A blog dedicated to supporting the I-49 Connector freeway project in Lafayette, Louisiana. The views expressed here are solely those of the writers and contributors, and do not reflect anyone employed by Lafayette Connector Partners, Inc., LADOTD, Lafayette Consolidated Government, or any other entity of government or business. All official information on this project can be located at the LCP/LADOTD's official Lafayette Connector website (http://www.lafayetteconnector.com).
The LADOTD’s I-49 Connector CSS Executive Committee just concluded their meeting; and they finalized their decision on which concept design for the Connector freeway would advance into the Tier III analysis and Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (SEIS) study. Only the Series 4 Elevated options will now advance forward, and the Series 6 Semi-Depressed/Covered options have been officially eliminated.
This reflected the most recent comments by Transportation Secretary Shawn Wilson that the entire Conceptual Design/CSS/SEIS process had gotten too bogged down, and that it would be easier to proceed if one concept was agreed to. It also reflected LADOTD’s historical bias towards the Elevated option as the least expensive and most direct alternative for the Connector freeway.
However, local officials with Lafayette Consolidated Government, in particular the Evangeline Thruway Redevelopment Team (ETRT), had been pushing for more time to develop and analyze the Series 6 SD/C option as an alternative to Series 4. There was also concerns that many of the desired amenities that the local communities wanted to mitigate the footprint of an elevated Connector — such as a “signature bridge” landmark, an expanded greenspacing of the corridor, provisions for pedestrian walkways and bikeways, and greater connectivity between the neighborhoods that would be affected by the project — would not be funded by the state but passed on to LCG, risking the prospect of a cookie-cutter freeway traversing the heart of Lafayette.
Apparently, those concerns were overturned by the need to quickly finish the study in time to fight for limited funding.
My feelings on this are mixed here.
I’ve been all along a strong supporter of the Connector freeway as it stands, and it is apparent that the Elevated option is the most cost-effective and least disruptive alternative. I still would prefer this to any bypass of Lafayette (like the Teche Ridge Bypass further east).
However, LADOTD needs to be made aware that the implication of jamming a bare-bones elevated highway through Lafayette was how all the previous Connector efforts failed in a hail of public opposition. The ETRT’s Evangeline Corridor Initiative and the efforts of the local governmental groups were legitimate means of attempting to ease the impact of the project’s massive footprint; and their efforts were essentially summarily dismissed by LADOTD in a classic turf battle.
It remains to be seen if the final design concepts the consultants approve will include full funding and implementation of the ETRT’s design concepts. The implication of LADOTD “not caring” about the concerns of Lafayette, however, just got a major boost in justification…and that can’t be good. Especially if many jaded activists defect over to the Sierra Club/Teche Ridge Bypass lobby to fight against the project in its entirity.
The path to completing the Connector freeway just got that much more turbulent.
Last night (Wednesday), the first of three meetings of the I-49 Lafayette Connector CSS committees took place. Originally, the idea for the Community Work Group’s meeting was to finalize the alternatives that would go into the final Tier III analysis for selecting the preferred alternatives that would go into the preliminary engineering and Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (SEIS) process.
That’s not the way it quite turned out, however.
What was supposed to be a summary of the Tier II process broken up into sub groups was transformed into a impromptu session where the entire CWG committee took control of the meeting from the Stantec consultants and rehashed some concerns they had over the process and the future of the Connector freeway design and construction timetable.
Essentially, the CWG, mostly made up of representatives from Lafayette Consolidated Government (LCG) and some community leaders, took major exception to LADOTD and the Lafayette Connector Partners (the consulting group paid by LADOTD to shepherd the Conceptual Design and SEIS processes) for what they said were unanswered concerns about the designs that were being pushed to Tier III.
The main objection they had was to the recent decision by LADOTD Secretary Shawn Wilson to only allow one concept design out of the two studied (the Series 4 Elevated and the Series 6 Partially Depressed/Covered) to be retained for the Tier III and SEIS processes. The fear was that the Elevated design that was favored by Wilson and the LADOTD would not include amenities sought after by LCG to mitigate and soften the huge impact the Connector would have on the footprint of the city. Also, they were convinced that the Depressed/Covered design of Series 6 had not been given a fair vetting; in particular, the design approach that was put forth by the Evangeline Thruway Redevelopment Team (ETRT) through its Evangeline Corridor Initiative (ECI) Charette Meeting process. The design for the “Cut-and-Cover” alternative proposed by LADOTD was fundamentally different from what the ECI had proposed in its Charette process.
