AARoads Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

New rules for political content in signatures and user profiles. See this thread for details.

Author Topic: I-10 expansion between San Antonio and Houston  (Read 10262 times)

cenlaroads

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 64
  • Last Login: September 18, 2020, 10:52:30 PM
Re: I-10 expansion between San Antonio and Houston
« Reply #50 on: October 24, 2019, 08:02:04 PM »


I agree. Houston to Lake Charles should be 3×3 and again from Lafayette to Baton Rouge. Traffic on that section is very heavy and frequently backs up in the afternoon at the Plaquemine exit and on the bridge leading into Baton Rouge.

Problem is I can see the section between Winnie and Beaumont as being particularly expensive, since there would be a lot local demand to raise it on pylons given the twice-a-year flooding that shuts down the highway.

The section from Winnie to Beaumont is already being widened as we speak.  2 sections are under construction, and the others are scheduled to be let within the next few years.
Logged

sparker

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 7243
  • Location: Bay Area, CA
  • Last Login: Today at 03:11:46 AM
Re: I-10 expansion between San Antonio and Houston
« Reply #51 on: October 24, 2019, 08:56:06 PM »

Quote from: dariusb
I agree. Houston to Lake Charles should be 3×3 and again from Lafayette to Baton Rouge. Traffic on that section is very heavy and frequently backs up in the afternoon at the Plaquemine exit and on the bridge leading into Baton Rouge.

I agree I-10 should be expanded through there. It pretty much should be at least a 3x3 facility from the Texas border to Mississippi. But replacing all those long bridges over swamp land is going to be seriously expensive. It's going to have to happen eventually though.

Why does it have to be replaced, just widened. The bones are still good.

If widening/expansion occurs on I-10 between Lafayette and Baton Rouge, what will likely be the methodology used, particularly on the Atchafayala Swamp viaduct, is to "bridge" the space between the parallel spans and install a K-rail for directional separation, with the additional lane per direction in the center (and likely the standard minimum 4-foot inner shoulders).   Sinking additional support bents into the swamp would almost certainly not be the first choice of LDOT engineers (or their accountants, for that matter!).  Either option would be costly and require either complete or at least single lane closures at some point.  Nevertheless, this is something that will have to be considered at one point -- unless I-49 South is completed, which may have the effect of diverting some traffic away from I-10, particularly if signage proclaiming it as an alternative to and from N.O. is deployed.   
Logged

Bobby5280

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2207
  • Location: Lawton, OK
  • Last Login: Today at 01:27:19 AM
Re: I-10 expansion between San Antonio and Houston
« Reply #52 on: October 25, 2019, 03:57:40 PM »

The median between the two exising I-10 bridges over the Atchafalaya Swamp is approximately 125' wide. The same design is used on the other really long I-10 and I-55 bridges over the Maurepas Swamp farther East between New Orleans and Baton Rouge.

The strip of space between the two bridges is wide enough that it functions as a boat channel. But it's probably not wide enough to squeeze in a new 6-lane bridge (particularly one that complies modern highway geometry and bridge regulations) while leaving the two existing bridges unaffected.

My guess is when they finally start replacing these aging bridge structures they'll shift traffic to just one bridge, demolish and replace the other span, shift traffic to the newly completed span and replace the other old span. I wouldn't expect them to start replacing those aging bridges until the I-49 South project to New Orleans is completed. That would provide one alternate route to ease the traffic load on I-10. Once the projects get going the process will be aggravating and maybe involve non-freeway detours.
Logged

sprjus4

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 4949
  • Location: Hampton Roads, VA
  • Last Login: Today at 09:26:46 AM
Re: I-10 expansion between San Antonio and Houston
« Reply #53 on: October 25, 2019, 04:54:28 PM »

The median between the two exising I-10 bridges over the Atchafalaya Swamp is approximately 125' wide. The same design is used on the other really long I-10 and I-55 bridges over the Maurepas Swamp farther East between New Orleans and Baton Rouge.

The strip of space between the two bridges is wide enough that it functions as a boat channel. But it's probably not wide enough to squeeze in a new 6-lane bridge (particularly one that complies modern highway geometry and bridge regulations) while leaving the two existing bridges unaffected.

