Interstate 81 in Syracuse

[seicer]

I'm pretty certain that a "skyway" option was presented before and dismissed as too expensive. Sure, you can have a "community grid" underneath it, but it didn't meet all of the objectives of the project and/or cost.

Note that the "skyway" was proposed by people who don't live in Syracuse.

[Rothman]

To be fair, I don't think there's any consensus amongst the public in Syracuse regarding what they want done.  The angry are determined to stay angry at this point, no matter what their position is.

[kalvado]

I'm pretty certain that a "skyway" option was presented before and dismissed as too expensive. Sure, you can have a "community grid" underneath it, but it didn't meet all of the objectives of the project and/or cost.

Note that the "skyway" was proposed by people who don't live in Syracuse.

While "expensive" is certainly a very valid argument of a show-stopper grade, I don't see why "who don't live in Syracuse" deserve even a mention.
We're talking about a part of the National System of Interstate and Defense Highways, which is a major commuter and regional route. So there are stakeholders besides those living in the city proper. That includes businesses in the city, such as Destiny mall, and many of those living outside of the city limit - such as suburban commuters; regional truckers - e.g. those going to Rochester; out-of-state soldiers in Fort Drum, and even out-of-country long haul truckers from Canada.
Love it or hate it, compromise is the name of the game. Too bad there is little wiggle room - or right of way; geology of the area doesn't help; so outcome is less than desired for many people. but disregarding their opinion based on just residence is a bad idea.

[froggie]

To be fair, I don't think there's any consensus amongst the public in Syracuse regarding what they want done.  The angry are determined to stay angry at this point, no matter what their position is.

Much like politics in general in this nation.

Regarding this Grid + Skyway proposal, I fail to see how it's any different than the "Viaduct Replacement" option...

[kalvado]

To be fair, I don't think there's any consensus amongst the public in Syracuse regarding what they want done.  The angry are determined to stay angry at this point, no matter what their position is.

Much like politics in general in this nation.

Regarding this Grid + Skyway proposal, I fail to see how it's any different than the "Viaduct Replacement" option...

Unlike many political issues, where some middle ground could - and should - be found, Syracuse is pretty much "A or B" type of question. Either there is a highway, or there is no highway, few options in between.

[Rothman]

The thing is that there is no question or real debate any longer.  The grid will be implemented.  The people that want to replace the viaduct will voice their comments at the scheduled hearing(s), they will be responded to in a way that will meet FHWA's requirements and the grid will move forward.

[kalvado]

The thing is that there is no question or real debate any longer.  The grid will be implemented.  The people that want to replace the viaduct will voice their comments at the scheduled hearing(s), they will be responded to in a way that will meet FHWA's requirements and the grid will move forward.

Or they will drag the project long enough for administration and priorities to change, another study of environmental effects of the previous study will be ordered, and viaduct will stay another few years decades until it collapses. [ /cynical]

[Rothman]

The thing is that there is no question or real debate any longer.  The grid will be implemented.  The people that want to replace the viaduct will voice their comments at the scheduled hearing(s), they will be responded to in a way that will meet FHWA's requirements and the grid will move forward.

Or they will drag the project long enough for administration and priorities to change, another study of environmental effects of the previous study will be ordered, and viaduct will stay another few years decades until it collapses. [ /cynical]

At this point, I don't think so -- at least in terms of getting to the ROD.  Now, after that point is a different matter, given the complexities of the work being done and both state and consultant forces crying that they're overstretched as is.

[vdeane]

Let's hope they'll at least ditch the "business loop 81" idea and go back to having a proper 3di for the portion that will remain a freeway.  I'm really not liking the option of having to briefly leave the interstate system to take a "business loop" between Rochester and the 1000 Islands (or, for that matter, the other transportation impacts this has on Rochester... Rochester has enough areas where taking an all-interstate route will take you out of your way, we don't need to add more!).

(personal opinion)

To be fair, I don't think there's any consensus amongst the public in Syracuse regarding what they want done.  The angry are determined to stay angry at this point, no matter what their position is.

Much like politics in general in this nation.

Regarding this Grid + Skyway proposal, I fail to see how it's any different than the "Viaduct Replacement" option...

It's higher in the air, which supposedly makes it less of a barrier.  Of course, that also increases the cost and makes connecting to I-690 more interesting.

