Interstate 81 in Syracuse

[Beltway]

For what it is worth, the I-787 rehab was a drop in the bucket compared to I-81's situation.  I-81 adds a whole bunch of zeroes.

The New Tappan Zee Bridge added a couple more zeros to that.  It still had to be built, and is being built.

Can't toll I-81.

Indeed, but it shouldn't need to be tolled.

But you're comparing apples and oranges. Tap is more money, but supported by toll revenue.

Interstate projects are supported by up to 90% federal funding. 
Turnpikes normally don't get any federal funding.

[jemacedo9]

I travel the I-81/I-690 corridor sometimes from PA to Rochester NY...if I-481 were to remain free-flowing if I-81 were removed, I don't think removing I-81 would annoy me all that much.  An extra 10 minutes on a 5 hr trip isn't brutal.

The question is...would I-481, and I-690, remain free flowing, if not widened?

[Alps]

Can't toll I-81.

Indeed, but it shouldn't need to be tolled.

But you're comparing apples and oranges. Tap is more money, but supported by toll revenue.

Interstate projects are supported by up to 90% federal funding. 
Turnpikes normally don't get any federal funding.

Federal monies go all over the country. Toll monies go straight to the road they're collected from. No matter what you try to say, it's apples and oranges in terms of how these projects are funded. Toll agencies look at their total revenue and decide how to allocate it. State agencies need to work with a more limited budget and apply for more. You know all of this.

[bugo]

Mileage based exit numbers are far superior to sequential exit numbers.

[bugo]

"Trips would just go away"? I question the theory that somebody would say "I want to go to (grocery store/club/Walmart/dispensary/church) but they tore the freeway down so I'll just stay home."

[cl94]

For the benefit of everyone, assume we have a supermarket, a Target, and a liquor store in a strip mall. If it takes you 10 minutes to drive there and gas costs $2/gallon, most people wouldn't think twice about making separate trips to each store. But suppose the travel time increases to 30 minutes each way or gas goes up to $5/gallon. You'll start hitting 2-3 of those stores during each trip and traveling to the area less often. Same idea is at play here. People will generally be combining trips as it will now be more inconvenient to travel to the other side of the metro area. If people work on one side and live on the other, they'll start visiting the stores on their way home from work to save a trip.

[Beltway]

Can't toll I-81.

Indeed, but it shouldn't need to be tolled.

But you're comparing apples and oranges. Tap [TZ Bridge] is more money, but supported by toll revenue.

Interstate projects are supported by up to 90% federal funding. 
Turnpikes normally don't get any federal funding.

Federal monies go all over the country. Toll monies go straight to the road they're collected from. No matter what you try to say, it's apples and oranges in terms of how these projects are funded. Toll agencies look at their total revenue and decide how to allocate it. State agencies need to work with a more limited budget and apply for more. You know all of this.

Not quite.  There is a varied funding package --

The New York State Thruway Authority projects the 3.1-mile replacement bridge will cost $3.98 billion.  The state has already budgeted $3.65 billion of that cost.  More than half of the cost will be covered through borrowing.  The Thruway Authority has taken out an $850 million bond with payments through 2056.  The federal Department of Transportation loaned the state $1.6 billion.  Payments on the loan begin in 2023 and will last 30 years.  The state has spent $750 million on the project and has committed to spend $450 million more through 2018.

http://www.politifact.com/new-york/article/2017/aug/21/whos-paying-4-billion-tappan-zee-bridge-replacemen/

[Beltway]

[[ ... Embarcadero Freeway cites snipped ... ]]
Upshoot to the above IMHO:
1.  Had the 1989 earthquake not happened, the Freeway might be still standing & in use.
2.  Support for the keeping the freeway came from locals (i.e. voters) as well as commuters (i.e. outsiders).
3.  The Mayor who supported the freeway removal was shortly voted out of office.

Very interesting.  I didn't realize that there was strong citizen support for keeping the freeway in service, existing both before and after the earthquake. 

Basically there was a local coup by the mayor and bare majority of the city council, a bogus and corrupt process used to remove the freeway.

