1 20 1 https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/44124/archive/files/295f2f74c30186e7373ae482d4d24a2c.pdf?Expires=1792627200&Signature=rCZxCx867dnQto4j6yjaWs1SbKv0Qq5T0%7EvFmpZ3OVlASUhyQn4oI0wzYJcie8oAxIjIUzlPSxCJBgrzEi5WQfk3OhfzPyVMLRhQvlfhA2dT49NK3-jmYCglKaex3pqblzY4gA890SN%7EhYgYC7asKbGpXvZBPmO98kgG04JCTiImLnR9ri9ckH-Akxlv75brFUifnZzg4gek%7ESV2yMZEFhdP07QeRGi2zNwAKCmcLcA9UDYb7XINMWVGel36eIMwInxhb7ztbXQ6B8YthRRyi6HUrXQVSMQEmrP6mU467qUFa39tpTXCLJNvKTDSBNxKx7hXdNYcSPKXQ%7EYSkB120A__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM 83efe7eb2399f78cb0e60b4d9f441395 PDF Text Text -....- . o Maty/andDepartment ofTiansportatlon Harry R. Hugh" SKf.'a" Bernard M. Evans Siale Highway Administration Admlni1lt .. tOf P1..I:ASI: UPI.1' 1'0, UCTE.UTAn DIVlllotl ,.0 .. 'A LTIWOIl.E (;ITY 1001 CATHEDJ.AL .TllUT IIA1. TIWOJU:, lolA. Tl,.AtlD 11101 COMBINED LOCATION-DESIGN PUBLIC HEARING and PUBLIC INFORMATION MEETING NATIONAL HI STORIC PRESERVATION ACT 1-83, GAY STREET TO 1-95 INFORMATIONAL SUMMARY JANUARY 28, 1975 Hampstead Hill Junior High School E lwood Avenue and Pratt Street l Baltimore, Maryland P.O. Box 717/300 Weal Preston Street, aaltl more, Maryland 21203 �Preface The Interstate Division for Baltimore City has compiled this booklet for use in connection with the Combined Location-Design Public Hearing, pursuant to Title 23, U.S. Code; and Public Information Meeting, in accordance with the National Historic Preservation Act, for Interstate Route B3 from Gay Street to 1-95 in Baltimore City, Maryland. This Hearing will be held to enable the public to comment on the need for and location and design of, Interstate Route B3 from Gay Street to 1-95, including comments relative to the proposed Interstate Route B3 highway project in the vicinity of the Fells Point Historic District, the Saint Vincent DePaul Roman Catholic Church, Shot Tower, Caton-Carroll Mansion, the Star Spangled Banner Flag House, and several other sites in the project area. Officials are particularly interested in comments concerning social, economic, and environmental effects that may not have been considered. All comments will be examined and considered before a final decision on Interstate Route B3 is made. This Hearing is a major step in the total transportation planning process. This project would support regional planning goals such as maintainin9 urban mobility, discouraging unnecessary street traffic, and integrating transportation services in the growing metropolitan area. * * * �Table of Contents Preface Part I Purpose of Heari ng. . . . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . . • . . . . . 1 - 3 Part I I Project Hi story . . . . • . . . . • . . . • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 - 8 Part III Build A ternatives . . . . . . l . 9 23 Gay Street to Fleet Street .1 0 12 (a) (b) Scheme '0' Scheme 'E ' .11 .11 • Fells Po int. .12 - 22 (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (f) (g) (h) (i ) (j) .13 UDCA A lternative A lternative #1 Alternati ve #2 A lternative #3 Alternative #4 A lternative #5 A lternative #6 A ternative #7 l A ternative #8 l A lternative #9 • • • . 14 . 15 .16 .17 .17 .1 8 .19 .20 .21 to 1-95 at Bos t on and Ponca Streets. .23 "Na - Build Alternat i ve . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .23 Boston Stre~ - More - 16 - 18 19 - 20 - 21 - 22 �Part IV Impacts. (1) Soc ioeconomic. (2) Visual Effects . . . (3) Ecological Impacts . . . . • . . . (4) Soil Erosion and Sediment Control (5) Right-of-Way and Relocation . . . . . . (6) Historical, Cultural, and Recreationa l . (7) Sol id Waste . . . . . . . . . (8) Air Quality . . . . . . . . . (9) Noise . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (10) Transportation Effecti veness . . . . (11) Joint Development . . . . . . . . . (12) Water Quality - Tunnel Construction (13) "No Build" Alternative . . . . . . . .7.4 - 44 • • • . 24 .25 .25 .25 .26 .26 . 36 .36 .36 .37 . 25 - 26 - 36 - 37 - 38 .39 - 42 .42 - 43 .43 - 44 Part V Local/State/Federal Rel ationship in Interstate Planning . . . . . . . . 45 �...- o STATE OF MARYLAND DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 13.200' ~1~iiiiiil~3.20o' SCALE .....0. STATEIDGHWAY ADMINISTRATION INTERSTATE 83 - IN BALTIMORE OTY, MARYLAND GAY STREET TO INTERSTATE 95 LOCATION MAP EXHIBIT I �PART I - PURPOSE OF HEARING The combined Corridor Location-Design Hearing and the Historic Preservation Public Informational Meeting are an official part of the highway program dea ling with 1-83 from Gay Street to 1-95. Public Informat i onal Sess i ons for the project are schedu l ed for 7 p.m. to 10 p.m . on Monday , January 20, 1975 at St . Stanislaus Church Hall, 700 South Ann Street; Tuesday, January 21 ,1 975 at St . Leo's Church Hall, 227 South Exeter Street; and Wednesday, January 22, 1975 at St. Casimer ' s Chruch Hall, 2736 O'Donnell Street. These sessions are an attempt to give the public as much information as reasonably possible about the nature of the project, the combined Corridor Location-Design Hearing, and the Historic Preservation Public Informational Meeting before testimony is taken on January 28, 1975. This hearing i s being held in accordance with Title 23, Code of Federal Regulations, Secti on 790.5(g) and Section 106 of the Nat i ona l H stori c Preservation Act. The hearing will afford i nterested i parti es an opportunity to present their views relative to the need for and location and design of Interstate Route 83 from Gay Street to 1-95 in Baltimore City. a distance of approximately 3. 6 miles. Corridor Location Public Hearings were held under Federal Aid procedures for this project on January 3~. 1962 and February 14. 1967, at which time a lterna ti ves, i ncl udi n9 the tlNO ROAD" alternat i ve were presented to the pub 1i c . The purpose of this combined Corridor Location-Design Public Hearing is to present to the public, additional alternatives and the soc i al, economic, and environmental impact of this segment of 1-83. The additional alternatives and additional socia l, economic, and environmental information were developed i n response to publ ic comments received at the aforementioned Corridor . Location Hearings. The Federal Highway Administration and the State Highway Administration have determined that a new Corridor Location Hearing is desirable and may be combined with the Design Hearing in accordance with Title 23, Code of Federal Regulations, Section 790.5(g). In addition, as required under Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act, the Federa l Highway Admin i stration of the U.S. Department of Transportation, in cooperation with the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation , is holding this Public Hearing to ascertain the views of representatives of National, State, and Local units of government, public and private organizations, and interested citizens regarding the proposed Interstate Route 83 highway project in the vicinity of the Fells Point Historic District, the Saint Vincent DePaul Roman Ca tho 1i c Church, Shot Tower. Ca ton-Carro 11 ~lans i on, the Star Spangled Banner Flag House. and several other sites in the project area. These sites are included in the National Register of Historic Places. Furthermore. the purpose of this Hearing is to insure to the maximum extent practicable that the highway designs under consideration reflect and are con sistent with Federal, State, and Local goals and objectives. It is intended to afford full opportunity for effective public participation in the process of determining the need for and location and design of the project, including the social, economic, environmental, historic, cultural. and other effects of alternatives. �-2- This hearing ;s ca l led a combined Corridor Location-Design Hearing and is requried by Title 23, Code of Federal Regulations. Thi5 hearing is held before the route l ocati on is approved by the Federa l Highway Administration, and before highway officials are committed to a specific proposal. Those who attend the Public Informational Sessions on January 20, 21, and 22, 1975 are afforded ind i vidual and collective responses to questions about the proposed project. A number of individuals have availed themselves of the opportunity for information by visiting the Interstate Division for Baltimore Ci ty Office at 1001 Cathedral Street and by contacting the Office by telephone. This opportunity continues until February 27, 1975. All comments. suggestions, and stated or written questions received at this Public Hearing will be made part of the record, and given proper consideration in the review, analysis, and evaluation of the Public Hearing record, the Environmental/Section 4(f) Statements, and the Section 106 Historic Review Process Case Reports . For those who elect to send us written statements, you are advised that the official record of this hearing will not close before February 27, 1975 and that such statements wil l be included as part of the official record. A verbatim record will be made at all sessions of the Public Hearing. Copies of the transcript may be purchased at a nominal charge from the Interstate Division for Baltimore City upon request. Any time after this hearing and before the location or design approval, all information developed in support of the proposed location or design will be available, upon request, at the Interstate Division for Baltimore City for public inspection or copying. Notification of this hearing was published in the local newspapers -the Sunpapers, the News-American, the Afro-American, the Catholic Review, and the East Baltimore Guide. A copy of the legal notice, a certified list of the newspapers that carried the notice, and specific publication dates will be included as part of the hearing record. Notification of this hearing was accomplished also through the radio channels and local T.V. stations, to professional and civic organizations, to governmental agencies. and to individuals thought to have an interest in the project. The two original Draft Environmental Impact Statements for the project were circulated in April, 1972. New Draft Environmental Impact/Section 4(f) Statements have been circulated for review and comments for the following segments: (1) 1-83 from Gay Street to Fleet Street at President Street; (2) 1-83 from Fleet Street at President to Boston Street at O'Donnell Street and; (3) 1-83 from Boston Street at O'Donnell Street to 1-95. �• • -3In addition. two Section 106 Historic Review Case Reports have been cir- culated for: (1) Fells Point Historic District; (2) Saint Vincent dePau1 Roman Catholic Church, Shot Tower, Caton-Carroll Mansion, the Star Spangled Banner Flag House, and several other sites in the project area. These documents outline the anticipated social, economic, environmental. cultural, and historical effects of the alternatives under consideration. These reports are among the materials available for viewing at this hearing. Copies of the new Draft Environmental Impact Statements and the Section 106 Historic Review Process Case Reports were distributed to all interested major community organizations within the project area. Additional copies are available from the Interstate Division for Baltimore City at a nominal charge. The matter of the State and Federal relationship and the Federal Aid program is explained in Section IV of this booklet and in the form of a booklet entitled, "America's Lifelines"; copies of which are available at the Hearing. Also available is a copy of a brochure entitled, "Relocation Assistance Program", which contains infonnation needed by anyone who has property involved in the alternatives under discussion. There are several other pieces of information, which provide additional material and background on the project. These documents are available for public inspection or copying at the Interstate Division for Baltimore City Office at 1001 Cathedral Street between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m. on normal working days. This material includes large scale display panels for each of the proposed route locations and designs; the new Draft Environmental Impact Statements/ 4(f) Reports, the Section 106 Historic Review Process Case Reports, the original Draft Environmental Impact Statement/4(f) Reports, the Urban Design Concept Associates Point V Reports entitl ed, "Corridor Development Baltimore Interstate Highway System 3-A Segments 1, 2, 3 and 4 and 5; the Urban Design Concept Associates Transit Coordination Report; the Urban Design Concept Associates Final Joint Devel opment Report; Feasibility Study for the Location of Interstate Route 83 from Fleet Street to the vicinity of Boston Street at O'Donnell Street, July, 1974; the Feasibility Study - Alternate Route Location for Interstate Route 95 across the Baltimore Harbor, Volumes I, II, and III, 1972; and the Expressway Consultant Study dated 1961. * * * �-4Part II - Project History Freeway planning in Baltimore City spans over 30 years of study, involving several major alternative systems to provide for the city's transportation needs. In 1960, the City engaged three local engineering firms to study various expressway alignments. Eleven routes were studied by the "Expressway Consultants" for the east-west traffic movement between the Central Business District and the East City Line. These study routes covered an extremely wide area of the City from Federal Street on the north to Fort McHenry on the south. The Expressway Consultants recommended what became known as the 10-0 System. 1962, this System was adopted and preliminary work begun. In The 10-0 System included an 1-95 bridge crossing between Federal Hill and Fells Point. Under the 10-0 System, 1-83 extended south along the Jones Falls, at the eastern edge of the Central Business District, and interchanged with 1-95 west of Fells Point. From this interchange, 1-95 proceeded easterly through Fells Point across Anchorage 'A' and north of, and along. Boston Street to the vicinity of the Harbor Tunnel Thruway. Public Hearings on the 10-0 System were held in 1962. From 1962 to 1967, alignment shifts and modifications were made to the 10-0 System, including the O'Donnell Heights Bypass and a shift of the 1-95 approach to the Central Business District from a Carroll Park Route to the Sharp/leadenhall Corridor. The planned extension of 1-95 to the Inner Harbor area was the subject of controversy during the 1960's. Consequently, a consultant report was issued in April, 1964, evaluating 10 alternative alignments over a large area. The present general corridor was recommended after evaluation of traffic service. historic effect. visual aspects, socia-economic impacts. and potential for future joint development on all alignments. The narrow corridor, closely following the location of Jones Falls and the existin9 Fal1sway, was chosen as the location which would most nearly satisfy the following requirements: -Improved access to the Central Business District . • Provision of a limited access north/south through corridor to serve existing and future industrial activity in the genera 1 area. -Opportunity to perpetuate the current trend of "Area Redevelopment". which is characterized by the new post office. the new police building, and the Shot Tower Square Historic Park. -Greatest potential for incorporating Joint Development projects which are aesthetically creative and which are consistent with the goal of transforming the area's many sites of architectural and historic significance from a diSjointed area into an attractive and recognized "historical district". �-5- -Necessity of having a complete and balanced system of transportation modes and networks. -The ability of meeting the area's development goals, while minimizing the necessary disruption of people's activities. In 1967. the City pioneered a new technique in highway planning . This approach established a "Concept Team". consisting of experts in the fields of highway engineering, traffic and transit planning. architecture, and urban planning; as wel l as specialists in sociology. housing, environmental and systems analysis . The Concept Team was charged with the task of designing a highway system in Baltimore City that would provide for the social I economic. and aesthetic needs of the City's environment, as well as provide efficient transportation. In October. 1968. after considerable study of several alternative concepts. the multidiscipl inary team presented their findings . In December, 1968. the City adopted what is currently known as the 3-A System Concept. In January of 1969, this concept was adopted by the City/State Poli cy Advisory Board, which i s the Board of Directors of the Interstate Division for Baltimore City and by the Federal Bureau of Public Roads . The 3-A System incorporated portions of the original 10-0 System, with several deletions and some notable additions. The 3-A Concept links together the three Interstate highways currently serving the Baltimore Metropolitan area; 1-95; I-70N; and 1-83. In addition to the three major routes, two spur radial routes -- 1-170 and 1-395 were proposed. 