Route 5 @ Five
The above pictures are taken at 5:00 on a Friday on Route 5 in the construction zone along what will eventually again be Fuhrmann Boulevard. What you do not see is a traffic jam. Actually, traffic was completely free flowing during what is generally considered the busiest part of the day, and week, for traffic congestion. Which brings about the question: What are we missing here?
Those who support the current reconstruction of the Route 5 Expressway say that without the short 1.5-mile expressway, that traffic would grind to a halt. But, as you can see here, this is not the case. With that said, navigating through the construction zone has not been without it’s glitches. The first day of the rerouting was a nightmare. Once drivers became accustomed though to the new layout, they adjusted. Some found alternate routes, others changed the times they drove through the construction zone, and some have cut trips due to the high cost of fuel.
The real question is: Do we need an expressway here? The answer is, and always has been, no. Traffic has never justified it. Traffic counts from the Skyway down the stretch of Route 5 Expressway are less than those of Main Street in Williamsville (42,000 vs. 47,000, respectfully). Last I remembered, nobody was suggesting we build an expressway through the Village of Williamsville. The only logical reason that it has been pursued so vehemently is that certain politicians just want to show that they can get projects done before re-election time. It does not matter that it may not be in the best interest of the city to rebuild an expressway on the waterfront.
Now there are those out there that say that the public had plenty of opportunity to express this opinion before. Well the public did. The last Route 5/Southtowns Connector Project meeting I went to last year had everyone walking out with the belief that the DOT was going to build the Boulevard Alternative. Then late last year the DOT put out on their website that they were going to proceed with a “hybrid” alternative. This basically meant that the Expressway would remain to Ohio Street with a boulevard from there south. This plan focused around a major interchange at the NFTA property that when this plan was developed, was to be turned into that “pie in the sky” development plan that we all know went nowhere.
So here we are, in the late Summer of 2008, with construction on what is best described as a “hybrid” of the Hybrid Plan, since we, the public have no real idea what is being built. Throughout the EIS process for this project, the DOT had engineering diagrams posted on their website. Currently though, there are no engineering diagrams of what is being constructed. There are some vague drawings of what the so-called “Olmsted Boulevard” will look like for Fuhrmann Boulevard, but we have no idea what the entire project entails. By law, if the DOT made major changes to the Preferred Alternative, then they needed to have a public hearing before proceeding with construction. They did not, and the public therefore has no idea what is being built.
Where can we go from here? Well, its not too late to stop a mistake that Buffalo will have to live with for at least the next 20 years. Right now traffic is already diverted to Fuhrmann Boulevard. A large section of the Route 5 elevated berm has been dug up. Why stop there. Leave traffic on Fuhrmann Boulevard. Take down the whole of the Route 5 berm. Reconstruct Fuhrmann Boulevard as proposed by the DOT, but do NOT reconstruct the Route 5 Expressway. Instead, grade that land, cleanup any toxic materials that may have been used as fill, layout a street grid, and sell the land to developers to develop. Too much of the Outer Harbor land is currently occupied by road infrastructure that is unnecessary. Do we really need to have a 4 lane Expressway directly next to a 4 lane Boulevard? No. All we need is a 4 lane Boulevard, right along Fuhrmann Boulevard, just as it currently exists.
What I propose would cost the DOT significantly less than what the current project costs, and the City would gain taxable property along the waterfront at the same time. Look, we would not be in this situation if the City of Buffalo had a fully staffed Planning Department that could actually devise precinct plans for all areas of the City. We don’t have that. So we get into these situations where we are always playing catch up. How hard is it to consider, based on the fact that the world did not end when the Expressway was closed, just not rebuilding it. Maybe what I suggest is too simple. But it is worth consideration, right now, before construction on permanent sections of the Expressway begins. This is the last chance, because like any major construction project, we’ll be stuck with this for the next quarter century.
Traffic count data from GBNRTC, update 1/15/08.
What Others Have To Say
What Do You Think?
