[Sunny]

What about the other person house and land it may take?

I don't think that matters. Most peoples attitude on the loop is "Not my property, not my problem...."

[mudbug]

Scotty,

You are right about this loop is all about MONEY. They are not looking at any other options. They are wanting this because of econmic development so they can make alot of money to put in (their) pockets.

Who is "they" that is going to line their pockets? Property owners that live near the loop corridor whose property value will skyrocket when the loop opens in 10 years? Or is it the people living in the area whose commute will be shorter and get to keep the extra gas money in their pocket? Or is it the people who will have new jobs with the economic development, getting careers and not just living off welfare or moving out of state or the region to get a job?

Any other options like some have suggested are not feasible with the financing sources that they have found (using federal highway money and bonding against future toll money).

Discussions like this help the loop, but I think claiming it is all about money is rather lame considering noone is making money off of the loop...

[Scotty]

I don't consider it lame to think that this project is being pushed for money reasons. I'm not naive enough to belive for one second that no one is making money off of this loop. Can anyone tell me where we can find the list of private investors willing to fund this project? Investigating some individuals currently listed as loop comittee members and stakeholders appear to suggest some sort of tie to real estate invetments. Could this tie into the loop? If there were such a list of investers, you would indeed see who stands to make good return on their money.

Property values will rise with or without the loop. Unless employers relocate their businesses, how will commutes be shorter? And don't think the loop will help you keep extra gas money in your pocket. Gas prices aren't going down anytime soon, if ever. Also, the loop won't cure cancer either.

[mudbug]

I don't consider it lame to think that this project is being pushed for money reasons. I'm not naive enough to belive for one second that no one is making money off of this loop. Can anyone tell me where we can find the list of private investors willing to fund this project? Investigating some individuals currently listed as loop comittee members and stakeholders appear to suggest some sort of tie to real estate invetments. Could this tie into the loop? If there were such a list of investers, you would indeed see who stands to make good return on their money.

Property values will rise with or without the loop. Unless employers relocate their businesses, how will commutes be shorter? And don't think the loop will help you keep extra gas money in your pocket. Gas prices aren't going down anytime soon, if ever. Also, the loop won't cure cancer either.

You are a stakeholder. I am a stakeholder. The investment firms that will most likely finance this may be large firms outside the state and outside the country. California, for example, did something similar to this and guaranteed some Japanese firm (I believe) all the revenue for X number of years for building, maintaining, and placing the toll on a road alongside the interstate in oder to alieve congestion (it was through a mountain pass, so there was no other place to put it). After 8 or so years, CALTRANS bought back the toll road because it was so popular and paid for itself in less than a decade. Those will be the type of investors that are drawn to this level of project, not sleazy politicians and other unsavory people trying to scam the public.

Gas prices might not go down, but more people may take the loop if the drive is 10 miles longer, but the speed limit is 70 and there's no traffic, as opposed to sitting on I-10 for a half hour in bumper to bumper traffic. If you want an example of this, look to Orlando. When I spent a year interning at DIsney for Business Management in 1997, I could take the interstate 4 to downtown in an hour and sit in traffic, or I could pay $2.50 and take the Oceola Parkway to the Beeline Expressway to get to downtown in about 20 minutes. It cost about the same in money, considering gas, but I saved 40 minutes of stressful traffic. I believe that the loop will have the same effect.

I don't expect everyone will like the idea, I'm just asking to keep an open mind. I'm sure the loop won't kill cancer, but it may be one of many steps to help the traffic situation in Baton Rouge.

[Scotty]

I do not have an interest or share in the loop. I will not realize a monetery gain from the loop. So I am not a stakeholder. I am, however, someone who believes that people have a right to dispose of their own property as they see fit. On the occasion where a property owner is asked to give up some/all of their property, I would expect all options to be truely considered. I don't believe that to be the case here. I believe their are other options and road improvements that may work. I am keeping an open mind about this, by listening to ALL ideas. I consider it close-minded to hang your hat on the fantasy that the loop is the absolute solution to everything.

My job has also required me to travel around southern Florida. I've used the toll roads you mention, as well as others. The difference between those toll roads and this one, is that Florida was pro-active. They utilized more sparsely populated property, such as marshes and orange groves.

Your commute won't be shorter and you won't save extra gas money. You may save some time.