1-170 and 1-395 would carry traffic into the Inner City and link with the collector/distributor, City Boulevard, which rings the Central Business D strict. The City Boulevard would distribute traffic from the Interi state spurs to arterial streets to and from downtown Baltimore. The 3-A Hi ghway confi gurat i on reduced the sca l e of the road in the Inner City by eli minating an Inner Harbor bridge crOSSing and recommending an 1-95 bypass of the Central Business District near Fort McHenry. 1-83 was deSignated by the Concept Team as Segments 3, 4, and 5 of the 3-A System. Considerable study of Segments 3, 4, and 5 was performed by the Concept Team . Their findings were presented in Segment Area reports of November and December, 1968 and Final Segment Reports of May and December, 1970, entitl ed, "Corridor Development, Baltimore Interstate Highway System 3-A/Segments 1, 2, 3 and Segments 4, 5. 1-83 was divided into three general study areas by the Concept Team: Lower Jones Falls Fells Point Canton I I �-6- Lower Jones Falls A depressed roadway, or tunnel was not given serious consideration by the Concept Team for the Lower Jones Fall s area because of: 1. High cost of building and operating the Freeway below water 1eve 1. 2. Difficulty of relocating utility lines to the Sewage Pumping Station and relocating the Jones Falls outflow . 3. Difficulty of getting the depressed alignment in the short distance between the given elevated roadway at Gay Street and under Fayette Street. (Also, the impact on the MuniCipal Center area with such a trans ition would be less desirable than an elevated roadway). 4. Difficulty of putting platforms for joi nt development over the roadway where ramps occur . The Concept Team studied in depth, two alternative roadway alignments in the Lower Jones Falls area; namely, 1. Eastern Al ignment The eastern alignment provided a better urban design soluti on since, with a narrower corridor, more l and uses were made available for the Central Business Di strict development and more design flexibility was achieved. Furthermore, it avoided both the Fi sh Market and the Scarlett Seed building. The eastern ali gnment. however was closer to the Carroll Mansion and requi red a mo re complicated engineering solution with re spect to construct ion over the existing Jones Falls box culvert. 2. Western Alignment The western ali gnment provided a better level of traffic service, greater flexibility in the l ocation of the substructure, l ess costly construction, and required a wider corridor. West of the roadway, i t necessita t ed the demolition of the Fish Market and the Scarlett Seed building, leaving smaller parcels for the Central Business District development . There was no perceptive acoustical advantage of either alternative. Fells Poi nt In the Fell s Point area , initial roadway alternatives investigated by the Concept Team ranged from a sub-surface tunnel to a high-elevated structure -some 50 feet above ground l evel. The reco~nended freeway alignment, sel ec t ed after extensive consideration of all relevant soc ial, economic , and environmenta l factors , was a l ow-el evated structure situated in the northern half of the condemnation corridor, paral l el to the exi sting lancaster Street . �-7- The Concept Team did not recommend a depressed cut-and-cover tunnel . They felt the alternative was too costly due to complex construction techniques. In the Anchorage 'A' area, east of Fells Point, the Concept Team studied a northern and southern alignment, as well as elevated and fill sections in the Anchorage itself. After considerable study, they recommended the northerly alignment on structure. Canton In the Canton area, the Concept Team studied a northern and a southern al ignment in the condemnation zone. The northerly alignment al l owed for the maximum excess condemnation land to the south of the proposed route for industrial developmen t, whi l e the southerly alignment al l owed for the maximum excess land to the north of the road for community-oriented development. The Concept Team also investigated a depressed tunnel section which they abandoned as it offered no rea l engineering or environmental advantages. The elevated structure. as recommended by the Concept Team. would maximize joint use below the 1-83 structure. The Concept Team recommended the southerly alignment, which maximized the possible community-related development while acting as a buffer between the community and the industry along the waterfront. With the approval of the 3-A System Concept in 1969, the City of Baltimore began to work toward the implementation of the System through a series of public meetings. environmental statements. and other necessary actions. As a result of Public Hearings. it was determined that considerable public objection existed over the proposed 1-95 bridge crossing near Fort McHenry. During the month of May, 1971, as a result of resolutions passed by both the Maryland State Legislature and the Baltimore City Council, further investigations were initiated to study alternatives to the proposed bridge near Fort McHenry. One of the alternatives studied the feasibility of routing 1-95 through the City via the Sharp/Leadenhall Corridor, under the Inner Harbor and Fells Point, via a tunnel and easterly to 1-95. This proposed alternative was known as the u3_A Modified System u. In January of 1972, proceedings were held before the Baltimore City Council to evaluate the two Interstate Systems. Considerable doubt existed as to whether the 3-A Modified System would serve a primary function required for a Baltimore Interstate facility; i.e., separation of local, Central Business District, and Interstate traffic. Likewise, it was felt that the 3-A Modified System would not serve industrial traffic needs and stimulate industrial development in the Lower Canton and Locust Point area s as would the 3-A System. In addition . considerable objection was rai sed over probable impacts upon the planned Inner Harbor Redevelopment projects and upon the Federal Hill and Fells Point Historic District that would result from the proposed 3-A Modified System. In May of 1972. after careful evaluation of the social. economic. environmental, historical. and traffic consideration, the City announced a preference to proceed with the further development of the 3-A System Concept. However. the City indicated that a tunnel would be considered in the vicinity of the Fell s Point Historic District, in an effort to further reduce impact from the highway . �10-0 SYSTEM 1961 MODIFIED 3 - A SYSTEM 1971 3-A SYSTEM 1970 -1973 PROPOSED INTERSTATE HIGHWAY SYSTEMS FOR BALTIMORE (1961-1973) ��./ .t. o MIDDLE BRANCH 3-A SYSTEM �INTERSTATE DIVISION FOR BALTIMORE 3-A t MENT CITY SYSTEM "0" DATE 111111111 .... ALIGNMENT UNDER STUDY NOV,,1974 seAL E I" =2000' FIGURE 6 �-BUnder the 3-A System Concept, I-B3 would pass through the Fells Point Histori c Di 5 tri ct and ; n the vi d n; ty of the Shot Tower. Sa i nt Vi ncent DePaul Roman Catholic Church, the Star Spangled Banner Flag House and the Caton-Carroll Mansion. These sites are listed in the National Register of Historic Sites and Places; and therefore, compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 is required. Historic preservation proceedings involve a series of joint consultations between the Federal Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, the State Liaison Officer for Historical Sites, the Federal Highway Administration, and the State Highway Administration. These consul tations are held to determine if there would be an adverse impact to any historical site as a result of the project and whether these impacts can be eliminated or mitigated. To date, the following steps have been completed in compliance with Section 106: 1. An application of the "Criteria of Effect" indicates that proposed 1-83 could have an effect on these sites . 2. Joint consul tation for determination of effect occurred on August B, 1972. The effect of the then-proposed alternatives was determined to be adverse for the Fells Point Historic District . Those participating in the determination agreed there was an effect on the Flag House area; however, there was disagreement on whether or not the effect was adverse. 3. Additional studies were requested to determine if impact could be mitigated. 4. Preliminary Case Reports have been prepared and submitted to the Federal Highway Administration, the President1s Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, and the State Historic liaison Officer. The results of those studies are being presented at this meeting as alternatives. 5. Following the public hearing, the consultation process will be re;nitiated to analyze the effect of the new alternatives. The results of the additional study of 1-83 are included in the new Draft Environmental Impact and 4(f) Statements and Section 106 Historic Case Reports all of which have been circulated for comments. In addition, the overall impact of the 3-A System has been evaluated as part of the Baltimore Regional Environmental Impact Study (BREIS). Copies of all these documents are available at the hearing for inspection. This material is also available for public inspection or copying at the Interstate Division between 9:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m. on normal working days. * * * �-9- Part III - Alternatives General Description Under the "Build!! Alternative, the project ;s an extension of existing Interstate Route 83~ which has been constructed from its intersection with the Baltimore Beltway (1-695) to Eager Street in Baltimore City . The segment between Eager and Gay Street is currently under construction. This project segment will extend approximately 3.4 miles from Gay Street in the north to Interstate Route 95 in the vicinity of Boston and Ponca Street in the east. Beginning at Gay Street and proceeding in a southerly direction, Interstate Route 83 would be elevated over Fayette Street, roughly paralleling the Fallsway. Approaching Baltimore Street, the ali9nment would pass between St. Vincent DePaul Roman Catholic Church on the east and the War Memorial on the west. After proceed. ing over Baltimore Street, the Expressway would cross, on elevated structure, the uncovered portion of Jones Falls and continue south, passing just west of the CatonCarroll Mansion and the Flag House. The Expressway would then continue south across Pratt Street at Falls Avenue, Eastern Avenue at President Street, Fleet Street east· of President Street Station and Aliceanna Street. At the crossing of Eastern Avenue, the road would intercept the corner of D'Alesandro Playfield. Continuing onward, Interstate Route 83 would pass to the east of the President Street Station. turn in an easterly direction, and pass throu9h the Fells Point area. The Expressway continues easterly and passes through the Canton area generally parallel to, and over, existing Boston Street, finally interchanging with Interstate Route 95 in the vicinity of Boston and Ponca Streets. Interchange ramps providing access to the Expressway are located at Lexington, Lombard, and Caroline Streets, northboundi and Baltimore and Fleet Streets, southbound. Exit ramps leaving the Expressway are proposed at Baltimore and Fleet Streets, northbound; and Fayette and Caroline Streets, southbound. An alternative to the Fleet and Caroline Street ramps is presented and consists of a diamond interchange with relocated Central Avenue. Between Fayette Street and Fleet Street, continuous service drives, or frontage roads, paralleling the Expressway are proposed to provide easy access from existing arterial streets to the Expressway; and in periods of peak traffic demands, afford a bypass of Interstate Route 83 without a significant reduction in traffic level of service. The service roads are located under the mainline between Fayette Street and Lombard Street and outside the mainline between Lombard and Fleet Streets. Between Fleet and Boston Streets, a number of alternatives have been studied to minimize impacts on the Fells Point Historic District. With one exception, all alternatives consist of tunnel construction located in a band from Aliceanna Street on the north to the Harbor on the south. �-10At Boston Street, interchange ramps are proposed to provide full access to the project from the City streets. From Boston Street to Interstate Route 95 in the vicinity of Ponca and Boston Streets, the project is located on an elevated viaduct parallel to, and over, eXisting Boston Street. Boston Street would be rebuilt with two 27' roadways located underneath the viaduct structure . Interchange ramps with 1-95 would provide fully direction movements between the two Interstate facilities in the vicinity of the Exxon tankfields. In addition, ramps are proposed to provide access to Interstate Route 83 from Boston Street and O'Donnell Street cut-off. The elevated structures east and west of Fells Point are deSigned to have three 12'-wide lanes with shoulders in each direction on separate structures. Design speed for the elevated viaduct is 60 mph; and design speed for the frontage, or service, roads is 25 mph. Through the Fells Point Historic District, three 12'-wide lanes in each direction are proposed, except for Alternative 2. where due to limitations in construction technique, the Expressway would be two lanes in each direction. The projected traffic volumes for 1995 vary from approximately 40,000 vehicles per day on the Expressway in the viCinity of Baltimore Street, to 85,000 vehicles per day through the Fells Point Historic Di strict, to Interstate Route 95. Should a "Build" alternative be selected, construction would be anticipated to begin in late 1975 on 1-83 from Gay Street to Pratt Street and from Anchorage 'A' to 1-95, and late 1976 for the tunnel and its western approach from Pratt Street to Caroline Street. The complete Interstate extension between Gay Street and 1-95 would be open to traffic in 1979 or 1980--depending on the selected alternatiVe. The tunnel would take from three to four years to build. Should a build alternative be selected, the cost of the project would be eligible for 90/10 Federal Aid Interstate funding. Detailed Description Gay Street to Fleet Street Between Gay Street and Fleet Street, numerous alternatives were originally studied in 1964 for the location of 1-83 in order to minimize the impact on adjacent structures of historical Significance, existing communities, and proposed Harbor development. These initial alternatives were discussed earlier. Within this corridor, a total of five alternative configurations have been considered for development with the past year. Two separate ali9nments and several frontage road systems were studied. After careful consideration of the five earlier schemes, a number of inconsistencies and contradictions to the overall development goals were pointed out. As a result of the analYSiS, the two alternatives (D &E), which are being presented, were proposed as a means of incorporating the most desirable qualities of the original five alternatives into a more functional and effective package . The major purpose of the refinements in Schemes 'DI and IE' is to maximize the amount of land available for joint development without degradin9 the level of traffic service that the roadway is intended to provide. �-111 Alternate 10 is the western-most of the two alternative alignments. Between Fayette and Lombard Streets, frontage roads are located underneath the elevated viaduct to make available as much land as possible for the creative development of the proposed Historic District between Lombard and Fayette Streets. Between Lombard and Fleet Streets, the frontage roads diverge and are located adjacent and parallel to the elevated roadway. The project right of way. which includes ramps and both northbound and southbound frontage roads, varies from a maximum width of 270 feet in the vicinity of Granby Street to a width of 175 feet just south of Fayette Street. In the vicinity of the Historic District between Lombard and Fayette Streets, the right of way is approximately 225 feet. The reason for the additional width in the Historic area is the presence of both northbound and southbound entrance ramps and a northbound exit ramp in order to provide the necessary traffic service to downtown Baltimore. Northbound access ramps are located at Gay Street, at Lombard Street, and at Caroline Street. Southbound access ramps are located at Baltimore Street and Fleet Street. Northbound exit ramps are located at Baltimore Street and at Fleet Street. Southbound exit ramps are located at Fayette Street and Caroline Street. In order to facilitate east/west movement throughout the area, Fayette, Baltimore, Lombard, Pratt, and Fleet Streets will remain open to traffic. Eastern Avenue