Skyscraper City Forum banner
1 - 20 of 154 Posts

·
Moderator
Joined
·
7,023 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 · (Edited)
Location: Penn Station
Neighborhood: Midtown-Belvedere/Charles North
Developer: Penn Station Partners (Beatty Development Group, Armada Hoffler Properties, Cross Street Partners, Gensler, WSP USA, Network Rail Consulting and Mace Group)

Includes: $500 million, 1.6 million sq.ft. mixed-use development including office, residential, retail, and hotel.

----------------

More details will be unveiled at the end of the month, so I figured it's probably time to create a thread for this project.

Penn Station redevelopment to be subject of July 31 public meeting
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
344 Posts
Location: Penn Station
Neighborhood: Midtown-Belvedere/Charles North
Developer: Penn Station Partners (Beatty Development Group, Armada Hoffler Properties, Cross Street Partners, Gensler, WSP USA, Network Rail Consulting and Mace Group)

Includes: $500 million, 1.6 million sq.ft. mixed-use development including office, residential, retail, and hotel.

----------------

More details will be unveiled at the end of the month, so I figured it's probably time to create a thread for this project.

Penn Station redevelopment to be subject of July 31 public meeting
Is anyone planning on attending the meeting? I'm going to be out of town sadly. This forum needs a correspondent in there!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,415 Posts
To give context to the size of this... Harbor Point's full build out is somewhere in the ball park of 3 million sq/ft and occupies 27 acres. While Penn Station's total build out is 1.6 million sq/ft.. they don't even have half the land to play with in terms of development.

Imho there going high-density here (they referenced Chicago's Union Station as an inspiration/template)

I can see a one or two 200-300' Hotel/Office high-rise's in filled with several 100-200' mid rise mixed use residential/retail buildings. There not cramming 1.6 million square feet on the available lots without going substantially vertical relative to what's around

I'd love to see a Midtown skyline develop around State Center/Penn Station
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
623 Posts
To give context to the size of this... Harbor Point's full build out is somewhere in the ball park of 3 million sq/ft and occupies 27 acres. While Penn Station's total build out is 1.6 million sq/ft.. they don't even have half the land to play with in terms of development.

Imho there going high-density here (they referenced Chicago's Union Station as an inspiration/template)

I can see a one or two 200-300' Hotel/Office high-rise's in filled with several 100-200' mid rise mixed use residential/retail buildings. There not cramming 1.6 million square feet on the available lots without going substantially vertical relative to what's around

I'd love to see a Midtown skyline develop around State Center/Penn Station
I'm hoping that North Avenue becomes the new northern end of downtown (high-rise wise) and is close enough to Mt. Vernon to be continuous to existing high-rise housing.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,868 Posts
Location: Penn Station
Neighborhood: Midtown-Belvedere/Charles North
Developer: Penn Station Partners (Beatty Development Group, Armada Hoffler Properties, Cross Street Partners, Gensler, WSP USA, Network Rail Consulting and Mace Group)

Includes: $500 million, 1.6 million sq.ft. mixed-use development including office, residential, retail, and hotel.
Here's an image showing the parcels available to the developers.


Photo: CAD
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
623 Posts
All of Mt Vernon is zoned that way to prevent high-density development (a nice way of saying we don't want skyscrapers here)
...
Buildings that exceed the so-called 100' height zoning (as if there was ever a zoning - it's just how high they chose to go.):
;
;
;
;
;


Show me the zoning regulation that says a building shall not exceed 10 stories. I just showed you 6 buildings that exceeded that limit over the past 100 or so years.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,415 Posts
Buildings that exceed the so-called 100' height zoning (as if there was ever a zoning - it's just how high they chose to go

Show me the zoning regulation that says a building shall not exceed 10 stories. I just showed you 6 buildings that exceeded that limit over the past 100 or so years.

Zoning was restructured city wide end of 2016. Mt. Vernon had a 100' height cap placed unless a formal request is submitted to exceed said height restriction. The new zoning was contributing factor in why it took so long to green light the 10 story apartment building that's going to replace Eddie's. The lots immediately around Penn Station have a different zoning then Mt. Vernon and can be built higher with less restrictions

The zoning regulations are on google or you can go like 50 pages back where I posted the link lol
 

·
Moderator
Joined
·
7,023 Posts
Discussion Starter · #15 · (Edited)
the image works for me, waj. Thanks for posting.

The height limits are the limits until they aren't the limits anymore. If you're following the situation with the Eddie's development in Mt. Vernon, you're aware that this building is on course to exceed the height limit (albeit by a mere 16 feet). What's important is that this is really the first attempt that I'm aware of where someone has proposed to exceed the height limits since they were put in place. So, if this building is built as planned, the reality is that the height limits existed up until the point that the first developer challenged them.

