Under Armour Corporate Campus by Zdgrossl

NDER RMOUR CORPORATE CAMPUS

PORT COVINGTON BALTIMORE, MD

Zack Grossl

London Oliverio

Prepared for Landscape Architecture 451 Spring 2018

Joe Snouffer

THE TEAM

Zack Grossl BSLA 2018 “With drive and a little bit of talent you can move mountains.”

London Oliverio BSLA 2018 “What you do in the dark is what puts you in the light.”

Joe Snouffer BSLA 2018 “Sometimes, there just aren’t enough rocks.”

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

We would like to thank the following individuals for their guidance and support not only on this project, but throughout our four years in the program.

Micheal Hasenmyer Associate Professor, WVU Lisa Orr Assistant Professor, WVU Conway Bristow Designer, EDSA Charles Yuill Associate Professor, WVU Vaike Haas Assistant Professor, WVU Shan Jiang Assistant Professor, WVU

TABLE OF CONTENTS

CHAPTER 1:

PROJECT OVERVIEW

Introduction Literature Review Problem Statement Scope

CHAPTER 2:

METHODOLOGY & PROCESS

Inventory & Analysis Case Studies Design Process

CHAPTER 3:

SOLUTIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS

Final Masterplan Support Drawings Construction Documents

PROJECT OVERVIEW Introduction Literature Review Problem Statement Scope

INTRODUCTION Baltimore city is in north-central Maryland, about 40 miles northeast of Washington, D.C. and is home to nearly 622,000 people. It lies at the head of the Patapsco River, 15 miles above the Chesapeake Bay. Baltimore is the largest city in Maryland and the 26th largest city in the United States. It is also Maryland’s largest economic center and constitutes the Northeastern hub of the Baltimore-Washington metropolitan area. The city was separated from Baltimore County in 1851, and is now the only city in Maryland not located within a county. The Baltimore Harbor (1957) and Fort McHenry (1985) tunnels and Francis Scott Key Bridge (1977) cross the Patapsco River. There is a dense network of interstate highways and other roads between Baltimore and Washington. Our project site is in South Baltimore, lying at the southernmost tip of Port Covington. It is 50 acres on the peninsula jutting into the Patapsco River’s middle branch, south of interstate 95. Port Covington was originally the home to Fort Covington, used to defend Baltimore during the War of 1812, and later became a depot for the Western Maryland railroad where it was used to ship coal from Ohio, Pennsylvania, and West Virginia off its piers. The site of Sagamore Spirit, an under-construction facility for a new rye whiskey company, was also once the site of a former distillery. Adjacent to South Baltimore peninsula neighborhoods of South Baltimore, Riverside, Locust Point, and Federal Hill, all of which have seen continued investment over the last couple decades, Port Covington was often a mystery for locals because of its lack of investment. This was highlighted by the failed Port Covington Shopping Center. The site is currently a flat and dilapidated area with very little vegetation. The shoreline is consumed by invasive vegetation and an alarming amount of litter and debris. The only buildings that remain on site are a closed Walmart and a former Sam’s Club that has been converted into offices for the employees of Under Armour.

Introduction continued... Despite the site’s undesirable existing conditions, it is a large blank canvas with unlimited potential. Our plans for this area are to create a corporate campus for Under Armour’s global headquarters as well as a new iconic destination for the Baltimore community. The design will include buildings with 3,000,000 sq. ft. of office space, 75,000 sq. ft. for innovation, 70,000 sq. ft. for recreation, 140,000 sq. ft. of commercial, and 5,000 parking spaces. These numbers were based off Under Armour’s existing proposed expansion plans (by Nelson Byrd Woltz) to have room for 10,000 employees. We intend on using these numbers to shape how the architecture will create space for a private campus, apart from utilizing as much of the site as possible for public use. This project will not only embody innovative workspace, but also change the way one perceives urban development and the City of Baltimore. Port Covington has been the site of Under Armour’s headquarters and warehouse since 1998; just two years after Kevin Plank created the first Under Armour t-shirt. In 2016, Plank announced the expansion of Under Armour’s global headquarters. The project is being led by Neil Jurgens, vice president of corporate real estate at Under Armour, as well as the design team of Bohlin Cywinski Jackson, BuroHappold Engineering, Nelson Byrd Woltz, STV, and Biohabitats. The Under Armour campus is part of a larger mixed-use project to develop 266 waterfront acres. This is a multi-billion-dollar project done by Sagamore Development, which is owned by Under Armour CEO Kevin Plank.

LITERATURE REVIEW In just 20 years, Under Armour has managed to become the second largest sportswear company in the U.S. and the fourth largest in the world. Therefore, a dynamic corporate campus is exactly what the brand now needs for relentless growth and innovation. When we first stepped foot in Port Covington and saw only two Under Armour buildings in this massive empty space, it became clear that a corporate campus was what we needed to pursue. A corporate campus consists of buildings in close proximity to each other with centralized support, amenities and other internal functions (David T. Haresign). The decision to plan and design a corporate campus consists of numerous and conflicting considerations. As a way of solving long-term real estate challenges, business leaders frequently look to developing a corporate campus as a way to gain operational benefits, improve business performance, strengthen corporate culture, and control real estate costs. Although there are opportunities for significant financial benefits, it is likely a company will make the decision whether or not to go the campus route based on more intangible issues: operational, business performance and cultural. Operational issues address how facilities support day-to-day functions and evolving space requirements. Business performance issues examine the effects of the different ways employees communicate, collaborate and share knowledge. Cultural issues delve into how connected the employees feel to the company and to each other. The tangible financial considerations come into play once a company decides a campus is worth considering (Haresign). Early corporate campuses in the United States were originally designed for research scientists and engineers. Surrounded by landscaped gardens or centered around a grassy quadrangle like an Ivy League university, the campus was a safe, serene workplace. In 1942, communications giant AT&T created the first corporate campus, called Bell Labs in New Jersey.

Literature review continued... General Motors, General Electric and General Life Insurance followed suit with similar suburban campuses in the 1950s. Early campuses had various names – industrial park, research park or technology park that emphasized a connection to industry and science on the one hand, and nature on the other (Agustin Chevez and DJ Huppatz). In post-war America, cities were popularly portrayed as “dangerous”, racially divided, crowded and polluted. As well as a physical workspace, the campus was a symbolic, cultural and social place. The new campuses were photogenic, promoting the corporation and its values in the media and to potential employees. A university-like campus signaled that this was not simply a business, but an organization working towards a higher purpose. A campus should also suggest a sense of community. With recreational facilities and social spaces, the low-rise campus aimed, symbolically and practically, to promote interaction and collaboration. As complete environments, corporate campuses expanded the idea of the workplace by including leisure facilities, cafeterias, shopping and service facilities. Playing tennis and drinking coffee on campus became part of an integrated lifestyle curated by the corporation. A paternalistic sense of “family” pervaded the carefully designed “home” for employees (Augustin and Huppatz). As landscape designers and future landscape architects, we are constantly struggling with not being respected as multitalented designers. Many people see the profession as simply planting gardens when it is so much more than that. This dynamic and complex design of a corporate campus for a company as unique as Under Armour is intended to be a prime example of all the things that go into the job of a landscape architect. Through our design, we will be able to show our skills in sustainable/ ecological practices, urban design, site grading, site engineering, and overall communicate our role as place makers.

PROBLEM STATEMENT While our overall goal is designing a corporate campus for Under Armourâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s global headquarters; our challenge derives from using our proposed infrastructure numbers for a central, private campus in accordance with utilizing as much of the surrounding space as possible for public use. The intention of this project was not to limit the site strictly to the employees of Under Armour, but an opportunity to develop an exciting new destination for the city of Baltimore. The question arose time and again from the beginning; how are we going to establish a separation between public and private areas? Without the use of a harsh fenced edge, this seemed nearly impossible. However, as landscape architects, we are problem solvers. While looking for project examples which faced a similar problem, we found that Salesforce.com in San Francisco faced the same challenge when deciding to build a new 2-million sq. ft. campus on 14 acres in Mission Bay. Salesforce.com currently occupies a number of buildings centered around One Market Street, and in considering the move to Mission Bay there was concern about the firm being isolated on a campus of its own. To prevent this, the company designed an urban environment that breaks down the conventional walls of the corporate campus. The proposed plan has no single gated campus entry. There are three primary types of corporate campuses: urban, ex-urban, and suburban. The buildings on an urban campus are adjacent but not necessarily connected. An ex-urban campus is located close to the urban core, where costs are high, so the buildings are proximate to each other and parking is usually under the buildings or in an adjacent garage. Since land costs are less, a suburban campus affords more opportunities for open space and more parking options; there is often freestanding structured parking, surface parking, or a combination of both (Haresign).

Problem statement continued... While our site is going to be predominantly occupied by Under Armourâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s corporate campus, which will be physically and visually dominated by the scale of the corporate buildings, intermingling public shopping and recreational usages are also a key part of the design. With 4,700 feet (.9 miles) of shoreline, made up of different typologies, creating spaces which provide interaction with the water available to the public is an important factor. Because the site is peninsula-shaped, this means that public access zones will be surrounding the corporate campus. In turn, we need a way to prevent the public from entering the privately-owned campus in a way which doesnâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t detract from the onsite views. When we began to generate our solutions, which defined the boundary between public and private zones within the port Covington project site, subtle restrictive techniques were preferable. In contrast with fences, walls, and gates, natural landscape features which limit movement between Under Armour employee zones and public recreation greatly decreases harsh visual edges, while at the same time benefiting the ecological well-being of the site. Possible landscape features which provided opportunity in creating divisions between these two zones include topography manipulation, vegetation, and water. Through repeated design processes, eventually came our end solution which incorporates elements of each of these landscape features.

