I agree. Get rid of the skyway.
Too bad it is not up to city hall. Can Albany hear from that far away? Oh that is right they really don't care what Buffalo wants or needs. Oh well.
get rid of the Route 5 expressway with the skyway
a single Furhmann Boulevard is all that is needed for Route 5
Do I need to remind everyone that they are building a Tift Street Aterial...to connect route 6 to I-190.
Neither the expressway or the skyway or needed.
Look at that huge crowd! Standing room only... In terms of importance to the majority of Buffalonians, this ranks a considerable distance behind more jobs, lower taxes, better schools, repopulation of the city, and political reform.
I can't imagine the people in the suburbs thinking that adding 45 minutes to their commute as a good idea. It may be good for the people of Buffalo, but the vast majority of "Buffalonians" will see this as more of a hinderance than a help.
If you havent already, take a look at the Queen City Hub plan from the City of Buffalo website. It points out that a reliable and sensible transit system is key to the development of Buffalo. Will an upgrade to a Boulevard system fix the city's problems. No. It's just a piece of the puzzle.
And its not that the Skyway is at the back of people's minds. Lets remember that this meeting took place when most citizens who do care about Buffalo's improvements are working.
Why do people in the suburbs get to dictate land use in Buffalo. Certainly the People in the city don't have a say in Hamburg's land use.
Eliminating the skyway will result in a less costly structure to maintain. There is your tax savings. I highly doubt that there will be any more than a 5 minute add to anyone's commute if the highway is eliminated. Increasing the value of property where this highway stands would serve to add to both the city's population and its tax base. Two things which could help improve schools. If removal of the skyway is a benefit to the people of the city of Buffalo why would any WNYer be against it. Why should the people of the city of Buffalo shoulder the burden of someone's decision to live in Hamburg. If your commute is too long you should decide to move closer or shut up.
Brandon there is such beauty is statement.
The skyway does NOTHING for the city in a positive aspect. All the skyway has ever been is a short cut for those who live south of the city and need to commute to downtown or even worse NORTH of downtown in the northern suburbs. For this fact alone, the skyway should come down. IT DOES NOTHING TO BENEFIT THE CITY.
As far as traffic, you have no idea what you are talking about. Buffalo would have to add 300K residents for 45 minutes to be added to a commute. Even if, tough shit. If you want a shorter commute move closer. There is no such thing as traffic in Buffalo. Even with the focus of drivers on getting to a thruway as soon as possible, the thruways are not clogged in comparison to other areas. Adding to this point, downtown is a radial grid. With some very simple and low cost measures to time lights, 4 times the amount of traffic could be handled with the current infrastructure.
The placement of the 33, 190 and skyway were done at a time when assumptions were the only thing to go off. Mass use of the car is only 60 years old. The same time cars became popular, transportation engineers were looking to create the most comprehensive infrastructure as fast as possible.
True, this is "just a piece of the Puzzle" but a very important piece. Just like the historic Erie Canal is a piece and the Federal Courthouse is a piece, and the Dulski is a piece, and the Statler is a piece, and the Court Street Office Building is a piece, the new Delaware Office Building is a piece, The Church on Delaware is a piece, Gates Circle Condo Tower is a piece, Waterfront High Rise Condo is a piece, ECC is a piece, Health Now is a piece, New Era is a piece, Cobblestone is a piece, Casino (yes, the much maligned Casino!) is a piece, International Bridge is a piece, etc. etc., etc. My my my look at all the pieces. Let's get some momentum behind the sky-way before another 80 million is spent to "rehab" it and get the thing down. It's a gross impediment to accessing the waterfront and potential development.
Who wants to swing the first sledgehammer or spin the first wrecking ball?
What I am curious to know is once the Canal district is completed, is even going to be possible to take down the skyway? I do not see how it could be dismantled when a supposed "tourist destination" is directly below. One would think they would need to block off a couple hundred yards each way for safety and since it would a union job, God only knows how long it would take to bring the thing down.
