Interstate 81 in Syracuse

[Plutonic Panda]

Alright, time to answer a lot of the points brought up in the past few days while I was on vacation...

"Why can't they rebuild what they have?": Feds will only allow a complete rebuild that does not meet modern standards if there is an engineering reason why those standards could not be met. Rebuilding on the current alignment, but meeting modern standards, is technically feasible.
"It's only X properties!": Problem is what those properties are. Current I-81 is shoehorned in between a hospital and low-income housing, possibly the two hardest things to relocate right now. Most (if not all) affected properties are low-income housing or Syracuse University/its hospital and relocating either is politically infeasible.
"But what about 29/50 in Birmingham?": Different circumstances. ROW wasn't nearly as constrained and property takings were minimal. Even if there was property taking, Alabama is far more willing to plow through minority neighborhoods to build a road than New York is.

These points and the legal battles to come are why I expect the viaduct to fall down before shovels hit the ground.
(Personal opinion emphasized)

then build the damn tunnel. How can one of the richest counties in the world not afford a 10> mile tunnel. This is embarrassing. I guess I'll just bitch about this like the 710 tunnel in LA that wasn't built until it's done.

[kalvado]

Alright, time to answer a lot of the points brought up in the past few days while I was on vacation...

"Why can't they rebuild what they have?": Feds will only allow a complete rebuild that does not meet modern standards if there is an engineering reason why those standards could not be met. Rebuilding on the current alignment, but meeting modern standards, is technically feasible.
"It's only X properties!": Problem is what those properties are. Current I-81 is shoehorned in between a hospital and low-income housing, possibly the two hardest things to relocate right now. Most (if not all) affected properties are low-income housing or Syracuse University/its hospital and relocating either is politically infeasible.
"But what about 29/50 in Birmingham?": Different circumstances. ROW wasn't nearly as constrained and property takings were minimal. Even if there was property taking, Alabama is far more willing to plow through minority neighborhoods to build a road than New York is.

These points and the legal battles to come are why I expect the viaduct to fall down before shovels hit the ground.
(Personal opinion emphasized)

then build the damn tunnel. How can one of the richest counties in the world not afford a 10> mile tunnel. This is embarrassing. I guess I'll just bitch about this like the 710 tunnel in LA that wasn't built until it's done.

You better ask how residents of Syracuse can afford minimal housing and food (the answer is subsidized substandard housing and food stamps, as 30% live below poverty line). This is before any geology questions are asked.
Unlike much milder CA, living in the street in winter is not an option in upstate NY...and unlike well-to-do CA, rust belt cannot afford a few extra billion on frivolous highway projects.

[cl94]

Alright, time to answer a lot of the points brought up in the past few days while I was on vacation...

"Why can't they rebuild what they have?": Feds will only allow a complete rebuild that does not meet modern standards if there is an engineering reason why those standards could not be met. Rebuilding on the current alignment, but meeting modern standards, is technically feasible.
"It's only X properties!": Problem is what those properties are. Current I-81 is shoehorned in between a hospital and low-income housing, possibly the two hardest things to relocate right now. Most (if not all) affected properties are low-income housing or Syracuse University/its hospital and relocating either is politically infeasible.
"But what about 29/50 in Birmingham?": Different circumstances. ROW wasn't nearly as constrained and property takings were minimal. Even if there was property taking, Alabama is far more willing to plow through minority neighborhoods to build a road than New York is.

These points and the legal battles to come are why I expect the viaduct to fall down before shovels hit the ground.
(Personal opinion emphasized)

You know, though, existing hospital and low-income housing ARE engineering reasons - you can't engineer a road without taking properties that are infeasible.

Define "infeasible". It's not technical infeasibility here, it's political infeasibility. As in NY is unwilling to relocate low-income housing. It's certainly possible to do so, but it would get so dragged down in court that it's not even worth attempting. FHWA only issues exemptions for physical infeasibility.

(Personal opinion emphasized)

[dkblake]

Define "infeasible". It's not technical infeasibility here, it's political infeasibility. As in NY is unwilling to relocate low-income housing. It's certainly possible to do so, but it would get so dragged down in court that it's not even worth attempting. FHWA only issues exemptions for physical infeasibility.

(Personal opinion emphasized)

Especially since the political argument for getting rid of the viaduct is that it contributed to "other side of the tracks" inequality between the wealthier University hill and the poorer South Side projects...

