Perkins Road Overpass Corridor

[richyb83]

33rd Annual St.Patrick's Day Parade

Saturday March 17th   ...10:00 am

One of my favorite old maps of the Parade route

 

[richyb83]

New restaurant in former Crispy Catch space

Hughes and Carnegie’s H.C. Burger company is planning to renovate and expand the restaurant, adding a second floor with both indoor and outdoor dining, according to a construction building permit filed July 18. The ground-floor patio will also be expanded. When completed, the restaurant will more than double in size.

https://www.businessreport.com/article/chad-hughes-eric-carnegie-ink-deal-new-restaurant-crispy-catch-space

Edited July 25, 2018 by richyb83

[richyb83]

[Antrell Williams]

Painted crosswalks would improve the aesthetics of that street so much. As well as wider sidewalks, curbs, and dedicated bike lanes. Similar to what it looks like directly under I-10. Once the Perkins Rd ramps are demolished, it'll be safer for pedestrians and cyclists. It would be ideal to seriously reduce the speed limit on Stanford Ave as well. Would like to see a 3 story mixed use building replacing the shopping center and that Cracker Barrel gas station next to it, as well as the lot next to it. Possibly a small Rouses exactly like the French Quarter location could be part of it.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Tapatalk

[richyb83]

Those are some good ideas Antrell The area is so unique!

Perkins Road overpass businesses nervous about I-10 widening impact

https://www.businessreport.com/business/perkins-road-overpass-businesses-nervous-10-widening-impact-2

[Mr. Burnham]

I'm nervous about this plan as well. It might relieve congestion for a little bit, but will it relive the congestion in the long term? They can't just keep expanding the interstate. 

[Antrell Williams]

It will just be a shiny new parking lot during rush hour. Can anyone find the preliminary plans on LaDOTD website?

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Tapatalk

[Mr. Burnham]

On 8/30/2018 at 10:26 AM, Antrell Williams said:

It will just be a shiny new parking lot during rush hour. Can anyone find the preliminary plans on LaDOTD website?

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Tapatalk
 

I went to the public forum. Not impressed. 

There were some nice ideas and changes that should happen, but my issue is that they're not proposing a larger regional plan. They kept saying that in order for this to work, we have to do more than just widen the interstate...but they didn't propose anything other than widening the interstate. 

I hope this project just looses funding. They're marketing it too well to defeat it.

[Antrell Williams]

I went to the public forum. Not impressed. 
There were some nice ideas and changes that should happen, but my issue is that they're not proposing a larger regional plan. They kept saying that in order for this to work, we have to do more than just widen the interstate...but they didn't propose anything other than widening the interstate. 
I hope this project just looses funding. They're marketing it too well to defeat it.

That's unfortunate but not surprising to hear. Was there time for questions?

I imagine it would be cheaper to try to create better surface street connections in south Baton Rouge. Was there any talk of a new bridge at all?

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Tapatalk

[Mr. Burnham]

On 9/3/2018 at 10:29 PM, Antrell Williams said:

 

 

That's unfortunate but not surprising to hear. Was there time for questions?

I imagine it would be cheaper to try to create better surface street connections in south Baton Rouge. Was there any talk of a new bridge at all?

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Tapatalk
 

 

It wasn't a real public forum. They threw everyone into a 30 minute video presentation that was designed to throw a lot of information at citizens. Then for questions you had to go around a room set up with a ton of fancy renderings and maps and have 1/1 conversations with DOTD designers. 

There was no real opportunity for the community to address concerns (aside from comment boxes set up throughout). There was no real public questioning. And when you talked to DOTD people the focus was on technicalities...not on what kind of affect this would really have. 

I had a lot of questions I wanted to ask, but there was no point. The whole experience made me very disheartened. They're simpling ramming this through and the only real argument for it is that "we have to do something" and "our models say that this will decrease traffic the most when operating under 2014 levels of volume". The whole process...even the research phase was biased towards only doing one thing. Expanding the interstate, making a loop, a new bridge, etc. There were no real models of multiple solutions being tested (aside from one that included every project but the interstate expansion...pointedly they did not have a traffic model for everything plus an expanded interstate). 

