Site Information

Location: Pittsburgh, Pa.; In the Allegheny River about 2 miles north of the point. (Figure M-1)

A Delaware Indian path crossed Herrs Island from what is now Fortieth and Butler Streets in Lawrenceville. The island was ideal for overnight encampments even though there is no evidence of a lasting Indian settlement. (McFarland, 1986) It is believed that Washington slept on the island in 1753 when his raft capsized in the Allegheny River. For this reason, Herrs Island was officially renamed Washington’s Landing on October 24, 1987. (Linn, 1987) The island was originally owned by William Wilson, who obtained a patent to the land on May 18, 1792. It was later purchased by Benjamin Herr in 1797. In the years following the acquisition by Herr, the island was used primarily for farming. But as the years progressed, industry found its way to Herrs Island. (Herr, 1970) The Pennsylvania Railroad bought a portion of the island in 1903 to be used as a stop-over for its route from Chicago to New York. (Dept of City Planning, 1969) This purchase was in response to the Federal law which required livestock to have rest, food, and water after every 36 hours of travel. Herrs Island served as the midpoint, where the livestock were allowed rest in the many cattle pens located there. (Stearns, 1977) With livestock already present, meat packing and rendering facilities eventually covered the island. "While isolated physically from the city - the island made its presence known for miles around with the smell that often emanated from the site." Herrs Island became well known for its "Herrs’ stink". (Dept of City Planning, 1969) "Odors from the island's animal rendering plant were foul enough to make a fellow just about swear off breathing." (O'Neill, 1986) Workers on the 31^st Street Bridge were quoted as saying: "You can't even drink your coffee when the wind blows the wrong way." (Rieland, 1974) North Catholic High School even had to close its windows on hot summer days due to the bad odor." (Post-Gazette, 1990)

Throughout the years, Herrs Island was controlled by various industries. The following is a time line of the industries residing on the island, as found on real-estate and insurance maps .

In later years, Western Packing Company, Inland Products Company, and Armour Meats (Rieland, 1997), which were all rendering companies, occupied portions of the island. (URA, 1997) Armour Meats later became the site of the Hausman-Buncher scrapyard. (Rieland, 1974)

By the mid 1960s, new technology had invented high speed trains putting Herrs Island off the route for the railroad and in 1966, the packing companies closed. (Stearns, 1977) In the late 1970s, the only remaining industries on the island were the .5-acre Western Packing Company and the 2.8-acre Inland Products Company rendering plant. (URA, 1997)

As far back as 1959, the City Dept. of Parks and Recreation, the City Planning Commission, and the Three Rivers Improvement and Development Co. thought about making the island a recreational park, although the plan was never adopted. (Stearns, 1977) The Regional Industrial Development Corp. of Southwestern Pennsylvania (RIDC) prepared a report of the island in 1976 stating that a industrial park and marina would be economically feasible. Mayor Pete Flaherty’s original plan for the island was based on the RIDC study and called for two phases. Phase I was to cover the existing land and Phases II called for the enlargement of the island to 70-acres by filling in the back channel of the Allegheny River at a total cost of $34.2 million. This project was estimated to provide 2,500 jobs and $1.3 million annual tax revenue. Phase I by itself was expected to yield 2,000 jobs and $806,697 in tax revenue. (Warner, 1976) "The island, abandoned in the '60s, was something of a white elephant until taken over by the Urban Redevelopment Authority." (McKay, 1996) In 1978, the URA bought .5 acres from Western Packing Co. and, in 1979, 20 acres of the Buncher Co.’s land. (Chute, 1979) The state bought 2.8 acres for a park and a marina from Inland Products Co. in 1981. (O’Toole, 1981) After delays by the Buncher Co., the City Planning Commission agreed to the rezoning of the northern two-thirds of the island for development. (Post-Gazette, 1986) The URA's plans to buy the remaining 20 acres of the Buncher Co.’s land were halted in April 1988 because of toxic waste found on Buncher land. During this time, the URA asked for easements to the Buncher Property in order to install utility lines, but Buncher refused. (Guo, 1988) The URA finally bought Buncher’s land in March 1989 after a year of delays.