My guess is when they finally start replacing these aging bridge structures they'll shift traffic to just one bridge, demolish and replace the other span, shift traffic to the newly completed span and replace the other old span. I wouldn't expect them to start replacing those aging bridges until the I-49 South project to New Orleans is completed. That would provide one alternate route to ease the traffic load on I-10. Once the projects get going the process will be aggravating and maybe involve non-freeway detours.
With 125 ft, you could technically squeeze a 6-lane viaduct in there.

Three 12 foot lanes each way, a 12 foot right and left shoulder, separated by a 4 foot median barrier.

124 foot wide bridge.
Logged

sparker

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 7243
  • Location: Bay Area, CA
  • Last Login: Today at 03:11:46 AM
Re: I-10 expansion between San Antonio and Houston
« Reply #54 on: October 25, 2019, 06:01:08 PM »

The median between the two exising I-10 bridges over the Atchafalaya Swamp is approximately 125' wide. The same design is used on the other really long I-10 and I-55 bridges over the Maurepas Swamp farther East between New Orleans and Baton Rouge.

The strip of space between the two bridges is wide enough that it functions as a boat channel. But it's probably not wide enough to squeeze in a new 6-lane bridge (particularly one that complies modern highway geometry and bridge regulations) while leaving the two existing bridges unaffected.

My guess is when they finally start replacing these aging bridge structures they'll shift traffic to just one bridge, demolish and replace the other span, shift traffic to the newly completed span and replace the other old span. I wouldn't expect them to start replacing those aging bridges until the I-49 South project to New Orleans is completed. That would provide one alternate route to ease the traffic load on I-10. Once the projects get going the process will be aggravating and maybe involve non-freeway detours.
With 125 ft, you could technically squeeze a 6-lane viaduct in there.

Three 12 foot lanes each way, a 12 foot right and left shoulder, separated by a 4 foot median barrier.

124 foot wide bridge.

Plus another 8-10 feet for railings (either half-K-rails or an actual railing structure); if the left shoulder were shrunk to the Interstate minimum of 4 feet, and the side rails were 4 feet each (sticking with the 12' lanes + outer shoulder), the overall width would be 116 feet.  With that margin, the inner/left shoulder could be brought out to 8 feet (enough to accommodate most automobiles if not trucks) to achieve the 124' width that could -- technically -- be accommodated in the space between the present I-10 bridges. 

That being said, Bobby is probably correct as to the replacement method -- but with a potential "twist" -- building one new single-direction bridge (68' wide: eventually 3 12' lanes + double 12' shoulders + double 4" siderails) in between the two existing bridges, but substantially closer to one than the other.  The old bridge closest to the new one would be kept intact for one direction, while the other is relocated on the new bridge.  At that point the more distant bridge is torn down and replaced with a new structure identical to the first.  When that's opened, the remaining old bridge would be removed.  The choice of precise location of the new bridges would be left to LDOT's engineers.  And whether the 2nd new bridge would be located within the footprint of the first of the old ones to go or farther afield to maintain the 125' median would also have to be determined by the engineers.  With the traffic volume on I-10 across the swamp, LDOT may not wish to squeeze both directions into one of the existing structures; the method described above would avoid that issue.   
Logged

sprjus4

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 4949
  • Location: Hampton Roads, VA
  • Last Login: Today at 09:26:46 AM
Re: I-10 expansion between San Antonio and Houston
« Reply #56 on: October 25, 2019, 07:02:37 PM »

I don't know anything about bridge widening/replacement, but one factor to be taken into account is that the two viaducts join to become a single span at two locations, (1) the Atchafalaya River:

https://www.google.com/maps/@30.3436708,-91.7178502,3a,75y,63.17h,69.76t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sxlb4imNKJnRQR35Zsh0GLw!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo0.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3Dxlb4imNKJnRQR35Zsh0GLw%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D264.9236%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i13312!8i6656

and (2) the Whiskey Bay Pilot Channel:

https://www.google.com/maps/@30.365312,-91.6380252,3a,75y,84.37h,55.93t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sQNysUBrOn7c-gVq9dT3Cwg!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo2.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DQNysUBrOn7c-gVq9dT3Cwg%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D254.27167%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i13312!8i6656
As sparker noted, realistically if any bridge replacement were to occur, it would be built in sections and phased out over a few years. These sections would be tied seamlessly into a new viaduct, as for construction likely would build part of it, shift traffic, demolish part of the existing, build the rest, shift traffic. Up where I'm at in Hampton Roads, they used a lot of that on older 60s bridges that are being replaced on the I-64 Widening projects heading west.
Logged

Anthony_JK

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1387
  • Age: 56
  • Location: Lafayette, Louisiana
  • Last Login: Today at 08:00:35 AM
Re: I-10 expansion between San Antonio and Houston
« Reply #57 on: October 25, 2019, 09:00:23 PM »

The median between the two exising I-10 bridges over the Atchafalaya Swamp is approximately 125' wide. The same design is used on the other really long I-10 and I-55 bridges over the Maurepas Swamp farther East between New Orleans and Baton Rouge.

