High Speed Rail - Question for Mike Miller

[Mike Miller]

By the way...I love the CT. My grandfather worked there for 15 years in the tower. He passed before I was born but I have seen pictures of him at the CT in the 40s I think.

I know you do. That's why I take your comments seriously. I want the best for Buffalo. I want the best for the terminal. If this opportunity doesn't work out, then I'm on to the next.

If you can find any photos, we'd love to scan them in for our website!

[300miles]

Lefty - although I'm torn between reusing the CT and pushing for a downtown station, I'm also not totally following your thought process here.

I don't think reusing the CT is shortsighted as you keep saying, actually I think it's just more realistic. You mention a connection to Toronto, but using the CT would not hinder that connection in any way. Although it may not be ideal to have the platform on the East Side, it's not as big a deal if it were well connected with an expanded metro-rail. I don't think the benefits of having it go directly downtown necessarily outweigh the cost of substantial demolitions and costs of all the things you are talkiing about like a new convention center, new ball park, land acquisitions, etc. On top of that, the CT fits much better with a westward expansion to Chicago. Much like having the airport in Cheektowaga, I don't see the CT's distance as a total negative. If both the airport and CT were connected to downtown (and other local destinations) then they can work well. Finally, I know you keep talking about 25 years out, but the HS rail in NY could happen much more quickly if realistic solutions are selected (like reusing the infrastructure at the CT) and using that as a strong business case to get money for the metro rail expansion. I think those investments are more likely to happen. I know you think the more grandiose plans are more forward-thinking. But they are also less likely to ever happen... or at least less likely to be completed properly. The money is being made available in the short-term.... i.e. "now". There is no guarantee any of it will be available later when all this city-redesign you mention has been studied, engineered, planned, debated, and finally approved. This is NY after all.

This is a good debate though. I don't see any of this as 'right' or 'wrong'... but they are serious decisions, and they need to be made relatively soon so that the opportunity of these federal investments isn't lost to another region.

[leftWNYbecauseofBS]

Lefty - although I'm torn between reusing the CT and pushing for a downtown station, I'm also not totally following your thought process here.

I don't think reusing the CT is shortsighted as you keep saying, actually I think it's just more realistic. You mention a connection to Toronto, but using the CT would not hinder that connection in any way. Although it may not be ideal to have the platform on the East Side, it's not as big a deal if it were well connected with an expanded metro-rail. I don't think the benefits of having it go directly downtown necessarily outweigh the cost of substantial demolitions and costs of all the things you are talkiing about like a new convention center, new ball park, land acquisitions, etc. On top of that, the CT fits much better with a westward expansion to Chicago. Much like having the airport in Cheektowaga, I don't see the CT's distance as a total negative. If both the airport and CT were connected to downtown (and other local destinations) then they can work well. Finally, I know you keep talking about 25 years out, but the HS rail in NY could happen much more quickly if realistic solutions are selected (like reusing the infrastructure at the CT) and using that as a strong business case to get money for the metro rail expansion. I think those investments are more likely to happen. I know you think the more grandiose plans are more forward-thinking. But they are also less likely to ever happen... or at least less likely to be completed properly. The money is being made available in the short-term.... i.e. "now". There is no guarantee any of it will be available later when all this city-redesign you mention has been studied, engineered, planned, debated, and finally approved. This is NY after all.

This is a good debate though. I don't see any of this as 'right' or 'wrong'... but they are serious decisions, and they need to be made relatively soon so that the opportunity of these federal investments isn't lost to another region.

For the Toronto aspect, I mentioned that because of Niagara Falls. 95% of the connection of a Buffalo to Toronto line would be done in Canada. In order for Ontario to consider such and investment, they would want the best situation for them. That would be a connection to Niagara Falls Canada not Fort Erie.

As for the development of such things like a new Stadium or Convention Center...those would have to be funded in large part by Private money. I personally feel that finding an investor to build downtown on top of or next door to a rail hub is more likely than without. Even if DT is connected by a short Metro conversion.

The is not even mentioning that a Metro extension would be mostly a local affair, whereas the HS rail project would be backed on a Federal level. I do not see any end in sight to the backward corruption of WNY and Buffalo that would need to happen for a Metro extension to happen. Even if HS rail is placed at the CT. Basically, I think LTR should happen but this is a once in a lifetime grab and it needs to be done right.

If Buffalo were to have the DT station and no LTR connection to the airport...it would still produce a great gain. If Buffalo were to have a CT station and no LTR connection to DT....it would still bring something but not close to what it should or could.

We agree that the money is being made availible "NOW" for HS rail, which is why the assumption can not be made of a LTR conversion or using the CT would not hinder that connection in any way.

[Mike Miller]

Did anyone see the 30 second spot on WIVB News yesterday, where Sen. Gillibrand publicly declared her support for rehabbing the Central Terminal as Buffalo's high speed rail terminus? Personally, it was pretty exciting for me. She must have read my letter to her. She mentioned the terminal in the same breath as Grand Central and Union Station in DC and went on to say that rehabbing the terminal would be an "economic engine" for regrowth in the area.

Unfortunately, the video is not up on the WIVB website, but I'm trying to get hold of it.