I'm not opposed necessarily to expanding the interstate, it needs to be done, and the plans they have are very well done...and they're using it as an opportunity to improve the aesthetics of the area too.  But it's going to be a waste of time and money without doing other things like a new bridge, and a loop. Extreme lack of foresight for the sake of doing *something* in the hopes that later on we will be able to do more. What they're failing to take into account is that when in 5 years time they try and get approval for the loop, their legitimacy will be lost. 

I think it's like 80% of road widening projects ultimately lead to the road needing to be widened again. With the city's population growth and the length of time this project will take (almost a decade), when it's finished I don't think people will notice or care about a 5% decrease in traffic. At that point it's insignificant enough to not really affect peoples lives. 

Edited September 6, 2018 by mr. bernham

[Antrell Williams]

It wasn't a real public forum. They threw everyone into a 30 minute video presentation that was designed to throw a lot of information at citizens. Then for questions you had to go around a room set up with a ton of fancy renderings and maps and have 1/1 conversations with DOTD designers. 
There was no real opportunity for the community to address concerns (aside from comment boxes set up throughout). There was no real public questioning. And when you talked to DOTD people the focus was on technicalities...not on what kind of affect this would really have. 
I had a lot of questions I wanted to ask, but there was no point. The whole experience made me very disheartened. They're simpling ramming this through and the only real argument for it is that "we have to do something" and "our models say that this will decrease traffic the most when operating under 2014 levels of volume". The whole process...even the research phase was biased towards only doing one thing. Expanding the interstate, making a loop, a new bridge, etc. There were no real models of multiple solutions being tested (aside from one that included every project but the interstate expansion...pointedly they did not have a traffic model for everything plus an expanded interstate). 
I'm not opposed necessarily to expanding the interstate, it needs to be done, and the plans they have are very well done...and they're using it as an opportunity to improve the aesthetics of the area too.  But it's going to be a waste of time and money without doing other things like a new bridge, and a loop. Extreme lack of foresight for the sake of doing *something* in the hopes that later on we will be able to do more. What they're failing to take into account is that when in 5 years time they try and get approval for the loop, their legitimacy will be lost. 
I think it's like 80% of road widening projects ultimately lead to the road needing to be widened again. With the city's population growth and the length of time this project will take (almost a decade), when it's finished I don't think people will notice or care about a 5% decrease in traffic. At that point it's insignificant enough to not really affect peoples lives. 

That's really sad to hear. Like I am truly hurt. I love home but this is the kind of stuff I cannot deal with mentally.

It seems like an obvious "my cousins company got the contract so push it through."

I would even accept some corruption in the case of infrastructure that will improve the quality of life of everyone.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Tapatalk

[cajun]

On 9/5/2018 at 9:12 PM, mr. bernham said:

It wasn't a real public forum. They threw everyone into a 30 minute video presentation that was designed to throw a lot of information at citizens. Then for questions you had to go around a room set up with a ton of fancy renderings and maps and have 1/1 conversations with DOTD designers. 

There was no real opportunity for the community to address concerns (aside from comment boxes set up throughout). There was no real public questioning. And when you talked to DOTD people the focus was on technicalities...not on what kind of affect this would really have. 

I had a lot of questions I wanted to ask, but there was no point. The whole experience made me very disheartened. They're simpling ramming this through and the only real argument for it is that "we have to do something" and "our models say that this will decrease traffic the most when operating under 2014 levels of volume". The whole process...even the research phase was biased towards only doing one thing. Expanding the interstate, making a loop, a new bridge, etc. There were no real models of multiple solutions being tested (aside from one that included every project but the interstate expansion...pointedly they did not have a traffic model for everything plus an expanded interstate). 

