Interstate 81 in Syracuse

[Rothman]

https://www.syracuse.com/news/2019/06/5-things-to-know-about-how-i-481-would-become-i-81-near-syracuse.html

Looks like the part of I-81 north of the Thruway will still be a freeway just numbered differently.

^ Buffalo to NYC uses the exact same route as Rochester to NYC... It just joins the Thruway further west...

https://www.google.com/maps/dir/Buffalo,+NY/New+York,+NY/@42.2964056,-76.3975838,8z/data=!4m14!4m13!1m5!1m1!1s0x89d3126152dfe5a1:0x982304a5181f8171!2m2!1d-78.8783689!2d42.8864468!1m5!1m1!1s0x89c24fa5d33f083b:0xc80b8f06e177fe62!2m2!1d-74.0059728!2d40.7127753!3e0

The Thruway is not used, the fastest route is 20A-390-86.

Pfft.  I still doubt many people go that way.

I also wonder how many people go from Syracuse, Rochester and Buffalo down to the City.  I would think it pales in comparison to Albany.

[Rothman]

https://www.syracuse.com/news/2019/06/5-things-to-know-about-how-i-481-would-become-i-81-near-syracuse.html

Egads.  That article is two years old.

[froggie]

https://www.syracuse.com/news/2019/06/5-things-to-know-about-how-i-481-would-become-i-81-near-syracuse.html

Of course, the proper solution to improve I-481 to accommodate significantly increased traffic volumes along with future projections would be an expansion from 4 to 6 lanes throughout, plus the currently proposed auxiliary lanes where needed.

But that would cost too much money... say, maybe, the additional costs needed to reconstruct the I-81 viaduct?

It seems to me, without proper expansion of I-481, traffic will increase significantly on that route and with congestion becoming more commonplace due to lack of proper capacity.

Even with rerouted traffic, the entire I-481 route does not need to be 6 lanes.  It's just not that busy, especially north of the Thruway.  While IMO the current plan for auxiliary lanes falls short, you would really only need 6 lanes between NY 5/92 and the Thruway.

[webny99]

^ Buffalo to NYC uses the exact same route as Rochester to NYC... It just joins the Thruway further west...

...
The Thruway is not used, the fastest route is 20A-390-86.

Pfft.  I still doubt many people go that way.

I also wonder how many people go from Syracuse, Rochester and Buffalo down to the City.  I would think it pales in comparison to Albany.

It's basically identical time-wise, and I-81/I-90 is faster to the northern suburbs and Niagara Falls. Google doesn't even recommend US 20A as an option for those points. And even for Buffalo itself, anyone with any aversion to two-lane roads whatsoever is going to opt for I-81/I-90. Also (Roadgeekteen, just FYI since you may not know this), trucks are banned from US 20A in Warsaw, so all truck traffic would likely use I-81/I-90. Another option for trucks is I-390 to NY 36/NY 63, but it's all two-lane between I-390 and the Thruway, so it's not a great option.

And that's not to mention Canada - most of the truck traffic from there is also going to end up on I-90 because of the same issue with 20A. You'll see plenty of trucks with Ontario plates on the southern half of I-390, but I suspect most of those are going to/from PA/MD and points further south, not NYC/NJ/CT.

[Rothman]

One of the main obstacles to three-laning 481 is the bridge over the railyards between the Thruway and I-690.

It was decided that major interchange improvements were enough to handle the anticipated traffic.

Really, turning I-481 into I-81 isn't a real major concern.  As discussed extensively above, it's accomodating the west-to-south movement, especially as communities west of Syracuse are vehemently opposed to increased truck traffic.  Surprisingly, I attended a public meeting for Homer officials that didn't seem as concerned (to the south, where trucks may decide to rejoin I-81).

[Rothman]

^ Buffalo to NYC uses the exact same route as Rochester to NYC... It just joins the Thruway further west...

...
The Thruway is not used, the fastest route is 20A-390-86.

Pfft.  I still doubt many people go that way.

I also wonder how many people go from Syracuse, Rochester and Buffalo down to the City.  I would think it pales in comparison to Albany.

It's basically identical time-wise, and I-81/I-90 is faster to the northern suburbs and Niagara Falls. Google doesn't even recommend US 20A as an option for those points. And even for Buffalo itself, anyone with any aversion to two-lane roads whatsoever is going to opt for I-81/I-90. Also, trucks are banned from US 20A in Warsaw, so all truck traffic would likely use I-81/I-90 (I-390 to NY 36/NY 63 is an option, but not a great one).

And that's not to mention Canada - most of the truck traffic from there is also going to end up on I-90 because of the same issue with 20A. You'll see plenty of trucks with Ontario plates on the southern half of I-390, but I suspect most of those are going to/from PA/MD and points further south, not NYC/NJ/CT.

