Mr. Burnham

Totally agree. The new traffic that has come from more and more students having to get housing further from campus has made traffic here really intolerable. Parking is also a beotch, but it's always been a beotch for LSU.

Public transport will only be feasible if we are able to build out complete streets and build more densely. As long as BR is still a city of strip malls and suburban urban planning, public transport will never be truly viable. But I agree we need public transport options, the key to making it work though is to make BR more dense.

I agree with all of this, but what frustrated me most at the time was that it seemed like most of the people in the room, myself included, supported the plan, but we wanted to see more projects. Baton Rouge needs alternative routes, a new bridge (or two tbh), an expanded road network. Widening the interstate is fine, but it needs to be paired with more long term road planning for the region as a whole. The new Narin Drive Bridge will be great, as will the new spans over the lake, and the other aesthetic improvements, but at the end of the day the interstate is only one of many traffic problems in BR.

It wasn't a real public forum. They threw everyone into a 30 minute video presentation that was designed to throw a lot of information at citizens. Then for questions you had to go around a room set up with a ton of fancy renderings and maps and have 1/1 conversations with DOTD designers. There was no real opportunity for the community to address concerns (aside from comment boxes set up throughout). There was no real public questioning. And when you talked to DOTD people the focus was on technicalities...not on what kind of affect this would really have. I had a lot of questions I wanted to ask, but there was no point. The whole experience made me very disheartened. They're simpling ramming this through and the only real argument for it is that "we have to do something" and "our models say that this will decrease traffic the most when operating under 2014 levels of volume". The whole process...even the research phase was biased towards only doing one thing. Expanding the interstate, making a loop, a new bridge, etc. There were no real models of multiple solutions being tested (aside from one that included every project but the interstate expansion...pointedly they did not have a traffic model for everything plus an expanded interstate). I'm not opposed necessarily to expanding the interstate, it needs to be done, and the plans they have are very well done...and they're using it as an opportunity to improve the aesthetics of the area too. But it's going to be a waste of time and money without doing other things like a new bridge, and a loop. Extreme lack of foresight for the sake of doing *something* in the hopes that later on we will be able to do more. What they're failing to take into account is that when in 5 years time they try and get approval for the loop, their legitimacy will be lost. I think it's like 80% of road widening projects ultimately lead to the road needing to be widened again. With the city's population growth and the length of time this project will take (almost a decade), when it's finished I don't think people will notice or care about a 5% decrease in traffic. At that point it's insignificant enough to not really affect peoples lives.

I went to the public forum. Not impressed. There were some nice ideas and changes that should happen, but my issue is that they're not proposing a larger regional plan. They kept saying that in order for this to work, we have to do more than just widen the interstate...but they didn't propose anything other than widening the interstate. I hope this project just looses funding. They're marketing it too well to defeat it.

I'm nervous about this plan as well. It might relieve congestion for a little bit, but will it relive the congestion in the long term? They can't just keep expanding the interstate.

I think the concern of residents was that it would bring too much traffic into the area and that there wouldn't be enough parking for both the new residents and the workers for the economic development building. I would definitely like to see something go in that spot though.

I just think it looks like an office tower. Not a civic building. The River Center looks pretty rough too. If the City Hall was just a normal office tower, it would be fine, hell, I'd probably even like it. But it doesn't work as a city hall. A city hall should be a grand public building that elevates the individual and makes them feel apart of something grand and greater than themselves. The current City Hall works just fine as an office building, but it doesn't achieve the purpose it's name bestows upon it.

Yes I am. By out of place I mean they do not fit with the original (and beautiful) city court house, the old state capitol, and the new district court house tower. They also do not fit with the green space at Galvez Plaza. Their brutalist style is just not a great fit and is depressingly imposing on the site. All three buildings (library, city hall, and theater) are rather quite hideous buildings. The Shaw Center is a gorgeous building that gets modernism right. It's light and beautiful. It partakes in a lovely architectural dialogue with the Hilton Hotel, the beautifully detailed brick warehouse it sits partly on top of, and of course the old state capitol building. The only thing I would add/change would be to turn the empty lot in front of it into a beautifully landscaped park with a terrace and stairs that lead down to the river front and open up a vista that extends to the river. I'd also close the street in front of the Center's entrance to cars and make it a pedestrian only street.

I agree. I just feel that with Galvez Plaza, and the NB Town Square, we were building a real civic center for Baton Rouge. The City Hall, the River Center Theater, and now the failed new library really are out of place, ugly, and just ruin that civic center. The structural failure of the new library just shows they should've gone with something better.

I hope they stop building that hideous library and tear it down. Build something classical and beautiful in its place.

This roundabout makes sense. Would be really great placed here.

http://www.theadvocate.com/baton_rouge/news/article_0a9da5e4-342d-11e8-9ddc-77f101dfe702.html

Those are hideous buildings. I'm really getting tired of the plain, boring modernist architecture that doesn't fit the space or environment it's located in. A library in this area should reflect the historic architecture of South-downs.

He will have won re-election or not won by the time the vote happens.

Probably is. Functional developers don't care about good design.

I agree. I just hope that it becomes a city during a Republican governor. If a Dem is in office the new city council will be appointed by the governor, not the community. I think it's fair to say that such a move would be bad for the new city.

Well as stupid as I think this is in some respects, because I've always considered parts of the proposed boundaries Baton Rouge proper, I think it'll be a success. It will be a vote on Broome, not on actual incorporation.

Its been almost 3 months and I still can't get over how fantastic this post was. So absolutely true. Everything. I would've quoted it all, but that would be a lot to post.

New City/Parish website! Looks great, though I'm not a huge fan of the logo: http://www.theadvocate.com/baton_rouge/news/article_9fce31fc-1b40-11e8-9a3b-6bfcc475e963.html I made my own logo a while back. I might send it to my City Councilman to see if they'll adopt it. Thoughts?

I always thought a sports park at Perkins Community Park would be best. Heart of the new medical district. Really promoting an active lifestyle. Build new gym, new natatorium, new flex stadium, and fields.

No. Not here. This is an awful location for a soccer stadium. Any soccer stadium constructed must be a flex stadium meaning it is flexible and has multiple uses. Think stadiums, high school games, etc. A soccer stadium here would fail for the same reason Cortana failed; it's too far from the disposable income inclined population center.

Finalized Campus Masterplan: Master Plan Report: http://lsu.edu/pdc/files/2017_lsu_master_plan.pdf LSU Now Article: http://www.lsunow.com/daily/board-of-supervisors-approve-campus-master-plan-new-degrees/article_1e955b8c-b048-11e7-99cd-133a7b1b8842.html

Yeah that fire station hasn't been in use for quite a few years now.

Thank god. Campus needs a fudgeing grocery store. Can't tell you how many times I needed to go to one during class days.