- 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: New tax plan for bridge across Mississippi
Posted on 4/6/18 at 9:28 am to KG6
Posted on 4/6/18 at 9:28 am to KG6
quote:and it is racist to close that exit.
Heading into BR, you basically neck down to one lane on I10. It's technically 2, but when that right lane becomes an exit only, you have all of I10 from the west necked down to a single lane on a narrow bridge/elevated road.
This post was edited on 4/6/18 at 9:29 am
0
Posted on 4/6/18 at 9:31 am to Lee Chatelain
quote:
so how much more tax do you want to add to fuel? It's already about half of what we pay now.
Gas tax in LA is currently 38 cents and only 20 cents of it is state tax.
Please let me know where you're buying your gasoline for 80 cents/gallon.
Thanks.
Posted on 4/6/18 at 9:32 am to tigerinthebueche
quote:a lot of reason is LA doesnt want to give up ownership of its roads.
why not just make it a privately funded toll road? let a private investor do it and charge to use it. If that's possible.
Posted on 4/6/18 at 9:34 am to Areddishfish
quote:The LADOTD are so incompetent, this is what they think of:
Loop
Posted on 4/6/18 at 9:35 am to CarRamrod
quote:
you havent looked at the project outlook for LADOTD have you?
Can you explain this "project outlook" a little more? Not sure I understand exactly what you are referencing.
Posted on 4/6/18 at 9:39 am to tigerinthebueche
quote:
Aww, poor BR got left out of the TIMED program. Be pissed at your local reps.
It's some of that, but it's more like NO allied themselves with rural reps to screw BR, Lafayette and others.
BR metro has gotten left out for years. The bridge problem is not a new problem, it's been like this for decades now.
If BR had the infrastructure Shreveport has it wouldn't be nearly as bad.
The fact is politics has worked against BR and No, Shreveport and others have gotten more than their fair share while we got screwed.
It's time that we catch up. The state should build us a by-pass and a bridge.
Posted on 4/6/18 at 9:39 am to Boudreaux35
multiple times throughout the year the Secretary does presentations of the future plan of projects they want to get done. Granted this changes from administration to administration. Thats one thing people dont realize when voting for Governor.
and what i mean is a new bridge is on the plan. The problem is funding. Yes there are ways to fund it; Tolls, Bonds, etc. But when you have an agency that is set in their ways it is really hard to push them to do something new.
and what i mean is a new bridge is on the plan. The problem is funding. Yes there are ways to fund it; Tolls, Bonds, etc. But when you have an agency that is set in their ways it is really hard to push them to do something new.
This post was edited on 4/6/18 at 9:42 am
Posted on 4/6/18 at 9:44 am to doubleb
quote:
It's time that we catch up. The state should build us a by-pass and a bridge.
Lake Charles is getting repairs for the I10 bridge and then the 210 bridge is getting redone soon. Meanwhile, BR has a horrendous traffic problem with no end in sight.
The rumor I heard is that the loop in Lake Charles was supposed to be for BR, but some political disagreement ruined the original plan.
Posted on 4/6/18 at 9:44 am to Areddishfish
quote:
Out of three proposed mega projects, they should prioritize them in this order: 1) loop, 2) widen interstate, 3) new bridge. I personally find the new bridge a waste being that the bridge there currently is plenty wide and it isn't that old.
Disagree. A "new bridge" isn't about replacing the existing bridge, but adding a 3rd option. It's a critical peice of any "loop". Also, the preliminary project for widening (moving the Washington Street Exit to I-110) is already underway.
In my opinion, the priority should be:
1. Widened Interstate (already happening)
2. New Bridge
3. Loop (since the loop has to tie in to this new bridge)
Posted on 4/6/18 at 9:48 am to kingbob
quote:yea but how far underway? I havent looked into it in a while. I really dont see how they are letting one councilmen bully the race card on closing this exit.
Also, the preliminary project for widening (moving the Washington Street Exit to I-110) is already underway.
Posted on 4/6/18 at 9:48 am to CarRamrod
quote:
and what i mean is a new bridge is on the plan. The problem is funding. Yes there are ways to fund it; Tolls, Bonds, etc.
I agree with that.
quote:
But when you have an agency that is set in their ways it is really hard to push them to do something new.
The agency is actually trying many new methods currently. Bonds are not anything new. They've been used for a long time. Tolls are not very new either but their use is very limited in our state, especially compared to others. The public (in LA) does not like tolls. They want it to be free. Grants are another means for funding, however grants have restrictions, usually on the types of projects they can be used for. If you have been following the news lately, for the first time in history, LADOTD is attempting a P3 project. Personally, I believe this is probably the same route that should be taken for the "new, new bridge" project.
Posted on 4/6/18 at 9:53 am to Boudreaux35
quote:well they started in the 70s. and LA has 2 toll roads. The Causeway and LA1 to the fourchon. So yea these the Causeway has been tolled for a while but they idea of that toll was for maintenance. The idea to toll a road to pay for another is a "new" idea for them.
Tolls are not very new either
Posted on 4/6/18 at 10:03 am to tigerinthebueche
quote:
my point being, why be pissed (20 years later) that a bridge was built as it was intended, for the purpose it was intended, when the local leaders in BR didn't have the vision, forethought, or initiative to get something for BR from the same program that funded the bridge you malign?
Aww, poor BR got left out of the TIMED program. Be pissed at your local reps.
