Interstate 81 in Syracuse

[The Ghostbuster]

No one can see the future, but my crystal ball prediction (and gut feeling) is NYDOT is going to go forward with the Community Grid, and tear down the viaduct. And when the locals complain about the traffic problems the boulevard will inevitably cause, the DOT will blame everyone but themselves for it.

[kalvado]

No one can see the future, but my crystal ball prediction (and gut feeling) is NYDOT is going to go forward with the Community Grid, and tear down the viaduct. And when the locals complain about the traffic problems the boulevard will inevitably cause, the DOT will blame everyone but themselves for it.

They don't really have much choice.

[sparker]

^^^^^^^^^^
Syracuse is an archetypal "rust belt" city, with business declining and those folks with opportunities elsewhere leaving in droves (and SUV's and trucks and whatever else they can commandeer!).  The earlier posted speculation that the I-81 viaduct teardown and "boulevardization" was a done deal several electoral cycles ago is probably correct; with upstate NY politics the way they are, there's probably no one entity in the state legislature who could or would "roadblock" this project.  My guess is that, besides the state fair, the one institution that will remain intact in Syracuse regardless of population loss is the university of the same name -- ostensibly containing an urban planning and/or public affairs department; I could count on the fingers of one hand those particular entities not being dominated by the latest trends in urbanism (how it morphed from methodology to ideology would be an interesting side-study!).  It's also highly probable that the one source of local information maintaining a high level of consistency would be those same academically-based folks; maintaining a moderated stream of information to NYDOT emphasizing their POV (including students afraid to walk through underpasses) in all likelihood turned the tide.  Without a consistent barrage -- or, again, even a stream -- of contrarian information, likely due to a dearth of local industry with a "dog in the race" -- the side making the most noise prevailed. 

Possibly another backhanded rationalization for the I-81 teardown/relocation would be that a city effectively on its last socioeconomic legs under the existing set of circumstances might serve as a "test bench" for elevating urbanist theory into actual practice.  After all, who's going to be left to complain?  Surely not NYDOT, which will, after spending some bucks on revamping 481 to handle more through traffic than it's getting now, have one less crumbling structure to maintain.  And surely not the other Syracuse U. students, most of whom will be getting the hell out of Dodge after graduation, so area issues won't be a primary concern to them.  About the only likely complainants would be the folks commuting into town from the north or south who'd find the boulevard slog less than pleasurable -- particularly in a city or region that can ill afford massive expenses to implement much in the way of new transit.   And without an effective political voice that carries east to Albany, the decision to manipulate Syracuse traffic patterns to determine if indeed the theories currently in vogue hold water will likely stand barring some unforeseen cohesive opposition. 

Prior thread speculation puts the timeframe for all this at about a decade; if anyone with official knowledge (you know who you are!) has different info, please chime in!     

[Rothman]

Who the heck is "NYDOT"?

[sprjus4]

Who the heck is "NYDOT"?

NYSDOT... But nice catch 

[sparker]

Who the heck is "NYDOT"?

NYSDOT... But nice catch 

Aaaaarrrrrghhh........typical New York modus operandi; making things more complicated than they need to be!!!!!   Glad all we have out here is good old apathetic Caltrans!

[steviep24]

Who the heck is "NYDOT"?

NYSDOT... But nice catch 

Aaaaarrrrrghhh........typical New York modus operandi; making things more complicated than they need to be!!!!!   Glad all we have out here is good old apathetic Caltrans!

There's also NYCDOT. Need a way to tell them apart.

[Beltway]

Who the heck is "NYDOT"?

NYSDOT... But nice catch 

Aaaaarrrrrghhh........typical New York modus operandi; making things more complicated than they need to be!!!!!   Glad all we have out here is good old apathetic Caltrans!

There's also NYCDOT. Need a way to tell them apart.

That is what happens when the state and its largest city have the same name.

[kevinb1994]

Who the heck is "NYDOT"?

NYSDOT... But nice catch 

Aaaaarrrrrghhh........typical New York modus operandi; making things more complicated than they need to be!!!!!   Glad all we have out here is good old apathetic Caltrans!

There's also NYCDOT. Need a way to tell them apart.

That is what happens when the state and its largest city have the same name.

