Charting the Future of Baltimore’s Industrial Waterfront

BY JOHN J. HENTSCHEL, CRE, MAI, FRICS HENTSCHEL REAL ESTATE SERVICES

With Economic Analysis By: Daraius Irani, Ph.D. RESI of Towson University Research and Consulting

• • •

PUBLISHED BY The Abell Foundation 111 S. Calvert Street, Suite 2300 Baltimore, Maryland 21202 www.abell.org

• • •

JANUARY 2009

Ta e l b o f o C n st n e t ...... Ex Int B Wh Indust Th U Sur Ec Wh Me Co Re Ab Ap ac .S onmi ec fe out p e nclusi r asur at at . v kgr oduc endix re ey P P ut or or i M s nce r t ive ound i y of he IZO ng t t M on ti c Tr of T IZO s B on A S r Aut Imp ends M ends umar usine D B t . . IZO o a . . . . D? Doe hor lti . . . . ac D . . . . more D se t ...... s and . . . . . of . . y . Pe ...... Not s ...... Alt . f r wi ...... Econmic ...... or . er th Do: ...... ma ...... nat . in ...... nc F MI ive ...... ind ...... e ZOD ...... L ...... A and ngs ...... na ...... lyst ...... and . Use ...... R ...... ecomend ...... A ...... ctions ...... Separt ...... A ...... tachment ...... 1 17 21 25 29 39 41 43 49 65 7 83 89 . 1

e v i t u c e x E yr a m m u S

...... pr incl Prot MIZO ten cur Th re Cur pr consumi Pl and esti de Dev Janu pr de si fir (18 di mo Or se pa ma is mi re re busine comp • • de ope nce ani str sta loc lat st ve not ofe obl ovi t r ve ep cr gh ig e r r dif mat uding ti ye ra it fe elop ent ic ma F Co t r n e iv MI i lop ec ur nal h at w s ct t ev de ime siona ems, ew r ase t la D ula t et ar e ng e e da he y es be ing s B at ed . ant Z nsider tio ly ed ri isi int asi ment s to is ay r 20 OD cont or ment er ng y te ys ne Th d p e p th of on wi c c co busi , no-ma mar ly s gula s a n e ex i to it onside ri s, ot and p nte mor F a fi rc e p nac e l t th a 9, a y , te ci nsider ro s r o a or o ci pe si he er nd of ig nd vib o est pr el a c ir st . ng h nes m r a in f nce ed nd w ti als duct e ble r r c di ui t fie s se n av op e rat it r e) ovi wek ic ons x Mari M c c ed ra e it ored c lunc gula Ch nanc ty , pira wit eria ur omn i por mode ring es ha h ing nals; ld, IZ , rela rit t tions, eg c 1 sion er wi iv i and t or ost adop from a or d 973 n b OD leng h to ot to y , ti ts. hroms rting me mina and tim tor etw re th f ty . e te and nui t 2 a ade on or he unit a is o go 0 ls, pres f ce co , re is pro or y comp ra th unsi The whi ma of tion i in e ing i Th r sanc lengt v in ndust Hawki 4 ntly nclusion qua nta de a and a ls en il t of e a zoned t ies. , dre uth andL po ha t Ba th t nr sca rit e 2 th a he f ch nomia re gh v r pro or draf ins en 024. c 20 oth te ta ext es n adopt ltimore sal ri ime e e ce dgi h orite t reloc e rc hem, are r tly midst will rget Th se y 1 t a ns M F ia si produce ce a b s he land e c er ting t uture M t ng ze l y o a nsive ce sunset es enurs v use. An resouce s a Poi i few rit use, lea f -3 inc iews a n no-idustral th ed s folwing e nd ive tor, y sor a tion d a b x i of with of MI of nd with nd an and extension me ding nt. Ci tend ut are lude for a 20 alte distnct sunk Marine mapi cratf ing ’s ty Z but the of new and and also y acc esor dep uction constr pro as would OD noxius 16. Industrial at 20 use, not the dep nati r to the no Bal include t new 19 each e 10. visio hat t p cost a comp xi include he reason: a t wat ng designat poteni roh 73 rev prov sting only timo a ve minals ter parcel wat planed a a Comple produce re once poten zonig n t the with er zonig comprehensiv i ised and odrs, ne locati this bi a rehensive and use er isions s Z L r a are t locations ighbors ocust onig of e’s ne al parcels new hotels acce te conver wit respondig cor to uniqe s. map ti expires ial ons d me the w to av tion ordinace unit code bri I dev compet h D ope of nd a ai zonig s for se result epwat Point, depwatr of Planed Ov is labe; cit ght avilbe MI t ustrial and of for and master dev rat wit so of lop indust zoni are f y , erlay throug in eaturs, Z d the e light, mewha e OD al indust h zoning elopmnts, itv in mot to the 201 zoni Canto clasif new 24-hours built ng depwatr i with more r increasd s no-idust Di e rial pl Unit f 4. or is els, for source slated distri Wat erf noise, ng reduced disav an strict a or rial t int pre an i cces, an classif The acc ide nflueces, cati acces paradoxical new ordin busine and t replacemnt a o ime- c overlay use, requist nd additional p t ons rentcur (MI to s. ant city of er and ro e ications or acces cost Dundalk, ance, tha nts conomic be rial t age ZOD) day , s nt is o is gin s t a use hat nd and the to in 1 • Capacity of existing dredge material placement sites is committed to maintenance . .

of the shipping channel; and . .

• Identification of and regulatory approval for new dredge material placement sites . .

to accommodate development of new terminal facilities is a lengthy and often . .

contentious process requiring long lead time. . . . .

The Port of Baltimore . . . .

The Port of Baltimore consists of both private and public marine terminal facilities, . . as follows: . .

• 49 Marine Terminal Facilities; . .

• 43 are located within Baltimore City; . .

• 36 are privately owned and operated; and . .

• seven are owned by MPA. . . . .

The Maryland Port Administration (MPA) administers the state-owned public terminals . .

and as such, is only one component of the port. . . . .

According to a study conducted by Martin Associates entitled The Economic Impacts . of the Port of Baltimore conducted in 2008, the port excels in handling certain niche . . cargoes for which it is a dominant port, namely paper, automobiles and roll on/roll . . off (RO/RO) and bulk commodities. The Port of Baltimore is a significant regional . . economic engine with: . .

• 16,493 direct jobs plus 33,693 induced & indirect jobs, . .

• 59% of direct jobs (9,718) are associated with privately owned marine terminals, . .

• 2,921 of the total 6,775 jobs associated with the public marine terminals are held . .

by city residents (43.12%), while Baltimore and Anne Arundel County residents . .

hold 1,609 (23.75%) and 849 (12.53%) jobs respectively, . .

• Personal Income associated with direct jobs at private marine terminals ($491.5 . .

million) is 1.5 times that of public terminals ($296.4 million), . .

• The port is a source of job diversity for local economy offering high paying blue . .

collar employment to those with less than college education, . .

• Average 2006 wage $47,780; and . .

• Average 2003 wage $50,870. . . . .

Demand for Non-Industrial Uses . . . .

Developers have discovered that the waterfront is an attractive location for lucrative . .

and successful mixed use residential and commercial projects in areas formerly . reserved exclusively for industrial maritime users. The economics of development . . gives commercial and residential users the ability to pay more for waterfront property . . than industrial users creating an affordability problem for industrial users in the . . . .

2 Charting the Future of Baltimore’s Industrial Waterfront ...... pr For Advi wh de to ex ev Ma nag gre conc comp ma woul pr sh Land Su to ori any Lik ne a alr ar as For bei me of among MIZO of Th funct ma its sc ch op es pe ould nie utr ea r a e e re imp gina ma ew ec ile r r ng et at ntua e a f it it th pr unfa sor it l unco sident dy ap ludes ct rc er d and-use er io ec onmi ime ime a v r w s ec et -p D t ise c ose op a he lize at ose e h ti ly nal ont em it a uto ti e be y ot it jo ex p l t av es io , vor y r h r ura ve er c ion ma ot C and esour ro ndit he b use indust t enc r ar ash p pa ent ns e hr ri ac t def ec mat ounc la th ia t wi ent he er b of buf ies te ca a l but r r t nd l-c e r e ce ble en for a ome o it and a ro th -st p ie ce a ion ct co pr qa u shold ic ly t St nd im nui ic ia F th lan ome s ex fe c loc nci ing mix out ed ac ie use ls ar il s ud ote ria in mpa e a ly wat Ch a fit fe rs a e pend ly nc l to e in t hi req ved sanc t wh l t at ng di ba l s asi pa re y ha ngi use ed g lit rib ct p a for M nde fi ng p ie c ed e of re t S de rea (M tib rting ng res sponi se rst ontrls o ose uire tle rce res r t IZ ble rc ep c s t utes neri ci front es ser re he onfli war p no-i pro th d of a consi le so i I OD s te ty a temb pwa RGM de hy long ls to si va r l on i asoc ments e ph and ved b r industra ndustri t por de p wit use va ra he c sic te y of ci b th th ct ng bi ronuc is ompr la er ti ysica ndustria ter en nts p th ti dera nti ming r t like s, S) al e lit on h er t’ th nd. y pre for e proe re int on ti Re r ia e s overa i a a y eg es th should e a F th n se pub 205 of fits v pres ted l v M end a nd l uture al f c -ex b MI a mari co resi ita e a or ula nd c a nt a Th la nea nd le ari t l nd c e t nd use hi f s ZO ontemp use r l mende d lished istng wit functi r wi ed is rom l prov l t a sum t e . tain dential-comercial prote dep ghest their tim ions y p projects time r nd come of location th succ es f econmic D. rotection first h unct mi indust s. tha for at to of e workable cont idng prose wise other marite re ion ona ght nearby But, wat and protect. ct by to Ind f marit p Bal tax easiblty be dev ional y ora the urpose. ion and acquire l y empora rc rial the er be us along sc of desig utily buf rate industral timo charc teris i cost a A ct ime loping of aset trial uti r i fut l anlysi and the use, s marit Pt or c marite prote ive use ers tions: t industral unde weak. in Pub ransi r ile. f n nized easibl pur the to for e’s for t. por ty proe deman. Retnio conduc standr the L and dev but t c comunit If me li and cure ogethr s p ut r marit t tional c exist mari I fronti p ion armet a nd presnt ose, st elopmnt and to ties rope desig For for parce ilzed industr user, cs at Use nativ alter ustrial t withn use tain ascer i time ing he ime e v n do the er priv use e such rights Ftunaelyor , the the m and n ers D wi with to l MIZOD or ed in not ies holding has indust ev elmnt ned i cit no at th ndustrial al just op marite ne t and marg the on parcel s, elopmnt in e act hat ’s y Growth than Wat erf to tie proe mand the e me longer physical tuniy por t por ighbords whe ifcation t use, ualy the hi to contex bufer, wilnge rial are can inal peri pote s t the out s be the the study i front most nter to use cluste t use se t yields yor ro sup ypher use he devis. ntial r f or mit ve r s or for nt they ier as bef t por st is s an red igat to ore s e 3 development of suitable compatible transitional uses that would not undermine the . . efficacy of nearby maritime uses, the specification of architectural and engineering . . design elements that could mitigate use conflicts, and the establishment of a means . . to infuse economic and community development resources capable of preserving . . the viability of the maritime use should be considered. . . . .

Finding: MIZOD preserves properties adjacent to deepwater for industrial, not . . necessarily maritime, use; however it ignores functional utility and/or economic . . feasibility for such use. . . . .

Recommended Action: Properties should be reserved for maritime-related, not . . merely industrial, use and the rules governing their use should have the capacity to . . deal with and provide for compatible non-industrial uses for those sites that are not . .

suitable for deepwater maritime industrial use, especially at residential-commercial . .

frontier locations. . . . .

Finding: MIZOD does nothing to mitigate use conflicts that already exist nor does it . .

establish effective buffers or define transitional uses to be located therein. . . .

Recommended Actions: . .

1. Define the composition of a suitable buffer and the appropriate transitional uses that . .

can best serve to protect and mitigate the effects of nearby heavy industrial uses. . .

2. Adopt mandatory architectural and engineering design regulations, including . .

required buffers for new and redeveloped non-industrial projects proposed in the . .

vicinity of existing maritime industrial uses to lessen the conflict between . .

industrial and non-industrial uses. . .

3. Provide that all leases and real estate sales contracts for property within a certain . .

distance of a maritime industrial facility contain a disclosure and . .

acknowledgement that the property is subject to certain unavoidable hazards and . .

nuisances originating from the maritime use. . . . .

Finding: MIZOD does nothing to preserve and protect essential industrial . . transportation corridors that serve the properties located within MIZOD. . . . .

Recommended Action: Refine and reconcile city land use policies and decisions and . .

improve interagency coordination and communication to minimize adverse effects on . .

primary industrial transportation corridors. . . . .

Finding: MIZOD does not consider or address the off-dock and off-port land use . needs to facilitate and support port expansion and growth......

4 Charting the Future of Baltimore’s Industrial Waterfront ...... 2. Fin Reco asoc ef pr yet de th Reco cost Reco mi industr Fin ar so Fin re zo Reco th wi 1. Fin MIZO Reco 3. ea sulte at at oj th urc nig sign ec sha ding ding ding ding t ec s s De P a th int a of Enc no-i in he c M t mend mend mend mend mend nd nd ia r es ould a D. suc p of otec er ts IZO nd d inf er ci te i vi r re c al : : : : or our egula e and ty r t it pr a se f d e h he ndustr vi or ro e MI The MIZ By ar y pr r st D t posi c a be op ew w a as ew ag f m mat bea onfi e c ma re ox ina ZOD c it sunet w ed ed ed ed ed t i t fe to ose tse ordina e a t OD h ne ions, as a of a p h a i rds r w mi rs nci lte s ion t gure ble nd t or A A A A A e itime a i promte h Ch lf, al and te d int lter cti cti cti cti ct a de e t Poi ty na r doe does ng ppa h t roi r i M land i rev a o i is reg c n inc on on on on on end e prov ndustri to rting na rea nt IZ th ti neig c and ti th a di s industri rent ison to : : : : s: ompensat ve luding ardi on tiv OD ei resid reg noth not sm. Bre rec De Consi Consi e ti use. Prov ison d r sup on e use vic hb t ta of p he ng ional land ve t to th is no a p to rope x c ing orhds ze l in of por ef ide rovi lop ntia os no al der der in a elimna e p req m adres o cc for t ma t or a Busine -industral use F t y ari f sa t tia to t re s t r e protecti uture ident de a new l uired th of enough req imp por ts a nc y ’s ies a sourc time th tiv f e nd mula or c nd e a a limnate and existng suc t on e c uir es te uarie surance t land. as lemntig to reg tualy s cit foreg operatins comercial or changi . fl buf i c to e of ic ndustrial an ng cre resouces Centr on es. y ional security t producing t s land fers s asi f o Bal or f alte at y mandtor such or n for encourage mari v pres safe ow , e the st s of enti the for nati r timo use bet v tuni opr and period v iable ns pater ty to time contiue as ulnerab land benf incide now new equit among use and y av ve r tha e Fai r Chesapke ben e’s t etr o compatibly of -doc k and i to use ndustrial architectural fr i and and the c security its foster able nt. in MIZ I p el the or nd of fits roble d promt public tha ne the y d la redv in industral industral ustrial cyclic al deman cost sharing OD nd and sune eds, bey the and e and ms mi vent isue speculation use prohibts. ond elop Comerce and Hawk i ght e reg f a faci be utre. t t of -por nd wit a comprehnsiv and prov of of fo Wat erf and ional t v the use p wise other litae o use h ibrant tax asociated d re rivate t-re por an ns lesn adjoing e -industralno ison rs the c land ngie rev for i indust cope Poi ty e t to he activy y xpansio ro Cent t por sect e limts, capitl nt can la re nue use t of nt sharing he t have trofi ring ed rial whe rat or . with a r ris ion re e. 5 4. Baltimore City and the metropolitan counties need to better coordinate their . .

land use planning and zoning actions especially in areas along their common . .

borders, including examining the feasibility of Baltimore City, Baltimore County . .

and Anne Arundel County adopting uniform industrial zoning classifications . .

(particularly those concerning maritime uses) since the city is in the process of . .

drafting its first new comprehensive zoning code in over 35 years. . . . .

Finding: Currently, the city is required to report annually on the status of the MIZOD. . .

The measurements were selected on the basis of availability, cost-effectiveness and . . practicality of collection and include: property taxes, number of permits, amount of . . fixed cost investments, number of firms and cargo volume, and vessel arrivals. . .

However, all of the measures are currently presented without the benefit of context . . or comparison. . . . .

Recommended Actions: . .

1. The city should provide the comparative context for existing measures. . .

For example, property taxes collected, building permits issued, fixed cost . .

investments, and number of new firms within MIZOD should be compared and . .

contrasted with industry on a city wide basis. Cargo volume and vessel arrivals . should be compared with experience at competitive ports. . .

2. The city should also measure whether: . .

• The city is receiving benefits commensurate with the diminished tax . .

revenues and forgone opportunity costs, . .

• the MPA is being funded at sufficient levels to enable the Port of Baltimore to . .

compete for its appropriate share of the market and to properly maintain . .

MPA facilities, and . .

• the port’s market share in its targeted commodity classes has grown or at . .

least remained the same relative to the competition. . . . .

Finding: The collection and analysis of data to support land use planning, especially . . the assignment of responsibility for tracking data and comparing actual performance . . relative to original projections over time, is lacking. . . . .

Recommended Action: The city needs better mechanisms to track and assess the . .

supply of and demand for various land uses, as well as the utilization and allocation . .

of economic and community development resources to gauge their productivity . .

and payoff. . . . .

Finding: Although MPA develops and issues a strategic plan, there is no strategic . plan or corresponding land use plan for the Port of Baltimore as a whole. This is . . problematic as there is no calculation of the land requirements to accompany . . projected expansion of the port and need for industrially zoned land with deepwater . . access. With ownership divided between public and private marine terminal . .

6 Charting the Future of Baltimore’s Industrial Waterfront ...... • • 2. 1. Reco Fin se • Th Co (op comp th de Reco vie ope per at r ve e wp nc ve ding f por ra or — h — Adr — — Pr dei Est a fa indust Est t a Al no-i — loc t ch i lop mend mend er he s cq mount as lu et t oi as c low manc ovi or ba a il mina t a ab ab it uist nts unit : si ment leng p th ti Asur dec re Ma Reso Ade Rem th ca s ti or e sed T des ndustr or lish lish on s on es o se it e r sour e t s a ia of xi ed t’ e io y l iso ca t i q deq ba and ed ed : t s e of i he l s mize on o lve marit h nto and co uat a a ns. of anc t dy us pa d pera p t f h a si i c or p p o ns sue of A A if t st i resnt es e e uat Ch s a a e al c pre e t or ri loca fi cti cti t are xt e f f-doc n th rs, ity succ h f M undig t c va cult a and op prote or ime t use, he tors e a of ompreh e e nd e o on on e PA sent nt te t rting mp i to: ti b sh ax t ncludi f comuni with mi cont ime c utre : : es. et on k t or di to at a and p indust th it or to The di nd i ct tig t or a et y minshe tra ric a er a est nd unit tc of proj ion stric in nd t i provide inued to c. at th s al p ct Fur pri ens oming ng t fun ve c c ab marit he e to th roj of pla it om ria pr e d ie from i e t va nture th nv e y lish t fundi f ive et , de ty , ct c s ec F -por he ospec Por l n simlar te raf sh e c uture d p industra er estmn for s user ontex d ime ted s c re r, th efc ma th ta ould bri responi minato ter t t ost and/ of a t the ng h e fund a of th x nd a t supor ritme e dge tiv land minal t land la solutin th rev e nsiv Baltimore ts wi specif improv t of or nd of encourage e neds, more o e ci of enus th: of l c to land fundi ty existng a ameliortng econmic e use ap use Bal use based a bi neighbord operats la nearby zonig work of to new ica ital; lity land; nd agile emnt timo neds use tha for ng framewok the objectiv prose ly fore and use may on compre in t for thei MIZO benf , conf and t’s por r incompatible idealy de the gone) e’s tandem an s and plan accountabil including op r, are be c r to es, licts, i t the cit ti proe e sion. he D; and it tunisc por I mpircal nd aid di comunity he la : not for ’s y the decison may and tax and nd sadv MPA ef ustrial nsive i with fects ntegraio inv the alwys t por distr use pre the be antged es should estmn use, Pt or det zonig public y ve ser for of neds to and amount crite ct f p or Wat erf identcal. encroach tyrope , dev make naught. r of with and mi the marite sup ria the by of and Balt elopmnt tha code in nat and indust POB’ t por and medinfor p MIZOD requiste ro imore ion roce p ca ing rivate tha nt n s the of rial ds 7 • Provides the owners of properties that are located on the periphery of the . .

existing MIZOD boundary, which have characteristics that render the property . .

incapable of maritime industrial use, or are of adequate size to be master planned . .

as a transitional use buffer area between existing residential and/or commercial . .

and industrial uses the opportunity to propose to the city, without undue delay, . .

alternative uses for their land that would not undermine the efficacy of nearby . .

maritime users. The Baltimore Development Corporation and the Planning . .

Department have identified only a handful of property owners who have . .

expressed such intent at this time. . . . .

While the City might accomplish the foregoing in any number of ways, some actions, . . whether taken together or alone that the City might wish to consider, include . . the following: . . . .

• Formulate the new zoning code in a sequential manner. . . . .

Conceptually, the process of devising and mapping the new zoning code could . .

be segmented to prioritize the development and approval of the applicable . .

zoning classifications, their associated governance, and the land use framework . and its mapping first for those areas that now comprise the MIZOD on an . .

expedited, fast-track basis to facilitate completion and adoption before MIZOD’s . .

scheduled 2014 expiration. In the event that the development and mapping of . .

the new zoning code in its entirety is delayed and not completed by MIZOD’s . .

scheduled 2014 expiration, those provisions developed for the communities . .

comprising the existing MIZOD could be adopted as an amendment to the . .

existing zoning code pending incorporation into and the subsequent approval of . .

the new zoning code at a later date. . . . .

• Extend MIZOD’s protective provisions or, in the alternative, enact substitute . .

legislation, for a period to run concurrent with the process of developing the . .

new zoning code. . .

This action would serve to protect strategic maritime parcels, avert renewed . .

speculation, price distortion, and the possible loss of deepwater sites to . .

non-industrial uses, and forestall any other detrimental effects envisioned by . .

maritime users as MIZOD’s scheduled 2014 expiration draws near, pending . .

adoption of the new zoning code, even if enactment of the new zoning ordinance . .

extends beyond the current 2014 expiration. It would also provide the time . .

necessary to devise the land use framework within the context of a new zoning . .

code, as well as empirically determine the port’s present and prospective land . use needs. Any legislation should also include provisions that would afford the . .

owners of those few parcels possessing the characteristics stipulated above and ......

8 Charting the Future of Baltimore’s Industrial Waterfront ...... Fina hig ben bet th Some eco wi woul Wit at pa ben For to ma comp of ver ta e ling t r r pr r he y w h e nomic in ke v th ly , a p r suit sa wa f la en d ot fit fit er esour MI wa or lans r ensa is siml ti t gov nd nes h s s ec y va t r sfa th a ZOD it he t av ds re w f la ble he la or t. lue ing a use er th te i ct aso e nd r c th t, nd ar f P ew t es ro nme t or b s t a o or sec , he i in o r MI t e en f l n, t t es th m e use, a impose y h h to t inc l th ex ve rds e and ZO uri a e c ide b of e t Ch nt t f th t a he ity fit pend resolv uf ls c orpa ci t ma al ty unc Balt it is D’s t ntia a M ty , of of ha b be ers; y th c rting juri vit mea ut it IZ ri f t a pre la yond he th th or y imore 20 time l consi n al OD th also nd a sdic ef must rough te e ck a 14 nd th sure th reg ser ey ny reg ec th ac ed, use e e p user t ti ex dera a c reap vati he roh iona ti is i ma c be e ons ome ion, s; nh conside conflic ep ve pira migh ex a F c nefit and b on ritme ib ontrls ernt uture b ta re l ordes a erc c from de le th its. ti rc a ble ontri g a set on t rci e ade s h ional sum em ise nd t ot itec , r tha stae be c al industral c th whetr the he onflicts but of quate protecti of ompatible among esnt like of twen projects e tural aset wi r for it its , Bal tun i opr e Baltimore p and might MIZOD or or se police the econmic and ial timo t local wit tha . gov fore on produce the priv Morev use creating are acq h t eng wise other of nmetal er r ra go , y rent cur ate powe nearby e’s and ields ui p ty now nsi C the tha ubli inerg lit i siton ty . to p tional I er, and sup reg nd or le esntial r not c e mulate for signf In the of t conmi but ustrial marit in and mula for ional erio inter comunity tain cer of hav zonig jurisdcti only leg e use design for x land cant priv change e islaton me inter tax st re de the c a along aly at Wat erf cit , for de or ce c econm epwatr industra and is omp to e standr; ons cit y ive v easm st t por feasible aske the elop f const comunit devlopmnt is or ’sy with d econmic etion ad as esign d from the sharing ro d, ment int ic e wel. aset rain l q nt in nts er use uate on t he a st t s. s. ies d o ly 9 10 Charting the Future of Baltimore’s Industrial Waterfront no i t c u d o r t n I

...... The MI an U w emp Zoni zonig mont inc • The w pr ex To • • nive at it ov p ZOD lude, hi a ly er ir sit — — I sa I Tr A Cor tr — — — — — — — — — — — loy A f ng is n nte nte e ze indg hs fr r ansp bel ansp r mp sit ons unti MI ont ev c ment O po t fi r r of ode A T B Me a Th B ( Li Th Ma Anua B Th Zoni Co Ma a h y i l vie vie ie r M ver n ec nd nd ZOD le usine al al b e F ve ms, r or ra R or l wo f w a e e e ut IR munity ounda ep r r th mbe s ti ti or hnolg c w w es of 2 r yla yla , t la . t Ma 20 more more ost to M B E ng t ea a ion; 014 GMS of at is s s E at t or rk wa nd y conmi . a a a Orig ocd ume C l ari ar nd nd 08 w w arc s s ion n n lti ion, resti e y r Dist s rs sali MI f ha conduc s d , or wit it it nde n, time more adi of rec a , ti land Alia t ), h h h not Por Por of nd ZO t rti he y Econmi Ci i on a ent o Pla na M h ric Re th indv rep and nd A omenda a ct SNA ty th pe ari t t ti D vor ng or li b c ly nc c e h li y , t I al Dep nts it Admi Admi onal e ex enf ndustri a Zonig Indust mite ma Imp as anc ( f r Pt or te time Re lowabe e, y Lea Consu a M e Esta , Balt P idua th ist m or sent dja d nac i HR req of rit IZ s por and ar Pla e, it ing ac e c r f d, ten c ni ni rom OD) n, c Land i imore s tmen te p I ES ur me ls te Dev M uest F ent ns ts ativ ria ndustria stra stra ts ec al a asoc to: tions uture , lti C va The d a studie, t r rently re ye a of l enga y r of ode onmic R f ng ic i nd la rious es in or J elopmnt L presnti to on ndust ed tion tion etn une ars Use la a ular th nd 206 I of nd ia Ba 2 of nd ( ndustrial Loc p de F e tha R Baltimore a 04, ged ted resntd until ina contemp of l nd T use ltimore ESI) V M T t the Pt or of Use ra ion note Prote M hroug r a ts, repo ust ison pwater y , a and nce sk anlyse f taion nspor Ba otr with rine Zoni D Hent ic ng the the Baltimore 20 and to arius to ia Point, A of Forc e, Straegy , ltim , include: ct nalysi ls the 207, 20 24. h and Group MIZOD desi industral ng Te Baltimore Tuc k r Compre Pt or the ion, schel lat in of October ’s City Growth acces. 25, ore’s a mi r Pt or Code nd ing this relatd Irani, the Key the gn e s, of xt nal Real Asociat doc (BIG), City and the ensio Of t of y Mar Baltimore, Balti modife re Hig a he Industria l D Dev x Ph.D A Mang fice , t por and Baltimore 20 ume iagnostc, nsive extnsio lthoug t Mar Est base, to adminste De hway , more land elopm the 8, of alt a indust ., par of nts are on, t s in e the and emnt na er Real Plan, econmy , Baltimore the Pt or yland Mar t Brok lyn-Cr u t v Ser D A relatd ments the and South MIZOD soci ev scop rial-etd R including Wat erfont t nt r Maritme of Est ive ESI ices e A result a MIZ lopment S Plan, dminstra its vey sur at at traegy e use of Baltimore of to e; es (HRES) of ori OD. and Industrial Cit is Planig, T of 20 which owsn ginal not of ’s y Indust four of A is use Re land tion 1973 smal set Bay; tpor s in ria 1 to 1 l • Interviews with real estate executives of Colliers Pinkard and Cushman & . .

Wakefield, and with Aeigir Port Property Advisors, an international consulting firm . .

that specializes in maritime property; . .

• Interviews with representatives of property and business owners unrelated to the . .

maritime industry that are affected by MIZOD; . .

• Interviews with Baltimore County Planning and Economic Development officials; . .

