New York

[Rothman]

Oh no!  Not $14m!  Why, God why?  Oh, NY will never recover!  Oh, the humanity!

(Great news story, but in the end, meaning very little given how federal aid works)

And given that installation is said to be $8M....
However - is that $14M a one-time fine, or recurring amount?  Can they increase the number next year if nothing changes?

From what I am reading it is a one shot fine.

Here is the thing:  NY is nowhere near its threshold for advance construction unlike many other states and actually has to scramble to use up its obligation limitation by the end of the FFY.  So, NY advance constructs another $14m, which is like adding a penny to a jar, and it will fit into the obligation cycle just as other projects slip in and slip out of it.  It just is no big deal at all.

Now, what would hurt is if they said such highways were ineligible for federal aid.  That would probably get the signs removed, but I also don't know if such a disproportionate threat would stand up in court.  With the Wantagh, which is no longer eligible and that still hurts NYSDOT as far as I know, it was because of a contractor laying fiber optic cable in the ROW.  That was a dumb move, given that cost that was inflicted.

But a one-time $14m penalty to obligation limitation?  Pfft.  Other states lose that much and more for not having compliant open container and seat belt laws.

(personal opinions expressed)

[Alps]

The pages of long discussion of exit numbering have been moved to https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=22198.0.

[seicer]

The I Love New York highway signs on interstates (and I presume elsewhere) are coming down by this summer. The panels and such are supposedly reusable.

[Rothman]

Read somewhere that new ones will go up.

This whole situation is fakakta.

(personal opinion emphasized)

[seicer]

The Short, Sad, Corrupt Life Of New York's Elevated West Side Highway

December 15, 1973, was a chilly and cloudy day in New York City. The city's fortunes had already begun to take a downturn. A single dump truck, overloaded with more than nine tons of asphalt, rumbled down the old elevated West Side Highway, which promptly collapsed. And in a moment of almost hilarious corruption that typified the highway's brief existence, that very truck's construction company won a no-bid contract to clean up the wreck.

The West Side Highway began in 1913 as a faint idea in the nearly-all powerful city planner Robert Moses's head before it was felled by that asphalt truck, coincidentally bound for repairs on a different section of the road.

--

A good read on what was an awful elevated highway (IMO). I'd wish they would have gone into detail of what the highway has become - a thoroughfare with bike lanes, pedestrian paths and connectivity.

[Alps]

Why are you in a roads forum if you're anti-roads? The elevated highway was antiquated and not kept up, but look at FDR Drive (southern reaches), Lake Shore Drive, and other successful waterfront highways. Had WSH been maintained properly and modernized over time (gradually improving curves, merges, etc.), it could be a perfectly fine highway. It would certainly help with traffic if there weren't all those lights.

[froggie]

Why are you in a roads forum if you're anti-roads?

Given their postings elsewhere, I wouldn't call them anti-roads.

One can be pro-roads but not be for EVERY road.

Furthermore, it's good to get differing opinions.

[seicer]

It's just Steve being a dick against me for years. No big deal.

Not everyone has to be in supportive of every road project. I made it quite clear years ago that I was not in favour of highways that were rammed through inner cities, many of which were done under racial pretences. Robert Moses is one of the worst offenders of this, an outright racist, but many planners across the United States deliberately placed highways through the "worst" neighbourhoods for "slum clearances" and "urban renewal." Just look at the Kenyon-Barr neighbourhood of Cincinnati, 95% of which was destroyed for Interstate 75 and Queensgate. It took what was one of the densest 19th-century neighbourhoods - on the scale of Over-the-Rhine (the largest urban historic district in the nation) and killed it in favour of a very ugly highway, one-story industrial parks and projects. Mass displacement occurred which the city has never healed from.

What's amazing is that even after the West Side Highway was demolished, the impending chaos never materialised. Sure, the new roadway might be slower than if the six-lane freeway remained, but it's been augmented by better mass transit, more inclusive connectivity, and extensive bike paths. Not to say that it's now no longer a dingy, dank mess under the very wide viaduct.

People said the same thing for many one-way to two-way conversions. On a smaller scale, the conversion of four-lane one-way 3rd Avenue in downtown Huntington to one-lane each way was an urban planning success. It supported the rebirth of retail and restaurants on the street and aided in the pedestrian-friendly development Pullman Square on what was a multi-block parking lot. Traffic is slower, but who needs to speed through a pedestrian-heavy environment? And the congestion never materialised.

[NE2]

Why are you in a roads forum if you're anti-roads?

What a fucking stupid question. People research and discuss Hitler without being a Nazi.

[Beltway]

The elevated highway was antiquated and not kept up, but look at FDR Drive (southern reaches), Lake Shore Drive, and other successful waterfront highways. Had WSH been maintained properly and modernized over time (gradually improving curves, merges, etc.), it could be a perfectly fine highway. It would certainly help with traffic if there weren't all those lights.

The state and city had an excellent plan with a completed NEPA process in the 1980s.  It was called Westway, would have replaced the West Side Highway with a 6-lane Interstate highway that was partially depressed and partially buried, 90% funded by FHWA Interstate funds.  Nixed by RE/T groups.

[seicer]

Not all was lost. Funds for the Westway was reallocated for the $811 million replacement project and $1.7 billion to upgrade buses and subways throughout the city. That's probably as good, if not possibly better, of an outcome than one could have expected. How much would more funds have been expended for an EIS, lawyers and more court wrangling if the city and others continued to push for Westway? Some of the rationales for the cancellation of the Westway (striped bass between piers?) were silly, but much of the anger that came about was fueled from years of mistrust bourne out of the destruction wrought by Robert Moses and others (and that's not saying that all of what Robert Moses did was in malice or in poor taste). It's hard to blame them for having a distrust of the government.

