Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[bwana39]

After a start to repaint the old bridge
https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=11885.msg290956#msg290956

and a stop. (Endangered birds roosting on the bridge)

Then an underfunded decision to build an adjacent span and turn the existing bridge into a pedestrian bridge.

It looks like another try is on the books.

https://710keel.com/100-million-for-new-jimmie-davis-bridge-passes-in-louisiana/

[bwana39]

https://www.ksla.com/2022/03/20/ladotd-chooses-list-potential-contractors-jimmie-davis-bridge/

[bwana39]

https://www.ksla.com/2022/03/25/stakeholders-meet-discuss-future-historic-jimmie-davis-bridge/

https://www.scribd.com/document/566560859/Jimmie-Davis-Stakeholder-Meeting#from_embed

The thing I hate is they are touting the bridge history when in fact the issue is they cannot get an EIS to tear it down or even paint it.

[cjk374]

A 54 year old bridge is "historic"? Older bridges are torn down & replaced every day.

[Rothman]

A 54 year old bridge is "historic"? Older bridges are torn down & replaced every day.

50 years is the federal threshold for federally funded projects.

This means 1950s era bridges are now needing to go through the review process.

Each state has their own separate processes and thresholds as well (in NY, it's SHPO).

[bwana39]

It is not particularly historic. It is a truss bridge. That said....  cannot get an EIS to tear it down or even paint it.

[Rothman]

It is not particularly historic. It is a truss bridge. That said....  cannot get an EIS to tear it down or even paint it.

Historic and cultural resources are part of the NEPA/EIS process.

[Anthony_JK]

It is not particularly historic. It is a truss bridge. That said....  cannot get an EIS to tear it down or even paint it.

Historic and cultural resources are part of the NEPA/EIS process.

Historic and cultural resources are covered by Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966; which provides for protocols and procedures for any actions or displacements of properties or entities that qualify as a historic or cultural resource. It's a separate and independent entity as part of the full NEPA process.

The Jimmie Davis Bridge is considered a historical resource on its own (declared so by the NHRP); so any revisions or replacements would have to follow strict 106 protocols for historic preservation. Leaving the bridge as is and converting it to pedestrian/bicycle use while building a parallel vehicle bridge would probably be best in meeting those standards.

[bwana39]

I don't think it is on the National Register of Historic Places. I may be wrong.

LADOTD and the NWLCOG have decided to replace the bridge instead of recondition. Due to endangered birds nesting on bridge it will be preserved in place.

The endangered birds were, at least 5 or 6 years ago, the ONLY impediment to reconditioning it (primarily paint).
The decision to replace it was made AFTER they couldn't get a clean EIS to recondition it.

[Rothman]

It is not particularly historic. It is a truss bridge. That said....  cannot get an EIS to tear it down or even paint it.

Historic and cultural resources are part of the NEPA/EIS process.

Historic and cultural resources are covered by Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966; which provides for protocols and procedures for any actions or displacements of properties or entities that qualify as a historic or cultural resource. It's a separate and independent entity as part of the full NEPA process.

I suppose that's technically true, but in practice, as projects progress to design approval, NEPA is not considered complete until section 106 is resolved.

[bwana39]

It is not particularly historic. It is a truss bridge. That said....  cannot get an EIS to tear it down or even paint it.

Historic and cultural resources are part of the NEPA/EIS process.

Historic and cultural resources are covered by Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966; which provides for protocols and procedures for any actions or displacements of properties or entities that qualify as a historic or cultural resource. It's a separate and independent entity as part of the full NEPA process.

I suppose that's technically true, but in practice, as projects progress to design approval, NEPA is not considered complete until section 106 is resolved.

This bridge would have inevitably passed the historic part. There is little history to it. 
I think former Shreveport Mayor Cedrick Glover has it in a nutshell....https://k945.com/shreveport-rep-says-jimmie-davis-bridge-park-plan-is-waste-of-money/

[Anthony_JK]

I see why Mayor Glover is opposed to having the locals pay the maintenance costs of retaining the old JDB as a ped/bicyclist walkway while building an entirely new 4-lane span nearby. Why not just append the walkway to the new span...wouldn't that be cheaper?

[bwana39]

I see why Mayor Glover is opposed to having the locals pay the maintenance costs of retaining the old JDB as a ped/bicyclist walkway while building an entirely new 4-lane span nearby. Why not just append the walkway to the new span...wouldn't that be cheaper?

I think everyone would agree but the fans of the barn swallows. It appears that as long as there are swallows on the bridge ESPECIALLY during nesting season, no one can touch it.  It makes demolition iffy or at least more expensive.


Leaving it in place solves that and for DOTD, it also means no expense for demolition. It leaves the people of Shreveport Bossier with costs around 1/3 of the cost of the replacement bridge.

[bwana39]

https://www.ktbs.com/news/bossier-police-jurors-talk-bridge-commitment-want-more-information/article_c1deded2-c1ad-11ec-a3be-bb138cb40821.html


Apparently the state is (possibly) willing to foot the maintenance if the locals are willing to manage trash and security.