A curious, circuitous route!
A trip from Buffalo’s Inner Harbor to Buffalo’s Outer Harbor is less than 1/10 of a mile, yet it takes 4 miles by car. This partially explains why the development at the Inner Harbor has not spread to the Outer Harbor.
YES! Understanding that a formal Environmental Impact Study (EIS) is required by State and Federal Law before the Skyway can be replaced with alternative infrastructure, I am calling on the New York State Department of Transportation (NYSDOT) to immediately commence such a study. The study should assess the costs of maintaining the current infrastructure, the cost of a tunnel, and the cost of simply replacing the skyway with a series of lift bridges.
It appears that replacing the Skyway with more suitable infrastructure will make sense fiscally for Western New York in the long run.
The Skyway requires painting every ten years which costs $15 million, and it has been suggested that it will require major sub-structural repairs which will require as much as $100 million in the years to come.
Right now, the Skyway is undergoing $9 million in structural repairs and $15 million in painting.
Given this, an analysis of the alternatives, including a series of lift bridges to more efficiently distribute traffic throughout downtown Buffalo, needs to be considered.
The Skyway works badly as a piece of transportation infrastructure.
The Skyway is closed several times each winter. It is closed so often, that it is the only bridge in New York State with a mechanized closing system, warning travelers in Hamburg with flashing lights when the bridge is closed.
Even when it is not closed, it is a dangerous road to travel. Buffalo Police Department records show a high record of Skyway-related accidents and fatalities.
The Skyway dumps all of its Downtown-bound traffic at one intersection (Church and Delaware), causing dangerous backups, especially in the morning. A series of lift bridges could distribute traffic at several points throughout downtown (Possibilities include: Erie St., Pearl St., Main St., Michigan Ave.), providing for a much more efficient distribution (please see diagram).
The Skyway has a larger footprint (takes up more ground space) than either a tunnel or a series of lift bridges and related roadways would. Because of this, it ties up what should be some of the most prime land in the City of Buffalo (keeping it from either being developed privately and returned to the tax rolls, or keeping it from being effectively converted into public recreational uses).
The Skyway also serves to separate the Inner Harbor from the Outer Harbor. It is less than 1/10 of a mile across the channel from the Inner Harbor to the Outer Harbor, yet the quickest route by car is over four miles long (please see diagram).
Former Milwaukee Mayor John Norquist, who is credited with the revitalization of his City’s waterfront, was in Buffalo recently giving an address to a group of concerned citizens at the Nichols School. A participant asked him, if he were charged with improving Buffalo, what is the first thing he would do. He stated, without hesitation, that his first priority would be replacing the Skyway. A similar move in Milwaukee helped spark a new era of waterfront development there.
This site has been prepared in consultation with Congressman Higgins to provide information about the Buffalo Skyway, the need to look at alternatives to the Skyway, and to facilitate an online petition calling for the serious exploration of alternatives to the Skyway.
in response to the
Design Report/Draft Environmental Impact Statement/Draft Section 4(f) Evaluation
for the
SOUTHTOWNS CONNECTOR/BUFFALO OUTER HARBOR PROJECT
Submitted to:
Alan E. Taylor, Regional Director
New York State Department of Transportation
General William J. Donovan Office Building
125 Main St.
Buffalo, NY 14220
Background
Two tasks are fundamental to the redevelopment of the waterfront: the first is to create excitement and vibrancy at the water’s edge by constructing generous public open spaces, including a broad greenway hugging the shoreline with bicycle and pedestrian access. The second task which is fundamental to the redevelopment of the waterfront is the elimination of barriers to vehicular access to the Outer Harbor lands. If we address these two fundamental concerns, we will, as a community, have a choice of viable private development opportunities for the waterfront.
While the former concern of pedestrian and bicycle access to the water’s edge is being addressed by other initiatives, the Southtowns Connector Project provides an opportunity to address the latter concern, that being the problem of vehicular access to the Outer Harbor lands. The problem, however, is that given the limited availability of funding, and the overwhelming public demand that we see construction in the very near term, none of the alternatives laid out in the DEIS is entirely satisfactory.
