- 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 to widen I-10 between Lafayette and Basin bridge
Posted on 8/4/16 at 12:45 pm to SlowFlowPro
Posted on 8/4/16 at 12:45 pm to SlowFlowPro
Why will there be a bottleneck? Interstates lose lanes all the time without a bottleneck.
Yall are ridiculous. This is phase one of an improved I 10 corridor and all yall do is bitch.
Yall are ridiculous. This is phase one of an improved I 10 corridor and all yall do is bitch.
3
Posted on 8/4/16 at 12:46 pm to RDOtiger
quote:
Yeah, this portion of I-10 is the "best fit" for expansion...never mind the fact that East bound I-10 narrows to one lane at the end of the MS River bridge...this area doesn't meet the criteria for "best fit"
Can't do that part for $60 million.
Posted on 8/4/16 at 12:50 pm to ksayetiger
quote:
Why will there be a bottleneck?
Female
Drivers
Posted on 8/4/16 at 12:51 pm to Brosef Stalin
No need to add another lane, but frick it's been needed to be repaved for like 10 years.
Posted on 8/4/16 at 12:51 pm to Scooba
Not only will the lanes drop from three to two, but the speed limit drops by 10 mph at that same spot. All it takes is one cop car sitting near the start of the bridge for people to slam on the brakes and cause a wreck.
Posted on 8/4/16 at 12:53 pm to ksayetiger
quote:
Yall are ridiculous. This is phase one of an improved I 10 corridor and all yall do is bitch.
quote:
ksayetiger
You are correct. People want everything to be fixed in the blink of an eye. They fail to be realistic about things like this. There is only so much money, so you have to make the projects that fit in that budget happen. Many people don't understand that you can't put aside money every year to save up for bigger projects. If you don't spend your allotted budget, that money goes back to the feds and you lose it. And then, to make things worse, not spending it can count against you for future allocations.
But whining and bitching is much easier to do.
Posted on 8/4/16 at 12:54 pm to Brosef Stalin
They need to take care of 190 first. That road sees more and more action everyday
Posted on 8/4/16 at 12:55 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
well that seals it. 90 from lafayette to nola for the next couple years
No.. NO..NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
I enjoy my peaceful ride from Lafayette to Kenner every other weekend on HWY90.
Posted on 8/4/16 at 12:59 pm to waiting4saturday
quote:
No need to add another lane, but frick it's been needed to be repaved for like 10 years.
I believe that was why it was selected for widening. It was scheduled to be redone anyway so it was the perfect time to widen it too.
Posted on 8/4/16 at 1:00 pm to Boudreaux35
quote:
People want everything to be fixed in the blink of an eye. They fail to be realistic about things like this.
do we know how many studies have been done on this project?
Posted on 8/4/16 at 1:00 pm to Brosef Stalin
This seems like all kinds of dumb.
First of all, the I-10/ I-49 interchange has a lane about 100 yards long for cars to both exit onto I-49 north or south AND for cars to exit onto I-10 east or west. Fix that crap first.
Second, the basin bridge will still create a bottle neck and now there will be a bottle neck in Lafayette heading west as well.
Lastly, I cannot imagine they'll add a lane both ways and repave the entire 17 mile stretch for $60M. This shite will go over budget.
First of all, the I-10/ I-49 interchange has a lane about 100 yards long for cars to both exit onto I-49 north or south AND for cars to exit onto I-10 east or west. Fix that crap first.
Second, the basin bridge will still create a bottle neck and now there will be a bottle neck in Lafayette heading west as well.
Lastly, I cannot imagine they'll add a lane both ways and repave the entire 17 mile stretch for $60M. This shite will go over budget.
Posted on 8/4/16 at 1:03 pm to Brosef Stalin
quote:grants like this are very specific. they're made to address a particular type of transportation need. it's not "I-10 goes down to one lane in BR. why are are they using this money to fix this part??"
