Possibly replacing I-81 through Syracuse with street level boulevard? (Harrison: sales, 2009)

[ckhthankgod]

I wonder what will come out of this? Onondaga Citizens League supports replacing Interstate 81 in Syracuse with street-level boulevard - syracuse.com

[acknight]

Well planned, it's a good idea. I threw a few comments in there; I also attended an in-progress display of Dr. Carter's class they had involved.

My thesis is also cited in their report. http://www.acknight.com/15thWardThesis.pdf if you're interested.

[ckhthankgod]

I saw your comments and people just don't get that something will have to be done regardless. I think it is a great idea, that might have to be tweaked some.

I've also thought that West Street could be used and that the Western suburbs should have a bypass in that area. I posted(different name on that site) that there was supposed to be one, but never came about.

[phaelon56]

I still tend to think that a below grade arterial with multiple ramps up to and down from street level would be a better fit. One supposed benefit promoted by the boulevard idea is that it would eliminate the backups caused by the choke point of the Adams Street off-ramp. You'd still need a stop light at the new northern endpoint of 81 where it meets Adams Street and the folks who currently get off at Adams but really want to travel to Harrison, Genesee, Fayette and Erie will still pile up at that first light. Multiple exits at perhaps half of those streets but exits that run off a free flowing arterial would in theory be a better fit (or so it appears to me). I think it would also make crossing easier and less dangerous for pedestrians. I realize that aesthetically the boulevard concept has benefits and strong appeal but question whether it's practical for that initial stretch of road.

[RollsRoyce]

Originally Posted by phaelon56

I still tend to think that a below grade arterial with multiple ramps up to and down from street level would be a better fit. One supposed benefit promoted by the boulevard idea is that it would eliminate the backups caused by the choke point of the Adams Street off-ramp. You'd still need a stop light at the new northern endpoint of 81 where it meets Adams Street and the folks who currently get off at Adams but really want to travel to Harrison, Genesee, Fayette and Erie will still pile up at that first light. Multiple exits at perhaps half of those streets but exits that run off a free flowing arterial would in theory be a better fit (or so it appears to me). I think it would also make crossing easier and less dangerous for pedestrians. I realize that aesthetically the boulevard concept has benefits and strong appeal but question whether it's practical for that initial stretch of road.

I totally agree. An underground tunnel similar to Hartford or perhaps Boston would be my preferred option. The proponents of the "Tree- lined boulevard" that happens to run through a very high crime area replete with stop lights is not realistic for commuters from Southern Onondaga County and people needing to get downtown or elsewhere in a reasonable amount of time. Unfortunately, I fear that due to cost and all of the stories regarding Boston's notorious big dig, we'll be stuck with a tree-lined boulevard and all of the traffic, polution, and blight will be diverted to the eastern suburbs via I-481. I can imagine people in DeWitt's Boulder and Steinway Heights and the upscale homes sandwiched between Maple Drive and I-481 will not be happy. It's almost as if community leaders, special interests, and activist groups are saying that while I-81 has negatively impacted the city and several communities in particuar its perfectly fine to dump the congestion, polution, and potential blight on DeWitt since it is an affluent suburb. Two wrongs do not make a right. Clearly I-81 needs to be dismantled and anyone who believes the road doesn't need repair is naive. That being said, I believe an underground or recessed highway is the better option. Each to their own.

[acknight]

Originally Posted by phaelon56

I still tend to think that a below grade arterial with multiple ramps up to and down from street level would be a better fit. One supposed benefit promoted by the boulevard idea is that it would eliminate the backups caused by the choke point of the Adams Street off-ramp. You'd still need a stop light at the new northern endpoint of 81 where it meets Adams Street and the folks who currently get off at Adams but really want to travel to Harrison, Genesee, Fayette and Erie will still pile up at that first light. Multiple exits at perhaps half of those streets but exits that run off a free flowing arterial would in theory be a better fit (or so it appears to me). I think it would also make crossing easier and less dangerous for pedestrians. I realize that aesthetically the boulevard concept has benefits and strong appeal but question whether it's practical for that initial stretch of road.

I believe that the boulevard approach would come down substantially earlier, as Almond begins below the highway close to the Steam Station at Van Buren Street. This would provide a separation of traffic flow towards the university from the hospital traffic, giving a substantially better flow potentially. Almond Street is narrower at that point, but there may be room to expand there as well.

The biggest problem with the tunneling idea is that to be effective and worthy of the investment, you have to do a lot more than the mile and a half or so of the elevated portion as a tunnel to make there a reasonable point in the actual project - as you're still then talking one off ramp as there is now which will continue to be a choke point.

I've seen the traffic counts and the surrounding road structure to the elevated portion is somewhere around 45-50% of capacity at normal times. The only choke points in the infrastructure around 81 are at on/off ramps of the highway.