[Rothman]

Just take I-481 to the Thruway.  I mean, I am probably for rebuilding the viaduct when it comes down to it, but given realities about the grid, the minutes longer it will take makes it the best option.

I do wonder about this idea of removing freeways and if people have thought through the traffic implications fully -- just on the surface roads.  Syracuse isn't NYC, but looking at how long it takes to drive from my daughter's apartment in Brooklyn to a spot in Queens seven miles away under the best traffic conditions does cause some pause.  And, given the convoluted route BL-81 will take through the city -- with the offset I-690 connection at Crouse and Irving (i.e., having to go up the shoulder of the Hill to get to I-690)  -- I can easily imagine frustration for those that stubbornly decide to go through the grid rather than around.

[Plutonic Panda]

The thing is that there is no question or real debate any longer.  The grid will be implemented.  The people that want to replace the viaduct will voice their comments at the scheduled hearing(s), they will be responded to in a way that will meet FHWA's requirements and the grid will move forward.

Or they will drag the project long enough for administration and priorities to change, another study of environmental effects of the previous study will be ordered, and viaduct will stay another few years decades until it collapses. [ /cynical]

I hope so. If the tunnel can't be build the skyway is a great alternative to the viaduct.

[kalvado]

The thing is that there is no question or real debate any longer.  The grid will be implemented.  The people that want to replace the viaduct will voice their comments at the scheduled hearing(s), they will be responded to in a way that will meet FHWA's requirements and the grid will move forward.

Or they will drag the project long enough for administration and priorities to change, another study of environmental effects of the previous study will be ordered, and viaduct will stay another few years decades until it collapses. [ /cynical]

I hope so. If the tunnel can't be build the skyway is a great alternative to the viaduct.

Dream: a cool new structure built after collapse
More realistic: Sorry, no funding for debree removal.

Grid is the best case scenario at this point...

[vdeane]

I just really, really hope they don't actually do "business loop I-81" and made the remaining freeway a 3di.  The business loop idea is quite honestly the part of the plan I hate the most.

Just take I-481 to the Thruway.  I mean, I am probably for rebuilding the viaduct when it comes down to it, but given realities about the grid, the minutes longer it will take makes it the best option.

Well out of the way on a local scale.  I-690 is slightly faster unless there's congestion, and doesn't have the "3 extra toll charges per direction because the Thruway bills AET in the stupidest way possible" problem, but is still well out of the way on a local scale (arguably even more so, because the extra distance is the same but the total distance is less).  If you were talking about the northern movement, why should I have to go out of my way to stay on the interstate system because someone thought a green shield would appease Pyramid when it absolutely won't?  Plus it's confusing since upstate NY uses "route" for everything, and now you'll have two roads signed "route 81".

[froggie]

^ That speaks far more to New Yorkers' inflexibility than it does the plan itself.

[Rothman]

I just really, really hope they don't actually do "business loop I-81" and made the remaining freeway a 3di.  The business loop idea is quite honestly the part of the plan I hate the most.

Just take I-481 to the Thruway.  I mean, I am probably for rebuilding the viaduct when it comes down to it, but given realities about the grid, the minutes longer it will take makes it the best option.

Well out of the way on a local scale.  I-690 is slightly faster unless there's congestion, and doesn't have the "3 extra toll charges per direction because the Thruway bills AET in the stupidest way possible" problem, but is still well out of the way on a local scale (arguably even more so, because the extra distance is the same but the total distance is less).  If you were talking about the northern movement, why should I have to go out of my way to stay on the interstate system because someone thought a green shield would appease Pyramid when it absolutely won't?  Plus it's confusing since upstate NY uses "route" for everything, and now you'll have two roads signed "route 81".

Well, fine.  Drive through the city with it's ill-timed lights and awkward on-ramp placement.

[vdeane]

I just really, really hope they don't actually do "business loop I-81" and made the remaining freeway a 3di.  The business loop idea is quite honestly the part of the plan I hate the most.

Just take I-481 to the Thruway.  I mean, I am probably for rebuilding the viaduct when it comes down to it, but given realities about the grid, the minutes longer it will take makes it the best option.

Well out of the way on a local scale.  I-690 is slightly faster unless there's congestion, and doesn't have the "3 extra toll charges per direction because the Thruway bills AET in the stupidest way possible" problem, but is still well out of the way on a local scale (arguably even more so, because the extra distance is the same but the total distance is less).  If you were talking about the northern movement, why should I have to go out of my way to stay on the interstate system because someone thought a green shield would appease Pyramid when it absolutely won't?  Plus it's confusing since upstate NY uses "route" for everything, and now you'll have two roads signed "route 81".