SCOPE Mission Statement Our mission is to develop a dynamic image for the face of Under Armour’s corporate campus through the use of ‘high performance’ amenities in Port Covington. In revitalizing the shoreline, we will promote public access to the site’s waterfront, which will encourage activity and give it a sense of ‘place’. The Patapsco River is positioned in a manner which allows opportunities for growth, preservation and recreation. By balancing the site, the amenities, and the mobility- we will create a vibrant and athletic character for Under Armour’s headquarters, and a major destination for the city of Baltimore. Goals & Objectives Our first goal is to develop a corporate campus that expresses the culture of Under Armour. We want to use unique and innovative ways to portray that culture and really capture the brand’s image. We will be providing an athletic destination for social opportunities while improving health and wellness. In doing so, we will also create a symbiotic relationship between public and private zones in a subtle manner. Our second goal is to strengthen connections to the water and proposed amenities for Port Covington. Our objectives to achieve this goal start with focusing attention on the site from outside locations and create strong visual connections to the water. We will also design a multi-modal transportation network that will strengthen the circulation of Port Covington and surrounding areas. Last, the design of the spaces will accommodate for events hosting large numbers of people. Our third goal is to revitalize the shoreline to create a destination. First, we will have to enable shoreline accessibility throughout the site. Currently the site has no real access to the shoreline that does not involve sliding down the steep terrain. We will also incorporate local ecology. This will then allow us to position public open spaces adjacent to the water to encourage interaction.

Goals & Objectives continued... This involves clearing the abundance or invasive vegetative species that cover the shoreline and using native trees, shrubs and herbaceous perennials to replant the area. Next, we will construct a boardwalk capable of supporting a variety of activities. Our fourth and final goal is to reduce negative environmental impacts on the site. Our objectives involve enabling micro-climate control using natural materials and buildings. We will utilize green technology and implement sustainable stormwater management strategies. This will involve the use of green roofs, bioretention areas and floating wetlands in our final design.

METHODOLOGY & PROCESS Inventory & Analysis Case Studies Design Process

SITE CONTEXT

MARYLAND STATE

BALTIMORE CITY MARYLAND

[

Figure 1.1(Site Context)

Miles 2

Highlighted above in red, Baltimore City is positioned centrally within Maryland, on the western shore of the Chesapeake Bay. It’s the most populated city within the state, with roughly 600,000 residents, and acts as a central metropolitan hub along interstate 95 and the Eastern seaboard. Philadelphia is approximately 105 miles to the northeast, while Washington D.C. is just 40 miles south.

Within Baltimore, Port Covington is about 235 acres, seated adjacent to the southern edge of interstate 95. Of those 235 Acres, 50 acres (shown in red) account for the chosen site of Under Armour’s future corporate campus. This site is located just 2 miles south of the Inner Harbor and Baltimore’s downtown. 16

DOWNTOWN BALTIMORE

Figure 1.2(Site Context)

PROJECT SITE Buildings - 6.49 Acres Impermeable - 19.45 acres Permeable - 24.06 Acres

50 TOTAL ACRES

Figure 1.3(Site Context)

EAST WATERFRONT

THE GREEN

SAGAMORE DEVELOPMENT MASTERPLAN ECO PENINSULA

WEST WATERFRONT

ARCHAEOLOGICAL PIER

PORT COVINGTON

MIDDLE BRANCH

WINANS COVE

OPEN SPACE LAYERS OP EN SPACE STR UCTUR E NEI GHBOR HOOD C ONNEC TIO NS

HANOVER STREET BRIDGE

PA R K CO NNE CTI ONS EC O CO RR ID OR HABI TAT ENHA NCE M ENT

Figure 1.4(Port

FERRY BAR CHANNEL

MIDDLE BRANCH Covington PARK Rendering)

STR EET PL ANTI NG

Above, a rendering showing the planned development by Sagamore Development, which is owned by Under Armour CEO Kevin Plank.

Port Covington’s total 235 acres are shown above in different colors which highlight the designated Under Armour campus in relation to the remaining 185 acres which will become residential and commercial mixed use.

185 Acres

50 Acres

Legend

Figure 1.5(Port Covington Location Comparison) 0

500

1,000

Feet 2,000

Corporate campus boundary Remaining site development

The northern 185 acre portion of Port Covington is diagrammed to the left, representing building usage and arrangement. Included in this portion of Sagamore’s plans, are 18 million sf. of mixed use development, light industrial manufacturing, 7,500 residential units, and 40 acres of green space.

Figure 1.6(Port Covington Building Usage)

PARK SYSTEMS – JANUARY 7, 2016 SOUTH BALTIMORE

ACTIVE SPORTS PARK

WESTPORT

ENTERTAINMENT SQUARE

FOUNDERS’ PARK

THE GREEN

SOUTH LOCUST POINT

EAST WATERFRONT

ECO PENINSULA

WEST WATERFRONT

ARCHAEOLOGICAL PIER

PORT COVINGTON

MIDDLE BRANCH

WINANS COVE

OPEN SPACE LAYERS OP EN SPACE STR UCTUR E NEI GHBOR HOOD C ONNEC TIO NS

HANOVER STREET BRIDGE

PA R K CO NNE CTI ONS EC O CO RR ID OR HABI TAT ENHA NCE M ENT

MIDDLE BRANCH PARK

Figure 1.7(Port Covington Connections)

FERRY BAR CHANNEL

STR EET PL ANTI NG

Diagrammed above in orange are the most prominent neighborhood connections and major corridors of the future Port Covington development. The street layout and sizes in northern Port Covington, in relationship with the Under Armour corporate campus site, are important factors that need to be referenced. Keeping in mind circulation patterns and access points in and out of the 50 acre site will yield the most efficient and convenient accessibility to on site amenities. Referring back to the surrounding development will also allow us to play off of the nearby street planting, building styles, and public transportation network.

Figure 1.8(Existing Design Public Space)

One of the most important challenges in redesigning the site is to enable more public space and waterfront access than the current proposed plan allows for. The thin red strip surrounding the site illustrates the allocated space for public use in Sagamore Development’s current proposed master plan. Our goal is to enlarge and enhance this zone as much as possible, while still supplying Under Armour with sufficient private space.

SITE HISTORY

1813

1856

Figure 1.9(Site History) Fort Covington is constructed on the site to support Ft. McHenry during the war of 1812

“Long Bridge”, the first bridge to span the Middle Branch (Patapsco river), was built at the southern tip of Port Covington. It Linked Baltimore to Anne Arundel county in the south

Figure 1.10(Railyard Aerial)

1898 The Western Maryland Railroad built its waterfront terminal on the site. Port covington served as a grain and coal port for the eastern seaboard

1914

1973

The ornate Hanover Street Drawbridge is constructed

The Western Maryland Railroad is absorbed by railroad competitors. Port activity on the site soon followed, and the site was abandoned

1980’s

2000

2010

All traces of the sites previous railway history were removed and the site cleaned up by the Maryland Department of the Environment

Plans for a shopping district on the site were accepted by the city. Shortly after, the only things to end up being built are a Sam’s Club and Walmart are built

Walmart and Sam’s Club stores both shut down. Four years later, Kevin Plank purchases 58 acres of Port Covington, is now the planned site of Under Armour’s new corporate headquarters

Positioned on the part of the site which is now occupied by an empty Wal-Mart building, was a railway roundhouse and a railyard which covered most of the area. The 50 acres which we’re currently working with served this purpose for almost 100 years under ownership of the Western Maryland Railroad Company until 1973 when it was put out of business by competition. 20

Figure 1.11(Hand-Drawn Historical Image) © loc.gov

Seen above is an illustration of Baltimore City in 1869 which was drawn by E. Sachse & Co. This is the only graphic representation of what the area looked like after its use as “fort Covington” during the war of 1812. Prior to its railway industrialization, port Covington served multiple uses including swim and row clubs situated on the southeast coast of the site which can be seen outlined in red. Time has changed the shape of the shoreline, which is to be expected. However, the outlined area is the best representation of the same 50 acres with which we’re currently working with.

1980’s

Figure 1.12(Railyard 1980’s)

1930’s

Figure 1.13(Booming Railyard 1930’s)

1930’s

Figure 1.14(Active Port 1930’s)

While such a long span of this area’s history was occupied by industrial railway use, it’s not necessarily a bad thing. The most obvious constraint that comes out of the site’s past, is that of environmental contamination, which is also known as a brownfield. However, many of the old piers and docks seen in these photos still exist and offer a unique opportunity to tie new designs into the area’s history and create unique spaces.

1930’s

1940’s © loc.gov

Figure 1.15(Railyard 1930’s)

1950’s

Figure 1.16(Railyard 1940’s)

Figure 1.17(Coal Loader 1950’s)

ARCHITECTURAL INFLUENCE

Figure 1.18(Bromo Seltzer Tower)

Bromo Seltzer

IBM

Bromo Seltzer

Inner Harbor

Figure 1.20(Historical Bromo Seltzer Tower)

Figure 1.19(IBM Building)

Figure 1.21(Current Inner Harbor)

Baltimore’s identity plays a large part in how the Under Armour site is being developed. Assuring that the new corporate campus design has a strong relationship with the Character of Baltimore City is an essential part of anchoring the design to its location. As a result, we’ve chosen to refer back to some of Baltimore’s most iconic architectural examples, which include both old and new buildings and landscapes such as the inner harbor promenade, the Bromo Seltzer tower, National Aquarium, and the Baltimore Gas and Electric Building.

As with most cities, Baltimore has a very diverse architectural identity as a result of both old age, and influence from different nationalities over time. Some of these architectural identities/styles include: Romanesque / gothic, art deco, industrial Romanesque, midcentury modern, and contemporary. Reflecting these styles in the design of Under Armour’s new corporate campus’ buildings seems like an obvious solution when relating the Under Armour site to Baltimore City. However, Under Armour has its own modern style which isn’t very compatible with the existing architecture within Baltimore, creating a challenge.

Figure 1.22(Legg Mason Building)

Legg Mason building

National Aquarium

Figure 1.24(National Aquarium)

Figure 1.23(Bank of America Building)

Bank of America

Baltimore Gas & Electric

Figure 1.25(Baltimore Gas & Electric)

THE BUSINESS OF UNDER ARMOUR

1996 Kevin Plank engineered the first Under Armour HeatGear T-shirt

1998 Under Armour moved to an all new headquarters and warehouse in Baltimore

2003 ‘Protect This House’ established the brand and it officially made Under Armour a household name

2005

2008

Ended the year with $281 million in revenue

Official entry into the athletic footwear market

2011

2014

Under Armour opened in first ever brand store in China

UA Pledged $10 million to John’s Hopkin’s Hospital to create the UA LiveWell Center, a state-of-the-art, breast health clinic

2016 Announcement of the expansion of Under Armour’s global headquarters in Baltimore City

Figure 1.26(Under Armour History)

IT STARTED WITH AN IDEA.