[kphoger]

Wow, am I the only one who did a double-take at dkblake's username?

dzlsabe
dkblake

[seicer]

Define "infeasible". It's not technical infeasibility here, it's political infeasibility. As in NY is unwilling to relocate low-income housing. It's certainly possible to do so, but it would get so dragged down in court that it's not even worth attempting. FHWA only issues exemptions for physical infeasibility.

(Personal opinion emphasized)

Especially since the political argument for getting rid of the viaduct is that it contributed to "other side of the tracks" inequality between the wealthier University hill and the poorer South Side projects...

An interesting revisit, from The Atlantic: https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2015/11/syracuse-slums/416892/

[Plutonic Panda]

Alright, time to answer a lot of the points brought up in the past few days while I was on vacation...

"Why can't they rebuild what they have?": Feds will only allow a complete rebuild that does not meet modern standards if there is an engineering reason why those standards could not be met. Rebuilding on the current alignment, but meeting modern standards, is technically feasible.
"It's only X properties!": Problem is what those properties are. Current I-81 is shoehorned in between a hospital and low-income housing, possibly the two hardest things to relocate right now. Most (if not all) affected properties are low-income housing or Syracuse University/its hospital and relocating either is politically infeasible.
"But what about 29/50 in Birmingham?": Different circumstances. ROW wasn't nearly as constrained and property takings were minimal. Even if there was property taking, Alabama is far more willing to plow through minority neighborhoods to build a road than New York is.

These points and the legal battles to come are why I expect the viaduct to fall down before shovels hit the ground.
(Personal opinion emphasized)

then build the damn tunnel. How can one of the richest counties in the world not afford a 10> mile tunnel. This is embarrassing. I guess I'll just bitch about this like the 710 tunnel in LA that wasn't built until it's done.

You better ask how residents of Syracuse can afford minimal housing and food (the answer is subsidized substandard housing and food stamps, as 30% live below poverty line). This is before any geology questions are asked.
Unlike much milder CA, living in the street in winter is not an option in upstate NY...and unlike well-to-do CA, rust belt cannot afford a few extra billion on frivolous highway projects.

I am not quite sure what you're getting at. It isn't about being to afford it. This country has the money to undertake massive infrastructure projects. It's about allocating the money and as said here political feasibility. This freeway serves more than the residents of Syracuse.

At the end of the day it can be built and any person that says the only option is for it to go with no replacement is just making up excuses to support their desire to see it go away. There were alternatives given that would result in less property acquisitions while still maintaining this route through Syracuse as a tunnel but it was costly. Then there were alternatives given that would rebuild the viaduct as is or expanded. Can't do that either says some. The only option apparently is a downgraded facility and a rerouted interstate that will become like I-40 in Memphis. Just horrible short term planning going on here.

[kalvado]

This country has the money to undertake massive infrastructure projects.

I don't know which country you live in, but in US highway trust fund is predicted to go into red in a few years, federal and state budgets are running significantly deficit, and arguably much more important project of similar value in NY  - replacement of Tappan Zee bridge, a strategic link between upstate and NYC - was done using loans without identified repayment sources.   

Just horrible short term planning going on here.

Why, it is pretty much a part of a long term strategy: "last person out of upstate, please turn off the lights before you leave". More seriously, negative growth of population is a predicted trend over here, traffic is planned accordingly

[Plutonic Panda]

This country has the money to undertake massive infrastructure projects.

I don't know which country you live in, but in US highway trust fund is predicted to go into red in a few years, federal and state budgets are running significantly deficit, and arguably much more important project of similar value  - replacement of Tappan Zee bridge, a strategic link between upstate and NYC - was done using loans without identified repayment sources.   

Just horrible short term planning going on here.

Why, it is pretty much a part of a long term strategy: "last person out of upstate, please turn off the lights before you leave"

I was referring to the entity known as the United States of America lol... not the highway trust fund. It needs to be fixed. I saw a bill that funds 100 percent federal funding for the next two years but I'm not holding my breath it goes anywhere.

[dkblake]

Wow, am I the only one who did a double-take at dkblake's username?

dzlsabe
dkblake

Common first initial + common last name = this happens frequently 

[longhorn]

https://graphics.reuters.com/USA-BIDEN/INFRASTRUCTURE-FREEWAYS/qzjpqbzzyvx/

So where does I-81 traffic goes to when the freeway is torn down? How do you go west onto 690? Are the businesses fine with this?

