Wednesday, June 22, 2011

June 2011

Last month, I spent the weekend in Fredericksburg, Virginia, where I ran the Marine Corps Historic Half Marathon (and beat Drew Carey!). While the course started and finished in Central Park, a retail “power center” that includes almost every big box store and chain restaurant currently in business  (as well as three hotels, an expo center and a two-year old Wegmans), the race also ran through the historic downtown district, past such landmarks as the Fredericksburg Battlefield and Kenmore plantation, once home to George Washington’s sister.



Post-Standard, September 26, 1954

What’s remarkable is that the Town of Onondagawhere I grew up, and where my parents still livehas its own rich history that dates back to the very founding of the city of Syracuse. Unfortunately, the hypothetical trolley tour today might be somewhat sparse: here is site of Onondaga County’s first courthouse, now an intersection; here is the site of the town's first schoolhouse (and later town hall), now the same intersection. True, most of the historic buildings were already gone by the early 20th century:

The oldest of present or former residents of Onondaga Hill are too young to remember the events which wrote the name of that community high on Onondaga County’s historic roll of honor.

But there are men and women who have heard their parents or grandparents tell of the epoch making days when virtually all lawyers in Onondaga County lived on the hill, when the lone prisoner in the jail was shackled and taken to the new jail, when a new courthouse had been built on North Salina Street, Syracuse.

They have heard tales, too, of the visit of LaFayette, who toured the country and stopped at the hotel on Onondaga Hill, which long since has disappeared.

While Onondaga Hill, in the main, is made up of modern homes occupied by families whose heads work in Syracuse, a few historic old buildings still remain. (Syracuse Herald, August 5, 1930)

The most recent change is the expansion of the local Byrne Dairy. 562 residents have "allegedly" signed a petition opposing the land swap that would eventually result in the installation of gas pumps at the store (and another parking lot for the town). Is this another shift away from the town's historical past, or one step closer to the landscape envisioned 45 years ago, when town councilorsincluding current petition skeptic Charles Petriebecame enamored with another Virginia city?


Nine Town of Onondaga residents will depart at 8 am Monday from Hancock Airport for an on-the-scene look at America’s community of tomorrow.

Just 18 miles from Washington, D.C., Reston, VA, has been hailed as the community of the future. A planner’s dream, Reston is a model planned community built upon what used to be open land.

It contains one-family residences, town houses, high rise apartments, its own churches, schools, stores and industry. It was designed so everybody who lives there works there.

Two planned “community” developments are now in the preliminary plan stages for the Town of Onondaga. One of them is the multi-million dollar Sherwood Farms development which, if approved, would be located on Harris Road.The other is the $12 million Marnell development on East Seneca Turnpike. (Post-Standard, May 20, 1967)


Reston, Virginia had been founded in 1961, conceived by (and named after the initials of) real estate developer Robert E. Simon, who purchased the 6,750 acres of land in Fairfax County after the sale of Carnegie Hall (which his family had owned). Simon wished to create Reston in the model of a “New Town”: a community where residents could work, shop, and play within walking distance from their home.

The ideals Simon sought to apply in Reston included: a wide choice in housing to accommodate all income and age levels; the ability to work and live in the same community; the proximity of commerce and culture; the importance of recreation and leisure activity; privacy in the midst of public space; walkability and convenience with a minimal role for the automobile; preservation of trees and woodland and a minimization of lawns that require maintenance; and underground utility lines.


The “New Town” concept had also caught fire in Syracuse at the time, with MDA Executive Vice-President John Searles discussing about the possibility of creating new “planned and balanced communities” in Onondaga County:

Could this be done in Onondaga County? I believe it could. A new town planned for our county could cover 500 to 1,500 acres of land in the city or in one of the suburban towns. The development, unlike existing developments, would be balanced and planned. In the new town, there would be sites for industry, commerce, housing for families of different income groups and accompanying recreational, social and service facilities. Because the new town would be planned at the start to provide the various, but essential, types of uses which make an urban area tick, the problem of pushing the lower value, higher consuming uses into the next town, and of attracting an extra share of the “high returnlow consumption uses,” such as high cost housing and clean industry, would be minimized.  (Post Standard, January 6, 1963)

Certainly Syracuse had a need for more housing, as a mere nine months later, a long-standing residential community that had great proximity to commerce, culture and industry was bulldozed in favor of a highway. Yet as former 15th Ward residents relocated to nearby urban neighborhoods also complete with recreational, social and service facilities and housing for families of different income groups, a large number of white homedwellers left for the suburbs. Where, in accordance to the “New Town” movement, they wished to recreate their old existence:

A $12 million planned residential development, Marnell Heights, would add 1,014 housing units to the Town of Onondaga, according to a preliminary program for the development.