Is this really necessary?
here is the criteria for this particular grant
quote:
A project is eligible for an FASTLANE grants if it is:
-a highway freight project carried out on the National Highway Freight Network (23 U.S.C. 167)
-a highway or bridge project carried out on the National Highway System (NHS) including projects that add capacity on the Interstate System to improve mobility or projects in a national scenic area
-a railway-highway grade crossing or grade separation project
-a freight project that is
1) an intermodal or rail project, or
2) within the boundaries of a public or private freight rail, water (including ports), or intermodal facility, is a surface transportation infrastructure project necessary to facilitate direct intermodal interchange, transfer, or access into or out of the facility, and will significantly improve freight movement on the National Highway Freight Network. For these projects Federal funds can only support project elements that provide public benefits.
this section in I-10 must have fallen in one of these specific categories, probably the second
Posted on 8/4/16 at 1:06 pm to VermilionTiger
quote:
I enjoy my peaceful ride from Lafayette to Kenner every other weekend on HWY90.
Peaceful as in little to no traffic, but it is a terrible road from basically New Iberia to Morgan City.
In other news, Jeanerette City Marshals and Patterson City Police rejoice.
Posted on 8/4/16 at 1:14 pm to Topwater Trout
quote:
do we know how many studies have been done on this project?
For the widening of I-10 west of the basin? Probably just one. It isn't that complex. Same alignment and since the widening is to the median side, very little impact to anything else, i.e. nobody whining that it will be too close to their empty lot that they own.
Posted on 8/4/16 at 1:14 pm to link
Hit the nail on the head, link.
FASTLANE grants originated from the FAST Act, the 5-year surface transportation re-authorization bill. A lot of these funds are tied to freight congestion and bottlenecks, including roadways, railways and ports. Roadways must meet a certain percentage of 5-axle + freight trucks in order to qualify.
18 projects were awarded to only 16 states.
FASTLANE grants originated from the FAST Act, the 5-year surface transportation re-authorization bill. A lot of these funds are tied to freight congestion and bottlenecks, including roadways, railways and ports. Roadways must meet a certain percentage of 5-axle + freight trucks in order to qualify.
18 projects were awarded to only 16 states.
This post was edited on 8/4/16 at 1:15 pm
Posted on 8/4/16 at 1:18 pm to Boudreaux35
quote:
For the widening of I-10 west of the basin? Probably just one. It isn't that complex.
I was more or less being a smartass due to all the fricking studies we have had about traffic congestion on the Horace Wilkinson bridge
Posted on 8/4/16 at 1:20 pm to ksayetiger
quote:
“It was the only project that we had that was eligible for this pot of money that will allow us to stretch our dollars further and wider here in Louisiana,” Wilson said.
Does anyone know the eligibility requirements? It sounds like it's only available for relatively easy and largely unnecessary projects.
quote:
Yall are ridiculous. This is phase one of an improved I 10 corridor and all yall do is bitch
The complaint is that it is an "improvement" of a relatively problem free stretch of the interstate while the more problematic areas of the interstate continue to be avoided. Does that particular stretch of road going west bound back up all that often? I'm sure like most on here, I've never had an issue going eastbound unless there was a problem on the basin bridge. This appears to do nothing to alleviate problems on the bridge. I don't care if you have 8 lanes between Laf. and the bridge. If the bridge is still two lanes it doesn't matter.
This sounds like the Fedgov said "Here. We are going to give you a relatively small amount of money to use ONLY on federal highways." The state probably couldn't do any real work (i.e. something that will make a big difference) for only 60 mill, so they are "fixing" something that really isn't broken because they have to use the money but it isn't enough to do anything of note.
Can the state not combine the $60 mill with state money to actually fund a project that will provide significant improvements?
Posted on 8/4/16 at 1:20 pm to Brosef Stalin
This isn't necessary and will not alleviate congestion at all.
Posted on 8/4/16 at 1:24 pm to SCUBABlake
quote:
A lot of these funds are tied to freight congestion and bottlenecks, including roadways, railways and ports. Roadways must meet a certain percentage of 5-axle + freight trucks in order to qualify
no way that stretch of highway should get a priority over I-10 and the merge with 110 in BR...unless that stretch is not eligible or something
Posted on 8/4/16 at 1:25 pm to link
quote:
grants like this are very specific. they're made to address a particular type of transportation need. it's not "I-10 goes down to one lane in BR. why are are they using this money to fix this part??"
here is the criteria for this particular grant
Thanks. Now it makes more sense. So it's either do it in that particular spot, or don't get the grant.
It still doesn't really solve much in the grand scheme, but it's better than nothing (which would be the alternative)
Page 2 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News