Station 3: Your visions

Here is what others have said:

  • A tunnel would eliminate the isolation of the University and the near east side from downtown while allowing traffic to continue to use Route 81. Eliminating the corridor or turning it into a boulevard would make commuting into and out of the City miserable. Use of Route 81 is important to commuting as both a direct and alternative route into the City. We have serious weather delays in the Winter and construction delays in the Summer which makes it important to have more than one interstate accessing the City.
    (Posted on:6/3/2012 8:37:55 AM)

  • I prefer the boulevard option. It will prove the most cost effective and will open up a vast area for redevelopment in the center of the city. At the same time it will remove an ugly barrier between downtown and University Hill. I hope West Street can be reduced in size as well, certainly not expanded.
    (Posted on:5/29/2012 4:48:46 PM)

  • I strongly support the Boulevard option. It will open up a very large area of the city to be more livable, walkable, and inviting for retail and other businesses. It will improve air quality, noise, and safety in the downtown area. And it will break down an enormous barrier between east and west sides of the city, allowing ongoing initiatives like the Connective Corridor to achieve their maximum potential. As someone who lives not far from the Colvin Ave entrance to I-81, I appreciate the convenience of getting through the city quickly, for example to the airport, but I also regularly bike, walk, and ride the bus from University Hill to points downtown. The value of removing the viaduct far outweighs the value of keeping it, to my mind. Other cities have had great success with removing highways through downtown. Many cities thrive without limited access highways near their downtowns. Syracuse deserves a chance to become a ground-level, human-scale, welcoming place rather than just a drive-over zone. Furthermore, I understand that rebuilding the highway would involve claiming even more territory than it already commands, to meet current safety standards. This is absolutely unacceptable, and Syracuse deserves better.
    (Posted on:5/26/2012 8:15:01 PM)

  • Many others have articulated the issues well. I add the following to the chorus of voices and ideas in favor of removing I-81 from the City entirely. I-81 as currently positioned leads people to see the city as either a place that one simply is expected to pass through or as a place to which one comes from outside for a short period of time, after which one leaves to go home (which is somewhere else). If this city is to thrive, it must come to be more about itself--about cultivating life within. We need more people to live in the city. It is underutilized for living. When more people live in the city, there will be more activity of every kind and it will become the vibrant place we aspire for it to be--and will attract more people to want to visit it. All of this starts with changing the messages sent by having a highway bisect the city. It would no better--in fact, worse--to reroute I-81 to West Street, for example. That would be repeating the tragic mistakes of running it through the 15th Ward to begin with--from raw discrimination to misguided urban planning. We need a solution for the next 50 years, not for decades past. I-81 needs to go for all of our sake--and not just elsewhere within the city, but out of the city entirely.
    (Posted on:5/25/2012 4:29:42 PM)

  • The boulevard option should be implemented however I totally disagree with the "western by-pass" route as shown on the pre-screening models, more on that later. Regarding the boulevard option, and as some others have suggested, I would use the autobahn in Germany as my model. A fantastic super highway constructed between major urban centers, that doesn't penetrate the city proper. This super highway runs mainly through rural or sparsely populated areas to connect Germany's major cities, thus avoiding the 81-like twists and turns; numerous and tightly distanced exits/entrances and inevitable traffic slow-downs. When you approach your destination city, their is a "spur" which directs you through the outer suburbs and eventually turns into a boulevard street which directs you into the heart of the city. We have 481 in place, modifications at the north and south route 81 interchanges would allow for a successful diversion of all north and south bound traffic, passing through Syracuse. The western bypass schematic almost follows the original route that was part of the Camillus/Fairmount by-pass construction in the mid- '70's. The time to construct that route was then, when all the rights-of-ways were in place and the route had limited impact on existing housing, businesses, etc. Recapturing this route nearly 40 years later would be extremely expensive and disruptive, virtually impossible. While I do believe a western by-pass is necessary, a different route, skirting around the south west city suburbs (boundary), perhaps more along the 173 corridor, would be easier from a route perspective, however a bigger challenge from a construction standpoint.
    (Posted on:5/25/2012 4:15:07 PM)

  • I want the tunnel/depressed highway. I have seen them in other areas and I think they are great. Much less noise and it makes the ground level prettier.
    (Posted on:5/21/2012 11:29:41 PM)

