Metro Expansion

[nicole]

Should the Metro Rail Expand to the Airport and other sites of interest within the region? If so please state which sites in a reply.

yes or no

[WNYresident]

If they expanded the metro to the airport do you think people would go to a downtown hotel versus all the hotels they are building in cheektowaga near the airport and on walden ave?

[300miles]

I voted yes for the airport. I think people would most definetly go to a hotel downtown instead of cheektowaga. There's much more to do. I've had friends stay by the airport that complained how boring "buffalo" was... I had to point out they weren't even in buffalo.

I have to make a comment about this poll though... Could you add UB North Campus? That is much higher on the list than some of the other selections, and it was the original expansion plan anyway.

Also, what is with the "expansion to Chippewa"? The train already goes right by Chippewa! It doesn't need to expand there!

[biker]

As a frequent Metro Rail rider, I say

Absolutely Not!!!

Metro Rail never fulfilled any of its economic projections, even the most basic, ridership.

And now you trot out some half-baked "they'll stay at downtown hotels if we build a subway to downtown.

Spend what, $300 million to support Paul Snyder's Hyatt?

Downtown is a 14.5 minute cab ride from the airport.

Here's a cheaper solution if you want to get people to opt for downtown hotels: Have UMTA pay for all cab rides for anyone who says they're staying at a downtown hotel. Even if it's not true. Just transport them.

[ForestBird]

Much as I like light rail / streetcars, an express bus service from the airport to downtown is something they can do NOW and for very little money. Currently, there are 9 (woo-hoo! a whole NINE) round-trips per day, with the last leaving the airport at 5:04pm. Too bad for the many flights which arrive in the evening, but I guess one could ride on the regular 24 Genesee, through crackland.

Rail or bus to the airport competes with the NFTA's very profitable business of airport parking, so we can't expect much change.

So, extend the subway? Well, a new route, perhaps through some areas where people might actually travel? Maybe. Downtown to the Upper West Side to the North Buffalo shopping area to Kenmore and then to the shopping areas of Sheridan/N.Falls Blvd .... that might work . It could still connect to the current subway, downtown.

[biker]

To me, our LRRT gave us the greatest example of gubmint waste in one stunning example: the Tonawanda Turnout.

The opening of the LRRT was delayed for two years and millions more were spent to create a "turnout" at the LaSalle station for the line to go to the Tonawandas.

Within ten years, the bridges carrying the existing rails to Tonawanda were torn down, making the turnout moot ("mute" in internetese).

[granpabob]

if they expand to the airport that would help people leave the area even faster
we have old railbeds that lead to most of our towns and neighborhoods. many of them connect via downtown terminals. if the metro mail just used what was once a great railroad system. it might be worth it. but if they tear up more of main street or any other street if is foolish

[BuffaloEMT14216]

Biker,

I agree with you about the high cost associated and delays with the Tonawanda Turnout. However, the Rail Bridges you are talking about were not part of the master plan. Those two bridges at Main Street, one Erie and one IRC/Conrail, were torn down where the entrance to LaSalle Park and Ride is now.
Yet, the entire railbed from LaSalle station to the City of Tonawanda was conveniently tore up last summer by the NFTA. The former Conrail bed had laid abandoned there for 30 years, but the NFTA decided now to rip'em up.
I have seen the 1974 LRRT Report that had showed the Metro system covering the Airport, Rich Stadium,UB North, Tonawanda, even Niagara Falls.
Now Buffalo did have a world class streetcar system in the early 1900's up until 1950. The IRC(the smart forerunner to the NFTA), had streetcar lines on every major roadway in Buffalo. Streets like Delaware, Elmwood, Broadway, Genesee, Fillmore, Kensington,Parkside, Grider, Ferry, Main, Clinton, South Park, Hertel, Kenmore, etc. The New York Central Beltline that still circles the city delivered passengers to every major neighborhood. The IRC even had high speed cars, that ran the former trackbed from LaSalle station to Niagara Falls, in turn running streetcar lines up there and the historic Great Gorge route.
Can you imagine? I have an IRC map in my possession from 1939 and it's amazing. The NFTA hitmen would love to burn it and take out anyone with knowledge of a "real" system, not the little train that could.
Cars shared roadways, horses did too back in the day, yet nowadays we need $500,000 studies to determine feasibility. Why can Toronto still do it fine, and they have a population of 3.5 million?
I had an old friend who believes that the NFTA enjoys the stranglehold and the power it's commissioner have over this community. I often thought he was crazy but you know alot of what he said is true.
They own all the waterfront lands, they operate the airports, they control our transportation and future.
I believe the NFTA should expand the Airport Corridor, a line to Ski Country(which has abandoned rail the entire way), a line to Niagara Falls. A line to the Falls would be easy, the trackbed is currently used, but only 6 times a day with Amtrak, other than that it's unused.
They should have kept the lines above ground, they already had trackbed in place on Main Street and every other main throughfare which all have since been ripped up due to the construction ongoing. Will the NFTA ever listen? No. Mr. Meckler and the boys don't care about prosperity. Besides, they are a New York State approved shadow government which means they can do whatever they want, with no overshadowing from the state that birthed them. Got to love NY!

[biker]

I was referring to the bridges over Starin, etc., downstream from the LaSalle station.

Nice history on the rest.

[WNYresident]

Spend what, $300 million to support Paul Snyder's Hyatt?

Downtown is a 14.5 minute cab ride from the airport.

Here's a cheaper solution if you want to get people to opt for downtown hotels: Have UMTA pay for all cab rides for anyone who says they're staying at a downtown hotel. Even if it's not true. Just transport them.


How much is a cab ride from the airport to a downtown hotel?

$300,000,000 / $20 (what ever a ride would be) = 15,000,000 trips.

If I was a tourist I would rather be dropped off right in front of where I'm staying so a cab ride makes more sense.

Anyone have an idea of the actual visitors we get a year into erie county that would have a need to stay downtown?

[biker]

Need to stay downtown. Some (nuts like me) usually try to stay in historically significant, renovated hotels.

BTW-I think we should be big tippers on these free cab rides; the cabbies need a break. So figger on $40.00 per.

That's only good for 7.5 million trips. Should last for 30 years.

[300miles]

You have some valid points on ROI for the airport extension, but you're also overlooking other benefits of it besides just linking the airport to downtown.

It could also link the city to the Galleria and provide more transportation options to the East Side for shopping and jobs and business investment.

Could it also provide a hub from Amtrack station to Metro? (something they cancelled in the BassPro project downtown)

The same route could utilize the Central Terminal, giving it at least a chance in hell for some re-use possibilities. If it were right on the metro, it may be more attractive as an investment.

I'm not entirely sold on the Airport extension yet. But I think completing the original plan to UB North is a no-brainer. They have thousands of students stranded in the Amherst dormitories with no cars and no real nightlife options. If they had an easy link via metro to get to South campus and downtown, they would use it, guarenteed. It's a captive audience.

[crlachepinochet]

Getting from North Campus to downtown isn't really that hard... there's a bus between campuses that lets you off right at South Campus Station. I like the idea of connecting the Galleria, the airport, Central Terminal, etc. It'd be neat to make the airport line and then complete the loop through Williamsville. The Snooze actually did a poll a while ago and showed that people in Amherst would support it.

[300miles]

Yeah, when I was there (a while ago) they had a good bus service between the campuses. At that time I had equal number of classes on South and North campus. Now most undergrads have all their classes on North campus only, so I'm curious if the bus schedule is less frequest now.

But even with a good bus service... you could easily get stuck trying to get home because you missed the last bus or missed the last train. They're 2 independent systems that don't (or didn't at the time) mesh their shedules.

Having one single system with a train that goes all the way from campus to campus to downtown would greatly simplify things and make it more usable.

[biker]

Having one single system with a train that goes all the way from campus to campus to downtown would greatly simplify things and make it more usable.

And you think that'd be worth, say, $400 million and ripping up residential neighborhoods along the Grover Cleveland Highway?

Seriously.

[300miles]

For one, I don't know where the $400 million figure is coming from for one thing, so I can't say whether that's relevent or not. Secondly, there are federal dollars available for transportation projects. Most go to other cities that actually have a good plan and stick to it (unlike here).

It's entirely possible that the high amount of student traffic between North and South campus, plus the traffic of students from North Campus to the city could actually make the extension a financial benefit...

How much is spent every year on the bus system between campuses?

Seriously.

As for the houses... The plans for a rail route between the two campuses was drawn up decades ago. It should be a surprise to no one that eventually something will be built along that route involving emminent domain.

[biker]

You're a scary statist.

Since this will never happen, I won't waste any invectives.

[WNYresident]

It could also link the city to the Galleria and provide more transportation options to the East Side for shopping and jobs and business investment.

Isn't there busses that come to and from the city now to the galleria?

If the city is supposed to be walkable why do we need the NFTA anyways? :)

[DelawareDistrict]

Public transportation, in general, is a money pit. LRRT is an even bigger money pit. If you really want to make improvements in this area, you need to have government spending less taxpayers' money overall, not more!

[300miles]

Isn't there busses that come to and from the city now to the galleria?
Yeah. I think it took some kid getting hit by a car to force them to allow a bus stop near their sacred mall.

There are benefits to a train over buses. It's a direct route that makes less stops and doesn't get bogged down in traffic so it's always on time and there's less confusion from switching buses. The nfta bus schedules and zones are not the easiest things to comprehend... whereas a fixed train route is pretty clear. (may be more of a problem with the NFTA than a problem with actual buses though.) Trains take much more investment obviously so the routes should only go where there would be very high ridership to make it worthwhile. I think the UB campus route would get very high ridership because students are the exact type of people that want to go downtown... and they're all located in one specific area. An ideal environment for a train.

You're a scary statist. Since this will never happen, I won't waste any invectives.
Once in a while you could try joining a conversation without turning it into a pissing match.

[WNYresident]

Yeah. I think it took some kid getting hit by a car to force them to allow a bus stop near their sacred mall.

That was a sad accident. All in all though there's a bus that get's people from the city to the mall. Is that bus jam packed where there's call for a more efficient way to get people from the city to the mall now?


There are benefits to a train over buses. It's a direct route that makes less stops and doesn't get bogged down in traffic so it's always on time and there's less confusion from switching buses.

But what about the people on the way to the place they are going? If a train doesn't stop how are they supposed to use it? Take a bus to where the train starts and then get on the train? Go to the mall, go back on the train and then take a bus back home? I took a bus to highschool/college and can't remember a bus ever really being late.. ever.

The nfta bus schedules and zones are not the easiest things to comprehend... whereas a fixed train route is pretty clear.

Once our school systems/parents teach the children better that shouldn't be an issue. I was able to use a bus when I had to go to school and i was just some schmuk in lovejoy.

(may be more of a problem with the NFTA than a problem with actual buses though.) Trains take much more investment obviously so the routes should only go where there would be very high ridership to make it worthwhile.

If you took the very busiest bus route currently would if be enough to support a train? EVEN if you doubled the rider ship would the revenue be enough to support it?



I think the UB campus route would get very high ridership because students are the exact type of people that want to go downtown... and they're all located in one specific area. An ideal environment for a train.



So in your guess-i-mation what would be the top ridership from the UB campus to downtown?

[300miles]

All good points. I don't have any numbers.

I think at a minimum they need to make the bus system more user-friendly. Finding out which bus you need to take, and how to transfer, and what the fee is going between zones is confusing for someone not accustomed to using NFTA.

They could get more bus riders if they just simplified their system somehow.

[DelawareDistrict]

All good points. I don't have any numbers.

I think at a minimum they need to make the bus system more user-friendly. Finding out which bus you need to take, and how to transfer, and what the fee is going between zones is confusing for someone not accustomed to using NFTA.

They could get more bus riders if they just simplified their system somehow.
All of the information is on the nfta website and available from any bus driver.

They have simplified the system, you can purchase an all day pass for $3.50 on any bus and travel unlimited to any zone for the whole day. For $6.00 you can purchase a weekend pass that gives you the same benefits all day Saturday and Sunday.

[BuffaloEMT14216]

I was referring to the bridges over Starin, etc., downstream from the LaSalle station.

Nice history on the rest.