Another Alternative - a Grand Waterfront Parkway
There is not enough money presently, nor will there be enough money in the next two years, for a wholesale reconstruction of the Route Five/Fuhrmann Boulevard complex. And a staging, through which only a small portion of the Route Five/Fuhrmann Boulevard complex is immediately reconfigured, will fail to provide the maximum amount of access to the Outer Harbor in the least amount of time.
I submit that there is another way - an alternative which is immediately doable, given the financial constraints of the project. This alternative is the conversion of Fuhrmann Blvd. into a grand, two-way, urban parkway, in the tradition of the City of Buffalo’s Olmsted parkways. This parkway would have high-end lighting, consistent with the Central Park lighting used on the City’s Olmsted Parkways. It would have generous green space providing a pastoral feel similar to that of the Niagara Parkway on the Canadian side of the Niagara River. It will be elegant and functional and will convey promise and vitality to those who travel it.
A total of $22.36 million has been appropriated for Outer Harbor Access improvements. $9.36 million of this came from my work as a member of the House Transportation Committee and was contained in the Transportation Bill which the President signed this week. That legislation contained an additional $8 million which was secured by Senators Schumer and Clinton. We also have access to an additional $5 million which was secured by Senators Schumer and Clinton in the Fiscal Year 2004 appropriations process.
Rough estimates from the City of Buffalo suggest that Fuhrmann Boulevard, from the Coast Guard Station to Tifft Street, can be rebuilt in the manner I have suggested at a cost of $12 to $14 million dollars - making the completion of this project entirely feasible from a financial perspective.
I would like to see the design and engineering work for this project done this Fall and Winter, with the commencement of construction next Spring, and the completion of construction in Fall of 2006. I cannot stress enough the overwhelming public demand that waterfront access be improved immediately. The conversion of Fuhrmann Bouldvard to a grand waterfront parkway fulfills that pressing mandate.
When you rapidly take a project from planning to design to construction, it dramatically increases your ability to raise funds from other decision makers in Albany and Washington. I will use my position on the House Transportation Committee to aggressively pursue funding for subsequent waterfront access improvements, but we first must demonstrate viability and progress in the very near term.
Route Five can be reconfigured later. The The public is demanding that the waterfront be developed immediately, and vehicular access is necessary to attain that end, and the grand waterfront boulevard will achieve that goal with the funds that are available and in the immediate time frame which the public demands.
Removing the Skyway - The Next Steps for Improving Waterfront Access
Opening up the waterfront for development while facilitating traffic between the Central Business District and the Southern Suburbs are the stated goals of the Southtowns Connector study. It is not sensible for the DOT to have conducted this study while leaving options for the replacement of the Skyway off the table.
Replacing the Skyway only seems prohibitively expensive when one does not consider the costs of leaving it as-is. These costs include decennial painting which costs in excess of $15 million, the impending need for substructural repairs and redecking which may cost in excess of $100 million, and the economic costs associated with frequent closures and a high accident rate. In 1993, Erdman, Anthony and Associates prepared a study, commissioned by the City of Buffalo, which suggested that a tunnel could be built to replace the skyway at a cost of $94.6 million (1993 dollars). Given inflation multipliers, this would, of course, cost considerably more today. However, it shows that the cost of replacing the Skyway can be in the same range as the cost of maintaining it as-is.
The new link between the Outer Harbor and downtown which replaces the Skyway need not be a tunnel at all. I very much prefer the notion of a series of bascule lift bridges, landing perhaps at Erie Street, Pearl Street, Delaware Avenue, Main Street and/or Michigan Avenue, which would distribute traffic efficiently throughout Downtown, in stead of dumping it at the foot of Delaware Avenue, as the Skyway does currently.
While I am reluctant to avocate for spending money on further studies, the failure of the Southtowns Connector Study to address the Skyway means that the removal of the Skyway will require its own environmental impact study because of the requirements of state and federal law. Using some of the funds which Senators Schumer and Clinton and I have secured, we need to commence a Skyway EIS immediately. This EIS would consider the tunnel option, and the various bridging options, and would definitively compare the costs of these options against the cost of maintaining the current infrastructure.
