- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- 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
1
Posted on 3/12/14 at 8:15 pm to LSUTigers1986
quote:
is a much longer distance to travel than if you were to stay on I-10
Since 10/12 is a straight east/west line please tell me how a northern route would be shorter?
Posted on 3/12/14 at 8:34 pm to fightin tigers
The frick. No one's talking about the northern loop.
Posted on 3/12/14 at 9:47 pm to Golfer
quote:
When i49 is completed, this bridge will be more of a "local traffic" option. It needs to provide support for the current bridge but also not be so far out of the population center that it wouldn't be utilized.
I can't see I-49 getting completed in the next 20 years...
And as some others noted, the proposed "southern bridge" won't be "far out of the population" as the southern area of EBR will likely be developed by the time any new bridge or loop actually gets built.
Posted on 3/12/14 at 11:07 pm to Boudreaux35
quote:
Got any ideas where that will come from?
If they figured it out for st francisville they can. Figure it out for us.
Posted on 3/13/14 at 12:08 am to LSURussian
quote:
The only reason LC has a loop is because I-10 doesn't go through its downtown district. The loop connects downtown to I-10.
What? Incorrect. I-10 is closer to downtown Lake Charles than the I-210 bypass. It is very easy to get downtown from I-10.
This post was edited on 3/13/14 at 12:10 am
Posted on 3/13/14 at 12:37 am to mikelbr
Please do this. I will gladly pay daily tolls.
Posted on 3/13/14 at 5:07 am to LSUTigers1986
quote:
The frick. No one's talking about the northern loop.
So you are against loops in general.
Posted on 3/13/14 at 6:18 am to fightin tigers
You gotta loop way before you get to BR . The point is to take interstate traffic out of the equation. Loop it out about Hwy 30, cross the river and reconnect on the West side.
Go up through Watson, pick up I-12 and come around Zachary or so, pick up the Audubon bridge and loop back to 10.
Anything else is way to short sighted.
Go up through Watson, pick up I-12 and come around Zachary or so, pick up the Audubon bridge and loop back to 10.
Anything else is way to short sighted.
Posted on 3/13/14 at 6:22 am to Traffic Circle
quote:
Anything else is way to short sighted.
For a loop around BR I agree. It seems what most people want is a loop to help move within BR. Clearing out the interstate isn't going to help much with crosstown traffic.
Posted on 3/13/14 at 7:08 am to fightin tigers
quote:
For a loop around BR I agree. It seems what most people want is a loop to help move within BR. Clearing out the interstate isn't going to help much with crosstown traffic.
This is a good observation. Different types of traffic and more than one solution needed.
Posted on 3/13/14 at 7:50 am to mikelbr
The new bridge needs to be re-routed. It's a terrible design. However, I-10 wasn't originally supposed to pass through Baton Rouge.
Posted on 3/13/14 at 8:32 am to LSUTigers1986
quote:
But see Brusly is a shite hole.
Really? I live in Addis and disagree.
Posted on 3/13/14 at 9:52 am to fightin tigers
quote:
Clearing out the interstate isn't going to help much with crosstown traffic
Clearing the interstate and completing all of the planned Green Light Projects should help.
Posted on 3/13/14 at 10:27 am to Bard
quote:
A bridge at St Gabe that connects to Pville and eventually to Denham would give access to a veritable shitload of expansion room on the eastern side of the river while opening the corresponding western side up to that same level of expansion potential.
YES
THIS
Posted on 3/13/14 at 11:10 am to fightin tigers
quote:
For a loop around BR I agree. It seems what most people want is a loop to help move within BR. Clearing out the interstate isn't going to help much with crosstown traffic.
I put an interstate loop ahead of an city loop because an interstate loop would remove traffic from the equation, thus helping any city loop by freeing up space on the interstate for more intra-city traffic when and where applicable.
This will help a lot with East-West traffic, but a lot of the issues I see in my drivings are North-South. Places like College/Lee, Jefferson Hwy, and Airline don't seem to have any relief in site from Green Light (although Airline might get some localized help from the Old Hammond-Shenandoah work). And then there's Highland from LSU to Lee (which is about as likely to get expanded as Lee is from Perkins to Highland).
Posted on 3/13/14 at 11:16 am to TheDoc
quote:
A bridge at St Gabe that connects to Pville and eventually to Denham would give access to a veritable shitload of expansion room on the eastern side of the river while opening the corresponding western side up to that same level of expansion potential.
YES
THIS
The problem is the protected wetland in the middle. Despite this being the absolutely most perfect route, the federal government has made building anything through a wetland next to impossible unless you're "in the club". As you can imagine, Ascension Parish is not "in the club" (in fact, they're near the top of the Army Corps of Engineers' hit list due to some brazen infractions over the last few decades, but that's a whole different story) and therefor would never be able to afford the costs of mitigation.
Posted on 3/13/14 at 11:38 am to SmellslikeKevinBacon
quote:
The first they can do is close the E. Washington Exit on I-10 East.
quote:
there is absolutely no reason this exit needs to exist. there is traffic at any given time of the day there because of how big a cluster frick that area is.
the real problem is not the exit, and closing it would do nothing to help; you would still need to merge before it because it drops a lane. all along I-10, there are exits that just peel off from the outer lane without dropping the lane completely. the very next exit in fact, dalrymple, does this. a better solution would be to make it not an "exit only" and keep the outer lane going through, dropping it at the next exit instead. the only problem is you have to widen a very costly elevated section of interstate, construct for years over the lsu lakes, and further disenfranchise an impoverished neighborhood below the interstate.
and you can't just cross the mississippi wherever the hell you want. the coast guard and port authority agencies have a big say-so in that. the southern bridge crossings proposed by the loop were basically the only spots available to cross while not plowing through neighborhoods, churches, schools, etc...so saying we "need" a crossing here, or a crossing here is the "only" logical place is great in theory, but most don't understand that actually doing it presents major road blocks, so to speak.
Posted on 3/13/14 at 11:39 am to kingbob
quote:
The problem is the protected wetland in the middle. Despite this being the absolutely most perfect route, the federal government has made building anything through a wetland next to impossible unless you're "in the club". As you can imagine, Ascension Parish is not "in the club" (in fact, they're near the top of the Army Corps of Engineers' hit list due to some brazen infractions over the last few decades, but that's a whole different story) and therefor would never be able to afford the costs of mitigation.
I can't argue with this at all, and that annoys the bejeezus out of me because you can pretty much just spit on a piece of property almost anywhere in the state (especially south of I10) and it qualifies as a "wetland" (thus land could be set aside). Not only that, but bridges like the I10 bridge over the Atchafalaya are pretty low-impact once they are built. But yeah, environmental politics would be a beast.
Posted on 3/13/14 at 11:45 am to fightin tigers
quote:what does this even mean? if you cleared out the interstate (and i mean by giving another route, not diverting to surface streets and clogging those up), traffic would improve EVERYWHERE.
Clearing out the interstate isn't going to help much with crosstown traffic.
Page 8 of 9
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News