The strip of space between the two bridges is wide enough that it functions as a boat channel. But it's probably not wide enough to squeeze in a new 6-lane bridge (particularly one that complies modern highway geometry and bridge regulations) while leaving the two existing bridges unaffected.

My guess is when they finally start replacing these aging bridge structures they'll shift traffic to just one bridge, demolish and replace the other span, shift traffic to the newly completed span and replace the other old span. I wouldn't expect them to start replacing those aging bridges until the I-49 South project to New Orleans is completed. That would provide one alternate route to ease the traffic load on I-10. Once the projects get going the process will be aggravating and maybe involve non-freeway detours.
With 125 ft, you could technically squeeze a 6-lane viaduct in there.

Three 12 foot lanes each way, a 12 foot right and left shoulder, separated by a 4 foot median barrier.

124 foot wide bridge.

Except, the idea here is NOT to build a new 6-lane viaduct in between the current ROW, but simply add a third lane and appropriate shoulder. You only need an additional 12 ft. lane in either direction and a 10' shoulder, plus an occasional "layby" at regular intervals for accident clearance or breakdowns.
Logged

Anthony_JK

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1387
  • Age: 56
  • Location: Lafayette, Louisiana
  • Last Login: Today at 08:00:35 AM
Re: I-10 expansion between San Antonio and Houston
« Reply #58 on: October 25, 2019, 09:06:21 PM »

I don't know anything about bridge widening/replacement, but one factor to be taken into account is that the two viaducts join to become a single span at two locations, (1) the Atchafalaya River:

https://www.google.com/maps/@30.3436708,-91.7178502,3a,75y,63.17h,69.76t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sxlb4imNKJnRQR35Zsh0GLw!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo0.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3Dxlb4imNKJnRQR35Zsh0GLw%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D264.9236%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i13312!8i6656

and (2) the Whiskey Bay Pilot Channel:

https://www.google.com/maps/@30.365312,-91.6380252,3a,75y,84.37h,55.93t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sQNysUBrOn7c-gVq9dT3Cwg!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo2.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DQNysUBrOn7c-gVq9dT3Cwg%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D254.27167%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i13312!8i6656

There are two ways to resolve that issue:

1) Make a transition so that the new lanes and shoulders are tacked on to the outside of the existing high-rises and transition smoothly to the expanded sections outside of those locations;

or 2) do as LADOTD did with the I-10 High Rise in NOLA and simply build the improved crossings in a new ROW and transition them back into the existing ROW.

Since the current Butte la Rose and Whiskey Bay crossings don't have shoulders, any improvement would help greatly.
Logged

sprjus4

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 4949
  • Location: Hampton Roads, VA
  • Last Login: Today at 09:26:46 AM
Re: I-10 expansion between San Antonio and Houston
« Reply #59 on: October 25, 2019, 09:26:01 PM »

The median between the two exising I-10 bridges over the Atchafalaya Swamp is approximately 125' wide. The same design is used on the other really long I-10 and I-55 bridges over the Maurepas Swamp farther East between New Orleans and Baton Rouge.

The strip of space between the two bridges is wide enough that it functions as a boat channel. But it's probably not wide enough to squeeze in a new 6-lane bridge (particularly one that complies modern highway geometry and bridge regulations) while leaving the two existing bridges unaffected.

My guess is when they finally start replacing these aging bridge structures they'll shift traffic to just one bridge, demolish and replace the other span, shift traffic to the newly completed span and replace the other old span. I wouldn't expect them to start replacing those aging bridges until the I-49 South project to New Orleans is completed. That would provide one alternate route to ease the traffic load on I-10. Once the projects get going the process will be aggravating and maybe involve non-freeway detours.
With 125 ft, you could technically squeeze a 6-lane viaduct in there.

