- 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: Today's Advocate headline, "I-10 widening garners little enthusiasm"
Posted on 8/31/15 at 9:46 am to dagrippa
Posted on 8/31/15 at 9:46 am to dagrippa
quote:
The problem is the bridge. It's not the number of lanes up to the bridge.
This.
Widening the interstate inside the city is just increasing the bottle neck.
Build a loop, another bridge, or something like that. Last thing we need is a wider interstate INSIDE the city. So, so, so stupid. It would be better to spend 5x more on a loop than $350 million on a dumb fricking project like this.
This post was edited on 8/31/15 at 9:46 am
4
Posted on 8/31/15 at 9:46 am to dagrippa
quote:They still need to widen... not to add lanes, but to add shoulders.
The problem is the bridge. It's not the number of lanes up to the bridge.
Posted on 8/31/15 at 9:48 am to PhilemonThomas
quote:
I just hope they don't do anything to change the Overpass area before developers can figure out how much more shite they can cram into the area.
You mean the sandwich shop and restaurant built in place of the old hardware store that burned? That's pretty much it for development there in the last 50 years.
Posted on 8/31/15 at 9:49 am to TheCaterpillar
quote:
Build a loop, another bridge, or something like that. Last thing we need is a wider interstate INSIDE the city. So, so, so stupid. It would be better to spend 5x more on a loop than $350 million on a dumb fricking project like this.
The problem is that stuff has to go through Ascension Parish and Livingston Parish. Those people fear change and are professional NIMBYs. They've killed loops before and will do it again. They can't see the benefits past the Parish line.
This post was edited on 8/31/15 at 9:50 am
Posted on 8/31/15 at 9:49 am to doubleb
quote:
True, if only their cars were skinnier then two could fit in the same lane and the problem would be solved!!!!
thats what they did to burbank near lsu. Added the center turning lane without widening the road. Trucks can beside by side in that stretch, but they successfully added a lane
Posted on 8/31/15 at 9:50 am to PhilemonThomas
quote:Live in LP. I'll gladly sell my land for a loop. Don't know many who wouldn't.
The problem is that stuff has to go through Ascension Parish and Livingston Parish. Those people fear change and are professional NIMBYs. They've killed loops before and will do it again.
Posted on 8/31/15 at 9:51 am to dagrippa
quote:
You mean the sandwich shop and restaurant built in place of the old hardware store that burned? That's pretty much it for development there in the last 50 years.
Yeah that isn't true.
50 years? I grew up one street off the overpass. It has changed a shite ton. That whole strip with jimmy johns/sushi/yoga studio/etc, Zippys, Parrains, Schlitz, Chelsea's moving under the overpass, Ivars changing owners and remodeling, etc. They also added sidewalks, landscaping, redid the roads, added a median further down the road, etc.
It used to be a gas station and a hardware store (and Icehouse).
Posted on 8/31/15 at 9:52 am to TDsngumbo
quote:
The interstate is not the problem. It's the people who drive it.
No... the interstate, operating at level of service F, which dwindles down to one lane trying to accommodate an AADT of over 100k, is definitely the problem.
Posted on 8/31/15 at 9:52 am to TheCaterpillar
quote:
Widening the interstate inside the city is just increasing the bottle neck.
The fact is where I-110 and I-10 meet at the bridge is that three lanes from the North (I-110) and two lanes from the West (I-10) merge and there are only three lanes.
To account for this problem they decreased I-110 to two lanes, but I-10 still funnels down to the one lane. Four lanes from the merger point to the split heading East is just common sense.
Things aren't as bad on the East bound side, except the approach to the bridge is poorly designed which slows traffic and is dangerous for trucks. But four lanes from the I-10/I-12 split works well because there are three lanes of I-12 and two lanes of I-10 merging into three lanes at Acadian. Three lanes with No shoulders leaving you a big chokepoint if there is one accident.
Posted on 8/31/15 at 9:53 am to PhiTiger1764
quote:My man.
No... the interstate, operating at level of service F, which dwindles down to one lane trying to accommodate an AADT of over 100k, is definitely the problem.
Posted on 8/31/15 at 9:53 am to wickowick
One lane MAY decrease commute time by as much as 1-minute but not much more. The only solution is a bridge south of downtown. It can even be as far south as St. Gabriel with an upgraded Hwy 1/West Bank expressway.