When complete, the project would provide a “progressive, self-sustaining community” with shopping and restaurant facilities as well as complete summer and winter recreation developments, according to [project developer John] Marnell.

Marnell Heights, to be located on the southern side of East Seneca Turnpike, north of the Lafayette Country Club, had a master plan similar to Reston. Like the Virginia new town, Marnell Heights would be built in “clusters," with a mix of apartments and single-family homes:


Plans call for four neighborhood groups clustered about a centrally located shopping complex. Each neighborhood would contain a combination of apartment units and town houses accented by a high-rise unit near the core of the overall project.

The shopping core, at the center, a multi-leveled structure, would contain a partially enclosed arcade with small supporting retail shops and a larger market. A below grade parking plaza would serve both the high rise units and the shopping area. Ultimately it would combine and conceal all building, shop servicing and mechanical areas.

Plans for the shopping center include a superette, drug store, laundry, barber shop, beauty salon, small restaurant and a below grade service station.Each of the four neighborhood sites feature:

  • housing for more or less 250 families
  • an adult swimming pool and a wading pool
  • three tot play areas
  • seating pavilions
  • a tennis court, as well as the general recreation area
  • interior trash storage with pickup by a project maintenance crew
  • landscape development
  • semi-concealed parking areas
“Essentially the choice of materials and building systems reflects a direction toward totally unified design, both in appearance and thought,” the developer said. “An organic approach of brick and wood seemed to reflect the human scale and elegance we intended.” (Post-Standard, April 6, 1967)
 
Or, more succinctly, a Downtown do-over in suburban Syracuse! 


Make that two new (down)towns, as just seven miles away, developers wished to build an even more ambitious planned community:

The state’s first total community, featuring a full-range of housing from single-family residences to high-rise apartments, is scheduled for construction next spring near Howlett Hill and Harris roads in the Town of Onondaga.

Tagged Sherwood Farms, the new concept in living will cost private investors in excess of $25 million for just the 500 apartment units and 500 single-family homes.

Included in the overall plan will be a small shopping center, an elementary school, fire house, two churches, and 120 acres for park and recreational area. These facilities are expected to cost again as much as the apartments and houses.

The developers describe the community as “small neighborhood clusters of housing units spaced by sprawling parklands featuring pedestrian walkways.”

To avoid drawing large numbers from outside the community for shopping, the shopping center will only be 26,000 square feet, including a supermarket, variety store, drugstore, hardware store, laundry, liquor store, bank, barber shop, beauty salon and a small group of offices.

Current estimates call for about 3,400 persons living in Sherwood Farms enjoying “the convenience of the city residence with the freedom and individuality of suburban life.” (Herald-American, August 6, 1967)


Syracuse Herald-American, October 30, 1966
When Town of Onondaga Supervisor George F. Savage returned from his exploratory trip to Virginia (which had been sponsored by Sherwood Farms developers and Niagara Mohawk), he felt that Sherwood Farms had even greater potential than Reston, as “the hills of Onondaga would lend themselves to ‘better views’ (Post-Standard, May 23, 1967). Town of Onondaga residents were not so enthusiastic, expressing their downright displeasure of the idea at a town meeting:

Approximately 35 Town of Onondaga residents last night voiced disapproval and skepticism of the proposed Sherwood Farms planned community at Howlett Hill and Harris Roads in Onondaga township. Primary objection was to the high rise apartments, town house and duplex facilities to be included in the 320-acre development.

Residents of Harris Hill and the existing Sherwood Farms tract felt that the high density concentration in the community would decrease the value of adjacent properties. Proposed changes in zoning restrictions met with objection. (Post Standard, August 11, 1967)


Although several new “luxury” high rises had recently been built on James Street, high rise apartment buildings in Syracuse were still closely associated with public housing controversy from a decade earlier. Reston, VA was 18 miles outside Washington, DC; Sherwood Farms was located less than four miles from the corner of Velasko Road and West Onondaga Street, where one of the more contentious battles had been fought to prevent a public housing high rise from being built in the neighborhood. Renting also had a negative connotation due to urban renewal:

He’d hate to sell and leave this neighborhood, the homeowner thought. But what to do? 