Figure 1.27(UA Athletes Steph Curry, Dwayne Johnson)

Figure 1.28(UA Athletes Jordan Spieth, Cam Newton, and Lindsay Vonn

‘HIGH-QUALITY’

In 1996, Kevin Plank, a 23-year-old former University of Maryland special teams captain, turned an idea born on the football field into a new industry that changed the way athletes dress forever. Back in his playing days, Plank hated having to change his sweat-soaked cotton T-shirts over and over again during two-a-days. Knowing that there simply had to be something better, he set out to create a solution. Plank named his new company Under Armour, and after extensive research on the athletic benefits of synthetic fabrics, he designed the first Under Armour ‘HeatGear’ T-shirt. Engineered with moisture-wicking performance fibers, the shirt helps keep athletes cool, dry, and light in the most brutally hot conditions. Working from his grandmother’s basement in Washington DC’s Georgetown neighborhood, he traveled up and down the East Coast selling his revolutionary new product out of the trunk of his car. By the end of 1996, Plank made his first team sale, and Under Armour generated $17,000 in sales. In 1997, Under Armour introduced the now-famous ‘ColdGear’ fabric, which keeps athletes warm, dry, and light in cold conditions, and then the ‘AllSeasonGear’ line, which keeps athletes comfortable between the extremes. By the end of 1998, Under Armour outgrew grandma’s basement and moved to an all-new headquarters and warehouse in Baltimore. Copyright © 2018 Under Armour Performance

‘SPORTS-PERFORMANCE’

Figure 1.29(UA Athletes)

BALTIMORE DEMOGRAPHICS

RACE 63.7%

Black White Hispanic

29.6%

Asian Native American Other

2.2%

2.1%

0.5%

4.2%

Figure 1.30(Race Percentages)

AGE 12.6%

0-10 11-20 21-30 31-50 50 and over

Figure 1.31(Age Percentages)

12.6%

Median Age

37.4

11.4% 18.1%

26.6% 31.3%

GENDER

53%

47%

Figure 1.32(Gender Percentages)

HOUSEHOLD INCOME

31%

0-$25k 23.8%

$25k-$50k 16.8%

$50k-$75k $75k-$100k $100k and over

Median Household Income

10.1% 18.3%

$44,262

Figure 1.33(Household Income)

CLIMATE 90

High 80

Low

Fahrenheit

Figure 1.34(Average Temperatures)

p Se

r Ap

Fe b

Summer Sun Angle: 74°

Spring / Fall Sun Angle: 51°

° 51° 28°

Winter Sun Angle: 28°

Figure 1.35(Sun Angle)

Above, a simple graphic showing the sun angles in relation to the project area. They range from 74 degrees in the summer, to 28 degrees in the winter. The relevance of solar analysis comes into play when considering site vegetation, building heights, and desirable shaded areas. 28

Figure 1.36(Seasonal Winds)

Winds on our site come from nearly all directions, being located on the shore. However, prevailing winds during the winter generally come from the Northwest, while summer winds come from the West and Southwest.

BALTIMORE WASH INTL AP (MD) Wind Rose Jan. 1, 2017 - Jan. 31, 2017 Sub-Interval: Jan. 1 - Dec. 31, 0 - 23

WINTER

N NNW 5%

WNW

1.3 - 4 4-8 8 - 13

ENE

13 - 19 19 - 25

Wind Speed (mph)

Frequency (%)

NNE

25 - 32 32 - 39

WSW

39 - 47 47 -

ESE

BALTIMORE WASH INTL AP (MD) Wind Rose SW SE SSW

May 1, 2017 - May 30, 2017 SSE Sub-Interval: Jan. 1 - Dec. 31, 0 - 23 S

SPRING

Click and drag to zoom

NNW

N 10%

5% WNW

1.3 - 4 4-8

Wind Speed (mph)

Frequency (%)

NNE

WSW

ENE

8 - 13 13 - 19 19 - 25

25 - 32 32 - 39 39 - 47

ESE

47 -

BALTIMORE WASH INTL AP SW SE (MD) Wind Rose SSW

July 1, 2017 - July 30, 2017 SSE Sub-Interval: Jan. 1 - Dec. 31, 0 - 23 S

SUMMER

Click and drag to zoom

N NNW

NNE

5% WNW

1.3 - 4 4-8 ENE

8 - 13 13 - 19 19 - 25

Wind Speed (mph)

Frequency (%)

WSW

25 - 32 32 - 39 39 - 47 47 -

ESE

BALTIMORE WASH INTL APSE (MD) Wind Rose SW SSW

NNW

Anything from shubs, to trees and buildings are going to act as windbreaks, which can provide a sheltered calm zone for up to 30 times the distance that the windbreak object is tall. Keeping this in mind, it will be important to enhance breezes drung the hot summer months and avoid creating wind tunnel effects during the winter.

FALL

Click and drag to zoom

NNE 5%

2.5%

Wind Speed (mph)

Frequency (%)

ENE

Understanding wind direction and speed become relevant in several ways when designing our landscape and building layout. As is the case with any man-made structures and designed landscape, micro-climates form as a result. The challenge that we face, is to avoid creating undesirable micro-climates which will make an uncomfortable user experience, while at the same time attempting to promote desirable micro-climates that will benefit the site that weâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;re building.

Oct. 1, 2017 - Oct. 31, 2017 Sub-Interval: Jan.SSE 1 - Dec. 31, 0 - 23 N

WNW

Wind roses are a visually interesting graphic that depict a range of information. Each bar represents a wind direction. The larger the bar, the more often wind comes from that direction, with the different colors indicating different wind speeds.

1.3 - 4 4-8 8 - 13 13 - 19 19 - 25 25 - 32 32 - 39 39 - 47

WSW

ESE

47 -

SE SSW

SSE S

Figure 1.37(Seasonal Winds) Click and drag to zoom

VIOLENT CRIME RATE About 27 million visitors a year know Baltimore for its downtown with its glass skyscrapers, multibillion-dollar development along the waterfront, and affluent North Baltimore communities. Although the development in downtown has made Baltimore a more beautiful and desirable place, it is only a very small portion of the city that has become safer from Baltimore’s infamous high crime rate. The crime rate overall is 131% higher than the national average. What is worse is that while property crimes Baltimore may be decreasing, violent crime is rapidly increasing. In Baltimore, MD your chance of becoming a victim of a violent crime is 1 in 57. Types of violent crimes may include assault, robbery, rape, or murder. You also have a 1 in 21 chance of being the victim of a property crime such as vehicle theft, personal property theft, and burglary. Your overall risk of becoming a crime victim in Baltimore, MD is 1 in 16. (© AreaVibes Inc. 2010-2018)

The field of research is still young, but recent studies have found significant associations between green space maintenance and certain types of crime in Philadelphia, Baltimore, and Youngstown, Ohio. The exact mechanism is not yet known, but one theory harkens back to Jane Jacobs’ notion of “eyes on the street”: well-kept lawns and community plots encourage more people to spend time outside in those spaces, leading to a greater degree of informal surveillance of the area and deterring crime. Taken together, this research gives cities reasons to reassess policies about cleaning and greening vacant lots, developing parks, or catching stormwater in green installations. Beyond the ecological and aesthetic benefits, these investments create a safer environment for the people who live nearby(Julian Spector). 1,000

NUMBER OF VIOLENT CRIMES COMMITTED

900

800

Baltimore 700

National Average

600

Baltimore is almost 4x the national average

500

400

300

200

100

0 2010

2011 Crime Rate) Figure 1.38(Violent

2012

2013

2014

2015

2016

GREENERY VS. CRIME- CASE STUDIES Philadelphia, PA

In 2000, Philadelphia launched a program to convert roadside gray spaces into vegetated plots that soak up rainwater. Michelle C. Kondo, PhD, and her colleagues examined 52 sites across the city, along with control sites that hadn’t received the upgrade yet, and tracked 14 types of crime in those places. They found a statistically significant reduction in narcotics possession around the green improvements—the rate was 18 to 27% lower there than at control sites.Kondo speculates that the drop in possession might result from the visible change to the previously paved and anonymous spaces. When they have plantings or well-tended lawns, they tend to attract more positive attention and convey a stronger government presence. Baltimore, MD

Photo by: John Kuroski Figure 1.40(Baltimore Crime Study)

Scientists conducted detailed lawn surveys of 1,000 houses across Baltimore City and County, then crossreferenced them with data on crimes reported within 150 meters of each property. The analysis, published in the journal Landscape and Urban Planning in the fall of 2015, found 10 statistically significant landscape characteristics. The most powerful indicators of a decrease in crime were having a lawn, the presence of garden hoses or sprinklers, shrubs, tree cover, percentage of pervious area, and the presence of yard trees. The factors most strongly tied to more crime were the number of small street trees, litter, uncut lawn, and a dried out lawn.

Youngstown, OH

With 31% of the city’s land area vacant, Youngstown launched a program to turn those empty spaces into an asset. From 2010 to 2014, they hired a contractor to mow the plots and put fences around them. After a year they added a program that gave local communities the funding to improve vacant lots as they chose, including gardens, fruit trees, and monuments. This program created a natural experiment: The city had variable treatments (contracted improvement, locally driven improvement) and a control (unimproved vacant lots). When a team of researchers examined crime data around these sites for a study published in 2015, they found that the treatment lots had lower rates of property crime, like theft, burglary, and violent crime. 31

EXISTING SITE PHOTOS

EXISTING SITE CONDITIONS

12 12

2 8 6

12 12

Port Covington is relativley flat. The elevation ranges from 0-18 feet above sea level, with the steepest slopes occurring within 100 ft. of the shoreline.

2 4

18 16 14

12 12 12

16 16

4 8 12 12

12 12 12

12 2

14 12

2 FT. CONTOURS

14 16 14

14 14

16 1 4

2 8 86

12 18

12 2 12 8 4

Figure 1.42(2 ft. Contours)

[

250

Feet 500

HILLSHADE

The hillshade graphic is a helpful representation of where the most prominent topography changes occur on the site. Most notable, other than the shoreline, are the series of water detention areas along the southern edge, which range from 5 to 8 feet lower than the surrounding land.

Figure 1.43(Hillshade)

SLOPE

The slope along the shoreline averages 5-15%. The long, stright shoreline on the eastern side of the site is an old shipping dock which has an approximately 5-7 foot vertical face along the waters edge, depending on the tide.

