2. Achieving the Vision
Other Major Proposals
A number of large-scale A number of large-scale proposals for sites located Downtown, or with relevance for Downtown, have been discussed in the course of plan development and reviewed over the past three years. These are large budget, long term, and in some cases, very controversial proposals that represent alternative ideas for the future of Downtown. They command public discussion and, done well, one or more of them could add significant value to Downtown. None, however, are essential to achieving the vision of The Queen City Hub. That will only occur through the sustained implementation of the capital program and related work scheduled in the plan.
Casino Gambling
The Seneca Nation of Indians has an agreement that allows them to develop casino gambling facilities in Downtown Buffalo. Opinion is divided on whether such a development would be good for Downtown specifically or Buffalo as a whole. In any event, plan reviewers believe a range of key issues need to be addressed and potential social and economic impacts carefully assessed before moving forward. We especially need to know whether a casino would provide net employment and revenue growth for the city, as well as what negative social impacts are likely to occur and how to minimize them.
Some reviewers of The Queen City Hub say that if a casino is developed it should respond to the following performance criteria:
- Locate in Downtown Buffalo in order to take advantage of existing infrastructure, to reuse the stock of existing buildings, and create synergies with other visitor attractions.
- Integrate with the City – physically through the careful design of entries and connections, programmatically through business arrangements – to make sure the economic benefits are widely shared locally.
- Target tourists, not residents, to make sure the casino attracts outside revenues, avoids exploiting local players, and complements efforts to build convention and tourism business.
- Ensure revenue accrues to local government rather than the State – to pay for new infrastructure and services, to invest in Downtown redevelopment, to support tourism development and marketing, and to help provide for the general needs of the city and county.
Convention Center
Planning for a new 400,000 square foot convention center with a 125,000 square foot main exhibit hall is now on hold due to uncertainty in the convention and meetings market, shifting public investment priorities, and community controversy over the necessity of a new facility. While the long-term need for investment in larger and more up-to-date convention space is clear to many, it is less certain where a new facility should go, how large it should be, or how it will impact other goals of this plan.
A key issue in location and design of any new convention facility is how a building with a very large footprint can be permeable to the public realm, add life to city streets, and provide economic benefits to nearby businesses. Sites near the Theatre District and Chippewa Street have been discussed at length. A site next to HSBC Arena has been offered as an alternative. Expansion of the current convention center, recently renovated, remains an option. Estimated costs for a new facility exceed $120 million and could go higher depending on the cost of hotel accommodations in the package.
Light Rail Expansion
Light Rail Expansion. Citizens and professional planners reviewing drafts of this plan have strongly endorsed proposals to extend the Metro Rail system. Among the possibilities studied by the Niagara Frontier Transportation Authority (NFTA) are links to the south towns, the Buffalo Niagara International Airport, the University at Buffalo Amherst Campus, and the Tonawandas. The 2025 Long Range Plan of the Greater Buffalo Niagara Regional Transportation Council calls for Metro Rail extensions to the airport as well as the Tonawandas. The 2025 plan is incorporated by reference in the City of Buffalo’s comprehensive plan.
An expanded rail system could reinforce the strategic position of Downtown in the region and reverse a trend of declining transit ridership. However, serious issues confront proposals for rail system expansion. Federal funding for such projects is competitive. Significant local matching funds are required. New rail capacity may worsen structural operating deficits of the system. No dedicated source of funding for transit operations now exists. Residents in some suburban communities have expressed opposition to construction. Costs for the NFTA “preferred alternative” Airport route via Exchange Street are estimated at $456 million. An additional proposal offered by plan reviewers would extend the current transit line south and east, linking large parking lots currently served by a vehicle shuttle service to the employment centers on Main Street.
Genesee Street Restoration
Re-opening the Genesee Street radial would correct some of the acknowledged mistakes of the past. This would mean demolishing the atrium section of the Hyatt Regency Buffalo, part of the Buffalo Convention Center, and the Charles R. Turner parking garage next to Buffalo City Court. Doing so would restore one of Downtown’s primary connections between the City and waterfront. Additional work to make Genesee Street a “great street” could be done from Martin Luther King, Jr. Park on the east all the way to the water on the west. Estimated costs for all phases including land acquisition, demolition, infill improvements, and terminus at the water range from $600 million to $1 billion.
Niagara Thruway (I-190) Cut and Cover
It has also been proposed to “cut and cover” portions of the Niagara Thruway (I-190) to reconnect Downtown to the waterfront. An alternative to this proposal would rebuild the Thruway as a low-speed parkway with multiple intersections and pedestrian crossings. Impacts on commercial truck traffic, Amtrak rail service, and overall highway capacity would need to be considered. A third option would include a combination of cut and cover and at grade boulevard. Estimated costs range from $700 million to $1.2 billion depending on how and where the deck is constructed.
Skyway (NY Rte. 5) Removal
A similar proposal calls for the removal of the Buffalo Skyway with new access to Downtown from the south provided by a tunnel or one or more lower-level bridges. Assembly Member Brian Higgins, primary proponent of the proposal, argues that the anticipated maintenance and reinvestment costs in the current infrastructure, frequent closings of the Skyway, and numerous accidents on the bridge, make a strong case for some kind of replacement. “Increased access to the waterfront in general,” Higgins says, “would be worth the money.” The cost would depend on the alternative chosen to carry traffic currently handled by the Skyway. Developers exploring options on the waterfront adjacent to and under the skyway, however, have not described the skyway as a serious impediment to investing.
Erie Basin Marina Build-Out
Erie Basin Marina Build-Out. Another recent proposal involves completion of the Erie Basin Marina/Waterfront Village area, including an extension of the Buffalo River esplanade from the Inner Harbor to the marina, realignment of Erie Street to the north of its current path, construction of a hotel on the riverside development parcel this creates, and development of a new waterfront campus of mixed use office, retail, entertainment, and housing facilities. Such proposals are directly connected to the strategic investment areas for Downtown and could play an important role in reclaiming still more of our waterfront. It is critical to do such work in a way that fully connects this part of the waterfront back into the Downtown. Costs have not been estimated.
Downtown Cogeneration
The Western New York AFL-CIO recently proposed development of a Downtown energy cogeneration system to provide district heating and electricity using biomass as a fuel. The proposal is presented as a way to reduce the cost of doing business Downtown and produce energy in an environmentally sound way. Costs for a cogeneration system are not available but would likely be borne by ratepayers with an expectation of net savings over the current costs of energy.
