Berens/Redeveloping Ind Sites Sample Chapter

Click here to buy the book.

Sample Chapter

http://www.wiley.com/buy/9780470398241?utm_source=APA&utm_medium=banner&utm_campaign=BerensRedeveloping

SECTION 1THE INDUSTRIAL LEGACY

COPYRIGHTED M

ATERIAL



CHAPTER 1PATTERNS OFINDUSTRIAL SETTLEMENT

INDUSTRY ARRIVES

Starting with the first factories, facilities for manufac-turing and distributing goods produced indelible markson the physical layout and sociology of cities, and in-deed countries. Although the whys and wherefores ofthe Industrial Revolution are complex and beyond thescope of this book, the changes wrought by this histori-cal event shaped the built environment, influencing howand where cities developed. The story of the impact of in-dustry’s arrival and establishment can be read from theirremains today—urban population concentrations, pat-terns of transportation networks, and the evocative ruinsof factory and warehouse buildings. Industry’s monop-olization of urban waterfronts, the wide swaths of landconsumed to accommodate machines and production,and the system of roads, canals, and rails over which sup-plies and finished merchandise flowed shaped and oftencreated these cities.

For trading purposes, industry first settled where ithad easy access to rivers and oceans. When manufacturewas local and craft-based, port cities, traditional cen-ters of activity, received raw materials and distributedproducts through cavernous warehouses situated directlyon the harbor. As technology developed, especially in

America and in Britain, industry claimed waterfronts inorder to harness water power. Mills that produced cot-ton, paper, lumber, and flour, among other items, neededwater for energy, superseding the men or animals whopreviously turned the wheels. Initially, the mills took ad-vantage of naturally occurring waterfalls that producedenergy to power their waterworks. Developments thatmanipulated and controlled nature for more energy andconsistent results quickly followed, as waterways weredammed and raceways created in order to moderate theeffects of drought and generate a constant flow of powerthroughout the seasons.

Cities developed around these economic generatorsas the workforce they attracted settled nearby. Severalcities and regions claim the mantle of the birth of the In-dustrial Revolution as manufacturing developments hap-pened quite rapidly and often simultaneously, imposingsimilar physical effects on landscape and urban devel-opments. It is commonly agreed, however, that GreatBritain forged an important lead in the advancement ofmanufacturing, fueled in large part by an effective mer-chant fleet, natural resources, and dense population cen-ters. In addition to these advantageous factors, inventionsfor cotton spinning and the mechanisms to power thempropelled Britain into the forefront of textile manufac-ture and the development of cities. Manchester, quickly



4 PATTERNS OF INDUSTRIAL SETTLEMENT

HIGHLIGHTS OF INDUSTRIALDEVELOPMENT

1761 Bridgewater Canal built

1765 James Watt’s patent of improvedsteam engine

1769 Richard Arkwright patented spinningyarn machine

1780s Widespread use of steam power

1785 Edmund Cartwright’s power loom

1791 Panic of 1791

1792 SUM and City of Paterson

1812+ Textile mills in Waltham

1819 Panic of 1819

1822 Lowell established

1825 Erie Canal opensLachine Canal opens

1825 Menier factory in Noisiel built

1880s Town of Pullman started

1902 Ebenezer Howard’s Garden City planpublished

1917 Tony Garnier’s Cite Industrielle planpublished

1955 Air Pollution Control Act

1956 Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1956

late1950s–1960s

Rise of container shipping

1963 Rachel Carson’s Silent Spring

1963 & 1970 Clean Air Acts

1972 Clean Water Act

1974 Love Canal evacuation

1982 Times Beach evacuation

1980 “Superfund” Act

mid-1990s Brownfield pilot programs

2002 Brownfield Revitalization andEnvironmental Restoration Act

dubbed “Cottonopolis,” is a good example of how tech-nology and manufacturing transformed an area from asleepy town to a major industrial hub.

