daily menu » rate the banner | guess the city | one on oneforums map | privacy policy | DMCA | news magazine | posting guidelines

Go Back   SkyscraperCity > World Development News Forums > General Urban Developments > DN Archives



Global Announcement

As a general reminder, please respect others and respect copyrights. Go here to familiarize yourself with our posting policy.


Closed Thread

 
Thread Tools
Old February 21st, 2007, 07:07 AM   #1141
getontrac
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Mt. Vernon in Baltimore
Posts: 907
Likes (Received): 0

[QUOTE=adammeisterin2007;11832888]
Quote:
Originally Posted by cgunna View Post


Require owner-occupancy of most of the houses. You have to understand that for 6 years I have run TechBalt.com and I have read emails almost every day form people who want to move in to the City and can not understand why they can not buy a house from the City. I lived in Reservoir Hill since 2003 and I see all the people who want to live here and wonder why they just can't put money down on a SCOPE house. I get emails from investors who will buy anywhere in Baltimore! The demand is there! Every house could be sold. Even near the old Brewery in East Baltimore there is demand!


Recall that there is a great difference between what people say and what people do.

Also buying and rehabbing takes time, as you know.

Nate
getontrac no está en línea  

Sponsored Links
Old February 21st, 2007, 08:52 AM   #1142
micrip
Registered User
 
micrip's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Baltimore
Posts: 3,877
Likes (Received): 1051

Quote:
Originally Posted by scando View Post
I agree. Furthermore, I still think they ought to put a new arena where the old one is. It's got the city's best transit service, central location, oodles of garages within a few blocks that are empty at night and the West Side needs it. If they demolished the garage and used the surface lots on the block and cantilevered out over the street, the site would work. Unfortunately, I'm not part of the decision process or funding trail, so I guess nobody appreciates by transcendent logic, but anyway, that's my opinion.
The old site is just too small. For example, I consider Verizon Center in DC to be a bit cramped, and its footprint would occupy a space the would include the old arena and what is now Hopkins Place. Remember those aerial photos in an earlier thread?

This should have been built where the Hilton is going up, and the "Believe" team proposal for a hotel should have gone up instead.
micrip no está en línea  
Old February 21st, 2007, 12:06 PM   #1143
StevenW
Born in Baltimore
 
StevenW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Newberry, SC
Posts: 11,705
Likes (Received): 1602

excelent proposals.
__________________
Baltimore, my hometown.
StevenW no está en línea  
Old February 21st, 2007, 12:08 PM   #1144
StevenW
Born in Baltimore
 
StevenW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Newberry, SC
Posts: 11,705
Likes (Received): 1602



The Legg Mason building (center) on Light Street downtown stands 35 stories. Legg Mason leases 23 stories of the building, with its lease to expire in 2009.
(Sun photo by Monica Lopossay)
Jun 24, 2005
__________________
Baltimore, my hometown.
StevenW no está en línea  
Old February 21st, 2007, 03:08 PM   #1145
House3780
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Indian Ocean
Posts: 789
Likes (Received): 5

"Members of Gross' team said they would also make Charles, Light and Calvert streets, which run perpendicular to Pratt, two-way as well."

from http://www.wbaltv.com/news/11070839/...s=bal&psp=news


I wonder if they would plan to make charles street two-way all the way up to coldspring and with Light street, do they mean St. Paul street as well.
House3780 no está en línea  
Old February 21st, 2007, 03:37 PM   #1146
baltimoreisbest
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 416
Likes (Received): 69

Yeah, but did you read in that WBAL article that some of the planners are calling for a two-way version of Charles, Light, and Calvert Sts? These streets are narrow and aren't going to be able to accommodate more than one lane in either direction, unless you eliminate parking space, which would be a further step back for the city. Some of these planning people have to balance expectations about how traffic flow shoud "feel" to what havoc it would wreak on motorists and on traffic police. I actually feel that downtown traffic flows relatively well right now. My major complaint is that cars move too aggressively -- not that I need to experience more constrasting flows of aggressive traffic.

Some nice ideas came out of these plans, but the traffic ones seem exceedingly stupid. I bet the folks at the city's transportation department are getting a good laugh out of this one today.
baltimoreisbest no está en línea  
Old February 21st, 2007, 04:02 PM   #1147
wada_guy
Oh say can YOU see?
 
wada_guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Baltimore
Posts: 782
Likes (Received): 0

Thanks for the Pratt Street report Waj.

The problem with Downtown Baltimore traffic flow IMHO, is that too many streets have been cut off so that they are no longer considered through streets. We used to have a grid system so that if one street had a blockage on it, you could go up a couple of blocks and take another street to reach your destination.

The JFX resulted in many streets no longer passing to the east. Monument, Eager, and Chase Streets are examples. MLK blocks some streets, like Lexington, from going west. They closed Holiday Street in front of City Hall so that you can no longer go south. Lexington Street in the CBD was eliminated for Charles Center and Redwood Street is now a stub of its former self.

The city needs to do a complete traffic study downtown and eliminate as many of the blockages as possible. Picking a FEW E/W and N/S streets, and running ALL the busses on them would help too. I don't even know why we have bus stops. The busses rarely pull to the cub anymore, and if they do, they stick out in the back and still block traffic. If downtown had the same grid it had in the 40's, "we'd still have a mess but it would be less".

Last edited by wada_guy; February 21st, 2007 at 04:08 PM.
wada_guy no está en línea  
Old February 21st, 2007, 04:34 PM   #1148
getontrac
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Mt. Vernon in Baltimore
Posts: 907
Likes (Received): 0

Quote:
Originally Posted by baltimoreisbest View Post
Yeah, but did you read in that WBAL article that some of the planners are calling for a two-way version of Charles, Light, and Calvert Sts? These streets are narrow and aren't going to be able to accommodate more than one lane in either direction, unless you eliminate parking space, which would be a further step back for the city. Some of these planning people have to balance expectations about how traffic flow shoud "feel" to what havoc it would wreak on motorists and on traffic police. I actually feel that downtown traffic flows relatively well right now. My major complaint is that cars move too aggressively -- not that I need to experience more constrasting flows of aggressive traffic.

Some nice ideas came out of these plans, but the traffic ones seem exceedingly stupid. I bet the folks at the city's transportation department are getting a good laugh out of this one today.

Frank Murphy's laughing over his moring coffee.....

Nate
getontrac no está en línea  
Old February 21st, 2007, 04:41 PM   #1149
Hood
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 1,046
Likes (Received): 62

Great Summation WAJ. thank you very much for taking the time.

Jeff
Hood no está en línea  
Old February 21st, 2007, 04:54 PM   #1150
sdeclue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 879
Likes (Received): 47

Well, if you are a little disgruntled over the traffic suggestions, I offer some good news: the Senator Theatre has been saved. They paid off the debt this morning and it will live on until the next time this occurs. I almost feel like it needs a new ownership at this point to see if someone else can't make it work.
sdeclue no está en línea  
Old February 21st, 2007, 05:07 PM   #1151
folsomfanatic
Registered User
 
folsomfanatic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Baltimore
Posts: 416
Likes (Received): 17

EDSA's Pratt Street Concept

From last night, all teams looked at traffic. EDSA and Hargreaves both kept Pratt running eastbound. EEK and ASG proposed Two way. IMHO, 2 way doesn't fit on pratt or the side streets (which our traffic engineer).

Here is a breakdown of our plan. sorry we couldn't share sooner. i'll see if we can show graphics later:

EDSA broke Pratt Street into 4 districts:

University Gateway District (MLK to PACA)
Ballpark/Hotel District (PACA to HOWARD)
Civic/Convention District (HOWARD to CHARLES)
Retail/Entertainment District (CHARLES to PRESIDENT)


University Gateway District Highlights:
1. simple neighborhood scale gateway treatment at MLK and Pratt
2. exapnsion of UMD streetscape to all blocks
3. strategic neighborhood scale infill on vacant lots with restaurants/retail on first floor and residential above
4. expansion of babe ruth museum with new park along pratt highlighting the museum and ridgley's delight

Ballpark/Hotel District Highlights:
1. expand upon influence of CC hotel
2. new retail expansion off of the marriott's blank facade
3. infill building at eutaw and pratt (NE corner)
4. expanded outdoor cafes and plaza for ballgame/summertime use
5. START of the proposed HARBOR TRANSIT/BIKE LANE---a 15-19' lane to be used by local busses using Pratt Street nad bicyclists. sperated by a 14' landscape median. this feature will run all the way to the Columbus Center (13+ Blocks)

Civic/Convention District Highlights:
1. use additional ROW for raingardens and stormwater treatments. make pratt street a leading design for envirtonmental quality practices world wide
2. use green area to protect garmatz courthouse and remove the pyramidal bollards
3. create a signage and exhibit program to be used by the national aquarium to expand their pratt street presence (displays similar to those outside of the aquarium will be located throughout this district)
4. greenscreen treatment of the sloped walls at the convention center. create a new landsape around the CC to allow it to recede into the urban fabric
5. CONTINUE of the proposed HARBOR TRANSIT/BIKE LANE. convention center busses will have a drop lane off of this amenity
6. infill building at the B of A tower with a green roof. this building would be a "bookend" to the new lockwood place building further down Pratt


Retail/Entertainment District Highlights:
1. the EDSA team proposed a winter garden with two story retail wrapping the base of the legg mason tower. this would create year round "outdoor" space for residents, while allowing the tower to reconnect with Pratt and St. Paul Streets. This idea is REALLY cool.
2. KEEP the light street spur to Pratt. this connection cannot be "t'd" into Pratt. TOO MUCH traffic comes from conway to pratt and will only get worse with IHE expanding. we proposed to have 3 lans going east to pratt, with 3 north to calvert. we made that swing ramp a blvd. so that there is a pedestrian refuge for people crossing from the IH to Mckeldin plaza
3. Mckeldin Common- our team felt that this space needed to be an "oasis". there is too much paving there with little animation. a grand sweeping lawnspace focuses on a new art focal point (we're thinking a massive reflective sculpture similar to Milennium PArk in Chicago. the fountain would remain, but would be softened. vendor kiosks, a reading room, weather station and other fun amenities would animate this space year round. shade trees and lawn areas are provided for residents and CBD workers as an oasis to escape the heat and bustle of the city. the grand lawn also preserves and enhances the view and pedestrian connection that runs diagonally from the LM tower and the inner harbor,
4. Harbor Tranist Lane Continues
5. Pratt Place- the Team proposed a two lane local street running parallel to Pratt. this street would run between Charles and Gay Street and has the potential for WESTBOUND flow. this street would allow us to create off street parking for new retail opportunities, while pulling service, drop offs, taxi ques and more off of the main floe of pratt street traffic. this is a very DC approach (aka k Street). the new roadway would be seperated by a 14' landscape median. Pratt street in this section would be a grand boulevard with TWO landscape medians within it!
6. Retail infill along all buildings on the north side of the street. a 20' expansion would be accomodated to allow for new tennants to expand on the bottom floor of existing buildings.
7. a new bookend pvailion would be located on the greenspace east of the WTC. this 2/3 story building would frame a new plaza in front of the WTC building, the pavilion would compliment the pratt street pavilion with restaurants, retail and maybe residential uses?
8. sondheim plaza- this new plaza would reconnect the WTC with Pratt Street. a large fountain with sailboats and other amenities would be the space's focal pitn, with outdoor cafes and a tensile kiosk animating it. this space would be converted to an ice rink in the winter months. sondheim plaza is envisioned as baltimore's rockefeller center.
9. Jones Falls/Fallswalk- the team proposed terracing down to the jones falls, opening it up to the street and making it an interactie experiece similar to the riverfrot in providence. this would celebrate the jones falls' role in the city's history and would create a new space/oasis to be used by new downtown residents (michael graves tower, etc.)



Overall, all of the solutions were incredible, but here are my biggest concerns:

1. the swin ramps from Light to Pratt/Calvert is HUGE. removing it is a disaster for downtown traffic.
2. the two way blvd schemes shown yesterday do not fit in the existing street section. the road is pinched at the Wharf Rat and at PowerPlant/Lockwood. it was unclear how those solutions addressed thos issues
3. the City does not have billions to spend on these proposals. converting all roads to two way is expensive for resignaling and study. many streets are also too narrow!

We feel that the EDSA Team Plan created a viable and practical solution for the Pratt Street that enhanced the pedestrian experiece, created new and dynamic spaces, broke down the ovverpowering character of Pratt street into a grand boulevard, provided a transit and bike lane that would be a tremendous amenity for the downtown, and most importantly created a vision plan that isfeasiible, implementable immediately, exciting and frsh and most importantly, grounded in study with a well balanced team of local expertise.


THANKS for reading!!!!! no matter what, baltimore is going to be a BIG winner at the end of the day. all of the proposals had their strengths and weaknesses and it will be interesting to see how the BDC decides!!!!! Thanks to those that also came last night, it was a great turnout!
__________________
part of the baltiMORE comeback
folsomfanatic no está en línea  
Old February 21st, 2007, 05:23 PM   #1152
House3780
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Indian Ocean
Posts: 789
Likes (Received): 5

Lots of that sounds really great. Good job making the descriptions pretty clear.
House3780 no está en línea  
Old February 21st, 2007, 05:29 PM   #1153
sdeclue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 879
Likes (Received): 47

Very interesting. Thanks for sharing. We would love to see some pictures.

I like your proposal a lot. I wish there was a big LCD screen thrown in there somewhere, but everything else sounds great. I love the ice rink by WTC.

I thought the idea one group proposed about traffic circles like the Washington monument one sounded awesome, but I also understand how narrow our streets are and how difficult two-way traffic on Pratt would be.
sdeclue no está en línea  
Old February 21st, 2007, 05:32 PM   #1154
Maudibjr
Indeed
 
Maudibjr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Baltimore
Posts: 1,267
Likes (Received): 132

Thanks for typing out the proposals guys.

I guess I am in the minority, but I think downtown traffic flows reletively well.

I guess I was looking to see smaller scale athestic changes. Livining up mckeldin and the legg mason plaza, removing the berms. I don't think the inner harbor pavilons are going to be removed anytime soon, so I consider that idea pie in the sky.

I do like the idea of a seperated bike trail parrelling Pratt However.
Maudibjr no está en línea  
Old February 21st, 2007, 05:41 PM   #1155
Eerik
Registered User
 
Eerik's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Washington DC - Baltimore - Tallinn
Posts: 1,847
Likes (Received): 205

The current trend of the last fifteen or so years to propose two-way streets has to be a counter rebellion to the postwar generation. In fact, I would suggest a lot of the urban planning, architecture, and design we’re seeing today is a direct revolt against practices of the modernist movement.

Miesian “wind-swept plazas” in front of office buildings are now considered unfashionable. We’re back to office buildings that don’t step back from the edge of the street. Likewise, the current trend is to have some sort of pedestrian interaction with the automobile and street, whereas as little as 25 years ago, we were doing everything possible to separate them. Locally, the Skywalk, the Howard Street and Lexington Street Malls, even the berms along Pratt Street, were indented to shield the pedestrian from traffic. So I’m not surprised the immediate solution to Pratt Street would be to eliminate the berms, since today we want to “mingle” with traffic!

But as for the two-way streets I know this: when the first proposals were being presented to make Charles Street two-way, everyone, including just about every traffic study, cited traffic would be slowed down as a result. Whereas the Barnes-era did everything possible to move people in and out of the city as quickly as possible, as a result we drained our cities of life; now we have tossed his policies out the window, and are attempting to stop the bleeding.

