Susan Buchanan: Threatened coastal stretch of Louisiana Highway One needs funding

AppId is over the quota
AppId is over the quota
Get Green Newsletters: Subscribe

(This article is published in "The Louisiana Weekly" in the July 8, 2013 edition.)

The lower section of LA Highway 1, which runs from Grand Isle in south Louisiana up to Shreveport, is "at-risk infrastructure" in Lafourche and Jefferson Parishes, LA 1 Coalition executive director Henri Boulet said last week. Speaking at a Gulf Coast Restoration Summit in New Orleans last Monday, Boulet urged officials to continue elevating LA 1 before it's too late. Barely above sea level in spots, the highway is sinking near the coast as the state's wetlands suffer from erosion and ground subsidence. Boulet's group is a non-profit working for LA 1's improvement.

"Hurricane Isaac cut into the roadbed in 21 places last August," Boulet said last week. "LA 1 now floods even in low-level storms, and road closures after storms are becoming longer and longer. Sometimes the road, which is the only one into Grand Isle, Port Fourchon and the Louisiana Offshore Oil Port, is shut for five or six days at a time." LA 1 has been designated by the U.S. Congress as "critical energy infrastructure," he said.

Port Fourchon is the inland hub for the Gulf's offshore oil and gas industry. The adjacent Louisiana Offshore Oil Port or LOOP offloads supertankers, pipelining crude to half of the nation's refineries.

LA 1 is the hurricane evacuation route used by thousands of offshore oil and gas workers, 1,300 residents of Grand Isle and employees at Port Fourchon. Many of them, along with tourists, become stranded when the highway is closed. Louisiana Senator Mary Landrieu, trapped in Grand Isle several years ago after a storm brewed, had to be helicoptered to her next appointment, Boulet said. He told Landrieu then that her experience would draw some attention to the plight of LA 1.

The Louisiana Dept. of Transportation and Development is converting a 19-mile section of LA 1 from Golden Meadow to Port Fourchon into an elevated toll expressway, using federal and state money. That multi-phased, improvement project could be finished anywhere from five to fifteen years from now, depending on funding, Boulet said. The project is partially complete now but only partly financed.

So far, $43.3 million in environmental clearance, engineering and utility relocation has been done. Under Phase 1 of the overall project, work costing $318.8 million on a Leeville to Port Fourchon section is complete. On that stretch, a seven-mile, two-lane elevated highway from Leeville to LA 3090 at Port Fourchon opened in December 2011. And a four-mile, high-level, two-lane overpass, along with a toll facility, opened in July 2009 over Bayou Lafourche at Leeville.

Louisiana residents and businesses have agreed to tolls for the next 30 years to repay a federal transportation loan of $66 million and state bond sales of $78 million that partly funded Phase 1 construction. "Tolls are paying back bonds sold to private holders and will pay back the federal TIFIA loan that the project took out," Boulet said last week. TIFIA or Transportation Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act loans are managed by the Federal Highway Administration.

Boulet said the work done so far was urgently needed. "Highway 1 is facing a relative, sea-level rise of 9 millimeters per year--one of the highest rates on the U.S. Gulf Coast," he said. "It's subsiding at a rapid rate of 7 millimeters a year and is subject to sea-level rise of 2 millimeters yearly."

The second phase of LA 1's makeover involves construction of a $320 million, eight-mile, two-lane elevated highway from Golden Meadow to Leeville. "Because it's a large project, the state has divided this second phase into three segments," Boulet said. A first segment near Golden Meadow is needed for access to build the rest, and funding for it will include $40 million from the state and $6 million in corporate matches. The other two segments await federal and state funding, however.

Under a third project phase, plans are to build a four-lane, 19.5-mile highway from U.S. 90 to Larose for $340 million. In a fourth phase, estimated at $660 million, 19 miles of additional, two-lane elevated highway will be built from Golden Meadow to Port Fourchon along an existing structure, if traffic growth warrants it. And LA 1 from Fourchon to Grand Isle will be upgraded and elevated. These third and fourth project phases still need funding.

During Hurricane Isaac, LA 1 between Grande Isle and Port Fourchon was overtopped by water, the road's shoulders washed out in places and the stretch was closed for more than three days. Motorists didn't have an easy time after it reopened either. "You could be driving over asphalt, held up by nothing more than soil, with the risk you might fall through it and drown," Wayne Keller, executive director of the Grand Isle Port Commission, said last week. "The road was down to one lane so you couldn't pass. That hindered activity around here for awhile."

Since then, the road's been patched up, leaving it more vulnerable than ever, Keller said. "Many people question why anyone continues to live in Grand Isle but danger is the price we pay for paradise," he said. He hopes the stretch between Grand Isle and Port Fourchon will be elevated as soon as possible.

