Development Under the Burden of Infrastructure:
The West Baltimore MARC Station Area Master Plan
by
ARCH! fES
MASSACHUSErrS INSTITUTE
OF TECHNOLOLGY
Tamika Camille Gauvin
SEP 2.6 2015
BA in Economics
University of Chicago
Chicago, IL (1998)
LIBRAR IES
Submitted to the Department of Urban Studies and Planning
in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of
Master in City Planning
at the
MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY
September 2010
t[rebrut a zo 20
C 2010 Tamika Camille Gauvin. All Rights Reserved
The author here by grants to MIT the permission to reproduce and to distribute
publicly paper and electronic copies of the thesis document in whole or in part.
Signature redacted
Author
Dewrtment of Urban Studies and Planning
August 11, 2010
Certified by
___Signature redacted
___________
Professor Brent D. Ryan
Department of Urban Studies and Planning
Thesis Supervisor
Accepted
by_
Signature redacted
Professor Joseph Ferreira
Chair, MCP Committee
Department of Urban Studies and Planning
77 Massachusetts Avenue
Cambridge, MA 02139
http://Iibraries.mit.edu/ask
MITLibraries
DISCLAIMER NOTICE
Due to the condition of the original material, there are unavoidable
flaws in this reproduction. We have made every effort possible to
provide you with the best copy available.
Thank you.
Some pages in the original document contain text
that runs off the edge of the page.
Pages 23 & 81
Development Under the Burden of Infrastructure:
The West Baltimore MARC Station Area Master Plan
by
Tamika Camille Gauvin
Submitted to the Department of Urban Studies and Planning
on August 11, 2010 in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of Master in City Planning.
ABSTRACT
In the 1970s, approximately one thousand West Baltimore houses were
razed and thousands of residents displaced to make way for what would
have been 1-170, a highway that would have connected to 1-70 in Baltimore
County to the Baltimore City Central Business District. After years of
intense community opposition, the Highway was halted after a segment of
the Highway ha d already been built.
Thirty years later, West Baltimore is the backdrop to another major public
project. The Maryland Transit Administration (MTA) will redevelop the
West Baltimore MARC station as a Transit-Oriented Development (TOD)
via the West Baltimore MARC Station Area Master Plan for TransitCentered Community Development (The Plan). This Plan could redirect
investment into the severely disinvested areas in West Baltimore.
This research examines the intended results of the Plan to understand the
realistic development opportunities for the West Baltimore MARC Station
Area and the role that urban design and development could play in
supporting or hampering the project's success potential.
I make suggestions that would improve the Plan's urban design and
development approach to achieve better outcomes for community
transformation. I recommend improved connections to existing community
assets, minimal use of parking structures on prime Station Area blocks,
using targeted economic development initiatives to create jobs for West
Baltimore residents, a formal study for development scenarios for the
Highway, and the creation of a project oversight group.
Thesis Supervisor: Brent D. Ryan
Title: Assistant Professor in Urban Design and Public Policy
ForKarl-Henriand Tuck Daniel
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I express the deepest gratitude to Brent D. Ryan, my thesis advisor, for his
guidance during this journey.
Brent's combination of guidance and
flexibility was exactly what I needed to do this research at this particular
point in time. It was a pleasure to work with you.
I also thank my thesis readers Sam Bass Warner and P. Christopher Zegras,
for their valuable feedback. It was great to sit down with you and Brent on
the day of my thesis defense-your input gave me the confidence to move
forward knowing that my research could be useful and valuable in the
discussion on the West Baltimore MARC Station Area Master Plan.
Thank you to the representatives of Baltimore City-Department of
Planning, Department of Transportation, Baltimore Housing and the
Maryland Transit Administration, community organizations, and the
development community who shared a wealth of information that helped to
direct this thesis. I could not have done this without you.
I want to say a special thank you to Kirin Smith, Kate Edwards, Klaus
Philipsen and Lorenzo Bryant. I called on you numerous times during my
research and you were always gracious and helpful. Thank you.
To my dear friend Kristal Peters, I thank you for helping me over the finish
line.
Finally, to my sisters Sonia and Carla, I love you. You have always been
my support and you stepped up to the plate again when I needed you the
most. And to my mother, words cannot express how much you mean to me.
Thank you so much for your strength and wisdom.
I love you
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Chapter 1
Introduction
Chapter 2 Plans and Precedents
Chapter 3
Literature Review
6
17
27
Chapter 4 Urban Design and Development
48
Chapter 5
97
Interviews
Chapter 6 Recommendations
104
Bibliography
115
Appendix
118
CHAPTER 1: Introduction
Deja vu: Major Infrastructure Project Comes to West Baltimore.. .Again
In the 1970s, approximately one thousand West Baltimore houses were razed and
thousands of residents displaced to make way for what would have been 1-170, a
highway that would have connected to 1-70 in Baltimore County to feed suburban
residents into the Baltimore City Central Business District. This route is now
known as Route 40 and more infamously as the "Highway to Nowhere"-a name
that came into being when the highway project was halted leaving an
approximately 1.5-mile unfinished segment of highway to bisect West Baltimore.
Thirty years later, the community is once again the focus of a major public
investment plan.
The West Baltimore MARC Station Area Master Plan-for
"Transit-Centered
Community Development" (The Plan)-is a long-range
redevelopment plan issued in 2008 for the MARC commuter rail station area that
includes West Baltimore communities adjacent to the station.
The Plan is an
important project for the City of Baltimore and the Maryland Transit
Administration (MTA). For the City of Baltimore, it
nrovides
an opportunity to
develop underutilized land, thereby increasing the tax base, it could potentially
direct investment into some heavily disinvested West Baltimore communities, and
makes West Baltimore the potential location for a major transit a MARC station
and Red Line connection attracts new residents to the area.
The integral component of The Plan is the potential Red Line-a proposed
surface light rail-connection to the MARC station.
From this hub, West
Baltimore residents would have direct transit access to major employment centers
such as Washington, D.C., large employers to the west and east of Baltimore, and
Aberdeen and Fort Meade, major locations for the Base Closure and Realignment
Commission (BRAC) in Maryland. The ability of the West Baltimore MARC to
stimulate housing development and job creation is very important to West
Baltimore residents. The West Baltimore MARC Station Area Master Plan, which
6
incorporates the West Baltimore
community's goals and principles
for
redevelopment, is not a plan for Transit-Oriented Development (TOD)-a
compact, walkable mixed-use community centered on transit nodes-but for
Transit-Centered Community Development, which supports the community's
development needs and opportunities for current residents.
Can Transit-Oriented Development Transform West Baltimore?
Many state and local governments have begun to embrace TOD as one tool in a
toolbox of neighborhood reinvestment and economic development strategies.
TOD has shown its ability to transform struggling business districts and distressed
communities into vibrant and desirable areas to live, work and socialize, however
there are examples of Transit-Oriented Development that has fallen short of
expectations.
In some of these cases, the expected neighborhood revitalization
never materialized and ridership might have fallen short of estimates. In short,
TOD does not guarantee a successful outcome.
Then what does?
What are the conditions for a successful Transit-Oriented
Development? In the case of West Baltimore, can this Plan for Transit-Oriented
Development catalyze housing development in neighborhoods where vacancies
are extremely high, and where a paucity of basic services and lack of amenities
make these communities undesirable places to live for most? Will TOD spark
development interest in a place that has consistently been passed over for other
areas in Baltimore that have been deemed more desirable development
opportunities?
How can the West Baltimore MARC Station TOD truly be
community-oriented, serving the needs of the existing residents, while supporting
amenities that would attract new residents? Finally, could the full realization of
the vision in the West Baltimore MARC Station Area Master Plan be challenged
by the urban design and development interventions in other projects, and in the
Master Plan itself? These questions are the crux of this thesis.
7
The vision for a future West Baltimore, as it is presented in the West Baltimore
MARC Station Area Master Plan, is one of tremendous transformation-a level of
transformation that will require significant private and public investment.
The
problem is that there is little interest from private developers in the area, and the
City and State might not be equipped to provide the financial investment and the
political will required to mobilize private investment and see the project through.
Furthermore, conditions specific to West Baltimore-high number of vacancies,
crime, poverty levels and the eyesore of the Highway to Nowhere-the transit
mode (a commuter rail) for this TOD, and the depressed development market (the
overall lag in the market and its reluctance to go into West Baltimore) might
challenge the fulfillment of the Plan's vision.
If this were to happen, West
Baltimore could miss a pivotal development opportunity-one that many residents
feel is West Baltimore's last chance for revitalization in the form of housing
development, employment opportunities, and establishment of businesses that
provide basic services that the communities lack. Furthermore, if development
(TOD) does not occur the communities would likely not attract new residents that
could provide economic diversity and stability, thus leaving West Baltimore to
remain LII iL s.L %IJsIILcurrent L %-aJaL V1 LU eps1sst t Chag in1 a Xes UirCLU way aniu
perhaps over a more protracted timeline.
This could be to the detriment of
existing residents as vacancy spreads, additional neighbors leave in search of
better neighborhoods, and the social problems typical of declining neighborhoods
proliferate.
It is important, however, to note that West Baltimore comprises many
communities, many of them extending beyond the West Baltimore MARC Station
Area, and many of them with varying degrees of the aforementioned problematic
conditions. As such, the description above should not be considered characteristic
of all West Baltimore communities.
To do this would be to ignore the unique
qualities and conditions of each community, and the fact that there are other West
Baltimore communities that lie outside of the station area.
For example,
vacancies are high in Harlem Park, but are few in Evergreen Lawn where the
8
neighborhood fabric is largely intact. At the same time, it is evident that much of
West Baltimore is heavily disinvested, receiving very little development attention,
while other areas in Baltimore, particularly in downtown, are development
hotspots. In this regard, the West Baltimore MARC Station Area Master Plan
could be an extraordinary
opportunity to jumpstart a West Baltimore
metamorphosis.
It is also imperative that consideration be given to the range of neighborhood
changes that could occur as a result of the West Baltimore MARC Plan for TOD.
This consideration was the point of departure for this thesis, as I was initially
interested in understanding the chances that rapid gentrification would occur in
West Baltimore as people were potentially attracted to the combination of new
housing, retail, and employment opportunities that are the hallmark of TransitOriented Development. If rapid gentrification were to occur, the West Baltimore
MARC TOD could work against existing residents as housing values increase
rapidly and residents-particularly renters-relocate in search of affordable
housing.
My initial question was therefore, would the Plan for the West
Baltimore MARC station spur rapid gentrification? In Chapter.Five, my research
revealed that the probability of rapid gentrification was insignificant given
conditions in the development market and in West Baltimore, and some elements
of the Plan. Furthermore, some interviewees' comments hinted toward skepticism
that development would happen.
This led me to ask "Would developers be
interested in West Baltimore"? I also wondered what developers would build in
West Baltimore
and
how would
the
urban design
and
development
recommendations in the Plan encourage or preclude the vision for the redeveloped
West Baltimore MARC Station Area.
These rudimentary thoughts were the
impetus for the new direction in my research
Planning Is Not Predicting: What Could Happen in West Baltimore
What did I expect to learn in this research? The first point of departure for this
study was TOD and its potential influence on rapid gentrification. What range of
9
neighborhood changes could occur in West Baltimore as a result of TOD at the
MARC station? Could these potential changes cause a wave of gentrification that
would force families-and particularly renting families to move out when housing
prices rise? Furthermore, how is gentrification defined?
It is important to start with a definition of gentrification. The Merriam-Webster
defines it as "the process of renewal and rebuilding accompanying the influx of
middle-class or affluent people into deteriorating areas that often displaces poor
residents." In his paper, "Two faces of gentrification: can zoning help"? Michael
Davidson refers to the definition used in the 2001 Brookings Institution paper
"Dealing with neighborhood change: a primer on gentrification and policy
choices." The authors Maureen Kennedy and Paul Leonard define gentrification
as "The processes by which higher-income residents of a neighborhood displace
lower-income residents of a neighborhood, changing the essential character and
flavor of a neighborhood." These definitions illustrate the polarizing nature of
gentrification.
Notions of the "us versus them" and "longtime-residents versus
newcomers" underlie most discussions on the subject.
This contention is not
baseless. Many communities have experienced this sequence of events that places
affordable housing out of their reach- The new housing built is expensive-think
high-end condominiums-and the rehabilitated housing becomes expensive after
landlords renovate units to attract the incoming middle-class and affluent
residents.
Localities are not instituting inclusionary zoning regulations that
require and/or incentivize affordable housing production as part of market-rate
housing development projects. Yet, this is still not enough to mitigate the overall
impact of gentrification in many communities, which experience an exodus of
existing residents as housing becomes targeted at the more affluent classes.
In regards to the West Baltimore station area, it seemed plausible, that rapid
gentrification would occur since TODs are highly desirable for their compact and
walkable agglomerations of housing, retail and employment.
The distinction
between gentrification and rapid gentrification must be highlighted, as it was not
my stance that any gentrification was undesirable, but that gentrification that
10
happened so quickly that a significant numbers of families would be adversely
impacted was a problem. Of course, this begs the question, what is the right rate
of gentrification and what is the appropriate holding pattern-or mix of races,
income levels, families, etc., for a community?
In the early stages of this
research, when I interviewed city officials and organizations about the Master
Plan, it became clear that gentrification- or rapid gentrification-while a
consideration worth addressing proactively, was not the most pressing issue for
the West Baltimore communities at this time. Nor was it a likely possibility
according to developers I interviewed. Community organizations, and City and
State officials involved in the master planning process, addressed and are still
addressing this issue.
Furthermore, the reality for West Baltimore-and this
sentiment resonated in my interviews-was that some gentrification was
necessary in order to break patterns of concentrated poverty, increase the tax base,
and ultimately improve existing residents' access to services, housing, and
employment opportunities.
With this realization, it also became clear that the success of TOD at the West
Baltimore MARC Station could face an extraordinary set of challenges, namely
overcoming the perception that West Baltimore is a group of impoverished and
crime-ridden communities, and an inability to attract interest from the
development community.
A new set of questions arose.
Would developers
consider the West Baltimore MARC TOD a development opportunity and would
they agree with the design and development recommendations in the Master Plan?
What would developers say are realistic and good design and development
interventions given market conditions in the Baltimore region and the physical
conditions in West Baltimore? Finally, what type of development and design
should be implemented at the West Baltimore TOD and what would be the key
elements of these interventions?
These were the guiding questions for my
investigation, assessment of the neighborhoods, and subsequent urban design
recommendations.
11
Research Methodology
The goals of this thesis were to:
" Gain an understanding of the range of neighborhood changes that could
occur in West Baltimore as a result of the Plan for TOD.
Is rapid
gentrification an imminent threat to the communities in the West
Baltimore Station Area?
" Assess the urban design and development recommendations in the West
Baltimore MARC Station Area Master Plan and the implications of these
recommendations.
" Gain an understanding of the development community's perception of the
urban design and development recommendations in the Plan and its
assessment of the West Baltimore MARC Station Areas as a development
opportunity.
*
Use the knowledge gained from these insights to recommend urban design
and development strategies that will maximize development opportunities,
while also remaining sensitive to the existing communities' needs and
vision for the West Baltimore MARC Station.
To achieve these goals, I executed the research tasks outlined below. Along the
way, some tasks were modified in response to information uncovered during the
course of research.
Interviews
More than thirty interviews, with city and state agencies, area organizations, one
community resident (more on this below), and area real estate developers were
conducted. Interviews with key stakeholders such as City and State agencies, and
area organizations provided significant insight on West Baltimore's planning
history, the West Baltimore MARC master planning process, and precedents-or
lack of-for TOD in Baltimore. These interviews revealed the injustice of past
infrastructure projects such as the "Highway to Nowhere" and a host of later
projects that failed to transform the deteriorated fabric of some communities. The
12
interviews also revealed the communities' general distrust of planning processes
and projects, and how this distrust contributed to a tumultuous start to the West
Baltimore MARC Station planning process.
Analysis of Precedents
An examination of the changes that occurred in Baltimore neighborhoods that are
near existing transit lines would give some indication of what might happen in the
West Baltimore Station Area as a result of TOD.
This would be a direct
comparison because the existing lines are rapid transit lines, while the MARC is a
commuter rail system. These lines have different riderships and therefore, have
different implications for development. Although not a centerpiece of the Plan,
the proposed Red Line is a very important component-and likely the real
strength of the Plan-and would be more comparable to the existing rail in
Baltimore. It was revealed in the interviews City and State Officials that the
neighborhoods located in rail transit corridors did not experience change. One
take-away from this could be that the Red Line might not catalyze development in
its corridor, however, to assume this would be premature. Whereas, the Red Line
planning process was executed with an eye toward development, the planning for
the Metro and Light Rail lacked a development component.
Consequently, a robust analysis of possible neighborhood changes is not included
in this thesis, however, a review of the literature on transit and its impact on
property values gives some insight in the changes that experts have observed over
the past few decades. Their observations serve as good indicators of the changes
that could happen with the development of the existing West Baltimore MARC
commuter station and the proposed Red Line.
Literature Review
An understanding of experts' consensus and points of debate on the impact of
transit on communities would be useful for understanding the possible changes
that could happen in the West Baltimore Station Area communities and
13
particularly, the type of development and urban design patterns that might occur.
The review in Chapter Three ranges from Alonso and Muth's (1964) seminal
research on transit impact on urban settlement patterns to Cervero's contemporary
research on the effect of transit on different types of real estate.
Overall, the
research shows that transit has an effect on where people choose to live and where
businesses choose to locate, and that this effect is largely visible in property
values. The research also shows that this influence is nuanced. For example, the
effects-in the form of changes in property values-might be different for
commuter rail versus light rail.
In fact Cervero's 2003 study showed that the
price premiums for housing near commuter rails were significantly lower than
price premiums for housing near a light rail station. Furthermore, Kahn (2007),
illustrated in his research that residential areas near Park and Ride stations had
lower housing values and lower shares of college graduates than Walk and Ride
stations. These theories could be applicable to the West Baltimore MARC Station
Area, hinting toward less lower property values and presumably little developer
interest. Furthermore, we see here that urban design interventions such as parking
lots / structures could negatively affect the surrounding area. In the absence of
precedents in Baltimore, the literature certainly
provides
some basis for
understanding the changes that could happen in the West Baltimore MARC
Station Area.
West Baltimore Station Area Contextual Review
A brief description of the West Baltimore Station Area planning and political
history, and the area's demographic profile provides context to aid in
understanding its current social, political and economic conditions. For example,
the history of the Highway to Nowhere in West Baltimore is one of displacement,
political unrest, and public investment.
The Highway significantly altered the
built environment in West Baltimore; understanding how this fracture in the
fabric of West Baltimore impacted adjacent communities could lend some insight
into the design interventions that could improve the quality of life there. Some of
the historical context in this thesis comes from the interviews, as interviewees
14
usually mentioned the Highway to Nowhere and past projects when talking about
present-day conditions in the Station Area.
The review in this section will be brief and will serve only to give some
background to current events, as no planning or political action today is
completely isolated from what happened yesterday. The planning process for the
West Baltimore MARC TOD illustrated that a community's distrust could be
rooted in planning and political transgressions that happened decades earlier.
Furthermore, establishing trust, which was lost over years ago, could be a timeintensive and contentious, but necessary component of new projects.
Physical and Urban Design Analysis
Photo documentation is necessary to capture existing conditions in the
communities.
The field survey process could reveal assets to leverage and
challenges to address, the way the community functions, and how residents use its
public spaces. This is complemented with an analysis of the existing
infrastructure, building, open space, and land use patterns to further reveal
challenges and opportunities to improving development and urban design through
the proposed West Baltimore MARC TOD.
baseline
for
which
recommendations in the
to
analyze
the
This analysis will also create a
urban
design
and
development
West Baltimore MARC Station Area Master Plan, and
to propose new or modified interventions that would enhance the urban design
and development outcomes for the project and the communities in the Station
Area.
Ultimately, these improvements could provide an increased level of
specificity to the Plan, thereby increasing the marketability of the TOD and the
ensuring that the communities' vision is realized as development occurs.
Hypothesis
The West Baltimore MARC Station Area Master Plan provides a framework to
guide the West Baltimore Station Area toward revitalization. The West Baltimore
MARC station will be at the center of this revitalization; Transit-Oriented
15
Development at the station will capitalize on the amenity in transit. The mix of
housing, retail, and office space will bring new life into the Station Area and into
the communities that have not had a major injection of investment since the
Highway to Nowhere was built. The Plan evokes hope and excitement for a
better West Baltimore, but is redevelopment as straight-forward as it is presented
here? What are some of the issues that should be reconsidered?
I approached the Plan with skepticism, but my concern, at the time, was focused
on the potential for rapid gentrification. I thought that the Plan would ultimately
cause displacement in the Station Area communities. I quickly learned that rapid
gentrification was not an immediate threat for the West Baltimore MARC Station
Area because the area was so severely disinvestment that it would take time to
attract development interest. Consequently, I turned my focus on understanding
the development potential through the eyes of the developers and assessing the
urban design and development recommended in the Plan to determine whether the
Plan introduced any challenged to development or appropriately addressed the
existing challenges to development in West Baltimore.
I hypothesized that the Plan would be questionable on three points:
it was
developed around a commuter rail station that has approximately 600 daily
boardings, its placement of parking would challenge if not preclude development
opportunities, it would not offer a solid solution for the Highway to Nowhere.
Interviews with West Baltimore Station Area stakeholders and potential
developers supported my concerns and provided a strong basis for the
recommendations that I present in Chapter Six.
16
CHAPTER 2: Plans and Precedents
The West Baltimore MARC Station Area Master Plan
The West Baltimore MARC Station Area Master Plan for Transit-Centered
Community Development is a strategy for community-guided Transit-Oriented
Development at the West Baltimore MARC commuter rail station and the area
within the Y-mile radius around the station.
Baltimore
residents
Transportation,
collaborated
with
Between 2005 and 2008, West
the
Maryland
Department
of
the Maryland Transit Administration, the Baltimore City
Department of Transportation, and a number of local organizations to create a
community-minded vision for Transit-Oriented Development of the West
Baltimore MARC Station and the communities that comprised the Station Area.
The forty-year Plan, completed in 2008, reflects the State of Maryland's embrace
of transit, and TOD as a planning and development tool to effectuate its smart
growth policy and capitalize on existing transit investments.
It also reflects
Baltimore City's adoption of TOD as a tool to stimulate economic development
and neighborhood reinvestment.
These factors converged to create Transit-
Oriented Development opportunities for the State, which had made significant
investment in transit in previous years, and for Baltimore City, which had existing
transit lines and wanted to strengthen its position as a regional business center,
and spur community development in disinvested neighborhoods.
In 2004, after an analysis of potential strategic stations and subsequent
negotiations, the Maryland Department of Planning (MDP) and the Maryland
Department of Transportation (MDOT) designated the West Baltimore MARC
Station as one of three promising pilot projects for the incorporation of TransitOriented Development principles in land use, policy and practice.' The promise
for the West Baltimore MARC station is in its status as a link between Baltimore,
I Maryland, Baltimore City Department of Planning, Live-Learn-Pla-Earn: The City of
Baltimore Comprehensive Master Plan (Baltimore: Baltimore City Planning
Commission, 2006) 210.
17
Washington, D.C. to the south, and Aberdeen and Fort Meade-potential job
centers in the Base Realignment and Closure Act (BRAC)-to the north.
Additionally, the West Baltimore MARC station could become a transit hub if the
Baltimore City Red Line, a proposed 14.5-mile east-west light rail with a stop at
the West Baltimore MARC station, is built. The Red Line was designated as a
priority project in the 2002 Baltimore Regional Rail System Plan, which outlined
recommended rail construction and extensions that when complete, would make a
comprehensive rail system.2
The Red Line is an integral component and a key
first step in the implementation of this plan because it would be the first east-west
rail line in the City. The two existing rail lines-the Light Rail (called the Blue
Line in the Rail System Plan) and the Metro (called the Green Line in the Rail
System Plan) run in a northerly direction and do not connect (Figure 1).
Consequently, access to various parts of the City-and most notably the largest
employers in the City-is extremely limited. The Red Line will be a significant
step toward solving this problem. The proposed Red Line will traverse the heart
of West Baltimore, connecting at the MARC station and will link riders to
major
employers to the east and west of the City in Baltimore County, and to downtown
in the Central Business District (CBD). The Plan acknowledges the potential
construction of the Red Line, but in it, no design recommendations are based on
the existence of the proposed light rail. The Plan focuses on the TOD potential at
the MARC station, outlining potential sites for development and recommended
design guidelines, uses, and typologies that would best enhance development
impact. A unique feature of the Plan is its incorporation of the residents' requests
for services and guiding principles on housing, economic development, and
transportation, so as to create a framework for development that is sensitive to the
Maryland, Maryland Transit Administration, Baltimore Region Rail System Plan
(Maryland: Maryland Department of Transportation, 2002) 2.
2
18
existing communities. 3 Hence, the Plan is a framework for Transit-Centered
Community Development.
Sy ltimors Rflion Rail
stem Plan
Ex isting and Proposed Lines
N
At opted Match 2002
0"
Oele
A
V,
a000 0
Q 0
0
X7 NAPrqpsad Rlines
* Ns4Ing
$htan
0 N"pS ed SiMA"
*vfeStation
-
MARCTran
Figure 1. Baltimore Regional Rail System Plan
Baltimore City Department of Planning, West Baltimore MARC Station
Area Master Plan (Baltimore, 2006) 29-37.
3 Maryland,
19
The West Baltimore Community
Similar to many rust belt cities, Baltimore experienced a sizable decline in its
population-a drop from 950,000 to roughly 640,000 between 1950 and the time
of the 2000 Census-as the manufacturing industry declined in the United States.
West Baltimore, in conjunction with this city-wide contraction, has suffered from
significant disinvestment over the last four-to-five decades.
Furthermore, West
Baltimore suffered a serious blow during the 1960s and 1970s when several
hundred houses were cleared and thousands of residents displaced to make way
for 1-170, an east-west highway that would bring commuters from the West
suburbs into the downtown Central Business District. At the time, this highway
plan was considered a solution for reversing the decline in the CBD. Moreover, it
was one of a number of plans for highways that would cut through neighborhoods
to enter the downtown. Consequently, major citizen opposition marked the 1960s
and 1970s. Yet, by the time citizens succeeded in halting these projects, nearly
1.5 miles of the Franklin-Mulberry corridor was cleared and a segment of the
east-west expressway was built.
The expressway known infamously as the
"Highway to Nowhere" was not completed.
The highway segment built,
incomplete and ending abruptly, remains in West Baltimore today.
The
disinvestment that precipitated some of the West Baltimore communities is linked
to this relic of urban renewal and highway policies of the 1950 and 1960s. This is
the legacy of West Baltimore and it is a memory that remains brandished on the
memories of many of its residents. As a result a distrust of public projects looms
in the communities. For example, one interview said, "There has been a lot of
trust building along the Red Line Corridor."
Communities in the West Baltimore MARC Station Area
Today, many communities in West Baltimore show signs of decades of
disinvestment, however, there also exists a number of stable communities. Ten
communities lie within a V2-mile radius of the MARC station area.
These
neighborhoods
Lawn,
Midtown
include
Edmondson,
Rosemont Homeowners/Tenants,
Station
West
(Penrose),
Evergreen
and
portions
of
20
Bridgeview/Greenlawn, Harlem Park, Franklin Square, Boyd-Booth, and Shipley
Hill (Figure 2).
Figure 2. West Baltimore MARC Station Area.
Source: West Baltimore MARC Station Area MasterPlan.
The demographic information for these neighborhoods hints to some of the social
challenges in this part of Baltimore. According to the West Baltimore MARC
Plan, the 2000 Census data shows that 25,000 people, in 9,217 households, live in
the ten neighborhoods. According to recent data, the number of vacant housing
units in the station area is estimated at 1,250, with vacant lots estimated at 400.
As of 2,000, 45% of housing in the station area was owner-occupied, while 55%
was renter-occupied-some neighborhoods having higher homeowner-renter
ratios than others. For example, Boyd-Booth, Franklin Square and Harlem
Square had at 70% renter-occupied housing stock, while
Evergreen and Rosemont-more stable neighborhoods-had 23%. Median
household income for the area in 1999 was $23,500, which was below the City's
Park/Lafayette
median income of $30,000. Furthermore, approximately 30% of West Baltimore
21
residents had below poverty status, which was higher than the City's 23%.
Neighborhoods in West Baltimore generally have higher proportion of families
when compared to other areas in the City.
Over 30% of the neighborhood
population comprised residents age 19 and younger.
The Baltimore Neighborhood Indicators Alliance (BNIA), which tracks the
performance of community statistical areas on a number of indicators, provides
information on communities' Travel Time to Work in 2000-also based on
Census Data. Generally, the data shows that the West Baltimore communities in
the MARC station area spend more time traveling to work and that a greater
percentage of these communities use public transportation when compared to
other neighborhoods.
This is an important fact about the ten communities
because one of the goals for TOD-from the State and City perspective-is to
connect residents to job opportunities in the region and to do so using a fast and
reliable form of transit such as the Red Line light rail. Another indicator of note is
that described as "Job-ready, working adults who continue to gain skills." Once
again the data (based on the 2000 Census) on the ten communities indicate the ten
communities are challenged.
For example, the Greater Rosemont area, which
includes the Evergreen Lawn, Midtown Edmondson, Mosher, and Rosemont
communities, had one of the highest unemployment rates at 18%. It is necessary
to say that this is 2000 data and the picture might be very different today.
However, given the current economic environment, which is similar if not more
severe than the market decline in 2000, the unemployment rates for the Greater
Rosemont area and the ten communities might once again exhibit greater severity
when compared to other Baltimore neighborhoods. This is also an important fact
in the context of the Plan for TOD, as one goal one of the Plan is to provide more
job opportunities for low-skilled workers such as those that generally live in the
station area (Figure 3).
22
IN
0
WWI
(ERB
mow
C3
to
..........
I ........
.................................................................
.........................................................
. .........................
......................................................
..............................................
........ -/
......
....................
...................................................................
.........
the proposed Red Line Light Rail Corridor highlighted in Red.
L
23
Transit-Oriented Development: A State and Local Development Strategy
The development influences in the West Baltimore MARC Station Area extend
from a confluence of planning efforts and the plans that came out of these efforts.
This confluence of influences results from a planning climate in which
transportation is an integral component in strategies to advance State and Local
economic and community development goals.
Transit and Transit-Oriented
Development (TOD) are viewed as a means for connecting residents to
employment opportunities, attracting new residents and businesses to the
Baltimore region, and increasing transit ridership. Baltimore City has a particular
interest in realizing these goals.
As of 2000, the City experienced a 30%
population decline from its peak population of 950,000 in the 1950s.4
Consequently, Baltimore has experienced a substantial decrease in tax revenues
collected and has had to fill the gap by implementing a property tax rate, which is
at least twice the rate of surrounding counties. Also, Baltimore City's share of
regional jobs is declining compared to that of its suburban counterparts. 5 Transit
and Transit-Oriented Development are woven into the strategies that the State of
Maryland and Baltimore City have developed to address these issues.
The State and the City's interest in leveraging Transit-Oriented Development for
economic and community development is visible in the plans developed within
the last decade.
Two plans, in conjunction with the West Baltimore MARC
Station Area Master Plan (2008), have set the tone for Transit-Oriented
Development in the Baltimore region and for development in the West Baltimore
MARC Station Area. The transit investments proposed in the Baltimore Regional
Rail System Plan are subsequently leveraged in the City of Baltimore
Comprehensive Master Plan (CMP) and the West Baltimore MARC Station Area
Master Plan to drive economic development and neighborhood reinvestment
through strategic Transit-Oriented Development.
4 Central
Maryland Transportation Alliance, "Central Maryland TOD Strategy: A
Regional Plan for Transit-Centered Communities", 2009, ES1.
5 Ibid.
24
The Plans
Baltimore Regional Rail System Plan (2002)
In September 2001, the Maryland Department of Transportation (MDOT)
assembled a 23-member Advisory Committee to develop a long-term Regional
Rail System Plan (Rail Plan) and make recommendations on priority projects for
the Rail Plan.
In August 2002, the Advisory Committee, which comprised
elected, civic, business, transit, and community leaders, published the Baltimore
Regional Rail System Plan. The objectives of the Plan include establishing a true
system of rail lines between major life activity centers, serving areas with the
greatest concentration of population and employment, and making the most of
prior transportation investments.
In the 19-page document, the Committee
recommended new rail lines and rail extensions that when completed would give
the Baltimore region a comprehensive rail system. The completed system, which
will take forty years to build and consist of 109 miles of track, 122 stations and
six lines, will be an important step in meeting the Rail Plan objectives.
Live.EarnePlaysLearn: Baltimore City's Comprehensive Master Plan 2007-2012
(2006)
LiveoEamePlayeLearn, the City of Baltimore Comprehensive Master Plan (CMP)
was completed in 2006. LiveeEarnPlayeLearn added an implementation strategy
for the goals that were outlined in the City's 1999 PlanBaltimore. PlanBaltimore
was the culmination of a planning process that began in 1997 as an attempt to
update Baltimore's thirty-year-old comprehensive plan. The Executive Summary
of Live*EamePlayeLeam states "while the draft was greatly enhanced, it
primarily provided policy recommendations instead of concise goals and
strategies to move the City of Baltimore forward." As the title suggests,
Live*EamePlayeLeam takes a comprehensive look at the key aspects of
Baltimoreans' lives, with the goal of laying a foundation for constituents'
achievement of a quality life in Baltimore.
25
The Baltimore Regional Rail System Plan had been in place for two years when
the planning process for Live.EamPlay*Leam began in 2004. The Rail Plan,
and another State policy, the Smart Growth Act of 1997 might have set the stage
for Baltimore's connection of CMP goals, objectives and strategies to transit and
Transit-Oriented Development, and to the general State and City recognition of
West Baltimore as a critical TOD priority. The Smart Growth Act is a set of
policies and programs to support and revitalize existing communities, with the
goal of directing State infrastructure toward areas with infrastructure in place and
away from infrastructure for sprawl development. Its influence, and the influence
of the Rail Plan are evident in Live.EamPlayeLeam, in which transit and TOD
principles are threaded throughout the Plan. A look at some of the CMP goals
and strategies exhibit links between transit and TOD, and the goals, objectives
and strategies that will move the City's Master Plan forward. For example, to
achieve its goal of improving access to jobs and transportation linkages, the City
set as an objective enhancement of transportation options to provide workers with
commuting options and mitigation of traffic congestion. The City will meet this
objective by supporting efforts to implement the Baltimore Regional Rail System
Dn
nd 4ts dpT ;ine ndA Gr
T epirt
segments. The constru1ct4-1n of the
Red Line, could greatly benefit West Baltimore residents, who generally have the
longest commute times to work and rely more on public transit to get to work
when compared with residents in other Baltimore communities.
The CMP also details the measures that must be taken to create a development
climate that could support and encourage TOD. Zoning is a significant issue that
was highlighted through the creation of the Plan.
The current code does not
support mixed uses, which is usually a defining characteristic of TOD and usually
increases the success of such projects. The City has a launched a review and
rewrite of the existing code.
This initiative is called Transform Baltimore.
Mixed-use zoning and Transit-Oriented Districts and Overlays will be included in
the new zoning code, which is currently in a draft review phase and open to the
public
for
comments.
26
CHAPTER 3: Literature Review
Many states and municipalities are adopting Transit-Oriented Development
(TOD) as a strategy for the redevelopment of underutilized land and disinvested
communities along existing and new transit nodes. Many governments believe
that these areas can be turned around through the type of redevelopment that
makes transit nodes active centers.
TOD, by definition, creates this desired
activity through a mix of uses-typically residential, retail, and office-in a
compact and pedestrian-friendly environment.
Just as governments have
recognized the merits, so too has the public realized the benefits of living,
working, and recreating in locations set in a walkable and transit-connected urban
fabric.
Reaction to volatile gas prices, traffic congestion, and environmental
degradation-as well as an overall draw to the cultural amenities of the city-has
led many who would have typically chosen to live in the suburbs to opt for city
living.
Given the growing demand for Transit-Oriented Development, it is
plausible that land values and housing prices in transit areas would be driven up.
Many research findings suggest that this phenomenon does indeed occur. This
could have significant implications for TOD in inner-city communities where
low-income and working-class families live in large concentrations (Glaeser,
Kahn and Rappaport 2007).
Gentrification of once distressed neighborhoods
could occur as housing in the station area becomes more expensive and out of
reach to the existing residents in inner-city communities. One might ask, "Does
TOD cause gentrification?" In the case of West Baltimore, is there a significant
probability that gentrification would occur as a result of the plan for TransitOriented Development at the West Baltimore MARC Station?
In this chapter I provide a framework for answering these questions through a
literature
review
phenomenon.
on Transit-Oriented
Development
Gentrification-as
a
There is an extensive body of literature on gentrification and a
similarly extensive body of literature on TOD and its influence on residential
property values and land values in communities adjacent to transit.
Such
literature-on property values in transit areas-makes a significant contribution
27
to the theory of TOD and gentrification as the rise in property values can be used
as a proxy for gentrification. Gentrification entails a number of phenomena, i.e.,
conversions
from
renter-occupied
to owner
housing,
changes
in race,
socioeconomic characteristics, and increases in property values (Lin 2002).
A
large portion of the literature on TOD and gentrification-as a phenomenonexplore the relationship between changes in property values and the extension or
opening of a rail transit line.
Many of the theories presented here are of this
genre, however, each one offer a different perspective and raises different
questions about the link between transit and gentrification. The second section of
the review focus on this body of literature; the first section focuses on
transportation and residential spatial patterns; the third section focuses on
obstacles to Transit-Oriented Development in the inner city; and the fourth
section focuses on gentrification, as a broader topic, sans the connection to transit.
Transportation and Residential Spatial Patterns
In "Why do the poor live in cities? The role of public transportation" (Glaeser et
al. 2007), Glaeser et al. provides evidence for their hypothesis that poor people
concentrate in the city due to abundance of transit in these locales. Their point of
departure, similar to other theories on TOD and gentrification, is one of the
earliest theories to link residential spatial patterns and transportation-the
Alonso-Muth theory of centralization (Alonso 1964 and Muth 1969). The theory
states that the rich would choose to live further away from the city center because
they prefer more land, which is cheaper away from the city center. The rich
exercises this spatial preference despite the fact that they value time more highly
than the poor and should choose to live at the city center to minimize their
commute times. In this case, the income elasticity demand for housing for the
rich exceeds their income elasticity demand for commute time (Figure 4).
28
r
Figure 4. Bid-rent scenario.
Glaeser et. al does not base their theory on the Alonso-Muth model because the
latter assumes a monocentric city and income elasticity demand less than one.
Interestingly, Wheaton also rejected the Alonso-Muth model on the account of his
own findings that neither the rich nor the poor had a comparative advantage in a
particular location (Wheaton 1977). He concluded that the Alonso-Muth model
was not robust enough to explain residential patterns in American cities. Drawing
a similar conclusion, Glaeser et. al opted to base their work on LeRoy and
Sonstelie's theory, which also explored the link between transportation and
residential patterns. LeRoy and Sonstelie's theory represents a pivotal moment in
the development of the theory of urban form and transportation and thus requires
some discussion.
In "Paradise Lost and Regained:
Transportation Innovation, Income and
Residential Location," LeRoy and Sonstelie extend the Alonso-Muth Model to
include two modes of transportation instead of one. This model is considered
more applicable to the American pattern of settlement, particularly as it relates to
the effects of a new transit technology on the settlement pattern of the poor and
the affluent. The formation of the streetcar suburbs and the solidification of the
29
suburbs through the introduction of the car are reminiscent of the LeRoy and
Sonstelie theory. In their model a new transit technology is very expensiveeven for the rich-when it is initially introduced to the public.
A very small
segment of the population moves away from the city center, but still most of the
poor and the rich remain in the city. LeRoy and Sonstelie call this the Paradise
period. As the technology becomes more affordable, the rich use it-and move
away from the city to the suburbs-but the technology is still too expensive for
the poor. The poor, which have a higher income elasticity demand for housing
than for time, would stay in the city center and spend more time to get to work
using the cheaper mode of transportation. The rich, who attach a greater cost to
commute time, move to the suburbs and commute to work quickly using the new
technology. Consequently, the poor become concentrated in the city and most of
the rich will live in the suburbs. History has shown the multiplicity of social
problems that result when poverty is concentrated. This is the period that LeRoy
and Sonstelie call Paradise Lost.
As the cost of the new transit technology
declines further, it becomes attainable to the poor. As a result some of the poor
also move to the suburbs to get more housing at lower prices, while minimizing
commute costs with the use of the new technology. The rich might start to move
back into the city-perhaps to avoid the poor or to once again take advantage of
cheaper rents. The authors call this regentrification or Paradise Regained. These
results confirm Wheatons's finding that when both rich and poor commute by car,
as in 1970 and 1977 the bid-rent function of each are very close. No one group
has a strong comparative advantage in either suburban or downtown locations.
Glaeser et. al take their queue from LeRoy and Sonstelie's research, which makes
a direct connection between public transportation and the urbanization of the
poor.
They argue that the primary reason for central city poverty is public
transportation. Through analyses of the income-distance (distance to rail transit
lines) relationships for older and new cities, and urban poverty rates by
demographic groups, Glaeser et al find support for their theory that the poor
centralize in the cities due to access to public transportation. The results of their
30
analysis show that public transportation usage appears to strongly predict poverty
and to explain a substantial amount of the link between access to proximity to
transit and poverty (Glaeser et al 2006). They also analyze data for areas where
the car is the only transit mode and find that in these areas, the rich live closer to
the city center, concluding that the existence of multiple modes of transportation
is integral to understanding why the poor centralize in cities. In one more test,
Glaeser et al examine the effects of subways in metropolitan areas. Analyzing
income in subway and non-subway cities they find that income first declines with
respect to the distance from the Central Business District (CBD), out to three
miles, for subway cities such as Boston, Chicago and New York City. Income
increases with distance over three miles to the CBD. Oppositely, in non-subway
cities, income rises with distances within three miles to the CBD.
Moreover,
public transit usage decline-as income increases-with distances beyond three
miles from the CBD in subway cities. This finding picks up on the shift from
public transit to car usage by the rich-an idea that is a key tenet of LeRoy and
Sonstelie's theory.
The theories presented in this body of literature provides a good framework for
understanding how access to transit might have influenced the residential patterns
in West Baltimore and how Transit-Oriented Development-in the form of a
"new transit technology"-might catalyze a population shift. In this scenario, the
affluent would move closer to the city center-to areas like West Baltimore. This
phenomenon would be consistent with LeRoy and Sonstelie's "regentrification"
or "Paradise Regained" scenario and Glaeser et al's subway cities, where the rich
return and live closer to the city center. Based on these theories, West Baltimore
could experience gentrification as a result of the West Baltimore MARC Station
Area Plan for Transit-Oriented Development.
Transit Impact on Property Values
A number of social, economic, demographic, and other changes and shifts might
occur in a neighborhood undergoing gentrification. Changes in property values
31
are used most as indicators of these changes in the literature on Transit-Oriented
Development and gentrification. In this research, I focus on changes in residential
property values, as it is property values that directly influence individuals'
housing choices and the larger patterns of urban settlement. Many studies have
been done on the impact of transit on proximate residential property values and
most of these studies show some form of price premium for such properties.
However, the study results vary in the extent of the premium and reveal that this
variation could be the result of a number of external factors, such as station
effects, station design, demographics, etc.
These variations highlight the
uniqueness of each city and neighborhood context, and that it is often a
confluence of factors that make the benefit of transit access capitalized in housing
prices.
Many have looked at the relationship between housing price and proximity to a
transit stop. McMillen and McDonald (2004) examined the reaction of house
prices to a new rapid transit line between downtown Chicago and the Midway
Airport. Their study focused on the years 1983-1999, the periods before and after
LllteLLI% VVe wa LJtLL. Uing'1L 11%4 '%,F.I(L 0n"d p
s IaILes metLds, McViA.1VLLL CLlnan
McDonald provide empirical evidence that the transit line opening, which
happened in 1993, had been anticipated and that house prices with respect to
distance declined further away from the transit station-a negative house price
gradient. Their study revealed a negative gradient (-10% to -15% per mile) after
the opening of the Midway Line in 1993 compared to the initial gradient in 1983,
which was significantly less negative. These results were based on analysis of
price indices for repeat sales. An analysis using a hedonic method supported
these results: there was a price gradient of -4.2% in the initial period 1983 to
1986, -7.4% between 1987 and 1990, -15.2% in 1991-1996, and finally, -5.6%
between 1997 and 1999.
McMillen and McDonald's results also showed that
home prices increased substantially as a result of the new transit line. Using 1986
as their base, they found that appreciation rates were approximately 6.89
32
percentage points higher between 1986 and 1999 than comparable homes farther
from the nearest train station.
Two years earlier Lin (2002) also used housing market activity as a basis for
studying transit and gentrification in Chicago.
Lin, however, is not only
interested in difference in property values, but also in the difference in property
value growth rates. He focuses his research on the north and northwest sections
of Chicago during the period 1975 and 1991, first examining the role of
gentrification in these parts of the City. He also explores whether gentrification
behaved like a wave, moving out from the CBD and Lake Michigan.
Lin
acknowledges that it is widely accepted that transit service creates a premium on
property value, but also says that most studies prior to his did not examine the rate
at which property values increase. He also acknowledges that the CBD and Lake
Michigan are two geographic features that would have a strong influence on
gentrification patterns. Urban professionals, he says, would move close to the
CBD and that the lakeshore on the north has steadily been a magnet for the
affluent. Lin expects that property value growth rates for areas close to transit
stations would exceed those at areas farther from transit stations. The results
seem to support his hypothesis. Lin charted the percentage change of property
values as a function of distances from the lake, the CBD, and transit stations.
Through regressions and charting of percent change in property value on
residential density, and distance to the CBD, Lake Michigan and transit the
relationships between gentrification and transit and the rate of property value
growth and transit are clearly illustrated. Overall, the greatest rates of growth are
closer to the transit stations.
Similarly, the greatest rates of growth are at the
CBD. For example the percentage change in property value between 1985 and
1991 was approximately 130% for areas approximately .25 mile, 120% for areas
.5 mile away from a transit station, and 100% for area one mile away from the
from a transit station. Results for Lake Michigan during the same period,
however, show a slightly different pattern-the percent change in property value
increases with distance from the lake, peaking at 125% at 1.4 miles from the lake,
33
decreasing to approximately 90% at 3.25 miles from the lake, and then increasing
again with distance from the lake.
It should be mentioned that Chicago was
experience an explosive growth cycle between 1985 and 1991. The change rates
for the periods 1975-1980 and 1980-1985 are significantly lower, however, this
does not in any way negate the findings.
Bowes and Ihlanfeldt (2007) look at the negative externalities that can counter the
positive effects of transit on property values. The authors state that no study has
fully investigated the underlying factors that may account for the effect of
proximity to transit on property values. Accordingly, they sort out these effects
with the use of a hedonic price model and auxiliary models for neighborhood
crime and retail activity. From the outset they posit that access to a rail station is
a positive factor and that most studies confirm this, however, the compendium of
literature presents mixed results. Bowes and Ihlandfeldt point out Gatzlaff and
Smith's (1993) study, which found that the Miami Metrorail had no significant
effects on property values. In fact, in the time period covered by the Metrorail
study, there was no significant neighborhood revitalization along the northern
edge of the system. Policymakers in Miami believed that the Metrorail would be
a catalyst for revitalization in the northern section, which was experiencing
economic decline. Bowes and Ihlanfeldt's study probes more deeply into issues
such as these. What underlying factors influence property values such that they
negate the positive effects of access to transit? The authors examine the effects of
crime, retail, and proximity to the transit station in a hedonic model, and crime
and retail auxiliary models and apply the combined results to calculate the price
effects of a MARTA station in Atlanta. Bowes and Ihlandfeldt's three main
conclusions were that direct effects are generally larger in absolute value than
crime or retail effects, retail effects are larger than crime effects (except in the
immediate vicinity of stations located close to downtown, and that total effects
vary a great deal with neighborhood income level, distance to downtown, and
distance from the station. In regards to the last conclusion, the largest positive
total effect tends to occur at the farthest distance from the CBD between one-
34
quarter to one-half mile of a station.
The largest negative effects are found in
high-income neighborhoods within one-quarter mile of a station especially if the
station is located close to a parking lot. The authors attribute this to crime and
externality effects.
This study serves to highlight some of the nuances of the
transit access benefit-proximity to transit might positively affect housing prices,
but there are additional factors that also influence the overall price effect.
Kahn (2007) illustrates such nuances.
Studying fourteen transit-oriented
communities, Kahn finds that communities where "Walk and Ride" stations were
built experienced greater gentrification than those where "Park and Ride"
facilities were built in the same metropolitan area. His evidence showed home
prices increasing by 3% for census tracts that had median incomes below the
metropolitan median and were "treated" with a Walk and Ride station. Census
tracts that were "treated" with a Park and Ride experienced no change in home
prices. These figures represent averages for the fourteen cities; looking at the
cities individually revealed significant differences. For example, he states that the
average tracts treated with Park and Ride stations in Boston experienced a 5%
decline in home prices. Average home prices in Baltimore-Baltimore is one of
the fourteen cities Kahn studied-did not decline, however increases in home
prices were weaker for Park and Ride station areas. Home prices near Park and
Ride areas increased by 6.5% versus 16.7% at Walk and Ride areas. Kahn also
found that the share of college graduates residing near Park and Ride stations
relative to control tracts-census tracts in the same metropolitan area with similar
observable characteristics and have not experienced increased proximity to railwas higher.
Using the share of college students as a second indicator of
gentrification, Kahn reports that nine of the cities with communities treated with
Walk and Ride stations experienced a positive and statistically significant increase
in the share of adults who are college graduates. In eight of the cities,
communities where Park and Ride stations were built experienced a significant
reduction in the share of adults who are college graduates.
35
Cervero's (2003) study also highlights the variance in the data on transit impacts
on land values. In Cervero's study effects of light rail versus commuter rail, and
residential land uses are delineated. For example, he finds that the largest
premium accrued to parcels near the East Line-a trolley line. An apartment in a
multifamily development within
-mile of this line could price more than
$100,000 on average when compared to a similar project beyond the
radius.
-mile
Properties near the Coaster, a commuter rail, did not exhibit such
substantial premiums.
Cervero did not explain why this might happen, but it
seems plausible that the properties near the Coaster might have experienced the
effects of Park and Ride stations that Kahn focuses on in his study. Additionally,
he did not find a meaningful relationship for apartments and rental units, in
respect to proximity to the Coaster. He explains this by saying that commuter rail
lines often serve professional-class homeowners.
In other words, the working
class is not using commuter rail. Cervero also examined transit access impacts on
condominium and single-family properties.
The results of his analysis bore
results similar to those for multifamily housing, except that instead of finding a
disamenity for properties near the Coaster commuter rail, he found that there was
a significant nrice premium-for a condo and not a rental. He explains this, once
again, in terms of the resident market, which comprises professionals who regard
proximity to a commuter line as a benefit when they own their place of residence.
Condominium prices garnered price premiums of 6.4% for properties near the
East Line Trolley and 46% for properties near the Coaster.
Condo properties
along other line corridor had price premiums below 4%, but Cervero said this is
not statistically significant. In regards to single-family housing, Cervero expected
to find disamenities for properties proximate to rail stations. The data for San
Diego County supported his hypothesis, which is a widely accepted occurrence
among theorists. Prices for the properties along three of the four trolley corridors
in the County reflected the disamenity.
Price Premiums were absent for
properties in these corridors, however a price premium was evident for singlefamily homes that are generally lower in the region. Homes within
-mile of the
Coaster stations, on the contrary, had substantial price premiums. The research
36
might indicate that the lower prices near trolley stations and higher prices near
commuter rail stations might reflect higher income residents, a preference for a
more family-oriented environment-which might be disassociated with light rail
and heavy rail-transit that is associated with higher-density urban forms.
These studies-and the breadth of studies not discussed here-provide strong
evidence that proximity to transit has a significant and positive effect on land
values.
Gentrification-the influx of middle-class and affluent residents, as
evidenced in these studies by the rise in property values-is a consequence of
transit. Furthermore, there is a reason to believe that transit could spur rapid
gentrification, as was the case in Lin's study on gentrification around the CBD in
Chicago. The research also tells us that there are many factors in addition to the
mere presence of a rail station that influences gentrification-if there is any-in a
community. Positive influences on property values are not guaranteed.
Challenges to Transit-Oriented Development in Inner Cities
Some researchers'
works have examined
the barriers
to
neighborhood
reinvestment, and specifically redevelopment induced by Transit-Oriented
Development.
Inner-city communities have experienced such difficulties. The
conclusions? Transit-oriented development in inner cities is not impossible, but
requires deep public subsidy, and collaboration among civic and business leaders
and community organizations among other antecedents.
Loukaitou Sideris and
Banerjee's 2000 study looks closely at the necessary pre-conditions for
development in inner cities. Their study provides a practical look at how to make
the transformations proposed in development plans that are procedurally
applicable to projects on the metropolitan edge, and not the inner city, where
amenities, funding, and land assembly might present barriers to development.
Loukaitou-Sideris and Banerjee say:
Our arguments about missing antecedents of station area
development underscore the neglected dimensions of urban design
literature that focus on joint development, station area
development or new urbanist principles for integrating transit and
37
development... Yet these conventional design idioms lack an
understanding of the process, or a credible script for
implementation-a script that includes incentives, institutions,
public-private partnerships, community participation and
endorsement, fiscal and regulatory innovations, timing, phasing,
deal-making and inter-agency coordination.
Loukaitou-Sideris and Banerjee's (2000) study on the Blue Line in California
illustrates the importance of such a script. The Blue Line is a 22-mile rail system
that connects downtown Los Angeles to downtown Long Beach. Proponents for
the line touted its potential to improve the economic environment of its adjacent
communities, some of which were under the poverty level. Ten years after its
opening in 1990, the line still had not catalyzed any significant development
despite surpassing ridership estimates. The authors write of the line's physical
condition:
Today, almost 10 years after the opening of the Blue Line, the
physical context of its corridor is derelict and forbidding...the
0.25-mile radius is entirely devoid of any private or public
facilities or services that constitute the everyday landscape of a
market economy and offer the consumption, recreation and
social interaction choices associated with the sense of quality
of life.
Loukaitou-Sideris and Banerjee interviewed public officials and community
groups to understand the reasons that the Blue Line was not successful in the
depressed inner-city neighborhoods. From these interviews, the authors learned
of four groups of challenges that challenged the success of the Blue Line and
could be applicable to other similar neighborhoods along transit corridors. They
learned that a series of planning, physical/environmental, social/structural, and
economic problems plagued the line. The experts-the public officials-named
these barriers as particular challenges to inner-city development in the order of
significance:
38
*
Lack of interest by the private sector and unwillingness to invest in inner city
areas because of perceived risks;
" Absence of a market demand for inner city space within the range of costs at
which it is possible to develop around stations (in other words, poor inner city
residents find TODs too costly, while there is a lack of interest from the
middle class to live in the inner city);
*
Competitive disadvantage of inner-city areas and difficulty in competing for
development dollars;
*
Preconceived prejudices, such as negative image, perception of low wealth,
low potential and racial tensions;
" Lack of financing, and redlining by financial institutions.
Ten years after this study, Loukaitou-Sideris (2010) reaffirms her assertion that
the presence of a rail system does not necessarily translate to development.
Historically, this was true, as in the case of streetcar suburbs (Warner, Jr., 1962),
but development near transit stations required the right conditions-politically,
financially, and environmentally-to be successful. Comparing the development
path of the Blue and Gold Lines in Los Angeles, Loukaitou-Sideris further
illustrates the importance of these preconditions-or lack of-to the fate of
restructuring of urban forms and spurring economic development in disinvested
communities through transit-oriented development. Unlike the Blue Line, which
still had not catalyzed development in the most depressed communities along its
corridor, the Gold Line spurred a substantial amount of development activity
along its corridor since its opening in 2003. Loukaitou-Sideris attributes this to an
awakening of municipalities to the realty that an enabling policy environment for
TODs was also an integral component.
During the time the Blue Line was
planned and built, she says, municipalities (not only in California, but in general)
were neither prepared nor concerned with planning for development in sites
adjacent to transit stations.
She points to the example of the Gold Line.
According to Loukaitou-Sideris, the city of South Pasadena created a master plan
for the station site and the entire Mission District, awarded additional density
39
entitlements if developers allowed for a mixture of uses, and reduced parking for
developers building near stations. On the fiscal side, the city raised $5 million
from different sources to subsidize one specific project-the Mission Meridian
Project. Additionally, California voters approved a $2.8billon bond for affordable
housing; the bond included $300 million for a TOD implementation program.
The author once again outlined the major groups of challenges-procedural (i.e.,
coordinating among the different parties involved in TOD), economic (i.e., the
rising cost of land and the higher construction cost of mixed use projects), cultural
(i.e., negative attitudes toward higher densities), and physical/environmental
(noise from the trains and difficulty building close to train lines). For these
challenges Loukaitou-Sideris recommends that stakeholders find the right balance
between carrots and sticks, actively recruit pedestrian-oriented, transit-friendly
uses, find a solution to the parking dilemma, and make transit more appealing.
Hess and Lombardi (2004) share similar findings in their literature review on
policy support and barriers to TOD in inner cities. They added one observation
that could be key to understanding the likelihood of success for TOD in
Hess and Lombardi make a lirk between one of the key ingredients
-
Baltimore.
a strong local economy-and the preponderance of TOD case studies on rail
stations in high-growth metropolitan areas. Metropolitan areas in the South and
the West-such as Miami and San Diego-have healthy growth and strong local
economies. The authors point out that it is not a coincidence that development is
not happening in transit stations in depressed communities. They say:
The fact that cities like Cleveland are at least considering TOD and
evaluating its promise indicates that the concept is gaining
attention in medium-sized, slow-growth cities for its potential to
increase transit ridership and revitalize neighborhoods.
Nevertheless, many researchers are cautious that transit
investments in the United States have fallen short of their
objectives where they lack one or more key ingredients, including
supportive demographics, employment patterns, land use patterns
and densities, and pricing incentives and disincentives.
40
In this new generation of TOD, adjacency to transit is not enough. Community
and economic development, particularly in challenged communities, require many
more equally important inputs.
With these inputs, however, the research on
transit impacts on land values say that, for the most part, that gentrification will
happen.
The research also tells us that gentrification-and the resulting
settlement patterns--depend on physical characteristics of station areas, residents'
socioeconomic attributes, and the values residents place on station area
characteristics. Now, it is time to turn our focus to West Baltimore. How could
the theories on TOD-initiated gentrification apply to the communities in the West
Baltimore MARC Station area?
I discuss the possible applications and
interpretations in the following sections.
West Baltimore: Will Gentrification Happen?
The literature review illustrated that Transit-Oriented Development is not a
guarantee for successful urban transformation. Yes, in the past few years TODand the mixed-used pedestrian-friendly urban forms it creates-has gained
popularity as a strategy to catalyze economic development and neighborhood
revitalization strategy, and increase transit ridership. However, the theorists say
that this occurs with the right preconditions, whether they are physical, political,
or financial. This is particularly true for distressed inner-city neighborhoods that
usually lack the local economy, amenities, and basic services that are considered
necessary to lead a quality life in one's community-and to attract others to move
in. The literature says that with the right preconditions, there is a very good
chance that TOD would cause gentrification.
What does this mean for West
Baltimore? Could the plan for the West Baltimore MARC Station Area initiate
the consequences of gentrification:
increased property values, an influx of
affluent residents, and a potential decrease in affordable housing, which could
lead to displacement?
This is not an easy question to answer, as it would require the impossible task of
predicting the future.
However, the empirical observations discussed in the
41
literature and interviews with Baltimore-area organizations, municipal agencies,
developers and one West Baltimore community organization suggest that,
gentrification, while a potential consequence of TOD in West Baltimore, will
likely not happen for a very long time.
gentrification might be slight.
More importantly, the dangers from
The literature abounds with examples of
communities that experienced no improvements to their local economies or built
environments after rail transit was constructed there. Kahn's (2007) research that
showed different gentrification outcomes for "Park and Ride" stations versus
"Walk and Ride" stations is one example.
Kahn's research could actually provide some insight for West Baltimore. As I
discussed earlier in this chapter, Kahn's study showed that communities adjacent
to Park and Ride stations were less likely to gentrify.
He found that home
prices-a proxy for gentrification-did not change in Baltimore and declined in
Boston for areas near Park and Ride stations. Based on this study, we could
extrapolate that homes prices would not increase because the West Baltimore
MARC station is after all, a Park and Ride station. There is a chance that this
could change with the construction proposed Red Line Light Rail, hut the line has
not yet been approved for the Federal New Starts funding. With the Red Line, the
West Baltimore station would become a Walk and Ride station, which Kahn's
study showed increases home prices in adjacent communities.
This finding is
further-a decrease in housing prices in Baltimore-could be further supported
by the fact that gentrification did not happen around Baltimore's existing stations.
A representative of the Maryland Transit Administration commented on this in an
interview:
There is no market for development. Investors are not interested in
the potential there for better or worse, because of ignorance or an
understanding of the market... So, that's kind of like an upper-class
mixed race neighborhood in Mount Washington and a low-income,
I'd say, virtually 100% African-American neighborhood, one on
Light Rail, one on Metro. No difference in either case. So, if you
try to make a conclusion about West Baltimore, one conclusion
42
might be, it ain't gonna make a bit of difference. A difference is
the planning that goes on ahead of time. Development was not
planned for Mt. Washington or planned for Upton or Penn North.
It was not part of the process. We were just looking for the best
place to put it from a ridership standpoint, from an engineering
standpoint. So, maybe that is the difference with West Baltimore,
but only time will tell.
A substantial amount of planning and community engagement has been done for
the West Baltimore MARC Station Area Master Plan and the Red Line Corridor
Study.
This could certainly be one factor that makes the difference for West
Baltimore. This is not insignificant. Loukaitou-Sideris (2010) pointed out that the
Gold Line might have been more successful than the Blue Line-its
predecessor-because of the planning process that was done for former and
ignored for the latter.
Cervero (2003) found that multifamily apartments experienced less price
appreciation when they were located at commuter rail stations versus light rail
stations.
Condos and single-family housing projects accrued higher price
premiums at commuter rail stations.
Cervero explained that this could be
attributed to socioeconomic attributes-individuals and families that were
professional and more affluent had higher tendencies for riding commuter rail.
This research does not say that home prices will necessarily decrease, but it does
imply that the highest and best use of land around the stations would be for single
family and condominium housing. This might be a problem except another study,
by Nelson (1992)
found that housing prices
declined
in high-income
neighborhoods near elevated rail stations. Would the affluent choose to live near
the elevated MARC station where noise and other externalities associated with the
station might be an issue? That is hard to predict, but that is the point. It can go
either way, and right now, it largely suggests no gentrification pressure.
My interviews with developers also offered some insight into the factors that they
would consider when assessing West Baltimore's readiness for development.
43
These interviews were particularly insightful, because it is the developer who
ultimately decides whether it is economically feasible to build in a community.
Municipalities want the developer to see their vision for better communities, but
developers have to buy into the vision and believe that the vision will be
profitable or they will not come to the table. This is not to say that the vision is
not worth pursuing if developers do not see it, but they are a crucial piece of the
puzzle in realizing the vision.
The developers highlighted factors related to the general Baltimore development
context and its implications for West Baltimore, economic factors, and
neighborhood features and amenities. One developer said that development had
to be approached from an urban design, a placemaking, and an economic
perspective. He viewed economics a very important consideration, and thought
that the economics simply did not support development-the mechanism for
gentrification-in West Baltimore at this time and for some time out. He said:
We found that there was not enough job creation and not enough
pent up demand in neighborhoods such as Federal Hill that would
create a business opportunity or value opportunity for a renter or
buyer to move in droves to West Baltimore at this moment... Until
rent in Federal Hill goes from $1,500 to $2,000 and someone
wants to rent at $1,500 why are you building a 200-unit building in
West Baltimore?..Until there is job creation why do you need it?
The developer does not, however, suggest that West Baltimore's current status
precludes it from future Transit-Oriented Development. He believes that it can
happen with preparation-public subsidy and peacemaking. He says:
Just because you put in the infrastructure flower it will not sprout
right away. Put infrastructure in now. Create public investment so
that you can get to phase two. Encourage urban pioneers. And
create some placemaking to get some people to work there. And
realize that the first 'X' projects will be public-private investments.
There will be subsidies provided to set the stage. So when phase
two happens private development will not pass you over.. .If the
library was there... if the hospital was there... create reasons for
44
people to be there.. .Have to get a politician on it. If there is a
school.. .private school that needs to expand.. .why don't a
politician help with expansion by bringing something to the
neighborhood.
Another developer makes similar comments. He says:
In the short time frame what can actually happen? What's going to
drive this? Commercial growth, residential growth, economic
development? What is going to drive the development in this
direction.. .The job generators are more to the east... How do we
envision future of nascent industries? Johns Hopkins University
and University of Maryland Baltimore biotech parks... Look at
growth industry for Baltimore. How can we expand those areas
into West Baltimore and create the residential drive?
He also highlighted the importance of the Red Line to making TOD happen in
West Baltimore. The MARC train, a commuter rail that connect to Washington,
D.C., might provide service for the affluent commuters that Cervero references in
his research, however, the Red Line Light Rail would be useful to a wider
segment of the population and particularly to many of the transit-dependent
residents of West Baltimore. The latter is important because a major benefit of
the Red Line-a benefit often touted by City and State officials-will be its
ability to link West Baltimore residents to employment opportunities in the
region. He explains that there are three distinct decision points where developers
would consider development in West Baltimore:
Knowing the alignment,
knowing available funding, knowing when construction will happen. Until then
he says, developers will probably not look in the direction of West Baltimore.
Based on these developers' comments and comments of others I interviewed, it
seems safe to say that there is very little interest in West Baltimore at this time.
Another developer talked about the physical environment and the lack of
amenities and basic services in West Baltimore. He said:
It is a mental piece. It is easier to convince someone to move next
to the water and it is harder to convince them to move into West
45
Baltimore where it seems that everything that surrounds that train
station is bad.
Well, not quite. There are some neighborhoods in West Baltimore that have less
visible signs of disinvestment. The neighborhood fabric is in tact-most houses
are occupied and in good condition.
However, the wider story in the West
Baltimore station area is one of disinvestment, which manifests in high vacancy
and deteriorated housing conditions.
Related to the physical transformation of West Baltimore, one developer
questioned the Master Plan and the Red Line's impact on the viability of future
development if they were implemented as suggested. He said:
Maintenance Facility... the plan did not say how to make things
work together.. .that might preclude other development.. .how can
other parts of the triangle [the Southwest Industrial Triangle] work.
Envision this side by side... The parking plan is going to put in a
lot of infrastructure that will be hard to move. How can this be
developed with parking that does not preclude future development
of the area?
It became clear from the interviews with the developers-and from the
literature-that significant public investment will be required to make TransitOriented Development gain momentum in West Baltimore. It also became clear
that the investment in rail-the existing MARC commuter rail or the proposed
Red Line light trail-will not be enough. The Red Line, however, carries more
promise of development-and more promise of development that is sensitive to
the existing community.
Cervero's findings suggest that multifamily housing
would be more successful at a light rail station (Red Line) than at a commuter rail
station (MARC) and multifamily housing increases the potential for affordable
housing development.
Developers acknowledged the need for public investment. One developer said that
the dollar home strategy, used successfully in areas such as Otterbein, should be
46
implemented in West Baltimore.
Another suggested that politicians think of
creative ways to attract businesses and organizations to West Baltimore.
For
example, he suggests that a politician influence an agency or a school to move to
West Baltimore, build a library, attract a supermarket-uses that would attract
people.
Another developer talked more deeply about connecting economic
development to the nascent business opportunities in the area. The University of
Maryland Baltimore and Johns Hopkins University are building biotechnology
parks in the City. Both institutions have embarked on ambitious development
projects-the Johns Hopkins University East Baltimore Biopark and the
University of Maryland BioPark. He asks:
How do we envision future of nascent industries? Johns Hopkins
University and UMB biotech parks. looking at growth industry for
Baltimore. How can we expand those areas into West Baltimore
and create the residential drive?
These interviews highlight many issues that are discussed in the theory. These
developers and the theory say TOD in West Baltimore is not impossible, however
barriers to TOD exist and must be effectively addressed to increase chances of
successful physical transformation and economic development. Without attention
to these details the type of development that could cause gentrification-and West
Baltimore needs some gentrification-will not happen enough to change the
current physical and economic conditions. The literature also suggests-and the
interviews confirmed-the importance of the Red Line as an attraction for
development and an influence to the type of development that might occur for
commuter rail versus transit. The Red Line is important for the realization of the
West Baltimore MARC Master Plan.
47
CHAPTER 4: Urban Design and Development
Snapshots of an Urban Landscape
West Baltimore comprises approximately fifty neighborhoods bounded by Martin
Luther King Jr. Boulevard on the east, the City-County line to the west, North
Avenue to the north, and rail lines to the south. This part of Baltimore was
considered the suburbs, and as most suburbs were viewed as an escape from the
chaos of city life. The land, in its undeveloped state had "gentle hills alternated
with small valleys to the present western boundary of Baltimore City."
6 In
1840,
one would have found this landscape with the meandering Gwynns Falls and a
few streams that are now buried. According to West Baltimore Neighborhoods,
this landscape began to change after 1840 as industry and population growth
spurred development. The earliest suburban development occurred between 1850
and 1870, close to the city where roads were established. As with many suburbs,
the advances in transportation induced a spread into areas further away from the
City. West Baltimore Neighborhoods also points out that it is with the trolley car
that the traditional "mixed-use" development gave way to separated uses.
This pattern of development prevails in West Baltimore today. Eighty percent of
land use in West Baltimore is dedicated to medium-density residential
development (Figure 5).
Homes range from three-story rowhomes (originally
built to be single family residences), which are usually closer to the east where the
City originally ended-such as Harlem Park-to smaller single-family detached
homes with setbacks and lawns-such as Hunting Ridge.
The communities of
West Baltimore are organized on street grids, with very few other uses except
residential.
This makes it easy to notice interruptions in the fabric of West
Baltimore.
For example, rails cut through the heart of the community, in a
southwest to northeast direction. Amtrak owns the tracks, but the MTA MARC
service-the focus of the West Baltimore MARC Master Plan-operates on these
48
tracks. These tracks connect with two sets of tracks-one running in a northwest
fashion and the other in a slightly southwest to south direction-to form a ring of
rail
around
the
Rosemont
Homeowners/Tenants,
Evergreen
Lawn,
Bridgeview/Greenlawn and Mosher neighborhoods.
Figure 5. Land use in the Station Area is 80% medium density residential.
0 Medium-density residential EWedium-intensity commercial
Institutional
1kndustrial
MHigh-intensity commercial 'Parks
This ring of rail intersects with the Gwynns Falls Trail, which travels through an
urban greenway park along the Gwynn Falls stream valley (Figure 6). The
greenway includes the Gwynns Falls and Leakin Parks and the trail, making its
way through this park system, and running near the west edge of the Southwest
Industrial Triangle.
The Master Plan suggests that a bike and pedestrian
connection to the Trail through the industrial parcels.
The Gwynns Falls and
Leakin Parks mark a significant change in the West Baltimore fabric. To the east
of this almost north-south park system, the West Baltimore landscape is dense and
gridded in a matter in keeping with a city fabric. West of the parks, the street
structure is less gridded and resembles the street pattern of suburbs, particularly
with the hallmark cul-de-sac.
6 Roderick N. Ryon, West Baltimore Neighborhoods: Sketches of Their History 1840-
1960 (Baltimore: University of Baltimore Maryland Department of Transportation,
49
n EZI;Yt ~tI
X
-W
11 41
I* -
Fiur6.Ifattre..
d
Ir-
=4nb WetBlioe4igo al h iha Nwee
Figure 6. Infrastructure in West Baltimore: Ring of rail, the Highway to Nowhere,
and the Industrial Triangle.
The Industrial Triangle also stands out against the densely gridded West
Baltimore landscape.
Its southern boundary abuts the Amtrak rails and its
northern boundary marked by Franklin Street.
The east most portion of the
Triangle, is very close to the MARC station, separated only by Mulberry Street.
Currently, low-density industrial uses are located here. City trucks-trucks and
other heavy vehicles, building materials, and a recycling drop-off center are some
of the things you will find in the industrial parcels. The land is underutilized
however, and is envisioned to be redeveloped with a dense mix of uses.
Similarly, parcels of land north of the station are underutilized. This land is north
of Edmondson Avenue. If Smallwood Street were extended past the Ice House
and past Edmondson Avenue, it would intersect with these parcels-the site of the
vacant Acme Business Center, which is earmarked for development.
1993) xiii.
50
Lastly, the infamous Highway to Nowhere, is the most recognized aberration in
the West Baltimore landscape (Figure 7).
It does not penetrate the entire
landscape-it is only approximately 1.5 miles long and the length of West
Baltimore, extended past the Highway is approximately 4.65 miles. The Highway
bisects West Baltimore along an east-west axis between Martin Luther King, Jr.
Boulevard and Pulaski Street. The 400-block of the north-south streets such as
Pulaski Street, were removed-and approximately 1,000 homes razed-to make
way for the Highway segment, which was completed in 1979.
Figure 7. Highway to Nowhere.
Source: Google Earth.
The Highway begins east of the West Baltimore MARC Station, at the Social
Security complex, which is located at North Green Street, intersects with Franklin
and Mulberry Street, and looms over Martin Luther King Boulevard, a gateway to
West Baltimore. The juxtaposition of the Highway entrance-and terminus-to
the Social Security Building serves as a reminder that the Highway was intended
to be a conduit for suburban commuters to jobs in the City. The 1.35-mile long
section of highway, which has an approximate width of 330 feet along its length
51
quickly runs below grade, more than one hundred feet below street-level (Figure
The highway's roadways comprise less than half of the width at
8).
approximately 150 feet; the remaining surface comprises expansive stretches of
green space that flanks both sides of the Highway (Figure 9).
Figure 8. The Highway to Nowhere runs approximately 100 feet below grade.
Source: WBMTTI Facebook.
These spaces, bordering the north and south sides of the highway are void of
activity and seem to be unsuccessful attempts to alleviate the injury the thruway
inflicts on the community. The green space continues for most of the length of
the highway, extending westward and stopping at North Fulton Street, and is as
wide as 100 feet on the north side of the Highway and 40 feet on the south side.
Furthermore, the spaces, as they exist today, have some pedestrian pathways,
however, without a visual stimulating streetwall or landmarks, and no furnishing
to entice the pedestrian to sit and socialize, they are uninviting.
52
Figure 9. The Highway to Nowhere and bordering green space.
Source: Google Earth
The north and south edges of the green spaces front West Franklin Street and
West Mulberry Street, respectively, adding another sixty to sixty-five feet of
roadway. This translates to almost 400 feet of road infrastructure dividing the
West Baltimore community.
Standing on West Franklin and West Mulberry
Streets, one is reminded that Route 40 runs where approximately 1,000 homes
once stood before they were razed to make way for the Route. The buildings that
face the Highway are largely residential. Two- and three-story rowhouses-icons
of the Baltimore landscape-line Franklin and Mulberry, and secure-front-row
seats to the Highway to Nowhere. The houses range from good condition to poor
condition and many are deteriorated.
Some of the structures are vacant and
vacant lots interrupt the fabric. Consequently, the pedestrian and the driver on
Franklin and Mulberry Streets traverse a vast landscape of unarticulated space.
The feeling of enclosure and security, and the sense of place in the area fronting
the Highway are lost.
53
Streets that cross the Highway in a north-south direction are at street level,
hovering over the highway below. Most streets traverse Route 40 uninterrupted
and are broad, ranging between fifty and sixty feet. A couple of streets, such as
North Carrollton and North Stricker Streets are interrupted and replaced with
pedestrian pathways across the Highway. The Highway also cuts off North
Payson Street, which has no pedestrian crossing and thus completely prohibits
circulation across its footprint.
The area of Baltimore in which the West Baltimore MARC Station is located is a
landscape made memorable by the divisive Highway to Nowhere. This highway
has indeed made an almost indelible mark in the landscape-so much so that a
description of West Baltimore seems incomplete without mention of this fragment
of infrastructure.
In this section, I explore the fabric of the West Baltimore
MARC Station Area-its existing conditions and the new fabric that would take
shape as a result of the West Baltimore MARC Master Plan.
As it will be
illustrated, the West Baltimore MARC Station Area presents the City of
Baltimore, the development community, and the West Baltimore community with
a tremendous opportunity to transform the Station Area through urban design and
development.
The West Baltimore Station Area Today
The West Baltimore MARC Station is the central focus of the West Baltimore
MARC Station Area Master Plan for Transit-Centered Community Development.
The Station is bare-bones, comprising a platform and two commuter parking lots.
The tracks are elevated and are accessible by steps only (Figure 10, 11). Building
an elevator is recommended in the Plan. The platform, perched above the parking
lots, and offering commuters a view of the historic American Ice House building
to the northeast, the beloved mural on the retention wall at the end of the Highway
to Nowhere to the west, the rowhomes of the Station West (Penrose) community
to the south, the industrial land parcels of the southwest and the Rosemont
community to the northwest of the station (Figures 12, 13). The parking lots
54
stretch eastward from the base of the station. Combined they have capacity for
322 cars.
Figure 10. The bare bones West Baltimore MARC Station.
55
Figures 11, 12. The West Baltimore MARC station-a platform-and a view
of the end of the Highway to Nowhere from the station platform.
56
Figures 13. Views of the Ice House from the West Baltimore MARC Station
Platform.
Directly adjacent to the west side station and within the station area is the
Southwest Industrial Triangle, approximately 45 acres of underutilized land
dedicated to low-density industrial uses. A portion of this site will be used for the
Red Line Maintenance and Yard Shop, a use that requires a significant amount of
space to house the shop and for circulation of the light rail vehicles to and from
the shop. The Plan indicated that the Yard Shop would be located at the northeast
comer of the Triangle, essentially abutting the MARC station. More recent
rendering show the Yard Shop further west in the industrial parcels. This is likely
a better location for the Yard Shop, as it would allow for complementary uses to
be placed closer to the station and a more gradual movement toward a heavier
industrial use such as the Shop. However, this might place the Shop closer to the
neighborhood fabric. Design interventions will be needed to mediate between the
North of the station is the American Ice House, a significant
development opportunity for the Plan, Edmondson Avenue, which the Plan also
two uses.
57
identifies for development and for a direct connection to the Station, and the
industrial parcels where the Acme Business Center is located.
The latter
represents approximately 9.3 acres of land available for development.
These
parcels-the MARC Station parking lots, the Southwest Industrial Triangle, the
American Ice House, the ground-floor retail spaces of Edmondson Avenue, and
the industrial parcels north of Edmondson Avenue and the Acme Business Center
there-represents the major development opportunities for the West Baltimore
MARC Station Area.
The divisive Highway to Nowhere can be viewed as a spine that grows out of the
major development parcels, with the neighborhoods of the station area along its
length. The end of the Highway is located closest to the station, at Pulaski Street.
Here stands the great retention wall, a reminder of the injustice of urban renewal
projects of the 1950 and 1960s, and the mural on the wall, which was a
community's effort to beautify, commemorate, and envision recovery from the
injury of the Highway. Only an estimated .3 miles of the 1.5-mile Highway are in
the station area.
The Neighborhoods
The communities that front the north of the Highway and within the Station Area
include Harlem Park, to the east; Midtown Edmondson, to the west of Harlem
Park; and Rosemont Homeowners/Tenants.
The Bridgeview Greenlawn,
Evergreen Lawn, and Mosher communities lie north of the communities on the
northern of the Highway. To the south of the Highway and in the Station Area
are Franklin Park to the east and Station West (Penrose) to the west of Franklin
Park.
Communities in the Station Area directly south of these neighborhoods
include Boyd Booth and Shipley Hill (Figure 14). The neighborhoods in the
Station Area are diverse in regards to housing typology, tenure, and vacancy.
58
Figure 14. West Baltimore MARC Station Area with neighborhood boundaries.
Source: Baltimore City Departmento fPlanning
The Rosemont Homeowners/Tenants community is one the communities directly
adjacent to the MARC station, lying north and west to the location.
The
community's boundaries are Franklin Street to the south, Arunah Avenue to the
north, Bentalou Street to the east, and Franklintown Road to the west. Almost the
entire community is in the station area. Rosemont's southeast quadrant is located
at the heart of the West Baltimore MARC redevelopment area, putting the
community in the front row to witness the development unfold and for
development impact. The community's east boundary is proximate to the rails,
albeit at the periphery were it inflicts the least impact. The Rosemont area lies to
the west of the MARC station, the first block of the community facing what might
be considered the rear of the MARC station. Past the MARC Station platform,
Franklin Street becomes a six-lane two-way thoroughfare approximately 75 feet
wide. The Rosemont homes line the westbound side of the street and gas stations,
fastfood outlets, and large warehouse-style buildings line the street going
eastbound (Figure 15). This side of the street is the face to another significant site
59
in the Master Plan.
The "Warwick Triangle," the industrial parcels south of
Franklin Street and northwest of the rails presents a tremendous opportunity for
development if the City or private developer is able to assemble the parcels.
Different entities, including the City, own the parcels and there has been no
indication at this time that the owners will sell their land. It is a benefit that the
City owns some of the land, as the City could turn the land over for development.
The industrial lands are not located in the Rosemont community, however their
location across from Rosemont is worth mention, particularly because the
community fronts the industrial parcels.
Figure 15. South boundary of the Rosemont community fronts large
commercial and industrial uses. Source: Google Earth.
Moving north away from the perimeter gives a better understanding of the
neighborhood fabric. Two-story rowhomes prevail; some are attached and others
are semi-detached (Figure 16,17). Some houses also have porches and setbacks
with landscaping, hinting to West Baltimore's past as part of Baltimore County
before annexation to Baltimore City in 1887, when the area was a getaway from
what was considered the chaos of city living. The condition of the homes in
60
Rosemont range from very good to poor, but to the eye, very few seem to be in
poor condition. The neighborhood has very few vacancies-80 vacant buildings
and 9 vacant lots-and has a high owner-to-renter ratio (Figure 18).
Figures 16,17. Neighborhood fabric consists of two-story attached and semidetached houses in the Rosemont community. Source: Google Earth.
61
F\
gtK~~A
ERGREEN
RALWA
AV
dSEMQN1
EOWNERSA4TS
STATION WEST
(Penrose)
Figure 18. Low vacancies in Rosemont Homeowners/Tenants and Evergreen
Lawn communities. Source: Baltimore City Department of Planning.
To the north and east of the Rosemont community, lies the Evergreen Lawn
and portions of the Bridgeview
community,
communities.
Green Lawn and Mosher
Evergreen Lawn, bounded by Calverton Heights Avenue on the
north, Arunah Avenue on the south, Bentalou Street on the east, and Braddish
Avenue on the west, is similar to the Rosemont Homeowner/Tenants community
in that it boasts a low number of vacancies and a high owner-to-renter ratio
(Figure 18). The entire community posted 19 vacant homes and no vacant lots as
of 2009. Block after block, two-story densely packed houses with porches and
modest setbacks line the streets (Figure 19).
attached.
All of the houses appear to be
The neighborhood's stability is apparent.
The Empowerment
Academy, a charter school, is located in Evergreen Lawn, at Braddish Avenue.
62
Figure 19. Homes in the Evergreen Lawn community.
Source: WBMTTI Facebook.
The Mosher community, which is west of Evergreen Lawn, is not completely in
the Station Area.
The community is bounded by Riggs Avenue to the north,
Edmondson Avenue to the south, Braddish Avenue to the east, and Poplar Grove
Street to the West. The southeast section of the community, around Ashburton
Street and Rayner Avenue is in the Station Area. Mosher is the site of the historic
Hebrew Orphan Asylum building, which is now vacant. The Asylum, which was
built in 1876, is not in the Station Area. The neighborhood condition ranges from
fair to poor on a block-by-block basis. Vacancies are significant in Mosher, on
the order of 211 vacant homes and 50 vacant lots (Figure 20).
Homes are
generally two-story and attached in Mosher.
63
~0AVE
27QQS
T*."
2
9
2 00
OLK W YtAVS
S00LK PROSPECT ST
I-z
W0BLK W .AWALE ST
MOSHER
2 0
I VIERGF
LK RAYNER AVE
2$W'*AtjEfAVE
E
....K.Y.E.R
25000
4EOM~tO.~
.A
.
....
......
...
%
R
AVE
SENIQNtTLlDUEiWNERS
Figure 20. High vacancies in the Mosher community.
Source: Baltimore City DepartmentofPlanning.
A portion of the Bridgeview/GreenLawn community is also in the Station Area.
The entire community has boundaries at Presstman Street on the north, Lafayette
Avenue on the south, Monroe Street on the east and Braddish Avenue on the
West. The southern portion of the community that is the Station Area is bounded
by Riggs Avenue on the north, Lafayette on the south, Payson Street on the east
and Braddish Avenue on the west. The entire community has residential land
uses and industrial land uses. This is in contrast to Evergreen Lawn which as
residential uses and institutional uses, which is attributable to the charter school.
The portion of the community in the Station Area is largely residential, but there
is also an industrial use-a large factory. The residential blocks are noticeably
different from the blocks in the adjacent Evergreen Lawn community. The blocks
in Bridgeview/Greenlawn have interior spaces-some used for green space and
others for detached garages (Figures 21,22).
64
Figures 21, 22. Aerial view of Bridgeview/Greenlawn and Evergreen Lawn
block patterns. Source: Google Earth.
65
Similar to Evergreen Lawn, the houses are attached, with porches and setbacks.
Also like Evergreen Lawn, this community has few vacancies-only 24 houses
and 30 lots. A school-the James Mosher Elementary School is located very
close to the Station Area boundary at Mosher Avenue. The industrial building is
located at the eastern edge of community; the Amtrak rails are located to the east
of this building.
A walk through the adjacent community, Midtown Edmondson, which is east of
the station, would reveal the diversity in the structures' conditions and the
conditions of entire blocks (Figure 23, 24). A cursory survey of houses reveals
conditions ranging from good to poor, but again, the houses remain leaving the
fabric and street wall intact.
Figure 23. Block conditions in Midtown Edmondson.
Source: Google Earth.
66
Figure 24. Block conditions in Midtown Edmondson.
Source: Google Earth.
This remains true for the portion of Midtown Edmondson bounded by Pulaski
Street on the west and Monroe Street on the east. At Pulaski, a significant change
in the Midtown Edmondson fabric occurs. Rail lines traverse the western part of
the community in a north-south direction. Amtrak owns the rails; Amtrak and
MARC trains use the rails.
The rails leave nearly nine blocks of Midtown Edmondson sparsely developed,
and juxtapose an industrial use with a residential use. The land around the rails,
owned by the City of Baltimore and the site of the ACME Business Center, is
designated as a significant development opportunity in the West Baltimore
MARC Master Plan.
This agglomeration of land is also significant because
beyond its western boundary are the Rosemont Homeowner/Tenants
Evergreen
Lawn communities,
and
which are very different from Midtown
Edmondson and Harlem Park in terms of vacancy and tenure (Figure 25).
67
BRIDGEVIEW/GREENLAWN
iVERGREEN
MIDTOWN-EDMONDSON
Figure 25. High vacancies in Midtown Edmondson.
Source: Baltimore City Department of Planning.
A second striking feature of Midtown Edmondson is its modest two-story
rowhomes. This feature is in stark contrast with Harlem Park's large three-story
rowhouses. The size of these houses and the fact that many still remain might
present an opportunity for rehabilitation, perhaps in the form of a dollar homes
program.
A couple of the developers interviewed thought that this program
would be a good incentive for new pioneering residents.
In the best-case
scenario, these houses would be renovated to preserve the character of the
community and an architectural style. One interviewee said of the Midtown
Edmondson's development opportunity:
In D.C. with is the Metro, they have taller buildings...so one
wonders if, at least in Midtown Edmondson that there will be
an effort to buy up homes, tear them down and rebuild.
68
Lastly, the southwest quadrant of the Midtown Edmondson neighborhood, in
which the rails are located, is directly adjacent to the existing MARC station and
parking lots. Franklin Street-the Highway ends at Pulaski Street-runs adjacent
and parallel to the Highway, linking the southwest edge of Midtown Edmondson
to the existing MARC station and to the heart of the Plan's study area. The
historic American Ice House, an artificial ice manufacturing plant built in 1911, is
located in Midtown Edmondson on Franklin Street at the intersection of North
Smallwood, which is the main point of access for the existing MARC station
(Figure 26). The Ice House is the focus of many discussions on redevelopment of
the MARC station, as it is viewed as a significant component of the Plan for
redevelopment. The Ice House is approximately 305 feet long and 255 feet wide,
assuming a large portion of the block and cutting off Smallwood at its north end.
It is located in a block bounded by Franklin Street on its front and south edge,
Edmondson Avenue to the north, Pulaski Street to the east, and Bentalou Street to
the west.
Figure 26. The historic American Ice House.
69
Edmondson Avenue is another key component of the Master Plan-the vision
calls for a connection between the MARC station and Edmondson Avenue. The
avenue was once a bustling commercial center for this area of West Baltimore.
Today, remnants of Edmondson Avenue's commercial past are present.
Edmondson Avenue between Pulaski and Payson Streets is lined with traditional
storefronts on the ground level with residential on the upper floors (Figure 27). It
is easy to imagine the quaint butcher shops, bakeries, and pharmacies that might
have lined the street. The area of Edmondson Avenue between Pulaski and
Bentalou Streets and located directly behind the American Ice House has a
mixture of the traditional storefronts and buildings with larger footprints-good
for mechanic shops, movie houses, and furniture warehouses. One of the
comments frequently heard about Edmondson Avenue's future as a revitalized
retail center is that most of the retail spaces are too small for today's larger store
formats. Edmondson Avenue could be a viable location for the types of stores
that can be found on many Main Streets-coffee shops, restaurants, and bakeries,
for example. As development gets underway in the area, an initiative to promote
small and local businesses could be supported by the small footprints on
Edmondson Avenue.
Figure 27. Ground-floor retail on Edmondson Avenue.
Source: Google Earth.
70
Harlem Park, the easternmost community in the north portion of the Station Area
has a fabric marked by structured open space. The community's historic squares
include Lafayette Square, which date to the 1800's, and a number of smaller
squares were added in the 1960s as part of an urban renewal plan. Harlem Park,
the square for which the community is named, is located in the center of the
neighborhood and bounded by North Gilmor Street to the west, North Calhoun
Street to the east, Harlem Avenue to the north, and Edmondson Avenue to the
south. Lafayette Square is also bounded by West Lafayette to the north; other
boundaries include West Lanvale Street to the south, North Carrollton Avenue to
the west and North Arlington Avenue to the east.
Today many of the homes fronting the Square stand vacant or severely
deteriorated. The amenity of a square is not strong enough to deter the rampant
vacancy-on the order of 660 units and 393 lots for Harlem Park-that plagues
many Baltimore communities. I should note that only a small portion-the
southwest area-of Harlem Park is in the station area. Therefore, the vacancy
numbers for the portion of the community in the station area is smaller.
The
stately three-story row homes that were once symbolic of middle-class
achievement and comfort are now sources of blight on the community.
Furthermore, the stark juxtaposition of a passive recreational park with pathways
and landscaping, and an active park with playing fields lends to a demotion of the
park as a central place in the community. Also, a school and recreation center
megacomplex borders the entire north end of the square, creating a physical
barrier to most of the north side of the square.
Lafayette Square's history as a community amenity is still visible today. Four
churches and the same type of rowhouse that lines the streets of Harlem Park
Square anchor Lafayette Square, which is located in the northeast section of the
community. Vacancies along the Lafayette Square are visibly lower than those
along Harlem Park and the houses also seem to be in better condition-perhaps
fair-to-good instead of poor. The Seller's Mansion, a three-story Second Empire
71
brick structure built in 1868 for the then president of the Northern Central
Railway, which is on the National Register for Historic Places, is located at
Lanvale and Arlington facing the park. In the Square, itself is another treasured
artifact of the 1800s-the bronze fountain that was installed shortly after the Civil
War. In all, Lafayette Square commands a little more attention, however, it-and
Harlem Park could be programmed to attract more desirable usage of the Park.
At first glance, one might deduce that the two squares create a regular grid
pattern. In most of the neighborhoods in the station area, which largely has a grid
pattern of streets, smaller, local streets are prevalent throughout the grid pattern.
These smaller streets seem nearly absent from the Harlem Park. An alternative
explanation could be that the demolition of the alley houses to make interior parks
could have removed the local streets that are visible in neighboring communities
in the Station Area.
The smaller squares, which were created when alley houses were demolished to
assemble the land for "inner block" squares have grown into a security concern as
they become the backdrop for dangerous and illegal activities.7 An aerial view of
Harlem Park clearly illustrates the amount of land available for redevelopment
(Figure 28). Furthermore, these interior parks have presented Harlem Park with
the benefit of having land that is organized into large parcels. This might increase
the potential for development interest.
Harlem Park also has a high renter-
occupied percentage-at least 70 percent according to the Plan-that could also
make the neighborhood more vulnerable to problems such as unresponsive and
absentee landlords, speculative real estate purchases, and high tenant turnover.
7 Roderick
N. Ryon, West Baltimore Neighborhoods: Sketches of Their History 18401960 (Baltimore: University of Baltimore Maryland Department of Transportation,
1993) 116.
72
Figure 28. Interrior parks in the Harlem Park community.
Source: Google Earth.
The communities in the southern hemisphere of the Station Area include Station
West (Penrose) and portions of Shipley Hill, Boyd-Booth, and Franklin Square.
Station West is the only community that is entirely in the southern portion of the
Station Area that is entirely in the Station. Its north boundary Mulberry Street;
Lexington Street is to the south, Monroe Street is to the east and Warwick Avenue
is to the west. The north boundary fronts the existing MTA parking lots and the
very end of the Highway to Nowhere-the portion of the highway that rises above
street level as if was transitioning into an elevated highway, but just stops instead.
The retention wall at the end of the Highway bears the mural that has also become
emblematic of this area in West Baltimore. The neighborhood is adjacent to the
West Baltimore MARC station and the Amtrak rails, which also serves as a
boundary.
Station West has a significant number of vacancies-253 vacant
houses and 62 vacant lots (Figure 29).
73
MIDTOWN-EDM
7
STATION WEST
(Penrose)
2KK W Lkm4
ST
BO*TH-BOYD
"SINHIPLEY HILL
CARROLL-SOUTH HILTON
Figure 29. High vacancies in the Station West/Penrose community.
Source: Baltimore City Departmentof Planning.
This presents an extraordinary development opportunity for the neighborhood,
and especially since most of the neighborhood fabric is intact. Most of the vacant
lots are located within two blocks, which again, present a development
opportunity since the parcels are contiguous. Homes in the Station West
(Penrose) neighborhood are largely two-stories tall and attached. Some of the
houses have porches and a setback with some minor landscaping and others are
built to the property line (Figure 30, 31). The use is largely residential with some
institutional and recreational uses-the Lockerman Bundy Elementary School and
the Bentalou Recreation Center. Lockerman Bundy fronts the Highway, at the
corner of Mulberry and Pulaski Streets. The Bentalou Recreation Center is
located at a dead end on Bentalou Street, at Pulaski Street (Figure 32). The
Recreation Center is community asset located within the Station Area, however, it
74
Figure 30. Residential blocks in Station West (Penrose).
Source: WBMT TI Facebook.
is not directly accessible to the neighborhoods in the north hemisphere of the
Station Area. A bed factory that is located on Mulberry Street stretches east on
Mulberry toward Bentalou, cutting off Bentalou Street. The Amtrak rails are
elevated near this Bentalou Street, so a part of the structure might contribute to
the obstacle on Bentalou Street.
75
Figure 31. Residential blocks in Station West (Penrose).
Source: WBMT TI Facebook.
Figure 32. Bentalou Recreation Center in Station West (Penrose).
Source: Google Earth.
Southwest of Station West is the Shipley Hill neighborhood, which is bounded by
Warwick and Calverton Road to the east, the Amtrak rails to the west, Ellicott
76
Drive to the southwest, and Frederick Avenue to the south. The north portion of
the community is formed by the intersection of Calverton Road and the Amtrak
Rails. The entire community is not in the Station Area; this portion is bounded
Hollins Street on the south and Franklintown Road on the west, with the same
north boundaries. Across from the Amtrak rail that comprises the community's
west boundary lies the Southwest Industrial Triangle. Pockets of industry border
the Amtrak Rails in Shipley Hill and so it appears that the industry of the
Southwest Industrial Triangle spills over the Amtrak rails into the community.
The backyards of the homes on Fayette Street is face the industrial parcels in
Shipley Hill. The homes here-in the small area that is in the Station Areashow more signs of deterioration.
condition.
The two-story attached homes are in fair
Some have porches while other do not. Vacancies in the entire
community consist of 301 homes and 152 lots. The community's appearance is
similar to Midtown Edmondson, which is also severely deteriorated and has a
high number of vacancies, and is on the edge of the Amtrak rails. Perhaps there is
a link between the Amtrak rails and the way the edges of the rails and community
intersection are treated. It seems that Shipley Hill is located between industrial
uses-a burden of infrastructure that might have been too significant for the
community to balance with the health of the neighborhood.
The Boyd-Booth community is east of Shipley Hill, sharing the Calverton Road
boundary with the latter community. It is also bounded by Monroe Street to the
east, Lexington Street to the north, and Frederick Avenue to the south. BoydBooth is a small community so most of it lies within the Station Area. There are
many vacancies in this community-162 houses and 84 lots. As with many of the
neighborhoods in the Station Area, the residential fabric is largely intact. This is
an important feature for development of the many vacancies in the Station Area.
Blocks in general are in fair condition. They do not seem severely deteriorated,
but early signs of deterioration are visible. Investment in this community could
probably save it from becoming severely deteriorated.
The condition is better
than that seen in Shipley Hill, however. Bon Secours Hospital, a significant West
77
Baltimore stakeholder, is located in Boyd-Booth, in the block bounded by Payson
Street, Pulaski Street, Baltimore Street, and Fayette Street. This hospital might
provide some stability to the community, which might attribute to the
community's relative better condition when compared to Shipley Hill. An aerial
photo shows that there is a significant amount of vacant land in Franklin Square.
Most of them appear to be used as park space.
One of the spaces is Franklin
Square, which is a formal park that dates back to the 1800s. Row house mansions
were built around this square, just as more elaborate housing was built around
Harlem Square in the Harlem Park community. Three-story rowhouses face the
square. These rowhouse mansions set the standard for the community; three-story
rowhouses dominate the housing stock.8 Many of the homes, however, are now
severely deteriorated. Vacancies accompany the severe deterioration. There are
325 vacant houses and 334 vacant lots in the entire community, however there is a
smaller portion present in the Station Area since a small area of Franklin Square is
in the Station Area.
Franklin Square is the last community in the Station Area. It is located east of
Boyd-Booth and Station West (Penrose).
Its northern boundary is Mulberry
Street, which borders the Highway to Nowhere; Booth Street and Frederick
Avenue make its south boundary, Calhoun Street makes its east boundary, and
Monroe Street makes its west boundary. Only a portion of the community-the
westmost section-is in the Station Area.
8 Roderick
N. Ryon, West Baltimore Neighborhoods: Sketches of Their History 18401960 (Baltimore: University of Baltimore Maryland Department of Transportation,
78
The West Baltimore MARC Master Plan: Recommendations for a Better
Tomorrow
The Concept Diagram for the West Baltimore MARC Master Plan illustrates a
core station center that covers a portion of the industrial land parcels of the
"Warwick Triangle" located southwest of the station, the station and its two
existing adjacent parking lots, and a portion of Edmondson Avenue that is
northeast of the station.
Infill and development, as depicted by the Concept
Diagram, extends in a similar pattern and includes the remaining industrial parcels
in the Warwick Triangle, the station center and existing parking lots, four blocks
of the Highway to Nowhere (east of the station) and a portion the residential
fabric in Harlem Park (Figure 33). The development in the station center will
catalyze reinvestment in communities within the
-mile radius of the station-
also depicted in the Diagram-and retail is strengthened at key corners within
these communities.
The Concept also includes development of Route 40.
79
80
N
preserve he best areas of West Baffimore.
who wanis 1o lIve and wowk here. Transportation
ity - not sever ir.
-engthenand
,e
Improved Streets
Community Serving
Retail
Improved MARC Station/
Red Line Station
Potential Red Line
Alignments
"Highway to
Somewhere"
Wilt 1*4MMAN
AN. -tA
e#,l
90"t
BAOWt"ANt stratify
81
The Master Plan presents a framework for urban design and development
interventions that could move the Concept Diagram toward reality.
The
recommendations are outlined in five sections-four of them grouped by
development site-West Baltimore MARC Station/Ice House, Highway to
Nowhere, Southwest Industrial Area ("Warwick Triangle").
The final section
covers general urban design and development guidelines and recommendations
for housing typology, infill development, block configuration and parks and open
space. Within the four sets of site-specific recommendations, five types of urban
design recommendations are presented: land use, circulation, parking, parks and
open space. A brief description of the urban design provides goals and outcomes
for the urban design recommendations.
The Plan also provides a list of the
communities' suggestions for programming-the suggestions a reminder that
these communities lack the basic services that are usually accessible in a
neighborhood's commercial center or "Main Street." A grocery, a bank, and a dry
cleaner, for example, are some of the services a resident expects to find steps
away from his front door, which West Baltimore has lacked for a very long time.
The communities' vision for development serves as a reminder that the Plan for
Transit-Oriented Development in West Baltimore is as important for its potential
to bring much needed retail and services to the communities in the station area as
it is for maximizing land use, increasing the City's tax base, and increasing transit
ridership when the Red Line is built. One developer I interviewed continuously
spoke about this opportunity. He held the position that housing did not have to be
a component of this TOD, at least not initially.
He believed it was more
imperative to establish the retail component of the TOD because transformation
was unlikely to happen if residents-and new residents-could not buy their
groceries or a cup of coffee within their communities.
Overall, the Plan calls for mixed uses, improved pedestrian connections between
communities and from the communities to the MARC station area, contextsensitive infill development where possible, streetscape improvements, and
managed parking where parking structures are not used.
Some of the urban
82
design recommendations respond to specific conditions at each development site.
For example, it is recommended that the large blocks in the industrial assemblage
of parcels be re-configured with the addition of local streets to improve pedestrian
connectivity.
Context-sensitive
and human-scale
recommended for Edmondson Avenue.
infill
development
is
Recommendations for parks and open
space are also presented for each development site.
Before presenting my analysis
of the urban
design and
development
recommendations in the Plan, I must describe the recommendations in the Plan.
The recommendations are outlined by potential development parcel; in the next
section, I also describe the recommendations by parcel so as to give a picture of
how the parcel might be transformed by the recommended interventions.
The West Baltimore MARC Station and Ice House
The existing MARC station comprises the rails and the platforms. There is no
structure, no shelter, and no seating. Commuters are exposed to the elements as
they wait for the train. Furthermore, the station stands alone, overlooking two
surface parking lots to the east and the American Ice House to the north. No retail
exists at the location; a commuter cannot grab a cup of coffee or newspaper, or
drop off her laundry to the drycleaner in the morning so she can pick it up when
she returns in the evening. From the resident's perspective, there is nothing that
draws him to the MARC station or the vacant Ice House. It is said that most
MARC riders do not live in the communities adjacent to the station.
This
resonates in residents' complaints about the commuters who park in front of their
homes. The recommendation for the MARC Station and Ice House address some
of these issues (Figure 34).
83
0
IW "1XAO Mfr
Figure 34. Recommendations for Station and Ice House in Plan.
Source: West Baltimore MARC Station Area Master Plan.
Land Use
The Plan proposes a major shift in the use of these sites.
The communities'
recommendations for basic retail and services such as dry cleaners, banks, and
coffee shops are included in the Plan. The existing transportation-oriented uses of
the station and the existing parking lots would transform into uses that activate the
station area. The urban design recommendations in the Plan would foster this
transformation.
84
Circulation
The Plan's overall design direction for circulation aims to improve pedestrian
connections via street crossing improvements, traffic calming, the incorporation
of bike facilities, and the improvement of bus transit facilities such as shelters.
The recommendations for circulation improvements for the MARC station and Ice
House also contain elements of these issues, addressing the station's existing
challenges and shortfalls. The existing station is surrounded by speeding trafficcars traveling west on Franklin Street and east on Mulberry Street travel with
great speed making pedestrian access from the communities unsafe and commuter
access just as perilous. One community member commented that cars turning left
off of Franklin Street to enter the parking lots barely have time to complete the
turn because the trailing cars move so quickly. Also the existing station does not
have an elevator, which presents a challenge for handicapped commuters and
commuters who can access the platforms must contend with no shelter from the
weather conditions, shortened platforms, which prevent access to all train cars,
and an unattractive environment.
A pedestrian connection to Edmondson Avenue is a recurring theme in the Plan.
Edmondson Avenue was historically West Baltimore's commercial center and
today has enough retail space-in small storefront footprints-to house the
services that are typically found in neighborhood commercial districts. The stores
on Edmondson Avenue and the new mixed-use development at the West
Baltimore MARC Station starts to form a place for West Baltimore residents and
West Baltimore MARC commuters-a community activity center and a
significant transit connection.
The Plan addresses the existing circulation conditions with recommendations for
an elevator, street crossing improvements that included signage and crosswalk
striping, traffic calming on Franklin and Mulberry Streets, and platform
improvements including signage, lighting, seating and weather protection.
85
Furthermore, the Plan calls for the incorporation of bicycle facilities-bike lanes
and parking-bus transit improvements, and visual and functional integration of
the MARC station with the future Red Line. This last recommendation is very
important to the creation of a transit hub when the Red Line is built (Figure 35)
PEDESTRIAN IMPROVEMENTS AT
MARC STATION- SKETCH
0
Elevator with ADA access and direct connection to future Red Line.
Pedestrian plaza with connection to platform and community open space.
Improve station platform with shelters and seating.
Direct pedestrian connection to Edmondson Avenue.
Potential Red Line location.
0
Ice House redevelopment with fogade preserved.
"'P
Figure 35. Pedestrian Improvements at the MARC Station.
Source: West Baltimore MARC Station Area Master Plan.
86
Parking
The two existing parking lots have a capacity for roughly 320 cars; however, this
is not enough parking for the 600 West Baltimore MARC daily riders. Many of
them park in the adjacent communities angering residents about who contend with
the additional pedestrian activity through their communities.
The Plan recommends that short- and long-term parking needs be addressed
through limited expansion/extension of existing lots. It states that these expanded
lots would eventually be replaced with parking garages.
The former
recommendation is already underway. The Maryland Transit Administration will
begin demolition of the Highway to Nowhere retention wall in the winter of 2010
in order to temporarily expand parking by two lots or approximately 400 spaces.
This move would utilize the area currently monopolized by the Highway and
would enable the re-adjoining of North Payson Street.
Renderings depicting
future development depict these parking lots as ground floor retail with parking
structures above. The Plan also recommends aesthetic improvements-such as
decorative
paving,
landscaping,
signing
and
functional
lighting-and
improvements such as signage, lighting, seating and weather protection.
Parks and Open Space
The station is reconceived as a gathering place in the Plan.
A plaza is
recommended to support this use and to serve a number of functions including
gateway for West Baltimore, waiting areas for riders, community recreational
asset and/or stormwater management.
Highway to Somewhere
The Highway to Nowhere currently a major source of disconnect in the station
area.
The Plan envisions the one-block wide and 1.35-mile long gash as an
opportunity for infill development. This area might actually be considered one
for new development, as opposed to infill development as the landscape here is
unencumbered by the presence of existing structures. Consideration would likely,
87
and should be given to the context of the residential fabric that fronts the length of
the north and south sides of the Highway.
Route 40 should complement this
context as much as possible, but it could also present an opportunity for a mix of
uses that complement the existing land uses that abut the Highway. The Highway
redevelopment has the longest time-horizon-almost 30-plus years-of all the
key development sites in the Plan.
The cost to do any redevelopment in the
"ditch" would be exorbitant, so a long-term plan is requisite.
The Plan and
subsequent updates to the vision, which is more near-term, for the Highway focus
on the section of highway between Pulaski Street and Monroe Street, only .15
miles of the 1.35-mile roadway. Nevertheless, recommendations for urban design
and development in the Highway to Nowhere prepares Route 40 to become the
Highway to Somewhere. The "Urban Design" recommendations provided in this
section emphasize breaking the Highway down to smaller blocks to achieve a
larger redevelopment vision.
Land Use
The Plan uses recommendations similar to those for the MARC Station/Ice House
site. They recommend new land uses such as office, retail, and housing and they
named specific project the community would want. These included a grocery
store, library, community center, retail, and housing.
Circulation
The recommendations for the Highway to Nowhere aim to mitigate the division
and disconnect that the Highway imposes on the surrounding communities. One
recommendation is to extend Payston Street across the Highway, reconnecting the
neighborhoods north and south of the right-of-way. This recommendation will
soon materialize as the Maryland Transit Administration moves forward with a
parking expansion program that will involve demolishing the retention wall at the
west end of the highway and reconnecting Payson Street. These moves will result
in the creation of two new lots, the new Payson Street marking the boundary of
the two new lots. Similar to recommendations for the MARC Station, those for
88
the Highway include improvements to street crossings with interventions such as
signage and crosswalk striping and street calming measures for Franklin and
Mulberry Streets.
Improved street lighting is also recommended here-for
Monroe and Fulton Streets-and bicycle facilities are also recommended.
Parking
The parking recommendations for each of the four development zones conform.
Recommendations comprise best management practices such as placement of
parking behind, above or to the side of buildings, sharing surface parking
facilities, and softening, screening and/or providing active uses along the ground
floor.
One important parking consideration mentioned in the Plan is parking
ratios. It is recommended that ratios be made as low as one dwelling unit or
lower.
Parks and Open Space
Detailed recommendations on parks and opens space are not provided. The Plan
only suggests that locations for parks and open spaces should be identified for
recreational use and aesthetic enhancement.
A
rendering
of the
Highway
to
Somewhere
provides
an
additional
recommendation that should be considered given the size of the Highway and its
amenability to large-scale developments (Figure 36). It calls for the "transitional
scale of new buildings," stating that new buildings should match or scale down to
match the scale and quality of the existing neighborhoods.
89
0
Figure 36. Development on "caps" over the Highway to Nowhere.
Source: West Baltimore MARC Station Area Master Plan.
Southwest Industrial Area ("Warwick Triangle")
After the Highway to Nowhere, the Southwest Industrial Area is the largest
parcel-or group of parcels-that potentially could be redeveloped as part of the
West Baltimore MARC Station TOD. The area, occupied by low-density
industrial uses, is underutilized.
The Plan's vision for redevelopment and
presents an opportunity for high-density mixed-use development. This would
require making the area pedestrian-oriented, which would be achieved by creating
an internal street network and creating a link to the Gwynns Falls Trail (Figure
37).
90
F
Figure 37. Development at the Soouthwest Industrial Triangle.
Source: West Baltimore MARC Station Area MasterPlan.
The industrial character of the Warwick Triangle would not be completely lost,
however. The Red Line Maintenance Facility, a significant piece of infrastructure,
where the light rail vehicles are maintained and repaired will be located in the
Triangle. These structures are usually large, having some urban design and
development implications. For examples, due the nature of the use and their size,
these facilities could be a deterrent to other development. Developers might find
the facilities incompatible with pedestrian uses and might build their development
projects elsewhere. Also, depending on its placement in the Southwest Triangle,
91
the facility could potentially adversely impact the new street network and access
to the Gwynns Falls Trail. The bulk of these facilities is addressed in the urban
design recommendations.
The Plan recommends that higher density taller
buildings be located closest to the MARC station and that height and density step
down away from the station to match the scale of the adjacent neighborhoods.
Additional urban design recommendations were outlined.
The Red Line maintenance facility also demonstrates another aspect of TOD in
West Baltimore, and the Warwick Triangle, specifically.
The Red Line
maintenance facility is expected to generate jobs to which West Baltimore
residents would have access.
This type of connection between land use and
community needs is a component of the land use recommendations for this set of
development parcels.
More design and development recommendations are
described below.
Land Use
In the previous section I mentioned that the land use in the Southwest Industrial
Triangle is largely industrial, but is envisioned in the Plan as a future mixed-use
site that also provide jobs to the community.
Circulation
Recommendations on street calming, improved street striping and signage, and
the incorporation of bicycle facilities. Similar to Route 40 the circulation
recommendations for the Warwick Triangle, include the breakdown of the
existing large blocks to smaller units.
This would improve pedestrian
connectivity, theme that also threads through the recommendations.
The
recommendation to include a Roundabout on Franklin Street and Franklintown
Road is a new recommendation, not seen in other sections of the Plan.
92
Residential Neighborhoods
Neighborhood conditions vary within the Station Area. Some have low vacancies
and have housing stock that is in good condition, while others suffer from severe
deterioration coupled with high vacancies. The Plan calls for sensitive renovation
of vacant housing so that community character is preserved and says that the
neighborhoods' character will be enhanced by aesthetic, recreational and personal
safety improvements.
Land Use
The Plan recommends that the uses remain largely residential, but with a more
diversified housing typology. Duplexes, live/work spaces, and lofts are some of
the Plan's recommendations.
It also recommends complementary uses such as
churches, schools, day care-uses that the community recommended.
Circulation
The recommendations for circulation are similar to the recommendations made
for the other development areas covered in the Plan. Streetscape improvement,
traffic calming measures, pedestrian crossing improvements, and bicycle facilities
are recommended.
Parking
Here too, the recommendations are in line with those made for the other
development areas covered in the Plan.
Best management practices such as
placing parking behind or to the side of buildings, sharing surface parking, and
the promotion of on-street parking are recommended for the residential
neighborhoods.
93
Analysis of the Plan Recommendations
The West Baltimore MARC Station Area Master Plan is designed to be a flexible
framework for redevelopment.
It will take thirty to forty years to realize the
vision in the Plan making it imperative that the Plan can provide guidance in most
market conditions. The urban design and development recommendations in the
Plan are reasonable. For example, the best management practices for parkingputting parking behind, above, or to the side of buildings; sharing surface parking;
etc.-supports the creation of a visually pleasing environment. This ensures that
parking does not utilize valuable street frontage, breaking the street wall and
interrupting pedestrian connections.
Also, the recommendations for improved
pedestrian crossings, lighting, and for bicycle facilities, are steps toward
enhancing the Station Area built environment. However, what seems absent is an
aggressive approach for dealing with infrastructure in a once vibrant community
where infrastructure could be linked to its decline.
A more aggressive approach would address the challenges that the West
Baltimore Station Area faces because of depressed market conditions, developers'
perception of West Baltimore's marketability, the absence of the Red Line, and
extreme physical conditions such as the burden of infrastructure (both existing
and proposed). One affordable housing developer said:
MTA's
plan
and
neighborhood's
plan
come across
disconnected...don't read as they are contemplated together. How
can this happen together in a way that does not preclude the
expansion. What is first? The chicken or egg? What are things that
are going to have to happen before that will make the area visible
and attractive by developers?
The latter challenge-the burden of infrastructure is significant in the West
Baltimore Station Area. The nearly 1.5-mile Highway to Nowhere has scarred the
community for decades, causing the decline of what was once a community of
largely middle-class African-Americans.
The rail on which the MARC and
Amtrak trains operate also cuts through the community. It also leaves its mark, an
94
overpass that is a visual obstacle and leaves the area underneath it dark and
possibly unsafe at certain times of the day. The Plan, which presents a new vision
for the Station Area, and which should be aggressively pursued and implemented,
does not address the Station Area's main problem, and may in fact add to it. The
redevelopment of the station will include parking structures, which according to
the plan and more recent renderings could be sited on the prime Station Area
blocks bounded by Franklin, Mulberry, Smallwood, and Monroe Streets. Even
with retail at the ground level-if retail is included in the build out-these
structures could continue the affect of the Highway to Nowhere.
The Station
Area also has the large assemblage of industrial parcels, or the Southwest
Industrial Triangle.
This is certainly a development opportunity, but future
development will include the Red Line maintenance and yard shop, which is a
major infrastructure to add in a development that will largely have pedestrianfriendly uses such as retail, office, and commercial space. That is if it is not taken
into consideration the fact that some developers might not want projects close to a
maintenance and yard shop and divisive highway.
Another significant challenge for the West Baltimore MARC Station Area Master
Plan is the absence of the Red Line. The Red Line Transit Project must happen to
garner the most successful development at the West Baltimore MARC Station.
Success in this instance would be defined not only by reinvestment and
development that results in new housing, renovated housing retail, and office
space, or the achievement of economic diversity, but also development that
supports the existing residents' needs.
Referring back to the literature review, I
highlight Kahn's study that showed little to no increase in the properties built
around Park and Ride stations.
Cervero, on the other hand found that
condominiums had a price premium when located proximate to commuter rail,
unlike rental apartments, for which there was a disamenity at commuter rail
stations. Rental apartments exhibited a price premium at light rail stations, while
condominiums exhibited a disamenity. Using Kahn's and Cervero's findings, we
can probably deduce that housing-such as condominiums-and perhaps retail
95
that is targeted at affluent residents would be strongly considered for the West
Baltimore MARC Station Area Master Plan if developers wanted to achieve the
highest level of profitability. We can also deduce that apartments-or rentalswould be more profitable at light rail stations. This might mean that a light rail
station brings with it, the best chance of affordable housing-and that the Red
Line station is necessary to bring about the Transit-Centered Community
Development that is envisioned in the West Baltimore MARC Station Area
Master Plan.
A third challenge for the Station Area, is not an infrastructural challenge. It is the
challenge of vacancies.
The Station Area has approximately 1,600 vacant
housing and lots. In the communities where vacancies are high-communities
such as Midtown Edmondson-there is severe blight. These communities might
experience the greatest difficulty in attracting new residents.
Some take-aways from my analysis are:
The Plan should create stronger connections to community assets.
The
illustration of pedestrian path to Edmondson Avenue could be tenuous if
developed as illustrated in the Plan because the path is in an area that is peripheral
to the Station Area, which could result in underutilization.
Also, there is an
opportunity to connect to the Bentalou Recreation Center, which is now a
community asset with little connection to neighborhoods north of the MARC
Station.
Parking structures on Franklin and Mulberry Streets should be designed for
minimal impact to street frontage. Franklin and Mulberry Streets are major
access points to the station area and border residences-existing and potential.
Parking structures might challenge the development potential in ways similar to
the how the Highway to Nowhere did in the 1970s. The impermeability of the
structure then and its visual unattractiveness ultimately led to disinvestment in the
area.
96
The Highway to Nowhere must be addressed. The Plan is vague about the
Highway to Nowhere because addressing the Highway would take time, on the
order of decades. It will remain a blight on the community and will adversely
impact development potential until a plan for development or aggressive
mitigation is developed.
The Plan's recommendation for job-creation begs the question what are the
long-term economic benefits to residents. It is unclear that beyond construction
who are natural partners for job creation. A more sustainable plan would focus on
both the demand side to target specific industries and sectors to come into the area
and the supply side to identify training opportunities and partnerships to incentive
occupancy in the redevelopment. This much needed piece will ensure the longterm viability of the development.
97
CHAPTER 5: Interviews
Baltimore Talks: Community Stakeholders Speak on TOD in West Baltimore
One of the most poignant findings from the more than thirty interviews conducted
was the perception that past transit projects in Baltimore did not spur any
changes-good or bad-in adjacent communities. In the 1990s when the Light
Rail, a 30-mile north-south surface line, and the 1980s when the Metro, a 15.2mile, a northwest-running underground line, were constructed, transit within itself
was seen as a benefit.
Transit-Oriented Development at these sites was not a
consideration when these lines were built.
Interviews with real estate developers revealed that they viewed West Baltimore
MARC Station Area as a very challenging site for development.
They saw a
combination of market, physical, and planning and policy barriers to the success
of the West Baltimore MARC TOD. This is not to say that they did not see the
potential in the project, but they acknowledged that it would need significant
inputs, particularly public investment, to jumpstart private development interest. I
explain these developer interviews in further detail in Chapter Three.
Interviews with community organizations and residents were unexpectedly the
most difficult interviews to secure. In the end, efforts to reach out to community
organizations were largely unsuccessful.
One resident served as a significant
source of information. It was particularly helpful to speak with her because she is
also an active member in the newly formed West Baltimore MARC
Transportation I TOD Inc. group, which was organized to advocate on issues
related to the redevelopment of the West Baltimore MARC Station Area through
Transit-Oriented Development.
She spoke with me the in the capacity of a
resident, and yet although only one perspective, provided me with some insight
into how the community is organizing to be an influence in the redevelopment of
the Station Area.
98
This issue-the inability to secure interviews with community leaders-deserves
some discussion and will be addressed briefly in this thesis.
difficult to get interviews with community leaders?
Was it distrust of a perceived outsider?
Why was it so
Was it planning fatigue?
This is a central planning issue,
particularly in disinvested communities, and could be the topic of an entire
separate thesis.
From these interviews, four major themes emerged:
" The West Baltimore Station Area needs basic retail and services.
" Gentrification is not and immediate pressure for West Baltimore.
*
West Baltimore is not an attractive development opportunity.
*
Public investment is integral to successful development in West
Baltimore.
*
Trust is an important factor in ability to engage the communities.
The interviews revealed the challenges that the West Baltimore MARC Station
Area faces in realizing the vision of the Plan.
The West Baltimore Station Area Needs Basic Retail and Services
The communities in the West Baltimore Station Area live without basic
conveniences such as a grocery store, a dry cleaner, or a place to get a cup of
coffee.
The need for these services are illustrated by the communities'
recommendations for development that are listed in the urban design and
development recommendations in the Plan.
This need-an urgent need-also
came out in the interviews:
This area has very few basic services...the residents had an
opportunity to talk about what some of their hopes and needs are.
Someone said "I would like to see the windows fixed," "I would
like a place to exercise," "I would like a place to buy a cup of
coffee," "I would like a place to buy healthy food." They weren't
huge, unrealistic desires. They were basic amenities that we all
expect to have for quality of life.
99
[There is] a brigade of strollers in Fed Hill. They want to push
their strollers to that coffee shop. There is nothing in West
Baltimore.
This neighborhood does not even have a grocery store. Some
people will want transportation, but some people want parks, etc.
It is clear that the first wave of development in the West Baltimore Station Area
must address these basic needs-for the existing residents and to attract new
residents.
It is requisite before a successful TOD in West Baltimore can be
realized.
Gentrification Is Not An Immediate Pressure for the West Baltimore MARC
Station Area
The first principle listed in the Plans Housing Principles is to "Avoid
Displacement."
This second prices is "Maintain Housing Affordability."
Gentrification was and is certainly a concern for the communities in the West
Baltimore MARC Station Area, however, there is also the realization that West
Baltimore needs more economic diversity. This seemed to outweigh any fears of
gentrification. One interviewee said:
I can't see them put all that money into a redevelopment in the
middle of nowhere because... it is difficult, I think, to market the
area. Now there are some smart people that know that they can
move into the neighborhood and walk to the train station and they
can get more value in their money for housing and can get a
housing and get a big three-story house for nothing. But you have
to consider the racial make up of the neighborhood and the high
crime. A lot of people won't look at a neighborhood that is not on
the edge of a gentrified neighborhood.
The West Baltimore MARC Station Area is not on the edge of a gentrified
neighborhood. Another interview commented:
100
Gentrification, does feel like it is long off, but must pay attention
to those issues early on.
The original questions of my research, which were focused on the extent of
gentrification that would occur in the Station Area due to the Plan for TOD, were
questioned for their relevance at this time. One person who took me on a tour of
West Baltimore near the Station Area suggested that I change my thesis topic to
one that focused on strategies for getting investment into West Baltimore because
there is little investment interest, therefore mitigating gentrification pressures.
West Baltimore Is Not An Attractive Development Opportunity
Interviews with Baltimore-area real estate developers-in the market-rate and
affordable housing markets revealed that the developers would be cautious if not
reluctant to build in West Baltimore.
They cited many reasons for their
skepticism including, lack of growth generators-i.e. jobs, lack of pent-up
demand, competing desirable locations elsewhere in Baltimore, uncertainty about
the Red Line Light Rail-it has not yet received Federal Transportation
Administration approval. One real estate developer commented:
A developer's timeframe is much shorter ... three to five years.
The Red Line will really drive what might happen in this location.
There are three distinct decision points: Knowing what the
alignment is, when I know funding is there, when it is happening.
Until then probably will not look at this direction. Part of
that.. .have to look at other competing investments...other
possibilities. West side still has room for more commercial office
and residential development. Would be competing location.
Howard and Eutaw are other competing locations where interest
would go before West Baltimore.
Similarly, another developer said:
What we found is there wasn't enough job creation. There wasn't
enough pent up demand in the near neighborhoods like Federal
Hill.. .that would justify or create a business opportunity or value
opportunity for a renter buyer, etc to move in droves to West
Baltimore at this moment... Until rent in Federal Hill goes from
101
$1,500 to $2,000 and someone wants to rent at $1,500 why are you
building a 200-unit building in West Baltimore?
It seems that developers will sit on the sidelines until they get more queues that
West Baltimore could be a profitable development opportunity.
Public Investment Is Integral to Successful Development in West Baltimore
It became clear that from the interviews that public investment would be integral
to jumpstarting development in the West Baltimore Station Area.
Private
developers would not see the Station Area as a promising opportunity on its own.
The public investment that developers envisioned ranged from the incentives that
would motivate young professionals to buy and renovate the vacant houses to
locating public agencies or public services in the Station Area. Public investment
was key to setting the foundation for private development-from developers or
potential residents. Some of the interviews illustrate this sentiment:
The City is going to have to invest a lot in that area.. .retail or
whatever they are going to do that is going to be an anchor project
to make it attractive to people.. .You would think that after Fed Hill
was so successful with the dollar homes.. .the City gave a dollar
properties and people came back. In that situation it would be
successful.
That is the natural first step in any regeneration process that needs
to be coupled with significant public investment not only in
infrastructure, but with placemaking and understanding that the will
be setting the ground rules as well as the infrastructure and setting
so that private investment can come.
And create some placemaking to get some people to work there.
And realize that the first 'x' projects will be public-private
investments. There will be subsidies provided to set the stage. So
when phase two happens private development will not pass you
over.
The need for public investment in some comments where implicit:
How do we envision future of nascent industries? Johns Hopkins
University and University of Maryland biotech parks. Looking at
102
growth industry for Baltimore. How can we expand those areas
into West Baltimore and create the residential drive?
Trust is an important factor in ability to engage the communities
Entering into this research, I anticipated securing many interviews from
community association representatives and residents in the Station Area. It turned
out that interviews from these stakeholders were the hardest to secure.
My
request for interviews went unanswered and when I did make contact with
someone, I quickly hit a wall shortly after. The enthusiasm for talking about the
project for academic research was absent. In the end, one community resident,
who is active in the communities' discussions on TOD in West Baltimore, talked
to me and became my source for the community perspective.
Why was there such little interest? The importance of building trust with West
Baltimore residents was a theme that came out of the interviews. Many residents
in the Station Area could remember the debacle of the Highway to Nowhere and
the disinvestment that occurred in the communities afterward. They probably also
remembered the subsequent
Initiatives that were started and stopped without completion. Persons who were
not from their communities perpetrated these acts, probably making the
communities leery of anyone from the outside who wanted to talk about an
infrastructure or development project. The agencies and consultants that worked
with the communities for the West Baltimore and Red Line planning processes
also had to build trust with the communities in the Station Area. A representative
of one community development organization said:
There has been a lot of trust building along the Red Line Corridor.
These insights show that I probably needed more time to build a rapport with
community residents to speak with them about a topic that is so linked to past
transgressions such as the Highway to Nowhere. This also underscores the need
103
to make the West Baltimore MARC Station Area Master Plan benefit the
communities in the Station Area.
I use the insights gained from the interviews and my analysis of the urban design
and development recommendations as the basis for my recommendations in
Chapter Six.
104
CHAPTER 6: Recommendations
Development Under the Burden of Infrastructure
The recommendations that I make in this chapter are based on my analysis of the
urban design recommendations in the Plan and the insights gained from thirtyplus interviews. They include:
1. Create stronger connections to existing community assets near the station
The Plan talks about connecting to Edmondson Avenue, which was the historic
neighborhood commercial center for the Station Area. The connection, via the
peripheral station is minimal and seems to hold the risk of being underutilizedand therefore dead space-in reality. The connection does not make Edmondson
Avenue as significant as the Plan wants to make it. I recently had the opportunity
to go to the local community enter which serves as the community meeting place.
Although many businesses are long gone and vacant storefronts are left behind,
residents are still drawn to Edmondson Avenue-to the Center, for example. Men
congregated crates on the sidewalk. Edmondson Avenue is still alive and the Plan
seems to miss that. A stronger connection could be made via North Smallwood
Street, which is currently cut off by the behemoth American Ice House on the
North end of the street. The beloved 99-year old structure boasts 305 feet of
street frontage. Following the Smallwood Street axis, one could envision a path
through the Ice House to Edmondson Avenue. Perhaps the Ice House could be
segmented to allow for a plaza, atrium or path that makes a more significant
connection to Edmondson Avenue.
Another community asset that is along this north-south axis, on which
Edmondson Avenue and the West Baltimore MARC Station are linked, is the
Bentalou Recreation Center. Although located in the Station Area, the Center,
which is located south of the Station is not easily accessible from the communities
north of Station. The Recreation Center provides many activities and services for
children, which is significant given the Station Area's high percentage of children
105
compared to other Baltimore communities. Furthermore, one of the public
services that the communities request in the plan-a recreational facility-is
already in the Station Area, but with little direct access.
An operational bed
warehouse currently cuts off Bentalou Street, which runs parallel to the Center. It
would be worth investigating whether the entire building is used, as there might
be an opportunity to remove a portion of the building to access Bentalou Street.
These locations-the Bentalou Recreation Center, the West Baltimore MARC
Station, the American Ice House, and Edmondson Avenue, could be strategically
linked so as to lay the foundation for making the station a central location in the
community.
2. Minimize parking structures on prime Station-Area blocks
The Plan's recommendations for parking best management practices aim to
minimize the impact of parking as development unfolds. However, the Plan and
recent rendering suggest parking structures with ground-floor retail on Franklin
and Mulberry Streets between Pulaski and Monroe Streets.
These blocks are
prime real estate for the Station Area and the streets are major access routes to the
Station. Yet, they will be lined with behemoth cement structures. Look at else
where in Baltimore where streets, which should be prime real estate are lined with
parking structure, and you will see little pedestrian activity, even if there is
ground floor retail. Beauty and security encourages pedestrian activity. A place
is more than what is on the ground floor.
The feeling, the experience, the
attraction factors are vertical along the height of a building as well as horizontal,
along frontage to the street.
Pedestrian activity and the overall energy-pull
factors-of these areas are low on the scale, while The downtown areas around
Charles and Lombard Streets where parking structures dominate, are dead zones.
To the contrary, Harbor East, where parking structures are in a sandwich
structure-ground-floor retail, a couple of stories of parking-and residential or
office space on top is visually stimulating and gets more pedestrian activity.
106
I recommend that a similar structure be considered or that parking structures be
"lined" with buildings.
The latter might require more engineering and might
consequently be more expensive.
The former solution might demand taller
buildings, which could be out of context with the three-story rowhomes that line
Franklin and Mulberry Streets. These are considerations
that should be
deliberated carefully, with the intent to go beyond parking structures with groundfloor retail. Also, the Southwest Industrial Triangle could be designated for well
designed and integrated parking structures, as the area is larger and has more
space to build around parking structure, ultimately concealing them.
Parking
structures with ground-floor retail will only add to the West Baltimore MARC
Station Area burden of infrastructure. The burden of infrastructure will challenge
the success of TOD in the Station Area.
3. Link the Plan with iobs through targeted economic development initiatives
The Plan recognizes the opportunity to create jobs in the Station Area as part of a
TOD strategy, however, the developers I interviewed echoed the same sentiment:
there were other places in Baltimore that would be considered first. Essentially,
why would business-like Baltimore residents-be attracted to West Baltimore?
The Plan was made vague because of the timeframe it would take to execute and
the need to keep it flexible to guide development under varied circumstances.
This makes sense, however, the circumstances of the West Baltimore MARC
Station Area requires more concrete plans for attracting businesses (and residents)
into an area that would seem undesirable to most.
I recommend that the West Baltimore's proximity to the University of Maryland
and location within a city whose top industries include the life sciences, be used
as a driver for attracting biotechnology businesses particularly to the Southwest
Industrial Triangle. This might have been a recommendation in the Plan, however
I recommend that this is addressed aggressively, with the creation of an initiative
similar to the Emerging Technology Center, a non-profit business incubator
programs geared toward early-stage technology-based companies in Baltimore
107
City.
The Baltimore Development Corporation is Baltimore City's economic
development agency. One component of such an initiative would be to connect
residents in West Baltimore, with training and/or job placement opportunities to
give them entry into the new industries of the twenty-first century.
In one interview, it was revealed that West Baltimore has a nascent arts district.
Cultivating this arts district through a dedicated building for the arts-a building
where performances, galleries, and other activity- and revenue-generating uses
can be located-could be another area for economic development. Once again,
this type of development could be tied back to the community, via classes for
children, arts apprenticeships, and jobs.
An added benefit of the arts district is
that it would provide a second layer of pedestrian activity. Whereas development
geared toward the life sciences would introduce daytime uses to the community,
the arts district would likely bring nighttime uses, creating a longer interval of
pedestrian activity and eyes on the street.
Lastly, economic development initiative should also comprise basic services. The
Station Area needs a grocery store, and other services such as a dry cleaner, a
hardware store, and other services that residents rely on and expect to have in
their communities. These services should be among the first that are attracted into
the Station Area. The existing communities need them now and should not have
to wait until new residents arrive.
4. Initiate a detailed study of the Highway to Nowhere and cost scenarios
for eliminating, partially eliminating, or developing over the highway
The Highway to Nowhere has to be addressed as a separate issue and not part and
parcel of a plan. The Highway is linked to the decline in the West Baltimore
MARC Station Area; therefore, no plan to redevelop the area will completely
reverse the decline without a real solution to this lingering problem.
The
Highway challenges the development potential of the area. Plainly and simply,
108
developers will overlook the area for the type of quality development that it needs
because of the Highway.
Discussions on filling in the ditch are quickly met with rebuttal because it would
be too expensive to execute and might be challenged by engineering elements. It
is time that we know the specifics. What are the costs? What are the engineering
problems? What are the solutions and the cost to implementing these solutions?
The solutions that are introduced in Plan-"caps" or disconnected intervals of
development over the Highway-was first introduced in a 1970 report titled
"Corridor Development, Baltimore Interstate Highway System 3-A / Segment
l0.")10 Would these "caps" really support development? Where has this been done
and was successful? It is time for the question "What to do about the Highway to
Nowhere?" be brought to the forefront and planned as a separate entity for
implementation.
5. Create an oversiqht body that directs the implementation of the Plan
If true transformation on the order of that presented in the Plan is to be achieved,
coverage and direction of the Plan must be aggressive, proactive, and creative.
The Plan has to be an obsession for a group or individual who not only wants to
see the Plan implemented, but wants it to be a perfect and shining example of
transformation, as well as be recognized as his or her legacy to Baltimore. This
person will be a champion for West Baltimore MARC Station Area Master Plan
projects and would be the force behind a core group comprising largely agency
representatives whose mandates are to see the project through and to facilitate the
realization of the perfect and shining example of transformation.
10 Gerald Neilly, "Plan to build caps over Baltimore's Highway to Nowhere not worth the
wait", (Baltimore: 2009).
109
6. Drive residential interest through new construction and incentives for
rehabbing vacant properties
A two-pronged approach to attracting new residents to the West Baltimore
MARC Station Area would include new construction at the Station Area, which
would act as an signal that change is happening and would satisfy the target
audience's appetite for the new, and rehabilitation of vacant properties, which
might attract potential residents once the signal is received. The latter would also
likely happen with incentives, such as a dollar homes program. One developer
interviewed suggested just that:
Phase I should be filling in the gaps.. .the vacants... getting the
young professional...anyone who wants to get a dollar house.
In another interview, the interviewee thought that new residents would likely not
want to move deep into the neighborhoods that had vacancies right away. She
said:
I can't see them putting all that money into a redevelopment in
the middle of nowhere because.. .it is difficult, I think to
market the area. Now there are some smart people that know
that they can move into the neighborhood and walk to the train
station and they can get more value in their money for housing
and can get a big three-story house for nothing. But you have
to consider the racial make up of the neighborhood and the
high crime. A lot of people won't look at a neighborhood that
is not on the edge of a gentrified neighborhood.
Building new housing at the core of the Station Area, make new housing visible,
puts residents close to the new development and creates pedestrian activity so that
the Station does not become a dead zone during off-peak hours. A dollar house
program would work in conjunction with the new housing development to attract
residents to the Station Area.
Implementation
Based on my literature review and insights gained from the interviews, it became
clear that the Red Line is very important to the viability of the West Baltimore
110
MARC TOD. I will assume that the Red Line will be built-the alignment is
decided, the funding is secured, and the timeframe for construction is
confirmed-as a point of departure for this discussion on implementation of the
West Baltimore MARC Station Area Master Plan.
I will also assume an
implementation timeframe of three to five years since developers' timeframes
usually fall within in this range.
The first five years might be more about putting mechanisms into place and
creating partnerships than actual building.
The management / oversight body
(Recommendation 5) should be in place by the end of the first year to ensure that
projects fall under its purview. Ideally, no major projects would commence before
the committee is established, as it is this committee that would ensure quality,
community sensitivity, and integration of projects in the Station Area.
This
committee would also work with the appropriate partners to create incentive
packages for developers, business owners, and residents; these mechanisms
should begin to solidify within the first five years, with subsequent rounds of
modifications and mechanism creation as needed.
It is likely that these
mechanisms would have to evolve at different stages in the development process.
Direction, oversight, and political will would be extremely important in these
early years as it might take persistence, salesmanship, and incentives to attract the
first projects in this timeframe.
West Baltimore at this time, even with the
promise of the Red Line, might seem undesirable to potential business owners,
developers, and residents. The management / oversight body that is headed by
someone-a politician-who wants to see this project through-would lead the
effort.
During the first year-and probably before then-the anchor project should be
determined.
What will be the identity of the West Baltimore MARC Station?
The identity could be linked with the anchor project and this identity, in
conjunction with the Red Line, could start to drive interest from the development
111
community. The anchor project, furthermore, is significant because this is where
public investment could happen first. Perhaps a city agency is located at the
station, or the elected official-led oversight group could begin brokering a deal
with the University of Maryland or a biotechnology firm to locate its offices in the
Station Area. This might not lead to construction for a couple of years, but the
discussions should happen early and aggressively.
The results of these
discussions would probably not be visible in the built environment by the fifth
year, but communication with the public could keep the vision alive and real,
while the project is assembled. Linking these developments with jobs for West
Baltimore residents should be addressed in discussions early to set the expectation
and provide enough time to investigate jobs in the life sciences industry that that
community for which West Baltimore residents could be trained-essentially
connecting residents to the new economy (Recommendation 3).
Projects in the three-to-five year timeframe should also focus on building up the
core Station Area with basic services such as a grocery store, coffee shop, a shoe
repair, or a day care. The Plan provides lists of services that the communities
recommended during the planning process. These that I list are only a few. The
services, particularly, the grocery store could provide jobs, however, every
business should be considered an opportunity to connect the community with
jobs. This is particularly true for teens and young adults, of which there are many
in West Baltimore.
Job placement at new community businesses could be taken
a step further with an additional layer of service that provides financial literacy
training, job training and placement services, or similar programs.
Existing
organizations that are experienced in providing such programs should be
investigated, as they could partner with West Baltimore organizations to provide
these services. Unlike the anchor project, these smaller projects should start to
become present in the community in the first five years. The elected official-led
oversight group should approach these projects with the goal of getting something
built-a grocery store would be the best choice-quickly.
112
Some housing would be developed during the first five years.
Housing
development should be designed to target low-income, moderate-income, and
some higher-income residents. The latter category of resident might be harder to
attract without significant subsidy or development already completed. There may
be some pioneers that would consider residing in West Baltimore if a dollar
program was instituted for the 1,600 vacant houses and lots in the station area.
Furthermore, housing stock in West Baltimore-as with much of Baltimore is
rowhouses-which might attract young couples buying their first home or young
families.
West Baltimore has a higher percentage of children than other
Baltimore neighborhoods so it could possible appeal to the latter group.
Communities such as Midtown Edmondson and Station West, which have many
vacant houses and would likely need an incentive to attract residents, could
benefit from a dollar program. The City, which owns the properties, could also
develop them as affordable housing opportunities-homeownership and rentalfor moderate-income families and low-income families, ensuring that some
housing remain affordable. A mix of market-rate and affordable housing should
be placed closer to the station to take advantage of the amenity. According to the
literature, rental housing has a higher price premium near light rail stations than
commuter rail stations. Homes near commuter rail stations enjoy price premiums
when the homes are condominiums. I doubt that condominiums would do well in
the West Baltimore market. Homeownership, would probably gain momentum in
the neighborhoods where a dollar program is offered.
The market-rate and
affordable housing rentals would appeal to singles and young couples that are
unable to buy and renovate a home. The City of Baltimore owns the two existing
parking lots and land in the Southwest Industrial Triangle so it has an opportunity
to include affordable housing development at these sites.
Housing development would probably gain most momentum after year five, and
more likely in years six through ten. Incentives and partnerships would be created
in the first five years, but at least one project should break ground at the station
and at least one round of dollar homes-perhaps in a pilot neighborhood or
113
block-should be done.
It should be noted that the dollar homes should be
distributed in such a manner as to create completely populated blocks.
This
would ensure safety and contiguous development that could be used as a model of
what the community could look like with new investment.
Closer to the end of five years, a Highway to Nowhere Plan should be set in
motion.
Development opportunities and the related engineering and cost
scenarios should be studied to determine real solutions for the Highway. It is no
longer enough to say that filling the ditch will be too expensive. What are the
alternatives? How can building over the Highway be done? This has to be a
consideration. The true development potential of this area of West Baltimore is
hampered by the existence of the Highway.
Funding Sources
The Plan provides an extensive list of funding and program resources for housing
and economic development. They range from grants and loans to tax credits, and
have a range of providers-Federal Government, Maryland State, and Baltimore
City. One of the first tasks for the first five years should be to verify and amend
these funding sources.
The economic climate has changed significantly and
funding sources might have been impacted adversely, but could new sources of
funding might have come on line to fill in gaps, i.e., ARRA funds.
Conclusion
The West Baltimore MARC Station Area Master Plan is a vision for
transformation. This Plan could direct investment in communities that have had
none for decades after the infamous Highway to Nowhere was built. Yes, this is
an opportunity that should not be allowed to pass by, but it has to be done right,
and it has to be done with the type of passion and energy that brought Charles
Center, the Inner Harbor and Harbor East to Baltimore.
It is certainly a
development opportunity worthy of this passion given the history of the
communities. Infrastructure changed the fate of West Baltimore over thirty years
114
ago. Thirty years later, infrastructure is at the center of another plan for West
Baltimore, but this time around it can-in the form of community-sensitive
Transit-Oriented Development-transform for the better.
115
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Baltimore Neighborhood Indicators Alliance. (2009). "Vital Signs 6 & 7."
Retrieved December 7, 2009, from http://www.ubalt.edu/bnia/index.html.
Baum-Snow, N. and M. Kahn (2005). The Effects of Urban Rail Transportation
Expansions: Evidence from Sixteen Cities, 1970-2000. Brookings-Wharton
Papers on Urban Affairs. Washington, DC, The Brookings Institution and The
Wharton School of Business: 145-206.
Baum-Snow, N. and M. E. Kahn (2000). "The Effects of New Public Projects to
Expand Urban Rail Transit." Journal of Public Economics 77: 241-263.
Belzer, D. and G. Autler (2002). Transit-Oriented Development: Moving from
Rhetoric to Reality. Washington, DC, Strategic Economics.
Cervero, R. (2004). Transit-Oriented Development in the United States:
Experiences, Challenges, and Prospects. Washington, DC, Transportation
Research Board.
City of Baltimore. (2006). Live-Learn-Play-Eam:
The City of Baltimore
Comprehensive Master Plan. Baltimore, MD, City of Baltimore Planning
Commission.
City of Baltimore. (2007). The BRACtion Plan for Baltimore City. Baltimore,
MD, City of Baltimore Office of the Mayor.
City of Baltimore. (2008). Inclusionary Housing Requirements. Baltimore City
Code. Article 13, Subtitle 2B.
City of Baltimore. (2008). West Baltimore MARC Station Area Master Plan.
Baltimore, MD, City of Baltimore Department of Planning.
Central Maryland Transportation Alliance. (2009). Central Maryland TOD
Strategy: A Regional Action Plan for Transit-Oriented Communities. Baltimore,
MD, Central Maryland Transportation Alliance and Center for Transit-Oriented
Development.
Cuthbert, A. R. (2003). Designing Cities: Critical Readings in Urban Design.
Malden, MA, Blackwell Publishing.
Farris, J. T. (2001). "The Barriers to Using Urban Infill Development to Achieve
Smart Growth." Housing Policy Debate 12(1): 1-30.
Freeman, L. (2005). There Goes the 'Hood': Views of Gentrification from the
Ground Up. Philadelphia, PA, Temple University Press.
116
Freeman, L. and F. Braconi (2004). "Gentrification and Displacement New York
City in the 1990s." Journal of the American Planning Association 70(1): 39-52.
Hall, Peter. (2002). Cities of Tomorrow: An Intellectual History of Urban
Planning and Design in the Twentieth Century. Oxford, London, Blackwell.
Hess, D. B. and P. A. Lombardi (2004). "Policy Support for and Barriers to
Transit-Oriented Development in the Inner City." Journal of the Transportation
Research Board 1887: 26-33.
Jacobs, A. (1993). Great Streets. Cambridge, MA, MIT Press.
Jacobs, J. (1961). The Death and Life of Great American Cities. New York, NY,
Random House, Inc.
Jarvis, F. D. (1993). Site Planning and Community Design for Great
Neighborhoods. Washington, DC, Home Builder Press.
Kahn, M. E. (2007). "Gentrification Trends in New Transit-Oriented
Communities: Evidence from 14 Cities That Expanded and Built Rail Transit
Systems." Real Estate Economics 35(2): 155-182.
Knapp, G., C. Ding, et al. (2001). "Do Plans Matter?: The Effects of Light Rail
Plan on Land Values in Station Areas." Journal of Planning Education and
Research 21: 32-39.
Loukaitou-Sideris, A. (2000). "Transit-Oriented Development in the Inner City:
A Delphi Survey." Journal of Public Transportation 3(2): 75-98.
Newman, K. and E. K. Wyly (2006). "The Right to Stay Put, Revisited:
Gentrification and Resistance to Displacement in New York City." Urban Studies
43(1): 23-57.
Ohland, H. D. a. G. (2004). The New Transit Town. Washington, DC, Island
Press.
Talen, E. (2006). "Design That Enables Diversity: The Complications of a
Planning Ideal." Journal of Planning Literature 20(3): 233-248.
Talen, E. (2006). "Neighborhood-Level Social Diversity: Insights from Chicago."
Journal of the American Planning Association 72(4): 431-446.
Talen, E. (2008). Design for Diversity:
Neighborhoods. Burlington, MA, Elsevier Ltd.
Exploring
Socially
Mixed
117
Vandell, K. (1995). "Market factors affecting spatial heterogeneity among urban
neighborhoods." Housing Policy Debate 6: 103-139.
Wander, M. (2008). An Equity Agenda for Transit-Oriented Development. Urban
& Environmental Policy. Occidental, CA, Occidental College.
118
APPENDIX
Interviewees
Lorenzo Bryant, Maryland Transit Administration
Paul Clary, Baltimore Development Corporation
Jacquelyn Cornish, Baltimore Housing
Otto Condon, ZGF Architects, LLP
Danyell Diggs, Baltimore City Department of Transportation
Kate Edwards, Baltimore City Department of Planning
Laurie Feinberg, Baltimore City Department of Planning
Brenton Flickinger, Baltimore City Department of Planning
Staycie Francisco, Maryland Transit Administration
Stanley Gordon, Baltimore Housing
Terrance Hancock, Baltimore Development Corporation
Henry Kay, Maryland Transit Administration
Gee Kim, Canyon Partners
Jair Lynch, Jair Lynch Development Partners
Klaus Philipsen, ArchPlan Inc.
Irene Poulsen
Ann Sherrill, Baltimore Neighborhood Collaborative
Kirin Smith, Evergreen Lawn Resident
Patrick Turner, Turner Development
Ernst Valery, Ernst Valery Investment Corp.
Laurie Volk, Zimmerman / Volk Associates
Ron Wilson, Enterprise Homes, Inc.
119
120