In the summer of 1996 I emailed copies of my PhD dissertation to all the members of my committee. My dissertation was about family firms, craft dynasties, and leather tanning in the Catskills and eastern Pennsylvania, c. 1780-1950. Instead of sitting back and waiting to read their comments, I followed up on some research notes I had made about tanneries in the Pittsburgh region. That research ultimately led to several published articles, a couple of Historic American Engineering Record reports, a PBS interview, and several newspaper articles. But those aren’t what this post is about.

At the same time I was researching leather tanning in Pittsburgh and elsewhere, a cultural resource management (CRM) company was doing compliance studies for a highway improvement project in Pittsburgh. The highway project cut through the geographical heart of the space I was researching: Pittsburgh’s North Side and the north shore of the Allegheny River. After I read the CRM company’s report I published a review in my website and shared it with colleagues via various nascent listervs (this was the early days of the Internet before blogs, Twitter, etc.). The original post also was written long before the field of critical heritage studies emerged.

My review and the criticisms of the National Historic Preservation Act compliance stirred up quite a kerfuffle. The fallout included lawsuit threats and a considerable amount of retaliation by the firms involved in the studies and the agencies that reviewed them. Over the years, my website morphed into a blog and the original Pennsylvania Route 28 page ultimately was deleted. The Route 28 research, though, never really disappeared from public view. Every few years I get calls from print and radio reporters with questions about the highway and the area’s history.

I have recently returned to Pittsburgh and to some of my work from the 1990s. New publications and projects are forthcoming, including a recap of a May 2019 walking tour of PennDOT’s mitigation efforts in the Route 28 corridor. But, in the meantime I have decided to resurrect the 1997 web review (with some minor edits).

Carole Ashbridge  talks about the history of the Heinz plant in the Route 28 corridor. Allegheny City Society Lost Allegheny City Murals Walking Tour, May 19, 2019.

---

Original URL: http://davidsr01.home.mindspring.com/route28.htm

Accuracy . . . is the sin-qua-non.A History not accurate, is, in other words, no history⁽¹⁾
Introduction

Pennsylvania Route 28, which follows the Allegheny River from its confluence with the Monongahela at the headwaters of the Ohio River, is a congested urban artery from its southern terminus in the city of Pittsburgh to the Fortieth Street Bridge across the Allegheny, some three miles to the north. In 1996 the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation (PennDOT) hired Cultural Heritage Research Services, Inc. (CHRS) to conduct a historic resources survey of the Route 28 corridor in anticipation of a proposed project to improve the outdated transportation facility. The project was done to enable PennDOT and the Federal Highway Administration to comply with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act and the National Environmental Policy Act and their implementing regulations requiring surveys to identify historic resources and assess their significance under the criteria for listing in the National Register of Historic Places.

Pennsylvania Route 28 location map.

CHRS submitted their report, Historic Resources Survey and Determination of Eligibility Report, S.R. 0028 Project, Pittsburgh and Millvale Borough, Allegheny County, Pennsylvania, to PennDOT in September 1996. In May 1997, I had an opportunity to review the CHRS report. I wanted the report because I had been conducting an independent research project within the proposed PennDOT corridor for the previous year. My work focused on the social and economic history of the project vicinity, once known as Allegheny City. More specifically, I had been researching the once dominant livestock , meat and meat byproducts (leather, glue, fertilizer, soap) industries. Although these industries dominated the economic and social landscape of much of the former Allegheny City (after 1907, Pittsburgh’s North Side neighborhood) between the 1830s and the 1960s, few historians writing on Pittsburgh’s history had recognized the intricate vertical and horizontal integration present among the butchers, tanners, wool pullers and drovers who founded stockyards, tanneries, meatpacking plants, glue factories and soap works along the shores of the Allegheny River and the small stream hollows dissecting the river valley’s uplands (Rotenstein 1997).

One of the most frustrating aspects of my research was the lack of accurate and credible historical material. There were the standard 1941 Works Projects Administration history of Allegheny City (Pennsylvania Writers’ Program 1941) and a University of Pittsburgh dissertation (Faires 1981) on the German community whose traditional foodways established the demand for fresh meats and the economic impetus for German butchers to integrate their craft to maximize profits from animal byproducts. And there was a “comprehensive” and often cited 1985 survey of historical and archaeological resources within Pittsburgh (Cowin 1985). But, for all the ink and effort put into each of these works, none of these investigators had tied together the superficially discrete pieces of the livestock and leather puzzle to get the complete picture of just how important the livestock-dependent industries were in the former Allegheny City.

Because PennDOT’s proposed project occurs along the former East Ohio Street (Route 28), one of the most important roads in the former Allegheny City linking its former core to outlying Allegheny River boroughs and to the sources of rural raw materials, I was hoping for a fresh insight from the CHRS survey. What I read in the CHRS report, however, was a facile attempt by CHRS historians to construct a historic context narrative and a badly bungled survey of the existing historic resources and landscape. On May 21, 1997 I wrote a detailed letter outlining the report’s deficiencies to the Pennsylvania SHPO (Pennsylvania Historical and Museum Commission, Bureau for Historic Preservation) and to PennDOT. I never received a reply to my letter.

On October 20, 1997 I detailed some of my observations regarding the report in an e-mail post to the American Cultural Resource Association Internet discussion list, ACRA -L. Terrence Epperson, Ph.D., Vice President and Director of Research for CHRS, Inc. posted a reply to my continued criticism of the CHRS, Inc. report. Epperson wrote that the Pennsylvania SHPO had dismissed my review of the report as “a personally-motivated slur perpetuated by a disgruntled former employee who has a financial interest in bad-mouthing competition in his region” (Epperson 1997) [ACRA has since deleted its entire archive from the ACRA-L listserv]. (Follow these links to the actual PennDOT and PHMC-BHP memoranda regarding the Pennsylvania Route 28 project.)

This is an issue that goes far beyond the cultural resource management community and begs the attention of all academic historians and public historians concerned with historic preservation and the growing body of literature created by cultural resource management historians. What kind of permanent damage are we doing to other historic resources in later projects within the vicinity of Pennsylvania Route 28 because of inaccurate work? What about creating a body of literature produced by professional historians and archaeologists that by the virtue of our advanced degrees and voluminous reports, makes us look like experts, but in actuality is rife with errors in fact and errors in methodology. Yes, it is good CRM for the moment, but it is bad history for the future.

Route 28

CHRS identified forty-eight historic properties in its historic resources survey of the Route 28 corridor; six subsequently were determined to be potentially eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places (i). In addition to the resources identified during their survey, CHRS historians also noted several resources within the project area already determined eligible for listing (or already listed) in the National Register of Historic Places. These included the Pittsburgh Wool Company, the Fortieth Street Bridge, the H.J. Heinz Company and the former Eberhardt and Ober Brewery.

Although CHRS diligently identified four dozen historic resources, one of CHRS’ greatest gaffs concerns the road known today as Rialto Street. CHRS historians wrote of the street, “The track of the Troy Hill incline became the modern Rialto Street, which offers motorists a brisk jaunt downhill at a 24 degree drop” (9). Rialto street traverses a steep hill, known as Troy Hill, from its intersection with Route 28 to Wicklines Lane, a narrow winding road that links Troy Hill with the Spring Garden valley.

Rialto Street, prior to the annexation of Allegheny City by Pittsburgh, was known as Ravine Street. The Troy Hill incline was in fact located several hundred feet south of the Ravine/Rialto Street corridor, as several atlas and fire insurance maps published between 1884 and 1902 clearly illustrate. On August 31, 1850 the Duquesne Borough Council appropriated $50 “for opening a road from the Butler Pike [S.R. 28] to Troy Hill . . . called Ravine Street” (Duquesne Borough Council Minutes August 31, 1850); three weeks later, an additional $25 was appropriated toward the construction of Ravine/Rialto Street (Duquesne Borough Council Minutes September 21, 1850).

In 1885 a large stockyards facility (Pittsburgh and Allegheny Drove Yard; later, the Pittsburgh Union Stock Yards and Pittsburgh Joint Stock Yards) opened on Herr’s Island in the Allegheny River. The Pittsburgh and Allegheny Drove Yard Company was chartered by Allegheny City tanner James Callery and six partners in April, 1884 (Allegheny County Charter Book 9:189) and in December of 1884 the first tracts of land on Herr’s Island were purchased for the stockyards (Allegheny County Deed Book 497:535). By December 18, 1884, construction on the stockyards had commenced (Pittsburgh Post December 18, 1884).