will also remain a thru street. The estimated cost of Scheme '0' is approximately $45 million. Alternate lEI is the eastern-most of the two alternative alignments. Frontage roads for this alternative vary in their configuration in order to satisfy the somewhat conflicting objectives of providing both large amounts of land for joint development and high levels of urban transportation service. North of Lombard Street, the frontage roads are located parallel to, but underneath, the elevated vi-aduct. The purpose of this is to narrow the project as much as possible along the segment of land between the Caton-Carroll Mansion and the Shot Tower Square Historic Park. This area east of the project is envisioned as a Historic District. Between lombard and Fleet Streets, the frontage roads are located outside of, and parallel to, the main roadways, and outside and immediately adjacent to the access and egress ramps. The project right of way. which includes both the northbound and southbound frontage roads, varies from a maximum of 240 feet near Granby Street to a minimum width of 190 feet between Stiles and Fawn Streets. Northbound access ramps are located at Gay Street, at lombard Street, and at Caroline Street. Southbound access ramps are located at Baltimore Street and at Fleet Street . Northbound exit ramps are located at Fleet and Baltimore Streets. exit ramps are located at Fayette and Caroline Streets. Southbound �STATE OF MARYLAND DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORT AriON STATE lfiGHWAY ADMINISTRATION 7po' SCALE o 700' ~ ~iiiiiiiiji INTERSTATE 83 - IN BALTIMORE CITY , MARYLAND FROM VICINITY OF GAY STREET TO VICINITY OF FLEET SlREET AT PRESIDENT STREET ALTERNATE D EXHIBIT 7 �7po' SCAlf o 700' ~ ~iiiiiiil' STATE OF MARYLAND DEPARTMENT OF TRAN!,PO'RTAT';ON STATE HlGHWAY ADMINISTRATION INTERSTATE 83 - IN BAl.TlMORE arv. MARYLAND FROM VlCIr--'lTY OF GA Y STREET TO VICINITY OF FLEET STREET AT PRESIDENT STREET ALTERNATE E EXHIBIT 8 �-12- Both Alternates '0' and IE' penetrate the eastern edge of D'Alesandro Playfield. In both Alternate '0' and IE', a large portion of the right of way required by the project has been acquired and approximate ly 60%of all structures within the right of way corridor have been razed. An alternative to the Caroline and Fleet Street ramps has been developed as part of the on-going planning process. This alternative was developed in cooperation with the "Little Italy" community to provide a buffer and parking strip adjacent to the Expressway, as well as provide access to the proposed Cruise Ship Terminal in Inner Harbor East. The ramps proposed in Alternate '0' and 'E' would be replaced by a diamond interchange planned near Central Avenue. Central Avenue would be continued in a southwesterly direction under 1-83 and would ultimately provide access to the proposed Inner Harbor East Cruise Ship Terminal. The estimated construction cost of Scheme 'E' is approximately $43 million. FELLS POINT Tunnel alternatives along the same corridor as the Concept Team's elevated structure were investigated intial1y in an attempt to reduce the nurner of structures affected by construction and to minimize aesthetic impacts. These alternatives included studies of a single-level. cut-and-cover tunnel along the original corridor (Ali gnment 1); a bored tunnel along the same corri dor (Al i gnment 2); two one-way . cut-and-cover tunnels under Lancaster Street and Allceanna Street (Alignment 3); and a double-level, cut-and-cover tunnel along the original corridor (Alignment 4). Feasibility studies indicated that these alternatives would still have significant negative impacts on the Historic District. Cut-and-cover tunnels, although not visually apparent after construction. would require the displacement of a large number of structures. The possibility of moving the buildings during construction and then returning them to their original sites was studied. In theory. this process would totally restore the District to its original condition after construction of the tunnel. In practicality, this procedure was judged to be risky due to the structural characteristics of the buildings; and impractical due to the large number of historic buildings involved. Relocation of the houses. whether temporary or permanent, would likely result in damage to the structures. In addition. the introduction of the construction process and noise in the central portion of the Historic District would also be deemed undesirable . Bored tunnel construction, by virtue of the techniques required. would entail substantial risk to the historic structures . Houses located over the bored tunnel alignment would be subject to damage from shifting soils caused by changes in air pressure during construction. This type of construction would also require the displacement of the structures located at the tunnel portals to allow construction of bulkheads to maintain the air pressure in the tunnel during construction. �· ' \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ ~_J �KEY - - - LINE I LINE e.ee . . . . . 2 UNE 3 _ _ UNE4 a U.O.C,A. - -- - UNE 5 _ _ _ • UNE6 _ _ _ UNE7 _____ LINES - - - - . LINE 9 �~ -b;,;,,-''''''-:;;' - -- ---- ANCHORAGE ..... .,. ' "A" .. .. ., " ) OUNO/IRY LINE - ZOLLMAN PER HALL. INTERSTATE DIVISION FOR BALTIMORE CITY SEGMENT 'C' 1·83 ALTERNATIVE ALIGNMENTS OATE NOV.,1974 SCALE I" = 400' FIGURE · 3 �• -13Realizing that these alternatives did not sufficiently reduce the possible negative impacts on the Historic District, alternative studies in different, additional corridor were initiated. Progressively southern alignments were studied along Thames Street (Alignment 5); across the northern end of the Recreation Pier (Alignment 6); at an angle across the northern end of the Recreation Pier (Alignment 7); across the southern end of the Recreation Pier (Alignment 8); and south of the pier out in the Harbor (Alignment g). These alignments pass through the industrial zone along the southern border of the Historic District. thereby avoiding the greater part of the historic structures--with the southernmost alignments affecting fewer buildings. The specific effects on the Historic District of these tunnel alignments and previous alternatives are outlined as follows: A typical tunnel section requires 164 feet in width. A typical louvered section requires 176 feet. Adding 30 feet of right of way to each side for construction purposes. the sections require corridors of 224 feet and 236 feet, respectively. The normal 3D-foot right of wayan each side can be reduced to a minimum of 5 feet for short distances on one side of the tunnel. Elevated Structure (UDCA Alternative): The alternate recommended by Urban Design Concept Associates included construc- tion of a low-elevated structure throughout the entire length of the study area at an elevation of 20 to 25 feet. It would run along existing Lancaster Street until it reached Anchorage 'A', where it again would curve to the south and cross Boston Street near O'Donnell Street. Interchanges would be constructed with ramps leading to Wolfe Street and Washington Street. As an elevated structure, the Expressway would pass over and leave uninterrupted, major traffic facilities. However, because of its proximity to these streets, it would cause other streets, such as Lancaster and Boston Streets, to be relocated. In addition, portion of other local streets would have to be closed . The elevated structure would threaten a unique, historic area by the disruptive nature of its scale and design--removing 82 historic structures and visually overpowering the remaining houses. This alternative would also place any possible air and noise impacts in the center of the District; restricting the redevelopment po- tential of the area as an aesthetically pleasing historic site. Additonally, 25 commercial properties and 5 industrial properties would have to be acquired. These acquisitions would entail the displacement of 145 residents and 450 jobs. The estimated cost of the UDCA alternative is $69 million. �-14- Alternative 1 (Cut-and-Cover Tunnel Along Lancaster Street): Alternate 1 wo~ld run south of, and parallel to, Lancaster Street as a tunnel from Caroline Street to Wolfe Street--reaching a maximum depth of E1. -33.00. The width of the permanent structure, including an allowance for construction space, would occupy all, or most, of the block immediately south of Lancaster Street. From Wolfe Street, the al ignment would pass through the National Can Company property and into Anchorage lA' on a short earth embankment. It would then proceed to O'Donnell Street at Boston Street, just south of the property of the American Can Company. Interchanges would be provided in the Wolfe Street and Fell Street areas and near Boston and O'Donnell Streets. ThiS tunnel alternative would be approximately 1600 feet in length and constructed by the cut-and-cover method. The cut-and-cover method is characterized by the excavation of an open trench in the existing ground surface. Ground support structures are built to retain the earth on each side of the trench during construction. The open-cut usually results in a large construction corridor width, occupying both the ground directly over the tunnel and enough adjacent space for passage of equipment and materials. Where it is deemed necessary to preserve a structure located within the corridor, the width of the area may be reduced for short lengths on one side of the tunnel. Upon completion of the tunnel , the trench is backfilled and the ground surface ;s restored to its original level. For Alternate I, right of way reductions would be made along Shakespeare Street between Bond Street and Broadway to preserve the facade on the south side of Shakespeare; and along Thames Street to permit preservation of the row of houses between Broadway and Ann Street. To compensate for these restrictions in access, additional working areas and an alternate access would be required. The Caroline Street berth has been proposed as a spoils area for the excavated materials not required for later backfilling or forming of the embankments. It is estimated that the volume of surplus materials would be approximately equal to the volume available in the berth for spoils, and that only very small quantities of excavated material would have to be disposed of off-site. An embankment in Anchorage IAI would be constructed from suitable excavated material to carry the outer sections of the east approaches. Construction on this alignment would require the temporary, sequential closing of Caroline, Bond, Broadway, and Wolfe Streets; of Lancaster Street between Caroline and Wolfe Streets; and of Shakespeare Street. It would also require the permanent closing of the southern end of Eden and Central Streets. This alignment improves upon the UDCA structure in that, after construction, it would no l onger be visible as a roadway. However, it would still necessitate the relocation or removal of many of the structures in the center of the Historic District--disturbing the overall integrity and unity of the District. Construction of this alternative would displace 95 historic structures, 145 residents, 26 commercial properties, 5 industrial properties, and 468 jobs. The estimated cost of Alternative 1 is approximately $130 million. �-15Alternative Z (Bored Tunnel Under Lancaster Street): Alternative Z would follow the same path as that of Alternative 1, with the exception that it would utilize twin bored tunnels--each of which would carry only two lZ-foot traffic lanes under the City blocks south of Lancaster Street . . As with Alignment 1, the highway would run parallel to, and south of, Lancaster Street to the National Can Company property at Wolfe Street. It would then swing in a southeastern direction through Anchorage 'A' to O'Donnell Street at Boston Street. The tunnel portals would be located just west of Caroline Street and just east of Wolfe Street, resulting in a tunnel 1600 feet in length, with the lowest point at El. -56.50 between Bond Street and Broadway. Interchanges would be provided as in Alignment 1. For bored tunnel construction, two drop caisson-type chambers are constructed at each portal and sunk to the required depth. The tunnel shield is assembled inside the caissons and the tunnel boring commences under compressed air conditions. Cast iron rings lined with reinforced concrete are erected in the excavated area to protect against ground water seepage. Shields are driven ahead of the cast iron rings, with excavation being done at the face of the shield. The grade at the top of the caissons might have to be raised temporarily to provide sufficient weight to retain the air pressure when driving starts and near completion of the drive. As the work progresses to the lowest point of the tunnel, there would be a sufficient mass of soil overhead to counteract the air pressure . On completion of tunnel driving and 1in;ng, the caissons are modified to serve as part of the ventilation structure. All tunnel lining, supplies, materials, and equipment are delivered through the air- locked caissons. All material removed from the tunnel must also pass through the air locks. The earth embankments to maintain air pressure at each tunnel portal would ex- tend at the west portal from Caroline Street to Bond Street and at the east portal from Wolfe Street to Ann Street. Between Bond Street and Ann Street, there would be no impact on the above ground structures, with the exception of effects due to possible differential soil settlement. Due to the depth needed for the tunnel and the consequent high air pressure, construction progress would be slow. The rate of advance has been calculated at 12 feet per day with 10 crews working on a 24-hour basis . It is proposed to dispose of materials from the excavation in the cofferdammed area at the Caroline Street berth. Any excess reusable material would be utilized in the roadway embankment in the Anchorage 'A' area. In addition to material avail- able from the excavations, substantial quantities of imported materials would be required to construct this embankment . As a bored tunnel, this alignment would have little direct effect on the Historic District. However, 12 historic structures would still require removal due to the need for the bulkheads at the tunnel portals to maintain sufficient air pressure for boring. Twenty commercial properties and three industrial properties would have to be acquired for construction of this alternative. These acquisition would displace 25 residents and 400 jobs. �-16Acquisitions for this alternative would also include the securing of sub-surface easements of the 103 properties which would be located directly over the bored tunnel but not physically displaced by the construction. The most significant factor involved in this alternative ;s the risk of damage to the historic structures located over the tunnel construction due to differential soil settlement. This risk and the prohibitive cost (more than twice the cost of any other alternative for the construction of 6 traffic lanes) leaves this as an ineffective alternate when compared to other proposed alternatives. The estimated cost of Alternative 2 is approximately $144 million. based on only 2 l anes in each direction. This cost is Alternative 3 (Two Single-Tube Tunnels): In this alternative, the northbound and southbound lanes of 1-83 would diverge and descend into two separate three-lane tunnel structures. The northbound alignment would run along Aliceanna Street, and the southbound alignment would run along Lancaster Street. Beyond Wolfe Street, the alignments would surface and start to converge and eventually merge in the Anchorage 'A' area and continue to O'Donnell Street at Boston Street. The lowest pOint of the tunnel would be near tlroadway at El . -36.00. Interchange systems would be provided east and west of the Historic District. Construction techniques would be similar to those described in Alternative 1. Approximately 30 feet of access would be provided on the north side of each alignment. It is proposed to close off the Caroline Street berth by a cellular cofferdam to provide a spoils area for surplus materials from the excavation. Contruction of this alternative would require the temporary closing of Aliceanna Street and Lancaster Street from Central Street to Wolfe Street, as well as all the intermediate cross streets. The tunnels would each be approximately 1600 feet in length. The configuration of two one-way tunnels was studied to determine if, by reducing the tunnel structure width (148 ft.), it would be feasible to construct the tunnels under existing streets and within the width of these streets (20-40 ft.), leaving the adjacent houses undisturbed. It was found that the construction corridor width could not be contained within existing streets' widths; and because of the need for two separate construction corridors, the alignment would actually have a