Niagara Heritage Partnership Slams the Robert Moses Parkway Scoping Report

The NHP Evaluation of the Niagara Gorge Corridor Project, Robert Moses Parkway-North Segment, Scoping Report Presentation. NYSDOT PIN 5757.91 The Niagara Heritage Partnership (NHP) (www.niagaraheritage.org) found this scoping report to be biased in favor of options other than total removal in the following ways.

 The Project Objectives, as written, favor parkway retention. 1) benefits related to total removal, elsewhere thoroughly discussed by NHP and documented by the independent study conducted by EDR were ignored. 2) arguments against total parkway removal that were thoroughly debunked by the EDR study were incorporated as "objectives " that can only be "met" by parkway retention. 3) goals and benefits of total removal proponents were incorporated as vague "catch phrases" to imply that treatments other than total removal could also provide them.

 Some amplification of the above: 1) the potential for ecotourism as outlined by NHP, the increased Homeland Security, the potential for power plant-greenhouse--all detailed elsewhere and which we'll forward by snail mail tomorrow or hand deliver--were not acknowledged. 2) the EDR traffic study concluded alternative routes could easily handle parkway traffic with the parkway totally removed; yet a "Goal" of the project remains "Promote vehicle traffic patterns that minimize traffic patterns in residential areas." Translation: keep the "detour" function of the parkway. 3) "Promote ecotourism..." This has been a central feature of total removal and it has been repeatedly explained why attempting to attract ecotourists to hike, walk, and bicycle alongside a two-lane commuter route is a non-sell proposition: yet there that phrase is, as if merely printing those words make it feasible in the world of reality.

 Nowhere in the Project Objectives do we find: to eliminate road maintenance costs for the future; to eliminate the direct, on-site contamination of the Corridor that occurs as a function of road use and maintenance (salt spreading, vehicle carbon emissions, the latter just under 232,000 tons annually by OPRHP's own calculations); to increase as much as possible the numbers of acres of wildlife habitat acres to the Corridor, which is already recognized as a Globally Significant Important Bird Area; to reduce threats to Homeland Security; to create the potential for a world-unique greenhouse with both practical, economic, and tourist-attracting capabilities (in spite of the Report's inexplicable depiction of the power plant on the front cover as if it's a contribution to the Greenway); to begin the restoration and future-creation and preservation of an historical old-growth forest; to eliminate (not "reduce") the dysfunctional detour function of the parkway, and so on.

 It's clear that an honest assessment of the realities and potentials associated with the North Corridor Project is likely to have resulted in a quite different set of conclusions. Further, when the estimated cost of total removal provided by EDR is 3.8 million, the Scoping estimate of 33 million is nothing short of preposterous. The difference of some 28 million can be found in projects such as the "Expansion of Discovery Center and Aquarium footprint," and in "new shared park road entrance to....Maid of the Mist facility." While these may be desirable projects, they have zero to do with removal, and it is dishonest to indulge in this kind of accounting. Even with this obvious slight-of-hand number juggling, the difference between total removal (the lowest estimate in spite of padding) and the much-touted Alternative 3 (by local politicians) remains 19 million. Advantage: total removal.

 Of course the facts and other complexities obscured by the accounting numbers noted above beg further discussion, but we've done that previously and it's been ignored. Rather than repeat, we'll forward other relevant documents with this response: a letter to Assemblyman Ceretto; a recent Guest View (9 March 2013); a sampling of the online petition; the statement "The NHP Position re: RMP/Niagara Gorge Corridor Project: Meeting No. 4 for Representatives of Organized Groups" (27 Oct. 2012); and documentation that no road (a retained parkway) ever pays for itself, is invariably a drain on future economies, facts with which the DOT and others are no doubt very familiar.

 It's worth noting, however, that the Scoping Report's failure to take into account the 4,000 + individuals who've voted for total removal (plus the 80 organizations who also support total removal) is a serious oversight, indeed. We ask that their voices be counted, so that no future report can say, as this one does, that the Phase One {removal to Findlay} is supported "by the public." These voices are a genuine expression of what potential visitors want to see along the gorge rim--a park without a commuter road. The "public" of the Scoping Report is not comprised of those who've responded to the Niagara Heritage Partnership's proposal for total removal over the last 16 years.

As we may have pointed out previously, the list of organizations and about half of the individual names (the other half we have on hard copy) are available for viewing at: www.niagaraheritage.org That the MOU partners endorse Phase One is no surprise--they are all entities who share conflicts of interest regarding this issue. ( The MOU was entered into prior to the Niagara River Greenway becoming a reality, so it may be bound to strictures other than that new, over-arching vision.)

That the Scoping Report concludes removal to Findlay ends at a "logical termini" and has an "independent utility" (whatever that means) is a conclusion with which NHP takes issue--we believe that Phase One should be total removal to the City Line at Devil's Hole, which is our "logical termini." What's more logical than a termini that terminates at the City's boundary? It's an additional mile of parkway removal that would permit much of the natural restoration upon which developing an ecotourism market depends; it is the portion of the gorge rim most ecologically valuable, the portion EDR recognized as the most significant, and that which they recommended be first scheduled for parkway removal and natural restoration.

Perhaps that was a moderate view; NHP believes that mile should be added to Phase One. Relevant to this additional mile, under Project Objectives, Improve Access and Transportation, "C" is "Link Parks, communities, and attractions adjoining the NGC." Having "link parks" as an objective is clearly a goal requiring parkway retention, but it is also very close to being silly when two facts are known: 1) three State Parks are currently "linked" by that first mile of parkway north of Findlay (only two of which are accessible from it), and 2) no State Park, community, or "attraction" to which vehicle access is currently available would be denied vehicle accessibility if that additional mile of parkway were totally removed--and the same could be said of the entire length of the parkway should that be totally removed. The objective itself, therefore, is of questionable value, unless we imagine alternative routes do not exist.

The entire "Improve Access and Transportation" category is feeble when examined closely, stating the obvious (remove cones) and "remove barriers that impede access" (a given), though we suppose it had to be said. It is the NHP position that the "transportation" here is of little value and should be discarded as an objective when the road providing the "transportation" degrades the landscape, and the potentially restored landscapes, though which it runs.

 Sincerely, Bob Baxter
Conservation Chair
Niagara Heritage Partnership
19 March 2013

Will Officials Ignore The Robert Moses Parkway Study?

Dear Editor,

I agree with almost everything Joe Grabka said in in his recent letter. He's only unaware of a few things--such as the degree to which the Niagara Heritage Partnership believes total gorge parkway removal would improve the business climate of Main Street, for example. As such, he's still light years ahead of Assemblyman Ceretto and Senator Maziarz, who haven't, in 16 years, given the NHP proposal genuine consideration.

NHP does say that removing the parkway detour around the City would help businesses in Niagara Falls. We never said, however, that removal would create instant economic prosperity for Main Street, or anywhere else, but that it would be part of the solution to reviving business districts. Yes, much else needs to be done, as Grabka points out. But who can deny that removal would help, under present conditions? I don't remember a time since the power project (and the parkway) was completed, and all the workers left town, that all the business districts in Niagara Falls were "booming," as Grabka does. But maybe he's right about that.

