Print

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

[froggie]

Looks like US 167 and LA 182 have been rerouted around Lafayette.

Evangeline Thruway south of I-10 no longer carries US 167, but does carry LA 182. I only went as far as Kaliste Saloom Rd., but I expect that LA 182 now stays on Evangeline Thruway all the way to the interchange in Broussard.

As for US 167, it apparently now comes down LA 3184 to Bertrand Dr., then follows LA 3025 along College Dr. to Johnston St., where it resumes its historic alignment.

Clearly Louisiana is reducing its mileage in Lafayette. That's not surprising, and neither is the DOTD level of competence being shown. The new US 167 alignment doesn't make sense when Amb. Caffery Parkway (which isn't a LA highway between Bertrand Dr. and Johnston St.) shunts the alignment by multiple miles. Nobody going to Abbeville from I-10 is going to use the new US 167 alignment.

Also, what is the rationale for rerouting US 167, and not rerouting US 90 off the useless alignment on Cameron St.? DOTD could eliminate the "to US 90" business for the Evangeline Thruway by rerouting US 90 onto I-10 at, say, LA 93 in Scott or Amb. Caffery Pkwy.

At any rate, this will give Lafayette a rare interstate-US-LA triplex, which I don't think exists anywhere else in Louisiana.

Unfortunately I didn't get pictures when I was in Lafayette on Friday. Maybe Anthony_JK can grab some for us?

So the reroutes have finally been signed.  I wonder if this has been submitted to AASHTO....

Per a recent post in another thread, yes something was submitted and approved back in the spring.  But we don't have the details of WHAT was submitted yet.

[jbnv]

I agree about the level of DOTD competence displayed with regard to routing. Bertrand/College should be swapped for Ambassador Caffery north of Johnston Street. That would place all of Caffery under state control and create a logical Lafayette half-bypass.

There is a logic in that Bertrand Drive is already a state route and Ambassador Caffery is not a state route between Bertrand Drive and Johnston St. So the US 167 reroute follows road that's already under the state's purview and doesn't add any mileage to the state's plate.

It's lazy logic, the sort of minimalist quality that we tend to get in Louisiana. Only DOTD sees any sense in Ambassador Caffery not carrying LA 3073 all the way to LA 3814.

[bwana39]

I agree about the level of DOTD competence displayed with regard to routing. Bertrand/College should be swapped for Ambassador Caffery north of Johnston Street. That would place all of Caffery under state control and create a logical Lafayette half-bypass.

There is a logic in that Bertrand Drive is already a state route and Ambassador Caffery is not a state route between Bertrand Drive and Johnston St. So the US 167 reroute follows road that's already under the state's purview and doesn't add any mileage to the state's plate.

It's lazy logic, the sort of minimalist quality that we tend to get in Louisiana. Only DOTD sees any sense in Ambassador Caffery not carrying LA 3073 all the way to LA 3814.

You seem to see this as transportation. It is just the way LADOTD and the local communities negotiate and trade highway maintenance / construction  back and forth. Sometimes they will exchange lane miles from a newly refurbished stretch to one that is barely open almost as soon as DOTD has finished the upgrade. This is primarily done when DOTD has extra money, but that is not the only time they do it.

[jbnv]

I agree about the level of DOTD competence displayed with regard to routing. Bertrand/College should be swapped for Ambassador Caffery north of Johnston Street. That would place all of Caffery under state control and create a logical Lafayette half-bypass.

There is a logic in that Bertrand Drive is already a state route and Ambassador Caffery is not a state route between Bertrand Drive and Johnston St. So the US 167 reroute follows road that's already under the state's purview and doesn't add any mileage to the state's plate.

It's lazy logic, the sort of minimalist quality that we tend to get in Louisiana. Only DOTD sees any sense in Ambassador Caffery not carrying LA 3073 all the way to LA 3814.

You seem to see this as transportation. It is just the way LADOTD and the local communities negotiate and trade highway maintenance / construction  back and forth. Sometimes they will exchange lane miles from a newly refurbished stretch to one that is barely open almost as soon as DOTD has finished the upgrade. This is primarily done when DOTD has extra money, but that is not the only time they do it.