In America as in Britain, textile production led theway and the textile mills of New England were the van-guards of industrial development. The rest of the coun-try quickly followed, adapting the milling process as in-dustrial and agricultural progress dictated. The naturallandscape was transformed to accommodate industry’sneeds, and towns formed or grew exponentially in re-sponse to this rise in development. Social and physi-cal changes occurred as towns expanded around thesemills, thus enabling laborers to live close to the fac-tories where they worked. Some enclaves were builtby mill owners, who established company towns com-plete with workers’ housing, stores, and community fa-cilities, while others occurred naturally and incremen-tally. The first centers of American industry, however,were planned.1

Although New England became America’s major millcenter, the first industrial planned town was located fur-ther south, in New Jersey. As early as 1791, AlexanderHamilton and a group of investors founded the So-ciety for Establishing Useful Manufactures (SUM). Itwas created to implement his Congressional Report onManufactures, which stressed the importance of creat-ing an independent American manufacturing capacityto establish economic autonomy from Britain. Its firstand only industrial foray created Paterson, New Jersey,high above the 77-foot-high Great Falls of the PassaicRiver (Figure 1.1). In 1792, SUM purchased approx-imately six acres from three existing landowners and,supported by a charter from the New Jersey State legis-lature exempting it from local taxes, hired Pierre CharlesL’Enfant, the architect of Washington, DC, to designthe town and develop a means of controlling the waterpower to run mills. His plan was ultimately scrappedas too complicated and costly, but an alternate seriesof canals and raceways was built to provide water stor-age to ensure adequate and uniform water power to thecotton mills.



INDUSTRY ARRIVES 5

Figure 1.1At 77 feet high and 280 feet wide, the powerful Paterson Falls on the Passaic River in Paterson, New Jersey,were a source of power for some of the first mills that were developed on the East Coast. The 1912 SUMHydroelectric Plant is on the left.Photo by Martha Cooper, 8/15/1994 Working in Paterson Project Collection (AFC 1995/028), Archive of Folk Culture,

American Folklife Center Project, Library of Congress

SUM’s life span as a producer of goods was cutshort by overreaching and mismanagement. Althoughno longer engaged in manufacturing after 1796, it con-trolled the land and leased water rights. The num-ber of mills grew, requiring new sites and a rework-ing of the raceway and reservoir system to keep pacewith the expansion. By 1910, the existing power wasinadequate and SUM built a central hydroelectricplant, employing Thomas Edison’s Electric Company,and increased production to 6,500 horsepower. The

city of Paterson bought SUM’s business and holdingsin 1946.

When SUM exited the manufacturing arena othersstepped in, and factories producing paper, firearms, silk,railroad locomotives, and other items soon joined theoriginal cotton mills. In the 1840s, Paterson started fab-ricating silk, and when high tariffs were placed on im-ported textiles after the Civil War, it became the centerfor the domestic manufacture of silk ribbons and cloth.By the late 1880s Paterson was responsible for about half




Figure 1.2Essex Mills Building in 1973, built in 1870s in Paterson, New Jersey, shows the drop from the middle to lowerraceway.Historic American Engineering Record, NJ-2-9; HAER NJ, 16-PAT, 16, Jack Boucher, Photographer, 1973

the domestic production of silk, giving rise to its moniker,“Silk City.”

Meanwhile, in Waltham, Massachusetts, in the yearsafter the War of 1812, another textile manufacturingcommunity started, taking advantage of the power of theCharles River and British textile advances brought backto America by Francis Cabot Lowell, who had toured thetextile mills in England.

