IrishRover--do you think the sacrifice of the Columbus Park neighborhood is the only way the bridge can be built? Is it really the best possible solution? I don't find your argument unreasonable, but when there are so many options available, and because we've waitied so long, it seems that doing it absolutely right is critical. Why wait this long and then do something that will embitter so many city residents? The PBA is not a demon, but it has not shown itself to be especially civic-minded.
Irishover
Not all of the homes on Columbus Pkwy are undesirable. Take a drive down the street and see the properties they are planning to destroy. Look at the others the block before them and picture what a bunch of concrete and ramps will due to deteriorate the rest of the neighborhood.
Truck traffic is down! Western New York's economy only benefits from a small percentage of this trade.
Other communities are looking to move trucks to different locations away from any residential areas.
There are alternatives that were not appropriately looked at or fully studied because the authority just wants what it wants.
The Black Rock area that the Ambassador people are looking to develop for a plaza is not a neighborhood, but Brownfields. Have you looked at their proposal and talked to the Ambassador group? It would also send part of the traffic north and part south, lessening the traffic impact to one area.
Marilyn,
As a 20+ years resident of the District of Columbia-- most of it spent (and I ended up more than somewhat spent myself) fighting for the kinds of things you do so effectively in Buffalo, I hear you.
"No taxation without representation" is on the D.C. license plate now, long after I moved away. But have things changed other than that?
Endless war has simply made the city so much richer, so people forget.
May Buffalo never lose its soul.
pgf1948 - how about an old expression? "No taxation without representation."
" ... A Destination, Not a Doormat."
Very good and effective choice of words, given the circumstances.
But how about a more assertive phrase that expresses the will of the people not to have to feed any longer on crumbs?
This is a monumental issue. If the PBA goes forward with its plan, it will rank as one of the worst urban planning disasters in Buffalo's history. Please keep more information about this coming. The people of Buffalo need to tell Brian Higgins (what has happend to that man?) and Mayor Brown that this PBA plan will permanently damage the health, livability, and historic texture of the city.
I've said it many times before. The best option is to move the bridge out of the city and to Grand island. In doing this we can reduce our dependence on the 190 to the point where I feel it can be removed and we can reclaim the west side neighborhoods and their beautiful riverfront. As long as there in an international crossing along this section of the 190, these neighborhoods and this waterfront will never change.
You want a small plaza? Then take the trucks off the Peace Bridge and send them somewhere else - the IRR or Queenston-Lewiston. But don't put your hope on SBM! West Side doesn't deserve destruction and neither does Fort Erie. Again, the IRR plan puts trucks parrallel to a railroad that's been there for 100+ years. It does not destroy any neighbourhoods - that's PBA crap. The trucks would idle in the middle of what is now farmland. In fact, the IRR option IMPROVES Fort Erie because Ambassador's plan includes landscaped berms - barriers to sight, sound and diesel particulates. (Based on what I've learned about the PBA, I suspect that if they were to build at the IRR, there wouldn't be any berms). Listen, these 'options' were strategicly chosen. Three options: the NEPA required 'no build', the PBA's favourite to expand the existing plaza and your politicians politically expedient solution of SBM to shut you up from all your complaining (rightful complaints too) about noise & pollution. Notice how SBM came out just after the first studies connecting asthma and diesel? PBA and your politicians have always know Canada would not approve U.S. demands for what are unconstitutional privileges in Canada. Still, PBA, Spitzer, Higgins, Brown, Massiello --- kept waving the flag, getting you excited about SBM and that distracted you as the PBA merrily went on its way. PBA knew it would come down to only one option: The PBA Way. Remember: SBM is a ruse, not an option and the free-thinking people of Fort Erie support the IRR.
If you're gonna make an omelette you gotta break some eggs....or in this case...neighborhoods. So they have to move...big deal. There are pleanty of empty houses on the east side that these people can live in.