Trucks were taking NY 63 for a while.  I haven't heard concerns about that "shortcut" in five years or so, though.

[webny99]

Even with rerouted traffic, the entire I-481 route does not need to be 6 lanes.  It's just not that busy, especially north of the Thruway.  While IMO the current plan for auxiliary lanes falls short, you would really only need 6 lanes between NY 5/92 and the Thruway.

It's not that busy now, but it remains to be seen what it will be like with the new traffic patterns..

With that said, though, doesn't the plan now basically provide 6 lanes from NY 5/92 to the Thruway? The only exception I can see is SB from the Thruway to Kirkville Rd - only a mile or so, and there will be a NB auxiliary lane on that segment.

[froggie]

^ I was referring to post-construction.  In all likelihood given that existing I-81 remains intact north of 690 (and is actually improved from 690 to 370), traffic patterns will not change much north of the Thruway.

I was under the impression that the auxiliary lanes would not continue through the Kirkville Rd interchange...one of the shortcomings I have noted previously.

[webny99]

The plans that vdeane linked to show an auxiliary lane NB but not SB. It would enter from Kirkville Rd. and exit to the Thruway, so it wouldn't technically be a "through" lane.

[vdeane]

Even with rerouted traffic, the entire I-481 route does not need to be 6 lanes.  It's just not that busy, especially north of the Thruway.  While IMO the current plan for auxiliary lanes falls short, you would really only need 6 lanes between NY 5/92 and the Thruway.

It's not that busy now, but it remains to be seen what it will be like with the new traffic patterns..

With that said, though, doesn't the plan now basically provide 6 lanes from NY 5/92 to the Thruway? The only exception I can see is SB from the Thruway to Kirkville Rd - only a mile or so, and there will be a NB auxiliary lane on that segment.

Oh, it's busy.  The speed limit on that road is 65, but traffic often is stuck at 60.  Normally, I drive 72 in 65 zones, but getting to that speed is basically impossible on I-481.  And that's with the traffic as it is now.

[Michael]

I watched some of the video simulations released this past week, and it was much easier to visualize the plans seeing them rendered in 3D. Having both driven in and seen rush hour traffic in Syracuse, I have to say that the traffic simulations seemed on the light side.  I did get a kick out of the fact that the viaduct option showed a backup during the afternoon rush hour on I-481 southbound at NY 5/92.  The backups I've experienced there were after the first exit ramp, but the simulation showed the backup before the first ramp.

In the downtown area, I was surprised to see how wide the viaduct ROW would be.  I was under the impression that the ramps would be closer together, but they looked to take up the width of an entire city block!  I always thought the acquisitions needed would be to increase the radii of the curves.  With the Community Grid simulation, I thought downtown traffic was especially light.  I've driven in downtown Syracuse at various times through the day, and it seems to be busier than the simulation unless it's later in the evening.

Even with rerouted traffic, the entire I-481 route does not need to be 6 lanes.  It's just not that busy, especially north of the Thruway.  While IMO the current plan for auxiliary lanes falls short, you would really only need 6 lanes between NY 5/92 and the Thruway.

It's not that busy now, but it remains to be seen what it will be like with the new traffic patterns..

With that said, though, doesn't the plan now basically provide 6 lanes from NY 5/92 to the Thruway? The only exception I can see is SB from the Thruway to Kirkville Rd - only a mile or so, and there will be a NB auxiliary lane on that segment.

Oh, it's busy.  The speed limit on that road is 65, but traffic often is stuck at 60.  Normally, I drive 72 in 65 zones, but getting to that speed is basically impossible on I-481.  And that's with the traffic as it is now.

During the evening rush hour heading southbound between I-690 and NY 5/92, I normally find traffic is going 55 MPH.

[Rothman]

Even with rerouted traffic, the entire I-481 route does not need to be 6 lanes.  It's just not that busy, especially north of the Thruway.  While IMO the current plan for auxiliary lanes falls short, you would really only need 6 lanes between NY 5/92 and the Thruway.

It's not that busy now, but it remains to be seen what it will be like with the new traffic patterns..

With that said, though, doesn't the plan now basically provide 6 lanes from NY 5/92 to the Thruway? The only exception I can see is SB from the Thruway to Kirkville Rd - only a mile or so, and there will be a NB auxiliary lane on that segment.

Oh, it's busy.  The speed limit on that road is 65, but traffic often is stuck at 60.  Normally, I drive 72 in 65 zones, but getting to that speed is basically impossible on I-481.  And that's with the traffic as it is now.

Pfft.  No, it isn't.  I drive on the section between I-690 and the Thruway frequently and haven't had much trouble out of the ordinary.  There's some minor traffic at rush hour and getting out on Fridays, but it's pretty tame.