I'm not opposed necessarily to expanding the interstate, it needs to be done, and the plans they have are very well done...and they're using it as an opportunity to improve the aesthetics of the area too.  But it's going to be a waste of time and money without doing other things like a new bridge, and a loop. Extreme lack of foresight for the sake of doing *something* in the hopes that later on we will be able to do more. What they're failing to take into account is that when in 5 years time they try and get approval for the loop, their legitimacy will be lost. 

I think it's like 80% of road widening projects ultimately lead to the road needing to be widened again. With the city's population growth and the length of time this project will take (almost a decade), when it's finished I don't think people will notice or care about a 5% decrease in traffic. At that point it's insignificant enough to not really affect peoples lives. 

I read through the plans carefully and I came away with an entirely different opinion.   Assuming they can actually build what's in the design, I think it's excellent work and will be a huge relief for Baton Rouge, and the upgrade in aesthetics will be welcome especially around Narin drive, as will the new sound walls in the old south area.

This is projected to reduce congestion even at the predicted traffic levels in 2035 and increase capacity overall by 33%.   So 33% more vehicles can pass through even if traffic speed doesn't increase.   

It's a great plan, but it is NOT a replacement for a new bridge.   I can't stress that enough.   The sad fact is that this is desperately needed along with more alternative routes.   

[Antrell Williams]

I read through the plans carefully and I came away with an entirely different opinion.   Assuming they can actually build what's in the design, I think it's excellent work and will be a huge relief for Baton Rouge, and the upgrade in aesthetics will be welcome especially around Narin drive, as will the new sound walls in the old south area.
This is projected to reduce congestion even at the predicted traffic levels in 2035 and increase capacity overall by 33%.   So 33% more vehicles can pass through even if traffic speed doesn't increase.   
It's a great plan, but it is NOT a replacement for a new bridge.   I can't stress that enough.   The sad fact is that this is desperately needed along with more alternative routes.   

Do you know if they used future upgrades to other roads within the region in this projection?

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Tapatalk

[cajun]

18 hours ago, Antrell Williams said:

Do you know if they used future upgrades to other roads within the region in this projection?

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Tapatalk
 

I don't think so. 

I'll post some proposes layouts later when I have time BTW.  They are going as far as they can while taking a minimum amount of space.  With 12' shoulders inside and out, they could re-stripe and add an extra lane later if they felt it was appropriate (but they'd lose the inside shoulder)   They are taking as much space from the gap in between the spans as they can to minimize the impact on the surrounding area.

They also mapped out where federally funded sound walls will be built and where existing sound walls will be relocated.   There's also a section that doesn't qualify for federal funds but can support (and benefit from) shorter sound walls that the state can fund at a future date.

They actually did a really good job with the Washington-Dalrymple area IMO.   The preliminaries for the new spans over the lake look very nice as well.

Edited September 11, 2018 by cajun

[Mr. Burnham]

On 9/10/2018 at 6:17 PM, cajun said:

I read through the plans carefully and I came away with an entirely different opinion.   Assuming they can actually build what's in the design, I think it's excellent work and will be a huge relief for Baton Rouge, and the upgrade in aesthetics will be welcome especially around Narin drive, as will the new sound walls in the old south area.

This is projected to reduce congestion even at the predicted traffic levels in 2035 and increase capacity overall by 33%.   So 33% more vehicles can pass through even if traffic speed doesn't increase.   

It's a great plan, but it is NOT a replacement for a new bridge.   I can't stress that enough.   The sad fact is that this is desperately needed along with more alternative routes.   

I agree with all of this, but what frustrated me most at the time was that it seemed like most of the people in the room, myself included, supported the plan, but we wanted to see more projects. Baton Rouge needs alternative routes, a new bridge (or two tbh), an expanded road network. Widening the interstate is fine, but it needs to be paired with more long term road planning for the region as a whole.

The new Narin Drive Bridge will be great, as will the new spans over the lake, and the other aesthetic improvements, but at the end of the day the interstate is only one of many traffic problems in BR.