Chris69 - In a perfect world no neighborhood would be sacrificed, not Columbus, not Black Rock and not Fort Erie. Should the bridge be moved to a location that impacts more properties so long as they are less desirable homes? The Ambassador Bridge group is advertising a magic elixir to solve the problem, but if it were a viable alternative the NEPA process would require that it be chosen. The federal government will decide whether or not the NEPA process has been fulfilled. Part of that process would require the ABG to provide proof of the impacts, which they have not. The ABG has not even officially begun the process- although they make claims that they have. If it is feasible alternative I really hope that they do and that they aren't just snake oil salesmen.
As far as the plaza being placed in Fort Erie, why would the Canadians absorb more than their fair share of the development? They have a plaza, and Buffalo should have their plaza. It would seem unfair to dump everything in their backyard. The election of a new administration in 15 months will not change the outcome either. I don't see Rudy or Hillary making their first presidential decree as "We have appeasement!!! Shared border management is a reality!" Administrations are quick to adopt stricter security measures, they are not inclined to relax them.
I sincerely hope that the bridge moves forward and that the best alternative for Fort Eriie and Buffalo is achieved, and quickly. If this process fails, nothing will happen for another generation except more congestion and a choking off of trade at the existing bridge, and those homes along Columbus will be covered in more diesel soot and Buffalo will continue its decline.
There has been a general sense of optimism recently with this project, I hope it doesn't fade away like so many other broken promises here in the Queen City.
irishrover: if you derived that thought only from PBA "spin" and their narrow-focus DEIS… keep digging. Did you happen to look at the plaza details? Did you see the doubled-in-size Duty-Free? Do you think truck drivers don't pull over to go to the bathroom and buy some tax-free smokes, booze and perfume (well, not so much with the perfume, maybe)? What about when they have to step inside for customs reasons or whatever at all those facilities? Truckers lovvvvvve to leave those deisel motors idling! and now, there will be even MORE of them at the tip of our waterfront city, as you and the kids head off to the cottage. And what fun it'll be to loopdy-doo around all those ramps alongside semis in a hurry as you head back home. The bottom line is that the trucks and human safety simply don't mix. Our forefathers REMOVED pedestrian and auto traffic from the railroad corridor when they built the Peace Bridge in 1927. Now OUR so-called "Authority" wants to put co'mingle them to an even greater degree! Hello!!!!???? Is anybody in there?
The only preserved part of the West side that's left is the Columbus Pkwy corridor. Let's not add it to an already exhausting list of Buffalo urban planning disasters! The urban redevelopment of Buffalo will never happen (no matter how many trucks come over the bridge) without people.....people who want to actually live in the City! How smart is it to remove the only viable remnant of people left living and thriving in downtown? In an already descimated downtown, we should be trying to preserve and cultivate liveable communities, not wipe them out for trucking terminals! The Peace Bridge Plan is simply the wrong solution!
whats this I hear abt the PBS planning on building a tunnel under the waters instead of a bridge now.
RealityChek and Irishrover, who's reality are you pushing? RC-If you check your facts, you will find out that it was the Michigan DOT that planned, conducted the environental review, designed, and is building the Gateway Project to create a new interchange to connect to the Ambassador Bridge. The assumption that Ambassador must be evil because they make money is getting old when the bottom line is that a private company is far better equipped to get the job done than an un-accountable authority. The State of Michigan recognizes that Ambassador is the preferred option for expanding between Detroit and Michigan by passing State Resolution 123 today endorsing their Enhancement Project. IR-You are being naive to assume that the government "partners" in the PBA process or the all-knowing "NEPA process" didn't endorsed the IRR corridor and therefore it must not be viable. The bottom line is that the IRR corridor was eliminated from consideration based on flawed assumptions and analysis that was put out by the PBA. Their rationale for not considering the IRR consists of it costing too much ($700 million when it is acutally less than $300 million), environmental concerns (never investigated but assumed), the Town of Fort Erie not wanting it (never seriously considered because the PBA said it was bad), dividing Fort Erie through a residential community (an existing transportation corridor for over 100 years next to rail yards, industrial sites, land fills and wrecking yards), etc are assumptions that have been proven wrong. The bottom line is that the PBA refuses to consider any option that isn't where they said it needed to go 20 years ago. How can you justify demolishing 5 blocks of a well-established residential neighborhood and moving a truck yard so close to existing houses for fear of dividing a community in Fort Erie?