larger negative impact on the Historic District than the construction of one 6-1ane tunnel. The two corridors would require removal of 95 historic structures, leaving two breaks in the District's unity. Fifty commercial properties, 9 industiral properties, 220 residents. and 910 jobs would be displaced. The displacements would include a portion of the St. Stanislaus Church complex at the corner of Ann Street and Aliceanna Street, which is of primary concern to the community. The cost of Alternative 3 is approximately $143 million. �-17Alternative 4 (Double-Level Tunnel): This arrangement is based on two cast-in-place reinforced concrete tunnels, one above the other, to be constructed along Lancaster Street. The upper tunnel would carry southbound traffic and the lower level would carry northbound traffic. This arrangement could be accomplished in a narrower working width than could a side-byside configuration, but the additional height of structure resulting from double-deck construction would require a longer tunnel. The alignments of the combined tunnel would run along the south side of Lancaster Street, affecting the area of historical buildings between Lancaster Street and Shakespeare Street, and between Lancaster and Thames Streets. The maximum tunnel depth would be at El. -43.50. The alignments would then diverge and surface near Ann Street, pass through the National Can Company property, and run alongside each other as they curve onto the embankment in Anchorage 'AI, and then continue on to O'Donnell Street at Boston Street. Interchanges would be provided as in previous alternates. The tunnel would be a maximum of approximately 3800 feet in length. This work would be performed using standard diaphragm wall cut-and-cover construction methods. There would be no surplus material to be disposed of other than the organic silt from the excavations, which would be accommodated in the Caroline Street berth. This double-level tunnel arrangement was studied) like Alternative 3) to determine if the road could possibly be constructed within the existing road width such that no historic structures would be disturbed. The extent of the adverse effects would be somewhat reduced by construction of one six-lane tunnel . However~ the adverse effects on the Historic District and the Fells Point community would still be quite substantial--displacing 69 historic structures~ 26 commercial properties) 7 industrial properties) 85 residents, and 460 jobs. The cost of Alternative 4 is approximately $124 million. Alternative 5 (Cut-and-Cover Tunnel Under Thames Street): Thi s alignment would run under Thames Street and the Recreation Pier Harbor frontage and into the triangular plot bounded by Thames, Fell, and Wolfe Streets. The roadway would surface east of Wolfe Street and continue into Anchorage 'A' and on to O'Donnell Street at Boston Street. The minimum elevation would be located under the intersection of Broadway and Thames Street at El. -33.50. An interchange would be constructed in the Hoston Street area. Due to the southern shift in corridor location of this alternative~ the Boston Street interchange for this and succeeding alignments is based on a different concept than Alternative 1 through 4. The interchange is more compact--eliminating the extremely long ramps of the previous alternatives. This interchange proposal is accompanied by the proposal for the widening of Boston Street to the east and south to Aliceanna Street. �-18A cellular cofferdam would be constructed across the Caroline Street berth , if approved, to permit use of this area for di sposal . A complete cofferdam would then be constructed around the area of the depressed structure. This cofferdam would be of reinforced concrete diaphragm construction t with the exception of the length across the Recreation Pier area on the south side of the tunnel whi ch would be of cellular cofferdam construction. The area within the cofferdam would then be dewatered and excavated in the dry and the reinforced structure would be constructed . At the eastern end of the section, an earth embankment would be formed from excavated material. Preliminary calculations indicate that there would be a surplus of about 100,000 cubic yards of excavated material which could not be accommodated at the proposed Caroline Street berth site . Within the Historic District, the original waterfront would be restored after completion of the tunnel. Construction of Alternative 5 would require the temporary closing of Caroline Skreet, Bond Street, Thames Street, Fell Street, and Wolfe Street. All of these streets would be re-opened after construction of the tunnel . The tunnel would be approximately 1600 feet in length. A right of way reduction would be made on the north side of Thames Street between Wolfe Street and Broadway to preserve valuable structures . This alignment was studied in an attempt to move toward the southern edge of the Historic District. The corridor avoids the central portion of the District. but still requires removal or relocation of 46 historic structures on the edge of the District. The alignment marks the beginning of a shift from residential to industrial impact-stil l affecting both to a large extent . Thirty-five commercial properties, 15 industrial properties, 158 residents, and 680 jobs would be displaced . The cost of Alternative 5 is approximately $123 million . Alternative 6 (Tunnel at Inshore End of Recreation Pier): This alignment would pass under Bond Street at Thames Street and the Rukert Terminals building and pass into the Recreation Pier area . The minimum tunnel elevation would be located under the Pier at E1 . -31. UO. The roadway would cross the inshore end of the Pier and pass under Ann, Fell, and Wolfe Streets--affecting the historic properties in the triangular plot bounded by Thames, Wolfe, and Fell Streets. From Wolfe street, the roadway would surface and cross Anchorage 'A' to Boston street at O 'Donnell Street. Interchange access would be provided in the Boston Street area as in Alternative 5. The tunnel would be approximately 1400 feet in length. A cofferdam would be constructed by means of sheet pile cells across the entrance to the Caroline Street berth to provide a spoils area for the organic silt and other excess material from the excavations . Cofferdam construction for the tunnel on each side of the permanent construction would be similar to that described for Alternative 5. �-19In general, an additional width of 30 feet on each side of the permanent structure would provide working and traveling room. The reinforced concrete permanent structures would be constructed in the dry within the cofferdam. The eastern end of the open structure would be constructed on the embankment formed in Anchorage 'A'. It is estimated that it would be possible to dispose of all excavated material in embankments, backfill, and the Caroline Street berth spoils disposal area. The original waterfront would be restored within the Historic District. Construction on this alignment would require the permanent closing of Dock Street and the temporary closing of Caroline, Bond, Thames, Ann, Fell t and Wolfe Streets. The southern blocks of the Historic District would still be impacted--requiring displacement of 52 historic structures. These displaced structures include the Captain John Steele House, located at 931 Fell Street--one of the most valuable buildings in the Historic District. Thrity-five commerical properties, 12 fndustrial properties, 123 residents, and BOO employee positions would also be displaced. In addition, the Recreation Pier at 1715 Thames Street would be impacted. The Pier is not of great historical or architectural importance; but it is the only recreation facility in the Fells Point Historic District, providing basketball courts, activity rooms, and a hard surface play area for the neighborhood residents. The Pier could be saved by extensive underpinning of the structure's foundations or it could be rebuilt. Because the right of way corridor is physically 'located on the Recreation Pier, Federal fund s could be made available to save or replace it. One of the most positive aspects of this alignment is its function as a border between the residential and industrial sectors . The cost of Alternative 6 is approximately $117 million. Alternative 7 (Tunnel at Center of Recreation Pier): This alignment would be similar to that of Alternative 6 but would pass at an angle to Thames Street and would be located slightly further off-shore at the east portal. The route would pass under the junction of Thames Street and Bond Street, under the Rukert Terminals Corporation buildings. and into the Harbor area. It would cross the Recreation Pier and proceed to the intersection of Fell Street and Wolfe Street, surfacing just west of Fell Street. From there it would cross the Belts Wharf warehouse and the Arundel Corporation plan into Anchorage IAI. Overpasses would be provided for Caroline, Fell, and Wolfe Streets--with interchange provisions at improved Boston Street. The tunnel would be approxi mately 1230 feet in length, Construction procedures would be the same as for Alternative 6, with the same requirements for street closures . Calcul ations indicate that there would be a surplus of about 20,000 cubic yards of material to be disposed of off-site. After tunnel construction, the origina l waterfront would be restored but the water draft would be reduced . The new draft would allow docking of pleasure craft but not of the deep water vessels which presently use the pier. �-20The angle of the alignment would allow for preservation of the Captain John Steele House, which would be impacted by Alternative 6. However, the total impact of Alternative 7 would not be significantly less; and in some cases, would be greater than that of Alternative 6. Forty-two historic structures, 103 residents, 33 commercial properties, 10 industrial properties, and 890 jobs would be displaced. The cost of Alternative 7 is approximately $123 million. Alternative 8 (Tunnel at Outer End of Recreation Pier): This alignment would be located in the Harbor area, south of the major portion of the Historic District. Descending to tunnel at Caroline Street, it would cross the Harbor and the southern end of the Recreation Pier, pass through the Belts Warhf Warehousearea, and surface east of Fell Street. The road would continue across Anchorage 'A' to Boston Street at O'Donnell Street. Interchange systems, as currently proposed, would provide access at improved Boston Street. The tunnel would be approximately 1400 feet in length. The tunnel elevation would give water depths ranging from about 10 feet to 20 feet over the tunnel in the Recreation Pier area, allowing use of the Harbor for shallow draft vessels after completion of construction. Currently, a draft of 22 feet is available. This depth would be reduced only on the east side of the pier, leaving the original draft on the west side. Contruction procedures again would be the same as for Alternative 5. In general, a working and access width of 30 feet would be required on each side of the cut-off wall, with local restrictions at the corner of the Allied Chemical Company plant and at the junction of Bond and Thames Streets to reduce the impact on industrial and historic properties. It is estimated that, in addition to complete utilization of the spoil volume availalbe in the Caroline Street berth, there would be a surplus of approximately 90,000 cubic yards of material to be disposed of off-site. The construction would also require the permanent closure of parts of Wills Street ana Oock Street at their junction. The original waterfront would be restored within the Historic District boundaries. By skirting the southern edge of the Historic District and out into the Harbor, this alternative minimizes the impacts on Fells Point. Only twelve of the historic structures would be located within the construction corridor. The total impact of this alternative would include displacement of B residents, 25 commercial properties, 13 industrial properties, and 710 jobs. Stringent right of way reductions have minimized these displacements. Other variations of Alternative 8 have been considered, seeking to minimize negative impacts and to maximize benefits to the Historic Oistrict. �-21Along Alignment B, a shallow tunnel variation would be possible. The Recreation Pier could be shortened with land fill surrounding it, providing additional land space for joint development. If a working pier for deep water vessels was desired, the Pier :ou1d be extended past the tunnel rather than shortened. The basic disadvantage of thlS type of variation would be the ajteration of the original waterfront line, tampering with the long-standing associations between historic Fells Point and the Harbor . Along Alignment B, another possibility would be to construct a deeper tunnel, allowing sufficient draft for deep water vessels at the Recreation Pier . A tunnel of this depth could also be extended on the western side of Anchorage 'A'. This shallow draft would allow the passage of pleasure craft, presenting the jOint development possibility of a recreational marina along the Anchorage 'AI/Boston Street waterfront. The cost of Alternative B is approximately $126 million. Alternative g (Tunnel Beyond Off-Shore End of Recreation Pier): Alternative g is to be based on the use of precast tunnel elements to be sunk in place across the Harbor beyond the off-shore end of the Recreation Pier. The alignment would descend the tunnel in the industrial area between Block Street and Caroline Street. The western ventilation tower would be located in this area. The alignment of the sunken tunnel elements would pass under the Rukert Terminals Corporation property and into the Harbor area, falling through a vertical curve to a low point of E1. -SB.SO under the Harbor. The eastern portal ventilation tower would be located on an extensive earth embankment in the Anchorage 'AI area, outside the Historic District boundary . From there. the alignment would cross the outer limits of Anchorage 'A' on elevated structure toward Boston Street. The profile would provide a minimum water depth of 22 feet over the structure in the Harbor area. The tunnel would be approximately 2600 feet in length. For this alternative, it is intended to build the ventilation buildings in the dry inside the cofferdams. The tunnel elements would be constructed in a temporary drydock as close to the site as possible (probably Anchorage 'A') so as to reduce towing risks. but to minimize visual acoustical impacts on the Historic District. After the elements are built, waterproofed, and the bulkhead installed, the temporary drydock would be breached to provide flotation of the elements. The trench for the tunnel would be excavated by dredge and screeded to provide a good base to the required grade. Individual elements would then be towed into position and lowered into the prepared trench to be jOinted to a previously lowered unit . It is normal with this method of construction to build the tunnel portal, ap- proaches, and the ventilation buildings first. This work would proceed concurrently with casting of the elements in the temporary drydock. When the last element would be placed, therefore, only inside finishes, road surfacing, and electrical and mechanical installations would be needed. �-22All materials dredged or excavated in the dry from the foundations would be disposed of in the proposed spoil area in the Caroline Street berth and in the earth embankment in Anchorage IAI. By passing through the Historic District at the extreme southern edge, the majority of the tunnel construction would be in the Harbor. Displacement impacts would be limited to 5 historic structures 9 industries, and 25 commercial properties. Job displacement would involve 590 employees. No residents would be forced to relocate. I It would be difficult to restore the original waterfront line in the Historic District with this particular type of construction . Reconstruction of the original piers and bulkhead lines that exist just east of Thames Street and off the west side of Fells Point would not be advisable under this scheme. There is a limited amount of cover (varying from 8 ft. to 25 ft . ) over the roof of the proposed tunnel, and any major waterfront improvement in these areas could represent a potential threat of damage to the tunnel roof, its waterproofing; and thus, the safety of the traveling public. The cost of Alternative 9 is approximately $161 million. Following completion of the Draft Environmental Impact, and as part of the ongoing planning process, other alternatives dealing with an extension of the tunnel to the east were studied. All tunnel alternatives previously studied limited tunnel construction generally to the area within the Historic District and the project extended across Anchorage lA' via embankment or elevated structure or a combination of the two. Concern was voiced by the community regarding the maintenance of water access to the Anchorage IAI area . The elevated structure would allow the passage of small craft underneath, but would not facilitate the larger tug boats that use the Anchorage today. As a result, Alternative 8 was modified. The eastern portal of the cut-and-cover tunnel was shifted to the east in order to provide a waterway opening into Anchorage IAI. This waterway would provide a navigation channel for pleasure crafts and working boats . By lowering the profile of Alternative 8 somewhat further, conditions would allow 'for a tug boat terminal in Anchorage IA' . A further modification of Alternative 8 would be to fill in Anchorage IAI. A park could be created on the filled land and a marina provided on the Harbor side of the highway. The feasibility of this scheme is presently under study; and if adopted, would allow Boston Street to be relocated into an area presently occupied by water and simplify the ramp arrangement of the 1-83 Boston Street Interchange. Approximately 18-20 acres will be reclaimed and dedicated to park and recreation uses . In all alternatives, an interchange is proposed between 1-83 and Boston Street with all ramp movements provided. An alternative to the ramp arrangement of this interchange was recently suggested. Ramp IAI from Boston Street to 1-83 southbound, which is presently designed as a IIfly-over ramp, would be shifted to the east and would be located at the intersection of existing Boston Street and Elliott Street. It would parallel the southbound 1-83 roadway merging with the southbound roadway over Potomac Street. U �-23Alternatives - Boston Street to 1-95 at Boston and Ponca Streets: The build alternative would locate 1-83 on elevated structure over Boston Street between the American Can Company and the Renneberg Company, south of St. Casimer's Church. The roadway would be located approximately 130 feet south of the church at the closest point. 