The other major concern was that of cost-sharing for the amenities sought by LCG and the ETRT. LADOTD to date has been a bit distant about negotiating the terms of what they would be willing to pay for regarding construction. That has jolted LCG because many of the desired additions that they want for mitigating the Connector’s impact — including a “signature bridge”, provisions for bicycle and pedestrian paths, additional space for community development, and clean up of the “brownfield” site of the former Southern Pacific Railroad rail yard site from possible toxic waste contamination — would not be paid for out of Federal/State construction funds, but out of local funds that might be out of their reach.
This email letter from LCG Planning Director Carlee Alm-LaBar to LADOTD Connector Project Chief Engineer Tim Nickel (released by the Lafayette Independent) is an encapsulation of all the concerns of the locals to what they perceive as LADOTD rushing the process to push the Elevated option ahead of any true vetting of all the analysis. Ms. Alm-LaBar is also a member of the Connector Executive Committee, as well as on the ETRT. (Reposted by me via Scribd.com; scroll to bottom for Fair Use notice.)
The meeting process continued today (Thursday) with the Technical Advisory Committee having met this morning. Tomorrow evening, the Executive Committee is scheduled to meet, whereupon it is expected that they will make their final decision on which design concepts would move on to Tier III and the SEIS. The CWG did vote by majority to recommend both Series 4 and Series 6 be advanced, in defiance to the prevailing notion by Wilson that only Series 4 would be pushed due to time and expense.
As always, I will update this as events warrant.
[Fair Use Notice: The email by Carlee Alm-LeBar was originally linked in the article posted at the Lafayette Independent. Since it is already linked as a public document, I am invoking the Fair Use-Public Domain protocol in reposting the email as a public document. If there is any objection from either the Independent or Ms. Lebar or any official of LCG, I will retract the document and link only to the article.]
UPDATE (3-31-2017):
Well, it looks like the CWG revolt may actually yield some results.
Today, the Lafayette Advertiser quoted LCG Mayor-President Joel Robideaux saying that there was a chance that the Connector Executive Committee, which is scheduled to meet later this afternoon, could delay the decision to reduce down the choice of design concepts down to one (the implication being that only the Elevated option would be retained for the Tier III and SEIS processes). This would possibly allow the Depressed/Covered option more time for vetting and analysis, or even get it included into the advanced studies prior to a final decision on which concept alternatives would be selected as the preferred alternatives.
My apologies to you all for it being so long for an update to this blog; but life happens, as it is. (Until it isn’t.)
Things are beginning to happen right now with the I-49 Lafayette Connector freeway project that will have major ramifications down the road for the Conceptual Study and Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (SEIS) processes now ongoing. Here’s what has happened since we last met.
On Friday, March 10th, the Executive Committee for the consultant group Lafayette Connector Partners, who has been contracted by LADOTD and FHWA to oversee the Conceptual Design and SEIS processes, held an impromptu meeting after nearly two months of inaction. The stated purpose was to provide an update on the process ongoing; but it ultimately created some degree of fireworks for some changes in the process that were made.
For those not quite in the know: the Connector Conceptual Design Study process utilizes a three committee approach for analysis and decision making. The Community Work Group (CWG) is responsible for hashing out ideas for specific design features for the freeway project; the Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) provides technical support through detailed studies; and the Executive Committee (EC) makes final decisions based on the input and analysis of the other two groups. The EC includes the major leads for all the governmental entities involved in the project, including Transportation Secretary Shawn Wilson (who also just so happens to be a Lafayette native, a graduate of what was then USL (now ULL) who worked engineering on the Connector project during the initial stages); LADOTD Lead Engineer Tim Nickel; and Lafayette City-Parish President Joel Robideaux.