• A review of studies, reports and articles concerning industrial land preservation, . .

zoning, land use, and development issues affecting other cities and ports in the . .

U.S. and abroad; . .

• Interviews with representatives of the Port of San Diego and the City of San . .

Diego Departments of Planning and Zoning, together with a site visit and . .

inspection of select San Diego Marine terminal facilities; . .

• Field inspection of the MPA public marine terminal facilities; . .

• A RESI-administered survey of MIZOD businesses conducted in August 2008; and . .

• An analysis of the economic impact of alternative land uses within MIZOD. . . . .

A complete list of interviewees and documents reviewed is contained in the report . .

bibliography. In addition to John J. Hentschel, CRE, MAI, FRICS, other members of . .

Hentschel Real Estate Services who materially contributed to the preparation of this . report include Andrija Skopac, Jeremy D. Hentschel, and Jessica S. Hentschel. . . . .

The conclusion of our four-month examination of MIZOD has revealed more about . . what MIZOD does not do, rather than what it does, and about what should and needs . . to be done by the city and others to preserve, protect, and promote the port and the . . maritime industry in Baltimore. . . . .

The investigation discovered not only conflicts in land use, but also inconsistencies . . between the aspirations of neighborhoods and the needs of commerce and industry. . .

The research raised questions not only about the proper role and responsibility of . . the city and others with regard to a resource that is critical to the economy of the . . region and the state, but also about the appropriate equation to ensure an equitable . . distribution of the benefits as well as sharing of the responsibilities, including . . opportunity costs foregone. . . . .

The study uncovered inconsistencies in the interpretation of goals and the . .

application of policies that has resulted in ad hoc decisions that once made can . .

have lasting and profound consequences not just for the city, but the region as well, . .

a circumstance that is perfectly understandable for a city that is unaccustomed to . .

having options and needing to make choices. . . .

Despite over ten years of blue ribbon committees, meetings, discussions and reports, . . the investigation highlighted the current lack of coordination and communication . . . .

12 Charting the Future of Baltimore’s Industrial Waterfront ...... re pr as Fina use th pr of inco Ba na Th use si Whi br de gove Alt Ba pr ca mo th dr of flow It for re Sta no Alt re re we mila gar c por ver e e ief rg is i ofe inc oduc vi ca lt lt e t t w houg houg e ven igh t ome dels h Ea es, x imor imor v do le ga insur de de o ly , s, me e inde ci ly yi e nme r ist ic se di ip siona l t r st v r ng ble th s, is P ck ci ci t in lok mor cumst ng al th ing olumes ti i a he t a sue. h h a wh t he Co sion. sion. s e but on e. e, bei nam a nd mounta ty e sour a to ndat hi th xe d b de nts, p inc nd op com ic I a ast str e et ed st ls or o ng nde, stor t i e s s U c ro h o h f by udy anc w t re an a t p in t t isue unde .S c av ions, io e t at he Alth p h l ha te nic d en C C es he ower th land ase s wat i t or a ns th e i ca ha t an t ha es gi scuse c t b t y h ve ab uni at re he of not onsumer. e le, oc th are c e ly ough d c ve h rti ut r er th p underlyi for f vea lish onte a l ec a ac pi use ave re b th a p tie t or cur ex re c lter i nor i e t udge n sub opula t nflue a ost ng il b onmy il al at o led once t ed s s pe pub d eli ase th he 20 zed tie renc a neds c c nd ye no-ma e a M a lrea sta a th onstrai it d fa rie e nd ne st 14 sea nd re th s, d t t de IZ nce lic es ci re a tion t ng wi urba e ntial f be nce he e made, t on at but undig OD t dy lite t is ther e por ba sult de h he a F th and th is d en th a nd rough th uture c not sup te pla mong be ci a omuni rought ritme ned n pa of b t s t t e i regional seks e nd he he ncursi de of y implent th a fa ove p wa en ned c r c a ply ot th only b c rivate ticulary e ci it ny e the c t ef hang out c by te her ax e ’s y an dev lites, which ompeti of rsea, de in of local c use f r decis t obv on time hain o rev expcte ct outsrcing for residnce prof mand ronts t ty , t reliance elopd cit Ba he he es consequce s. sector adres s the ious of enus and and gov of M is ltim as es in untimely the destiny contex ed. oundly f and ons or new ion IZO a U.S burgeoni are wel renc y cur for in nmets er or phenom those the d the gods ore’s For compnet and are on scope for t D result to may welcome h residnt gods. e ra and , as e asy conv deli and of tain, cer ad na t dramticaly of ir long of i presnt h t for responibl t e Industria l he be me search as t t por the ng ing soluti local valorem U.S of hat y ver r exchange ersion i U.S nexorably than of wel. The lasti “just intractable, ly work, globa from world a sat news facilt the s l manufct t the zoni of ons. he a of d ng p for tha impend y isf nd place in t or f of in regi oreign p changi the city the this ng and trade increas are soluti ty rope to ti Some c es la s, f our rates, pri i or ome Wat erfont me s influe nd on ordinaces. st incgludin Pt or of renaisce must in not study or graplin dif uring loca they ug r daily ng distr ng and ons. e a and g t studie h god djacent mploy s od t , icult unique rade rc nc e glin taxes including l exp charcte busine care are land has Unite i risng the e ne a b l ut ansio land t from use is o fuly me local a ion” and wit st ds and to lso now to d of a nt t h r e, in 1 as 3 Consideration of whether to extend the provisions of MIZOD for an additional ten . . years must begin with what at first might appear to be an irrational question – do . . the city, the region and the state really want the port and the benefits associated . . with it, because if so, there are certain fundamental prerequisites that accompany . . such a decision. An examination of the corollary issue, namely, what alternatives . . and associated benefits are available to the city, and a comparative analysis follow. . . . .

An assessment of the port, in terms of its assets and its capacity to effectively vie for . . business and produce benefits (in tax revenues as well as economic spin off) to the . . city on par with or greater than those afforded by alternative uses of the land . . now and in the future is essential, especially if the land use decisions confronting . . the city are conflicting, irreconcilable and mutually exclusive. Of equal import is . . consideration of whether moving marine terminal facilities to other locations to make . .

way for alternative land uses is feasible or even possible. . . . .

One of the author’s biggest disappointments was the inability to ascertain the “right . .

size” of the Port of Baltimore. None among the public or private sector port officials . .

and port real estate experts interviewed was willing or able to proffer an estimate of . .

the port’s appropriate size (in terms of acres) or in the alternative, its best case, . maximum size relative to its potential and likelihood to capture market share based . . on its competitive stature. This is a significant shortcoming because if the port’s . . proper physical size is unknown, how does one know whether legislation like . .

MIZOD is reserving and protecting too much or too little land for maritime purposes. . .

Although the Maryland Port Administration develops a strategic plan for its own . . operations, it acknowledges that there is no apparent on-going process to collect or . . analyze empirical data to assess either its own or the Port of Baltimore’s collective . . present and prospective land use needs. . . . .

Moreover, the author discovered a dearth of corroboration and factual follow up to . . refine future decision making. For instance, although numerous studies over the . . years have recited a statistic that originally appeared in a Port Land Use Development . .

Advisory Council report in 2002 citing the need for 412 acres of port related industrial . . land by 2012, this study was unable to identify anyone responsible for tracking data . .

over time to verify whether the projected need ever materialized, and if so, the extent . .

to which it was satisfied or not. . . . .

These are important questions because essentially with MIZOD, the city is asked to . .

exercise its regulatory police power of zoning to forestall market forces which, if left . .

unchecked, could definitely pose a threat to port interests, but also possibly yield . significant benefits, in terms of tax revenue, to a cash-starved city with the highest tax . . rate in the state......

14 Charting the Future of Baltimore’s Industrial Waterfront ...... Th funds th Fina and Th (if to se wh gove As th or inve In pa th e at e ek t r e e adr t ev co a et hi P c ner stme ly , C al r mi r nme r he it en or to vena ep s eg ant te b y r ght t es t r y eg iona op or to wi na r he posi of suc on nt t nt h nta t ar th t h la h r B e t also in s) out it d, ep iv l alo h a nd a a M l ble r c v e lti e su ben t ju h e or th v C ar o ng source to more, est use of loks ha c risdc i ch e t yla a ts buf ome nd bri such t M land rti he fi wa e nd d i fer I ts sue nt efly Z a ti i ng a , gon th front t nter a OD a erp , Por ons t t use b re ev re he pres e th out s, pre th gula ci rise t be to ose in a ie r Por f prot Adminstra st e ty , ar s sent es i r ing 2014 th n ve r F w tor in would of bey t th rela c uture e t el ec a of h th e e y la residnt por and e q , ond tion a tiv a ac reg Balt ting e which ui a s f bsence t’s por ti ew t’s ely tab some be ion protect on of imore the aforde prices) star on exampls ly few, the Ba ial by and are shared cit succes. and/or re ltim wher of and t tax but ’s y h produces come concentrad t d the e he pro MIZ by rev city ore’s bordes. comercial si t’s por by st of b priv gnifcant, OD MIZOD enu y ty er at One would nde act the the e ate Industria l protection. numeros to ions rights v from me t’ por c ital The p conside i actions ty rep or entail e asure parc taken x aset dev be t s clusiv t repo nativ alter resnt (in inter benficiare come elopmnt. e the ls s. r. of f benfi and e, in Wat erfont ely most the st brief other expndit s a by strae in a e de to ts ci ve easm land L ly lik ’sty ci ocust to acquire ritable s. p conside ely sion gies t or ure use to cit Point nts f b or of y ies rs 1 5 16 Charting the Future of Baltimore’s Industrial Waterfront dn u o r g k c a B

...... 41 To th th devlo int toge devlo th of land, an Among pla av defin wa th of Th 20 Th Use Land Admin envi sur ( pr an Ar Count of Th th PL e e at e e op undel ai p t ma e e is s n imp i r UD ia h lyze 4. nve p i i P r oundi sione of t De th nev sue MI Ma t lable e op er leg ti f or o or he U a or r As y , ve AC) it er P pmen pmen nd t lem ti the “cat se str ZOD ntor t ve t er r he or oth isla ime a it Ane . es it p inv condu “…t mo s count L set va wi ab d lop of ti ime a or and D under ng t of and is la ti w es, ti for alog ila er L th by y ev le st est nt t on under su busi on t t w o f and hi w t ment t o of ble ar he of enti he elop th Ar s Indust c Use conf a PL as delin ch ment ie r PL es “po PLUTF’ C c un r n t e ( of a under ut ings, i h and ted s. ha un unde MPA) nes a UTF t a lso UTF , Use th Por and wa “ ic s ty” utonms t r der ilze among in aut util ment Ma The lic D Zone rti e a der t eate te w o l c i ev relat t’ ria O ts c analyze th n Ta r PL rea busi ut e l t it hor s s f r i uti p ulmina ng s, d zed yland, wa ha rdina mped sp ut Count Por l hou at mar be rovide rec wa ront, sk il UTF lopmen f Zone re Z te c an lize ac il t s oused ed it th ne ompri would oni oth twe zed te Forc al inc land t d ome c y il zed t it h nc Lan e d ar f r s or iments th to t c esta tie wh wa ng ti ime y , arged er he lude ront onduc land F land.” p a e p on a ea n e e i and clear nd uture land,” s. mpera po d sur rope oli t ter sing th th ic 04-8 pla Ov int Por ( th c te nda Zone. Use I PL i h w of rea t r e ings, tic n nfr to roundig in e , e r m tfor dep dev h with as va UTF), c repsnt t w ted u a rlay a com a ly a a zoni er t t reation ty Baltimore L e dit mong astr ions, l e l s rious hi tiv D p recognizing and of stabli i ets , e jurisdctions ticulate ar endt on was roc public a PLUDAC ev withn ch the lopers, an e the Di m pa tible ng, multi-jurisdctional u f Ba elopmnt s on was or which ar of ur e in Use strict ctu in in st responibl sh i other s ltim re nte the land of hibit itm regional at no round to at 198 tial re and tha t sponiblty and a and e o D ive an and Ci n-idus creating c use (MIZOD was Baltimore ore’s agencies is was ev e creat ef olabrtiv use, and ty things, s the “over-archin of the p s de the began en p ing hip t of t or re rivate Ofice and lopment hat roxi .” the MI orignaly velop cour cope higes sidental and Baltimore imp ned legi ping Industria l to t Z trial f a he gove mat or t par and inter-jurisd ictional ) OD e Po in as v sur ti proe was aged of sla stabli lemnt econmic withn ing harbo . Pt or compilng e ra can r t to e 196 wel compre s us maintg r t cordi was t A an ef ure t n no-water of ey , Devlopm a ion. orignaly dv cordinate com unit asembld es .” g t for she the of d master be City , Baltimore plan y isor as (Sec inv with the and adopte s bes es B The trategic PLUTF d Wat erfont nat are to rep altim he yentor , dev the withn t y Mar Balti and 8-402) w marke the Counc il ing us nsive ing focus plan h enacted ctaingon elopm ent de e Pt or ies. taiv es sen a er ore more to conclude maint and the land f C of a dat mat or and pend body e a 3,0 hapte nd Zone mast for t a nd of and Land dre zone aba Ptor re Ptor Ane PLUTF aing nt solv in ion er nt se r f to s e 1 e t 7 Contrary to the original perception that a significant amount of property within the . . zone was vacant or underutilized, it became apparent as properties were surveyed . . and the inventory database was compiled, that the original parameters of intensity . . and extent of land use were flawed as indicators of property underutilization. . .

Thereafter, the tone of PLUDAC’s annual reports shifted from hopeful anticipation, . . optimism, and promotion of redevelopment opportunities to cautious concern . . about the perils of new development infringing upon and conflicting with existing . . waterfront industrial uses that were first expressed in its 2001 annual report. By 2003, . .

PLUDAC was cautioning that . . . .

“…conversion of industrial use properties to mixed use activity . .

creates the potential for land use conflicts between existing Port . .

and Industrial Uses and new mixed use tenants and residents and . .

that local governments value redevelopment based on its return in . .

property taxes and job impacts.” . . . .

The report further acknowledged that the Port Land Use Zone was . . . .

“…once an area in which private investment was scarce but [it is] . now the site of competition for well positioned property…A policy . .

decision needs to be made as to where future growth should be . .

directed.” . . . .

Despite these warnings and the foreboding about the growing incursion of mixed-use . . development and the accompanying potential for conflicts within the Port Land Use . .

Development Zone, by 2004, PLUDAC itself appeared to be conflicted, touting among . . its successes “projects too numerous to mention involving the conversion of former . . industrial use properties to mixed use developments throughout the Port Zone.” . . . .

In September 2005, PLUDAC published the Maritime Industrial Retention and . .

Growth Management Strategy (MIRGMS) to serve as the inter-jurisdictional master . . plan originally envisioned by PLUTF. But, by 2005, developers had discovered that . . waterfront living was the lure to attract affluent suburban baby boomers back to the . .

city, while cheap, easy-to-obtain, flexible mortgages in the aftermath of 9/11 had . .

already been fueling an unprecedented housing boom along the city’s waterfront. . . . .

While port activity had been waning for years prior to the formation of PLUTF, by the . .

time PLUDAC was empanelled, port business was already on the rebound, and was . .

booming by the time MIRGMS was published. Indeed, the combined national total . value of imports and exports increased 65 percent between 1997 and 2005, and had . . doubled by 2007 (see exhibit on page 29)......

18 Charting the Future of Baltimore’s Industrial Waterfront ...... re mo we lev sh Unf per and re 163 sq wi pr As Source: FL PO Proj Cont da WARE st to Ba MIR envi land-i flex and Dev mi Ove pr bef por of r sponi dev op oj uar th a EX t lt ong ti 9 met re i RT or a y dif re i lust ,0 t o 17 imor ga elop od. GMS l r ec spa sione out f 4 e er indc ra r t lex o e e th me nte .8 onag S tuna HOU cte of ti ,0 ti D 0 f Maritme lop r ty ing PACE inve de fe 58 ce on, e on y ra Thi de IRE squa ment dev f bi spa e t t. nsiv utr 0 et d w e to he same d cl t a ment te mil lit mand ed w and sti Li th te f squa SE it s stme ing and Ne CT by or of ce e elo it PLUTF’ ly , y ke h w e is ose mat re e h t l i in i for ion n ha Z a ne n w t t c Industrial w in w Ane o n C fa pme he m he ) p reh one re a f cre dre nt t ha et t ise, a t eri ed r rgoe th PLUD w he p t Co h ark Ba tra s o sq b pub sh roje f c M e ouse ac ase at rti e up dge fle od s et ity nt 27 a lti ex req e ns cki ua Por et PA’s noe t or Ar ori ti ANE we s, ac a t ne x more ng d .8 lic ct vit p h AC ct only to por re uc tr ( dema undel ng and ui h Retnio suc p t proj gina lans ib a ions ed of a ualy mil 4 7 stra y lac or Dev bout nd n f rem th yea it 91 2 c e t c a t ag th h onc hroug 20 for tio ould c sli c enti emnt ARUND ec war C p l e ,0 ,0 in te t tual nd f on r. as on gresiv e over elop a riv lex it countie en gh 03 o 0 0 F te sump g n 2 nt lude y , Th MI 4 pla f 0 uture ta eh i Rol 4 at and for d 12 c sued tly tons led wa p D a fa spa p sq. sq sq iner for RG percent e ment e pla nd c oint ouse 9.1 time. er r em out th e a ( rehous t..f t..f to la EL sector Growth e, t.f ov W On c about c mance for MS tion n. p rough 897,0 7 s. nd 2 tha res i e or arehous traf n and roxi or al 06, of ershadowing to t milon inv uction, constr Zone he R 206 e proximate whetr standig of di ol the stimaed (tha Ba t ic from mat y entor 0 i Mana gemnt he 20, BALTI region vi nter by the land 201 space, increasd ltim 1,4 Of . the re square tha organization Was e e 95 square relativ Sector ther city 0, 2 to was Space 0 (R , to M ore’s ? ew ci the ther fur ,0 stock .5 would should the O/R OR p ty av square a sup to ade t or t nd a mil fe 0 0 e h erag was fail projected an E Strategy limt fet t por e O ori Statis almost et sq.f t.sq.f sq. to was Industria l 4.308 facilte C i deman t or nvet av on to y machiner chaleng O of ginal ori t.f p a be t. aproximte a fe ed or erag roje . able f anul surpl capture p a Por tics expansio, to ginal et) promt tioned por cil indv milon amount 3 or MIRGS s. ct about 3 t ties, during land t on BA y ing direct-rela o PLUDAC percent of projections e projections, of idual deman coment LTIMOR 4 4 the of page Wat erfont aproximtely and and ,308 ,85 ed a espcialy 897,3 ci and square 29 util izedunder Pt or of ty ly p the e for ov with deman produce milon equipm t or nvirome 2 vacant 0 0 ware space 4 while 6, rie wor er 36 8, Land E same ’s f or CoStar f 10 d CI on for t t.sq.f t sq.f t sq.f et ab house he or space, for the TY t ne years). land t ilt otal t Use d ons of he for it nt), . . ntal tha y s city ds 1 9 MIRGMS espoused certain strategies to support its stated Land Use Goal of retaining . . industrially zoned land that would support the growth of industrial and Port Related . .

Industries within the Port Focus Areas, namely, to encourage local governments . . to adopt: . . . .

1. Zoning and development controls to protect access to and use of transportation . .

infrastructure serving and connecting area distribution channels; . .

2. Zoning classifications and development guidelines that would maintain . .

appropriate land use buffers between port and other uses; . .

3. Legislation placing developers of land contiguous to industrial uses on notice . .

about the nature of industrial operations; required installation of buffers by the . .

developer of a new residential or commercial project contiguous to existing . .

industrial uses; requirements that developers of land adjacent to industrial . .

properties ensure that existing traffic flow will not be adversely impacted by the . .

proposed new residential or commercial development; and . .

4. Development guidelines and policies that would take MIRGMS into consideration . .

and promote MIRGMS vision and goals. . . . .

The original MIZOD legislation was viewed as a capstone supporting the tenets . of MIRGMS and was lauded among PLUDAC’s land use successes in its 2004 . . annual report. . . . .

However, as will be discussed elsewhere in this report, the city’s policies and actions, . . as well as the provisions of the original MIZOD ordinance, appear to have fallen short . . of MIRGMS’ intended land use goals. . . . .

Upon publication of MIRGMS, PLUDAC viewed its work as completed and, thereafter, . . disbanded, leaving implementation of MIRGMS to existing state and local agencies. . .

The Port Land Use Development Office (PLUDO) and the PLUDAC property . . inventory database were reportedly transferred to MDOT’s Real Estate Unit, which . . reports PLUDO to be defunct and the PLUDAC property inventory database retired . . and outdated. . . . .

Thus, it is currently unclear who bears the responsibility designated by the legislature . .

to coordinate activities within the Port Land Use Development Zone and the . .

collaborative effort to market Port Land Use Zone properties for “port related or port . .

compatible uses.” ......

20 Charting the Future of Baltimore’s Industrial Waterfront t a h W s I ?D O Z I M

...... • • use de MIZO ac • Acc • • • • • zo • Whi elig An • unde 20 • Th 1. a op 2. c tua ne ep e omn ov or ibi 4 le or b A c A A T or Re Pla B Hot A Ma Inv L r of r Hist A C Ma w ec ela r ly av onside ut a o oc ding usine er D a lit lyi tuni pa pa pa pa long- wa s at sta r p da nto ned r ent est er r la t y a it els is ex c us ubli ng or w it er r r r r ed t n ompr ime y nc ns. ce ce ce ce ur for ime er it ti ment g cl ic ly t t n/ s o dist l sta hi denomi zoni and enr o es, ant l l l l and i ing; fr ra c udes a Poi v stri ndu be Uni t w t w Du inc ly , n t on t er a and h h ship bl ndig Indust he i i nd i r s C and at at an th th se en la i ng y motels; nt a lusion i t c a ha ndal a t a n o ly y t nd c s t n i de nd ne is Dev Profe ra de pi ndustria priv he indust it introduc i ma di zonig wa rti f nat s isue isola al ive zoned ’s y i re ng pendi red epwa ria l stri not lunc de k f te rit ac use at ng fe olwing or, wi lopme l c Dep sep siona r-de e re r ce ct t an Z s: me ria e dist velop th h th but oni ma t te ng d s l dist th roms o M ar d into ed l b in ar p re r e e plane inf -3 b e inct. e rin le to e ng on ncla a tmen n l e teni te e MI F ric n c prov c ading i O ac ts; , a rast uture ng use dent ce onducted e wh inc Ov nd v t a fic t, ZOD h he ve iewd, ter nd I ot s on t re th lude uc ture r ic with e ison d not es he merly of of rlay mina ( sourc h sidental tha e or to dist a unit progams was: lt r of ot new int public Planig, a desi marit houg than uniqe Di he a nct would for ent parcel ls of Ba nd e; withou de strict is r resid modif wi gnated whi ltim MIZOD velop than contigu ares h ime regulatd y accesor encouraged. of comunit and th the ch featurs, wh in wise other wit (MIZOD existng ore’s the ies use, ntial y accesor ment p i some of defi ot i usion ntr h as rivate ch defin tain cer crite ty he depwatr the a and was nito MIZ Industria l as withou of wi r PUD (PUD): y U.S ) land influeces, ci marine t a the was hat be se a comercial s t ty , OD ; si o . of p used it ngle of cites remain rovis delinat al p use zone abuts as orignaly no-idustr mited er mits per live depwat a wit 1 te cces; to conflic ts dist 8 ; ons restict mi r Wat erfont h tainme entr and fe a problems, e i rict, dep ntact stab combin nals use t of any an in or enacted r li the but are . use sh an varies al and wate more industral h use; a at a M-3 it s ve whe ion other of r nt ); in as only and re: 2 1 MIZOD Railroad M-3 Zoning

MIZOD CCB 08-0018 April 2008 Source: Baltimore City Planning Department MAP OF MIZOD – PROPERTIES LIKELY TO OPT OUT IN 2014 IN YELLOW

22 Charting the Future of Baltimore’s Industrial Waterfront ...... 4. 3. 5. zo Th MIZO Ha pr Janu Th age comp but vis ident code dur input th Acc fr re pr wh gove incl Th om quir e oc ogr nig e e e vi er on, nci or i uding e al ng c fr Fa An P Pr C la An Ha p Sp ng MI new sec es n r e nd if omunit oint c r r a urc so ding r D om ur nd a e iv ew es ies y omenc eh med i a ea nd th ZOD t d w or fi r isol isol th r ond r r at he ha 20 o tis of e se h ensiv ch e ki ne w r t c ow dina f ce co em. e th dev o o it el ase se omp s ts t i de fir at at 2 sum r ns e th o mar ar 9 Ba e ntly c me a d zo 01 a r s ov ed ed Ca omple for st is ies d nd ve c d an t st f nce Poi e su t int o ni it y y lopme Poi C erla he r b e nto r k r ine lopi , y th eh sanc industr zonig a e a ha e ng b b ment. y now, of more wil nt) rci lb dopt er ngth wri p eg e seq hop th long nt t ensiv t y rti lani he eit t h he te ng ter cla al er of in a tua di te ea f nt uent t ocus ef ng th and s ed mina c sif stric a m fra -ter in a h di 20 ring in ity code t y r e pub a a uly ng of a e ne f nd l an t s mewo 2 a th zoni ic 37 ha map ic sanc m or 8. pub ove resi 01 t t b s, w ne of on l at he lishe ult ea e was c en p t fa . f 1. yea ion fi e onc pla c erc utre w Th is ng F r dent cil nc rlie cia omprehnsiv lic ping dra t relv map uture uar Bec rk a c c nig rs. d ori e in e lav lude c and ur omprehnsiv ties ls, de input r ting f iv ode withn p a y ia ph ef a ginaly rently I e a ping ed proces, roce e ca t Zo n use with l nt he x fect a of its use; a p de with J b of wi nig tcomings shor oficials uly se the zonig a vi uti first industral s this nsi respondig cor p l a ag which and a Ba of schedul hase enacted 208 began emrg a prov ng e conside on the o. e Co nactme ltim t phase seri est p he zoni ge roce a e ares de clasi are whi , remaing imatng ison wel-st the neraly maste redv T ore’s with r ng Diagn and , s an unce ch from unde ra of which nt ci fications of to ble code wil of s ty public elopmnt wi of r m for of an marit the Industria l unchanged expir a plan, t r a the resticti inteds r l osi a blished a the a requi ai p i the mount y specif nal nter two-p re is to eriod ne n t por s ime exist B sidental exp met document ne of and the implent altim w prov i n w ons the zonig hase (Cox use t cy ing residnt of o 2014 extnsiv of ci ct the zonig ings the rev ison cle ty ore dev ed si one Wat erfont amount unimp wil zonig nce iew proces. toaly is p ule r Cre exact . t , to conducte elop tie rope han ordi as now tha aply to of the ordinace ek begin 1973. by e al s the rove f to p L nace a ive locat code, a of segratd a not city ocust ublic in plan’s city nd new is zonig t d years s t in ime d h ions only wer e by 2 3 A viable land use plan and the zoning to implement it begin with a vision but should . . always be grounded in reality. A land use plan should not only consider the supply . . of various classifications of zoned land in terms of its geographic and physical . . characteristics and economic linkages, but also should examine the extent of present . . and prospective demand for the various classifications envisioned for each use and . . community. Furthermore, since market conditions are constantly in flux, an effective . . land use plan must also have the capacity to evolve in tandem with market needs. . .

Such deliberation appears to be lacking historically in Baltimore, and is absent from . . the current dialogue about developing a new zoning code in general and with respect . . to MIZOD in particular. . . . .

Similarly, although MPA develops and issues a strategic plan for its operations, there . . does not appear to be a strategic plan for the Port of Baltimore as a whole. Likewise . .

there is no maritime land use plan for the Port of Baltimore as a whole that is based . .

on an empirical determination of the Port’s land use needs that can serve as a basis . .

for comprehensive zoning decisions......

