Interstate 81 in Syracuse

[Molandfreak]

Hey, if I were Beltway, I'd welcome a trip to Azerbaijan. They're building some nice infrastructure including an expressway to Xankəndi since they gained control of the former Republic of Artsakh.

[kalvado]

Can we just ship Beltway off to Azerbaijan?  He's repeating his tendency from the Key Bridge thread of ignoring everything everyone posts that debunks his assertions and repeating them over and over again.  Meanwhile, any discussion that might have been had about the status of the construction has since been subsumed.  At this point, I can only conclude that he is intentionally sabotaging discussion on projects that he does not like.

Why do you hate Azerbaijan?!

[hotdogPi]

Can we just ship Beltway off to Azerbaijan?  He's repeating his tendency from the Key Bridge thread of ignoring everything everyone posts that debunks his assertions and repeating them over and over again.  Meanwhile, any discussion that might have been had about the status of the construction has since been subsumed.  At this point, I can only conclude that he is intentionally sabotaging discussion on projects that he does not like.

Why do you hate Azerbaijan?!

It's a reference to the aforementioned fan fiction where the author misspells Azkaban as Azerbaijan.

[PColumbus73]

No need for a physical test since the traffic was extensively modeled.

As with the Key Bridge, Beltway is simply proving that armchair antics are ridiculous, especially as he ignores the facts that have been brought forward by others.

...

Although sending him to Azerbaijan is extreme, it is becoming harder and harder to see the benefits of Beltaay's antics on the forum as outweighing their costs.  Damage to the forum is being done and I'm just talking about for our little group of enthusiasts on here, rather than any broader appeal to public or whatever.  He's putting himself in the camp of other bad actors we've had on here.

I think there's a general feeling the forum is in decline.  I'd hope there is no need to accelerate such...but, then again, maybe we should just let it go and be done with it.

It's not much different than arguing about 150 MPH freeways. No amount of evidence we provide will ever be enough.

I feel like freeway demotions like the I-81 viaduct are going to become more common. The money that built the original Interstate system is gone and now it's up to the states to maintain what the Feds bankrolled. As these 60s Era highways are reaching the end of their service life, states like New York are having to decide whether its worth the expense by various metrics and cost-benefit analysis. New York looked at I-81 and decided it's not worth the expense in keeping it or rebuilding it to modern standards, similar, but not exactly like, the Sheridan Expwy. I would also assume that maintaining a 65 MPH speed limit on a mainline I-81 is more desirable than keeping it through downtown Syracuse.

[kalvado]

No need for a physical test since the traffic was extensively modeled.

As with the Key Bridge, Beltway is simply proving that armchair antics are ridiculous, especially as he ignores the facts that have been brought forward by others.

...

Although sending him to Azerbaijan is extreme, it is becoming harder and harder to see the benefits of Beltaay's antics on the forum as outweighing their costs.  Damage to the forum is being done and I'm just talking about for our little group of enthusiasts on here, rather than any broader appeal to public or whatever.  He's putting himself in the camp of other bad actors we've had on here.

I think there's a general feeling the forum is in decline.  I'd hope there is no need to accelerate such...but, then again, maybe we should just let it go and be done with it.

It's not much different than arguing about 150 MPH freeways. No amount of evidence we provide will ever be enough.

I feel like freeway demotions like the I-81 viaduct are going to become more common. The money that built the original Interstate system is gone and now it's up to the states to maintain what the Feds bankrolled. As these 60s Era highways are reaching the end of their service life, states like New York are having to decide whether its worth the expense by various metrics and cost-benefit analysis. New York looked at I-81 and decided it's not worth the expense in keeping it or rebuilding it to modern standards, similar, but not exactly like, the Sheridan Expwy. I would also assume that maintaining a 65 MPH speed limit on a mainline I-81 is more desirable than keeping it through downtown Syracuse.

Keep in mind, cost of keeping viaduct would be not only financial, but also political. Later is probably  more important than mere money.

