too.
Posted on 11/26/19 at 11:21 am to NOLALGD
Induced demand is such a fallacy. It assumes the increased capacity created the cars, but that’s not true. The cars were already in the road system. Just like widening and deepening a canal doesn’t make it any less full, widening a road rarely makes it less congested. However the reason is that the water was already there. You’re just giving the water a better path. So, rather than it taking 12 hours to drain your yard as the water inefficiently trickles through the grass, it now drains in 6 hours through ditches.
The cars in induced demand scenarios are already in the road system utilizing clogged surface streets. The numbers are already increasing due to growth outpacing infrastructure development due to cost and long lead times. Those increases in cars were coming with increased capacity or without it. Typically, by the time the project gets built, it’s already insufficient for the demand. However, it’s still a massive improvement over the prior capacity, and pretending it makes no difference is entirely intellectually dishonest.
Once the capacity on arteries is increased, they then move to occupy that increased capacity, like water flowing into a better ditch. Induced demand is just propoganda used by anti-development communists and lazy government bureaucrats to justify diverting taxpayer dollars from one of the few things EVERYONE agrees they’re needed for. Induced demand narrative is a scam designed to stop progress and make excuses for not building, maintaining, and widening roads despite collecting tax dollars to do so.
The cars in induced demand scenarios are already in the road system utilizing clogged surface streets. The numbers are already increasing due to growth outpacing infrastructure development due to cost and long lead times. Those increases in cars were coming with increased capacity or without it. Typically, by the time the project gets built, it’s already insufficient for the demand. However, it’s still a massive improvement over the prior capacity, and pretending it makes no difference is entirely intellectually dishonest.
Once the capacity on arteries is increased, they then move to occupy that increased capacity, like water flowing into a better ditch. Induced demand is just propoganda used by anti-development communists and lazy government bureaucrats to justify diverting taxpayer dollars from one of the few things EVERYONE agrees they’re needed for. Induced demand narrative is a scam designed to stop progress and make excuses for not building, maintaining, and widening roads despite collecting tax dollars to do so.
This post was edited on 11/26/19 at 11:26 am
Posted on 11/26/19 at 11:29 am to cgrand
Posted on 11/26/19 at 11:29 am to SuperSaint
quote:
If you are going less than say 30 miles, you should never have to get on an interstate. If your commute in and out of work ever revolves getting on an interstate twice a day, you need to relocate.
Well this is certainly a unique take
Posted on 11/26/19 at 11:40 am to cgrand
He should have his license revoked for spouting such idiocy.
The problem isn't the Washington Street exit, it's that the extra lane from the bridge fricking ENDS as the Washington Street exit thus taking I-10E down to 1 fricking lane. Had they just extended that lane on to the I-12 split and made the exit a normal one, no one would even realize Washington Street had an exit there other than the people who use it.
Anyone with a working eyeball can look at the traffic flow and patterns to see one of the biggest issues is the overall lack of capacity along the 110-12 corridor. Going in both directions you have situations where you quickly drop 6 or more lanes of traffic down to 2 or 3 within a small range that does not bleed off a commensurate amount of traffic.
While this is indeed needed, it's only going to be a bandaid until/unless a true southern loop is built (to allow the passthrough traffic to be removed from the equation as well as help facilitate growth south, west and east of Baton Rouge).
The problem isn't the Washington Street exit, it's that the extra lane from the bridge fricking ENDS as the Washington Street exit thus taking I-10E down to 1 fricking lane. Had they just extended that lane on to the I-12 split and made the exit a normal one, no one would even realize Washington Street had an exit there other than the people who use it.
Anyone with a working eyeball can look at the traffic flow and patterns to see one of the biggest issues is the overall lack of capacity along the 110-12 corridor. Going in both directions you have situations where you quickly drop 6 or more lanes of traffic down to 2 or 3 within a small range that does not bleed off a commensurate amount of traffic.
While this is indeed needed, it's only going to be a bandaid until/unless a true southern loop is built (to allow the passthrough traffic to be removed from the equation as well as help facilitate growth south, west and east of Baton Rouge).
Posted on 11/26/19 at 11:52 am to SuperSaint
quote:
If you are going less than say 30 miles, you should never have to get on an interstate. If your commute in and out of work ever revolves getting on an interstate twice a day, you need to relocate.
30 miles of surface streets?
I don't use the interstate on my commute but man that sounds brutal
This post was edited on 11/26/19 at 12:04 pm
Posted on 11/26/19 at 12:00 pm to Booyow
quote:
Stay in your lane, bro
This.
Posted on 11/26/19 at 12:02 pm to Oilfieldbiology
Maybe people wouldn’t have to take the interstate to work if:
1. There were more redundant east/west and north/south surface streets that ran from the suburbs to where the jobs are (downtown, LSU, plants along the river, etc). BR is surrounded by water on 3 sides. There are only 14 total lanes of traffic across Bayou Manchac, 10 across the Mississippi River, and 12 across the Amite River. These sparse crossings create choke points forcing traffic coming to and from suburbs onto interstates.
