Absolutely true. They have already paid for the water & gas service hookups. Telephone applications are pending
Has anyone else heard about a Sam's Club going up across the Target on Milestrip?
My dad is a huge fan and was told that apparently one is supposed to be going up there... anybody know if there is truth to that?
Absolutely true. They have already paid for the water & gas service hookups. Telephone applications are pending
may be true...but that wouldn't be in Hamburg
First of all, that's Orchard Park. Second of all the rumor was the Sam's Club was going in where the current Walmart is now. I would love to see a Sam's Club in Hamburg. Just don't tear down green space to build it.Originally Posted by nickknaack
Ok... so there is one coming to town (err.. a town)... but is it in fact across from Target (in Orchard Park) or where the Wal-Mart is now (in Hamburg).
Right you are! Businesses locate where they are wanted & welcomed.Originally Posted by bwilson
Near Target in ORCHARD PARK. As of now, the current Wal-Mart site has no redevelopment plans after the new Super Store is builtOriginally Posted by nickknaack
Businesses like to come to a town and build new. The tax incentives are too attractive. If towns insist that business occupy existing vacant buildings, they tend to move on to a more business friendly area. Hamburg has some areas that need new business Growth (Mckinley, Rt 20 and Camp), but what about the old Wal-Mart bldg or Town hall plaza. Even though these bldgs are vacant they at least pay some taxes. Hamburg needs to come up with some incentives for businesses to re-occupy these bldgs.
Another thought, why not tear down the T-Way ramp at Camp and make an at-grade intersection like the one at Rt 179. That would open the whole area from the T-Way to Rt 20 for business development. If I remeber correctly the Town Board did recommend that years ago. This would also make the interchange much safer.
HJ,
I agreed with you until you threw in the safer intersection comment. Explain to me using your engineering knowledge how a 3 way intersection would be safer than a fly-over off ramp!!!!
Would a 3 way intersection improve traffic flow?
By putting in a 3 way intersection you open up one parcel. Would it be worth the probable greater than $1,000,000 cost to demolish the current configuration and design and install a new signal system to open 1 parcel for development?
The more of these types of boards I read the more frustrated I get because of the stupidity displayed. It is a bunch of trolls who see things superficially without knowing the operations involved and the behind the scenes work necessary, as well as failure to use a little common sense and see things only through their narrow prism.
When you create an at grade intersection you accomplishe two things. 1) you create a controlled intersection which is safer and 2) you add another signal on Camp road to slow traffic. As for the current arrangement, I don't believe it is much safer. The current exits onto Camp Rd are not controlled. Take the exit northbound onto Camp Rd, the driver exiting cannot see traffic for which he must yield to. This causes many near misses as these vehicles exit blindly onto camp. Tractor Trailers exiting have been known to tie up lanes as they exit in the same manner.
I am not an engineer but I do drive alot and see these hazards.
If you look at that one parcel, you will see it is very large. You could put a BJ's or Home Depot sized plaza there. Right now this land is off the tax records as it is owned by the T-Way.
As for costs incurred in demolishing this bridge, compare that cost to the 10 or 20 year maintenence cost of that same bridge. I think you will find it may very well exceed demo costs by a large margin. What is more important is building a strong commercial base in Hamburg and therefore a strong tax base. If the thought of doing a little "behind the scenes work" puts you off, then these are not the minds that Hamburg needs to prosper.
Just a view through my narrow prism
You have got to be kidding me. Do a little engineering research.
There is one conflict point on each ramp entering Camp Road. That is a total of 2 conflict points. Lets look at just some of the conflict points with a signal. Left turn from Camp to the toll into oncoming traffic, Left turn from the toll onto Camp, right turn into the intersection onto Camp Road. That is three and I haven't even listed them all. Flyover ramps are one of the safest types of interchanges around.
By adding another signal you increase traffic congestion. That is definitely what we need on Camp Road. Is there a speeding problem currently on Camp Road? Not one that I have seen. I drive it every day and I rarely see cars going over 45 mph. You are telling everyone on this board that the interchange there now is not as good as intersections of Milestrip/179 at exit 56 or Transit at exit 49. That is a funny one.
When is the last time you saw maintenance being done on that overpass? About the extent of the maintenance is plowing and repainting. The more I think about my estimate I think it may have been a little low for design and construction costs.
Talk about doing a little behind the scenes research. Come on buddy. Do a little would you. Research through the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials. You waste the government's time asking about stuff like this. Find out how to make government more efficient instead of getting involved in things you know nothing about.
I will agree with you on one of your conflict points on making the l/h turn from Camp Rd onto the entrance. That is always the most dangerous actions made while driving a car. The other two are actually safer. L/H turn onto Camp from exit is controlled by the signal as is the righthand turn onto Camp. Next time you are on Camp rd and have 10 minutes, park in an area where you can see both off ramps and watch how people fly off the ramps disregarding th yeild signs. It is scary. I do believe that with the current redesin of the Camp/20 intersection congestion wil be greatly decreased. I fact the congestion issues on Camp have been a direct result of the reconstruction in the immediiate area over the last 10 years. Now that the const. has ended and a total of 6 lanes have been added, that intersection will flow rather freely.
So safety and congestion issues aside, We fall back to costs. I would have to agree if the cost/benefit ratio were way out of whack. Instead lets put a Lowes at 20 and Sowles.
If you want to see an example of bad traffic engineering look no further the the proposed Rt 20/ Big Tree re-alignment. Large cost for no gain. In fact makes the road more dangerous.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)