Mobile-Baldwin

[Alex]

County pushing ahead with Baldwin 83 four-laning

BAY MINETTE, Alabama -- A Mobile construction firm should start work in coming weeks on the next phase of four-laning Baldwin County 83 from U.S. 90 to Baldwin 64 with a low bid of $14 million on the work, officials said Monday.

Work on the massive project that officials hope will one day link Orange Beach to Interstate 65 should enter the next phase in coming weeks as Hosea Weaver & Sons starts work to widen a section of the route south of Interstate

Officials said the Baldwin Beach Express that will follow Baldwin 83 and 21 miles yet to be constructed north of I-10 could become a major hurricane evacuation route from the county's beaches.

County Engineer Cal Markert told commissioners last week that estimates for the section had come in at $19 million, but bids were $5 million lower than expected. The county will pay $2.7 million from bond money with federal funding covering the rest.

When the state and county offered different road plans last fall and earlier this year, Baldwin officials prevailed, moving forward on the project they contend was the best route to connect with I-65 years from now.

Studies are ongoing regarding a proposed link from I-10 north to I-65 east of Bay Minette. The road, which might be funded through a toll, would pass by the 3,000-acre megasite selected by Hybrid Kinetic Motors as the location for a new plant that would make natural gas-powered hybrid cars.

State highway officials had planned a route farther to the east that would have impacted protected wildlife areas, environmentalists said. State officials shelved their plan earlier this year. Baldwin pressed ahead, completing a section of highway from the Foley Beach Express to Baldwin 32. County officials sent notice to the Alabama Department of Transportation last week regarding the contract award on the latest phase from U.S. 90 to Baldwin 64.

Markert said work should start on that section in about 45 days. The longest and most expensive section south of I-10 should be let for bid in September, he said, with the part from Baldwin 32 to U.S. 90 estimated to cost $54 million.

Markert said the county is about $20 million short on funding for that project but the actual cost should be less than the initial estimates.

[Alps]

At least it will live on in all the photographs we have of it. The only item I believe that is still button copy on Interstate 10 in that general area is actually near Pensacola at the 9th Street overpass (heading eastbound). Other than that the remaining button copy sign is near Interstate 10 in Mobile, and I await the day when that will be replaced as well...

There was a westbound distance sign on I-10, I think still in Florida, west of Pensacola.  Need to keep my updates moving...

[agentsteel53]

you mean all those overheads, on the slotted signs, in Mobile are gone?

[Alex]

At least it will live on in all the photographs we have of it. The only item I believe that is still button copy on Interstate 10 in that general area is actually near Pensacola at the 9th Street overpass (heading eastbound). Other than that the remaining button copy sign is near Interstate 10 in Mobile, and I await the day when that will be replaced as well...

There was a westbound distance sign on I-10, I think still in Florida, west of Pensacola.  Need to keep my updates moving...

They added a mileage sign after the weigh stations between the state line and Exit 5 in the early 2000s. So you read one sign "Wilcox Road - 17" then after the weigh station "Wilcox Road - 15".

you mean all those overheads, on the slotted signs, in Mobile are gone?

They are all still in place, have not seen one of those replaced ever. The letters however are not button copy, just reflective white.

[agentsteel53]

They are all still in place, have not seen one of those replaced ever. The letters however are not button copy, just reflective white.

oh, I must be mixing them up with a different set.  With button-copy AL-163 shields, no less.

[Alex]

They are all still in place, have not seen one of those replaced ever. The letters however are not button copy, just reflective white.

oh, I must be mixing them up with a different set.  With button-copy AL-163 shields, no less.

You are thinking of that Summa photo. Only one button copy shield left on a guide sign, the I-10 on US 90/98. There's still a button copy guide sign on Canal Street as well.

[agentsteel53]

You are thinking of that Summa photo. Only one button copy shield left on a guide sign, the I-10 on US 90/98. There's still a button copy guide sign on Canal Street as well.

I could've sworn that was around until relatively recently.  When did it vanish?

[Alex]

You are thinking of that Summa photo. Only one button copy shield left on a guide sign, the I-10 on US 90/98. There's still a button copy guide sign on Canal Street as well.

I could've sworn that was around until relatively recently.  When did it vanish?

Button copy was mostly the norm along Interstate 10 through south Alabama in 1993 but by 1996 much of it was gone, though several overheads retained it. However by 1998, all but a couple of mileage signs were fully reflectorized.

Cannot say when Interstate 65 button copy signs were replaced, but they were certainly out of there by 1996.

[Alex]

I attended the I-10 Mobile River Bridge meeting on December 9, 2003, and this meeting appears to be about the same in concept, except that instead of eight-laning the Bayway as they wanted to do in 2003, now its only a six-laning. There is too much opposition from the ship building industry to locals in and around downtown for anything to happen.

Back in 2003 they were talking about a possible completion of a new span by 2012! Can we suggest 2022 now? 