Iishrover...but to sacrifice a neighborhood in the process when their alternatives that could be worked out is to much to ask.
Irish: it is also worth noting that the high-priced DEIS was narrowed to ONLY one solution — not the solution the PUBLIC wanted. I too, would like to think that government agencies would and will do the right thing but, I'm afraid we're no longer in such an era (if we ever were). I'm certainly not suggesting that this Plaza project become a public-works version of American Idol but, there is merit in having concensus among very informed citizens who have to live with and pay for the final decision. The people I've met who are long-term actively involved in this tortured process are stunningly informed about health, environmental, traffic and many other issues that the typical citizen (and I'm sure, our Mayor) is not. There may not yet be clear concensus on WHICH other solution (wait for SBM or move trucks to the IRR) but, the voices are united that 1B-R3 is NOT acceptable.
I thought that the plan was designed to mitigate the pollution this resident was complaining about? Commercial traffic passes through this neighborhood now, the new plan, as I understood it, directs traffic directly onto the highway. By building a new bridge and better plaza facilities with direct access to and from interstates to accomodate the increasing trade and traffic crossing the border there would be less idling congestion on the facility. With less congestion you elieviate higher concentrations of pollution. With limited facilities to cross the border along the Great Lakes and St Lawrence Seaway the traffic will continue to grow regardless of this project. In terms of pollution the solution is to keep traffic from congesting.
Thank you to the many sympathetic folks who understand our frustration with the PBA! Dear IRISH - In response to your original comment about the soot-filled sponge, the Front Park Neighborhood DOES recognize the need for a redesign that mitigates pollution by improving traffic flow. We want a new plaza design just as much as everyone else. Unfortunately, the narrow-minded PBA only seems to be able to come up with a solution that decimates a significantly historic neighborhood - truly one of the last of its kind in Buffalo's west side (see Appendix U in the DEIS). With SBM currently off the table, only Alternative 1 and "No Build" are left. Unfortunately, it backs the PBA into a corner where "No Build" is the only option because the FHWA will never approve a plan that fails to provide a sufficient number of alternatives that avoid damaging an historic neighborhood. Alternative 1 will bring even more trucks into an already overcrowded space, even with its "taking" of several homes to make more room. Gee, could you give up the Duty Free and Visitor's Center in exchange for the neighborhood? Ka-Ching! THE CURRENT PLAZA MUST GO! The Front (Fort Porter) was wrongfully obliterated to make way for a truck parking lot in front of once-beautiful waterfront homes, which are now the PBA's boarded up slum shacks! Their underhanded scheme to blight our neighborhood to obtain "easy pickin's" to expand the plaza shows their true colors. It's back to the drawing board only because the PBA has failed to LISTEN all along during the public comment phase over the past 10 to 15 years!! Bottom line is - Fort Porter should be restored to park land with an historic theme based on its involvement in the War of 1812 and to reverse the blight that the plaza (and related underhanded activities) has inflicted on the block adjacent to it (Busti between Vermont and Rhode Island). Depending on the willingness of homeowners north of Rhode Island to sell, a new plaza should be constructed with truck activities as far north as possible, and Duty Free and Visitors Center should be eliminated from the plan as they are merely revenue-based entities. After all, this is a PUBLIC entity...