Environmental Implications

In September 1993, GAI Consultants, Inc. of Monroeville completed an environmental investigation of Washington’s Landing on parcels 1, 2a, 2b, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8, the central and northern portion of the island for the URA . The Waste Materials Investigation consisted of a subsurface sampling and trenching investigation. Soil and groundwater samples were taken to be analyzed for Acid Extractable Organics, Base/Neutral Extractable Organics, Volatile Organics, Pesticides/PCBs, and Inorganics. No contamination was found except for waste materials from rendering operations. These non-hazardous materials give off a noxious odor and therefore were disposed of off-site. (URA, 1993) This study also showed that due to the placement of fill, groundwater did not meet drinking water standards. The fill, up to 20 ft. in height, consists of granular materials, including ash, sand, slag and cinders. (URA, 1997) In April 1988, GAI conducted an Environmental Contamination Assessment, this time of parcels 10, 12, and the southern portion of 11, which was the Buncher Company land. The presence of Volatile Organics, Semi-Volatile Acids, Base/Neutral Extractables, Pesticides, and Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs) was tested for on the land. Hazardous waste including Polynuclear Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs), found at levels of 0.4 to 430 ppm, and PCBs, found at levels of 0.01 to 200 ppm, were discovered. The EPA accepted concentration levels are 0.01 to 13 ppm for PAHs and 0.01 to 0.1 ppm for PCBs. (URA, 1993) The PCBs were linked back to old electrical transformers (Barnes, 1993) from a salvage plant operating in the 1980’s. (Sheehan, 1989) PCBs are a known cause of adverse reproductive effects, developmental toxicity and tumor development in humans. These contaminants penetrate the body through skin, lungs and gastrointestinal tract and collect in fatty tissues. (Freeman, 1989) To be certain of earlier findings, in April 1988 the URA hired ICF/SRW Associates to conduct the Contamination Assessment. This assessment was to be a review of the Waste Materials Investigation done in1983 to make sure that the northern and central portions of the island contained no PAH’s or PCB’s. This land did not exceed the acceptable EPA levels for these contaminants and redevelopment continued. (URA, 1993)

Two options were considered by the URA for the disposal of the PAH and PCB contaminated soils: 1) excavation and off-site disposal of the soils; or 2) excavation with on-site encapsulation of the soils underneath what is now tennis courts. (DER, 1991) Alternative 1 produced original estimates of $1 million to $6 million. When the Department of Environmental Resources (DER) agreed to on-site disposal, Alternative 2, millions of dollars were saved. (Perlmutter, 1989) Design and engineering of the encapsulation cell cost a total of $750,000 and construction of the cell cost $2,654,000. (URA, 1997) ICF KE composed the project guidelines and construction drawings to be used for the Site Remediation and Soil Encapsulation Cell Construction Project. Atlas Services Corporation was hired by the URA to construct the encapsulation liner. Remediation began on October 24, 1989 with the clearing of the northern tip of the island, where the cell was to be buried. (ICF KE, 1991) During this process, organic wastes, which were previously discovered by GAI, needed to be removed. These wastes were a byproduct of the meat rendering facilities previously located on the island. Costs of up to $792,000 were required to haul away and dump the 10,000 tons of organic waste found. (Barnes, 1990) Other wastes included decayed carcasses of animals, which had been dumped by the Pittsburgh Zoo. These animal wastes were taken and dumped in an Ohio landfill. (Barnes, 1993)

Construction of the encapsulation cell using a High Density Polyethylene (HDPE) double lining and leachate detection and collection systems began on March 12, 1990 by J.H. Water Systems, Inc., a subcontractor of Atlas Services Corporation. (ICF KE, 1991) HDPE is a plastic Flexible-Membrane Lining (FML) used for encapsulation purposes. (Freeman,1989) The liner system was composed of:

Extra protection was added to the original design specifications to be sure that demolition debris would not puncture the lining. The additional protection included a double mat of drainage net and an additional layer of woven filter fabric. A 72 inch diameter HDPE sump was placed inside the northeast corner of the cell.

Transportation of PCB contaminated soil with concentrations of 2 to 50 ppm began on April 4, 1990. All contaminated soils were transported over Waterfront Drive in fully tarped trucks to prevent wind from carrying away the soils. While excavating, soils with a +50 ppm concentration were taken to a Toxic Substances Control Administration (TSCA) regulated landfill. A two foot depth of finer soils were placed at the bottom of the cell providing a padding for the liner, while structural steel from excavated concrete pieces were strategically placed in the middle so as not to puncture the liner. 17,962.69 cubic yards of contaminated soils were eventually placed in the cell. Six inches of sand were placed over the contaminants before the HDPE cap liner was put in place. A cap drain system, placed along the east and west sides of the cell to drain rainwater runoff, was connnected to an ALCOSAN storm sewer manhole at the northern end of Waterfront Drive. A red warning grid was placed over the encapsulation cell to serve as a warning for future excavators on the site. To complete the soil encapsulation cell, a bolted manhole cover and concrete pad were constructed over the sump. Four stainless steel groundwater monitoring wells (MW-1, MW-2, MW-3, and MW-4), two located to the east and two to the west of the cell that were installed before construction began and two located at the southwest and northeast corners of the cell that were installed later. These wells were used to test for leaks of PCBs. (ICF KE, 1991) The monitoring of these wells was conducted by the URA on a quarterly basis for two years and is to be monitored for the eight following years at a lesser frequency. (URA, 1993)