Former Milwaukee Mayor John Norquist, who is credited with the revitalization of his City’s waterfront, was in Buffalo recently giving an address to a group of concerned citizens at Nichols School. A participant asked him, if he were charged with improving Buffalo, what is the first thing he would do. He stated, without hesitation, that his first priority would be replacing the skyway. That the Skyway is ineffective and inefficient is obvious to Buffalonians and to visitors alike - we must begin the work now which will allow for its eventual removal.
After Fuhrmann Boulevard is turned into a grand waterfront parkway, and the skyway is replaced with a more suitable link or set of links, then we can address the issue of how to reconfigure Route Five. It is less pressing then the problem of waterfront access which the parkway will solve and the larger problems posed by the Skyway.
Conclusion
I am interested in making the greatest impact possible on waterfront access in the shortest time possible. It is for this reason that I decline to support any of the design alternatives in the DEIS, and instead prefer another alternative - a grand waterfront parkway.
Thomas J. Madison, Jr.
Acting Commissioner
New York State Department of Transportation
50 Wolf Rd.
Albany, NY 12237
Re: Buffalo Skyway
Dear Commissioner Madison:
Let me first congratulate you on your recent appointment. Your reputation for professionalism and vision precedes you, and, as a new Member of House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, I look forward to working closely with you to make a meaningful and positive impact on the transportation system in Western New York in the very near term.
I am writing to respectfully request that the NYSDOT commence an EIS to study alternatives to the Buffalo Skyway. The funding for the study can be designated from the $22.36 million in federal transportation funds which are available for access improvements at the Buffalo Outer Harbor, while still allowing for the design and construction of meaningful improvements to vehicular access to Buffalo’s waterfront.
Last Thursday’s Buffalo News quoted DOT spokesperson Jennifer Post as saying that “Long-term alternatives to the Skyway continue to be a consideration, but so far have not garnered local support or found it to be cost-effective.”
The DOT needs to be aware that public support for alternatives to the Skyway is very significant and widespread. Here are just a sampling of the many examples of demonstrated local support for alternatives to the Skyway (copies are attached):
Not only is it apparent to Buffalonians that we need to explore alternatives to the Skyway, but nationally-recognized waterfront development experts agree as well. Former Milwaukee Mayor John Norquist, who is credited with the revitalization of his City’s waterfront, was in Buffalo recently giving an address to a group of concerned citizens at the Nichols School. A participant asked him, if he were charged with improving Buffalo, what is the first thing he would do. He stated, without hesitation, that his first priority would be replacing the Skyway. A similar move in Milwaukee helped spark a new era of waterfront development there.
It appears that replacing the Skyway with more suitable infrastructure will make sense fiscally for Western New York in the long run. The Skyway requires decennial painting which costs $15 million, and it has been conveyed to me that it will require major substructural repairs which will require as much as $100 million in the years to come. I understand that even as I write, the Skyway is undergoing $9 million in structural repairs and $15 million in painting. Given this, an analysis of the alternatives, including a series of lift bridges to more efficiently distribute traffic throughout downtown Buffalo, needs to be considered.
To further these discussions, I would appreciate it very much if you would convey the following information to my Buffalo office as soon as possible:
Using my position on the Transportation Committee, I look forward to working closely with you and your colleagues at NYSDOT on this issue, and on Western New York’s transportation needs generally. In my new role as a Member of Congress, I am focused, as I was while a Member of the New York State Assembly, on funding real projects in Western New York and bringing them through to design, construction and completion. I am confident that NYSDOT will be a true partner in these efforts.
Thank you very much for your assistance in this matter.
Sincerely,
Brian Higgins
Member of Congress
Thomas J. Madison
Acting Commissioner
NYS Department of Transportation
50 Wolf Rd.
Albany, NY 12237
Dear Commissioner Madison:
I write in strong support of Congressman Brian Higgins’ request for the NYS Department of Transportation to undertake the necessary environmental studies to remove the Buffalo Skyway and replace it with a new connector.
As a member of the Assembly’s Transportation Committee and the member who represents a significant portion of the Skyway I have long supported this idea. As you know, the Skyway has been demonstrated to be a dangerous transportation structure in the winter months, coupled with its frequent closures due to inclement weather. It is also expensive to maintain, requiring frequent painting and repairs, and is expected to require significant repairs in the immediate future estimated at more than $100 million.
