When was that building last occupied, and were residents displaced?

I hate the idea of more parking lots, but that area can be a real clusterF. Ideally, we’d have more reliable public transportation to access all these wonderful local businesses. The 21 and 94 ain’t cutting it.

So many other places which would fit the needs of the Wine Source, but this one is the one they are betting the farm on. Since this is Baltimore the demolition will take place.

Anyone know where to find the webex link for the hearing?

found it - https://baltimore.legistar.com/MeetingDetail.aspx?ID=1085974&GUID=30F39144-949A-4B7C-80E0-8FEE32FDF690&Options=&Search=

I for one am looking forward to all the overblown shitty takes on this.

I know the building is condemned and hasn't been lived in for a while (not sure exactly how long, but they made it sound like it's been a couple years at the HCC meetings about this.) I don't like the idea of it becoming a parking lot, but I understand that they're losing access to the lot neighboring this building, and that parking is in demand even with that lot, so I see why this is their solution. I hope they make some good decisions about it - like making it a permeable lot and including some native landscaping.

A big part of what makes Hampden a nice area is the density. Tearing down housing (or businesses) for parking lots will fracture the community.

If there’s too much parking pressure, we need to focus on making it so more people walk/bike/scooter/bus/light rail, not on making it easier to park.

Building a parking lot next to a parking lot, across the street from a parking lot, behind a parking lot.

Just lovely. Cars ruin everything. Would it kill people to park around the corner and walk a block?

Hampden is extremely well suited biking. The problem is cycle infrastructure will have to largely replace either parking or car lanes, for example 32ed and 33rd could have one way bike lanes put in by reducing the size of the travel lanes. The community as a whole would have to get on board with taking full advantage of their mixed use built environment to make quality of life better for everyone living there this way, but all that is really stopping Hampden is willpower and the ability to get the DOT to do anything to enforce the complete streets ordinance.

I don't live in Hampden, I live in Mt. Clare, but I like to be an annoying buzzy bee with my bike lane and pedestrian protection map proposal. Do one for your neighborhood and talk about it more!

My biggest concern about the proposal is that the traffic pattern for this new lot requires that cars will enter on Elm, but the only exit is onto the Avenue via the alley between Holy Frijoles and the former Bank of America building. Given the high level of pedestrian traffic, the difficulty of seeing oncoming traffic from that spot if cars are parked on 36th, and the fact that stop signs on the Avenue are already treated like a suggestion, I don't see a scenario in which this won't create accidents.

I wonder if it would be possible to make the Avenue one-way (probably eastbound?) for cars. If they took away a lane and some parking, there could be more space for a bike lane, pedestrian space, and outdoor dining.

We’ve got to stop destroying land to create parking. What does a new lot do to the next house over? Nothing good, that’s for sure. If The Wine Source wants a parking lot then they should move to The Rotunda where the pet store used to be.

As someone who drives to the wine source frequently on Friday and Saturday evenings… it’s not that bad? Like just wait 2 minutes and someone will pull out. If you build more parking, then it will just turn into the Total Wines lot in Towson. Cars are always going to fill the space allotted to them, this will not solve the problem of parking in the area, which isn’t even a problem. It SHOULD be hard to freely park your giant private vehicle in the middle of a busy neighborhood.

That duplex looks pretty structurally sound---I thought the building would have been an eyesore. I wonder how much funding it would take to make the units habitable. Ideally, these would become affordable (or market-rate) housing, given that Hampden is one of the city's more in-demand neighborhoods. I also wonder what Wine Source's math is re: actually quantifying how lack of parking capacity impacts their revenue and how the addition of this lot is expected to improve revenue.

That said, this is the mindset (cars over everything) that Baltimore's generational lack of significant transit & micromobility infrastructure fosters among many of its citizens and politicians; and I hate that for us. It's hard to see this scenario playing itself out in any leading transit-oriented city in this country or abroad.

Echoing another comment that not only should this lot be denied, but 36th should become 1 way.

This account gets induced demand.

The proposal is not to build more parking for Wine Source — it’s to build a replacement for the parking they are losing.

Oh I wasn’t aware. What is happening to their current lot?

The Wine Source should move somewhere with more parking (Rotunda?) if they want more parking, not subject one of the most walkable neighborhoods in the city to the hellish externalities of surface parking lots.

Are they really losing the RoFo parking or are they just not paying what RoFo wants to lease it?

Question for you (with absolutely no judgement): what is preventing you from walking, scooting, biking, or taking the bus here? Timing? Location of services? Lack of familiarity or comfort riding/navigating on two wheels? Mobility concerns?