Even if he is, we should still consider the major reasons, supported by evidence shown by the EDR study, that total removal is advisable. This study, titled "Regional Economic Growth Through Ecological Restoration of the Niagara Gorge Rim," the only actual study ever done of this issue, cost $140,000. The Niagara River Greenway Commission funded $115,00 of that, and $25,000 came from the City of Niagara Falls. (Sen. Maziarz spoke against the funding being granted, and even today remains confused about what constitutes a real study.) Note: Paul Dyster--but not as "Mayor"--and family members, have signed the NHP petition for total removal. As a common-sense person he knows the parkway should be totally gone; as Mayor, he hedges his bets--he'll take what he can get.

The EDR study concluded that the gorge parkway should be totally removed; that traffic on alternate routes would pose no problem; that it was affordable at 3.8 million; that removal would save millions in both the short and long term; that it had the potential to reap economic benefits for the region--and that the gorge rim between Findlay and the City Line (exactly the section those opposed to removal are so desperate to keep), was so valuable environmentally that it should be the first section of the road removed, and then the rim restored with natural landscapes.

And now everyone, Ceretto, Dyster, and to some degree, Maziarz, et al, including State Parks, seem content to pretend the EDR study never took place. They didn't like the conclusions. Never mind facts and evidence: they know what they believe, they know what they want. The results of the State Park "scoping" of the issue reflects this bias.

Several weeks ago I sent Assemblyman Ceretto a letter asking him to reconsider his position and support total removal. I mapped out a rationale and sources where he could find out more about the details. But he didn't give me the courtesy of a reply.
If you'd like to see that letter, email me at erbaxter@aol.com and I'll send you a copy.

And now Joe Grabka says if I want to hug a tree I should start on Goat island, get some planted there instead of the concrete parking lots. He asks if that would be too much trouble for me. Well, it hasn't been too much trouble so far, and I do want to hug a tree, many of them, in fact, and I have been advocating good stewardship for Goat Island for over 25 years, most recently in a guest view titled, "Ecotourism Best Way to Extend Tourism for Niagara." That was May, 2012, and can be found at www.niagaraheritage.org under Recent Postings, the 4th item on the list. It's one of a half dozen or so sources I sent to Ceretto, btw.

In the end, Mark Thomas of the OPRHP and the rest of the politicians will do what they want, regardless of a mountain of contrary evidence pointing to a different course of action. It's difficult to believe that this local State Parks administration isn't taking its marching orders from Albany--and if it isn't, it should be, given the significance of the issue. It's possible we'd get a clearer view from afar, from where the situation might be less likely to be examined through the lens of local political considerations. In any event, we know at whose feet the final responsibility for wrong action here is to be placed.

Senator Maziarz can go on with his public endorsement of "Option 3" (keeping the parkway on the best part of the gorge rim); he can go on trotting out Wallenda; he can continue to say "restoration of native landscapes in several areas" to journalists for quotation as if he believes those words stand for something worthwhile, rather than what they will translate to in reality: the spotty planting of a few native trees and shrubs along a two-lane road; he can go on disparaging the EDR study without naming it, revealing his confusion about it and other earlier "plans" and schemes; he can go on noting that Option 3 got the "highest rating from public response forms received to date," while ignoring the 4000+ signatures of those endorsing total removal (essentially votes for # 6) and the 80 organizations who also support total removal. These are, at the very least, tens of thousands of people who value the natural world telling us what they want to see here.

That he even thinks that this issue should be largely resolved by local comment is revealing; we are not discussing the proposed enlargement of a Walmart parking lot here, where only those "in the neighborhood" get to have a say--we are trying to determine how to remedy the desecration of a world-renowned landscape by a redundant highway, how this geological feature unique in North America, carved out by the retreat of the last ice age, can be best preserved and ecologically restored for future generations.

So Maziarz and the rest of guys should stop trying to sell us this version of "keep the parkway." They know it's bogus. Maziarz should stop telling the tale of his going "door-to-door in the city of Niagara Falls, particularly in the DeVeaux neighborhood," listening to thoroughly debunked complaints about "air quality issues" and traffic jams on Lewiston Road; both Dick Soluri and Maziarz should stop repeating the parkway is crucial for Lewiston's survival when there's absolutely no evidence in support of that, zero. Mark Thomas should stop behaving as if providing "transportation," ie, keeping the parkway, has suddenly become the most important part of the State Parks mission; he should stop rhapsodizing about the land added to State Park holdings south of Findlay while ignoring the damage caused by the parkway north of it, while he also ignores the fact that the Niagara River Corridor has been designated a Globally Significant Important Bird Area. (Will tour busses be driving on that "multimodal" gorge rim trail, incidentally?)

Paul Dyster should stop asking that people be "willing to postpone their disagreements with what happens north of Findlay into the next phase of the discussion." When he's willing to successfully work to re-visit Phase One so that it totally removes the parkway from downtown to the City Line at Devil's Hole, I'll postpone my disagreements. Christopher Schoepflin, president of USA Niagara Development, should stop the magical thinking that makes him talk about the three options as if they're compatible, while simultaneously extolling the virtues of north south "connectivity" to Lewiston and Youngstown.

These guys are starting to remind me of Colin Powell, displaying sketches of fictional mobile bio-weapons and holding up vials of talcum powder, a show-and-tell based on, they claimed later, bad intelligence. As it turned out, it was no intelligence at all, just fantasy, lies. But they sold it. We're not buying it this time. We may have it forced on us, anyway, but we still prefer the elegant vision of total removal and the benefits it could provide along the gorge rim and throughout the region.

We can imagine long-grass, flowering meadows, song birds and butterflies, hiking and bicycling trails winding through stands of young trees, maturing over time to become the old-growth forests of the future. At gorge bottom, the river will continue to flow. We'll all be long gone by then, of course. But through this environment over the years are the families--having picnics, hiking, riding bicycles, young children playing, becoming young adults, the couples, the solitary walkers, the middle-aged, the elderly, those in wheelchairs, their lives enriched by the natural landscapes they can enter. For many of us, this would be our little ribbon of wilderness close to home, one we could afford. This should be our legacy.

Sincerely.
Bob Baxter
Conservation Chair
Niagara Heritage Partnership

Spread the Message - Restore Niagara Fall's Landscape

If I could spread my message right now to 1 million people, I would tell them about the vision to remove the Robert Moses Gorge Parkway from the Niagara Gorge Rim as necessary to ecologically restore the unique botanical landscapes of Niagara Falls, NY and the Niagara River Gorge rim.