Is this the one and only chance to get it done?
chris69, honestly your comments typically drive me crazy.....and thats in my opinion only, however you are dead on right this time. keep it up!
reason dictates that the route 5 and fuhrmann blvd. be combined to one at-grade thoroughfare. and simply put, the current DOT plans are concerned only with moving cars as fast and efficiently as possible without regard to the possibly of an outer harbor neighborhood or any future development for that matter. hell, look at all the use those bike paths are getting along the current concrete mess. build the blvd. alternative for the sake of buffalo.
Call me crazy, but I do not believe Canalside will be built under our Skyway.
Wow - do I feel guily - I LOVE the Skyway !! Anyone who thinks the Skyway is an eyesore, must never have been to the top. In a region that is so geologically flat, a trip over the Skyway is like a drive through the observation deck of City Hall. The vista is spectacular: spanning the nexus of the Buffalo River, old ship canal, Lake Erie, the Niagara River, the city’s skyline, grain elevators, the Central Terminal, Wilson Stadium, the Boston Hills, the Peace Bridge, sailboats, tanker ships, incredible sunsets and the breakwall that provides fireworks of exploding waves.
As a pleasure driver, I have listened with guilt to years of criticism of lack of waterfront access due to the 190 and the Skyway, but it’s time I speak up before we destroy down another piece of what makes Buffalo, Buffalo.
We already have a signature bridge! Imagine the potential of a running or bike race over this bridge. Next time I dial up a great tune on the car radio, I know where I am going - down to the river, along the 190, over the Skyway to the Milestrip Rotary - and back!
Whats wrong with a fast, pleasurable, scenic, uninhibited route - especially when it alreadys exists?
SkaJack,
I completely agree. I think we should build an elevated roadway over Niagara Falls as well. I cannot imagine a better spark for development. And as far as the bigger picture, who cares as long as its a pretty view for the 5.6 seconds you are at the top in between watching the road to prevent from driving into the barriers and holding your breath hoping that it is being maintained properly.
skajack makes a really good point....lets expand on the idea that the skyway has great views and put a parking deck on the shoulder so people can get out and look
and even better to have a bike race across the skyway...
and while we are at it, lets just put a safety net under the skyway for all those bikers and pedestrians who get blown over the side.....it could be Buffalos version of bunjee jumping. yeehaa
(sarcasm)
as a hamburg resident i must say that hamburg sucks and though i enjoy the view of the skyway i would toally be willing to destroy it.
Contact Astrid Glynn at state DOT. Tell her we don't need an expressway along the waterfront. The "boulevard" scheme, that includes one roadway will do the job, and will help provide better access to the waterfront. It will be worth the few more minutes added to a commute from Hamburg.
Everyone notice Congressman Higgins' outrageous comments in the Buffalo News today. Higgins has solidly established himself as an enemy of good planning on the waterfront. He has been the biggest proponent of a traditional truck plaza that will destroy the Prospect Hill neighborhood at the Peace Bridge, has been the biggest roadblock to getting things done at the foot of Main Street by embracing the Bass Pro boondoggle that halted Canal District construction for months, and now he's the biggest advocate for thoughtlessly moving forward on making Furhmann Boulevard a six-lane surface highway!
I regret pulling the level for Higgins in the last election. It won't happen twice!
This issue ranks behind jobs, buidling tax base, and repopulating the city? Wait a minute, that's exactly what replacing the Route 5 Freeway and the Fuhrmann frontage road with a single urban boulevard is all about. The single boulevard could be lined by buildings with stores and restaurants on the ground floor and loft apartments and condos above. Investment would flood into the area because as it became the best place in Buffalo to access the waterfront, along with the Inner Harbor after the Skyway Bridge came down. If you think the development around Shanghai Reds is strong, just wait till you see what happens in a well-planned neighborhood.
Now, try to imagine what kind of development will line the side-by-side freeway and frontage road that the DOT currently plans to build and maintain along the Outer Harbor. One side of Fuhrmann would be the Route 5 berm, completely inaccessible to anything but shrubs and weeds. And what businesses would line the other side in order to look out on 8-10 lanes of freeway and frontage road? Maybe tire and muffler shops.