[vdeane]

Even with rerouted traffic, the entire I-481 route does not need to be 6 lanes.  It's just not that busy, especially north of the Thruway.  While IMO the current plan for auxiliary lanes falls short, you would really only need 6 lanes between NY 5/92 and the Thruway.

It's not that busy now, but it remains to be seen what it will be like with the new traffic patterns..

With that said, though, doesn't the plan now basically provide 6 lanes from NY 5/92 to the Thruway? The only exception I can see is SB from the Thruway to Kirkville Rd - only a mile or so, and there will be a NB auxiliary lane on that segment.

Oh, it's busy.  The speed limit on that road is 65, but traffic often is stuck at 60.  Normally, I drive 72 in 65 zones, but getting to that speed is basically impossible on I-481.  And that's with the traffic as it is now.

Pfft.  No, it isn't.  I drive on the section between I-690 and the Thruway frequently and haven't had much trouble out of the ordinary.  There's some minor traffic at rush hour and getting out on Fridays, but it's pretty tame.

I cannot say that I've ever experienced free-flow conditions on I-481 between NY 5 and the Thruway, except perhaps early on a Sunday morning.  Heck, on my last drive, I never managed to get above 65 at any point, and I've found that's fairly typical.  Now, I'm not on the road during rush hour - more like mid-day.  Now, Syracuse locals do tend to drive slower in 65 zones than I would, so maybe that's why it feels fine to you.  I have similar issues on I-81 too, but I-81 has room to maneuver around the slowpokes.  I-481 doesn't.

Now, most people DO tend to have more of a "go with the flow" attitude towards speed than I do.  I'm the type that wants to go a certain speed for a certain speed limit unless the roadway geometry or weather conditions dictate otherwise, so I tend to get annoyed whenever my speed is instead dictated by how fast the person in front of me is going.  This leads to a unique effect where I go from being one of the faster cars on the road to one of the slower ones where I-81 drops to 55 mph.  This effect happens everywhere, but it does seem to be more pronounced around Syracuse as Region 3 has raised more of their suburban freeway network to 65 than the other urban regions have.

[Rothman]

Even with rerouted traffic, the entire I-481 route does not need to be 6 lanes.  It's just not that busy, especially north of the Thruway.  While IMO the current plan for auxiliary lanes falls short, you would really only need 6 lanes between NY 5/92 and the Thruway.

It's not that busy now, but it remains to be seen what it will be like with the new traffic patterns..

With that said, though, doesn't the plan now basically provide 6 lanes from NY 5/92 to the Thruway? The only exception I can see is SB from the Thruway to Kirkville Rd - only a mile or so, and there will be a NB auxiliary lane on that segment.

Oh, it's busy.  The speed limit on that road is 65, but traffic often is stuck at 60.  Normally, I drive 72 in 65 zones, but getting to that speed is basically impossible on I-481.  And that's with the traffic as it is now.

Pfft.  No, it isn't.  I drive on the section between I-690 and the Thruway frequently and haven't had much trouble out of the ordinary.  There's some minor traffic at rush hour and getting out on Fridays, but it's pretty tame.

I cannot say that I've ever experienced free-flow conditions on I-481 between NY 5 and the Thruway, except perhaps early on a Sunday morning.  Heck, on my last drive, I never managed to get above 65 at any point, and I've found that's fairly typical.  Now, I'm not on the road during rush hour - more like mid-day.  Now, Syracuse locals do tend to drive slower in 65 zones than I would, so maybe that's why it feels fine to you.  I have similar issues on I-81 too, but I-81 has room to maneuver around the slowpokes.  I-481 doesn't.

Now, most people DO tend to have more of a "go with the flow" attitude towards speed than I do.  I'm the type that wants to go a certain speed for a certain speed limit unless the roadway geometry or weather conditions dictate otherwise, so I tend to get annoyed whenever my speed is instead dictated by how fast the person in front of me is going.  This leads to a unique effect where I go from being one of the faster cars on the road to one of the slower ones where I-81 drops to 55 mph.  This effect happens everywhere, but it does seem to be more pronounced around Syracuse as Region 3 has raised more of their suburban freeway network to 65 than the other urban regions have.

No, I get up to 75 regularly on I-481 on that section.  The idea you can't get above 65 just doesn't pan out in my much more frequent experience with the stretch of I-481.  Free-flow is common.

I'm more concerned about the northeast arm of I-481.  There, a little more congestion is more common.

And hey, concerning the rush hour congestion at 5/92, just don't live in Fayetteville.  It's to Syracuse what Clifton Park is to Albany...