Although perhaps an urban legend, the establishmentof the Industrial Revolution in America may also

be one of the first instances of industrial espionage.During a tour of England, Lowell is said to havememorized the design of Edmund Cartwright’s powerloom and then recreated and refined it with the helpof others in Waltham, thereby bringing the methodof manufacture to America’s shores. Not only did theowners build upon the progress and standardization ofthe British manufacturing system and maintain com-paratively clean and organized mills, they establishedboarding houses for their workers, in this case almost



INDUSTRY ARRIVES 7

Figure 1.3Waltham, Massachusetts’ Boston Manufacturing Co. building as it looked in 1979 from across Moody Streetdam. The 1814 wing is on the left, the 1816 mill is on the right, and the 1843 addition connects the two.Historic American Engineering Record, MA-54-5; HAER MASS, 9-WALTH, 4-5, Steve Dunwell, 1979

all women, or “mill girls” as they were called. Thishousing was comparatively safe, but strict rules forliving and conduct were enforced and boarding feescharged.

The practice of providing housing and services forworkers near mills, thus creating an industrial district,

became known as the “Waltham System.” It became the“Lowell System” when the community moved to Lowellin 1822 to take advantage of the more powerful watersof the Merrimack River, which was harnessed througha series of canals and dams. At the time of the relo-cation, Lowell’s population was small and agricultural,




FACTORY GIRLS

The story of working conditions, the rise of thelabor movement, and the influx of immigra-tion obviously parallels the story of the arrivaland departure of mills and factories and theimpact on urban development. Despite theirimportance, these subjects are beyond thescope of this book. From time to time, how-ever, it is valuable to acknowledge the peoplebehind the machines who made the goodsand materials and who were responsible forthe rise of industry. The history of the labormovement is rich in song, and sometimes thesimple lyrics bemoaning workers’ fates illus-trate difficult lives better than text. For ex-

ample, while owners claimed their providedhousing was a service, having their lives ruledby the factory bell and expensive boardingfees made the workers’ lot difficult. Perhapsthe truth of the mill girls’ lives can best be visu-alized in songs, which they sang while workingbecause they could not be heard above thedin of the machines. An example of one of themany songs, entitled, “Factory Girl” follows:

No more shall I work in the factory, greasy upmy clothes;

No more shall I work in the factory withsplinters in my toes.

Pity me, my darling, pity me I say;Pity me my darling and carry me away.2

Figure 1.4Lithograph of Boott Mills in Lowell, Massachusetts, shows the large mill complex sited against theMerrimack River. Many of the buildings have been converted to housing or are sites in the Lowell NationalPark (see Chapter 9).Library of Congress, 1852



INDUSTRY ARRIVES 9

Figure 1.5The design of this brick block on Dutton Street in Lowell, Massachusetts, is attributed to Kirk Boott and was oneof the original boardinghouses built as part of the Merrimack Manufacturing Company (since demolished).Historic American Building Survey MA-1151-1, Richard Graber Photographer, 1960s

and the boardinghouses and services were a recruitmenttool to entice workers to this new area. The build-ing of canals, whose owners leased water rights to themills, also created a magnet for laborers, both from thenortheast region and new immigrants, mostly from Ire-land. Within 25 years, Lowell was the second-largestcity in Massachusetts and America’s largest industrialcenter. Its 5.6-mile-long canal system produced enough

horsepower to support 40 mills. Not only were thereover 10,000 workers in these mills, but they createdthe need for more support and other industrial develop-ments as well as spurring the creation of other industriesand putting Lowell at the front of industrial technol-ogy. In fact, Lowell is considered “the first major cityin the United States designed and built for the needs ofproduction.”3




Figure 1.6Slightly later version of the boardinghouses built in Lowell, Massachusetts, often sited near a canal or the river(circa 1840s; since demolished).Historic American Building Survey MA-1153-2, Richard Graber Photographer, 1960s

The building of one or two mills was soon followedby other factories, making either the same or totally dif-ferent goods. This was a pattern repeated throughoutEurope and America. New factories tended to be builtnear each other, drawn by physical attributes such asa convenient energy source from a rapids-filled river,planned sites along man-made canals, conveniently lo-

cated transportation, or the availability of a large numberof factory workers, both skilled and unskilled. With eachnew factory more workers arrived, requiring places to liveand shop, thereby fueling the development of industrialtowns and cities. And thus the cycle repeated itself.