Why? Because in general when we think of cities, we think of street life, hustle and bustle...but not too much bustle! We prefer to walk along a street where the average speed of traffic is less than 25 miles per hour; that’s why a pedestrian feels more comfortable walking in Fells Point or Federal Hill than along Lombard Street. While Lombard Street does run through the city, most relate to it as more of an urban expressway, than a normal city street.

But the concept of how we define, and relate with The City is definitely being redrawn. This is probably a trend the vast majority of the early postwar generation would question. I think by nature, humans are social beings, and policies of the last half-century have isolated us from one another by forcing us into our autos, suburban cul de sacs, and offices in those isolated “wind swept plazas.”

While none of the proposals for Pratt Street really stand out as exceptional, I can’t help but sense this feeling we’re trying to undo a lot of what we’ve done wrong in the last fifty years. That is one reason I find it ironic, that in some ways we’re “sacrificing the lamb” by promoting the removal of the pavilions at the harbor. As a form, they introduced the concept of non-isolation to us, where we could all gather and relate to one another, no matter what background. So although I understand the desire to demolish the pavilions, this is somewhat of an interesting conundrum. That is, unless one could argue we no longer actually need them as a form in our lives? Perhaps as a society we have matured, and now they represent an unneeded and archaic past?
Eerik no está en línea  
Old February 21st, 2007, 05:47 PM   #1156
rxsoccer
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Baltimore
Posts: 122
Likes (Received): 0

Thanks for keeping us updated on the proposals (for those of us that couldn't be there). My gut reaction to the proposal that suggested eliminating a couple of the harbor pavillions was skeptical (and someone else mentioned that would clearly not win because of that suggestion alone). But after thinking about it a bit, I'm not sure its a bad idea.... and in fact, might make the most significant positive impact on improving Pratt st. Nate pointed out the concern over viability of adding significant amounts of retail to pratt where it probably is not sustainable currently. But if you think about taking down the pavillions on pratt and moving those retailers to pratt st, then you would have a long stretch of street level retail all along pratt st which would achieve the exact function we really want for pratt st. If we want a "miracle mile" or any other type of major blvd that you can walk from MLK to president st with retail, restaurants, etc the majority of the way, why would we need those pavillions which do very little to stimulate foot traffic on pratt st? I think having urban outfitters, cheesecake factory, etc along pratt st makes sense and models after the more successful areas. Think M st, wisconsin ave, etc... I think we'd be much better off focusing our retail efforts on pratt than on those pavillions. Because the fact is, we probably can't sustain both.
rxsoccer no está en línea  
Old February 21st, 2007, 06:11 PM   #1157
MasonsInquiries
B-MORE than u strive for!
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Baltimore/Columbia, Md.
Posts: 2,257
Likes (Received): 13

Quote:
Originally Posted by folsomfanatic View Post
From last night, all teams looked at traffic. EDSA and Hargreaves both kept Pratt running eastbound. EEK and ASG proposed Two way. IMHO, 2 way doesn't fit on pratt or the side streets (which our traffic engineer).
this sounds really good. to be honest, most of the proposals sound really good. but i think that we all won't have a true sense of what to expect until we see renderings.
MasonsInquiries no está en línea  
Old February 21st, 2007, 06:15 PM   #1158
HAudidoody
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 123
Likes (Received): 1

Quote:
Originally Posted by rxsoccer View Post
Thanks for keeping us updated on the proposals (for those of us that couldn't be there). My gut reaction to the proposal that suggested eliminating a couple of the harbor pavillions was skeptical (and someone else mentioned that would clearly not win because of that suggestion alone). But after thinking about it a bit, I'm not sure its a bad idea.... and in fact, might make the most significant positive impact on improving Pratt st. Nate pointed out the concern over viability of adding significant amounts of retail to pratt where it probably is not sustainable currently. But if you think about taking down the pavillions on pratt and moving those retailers to pratt st, then you would have a long stretch of street level retail all along pratt st which would achieve the exact function we really want for pratt st. If we want a "miracle mile" or any other type of major blvd that you can walk from MLK to president st with retail, restaurants, etc the majority of the way, why would we need those pavillions which do very little to stimulate foot traffic on pratt st? I think having urban outfitters, cheesecake factory, etc along pratt st makes sense and models after the more successful areas. Think M st, wisconsin ave, etc... I think we'd be much better off focusing our retail efforts on pratt than on those pavillions. Because the fact is, we probably can't sustain both.
Many would argue those pavilions are one of the more historically significant structures in the City of Baltimore. Anyway, they are very much a destination, certainly not what they used to be, but still an important part of the city. As the city's new neighborhoods grow, retail will be added... just look at Harbor East. I don't see any reason to remove Harborplace. There are plenty of examples of other cities with Harborplace clones and multiple, thriving retail districts.
HAudidoody no está en línea  
Old February 21st, 2007, 06:26 PM   #1159
rxsoccer
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Baltimore
Posts: 122
Likes (Received): 0

Quote:
Originally Posted by HAudidoody View Post
Many would argue those pavilions are one of the more historically significant structures in the City of Baltimore. Anyway, they are very much a destination, certainly not what they used to be, but still an important part of the city. As the city's new neighborhoods grow, retail will be added... just look at Harbor East. I don't see any reason to remove Harborplace. There are plenty of examples of other cities with Harborplace clones and multiple, thriving retail districts.
I agree to a certain extent... but I just think that if Pratt St is really going to be a highlight of the city we need to encourage foot traffic there. And there is no better way to encourage foot traffic than to put all of your PRIME retail establishments in that location. Can we add retail to Pratt in addition to the pavillions?... of course. But, what quality? how successful will they be? Will they really draw people as a destination? Lets face it, places like cheesecake factory are a major destination and bring TONS of foot traffic. Places like that will solidify Pratt st as a major draw, instead of it being a second tier location to the harborplace or worse, a third tier location behind IHE. I'm not saying its the right thing to do, but I do find the idea intriguing and worth discussion and it has definitely grown on me (in the last 12 hours ).
rxsoccer no está en línea  
Old February 21st, 2007, 06:36 PM   #1160
waj0527
Registered User
 
waj0527's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Baltimore
Posts: 2,599
Likes (Received): 484

Quote:
Originally Posted by wada_guy View Post
Thanks for the Pratt Street report Waj.

The problem with Downtown Baltimore traffic flow IMHO, is that too many streets have been cut off so that they are no longer considered through streets. We used to have a grid system so that if one street had a blockage on it, you could go up a couple of blocks and take another street to reach your destination.

The JFX resulted in many streets no longer passing to the east. Monument, Eager, and Chase Streets are examples. MLK blocks some streets, like Lexington, from going west. They closed Holiday Street in front of City Hall so that you can no longer go south. Lexington Street in the CBD was eliminated for Charles Center and Redwood Street is now a stub of its former self.

The city needs to do a complete traffic study downtown and eliminate as many of the blockages as possible. Picking a FEW E/W and N/S streets, and running ALL the busses on them would help too. I don't even know why we have bus stops. The busses rarely pull to the cub anymore, and if they do, they stick out in the back and still block traffic. If downtown had the same grid it had in the 40's, "we'd still have a mess but it would be less".
This is exactly what the groups that proposed Pratt and Lombard and much of the major streets of the CBD become two way were attempting to accomplish.
waj0527 no está en línea  


Closed Thread

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Related topics on SkyscraperCity


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 11:40 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Feedback Buttons provided by Advanced Post Thanks / Like (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

SkyscraperCity ☆ In Urbanity We trust ☆ about us | privacy policy | DMCA policy

Hosted by Blacksun, dedicated to this site too!
Forum server management by DaiTengu