- 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: Work to begin on Government Street reconfiguration on Jan 8
Posted on 11/30/17 at 10:13 am to LSUBoo
Posted on 11/30/17 at 10:13 am to LSUBoo
quote:
You could just as easily make the left on Government and then a right onto Foster since that stretch is staying 4 lanes... I just prefer taking Claycut.
But won't traffic be bottlenecking immediately east of Foster? Logic tells me the section of Government between Foster and Jefferson Hwy. is going to stack up in the mornings. Going home will throw more cars turning left on Foster onto Government. That's going to impact the drive home.
But it probably won't be so bad, the CP will synchronize the lights.
1
Posted on 11/30/17 at 10:16 am to doubleb
quote:
Is there some place you can find accident rates?
Study on crash rates before and after road diets (4 to 3 lanes)
The crashes/mile drops significantly after the road diets in which a center turn lane is added. Anywhere between 47 and 19 percent decrease on average.
Nationally, road diets reduce crashes some 29 percent.
This post was edited on 11/30/17 at 10:19 am
Posted on 11/30/17 at 10:19 am to doubleb
quote:
But won't traffic be bottlenecking immediately east of Foster?
I understand based on what someone said earlier in the thread that the right lane headed W on Government was going to be a right-only lane to turn N onto Foster... so once you get past the people who don't realize it and block it trying to get over to the left, it shouldn't be a problem.
It's going to suck during construction and it's going to suck for a bit after until people adjust. It might continue to suck... but I at least see the potential gain.
Posted on 11/30/17 at 10:24 am to LSUBoo
quote:
t's going to suck during construction
....which will take at least twice as long as expected.
This is a known remedy to planning mistakes that were common in the 1950s and 1960s. In an area frequently clogged with traffic, you'd think people would be open to solutions that worked in scenarios like this in many other places.
Posted on 11/30/17 at 10:26 am to member12
quote:
Nationally, road diets reduce crashes some 29 percent.
Do adding center turn lanes (suicide lanes) add or subtract accidents?
I'm trying to compare Perkins with Government now.
Posted on 11/30/17 at 10:29 am to doubleb
quote:
There is a reason and its not because people are dumb.
Oh, and "people are dumb" is almost always a valid answer. To almost any question.
Posted on 11/30/17 at 10:30 am to member12
quote:
This is a known remedy to planning mistakes that were common in the 1950s and 1960s. In an area frequently clogged with traffic, you'd think people would be open to solutions that worked in scenarios like this in many other places.
I understand this has worked elsewhere, but is it the exact circumstances.
Did they do this to other state highways where the alternative routes were minimal?
I'm not trying to be a contrarian, but it defies logic, and it uses valuable resources(money) that are in short supply that might could be used elsewhere on other more vital projects.
It's going to get done, I hope it works. I'd rather be wrong and have it work then right and it be a bust.
Posted on 11/30/17 at 10:35 am to LSUBoo
quote:
Oh, and "people are dumb" is almost always a valid answer.
So you think you are smarter than everyone else because you use Claycut and they don't???
Believe me I've driven BR streets for over 40 years and Baton Rougeans can find short cuts.
Posted on 11/30/17 at 10:37 am to doubleb
quote:
So you think you are smarter than everyone else because you use Claycut and they don't???
I was speaking in general terms. People, in general, are dumb.
Posted on 11/30/17 at 10:43 am to doubleb
quote:
I understand this has worked elsewhere, but is it the exact circumstances.
Why would a solution that works elsewhere not work in Baton Rouge? This is a proven safety enhancement.
quote:
I'm not trying to be a contrarian, but it defies logic
I agree with your posts on a number of topics, but you are disagreeing with both real results all over the country and a lot of recent studies conducted by state and local officials everywhere.
quote:
I'm not trying to be a contrarian, but it defies logic
Louisiana can't even get a fricking ditch built (Comite Diversion Canal), so I wouldn't put it past them to screw anything up.....