ALDOT to hold meetings on controversial I-10 bridge proposal

MOBILE, Alabama -- State highway officials, seeking input on a proposed bridge over the Mobile River, will hold a pair of community meetings in the coming weeks, part of an impact study that will help determine the bridge's location.
Engineers with the Alabama Department of Transportation say the bridge is necessary to address frequent congestion on Interstate 10 through the Wallace Tunnel and onto the Bayway, congestion they say will only increase with time.
In addition to the bridge's construction, the project would add 2 lanes to the Bayway, one in each direction, bringing the total to 6.
The maritime industry on the river has generally opposed the bridge, saying it would limit traffic on the waterway and cost them millions of dollars in lost business.
The first meeting will take place Aug. 31, from 5-7 p.m.,  at the Texas Street Community Center, 540 Texas St.The second meeting will take place Sept. 2, from 5-7 p.m., at the Daphne Bayfront Park Pavilion, 6200 Bayfront Park Drive.

Mayor Sam Jones has said he supports option a bridge route that runs from a point south of the Alabama Cruise Terminal, over the Harrison Brothers Dry Dock and Repair Yard, and north of the Austal shipbuilding expansion.

The route is a few hundred yards south of the Wallace Tunnel on I-10.

[Alps]

MOBILE, Alabama -- State highway officials, seeking input on a proposed bridge over the Mobile River, will hold a pair of community meetings in the coming weeks, part of an impact study that will help determine the bridge's location.
Engineers with the Alabama Department of Transportation say the bridge is necessary to address frequent congestion on Interstate 10 through the Wallace Tunnel and onto the Bayway, congestion they say will only increase with time.
In addition to the bridge's construction, the project would add 2 lanes to the Bayway, one in each direction, bringing the total to 6.
The maritime industry on the river has generally opposed the bridge, saying it would limit traffic on the waterway and cost them millions of dollars in lost business.
The first meeting will take place Aug. 31, from 5-7 p.m.,  at the Texas Street Community Center, 540 Texas St.The second meeting will take place Sept. 2, from 5-7 p.m., at the Daphne Bayfront Park Pavilion, 6200 Bayfront Park Drive.

Mayor Sam Jones has said he supports option a bridge route that runs from a point south of the Alabama Cruise Terminal, over the Harrison Brothers Dry Dock and Repair Yard, and north of the Austal shipbuilding expansion.

The route is a few hundred yards south of the Wallace Tunnel on I-10.

So... why not build one more tunnel tube?  It can be reversible for rush hour traffic, provide six lanes during daytime travel periods, and gives flexibility to do tunnel maintenance at night.  See the Lincoln Tunnel.

[froggie]

Based on the ongoing I-64 HRBT study in Norfolk, VA, FHWA has concerns about 2-way running in tunnels and the operational issues with them.

Another thing with extra tunnel tubes here:  unless you put them in the same general location as the proposed bridge, you will be perpetuating the tight 40 MPH curve on the eastbound tunnel approach.  Improving that in the same area as the existing tunnel would require a fair bit more right-of-way (possibly more than the new bridge requires).  But moreso, any new tunnel near the existing tunnel would require ripping up the existing Water St interchange...something the bridge does not require.

[Alps]

But moreso, any new tunnel near the existing tunnel would require ripping up the existing Water St interchange...something the bridge does not require.

I disagree - it would easily fit through the middle of the interchange (just alter the alignment of the WB lanes a bit and remove Church St., and fit the middle lanes into the existing WB tube).  The question would be access to/from the middle lanes, which I propose would be a single reversible ramp between the tunnel and the middle of Water St.  If the outer tubes are both running, you don't need the ramp open at all.  If the center tube is running all WB traffic, you'd have a left-hand off ramp to Water.  If it's running all EB, you'd have a right-hand merge from Water.  Either way, Water St. stays fully open and the existing interchange just adds a single ramp.

[Alex]

But moreso, any new tunnel near the existing tunnel would require ripping up the existing Water St interchange...something the bridge does not require.

I disagree - it would easily fit through the middle of the interchange (just alter the alignment of the WB lanes a bit and remove Church St., and fit the middle lanes into the existing WB tube).  The question would be access to/from the middle lanes, which I propose would be a single reversible ramp between the tunnel and the middle of Water St.  If the outer tubes are both running, you don't need the ramp open at all.  If the center tube is running all WB traffic, you'd have a left-hand off ramp to Water.  If it's running all EB, you'd have a right-hand merge from Water.  Either way, Water St. stays fully open and the existing interchange just adds a single ramp.

Well for what its worth, there have been talks about tearing the Water Street interchange down either partially or fully.

[roadwarrior]

I live in the Mobile area and love the idea of a second tunnel. I don't know why they haven't discussed a tunnel. The only reason I can think of that they haven't discussed it is because it prevents large trucks from driving through it, but they already have a truck route on Bay Bridge Road. I guess it is too much for trucks to take that path.

[Alex]

I live in the Mobile area and love the idea of a second tunnel. I don't know why they haven't discussed a tunnel. The only reason I can think of that they haven't discussed it is because it prevents large trucks from driving through it, but they already have a truck route on Bay Bridge Road. I guess it is too much for trucks to take that path.