I’d direct them to www.niagaraheritage.org and ask them to sign the online petition--and then please mail a letter with a postmarked date no later than July 1, 2011, to New York State's Governor Cuomo and to NYS Parks' Commissioner, Rose Harvey. I would ask them to send copies to NYS Senators Charles Schumer, Kirsten Gillibrand George Maizarz, Mark Grisanti, to Congresswoman Louise Slaughter, Assemblyman John Ceretto, to NYS Parks Western Director Mark Thomas, to the Parson's Group consultants, and to the Buffalo News, The Niagara Gazette, The Buffalo Business First, and the Albany Times Union.

I’d ask them to say the following:

1. They want to see the road totally removed between Niagara Falls and Lewiston,

2. They embrace and share the vision for NYS Parks and the Niagara Gorge Rim as put forth and advocated for these last 15 years by The Niagara Heritage Partnership. Tell them you believe it could be funded, and implemented, within the next three years through the Niagara River Greenway Relicensing dollars, through the Niagara National Heritage Area funds, through Federal Administration Funds, by another New York Power Authority sweep, through NYS Park's Heritage and Preservation Grant funds, or through bonds.

3. I would ask them to speak for those who can't: the flora--the native plants, the Old Growth Forest at DeVeaux Woods and Whirlpool State Parks, the ancient cedars growing in the gorge walls, and for the wildlife--the birds that migrate this Globally Significant Important Bird Area (the Niagara River and its shorelines), and for the deer that lay dead for a week against the parkway cement wall that prohibited its access to the natural environment.

4. I would ask each to write he or she strongly believes this vision will economically benefit not only the residents of a financially challenged city, but will also benefit the millions of tourists who come to see Frederick Law Olmsted's unparalleled 1880's vision--NY's first and oldest State Park.

5. I would ask them to promise that they will visit the charming northern villages when they come to see our restored wonder, but they want to do it by alternate routes--the I-190, Route 265, and via Highland/Hyde Park Blvd.

6. I would ask them to mention that they have learned about how other cities around the United States and the world have removed and are removing their highway mistakes.

7. Finally, I would ask them to state unequivocally that anything less than total removal of the gorge parkway and a full restoration would do a disservice to the multitudes that travel to this world destination and to those of us who live in this western New York region.

USA Today: letters@usatoday.com
Albany Times Union: tuletters@timesunion.com
Buffalo Business First: buffalo@bizjournals.com
Buffalo News: LetterToEditor@buffnews.com
Niagara Gazette: mark.scheer@niagara-gazette.com

Governor Andrew Cuomo: (518) 474-8390
Congresswoman Louise Slaughter: Fax: NY: (716) 282-2479, Fax: Washington DC  Fax: (202) 225-7822
Senator Charles E. Schumer: Fax: 716-846-4113
Senator Kirsten Gillibrand: Fax (866) 824-6340 
Senator Mark Grisianti: grisanti@nysenate.gov, buffalo.grisanti@gmail.com
Senator George Maziarz: maziarz@nysenate.gov
Assemblyman John Ceretto: cerettoj@assembly.state.ny.us

Rose Harvey, Commissioner, NYS Parks: rose.harvey@oprhp.state.ny.us
Mark Thomas, Western Director, NYS Parks: mark.thomas@oprhp.state.ny.us
Tom Donahue, Parsons Group: thomas.donohue@parsons.com

Related articles

• Removing the Robert Moses Parkway (fadingintomyth.blogspot.com)

Niagara's ER Baxter Rant Will Be Published On Garden Rant

On August 30, Bob Baxter, a regular Fading Into Myth contributor, will be a guest blogger, “a Garden Ranter.”  From August 30 through Labor Day, garden bloggers from all over the web are scheduled to post pet peeves during a two week long (maybe longer), Garden Rant “Second Annual Guest Post Week.”

The four Garden Rant owners are looking for “the 10 Hottest Rants of the Year.” If Fading Into Myth’s award-winning poet/author/contributor surpasses, he’ll be presented with a “cute badge” to put on the Niagara Heritage Partnership’s website.

The Garden Rant submission guidelines are simple. Keep it short and lively. Make it highly opinionated. Rage or advocate. Tell it like it is. Those provocative qualities suit Baxter and he’s opining how it is here on the Niagara River and what needs to change. Baxter even offers a festival suggestion, though I hesitate to admit that in Niagara County, since the one he talks about might be mistakenly embraced.

The upcoming rant is pure Baxter. At times droll, mocking, big grin funny, controversial, truthful and punctuated with outrage. He’s still “Looking For Niagara,” the one we’ve almost lost to New York State Parks and Albany. (Review here. Video here.)

So, who’s behind the Garden Rant blog and what’s their story? One of the Garden Rant writers is a Buffalo, NY magazine editor. Another blog owner lives near Saratoga Springs. I also met the other two at the 2010 Buffalo Garden Meetup held in July, but can't remember what they do outside of their blog. By their own admission, they’re “convinced gardening matters, bored with perfect magazine gardens, in love with real, rambling, chaotic, dirty, bug-ridden gardens, suspicious of the “horticultural industry,” appalled by pesticide use, and turned off by activities that involve landscaping with plant materials.”

I think Baxter’s found four kindred souls as long as they don’t present him with a bouquet of daffodils. Not even an artificial one.

Remember to bookmark the date and website www.gardenrant.com. Then click over to www.niagaraheritage.org. You’ll know what to do. It will brighten his day. Afterwards, come back and tell us what you think.

Related articles by Zemanta

• The Niagara River Greenway is a Rudderless Boat (fadingintomyth.blogspot.com)

Thought of the Day

Things Frank Croisdale Missed
While Living On The Niagara Frontier

I'd like to see Croisdale walk west on a DeVeaux street, come to the parkway, climb over a fence, run across the parkway...then go back & do it again on the next street, and the next, and the next...I'd like to see Croisdale, his fingers hooked in the chain link fence, peering into the State Park's Maintenance garage area on the gorge rim...I'd like to see him staring at the "princess" on the "other side of the border" when he recognizes her for the gaudy whore that she is...I'd like to see him sitting on Tesla's lap for a photo op...etc. I'd like to see his name on the Niagara Heritage Partnership petition for gorge parkway removal...then I'd know Niagara was rising... --Bob Baxter, Niagara Heritage Partnership

Related articles by Zemanta

• Niagara Falls Recommends RMP Removal (fadingintomyth.blogspot.com)

The Benefits and Impacts of Removing Urban Roads

http://www.wildonesniagara.org/advocacy.html
Case Study Summary: Benefits and Impacts of Road Removal
City Parks Closing Roads for Parks
Parking In Parks
Economic Impacts of Protecting Rivers, Trails, and Greenways
Conservation: An Investment That Pays
Case Studies in Urban Freeway Removal

Looking For Niagara Author To Read May 6, 2010

RAIDERS OF NIAGARA PRESENTS
E.R. Baxter III and Mark Lloyd

Baxter, a Niagara County Community College Professor Emeritus of English, has been a fellow of a New York State Creative Public Service Award for Fiction and a recipient of a Just Buffalo Award for Fiction.Previous publications include Looking for Niagara (Slipstream Press); chapbooks: A Good War And Other Poems; Hunger; and What I Want. Additional work has appeared in New Madrid, Stone Canoe, and in Underbeat Journal #2. A novel, Captain Hooter at Niagara, awaits publication by Michigan State University Press.Baxter is also a founding member of Niagara Heritage Partnership (www.niagaraheritage.org). E.R. Baxter will be reading an excerpt from his creative nonfiction book manuscript, American Digression.