...but this design is modeled off of proven solutions elsewhere. It's not just thrown together to appease a couple of totalitarians in mid city who wanted bike lanes. Although those bike lanes may be a huge part of the political push to get this done.
This post was edited on 11/30/17 at 10:45 am
Posted on 11/30/17 at 10:44 am to member12
quote:
This is a known remedy to planning mistakes that were common in the 1950s and 1960s. In an area frequently clogged with traffic, you'd think people would be open to solutions that worked in scenarios like this in many other places.
THEORETICALLY it should work, but many issues (especially the bus one, but also the city layout, generally) make this super risky
i mean what happens if BR's externalities make this a bad plan? what then? you gut one of your primary E/W arteries in a city with shitty infrastructure to start with
Posted on 11/30/17 at 10:46 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
THEORETICALLY it should work, but many issues (especially the bus one, but also the city layout, generally) make this super risky i mean what happens if BR's externalities make this a bad plan? what then? you gut one of your primary E/W arteries in a city with shitty infrastructure to start with
Exactly what I'm asking.
And again, I hope I'm wrong here and it improves traffic and is an asset to the community.
Posted on 11/30/17 at 10:47 am to Fat Harry
quote:if this is so brilliant,why didn't they do it to staring lane a few years back?
becoming pretty common with inner-city streets that were four-laned back in the 50's and 60's.
Posted on 11/30/17 at 10:52 am to bigrob385series
quote:
if this is so brilliant,why didn't they do it to staring lane a few years back?
They had the space for a 4 lane road with a divided median or a center turn lane, so they installed one.
That's an ideal solution, but not possible within the confines of Government Street's right of way. They didn't plan well enough 65 years ago. What is proposed is a common solution to those common planning mistakes in the mid 20th century.
This post was edited on 11/30/17 at 10:56 am
Posted on 11/30/17 at 10:52 am to bigrob385series
quote:
if this is so brilliant,why didn't they do it to staring lane a few years back?
Staring has a center turning lane or a median with turning lanes for its entire length... not sure what you're talking about here.
Posted on 11/30/17 at 11:10 am to 4WHLN
quote:
Translation, we will keep this section 4 lanes to better handle the impending traffic bottleneck thats about to happen from the complete frick up by our inept staff for approving such an idiotic "road diet" plan by taking away two travel lanes on a high traffic hwy.
Nahbrah. It's because those idiots really think people are going to want to use North and North deadends at ...Foster.
Claycut and Capital Heights can prepare to see their traffic explode.
Posted on 11/30/17 at 11:11 am to doubleb
quote:
The turning lane is a "suicide lane", right? Wrong?
Wrong. There will be a median in most places.
quote:
And was the "road" in Los Angeles a state highway? A primary artery? Government Street has a traffic count of over 15,000 cars on a daily basis.
Yes. The road in LA had the 15-20k traffic counts and was in the same part of the city as Government is to BR...
State vs. local is irrelevant here given that this is becoming a local road.
Posted on 11/30/17 at 11:14 am to TigerstuckinMS
quote:
Nahbrah. It's because those idiots really think people are going to want to use North and North deadends at ...Foster.
Claycut and Capital Heights can prepare to see their traffic explode.
I suppose they will respond by making Claycut one way. Sounds about par for the course.
Posted on 11/30/17 at 11:23 am to member12
As confusing as this sounds if it involves a fresh coat of pavement on that whole stretch I’m for it
Posted on 11/30/17 at 11:26 am to Golfer
quote:
State vs. local is irrelevant here given that this is becoming a local road.
It's not about what you call it its about what Government Street became, a state highway. A truck route. That's my point. It's not just another street on the grid.
And thing about state to local authority is this: it was done so the state could shed the maintenance load. As part of the deal the state has to fix it and bring it up to good condition and then the parish will maintain it.
The state therefore is doing the construction or should I say reconstruction work. The reconstruction could have been for Government to be rebuilt just as it is; however, the parish wanted to do the diet thing.
This is the parish's idea, and like I said earlier I hope it works and people in the area like the results.
Page 4 of 6
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News