BR's problem is itself. Interstates aren't supposed to facilitate intra-city travel, much less the suburb-to-city daily commute, but decades void of planning and a lack of surface connectivity have turned I-10 into BR's Main St.
BR's problem is itself. Interstates aren't supposed to facilitate intra-city travel, much less the suburb-to-city daily commute, but decades void of planning and a lack of surface connectivity have turned I-10 into BR's Main St.
Posted on 8/31/15 at 9:53 am to doubleb
Aight, all I'm interested in is the opening of the Stumberg extension. It looks good to me. They need to open it now.
Posted on 8/31/15 at 9:54 am to dagrippa
quote:
You mean the sandwich shop and restaurant built in place of the old hardware store that burned? That's pretty much it for development there in the last 50 years.
When is the last time you went down there? Since Perkins Road hardware burned they've added Street Breads, Magpie, Frankie Dog, Shitz and Giggles, A smoothie joint, Jimmy Johns, Crispy Catch, City Pork, 3 or 4 apartments and several women's boutiques. I know I'm missing something. All in that little stretch between the light at the off ramp and where Perkins goes over the tracks.
Posted on 8/31/15 at 9:54 am to doubleb
I could see the benefit of just adding wide shoulders to get wrecks out of the way, but that is it. We don't really need more lanes nearly as much as we need another bridge and/or loop.
Posted on 8/31/15 at 9:54 am to dagrippa
quote:
You mean the sandwich shop and restaurant built in place of the old hardware store that burned? That's pretty much it for development there in the last 50 years.
Actually the new shopping center with Acme and Galatoire's etc. was a big addition.
The other small additions just compound things.
That area is maxed out now.
Posted on 8/31/15 at 9:55 am to AnonymousTiger
Just to throw a radical idea out there, you can also have a "bypass" go directly through the middle of the city by using stacks as well. You could just build another interstate on top of the current one that has limited access/exits. That way, vehicles just going through Baton Rouge could get on the upper portion that has very few, if any, exits while local traffic could use the lower interstate that has the usual exit/entrance ramps.
Access to the upper would be near the bridge, and cars getting on the "bypass" could not exit until they are past Walker or Gonzales; at which point the upper level would simply lower and become part of the "local" interstate below.
(I'm just trying to think out of the box here since NIMBYs are keeping this from getting done)
Access to the upper would be near the bridge, and cars getting on the "bypass" could not exit until they are past Walker or Gonzales; at which point the upper level would simply lower and become part of the "local" interstate below.
(I'm just trying to think out of the box here since NIMBYs are keeping this from getting done)
This post was edited on 8/31/15 at 9:57 am
Posted on 8/31/15 at 9:57 am to AnonymousTiger
quote:
Just to throw a radical idea out there, you can also have a "bypass" go directly through the middle of the city by using stacks as well. You could just build another interstate on top of the current one that has limited access/exits. That way, vehicles just going through Baton Rouge could get on the upper portion that has very few, if any, exits while local traffic could use the lower interstate that has the usual exit/entrance ramps.
Access to the upper would be near the bridge, and cars getting on the "bypass" could not exit until they are past Walker or Gonzales; at which point the upper level would simply lower and become part of the "local" interstate below.
This would be great if they had another bridge, but as it is, that would just add more lanes merging onto the bridge.
Posted on 8/31/15 at 9:57 am to TheCaterpillar
quote:
I could see the benefit of just adding wide shoulders to get wrecks out of the way, but that is it.
Won't matter, people will have a minor fender bender and leave their cars in the traffic lane until cops arrive.
Posted on 8/31/15 at 9:57 am to wickowick
quote:
by wickowick
I think it needs to happen, but another bridge near Plaqumine should have priority over this...
They are supposed to be building one down in White Castle. That was the plan when they put up the one at St. Francisville area.
Posted on 8/31/15 at 9:58 am to AnonymousTiger
quote:
Just to throw a radical idea out there, you can also have a "bypass" go directly through the middle of the city by using stacks as well.
I like this idea too. Don't know if its feasible, but if you had express lanes above the regular interstate and charged a toll, it might be a good deal.
I still believe the problem of no shoulders and one too few lanes "below" would also need to be addressed.
Page 2 of 14
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News