The house needed costly repair. And plainly the area was changing. Would the future justify the outlay he must make?

He sat on the porch surveying the street. The sun filtered through the tall shade trees across the wide lawns. 

But how many of the lawns were unkempt! Paint was peeling in strips from the house next door. Porch steps sagged across the way. Should a middle-aged man and his wife invest in a new furnace, and a year or so a new roof, to continue living here? 

His glance moved to the two one-family houses down the block, which an investor had bought recently. The new owner did not plan to live in the area. The talk was that he would cut these fine old homes up into housekeeping apartments. Everyone knew that many families would soon be looking for quarters because of the urban renewal program. This would bring more cars to be kept on the street. If other houses went the same way, there would be much more traffic. And where would the children play? (Post-Standard, November 23, 1961)

As a more transient population, renters might not contribute to required responsibilities of the homeowners’ association:

[Gallinger Real Estate's John] Gallinger said the parks and recreation area would be managed by a homeowners’ assocation at the expense of the residents.

The association would also oversee the maintenance of community regulations designed to prevent property deterioration. Typical of rules enforced, officials said, would be a ban on above-ground utility wiring, exposed trash containers, and any exterior construction without the approval of the association’s architectural review board. (Syracuse Herald-American, August 6, 1967)


Marnell Heights and Sherwood Farms would differ from Reston in one other key factor:


The first industrial customers came to us before there were roads, sewers, or waterlines, when Reston still looked like Virginia countryside. Soon there was a strong demand for industrial space. Albert Mayer, who was connected with Radburn, wrote me a letter saying, "Congratulations. You are the first New Town to get industry at its conception." This pleased us very much. (1966 speech by Robert E. Simon)


Post-Standard, November 16, 1967
Ideally, residents of “new towns” could forego their cars, as they would be able to walk to work as well as their daily errands. Neither Marnell Heights or Sherwood Farms had any plans to locate significant employers within their developments, given that each had far less acreage than Reston (320 acres in Sherwood Farms and 88 acres in Marnell Heights, compared to the 6,750 acres in Reston). Nor did either have any plans for public transportation from the community to Downtown or neighboring suburbs. So if residents had to drive from Sherwood Farms to their workplace, they could easily stop for groceries at Loblaws or Kmart in the new Western Lights Plaza, go shopping or eat at Fairmount Fair or Camillus Plaza. Therefore, the need for a supermarket or salon located within walking distance from home became less important, as more expansive options were located along the driving route that residents traveled every day.


Approval for both Marnell Heights and Sherwood Farms was contingent upon the construction of sewers for the projects.  As stated in an article about Marnell Heights, “under town regulations, the developers would have five years to build the development under ‘modified, planned development district’ before the building would return to ‘open land.’” (Syracuse Herald-Journal, April 6, 1967). Apparently, Marnell could not build the development within the five years, as the project was not mentioned again until the the 1980s, when Lee Belle, husband of then (and now) Town Councilor Suzanne Belle wished to revive the project as Stonegate Heights. By decade’s end, Sherwood Farms resolved their sewer issues, but the mixed-use community—apartments, in particularhad lost even more appeal. In 1969, 1,000 Town of Onondaga residents protested the construction of the Westbrook apartment complex, located just two miles from Sherwood Farms:

Over the protests of an estimated 1,000 individual homeowners, the Onondaga Town Board, last night, passed a zoning resolution, 4-1, paving the way for the construction of a 408-unit apartment complex to be located between McDonald Road and Route 173, behind the Onondaga Community College site.

Casting the no vote against the resolution was Charles Petrie, of Nedrow, who said, “I am not opposed to good apartments...I am opposed to a heavy concentration of apartments in any area.”

Robert H. Marble, treasurer of the Hill Homeowners’ Association, said the town had a population of better than 16,000 persons in its 58 square miles and the resolution approving construction of the new apartment complex had the effect of jamming too many persons into a tight area which would produce undesirable conditions. He described the town as a neighborhood which 98 percent of the homes were individually owned. (Post-Standard, September 18, 1969)


Syracuse Herald-Journal, May 2, 1988
Ironically, the town soon underwent an explosion of single-family housing developments, which some felt had the effect of jamming too many houses into a tight area which then produced undesirable conditions:
For generations the hills of Onondaga have provided a panoramic view of the city below and served as a barrier to the growth that spread more easily to the north and the east, into Clay, Salina and DeWitt.