[mudbug]

You will save gas. Sitting in traffic eats a lot more gas than driving 55-60 mph when you have the same distance to go.

The florida tolls were very pro-active and I think the loop here is being pro-active, considering how far behind we are. To build a loop now that only has sparsely populated areas, the loop would start at lafayette and end near covington, making it useless for BR. But what the engineers are trying to do now is find the area most effective with the least amount of residents. But somehow, there will be displacements and the government will have to buy up land. But to do it smart and respectful is the key.

Without double decking the interstate (which is prohibitively expensive) what can be done to shorten commuter times, expand our infrastructure, and do it with revenue streams that we can obtain (with a $14 Billion backlog of DOTD projects, new roads aren't going to financed by them)?

I'm not saying the loop is the end-all, be-all. But it is one piece of a puzzle, and I am open to other suggestions. Just one, in my opinion, just seems to fit us best right now. Light rail is my favorite, but the infrastructure cost is high and a scarcity of private (or public) financiers make this unlikely. Besides, CATS is underused and a mass transit line would only have meek ridership. Widening the interstate is only a stop-gap method, causing more snareups.

oh, and by the way, a shareholder or stakeholder is a resident of the 5-parish area. Your opinions count and that is why they hold public input meetings. If you weren't, they would be buying land right now.

[Jeremiahwabf]

So are you now in support of the loop as a whole?

I have mixed feelings. I'm not in favor of it taking people's property, particularly in this tough time. On the other hand, if it goes as proposed on the NE side of the corridor, it would make a quick and direct way to get to the airport for those of us out here. I still think that making I-12 a 3-lane (including the Amite River bridge) from Livingston/Frost all the way to Baton Rouge and fixing the I-10 bridge at the pinch points to open up 3-lanes would make more sense as a first fix.

[Scotty]

I feel part of the problem is the lack of utilizing the surface streets. Had these streets been maintained and/or expanded over the years, people would've utilized them more, thereby reducing the traffic on the interstate. Also, it wouldn't cost so much to expand later on becuase you'd have something to work with. Improving the surface streets, and as Jeremiah stated, three lane the interstate to Livingston are starters.

As far as revenue streams that we can obtain, please do not rely on the majority of the cost of the loop to be completely funded by private investers. They may get it started, but once it's underway and the state has no more leverage, don't be surprised when you and I, as well as other tax payers, are required to complete the project with our money. And, so the state has squandered it's revenue and has done a poor job of managing it's money, property owners should be forced to clean up the mess? It would seem that our elected officials have let us down, again.

I'm not sure you know what it means to be a stakeholder. I'm not putting any money up to construct it. What royalties will I receive from the profits of it? How will I gain financially? I agree I'm a resident of the 5 parish area, but beyond that, there's nothing else. Sure I have an opinion, but that's all it amounts to. The parish presidents have made up their mind and they are for it. So unless your opinion is to build it right away, then you are cast aside.

I feel part of the problem is the lack of utilizing the surface streets. Had these streets been maintained and/or expanded over the years, people would've utilized them more, thereby reducing the traffic on the interstate. Also, it wouldn't cost so much to expand later on becuase you'd have something to work with. Improving the surface streets, and as Jeremiah stated, three lane the interstate to Livingston are starters.

That's a very good point, Scotty. It appears that most of the east/west surface streets are just about up to par. Old Hammond Hwy is a great alternate route to the downtown area. There are only a couple miles left of that hwy that aren't 4 laned. I would like to see Florida Blvd upgraded (somehow) to better manage the traffic that passes down this hwy. I think a couple of overpasses on Florida would be a good addition. You could put the 'exits' a few blocks before the intersection and have traffic exit to the existing service road to navigate to Sherwood Forest. Larger cities like Houston and Dallas utilize their service roads much better than we do. An overpass combined with closing most of the smaller intersections on Florida would cut travel time in half from Denham Springs to downtown Baton Rouge. Instead of these small intersections with traffic lights, make them short 'entrance' ramps east and west. Like I said before, the service roads are already there. For traffic wanting to turn left, they would have to enter going the opposite direction and utilize U turns to get going in the right direction. Simple things like this would improve the flow on Florida Blvd and make it more enticing to local interstate travellers, which should reduce the load on the interstate.