[kalvado]

For the benefit of everyone, assume we have a supermarket, a Target, and a liquor store in a strip mall. If it takes you 10 minutes to drive there and gas costs $2/gallon, most people wouldn't think twice about making separate trips to each store. But suppose the travel time increases to 30 minutes each way or gas goes up to $5/gallon. You'll start hitting 2-3 of those stores during each trip and traveling to the area less often. Same idea is at play here. People will generally be combining trips as it will now be more inconvenient to travel to the other side of the metro area. If people work on one side and live on the other, they'll start visiting the stores on their way home from work to save a trip.

It is pretty well known that demand for gas is not really elastic. Of course, combining trips is an option - but if I need 2 eggs for the dish I am making and realizing I am short of ingredients; or if I need a 4" section of plastic pipe to complete that sewer project - guess what?..
Even better, I have to go to work 5 days a week. Combining those trips with Lowes stop or grocery shopping is normal for me, but number of weekly trips is not really negotiable...
Tail of this graphs show 2008 recession, $5 gas.. and effect is in single digit %%..

[vdeane]

And how do you guys think the loans are going to be paid back?  Tolls.  There's currently talk of the toll rising to $10 in 2020.  It's also worth noting that some of the money contributed by the state came from a one-time windfall from a bank settlement, and NY may be looking at a budget shortfall next year.

Also worth noting that you can't just spend money on interstates and get reimbursed at 90%.  Federal funds are given as block grants and have to be obligated, and that requires approval from a MPO in an urban area, and there are many other interests, including municipalities, competing for limited federal funds, and the MPO's priorities and the state's don't always line up, either.  Just because a road is an interstate is NOT a guarantee of how much federal funding (if any) will be available.  And the state's share can be an issue too; there are more needs in the state than there are funds to fix them.

(personal opinion emphasized)

[Beltway]

And how do you guys think the loans are going to be paid back?  Tolls.  There's currently talk of the toll rising to $10 in 2020.  It's also worth noting that some of the money contributed by the state came from a one-time windfall from a bank settlement, and NY may be looking at a budget shortfall next year.

Agreed, $2.45 billion of bonds and loans is a lot of debt that needs to be serviced.  There is a whole funding package using innovative financing techniques to fund the TZ Bridge project.

Also worth noting that you can't just spend money on interstates and get reimbursed at 90%.  Federal funds are given as block grants and have to be obligated, and that requires approval from a MPO in an urban area, and there are many other interests, including municipalities, competing for limited federal funds, and the MPO's priorities and the state's don't always line up, either.  Just because a road is an interstate is NOT a guarantee of how much federal funding (if any) will be available.  And the state's share can be an issue too; there are more needs in the state than there are funds to fix them.

That's true, each state has annual allocation amounts from FHWA and it of course is a finite resource.

Nevertheless, maintenance, which includes maintenance replacements, is a fundamental and priority need on highway systems, that needs to be fully funded before spending money on new highways and expansion projects.  The state can't let MPOs be the sole arbiter of how to maintain Interstate highways.

I have been visiting friends in the Buffalo areas a couple times a year since 2008.  I noticed that the whole Interstate system there had major rehabs some time not very long before that time.  Long elevated sections had nice new roadway decks and parapets, with some ramp improvements.  I observed the total reconstruction project on the NY-5 freeway just south of the skyway bridge.

There is no reason why Syracuse should not receive similar treatments.

[froggie]

It still goes back to how to pay for them.  Some of those Buffalo improvements you mention, specifically along I-90 and I-190, are Thruway-supported (as 90 and 190 through Buffalo were NYSTA-supported routes at the time).  And redecking a bridge, even a long viaduct, costs considerably less than completely replacing it under traffic as you well know.

So how do you pay for the Syracuse improvements?  FHWA funding is very finite, as you already mentioned...and Congress has been very loathe to increase the gas tax which is the #1 source of that money.  Nevermind that NYSDOT has needs that stretch far beyond Syracuse which is also a factor for potential state funding.  PPP?  Would likely require tolls, and all the regulatory hurdles that such would entail.