Those bridges that crossed Starin Avenue, Delaware, Elmwood, etc were part of the old Erie Lackawanna Belt Line. That old railbed was never put into the mix as part of the Tonawanda Line. The Tonawanda Line was an old NYC/IRC/Conrail right of way that stretched initially from the Central Terminal to the mainline which goes to Niagara Falls. The bed has been ripped up as of last year . Which I agree it was stupid to rip up any of these trackbeds, however from family members that work on the railroad,New York State was killing Conrail on land taxes. The decision was made to take down the rail line, bridges, infrastructure,etc. Sad too since we had such a wonderful setup that could have been used.
I think if we had street level lines run of Main Street in the Cobblestone District, loop down to the Erie Basin Marina, over to the new Casino area, back down Main Street. I think even just that little "expansion" would be great.

[leftWNYbecauseofBS]

I voted yes for the airport. I think people would most definetly go to a hotel downtown instead of cheektowaga. There's much more to do. I've had friends stay by the airport that complained how boring "buffalo" was... I had to point out they weren't even in buffalo.

I have to make a comment about this poll though... Could you add UB North Campus? That is much higher on the list than some of the other selections, and it was the original expansion plan anyway.



The UB line would be nice as all the metro would have to do is go straight. Take a look at a map on google. I think that would take UB to the next level as they could really make it one campus.
As for going to the airport, that is a harder call. I am someone who travels 2 weeks every month. It is unlikely I would spend 45 minutes on the metro from the airport to downtown. The only way I could see it work is if there was an express that went straight downtown or sinking the metro under the old AUD and using the Aud as the downtown hub. Create an East bound line that runs from the Aud to the Central terminal to the airport.
If you were to do this, you could make the area around the CT a mid town hub. You could also create a light rail from the CT to the Falls and to Rochester. There are talks about creating a Bullet train from Boston to NYC. Buffalo should do the same with Rochester and the falls. MAKE WNY A METRO AREA.
If this were to happen, create a 3rd line from the Aud hub to the outer harbor and build a new stadium for the Bills. Having the ability to draw people from 2 major populations would for sure keep them in town. I never understood why is placed in OP.
Then create a 4/5 line that run north from the Aud up Delaware and Elmwood to Buff State.

The reason development has not happened along the current line is it goes nowhere. For a metro system to work you have to reach multiple parts of the area. Too bad the NFTA is in charge.....

Anyways, that is my idea on it.

[leftWNYbecauseofBS]

As a frequent Metro Rail rider, I say

Absolutely Not!!!

Metro Rail never fulfilled any of its economic projections, even the most basic, ridership.

And now you trot out some half-baked "they'll stay at downtown hotels if we build a subway to downtown.

Spend what, $300 million to support Paul Snyder's Hyatt?

Downtown is a 14.5 minute cab ride from the airport.

Here's a cheaper solution if you want to get people to opt for downtown hotels: Have UMTA pay for all cab rides for anyone who says they're staying at a downtown hotel. Even if it's not true. Just transport them.

Biker, it is not just about the hotels. Hell who visits Buffalo unless they have family. It is about movement from one part of the city to another. I see you point but this is all a dream anyways. Have some fun with it. :)

[leftWNYbecauseofBS]

Spend what, $300 million to support Paul Snyder's Hyatt?



Biker, your numbers are off. It costs about 86 million (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gotthard_Base_Tunnel) per mile to create a subway. With that figure here are the distances if we were to create a downtown hub

UB north to South - 3.5 miles
Aud to CT to Airport - 10 miles
Aud to Del Ave to Buff State - 3.8 miles
Buff State - Elmwood to Auf 2.53 (use some Del track)
Aud to Outer Harbor - 3.4 miles

Total Miles - 23.2
Total Cost - 2 Billion (HA HA)

Like I said. It is nice to think about


FYI this is for all subway. Using light rail would be about 15 million a mile.

[crlachepinochet]

How much is spent every year on the bus system between campuses?


Cognisa Transportation has a 5 year, $11M contract to run the inter- as well as intra-campus buses.

[biker]

Biker, your numbers are off. It costs about 86 million (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gotthard_Base_Tunnel) per mile to create a subway. With that figure here are the distances if we were to create a downtown hub

UB north to South - 3.5 miles
Aud to CT to Airport - 10 miles
Aud to Del Ave to Buff State - 3.8 miles
Buff State - Elmwood to Auf 2.53 (use some Del track)
Aud to Outer Harbor - 3.4 miles

Total Miles - 23.2
Total Cost - 2 Billion (HA HA)

Like I said. It is nice to think about


FYI this is for all subway. Using light rail would be about 15 million a mile.

Well, let's see how I arrived at my number: I took the number of mile markers on the Kensington times the average temperature in August divided by Pi times the number of chicken wings I can eat in one hour

I guessed! I pulled the number out of my ...

Well, you get the idea. If it cost $500 million to build the original, so I guess $300 million.

So using your numbers: 23.2 miles times $15 million per LRRT mile=$348 million.

I say CEFGW.

[leftWNYbecauseofBS]

Well, let's see how I arrived at my number: I took the number of mile markers on the Kensington times the average temperature in August divided by Pi times the number of chicken wings I can eat in one hour

I guessed! I pulled the number out of my ...

Well, you get the idea. If it cost $500 million to build the original, so I guess $300 million.

So using your numbers: 23.2 miles times $15 million per LRRT mile=$348 million.

I say CEFGW.


Funny reply. I based my numbers on the construction of the Gotthard Base Tunnel. Which was in the link. It cost 6,428 billion and is 153.4KM long. I then converted 153.4km to miles and divided that into the total cost. That number is 86 million. So that is how I got the number. But I was laughing my ass off at your reply. Very funny.

Either way, it is all a pipe dream. It could cost a million and it would never get done.

Still fun as hell to talk about. When I am bored I play with google earth. Moving this and building that. I only wish there was a sim city/ google earth combo. That way we could all show what the city could be.

[granpabob]

I'm not entirely sold on the Airport extension yet. But I think completing the original plan to UB North is a no-brainer. They have thousands of students stranded in the Amherst dormitories with no cars and no real nightlife options. If they had an easy link via metro to get to South campus and downtown, they would use it, guarenteed. It's a captive audience.[/QUOTE]

yah I feel real sorry for these kids they cant get down town to get drunk we have to spend millions to help them party. the hell with all the poor who cant eat and all the people leaving town because of the high taxes . we haver to spend more to help these people college kids get bombed

[crlachepinochet]

So the total UB bus system costs ~$2M per year. You have to really think about whether or not those hundreds of millions of dollars of difference is worth it...

[300miles]

yah I feel real sorry for these kids they cant get down town to get drunk we have to spend millions to help them party. the hell with all the poor who cant eat and all the people leaving town because of the high taxes . we haver to spend more to help these people college kids get bombed
You need to start thinking economics, grandpabob.

It's not about helping the kids drink and party... it's about adding business to the city. The city would benefit from their dollars. And some of them would definitely think about living in the city if there were an easy quick transportation link from downtown to UB. That could result in more residents and more spending money into the city economy instead of spending it on the Campus Dorms.

Everyone always complains that putting UB in Amherst was a mistake. But finding ways to better integrate the campus with the city would balance that.

Initial design and planning for the Amherst Campus and planning for the metro rail occurred around the same time (1960's) I'm sure that part of the reasoning for choosing amherst was that it would still be linked to the city via rail.

That never happened.

Isn't the $300 million figure for building a subway to North? I thought they had planned the North Campus leg to be above ground trolley. wouldn't that be more like $60 million?

Doesn't seem that unreachable. Heck, we're throwing that much money at Bass Pro like it's confetti!

[ForestBird]

For the North Campus leg, $60million sounds about right... IF it isn't subjected to the same Mafia "cost over-runs" as the original subway. )
"Lead Pipe Joe" is now concentrating on the $100,000 per week pizza biz, so maybe construction is safe again? ) :)

[biker]

$60 mill?

What are youse guys gonna do, lay track bed and rails through the back yards of Eggertsville???

[leftWNYbecauseofBS]

You need to start thinking economics, grandpabob.

It's not about helping the kids drink and party... it's about adding business to the city. The city would benefit from their dollars. And some of them would definitely think about living in the city if there were an easy quick transportation link from downtown to UB. That could result in more residents and more spending money into the city economy instead of spending it on the Campus Dorms.


GREAT POINT. I never looked at it that way. Housing could be spread along the entire line and be "sold" to UB students.

[WNYresident]

Sold to UB students?

[biker]

I think he means "selling" the concept of living along the line.

[WNYresident]

and where do they live now? What would you do with those empty apartments?

it's like the concept of IDA's that move businesses from one town to another. You fill one distressed building with a new business but leave an empty one behind

[leftWNYbecauseofBS]

and where do they live now? What would you do with those empty apartments?

it's like the concept of IDA's that move businesses from one town to another. You fill one distressed building with a new business but leave an empty one behind

WNYresident I think you need to read more before you make comments. Read this (http://www.theamherstrecord.com/local/local_story_241155302.html)
it is an article about how UB needs more housing. Amherst does not want student housing and the city needs it. The University of Buffalo should benefit all of the area, not just Amherst. By allowing students to go to school in Amherst and commute from all the way downtown is a huge selling point.
When I was in school, all I did was spend money and work a part time job to make it. These kids can be shopping downtown, eating downtown and ENJOYING downtown. So when the tell people where they go to school it is Buffalo not Amherst.

AND I AM A FORMER AMHERST RESIDENT who hopes to move back.

[biker]

This one might be a bit different.

They've built some sudent housing and I think they plan more in the future. Apartments, not dormitories.

There may be a unique aspect to UB. I believe their Faculty/Student Association owned land out there. A holdover from when UB was private. I think they were going to build a golf course.

So there may be some pseudo profit motive in development activities on campus. Activities in direct competition with private developers, whose business taxes support UB.

So, stopping further construction of such apartments may result in demand for housing along the line, without harming private investors.

[leftWNYbecauseofBS]

Found a great site. If anyone is interested in the metro it is a must read.



www.citizenstransit.org

[leftWNYbecauseofBS]

MYTHS ABOUT METRO RAIL

Despite the abovementioned advantages of improved transit service, Metro Rail expansion has been hindered by a variety of myths.

MYTH 1: "WHAT WE'VE DONE SO FAR IS A FAILURE."
FACT: For a system of its limited size, Metro Rail has been very successful. Metro Rail ridership is higher than ridership of equally small rail systems in other cities. For example, Sacramento has three times as much rail mileage as we do and carries two-thirds as many riders.

MYTH 2: "ANYTHING MORE WE DO WILL BE A FAILURE, BECAUSE MIDDLE-CLASS COMMUTERS WILL NEVER USE PUBLIC TRANSIT."
FACT: Where transit service is good, people use it. At one end of the spectrum, cities with excellent rail service, like New York, have higher transit ridership than Buffalo (over 50% of New Yorkers use a train or bus to get to work). By contrast, cities with even less transit service than Buffalo (including Sunbelt cities like Houston) have even lower ridership than Buffalo. It logically follows that Americans will use public transit if it is convenient for them.

MYTH 3: "BECAUSE ALL NEW JOBS ARE IN THE SUBURBS, WE DON'T NEED PUBLIC TRANSIT ANY MORE."
FACT: In fact, public transit is more necessary now than ever, for two reasons. First, welfare reform will force the carless poor to go to work, and we need public transit to get them to work. Second, the growing number of older Americans will increase the number of people who are physically unable to drive.

MYTH 4: "BUFFALO IS ALREADY SO SPREAD OUT THAT PUBLIC TRANSIT IS INEFFICIENT."
FACT: Buffalo is more densely populated than cities with higher transit ridership. For example, the city of Buffalo is twice as densely populated as the city of Atlanta -- yet Atlanta's transit ridership is higher (about 20% of city residents use public transit to get to work, as opposed to about 15% of Buffalo residents). It logically follows that if our mass transit service equalled that of Atlanta, our ridership would be higher.

MYTH 5: "WE CAN NEVER BRING METRO RAIL TO THE SUBURBS BECAUSE SUBURBANITES ARE AGAINST IT."
FACT: In a WGRZ-TV telephone poll, 80% of metro area residents stated that they favor Metro Rail expansion. And in a 1994 Goldhaber Associates poll, 59.6% of Amherst residents endorsed expansion of Metro Rail into Amherst.

MYTH #6: "THERE'S NO POINT IN SUBSIDIZING METRO RAIL BECAUSE IT DOESN'T PAY FOR ITSELF."
FACT: This argument overlooks two facts. First, almost no other government service is expected to pay for itself -- not food stamps, not public housing, not the Pentagon. Second, mass transit doesn't just benefit the riders who pay for it: it benefits the public as a whole by reducing pollution, traffic, and welfare dependency. It follows that the public as a whole should help pay for it.