Three 12 foot lanes each way, a 12 foot right and left shoulder, separated by a 4 foot median barrier.

124 foot wide bridge.

Except, the idea here is NOT to build a new 6-lane viaduct in between the current ROW, but simply add a third lane and appropriate shoulder. You only need an additional 12 ft. lane in either direction and a 10' shoulder, plus an occasional "layby" at regular intervals for accident clearance or breakdowns.
In theory that would work - but consider this. The 22 mile long bridges are nearing 50 years old. Considering any massive expansion is at least 10 years out, it’s a better bet to go ahead and replace the two viaducts with a new span entirely that would have a much longer life span, up to at least 100 years.

Here in Hampton Roads, a massive $3.8 billion project to widen the HRBT (Hampton Roads Bridge Tunnel) from 4 to 8 lanes begins next year, and the original concept was to retain the two 4-mile viaducts, one from the 50s and the other from the 70s, and simply build a new 4-lane viaduct next to them. Instead though, after considering how old they are, “sea level rise”, and other factors, they’ve decided to instead replace the whole thing with one brand-new higher 8-lane viaduct with a 100 year lifespan, and demolish the existing ones.
« Last Edit: October 25, 2019, 09:30:13 PM by sprjus4 »
Logged

Bobby5280

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2207
  • Location: Lawton, OK
  • Last Login: Today at 01:27:19 AM
Re: I-10 expansion between San Antonio and Houston
« Reply #60 on: October 26, 2019, 01:03:27 PM »

Quote from: sparker
That being said, Bobby is probably correct as to the replacement method -- but with a potential "twist" -- building one new single-direction bridge (68' wide: eventually 3 12' lanes + double 12' shoulders + double 4" siderails) in between the two existing bridges, but substantially closer to one than the other.  The old bridge closest to the new one would be kept intact for one direction, while the other is relocated on the new bridge.  At that point the more distant bridge is torn down and replaced with a new structure identical to the first.

That approach could work, but it would come at a cost of taking out the boat channels. There are boat ramps in between the bridges at Exit 121 and 127. Farther East near New Orleans the I-10 and I-55 bridges over the Maurepas Swamp have accommodations for boating and fishing. It would be controversial to build a new bridge structure through much of the middle of that channel.

Considering what it will cost to replace any of these existing bridges, building new structures only wide enough to add a third lane seems like not nearly enough of a benefit in return for all the cost and inconvenience that will occur when the bridges are replaced. I think the planners should consider building each replacement span 4 lanes wide.

Quote from: Anthony_JK
Except, the idea here is NOT to build a new 6-lane viaduct in between the current ROW, but simply add a third lane and appropriate shoulder. You only need an additional 12 ft. lane in either direction and a 10' shoulder, plus an occasional "layby" at regular intervals for accident clearance or breakdowns.
Quote from: sprjus4
In theory that would work - but consider this. The 22 mile long bridges are nearing 50 years old. Considering any massive expansion is at least 10 years out, it’s a better bet to go ahead and replace the two viaducts with a new span entirely that would have a much longer life span, up to at least 100 years

Exactly. The existing bridges are OLD. There is nothing visually attractive about these bridges to warrant saving them from demolition and replacement with entirely new structures built to modern standards.

Simply adding an additional lane onto aging bridges could open a big can of worms in terms of legal and regulatory red tape. These existing bridges do not comply with modern Interstate highway standards and modern highway bridge standards. Would a significant alteration to these bridges (adding a 3rd lane) require the entire structures to be brought up to code?

Very often it's just more simple to demolish the old, out of date bridge structure and replace it with a new bridge. Lately the trend with major Interstate highway bridge projects has been to build twin spans to increase capacity.
Logged

sprjus4

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 4949
  • Location: Hampton Roads, VA
  • Last Login: Today at 09:26:46 AM
Re: I-10 expansion between San Antonio and Houston
« Reply #61 on: October 26, 2019, 01:12:57 PM »

Lately the trend with major Interstate highway bridge projects has been to build twin spans to increase capacity.
Not necessarily, having one single 6-lane span would be adequate.

In a massive multi-billion dollar project like this, I'd say replace the existing spans with a single 6-lane span designed to easily be widened in the future to 8-lanes if warranted. It wouldn't be 6-lanes with wide shoulders, but rather a standard 6-lane cross section with the bridge structure able to easily accommodate a widening of the structure.
 
