Interstate 81 in Syracuse

[PHLBOS]

Nevermind that there were other reasons a tunnel wasn't forwarded...same as why the depressed roadway/"trench" didn't make it:  the ramp connections between 81 South and 690 would have severed several key east-west streets, including Erie Blvd and possibly Genessee St.

Another often-overlooked disadvantage with the tunnel option (in general and not just the I-81 option in the Syracuse area) is that such, for safety reasons, imposes a hazmat vehicle restriction; which becomes an issue for local, O&D (origin/destination) transport.  To those drivers; replacing the viaduct (which they presently can use) with a tunnel is, in essence, taking away a viable option for them.  They would be forced off at the last exit ramp prior to the tunnel and would have to use more local, surface roads.

Samples of tunnel hazmat prohibition signs:

Along PA Turnpike:


Along I-95 in Baltimore, prior to the Fort McHenry Tunnel:


If this tunnel option were for a brand new highway (as opposed to a replacement), that's one thing; but since it's replacing an existing viaduct, that drawback needs to be discussed/addressed (if such hasn't already been done so).

[kalvado]

Another often-overlooked disadvantage with the tunnel option (in general and not just the I-81 option in the Syracuse area) is that such, for safety reasons, imposes a hazmat vehicle restriction; which becomes an issue for local, O&D (origin/destination) transport.  To those drivers; replacing the viaduct (which they presently can use) with a tunnel is, in essence, taking a way a viable option for them.  They would be forced off at the last exit ramp prior to the tunnel and would have to use more local, surface roads.

There are a few 3-digit interstate roads in the area going around the stretch in question, so the problem would not be as severe as it may sound.

[kalvado]

with each of them being clearly worse than all other options.

Why do you say this?

Because there is no good option, all options on the table have show-stopper grade problems attached to them. It is either too costly, too disrupting to the city, too damaging to traffic flow, and maybe all of the above.
If I had to vote for one of the options, I would just stay at home.

[PHLBOS]

Another often-overlooked disadvantage with the tunnel option (in general and not just the I-81 option in the Syracuse area) is that such, for safety reasons, imposes a hazmat vehicle restriction; which becomes an issue for local, O&D (origin/destination) transport.  To those drivers; replacing the viaduct (which they presently can use) with a tunnel is, in essence, taking a way a viable option for them.  They would be forced off at the last exit ramp prior to the tunnel and would have to use more local, surface roads.

There are a few 3-digit interstate roads in the area going around the stretch in question, so the problem would not be as severe as it may sound.

I will clarify; if a hazmat vehicle's origin or destination is, for example, near/at Syracuse University or Upstate Medical University; I-481 or 690 won't help if the vehicle is coming/going from the south (via I-81).  Such vehicles would have to use either US 11, another parallel street or whatever boulevard would be placed over a tunnel.

[kalvado]

Another often-overlooked disadvantage with the tunnel option (in general and not just the I-81 option in the Syracuse area) is that such, for safety reasons, imposes a hazmat vehicle restriction; which becomes an issue for local, O&D (origin/destination) transport.  To those drivers; replacing the viaduct (which they presently can use) with a tunnel is, in essence, taking a way a viable option for them.  They would be forced off at the last exit ramp prior to the tunnel and would have to use more local, surface roads.

There are a few 3-digit interstate roads in the area going around the stretch in question, so the problem would not be as severe as it may sound.

I will clarify; if a hazmat vehicle's origin or destination is, for example, near/at Syracuse University or Upstate Medical University; I-481 or 690 won't help if the vehicle is coming/going from the south (via I-81).  Such vehicles would have to use either US 11, another parallel street or whatever boulevard would be placed over a tunnel.

Or loop around and come from the north.  Which may be not the nicest thing to do, but for me extra 10 minutes on interstate is a reasonable price to pay to avoid 5 minutes trip on side streets.

[amroad17]

This has become an absolute mess.  Obviously, very few leaders thought "what do we need to do in 50 years when the viaduct needs to be replaced?"  Also, this is the product of wanting to build Interstate highways through downtown areas that was so prevalent in the 1960's.  Now the residents of Syracuse are going to pay for a solution that has been dragging on for at least five years.

With the terrain around Syracuse (mostly south), NYSDOT more than likely chose a path of least resistance.  I-81 couldn't be built around the city (Onondaga Lake, subdivisions, and hills to the west and hills just south of I-481 southeast) so it had to go through the city.  Unfortunately, with hindsight being 20/20, what was chosen was probably one of the worst choices to build a freeway.  This is one where once the decision was made, there wouldn't be an alternate place to build a new freeway if one was needed.  Right now, it is two choices, use I-481 around the city or have a more modern version of what there is now.