Unclear. The large lot across the street is owned by Royal Farms, and Royal Farms informed Wine Source that they have other plans for the lot and will no longer allow parking there, hence Wine Source’s proposal.

From this earlier discussion, Royal Farms is apparently declining to renew a parking lease.

That argument doesn’t make sense. You’re then still left with a retail property that doesn’t have enough parking to make the business viable. It’s worked fine for close to twenty years as it is.

Wine Source will likely end up having to pay somewhere close ro $1M to convert the lot in question into their own parking — I doubt the issue with the Royal Farms lot is simply one of cost.

Better question — does Hampden really need a 7-11 AND a Royal Farms right on the Avenue? In addition to both other locations on Keswick?

How many late night cigarettes and candy does one neighborhood need?

All of this is being put in motion because RoFo is refusing to renew Wine Source’s parking lease at the existing lot. Why on Earth does a Royal Farms need such a large lot?

[deleted]

Again, the proposal is merely to make up for the parking they’ve had for years and are losing due to RoFo’s decision.

That’s a fair question. Many people are buying large quantities (multiple cases of beer or wine) at a time. It just wouldn’t really work with other modes of transportation. Personally I used to buy cases there years ago when I had a car; now that I bike everywhere and take public transportation, I no longer buy in quantity and just generally buy less overall at Wine Source.

People were living in it when it was purchased. They were evicted.

The plan set submitted with the legislation is pavement.

It's also apparently illegal to put a new curb cut on Elm and they're just going through with the ordinance to pressure DOT into breaking the law and giving them the curb cut permit.

Again, all of this is being put in motion by RoFo’s decision to do who knows what with their parking lot and discontinue access for Wine Source.

I have to wonder if the folks making this argument (you’re not alone) have ever purchased alcohol. It’s typically stored in large, heavy, breakable glass bottles. Who’s going to carry a case of beer on a scooter?

Dude.

Wait 2 minutes where? Double parked? Driving around the block?

That’s RoFo HQ. There are offices upstairs.

This is the only reasonable concern I’ve seen raised about this plan.

Totally valid, a scooter would not be ideal for a large purchase. I wasn't imagining people were hitting the Wine Source like a Costco on the reg.

What? I don't make the rules. But they exist for good reason. New curb cuts on dense, mixed use, walkable streets are dangerous, anti pedestrian design. And it sounds like there is precedent of previous denials so there certainly shouldn't be special treatment here.

I used to buy a few cases at a time on my bike. It has a storage platform on the back for carrying cargo. I don't go to Wine Source anymore though, because they removed their bike rack.

Wine Source was viable long before RoFo let them use the parking lot. And every other business on the Ave with literally ZERO parking spots also makes it work. It's the pedestrians that make the Ave profitable.

The RoFo parking lot was off limits for years. Only recently did they allow weekend and evening parking for Wine Source customers. Wine Source has parking right out front, which is very rare for the Ave. Obviously they don't want to move because nothing can beat the foot traffic of the Ave.

And that's the thing. Its the foot traffic that makes that spot good. Everyone knows it. If we start surrounding the Ave in parking lots it's not going to be walkable anymore.

Wine Source's proposal isn't unreasonable, but people are afraid of what the next parking lot will be. And the next and the next. It would be better if Wine Source would lead by example, if they're really such an anchor of the Ave.

If I were to just go to the Wine Source I would walk or bike (though they don’t have a bike rack!!!), but I just happen to only go when I’m on the way home from something else that I usually drive to. It’s definitely not, as other commenters said, because I’m buying cases of wine lol, I only go to pick up a discounted 6 pack. Though I have fit like 6 750 ML glass bottles in my bike paneers before, it’s not hard at all, they give you little sleeves on the bottles to stop them from clanging around.

In your driveway specifically

Why not just turn it into a pedestrian only piazza? The restaurants and coffee shops could expand outdoor seating into what is now the street and it would be really really pleasant to just hang out there.

99.99% of people are not going to bike during the winter. It's also a nightmare with children or if you want to carry something heavy or in the rain or if you have a disability. You hipsters need a serious reality check on this topic. The constant posting absolutely reeks of ableist upper middle class privilege.

Because there are no east-west through streets south of it in the neighborhood. Getting rid of 36th would leave it at just 37th and 40th.

40% of the city also doesn't drive, because they cannot afford a car and thus do not own one.