24 Charting the Future of Baltimore’s Industrial Waterfront y r t s u d n I Tsd n e r

...... th ma Does Th th to st goal de Ba per to The Whi envi Tr cont Cor Ba Th Ba job ap Acr 20 at th th Whi a ade eir e e e pe a cl lt lt lt is e 20 te al nufa s os c 1, po imor imor imor c S a le le ine s ro r In ent r co st migh ar it c at ta indust ac (2 pr , a th a ce 6. ra nmet y Who lose at dus and nd s e ntr t th c 1 ti ima e. los ove e ga t ew ler r t tur e e’ e In of ng. ion o esp e pe ci a t tri dir ined s Coun Coun a ct lesa boa Tr i be r inc r ty se t ing r de, rc f ti y of e i sha al Thi utre ec ion a in al e of a on r e en sourc w l nspor ct ms ac r m r 23, le C t y e ea t an L 36 2 and a s d ive dowe s ty , ty ive own. t ha mploy c uch nt 0 i in f , Tra n li se tre elra riendly v 20 8 of , t over ly . ke th ersu s ota rti 3 d th th or h e j th ta 3 ob de , of nd to manuf ea e ma Use of e e rep But an tion j e ng l a ti obs. ci ment s t vy rep indust rat th e emp th h hre ng. 9 emp remna gni ty , in mployent od 8 t or as indust A at th e p ma industr e and p lac nalys ac Tra erc e how tude Th sa not of of ercent ed loyment e loyment has ny pe turi e q me ri F nsp i ent nt dec Ba uesti s Wa a th h uture rce ries. ev only c l is is a ea ng dec omuni y ltimore of at period. j re t or , reh ob line g ) in nt, v a r, c , a on th its y re nd omi disturbng lined Are i a at c in re post n stark b ousing) now smok e ontiued lated half los of is ase ion for past? mai of the Baltimore ’ city h of County ed Ba ties 41 e at sioned a of ( include and ned contras of a estack indust consit g emp s city ,65 v ltim a reat a the y ap industral has t rate 26 hat , Warehousing industre gen since as loyment with ore’s j six and roxi percent obs rial ben C conc ing by once ilustrae withn more n. conc er i t ty ra pe o mat use a the the tha e ly of the h rce e xp long Industria l ev job s as relid ns r , M than ely stai erinced Baltimore stae an their en the job nt ti 5 asociated de anufcturing d base me, with percent heritag 1,20 integ f increas more c c by rom cit los. 2. li on staewid at comprehnsi ned 5 but ’s y t had “cleanr,” he 1 ra time heavy 0 201 8 On sev by 31 Wat erfont l jobs De 5 t folwing percent ri h par a ben wi re p neig er. se s e s perct en a velop erct en , to th ali a tha rate st indu t brighte from Whole in and b of zed h 206, the The st lue more boring ve ment of eadily of and in -colar 201 t by since p y r able, ’ city sale the plans decline r t?or but note as 19 s 2 , 5 .

BALTIMORE CITY JOBS . . .

% change % change . .

1990- 2000- . .

1990 2000 2000 2006 2006 . MANUFACTURING 41,500 26,900 (35%) 17,554 (35%) . .

WHOLESALE TR 21,600 13,300 (38%) 11,033 (17%) . .

TRANS WH UTIL 20,900 14,300 (32%) 13,509 (6%) . .

TOTAL 85,990 56,500 (34%) 44,102 (22%) . .

CHANGE (29,490) (12,398) . .

PER YEAR (2,949) (2,480) . . .

Source: Maryland Department of Planning . . . .

While total industrial employment was down 34 percent for the 10 year period 1990 . .

to 2000, it sustained a further 22 percent decline in just six years between 2000 and . .

2006. Meanwhile, manufacturing employment, which fell 35 percent over the 10-year . .

period between 1990 and 2000, plummeted another 35 percent over the 6 year . .

period between 2000 and 2006. . . . .

In addition to those jobs lost as a result of technological advances and enhanced . .

productivity, a combination of factors reported in the Industrial Land Use Analysis . .

has most likely contributed to the city’s continued industrial employment decline: . .

• An antiquated and functionally deficient supply of industrial space relative to . .

suburban locations; . .

• A dearth of industrial land parcels in functional denominations suitable for . .

industrial use convenient to transportation corridors; . • Incompatible adjoining land uses; and . .

• A noncompetitive tax rate relative to suburban locations. . .

Warehouse Space Statistics

Warehouse & Flex Region Warehouse Only Region Warehouse & Flex Baltimore City

TOTAL INCREASE ABSORP. TOTAL % OF INCREASE ABSORP. TOTAL % INCREASE ABSORP. % OF SF UNDER SQ FT. SQ FT. SQ FT. SQ. FT. WH&FLX SQ. FT. SQ. FT. SQ. FT REGION SQ FT. SQ FT. REGION CONSTR 2000 185,269,291 3,588,325 150,612,110 81% 2,373,124 N/A N/A N/A 2001 188,524,437 3,228,146 -71,939 152,487,747 81% 1,875,637 -411,168 N/A N/A N/A 2002 190,935,525 2,411,088 -1,603,972 154,213,368 81% 1,725,621 -1,559,605 N/A N/A N/A 2003 194,035,228 3,099,703 4,008,670 156,709,383 81% 2,496,015 3,698,922 48,926,735 25% N/A 888,476 2004 196,867,071 2,831,843 2,708,455 158,998,246 81% 2,288,863 2,027,097 49,118,907 25% 192,172 -114,705 192,172 2005 196,881,036 2,013,965 1,040,849 160,469,925 81% 1,471,679 -73,209 49,225,907 25% 107,000 -936,627 130,000 2006 201,194,544 2,313,508 1,735,773 162,323,963 81% 1,854,038 1,293,764 49,125,034 24% -100,873 362,559 165,600 AVG/YR 2,649,709 1,629,452 AVG/YR 1,951,976 1,049,846 AVG/YR 66,100 199,703 12% 2003-06 7,159,316 2003-06 5,614,580 2003-06 198,299 3% 487,772 AVG.ANNUAL ACRES 0.3 FAR 15 12 REQUIRED Source: CoStar

26 Charting the Future of Baltimore’s Industrial Waterfront ...... to ex me Alt of pr ar For industr in coh st inte of th empl of to foc incl Dur St an tr find Ma ri Alt th co Indu 20 GM Th co redv The of ac a atis ea e e ed ist nti mpet t r t kno C houg houg e comp low te nual p us ans ande h e uding esi k r ing C I inst ha s sit ercnt In ngs r ed zonig ndus ment est e st tim oyme nue tics ec omp t elop of ce it er h ve dus rial wl e p c i of s it anc it ent th a e al h h te sor, m in a dem e t a of , edg s e ’s y c he indust nd re a ve tr e tr r to th admi s i ment th dev ost re co tri I o t mount nt, r w ndu L e, t 41 o a ial a op int et f wo e he and e he and/ a indu c lag s cki nomic al it f nd t and t nd ite t it in h elop ai -ba 4 lo h ci h the por it he eni er n y t e an L C ld u str e P an L ni g n ty t r ca s o it ac i sive lig beh h ha or edly vie c or ia s c sed 5 Us stri M .” f ng s Por in ng t. onta r at ontra ial ti 0-a ha a ment ti not l k ht and t egio d sta a I rti nd ons d As ws e re ret ons de A ZOD ey in p L al c the s or M of t i cre Us A Ret and Use new rea of ndustri dev bri te velop a ng d L in i ent surpi ast nalys busi loc c in ea lustra n’s an st t and e ex . a d onduct t f I glob he o enti ef ted unct ha ’s broa Hola ng -95 du r A er t A th at th ion pa Use p h t lopme naly in th lyzi nes 2 nalys lok o t olic 18 ion er e ment str Use th Pla is 0 ndi e on sing ali th co would a es, du t te ion d, amount a 4-a heir t, ng e nder Dev F jur p ial 4 e nd ie za r n ed d si of uture ng st re and a a c ri por into ta Ta inc is Por s c nt. tion, t nd docume omunity ng i ri land t is ts. efor n dic dor, re p ha rgeti industr growth or in elopm f le sk post, c h -95 al oreca dict ro eption sug t, th onclude t eavy a G L the t C Growth t conjunc tion the with st Forc e. L ties per ikewi ion activ while the e IS hesapke of use t B and Busi of ng ions h gest t above altim resp cor e h st sy industral mater t indust nts tha roug ’s city Ba fiv he nt al policy , a proensi . chang stem, dat se, Use nes ty, familr t uni in expr , land e hat ltim A Mana gem would sector ore B e tha y dvisor “wit g the exhibt or h the altim m for rowth Z rial Ec with ondig Park di es the 206, one; i and ore’s lost Comerce 30 t co with sed onmi abil h region “…with aprently land ty ov entrp u with both planers m rev city to ore’s mindset t may ld tha hat to er to or ent sectors Counc il n oder ty market this v res 40 eal en Industria l decline by expect no-i time outsrce might c wit to MIZOD itled emp whi wi help indus t rise the acres out Dev some zonig st Study ase h th udy , . ch bui ations C responibl ndustrial whe on the hasize city This lack s e Warehous elopm (PLUDAC); upgradin e o the hav to wit x trial in nter rently cur per nly , ldings p , confli which some we prov at n erince or does the h indust clasif e ci makes p i a it about tract Wat erfont 10 n year.” a re on roduct ty the dem the sy comes nt extn the les-t ison ct use to achiev devlo unawre stemaic me not the t g ing icat e h imp rial Stra work and up f 15 exist and or re e Space it city the or mb han- iv alwys c ion mer for se policie as if d tance or to acres of it it to e those of , egy ped e s y wil ’scity mb s, and ficult a capcity rs the 15 the t the should h re or le a at on to sult nd act of s, d to 2 7 city’s commitment of economic development resources (e.g., tax abatements, PILOTs, . . public works contributions, loans, grants, TIFs etc.) to industrial versus non-industrial . . ventures over time and to gauge and compare the relative productivity and return on . . the respective investments appears to be limited. Despite the ongoing comprehensive . . rezoning process, city officials interviewed acknowledge that there has been no explicit . . attempt to estimate or project the amount of industrial land that will be needed to . . support future industrial demand, including that generated by the port. . . . .

The incongruity of city actions at times seems to underscore the need for city officials . . to view their actions and decisions in the context of the “big picture” and recognize . . how land use decisions, including property dispositions, can have imperceptible . . and unintended consequences with profound and long-lasting effects on industrial . . communities. . . . .

For instance, in a recent Request For Proposals (RFP) to dispose of industrially zoned . .

surplus land situated in Anne Arundel County and associated with the closed . .

Pennington Avenue Landfill in Curtis Bay, the city’s RFP imposed the obligation on the . .

prospective developer not to overburden area residential streets, citing the area SNAP . .

plan’s recommendation that “…Pennington Avenue should be a local residential . street protected from heavy traffic levels…,” despite Pennington Avenue’s designation . . as a federally supported intermodal transportation corridor as reported in MIRGMS. . . . .

Despite the parcel’s industrial zoning, the RFP established a residential land use goal, . . reportedly in response to Anne Arundel County’s request. The city entered into . . agreements with a developer who had also acquired adjoining land in Anne Arundel . .

County, portions of which had been zoned industrial, but had been rezoned by the . . developer for residential use. The developer was seeking to create a residential . . community to be known as Cedar Hill, some of which would overlook the Curtis Bay . . industrial waterfront. The acquisition of city property would provide a means of . . secondary ingress and egress via Aspen Street to Pennington Avenue. . . . .

The increased residential traffic and potential for future congestion of a designated . . inter-modal, industrial transportation corridor that might ensue from the residential . .

development facilitated by this sale of city property is an example of how seemingly . .

innocuous property decisions made by the city can have inadvertent and . .

unintentional consequences on port related industrial users......

28 Charting the Future of Baltimore’s Industrial Waterfront e h T t Pr o f O

...... er o m i t l a B Th st YEAR Sim Source: U. Th Acc se comp Admin 19 funct owne 20 20 19 count 20 19 re As for bec dr 20 tr 20 impo sh 20 20 tona equi 20 a ade ea do sulti ve e ip S. e e ma dgin or of ause 7 4 0 8 1 9 2 3 5 6 7 dil p lar n mina pme POB P io t r I f d er ding or r ie ge, h nufa -po mpo ng a y ise U.S ly s n str as re a s s t c , a nd t nt) of h a ont of nt i a t r he w nd w e a be n unde Censu s ct uto av t ti x 49 h ts r it IMPO 1,2 1, 1,0 1, 1,2 1,4 1,6 1,8 1,9 o t e op , a ce Ba a por on ur en he ile c r e h e x F 876 918 t ac se ge it mob m pa x ls he ore in 2 48 31 67 64 7 81 61 67 lt f era o n C and y por e r ( s ma loc ti t v r imore ari nera g Bureau, ha w in M . nsio t ha th ,7 ,68 ,6 ,23 ,78 ,37 ,30 ,09 ,78 ,38 ,85 ng, RTS ea Regi te st ic re ca PA) ne ile nufa at 94 37 de ts e ce rti s e-ori dily d. 4 1 4 7 7 4 0 0 3 Product E adi pa ion l cont tra a s doubli e t r xpo , ter onal de ng The pwa ( a de a c an ai ct ly PO de nd Foreign nd inc ity cli of mina n uring a nte rol a th ts r ag r B) va te ni ne ha rea a t h CHG sup na th L 19 12 17 14 1 ng uc r gr s, -6% % e enc and as r d ch ila 5% 2% 8% 6% of s is vi ls V in % % % % % of sing loc F and Trade p por b s al and ble e ks, b . e ga uture t not inc y t or en he en Of ga U.S s la u c at i ble of a de rge t e R tion Bulk dre ove e ions, . rgo ot M t Divson v ser sy ol A he the i e 1 outsrced manufcturing n dep A EXPORTS PA. he 1,023 1,48 s xp noy 9 dge wel-ocated r of ces On categori ilustraed 71,9 678,3 718, 683,9 670,4 682,4 713,4 807,5 894,6 of 43 Mil the ices Carg r andi 7. yland Mar most Th industral Ba minals ter materi t s R ,109 ,481 mous wat hat e last ol Study is ltim ng. ons o 94 6 12 65 16 2 15 16 31 other requing er. including loc are es Of de ore’s to a with o ate Balti f by , and l D cade f indust locat (RO The place activ lowe 36 tmen t epar wit Dolars outp d CHG the 13 13 1 14 12 -7% -1% -5% % more the is 2% 5% in marine h /RO Industria l % % % % % with Pt or ed conside ity r i ment re coal exhi n the -cost rial y Mar tedly por in the in machine and and of the site, bi c and Balti the ount sit te venu 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 3 ts, city land Balti of ra ,715 ,94 ,5 ,86 ,589 ,97 ,849 ,284 ,576 ,84 ,16 employ mi r A dolar es. TO ble, ste city Ttaion.ranspo ne in more much ies. is, Wat erfont more regad nals Ptor Pardoxicaly, y r ms ter TAL el, s 749 678 160 943 053 72 79 610 41 489 34 has in expnsiv ove A and v Baltimore unde r ment, City , olume are t, par of actualy rsea ben of the privat only by toal l a CHG U.S 16% 16% 13% 12% of -6% -1% % la 8% 2% 7% 8% nd ely is 2 9 . Although matching the five-year growth reported for all U.S. ports, the POB has . . . . lagged behind some of its East Coast competitors in terms of growth in container . . . . traffic in part because of its inland location and constraints on railroad service. As a . . . . result, the Regional Landside Access Study describes POB as “a local and regional . . . . distribution port serving a freightshed consisting mostly of customers within 500 . . . . miles, and because it handles a diverse mix of cargo types, most of its cargo prefers . . . . truck over rail.” Citing a Drewry Shipping Consultants Ltd. study of the Seagirt . . . . Marine Terminal, The Baltimore Sun recently reported that despite Seagirt’s location . . . . within the fourth largest consumer market in the country, the terminal captures just . . . . 16 percent of the market for goods shipped within a 100 mile radius, while trucks . . . . bring in goods from the ports of New York and Norfolk...... Local and national port and maritime real estate experts interviewed predict that . . . . Baltimore could reasonably expect to expand its container business, in part by . . . . capturing those medium-sized ships that will be displaced by larger post-Panamax . . . . vessels from other ports. Recent media reports document MPA’s actions aimed at . . . . striking a public- private partnership arrangement to procure funding of needed . . . . improvements and the long- term operation of the currently underutilized Seagirt . . . . Marine Terminal container facility in Dundalk, as well as the relocation of the adjacent . . 66-acre ICTF operated by CSX, which handles predominantly domestic rather than . . . . international cargo...... While the MPA terminals handle mostly general cargo (principal commodities include . . . . autos and trucks, RO/RO, machinery and farm equipment, forest products, breakbulk . . . . cargo such as steel and palletized cargo, and containerized cargo), some of the . . . . privately operated marine terminals handle more targeted or specialized cargo (e.g., . . . . the CSX Curtis Bay and Consolidation Dundalk Piers concentrate on coal, the Apex . . . . Canton terminal on oil, and the Westway N. Locust Point Terminal on liquid storage), . . . . while some manufacturers (e.g., Domino Sugar and Sverstal Steel) use their . . . . deepwater piers to receive raw materials and/or ship finished products)......

30 Charting the Future of Baltimore’s Industrial Waterfront G G % % % % % % % 4 % H H 8 % 1 % 6 % % % 5 % % 1 1 2 7 7 6 1 6 - 4 4 4 - 4 1 0 4 2 1 % C % C N N O O T T 2 6 9 9 G G 1 6 7 3 N N 9 1 4 0 8 1 4 8 8 6 8 0 8 , 6 , , , 0 I I 7 5 9 9 2 8 2 9 0 9 8 7 8 5 0 M M 2 0 3 0 0 1 0 6 6 0 5 5 9 5 2 , , , , , , , , , , , L L 4 4 8 6 5 4 7 8 5 3 8 2 1 , 6 , , , 4 I I 8 7 5 4 9 3 2 2 3 3 2 3 2 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 W 1 1 W % G G % % 8 % % % % % % 0 % 2 H H 1 % 4 1 8 7 % 0 % 7 % % 1 7 2 1 8 1 2 2 - 3 0 - - 1 2 2 2 5 % C % C L L 9 4 8 4 E E 8 5 1 1 6 6 3 1 D D 2 6 7 3 8 9 , 1 , , , A A 0 0 5 2 0 5 8 6 5 5 8 3 6 5 7 L L 0 7 5 2 4 6 0 5 4 2 9 0 7 8 1 , , , , , , , I I 4 2 3 8 9 5 7 5 7 1 9 2 3 4 , , , , 4 , , , , H H 9 8 5 3 0 1 3 3 9 5 1 4 3 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 8 8 8 5 1 5 5 P 5 9 P G G % % % % % % % % H H 7 % 4 % % % 3 6 0 % % % 7 1 7 4 - - 7 1 4 3 - 7 1 2 1 8 7 % 8 C % C N N O O T T 3 1 4 9 S S 6 2 1 1 0 8 1 1 2 0 8 1 6 8 E E 0 7 0 5 7 9 5 8 5 2 1 6 3 8 L L , , , , 0 8 4 6 2 7 3 7 1 5 9 , , , , , , , , , 8 , 5 0 2 2 R R 0 7 1 1 9 7 8 6 9 9 4 8 0 6 6 , A A 0 0 2 2 4 9 5 4 6 7 3 8 6 2 , , , , 5 4 5 5 4 2 1 1 2 1 0 H H , , , , , , , , , 1 , 9 8 7 5 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 C 1 9 C % G G 3 % % % % % % % % % H H 0 1 % 0 0 1 1 % % % 5 0 % 9 4 1 1 7 1 1 1 1 4 3 5 2 1 3 1 % - C % C K K 5 3 2 4 L L 2 6 7 4 7 0 9 7 8 1 2 0 3 0 3 5 5 4 7 2 0 O 4 O , 9 , , , 0 1 9 5 0 2 , , , , , 0 9 0 9 2 5 2 2 6 9 F F 8 3 4 6 3 0 3 4 0 4 3 8 5 4 7 R R , , , , , , 6 1 2 0 9 5 2 5 4 2 5 0 9 , 3 , , , 0 5 4 3 2 0 O O , , , , , 8 8 5 2 5 9 3 9 0 7 1 1 1 1 1 9 8 8 8 2 7 2 1 N 2 7 N % G G 0 % % % % % % % % % % % % H H 8 7 % 6 5 1 5 3 5 2 4 3 % 2 2 2 2 7 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 5 1 5 1 % 2 C % C H H 9 3 7 7 A A 5 3 3 8 9 3 0 3 4 0 N N 5 1 6 7 0 9 2 2 0 2 4 1 7 , 2 , , , 1 2 8 6 1 4 8 N N , , , , , , 8 3 9 0 4 1 7 7 6 7 7 0 0 4 3 9 2 4 0 6 3 0 8 2 A A , , , , , 1 8 9 9 2 1 7 2 3 9 V V 2 0 4 , 7 , , , 0 0 5 4 2 1 0 A A , , , , , , 1 2 2 0 5 7 4 9 3 2 1 1 1 1 1 8 7 6 3 5 2 S 2 1 5 S 4 7 0 5 9 , 4 6 O O 6 1 4 5 6 7 , 7 2 1 6 n R R T T 8 8 0 3 1 2 7 8 3 4 4 4 o L L , 9 8 8 3 0 5 5 0 C C i 5 2 2 , , , , , , , , , 3 t 9 7 A A 2 4 7 7 , 8 0 6 , N N 2 1 5 6 a 2 2 2 4 4 2 - 2 6 - - - B I 6 B I r t s i n i G G % m % % % % % 9 % % % H H d 5 % % % 5 % 0 % % 4 % 0 4 1 4 2 A 6 6 7 8 1 2 1 - 8 0 2 - - 0 % C 3 % C e m i E E t i R R s r 7 1 5 8 r O O a 7 8 4 8 e 8 7 2 5 M M M 1 5 4 0 5 4 8 5 8 2 , , , , 3 n I I i 5 6 8 8 4 4 1 5 7 1 3 6 0 1 5 n a T T 8 8 9 1 8 9 4 9 3 3 2 6 3 2 5 , , , , , , , , , , , t o L L 8 0 1 4 i 9 6 1 4 6 1 3 5 5 , 5 , , , 0 n t A A 2 0 8 5 0 0 7 7 5 7 5 9 9 2 6 o a 4 4 3 3 3 3 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 B 2 B 2 c t r - t o i p E E n e s u G G d n t a a N N r r n A A T T e % % % l f H H 5 % % % 2 % % % % % 4 % % % % n a % o 9 5 6 9 1 8 9 1 8 6 1 5 2 3 C 8 % C v g t i i n e u e r 3 4 8 8 q e 6 7 8 6 o S S m 3 2 1 5 t t F 3 3 5 3 5 2 2 0 9 , 5 , , , 7 T T r o 4 9 0 2 4 2 8 7 8 5 5 6 0 7 6 ) e R R a o 3 4 4 5 5 4 5 6 7 0 2 4 1 8 3 f , , , , , , , , , , , n C p O O 6 0 6 5 I r 0 1 2 0 8 9 6 7 3 , 6 , , , 0 e y P P t 2 3 9 5 8 2 1 3 6 0 5 1 5 9 6 o R D . . 0 6 0 8 2 7 1 9 5 8 5 5 0 0 8 n b T , , , , , , , , , , , . e 3 3 3 2 S S r S 9 7 6 3 1 9 8 7 6 , , 5 , , 4 E . e w 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 U U 1 1 6 7 6 t t U M 0 0 0 ( a : – 0 0 0 * e 2 2 2 W S S c - - - ' U . r 2 7 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 3 6 9 5 8 4 3 7 N E U S 0 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 0 9 0 0 9 u T . O E 0 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 0 9 0 0 9 o 2 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 2 * 1 2 U T S T 2 1

Charting the Future of Baltimore’s Industrial Waterfront 31 According to the 2008 Martin Associates study entitled The Economic Impacts of the . .

Port of Baltimore , approximately 16,493 direct jobs and about three times that . . amount (33,693) of induced and indirect spin-off jobs are associated with the Port of . .

Baltimore. While approximately 59 percent (9,718) of the direct jobs are connected . . with private terminals, the total number of jobs (direct, indirect, and induced) . . associated with private terminals (33,768) is about twice that of the public marine . . terminals (16,418). Likewise, personal income at private terminals ($2.371 billion) is . . approximately twice the amount at the public marine terminals ($1.158 billion), with . . private terminals accounting for 83 percent of the estimated local purchases linked to . . port activity. . . . .

2006 POB Economic Impacts . . .

PUBLIC PRIVATE TOTAL . .

TERMINALS TERMINALS . .

JOBS . .

DIRECT 6,775 9,718 16,493 . .

INDUCED 7,497 12,035 19,532 . .

INDIRECT 2,146 12,016 14,161 . .

TOTAL 16,418 33,769 50,186 . . .

PERSONAL INCOME ($1000) . .

DIRECT $296,432 $491,525 $787,957 . .

RE-SPENDING $874,533 $1,450,097 $2,324,630 . .

INDIRECT $87,133 $429,793 $516,926 . .

TOTAL $1,258,098 $2,371,415 $3,629,513 . .

$0 . .

BUSINESS REVENUE($1000) $986,861 $863,859 $1,850,720 . .

$0 . .

LOCAL PURCHASES ($1000) $220,408 $1,066,475 $1,286,883 . .

$0 . .

STATE/LOCAL TAXES $134,617,000 $253,741,000 $388,358,000 . . .

SOURCE: Summary of Economic Impacts for the Port of Baltimore, 2008, Martin Associates ......

Container cargo is the category with the most direct employment (2,454 jobs) and is . .

overwhelmingly concentrated at the public marine terminals. Other commodities . .

that account for similar levels of direct employment include breakbulk, dry bulk, . .

coal, and iron ore cargos which are handled exclusively at private marine terminals. . .

However, as pointed out in the Martin Associates report “…coal, dry bulk cargo, and . .

liquid bulk cargo is less labor intensive, and the growth in these bulk cargoes has a . .

lower impact on job growth than the more labor intensive cargoes.” Automobiles are . . .

32 Charting the Future of Baltimore’s Industrial Waterfront s e c i v r e S e t a t s E l a e R l e h c s t n e H d n a , n o i t a s r t e s i i t n i i d m d o A m e m m i t i o r C a M t . e T . g O r . a D T . S . A U P , n M o i t – a r t e s r i a n i h m S d A t t e r k o r P a d n M a l e y r r a o M : m i e t c l r u a o B S

Charting the Future of Baltimore’s Industrial Waterfront 33 the most job-intense commodity (1.71 jobs per 1,000 tons), followed by breakbulk, . .

RO/RO, and lumber (1.41, 0.63, and 0.63 per 1,000 tons, respectively). . . . .

Distribution of Direct Jobs by Commodity . . .

Commodity Public Private Total . .

Terminals Terminals . . . .

Containers 2,454 (99%) 24 (1%) 2,478 (15%) . .

Breakbulk 783 (33%) 1,575 (67%) 2,358 (14%) . .

Dry Bulk NA 2,044 (100%) 2,044 (12%) . .

Iron Ore NA 1,832 (100%) 1,832 (11%) . .

Coal NA 1,527 (100%) 1,527 (9%) . .

Other 3,538 (57%) 2,716 (43%) 6,254 (38%) . .

Total 6,775 (100%) 9,718 (100%) 16,493 (100%) . . .

Source: Martin Associates, Economic Impacts of the Port of Baltimore, 2008 . . . .

Job data and economic impact are not calculated for each public or private marine . .

terminal facility. . . . .

According to the 2008 Martin Associates report, the average wage of the 16,493 . .

individuals directly employed in port-related activities was $47,780, a slight decline . from the $50,870 reported in 2003. Despite the decline, port proponents hasten to . . point out that, as manufacturing jobs have declined in the region, the port remains a . . source of job diversity, offering high-paying, blue-collar employment for those with . . less than a college education. . . . .

While all public and private terminals contribute to and/or benefit from the port’s . . overall success, their specific needs, objectives, decision criteria, and viewpoints are . . not always identical. . . . .

Many of the private terminals are long-term owner-occupants of their facilities. . .

Among those responding to the survey of businesses located within MIZOD . . conducted in conjunction with this study (see a discussion in the next section of this . . report), the average tenure of occupancy was 46.4 years, with 56 percent of the . .

respondents occupying the location for more than 30 years, 25 percent over 50 years, . .

and 12 percent over 100 years......

