Brunswick and Strongsville residents rallied against the interchange outside a Strongsville City Council Meeting. Credit: Maria Elena Scott
At a meeting Friday, the Northeast Ohio Areawide Coordinating Agency board of directors passed a resolution supporting House Bill 155 and Senate Bill 276, which would repeal the requirement to build an interchange on I-71 between Brunswick and Strongsville at Boston Rd.

“I think this is a great step and I think it really helps reaffirm what a lot of us having been saying, that these kind of transportation policies need to be left to the traditional processes, and I’m really thankful for the many community leaders that share in that and condemn the process of how we got to this point,” Brunswick City Council President and Vice Mayor Nick Hanek told Scene. “While this is not over until the legislature repeals the damage that’s been done in the Revised Code, this is a very strong statement.”

Republican state Representative Tom Patton of Strongsville led efforts to include a provision in the Ohio State Transportation Budget to require entrance and exit ramps at least every 4.5 miles on interstate highways in adjacent municipal corporations in different counties. Although the requirement only applies to the border between Strongsville and Brunswick, it could be enforced elsewhere in the future.

Addressing highway-related issues like interchanges in the state legislature was an unprecedented move in Ohio. Typically, the decisions are made by agencies like NOACA and the Department of Transportation — both of which previously rejected a proposal for the 1-71 interchange.

“State Representative Tom Patton and the president of the Strongsville City Council and the mayor of Strongsville have been stating untrue statements, outright falsehoods, that NOACA didn’t have a position on this or NOACA might be in favor of this,” Hanek said. “Even as recently as November 20, at the Strongsville City Council meeting they stood up there and said, “NOACA doesn’t have a position on this,’ and that is simply not true.”

A preliminary study commissioned by Strongsville estimated that up to 14 homes will be demolished. In a neighborhood with many retirees living on fixed income, those who would lose their homes worry they won’t be adequately compensated by the government. Others nearby fear the value of their homes will plummet. More than a dozen residents attended the meeting and several shared testimony about their experiences.

“They legislated a bypass of this board and organization because that’s what they wanted. They took the power away from this group, a group that has not approved, and has generally opposed the project on 71 on all fronts,” one resident told the board.

Both bills have been introduced in their respective transportation committees and have received dozens of proponent testimonies. The Senate Transportation Committee removed the provision from the State Transportation Budget last year, but the requirement was later added back in conference and the bill passed anyway.

“As somebody who voted on the transportation bill, obviously, the bill was such a good bill that you couldn’t vote no on one thing and, trust me, I regretted it. I thought about voting no just because of this issue…We voted for the transportation bill because not voting for a transportation bill for one thing out of 3,000 that are in it, you really can’t do that in the legislative process,” Senator William DeMora said at a hearing for S.B. 155.

Houses aren’t the only concern for those in the affected area. Residents say the hilly, winding terrain is already prone to accidents — an issue they fear would worsen with higher speeds and more traffic. The neighborhood also sits atop a fuel pipeline which might have to be relocated to widen the road. The process would be costly and neighbors told the board they’re wary of an environmental disaster like the train derailment in East Palestine.

Ultimately, all members of the board voted in support of the resolution except one abstention on procedural grounds.

“This was not a close call. This is saying, ‘We’re not going to accept this kind of process to have a politician unilaterally pick where they think a road should go and whose home gets destroyed or not,'” Hanek said. “And so many other communities and their leaders and the members of this board and those representing the communities all stood with that and said, ‘We don’t think this is right.’”

Subscribe to Cleveland Scene newsletters.

Follow us: Apple News | Google News | NewsBreak | Reddit | Instagram | Facebook | Twitter | Or sign up for our RSS Feed