Highway Removal in Syracuse and Buffalo: A Study in Interest Groups, Power, and Bureaucracy

Abstract

In recent years, the federal government has allocated funds across the country to reunite communities divided by previous infrastructure projects. Among the cities in which urban highways are being addressed are Buffalo and Syracuse, NY. Separated by only 150 miles, these two cities are similar politically, demographically, and economically; the urban highways in both cities have similar usage and are both overseen by the New York State Department of Transportation (NYSDOT). But despite these similarities, the projects to address the highways have played out quite differently. In Buffalo, the below-grade Kensington Expressway is being made into a tunnel, while in Syracuse, the elevated Interstate 81 viaduct is being removed completely. This thesis seeks to answer the research question: why are two similar cities seeing different outcomes in similar highway projects overseen by the same agency? Qualitative analysis of NYSDOT documents, public comments, and news coverage suggests that the interest group environment in each city is the likely answer. A deferential interest group environment in Buffalo led to decreased public engagement, while an active interest group environment in Syracuse allowed for frequent and meaningful opportunities for public engagement. The mechanism driving this relationship is NYSDOT’s choice of public engagement strategy: the elitist “Decide, Announce, Defend” or the pluralist “Engage, Deliberate, Decide.” These findings have implications for understanding the role of community and interest group involvement in transportation planning and the potential problems with bureaucratic implementation of federal funding at the local level.