Demolition of the Great Northern Grain Elevator: A Legal Perspective
This guest blog post from Jeff Iovannone provides an analysis of the demolition of the Great Northern Grain Elevator in Buffalo from a legal perspective. This piece was originally written for his Historic Preservation Law course at Cornell University.
Introduction
The Great Northern Grain Elevator, located in Buffalo, New York, was a locally designated property and the last extant North American example of a “brick box” style grain elevator. The structure, whose northern exterior brick curtain wall collapsed during a wind storm that occurred on December 11, 2021, was demolished by its owner, Archer Daniels Midland (ADM) Milling Company. Following the storm, ADM sought, and was granted, an emergency demolition permit from the City of Buffalo Department of Permit and Inspection Services. The Campaign for Greater Buffalo, a local preservation advocacy organization, then sued the city and ADM to block the demolition order. This post analyzes the New York State Supreme Court Case, The Campaign for Buffalo History, Architecture, & Culture, Inc. vs. City of Buffalo and ADM Milling Co. and the pertinent legal issues considered. The case involves the local regulation of historic properties and speaks to the authority of local regulators and under what circumstances property owners can evade historic regulation.
Historical Background
Figure 1. Sanborn “Elevator District” Map of Buffalo (1895). Source: Library of Congress Geography and Map Division.
The Great Northern Grain Elevator is located at 250 Ganson Street in an industrial area along Buffalo’s waterfront historically known as the “Elevator District” due to the abundance of grain elevators constructed during the mid-to-late nineteenth century (Figure 1). In 1843, Buffalo businessman Joseph Dart developed a steam-powered grain elevator that became popular, and Buffalo soon developed into a national grain center. Early grain elevators presented two major issues. First, their cylinders were constructed of wood, and the threat of fire posed the loss of the valuable grain stored within. Second, as Buffalo developed as a major grain port, concerns emerged over whether steam-powered elevators were sufficiently fast enough to accommodate the number of ships exporting grain along the city’s waterways. Engineers, drawing inspiration from early skyscrapers, began to design grain elevators with cylindrical storage tanks constructed of Bessemer steel (versus wood).
Figure 2. Detroit Publishing Co. photograph of the Great Northern Grain Elevator (c. 1900). Source: Library of Congress Prints and Photographs Division.
In 1897, James H. Hill, owner of the Great Northern Railroad Company, commissioned a grain elevator to be built on Ganson Street in an area along Buffalo’s ship canal in the First Ward (Figure 2). Designed by engineer Max Toltz and architect D.A. Robinson, the Great Northern Grain Elevator, as it came to be known, was the first elevator in the world to utilize machinery powered by electricity. An electric “marine leg” lifted grain from the holds of ships into the elevator’s cylinders. The Great Northern was composed of 30 cylindrical steel bins, a box-like brick curtain wall that was the height of a typical 10-story building, and an upper clerestory made of corrugated steel with large windows (Figure 3). Significantly, a steel girder system provided the elevator’s structural integrity as opposed to the brick curtain wall. The masonry, instead, functioned as a weather barrier and temperature control for the grain housed inside. The elevator, constructed of brick and steel, unlike earlier designs, was virtually fireproof. The Great Northern was regarded as a marvel of engineering, and its design later influenced modern architectural styles (industrial, commercial, and residential).
Figure 3. Historic American Engineering Record (HAER) Survey measured drawing. Source: Library of Congress Prints and Photographs Division.
Rationale for Designation
The Great Northern Grain Elevator was designated as a Buffalo local landmark in 1990 following a demolition attempt by its then owner, the Pillsbury Company. The structure was first significant under the National Register of Historic Places Criterion A for its connection to the City of Buffalo’s industrial development, particularly as a grain center. It was additionally significant under Criterion C as an early and largely intact example of a late-nineteenth century, electric-powered, “brick box” style elevator. The structure also exemplified the use of masonry and steel in the creation of weather-resistant and fireproof grain elevators. It was further significant under Criterion C for its design by engineer Max Toltz and architect D.A. Robinson.
For years, the Great Northern was the last surviving “brick box” style grain elevator in North America and retained a high level of integrity; however, following the decision in The Campaign for Buffalo History, Architecture, & Culture, Inc. vs. City of Buffalo and ADM Milling Co., the structure was demolished. The site, which current owner ADM Milling Company intends to turn into a parking lot for its employees, may be significant under Criterion D and impart important archaeological information about the construction of “brick box” style grain elevators and the development of Buffalo’s industrial waterfront.