1-83 would continue elevated over Binney, Kenwood. Streeper, Linwood, Potomac, Decker, and Ellwood Avenue. The highway would be located from 200 feet to 350 feet south of the community in this area. The open space between the highway and the community is planned for a playground. From Anchorage 'A' to Ellwood Street. 1-83 would be located slightly north of existing Boston Street. However. Boston Street would be rebuilt as 2-27 foot roadways underneath the elevated 1-83 structure. From Ellwood Avenue, 1-83 continues easterly as an elevated structure. crossing over East. Clinton, Highland, Baylis, and Conkling Streets. 1~83 would cross existing Boston Street at its existing intersection with Clinton Street. Again, Boston Street would be rebuilt under the elevated mainline of 1-83. The highway would be located from 160 to 30Q feet south of the existing Canton community. From Conkling Street to the Harbor Tunnel Thruway. 1-83 would be located parallel to and over existing Boston Street. Near the Harbor Tunnel Thruway a directionru interchange would be built with full movements between 1-83 and proposed 1-95. In addition, interchange ramps between 1-83 and Boston Street near Broening Highway would be provided. Access ramps would also be provided between improved Boston Street and 1-95 near O'Donnell Street and O'Donnell Street cut-off. The existing 8&0 Railroad bridge over Boston Street would be reconstructed over improved Boston Street and under 1-83 near the Crown, Cork, and Seal Company. Traffic would be maintained continuously on the local streets, including Boston Street. Traffic patterns on local streets would remain as they are today. Improved Boston Street would extend from Aliceanna Street in the west to O'Donnell Street and O'Donnell Street cut-off in the east. "No Build" Another alternative under consideration is the "No Build" Alternative. This alternative would eliminate the section of Interstate Route 83 from Gay Street to 1-95 from the City of Baltimore's Transportation Program and would not require any additional displacement of homes, businesses, or parklands; and no initial outlay of funds for construction, right-of-way, or design would be required. * * * ��-24Part IV - Impacts 1. Socioeconomic Effects Baltimore must have an overall balanced transportation system that includes both rapid transit and highways if it is to grow as one of the countryr s leading ports and industrial centers. Without improved efficient transporation, Baltimore would continue to decrease in potential for commercial-industrial expansion. It has been the hope and promise of improved transportation that has made redevelopment projects such as Charles Center and the Inner Harbor Development possible. The recently completed Baltimore Regional Environmental Impact Study (BREIS), evaluated the economic implications of building the 3-A System, which includes 1-83. Completion of the 3-A System means: By 1995: 50,000 more jobs; $643,000,000 more in payrolls; $238,000,000 more in retail sales; $278,000,000 more commercial and industrial construction In addition, an immediate effect would be the creation of new jobs for the actual construction of the highway. On a local scale, the 1-83 corridor would realize a positive socia-economic impact. This corridor has been scheduled for several jOint development projects, which have been carefully coordinated with the development of 1-83. The joint development projects will be considered later in the presentation. Short-term effects on the community would involve relocation of people and businesses, much of which has already been accomplished and temporary inconvenience during construction. The long-term benefits resulting from the highway and joint development plan; however, would offset the short-term disruption . Short-term employment resulting from the construction of the project would have a positive effect on reducing unemployment. The long-term effect of the proposed project on surrounding communities and employment would be positive, since the area would have greater mobility and would benefit from proximity to a direct linkage with a complete transportation system. This would, in turn, increase land values and should encourage development of adjacent areas. The construction of the project would~quire the relocation of certain bu il dings, railroad tracks, and portions of industrial complexes. In the longterm, however, the land redevelopment benefits to be derived outweigh the initial relocation requirements. �-251-83 between Gay Street and 1-95 impacts several Historic Sites. The highway alternatives considered have attempted to minimize the adverse effects on the historic sites by either reducing land and property acquisition, or by integrating the highway into the overall development plan, both within, and adjacent to the historic sites. Once a final decision is made regarding the need for and l ocation and design of the highway, which would identify the ultimate pattern of traffic through the area and the location of l andscaped buffer zones adjacent to 1-83, private redevelopment of homes within the Fells Point Historic District would realize its full potential. 2. Visual Effects: 1-83 passes through areas now being utilized primarily for industrial, and residential land uses. Most structures within the condemnation zone, except i n the Fells Point Area, have been razed. The presence of the highway desi9ned as a modern facility with landscaped edges and buffers should not have an adverse visual impact on the area. The 1-83 viaduct from Baltimore Street southerly to Aliceanna Street would be designed in graceful, pre-stressed concrete in order to be an attractive addition to the predominantly residential and historic atmosphere of this segment. Any visual impact to Fells Point wo uld be almost entirely eliminated by constructing the highway as a tunnel under or around the district . A temporary visual impact would occur during actual construction. This impact would be minimized by special construction procedures and sequencing, which would be developed in cooperation with affected communities. The elevated section of 1-83 east of Fells Po i nt would be designed of aesthetically pleasing weathering steel construction. ;nstitutional~ historic~ Through the Canton area, the elevated viaduct would tend to act as a buffer between the industrial waterfront to the south of the highway and the longestablished Canton residential community to the north. Should a build alternative be selected, a park would be built in the excess condemnat i on area north of the expressway between Saint Casimer's Church and the existing Canton Playground. The park would be landscaped in such a way as to create an earth berm six to nine feet high between improved Boston Street and the New Canton Playground and Canton Community. The earth berm would be built with highway funds prior to the highway to assure that the construction activity from the highway would be screened as much as possible from the Community. 3. Ecological Impacts Ecology is the study of the relationship of plants, animals, and other organisMs with their environment. The ecological impact is expected to be negligible. as the area is almost totally urbanized. No significant wildlife forms are reported in the area affected by the proposed project. No significant plant life exists along, or within. the proposed highway corridor. 4. Soil Erosion and Sediment Control Sediment control devices. such as diversion dikes and sediment basins, would be incorporated into the construction plans and approved before a sediment and grading permit would be issued. The Maryland State Highway Administration has been a leader in this field and has worked cl osely with the Maryland Department of Natura l Resources over �-26the past several years to establish procedures for prevention of erosion impacts. Both of these departments exercise authority over the implementation of these measures. 5. Right-of-Way and Relocation From Gay Street to Fells Point, approximately ten residential units, seven of which are occupied would be acquired. Approximately 50 businesses would be impacted by the project, 38 of which have already been acquired. Through the Fells Point Historic District, the number of affected properties varies with each alignment and was described earlier under alternatives. Through the Canton area of the project, all required property has been acquired and cleared with the exception of Exxon and portions of Crown, Cork, and Seal. The State Highway Administrationls Office of Real Estate, acting under the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, insures just compensation for any property taken by highway construction. Relocation services consist of assisting each owner and tenant to find a new home in a location which meets the householders' needs and desires, at a price at which they can afford to pay &maintain. All affected persons are reimbursed for their moving expenses. Owner occupants may be entitled to a replacement housing payment of up to $15,000 -- in addition to the fair market value paid by the City agency in purchasing their property, in order to facilitate relocation of housing. Tenants may also be helped in adjusting to higher rental rates in their new locations by means of a rental assistance payment, which may be as much as $1,000 per year for up to four years. 6. Historical, Cultural, and Recreational Jones Falls Extended The 4(f) chictectural, corridor. Of significantly Statement for the project identifies 17 sites of historical, ar" recreational,civic, or religious significance within the project the seventeen sites, four are too far from the highway to be impacted. These are: Old Town Meeting House McKim's School Lloyd Street Synagogue Engine House #6 One unique engineering example, the Bollman Truss Bridge, (formerly Lombard Street Truss over the Jones Falls), has been removed and relocated in Dickeyville. Of the twelve remaining sites, four are included in the National Register of Historic Sites; namely. �• \ \ 1 1 1 11 11 11 1 SITES OF HISTORICAL &ARCHITECTURAL SIGNIFICANCE. ,~ SITES IN CLOSE PROIIMITI TO THE ROAOWAI. D SITES USED FOR RECREATIONAL, REliGIOUS, OR -: CULTURAL PURPOSES. STATE OF MARYLAND DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION STATEI:DGHWAY ADMINISTRA110N INTERSTATE 83 - IN BALTIMORE On , MARYLAND FROM VIQNlTY OF GAY STREET TO VICINITY OF FLEET STREET SCAlf 7po' D 700' C.iiiiiiiiiiiI'~~siiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii' AT PRESIDENT STREET LOCATION OF SITES OF ARCHITECTURAL, HISTORICAL AND RECREATIONAL SIGNIFICANCE EXlDBIT H-I �, Table H-l D istance Between Historic Sites and Roadw~ (Alternatives Presently Under Consideration Distance in Feet Between Alternate 0 Site MAio Sites of Historic and Architectural Si~ificance 1. St. Vincent dePaul R. C. Church 2. Sho' 2•• Site Roadway Prontage """ (Inc . -I ~d _ds BO Alternate E Site and ...io Site and . . . . . .y Frontage (Inc. Ramps) ,.,... BO m Tow" (Structure) "S 220 20S Sho< Tower Square P"k 30 S -'0 0 2 SO " 60 Replace Replace 9S 1<0 160 110 lOS SS "nIe 0' Alesandro Playfield 10 -30 0 -' 0 ,. President Street Station OS 3S B. War MelllOcial 60 60 60 60 9. Zion Lutheran Oturch 200 200 200 200 iO. Peale MWieUIII "0 "0 "0 ,.. 11. City Hall 6SO 6.0 6SO 6SO 12. Nine North Front Street 2lS 26S 155 190 13 . Old Town Me e ting House over 1500 over lS00 ~O< lS00 ~"' 1500 over 1<00 over 1<00 ~"' ~"' ~ver over 1200 1200 over 1200 ~" 3. Fish Muket •• carroll Mansion S. Flag House 6. 1<. is. McKiIll' I!I School Lloyd Street Synagogue 16. BoIlJllan 1'russ 17 . Engine H OUlJe 16 Removed 1200 Removed 1200 • 1<00 Rellll)ved 1200 1<00 1200 ........ 120<1 �-27- Shot Tower Caton-Carroll Mansion Star Spangl ed Banner Flag House St. Vincent dePaul Roman Catholi c Church The remal"lng eight sites are significant and given proper consideration in the project Environmental Impact Statement/Sect i on 4( f) Report and the Section 106 Historic Review Process Case Report . In addition, these documents a~avai lable at the Interstate Division Office for inspection or copying. Copies of the documents may be purchased from the Interstate Division for a nominal charge. This presentation addresses the four National Register Sites: Shot Tower Originally known as the Phoenix Shot Tower, and later known as the Merchants 1 Shot Tower, the O Baltimore Shot Tower was built in 1828. ld The cornerstone was laid by Charles Carro ll of Carrollton . The structure is the l ast remaining of four such shot towers in the City of Ba ltimore and i s one of the few remaining in this country. The structure was designed for the manufacture of lead shot for weapons. By dropping molten lead from a pl atform at the top of the tower through a sievelike device into a vat of cold water below. The tower stands about 14 stories high. its kind in the world. It is the tallest structure of In 1882, the interior of the Old Baltimore Shot Tower was destroyed by fire; however, it was quickly rebuilt. stopped. In 1892, the manufacture of shot was The City purchased the tower in 1924. The Shot Tower i s currently owned and operated by the Baltimore City Department of Recreation and Parks. The structure is located on the southeast corner of Fayette and Front Streets . Plans are already underway for the development of a Shot Tower Square Historic Park. Two-thirds of the area is cleared and construction plans are being drawn by the Architectural firm of Smith and Kirwan. The park is bounded by Fayette, Baltimore, and High Streets and the Fall sway. D5 i gn alternative lEI requires a negligible amount of land to be taken from the southwest corner of the Shot Tower Square Historic Park. The proposed mainline roadway will pass about 250 feet to the west of the tower for design alternative 10 1. The elevated freeway will pass 220 feet west of the structure for alternative lEI. Caton-Carroll Mansion The structure which i s now known as the Caton -Carroll Mansion was built by Henry Wilson, a Baltimore merchant. in 1808. The house was l ocated on the �-28corner of King George and Stillhouse Streets -- names which were later changed to Lombard and Front, respectively . In 1818, the property was sold to Richard Caton for the sum of $20,000. Caton's wife, Mary Carrol1~ was the youngest daughter of Charles Carroll of Carrollton -- the last surviving signer of the Declaration of Independence. The Catons moved into the house in order to accommodate Charles Carroll, by that time in his BOis. In the spring and summer. Charles Carroll lived in his large estate near Ellicott City. In fall and winter, Carroll came to Baltimore, bringing many of his personal goods with him. When Richard Caton's business affairs went bad, Carroll purchased the house for the sum of $14,000 and deeded the property in trust to Mary Caton for her daughter Emily. The move was designed to keep the property out of the hands of Caton's creditors. On November 1,1832, at the age of 95 