- 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: DOTD changes up I-10 widening project. Less pain(?), more expense, more time.
Posted on 1/30/23 at 6:03 pm to saint tiger225
Posted on 1/30/23 at 6:03 pm to saint tiger225
quote:
frick up a good nut.
1
Posted on 1/30/23 at 6:07 pm to 0x15E
Ain't nothing kinky about blue balls. 
Posted on 1/30/23 at 6:08 pm to TheAstroTiger
quote:
So lane closures were originally scheduled to last a year but now two? Whoever wrote this article was not clear in many areas.
The entire idea behind making it one lane in that stretch was that it would suck for a year but total time spent on construction would be less. Construction zones create traffic regardless. Now they are reducing it to two lanes but it will increase the time spent working in that area by a year
Posted on 1/30/23 at 6:08 pm to titmouse
quote:
DOTD changes up I-10 widening project. Less pain(?), more expense, more
JBE getting his cut before he leaves office
Posted on 1/30/23 at 6:11 pm to saint tiger225
quote:
Get the hell out of that shithole state. I love Louisiana bc it's home. That said, the politicians there could frick up a good nut
I wish I could but I’m stuck because I’m in education and my pension doesn’t transfer. I have to stick it out. However, I don’t have to stay in WBR traveling to EBR everyday. That’s a big decision I have to make in the next year.
And for the record, my retirement plan is entirely dependent on leaving this hell hole.
This post was edited on 1/30/23 at 6:12 pm
Posted on 1/30/23 at 6:14 pm to titmouse
I’m going to be retired before this is completed, and I don’t plan on retiring for 15 years.
Posted on 1/30/23 at 6:30 pm to saint tiger225
So they will widen they flyover at a cost of $50 million before they cut down lanes so they won't have to go down to just a single lane.
I'm 100% okay with this. And in the end we get a wider flyover.
I'm 100% okay with this. And in the end we get a wider flyover.
Posted on 1/30/23 at 6:32 pm to Dingeaux
quote:
it was stupid of them to think cutting down westbound I10 to one lane at the foot of the bridge wouldn't be a problem.
It was stupid of them to not think that janky old flyover was okay to leave untouched.
The railings are old. The alignment is shite. The lighting is terrible. They should have just included that in the project to begin with, then they never even would have had to bring up the single lane bullshite.
Posted on 1/30/23 at 6:34 pm to titmouse
The big money is always in the change orders.
Posted on 1/30/23 at 6:36 pm to titmouse
Posted on 1/30/23 at 6:41 pm to Dingeaux
quote:
it was stupid of them to think cutting down westbound I10 to one lane at the foot of the bridge wouldn't be a problem
Not a single person thought that. That is one of the tightest interstate highway rights-of-way in the entire country. The original design from the 60s was badly flawed, but pushed through for reasons we could probably all guess.
It's still going to "be a problem," but the problem is basically unavoidable at the present moment. It's a shame we couldn't get the legislature to fund a new southern bridge over the last 30 years. That would have eased a decent amount of the daily congestion.
Posted on 1/30/23 at 7:05 pm to titmouse
For anyone confused about what exactly is changing..
Old Plan:
New Plan:
So basically by widening the WB flyover from 10 to the bridge before the EB lane closure starts, it will allow them to add another WB lane to the bridge. This should marginally reduce backup in the city, though it doesn’t do anything for backup coming into BR across the bridge.
As I read it, it doesn’t sound like they are extending the closures between the bridge and Acadian by a year. It sounds like they are delaying the closures between the bridge and Acadian by a year so they can do the flyover first.
Hopefully the widened flyover adds some long term value as well. I’m a bit skeptical as it will presumably still only be 2 WB lanes going to the bridge in the long run, and it doesn’t seem like they are doing much to re-align the flyover. But maybe they can widen the travel lanes a bit so that it doesn’t slow down quite as much in the curve.
Regardless this appears to be necessary. Particularly if it doesn’t actually extend the larger I-10 closure by a year. The devil’s in the details though, as always. I’m sure the flyover work will cause congestion as well.
Old Plan:
New Plan:
So basically by widening the WB flyover from 10 to the bridge before the EB lane closure starts, it will allow them to add another WB lane to the bridge. This should marginally reduce backup in the city, though it doesn’t do anything for backup coming into BR across the bridge.
As I read it, it doesn’t sound like they are extending the closures between the bridge and Acadian by a year. It sounds like they are delaying the closures between the bridge and Acadian by a year so they can do the flyover first.
Hopefully the widened flyover adds some long term value as well. I’m a bit skeptical as it will presumably still only be 2 WB lanes going to the bridge in the long run, and it doesn’t seem like they are doing much to re-align the flyover. But maybe they can widen the travel lanes a bit so that it doesn’t slow down quite as much in the curve.
Regardless this appears to be necessary. Particularly if it doesn’t actually extend the larger I-10 closure by a year. The devil’s in the details though, as always. I’m sure the flyover work will cause congestion as well.
This post was edited on 1/30/23 at 7:06 pm
Page 2 of 2
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News