As we continue our efforts to revitalize Buffalo’s waterfront, we must explore new and forward thinking ideas to incorporate transportation infrastructure that compliments, rather than detracts from these efforts. I respectfully encourage you to undertake these studies as soon as possible, so that we may begin substantive planning for its replacement.
Thank you for your attention to this matter.
Sincerely,
SAM HOYT
MEMBER OF ASSEMBLY
SH:sjmk
The Honorable Joseph H. Boardman Commissioner
New York State Department of Transportation
1220 Washington Ave.
Albany, NY 12232
RE: ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT (EIS) FOR REMOVAL OF SKYWAY BRIDGE IN DOWNTOWN BUFFALO (NY ROUTE 5)
Dear Commissioner Boardman:
The revitalization of downtown Buffalo, for many purposes including commercial and residential redevelopment, is in many ways contingent upon the effective use of existing transportation infrastructure. When the use of existing infrastructure is no longer viable - for whatever reason ~ alternatives can and must be examined carefully.
As you know, the removal of the aforementioned “Skyway” bridge, constituting the elevated section of NY Route 5 in downtown Buffalo, has outlived its usefulness. Constructed in the 1950s as a means for vehicular transportation that would not interfere with Buffalo’s inner harbor shipping industry, the bridge has sadly degenerated into a dangerous and costly eyesore. Worse, its existence continues to hamper efforts at waterfront redevelopment in Buffalo as its location remains an impediment to waterfront access to pedestrians and vehicles.
A source of many vehicular and traffic problems and frequent weather related closings, at this time, the Skyway is coming due for $70-80 million in state-funded: rehabilitation. In addition, officials of the Buffalo Police Department Accident Investigation Unit have repeatedly cited the Skyway as one of Buffalo’s most treacherous roadways. In my opinion, there is no amount of funding that can appropriately address the long-term needs of this bridge. The State ought not to throw good money toward an insufficient rehab project. The Skyway should simply be removed and replaced with a safer and more effective roadway.
As you know, I have advocated this position for some time. I am interested now in pursuing the Environmental Impact Statement (E/S) process, and am requesting the assistance of your department with the same.
Obviously, the removal and eventual replacement of the Skyway bridge �in whatever form its replacement will take - is a project that will require significant resources and will have a positive impact on downtown development. I am hopeful that NYSDOT will examine a wide range of alternatives to the bridge and will include the same in all necessary legal documents required to move forward with this proposal.
I would ask that your office advise me as to the progress of the E/S process and similarly advise as to any assistance I may provide in this regard. I would encourage you to contact me directly at (716) 825-6080 if you should wish to discuss this request in greater detail. Thank you in advance for your anticipated cooperation. I look forward to speaking with you concerning this matter very shortly.
Very truly yours,
BRIAN M. HIGGINS
Member of Assembly 14Sth District
cc: Brian Rowback, WNY Regional Director, NYSDOT
County of Erie
Dennis T. Gorski
County Executive
September 25, 1991
Dear Mr. Russell:
Thank you for submitting the Draft Southtowns Connector Feasibility Study for my review.
The document certainly provides sound justification to move forward with the preliminary design and environmental analysis phase. It clearly notes the economic justification for the Highway as well as the transportation need. The latter being a surprise finding.
Upon reviewing the Study with Commissioner Richard Tobe of the Department of Environment and Planning, I wish to note the following points. Hopefully, the items can be clarified in the final document.
1. The alternatives outlined indicate that a connection from the Connector to Route 219 Connection and I-90. It is not clear as to why this was omitted, since it seems to be a logical link
2. The horizon Waterfront Commission’s draft Action Plan includes the Southtowns Connector as a key transportation component. Likewise the draft Southtowns Connector feasibility Study continuously notes the positive economic impact a connector would have on the Horizon Waterfront Commission’s goals for shoreline development. Such interplay between the two documents is commendable and was certainly a desired result of both efforts.