It won't be elevated this year, however. "The Grande Isle to Port Fourchon section of LA 1 is scheduled for work in a state maintenance project related to Hurricane Isaac, and it's going to public bid in August," Boulet said. "This project isn't really part of the larger LA 1 Improvement Project. The work that will be done involves widening the road bed between Grand Isle and Port Fourchon and armoring the sides of the widened bed. For the first time, that section will get a badly needed, black-topped shoulder. We're fortunate that DOTD has been able to scrape up several million dollars in funding for it." Inundated roads with black-topped shoulders in western Louisiana have fared much better than LA 1's Grand Isle-to-Port Fourchon stretch did in Isaac.

Meanwhile, raising the road between Grand Isle and Port Fourchon will be costly and no funds have been dedicated to it yet, Boulet said.

For unfunded parts of LA 1, some money could come from tens of billions of dollars in fines likely to levied against BP and divided between coastal states for the 2010 Gulf oil spill. And in a possible, longer-term source for the highway, Louisiana will receive increased, offshore oil-and-gas royalties shared with the feds, starting in 2017 under a 2006 law.

Last week, south Louisiana residents headed to the Golden Meadow-Fourchon International Tarpon Rodeo from July 4 to 6 in Port Fourchon. The trip was smoother than usual for many motorists. "I'm super-pleased that LA DOTD will man the cash toll booth around the clock all this summer in Leeville, where drivers access the new bridge," Boulet said. "We won't have the delays we've had in the past from people figuring out how to use the automatic toll-payment machine."

Southern LA 1 is critical to the nation's economy, according to a 2011 study by the U.S. Dept. of Highway Safety. The agency predicted that a 90-day closure of seven miles on the lower end of the route, along with a simultaneous shutdown of Port Fourchon, would slash oil and gas production immediately and could cut U.S. gross domestic product by up to $7.8 billion over a multi-year period. end

Get Alerts

2013 Highway Report Reveals Worst State Highway Systems In U.S. (PHOTOS)

AppId is over the quota
Translate Request has too much data
Parameter name: request

Forget what you think you know about the United States' crumbling infrastructure. The simple truth is that the American public highway system has been steadily improving for at least two decades -- at least according to David Hartgen, Emeritus Transportation Professor at UNC Charlotte and author of the Reason Foundation's 2013 Annual Highway Report.

Hartgen, who has been compiling the annual report for 20 years now, works with data that each state submits to the federal government in order to receive federal funds. He uses eleven factors, including highway spending, pavement and bridge conditions, urban congestion and fatality rates, to get a complete picture of states' public highway system.

What he's found challenges the common narrative that U.S. infrastructure is in dire straits.

"Anyone who has driven around the country for a number of years knows that the system is actually in pretty good shape," said Hartgen in a phone interview with The Huffington Post. "This idea that we have a crisis of crumbling infrastructure that we've got to throw another $100 billion at is just plain wrong."

The 2013 rankings are based on 2009 state reports, the most recent year that statistics are available for all states. That means that most of the effects of President Barack Obama's stimulus package, which hit states with infrastructure funding in 2009 and 2010, have yet to be accounted for -- and the infusion would certainly improve state highway systems even more, Hartgen pointed out.

Click through the slideshow below to see the worst-performing state highway systems according to Reason Foundation's 2013 Highway Report. Captions in each slide are from the report's breakdowns on individual states. Story continues below.

Loading Slideshow

2013 Ranking: Wisconsin’s state highway system is ranked 31st in the nation in overall highway performance and efficiency. Last Year's Ranking: It is a slight decline for Wisconsin which ranked 27th in the previous Annual Highway Report. Problem Areas: Wisconsin ranks 7th in deficient bridges, 15th in fatality rate, 30th in urban interstate congestion, and 31st in disbursements per mile. Total Spending Per Mile: $165,184/mile.

2013 Ranking: West Virginia’s state highway system is ranked 32nd in the nation in overall highway performance and efficiency Last Year's Ranking: West Virginia ranked 27th and 30th in the previous two reports. Problem Areas: West Virginia ranks 47th in fatality rate, 45 th in deficient bridges, 39th in rural interstate pavement condition, and 30th in urban interstate pavement condition. West Virginia has the 2nd lowest total disbursements per mile and 4th lowest urban interstate congestion. Total Spending Per Mile: $40,436/mile.

