Residents and advocates urge ODOT to complete EIS for I‑75/Brent Spence corridor

Residents, public‑interest organizers and a university climate expert urged the Cincinnati City Council'Climate, Environment and Infrastructure Committee on Monday to press the Ohio Department of Transportation (ODOT) to complete a full Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) before moving forward with the I‑75/Brent Spence corridor expansion.

"Why would DOT rather be sued than simply conduct an environmental impact statement?" asked Bob Hyland, a published environmental author and educator, during the committee'public comment period. Hyland cited a U.S. Environmental Protection Agency report noting that many children under age 5 live in parts of the Ohio section of the proposed project and that schools, childcare providers and hospitals are nearby.

Mackenzie, an organizer with the Coalition for Transit and Sustainable Development, told the committee she was asking council to pressure ODOT for an EIS, arguing that adding a second bridge and widening the corridor would increase ozone and particulate pollution and worsen health outcomes for neighbors along the route. "I implore you to push ODOT to conduct a full environmental impact statement for those neighbors who deserve a healthier environment," Mackenzie said.

Dr. Amy Townsend Small, a professor in the University of Cincinnati'School of Environment and Sustainability, said the Brent Spence plan would not replace the existing bridge but add capacity along I‑75, in some places widening the corridor up to eight lanes and likely producing "induced demand" that increases vehicle traffic and greenhouse gas emissions. She said the project had a budget estimate of more than $3.5 billion that is likely to rise.

Camp Washington resident Mimi Rook recounted living through past highway expansions and urged the committee to pursue creative engineering and deeper community engagement, saying a more exhaustive environmental review could help build trust with affected neighborhoods.

Remote speaker Matthew Smeal said the city should consider mass‑transit options and make greater use of existing rail before widening freeways, citing international examples as lessons for alternatives.

Council members did not take a formal vote on an EIS during the meeting. Chairwoman Mika Owens acknowledged the public comments and moved the committee on to the day's agenda, which included a presentation on the Impact Award and related programming.

Why this matters: Committee members and presenters repeatedly pointed to potential health impacts in neighborhoods near the corridor, to historic harms from past construction, and to differing views about whether widening or investing in transit better serves long‑term city goals. Hyland specifically framed the request as a preventive public‑health and legal step, arguing an EIS could avoid future litigation and better protect children and nearby institutions.

Next steps: The committee did not record any motion or vote on an environmental review at this meeting. Advocates urged the committee to press ODOT and the city administration for a full EIS moving forward.