[Alps]

It's just Steve being a dick against me for years. No big deal.

Trying to figure out which years you're referring to. I actually saw you biking around Cincinnati a few years ago but didn't have the confidence to say anything. I'm not against you, just against the idea that the WSH is unnecessary.

[seicer]

It's just Steve being a dick against me for years. No big deal.

Trying to figure out which years you're referring to. I actually saw you biking around Cincinnati a few years ago but didn't have the confidence to say anything. I'm not against you, just against the idea that the WSH is unnecessary.

No problem. I'm extending an olive branch to put this behind us. I have no hard or lingering feelings but I'm not anti-road in any sense. I am far from an eco-liberal - and more of a Tim Allen-moderate, if you will. Feel free to reach out and message me if you want to chat. And I'm more than glad to meet up - especially since I'm just a state over.

[Beltway]

Not all was lost. Funds for the Westway was reallocated for the $811 million replacement project and $1.7 billion to upgrade buses and subways throughout the city. That's probably as good, if not possibly better, of an outcome than one could have expected. How much would more funds have been expended for an EIS, lawyers and more court wrangling if the city and others continued to push for Westway? Some of the rationales for the cancellation of the Westway (striped bass between piers?) were silly, but much of the anger that came about was fueled from years of mistrust bourne out of the destruction wrought by Robert Moses and others (and that's not saying that all of what Robert Moses did was in malice or in poor taste). It's hard to blame them for having a distrust of the government.

Unlike some of the other expressways that went thru urban areas, the Westway would have had little in the way of negative urban impacts.

[Rothman]

*shrugs*

I don't mind 9A the way it is.

[SignBridge]

I actually think the boulevard that evolved in place of Westway isn't a bad compromise. The legal battles would have dragged out for years if the City and State would have pushed it and it would have taken much longer to get as much as we did in the form of the modern boulevard type road.

[storm2k]

*shrugs*

I don't mind 9A the way it is.

I have to say that, while there is always traffic, it does move. You can get uptown and downtown fairly easily enough. Plus, the additional access to the waterfront for city residents is great.

[Beltway]

*shrugs*
I don't mind 9A the way it is.

I have to say that, while there is always traffic, it does move. You can get uptown and downtown fairly easily enough. Plus, the additional access to the waterfront for city residents is great.

The West Side Highway had nowhere near the capacity of a modern freeway with the same number of lanes (6 in that case).   Ten foot wide lanes, no shoulders, very short accell and decell lanes.

As such the 8-lane arterial 12th Avenue probably has not much less capacity than the old West Side Highway.

[seicer]

*shrugs*

I don't mind 9A the way it is.

I have to say that, while there is always traffic, it does move. You can get uptown and downtown fairly easily enough. Plus, the additional access to the waterfront for city residents is great.

I wonder what will happen to FDR and the east side highway once it reaches the end of its lifespan. Would a boulevard work better than the rather obsolete freeway that exists now?

[Rothman]

*shrugs*

I don't mind 9A the way it is.

I have to say that, while there is always traffic, it does move. You can get uptown and downtown fairly easily enough. Plus, the additional access to the waterfront for city residents is great.

I wonder what will happen to FDR and the east side highway once it reaches the end of its lifespan. Would a boulevard work better than the rather obsolete freeway that exists now?

Kind of hard to have a boulevard since the FDR is elevated above the East River.

[seicer]

Fills have been occurring on both sides of Manhattan for some time. It's not out of the realm of possibility to see land added for a FDR Boulevard and park.

[Beltway]

I wonder what will happen to FDR and the east side highway once it reaches the end of its lifespan. Would a boulevard work better than the rather obsolete freeway that exists now?

Kind of hard to have a boulevard since the FDR is elevated above the East River.

I thought that the South Street Viaduct had a major rehab in the last 20 years.

[Alps]

*shrugs*

I don't mind 9A the way it is.

I have to say that, while there is always traffic, it does move. You can get uptown and downtown fairly easily enough. Plus, the additional access to the waterfront for city residents is great.

I wonder what will happen to FDR and the east side highway once it reaches the end of its lifespan. Would a boulevard work better than the rather obsolete freeway that exists now?

Nice trolling. Ever seen the 12 mile delays up there? Sure, that'll flow better with less capacity.

[Alps]

It's just Steve being a dick against me for years. No big deal.

Trying to figure out which years you're referring to. I actually saw you biking around Cincinnati a few years ago but didn't have the confidence to say anything. I'm not against you, just against the idea that the WSH is unnecessary.

No problem. I'm extending an olive branch to put this behind us. I have no hard or lingering feelings but I'm not anti-road in any sense. I am far from an eco-liberal - and more of a Tim Allen-moderate, if you will. Feel free to reach out and message me if you want to chat. And I'm more than glad to meet up - especially since I'm just a state over.

You and froggie... I give him a lot of shit too, but we're still friends. I'm just gonna call you out when I gotta. (Like on FDR Drive...) It's a pretty big state over. I'll be driving by you again tomorrow on I-86. I mean NY 17. I mean the Quickway.

[kalvado]

*shrugs*

I don't mind 9A the way it is.

I have to say that, while there is always traffic, it does move. You can get uptown and downtown fairly easily enough. Plus, the additional access to the waterfront for city residents is great.

I wonder what will happen to FDR and the east side highway once it reaches the end of its lifespan. Would a boulevard work better than the rather obsolete freeway that exists now?

Nice trolling. Ever seen the 12 mile delays up there? Sure, that'll flow better with less capacity.

Such stupid fact wouldn't stop decommissioning.
(urbanist hat on  )
Those money are better spent on improving public transportation, and not on fixing something that shouldn't be there to begin with. Improved river access, more walkable neighbourhood, quality of life, less parking demand...
(urbanist hat off  )