Really guys...

Get over it.

As I said in a previous article; I'm a Southtowns resident who would drive either the expressway, or the boulevard. I don't care about the extra 5 minutes. Honestly.

But...

I'm not sure how a sea of traffic lights and stopped cars (Think NF Blvd, Sheridan, Transit, etc) is better than an expressway, and low-speed alternate route. Neither is particularly great, both have advantages and disadvantages. I've read both the studies. I just don't see advantages in either direction. And to all the posters above, I agree. Any BRO staff member wants to ride home with me tonight (I'l lbring ya back), even on a Friday, around 5, it doesn't look like that..

I've said it before, and I'll say it again. I usually agree with this site; but on this topic, it's done. Spend your energy fixing something else that's broken; help Mark with the CT, plant flowers somewhere, paint a house for an old lady, but move on already.

Build a bridge (Or Skyway in this instance) and get over it.

RonR...Thanks for clearing the air...blowhard. This is not a personal insult, just a description of your mindset :)

Why are there no traffic problems a mile down the road in Lackawanna where route 5 turns into a regular at grade road with stop lights? Is there some type of space time warp inside Buffalo that creates the traffic jambs?

I'm sure there are reasonable arguments against the DOT's plan, but when BRO posts articles like this, it doesn't help their cause. Whether they utilize the data properly or not, the DOT has volumes of traffic flow data, etc. that they belive support their plan. The counter argument is snapping a few pictures on ONE day at non-peak time?

Compare the backed up traffic to any other comparable city and you will realize that the backups caused by the construction is nothing. 5-10 minutes is not traffic lol try commuting in Washington DC or even Pittsburgh for that matter! And sorry to break the news people but if we are al on teh same boat that we want Buffalo to grow and and keep getting better increased traffic will be apart of the future, not that this is necessarily a bad thing though because traffic is a sign of a health economy and maybe just maybe increased traffic will help leverage more support towards building up and improving upon our inadequate mass transit system.

so the time frame according to the article is 20-25 years and some dude in the comments now says 75 years this plan will now effect us? whaa, those two pictures however have convinced me. the 10+ years the planners of this roadway have put in are completely wrong, lets change direction now and have one road w/ trucks cars and bike lanes so everyone can share and have fun trying to cross the street to all the development on both sides of this new boulivard. gee I can't wait to use my frogger skills to maneuver through that shitshow

I don't understand the traffic problem here. I've been on this construction stretch at all different times of the day and night, not once did I see or get caught up in a "traffic jam". Very smooth going, The only difference I see this year is it takes a few extra minutes to get out of the small boat harbour parking lot, no biggie. What I do like is seeing the "mounds" coming down from the expressway, opens up the water front views, I can imagine what a Boulevard would look like, clean lines and open views. It would be a crime to put that highway mess back up. This is one of Buffalo's problems that can be rectified now. The lake is one of this cities biggest [and only] assets. Screw up this stretch of waterfront again while crews are working on it, then the city deserves everything it gets.

That is the problem Wiz

Any transportation engineer or planner knows that 5 p.m. is not the peak moment of traffic. The average work day ends at 5, so it stands to be that the traffic does not peak at 5 but sometime after. Here's an example: when it starts raining like crazy, flooding and drainage issues aren't immediate, but rather drainage occurs and the water begins to find it's low areas and accumulate overtime, resulting in a peak. Same with traffic. It disperses from employment areas and disperses onto the roadway system and often main routes are clogged at peak times after people leave their place of employment.

The best measurement is to set up a camera from 6-8 am and 4-6 p.m.

Or here's a better idea, call this crazy, instead of inferring with one snapshot the entire traffic situation, you might actually find actual traffic counts for this road from GBNRTC. Oh, but that might put hard facts against emotion and we can't have any discussion based on fatc, just conjecture and feelings.

This argument is getting so tired. These pictures are a gross misrepresentation of what this detour has actually been like at peak times. I drive this road every single day and I can assure you that almost every evening there have been backups stretched as far as the 190 on ramp/Pearl Street Brewery area. Also, in the morning, there have been backups as far as Ridge Road. Now, please don't let me confuse anyone - I am vexed as to why there needs to be the elevated roadway in the revised plan. I would continue the road from Lackawanna as a six-lane roadway with a median and traffic lights at Ridge, Tiftt, and Ohio. I really don't see the need to have a dual roadway.

