COLUMBUS, Ohio—Ohio lawmakers on Wednesday approved a measure requiring the construction of a new Interstate 71 interchange between Strongsville and Brunswick, possibly bringing an end to a years-long battle between the two Cleveland suburbs.
The proposal, added to the final version of the state’s $13.5 billion transportation budget bill passed by the legislature, will help ease congestion in the area and improve safety, according to state Rep. Tom Patton, the Strongsville Republican who authored it.
However, Brunswick city officials have vocally denounced the measure, warning that connecting I-71 with Boston Road – the road on the border of Strongsville and Brunswick – will lower nearby property values, destroy homes in the path of on- and off-ramps, and turn a residential country road into an unwanted commercial corridor.
There’s also one more hurdle to cross: Gov. Mike DeWine could use his line-item veto power to remove the proposal, though a supermajority of state lawmakers could then vote to override that veto. It was unclear Wednesday whether state or federal policy would give Brunswick additional say in the matter even if DeWine approves the measure. Brunswick officials say the budget intends to cut them out of the decision.
Patton, in an interview, said for about 25 years, Strongsville has looked to create another interchange south of State Route 82, as the area has a lot more people than when I-71 was first built decades ago. Sometimes, he said, it takes drivers on nearby Howe Road 40 minutes to get out of the driveway. Many Brunswick residents get off I-71 at the Strongsville exit too, he said.
Regional planners, Patton said, have long sought to contain urban sprawl. But in this case, Patton said, “The sprawl has occurred. Now it’s a question of, how do you invest in the safety of those 90,000 people that are in those two (cities)?”
Patton said it will likely take at least two to three years to acquire the property and take other preliminary steps before construction on the new interchange would begin.
Brunswick City Council President Nicholas Hanek has been a vocal critic of the proposed interchange at Boston Road.
In an interview, Hanek said Strongsville has created a traffic problem by overdeveloping their highway exit with big-box stores, and their proposed solution – a Boston Road interchange – would not solve the traffic problem. Rather, he said, it would lead to Boston Road becoming little more than a “rest stop” along I-71, with commercial buildings popping up that would increase congestion and lower property values.
“The entire intent here is to destroy part of a community to the point that maybe somebody in Strongsville can ... have a minute or two off of their commute,” Hanek said. “It’s short-sighted, it’s ridiculous, and it contributes to, really, the problems of the state.”
Northeast Ohio Areawide Coordinating Agency Executive Director Grace Gallucci previously expressed concerns about Patton’s proposal to state lawmakers – among them that the measure would skirt state and federal requirements that an interchange justification study be completed prior to the development of new state highway interchanges.
Patton noted that Strongsville conducted its own study on the issue. He said that by passing this measure now, the interchange can be paid out of DeWine’s budget proposal to spend a total of $300 million on capital projects around the state. His proposal puts the Ohio Department of Transportation on the hook for covering the entire cost of building the interchange.
The measure inserted into the budget doesn’t specifically mention Strongsville or Brunswick, though the language appears to be carefully tailored so the interchange requirement doesn’t apply to any other parts of the state.
After the House added the proposal, the Senate removed it, but a legislative conference committee that convened to work out a compromise bill put Patton’s proposal back in.
DeWine spokesman Dan Tierney said late Wednesday afternoon that the governor supports the transportation budget overall, but Tierney said he would have to check about whether DeWine backs this specific part of it.