Big Fish: P. David Bramble and reimagining Harborplace (Part I)

P. David Bramble has become the public face of the Inner Harbor, and, along with it, the future Downtown Baltimore. He assumed this consequential position himself, but it’s not quite clear how much he relishes the role.

Bramble, 47, is co-founder and managing partner of Baltimore-based MCB Real Estate, a growing firm with extensive assets in Maryland, Virginia, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Florida and Massachusetts — spanning residential, retail, mixed use, office and industrial properties. His firm grew its Baltimore holdings in a big way by purchasing Harborplace through a court-governed process after a previous owner declared bankruptcy.

In one breath, Bramble — raised in West Baltimore before attending Princeton and University of Pennsylvania law school — says he and his firm need the Harborplace project “like a hole in the head.” But in the next, he says he is committed to replicating and eclipsing the excitement that Harborplace generated as a landmark waterfront destination in the 1980s and making the Inner Harbor a place for all of Baltimore to spend time, and just as attractive as The Wharf in DC. or similar projects in Singapore and Copenhagen.

After the receivership purchase, MCB hired architects and planners, solicited input in community settings and unveiled their vision in a masterplan released in late 2023. Features include a new park, amphitheater, a resilient waterfront promenade with garden islands, a distinctive commercial building called the Sail, and twin residential towers of 32 and 25 stories apiece with up to 900 apartments. The plan will cost close to $1 billion to execute, with $400 million in public money for the public portions. The concept has been embraced by Mayor Brandon Scott, Gov. Wes Moore, and members of the City Council and General Assembly. In November, Baltimore voters will be asked to approve a charter amendment that lets the residential towers get built.

But other reviews have been mixed, particularly from established developers and architects. Critics say the design process was rushed, and the results are not special enough. Some have asked for a reboot. In an interview with Baltimore Fishbowl executive editor David Nitkin, Bramble embraced and defended the plan, even as he said some elements could change as community discussions continue. Fishbowl is presenting this Big Fish discussion in two parts. [Part II can be found here.] This conversation has been edited for length and clarity.

Baltimore Fishbowl: Talk to me about your overall vision for the core of Baltimore, what it can be, what it should be, and how Harborplace fits into that?

David Bramble: I think that we are incredibly optimistic about the core of Baltimore, which has sort of been abandoned in some ways. But it’s still the heart of the city and still a key, a cornerstone to the success for the entire city. A lot of people feel or are concerned that Baltimore can’t grow. And I think they’re dead wrong. And the reason we think they’re dead wrong is because Baltimore is the beneficiary of amazing assets that are unique to Baltimore, that can’t move. Its geography is the number one thing — location, location, location, as we say in real estate all the time. And what you have is a city that’s close to Washington D.C., not far from New York, major transportation, trains and airports. You have the only law schools in the state; you’ve got the only medical schools in the state. You have all of this happening here in Baltimore, and massive GDP growth, by the way, for a very small working population.

There’s huge potential here, huge opportunity. And Downtown Baltimore, in our mind, is the key to unlocking it. People haven’t been willing to invest in Downtown Baltimore. And I think there’s been this theory that if you build something here, people will just move from over there. But that, in my mind, is the thinking we have to get away from. We’ve got to lean into growth. And we can grow. We just have to want it. We’ve got to lean into it. And we’ve got to push away all the folks who are constantly saying, ‘Don’t build this here; don’t build taller; don’t build more.’ We’ve got to combat that.

BFB: So as a developer, have things like Harbor East and Port Covington and the Peninsula detracted from Downtown Baltimore? Or was that a sort of natural process to go through to develop other areas?

DB: I think the answer is both. I mean, the reality is that Harbor East and the Peninsula are amazing projects. And what you’ve seen, particularly with Harbor East, is that the people who were in the [Central Business District] moved over to Harbor East.

And that hasn’t necessarily happened at the Peninsula yet. But…if you’ve been there, it’s stunning. They’ve done a fabulous job building an amazing space. And it’s got a bright future. However, the reality is there’s room for all of it. If we believe in growth, this is a city designed for well over a million people, with a half a million or so [residents now], and declining. The reality is this city could be filled with two million people if we really wanted it. The question is, as a city, as a state, as a region, are we going to lean into our economic engine, which is Baltimore? And the thing is, all the assets are here, we just have to say we’re going to leverage it. And we’re not going to focus on things that stand in the way of growth, particularly because the best way to help the people who have been here for all these years, and people like me who have lived in these neighborhoods, is to grow. It’s not to shrink.