34 Charting the Future of Baltimore’s Industrial Waterfront ) x t i k & , o m l t c d i , a p o P h h n l , t t l p w o g L . i i i i a l r e e l s r F a L p F S s n w w i S n c l c l . l l r u o l l u e n t i s a d d e a n n n a a l , i a r o a a i t e s n l o i i e e i t n n o o b u A h B 6 C i i i i r r i e n e o r g g n t t S d e t e e s N a s F r d d e e t t a a w d m m X X X P n s t t p r s s r r l G a e e e e a a l M S S S L I a a o o e r r x r r i a e e e b T c P G Y T c d m W F C d m v C C C b P E N C y r a , , r l l v e a a g n t t n n a e e i i s s c X , n n a n a a d ( t . g S e e a a o o , e n n o r r e C i , n C C m m s o T c e / n C e p r g ) a , c n s o g . M s e a a a o m m , s y e p t e n s i i r s r e r e g i f i c d y u P c t y y a e r n i i s b b l e o d r n h m m m m o r g n d r m i p r K K A e l e o I n r r r e A w a t a t e o S b o m m p e i t g m e n , s e e e , t c i l k i t s s r % P u u r l s p o h T T t T r d m L M M l l s m i t l l l l l C s c s e e a i 0 i a e a e e r u P P a o o m C u r a a a a h t a a v u T e i 3 a C M E F A B W U B U L E C b P M ( S B B C S A W W A P C 0 0 t 0 s , o , ’ n t e 2 b 0 r e y t a p c 5 A l , i m m n I l h a e I e 3 g t y e e o o s e 0 s a t r , d b c i ? 8 e e m l t f 0 R l ) i : m a A u n s s 1 e i s l B 0 i d a s y r u . o s , x + a 5 0 t g e r p r e u e e c i b o e 9 r f g 0 h e , 0 l d r r r , v h y s i c 1 e e n t 7 p s e P c s e n 8 d B l s C i i n u M s t r a l r g p 0 i E e 5 e a m i e r t 1 s 3 c o a t a d e o d l 2 d d o v v e n f u s f d t l a t 6 , f h a r c e 0 i e 5 , l d y g e n l n ) n o e s o o l o . i p o r 6 i e t g i e . o 3 r F d 5 r a t 4 s a i e l o r d i c t a n l I a L 1 d h ( v a l n a i e d n u c ) e s e u t s a v e t g a a o d l c t c h t ’ . a o c i o r l i r g & r p a u o n e a t 5 n i i d o t r n R t i a s F s n t o h u W r r a r e s p p t u t g o u 0 M n e @ n u r d n f . r e T g c M r e b e p a g h e y g o a n n c e u e d a 0 . B s n K u s i t l o . t o i u r t t f o p C o e l a a c g B i t e t t ) r o l o I l o e 2 n f r t o a o ( . / r f r s e l i r o o n a i c t t t t c s n ( s t u s i e P t n o e s e h h e a o o v m s p p i l e t s o e a n t s o c s t t e w r s A r b a A e s t g s b e d A o e s r s h i n l : r a a p r c s u d e p 6 y s y u a e m v w P r e a v t T k y c n u X s r t g b s c o a E c r n C n n u M i i e w t n o u d o o i h g i i A d o o n l c a a b l a s M c l - c , e S a o r k R t e n c r M f s . o e u s a a e t n o p a l h e a d t n g X w t n t p i y C r n o u a 4 t m n o o d 8 l c S U g N d G s x a t a e e a i t n r a i n l r c R 0 n S d a c g s e m p e o f A t 1 t T n e 0 f , t n n a m h e t r r u o 0 R e e s a - o - y n i a o i l p B c i C o T t n r R n d a e o 0 e n 0 U t r e e c 2 t o l S S l T n h c 0 c t 4 c 2 ) o i e e A o o f f , M e F l v 0 e , u m 1 a o s i l t n n n f b c t t m l n o 0 , d i 1 d f i r c r k - y o l m 4 e . . o n e e . p t . a r l u A ( a m M o o l o c l t a r m e o r t t P i 0 0 d e e l i i 1 y u 7 v y r a - y s i d a i , k n u t r m t t a p t c a d a u t n i t e e e p d l a g r n 5 s i m i . e g u i d s l l y d 0 e B t t i a r r l i r o 0 a a b t o e n o n s l o y a . n a o t A i - e 9 i l d f C i n c n n e p p v l a e t n n 0 C e k t c c & u 3 t n y 0 , i a t h i e d u t s i 0 s e d l g i a / a a l s t e a , 3 J . p e n a f i p 0 e s k o o i 2 1 m d n n n m m d v y e l l t S , 1 r t n s r d d v d a p p p e r e 4 o n u a o o c t t n u e o O e e o o o o d l e r u h o r - 0 0 o x x r a e e o r a d n d i f e o o u a o a i C B 1 ( L C T B E L c t 9 2 D T s p d A l P P E N f M p B a P R D a l C P R C S N c T a k s s e ) e e d e e s g g n v r r e s a W a a o g p i r r A b b b 3 6 6 / h e 1 . . . a a 6 1 3 6 2 S P N . 1 2 ( 0 b , y X r a S v s , F l C : : : e e e i n T l l l y y y i i i a a X y f , C t t t t a a a r , c I S 5 , b ( m m m n o c c c c t X w w w t 5 5 5 . 9 5 y C e e e e o t c s S 5 0 0 e t h h h n r r r r 5 9 9 9 6 9 a l o . . . : i i i i e s e n g g g - - C r o 9 8 8 6 b i i i I I d d d d o 1 1 1 e i f w a c - - - - t a I I I I c : : : : : d H H H t o h a e s s C X X X X t t j r p y y y y y c c , , , , , g e e e e e e a n S S S S o a i d l l l l l l a a a a a a s e d e e e e e i i i i i i d u e r A C C C N C C s H i t c c c c c n q e w w w w w c i i i i i - m m m m m m s e : : : : : : : : c d a s l 5 h h h h h a v v v v v l l l l l l l l i 5 5 r j i i i i i i i i c e a r r r r r 9 g g g g g 5 5 5 5 5 0 r e a i i i i i S S a a a a a a a a d 9 9 c . . . . . - i e e e e e e I p 7 - - s R N A L R 1 H 2 R H R d H R N I s . R s H R I A H 0 R s 0 R s 1 n o t 0 0 5 . , s 0 0 t 7 1 l o 0 i t 5 l 3 l y , . . . . i i , l u 5 t t t r , , 8 . s e f f f u 5 b e t t g d 8 0 f b a . . . 6 p e e n g 0 1 i q q q . a 7 m g t d g i n 1 s s s q i - p a x s n n i r = i s e - o r u d 0 0 0 r x 5 e s s o e b f o t p e 0 0 0 0 e 6 d d g b f . . r p s s 0 0 0 0 t t . e e a a e e e e , , , e t d d f f d d r 8 h h k f f n n n n v l e e , 0 0 5 . . . e e o o s s o o o o t o u h h 6 0 2 6 q q h h q t S 9 s C B s N s 1 3 s 3 S N 3 2 N s S N u p h g , s s u e e , , s o p n r i n s s e , h ) a r - a e e h t e n r x r e i / s n n l a n c s c , r a d a a t m a w l e r r u r s c r a , s c g a o r n n o c c e t c s o e u s n n e n l g n a n i i r r r r i p t a n r i d n i g g - a v s - e i e e a l a n c t o s r m c h n n l t r a d n n r i i i r e o e ’ s i i t o s n c n a v v p e u v e a a s l l y m G t o o m t t o e t d b l u n y n e o o T r c i n n p d r s s a k e e e a v v v p i t e a e s R o r o e c o e e n n n e n o r o u s l n v r A c r c t c t r a a n o o o o 2 q a n a t o w 2 b 9 g 2 E u s 7 1 2 N 3 2 F C 1 h N O N T ’ ) 2 s T 3 c h i t t M y t r o ’ a F h h a n l t t e g ; 6 i t h h a r s h p g l t t b s o t 3 a t 1 a r h w d e n p p r ) r t g i t e A c e d t e e r h r i e d s e t p a t i ’ n a d d a ’ s p b n n e r 7 i s e c h s e ’ ’ ’ 4 ’ ’ ’ a l e t m r ’ D a e i e s h n r a t 2 2 2 3 8 4 5 l l b e s m l 0 n t s . t g d o n a 4 4 4 3 3 2 t g r r i e h h e u h 4 e h h o y t s t t f t P o t t t a a e v - n s t t t t t t e r g r n i e r o ’ r r r r p e c - a b t a b f a a a a o e e o s m e e e 3 4 - 0 e e r i e s g v 6 l i u ( N 3 1 4 d B 1 4 3 4 p b b 7 1 3 1 U B a A p 1 1 1 ( a t n i i l m r r d i e e g t e r c b n s k s e i e l l r h d s z l a h k a t , m i t a u e t e a r , l l r a e i e e i i u c n b p F o a s t n i r e e v d L s a k L u s s r p o i ( g p o s o b r o i , , a r t t d m e e e , u k s l l r s s u l r U s e a i i r r u F n y o p m r r k r e r l c e u q m r e l r r b b i C , A C e e ) e g T n n t u e t B u a u o & P e B i o o ) n n t , t X n n s i i p n i a n r u b , o i t e t i c d t o n m r o d e e i S a a e s m m d e k t e i i l a s i n s e t t e t c n e t r g s i R j a o o o o p e g m o C e u m n / n n r t t t m a a n p n e r s d u r a c e o a e o u t q o o o r o o e u u u l a r t a r a a y a i o n r r o p o g n t R a c C b C C t b F ( A B P L S S p C I A W A A C N D P t n s i i k s c i ) n a r i t , , e s r n d w t s s s k e i r n 2 s r m e a r y e e o s s s s s s s s s p a e e 3 0 0 f t r r n ; d o r e e e e e e e e e i w a n , 0 0 0 0 c c r r r r r r r r r d s i m c c A e p w r 2 a a s 0 0 0 0 c c c c c c c c c e n a / s a n a , , e t t a a a a a a a a a o 0 0 d a a s n e e o h p t l 1 0 0 , , 0 r n d t t r t 5 z a n i c u i a 9 7 9 5 2 3 0 4 5 0 0 0 6 3 1 f a n r o u A 6 o o ” 1 C 5 7 6 c g 6 4 S t ( A 4 2 1 u o 4 4 9 9 a 2 1 w c P y r t t n r d a l n G o ) a ) ) a T n e P P i E r l P i L L M L y T m S N F L r r r e I ( ( ( d D K e e g a l l l l l V b T T L n L T I s d T T I n a a a a a b i N y E R R o n A ) r M H H I I I u S S e e e e e e t ) i r n n n n n ) T T e i i i i i i I a O T b F D R T T k n n n n n n t l : T T G G U U i i i i i i l s i “ t N N S F r r r r r r n R R N e m m m m m U I I M w A A m C C a r i c I M M r r r r r T a a a a a A a y c a U O a O E E O O h u o a = O O e e e e e A S D M C r r I ( S D M T ( S F M T S L M P T N L M P T F M T M P K M C P ( H G u a T R o 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 S 1 M Charting the Future of Baltimore’s Industrial Waterfront 35 As discovered through the interviews, the sunk costs represented by such long . . tenure and the relatively high cost of replacing the facilities (in particular the cost . . of dredging and dredge material placement) generally make any consideration of . . relocation difficult because the current pricing structure and business model of most . . companies typically incorporate the correspondingly low occupancy costs. An . . increase in cost would not only affect the profitability of individual firms, but it also . . influences shippers’ decisions of whether to route traffic through the Port of . .

Baltimore or go elsewhere. Similar to farmers in rural areas, when confronted with . . development pressure and opportunities for sale, owner-occupants of industrial . . properties not only consider the exchange or fair market value of their real estate . . for alternative development at its highest and best use, but they also consider the . . enterprise or contributory value of the real property to the overall value of the . . going concern. . . . .

Likewise, the significant cost associated with creating and maintaining industrial . .

transportation infrastructure, e.g. railroad corridors, road networks, and shipping . .

channels, requires a threshold critical mass of industrial users that can only be . .

achieved through clustering to produce operational efficiency and economies . .

of scale. . . .

The seven public marine terminals owned by MPA located in Baltimore City comprise . .

1,038 acres that are improved with 1,967,375 square feet of shed space with . . capacities, utilization rates, equipment, ship calls, and principal customers and cargo . . detailed on the accompanying exhibits. . . . .

Information obtained from the interview process and inspection of MPA marine . . terminal facilities suggests that some facilities are antiquated, functionally deficient, . . and poorly maintained. . . . .

For instance, North Locust Point Marine Terminal was regarded by some interviewees . . from the maritime and real estate communities as functionally deficient, comprised . . of finger piers that do not comport with current industry standards. Many of the . . piers are in poor physical condition or are unusable, and are served by antiquated . .

equipment and sheds. The same interviewees cited a history of this facility being . .

underutilized. MPA recently entered into a long-term lease with Westway Terminals in . .

2002 and 2007 to develop and operate a liquid storage facility on seven acres, and . .

more recently executed a short-term three-year-lease with Ceres Terminals for most of . .

the facility’s surface storage space (about nine acres) for the processing and transport . .

of cars, trucks, and construction equipment. Although the Locust Point SNAP Plan . authorizes new residential and commercial development within the circle formed by . . the railroad right of way, new residential and commercial uses have been introduced . . within feet of this facility’s fence line. . . . .

36 Charting the Future of Baltimore’s Industrial Waterfront S Source Oth FAI DU TER MP HAWK C S NO. O MAS re cur EAGI O. LIN RFIE NDALK A MIN LO LOCU er tl n TO Ge NVI RT : C INS LD yland Mar y MPA AL UST N nera LE ST STRE PT P PT Fa . T. l . Ca ci ET Pt or lit rgo dminstrationA e Cr Aut Forest Ot B Contaiers Contaiers CO L Va Autos R Forest A Autos F s or ay ut oR rea T uis rious he i e M es o os n o Ve min r k r MODI e t POB B Prod. Prod. Pr se (C ul C Bulk o Y) OM k d. l als TY ...... t Ber Com ODI ne to ex MPA at Maso inspe ha Alt Many se Cant de land obt wa lay ut hi il co ce ndle, t x te fou r houg ber s ng he ized, ai 1 4 t TY F r ,189 ,708 r ed nd on Y08 p fi v 6 3 2 9 4 4 to ned eq nvil ior ct of 2 1 34 23 93 54 9 1 43 t ro p & hi 6 04 0 9 io e dites p t ue sup re le h to a h je t t ng er le, TONS ye n ti he he a f vel at sent dat ct st r nd ng be c om of ar 1, 4, F ent ed io f FY f i sa or o igu re ai a vi nfor s. 5 39 21 14 37 7 143 510 42 sub t func t ns r 29 13 07 he he me t f r a (1,0 r t C m to Wi ime 6 4 9 0 2 1 5 some eg ra ie it ha a ant a str mat s nge . te numb de th ardi ld, rit ti det inte if rti , use 0) onaly mi r ic uct te CHANGE Ch wi mo st me Dundalk, ion ip ti ng ng mi r v r M rioa th me. ure nal ine se -10% for at er iew -10% -23% -18% -29% 4.0% 4.% 4.2% PA and 14% 34% 1% 24% t was e th li ne he def te of tle fa ca a and Th ti of e n m r ci ng t es t rg j ve rea ic fi not ob h heort F ann ua e lit elb cia in a e ient a o uture hi supe a intero vi nd ies l s lso ex S VES ( cl ls e obt a ow CALS c ls th sta duct e onected ten S. te re a e retpeo r l uct rst 102 741 516 182 c ical nd imtpsor a rom 68 gro wth onsider te nds tpeodr EL Locust land i of nable t of in comunity she maxiu hroug Ba to capc ity por ure, was f d dl y 75 Kymen. m ter Al recent Fumigaton w a dem c f C The Al Al Complet Operated Co flo exception Ampor a ste Co at ri ar N or ltim a m confir from ou dit dit tha t wit be in ers Poi ot ith ci space ab w. d mplety mplety ve cr h cargo useabl li ve ths ber expansio ld e: op sold this gin comm o o remaing ty ou p h MPA’s an nt uis d io io Principle ore’s ty proe leas , l be Ma h ore via ly i ), aut o er at in g Ma ts, ti na na each MPA. t y es agr minals ter througp to to o a 50% leasd. pier sical is s con 20 int shed l l nd n AMPts’ or WL, r by o se MPA’ of p a b yl ee ly which uise Cr ent er mobi are almost nvil acreag o c Pier y a and with l l vie er vr ic a Industria l ye easd easd dit y r su Mayr land ar p f r about m Howev to nd le es 20 king has Shed condit. ubli tenas e l me ars at e useabl s a e complet or are es owned 10; 70% Principle Pts or Bal n wil se One c Maritme le BalTm, er tion aser has tra ffic t wes ounted or the . d b COMENTS ben c each g to d ag to are to to Curr ently Atlanic timore comp open 5 usine gro is we 5 rowth. by come ma of ne ar er, to acres no o), expand P e capc ity , Merceds ATC and rently cur A on U.S . Intenr ational are: otr s one are y ver m capacity; wth acreag ri tog by East in i minal ter vesl used mat nfor erica, space sole ne tenas at Clint lety ly Wat erfont paving and With Mreal (A cap acit y , onlie Packagi rently cur Pash, used Am mar ket the Tminal, er new others, wil ethr tha A may le inte mPts) or Seagitr minal ter tlanic Alcoa capcity erica ase acces Fireston. soley on th; ber BDS, leasd and grow thr ee actual at long large no howev v for and nsely t Lot subs tanti ally upon acant. he Ba d. ion ng. wit N is Stre are: wit Temr inals for LP under a adj surge/ov long Tminal.er is MP A lTm, er dev Wn estr being UPM- m.ter nd 60. (a to . long ac h for Aprox.8 Autos per cent to op with er was cargo hi facilty et providing Westway , utilzed count. visual private at eloping ce , a er n the te this in m. ter least long nt ating the the m.r 3 7 estimates that development of a new auto terminal facility would require an additional . .

30 to100 acres of land. Further, if RO/RO traffic is to increase three percent to four . . percent per year as projected, terminals operating at capacity would have to displace . . other commodities to off-terminal location because RO/RO cargo must remain close to . . the dock, unless the rate of commodity throughput could be increased. . . . .

A key question to consider, especially in those communities like Locust Point and . .

Canton where demand for alternative non-industrial land uses can produce . . substantially higher property values than current industrial uses, is whether existing . . maritime industrial uses in these communities could be developed at or relocated . . to alternative locations, and if so, in what time frame. . . . .

In addition to significant expense and issues of sunk costs discussed previously, the . .

ability to relocate an existing or develop a new public or private marine terminal . .

facility requires extensive lead time and is complicated not only by the limited . .

number and availability of alternative deepwater sites of adequate size, but also by . .

the cost of dredging and the limited options for the placement of dredge material. . . . .

MPA officials stated, and area industrial real estate experts concurred, that there are . few large deepwater sites that could be made available for terminal development . . or relocation at this time. Those few available would require varying degrees of . . dredging, whether to create access from the shipping channel or to prepare berths . . for the mooring of vessels. According to MPA the existing approved dredge material . . placement sites currently have the capacity to accommodate annual maintenance . . dredging of the main shipping channel and little else. Therefore, the dredge material . . placement needs associated with creating a new replacement or public marine . . terminal facility would displace existing dredge material placement capacity for . . maintenance dredging, jeopardizing upkeep of the main shipping channel. Private . . terminals are responsible for the cost of all dredging and disposal in relation to their . . terminal facilities as well as locating a suitable dredge material placement site. Open . . water dredge material disposal is no longer permitted in Maryland. . . . .

Because the selection and regulatory approval process for new dredge placement . .

facilities is lengthy and contentious, developing or moving an existing marine . .

terminal facility would require a considerable lead time. . . . .

In the long term, as part of its Dredge Material Management Program (DMMP) MPA . .

marine terminal expansion is planned to come about as the result of new marine . .

terminals slated for development at current dredge placement sites in outer harbor . locations at Cox Creek (approximately 130 acres projected to be available in about 12 . . years) and at Masonville (approximately 140 acres projected to be available in about . .

20 to 30 years). An additional placement site is contemplated for an area of Sparrows . .

Point as well. . .

38 Charting the Future of Baltimore’s Industrial Waterfront U.S. Port Trends .

. According to industry sources, there are a number of issues and trends that are . currently affecting East Coast U.S. ports, including POB, that should be monitored .

. and considered when making future land use planning decisions because they .

. influence the port’s competitive stature and its ability to capture and retain .

. market share. . . .

. 1. Larger ships are calling on fewer terminals, increasing the distance that goods .

. are willing to travel. . . .

. The trend toward larger ships, particularly container carriers, has resulted in .

. carriers calling on fewer ports and concentrating more cargo at selected hubs .

. heightening the competition for a contracting customer base. . . .

. Work to expand the capacity of the Panama Canal, scheduled to be completed in .

. 2014, is expected to create a considerable amount of new business for East Coast .

. Port facilities as ships are diverted from congested West Coast ports to the East .

. Coast. The very large Post-Panamax ships require channels deep enough and .

. equipment large enough to handle them. While Baltimore’s 50-foot channel is a .

. rarity on the east coast, it currently lacks a 50-foot berth (the deepest at Seagirt is .

. now 46 feet) although MPA’s capital construction program reports that dredging .

. is now underway to accommodate these larger ships. However, according to . interviewees, the equipment at MPA marine terminals is aging, with current crane .

. equipment capacity below that needed to handle the new larger ships. . . .

. 2. Single user marine terminal facilities are emerging. . . .

. As a result of industry consolidation, the traditional East Coast model of public .

. port authorities building and leasing container terminals to multiple shipping .

. lines may be supplanted by the West Coast model of developing terminals for .

. the exclusive use of a single carrier. MPA acknowledges that POB would be .

. challenged to provide land and terminal structures to attract customers should .

. this model take hold on the East Coast. . . .

. 3. Rail is re-emerging as a means of long-haul, inter-modal travel. . . .

. Nationally, while the number of rail-car loadings decreased 1.3 percent between .

. 1995 and 2005, rail container shipments increased 98 percent. Rail enjoys a .

. competitive advantage for heavy loads and long distances. The deficiencies .

. associated with Baltimore’s Howard Street tunnel constrain the port’s capacity .

. for high-cube double-stack container rail shipments to and from the POB. Port .

. officials and port real estate experts concede that the POB, as a result, remains

. a local traffic destination for containers. This is corroborated by the Regional .

. Landside Access Study’s finding that 95 percent of inbound and outbound .

Charting the Future of Baltimore’s Industrial Waterfront 39 containers move by truck rather than rail. According to media reports, CSX is . .

considering a new inter-modal facility south of the city that would by-pass the . .

Howard Street tunnel. . . . .

4. Large ex-urban distribution centers and cross-dock trans-loading facilities near . .

ports and major highways are developing inland. . . . .

According to Cushman Wakefield, increased reliance on imports and container . .

traffic has caused a proliferation of very large, million square-foot-plus . .

distribution centers, many of which are located far inland where land is plentiful . .

and less expensive, and are connected to port facilities by railroad. This new . .

trend is in contrast to the earlier reliance by domestic producers on . .

decentralized, smaller, and more numerous warehouse facilities......

40 Charting the Future of Baltimore’s Industrial Waterfront y e v r u S f o s e s s e n i s u B

...... • • • • • • • • To • to as insgh Th is Res Be av p ca i e col sumar il nput r a w Th p 62 On 30 20 p Th ex 87 loc op loc 67 Th busi or ab esnt inf ar use Ap re ro ubli lec it t p c .5 04 le er e e e e or a a h p p p int pr h je ec av r mpl te ti nes t er er er f a ma ma esi dat a p fr ho or mat c ct inc ons and ed ox ve and ti o t er d er c c c om mar ize ing ng busi dent ent ent ent j j url a cur r t oye a ima w or or ce ep h in age ion ge, by spe it i , Consult e an ncre c it it e nt y C ine fur t th hi r th ap of ant of nes es xi te ion; y y ec s ent ha work aug n i Wh t i 8 obt 2 n ci e repo sti e of ( of ly lyze th ac 9.5 0 th th onmic a 8 t ic fic ase rti th R a er nd 2 ng menti 2 er indust it re e e ai Ba ip ESI p 7 t e 6 ers o y; p mina p ing t pendi ng ned d resp resp da sponde at sa o job b erc lt p erc t MI perc de si y e imore ubli sur por la b ta ave th (h nc ZO ng usine rec cre ent) a ent y r ri ondet ondet ls; from i i n reg ncre mpa ent vey x. er a e t e she rag repo D l onfi the ase; i re nc M F of use a C of ina uture ts wa la rding of ing d found: c a IZ th DO Z I M rea it th t se guri ra te pla th sources, y . s s OD’ s f a t is of ted t e he t d na se $ t repo ted repo e $5 e e locate v sur ov n 56,3 respondt’ r ng the busine those re of lysi 9, s in employ red ref of for to er spondet 204 op t busine e land 46 hroug accomdate Ba the y al 0; d of op a erations was b withn (above ltim v sur and employ usi incepti tha nativ alter erating ne es wit has h-p t s o nes. not xt t ey ore’s hi the p as ove increasd ut busine fiv op n t hy by the on he on only es the at MI e at sicaly erat r number t e y t MIZ the Industria l he with 96% $47 Z he the A ears; t wh land R OD, h inted copy ESI ir e RES OD next ,780 from ose faci is locate anticipated or a exist si use but ve sur t-relad;por sim nce of I lity more wa of work of tin Mar fiv priv job ng it s t d lar e Towsn for MIZ he by to y) Wat erfont not a withn s y at proe lso of was ears amount prov a ading complet the was e, OD’ t 208 readily their increas their wa rathe physica MIZOD and ide conducte s iverst Un t r MIZOD s y; e t f t shif o MIZOD stimae a great e noe cilt veser t re han in ly s a tpor ’sy re y d 4 ) a. 1 42 Charting the Future of Baltimore’s Industrial Waterfront c i m o n o c E t c a p m I

...... pa mul and Th and a th col Pe on impa re Th end and consi Alt MIZO loca To ap and Whi re eco genr sp a Land and/or di as per wa pot v l f venu giona e endi oca ri rc por i houg e e r ar ove er, f t ent f ec nomic eh odic ti c le l he or el r b sh c of I mat dev i c onc e pli der ec ndu et ont use ig- D. a l ti t t s ouse med ta some al rc ould ia ng ione te ec t on come r y studi onmy , l of er h hi box a egi x l r f O ome ed lusio and f ec r o ly , ix onmy . lop t or s t dec ast s th p r he f o la t e b st ev onmy , r on d a se a c and l f y ta ti not es nd, ia and lus imu t t th t es r ed n ed omp ec enus he pe he on mes iso e h t ns ct x csu er l h a e e v i t a n r e t l A ta e ig es r C t ts , ion. d n L th e ci r th conmi on ns e ma o studi ci ci il, Ma ha a th he sonal b use an ns h ac Th are al st a ply of e e e ty ty de sign nd e th its t rti nufa shor st th th at h r d result use ha t c a to th e s. yland suc ax whi s b and sc an s e es, e ey e a t Us a g e na t a t ng ax Tha gre prox fund proe ri only -produc fi he ware si and ove same nd c c wi tc h sole of a e ca be le do ture most turing th lso re imp s oming th at A use l e of nt t Pt or t c ofi nme r of e naly venu conmic t he loca not study ontra hou t sube t he e a ly , o im c ha he t r e e t ac a s ri wh rac ce ac c F rec nd y) t la i on an among v teria at h A e onmic ng t uture industr l i se si c s, e h nta e nd. nc c e dmi ic gov a use t ely ’s ity re st ently q onmi number c na a for a ind th R a h POB c use lude uently c onclude venu lte l t a ESI profund ompared While upon lysi nmets er e are the 30 nistrao j pac multi t would urisdctions t he r operating v local he nati of a would med for per idual al s acres and as multip lt any d n a L c i sumarized econmic ty same nat er tha city land rip Ba impact poten plier a whi of v the d of e econmy . produce comparisn Hentschel whole, ltim ple minal ter j tha use in obs, yie might includes and i ofi ch ive nfluece Indus use, location. i h e n er size, budg as throug fect ld ial ore’s t ce the of with including among o land ef cont a b comis imp the and nd to base y t and not se s U it trial ect he v the on agre et of tin Mar or ersu di Baltimore le rast the an use. R act least Industria l ha are on jobs marite- eal ser necesarily of retail t with for public most t he warehous, a nd L e he not v ed of gate. respondig cor v stimae t e the i Estae he t ying ar the be ts oned matrix A hat A asociate tax industr local not the mixed, . sociates, land consi land life nefits healt Us taxe policy are MPA pay of City ben t blod, e ring recur ax v Ser econmy land of use a pres use der Analys s Wat erfont la prov ing in al se mixed-u compri residnt (from advi genrat asoci t flex the d and ed decison. s ices est use ms ter the tha capcity . with use hav ve ide they nted se jobs tax space, imat wa is vi rsu t have at income e e tali sing e migh a of as compared conmic the on ge tha ed re ial, conmic are of le d ed on at two a ve s v parcel y for t t wit tax of POB, t e re and he t or the nue he not, of l sult, ice, of h 4 3 To illustrate the impact of a water-oriented manufacturing/processing facility, the . .

Domino Sugar property along Key Highway in Locust Point was selected. The 2006 . .

MIZOD annual report reported employment for this facility at the rate of 17 jobs . . per acre. . . . .

The second parcel selected as an illustration of a port freight-service use is the . .

Highland Marine Terminal, a 30 +/- acres property at 1601-1681 S. Highland Avenue in . .

Canton. In the absence of employment data specific to the Highland Marine Terminal . . property, for purposes of analysis, a rate of 1.17 jobs per acre has been applied based . . on the adjoining port service use at the Rukert Terminals Corporation facility as . . reported in the 2006 MIZOD Annual Report. Additionally, a composite rate of all . . harbor-related uses conducted at the publicly operated marine terminals reported in . . the Martin Associates 2008 study at 6.15 jobs per acre has also been applied. . . . .

To quantify the economic impact of a new business entering into an area, economists . .

typically measure three types of economic impacts: direct, indirect, and induced . .

impacts. The direct economic effects are generated as new businesses create jobs . .

and hire workers to fill new positions. The indirect economic impacts occur as new . .

firms purchase goods and services from other firms. In either case the increases in . employment generate an increase in household income, as new job opportunities . . are created and income levels rise. This drives the induced economic impacts that . . result from households increasing their purchases at local businesses. . . . .

Consider the following example. A new firm opens in a region and directly employs . .

100 workers. The firm purchases supplies, both from outside the region as well . . as from local suppliers, which leads to increased business for local firms, thereby . . creating jobs for say, another 100 workers. This is called the indirect effect. The . . workers at the firm and at suppliers spend their income mostly in the local area, . . creating jobs for another 50 workers. This is the induced effect. The direct, indirect . . and induced effects add up to 250 jobs created from the original 100 jobs. Thus, in . . terms of employment, the total economic impact of the firm in our example is 250. . . . .