Pittsburgh Union Stockyards advertisement, 1924.

Between 1884 and 1891, the Pittsburgh and Allegheny Drove Yard Company acquired several more tracts on Herr’s Island comprising most of the middle of the island (Allegheny County Deed Books 548:149, 697:301). While the principals of the stockyards company were building their stockyards, Allegheny City butcher and byproducts dealer Emil Winter, in 1887, bought the former site of the Pennsylvania Tube Works located south of the 31st Street Bridge on Herr’s Island and built a substantial slaughterhouse locally known as “Emil Winter’s Abattoir” (Allegheny County Deed Book 574:428). By the turn of the twentieth century, Herr’s Island’s entire 41 acres consisted of livestock yards, a slaughterhouse and soap making facility.

Linked to the Pennsylvania and the Baltimore and Ohio railroads by the Pittsburgh Junction Railroad, the Herr’s Island stockyards became a significant point of sale and resting place for livestock in transit between the Midwest (Chicago) and eastern markets (Philadelphia and New York City). Livestock sold at the stockyards was driven up Ravine/Rialto Street in midnight drives, through the Troy Hill community and into the Spring Garden valley to several large slaughterhouses.

Cattle being herded in stockyards on Herr’s Island, 1960s. Photo courtesy of Fred Rosen.

The midnight livestock drives up Ravine/Rialto Street defined the street’s cultural landscape. Ravine/Rialto Street, along with steps constructed up the south face of Troy Hill were the only transportation corridors linking Herr’s Island with Troy Hill and the Spring Garden valley. Local historian and journalist William Rimmel wrote:

Long lines of workers could be seen every night climbing the steep steps leading from Herr’s Island to Troy Hill after a 12-hour day in the stockyards. Others hiked up and down Spring Hill and Troy Hill en route to and from the tanneries, packing houses, soap factories and the H.J. Heinz plant. (Rimmel 1981:103)

Walter Mall, 88, worked for the Northside Packing Company (located on Spring Garden Avenue) for sixty-seven years. He began his career on the packing house’s shipping floor and worked his way up to credit manager. Part of his early responsibilities with the company was driving livestock from the stockyards on Herr’s Island up Ravine/Rialto Street. “We went up from the stock yards up Ravine Street. We called it ‘Pig Hill’. And that went down into Spring Garden Avenue. And we drove them up there at night,” said Mall i n a 1996 interview (Mall 1996).

Rialto Street (“Pig Hill”), 1998.

There is no available evidence for when Ravine/Rialto Street became known as “Pig Hill” or “Pig Alley,” but they are the names used by local residents when referring to Ravine/Rialto Street. Livestock – pigs and cattle – drives through Ravine/Rialto Street were constant up until the stockyards on Herr’s Island closed in the 1960s. Mickey Zeidler is a third-generation Croatian who grew up along East Ohio Street (Route 28) during the 1940s and 1950s. Most of his family were employed in the stockyards, meatpacking plants or soap factory. During a May 1997 interview Zeidler recalled

[O]ur mother said that Ravine Street, on the end of the 31st Street Bridge, we know that as Pig Hill. They used to run cattle up the street at night because they didn’t have the traffic or the trucks and they’d block off and they’d run them over to Walker’s Bridge and up into the O & H Packing Company [Oswald and Hess] in Spring Garden.” (Zeidler, et al. 1997)

“They did the same with pigs. Sometimes they had to go back and look, see the ones that went in the sewer. Some would crawl into the sewer.” added Zeidler. He also noted that some people who lived along the drive would take animals “lost” the previous night and then sell them back to the packers. The sounds and the smells from the animals on Herr’s Island and driven through neighborhood streets defined much of the East Ohio Street community the Croatian residents called “Mala Jaska.”

Children living in Mala Jaska (East Ohio Street), 1915. Photo courtesy of Elsie Yuratovich.

