Talk:Buffalo Metro Rail

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Trains Portal

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Trains, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to rail transport on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
See also: WikiProject Trains to do list

This article lacks sufficient references and/or adequate inline citations.

This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale. (assessment comments)

Low

This article has been rated as low-importance within the Trains WikiProject.

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Rapid transit.

[edit] Not Going to happen

Two lines that are at the front of their cause include the Airport Corridor, and a Tonawanda Corridor.

The Airport Corridor is planned to begin in Downtown Buffalo, near the current Metro Rail's CHURCH station, and continue in an easterly direction in/out Division Sts., diagoanally in a northeastern direction near Jefferson toward the abandoned New York Central Terminal, cross Broadway, and then continue eastbound in it's private ROW (Right of Way) to the Thruway Plaza, Galleria Mall and Buffalo Airport.

This is currently in the article, but i can find no evidence that plans like this actually exist. Given the pathetic state of the current system and that this would be really expenscive it is never going to happen. Also this would have the trains going right through my house, so you would think that I would have heard about it if it is true. Unless anyone says anything to support this, I plan on deleting this section --T-rex 22:52, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

"I agree that the plan for this expansion is not going to happen in the near future, however I would not say that it is a pathetic system."--Railmogul

If you look at the bottom of the article you will see a link to the CRTC web site. On that web site they have a link to a 100 page document that outlines this dated in 2000 and published by the NFTA. Here is the link to the document: http://citizenstransit.org/STA2000.pdf

Look at page 17 for a map of all of the proposed lines.

I agree that it probably will take many years before we have the funding to make this happen as there are so many projects that are higher on the city/reqions priority list, but that does not mean that they are not planned.

T.C. 23:48, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

I changed the wording to "proposed" since the Tonawanda and Airport lines are just CRTC's suggestions, not actual plans. Vesperholly 16:59, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Light Rail or Metro/Subway

I think its pretty clear, since it uses lrt vehicles and has no third rail, it should be classified as light rail, even though it is described as running underground.

Also, I'd like to know WHY so much of the line was built as a subway, if they are using lrt vehicles? Was the switch to lrt vehicle and street running made after the initial planning, as a cost-cutting measure? Redneb 00:11, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

Buffalo's Metro Rail can be considered a "pre-metro". It is a mixture of LRT features, and metro features. LRT can run almost anywhere. Above grade, below grade, at grade. This is what makes LRT so attractive over a conventional metro. It is more versatile. Go and look at Edmonton's system. It is mostly underground, yet it is LRT. If you need a defintion of Buffalo's system. The closest would be an LRT with pre-metro sections.

The Buffalo Metro Rail uses lrt vehicles becuase part of the line runs through a pedestrain mall. A third rail in this area would be hazardous. The switch to lrt vehicles was not made after initial planning.

[edit] "Buffalo is now the smallest city in the U.S. to have a subway system of any kind" is factually incorrect

Newark is smaller than Buffalo and has a subway. I'm new to Wikipedia and do not yet know how to change this. Can someone please correct this? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Ethelk (talk • contribs) 03:19, 21 April 2007 (UTC).

While that's true strictly speaking, Newark is part of a much larger conurbation (greater New York). --Jfruh (talk) 17:32, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

Despite that Newark and New York City happen to be part of the same greater metropolitan area, their subways and city transit systems are entirely different. Newark is the smallest city in the United States with a subway. That is technically and factually correct. This article (and the one on Buffalo, NY, which incorrectly states "Buffalo is the smallest city in the United States to have a subway system") is wrong and should be changed. Ethelk 20:34, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

If you really want to get technical, the smallest city in the US with a subway is Union City, New Jersey, which is served by an underground subway stop on the Hudson-Bergen Light Rail line. But, like the Newark Subway, the Hudson-Bergen LR is part of the larger transit picture in greater New York. Both the Newark Subway and the HBLR offer connecting services to the PATH and NJ Transit commuter rail lines. The modes are different and there isn't a unified fare structure, but plenty of people use the Newark Subway as part of their commute to and from New York City, and one could argue that the Newark Subway wouldn't exist if not for the connection it offers to other NY-area rail trasnit.

The Buffalo Metro Rail, by contrast, exists in isolation. While you're right to say that it's incorrect use the phrase "smallest city in the U.S.", I think it would be both accurate and, more importantly, noteworthy to mention that Buffalo is the smallest urban area in the U.S. with a subway system. --Jfruh (talk) 20:54, 21 April 2007 (UTC)