‘The place you want to go’

BFB: When I’m looking at the media, since the plan was released, critics have come out. It’s easier to criticize things than to propose things, but how do you respond to the criticisms that have come out or the critiquing of the project?

DB: I have no problem with criticism. I think it’s good. And I think it’s part of the process. I think people didn’t really understand the process. The process was first, listening. That’s all we did. We listened to people all over the city, and not just fancy people, who generally get to decide everything. We listened to everybody. We went to people in ZIP codes that were shocked that someone talking about downtown Baltimore and the waterfront wanted to talk to them about what they wanted to see. And I think there were people who felt, ‘Why are you including so many people in the process of doing it?’ We’re doing it for a lot of reasons. One, we were doing it because, obviously, it’s just the right thing to do, considering that this project belongs to the whole city, not just the wealthy neighborhoods that border it. And for it to be successful, we need the entire city to buy into it. For this to work, everyone in Baltimore has to be ‘That’s the place you want to go.’ And that’s the feeling we want to create. And part of that process is getting people excited by including them in the visioning. So that’s just step one. That’s listening. Step two, is okay, we heard you, here’s what we think, based on what you said, and based on our opinions, too, because guess what? We listened to you. But at the end of the day, we’re the ones who have to deliver the project. We own the project, right? We paid for it with our own money. This wasn’t a gift from the city. We had to buy the project from another private entity. So it’s a combination of what we heard from people plus what we thought made sense.

Now we are listening. So now it is time for people to say, ‘I don’t like this. I don’t like that.’ That’s the process… Now’s the time to tell us what you don’t like so that we can incorporate things that make sense. And look, we’re not going to do everything. I said from the beginning, we’re not building a Ferris wheel, right? And I probably got a gazillion people saying you should build a Ferris wheel. I mean, people sent me Ferris wheel books and all kinds of stuff. And we said no. But what it does mean is we listen, we incorporate things, we’re talking to people, and the conversation continues. It didn’t end with us presenting the plan. We still are going to community meetings, we’re still presenting the plans. We’re still continuing, modifying the plans. This will go on for some time. So it’s always interesting to me that the critics attack and say, ‘Oh, it’s a sham.’ That’s complete nonsense. This is the process… I could have drawn something first, and then fought with you. But then, when would I be listening? So what we did here is, I think, the way any large-scale private project that includes a public component should be done, which is listen, then present, then we listen again. That’s what we’re doing now. And then ultimately, we hope that the final plans will incorporate the best of our ideas, the best ideas that we think make sense and can work. And then we get a project out of it.

BFB: I think there’s some education component, too, isn’t there? Because I think people think — maybe even I thought — that the Inner Harbor is like a park; it’s public open space.

DB: This is important, because I think this is where everything gets lost. People keep saying, ‘You’re privatizing the harbor.’ The promenade, according to the law, will always be public. All we’re doing is taking private property that we already own and adding more to it. That’s all we’re doing. And I think that that gets lost. Because it’s so easy to say, ‘privatizing the park for rich people.’ And I just want to say that’s not what we’re doing. I understand that people have a visceral reaction. But this is too important for that. People who care about Baltimore really need to peel back the onion. And if you have specific concerns about the project, guess what? We’re right here. Anybody can find us. Like, I got grandmas calling me and talking to me. So we’ll talk to anybody. But I think what people need to understand is that this project is so important. We cannot fall victim to the normal ‘NIMBY, traffic’ hype. Let’s focus on what is really going to create an excellent world-class waterfront.

BFB: When you hear and when you see the writings and thoughts of people who have criticized the project, is there a generational or even a racial component to the opposition or criticism of what’s been presented so far? Of like, ‘Well, hey, we were the people who did it back in the 70s and 80s. And the William Donald Schaefer days were the right way to do things, with the right people doing them.’

DB: I’m not going to speak to what’s in those people’s hearts, because I don’t know. But I can tell you this. I didn’t see any of them at the community meetings. The only critic of the program who came to any community meetings was Ted Rouse [son of original Harborplace developer Jim Rouse]. And I will tell you, the other thing that you should maybe think about too, or we should all be thinking about is, it’s basically the same people over and over again, complaining with massive amplification. Most people that I talked to, even if they don’t love the entire plan, they’re supportive of what we’re doing because they understand how critical this is. People will say to me, ‘Oh, could you make this a little bit different?’ Or ‘Would you do that?’ Or ‘Would you add this?’ And the truth is sometimes yes. And sometimes no, because there’s a practical component to all this, which is weaving economic sustainability with creating this world-class project. We have to weave them all together to execute, and you can’t get everything you want. And no, we’re not going to turn it into one big park. Because it’s private. We paid for it, we own it. And I think that the most laughable thing I hear all the time is you should do an RFP. And I said, ‘People, we did do an RFP. We did a private RFP for our private property.’ I want to ask people if you want me to come to your house and just do an RFP for your house and tell you what you should do with it? That’s not how this works. So I think that there are certainly people who are more resistant to change than others. And I don’t know what the full sources of that are. But I can tell you, from our experiences and the people we’ve talked to, which is tens of thousands of people we’ve heard from, it’s generally positive.

BFB: And cities like Baltimore should be concerned about taking properties off the tax rolls?

DB: Well, it’s even worse because here’s the problem. And I’ve tried to explain to people. Cities all over the country, and indeed all over the world, are in an existential crisis post-COVID, and downtowns in particular. And we need to reimagine our downtown. And valuations are already falling through the floor. No one wants to be down there. And if you really want to create an exciting, vibrant place, you need mixes of uses. Big, empty office buildings really do nothing for anybody. And so we think Harborplace and redeveloping in this massive and internationally amazing way will then drive value for all the surrounding assets, many of which we own, and which will then create more tax revenue for the city. So in our mind, this billion dollars that we spend here between the public and the private pieces will then drive billions more in investment in downtown Baltimore.

Signature elements

BFB: You said, ‘I’m not building a Ferris wheel.’ I get that. Is there a signature or landmark that will be part of Harborplace? Is it the gondola that you see crossing the harbor on a drawing? Is it the “Sail” building? Is it those floating islands – the sundecks?

DB: We think there are multiple things that are signature. We think, number one, that the Waterfront Partnership and its partners have done an amazing job advancing cleaning up the harbor. The waters are the anchor, and we expect that this water will ultimately be usable and swimmable, so we’re excited about that. We think some of the floating wetlands are going to be amazing and cool and sort of integrate with what the aquarium is doing. We think that, obviously, the Sail building that we had designed — the architect that put that together was designated, I think, the most innovative architect in the world in 2022…The concept is a marketplace and an outdoor park, because you’re able to use the exterior of the building… There’s definitely some signature moments.

BFB: I feel like that Sail building hasn’t gotten enough attention. People talk about Pratt Street and the 900 residential units … but people aren’t talking about that building. Do you agree, or no?

DB: It gets a lot of attention, okay? It just doesn’t get attention in the newspaper because the negative stuff gets the attention in the newspaper. But I hear all the time, ‘I love this.’ Many people even call me and say, ‘I don’t want the apartments, but I love the Sail building.’ And to get the Sail building, I’ll live with the apartments.’ But the funny thing about the apartments, in particular, is it really doesn’t impact anybody on the ground. Most people in Baltimore, unless you live in those apartments, you’ll be walking along the ground. You’re not going to be looking up to see that there’s apartments above. And the apartments above create all the people who will help support all the things below and keep it alive and vibrant. That’s sort of how to think about it. And I’ll tell you, I think the feedback on the Sail building has been absolutely incredible. You know, there’s always critics, and there’s a couple of people who have said, ‘Oh, it’s facing the wrong way,’ or ‘Do this’ or ‘Do that.’ And there’s lots of stuff that will happen between now and when the buildings go vertical. But I would say to you that the feedback on that has been incredible.

BFB: And the Sail building gets built with private funds?

DB: The parks and the public space will be public and be financed publicly, and go through a public process. The buildings will all be private.

BFB: 301 Light Street with the sort of cool mushroom structure?