That said, I think exceeding the limits by 16 feet is an entirely different thing than building, say, 300 or 400 feet. But I think 200 feet would be plausible. This site is not part of the Mt. Vernon Historic District; that ends at the southside of Mt. Royal Ave. The Angelos Law Center at UB is over 150 feet tall and the Nelson-Kohl Apartments are just over 100 feet. There's really no reason from an architectural perspective to limit these building to below 100 feet, unless you're really concerned about not overpowering the original Penn Station building.

I will disagree with you on one point, Joakim. Mt. Vernon's zoning does not prevent high-density development; it prevents tall development. With few buildings over five stories, Mt. Vernon is one of the most densely-populated areas in the country. It's population density is around 30,000 residents per square mile, which makes it among the densest parts of Baltimore, alongside northern Fed Hill and Baltimore-Linwood. But arguably, Mt. Vernon is more densely-built than those places, since it also has a greater number of non-residential uses.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
267 Posts
the image works for me, waj. Thanks for posting.

The height limits are the limits until they aren't the limits anymore. If you're following the situation with the Eddie's development in Mt. Vernon, you're aware that this building is on course to exceed the height limit (albeit by a mere 16 feet). What's important is that this is really the first attempt that I'm aware of where someone has proposed to exceed the height limits since they were put in place. So, if this building is built as planned, the reality is that the height limits existed up until the point that the first developer challenged them.

That said, I think exceeding the limits by 16 feet is an entirely different thing than building, say, 300 or 400 feet. But I think 200 feet would be plausible. This site is not part of the Mt. Vernon Historic District; that ends at the southside of Mt. Royal Ave. The Angelos Law Center at UB is over 150 feet tall and the Nelson-Kohl Apartments are just over 100 feet. There's really no reason from an architectural perspective to limit these building to below 100 feet, unless you're really concerned about not overpowering the original Penn Station building.

I will disagree with you on one point, Joakim. Mt. Vernon's zoning does not prevent high-density development; it prevents tall development. With few buildings over five stories, Mt. Vernon is one of the most densely-populated areas in the country. It's population density is around 30,000 residents per square mile, which makes it among the densest parts of Baltimore, alongside northern Fed Hill and Baltimore-Linwood. But arguably, Mt. Vernon is more densely-built than those places, since it also has a greater number of residential uses.
Given that Mt Vernon has a good number (far too many) surface parking lots and other under-utilized parcels, the density figure could be much higher. I wonder what it was say in 1930 before all the surface lots popped up?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,415 Posts
I will disagree with you on one point, Joakim. Mt. Vernon's zoning does not prevent high-density development; it prevents tall development. With few buildings over five stories, Mt. Vernon is one of the most densely-populated areas in the country. It's population density is around 30,000 residents per square mile, which makes it among the densest parts of Baltimore, alongside northern Fed Hill and Baltimore-Linwood. But arguably, Mt. Vernon is more densely-built than those places, since it also has a greater number of residential uses.


Fare point, and good info! Did not now Mt. Vernon was that dense in regards to population


Depending on how many lots are available for development I'd imagine we will get a couple of buildings in the 200-300' range if they plan a "go big or go home" style of development.


I look forward to July 31
 

·
Moderator
Joined
·
7,023 Posts
Discussion Starter · #19 ·
I don't expect that we'll get this in the July 31 announcement, but what I think would be really great for this development and for really kick start things would be if the developers can poach an office tenant from the DC area.

Penn Station is a really unique location and it should be able to attract tenants who wouldn't necessarily consider another spot in Baltimore. If Baltimore is going to continue to make the case that improved connections to DC - MARC, MagLev, Hyperloop, whatever - would make us more economically competitive (especially if the DC region lands Amazon), then this redevelopment should be proof of concept.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
778 Posts
What I hope is incorporated into this development, and something that I've yet to hear anything about, is more fleshed out bike infrastructure in terms of a hub for bike storage or rental.

DC's Union Station has this (imo, gorgeous) Bike Station for storage:


And there was in past rendition of a redevelopment proposal, Race Pace Bicycles prposed this awesome automated storage facility and rental shop:
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://vo-general.s3.amazonaws.com/23d5c348-9a7d-4dc0-8c7a-903d41a20ae3/LeUl2ZrTRWc0fKUklr0T_JPDF_RacePacePennStationUnbuilt.pdf%3FAWSAccessKeyId%3DAKIAJ3YBR5GY2XF7YLGQ%26Expires%3D1616674251%26response-content-disposition%3Dinline%253B%2520filename%253D%2522JPDF_RacePacePennStationUnbuilt.pdf%2522%26response-content-type%3Dapplication%252Fpdf%26Signature%3Dt1VJHZkHbsxKXBNwW5ySs8KV2DA%253D&ved=2ahUKEwi_svPfnqncAhXwTN8KHe__DQMQFjAEegQIAhAB&usg=AOvVaw0WXT3TWWASI9FT_RRP9_ic

Bike infrastructure goes hand in hand with rail and it would be ignorant not to expand on that at a time when you can really amke the most of it!
 
1 - 20 of 154 Posts
Top