Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
You are listing proposals/wishful thinking. There's thousands of proposals and ideas out there, pretty much any public works project has 20 other alternatives listed somewhere, and every random citizen group/NGO comes up with plenty more.
Your phrasing is insinuating that these things are happening, or are at least likely to happen at some point, which is largely false.
Well I didn't say they are underway except a few , but they are on the radar and I would expect them sometime over the next 20 years. These types of projects are usually the last to happen in terms of Urban Renewal unless the Project involves a crumbling structure....or tied to a large scale redevelopment.
I don't believe that you are saying having an elevated highway through your community gives a city a "distinctively northern feel"... What it shows is poor judgment and a lack of concern for the residents. When Robert Moses forced the Cross Bronx Expressway through the Bronx it started the destruction of that boro and the addition of the Thruway and every other interstate just made it worse. Don't you realise these elevated roadways cut cities and in many cases isolate sections. Boston as an example lost it's connection with it's waterfront . In many ways it becomes the american version of a Berlin Wall. I can't say if 81 contributed to the decay in parts of Syracuse.
How many choose to stop in the city because 81 passes through? I really don't think it makes much of a difference. Your prefered methods to redo it are nice but Syracuse is no Denver and I don't see that kind of financial investment being made. The southern cities are smarter to have a feeder interstate coming into the city and allowing those just passing through to keep on going.
I'm not sure how this thread devolved into negative criticism since it was designed to be constructive, but everyone is entitled to their own opinion.
VA Yankee, your assertions are utterly ridiculous and misinformed. If you had bothered to read any of the previous posts, you would know that there is pretty much a consensus (myself included) that the construction of interstate highways through urban areas under the guise of "urban renewal and slum clearance" was incomprehensibly destructive to the neighborhoods through which they plowed. If you have ever driven through a city such as Atlanta and wondered why I-75/85 has such a sharp curve, it is because the connector was bent out of its way just to destroy a black neighborhood adjacent to downtown even though the initial plan was to build the highway through the railroad gulch (where the Georgia Dome, Phillips Arena, Olympic Park, etc. now sit) which would have caused no damage to any residential neighborhood at all. To think that the damage caused 50 years ago was favored by anyone is disingenuous.
However, the reason why the interstates built through northern cities (such as Syracuse and the Bronx) were so destructive is because while they did successfully engage in "slum clearance" and displacing low-income, largely minority residents, the "urban renewal" funds have been siphoned off by corporations lobbying the increasing number of US representatives from the increased apportionment in the south due to population gains in the Sunbelt. So additional funds were intended to be used to rehabilitate the areas around I-81 and other northern interstates but the funds never arrived because they were tied up subsidizing suburban sprawl along arterial beltways.
"southern cities are smarter to have a feeder interstate coming into the city and allowing those just passing through to keep on going"
For someone who came on the forum to ridicule the ideas of others, you certainly have a penchant for contributing nothing but nonsense. The sunbelt structure of interstate highway construction and the suburban sprawl that ensued over the past 50 years has to be the grossest misallocation of domestic capital resources in the history of the United States. Period. What you are describing is a system that has decimated the limited urban cores of sunbelt cities in exchange for sprawl development of Walmarts and half empty commerce parks along the corridors of the interstates that bypass those cities.
If the "VA" in your name stands for Virginia, you clearly have never driven out of Washington DC on I-66 toward Front Royal (where it intersects with I-81) or driven on I-95 toward Fredericksburg. Certainly the preferred strategy would have been to tunnel under DC rather than plow through it (which is why DC interstate construction was blocked). However, the fact that I-95 diverts onto the I-495 Beltway rather than go directly through the city (gee exactly what is being proposed in one scenario for Syracuse) and I-66 turns into a bottleneck that then just dumps off into Constitution Avenue summarily creates the worst traffic in the United States bar none. The Sunbelt template of interstate highway construction and the type of development it spawned has been an unmitigated disaster and an environmental calamity not to mention more destructive to inner-cities that the interstate slum clearance itself, particularly within the "rustbelt" region in which Syracuse lies.
