The Detroit Free Press this week published an article about the dispute over the Peace Bridge Authority's* expansion plans. Although the idea of the article is more to draw a comparison with challenges to border crossing project issues in the Detroit area, it provides some fresh, unfiltered insight lacking in much of our local coverage of this issue: unlike local newspapers, the Free Press doesn't have an editorial dog in the Peace Bridge fight.
In particular, I detected a less imperious and dismissive tone in the Free Press' quotes from Ron Rienas -- although he still concludes on a "what's all this fuss about, really" note. Could that be due to recent unfavorable developments, or that he's talking to a media outlet that he knows he can't browbeat (as he's tried to do - unsuccessfully - with Buffalo Rising) and won't spin his way? Instead of the usual "this is a done deal, resistance if futile" bravado (for example, his correspondence with Buffalo Rising saying that the PBA-owned houses in the Prospect Hill neighborhood will be torn down "either way"), he adopts a more resigned, "gee, it's just impossible to get anything done these days" tone.
Also, notice how Rienas' focus is now on the truck plaza, not the bridge -- whereas a year ago he was clearly saying they were integral to each other. The plaza plans have taken on a life of their own, to the point where the PBA's aggrandized vision would cost more than a new span itself -- overshadowing the bridge not only in cost, but importance:
This fuels the suspicions and hardens the resolve of neighborhood opponents, who have been questioning whether the PBA's eye is more on the plaza land grab (for comparison, look what they did across the river in Ft. Erie) than the bridge.
Folks here in WNY often invoke "Peace Bridge" in the same way as "wide right" -- as if it's an avatar of community fail whether any new metal has been extended over water at that particular location. Yet the PBA could go forward with a second span -- they have the design, and they could fund it through bonds backed by toll revenue. But they have said to local media that they won't build the new span without the neighborhood-displacing truck plaza, and in this article seem to be confirming that the plaza is their real object at the moment, not the bridge.
So if it's really no longer about the bridge now, then it's about the land grab: directly wiping out much of -- and indirectly wiping out the rest of -- an urban neighborhood. And as the entry image (credit: Detroit Free Press) reminds: wiping out a neighborhood isn't just about the buildings, it's about the people.
At one of the Green Code planning sessions earlier this week (Have you been to one, yet -- there's more sessions tonight) the question of "show me on the map a part of the city that doesn't work" caused folks to point, unhesitatingly and collectively, at urban swathes that had been clearcut for ill-conceived projects -- all originally sold as "community improvements." People around the city don't want those same mistakes made again, regardless of which neighborhood they live in. I even heard this from participants who don't live in, but care about, Our Fair City.
So the Detroit Free Press, after just a brief visit here, homed in on the heart of this issue. What about our local press, and some of our local leaders?
* For the persnickety: The Buffalo and Ft. Erie Public Bridge Authority
I really want them to just hurry up and build a bridge. But this neighborhood, this area can't be turned into transit hub. Someone with more ability to retain historical information than me may be able to provide greater input. But that whole area down there deserves to be more than a truck depot.
Fort Porter? Or was that further south where LaSalle Park is?
http://www.buffaloah.com/h/ftPort/source/14.html
No, Fort Porter was NOT closer to LaSalle Park. The buildings themselves were clustered around the area where the plaza admin buildings are now. The fireplace from one of them is even said to be inside one of the current Peace Bridge office buildings. I'm not an official historian or anything but have done a decent amount of amateur research on the Fort location and buildings. There is a map I came across that indicated that one of the buildings (often shown on old postcards) was located about where Vermont Street would have continued if it crossed Busti.
The bluff at about present day School St. was the location of the Black Rock. This outcropping of chert or flint was the source of material for Native Americans to produce tools and weapons. They had been coming here for hundreds of years to obtain this material. The area around Fort Porter was said to
littered in stone chips and flakes from generations of this activity. The claim was this waste material dominated over the soil in the area. Implements made of Black Rock chert have been found as far as Ohio, Pennsylvania and points beyond.
I have conceded the fact that I will never see a new bridge built in Buffalo. As someone who crosses with great frequency, it would be a huge advantage for the region to have three lanes in both directions.
I do think it would be wise to route the trucks away from this area. However, the American plaza is nothing short of a cluster.
The Canadians have benefitted from having a ton of extra land to work with. Thus, thier plaza is attractive, effective and large. We don't have that luxury. While I certainly do not side with those trying to halt this project, I don't know if it is entirely necessary to build a monstrous plaza there either.
At this point it seems like building a workable plaza - larger and more effective than the current set-up - over the park is probably the best option. Of course, I know there are many against that as well. At some point everyone will have to look at the big picture, not just facets of it, i.e. tearing up the park/neighborhood etc.