[Beltway]

It still goes back to how to pay for them.  Some of those Buffalo improvements you mention, specifically along I-90 and I-190, are Thruway-supported (as 90 and 190 through Buffalo were NYSTA-supported routes at the time).  And redecking a bridge, even a long viaduct, costs considerably less than completely replacing it under traffic as you well know.

They were Thruway-supported routes in the early 2000s timespan?

I didn't look at them closely enough to see what had been done to the substructure; there may have been major rehabs to parts of them (as with I-95 JRB and Lombardy Bridge for example).

As for the Syracuse bridge, I have not seen definitive DOT evaluations that the substructure is not repairable.

So how do you pay for the Syracuse improvements?  FHWA funding is very finite, as you already mentioned...and Congress has been very loathe to increase the gas tax which is the #1 source of that money.  Nevermind that NYSDOT has needs that stretch far beyond Syracuse which is also a factor for potential state funding.  PPP?  Would likely require tolls, and all the regulatory hurdles that such would entail.

It's not my job to figure it out.  NYSDOT has had the last 10 to 20 years to plan for how to fund and execute this project.

[froggie]

They were Thruway-supported routes in the early 2000s timespan?

Yep...and still are per NYSTA.

[Beltway]

They were Thruway-supported routes in the early 2000s timespan?

Yep...and still are per NYSTA.

Maybe we need more examples of such major Interstate bridge rebuild or replace projects performed on toll-free Interstate highways, where age and wear alone were sufficient warrants to replace or rebuild the bridge.

I-95 JRB and Lombardy Bridge already cited.  Originally built on a turnpike 1955-1958, but the rebuild projects (1999-2002 and 2012-14) took place on a toll-free Interstate highway.

I-91 bridge in Vermont, a $60 million project underway now.

I-81 New River bridges, Pulaski County, VA, opened 1965 and the $100 million replacement projects are now getting underway.  Modern picturesque bridges when built but are simply wearing out and need to be replaced.

I-71 bridges in Ohio -- The Jeremiah Morrow Bridge is the name for a pair of concrete box girder bridges built between 2010 and 2016 which carry Interstate 71 over the Little Miami River gorge between Fort Ancient and Oregonia, Ohio.  The bridges are 239 feet (73 m) above the river, making them the highest bridges in Ohio, and are 2,252 ft (686 m) long, 55 ft (17 m) wide, with 440 ft (130 m) main spans.  Cost $88 million.  [Wikipedia]

I-90 bridges in Cleveland, OH -- The George V. Voinovich Bridges are two bridges in Cleveland, Ohio, U.S., that carry Interstate 90 over the Cuyahoga River. They are named for George Voinovich, former mayor of Cleveland, Governor of Ohio, and United States Senator.  Innerbelt Fwy, Cleveland, OH.  Total length: 3,918′, Height 136 feet (41 m), Construction cost $293 million, Opened: November 9, 2013.  [Wikipedia]

Those are a few that I can think of at the moment.  All very expensive projects. 

[cl94]

I-90 and I-190 in Buffalo are NYSTA. No federal funding outside of very major projects. I-190 is NYSTA south of Exit 22. ALL of I-90 in NY is NYSTA save the free section through Albany. Region 5 maintains a relatively small amount of the regional expressway network.

[Alps]

It's not my job to figure it out.  NYSDOT has had the last 10 to 20 years to plan for how to fund and execute this project.

In other words, you have no answer, and you're just speculating that it's possible. It's really not. There are enough other demands on funding that they don't necessarily have the resources for something like this. They're planning it now, but a cheap boulevard will win over an expensive viaduct in this era without a Federal windfall... or tolls.

[Beltway]

It's not my job to figure it out.  NYSDOT has had the last 10 to 20 years to plan for how to fund and execute this project.

In other words, you have no answer, and you're just speculating that it's possible. It's really not. There are enough other demands on funding that they don't necessarily have the resources for something like this. They're planning it now, but a cheap boulevard will win over an expensive viaduct in this era without a Federal windfall... or tolls.