So no, Syracuse is not Denver. But I thought you said these cities are "smarter"? Contradict much? So I guess at your suggestion Syracuse should do nothing. For as destructive as the interstates were in the 1960s, they are now serving as a catalyst for redevelopment and revitalization in places such as the Bronx, perhaps a closer approximation to Syracuse than Denver which is why I invoked the name of the Bronx in the first place. Most of the revitalization in the Bronx is concentrated along the Major Deegan Expressway (I-87) and the Grand Concourse, a scenic boulevard very much like the one proposed for Syracuse with some portions that are viaducts like I-81. As I have stated before, I would be in favor of a below-grade cross-cut I-81 with Genesee St. or perhaps Harrison St. being rehabilitated into the scenic boulevard anchored by the mixed-use development examples from my initial post. Please look at the images of the Bronx below where a combination of the I-87 viaduct (similar to I-81), the Grand Concourse, E 161st Street, and elevated trains (possible future for OnTrack?) create a commercial/residential/entertainment district anchored by Yankee Stadium. I think this could work for Syracuse. AllianceBank Stadium and Destiny USA are already in place; what is lacking is the mixed-use development in-between Townsend St. and I-81 that I have suggested if you have read my posts (and the future Inner Harbor is the lynchpin). You don't have to like my opinion but if you want to denigrate it at least come with some viable suggestions of your own!
I agree a tunnel would be very ideal. Think of how much space would be available for development while thru traffic zips on by underneath. The thing that would be most difficult would be connecting the tunnel with 690. It just a shame how the BIG picture isn't seen and how much potential this project really has for the city.
I wonder why they even held the workshops and asked for our design input knowing they were going to take the cheap route (no pun intended)
Some realignment of 690 would have to be involved within a tunnel concept. A realignment of this magnitude contributes to the greater cost of building a tunnel. As you point out, the long-term economic implications would far exceed the short-term (high) capital costs.
As for public workshops, they are usually a requirement and play a useful role to be fair. This was not the case during the 1950's and 60's that resulted in the destruction of the vibrant 15 Ward and cutting Syracuse in two by I-81. If a "Bunker Hill" viaduct design replaces the existing one, it is the result of the workshops. Otherwise, DOT might just as well replace the existing viaduct without any community imput, but times have changed since then due to political considerations.
I have not attended the I-81 meetings, so I cannot get a sense of the sincerity of the discussion. However, it has been my experience that one concept is usually preferred by those hosting (i.e. NYDOT, etc.) the community workshops or event. Usually two or (for the sake of discussion) three concepts are given, you illustrate the pros and cons, ask attendees a series of controled and well defined questions, and guess which one sounds the best?..the one preferred by NYDOT (or what ever agency), esp when cost is a factor. IMO, the "Bunker Hill" bridge concept is meant to appease the community and its leaders.
Unfortunately, Syracuse and other upstate cities do not have the political clout that NYC or downstate municipalities have where money is not object. I do not mean to be cynical, but I don't believe local leaders are strong enough to demand the best possible solution that addresses all concerns, that is a tunnel! The key is getting short-sighted people to think long term and the big picture. I think a transporation planner should have co-facilitated the process with the project engineer.
Last edited by urbanplanner; 05-10-2013 at 01:11 PM..
Taking out 81 through the city is just a horrible decision.
I'm going to hold off on buying a house until they make the decision. I'd hate to buy a house that's near 81 and end up having to take 500 miles of surface streets to get anywhere -wasting my gas and time like crazy. My 8 mile commute to work will turn into 23
Second, it's going to be a HUGE inconvenience to those who have to be brought to the hospitals in an emergency. If you're in the northern suburbs and have a heart attack, you want to be to the hospital as quick as possible. Going 20MPH down North Salina in an ambualance is going to cost lives - it will easily add 20 minutes to getting to the hospitals.
Also, it will kill downtown. If there's no way to get to downtown from the nothern suburbs, that's bad.
481 is reasonable if you're going from Binghamton to Watertown. If you're local to Syracuse ... it's going to add way too many miles.
Go to Utica, try to commute through the Arterial. Even though there's a total of 3 employed people in the Utica area, it gets backed up. Simply put, getting rid of the interstate is going to severely hurt the city.
81 acts as a barrier for the south side. I'm sure if 81 was taken out, I'd live in a war zone. I would have no choice but to move, because the criminals from the south side will migrate east.