years, Charles Carroll died in his bedroom in the Caton-Carroll Mansion. The Catons occupied the house until Richard Caton's death in 1846. In 1914, the City of Baltimore purchased the house as part of the Centennial Celebration, commemorating the writing of the Star Spangled Banner. A long and vigorous public controversy saved the structure and with the election of Mayor Theodore R. McKeldin in 1963, renovation of the building was initiated. The Caton-Carroll Mansion is currently owned by the City of Baltimore and operated by the Board of Trustees of the Municipal Museum. The house, located on approximately one-fourth acre of land, is open to the public as a museum. Admission to the museum is free of charge. The proposed elevated roadway passes west of the structure at a distance of 90 feet for alternative '0 ' , and at a distance of 25 feet for alternative 'E'. Frontage roads for alternatives '0 ' and 'E' are located 120 feet and 30 feet, respectively from the Caton-Carroll Mansion. Both design alternatives include a northbound access ramp at Lombard Street. The Star Spangled Banner Flag House The Star Spangled Banner Flag House, built in 1793, is one of the oldest houses in the area. The structure was built by Brian Philpot, a gentleman landowner of Baltimore. The two and one-half story corner row house is made of Salmon brick, laid in Flemish bond. with a black slate hipped roof. Architecture is of the Federal period . Many of the original mantels, doors, butterfly shelves and cupboards still exist in the building. It was in this house that Mary Young Pickersgill. the niece of Colonel Benjamin Flower -- Commissary General for George Washington -- and her daughter sewed the l5-star, l5-stripe flag that flew over Fort McHenry through the night of bombardment during the Battle of Baltimore (September 13 - 14, 1814). The original flag is in the Smithsonian Institute in Washington, D.C. �-29In 1927, the City of Baltimore bought the house in order to preserve the tangible remnant of the events relating to the Flag of 1B14. The Flag House was recognized by an Act of the United States Congress in 1954, thereby accord- ing it the privilege of flying the American Flag 24 hours a day. The Star Spangled Banner Flag House is owned by the City of Baltimore and is operated by the Star Spangled Banner Flag House AssOCiation, Inc. The house and its surrounding grounds occupy about a square block of land. The building ;s operated as a museum and is open to the public free of charge. The proposed highway will pass to the west of the Flag House at a distance of 160 feet for design alternative '0' and at a distance of 105 feet for design alternative 'E ' , Saint Vincent dePau1 Roman Catholic Church Saint Vincent dePaul Roman Catholic Church was dedicated on November 7. 1B41, by Archbishop Samuel Eccleston. The church originally served the area then known as uOld Town 11 • The architecture of the church relates in style to the classical revival churches built in London and Paris in the 1820's. Father John Baptist Gildea, the first priest of the church, is credited with designing the structure. A white brick tower rests on an octagonal base and supports three successive indented tiers. One of the three tiers is octagona l and the other two are cylindrical, and are capped by a copper sheathed dome that supports a 12 foot cross. Saint Vincent dePaul was the fifth Roman Catholic Church to be built in Baltimore. The church has a main sanctuary for use during special occasions and a smaller chapel for daily worship. In 1883. the famous Saint Vincent Chimes were hung. The chimes were designed by Henry McShaw of Baltimore, and consist of 14 bells that range in weight from 250 to 4,000 pounds. The clean, white building is in very sound structural condition. In 1941. the interior was refurbished to commemorate the church's lOOth Anniversary. The windows were adorned with scenes of symbolic sacraments and moments in sacred hi story. The church is located on about two acres of land bounded by Lexington Street, Fayette Street, the new Post Office Building and the Fa11sway . The church is owned and operated by the Catholic Archdiocese of Maryland. Although recent trends in suburban migration have hurt the church as far as service attendance is concerned. it is hoped that the new Inner Harbor project and the revitalization of Central Baltimore will help to attract new worshipers. The proposed elevated roadway will pass BO feet to the west of the Church. Also of considerable interest is the impact of the project upon: �-30Nine Front Street The Wholesale Fish Market The President Street Station D'Alesandro Playground Nine Front Street This house, located at Nine North Front Street dates from the period immediately following the American Revolution. The architectural style is known as "Conservative Georgian" and was chosen for the structure by architect9 H. Chandlee Forman. The house has a gable roof and two dormer windows. There is a large chimney on the north side of the building. The exact date of the construction of the house is not known; however. records indicate that it was built some time around 1790. It is also not clear just who built the house. The house at Nine North Front Street ;s presently in a state of disrepair. The Commission for Historical and Architectural Preservation had drawings and a restoration feasibility report, prepared by the late Richard C. Bernard in 1969. The City of Baltimore purchased the structure in 1971. The house has been incoporated as part of the new Shot Tower Square Park design. Restoration of the structure is to be accomplished by the Women's Civic League for use as their headquarters and as a visitors center for the nation's bi-centennial celebration. The house at Nine North Front Street has been nominated for inclusion on the National Register of Historic Places. The proposed elevated roadway will pass to the west of the house distances of 220 feet, and 160 feet, respectively for project alternatives '0' and 'E'. Wholesale Fish Market Baltimore's Wholesale Fish Market was constructed in 1907, following the Great Fire of 1904. The building was intended to serve as a facility for local fishermen to sell and distribute their catches. The building is considered a good example of American commercial architecture of the early Twentieth Century. The Wholesale Fish Market is bounded by West Falls Avenue, Market Place, Water Street, and Watson Street . Because no structural restoration has taken place during the last 51 years, there are many deficiencies which severely hamper efficient operations. The Fish Market is owned by the City of Baltimore and is currently leased to 23 different companies, which employ a total of about 300 people. The Fish Market would be replaced under alternative '0', Under alternative 'E', the existing facility would remain and be located two feet west of the Baltimore Street on-ramp and 50 feet west of the service roads, which are under the elevated 1-83 viaduct at this location. �-31- If the Fish Market is maintained at its present location, extensive and costly renovation would be required to upgrade the facility for efficient, safe and sanitary operations. A detailed analysis of the required renovation has been prepared by the firm of David Q'Mally and Associates. At minimum, present loading platforms would have to be lowered; modernized heating, cooling and drainage systems would have to be installed. Improvements in produce movement and marketing would be required . While considerable work may be accomplished within the bui lding's interior space, some modification of the exterior structure is inevitable. The degree of alteration may be sufficient to negate the structure's va 1ue as a hi s tori ca 1 ed i face. The cost of thi s major fa ci 1 ity renovati on would be paid by the City of Baltimore. If Alternative '0' is selected and the present site razed, the Fish Market would be replaced under provisions of the Federal Highway Functional Replacement of Public Facilities procedures. This procedure requires replacement of a "functional equivalent" to the facil ity taken. This is interpreted to imply a functional equivalent to the modern, efficient, safe and sanitary facility. which would result from renovation -- not the inadequate, obsol ete. existing Fish Market. In purely economic terms, this provision could result in a major savings to the City of Baltimore. The new facility would incorporate all the modern design, equipment and technology that is lacking in the present Fish Market and would still fall within the "functional equivalent" definition. Thus, the community would have the full advantage of a new facility and be relieved of the financial burdens associated with major renovation. President Street Station The President Street Railway Station was built in 1850 to serve passengers of the Pennsylvania Railroad. In 1861, the building was the site of a brief skirmish between civilians who were Southern sympathizers, and soldiers from a Massachusetts Union regiment. Both civilians and soldiers were killed when the civilians attempted to prevent the soldiers from travelling to Camden Station and further south. In 1913, additional facilities were constructed, which resulted in the present configuration of three closed sheds. The President Street Station is bounded by Fleet Street, Aliceanna Street, Central Avenue, and President Street. The structures are owned and operated by the Penn Centra l Railroad Company. Their present use ;s as a storage garage. The portion of the President Street Station that would remain is currently rented to a construction company. The proposed elevated roadway would pass 40 feet to the northeast of the station for Alternate '0'. Alignment 'E' places the roadway about five feet . northeast of the structure . Under both proposals, the railway station would be preserved. �-32The D'Al esandro Playfield The O'Alesandro Pl ayfield is located on the northwest corner of President and Fleet Streets. The 0.73 acre site i s owned and operated by the Baltimore City Department of Recreation and Parks and is in tended to serve as a recreational facility for the youth of the littl e Italy neighborhood. The playground is unu sual because of its location in the midst of a hi gh l y industrialized area. The location of the proposed elevated f reeway may render a sma ll f raction of the pl ayfield useless as an area of recreation. Fells Point The F s Point Historic District i s a uni que 19th Century Harbor-side ell resi dential neighborhood having much of its original architecture and its ori gina l town pl an in tact. As li sted in the National Regis t er~ the District i s bounded by A ceanna Street on the north, Wolfe Street on the east . the Harbor li on the south, and Dallas Street on the west. The district encompasses a total area of 75 acres -- some 41 of which is land. with the remainder being water. The Historic D istrict stands as an exampl e of an lBth and 19th century ma riti me port community , both hi s torically and architectura ll y . Other waterf ron t areas along the Baltimore Harbor were either razed by the grea t fire of 1904 or have been converted to heavy i ndu strial uses, leaving Fells Poi nt as a unique remnant of Baltimore 's earli er mari time glory. Fells Po int was l aid out in 1763 by Colonel Edward Fell in a pattern of streets north and south, east and west -- except on the extreme pO int itself where he was governed by the course of the river. The use of family names such as A lice, A nna, Bond, and F ell to des i gnate the streets in the area indicates that the l ayout of the streets in the Fell s Po int Historic District was a part of the original plan of Colonel Fell . With the growth of Baltimore as a shipping port, Fells Point became a major focus of mariti me activ ity. East and west of the Fells Point H storic i District were located ship yards, wharfs, chandl eri es, sh ipfitters, and other shipping facilities. The Historic District served as a maritime support community with shops. stores, and homes to suppl y the need for the seamen and sh ip owners. Beyond the wharfs, docks, warehouses. and shops of the port, the s ingle most Signifi cant civic function of the Fells Point H st ori c District was the market i at the foot of Broadway. Its s i gnificance i s ind i cated by the fact t hat for a period of some fifty to s i xty years. the Fel l s Point Market was the only market i n East Baltimore. With the approach of the 1800's, the ship builders of Ba lti more developed a reputation for the construction of fast, seaworthy vessels. F amous sailing ships such as the Constell ation. the Virginia, the Chesa~eake, and several Balti more cl ippers were constructed in yards near the Fe 1s Point Historic District. �-33- At the same time. the speculative builders of Baltimore began to erect the row houses characteristic of the present Fells Point area. Parcels of land were divided into 15' to 20' wide lots and covered with small wood frame houses in groups of two and four. These houses, generally the homes of artisans and seafarers, typically had two low ceiling rooms on the main floor, with an attic dormer room above. Families of greater means inhabitated brick masonry row houses two bays wide and two and a half stories high. To meet the demands for more living space, the homes were expanded in the rear and sallyports were constructed to give access to the back yards. The wealthy ship owners and merchants built townhouses much like the artisans' row houses -- only larger. These homes were constructed in a Flemish or English bond brick pattern. There were flat brick arches over the door, but no elaborate moldings . The architecture of domestic scale in the district managed to survive to meet the need for small stores, shops and residences as Baltimore's growing industrial community of the era developed the more available, economical land to the east of Fells Point . Within the District, construction activity generally took the form of reconstruction and rehabilitation of existing structures. The buildings were increased in size by the addition of upper stories and wings to the rear of the structures. Gable roofs were replaced by flat roofs, resulting in an increase in usable interior area. Bracketed cornices proliferated throughout the area, producing the semblance of the late 19th century community. The overall significance of Fell s Point rests in the view. of history as the record of man's passage through time and the world. The primary historic value of the district is as an example of the physical environment, which surrounded the lives of the mechanics, artisans, and tradesmen who provided the supporting services for the maritime commerce of Baltimore during its development as a major commercial and industrial center. In evaluating the impact on the historic district, the number of historic buildings, their relative priorities and their locations were taken into consideration. The priorities of the structures are based on a survey compiled by Mr. Robert Kerr, Historian. Mr. Kerr's analysis, which closely parallels the National Register of Historic Places criteria for evaluation, was based on symbolic significance, aesthetic potential and environmental quality of each building. Each of these three values was weighed to reflect the overall character and preservation potential of the area. The three individually weighed values associated with each building were then aggregated, resulting in a single inclusive value which expressed a final preservation priority. Five preservation priorities were set up. �-34- First priority structures justify the most extensive efforts of preservation. Second priority structures, although deemed of exceptional consequence, may not warrant as extensive preservation efforts as first priority structures. Third priority structures, while of major consequence, justify only those actions necessary to stabilize structures, eliminating code deficiencies and improving their exterior appearances. Fourth Priority structures are those of minor consequence. Fifth Priority structures are those of no consequence. Tables 6 and 7 summarize various features of the alternative alignments studied to minimize the effect of expressway construction on the Fells Point Historic District. Table 6 is an inventory of the number and priorities of the historic structures involved in the construction corridor of each alignment. It is followed by Table 7, giving the acreage affected within the Historic District by the various alternatives. Presently, access to the district is hampered by congested traffic movements on the local, narrow, one-way streets of the city. With the construction of I-83, the local streets would be relieved of a portion of their current traffic burden. improving travel within the district through reduction of local street congestion and by providing direct freeway access adjacent to the district. The specific effects on the historic district by the various expressway alignments studied were outlined in the descriptions of the individual alternatives. As evidenced by these descriptions, the original alternatives of an elevated viaduct and alignments one through four inclusive, would still have significant negative impact on the historic district. Alternatives five thru nine proceeding progressively southward and passing through the industrial zone along the southern border of the historic district were then studied to avoid the greater part of the historic structures. These alignments of course, affect fewer buildings. The preservation of Fells Point represents a relatively new trend in preservation and restoration efforts. Past efforts have been largely directed toward the designation of specific landmarks. In Fells Point, there is no specific landmark or individual building of any overriding importance. Its value lies in its existence as a community, the specific groupings of the structures, the original street patterns. the association with the harbor and the visual relationship of the various elements. It is evident that the most practical preservation oriented alternative in the Fells Point area would be to avoid the Fells Point Historic District as much as possible, minimizing the number of structures affected. �TABLE 6 DISPLACEMENT OF HISTORIC DISTRICT STRUCTURES STRUCTURES WITHIN CONSTRUCTION CORRIDOR Priority ·~ Tota l Al ignment St udy Elevated Structure 1st 2nd 3rd 4th 5th ~ p- % 0 21 43 18 82 23 _2 1 2 25 50 18 95 26.8 2 0 3 7 2 12 3.4 3 0 25 46 24 95 26.8 4 0 2l 35 13 69 19 . 