North-south parkway would link Livingston, Ascension parishes

Ascension-Livingston Parkway alternatives Show caption
Ascension-Livingston Parkway alternatives

Designers presented three potential routes Tuesday night for a four-lane, north-south parkway that would run through Livingston and Ascension parishes to connect Interstates 10 and 12.

The proposal is an alternative to a shorter toll road that presidents of those parishes have discussed during the last two years.

The larger, publicly funded project would not only tie the two interstates together, but also link up with U.S. 190, Airline Highway and a number of other east-west roads in the two parishes.

Livingston Parish Councilman Ricky Goff, who represents the Walker area, said he likes the second or third alternatives, which both run to the east of traffic-snarled La. 447.

Those proposals not only would give Livingston Parish an additional north-south roadway, but also open areas of timberland as potential commercial and industrial sites, Goff said.

Additionally, they provide a better link from the industrial area east of Walker to the plants along the Mississippi River that are a major market for the products the Livingston Parish plants fabricate, Goff said.

Randy Rogers, executive director of the Livingston Economic Development Council, agreed that the eastern routes open more Livingston Parish land for industrial development to feed the growing number of plants along the Mississippi River.

Companies that service the plants on the river could have easier access to them from Livingston Parish if this project is built, he said.

“We like it,” Rogers said of the idea to build the proposed Ascension-Livingston Parish Parkway.

Councilwoman Sonya Collins, who represents the Port Vincent area, said that if the project is built, she, too, prefers the more easterly routes that open up land for industry, but she said some of her constituents aren’t happy about any of the routes.

Those people are concerned about the roadway cutting through family land that has been owned for generations, she said.

An advantage of the project is that it would provide an easier route for Livingston Parish residents who commute to work in the Ascension Parish plants, Collins said.

Project Manager Paul L. Waidhas said that would be a big improvement because now only two-lane roads run north and south through Livingston Parish, and those roads meander and aren’t designed to handle heavy traffic.

The feasibility stage of the project is just wrapping up and the project still has five other stages it would have to get through before it would become operational.

That could take 10 years, Waid has said.

A second public meeting on the parkway concept will be held from 6 p.m. to 8 p.m. Wednesday at Lakeside Primary School, 16500 La. 431, Prairieville.


Please log in to comment on this story

Comments (11)


1) Comment by 36racin - 23/02/2013

Lets look at a few items here. Just a month or so ago Ascension Parish was pushing road improvements that if added up would have taken care of 61.1 million dollars of this proposed 285 million dollar project. And that was 4 lanes of road from Hwy 61 to Hwy 621 going northward on Hwy 431. 285 million would probably not even get the road on the Ascension Parish side of this Parkway completed with a new bridge. A new bridge alone will cost 30+ million dollars and the parishes and DOTD are already looking for alternatives to replacing the aging bridge at Port Vincent. One without a draw bridge meaning it would need to be elevated even higher than the current one. Parish officials cannot tell any of us that they didn't know anything about this project back when they were pushing the "Lanes for Change" road tax!!!! Heres something else to chew on. The Parishes are pushing building roads for 10 thousand PASS THRU vehicles a day and still ignoring the road conditions where 40 thousand TAX paying, voting residents work, live and spend their hard earned money and raise their families. I know where I would spend my money!!!

2) Comment by NewsReader - 20/02/2013

I don't think there's too many opposed to this in LP. Might be a different story in Ascension where that proposed route is drawn through more populated areas. Regardless, I don't see this as a bad idea provided the landowners get recompensed fairly (not absurdly) and retain the rights to do what they wish with their property which would include the rights to develop it commercially.

3) Comment by BRmoderate - 20/02/2013

Any land not expressly used for the parkway or reserved for the expressed purpose of future expansion (lane widening) should be returned to the present property owners after construction. They should have the right to sell at the new fair market value of they so choose.

4) Comment by nimby? - 20/02/2013

wherearewegoing , developers , not the owners of the land will be making the deals . a toll road would restrict right of way use , real estate agents , developers don't want this . they're salivating at more urban sprawl . attend this evenings meeting , ask for yourself ..

5) Comment by gary - 20/02/2013

@woody - no, I live in S./E B.R. - although I do own property, but it is in the S/E part of LP - so, I will miss out on all the action.

6) Comment by wherearewegoing - 20/02/2013

Nimby? Where have you read/heard that they want a large development right of way? I'm not calling you a liar.....I'd just like to read it for myself or hear it from a credible resource. If what you say is true then I am highly against this proposal, though I do think a road is needed. It just doesn't need to be larger than necessary just to support development. If you want to develop, buy someone's house, knock it down, and stick a gas station on it. Taxpayer dollars shouldn't be used for this.

7) Comment by DMJ - 20/02/2013

"but she said some of her constituents aren’t happy about any of the routes." No kidding. Buy them out. Everyone's got a price.

8) Comment by Whatnow - 20/02/2013

gary, nimby? is right.

9) Comment by nimby? - 20/02/2013

gary , the developers want more than just to put a road thru , they want a very generous right of way to develop , for their own profit . nimbys have no say in this , all they can do is say no . I know folk in both parishes who know a road is needed . they don't object to a road , they object a half mile swath thru their property .

10) Comment by Woody - 20/02/2013

which route cuts through your back yard, gary?

11) Comment by gary - 20/02/2013

The nimby folk will put a stop to this.