A new independent analysis commissioned by environmental advocates is casting doubt on the need for a proposed $1.4 billion expansion of Route 17 in the Catskills, arguing that the project may rest on outdated traffic assumptions and could conflict with New York’s climate goals.
The report, released by Catskill Mountainkeeper and the Rethink Route 17 coalition, challenges the state’s plan to widen roughly 30 miles of the corridor between Harriman and Exit 113 in Orange County as part of a broader effort to upgrade the highway to Interstate 86.
Speaking about the project’s scope, Taylor Jaffe of Catskill Mountainkeeper said:
“So the Route 17 project is primarily about upgrading Route 17 to I-86. And so getting that interstate designation nation. This will be across the entire Route 17 corridor, not just the part that we’re looking at in Orange and surrounding counties. As the state is moving forward with this project, though, they’ve also mentioned that they are aiming to address traffic flows and safety in the region. And so the part that we’re looking at right now is about a 30-mile segment between Harriman and Exit 113 between Worth and Mamakating.”
Questions about need and scale
The analysis, authored by transportation expert Norm Marshall, argues that state projections may overstate future traffic growth and that some congestion issues are more localized than previously described.
Jaffe said the group commissioned its own review after seeing similar studies from project supporters.
“What our communities were saying and what people on the ground were saying is that there’s really no need for that third lane. When we did our own sort of look at the public data, we saw that drivers could save a maximum of three minutes and six seconds.”
She added that widening the highway could introduce new safety concerns, even as the project is framed as a safety improvement.
“Adding a lane also would increase merge points and conflict points, which would likely decrease safety based on the types of accidents that do occur on Route 17, mostly being about driver behavior or animal crossings.”
Traffic modeling and climate concerns
A central critique in the report is that state traffic forecasts rely on older household survey data from 2010–2011, predating both the pandemic and more recent shifts in driving behavior.
Jaffe said updated local projections suggest slower growth in driving demand than the state’s current models assume.
The report also warns that expanding the highway could increase emissions through “induced demand,” a concept in which adding road capacity leads to more driving overall.
Jaffe said:
“So using using a different analysis and different tools by the Rocky Mountain Institute, I believe, Norm shows that adding that third lane across the corridor would induce about three million metric tons of additional carbon dioxide emissions.”
She connected that finding to broader state climate goals.
“And right now, New York State is trying to lower our emissions. The climate crisis is certainly here, and it’s really impacting low income and black and brown folks first and worst.”
Targeted fixes vs. widening
While the analysis acknowledges congestion in specific locations, it argues that problems are concentrated rather than corridor-wide.
Jaffe pointed to a key bottleneck area:
“Norm identifies the key problem area around exit 130 to 130A and he mentions that some really targeted solutions could could help alleviate congestion in that area.”
She said the report favors more limited infrastructure changes over full widening, including interchange improvements already under consideration by the state.
Cost transparency and next steps
The analysis also questions whether the state has fully detailed how the $1.4 billion project would be funded or broken down by component.
Jaffe said advocates are seeking more clarity:
“There’s not really any clarity on where the funding is coming from or how much different components of the project cost.”
Catskill Mountainkeeper is hosting a virtual town hall on May 13 with Marshall to present findings and take public questions. Jaffe said the goal is to make technical transportation modeling more accessible to residents and local officials.
“This is going to be a great opportunity for the public, for elected officials to ask questions, really get to understand this analysis a little bit better.”
As for what comes next, Jaffe said the group is urging the state to reconsider widening as part of the project’s alternatives.
“We want to see a project that reflects our community needs though and so widening is unnecessary, but there’s a real opportunity to flex that funding to local uses and make sure that the region as a whole gets lifted up instead of just spending $1.4 billion on 30 miles of roadway.”
Image Credit: East Coast Roads