Related Articles
-
My Favorite Buildings
After reading a recent Buffalo News story about funding and delays in renovation of the Buffalo State Psychiatric Hospital I was reminded of how much I love that building. This structure designed by H.H. Richardson is massive and I love the whole thing. However I really love the part that no one thinks of, the 1/4 mile long wings (or should I say wing since one wing was lopped off in the 60's). This building is not considered to be one of Richardson's best buildings. But, t …
- Sep 28th 2011, 11:02am
- Continue Reading
- 26 Comments
-
My Favorite Buildings
This house on Richmond Avenue is very unusual for Buffalo. It stands out among its wooden neighbors not only in material but also in detail and form. Buffalo is overwhelmingly constructed of wood with brick coming in a distant second as a material. Stone houses are very rare. Also rare is the Palazzo styling and shape of this house. Buffalo's Queen Anne Victorians are strong expressions of Buffalo's new money attitude in the late 1800's and early 1900's. Unlike staid Delawa …
- Sep 28th 2011, 11:00am
- Continue Reading
- 13 Comments
-
If You See This Posting, You're at the Wrong Site
We've updated Buffalo Rising. Some people haven't seen it yet, though, so if you're seeing this post, you need to refresh your browser to be taken to the new www.buffalorising.com. If hitting refresh alone doesn't do it, hold the *shift* key and hit refresh. If that doesn't work and you still see this old version of the site, try going to this story. That should certainly take you to the new site and from there, you can navigate around the new BuffaloRising.com.
- Feb 5th 2009, 9:21pm
- Continue Reading
- 3 Comments
-
The Wait is Almost Over - BR's New Site
As we mentioned in our previous post, we’re in the process of changing the Buffalo Rising site. We’re almost there as we expect to launch the new site on Friday, December 19th.
In the meantime, posting will be light as we log new stories in the new publishing system which will only be viewable when we launch on Friday.
As always, we appreciate our users’ patience as we make this transition but we promise it will be well worth it. With faster load times, a comment view … - Dec 18th 2008, 11:32am
- Continue Reading
- 6 Comments
Comment Options
jattea
Are you kidding? I was on this exact stretch of road today at 5:45pm and it was a parking lot.
Report this
bfloboy86
How can Buffalo NOT have a fully-staffed Planning Department when the incentive has been there for decades?
Report this
dagner
Don't use traffic conditions in the Williamsville as evidence that an expressway isn't needed elsewhere. The traffic situation there is horrendous. Drawing comparisons to it might convince drivers-in-the-know to go against your position to avoid a similar fate for this section of Route 5. Main Street, 14221, has the traffic volume of an expressway without the safety features of one. Make a different argument.
Report this
dagner
What defines a fully-staff Planning department? What are the criteria? Are there specific activities that are mandated that are not completed? Or just not enough staff to do as much as everyone would like?
Report this
sbrof
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.
Report this
onestarmartin
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.
Report this
BLONDIE
Everyday this week it is backed up to 190. Nice way to take a pic in August at 5pm on a Friday....not an accurate representation as half my office was out last Friday and most Fridays all summer and many who are working do not stay until 5pm on a Friday. How about you try on a Tuesday at 5:15pm or even in a few weeks when school is in. EVERYDAY IT IS BACKED UP 5MPH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! You picked a FRIDAY in the SUMMER>>>>>>>>>
Report this
KenS
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.
Report this
thinker
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.
Report this
flyguy
I think this "temporary" realignment works just fine off the skyway. They really ought to consider firming this alignment up and getting rid of the elevated section and leaving one "boulevard" if you will in its curent configuration as it is temporarily. Seems a waste of money to build two parallel roads. Pump those funds into something else out there like further brownfield reclamation or something to get more land available for development out there.
Report this
sbrof
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.
Report this
mepolo
Ironically I was thinking, as I was breezing through this area on Friday afternoon....just about the same time the pic was taken...that traffic was VERY LIGHT for a Friday afternoon. Usually a Friday afternoon commute is just as bad as the rest of the week because of the cottage traffic heading out to the lake for the week-end. I know....I've lived in Evans my whole life, and commuted for the past 20 years. This picture is the exception....not the rule. Yesterday afternoon @ 4:30pm we were backed up onto the skyway....most days when I come through there is a back up at least to the base of the skyway at that time. For those who think that development along this area would be a good thing...take a moment to think about why there hasn't been developement already (other than the NFTA)...take a moment to drive that stretch this winter while it's snowing....take a moment to get out of your car along the lake in that stretch of land....then take a moment to think of what it would take for any business to deal w/the snow that blows off the lake at 50-60mph without anything to stop it. There is wide open lake there.......if it weren't for the state DOT and their wonderful job of plowing....we would be driving through drifts a foot high in the winter...and that is on a good day. Recreational development is what's needed in that stretch the most, and it's finally coming...let's all be glad for that!