[webny99]

Oh, it's busy. The speed limit on that road is 65, but traffic often is stuck at 60.  Normally, I drive 72 in 65 zones, but getting to that speed is basically impossible on I-481.  And that's with the traffic as it is now.

That actually sounds a lot like the four-lane section of I-490 east of Rochester. Usually bearable, but the third lane is a big relief in both directions.

This leads to a unique effect where I go from being one of the faster cars on the road to one of the slower ones where I-81 drops to 55 mph.  This effect happens everywhere, but it does seem to be more pronounced around Syracuse as Region 3 has raised more of their suburban freeway network to 65 than the other urban regions have.

Syracuse does seem to have a surprising amount of 65 mph on their freeway network. I-690 between the Thruway and the Fairgrounds, in particular, is one of the more aggressive segments posted at 65 mph. Come to think of it, it's pretty crazy that I-690 is 65 mph while I-290 is stuck at 55 mph. 

Rochester, on the other hand, doesn't have many that are a surprise except for maybe NY 531 and the aforementioned section of I-490 (because it's so old/narrow and traffic usually slows right where the limit increases thanks to the lane drop).

[webny99]

I'm more concerned about the northeast arm of I-481.  There, a little more congestion is more common.

The section north of the Thruway? Whereabouts, exactly? I've never heard of any problems on that section and traffic volumes are also lower than the Thruway to NY 5/92.

[Rothman]

I'm more concerned about the northeast arm of I-481.  There, a little more congestion is more common.

The section north of the Thruway? Whereabouts, exactly? I've never heard of any problems on that section and traffic volumes are also lower than the Thruway to NY 5/92.

Up there before and after the bend.  Traffic at rush hour is sort of just under the congestion cusp.  I do wonder if the conversion will push it over the edge during rush hour.

5/92's always going to be an issue due to people getting to the shopping centers in Fayetteville and commuters, so some more traffic there will just blend into expectations.  Up north?  That might get people ticked due to it being more surprising.

[webny99]

5/92's always going to be an issue due to people getting to the shopping centers in Fayetteville and commuters, so some more traffic there will just blend into expectations.  Up north?  That might get people ticked due to it being more surprising.

The main issue with NY 5/92 seems to be the SB to EB loop in the afternoon, correct? That is going to be addressed with this project - the loop will be removed and that movement will occur from the current SB to WB ramp, which will be modified to allow a triple left turn. There aren't many triple lefts around, but the one in the Rochester area (I-490 EB to NY 441) handles volumes that are probably pretty similar if not higher, and seems to work well.

I would think the redesigned I-81/I-481 interchange in the north would alleviate any congestion issues there, but then I can see how the improved flow onto I-481 could create problems at Exits 7 and 8. We shall see...

[Rothman]

Yeah, we'll see how that triple left works.  Going to be some adjusting to get used to which lane you need to be in to go where.  I still think congestion in the interchange's vicinity will be an issue.

[Michael]

I saw this on Syracuse.com the other day: Destiny USA hires former Federal Highway Administration lawyer to fight I-81 plan

[Rothman]

I saw this on Syracuse.com the other day: Destiny USA hires former Federal Highway Administration lawyer to fight I-81 plan

I don't believe Destiny USA showed up at the hearings yesterday.  Not sure.  From what I heard, they were uneventful.

[froggie]

It was mentioned in another thread that AASHTO has posted the route applications for this latest round of Interstate/U.S./USBR changes.  Worth noting that, per NYSDOT's applications on I-81/I-481, they intend to have things changed by the spring of 2027.

[vdeane]

It was mentioned in another thread that AASHTO has posted the route applications for this latest round of Interstate/U.S./USBR changes.  Worth noting that, per NYSDOT's applications on I-81/I-481, they intend to have things changed by the spring of 2027.

That's odd.  Wasn't it mentioned that the projects on I-481 were supposed to happen first?  Wouldn't it be logical for the designation change to happen right after that?

[froggie]

Stranger things have happened where NYSDOT is involved...

Yes, I recall something along those lines was mentioned, and it makes sense to get the I-481 stuff done first.  But that doesn't mean NYSDOT will move I-81 over right away....it's entirely plausible that they will build everything along 481 and just pull a NCDOT and slap I-81 overlays on the signage when they actually make the change.

[webny99]

Yes, I recall something along those lines was mentioned, and it makes sense to get the I-481 stuff done first.  But that doesn't mean NYSDOT will move I-81 over right away....it's entirely plausible that they will build everything along 481 and just pull a NCDOT and slap I-81 overlays on the signage when they actually make the change.

I sure hope not. Given that I-81 is going to be renumbered with mileage-based exits, I would hope they just do it properly and switch I-81 to the new alignment with new signage as soon as the improvements are complete before even touching anything downtown.