My opinion is solely based on the fact that the roads are redundant and construction and maintenance costs are going to be duplicated when there is no need. The talk about the road being elevated in order to counter the blowing snow is silly. That road was constructed in the early 50's as a means to bypass all of the industrial backups that were occurring on Fuhrmann Boulevard at the time. Between ships passing through, trains, and trucks, traffic commuting into the city from the growing suburbs needed a bypass and hence, the Skyway, Father Baker Bridge (the original, high-level one), and the elevated section in between were constructed. At this point, there really is no industrial traffic down there to bypass.

Of course, in typical BRO fashion, the argument turns into nonsense where people say "PEOPLE FROM HAMBURG SHOULD TAKE THE THRUWAY AND NOT ROUTE 5!!!!! IT'S OUR LAND NOT YOURS!!!! MOVE INTO THE CITY IF YOU DON'T LIKE DRIVING TO WORK!!!!!!!" I stand by my belief that the dual roads aren't needed anymore and are only going to lead to much higher construction and maintenance costs.

"Maybe everyone WILL move back to the City of Buffalo - yep, that 3/4 of the metro population that lives beyond the city border... " Why move back when you can drive right through it in 10 mins?

"That is why we don't have traffic problems like other cities...we have so many highways connecting the city...90, 190, 290, 990, 33, Rt. 5, 219 all connect the city and have plenty of lanes for the traffic they host. " That is also a reason is why Buffalo is half empty, why live there or reinvest when you can drive right through it without stopping and build on cheap green space at no additional cost to you while still growing off the city?

"Please stop pointing to Main St, Williamsville as evidence for how a boulevard will succeed." I don't see it as being used as a reason for "sucess". It is being used as 1) even in its current state no one would say that is should be turned into an ugly highway. That's the point. It would pry meet the same fate as the area bordering the 33 in desireability. 2) It also shows that the widening they did a decade ago did not help any. All it shows is that adding capacity just attracts more vehicles because people feel they can now live and work farther apart due to the new capacity. If Main St. in Williamsville was made 6 lanes each direction it would most likely fill right up again as more peopel decide to use it and buy new houses further away from work.

"I'm not sure how a sea of traffic lights and stopped cars (Think NF Blvd, Sheridan, Transit, etc) " I don't feel that Niagara Falls Blvd is the goal here. If anything it should be stripped of the word Blvd. There is minimal street grid there and it is full of the single use parking lot developments that promote car usage, even for those living near by. that is what this highway would give us. The goal is urban development on a grid with a "thru" Blvd. for peak travel times. As for crossing, multiple medians, corss walks etc help. that. Signals can easily be times to those going the speed limit hit greens on cue and those speeding aend up having to stop and thus not gaining. Oak st is currently this way. Al you get by speeding is hitting the next light red instead of green.

I was in San Fran as recently as this past April and got to experience the waterfront first hand. Hanging out down by the water where the Escadero was removed was amazing. Wakling city streets flowing right into the water front. I could not imagine wanting to walk around down there with a double stacked highway right next to me. But they too had to fight to remove and not rebuild it. Cries of gridlock, longer commutes, ruiining city buisnesses etc were all heard, only for the opposite to happen once removed. Was the blvd backed up during rush hour? yep. Guess thats the price to pay for a sucessful waterfront. Or I guess they could have left it empty industrial slips so people could drive by them quicker....maybe even complain that nothgin happends there while they do.

RonR says everything so well, I should just give the +1. Especially for the comment on building this, then building Tift, then removing this even though any development would have already been built around it.

Are you kidding? I was on this exact stretch of road today at 5:45pm and it was a parking lot.

I experienced a 20 minute delay to get through the first traffic light heading westbound from downtown at about 5:30 pm.

Ron...the Rte. 5 redesign is gong to "control" the outer harbor development over the next 50-75 years? 50-75 years?

