Skyway key to waterfront choices
Proposal by Higgins asks the right questions, but action needed
8/17/2005
Rep. Brian M. Higgins’ proposal to use federal transportation money to turn Fuhrmann Boulevard into a landscaped waterfront parkway deserves careful consideration. While it’s far from a solution to waterfront-to-city access problems, it’s a chance to leverage immediate benefits into long-term private waterfront development investments.
The alternative is using the funds to do some incremental work on the Route 5-Skyway complex, which would be asked to double as a high-speed arterial and local-access waterfront roadway. That’s a major conflict, and the potentially available $22.36 million would only fund a piece of the $140 million cost of that project. Involved state officials say a parallel roadway system, with a local-access landscaped Fuhrmann Boulevard next to a commuter Route 5, is consistent with earlier plans.
Higgins also has a more fundamental objection to the Route 5 approach. The options all assume continued existence of the Skyway. Buffalo would be far better served by removal of that 110-foot-high bridge in favor of other waterfront connections across the Buffalo River, if a viable alternative emerges.
The Skyway, built in the 1950s, has needed major repairs and will need more, estimated at $70 million. Once-a-decade repaintings ran $11.5 million last time. Higgins Monday asked for a formal state assessment, arguing that actual repair costs will top $100 million.
Alternatives range from a $250 million tunnel, to a lower replacement bridge costing $100 million, to upgraded roads and up to four $25 million lift bridges. The six-year, $286.4 billion federal transportation bill just enacted has good things for Buffalo, including the $22.36 million. Careful study of options is indeed necessary, but let’s get things moving if the city is to get the most bang for the bucks.