* * *



INDUSTRY ARRIVES 11

Figure 1.7Worker housing in Pullman, formerly outside Chicago, Illinois, though plain, was sturdily built of brick and hadcross-ventilation, gas service, and indoor plumbing among its amenities.Historic American Building Survey IL-173-2, Jack E. Boucher, photographer, December 1977

In response to these changes to the environment andsociety, utopians and pragmatists, whether philosophers,ideologues, or factory owners, formed theories and estab-lished communities to address the location of industry inrelation to other urban uses in order to provide a betterlife for workers and more “rational” cities. Many of thesecommunities, including Lowell, not only aspired to thephysical betterment of workers in terms of hygiene andeducation, but many also contained a moral componentand a concern for propriety. The balance of work andleisure, as well as the contributions of workers to theindustrial products, was the goal. Some also addressed

the design of industrial buildings and physical layout oftowns to accommodate workers and factories.

During the early 1880s, about 60 years after the cityof Lowell was founded, George M. Pullman establishedhis eponymous town in Pullman, Illinois, on approx-imately 4,000 acres about 13 miles south of Chicago.The town was built to support the factory that pro-duced luxury sleeper railway carriages, with the expecta-tion that quality housing, far from city pollution, wouldcreate a happy and productive workforce free from laborstrife and agitation. Pullman was a planned industrialtown, with factory buildings for manufacturing railway




Figure 1.8Pullman, formerly outside of Chicago, Illinois, was a complete town that contained public buildings as well asfactory and worker housing started in the 1880s. This is the Hotel Florence.Historic American Building Survey IL-1018, Cervin Robinson, photographer, August 19, 1963 (ILL, 16-CHIG, 20-1)

cars using the steel of Chicago’s mills, and also hous-ing, public buildings such as a hotel, churches, schools,and parks. Meticulously planned by the architect SolonBeman (who designed all the 1,300 original buildings)and landscape architect Nathan Barret, the town planwas a grid with landscaped elements arranged through-out and provided for planted circles at some intersections,front yards, and tree-lined parkways, supplied by plantsfrom its own greenhouse and nursery.

The more than 500 houses accommodated workersas well as professionals and company officers. Although

designed in different styles to reflect class status as well asto lend visual variety to the streets, buildings were all con-structed of brick and designed to have cross-ventilation,gas service, indoor toilets, and running water—a stepabove most worker housing of the day. Executive homes,located closest to the carriage plant, contained more or-nament and detail than the plain worker houses.

Pullman expected the residents to be as fastidiousas his town and controlled their lives by forbiddingnewspapers, speeches, and free public life. The town wasmaintained by the Pullman Company, which charged



INDUSTRY ARRIVES 13

Figure 1.9Worker housing built by the Menier family in Noisiel, France, was part of a company town that included a townhall, school, and other public buildings that supported its chocolate factory. Photo circa 1900.Collection Nestle deposee en mairie de Noisiel. C© Nestle France et mairie de Noisiel

rent but also inspected homes and evicted renters forbreaches of cleanliness. As a result of the Panic of 1893,business declined, and by the next year many employ-ees were let go; however, their rents were not pro-portionately reduced. In an exemplification of the factthat architecture cannot trump sociology, the resultingPullman Strike was a violent landmark in labor his-tory; federal troops were brought in to break the strikebecause it disrupted rail and federal mail service. In1898, the company town became part of the city ofChicago, when the Illinois Supreme Court ordered thePullman Company to divest its ownership, a result of a

commission’s ruling after the strike that the town was“un-American.”