[vdeane]

I feel like freeway demotions like the I-81 viaduct are going to become more common. The money that built the original Interstate system is gone and now it's up to the states to maintain what the Feds bankrolled. As these 60s Era highways are reaching the end of their service life, states like New York are having to decide whether its worth the expense by various metrics and cost-benefit analysis. New York looked at I-81 and decided it's not worth the expense in keeping it or rebuilding it to modern standards, similar, but not exactly like, the Sheridan Expwy. I would also assume that maintaining a 65 MPH speed limit on a mainline I-81 is more desirable than keeping it through downtown Syracuse.

Indeed.  This is a major reason why none of the study concepts presented for I-787 kept the South Mall a freeway.  The combination of the circle stack interchange and the Dunn Memorial Bridge is 12% of Region 1's bridge deck area and is very underutilized (we joke that the most traffic it's ever seen is when they shot the car chase from Salt on it).  I imagine this is a large part of why I-375 is being removed as well.

[kalvado]

I feel like freeway demotions like the I-81 viaduct are going to become more common. The money that built the original Interstate system is gone and now it's up to the states to maintain what the Feds bankrolled. As these 60s Era highways are reaching the end of their service life, states like New York are having to decide whether its worth the expense by various metrics and cost-benefit analysis. New York looked at I-81 and decided it's not worth the expense in keeping it or rebuilding it to modern standards, similar, but not exactly like, the Sheridan Expwy. I would also assume that maintaining a 65 MPH speed limit on a mainline I-81 is more desirable than keeping it through downtown Syracuse.

Indeed.  This is a major reason why none of the study concepts presented for I-787 kept the South Mall a freeway.  The combination of the circle stack interchange and the Dunn Memorial Bridge is 12% of Region 1's bridge deck area and is very underutilized (we joke that the most traffic it's ever seen is when they shot the car chase from Salt on it).  I imagine this is a large part of why I-375 is being removed as well.

That was designed for a very different map...

[roadman65]

No need for a physical test since the traffic was extensively modeled.

As with the Key Bridge, Beltway is simply proving that armchair antics are ridiculous, especially as he ignores the facts that have been brought forward by others.

...

Although sending him to Azerbaijan is extreme, it is becoming harder and harder to see the benefits of Beltaay's antics on the forum as outweighing their costs.  Damage to the forum is being done and I'm just talking about for our little group of enthusiasts on here, rather than any broader appeal to public or whatever.  He's putting himself in the camp of other bad actors we've had on here.

I think there's a general feeling the forum is in decline.  I'd hope there is no need to accelerate such...but, then again, maybe we should just let it go and be done with it.

It's not much different than arguing about 150 MPH freeways. No amount of evidence we provide will ever be enough.

I feel like freeway demotions like the I-81 viaduct are going to become more common. The money that built the original Interstate system is gone and now it's up to the states to maintain what the Feds bankrolled. As these 60s Era highways are reaching the end of their service life, states like New York are having to decide whether its worth the expense by various metrics and cost-benefit analysis. New York looked at I-81 and decided it's not worth the expense in keeping it or rebuilding it to modern standards, similar, but not exactly like, the Sheridan Expwy. I would also assume that maintaining a 65 MPH speed limit on a mainline I-81 is more desirable than keeping it through downtown Syracuse.

The Sheridan was really not that big of a road as it never got built to what it was to be.  It was to extend further beyond I-95 and reconnect to it along the New England Thruway portion.  So what little got built wasn't worth the financial expense to keep it for what traffic does use it.

I-81 is a major route, but I-481 is another corridor nearby that will take pollution away from the city and keep a large monstrosity away from blocking a view of one side to the other of a neighborhood.  Plus the expense of maintaining which is the secondary reason as you said.

I did see that the new Exit 90 on I-81 will be for I-90 just as Exit 81 will be for BL I-81.  A rarity that two exits within one area will be serving routes with the same number as the interchange.