Think about how much has changed in Buffalo over the last 75 years? If and when the need for more waterfront land comes about and this extra 77 acres is needed, I am sure at that point, changes can be made. In the meantime, you are dreaming if you believe the entire outer harbor parcel will be developed in the 5-10 year short term vision you describe and this huge land shortage crisis will then occur. Look at how long it took to fill up the condos and townhouses at the Erie Basin Marina and that footprint is nothing compared to the outer harbor.

PS As I took a ride down there on my lunch hour today, I had people "buzzing" by me as I did the 40MPH speed limit in the work zone. That is why the highway should be left in place for the commuters and the parkway for the people who are trying to get around the outer harbor.

So a regular street grid performs better than a super highway? Interesting. By the way my experience is that the vast majority of cars on route 5 are headed farther south than Lackawanna and that very very few exit onto that city's street grid. But anyway thanks for pointing out the beauty of having a street grid versus highway at this place

Anecdotal as it may seem, the many times I have driven this stretch of road shows me that the vast vast majority continue on to Hamburg. I see maybe one car every once in a while exiting at Ridge Road. certainly I have never witnessed a stream of cars exiting and it would need to be a stream to make up for the congestion being complained about. But hey, we have already determined that this is a crap area which needs to stay crappy so that people can get to Hamburg faster.

Still no one has explained why this stretch which reportedly handles the same of less volume of traffic as Main Street in Williamsville needs to be a highway.

Well if it is so bad I think we should build an expressway through williamsville.. for health and safety reasons of course.. plus all those people would now have easy access to all of the shops and businesses in the village creating even more of an economic boom....

Sounds ridiculous when it is close to home huh? Then why should Buffalo get this kind of crap crammed down its throat? Traffic is like water... it will find another route. The 90 just added another lane in partial anticipation for a southtowns connector (which never happened) and the 190 no longer has any tolls to back up at. It is time for people from the southtowns to start taking that route instead of Route 5. Which they already started doing since the tolls disappeared anyhow.

The four lane boulevard could handle 35k no problem so only 8-10 would need displacing from the beginning. But to add an ENTIRE thruway for the benefit of 8-10k cars is a HUGE waste of money.

thinker.. I agree that a better standard would be after five and at multiple times but did you not read the article? It does have traffic counts from the GBNRTC. If you do'nt read the article how can you make such a claim that they didn't do their homework if you didn't either.

Also I wonder how much of the traffic build up is because of construction and not lane capacity..

The skyway lead into a 4 lane highway.. it would now lead into a 4 lane boulevard. There is NO CAPACITY LOSS except that the speed limit would be lower.

again, the real question here simple. Are the jams caused by a lack of capacity or just because of normal construction delays. Somehow I think if people just had to drop speed (like they do in Hamburg) without any construction there wouldn't be any backups with just a boulevard alone. Again it is 4 lanes, going into 4 lanes...

Well said STEEL and RonR.

Want the non-water side of Rt 5 to remain crappy old industrial land, keep elevated route 5. Want the water side to remain tax-payer parking lots with a nature trail, keep elevated route 5. Want to keep your easy commute and to keep bitching how the city does nothing there, keep elevated route 5.

We get what we plan for. We are planning for the status quo with some green space next to it. Hardly the best use for waterfront property. This investment is supposed to spur private investment and hopefully come out richer for it way down the road. Imagine Tift being designed into a parkway leading from the water to McKinley Parkway and Caz Park. Imagine Ridge Rd or a new road becoming a parkway from the water to South Park? Progressively infill the whole thing with new build intergrated urban neighborhoods and hopefully helping spur the gentrification of the western portions of South Buffalo and Lackawanna. Happen in 10 years?..nope. Happen in 25-50 years? Maybe if we plan for it and take the incremental steps to see it happen. Getting rid of this wall is the foundation to the whole process....

NFTA Pictures of Outer Harbor Trail

If it is just the light that is holding up traffic then why not time it so that during the peak rush it stays green during peak unless someone needs it. I doubt there is enough traffic coming on from Ohio to back up Route 5 very long. also.. what about a large roundabout here. It would remove the need for a light and allow the constant flow of traffic as well as allow Ohio Street traffic to get onto Route 5.

It just doesn't seem worth building an entirely parallel road to alleviate an hours worth of moderate traffic a day. That is a huge maintenance cost and construction cost as well as all the other reasons. 77 acres of land needed so that there is never any congestion. A little congestion would be a good thing for this region.because it would spur people to get out of their cars in the first place.

