- 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: Committee shoots down proposal for new Lake Charles I-10 Bridge
Posted on 10/25/23 at 12:53 pm to winkchance
Posted on 10/25/23 at 12:53 pm to winkchance
I'm not an engineer but it seems to be an easier build compared to the Ms river bridge B.R. Do they have to build the thing high like the previous one. I fish underneath that bridge a lot and don't see many ships going underneath it now, just tugboats pushing barges. So, the lower the cheaper. Am I right!
1
Posted on 10/25/23 at 12:57 pm to lsu777
Has any study for cost been done other than the current design on the table? AFAIK it hasn’t been considered. Do you have that information? If you do, what would the difference be?
This post was edited on 10/25/23 at 12:59 pm
Posted on 10/25/23 at 12:59 pm to VernonPLSUfan
quote:
I'm not an engineer but it seems to be an easier build compared to the Ms river bridge B.R. Do they have to build the thing high like the previous one. I fish underneath that bridge a lot and don't see many ships going underneath it now, just tugboats pushing barges. So, the lower the cheaper. Am I right!
wont be nearly as high. current bridge is 135, proposed would be 75
This post was edited on 10/25/23 at 1:01 pm
Posted on 10/25/23 at 12:59 pm to MasterJSchroeder
quote:
but they cant find a way to put a bridge on I10 in Lake Charles. One of the most heavily trafficked routes in America.
It’s crackhead level insane that the federal government doesn’t fund it. It’s a national security issue.
Posted on 10/25/23 at 1:08 pm to Traveler
quote:
Has any study for cost been done other than the current design on the table? AFAIK it hasn’t been considered. Do you have that information? If you do, what would the difference be?
so originally design proposed before inflation it was estimated to be between 500-600million. that was pre-covid and all in. It was nice but more basic
then the state estimated it to be $800m if they funded it
the PPP committee came back in like 2021 or 22 and said it would be 400-600m if done through PPP. The committee advised the state it would cost 25 million in inflation every year it delayed the project.
State then took and adjusted the design and some other things and now are saying it will be 2.1B. This is the work of art that you see now.
before all of this the state always claimed it couldnt be done due to environmental issues from an old pipeline spill. Well the committee sued for those documents and caught the state in a lie with their pants down.
state backed off and agreed to play ball after the committee went to the press.
since the state took everythign from the committee(local and state level business guys) the price has tripled and there have been nothing but delay after delay. its all a stall tatic because the state doesnt have the money.
Posted on 10/25/23 at 1:10 pm to Earnest_P
quote:
It’s crackhead level insane that the federal government doesn’t fund it. It’s a national security issue.
the feds are willing to kick in their portion but the state has been retarded with the fed money in the past so the feds are not going to kick in until it can assure that the project will be a go and go as planned.
all the info i have is from the OG committee meetings where they released all the info and the website they built LINK
Posted on 10/25/23 at 1:25 pm to Sao
quote:
Man. I just don't understand your state's mindset at all. Isn't that think crumbling?
I believe the Federal Government inspected it a few years back and it scored 1 out of 100 on the safety rating. The state had to come in and get it up to the bare minimum which is 10 out of 100 I believe. Allegedly, its currently at 24 out of 100 on the safety scale.
This post was edited on 10/25/23 at 1:26 pm
Posted on 10/25/23 at 11:29 pm to stout
They've been working on this for 20 years and what they came up with was a low height bridge that charges people tolls?
On a primary interstate?
Basically, this bridge will be the most expensive bridge ever.
- $2.1B up front costs
- $200M a year in tolls to a private company
- $10's of millions in tax rebates to trucking companies
- diverted traffic to 210 would add more wear and tear to a longer, higher, and more expensive bridge to maintain
Genius, Louisiana.
On a primary interstate?
Basically, this bridge will be the most expensive bridge ever.
- $2.1B up front costs
- $200M a year in tolls to a private company
- $10's of millions in tax rebates to trucking companies
- diverted traffic to 210 would add more wear and tear to a longer, higher, and more expensive bridge to maintain
Genius, Louisiana.
This post was edited on 10/26/23 at 12:06 am
Posted on 10/26/23 at 6:07 am to stout
Good. They need another bridge in the baton rouge area first.
Page 7 of 7
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News