Report this
jmn3
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.
Report this
sbrof
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...
Report this
mepolo
People aren't going to 'drop speed' going down this 4 lane boulevard....have you had the opportunity to drive through Lackawanna and Hamburg on a regular basis during rush hours? It's posted at 40mph....yet the standard speed is 50mph + .....the only way to get people to drop speed would be to have pace cars in the front of the lanes to keep the speed down! I don't think we need raised lanes any longer along that stretch either.....my point is that the picture above is unrealistic. The real delay seems to be the signal @ Ohio St....and perhaps @jmn3's idea is a good one...put more lights in, that would break traffic up more, and allow for better flow....if indeed one roadway were the plan. Another thought for those talking about the 'view' should the current highway not be elevated....the only thing on the other side of Rt 5 in that area is industrial, and Tifft Farm at that end.....so other than Tifft Farm...who would that view be for?
Report this
Downtownjunkie
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.
Report this
ToughintheStreets
Sbrof, to answer your question: none of the traffic build up is because of construction. Unless that light in front of the harbor is coming down then I suppose its all b/c of the construction... Traffic is a mess and backed up to the 190 regualrly. And it stays backed up like that until after 6pm. A boulevard would be fine here as long as there are no traffic lights. If part of this plan includes traffic signals then traffic is going to look like it does now for the foreseeable future. As of right now there are two spots on 5 where traffic gets backed up: the light at the harbor and the light near the steel plant. The comments here are right on. You gotta do a little more research about the traffic here before you post an article like that and not just go out there at 5 on a friday in the summer and snap a picture. Get out there at 5:30 today and see if the picture looks the same. And leave the political pot shots out of it.
Report this
MikeInWNY
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.
Report this
livesintheburbsworksinthecity
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?
Report this
ToughintheStreets
I understand the argument for more traffic lights but I question how effective they would be in breaking up traffic as apposed to making it a log-jam. And as it stands now the wait in traffic is well over 10-15mins at peak time.
Report this
PaulBuffalo
For the folks who claim there are, indeed, delays, how long are these delays? How many extra minutes per day are added to your commute?
Report this
MikeInWNY
I experienced a 20 minute delay to get through the first traffic light heading westbound from downtown at about 5:30 pm.
Report this
ToughintheStreets
Easily 30 minutes or more in the heaviest traffic no less than 15 on "light" days. That may be no comparison to D.C. or Atlanta but we should not strive to have traffic like thiers. More people: good. Two hour commute: bad. Yes we have it good here and we should work to keep it that way. Need to have appropriate traffic flow. And I think the comment about finally getting adequate mass transit is a fantastic one.
Report this
Buffalopundit
This is easily the most misleading set of pix I've ever seen. 5:00 is when people get out of work. I'd be willing to bet that the scene at 5:15 on any other day of the week would be a significantly different story. I know, because I had to put up with it for a week trying to pick someone up from Tifft after work a month ago. Traffic due to the light at Ohio Street routinely backs up all the way to the 190 now, whereas in the past it would have sailed along on the bermed limited-access highway. Traffic coming onto Route 5 from the Old First Ward meets up there with commuters going home, and traffic is a routine nightmare there.
For all the Boulevard proponents' anti-car talk of the environment, it strikes me as counteproductive that they'd advocate for a solution that results in thousands of trucks and cars idling at a traffic light during peak traffic hours. Particulate matter for everyone! Or, of course, we could just tell those nasty suburban people to stay home and leave their death machines there with them! In which case, I'm sure there would be loads of companies that would simply up and move from, e.g., Franklin Street to Southwestern Boulevard.
To the poster who suggested that they run an expressway through Williamsville, they don't need to. It's called the Thruway and it runs parallel with Route 5 through Lancaster, Cheektowaga, and parts of WIlliamsville.
You might as well have posted a picture of the roadway at midnight on a Sunday, because it would be equally indicative of just how super-awesome the boulevard alternative would be.