But those towns are now heavy with subdivisions and developers are going west, tantalized by the town of Onondaga’s open spaces, scenic vistas and proximity to Syracuse.

“People were attracted to Onondaga, a town of 17,793, because of its semi-country atmosphere, Doug Morris, planner for the Syracuse-Onondaga County Planning Agency, said. Even houses that were built in subdivisions look out onto nice vistas and vacant land, he said.

“Now all of the sudden, all that vacant land is disappearing,” he said. “In some people’s minds, it’s going to look like Clay with a lot of hills.” (Syracuse Herald-Journal, May 2, 1988)


The number of subdivisions has increased even more in the two decades since, seemingly limited only by the thesaurus which provides their pastoral-sounding names.  One comment in the recent Post-Standard article about the Byrne Dairy expansion controversy suggests the town that grew as an escape from the city must now be escaped as well:

I moved from the Town of Onondaga six months ago, after 30 years as a home owner there. The Town of Onondaga is one of the top towns for SPRAWL in the United States. There was an article about a year ago with the supporting statistics. They have turned a small town atmosphere area, with a lot of green space, into a sprawling future ghetto of tract housing on a sea of over fertilized lawn with sparse immature landscapes. It has become overcrowded and ugly. The sound of lawn mowers never ceases, and the traffic is overpowering the road networks.

The greed and short-sightedness of the Town of Onondaga administration has already done its damage over the past two decades. All of the development in the past decade looks the same cookie-cutter style. It is ugly and it won't age well. A totally automobile dependent community. I'm just glad that I got out of the Town of Onondaga, and now live on a farm north of Oneida Lake. There is a need for another gas station there like there is a need for another donut shop there. It is stupid from a town planning perspective and a real shame.

Of course, similar sentiments could be expressed about Reston. In 1967, the community was sold to Gulf Oil Corporation, who it turn sold it to Mobil Oil in 1978. Oil companies would hardly be the champions of car-free lifestyles, and accordingly, despite a master plan which called for “the pedestrian [to] have uninterrupted access to the full range of neighborhood facilities,” few major arteries have complete sidewalk networks . The master plan called for “seven villages with seven community shopping and social centers,” each with its own housing and pedestrian walkways; this was eventually considered “economically unsound...later centers, like South Lakes and North Point, were built more along the lines of traditional shopping centers.” And: Ebola.


Although the Town of Onondaga at times appears to suffering its own virus of hemorrhaging every last trace of its past, it is important to remember that the oldest and most key element of its history remains intact: Seneca Turnpike. The road that carried travelers from Utica to Canandaigua was "of the greatest importance to the county, it meant more than any single railroad ever constructed here” (Syracuse Standard, June 9, 1894). Opponents of the addition of gas pumps at the Byrne Dairy are concerned about increased delays and accidents on the turnpike, but what could be more true to road’s roots?

Rising out of Onondaga Hollow is a long and steep hill. The road is constructed on the southern side of a precipice, in such a manner that, as you approach the top of the hill, you have a tremendous gulf on your left hand, at the bottom of which you hear the murmur of a brook fretting among the rocks, as it is passing on toward the Onondaga Creek, which it joins in the Hollow. There is a kind of railing or fence, composed of logs secured with stakes or trees, which is all that prevents the passenger, and even the road itself, from falling to the bottom of the gulf. (Pioneer Roads and Experiences of Travelers, by Archer Butler Hulbert, 1904).

Talk about a traffic nightmare! But relief awaited the travelers at the top of the hill:

On the hill we found an embryo of the village. A courthouse is already built, and the frame of a hotel is raised. The hotel, we are told, is to be kept by one Brunson. It is an accommodation much needed on this road. (Pioneer Roads and Experiences of Travelers)

What could be more accommodating in our present day than not having to drive 60 more seconds in three possible directions to locate another gas station?
 