A close examination of both documents however, does note on area which requires further clarification or the preparation of a sound strategy for dealing with it. The issue pertains to the treatment of Route 5 from Ohio Street to the Buffalo River. The connector Study indicates that this road segment will remain as it is currently aligned, while the Horizon Plan recommends removal of the elevated section and subsequent relocation of Route 5. A waterfront boulevard would be constructed as a new roadway somewhat east of the existing Route 5.
Since the relocation of Route 5 is a key part of the Commission’s Outer Harbor proposal, I will be urging Tom Blanchard to discuss this discrepancy with you in the near future.
1. It is my understanding that the Skyway will exceed its useful life in the Year 2010. Additional repairs to the Structure will not be feasible and complete replacement necessary. I would clearly and to set the stage for public discussion of alternatives to the Skyway such as a tunnel or small Gateway Bridge structure.
2. The report does not include a recommendation. A reading of the document however, clearly indicates that the Connector is feasible, not only from an economic view but from a traffic recommendation that the project move forward into the environmental analysis and preliminary planning phase. This would be logical statement given the facts and figures contained in the document.
Thank you for the opportunity to comment and congratulations to you Department and the Western New York Economic Development Corporation for a fine report.
Very truly yours,
Dennis Gorski
County Executive
DTG/RMT/SV
CC: Richard M Tobe
Thomas Blanchard
Judith Kossy
Andrew Rudnick
Ronald Coan
David R. Smith
John C. Loffredo
MEETING NO. 11
June 5, 2003
ERIE COUNTY LEGISLATURE
RESOLUTION NO. 206
Re: Buffalo Skyway (NYS Route 5) Painting & Restoration. (Intro. 11-3)
A RESOLUTION SUBMITTED BY LEGISLATOR KUWIK
WHEREAS, the Buffalo Skyway, New York State Route 5, is a major thoroughfare providing direct access to the City of Buffalo from the southern suburbs for commuters, and
WHEREAS, the Skyway directs vehicular traffic 110 feet over the Buffalo River and City Ship Canal, and
WHEREAS, the Skyway, due to its height, location, and condition, is considered by many to be an eyesore and a major impediment to the waterfront and inner and outer harbor economic development projects, and is no longer necessary due to the absence of lake freighters entering the City Ship Canal, and
WHEREAS, New York State Assemblyman Brian Higgins has called for a study and examination of the options for the development of the harbor area, focusing on the potential elimination of the Skyway and its replacement with an alternative corridor, such as a tunnel, and
WHEREAS, Assemblyman Higgins has been joined by Buffalo Mayor Anthony Masiello and Assemblyman Richard Smith in a discussion of the long-range use of the waterfront and the potential devolution of Route 5 into a parkway starting at the foot of the Skyway, thus contributing to the revitalization of the waterfront and better and easier access for the public to the Lake and harbor, and
WHEREAS, the demolition and removal of the Skyway will open- up 100 acres of prime waterfront land for development and public uses, including parks and beaches, and
WHEREAS, there is significant public and governmental support for the elimination of the Skyway, and
WHEREAS, the New York State Department of Transportation (NYSDOT) has announced that it will commence with a 16-month long painting and restoration of the Buffalo Skyway, New York State Route 5, and
WHEREAS, that painting project will cost $11.4 million, and
WHEREAS, in 1999 and 2000, a $5.7 million project to clean and repaint the Skyway, awarded to a Poughkeepsie, NY firm, was halted midway when the firm experienced financial distress and closed and the bonding company guaranteeing the project entered receivership, and
WHEREAS, in 1985, a similar effort to clean and paint the Skyway resulted in some 2,500 cars and boats parked near or underneath the bridge being damaged with grit or paint, leading to hundreds of thousands of dollars in damage and reflecting the cost and difficulty associated with maintaining the bridge, and
WHEREAS, in the near future, the Skyway will require expensive and extensive rehabilitation costs, including painting, a comprehensive deck replacement, sub-structural repairs, and other work totaling as much as $100 million, and regular maintenance costs that make the structure prohibitively expensive, and
WHEREAS, the Buffalo Police Department, over a recent three-year period, responded to 1,269 police and emergency calls on the Skyway, 167 of which resulted in personal injury or death, and
