George Grasser, an urban planner and president of Partners for a Livable Western New York, was in Council Chambers Monday night. Grasser was one of many citizens who spoke out in favor of the boulevard plan for Route 5. The following is his take on what happened to the plan, and how we can affect a change before it's too late.
I believe the DOT plan was the result of pressure by Congressman Higgins and the developers of the NFTA designated plan - Uniland and OPUS, to get access to the waterfront quickly to accommodate their development. So DOT adopted the plan that would result in getting access to the waterfront in the fastest way. But with Uniland and OPUS out of the picture there is no longer the urgency to get access to the waterfront immediately. Therefore, the only reason Higgins is still supporting the DOT plan is political expediency.
The DOT will not back down unless Higgins backs down. Higgins is known to concentrate on very few, but important, issues - the Power Authority, waterfront development, etc. But he is out of his element here because he is neither a land planner nor a transportation engineer. In addition, he has no community support and Uniland and OPUS, who demanded expeditious waterfront access, are no longer players.
Higgins should do the right thing for the community, and tell the DOT to hold up the process, give the community the opportunity to bring in one of America's great boulevard designers (there are at least two prominent boulevard designers in California*), limit the time for a new design to be decided on by the community and the DOT in a joint effort, and I believe the community can get what it wants - an attractive boulevard, great access to the waterfront, removal of an ugly and outmoded elevated highway, and a street that recognizes its relationship to the land on each side of it. The ball is in Congressman Higgins court - he can sit by and let a bad thing happen or he can do the smart thing and re-engage the community.
*There is precedent for DOT doing this. At the urging of the Village of Hamburg, the DOT hired a leading authority on walkable communities and roundabouts as the DOT consultant. The result is outstanding. DOT did not, at the time, have staff experts on roundabouts. I suspect DOT does not, today, have staff experts on boulevards.
As a matter of interest for those of you who would like to know what fellow citizens had to say, the discussion flashed back and forth from the Route 5 project to the Peace Bridge toll plaza. The common thread was that the DOT isn't listening to the people. The following is a compilation of quotes from speakers at the meeting:
Councilmember Michael Kearns opened the meeting and stated that he and Councilmember David Franczyk had appealed to Governor Eliot Spitzer, to which Spitzer replied, "Trust me and listen to me," but concluded that the governor has not trusted or listened to the public and is unresponsive.
Franczyk said NYSDOT) Regional Director Alan E. Taylor sent a letter saying that the objectives have been met. "They are not urban planners, this is not their decision to make," Franczyk said. " A consortium of community groups has said what they want. The DOT doesn't represent policy makers. We should stand our ground."
Councilmember Nick Bonifacio said, "The DOT says the debate is over. The debate hasn't started yet. I have problem with the authority telling us what they want. We need to tell them what we want."
Kearns replied, "I also question their being called an 'authority'."
Councilmember LoCurto said, "We have to stand up and demand the best project. If we want to be first-class city, we need first class projects."
Councilmember Golombek addressed Kearns by saying, "I wish you had been in charge back when the I-190 cut off Blackrock from the waterfront."
Kathy Mecca, a resident in the 'red zone' for the Peace Bridge project expansion said, "We will not give our homes up to Eminent Domain. We will not give our neighborhood up to be a parking lot for trucks."
Julie Barrett O’Neill, Buffalo Niagara Riverkeeper's Executive Director, said, "The city's councilors have it right. They know what we want. This project reactivates another set of highways for the next 50 years. Most vibrant waterfront communities do not separate people from the waterfront. They have to do more than something. They have to do the right thing." She thanked the council for their diligence.
Jim Metzger, Chair of Waterfront Development for the League of Woman Voters said, "Our waterfront, is eight miles of splendor that the rest of the world would cry for. Do it right, do it now, build a boulevard."
Charlie Banas of The New Millennium Group presented a slideshow and said, "Our goal is to describe some background of the issue." The opening slide asked, "Why a boulevard?" The upshot was that the Buffalo Common Council, Hamburg and the Congress for New Urbanism all want a boulevard, while the DOT never gave reasons for not wanting a boulevard. "It creates access. It provides more useable land," Banas said.
Jim Rozanski with Partners for a Livable Western New York stood and said, "An aspect of the project that hasn't been talked about is that impoverished people want to enjoy waterfront too." He went on to say that a redesign of Route 5 with access to the waterfront would aid in job creation as well.
Cynthia Van Ness President of the Board of the Preservation Coalition of Erie County made the point that the dead space surrounding Route 5 lends itself to a poor image of the city, "People think their cities are in terrible shape because they see then from the highways, which create dead space on either side," she said.
Grasser spoke last with a call to Higgins to do the right thing.