Mark Lloyd recently published a chapbook: Warm Blooded Mornings, which will be available for purchase at Talking Leaves. Several of Lloyd’s poems have appeared in Artvoice.

Born in Lockport, NY, Mark began his love of writing for theatre by listening to old time radio dramas and comedies. In May of 2006 he won a Writing Award from the Theatre Association of New York State for his work "Hollywood Dreams—A Monologue," produced by The Amherst Players, and in 2009 won an award for Directing Neil Simon's Come Blow Your Horn, produced by the Towne Players.July 2010. He is the Events Coordinator for an Art Festival at the Historic Tonawanda Castle where he will direct his one act play “Asleep In the Snowy Forest.” August 2010 he will direct and write his first dinner theater production: Dating Is a Drag at the same location.

Thursday, 6 May 2010 @ 7:00 PM
TALKING LEAVES BOOKSTORE
3158 Main Street, Buffalo, NY
Free Admission – Public Welcome

Creating A Sense of Place - How To Turn A Place Around Handbook

"When AN IDEA stretches beyond the reach of an organization, people are often told, "It can't be done." But when officials say, "It can't be done," often what they really mean is: "We've never done things that way before." How to Turn a Place Around pg 47 from Project for Public Spaces, Inc.
See also: http://fadingintomyth.blogspot.com/2009/10/another-robert-moses-parkway-myth.html

Related articles by Zemanta

• Principles of Creating Great Places - Project for Public Spaces, Inc. (fadingintomyth.blogspot.com)
• A Waterfront Project Opens Up The Debate About the Soul Of A City (fadingintomyth.blogspot.com)

Quote of the Day

Children have an amazing fresh ability to see clearly and to state the obvious. Here are two young viewpoints found on the Niagara Heritage Partnership's (NHP) website. NHP  proposes the region remove the Robert Moses Parkway between Niagara Falls, NY and Lewiston, NY, restore the space ecologically as the means to revitalizting the local economy and tourism. Reprinted with permission. Click HERE to view and sign the Niagara Heritage Partnership petition.

"I'm only 9; why do we have to sign a petition to fix this? just do it."

"I'm only 15, i don't know the economy, i don't know the beatles, all i know is this is ugly, dangerous and nobody can really explain to me why this ugly thing exists."

Related articles by Zemanta

• Cerreto: Parkway is Like A Berlin Wall (fadingintomyth.blogspot.com)
• Historic Preservation at a Crossroads (fadingintomyth.blogspot.com)

Governing and Bickering in Niagara Falls

Image via Wikipedia

An interesting read about Niagara Falls, the Niagara gorge, and the Robert Moses Parkway can be found here. (click the word here)

For more information about the Robert Moses Parkway, please click on the labels.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Robert Moses Parkway and the Handicapped (fadingintomyth.blogspot.com)
• Niagara Gorge Rim Restoration - More Q & A For The Wild Ones Proposal (fadingintomyth.blogspot.com)
• Comments on the Explore Niagara Trolley Study (fadingintomyth.blogspot.com)
• Niagara Gorge Restoration Final Question for The Wild Ones Niagara Proposal (fadingintomyth.blogspot.com)
• Quote of the Day (fadingintomyth.blogspot.com)
• Cerreto: Parkway is Like A Berlin Wall (fadingintomyth.blogspot.com)

Quote of the Day

From the Niagara Heritage Partnership website petition to remove the Robert Moses Parkway:

1734.

Tom Christy

Buffalo, NY

Niagara Falls New York is in need of a complete makeover; there really aren't many things worth keeping, and the theory should be "implode as much as possible and start over"......I've followed the niagara heritage partnership for some time without being more involved; i've concluded that this is a most thoughtful and resolute group of people; they only ask to fix things, and they listen more than they talk, which is rare and appreciated. I have not heard one iota of logic for keeping the parkway. Robert Moses raped this region; there are things we cannot do on some fronts; there are things we can do on others. Eliminating the parkway seems to make sense environmentally, economically and for the future plans of the falls. I fully support the work of the NHP because if someone had a logical, working solution to what they are proposing here, we'd have heard of it. If anyone has such a solution, bring it forward and i'm sure the NHP would listen. To quote Ronald Reagan, "Mr. Gorbachav, tear down this wall"!!!!!!

Historic Preservation at a Crossroads

This is the second handout given to the Niagara River Greenway Standing Committee. You can read the first one here. (click on here).  

NYS Office of Parks, Recreation, and Historic Preservation recently published its 2009-2013 Historic Preservation Plan, Historic Preservation at a Crossroads. It received final approval by the National Park Service on March 27, 2009.  

The rationales for creating the document are on page four. Here are two: [1] “New York is a state of incredible beauty, abundance, history, and culture. Historic preservation helps communities make the most of these assets and is a positive but underutilized contributing force at the intersection of the state’s declining population and economic trends and its considerable assets and opportunities.” [2] Historic Preservation is a community catalyst and a powerful engine for economic growth. It stimulates pride, and inspires residents to help themselves, brings neighborhoods and communities together, enhances community assets, attracts reinvestment, creates more jobs than new construction, and keeps labor earnings cycling through local economies. Its incremental, locally oriented, and sustainable revitalization activities have been successful in good and bad economic climates in diverse communities across America for many years.”  

The “Plan has been prepared to assist all New Yorkers interested in identifying, protecting, enhancing, and promoting the state’s historic and cultural resources. It is based on the premise that historic preservation is in New York State’s best interest: it is a powerful but as yet underutilized community and economic development strategy that should be an integral part of New York State’s revitalization, smart growth, and sustainability efforts.” (page 7)  

"Part I is the heart of the plan. It identifies 11 key themes and seven key historic preservation strategies", or goals. The first theme, Leadership and Advocacy, notes “a need for a clear, unified voice, stronger execution of federal and state preservation laws, increased collaboration with others. Coordination and Collaboration, listed as a second theme, addressed “better integration, coordination, and collaboration between state agencies, not-for-profits and private agencies, organizations and individuals in order to bring people together."  

For Niagara Falls, the “Statewide Main Street Program” theme is particularly important. The plan states on page 14, “Despite being a pioneer in the main street revitalization concept, New York is one of a very few states that have not established a statewide Main Street Program, although such a program has been considered and partly implemented by state agencies and organizations such as New York State Division of Housing and Community Renewal, New York State Department of State, and the New York Main Street Alliance.”  