Procedural History
A significant portion of the Great Northern Grain Elevator’s northern brick curtain wall collapsed during the December 11, 2021, windstorm (Figure 4). The structure’s owner, ADM Milling Company, filed for an emergency demolition permit with the City of Buffalo Department of Permit and Inspection Services. The permit was granted on December 13, 2021, based on a report authored by an ADM engineer and the assessment of the Buffalo Commissioner of Permits and Inspection Services, James Comerford. The structure was officially condemned by the City, and ADM could proceed with demolition. The Campaign for Greater Buffalo (hereafter, the Campaign) then sued the City of Buffalo and ADM to annul the demolition order.
Figure 4. Damage sustained to the Great Northern Grain Elevator following the December 11, 2021, windstorm. Source: News 4 Buffalo.
On December 19, 2021, following issuance of the emergency demolition permit, the Campaign petitioned the Court for a temporary restraining order to delay demolition until a judicial hearing could be held. On December 30, 2021, the Court ruled that a more developed record was needed and ordered a fact-finding hearing, and the temporary restraining order was continued. Following the fact-finding hearing, held on January 5, 2022, the Court dismissed the Campaign’s petition and vacated the temporary restraining order. Demolition could therefore proceed. The Campaign then appealed the decision.
On January 14, 2022, the Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department granted a temporary injunction and restraining order. The Appellate Court further issued a Memorandum and Order on April 29, 2022, reversing the January 5 decision. They opined that the Court erred, as Judge Emilio Colaiacovo refused to consider the Campaign’s proposed evidence regarding the Great Northern’s structural integrity. The matter was then remanded to the Court for a hearing consistent with the decision.
On May 31, 2022, the Court conducted an on-site inspection of the Great Northern. The Court then held hearings on June 2, 3, and 9, where each side was permitted to call witnesses to testify. The Court’s ruling, issued on July 5, 2022, denied the Campaign's request for a preliminary injunction and vacated the temporary restraining order against ADM Milling Company. Judge Colaiacovo opined that the Campaign failed to adequately support its claim that Commissioner Comerford’s decision to approve emergency demolition was not rational and not based on sound evidence regarding the elevator’s condition. He further noted the Court must give deference to evaluations made based on a city agency’s expertise. Thus, demolition could, again, proceed. The Court blocked the ability of the Campaign to appeal until the case was dismissed on September 14, 2022.
On September 15, 2022, Preservation Buffalo Niagara (PBN), Western New York’s leading non-profit preservation organization, offered ADM a proposal to take on a long-term lease of the Great Northern including its repair, stabilization, and ongoing maintenance. They received no response. Demolition of the Great Northern Grain Elevator commenced on September 16, 2022.
Pertinent Legal Issues
The Campaign for Buffalo History, Architecture, & Culture, Inc. vs. City of Buffalo and ADM Milling Co. raises three pertinent legal issues. It, first, speaks to how a property that is locally landmarked, and technically protected under the City of Buffalo’s Preservation Standards Ordinance (Chapter 337 of the City’s Municipal Code), can legally be demolished. Second, the case speaks to the Court’s consideration of evidence and addresses whether the decision on the part of the City of Buffalo to issue an emergency demolition permit for the Great Northern was rational and evidence-based. Third, the case illustrates the limits of local preservation ordinances to protect historic properties. It further exposes weaknesses in the Buffalo Preservation Standards Ordinance in the authority possessed by local regulators.
The demolition of Buffalo individual local landmarks typically require the approval of the City’s Preservation Board. As stated in the Preservation Standards Ordinance, “In a case where no building permit is required, application for permission to construct, alter, remove or demolish landmarks, improvements on landmark sites or structures within historic districts shall be made directly to the Preservation Board.” However, due to the damage incurred to the Great Northern during the December 11, 2021, windstorm, ADM was able to circumvent the Preservation Board and apply for an emergency demolition permit with the City of Buffalo Department of Permit and Inspection Services, as they argued the Great Northern’s lack of structural integrity posed an imminent safety threat.
The Preservation Standards Ordinance further empowers the Preservation Board to “take such steps as it deems necessary to avoid demolition of the structure or improvement, including but not limited to preparation, publication and receipt of requests for proposals; solicitation of prospective developers; consultation with civic groups, public agencies and interested citizens; and recommendations for acquisition of the property by others.” The ordinance additionally requires a public hearing when a permit for the demolition of a landmark is sought. A hearing regarding the proposed demolition of the Great Northern, a beloved Buffalo landmark, would likely have generated public outcry and negative publicity for ADM, both locally and nationwide.