In 1990, SE Technologies, Inc. performed a Phase I Environmental Assessment Survey / Phase II Subsurface Investigation along River Avenue, parcels 13 and 14. Tests were done to look for pH, heavy metals, base/neutral compounds, pesticides, PCBs, VOCs, and TPH (total petroleum hydrocarbons). The tests revealed high levels of heavy metals and TPH due to a 550 gallon underground storage tank (UST) abandoned on the site. The tank was drained and disposed off site. The contaminated soils were brought up to standards by using lime for pH control. The soils were then covered with crushed stone to be used later as a boat storage area/parking lot. Earth Sciences Consultants, Inc. conducted a brief environmental study on parcel 10, the Washington's Landing Marina site. Excavation and disposal of TPHs found was completed in May of 1991. (URA, 1993)

Before reconstruction of Washington’s Landing began, the only infrastructure on the island were old warehouses, abandoned railroad tracks, deteriorating railroad bridges and the 31^st Street Bridge crossing it. There were no fire hydrants on the island. (Post-Gazette, 1980) To make way for the marina, 15 to 18 sunken barges had to be lifted out of the water. (Maryniak, 1985) In March of 1979, the URA put forth $150,000 for designing roads, a connection to the 31^st Street Bridge, and water and sewer lines. (Chute, 1979) From 1978 to 1985, $1,235,607 was spent demolishing cattle pens and a meat-packing plant, and building utility lines and a 1/4 mile spine road. This road built between a junkyard and a newly level lot was the only visible sign of Herrs Island Redevelopment in 1985. The URA built a $4 million bridge linking Herrs Island to River Road and East Ohio St. They also spent $19,900 for repairs of the 85 year old existing span of the bridge while putting up the new one and paid engineers $50,000 to insure that the structure was in no danger of collapse. (Maryniak, 1985) The new bridge was completed in 1986 and signals at intersections of the 31^st Street Bridge, Route 28 and River Road have been synchronized with a newly installed traffic signal system at the entrance to the Landing, minimizing delay. The rehabilitation of the 31^st Street Bridge is scheduled for sometime between 1998 and 2002. (URA, 1997) Officials spent $25,000 for a consultant to do a traffic study related to development. (Post-Gazette, 1994) It was found that the road system on the island could not support traffic if it was filled with commercial buildings. (Linn, 1987) There are 3 access routes to Washington’s Landing, all of which use the access ramp to the 31^st Street Bridge: from Route 28 to the 31^st Street Bridge; through Lawrenceville to the 31^st Street Bridge; and from River Road which parallels Route 28 along the city’s North Side. (Gannon, 1994) An old railroad bridge, with weathered wooden planks, will soon be converted into a new link between the island trail and a trail on the North Side, just across the back channel of the Allegheny River. (Post-Gazette, 1996)

The aesthetic viewpoint of the island has also been given much attention. Developers are required to plant trees and bushes to enhance the beauty of the island. Requirements go so far as a list of plant types to be used in landscaping. All ground that is not paved must be covered by something other than gravel, plastic, bark, or other similar material. Railroad ties or timbers are restricted from being used as landscape elements. Asphalt sidewalks are prohibited on all parts of the island, concrete or better is required. Brick or stone accents on the pathways is suggested. These paths, if close to the river, must conform to river trail standards. The river trail is another example of a visual masterpiece with its wild flowers and scenic overlooks. Outside dumpsters, when necessary, must be screened from public view. All utility lines must be underground. In some areas, only 15% of a building facade may be illuminated and this is limited to unique features of each building. Since the roofs of the buildings are clearly visible from the bridges and surrounding communities, it is required that no more than 10% of the roof be constructed of low grade material. Glass, metal, sod or other visually attractive materials are encouraged. (URA, 1997)