WHEREAS, in times of inclement weather, the Buffalo Police Department is forced to dedicate six patrol cars and numerous police officers to barricade and close the Skyway, costing thousands of dollars per year, and
NOW THEREFORE BE IT
RESOLVED, that the Erie County Legislature supports and encourages the award of local transportation and other public sector contracts, where possible, to local construction firms and companies that employ significant numbers of local union employees, and be it further
RESOLVED, that the Erie County Legislature calls on NYSDOT to reexamine repainting the Skyway in these difficult fiscal times at a cost of $11.4 million when the structure may be demolished and replaced within the next few years, and be it further
RESOLVED, that the Erie County Legislature calls on NYSDOT to initiate a much more limited repainting and restoration of the Skyway that ensures public safety and guarantees the integrity and stability of the bridge, while limiting costs while a review can be undertaken to study the potential for a tunnel or other alternatives, and be it further
RESOLVED, that the Erie County Legislature expresses its support to Assemblyman Brian Higgins and the local state delegation in their efforts to replace the Skyway, and be it further
RESOLVED, that the Erie County Legislature calls on the State of New York to provide funding to conduct a comprehensive study of alternatives to the Skyway, including the costs of those alternatives, and be it further
RESOLVED, that the Erie County Legislature calls on the local federal delegation to work together to develop federal funds to assist in the replacement of the Skyway in the context of the development of the waterfront and harbor, and be it further
RESOLVED, that certified copies of this resolution be transmitted to Joseph H. Boardman, Commissioner of NYSDOT, Alan E. Taylor, Acting Regional Director of NYSDOT, Robert E. O’Connor, Regional Construction Manager of NYSDOT, Assemblymen Brian Higgins and Richard Smith, Senator William Stachowski, Erie County Executive Joel Giambra, Buffalo Mayor Anthony Masiello, and members of the local federal delegation.
Fiscal Impact: Highly significant for the development of the Buffalo waterfront.
MR. RANZENHOFER moved to amend the resolution. MR. KUWIK seconded.
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
DELETE the first RESOLVED clause and REPLACE with the following:
RESOLVED, that the Erie County Legislature supports and encourages the award of local transportation and other public sector contracts, where possible, to local construction firms and companies that employ significant numbers of local employees, and be it further
MR. KUWIK moved the approval of the resolution as amended.
MR. HOLT seconded.
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
COMMON COUNCIL PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY OF BUFFALO
February 3, 2004
NO. 131
By: Mr. Griffin
Feasibility Study for a Gateway Tunnel and the Removal of the Skyway Bridge
Whereas: In 1990 a Gateway feasibility study was prepared by Hayden/Wegman and Jenny Engineering Corporation to explore constructing a tunnel from downtown Buffalo to Fuhrman Blvd. and the removal of the Skyway bridge; and
Whereas: Five alternate options were proposed; the first option called for construction of a tunnel and the removal of the Skyway bridge. In 1990 dollars, that option carried a $113.6 million price tag; and
Whereas: The study resulted in Congressman Henry Nowak securing $20 million for demolition of the Skyway and the construction of the tunnel; and
Whereas: Unfortunately, after Congressman Nowak left office, the $20 million was used for other purposes; and
Whereas: Access to the outer harbor has been a deterrent for the development of our waterfront; and
Whereas: The Skyway Bridge often has to be closed when inclement weather hits, or when there is an accident on the bridge. This presents a very dangerous situation and also take police officers off the street so that they can block off the bridge entrances on both sides; and
Whereas: Construction of a new tunnel and demolition of the Skyway bridge would also open up prime waterfront land for economic development projects in the City of Buffalo; and
Whereas: There is currently about $50 million in unused State funds from the Adelphia Operations Center project that could be allocated to this undertaking;
Now, Therefore be it Resolved:
That the Common Council requests the Department of Public Works, Parks & Streets review and update the 1990 Gateway feasibility study; and
Be it Further Resolved:
That the City Clerk’s office send certified copies of this resolution to the Department of Public Works, the Buffalo Urban Renewal Agency, the New York State Department of Transportation, to Congressman Jack Quinn, and to Mayor Anthony Masiello to review this resolution and send their comments and recommendations as to the feasibility of this proposal.