The Peace Bridge: Rust Belt Aesthetics
In 1893, Alonzo Mather proposed a design for an international harbor on both sides of the Niagara River and a bridge connecting Buffalo, New York and Fort Erie, Ontario by rail, trolley, and vehicular and pedestrian traffic.
Mather wanted to install electricity-generating turbines under the span, but fearing competition the Niagara Falls power interests successfully fought the plan. In 1909 a citizen’s movement to erect a vehicle bridge gained momentum based on the desire to erect a series of monuments along the Canadian and United States shores to commemorate a century of peace between the two countries, since the War of 1812.
At the conclusion of World War I, a bridge commission was established, land was purchased, a plan was adopted, ground was broken in 1925, and on August 7, 1927 Mather’s concept was realized with the opening of the Peace Bridge. The bridge is 5,800 feet long, has three traffic lanes, and handles nearly 7 million. Only the Ambassador Bridge between Detroit and Windsor sees more cross border traffic between Canada and the U.S.A.
The Authority (PBA), run by a ten-member board, equally divided from New York State and Canada, governs. Public funds have not been used for construction, operation, maintenance or capital expenditures for the bridge. Capital improvements and operating expenses have been funded by tolls and rentals of Peace Bridge-owned property and buildings, but times are changing.
For years the PBA has been engaged in a seemingly endless debate about whether the increased international trade, travel, tourism, and security needs of the twenty-first century would be best met by building a new bridge or a twin companion span. Critics charge the PBA has been arrogant, trying to force the construction of a companion bridge instead of seeking public input. In a turnabout, the PBA has allowed the public to vote on 13 possible bridge designs that they are currently considering. The results of this non-binding poll reflect the polarized divisions that have produced years of gridlock.
PBA officials reported Swiss designer Christian Menn’s concept for a 2-tower; cable span replacement span was the top vote getter for the Americans. However, Canadians who seemed concerned about costs, congestion, and preserving the past favored building a replica. But even supporters of the companion span, such as the Danish bridge architect Poul Ove Jensen, who favor retaining the asymmetric Parker Truss above the Black Rock Canal, acknowledge that “it is somehow inconsistent with the rest of the bridge. Most river crossings tend to be very symmetrical, (with) a navigation span in the middle,” he said. “Here, we have a navigation span at one side of the river. And I think that’s what gives the old bridge its character. I think any new bridge, whether it is a replacement bridge or a companion bridge, should reflect this asymmetric situation.” Jensen is advocating a two-tower, cable-stayed design that locates a tower on each side of the river with the pylon shorter on the Canadian side and taller on the American side, reflecting the lop-sided nature of the site.
Deborah Lynn Williams, of the New Millennium Group, which supports a new Signature Bridge, expressed concern that the voting procedures were flawed and excluded the poorest people in the lower West Side community who would be most physically affected by this project. Regardless, the PBA has said they will continue looking at numerous issues, including financial capacity and recommendations about durability, before a final selection is made. Menn, who according to a leading trade journal publication has designed two of the 10 bridges nominated by experts as the most beautiful bridges built during the 20th century, favors a radically different design than the companion span the PBA originally adopted stating: “You should have the courage to build a big bridge between these two big nations.” Anyone who has recently been to Boston can experience Menn’s impressive cable-stayed bridge across the Charles River that has given Boston a new and striking signature bridge (see: bigdig.com).
Numerous community activists have denounced the PBA’s companion span as an ugly throwback to an earlier and failed utilitarian industrial aesthetic, calling attention to the Rustbelt’s unsolved problems and our area’s loss of the three “Ps”: population, power, and prestige. Menn has criticized the twin-arch bridge as a “new bridge in old clothes” also adding that the “appearance of the historic, existing bridge (would be) badly affected.”
Still Menn acknowledges those who feel the Peace Bridge should be retained as a homage to the past by recommending it be preserved, but uses this point to buttress his case for a new, modern bridge that does not interfere with the first bridge. Clinton Brown, a Buffalo architect and a leading spokesman for the signature span proposal, agrees that the Peace Bridge does carry sentimental value: “It is a heritage bridge in many people’s minds. But we’re paying $2 million a year just to maintain it. Why should we keep picking up that tab when we can have a newer bridge?” Brown compares the Peace Bridge to the old terminals at Buffalo Niagara International Airport that were demolished after the new terminal opened, which nobody misses. “It is no more necessary to keep the old bridge than it was to keep the old terminals,” Brown said. “Just because it is old doesn’t mean it is historically significant.”
Another issue that needs attention is improved public access and beautification of the entire Buffalo waterfront area. Presently, people in Buffalo can access the Seaway Trail River Walk along the break-wall at either Front Park or at the drawbridge at the foot of Ferry and Niagara Streets.
This latter site was known as the River Crossing that the Underground Railroad used to take escaping slaves to freedom in Canada. This walkway along the Peace Bridge, which runs under the International Railroad Bridge, has potential to be made into a user-friendly promenade, such as the Brooklyn Promen-ade, as its current largely ramshackle state does not invite the average person to stroll. On a recent walk along this route I encountered a few fisherman, some homeless people, and the U.S. Border Patrol who stopped and questioned me for being “suspicious” because I was taking photographs of the bridges.
Ultimately it comes down to the “vision thing” that has been notoriously non-existent in Western New York’s business and political leadership. One encouraging sign is that The New Millennium Group (NMG) held a press conference at the end of April with Assemblyman Sam Hoyt and the Landmark Society that called for a new, single, 6-lane signature replacement bridge instead of a mis-matched companion span. Pat McNichol of the NMG says the PBA has a vested interest in maintaining the status quo and “is stuck in a Henry Ford mentality telling us that we can have any bridge we want as long as it a companion.”
The $64,000 questions are: Will the Buffalo area economic and political powers break free of their microscopic worldview and take a chance on something more creative and grander than a gambling casino? Are the so-called leaders capable of opening their eyes to a new way of representing our area or will they continue down the rusted spiral that has earned us the reputation as the “stupid city”?
For more information visit: www.peacebridge.com