In addition, because of the fact that the Record of Decision approving the current Connector alignment is over 10 years old, a reevaluation of the approved Selected Alignment had to be done to update potential impacts to the community. In response to feedback from the locals who didn’t like what the 2003 ROD Selected Alternative offered them, the process was altered to allow for some major design alterations and modifications; and to offer new design alternatives. Hence, a Supplemental EIS was also called upon to reflect and analyze the modifications to the 2003 Selected Alternative, and to select a modified design alternative to proceed further.
At this point, the studies are nearing the conclusion of the Tier II analysis for both the design alternative concepts and the specific design modifications originally developed and analyzed during the Tier I process.
Thus far, the main focus has been on vetting and analyzing the proposed concepts for the core segment of the Connector freeway between Pinhook Road and the crossing of the Louisiana & Delta Railroad Breaux Bridge spur, that would pass through the heart of Lafayette along the Evangeline Thruway. What started out as 19 Conceptual Design Alternatives utilizing five concepts at the start of Tier I has now been reduced to 4 conceptual alternatives utilizing two “series” of design concepts. Two alternatives reflect the “Series 4” concept of an continuously elevated mainline freeway; while the other two reflect the “Series 6” concept of a freeway mainline partially depressed 10 feet with cross streets passing over the freeway on embankment.
Original Selected Alternative from 2003 EIS/ROD, used as a control for the other alternatives in this CDS/SEIS process.Concept 4.1: Elevated Option with the Evangeline Thruway generally remaining in its present one-way couplet; indirect connections via ramp pairs to the Thruway.Concept 4-2: Elevated Option, but with Evangeline Thruway repurposed as a “Grand Boulevard” using current southbound ROW. (Northbound Thruway reverts to local street within grid.)Concept 6-1: Semi-Depressed Mainline with major crossing streets passing over freeway; Johnston Street overpass of freeway and BNSF/UP railroad mainline.Concept 6-2: Semi-Depressed Mainline, but with the freeway covered through a “cut-and-cover tunnel” design allowing cross streets to pass over the tunneled mainline via embankment.
The Concept 6 series was developed mostly in response to the stated criticism from the Evangeline Thruway Redevelopment Team (ETRT). This group was created by Lafayette Consolidated Government to develop and implement means to reduce and mitigate the footprint impact of the Connector freeway on the neighborhoods it would pass through and near. The ETRT, empowered by a federal Department of Transportation TIGER Grant, undertook detailed analysis and public feedback from locals on how to best integrate the Connector into the community, while retaining interneighborhood connectivity and better access for alternative transportation means than just vehicles (as in bicycling and walking). Based on their studies, they came up with two alternative concepts of their own for the Connector; utilizing the same “series” concept as the CDS Tier II alternatives.
ETRT/Evangeline Corridor Initiative conceptual design for Elevated Mainline freeway; note the special design for the Willow Street interchange which would allow for an Arc de Triumph-inspired circle plaza in the middle of the ROW as a gateway for Lafayette.A closer view of the ETRT/ECI Elevated Mainline crossing through Downtown/Freetown-Port Rico/McComb-Veazey. This includes the Evangeline Thruway converted into an “grand boulevard” on its southbound ROW.
ETRT/ECI conceptual design for Semi-Depressed and Covered Mainline, with the Evangeline Thruway mainline shifted to directly over and/or flanking the capped freeway, as compared to the Concept 6-2 alternative from LADOTD/LCP.A closer view of the ETRT/ECI SD/C Mainline alternative passing through Downtown/Freetown-Port Rico/McCovey-Veazey.
In addition to proposing design changes, the ETRT was also empowered by the Lafayette Consolidated Council to negotiate with the LADOTD and FHWA the terms of how the refinements in streetscaping and walkability/bikeability would be funded as part of constructing the Connector. FHWA and LADOTD policy allows for them to fund the bulk of the construction of amenities for mitigating impacts of the project; but many of the neighborhood amenities sought for by ETRT would probably have to be funded locally since that would be outside the immediate ROW impact.