[Antrell Williams]

I agree with all of this, but what frustrated me most at the time was that it seemed like most of the people in the room, myself included, supported the plan, but we wanted to see more projects. Baton Rouge needs alternative routes, a new bridge (or two tbh), an expanded road network. Widening the interstate is fine, but it needs to be paired with more long term road planning for the region as a whole.
The new Narin Drive Bridge will be great, as will the new spans over the lake, and the other aesthetic improvements, but at the end of the day the interstate is only one of many traffic problems in BR.

You forgot to include public transit options. I'd rather see that than just about any road project.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Tapatalk

[Mr. Burnham]

10 hours ago, Antrell Williams said:

You forgot to include public transit options. I'd rather see that than just about any road project.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Tapatalk
 

Public transport will only be feasible if we are able to build out complete streets and build more densely. As long as BR is still a city of strip malls and suburban urban planning, public transport will never be truly viable. But I agree we need public transport options, the key to making it work though is to make BR more dense. 

[Antrell Williams]

Public transport will only be feasible if we are able to build out complete streets and build more densely. As long as BR is still a city of strip malls and suburban urban planning, public transport will never be truly viable. But I agree we need public transport options, the key to making it work though is to make BR more dense. 

We will never solve the traffic congestion issues by building roads though, I agree we need density but we can build the infrastructure before and develop along the corridors after.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Tapatalk

[cajun]

On 9/25/2018 at 11:12 AM, Antrell Williams said:

We will never solve the traffic congestion issues by building roads though, I agree we need density but we can build the infrastructure before and develop along the corridors after. 

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Tapatalk
 

I've heard the same platitude spouted by people that oppose infrastructure investment  in a number of places and I disagree with even considering it as a problem here.   Opposition to these projects tend to projects tend to fall under3 major categories.

1.   New Routes (Highway or rail) creates more traffic Building new road and highway infrastructure (such as the many beltways under construction around some Texas cities or around Memphis) is that it tends to attract more economic development, which itself more freight movements, residential development, retail build outs, and commuter traffic.    I think everyone can agree that Baton Rouge could be so much more if it wasn't saddled with crappy infrastructure.    Economic development isn't a bad thing, but I would prefer that we actually plan for new highways (including acquiring land) while allowing the area around them to be built out on existing road network limitations before adding a major new road.    That way the traffic impact is minimal and there's a limited amount of available land to develop after the fact.   

Example:   A new freeway is built out in an area with ample room for new private development.  The plots of land along exits near I-12 in eastern Livingston Parish are not already developed.   We (the taxpayers) are widening that section from 4 to 6 lanes today because of the increased commuter traffic between Hammond and Baton Rouge, but the likelyhood that more major traffic generators are built out in that area is VERY high, and a lot of that future development should be built out on other corridors and away from I-12.    Many plots are open and undeveloped today in this area, and building out a super-efficient means to reach them would only encourage more density farther away from the existing street grids.    Widening this section from 6 to 8 lanes today would be a huge mistake, as it would impact the degree of sprawl that will occur in the future there.    Not really a problem we have to worry about in Louisiana because infrastructure development of all kinds seems to be on the back burner.    We usually get new infrastructure decades after it should have been built, if at all.   We actually do this one half-correct by sheer accident, although we don't really plan for anything.   Ever.

2.   Capacity Enhancement won't solve gridlock.  Enhancing existing routes that already have congestion (in particular, Airline Highway and I-10) and are fully developed already are one of two major textbook cases of exactly when adding lanes are effective and actually produce results.     The other is making increased connections to add routes within an existing and fully developed street grid.    Baton Rouge desperately needs a lot of this, as the street grid sucks and many of the existing arteries are fully (or nearly fully) developed and have NEVER been enhanced.   

An example of my logic:  While there is a lot of room for investment, there will never been substantially more traffic generators on Airline Highway in North Baton Rouge than there are today.  Most of the plots are already developed.    The nature of the businesses may change if the area's fortunes improve or decline, but there just isn't enough available land for a major increase in residential or commercial traffic generators.    Thus, this area's congestion problems would respond greatly to additional lanes and more capacity.   Cases like Airline Highway or I-10 through Baton Rouge are EXACTLY when we should be enhancing road infrastructure and adding lane capacity.   Keep in mind that I say this as someone who believes that if a 2 lane road with a center turn lane can't handle the traffic demand, we've f-cked something up.......but there are several textbook cases of enhancements in Baton Rouge that fit this category of being exactly when an where it's appropriate to invest in new lanes or capacity.   Airline Highway and I-10 are two MASSIVE examples of existing routes whose enhancement is 100% and completely appropriate.

3.   New highways and connections can contribute to sprawl.  Adding new routes, such as a new bridge over the Amite and Hooper Road could actually help direct economic development away from existing congested routes while providing system redundancy critical to sustaining commerce as the area grows.    I consider sprawl as something we can't really stop.   I believe that city leaders should actually at least influence where it goes, as that impacts the city's infrastructure directly.    In Baton Rouge's case, more of that "flow" of sprawl should be directed north and west, where access to major job centers is relatively close today as the crow flies.   It's beneficial that said sprawl be as close to the city center as possible if not within the same taxing district (East Baton Rouge).   So my answer to this one is to build away with the criteria that these new alternative routes actually make areas closer to the city center more attractive for development.   So build out Central and Zachary and build a connection from Baton Rouge into Watson on Hooper or between the major industrial employers on the west bank and East Baton Rouge/Ascension.    Those routes can at least direct sprawl into a better place than farther down I-10 and I-12 while providing alternative routes to congestion or emergency circumstances on I-10 or I-12.  

Example:  Baton Rouge is sprawling down I-12 and I-10 because those are the most efficient highways in the area and because sprawl is inevitable and will continue until it's no longer economically viable to do.    Places like Watson, northern EBR, or Brusly are already very close (as the crow flies) to downtown Baton Rouge or the major employers along the river relative to Gonzales or Walker, but they take more time to reach because the highway or road network can't support their development.    It's beneficial to Baton Rouge that the inevitable sprawl and development occurs closer to the city center rather than 15-25 miles down I-10 or I-12.     Therefore, the pragmatic solution is for the city of Baton Rouge to actually support infrastructure investments that can help make those areas more attractive to development.    In this case, the new infrastructure doesn't have to be a superhighway or a direct rail link....it just needs to be slightly faster and more efficient than taking I-10 or I-12 out to Walker or Gonzales at peak hours.    It's a very low bar, and there are at least 3 major examples of projects like this that I can think of that would have a huge and immediate impact on keeping sprawl more Baton Rouge-centric while also providing alternative routes to the existing highway network.   

Edited October 8, 2018 by cajun

[Antrell Williams]

Beautifully worded post, I will have to respond later tonight after work.

[richyb83]

•  

Outdoor dining in Baton Rouge is a thing, but is it profitable?

https://www.businessreport.com/business/outdoor-dining-baton-rouge-restaurants

[richyb83]

St.Patrick's Day Parade

Saturday March 16th ...10:00am

[richyb83]

Parking problems persist at Perkins Road overpass

https://www.businessreport.com/newsletters/parking-problems-persist-at-perkins-road-overpass

[cajun]

On 5/6/2019 at 9:05 PM, richyb83 said:

Parking problems persist at Perkins Road overpass

https://www.businessreport.com/newsletters/parking-problems-persist-at-perkins-road-overpass

PUBLIC 

PARKING

GARAGE

And we can solve the drainage issues in that area with a catch basin underneath the parking deck. 

Yay!  I've solved the problem.   Now pay me my $250,000 in consulting fees.

Edited July 14, 2019 by cajun

[Mr. Burnham]

Map I made a while back for a potential redevelopment plan of the overpass area once the interstate ramp is removed:

I believe I intended the pink to be public parking garages and new shops/restaurant/office space on ground level. Green obviously park space, white is building (existing and new), dark grey is parking lot.