Logged

Beltway

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 6783
  • Roads to the Future

  • Location: Richmond, VA
  • Last Login: August 04, 2020, 05:54:39 PM
Re: I-10 expansion between San Antonio and Houston
« Reply #62 on: October 26, 2019, 11:39:58 PM »

That approach could work, but it would come at a cost of taking out the boat channels. There are boat ramps in between the bridges at Exit 121 and 127. Farther East near New Orleans the I-10 and I-55 bridges over the Maurepas Swamp have accommodations for boating and fishing. It would be controversial to build a new bridge structure through much of the middle of that channel.
I have been an occasional boater since youth.

How serious is this boat channel?  Does it serve private properties?  Does it provide connections between lakes and rivers?  Is it part of a system that connects to the Gulf?  Does it carry commercial traffic such as fishing vessels and barges?  Does it carry large volumes of pleasure craft?

If is a serious boat channel then there is no way that its users will not vigorously oppose anything that would compromise it.
Logged
http://www.roadstothefuture.com
http://www.capital-beltway.com

Baloney is a reserved word on the Internet
    (Robert Coté, 2002)

Bobby5280

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2207
  • Location: Lawton, OK
  • Last Login: Today at 01:27:19 AM
Re: I-10 expansion between San Antonio and Houston
« Reply #63 on: October 28, 2019, 11:45:34 AM »

The boat channels between I-10 and I-55 over the Maurepas Swamp close to New Orleans both have outlets to Lake Ponchartrain. On I-10 about 2.5 miles West of the LA-3188 exit at least 3 boat houses are built down there along the boat channel at the junction of an outlet going directly North to Lake Ponchartrain. These buildings can be reached only by boat.

Farther West going over the Atchafalaya Swamp two of the three channels between the I-10 bridges have permanent boat ramps for access to the channels. The one by the Atchafalaya Welcome Center (positioned within the I-10 exit with LA-3177) is a primary outlet to Lake Bigeaux and other parts of the swamp. The East channel is more isolated, but I've personally seen boats down in it on drives across that bridge.

I think if both existing bridges along I-10 and I-55 were to remain open while a first new bridge was built I would bet on the first new bridge being shifted outside the existing pair of bridges (and require a bit more clearing of trees and brush along the edge of the channel). Building in between may be a non-starter. Such an approach may be necessary anyway. For instance, the taller bridge going over the Atchafalaya River will require a new bridge (or pair of new bridges) to be built to the left or right of the existing bridge. Some of the exits will have to be rebuilt as well since those on/off ramp bridges are just as old.
Logged

Beltway

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 6783
  • Roads to the Future

  • Location: Richmond, VA
  • Last Login: August 04, 2020, 05:54:39 PM
Re: I-10 expansion between San Antonio and Houston
« Reply #64 on: October 28, 2019, 11:57:28 AM »

I think if both existing bridges along I-10 and I-55 were to remain open while a first new bridge was built I would bet on the first new bridge being shifted outside the existing pair of bridges (and require a bit more clearing of trees and brush along the edge of the channel).
The boat channel looks like it involved considerable dredging so that the construction barges could operate there, maybe as much as 5 or 6 feet of depth.

Building this pre-NEPA didn't encounter the kinds of environmental and permitting issues that would occur today, not to mention the amount of excavation that would be required to dredge a new or widened channel.

This may be a difficult project to figure out, given the limited clearances they would have to work with if they stay within the existing channel.

Have any EIS/location studies been conducted for widening these bridges?
Logged
http://www.roadstothefuture.com
http://www.capital-beltway.com

Baloney is a reserved word on the Internet
    (Robert Coté, 2002)

longhorn

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 346
  • Last Login: September 30, 2020, 10:35:55 PM
Re: I-10 expansion between San Antonio and Houston
« Reply #65 on: October 28, 2019, 11:59:56 AM »

I remember when the twin spans were built over the swamp. Everyone had to take 190 out of Baton Rouge until finished. When there is an accident on the bridge guess where traffic is rerouted? The 190 stretch from Lafayette to Baton Rouge on 190.

Though the spans are getting up in age, I just don't see Louisiana having the money to rebuild, so a simple addition of lane will be relatively cheap and do wanders for the immense traffic that stretch sees. Seeing how well the bridges have held up with no issues speaks to how well engineered and made it was.
 