And there’s this: while in Fredericksburg, I paid a visit to the James Monroe Museum, dedicated to the history of our fifth President of the United States, who once made his home in the city. One of the first reading panels that greets visitors shares this history regarding the museum: 

[Monroe’s great-granddaughter] Rose de Chine Gouverneur Hoes played a central role in the creation of this museum...In 1927, when notified that the old buildings on Monroe's Fredericksburg town lot were about to be demolished and replaced with a gasoline service station, she bought the buildings and brought there her collections of objects, books and documents, opening our James Monroe Museum, now in its seventy-fourth year.

So even the property of a Founding Father has been threatened with a gas station. With their own current fight, Town of Onondaga residents stand beside the great figures of early American history once again!

Wednesday, April 27, 2011

April 1917

Syracuse Herald, March 21, 1917
As Syracuse approaches the 75th anniversary of the elevation of the railroad tracks, this blog will revisit the history leading up to this most divisive decision. Call it (Dis)Union Station, if you will.
 
After taking a break from this series for over a month, I had to refresh my memory on where we were in the timeline of grade crossing elimination in Syracuse. This was not a problem for Syracuse residents in April 1917, as they were where they had been for close to two decades: trains running through the center of the city, gruesome accidents, and every mayoral candidate promising to be the one to solve the issue. In a 1915 campaign speech, eventual winner Walter Stone stated that he “expected to see the abolishment of grade crossings during the coming two years.” (Syracuse Herald, October 7, 1915).


Stone’s first action to make this revolutionary change finally happen? Hire the person most closely associated with the grade crossing project for the previous thirty years: Henry C. Allen.


Henry Clayton Allen first worked as an assistant to the City Engineer in 1886, and took over the post four years later at the age of 26 under Mayor William Cowie. Cowie had been one of the early mayors to express his concerns about the grade crossing problem:

Mayor Cowie said that the question under consideration was one of great interest to the city. The most important thing was “to get the New York Central out of the heart of the town,” and a committee of influential citizens should be appointed to wait upon the railroad authorities and see if they couldn’t learn what they proposed doing in the matter. (The Evening Herald, May 1, 1891)

Six months later, these “influential citizens” apparently consisted of Mayor Cowie alone entering into an agreement with the New York Central Railroad to “make improvements on Washington Street in return for releasing the Central company forever after from its present obligations”:

Mayor Cowie returned yesterday and was called upon this morning by a Herald reporter. He said that he went to New York on private business, but incidentally he called at the general offices of the New York Central railroad company, where he had a conference with President Chauncey M. Depew, H. Walter Webb and others of the road relative to their intentions in regards to the improvements asked for by the people of Syracuse. Regarding the result of the conference, the Mayor said:

“They are ready to go ahead and pave Washington Street as proposed by the city. This means a sandstone pavement on a concrete foundation from Franklin Street to Crouse Avenue, to be laid under the supervision of the City Engineer...I say they are ready to go on with this work at once. I came away thoroughly convinced of one thing, and that is that the company has no idea of abandoning Washington Street. 

“It can readily be seen from this expression,” continued the Mayor, “that the company have no idea of moving their tracks, and, as we cannot drive them out of the street, the next best thing, in my judgment, is to get all we can out of them. I have been hammering at them all summer with the hopes of getting some sort of a settlement, and when I found that they would accept my proposition, I thought it was a good bargain, and so did some of the leading property owners.” (Evening Herald, November 20, 1891)

Though he had been city engineer under Mayor Cowie, and later Mayor Amos, who finalized the paving agreement (which absolved the railroad from any further responsibilities until 1917), Allen soon became the leading figure associated with plans to eliminate the tracks from Washington Street.  By 1915, he had served as City Engineer under Mayors Fobes and Schoeneck, and as Grade Crossing Commission Engineer during the Will administration. Under Mayor Stone, Allen would hold both titles simultaneously. Hoping to break the stronghold that Allen held over the grade crossing planning for the previous thirty years, Mayor Will, in his final days in office, set aside funds for the hiring of an expert to study the problem.



Bion J. Arnold certainly had the credentials to serve as an outside consultant; he had devised plans for Chicago and New York regarding the electrification of their rail systems. Of course, such expert advice came at a price: not only Arnold’s $250/day fees, but a long delay in the review process:

Over thirty different possible solutions of the grade crossing problem in this city are being considered by B.J. Arnold and his assistants.  It is expected that he will be able to report upon what he considers the best within the next few weeks.

The many different solutions which Mr. Arnold is considering do not necessarily mean that he will recommend any solution different from the one adopted by the Grade Crossing Commission which contemplates the use of the Erie and Oswego canal beds. It does mean, however, that Mr. Arnold is conducting thorough investigation into the situation here.