There is an environmental benefit to slowing traffic down. Instead of people whipping through lat 65 - 75 like they do now bringing their speed to 45 - 55 would increase their car's efficiency and allow everyone to move through just fine. Like what happens in Lackawanna \ Hamburg.

So I guess what is there now should be locked in forever. Makes sense. Don't make anything better because right now it is crap. We should not make Buffalo better because is is not good now? Is that the reason for keeping a highway here. And why not plow a super highway through Williamsville? If traffic volume is similar it seems that such a plan should be in the works

But beyond that your Lackawanna argument does not hold water because I am quite sure that the number of people exiting onto Lackawanna's west side streets is quite small

ATTENTION ATTENTION ATTENTION!

Here is something no one has mentioned with regards to Route5 and why the elevated expressway IS NOT needed

If you check the plans by the NTSDOT the Route 5 is only one part....the other part is a bypass of the skyway called the TIFFT STREET CONNECTOR (which connects route 5 to I-190.

Now how many people will use this instead of the skyway? How many will be forced to use it when the skyway is closed How many are using alternate routes during the construction of Route5

The TIFFT STREET CONNECTOR NEGATES THE NEED FOR AN ELEVATED EXPRESSWAY.

spread it around!

The Embarcadero double decker expressway in San Francisco carried 100k cars/day.

It is now gone, replaced by a waterfront boulevard resulting in hundreds of millions of $ in development.

The SanFran waterfront is now a place worth caring about.

Let's do it here.

I have driven through the construction zone several times during peak hours and experienced very long delays. The peak hour traffic in the morning from Fuhrmann Blvd to the I-190 is 3700 vehicles and 3600 vehicles during the PM peak hour (NYSDOT).

Perhaps improvements to Ohio Street could provide a viable alternative that would enhance the Boulevard experience along Route 5.

I'll stick to my guns...

The redesigned parkway that will run parallel with a still elevated Route 5 is NOT going to make or break the outer harbor development.

Focus instead on what the ECHDC is going to do with a HUGE parcel of land and not the road running along side it. Let's see what Quinn and friends bring to the table for the outer harbor after their "master plan" for the inner harbor is released in August...I mean September....I mean sometime before the end of the year....I mean after the architects and engineers have made a killing on the project.

If I hear one more thing about how without a proper street grid this whole thing will fall apart, I am going to start having "street grid" nightmares.

Haven't you caught on to the rotation yet...

Day 1 - article about Casino brings readers and commentary.

Day 2 - article about the waterfront, EV business or festival, human interest piece

Day 3 - article that highlights a building, article about bicycles or skateboarding

Day 4 - article about the buffalo schools, Bashar Issa, or condo / loft project

Day 5 - article about UB, the Casino, or threatened building that hasn't been mentioned in a few months.

Day 6 - lather, rinse, repeat.

RonR...dumbass? Resorting to personal insults? Very nice.

PS Go back and read my post. I said recreation/entertainment/commercial WITH SOME RESIDENTIAL! How convenient that you left off the last part.

Yeah it can get rough in traffic peak times, rest of the time highway is unnecessary. 6 lane blvd. no highway. and people do seem to create facts out of nowhere...

RonR...my street grid nightmares are going to get worse tonight after reading your woeful tale. I really can't believe that some fools(your word not mine) actually believe that this elevated highway is going to be a death blow to the outer harbor.

As far as your statement that Buffalo doesn't need parks and trails on the waterfront, what is it that you're proposing?? Elmwood Strip Part II??

The outer harbor should be mostly recreational/entertainment/commercial with some residential. Are you trying to tell me this can't be done without a street grid? If so, we will agree to disagree.

How does anyone plan on trying to stop the construction? I know the battle has been taken to court and several interest groups are pressuring to stop it, but what is the current situation? What does this mean for the Skyway?? Is it still coming down or did Higgins tuck his tail between his legs and give up?

How can Buffalo NOT have a fully-staffed Planning Department when the incentive has been there for decades?

There are real-time traffic cameras on Rte 5 @ 190 in each direction -- you can see them on line at

http://maps.nittec.org/mappage.aspx