Why wouldn't I see this as transportation? If there's no navigational aspect to it, then it doesn't need to be signed. There's no compelling reason for the BGS for Evangeline Thruway to have "LA 182" on it unless LA 182 has navigational value. "Evangeline Thruway" should actually be on the sign because the name "Evangeline Thruway" has navigational value. LA 182 doesn't have any navigational value within the city of Lafayette.

I think this is a fair criticism of DOTD. I've lived in Tangipahoa Parish for almost 10 years. You could put a gun to my head and force me to tell you the street names of US 190, US 51 and US 51 BUS. And I expect I would fail that test. Because none of the interstate interchanges with these roads have the street names on the BGSes. Just "Hammond." I'm old enough to remember when the LA 182 exit from I-10 read "Lafayette / Carencro" instead of "N University Avenue."

[bwana39]

https://www.ksla.com/2023/05/26/dotd-announces-110-million-project-repair-i-20-bossier-parts-shreveport/

http://wwwapps.dotd.la.gov/administration/announcements/announcement.aspx?key=32912

Not sure exactly what they are doing, but they are NOT adding any lanes or replacing existing bridges.

[cjk374]

https://lincolnparishjournal.com/2023/05/27/hwy-167-overpass-down-to-one-lane/

This article states that the overpasses at exits 84 & 85 (2 at exit 85 carry US 167/LA 146 as one way couplets) are the oldest on all of I-20. They all have 1959 engraved on the bridge ends. So now I guess we can say that I-20 may have started in Ruston? I have looked at culverts under I-20 in Ruston, and they have 1958 etched above them. Was I-20 started earlier somewhere else?

[rlb2024]

https://www.ksla.com/2023/05/26/dotd-announces-110-million-project-repair-i-20-bossier-parts-shreveport/

http://wwwapps.dotd.la.gov/administration/announcements/announcement.aspx?key=32912

Not sure exactly what they are doing, but they are NOT adding any lanes or replacing existing bridges.

The concrete along I-20 through Bossier City is in horrible shape.  I hate driving through there when we go visit our son in Bossier.  And while I wish they were widening the highway anything will help.

[mgk920]

https://www.ksla.com/2023/05/26/dotd-announces-110-million-project-repair-i-20-bossier-parts-shreveport/

http://wwwapps.dotd.la.gov/administration/announcements/announcement.aspx?key=32912

Not sure exactly what they are doing, but they are NOT adding any lanes or replacing existing bridges.

The concrete along I-20 through Bossier City is in horrible shape.  I hate driving through there when we go visit our son in Bossier.  And while I wish they were widening the highway anything will help.

E few years ago Big Rig Steve drove I-20 through the Shreveport, LA area and the road surface was so bad that it made a real mess of the stuff in the cab of his truck.

Yes, it's due for simple repaving.

Mike

[Plutonic Panda]

https://www.ksla.com/2023/05/26/dotd-announces-110-million-project-repair-i-20-bossier-parts-shreveport/

http://wwwapps.dotd.la.gov/administration/announcements/announcement.aspx?key=32912

Not sure exactly what they are doing, but they are NOT adding any lanes or replacing existing bridges.

For some reason I had thought they were adding auxiliary lanes and doing a major rehab or outright replacement of the bridge.

[Anthony_JK]

I don't know if anyone has already reported this, since it went down last February, but:

LaDOTD and FHWA announced that they had released an approved Tier 1 Final EIS and ROD for the Lafayette Regional Expressway toll loop.

The approved corridor is defined as the Outer Corridor extending from I-49 just north of Carencro southwest and south to I-10 between Scott and Duson; then south generally paralleling Fieldspan Road to US 167 west and south of Maurice, then curving east along northern Vermilion Parish just south of Youngsville to US 90/Future I-49 South at the current US 90/LA 88 interchange, with an extension to LA 182 near Cade to serve Acadiana Regional Airport. It basically follows the outer perimeter of Lafayette Parish and the northern portion of Vermilion Parish.

No word as of yet on when Tier 2 studies, which will pinpoint the exact alignment of the LRX tollway, will commence or what the funding details will entail.

This is considered an independent project, completely separate from the I-49 Lafayette Connector and freeway upgrade of US 90 south of Lafayette; while the usual opponents of the Connector were around during the Public Hearing last October attempting to push this as an alternative bypass to the Connector, LADOTD and LMEC officials were having none of that.