Comptart_lws – I wasn’t aware that the size of the duty-free is proposed to be doubled, or did you imply duty-free parking? Maybe the Peace Bridge folks can rethink Duty Free (or make a combined Duty-Free on the Canadian side). Regardless of the percentage of truckers stopping at Duty Free, the number of trucks stopping at D-F (I would assume) is tremendously smaller than the amount of vehicles currently lining up at the inspection booths today, and even more so in the future if this project dies a miserable Buffalo-style death. The amount of traffic will continue to rise with or without this new bridge
As far as “co’mingle” of traffic, I am unaware of any ‘truck-only’ interstates. I currently pass trucks to and from Canada, or NYC, for that matter. What is your point? I drive next to these same trucks on the 90 and QEW, what difference is it that I do so on a bridge? Trains travel on rails, cars on trucks on pavement, your comment about our forefathers makes no sense.
Do not try and dismiss me as ignorant. I’ve followed this bridge and the goings-on for a very long time. I’ve participated in the workshops, the meetings and the blogs. I may not know as much as others out there, but I’ve done my civic duty…with constructive criticism and active, productive participation, as have others. I want to see Buffalo progress.
Irish: sorry if my closiing sentence was taken to imply that you are not informed. Those last words were for the "Authority" (PBA) not you. At the beginning of your comment, you say: "if it were a viable alternative the NEPA process would require that it be chosen" and that is precisely the point. The PBA would prefer that the only alternative that survives is the one they've always wanted to do (the ONLY one they've ever wanted to do). In hindsight, it is quite artful, the way that they loaded the deck for the EIS to be done on only the Alternatives that made use of the existing plaza with companion bridge to the South. Alternative 2 (that had public concensus in '04/'05) offered a Northern Plaza Alternative and if they'd left it iin for the DEIS we might have still accepted it. But now, with it cast off and SBM revoked, I've started looking at the IRR as most sensible in the first place. I haven't made up my mind for sure yet but, I know that the PBA "Preferred Alternative" is a stubbon, entirely uncreative "solution" that is NOT good for our city.
You want a small plaza? Then take the trucks off the Peace Bridge and send them somewhere else - the IRR or Queenston-Lewiston. But don't put your hope on SBM! West Side doesn't deserve destruction and neither does Fort Erie. Again, the IRR plan puts trucks parrallel to a railroad that's been there for 100+ years. It does not destroy any neighbourhoods - that's PBA crap. The trucks would idle in the middle of what is now farmland. In fact, the IRR option IMPROVES Fort Erie because Ambassador's plan includes landscaped berms - barriers to sight, sound and diesel particulates. (Based on what I've learned about the PBA, I suspect that if they were to build at the IRR, there wouldn't be any berms). Listen, these 'options' were strategicly chosen. Three options: the NEPA required 'no build', the PBA's favourite to expand the existing plaza and your politicians politically expedient solution of SBM to shut you up from all your complaining (rightful complaints too) about noise & pollution. Notice how SBM came out just after the first studies connecting asthma and diesel? PBA and your politicians have always know Canada would not approve U.S. demands for what are unconstitutional privileges in Canada. Still, PBA, Spitzer, Higgins, Brown, Massiello --- kept waving the flag, getting you excited about SBM and that distracted you as the PBA merrily went on its way. PBA knew it would come down to only one option: The PBA Way. Remember: SBM is a ruse, not an option and the free-thinking people of Fort Erie support the IRR.
comptart_lws - Sorry for my terse response, I misunderstood your remark.
I do not agree with the notion of executing a project just for the sake of getting something done, however this project like many other beleaguered projects in Buffalo has waited long enough.
I question the argument that the authority is the evil empire imposing its will on the City of Buffalo and Town of Fort Erie. First, both have been involved throughout the process - elected officials and their aides - helping to define the scope and objectives of the project and its boundaries. Second, this project has had oversight by federal and state governments. As a citizen I would like to believe (perhaps in naivete) that the required processes for arriving at the least impacting solution have been met. The environmental report should address the steps the authority has taken to arrive at their conclusion, if their methods are suspect or lack the necessary breadth, the federal oversight agency will not approve the document. I agree that the authority should be held accountable to the process, a process that the ABG has cleverly avoided while making their claims. As the public we should require the authority to show proof of the reasoning behind the dropping of the IRR bridge alternative. I believe I understand some of their reasons; maybe the answers are in the document. If not, they should be made known. The decision may rest with other government agencies and not with the authority…regardless, I agree with you that the public should know why and scrutinize the results. In the end, however, as is typical with Buffalo, there will always be conspiracy theorists that will scoff at what is shown and deride the process as ever-flawed. These citizens are the brakes on the wheels of progress. (It is not my intention to imply that you are one of them.)
