by Donna Ashby
Erie Canal, western terminus, May 21,
2000: Central Wharf substructure (lower right corner) meets stone canal walls (under
two parallel steel tie rods). In the distance, other parts stone and concrete parts
of the east wall have been discovered all the way up to near Memorial Auditorium.
Similarly, the part of the west wall featured on the Artvoice cover two weeks ago
have been found, but reburied. ESD, with support of Mayor Masiello, says canal cannot
be restored, and proposes to bury Erie Canal and install a sheet-metal replica slip
next to it.
Photo reprinted from ARTVOICE, May 25-31, 2000
The Empire State Development Corporation (ESD)
says its intentions for its Inner Harbor Development Project are to "create
a focal point along the Buffalo River, recapturing the historic development patterns
and relationships to the waterfront." Mere hijacking of buzzwords to cover up
exactly the opposite, say preservationists. ìThe plan is to destroy utterly and for
all time any comprehensible history,î says Preservation Coalition Director Tim Tielman.
ìThe only pattern that description fits is one of untruth and innuendo. I guess they
think repeating that boldly and often enough, it can become the truth in unsuspecting
minds.î
The site in question is the western terminus of the Erie Canal, or the Canal District,
located south of Memorial Auditorium and stretching east to the Marine Drive apartments.
Currently the majority of the historic artifacts at the site lie buried under a thin
layer of fill.
In a Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (SEIS) released May 10, the
ESD stated it has chosen an alternative titled "Preservation in Place"
for the site. Detractors call the plan ìEntombment in Place.î This alternative, according
to the document, includes covering the entire Commercial Slip under new pavement,
special landscape design and selective reuse of "other recovered resources to
communicate the historic spatial relationships between the slip and adjacent buildings
and streets."
This ìspecial landscape designî involves reburying sections of the Canal wall which
have been uncovered, and keeping a major part of the rest of the District underground.
The ESD's solution to the question of preserving the historic remnants at the site
is to create the new "replica slip" which will be deeper than the original
Commercial Slip, to accommodate large watercraft. The corporation plans to create
a plaza with remnants of former building foundations, to remove a portion of the
cobblestone of former Lloyd Street, and then to build a pedestrian pathway that would
be an "interpretation" of the Lloyd Street right-of-way.
The ESD concept that preservation of the canal remnants can be accomplished by keeping
them covered in fill and placing site markers over them, goes against logic, according
to Tielman.
ìIn a historic landscape, people need to see the street, the wall, the river - in
order to visualize the relationship of the objects and the activities that have taken
place in years gone by,î Tielman said. ìWithout the actual objects, itís impossible
to make sense out of any historic site.î
Additionally, he said, the ESD's reasoning for preserving the artifacts by burying
them, is unsubstantiated, even within the Draft SEIS document. ESD maintains that
the limestone blocks forming the walls of the Commercial Slip have always been below
the water level, and thus out of sight.
ìThink about this,î Tielman said. ìHave you ever seen a wharf or dock built where
the mean level of the water was at the same level? Itís ludicrous Every time the
wind came up merchants would lose their raw materials or finished products to water
damage.î
The Preservation Coalition has a number of photographs taken from one shore of the
canal looking towards the other, clearly showing the limestone rock construction
of the canal walls six feet or so above the canal's water.
The ESD also states that the limestone rocks cannot withstand the freeze- thaw-cycle
of local winters if they are left exposed. Geologists who have inspected the rocks
have said the blocks would last thousands of years. In fact, within its own document,
there is a seeming contradiction. In section 2.2.2 of the Draft SEIS, it is stated,
ìThis tendency [destruction of rocks by the freeze-thaw cycle] was confirmed by Richard
Pieper, a well-respected stone conservator, hired to consult on this matter.î
In fact Pieper, director of preservation for Jan Pokorny Associates, writes: ìThe
exposed stones are below the proposed final grade in this location, but if exposed
and interpreted at finish grade, they would not require any maintenance or repair.î
In stone-building practices, Tielman said, it has long been known that itís usually
the mortar that deteriorates, not the actual stone, which explains why canal builders
would use stone blocks that didn't require mortar for security. ìWhen the public
sees this kind of misleading and contradictory information within one document that
was formulated by one source, in this case the ESD, it has the right to question
the validity of the entire study,î Tielman said.
Overcoming Structural Interference
Two other points that the ESD feels are significant to the restoration of the site
are the Hamburg Drain and the Skyway Piers. It is true that the Commercial Slip itself
and the streets of the Canal District, Lloyd, Prime and Hanover, have been compromised
by the construction of modern-day conveniences such as the Hamburg Drain and the
Skyway. However, this doesn't preclude the preservation of the district.
