This weekend I discovered that my a favorite crumbling ruin of mine, a pistachio-green three-story rowhome on the 2100 block of Calvert Street, in Baltimore, was finally demolished. I wrote about the house earlier, here.
At the same time, Axis Alley, a very cool experiment in environmental art, also comes to a close. A number of artists had been painting, building and engaging with the site for the past few months. The demolishing of the block and clearing of the lot ends this temporary exhibit as well.
I've discovered that the 2100 block demolition is part of an 85 Million dollar redevelopment deal between the city of Baltimore and the DC development company, Telesis. Details are here.
Neighborhood re-envisioned by Telesis. [From Baltimorebrew.com, courtesy Telesis.]
I don't quite understand why the properties still appear to be owned either by the "Housing Authority" or "the Mayor and City Council". They got some good deals though! (Here's a home sold to the city for 5$!!)
I hope the new structures coming soon to Charles Village, Goucher and Barclay will respect the architectural heritage of the buildings they are replacing, and not just be bland, thoughtless generic "ugly-tecture" (Of the variety of Charles Commons or Village Lofts in upper Charles Village! Ugh!). We'll see I guess! † [A Note to readers. I am currently migrating images previously hosted on flickr. Hopefully images that have been 'broken' by flickr (*shakes fist menacingly*) will soon be restored.]
What's happening with the proposed Charles Street corridor trolley in Baltimore? The last press (via JHU) on their website (dated September 08') made it sound like funding issues and mixed community sentiment were slowing things down.
The project funding proposal seems to hinge upon Johns Hopkins University's willingness to voluntarily pay 50$ tax for each $100,000 assessed value of their property in the area, which probably comes to an enormous sum. Obviously, the current economic climate may make this voluntary payment unlikely to happen.
Secondly, the use of city funds to build a trolley serving an allegedly homogeneous population has been called into question: (from the above press link)
Ed Hayes, a resident of Remington and an opponent of the trolley, put his concerns about the trolley in stark terms. He believes that it would be a "gated transportation system" which would only serve to connect the "all white Charles Village to the all white Inner Harbor."
The three primary districts in question, Inner Harbor, Mount Vernon and Charles village/JHU homewood are unquestionably neighborhoods that are 'whiter' than average in Baltimore.
But shouldn't one also note that are neighborhoods with great historical and architectural significance, house multiple city cultural institutions (museums, schools, etc) and serve as a city business corridor?
(Postcard depicting street trams in Richmond, VA--1920's. Public Domain)
~ Just a Tourist Trap?
Some opponents of the Trolley, on a website here(Trolleytrouble), take issue with the cost (they quote 300 million, the JHU article quotes 150 million) compared to busing. They also argue that the trolley wont provide reliable transport and in fact, may cause congestion.
One thing I noticed however, is that in fact nowhere do trolley supporters suggest that the project would ease congestion or provide convenient transportation. They carefully use words like 'calming' or 'connectivity' when describing befits--never efficient or economical.
The official page here suggests that increased tourism, "image" and retail visibility are the concrete primary goals of the project--and frankly, I think that a trolley probably would help meet these.
~ Fair?
And so, the question seems to be: "Is it fair to use some public (special tax district, state and federal) funds to build a private tourist amenity for the benefit of a culturally and historically significant yet possibly elite 'minority*' enclave."
My personal answer would be "Not unless the people who are paying for it, or their representatives, approve the project by democratic process." Its currently unclear to me if this has really happened yet. When and if it does however, I hope neighborhoods not impacted by the Trolley will allow it to proceed.
Under current plans, the Private, not-for-profit 'Baltimore Development Corporation' plans to use 71 million dollars of "state and federal" [funds] for building the line.
If and when elected state officials find the project worth funding, I believe one must consider it the same as a majority of it's citizens democratically doing so as well.
The remainder 85 million would be raised by a 'special tax zone' 1/4 miles on either side of Charles Street.
~ The Future
I like the idea of a Trolley in Baltimore. It would be fun to ride and increase ease of transportation for some--but I don't think I can support the proposal until it is either approved democratically by the citizens of the communities that will pay for it,-- or payed for entirely by private voluntary revenue.
The Charles Village neighborhood in Baltimore is a dense, older residential neighborhood circa 1910's, highly walkable with moderate mixed-use zoning.
It's the kind of neighborhood that can make even suburbanites reconsider living in the city. This is a little ironic considering Charles Village itself was established as a streetcar suburb--I believe a car ran up and down St. Paul street before being torn out in the middle of the century.
Today the low 3000's blocks of St. Paul street are the commercial hub of the neighborhood. There's a small grocery, restaurants, coffee shops--and -sigh- new modern condominiums. All in all its an interesting, useful, part of the neighborhood
To some it may even sound like a new-urban paradise--but there is something strange happening here too. In the heart of this very valuable area is a large field of weeds. Its empty, fenced-off, and it's been this way for years.
Why?
According to a very informative article in the Johns Hopkins Newsletter, a row of turn-of-the-century row homes being used as JHU frat houses and a convenience store were demolished in 2006 to make way for a supposed new block of condos.
'The Olmstead' as it was to be called, has failed to materialize. In the mean time, where there once were people and businesses there is now nothing.