  • It's unfortunate that the condition of the highway is such that we have to make a decision now, when we're still caught up in a car-dominated lifestyle. In a few years, I think it will become more apparent that we need to shift to reducing urban sprawl and rely more on efficient public transit. Most of the options seem to fit the 20th century better than the rest of the 21st century, which will have to deal with life beyond peak oil.
    (Posted on:5/19/2012 8:38:21 PM)

  • Boulevard option - Thru truck/freight will use 481 anyway, leaving only that traffic needing access to CBD. However, pedestrian access must be a very high priority. Cheaper to build ped bridges than car bridges.
    (Posted on:5/16/2012 1:56:10 PM)

  • The boulevard is the way to go! 81 through the city was obsolete the day it was opened! BLVD traffic will flow ok.
    (Posted on:5/16/2012 1:54:16 PM)

  • Do not destroy new development on west side!
    (Posted on:5/16/2012 1:52:18 PM)

  • Western bypass solutions are absolutely non-viable environmentally, economically, and transportation-wise. An interchange near Velasko Rd. dumping traffic into the southwest city streets is the ultimate in stupidity.
    (Posted on:5/16/2012 1:51:49 PM)

  • If I had a car, I'd drive it to the city and park it and use some other transportation to get around save gas.
    (Posted on:5/16/2012 1:49:58 PM)

  • Boulevard inside city 4 lanes outside Stress 481!
    (Posted on:5/16/2012 1:46:39 PM)

  • I absolutely support the idea of a blvd. It will help traffic flow and commute times in and out of downtown, which alot of people fail to realize.
    (Posted on:5/16/2012 1:44:24 PM)

  • I support the tunnel option, since that would allow for more friendly pedestrian routes in the heart of the city, as well as improve bikability.
    (Posted on:5/16/2012 1:42:28 PM)

  • Non of the above. Look towards the red and blue train link in the center of N.Y.C. built of stone with cut out.
    (Posted on:5/16/2012 1:41:32 PM)

  • It is life threatening to try to cross under 81 in a wheelchair.
    (Posted on:5/16/2012 1:38:53 PM)

  • A boulevard provides a greater economic opportunity for the city.
    (Posted on:5/16/2012 1:36:26 PM)

  • I still prefer the idea of a western bypass (481). But find the idea of a depressed 81 very interesting. What about flooding concerns in the depressed area? Now how about both concepts?
    (Posted on:5/16/2012 1:34:50 PM)

  • I love being able to zip downtown - or across town from my home in the valley (since 1969). Anything that prevents this has my thumbs down!
    (Posted on:5/16/2012 1:30:50 PM)

  • We need a route 81 that is not a boulevard. Otherwise we would get gridlock becomes more traffic (games, work, event). I prefer rehabilitation. I81 is not the barrier that West St and a Boulevard are. It could be attractive underneath it.
    (Posted on:5/16/2012 1:29:34 PM)

  • Reconstruction/Rehab is the very minimum of what is needed. Tunnel/Depressed highway seems "over the top" cost wise.
    (Posted on:5/16/2012 1:25:18 PM)

  • The near west side is becoming the next jewel of Syracuse! Companies like King & King, WKNY, Proliteracy are making it grow! Putting a highway through the middle of this neighborhood is not the way to go!
    (Posted on:5/16/2012 1:23:20 PM)

  • No Boulevard - Tunnel with park on top. Seperate vehicular & pedestrian traffic - Revitalize downtown.
    (Posted on:5/16/2012 1:16:44 PM)

  • Blvd design inside city access to businesses & neighborhoods. Buses do not support city transportation other than AM & PM commute.
    (Posted on:5/16/2012 1:15:22 PM)

  • Until the mindset changes from: "Syracuse will become a great town" "People will move away" "It will shift the problem elsewhere" To: What choice do we have! Jobs will be created. Neighborhoods will improve and life will be better. Move the damn thing!
    (Posted on:5/16/2012 12:15:25 PM)

  • I believe the underground option is the best one for the city of Syracuse. Re-establishing neighborhoods that were destroyed by the highway should be a top priority. Parks and green space could replace the aesthitically displeasing highway that exists now.
    (Posted on:5/16/2012 12:12:22 PM)

  • Rochester has 2 circles around it - inner one and an outer one - Why can't we do this? Rt. 481 will become Rt. 81 East. Opposite Rt. 481 make another circle to the west and name it Rt. 81 West. Then make a parking lot on roadway (non-elevated) that will go into the city for public transportation.
    (Posted on:5/16/2012 12:09:30 PM)