The major prohibitive factor is cost. Not only do you have the cost of the tubes, but constructing another approach, because widening the existing one is impractical due to Fort Conde above. FWIW, the adjacent ship builders (Bender, etc.) prefer a tunnel over having a bridge levying a potential height restriction on craft that they can work on.

[Alex]

The last '57 spec Interstate 10 Alabama shield bit the dust this summer. From what I could discern, it may have happened on June 25. Anyway, this:



was replaced with:



Photo taken this afternoon (08/09/10).

[FLRoads]

You know what's gonna happen next...

[agentsteel53]

they'll take down that 59?

[Ian]

At least its replacement is state named. It could have been replaced with a neutered I-10 shield.

[The Premier]

That is one OLD sign!

How old is it anyway?

[agentsteel53]

How old is it anyway?

not quite ridiculously old as simply made of shitty materials.  Alabama was using that standard as late as 1972, and that sounds about right.

[Alex]

And in other changes, the set of flashers at Wulff and Snow Roads was upgraded (I knew it was only a matter of time...) to a fully signalized intersection. It also appears that the Grelot Road extension is close to being opened between Leroy Stevens Road and Airport Boulevard. The terminal road to Mobile Regional Airport will tie directly into the Grelot Road extension. Traffic signal changes are already nearing completion.

[froggie]

Which basically makes Grelot an alternative route for getting to the airport.  Except that Grelot doesn't get anywhere near as far as I-65.  It'd be nice if there was a way to more directly tie McDonald Rd into Dawes Rd.

[Alex]

Hurricane damage to I-10 bridges during Ivan and Katrina prompts officials to consider Bayway reinforcements
August 28, 2010

MOBILE, Ala. -- It happened to the east during Hurricane Ivan and to the west during Hurricane Katrina. A massive storm surge destroyed part of an interstate highway bridge, causing years of delays and requiring hundreds of millions of dollars in repairs.

In the five years since Katrina punched out the Interstate 10 bridge east of New Orleans and the U.S. 90 bridge connecting Ocean Springs to Biloxi, Alabama officials have done nothing to strengthen an 8-mile-long section of I-10 that crosses Mobile Bay.

Vince Calametti, division engineer for the Alabama Department of Transportation in Mobile, said the state will study the possibility of raising or reinforcing the Bayway as it eyes a new bridge over the Mobile River and widens the interstate from four to eight lanes.

First proposed more than a decade ago, that bridge project has been delayed time and again by opposition from a variety of groups, including some shipyards and historic development proponents.

On Friday, Calametti said he didn't want to wait any longer before looking at some ideas to make the Bayway more storm-surge resistant.

"That is something that we are going to start pushing immediately,"  he said. "It seems like the logical next step to take regardless of what happens with the Mobile River Bridge."

Nearly 62,000 cars traversed the Bayway every day in 2009, according to Alabama Department of Transportation data. If a storm were to knock out the bridge, those vehicles would likely choke the Causeway, which carried only about 15,000 cars a day last year.

In the doomsday scenario – both the Bayway and the Causeway knocked out of commission – it could take two hours to bypass the hole in an important east-west artery.

Mobile Mayor Sam Jones said ensuring the Bayway's hurricane survival should be a high priority for both the state and federal officials.

A Press-Register study conducted after Katrina found that, given a certain combination of factors, the Bayway could be vulnerable.

Measurements made on the bridge by Press-Register reporters indicated that the height of the deck girders could range from 16½ feet to 19 feet above mean sea level.

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers models indicate that a Category 3 storm hitting somewhere between Mobile Bay and Pascagoula could produce a storm surge at the Bayway of more than 14 feet.

It's likely that such a storm could bring gusts of 140 mph into the upper part of the bay. A wave generation program developed by the University of South Alabama suggests that it's reasonable to expect such conditions could produce individual wave heights in Mobile Bay reaching 8 feet to 12 feet above the surge.

So the underside of the Bayway's road deck would hover just a few feet above the surge, and could be slammed by waves reaching 22 feet to 26 feet above sea level.

"We're going to see more hurricanes, and they're going to be big,"  said Scott Douglass, a professor at the University of South Alabama's civil engineering department who has done extensive research into hurricane damage to other coastal bridges.

"It's not a matter of if,"  he said, "it's a matter of when."

The best way to ensure a bridge survives a hurricane is to build it high enough that the waves can't reach it, he said.

But raising existing structures can be costly, and he said there are less-expensive Band-Aids. They include strengthening the connections that knit the bridge together or reshaping the southern edge of the bridge to give it a more streamlined, wave-resistant design.

Calametti said a decision about raising the Bayway will come down to a cost-benefit analysis – is the possibility of destruction significant enough to spend the money it will take to raise it?

If the answer is yes, the state would likely build four new lanes at a higher level then divert traffic there while workers raise the existing lanes.

[codyg1985]

How would they raise the bridge bents? Would they just build on top of the existing ones? It would still require additional pilings due to the additional weight of the materials needed to makr it taller.