[vdeane]

I did see that the new Exit 90 on I-81 will be for I-90 just as Exit 81 will be for BL I-81.  A rarity that two exits within one area will be serving routes with the same number as the interchange.

Which is interesting and quite possibly deliberate.  If they followed the same logic that led to exits 13A and 13B down in Binghamton or future exit 147 near Adams Center (NY 177), it should be exit 91A, but instead they fudged the numbers.  Then again, there's also exit 95 being at MP 94.9, so who knows.

(personal opinion)

[The Ghostbuster]

It is fortunate that Interstate 481 was constructed (1963-1990). Otherwise, who knows what route Interstate 81 would be able to take without it (after the viaduct is demolished, that is).

[sprjus4]

It is fortunate that Interstate 481 was constructed (1963-1990). Otherwise, who knows what route Interstate 81 would be able to take without it (after the viaduct is demolished, that is).

It wouldn't be demolished then

[Michael]

On Tuesday before Thanksgiving, I met up with a friend in Syracuse, and I drove around the I-81 project with him.  I planned my route to use following roads:

• I-81 in both directions from US 11 in Nedrow to the northern I-481 interchange
• I-690 in both directions between Geddes St and I-481
• the new I-481 exit at NY 5/92
• Almond St under the viaduct
• And my ultimate goal, every ramp of the I-690/I-81 interchange

I'm writing this report in roughly the same order as I drove.

The cantilever sign for the 7th North St exit has it's new number, but everything else still had it's old numbers, including the 7th North St sign at the exit itself.  Thankfully, there's a ground-mounted "OLD EXIT 25" sign next to the one with the new number.  The future mainline I-81 at the northern interchange seemed finished, and the construction seemed limited to the area within the loop ramps.  There could have been more construction I missed since I was only on the I-81 north to NY 481 north and NY 481 south to I-81 south ramps.

Once I got on I-81 south, I was surprised with how far along the new exit for N Clinton St was.  It looked to have the top course of pavement, and just needs to be connected to I-81.  I was also surprised at how far along the new Bear St bridge was.  On the south side of Syracuse, there were two separate spots where the right lane ended, so someone taking I-81 south through Syracuse while staying in the right lane would have to change lanes 3 times: once at the existing lane drop in the I-690 interchange, and two more times on the south side of Syracuse.  Near the S State St/S Salina St/Brighton Ave exit on I-81, in addition to the lane drops, there were also a few long and somewhat confusing lane shifts.

Once I got to the southern interchange, I was surprised to see that all the bridge beams were in place.  I didn't get a close look since I had to pay attention to fairly heavy traffic, so I'm not sure how far along the bridges were.

Approaching the southern interchange on northbound I-81, there were a few BOSes (is that the right term, big orange sign?) and a VMS further back (near Sentinel Heights Rd) telling you which lane to be in for I-81 and I-481. The current route of northbound I-81 through the southern interchange was extremely narrow, with the permanent guardrail on the left side, and a temporary Jersey barrier on the right side.

When I went to U-turn from northbound I-81 at Court St and re-enter southbound at W Division St, I was slightly annoyed at the 4 way stop signs that could have been covered up at Genant Dr/Court St, North Clinton St/Spencer St, and Genant Dr/W Division St.  North Clinton St looked like all it needed was final dirt fill along the curbs.  N Clinton St between Spencer St and W Division St and W Division St itself (especially crossing Genant Dr) were pretty rough.

I got stuck in traffic for a few minutes on the I-81 south to I-690 east ramp due to I-690 just east of I-81 being temporarily down to 1 lane.  While I was stopped, I was surprised to feel my car bouncing a bit since I was stopped on a bridge.  I was also surprised that the backup wasn't much worse than it has been with 2 lanes.  As I first thought with the Teall Ave bridge project, I'm amazed at how much having 3 lanes on I-690 makes a difference.  I-690 at the new Crouse Ave/Irving Ave exit had super long somewhat confusing lane shifts.

