Date: Thu, 28 Aug 1997
From: Kevin R. Young
The issue is simple. You do not remove existing historical structures, significant in their own right to the development of Alamo Plaza, to rebuild something we are not sure what it looked like in the first place.
Remember, Fray Olivares wanted the plaza of Mission Valero to be a thriving center of activity-and it certainly is that today. One of the things the men of the Alamo died for was the prosperity of Texas and Alamo Plaza demonstrates that as well. The best course is to improve existing historical interpretation of the plaza through professional interpretive markers, establish a good visitor's center and San Antonio museum (Woolworth Building would be perfect), close Alamo Plaza West to traffic, put some teeth into the signage ordinance for the Alamo Plaza Historical District and get the Plaza all one ground level.
With existing historical preservation ordinances and practices in effect, you are not going to tear down or move the Crockett Block, Woolworth, Empire Theater Building, the 1936 Federal Building or the Emily Morgan Hotel/Medical Arts Building. And the re-routing of downtown traffic would be a nightmare.
If you rebuild the walls, you are only pushing the confusion zone out about a couple of hundred yards. Then people are still going to wonder why the Alamo was built in downtown! You will still have buildings butting against the replica! You have not restored the battlefield-only the Alamo compound. To restore the battlefield, you need to level everything in 250 yards from where the outer walls are at! Unless of course, you feel the ground where the Texian defenders died is more holy than were the Mexican soldados died.
Even the modified plans, of rebuilding part of the 1836 Alamo have problems. The 1936 Federal Building is sitting right on the most important part of the battlefield-the north wall. The south barracks idea might work-but you would still need to remove the Texas Adventure/Ripley's Museum Building, the Hyatt Parking Garage and several other buildings on Houston Street to give it breathing space. Besides, I believe that someone has copyrighted this plan and will expect a large sum of money if it is used!
Best idea-find some nice land on the San Antonio or something close within forty miles of downtown and build a replica Alamo and village. Bus the tourists from Alamo Plaza to it. And leave an improved Alamo Plaza alone for those of us who enjoy all of its history.
Kevin R. Young
Date: Fri, 5 Sep 1997
From: John Robert Behrman
I strongly support reconstruction of the Alamo as it was when old Ben Milam's boys took it over from General Coz. That was pretty much the way it was when the battle began, inasumuch as Travis was a lawyer, not an engineer or a gunner.
The commercial property around the Alamo is pretty awful.
Another idea would be to build a virtual reality Alamo and let visitors walk through, even view it as Santa Anna would have seen it. This could be combined with partial restoration, perhaps, of the corner wall with the 18-pounder mount.
One problem I see is that the USArmy restoration is part of the Alamo image now. Knock the top back off the former sanctuary and nobody would recognize the building.
The virtual reality approach could go back to when the Alamo or one of the prettier missions really functioned as a mission, not a magazine and artillery park.
John Robert Behrman
Date: Fri, 5 Sep 1997
From: William Chemerka
The May 1994 issue (#91) of The Alamo Journal featured an article titled "The 1994 Battle of the Alamo" which reported on the debate about the possibility of restoring the Alamo---in whole or in part---to its 1836 appearance. The article was augmented with an aerial view of such a finished site (thanks to a $32.6 million theoretical investment!) by artist Felipe Soto, who had his original sketch printed in the March 6, 1994 issue of the San Antonio Express-News. Issue #92 of The Alamo Journal featured animated feedback by members of The Alamo Society about such a plan.
Now, three years later (and $67.4 million more to invest in such a project!) the debate continues. And rightly so, for such answers are rather complex. To be sure, all historic sites are different and unique; however, two examples immediately come to mind. About a decade ago, the Thompson House in Morristown, New Jersey was destroyed by the National Park Service because, essentially, it undermined the esthetics of the Ford Mansion, i.e., George Washington's headquarters during the "hard winter" of 1779-1780. The Thompson House, built in 1892, was somewhat significant in its own right since it was regarded as a "good example of late Queen Anne domestic architecture with some colonial-style influence." Yet it was demolished to accentuate the primary historical structure: Washington's Headquarters.
The second example stems from efforts that began over 70 years ago. A Southern town was expanding and encroaching on a site that was once rich in history. Since its glory years, the area had grown somewhat with the addition of various structures (both residential and commercial) during the following century. Extensive research, unfortunately, revealed that if the site was rebuilt, restored and reconstructed parts of the site would never be exactly as it was originally. Furthermore, it was determined that some non-congruent structures would have to be destroyed in order to emphasis the primary historical ones. Doubt and debate incrassated the initial arguments over such a costly plan. Still, a handful of visionaries moved ahead. Their philosophy: "The restoration of the site offered an opportunity to restore a complete area and free it entirely from alien or inharmonious surroundings as well as to preserve the beauty and charm of the old buildings and gardens of the city and its historic significance."
That site was Colonial Williamsburg.
William Chemerka
Date: Tuesday, September 9, 1997
From: Chuck Chappell
Well, unlike my previous discourse back in June on this page, this time I can agree with Kevin Young. I say let Alamo Plaza grow and prosper unfettered by dictates -- governmental or otherwise. I don't see the sense in tearing down thriving businesses in order to build enormous shrines.
I can't help but think that that is just as the defenders of the Alamo would have wanted it. I don't think there can be a more fitting tribute to them than a free and prospering Texas!
Remember the Alamo!
Views expressed are not necessarily those of