The Skyway

[leftWNYbecauseofBS]

Actually, if the Skyway is to come down, a tunnel is the most overall appropriate means to replace the Skyway... from every measure (yes, including cost). The "proposed" Tift route would be a mess. When the three lift bridges would go up, it would be a nightmare. I'd expect that General Mills and the railroads would not be happy with this plan... nor would those like the Coast Guard, American SteamShip, Nova Marine, Army Corps, Lower Lakes, Canada Steamship, or those that have prevailing seaway jurisdiction. No, if the Skyway is to come down, a tunnel should be the answer. I do not know where first responders stand on this plan. Sadly, the money that was set aside for a tunnel was highjacked for cobblestone repair, remember that?

When the 3 lift bridges go up is maybe a few hours a week. A tunnel or skyway is only useful when there is a massive amount of water traffic to avoid. In case you don't know what year it is...Buffalo does not have that kind of water traffic and won't in the future.

The proposed Tift isn't going to be a mess because the skyway traffic that's being diverted isn't that much. It's absolutely not enough to justify keeping the skyway or wasting money on a tunnel. Downgrading here is right sizing Buffalo and it's harbor to what it is...not what it used to be.

[WNYresident]

Perhaps we should consult with Elon Musk about the skyway. He might be able to make a "Hyper tube" that would carry cars on the way out of NYS.

[Member 2358]

When the 3 lift bridges go up is maybe a few hours a week. A tunnel or skyway is only useful when there is a massive amount of water traffic to avoid. In case you don't know what year it is...Buffalo does not have that kind of water traffic and won't in the future.

The proposed Tift isn't going to be a mess because the skyway traffic that's being diverted isn't that much. It's absolutely not enough to justify keeping the skyway or wasting money on a tunnel. Downgrading here is right sizing Buffalo and it's harbor to what it is...not what it used to be.

To me it seems that you do not know what it is that you do not know.

Very telling that you do not address the ROW issues.

Actually, you are obviously misinformed about commercial transits. Of course there are not as many now as the peak years ago. But there are quite a few (dozens on a regular basis)... and increasing. And the congestion relief plan will bring many more. Most (if not all) Captains - for obvious reasons - want all the bridges up before they'll start in. Plus, they have to open for the GLTs. And don't forget the pleasure and harbor-tour traffic. A few hours a week???? LOL

Surface streets won't be a problem. I point to traffic the past two summers with no/limited Skyway. 'nuff said.

You think the RR's will willingly give up their ROW? They've been completely resistant to that. how will GM get deliveries with that proposed bridge?

Wasting money on a tunnel. You know that the proposed cost for the present plan is equivalent to the cost of a tunnel, right?

Your argument against a tunnel would only bear weight if you'd brought up the city side of it. But you didn't even mention it. You also didn't mention the requirement of navigable seaway in light of another/new bridge.

There's a lot you gloss over/omit to make your position seem legitimate. In reality, you clearly haven't a full understanding of activity in the area.

I'm guessing you are a proponent of removing the Skyway.

[WNYresident]

How long of a tunnel would it have to be?

[Member 2358]

How long of a tunnel would it have to be?

There's some dependencies there... but, for reference, the Sky way is ~ a mile and a half.

[WNYresident]

What is the going rate? A billion a mile or so?

[leftWNYbecauseofBS]

What is the going rate? A billion a mile or so?

Might as well be $100 billion.

New York State isn't going to spend money on a tunnel in Buffalo. No matter what delusional locals think. Now where there is the need for 100s of billions in infrastructure needed in NYC. The City is currently broke...so money isn't going to come from there. Not much cash is flowing at the Federal level either, currently. And even when things do flip, pork isn't coming to Buffalo because pork is used to by votes. Why purchase votes when you are guaranteed to get them for free...

The reason why this plan was selected is because it's the most cost effective. It doesn't remove the skyway section over the water because that would cost too much. It builds bridges and roads that are appropriate for a city the size of Buffalo.

[WNYresident]

Might as well be $100 billion.

New York State isn't going to spend money on a tunnel in Buffalo. No matter what delusional locals think.

For a guy who has been witnessing what goes on in NYS I'm surprised you would say that. (sorry if I'm assuming your gender)

This would be a gift to unionized tunnel makers. Just think of all the money that could be skimmed off a project like this.

[Member 2358]

Might as well be $100 billion.