2013 Ranking: Iowa’s state highway system is ranked 33rd in the nation in overall highway performance and efficiency. Last Year's Ranking: It's a decline from 30th and 31st in the previous two reports. Problem Areas: Iowa ranks 19th in urban interstate congestion, 26th in fatality rate, 34th in deficient bridges, 37th in urban interstate pavement in poor condition and 38th in rural interstate pavement in poor condition. Total Spending Per Mile: $111,422/mile.

2013 Ranking: Illinois’sstate highway system is ranked 34th in the nation in overall highway performance and efficiency. Last Year's Ranking: It's an improvement from 40th in the previous report. Problem Areas: Illinois ranks 6th in fatality rate, 9th in deficient bridges, 25th in urban interstate congestion, and 35th in urban interstate pavement in poor condition. It also reported no rural interstate mileage in poor condition, tying for 1st. Total Spending Per Mile: $277,977/mile.

2013 Ranking: Louisiana’s state highway system is ranked 35th in the nation in overall highway performance and efficiency. Last Year's Ranking: Louisiana ranked 36th and 43rd in the previous two reports. Problem Areas: Louisiana ranks next to last, 49th, in fatality rate, 39th in deficient bridges, 44th in urban interstate condition, 26th in rural interstate pavement condition, and 20th in urban interstate congestion. The state does a good job controlling administrative costs, ranking 9th. It ranks 21st in maintenance spending per mile. Total Spending Per Mile: $208,215/mile.

2013 Ranking: Arkansas’ state highway system is ranked 36th in the nation in overall highway performance and efficiency. Last Year's Ranking: Arkansas was ranked 29th in the previous report. Problem Areas: Arkansas highways have one of the nation’s highest highway fatality rates, ranking 46th out of 50 states. Arkansas ranks next to last, 49th, with 3.4 times the national average of rural arterial lanes that are too narrow, 44th in the amount of rural interstates in poor pavement condition—with 2.2 times the national average in poor condition—and 40th in urban interstates in poor condition. Total Spending Per Mile: $55,294/mile.

2013 Ranking: Florida’s state highway system is ranked 37th in the nation in overall highway performance and efficiency. Last Year's Ranking: It's a slight improvement for Florida, which ranked 40th and 39th in the two previous reports. Problem Areas: Florida ranks 10th in deficient bridges, 17th in urban interstate pavement condition, 38th in urban interstate congestion, and 34th in fatality rate. Total Spending Per Mile: $551,045/mile.

2013 Ranking: Oklahoma’s state highway system is ranked 38th in the nation in overall highway performance and efficiency. Last Year's Ranking: Oklahoma ranked 34th and 37th in the previous two reports. Problem Areas: Oklahoma ranks 42nd in fatality rate, 22nd in urban interstate congestion, 38th in deficient bridges, 42nd in rural interstate pavement condition, and 47th in urban interstate pavement condition. Total Spending Per Mile: $114,722/mile.

2013 Ranking: Pennsylvania’s state highway system is ranked 39th in the nation in overall highway performance and efficiency. Last Year's Ranking: It is a slight decline from the previous two reports, where it ranked 38th. Problem Areas: Pennsylvania ranks last, 50th, in rural lanes that are too narrow, 48th in deficient bridges, 27th in fatality rate, 27th in urban interstate congestion, 32nd in rural interstate pavement condition, and 20th in urban interstate pavement condition. Total Spending Per Mile: $149,813/mile.

2013 Ranking: Maryland’s state highway system is ranked 40th in the nation in overall highway performance and efficiency. Last Year's Ranking: It's an improvement from 43rd in the previous report. Problem Areas: Maryland ranks 17th in fatality rate, 31st in deficient bridges, 32nd in urban interstate pavement condition, and 48th in congestion. Total Spending Per Mile: $422,852/mile.

2013 Ranking: Colorado’s state highway system is ranked 41st in the nation in overall highway performance and efficiency. Last Year's Ranking: It is a sharp decline for Colorado, which ranked 33rd and 34th in the two previous reports. Problem Areas: Colorado ranks 36th in urban interstate congestion, 35th in rural arterial narrow lanes, 33rd in the pavement condition of urban interstates and 47th in the pavement condition of rural interstates. Total Spending Per Mile: $163,028/mile.

2013 Ranking: Minnesota’s state highway system is ranked 42nd in the nation in overall highway performance and efficiency. Last Year's Ranking: This is a steep decline for Minnesota, which ranked 15th and 24th in the previous two reports. Problem Areas: Minnesota ranks 3rd in fatality rate and 3rd in deficient bridges, but ranks 49th in urban interstate congestion and 49th in rural interstate pavement condition. Total Spending Per Mile: $128,849/mile.