Figure 1.44(Slope)

[

250

Feet 500

FLOODZONE

The floodzone covers 149,276 sq. ft. of the shoreline (3.4 acres). It would take approximately 12-14 ft. of water to endanger our site.

Figure 1.45(Floodzone)

EXISTING SITE SECTIONS G

G’

F’

E’

D’

C’

B’

A’

Figure 1.46(Existing Site Sections)

The existing site sections display just how open this 50 acre piece of land is. With the exception of two large buildings, which were previously a Wal-Mart and Sams Club, the whole area is completely open. Vegetation only exists within a 100 foot buffer of the shoreline. Another site attribute, which becomes even more apparent in these sections, is the lack of grade change across the site, with the exception of a few bio detention areas.

G’ F’

F E

E’

D’

C’ B’

B A

G A’

Figure 1.47(Existing Site Sections Locator Map)

AREA COMPARISONS

= WVU COLISEUM

Figure 1.48(Coliseum Area Comparison)

311,142 Londons

242,000 Joes

London

Joe

217,800 Zacks

Zack

Figure 1.49(Team Members Size Comparison)

The above area comparison shows how many of each of the individual team members it would take to equal the area of our site, after measuring our horizontal and vertical dimensions. However, on a more practical and relatable scale, the new Under Armour HQ site is approximately 38 football fields in size.

X 38

Figure 1.50(Football Field Size Comparison)

WATERSHED ANALYSIS 64,000 sq. Miles CHESAPEAKE BAY WATERSHED NEW YORK

11,684 Shoreline Miles 150 Major Rivers & Streams

PENNSYLVANIA

Land - Water Ratio 14:1 100,000 Streams Situated in Five States:

WEST VIRGINIA

DELAWARE

VIRGINIA 0

• • • • • • •

Delaware Maryland New York Pennsylvania Virginia West Virginia District of Columbia

Miles 100

Figure 1.51(Chesapeake Bay Watershed)

PATAPSCO RIVER WATERSHED

586 sq. Miles

Miles 10

Figure 1.53(Baltimore City located in Patapsco River Watershed)

Figure 1.52(Patapsco River Watershed located in Maryland)

JONES FALLS BACK RIVER INNER HARBOR

GYWNNS FALLS

MIDDLE BRANCH

PATAPSCO

F F

F F F MIDDLE BRANCH

GYWNNS FALLS - 64.70 sq mi SW HARBOR

MIDDLE BRANCH - 6.34 sq mi

JONES FALLS - 57.57 sq mi INNER HARBOR - 4.68 sq mi

F F

BACK RIVER - 30.67 sq mi SW HARBOR

PATAPSCO - 5.45 sq mi SW HARBOR - 6.14 sq mi

Figure 1.54(Baltimore Harbor Water Quality Grades)

(Figure 1.54) focuses on the Baltimore harbor and shows the seven subwatersheds that flow directly into it. This is very important because it shows the areas where most of the contaminants are coming from. Also shown in (Figure Whatever3) are the water quality grades for 2016. All of the testing locations received a failing grade except for directly in the Inner Harbor and at the location furthest away from downtown.

(Figure 1.51) takes a look at the Chesapeake Bay watershed as a whole. The watershed is roughly 64,000 sq. miles, which makes it comparable in size to the state of Wisconsin. There are six states and the District of Columbia in this watershed, roughly 100,000 streams, 150 major rivers and streams, as well as a land-water ratio of 14:1.

(Figure 1.52 & Figure 1.53) shows the Patapsco River watershed and where it is situated within the state of Maryland with an area of roughly 586 sq. miles.

BROWNFIELD

Maryland DEP issued certificate of completion 2005 To be addressed

Figure 1.55(Brownfield Loaction Diagram)

Railroad Yards: Brownfields, of which railroad yards are a subset, are defined by the federal brownfields law “as real property, the expansion, redevelopment, or reuse of which may be complicated by the presence or potential presence of a hazardous substance, pollutant, or contaminant.” Brownfields are located across the country, and although brownfields are often located in areas with access to transportation and utility infrastructure, developers and other potentially interested parties are hesitant to redevelop brownfields because of the investment risk and potential cleanup liability associated with the property. Residual contamination including herbicides, petroleum products and byproducts, metals, and creosote, is often present as a result of the former railroad operations and associated industrial activities (US Environmental Protevtion Agency). The site of a fort in the War of 1812 and later a garbage dump, Port Covington came of age at the turn of the century as the terminus of the Western Maryland Railway, from which coal, grain and other goods hauled from Maryland, West Virginia and Pennsylvania were shipped to cities around the world. Since then, Port Covington has been addressed as a brownfield. Soil testing on the site is still being completed and has not been updated since February of 2000. Little information has been provided from the last soil testing, and groundwater samples were not collected at all. Since the site was previously an old railroad yard, virtually any type of chemical contamination could be present because of the variety of chemicals used at and transported through railroad yards.

Recommended Remediation Techniques: 1. Chemox involves oxidising contaminants with the purpose of reducing the concentration.

The main benefits of Chemox are that contaminated soil and water can be treated in-situ (in the ground), and in difficult to access area. Applying the chemical through injection lances (at pressure) essentially means that if the materials are accessible with a drill rig, then they can be treated with chemox. As usual the suitability of chemox for your site depends on many factors.

2. Thermal desorption is a process where heat is used to remove contaminants from soil. Heating certain contaminants will reduce their concentrations. The most common use of thermal desorption is to treat hydrocarbon contamination (e.g. petrol and diesel). Contaminated materials are subjected to intense heat to remove all moisture and organic matter. Typically, a carrier gas or vacuum system transports the volatilized organics and water to a gas treatment system. Based on the operating temperature of the desorber, thermal desorption processes can be categorized into two groups: high temperature thermal desorption (HTTD) (320 to 560ºC or 600 to 1000ºF) and low temperature thermal desorption (LTTD) (90 to 320ºC or 200 to 600ºF). © 2003 - 2018 SOILUTIONS LTD.

Figure 1.56(Chemox Remediation)

Figure 1.57(Thermal Desorption Remediation)

PROXIMITY ANALYSIS BIKE LANES

Miles 0.5

0.25

Providing bicycle connectivity throughout communities is becoming more and more popular in major cities across the country. While bicyclists can share any roads within the city, this map shows routes in Baltimore which have existing bicycle facilities such as bike lanes, sharrows, and shared lane signage. Understanding where cyclists may be more prominent as well as extending and improving upon existing bicycle routes is the main goal in documenting this information.

Bike Routes Bike Routes

Figure 1.58(Bike Routes)

MAJOR CORRIDORS

Collector Roads

Arterial Roads Collector Roads

Miles 0.5

0.25

Highways

Miles 0.5 Highways

0 Roads 0.25 Arterial

Figure 1.59(Nearby Roads)

WATER TAXI

Baltimore’s Inner Harbor has an existing water taxi route which is represented by the dotted black line. Because our site is situated on a peninsula and is being designed as a public attraction as well as a commercial hub, introducing water taxi stops on-site will be necessary. The red line in the graphic shows the additional water taxi route and its possible docking locations on the site’s shoreline. 0

Existing Routes

0.25

Miles 0.5

Proposed Routes Proposed

Existing Routes

Figure 1.60(Water Taxi Routes)

Understanding the relationship between the site and surrounding roadways is a significant aspect of the project. Relating Under Armours’s new headquarters to the existing transportation network allows us to more effectively plan for new vehicular connection points, as well as more accurately understand which corridors and routes people will travel on to access the site and surrounding attractions. Black lines represent interstates highways, red lines represent arterial connections within the City, and blue represents smaller neighborhood connections

Routes

NEARBY ATTRACTIONS AND ROUTES 2.8 Miles 10 Minutes 2.2 Miles 8 Minutes

3.5 Miles 15 Minutes

2.6 Miles 7 Minutes

2.1 Miles 8 Minutes

1.6 Miles 6 Minutes

2.5 Miles 9 Minutes

Convention Center

Fells Point

M&T Bank Stadium

Convention Camden Center Yards

M&T Bank Riverside Stadium Park

Fells Point

Camden

Riverside

Ft. McHenry Yards Park

0.25

Miles 0.5

Inner Inner Harbor Harbor

Ft. McHenry

Figure 1.61(Nearby Attractions and Routes)

Many of the attractions within Baltimore City are located relatively close to the project site. This graphic shows the distance relationships between the site and some of the more popular destinations within Baltimore. The majority of these destinations are near the Inner Harbor or downtown region, and within a 5-15 minute drive. Though, they are also accessible by other means of transportation, being within 3 miles. Some of these attractions include: M&T Bank Stadium, Camden Yards, the Inner Harbor, Baltimore Convention Center, Fells Point, and Fort McHenry.

PROJECT SITE

Figure 1.62(Nearby Attractions)

PATAPSCO RIVER

The following graphic shows a birds eye view of some of Baltimore’s most recognizable locations. This gives a reference of the site’s location at a scale which will make sense to people who aren’t very familiar with the city.

1.43 Miles

1.77 Miles

CAMDEN YARDS

M&T BANK STADIUM

HANOVER ST. BRIDGE

46 1.61 Miles

FORT MCHENRY

1.42 Miles

UA GLOBAL HQ

1.86 Miles

INNER HARBOR

POPULATION ANALYSIS

The population of surrounding neighborhoods is of significant interest when planning where people will be commuting to the site from. Port Covington itself currently has no residential population, given POPULATION its current and past 0 400-900 industrial land use. 1,000-3,000 Neighborhoods within 3,000-6,000 two miles to the 1 mi. 1.5 mi. north and northwest 2 mi. which are closer to Figure 1.63(2 Mile Population Analysis) the downtown area, host populations which range from a few hundred to a few thousand. Keeping in mind that these are the areas which residents from outside of Port Covington may be coming from will help us better anticipate user numbers on the site. The 2 mile radius from the site is relevant because it represents the extent that the average person may be willing to travel by means other than vehicular transportation. POPULATION

400-900

1,000-3,000 3,000-6,000

1 mi.

1.5 mi. 2 mi.

