Proposed I-410

[brresident]

Northern Beltway:

Proposed Routing

Originally proposed in the 1960s and 1970s as a freeway connecting Interstate 110 with Interstate 12 via U.S. 61-190/Airline Highway in Baton Rouge, Interstate 410 (unofficial designation) recently resurfaced as a modern version of a Baton Rouge bypass. This new, tolled freeway would extend from Interstate 10 west of Louisiana 415 in West Baton Rouge Parish near Port Allen east to Interstate 12 in Walker in Livingston Parish via the U.S. 190 bridge over the Mississippi River and through Central and Denham Springs. A consultant's study, commissioned by the Capital Region Planning Commission (CRPC) and released in 2004, indicates it would cost $910 million to construct the freeway, including spending $300 million for upgrading the U.S. 190 bridge.1 This high price tag, coupled with an expected completion date in 2020 and the prospect of tolls, has raised some skepticism about the project's viability.

According to the consultant's study released in November 2004, the recommended central route for the bypass would begin at Interstate 10 a few miles west of Louisiana 415 in West Baton Rouge and connect with U.S. 190 just west of Louisiana 1145. The bypass would then continue east along with U.S. 190 east and cross the Mississippi River via the upgraded U.S. 190 bridge (built in 1940). From there, the freeway would connect to the intersection of U.S. 190 and U.S. 61, then continue northeasterly across the parish a few thousand feet north of existing Hooper Road. The freeway would cross Blackwater Road, Sullivan Road, Hooper Road, Greenwell Springs Road, the Amite River, Louisiana 1026, Range Road, and Louisiana 447/Walker Road. The freeway would then curve back down to Interstate 12 between the Walker exit and the Satsuma exit on Interstate 12.1

The report recommends a six-phase approach toward building the highway:

Phase One - Plank Road east to Louisiana 16/Range Road, $263 million, open 2012

Phase Two - Louisiana 16/Range Road east to Louisiana 447/Walker North Road, $76 million, open 2014

Phase Three - Louisiana 447/Walker North Road east to Interstate 12, $87 million, open 2014

Phase Four - Interstate 10 east to U.S. 190/Louisiana 1, $93 million, open 2016

Phase Five - upgrade U.S. 190 from Phase Four segment east to Mississippi River Bridge, $72 million, open 2018

Phase Six - upgrade U.S. 190 Mississippi River Bridge and extend freeway through northern Baton Rouge along U.S. 61-190 east to Plank Road, $319 million, open 2020

Complete Article and map: http://www.interstate-guide.com/i-410_la.html

[richyb83]

Thanks for starting this new thread brresident. Thanks for all the info too.

This project will take forever, I won't hold my breath. Don't get me wrong, I like the idea. But a I-415(northern by-pass) would be only 1/2 what really needs to be done. A Baton Rouge Beltway would best serve the metro region. The northern by-pass should continue past I-12 on the other side of Walker and connect in Ascension Parish somwhere near Gonzales to I-10. Then up-grade Sunshine Bridge and loop it back around paralell with La. Hwy. 1 thru the Industrial corridor back to WBR and the I-415 north-bypass.

The northern by-pass would NOT benefit any evacuee traffic coming from NO...They would still funnel into I-10 thru the middle of BR. Taking the southern "Beltway" route over the Sunshine Bridge into WBR back to I-10 would help dramatically. I-49's completion thru Houma, Morgan City, to Lafayette will also help tremendously.

[brresident]

^^You are right on that one.

Anyone notice that Baton Rouge is probably the biggest bottleneck of through traffic (east to west) on I10?

They are probably just planning that right now because the New Orleans evacuation route is about to get a boost when they finish I 49.

They still need a southern beltway......at least a new bridge somewhere between Brusly and Donaldsonville and connect in the Bluebonnet/Gardere area. Even if it is not a freeway- gotta have some way to move traffic when the interstate is backed up, as it often is. Besides, a new bridge would fuel a lot of growth to the west bank and south baton rouge.

[Rardy]

Wasn't there a study a few years back that found that a northern bypass would reduce traffic on I-10 at College by like a whopping 3%? Anyone remember that?

A billion dollars for a 3% reduction in traffic at BR's biggest bottleneck...?