[kalvado]

https://graphics.reuters.com/USA-BIDEN/INFRASTRUCTURE-FREEWAYS/qzjpqbzzyvx/

So where does I-81 traffic goes to when the freeway is torn down? How do you go west onto 690? Are the businesses fine with this?

If you take some time to read 810 prior replies in this thread, you may find some of the answers.
One line summary: "it is complicated!"

[silverback1065]

Here's my opinion on this one. Remove 81 and 690. A city the size of Syracuse never needed them anyway. I support removals in the case if it's for small cities like this because it was over kill to begin with. For larger cities I only support it in cases where it is a spur or piece of an unbuilt larger section, i.e. 375 in Detroit.

[webny99]

One line summary: "it is complicated!"

Here's my opinion on this one. Remove 81 and 690. A city the size of Syracuse never needed them anyway. I support removals in the case if it's for small cities like this because it was over kill to begin with. For larger cities I only support it in cases where it is a spur or piece of an unbuilt larger section, i.e. 375 in Detroit.

I-81 has a lot of through traffic, and there aren't good alternate routes elsewhere in the metro. Try connecting between south and west without using I-81 or I-690.

[silverback1065]

One line summary: "it is complicated!"

Here's my opinion on this one. Remove 81 and 690. A city the size of Syracuse never needed them anyway. I support removals in the case if it's for small cities like this because it was over kill to begin with. For larger cities I only support it in cases where it is a spur or piece of an unbuilt larger section, i.e. 375 in Detroit.

I-81 has a lot of through traffic, and there aren't good alternate routes elsewhere in the metro. Try connecting between south and west without using I-81 or I-690.

I don't know the area well so feel free to educate me. seems like changing 481 to 81 and moving any traffic that used 690 onto 90 would work fine. why am I wrong? I'm interested in learning more about this debate.

[dkblake]

Here's my opinion on this one. Remove 81 and 690. A city the size of Syracuse never needed them anyway.

Eh, I-690 is pretty important for east-west traffic- it has 60-90K AADT in the downtown stretch between Hiawatha Blvd and Thompson Rd. Pretty sure Erie Boulevard/Genesee St can't handle that.

[The Ghostbuster]

If the new boulevard is only four lanes, I'd expect it to be more congested and time-consuming to use. Especially if the new signaled intersections are not properly timed, and if the boulevard is not easier to cross on foot than the existing freeway is. I also doubt enough through traffic will use the bypass to significantly relieve the new boulevard. Let's hope Syracuse doesn't live to regret downgrading this segment of Interstate 81.

[webny99]

Here's my opinion on this one. Remove 81 and 690. A city the size of Syracuse never needed them anyway. I support removals in the case if it's for small cities like this because it was over kill to begin with. For larger cities I only support it in cases where it is a spur or piece of an unbuilt larger section, i.e. 375 in Detroit.

I-81 has a lot of through traffic, and there aren't good alternate routes elsewhere in the metro. Try connecting between south and west without using I-81 or I-690.

I don't know the area well so feel free to educate me. seems like changing 481 to 81 and moving any traffic that used 690 onto 90 would work fine. why am I wrong? I'm interested in learning more about this debate.

I'm not aware of any proposals to remove I-690, so I'm keeping it just to the I-81 removal for the purposes of this discussion...

For thru traffic between north and south: taking I-481 adds about 4-5 minutes. It would likely be more at peak times with the increased traffic on I-481.
For thru traffic between south and west: taking I-481 to either I-690 or I-90 adds about 7-8 minutes, again likely more with the increased traffic on I-481.

There is a lot more discussion earlier in the thread with volume data as well as analysis of what specific start and endpoints would be affected the most. Rochester to NYC/Phila is one of those, which is partly why I am firmly against the removal. If this was an issue local to downtown Syracuse it would be one thing, but it's a totally different conversation when it's an integral part of a corridor with significant long-distance traffic.

[sprjus4]

Is funding in place to widen all of I-481 to a minimum of 6 through lanes, and reconfigure the north and south I-81 junctions to provide continuity? If they are so serious about demolishing I-81, they need to be equally as serious as accommodating that traffic on other facilities. Don't cheap out and just expecting the existing I-481 and I-81 junctions to adequately handle the new load.

[Bobby5280]

At this point, I think it's a foregone conclusion the elevated I-81 freeway South of the I-690 interchange will be removed. The facility is old and badly in need of replacement (or demolition). Even without the socio-political controversy caused when the elevated highway was first built, the idea of building a new replacement elevated highway might be hard to justify.