In short, ADM likely knew the Preservation Board would be reluctant to issue a demolition permit for the Great Northern and would actively take steps to avoid demolition of the structure. The case illustrates how demolition of local landmarks is legally permissible under the issuance of emergency permits as opposed to the granting of demolition permits by landmarks commissions on the basis of economic hardship exceptions. However, it remains questionable whether the Great Northern was, in fact, structurally unsound and if an emergency demolition permit was warranted.
In his July 5, 2022, ruling, Judge Colaiacovo found that the Campaign did not adequately prove their argument that Commissioner Comerford’s decision to approve emergency demolition of the Great Northern was not rational and not evidence-based. In particular, he noted the Campaign only presented testimony from individuals who had personal connections to the organization (though, notably, ADM did the same). No testimony from independent professionals was heard, namely those with expertise in this particular type of industrial building. It is unclear why the Campaign chose to pursue this particular strategy given that the National Trust for Historic Preservation “urged the City of Buffalo and ADM to allow independent structural engineers, with expertise in historic buildings, to make an evaluation to develop a plan for preservation before rushing to raze the Great Northern.” Judge Colaiacovo further opined that the Campaign did not present viable reuse plans for the Great Northern. The Campaign was likely focused on presenting evidence to counter Commissioner Comerford’s decision, which was the most pertinent issue at hand.
Arguably, neither the Campaign nor ADM and the City of Buffalo presented sufficient evidence for the Court to make a fully informed ruling regarding the preservation of the Great Northern. No testimony from independent experts was heard. Judge Colaiacovo based his ruling on the record and, in the absence of compelling evidence to the contrary, deferred to the expertise of James Comerford as Buffalo Commissioner of Permits and Inspection Services. As Judge Colaiacovo stated, “given the record now fully developed, the Court has no basis to substitute its judgment for that of the Commissioner, as his determination is neither arbitrary, capricious, nor contrary to the law.”
It is noteworthy that, following the windstorm, the Great Northern stood intact for approximately 9 months before demolition commenced without collapse or injury to ADM employees working near the structure. If the Great Northern was, ultimately, unsound, it was likely due to ADM’s longstanding neglect—not damage incurred to the brick curtain wall during the December 11, 2021, windstorm. It is also unclear why ADM chose to reject PBN’s offer to rehabilitate the Great Northern given that its demolition is estimated at a total of 3.6 million dollars. Local preservation experts argued that the cost of demolition is greater than the cost of repair and stabilization.
Recommendations
The case of the Great Northern suggests the need to amend the Buffalo Preservation Standards Ordinance in several key ways. The ordinance could, first, require the Preservation Board to be consulted in, or have direct authority over, instances where an emergency demolition permit for a locally designated property is sought. Such an amendment is timely given the ongoing effects of climate change and the increased frequency of extreme weather events. Second, the ordinance could require owners to keep locally landmarked properties in a state of good repair in order to avoid demolition by neglect. Finally, in light of climate change, the ordinance could further be amended to include a deconstruction standard. In events where it is not feasible to preserve or rehabilitate historic properties, deconstruction, salvage, and reuse could be required over mechanical demolition processes that result in carbon emissions and air pollution. These amendments to the Buffalo Preservation Standards Ordinance would result in significant benefits to the City’s historic properties, its people, and the environment.
Bibliography
Buffalo as an Architectural Museum. “Nomination—Great Northern Grain Elevator.” Accessed September 15, 2022.
DeCroix, Douglas W. “Buffalo’s Great Northern Grain Elevator—Beginnings.” Western New York Heritage, Spring 2022.
Hackford, Rob. “Judge OKs grain elevator demolition, opens door for preservationist appeal and new offer.” WGRZ, September 15, 2022.
Lakamp, Patrick and Mark Sommer. “Preservationists race to save Great Northern grain elevator as demolition begins.” The Buffalo News, September 16, 2022.
Leary, Thomas E., John R. Healey, and Elizabeth C. Sholes. “Historic American Engineering Record: Great Northern Elevator,” National Park Service, U.S. Department of the Interior, 1990-1991.
McKinley, Dave. “Demolition Underway on Great Northern Grain Elevator in Buffalo.” WGRZ, September 16, 2022.
Mckinley, Jesse. “Eyesore or Monument? Preservationists Fight to Save a Grain Elevator in Buffalo.” The New York Times, January 22, 2022.
Spectrum News Staff. “Demolition of Buffalo’s Great Northern grain elevator begins.” Spectrum News, September 16, 2022.