Spare both neighborhoods and put the inspection station on Squaw Island and a park on the Brownfield site.

I believe that the Black Rock location provides a good alternative to an expansive Peace Bridge plaza and needs to be looked at more closely.

However, the Ambassador Bridge plans as presented leave much to be desired. A maze of ramps that looks confusing to navigate. A bridge height that seems to be overkill. And I wonder with all these elevated ramps and tall bridge piers if it would be closed half the year due to icy road conditions similar to the Skyway.

My God! Why should any neighbohood, anywhere, die for a bridge, a stupid parking plaza, or a mixing bowl of highway ramps?

...the most historic part of Buffalo -- "The Front." Jim, you haven't been paying attention, that designation belongs to Canal Side.

chris69, what took you so long to post that rant? I assumed that was a permanent part of your computer's memory and was only one right-click and paste away from gracing the screen again.

RonR, why would there be feedback on the ABG design? It's not public money building it. Do you ask for advice before getting dressed every day? No? You should, that shirt looks like hell!

Speaking of design, whatever bridge is built, it better be designed to blend with the surrounding community instead of some faux, modernist albatross. It needs to be Terra Cotta in color, linked to Metrorail and have 1st floor retail as well.

OK, done strirring now. ; )

Well who knew that the incompetent minority/gender patronage appointment president of Buffalo State (HOWARD) would somehow be involved in the Peace Bridge / Ambassador Bridge conflict. Buffalo State has been refusing 10,000 applicants a year! Refusing $150 million in economic impact to the Westside/Black Rock community! Refusing to partner with local business and local colleges/universities to expand programs, bring more centers and create more small business incubators and outreach to the surrounding community. ON ONE HAND BUFFALO STATE HAS IGNORED GROWTH AT EVERY OPPORTUNITY AND IGNORED FOREST, GRANT, AMHERST, TONAWANDA, ETC.....BUT HOW DARE THE AMBASSADOR BRIDGE GROUP WANT THE SURROUNDING LAND THAT BUFFALO STATE HAS TAKEN FOR GRANTED FOR DECADES TO BUILD A BRIDGE....NOW ALL OF A SUDDEN THATS LAND FOR BUFFALO STATE!

WELL HOWARD, IF YOU HAD SPENT AS MUCH TIME PLANNING FOR GROWTH AT BUFFALO STATE AS YOU DID GETTING YOUR HAIR DONE AND SHOPPING FOR POWER SUITS, THEN THAT LAND WOULD ALREADY BE SPOKEN FOR!

WELL HOWARD, IF YOU HAD ANNOUNCED THE SAME 40% GROWTH RATE AS UB THEN THAT LAND WOULD BE SPOKEN FOR BUT YOU TOOK THE WESTSIDE AND BLACK ROCK FOR GRANTED AND KEPT THE COMMUNITY IN THE DARK JUST LIKE YOU DID WITH THE BURCHFIELD PENNY. ITS A SIGN OF ARROGANCE AND INCOMPETENCE! FURTHER EVIDENCE YOU SHOULD RESIGN OR BE FIRED!

It seems like the place for the bridge expansion is Grand Island where there is plenty of land for a truck plaza big enough to last for decades and its right off the youngmann which is a plus because there is a significant cross border traffic coming from the East-West Thruway.

The truth is that neither the Peace Bridge expansion or the Ambassador Bridge will be accepted by the community without SHARED BORDER MANAGEMENT. Other than Grand Island, there is no community in Buffalo that can handle the acreage of the kind of plaza being demanded.

why can't the Town of Tonawanda die instead......vast land north of Sheridan drive off River road is basically a wasteland, "literally", anyways right now. With the infrastructure in place already with the 190 / 290 it seems to make sense. Has anybody thought of what would happen to the properties over in Ft. Erie if this Ambassador plan went through.....many homes far nicer than the ones on our side would be destroyed. America comes first I guess

Jim Kane - seriously, now is the time to *greatly* increase your group's public arguments, not just incrementally so. Maybe past time for that. The comparison to Bass Pro situation is weak, since you've got to overcome the PBA's power and influence. For one thing, your web site needs real improvements. You should hire somebody top-notch and quick to make it tell the message much better than it does now. Also, more advertising and some appearances on local TV and radio shows, etc. would be wise. Good luck. You'll need it.

MeliQ - I agree, that part of the west side (proposed expansion PBA) is in VERY rough shape, I dont know what it is we would be losing ?

On a side note, in regards to the loss of business/tourism, has anyone gone to the Galleria mall on a recent weekend? I was there last week and the parking lot was FULL, and 75% of the vehicles were from Ontario. I personally would not wait at the peace bridge to go shopping (last time I crossed about a month ago it was a 2.5 hour bridge wait), I just hope our Canadian friends continue to deal with it until something is done. Buffalo needs the additional revenue.