The announcement of the release of the Tier 1 FEIS/ROD can be found at LADOTD's website and at the LRX website.

[The Ghostbuster]

Will this toll loop have any highway designation, such as Interstate 249?

[Anthony_JK]

They really haven't said; they could do what Houston does with their toll roads and not designate a number since most of the income will come from the tolls; but, if they do assign a number it probably will be something like an x49.

[Bobby5280]

I wonder if the plans for this partial loop raise any risk of derailing plans for the I-49 inter-city connector.

[bwana39]

I wonder if the plans for this partial loop raise any risk of derailing plans for the I-49 inter-city connector.

Bobby,

I don't think so. The connector is slowly but surely progressing in Lafayette. I think what most people on here fail to recognize is the growth of Lafayette and its' metro area. It has gone from fourth or fifth to third in metro population in Louisiana and is growing fast. I would say faster, but Lake Charles and Houma are growing as fast or perhaps faster.

Shreveport / Bossier, Monroe, and Alexandria / Pineville are shrinking.

The bottom line is that Lafayette needs the added infrastructure. It needs both the toll loop AND the I-49 connector. and perhaps a full loop.

 

This is considered an independent project, completely separate from the I-49 Lafayette Connector and freeway upgrade of US 90 south of Lafayette; while the usual opponents of the Connector were around during the Public Hearing last October attempting to push this as an alternative bypass to the Connector, LADOTD and LMEC officials were having none of that.

[Anthony_JK]

The LRX is a totally separate and independent project from I-49 South and the Lafayette Connector project. It would be funded mostly with tolls through AET/pay by mail, with some fed/state matching funds. It would be too far anyway to impact the value of the Connector project.

Also, portions of the Connector project are actually funded and may even start construction later this year or next year. A letting for the portion including the Willow Street interchange to I-10 is now on the list of scheduled lettings over at the LADOTD website, set for bidding in November. And, it seems like the Supplemental EIS process has now resumed; the Connector website is listing a new round of meetings set for later this summer/early fall, and there is the possibility of the SEIS being issued for public view and comment by early 2024.

[cenlaroads]

From this past Tuesday.  The state has selected a partner for the Calcasieu River Bridge project in Lake Charles:

http://wwwapps.dotd.la.gov/administration/announcements/Announcement.aspx?key=33364


The total cost of the project is estimated at $2.1 billion!

[bwana39]

https://www.ksla.com/2023/05/26/dotd-announces-110-million-project-repair-i-20-bossier-parts-shreveport/

http://wwwapps.dotd.la.gov/administration/announcements/announcement.aspx?key=32912

Not sure exactly what they are doing, but they are NOT adding any lanes or replacing existing bridges.

Work on the I-20 rebuild through western Bossier city begins next month. It also explains exactly what they are going to do.

http://wwwapps.dotd.la.gov/administration/announcements/announcement.aspx?key=33715

[Plutonic Panda]

From the bridge to LA-3 Looks like it’s 3 lanes each way with aux lanes for a road that handles 70-100k vehicles per day that sounds fairly sufficient. Still, I’d add a lane for any future growth to stay ahead of the curve. It drops off to two lanes after that and you think they’d widen it to 3 lanes each way to I-220.

The Red River Bridge and the section through Downtown Shreveport really need to be next on the radar for reconstruction, expansion, and modernization. Won’t come cheap though and it doesn’t appear LADOT has this project on their list as they have other more pressing priorities.

[bwana39]

From the bridge to LA-3 Looks like it’s 3 lanes each way with aux lanes for a road that handles 70-100k vehicles per day that sounds fairly sufficient. Still, I’d add a lane for any future growth to stay ahead of the curve. It drops off to two lanes after that and you think they’d widen it to 3 lanes each way to I-220.

The Red River Bridge and the section through Downtown Shreveport really need to be next on the radar for reconstruction, expansion, and modernization. Won’t come cheap though and it doesn’t appear LADOT has this project on their list as they have other more pressing priorities.

Yeah, but.. The I-20 bridges may be the 3rd priority for Red River Bridges in metro Shreveport Bossier.