In 1960, when Pullman was scheduled to be demol-ished for the construction of an industrial park, thePullman Civic Organization formed to save the area.Subsequently, it became the Historic Pullman Founda-tion and has been working to restore the buildings andgrounds and maintain public access. Pullman was des-ignated a historic district by the National Park Servicein 1970. It is now called the Pullman State Historic Siteand the Illinois Historic Preservation Agency owns por-tions of the original Pullman factory, as well as the Hotel




Florence. Although the subject of continuing preserva-tion and restoration work, people live there, some ofwhom are descendents of long-ago residents.

Europe also had planned industrial towns. WhenMenier Chocolate established itself in Noisiel, France,in 1825, it found itself in the same situation as the earlyLowell factories. The town itself had few inhabitants,resulting in a labor shortage. Menier’s solution was tocreate a workers’ city—“a society of the future”—basedupon progressive social ideals. Beginning in the 1870s,the Meniers launched an enclave complete with schools,library, stores, town hall (where a member of the Menierfamily would be mayor until 1959), and hotel. The pub-lic buildings were arranged around a central town square.Thirty years after its start, a home for retired workers wasbuilt. Soon, the company owned the whole town, andthe Meniers considered their town the ideal workers’ cityand showcased it at the Universal Exposition of 1889in Paris.

Brick housing was constructed along parallel streets,with the buildings staggered to allow as much air andlight into the residences as possible. Approximately 300houses were built, each containing two apartments withseparate entrances, many with side and rear gardens. Thewide tree-lined streets were lit by gas. Tenants were notallowed to purchase their houses, as Menier wanted tocontrol their use for his factory workers. Rents, deductedfrom wages, were approximately 10 percent of the annualearnings of the heads of household. It was a paternalisticarrangement in which renters received free education fortheir children and free medical care, as well as access topublic baths and entertainment venues.

In 1960, the housing was sold to a real estate devel-oper, and today this former workers’ housing is locallycoveted houses. The European Route of Industrial Her-itage considers it one of the best-preserved industrialcommunities in Europe.

The nineteenth century produced a hotbed of ideasand approaches to city planning and social theories aimedat taming the problems of industry’s rise and saw nolack of utopian communities. Reacting to what was seenas the physical degradation of the land as factories en-

croached upon the rural landscape, these schemes alsoattempted to redistribute wealth and resources. The ideasbehind Ebenezer Howard’s Garden Cities and Tony Gar-nier’s Cite Industrielle can been seen in today’s con-cepts of zoning and city planning. That industrial ar-eas are often set apart from the rest of their citiesstems from these zoning approaches, and their integra-tion into the urban fabric can be a major challenge toredevelopment.

The basis of Howard’s idea of community controlof land and profits was an attempt to integrate townand countryside, a method of controlling the movementof the urban, industrial population into the rest of thecountry. Dirty industry and overcrowded slums would beeliminated in these new cities, which were to be startedfrom scratch. His 1902 Garden Cities of Tomorrow pro-posed towns built in concentric circles connected by axialroads. Public buildings and a commons were in the cen-ter, surrounded by grand avenues, housing, and industry.Farms were at the outer ring, a link to the untouchedlandscape. Residents would be assured of air and lightand be close to work.4

Tony Garnier’s Cite Industrielle, first exhibited in1904 and later published in 1917, was a comprehensiveproposal for the regulation of towns that clearly separatedthe city into areas reserved for work, living, traffic, andleisure, with each element isolated to allow for expansion.A green belt separated industry from the town. Garnier’stown was sited on a river, the power source for a hy-dropower plant, and although connected by a railroad,the city was self-contained, the local economy capableof providing all. Garnier’s Cite was a socialist haven; thepublic realm was responsible for the distribution of land,food, and necessities. There are great similarities betweenhis plan and the workers cities such as Noisiel, specificallyin the provision of housing and public facilities, suchas schools and libraries, as well as the need for a riverand rail transportation. Garnier’s Cite was owned by thepeople, whereas workers cities were owned and controlledby industrial families.

