Plaquemines Point residents press DOTD and FHWA to drop site E114, request stronger environmental review and better notice

Landowners from Plaquemines Point used the district's public‑comment period to urge DOTD and FHWA to remove site E114 from consideration and to strengthen the environmental review.

Millie Bailey, a landowner in the area, told the Capital Area Road and Bridge District she and neighbors are not receiving consistent notifications about public meetings and that public outreach has been disjointed: “We're not being notified … we're not informed of where we can voice our opinion,” she said, asking that DOTD ensure affected landowners receive notice. Several speakers asked that public comment letters be posted so landowners can verify their submissions were included in DOTD's materials.

Lara Como, who said she reviewed documents published by DOTD, criticized the Enhanced Planning Investigation (EPI) for not including local comment letters and for treating ‘‘wetlands’’ as a single category that fails to distinguish between soybean fields and old‑growth cypress stands. Como said the EPI’s species listing included only the pallid sturgeon and did not reflect a species list she said had been submitted to Wildlife and Fisheries. “I feel like it needs to be modified,” she told the board and DOTD staff, and she argued that the community deserves consideration for tree and cultural resources when alternatives are ranked.

Several landowners, including Mary Elmasian, described old‑growth trees and cultural history on their parcels and said loss of those resources would be irreversible. Mary Elmasian said: “We have 400‑year‑old trees … it would just be a tragedy that they would choose that site and cut those trees down.”

District members and DOTD representatives clarified process and responsibility: a district official reminded the public that the district is a taxing entity and does not choose the bridge site, and Secretary Donohue (DOTD) noted the Federal Highway Administration holds approval authority for the environmental document. Donohue and other DOTD representatives said public input will be part of the environmental analysis and that a public hearing associated with the draft environmental document will provide an opportunity for oral comment; DOTD staff also described kiosks and written comment options used at prior meetings. “You will have the opportunity to provide input,” DOTD said, and officials urged residents to participate in the environmental public meetings and hearings that will be scheduled as the NEPA process advances.

Speakers also asked DOTD to consider an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) rather than an Environmental Assessment (EA) for the corridor; DOTD staff said the type of environmental document will be determined as the traffic study and environmental screenings proceed and that FHWA must approve the form and content of the document. Residents requested that DOTD post the comment letters submitted to ensure those comments are included in the record.

The CARBD recorded the presence of several individuals who had expressed opposition to E114 but did not wish to speak; the record will reflect their registered opposition. The meeting concluded with no district decision on site selection; DOTD and FHWA will continue environmental work and public outreach.