Buffalo Rising Online

it's blatently obvious that the NYSDOT has no concern or aesthetic or psin off developments. This is what you get when you create an agency that their only purpose is to move cars. Transportation has always been tied to land development, urban design. Ellicott didn't just lay out roads he layed out blocks, a city, neighborhoods, Civic spaces. park spaces. Olmsted didn't just design a park, he design an neighborhood with the park. The parkways enhanced and reinforced his neighborhoods. The NYSDOT doesn't think this way.

If they were actually worried about the wellbeing of the city, the skyway would be gone and we wouldn't even be having these conversation about route 5. The whole highway to somewhere comment, the first goal being to allow THROUGH traffic. Means they worry more about traffic moving THROUGH the city than traffic going TO the city.

We need roads that bring us TO downtown not through!!!

No... Buffalo will not get it right. The wheels are already in motion thanks to Higgins and our mayor who think they have the answers. Only a huge public outcry will stop it. Let's face it. Not enough people are educated on the matter... not enough people care. The DOT says that the public was involved in the process. Really? Ask 10 people if they felt like they were involved. You know where I'm going with this. This process was intentionally done under the radar. If the DOT really cared what the people of Buffalo thought... or wanted... then more people would have known about this. There would have been some sort of public referendum on the matter. I want to know WHY $55M is being spent on a project that professionals have studied and said "this is not the best choice". The DOT says it is the right choice. Individuals who have spent their entire life in urban planning and design say it is the wrong choice. Something is not right here. Not once have I heard from the DOT as to WHY this is the better option. What does this design do that the Boulevard Alt does not? I really believe people move out of Buffalo not because of the city... but because of the state the city is located in. Thank you DOT. Thank you Cong. Higgins. Thank you Mayor Brown. Thank you for giving us one more reason not to trust politicians. Thank you for giving us another reason to shake our head at your decision making. Thank you.

EB Blue, this article is top-notch, and couldn’t be more timely - you’ve sealed the deal. The response to Newell’s article Friday was simply the most impressive and cohesive expression of consensus I can recall seeing on BRO about a major community issue. And today’s article hammers home the point that the Waterfront Coalition and CNU aren’t just a wild-eyed bunch of dreamers - the community’s preferred alternative is indeed feasible, and here’s solid proof from none other than congestion-plagued California. Notice I just labeled the alternative advocated by the Waterfront Coalition as “the community’s preferred alternative,” which seems perfectly appropriate after studying this weekend’s very passionate yet well-informed comment stream. Being so far to the east, my own voice may not carry the same volume in the discussion, but the comments on Friday’s article come from among those most informed, involved, passionate, and progressive about Buffalo and her future.

Speaking of whom, Newell, you can take what you’ve seen here the past couple of days and decide to make a difference on this, as well, by adding your voice to the chorus. Perhaps a stretch, but it might be a bit like Walter Cronkite speaking out on the Vietnam War, causing LBJ to say “if I’ve lost Cronkite, I’ve lost the nation.” Show your friend Brian (clearly the central figure here) that not only has he lost the progressive and dedicated groups of the Waterfront Coalition, he’s lost BRO. Help us get Higgins to toss away the banner with the cement mixer on it, and take up the banner with the Bison on it. And listen while all of us fans of a better Buffalo - from all over - cheer him and you for doing it.

hooray! keep it up. well timed part 2 indeed. we must let higgins and brown know that this decision must! be changed and changed quickly. the people of buffalo can no longer stand by and see the future so poorly decided this is a case where only the best plan will do.building is not better only building better is better .i also agree i have never seen such a consensus on an issue on bro before . i think this demonstrates a solidarity on this issue at the very least in the blogging community ,wich by its own natural diversity ,at least in part represents the community as a whole.

It amazes me that anyone can still--with a straight face--raise the spectre of traffic jams as the worst possible fate that can befall Buffalo, a city that is losing rather than gaining population. If we have a traffic jam in the city it is because the Sabres, Bisons, or BPO just let out. Ten minutes later, the streets are as vacant as if aliens Hoovered everyone up to the mothership. I'm exaggerating, of course, but fer cryin' out loud, traffic jams are nature's way of telling us to walk, bike, carpool, and use mass transit.

"We simply can't turn back decades of sprawl and poor regional land management."

That doesn't mean we should continue with more poor regional land management. Besides, if the boulevard design moves traffic just as quickly as the elevated expressway does, what do you care??

Harry your right there is a strong, quiet, and I'll add SMALL group of people who are for an outdated 3 mile stretch of expressway. But come on man, nobody but over eager pols and bureaucrats (including yourself?) are for getting this plan done and keeping a section of Route 5 a limited access highway. BTW you don't think the mess of concrete your advocating has a bigger foot print than 109 feet! What we need and what makes sense is a boulevard.

Listen to what the people want and build what makes sense on the outer harbor. Higgins are you listening?

K - street in Washington DC is designed exacly like this and They are thinking of tearing it out.

K - street scenario. U see the Building You want but you can't stop because you are in the center lane.. U go past to the next block. Find a pass thru to the sevice lane. turn left. Turn left. go back two blocks. turn left. turn left into the sevice lanes, not the center lane. Then wait behind cabs processing fares. Then u get to the building u want and the underground garage is filled.