Although neither of these plans was tested by reality,the ideas behind them periodically are revived and can



INDUSTRY ARRIVES 15

CHIMNEY POT HOUSES

Today renovated worker houses play an im-portant role in addressing affordable housingissues, and though they are small and posechallenges, they have been converted, somequite cleverly. Chimney Pot Park in Salford,England was recently renovated by UrbanSplash, an English company that renovatesall types of industrial buildings mostly for res-idential use. Salford, along with its neighborManchester, was an early center of textilemanufacture, especially of cotton and silk fab-rics. These 349 houses, built during the nine-teenth century, were typical of the crampedunits created for mill workers in the nearbyfactories. Because of its distinctive rooftoplandscape, it had a screen life as a working-class backdrop—first as the setting in the 1961film A Taste of Honey, and then during the

Figure 1.10The renovation by Urban Splash of the Chimney Pot Park row houses in Salford,England, maintained the streetscape and modernized its namesake feature.Image by Robert Cooper, Photoflex, Liverpool

opening credits for the British television showCoronation Street.

Scheduled for demolition in 2002, localgroups came to its rescue and it was recentlyrenovated into ingenious housing, backed bygovernment support and an innovative devel-oper. The designers retained the exterior, inparticular enhancing its name-giving chimneysand streetscape but gutting the interior. Sitingtwo bedrooms on the ground floor and the liv-ing spaces on the second floor with kitchensand a newly created mezzanine level, thisscheme opens up the attic to give the 1,000-square-foot houses a greater sense of space.The former rear yards contain a parking areawhich is terraced over to create communalbackyard accessed from the upper floor livingspaces. It received the government-bestowedHousing Design Award in 2008.




be seen in the New Towns of the post-World War II eraas well as some suburban enclaves. The principals of cityzoning underline the need for rational development, theseparation of uses, and integration of green space and de-velopment. As will be seen in the following chapters, thestrict separation of zoning uses can make reuse of someindustrial sites difficult, another barrier to overcome.

Figure 1.11Ebenezer Howard’s Garden City Plan proposed that towns be designed in concentric circles connected by axialroads that separated uses.

TRANSPORTATION

Industry demands the ease of movement of ideas andgoods: raw materials need to get to the factory, finishedmerchandise must be distributed, and fuel has to be de-livered to factories to fire their furnaces. Before the rise



TRANSPORTATION 17

Figure 1.12Garnier’s Cite Industrielle was an early twentieth-century plan that alsoproposed separation of uses.

of industry, river boats and horse-drawn carriages alongmuddy roads sufficed for local trade. Entrepreneurs andbudding industrialists lcreated canals to tame existingrivers and channel new routes for the inland movementof bulk goods. In Britain, canal construction soared, andin turn, created pockets of industry along its path. Canalboats were capable of moving more goods quickly andsmoothly compared to any previous system that relied onthe horse and cart.

Although canals were known and used by the Romans,and most obviously by the Dutch to control flooding inlow-lying cites such as Amsterdam during the 1600s, itwas the rise of industry and its unquenchable desire fortrade that spurred canal building and refinement in bothEurope and North America. The advantages of a navi-gable water network became evident as soon as the firstcanals were built. Between the end of the eighteenth cen-tury and the beginning of the nineteenth, canals trans-formed the countryside and transportation systems, eas-ing internal commerce wherever they were built.

British canals were originally designed to connectrivers, by supplementing and feeding into the existingtransportation network. As these waterways became morelinear and sophisticated, their network changed the faceof the country’s landscape. The first canals, such as theBridgewater Canal that opened in 1761, were quite effec-tive in hauling coal from the mines in northern Englandto fuel the factories of Manchester’s burgeoning textileindustry. Horses trod along towpaths on the sides of thecanals and hauled barges, an economical and smooth wayof moving heavy as well as fragile goods. In England, as inother European countries, canals were privately built andtolls were collected to repay investors. These canals werenot built according to any master plan, but accordingto the will and finances of private companies, oftenproviding redundant services and creating conflicts. (Thecanal system was nationalized in 1948, along with therailways.)