Everything that I've read in the Buffalo News and Buffalo Business First over the past couple of years has reported that the Mayor of Fort Erie is strongly opposed to building a new bridge along the International Bridge corridor. Opposition is based on the fact that the international bridge goes right through a residential neighborhood in Fort Erie. I looked at Microsoft Maps and noticed that while this is true, approximately 1/2 mile later is a big open area that could be used as a bridge plaza. I've also read that the Canadian government (not sure whether local, provincial or federal) has not approved the Ambassador plan out of support for the bridge monopoly granted to the PBA. I'm sure the fact that substantial improvements were made to the Canadian plaza are a part of that. If this is true and unless our Canadian neighbors change their minds, the location of the US plaza will need to remain nearby the current plaza.

As far as the two competing plans, I'd be interested in how building a bridge on the international bridge corridor would not adversely impact the plans to downgrade the Scajaquada (from someone other than the Ambassador Bridge Group). I would expect to see a lot of pressure to keep or expand the capacity of the Scajaquada with the Ambassador bridge proposal. The Scajaquada is a direct East-West corridor to the proposed Ambassador bridge. Loads of fun for all the residents of the communities right off the Scajaquada from the 33 to the 190.

BRO - Are we not allowed to post images anymore?

peggar I have to take issue with your dismissal of Black Rock.

the Westside ends and Black Rock begins at Forest Ave as I understand it which means that it is flanked by Richs/HealthNow to the south, Contract Pharmaceuticals/Buffalo State and GM Powertrain/Dunlop/Dupont to the north. THESE ARE NOT MINOR REGIONAL ASSETS BY ANY MEANS.

INFACT THE FUTURE OF THESE AREAS ARE AT A CROSS ROADS RIGHT NOW FOR THEIR VERY EXISTENCE!

1) an expanded plaza could cripped the westside just as the initial Peace Bridge Plaza and Niagara Expressway caused the initial downward spiral.

2) the ambassador bridge and its plaza could cripple Black Rock but not just cripple black rock but cripple Contract Pharmacueticals and Buffalo State in the process by removing land for future growth and surrounding both with truck fumes/exhaust and 24 hour noise.

3) as well as destroying Niagara Street and its future as a Gateway to downtown, to the westside, to Black Rock, Riverside, Kenmore and Tonawanda.

TO WHICH HAVE TO PUT A HUGE BLAME ON PRESIDENT HOWARD OVER AT BUFFALO STATE. HAD SHE ANNOUNCED THE SAME COMMITMENT TO GROWTH 40% AS BUFFALO STATE EVEN IF IT WAS OVER A LONGER PERIOD.....THE ENTIRE DYNAMIC OF MANY OF THESE DECISIONS IMPACTING THE FUTURE WOULD HAVE A DIFFERENT FRAMEWORK.......

ADDING 5,000 STUDENTS TO BUFFALO STATE PLUS DORMS AND PLUS SMALL BUSINESS INCUBATORS WOULD INFUSE $150 MILLION DOLLARS A YEAR TO THE WESTSIDE AND BLACK ROCK...TO WHICH BOTH COMMUNITIES WOULD HAVE ENTIRE DIFFERENT DYNAMICS.

The more one looks at the future.....the more one cannot come to any other conclusion except that we need to either wait for shared border managment to put the US plazas in Canada or build these bridges to Canada in Grand Island or risk making decisions that will demolish the future of Niagara Street, the westside and Black Rock (along with the signicicant economic engines) forever!

Dont take these issues lightly....just because these areas are depressed now.....dont make economy killing conclusions that will destroy these areas forever.

Grand Island? Why would you pick possibly the widest part of the river for a bridge? I live here and personally don't care if it was built here, but explain the logic other than "We won't have to tear down houses"?

Buffalo State expand...what, their already enormous parking lot !

well I doubt they are going to do anything with the pollution except for pave over it. Since there isn't any residential uses going into the site mitigation will probably not be needed. Leaving it locked up under asphalt only to continue to slowly leach into the Creek for god knows how long. Show me they are going to actually clean up the site first and I might be more inclined to their scheme.

We are all forgetting that lots of planning and studies of the PB were done by the Urban Design Project. Check out their site. The Queen City Waterfront has an entire Volume dedicated to the Peace Bridge Debate. It doesn't weight multiple locations but it does talk about the existing site with some skill and gives us a good option. The problem

Urban Design Project

The existing plaza is NOT ON any of OLMSTED's Front Park. The Onramps that lead into the plaza which seem from the map above to STILL be there even with the new expanded plaza to the north. We are not gaining anything by this proposal. The PBA should keep the plaza there and therefore save more of the neighborhood from the total shift north that may be needed.

Well this bridge isnt getting built in the next 15 months....and in 15 months we will have a new president of the US which means shared border management will be back on the table.

So my friends and neighbors on the westside and black rock, you only need to keep up your vigilance for a few more months...and not forever.

Remember that your not fighting either bridge but your fighting for shared border management which will allow the bridge and your homes/businesses to coexist.