"Thirty-five years ago, Herrs Island on the Allegheny River was notable for just one thing: the nauseating smells generated by the animal rendering plant housed there. What a difference a few decades--and a vision--can make." (McKay, 1996) The first site to open on the new and improved Washington’s Landing was the Three Rivers Rowing Association in September 1989. (URA, 1997) Construction of Washington’s Landing Marina Inc. began in the fall of 1990. The marina includes 150 dry storage cells and 150 in-water cells. Along with the marina, Gamma Sports Inc. constructed a tennis complex. The outdoor courts cover the site of the buried encapsulation cell. (Perlmutter, 1990) In 1992, Rubinoff Co. and the North Side Civic Development Council (Linn, 1987) finished construction of 400 Waterfront Drive, a 44,500 s.f. office building. The same developers opened a second 30,000 s.f. office building, 500 Waterfront Drive, in 1993. (URA, 1997) These office buildings house the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (DEP). (Haurwitz, 1991) In the same year, the Rubinoff Company and Montogomery Rust began construction of what will be 100 townhouses called The Village at Washington’s Landing. (URA, 1997) These townhouses are located on the north shore of the Allegheny River and each townhouse are being sold for between $142,000 and $330,000. (Rubinoff Co., 1997) Also in 1993, Sports Technology Group, Gamma Sports Inc., completed construction of its new 37,000 s.f. manufacturing and office building, 200 Waterfront Drive.(URA, 1997) In 1996, 600 Waterfront Associates developed a 30,000 s.f. office building, which will be leased to Cray Research: A Silicon Graphics Co. and Computer Systems. (Post-Gazette, 1996) October of 1996 also saw the ground breaking of a prototype home, a 3-story, 3,000 s.f., single family house developed by Montgomery & Rust and Integrated Building and Construction Solutions (IBACOS). This house is a high-tech home of the future, researched to have more efficient ways to use heat and cooling systems. (Gannon, 1996) These systems are strategically located on the center floor, reducing the amount of air travel. Electrical and communication connections are all controlled from one location, a "control panel" on the second floor. Plastic piping replaced the normal copper tubing usually used in plumbing systems and each appliance has its own connection to the water tank. The prototype home is expected to be completed by the end of summer 1997 and will be vacant for two years to be used as a model. (Newman, 1997) Three single family houses, including the protype home, will be present on the island when all building is completed. (Gannon, 1996) Features of the prototype home will be integrated into at least one other home on the island. (Newman, 1997) 800 Waterfront Drive, another 30,000 s.f. office building, is now under construction downstream from 600 Waterfront Drive. (URA, 1997) Trolls Restaurant and Sundeck, scheduled to open in 1997, will be the first retail operation on the island. Trolls will provide riverfront service for boaters on the Allegheny River.(Barnes, 1997) Ground will be broken for Automated Healthcare Inc. in the summer of 1997. It is a 45,000 s.f. facility located under the 31^st Street Bridge and will be completed in April 1998. (Ackerman, 1997) Most of the construction on the island is underway or completed and is attracting home owners as well as light industrial companies. "Washington's Landing shows what can happen if you do it right. For a long time, people saw this area as a blight, but now we've got a park, running trail, businesses and government offices." (Deggans, 1993)

The Washington's Landing redevelopment project was funded by various organizations. Both public and private industries made significant contributions to the site through loans, grants and investment funds. The following tables are a breakdown of the total costs.

U.S. Economic Development Administration	$ 2,280,590
PA Department of Community Affairs	$ 2,300,000
PA Department of Commerce	$ 2,400,000
PA Department of Environmental Resources	$ 3,140,000
Appalachian Regional Commission	$ 1,850,000
City of Pittsburgh CDBG Funds	$ 4,400,000
Urban Redevelopment Authority	$ 1,301,000
City of Pittsburgh Bond Funds	$ 3,248,000
Port Authority Transit	$ 800,000
Urban Redevelopment Authority Program Income	$ 585,500
Pittsburgh Water and Sewer Authority	$ 1,200,000
PA Strategy 21 Funding (park and open spaces)	$ 3,000,000
TOTAL	$26,505,090
(URA, 1997)

Washington’s Landing Associates I	$ 2,400,000
Washington’s Landing Associates II	$ 2,900,000
Three Rivers Rowing Association	$ 1,500,000
Sports Technology Group	$ 3,288,000
Washington’s Landing Marina	$ 3,000,000
600 Waterfront Drive	$ 2,600,000
800 Waterfront Drive	$ 2,900,000 (projected)
Automated Healthcare Inc. and Manufacturing Facility	$ 4,000,000 (projected)
The Village at Washington’s Landing	$21,000,000 (projected)
TOTAL	$43,588,000
(URA, 1997)

Web Pages for the Washington's Landing Site Created By: Sarah M. Putaro and Kathryn A. Weisbrod, Carnegie Mellon University. Questions or Comments: Send E-mail to: mcneil @andrew.cmu.edu. Last Updated: August 24, 1998.

Site Information

General Site Information

History of Washington's Landing

Environmental Implications