Main Street revitalization is also noted as a “key historic preservation strategy.” Here’s part of the vision statement printed on page 18: “Historic preservation will be understood as a rational approach for protecting irreplaceable historic and cultural resources and managing change, offering proven, fiscally conservative, cost-effective community strategies that: 1. Revitalize, strengthen, and enhance New York’s cities, villages, and rural hamlets while making use of existing infrastructure and transportation systems and CONSERVING farmland, OPEN SPACE, and NATURAL AREAS." [emphasis, mine.]  

So, there it is, laid out in print by New York State Parks, a five year plan that clearly states exactly what the Niagara Heritage Partnership as envisioned and advocated for since 1997: We can make use of all the existing alternate routes (I-190, Route 265 etc), eliminate the Robert Moses Parkway, redirect the traffic down Main Street, Niagara Falls via Hyde Park Boulevard and Highland Avenue, AND reclaim the natural area of the gorge rim as open space. A third post will list the Key Threats Identified in the Planning Process.

Discussion About The Trolley Study Proposed by Niagara County Legislator John Cerreto

Dan Davis - Niagara Community Forum Blog (Used with Permission)

"I'll predict the outcome of the study will be that it is a terrific idea and that they will need further study to determine what the implementation process should be. Then, they will need a few million to buy buses (trolleys) and hire consultants to determine the best routes. They will likely try to bypass Main Street in favor of the Aquarium and Whirlpool Park (of course they will have to double back for the new train station). When the "Garden Parkway" is complete, they will be able to drive right past there (new station) on their way to Whirlpool Park. The big question will be, how they route to Niagara University and the Power Vista and get back on the Parkway before they reach the top of Lewiston hill. None of this fares well if you have business interest on main street or are in favor of parkway removal to Lewiston.

I think someday there will (and should) be a trolley service through the city to north towns and back. How it is routed is a different situation. If our civic leaders are concerned about the livelihood of Main Street, they will insist is is routed from the Aquarium down Main to the new depot and beyond.

It is unlikely they will recommend going through Deveaux. There is a slight chance it could be routed to the [Niagara Falls] Country Club, at the top of Lewiston hill eliminating the need to use the parkway past Devils Hole.

What do you think John Ceretto's motives are? Does he want a "People Mover" that promotes the entire area, or does he want a fast track to Lewiston. His actions in respect to the routing will have the answer."

ER Baxter - Niagara Heritage Partnership (Used with Permission)

"Your prediction sounds like a solid possibility. What I return to is: this was billed as a feasibility study. The main question, then, is: "Is it feasible?" If the answer is: "Yes, if you throw enough money at it," then it could have been answered without the "study," as easily as I did just now.

2) If the question is expanded to "How can we encourage visitors to stay here longer & see more of what we have to offer (and as a result spend more of their money here)?" then how that question is answered becomes more complicated. If the answer is "We provide a trolley to take them to various points of interest," that brings up other questions.

The first one is, "Who will pay for the trolley?"

The second one is, "Will the money spent to establish, operate, and maintain the trolley be repaid by the fares visitors spend to ride it?"

That is, "Will it be self-supporting?" The short answer is, "No, not even close." We now go back to the first question of who will pay for it.

Thus far the answers have been relatively easy and the team at Niagara University had arrived at this point quickly--hence their speculation about "corporate sponsors." Maybe that's possible. Perhaps machines vending Coca-cola on the trolleys would be enough payback as was one idea floated by the team--as well as logos on the trolley sides, ect. I can't speak to that.

But these questions have to be answered by the study:
How much would it cost to establish a trolley system?

How much for each trolley?

How many are needed?

What would the fuel costs be per mile?

How much would it cost annually for insurance?

Would the trolleys run beyond the approximately 100 day tourist season?

From what segments of the tourist population would the ridership come?

Would couples and families who drove their own vehicles here be willing to embark on an hours-long trolley ride to Murphy's Orchards, the NT Carousal museum, [The Niagara County] Wine Trail, Lockport Caves, and so on, away from their cars, unable to make a decision to stop for lunch when & where they wanted to, take a side trip, etc etc?

How much time would be taken up by these trips? Seems as if 3 hours wouldn't be an over-estimate. (To each location.)

How about those who arrive here on tour buses? That would seem to be natural--these people don't have their own cars to drive to Fort Niagara, for example. But tour buses already go to Fort Niagara...and these drivers have a schedule to maintain, too. They aren't going to sit around drinking coffee waiting for their customers to take a trolley ride. "Okay, everybody out. Take a look over the gorge edge. Thirty minutes here at the Power Vista, and everybody back on the bus. Here we go. Next stop Goat Island."

At what location would these trolley-loads of tourists be picked up to begin their "stay-with-us-longer" tours? Has this question even been considered by the Niagara University study team?

It's a logistical nightmare from which there is no escape, if we are looking for the effort to have an economic payoff and not be just another instance of tens of
millions of taxpayer dollars poured down yet another rathole of special interests.

I suspect as you do that this "study" will be a subjective mass of speculations and fictions that will conclude there is a need for further study and that it remains what it was to start with: a transparent attempt to justify the continued existence of the gorge parkway coupled with the goal of trolleying tourists to Lewiston businesses (and to Old Fort Niagara, at Bob Emerson's insistence as the initiative evolved). (This route will be the "pilot" part of the proposal.)

Further, (note: see the pdf file filed under recent doucments)Legislator John Ceretto, also an employee of OPRHP, [Office of Parks Recreation and Historic Preservation] seems not to understand the concept of "conflict of interest," in spite of his earlier efforts to get a County resolution passed calling for the retention of the gorge parkway and being forced to withdraw it because he was in conflict. Having Niagara University and students there function as his proxy doesn't shield him from engagement in this further conflict.

The study conducted by NU must state the parkway will not be a utilized route--it is insufficient to say that "study findings are not dependent upon" the gorge parkway. And what "findings" would those be?

A very good map (made new, not some cobbed together version of an old one) clearly showing tourist attractions throughout the County and the roads to get to them, made readily available to every tourist arriving here--even at a cost of a million or two or more--would put us further ahead economically, I believe. The map itself should be of a quality that would make it a keepsake, a souvenir, an advertisement for our region. And the map could largely pay for itself from contributions made by the attractions listed & shown, restaurants, gift shops, and so on. NTCC [Niagara Tourism and Convention Corp.] should pick up a share as should OPRHP & NYPA [New York Power Authority].

Anyway--that's my take on it."

From: Percy, NTCC squander city share of casino $$.(EDITORIAL) by
Source: The Niagara Falls Reporter (Niagara Falls, NY), 7/22/2008.
Via: HighBeam™ Research
COPYRIGHT 2008 The Niagara Falls Reporter

"See more articles from The+Niagara+Falls+Reporter+(Niagara+Falls%2c+NY)

Percy, NTCC squander city share of casino $$.(EDITORIAL)

Article from:
The Niagara Falls Reporter (Niagara Falls, NY)
Article date:
July 22, 2008

Niagara Tourism and Convention Corp. CEO John Percy's attempts to justify his squandering of nearly $3 million in city casino and bed tax money would be laughable, were it not so tragic.