If else fails....I think we need to put bridge proposals on the table for Grand Island. Everyone knows the untapped resource for expansion into Canada needs to come from Grand Island. Bridges after Niagara Falls are significantly more expensive.....and bridges south of Grand Island reside in populated areas. Grand Island is the only place left in the region bordering canada with raw land to handle all the trade and expansion this region needs for the next 100 years.

Grand Island

RonR said, "We already have the cards stacked against WNY..." Ron you live in San Diego; you are not 'we'.

Living near the border with Mexico and near the port of Long Beach, you should realize that there is no monopoly granted by owning two bridges. This is a big country with many ways to move things in and out.

Besides, private companies are more efficient than the government any day. It is unrealistic to think that ABG would strangle growth when they need to make payments to their creditors for an expensive bridge that they just built.

RonR - If the ABG builds, has high rates, and forces traffic to use other crossings... would they not need to lower their rates to stay competitive? Not all truck traffic will use the Detroit crossing. A shipment from Toronto to Pittsburgh would not use the Detroit crossing. If they were forced to use a crossing other than Buffalo, they would use the Lewiston bridge. If traffic continuously used Lewiston as their crossing ABG would need to lower rates to get traffic back. I appreciate your concerns for Buffalo. BUT I don't think that ABG would benefit by having extremely high rates. They would just lose traffic to another "public" crossing.

Grand Island would be a good alternative for the US... but would our Canadian neighbors approve?

that is the worst spot for a bridge to be, and if you were to drive through the area you might get a hint towards why its easier to bulldoze. This Ambassador bridge is just more fuss for an already catastrophic set of elevated paths.

I still don't understand why the peace bridge project can not accommodate inspection underground and there by control the outlet and need for green space. It just looks like they are winding everything too far when they need to just close the circuit. If roads need to be closed to tighten up the project.. then so be it. bla bla bla.. beautiful new peace bridge for the community to travel through.

RonR or Chris I should say, this is where our opinions diverge, "These two crossings are the main arteries connecting Canada to the Mid West and the East coast." We share a border thousands of miles long and our coastlines share the same oceans. How can it matter if the same company owns two bridges? They are competing against ports, rail crossings, air freight, regular no-bridge crossings etc, etc. They really don't have that much leverage by owning two bridges.

When I said they I mean the Ambassador group. There are few pollution concerns in the PBA proposal since those blocks were historically residential.

I see the value in taking brownfields instead of decent homes on the west side but my fear is that unless these two parties work together and not against each other they are Both going to be for truck traffic and both are going to be detrimental to their neighbors. How can we, the public, be given the guarantee that trucks won't be using the PB because you know that they will want to if they are going to be heading south to the Thruway.

Also if the Ambassador bridge is going to get the trucks, fine but the PBS is still going to want to expand. Instead if the trucks go to ABG then we dont need any of those onramps or such a large plaza and could essentially shrink the PBA's existing plaza, give us beautiful entrance here. Put people from the bridge right into Front park and the city grid. Just like in Niagara Falls. When you cross the rainbow bridge, you navigate through downtown and then get onto the highways. This deters NO ONE and it would have the potential to create a much larger impact on our economy. If they want to get onto the highways again to head out of town to the galleria etc. that is find, to go through downtown and hop on the 33 or 190 again. But at least they are provided the option to stay in Buffalo.

The problem with this whole situation is no one is looking out for the greater good of the city and the ability that these two proposals have in reinforcing each other. If that happens I think there is a win win for everyone. Prove that we get a great entrance at the PBA then we can justify the damage to the Black Rock Neighborhood. Give us two ugly plaza's instead of one and no one wins except for the authority or private investment group collecting the tolls.

Is there any argument? Black Rock has been in a steady decline for the last 50 years. Geographically. it is just a small working class neighborhood that abuts larger, more significant regions. By virtue of its location, it is a an area that is driven through, not a destination (other than to its residents). The West Side has potential with some very positive community activity. Black Rock is what it is; it is stagnant and has remained essentially the same over decades. Just older and increasingly valueless.

icecreamsub....a bridge that far north might not jive with the ifrastructure in Ontario. Sadly there is no win-win situation for this. I think the ambassador plan is the best propsal yet. Am I correct in thinking that the Ambassador plan provides for the lowest residential destruction?

the entire proposal is moot because buffalo is all about planning but fails at execution. Buffalo is a town of losers run by a bunch of retarded italians and kept tied in knots by alcoholic rotten insurance defense attorneys and labor unions.

Chris69, I applaud (as usual) your comments concerning the sacrifice of Black Rock. You raise valid issues that correctly identify both current and potential values that characterize the neighborhood. However, recent industrial interest, I believe, does not indicate a trend as of this date. Buffalo State is, as you explained, a virtual wild card as its political history illustrates. Personally, I don't think its loss will impact neighboring regions as significantly as much as you state. In fact, it is more likely to be a boon to those areas immediately adjacent. Most definitely any change will have an effect in the Northeastern part of town. as well as certain suburbs. However, if it were to become the gateway to the city itself in its current condition, it would definitely be a huge negative. Yes, it can go. That is my limited view from the proverbial armchair.