Of course, not the only example in America.

[Mergingtraffic]

https://www.syracuse.com/news/2019/04/i-81-690-were-supposed-to-finally-connect-on-syracuses-north-side-what-happened.html


So they took out the I-81/I-690 ramp connection to please a few regardless of safety. They contradict themselves

[hbelkins]

Is the viaduct really "crumbling?" Are there not less-involved repairs that can be done to extend its useful life? Concrete flaking off the piers or potholes on the bridge deck are a normal fact of life.

[kalvado]

Is the viaduct really "crumbling?" Are there not less-involved repairs that can be done to extend its useful life? Concrete flaking off the piers or potholes on the bridge deck are a normal fact of life.

my understanding is that yes, these are structures approaching the end of life.
Next door, in Albany, NYSDOT did quite a bit of work on I-787 and I-90 bridge (I believe it was basically rebuilt in place).  Those are similar elevated structures, but those are built so that there is much less controversy with modern standards. That mean 1:1 replacement is possible from funding point of view. Syracuse's problem that structure is quite a bit substandard.

[Rothman]

Pfft.  The costs in Syracuse make the I-787 and even the Patroon Island Bridge work look like a pittance.

[froggie]

Is the viaduct really "crumbling?" Are there not less-involved repairs that can be done to extend its useful life? Concrete flaking off the piers or potholes on the bridge deck are a normal fact of life.

The viaduct was already on "life support" when Meaghan lived in Syracuse 15 years ago.  Age, winter, and traffic certainly have not helped in those years.  It's to the point where it would cost NYSDOT more in the long run to do "less involved repairs" (which at this point would happen with considerable frequency) than it would cost to remove or replace it.

[vdeane]

https://www.syracuse.com/news/2019/04/i-81-690-were-supposed-to-finally-connect-on-syracuses-north-side-what-happened.html


So they took out the I-81/I-690 ramp connection to please a few regardless of safety. They contradict themselves

Part of me wonders if that has anything to do with designating a business loop rather than making the freeway portion a new I-481 and the rest a state highway like was originally planned.  I know FHWA hates partial interchanges these days - especially for interstate/interstate junctions.

(personal opinion)

[Duke87]

So they took out the I-81/I-690 ramp connection to please a few regardless of safety. They contradict themselves

Well, and to cut costs. Given the current state of NYSDOT's finances, it won't take much local complaint to convince them to spend less money on something.

This is also a contributing factor to the "community grid" alternative itself - the state has to tear down the existing viaduct regardless, and the proposed improvements to 481, while unrobust and leading to a reduction in overall capacity and network quality, cost less than building a new viaduct would.

They won't of course come out and say "sorry, we can't afford to build a new viaduct, we're broke", they'll only present it as "revitalizing the community" and all sorts of other buzzphrases, but that is part of what is going on here.

[Beltway]

So they took out the I-81/I-690 ramp connection to please a few regardless of safety. They contradict themselves

Well, and to cut costs. Given the current state of NYSDOT's finances, it won't take much local complaint to convince them to spend less money on something.
This is also a contributing factor to the "community grid" alternative itself - the state has to tear down the existing viaduct regardless, and the proposed improvements to 481, while unrobust and leading to a reduction in overall capacity and network quality, cost less than building a new viaduct would.

Good grief, it is only a 0.9-mile-long bridge.  You would think it was 30 miles long the way some of officialdom is wringing their hands over this.

[kalvado]

So they took out the I-81/I-690 ramp connection to please a few regardless of safety. They contradict themselves

Well, and to cut costs. Given the current state of NYSDOT's finances, it won't take much local complaint to convince them to spend less money on something.

Cost of ramps is quoted $90M out of $2B project, less than 5%. Not negligible, but it may raise questions from FHWA, as mentioned. That is for the project which is mostly federal money.

[sprjus4]

This whole thing is going to be a mistake if actually put forth and constructed (or more like destruction).

The current "bypass" is going to see massive traffic issues as it's already overloaded, and traffic who already relies on the existing I-81 that's not long-distance is going to be forced to surface streets.

Keep it going NYSDOT!

[kalvado]

This whole thing is going to be a mistake if actually put forth and constructed (or more like destruction).