At the new I-481 exit, I was surprised at how wide the exit ramp felt.  I'd looked around in Street View, but only now got around to driving it.  I was also amused at the fact that there was still a "DO NOT ENTER/WRONG WAY" sign assembly for the now removed loop ramp.  I only drove to the Wegmans on E Genesee St, but I saw new overhead signs in the distance at Lyndon Corners.

Driving under the viaduct, the only visible construction was the road closed barrier and earthwork at Renwick Ave.  Heading back north on I-81, the lane shift at the Hiawatha Blvd exit made it hard to see which lane was which.  By the time I realized I needed to move over to the right, it was too late so I was forced onto the ramp for Old Liverpool Rd/Onondaga Lake Parkway, so I just u-turned at the intersection of Buckley Rd and Old Liverpool Rd.

At this point, after a trip to the new Ikea, my friend had to leave, so I finished my drive by myself.  It had gotten dark and started raining at this point, so it was hard to see and it was almost impossible to see any lane lines.  The lane shifts on I-690 and I-81 were extra hard to follow since the rain made the ground areas of the original lines just as visible as the temporary lines.  Exiting I-690 at Teall Ave and using the I-690 east to I-81 south ramp felt super weird because of the lane shifts being right before the ramps.  Towards the end of my route, I u-turned at the new Glen Ave exit.  Since it was dark and rainy, I wasn't able to see much.

Overall, even being local, aware of the potentially tricky to drive through parts of the project, and a roadgeek, it was still a bit tricky to follow the lanes as intended, especially with the dark and rainy weather.  At one point on Salina St in downtown, cars were making three lanes when there were only two since it was impossible to tell where the lines were. Even when it was still light and not raining, I cut a few people off, either accidentally because I couldn't see them (I recently got a new to me car, and it has worse visibility than my old one), or because I had no other choice (it was either cut someone off, hit a wall, or get rear-ended).

Lastly, I have two side notes I couldn't fit in above: One, there were areas between the viaduct and downtown that had weird sounding pavement.  I initially thought it was something with my tires, but I now have a car with a TPMS, so I would have a warning if I had low tire pressure. Two, I was pleasantly surprised that people were actually following the work zone speed limit for the most part.  There weren't any speed cameras, but I wonder if the ones that have been around have scared people into actually following the speed limit.  Before, I've seen most people completely ignore the speed limits on both I-81 and I-690.  I feel like I'm crawling when I do the 45 or 50 limit depending on where I am, but the limits are perfectly reasonable for the geometry of the roads (although I-690 being 55 between NY 635 and I-481 is annoying).

EDIT: I forgot to mention that I didn't realize that the new Crouse Ave/Irving Ave ramp to I-690 east was opening that afternoon until I read about it when I got home.  The first time I passed it was about two hours before it opened.

[Beltway]

I feel like freeway demotions like the I-81 viaduct are going to become more common. The money that built the original Interstate system is gone and now it's up to the states to maintain what the Feds bankrolled.

It's interesting how some arguments in this thread echo agency talking points more than enthusiast debate. The reality is that more than 47 state DOTs still consider wholesale freeway removals radical and extreme, preferring modernization or rerouting. The few precedents often cited weren't true removals -- California's stub was earthquake‑damaged, Oregon's Harbor Drive was replaced by I‑5, Wisconsin's incomplete stub was lightly used, and Massachusetts rebuilt underground.

None erased a functioning Interstate through a mid‑sized city. So when removal is presented here as inevitable, it's worth asking whether that reflects genuine forum consensus or the perspective of those aligned with official planning agendas. Principled opposition isn't fringe; it reflects the mainstream DOT consensus nationwide. Silencing dissent doesn't strengthen the case -- it only highlights how unsettled the removal idea really is.

[kalvado]

I feel like freeway demotions like the I-81 viaduct are going to become more common. The money that built the original Interstate system is gone and now it's up to the states to maintain what the Feds bankrolled.