But I think the original plan for a southern bypass died because area residents opposed it and managed to kill it.

[byrde]

Wasn't there a study a few years back that found that a northern bypass would reduce traffic on I-10 at College by like a whopping 3%? Anyone remember that?

A billion dollars for a 3% reduction in traffic at BR's biggest bottleneck...?

But I think the original plan for a southern bypass died because area residents opposed it and managed to kill it.

I think wetlands south of the city also played a part in this.

[brresident]

Wasn't there a study a few years back that found that a northern bypass would reduce traffic on I-10 at College by like a whopping 3%? Anyone remember that?

A billion dollars for a 3% reduction in traffic at BR's biggest bottleneck...?

But I think the original plan for a southern bypass died because area residents opposed it and managed to kill it.

It was convinient for William Daniel to issue results to a flawed study at the time. Now that he is in office under the Holden administration- he wants the northern loop again.

The loop isn't to relieve traffic for commuters (we have to widen the current freeways for that), it's to allow through traffic traveling on I10 to get through BR in less than an hour and a half. Baton Rouge is by far the worst bottleneck in I10 this side of Houston...but Houston has a loop.

The loop is for folks to get around traffic in the city- and relieve congestion for us a little. It will also spark huge retail and commerical development for Walker, Central, WBR, etc. In other words, the loop isn't for the people of Baton Rouge- its for outsiders who want a way to get around the gridlock.

Southern bypass died because of wetlands, poor planning that would have resulted in removing homes (which sparked a backlash), and the fact that the one planned would require a new bridge. Bridges are expensive, especially over that part of the river.

[dimebag1980]

It was convinient for William Daniel to issue results to a flawed study at the time. Now that he is in office under the Holden administration- he wants the northern loop again.

The loop isn't to relieve traffic for commuters (we have to widen the current freeways for that), it's to allow through traffic traveling on I10 to get through BR in less than an hour and a half. Baton Rouge is by far the worst bottleneck in I10 this side of Houston...but Houston has a loop.

The loop is for folks to get around traffic in the city- and relieve congestion for us a little. It will also spark huge retail and commerical development for Walker, Central, WBR, etc. In other words, the loop isn't for the people of Baton Rouge- its for outsiders who want a way to get around the gridlock.

Southern bypass died because of wetlands, poor planning that would have resulted in removing homes (which sparked a backlash), and the fact that the one planned would require a new bridge. Bridges are expensive, especially over that part of the river.

Giving outsiders a bypass is a great way to free up some room on the main freeways. There will always be people who don't want to loop so far around a city, but I think in the case of Baton Rouge, most people will opt for that... because there's no way it can take any longer than sitting in gridlock. I'd also hope that most large trucks would use a bypass as well. There goes yet another group of vehicles that would help to free up some space on the main freeways.

[UptownNewOrleans]

^I co-sign. Having a loop would not only free up freeway space but it would also help improve commute times. If you had somewhere to be in 15 minutes and there wasn't a lot of traffic, you could get to your destination in 5, depending on distance.

[fla_tiger]

^I co-sign. Having a loop would not only free up freeway space but it would also help improve commute times. If you had somewhere to be in 15 minutes and there wasn't a lot of traffic, you could get to your destination in 5, depending on distance.

Given the high volume of traffic along I-10 and the limited availablity of affordable rights-of-way, I have always wondered why the state has not considered "double-decking" I-10 between I-110 and I-12. This would free up the existing lanes for local traffic, while allowing thru traffic to use the newer lanes above. Interchanges or connections between the two should be limited to both ends and possibly between Acadian and College.

I don't know of the costs but surely this has to be lower than purchasing needed land and building a six lane loop adjacent to the city for some 30 miles.

I also realize that it would not be attractive but given the nice look of the sound barriers today, perhaps these could be incorporated into the new designs.

What do you guys think?

[dan326]

^Actually, I think that sounds like a pretty neat plan. I've never heard of something like that before, but it sounds great. Do you mean actually building the lanes directly above the existing lanes or building them off to the side like between Bluebonnet and Siegen?

[dimebag1980]

There's a plan in the works in Dallas to tunnel underneath the existing I-635 (LBJ Freeway.) It would have the same amount of lanes (10, I believe) as the current road, doublig the road's effectiveness and not taking up any more room.