Interstate 81 is a barrier for the South Side? Riiiiiight. If people from the South Side wanted to rob you, guess what? They have cars. And they have legs--it's not hard to walk across. They will get you if they want to get you. They clearly don't (yet), so unless you have zero street smarts, there's no reason to fear getting robbed, highway or no highway. If you're really scared about a "war zone", just move to Fayetteville like everyone else with that fear.
As for traffic issues, the architects are obligated to solve these issues if they do choose to remove 81, so I don't see a need to speculate about disastrous effects right now. My view is that we should build a tunnel, but unless DeFrancisco can twist some arms for us or we can find a billionaire benefactor, it's just not happening.
Interstate 81 is a barrier for the South Side? Riiiiiight. If people from the South Side wanted to rob you, guess what? They have cars. And they have legs--it's not hard to walk across. They will get you if they want to get you. They clearly don't (yet), so unless you have zero street smarts, there's no reason to fear getting robbed, highway or no highway. If you're really scared about a "war zone", just move to Fayetteville like everyone else with that fear.
As for traffic issues, the architects are obligated to solve these issues if they do choose to remove 81, so I don't see a need to speculate about disastrous effects right now. My view is that we should build a tunnel, but unless DeFrancisco can twist some arms for us or we can find a billionaire benefactor, it's just not happening.
I live of of E. Brighton pretty close to the south side. I do think it would get a bit worse if 81 was taken out.
I think they would get a pretty good reduction in traffic if they renammed 481 to 81 - and made it a bit more seamless to go from 81S to 481S. Seems like it would help the people on autopilot just navigate around the city.
I don't think crime would change if I-81 was removed between Downtown and University Hill. I think it is about connecting the two areas with development more than anything else.
Also, commutes on surface streets doesn't necessarily mean a longer commute, depending on where you live and have to go for work. It is possible to live in first ring suburbs/towns and have a commute into Downtown/University Hill in less than 20 minutes on surface streets.
I don't think crime would change if I-81 was removed between Downtown and University Hill. I think it is about connecting the two areas with development more than anything else.
Also, commutes on surface streets doesn't necessarily mean a longer commute, depending on where you live and have to go for work. It is possible to live in first ring suburbs/towns and have a commute into Downtown/University Hill in less than 20 minutes on surface streets.
It would be a very select few that would be affected. In my current situation, I would be.
I live about 300 feet from 81 (south of downtown) and I work off of 81 on the north end of the city. In fact, my parking lot borders 81. It's an ideal commute ... as long as 81 isn't closed all summer for paving :S
By the time the changes start taking place, I'll be in the market for a house. I am looking towards the eastern towns (Minoa, E. Syracuse) more than anything ... I dont think I would be affected too much.
As convenient as 81 through the city is, it does drive my stress levels through the roof. I'm used to driving on two lane country roads!
I don't think crime would change if I-81 was removed between Downtown and University Hill. I think it is about connecting the two areas with development more than anything else.
Also, commutes on surface streets doesn't necessarily mean a longer commute, depending on where you live and have to go for work. It is possible to live in first ring suburbs/towns and have a commute into Downtown/University Hill in less than 20 minutes on surface streets.
Plus, the whole purpose of re-routing 81 traffic around the city or (preferably) building a tunnel beneath the existing I-81 right of way is to encourage walkable urban space between the two areas (downtown and university hill) that also encourages mass transit.
For all the comments about Brighton and whatnot - you all do know that the viaduct section, the section in actual replacement consideration in whatever method deemed appropriate/affordable, is only a small subsection of the highway between 481 and 690, right?
For whichever option they choose, obviously, the parts outside of the viaduct will have to change accordingly. But the viaduct portion, the elevated portion, is solely comprised of the section from approximately Van Buren at the south to just a hair north of the 690 interchange.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
What it shows is poor judgment and a lack of concern for the residents. When Robert Moses forced the Cross Bronx Expressway through the Bronx it started the destruction of that boro and the addition of the Thruway and every other interstate just made it worse. Don't you realise these elevated roadways cut cities and in many cases isolate sections. Boston as an example lost it's connection with it's waterfront . In many ways it becomes the american version of a Berlin Wall. I can't say if 81 contributed to the decay in parts of Syracuse. 
So I guess at your suggestion Syracuse should do nothing. For as destructive as the interstates were in the 1960s, they are now serving as a 