It's interesting how some arguments in this thread echo agency talking points more than enthusiast debate. The reality is that more than 47 state DOTs still consider wholesale freeway removals radical and extreme, preferring modernization or rerouting. The few precedents often cited weren't true removals -- California's stub was earthquake‑damaged, Oregon's Harbor Drive was replaced by I‑5, Wisconsin's incomplete stub was lightly used, and Massachusetts rebuilt underground.

None erased a functioning Interstate through a mid‑sized city. So when removal is presented here as inevitable, it's worth asking whether that reflects genuine forum consensus or the perspective of those aligned with official planning agendas. Principled opposition isn't fringe; it reflects the mainstream DOT consensus nationwide. Silencing dissent doesn't strengthen the case -- it only highlights how unsettled the removal idea really is.

In case you are new to the debate... More or less local people spent thousands of posts upstream l8ooking at this situation, and basically agree that there wasnt a perfect solution. But the one being implemented may be the least problematic one.

[Beltway]

In case you are new to the debate... More or less local people spent thousands of posts upstream l8ooking at this situation, and basically agree that there wasnt a perfect solution. But the one being implemented may be the least problematic one.

I'm not new to this discussion, I have read all the way thru, and I highly doubt that "local people" upstream reached a consensus that the removal ("grid") is the least problematic option. Thousands of posts (when there are 1,889 in total?) show debate, not agreement.

[The Ghostbuster]

That is why I started this thread, because it piqued my interest. I also disagreed with the preferred alternative (preferring upgrading the viaduct to modern design standards).

[Rothman]

On Tuesday before Thanksgiving, I met up with a friend in Syracuse, and I drove around the I-81 project with him.  I planned my route to use following roads:

• I-81 in both directions from US 11 in Nedrow to the northern I-481 interchange
• I-690 in both directions between Geddes St and I-481
• the new I-481 exit at NY 5/92
• Almond St under the viaduct
• And my ultimate goal, every ramp of the I-690/I-81 interchange

I'm writing this report in roughly the same order as I drove.

The cantilever sign for the 7th North St exit has it's new number, but everything else still had it's old numbers, including the 7th North St sign at the exit itself.  Thankfully, there's a ground-mounted "OLD EXIT 25" sign next to the one with the new number.  The future mainline I-81 at the northern interchange seemed finished, and the construction seemed limited to the area within the loop ramps.  There could have been more construction I missed since I was only on the I-81 north to NY 481 north and NY 481 south to I-81 south ramps.

Once I got on I-81 south, I was surprised with how far along the new exit for N Clinton St was.  It looked to have the top course of pavement, and just needs to be connected to I-81.  I was also surprised at how far along the new Bear St bridge was.  On the south side of Syracuse, there were two separate spots where the right lane ended, so someone taking I-81 south through Syracuse while staying in the right lane would have to change lanes 3 times: once at the existing lane drop in the I-690 interchange, and two more times on the south side of Syracuse.  Near the S State St/S Salina St/Brighton Ave exit on I-81, in addition to the lane drops, there were also a few long and somewhat confusing lane shifts.

Once I got to the southern interchange, I was surprised to see that all the bridge beams were in place.  I didn't get a close look since I had to pay attention to fairly heavy traffic, so I'm not sure how far along the bridges were.

Approaching the southern interchange on northbound I-81, there were a few BOSes (is that the right term, big orange sign?) and a VMS further back (near Sentinel Heights Rd) telling you which lane to be in for I-81 and I-481. The current route of northbound I-81 through the southern interchange was extremely narrow, with the permanent guardrail on the left side, and a temporary Jersey barrier on the right side.

When I went to U-turn from northbound I-81 at Court St and re-enter southbound at W Division St, I was slightly annoyed at the 4 way stop signs that could have been covered up at Genant Dr/Court St, North Clinton St/Spencer St, and Genant Dr/W Division St.  North Clinton St looked like all it needed was final dirt fill along the curbs.  N Clinton St between Spencer St and W Division St and W Division St itself (especially crossing Genant Dr) were pretty rough.