  • Reconstruction/Enhancements. I believe the I-81 footprint is fully funtional in moving traffic throughout the city and region. Improve the exit/entrance ramps and improve the aesthetics of the elevated portion by nicer concrete panels and sound attenvation panels to reduce traffic noise. Enforce the speed limits.
    (Posted on:5/16/2012 12:05:13 PM)

  • I believe I-81 should be reconstructed and built wider. I use I-81 at least 3-4 days a week: Plus I use it to visit families on weekends.
    (Posted on:5/16/2012 12:02:28 PM)

  • Please show care and concern for people of the westside. The Boulevard option entailing the larger use of West Street (via vehicular traffic) inhibits the westside community from downtown. My fear is the use of West St will split the westside further from the care and concern of the public.
    (Posted on:5/16/2012 12:00:25 PM)

  • It is preferable to go w/ a tunnel/depressed highway. More importantly, LOCAL PEOPLE need to be hired for this project.
    (Posted on:5/16/2012 11:54:22 AM)

  • I just want people to realize that there is no "magic bullet" and there is no one perfect solution that will address all the issues. Also, removing 81 totally, and the "support for a car-centric culture" will not suddenly put all of us on bikes, it'll likely just clog the streets.
    (Posted on:5/16/2012 11:53:13 AM)

  • I have read these other comments - these people are CRAZY!!! It is so nice living in a city where I can enter and exit easily!!! There are no real traffic delays compared to any other cities. Leave I-81 downtown alone! Improve the ramps and the curves and keep traffic moving!!! Please
    (Posted on:5/16/2012 11:44:50 AM)

  • Take it down, but has to spur in center of Syracuse.
    (Posted on:5/16/2012 11:42:24 AM)

  • Throw out scheme to direct traffic to West St. Residents of that neighborhood, after decades of being dumped on, are trying to reduce the barrier of West St. Not make conditions worse.
    (Posted on:5/16/2012 11:41:05 AM)

  • Keep the same route so as not to disrupt more neighborhoods. BUT- make it below grade with pleasing cross streets and shops.
    (Posted on:5/16/2012 11:39:32 AM)

  • Bypass the city through downtown and create loop, 81 area currently occupied becomes park space.
    (Posted on:5/16/2012 11:38:00 AM)

  • A boulevard has some clear advantages for access to downtown, Mall, etc, and 481 already exists for bypass!
    (Posted on:5/16/2012 11:36:10 AM)

  • No-Build should not be an option!
    (Posted on:5/16/2012 11:34:54 AM)

  • Boulevard. Make our city beautiful.
    (Posted on:5/16/2012 11:34:08 AM)

  • We like the tunnel!
    (Posted on:5/16/2012 11:33:16 AM)

  • Love the boulevard concept! Just hope that in thinking about how we handle overflow traffic we can be repectful of neighborhoods already.
    (Posted on:5/16/2012 11:32:20 AM)

  • Think of cost first, then work on which ideas fit one economic landscape/current conditions - NYS Dept
    (Posted on:5/16/2012 11:31:02 AM)

  • Thank you so much for listening and providing this excellent display of the discussion to date.
    (Posted on:5/16/2012 11:29:55 AM)

  • Boulevard or Tunnel/Depressed highway YES!
    (Posted on:5/16/2012 11:28:36 AM)

  • The Boulevard would still completely seperate SU and downtown. Although not visually, but in terms of connectivity you still could not walk or easily get from SU to downtown.
    (Posted on:5/16/2012 11:27:55 AM)

  • Reconstruction of elevated highway.
    (Posted on:5/16/2012 11:24:24 AM)

  • Western bypass only recreates the same problem and shuffles it to the near westside (essentially, cutting it off further from downtown).
    (Posted on:5/16/2012 11:21:57 AM)

  • What buildings would be effected/torn down if I81 is widened, rehabbed, etc?
    (Posted on:5/16/2012 11:20:16 AM)

  • No build- You must be kidding. We need more highway to make Syracuse business attractive, not less. Need to connect 695 with 481 (west to south also).
    (Posted on:5/16/2012 11:19:21 AM)