[brresident]

Given the high volume of traffic along I-10 and the limited availablity of affordable rights-of-way, I have always wondered why the state has not considered "double-decking" I-10 between I-110 and I-12. This would free up the existing lanes for local traffic, while allowing thru traffic to use the newer lanes above. Interchanges or connections between the two should be limited to both ends and possibly between Acadian and College.

I don't know of the costs but surely this has to be lower than purchasing needed land and building a six lane loop adjacent to the city for some 30 miles.

I also realize that it would not be attractive but given the nice look of the sound barriers today, perhaps these could be incorporated into the new designs.

What do you guys think?

It would probably help traffic but the construction of a higher, more elevated sections would be pure hell on drivers and construction crews for about 5 years. I don't think those freeways are high enough to do this as it is. It would probably be easier to double deck at grade roadways, such as Airline, than to change the freeway like that. Besides, it makes since. Louisiana doesn't often do things that make since.

I bet it would be a lot cheaper to expropriate the necessary property to widen the right-of-way than to do that....but who knows? I bet that when they widen the I10 freeway eventually, they will replace some overpasses and bridges...so this might be a good idea.

[Rardy]

Double-decking was proposed back in 2002. City leaders saw it in Austin and thought it was creative. Cost and neighborhoods killed it very quickly, though.

Can you imagine a double decker freeway crossing University Lake at Dalrymple? I'm not sure how I feel about that...

[NCB]

I think something like double decking could work in that part of Baton Rouge, but one major problem would be the amount of money, workers, and time needed to actually get all of it done. And at that point, the traffic and backups in that area would be even worse than they are now for years.

About the loop, however, I really like the idea. I posted the idea in a thread about a year ago, and I'm glad to see the idea is still moving forward. Shreveport has a loop, New Orleans basically has a loop around the entire area with the way I-10, I-59, I-55, and I-12 are formated, and it has a bypass around the CBD. It's no suprise that the city with the worst traffic in the state, not to mention some of the worst in the South, really has no bypass or loop to take any of the stress off of I-10 and the city highways. So I think any kind of loop or bypass would work wonders with traffic in Baton Rouge.

[bluff2085]

I think something like double decking could work in that part of Baton Rouge, but one major problem would be the amount of money, workers, and time needed to actually get all of it done. And at that point, the traffic and backups in that area would be even worse than they are now for years.

About the loop, however, I really like the idea. I posted the idea in a thread about a year ago, and I'm glad to see the idea is still moving forward. Shreveport has a loop, New Orleans basically has a loop around the entire area with the way I-10, I-59, I-55, and I-12 are formated, and it has a bypass around the CBD. It's no suprise that the city with the worst traffic in the state, not to mention some of the worst in the South, really has no bypass or loop to take any of the stress off of I-10 and the city highways. So I think any kind of loop or bypass would work wonders with traffic in Baton Rouge.

A loop would be nice, but I'd hesitate to blame BR's traffic situation on the lack of one. BR's first priority is [and should be] to improve primary road infrastructure. A disproportionate number of BR residents are dependent on I-10/I-12 for trips less than 5 miles. It's like people feel obligated to take the Interstate from College to Bluebonnet. Improvements on the way for roads like Perkins and Old Hammond should provide more viable east-west alternatives. North/south connectivity b/t College and Essen will help too, diluting some of the traffic in the College/I-10 clusterf*ck. My point is I-10 traffic might flow a little smoother once the major arteries in the urban core can absorb some of the local commuters who currently rely on the interstate. I like the idea of a loop but it's not as urgent.

[NCB]

^Oh believe me, I'm not blaming all of the traffic problems on the lack of a loop. Continuing to expand, improve, and widen the major highways running through the city should be the first priority. That has to happen to reduce traffic on I-10, and eventually a loop would serve the rest of the area very well, especially as both the population and traffic continues to grow in the area.

[richyb83]

Great topic and responses yall.

The double decker freeway would be a good idea, but the $$ issues will end that. + the way most of the idiots drive around here I don't think they could handle a double-decker. As someone had posted above, Airline Hwy. was talked about being double-decked..but never heard much about it after that. To give you an idea how much Baton Rouge has grown; Airline Hwy. was originally a "by-pass" built back in the 50's?? way before Interstates came about.