The corridor leading from East Ohio Street (Route 28) to Troy Hill now known as Rialto Street is potentially eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) as a historic transportation resource under Criterion A of 36 CFR 60.6. The corridor’s steep grade and continued use, as well as its role in and associations with the locally and nationally significant livestock and meat industries, contribute toward is significance. Ravine/Rialto Street’s position in the local cultural landscape further enhances the resource’s viability as a significant historical resource.⁽²⁾

The Island Hotel / Lambros Lounge is another historic resource within the Route 28 corridor. CHRS, in its NRHP significance statement, determined that “The Island Hotel is not eligible for listing in the National Register. It is not associated with important historical events or significant individuals” (75). According to CHRS, “The property consists of a historic hotel, recently used as a commercial property, ‘Lambros Lounge’ ” (74).

East Ohio Street 1920 showing homes and island Hotel/Lambros Lounge. Pittsburgh City Photographer Collection, Historic Pittsburgh.

Contrary to CHRS’s determination that the Island Hotel is “not associated with important historical events or significant individuals,” the resource was a prominent fixture among the Croatian residents of East Ohio Street (Route 28) and played a key social role in the community of workers employed in the Herr’s Island livestock, meat and meat byproducts industry.

According to Ray Zeidler, the Island Hotel was a common place to board for people who brought livestock to fairs held at the Herr’s Island stockyards:

[T]hey used to bring their prized hogs and steers and sheep and they’d have an auction over there. And they used to bring their prized hogs and steers and sheep and they’d have an auction and a show, called the 4-H club and we used to always run over there and get the free donuts. They had free donuts and coffee for the 4-h members. So to get a free donut, we’d get out of school and run right over there. A lot of them stayed over there, but they also stayed at Lambros’ Hotel. (Zeidler, et al. 1997)

The bar – Lambros Lounge – was one of the saloons around which “Croatian life centered,” wrote CHRS historians (11). Lambros Lounge, according to former East Ohio Street (Route 28) residents was the social focal point for Croatian workers employed on Herr’s Island. Sam Santini, the Zeidler’s cousin who also grew up on East Ohio Street recalled

As far as Lambros’, my grandfather would stop there in the morning and get a shot or something and he’d go to work. When he’d come back, he’d stop there and get a shot and a beer before he’d go down and eat. My grandmother would have lunch. Then he’d go back up there and stop there and have some more and go back over and then after work. (Zeidler, et al. 1997)

Santini’s cousin, Mickey Zeidler, noted that Lambros was an important part of the community. “All the guys that worked the night shift, they had an hour for lunch at Armour’s and they ran across there and they was in there in their white coats for the whole hour” (Zeidler, et al. 1997). The bar also was a focal point for children too young to drink, as Ray Zeidler recalled about Halloween. “Lambros – the places, the businesses gave the best. Lambros gave some good stuff,” he said. His brother Mickey added, “If Lambros didn’t give it, I used to go in his cellar and take his cases of beer” (Zeidler, et al. 1997). Later, Sam Santini tied together Lambros Lounge, the Croatian community and the Herr’s Island stockyards. “Our domain was East Ohio Street, stock yard,” said Santini:

We had Lambros, we knew everybody because we walked to school every morning. So, you know, walking from 1644 East Ohio Street down to St. Nicholas and then back, that was our domain. And then we – we’d only go to shows down North Side and that, but we didn’t play or . . . . (Zeidler, et al. 1997)

Although the Island Hotel / Lambros Lounge has undergone some architectural modification (as indicated by CHRS) and was moved, along with most other structures along East Ohio Street during a massive 1924 improvement project by Allegheny County transportation engineers, the resource is potentially eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places because of its association with the meatpacking industry and the surrounding Croatian community.

Lambros Restaurant as seen from the Herr’s Island Bridge, 1930. Photo source: Pittsburgh City Photographer Collection, University of Pittsburgh Libraries.

Without any documentation to support their claim, CHRS historians wrote of members of the Croatian community, “Often, they worked in the coal mines and steel mills” (11). According to current and former residents of the East Street (Route 28) corridor, most of the Croatian community were employed in the livestock , meat and meat byproducts (leather, wool pulling, rendering, soap making) industries, as well as in the two canneries (H.J. Heinz and Lutz and Schramm) located along the shore of the Allegheny River. In their somewhat uneven discussion of Pittsburgh soap factories, compilers of the multi-volume, multi-year sociological study of the Pittsburgh region known as the “Pittsburgh Survey” wrote that most of the employees of Walker’s Soap factory on the northern end of Herr’s Island were women, “Polish [Eastern European] from the lower North Side” who lived in “unsightly shacks on the hills along the River” (Butler 1909:270). Working conditions were comparable to the descriptions of similar facilities painfully presented in Upton Sinclair’s classic 1906 study of Chicago’s meat industry, The Jungle:

The stench from the stockyards and the odor from the soap combine to daunt any but the most hardy seekers for employment. Unventilated and sometimes dirty rooms, a heterogeneous series of industrial processes, an atmosphere of nervous haste, low piece rates, high pressure, – such facts as these characterize a plant unique among Pittsburgh factories. (Butler 1909:269)

Croatian labor, after the turn of the twentieth century, also came to dominate the declining leather industry within the Route 28 project area. Although precise figures currently are not available for Pittsburgh North Side (research is in progress), in 1914 the U.S. Immigration Commission reported to the U.S. Senate that labor in the tanning industry was dominated by Eastern European (Polish and Slovak) immigrants and their first generation descendants (U.S. Congress. Senate 1914). In Pennsylvania, at the time of the Immigration Commission report, the Pennsylvania Department of Labor and Industry reported that “foreigners” comprised 43 percent (5,510) of labors employed in Pennsylvania tanneries (Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. Department of Labor and Industry 1915:193).

Although CHRS historians presented a lengthy discussion of the development of the Croatian community within the project area (pp. 11-12), the company’s failure to account for the dominant local industries (livestock , meat and meat byproducts) that drew heavily upon the Croatians is a serious oversight. About the Herr’s Island industries, the raison d’etre for many of the Croatian immigrants who chose to live along East Ohio Street, Sam Santini — a Millvale resident who also grew up on East Ohio Street – said “I don’t know of it ever being a nuisance because the majority of the old Hunkies, they all worked there to a point” (Zeidler, et al. 1997).

Relying on incomplete cartographic resources and a booklet prepared for the 1992 Society for Industrial Archaeology convention, CHRS historians identified a so-called “North Side Breweries Historic District.” “Several resources within the study area, in particular, appear to be historically and architecturally related. Further historical research indicated the importance of this resource type within the study area and a brewery context was established to help place these resources within the cultural and historical milieu in which they existed,” wrote CHRS historians (75). Had CHRS historians done more thorough research, they would have found a more geographically contiguous and historically significant Duquesne/Allegheny Industrial Historic District within the proposed PennDOT project area than their questionable breweries district.

One of the contributing resources with the breweries historic district is the site of the former American Brewing Company. “Many of the buildings associated with the American Brewing Company survive. The transformation of the brewery into an industrial park has strengthened the viability of the complex,” wrote CHRS historians (88). The site did in fact house a brewery formerly known as the American Brewing Company until August 29, 1921 when the property was sold to the Fried and Reineman Packing Company by the Independent Brewing Company of Pittsburgh for $250,000 (Allegheny County Deed Book 2069:320). The Fried and Reineman Packing Company consolidated its operations at the East Ohio Street site and in 1923 sold its Spring Garden facility to Oswald and Hess, another local meatpacking company (Allegheny County Deed Book 2146:208). The Fried and Reineman Packing Company remained in business at the East Ohio Street site until its sale in 1961 to Martin Fellman et al. (Allegheny County Deed Book 3927:537). The Fried and Reineman Packing Company was one of few Pittsburgh (and, indeed, US) meatpackers who remained independent of the Chicago meat oligopoly (Armour, Swift, et al.).

Fried and Reineman packing plant. Photo courtesy of Joe Reineman.

CHRS historians also remarked on the facility having been built into the steep side of Troy Hill. They wrote, “The office, stock house, and brewing buildings are extant. Additionally, the brewery is banked up into a hill, where vaults were normally placed to store beer during the lagering” (88). Contrary to CHRS’ interpretation for the site, the facility was banked into the hillside for two reasons: to drive cattle into upper story slaughtering floors and to store meat. The sharp topography of the hills surrounding the project area was adapted by the many traditional butchers as cold storage for slaughtered meats. The hillsides of the Allegheny River and Spring Garden valleys are scarred with such cold storage areas, some two or three rooms deep, where meat was hung on overhead rails until its sale. Although issues of significance for listing resources in the NRHP are debatable, CHRS was negligent in its assessment of the former American Brewery site by not including it as a significant component in the local meat industry.

