NFTA to Study Amherst Light Rail Extension

Where is this "Niagara Street Corridor" transit center going to be located? This is the first I've heard of it. I'm thinking maybe around Niagara and Forest, near the Scajaquada?

What do they mean by the Seaway Trail System? The Seaway Trail is just Niagara Street in this area! Do they mean the River Walk?

This is stupid. The Tonawanda corridor would be more profitable and cheaper because most of it is above ground. It should be done to Tonawanda and Niagara falls first, since they would be highly profitable and cheaper to build. Then the increased funds would support the more costly development of Airport/Amherst corridors. Perhaps completely relook at the Robert Moses parkway and use it for transit/people/cars. We need to look at our regional transit situation as a whole. Getting everywhere should be easy, with well marked routes. It is easy to screw up where the robert moses dumps into downtown due to the route through the park being destroyed.

Connecting UB North/UB South/UB City/Downtown/Canalside/FN Center by rail transit is HUGE. Allowing UB's 30,000 students to have easy access to downtown will spur development in the city, especially in restaurant/bar/entertainment areas. Having 6-7K new students a year will bring a fresh influx of cash every fall.

This could be the lifeline needed for Canalside to prosper. The area (Canalside + Cobblestone District + FN Center) can (and should) be the go-to for restaurants, entertainment, shopping and drinking for all UB students and employees.

The next projects should be a train line from downtown to Delaware Park/Buff St to connect Canalside/Elmwood/Buff State/ Delaware Park residential area. Then the obvious third project is to run an express train line to the airport.

A line south through the Larkin District/Valley/Ward/South Buffalo then express to the Ralph/ECC South only will be necessary if these areas are built up to sufficient density.

Completing the original "phase 1" to UB North has been a no-brainer for the past 30 years. While I'm glad they're looking into it again, it's frustrating to hear about yet another study for this route. They probably have a bookshelf somewhere filled with all the past studies on linking UB North by rail.

Does anyone know how the connection between UB North and UB South will be done? I am assuming it would be all underground..right?

A straight A-B line under Millersport is about 3.5 miles. This would essentially bypass Amherst with maybe a stop between UB North/South

An A-B-C line could go from UB South to the Blvd Mall and then on to UB North. This would be great for Amherst in redeveloping that area of town. Lots of empty or underused strip malls.

Doubt any of us will ever ride it however.

Should extend study to address crossing of Buffalo River and Outer Harbor access with Metro Rail. I maintain future bridge being planned to reach outer harbor should include light rail ROW!

Start constructing! Let's go already!

Why not explore an above ground trolly system?

In terms of possible metrorail expansion, Buffalo and its metro area really have a major advantage in the sheer amount of abandoned right-of-ways criss-crossing the city North to South and East to West. Many of these ROW's are still abandoned and require (relatively) minimal reconstruction to return them to revenue service.

The trial baloon to UB North is an excellent place to start, but the next step needs to be connections through the Tonawanda Corridor to Tonawanda, the airport and a West Side line.

UB North expansion is the only one that makes sense. Find another population center that is as densely populated. This will help UB as much as it helps the region in general. A downtown connection would make UB much more attactive to downstate students who do not have cars.

Okay!! It's all decided, then.

The reason that Light Rail was even considered in Buffalo was to connect the city with the newly proposed Amherst Campus. If you go to any and all of the original plans, SEQR statements, Final EIS reports (all of which can be found in the downtown library) it was always explained that the line is to connect the city to its university. Every site plan of North Campus from the 1970s shows the Light Rail connection coming to campus. The spine was created as a dense collection of buildings so that it was all within easy access to the light rail. The campus and the Light rail was all part of the same mega infrastructure project to create a new modern unobstructed university AND connect it to its core city.

The fact the line doesn't already connect to north is a blunder by the region. There are 28k students at UB, another 7k people. The existing rail like carries about 22 - 26k people a day. You could probably double the use and efficiency of the existing route just by connecting to north. That is the best bang for any LR investment possible right now. It is only 3 miles between campuses. Take into account all of the businesses that could prosper from easier access for students along the blvd and it is a no brainer.

North Campus could become a large park and ride for everyone in Tonawanda, Amherst and Clarence. Easy access from the highway. Plenty of parking quick 20 minute right to downtown on the train. How nice would it be to leave your car at North Campus instead of commuting to south campus. For many people it would increase the ease of use of the whole system.

Then you have all the events that happen on north campus and which the existing transportation system crumbles at every one. Fourth of July fireworks, football games, events at the CFA, guest and visiting lectures. It is a huge magnet for people and events and as anyone who has waited in traffic for 30 minutes on Augsburger Rd knows the existing infrastructure even being over sized as it is cannot handle it.

Lastly you think about the growth of UB's downtown campus and how that will increase the need for students to travel from north to south to downtown it becomes even more obvious how needed this extension is.

I can't even call it an extension. It is time to finish the job we started.

"UB North expansion is the only one that makes sense. Find another population center that is as densely populated. This will help UB as much as it helps the region in general. A downtown connection would make UB much more attactive to downstate students who do not have cars."

As stated above and done SO often here, people make statements based on perceptions rather than reality. Go to the website Social Explorer and create a map using 2010 Census data by census tract for population density and you'll see that any extension to the North Campsu from its existing dead end is going through a LESS DENSELY populated area that if the line were extended through the xisting right of way through the town of Tonawanda and near the Village of Kenmore. If I felt like doing the analysis in GIS, I would be certain that population within say 1/4 mile of either proposed right of way would show more population through the Tonawandas.

Look at a simple map in Google for the love of it all. You'll see that the existing right of way in the Tonawandas cuts through major residential population centers and any link to the North Campus cuts through large areas of highways, roadways and open space. Once it crosses Sheridan, population declines rapidly as does density. Look at the North Campus, it's in the middle of nowhere.

I'm not advocating either (frankly our issues and priorites are larger and more important than mass transit) only advocating that people stop making statements that are based on nothing but your falsified perceptions.

Let's hope that this 'alternative' study actually includes alternatives. I'm all for an extension to Amherst, but the only plan that's been bounced around for that over the past 40 years has been an incredibly difficult and expensive combination of tunneling and elevated tracks. The Amherst line has become a case study for engineers in the /opposite/ of faster-cheaper-better.

Unless the study looks at variations to the alignment to make this dream actually feasible within the forseeable future, it will just be more money down the toilet.

The Amherst line would be great, don't get me wrong... but it's been a money hog that has distracted the state and the NFTA for over a generation. In all that time, there has been little progress on the various other projects that are significantly more realistic and equally beneficial (lines to the Airport/Lancaster, Kenmore, Tonawandas/NF, East Side/Beltline, Larkin, South Buffalo/Outer Harbor, Orchard Park/stadium)

Maybe there is a way to revive the Amherst line in a way that won't cost billions (and I hope those alternatives are looked at... street-grade trolleys, BRT Bus Rapid Transit, existing rail ROWs, etc). But as long as they stick to the tunnel/elevated track configuration, we'll never see any action on the more economical extensions that have been staring us in the face for decades.

When I was studying at UB in 1995 ish, there was a great article published in the university newspaper about the decision making around the initial planning for the light rail system in Buffalo. The article mentioned that the plan was to connect Downtown to UB South campus to UB Amherst campus. The article also said that the WNY region won the federal funding for the project over other key metro areas in the US. However, due to the protests from Amherst residents, the line only made it so far as South campus.

If that was actually the case, what has changed since then that would allow the project to move forward?

Also, even if everything was approved, and there was support for the project on all sides, what insights are there to suggest that the WNY region actually needs a light rail system? I am totally in favor of light rail to relieve stress and congestion as a mobility solution in cities where the transportation system is broken. But would there be enough commuter demand to justify the project? I hate the fact that we have to depend so much on cars, and I would rather see people ride a train than go buy a car and support that whole industry. Living in Santa Monica/Los Angeles, I can say for sure that planners here really screwed up by not building a robust rail system. When I visit Buffalo and drive the streets/thruways, I see alot of emptiness, a road system that works and is never congested.

In this endless extenstion conversation...one has to think which lines would have the most uses? Most bang for the buck..

Used the most for...park and ride..sporting events..EVERY DAY COMMUNTE TO AND FROM WORK.

For this to work in Buffalo it has to make money and be used by more than one population. UB is a great start but students don't exactly pay the highest rates for anything anywhere.

Which lines would be the most profitable? Are people from Amherst now more likely to take mass transit? Tonawanda...how bout West Seneca? Who is most likely to use this system 5 days a week (some times 6) rather then only when school is in session? Buffalo's road system is a breeze 15 hours out of the day..if done properly light rail in the correct location would do wonders for congestion (what little we do have) and the environment as well.

Now lets stop with the silliness too...just because there is a rail connection doesn't mean we're going to have 10k more students wandering downtown Buffalo looking for something to do...they go to Wegmans for food and the Boulevard mall for clothes.

Given whiteflight..racism..w/e..w/e..may have derailed light rail in the past; I definately think we're dealing with a completly different populus that in the age of dwindling resources would be much more inclined to park their car and take the train to work downtown if it was worth it and saved them a couple bucks on their gas bill.

Lets say a gallon of gas (roundtrip) and parking...I know 15 minutes of my time is worth a few dollars; how about yours?

I'd be interested to see which suburb has the highest concentration of Downtown workers anyways? Any suggestions??

I'd love to see both the Niagara St and Amherst extensions. I'd also like a South Park extension. It seems like a no brainier. It's a flat mostly straight road. The line already bends south behind FNC. Run it all the way to South Park above ground. Then anyone from S. Bflo and the south towns could avoid the 190 and lower need for parking lots and ramps downtown when attending events.

For what it's worth I don't think this will ever happen, nor do I believe 22-26 thousand people a day ride Buffalo's rail, No way no how.

Here's my two cents, and let the naysayers Vote my comment down to their hearts content.
A line expansion to the North Campus is a no brainer, we all agree. However, the issues that arise compared to a Tonawanda and/or Cheektowaga/Airport Line outweigh the other.
The amount of money it would cost to tunnel, move underground utilities, sewer lines, etc; would be astronomical for this area.
Whereas the Tonawanda Line, a remanant of the glory days of the International Railway Corporation, just requires new track, a catenary system, crossing gates at only 6 intersections along it's current route. I believe when it would enter the City of Tonawanda it would need to be rerouted to the CSX active line if a turnaround on the North Tonawanda side was facilitated.
What I would suggest is an easy expansion for the NFTA. Simply utilze the current infrastructure available. The current CSX Line which runs two, maybe 4 Maple Leaf Amtrak trains a day could be heavily utilized as a commuter line. The NFTA would need to purchase a few locomotives as well as passenger rolling stock, and make a GO type system between Buffalo and Niagara Falls. Think about it. The current CSX line runs from Downtown Buffalo to Niagara Falls, NY. The ability of Canadians, especially during the summertime, to transfer from GO Trains from Toronto to awaiting NFTA Commuter Train to Downtown Buffalo, and or sites beyond is an interesting proposition and vice versa for those of us in this area.
We had an infrastructure over a hundred years ago of trolley routes, commuter trains, high speed trains, and access to points beyond. A commuter train to Ellicottville, Colden, East Aurora, Orchard Park...is not far fetched. It was available in the past. Trolley lines ran from Buffalo to Lancaster to Niagara Falls with it's own system.
We are a community that fails to realize that rail helped our birth and that can help rebuild us too.

Connect Buffalo's largest, nicest, growing suburb to the city?!! Connect the UB campuses?!!! What a great idea?!! I hope you can detect my sarcasm here. While Buffalo Metro's population has remained stagnant that last 20 years, the city's population has dropped and shifted to the suburbs. While this flight may or may not continue, the suburbs have grown enough to become the area's majority for the near future. With fuel prices climbing, extending the "train to nowhere" to the rest of the metro area is something that should be done NOW, especially while the current federal administration is in big support of the rail concept. Develop the medical corridor and support our medical industry growth, develop the waterfront, build new UB School buildings downtown, building new ECC school buildings downtown, support our strong regional banking growth, extend the rail transportation to as much of the suburban population as possible and watch our great city shake off it's remaining rust...

Politically and when one speaks of economic multiplier effect there the priority must be the Amherst to Buffalo Light Rail extension. UB Amherst, UB South Campus and UB downtown Campus are economic engines that must be connected.

Now reactivating the old Beltway for Light Rail use would connect downtown, larkin, central terminal, ECMC, Main Street by Canisius, much of Amherst Street, Buffalo State, D'Youville and most of Niagara Street but this has a lower economic multiplier effect though its probably cheaper and would serve more people.

Now extending to the airport would change a huge dynamic for the eastside by connecting the economic engines of the airport, rail station, larkin and downtown and this has a lower economic multiplier effect though its probably cheaper and would serve more people.