The effects of a mixed use project if developed at the same location, have been . .

calculated at a rate of 1.5 square feet of improvements for each one square foot of . .

land (i.e. 1.5 floor area ratio, or FAR). Office use has been projected at 25,000 square . .

feet per acre totaling 750,000 square feet with corresponding employment estimated . .

at 250 net rentable square feet per employee (85 percent building efficiency) for a . .

total of 2,550 employees. Projected retail space at 110,000 square feet represents 15 . .

percent of projected office space. The remaining space is projected for residential . use at a rate of 21 units per acre or 83 units per 100,000 square feet of office that is . . apportioned 75 percent for-sale housing versus 25 percent rental housing......

44 Charting the Future of Baltimore’s Industrial Waterfront ...... Pinka Pr pr wi toge for Ba [ re ac genr As de an Alt of sur and wa Th pr wh and use Econ use Th industr wh agr we th Outp at ta Th th and ir tr xe quir op e e ti op op th r te lt t houg e e e te l mula p ile ose v esp h ib s lysi vit imor r e s h eys. r e in a p i th r flo mat mat a r e er a er er nduce of nsuig esnt ut ute mined r r av gat fr a r a s te ie w e d ound mic er c op s ec suming te t th ty ty ont ta or y ment t e y omp s. t a te h a h (se p r r he of , e, s e A d ges ex x ti nd e ix ix wi osed ta a be e r a d Th th a of ve Ci e nd , ed Ana sp e b nd Cent t re 1 x a d e e th a p la se he a ba sti e y es mi t 8 one w in nsuig ind s ty e na ar t s r r h n a ap j of . nd he in t es ob nt h aut e ag se p p t ma t e ly we e h e Plane r ne a o C th ( h a lyzes h de as ersona e pe s r at th e ed emp ent inc cc si dsh nts Ba es d th ha rec a s e al def t rce j p hor e For te l ima d ob ve io velop e b at a ndix ompa roduce di on e lti Busine conmi luding a rti h for soci a e s s ( in t ine e nt of ind s na a BEA) stri s ma en 50 be er loye fod more out i a te nd is e nclude d or a a t nd ng t l ac ). lysi. t of t h en d ed he sur tri he b p a Uni p p of Nove of i rec nyi at e put n j t h Oc ut erc rope a re ob de re he i th x, s ed proc RI mat nduc s rea a e t i Balt a b mix ve c i use, i wa s ng t p hi t ndustri sti al on s c th si en uni ent outp M e h Di are ac and and D no p upa mb y pay s a wit l g te m ty r pro olders. e rix rop S F m imore e ev proe na t esi of a s o comp ed t t iv uture a d d r fit ea a tri na I of f h er at nc front. n ments elopm of i t induced wa ted a ta nt c unit use e a ty r c ri mult re lysi th p ng; j ur al input nd th er d nigs y ob 20 x t out e x is ges ac ti es. asociate e a nde t r lev rent osite b ty e use difer City a on isolate nd s. have def kages] p y nd frei typ uc tion constr y 7 of employ put. Capit iplers is taxe resntd to els for aply The -outp t nt ratio for axes, Harbo of ined pres es, c comp ght taxes jobs. Ba have t local e for and h ben projects the s The nt the r each ali at outp ltim t size base and d ing ifed t v ser was anly use ax as es since zat personal wa nted with Unlike direct arble includes be pro and workers econmetric mode s, deri East soley the ore’s p rent cur ut ion of i d s ices; en employ s as are ay genral rents, si deriv on f of not i and stae e t in or the n ments ved he value an esti rates ach tha ofice re sale, of l the t and ma the and historcal he for base Industria l pro desi aprisl use sident ty ed a wages only mat sp from and city indust g sociate ed. p was of mixed-us ti Mar real nmet over use apendi ilustra of around a retail, e due from d and gned rentals, ce fice ed ty er compris of The tax local al model prices on d published pre e a f for n r or of activ and nd stae to re gods and y anlysi rates an the taxe d ofice, of Asociate to mult tail has Baltimore the income, the est ve x. t are with a Wat erfont he anly and any hav pay adre location ity use ret Bure projec t s aprise s imate purose. ng jobs, to dif d iplers dire Baltimore computed direct and in s, on ai e able and ticularpar those by of the the i si l ben and base ernt nvest the au s ferings t ren ct s t Coliers as real vicesser h the of , t repo only resid qualit City) of e mixe value have for jobs, indrect of r, income wel s, wages land, act or input t v use he e alue t . ual d in at ach s at o also as ntial as s, s iv 4 , e 5 been estimated and presented. The output and wages derived from direct, indirect, . . and induced employment reflects those jobs that are associated with and arising from . . the residential uses to be located on the site. . . . .

The taxes reported for the residential use component reflect only Baltimore City’s . . entitlement (i.e., real property taxes, personal property taxes computed at the rate . . of 18 percent of real property taxes based on historical analysis, and income taxes . . assuming that 50 percent of the employees and 100 percent of the unit occupants . . are residents of Baltimore City). . . . .

With a greater number of city tax-paying residents working and living on site and a . . significantly higher employment density per acre, it is not surprising that the city . . would reap infinitely more in tax receipts from a mixed use of the 30-acre tracts . .

(approximately $24.5 million with an additional $1.9 million associated with project . .

construction) than for many of the industrial uses analyzed regardless of employment . .

density (ranging from a low of $293,301 to high of $2,048,644). . . . .

Arguably, the intensity of jobs, economic benefits, or tax revenues associated with . .

any particular property within MIZOD could be greater than or less than those . analyzed in the economic impact matrix depending upon the actual size of the . . parcel, mix of uses, and intensity of development (FAR). For instance, Tide Point, . . a 400,000-square-foot office complex immediately adjacent to the Domino Sugar . . property, is reported to contain either 9.7 acres or 15 acres with 1,650 jobs . . suggesting a FAR of 0.95 or 0.61, and either 110 or 170 jobs per acre depending . . upon the property size data source. The FAR of the Canton Crossing PUD, adjoining . . the Highland Marine Terminal used in the matrix, varies from 1.338 to 3.657, . . depending upon whether the 32.39 acre Exxon property is included or excluded . . from the computation which would materially influence the calculation of jobs . . per acre. . . . .

Although the specifics may vary from property to property, the following exhibit . . clearly illustrates the relative superiority that mixed residential/commercial use of . . land would yield for the city in terms of jobs (quantity without regard to quality), . .

economic benefits, and tax revenues versus maritime-related industrial use of the . .

same property......

46 Charting the Future of Baltimore’s Industrial Waterfront ...... ar Adit *Tota l AN L Pe PO FO MAN RETA PO RESI e r RT RT OD det D Ac DEN U IL iona is FR C FACTU U ai re /OFI PR the OMP SE led EIG TI l OCE sum C dat AL o in HT CE mpari R a of SI S SI IN C t h and Direct, ha TE SERV G/ e NG a rti TO so p asump IC ng Indirect n endi PER ES AL* o th f x an L ti e ACR 16 JOB of on and 49 23 F 8. 1. 2.9 uture th d s .8 .1 E S 7 6 Induce used is U s t. repo es of in TO A source Ba ming for per ltim L $15, $2, * $2,8 PER ore’s OUTPUT $91 $147 678,5 904,7 03,62 AC t ,716 ,597 he Industria l RE 12 87 6 econmic TO TAL Wat erfont impact * CITY PER $316, $498, anlysi $68,2 $32,187 $9,7 T AC AXES 82 721 R E 4 7 Economic Impacts of Alternative Land Uses

DIRECT INDIRECT INDUCED TOTAL MULTIPLIER 17 JOBS/ACRE Employment 510 670 313 1,494 2.93 MANUFACTURING Output $321,894,272 $109,814,356 $38,646,734 $470,355,370 1.46 FOOD PROCESSING Wages $ 51,553,100 $37,190,935 $13,264,024 $102,008,058 1.98 Taxes $1,035,349 $746,911 $266,383 $2,048,644 1.98 1.17 JOBS/ACRE Employment 35 4 8 47 1.33 PORT FREIGHTSVCS. Output $3,002,041 $425,373 $1,000,529 $4,427,917 1.47 Wages $2,114,166 $196,903 $343,392 $2,654,461 1.26 Taxes $233,602 $21,757 $37,943 $293,301 1.26 6.15 JOBS/ACRE Employment 185 30 45 260 1.41+ PORT TERMINAL Output $18,179,277 $3,584,634 $5,587,569 $ 27,351,480 1.50 COMPOSITE Wages $11,006,269 $1,580,723 $1,917,678 $14,504,670 1.32 Taxes $736,542 $103,862 $125,204 $965,608 1.31 Retail/Office Employment 2,969 1,081 837 4,887 1.65 99 JOBS/ACRE Output $454,878,069 $129,095,305 $103,170,238 $687,143,611 1.51 Wages $172,836,705 $51,973,620 $35,407,156 $260,217,476 1.51 Taxes $6,310,996 $1,897,776 $1,292,864 $9,501,636 1.51 Construction Employment 1,771 543 474 2,788 1.57 59 JOBS/ACRE Output $269,606,040 $64,559,906 $58,406,718 $392,572,664 1.46 Wages $102,769,080 $25,845,033 $20,044,928 $148,659,040 1.45 Taxes $1,300,800 $327,134 $253,719 $1,881,652 1.45 Residential Employment 497 106 89 692 1.39 16.5 JOBS/ACRE Output $59,125,724 $13,924,824 $11,058,233 $84,108,766 1.42 Wages $19,657,890 $5,291,211 $3,796,822 $28,745,923 1.46 Taxes $11,870,882 $1,724,489 $1,369,483 $14,964,854 1.26 Total Employment 5,237 1,730 1,400 8,367 Retail/Office + Output $783,609,833 $207,580,035 $172,635,189 $1,163,825,041 Construction + Wages $295,263,675 $83,109,864 $59,248,906 $437,622,439 Residential Taxes $19,482,677 $3,949,399 $2,916,066 $26,348,142 Source: RESI of Towson University Research and Consulting ......

48 Charting the Future of Baltimore’s Industrial Waterfront s g n i d n i F t a h W D O Z I M d n a

...... s e o D d e d n e m m o c e R • • • Dur • • • limt In • • • • • Fin MIZO fea ne Odly , cur ce i sib r ts di ing ent Ac — — inc A Ac — — Asur Do MI eq nec ec ef MI Do c MI ma t B of Do a t a sar o o or nd ti cur y D il ng fe loc onmi c c uit ZOD ZOD ZOD t ons e r a omp es es es y it ly ty ri er th es es esa esi ct pr lth lim dec to Det Insula Adeq Funct ro ra i : sup self r dor a ly at y a wr r iv e ent fo no no no c t o N es il dent or ute nce ough io and tua a inc e t t mar ro int at nat r r , re er o o s por i p doe doe s t t th ism. ily t n c b i such r uat r ib f ad, f s s t as pr mea iona re navi r er ly en m or te olws. ves f u esr fe ing comp ha C among of e. ea ia it eb d not f le ma t e s s or lia ha ovi vie asi i ime e l t enc ers por ts t d sed a and c not not he land a ga th sure l, ble nd : o D to clust ser ontiue ve rit use rti tr nd w bi and t produc de enoug espou wel m ose , ble lai ca uc ourag t or s lity hi hi eli regula p me, ve use pro ng t ex . c a li th pi nts roce ransp use, f ks; ng ng e or omerc sura as def ke-mi rom mina de pa ring proe th ose for ta mai ; th h use; adre to to prosed h from d e ti a l e osed ine nsio s, nd ti to owev d vit to p e suc th ta or po i pro ntaie espc te nce proe ons m p ndustri of nde purose wa F y res t e a t r pre h itga uture tenia h sa ransi ; ties h t mor i ia s residnt owev for sn o i t c A land ndustria tion e ter of a er a fety e l use. ser nd nd ia t por th r use d, indust te v tie c a extnsi t it ly as tiona al e i i e for ontiued djacent l v es ze with: spec growt unc and c ignores use s li e of and of r use or a is resid ab comunit located i adja and it sunk extnsi f-dock n prequist l al respondigly to ongest l rial Ba il user ulation conflicts security i the use gnores at prote on, and h. ties v pres cent ltim promte to ntial neighbors a cost. f ev i unct MIZOD location ndustrial on, and dep come and t withn t c o o ore’s ent to d, t activ y use, thei be isue rant war esnti tha ional MIZOD e e de div of de lawsuit of dep wate to located f-p a sc r ity MIZOD ersion-f gre does Industria l rci an p s v alredy functional ov to: tog ri f t or use ibrant util unc asoci tha water be al a r at er wat industr l cont s, ethr has for er neighbors d land industral not t f suf and ion; y or ther er MIZOD its . operati indust and/or at t.por a inued e f ficient cap or e ob for x ed ne use numb wit i al taiontranspo st uti in. li industral, Wat erfont eds ital marit with ge h mishap nor lity ne rial, ng v ser was transp b econmic time tha e marite sources uf as: r and/or ds est cost p ime fers not of ice int roximty could ablish to t or taionor o end b use not from f alow a y acilt a nd/or and ct a use s, le as a at 4 d 9 e of deepwater sites. MIZOD’s provisions would be satisfied even if no seagoing vessel . . ever visited the Baltimore harbor, so long as deepwater waterfront properties are . . reserved for heavy industry, despite the documented, protracted, and accelerating . . decline of industrial activity within the city. . . . .

The utility or usefulness of a parcel of real estate is greatly determined by its physical . . capacity to accommodate those uses for which it is legally permitted, as well as those . . physical standards and criteria that are demanded by users in the marketplace. . . . .

For example, a small, functional warehouse in today’s market would typically be . . built to contain no less than 50,000 square feet of improved space. Hence, a . .

50,000-square-foot warehouse would need at least 2.3 to 3.8 acres of land to comply . . with the criteria of users in today’s market based on a ratio of 0.3 to 0.5 square feet . .

of building for each square foot of land. Unless there were some legally permitted . .

and market-supported use for land parcels of smaller denominations, such properties . .

would likely remain unused or underused for lack of effective demand if restricted . .

solely to warehouse use. . . . .

Discussions with industrial property brokers and private- and public-sector port . officials concluded that a minimum of six acres of adjoining land would likely be . . needed to warrant productive maritime use of deepwater, and that parcels of 30 acres . . or more would be necessary for contemporary maritime uses to function efficiently. . .

This does not include layberthing of vessels like the Sanctuary at N. Locust Point or . . the John Brown at Pier One Clinton Street or the military vessels at each location that . . would require much less land. Although a legitimate and necessary use of deepwater, . . layberthing provides the city with less in the way of taxes, jobs, or economic spin-off . . than other more intense maritime activities. . . . .

An undated white paper issued by the city’s Planning Department, entitled Zoning . . for Industrial Maritime Protection, noted, “An important principle of zoning is that . . use areas should be contiguous, and spot zoning should be avoided.” . . . .

While introducing new residential or incompatible commercial uses into the center . .

of an existing industrial enclave like Hawkins Point or Fairfield would obviously alter . .

the character of the area, the development of compatible commercial uses on small . .

parcels with limited or no industrial utility at locations in transitional communities . .

like Canton or Locust Point, especially on the periphery or frontier where land uses . .

already coincide, should be less influential. . . .

MIZOD’s current provisions are not conducive to tailoring the site-by-site solutions . . for small parcels not suitable for industrial development as envisioned by the . .

Industrial Land Use Analysis . . . . .

50 Charting the Future of Baltimore’s Industrial Waterfront ...... wh encr or cr Such Pro Th ( One a R Gen or pr wr landsc Fr unr ap di th of Wit fr MIZO Re obli th and ef for Fin ma MIZO sic. om str om e at eated op pr th ec it l e w under co at r and, h c e di teci gat t it si t oa i he Pla omp er i ov en, ali t in er usefl ct h s ime r ra M ze me a i a D D ng th ve ep ap e bo c e c zed ti dus ed n t g l IZO nig b ompa he on h e pr doe t es r th w MI oal Sh : th or ing oundar ut he nest buf ut at ule an indust ci hen f op d r tri e or te il ZOD ib wi ip ta nde D st esh ’ ty ex , th s is p fer s a enc sit z, ed dly le x er at al a le th ar nd noth t i no-i p De a gov os s nd n ible at t r old es, e C mple d s rop t he on-idust n c d out ev p an y ri ourag y ta 2 e ha el lim inf or to pa now a ersp 014 a de er sh dim Ac enu ab ina t loca “…th tw ing l d er wi sug ndustri is rti lex t r def imple th comp nig use ould sign ut ted tio n ty o is ment’ th . b not e e e ib o ng ni to g ti le ct ar ine th xi ing and , n-i e e c n: of ons c th ly sh docki ive e ent st st? wi th re g mit e e b ment goal we romisng th spe e ui al ndu such woul ed ria ing e tra s locat a ei th pro th , Domi a er wh ti del e l igat res wh use a r dj l e in nsi ci ve for , ng sui F use use pre is str of oi r G aly er i e d uture ite a at nes indust er e . ed tiona solutin nha v r to enral nig ted ial) fea rig a a no proe he s fera use t low sh ed pa y residnt a th MI in dem for ht i t si r nced nte locate S ould for e per l us resid ble ble than ZO f indust ugar, s, confli the rial or use of those neds such t r Ship e arca t nde relativ he D y ent marite- marit nativ alter …in Ba sam se sanct hav t d enhaci hat mi av ial di one ct ntial-comercial t curi rial o ltim itled ma at ty proe site y strict e s e ght of to e and ely be order optimze industral tha 10 area s uari me t rg area .” ty use, of he the ne ore’s be located Zo inal shalow t requimnts. comercial 0 t e ng, among utralize hat es use. cap h alredy adjoing nig Key to to t e lat to o of like ti proe which city parcels are acit Industria l the identf prescribe ed, avo Thi t the he Highway use ther for water, Hawkins y li not tax any s not util under exist id ke front wa ter t uti parcel o has frontie and Ind y industral t es rev like indust suit deal in. lity use he negativ merly and and nor us alre to enus. adequt is ly in b able of trial Point e ms for with Wat erfont sig r langui have li comp t twen ady doe rial o les mit marginl zat loca e nifcantly industral, sek for for ion e Marit use and use. s ben or it alredy t fects, than atib iltes sh, the ions. it s de each b t rs, and Ffield,air use t h e u o p unsed stablish e ime fe MIZOD pwater But rov an as opt and below t rs, o use acre ide one out 5 to 1 Neither the original MIZOD ordinance nor the proposed extension contains any . . provisions that address the issue of industrial-use buffers or the transitional uses that . . might be allowed there. . . . .

The term “buffer” is not universally conceived, commonly defined, or uniformly . . applied. The Industrial Land Use Analysis included a recommendation for a . . minimum 35-foot buffer yard containing one shade tree per 30 linear feet with shrub . . planting every ten feet for industrial uses adjacent to residential use. Like the current . . zoning code, the recommendation does not contemplate the opposite, namely buffer . . requirements for residential or commercial uses that are introduced adjacent to . . existing industrial uses. . . . .

Regardless of the definition, the purpose of a buffer is to separate uses with the . .

intent to lessen the effect or impact of one use deemed to be incompatible with or . .

unwelcome by another use. The effect or impact can be sensory (sight, smell, or . .

sound) or physical (e.g., vibration, dust, dirt, and particulates). . . . .

Baltimore’s current zoning code acknowledges the adverse physical and sensory . .

effects associated with certain industrial land uses by establishing and imposing . performance standards that are set forth in Chapter 12. . . . .

Some view a buffer as a dedicated area that physically separates incompatible land . . uses and is comprised of green or other open space, with or without barriers, such . . as berms, trees, fences, etc. This “green space” view of an industrial buffer is . . tantamount to a dedicated, albeit large, setback or yard area. . . . .

Each of Baltimore’s three existing industrial zoning classifications require setbacks . . and yards of varying sizes, especially when abutting residential or office-residential . . use districts. Oddly, the heavier the industrial use, the lesser is the setback required . . from the adjoining office or residential use: . .

• M-1 requires a 30-foot setback . .

• M-2 requires a 20-foot setback . .

• M-3 requires a 10-foot setback . . . .

Each industrial zoning classification requires that industrial and storage uses located . .

within 200 feet of and visible from the ground level of a residence or office-residence . .

district be located within enclosed structures or screened by a wall or fence or a . .

terrain or landscaping feature. However, there is no reciprocal requirement for new . .

residential or office uses that are introduced within 200’ of an industrial zone to . incorporate such features. . . . .

Others view a buffer as the physical space contained within the distance separating . . incompatible land uses, within which are located uses that progressively mitigate the . .

52 Charting the Future of Baltimore’s Industrial Waterfront ...... af inco zo In sui Regul di di Ap re pr industr Ha re obv Cr for Whi built pr to re of adve ap elm re nui bar tr pr nui de ma Loc inco so th af f f sident seli por dev e op ovi oj le nig ea or pr ve a 2 of r ta m t r sanc sanc ic ic fi at iousl bor c er le 05 t r ec ie mpa mpa -up d ti c; op r buf bl ow lop ce er op ult ult ding ed ic se a t at ia r ng ng nts MI t ed e t s; lop ty th pt e i ) p r he cla ions , ls ri es e nh al and ment ia ia to to e y t a in r er imp ti ti th a ZOD ing at e o a ab r a ogr f or th r i l to te nd ansi an ar ment ble bi sif deq a n ouse th ea (od cq most ec e e or and p imp L f le at lit e or suit re th oc st and ro c p mit er le Po and s. es uis ts indust ien as r ic con lac la ie in c t r uate a e s e asp me hib s ust i noi cu t W ose C at ost t r c co onal ta rs, of nd ab s and te ig ion p req p a ta qui tion ha e a gui a ions h ma er il t f a roje of alp nte at mmerc ment ires it nd v r t le ures, tion he se, i Poi nd b er use le rti use b on n) Si ria uire sit e and/ rig or enig from deli Sa nda i uf use tra ab avy s d wit lo e ct gre nui nt i visua fa i ions l to mposi ng on s. nto gres e ht n worki s elim of a le ers si s nsit d c xi ne of Point to tor h or a di Di Alth indust ilt te 1, th sanc pro i lig nd sti a he solut wi bui inc t th n th use s rec he prote l its 0 name l of p e eg i dec y at loc on ht ng nat uses t c sp p avy rov e points ng e ng lusi h only ough idea lding arc 0 ou e es o olutin, tly g genra si vi s osed s, i i F ac at i n re re f nte t p coh e ria on te ( vi a uture et e wit ld resti o h i c noise a e on wh rope e nd a ndustrial th d ase ex ca a l dly tiv nd itec d l cros b th in s n o b a to few h th to e a la ufer n ist ic near for buf design nd f of e ( e bi t en space a l e.g, reduce nd he land the a i e a tural of c h not an lustrae ms ber adopte ing be , and taion. tainble n . tie tiv blast-prof, fashi fire, p fer of set unsightly locati contrls to While Ft or acqui size enclav use. or wise other or the e s, cost city be conflicti design use b residnt Ba zone comunit to and t or cov industr on acks and/ wit aproite mov conflic ts of Ave ons negati and/or ltim to warehous ring transi to prohibtv Such such fab enats this e tha h re eng the densit or adopt i roundi sur nue al can location separt n e ng qui near v ri ore’s ng and d iews) established fire-p c inerg roist ter point. ve al al would land bufe troublesm requim b ional and other a ring of be from uf no-idustr y or use, on like y asp solid t por ret and p fers exist t requi e. Industria l d rof, la on no-idustral. he abuting must r the f and among ects a no-idustral Ft or use utre ns $2.0 augme are. ng wit physical a i y le incorpate nig f v wal occ upants at design acil main ng y ar could sen to folwing: h t por and/or flex tack of nts be Ave communit is milon d eac discourage A comunite use, ties f in tain cer like i acing nted problematic circumstanc e. of ndustrial addresse the al comn space, might S C the nue cargo be h ms ter ne or stand new use t Wat erfont t por X succesiv sound-i o minded twen San utralize e landscaped set comprise of f switching the include fects or t al Lik lands, ransi increas from t use, and ies or back s; the of minals er pe D rds bufe d ne ewis, are activy . and vi ieg t imp s. t in rsonel cont nsulat he h o ew w t tional-use pro n might in he indust e f t o while eighbors, pl de he r or of alevit p ose use s na te reaf is a a yard, tor the it sign y ce. i osed t ning ing and t ure are is o rial 5 r 3 townhouses and the rail yard across the street. Instead of fronting the townhouses . . directly along the Fort Avenue street frontage overlooking the rail yard, perhaps an . . augmented set back with landscaped and elevated berms or an orientation of the . . homes away from the railyard could have provided a more effective buffer from the . . effects of the industrial use, albeit at the expense of some residential density. . . . .

The city already has a mechanism for the formulation, review, and implementation of . . such guidelines, namely the Urban Design and Architectural Review Panel (UDARP). . .

While the panel’s opinions and recommendations are more advisory than mandatory . . and are not solicited for every development project, those projects proposed near . . port facilities could be subjected to mandatory architectural and design standards . . intended to mitigate inherent use conflicts. The UDARP currently examines building . . proposals to see if they “negatively impact surrounding properties.” Such a guideline . .

could easily be expanded to include an evaluation of how well the proposed project . .

handles and alleviates the negative aspects and effects posed by existing nearby . .

maritime industrial properties. . . . .

Such a requirement would implement the provisions of MIRGMS that originally . .

recommended that local governments promote zoning and development guidelines . to maintain appropriate land use buffers between port industry and other uses, and . . devise regulations that would require the developers of new projects, contiguous to . . port uses, to provide appropriate buffers as part of the new project. . . . .

The Highland Marine Terminal property in Canton, another of the relatively few . . parcels likely to opt out in 2014, aptly illustrates the shortcomings of MIZOD when . . dealing with peripheral properties located on the residential-commercial frontier. . .

This 30 +/- acre parcel abuts portions of the Apex Marine Terminal as well as the . .

Canton Crossing PUD. The property’s southern boundary is formed by the Canton . . railroad right of way. Danville Avenue (a paper street) abuts the parcel’s northern . . boundary and serves as the MIZOD border, while Holabird Avenue to the south is a . . surfaced street separating the tract from the Rukert Terminal site. The Department of . .

Planning’s white paper entitled Zoning for Industrial Maritime Protection relates . . that, “since the waterfront parcels between Boston Street and Danville Avenue have . .

already been allowed to convert to mixed use under the PUD, it is assumed that the . .

port compatible area would begin south of Danville Avenue…,” suggesting that the . .

selection of the northern MIZOD boundary may have been arbitrary. . . . .

The large size and rectangular configuration of the Highland Marine Terminal parcel, . .

its physical separation from Rukert Terminals by Holabird Avenue, and its physical . adjacency (by virtue of Danville Avenue, a paper street) to Canton Crossing . . constitutes a significant opportunity to master plan an effective buffer of transitional . . uses that, once defined, would separate and mitigate the heavy industrial uses within . . the Canton MIZOD district from Canton Crossing’s residential and commercial uses. . .

54 Charting the Future of Baltimore’s Industrial Waterfront ...... Pe San of th re Cant Uni Mar a Ba loca (name buye Ho cloc de Sim gar pr Inste ex ma wi wi th Lik 2. 1. Re h ta at e op posur th th rc fe lt sa co ew r ea use ner t y imor il, ine nui k, t Di ei r nuisa Ado indust use De t lar nse out in a on le ed rs er land Dev ad he eq vy me r ise vi a ly , e et ego sta ty t fi th B sanc and nd legi uir t ng o Cr ne of e i vi pt l ne er le c. a , e i ndust elo oca p l s e th w nc nd nda legi c ci leg ). gisla osing ed or B ar mina r enc r t t ont and ma 1 sla it sup nde ia a nit esi t o es he te oar es. pme 10 Wh h t h t ts isla a l an ed sla r buf li nat ti e in ca ndat y oura dent ai us d as r r t 0 ab p C are on d ia oth ive e d l c ile tiv of n n tiv t or industr ote Board i ha MI soc a nt e ompsi tor f n l il of c ac ers nd Ac s. a b s use e c omerc e y or e such er noisy , gi a ia ty , p rti ZO ( est ntia once il t disc of ne xi ia R ct re P roxi se tio l ng S to for ea ty UD) por te sti th ion. lea ng e D, lie ed wi th sion a ser of l na d ltors ns rch losure ng f t could e a di mity ti ni r li ut e he t f se, ne ly ts produ whi h wit th on ab , te R aw ve t sclosu : rami ure o in ia it c ma ea w ng ha dev zone for oul il e ec Bil but h l c i ch to of a to mpose 1 ltor rens a onc use. ty ve ri F nd b p por 0 tura sta complaint nd fic l uture d ce e time a th mitg rope proh ma 67 res a we fe lop sought d suitable a re introduced. nd temn lude in cont ei redv t-relad et noxius tions 2, l typroe , rine re sult r a ment do re a lawsuit i at limts ibts ( nd pasge. which ndustrial tie the nd not racts sidental of e not elop in te tha s of e to the s. p y notif ngier loca Ba the mi r bufe re of e a rof their odrs on t incorpate acti nacte n necesarily could would qui ltim de a the wer nal d united fe flexib t transiol-ue lega Inclusion ed vit use r trimenal red ing a sale no-idustral of de re and langue d. ore’s tie proe ies and withn also ng di i d ci ha ntroduced b setback D liabt cont sclosure t uy sion by could o the ty desig iscusion v bright e b ers lesn elimnat Industria l t a disclosure e re he racts of sociate a e apro to negoti y c fects q of n t specife s. onse also h such in Baltimore f ui locate rom regulations, at lights, The the does red t nig concer t during p buf he he with the roje be q a of riate d disclosure bils c ue lawsuit t pur a ef ed M-3 omp d er, aford with provi soug near nearby proe resid op ct nce Wat erfont t distance he with s ct transi the wa i Pt or erat nclusi ose zone) lai prose ht a of sion a of Great s including nts t r a ne Plan ntial 207 t por . dealing proe to local he is cont ind y c line langue ional around omunit on may t or av of of o er in ustrial va contract f y inug of a d ynotif of Boards the a tie r d gue of cilt be in wit t fice, h s the y is 5 to h y , 5 3. Provide that all leases and real estate sales contracts for property within a . .

certain distance of a maritime industrial facility contain a disclosure and . .

acknowledgement that the property is subject to certain unavoidable hazards . .

and nuisances originating from the maritime use. . . . .

Finding: . . . .

MIZOD does nothing to preserve and protect essential industrial transportation . . corridors that serve the properties located within MIZOD. . . . .

Although MIZOD preserves access to deep water, its provisions do little to preserve . . transportation corridors leading to and from it. According to the Regional Landside . .

Access Study , 95 percent of the container freight moving in and out of the port is . .

by truck. . . . .

The effect of conflicting government policies and uncoordinated decisions are most . .

immediately apparent within transportation corridors. For instance, Boston Street . .

is cited in the Regional Landside Access Study as a principal industrial transportation . .

corridor that connects the Canton Industrial Area with I-95 and I-895 via . Clinton Street. . . . .

The Baltimore Sun recently reported that an additional 20,000 peak-hour trips are . . expected in the Canton area as a result of new development within the next seven . . years and that 22 of 31 intersections in Southeast Baltimore are projected to fail . .

(i.e., traffic volume exceeds capacity). Increased congestion not only decreases . . productivity and increases costs for industrial users, it also invites the potential for . . imposition of truck restrictions and/or prohibitions to and from Boston and/or . .

Clinton streets in contravention of the intent of MIRGMS and MIZOD. . . . .

The Baltimore Sun article indicated that of the four solutions under consideration, . . the city’s Transportation Department favored the alignment that, among other things, . .

“would retain development opportunities… and preserve development parcels.” . . . .

Unless the city develops a “big picture” uniform mindset, resolves industrial and . .

community development policy conflicts, better coordinates actions and decisions, . .

and communicates objectives and policies among various officials at all levels of . .

the organization, MIZOD will do little to protect essential industrial . .

transportation corridors......

56 Charting the Future of Baltimore’s Industrial Waterfront ...... Alt ri As cost inve re inco MIZO al or Fin tr zo won’ cor Ref Re fundig ma si and Pr to No fol flex pr industr a sp ( Conside per come Va i. sk, zab ansp c sident op e. oba lua ec nig houg eli h eq co inv r r ine i di lend ec it ac s bil angi stme mpa ma wi th ula di one e le t mina ti ime uit me t D ng bl est spe ent r or tr ha nat on it e ng and e i ca y wi ti rc al e h y a y does ia r ng is ph t nts : ti ment t i on nsit nt. ac r at ia n p ci a f ion la i l a l, t pr si e use. ble te a nve or re h nd or it i l ysi ve al nde t nd, r r t t mpl ma not c on eor . ual ov al en-a a e ’ oday ec of Ma use ion po omerc ly sub c nts e not an la ca sto e s not ti onci in id r qui Sup ex C c l conmi f build ri t r e y ke nd d be a y vit or ly d or ha ve ing cre could eit nd seq t rs edly de presc tendi e e ime provi s Ac tp ty c y q ridos. xa ncoura pose stmen rea c use le posib rti omunic he ma whe ui monstra ha t lac h uent M tra tio inve mple ha ngs, ia c c op r l from c ng IZ nge s it rke kly ng rib e, ca be de l, c t est a f n: n y or t t ef th p OD MI ha stor or ly suc le, es of la modif th ita g c t. MI . ma uly ex at d re a at i ap b e s t nd ZO sura f mi e fea l te or et c oreign la e th pe Z le wit ma h ne th at c c a it e evr OD d nd omercial h , F ga x c p D a x u al fle i er e c t si ue ed on th i e uture a t ic h penditur y tured, h se ner ted. nc pita ble ly d la was rea is xi a a with inte er or an b t tions to h nd use, to policie bi e inve ef source y , mis per th a l in l worse A expiraton lity of s to its ore inted pro fe r are min and wil e speculation sume a complet re of te or sted contiued charcte fund and v imoblty . re can q n alue no its use s s b Ba ui e s, ty er in . with ye e and q tend That ring ble 20 in adjustmen which ui guar actualy ze ltim a equitably t the ars, of hat of pment. 14 busine e b eithr to , adve decison, date or r e the econ micaly ext t asurnce $450, ore’s is acquist at o schedul of come elim valued activ nt i mine under ndustrial are an be which rse pro es a may nde contribue re roundig sur 0 M e sizable ity nat c quite Industria l sential al ef omp e ost or nterpis ty er at rci to on i tha e esta, nde a p ects time tization amor asurnces tha nd er as its al of zonig ensatd use e and senitv would and x land feasibl acre MIZOD ilustrae ’s today improv the hig p on compnet zonig ov to iraton f prov expansio wh or h er . rep pri security the fetches e as neighbord R to Wat erfont e cap e st be isk time and y mar ther resnt ide e zoned t acc omdate mari for was use land and o d for t aser inte ital reasonbly p is encroa by eriods. ret some lendrs a indust i tha its ust ind in time $1, nhe of best sources ra proe of of t ne ur sunk f tend he or ge t 10, tha he busine rent ret ching ncy use ria d. ir rial ’ ty r nsur d l, in 5 s s 7 the highest value to the land over time). In the example, although the ten-acre tract . . is currently zoned and used for industrial purposes, speculative investors would be . . attracted to the property in the expectation of a substantial profit as a result of an . . anticipated use change in year 10. In this circumstance, the current industrial use . . would reflect an interim use pending its conversion to the more profitable . . commercial use at the end of the ten-year period. . . . .

As presented in the following table, the property’s value would be calculated by . . discounting the present worth of the property’s future commercial use value in year . .

10. The table compares and contrasts the progression of industrial values over time . .

(appreciated 3 percent per year for inflation) against the projected future commercial . . use value of the parcel in year ten discounted to a present value at a 12 percent . . return on investment. . . . .

As the following exhibit illustrates, by year four value of the property as an interim . .

use (i.e., calculated at the present value of the anticipated future commercial use of . .

the property) surpasses its value for industrial use. Each year thereafter, the interim . .

use value of the property progressively surpasses the price warranted for its industrial . .

use. By year seven, the value of the property significantly exceeds the price that an . industrial user could afford or justify paying at which point the industrial buyer is . . effectively priced out of the marketplace. . . . .

Comparison of Land Values Based on Future Use . . .

YEAR PRES. VALUE VALUE OF PV VALUE OF . .

COMMERCIAL INDUSTRIAL 10 AC. 10 AC. . .

REVERSION LAND COMMERCIAL INDUSTRIAL . .

PER ACRE PER ACRE USE USE . .

1 $354,171 $450,000 $3,541,706 $4,500,000 . .

2 $396,671 $463,500 $3,966,710 $4,635,000 . .

3 $444,272 $477,405 $4,442,716 $4,774,050 . .

4 $497,584 $491,727 $4,975,841 $4,917,272 . .

5 $557,294 $506,479 $5,572,942 $5,064,790 . .

6 $624,170 $521,673 $6,241,695 $5,216,733 . .

7 $699,070 $537,324 $6,990,699 $5,373,235 . .

8 $782,958 $553,443 $7,829,583q $5,534,432 . .

9 $876,913 $570,047 $8,769,133 $5,700,465 . .

10 $982,143 $587,148 $9,821,429 $5,871,479 . . . .

As illustrated above, incrementally extending MIZOD for finite periods will . .

almost certainly invite further requests for extension well before the stipulated . .

expiration date. . . . .

58 Charting the Future of Baltimore’s Industrial Waterfront ...... Not pr th land th hel land pr count and pr adit ro ne re Conside Re na MIZO Fin Th of fac MPA th Obv Ne and/or impo pa th Alt por and vis e en-c e e ic ic op r rc igh -doc houg e it il co d r m t di e es c mo f it iously he ow -r o el b p eli or er lame spe spe it io fo on se at me bo est nly indust r D ng ela s, fo ur y , on op fa r mer gib ty k nal r e stor st a h l does r th r rh ne r sinc cula cula t re : spe imt te a nd and use er ca o t idea ex , imp th nts esnt in nd il a e ods nt d la it l e nde x adr ly n G oca ty e p ri cul P he fo d. nd e ex t t a use . o M of ans ion or oint use, sup M al t not zoned ti le ci l Th Ma cse u h c b r ce C ons t for ati f ri IZO ty me d at li for ions user site -por es as . is is ia ha ion. is t ga s y r as on eri mea Ac to l, Bre t i prog t or cur p nti re r an d er was rti t land ex D’s on of c de i an t or me t a tio ons land he c h sole i mina Re ng pa n la spec loset out rent alt sure ori por a ng th th ze unit re t sunet ngi lp nd evi th n: p use ce nsio. SDA er ei p t e a gi ly siv he of th wa Busine e t c s of eri ly ls nt dent r ti nat naly ne di a or , ex on ci h ve a r r e a adeq t T p te e end t sta odic M ely medi sed e o ed ’s ty re he pa p spec iv res y ad F r a p I prot of aw ate t ZOD e uture nc se a h he rovis a nsi esta nea dres e s ma s lone i to ua th f d nri m or e v r a ina c ia it r on e f dock C h e c or te rke ns from ring ts repo ly ed t s b c throug c cy onsequce. entr ronicaly h inclusion nci v ting on lished speculativ hed cash-out e is and alues si the expansio of of clical because tplace, or no-re ze sunet al insufcie capc ity , inadve aford t deman de Ba protected he over of distrct growt nor tha relat for earli f-dock epwatr comprehnsiv ltim the dock vacant sidental it crite upon the the p t r is econmie e inclusion shiper ca h rov ently ore’s sp v nt of are reasonbly r . we MPA’s This a and n Chesapke to in inte ria. and lue ecula is a for actualy in sale re ofi si b which the growin ons escal oxed tes. land Consequtly , rim can tha any i Industria l sold of a nterim ce elusi t and at withn s p ion deca f-p of e t or Ther of holding ti proe occur way use refl t in, or gods t for zonig he encourage MIZOD afordble ve e insure peri scale de to t p proe use and Comerc e for expiraton withn land goal adpt or ct M . flouri od was at s Hence, IZO t . can and ty proe futre p es its have Wat erfont rev the . with of eriod, use t r ive lite albei somet D tha sh. f city y iew be utre acquirng would must and expns we v ne lite reus alues cheapr while Wel-ocated mo t of wer n concer ares and Ce re he strae imes re at s d M also higest ve nte relativy elbow ward be can IZOD. it at and to the d being s and of r gic be on f 5 or 9 available, especially because much of the port’s targeted commodity cargo is . . land intensive. . . . .

The city should consider protecting critical parcels like Point Breeze and the . .

Chesapeake Commerce Center for port-related use. . . . .

The land mass surrounding the Hawkins Point Marine Terminal, including the city’s . .

Hawkins Point landfill, should be similarly considered for protection as maritime . . industrial support land because, in the long term, port expansion is slated for this . . section of the outer harbor. . . . .

Recommended Action: . . . .

Consider long term protection for viable off-dock and off-port expansion areas that . .

could be needed to support port operations now and in the future. . . . .

Finding: . . . .

MIZOD does nothing to eliminate safety and security issues associated with proximity . to residential and commercial uses in the event of an industrial mishap or act . . of terrorism. . . . .

The Maritime Transportation Security Act of 2002 (MTSA 33 CFR Part 105) requires . . that owners and operators of certain maritime facilities that: . .

• Receive vessels that carry more than 150 passengers; . .

• Receive vessels greater than 100 gross register tons of domestic or foreign cargo; . .

• Receive barges carrying dangerous cargo; or . .

• Have other specializations defined in Section 105.105 of MTSA, . . . . prepare and present for review and approval by the US Coast Guard a facility . . vulnerability assessment and security plan. The plan, among other things, must . . include security measures to control access to the facility and designated restricted . . areas including shore areas immediately adjacent to moored vessels. The plan . .

must also provide for perimeter protections to secure landside and water access to . .

the facility and vessels moored at the facility, as well as monitoring of the facility . .

through a combination of “…lighting, security guards, waterborne patrols, automatic . .

intrusion detection devices, or surveillance equipment.” . . . .

As described by security personnel, waterfront industrial facilities require protection . not only from acts of terrorism, but also from criminal acts like theft, vandalism, . . industrial espionage, or those that may affect the personal well-being and safety of . . employees and visitors. . . . .

60 Charting the Future of Baltimore’s Industrial Waterfront ...... Sim industr de Be and for An no st or re ( Idea Pe oth at no th come comuni Alt pr fr of could on In outsi sh se a de cit For esp th for pet po onti or sp te por us at cur op ould ri ie ve ep c ma t n-MTS houg a tr r t e er di st t r a nti ph dit ed ex ec be he ole s ly , lar c uc xp c ci lop use er de inc w or io i sat ost er t ould r ( ty l amp ia be al edly on er it ik e.g at ly k, losi ti on i ns move um MI ag be rc se al ion h ime li ly ment r M o , es, p s e a er pe ea A zed er wh be ia t f l ti e cur ., b ro ZOD MIZ IZO fa of of h tr w a on eq le l r af es, e r l sing c t p oca ri not i Ph e t to e ci f nef ue e er te a n ont fa or et , end or r fec t t d, p ph sident it te ual gulat f p op lit he he C o OD D. sla ct ac m c doc ila a y h wh t r he t C r r ic on ilt ant h r id ap t f y t era ions ox ain er ion th front person ina rontie esi hose er il ha delph te fi e i pi ia conc t th ca ndustria e r ies, o kside re t ty e cont imt ed ty . on t l e t d th pe o l denti p rti l e ia ropi he he n ng f to th inc ri i t or fe fa subj a t i ndustri p er l saf Henc nvoli line use. p ha sk fa t er pa C M an erim or y c ng r. ct ia re MTS M ca ai rec rea C ilt rosing ion ci i IZ ety n t of ta sola troni al Howevr at of ns I sult a a ec of usti comerc a lit Z ab th l nto are l nd nks, OD’ y a ip se e Adit use O e, c loca b op a p t A-re ies ng no of pot a t omerc ut ita al a te n ted out e ha ref D to c nd th of unle rc zing Bo a era r s t in and F sit te no-M th a a b s p t he tion ent e hite gula Crosi th is uture p a ex iona pec h nd se ove ston) c sa e of ta r poteni es a n tor. c rotec a a i , e riph nea s dent. t th c ost or A n curi ve nker nct ia unlike ia ex a -loads ct lusion subeqnt a prov ifc t a pex wi c l e ly , incident a e ia ground re l b ural residng ci plosi TSA a r n security , uari d ng. y er use, uting lay l-ofice thin ty tion dent MIZOD of t of higer p also adj indust marit v h L al p i rov sion esl, of erd e ocations ty rope es security . and at tain cer large regulatd ve of Ba incidents oi ty proe any re abuting or is gov or the or nig and the those ltim mat gardles and me patrons rial at ons breache engi p incide those of a a does clust wise other t transpo rotection ned er pi resi nearby storage t resid erials span MTSA ore’s facilt marite roist er tha indust pelin locat thus on tha use dential-comercial er use ring occur of no-idustral not nc abuti t and of s ring by abuts he ov ions of ad are ntial-comercial relat e , Ape es, s on Industria l rial of t MIZOD t transpo mandte t tank, of er hat the i , requi tanker of he peri incide ndustrial fices, resid esp ng somet desi except x industr protecti to on v Clinto use sha the ehicular nature T are p directly large e t the rov at he the gn h r ci re shop nt, recei mi p e v prov nts not aly imes industral t r d esl ropsed is security marite h standr for pi y na to frontie al on has use. uni use at perim Stre of ons of Wat erfont to subject ves those ls, ides use, trafic a to those elin, a loade or zones the mprove industral di a sate the a frontie at the of frontie locate ves v This resid working ). olatie no tional nsconcer t abu the ret ters MTSA. the of lite on p facilte i ail R use a locat security nteraction might to ote in great ail railcar and is ls re d the d dock r. r abut MTSA nces. facilty ot ing ntial of cars or can ed he s is r ting r 6 1 afford at least some level of protection. Regulations and guidelines could be adopted . . for properties located on the MIZOD frontier that could include protective . . requirements like augmented setbacks; the placement of protective berms and/or . . other physical barriers; the placement of buildings on the site to lessen the effects . . of a possible incident (e.g. placement of a blank wall facing the area of concern); and . . the inclusion of blast-proof, fire-proof and sound-insulating materials in structures, . . to name a few. . . . .

Recommended Action: . . . .

Require mandatory architectural and engineering design regulations, including . . required buffers for new and redeveloped non-industrial projects proposed in the . . vicinity of existing maritime industrial uses to lessen the effect of a possible industrial . .

accident or security incident. . . . .

Finding: . . . .

By itself, MIZOD is not enough to preserve and promote a vibrant port. . . .

The port’s desire for a location among like-minded industrial neighbors is mirrored . . by industrial enterprises across the country and reflects an era when industry . . was either segregated from incompatible uses or had neighbors who relied on . . the enterprise for business or employment with little incentive to complain about . . annoying sights, sounds or smells. Industrial sanctuaries (clusters of industrial . . users segregated and isolated from residential and commercial uses, like Fairfield . . and Hawkins Point) are rare and rapidly becoming endangered species. They are . . the exception rather than the rule, and, if left unprotected, they are susceptible . . to extinction. . . . .

As such, these communities warrant the benefit of protection, especially since . . the outer harbor area is the planned location for future port expansion. The . . same could also be said for the areas containing the Dundalk and Seagirt Marine . .

Terminal facilities. . . . .

Portions of the Canton industrial district have generally remained an industrial . .

sanctuary, except for the fringes along Clinton Street and Boston Street which now . .

form a frontier with significant residential and commercial uses. The Canton area . .

marine terminals are all privately owned and operated and are served by notable . .

transportation infrastructure including interchanges with I-95 and I-895 as well as . short line railroad connector service at Canton Railroad’s Penn Mary Yard. The ability . . of these privately owned terminals to relocate elsewhere is materially constrained by . . the sizeable costs of relocating, and the sunk costs inherent in their existing facilities . . and locations as a result of their long term tenure, all of which is now reflected in . .

62 Charting the Future of Baltimore’s Industrial Waterfront ...... ar cor sur fur posi in th lar use Str MIZO re along th industr Exc industr wi owne Be ma use re st re Ba by th Loc fr Whi coh elsw cer Pa buf to Th om a ea mai sident sident eir e e st sh ge lt t for e neut ndar e th MIZ r t r r he r ep ust ab imor ai ine C ne er le et ounde b idor s co dec b er bly to ufe busine ant ot e r p h n nig D t s, t it et t -oc it w v a ha ar he er OD. mpr i i Po pe ra ds fo at p h ic re t al al co we in fea ia ia iso s. ch is er on e t r c r er e t, r int li io cup r uc r ea int ope r l-c l, els w use. fr t nsider c ze As is mina d unde 2 ip a a industr in en th o due t eh n onc i ont ns c at re nges ure 01 Indu lit s om ncomp , by y he an omerc k e be ie a of use th a er C r en y a O of mong 4. ti ha m r d r C ie ant result ent ral s is ls e e th and t front old esid rst ’D es la ap sive o ha odels st The xi stric r pro not C ve in prot c erc nd at t repo onel, on, and wi th ri land ant sti rat ha onfli al plie i rti n at ci la a ra defi de ei ia th ref zonig ng di are t l t c ti nti ib ed ia i t ty nd of ec on ha er s dic re ur hi ng Di a r l const d ons and mands fe l, le ct b nd t, ore, use ne a f al-c b wit ne tion ti a s a. t rezoni ronti t i le stric lso and use s aly C n nd usine he es ring use, th are a Bostn, w be ntly rosing t C i rea h t t th Sh com omerc n hroug c rein ha he it th unl ex e ur c a p of onf t many alt a er ose in ute in the ode si nd t if ropsed , land nd F nov t e south ti clusiv s ng env tua ha dust like div espc th uture ikely erd peti i , ing s in lic c ndust p a ity mode a Bostn ap e tra Ba nds and c el ropsed te nother t C P isone C fea dualy ur use s neighbords ti Cur t c la rial UD, ia p onkling y , tis ur ely d fi he should ive soluti reativ of t to like ialy ropiate rently nd l he ture of y r inte c south the s. of fronti re ls, Holabird use Highland op occupied price ns pater whi s a d use would charc ter sidental those St Bay , planed resid Ba v are gration ons Bay e limted t aprov or not eritabl ret resi , out being sim ch build er located ltim of ns pater and mit per st unlik t transiol to i he rently cur dential ndustrial along wi in Holabird r pref f ntial and lary ucture rom wit Av ore’s the Ponc a l al Marine by ng wit C city numbe dev and and/ of ely indust likely enu tha anto of er h ted Clint i heav use, hi consider and c tis Cur n MIZ the mi unknow neds haleng to PUD to and mi s. loped n or close Industria l stre have by ght env front.water Av the and The requst Tminal er on increas xe r be OD balnce y site rial ev c use in of comerc ial s, an enu indust MIZ d Av olve isoned isolated requi Stre t comunity proximt the redv mostly sanct should long use east in o design ownership s e enu, protecting a OD’ merg is of establih 201 nd futre a into re to now rial t of nd fost cong of housed which pro y uar elopi taiontranspo ma s mancefor per 4. Wat erfont opt or the tha the owner-occup Clint and standr consider parmets. east use transi y ering The i along e nig mit per estion efcts t use, ty er of ntirely ng o out s Cant tis Cur a ove is could seg the on of of each large and a transiol cit ares be t ional-use indust detail from olerant variety the Clint relativy re r Stre on esp y are coming ted and time means on ga private migh Bay ot yield distrct et t like on he the ed cialy a of rial nt for of t r. 6 3 whenever possible since isolation or separation of industrial uses from other . . incompatible uses is not always possible in a fully developed city and can result in . . idle or underutilized property and the corresponding unrealized tax revenue. . . . .

In this regard, the city needs to devise financing initiatives and tax incentives . . designed to encourage and enable those maritime industrial property owners who . . are vulnerable to the effects of conflicting land uses to retrofit and reconfigure their . . sites and buildings to better harmonize with surrounding land uses as well as help . . industrial users defray the costs of streetscape and facade improvements to lessen . . the impact of heavy industrial use on surrounding properties, thereby integrating . . the facilities into the community and minimizing the potential for complaints . . and conflicts. . . . .

Similarly, the city must be mindful that all of its policies and decisions, including . .

those involving the disposition of property, should be coordinated and considerate . .

of their sometimes imperceptible and unintended effects on the port. . . . .

Recommended Actions: . . .

1. Protect maritime industrial sanctuaries such as Fairfield and Hawkins Point . .

where there are few apparent conflicts now, to avert problems before they . .

can arise. . .

2. Develop buffers and compatible transitional uses for those areas where use . .

conflicts already exist, especially along the residential-commercial industrial . .

frontier. . .

3. Develop effective methods and means to neutralize conflicts between uses, . .

including creative architectural and site design standards, because isolation and . .

separation of uses is not always possible in a fully developed city. . .

4. Implement periodic or cyclical comprehensive zoning review and revision to . .

consider changing patterns of demand and land use within city neighborhoods. . .

5. Devise financing and tax initiatives to assist vulnerable industrial users to retrofit . .

and reconfigure their properties to better harmonize with adjoining . .

non-industrial land uses......

64 Charting the Future of Baltimore’s Industrial Waterfront g n i r u s a e M Source: Tr e 2 Y 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 nd EA 09 08 07 06 05 04 03 02 01 0 R Baltimor e i n P rop I N $39,426 $36,5218 $3,5870 $31,854 $30,872 $29,5183 $28,6934 $28,9543 D City t er U STRIA y tmen Depar T AXE Taxe NA NA D O Z I M S 4 1 2 6 1 0 9 7 L s ...... CHGE of Whe ben industr Unf • • ha is Mea cit • In so • • In th Cor • fol • Finan ce at not met -1% y-w p t t 8% 9% 5% 3% 5% 3% hi he or po sur % de use; no-i Ca Amo T N Amo wi n di fit en, ota s ide tuna umbe hi a ra d. p a ng r r i ing o go al bse ro eg p si ng t l na unt unt f ion ndustr b mpl number ec n a m r o f Pr e p w and pe pr ar c te asi volum th nce a mely t ont at r ha d, $71 $60 $52 $48 $45 $42 $40 $39 op ly , ra t r and of of e of s, e er y met t ex th al e C succ t of a fix proe 9,560 4,029 5,692 2,85 3,029 6,508 5,96 6,170 pe di ta ask. i t r si ha al lth th e t. e th te ies of xe ed oth ers of mi r TO job T a use a rti ough es e s not t: AXES nd s th Th fir ,324 ,350 ,91 ,506 ,271 ,70 ,287 ,906 cost a a Pla er TAL a t r ts anu ng s NA NA re e i re ms s of e y ve a oc do nig i disc me t sued not t sta t vie th o cla sel M ax i ax c nvestm loc not ur, measur asu I ted es ly e er es we s ZO c CHGE a ar F onve na D ra c te o in res with d wit uture 1 1 enc D inte olec riv r epa 9% 5% 9 7 6 5 2 th ble d in a % % % % % % rev a hi a n a er withn roach s t r in ls re , th r n a st ted a ed enus tmen readily s than temp withn e t MI ipulated of rently cur of negativ withn he conte to wit Z MIZOD $5,9 $5,7 $5,6 $5,6 $5,3 $5, $5,4 $5,4 and Ba MIZOD MI OD to no-i obtained f hi t or ltim avilbe Z MIZ MIZO to quantif xt 06,27 71,3 95,6 4,1 62,49 04,9 04,73 98,3 TA n ; MIZOD e, conflict OD mulate by MI g of ndustrial XES pres tha OD ore’s aug NA NA ; is h Z the D and tax 2 7 5 2 1 2 4 3 av t OD . o y e is, from ; d dat, e nted wit rev t p ensur the he ; Industria l ben and t rovis CHGE o h enus use. benfit -3% -2% ase succes proe industral 2% 1% 1% 5% 2% in the re cur % ons sh a t h Baltimore vacum own at ob INDUSTR t r the ntly s of AS ies something t of MI of a Wat erfont TA Ordi 17.% 18.% 18.4% 19.% 18.7% 19.0% i to ned succes marit MIZ %OF ZOD somet t repo of XES be withou al nace OD: from D incre me evlop typ h t ing of h AS% doe MI es TO e al T 04-8 asing, 1. 1. 1. 1. 1. 1. AXES the ZOD on 12% 20% 26% 32% 32% 39% s ment OF AL not 6 a 5 property taxes collected within the MIZOD, although growing, have actually lagged . . both of the foregoing categories as illustrated by the table on the previous page. . . . .

Without the benefit of context the number of permits issued and the amount of . . fixed-cost investments measured thereby are similarly problematic and may not . . accurately reflect the nature and extent of work performed. For instance, MPA . . and some businesses reportedly are not required to obtain permits, while some . . permits and the values associated therewith might solely reflect the cost of routine . . maintenance. Furthermore, as a metric, building permit activity is a poor barometer . . for those facilities that are fully built out and functional. . . . .

MIZOD is a fixed area contained within finite boundaries. Much of MIZOD is located . . within established, fully developed areas of the city. If the absolute number of firms . .

within MIZOD has increased or decreased, such change only indicates a shift in . .

density, rather than measures any difference in productivity or productive capacity. . .

If reporting the number of firms located within MIZOD is intended for use as a . .

surrogate for employment, it is a poor measure. For example, if five new firms each . .

employing five people locate within MIZOD, the five additional firms represent a net . .

gain of 25 jobs within MIZOD. If, on the other hand, three firms each employing 25 . people for a total loss of 75 jobs leave MIZOD and are replaced by a single firm that . . employs 100, the net reported result is a loss of two firms, notwithstanding that there . . was a net gain of 25 jobs within MIZOD. . . . .

According to a draft critique of the MIZOD annual report provided by the MPA, cargo . . volume and vessel arrivals have several measurements, with cargo volume the most . . useful indicator and MPA dockage days of lesser value. MPA points out that cargo . . volume listed in the MIZOD annual reports only reflects foreign commerce because . . domestic waterborne cargo reported to the U.S. Army Corp of Engineers is voluntary, . . and that reported arrivals are to the entire Port of Baltimore and not just the . . terminals located within MIZOD. . . . .

When reported in a vacuum, the volume of cargo moving through the Port of . .

Baltimore is inadequate. An absolute three percent reported increase in the port’s . .

cargo volume loses some of its luster if the volume handled by competitor ports has . .

increased by ten percent or if an erosion of the port’s competitive market share has . .

occurred. Only when presented in the context of performance against competition . .

and relative market share can cargo volume data be properly evaluated as a measure . .

of success. . . .

There is a distinct difference between developing parameters to measure the . . success of a zoning ordinance versus those used to gauge attainment of the public . . policy objective that originally prompted the zoning ordinance in the first place. . . . .

66 Charting the Future of Baltimore’s Industrial Waterfront ...... and ca sp af A ha goal As legi Mea ar no and use MIZO Be of re th do Mea re val inh so Th re obj • • • • ea r str ca vie e n urc ec or lt ca suc t es ues e eg gl ec s slat bi i hom c sur sur s pt s Enh a Ma Pr long in Mi a t p th nci ula pe dab ic ea use w t h ri ist l nd ti no es r D’ t a t ha c t ur ovi e e o op te nim ve b th re io ned s es. r so th of x ing ing ti denc y r spe s t ey t anc il im th c enc e c r p w n on. it e s er e de a ur urc ia mand t r d use t ro genous ty of o th elf ond s a ea he c ci be is id succ MIZ ope ze ty ct ze f t r ould e be r t r pe p ei ty e ent jo of es; te ar he U oac p industr om imp iv gin th r no pr c v l r r ; of t bs nf ev e t r and it a de e C r t OD’ ope he la a es a e inve he at c lue oh ’s y h te i ha t or s b t of nd from nd b mari e th osib usef ity f velop loca ment ions il oc nt or by and s e c ib t r mari e rti s use e s th of it unat Ec t stme sumari inc t conmi f cur o y it al th di ’s y suc t or o va def ul e time he l th ions, onmic ng le wh t seldom th of f e e e e use ransf rious urs ci c fi ti of i da ely , e conm xt t ce i d ing ndustri onfli cult t e los s c me nt. ti ax ma ic o th ori it end a ta zens inc i s industr use nfe no h of nd know notig b isol zens c ers ba e rit us gi ct i zed a a to to of ompa nter fe t wh t se F asib dispro Dev se na i tur ime ap h s o e t y at uture a asi at a with ea mea de e f to nd a . l of of and l a proiate a ed (t ta th n re wh v proe purose sily le. nd bi t public a elopm th iews houg industral tib e ing l t ov succes th p e busi lity in sure he nhace instaces si use a e water enhace econmic indust e le t lent ase er of number MIZOD would depwat city for tha t r nes. h s land ti i t p succ es n y he Ba onat mit per nt not wit olicy b land indust suficie would and, is rial but se t e ltim we because Strae he use use h nc and hav necesarily e of the could objectiv of re regad front water objectiv a hmarks op cost tha quali rs; s when ore’s speculation lso r is ed rial e new conducted, tha c nt f rev gy tunie por ty proe rom ont hapend tha contrl by to i numbers be ty use; s large and enu in to t inue resid could es posible, prequis Industria l ident the e of whose of est usef promting e unde is in Comp and life ach. Baltimore i i ablished. y s M-3 ndustrial the for p wit t ield ul y if s ntial not he would infr roble and i in for asure rlying n wit not pers hi a the e zone. rehnsiv orde t practice to scaltion the period a hat te nge n h and busine promte mat usef only i its incide the Wat erfont n to regional b Ordinace ectiv absence the of proe City . e capit on smal Hence, aries, bound ic. comercial of mari ul ha cit the to suf e MIZOD and prioty) MIZOD MIZOD’s e. measur nce rd y Up of a Master g time t r ficient l georaphic f re s Only the auge rom to inters fundig ies land on p residng of gion gauin of osibly det safet 04-8 are use then the Plan, as: to ect but so ; s; 6 y 7 With objectives in place, the criteria for success can then be discerned and . . defined and appropriate benchmarks to measure performance developed which . . could include: . . . .

1. Is the city receiving benefits at least commensurate with the diminished tax . .

revenues and lost opportunity costs associated with hosting port facilities within . .

the city? . . . .

Periodically, MPA commissions and publishes economic impact studies to gauge . .

the economic benefits that the Port of Baltimore yields to the region and its . .

economy. Previous reports have apportioned, at least in terms of direct . .

employment segregated by public and private terminals, the benefits to each . .

governmental subdivision. In the most recent study (dated January 28, 2008), . .

Martin Associates reports that 2,921 of the total 6,775 jobs associated with the . .

public marine terminals are held by city residents (43.12 percent), while . .

Baltimore and Anne Arundel county residents hold 1,609 (23.75 percent) and 849 . .

(12.53 percent) jobs respectively. The survey conducted in conjunction with this . .

study found that approximately 26 percent of those working within the MIZOD . .

boundaries are city residents. To the extent the income taxes are paid to the . jurisdiction in which people live rather than work, localities reap a direct benefit . .

from the employment at the public marine terminals. . . . .

While the economies and tax coffers of all of the region’s governmental . .

jurisdictions share the benefits of a regional economic engine like the POB, only . .

the city must forego opportunity costs associated with alternative higher value . .

non-industrial uses of the industrially zoned land on which marine terminal . .

facilities are located in redeveloping communities, and realize reduced tax . .

revenues associated with the public use of the MPA marine terminal properties . .

almost all of which are located within the city. . . . .

Comparing the amount of opportunity costs foregone (by measuring the tax . .

revenues obtainable from alternative uses of the land in the absence of MIZOD . .

against the actual revenue to be collected with MIZOD in place) is an important . .

exercise when enhancing tax base is a goal. . . . .

As detailed in the following table, MPA is scheduled to pay service charges in lieu . .

of taxes (PILOT) to the city in the following amounts: . . . .

YEAR PILOT . . .

2007 $743,598 . 2008 $930,084 . .

2009 $930,084 . . .

68 Charting the Future of Baltimore’s Industrial Waterfront ...... w MI op c inc Al w a a is HA FAIR LOC SEAGI TO MCC MCC PO O MAS PA DMT DU *N/ U. WORL PR LOC RE MPA Wh Source: PI t Th w r ena ep ap nd it oul oul six th ERS $2 S. RC OPE ZOD er e WKI ludi IN N hi TA ND ile or A it ough nts fo US US f FIEL 5,0 QUA a T al OMA OMA -B d d p n pe ol EL T ind te L te N D RT ay i r iza 1 AL yland Mar ng imp somewh RTY M AN nte EN NS T T B rc 0 d d VIL on-p occ a & B; s TRA I R icates D wi K ti nual PO PO RANTI en t ZOD ma S S de DI b a D EZ v r ha on t PO C 6 ute LE nualy TOY ui g n o up S A t ha iews INT INT X;SEAG ta t or CL t D rine PI TRE 2; lding $ c INT ra ope ying ile a E 28, ta rti a to LOT INTO Pt or at d rep O pit te NE stora ble C land d NORTH O S etai wit T te 0 ng be unde ENTR rat ali s as A-M inf t or M to dminstration A mi r S UTH 0 a c I h zat T BY ing N led RT PA’s a t sug ompa ge ma or th va p th A s p some M D. nal STRE TIO rstae er ion c lue e e a PA LOCAT ma data ite rox fa rea SHI est F ac city . fa t res uture N c s ion ra te of rine re ima ilte c s, inter ed ta P te mi r va ilt are a a x oth a prox a lue. nua tely t a b ies I te b pa s nals. O b doc a na out with ers not of mi r ove sed y N wit tional ments M $5 l kside imately Ba nal the PA’s cont rents availa ble hi .9 on to the ltim n mil an faci t compsite marine rent cur . end the ax for Payment A receiv ave ore’s lites ply $4 $564 $930 $17 on li city al $30, $25, $50, $14, $73, abil tha 42,0 $1,0 rag PILOT for priv ing N/A ed minal ter ,105 ,084 ,850 are t was N/A N/A N/A 0 750 $20 0 0 359 ty e Industria l a such 0 20 ri in rent 0 by * tarif a at for f re cur 07. per six not ely L for the ieu the a of p re owned capitlz ation acre proe readily rent ntly ercent of MPA $26 venu 3 CO 6 $18, $10, Taxes Wat erfont $2,5 $2,0 $2,3 priv to ,50 be of L from r $713, $29, $231, t L proe ing a the s ov paved 982, $21,5 87,6 y ECTE v ately 07,139 82,50 17,360 at e ailbe, per (PIL RENT eral xp price land priv the N/A N/A N/A N/A 915 65 $ 780 46 02 25 21 t er t r ra a D OT) face sur cre ies at te dock s d not the e at tha 6 t 9 The mayor’s Blue Ribbon Committee on Taxes and Fees recognized the benefits . .

to the citizens of the region, not just the city, of the many tax-exempt cultural . .

assets that are disproportionately concentrated within the city and sought to . .

formulate a remedy to equitably share the costs associated with providing such . .

benefits among the beneficiaries. The opportunity costs related to alternative . .

uses of MIZOD-protected land foregone by the city in certain communities . .

and the reduced tax revenues associated with MPA facilities that are . .

disproportionately concentrated within the city are additional examples of . .

how other regional governmental jurisdictions share the rewards from a . .

regional resource without necessarily having to contribute, forego, or risk . .

anything in return. . . . .

The economic impact studies of the POB periodically commissioned by MPA . .

could be expanded to measure and apportion not only the benefits received by . .

each jurisdiction from the marine terminal facilities located within the city, but . .

also the costs and contributions (including foregone opportunity costs and tax . .

revenues) borne by each beneficiary as a basis for devising a regional sharing . .

formula. . . .

2. Is MPA being funded at levels sufficient for the Port of Baltimore to compete for . .

its appropriate share of the market and to properly maintain MPA facilities within . .

the MIZOD? . . . .

The MIZOD equation is relatively simple: If the port wins, the city and the region . .

win. The inverse is also true. If the port loses, the city and the region do as well. . .

However, should the port falter, the city stands to lose more than others in the . .

region by virtue of its stake in the game, regarding the reduced tax revenues . .

received from public marine terminal facilities and the lost opportunities from . .

alternative land uses as a result of the protective effects of MIZOD. . . . .

MIZOD, in effect, makes the city and the port partners with a vested interest in . .

the port’s success. As any prudent investor in an enterprise, the city should . .

expect adequate returns on its investment. . . . .

In this regard, port performance relative to industry benchmarks and that of . .

competitors should be periodically reviewed to assure that MIZOD-protected . .

port assets are being maintained and utilized at optimum capacity to promote . .

the success of the port. Idle or underutilized assets that are not fully contributing . .

to the success of the enterprise, especially those under the protection of MIZOD, . deprive the city of the economic benefits to which it might otherwise be entitled. . . . .

For example, as stated earlier, the North Locust Point Marine Terminal (NLP) . .

has been described by interviewees from both the maritime and real estate . .

70 Charting the Future of Baltimore’s Industrial Waterfront ...... Wh B sup p c c P ex use of of t p p On t no-i indust ma Lo inc t dev (a On in c t r r j 27 in p MPA fr p If sa obs er he hr he esi ew ompr omunit once at ubli er ro re ro al e suming le, M p 9 cust th th t it igh mina ough ludi ap s ti ile ser he for te duct elo dent ansi er a th th c West PA s in jo mor is is pe rds. a ha j c ndustr sc ct si t oint ior t- e e r nd bs r ma o p va i Ge pme th ng te ns ar r i ze ia se P ser r r o on, s one ot er ep ls a iv ia ac j oi t e, w is m r e a t l ust p nd be wi un ion p nce R nera h e he for a For l-c cr and a o Domi c v t or nt vi ay er y te C r iv bout t es th are it onc nt) ent utnmb ha f iva nefi h i dec i e i ce a ha omerc or ha nals. r p al r e y f ma M e a is a Bulk s and , a r. and res ex h s of l c t ling s te pla th ure, nd, use nd rti p th er ma te ari t ma S re and, dif line. ts p t Ti no h nce use. a amp hy th he hi t e mi r revi te nd ns e e he ce ne de prote p ng ve r and j suc $3 rit p e Liq c ority ic sic a ci c mi r cont S osed or pub er Loc it ment, t ould mig uga i cost ult h ce proe nals, 2,1 ty sur le, ously ia Te Poi hroug f y me aly th ce ui a t una a t l $8 nal he sat mi s h mi r would ust ct nd lic d inua 86 mixe b to s roundig nt, of r, ht e e ef by 78 indust ased ion of h an gh T b p ble th F opera ma p fe th a ion e na er r th p cont pen av b Point ut uture arc ,271 a re ’s ty va riv t d c t tion er e e c out n he e d mi e e onti l, of tiv rine h to func a lua one Ba b not at el on of use of use L nota a a t lso rib ria na e he rec mi ely mari oc t c ve tors. e per fic t c ltimore ra of for S te re nued th he in omit th l. l neighbord. pa ute NAP t re ust tionaly cle x of for measur ted of e of th e ent use, is b isolated ra ed be in e a r a marite Th time-or r region le c would e minal arly this Thi cre tnership, il the minal’s ter Ba result positn omplex Point more the cause t and use op designat chane p ne e a v ser i x se la ltim s Metals s i in proe ts def gativ minal’ s ter re remaing n it complicates deficie alt t or int user facilty ice tha tax penisula’ of the own be venu c to re responiblt ined ore’s of ould nat er nted r er unity t purose asonble e l succ es, to h the to etc.) i rev dregin r the nsuficient and D on at consequces, use, rely t up resouces nt. y r wor y , reap omin t and wer be h ive is ba re land for Industria l v ted e to nue e Comdite to sit The ersu on slated c gional industral or ir se amend onmi tha dist realize subtani e comercial any mak facilt d in the tha t i th nor because c comdite and at ts can o , y Sugar marine onv on should the ingushed aproximtely expct and ful it conve volume decison e cont or f econmy or withou c depriv its signf is ted er es. this aproximtely case shore dev impact b mixed asked acc ountabilt use p c a Wat erfont to not inuty ui MPA la rent ur the ly minal ter s rsion f the ld-out t ise icant acil nt Tminal, er mit per rs he to of e and use. gre only s bet along priv the it in in about a t use also the a than anlysi use city tha ty o self of to ly a pla mixed-us critcal the th marite we t prohibit? of at opt By thNor er for indust r inf a nie Pt or e sit such to n h of e ba pa en t do a as he wake v the luence v y (via imaly e and icint se t s t ir for he the the of ria ue 7 y , l 1 MPA’s vision statement indicates that its actions “to promote the resources of the . .

Port and ensure that navigable waters in the state are safe for efficient . .

commercial navigation,” support not only public-sector facilities and operations, . .

but the private sector and private port facilities and operations as well. . .

While such a statement might infer that the port is a monolith under unified . .

guidance, MPA and the private operators hasten to point out that the MPA . .

and the port are not synonymous, and that there is no strategic plan or . .

corresponding estimate of land use needs guiding the Port of Baltimore as . .

a whole. . . . .

In the absence of an entity with designated or perceived responsibility and . .

accountability for POB performance, the State of Maryland’s commitment to the . .

POB’s success, as measured by its willingness to fund MPA operations and capital . .

projects at levels consistent with those of the port’s principal competitors, could . .

serve as a useful surrogate and an essential barometer to track over time. To the . .

extent that the POB is hampered in the competition with autonomous, better . .

capitalized, and more agile Port Authorities elsewhere, the city’s contribution . .

associated with MIZOD might be for naught. . . .

Historically, MPA has often lacked the resources it needs to excel. For instance, . .

MPA’s strategic plan and vision statement speak of the need for: . .

• A proactive land acquisition policy to ensure that land is acquired before . .

conversion to non-port uses; . .

• The ability to make quick decisions when land becomes available and . .

• A strategic opportunity fund for property acquisitions to overcome the . .

cumbersome procedures that can inordinately delay transactions that . .

discourage property owners from selling to the port. . . . .

Yet, MPA acknowledges that to date these goals have remained elusive, and that . .

in the past MPA has failed to act strategically and decisively due to lack of funds . .

and arcane processes to control critical parcels when needed for port expansion. . . . .

During a period of fiscal austerity when governments are trimming (not . .

bolstering) expenditures, creative, outside-of-the-box solutions would be in order. . . . .

For instance, a port venture fund might be organized and capitalized by those . .

with a vested interest in the port (banks and service providers to name a few). . .

The fund could work in tandem with MPA and private marine terminal operators . .

and provide bridge funding as necessary for opportunistic property acquisitions . that otherwise would have been lost while awaiting approvals and/or . .

appropriations......

72 Charting the Future of Baltimore’s Industrial Waterfront ...... 3. 4. busi ex As r A is Ha dist sp ma op • h Amo Pub fund fo w • nei B of be p t if p Is t t a p he he he ema nd ubli ro ro ow ec it t r spe w p ec th ing ea er he s th h ri gh or fa te te andi r ause lic ar a p nes The info mar sta The at t t er ic ti if ng a c w mount th e ine c he he ça or op ct ct et ci bor ti r e me h -p ta t, uti ca e el ant (a say ndar conmi ei ons al ed ion de ic t’ ot ine ng pub er r w ine ma r d ec a p ly le r nd s p iva r lize al h model deq p et industr t or it ed h in at t ubli int he by c ods, imp onmi vel C t or he d i h of er m t b ompe n ur ds te ts ion g lic te t’s ha ti o pri d), and en b and eg cole uat ax MI on por goe MI mi r inf c sh of a sa pa y ta rovem and c rti ma mark va meli rat imu mari and would on p ZO me is x e a imp fit ZO or i r opera typ i te c t t rinc nals ti s working a re s, tnersh ng rine ct dist ion regi suc l is would ma impa ef a t a D i orat D, t whe user i he e re et vai ve of imp set ne ac ons he per th ip ic on ric of c tion rela lat onal th i nt, nes? t ti te as sh nto be t lab esf t por ie al ter arget e p e ona c studi n ip s rovemnts t rough mi for c ive m r us are an ncies t rof w t la compet ar be mig . tiv at def F le a i h mi o nfor th opr ul th ed el uture c ndsca ina . go; ) e use l f to ind e operatin pub a A i usefl ef es ray e nal ea mari a n c ef ht t ng is to as mong to put nd omdity l t comuni a ma ful th its c th i he fa peri t vidua ec c in lic b h th fa in th fund pi tuni would i itor c e c e e ne th enc tion of ts t b ci ompeti ter c ilty t e c a ng, arg ( c th number establihd, he for for ap a odicaly ompeti e t lites and it c other of romet ter ties minal l y Ba of e por y ost ’ city acit etd p is t puding. or located the mation infor of ag e mi minal er roje minal include: and published ltim priv ty . nc s avilbe) t are are y trafic ot each s. s ght of or regat. t roaching S and comdit inv hi facilt ct h ion of comisne t eagir at cordinat ore’s rent cur ret e scat ts; por s ngs, of wish f r e estmn direct, acil wit or public t as beautifcation ov rofit re simlar when mance. for per he If y terd h proe lat er funds The wel the Marine ty located y industr marine Industria l to i extn to n and ive use ly time relativ ng indrect, y the exami (and inf be p unde on utilzati among as to in clase t or s to t r c on-site mati or ? d tha compiled ould y city an prote a of Tminal. er of the minal, ter withn e priv acquist by is standr ne ne r resouces agre to maxiu considerat ret under projects are on ighbor MPA It comp difer and b g ov at Wat erfont ct on p improv e rown ai would e ub ing er rate the conflict used nig gate is when induced t repo on ons li time (i.e eti the sh t por av nt ci and or of o to the to ail em b or ty e to be ., th ca on, d asi. e at d ing, to t asit and ed bolster a at aset p he he t yindustr b helpf tax basi ch h least a nts le) to jobs; ase it at city lp s or or ul 7 3 Successful endeavors require organization, commitment of sufficient resources, . .

and direction and coordination by acknowledged leadership. The city, the region, . .

the companies, and their employees whose livelihoods depend on the port’s . .

success all have a vested interest in and are relying on the POB to prevail in the . .

competition for business. A well-orchestrated and coordinated effort is, therefore, . .

warranted and essential. . . . .

Unfortunately, the study suggests that planning, coordination, and . .

communication between essential players at all levels are lacking and in need of . .

improvement. In 1996, the Port Land Use Task Force (PLUTF) recognized the . .

need and called for regional cooperation and coordination of efforts to facilitate . .

the port’s success. The Port Land Use Development Advisory Council’s (PLUDAC) . .

original vision and mission emanated from a concern about underutilized land. . .

However, different conditions now dictate the need for a new entity that can not . .

only foster but focus regional cooperation and coordination on the port’s ability . .

to compete. . . . .

MPA’s targeted commodity cargos for future growth are land intensive. The MPA . .

is projecting three percent to four percent annual growth. Existing terminals . are reportedly at or near capacity. For the port to prevail in the competition . .

for cargo, all constituents (MPA, private terminal operators, the real estate . .

community, and state and local land use planners and regulators) must act with . .

a coordinated plan and land use strategy to address dockside and off-port land . .

use needs. . . . .

Although MPA develops and issues a strategic plan, there is no strategic plan for . .

the Port of Baltimore. Likewise, there is no maritime land use plan for the port . .

of Baltimore as a whole that is based on an empirical determination of the port’s . .

land use needs that can serve as a basis for comprehensive zoning decisions. . . . .

A new forum comprising all constituents that meets regularly to coordinate and . .

communicate information about the POB’s land use requirements should be . .

established. . . . .

Pat Keller, Baltimore County’s Planning Director, related that, early in the . .

PLUDAC process, the city and Baltimore and Anne Arundel counties had . .

considered adopting a unified set of industrial zoning classifications to assist . .

port users in their consideration of alternative locations and sites. Now would . .

be an excellent time to revisit the discussion of uniform industrial zoning . classifications because the city is drafting its first new comprehensive zoning . .

code more than 35 years. Collectively, the city and Anne Arundel and Baltimore ......

74 Charting the Future of Baltimore’s Industrial Waterfront ...... p r fut fo a t Li a dev p a Th go c t esp c t Th bui Wh some or ent c st of a c t p la imb ax o hi o ela ompa ounti omp ombi nd l dvis nd er re lani nd at ke r t s e e sup c ur l c lding it ile va he ea for ec i ist a elo t omp d al a ndust w st a a ive r f ie ba e use n oundat e wh loc nti anc il ng se, ia ise, a ic udy ned ng ma po t s es “ al pe al r s t c net he in ly s ri ing emnt p ma ole ci -int ile a or st est gh es oca at t r nei de f ned rs r nce o t t or r pa th oduct i C h at he ia ig C wi f ion n lac int l ac ag t ensiv ci ab as ct in at oSta and e t ha th te of e l ion ina ti wa he a si th sion a tua ive a e king c gre ai on i rea out and d s, er t found ze” nte nd sem rti of it to por he reh n ly c t iv p y r b of use PILO ly he omunit e. l g th s of res a its usine be i nse ng ne no-idu p . th ma a of ty nfor sup e t loca a ouse p i ey roste Thoug te er nfor nvis por long th c te lot e eds ec p and th a th king th Ts, for lani da c es ply nor c rgo va mat l onmic r nt omp e h at t’ contemp med e g oned and r t c ma angi a p ti s por t , a over pay ordina c n cri h of h of F y sc ub on comdit any t f stra ion ap ng ove or uture eir h stria nc ongi must eti C a teria and a a t lic fle of ture de rc osSta , a t rea nme th e c teg by sy c loc r nd e a a a e x omn works l c on re spec time na f e ov n nd stem ora i f deman v resouces spa PL ic si e i te c a a la p ra most enturs, ndustrial e nt of ture er a lso l, ct r, on for rotection merg UTF c tiv marketing n t t c regi s ialy e omunity D me h y land t to es e Ba be s e ime. amply the take e making contri BED straeg globa of in ir relativ t, par to chanism n discer is bordes ltim onal, and e deri the land for the the use t. por land-it and orignal and a , From can land and but ore’s more ved rep PLUD the responi of trade. indust ies e region or suply planers, is goals, use v ser to to be From dev ions, marite tre t or fact rently cur local t t por tha c t and anly o o gaue ole ensiv t AC, p establihd. inte projecti nds he e Industria l s elopmnt promte rial track la ual suply as projecte ov loans, and af usefl bi ni such ct p econmic competi si and gral lani and/or e land er lity the ion da ord re and ng rathe of and ase dist gulators, t t being ons cited ime, a and mation, infor for and basi g the . ng such and and benchmark s tha the rant c d ributon resouces ts. ase tunae Unfor omp spot tracking ov ion, ca agencies act Wat erfont than anlysi a best absorptin i zonig dev of t’s por s, f could n e rg dat, or conside ive r ferd a MI TIFs, o lom and an re time elopm the refut chan e dema R role ch th est va G ben comn dat e d (e. of whe ain ut se , f ing eir et MS. luab conmic to or e rable imat a ly , in cison, ilzation em a c.) g., re dat nd, nt guide sale so fit and n to le e tha 7 5 t Recommended Actions: . . . .

1. MPA’s periodic economic impact analysis of the POB should measure, reconcile, . .

and apportion the benefits obtained from the POB relative to the contributions . .

(including opportunity costs and tax revenues foregone) made by the region’s . .

governmental jurisdictions as one means of devising a regional sharing formula. . . . .

2. The city should periodically evaluate MPA funding and port performance against . .

competitors and industry benchmarks to assure that MIZOD-protected port . .

assets are being maintained and utilized at optimal capacity to promote success . .

of the port. . . . .

3. A regional entity should be established to facilitate the collection and . .

dissemination of information about the POB’s land use needs, and foster regional . .

cooperation, planning and coordination of resources among public and private . .

sector interests to address the needs and promote the POB’s success in the . .

competition for trade. . . . .

4. Baltimore City and the metropolitan counties need to coordinate their land use . planning and zoning actions especially in areas along their common borders to . .

promote the common good of the POB. . . . .

5. The city needs better mechanisms to track and assess the supply of and demand . .

for various land uses, as well as the utilization and allocation of economic and . .

community development resources to gauge their productivity and payoff. . . . .

6. The city should encourage and the MPA should support the development of a . .

comprehensive maritime land use plan for the Port of Baltimore that is based on . .

an empirical determination of the port’s land use needs that can serve as a basis . .

for comprehensive zoning and land use decisions......

76 Charting the Future of Baltimore’s Industrial Waterfront no i s u l c n o C

...... base Ho be up wi ch it of consi to posi also use inh As sh Ho th di op holde outda could Wit is wh gove Pl time a ex Alt in mi th tr industr adi ne ani sto is e e e th te ould ar dst J c on houg ta c ic we we bet h anu sti onf bi a e or ur ma sti nsio w a out , -c ke inc ti h n r t r dve x ble der a ct mat enh t r te ve ve ona long-e ng te onsumig tuni re of be t l c io w inem new er i ca p er t be r no ompr th al d h o r nsio r, r, ntl p il c ea n, nt ab los cr y and pi of vi e ompr anc osi l sy em, sui MIZ o p use in w ti at p d se 2 inc a ac t y le ew o ta f fi of r es hi st it zonig t f 0 ar esr sta r ci t to te w neig t t ing l e h nt of h ing unce e t ble r h nking e lud ion OD a ed co a b h als in he of 9 r fo eg d m e C i mount bli omi from o n it occ ut , s e new dep and vest nversi ha r ve neig te a wit ula th nsive a i hb as a ti to th p she rela t nd a t nd is a s t r a n, me ra t ote ur not c sing e rti lso code a at suranc orhds an ti h er orig ompreh a ai th ment not nd cont zonig de come loca hb d c wat nd M ons. te c nty b . adop i ntia ng onduci is on is h s ma a inte only i et I ct orh ndustrial ma a ZOD p a th ina a se is time re er some lengi f l a we ai rotec bout th for wa to ster l a nd As e in orde t vise most nmet rim rit t l t od f e site conmy , i or t a cod e e p rci on oth ls draf o th like suc n th ma ve ns is la ro me n c F wh pla ng t d t renw ex al s onc e soluti nd 2 ew a a uture o a i t i v stra e er to rit ve 01 t rel round s h a to ma ting por i p b a Ca at clust n pa b indust sion rg p a a , th c nd y ire use er set e use nd at roces me its ha zonig no-i a ne tegi p etd p siv nto, the rough vant nd t replaced. on, i a taing nig ardox of ncre ngi resi of nd until at ers, w extnsio map d of of f busine ra t c e f econmic the pendig rial im or he land zonig the zoni a ndustrial ng f zonig 2 mari f aproch dential me or asi Ba Locust or MIZOD of 016. inov patch ordi an the 2 tres, for would neds. new i and 014, ng t 201 v work c ltim ng those maping he speculation, net y er al time aditonl In na se jobs dist si code ativ de ’s city use clasif to f zonig use. the ore’s the greation Point . or time nce, this nc use. isue on be dev Completi expansio ci p cluster p tha e ricts. e an arcels like and sion confli lug ev city and uos. incongr wil the regad, the elopm objectiv the the icat t Such and entual aditonl hat Industria l is ordinace It F a v pres te might is making horizon, b ai city , proactiv ions fi price ct percei f new from might n ounde e capt and f r tis Cur of rst rently cur on s an ye ready ield it of hav nt es industr adopti hav rev and ars of zonig aproch not uring is isolatn dist speculation, the ing straeg v (maxizing e a and and ed a ing the ison e te Bay lso until MI alredy b i the bri only on t or s st Wat erfont n quality P y on lophe slated contemp Z anm new rat recently more Hawkins t inopr i al ye 20 dge, wher nv ion, OD clasifcations a re y , si 20 of a egis use 14, creat pri nc est of rs gula is reflct 24. a cen roached a and or e nciple of i he n me to t a n ne Canl price ow 1973, whe t this e t de A might the a the he life ions avy adopte lat in be unely w nt, Point n the p s cison at ing gin an la la ) re point t but ax ce nd to . 7 d 7 Land with access to deepwater that is functional and conducive to maritime use is a . . scarce resource warranting preservation and protection within the context of a land . . use plan based on present and prospective demand. However, neither the city nor . . the MPA is able to empirically quantify the extent of need at this time. . . . .

