The reimagined Brent Spence companion bridge. (Photo provided by brentspencebridgecorridor.com)
A coalition of transportation and environmental nonprofits have sued the Brent Spence Corridor project in federal court over its potential environmental impacts, especially as they relate to non-white communities around the bridge.
Filed on Tuesday, the suit’s plaintiffs include the Devou Good Foundation, Civic Cincinnati, Ride the Cov and Queen City Bike. The group’s complaint alleges that the project has inadequately explored the potential environmental impact of the construction and demands that work on the project cease until their concerns are redressed.
Construction for the estimated $3.6 billion corridor project, which includes a new companion bridge slated for construction next to the existing bridge, is scheduled to begin next year and continue through 2029. This conceivably would bring the number of traffic lanes up from the existing bridge’s eight lanes to 16. The project also entails the widening of I-75.
Specifically, the suit calls for the project to engage in and produce an Environmental Impact Statement, or EIS. Large federal projects are required to assess their potential impacts on the local environment. The project first completed an environmental assessment in 2012, which found no significant impact.
The project floundered for years due to lack of funding, but following an injection of federal money in late 2022, the project went about updating its initial assessment. The federal government approved a second finding of no significant impact in May, following months of public input. Projects whose assessments find no significant impact are not required to produce an environmental impact statement, much to the protestations of the plaintiffs.
“By refusing to acknowledge that the Project will have significant impacts on the human environment, Defendants have arbitrarily and capriciously refused to prepare an EIS, which would require them to meaningfully consider reasonable alternatives, including ones that would include substantial investment in public transportation as part of the Project, or to consider charging tolls on the Ohio River bridges, which would reduce the demand for the Project’s dramatic increase in the number of travel lanes,” the suit alleges.
“Defendants also have failed to adequately consider or mitigate adverse effects on the predominantly non-white residents located near the highway in the project area, including effects on air quality, noise, health and mobility caused by the anticipated 6 years-long construction of the project,” the suit continues. “They have also failed to adequately consider or mitigate long term effects of expanding these highways, including greatly increased vehicle traffic; water quality and quantity impacts from increased emissions and from the additional acres of highway right of way and impermeable pavement; increased urban sprawl and associated segregation; and the unequal distribution of the benefits and burdens of these transportation system investments.”
The suit demands the court nullify the federal government’s finding of significant impact, issue a court order voiding any agreement using federal funds on the project, prevent any additional work on the project until the environmental assessment issues can be redressed and pay for the plaintiffs’ legal fees.
This story is republished from LINK nky.