There has been a lot of out-migration of population in the region over the last 50 years. In recent years the out-migration has been happening state-wide. I lived in Syracuse a couple years when I was a kid and I never forgot how cold and snowy it was in the winter. Before we moved there I loved snow. By the time my family moved I was sick of snow. Many Americans in general are leaving the Northeast for warmer (and less expensive) environments.

Nevetheless, I doubt the removal of I-81 in downtown Syracuse will have the desired effect. If anything, it could accelerate local migration farther out into the suburbs. That would underscore the need to add lanes to existing I-481. Syracuse University is one of the main draws of downtown. SU's long term outlook could get cloudy. There has been a lot of high inflation in college tuition prices, particularly at private universities. The high cost is making such schools increasingly dependent on Internation students. Meanwhile America's demographics are changing with a birth rate now stuck in a sustained decline. That's going to equal fewer and fewer college students in the future (not to mention fewer taxpayers).

If the powers that be in Syracuse want a revitalized and re-connected downtown they have other big problems to handle than simply removing I-81. And even if the plan "works" to encourage new downtown development how will they prevent gentrification that comes along with it? I-81 simply divided neighborhoods. Gentrification forces affected residents completely out of the area.

[vdeane]

https://graphics.reuters.com/USA-BIDEN/INFRASTRUCTURE-FREEWAYS/qzjpqbzzyvx/

So where does I-81 traffic goes to when the freeway is torn down? How do you go west onto 690? Are the businesses fine with this?

I-481.  I-481 or the boulevard, even though both will likely at least double the time it takes to get from I-81 south of exit 16A to I-690 west of I-81.  Hell no they aren't, DestiNY USA and the hotels in Salina have been the leading advocates for keeping I-81 through the city in some form.

Is funding in place to widen all of I-481 to a minimum of 6 through lanes, and reconfigure the north and south I-81 junctions to provide continuity? If they are so serious about demolishing I-81, they need to be equally as serious as accommodating that traffic on other facilities. Don't cheap out and just expecting the existing I-481 and I-81 junctions to adequately handle the new load.

Last I heard, yes on the junctions, no on a general widening.  What widening is there would be on a limited scope within the I-690-Thruway corridor (and wouldn't even be the full length both directions).

There is a lot more discussion earlier in the thread with volume data as well as analysis of what specific start and endpoints would be affected the most. Rochester to NYC/Phila is one of those, which is partly why I am firmly against the removal. If this was an issue local to downtown Syracuse it would be one thing, but it's a totally different conversation when it's an integral part of a corridor with significant long-distance traffic.

Such is also why I don't like it.  Also the fact that I just don't like business interstate routes.  Going back to the original proposal for a 3di with a state route extension on the non-freeway part would make me happier, and building that western bypass that was previously planned and giving it a 3di number would make me happier still.

[sprjus4]

^

A western bypass would certainly address the needs of I-81 North to I-690 West to ultimately I-90 West. If such was in place, then I could see more viability in demolishing the viaduct. But since it currents holds that regional traffic movement, then no.

[kalvado]

^

A western bypass would certainly address the needs of I-81 North to I-690 West to ultimately I-90 West. If such was in place, then I could see more viability in demolishing the viaduct. But since it currents holds that regional traffic movement, then no.

Not demolishing that viaduct is not an option. It passed the point if no return in terms of structural condition.
Questions are what would replace the old structure and when that is going to happen.

[sprjus4]

^

A western bypass would certainly address the needs of I-81 North to I-690 West to ultimately I-90 West. If such was in place, then I could see more viability in demolishing the viaduct. But since it currents holds that regional traffic movement, then no.

Not demolishing that viaduct is not an option. It passed the point if no return in terms of structural condition.
Questions are what would replace the old structure and when that is going to happen.

That's what I meant... by saying demolishing I'm meaning fully get rid of, apply their street grid concept, etc. What needs to happen is a proper replacement.

[kalvado]

^

A western bypass would certainly address the needs of I-81 North to I-690 West to ultimately I-90 West. If such was in place, then I could see more viability in demolishing the viaduct. But since it currents holds that regional traffic movement, then no.

Not demolishing that viaduct is not an option. It passed the point if no return in terms of structural condition.
Questions are what would replace the old structure and when that is going to happen.

That's what I meant... by saying demolishing I'm meaning fully get rid of, apply their street grid concept, etc. What needs to happen is a proper replacement.

Nope. Sorry, not gonna happen