Former cold storage vault cut into a hillside along Spring Garden Avenue, 1997.

Conclusions

This review of Historic Resources Survey and Determination of Eligibility Report, S.R. 0028 Project, Pittsburgh and Millvale Borough, Allegheny County, Pennsylvania by Cultural Heritage Research Services, Inc. raises some serious questions about the accuracy and quality of historical research done under the auspices of cultural resource management. Because of federal, state and local environmental and historic preservation legislation, much of the work of history done in the United States today is conducted to comply with these laws. But what are historians and clients (in many cases, taxpayers in the communities where these studies are done) getting in return? In the case of the Route 28 historic resources survey report, I would argue that the costs of CRM outweigh the benefits.

Furthermore, questions regarding the role and objectivity of State Historic Preservation Office staffs are raised when legitimate criticism is directed toward work they are responsible for reviewing goes unanswered. The Route 28 report and the actions on behalf of the consultants (CHRS) responsible for doing the survey and writing the report and the silent dismissal of documented evidence that a CRM survey had been badly botched by the SHPO beg for a closer examination of how history gets done in the field and in the offices of review agencies such as the Pennsylvania Historical and Museum Commission Bureau for Historic Preservation.

References

Legal Instruments

Deed Books. Recorder of Deeds, Allegheny County. Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.
Charter Books. Recorder of Deeds, Allegheny County. Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.

References Cited

Bendroth, Cindy, cjb@POSTOFFICE.PTD.NET
1997 Re: History and Historic Resources in Crisis: ThePennsylvaniaRoute 28 Project -Reply. E-mail posting, PUBLHIST group, October 30.

Butler, Elizabeth B.
1909 The Pittsburgh Survey : Findings in Six Volumes. Vol. I, Women and the Trades, Pittsburgh, 1907-1908.

Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. Department of Labor and Industry
1915 Second Annual Report of the Commissioner of Labor and Industry. Harrisburg,Pennsylvania: Commonwealth of Pennsylvania.

Cowin, Verna
1985 Pittsburgh Archeological Resources and National Register Survey. Pittsburgh: Carnegie Museum of Natural History.

Epperson, Terrence W., TWEpperson@aol.com
1997 Re: Models for CRM Practice. E-mail posting, ACRA-L group, October 27.

Faires, Nora
1981 Ethnicity in Evolution: The German Communities of Pittsburgh and Allegheny City, Pennsylvania, 1845-1881. Diss. University of Pittsburgh.

Mall, Walter
1996 Interview with David S. Rotenstein, December 17. Tape and transcript on file with the author.

Pennsylvania Writers’ Program
1941 Story of Old Allegheny City. Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania: Allegheny Centennial Committee.

Rimmel, William M.
1981 The Allegheny Story. Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania: The Guttendorf Press.

Rotenstein, David S.
1997 Leather Bound: Nineteenth Century Leather Tanners in Allegheny City. Pittsburgh History 80(1):32-47.

Russo, David J.
1988 Keepers of Our Past: Local Historical Writing in the United States, 1820s-1930s. New York, New York: Greenwood Press.

U.S. Congress. Senate
1914 Immigrants in Industries. Senate Document No. 633. 61st Cong. 2d sess.

Zeidler, Danny, Mickey Zeidler, Ray Zeidler and Sam Santini
1997 Interview with David S. Rotenstein, May 5. Tape and transcript on file with the author.

NOTES

1. North American Review 42, Jan.-June 1836, p.449. Quoted in David J. Russo, Keepers of Our Past: Local Historical Writing in the United States, 1820s-1930s (New York, New York: Greenwood Press, 1988), p. 61

2. An e-mail message from a Pennsylvania Historical and Museum Commission employee, Cindy Bendroth (1997), indicates that PennDOT and the PHMC reviewed my concerns and determined that Rialto Street was not eligible for listing in the NRHP as I suggested. Bendroth wrote, “From the information provided we agree with PennDot that Rialto St. appears not to be eligible for association with the meat packing industry since it lacks integrity from the time of this activity.” Cartographic data and informant interviews confirm, however, that Rialto Street follows its original alignment, within its original width at its original twenty-four degree grade.

© D.S. Rotenstein 1997-2019.

Shortlink for this post: https://wp.me/p1bnGQ-3lr