5 5 1 10 28 7 46 13.0 6 1 9 26 16 52 14. 7 7 0 8 20 13 41 11. 6 8 0 0 2 10 12 3.4 9 0 0 2 3 5 0. 7 4 88 1 78 84 Existing Stru c tures in the Historic 354 District .Prio r ities based on work by Robert Kerr as ou tlined in Fel l s Point Historic District , August 1970. �Temporary Requirements During Construction Alignment Land (Acres 1 Water (Submerged Acreage) Permanent Land Requirements After Construction (acres ) 1 7.49 2 1.87 3 7 . 82 0.73 4 5.89 0.84 5 6.46 1.58 0.76 6 5 . 96 2.57 0.88 7 6.57 3.82 1.21 8 5 . 69 6 .13 0.73 9 5.14 11. 61 Table 7: 0.76 District Acreage Affected by Alternatives �-35- Appropriate landscaping plans would be incorporated into the project, regardless of the alternate selected, in order to mitigate any adverse visual impact. Earth formation and plant materials would be planned in relation to the total environment and consideration would be given for their use as visual screens where existing homes and other facilities are in proximity. Should a build alternative be selected, of equal or greater importance, would be an on-going coordination program with the Fells Point Community both during the design phase and later during the construction of the highway, to further assure that all measures are taken to minimize impact on the District. Canton Playground The Canton Playground is presently bounded by Boston Street, Ellwood Avenue, Toone Street, and East Street. This facility is a local neighborhood playground operated by the Baltimore City Department of Recreation and Parks. Currently, the Canton Playground consists of about three acres of land a grass playing field, a fenced-in outdoor basketball court, a children's play area (swings, sliding board, etc.), and a recreation center building. ~/ith The construction of the elevated expressway (1-83) along Boston Street would alter the physical facilities of the Canton Playground. In recognition of the importance of this recreation facility to the local Canton area, a Joint Redevelopment Plan has been prepared for the Canton Playground. This redevelopment plan is designed to replace and improve the facilities of the Canton Playground to help meet the recreational needs of the area. The development plan proposes a series of recreational facilities to accomodate people of all ages in an area of 13.9 acres on the north side of 1-83 from the existing Canton Playground to Saint Casimer's Church. In the general area of existing Canton Playground, the plan calls for a 60foot baseline ball diamond, two basketball courts and three tennis courts. Between the ball field and the basketball courts, a passive recreational area ;s planned. Slightly to the northwest of the original playground area, between Ellwood and Linwood Avenues, two more fields would be situated -- a ball field and a soccer field. In the northwest corner of this area, a small 24-car parking lot would be built. Between Linwood and Lakewood Avenues, facilities for younger children would be implemented, including a small playing field, a playground with paved surface for children's games and a tot-lot. The northwestern corner of this area, bordering on O'Donnell Street East, would include a 40-car parking lot, to service the tot-lot and Saint Casimer's Church. �-36- Extensive landscaping, including trees. shrubs, grass. and other plants, is planned. Division between fields and barriers to streets would consist of six to nine foot earth berms, with appropriate landscaping. The earth berms would be built to buffer both visually and acoustically, improved Boston Street from the playground and the community. be built as the first item of construction. These berms would The Final details for the park berms and highway construction sequencing would be developed in cooperation with the Canton Community Associations. 7. Solid Waste The majority of waste materials resulting from highway construction can generally be attributed to the removal of existing buildings and the removal of excavated materials. A large portion of the building demolition has already taken place. With the exception of the proposed tunnel alternatives under and around Fells Point, the project is on elevated structure and excavation is limited. The disposal of excavated material for the tunnel alternatives is proposed for the Caroline Street berth and would form the base for the proposed Cruise Ship Terminal to the west of Allied Chemical. 8. Air Quality On a regional basis. the Baltimore Regional Environmental Impact Study noted that from an air pollution ViewpOint, building the 3-A System versus no new construction, appears to have little or no effect on the air pollution levels. After 1980, there wil l be no violation of carbon monoxide air quality standards. However, there would continue to be a violation of hydrocarbon guideline levels, primarily due to the growth in stationary rather than mobile source pollution; and as a consequence, predicted violation of the photo-chemical oxidant standards for some period of time between 1980 and 1995. These findings hinge, however, on effective implementation of motor vehicle emission contro l s, as currently described by the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1970. As a result of the detailed Corridor Air Quality Assessments, it is reasonable to derive the following general conclusions with respect to the project. Pro- posed 1-83 would create no localized CO problems. Projected CO concentrations adjacent to the route would be we ll within the ambient air quality standards. The 1-83 segment, as a part of the 3-A System, appears to be consistent with the intent of the transportation control strategies, if not with specific means of reducing vehicle miles travelled. 9. ~ise As a result of the noise ana lysiS for 1-83, the following general conclusions may be derived. The introduction of a new highway into an urban setting virtually �-37- I insures by its very nature, a comparable increase in traffic related noise levels. Through the Jones Falls Extended area, construction of 1-83 would increase noise levels adjacent to the highway several decibels above present levels . The largest portion of the noise would emanate from traffic travelling on the frontage roads. Through the Fells Point Area, the Concept Team and tunnel alternatives would increase noise levels adjacent to the highway. Again, in the Canton area, the "build" alternative would increase the noise levels adjacent to the highway . Outdoor noise levels at those sites abutting J-83 would exceed the design levels established by the Federal Highway Administration's PPM 90-2. Noise levels in future years resulting from traffic on existing streets in both Fells Point and Canton would be lower than present day levels. A greater reduction would occur in these two areas with the construction of 1-83 as opposed to the "No Build" alternative. It may be possible to bring interior noise levels within reasonable limits at many of the abutting facilities along the road. A nationally recognized expert in the field of acoustics would be retained to examine all existing technology and recommend implementation of all feasible and prudent measures. These measures would then be discussed with the various groups affected, including community groups, such as little Italy ) Fells Point and Canton, and those measures that are found acceptable to the impacted areas would be implemented. 10. Transportation Effectiveness The traffic related effects of constructing the 3-A System, including Interstate Route 83, can be evaluated on a regional level and on a local level. Regionally, the effects on traffic have been summarized by the Baltimore Regional Environmental Impact Study, as follows. From a traffic standpoint, only, the construction of new highways in the region will induce more travel by more vehicles, open new opportunities, encourage people to drive further distance in the same amount of time, reduce hours of travel for those who drive, and reduce congestion. On a local level, the essential function of 1-83 is to provide a vitally needed east-west transportation corridor for East Baltimore. One of the most notable deficiencies in the existing transportation system is the lack of this major east-west facility. Current traffic movement in Fells Point, Canton, and all of east Baltimore is restricted by narrow local streets. Circulation is hampered by congested intersections, heavy truck movements through commercial and residential areas, poor railroad grade crossings, and lack of access to major thruways that currently terminate on the outskirts of the City. With the future redevelopment of certain areas of East Baltimore, the inadequacies of existing streets and the critical need for a direct ~ast-west freeway in Baltimore will become more apparent. The proposed project is located to maximize traffic diversion from local streets. The project would skirt the eastern edge of the Central Business �-38District, ~urn near Fells POint, and proceed easterly along Boston Street to an interchange with 1-95 near 80S ton Street and O'Donnell Streets. 1-95 would then proceed northerly, paralleling the East City Line. 1-95 and 1-83 would divert much of the east-west traffic currently traversing East Baltimore. This would be accomplished by interchanges at Pulaski Highway, Moravia Road, Eastern Avenue, Kane Street, Dundalk Avenue, O'Donnell Street, and Boston Street. The traffic now using these local streets destined for the downtown area would divert to the expressway, thus reducing the traffic on east-west arterial streets. In addition, a new 80ston Street would be built under the 1-83 elevated structure from Anchorage IAI near the American Can Company to O'Donnell Street cut-off east of the existing Harbor Tunnel Thruway. This facility would collect and distribute the majority of the Canton Industrial traffic bound for 1-95 and 1-83. Improved 80ston Street would help reduce truck traffic currently moving through the community. Access to 1-83 in the Canton area would be near Anchorage rA r in the west and O'Donnell Street at the O'Donnell Street cut-off in the east. The access ramps proposed for Ellwood Avenue and Clinton Street, as recommended by the Concept Team were dropped from further consideration as a result of additional study and work sessions between the Interstate Division and the Ellwood Avenue Improvement Association. Access would also be provided in either the Caroline Street area or near Central Avenue. Both alternatives are under consideration. The Interchanges have been located to collect and distribute traffic to or from the communities -- Little Italy; Fells Point; and Canton, while discouraging through traffic in the communities. For this reason~ the interchange movements would be provided in the transition areas between the communities; Central Avenue or Caroline Street and Boston Street at O'Donnell. The Interstate Division for Baltimore City is currently conducting a traffic management study to incorporate into the design, construction, and management of the 3-A System, those operational strategies that would provide maximum traffic handling capabilities of the System. The proposed rapid transit system would allow an even more efficient movement of people into the Central 8usiness District. Phase I of the System, which includes two legs of the six-legged System, runs from Owings Mills to downtown and then south to the Baltimore/Washington International Airport, Glen Burnie, and Marley Neck. The Maryland Department of Transportation is currently investigating as part of their Phase II Study, the other four legs of the proposed Mass Transit System, including the eastern segment. The present surface transit system will function primarily as a circumferential feeder to transit stations, with some remaining radial bus lines travelling on, or parallel to the 3-A roadways. 1-83 is ideally situated for express bus operation and interface with the Mass Transit System. Vehicular and pedestrian traffic on existing city streets would be maintained during the entire construction period, with inconvenience to adjacent residences and businesses in the area being kept to a minimum. �• -3911. Joint Development 1-83 Corridor from Gay St. to 1-95 at Boston St. Design of 1-83 has considered the adjacent neighborhoods. businesses and institutions. Attempts have been made to ameliorate the effects of the expressway by appropriate redevelopment and by special treatment of the road- way and its edges. The following project areas and items deal with a wide range of proposals for new downtown and intensive urban development neighborhood parks and open spaces: War Memorial Development Site Gay Street to Fayette Street to the Fallsway -- This parcel previously considered primarily as a grassy slope, now has been recommended for future office building use, probably for a mid- rise structure. In the interim, it is to be landscaped. In addition to the complimentary War Memorial Plaza building enhancement, some 130 parking spaces are possible under and adjacent to the expressway . Also, a pedestrian crossing under the roadway in the vicinity of Lexington Street is proposed. Market Place Redevelopment Under alternatives which either take or leave the Wholesale Fish Market, various plans for l and reuse are anticipated. Either way, the site between Ba lti more and Fayette Streets to the east of Harrison Street can be used in a combination of off-street parking and landscaping. The Fish Market, located at Water Street and Market Place if saved and refurbished, could be complimented with service usage of the partial block to the north. The block south of the Fish Market now owned by the City, has multiple opportunities for officecommercial use, not unlike the Chandler Building adjacent to it. An important pedestrian link to the east side of the expressway connecting the Inner Harbor Campus of the Community College of Baltimore and Market Place development to the Jonestown Historic District and Lombard Street Merchant Area is included. If the Fish Market is taken by the expressway (Alignment '0'), a replacement market is l ikely to be rebuilt south of its present site. It would jointly occupy the tract between Baltimore and Lombard Streets with other related Wholesaling and retailing commercial activities as well as Office Building use. St. Vincent dePaul Church and Urban Plaza One improvement to this park wou ld be to close off Front Street at Fayette Street. Better traffic control and pedestrian flow would result. Shot Tower Park Located at Fayette and Front Streets, this unique historic feature has been the subject of great design attention. Park plans would be finalized, subsequent to a decision on the highway, including special design features tying �• -40- the park area to the west under the expressway with coordinated surface materials and landscaping. Jonestown Historic District In the area between Baltimore and Pratt Streets, from the expressway to Albemarle Street, the best development approach is both to recognize the old residentially scaled buildings for rehabilitation as well as encourage new housing-office-commercial buildings to be built in a comparable historic style. Some thirty units of each type, rehabilitated and new, is possible. The setting would be in a landscaped open space context with the strip of land between the expressway and Front Street to be a green buffer, infused with