In 1825, when New York Governor De Witt Clin-ton opened the Erie Canal, the most famous man-made




waterway in the United States, he connected the HudsonRiver and New York City in the east with Lake Erie inthe west, and along with it the agricultural riches of up-state New York and the heartland. Originally 363 mileslong, 40 feet wide, and only 4 feet deep, the canal’s suc-cess demanded that it be expanded many times. It andother American canals not only transformed their ter-mini, but also all points in between, attracting industriesand immigrants along their routes.

Concerned that the Erie Canal would draw the Amer-ican Midwest trade to New York City, the Canadiansbuilt the Lachine Canal to connect the Great Lakeswith the Atlantic Ocean, thereby avoiding the LachineRapids and simultaneously changing the character ofMontreal. Finished the same year as the Erie Canal andfinanced by the founder of the Bank of Montreal, it orig-inally spanned 8.7 miles and needed seven locks (sub-sequently reduced to five) from the port of Montrealto Lake Saint-Louis. However, more trade and largerboats demanded progressive expansion that lasted untilthe 1880s. As with the Erie Canal, the Lachine spawnedsmaller canals, such as the Welland Canal, that connectedLake Erie with Lake Ontario and allowed ships to bypassNiagara Falls.

The Lachine Canal allowed Montreal to progress froma trading city to an active industrial base and one of thelargest ports in North America. The changes in elevationthat required the locks on the Lachine Canal also pro-vided hydropower for burgeoning industry. A system ofheadrace and tailrace hydraulic canals was built on bothsides of the Lachine Canal. Along these canals and falls,industrial lots were developed and sold for the building ofwood, flour, and cotton mills, and factories specializingin iron and tool manufacture. Later into the twentiethcentury, larger industries specializing in chemical andsteel production flourished. The industrialization of thebanks of the Lachine Canal typified industrial expan-sion and the concentration of industry into clusters incertain areas with access to easy trade routes and cheappower. Industrial districts formed as businesses neededeach other’s goods and could benefit from the availablepool of workers.

For several decades, Montreal was the industrial pow-erhouse of Canada, with nearly 15,000 ships passingthrough the Lachine Canal annually before the Depres-sion of the 1930s. Although industry still has a presencealong the canals, much of the industry that grew on itsbanks eventually led to the canal’s demise: industrial de-velopment hogging its edges prevented canal expansion.The St. Lawrence Seaway to the east opened in 1959 andsiphoned off much of the maritime trade from both theErie and Lachine canals. The Lachine Canal closed toshipping in 1970.

* * *

With the increase in both the volume of goods and theneed to transport them faster and over longer distances,canals became outmoded and were soon superseded byrailroads, many of which were built along canal rights-of-ways. The surviving canals, however, remain an evocativeand still-working remnant of the pervasive push towardindustrialization. As will be seen in subsequent chapters,some of these renovated channels are among the moresuccessful recreation and tourist attractions, their banksfilled with strollers and picnickers rather than barge-pulling mules and horses, and the old warehouses andfactories replaced with housing and museums.

WHY INDUSTRY LEFTAND WHAT IT LEFTBEHIND

Industry and change have been synonymous since thespinning jenny produced its first thread. Populationsmove. Markets are fickle. Technology sows seeds of itsown progress and forces industry to adapt as one inno-vation quickly supplants another. Different technologiesand patterns of behavior continually replace the old. Atrip along the Erie Canal, for instance, is an interestingmicrocosm of how industry has changed over the years,



WHY INDUSTRY LEFT AND WHAT IT LEFT BEHIND 19

a catalog of now-defunct nineteenth- and twentieth-century products. One passes towns once famous formaking brooms (Scotia), rags (Amsterdam), cotton sacksand paper bags for shipping on the canal (Canajoharie),matches (Frankfort), bushels for apples (Middleport),knit goods (Utica), and salt for food preservation (Syra-cuse). A prickly plant formerly required to finish woolfabric propped up the New England textile industry, andput Skaneateles on the map for just enough time to pro-duce a few local moguls. Now only its namesake, TeaselStreet, remains. The typewriter (Syracuse) will soon jointhis list. Over the past 60 years this process has continued,and accelerated.

