Metro Rail: The Original Vision

While searching for an image of the Metro Rail, I came across a post on Forgotten Buffalo that paints a picture of the futuristic rapid transit system that was originally dreamed up for Buffalo. It was a revolutionary vision that some thought would help to reverse the trends of a declining city. With permission from Forgotten Buffalo, here is the post in its entirety:

From the 1973 Metro report: The third element of the Transit Development Program would be the backbone of the Niagara Frontier’s 1995 transit system — a 46 mile rail rapid transit network known as the Metro. Phase 1, costing $241,339,000, encompasses the design and construction of the Blue Line from Cathedral Park to North Campus 1 – 10.7 miles. Of this cost, $2,049,000 is for the relocation of 99 families, 78 businesses and 2 others from the 130 structures (which must be purchased for the right-of-way) to suitable equivalent facilities. The transit system will be designed to enable use by the aged and the handicapped.
All stations except North Campus 1 will be tapped by bus routes, and 4,750 commuter parking spaces will be disturbed among Sweet Home, Maple, Sheridan, LaSalle and Meyer Hospital stations. Consultants recommended the line to be opened from North Campus 1 to South Campus in four years and to Cathedral Park in six years after start of design. Six-car trains will run every 2 minutes during peak hours.
Metro-Forgotten-Buffalo-NY-8.jpg
Metro-Forgotten-Buffalo-NY-7.jpg
Metro-Forgotten-Buffalo-NY-6.jpg
Metro-Forgotten-Buffalo-NY-5.jpg
Metro-Forgotten-Buffalo-NY-4.jpg
Metro-Forgotten-Buffalo-NY-3.jpg
Metro-Forgotten-Buffalo-NY-2.jpg
Metro-Forgotten-Buffalo-NY-1.jpg
                                                                             End
Horizontal-line-Buffalo-NY.jpg
Below is an additional image from a post that Steel published back in 2007 with his lead-in as follows:
Before the Main Street pedestrian mall (that we all know and love) was constructed, there was a much, much more grand plan for the street. Concepts dating back to the early seventies called for covering 4 blocks of Main and several side streets with a glass roof supported by a futuristic space frame. The new enclosed heated and cooled street was going to be the focal point of WNY and would save downtown, or so they thought. A subway would have run directly under Main and would be open to the newly
covered mall-street at certain locations creating a dynamic multi level space. Subway lines to Kenmore, Hamburg, and the airport would also have converged on Main Street.
Writing available on the proposal indicates that officials were seriously working toward making a covered Main Street real. The detailed drawings and models show a highly thought out design. Building and business owners had signed off on the plan and even accommodations for fighting fires were worked out. I wonder if they considered the heating bill? Eventually the reality of paying for this mega-scheme hit home and officials scaled the idea back to the pedestrian mall with surface rail that exists now (which was even more scaled back as construction progressed).
Metro-Rail-Buffalo-NY-steel-future.jpg

About the author  ⁄ queenseyes

Founder of Buffalo Rising. Co-founder Elmwood Avenue Festival of the Arts. Co-founder Powder Keg Festival that built the world's largest ice maze (Guinness Book of World Records). Instigator behind Emerald Beach at the Erie Basin Marina. Co-created Flurrious! winter festival. Co-creator of Rusty Chain Beer. Instigator behind Saturday Artisan Market (SAM) at Canalside. Founder of The Peddler retro and vintage market. Instigator behind Liberty Hound @ Canalside. Catalyst behind the Pierce-Arrow Film Arts Center. Throws The Witches Ball at The Hotel @ The Lafayette. Themed New Years mayhem at various locations. Next up: Porchfest... Also offers package tours of the city for groups or individuals. Contact Newell Nussbaumer | Newell@BuffaloRising.com

69 comments
Up and coming
Up and coming

The outer harbor was never accessible, houses on the east side were demolished because nobody wanted to I've there, removal of street cars because people bought more convenient personal automobiles, downtown buildings were demo'd because there were no business to occupy them. The city did itself in.

Mark_P
Mark_P

50% of downtown buildings replaced with parking, streetscapes ruined for widened lanes, a highway run through a neighborhood to ruin property values, another highway sealing the city off from its waterfront, urban renewal destroying functional neighborhoods, demolition of half the housing stock on the east side, the radial street grid marred by ugly low density buildings and one way mini-highways, the removal of all streetcars, the loss and failure to replace our city of trees....yeah, I was going for dramatic, because it was dramatic change over a short period of time.

Up and coming
Up and coming

.......also, logic is always flavored, it makes it easier to swallow.

Up and coming
Up and coming

"rather than coping with some losses and emphasizing our strengths, we burnt the place to the ground trying to be something we werent (the suburbs)."

So "we" burnt the place to the ground. That's awefully dramatic.

Mark_P
Mark_P

I didnt realize logic had a kool-aid flavor, but I sure do love it.

Buffalo's population was going to be affected by suburban flight the same way most cities were affected, because that was the trend at the time. The problem is, rather than coping with some losses and emphasizing our strengths, we burnt the place to the ground trying to be something we werent (the suburbs). We made what would have been a small temporary problem into a larger more persistent one. And now people use that as an excuse to never fix/create anything in the damaged areas.

As for how much the 33 is used, what does that matter? If it wasnt there, they would use the streets they should use (the spokes of our radial grid), or they would live closer because being far away is less convenient.

Up and coming
Up and coming

Mark, you've been drinking the cool aid too much my good friend. The 33 was started in 62 and completed in 65. By that time Buffalo's population had already started to dwindle by 50k residents. Just because the 33 was built during the same time the city was declining, doesnt mean the 33 was the reason. Plus, who's to say that without the 33 the suburbs wouldn't have blossomed more than they did. Maybe Amherst would be the new Buffalo with out the 33? Maybe all companies would have said, "screw it since it take my employees 45 minutes to get downtown and they all live in the suburbs, why don't I just relocate to the suburbs?" Also, for being such a bad idea, it's used quite a lot.

Mark_P
Mark_P

The 33 "relieving" traffic from Broadway/Genesee/etc are a big reason why the East Side depopulated. Traffic to those commercial centers was decimated, which hurt business, while at the same time making it easier to live outside the city instead. Migration and disinvestment, lowered property values and crime all followed. Many people didnt want to leave but felt they had no choice, as the city had basically folded up shop on them.

I would love to see the restoration of Humboldt parkway, some infrastructure investment, or light rail come to that area. It would show stability. Not to mention that in other cities, the availability of quality transportation (not buses or highway ditches through your neighborhood) is a big selling point when picking a place to live.

A.T.Payne
A.T.Payne

The many different representatives from the Suburban areas lobbied successfully against the plans. They didn't want the "easy access" of the inner city population to the suburbs.

Pegger
Pegger

Not only do I like it, I like it a lot! What an exciting concept. Never would I have ever imagined that the original infrastructure to be extant all these decades later.

Distinctly I recall what I was told were trolley tracks down many of the streets in Erie Co. as late as the mid 60's. I do not know from what decades they were last operational, but right down the center of many major thoroughfares they were. Kenmore had them on Delaware Ave. I used to watch the horses' hooves during the parades for fear they might get stuck in the spaces between the tracks and the pavement.

I remember hearing the adults around me debating whether to pull them up, bury them, or pave them over perhaps in the same manner young people overhear discussions today about the Skyway or Canalside. Before that, there were serious conversations about the coming effects of the opening of the St. Lawrence Seaway on the Buffalo economy.

Once the rails had vanished, never did I think That such a relatively intact system remained in these places awaiting a resurrection. But, I now I have more insight into why I never saw any of my grandparents drive a car. No need.

During the 50's and 60's, public transportation in the city and into the suburbs was fairly decent. The original street design lent itself well for crosstown traffic patterns. They ran all night at frequent intervals and out to the burbs. Even on weekends.

Most everyone knows of Buffalo's legendary ethnic self-segregation (as I call it). This loop provides an excelent way to reach most of these neighborhoods in a way that was way ahead of its time. Let's hope that this can be brought to life with out the powers that be destroying it. We were talking about the Skyway when I was a kid. Now I am retired and there it still stands with the same tired suggestions being recycled.

JSmith
JSmith

That "Richmond Corridor"... was that really going to be an elevated train running along Richmond Avenue? I can't imagine they would have planned for a subway under Richmond. Guess we dodged a (silver) bullet on that one.

A streetcar line might work well on Richmond, though probably better on Elmwood or Grant.

nick at nite
nick at nite

Great article queenseye. This is the first time I've seen this.

whatever
whatever

You're welcome - it has to be out there somewhere!

Eric
Eric

I wish this was here. The Hamburg line would most likely run within a few blocks of my house in South Buffalo. I dream of the day I could ride the train to Sabres or Bisons games or just downtown for dinner and drinks. We do those things often and I'd love to not worry about driving.

Plus, uniting all 3 UB campuses seems like a no-brainer. I'd like to see it as part of the Medical School plan. It seems like if UB combined with the Buffalo Billion and federal grants it could be feasible.

whatever
whatever

bobbyraz49 -

At this link (which leads to Flickr) is Pilot Field expanded to major league size.

http://tinyurl.com/expanded-pilot-field

I found that rendering posted by a user in this baseball discussion forum:

http://www.baseball-fever.com/showthread.php?111870-Coca-Cola-Field-Dunn-Tire-Park-North-AmeriCare-Park-Pilot-Field-Buffalo-NY

You can also see that same rendering at that baseball-fever link above, but you'd first have to register and log in as a user there before user image attachments like that one will display. There's a few steps confirmation steps involved in registering there to weed out spammers, but it's free to anyone.

There's no attribution of the rendering's original source, but presumably it was publicly released by the stadium design firm back when it was being advocated. Google and TinEye don't find any web postings of that image.

If you'd like the image file emailed to you, just let me know the address.

grad94
grad94

yeah, that would have put the borg to shame!

Rand503
Rand503

Call me a hater if you want, but every time a discussion of metro arising, we have all these silly ideas that if you build a subway line, Buffalo will launch into a paradise of economic activity and be really the coolest place to live.

It's all very ridiculous, and past experience shows us its not at all true.

Why is it ridiculous? Because if the city is ever going to rise economically, we need people to understand basic principles of the economy. What makes a city grow? What makes it shrink? how can we create jobs? How can we create wealth? How can we attract the people we need for the 21st century?

There are no easy answers to any of this, and there is no one answer to any of them either. But it requires maturity of thought and experience. We have limited resources as it is -- we simply dont have several billion dollars lying around waiting to be spent.

So all this talk about how a metro line will cause development to occur is totally unfounded in logic or experience, yet people still clamor for it. There is no projection for how much it will cost to build or maintain, or who will pay for it. Nor is there any analysis of who will actually use it often. In Washington, we have a great metro system, and we are building more. But it's actually cheaper to drive than to take the metro during peak hours, and still it requires tremendous amounts of funding from local and federal governments.

People are free to talk pie in the sky all they like, but we have real problems here and playing up fantasies of "wouldn't it be cool to take a metro train from my house to the airport" merely means no one is serious about finding ways to actually promote business in town.

Rand503
Rand503

Call me a hater if you want, but every time a discussion of metro arising, we have all these silly ideas that if you build a subway line, Buffalo will launch into a paradise of economic activity and be really the coolest place to live.

It's all very ridiculous, and past experience shows us its not at all true.

Why is it ridiculous? Because if the city is ever going to rise economically, we need people to understand basic principles of the economy. What makes a city grow? What makes it shrink? how can we create jobs? How can we create wealth? How can we attract the people we need for the 21st century?

There are no easy answers to any of this, and there is no one answer to any of them either. But it requires maturity of thought and experience. We have limited resources as it is -- we simply dont have several billion dollars lying around waiting to be spent.

So all this talk about how a metro line will cause development to occur is totally unfounded in logic or experience, yet people still clamor for it. There is no projection for how much it will cost to build or maintain, or who will pay for it. Nor is there any analysis of who will actually use it often. In Washington, we have a great metro system, and we are building more. But it's actually cheaper to drive than to take the metro during peak hours, and still it requires tremendous amounts of funding from local and federal governments.

People are free to talk pie in the sky all they like, but we have real problems here and playing up fantasies of "wouldn't it be cool to take a metro train from my house to the airport" merely means no one is serious about finding ways to actually promote business in town.

Rand503
Rand503

We built a metro system 30 years ago. Please show me where the growth is.

Portland is a growing city = people are moving into it. Buffalo is losing population - people are moving out of it. If anything, traffic is better than it ever was. So where is the need?

You also have to explain this magical theory that everyone seems to like. You build a metro line and magically stores open, and office buildings pop up. So who shops at these stores? If there was a demand for them, why aren't they open now? Same with office buildings. If there are companies out there demanding office space, why are they waiting until a metro line is built?

Help me with the logic here.

Rand503
Rand503

Why didn't happen when the current metro line was built?

Rand503
Rand503

IT's total baloney to claim that metro operates at a profit. High ridership is great -- I'm happy about that. But it does not pay the costs of operating the rail line.

No, I do NOT think business will boom along main street with another line built. Where exactly has business boomed anywhere along the current metro line? It's just as dour as it was before the rail line was built.

Mass transit is built not because people desire it, but because traffic is so bad that unless other forms of transit exist, further developement will be choked off. IN Buffalo, traffic is never bad -- you can easily get where ever you want to whenever you want to within half an hour.

Enough with the fantasies. You have provided no evidence that business will boom with mass transit, you have provided no evidence that traffic is so bad anywhere in town that it is needed, and you have provided no thoughts on how much it would cost or who would pay for it.

travelman
travelman

I agree with the comment regarding bringing back the belt line. The majority of the tracks are still there and it would service the whole city not just one area.

It runs right past Larkinville, the Waterfront, Downtown, up the West Side along the water, then across right past Rocco Termini's FWS location, Tri-Main, then down through the east side passing Central Terminal. It would be a remarkable tourist asset that would feature some of our more positive accomplishments.

If you look at a google map of buffalo you can still see the loop making its way around us. It already intersects the metro at the Waterfront and at Tri Main so people could make connections that would get them through the center of town. Just saying....

Buffaboy
Buffaboy

> Total baloney.

Not exactly. If you haven't checked, Buffalo is actually in the top 20 systems with the highest daily passengers. That is not a typo. Because people see how convenient this sytem is to get downtown, for anything, it has generated high ridership levels. But since the NFTA is lazy and has not thought about expanding recently, the system seems small, useless and underproductive. And that is why the car on Main St. project is important in a way, blending transport systems together.

So why else is this not "total baloney"? If light rail were to be expanded to, say, UB, do you not think commerce would explode along Main St.? How about Walden Ave.? Even better, a line down to the Southtowns? Boy, would that reshape the economic topagraphy of this area.

Bottom line is this; a transportation system ---> better choices for businesses ---> jobs ---> new residents ---> increased level of economic development.

Not to mention that queenseyes regularly posts articles here on how Main is getting revived in conjunction with cars returning and not just one mode of infastructure, allowing people to have choices.

Businesses tend not to care about superficial things like a city's weather (IBM, PepsiCo and countless others). They care about infastructure and moving their products and people.

My parents used the light rail to commute to work when it first opened because it is convenient. Imagine it stretched out.

Part of the reason Buffalo cannot expand is a corrupt political system, and possibly hidden cash.

Look around you, the Metro Rail is in demand, there is just no money. Perhaps the Buffalo Billion could solve this, but I have my doubts. As said before, demand brings mass transit so development does not choke off. Deja vu, didn't you say something like this too?

buffaloroam
buffaloroam

When did this site become full of so many haters?

beersponge
beersponge

stop stop stop it , my side are hurting from laughing so much. We haven't done much right. As someone once said, "The only thing Buffalo is good at, is shooting its self in the foot. And their aim is getting better. "

sobuffbillsfan
sobuffbillsfan

I find your whole logic for this interesting. Development happens because of "growth". WNY hasn't experience any "growth" in decades, but it has experienced exponential development.

Also places like Portland Org. has used regional smart growth initiative to make transit projects most effective. They build a line and station, stuff gets built around it.

Rand503
Rand503

Next up -- we should spend a billion dollars to revitalize the Beltway line, because that was in use during Buffalo's heydey, and surely that will bring people to downtown and be a viable commuter line.

then we have to spend another couple of billion on a new line that goes down Humbolt Parkway, because that once was an important traffic area, and we really really need to make it nice for drivers.

of course, no one bothers to say who exactly will benefit from all this. Would any of you build a new building along these lines just because there is a metro stop there? Development happens for a reason -- because there is GROWTH that needs to be accommodated. Without growth, there is no need for any new development.

There is a need for office space in the medical campus because there is growth there. There is no need for new housing in the east side because there is no growth there. Building a first class metro line down Broadway isn't going to bring growth there -- but hey, if you have any examples of that happening anywhere else in the world, be my guest to prove me wrong.

Rand503
Rand503

So -- we should saddle ourselves with huge taxes for our generation all future generations so that we can all feel good?

And I guess that the current metro wasn't enough to make us feel good. I guess the baseball stadium wasn't enough to make us feel good. Nor was the the convention center, built during this time period, enough to make us feel good. That pedestrian mall actually made us feel pretty darn bad.

If we need to spend tax-fed governement money just to make us feel good, I think it might be cheaper to drop prozac from airplanes.

Rand503
Rand503

Realistically? How so?

Realistically, such a line would cost over a billion dollars. I would suggest that for that amount of money, we could buy each commuter a high end Lexus and provide them with special heated bays for parking lots, and it would still be much cheaper.

Rand503
Rand503

Total baloney. There is no precedent that mass transit stimulates development. Rather, it is the other way around -- mass transit is built in reaction to so much traffic that the community needs it or else development will choke off without it. Even if you were correct, that developement would be spurred by mass transit, then why hasn't it happened in downtown Buffalo? We are still waiting for the massive redevelopment along the metro lines for almost 30 years now. When will it happen?

PLEASE -- I have had it up to here with this ridiculous thinking that if Buffalo just had some really cool toys like all the other Big Cities, we will automatically become a Big City too. First the cost is ridiculously high -- any line worth a damn is going to cot a billion dollars, minimum. What better uses for the money, real economic development, could we have with that billion?

There are NO SILVER BULLETS to economic development. You can't just throw money in some really cool hipster toy and assume that the local economy will boom.

Rand503
Rand503

Yes, like the fact that the current metro system has had such a tremendous impact upon the existing baseball stadium. Look at all that impact!

Penn Station
Penn Station

Oh, there were plenty of dreams on paper, but there was no master plan for downtown on what all these people would do when all the federal money was spent on Metro routes. At the time it was Buffalo on the dole," Fed. Daddy, Give me more money"! I am all for public transportation but this was a sham, which is why its a failure now.

,

Buffaboy
Buffaboy

Instead of making ELAB0ORATE plans and T e a s i n G peple with these bull$#i++£rs, why did they not consider the funds? I'm sitting here thinking if this stuff happened, life would be completly different around here. For better or worse, because if even one of these projects had happened, just the city's self-esteem would haverisen a lot. If many were built, this city would be hugeathon! Now looking at the bigger picture, because we can't live in a 300-mile radius the rest of our lives, Dubai for example builds crap like this every month. It may not be the safest in the world, but hell, at least stuff is getting done over there. Yet over here, and not at all just Buffalo, putting anything up, digging anything, expanding anything, connecting anything, attracting any business takes generations. If someone has an answer besides money and oil, you should have a degree in economics.

Buffaboy
Buffaboy

Absolutly, this is what NEEDS to happen in conjunction with economic development. This is why the Main Street development is important, because any progress on anything in this former smoke belching town is exciting to me. A high falutent (I hope I spelled that right) project like this and the stadium just quenches the redevelopment juices. I know some people disagree with both of the posts above mine, but when it is all boiled down, it leads to a much better Buffalo than we have now. And don't get me started on the Old Buffalo/New Buffalo scenario to happen in about twenty years, it is going to be an unprecedented ride for Buffalo, where our current downtown will be shifted to the Outer Harbor/Perry projects. Trust me, it's going to happen.

Buffaboy
Buffaboy

Absolutly, this is what NEEDS to happen in conjunction with economic development. This is why the Main Street development is important, because any progress on anything in this former smoke belching town is exciting to me. A high falutent (I hope I spelled that right) project like this and the stadium just quenches the redevelopment juices. I know some people disagree with both of the posts above mine, but when it is all boiled down, it leads to a much better Buffalo than we have now. And don't get me started on the Old Buffalo/New Buffalo scenario to happen in about twenty years, it is going to be an unprecedented ride for Buffalo, where our current downtown will be shifted to the Outer Harbor/Perry projects. Trust me, it's going to happen.

Dan
Dan

I forgot ... the Gordon Bunshaft plan for the UB North Campus. One building: one mile long, a quarter mile wide.

Dan
Dan

Lots of typos in that post. :(

Dan
Dan

> Niagara and Broadway come to mind immediately.

Niagara Street has a lot of residents to the east. To the west, a lot of water. Important transit corridors should be in central locations, not on their periphery.

Broadway used to be one of Buffalo's most heavily traveled streets, and its #4 streetcar line was the last to be abandoned, because it was so busy. Today? No. 4,800 vehicles a day (AADT) between Michigan and Jefferson, and 9,000 from Jefferson to Fillmore. Richmond Street is busier; an AADT of about 9,700 between North and Lafayette, and 6,300 from Layfayette to Forest. Elmwood between North and Forest has an AADT ranging from 11,000 and 13,000 AADT.