NEARBY PARKS

When designing public recreational facilities such as water access zones, walking and running paths, and open space on the site, we first need to assess where these same amenities exist outside of our project site. Doing so will provide justifiable Parks reasoning for including or excluding mi. certain recreational 1.51 mi. amenities. For 2 mi. example, we Figure 1.64(2 Mile Park Analysis) find that where water access is already available at nearby locations, it isnâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t necessarily an attractive or clean area. Therefore, there is strong reasoning for boosting the appeal of the shoreline on site and providing public access to it. Parks

1 mi.

1.5 mi. 2 mi.

BEACH

SHORELINE TYPOLOGIES

PIER

Figure 1.65(Beach Shoreline Typology)

VEGETATED

Figure 1.66(Pier Shoreline Typology)

The existing portion of the shoreline on site that is a beach is located in the southwest, and takes up approximately 890 feet. As seen in some of the existing site photos, it is heavily polluted by everything ranging from tea cups to tires and paint buckets. The grade on this region is relatively flat, with the beach being about 30 feet wide before a steep incline begins.

The region of the site which we are calling the “pier” makes up the eastern shoreline which runs NW/ SE, and is about 1,630 feet in length. During the site’s industrial time period, this was a major shipping dock within Port Covington. The concrete dock has about 6-8 feet of elevation drop to the water level depending on the tide.

886 ft

1,633 ft

Vegetated shorelines makes up the majority of the coast, with approximately 2,200 feet stretching along the south edge of the site.

Figure 1.67(Vegetated Shoreline Typology)

2,212 ft

VIEWSHED ANALYSIS

Close View

Mid Range View

Distant View

Figure 1.68(Viewshed Analysis)

Viewshed analysis from the site exposes what people can and canâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t see from the shore. Taking views into account is an important part of our site inventory because it allows for the design to play off of the good views, and screen off the less appealing views. Being surrounded by water provides an opportunity to emphasize visual connections with the Patapsco River, as well as some of the distant viewpoints, such as: The Key Bridge, Hanover Street Bridge, ports and shipping channels, and even the Baltimore City skyline to the distant north.

COMPOSITE ANALYSIS

SITE OUTLINE

Figure 1.69(Site Outline)

CIRCULATION

Figure 1.71(Circulation)

KEY VIEWS

BUILDING ZONES

Figure 1.70(Building Zones)

FLOODZONE

Figure 1.72(Floodzone)

Suitable for Highrise Non-suitable for Highrise Vehicular Non-Vehicular Water Taxi Floodzone View Direction Sun Path

Figure 1.73(Key Views)

COMPOSITE ANALYSIS

Figure 1.74(Composite Analysis)

Composite analysis of the site consists of multiple components which derive from the inventory and analysis process. Five main categories are prioritized based on their relevance in decision making during the design process. These categories consist of: site outline/edges, building zones, circulation, floodzone, and important visual axes. Taller building heights are preferable in the northern portion of the site as opposed to the south because of how important long sight lines are in the design. Keeping tall structures confined to this northern portion of the site will assure that there are no visual barriers between users and the water. These visual axes are represented by the purple cone shapes that extend from the center of the site, outwards. Understanding basic site circulation from the start of the design process is key in effectively placing both vehicular and pedestrian routes. The location of these routes is based off of existing roadway infrastructure, as well as the earlier referenced future Sagamore Development plans to the north of our site. Allowing people to access the water as well as providing a new recreational resource to the city means that pedestrian trails and connections throughout the southern portion of the site are essential. Finally, the floodzone, which is seen as the darker purple strip along the southern shoreline, will be kept in consideration when designing water related public amenities. 51

CONCEPT THE IMAGE OF UNDER ARMOUR WILL BE EXPRESSED THROUGHOUT

FITNESS.

THE

SITE

CONNECTED

EVERY ELEMENT OF OUR DESIGN WILL

BE MADE WITH THE INTENTION OF IMPROVING ITS USERS OVERALL HEALTH AND WELL-BEING.

PROGRAM ELEMENTS

RECREATIONAL • • • • • • •

Boardwalk Fishing piers Marina Gathering spaces Water features Recreational trails Track

• Basketball courts • Tennis courts • Multi-use field -Football -Soccer -Baseball

INFRASTRUCTURE • • • • • •

Water taxi stops Bike share Green infrastructure Parking garage Corporate buildings Commercial space

NATURAL • Floating wetlands • Oyster beds • Estuary

Estuary

Oyster Beds

Floating Wetlands

Commercial Space

Corporate Buildings

Parking Garage

Green Infrastructure

Bike Share

Water Taxi Stops

Multi-use Field

Tennis Court

Basketball Court

Track

Recreational Trails

Water Features

Gathering Spaces

Marina

Athletic Facility

Fishing Piers

Boardwalk

SUITABILITY MATRIX

Estuary Oyster Beds Floating Wetlands Commercial Space Corporate Buildings Parking Garage Green Infrastructure Bike Share Water Taxi Stops Multi-use Field Tennis Court Basketball Court Track Recreational Trails Water Features

The suitability matrix indicates how compatible the program elements are with each other. Determining which elements work well together helps to make informed design decisions when creating the new plans for the site.

Gathering Spaces Marina Athletic Facility

Compatible

Fishing Piers

Semi-compatible

Boardwalk

Least Compatible

Figure 1.75(Suitability Matrix)

BUBBLE DIAGRAMS

Figure 1.76(Relationship Diagram 1)

Two bubble diagrams indicate the physical placement relationships between the program elements. The diagrams changed slightly throughout the process of the design, however the same core concepts always remained the same. Some of these consistent diagramming trends include:

• Keeping corporate space separated and blocked from public access. • Creating a strong connection between commercial/retail and the boardwalk. • Providing public transportation options near the public ammenities such as retail and the boardwalk. • Keeping the track and some of the sports fields connected exclusively with corporate private space.

Figure 1.77(Relationship Diagram 2)

RECREATION TRAILS

BOARDWALK

PROPOSED SHORE TYPOLOGIES

Creating a boardwalk along the eastern shoreline of the site will create a new attraction for the public. This provides an opportunity to bring a mix of uses to this region of the project, such as recreational, commercial, and private Under Armour space.

Figure 1.78(Boardwalk Shoreline Typology)

The proposed recreational trails will run parallel to the shoreline, with an interesting interaction with the site topography. The goal in developing trail systems is to create trail types of different sizes and types in order to accommodate multiple types of uses, as well as all user ability levels.

Figure 1.79(Recreational Trails Shoreline Typology)

FISHING PIER

Fishing areas within Baltimore City arenâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t very abundant, so introducing piers on the new site brings a new commodity to the area. The idea of incorporating fishing locations on the site also brings more interest to the shoreline and possible interaction with the recreational trail system.

Figure 1.80(Fishing Pier Shoreline Typology)

BEACH

Enhancing and cleaning up the existing beach zones of the shore is a goal which will enable safer and more attractive water access areas for the public.

Figure 1.81(Beach Shoreline Typology)

KAYAK LAUNCH

Promoting interaction with the water is a huge aspect of the design process, therefore introducing marina facilities and kayak launches helps to draw interest to the siteâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s shoreline. The marina and launches would be fully accessible by the public as well as offer docking amenities for privately owned boats.

Figure 1.82(Kayak Launch Shoreline Typology)

CASE STUDIES Our case studies start with the newest headquarters for famous sportswear company Adidas that was recently completed in Herzogenaurach, Germany, by KINZO. Entitled WORKOUT, the project displays a highly modern architecture and pays tribute to the values of the brand. “Round about 1,700 Adidas’ staff members have moved into a new working environment at the corporation’s headquarters in Herzogenaurach, a building distinguished by an exterior and an interior which strike new paths – literally: Glass walkways cross the inner courtyard, intertwining like the laces of a sport shoe. WORKOUT opens up new realms of creativity and possibilities for team play and displays folders, textiles, balls and shoes with the visual quality and continuity of a film set “- the designers informed in an official press release

The second of our case studies is The Evelyn Grace Academy in Brixton, London. This Academy presents itself as an open, transparent and welcoming addition to the community’s local urban regeneration process. These spaces present generous environments with maximum levels of natural light, ventilation and understated but durable textures. The project team included: Lars Teichmann, Matthew Hardcastle, Bidisha Sinha, Henning Hansen, Lisamarie Villegas Ambia, Judith Wahle, Enrico Kleinke, Christine Chow, Guy Taylor, Patrick Bedarf, Sang Hilliges, and Hoda Nobakhti. What inspired us most about this project was their innovative track design and environmentally friendly ways of creating space.

Next, we looked at Expedia’s corporate campus in Seattle, Washington. Designed by the Seattle office of Bohlin Cywinski Jackson (BCJ) in conjunction with STUDIOS Architecture and PWP Landscape Architecture. The architecture of the new Seattle campus is primarily transparent, connecting employees with views of Elliott Bay, Mt. Rainier and the Olympic Mountains. What inspired us most from this project was the strong connection and interaction that the designed trail systems have with the shoreline.

Finally, we have the Nike World Headquarters expansion project in Beaverton Oregon. Being the largest sportswear company in the United States just in front of Under Armour, naturally Nike sparked our interest. Nike is currently in the process of adding 3.3 million sq. ft. of office, mixed-use and parking facilities to the campus, all designed by three Portland firms: ZGF, Skylab Architecture and SRG Partnership (with landscape design — no small aspect of this campus — by PLACE). Nike’s existing track with a large forested canopy was inspiration to begin with, but what intrigued us most was the new architecture for their expansion and how strategically they designed the buildings to have such a strong relationship with the landscape.

ROUGH SITE SKETCHING

The design process started with many rough and messy sketches which were a way of getting ideas on paper quickly and ruling out the ideas that plainly wouldnâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t work, right from the start. It became apparent from the start that the track was going to be a dominating and most likely, centrally located portion of the plan. Deciding on the most efficient way to design the building shapes and sizes was also somewhat complicated by the fact that they were going to have to be closely associated with the track.

Relatively soon after beginning these initial sketch ideas, visual axes begin to add some structural gridlines to the site. Keeping the southern shoreline heavily vegetated and free of structural features is an idea which stuck from the very beginning. The idea of possibly making the track a more abstract and less conventional form is also an early idea. Elements from the initial abstract track idea sketches seen above stay with the design to the end.

ROUGH SITE SKETCHES

These rough site sketches show more of the earlier ideas that were considered for the site layout. Many different ideas are generated that donâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t yield many, if any, components that make it to the final plan. However, this graphic shows how small parts of every design idea leads to a new, more refined form which eventually makes it to the final plan. For example, the only portion of the design on the far left that had any influence on the design was the orientation of the track, which eventually makes it to the final masterplan. Also, building shapes in the north constantly changed through the process, but the space between them was decided on very early on. This lead to a cross shaped plaza space in the north which ends up sticking in the design.

CONCEPTUAL MASTERPLAN The conceptual master plan shows general locations and rough shapes of building types and locations, along with circulation paths. High rise corporate buildings are kept in the northwest of the site, with the main vehicular circulation using the existing road infrastructure which runs the length of the west side. Other pedestrian circulation can be seen along the southern shoreline of the site.

[

Figure 1.83(Conceptual Masterplan)

0’

100’

200’

300’

PRELIMINARY MASTERPLAN The preliminary master plan shows the more refined and detailed ideas following the conceptual stage. The elevated track acts as a strong central core of the design and creates unique connectivity between the high-rise Under Armour corporate buildings. Contrary to the usual typical sports field which is located inside of tracks, a planted gathering space and water feature takes its place. Access to the raised track is only available through the third story of the corporate buildings. The concept behind elevating the track, is so that there aren’t circulation conflicts between runners and people who just need to move through the central gathering space. In addition to an elevated track being an interesting focal point on the site, it also provides unique views for the people using it.

The long, straight eastern edge of the site, which used to be a shipping dock, will be repurposed as a public boardwalk which extends from the northern end of the site, down to the beginning of the trails to the southeast.

[

Figure 1.84(Preliminary Masterplan)

0’

100’

200’

300’

Heavy canopy coverage in the south of the site provides a wooded recreational zone for public use. This is the area which will be more heavily developed with recreational trails. Existing water detention zones are shown in the south and east as well. 65

PRELIMINARY BUILDING USAGE

[

Figure 1.85(Preliminary Masterplan)

0’

100’

200’

300’

Corporate Space ----- 2.98 million sq. ft. Commercial Space ----- 60,414 sq. ft. Athletic Space ----- 284,160 sq. ft. Innovation Space ----- 136,720 sq. ft. Parking ------1.53 million sq. ft.

Figure 1.86(Preliminary Building Usage)

The building sizes in the preliminary masterplan are calculated based on the square footage requirements which Under Armour specified. Building shapes were first drafted in plan view, given a designated use, and from there the number of stories necessary to meet the square footage requirements are calculated. Under Armour plans to accommodate 10,000 employees on the campus, needing approximately 3 million square feet of office space, and parking to support roughly 5,000 vehicles. Multi use athletic facilities were also a necessity, totaling nearly 300,000 square feet. The commercial space, which is located alongside the boardwalk, totals 60,000 square feet which will be broken up into a variety of retail and restaurants. The tallest high-rise office building reaches 35 stories / 457 feet tall. The high rise office buildings are reduced in height by 7 stories each in a counter-clockwise order, which allows each of them outward views of the Patapsco River. Finally, the central oval space will house the elevated track and gathering spaces within.

POST PRELIMINARY SKETCHES SOUTH BUILDING CHANGES After finalizing the preliminary masterplan, assessing the designâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s strengths and weaknesses lead to redevelopment of several parts of the site, and further development of some of the areas which had sensible designs already in place.

One of the weakest points in the preliminary masterplan was the design and layout of the south central Under Armour buildings. Using the four norther high rise buildings as a center point, a radial grid system begins to form which provides structure which will be used to guide new building placement in the south. Zones which we want to keep open for sight-lines are shown in red, while the blue areas represent suitable building spaces.

SOUTH BUILDING CHANGES

In the next draft, the new building sizes and locations are refined. The radial gridlines which were used to direct the placement can be seen in the above sketch. Another concept which began to take form is the concept of using a water retention zone that would run the length of the southern portion of the site, acting as a natural barrier between the public access areas and Under Armourâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s corporate campus. The development of this wetland/retention concept will play off of some of the siteâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s existing water detention areas, as well as topography changes which will be made later in the design. 69

POST PRELIMINARY SKETCHES DESIGN PROCESS

DESIGN PROCESS Further refinement of the preliminary masterplan includes what is going inside of the elevated track. The gathering space was completely changed from a large Under Armour logo water feature, to a replication of Fort McHenry. Relating components of the design back to Baltimore City is a strategy that we constantly rely on in order to assure that this project has a strong foundation in its location. Therefore, using the form of one of Baltimoreâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s most historic sites was a strong way to accomplish this.

Even further development of the newest edition of the southern office buildings is achieved by breaking them into smaller pieces, which further plays off of the radial grid structure of the site. Also, the first rendition of where the barrier wetland will go is sketched out.

POST PRELIMINARY SKETCHES DESIGN PROCESS

In the next step of the process, our final positions and placement of buildings are drawn out in their proper locations. This is where we begin to understand how canopy coverage can play off of the site structuring to the north. Also, Planting and circulation styles within the smaller office buildings begin to take form.

SOUTHERN DIAGRAMMING

TOPOGRAPHY MANIPULATION

The southern portion of the site along the shoreline is a complex part of the design, which will have multiple designed elements within it, including: recreational trails, bridges, swales, water retention areas, canopy coverage, and shoreline interaction. Diagramming all of these pieces in order to find a harmonious manner for them to interact with one another is essential in finding a successful solution. The different colored lines represent the location of some of these elements and where they can be successfully implemented. One of the biggest driving factors in determining the location of these program elements is the topography, which has been manipulated to meet the needs of the site. 73

POST PRELIMINARY SKETCHES CONCEPT PERSPECTIVES

Creating an attractive entry to the site which expresses a strong presence in Under Armourâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s image is one of the most important parts on the design. The intersection that the above sketch depicts, is located adjacent to the northern portion of the future Port Covington development, and will be seen by thousands of users every day. Assuring that the scale and iconic image of Under Armour is captured by the gateway to their 50 acre site is essential. 74

BOARDWALK PROGRESSION

POST PRELIMINARY SKETCHES CONCEPT PERSPECTIVES

As seen in the post-preliminary sketches, expanding smaller Under Armour office space into the south brings employees closer to the water and allows an opportunity to bring a more naturalized landscape closer to the workspace. In contrast from the northern high-rise buildings, these 2 and 3 story office spaces are separated and surrounded by more naturalistic vegetation that breaks away from the urban feel of working in a metropolitan area. The concept of biophilia was a strong influence in redesigning this portion of the site.

POST PRELIMINARY SKETCHES CONCEPT PERSPECTIVES Finally, a concept for the northeast corner of the site shows how we might introduce a drop-off loop at the front entry of the tallest high-rise building which sits directly next to the start of the boardwalk. This area is anticipated to be one of the main public transportation hubs on the site.

The sketch below illustrates an idea for a breezeway which would provide a connection between the private Under Armour campus and the boardwalk. The breezeway can also serve as a public attraction with store and restaurant entries within it. Creating a barrier within the breezeway which restricts public access to the campus would be necessary.

SOLUTIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS Final Masterplan Support Drawings

FINAL MASTERPLAN 2 1

3 6 8

7 10

14 15 17

19 18

20 Figure 2.1(Final Masterplan)

0’ 25’

75’

250’

500’

LEGEND:

Entry fountain

Bus stop/ bike share

Breezeway connection

New boulevard design

Tidal wetlands

Drop off loop

Public/ private barrier wetlands

Towers Plaza

Fishing pier

Cantilever boardwalk extension

Public marina

Elevated track

Recreational trails

Cantilever track extension

Tidal wetlands

Fort McHenry Plaza

Wetland bridge

Public rooftop recreation

Fishing pier

Drop off/ service loop

Entry

Towers Plaza

Elevated Track

Figure 2.2(Entry Plan)

Figure 2.3(Towers Plaza Plan)

Figure 2.4(Elevated Track Plan)

Boardwalk

Fishing Loop & Trails

Figure 2.5(Boardwalk Plan)

Figure 2.6(Fishing Pier Plan)

FINAL MASTERPLAN

Public Private 0’ 25’

Figure 2.7(Public vs. Private)

75’

250’

500’

The most commonly asked question about this project is how exactly to create a harmonious relationship between public and private space on the site. Early solutions in the project limited the public to just the boardwalk and shoreline, while prohibiting visitor access to anything in the northern “towers plaza”, or the rooftops of the eastern commercial buildings. Eventually it was decided that the site as a whole would benefit if there were more areas where Under Armour and the public could interact, decreasing the sensation of off-limit zones, and creating a more welcoming atmosphere. This was accomplished by bringing some commercial/retail into the ground levels of “towers plaza” which activates the space and draws more visitors from the residential zones in northern Port Covington. Adding public sports facilities on top of the buildings adjacent to the boardwalk brings visitors to a position where they can clearly see into the Under Armour campus. This way of “breaking down the walls” between the public and private zones creates a sense of unity throughout the site.

DESIGN BREAKDOWN Formal Public Gathering

Private Athletic

Waterfront and Retail

Private Office

Ecologic Enhancement Private Office

Ecologic Enhancement

Public Recreation

0’ 25’

Figure 2.8(Design Breakdown)

75’

250’

500’

Office: 3 million sqft. Innovation: 75,000 sqft. Commercial: 140,000 sqft.

Compared with the building usage diagram, the new square footage numbers of the finalized masterplan have remained relatively the same. The biggest changes in the usage is the amount of commercial and athletic/recreational space. Commercial space more than doubled from 60,000 square feet to 140,000 square feet, which was done in an effort to provide more amenities for the public. Athletic space dropped from 280,000 square feet to only 70,000, as a result of the addition of more outdoor activity options and the realization that the previous amount was unnecessary.

Recreational: 70,000 sqft. Parking: 5,000 stalls Figure 2.9(Designed Building Usage)

DESIGN BREAKDOWN BUILDING HEIGHT As noted in the composite analysis, the taller buildings are most suited to be in northern portion of the site in order to promote the concept of keeping clear site lines to the water. The tallest high-rise reaches 457’, while the shortest buildings are 13’.

For reference, the tallest building in Baltimore is the Transamerica Tower, at 528’. This Under Armour office building would be the 5th tallest in Baltimore once completed. Figure 2.10(Building Height)

PEDESTRIAN CIRCULATION This diagram shows the clear distinction between public and private circulation routes. Making public accessibility around the entire perimeter of the site is a crucial goal in the design.