Using figures cooked up from who knows where, Percy claimed the NTCC brought in $46 million in tourism dollars last year. Knowing there is no way to possibly verify the number, we were frankly surprised he didn't just say he brought in $100 million.

The NTCC is a state agency. Why the city of Niagara Falls has to pay for its entire operating budget is a question that has never been answered satisfactorily. A quick glance at the literature put out by the organization shows that it spends as much of its resources promoting the canal in Lockport, Fort Niagara in Youngstown and the Wine Trail out someplace where they don't have any sidewalks as it does promoting Niagara Falls.

While Percy pointed to targeted advertising purchased in places like Cleveland and Pittsburgh, you're far more likely to see television commercials for the Seneca Niagara Casino in those places than you are to see any taxpayer-funded NTCC advertising.

The organization spends quite a lot on Percy's frequent trips abroad, ostensibly to promote the Niagara region to potential tourists in Europe, India and elsewhere. Of course, there is no way to determine whether or not his taxpayer-funded travels result in a single tourist coming here who wouldn't have come otherwise, but perhaps from Percy's perspective that's the beauty part.

Percy said the numbers he cooked up are based on research conducted by Niagara University. He doesn't say what standards the students or professors or whoever used, which raises many interesting questions.

For instance, Percy claimed that hotel occupancy was up by 7.6 percent in 2007 over 2006, but didn't say how many more rooms were rented. Did the number take into account the closure of the Ramada, the Holiday Inn or the two riverfront hotels formerly operated by John Prozeralik? Clearly, fewer hotels open will result in a higher occupancy rate for those that remain, even if the number of visitors remains exactly the same.

"This is only a snapshot," Percy said in issuing his report. "I could go on and on about what this agency and our staff actually does."

We wish he would.

Because, for the life of us, we can't figure it out."

Robert Moses Parkway Removal - For Versus Uniformed

When people take the initiative to learn about the economic benefits of removing the Robert Moses Parkway between Niagara Falls and Lewiston, NY, they become supporters. You can read what the Niagara Community Forum has to say about the subject here.

Reinveting State Parks - Eyefromalbany's blog

Here's additional support for the Niagara Heritage Partnership's proposal to removal the Robert Moses Parkway.

Reinvention of parks
By eyefromalbany

Introduction
The red flag has been raised when it comes to the newspaper trade (watch the NY Times shrink before your eyes), on Wall Street, in corporate law firms, the automobile industry and in the plight of state and local government budgets with all the public programs they support. We are approaching huge changes in our economy and the way we live.

Some of the change has to do with scale. Over decades single family homes grew from 800 Sq. Ft. to 1,600 Sq. Ft., to 2,400 Sq. Ft. to the McMansions of recent decades. Sedans were replaced by SUVs. The population of traditional cities spread themselves over territory 8 times as large as the city space during in the 1950s. Yes, we will be downsizing on a lot of things, but that is the easy thing.

What really will be interesting and challenging are those aspects of our lives that will be completely reinvented like, I suggest, parks, senior living, mobility, urban living, education, environmental protection, medicine, energy, how we get news and what we eat to begin the list. Not only will the automobile be downsized, again that is easy, but, for example, new transit systems and other means of mobility will become the norm (back to the future). The automobile, for example, may not be individually owned, but rather be cooperatively owed and used as needed.

Despite these daunting prospects, we are like the deer caught in the headlight when it comes to understanding and taking control of the reinvention that will take place and in many cases is actually happening around us with little real awareness on our part. Many people and institutions are simply holding on to what they have always been accustomed to and this is not helpful. Too few are seriously thinking and contributing to the changes and reinvention that is happening. Apparently many believe this too will pass situation or simply right sizing will make things better. They should look again.

Beginning with this Eye column we are going to take a look at how certain key features of our lives need to be reinvented and how that should be done. In many cases reinvention has been quietly happening for years, mostly with little public and leadership awareness. Some of this reinvention comes from creative thinking and other aspects are a result of nature abhorring a vacuum.

Future of State Parks as We Know Them
Most people take state parks for granted. I was told a former Commissioner of the Office of New York State Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation went to a cocktail party in New York City soon after her appointment and proudly told others at the party that she was “the state parks commissioner”. The response was ho, hum and what else is new. Protecting open space in the Hamptons and Columbia counties is interesting, but state parks?- they are yesterday’s news. Yet, state parks for much of the 20th century were very important in preserving natural wonders and should emerge in the 21st century in a different form as green and cultural infrastructure. Take notice!

State parks as we know them are unlikely to survive into the future.

Traditional parks have been public estates, separate and apart from surrounding land. Many state parks should and will continue as public preserves (see, the state forest preserve and Albany Pine Barrens Preserve as examples) set aside for their natural beauty and unique natural and cultural features. Otherwise, as park historian Galen Cranz wrote about urban parks in the “open space” era, state parks will become more entwined with the whole landscape. Gone will be the golf courses, swimming pools and other costly active recreational facilities as a major concern of a state park system.

The park of the “green” and “sustainable” future (identified, designed and protected, but not wholly owned by the public) is already here, for example, as greenways, heritage areas, agricultural and forest landscapes with scenic values and all sorts of trails for recreation.

This is both the result of emerging environmental objectives and financial realities. If you don’t believe me consider what Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger is proposing in California. Schwarzenegger proposed eliminating $70 million in parks spending through June 30, 2010. That could mean closing up to 220 state parks. An additional $143.4 million would be saved in the following fiscal year by keeping the parks closed.

In response, Assembly Minority Leader Mike Villines said the state cannot afford to subsidize state parks when lawmakers are being asked to make severe cuts in even more vital areas. “Parks are just not going to be a priority over public safety and education, as much as we hate to see them close,” Villines said.
California State Parks Director Ruth Coleman declared: “We are often a harbinger of things to come elsewhere, for better or for worse. What will happen here with our state park system deserves close monitoring by World Commission on Protected Area members throughout North America and abroad. How much public support do we really have?”

A Little Background
In the early 20th century when State Parks came on the scene in New York City there were two opposite advocacy points of view on the development of State Parks. The booster types called for State Parks to be developed every 20 miles along Route 20 which crossed New York State. Do some landscaping including, if possible creating a swimming hole and add picnic and other recreation facilities and you will have a State Park. These parks were to be recreational amenities to encourage development across the State.

The other advocacy interest simply believed you can’t have a State Park until you find it. These scenic preservationists believed State Parks should be created to bring scenic lands like the Letchworth Gorge (the Grand Canyon of the east) and Niagara Falls under State protection.

For the most part, the scenic preservationists prevailed and many of our state parks are special places though often with conventional recreational facilities like golf courses, swimming pools, sandy ocean and lake beaches and other play spaces mostly for the auto dependent middle class (with exceptions like Roberto Clemente State Park and the state park on the sewage treatment facility on the Hudson River at 145th Street).