I got stuck in traffic for a few minutes on the I-81 south to I-690 east ramp due to I-690 just east of I-81 being temporarily down to 1 lane.  While I was stopped, I was surprised to feel my car bouncing a bit since I was stopped on a bridge.  I was also surprised that the backup wasn't much worse than it has been with 2 lanes.  As I first thought with the Teall Ave bridge project, I'm amazed at how much having 3 lanes on I-690 makes a difference.  I-690 at the new Crouse Ave/Irving Ave exit had super long somewhat confusing lane shifts.

At the new I-481 exit, I was surprised at how wide the exit ramp felt.  I'd looked around in Street View, but only now got around to driving it.  I was also amused at the fact that there was still a "DO NOT ENTER/WRONG WAY" sign assembly for the now removed loop ramp.  I only drove to the Wegmans on E Genesee St, but I saw new overhead signs in the distance at Lyndon Corners.

Driving under the viaduct, the only visible construction was the road closed barrier and earthwork at Renwick Ave.  Heading back north on I-81, the lane shift at the Hiawatha Blvd exit made it hard to see which lane was which.  By the time I realized I needed to move over to the right, it was too late so I was forced onto the ramp for Old Liverpool Rd/Onondaga Lake Parkway, so I just u-turned at the intersection of Buckley Rd and Old Liverpool Rd.

At this point, after a trip to the new Ikea, my friend had to leave, so I finished my drive by myself.  It had gotten dark and started raining at this point, so it was hard to see and it was almost impossible to see any lane lines.  The lane shifts on I-690 and I-81 were extra hard to follow since the rain made the ground areas of the original lines just as visible as the temporary lines.  Exiting I-690 at Teall Ave and using the I-690 east to I-81 south ramp felt super weird because of the lane shifts being right before the ramps.  Towards the end of my route, I u-turned at the new Glen Ave exit.  Since it was dark and rainy, I wasn't able to see much.

Overall, even being local, aware of the potentially tricky to drive through parts of the project, and a roadgeek, it was still a bit tricky to follow the lanes as intended, especially with the dark and rainy weather.  At one point on Salina St in downtown, cars were making three lanes when there were only two since it was impossible to tell where the lines were. Even when it was still light and not raining, I cut a few people off, either accidentally because I couldn't see them (I recently got a new to me car, and it has worse visibility than my old one), or because I had no other choice (it was either cut someone off, hit a wall, or get rear-ended).

Lastly, I have two side notes I couldn't fit in above: One, there were areas between the viaduct and downtown that had weird sounding pavement.  I initially thought it was something with my tires, but I now have a car with a TPMS, so I would have a warning if I had low tire pressure. Two, I was pleasantly surprised that people were actually following the work zone speed limit for the most part.  There weren't any speed cameras, but I wonder if the ones that have been around have scared people into actually following the speed limit.  Before, I've seen most people completely ignore the speed limits on both I-81 and I-690.  I feel like I'm crawling when I do the 45 or 50 limit depending on where I am, but the limits are perfectly reasonable for the geometry of the roads (although I-690 being 55 between NY 635 and I-481 is annoying).

EDIT: I forgot to mention that I didn't realize that the new Crouse Ave/Irving Ave ramp to I-690 east was opening that afternoon until I read about it when I got home.  The first time I passed it was about two hours before it opened.

Tonight, I noticed the overhead signage for the new ramp from what will be BL-81 to Colvin St (Exit 1C, future).  Ramp's not open yet and the little sign on the structure has a small "ramp closed" placard placed over its text.

[Rothman]

I feel like freeway demotions like the I-81 viaduct are going to become more common. The money that built the original Interstate system is gone and now it's up to the states to maintain what the Feds bankrolled.

It's interesting how some arguments in this thread echo agency talking points more than enthusiast debate.