That process has rubbed some nerves raw locally, since there is the fear that due to revenue pressures, LADOTD would attempt to push as much of the costs other than basic construction of the freeway onto LCG, but without considering all of the amenities that ETRT and LCG say they need to mitigate the impact of the project. In addition, there’s the perception going forth that the ETRT has been stonewalled at every turn by the Connector consultants, because the latter don’t consider their proposals to be legitimate and because the process has been slowed to nearly a crawl due to meeting their concerns. This has revived on its own local concerns that LADOTD is deliberately stoning ETRT in order to impose their desired Elevated Option without giving the ECI Covered Option a fair vetting.
As previously mentioned here, those frayed nerves have gone public previously, like in the last CWG meeting in December, when project chief engineer Tim Nickel got so frustrated with the questions that was thrown at him by local reps that he abruptly concluded the meeting. The ETRT responded with an official letter stating their concerns about how the process was being run; that led to the LCP and DOTD posting a detailed rebuttal response at their official Connector website (reposted below, via Scribd.com).
The ETRT responded that the LADOTD response wasn’t quite adequate enough; so they plan on airing their grievances directly to the Lafayette Consolidated Council, which does have the power under the process to approve or reject any design changes or call for negotiating all terms of joint use agreements.
This brings us to the last Executive Committee meeting of March 10th, where some changes in the process of developing and approving the ultimate design of the Connector were announced.
The original intent was to have at least 2 design concepts make it to the final Tier III analysis series by now, with a final alternative encompassing the entire Connector corridor selected and approved by July for the more detailed SEIS process. The assumption was that one Elevated and one Semi-Depressed alternative would be passed on to Tier III; although before this month LADOTD was being quite coy and indirect over whether they would allow the Semi-Depressed alternative through.
With this meeting, though, it seems like the coyness is now disappearing; Secretary Wilson announced there that only one concept series would now be advanced into the Tier III studies, citing the need to complete the now severely backlogged studies in time to produce the Draft SEIS by the end of this summer. The public meeting and CSS committee meetings that had been originally scheduled to introduce the “hybrid proposals” was also put off until at least April; only after which “a consensus” would be reached by the Executive Committee on which design concept would go forward. It was also announced that the LCG would not be allowed any official input until the final conceptual alternative was given by LADOTD and the CSS committees. The full handout of the presentation given at the March 10th meeting is posted below, along with a screenshot of the newly revised process schedule.
To further make the point across, the LCP added this Alternative Matrix where they give the official Tier II analysis of the four Conceptual Alternatives (along with the original Concept 1A consisting of the 2003 EIS/ROD Alternative). Green is very good, red is very bad.
Matrix of Tier II Technical Analysis for the conceptual alternatives for the Connector freeway.
So…it’s very likely that Concepts 4-1 and 4-2 will be the finalists for the ultimate design of the Connector freeway through downtown Lafayette, and the Depressed/Semi-Depressed options will go into history as great ideas that ultimately fell short because they were too expensive and disruptive.
The next steps will also probably be starting negotiations for the inclusion of various design amenities sought for by the ETRT and LCG, such as a “signature bridge” design for downtown, adding pedestrian and bikeway and streetscaping to beautify the corridor, fighting for the North Gateway including the circle design interchange at Willow Street, and resolving the issue of the potential contamination at the old Southern Pacific rail yard property.
And all this before residents of the Sterling Grove Historical District and the Greater Lafayette Sierra Club marshal their forces for the inevitable lawsuit to stop the project in its entirity and divert it through their preferred Teche Ridge Bypass east of Lafayette through St. Martin Parish or the Lafayette Regional Expressway proposed toll loop around western and southern Lafayette Parish.
Another major development is that the proponents of the Connector freeway are beginning to develop a public relations front to counter what’s sure to be heated and fiery opposition from the Sierra Club/”Y-49″/Teche Ridge contingent.
The “Connect Lafayette Coalition” has recently created a social media campaign via their official website (http://www.connectlafayette.com) and via Twitter and Facebook, to promote the positives of the Connector and rebuke the arguments of the Teche Ridge lobby. On January 22nd, the group held their first public press conference, which featured a passionate speech by LADOTD Secretary Wilson where he highlighted his own personal history of developing the project. The video of his speech is below.
