| Despite the areas of natural beauty, the BPC’s investigations focused on the urgent need to remedy the contamination found in much of the valley. The BPC outlined two ways to reclaim the Bronx River. One alternative had already been formulated by the Bronx Sewer Commission: channel the water into a culvert and build over the stream. The BPC rejected this approach as inexpedient and undesirable.(21) The commission’s preferred alternative was to acquire all the land along the river in order to prevent discharge of sewage and other pollution. The BPC argued that the value of the reservation and restored stream would far outweigh the cost of the project, noting that municipalities throughout America were preserving areas of unusual natural beauty and maintaining them for public use. It cited Fairmount and Wissahickon in Philadelphia and the Fenways of Boston as examples of successful and valuable reclamation projects. The BPC unanimously decided that the best means to reclaim the Bronx River was to create a reservation that would encompass all the land along the Bronx River and prevent future discharge into the river. It instructed Thayer to prepare a map indicating the land necessary for such a project.(22) To better understand how the proposed reservation would fit within the Bronx River Valley, the BPC considered adjacent developments that might affect the project. The commissioners met with railroad company officials, with the Bronx borough president, and with sewer commission authorities to learn about their plans and ensure their cooperation. Developments planned near the proposed reservation included additional railroad tracks, a trunk sewer between White Plains and Woodlawn, and Bronx Boulevard. The BPC instructed Thayer to portray these previously scheduled developments on his map of the proposed reservation.(23) The BPC summarized its year-long investigation in a 1907 report that was printed and made available in an attractively illustrated pamphlet.(24) The report emphasized the importance of civic improvement and aesthetic development and underscored the "intimate relationship" between New York City and its suburbs. The commission praised Boston and Chicago for their comprehensive park systems. Both cities had acquired land for park development outside city limits in anticipation of future growth. New York City, on the other hand, was growing into the surrounding region but had made no provisions for reservations in its most immediate suburb, Westchester County. The BPC emphasized that the Bronx River Parkway would open an entirely new phase in developing the city’s park system. It would provide a direct and attractive boulevard from the city to the open countryside, with Kensico Reservoir as its destination. The commissioners asserted that the river valley would offer endless combinations of scenic possibilities in its forests, rocky valleys, meadows, and water, and would also provide opportunities for active recreation. In addition, they noted that improving the river channel as part of the parkway project would provide flood relief.(25) |
|
|
|
|
| (21)Bronx
Parkway Commission, Report, 1912, 11: BPC reports indicated that
this solution would be very expensive, estimating it would cost $10 million. |
|