I'm not even remotely pissed that the New Roads bridge exists. Those politicians have been united in their push for a new bridge since the 1960s. The only major push back they had about placement was that St. Francisville didn't want the new highway going through their downtown for whatever reason, so the alignment was several miles farther south than originally planned and required a longer bypass road around New Roads.
But IMO Baton Rouge and Lafayette have very legitimate gripes in how state funds are spent on transportation and flood protection projects. Baton Rouge in particular has been completely screwed for a very long time. Right now promises and plans are being made to fix some issues, but certainly not all of them.
This post was edited on 4/6/18 at 10:09 am
Posted on 4/6/18 at 10:05 am to kingbob
quote:
3. Loop (since the loop has to tie in to this new bridge)
Very true.
Construction and planning for a Mississippi River bridge and its approaches will take a lot longer than most other aspects of the loop (not that the rest of the loop isn't complicated enough).
The bridge placement and alignment should be hacked out RIGHT NOW if there is any expectation of it being complete in 10-12 years.
Posted on 4/6/18 at 10:07 am to Boudreaux35
quote:
Gas tax in LA is currently 38 cents and only 20 cents of it is state tax.
yes, well I don't care what portion the state gets. Its all coming out of my pocket regardless. I don't get to pay less per gallon cause LA only gets .20 or I want more of the .38 to go to the state.
furthermore, Louisiana hasn't done worth a shite with what I've given/give them already. Why would I want to give them more?
Posted on 4/6/18 at 10:08 am to kingbob
quote:
In my opinion, the priority should be: 1. Widened Interstate (already happening) 2. New Bridge 3. Loop (since the loop has to tie in to this new bridge)
Before you prioritize to need a comprehensive plan, and then you have to integrate that plan into the current operations so it all comes together as fast and as seamless as possible.
First of all we need a comprehensive region plan before we prioritize. Then you build what you need and integrate it into what we have as best you can.
For instance you could start a new bridge south of I-10 tomorrow and not impact traffic at all. But once the bridge is complete you need the approaches on each side connected to major arteries so traffic can huge a portion of the plan as those "pieces" are completed.
Posted on 4/6/18 at 10:12 am to tigerinthebueche
quote:
furthermore, Louisiana hasn't done worth a shite with what I've given/give them already. Why would I want to give them more?
That's a fair criticism IMO. I think EBR, Ascension, and Livingston has been collecting their share of the matching funds for the Comite Diversion Canal for 15+ years. The state has opted to waste millions of dollars on unnecessary BS instead of contributing to this. They've put up almost jack shite towards the project and the Army Corps of Engineers has only just started to handle the wetlands mitigation required to move forward. IMO people in EBR, Livingston, and Ascension should be calling for people's heads on that.
But I think it's pragmatic and reasonable for a regional transit authority that encompasses the entire metro area to be organized specifically to make it easier to lobby for federal funding, organize toll authorities, develop regional (and less fragmented) infrastructure solutions, and to propose taxes for necessary projects if needed.
I don't think EBR parish alone should shoulder the tax burden of widening some of the major arteries that are used by commuters in Livingston and Ascension. I absolutely don't think those 4 parishes alone should have to cover the entire costs of a new bridge on their own when such a project has a massive impact on the state-wide transportation grid.
Frankly, I think it should have happened a long time ago.
Too many of the area's infrastructure needs and proposed projects encompass multiple parishes and multiple legislative districts.
This post was edited on 4/6/18 at 10:20 am
Posted on 4/6/18 at 10:19 am to kingbob
If you put in a northern loop then why would Ascension be responsible for that tax?
If you put in a southern loop then why would Central and Livingston be responsible?
You cant just say 4 parishs benefit so they foot the bill because its not true.
If you put in a southern loop then why would Central and Livingston be responsible?
You cant just say 4 parishs benefit so they foot the bill because its not true.
Posted on 4/6/18 at 10:22 am to Catman88
quote:
If you put in a northern loop then why would Ascension be responsible for that tax?
If you put in a southern loop then why would Central and Livingston be responsible?
That's the kind of parochial thinking that keeps the region behind on infrastructure. A northern bypass may not directly impact people in southern Ascension, but a northern bypass integrated into a regional transportation grid and loop absolutely will - and those communities definitely need to be involved in the planning of mega projects like that.
quote:
You cant just say 4 parishs benefit so they foot the bill because its not true.
I don't think it's reasonable for 4 parishes alone be required to pay the entire costs of a bridge that will handle tens of thousands of travelers from well outside the region either way.
But they should be part of a regional toll authority, planning body, and (if necessary) a tax authority. NOTHING gets done with a bunch of different politicians from different parishes demanding different things.
Ibberville and West Baton Rouge have been bickering about the placement of the new bridge for years, which has successfully held up a desperately needed project that definitely impacts Ascension and East Baton Rouge. Both locations they are fighting over would be better than no bridge at all.
Heaven forbid the area have to expropriate land for a larger airport or a levee. There just isn't a united regional push-back against the NIMBY cry babies.
This current "free for all" system just doesn't work especially in a state this screwed up. It doesn't even usually work in states that actually have their act together.
This post was edited on 4/6/18 at 10:34 am
Posted on 4/6/18 at 10:24 am to member12
quote:
That's the kind of parochial thinking that keeps the region behind on infrastructure. A northern bypass may not directly impact people in southern Ascension, but a northern bypass integrated into a regional transportation grid and loop absolutely will - and those communities definitely need to be involved in the planning of mega projects like that.
Not only that but potential growth in those communities due to direct access to an open freeway.
But folks in Louisiana have always been shortsighted.
Page 5 of 8
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News