MYTH #7: "BUSES ARE MORE EFFICIENT THAN RAIL SERVICE, SO LET'S END THE RAIL SERVICE AND BRING BACK THE BUSES."
FACT: Metro Rail has consistently carried about 25% more passengers than did the buses, and has maintained ridership to a greater extent than buses. Moreover, trains cut the bus travel time in half, adhere more regularly to their timetable, and are more dependable in bad weather.

MYTH #8: "HIGHWAYS ARE MORE POPULAR AND EFFECTIVE NATION-WIDE THAN MASS TRANSIT."
FACT: click here to hear otherwise!Page 1 Page 2

[DelawareDistrict]

Truth about the metro rail.
Pickrell reports that it went 61 percent
over budget and carries less than a third of the anticipated
riders. Transit has not only lost market share
in Buffalo, it has lost both transit commuters and total
transit riders.
And the taxpayers pick up the tab . . .

Great Rail Disasters: The Impact of Rail Transit on Urban Livability (http://www.reason.org/ps317.pdf)

[leftWNYbecauseofBS]

Truth about the metro rail.

And the taxpayers pick up the tab . . .

Great Rail Disasters: The Impact of Rail Transit on Urban Livability (http://www.reason.org/ps317.pdf)



I looked over the report. A lot of detail and VERY ONE SIDED. I looks like to show how every rail is a failure. Including NYC. So because of that, I do not put much trust in the numbers.

My political science professor told me once, our economy is run by the decimal point. All one administration has to do to lower taxes or raise them in regards to the living poor is to change the definition what what you call poor.

The current metro system is not perfect. A lot of the financial burden comes from the cost overruns from construction. That is not the metro's fault. Also, the current metro is only a section of what it was supposed to be. That is like building only the 1st floor of a 2 story home and wondering why there is no resale value.

[biker]

A lot of the financial burden comes from the cost overruns from construction. That is not the metro's fault.

Of course it was. It was their project.

This complete abdication of responsiblity is why there is widespread scepticism that any public project can be run well. Do you know how to spell "Big Dig".

The Circle of Life in the public sector: some unaccountable, unelected authority secures funding for a project and the unions pile in, feeding like hyeans on a downed elephant.

[speaker]

.. Also, the current metro is only a section of what it was supposed to be. That is like building only the 1st floor of a 2 story home and wondering why there is no resale value.

Exactly right. If it was completed everyone would be extolling its virtues.
The UB North campus was built in the wrong place, a fact well recognized now. light rail could be some damage control. Buffalo needs the vitality of the young.
Maybe I can find a diagram of the original plans for the rail. Would've benefitted all.

[300miles]

I looked over the report. A lot of detail and VERY ONE SIDED. I looks like to show how every rail is a failure. Including NYC. So because of that, I do not put much trust in the numbers.
I didn't read the whole report, just the summary, but I saw some issues with it too.

It says all the growth cities have no rail while the declining regions do have rail, implying that rail is somehow responsible for our decline and the lack or rail is responsible for their boom. That kind of reasoning seems completely unprovable.

And that doesn't explain why NYC with all it's rail is the only growing city of NYS, while the other cities of NY with much less rail are declining.

I'm sure there a better explanation reading the whole report, but the summary doesn't get it off to a good start.

[ForestBird]

Historical tidbit: The first trolley line from Buffalo to Niagara Falls, which involved connecting tracks from Niagara St via Tonawanda/Military in Buffalo with tracks at the outskirts of N.Falls, took how long to build?

Using hand labor, horses, and wagons : 113 days !

Today, it would be 20 years before construction could even begin.

[leftWNYbecauseofBS]

I didn't read the whole report, just the summary, but I saw some issues with it too.

It says all the growth cities have no rail while the declining regions do have rail, implying that rail is somehow responsible for our decline and the lack or rail is responsible for their boom. That kind of reasoning seems completely unprovable.

And that doesn't explain why NYC with all it's rail is the only growing city of NYS, while the other cities of NY with much less rail are declining.

I'm sure there a better explanation reading the whole report, but the summary doesn't get it off to a good start.


I do not think a black and white parallel can be drawn between growing areas and lack of mass transit. I would bet that growing areas have less taxes, less financial obligations(state pensions) and more land to develop.

Buffalo has plenty of land to develop but it would cost more to clean it up than to develop.

[boomeriam]

"MYTH 5: "WE CAN NEVER BRING METRO RAIL TO THE SUBURBS BECAUSE SUBURBANITES ARE AGAINST IT."
FACT: In a WGRZ-TV telephone poll, 80% of metro area residents stated that they favor Metro Rail expansion. And in a 1994 Goldhaber Associates poll, 59.6% of Amherst residents endorsed expansion of Metro Rail into Amherst."

You do realize you are quoting a 12 year old poll ? Do Amherst residents want the extension now? Oh I forgot there has not been a poll in twelve years. :D It is all a pipe dream to think that this area would do something right for a change. And we keep putting the same people in office,we the voters are the real morons, :mad:

[leftWNYbecauseofBS]

Of course it was. It was their project.

This complete abdication of responsiblity is why there is widespread scepticism that any public project can be run well. Do you know how to spell "Big Dig".

The Circle of Life in the public sector: some unaccountable, unelected authority secures funding for a project and the unions pile in, feeding like hyeans on a downed elephant.


The project and the union are not one in the same. I say put it out for international bid. Hell if it were to ever happen, which it wouldn't, I would have no problem if not a single WNY worked on the project. Bold but here is my case.

The ammount of money that would be given to WNY via jobs would be signifiantly less that the cost to WNY if the project was done by a union firm and the NFTA.

[biker]

That's not how they figure the economics.

Here's their calculus.

This public sector project will bring money and jobs to WNY only during the construction phase.

Because its actual operation will be a money loser, just like all the rest.

And their calculus is correct.

[leftWNYbecauseofBS]

That's not how they figure the economics.

Here's their calculus.

This public sector project will bring money and jobs to WNY only during the construction phase.

Because its actual operation will be a money loser, just like all the rest.

And their calculus is correct.


This thread is slow so I am going to post some great content. I found it here (http://ribaulo.tripod.com/metro.html)

[leftWNYbecauseofBS]

The Buffalo Metro Rail

Are you sure you know the whole story?

The city of Buffalo, New York has consistently suffered from bad publicity and the persistent roadblocks of a bureaucratic system. From the Blizzard of 1977 to the Buffalo Bills streak of lost superbowls, there are many events that reflect these issues. Spanning these two events has been the controversial and continual struggle of the Niagara Frontier Transit Authority's (NFTA) Metro rail, a light rail rapid transit system (LRRT). The LRRT was to transform the city of Buffalo into a booming metropolis that would enjoy the conveniences and economic benefits of moving large numbers of people efficiently and ecologically. The Buffalo Metro Rail would be just what was needed to revitalize downtown. The problems of attaining this goal surfaced right from the beginning. The NFTA found out that they must also be able to leap tall hurdles, deflect scathing accusations, and see into the future of Western New York with accuracy.

More than 170,000 households in Greater Buffalo do not have a car (LaKamp A1,6). For those who do have a vehicle, fighting rush-hour traffic, the cost of downtown parking, and the cost of operating a car are detrimental, both physically and mentally. NFTA has spent millions of dollars on consultants and studies in an attempt to fill the needs of Buffalo citizens and improve the public transportation ridership in this city with little success. The key to improving the quality of life in the City of Buffalo is improving how its people get around. Public transportation will be the catalyst for improving the entire area if it is efficient and effective.

The city of Buffalo and the NFTA have demonstrated how bureaucracies can impede progress from the inception of the Rapid Transit. The system had its problems from the beginning with the initial contract bidding. Federal and State regulations, in addition to restrictions set by the Urban Mass Transportation Administration (UMTA), dictated that minority contractors must be awarded 12.2 percent of the work bid out for the project (Dibble A21). This is a standard clause for public works projects that is based on population information. The NFTA has been in litigation and scrutinized for its blatant disregard of these policies and for the way that it conducted the bid process. One of the contractors that was awarded part of the project was initially listed as a minority contractor and was later reassigned as a non-minority contractor with no explanation regarding the misrepresentation. One local contractor, VanWert-Snyder-Sklarsky-Rowland of Tonawanda, submitted a bid that was far below the bid ultimately accepted with no explanation whatsoever of the procedures used by the NFTA. This project was to create hundreds of construction and engineering jobs that would be a boon for Buffalo area businesses. It was so large that it even dwarfed the "famous hydropower installations at Niagara Falls" according to the NFTA ("Metro History"). Paul H. VanWert of VanWert-Snyder-Sklarsky-Rowland states that "Only three local firms got subcontracts" (qtd. in Dibble A21). Another contractor, Walter L. Jones Corp., submitted a bid that was two-thirds the cost of the accepted bid. This irregularity would have been acceptable if the contract was for construction or design that required extensive experience in rail or tunnel construction, but according to the Buffalo Evening News, the bid was for a simple cut-and-cover operation ($16M Suit A31). These conflicts and unfair bidding practices overshadowed the positive aspects of the rail system from its infancy.

The bidding procedures were far from the only complication in the beginning of the Metro Rail Project. There were also significant changes in the design of the rail. In the original plans, Phase I was to be an eleven mile stretch from the Memorial Auditorium through SUNY Buffalo's South Campus and ending at SUNY Buffalo's North Campus. The Main Street Stations were to draw large numbers of the downtown workforce; the University District (LaSalle and South Campus stations) was to draw from a population base of approximately 47,000 residents; and at the far north side, the North Campus alone was to draw a student population of 27,000. Phase II was to extend from South Campus to the Tonawandas. In an application for deletion to UMTA, Phase I was trimmed down to exclude the LaSalle Station, the Tonawanda Turnout that would facilitate the continuance to the Tonawandas, and to completely stop at South Campus excluding the University District and all of Amherst and the Tonawandas. The NFTA's stated reason for the deletion was that additional funds were needed to make improvements in the construction and design of the downtown pedestrian mall that ran over-budget. The NFTA then proceeded to switch gears again and re-apply to UMTA for more funds to reinstate the LaSalle Station and the Tonawanda Turnout after protests from a very angry public. The vocal University District Councilwoman Rosemarie LoTempio, at a meeting in September of '82, said "We're going to march on UMTA if we have to and we're going to be heard" (qtd. in Dibble B1). In response to the Councilwoman and the angry public that agreed with her, the NFTA revised their application for funding by amending $26.4 million to their Phase I funding application to UMTA. The numerous changes throughout the construction of Phase I were another contribution to the black cloud that has hung over the Metro Rail Project.

The revision of the funding application to UMTA was only a glimpse into what the future would bring to the Metro Rail System. Phase I had been almost cut in half: down to 6.2 miles from the initial eleven miles, leaving Amherst in limbo. Phase II was to start at the Tonawanda Turnout and continue north just across the Erie Canal in North Tonawanda. The next phase in the project was just labeled as future possibilities: flanking the city along the waterfront to the north and through South Buffalo and Cheektowaga to the south. There have been continuing discussions, planning, and funding meetings for all of the options that were tabled in the midst of the first phase. The most promising of these options was an offer by Edward F. Michalik of Adrian Development, a minority owned company, based in Denver. Robert McCarthy of The Buffalo News states, "A private developer is offering to finance, design and construct Metro Rail extensions to Amherst . . . then lease the completed system back to the [NFTA]" (B4). On its face, this offer was a great idea. According to McCarthy, the project would have been completed in time for the University Games of 1993 creating a substantial short-term source of revenue for the NFTA (B4). In the long run, this project would have given 27,000 students and the residents of Amherst access to the rail and significantly reduced traffic congestion in the University District and the I-290. The NFTA, however, decided that this option was not feasible due to the long-term lease payments that would be incurred. If we check the math they used to make their decision it would raise several questions as to the real reason they declined. Adrian Development may not have been the right company for the job, but the NFTA dismissed the entire idea along with the proposing developer. This is yet another hurdle that the NFTA did not clear well on its road to the rail system.