  • Take the 81A Duct down and replace it with Boulevard. Create "Alternate" routes in and out of city to meet commuter needs.
    (Posted on:5/16/2012 11:17:24 AM)

  • Why not add a lane to 481? Leave I-81 as an arterial through Downtown (like West St).
    (Posted on:5/16/2012 11:14:59 AM)

  • Just tear down I-80 throught the city and send through traffic over I-481.
    (Posted on:5/16/2012 11:12:26 AM)

  • What about the great things going on in the near westside? Do not impact! Please
    (Posted on:5/16/2012 11:11:08 AM)

  • Blvd- Greatest potential for downtown economic development. We need to enhance the core of this community.
    (Posted on:5/16/2012 11:09:48 AM)

  • A boulevard seems the most pedestrian & bike friendly. We already have 481 and 690 for those who aren't stopping. Leave the city area to those who can use it.
    (Posted on:5/16/2012 11:07:55 AM)

  • I think the boulevard/arterial plan in the existing footprint in combination with the western bypass is the best choice. This will eliminate some unsafe and overused on/off ramps and provide better access to downtown from the arterial. Hopefully this will eliminate the need for so many one way streets in the downtown/University areas. Better access to hospital/University area from 690 is needed as well.
    (Posted on:5/15/2012 9:25:27 PM)

  • Whatever is done, please make allowances for regular replacement of burned out street lights. Having so many lights dark is dangerous and UGLY.
    (Posted on:5/15/2012 6:44:44 PM)

  • boulevard through the city - highway either under or around. Have seen this effectively work in various places - Zurich Switzerland, Santiago Chile, et al
    (Posted on:5/15/2012 4:19:51 PM)

  • Personally, I don't have much of an opinion besides not building at all. All this rebuilding and relocation will just cause angry individuals and a lot of chaos. If we decide to just continue fixing and renovating weak and damaged areas, we will be able to solve the aging problem. All of this rebuilding is unnecessary and will just create more of a problem than we already have. This may not be the best idea but honestly the others weren't too impressive either.
    (Posted on:5/14/2012 10:06:24 AM)

  • I lived in Boston during "The Big Dig" project. While it was severely over budget and behind schedule, the results were beautiful. I live in Syracuse and my priorities are seeing downtown revitalized and becoming more pedestrian/bike friendly. I think a tunnel or boulevard option offers the most potential. I also like the idea of a light rail from the suburbs to downtown. I worry that, like the urban renewal projects of the 1960s, there will be unintended consequences of limiting traffic and utilization of downtown if it is too difficult to get there.
    (Posted on:5/14/2012 9:51:02 AM)

  • I've been strongly in favor of the boulevard option ever since it was brought up years ago. I've lived in cities in this country and in others, where a lot of traffic moves along boulevards where people nevertheless are able to walk, shop, sit in cafes (inside or on sidewalks), relax on rows of benches along wide sidewalks and green space in a center median. All of this contributes to a sense of place and a sense of community. People spend a lot of money to travel to the world's great cities and to walk along the great boulevards of those cities. There's no reason why Syracuse should not have its own. I-81 can go around the city on what is now I-481. People should not be able to get out of a city all too easily; it leaves the city desolate when the people leave. It's clear that people want to live in downtown Syracuse, given the high rents they're willing to pay every time the next apartment opens up. With a boulevard bringing traffic down to where the humans are walking, businesses will be more willing to locate in the city. I look forward to the day when this is accomplished.
    (Posted on:5/13/2012 9:31:42 PM)

  • The boulevard option, with through-traffic redirected to the existing 481 through DeWitt, seems to be the most beneficial for the city and regional as a whole. Developing West Street into limited access highway that would further divide the west wide from downtown is not a viable option and would only shift the burden. If West Street could be redeveloped as a boulevard that compliments an I-81/Almond Street boulevard, this might be worth pursuing. The options within the city must emphasize enhancement of the urban environment (i.e., human environment) over high-speed commuting.
    (Posted on:5/11/2012 2:30:41 PM)

  • I like how alternative options outside of route 81 (the western bypass and rail) are being considering. It's refreshing to see so many ideas and hope we can all feel proud of the decision being made in a few years. It's also nice to see these ideas being categorized and broken down to be easily identified and understood. While it may not be completely feasible, it would be pretty cool to have a hybrid of the different recommendations, such as a tunnel for thru-traffic while having a blvd and light rail for those wanting to go into the city.
    (Posted on:5/10/2012 11:07:59 PM)