Fortunately, most MIZOD-protected parcels comport with contemporary parameters . . and are clustered among other compatible industrial uses. But, industrial properties . . on the frontier of residential-commercial uses should first be scrutinized to ascertain . . whether they meet the threshold of physical and functional utility for maritime . . industrial use before being automatically reserved for maritime purposes. . . . .

For properties located along the residential-commercial frontier in neighborhoods . . already experiencing conflicts, a class of workable transitional uses that can serve . .

as effective buffers for properties near industrial uses, together with mandatory . .

architectural and engineering regulations and design standards with the potential . .

to neutralize the nuisances associated with maritime industrial uses need to be . .

devised. Likewise, encroaching non-industrial projects along the existing MIZOD . .

periphery should bear equal responsibility for providing buffers and design elements . .

to mitigate any unfavorable attributes of pre-existing nearby maritime industrial . properties as originally recommended by the Maritime Industrial Retention and . .

Growth Management Study (MIRGMS) published by the Port Land Use Development . .

Advisory Council in September 2005. . . . .

For those parcels whose physical and location characteristics do not meet the . . expectations and requirements of contemporary maritime users, holding out for an . . eventual maritime use of the property might be futile. If a parcel has physical or . . functional deficiencies so pronounced that the cost to cure them no longer supports . . its economically feasible industrial use for maritime purposes, the justification for . . maritime industrial preservation and protection is weak. . . . .

The unconditional preservation and protection of underutilized or marginal . . properties without first determining their feasibility for maritime industrial use . . denies a cash-starved city with the highest tax rate in the state the opportunity . .

to reap potentially greater benefits from otherwise feasible alternative uses, . .

while contributing little to the overall success of the port. For such parcels, the . .

development of suitable compatible transitional uses that would not undermine the . .

efficacy of nearby maritime uses, the specification of architectural and engineering . .

design elements that could mitigate use conflicts, and the establishment of a means . .

to infuse economic and community development resources capable of preserving . the viability of the maritime use should be considered......

78 Charting the Future of Baltimore’s Industrial Waterfront ...... • • no roa to no th use ac th and no Rea guar Rea ar ar base (TIF) pr to comi Th • Th ne • e ea e at comp op ar n-idust n-idust n-idust e e pr th dw ’ r lit l in e ’s — h — Adr — — Pr a Al — loc t inc ex Pr j b a , ci ch t e so osed ov ust s he f mount r nte y as y jo fo low ansc ’ ty ay p ovi ovi ex ec i p ex t a sti luti a a ne ide ma bs la r li ro if leng p th ti pa funds Asur dec re Ma Reso Ade Rem ist ts s es, pe shme modi e ic des des ce indust ng or on s pe no-i se Econ e ons r a sour ends ble at r r r ing ds of asi it a xi ct nd t’ ia ia ia iso gr ca t q deq M t r and ime io e of he s mize ed lve l l l marit th uat inc t anc an dy fi y pa of IZO nt sh ma st o n se u p p land-use p f q C i c or c y e ns sue of ria rope roje or proe resnt es ua uat a ha va a ts, b to ompa mi c pre e dust ould loca ma i of must t owners e nc f-doc ti y ndust ity e h rs l t D and lity op lue prote ime t indust rti he ons, of e aloc e use also c et o ac e th ct rit sent t b t r to: ti sh ria t G o c. with mi i s knowle cont oundar ime e ng t r b c of n ime of y ti on k t or s. at r b a indust ) it h a ria e or l y ble f ci o landsc re at nd or ct tig e t re ab a y elp tra and lif h pro t Pe a wt ria if of th b ’ ty nd unit tc he of e l ion in q adres nd e i inued to e, at industra ounda ri s devlopm pro th use uire p rha ct use oming h th l s p e for c marit defra e to th roj of p re comunity pla th dge, y , e rope ria pr St ie ob es from i er F c a r th nv ( e p f s sulting a m c oc uture r a c ping, wh s ec -por s) ospec l resouces. ty , s, osed n n ost j at t raf e c wil ec industra estmn for rie user es ontex y ime of ted c sc s th t r b th a egy efc ic b a t tiv s th and/ e not of l t ies arce, s of n h ut at e e a th requi use a be etc.) t supor lamentd, i e could es, for tiv conmi land n ensu. ha land la solutin nt. th env of ben re e ycorla , could also ts wi tha cost c ig or nd aditon e , e ause ci v solving of enha si fint dev nored. th: Ba of The e or l c land isoned ty inducemnt existng tes econmic use ap use S use based a charcte for fits. are fund of ometis nearby ltim are to modifcations elopm neutralize new The ital; e, c wise other land; ncem cit near resolv neds use alterions dev tha for framewok prose locate but but of the proactiv y ore’s The t imp on o measur t compre t (and thei MIZO he adequt conf marit incompatible or idealy e lopment ristcs can use nt nt ing sential an rovem and e including d use s r, fects r inste the Industria l (public of licts, on the negativ to ti proe e not they D; and conf use ime e mpircal comunity he of t : of tha solutin, both remdi he and the e to of ad and stae) be nsive of conf Tax nts or size lict (tax indust resouces wil whe the ’s city of p e re works past pre undoe the imp indust y eriph es not Incremnt is atri nder licts. the to intesf credit use, marit should ther es det zonig ve ser le to rial Wat erfont amount rovem t decis when be only s ax to b e dev contributions, make ut ncroaching The the rial r or ime than use, maste and . s, and is mi ne es. Once the y . elopmnt of be on loans, not code the ons nat utra d an p mot nts indust Finacing rop e and medinfor t or requiste pre t a he conmic r ion he to on lize TIF conflict planed t iv e tha t er o pared loan qual ation of a ria y n 7 l 9 s as a transitional use buffer area between existing residential and/or commercial . .

and industrial uses the opportunity, to propose to the city, without undue delay, . .

alternative uses for their land that would not undermine the efficacy of nearby . .

maritime users. The Baltimore Development Corporation and the Planning . .

Department have identified only a handful of property owners who have . .

expressed such intent at this time. . . . .

While the City might accomplish the foregoing in any number of ways, some actions, . . whether taken together or alone that the City might wish to consider, include the . . following: . . . .

• Formulate the new zoning code in a sequential manner. . . . .

Conceptually, the process of devising and mapping the new zoning code could be . .

segmented to prioritize the development and approval of the applicable zoning . .

classifications, their associated governance, and the land use framework, and its . .

mapping first for those areas that now comprise the MIZOD on an expedited, . .

fast-track basis to facilitate completion and adoption before MIZOD’s scheduled . .

2014 expiration. In the event that the development and mapping of the new . zoning code in its entirety is delayed and not completed by MIZOD’s scheduled . .

2014 expiration, those provisions developed for the communities comprising the . .

existing MIZOD could be adopted as an amendment to the existing zoning code . .

pending incorporation into and the subsequent approval of the new zoning code . .

at a later date. . . . .

• Extend MIZOD’s protective provisions or, in the alternative, enact substitute . .

legislation, for a period to run concurrent with the process of developing the . .

new zoning code. . . . .

This action would serve to protect strategic maritime parcels, avert renewed . .

speculation, price distortion, and the possible loss of deepwater sites to non- . .

industrial uses, and forestall any other detrimental effects envisioned by maritime . .

users as MIZOD’s scheduled 2014 expiration draws near, pending adoption of the . .

new zoning code, even if enactment of the new zoning ordinance extends . .

beyond the current 2014 expiration. It would also provide the time necessary to . .

devise the land use framework within the context of a new zoning code, as well . .

as empirically determine the port’s present and prospective land use needs. Any . .

legislation should also include provisions that would afford the owners of those . .

few parcels possessing the characteristics stipulated above and awaiting MIZOD’s . 2014 expiration the opportunity to formulate development plans that incorporate . .

acceptable, compatible transitional uses along with satisfactory buffers; effective ......

80 Charting the Future of Baltimore’s Industrial Waterfront ...... Fina hig ben bet th Some eco wi woul Wit at for ben For to ma re comp ver ta wa e ling pr r he y w h t nomic in ke v th ly , a a inh he r la en d ot fit fit er MI dequa rc ds r ensa is siml t gov nd nes h s s ec y va h t b er th ZOD he av re f w f it enf la la ro or t. lue e a use er ec te i aso e nd r nt th t, nd ar P ew m t t nme t s tur t e o or , he i in o r it f conf l n, t t es th t e e use, a impose h h t l hi th C ex of a ve conmi rds e and a e c ide of e l t ha nt t f s t a he ity pend a ls c t lic ci t vi ma he nd al unc Balt it rti t ntia M ty , of ha b be ta t y th c juri s ut it IZ ri reg l eng f ng t a pre la yond he th wi or y imore time c l consi reg n OD th also nd a sdic must rough and th ion, ck nd th th th ine ser ey iona ed, use e e ne p e user t ti dera a c eri reap vati he roh co is ma be the ons ome F conside arb conflic l migh uture ex ng munity a c nefit a b on ritme ib ontrls b set re y ordes sta erc c from de le its. desi ontri mari g a t rci te, s ional sum em ise nd t among ot r tha be of g al industral whetr the and time he but n protecti of esnt like of twen projects dev Ba standr; aset wi r for it its e Baltimore p priv ltim might MIZOD or i elopmnt or gove ndustrial se police the ial t local tha at . fore on produce the ore’s Morev use e creating are nme r acq wise other of t por go , y rent cur powe suitable and ields ui p now C the tha ubli use. lit Industria l resouces i siton ntal ty . i er, nters sup reg le esntial r not c e signf In the of jurisdctions conmi but in and mula for ional erio securit tain cer of hav zonig only leg e for x land cant priv change e to to islaton inter tax re de the c Wat erfont a y re constrai aly at cit , for or ce c econm me epwatr and is omp e solve cit y ive easm st t por feasible aske the adequt asure f comunit is or ’sy d econmic etion as esign d any from the sharing d, int ic wel. s; a aset in nts er and on t ly tpar he st t s. ies d o 8 of 1 82 Charting the Future of Baltimore’s Industrial Waterfront se c n e r e f e R

...... Ba for Fa Cit Rep HTN Do Amer Camb Dev Indu Amer Infr Amer Con Amer Flo Con Amer Quar Aegi Plan Dix Cit Dr Cit Cit Cit May Pro l y af y y y y y lars ur on, M gr t or ast elop or, 2 sider ns cer Ar r t, of of of of of B st t 0 ic ic ic ic ic ar for ish am r er P De ea rial idge uct r C or a a a a a Ba Ba Ba Ba Ba Ma Reg unda yl : 7. n n n n n or ment 2 As and a N , ed t ce Ec 0 lt lt lt lt lt Aso Aso Aso Aso Aso yo as O po Pr ear io L set ur imore imore imore imore imore W mbe Sy onmi and 8. ct in te r, op nal or ra Ocean De e ste ob M C d. 20 ci ci ci ci ci Po C C ti ld D er orpa r anagemn pa at at at at at ha on, r ar er mat Us evlop an L 08. , , , t r ty 5 C Eco Clas ion ion ion ion ion C Rep Dep cs, , t r rti s omp e 1 omp 2 Advi ier Mi ment 9, and ic Car dsi A 0 nom a R or ng of of of of of s s, nalys ar ti s’ leston 20 m 7. Ci reh de on, c t reh sor, I ri tme Por Por Por Por Por Ro he nc 04 A th ent of ty ic ers of t A ensi t u , . ens . l is, Novemb e t t t t t In th ces nt fo Gro 20 in t Eds, Tra i Auth Auth Auth Auth Auth i Por S F e n ng lan r Cit A elct ive 07-21 ve of uture a B nspor Por soc the s soc wt t lu y Decis Pla d Stu Econ orit orit orit orit orit P M h AI of e ts Sites r Age Ptsor er i as nig, iat ty oper Strategy dy a Ribbo , CP, taion, ies ies ies ies ies Balti t of Na ter , es ions 23 omi on J of fo , andl R une ncy Se Se Se Se Se , , P Ba and r P Ian 20 a Gent more n with c , lan, ap ap ap ap ap ul B yla nd’s Mar Ins ltim M Apri Devlopm Com altim J 1 – ohns, or or or or or Wodley 3. Ca Scot i 5, ight ke B r Sabr-Wang t t t t t Live, i ore’s Gros/D yla n Mar i uildng s s s s s 20 l fication r mi D 14, ns, Ma Ma Ma Ma Ma ore , 06. iVrg Volume A te bot g g g g g n Ear Volume 206. Cit a a a a a Volume Industria l ent A zi zi zi zi zi Pt or ilo, praisl o ev on , ne, ne, ne, ne, ne, y d n t, R , , elopmnt Strategy Critcal on P Volume Taxes Asociates, 2 Prepad Strengh Volume of Strechi Dis The P t, Draf lay , , 13 lethora Isue 1 Popham, B tribution , altim Group, , Chalen n ea r L Sumer and Fal Wat erfont A B (CEDS) 10, 2, , ng 13, rea thin er Econmics, ti Mar for ore o 20 2nd Fes Inc. ; f S Scarce Sumer Volume A Inc. um Fact 07. Ma ge Ba , Centrs 208. Bu pre n , , , g l of me nagemnt She Final timore Final O’Male eadL ors sine Ptor r a ila 1, re 207. 208. d 8 y , 3 City of Baltimore, Department of Planning, Brooklyn and Curtis Bay Business Area . .

Urban Renewal Plan , December 2, 2004. . . . .

City of Baltimore, Department of Planning, Canton Industrial Area Urban Renewal . .

Plan , June 20, 1990. . . . .

City of Baltimore, Department of Planning, Key Highway Waterfront Study , May 1, . .

2008. . . . .

City of Baltimore, Department of Planning, Locust Point , June, 2004. . . . .

City of Baltimore, Department of Planning, Middle Branch Master Plan , . .

September 20, 2007. . . . .

City of Baltimore, Department of Planning, TransForm Baltimore: The Zoning Code . .

ReWrite, Zoning Code Diagnosis, Public Review Draft , July 2008. . . . .

City of Baltimore, Department of Planning, Zoning for Maritime Industrial . .

Protection , Undated. . . .

City of Baltimore, Department of Planning, Baltimore Development Corporation . .

Maritime Industrial Zoning Overlay District, 2006 Annual Report , 2006. . . . .

City of Baltimore, Department of Planning, Baltimore Development Corporation, . .

Maritime Industrial Zoning Overlay District, 2007 Annual Report , 2007. . . . .

City of Baltimore, Department of Planning in Cooperation with the Technical Advisory . .

Committee, Maritime Master Plan, A Plan for the Waters of Baltimore’s Harbor, . .

December 3, 2003. . . . .

City of Seattle, Washington, Department of Planning and Development, Industrial . .

Lands Survey; Investigation of Comparable Cities , March, 2007. . . . .

CoStar Group, The CoStar Industrial Report, Year-End 2006, Baltimore Industrial . .

Market , 2006. . . . .

Colliers Pinkard, Baltimore Market Reports, Office and Industrial, Midyear 2008. . . . .

Cushman & Wakefield, Market Beat, Baltimore Industrial Report , 1st Quarter 2008. . . .

Cushman and Wakefield, Industrial White Paper, New Age of Trade , August, 2006......

84 Charting the Future of Baltimore’s Industrial Waterfront ...... Mar Dec Dev Mar Dec a Mar Eh an Mar Dec Dev an Mar Com Indu 209 Mar Mar Mar Jones, Ask Manu Ho Th Ho Dev Mar a nd L Advi Mar Sep n r e d d d pki pki s lich, te y y y y y y y t y y elo elo elo emb emb emb sor B in mit the The The land land land land land) land land land land Mo st B mbe U alt factur ns, ns, rial udg L pmen pmen pmen Asoc se y ang, re imo er er er yla n Ma r J es Ma Ma C r. J J De De De De P De De P Dev r, , ami ami et ounc of M or or 2 2 1 an Dec , 20 01 02 9 re yland r yland r ing L t t t pa pa pa pa pa pa ark ia Over 2 t t W aS elopm d A d A d A e e d 08 05. t Admin Admin C Sun, or t r t r t r t r t r t r e emb il, . . . S S Th to ha s, et viso viso viso ment ment ment ment ment ment mit mit le, d ker . view Mar Th e Smar a rti G er G G O ent M h h On s, y r y r y r Kn en e enr enr stra stra ct ng yland ar it 30 and and , of of of of of of but Eco er obe C C C ow ime Op A t Po , , ou ou ou Tra Tra Tra Tra Tra Tra th tion, tion, dvi al 2 al al 2 no ledg erat Ste Ste J i 0 r, 0 ob n n n nci e A In nsp nsp nsp nsp nsp nsp 0 y sor As As t ci ci mic 19, 3. s 8 F , ph ph du Nov C Help ing . uture l l l, sem sem B embly G t or t or t or t or t or t or apital ” A ( alt Eco a en enr 208. st C C n s I ( mpact embr h ri C and at at at at at at bly bly ounci r im Kiehl, K ap Wanes equird h nom al ion, ion, ion, ion, ion, ion i al apter ehl, o regard of ter regardin regardin Progam Retn r Capi As e/ on s y l A A A Anual y Mar Ba 10, ” 41 W Faling A sem of , B Rt epor Rt epor Rt epor (Chap 4 as The behalf ltim ri New 4 tal 14 in ing th 203 ion ngs hin land of bly e Chapter of g g P Baltimore ore’s Sum Pt or t t rogams t Shor Era, gton, the the ter he h and Repo Bo regardi ; the to to to of e Pt or Re “St th 198 41 y mar “Status Status G G G The of v 19 yland’s Mar Growth t r o o o Industria l ise atus DC, On Op 4 A n ver n ver n ver B 41 to of dminst altim ng d , 8 Pt or Laws tuniy por S T P and nor Gover 2nd L J t of un, rai of resnt y anur he of or or or of th aws the Managemn L th e ore the nig, the of Pris ar Pris ar Pris ar 198 and October, ter Quar Det “Stat e rat of Po y Mar Pt or , ation Evo Acts Pt or Wat erfont ion, ail Prep y Mar 28, Use and t r Laws New us Rt ober , N. N. N. lu and L land), a n L o 2 Undate and L Fis o are t D ),land 08. to f 208 ion Glendig Glendig Glendig 20, t Hear f 198 Eco evlopm of cal the d Budget d t 208. St Use Use from L. for Use nomy Ptor Y rat , d. ache ear t egy he a 8 , nt , 5 Maryland Port Administration, Fiscal Year 2009 Budget Overview Operating and . .

Capital Programs, Presentation to Budget Committees , 2008. . . . .

Maryland Port Administration, Marine Terminal Development Plan 2000-2010 , . .

Undated. . . . .

Maryland Port Administration, Strategic Plan 2002 , Undated. . . . .

Maryland Port Administration, Vision 2025 , Undated. . . . .

Maritime Transportation Security Act of 2002, Public Law 107-295, 46 USC 2101, . .

November 25, 2002. . . . .

Philadelphia City Planning Commission, Central Riverfront District Plan , 1984 . . . .

Port of Baltimore Land Use Task Force, S.A. “Skip” Brown, III Chairman, Governor’s . .

Port of Baltimore Land Use Task Force , December 1996. . . . .

Port of Portland, Oregon, Working Harbor Reinvestment Strategy , December, 2006 . . .

Port of San Diego, San Diego Unified Port District Maritime Business Plan Update , . .

TEC, Inc., April 2007. . . . .

U.S. Department of Transportation, Maritime Administration, U.S. Water . .

Transportation Statistical Snapshot , May 2008......

86 Charting the Future of Baltimore’s Industrial Waterfront ...... Br Stua Mel Dav Li Dav Se Robe Wa Laur Sta Ane M. Jame Joh Cr Alfr Gar Lar Bud Edwa Rupe Car Pr Ha Dav Melv Ni Ar Pa Louis Josep Jil Cr s i col ul nold ent ai ai sci r lt nle a t Kat Le ol n e ma y r id id id g g er B r i y d in Fra of G K e s r e r t la yn r B B mke h on af S. A S H. t y t el d D h W. Ia M. at M B J. F ow r Ho R . . Iye Ja Huber “ for Den T emr I le S nk, e . ar Ca G nucc F L es, B P . B . y , Fi . nte Flic Kist . ck son, inbe B Halp ew er at Gi Ke D la en, , li “ al t r r r, Fine d, t MT a n r ” Jody y , nke Ba zg ” w nc r Ma r on, Ci ir lec agh B elt is, v r o, kinge ol, B ner Ma Ke AB yer d, ibb r B lt al , t ha er r y , i, g, y , r i , y , C Ma m imore Ma oadw alt C e, timore ew yland Ci ler A C er Rosenb y r , C , t, Balt St of M rd C. ha Asoc oliers on, C Balt a La ush M M imore SX ty Int , C land r, yla r y r n, ar M reuv olie e , Sa Ba rti S a C olie a nders e Ba Ba land erc imore of yla yla r tei yla r Ameri er O ok, imore ma Tra s n lti te nd Pt or C ng ia bre ltimore lti modal rs C Balt nweg Por nd ity Di ha erg Pi more r, rs tes r nd nspor n nd Ci it more M Pt or P nkard Brothe Ma th eg y I nts ch G and P De ty Por t inka Adm ca , i C otr I I inka more De Por Ci re Admi M , o ndust e t , ounty r n Urb par G yla Te I ty City a Prope Counc t a Adminst ta Ca F nc pa Wa C County rd t S t ti r re Admin instra uture er rd r T ug ity De nd Admi rs, ion tmen a lifor mina . r r at nist n, kef De n tmen ria uc D Ba a D er pa D Pt or Ec r Desi G tmen epar k il l t par ield tmen epar tie nia, ra ltimore tmen epar R tion r renbg, nistrao Baltimore Techn olg l cles A t straion efing of Of t rat Corpatin ment s of ion sociaton gn A of ment L Dep ion ice dminstrao Ba Planig & Planig C and ltim Boa R of of tme ar , ouse of Inc. of Plani A of L Planig y of Board rd ore’s Real rc A F P Econmic Planig inace hit liance nt of Inc. ecture ng of Est R of Industria l ealtors Planig at R e ealtors R D ev ev iew lopment Wat erfont Panel (UDARP) 8 7 Ben Lieberman, Maryland Port Administration . . .

John Macsherry, Duke Realty Corporation . .

Joseph Madison, Baltimore City Department of Transportation . . .

Dirk I. Mathiasen, Unified Port of San Diego, California . .

Michael Miller, Maryland Port Administration . .

Samuel Minnitte, STV, Inc. . . .

Judy London Murray, Remarkable Properties . .

Andrew G. Nixon, Rukert Terminals Corporation . . .

Tommy Obrecht, Obrecht Properties LLC . .

Theodore K. Oswald, M&T Bank . .

Christopher Patusky, Maryland Department of Transportation Office of Real Estate . . .

Richard Pecora, Esq., former Maryland Department of Transportation Office of . .

Real Estate Assistant Secretary . . .

Regis Peternel, CNX Marine Terminal, Inc. . .

Franc Pigna CRE, Aegir Property Advisors . .

Ron Popham, Unified Port of San Diego, California . . .

John R. Redding, The Belt’s Corporation . .

Rick Rodgerson, GAF Materials Corporation . . .

F. Brooks Royster III, Merchants Terminal Corporation . .

Larissa Salamacha, Baltimore Development Corporation . .

Patricia Slawinski, Maryland Port Administration . . .

Sharon Smith Klotz, Baltimore County Department of Economic Development . .

C. William Streuver, Streuver Brothers, Eccles & Rouse Inc. . . .

Sara Trenery, Baltimore County Department of Economic Development . .

Eric Turner, Turner Development Group . .

Patrick Turner, Turner Development Group . . .

Tim Whistead, Little Havana ......

88 Charting the Future of Baltimore’s Industrial Waterfront t u o b A e h T r o h t u A ...... Is re top por of Euro Th Moldv Ap th to gove fel As for on th Ba Rea consult aset Esta Ap Joh and Ser Abo Comit Abo Dr. Tow adj Dr. Dr. st st eco impa cost udie udie al e e ues lt T e adv mer unct ow ets vi t ic n t nomic l r Da Ir Ir imor C 2 r r son he /be te foli est ut ut f ansp Wor nme r pe E ai ai ce c ina s, 0 a a J. RE ma - . . ts s s sta ise ni ni r ser sal of I He s. nef at N and Na a ai an He t t o 6 a, me nt D f nci f t Uni he he or nt of ld na e desi ac at e. t ha ser us e or t U Fo r. ma t d n a e F C er t he nts w h ntsc it Rea B out is io iona mbe fa ult r ound gem al th B to dev ro s Ir t O is e ba ve r Auth Ec h oar I nat ve at a na a nal cul ra gnat a b a e o Ro fi ser more nalysi at U y nk, co a fe lok l i rsi ni n s en he on lic n on elop gem C prose ly .S d r h c Prope me ia i m ty , dera as yal i I o nce Asoc at er ha vi ty nt as of e ens nsti . , l of ion o is om th n e xa re Rea ce ion G a C h mbe proj th r: mbe al Res rti c i m o n o c E of pre s be ers, a Inst nd th th b e RE, e R ni r en c mine l, s nd nt tu wa oth e ogni b ic ea U. e an d l h Ex t en ia f st Advisor ng ty y he senta princ ir ec Eg ng Est r a it r p Board d e ltors s M corp tion ral S. arc MA re at A s ms th p of ution 35 rac Founda of t t conf t under d ypt Pre nal de ar eri th zed he e, C pub a a at Ag e man h Se l set I, th ity t yla th ti ye in e ti ip velopmnt he a e C esta ora of encs s’ A enc a Di ys ce FRI on nd ons v r e red er e ounse Advi y lis a al nd ars p F of nd o th of s R De rec di i uture s. t: C edi tions a f semi c he ger ak te inv ti y ea a C e a loc nd rai Dire es ounc Ba rec C C t h signme A R on. S, . y sor for pa sp o en. tor Unit d torial ltors onsulti h pract e ea estigaor I sal ltimore, a mer for th A on lors tfoli por natiolynter , a org t, numeros is na t r e l has dminstrao and l ct t r Inte He e aker gov of il ment ind Estae of Comi founder ed /project. erd l Group ors numeros MAI ani Comercial as ices, b of board the v ser ts y l a n A was nmet er ok gov ng nati r Ba nts Stae rect, a zat and of R me o v Sur he of de eal mer for ltim A for and ed he Broker nmet er for the mang ions a plied te, Managin (R onal mbe signato Econmi s of author head me and and ticles ar Estae, For as numeros was and EAG) ey ore’s clie ED Counse the projec ts acros mbe an a r ors. he and on Dev induced pre many c g emnt A of nts a A and ab hair Econmi encies, profesinal aprise liance, has Uni contri and on ag improv r the and sident road. on Industria l A elopm the since cs such of by s encies lors ti Cer nme Gover the of versi the of adv an at real chaired at Unive e the p cit the the its b conmi econmic racti thes as Towsn From stae y industr 19 RESI of as ut ised chaired topi ing ’s y cs of fied r, ty esta nt, y Mar Eme we FR A ing 98, in R The adv Hentschel Group rsity praisl Ce c D eal i c S IC e ts l and y Mar local Gen nal jour and of projects, t tmen epar a 1982 s has author of Wat erfont nter, rgin isor, c land as aset panel Urban in Estae, Univ yland. Mar t and of and the designato public leadr, the lega, P doe and land. v ser Poland, and ra at roper Baltimore to and as Dep Insti e Isu G l valution ersity . fiscal and Real R Ea to s of Real 19 ed Real we fiscal re Instiu ESI a natiol has numeros busine, In st se a e h a 92, t of t r l y ute s on t ner xpe e ctor Estate er t impact of Est ment as se Est he Real is as , the ’s tsr ve r a e, an se a at at s 8 e a e d 9 Prior to joining RESI in 1997, Dr. Irani was the senior economist at the Santa Barbara . .

Economic Forecasting project where he developed county level economic forecasts . . for Santa Barbara County, San Luis Obispo County and Ventura County. In addition, . . he co-authored several reports including an analysis of the oil and gas industry and . . the tourism sector in the Central Coast of California. Dr. Irani received his B.A. from . . the University of California, San Diego and received his Ph.D. and M.A. from the . .

University of California at Santa Barbara......

90 Charting the Future of Baltimore’s Industrial Waterfront