I-210 Interchange Improvements Making Every Day Count

Post Office Box 94245 Baton Rouge, LA 70804-9245

Timothy Nickel, P.E. (225) 379-1110 Timothy.Nickel@la.gov

• Project Details • Project Acceleration • What made it work

Future Development Opening July 2014

Existing Congested Nelson Interchange

• Based on a 2007 Corridor Study DOTD had an existing need for improvements on I210, with current budget, improvements would be years down the road. • Developer approached DOTD with the request for an interchange and to provide $17 Million toward the project. (June 2011) DOTD teamed with the developer who paid for all engineering & a portion of construction. This allowed an accelerated schedule • An Interchange Justification Report (IJR) is required to be completed and accepted by FHWA, alternatives vetted through the NEPA process, and designed in accordance with DOTD and FHWA guidelines. • Developer requested if we could expedite project process to limit impacts to their initial opening in July 2014. • This would consolidate a typical 10 year process into 3 years.

THIS MADE EVERY DAY COUNT

Early MOU Schedule

Environmental Process

For the EA, the team worked with FHWA and DOTD to issue the FONSI within a condensed schedule.

STAKEHOLDER/PUBLIC MEETING

Design Process

• DOTD allowed condensed reviews and used “real-time” working meetings to resolve comments and questions. • Early coordination of utility relocations and ROW acquisition accelerated the schedule

• Project was given high Priority in the Department • All reviews were given priority by all DOTD Sections • DOTD staff would work overtime to meet timelines.

• Interchange Justification Report and NEPA Process was done concurrently.
• At the Developer's own risk, Preliminary Design began during NEPA process

For the IJR, after investigating over 30 concepts, a full interchange at Cove along with improvements to Nelson was selected as the preferred alternative.

Obstacles Along The Way
1. Interchange Justification Report 1. Memorandum of Understanding 2. Alternatives, Alternatives, Alternatives 2. NEPA Process 1. Timing 2. What moves forward from IJR? 3. Design 1. Critical Items first 2. Avoid late notices 3. Value Engineering 4. Real Estate 1. Limit impacts to community 2. Begin as early as possible 5. Utilities 6. Construction 1. Consider Incentives

Estimated Project Cost = $80 Million Three Phases

Initial Estimated Project Cost = $50 Million
• • • • Private Investment State Capital Outlay DOTD Program Parish, City, MPO “Locals” Total $20 Million $20 Million $20 Million $20 Million $80 Million

PROJECT TEAM
• A good plan is just “a good plan” without the motivated people to make it happen.
• Team was creative with solutions and motivated others. • We held many meetings at the Consultants office and ours with very little notice. • Specialty specific meetings and conference calls were held to discuss plan development with Consultant in-between submittals. • “Stovepiping” was limited by having multiple specialties work together periodically. • A lot of team trust. • Support of the Executive and Administrative staff of DOTD and the Consultant.

• • • •

Private interest willing to provide resources Executive Staff (encouragement and priority) Local entities working with us Excellent Plan Development Teamwork and individual effort
• • • • FHWA DOTD Consultant City/MPO Locals

THANK YOU!
Questions or Comments?

Timothy Nickel, P.E. (225) 379-1110 Timothy.Nickel@la.gov

Post Office Box 94245 Baton Rouge, LA 70804-9245

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful