Skyway: DOT tilts competition to Highway-Industrial Complex
Why doesn't Governor's "Aim for the Sky" competition winner—and any idea that saves any part of the Skyway corridor—make the first cut by the state DOT? Do we have to take this?
The New York State Department of Transportation has released a preliminary scoping document that rejects the first-, second-, and third-place prizewinners in Governor Andrew Cuomo's recent "Aim for the Sky" competition to develop new plans for the 70-year-old Skyway corridor. In fact, DOT rejected all 16 of the contest's finalists, and every single concept in its public comment phase that called for retaining any part of the Skyway between Tifft Street, south of the Buffalo River, and Church Street in downtown Buffalo. The Campaign for Greater Buffalo had submitted comments in favor of its "Skywalk" proposal.
Not only did DOT refuse to even consider anything that did not reduce the 3-mile length of the Skyway complex to bare earth, thereby washing its hands of any expense of actively remedying the damage its road has inflicted on Buffalo for 60 years— or leaving the region with the makings of a spectacular bike-and-walkway—it also made matching or enhancing automobile speed, comfort, and convenience above all else non-negotiable. It therefore was left with two alternatives which it conceived itself outside of the public competition and public comments.
Something strange happened between Governor Andrew Cuomo’s competition and the state Department of Transportation’s (DOT) Scoping Report, part of the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) review process. DOT eliminated 100% of all the publicly-submitted concepts for the Skyway corridor, created two alternatives for new inland highways outside of the public review and comment, and selected one as its preferred alternative. There is not a dime’s difference between them, both highways calling for speeds, volumes, and impacts that meet or exceed what the Skyway presently has. DOT is doubling down on past mistakes that the Governor explicitly called to be corrected.
It is the myopic 1950’s all over again, but with even more induced demand, higher design-speeds, and more problems for people walking and pedaling. Both have as their prime goal razing the entirety of the Skyway corridor to bare earth, and servicing the cars and trucks that thundered across in the style to which they are accustomed. Rather than spending $100,000,000, as the governor proposed, on, say, adapting the Skyway for non-vehicular transportation, recreation and ancillary benefits, we now have a bloated $600,000,000 project to perpetuate and exacerbate sprawl and car dependence plus a host of environmental ills.
DEAD PLAN WALKING. OR, THE INSIDIOUS MATRIX
The fix was in even before the two public show-and-tells DOT held in Lackawanna and South Buffalo in late January (ignoring downtown Buffalo, which would be most effected). DOT had magically changed the so-called needs for the project in its brief. It is there in the fine print: “Remove the Buffalo Skyway structure and elevated approaches...” No negotiation. Every option paraded before the public that retained any part of the miles-long Skyway corridor was a zombie, a dead plan walking.
There were 16 finalists evaluated, plus 12 that the DOT made up (which included a number of “straw men” featuring wildly infeasible tunnels and viaducts). Fifteen of the 28 did not call for demolishing 100% of the Skyway and its approaches. Bam! “Thus these 15...were dismissed from further consideration.” Similar schemes received during the scoping process from the public, including The Campaign for Greater Buffalo’s own Skywalk proposal, were also summarily dismissed. Presumably, before the morning coffee was finished.
Also embedded was a second directive that the project “Improve the transportation network to safely and efficiently accommodate the traffic currently carried by the Buffalo Skyway...” Wham! That is code for new roads, new lanes, longer on-ramps, 3 new bridges and 3 new interchanges (“Mustn’t cause a minute’s delay for drivers! Mustn’t have ground-level intersections!”).
The third horseman of the traffic apocalypse is the chestnut of safety for drivers on the roads over other citizens: “Improve the safety, operational, and capacity deficiencies of the highway connections...” Did we mention more highway capacity, Higher speeds, more elevated highways, and more interchanges? All three of these principal “needs” and the definition of what constitutes a valid solution are decided by... DOT.
Five more schemes bit the dust because they would not, according to standards dictated by DOT, accommodate all the Skyway traffic on an “improved network.” Two more of DOT’s strawman tunnel schemes were tossed because of expense (duh). Possibly, before everyone had to leave that afternoon to avoid the rush-hour traffic they helped create.
Three more proposals were axed after a traffic study which cannot take into account changes in human behavior that cannot be quantified—it measures just road behavior, and leaves out any social or policy effects because, lets not be silly, you can’t quantify an unknown (like removing toll barriers and resulting shifts to that route). So let’s just ignore the possibility. That left just two, both concocted by DOT.
The devil is in the matrix, and DOT not only weaves the matrix, it spins each thread. The problem is that DOT finds refuge in a welter of federal and state regulations that, except to a determined action figure, considers only the impact on a person in a vehicle on a particular roadway, not on the person in every other aspect and moment of life, nor on the community through which that person passes, nor society at large.
As of this writing, there is no information how to, or by what date, comment on the DOT’s project website. The scoping report is available here
THIS MUST BE DECIDED OUTSIDE THE GUARDRAILS
Engineers may not feel responsible for impacts outside the guardrails. They may want to just zone out, cruise in the flow. They’ve been down this road before. Citizens and communities don’t have that luxury. And spitting in the wind isn’t going to do any good. Tell the Governor Andrew Cuomo what you think by calling 1-518-474-8390 or by email