Report this
AndyJ
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?
Report this
sbrof
NFTA Pictures of Outer Harbor Trail
Report this
mepolo
@AndyJ - I don't think the discussion is about trying to stop the construction per se...they are trying to make an argument for one roadway...taking both commuter & recreational traffic down the same roadway....using examples like the light traffic above as reasoning....stating that if the traffic isn't that bad during the construction, that it won't be that bad if the entire stretch was a 40mph roadway of mixed use traffic. Unfortunately that picture does not give an accurate view of the daily commute through there.
Report this
STEEL
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?
Report this
Italyan
Wait I thought if they approved the Blvd. plan it would be where route 5 is right now, not where traffic is currently being diverted too? The article says to leave it as is and level route 5 for further development... The riverkeeper said route 5 is not needed and it should be leveled so the views can be extended to the lake and from the lake to the buffalo river. Who wants to look at all those cluttered rusted up buildings from the lake? Why not put route 5 at ground level, keep all the roads, knock down those old ugly looking buildings or at least fix them up, and develop that area. Theres your views while keeping the flow of traffic consistent. If this area does boom like they say it will, they will need ALL these roads for the traffic.
Report this
sbrof
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.
Report this
sbrof
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.
Report this
Buffalopundit
They can't shut down the light during peak rush, because much of the traffic is coming down off Ohio Street.
As to Steel's question, by the time the traffic gets down to Lackawanna, it's thinned out, thanks to an actual street grid for cars to escape from Route 5 off of. There is no such thing closer to downtown.
Sbrof - if you put a roundabout there, it may or may not help at peak rush, because the cars coming off of Ohio would have the right-of-way versus traffic to the right coming in off the Skyway.
Report this
ToughintheStreets
Steel there is a third lane (maybe a fourth at some spots I cant picture it) once you get to the steel plant and into blasdell/hamburg. There are delays at that light as you get off the elevated portion that back up to ridge road and furthur at some points. Remember too that people are exiting 5 before they get to that point. Traffic off the skyway represents everyone coming from downtown.
Report this
STEEL
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
Report this
RonR
@BuffaloPundit,
If there is anyone who knows how to skew information, pictures or fractions of content to frame their opinion, it would be you. Great observation guy.
Even with the traffic, who cares! Traffic is a good thing IMO. It means there are PEOPLE!
What IS most obvious to me in the pictures is not the volume of traffic but the land available for development. These images clearly show the wasted land used for the raised section.
Now, does Buffalo need 120 acres of waterfront land today? The answer is NO! However, this road is going to control the development for the next 50-75 years. I for one feel that in the next 50-75 years, things WILL change and Buffalo WILL need every square inch of land on Lake Erie. It is called PLANNING and VISION.
People who have no issue with the DOT plan NEVER talk about the Outer Harbor outside of the next 5-10 years. If you can not see the flaw in having such a short term perspective on such a long term issue....well I just do not know what to say.
Report this
MJWorthington
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....
Report this
KenS
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.
Report this
wizardofza
Yeah DOT plans are reflect the "psychology of previous investment" i.e. highways, sprawl, and car-only infrastructure, and only able to "plan" things in terms of 20th century business-as-usual.
If govt. actually planned for ther long-term they would have instead invested in a light rail line that follows the lake and makes stop along each of the lakeside communities with ample park-n-ride lots for southtowns commuters. The idea should be to make downtown a pleasure to get to and from. Obviously not everyone wants to LIVE in the city but if they can get there easily for work and play it would greatly strenghten Buffalo's urban core.
Report this
Buffalopundit
Steel - not sure if you realize this, but the outer harbor right now is a peninsula, so a steet grid there (for what? the weeds? ) isn't going to have much effect.
If you guys were really interested in a Boulevard, you'd be fighting tooth and nail for the Tifft Street Arterial to be built so that the Skyway could come down and commuter / truck traffic could get to the 190 further away from downtown.
Have fun with the idling fumes in the meantime.
Report this
STEEL
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
Report this
wizardofza
With that said, the road configuration really isn't a big deal (besides the construction $$$ being a possible waste in terms of traffic actually served) for the forseeable future. There is no market in the Buffalo region that would enable whole new neighborhoods to be spawned out of nothing, especially along old inustrial land with poor road connections.