KED – I want to clarify a point that you made regarding "THE CURRENT PLAZA MUST GO". Even under the No-Build alternative the existing plaza and bridge will remain. The federal government will not authorize the destruction of the existing bridge if it is proven that the impact of the bridge being there does not cause a clear threat within well defined governmental and public health guidelines to the well-being of the public. Any conclusive studies to the contrary should be made known by those claiming otherwise. If there have been conclusive studies, why aren’t the documents in the public record? The same applies to the proposed alternative; if the option creates any impacts beyond acceptable levels it will not be approved.
If your argument is that you don’t want to see you home taken under eminent domain, I sympathize with you. However, any resident that has purchased property in the area since 1927 should have no expectation that the bridge system will be removed. Furthermore, anyone purchasing property in the surrounding neighborhoods over the last 20 years should have anticipated even the remotest possibility of increased traffic and bridge expansion at some point...to underscore this, there was a man at the hearing that had plans dating back to the 1950s for an expanded bridge. If you buy property by an airport you should expect noise…air travel will not be suspended because the new resident decides they no longer want the noise. Similarly, if someone purchases property near one of the busiest international trade and travel corridors they should not expect traffic to be diverted to someone else’s neighborhood (either Black Rock or Fort Erie) because of the decisions they made.
I don't want my remarks to sound harsh, because I am sympathetic, but at some point accountability must be taken by residents also. Many made decisions to purchase homes along Columbus, fully knowing that this day might come.
KED – I wasn't aware that the air quality tests were done on only low traffic days. But, what DID stand out to me in the the presentation at the Armory was that the wait-times and traffic volume were done at "peak". Of COURSE there are delays at peak — hell, there were delays when we came back from vacation in the 1960s! and that was before NAFTA. The number of open booths was the issue then! and often the case up until recently! How convenient that air-quality tests weren't mandatory at the SAME TIMES as when the volume and wait stats were done.
IRISH - I don't know anyone in the Front Park (Columbus Park) neighborhood who thinks the bridge should be removed. Ideally , the bridge would be replaced with a new bridge connecting the existing Canadian plaza with a new US plaza slightly farther north of the current plaza, with careful consideration to its effects on that neighborhood and a relocation plan. Most of the homes north of the current plaza are occupied by a somewhat transient population, with most of the homes owned by "slumlords" - well, let's just say they don't come around much to take care of their properties, but I'm sure they'll come out of the woodwork when they hear the PBA sniffing around to scoop up property for a new plaza. They'll surely get more money for their houses from the PBA than they would on the open market in this very depressed and non-historic neighborhood. The area also has several dilapidated factories that have been for sale for years. In contrast, the neighborhood immediately east and south of the current plaza existed long before the Peace Bridge came along. Please take a look at the very interesting history of this area in Appendix P of the DEIS (peacebridgex.com). Better yet, come over here and walk around on Columbus Parkway and Busti Avenue between Porter and Rhode Island and see for yourself. After the Civil War, Olmsted saw such beauty in this waterfront area that he chose it as the waterfront connection to his parkway system for Buffalo, the first in the US! Peter Porter developed a street grid for what was then called Black Rock. It became THE place to own a home in the City of Buffalo. Later, the area became a very strong Italian-American community. Many of these families are still here - you would be hard-pressed to find a homeowner without an a, i, or o on the end of their name. When people built or bought homes here after the bridge was built in the 1920s, bridge traffic was reasonable and they probably never imagined what NAFTA would do to the transportation industry - and therefore the neighborhood. How unfortunate that it led to the deterioration of