Logged

Beltway

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 6783
  • Roads to the Future

  • Location: Richmond, VA
  • Last Login: August 04, 2020, 05:54:39 PM
Re: I-10 expansion between San Antonio and Houston
« Reply #66 on: October 28, 2019, 12:14:37 PM »

Though the spans are getting up in age, I just don't see Louisiana having the money to rebuild, so a simple addition of lane will be relatively cheap and do wanders for the immense traffic that stretch sees. Seeing how well the bridges have held up with no issues speaks to how well engineered and made it was.
The "Swamp Expressway" was one of the more notable projects in the early years of building the Interstate highway system.

That said, they are approaching 50 years old, well beyond the design life envisioned back then (most highway engineers didn't plan more than 20 years then), and if not complete replacement, they will soon need a major restoration on the order of complete superstructure replacement and major rehabilitation to the substructure.  That might be not much less costly than a full replacement.

The Atchafalaya Basin Bridge opened in 1973.  It is the 3rd longest bridge in the United States spanning a total of 96,095 feet or about 18.2 miles.  The Atchafalaya Basin Bridge holds the title of 2nd longest bridge on the U.S. interstate system and is the 14th longest in the world by total length.

It's almost inconceivable that it only took a little under 3 years to complete.  Construction started in 1971 and it opened to the public in '73.  At the time of it's opening, the Atchafalaya Basin Bridge was honored with the title, 'longest bridge in the world'.  It only has two exits.  One at Butte La Rose and the other for Whiskey Bay.  Latest data (2015) puts the average traffic count at 30,420 vehicles per day.

https://999ktdy.com/vintage-video-of-the-atchafalaya-basin-bridge-being-built-is-unbelievable-video/?utm_source=tsmclip&utm_medium=referral
 
« Last Edit: October 28, 2019, 12:19:35 PM by Beltway »
Logged
http://www.roadstothefuture.com
http://www.capital-beltway.com

Baloney is a reserved word on the Internet
    (Robert Coté, 2002)

sprjus4

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 4949
  • Location: Hampton Roads, VA
  • Last Login: Today at 09:26:46 AM
Re: I-10 expansion between San Antonio and Houston
« Reply #67 on: October 28, 2019, 04:40:07 PM »

Everyone had to take 190 out of Baton Rouge until finished. When there is an accident on the bridge guess where traffic is rerouted? The 190 stretch from Lafayette to Baton Rouge on 190.
I ended up having to take US-190 a couple of months ago heading east due to a major accident on the bridge that shut it down. It was at night, but there was still a significant amount of traffic but everybody was moving fast. The detour wasn't too bad, it's all divided 4-lane highway, and the speed limit is mostly 55 mph with 65 mph in some areas, although everybody was already doing 70+ mph. Going with flow, hit 80 mph in a couple of times. Not something I'd do if I was alone (probably 65 - 70 mph is the most I'd do if solo), but was in a group of cars all going the same speed. No major delays, only a couple of towns and traffic signals.
« Last Edit: October 28, 2019, 04:42:30 PM by sprjus4 »
Logged

MaxConcrete

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 642
  • Location: Houston, TX
  • Last Login: September 30, 2020, 11:03:33 PM
Re: I-10 expansion between San Antonio and Houston
« Reply #68 on: November 05, 2019, 07:17:08 PM »

Bids were opened today for the next section to be upgraded to 3x3, 7.6 miles from Sealy to the Austin/Colorado county line. (I don't know why the bid listing shows 13.75 miles, the plans state 7.642 miles, which is correct.) Lowest bid is $184.6 million, or $24.1 million per mile. It's nice to see that the low bid is 5.4% under estimate. Last month the aggregate bid total was 1.07% under estimate, so it looks like the recent inflationary surge has taken a pause.

http://www.dot.state.tx.us/insdtdot/orgchart/cmd/cserve/bidtab/11053001.htm

County:   AUSTIN   Let Date:   11/05/19
Type:   WIDEN FREEWAY   Seq No:   3001
Time:   0 X   Project ID:   NH 2020(115)
Highway:   IH 10   Contract #:   11193001
Length:   13.750   CCSJ:   0271-02-049
Limits:   
From:   COLORADO C/L   Check:   $100,000
To:   FM 3538   Misc Cost:   $744,400.00
Estimate   $195,127,131.22   % Over/Under   Company
Bidder 1   $184,551,690.06   -5.42%   WEBBER, LLC
Bidder 2   $192,205,823.26   -1.50%   JAMES CONSTRUCTION GROUP, L.L.C.
Bidder 3   $198,611,306.16   +1.79%   ZACHRY CONSTRUCTION CORPORATION
Bidder 4   $209,125,829.73   +7.17%   WILLIAMS BROTHERS CONSTRUCTION CO., INC.