IMHO, lift bridges from the downtown street grid would do alot more to enable some form of new activity (whatever that may be) to take place on the OH rather than some super-wide boulevard. Also, as a cyclist, I'd enjoy the OH must better with all the heavy traffic segregated off on an elevated road that I'll have zero contact with instead of an assload of cars belching fumes in my face at-grade. The best use of this land right now and in the forseeable future is rereactional use. Keeping the area pleasurable for that purpose would be a laudable goal at this point. I don't see cosompolitan, mixed-use yuppie mecca neighborhood sprouting up there anytime soon.
Report this
ToughintheStreets
I think people exiting to Ridge Road and Tift to get into South Buffalo and Lackawanna Make up a significant enough portion of travelers that traffic thins towards Hamburg/Blasdell. The proof is that the congestion coming of the skyway at the harbor light is much heavier than the congestion at the Lackawanna light being referred to. Even if you take into consideration that the light is longer to allow the ohio st traffic to merge onto fuhrmann.
Report this
RonR
KanS,
Are you that naive? Have you looked at the layout of the combo plan?
NOBODY has said the outer harbor will be close to being FULLY developed in the next 5-10 years. Development WILL happen on the outer harbor in the next 5-10 years. Not much but regardless of what plan is put in place, some development will happen. I think a safe bet would be 10% in the next 15 years..if that.
The whole basis of the anti-DOT plan IS the fact that the roadway needs to be thought of as a 50-75 year SOLUTION and not a NOW solution. When you hear people like Higgins talk about the DOT plan, it is all about NOW. The reason is he needs NOW for his NEXT election.
The fundamental flaw in the direction of Buffalo and the region over the last 50 years is the focus on NOW and not the focus on the future. Save labor jobs NOW instead of building for tech jobs in the FUTURE. Build things like the skyway NOW instead of realizing it was not going to be needed in the FUTURE. Build public subsidized housing NOW instead of working on the economics to allow Buffalo to evolve naturally in the FUTURE.
What fools like you do not see is the FUTURE eventually becomes the NOW and people say what the F*ck were they thinking back then!
Now say the DOT plan is completed. What you will have is anything but a simple grid. Development will follow the lines of the main roads, which under the combo plan, is full of curves. Because of the curves AND the wasted space AND the need to buffer from a freaking EXPRESSWAY, the type of development will consist of office park type development. See the HealthNow complex or most of Amherst as an example. These developments will be built in the middle of parking lots and landscaping, which is not a productive use of space for a CITY. Maybe for a suburb but even Amherst wishes they could have laid out things better 30 years ago and prevented the challenges they face TODAY!
Fast forward 25-50-75 years... We would not just be talking about the road work but the EXISTING development that was built between now and then. Are you seriously suggesting that those buildings could be magically moved and placed in a grid? Are you going to tell the owners of those buildings to F*ck off and demo their buildings to make way for more productive development when that time comes? Do you think they would listen?
What most people can not grasp is the moment ANY construction of buildings happen on the outer harbor, there is NO GOING BACK. The reason why this in the only window of opportunity is the outer harbor will NEVER be completely empty again. It will never be a CLEAN SLATE! It took decades of disappointments and failure to give Buffalo this ONE opportunity for the future. For when everyone on this little blog is nothing more then food for the worms.
Report this
mybuffalo
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
Report this
RonR
MyBuffalo,
Just an FYI, the radial grid plan laid out by Ellicott is still effecting Buffalo today. Pick up a history book and look up when THAT was laid out.
As for the 10 plus year the planners put in, a lot of that time was DEVELOPING the Boulevard plan which until just recently WAS considered the plan and has ALWAYS considered a VIABLE option. It is amazing that those who comment on this issue today choose not to spend a couple of hours an educate themselves on the last 10 years.
Nobody knows what the needs for Buffalo will be in the next 10,20,30,40,50,60 or 75 years. With this being the case, you build TODAY for the best result TOMORROW. I have yet to read one logical argument as to how the current DOT plan is a better solution for the LONG TERM future of Buffalo. It is always about access now to parks and trails and sh*t that Buffalo really does not need. What it NEEDS is to focus on the long term vision of where the city will be when WE are not here.