The Metro Rail faces severe roadblocks that continually impede its progress. One of the largest obstacles to improvement of the NFTA's Rapid Transit is the consistent refusal by surrounding townships to support, financially and publicly, the need to expand the rail system to its full potential. The two branches that are most questionable are the Tonawanda and Amherst lines. Both of these extensions would serve large numbers of suburban populations who are currently complaining about the rush-hour traffic of Interstate 190, an inbound toll road that connects the Tonawandas to downtown Buffalo via the Youngman Expressway (I-290). Town of Tonawanda Supervisor Ronald H. Moline states, "The Town Board would not be inclined to help fund the extension" (qtd. in McNeil E7). Representatives of the Board claim that the town does not have the revenues necessary to contribute to the project, despite the large number of their constituents that would be able to fully utilize this branch. Town of Amherst Supervisor Daniel J. Ward also opposes the extension to the North Campus of the University of Buffalo but for different reasons. Supervisor Ward states "The [Town of Amherst] board does not . . . [feel] that both the town and the region need the rail line extended from the South Campus of the University at Buffalo to the Amherst Campus" (Ward C2). Supervisor Ward is adamant that his constituents elected him on the basis that he supports Amherst's planned growth. A Rapid Transit infiltration would destroy any control that Amherst currently has over its own destiny. These two towns are a stumbling block for the NFTA's plans for completing and expanding the current rail system.

In addition to community objections, the NFTA also faces hindrances due to its own decision-making and political skills. The NFTA somehow continues to experience the same ineptitude from different combinations of board members and directors year after year. Councilwoman Rosemarie LoTempio, vocal advocate of the Rapid Transit, wishing to speak at an NFTA board meeting was told "It's not on the agenda. This is a meeting, not a hearing" by James H. Wolford, acting NFTA chairman (qtd. in Dibble A1). Mrs. LoTempio then responded "That means we're being given a chance to meet with you only after the fact of your action" (qtd. in A1).

The NFTA doesn't even listen to its own advice. A proposal in September of 1990 for the Tonawanda expansion using second-hand trolley cars from Cleveland, according to The Buffalo News, "was rejected 3-1 by the NFTA's Capital and Planning Committee" (Anzalone C1). Richard T. Swist, former NFTA Director, states "We have 12 old Cleveland trolleys that we can refurbish and run into the Tonawandas" (qtd. in Levy C1). Even after their own committee refused the proposal to purchase the trolley cars, the NFTA bought them and put them in storage for a rainy day. This persistent practice of not listening to public sentiment, professional judgement, or even their own committee findings continues to be a hindrance to progress on this issue.

In order to avoid further deterioration of the Rapid Transit, the NFTA must also deal with their image problem. According to Harold McNeil of The Buffalo News, "Local governments' unwillingness to contribute to the extension is a barometer of public sentiment" (E7). Lewis Harriman, chairman of The Citizens Rapid Transit Committee, says of Niagara County Commissioner of Public Works Donald Smith, who sits on the Niagara Frontier Transportation Committee on behalf of the Niagara County Legislature, "[Donald Smith] has always been the archenemy of any rail development" (qtd. in Cardinale C1). Mr. Harriman also states:

[leftWNYbecauseofBS]

It is shameful to have invested a half billion dollars in a rail line to reach a billion-dollar campus and rest content that they never be joined, thus substantially wasting an enormous taxpayer investment. Furthermore, such irresponsibility leaving half a railroad in place tends to justify the unthinking critics of both projects who complain of their cost-effectiveness. (C3)

Mr. Harriman's words reflect the sentiment of a large portion of the Greater Buffalo population. Half a railroad does not a Rapid Transit make. If the NFTA had completed even one of the extensions, making the rail useful to a respectable percentage of the area's population, there would be more support for further expansion. In addition to many other roadblocks the NFTA is encountering, the image of this road to nowhere contributes to the unwillingness of the general public to support any further projects for the LRRT.

The NFTA, despite decreasing population and ridership, has made attempts to solve its public transportation problems and failed. One proposed attempt to improve the NFTA is the hublink program. The hublink program is a device that will coordinate express bus, van, carpool, and other modes of transportation to feed in and out of the Rapid Transit system (Collison B4). On the surface, this seems like an ideal solution to improving public transportation and ridership of the rail system, but, taking a closer look, there has to be a reason for people to use the system instead of their cars. People without cars are already forced to use public transportation. The NFTA needs to tap into the large numbers of people that have cars but would find the Metro convenient and economical. The combined cost of parking, fuel, and depreciation of the family car is not high enough in Buffalo for the NFTA's monthly flash pass to provide substantial savings. New bus schedules fail to solve anything unless ridership is significant enough to reduce traffic congestion on the highways they travel (Harriman C3). The least attractive feature of this program is the amount of time it would take to actually make the commute. After a one hour bus trip to work while his car was in for repairs, Gary Willis, a city-to-suburb commuter, says, "If I can get there in 10 minutes by driving, I'm not going to take the bus" (LaKamp A1, 6). Why would any commuter want to spend three to six times longer getting to work on a bus, while fighting the same amount of traffic, just to link up with a 6.4 mile rail system?

In addition to the hublink program, the NFTA has also proposed a Tonawanda Rail corridor that would use current right-of-way rail lines. The Tonawanda proposal consists of using trolley cars that were purchased in 1990. These trolley cars are currently mothballed waiting for extensive refurbishing that would prepare them for use on standard rail lines. The worst part of this program is that it would tie into the existing Metro Rail at LaSalle Station where commuters would have to transfer from the above ground trolleys to the underground rail (Levy C1). This transfer would be a significant inconvenience to riders who could have taken their cars to work and be better utilizing their time.

The proposed Amherst section presents many of the same problems as the Tonawanda Trolley line. The Amherst line is proposed as an underground continuation of the current system, continuing where the earlier project left off, at the South Campus station. The Amherst proposal has the added ingredient of being classified as a pork-belly politics project according to the newest federal mandates regarding public works projects, because the economic benefits of the project exceeds the transportation benefits. Both of these corridors face the same issues as the hublink program. The current time and cost of commuting from the Tonawandas or Amherst is small in comparison to the time that it takes to use the Rapid Transit and its proposed coordinating systems.

Another attempt the NFTA has made involves substantial service cuts that it felt would make significant cuts in expenses. The NFTA cut the frequency of its rail schedule along with its bus route system from 1993-1997 by 6% (LaKamp A1,6). During this time frame, ridership decreased by 16%. The City of Milwaukee, a similar sized transit system, increased its service schedule by 13% and was able to keep its loss of ridership down to 5% despite the decline in population (A1,6). This is obviously not the way to improve financial stability. The decrease in expenses was not large enough to compensate for the decrease in fare revenues. In addition to fare revenues, many of the federal subsidies that the NFTA relies on to support its deficit budget are based on ridership statistics. With a large, disproportionate drop in fare revenues when service expenses are cut, the NFTA must strive to avoid any actions that will cause ridership to drop.

The key to improving public transportation in Buffalo revolves around improving the effectiveness of the Metro Rail. The most significant solution to this transportation crisis is instituting the Bus Rapid Transit (BRT). BRT is a simplified, bargain solution that will satisfy the transportation needs of the Greater Buffalo area. This system consists of linking major suburban populations with newly created roadways that are used only for buses. Commuters would be able to drive or walk a short distance to the local BRT station and board a bus that would take them, non-stop or with few stops, to the nearest Metro Rail station. This would substantially increase the total ridership of the Metro Rail by efficiently linking inbound and outbound commuters with the entire NFTA system, without the large capital and operating expenditures that would be incurred with other proposed options (Collison B4). Bus Rapid Transit is the least expensive method of expanding public transportation services (Wagner B8). The NFTA would use current bus and para-transit vehicles, depending on the actual ridership in the area served. The only capital expenditure would be building the busways. Construction of busways would be very economical because the NFTA already owns miles of unused railroad tracks that would be quick and easy to convert. Increasing ridership without a proportional increase in operating expenses with the BRT is a key to making the Metro Rail an effective and efficient transportation organization.

In addition to the Bus Rapid Transit, the NFTA must respond to consumer demands by servicing the needs of two underutilized markets: theatre patrons and carless households. With the revitalization of the theatre district, the NFTA needs to encourage suburban patrons of the arts and other downtown events to park-and-ride on the weekend. The schedule must run outbound as late as midnight, leaving plenty of time to stop for a cappuccino after the theatre and to still catch the last train home. Carless citizens who have a dire need for transportation to work, healthcare, and church or community centers must also find the Rapid Transit an effective solution to their transportation dilemmas. The NFTA must use need-based route scheduling to respond to the demands of the carless riders in urban areas if they are to increase their farebox revenues with any sense of regularity. According to Mark Pritchard of The Community Transportation Association of America, "Most human service agencies, hospitals, and, increasingly, private businesses all operate fleets of vehicles for passenger transportation" (2). The existence of these fleets is a red flag for the NFTA that indicated these organizations find that current schedules are not sufficient for the transportation needs of their clients and employees. If so many organizations have a need for transportation, the NFTA is not doing the job that the public is paying them for. In addition to continuing the improvement of access for the handicapped and elderly with its para-transit services, the NFTA needs to change their current fixed-based bus routes and integrate urban bus routes with the Rapid Transit to better serve the communities whose best option is public transportation. Being aware of the needs of its customers is necessary to improving the Metro Rail.

Like responding to the needs of transit consumers, financial stability through a predictable revenue source is an important key to improvement. Newly enacted Federal regulations have limited the length of time a person can receive public assistance. These regulations do not solve the problem of how these people will find transportation to the jobs and training programs they are required to attend, even though these low-income families make up the majority of Buffalo's carless households. The Metro Rail system can be an integral part of assisting in these needs if the NFTA holds itself out as a solution. Currently, Social Services offers a gas coupon program to assist recipients during the transformation from public assistance to gainful employment (Miller 2). The NFTA must work with the Social Services Department of Erie County and offer the monthly flash pass as an alternative to this program. This would be a beneficial situation for both the NFTA and the community. The citizens of Buffalo that must find a job will have a reliable means of transportation and the NFTA will have a predictable revenue source.

In addition to financial stability, changes in schedules will only be effective if the NFTA can change their image. The Metro Rail has received bad publicity since its inception. The NFTA's new Executive Director, Lawrence Meckler, has formulated a response with a long-overdue changes in the logo, bus colors, and uniforms. These changes must be reflective of attitude changes at the every level of the NFTA structure and must be part of a total image re-creation (Bogren 3). Executives and bus drivers alike must be retrained to understand and implement customer service as an integral part of improving ridership and overall quality. The marketing department must understand this message and relay it to consumers by advertising the new look, attitude, and schedules of the NFTA. Improving the image of the NFTA can be just the catalyst needed to breathe new life into the organization.

The history of the NFTA Metro Rail has been, at the least, a rocky road. Residents of Buffalo can only hope that the future can bring about positive change. The NFTA has, planned, surveyed, and consulted on several different ways of improving the Rapid Transit in Buffalo. Most of these attempts have been plans that would do more for the employment level of the area, than to improve the transportation system itself. Their solutions must not only enhance their ability to move people from one point to the next; they must also be cost effective. The NFTA must overcome the past mistake of spending large amounts of money on studies and not putting into practice what has been learned. They must concentrate on solutions that will be both economically feasible and serve the needs of the taxpayer.

The NFTA must show the citizens of Greater Buffalo that its new management does care about meeting their needs. By instituting significant changes in the way that they fulfill the needs of the community and by regaining the trust of the community, the Metro Rail will become the transportation organization that the City of Buffalo needs to propel the area into the next century. They can prove to the public that they do have the best interests of the community at heart. For the NFTA to truly add to the prosperity of the City of Buffalo, it must learn how to act as an efficient and effective organization, bringing together the needs and wants of the communities that it serves while maintaining sound fiscal and political policy. The NFTA can become a healthy, essential part of the successful future of Buffalo.

[DelawareDistrict]

I looked over the report. A lot of detail and VERY ONE SIDED. I looks like to show how every rail is a failure. Including NYC. So because of that, I do not put much trust in the numbers.

My political science professor told me once, our economy is run by the decimal point. All one administration has to do to lower taxes or raise them in regards to the living poor is to change the definition what what you call poor.

The current metro system is not perfect. A lot of the financial burden comes from the cost overruns from construction. That is not the metro's fault. Also, the current metro is only a section of what it was supposed to be. That is like building only the 1st floor of a 2 story home and wondering why there is no resale value.
The simple fact is that lrrt's and other public transportation rely on massive government subsidies. That, to me, spells F A I L U R E!

[biker]

The simple fact is that lrrt's and other public transportation rely on massive government subsidies. That, to me, spells F A I L U R E!

And to add insult to injury, DD, some of the subsidy is from gasoline taxes.

Extorted from auto owners under the guise of a "users fee".

