From the Preliminary Alternatives Screening Report (2014), B&P Tunnel Project.

Share your comments on the B&P Tunnel Project draft study

The recent release of a draft study on the B&P Tunnel project is an important opportunity for West Baltimore residents to share their comments. Learn more background about the B&P Tunnel project or read on for information on submitting comments and the contents of the draft report.

How do you get a copy of the B&P Tunnel draft environmental impact study?

Hard copies of the report are available at the locations listed on the project website or available for download as a series of PDF documents:

How do you share comments on the B&P Tunnel draft environmental impact study?

There are five different ways you can send comments:

  1. Share oral testimony at a public hearing.
  2. Share written comments at a public hearing.
  3. Mail comments to the B&P Tunnel Project, DEIS Comment, 81 W. Mosher Street, Baltimore, MD 21217.
  4. Comment online using the B&P Project comment form (include “DEIS COMMENT” in your comment text).
  5. Email comments to info@bptunnel.com (include “DEIS COMMENT” as the subject line).

All comments need to be submitted before February 19, 2016 at 5:00 pm. The recent blizzard forced the B&P Tunnel Project team to cancelled planned meetings this week but public hearing scheduled for next Monday and Saturday meeting :

  • Monday, February 1, 2016, 5:00 pm – 8:00 pm
  • Saturday, February 6, 2016, 10:00 am- 1:00 pm

Both meetings will be held at the Frederick Douglass High School (Main Auditorium), 2301 Gwynns Falls Parkway, Baltimore, MD 21217. Anyone interested in testifying at the public hearing may find our tips to effective public testimony helpful.

What do the proposed alternatives mean for historic properties?

You can find a detailed review of the three remaining proposed alternatives in Chapter IV: Alternatives Still Under Consideration and a detailed review on how the proposed alternatives affect historic properties in Chapter IV: Environmental Consequences under Section C: Cultural Resources (p. 179-182). Each of the proposals would require demolition of historic buildings at the South Portal and place a ventilation stack at the center of the Reservoir Hill Historic District. To make this thick report a bit easier to digest, we’ve put together a quick review of the three alternatives, including a map, a slider (comparing of the existing and proposed conditions at the south portal), and a list of notable historic resources affected by the proposal.

Alternative 3A

Alternative 3A would have an adverse effect on six historic resources, including:

  • Midtown Edmondson Historic District (3 buildings)
  • Reservoir Hill Historic District (depends on vent stack location)
Alternative 3A: South Portal Map
Alternative 3A: South Portal


Alternative 3B

Alternative 3B would have an adverse effect on eight historic resources, including:

  • Atlas Safe Deposit and Storage Company Warehouse
  • Greater Rosemont Historic District (5 buildings)
  • Midtown Edmondson Historic District (73 buildings)
  • Reservoir Hill Historic District (depends on vent stack location)
Alternative 3B: South Portal Map
Alternative 3B: South Portal


Alternative 3C

Alternative 3C would have an adverse effect on ten historic resources, including:

  • Ward Baking Company
  • Edmondson Avenue Historic District (58 buildings)
  • Greater Rosemont Historic District (61 buildings)
  • Midtown Edmondson Historic District (7 buildings)
  • Reservoir Hill Historic District (depends on vent stack location)
Alternative 3C: South Portal Map
Alternative 3C: South Portal


Ventilation Plant

In addition to the South Portal, another area of concern is the proposed site of a ventilation plant on the site of a community park located across the street from Whitelock Community Farm. The estimated size of the ventilation plant footprint is 200 feet by 100 feet and around 55 feet high. The ventilation plants must be large enough to house the required number of fans and ancillary equipment, such as silencers and dampers, as well as associated ductwork to connect to the tunnel. A group of concerned residents have organized the Residents Against the Tunnels (RATT) and published a position paper opposing all three alternatives.

Alternative Vent Stack Sites Considered
Alternative Vent Stack Sites Considered
ventstack-study-area
Area of Consideration for Vent Plant Locations



Please stay tuned for more analysis of these alternatives in the next couple weeks as we prepare our own comments from Baltimore Heritage. If you have any questions or suggestions, please get in touch.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.