This is nothing more then a political ankle grab like the countless mistakes in the last 50 years. A backroom push so the boy with from South Buffalo who sold his soul in DC has something to run on in the next election.
Report this
Buffalopundit
@Steel, you don't know where those cars ultimately exit Route 5 after they reach at-grade any more than I do, so I don't know why you keep positing your wild-ass-guess as fact.
Also, I think the point that people are making is that an at-grade boulevard there with a stoplight at Ohio is decidedly not an improvement.
But maybe you guys could post a picture of the traffic there as it appears at, say, 2pm on a Saturday to prove how ZOMGLOLAWESOMES@!!@## the boulevard would be if they'd just build it.
Report this
STEEL
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.
Report this
buffaloweiner
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!
Report this
DerekPunaro
This has to be one of the worst pieces of "journalism" by Buffalo Rising ever. Way to distort the facts!
Report this
allfit
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.
Report this
Buffalopundit
@buffaloweiner, that's the point I was trying to make at 13:45.
Report this
ToughintheStreets
haha well said allfit. Steel: Take the Ridge road exit once and hang out there for a half hour or so. There is a bridge undergoing construction that has made it one way. This backs up a considerable amount of traffic when the light is red. Feel free to count the cars when they're stopped. It may be easier for you to see how man people get off at that exit. And its probably safe to double that number for the tift street exit.
Report this
wizardofza
This many comments for a chunk of land that maybe 2% of Buffalo gives two shits about?
Report this
STEEL
That is the problem Wiz
Report this
KenS
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.
Report this
TheNextMayor
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.
Report this
RonR
KenS
PLEASE stop putting "words into my mouth" to try and make your weak argument better. It is a typical tool of people who can not counter what is being said to try and frame the opposing argument in unrealistic terms.
I have NEVER said that the removal of the skyway would have "the entire outer harbor parcel will be developed in the 5-10 year short term"...people like you say this as a weak as counter to the LONG TERM argument I raised. In fact, I feel it is going to take a VERY long time for the Outer Harbor to be developed. I am also saying that this project WILL determine WHAT goes out there in the FUTURE that we can not predict.
I have NEVER said "that this elevated highway is going to be a death blow to the outer harbor." In fact I have said SEVERAL times that development will happen out there regardless of what is done. What I HAVE said is the AMOUNT of development, the QUALITY of development and the DENSITY of development WILL be determined by WHAT goes out there. It has been PROVEN several times before that an at grade blvd would bring in MORE development and of better quality.
Your comment about the Elmwood Strip part II just screams how small town you are. I bet you think a going big is getting one of those "craft" beers on tap and upgrading your Sabres tickets. It is really pathetic that some people consider Buffalo to be a city at all with the mindset of the people who live there.
Now the "vibe" of Elmwood is not my thing. However, if you are asking if I think an densely populated area with rising house values above the market norms and a healthy rate and has a mix of retail, commercial and residential is a good thing, the answer is year. If you are asking if Buffalo should have more areas like this, the answer is yes again. Only a freaking moron thinks otherwise.
Buffalo is not the burbs and is NEVER going to beat the burbs in a head to head match up for residents. Buffalo is a CITY and needs to act like one. The fact that you think that one of the largest sections of waterfront land in the US should be reserved for recreational/entertainment/commercial use in a city that needs EVERY CENT of possible tax revenue shows you are a freaking dumb ass. Maybe you are Brian Higgins...who knows.
Report this
RonR
Ok...
So let me see if I have this correct.
Stop focusing on the CONSTRUCTION going on and let the DOT spend $50+Million on building their plan. Even though at the current point in construction, all work can be used for the wanted blvd plan. Instead place focus on the Tift Plan and make sure that gets done. Which is years away and which will cost at least another $50+Million. Now IF that ever gets done, in a region not know for getting much done, we can then go back to the DOT for MORE money to take down whey they are spending $50+Million today to build. Only to spend $100+Million MORE to do what should have been done in the first place. All of this in a state that is a couple BILLION in debt.
THAT GOD some people do not get elected!
Report this
KenS
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.