Mr. Bibbins [Arnold's assistant] said that he could not explain which solution Mr. Arnold favors, but that it would only be a matter of a short time before the decision is made. The report will be sent directly to Mayor Stone and Mr. Allen. (Syracuse Herald, July 2, 1916)

In fact, Arnold did not submit his findings until January 1917, a full year after his hiring. As mayors only held office for two-year terms, such a delay cost valuable time when grade crossing elimination formed a central component of candidates’ platforms. Luckily for Mayor Stone, Arnold’s report agreed with Allen’s earlier opinions regarding both the New York Central and Lackawanna tracks:
 

The so-called dual plan A-X is recommended by Bion J. Arnold, of Chicago, expert engineer, in his report on grade crossing elimination in Syracuse, submitted to the Grade Crossing Commission. This plan provides for:

Elevating Lackawanna tracks along or near present right of way under certain stipulations.


Depressing New York Central tracks in the Erie Canal from the eastern city line to the junction with the Erie Canal, then northwesterly on the line of the West Shore, with certain modifications.


A depressed passenger station for all New York Central traffic located along Belden Avenue west of the Oswego Canal with station headhouse near the junction of West Genesee and North West Streets.


Mr. Arnold practically accepts the plan prepared by city engineer H.C. Allen. (Syracuse Herald, January 26, 1917)1



With this plan confirmed as the best option, Mayor Stone worked to have a new Syracuse Grade Crossing Bill passed by the state:


The Syracuse grade crossing bill is expected to become a law within a week. Advanced to a third reading yesterday in the Assembly, it will be finally passed on Monday next. Governor Whitman will sign it soon after and before many weeks the people of Syracuse will actually see work started on the grade crossing elimination. 

Under the bill the city is permitted to start the work. At the end of the year the grade crossing commission will submit a list of the expenditures involved to the public service commission, which, as a board of audit, will scrutinize the figures and determine how much of the money has been spent in actual grade crossing elimination. It will then pro rata the cost, reimbursing the city for money spent in the work assessing the State one-fourth, the city one-fourth and the railroad one-half. (Syracuse Herald, April 4, 1917)



There was also a late amendment added that required a public hearing and Common Council approval of any plans that involved track elevation. The amendment had been added under the pressure of the Syracuse Real Estate Association and various neighborhood improvement groups who were against the planned elevation of the Lackawanna tracks through the southern section of the city:


With the plan of eliminating the Central tracks at grade by the partial utilization of the Erie Canal channel our Syracuse readers are now familiar. No objection to it that is worthy of serious consideration has been heard. It is generally regarded, we believe, as the best solution, from the engineering point of view, of the Central problem, as well as the least expensive. 

The same cannot be said of the proposal to remove the Lackawanna tracks from grade by the expedient of an elevated structure. This has encountered resolute opposition among the people most directly concerned. The Herald has contended that this feature of the plan should not be pressed in the face of a determined, and as we believe, formidable antagonism. It may be questioned whether any proposed measure of relief of the grade crossing nuisance which involves a bitter grievance to the residents of a populous section of the city would be preferable to existing conditions. (Syracuse Herald editorial, April 18, 1917).



When the bill was finally signed by Governor Charles Whitman on May 16, 1917, the Herald announced that “plans for the elimination of crossings at grade have been started and the work will now be rushed in every way possible.” Except, as they noted a month earlier in their editorial, without ownership of the Erie Canal lands, there was no way possible:

We must, however, possess our souls in patience a while longer. The actual launching of our great enterprise of grade crossing elimination must await the abandonment and alienation of the canal bed by the State. That may come a twelvemonth hence, or perhaps a little more than a twelvemonth; but the time is so relatively short that it will seem like a single circuit of the clock compared with our long years of tribulation and patient endurance. (April 18, 1917)

Their patient endurance would continue to be tested, as "a little more than a twelvemonth" stretched into nineteen years.






1. The Arnold report also discussed improvements for the city as a whole, such as connecting Lodi Street to Walnut Street. Arnold also suggested that "every artificial barrier to the expansion of the present business should be discouraged." Read the report here.

Thursday, March 31, 2011

March 1957-March 1958

A Syracuse tale of city, suburbs, public housing, arterial highways...and bowling: