Pier 5 & 6 Alternatives

     The Inner Harbor 2.0 plan includes several recommendations for Pier 5 & 6 that are inconsistent with appropriate land use, good urban design, encouragement of transportation alternatives, and the retention of maritime heritage.  Objectionable proposals in the Inner Harbor 2.0 plan are:  1) expanding the Pier V Garage; 2) eliminating the Seven Foot Knoll Lighthouse; and 3) moving the U.S. Coast Guard Cutter Taney to a fenced loading and parking area along the east side of Pier 4.

     This revised Inner Harbor 2.1 plan for Pier 5 & 6 is more consistent with the following Inner Harbor planning principles: 

•   The waterfront should be for people instead of cars.  Above ground and surface parking should be eliminated from the waterfront  as much as practical.

•   Plans for the Inner Harbor should emphasize transportation alternatives instead of additional parking.

•   Pier 5 & 6 is the entryway to the Inner Harbor from the east.  A well coordinated design should provide a line of comparably sized buildings and connected open space to create an appropriate entryway to Baltimore’s “crown jewel.”

•   Non-pervious surfaces should be reduced eliminating rainwater runoff into the Inner Harbor and Chesapeake Bay.  Efforts should be made to create a sustainable environment and encourage renewable energy.

•   The maritime heritage of Baltimore and the Inner Harbor should be enhanced at this location not diminished.

The following recommendations are proposed in this Inner Harbor 2.1 plan:

1.   The Pier 6 Pavilion dates from 1991 and has surpassed its 20 year guarantee.  A new pavilion will be built closer to Eastern Avenue retaining a line of relatively small scale buildings on the south side of Eastern Avenue from the Aquarium on Pier 4 to the Pumping Station at President Street to create a more uniform gateway to the Inner Harbor from the east.

2.   The Pier 5 Hotel circular entry drive will be scaled down comparable in size to the Marriott Waterfront entryway.  A tensile canopy will unify its design with the Columbus Center and Pier 6 Pavilion. 

3.   Pierce’s Park will be expanded along the north side of Eastern Avenue to create a continuous park from Pier 5 to the Columbus Piazza on President Street.  A two lane drive will be retained to provide access to the Pier V Garage. The garage, which is rarely occupied to capacity, will accommodate the 180 parking spaces in the current surface lots south of  the garage and north of the pavilion.  Overflow parking can be directed to nearby parking garages holding approximately 4200 parking spaces.

4.   The drive along the west side of Pier 5 to the hotel will be eliminated and replaced with planting and a bicycle lane to reduce run-off along the pier and provide direct bike access to attractions on Pier 5 & 6.

5.   The Pier 6 Pavilion lawn will be enlarged within a brick promenade.  It will be open to the public during hours when concerts are not taking place.  This lawn will be available for general recreation, special events and large outdoor weddings (receptions could take place at nearby hotels).  A potentially expanded lawn could also include an earthwork mound identified for West Shore Park in the 2.0 plan.

6.   The Pier 6 Pavilion lawn will be connected to Harbor East by a new bridge at the south end of the pier.  If the proposed Inner Harbor crossing pedestrian and bike bridge is built, it could connect Rash Field to the Pier 6 Pavilion lawn instead of Pier 5.

7.   The brick landscaped loading area east of the Pier 5 Hotel will be expanded to accommodate loading for the Pier 6 Pavilion for performer busses, etc.

8.   Part of the slips between Pier 3 and Pier 4  and Pier 4 and Pier 5 will be filled in for retail development creating a water line and usage consistent with Harborplace.  The Barnes & Noble space within the Power Plant will be an extension of the promenade housing a festival market place of local products – the Baltimore Emporium.  Barnes & Noble can be relocated to the former Best Buy space across Pratt Street.  The asphalt parking/loading area on the east side of Pier 4 will be bricked in keeping with the Inner Harbor promenade.  Eliminated parking spaces will be accommodated in the Pier V Garage.  The U.S. Coast Guard Cutter Taney will be moved just to the south as part of a maritime heritage center (see 10 below).

9.   The Columbus Piazza opposite Pier 6 will be landscaped increasing pervious surfaces in keeping with Pierce’s Park and open space along the northern side of Eastern Avenue.

10. The Seven Foot Knoll Lighthouse will be retained at its present location as the headquarters of historic ships in the Inner Harbor.  It will not be replaced by a Ferris wheel.  Instead, other historic vessels  (including the Submarine Torsk and Chesapeake Lightship) will be relocated  to the vicinity of the Lighthouse reinforcing Pier 5 & 6 as the center of the Inner Harbor’s maritime heritage.

11. Solar panels eliminated from the Maryland Science Center’s surface parking lot canopy across the harbor will be relocated to the roof of the Pier V Garage.  The garage will also include charging stations for electric vehicles promoting alternative energy at the Inner Harbor. 

Other Brief Considerations

Inner Harbor 2.1 – Other Brief Considerations

 

    The Inner Harbor 2.0 plan suggests a consolidated ticketing facility for all commercial boats integrated into the finger piers on Light Street.  New buildings should not be placed between the promenade and waterfront – a prime aspect of the Inner Harbor is full public access to the waterfront and preservation of harbor views.

     

     A comprehensive assessment of all Inner Harbor artwork, monuments, engraved brick paving etc. should be undertaken.  If art work is to be moved, all efforts should be made to find a proper relocation -  the Inner Harbor 2.0 plan shows new improvements of the site of the Pride of Baltimore I monument,  recycled “dolphin” fountain/sculpture at Pier 4, and sculpture east of the World Trade Center with no mention of what will happen to them.

 

    

    Projection art from light fixtures can provide a festive  appearance at the Inner Harbor and potential revenue source from sponsors. 

     All illuminated signs placed more than 45 feet above the ground on buildings and visible from the promenade should be considered billboards and subjected to a special tax based upon square footage of the sign.  Historic signs (Domino Sugars) would be exempt from such a tax.  The revenue generated  from this tax would  go towards improving and maintaining the promenade.  These signs are not for identification purposes, but as general advertising.  The number of these signs have increased exponentially in recent years and are often for corporate entities that can well afford to pay for such advertising.

     

     Much of the land and buildings directly along the waterfront is owned by the Mayor and City Council of Baltimore and leased to a variety of developers.  Instead of generating property tax revenue, payment in lieu of tax agreements govern many of these sites.  A comprehensive review of these lease and tax agreements should be conducted in order to determine if they are equitable and if the City of Baltimore is properly compensated for providing infrastructure and other services at these locations.

     Most of the stake holders involved with the Inner Harbor 2.0 plan were business entities rather than neighborhood residents and Baltimore citizens that use the Inner Harbor on a regular basis.  An improved effort should be made to solicit the opinions and ideas of the general public prior to amending the current master plan for the Inner Harbor.  A series of town hall meetings are needed before deciding the future of Baltimore’s most valuable resource.  A first step is to decide upon a series of principles to guide future development of the Inner Harbor.  These principles should include:  maintain complete public access to the waterfront, the Inner Harbor should be for people not cars (eliminate to every extent possible parking directly on the waterfront) and every effort should be made to encourage local business development at the Inner Harbor, not just national chains.  Once these principles are established, it should be relatively easy to  decide on whether to build a physical Inner Harbor Crossing or continue beach volley ball  on Rash Field, etc.