"Agency talking points"?  I mean, people in this thread have simply referred to the publicly available information (whether NYSDOT's or through the media) to respond to your posts.  The EIS is hardly just an unsubstantiated "talking point," just as one example.

Public input is only one ingredient into choosing a preferred alternative.  I don't think any of us would want projects engineered through direct democracy...

In case you are new to the debate... More or less local people spent thousands of posts upstream l8ooking at this situation, and basically agree that there wasnt a perfect solution. But the one being implemented may be the least problematic one.

I'm not new to this discussion, I have read all the way thru, and I highly doubt that "local people" upstream reached a consensus that the removal ("grid") is the least problematic option. Thousands of posts (when there are 1,889 in total?) show debate, not agreement.

I don't think consensus was argued here, actually.  And, I don't think there's 100% consensus on this forum or amongst the public on the project.  Would be kind of uncanny if that were the case...

Not sure what consensus on this forum would indicate, either.  A bunch of roadgeeks with an interest in the project agree with the project as signed off by FHWA, whereas another bunch object to it...with probable overlap somewhere in there...In the grand scheme of things, not much.

[Beltway]

It's interesting how some arguments in this thread echo agency talking points more than enthusiast debate.

"Agency talking points"?  I mean, people in this thread have simply referred to the publicly available information (whether NYSDOT's or through the media) to respond to your posts.  The EIS is hardly just an unsubstantiated "talking point," just as one example.
Public input is only one ingredient into choosing a preferred alternative.  I don't think any of us would want projects engineered through direct democracy...

You use the "public input is only one ingredient" line as if that resolves the controversy. But that's the generic DOT posture for any project -- expansion, rehab, replacement. What makes Syracuse different is that FHWA funds are being used for removal, which was never the purpose of the federal aid highway program.

Consensus isn't the issue. The issue is precedent: $2 billion in national highway money is being spent to erase a functioning mainline Interstate. That's not just "one ingredient among many" -- it's a radical departure from the program's original mission.

Some here point to the DEIS and FEIS as if they "prove" the removal case. But an Environmental Impact Statement isn't proof -- it's the agency's documentation of impacts under its preferred alternative. By definition, it reflects what NYSDOT wants to build, not a neutral verdict on whether removal is better than modernization. That's why more than 47 state DOTs still treat wholesale removals as radical: they recognize that EIS documents justify agency choices, they don't settle public debate. So when removal is presented as inevitable because "the FEIS says so," it's worth remembering that's agency narrative, not consensus of stakeholders.

[kalvado]

I feel like freeway demotions like the I-81 viaduct are going to become more common. The money that built the original Interstate system is gone and now it's up to the states to maintain what the Feds bankrolled.

It's interesting how some arguments in this thread echo agency talking points more than enthusiast debate. The reality is that more than 47 state DOTs still consider wholesale freeway removals radical and extreme, preferring modernization or rerouting. The few precedents often cited weren't true removals -- California's stub was earthquake‑damaged, Oregon's Harbor Drive was replaced by I‑5, Wisconsin's incomplete stub was lightly used, and Massachusetts rebuilt underground.

None erased a functioning Interstate through a mid‑sized city. So when removal is presented here as inevitable, it's worth asking whether that reflects genuine forum consensus or the perspective of those aligned with official planning agendas. Principled opposition isn't fringe; it reflects the mainstream DOT consensus nationwide. Silencing dissent doesn't strengthen the case -- it only highlights how unsettled the removal idea really is.

Thinking about your take if it... Do I remember correctly that you are from somewhere in the middle of east coast?
Then you may generally think of 2DI as something like I-95 with major cities in both directions wherever you are on that road.
I-81 in Syracuse is nothing like. There isn't much to the south of Syracuse for quite a distance, and you can write "here be dragons" on the map north of Syracuse.
Maybe that explains a different take?

[Rothman]

It's interesting how some arguments in this thread echo agency talking points more than enthusiast debate.

