Meanwhile our own council members and Mayor want to demolish structures for MORE parking lots (Grant-Ferrry for example) and when we decry foul to such, others say "parking is needed. Isn't this what many of us have been saying for years? Expand the Metro Rail, have more bus's running.

How about some billboards around town to explain the rules of the road - for bikers and drivers alike. If the bikers in the city will ride on the streets and WITH traffic, maybe the drivers will be more tolerant of sharing the road. Certainly we need designated bike lanes, but Buffalo would be much improved with some tolerance and knowledge of the actual rules of the road. As someone who formerly biked to work, I am surprised by how many people ride against traffic and on the sidewalk. It is NOT safer to do so (except for a child being supervised by an adult).

What is progressive about old transportation ideas like bicycles and walking? Shouldn't we call this a regressive strategy? I like the ideas, but the progressive buzzword doesn't fit.

Railroads are the future (and past). Reviving the belt line route around Buffalo with spurs to the suburbs would connect all our communities together and make commuting in and out of the city reasonable and possibly a pleasant expirience.

Another group of self appointed experts to add more layers to an already over-layed fiasco. Everyone wants instant credibility and the easiest way in Buffalo seems to be to start a group made of people with passion but lacking expertise and then saying the sum of the parts is where the power lies.

here's a solution, raise the federal gas tax. The current federal gas tax is 18 cents per gallon. that is way too low. kick the federal gas tax up to $1 a gallon and you'll curb consumption (coerce people into using public tansport) and rasie funds to expand our under developed public transportation network.

Keith, ironically, nearly all progressive planning ideas are based on ondoing modern day errors and resurrecting traditional urban transportation and design.

So, yes, in effect ideas about walking, cycling, streetcars, highway un-building, street narrowing, etc. etc... are all quite progressive.

sonyactivision, Buffalo had an elevated rail line that went through downtown and it was at the DL&W Station.

BuffaloNY, as far as raising the gas tax to $1 a gallon you should check out this statistic. The road, bridge and highway system is financed by the gas tax which was more than sufficient when there were few roads and lots of consumption of cheap gas. Now there is so much infrastructure that the gas tax has to increase 5 cents every year just to keep from going insolvent. Now couple the maintenance of all those roads, bridges and highways with the cost of expansion and the increasing cost of fuel plus inceasing fuel taxes....and very quickly...street cars, light rail and high speed bullet trains are cheap cheap cheap!!!!

Buffalo has one thing that Rochester, Syracuse and other cities dont and that is good bones. Buffalo can accept trolleys and street cars and light rail and high speed rail along with our airports and highways because our city was built to incorporate all of them.

Buffalo was founded as a transhipment center merging goods, services and transportation. 100 years later....transportation is getting expensive again and if Buffalo is smart it will have use its 100 year old infrastructure to provide cheap transportation. Its really one of the few things Buffalo can offer on the cheap other than greasy food

It will be interesting so see how this group fits in with the current system and whether or not it will have some real powers or not. Who gets to be on this group? Can I join? Is it paid? Volunteer? Are they basically a community voice to the GBNRTC (which I agree is a bit disconnected from most citizens).

My Ideas for Transit Expansion: View Larger Map

of if that doesn't work: Transit Expansion Along Existing Railroad ROW

The reality is that there are only two possibilities in the near future:

The previous consultant recommendation for extending the light rail named the airport as the most profitable route and this is even more true now with the growth at ECC downtown, the larkin district, central terminal, walden galleria, airport and transit road (lancaster). One could probably even make a case for some feasibility study all the way to Darien Lake and Batavia because there is alot of growth in that area as well.

The previous consultant also recommended UB and Niagara Falls but the dynamics of these two routes have changed drastically since the previous report. The Niagara Casino with 6 million people did not exist in the previous report which changes the dynamics entirely. UB didnt have its 3rd campus downtown in the previous report either.

So there Airport is going to get the highest priority build and the easiest funding and then probably because UB is a state university they will get the second priority but if there are any problems with Amherst not wanting light rail then look for Niagara Falls to replace it as the priority. Niagara Falls and all the riverside communities woudl benefit greatly (as well as the senecas) from having direct access from the Buffalo Airport to Niagara Falls.

If any one, two or three get built....then the bigger long term picture is reviving the beltway and commuter rail to Rochester most likely along the Niagara Falls-Rochester rail corridor since much of it is rarely used versus the rail lines that run along the Thruway which are heavily used.

Longterm connecting Buffalo, Niagara Falls and Rochester via light rail and commuter rail could change the entire dynamic for our region. Rochester has never looked to Niagara Falls or Buffalo and honestly not even to Syracuse....the business dynamic of our entire region could change if the these three cities integrated together. The change could be most dramatic in Albany....if Buffalo, Niagara Falls and Rochester started speaking as one economy.

There's a great set of photos of the DL&W terminal when it opened in 1917 on the Western New York Heritage Press Website. The second floor of the terminal was the passenger concourse. Nice job on the maps, sbrof! After WWII, there were 700 miles of track in Buffalo inside the city limits alone, and a good deal of the right-of-way remains today.

Thanks for the kind words GTA, there was many months of planning and thought with a couple other people that went into that map. There is are also many more details as to what could happen along the rail lines and background information about the plan. 10% of the city's parcels are rail parcels. That is how pervasive the routes and systems where here and why it would be CHEAPER to build such rail expansions here than almost anywhere else. That 10% of our land connects just about every neighborhood and school to an easy couple minute walk to a potential line. The west side and parts of north buffalo aren't as easily served but you can't win them all. Since land acquisition can be a huge cost when building these systems our already available land would mean at least a 10-25% cost reduction when compared to other city's light rail expansions.

There also exists a huge potential for development along the rail lines. That was one of the main focuses of studio was to determine what else could be done with these rail lines. Well often the ROW for them are so wide that you could fit homes, businesses, linear malls etc along the lines. Something to help both the use and fiscal stability of the system.

A last option that I think we really need to start to investigate more is incremental expansion. We have a vision, a goal of what a regional transit system would be like.. (or at least I have an idea) but building the whole thing at once isn't feasible or responsible. There should be the ability to small baby step expansions of our system. Existing line could be and connect to the Casino Site, then Larkin District, Then Central Terminal... Next thing you know the Galleria is right there and the airport one more step. This is how Toronto, Portland and to some extent Seattle build their systems. They go 1 mile at a time following the plan but paying for it in reasonable increments. Places like Washington who try and build a WHOLE line to service one main point never get the funding or support for the huge costs associated with it. Building in smaller steps takes less approval and less money upfront to start.

This is great news.

The thing I hate about traveling to place like Amherst and Cheektowaga is that you MUST have a car to get around. And then some of the freeways that pass thru the city ripped up the landscaping (especially Humboldt Parkway).

It's time we are reminded who owns this city: The pedestrian.