With 10 days to go before Baltimore’s Planning Commission is scheduled to take a key vote that will affect the Inner Harbor, Mayor Brandon Scott and developer P. David Bramble are holding a public forum to answer questions about Bramble’s $500 million plan to redevelop Harborplace.
The two-hour event, called the “Mayor’s Public Forum on Harborplace,” will take place at the Middle Branch Fitness and Wellness Center, 201 Reedbird Ave., on Tuesday, Dec. 12, from 6 to 8 p.m. Scott and Bramble, a managing partner of MCB Real Estate, will lead the discussion.
MCB has also launched a Facebook page to answer questions about its project, which calls for demolition of the two Harborplace pavilions at Pratt and Light streets and construction of about 900 apartments in two high-rise buildings, plus office space, shops, restaurants and expanded parkland, including a two-tier waterfront promenade.
MCB’s Facebook page, Our Harborplace, is an extension of the website that the development team created earlier this year. It is one of two Facebook pages started this month to serve as online forums about the redevelopment of Harborplace.
“We’re excited to launch this page so that we can…hear your feedback, so that we can share information, answer questions and correct the record where necessary,” one of the first messages states on the Our Harborplace page.
The second Facebook page, Harborplace Forum, was set up by Baltimore residents not affiliated with the development team. According to a statement from one of the administrators, it was launched by “a group of Federal Hill neighbors who want to keep residents informed whether pro or con of the Harborplace development process.” Since the public group was formed less than a week ago, it already has more than 275 members.
Public referendum
Because it would be constructed on city-owned land, Bramble’s development cannot move ahead without approval from city voters. In October City Council member Eric Costello and president Nick Mosby introduced legislation that would authorize a public referendum in November 2024, asking voters if they support the project.
Before it can move ahead, MCB’s proposal also needs approval from City Council to change zoning, waive a 100-foot height limit currently on the Harborplace parcel, and increase the amount of city-owned land controlled by the developer from 3.2 acres to 4.5 acres.
Tuesday’s forum is part of an effort to address questions that citizens have about the project, the Harborplace team said in an email message over the weekend. On the Facebook page, “we’ll be posting information and debunking some myths that we’ve been hearing” about the project, the development team said.
The forum follows at least three other public meetings that MCB representatives have participated in since unveiling plans for their project on Oct. 30. The previous meetings included a Nov. 3 session at Coppin State University; a Nov. 6 gathering at the National Federation of the Blind headquarters in south Baltimore; and a Nov. 30 hearing before the Planning Commission.
At the Nov. 30 planning commission hearing, the panel heard testimony from the developers and the public but decided to hold another session in December and hear more public testimony before taking any votes on the proposal.
Counterproposals surface
Outside of the public meetings, two local architects have presented counterproposals showing ways they would prefer to see Harborplace redeveloped.
Architect Steve Ziger suggested that any tall buildings be set on land currently occupied by McKeldin Plaza, instead of on land occupied by the Pratt or Light Street pavilions, so any high rises would be farther from the water’s edge.
“An option the developers might want to consider could be placing two tall thin residential towers to the northwest, as a dramatic gateway to the harbor without casting significant shadows” over parkland, Ziger said in his proposal. “Tall and slender is key to preserving views and celebrating this spectacular site. Underground parking could be discreetly accessed from both Pratt and Light streets. And an enhanced McKeldin Plaza would create a great civic place and public entry to the harbor.”
Architect and planner Craig Purcell and developer Lehr Jackson suggested on Linked In that city-owned land between the Light Street Pavilion and the Maryland Science Center be made available for high-rise development, but not the land occupied by the Harborplace pavilions. They suggested that the Harborplace pavilions be preserved and adapted for continued commercial use.
MCB does not control the land between the Light Street Pavilion and the Maryland Science Center, known as the West Shore of the Inner Harbor, and the pending City Council legislation would not give it control of that land.
“Best not to block views [to and from the Central Business District] if you are going to build dense in the public parklands — harbor views are precious,” Purcell stated in a note accompanying his proposal. “[J]ust redo Harborplace, which was mismanaged in the first place.”
Purcell also suggested the creation of a High Speed Hydrofoil Ferry line, including a stop at Harborplace, to connect Baltimore with Annapolis and the Eastern Shore. Maryland needs “a state-backed, bay-wide marine transit system like Washington State” has, he said.
Rebecca Hoffberger, co-founder of the American Visionary Art Museum, has continued to share her vision for “Rethinking Baltimore’s Inner Harbor for Enduring and Dynamic Success,” first published in Baltimore Fishbowl on Dec. 2, 2022.
One online commenter has asked whether MCB’s proposal to create a floating walkway as part of a two-tier promenade would make it impossible for tall ships and other larger vessels to stop at the Inner Harbor. Adam Genn, vice president of MCB Harborplace, said in a message that MCB’s promenade system has been designed so tall ships and other larger vessels could continue visiting the Inner Harbor.
The Planning Commission’s next public hearing on the redevelopment of Harborplace has been scheduled for Dec. 21 at 2 p.m. at 417 East Fayette Street. After glitches with the city’s Webex system during the Nov. 30 hearing, panel members say, the Dec. 21 meeting will be in-person only.
I just spoke with Eric Tiso from the planning commission, and he is strongly recommending that the only email address that folks use for commentary is Eric.tiso@baltimorecity.gov
This enables all of the commentary to get fully distributed to everyone on the commission, instead of people writing to other parties.
At this point in the legislative process, contacting a city council representative, or the mayor, is premature.
The only agency that should be receiving commentary right now is the planning commission, as this upcoming session is for them to tally up commentary, and then make a recommendation on the bills that are being proposed by the City Council
Please correct your article to state that if people cannot go in person to the Planning Commission meeting, the P Comm IS accepting emails sent PRIOR to Dec. 19 at 4 PM> to eric tiso. I do not know if they need to be sent to other members of Planning or not as well.