* * *

Technological advances after World War II combinedwith a population boom and a desire to apply these ad-vances to improve everyday life. Industry flourished, sup-plying war-weary populations with the means for becom-ing modern.

Unfortunately, this newly energized activity was ac-companied by the blatant disregard to the land, sea, andair around it. Rivers became de facto sewage systemswhen industry merely dumped one chemical byproductafter another into them without looking back. Drumsof waste products were buried on factory properties andchimneys spewed soot into the air. Slowly, postwar sen-sibilities became aware of a newly energized sense of theenvironment, emphasizing the dangers of pollution andenvironmental degradation.

As lifestyles and expectations changed, industries thathad built up these cities were seen as interlopers in theirown neighborhoods. At the same time, the roads that im-proved the movement of goods also served to disperse thepopulation. In America, government policies encouragedthe building of suburbs, further emptying cities. Industryacted as the population did—if still viable, it left urbancenters and resettled miles away from its traditional base.If obsolete, it merely closed its doors. In either case, it be-came easier to abandon decaying industry than to cleanit up and replace it.

The heavy industry that had changed the face ofNorth America and Europe since the Industrial Revo-lution moved en masse to other continents over the latteryears of the twentieth century, its products either super-seded or now extinct from lack of need. This movementof industry as it searches for cheaper or more convenientplaces to operate continues apace. As a result of changesin manufacturing and transportation spurred by WorldWar II, ships became larger, requiring deeper ports. Moreefficient methods to increase cargo capacity and pre-vent theft at the docks hastened the need for containerports, which required not only larger harbors but acresof land rather than mere port-side warehouses. Originalcity ports could not provide the facilities now required.As a result, the ports moved elsewhere—if only acrossthe river.

Government policies in America, quickly imitated inEurope, encouraged the building of larger roads to avoidthe small towns and cities, changing traffic patterns forboth residents and commerce. Delivery by truck becamemore efficient, quickly making obsolete the cities thathad made their mark first by the waterfronts of the seaand canal and then by rail.

Industry’s exodus has dealt a severe blow to urban ar-eas, now empty shells of their former selves, pockmarkedwith vacant, deteriorating buildings, victims of the trans-formation of the labor force and changing methods ofdistribution of goods. Left in their wake were rottingpiers, abandoned factories, and empty, collapsing ware-houses, often near city centers. How cities have beenrestoring these properties involves many steps and muchtime, as will be seen in the following chapters.

ENDNOTES

1. In America, whether to industrialize or not was asubject of controversy and disagreement betweenHamiltonians and Jeffersonians, the latter envision-ing an American economy based upon agriculture,




importing manufactured goods from Europe andavoiding the pitfalls of industrialized urban hubs.According to Thomas Jefferson, manufacture, whenit existed, should be local and cater to the agrarianeconomy.

2. Evelyn Alloy, Working Women’s Music (Somerville:New England Free Press, 1976), p. 8.

3. Dennis Frenchman and Jonathan S. Lane, DiscussionWhite Paper: Assessment of Preservation and Develop-

ment in Lowell National Historical Park at Its 30-YearAnniversary (2008), p. 3.

4. This idea is being revisited today in an effort to pro-mote “smart growth” and to prevent suburban sprawl.Some towns in agricultural areas are promoting a simi-lar “conservation area” designated to remain open andunbuilt at the outskirts of the town center, so that oneenters the town through a country landscape, not aroad lined with strip malls.



Berens/Redeveloping Ind Sites Sample Chapter

Documents

Transcript of Berens/Redeveloping Ind Sites Sample Chapter