I'm never an advocate for huge infrastructure projects that will only cut travel time by minor increments. Which is the main reason to oppose the currently proposed "Baton Rouge Loop" that kinda sorta just came out of thin air. The actual path wouldn't helps "traffic problems" in the metro area. Instead it would allow people in the suburbs to avoid Baton Rouge at all costs. Actual "travel time" probably won't be reduced... and the millions invested have yet to show any sort of cost/benefit analysis along with reduced travel times. The only rational is avoiding an occasional accident; while in inconvenient, that's A LOT of money. Especially when it is very rare the interstate actually closes. Is it really worth spending a billion dollars to save thirty minutes every so often?
So lets look at the problem purely from an automobile side (pretending other methods of transportation doesn't exist). Baton Rouge already has amazing infrastructure in place to assist in connectivity, and with some upgrades the City can fix a majority of the problems, while keeping the economic ramifications inside the Parish.
I'm still an advocate of upgrading Airline Highway to limited access (and possibly Florida Boulevard). A combination of access roads and interchanges would fix congestion problems. Obviously this process would be expensive, but it would actually help businesses WITHIN the Parish, and not adjacent Parishes. As for the western portion of the "bypass" the infrastructure is already there. Most the right of way is already in place for a connection of I-10 to the Sunshine Bridge; and there have been plans to upgrade Louisiana Highway 1 to limited access (most of the road is close to standards as is). Done. The interchanges at I-10 and the Huey Long Bridge have already been built.
So the recent articles coming out from Ascension and Livingston describing a new highway that links I-10 with I-12 is somewhat interesting. While I would still support the upgrade of Airline Highway, at least this plan utilizes current infrastructure and connects the Sunshine Bridge to I-12.
It just makes sense. People get up in arms when we spend a few million on a bus system... but there is rarely outcry when we want to build millions/billions of new road infrastructure that is duplicating systems already in place.
Showing posts with label congestion. Show all posts
Showing posts with label congestion. Show all posts
Tuesday, February 26, 2013
Tuesday, February 14, 2012
A plan you say? Preposterous!
I'm incredibly syndical about the Baton
Rouge "loop" project which emerged a few years ago. No American city builds loops anymore (bypasses, beltways, etc); and when
they are discussed they get rejected by the community
fast. Most are shot down because of NIMY’ism. Heck, one could say that Jane
Jacobs was a NIMBY at the time.
But the difference between Jane Jacobs and NIMBY's are solution based. Just opposing
something gets a city nowhere. Obviously Baton
Rouge has a traffic problem. We lack citywide connectivity with little to no interstate alternatives through town. Solutions are needed (plural "solutions"). We need interstate improvements; we need surface street improvements; we need transit improvements. We need an overall plan.
(Caution: sarcasm ahead.)
Baton Rouge insist on paying more than less, and mostly because of an “us” vs. “them”. Transit users are either poor, can’t drive, or get some kind of high using “free services from the government”. Obviously these are the only reasons anyone would use transit. Thus "transportation planners" (um, engineers) argue for a one solution (a loop), instead of a comprehensive fix to the Baton Rouge traffic.
The funny thing is, transit is cheaper, fee based, and can transport more people. So I cringe when newspaper comment sections blow up when the transit system wants $18 million dollars, yet no one opposes an additional three mile lane on the interstate for the same amount (see the above articles). Because of course, one solution is the best. We continue to throw millions and millions of dollars at one solution without any results being produced. A city the size of Baton Rouge needs a plan with options. When I fly home I have several options (my parents live in the middle of nowhere, btw). I could take the commuter rail, Amtrak, MegaBus, or Greyhound… or my family could come pick me up and take interstates, toll roads, highways, etc. I’m not stuck. When I fly into New Orleans I have two options to get home. I park, or someone picks me up. Both options are not ideal. The sad thing is, New Orleans was once on a tier of Chicago or New York... and their infrastructure still reflects that tier to an extent.
(Caution: sarcasm ahead.)
Baton Rouge insist on paying more than less, and mostly because of an “us” vs. “them”. Transit users are either poor, can’t drive, or get some kind of high using “free services from the government”. Obviously these are the only reasons anyone would use transit. Thus "transportation planners" (um, engineers) argue for a one solution (a loop), instead of a comprehensive fix to the Baton Rouge traffic.
The funny thing is, transit is cheaper, fee based, and can transport more people. So I cringe when newspaper comment sections blow up when the transit system wants $18 million dollars, yet no one opposes an additional three mile lane on the interstate for the same amount (see the above articles). Because of course, one solution is the best. We continue to throw millions and millions of dollars at one solution without any results being produced. A city the size of Baton Rouge needs a plan with options. When I fly home I have several options (my parents live in the middle of nowhere, btw). I could take the commuter rail, Amtrak, MegaBus, or Greyhound… or my family could come pick me up and take interstates, toll roads, highways, etc. I’m not stuck. When I fly into New Orleans I have two options to get home. I park, or someone picks me up. Both options are not ideal. The sad thing is, New Orleans was once on a tier of Chicago or New York... and their infrastructure still reflects that tier to an extent.
So the Baton Rouge's transit system sucks. But our traffic infrastructure is almost worse. Heck, I-10 goes to one lane after exiting the Mississippi River Bridge. Then the interstate
expands to three lanes, and finally five lanes in the suburbs. Since Baton Rouge already has a dysfunctional urban interstate, I don't even know why we are arguing a new bypass. We need to improve existing conditions. So when the
state
proposes an upgrade, we shouldn't just shoot
down the idea. This is the time to fix and improve what's wrong. Millions of dollars will be thrown at an interstate project (because a highway will never be rejected by the 'fiscally responsible'), so take a bad situation and make it better for the surrounding communities. I find it funny when people say a wider interstate will “ruin” an area that initially gained its character
because it’s under an interstate (Perkins Road underpass).
Of course, other arguments need to be made. Many cities are tearing down urban highway. Baton Rouge's "plan" should have this scenario. Rerouting I-10 around Airline Highway might be feasible; or around Baton Rouge all together. Even if a complete reroute of I-10 wasn't feasible, upgrading Airline Highway and Florida Boulevard would be much smarter than building an entirely new loop. Airline Highway was "the loop". Why can't it still be the loop? I would assume the cost of upgrading the Airline Highway would be far less than a loop. (But I have to assume because not one study was done).
When someone wakes up one day and decides a loop will fix all the traffic problems, it doesn't make sense. I don't consider myself a genius, but I can come up with all sorts of scenarios that should be studied before dumping hundreds of millions of dollars into just one project. But I guess that's the "planner" coming out in me.
Wednesday, November 9, 2011
Baton Rouge Loop Project stays alive http://bit.ly/uQGamZ
"Building a bypass is so 1970's". - Someone from Urban Land Institute
I totally pulled that quote from the Indianapolis Star back in 2005 when the Governor put plans to build an outer loop around Indianapolis. That idea was yanked almost immediately when an outcry from the community forced it off the table.
Then I moved here (Baton Rouge) and the bypass idea was proposed. There was no outcry. In fact, the only outcry came years later from adjacent Parish's (as noted from the article). It was odd. Planners supported the loop; transit advocates supported the loop; and even the Downtown Development District made a proclamation supporting the loop. My naive little planner mind couldn't take it.
Baton Rouge obviously needs regional traffic solutions. There are only four ways to get in/out of the Parish. One blockage on the Interstate and the entire city becomes clogged. But (like the quote says) bypasses are a thing of the past. They are relatively unhelpful with traffic congestion (billions dollars, only to be used when there's an accident?). Yet, they encourage development outside city limits, and discourage downtown inner city development. Which is why bypasses haven't been built around the county in the last decade.
So being the crazy liberal I am, I opt for the more fiscally conservative option. Fix what we have. First, do what they do in Texas. Upgrade Airline Highway and Florida Boulevard to limited access. The expense will be much less than building a new highway. Some right-of-way will need to be acquired; and some creative site design will be needed. But still cheaper, and it will help existing businesses along those routes.
In addition, upgrading those highways would actually benefit Baton Rouge. A loop, by nature, hurts the existing city's infrastructure. We already have infrastructure we can't maintain. Once built, development will flock to the 'new' infrastructure, draining even more resources from the City. Why not funnel that money into existing roads that need upgrading? Like, for instance, Airline Highway and Florida Boulevard.
Or we could continue to support people living outside the city. But that doesn't seem like good fiscal policy.
"Building a bypass is so 1970's". - Someone from Urban Land Institute
I totally pulled that quote from the Indianapolis Star back in 2005 when the Governor put plans to build an outer loop around Indianapolis. That idea was yanked almost immediately when an outcry from the community forced it off the table.
Then I moved here (Baton Rouge) and the bypass idea was proposed. There was no outcry. In fact, the only outcry came years later from adjacent Parish's (as noted from the article). It was odd. Planners supported the loop; transit advocates supported the loop; and even the Downtown Development District made a proclamation supporting the loop. My naive little planner mind couldn't take it.
Baton Rouge obviously needs regional traffic solutions. There are only four ways to get in/out of the Parish. One blockage on the Interstate and the entire city becomes clogged. But (like the quote says) bypasses are a thing of the past. They are relatively unhelpful with traffic congestion (billions dollars, only to be used when there's an accident?). Yet, they encourage development outside city limits, and discourage downtown inner city development. Which is why bypasses haven't been built around the county in the last decade.
So being the crazy liberal I am, I opt for the more fiscally conservative option. Fix what we have. First, do what they do in Texas. Upgrade Airline Highway and Florida Boulevard to limited access. The expense will be much less than building a new highway. Some right-of-way will need to be acquired; and some creative site design will be needed. But still cheaper, and it will help existing businesses along those routes.
In addition, upgrading those highways would actually benefit Baton Rouge. A loop, by nature, hurts the existing city's infrastructure. We already have infrastructure we can't maintain. Once built, development will flock to the 'new' infrastructure, draining even more resources from the City. Why not funnel that money into existing roads that need upgrading? Like, for instance, Airline Highway and Florida Boulevard.
Or we could continue to support people living outside the city. But that doesn't seem like good fiscal policy.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)