2. If Baton Rouge had safe and reliable public school system. Most people who work in BR but live around Denham/Walker or AP do so to send their kids to better public schools. The EBR non-magnet schools are atrocious and dangerous. The costs of private schools are substantial as well, so much of the middle class is forced to commute long distances to afford decent schools for their kids. If EBR schools were decent and safe, more people would choose to live closer to their jobs in the city.
1. There were more redundant east/west and north/south surface streets that ran from the suburbs to where the jobs are (downtown, LSU, plants along the river, etc). BR is surrounded by water on 3 sides. There are only 14 total lanes of traffic across Bayou Manchac, 10 across the Mississippi River, and 12 across the Amite River. These sparse crossings create choke points forcing traffic coming to and from suburbs onto interstates.
2. If Baton Rouge had safe and reliable public school system. Most people who work in BR but live around Denham/Walker or AP do so to send their kids to better public schools. The EBR non-magnet schools are atrocious and dangerous. The costs of private schools are substantial as well, so much of the middle class is forced to commute long distances to afford decent schools for their kids. If EBR schools were decent and safe, more people would choose to live closer to their jobs in the city.
Posted on 11/26/19 at 12:10 pm to kingbob
quote:
Once the capacity on arteries is increased, they then move to occupy that increased capacity, like water flowing into a better ditch. Induced demand is just propoganda used by anti-development communists and lazy government bureaucrats to justify diverting taxpayer dollars from one of the few things EVERYONE agrees they’re needed for. Induced demand narrative is a scam designed to stop progress and make excuses for not building, maintaining, and widening roads despite collecting tax dollars to do so.
Umm, under your scenario in 30 years I-10 in BR will be 12 lanes wide and there will still be traffic. I'm all for building and maintaining roads, but widening any interstate, especially elevated interstates in cities is crazy expensive and takes forever, primarily due land acquisition battles. You have to get developed land from people with houses and businesses, those folks generally want to keep their houses and businesses.
Also I didn't use the term induced demand in my post, I agree it is often misused, but I fail to see how it stops progress. Traffic itself doesn't stop development, in fact the places that are growing the most have the most traffic. But it does get to one point, cities and concentrations of people are beneficial because there are economies of scale for jobs, services, and sometimes fun things to do. But when people live further from cities, they still need/want things cities have, which means more traffic. In some places the solution is better transit, in other places the solution is providing more housing options so people can live closer to the places they want to go most often. And the BR metro needs another river crossing that connects places where people are right now, that's more important to me than the I-10 widening.
Posted on 11/26/19 at 12:25 pm to NOLALGD
The reality is that the traffic will be there whether the lanes are built or not. The only difference will be how efficiently it can be moved within the system. If there is proper capacity on the interstates, then that traffic will occupy the interstates. If not, it will clog the surface streets. This isn’t rocket science. There are basically two options: give up on adding capacity and just let everything get more fubar’d because “muh induced demand”, or actually add the capacity that gets more cars off the surface streets and onto the highways which can move them more efficiently. “Muh induced demand” is like someone claiming the chemo gives you cancer. Yeah, chemo sucks, but without it, the cancer will kill you.
Posted on 11/26/19 at 12:27 pm to NOLALGD
Adding another bridge is an increase in capacity. Adding lanes is another means of adding capacity. This isn’t a one or the other argument. Both are needed. Induced demand is used an excuse to do neither because “adding capacity increases cars” when it’s actually just adding cars where they’re measuring cars by taking cars away from where they’re not measuring.
This post was edited on 11/26/19 at 12:28 pm
Posted on 11/26/19 at 12:27 pm to kingbob
Since you brought up Bayou Manchac, the lack of a crossing between I10 and La. 30 is bad. I always thought a crossing connecting to Burbank at the big 90 degree curve would be very beneficial
Posted on 11/26/19 at 12:31 pm to cgrand
quote:
BR architect
what does he know about traffic flows? you know there is a whole engineering practice that specializes in fricking traffic. The Ted Mosby wanna be probably read one of those reports. Posted on 11/26/19 at 12:37 pm to cgrand
The people will march. President Washington will not be denied.
Posted on 11/26/19 at 12:37 pm to kingbob
quote:
If Baton Rouge had safe and reliable public school system. Most people who work in BR but live around Denham/Walker or AP do so to send their kids to better public schools. The EBR non-magnet schools are atrocious and dangerous. The costs of private schools are substantial as well, so much of the middle class is forced to commute long distances to afford decent schools for their kids. If EBR schools were decent and safe, more people would choose to live closer to their jobs in the city.
This. All of this.
Page 3 of 5
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News