I like I said on post # 2 and northern by-pass would do nothing for New Orleans when evacuting thru the "I-10 funnel" in BR. Not much help unless a full "Beltway" system is realized. If another Miss.River bridge is not built then "Upgrade" the Sunshine Bridge and hook-it back to I-10 in WBR. NOLA would miss EBR all-together. This would also keep the Bluff Swamp/Spanish Lake preserve intact as well. The southern by-pass failed bec. they were ready to rip right thru it. North of the swawmpland around Historic Highland Road with some of the most upscale niegborhoods also make a southern by-pass very doubtful.

The northern by-pass is so far away from happening in my mind. I don't look for it to happen anytime soon. As NCB said widening the Interstates is the best alternative. The I-10 Picardy overpass is BR's largest road project ever, is a nice start! It has a Texas-like design. The additional lanes should run from the 10/12 split to Highland Rd. then eventually out to Gonzales on the southern-end of the beltway. I-12 should have another lane added from Airline to O'Neal...and add lanes out-to Walker to the eastern beltway. Guess I can dream??

[brresident]

So....uh....I was thinking. Seeing as how this mega project is going to run a little better than a billion dollars, and the state has...uh...a 1.6 billion dollar surplus this year. (scratches head) Maybe we can get our representatives to set aside some of that to start on the northern bypass?

What would it take to point out the road projects, like this one, I 49 in Shreveport, and a beltway around Lafayette is needed more than a $50 child tax credit?

[Rardy]

So....uh....I was thinking. Seeing as how this mega project is going to run a little better than a billion dollars, and the state has...uh...a 1.6 billion dollar surplus this year. (scratches head) Maybe we can get our representatives to set aside some of that to start on the northern bypass?

What would it take to point out the road projects, like this one, I 49 in Shreveport, and a beltway around Lafayette is needed more than a $50 child tax credit?

A related idea currently in the legislature here

Basically, parishes would receive back the portion of automobile taxes they contribute, factoring in population. So if EBR is twice the size of Caddo, EBR gets twice the amount of money for roads than Caddo.

Couple of problems I see with this: some parishes have more expensive needs than others. Webster and Vernon have similar populations, but Webster has an interstate highway running through it. On the other hand, Vernon is the geographical largest parish, so it has more miles to maintain. The problem would come in with a small population, large geographic area, and an interstate or two. Natchitoches, Madison, DeSoto, Evangeline, etc. would all get cheated by this system. Orleans, on the other hand, would really benefit since population is determined by the 2000 census figures.

[richyb83]

Thanks for yalls imput and ideas, I like reading them.

[brresident]

This project is alive again! This is the first few paragraphs of the advocate article from today's paper. Click on the link to read the see the whole thing.

Holden tackles loop project

http://www.2theadvocate.com/news/5438871.html

Mayor-President Kip Holden announced Wednesday that he

[byrde]

Making it a toll road is the only way to get this thing done. I hope it will not take 10 years before they start moving some dirt.

[dimebag1980]

Why is this loop supposed to cost $3 billion? How long is it supposed to be? If I'm not mistaken, that's A LOT more money than the 35-mile stretch of I-49 from Shreveport to Arkansas will cost.

[byrde]

Why is this loop supposed to cost $3 billion? How long is it supposed to be? If I'm not mistaken, that's A LOT more money than the 35-mile stretch of I-49 from Shreveport to Arkansas will cost.

There is not enough info to give a clear answer on why $3 Billion. If they are planning to build a total loop around the city, that would mean building two new bridges across the Mississippi River. I do not see two new bridges being built in the BR area. Espescially since a bridge is currently under construction just north of the city between New Roads/St. Francisville.

BTW, the cost of that bridge is $406 million.

[richyb83]

I almost started a new thread on this. Thanks for posting this Eric

I am sure it will be much longer than 35 miles. It will be more like a Beltway. I will attempt a GoogleSketch sometime soon to give a good guesstimation on where it will go. But now that the Feliciana's name possibly comes up, I'm not too sure about the northern extent. But it will be located in Livingston, Ascension, and WBR Parishes too.

If you look at a recent area map of Nashville you can see just how wide thier new loop is. Could this one be similar??