One of Buffalo's best strategies for rebuilding its population and tax base and making itself an attractive place for employers is to make the most of its assets -- starting with its tragically underused and undervalued waterfront. Leaders can't just wave their magic jobs wand or their tax base wand. The renewal of the city starts with good planning.
The City has proven, over and over, that the "silver bullet" theories are it's own undoing. The NFTA should sell the land in pieces to small businesses with their own plans. First a hot dog stand, then some retail, then an office buildng, then some condos.
Wherever private enterprises have determinedd their own fate, they have been succesful: Chippewa, Elmwood, Allentown, Hertel. Wherever "planners" have stuck their nose in, has mostly been failures: the Theater District, Amherst Campus and now University Paza.
Why do people in the suburbs get to dictate land use in Buffalo.
I don't know, why do people in Chicago get to tell the people of Buffalo what to do? No risk, no ramifications, just your opinions on how we should live and what we should and should not do with our city. If you love Buffalo so much, then move here! If not, then please keep your opinions about us and our suburbs to yourself.
Why are we giving this political wash-out any of our time? His tenure as Mayor of Milwaukee could be categorized as 'unsuccessful' at best, in fact his only 'accomplishment' (if you view things from his perspective) was stopping construction of the South and Lake Freeways, and demolition of the Stadium South Freeway, a move that confused and irritated the residents of Milwaukee. He thoroughly pissed off small and large business owners with his socialist policies that took away tax incentives and drove a wedge between the rich and poor. He systematically drove out political opponents with his close group of political cronies, who he later turned on when they didn't see things his way. During his terms as Mayor, many of the richest people in the city (who were not connected with Norquist) moved away, taking their businesses with them. Property values in high-end areas of the city dropped as he removed and changed zoning codes to enable construction of pedestrian friendly shopping centers, unoccupied retail storefronts, and mixed-use buildings that weren't conducive to any use.
Norquist is a one-trick pony who publicly launched a campaign against the suburbs. He figured that if people found it difficult to commute to the city, then they may just move their families there. He tried to institute universal school choice to resolve the issues with the public schools (that was mildly successful to the poor, but failed for the middle class who now had to share expensive private schools with poorer students from the public schools).
To his credit, he did a lot of the things that the reader's of Buffalo Rising hold near and dear. He focused on the built environment, created mixed-use neighborhoods that were pedestrian friendly, he sponsored some nice looking bridges, and focused on the aesthetics of the city (often instead of more important issues). He definitely holds the socialist ideals that is evident in many of the BR comments, so I understand why so much attention is being paid to his visit. I doubt that the majority of Buffalonians care enough about his ideals (and yours for that matter) to allow for the destruction of the Thruway, Skyway, Kennisington, and the buildings that it will take to see his vision come to life.
New Urbanism has a very narrow minded view of how things 'should' be done, and it definitely runs contrary to what most American's think and how they live. You can't force people to live a certain way just because you think that it would be better if they did, things just don't work that way.
BTW - For those who are unfamiliar with John Norquist, he resigned from his post as Mayor of Milwaukee due to a sexual harassment complaint from a staff member, who he later admitted to having a long-term sexual affair with. He didn't see how his actions had anything to do with his elected position as Mayor, and refused to resign until he was asked to take his current position. Milwaukee is still cleaning up from his mistakes and short-sightedness.
So.. what does Norquist's mayoral career and personal life have to do with whether or not Buffalo should get rid of the skyway?
really? Does anyone think that a majority of citizens in Buffalo would support the demo of a functioning roadway for some New Urbanism vision? really?
For those of you that have a problem with "new urbanism" and "smart growth" etc, I'd like to hear what is an alternative that you favor. How about spending $100 million and we don't get any tangilble benefits? That's the current "southtowns connector plan". Are you in favor of highways that cut us off from the waterfront? Are you in favor of highways that limit economic vitality and development? What would you propose?
I hope that higgins reads this:
Higgins you are becoming the enemy of Buffalo not its savior. Your stand on demolishing homes and businesses for the Peace Bridge Plaza and now your stand on the skyway and southtown connector are diametrically opposite to what the community and the citizens of Buffalo and WNY want.
how quickly you earned the respect ...and how quickly you are pissing it away!