  • the only recommendation i dont agree with is doing a boulevard. the amount of traffic that goes through underneath on almond st is already congested especially during the rush hour times; adding the traffic from 81 will be a huge mess. the speed limit would be set at probably 35 mph because of pedestrians and there will be traffic lights like every 150 ft or so. this option would cause a major traffic mess.
    (Posted on:5/10/2012 6:43:17 PM)

  • I travel from Cortland into as well as thru Syracuse via i81 at least once a week. I continue to believe that the boulevard concept would be the preferable solution. Thru traffic north and south should be shunted to i481. A boulevard in place of the existing viaduct south of the city utilizing a portion of the existing right-of-way, portions of State St and West St would commercialize this area and encourage retail growth. The creation of a light-rail transit system with a terminus at the RTC in the north and extension as far as Binghamton to the south would create a new economic corridor for the communities along the way. Cortland would become an attractive bedroom community for people who might choose to work in Syracuse. Complimentary to that would be the access that communites like Cortland would have to an expanded and skilled professional workforce. Weather would no longer be a deterrent to those who want to enjoy the employment, social, cultural and sports activites offered by Syracuse. For those entering the city from the south by auto or light rail the attraction a spacious boulevard lined with retail establishments, restaurants and sports venues would bring a new consumer population. Its traffic would be those entering the city to engage in its commerce. 481 should serve those who want to travel efficiently N-S. the boulevard, perhaps with bike paths and pocket parks would engage those who want to experience the fruits of a metropolitan area.
    (Posted on:5/10/2012 10:53:43 AM)

  • A tunnel is not feasible. The city was built on a wetland. The engineering involved to relocate the existing utilities to the schools and the hospitals, let alone digging a tunnel into the ground, seems highly unlikely and extremely expensive. Progress the boulevard idea.
    (Posted on:5/10/2012 9:16:01 AM)

  • Please maintain the ability to get quickly in and out of the Syracuse downtown area. This should be the number 1 priority of any plan.
    (Posted on:5/10/2012 8:27:22 AM)

  • although a relatively new resident of Syracuse (32 years) I have often heard comments about how the construction of the highway decimated neighborhoods. When I drive through downtown on my daily commute to work , I often wonder about the buildings and communities that were lost. I think that it should be of the highest priority to NOT repeat that mistake. I think that if this very creative and intelligent community tries, they can produce a solution that will avoid disrupting any more neighborhoods and sacrificing any of the lovely, unique and irreplaceable architecture that our city displays. If people have any doubts about the value and character that these lovely buildings give to a city, they should take a trip first to Moscow and then to St. Petersburg (Russia) to see and understand how old buildings help to give character and warmth to a city.
    (Posted on:5/9/2012 9:00:14 PM)

  • I like how it's been weeded down. I really like the idea of a depressed I-81 or a blvd wit ha West street bypass. Both options will remove the elevated sections of I81 that divides downtown and will hopefully eliminate summer construction season
    (Posted on:5/9/2012 8:00:24 PM)

  • I love the boulevard option. This could be a central space in the city that attracts businesses, pedestrians, and bicyclists. I don't see how any other option could offer so many benefits to the city.
    (Posted on:5/9/2012 5:12:56 PM)

  • It is not clear why the "No-Build" option is included, when there is universal agreement that the existing highway is approaching the end of its useful lifetime. Doing nothing is a formula only for allowing people to die. This is unconscionable.
    (Posted on:5/9/2012 2:09:15 PM)

  • I think the current location is fine but would rebuild with ground level, tree and barrier lined highway.
    (Posted on:5/9/2012 1:24:17 PM)

  • My thought is to take another look at re-routing I-81 along present I - 481. The road is already there and has the capacity to handle through traffic without any changes except for some signage. As far as the current I - 81 we re number that to US or State Highway and make it at grade throughout the city (the boulevard idea) Doing one without the other would lead the FHWA to re designate I - 81 anyways because the boulevard idea would not meet interstate standards. If you need any more proof of this look whats happening to I-86 in the southern tier. The I-86 designation is only applied to the portions that MEET interstate standards, the rest is NY-17 still and will be until those portions meet Interstate Standards.
    (Posted on:5/9/2012 11:22:16 AM)

 
IN THIS STATION
EXPLORE ANOTHER STATION