Become a digitalPLUS subscriber. $12 for 12 weeks.
News Opinion Readers Respond

Harbor Point and harbor health

Despite all the back and forth squabble over the proposed Harbor Point development, I believe that in the end it can only benefit the city ("Harbor Point bonds gets OK," Aug. 13). My biggest concern, or rather disappointment, over the past weeks of daily coverage on the point's developments has been the lack of discussion of environmental concerns.

Having recently moved back to the Baltimore area, I have been shocked by the dilapidated health of the Inner Harbor and the unprecedented amount of trash not only near the water but flying around the streets on a daily basis. There certainly seem to be a number of leaders mounting the charge to clean things up — Blue Water Baltimore, the Chesapeake Bay Foundation, Biohabitats and Living Classrooms to name a few — that have vowed for a fishable and swimmable harbor by 2020. But without large corporations and developers getting out front on these efforts, I believe it is an insurmountable goal. When you have mega commercial and residential infrastructure developments (such as Harbor Point) that do not even whisper about environmentally friendly initiatives, I believe those goals can never be met.

In 2013, environmentalism has a much more friendly ring than in days of old. An environmentalist is no longer a tree hugger who is far removed from business growth and consumerism. Environmentalists of the 21st century understand the need for growth, the need for a viable economy and the need for social well being. Environmentally friendly no longer means more regulation, stricter enforcement, don't go there, don't do that; but rather, a means of making better informed decisions that help move the environment, the economy and society forward as one. This is the reason why the Harbor Point development team needs to be promoting how their development will help heal the harbor and help clean it up. Will they have a floating wetland promenade that will not only be visually appealing and attract visitors but also provide habitat for bay creatures as well as remove nitrogen from the water while putting oxygen in it? Will they have an environmental education site for students and the public? Will they have a stormwater runoff plan that traps run off water and filters it before reaching the harbor?

I am of the feeling that developers, residents and businesses should make this one of their top priorities rather than waiting for retroactive city, state or federal intervention, which will inevitably be too late to achieve what everyone in Baltimore can get behind — a beautiful and healthy harbor.

Andy French, Baltimore

Copyright © 2014, The Baltimore Sun
Related Content
  • The strength of downtown [Editorial]
    The strength of downtown [Editorial]

    Our view: T. Rowe Price's decision to stay in its Pratt Street headquarters is a reminder of the central business district's vibrancy

  • Harbor Point does not need more studies [Letter]
    Harbor Point does not need more studies [Letter]

    The recent commentary, "Harbor Point environmental questions," (Dec. 2), may lead The Sun's readers to believe that additional studies are necessary before work can begin on the proposed redevelopment there. In fact, these suggested studies have nothing to with the proposed redevelopment, which...

  • Red Line poses health threat, too [Letter]
    Red Line poses health threat, too [Letter]

    The recent commentary concerning Harbor Point and the hexavalent chromium clearly describes the potential harm to the surrounding residents, but there is another issue that should be of a greater concern ("Harbor Point environmental questions," Dec. 2).

  • Make Exelon building a real landmark
    Make Exelon building a real landmark

    The Baltimore City Urban Design and Architectural Review Panel should agree to the request to redesign the Exelon Corporation building at Harbor Point made by the developer ("Developer proposes to convert some Exelon office space to apartments," Sept. 27) upon one condition — that they...

  • Harbor Point and the city's low expectations
    Harbor Point and the city's low expectations

    The principles articulated by Michael Fox and Rachel Kutler ("Harbor Point and 'fair development,'" Sept. 13) are refreshing and thought-provoking. Why do we citizens not demand more accountability from developers?

  • Health hazards at former Allied Chemical site
    Health hazards at former Allied Chemical site

    I can't believe developer Marco Greenberg's quote in reference to the former Allied Chemical site and the potential hazards of building on top of capped chromium that "it's actually safer to build here than virtually anywhere else in the city" ("Harbor Point project stirs environmental...

  • Harbor Point: Stick to the facts
    Harbor Point: Stick to the facts

    Dan Rodricks' column ("Following the big money to Harbor Point," Aug. 18) on the development at Harbor Point contributes very little to the ongoing debate about the best ways of developing Baltimore. Indeed, Mr. Rodricks lapses into needless and unhelpful insults when he makes sophomoric...

  • No more Harbor Point surprises
    No more Harbor Point surprises

    Our view: News that developer Michael Beatty intends to buy the first round of Harbor Point bonds is a modestly pleasant surprise but a reminder of the lack of transparency in this deal

Comments
Loading