Report this
harry
Some of you folks just crack me up. I love the "facts" that get thrown out as easy as the firtst pitch on opening day. Let's see - take a picture at low volume time to make a point that isn't truthful, state that the thruway added a lane in anticipation of the Southtowns connector (I know you won't find that anywhere else but here - it was due to capacity needs on the mainline itself - as Marv would say "look it up!"), state how simple it is to just leave Fuhrmann Blvd. as it is now - absolutley a statement made by someone with zero engineering knowledge or any other knowledge of what that relly entails. But keep it coming - it's great stuff! Maybe everyone WILL move back to the City of Buffalo - yep, that 3/4 of the metro population that lives beyond the city border... Wait, I forgot - I've heard that the "suburban experiment" is over, better buy any property in the city you can get your hands on, the masses are returning!!!. LMFAO!
Report this
ruserious
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...
Report this
dagner
Please stop pointing to Main St, Williamsville as evidence for how a boulevard will succeed. It will be used AGAINST such a proposal. (I prefer the boulevard design.) Sorry to go tangential with a Billyville discussion, but the ignorant author and posters cite it. Make the case for the lakeside boulevard on its own merits.
[Not a topic for BRO, except to keep it out of a discussion of a waterfront boulevard: The Wmvlle section of Main St/Route 5 endures traffic volume way over its maximum rated capacity of 36,900. Even BRO reports it handles 47,000 vehicles per day. Businesses normally thrive on increased traffic but a threshold has been crossed and the Wmsvlle businesses are suffering from it. This villlage main street is no leisurely drive for shoppers or any other amatuer. It's used as one long ramp to and from the 290/90 - the riders don't stop and shop. The walkability of the area has plummeted. The village is pursuing traffic calming and diversion methods. Left free, the vehicles would find another route, but they've regulated traffic away from obvious alternatives, like Sheridan Drive, by forbidding (and enforcing) travel in that direction on some roads such as Park Club Lane.]
Report this
sonyactivision
The Skyway has only two lanes in each direction. It doesn't take much traffic on such a narrow stretch to jam up. A boulevard could be constructed with four lanes in each direction and easily handle the mix of traffic on Rt.5. The real issue is limited access vs. street grid. A boulevard could have limited access along critical areas where safety concerns and lack of nearby ammenities are present. Otherwise, with synchronized signaling and turn off lanes, a boulevard could move traffic as quickly or even more quickly than the present route. The only other alternative to the traffic headaches described above is to add another span to the Skyway and remove all the bottlenecks along Rt. 5. Anyone in favor of that? I thought so.
Report this
BLONDIE
What happens when you put a NFL stadium on the waterfront or in downtown Buffalo and you took out road capacity?? You will have 6 lanes to use when this project is completed. Not 4 as the single boulevard plans will be. Also the Southtowns are growing...that is the area that seems to be expanding now as Amherst and Williamsville get maxed out. So how about we plan for the future. 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.
Rt. 5 will be a NIGHTMARE once the colleges are back in. Anyone who commutes in the AM on any of our highways knows that summer traffic is much lighter. Oh yea and wait for the first snow storm. How backed up will Rt. 5 and the skyway be then??
Rt. 5 from Hamburg to Buffalo is a speedway everyone goes 55-65 on it or higher. Why would you want that along a park? It is dangerous too.
THAT PICTURE IS SUCH A JOKE, THIS SITE LOST A TON OF CREDIBILITY IN MY EYES TO POST SOMETHING LIKE THAT ON HERE, SO OBVIOUSLY MISLEADING IF YOU TRAVEL ON THIS ROAD!
Report this
BLONDIE
The Main St. comparison is so rediculous. It is residential, you can't change it now. Main St. in Williamsville or even past Bailey is such a mess I hate to drive it and actually will go a longer route to avoid driving it. Accident waiting to happen and annoying. Why would you ever argue that is a good example of what to do? That area grew and the roads there are not meant for the amount of cars on them. It would be a perfect spot for a rail extension.
Report this
oldimpala
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.
Report this
RonR
@KenS
Personal insults, from my perspective, would be calling you things that you are not. Examples would be a D**k head. Since I do not know you, I would not resort to calling you such things. However, based on your comments, I do feel you are a dumbass. It is more of a description of your mindset.
But regardless of our banter, I do think we boiled down one of the root arguments. What is the LONG TERM vision for the Outer Harbor. People like you think it should be the equivalent of another suburban pocket. Maybe some nice track homes, a rite aid and a movie theater mixed in with a community park and a boat launch. People like me think it should resemble a city. You know, because it is IN a city. If people want a suburban lifestyle of recreation/entertainment/commercial WITH SOME RESIDENTIAL, they sure as hell have better options in the area instead of Buffalo. THIS IS MY POINT. Buffalo needs to have what other areas can not offer if it hopes to ever climb out if its hole. This land in any other city with a clue, would be marked for dense development and not another version of Orchard Park or Amherst. Now I am not saying the outer harbor will become this amazing neighborhood overnight. What I am saying is eventually it COULD and it SHOULD!
So because people like you and I want different things for the city and for this VERY LARGE parcel of land, we are NEVER going to agree on the infrastructure to be built out there. All I ask is you think about this. What is better for the city of Buffalo in the long term. If you answer this honestly, you will change your opinion.
@ BLONDIE
It all depends on where you put a new stadium downtown. This is after you answer how the hell does Buffalo keep the Bills and then answer how the hell Buffalo pays for a new stadium. But I will play your game.
Currently, the best location for a downtown stadium is in the 1st ward on the current site of the Perry Projects. This location, if you do not have a map, is right next to the 190. So coming from the North, you would take the 190. Coming from the South, you would take the 190. Coming from West, you would take the 33. Unless you have a vision for Lake Erie to be filled in, there is not much traffic coming from the East or the outer harbor.
I would love for you to explain your theory on how colleges would add a significant volume to the outer harbor traffic. In reality, there are very few places in the area that are better serviced by this section of road compared to the 190 in terms of travel time.
Report this
KenS
RonR...Thanks for clearing the air...blowhard. This is not a personal insult, just a description of your mindset :)
Report this
RonR
KenS
Noun 1. blowhard- a very boastful and talkative person
Noun 1. dumbass- a stupid person; these words are used to express a low opinion of someone's intelligence
Yes...that sounds about right. Thanks for coming out guy.
Report this
MJWorthington
"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.
Report this
mepolo
So many people keep forgetting one thing...that I will remind you of come this winter....the snow down there is unlike anything experienced in any other part of the city. Even comparing it to the waterfront area along the river isn't possible...because the river is protected from the lake winds. The city has difficulty clearing streets now in some areas...imagine how quickly things are going to get cleared that aren't state roads w/ snow continously blowing in from the lake. It's nice to imagine our waterfront like San Francisco's...and for 6 months out of the year it could be...but keep in mind the reality of the other months. btw....not all of us who use these stretches of highway use it to continue on through the city...many of us choose to work in the city, and spend a considerable amount of money supporting city businesses...we just choose to live in areas with a little land around us....I think the city & outlying areas can have a symbiotic relationship...after all...we don't diss those who choose to come and vacation out in the cottages, and spend time at the beaches in our neighborhoods.
Report this
RonR
mepolo.
You make a very good point that the outer harbor will get hit with snow and wind. What you may not see is this is a very good argument to plan and develop the outer harbor as densely as possible. Tight development in the summer leads to warmer temperatures but it also leads to less effect from snow drifts.
The outer harbor will be MUCH MUCH worse off if it is developed according to the DOT plan. The development will be in islands of housing complexes and islands of residential complexes with shared common roads. Since there will be so much space between the buildings, the "lake effect" will be magnified.
If a blvd was laid, a street grid could be planned and the outer harbor could be built out in phases. Similar to how large housing developments are done down south and out west. In the fist 10 years, you "release" just a couple of blocks for development. The city does not sell the parcels of land until there is financing in place to build. Once the first phase is filled out, whenever that happens, the city releases the next phase. As time goes on, the value of each phase increases.
Another aspect to this development style is the shared burden and logical progression of infrastructure. Outside of the main blvd, side roads, sewer, water and power would only be run to the phases that are "live" This makes it more cost effective for development and more cost effective for the city to manage.
Furthermore, something not being considered in the genius plan of people like Ken is the tax burden that will belong to the city if the outer harbor is not developed to its maximum potential. Just look at the east side. All of the streets with 10% of houses on the tax rolls still cost 100% to the city to maintain. The lower the amount of taxable properties out there, the higher the tax burden the city to maintain access year round.
Report this
P525
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
Report this