Anthony_JK

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1387
  • Age: 56
  • Location: Lafayette, Louisiana
  • Last Login: Today at 08:00:35 AM
Re: I-10 expansion between San Antonio and Houston
« Reply #69 on: November 06, 2019, 02:32:29 AM »

I remember when the twin spans were built over the swamp. Everyone had to take 190 out of Baton Rouge until finished. When there is an accident on the bridge guess where traffic is rerouted? The 190 stretch from Lafayette to Baton Rouge on 190.

Though the spans are getting up in age, I just don't see Louisiana having the money to rebuild, so a simple addition of lane will be relatively cheap and do wanders for the immense traffic that stretch sees. Seeing how well the bridges have held up with no issues speaks to how well engineered and made it was.
 

Actually, the exact alternate detour route (going east) is I-49 North (exit 103B on I-10) to Opelousas, then US 190 east (exit 19A off I-49) to Lobdell just west of Port Allen, then LA 415 south to I-10. Just reverse it for westbound detour traffic.


Logged

MaxConcrete

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 642
  • Location: Houston, TX
  • Last Login: September 30, 2020, 11:03:33 PM
Re: I-10 expansion between San Antonio and Houston
« Reply #70 on: February 24, 2020, 07:50:48 PM »

TxDOT posted a solicitation for a consultant to prepare the plans for widening to 3x3 from Columbus to Schulenberg, about 20 miles.

The schematic is posted with the solicitation
http://ftp.dot.state.tx.us/pub/txdot/ppd/solicitations/4305/schematics.pdf

Observations:
* The main lane design is 100% per TxDOT's modern template: 3x3 with full interior and exterior shoulders, no median, center concrete barrier
* There is a strange diversion from the existing alignment about 1 mile east of US 90. The reason appears to be for smoothing the curve at this location. The diversion is about 1 mile long. Maybe that curve is accident-prone? This seems especially strange since the curve could have been smoothed on the north side, with much less right-of-way acquisition. Maybe the nearby railroad crossing was a design factor.
* Between CR 210 and CR 220, a forested area between the main lanes and frontage road is eliminated by relocating the frontage road to be alongside the main lanes. This eliminates the only location of natural foliage within the right-of-way on this section of IH 10.
« Last Edit: February 24, 2020, 08:09:37 PM by MaxConcrete »
Logged

thisdj78

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 173
  • Age: 42
  • Location: Texas
  • Last Login: September 27, 2020, 03:00:30 AM
Re: I-10 expansion between San Antonio and Houston
« Reply #71 on: February 24, 2020, 10:20:13 PM »

TxDOT posted a solicitation for a consultant to prepare the plans for widening to 3x3 from Columbus to Schulenberg, about 20 miles.

The schematic is posted with the solicitation
http://ftp.dot.state.tx.us/pub/txdot/ppd/solicitations/4305/schematics.pdf

Observations:
* The main lane design is 100% per TxDOT's modern template: 3x3 with full interior and exterior shoulders, no median, center concrete barrier
* There is a strange diversion from the existing alignment about 1 mile east of US 90. The reason appears to be for smoothing the curve at this location. The diversion is about 1 mile long. Maybe that curve is accident-prone? This seems especially strange since the curve could have been smoothed on the north side, with much less right-of-way acquisition. Maybe the nearby railroad crossing was a design factor.
* Between CR 210 and CR 220, a forested area between the main lanes and frontage road is eliminated by relocating the frontage road to be alongside the main lanes. This eliminates the only location of natural foliage within the right-of-way on this section of IH 10.

Are there bids for the Austin/Colorado County line to Columbus?
Logged

 


Opinions expressed here on belong solely to the poster and do not represent or reflect the opinions or beliefs of AARoads, its creators and/or associates.