Harry, I agree with you. This Octavia blvd example is only five blocks long and did not replace the entire (elevated) central freeway. It only removed the END of the expressway, basically a half mile section that was cut short and returned to street level. This was done in an already very heavily developed and valuable area of San Francisco. It is a Blvd and the center lanes may move traffic, but there are still traffic lights at every intersection. It has to be much slower than any expressway. Plus most of the heavy traffic has already exited the expressway at this point. This comparison has little to do with the skyway and rt5. For Buffalo to remain a good city it needs to keep higher speed highways in and out of the downtown area in all directions. And that’s what the skyway does now. The skyway mainly only cuts off General Mills and a bunch of abandon warehouses and grain elevators. We are not a growing city, so who’s going to develop all this available space? There is plenty of room for new development on the water side at this time. I think our politicians are doing a great job with this plan. We’re getting a blvd. and the skyway may still come down at a later date if needed. I wish people were more concerned with re-opening Main St. to traffic downtown then to spend more money on removing the skyway.

I love that the "Buffalo is going nowhere" crowd supports the dot and the "Buffalo has a great future" crowd wants something better.

dave,by the dots #'s the commute would be about 3 min longer at rush hour and a over 1 min longer off peak hours. the slower speed limit allowing a heavier volume of traffic. dont take my word for it check out dot. also people will develop this space .waterfront with great proximity to downtown. there are currently 4 developers submitting for shoshone park area a small 30acre railroad right of way. this is truly a no brainer!

Actually what is a no brainer is to keep all the 18 wheeler traffic from Lackawanna, Hamburg, the industrial park, and the port of Buffalo, separate from a boulevard with a Bike path. By the way How many people commenting even go down to the outer harbor. With all the money that higgens has secured for Bike paths and parks , you can count on one hand the number of people jogging or biking or walking. Of course the geese make good use of it, parts of it are like walking thru a minefileld.

Abbottroad - the dot apparently wants to remove the skyway - eventually- or at least so they say. the trucks would not use the outer harbor expressway because they would no longer connect into the 190. so there would be nothing to separate...like kahawa said, there are easy alternative routes.

Excuse me , but those 18 wheelers representsr bread and butter in south buffalo. And like i said hakawawwwaa and Nyc , do you ever go down to the the area around the smal boat harbor, or the old freezer queen, or and use the waterfront. You probably don't know where it is except to look at a Map.

Nice Pictures, but no one is talking costs. the cost of building Octavia Blvd was over 70 million for a half mile.

yes Abbotroad but the dot is planning to remove the skyway. Look at the big picture, the dot wants a lift bridge connection to downtown and to take down the skyway - so they say. so there will be no 18 wheelers using the outer harbor. they will use the tiff street connector that is planned. and why are you asking whether I have been to an inaccessable brownfield? Are you saying it should stay an inaccessable brownfield because that is what you are implying.

Octavia Blvd was built in an already existing urban corridor which makes it enormously more expensive. the DOT has an alternative blvd plan that is not much more expensive then their current plan.

"K - street scenario. U see the Building You want but you can't stop because you are in the center lane.. U go past to the next block. Find a pass thru to the sevice lane. turn left. Turn left. go back two blocks. turn left. turn left into the sevice lanes, not the center lane. Then wait behind cabs processing fares. Then u get to the building u want and the underground garage is filled."

Route 5 scenario. U don't see the building you want... because it doesn't exist. U keep going.

Build it an they will come. This will be some of the most valuable land in the country in 50 years. A recent study (don't remember where I saw it) said temperatures in the West and South will be unbearable during the summer months and populations will begin to migrate north again... to water.. our water. Of course by then the shoreline will be about 100 yards futher out... more land!

As I said in the other post:

How about we get funding to extend the elevated Rt5 all the way through Lackawanna, Hamburg, Derby, etc!?!? It is such a wonderful thing I bet they are all pining to have an elevated limited access highway on their waterfront land, no? Lets put the 55 mil torwards that. People in Evans/Angola deserve an easier commute to DT Buffalo. This is what is truely holding DT Buffalo back. The commute from the (very) south towns is still too long!!

They can also have a nice road inbetween it and the water too, just like Buffalo will. Best of both worlds no?

;)

NYC, Obviously you have never been there because the SouthBuffalo Waterfront is now all bikepaths and parks from the city line to the Freezer Queen. The other comments are really Dumb.

good response there abbottroad. you got me with that "really dumb" statement. it's now obvious that your opinions are so well educated.

I just pointed out you didn't know what the hell you were talking about. By the way NYC how many names do you log on under.

one.

and also, I haven't been on my bike yet through the outer harbor. I look forward to it but i think it is besides the point. the issue is how the state is addressing transportation on the outer harbor and the attitude the state carries is that it is primarily a commuter and commercial corridor for cars and trucks. My point about all this is the state therefore does not intend to remove the skyway if that is their attitude.. hence, they are blatently lying to the public or hiding the fact that when they say the skyway can come down with this scheme, it will not be for another 50 years, the lifespan of the project about to be constructed. They know that there is desire for the skyway to come down- from Higgins and common council and they are hiding their intent to keep it up otherwise why would they reinforce an expressway that only makes sense with the skyway in place. They are contradicting themselves.