New York State isn't going to spend money on a tunnel in Buffalo. No matter what delusional locals think. Now where there is the need for 100s of billions in infrastructure needed in NYC. The City is currently broke...so money isn't going to come from there. Not much cash is flowing at the Federal level either, currently. And even when things do flip, pork isn't coming to Buffalo because pork is used to by votes. Why purchase votes when you are guaranteed to get them for free...

The reason why this plan was selected is because it's the most cost effective. It doesn't remove the skyway section over the water because that would cost too much. It builds bridges and roads that are appropriate for a city the size of Buffalo.

The reason this plan was selected is because it *looks* the sexiest. It is highly impractical at any cost... and, believe it, it will cost a lot to get the ability to physically develop its components... and I believe that some required elements will be cost prohibitive.

Keep avoiding the hard facts and questions. GM, CSI, CSX, Lafarge, Buckeye, ADM, etc, etc. Anyone talk to them? Oh, well, no. No. Coast Guard? Um, no. ASC? Oops, no. I could go on & on. This plan appears to ignorant outsiders to be cost effective because they do not know what it really entails. They think they know, but they really do not.

[leftWNYbecauseofBS]

The reason this plan was selected is because it *looks* the sexiest. It is highly impractical at any cost... and, believe it, it will cost a lot to get the ability to physically develop its components... and I believe that some required elements will be cost prohibitive.

Keep avoiding the hard facts and questions. GM, CSI, CSX, Lafarge, Buckeye, ADM, etc, etc. Anyone talk to them? Oh, well, no. No. Coast Guard? Um, no. ASC? Oops, no. I could go on & on. This plan appears to ignorant outsiders to be cost effective because they do not know what it really entails. They think they know, but they really do not.

No. It was selected because it's the best looking pig with lipstick.

Nobody has talked to those people because they don't have a say. It's not 1950.

[Member 2358]

No. It was selected because it's the best looking pig with lipstick.

Nobody has talked to those people because they don't have a say. It's not 1950.

1950 has nothing to do with this. Last I knew property rights still mean something. Last I knew Federal Waterways still meant something. Last I knew RR ROW still meant something. Apparently you think otherwise... having something to do with mid 20th century. you would somehow just take all that? Tell us how.

[grump]

The proposal to spend $330 million in a dying city just to satisfy the editorial board of a dying newspaper and high talker Higgins is nonsense. We can take instruction from Boston where the attempt to “tunnel” to remove elevated road ways turned into a fiscal disaster of monumental proportions. And when it comes to getting the money for this type of project it’s important to keep in mind that this area now has the weakest representation it’s ever had in Albany and Washington. Higgins was considered a joke in the Common Council; he was considered a joke when he was in the state Assembly and he’s considered a joke in Congress. Thanks to the editorial board of the News this area has been completely stripped of effective representation in Albany where we’re now represented by a dope like Tim Kennedy and a token like Chrystal Peoples.

[WNYresident]

Rep. Higgins wants to tear down the Skyway. Here's why I'm conflicted.

I took a walk to the Skyway the other day with Rep. Brian Higgins, D-Buffalo. For years, he has embodied civic efforts to have the road removed. He speaks from the gut and he builds a passionate case. He said he has no nostalgia, no sense of wonder, associated with the Skyway.

That's where we differ. I do.

I remember being a kid, coming from the south, when the journey was an exercise in awe. I remember riding through Lackawanna and its this-is-Mordor landscape, through the torches, smoke and fumes that caused you to roll up your windows on summer days and left you wondering how the people in the houses along Route 5 somehow managed to hang their clothes out to dry.

https://buffalonews.com/2019/09/26/t...box=1569544505

[leftWNYbecauseofBS]

Sean Kirst is an idiot. He wants to keep the skyway because of emotions...or at least that's the argument he is making. Who knows if he is being honest.

He talks about a 'fondness' and a 'sense of wonder' in driving into the city using the Skyway. Big deal. How about the feelings one gets standing under it at CanalSide or going to a Sabres game? You know, one of the best improved places in the city with hundreds and hundreds of millions in investment and likely a billion more to come.

The only logical argument for keeping the skyway is if you're from the Southtowns, which Kirst is, and you want to avoid tolls on the 90. That's it. Guess what, Buffalo needs to worry about itself and not keep something they don't want because someone from Dunkirk doesn't want to get an e-z-pass.

[WNYresident]

Did seem like an odd reason to keep it. Memories from childhood driving over the bridge. I can understand saving older buildings because they are not replaceable for the most part. A bridge can go away.