Transit is not one size fits all. Its providing as many options as possible to give as many people as possible access. Its multi-modal, and requires enablement of all kinds of different use forms - bikes are generally the optimal vehicle for an able bodied person living in a city, but bike lanes are also for powered chairs and scooters. Getting bikes off sidewalks make them safer for pedestrians and strollers. Reducing car lanes makes the whole outside built environment safer for people in general. Getting higher frequency more reliable busses lets people forsake car ownership and thus reducing crowding in the public space, again. Building an actual metro would make Baltimore a real first class city because it would get you around faster in the city than a car ever could.

If you want to build me a driveway, I'd happily let you park in it while you wait your turn in one of the 4 spots in their lot.

Tearing down one dumpy house next to a parking lot isn't going to fracture the community. JFC

Seriously. It's sort of gone beyond ableist privilege into straight absurdity. I'm a healthy adult and I live about a half mile from there, so it's well within walking distance for me - if I'm getting a bottle or two. But once you get up to a case (which is about the only way I buy beer), then it starts getting kind of cumbersome. A case + something else starts is pretty awkward regardless of the distance.

Maybe flip the one-way street at Hickory and close off 36th from Hickory to Chestnut?

Yeah, one house isn’t going to make or break the community. But centering the community around pedestrians (and bus riders and cyclists and so on) is what keeps it alive. The more we give up to parking lots, the less lively Hampden will be.

If anything, we should be reducing the number of cars in and around the Avenue. Make the street one-way for cars. Use the parking spots for outdoor dining.

You have to think about commercial and emergency traffic. 37th is a problem for them because of the speed bumps (yes, they could possibly be removed) and most of the north-south streets are pretty narrow.

Emergency traffic can go through pedestrian-only zones (usually with movable posts or bollards). Commercial traffic can go through alleys and/or use smaller vehicles. There are plenty of pedestrian-only areas around the world that have thriving businesses because of the lack of cars, not in spite of it.

The only reasonable concern to tearing down buildings to put in parking lots, the thing that destroyed most American city centers and sent them back decades in development, is the new traffic pattern it might cause?

For this specific plan, yes. That’s the only reasonable concern I’ve seen. Removing one condemned house is not going to destroy Hampden.

Commercial traffic can go down alleys? lol okay

You do know that the city fits trash trucks down those alleys, right?

I think if you look at the traffic on 36th street, very little of it is commercial or emergency vehicles. We could still let those vehicles in (and encourage hand carts/kei trucks whenever possible, and require permits) while still restricting everyone else. We don’t need to leave the Avenue open for people to drive through or park their personal vehicles.

Those aren't standard garbage trucks that go down the alleys; they're smaller than normal. I don't know that they're custom per se, but they are somewhat specialized. I've gotten many deliveries to my back entrance and you can't fit anything wider than a van down there.

Very little of the traffic on any surface street is commercial or emergency, but you still need the ability for them to get through. And it's not just about deliveries to businesses on that section of street - it's also about through traffic going from one side of the neighborhood to the other.

Yes, and they make specialized small delivery trucks, too.

People who need to get from one side of the neighborhood to the other would be able to do so. The Avenue would still be open to everyone for walking and biking.

If you’re going farther than just around the neighborhood, you could use Falls, Hickory, Keswick, or Beech.

The majority of disabled Baltimoreans do not own a car. Hundreds more Baltimoreans are disabled every year as a result of crashes that could be prevented with safer street design that does not prioritize cars over pedestrian safety.

Designing neighborhoods to prioritize cars is ableist. Encouraging other options is not.

Bikes to carry stuff exist and are called bakfiets. You can buy them in the US, they just aren't common, because as long as the infrastructure is so poor practically using one is challenging. NotJustBikes has a video about this.

Bikes are also perfectly fit for towing, though you would probably want an e-bike if you do that regularly. Still, the fed just announced a tax credit for ebikes, so they suddenly just became a lot more practical too.

If you want to advocate for safer streets, go for it. The question at hand here is knocking down one single dilapidated house and replacing it with a parking lot. It’s not going to move the needle on pedestrian safety.

Every time someone says advocate for safer streets they say "except for this exception here" lol. This will make that block less safe for pedestrians. That's bad, and worse than any value add of inducing demand for a paltry few parking spots.

I agree about the metro. But you have completely sidestepped the issues I raised which shows just how detached you are from what the average person thinks.

With the average case of wine weighing somewhere between 30 and 40 pounds and an assumption that a “few” is more than 2, I have to say, I’m pretty fucking impressed.

Mostly bought beer cases but definitely carried 4 cases of cheap bubbly before for a brunch. There are lots of bikes (and ebikes) out there designed to carry big loads.