The advantage of a spoke-and-radial street grid is, unfortunately, a disadvantage when it comes to BRT in a city of Buffalo's current size and density. Buffalo has so many radials, traffic and demand has become widely dispersed through the system, so there's no really busy corridor where Curituba-style BRT would be viable. 60 to 70 years ago, the eastern radials -- Broadway, Sycamore, Genesee, William and Clinton -- were extremely congested; cars, trucks, and streetcars and buses on headways of a few minutes throughout the day. The 33 and 190 relieved much of their traffic, and depopulation of the East Side did the rest.

ExpressCourier
ExpressCourier

You are correct friend I don't know a whole lot about BRT I'm just interested in starting a conversation about it. Seems much more realistic and feasable than expanding light rail to North Campus, airpot, etc., etc., and all the other totally unrealistic plans that get bandied about on this site.

Dan
Dan

> Wow. That's nuts. 99 families and 78 businesses sounds like a bit more than a minor impact. But what the hell, the Kensington had just gone up to great acclaim

The original proposal was for a system that was mostly elevated north of Delavan,

jag
jag

Niagara and Broadway? I don't think you have a very good understanding of BRT. It doesn't make sense unless the buses run with very little headway. Running buses with very little headway only makes sense if there are a lot of riders. There are only a lot of riders in areas that are densely populated. Density. Density is missing and it is THE prerequisite for BRT.

ExpressCourier
ExpressCourier

What might have been. (sighs)

I find it interesting how we're still talking about plans that were drawn up 40 years ago. We should be drawing up plans for how we're going to get around in 40 years. We should be encouraging discussion of newer, modern transit solutions that work for a smaller, economically distressed city. Cities all over the world comparable to Buffalo are investing in Bus Rapid Transit (BRT), which is essentially a bus that acts like a tram. It has a designated lane, fares must be purchased in a station prior to boarding, and it only stops at said stations. It is relatively cheap to implement and flexible so it change to meet changing transit patterns. Google Curitiba, Brazil; the city that invented this. Buffalo has some very wide streets that could be successful with this. Niagara and Broadway come to mind immediately. Pittsburgh and Cleveland have invested in BRT and it seems to be working for them so far. If it can work in similar sized rust-belt cities it can work here too.

bobbyraz49
bobbyraz49

Dare to dream !!

I am looking for a rendering of Pilot Field when it was supposed to be expanded ! TY and Merry Christmas

Dan
Dan

> It's nice and all, but why does every station in the system have an above ground concourse?

Metro Rail was never intended to serve primarily those living around stations, as with the systems in NYC or other very large cities. It was intended to serve passengers transferring from feeder bus lines.

Before Metro Rail, many bus routes in Buffalo traveled on Main Street to downtown at some point. This resulted in lower parts of Main Street having extremely frequent service; a bus every minute in some cases. There were also far fewer crosstown bus routes.

One purpose of Metro Rail was to allow for more efficient use of the bus fleet. Instead of so many routes traveling down Main Street, bus routes would instead end at large Metro Rail stations. The stations would serve as transfer points not only for bus to rail, but also bus to bus. It was hoped that this would result in increased bus frequencies by making the routes shorter, and allow for more crosstown routes.

An example, instead of separate East Utica/Main and West Utica/Main lines, there would be a single Utica crosstown line, with those going downtown transferring to rail at the Utica station. With the Main Street portion of the routes gone, service on East/West Utica could be provided at the same frequency, or even increased, with far fewer buses.

Jesse
Jesse

What, by extending Buffalo northward and out, filling up Amherst until it turned into a great stinking pile of subdivisions and shitty traffic? Oh wait...

Up and coming
Up and coming

Realistically a one way line to and from the airport along the 33 would be a perfect idea.

LouisTully
LouisTully

"too elaborate, much simpler would have been much cheaper and efficient."

Reminds me of when you see a $70,000 Escalade parked in the driveway of a house worth about half the car. Instead of going for greatest use of the $ it's like they went for what would look nice and world-class, even though Buffalo was spiraling down.

Shoey
Shoey

It's nice and all, but why does every station in the system have an above ground concourse? You only see that in the super elaborate stations of systems like the TTC and MTA. It just seems like a huge waste of money when all that's really needed is a metro vending machine, a set of stairs, an escalator, and the platform itself.

Only the NFTA would heat a room for half a dozen people waiting on buses.

© 2014 Hyperlocal Media. All Rights Reserved.