Well, fine.  Drive through the city with it's ill-timed lights and awkward on-ramp placement.

Where did I say that?  Or is it now planned to remove more of I-81 than in the last plan that was publicly revealed?  Last I checked, everything north of I-690 was supposed to remain exactly as it is now (with the exception of the I-481/NY 481 interchange changes), just with green shields and new exit numbers/mile markers.  Is that no longer the case?

For going south, Google does indeed list I-690 as faster than the Thruway, just by not much.

No thoughts on my business loop I-81 vs. 3di and state route extension issue?

[kalvado]

No thoughts on my business loop I-81 vs. 3di and state route extension issue?

I'm afraid people don't really care about the shields too much. 3DI may make some sense - but who really cares?
I only wonder why business loop was brought up as an option to begin with. Someone from west coast in NYSDOT leadership? 

[Rothman]

I just really, really hope they don't actually do "business loop I-81" and made the remaining freeway a 3di.  The business loop idea is quite honestly the part of the plan I hate the most.

Just take I-481 to the Thruway.  I mean, I am probably for rebuilding the viaduct when it comes down to it, but given realities about the grid, the minutes longer it will take makes it the best option.

Well out of the way on a local scale.  I-690 is slightly faster unless there's congestion, and doesn't have the "3 extra toll charges per direction because the Thruway bills AET in the stupidest way possible" problem, but is still well out of the way on a local scale (arguably even more so, because the extra distance is the same but the total distance is less).  If you were talking about the northern movement, why should I have to go out of my way to stay on the interstate system because someone thought a green shield would appease Pyramid when it absolutely won't?  Plus it's confusing since upstate NY uses "route" for everything, and now you'll have two roads signed "route 81".

Well, fine.  Drive through the city with it's ill-timed lights and awkward on-ramp placement.

Where did I say that?  Or is it now planned to remove more of I-81 than in the last plan that was publicly revealed?  Last I checked, everything north of I-690 was supposed to remain exactly as it is now (with the exception of the I-481/NY 481 interchange changes), just with green shields and new exit numbers/mile markers.  Is that no longer the case?

For going south, Google does indeed list I-690 as faster than the Thruway, just by not much.

No thoughts on my business loop I-81 vs. 3di and state route extension issue?

It's going to be BL-81.

[sprjus4]

No thoughts on my business loop I-81 vs. 3di and state route extension issue?

I'm afraid people don't really care about the shields too much. 3DI may make some sense - but who really cares?
I only wonder why business loop was brought up as an option to begin with. Someone from west coast in NYSDOT leadership?

North Carolina and South Carolina have a handful of interstate business routes as well.

[sparker]

I just really, really hope they don't actually do "business loop I-81" and made the remaining freeway a 3di.  The business loop idea is quite honestly the part of the plan I hate the most.

Just take I-481 to the Thruway.  I mean, I am probably for rebuilding the viaduct when it comes down to it, but given realities about the grid, the minutes longer it will take makes it the best option.

Well out of the way on a local scale.  I-690 is slightly faster unless there's congestion, and doesn't have the "3 extra toll charges per direction because the Thruway bills AET in the stupidest way possible" problem, but is still well out of the way on a local scale (arguably even more so, because the extra distance is the same but the total distance is less).  If you were talking about the northern movement, why should I have to go out of my way to stay on the interstate system because someone thought a green shield would appease Pyramid when it absolutely won't?  Plus it's confusing since upstate NY uses "route" for everything, and now you'll have two roads signed "route 81".

Well, fine.  Drive through the city with it's ill-timed lights and awkward on-ramp placement.

Where did I say that?  Or is it now planned to remove more of I-81 than in the last plan that was publicly revealed?  Last I checked, everything north of I-690 was supposed to remain exactly as it is now (with the exception of the I-481/NY 481 interchange changes), just with green shields and new exit numbers/mile markers.  Is that no longer the case?

For going south, Google does indeed list I-690 as faster than the Thruway, just by not much.

No thoughts on my business loop I-81 vs. 3di and state route extension issue?

It's going to be BL-81.