Private Circulation Public Circulation

Figure 2.11(Circulation)

VEHICULAR CIRCULATION & TRANSPORTATION FACILITIES Public vehicular accessibility on the site is confined to the length of the western border. This road allows accessibility to the parking lot at the south of the site near the trails and marina. Service roads for waste removal, maintenance, and deliveries are seen in the interior of the UA campus.

Public Vehicular Service Road Emergency

Additionally, public transportation and bicycle facility icons designate their locations. Figure 2.12(Vehicular Circulation)

MULTI-USE FIELD One of the main visual axes on the new site design offers many possible uses. This diagram highlights that area, and shows some potential uses being two-half soccer fields, and space for multiple 500-person event tents.

Half Soccer Field 500 Person Tent Multi-Use Field

Multi-Use Field

Figure 2.13(Multi-Use Field)

DESIGN BREAKDOWN EXISTING TOPOGRAPHY Altering the existing topography is necessary for several reasons. Existing biodetention areas have lowpoint elevations of only 4 feet above sea level, making them convenient linking points for a site-wide swale which will serve as the main drainage system for the southern portion of the UA campus.

Figure 2.14(Existing Topography)

DESIGNED TOPOGRAPHY

The high point of the eastwest oriented swale will be located approximately at the midway point, at 8 feet above sea level. The grade will gently slope away, towards the newly formed tidal wetlands located on the east and west endpoints of the swale, before exiting into the Patapsco River. Side slopes will never exceed 3:1, while longitudinal slopes range from 2%-4%. Directly adjacent to the swale on the north side, slope ranges from 1%-2%, creating an area of slow runoff. This will promote the saturated ground needed to form the barrier wetlands and meadows which will create an edge between the public and the UA campus.

Water Flow Direction

Figure 2.15(Designed Topography)

SHORELINE CHANGES Once again referencing the existing detention areas in the south of the site, weâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;ve proposed to break the narrow boundary between them and the Patapsco River. Doing so will then turn the current detention areas into tidal wetlands, which will bring more interest into the site, as well as give the site drainage a direct link to the river. The orange outlined areas represent the location of the current detention areas.

New Shoreline Existing Shoreline

Figure 2.16(Shoreline Changes)

TIDAL WETLANDS/DRAINAGE The following diagram shows the final location of the proposed swale, wetlands, and barrier wetlands in an easy to understand and comprehensive view.

Barrier Wetlands Drainage Swale Tidal Wetlands New Shoreline

Figure 2.17(Tidal Wetlands/Drainage)

DESIGN BREAKDOWN OYSTER CAGES • More suitable choice for oyster farming • Can be maintained and attached to piers • Oysters clean water pollutants

NATURAL BEDS • Grows on natural surfaces such as reefs and rock formations • Oyster shells are deposited on site to provide foundation for new oyster colonies • ‘Seeding” oysters are brought onto site to start new growth • Clean water pollutants

FLOATING WETLANDS • Plants help to clean runoff from nearby land • Roots provide habitat for marine life

RECREATIONAL LOCATION The major public recreational amenities are shown below. Attention was given during the design to make common activities more unique on the Under Armour site. Some of these unique spins include: rooftop basketball and tennis, expansive circular fishing piers, and recreational trails that interact with wetlands and topography changes in an interesting manner.

Figure 2.18(Recreational Locations)

BUILDING ENTRY LOCATIONS

Vehicular Pedestrian

[

Figure 2.19(Door Entry Locations)

PLANT PALETTE

LARGE-CANOPY TREES Acer rubrum ‘October Glory’

Betula nigra

Gleditsia trianthos var. inermis

Pinus taeda

UNDERSTORY TREES Arborvitae ‘Emerald Green’

SHRUBS Comptonia peregrina

Platanus occidentalis Quercus phellos Taxodium distichum

Carpinus caroliniana

Cercis canadensis

Cornus florida ‘Cherokee Brave’

Magnolia virginiana

Malus ‘Prairifire’

Syringa reticulata

Clethra alnifolia

Hydrangea arborescens

Ilex glabra

Juniperus chinensis ‘Mint Jelup’

Morella cerifera

Myrica pensylvanica

ORNAMENTAL GRASSES /PERENNIALS Andropogon virginicus

Buddleia ‘Blue Chip’

Lobelia siphilitica Miscanthus sinensis Osmundastrum ‘Zebrinus’ cinnamomeum

FLOODPLAIN/FLOATING WETLANDS Eutrochium purpureum Hibiscus moschuetos

Zelkova serrata

Iris versicolor

Juncus effusus

Pennisetum alopecuroides

Nuphar lutea

Rudbeckia hirta

Nymphaea odorata

Echinacea purpurea

Spartina alterniflora

MATERIAL PALETTE

Concrete

Herringbone brick

Wire mesh fencing

Stone pavers

Swirl marble

Asphalt

Charcoal brick siding

Polyurethane

Wood panels

Metal

Aluminum

Artificial turf

Glass

Crushed gravel

Mulch

EXISTING SITE SECTIONS G

G’

F’

E’

D’

C’

G’ F’

B’

E’

D’

C A

A’

B’

Figure 2.20(Existing Site Sections)

A 96

C’

G A’

DESIGNED SECTIONS

G’

F’

E’

Figure 2.21(Designed Site Sections)

In order to clearly convey the magnitude of the changes proposed on site, cross sections of the current state and post construction of the design are shown side by side. The drastic changes are most evident in section G, which extends down the length of the entire site, and shows the scale of the proposed building additions. Also notable, is the topography addition in section F, which covers the new hills at the fountain entry of the site. Also, section E shows the elevated track relationship with the buildings that it’s connected to.

EXISTING SITE SECTIONS G

G’

F’

E’

D’

C’

G’ F’

B’

E’

D’

C A

A’

B’

Figure 2.22(Existing Site Sections)

A 98

C’

G A’

DESIGNED SECTIONS

D’

C’

B’

A’ Figure 2.23(Designed Site Sections)

The most notable changes made to these portions of the site are the addition of canopy coverage in many of the sections, and the improved shoreline interaction in section D, where the new boardwalk and tidal wetland will be constructed. Section C also accurately illustrates the kind of marshy grassland that will be used as a method of separating the public and private portions of the site.

ENTRY PLAZA LEGEND: 1

Entry fountain

Bus stop/ bike share

New boulevard design

Drop off loop

2 0’ 25’

50’

[

Figure 2.24(Entry Plaza Enlarged Plan)

The entry plaza shows a few key features on our site, including the entry fountain, a bus stop and bike share, the proposed boulevard, and the drop off loop. The plan also shows the different entrances that lead to the center buildings as well as an entrance, on the far right, to the proposed boardwalk.

100

Figure 2.25(Entry Perspective)

The entrance to the site is designed to be an alluring welcoming into the Under Armour campus. There are several entrances into the site with meandering pathways surrounded by large earth mounds and lush vegetation. (Figure 2.25) shows the reflecting pool, built with a black and white swirled marble. In the front of the reflecting pool are a variety of perennials and ornamental grasses for a big pop of color.

101

102

Figure 2.26(Enlarged Area Section)

0’

15’

30’

With the implementation of the new campus, Under Armour anticipates having 10,000 employees working in the new headquarters. The existing two-lane road is not the ideal circulation for this many employees coming into work every day. By creating a boulevard with four driving lanes and two bike lanes, traffic will flow much more efficiently. The bike lanes are completely separated from cars to increase safety and to make bicycle lanes more appealing by incorporating landscaping and trees along the route. It is this feature that make biking so popular year-round in countries with a lot of rain and very cold and snowy weather.

0’

6’

12’

Figure 2.27(Boulevard Section & Plan)

103

BOARDWALK

Figure 2.28(Boardwalk Perspective 1)

104

105

TOWERS PLAZA

0’

Figure 2.29(Towers Plaza Enlarged Plan)

106

25’ 25’

50’ 50’

[

We wanted the space in between the proposed skyscrapers to be more than just walking from one building to the next, so we created Towers Plaza. The cross design has a dense canopy formed by allĂŠes of trees on all four ends. The central water feature breaks up the rows of trees, and includes benches in the center and surrounding area for a shaded and relaxing place to sit.

107

OFFICE

PARKING

OFF

108

COMMERCIAL

COMME

The most prominent information to be gained from these perspectives (A2 / A3), is the scale of the new high-rise office buildings and their relation to adjacent site elements.

FICE

ERCIAL

0’

25’

50’

109

OFFICE

Figure 2.31(Towers Plaza Perspective)

COMMERCIAL 110

OFFICE

The most prominent information to be gained from these perspectives (A2 / A3), is the scale of the new high-rise office buildings and their relation to adjacent site elements.

COMMERCIAL A3

0’

25’

50’

111

112

0’ 0’

25’ 25’

50’ 50’

[

BOARDWALK

LEGEND:

Cantilever track extension

Cantilever boardwalk extension

3 Greenroof

Public rooftop courts

Breezeway connection

The detail plan for the boardwalk shows one of the most active and busy regions of the entire site. In this location, both public visitors and UA employees converge, creating a dynamic zone. Itâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s an interesting meshing of spaces, including transportation amenities, commercial/athletic/office/ and public recreational space all in one. Using the inner harbor as inspiration, the brick waterfront side of the boardwalk anchors this portion of the site to the city. 113

BOARDWALK

Figure 2.32(Boardwalk Perspective 2)

114

(Figure 2.32) shows the boardwalk facing south. Here you can see cantilevered track and pier and a clear view of the trees and earth mounds all the way down the boardwalk. The users here will get a great view and overlooking Winans Cove. Many of the materials used to design this area are the same as those used in Baltimoreâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Inner Harbor. The use of these same materials such as brick pavers, concrete, wood panels, and glass helped to give the boardwalk a more familiar sense of place and tie in into the rest of Baltimore.

115

BOARDWALK

Figure 2.33(Boardwalk Perspective 3)

116

(Figure 2.33) shows the userâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s experience farther down the boardwalk facing north. Here you can see the centrally located stepdown area for a water taxi stop, which can also be used simply for a closer interaction with the water. The far left shows one of several earth mounds on the boardwalk that was turned into a curvilinear seat wall.

