Evan,
Does the Obrecht Corp. own the whole parcel of land including where the Globe is located? I asked Tim, from Havana’s, about a rumor that I heard about him taking over the Globe and he said that it wasn’t true.

Are there any pictures floating around of the new proposed Little Havana site? I was at Havana’s Sunday, I always forget how much fun that place is.

Yeah it looks pretty grim as far as that new location is concerned. Essentially now instead of having a revenue-generating attraction next to a marina, we’ll have yet another all but abandoned piece of property serving as a “buffer” for industry. Pretty stupid.

A long time ago, there was a rumor about a so-called Crash Cafe that was suppose to be built somewhere on Key Highway, more towards the Harbor. I wonder if that could be it. There was a rumor on Sam’s blog about a location on Fort Avenue, but I don’t think that would work out as well. The sad thing is if the landlord sells the property then the tenant is out of luck with a year to year lease. The landlord gets the money, of course, and the tenant loses the business, depending on the lease, of course. I wish them the best.

PS info on the Heath Street building???

At any rate, according to another city council member there’s a rumor that they may be engaging in moving to a third, undisclosed area closer to the inner harbor and outside of the MIZOD. I would hope and assume that if Little Havana were forbidden from developing on land that they’ve already acquired the city or the industrial associations would pay them quite handsomely for the property and not force them to put it on the market, that would be completely ludicrous. I’ll be posting said council member’s comments shortly.

Thanks,

Jason

Obviously the city shouldn’t be able to tell property owners explicitly what to do with what’s theirs, we’ve been through this in the past with eminent domain (the highway to nowhere, etc.) and other strongarm tactics, and it more often than not fails catastrophically. With MIZOD, in my mind, it’s effectively like setting up an “industrial preserve” in which property is set aside – voluntarily by the owners themselves – in order to account for the expanding and contracting of industrial cycles. As industry contracts, the property is protected for a period of time so that if and when business begins to expand again, there is space available to be retaken. That’s essentially why I support it.

The particular portion of the Baltimore harbor in question is unique in that the space available for industry to breath is practically nonexistent, thus the heated debate over such a tiny space. But the truth of the matter, unfortunately, is that aside from Domino Sugar there is very little going industrially between The Museum of Industry and Tide Point. Essentially nothing. In my mind, the industrial uses of that tiny section of Key Higway have come and gone, they’re dead, so it shouldn’t really be a part of the MIZOD.

Getting back to the original point, it’s much harder to get rid of residential units (condos etc.) than it would be to relocate a restaurant, which is part of the reason I think that in the event (by some miracle) that industry is revitalized in the area the property could be bid on, sold, and used for whatever industrial purpose seen fit in a far smoother fashion than if say a highrise condo building were erected. Plus the argument boils down primarily to waterway usage, which in the case of a restaurant is completely moot, I see no reason why any industrial venture couldn’t have a gentleman’s agreement between owners and come up with a fair and decent way to utilize the “deep water” surrounding Egan Marine (it’s not very deep at all). Which again, more than likely could not be pulled off if there are exceedingly wealthy residents of condos balking at the site of rusty boats being serviced right outside of their window.

I guess that’s all for now

When you give the city (state) the power to determine the use of property, you give up your rights to determine the use for yourself.