Then there are a bunch of FM's embedded in the decision-making process.  BTW, "M" means morons, the "F" can be freely interpolated (hint: it's a gerund)!  Nevertheless, if the grid decision is nailed down, the main thing, besides designation of the inner-city remnants, is to revise the north 81/481 interchange to expedite the main traffic movement on the rerouted I-81; leaving it on a low-speed cloverleaf would be an equally deplorable decision. 

[machias]

I just really, really hope they don't actually do "business loop I-81" and made the remaining freeway a 3di.  The business loop idea is quite honestly the part of the plan I hate the most.

Just take I-481 to the Thruway.  I mean, I am probably for rebuilding the viaduct when it comes down to it, but given realities about the grid, the minutes longer it will take makes it the best option.

Well out of the way on a local scale.  I-690 is slightly faster unless there's congestion, and doesn't have the "3 extra toll charges per direction because the Thruway bills AET in the stupidest way possible" problem, but is still well out of the way on a local scale (arguably even more so, because the extra distance is the same but the total distance is less).  If you were talking about the northern movement, why should I have to go out of my way to stay on the interstate system because someone thought a green shield would appease Pyramid when it absolutely won't?  Plus it's confusing since upstate NY uses "route" for everything, and now you'll have two roads signed "route 81".

Well, fine.  Drive through the city with it's ill-timed lights and awkward on-ramp placement.

Where did I say that?  Or is it now planned to remove more of I-81 than in the last plan that was publicly revealed?  Last I checked, everything north of I-690 was supposed to remain exactly as it is now (with the exception of the I-481/NY 481 interchange changes), just with green shields and new exit numbers/mile markers.  Is that no longer the case?

For going south, Google does indeed list I-690 as faster than the Thruway, just by not much.

No thoughts on my business loop I-81 vs. 3di and state route extension issue?

It's going to be BL-81.

Then there are a bunch of FM's embedded in the decision-making process.  BTW, "M" means morons, the "F" can be freely interpolated (hint: it's a gerund)!  Nevertheless, if the grid decision is nailed down, the main thing, besides designation of the inner-city remnants, is to revise the north 81/481 interchange to expedite the main traffic movement on the rerouted I-81; leaving it on a low-speed cloverleaf would be an equally deplorable decision. 

I wouldn't mind NY 581 from the northern I-81/I-481 junction to I-690 downtown. Since Syracuse doesn't want an interstate going through the city, I don't think it should be I-581, but NY 581 would be appropriate. The BL-81 markers will also do the trick, though NYers aren't used to the green shields and as others have said, it'll just be "Route 81", which could be confusing for many.

The bright spot of all this is this grid plan (though my opinion has no relevance, I think it's a dumb idea) is that I-81 will now get distance based interchange numbers from Binghamton to the Canadian border.

That'll make the everyone in the state love the idea even more. /s

[vdeane]

No thoughts on my business loop I-81 vs. 3di and state route extension issue?

I'm afraid people don't really care about the shields too much. 3DI may make some sense - but who really cares?
I only wonder why business loop was brought up as an option to begin with. Someone from west coast in NYSDOT leadership? 

My understanding is that it was an attempt to appease Pyramid (DestiNY USA) and the hotels in Salina - "see, you'll still have route 81, the shields will just be green instead of blue!".  Except they're still as upset as ever.

I just really, really hope they don't actually do "business loop I-81" and made the remaining freeway a 3di.  The business loop idea is quite honestly the part of the plan I hate the most.

Just take I-481 to the Thruway.  I mean, I am probably for rebuilding the viaduct when it comes down to it, but given realities about the grid, the minutes longer it will take makes it the best option.

Well out of the way on a local scale.  I-690 is slightly faster unless there's congestion, and doesn't have the "3 extra toll charges per direction because the Thruway bills AET in the stupidest way possible" problem, but is still well out of the way on a local scale (arguably even more so, because the extra distance is the same but the total distance is less).  If you were talking about the northern movement, why should I have to go out of my way to stay on the interstate system because someone thought a green shield would appease Pyramid when it absolutely won't?  Plus it's confusing since upstate NY uses "route" for everything, and now you'll have two roads signed "route 81".

Well, fine.  Drive through the city with it's ill-timed lights and awkward on-ramp placement.

Where did I say that?  Or is it now planned to remove more of I-81 than in the last plan that was publicly revealed?  Last I checked, everything north of I-690 was supposed to remain exactly as it is now (with the exception of the I-481/NY 481 interchange changes), just with green shields and new exit numbers/mile markers.  Is that no longer the case?