[WNYresident]

WNYresident I think you need to read more before you make comments. Read this (http://www.theamherstrecord.com/local/local_story_241155302.html)
it is an article about how UB needs more housing. Amherst does not want student housing and the city needs it. The University of Buffalo should benefit all of the area, not just Amherst. By allowing students to go to school in Amherst and commute from all the way downtown is a huge selling point.
When I was in school, all I did was spend money and work a part time job to make it. These kids can be shopping downtown, eating downtown and ENJOYING downtown. So when the tell people where they go to school it is Buffalo not Amherst.

AND I AM A FORMER AMHERST RESIDENT who hopes to move back.


WOuldn't it of been completely wiser to have had built the campus downtown where all the lower cost apartments and entertainment was in the first place?

[ForestBird]

Streets, highways, and even sidewalks are also 'public transportation', and they rely on massive public subsidies. At least with buses and trains, you don't need to finance your own car to use them.

If trucking companies had paid the actual cost of the highways they used, and airlines paid the actual cost of building & maintaining airports (plus the cost of air traffic control), we'd have a lot more freight and passenger railroads in the USA. The biggest Buffalo employer and taxpayer in 1950 was - the New York Central Railroad. Taxes on the railroads went a long way toward building the highway competition which took away their business. Before then, transit companies such as the IRC were taxed to death. They had to plow the street from curb to curb wherever they had tracks, sweep & wash them in the summer, carry school kids for free, beg for fare increases (which they rarely got) while paying more and more for labor, and pay taxes on every foot of track in the street. Then along came Roosevelt, who ordered utilities to divest themselves of transit companies. No wonder they were so eager to rip it all out, in the 1930s! That was the death of the IRC (it was owned by United Gas & Electric, whose profits "carried" the transit ops) .

You can't expect a bus or train line to make a profit today, any more than the pavement in front of your house. The last American transit line to make a profit was the streetcar system in Washington DC; its profits actually subsidized the bus operation there, until it was ripped out in 1962 (to "modernize" DC) .

Anyway, I like the efficiency of electrified rail, but unless the NFTA is suddenly stocked with competent people, I don't trust them to expand the Buffalo rail line in a sensible way .

[leftWNYbecauseofBS]

WOuldn't it of been completely wiser to have had built the campus downtown where all the lower cost apartments and entertainment was in the first place?


No. UB in Amherst is the reason it is the biggest SUNY school. If it were to have grown from the south campus, it would have not grown. There was no location in Buffalo that could hold the current size of the campus. Just look at how Canisius is locked in.
Unless you would consider ED to make way for development. If that is the case, I think there are 100+ projects that would be better for Buffalo then UB.

[biker]

No. UB in Amherst is the reason it is the biggest SUNY school.

Weak "logic."

[leftWNYbecauseofBS]

Weak "logic."

How is this weak logic. My point was clear. The state wanted to build a billion dollar university and the city did not have the room for it. There is the "room" but you would have to either clean a brown field or use eminent domain to make that land available.

Biker, I respect a LOT of what you have to say. So lets discuss. How is this weak logic.

[300miles]

... There was no location in Buffalo that could hold the current size of the campus. Just look at how Canisius is locked in. ...
I thought they were considering sites near the waterfront for a new campus at the time. Although there was more industry then than today, there still would have been plenty of room. I don't think it being a brownfield was an issue since it usually falls on the state to clean them up anyway. Even Health Now is getting state funds to cleanup their site.

Also, UB South is landlocked, but if they really wanted to, they could have annexed the golf course across the street pretty easily. There's a lot of land there. Also they could have used (although not desirable) emminent domain to purchase some neighborhood land in the surrounding streets to expand the campus. Look at other city campuses like Boston University. When they need to expand, they buy nearby properties and re-use the buildings, or tear them down and rebuild. That's normal for a growing urban campus.

There were city options. They chose Amherst because it was the easiest. the land was all there unused and ready to go. Then they justified it by saying a train would connect the rural campus back to the city. But that part of the logic was ignored later.

[300miles]

re: Buses - ease of use
All of the information is on the nfta website and available from any bus driver.

They have simplified the system, you can purchase an all day pass for $3.50 on any bus and travel unlimited to any zone for the whole day. For $6.00 you can purchase a weekend pass that gives you the same benefits all day Saturday and Sunday.
Buses are not, and will never be as simple as riding a train.

The Metro has a fixed route with limited number of stations. The Metro always stops at each station. The only directions are inbound or outbound. Trains have isolated routes independent from auto traffic and never get delayed because of rush hour or accidents. Finally, Metro uses only one 'Zone' so you dont have to figure out how much it will cost because it's always the same price no matter where you go.

NFTA Buses are a different beast because of their flexibility. Different bus routes use the same stations. Some buses may not stop at every station. Its not as simple as inbound or outbound. You need to know which bus is going where you want to go, and which stations it will stop at.

Add to that the fact that buses don't have a dedicated route, they share the road with traffic. So their schedules will rarely be exactly on time and will get stuck in traffic problems just like any car would.

And if you take the bus to certain farther locations, you may cross into a second or third 'Zone' which will affect the price of your ticket. Sometimes you're required to pay that extra cost when you get ON the bus... on other routes you're required to pay the extra cost only when you get OFF the bus.

There is no way buses are as easy to use as the train. At least not with our NFTA.

[leftWNYbecauseofBS]

I thought they were considering sites near the waterfront for a new campus at the time. Although there was more industry then than today, there still would have been plenty of room. I don't think it being a brownfield was an issue since it usually falls on the state to clean them up anyway. Even Health Now is getting state funds to cleanup their site.

Also, UB South is landlocked, but if they really wanted to, they could have annexed the golf course across the street pretty easily. There's a lot of land there. Also they could have used (although not desirable) emminent domain to purchase some neighborhood land in the surrounding streets to expand the campus. Look at other city campuses like Boston University. When they need to expand, they buy nearby properties and re-use the buildings, or tear them down and rebuild. That's normal for a growing urban campus.

There were city options. They chose Amherst because it was the easiest. the land was all there unused and ready to go. Then they justified it by saying a train would connect the rural campus back to the city. But that part of the logic was ignored later.

The same state that would have to cleaned the brown field would be the same state building the university. Why spend the money cleaning up a site when there was a site that did not have the extra cost. It was a great money move for the state. A RARE MOVE!

They chose Amherst because it was the most cost effective AND the easiest. Yes it is landlocked but they still have land to develop. Right now they have about 30k students. How big do you want UB to be?

[biker]

How is this weak logic. My point was clear. The state wanted to build a billion dollar university and the city did not have the room for it. There is the "room" but you would have to either clean a brown field or use eminent domain to make that land available.

Biker, I respect a LOT of what you have to say. So lets discuss. How is this weak logic.

300 said it all and very well.

[speaker]

METRO EXPANSION IN THE PRESS

Here are some articles written by CRTC members or in support of Metro Expansion

Snow or no, go long with Metro Rail

By DONN ESMONDE The Buffalo News, 11/29/00
He has the worst of both worlds. His cause is just, yet few are moved. His words are strong, but hardly anyone listens. Give him a minute, and Ed Deutschman will tell you why it makes sense.

He will tell you that, if we're smart, we will take our too-short Metro Rail and make it longer.
He will tell you that, from Portland to St. Louis, cities are gobbling from a pot of federal money to build Metro Rail lines. He will tell you it costs $7,000 a year to own a car, barely $500 to ride Metro Rail. He will say a rail line cuts highway traffic, keeps exhaust fumes out of our lungs, slows the endless cycle of road building, road repair, road widening.
He will tell you that and more. If only you will listen.
It snowed last week. A lot. Which made me think of Ed Deutschman.
One thing we found out was how many people, every day, drive into and out of Buffalo. You didn't have to imagine the cars lined up end to end. You could see it.

Most of the cars had just one person inside. People say we don't need more public transit here. Then a sudden snow freezes everything in place, and there's the snapshot: Auto Bloat 2000.
Some folks left their cars in the snow. Some of them got home on - drumroll, please - Metro Rail.
I'm not saying we should extend this thing just because it's handy during paralyzing snowstorms. Though that's one reason.

People say we're not a big town, you can drive from anywhere to anywhere in 20 minutes. True. But downtown pays a price in ugly, space-sucking parking ramps and lots. Commuters pay anywhere from 40 to 90 bucks for monthly parking. It costs plenty to own and run a car. With longer Metro Rail lines, more people could leave the car home - or get rid of a second car.

"It's a transportation bargain," said Deutschman. "People don't leave their cars to ride buses. But a rail line attracts auto drivers. It's quick, it's clean, and you can read the paper while you get there."

He is 67, dresses in tans and grays, a retired salesman with a salesman's ease of conversation. He's the leader of a band of about 50. Citizens Regional Transit Corp. meets once a month. It puts out a newsletter. It has a Rolodex of public officials.
The nerve center is a file drawer in the back room of Deutschman's house in Clarence. The archives are in 16 boxes in his basement. It's all there, the letters to and from public officials, the studies, the reports. The cause of his current lifetime.
He is an improbable crusader: a nice retired guy in car-crazy Clarence who picked up the public transit flag.
"I feel it's important," he said. "We need a safer, quicker, cheaper way to get from the suburbs to the city. And where the (rail) line goes, development will follow."
Our one-line, six-mile system is about as efficient as a three-legged dog. Cost-heavy, service-light. Lines this short don't make sense. Even so, 25,000 people ride every day. That's more trips-per-mile than in transit-friendly Portland.
It was supposed to go farther, out to the University at Buffalo North Campus, but money ran out. Another stab at Amherst was shot down 10 years ago, by - ironically - the very folks it would most serve. The Niagara Frontier Transportation Authority, wrapped up in a new airport, lost interest. Deutschman and crew never left.
"Some days you feel like you're spinning your wheels," he said, mining the thin vein of transit humor. "Other days, you see a ray of hope."
Like now. There's a consultant's report due next month. It will say whether a longer Metro Rail makes sense. There's mostly talk of a line to the airport. Tonawanda, the Southtowns and the UB North Campus are also on the map.
Track lines are already there. No homes would be demolished. There's no need to buy extra land. Washington and Albany would build it. We'd just pay to run it.
It's ours, almost for the asking: a pollution-cutting, region-unifying, road-defying, low-cost public rail line.

Ed Deutschman can tell you it makes sense, if you have a minute.

These days, who has a minute?

-----------------------------
"Too Long A Wait for the Right Train"
by CRTC member J.P.Weiksnar

Imagine a young fourth grader in the mid-1970s, wowed enough by the prospect of Buffalo installing a subway system that he made tracking the progress of Metro Rail a lifelong hobby. What would he see today, exactly 25 years later, when the public largely "misses the train" regarding the facts and potential of this underrated marvel?

I was that student, at Amherst School 18 on Harlem Road. An assignment from my teacher was to draft a letter to then-Rep. Jack Kemp. I wrote about rapid transit, no doubt encouraging swift completion. Visits to New York City, Boston and Toronto made it easy even for a 9-year-old to see that downtown and our entire region needed help as the suburbs sprawled.

Construction on Metro Rail began in 1978. I clipped every article, both from our Courier-Express and The Buffalo News, and never missed a daily view of construction thanks to a bus ride along Main Street to a school in the city. When full service started in 1986, we had a fast, world-class line with art in every station and no graffiti on the handicapped-accessible trains.

Whether its thousands of daily riders know or not, Metro Rail has been scoring favorably in Federal Transit Administration reports covering systems across the country. Our modest route serves roughly one quarter of the Niagara Frontier Transportation Authority's transit riders but uses less than 10 percent of the mileage, vehicles and operators of the entire bus fleet. As in almost all cities, it costs less per passenger to run rail cars than buses. We even earned the highest rating anywhere for ridership per car owned.

Metro Rail is far from finished and cannot be dismissed at least until it runs at capacity, up to a whopping 100,000 riders per day. That is about four times the current figure, still enough for experts to call our line the most successful one anywhere not to have been expanded.

Completion means 30-plus efficient miles using existing, primarily surface rights of way - not tunnels - from and to the suburbs. Yes, the original plan to reach the University at Buffalo North Campus is still on the slate but at a lesser urgency than the lucrative Airport/Lancaster, Tonawandas, Niagara Falls or Southtowns corridors. Outer suburban population and employment shifting demands these.

Construction money has been available substantially from the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21). Essential operating and maintenance funding, either from tax reallocation or other creative means, could be the deciding point. Offsetting welfare costs by connecting people to jobs should help somewhat, but the time to start engineering a reliable financial scheme is now.