"Agency talking points"?  I mean, people in this thread have simply referred to the publicly available information (whether NYSDOT's or through the media) to respond to your posts.  The EIS is hardly just an unsubstantiated "talking point," just as one example.
Public input is only one ingredient into choosing a preferred alternative.  I don't think any of us would want projects engineered through direct democracy...

You use the "public input is only one ingredient" line as if that resolves the controversy. But that's the generic DOT posture for any project -- expansion, rehab, replacement. What makes Syracuse different is that FHWA funds are being used for removal, which was never the purpose of the federal aid highway program.

Consensus isn't the issue. The issue is precedent: $2 billion in national highway money is being spent to erase a functioning mainline Interstate. That's not just "one ingredient among many" -- it's a radical departure from the program's original mission.

Some here point to the DEIS and FEIS as if they "prove" the removal case. But an Environmental Impact Statement isn't proof -- it's the agency's documentation of impacts under its preferred alternative. By definition, it reflects what NYSDOT wants to build, not a neutral verdict on whether removal is better than modernization. That's why more than 47 state DOTs still treat wholesale removals as radical: they recognize that EIS documents justify agency choices, they don't settle public debate. So when removal is presented as inevitable because "the FEIS says so," it's worth remembering that's agency narrative, not consensus of stakeholders.

I'm not sure what you're arguing, then.  There's no real "consensus of stakeholders" on any project -- even dinky, simple paving projects -- let alone this one.  There are just degrees of how much disagreement there is over whatever project.

My understanding is all NYSDOT did was follow the process to develop a project that passed FHWA's muster to authorize federal funding for the project.  I would think FHWA understood what the purpose of their own funding was and would not have authorized federal funding if they thought the project was against such.

[Beltway]

Then you may generally think of 2DI as something like I-95 with major cities in both directions wherever you are on that road.
I-81 in Syracuse is nothing like. There isn't much to the south of Syracuse for quite a distance, and you can write "here be dragons" on the map north of Syracuse.
Maybe that explains a different take?

Yes I know. Not a regular in that part of the state but I visit the Buffalo area 3 or 4 times per year.

It is still unprecedented nationally,

My understanding is all NYSDOT did was follow the process to develop a project that passed FHWA's muster to authorize federal funding for the project.  I would think FHWA understood what the purpose of their own funding was and would not have authorized federal funding if they thought the project was against such.

Saying "FHWA approved it, so it must fit the program" is circular. Agencies approve their own departures all the time -- that's how precedent gets set. The Federal‑Aid Highway program was created to expand and rehabilitate highways, not remove them. The fact that FHWA signed off doesn't erase the reality that $2 billion in national highway money is being used to erase a functioning Interstate. That's the controversy: approval doesn't equal alignment with the original mission.

FHWA "approval" isn't proof of alignment --  divisions vary widely in how they interpret the program. New York's division may be permissive, but that doesn't change the fact the Federal‑Aid Highway program was created for expansion and rehab, not removal. Approval in one state doesn't erase the precedent drift.

[Rothman]

I am also frustrated by differences between FHWA divisions, but once one signs off on that authorization, it's FHWA's word.

Sounds like your disagreement is with FHWA, then.

Insomnia...

[kalvado]

Then you may generally think of 2DI as something like I-95 with major cities in both directions wherever you are on that road.
I-81 in Syracuse is nothing like. There isn't much to the south of Syracuse for quite a distance, and you can write "here be dragons" on the map north of Syracuse.
Maybe that explains a different take?

Yes I know. Not a regular in that part of the state but I visit the Buffalo area 3 or 4 times per year.

I am not sure if there is a comparable road in Buffalo. Maybe one going due south, US219 - but it's not a 2DI because it doesn't really qualify nor need to be one.
As for precedent... Rerouting traffic on a beltway around major city may be somewhere on same page (pun somewhat intended)

[NE2]

Since when are dolphin emojis agency talking points? 🐬🐬🐬🐘