117

BOARDWALK

ATHLETIC

COMMERC

0’

15’

30’

Section C2 shows the public access rooftop basketball courts next to the boardwalk below. Creating multitude of activities in this one zone makes it one of the most active spaces along the boardwalk.

COMMERCIAL C4 118

0’

10’

20’

CIAL Section C3 is the portion of the boardwalk with a large stepdown to the water’s edge, allowing people closer interaction with the river. This spot also serves as a water taxi drop-off and pick-up.

BOARDWALK BRICK STEPDOWN

0’

5’

10’

COMMERCIAL

C4 depicts the breezeway which links the boardwalk to the inner private UA campus, allowing employees easy access. The breezeway is partially covered on each side for cover during bad weather, while the center is left open to allow rainwater to reach the planted center. Also noticeable is the 2nd story restaurant balcony on the building to the left.

119

ELEVATED TRACK

0’

Figure 2.34(Elevated Track Plan)

120

25’

50’

[

The elevated track and its interior design, which houses a partial turf field and gathering spaces with design inspiration linked to Fort McHenry, is a central hub of the private corporate campus. Itâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s a space which will be heavily used throughout all times of the day for exercise, games, equipment testing, and lunch breaks.

121

DESIGN BREAKDOWN FORT MCHENRY

Fort McHenry, located a mile East of the site, is a famous military fort which defended Baltimore’s harbor during the war of 1812. As a national monument and famous attraction in Baltimore, it represents an iconic connection which anchors the site to the city.

ELEVATED TRACK The innovative elevated track design allows UA to continue to push the boundaries of the norm in sports. It also supports our concept of “Connected Fitness” by linking multiple buildings and portions of our site in a unique manner.

122

MULTI-USE FIELD

The multi-use turf field within the track provided a chance to use local symbols and icons in the design. The Maryland flag not only connects the Under Armour HQ to the state, but also to the University of Maryland where CEO Kevin Plank went to college.

VIEWS The elevated track design is intended not just as a functional sports facility, but also as an aesthetically interesting viewpoint. In return, it also provides good views to the rest of the site for users.

123

ELEVATED TRACK

Figure 2.35(Elevated Track Perpective 1)

124

The existing masterplan for Sagamore Development proposed a full-sized athletic track. Being such a large and significant element on 50-acre site, it was not something that we wanted to put just anywhere. Circulation flow was the main challenge we faced when deciding where to place the track. The decision to raise to track and be accessible from all the surrounding buildings allowed for easier pedestrian circulation and opened the door for unlimited opportunities. (Figure 2.35) shows the user experience on the track facing south.

125

ELEVATED TRACK

Figure 2.36(Elevated Track Perpective 2)

126

Moving down to the middle of the track, is a clear view straight to the river. We wanted to create a strong central axis on the site to keep completely clear of buildings and vegetation so that an open view of the water will be scene at every level in this central axis.

127

ELEVATED TRACK

Figure 2.37(Green Roof Perspective)

128

Directly to the right of the elevated track is a publicly accessible green roof, located on top of the recreation facility. Although the track and amenities located beneath it are limited to the employees of Under Armour, the green roof provides a beautiful perennial filled garden that allows public users to have a perfect view overlooking the track and field, almost as if they were right on it.

129

ELEVATED TRACK

Figure 2.38(Fort McHenry Plaza Perspective 1)

130

Moving back down below the track, is the Fort McHenry Plaza. This space provides the Under Armour employees with a botanical gathering space that carefully blends the constructed and natural environment. The heavily vegetated planters help to cool the larger hardscaped areas and manage stormwater.

131

ELEVATED TRACK

Figure 2.39(Fort McHenry Plaza Perspective 2)

132

In the center of the raised planters, are canopy-shaded seating areas with a view of the multi-use field.

133

ELEVATED TRACK

ATHLETIC COMMERCIAL

B1 134

0’

25’

0’

50’

10’

20’

OFFICE

135

0’ 0’

136

25’ 25’

50’ 50’

[

FISHING PIER AND TRAILS

Creating a unique experience with the water along the southern shoreline has been a priority throughout the design process. The addition of a swooping fishing pier of this scale is a feature which isnâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t available anywhere nearby, ensuring a unique quality for the siteâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s shoreline. This region also provides a multitude of activities for visitors and Under Armour employees, including: hiking, fishing, boating, and exercising on the shoreline trail system.

137

FISHING PIER AND TRAILS

Figure 2.39(Fishing Pier Perspective)

D1 138

0’

25’

The fishing pier and recreational trails, located at the southern most portion of the site, allow for a wide range of activities. A scenic view is provided looking over the water, with the Hanover Street Bridge, located ajacent to the site.

139

FISHING PIER AND TRAILS

Figure 2.40(Tidal Wetlands Perspective 1)

140

(Figure 2.40) puts the user on the meandering bridge over the tidal wetlands. This gives the user a more forested and naturalistic experience while walking along the shoreline.

141

VARIOUS PERSPECTIVES/SITE SECTIONS

Figure 2.41(Tidal Wetlands Perspective 2)

142

The manipulation of the existing topography allows us to create a tidal wetland from the area that was previously a detention basin. This intertwined with numerous boardwalks, creates various experiences for the users. While the decision to daylight the detention basin was not only for aesthetic reasons, it allowed us to do our part on cleaning up the Baltimore Harbor. The wetlands, along with carefully selected planting, will allow us to cleanse the water leaving our site and the water coming from the harbor.

143

VARIOUS PERSPECTIVES/SITE SECTIONS

Figure 2.42(Edge of Boardwalk)

144

(Figure 2.42) is located at the edge of the boardwalk, left of the east waterfront. The existing conditions on the site sparked our interest to create a grove of trees with a dense canopy, so that the users can stay shaded while enjoying the water or watching the sunset.

145

VARIOUS PERSPECTIVES/SITE SECTIONS

Figure 2.43(Fishing Pier Perspective 2)

146

The boardwalks on site were not only designed with fishing in mind, they were also an extension of the nearby recreational trails. These give users the option to walk or run in and alongside the water.

147

VARIOUS PERSPECTIVES/SITE SECTIONS

Figure 2.44(Recreational Trails)

148

All along the southern portion of the site, are recreational trails for public and private access near the shoreline and tidal wetlands. Creating an opportunity for visitors to see into the UA campus from the trails help to unify the site.

149

VARIOUS PERSPECTIVES/SITE SECTIONS

Figure 2.45(Multi-use Field Night Render)

150

(Figure 2.45) shows one of many ways that the open space in the central access can be used. By day, the open space can be used as a multi-use field, and by night it can be used for parties and events hosted by Under Armour. This area is large enough to fit up to two tents that hold 500 people each.

151

VARIOUS PERSPECTIVES/SITE SECTIONS C5 depicts the newly constructed tidal wetlands on the west side of the boardwalk. This section also puts into perspective the distance between the edge of the boardwalk and the rest of the southern mainland.

0’

15’

30’

A4 152

0’

15’

30’

153

VARIOUS PERSPECTIVES/SITE SECTIONS

OFFICE

Section C1 is key in understanding the relationship between the track and the boardwalk. This illustrates how the private track cantilevers across the boardwalk, extending overtop of the water. This creates a unique space where public and private zones intermingle.

OFFICE

BRICK

154

BOARDWALK

PARKING

0’

50’

100’

OFFICE

0’

25’

50’

155

VARIOUS PERSPECTIVES/SITE SECTIONS

Figure 2.46(Public Green Roof and Basketball Courts)

156

Looking into the accessible green roof, you can see the rooftop basketball courts, located on top of the Under Armour Fitness Center. This area is open to public users and gives them a view into the core of the private UA campus.

157

158

159

160

161

BIBLIOGRAPHY SITE RELATED: 1. “Port Covington: Baltimore’s Junction with the World.” Underbelly, www.mdhs. org/underbelly/2016/06/30/port-covington-baltimores-junction-with-the-world/. “Port Covington/W6.0(Miles to Walbrook Jct.) Port Covington More Photos of Port 2. Covington in 1989.” Port Covington, www.wmwestsub.com/tidesub/portcovington. htm. “Search Results.” Search Results: “Photograph:+md1206” - Prints & Photographs 3. Online Catalog (Library of Congress), loc.gov/pictures/search/?q=Photograph%3A%2B md1206&fi=number&op=PHRASE&va=exact&co%2B=hh&st=gallery&sg%2B=%2Btrue. 4. “E. Sachse, & Co.’s Bird’s Eye View of the City of Baltimore, 1869.” The Library of Congress, www.loc.gov/resource/g3844b.pm002540/. 5. “Oyster Restoration News & Resources.” Oyster Restoration Resources, www. baysave.org/oyster-restoration.html. “Baltimore Waterfront.” Waterfront Partnership, baltimorewaterfront.com/ 6. healthy-harbor/floating-wetlands/. 7.

Pedagogy of the Plants, verdant123.com/tag/oyster-bed/.

8. “Fort Covington (1813-1836).” Maryland in the War of 1812, 2 Apr. 2011, maryland1812.wordpress.com/2011/04/01/fort-covington-1813-1836/.

162

CASE STUDIES: 9. Spector, Julian, and CityLab. “Another Reason to Love Urban Green Space: It Fights Crime.” CityLab, 27 May 2016, www.citylab.com/solutions/2016/04/vacantlots-green-space-crime-research-statistics/476040/. 10. “NIKE, Inc. Reveals Design for World Headquarters Expansion.” Nike News, news.nike.com/news/nike-inc-reveals-design-for-world-headquarters-expansion. 11. Reuters. “Adidas Is Based In The Middle Of Nowhere, And That’s Becoming A Problem.” Business Insider, Business Insider, 28 Sept. 2014, www.businessinsider. com/r-adidas-fights-to-draw-top-talent-to-hq-in-sleepy-bavarian-town-2014-9. 12. Levy, Nat. “Expedia Clears Major Planning Milestone in Preparation for 2019 HQ Move to Seattle.” GeekWire, 15 June 2017, www.geekwire.com/2017/expedia-clearsmajor-planning-milestone-preparation-2019-hq-move-seattle/. 13. “Evelyn Grace Academy / Zaha Hadid Architects.” ArchDaily, 13 Dec. 2010, www.archdaily.com/95234/evelyn-grace-academy-zaha-hadid-architects.

163

164