2013 Ranking: Massachusetts’sstate highway system is ranked 43rd in the nation in overall highway performance and efficiency. Last Year's Ranking: This is a slight improvement for the state, which ranked 44th in the previous two reports. Problem Areas: Massachusetts has the lowest fatality rate in the nation, ranks 1st in rural interstate pavement condition, 10th in urban interstate pavement condition, 29th in urban congestion and 44th in deficient bridges. Total Spending Per Mile: $642,834/mile.

2013 Ranking: Connecticut’s state highway system is ranked 44th in the nation in overall highway performance and efficiency. Last Year's Ranking: It is a decline for Connecticut, which ranked 37th and 41st in the previous two reports. Problem Areas: Connecticut ranks 46 th out of 50 in deficient bridges, 47th in urban interstate congestion, 46th in total highway disbursements per mile, and ranks last, 50th, with the highest administrative costs in the nation—spending over seven times the national average per mile on administration. Total Spending Per Mile: $527,419/mile.

2013 Ranking: New York’s state highway system is ranked 45th in the nation in overall highway performance and efficiency. Last Year's Ranking: It is a slight improvement from 46th in the previous report. Problem Areas: New York’s system has been one of the bottom ten performing systems each year since 2000. It ranks 47th in deficient bridges, 46th in rural interstate pavement condition, 46th in urban interstate pavement condition, and 34th in urban interstate congestion. Total Spending Per Mile: $374,102/mile.

2013 Ranking: New Jersey’s state highway system is ranked 46th in the nation in overall highway performance and efficiency. Last Year's Ranking: It ranked 45th and 47th in the previous two reports. Problem Areas: New Jersey ranks 34th in deficient bridges, 45th in urban interstate congestion, and 48th in urban interstate pavement in poor condition. Total Spending Per Mile: $1,221,403/mile.

2013 Ranking: California’s state highway system is ranked 47th in the nation in overall highway performance and efficiency. Last Year's Ranking: It is a slight improvement for California, which ranked 48th in the previous two Annual Highway Reports and has ranked in the bottom 10 every year since 2000. Problem Areas: California’s urban interstates are the most congested in the nation, ranking 50th. The state ranks 49th, next to last, in urban interstate pavement condition and 39th in the condition of rural arterial roads. California’s roads are in poor condition despite a significant increase (24 percent more) in per-mile highway expenditures, making total per-mile spending in California 4.7 times the national average. Total Spending Per Mile: $679,296/mile.

2013 Ranking: Hawaii’s state highway system is ranked 48th in the nation in overall highway performance and efficiency. Last Year's Ranking: The state ranked 47th in the previous report. Problem Areas: Hawaii ranks last, 50th, in urban interstate pavement in poor condition, 49th in administrative costs per mile, 49th in deficient bridges, 28th in urban interstate congestion, 20th in fatality rate, and tied for 1st with no rural interstate mileage reported in poor condition. Total Spending Per Mile: $461,992/mile

2013 Ranking: Rhode Island’s state highway system is ranked 49th in the nation in overall highway performance and efficiency. Last Year's Ranking: The state ranked last, 50th, in the previous report. Problem Areas: Deficient bridges (which are 2.25 times the national average, ranked 50th—last), rural arterials in poor condition (which are almost 16 times the national average—ranked 49th) and urban interstate congestion (23 percent above the national average—ranked 42nd). The state’s fatality rate ranks 19th. Total Spending Per Mile: $345,970/mile.

2013 Ranking: Alaska’s state highway system is ranked 50th, last in the nation, in overall performance and efficiency. Last Year's Ranking: Alaska ranked 49th in the previous report. Problem Areas: Rural arterials in poor condition (over 29 times the national average and ranked last, 50th), rural interstates in poor condition (3.5 times the national average, ranked 45th), and fatality rate (14 percent above the national rate, ranked 31st). Total Spending Per Mile: $126,156/mile.

Still, Hartgen's report says that while some states are continuing to improve their highways, problems seem to cluster in a small group of states: California, Alaska, Rhode Island and New Jersey are among the worst for public highway systems.

The difference between these two groups?

"A focus on early maintenance," said Hartgen. Repairing already-existing infrastructure early and often ensures that states ultimately spend less overall because the damage is less extreme.

And because of the importance of early maintenance, said Hartgen, state politicians need to learn to "just say no" to new projects that areas say they need for their economic development and instead push the money toward improving already-existing infrastructure.

"The purpose of transportation is to provide mobility so we can get around," said Hartgen. "It's not to provide new jobs."

Reason Foundation is a libertarian, non-partisan think tank based in Los Angeles, Calif. It produces Reason magazine and Reason.tv. Hartgen, a Reason Foundation senior fellow, is also the president of Hartgen Group, a consulting agency focused on transportation issues.

Get Alerts