I am not against the 'new urbanist' ideal. I just think that we have far more pressing issues to tend to. We need to be cautious of how we relate with our suburban neighbors and co-workers. Most of the major employers are looking at alternate workplace arrangements for their employees, this means that employees will be working from home or remote sites 2 - 4 days per week. This push towards the home based worker has gained acceptance and interest with companies looking to reduce facility costs and increase employee satisfaction. There are several companies that have instituted this arrangement already, including M&T, HSBC, Bank of America, Key Bank, Buffalo News, HealthNow, and others. The idea that reducing the speedy and easy access to the city, with the hope that people from the suburbs will choose to a shorter commute from an urban neighborhood over an increasingly lengthy commute from the suburbs is naive, especially if they have the option of not coming to the city at all. We may actually lose ground that has been recently gained in terms of bringing more people to the downtown core.
I still believe that the removal of the Skyway or other major renovations to the city scape will not give us the return on investment that we expect they will. These are nice to have, but in the larger picture, they barely make a difference to the perceptions that most people have of the city. We have MAJOR issues that must be addressed first. I don't believe that this is a matter of redirecting $100M from the Skyway to another project, it is a matter of fixing the corruption, inadequate schools, high taxes, and other elements that make the city relatively unappealing to the majority of people in the US. The 'new urbanist' agenda will enhance the quality of life, no doubt, but we really need to quit focusing on these pipe dreams and start making the hard decisions that will fix the chronic issues that plague our city.
Brian Higgins doesn't have the balls to make a difficult decision, instead he puts his energies into highly emotional issues like the waterfront, skyway, and peace bridge. These silly media plugs serve to distract the public from the real issues, like poverty and the Buffalo Public Schools. Notice how we hear about Bass Pro the week that students returned to school? Instead of hearing about the teacher crisis in Buffalo, the unfinished school projects, and the shortage of qualified teachers and substitutes, we focus our attention on Bass Pro or the Peace Bridge. It is no wonder that we have debated the same topics and hoped that something would happen in Buffalo for the past 50 years.
Sure, Buffalo faces other priorities. But these aren't either-or decisions --- either reducing crime and stopping corruption OR getting the waterfront right. Why is one a distraction from the other? That's basically saying that Buffalo has a form of civic ADHD and can only focus on one or two problem at a time. And it's saying that spending tens of millions on a wrongheaded DOT plan that doesn't promote truly improved access and economic revival of the waterfront is somehow the right thing to do because it somehow allows Buffalo to focus on other issues.
And while some say John Norquist's ideas run contrary to the American lifestyle trends (presumably a love of spread-out burbs and long freeway commutes), just tell that to the thousands and thousands of new MIlwaukee residents paying premium dollars to live in downtown condos. In addition to dozens of new and refurbished mixed-use residential buildings lining the river, two new 35-story plus towers on Milwaukee's downtown lakefront have units selling for between $1 and $3 million apiece. One is nearly sold out. http://www.universityclubtower.com/
John Norquist may have been nicknamed a "fiscally conservative Socialist" for his belief that well-run government can improve the lives of citizens, but he kept a lid on taxes and was a bullish supporter of the free-market in Milwaukee. He also figured out that there's a huge potential market of people who like cities for their urban qualities -- and that enhancing a city's urban qualities (by doing things like replacing freeways with boulevards) actually makes a city MORE attractive to suburbanies.
John Norquist's The Wealth of Cities is practically a free market treatise. His views on planning run counter to statist zoning practices which limit the flexibility of neighborhoods to grow organically with a mix of uses - he advocates form-based codes that set forth simple rules for a complex city. Where do you get the idea that he's socialist?
Bravo to Norquist for bringing his passion and his hard work to this city. If only he could have been our Mayor instead... Here's hoping NYSDOT and their buddy Higgins doesn't ram this freeway through our waterfront. Over my dead body!
