Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Transportation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents urge council to kill Lake Saint Louis Boulevard extension over wetlands, cost and community impacts
Summary
Multiple residents told the St. Charles County Council the Lake Saint Louis Boulevard Phase 3 extension would cut through neighborhoods and protected wetlands, cost far more per mile than county averages, worsen drainage and split HOA common ground; speakers asked the council to reallocate funds to higher-impact projects.
At the Nov. 10 St. Charles County Council meeting, several residents urged the county to cancel the proposed Lake Saint Louis Boulevard extension between Paul Reynaud and Highway DD.
Les Neal told the council the project—originating in the county's 2005 transportation plan—would shift the planned alignment several hundred feet and "split the common ground that's owned by Preston Woods HOA," raising questions about drainage and liability for a multiuse path. "Residents are worried about the impact of when it rains too much, where's the water gonna go," Neal said, noting the route would disrupt a natural stream.
Rob Boss said the Phase 3 extension is a "band aid fix" that would run north–south through busy neighborhoods and a "US Army Corps of Engineers protected wetland area," and he argued the project would cost "over 2 and a half times the cost per mile to build than the county average." Boss urged reallocating the funds to east–west thoroughfares such as Highway N to produce greater traffic‑flow benefits.
Speakers asked the council to support any legislation that would remove or reallocate funding for the project. Council members and county highway staff acknowledged community pushback and that engineering constraints influenced alignment choices; the county said it is engaging partner agencies, and that some communities have expressed reluctance to cancel projects for fear of losing future county transportation funding.
No formal vote to cancel or reallocate funding occurred at the meeting. Council members referred the matter to staff and suggested further coordination with municipal partners and East West Gateway planning efforts; any funding changes would require formal action in a future meeting.