Why is it my responsibility to figure out how an agency should fund and execute a major maintenance replacement highway project?  We are not talking about building a new highway, we are talking about maintaining an Interstate highway that has been in place for over 50 years.  The bridge isn't even quite a mile long, DOT people should not be wringing their hands and having anxiety attacks over how to design and fund this project.

I have already posted details about the I-95 James River Bridge rebuild project here.  Thank goodness that the highway agencies didn't just say, "Hey, this is too hard, we can't figure out what to do, I don't know where we are going to find the money, we got I-295 now, that means that we can just close the I-95 JRB and route I-95 over I-295!"

[kalvado]

It's not my job to figure it out.  NYSDOT has had the last 10 to 20 years to plan for how to fund and execute this project.

In other words, you have no answer, and you're just speculating that it's possible. It's really not. There are enough other demands on funding that they don't necessarily have the resources for something like this. They're planning it now, but a cheap boulevard will win over an expensive viaduct in this era without a Federal windfall... or tolls.

Why is it my responsibility to figure out how an agency should fund and execute a major maintenance replacement highway project?  We are not talking about building a new highway, we are talking about maintaining an Interstate highway that has been in place for over 50 years.  The bridge isn't even quite a mile long, DOT people should not be wringing their hands and having anxiety attacks over how to design and fund this project.

I have already posted details about the I-95 James River Bridge rebuild project here.  Thank goodness that the highway agencies didn't just say, "Hey, this is too hard, we can't figure out what to do, I don't know where we are going to find the money, we got I-295 now, that means that we can just close the I-95 JRB and route I-95 over I-295!"

Problem is that what they should do - or even better what they must do  - does not always align with what they can do.
As it stands right now, people who know situation better than you (and better than me, if that matters) keep telling that capabilities of NYDOT and expected funding - as well as public pressure from the city residents -  don't really line up with shoulds musts the way you see it.
Sometimes "no" is the only answer you can get.... 

[Beltway]

Problem is that what they should do - or even better what they must do  - does not always align with what they can do.
As it stands right now, people who know situation better than you (and better than me, if that matters) keep telling that capabilities of NYDOT and expected funding - as well as public pressure from the city residents -  don't really line up with shoulds musts the way you see it.
Sometimes "no" is the only answer you can get.... 

Rebuilding 0.9 mile of 50+ year old elevated Interstate highway should be well within the capabilities of a DOT.

Illinois DOT has been rebuilding the old Chicago expressways one at a time for over 30 years.  They were built as Interstate highways back in the 1950s and 1960s.

[Rothman]

Problem is that what they should do - or even better what they must do  - does not always align with what they can do.
As it stands right now, people who know situation better than you (and better than me, if that matters) keep telling that capabilities of NYDOT and expected funding - as well as public pressure from the city residents -  don't really line up with shoulds musts the way you see it.
Sometimes "no" is the only answer you can get.... 

Rebuilding 0.9 mile of 50+ year old elevated Interstate highway should be well within the capabilities of a DOT.

Illinois DOT has been rebuilding the old Chicago expressways one at a time for over 30 years.  They were built as Interstate highways back in the 1950s and 1960s.

When you said that MPOs can't be the sole arbiters of federal funding, that told me you are not totally educated on the financing of transportation projects and the STIP development process.  So, let us dig ino this post of yours...

The comparison between IDOT's and NYSDOT's experiences is pretty silly as you laid it out.  Yes, IDOT can replace expressways in Chicagoland...just like NYSDOT and NYCDOT have done in NYC over the same time period!  Comparing work feasible to be done in the 1st and 3rd largest urban areas in the country and saying that work should be just as feasible in rotting Syracuse is ridiculous.  State DOTs allocate their funds regionally, and of course huge cities like NYC and Chicago will receive the bulk of those funds.  NYC gets half or even more than half of the funding for NY in each fiscal year.  That leaves only so much for the rest of the state, which typically does not have a nearly $2 billion project to fund (projected I-81 cost).  Heck, even NYC would be crying for help for something that large.

Within the capability of DOT?  Absolutely...but only when extraordinary funding is secured by the powers that be.  If there is no political will for a tunnel or other gigantic "solution," then that option is simply politically and fiscally infeasible.

(personal opinion expressed).