Instead of reaching back 30 years for red herrings -- as Becker does in citing unpopular and destructive Milwaukee freeway plans from the 1970s -- listen to what a real authority has to say about Norquist's leadership. That authority is respected Milwaukee Journal Sentinel architecture critic Whitney Gould and her assessment of pre-Norquist Milwaukee sounds a lot like Buffalo today. The path he recommends is one Buffalo can take to the bank. And really, where are the better ideas??
Norquist's Legacy is a Livelier City June 30, 2003 http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=151768
Excerpts: ...As his evolving openness to contemporary design merged with his commitment to New Urbanist planning concepts, though, the results could be stunning. The all-white 6th Street Viaduct, with its soaring, cabled mast and generous sidewalks, would not have been built in this form had it not been for Norquist's willingness to do battle with the state Department of Transportation and its bottom-line, cookie-cutter approach to bridge building. His administration has backed some equally innovative bridges that will be built over the Milwaukee River, linking neighborhoods and adding value to the waterfront.
Then there's the RiverWalk. The concept had been around for a long time. But the mayor, with the help of movers and shakers like Gary Grunau, finally got it moving big time. And the walkway, in turn, sparked millions of dollars of investment in housing, restaurants and other development downtown - a vindication of Norquist's mantra, "You can't build a city on pity." Especially as federal dollars dried up, he realized, you have to exploit the natural assets of urban centers: human capital, culture and commerce - and, in our case, a waterway that we had turned our backs on...
But I hope that whoever succeeds him will build on the stellar aspects of Norquist's vision and not try to dim it. Milwaukee is a livelier, lovelier and more sustainable city because of it.
How dare you bring teachers and Buffalo Schools into this Braden? In a region that has hemoraged jobs for 80 years....government workers have enjoyed the job security, pay increases and benefits that the rest of the city had to give up, descend to poverty or leave. Buffalo Teachers can go suck eggs....they can close every g-darn school in Buffalo ... the city would be better off with charter, parochial and private schools.
This is about rebuilding Buffalos economy....its not about blood sucking...vitality sucking teachers, unions or public schools.
HEY IDIOT69... I wasn't defending the teachers or the union you over-emotional jackass. I was stating that the media has deflected our attention away from more important issues like the crisis in the Buffalo Public Schools. I will not defend the district or the teachers. I believe that both sides are equally culpable in the decline of the BPS.
I did say that issues with the schools are far more important than the rewatering of canals, building train lines, and tearing down the skyway; because when it comes right down to it, families will not move to the city if they get a higher quality education for a lower price in the suburban schools. It doesn't matter what you do to the landscape and architecture, without serious improvement to the schools, controlling crime, and trust in the government, people will stay in the suburbs and Buffalo will remain in decline for another 30 years.
braden all reasons we should replace Buffalo Public schools with a school choice/school voucher program because you cant fix Buffalo Public Schools nor teachers unions nor tenured career teachers nor an over buracratized public school system, nor a public school system that tries every nutjob anti-assimilation bilingual sex-ed atheistic hate america program.....these liberal schools do anything but teach.....their social engineering warehouses that no parent who wants their child to have real world values and go to college wants any part!
So yes, light rail, rail, canals, business incubator parks, convention centers are all more important than public schools.
CHRIS69 - You are missing the point, or just losing it behind your misdirected bigotry. Let me rephrase this... THE EDUCATION SYSTEM of Buffalo is a far more pressing concern than the excavation of canals and removal of the skyway. The failing EDUCATION SYSTEM keeps people from moving to Buffalo, while the canals and skyway offer more aesthetic improvements that are nice to have. If we build population, then infill development and reworking of the built environment will have a chance, as it stands right ow, most of the new developments are targeted at existing residents or young and single professionals. Developers know that many Buffalo residents leave or relocate to specific neighborhoods when they have children, so they do not cater to that population.
We are on the same page (to an extent) regarding the EDUCATION SYSTEM (again, to a certain extent).
Bradon: love your comments.
As a city of Buffalo resident and booster, I aplaud urban evnironments and many new urbansit concepts. But as a commercial real estate guy, I think adding commute time will lose jobs for downtown.
SkaJack: completely agree. I love the views from the skyway.
Report this