ìIn the plan proposed by the Preservation Coalition, we preserve the actual cobblestone
streets, but where the streets run into piers, we use asphalt to continue the roadway,
to indicate that this is not the original route, it is a compromise. Many times,
compromise is simply the best you can do,î Tielman said. As for the Hamburg Drain,
he said, it is just not significant.
The ESD states ìrelocation around these modern features would not reflect the exact
routes of the historic rights-of-way.î The question is, if we cover all of these
historical remnants over with fill and replace them with signage and markers of what
was once visible, does that reflect the exact routes of the historic rights-of way?
Does it reflect our history at all?
Again, the ESD says that large portions of the Commercial Slip have already been
destroyed through earlier redevelopment of the area, therefore, ìmaking full restoration
an impossibility.î Preservationists, however, say that virtually anything can be
reconstructed and restored.
|
The Preservation Coalition has
proposed an alternative design of the Inner Harbor Project that would eliminate the
proposed replica slip and incorporate the original Commercial Slip. However, if construction
continues as it has so far, future use of the Commercial Slip as a functioning waterway
is questionable.
|
ìIf you accept what the ESD is saying, you have to believe that anything that happened
at this site after 1825 doesn't have any historical significance,î Tielman said.
ìIn fact, although some of the older remnants have been demolished and covered in
fill, later redevelopment, particularly by the railroad industry, is itself a significant
part of our history worthy of preservation.î
Certain elements of the ESD proposal, such as constructing a new loop road with stone
blocks salvaged from tearing up historic roads, Tielman says, constitutes what the
Secretary of the Interior Guidelines call ì falsification of the past.î
If the boat doesn't fit -- change the historic canal
To further justify the filling in of the Commercial Slip and the excavation of the
replica slip, the ESD states it will increase vessel use of the canal by 50 percent
by making the replica slip deeper than the six foot depth of the original Erie Canal.
This will allow boats such as the historic fire boat, The Cotter, to be docked in
the replica slip.
Tielman, says, however, there is no reason these other vessels cannot be docked at
the bulkhead just outside of the Commercial Slip, saving the waterway to illustrate
its original and intended use.
ìFor one thing, the initial plan for the Cotter was to dock it at the yacht Basin,
not in the replica slip,î he said. That scheme itself is insupportable.
Whose waterfront is it, anyway?
The elements of Alternative I, according to the ESD, are in keeping with its goal
to "foster a livable community environment through the creation of a setting
for year-round, family-oriented sports, entertainment, and recreational activities."
Their plan, the ESD says, will link our present transit with the waterfront, thereby
increasing use of the Light Rail system, and it will create moorage for various types
of water taxis, canal boats and commercial tourist crafts.
ìIt sounds a little grandiose to me. The transit experts I've talked to all say that
use of public transit increases when there are points of origin for the riders ó not
just points of destination,î Tielman said.
This means there should be housing and businesses included in the plan, as there
is in the Preservation Coalition's proposal.
Time is of the essence
The Preservation Coalition maintains that remnants at the site, including the original
Commercial Slip, are worthy of being local landmarks and have the potential of being
named to the National Register of Historic Places, status that would draw visitors
nationwide and have significant impact on the local economy.
The ESD's report maintains that the only section of the Canal District eligible to
be named to the National Register of Historic Places is the east wall of the Commercial
Slip. Because the remainder of the infrastructure lies buried, according to the ESD,
it is an ìarcheological resource,î not a historic resource.
ìBy calling the District an archeological resource, they are wiping out the value
of it,î Tielman said. ìThere is a historical infrastructure there that the mass public
can use and appreciate. It should not be be reserved for some archeological priesthood
to tell us what is there and what to feel about it. It belongs to all of us.
ìTelling the public that the best way to preserve these historical remnants is by
keeping them buried, is just a technique to make sure they can go through with their
plan.î
In the mean time, work goes on at the replica slip. This new slip requires a bulkhead
tieback system that the ESD said would not impact the slip wall resource. It also
proposes the Commercial Slip wall be backfilled with a material that would preserve
its integrity and prevent further deterioration of the resource. Tielman fears this
tieback system will definitely impair the original canal structure, rather than preserve
it.
The Preservation Coalition has proposed an alternative design of the Inner Harbor
Project that would eliminate the proposed replica slip and incorporate the original
Commercial Slip. However, if construction continues as it has so far, future use
of the Commercial Slip as a functioning waterway is questionable.
Return to Buffalo Canal District
This page was created by Chuck LaChiusa
for the Preservation Coalition of Erie County