So

No brainer. Get it done.

One problem with almost every proposed connect-the-UB-campuses routing is the "use" of Grover Cleveland and Millersport Highways. That's a lot of train passing by a lot of low-density residential. It would not be too much to imagine in that case omitting stations until you reach the Center for Tomorrow buildings along Flint Road!

OTOH, a route that bent sharply from University Station (which would then be re-re-named "South Campus Station," no?) to the northwest so as to travel along Niagara Falls Boulevard, with stations at Longmeadow, Sheridan, Boulevard Mall, Boulevard Consumer Square, etc., before swinging back east Maple to the North Campus would connect students and residents to retail, while passing significantly higher-density residential (much of it occupied by students!). Some form of commercial assessment for the benefited properties to defray the operating costs (as Rochester has done with some RGRTA service) would make economic sense (though my eardrums are already bleeding from the echoes of the screams from the plaza owners!).

No doubt this would be more expensive to build than a Grover-Millersport extension, but it would be exponentially more useful to riders, thus attracting more paying customers and reducing the operating subsidies needed.

You can also imagine a one-way loop north of Boulevard Mall, with a single-track going from the North Campus to that station. The added travel times for any rider going betwixt a station north of Boulevard Mall and a more-southerly station would be minimal, and perhaps there would be some construction savings, as well as conveniences (any North Campus station that doesn't provide for two-sided boarding of trains is brain dead, IMO, and that's a less confusing situation when trains are only running one-way).

I'm afraid this is one case where the expression "go big or go home" really does apply.

The problem with everyone's analysis is that they assume that rail lines will promote growth.

News flash: There is no evidence that they do. Nowhere.

The ONLY rail lines that have been remotely successful are the ones that were built to deal with overwhelming traffic issues. NY built it's entire subway lines because the city would have choked to death without easier ways to move about. Washington DC has a superb metro system that is used because driving is more of a hassle.

Until the traffic situation in Buffalo approaches anything like the major cities of NY, Washington, Chicago or SF, there will be no need for any further commuter rail.

Moreover, even in the cities which are dependant upon rail lines, like the major cities I mentioned above, major tax subsidies are required to keep them operating.

In a city like Buffalo, there is no need for trains of any kind, and if they are built they will be severely underutilized, and in any case will required annual subsidies just to keep them open. You think taxes are high now? I'd like to know how much tax subsidies NFTA needs annually to operate the single line it has now. Apparently, everyone thinks that isn't enough, and we need to add to the drain.

If making life easier for a few thousand students at the north campus is really that important to you, then I assure you it would be much cheaper to buy them all a new car than build a transit system to cater to them. And if you really think that few thousand students will somehow revitalize downtown, I have bridges I can sell you.

Personally, I think it would be cheaper and better in the long run to shut down the north campus altogether and rebuilt UB downtown. wouldn't that accomplish all the goals that everyone seems most to care about? the students would all be downtown, contributing to the economic and cultural life of the city, and we wouldn't have an annual drain on our taxes.

Of course, I'm convinced by facts, not emotion. So if anyone has any actual facts to show that train systems alone can rebuild an entire city's downtown area, I'd be happy to review it.

Enough of the pipedreams and silver bullets!

It seems like from what I see in Buffalo is we are not getting a huge flow of population moving in to the city but people leaving one area of the city and shifting to another area UB N moving downtown perfect example. I agree to that only bigger of the cities like DC NY Boston Milan Roma Europe in general etc have better need. Cant taxpayer money be put to better use? Drive down forest ave from elmwood to grant that street needs serious work also chip strip too.

"Forest" Avenue, without a single shade tree remaining, is a good example of what's become of Buffalo. It's all about evocations of long-gone triumphs and beauty. The City of Trees! The City of Light! The City of Churches! As we stand, Buffalo sucks. Don't you suburbanites get too smug, because ALL of the Buffalo suburbs are ugly, bleak, crappy excuses for home-towns. New Jersey looks 300 or 400 % better than our smug-crappy Amherst, Cheektochooga, Tondanowhere, Hamcrap surroundings.

There will never be any extension of the idiotic, noplace-to-noplace Buffalo subway. It should not have been built. The fact that it hasn't been closed is simply a matter of shame - nobody wants to admit that it is useless. NFTA is a garbage collection of idiots, they are about to destroy the bus system, and rail ideas are gigantic lies.