In the 1980s a state park administrator told me that his agency should drop concerns about conservation and concentrate solely on recreation. That never came to be but now we have reached the opposite situation,

it being time for states to drop most of their role as providers of recreation and to concentrate solely on preservation of scenic, natural and cultural places of significance and doing this actively in the context of stewardship of our natural infrastructure: the air, water, soil, plants, animals, and microbes that working together in ecosystems providing critical environmental services necessary for humans to survive and our cultural heritage or ongoing narrative of human attainments over time.

Why the change or reinvention?

Financial realities like those being faced in California, a growing environmental crisis, expanding population and need to bring human habitats more in harmony with nature and quality of life are all driving the need to reinvent our notion of parks from being separate and apart with a large recreational component to having a whole landscape approach to protecting and managing our natural and cultural infrastructure.
New York State’s state park program has a backlog of $650 million in traditional infrastructure needs while it is losing over a 100 positions. Carrying the backlog of deferred maintenance of a costly park infrastructure as staffing for ongoing operation shrinks is a strong wakeup call that state park facilities as we have known them including golf courses and swimming pools are not sustainable.

Signs of change

TNC: The Nature Conservancy is a premier national and international conservation organization dedicated to the protection of plant and animal species. Originally it narrowly focused on the immediate habitat of unique species. In recent years TNC realized that a narrow approach was not adequate and intervening in whole landscapes was necessary. Under the rubrics of Landscape by Design and Conservation by Design, TNC develops a systematic approach to preserving healthy ecosystems that support people and host the diversity of life on Earth. Instead of owning golf courses, state park programs need to follow the direction of TNC and become a whole landscape approach.

Open space movement. Open space protection has been a primary effort in recent decades. Land trusts established to acquire open space easements, development rights and purchase significant natural and cultural resources have sprung up across the country. They are complemented by tax policies, community preservation acts funding open space programs through dedicated revenue sources, cluster zoning and state and federal programs supporting protection of opens space including protection of agricultural land for agricultural use.

Heritage Areas and cultural landscape. The notion of the cultural value of the entire landscape was the basis for the Council of Europe designating the entire area of Europe as a cultural landscape. Human attainments over the centuries (don’t forget the Native Americans were in North America for centuries before the Europeans came) are associated with the land and deserve attention, in some cases preservation and many cases interpretation. In the 1970s heritage areas (first called urban cultural parks) emerged as an integrated approach for the goals of conservation, education, recreation and sustainable development. Yes, feature traditionally associated with urban and state parks can be found and utilized throughout urban settings and regional landscapes. New York State’s first in the nation state system of heritage areas was enacted in 1982 and more than 20 heritage areas have been designated by the state legislature. Congress has established 40 national heritage areas some encompassing large portions of States. New York’s Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor stretches 540 miles across the State and links to the Hudson River National Heritage Area. Heritage areas are one of the key models for the next generation of state parks-one encompassing entire urban setting and regional landscapes.

Greenways. Linkage or connecting the dots is an important conservation approach. Greenways have primarily been established to protect and manage river corridors, but they have other forms. New York State’s greenways beginning with the Hudson River Green way in the early 1990s encompasses an ambitious agenda for goals in a region stretching from Saratoga and Washington counties in the north to the Battery in New York City. It boundaries are county wide so its focus ranges from developing traditional trails to Greenway planning based on fostering regional planning for regions within his boundaries. Like heritage areas (and the HR Greenway manages the Hudson River National Heritage Area), the Hudson River Greenway connections the dots including the roles played by traditional state park programs. The only difference is that its mission extends to an entire and vast landscape.

Trails. In 1987 President Reagan’s President’s Commission on American Outdoor recommended that all Americans be able to go out their front doors and within 15 minutes be on trails that wind through their cities or towns and bring them back without retracing steps. Today, public programs like the Healthy Heart program of the NYS Department of Health supports trail development in rural and urban communities. Many types of trails from wilderness trails in the Adirondack Park to Scenic By-ways are becoming the health, recreation and mobility infrastructure in New York.

Natural infrastructure (see Saratoga counties natural infrastructure plan), healthy watersheds and ecosystem based management (see Art. 14 of the Environmental Conservation Law). Complementing heritage areas, greenways and trails is a new generation of state and local planning focused on integrating the needs of natural and cultural resources with the needs of human communities. This is but another driver of the transition of traditional parks from public estates into an approach that encompasses the entire landscape of states and the nation.

Conclusion. Look for state park programs to be reinvented from being the custodians and managers of public country clubs to being a leader in managing the entire landscape for its ecological and human values.

The Conservation Foundation in its report entitled National Parks for a Generation identified the phenomenon as a move beyond the feature to the entire setting. Like California and, in fact, the nation, New York State can no longer financially afford the traditional state and national park model and, at the same time, can no longer afford to not connect the dots and make the linkages so that our entire landscapes are ecologically healthy, economically sustainable and humanly enriching. (Don’t worry about our natural and cultural wonders, they will be maintained as preserves.) Change in parks has been approaching for decades. The current crisis can provide the impetus for the leap forward.
Tags: new normal, parks, transformation, whole landscape

Reprentative Slaughter Ignores Broad Coalition Supporting Robert Moses Parkway Removal

http://www.niagaraheritage.org/slaughter_letter_10-25-2007.pdf

The Niagara Heritage Partnership Letter is retyped below.

Oct. 25, 2007
Hon. Louise M. Slaughter
28th District Local Office
1910 Pine Ave.
Niagara Falls, NY 14301

Dear Representative Slaughter

A few years ago, the membership of Niagara Heritage Partnership was very pleased tolearn about the funding you'd made available for trail construction from the Village of Lewiston, up the Niagara escarpment, and south along the gorge rim. We'd been advocating for hiking and bicycling trails along the Niagara gorge rim since 1997.

At the same time we recognized the funds had the potential to be used in an inappropriate way that the legislation couldn't have forseen, which would also run counter to our central advocacy--the removal of the Robert Moses Parkway between Niagara Falls and Lewiston and the restoration of natural landscapes. Unfortunately, this potentially inappropriate and counter-productive use of the funding now seems on the verge of happening.

The Town of Lewiston has announced its intention to use the funding (with money from the Niagara Greenway initiative to create a trail that assumes the parkway will remain in place, which is far from certain. The town board has already voted to move ahead with contractor study. In our estimation, this is hurrying to build something before final decisions and related regional plans are complete.

A trail with the parkway retained will require multiple overpasses for walkers and bicyclists, a convoluted inelegance of planning that is likely to absorb a half to one million or more extra dollars which will result in a trail that expects eco-toruists to hike and bicycle alongside a commuter route. Spending millions to create this "overpass" trail would then become its own rationale for parkway retention, a position Lewiston officials are on record as favoring.

Town supervisor Fred Newlin and Lewiston Village Mayor Richard Soluri are both members of the "Parkway Preservation Committee." Soluri is also a Niagara River Greenway Commissioner whose public actions in that capacity were sufficiently partisan to cause twenty-two citizens from across Niagara Count to sign a letter to the New York State Ethics Commission requesting an investigation into his behavior. But their actions need not be purposefully manipulative to serve the function of influencing a decision to keep the parkway in place.