I thought of a "cap-and-cover" in which I-81 would be in a trench and the streets above it, however, the water tables would prevent this.  Syracuse was built amongst swampland and with nearby Onondaga Lake, there would be too much of an issue.  Switching I-81 to ground-level with local streets on overpasses would be waaaay too costly.

Asthetically, the Community Grid option would appease those who did not like the way I-81 "divided the city."  Functionally, would this work?  Would people living south of the city want to take I-81, I-481, and I-690 to their jobs downtown or north of downtown?  Would they be willing to use the "boulevard" to get to their jobs?  I know I wouldn't want to do this every day.

This has become a real serious issue for those in the Syracuse area.  A decision needs to be made as soon as possible.  Choose something NYSDOT!

Pfft.  It's not NYSDOT's fault for not choosing an alternative.  It's the freakin' public hearing process and the galvanized factions that have supported the infeasible and ridiculous options that are dragging the thing out.

All right, SOMEBODY make a decision and get on with it or we at AAROADS.com can make the decision for them!

Wouldn't that be nice?

[kalvado]

All right, SOMEBODY make a decision and get on with it or we at AAROADS.com can make the decision for them!

Wouldn't that be nice?

Would be interesting if we can come to any conclusion over here. Is there a way to setup a poll within comments, or do something similar?

[Michael]

Syracuse.com: DOT officials say tunnel feasibility study coming for I-81 in Syracuse

Senator John DeFrancisco called a meeting with NYSDOT officials, and a study from NYSDOT "will be coming soon".

[cl94]

Nice to see that there's a city where people are actually opposed to getting rid of the thing entirely. It's not like most of these removal things actually work. Yeah, let's make it so no through traffic actually drives through Syracuse and patronizes the businesses.

[vdeane]

How many times is NYSDOT going to be forced to study this because some people won't take "it's not feasible or affordable" for an answer?  Makes me wonder if the viaduct will collapse while the tunnel is studied again and again.

(personal opinion emphasized)

[froggie]

It should be noted that Senator John DeFrancisco represents a district that surrounds Syracuse (some serious gerrymandering there, BTW), but doesn't actually include south of I-690 where the viaduct is.

This has basically turned into a city vs. suburbs argument.  As a general rule, the city (and its residents) want the viaduct gone, but the suburbs don't.

It's not like most of these removal things actually work.

And your rationale behind this statement is...?

[Rothman]

Syracuse.com: DOT officials say tunnel feasibility study coming for I-81 in Syracuse

Senator John DeFrancisco called a meeting with NYSDOT officials, and a study from NYSDOT "will be coming soon".

Talk about p***ing money down the drain.  What a freakin' waste.

(personal opinion expressed)

[mvak36]

I have no dog in this fight, but the sense I get from that article is that they're going to be routing 81 around the city. That tunnel is more than doubling the cost of the other 2 proposals, so I don't think it will get selected based on the state of transportation funding around the country.

[kalvado]

I have no dog in this fight, but the sense I get from that article is that they're going to be routing 81 around the city. That tunnel is more than doubling the cost of the other 2 proposals, so I don't think it will get selected based on the state of transportation funding around the country.

If it only was that simple.
Through traffic is a relatively small portion of it, and I bet it can be rerouted on existing bypass with moderate disruption if all other traffic patterns are not changed. After all, there is not too much going on north of Syracuse. I-81 has 15-17k traffic counts over there, and I have hard time saying how many of those vehicles actually continue I-81 south, as opposed to going to/from Syracuse and I-90 Thruway. Military base Fort Drum is probably the biggest destination up there.
But interstate through city center inevitably becomes major commuter road - and it is those commuters who need a real replacement road, as well as traffic coming from the south to the city and back.   So bypass is pretty useless for them. And traffic from the south is traffic from NYC and Philadelphia, which is probably somewhat important for the city.

[cl94]

I-81 through traffic isn't the issue. Not only is it minimal, I-481 doesn't add much time. The bigger one is traffic between the south and west. How would they get through? Most of them would take surface roads.

And your rationale behind this statement is...?

I worked for the Buffalo MPO during the NY 198 crap. I performed the counts in that area myself both before and after the speed limit was lowered and changes were made.

[goldfishcrackers4]

If I'm not mistaken, this whole "boulevard" plan came about from some people at Syracuse University.  The former president of SU is the one who championed this and she is no longer there. The people who seem to think this "community grid" (so named because it sounds nice) is smart are urbanist hipsters who lack a basic understanding of what will happen without the viaduct. If you drove through the Utica area last week when the 5/8/12/840 interchange was closed due to the fuel spill, you got a small taste of what Syracuse will look like if 81 moves.