[Alps]

Problem is that what they should do - or even better what they must do  - does not always align with what they can do.
As it stands right now, people who know situation better than you (and better than me, if that matters) keep telling that capabilities of NYDOT and expected funding - as well as public pressure from the city residents -  don't really line up with shoulds musts the way you see it.
Sometimes "no" is the only answer you can get.... 

Rebuilding 0.9 mile of 50+ year old elevated Interstate highway should be well within the capabilities of a DOT.

Illinois DOT has been rebuilding the old Chicago expressways one at a time for over 30 years.  They were built as Interstate highways back in the 1950s and 1960s.

For someone who says that you don't need to know how they can do something, you seem so damn certain that they can. Stop trolling.

[Beltway]

Problem is that what they should do - or even better what they must do  - does not always align with what they can do.
As it stands right now, people who know situation better than you (and better than me, if that matters) keep telling that capabilities of NYDOT and expected funding - as well as public pressure from the city residents -  don't really line up with shoulds musts the way you see it.
Sometimes "no" is the only answer you can get.... 

Rebuilding 0.9 mile of 50+ year old elevated Interstate highway should be well within the capabilities of a DOT.
Illinois DOT has been rebuilding the old Chicago expressways one at a time for over 30 years.  They were built as Interstate highways back in the 1950s and 1960s.

For someone who says that you don't need to know how they can do something, you seem so damn certain that they can. Stop trolling.

So there is always another "reason" why my comparisons aren't "relevant", for some reason or another.

I'm hearing a bunch of excuses.  If they want to say that for urban planning issues and local goals they want to deconstruct a freeway segment, then I can respect that.  If they want to try to cloak that decision in asserting that they can't find the money to fix this particular problem, then I have a problem with that notion.

"nearly $2 billion project to fund (projected I-81 cost)" -- where is the official estimate that it would cost that to rebuild or replace that viaduct on its current alignment.  Sounds exaggerated by an order of magnitude.

[kalvado]

Problem is that what they should do - or even better what they must do  - does not always align with what they can do.
As it stands right now, people who know situation better than you (and better than me, if that matters) keep telling that capabilities of NYDOT and expected funding - as well as public pressure from the city residents -  don't really line up with shoulds musts the way you see it.
Sometimes "no" is the only answer you can get.... 

Rebuilding 0.9 mile of 50+ year old elevated Interstate highway should be well within the capabilities of a DOT.
Illinois DOT has been rebuilding the old Chicago expressways one at a time for over 30 years.  They were built as Interstate highways back in the 1950s and 1960s.

For someone who says that you don't need to know how they can do something, you seem so damn certain that they can. Stop trolling.

So there is always another "reason" why my comparisons aren't "relevant", for some reason or another.

I'm hearing a bunch of excuses.  If they want to say that for urban planning issues and local goals they want to deconstruct a freeway segment, then I can respect that.  If they want to try to cloak that decision in asserting that they can't find the money to fix this particular problem, then I have a problem with that notion.

"nearly $2 billion project to fund (projected I-81 cost)" -- where is the official estimate that it would cost that to rebuild or replace that viaduct on its current alignment.

I'm afraid you missed it - and information is somewhere way upstream by now:
https://www.dot.ny.gov/i81opportunities/repository/2016_OpenHouse_DRAFT_oct5_Rev.pdf
There are cost estimates, reasoning why certain things are not considered etc.

[Beltway]

"nearly $2 billion project to fund (projected I-81 cost)" -- where is the official estimate that it would cost that to rebuild or replace that viaduct on its current alignment.

I'm afraid you missed it - and information is somewhere way upstream by now:
https://www.dot.ny.gov/i81opportunities/repository/2016_OpenHouse_DRAFT_oct5_Rev.pdf
There are cost estimates, reasoning why certain things are not considered etc.

Those are major freeway realignment alternatives, with large scale urban right-of-way acquisitions, where such costs are quite conceivable.

If I lived there, I would most likely oppose such a project, for both cost issues and environmental impact issues.

Again -- rebuild or replace that 0.9 mile viaduct on its current alignment.  No new right-of-way acquisition.