With the parkway gone, commonsense would guide the trail segment on the steep escarpment slope into a graceful configuration of switchbacks with several or more level rest areas, perhaps with benches, which would make the trails far more friendly to family cyclists and casual hikers.

We urge you to oppose this precipitous action of the Town of Lewiston to inappropriately utilize funding in this fashion, which ignores a broad coalition of grassroots support for parkway removal. Further, we'd welcome the opportunity to meet with your to provide additional information about our advocacy. We believe our parkway removal proposal to be compatible with the concept of a genuine greenway, existing regional revitalization plans, and the goals o the National Heritage Area. Paul Dyster, Niagara River Greenway Commissioner, chairman of the Citizens' Advisory Committee, would be welcome at such a meeting.

Thank-you for your consideration.
Sincerely,
Bob Baxter, Conservation Chair
Niagara Heritage Partnership
716-791-4611

A Fairy Tale About Trolls by ER Baxter III

A FAIRY TALE ABOUT TROLLS
(“lawnmower,” concrete poem, (detail) 1972 E.R. Baxter III)

Once upon a time, long, long ago, in a magical land far, far away from most people, there was a beautiful waterfall. This sparkling river leapt and thundered into a deep gorge, sending up clouds of mist where sun rays made rainbows, and through which birds soared, disappearing and appearing again. The gorge and its rim were rich with forests of giant, ancient trees and wildflower meadows.

Slowly, as the years passed, factories and other manmade things gobbled up the beauty of natural landscapes that used to be everywhere. Still, what remained caused some people to notice that the river and its shorelines was a wonderful home for wild birds and they named this place a Globally Significant Important Bird Area.

Then others, as if waking from a long dreaming, said, "But there is an ugly concrete road running right through it! All the wildflower meadows are either sleeping under the concrete or cut into little pieces by lawnmowers!" They looked at one another, eyes wide in wonderment, and said altogether as if with one voice, "Let's ask that the ugly road be removed!"

But others, upon hearing this, said, "No! No! It's a globally significant important road! We love it! God gave us this road! So we have a God-given right to drive on it! Didn't God's most important prophet, Moses, build it for us? We drive back and forth on it all the time and if we do this long enough it will lead us to heaven!"

*

And the story must stop here, in this land where magic flutes still play faintly in the distance. Now you are probably saying to yourself, “What the hell kind of fairy tale is this? It doesn't have an ending! Nobody gets to live happily ever after?” Well, grow up. You expected a fairy tale because of the title?

Would you like to know where this place is, with its distant music waiting to be reborn? Visit www.niagaraheritage.org and sign the petition to help us remove the road. Do you know of a courageous politician who loves the natural world? Ask that person to help restore this little part of it. If the politician tries to tell you it's the road to heaven, don't you believe it. It’s more likely to be a road to that Other Place, anyway. It is an ugly, ugly road, filled with evil spirits. Trolls who love concrete more than trees come out from under their bridges and creep around on this road at night. Do not go there after dark.


The End

Moses Parkway Retentionists Stamp Feet, Ignore the Million Tourists Surveyed

“Little knotheads” is a thesis my old-school, Sicilian father muttered when he observed willful ignorance, selfish motives and actions, and a failure to listen or acknowledge information.

Open letter about road removal between Lewiston and Niagara Falls

Emerson,
Here are my candid observations about your email urging peers to “consider both sides of the Robert Moses Parkway (RMP) issue before blindly signing” the Niagara Heritage Partnership (NHP) online petition for road removal between Niagara Falls and Lewiston.

In the last four years, you and the Parkway Preservation Committee have ignored the benefits of road removal.

Your unsubstantiated opinion is the RMP is “an artery” for Old Fort Niagara State Park. You ignored Main Street, Youngstown, the Fort’s mainline front door.

The NHP proposal repairs the aneurism Robert Moses caused when he built the RMP, bypassing every Niagara Falls’ business direct. Main Street, Little Italy's Pine Avenue, Third Street and Niagara Street.

Removal rehabilitates that urban-decay abscess. It creates a new life support system with documented economic stimulus numbers and new urbanism thinking.

1. Hundreds of thousands of jobs, billions of dollars in tourism revenue. Data supplied by cities implementing road removal.

2. Seoul, Korea reclaimed a stream for open space. They removed 6-lanes. (Feb. 2009, Scientific American, pages 20-22)

3. USA Niagara proposed the 6-mile segment along the lower river gorge from Niagara Falls to Lewiston be removed." (A View From The Falls: The Demand and Opportunity For Hotel Development in Niagara Falls, page 51.)

4. The Curriculum Guide for Green Infrastructure Planning: "There are economic reasons for protecting "viewsheds" since they are important to attracting…Heritage Tourists...spend[ing] on average two-and-one-half times [more] than other tourists."

5. The New York Natural Heritage Program's Conservation Guide: roads and their associated run-offs are detrimental to calcareous cliff communities. page 2

6. The Smart Growth Network's "Getting to Smart Growth: 100 Policies for Implementation" pages 43-44- Chapter 6- "there is a sense of urgency to saving critical environmental areas. Communities MUST work with other communities in their region and political leaders to expend the resources and develop the innovative techniques to make open space preservation a reality."

7. RMP removal between Niagara Falls and Lewiston is what the Niagara River Greenway aspires to. See the 11 guiding principals, chapter 3, Niagara River Greenway Plan.

8. Counter compromise merely means keeping the current two lanes open.

Emerson, lead, follow, or get out of the way.

Winged Magellans

It's so clear to me. A six-mile section along the Niagara River Gorge rim where having it all is showcased by a gift of natural scenic wonder, a waterfall landscape so botanically unique that not protecting it is a living global nightmare.

It’s a restored old growth forest, an urban forest of ancients: oaks, hickories, and stunted gorge wall cedars, some 500 and 1,000 years of age. Unique calcareous cliff botanicals, rare blue asters included. It’s standing at the floor of time, the gorge walls a story, a geological slice of earth beginning. It’s glacial identity and diversity engraved by relenting, rushing water, a fall, cascading from four great lakes.

In this recognized globally significant migration zone, bald eagles soar on gorge thermals with migrant songbirds, winged Magellans, on the way back or to other-side-of-the-world locations.

It’s a six-mile walk, a careful, humbling Tubman trek, an experiential wild-eyed glimpse into fear and courage, prodded in the back by her rifle, a duel jeopardy reminder, mind-change flight versus the death of freedom.

It’s Native American sacred ground covered by Moses, his irreverent black pavement smear, the war of ongoing prejudice.

It’s so clear that non-motorized is a vision filled with unlimited possibility, the way Tesla first viewed Niagara’s raw water power turbulence. It’s the masses with head lifted, faces sprinkled by mist, tears, and rainbows.

Despite four years of research documenting hundreds of thousands of new jobs, tourist revenues in the billions, and an informal survey of millions supporting a vision, the remaining undeveloped landscape that makes Niagara Falls unique is almost extinct.