some fine homes immediately adjacent to the plaza, which was expanded in the 50's to accommodate another increase at that time. Who would buy a house directly in front of a truck parking lot? So now, for our Canadian visitors, it's "Over the river and through the slums, to Boulevard Mall we go!!" A new plan needs to be developed that works for the greatest number of people with minimal damage to the environment, cultural resources, and America's image. The PBA has had consultants working on this for years and they still fail to come up with such a plan. Instead, they come up with a plan that would eventually result in the loss of one of the few remaining nice neighborhoods on the lower west side. Speaking of environment, the air quality study in the DEIS is very rote. It merely conducted a standard analysis and failed to consider long-term health effects on humans within the project area. Most of the samples were taken only once a week on low traffic days such as Monday and Thursday. Dr. Mukasa (MD, PhD), head of the Center for Asthma and Environmental Exposure, has attempted to reveal on several occasions that a 2/3 higher rate of asthma and respiratory illness exists in areas where people are exposed to diesel fuel emmissions. He urges municipalities to avert diesel truck traffic away from heavily populated areas at a distance of 500 meters. His studies are confirmed by Dr. Jack Spengler from Harvard. His studies have been ignored by the PBA. Bruce Jackson's PEACE BRIDGE CHRONICLES highlight this as well as the farcical way in which the PBA has conducted itself during its mission to GET IT DONE. If you don't have time for this, at least read his article in the most recent Artvoice.
IrishRover--do you think the sacrifice of the Columbus Park neighborhood is the only way the bridge can be built? Is it really the best possible solution? I don't find your argument unreasonable, but when there are so many options available, and because we've waitied so long, it seems that doing it absolutely right is critical. Why wait this long and then do something that will embitter so many city residents? The PBA is not a demon, but it has not shown itself to be especially civic-minded.
Zimmerman,
You actually gave Jim Kane of the Ambassador Bridge a soapbox to spout off. That being the same Ambassador Bridge that in Detroit:
- destroyed the vibrant Mexicantown neighborhood by indiscriminant expansion of its plaza.
- sells Duty Free gas costing the National Higway Trust Fund and all of us millions of dollars every year, money that should be spent on maintaining our highways and bridges.
- ignores City of Detroit zoning by-laws, builds on property it doesn't own, and builds without building permits.
- wants to twin its bridge in Detroit and do exactly what the Peace Bridge is proposing here.
- took $200 plus million in federal tax funds to construct a "gateway" to its bridge in Detroit.
- charges $7.50 per round trip, almost triple what the Peace Bridge's E-ZPass toll is.
It's amazing what a little research can uncover.
You say it wold be "important and helpful to hear from both sides". I for one would be interested in what the PBA has to say. Will you give them the same opportunity you provided Jim Kane?
IrishRover--do you think the sacrifice of the Columbus Park neighborhood is the only way the bridge can be built? Is it really the best possible solution? I don't find your argument unreasonable, but when there are so many options available, and because we've waitied so long, it seems that doing it absolutely right is critical. Why wait this long and then do something that will embitter so many city residents? The PBA is not a demon, but it has not shown itself to be especially civic-minded.
Riverfisher,
Resolution 123 was not a state resolution. It was a Republican Senate resolution.
The State of Michigan (Senate Assembly Governor) actually approved the expenditure of funds to continue a study of an alternative to the Ambassador Bridge enhancement project.
$300 million to build the IRR crossing?? Two completely new plazas?? A bridge that is two times as long as the Peace Bridge, a five mile long freeway in Fort Erie, and a maze of elevated ramps in Buffalo?? Give you head a shake!! In Detroit the twinning of the Ambassador Bridge according to the Ambassador Bridge ITSELF is $1 billion dollars.
The bottom line is that the Ambassador Bridge is full of (you know what) and would be a disaster in this area.
Here's a link to an interesting article everyone on this site should read today. www.politicswny.com
Report this