We already have the Rolls Royce of light rail but the fate of Metro Rail expansion could be nearer than we think. The NFTA has contracted an engineering firm to evaluate the financial feasibility of expansion. My candid hope is they will consider the fourth graders of today and their transit interest, employment needs and environmental demands 25 years from now - some 50 years since I drafted my first letter of support.

By then, with a bona fide transit system serving the major regional population, these now-grown young citizens could consider Metro Rail to be the ultimate off-road vehicle.

JOHN P. WEIKSNAR, Ed.M., lives in Amherst.

I posted these long articles because there is activity in the NFTA to do away with the present subway. We need to have a voice in this. The NFTA has, for too long, made unwise decisions for the residents of WNY.:mad:

[speaker]

I think I'm incorrect in saying the NFTA is discussing "doing away" with the present system.
Email to NFTA produces nothing, so it apparently is shut down.:rolleyes: I don't think they want our input.

But here is some info:

Niagara Frontier Transportation Authority
181 Ellicott Street Buffalo, NY 14203
(716) 855-7300

[granpabob]

the inner circle of towns and the city would not profit from a bigger metro rial system. if trains were sent out in every dirrection so people could ride trains instead of cars and buses wouldn't even more people move out of the city. fast easy cheap transportation to down town might just back fire and make it too easy to commute and just move even more people to the "safer burbs" with the "better Schools"

[crlachepinochet]

At the time of site planning for the new campus, avoiding eminent domain was a high priority for SUNY.

The downtown site was an unwieldy shape and it would have destroyed Allentown. It was also bisected by the 190 and RR lines.

Expanding South Campus was an option, but the golf course doesn't offer up that much land. To approach the size of the North Campus, they would have had to take homes out of the surrounding neighborhood. Oh, and the city refused to sell the golf course.

The way I heard the story told, the campus probably would have gone there if they city gave up the golf course.

[granpabob]

why not just move the entire thing to amherst and get it over with

[speaker]

Weak "logic."

http://www.buffalo.edu/reporter/vol36/vol36n10/articles/GreinerLecture.html

[granpabob]

its just that another good thread became "if its not down town its bad" if the room is in amherst and transporting people back and forth is hard why not put it all in one place where they have room

[speaker]

I put a new thread in the "polls" feature--so, scuse me.

http://forums.speakupwny.com/showthread.php?t=9145

Maybe res can fix this.

[speaker]

Guess I've changed my opinion about the location of UB. Thanks, people, for updating my mind.:)

[300miles]

As far as lack of space to expand South Campus. There are a lot of open parking lots. If they consolidated them in to 3 or 4 parking garages there would be room to expand even on the current site.

map of South Campus http://www.buffalo.edu/buildings/maps/SouthCampus_bw.pdf

Everything that's not black is open space or parking. There is a lot of room on the north Main St side that's just parking right now. Also on the south bailey side. Also, some of the buildings there today are small 1-story temporary "annex" buildings that could be redeveloped into taller structures.

heres South Campus and the Golf Course across the street. It would have doubled their space. If they designed it like a truly Urban campus, it's possible they could have had enough room.

[DelawareDistrict]

Streets, highways, and even sidewalks are also 'public transportation', and they rely on massive public subsidies.

It is a popular myth that streets and highways rely on massive subsdies.
Reality: More than 90 percent of highway costs have been paid by highway user fees.

The federal and state governments have spent hundreds of billions of dollars on highways in the last fifty to eighty years. Auto opponents often label this spending "subsidies" and claim that it justifies spending more billions on public transit. But the vast majority of spending on highways has come out of gasoline taxes and other taxes and fees that are explicitly collected as highway user fees.

During the 1990s, highway user fees equaled or exceeded highway spending by both the federal and state governments. Local governments did spend more on roads than they collected in user fees. When everything is totaled, however, user fees account for more than 90 percent of highway expenditures.

Moreover, American roads are so heavily used that the remaining subsidy is tiny when measured per vehicle mile or passenger mile. The subsidy per passenger mile is typically around 0.1 to 0.3 cents each. By comparison, transit subsidies average 45 cents per passenger mile, 150 to 450 times as much.

For the past thirty years, U.S. subsidies to transit have far exceeded subsidies to auto driving, especially when it is considered that, unlike transit, highways also carry nearly a trillion ton-miles of freight each year. If there are any imbalances in transportation funding, then they are tilted in the direction of transit, not roads.

[leftWNYbecauseofBS]

As far as lack of space to expand South Campus. There are a lot of open parking lots. If they consolidated them in to 3 or 4 parking garages there would be room to expand even on the current site.

map of South Campus http://www.buffalo.edu/buildings/maps/SouthCampus_bw.pdf

Everything that's not black is open space or parking. There is a lot of room on the north Main St side that's just parking right now. Also on the south bailey side. Also, some of the buildings there today are small 1-story temporary "annex" buildings that could be redeveloped into taller structures.

heres South Campus and the Golf Course across the street. It would have doubled their space. If they designed it like a truly Urban campus, it's possible they could have had enough room.


The urban campus works in cities like NYC and Chicago. The south campus is a FAR FAR Cry from Urban. Let's face it, the South Campus is about 300 yards from Amherst. It is in a residential area, just like the North campus.

Buffalo WAS NOT THE BETTER OPTION. I know that is a hard people for people in Buffalo but it is the truth. It was FASTER, CHEAPER and BETTER to build in Amherst.

Would it be nice to have a downtown campus. HELL YES!!!! There are a lot of nice things that could go downtown and we all know what downtown looks like.

Either building downtown or building on the south campus would have cost a lit more money. Both options would have required EXTRA work and EXTRA money to get to the point of shovel ready. The Amherst site did not!

300 and Biker, I respect a lot of what you post but I am still going to have to disagree on this one.....

[ForestBird]

I see. So, as long as I pretend that all the taxes I pay on gasoline are not actually taxes, the Federal roads I never use and State roads I rarely use are not 'subsidized'. There's nothing like wishful thinking to brighten the day. :rolleyes:

btw - If more transit riders mean fewer cars on the road, it makes driving easier and probably safer for those who do drive. So, having a choice is always a good idea.

ps - When Nelson Rockefeller's ground-breaking shovel squished down into the soggy swampland of Amherst, he remarked something like "No wonder we got this so cheap". haha

[leftWNYbecauseofBS]

http://www.buffalo.edu/reporter/vol36/vol36n10/articles/GreinerLecture.html


Biker and 300 have you read this?

[leftWNYbecauseofBS]

I see. So, as long as I pretend that all the taxes I pay on gasoline are not actually taxes, the Federal roads I never use and State roads I rarely use are not 'subsidized'. There's nothing like wishful thinking to brighten the day. :rolleyes:

btw - If more transit riders mean fewer cars on the road, it makes driving easier and probably safer for those who do drive. So, having a choice is always a good idea.

ps - When Nelson Rockefeller's ground-breaking shovel squished down into the soggy swampland of Amherst, he remarked something like "No wonder we got this so cheap". haha

Yep. Compared to lovejoy or the fruit belt?

[DelawareDistrict]

I see. So, as long as I pretend that all the taxes I pay on gasoline are not actually taxes, the Federal roads I never use and State roads I rarely use are not 'subsidized'. There's nothing like wishful thinking to brighten the day.

btw - If more transit riders mean fewer cars on the road, it makes driving easier and probably safer for those who do drive. So, having a choice is always a good idea.
How would you propose paying for roadways other than gasoline and highway taxes? About the only other alternative would be toll booths on every roadway. The expense to administer that would outweigh any benefits. Gasoline taxes, etc., are about the fairest way to cover road costs.

I agree that choice is good, the choice not to pay for something that requires massive amounts of government subsidies.

[biker]

It is a popular myth that streets and highways rely on massive subsdies.

Beyond the popular myth is the dirty little secret: an increasing portion of gasoline taxes---always sold on improved highways---are being quietly funneled to other uses. Like mass transit subsidies.

I ride the Metro more than anyone on this MB and I don't think that's right.

[crlachepinochet]

I'm afraid many people who say we need to "think regionally" really mean "it has to be in the city". If you want to attack UB for moving to the suburbs, you should probably start with the decision to build South in the early 20th century. It wasn't exactly the middle of the city back then, nor is it now... it touches Amherst.

Take what we have and work with it. The Amherst site was attractive for a number of reasons, so it was chosen. UB's growth limit isn't even on the horizon, and that's great. They will need to build more student housing soon. Applications are up, allowing them to be more selective while they build capacity for more students.

[speaker]

Ok, let's get back to Metro expansion.
The NFTA has really ruled a big part of Buffalo for a long time, mass transit, the waterfront. The populace's wishes have been ignored for a long time. Sort of like the Peace Bridge Authority does the bridge.

I would like to rally for these things to be built and utilized.

Trolleys and light rail are a fun thing, and probably would cost less to ride. It's time again Buffalo had transportation that's easy to use and easy on the environment, too.
Lefty is right. We throw huge amounts of money at things that most people don't want or care about. Western NY could be regional, but not like Giambra has in mind. We could unite with common transportation.

[biker]

Biker and 300 have you read this?

Sigh.....

I've stopped reading Speaker's links, because they are usually some partisan polemic. But, since you called it out, I gave it a read.

Alas,this was par for the course; but with a twist.

Bill Greiner was Prez of UB. He's in institutional defense mode in this piece. Of course--according to Bill---UB's decision to build in Amherst was correct because.....that was UB's discussion. The President has to defend the institution's past decisions.

The same used to hold with the US Presidency itself. For instance, former Presidents would never criticize the actions of sitting presidents, even losers like Jimmy Carter. But that precedent has been tossed aside, with loser Jimmy Carter quite free in his criticism of Dubbya.

As a justification for the relocation to Amherst, this was another instance of

Weak logic.

[ForestBird]

That could describe anything that governments spend money on. Opting-out of expenditures we don't use or like just isn't possible. Taxes go into a big pot and spending is not tied to the source of each tax, for the most part.

Support of mass transit is hardly "massive", for that matter.


I agree that choice is good, the choice not to pay for something that requires massive amounts of government subsidies.

[speaker]

Life is such a trial for biker, isn't it?
Pres Greiner's name was right a the top of the article, in case you missed it, biker. I don't think he had anything to do with the decision, and, if that was so, he had no need to defend it and was not required to do so. Absolutely no axe to grind. What's the real trouble, biker, is he a Democrat? :rolleyes:
It was a fascinating rundown of the history of UB.

[biker]

Pres Greiner's name was right a the top of the article, in case you missed it, biker. I don't think he had anything to do with the decision, and, if that was so, he had no need to defend it and was not required to do so.

I didn't miss that.

But once again, you miss the point of a post.

[DelawareDistrict]

That could describe anything that governments spend money on. Opting-out of expenditures we don't use or like just isn't possible. Taxes go into a big pot and spending is not tied to the source of each tax, for the most part.

Support of mass transit is hardly "massive", for that matter.
You should look at the actual figures before making statements.
Metro bus & rail revenue last year was $23.9 million. Operating expenses were $130.3 million. That leaves $106.4 million in expenses not covered by fares. I call that MASSIVE! Also, revenue for the year increased by $1 million and expenses increased by $8.3 million. Any increase in ridership is more than offset by an exponentially increasing cost to the taxpayers.

Only 12% of people working in the City utilized public transportation, that leaves 88% using other means to get to work. I think the public has overwhelmingly voted for their preferred methods of transportation and Metro Bus & Rail loses. It is nothing but a money pit that sucks up more money everytime service is expanded.

[ForestBird]

Wow, almost $2 per week, per capita (Erie/Niagara Counties) ... what a "massive" burden. :rolleyes:

[biker]

DD:

I tried to comfort myself every time that I took the subway to work in the eighties that residents Amherst and OP were handing me a twenty dollar bill.

Made me smile.

Now, I guess they're handing me a Gen'l Grant!

[speaker]

Can we return to the thread, now--Metro expansion--the pros and cons?

Did someone quote the ridership numbers somewhere?

The costs of a light rail or trolley system could be offset by a much larger number of people using it, and the lessened traffic, no parking fees or parking lot maintenance, fewer traffic police needed, less pollution.

Downtown would be more attractive to retailers, knowing customers would have easier access to it. For that matter, any business would find it more attractive.

[DelawareDistrict]

Wow, almost $2 per week, per capita (Erie/Niagara Counties) ... what a "massive" burden. :rolleyes:
You could make a statement like that about every program to justify it, the sad truth is, we are drowning in taxes and every inefficient program contributes. With your reasoning, we should all be happy to see our taxes go up, that seems to be what you are advocating.

