Baltimore Development News

[micrip]

The Civic Center, as originally built, was a convention center/arena. Originally there were 2 floors of exhibit space where the garage is now, and the building does contain some meeting space, though I doubt it is used for that any longer. Before the Civic Center, the 5th Regiment Armory was where most exhibitions were held.

So what was old may possibly become new again...

[Eerik]

The number one priority for the city at this point should be two-fold: 1) increase the employment base, and 2) gaining residents.

With the exception of academia/hospitals, Baltimore (and Maryland) haven't fared too well with businesses. Why? Businesses that haven't left are often purchased/acquired. Why? Could it be the business climate here that prevents businesses from growing? What obstacles do they face?

Within a half-mile of downtown we have swaths of vacant homes (and in some cases contiguous acres of land) sitting vacant. What does this do to the tax base? Economically what problems are posed by having this dead zone -- one which continues to fester like a cancer -- one which we haven't been able to develop, bulldoze and redevelop, decade after decade of failed attempts?

As cited earlier, no one has ever left Baltimore because the arena is too old. Vibrant cities are comprised of people: be it those who work or live there. Baltimore (and Maryland) need to be run like a business, not a soup kitchen.

[CrazyDre26]

Originally Posted by Gsol

Cleveland, Pittsburgh or Cincinnati...... Baltimore is often compared to them.

I'm not sure how we're anything like your three example except for the fact that we're all Rust Belt cities. Baltimore is a much larger city than all three of them today:

City 1950 population (2010 population)
Baltimore 950,000 (621,000)
Cleveland 915,000 (397,000)
Pittsburgh 677,000 (306,000)
Cincinnati 504,000 (297,000)

Interestingly, Cincinnati probably has the healthiest economy of the four despite being the smallest. There are a ton of Fortune 500 companies headquartered there, which for you skyscraper lovers, means a lot of tall buildings.

[Infoman]

I agree with Eerik post. As a city our top priorities need to be making Baltimore more attractive as a whole. Some states that can't lure residents have been giving land away for free; so I say if those vacant lots aren't built over in a certain amount of time then the city should give it away or lower the prices to lure residents. I say make downtown tax-free (limited to businesses excluding retail establishments) in order to attract companies; thats the one of the only way downtown will be able to compete with Harbor East growth.

And the arena/convention center expansion is supposed to help broaden the city tax-base. I would say "lure a NBA and/or NHL team then we'll build the new arena" instead of building a new arena just for performances. If its just for performing we might as well and keep the old arena in my opinion. Besides that I think IF our next arena is needed, it needs to be carefully thought out in how to keep it in popular use for at least 50 years. Id rather spend $1 billion on an arena that will last than have one that cost $500 million and is only up to par for 10-20 years. It can be done; look at Madison Square Garden. It's over 50 and it's not obsolete yet.

[Gsol]

Originally Posted by CrazyDre26

I'm not sure how we're anything like your three example except for the fact that we're all Rust Belt cities. Baltimore is a much larger city than all three of them today:

City 1950 population (2010 population)
Baltimore 950,000 (621,000)
Cleveland 915,000 (397,000)
Pittsburgh 677,000 (306,000)
Cincinnati 504,000 (297,000)

Interestingly, Cincinnati probably has the healthiest economy of the four despite being the smallest. There are a ton of Fortune 500 companies headquartered there, which for you skyscraper lovers, means a lot of tall buildings.

Look at the metro area population. These cities have new arenas and more professional teams. You can toss St. Louis, Minneapolis and Milwaukee into this pile as well.

[KLynch]

This city needs a new arena badly. We are missing out on events that Boise and Birmignhan consistetly get. The only other major city I can think of without a suitable arena is Cincy and if you've ever been to Cincy it feels like the size of Towson compared to bmore. This should be the #1 priority of this administration, get this done before we lose Willard.

With the location of the new are and spinoff affect on dowtown and the old arena site, this is a true game changer for the future of dowtown.

[Mirage52]

The arena should be built because someone is willing to pay for a large chunk of it out of their own pocket. If they pass on this deal they will never get one like it again.

[cgunna]

Originally Posted by KLynch

This city needs a new arena badly. We are missing out on events that Boise and Birmignhan consistetly get. The only other major city I can think of without a suitable arena is Cincy and if you've ever been to Cincy it feels like the size of Towson compared to bmore. This should be the #1 priority of this administration, get this done before we lose Willard.

With the location of the new are and spinoff affect on dowtown and the old arena site, this is a true game changer for the future of dowtown.

Are you using a bit of hyperbole here?

Or do you really believe that the #1 priority of the City government should be a new arena???

[BmoreBullets7]

Originally Posted by cgunna

Are you using a bit of hyperbole here?

Or do you really believe that the #1 priority of the City government should be a new arena???

I believe he is simply emphasizing the importance and much needed efficiency in this extremely rare opportunity to have so much private capital infused in the deal by Willard.

Though i agree arenas do not make cities, i am a proponent that events which bring people, job creation and capital (ie concerts, conventions, ncaa tournaments) to our city are critical to our growth and future investment.

[k25150]

Unfortunately, all anyone gives a damn about is sports so we need a new arena to give them something to do. Maybe we can get an arena football team and get our indoor lacrosse team back.

NHL - no way. The Capitals locked in Baltimore. NBA - Never. If anything they will contract. They borrowed money from China two years ago. They are in bad shape and the latest CBA is a band-aid.

[KLynch]

Originally Posted by cgunna

Are you using a bit of hyperbole here?

Or do you really believe that the #1 priority of the City government should be a new arena???

You can talk all you want about building height and mass transit and.... but with a joke of an arena like First Mariner it is a clear separation between us and the power cites out there. Taxes, pensions, crime... that will all work it self out and what you accomplish can be completely disregarded by the next regime.

What is Schaefer famous for? Then Inner Harbor and our stadiums? Young people couldn't tell you a thing about his policies but know he is the guy who created the inner harbor and the stadiums. That legacy will last for decades if not centuries.

No one is going to remember SRB's policies 20 years from now. But if she pulls off a new arena that could lead to a pro team, political conventions (we know which one in this city), major events, and something that shot downtown in the future. That is a legacy!

[KLynch]

Originally Posted by k25150

Unfortunately, all anyone gives a damn about is sports so we need a new arena to give them something to do. Maybe we can get an arena football team and get our indoor lacrosse team back.

NHL - no way. The Capitals locked in Baltimore. NBA - Never. If anything they will contract. They borrowed money from China two years ago. They are in bad shape and the latest CBA is a band-aid.

We'll get at least 1 if not a handful of regular season games between the Wiz and Caps.... Leonosis is all about Bmore marketing. Hopefully we'll get another team eventually. AFL would be awesome, if I had the money I'd probably try to bring another CFL team here. This city is a football monster right now and people would probably love having football in the summer and tickets for less than $150.

[cgunna]

Originally Posted by BmoreBullets7

I believe he is simply emphasizing the importance and much needed efficiency in this extremely rare opportunity to have so much private capital infused in the deal by Willard.

Though i agree arenas do not make cities, i am a proponent that events which bring people, job creation and capital (ie concerts, conventions, ncaa tournaments) to our city are critical to our growth and future investment.

The bolded above really isn't true at all.

I'm all for a new arena if Willard H. wants to pay for it. I really don't mind the City/State footing a large part of the bill ether.

I just don't want the discussion to take on the identity that concerts, basketball games and wrestlemania grow a City's economy.

Baltimore has a much stronger economy now than New Orleans or Miami. Baltimore is also position to continue to grow much stronger than either of these two...and they both pretty much have the concert/final four/super bowl/whatever money flowing in consistiently.


I'm all for an arena, let's just be for real on what it will actually mean.

[Gsol]

Originally Posted by KLynch

We'll get at least 1 if not a handful of regular season games between the Wiz and Caps.... Leonosis is all about Bmore marketing. Hopefully we'll get another team eventually. AFL would be awesome, if I had the money I'd probably try to bring another CFL team here. This city is a football monster right now and people would probably love having football in the summer and tickets for less than $150.

There are several NBA and NHL teams whose futures are uncertain. It is possible to land one in Baltimore. I hope that DC doesn't protest a franchise transfer to Balt., after all they got a baseball team which impacts the Orioles. Baseball plays more games and requires higher attendance than either the NHL or NBA. Sports is big business and generates revenue and is a source of local pride. An arena with either one or both major sports would provide jobs for vendors, tciket takers, ushers and security. Aside from the two major sports, Balt. could host some NCAA games and many other events. Lets move into the big time.

[BlueSock]

Originally Posted by UCTerp

If the city invests the cost of a new arena ($400 million), it will get an expanded convention center,

Have you seen the economics of convention centers recently? We can't fill up the center we have, and larger convention centers around the country are struggling as well. There is way more supply than demand in the industry right now -- it's a terrible investment.

Originally Posted by UCTerp

an arena

Did you see my previous post about the economics of arenas? Also bad investments. And that's for arenas that are built with the guarantee of landing a team. We won't even have that.

Originally Posted by UCTerp

, and a new highrise hotel in the heart of the city.

You mean a new privately-owned hotel that will compete with the city-owned, money-losing hotel just a few blocks away? We haven't even finished paying off that fiasco, and people are already clamoring for the next one.

Originally Posted by UCTerp

The project will also enliven what is currently a dead spot on the city's two most important roads (Pratt and Charles)

Is the area around the current arena lively? What about the current convention center? If you want to make that area lively, put in some resdiential that caters to people who commute to DC and some street level retail.

Originally Posted by UCTerp

, and allow for the demolition of the old arena which currently stands as an impediment between the West Side and Central Business district (whether a park or new mixed use development replaces the old arena, it will help link the two areas far better than the current arena).

That site will be freed up eventually. We don't need to spend $450 million to do it.

[BlueSock]

Originally Posted by CrazyDre26

Interestingly, Cincinnati probably has the healthiest economy of the four despite being the smallest. There are a ton of Fortune 500 companies headquartered there, which for you skyscraper lovers, means a lot of tall buildings.

Originally Posted by KLynch

The only other major city I can think of without a suitable arena is Cincy...

Seriously, you do not need to have an arena to have a healthy economy. I'll say it again: nearly every objective economist who has looked at this says that public spending on arenas is, on the whole, bad for the local economy.

Originally Posted by Gsol

Look at the metro area population. These cities have new arenas and more professional teams. You can toss St. Louis, Minneapolis and Milwaukee into this pile as well.

I'm not sure when St. Louis and Cleveland became role models for Baltimore. Baltimore used to compete with cities like Boston, DC, and San Francisco. We could do it again, if we get out of this rut of high taxes and poorly conceived, symbolic projects.

[Gallev01]

Originally Posted by cgunna

The bolded above really isn't true at all.

I just don't want the discussion to take on the identity that concerts, basketball games and wrestlemania grow a City's economy.
I'm all for an arena, let's just be for real on what it will actually mean.

Not sure I follow your logic...The reality is a new convention center/arena/hotel would bring jobs, capital, tourism, and exposure to Baltimore. All of which will benefit our city's economy and likely provide residual investment in the businesses and the real estate in the CBD...no brainer

[BlueSock]

Originally Posted by Mirage52

The arena should be built because someone is willing to pay for a large chunk of it out of their own pocket. If they pass on this deal they will never get one like it again.

We are not a doomed city, desperate for whatever morsels someone might toss our way, no matter what the cost to us. If we pursue smart growth strategies and grow our economy to its potential, we will have much better opportunities in the future.

But if we continue down the trajectory of the last 30 years, you're probably right.

[pertplus]

Originally Posted by KLynch

Yes angled parking is the big goal, but for some reason some people have opposed that as well. It also amazes me the amount of people who don't use their back area for parking. Get an open garage door and it's a yard when you want and parking when you want.

It's bizarre how people oppose angled parking. A lot of people can't parallel park and so all our bumpers get torn up and dented in the process. The argument in my neighborhood was that people can hide between the cars more easily. What?? That doesn't even make sense. And if you have to park around the corner from your house because the street is packed, how does that impact safety? I think people get caught up in a this-is-how-we've-always-done-it mentality, and most people in areas that have angled in parking would never trade it.

[BlueSock]

Originally Posted by KLynch

What is Schaefer famous for? Then Inner Harbor and our stadiums? Young people couldn't tell you a thing about his policies but know he is the guy who created the inner harbor and the stadiums. That legacy will last for decades if not centuries.

No one is going to remember SRB's policies 20 years from now. But if she pulls off a new arena that could lead to a pro team, political conventions (we know which one in this city), major events, and something that shot downtown in the future. That is a legacy!

Schaefer might be a local hero, and his policies were highly visible. Yet they failed. Baltimore is arguably a worse city today than it was 30 years ago. It has fallen way behind other cities that used to be considered its peers. And you think we should continue down this path?

SRB has the opportunity to be just the latest in a long line of Baltimore leaders pursuing the same old failed strategies. Or she can stop the city from making bad investments, slash taxes, and be hailed as the hero who finally turned the city around.