For going south, Google does indeed list I-690 as faster than the Thruway, just by not much.

No thoughts on my business loop I-81 vs. 3di and state route extension issue?

It's going to be BL-81.

Then there are a bunch of FM's embedded in the decision-making process.  BTW, "M" means morons, the "F" can be freely interpolated (hint: it's a gerund)!  Nevertheless, if the grid decision is nailed down, the main thing, besides designation of the inner-city remnants, is to revise the north 81/481 interchange to expedite the main traffic movement on the rerouted I-81; leaving it on a low-speed cloverleaf would be an equally deplorable decision. 

See page 64:
https://www.dot.ny.gov/i81opportunities/repository/03%20Alternatives_04-19-2019.pdf

I just really, really hope they don't actually do "business loop I-81" and made the remaining freeway a 3di.  The business loop idea is quite honestly the part of the plan I hate the most.

Just take I-481 to the Thruway.  I mean, I am probably for rebuilding the viaduct when it comes down to it, but given realities about the grid, the minutes longer it will take makes it the best option.

Well out of the way on a local scale.  I-690 is slightly faster unless there's congestion, and doesn't have the "3 extra toll charges per direction because the Thruway bills AET in the stupidest way possible" problem, but is still well out of the way on a local scale (arguably even more so, because the extra distance is the same but the total distance is less).  If you were talking about the northern movement, why should I have to go out of my way to stay on the interstate system because someone thought a green shield would appease Pyramid when it absolutely won't?  Plus it's confusing since upstate NY uses "route" for everything, and now you'll have two roads signed "route 81".

Well, fine.  Drive through the city with it's ill-timed lights and awkward on-ramp placement.

Where did I say that?  Or is it now planned to remove more of I-81 than in the last plan that was publicly revealed?  Last I checked, everything north of I-690 was supposed to remain exactly as it is now (with the exception of the I-481/NY 481 interchange changes), just with green shields and new exit numbers/mile markers.  Is that no longer the case?

For going south, Google does indeed list I-690 as faster than the Thruway, just by not much.

No thoughts on my business loop I-81 vs. 3di and state route extension issue?

It's going to be BL-81.

Then there are a bunch of FM's embedded in the decision-making process.  BTW, "M" means morons, the "F" can be freely interpolated (hint: it's a gerund)!  Nevertheless, if the grid decision is nailed down, the main thing, besides designation of the inner-city remnants, is to revise the north 81/481 interchange to expedite the main traffic movement on the rerouted I-81; leaving it on a low-speed cloverleaf would be an equally deplorable decision. 

I wouldn't mind NY 581 from the northern I-81/I-481 junction to I-690 downtown. Since Syracuse doesn't want an interstate going through the city, I don't think it should be I-581, but NY 581 would be appropriate. The BL-81 markers will also do the trick, though NYers aren't used to the green shields and as others have said, it'll just be "Route 81", which could be confusing for many.

The bright spot of all this is this grid plan (though my opinion has no relevance, I think it's a dumb idea) is that I-81 will now get distance based interchange numbers from Binghamton to the Canadian border.

That'll make the everyone in the state love the idea even more. /s

The mile-based numbers are the ONE silver lining on a project that seems to get worse with each new iteration of the plan.  I think it's safe to say that I'm opposed to anything that takes the I-690-I-481/NY 481 portion of the route out of the interstate system.  Why should traffic from Rochester to Watertown/Canada have to leave the interstate system to get between I-90 and I-81?  That route will be an integral route for thru traffic, no matter what the business loop proponents may say.  Its status in the system should reflect that.

Regarding mile-based numbers, I'm pretty sure most of the opposition to that is downstate.  My aunt and uncle will be very happy to see the numbers on I-81 switch.  The Thruway's Facebook page also got a ton of comments asking when the numbers will change, as well.  I wonder what will happen with NY 481 - will everything be left as-is, or will it get re-calibrated to reflect the truncation of "481"?  Something tells me I-690 will stay the same (maybe exit 12 for current I-81, since the reconfiguration of West Street should free up the existing one?), though IMO this would be a good chance to just go ahead and convert everything in Region 3.

I just really, really hope they don't actually do "business loop I-81" and made the remaining freeway a 3di.  The business loop idea is quite honestly the part of the plan I hate the most.