some off-street parking for use by the adjacent properties. A connecting pedestrian way following the north-south axis of the district would allow movement from the Shot Tower to the Flag House and southerly to Little Italy. Nearby, a new playground for residents of the Flag House Courts Project should be built. Concord Street Site This tract between Lombard and Pratt Streets is ticketed for a downtown Gas and Electric Company utility station facility. The Jones Falls Stream should be kept open as much as possible to view and its edges enhanced with landscaping. Little Italy For one of the City's more important and well-known ethnic neighborhoods. joint development planning includes a buffer strip between the expressway and Slemmers Alley for the full length of the community. This strip of land apparently is preferred by the resident's and restaurant's associations for parking and heavy landscaping. Special treatment is given to repaving Slemmers Alley as pedestrian and vehicular access, possible commercial reuse of back portions of properties fronting on Albemarle Street. The area under the expressway is proposed for parking bays servici~g downtown business and commercial uses during the day and the restaurants in Little Italy at night. At the Eastern Avenue end of Albemarle Street. an outdoor urban neighborhood plaza is proposed as an open space focal point to facilitate pedestrian flow from Little Italy under the expressway to the harborfront. D'Alesandro Playfield Separation of this facility from the community by the expressway makes relocation highly desirable. Alternative locations for relocating this field varied from one north of the City's Pumping Station west of the expressway to one east of the route at Fleet and Exeter Streets. A larger more servicable replacement field on the Little Italy side of the roadway is being recommended. Relocation on this site would provide facilities superior to the existing playfield. �; .. -41- The Cruise Terminal Development Area Extensive planning by Charles Center - Inner Harbor Management, Inc. will bring significant new downtown harbor uses to this ten-block area. Dominated by a proposed Cruise Terminal for Baltimore embarkations, the area will house a motel, many commercial service uses, a promenade along the waterfront and sufficient off-street parking for the multiple use terminal building. The expressway would offer parking under the structure between Eastern Avenue and A1iceanna Street and suitable landscaping both along the expressway and at the Falls Harbor interchange. Fells Point Tunnel fill material could be used to initiate a modified dock line for the terminal facility. Falls Harbor Industrial District Relocating the existing Penn Central Railroad teamtracks from Fleet Street to south of the expressway would allow both the p1ayfie1d relocation as well as expansion siting{s) for existing industry in the vicinity . Allied Chemical A shifted waterline would need to be constructed to permit this industry to continue its full operation. Adequate space between the warehouse and the expressway is desired for internal circulation and for possible future local Inner Harbor-Fells Point circulation on the south side of the expressway. Fells Point In all of the alternative alignments tunneling through Fells Point, there are many choices available for the reuse of the land cleared for the construction of the highway . The Cityls Fells Point planning consultant, L. Sauer, will determine with the community, what the best set of choices is. Whether for urban park, landscaped, open-space, public parking, some private or public service, institutional use, or private residential, commercial or industrial redevelopment will depend on the new planning approach adopted for this historic, working waterfront neighborhood. Anchorage IAI In order for full development potential to be realized on the Anchoragels waterfront t careful consideration needs to be given to the roadwayls configuration. Three major and different proposals have been discussed: a low water viaduct crossing (short tunnel); a channel opening into Anchorage IAI (long tunnel); and roadway on fill, with a park. In making the choice, it is important to recognize the flexibility needed for future land use decisions in the anchorage. The short tunnel alternative would allow boats up to 30 feet in height to pass under 1-83 in Anchorage IAI. The long tunnel would permit vessels of any height although restricting the draft to 20 feet. The highway on fill moves the waterfront to the southside of the expressway for �...~ " ,. -42normal navigational use there . Both the Fells Point and Canton Communities would be brought into project analysis and subsequent determination of the expressway's committing forever, the kind of development potential to be realized at this extensive waterfront. Anchorage 'A' is one of Baltimore's last uncommitted sections of shoreline. Canton P1ayfie1d This playfiel d, which has been addressed previously, would be constructed between the highway and the Canton community as a buffer between the highway and the' residential area. All of the above joint development proposals are subject to review and modifica tion along with the roadway design. If other uses are deemed appropriate and desirabl e, contact with the Joint Development Section of the Interstate Division for Baltimore City is in order. 12. Water Quality - Tunnel Construction The tunnel section of Interstate 83, passing beneath the Fells Point District. due to its proximity to the Northwest Branch of Baltimore Harbor. has a number of water-oriented environmental impacts. The problems associated with the removal of harbor bottom sediments. and the disposal thereof, could constitute the single most Significant water-oriented environmental consequence of the Fells Point Tunnel if the disposal of the dredged material is not properly handled. Studies performed by the Environmental Protection Agency have shown that sediments taken from the general vicinity of the Upper Northwest Branch are unacceptable for disposal in open water. An alternate method of disposal, such as a land site or a diked disposal area. must be utilized. The proposed di sposal site for these materials is the Caroline Street berth area which if filled to grade, could hold approximately 330,000 cubic yards. With properly constructed cellular cofferdams, to isolate this area from the rest of the Harbor, fill material could be safely contained. The filled area would later be used for redevelopment - proposed Cruise Shi p Terminal. In dewatering the Caroline Street berths, a shallow layer of water would be allowed to remain. Due to the nature of the sed iments . complete dewatering and exposure to the air would result in a disagreeable odor in the area. The proposed technique for the alignments passing through the recreational pier area is to i solate the area by cofferdam construction and dewater. Once the bottom is exposed. the water in the layer of coarse sand beneath the depOSits would be pumped out, allowing the sediment to �-43- drain and dry. Drying and soi l stabilization could be accelerated.by t m - plementing techniques such as grouting, use of a surcharge, or addition of drying chemicals. Once stabilized. these sediments would be excavated in a semi-solid state and disposed of. thereby eliminating any water polluti on hazards normally associated with dredging operations. In the Anchorage 'A' area, most of the alternative alignments would require a fill at the pOint where the tunnel portal emerges onto structure. Depending on the nature of the fill material, this can be a contained, bulkheaded fill or simply an open fill, ass uming its natural slope grade into the water. The northern-most lines (1 thru 4) intrude least upon the water and therefore, have the least impact from a water quality standpoint. A lternates 5 through 8 move progressively further into the harbor area, and require the excavation of some harbor-bottom sediments from the Recreational pier berths, as well as land excavation al ong the corridor. Alternative 9, avoiding the Recreation Pier entirely, involves a much greater water pollution hazard than any of the others, as open-water suction dredging is required. A technical report is currently being prepared to fully evaluate the chemical and physical characteristics of harbor bottom sediments in the Recreation Pier and Anchorage 'A' areas. With the selection of a final alignment, the dredging and disposal of these sediments would be studied in further detail. During construction, flows from existing city storm drain systems outletting into the Recreation Pi er Area or Anchorage 'A' would be mai ntained thru the construction sites . This would afford continuous flushing of the water areas between the existing bulkhead lines and the proposed construction. A drainage system would remove water originating from rainfall on the approach roads, possible seepage through structural elements of the tunnel itself, tunnel cleaning methods and use of fire fighting equipment. Two large catch basins. one installed at each portal, would store storm water. Gutters and inl ets throughout the length of the roadway, with two lines conveying drainage to the catch basins, would be provided. A sump pump would also be located at the l owest point in the tunnel, so that intercepted seepage and cleaning water could be pumped into one of the catch basins. The proposed tunnel drainage system would have an outl et system capable of discharging polluted water into the City treatment plant, independently of the City sewerage system, and clean water directly into the Harbor basin. 12. "No-Build" Alternative The benefits to be derived by the construction of the 3-A System, both by the City of Baltimore and the region as a whole. were discussed earlier under the soc i oeconomic impacts. �. -, . -44Without the 3-A Interstate System, the City would not realize these gains and the current economic downtrend would continue unchecked. The development of a Rapid Transit Transportation System as an alternative to the 3-A System would not be a valid alternative since the Baltimore Metropolitan Area Regional Transportation Plan includes a full system of highways and a full system of rapid transit. In l and use and traffic demand studies, the implementation of both systems is assumed. Each system depends upon the other for functional operation. An example of this interdependence i s the fact that Mass Transit cannot handle the industrial freight requirements so necessary to the economy of the City, and the expressways cannot fully satisfy the requirement for transport of people throughout and within the City. The C ity1s Transportation needs must be met by a balance of the two systems. The elimination of 1-83 from the 3-A System would result in continued congestion and breakdown on the majority of the east-west streets in East 8altimcre The increase in future traffic levels would be confined to the neighborhood streets resulting in further aggravation of existing traffic congestion and truck traffic. * * * �~ --45Part V - Local/State/Federal Relationship in Interstate Planning: The responsibility for planning Interstate Highway routes is shared by all levels of government. Orderly construction and the greatest benefit are achieved through mutual cooperation. The responsibilities for highway location and construction are divided as follows: (1) Cities and counties prepare and officially adopt comprehensive community development plans. (2) State Highway Departments have the prime responsibility to plan, design. and construct Interstate Highways in accordance with the Federal Aid Highway Act. (3) The United States Department of Transportation is responsible for managing the Federal Aid Funds allocated to states. Its function is that of guidance. control, and approval in each step of the Federal Aid process initiated by the states. * * * � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Movement Against Destruction Description An account of the resource This exhibit examines community opposition to expressway construction in Baltimore during the 1970s through the organizational records of the Movement Against Destruction (MAD). Founded in 1968 as a coalition of 25 neighborhood and community groups, MAD's leaders included George and Carolyn Tyson, Barbara Mikulski, Walter Orlinsky, Norman Reeves, and Parren Mitchell. The complete MAD collection at the University of Baltimore consists of 9 linear feet of records, which are described in an online collection database. The complete collection has also been digitized at the folder level and is available in this guide. For this exhibit, 32 documents have been selected from the complete collection. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource <a href="http://langsdale.ubalt.edu/special-collections/" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">Special Collections &amp; Archives, University of Baltimore</a> Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived <a href="https://archivesspace.ubalt.edu/repositories/2/resources/80" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">Movement Against Destruction Records</a> Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available <a href="http://langsdale.ubalt.edu/special-collections/" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">University of Baltimore Special Collections &amp; Archives</a> Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1968-1983 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource Use of these images is governed by U.S. copyright law. The University of Baltimore Special Collections and Archives makes digital surrogates of collections accessible if they are in the public domain, the rights are owned by the University of Baltimore, the Special Collections and Archives has permission to make them accessible, or there are no known restrictions on use. Due to the nature of archival collections, rights information is not always discernible. The Special Collections and Archives is eager to hear from any rights owners wishing to provide accurate information. Upon request, material will be removed from view while a rights issue is addressed. Contact the Special Collections and Archives for more information regarding this image. Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource text/pdf Language A language of the resource English Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context R0062-MAD Date Created Date of creation of the resource. 2019-09 Extent The size or duration of the resource. 32 documents Subject The topic of the resource Express highways Maryland--Baltimore Urban renewal Highway planning Community activists Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Original Format The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data Paper Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Informational Summary: I-83 from Gay Street to I-95 Description An account of the resource Informational booklet prepared for the Combined Location-Design Public Hearing and Public Information Meeting, in accordance with the National Historic Preservation Act Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1975-01-28 Subject The topic of the resource Public meetings Express highways Historic preservation Highway planning Interstate 83 (Pa. and Md.) Jones Falls (Md.) Fells Point (Baltimore, Md.) Canton (Baltimore, Md.) Little Italy (Baltimore, Md.) Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Interstate Division for Baltimore City Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available University of Baltimore Special Collections & Archives Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/pdf Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context mad06.01.13 Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Movement Against Destruction Records, series 6, box 1, folder 13, Special Collections & Archives, University of Baltimore Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource Use of this digital material is governed by U.S. copyright law. The University of Baltimore Special Collections and Archives makes digital surrogates of collections accessible if they are in the public domain, the rights are owned by the University of Baltimore, the Special Collections and Archives has permission to make them accessible, or there are no known restrictions on use. Due to the nature of archival collections, rights information is not always discernible. The Special Collections and Archives is eager to hear from any rights owners wishing to provide accurate information. Upon request, material will be removed from view while a rights issue is addressed. Contact the Special Collections and Archives for more information regarding this image. Canton (Baltimore Express highways Fells Point (Baltimore Highway planning Historic preservation Interstate 83 (Pa. and Md.) Jones Falls (Md.) Little Italy (Baltimore Md.) Public meetings