DB: Yes, that’s a public park. And that we’re calling that the Park at Freedom’s Point. And that is especially meaningful. And I’ve said, many times, I grew up here in Baltimore City, went to city public schools, never heard once until I got involved in this project that Baltimore was a huge port for shipping slaves in the Deep South… But then on our team, we had our Sulton Campbell Britt & Associates, which is one of the oldest Black architecture firms. Their role was the historical context. And the thing that they revealed to us, which I think is kind of part of Baltimore’s comeback story, is that Baltimore once had the largest population of free Black slaves in the country… I didn’t know that; no one taught me that. And it’s something you should lean into, right? There’s all these opportunities around African American tourism. You’ve got first shots in the Civil War. You have the Reginald F. Lewis Museum. You have this amazing history of civil rights. I mean, Thurgood Marshall went to the church that I grew up going to. And you have Parren Mitchell, who lived across the street from me when I was growing up. So you have the Mitchell family, you have all these things in Baltimore that we should lean into… It’s exciting stuff, we got to lean into it. People will come here, they’ll come downtown… And then we’re saying, hey, while you’re here at this place that is built in memoriam for all of the freed slaves that lived around Baltimore, check out the restaurants, the Lewis museum, go to West Baltimore. You know, learn about the first shots in the Civil War, learn about when Lincoln ran through Baltimore, like learn about those things. And, you know, add more to your trip besides grabbing some delicious crabs and beer. So we’re excited about that.

BFB: How long does it take to build out this vision? 20 or 25 years?

DB: Dear Lord, no. We have a referendum in November. And then it will take us 12 to 18 months from then to go from design, which is what we have now, to actual construction drawings that somebody can build for us. So we’ll start construction in a couple of years, and then it’ll the build out will take another four or five years after that.

It all needs to happen at once

BFB: What’s the best way to stage this?

DB: The construction [order and timing] will depend on a lot of things that aren’t finalized yet. But generally, you know, on a project like this, you want to deliver as much as you can at one time. Because you want to encourage the use of the assets as quickly as possible. However, there’s lots of different factors that go beyond, it’s mostly technical stuff.

BFB: Let me rephrase the question: Is it better to build something like the amphitheater first and get the program running, so people say ‘Hey, this is awesome,’ and the community says ‘I can enjoy this space,’ versus what you need to do to get the revenue streams going?

DB: Well, they both need to happen. If they’re not both committed and financed, we won’t do it. So there’s not going to be a ‘Hey, we build this, and then maybe we’ll move forward.’ … It won’t work unless it all happens. Now, the timing of what goes first and when, that will be determined by technical factors about staging construction equipment and timing of unions, etc.

BFB: What you’re saying is you will not build this unless you have a commitment to do everything. The parks, the public spaces, the realigning of the Pratt Street corridors?

DB: Correct. So we have a lot of work to do. Listen, I gotta tell you something. Deals of this scale don’t get done by pussyfooting. You’re either going to go all in, and you’re going to bring resources to the table, and you’re going to do what’s necessary, or you’re not. And this requires scale. It requires a lot of expertise. And so it’s one of the reasons, when I hear people say, ‘Slow down, do this,’ I want to say to them, the process is already slow. It’s going to take all this time and we are spending a ton of money, right? Those designs, they don’t just show up for free. The community engagement process, that doesn’t happen for free… And remember, the buildings were empty when we bought them. Now they’re filled with small entrepreneurs that can’t really pay us any rent. So most of them are getting significantly discounted rent deals to try to live in the place up in the interim and who is footing the bill for that? MCB.

BFB: You call your document a master plan, yes? Typically master plans are kind of a public process driven by government – the city planning department or county planning department says we’re gonna do a master plan for this. Was this really a master plan? How does the private sector do a master plan? And was it the right process to go through?

DB: To be clear, we do master plans all the time for private properties. Cities will typically do master plans for entire regions or areas or huge swaths, and this is a master plan for a small area, which private developers do all the time

BFB: I guess Jim Rouse did a master plan for Columbia.

DB: That’s even bigger and I’m not even talking about that. So our Yard 56 project, before we did that 20-acre site [near Johns Hopkins Bayview in Greektown], we had to do a master plan. You go through the master plan approval process, you get that approved through the planning process, then you have to come back and you have to get each individual building a project. And that’s important. I think there’s a sense of confusion that we’re planning the whole city. And I think that’s just another way for people to sort of try to insinuate there’s something nefarious going on. And honestly, it’s just dumb. …I don’t know how much you know about us. But we need this deal like we need a hole in the head. We want this to happen because it’s the best thing that could happen for Baltimore City. And of all the developers that could step up — this was a public process, everything was public, it was in the courts. The court, even after we agreed to a deal, the court published something that said, ‘Anyone else can come if you want, and challenge the deal.’ Went through that entire process. And now, people say, ‘Do a master plan.’ It doesn’t make any sense. And I think we, as a city, need to get past that and lean into growth. You don’t get everything you want in the deal. I don’t get everything I want… We’ve got to make trade-offs.

Part II of the Baltimore Fishbowl Big Fish interview with P. David Bramble can be found here.