State DOT releases plans for three new tunnel options that could replace elevated I-81

[Orangeyes]

Bridges, tunnels, sunken lanes? With 16 choices for I-81, now ...

The 16 different paths for a new Interstate 81

 

[Millhouse]

I drove all through Buffalo for the tournament on elevated highways. We were in a hotel by the airport and found restaurants, First Niagara Centre etc very easy to access during the tournament.

They are never going to please everyone and with now with 16 crazy options, there will be even less consensus and more arguing.

i don't know where they are in the process but lots of people in buffalo wants to tear down the skyway too for similar reasons as syracuse with 81

 

[Millhouse]

Go with the East Alignment option - lots of spending in the local economy - lots of jobs and a great underground route that opens up downtown for commercial and residential development.

Go Big!!!

money's gotta come from somewhere.

 

[blizz]

Lets just re-open the Erie Canal and float cars through the city on ferries. It'll be slow, but scenic, and at least complete that part of Destiny that Congel couldn't. :noidea:

I would be in favor of this as long as it included an ordinance that banned construction of any bridges or tunnels that traversed the canal within city limits and included a city holiday centering around the tradition of residents on either side of the canal indiscriminately lobbing fruit, vegetables, and water ballons at the other side of the canal.

 

[sutomcat]

I suspect Ottomets is right and the powers that be are at least leaning hard towards the cheapest solutions to the problem, which means the tunnel options are being all but discounted.

I hope that when the solutions are debated, they take into account the long term costs for each solution, as well as safety.

Given the harsh winter environment in CNY, the elevated highway options are going to have huge on going costs to continually re-build the roads as they get destroyed by snow, ice, salt and the extreme temperature changes that the roads are subjected to. They erode at a significantly faster rate than normal roads because they are exposed from above and below.

The sunken highway option also ends up with significantly higher day to day costs, a little less than an elevated highway, because of all the new bridges required to allow traffic to flow over the highway east and west.

With a tunnel solution, all that goes away. You don't have to salt it, you don't have to plow it, and it is almost completely shielded from the primary causes of erosion and deterioration. It should last much longer and be far easier to maintain, even given that tunnels surely have some extra realatively maintenance costs for fans, etc.

When you take this into account, and take into account all the prime real estate that is freed when you opt for a tunnel based solution, I am not sure the true long term cost for a tunnel based solution is really going to be higher.

Couple that with the safety gains (anyone who has driven in the winter on elevated highways knows they are the most dangerous stretches of highway that exist); a tunnel, protected from all elements of winter, should be if anything safer than a normal stretch of highway, at least in the winter where even a white out is not a problem, I think a tunnel based solution starts to make a lot of sense.

Not a fan of the 4 billion dollar Eastern tunnel proposal, that one sounds like the cost could well double over time and the pricetag is too high even now to look at seriously. But the relatively shallow cut and cover type tunnels they are proposing should be relatively straightforward to get done and I don't see great risk in cost overruns. Would love to see cost estimates for all the solutions but right now, this is where I am leaning.

 

[Orangeyes]

Battle Lines Drawn Over Syracuse Highway Teardown

 

[Cusefan0307]

I suspect Ottomets is right and the powers that be are at least leaning hard towards the cheapest solutions to the problem, which means the tunnel options are being all but discounted.

I hope that when the solutions are debated, they take into account the long term costs for each solution, as well as safety.

Given the harsh winter environment in CNY, the elevated highway options are going to have huge on going costs to continually re-build the roads as they get destroyed by snow, ice, salt and the extreme temperature changes that the roads are subjected to. They erode at a significantly faster rate than normal roads because they are exposed from above and below.

The sunken highway option also ends up with significantly higher day to day costs, a little less than an elevated highway, because of all the new bridges required to allow traffic to flow over the highway east and west.

With a tunnel solution, all that goes away. You don't have to salt it, you don't have to plow it, and it is almost completely shielded from the primary causes of erosion and deterioration. It should last much longer and be far easier to maintain, even given that tunnels surely have some extra realatively maintenance costs for fans, etc.

When you take this into account, and take into account all the prime real estate that is freed when you opt for a tunnel based solution, I am not sure the true long term cost for a tunnel based solution is really going to be higher.

Couple that with the safety gains (anyone who has driven in the winter on elevated highways knows they are the most dangerous stretches of highway that exist); a tunnel, protected from all elements of winter, should be if anything safer than a normal stretch of highway, at least in the winter where even a white out is not a problem, I think a tunnel based solution starts to make a lot of sense.

Not a fan of the 4 billion dollar Eastern tunnel proposal, that one sounds like the cost could well double over time and the pricetag is too high even now to look at seriously. But the relatively shallow cut and cover type tunnels they are proposing should be relatively straightforward to get done and I don't see great risk in cost overruns. Would love to see cost estimates for all the solutions but right now, this is where I am leaning.

I've spoke with Jimmy Sexton. He manages the maintenance of all bridges for the DOT in Onondaga County. He doesn't want the viaducts to exist anymore just because of the cost of maintenance associated with them. Also the only Tunnel option that will probably be discounted from the beginning is the tunnel that would go under Lincoln Park come out near Teall, and re-enter under the university and finally come out near 481. This option could cost upwards to 4 billion dollars and would have no exits to city streets from the mall until the 481 interchange. All other options to reconstruct 81 will still at least cost a billion dollars and this is in 2014 dollars, so we can expect the project to be a lot higher.

i don't know where they are in the process but lots of people in buffalo wants to tear down the skyway too for similar reasons as syracuse with 81

Right now The DOT, with input from the state, and key stakeholders are evaluating the current 17 proposals based upon: does it satisfy current interstate requirements, does it limit economic impact during and after construction and allow for future economic growth, and finally the cost of the option. The 17 proposals will be studied throughout the summer, and will narrowed down to the most feasible options by sometime in the summer. At that point the options left will be studied further to see what properties would need to be acquired etc... Sometime in early to mid 2015 a decision will be made by the DOT and FHWA with input from the two stakeholder groups.

Anyone with questions, concerns, or just interested in seeing what the latest news on the project is should check out here.

https://www.dot.ny.gov/i81opportunities

 

[sutomcat]

I've spoke with Jimmy s e x ton. He manages the maintenance of all bridges for the DOT in Onondaga County. He doesn't want the viaducts to exist anymore just because of the cost of maintenance associated with them. Also the only Tunnel option that will probably be discounted from the beginning is the tunnel that would go under Lincoln Park come out near Teall, and re-enter under the university and finally come out near 481. This option could cost upwards to 4 billion dollars and would have no exits to city streets from the mall until the 481 interchange. All other options to reconstruct 81 will still at least cost a billion dollars and this is in 2014 dollars, so we can expect the project to be a lot higher.



Right now The DOT, with input from the state, and key stakeholders are evaluating the current 17 proposals based upon: does it satisfy current interstate requirements, does it limit economic impact during and after construction and allow for future economic growth, and finally the cost of the option. The 17 proposals will be studied throughout the summer, and will narrowed down to the most feasible options by sometime in the summer. At that point the options left will be studied further to see what properties would need to be acquired etc... Sometime in early to mid 2015 a decision will be made by the DOT and FHWA with input from the two stakeholder groups.

Anyone with questions, concerns, or just interested in seeing what the latest news on the project is should check out here.

https://www.dot.ny.gov/i81opportunities

Good to hear they are going to take the more practical tunnel options seriously.

It would be great to know approximately how much has cost to maintain the I81 viaduct over the past 10 or 20 years. My gut tells me it is really expensive...there are crews working on it all the time. And of course, when the viaduct is being worked on and is down or partly down, there are costs associated with that as well.