[DelawareDistrict]

The costs of a light rail or trolley system could be offset by a much larger number of people using it, and the lessened traffic, no parking fees or parking lot maintenance, fewer traffic police needed, less pollution.
That is a pipe dream used to justify more government spending. If pigs had wings they could fly, but they don't. And people will not use rapid transit in any appreciable number, no matter how much money you spend on it. It will never be any where near self-sufficient. People like cars much better, accept it, deal with it and quit wasting money.

[biker]

Can we return to the thread, now--Metro expansion--the pros and cons?

Did someone quote the ridership numbers somewhere?

The costs of a light rail or trolley system could be offset by a much larger number of people using it, and the lessened traffic, no parking fees or parking lot maintenance, fewer traffic police needed, less pollution.

Downtown would be more attractive to retailers, knowing customers would have easier access to it. For that matter, any business would find it more attractive.

Pssst--speaker.

Ain't nobody clued you in?

We already gots light rail.

Come on now, work with me here: what's LRRT stand for?

[DelawareDistrict]

LRRT = Large, Recurrent, Rampant Taxes :D

[ForestBird]

You could make a statement like that about every program to justify it, the sad truth is, we are drowning in taxes and every inefficient program contributes. With your reasoning, we should all be happy to see our taxes go up, that seems to be what you are advocating.

And I was wrong, because the NFTA is STATE funded, the cost is spread among many millions of State taxpayers, so is probably more like 25cents a week. Big freeking deal. Public transportation is necessary, is supported by most politicians, is not going away, and is a good service we can afford to subsidize.

2006 subsidy sources:
Federal: $11.29million
State: $32.187million
Counties: $34million

[biker]

And I was wrong, because the NFTA is STATE funded, the cost is spread among many millions of State taxpayers, so is probably more like 25cents a week. Big freeking deal. Public transportation is necessary, is supported by most politicians, is not going away, and is a good service we can afford to subsidize.

Please list the taxes you pay which go to the NFTA.
If the NFTA disappeared tomorrow, our taxes would not drop by a single cent.

This attitude, sadly, is why the entire country is separating into the blues and the reds.

Into high spending and low spending.

Hmmmm--do you wonder which side is winning?

Let's see: is the Northeast gaining or losing population and Congressional seats?

And is the Southwest gaining or losing population and Congressional seats.

What will the pro-public service, high-tax proponents do when there are no more wealth producers to fleece in WNY, Forestbird?

Your lackadaisical attitude about wasteful, unnecessary, unneeded and unappreciated public spending is the very tangible reason why talented people (who have a keen regard for the value of each and every dollar)
are shaking the dust of WNY from their sandals as they leave.

[DelawareDistrict]

Public transportation is necessary, is supported by most politicians, is not going away, and is a good service we can afford to subsidize.

Why is it necessary? That is a fallacy commonly referred to as a "false appeal to common knowledge".

Supported by most politicians - Of course it is, it keeps the socialists who want to spend everyone Else's money happy. And the politicians can pretend to be doing good, a frequent deception bought by the mass public.

Good service? It doesn't even come close to covering half of its expenses. At what point do the costs outweigh the benefits? Would that be when no one is left to pay for it?

We can afford to subsidize - Who are you to make that decision? We lost our liberty when we lost the right to spend our money the way we see fit.

[1964]

This is a NOVEL IDEA. Let's just keep it on paper, bound and on a shelf where it belongs. Another misguided idea, that will not solve any local problems. Until WNY is in the BLACK why not consider a MAGLEV (magnetic levitation) train system that circumnavigates the cities (buffalo to clarence to tonawandas) and looks like a giant wheel. Then you are building a low energy, high power method of MASS transportation for a society that claims to want Alternative Transportation. The idea will provide for FEDERAL grants, and more efficient loans, and actually do more than make a few people happy, look cute, but serve the whole community. WNY - set your sights HIGH! Not in the middle where we are stuck.

[biker]

Not bad, 1964.

We should go for a maglev, Monorail. Hot electricity warming the rails to keep them ice free. Electiricity produced from OUR Niagara Falls Power Project.

Think "The Mouse That Roared".

Think scumbag PLO.

Let's takeover ("nationalize") the NF Power Project, plant C4 all around it ("Liberate it") and announce that NYC will have to pay us $1,000 per kwh for our electricity.

We could kidnap trailer-trash politicians (Volker/Tokascz) and raffle off the right to decapitate them.

The payoff would be a really cool Monorail system at no cost to us.

Nothing more than the towelheads are doing in the ME.

[ForestBird]

I see a lot of Libertarian-esque, every-man-for-himself nonsense in this thread. I would suggest that those who want programs such as public transportation to go away should not hold their breath until that happens.

Suggesting that the Northeast is somehow hurt by public transort is just bizarre. All the big cities in the South and West have extensive systems, and spend plenty of money on them.

[1964]

I see a lot of Libertarian-esque, every-man-for-himself nonsense in this thread. I would suggest that those who want programs such as public transportation to go away should not hold their breath until that happens.

Suggesting that the Northeast is somehow hurt by public transort is just bizarre. All the big cities in the South and West have extensive systems, and spend plenty of money on them.

Maybe when Erie County COMES TOGETHER, Regionalizes, then and only then can you call this place a BIG CITY. Erie county is a cluster of many small towns and villages, each with their own government, services - pure unneccessary duplicity. When Erie county comes togther, then they will have a big voice, untill then, face it: You all just live in small towns.

You all voted against having ONE BIG GOVERNMENT (regionalization)... which will make you a BIG CITY with a real voice. You are not such an entity...

[leftWNYbecauseofBS]

Sigh.....

I've stopped reading Speaker's links, because they are usually some partisan polemic. But, since you called it out, I gave it a read.

Alas,this was par for the course; but with a twist.

Bill Greiner was Prez of UB. He's in institutional defense mode in this piece. Of course--according to Bill---UB's decision to build in Amherst was correct because.....that was UB's discussion. The President has to defend the institution's past decisions.

The same used to hold with the US Presidency itself. For instance, former Presidents would never criticize the actions of sitting presidents, even losers like Jimmy Carter. But that precedent has been tossed aside, with loser Jimmy Carter quite free in his criticism of Dubbya.

As a justification for the relocation to Amherst, this was another instance of

Weak logic.

Biker..that was a whole lot of typing that said little of anything.

Please explain to me HOW it is weak logic. You have not done so and I have asked a couple of times....

[biker]

I see a lot of Libertarian-esque, every-man-for-himself nonsense in this thread. I would suggest that those who want programs such as public transportation to go away should not hold their breath until that happens.

Suggesting that the Northeast is somehow hurt by public transort is just bizarre. All the big cities in the South and West have extensive systems, and spend plenty of money on them.

Don't restate the argument.

The Northeast is being killed by rampant unions, high taxes and unbridled government spending.

Baseline: NYS's budget will be over $100 billion this year. Arizona's was late (two weeks!!!!) because some were torqed that it went over $10 billion this year.

Is there anyone who thinks NYS is 10x bigger/richer by any measure?

[granpabob]

so why do we always have to talk about "PUBLIC" transportation. many private bus and train companies exist. with our area going broke shouldn't we at least look at the possiblity of "PRIVATE" transportaion that the public can ride

[DelawareDistrict]

I've been looking at this poll and it is really stupid. The majority of the people voting for expansion must be the people who keep voting the incumbents in.

14 people want metro service to Delaware Park, Why? Numerous buses already serve the area. Are you going to pack your picnic cooler, grill, blankets, etc., and head to the park with your family on the metro rail?

11 people want to see service extended to Ralph Wilson stadium. That is laughable. Using LRRT to transport 80,000 people, 8 times per year, who want to arrive at the stadium at the same time.

14 people want to extend metro service to the airport. I can just picture all those business travelers lugging their luggage onto the metro and heading off to downtown.

10 want service to the Broadway Market. The Broadway Market is a wonderful place but doesn't justify hundreds of millions for a metro rail expansion. It would be cheaper to give every resident a Butter Lamb at Easter.

8 want service to the waterfront. Except for the Erie Basin Marina, it is not even a destination yet.

5 want service to the "Chippewa Strip", HELLO, have these people ever set foot in the City? It goes there now.

8 for Riverside . . .you can draw your own conclusions on that one!

[leftWNYbecauseofBS]

I've been looking at this poll and it is really stupid. The majority of the people voting for expansion must be the people who keep voting the incumbents in.

14 people want metro service to Delaware Park, Why? Numerous buses already serve the area. Are you going to pack your picnic cooler, grill, blankets, etc., and head to the park with your family on the metro rail?

11 people want to see service extended to Ralph Wilson stadium. That is laughable. Using LRRT to transport 80,000 people, 8 times per year, who want to arrive at the stadium at the same time.

14 people want to extend metro service to the airport. I can just picture all those business travelers lugging their luggage onto the metro and heading off to downtown.

10 want service to the Broadway Market. The Broadway Market is a wonderful place but doesn't justify hundreds of millions for a metro rail expansion. It would be cheaper to give every resident a Butter Lamb at Easter.

8 want service to the waterfront. Except for the Erie Basin Marina, it is not even a destination yet.

5 want service to the "Chippewa Strip", HELLO, have these people ever set foot in the City? It goes there now.

8 for Riverside . . .you can draw your own conclusions on that one!

A couple of points.

First. This thread is not stupid, I see it as fun. Unrealistic, YES, but fun.

Second, all talks of light rail should be dropped. Light rail would mean waiting in Buffalo winters, ABOVE GROUND, for a train. The only way to go is subway. Neither will happen, so if we are going to dream, might as well do it right.

Third, when looking at the areas, you have to look at the path AND the destination. For example:

Delaware Park should really be Buff State. Linking that campus to downtown would be a great thing. A lot of people focus on UB, but I say that Buff State has the location to be a better candidate for the urban university. Everything west of Reese St. and north of Forest Ave. could be developed. It is landlocked by the Scajaquada. Also, the path to downtown should go right under Elmwood Ave. Forever Elmwood is doing great things for this area. Just IMAGINE what could be done if it was linked to downtown.

I agree with the Ralph. It should have never been moved to OP. Any money to run a line there should be spent in moving the stadium downtown. If the team is still in Buffalo in 10 years or when Ralph passes, whichever comes first. However, running a line from downtown via Abbot road, would do wonders for South Buffalo.

Running a line to the Airport would go right under the Central Terminal. The CT is a gem for Buffalo. If it were to be made in a hub, I could see amazing development there as well. Everything north of William Street, west of Fillmore, south of Broadway and east of Baily could be developed into light industry, suburban like office parks and new housing. Also, if the CT was brought back to life, there could be a movement to bring a bullet to Rochester. They are talking about a metro system there. Linking Rochester to Buffalo, could create a metro area to compete with NYC. As far as riding the train from the airport to downtown, that is a close call. Maybe if they ran an express every hour.

The Broadway market is the same as running to the CT. SEE ABOVE.

Running to the waterfront WOULD allow development to MAKE it a destination. Remember, it would take years to develop a metro system like the one being discusses here. But I can promise you this. If there was a line that was going to run to the outer harbor, developers around the world would like up to buy the land around the lines. This could be the incentive needed to clean up the brown fields.

Running to Riverside....I will draw a conclusions. If a line was run north under Niagara St all the way to Riverside, the land that runs west of Niagara would have more value then today. This could mean, high rise WATERFRONT condos and office space instead of warehouses.

One additional move I would make is to reroute the I190 north of the Scajaquada interchange. Instead of running along the river, it should run parallel to Military and meet with the I-290 to run west to Grand Island. The land to do this is owned by the NFTA and is currently unused rail line.
I could never figure out what the urban planners for Buffalo had such a passion to running thruways NEXT to the water. Go figure.

Anyways. Anyone interested in this kind of stuff should download Google Earth. It is free and allows to to "play" urban developer. I spend way to much time dreaming of how to fix the scares of WNY.


Lastly, don't quote the numbers of the poll. It just makes you look silly. Less than 40 people took it. :cool:

[speaker]

Lefty--I use Google earth all the time. Have you updated yet? It's a lot better now.

I want some light rail. I love the scenery, city or country. Couldn't we do a combination of subway AND above ground? But I like your plans.

[DelawareDistrict]

I said the poll was stupid, not the thread. It would be kind of hard making my case without using numbers since they illustrate the pie-in-the-sky mentality that renders the poll "stupid."

Buff State is connected to downtown, it is called the #20 bus. In fact, all Buff State students recieve all zone bus passes.

The costs to expand rail service are not justified. The ridership wouldn't even cover anything near half the actual operating costs.

[leftWNYbecauseofBS]

Lefty--I use Google earth all the time. Have you updated yet? It's a lot better now.

I want some light rail. I love the scenery, city or country. Couldn't we do a combination of subway AND above ground? But I like your plans.


I like the idea of light rail in regards to the idea of scenery. But if you look at the proposed lines for light rail, they do not give you the sights you want.

As far as google, I only like to use version 4 but it farts at times on my mac. So I have to clean and reload from time to time.

Another thing you should look at is local.live.com. It is not user friendly but it does give you visuals of the merge of 290 an 190. Not sure this is good thing or not. LOL. I do not know what google has it blocked.

[leftWNYbecauseofBS]

I said the poll was stupid, not the thread. It would be kind of hard making my case without using numbers since they illustrate the pie-in-the-sky mentality that renders the poll "stupid."

Buff State is connected to downtown, it is called the #20 bus. In fact, all Buff State students receive all zone bus passes.

The costs to expand rail service are not justified. The ridership wouldn't even cover anything near half the actual operating costs.


Like I said before, this is all about what SHOULD be not what COULD be.

And there is a HUGE difference between a bus and a subway. The main differences is the subway is not effected by the weather and it does not harm the enviroment. To save gas in San Diego, I try to use mass transit to go downtown or to ballgame. It is bad when you have to wait for 20 minutes in the sun. Unless you have to use the bus line, would you want to wait in the snow in the middle of winter.


What good mass transit does is create development corridors. In San Diego there is bus and light rail. Developments and business grows around the light rail. It does not go around the bus lines. In real mass transit, buses are used to get people to the main spine. They are not used to run the main spine. A developer is not going to build around a bus stop!

I would feel safe in saying that having a mass transit stop within 200 yards of a location increases property value or increases the desire to redevelope it. That is IF the mass transit goes places. The reason why the current metro does not work is because it is not complete. Good mass transit can get you to different parts of a city. The current metro is only 15% of what it should be.

If you look at parts of the city, there are 10 houses on streets where 30 were located 40 years ago. Making these areas desiriable to live is key. I am not speaking of urban gentrification but an urban renninsance.

Just for a second imagine with me.

A 5 line system of mass transit that was centered around a hub in downtown. Maybe something grand like the stations in NYC and DC. It would link UB, Buff State and Canisius. On top of this merge all of ECC into a 9 block campus. Ellicot to the west, Clinton to the north, Michigan to the east and Swan to the south. The only reason on why these campuses have not been merges is based on transportation. Invite Hillbert to locate in the city with land grants. Maybe even take over the Central terminal or locate near it. Corner of William and Bailey. Make Buffalo THE EDUCATION HUB of the Northeast.

I would link the North towns to the South towns. Developers would look at the Bethlehem site and see what it COULD be and not what it is. People could factor in the cost of transportation when buying a first home. The city would win one more often.

Mid rise developments would go up along all 5 lines to stack the population near walking access. Along with the housing, store front business that would improve the look of the area not the "markets" you see on a drive into downtown via Main.

Someone could spend the day in the Botanical Gardens and the evening at Kleinhans.

[300miles]

I agree the Poll is not the most scientific survey, but it's good for getting the conversation started, so what's the harm.

Of DelwareDistrict's list above... all are debatable, but the one I disagree with most is Waterfront. Because the currently metro line gets very close to the waterfront anyway (auditorium) and the bus turn-around is right on the inner harbor. So they only need to add one more stop to connect the line directly to Cobblestone and the Inner Harbor.

Any destination by rail should be a relatively permanent destination. So Broadway Market and the Ralph may be bad choices. We don't know if the Bills with still be playing at the Ralph 10 years from now, either because they've left town, or get a new stadium. Same with Broadway Market. There are many other Permanent destinations before worrying about questionable ones.

[DelawareDistrict]

What the waterfron needs doesn't cost us money. It needs the NFTA to sell the land for development.

[leftWNYbecauseofBS]

What the waterfront needs doesn't cost us money. It needs the NFTA to sell the land for development.


The land as is would be hard to develop no matter who is selling. The positive value of being on the water is negated by multiple factors. Something has to be done to bring up the value of this land on top of the current waterfront location.
What does not help are the empty grain elevators and new ethanol plant. Once again Buffalo is getting it all wrong. If you look up the ethanol site on a map it is in view of any potential development on the outer harbor. No hotel is going to build with that in the sight line. You can not call it A grade office space with brown fields in the back yard, regardless of the finishes you use.

Once again, Buffalo is taking a short term gain instead of having a long term picture.

Does city hall have a vision plan in the benie package? They have no foresight and are always nearsighted and never remember hindsight!!!

[biker]

I could never figure out what the urban planners for Buffalo had such a passion to running thruways NEXT to the water. Go figure.

They followed the path of the by-then-useless Erie Canal. Cheap.

Same as the thruway in Syracuse and (maybe) Rochester.

[biker]

5 want service to the "Chippewa Strip", HELLO, have these people ever set foot in the City? It goes there now.

Oops. I thought that was service to the servicers who use to ply their trade on Chippewa, before all those silly coffee bars and restaurants chased them out.

And maybe your allusion to the "Chippewa Strip" made me start daydreaming.

[DelawareDistrict]

Oops. I thought that was service to the servicers who use to ply their trade on Chippewa, before all those silly coffee bars and restaurants chased them out.

And maybe your allusion to the "Chippewa Strip" made me start daydreaming.
That business got run out of town like all the others.

[biker]

That business got run out of town like all the others.

Oh well.

I'm always the last to know.

[speaker]

Here's 3D of MainSt opened up to cars--and is this from OUR Gabe?

http://www.flickr.com/photos/31481908@N00/sets/72157594240853713/show/

[speaker]

And here is a nice break from the NFTA for anyone thinking about going to the zoo today--if you can stand to wait for the PDF to load:

http://www.nfta.com/metro/graphics/laborday06.pdf

[speaker]

And I can't seem to fill my zip in OR email NFTA.

But here is an article I picked up on the way:

http://www.senate.gov/~schumer/SchumerWebsite/pressroom/record.cfm?id=260542&&year=2006&

[joe d.]

That business got run out of town like all the others.
YA...BUT TI WASNT BECAUSE OF THE TAXES:D LOL

[speaker]

NFTA seems to be totally inaccessable, either by email ot phone.
Great! So much for information from the NFTA ANS their coupon to the zoo!

[DelawareDistrict]

And here is a nice break from the NFTA for anyone thinking about going to the zoo today--if you can stand to wait for the PDF to load:

http://www.nfta.com/metro/graphics/laborday06.pdf
total time to download & open the .pdf was 12 seconds. that qualifies as completely accessible to me.

[DelawareDistrict]

And I can't seem to fill my zip in OR email NFTA.

But here is an article I picked up on the way:

http://www.senate.gov/~schumer/SchumerWebsite/pressroom/record.cfm?id=260542&&year=2006&
you write in your zipcode after you print the coupon.

[speaker]

you write in your zipcode after you print the coupon.

NOW you tell me!
I have dialup, and maybe it's that or something in the configuration, but I can never download PDFs quickly if at all.

[DelawareDistrict]

NOW you tell me!
I have dialup, and maybe it's that or something in the configuration, but I can never download PDFs quickly if at all.
You can get dsl plans starting around $14.95 per month, not sure what cable would charge. You should look into that, once you have it you'll wonder why you stayed with dial-up for so long.

[Timmy]

Lets not forget that the Federal Government pays 80% of the capital plus whatever money the state kicks in.

THATS ALOT OF JOBS FOR OUR LOCAL ECONOMY
THAT A HUGE INFUSION OF MONEY INTO OUR LOCAL ECONOMY.
and for what spending less than $1 of local tax dollars to get more than $4 in federal and state dollars....you would have to be an idiot to walk away from that kind of stimulous to our local economy.

A light rail to Niagara Falls would integrate all those international travelers to downtown Buffalo. It would be great for our downtown, hotels, retail, sports and museums etc.

A light rail to the airport would connect ECC downtown campus, the Larkin District, the Central Terminal, the Galleria, the Airport and Eastern Hills which I think would be a huge boom for all those districts. It would be huge boom for the Galleria and the airport allowing an increasing number of canadian passengers. Plus there is enough ridership for it to breakeven if not be profitable.

A light rail to UB Amherst has a huge ridership...just between the two campuses and while people are saying the bus between campus costs only $2million a year....it would actually be cheaper (local dollars) to build and operate the light rail extension when one subtracts out the state and federal contributions.

This is ridiculous to even debate it which shows just how incompetent the NFTA leadership is and how retarded and backward many Buffalonians have become in their substandard Buffalo School educational system, poverty, lack of oportunity from a darth of jobs, broken dreams from broken promises and wasted life.

If we can get the 80% federal funds and we can get a state contribution then we should build it and infuse those jobs and funds into our local economy.

Im kinda laughing....the Maple Leaf/Empire Rail Corridor is the 4th most used passenger rail line in North America. Rail ridership between Buffalo and NYC is expected to double in less than 10 years. Should we turn our backs on investing in high speed passenger rail?

Truck traffic between the US and Canada is expected to triple in 10 years should we refuse to build the peace bridge expansion.

Freight rail between the US and Canada is expected to double in less than 10 years should we refuse to upgrade our freight rail lines.

And the list goes on...if we dont invest then we dont improve our economy, we dont stimulate development, we dont create new jobs but one thing is for sure...there will always be a politician and a union justifying a tax increase not for more services (aka work) but for more salaries and benefits.

Let me put it another way. You have a baby with a parasite attached to it. The parasites are civil service unions and politicians/patronage. The baby is the infrastructure of the city of Buffalo (companies, roads, rail, airport, water, sewar, etc). Now are you going to feed the baby or the parasite? Id feed the baby.

[Riven37]

the old, and I mean old Metro Rail system is now outdated, and has been for many years. I think the time for such outdated systems are unrealistic for this area. Heck, this area can't even expan on the waterfront issues let alone build an expansion to the airport which would decimate the Cheektowaga main corridor or Genesse street.

I think Eire County, needs to put its thoughts into useful projects like how in the world are they going to bring the old, and outdated expressway into the modern age. Or who are they going to deal with the main issue of beinning transformed into a service base ecomony....So no, I weould not like to see the expanssion to the airport. Its a real fight stopping the NFTA from taking over Genesse Street altogether for an airport expansion, which will happen one day in our futures.

[300miles]

why would they want to take over genesee street? If they expand I would think it would be on the other side by the thruway. (where the runway lights already cross the road)

[leftWNYbecauseofBS]

the old, and I mean old Metro Rail system is now outdated, and has been for many years. I think the time for such outdated systems are unrealistic for this area. Heck, this area can't even expan on the waterfront issues let alone build an expansion to the airport which would decimate the Cheektowaga main corridor or Genesse street.

I think Eire County, needs to put its thoughts into useful projects like how in the world are they going to bring the old, and outdated expressway into the modern age. Or who are they going to deal with the main issue of beinning transformed into a service base ecomony....So no, I weould not like to see the expanssion to the airport. Its a real fight stopping the NFTA from taking over Genesse Street altogether for an airport expansion, which will happen one day in our futures.


How is the metro old and outdated? Yes it goes almost nowhere, but what exists works well.

I am not sure of the numbers but expanding the subway or adding light rail would be a great investment for the city. For example, if you were to make a commute from the east side to downtown easier, you would see the demand for east side housing go through the roof. If you were to connect the 1st ward and the outer harbor to the rest of the city, you would see development in those areas as soon as the rail was complete.

The line that I think would do the best for the city is a subway line running under Elmwood from Downtown to Delaware Park, placing a station close to the Museums and a second under ground station near the Main Place Mistake. Going north of the museum district you should run light rail to the Falls via GI running along side the 190.

The next best line would be connecting Downtown to the Central Terminal to the airport. Heck, go bold and continue this line all the way to Rochester. Two lines connecting 3 cities to make a Metro Area to compete with NYC in Albany for the pork NY loves to spend. The line to the Falls would be about the same distance from NYC to the North Bronx. The line to Rochester would be about the same length as NYC to East Long Island. This would position Buffalo as the center of Erie, Niagara, Genesee, Orleans and Monroe county with a Metro population of just under 2 million.

Just imagine our convention pitch for the summer months. Have your convention in Buffalo and spend time in the Falls, Delaware Park. Just imagine the business that would locate inside of the metroplex with access to over 10 top notch universities and cheap housing and maybe someday, realistic taxes

Ah...to dream!