Just take I-481 to the Thruway.  I mean, I am probably for rebuilding the viaduct when it comes down to it, but given realities about the grid, the minutes longer it will take makes it the best option.

Well out of the way on a local scale.  I-690 is slightly faster unless there's congestion, and doesn't have the "3 extra toll charges per direction because the Thruway bills AET in the stupidest way possible" problem, but is still well out of the way on a local scale (arguably even more so, because the extra distance is the same but the total distance is less).  If you were talking about the northern movement, why should I have to go out of my way to stay on the interstate system because someone thought a green shield would appease Pyramid when it absolutely won't?  Plus it's confusing since upstate NY uses "route" for everything, and now you'll have two roads signed "route 81".

Well, fine.  Drive through the city with it's ill-timed lights and awkward on-ramp placement.

Where did I say that?  Or is it now planned to remove more of I-81 than in the last plan that was publicly revealed?  Last I checked, everything north of I-690 was supposed to remain exactly as it is now (with the exception of the I-481/NY 481 interchange changes), just with green shields and new exit numbers/mile markers.  Is that no longer the case?

For going south, Google does indeed list I-690 as faster than the Thruway, just by not much.

No thoughts on my business loop I-81 vs. 3di and state route extension issue?

It's going to be BL-81.

No chance that they'll walk it back and pick something more sensible?  That sucks.  One thing I've always loved about upstate NY is the great interstate system connectivity, but it seems like they're determined to throw that away.  Soon Albany will be the only place other than NYC that still has it (not that Rochester was great in that respect before, but at least it used to be solely PA's fault).

[Rothman]

A lot of prep work on I-481 will happen as phase 1 of the project.  I-690's off and on ramps are going to be reconfigured.  Bridges over I-690 are going to be replaced.  It's going to be a while before the viaduct actually comes down.

In terms of "interstate connectivity," BL-81 will be the same facility it is now and I would doubt it would lose its 90% NHPP eligibility.  Green shield or blue shield...just doesn't matter.

[sparker]

A lot of prep work on I-481 will happen as phase 1 of the project.  I-690's off and on ramps are going to be reconfigured.  Bridges over I-690 are going to be replaced.  It's going to be a while before the viaduct actually comes down.

In terms of "interstate connectivity," BL-81 will be the same facility it is now and I would doubt it would lose its 90% NHPP eligibility.  Green shield or blue shield...just doesn't matter.

Then you'll just have to agree to disagree with some of us about this.  Personally, I never liked the "Biz 80" concept in Sacramento, and the NC/SC instances always seemed a bit forced (and NC has, thankfully, backed away from the idea).  If it's an Interstate-grade freeway, it should be signed as such, regardless of whether or not some corporate weasel can convince state DOT officials to attempt to confuse the driving public with two roads bearing the same number.  We forum contributors aren't fooled, but we're the exception rather than the rule.  It's a shame that those with decision-making power have little or no concept of convention or system history (but then the national experience of 2017-2021 showed what malignant incompetence wrought!).  IMO, the best solution would be to sign the freeway remainder north of I-690 as I-681 (keeping the Syracuse "600" motif consistent), with the boulevard/grid segment to the south as NY 681.  One continually-numbered but situationally appropriate composite facility that references the trunk "81" number but poses minimal confusion to the driving public, especially visitors from out of the area. 

[vdeane]

Yes, I hate how people tend not to think in terms of the system as a whole anymore.  The interstate system is one of the greatest engineering marvels ever created by mankind.  It should be respected and refined with all that entails, not hacked about by people who only bother to think in terms of a specific corridor at a time.  I-681/NY 681 would be perfect for the route.  It would be elegant, at least to the extent it is possible to be elegant while still removing the viaduct.

A lot of prep work on I-481 will happen as phase 1 of the project.  I-690's off and on ramps are going to be reconfigured.  Bridges over I-690 are going to be replaced.  It's going to be a while before the viaduct actually comes down.

In terms of "interstate connectivity," BL-81 will be the same facility it is now and I would doubt it would lose its 90% NHPP eligibility.  Green shield or blue shield...just doesn't matter.

But the green shields aren't interstates.  It may still be an all-freeway route, but you can't call it an all-interstate route.  Go take a look at Spartanburg on FHWA's map and see what business loop 85 isn't recognized as.  If it's not signed with the red, which, and blue shield, recognized by FHWA, or in usai on TM, it's not an interstate.  Period.