[acknight]

Originally Posted by RollsRoyce

The proponents of the "Tree- lined boulevard" that happens to run through a very high crime area replete with stop lights is not realistic for commuters from Southern Onondaga County and people needing to get downtown or elsewhere in a reasonable amount of time.

Actually, while elevated, the crime rate in the area of the proposed boulevard is not particularly high. The high crime areas in this city are many blocks from the elevated portions of 81 - Pioneer Homes, while not low crime, isn't high crime (and certainly not primarily random crime).

[phaelon56]

I agree on the fact that the Pioneer Homers area immediately adjacent to and running down Almond away from the projects us not high crime. Yes it has its issue but it's not a gang controlled area (not that I know of), crack sales aren't happening on the street and there's not loitering or group congregation issues.

I'm not talking about a tunnel - just a below grade roadway where the existing streets that run perpendicular will stay at grade level and cross over iton bridge supports. No tunnel means digging but dramatically lower costs. If large truck traffic is prohibited (as it is on parkways in NJ and downstate) it will further reduce traffic load.

If properly designed it could have exits before Adams for hospital and SU traffic (maybe near the steam plant), a Harrison exit for downtown traffic and then a short spur for access to 690. Beyond that would be straight into 81 N on the far side of the Blvd - maybe near Pearl Street?

Anyone who doubts that it needs to be torn dopwn and replaced either with a new overpass system or with a different road design need only consult with a bridge and highway engineer. The question is not if - it's how and when.

[RollsRoyce]

Originally Posted by acknight

Actually, while elevated, the crime rate in the area of the proposed boulevard is not particularly high. The high crime areas in this city are many blocks from the elevated portions of 81 - Pioneer Homes, while not low crime, isn't high crime (and certainly not primarily random crime).

While I agree the crime rate along that corridor does not rival Seymour/Shonnard/Gifford or Newell/Cannon/Tallman streets, it is still very blighted and not a place someone would venture through for a night on the town coming from the south. Another interesting point made by a Valley resident on the syracuse.com forum was the impact on daily commutes. This indivdual's wife works in Liverpool and would have to add significant time to her commute by using the I-481 beltway and then connecting to Liverpool via the thruway. This person noted that although they like living in the Valley they will consider moving due to the longer commute and added costs (ie. gas, wear and tear) resulting from this proposal. Considering that Syracuse has lost tens of thousands of middle class families over the past two decades, is an even further population decline a risk that many of these proponents are willing to accept? Based on their rhetoric, it seems that way. To cope with the added commutation costs and the safety concerns associated with a tree lined blvd, the response from the OSL is people should ditch their luxury or medium sized cars for a Prius or a bicycle and stop complaining since its for the greater good of the oppressed on the south side? That doesn't sound very democratic or accepting of diverse opinons.

In fairness, the proposed rendering for the blvd does look impressive and showcases Syracuse in an entirely different light than the unsightly elevated highway. Clearly something has to give, but considering the leanings of the OSL based on their prior reports, it seems their recommendation was probably in the works prior to conducting their "research."

[acknight]

Originally Posted by RollsRoyce

While I agree the crime rate along that corridor does not rival Seymour/Shonnard/Gifford or Newell/Cannon/Tallman streets, it is still very blighted and not a place someone would venture through for a night on the town coming from the south. Another interesting point made by a Valley resident on the syracuse.com forum was the impact on daily commutes. This indivdual's wife works in Liverpool and would have to add significant time to her commute by using the I-481 beltway and then connecting to Liverpool via the thruway. This person noted that although they like living in the Valley they will consider moving due to the longer commute and added costs (ie. gas, wear and tear) resulting from this proposal. Considering that Syracuse has lost tens of thousands of middle class families over the past two decades, is an even further population decline a risk that many of these proponents are willing to accept? Based on their rhetoric, it seems that way. To cope with the added commutation costs and the safety concerns associated with a tree lined blvd, the response from the OSL is people should ditch their luxury or medium sized cars for a Prius or a bicycle and stop complaining since its for the greater good of the oppressed on the south side? That doesn't sound very democratic or accepting of diverse opinons.

In fairness, the proposed rendering for the blvd does look impressive and showcases Syracuse in an entirely different light than the unsightly elevated highway. Clearly something has to give, but considering the leanings of the OSL based on their prior reports, it seems their recommendation was probably in the works prior to conducting their "research."

The Valley piece is somewhat misleading, as somewhere around 60-80% of the comments didn't seem to understand that the study only concerned itself with the elevated segment - the segment from 690 to 481 at the north wasn't part of the study (as it's already a semi-depressed highway). 481-690-81 to Liverpool takes 15 minutes, maybe 20 in heavy traffic unless there's construction involved. Longer, yes, but not by all that much. The Valley is closest to where 481 splits with 81 now anyways.