The developer, Struever Brothers, Eccles & Rouse, had already built another block of ugly, boring, could-have-been-built-anywhere condos across the street. They didn't sell so well, and now it seems that The Olmstead is on hold until the market picks back up. The bad news is, this is what they said in 2007--that's BEFORE the "credit-crunch" hit the fan! I guess we could all be waiting a while.
I laughed when I visited the Streuver Bro's website--they claim to be "transforming America's cities." I may just be a cynic, but I think its fair to say that in this case they are transforming my neighborhood into a wasteland.
The sad part , in my opinion, is that the only thing this neighborhood can look forward to someday, is the arrival of another profit-extracting monstrosity when the yuppies finally feel like their portfolios have recovered.
I realize that developers are a fact of life. Private property is good. My only question is this: Should a neighborhood as a community have any say in the evolution of their built environment?
I wish that beautiful old buildings didn't have to be demolished.
I wish they didn't have to be replaced by bland, hulking, over-sized, cynically 'modern' buildings. And furthermore, I wish that 'mixed use' didn't have to mean chain stores. Isn't that what the suburbs are for?
I wish that a lovely neighborhood in a city generally plagued by decay didn't have to be exploited to grow.
I'll be very interested to see what ever becomes of the Olmstead. ~ -finally posting again after a LONG summer vacation! ~ UPDATED: here. Feb 2010.
I wanted to write a quick post about the 'urban stoop'--the small stairway used both to reach the entrance of a city dwelling and as informal social stage--before 'stoop culture' dries up again for the year.
Baltimore has thousands of stoops (on account of her thousands of row homes), and as a result of this fact, is historically well known for its 'stoop culture'--the culture of interactions taking place between friends, citizens and strangers as they sit on their stoops or walk by on the sidewalks.
As the colder weather arrives and people are pushed indoors, the streets start to revert to an emptier state and I am caught thinking about the emptying stoops and reflecting on their peculiar value to a neighborhood.
A stoop.
The stoop asks interesting questions about the way a buildings design influences the social interactions that can occur around it.
If there are utilized stoops, there are 'eyes on the street'. A neighborhood is lively and safer. Perhaps, though, residents want more privacy or more comfort? Porches offer these these qualities more abundantly, but because they are more withdrawn from the street, create less safety, in theory.
A stoop seems better than a porch at catalyzing social interaction and maintaining community safety when a certain level of safety is already present, and probably a little worse (than porches) when there's little or no pretext of street safety.
The stoop is an interesting element to consider as it applies to the concept of New Urbanism--the renewed interest promoting, creating and living in walkable, mixed use (dwellings, businesses and services in close proximity) urban neighborhoods.
What kind of social environment will people who want a 'new urbanism' be interested in? Will they want stoops? Will they sit outside or people watch? Or will they want to dash down the steps to their waiting smartcars?
A collection of porch stairs and stoops from around Charles Village, Baltimore. Baltimore is known for its large supply of stoops.
This apartment building on Calvert street exemplifies one way it can go. It features a sort of modified stoop--pretty much too narrow to sit on and facing the wrong way-- useful only as a way to get in and out.
Heres another view, from the alley, showing how the straighter, wider stoops only face one another inside the protective courtyard and fence. Why not just build a porch?
Who is going to sit on these stoops, if anyone? There are no people, buildings or traffic to watch inside a courtyard.
Perhaps the people who live here don't have time to watch anyone. Perhaps there are no nearby stores, or little street traffic anyway. I wonder how this building development has and will continue to impact it's surrounding neighborhood.
I don't want to come across as 'pro' or 'anti' stoop; only to consider the wide-ranging effects of a minor design decision.
There is a certain building, standing on a (frankly) ugly section of street several blocks south of my home, for which I have a strange affection, despite its being in a nearly complete state of ruin.
I like the home because of its unique brickwork, tall windows and interesting 'pistachio' paint-job. I decided to write about my affection for the home after I recently discovered 2 tidbits relating to its existence.
First, while googling some addresses as a time-waster, I found a photo of the home in 2006 and was shocked by its much superior condition. Its obvious that a fire occurred on the second floor sometime between September 2006 and 2008. The internet was unable to bring me any details of this unfortunate event.
-->Beautiful photos of the home, pre-crumble, on Flickr here: thepeoplemachine. (Via Flickr.)
According to city records(If you have time, check out this cool tool.) the home was built in 1890 (along with many homes of the Charles Village district) and is currently owned by the Housing Authority of Baltimore City. I sincerely hope they do not plan to demolish it (they own nearly the whole block it is situated in)--although, I don't know who would possibly be able to front the money to repair it.
Ok, second, also by way of the net, I learned about an artistic revitalization effort focusing on the 2100 block of N. Calvert, called Axis Alley. Its goal, from its website here, is to activate the back alleys of Baltimore and explore the "toxic beauty" and "fascinating possibility of urban intervention and creative gesture" by installation of art/design works in the alleys behind distressed buildings and spaces.
I especially like the phrase "toxic beauty". I feel like this is exactly what drew me to this home and this block in the first place.
Sadly, the deadline for submissions has passed, but it appears applications for proposed projects will perhaps continue to be accepted on an ongoing basis, so who knows, perhaps I will have an opportunity to interact with my favorite building in a more personal way.