[Rothman]

Nobody drives through Utica.

[froggie]

I-81 through traffic isn't the issue. Not only is it minimal, I-481 doesn't add much time. The bigger one is traffic between the south and west. How would they get through? Most of them would take surface roads.

Given experience elsewhere, there are a number of things that would happen.  Some, yes, would take surface roads.  Some would take 481 to 690 to avoid traffic signals.  Some would take the boulevard.  Some trips simply would go away.  I realize this last part seems unbelievable, but yes it does happen.

I worked for the Buffalo MPO during the NY 198 crap. I performed the counts in that area myself both before and after the speed limit was lowered and changes were made.

One could make a pretty strong argument that NY 198 was the exception to the rule, especially considering how it was handled.

[compdude787]

If I'm not mistaken, this whole "boulevard" plan came about from some people at Syracuse University.  The former president of SU is the one who championed this and she is no longer there. The people who seem to think this "community grid" (so named because it sounds nice) is smart are urbanist hipsters who lack a basic understanding of what will happen without the viaduct. If you drove through the Utica area last week when the 5/8/12/840 interchange was closed due to the fuel spill, you got a small taste of what Syracuse will look like if 81 moves.

Totally agree with this. I will never, ever, ever support getting rid of the freeway and replacing it with some stupid surface street. It's a shame that the water table makes it such that a tunnel wouldn't be possible.

[kalvado]

I-81 through traffic isn't the issue. Not only is it minimal, I-481 doesn't add much time. The bigger one is traffic between the south and west. How would they get through? Most of them would take surface roads.

If I remember correctly, signs on Thruway direct through traffic to either I-390 - I-86 or some roads near finger lakes. Until you originate in Weedsport (BTW, I never understood if that is a place of mowing competition or a barge port for marijuana shipments) there are options other than negotiating city center.
Local traffic from points west - the state fairgrounds and places like Crucible may suffer, though..

[kalvado]

Given experience elsewhere, there are a number of things that would happen.  Some, yes, would take surface roads.  Some would take 481 to 690 to avoid traffic signals.  Some would take the boulevard.  Some trips simply would go away.  I realize this last part seems unbelievable, but yes it does happen.

690 is 88k traffic on 3 lanes, 481 is 65k on 2 lanes. I doubt they would handle significant portion of diverted traffic.
I know 481 is up for some expansion, but I suspect traffic collapse would go first

[cl94]

The Thruway actually directs all traffic to Binghamton from the west to use 690 to 81. Trucks generally take 63-390-17, but most car drivers are stupid.

[machias]

The Thruway actually directs all traffic to Binghamton from the west to use 690 to 81. Trucks generally take 63-390-17, but most car drivers are stupid.

And there are signs for the reverse on I-81 NB down by Cortland, telling motorists to use 81 to 690 to the Thruway.

[Buffaboy]

Nevermind that there were other reasons a tunnel wasn't forwarded...same as why the depressed roadway/"trench" didn't make it:  the ramp connections between 81 South and 690 would have severed several key east-west streets, including Erie Blvd and possibly Genessee St.

Another often-overlooked disadvantage with the tunnel option (in general and not just the I-81 option in the Syracuse area) is that such, for safety reasons, imposes a hazmat vehicle restriction; which becomes an issue for local, O&D (origin/destination) transport.  To those drivers; replacing the viaduct (which they presently can use) with a tunnel is, in essence, taking a way a viable option for them.  They would be forced off at the last exit ramp prior to the tunnel and would have to use more local, surface roads.

Samples of tunnel hazmat prohibition signs:

Along PA Turnpike:


Along I-95 in Baltimore, prior to the Fort McHenry Tunnel:


If this tunnel option were for a brand new highway (as opposed to a replacement), that's one thing; but since it's replacing an existing viaduct, that drawback needs to be discussed/addressed (if such hasn't already been done so).

This is more of a problem that a lot of people may think. FedEx and UPS load hazmats on their trailers all the time.

[Buffaboy]

Syracuse.com: DOT officials say tunnel feasibility study coming for I-81 in Syracuse

Senator John DeFrancisco called a meeting with NYSDOT officials, and a study from NYSDOT "will be coming soon".

Talk about p***ing money down the drain.  What a freakin' waste.

(personal opinion expressed)

Now that the "New NY Bridge (stupid name, what happens when the GI bridges need to be replaced) is wrapping up, this could be Cuomo's next pet project.

I bet tunnling the Skyway and part of NY-198 would cost less than this.