The current "bypass" is going to see massive traffic issues as it's already overloaded, and traffic who already relies on the existing I-81 that's not long-distance is going to be forced to surface streets.

Keep it going NYSDOT!

There is no really good option here. At this point I feel the worse it grows, the better: there will be an example to show as a failure to counter urbanism approach.

[vdeane]

This whole thing is going to be a mistake if actually put forth and constructed (or more like destruction).

The current "bypass" is going to see massive traffic issues as it's already overloaded, and traffic who already relies on the existing I-81 that's not long-distance is going to be forced to surface streets.

Keep it going NYSDOT!

There is no really good option here. At this point I feel the worse it grows, the better: there will be an example to show as a failure to counter urbanism approach.

I don't see that happening.  Any congestion will be touted as a "feature" rather than a bug, and if development or revitalization fails to happen, it will probably be explained away as Syracuse being on decline rather than any flaw in the urbanist approach.

[sprjus4]

There is no really good option here. At this point I feel the worse it grows, the better: there will be an example to show as a failure to counter urbanism approach.

Or worse... it'll be the first of many...

I'm just glad it's nowhere around where I'm at... for now anyways...

Next, they'll want to demolish I-95 through Downtown Richmond, construct a community grid, and route I-95 on I-295 (ironically, that was the original plan when I-295 was built in the 80s). I-95 divides our neighborhoods, tear it down! (even though most of it isn't elevated)

[kalvado]

This whole thing is going to be a mistake if actually put forth and constructed (or more like destruction).

The current "bypass" is going to see massive traffic issues as it's already overloaded, and traffic who already relies on the existing I-81 that's not long-distance is going to be forced to surface streets.

Keep it going NYSDOT!

There is no really good option here. At this point I feel the worse it grows, the better: there will be an example to show as a failure to counter urbanism approach.

I don't see that happening.  Any congestion will be touted as a "feature" rather than a bug, and if development or revitalization fails to happen, it will probably be explained away as Syracuse being on decline rather than any flaw in the urbanist approach.

It would still be a pretty strong argument that city population, and probably are population, would go down. Of course, anything can be denied - including 2+2=4 - but there will be a good example of "and no, it didn't help"

[sparker]

^^^^^^^^
If indeed the Syracuse population continues to decrease, urbanists may be inclined to preside (or attempt to do so) over a city "transfiguration" into a format built around the university and geared toward the regional service sector, since manufacturing has essentially left the area.  If so, there's a distinct possibililty that attention may be turned toward I-690 as the singular feature of the "old way of doing things" remaining in the city core; placing that facility on the chopping block (wholly or partially) might be on the agenda within a decade or two. 

An ancillary question:  Have the independent suburbs surrounding Syracuse (e.g. Fairmount, Liverpool, Bayberry et. al.) also featured correponding population losses -- or have they actually served as relocation destinations from the central city?  That in itself would serve either as further incentive to continue down the selected path of urban revamping or, alternately, indicate that the regional population, rather than abandoning the region in a wholesale fashion, has simply rearranged itself around the periphery as with so many other urban areas. 

[kalvado]

^^^^^^^^
If indeed the Syracuse population continues to decrease, urbanists may be inclined to preside (or attempt to do so) over a city "transfiguration" into a format built around the university and geared toward the regional service sector, since manufacturing has essentially left the area.  If so, there's a distinct possibililty that attention may be turned toward I-690 as the singular feature of the "old way of doing things" remaining in the city core; placing that facility on the chopping block (wholly or partially) might be on the agenda within a decade or two. 

An ancillary question:  Have the independent suburbs surrounding Syracuse (e.g. Fairmount, Liverpool, Bayberry et. al.) also featured correponding population losses -- or have they actually served as relocation destinations from the central city?  That in itself would serve either as further incentive to continue down the selected path of urban revamping or, alternately, indicate that the regional population, rather than abandoning the region in a wholesale fashion, has simply rearranged itself around the periphery as with so many other urban areas.

Census estimates: city of Syracuse NY: 146k(2010)->144k(2017), -2k; Syracuse MSA 662.5k(2010) ->651k(2017), -11.5k
Traditional disclaimer: every urbanist knows these estimates are too low