ABSTRACT 
 
Title of Document: PORT OF BALTIMORE, POINT OF ENTRY: 
THE BALTIMORE IMMIGRATION MUSEUM 
AND RESOURCE CENTER 
 
Name of Degree Candidate: Karilyn Ann Glassmire 
 
Degree and Year: Master of Architecture, 2008 
 
Directed By: Professor of the Practice, Gary A. Bowden, FAIA,  
School of Architecture, Planning, and Preservation 
 
 
From 1880 until the 1920?s, approximately two million immigrants arrived in 
America through the Port of Baltimore.  This thesis explores how architecture can be 
used to celebrate immigrants, past and present, through the design of a waterfront 
immigration museum and resource center. This museum and resource center serve to 
honor the immigrants who settled in or passed through Baltimore and bring awareness 
to the city?s role as a major port of entry.  The building also serves to celebrate the 
resulting ethnic and racial diversity that remains the city?s legacy by telling the story 
of how Baltimore came to be the ethnic melting pot it is today and by providing a 
variety of services for contemporary immigrants. The building is situated in Fell?s 
Point, between the Bond Street Wharf and the Frederick Douglass Isaac Myers 
Museum.  The memorial is located across the harbor, visually connected to the 
museum and resource center. 
 
 
  
 
 
 
PORT OF BALTIMORE, POINT OF ENTRY:  
THE BALTIMORE IMMIGRATION MUSEUM AND RESOURCE CENTER   
 
 
 
By 
Karilyn Ann Glassmire 
 
 
 
 
 
Thesis submitted to the Faculty of the Graduate School of the  
University of Maryland, College Park, in partial fulfillment 
of the requirements for the degree of 
Master of Architecture 
2008 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Advisory Committee: 
Professor of the Practice Gary A. Bowden, FAIA, Chair 
Assistant Professor Angel David Nieves, Ph.D. 
Professor Karl F.G. Du Puy, AIA 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
? Copyright by 
Karilyn Ann Glassmire 
2008 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ii 
 
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 
 
 I would like to take this opportunity to thank my committee members for all 
of their contributions to my architectural education.  I would like to specifically thank 
Karl DuPuy for his constant enthusiasm and direction that enabled me to complete 
this project.  I would like to thank Elizabeth Vetne for her constant motivation and 
encouragement throughout the year, and for her phenomenal help and support in 
preparing the final presentation.  I would also like to thank my mother, father, 
brother, John Geronimo, and Mac Mackey for their help in sustaining my physical 
and mental health throughout the semester.  Finally, I wish to thank Lin Mao, Kris 
Glassmire, Wes Townsend, Laura DiOrio, and John Kucia for their remarkable help 
and support in preparing the final presentation, I cannot adequately express my 
gratitude.
 iii 
 
TABLE OF CONTENTS 
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS................................................................................................................. II 
TABLE OF CONTENTS....................................................................................................................III 
LIST OF FIGURES ............................................................................................................................ IV 
INTRODUCTION................................................................................................................................. 1 
CHAPTER 1: PROGRAM ................................................................................................................... 4 
IMMIGRATION MUSEUM AND RESOURCE CENTER PROGRAM .............................................................. 4 
BALTIMORE IMMIGRATION PROJECT ................................................................................................... 5 
DETAILED PROGRAM DESCRIPTIONS................................................................................................... 7 
SPATIAL REQUIREMENTS SUMMARY ................................................................................................. 19 
CHAPTER 2: SITE............................................................................................................................. 22 
SITE SELECTION ................................................................................................................................22 
EXISTING CONDITIONS ...................................................................................................................... 23 
ACCESSIBILITY.................................................................................................................................. 27 
PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT ................................................................................................................ 30 
IMMIGRATION GATEWAY HERITAGE PARK ....................................................................................... 33 
CHAPTER 3: PRECEDENTS ...........................................................................................................35 
ELLIS ISLAND IMMIGRATION MUSEUM.............................................................................................. 36 
PIER 21 IMMIGRATION MUSEUM ....................................................................................................... 37 
UNITED STATES HOLOCAUST MEMORIAL MUSEUM.......................................................................... 38 
REGINALD F. LEWIS AFRICAN AMERICAN MUSEUM ......................................................................... 39 
HOUSE OF SWEDEN ........................................................................................................................... 40 
DUNFERMLINE MUSEUM ................................................................................................................... 41 
MARCO ........................................................................................................................................... 42 
SEAMAN?S CHURCH INSTITUTE ......................................................................................................... 43 
CHAPTER 4: DESIGN STRATEGIES ............................................................................................ 44 
PARTI #1............................................................................................................................................ 45 
PARTI #2............................................................................................................................................ 47 
PARTI #3............................................................................................................................................ 50 
ADDITIONAL COMMENTS .................................................................................................................. 56 
CHAPTER 5: FINAL DESIGN PROPOSAL................................................................................... 58 
SITE STRATEGY................................................................................................................................. 58 
PLAN ORGANIZATION........................................................................................................................ 59 
CIRCULATION.................................................................................................................................... 59 
INTERIOR AND EXTERIOR .................................................................................................................. 60 
DIAGRAMS ........................................................................................................................................ 62 
DRAWINGS ........................................................................................................................................ 65 
CHAPTER 6: CONCLUSION ...........................................................................................................83 
APPENDICES ..................................................................................................................................... 87 
APPENDIX A: RESOURCE CENTER - POTENTIAL LIAISON OFFICES (AS DESCRIBED IN CHAPTER1) ..... 87 
ENDNOTES......................................................................................................................................... 90 
BIBLIOGRAPHY ............................................................................................................................... 92 
 
 iv 
 
LIST OF FIGURES 
Figure 1 Immigrants disembarking in Locust Point .......................................................................... 3 
Figure 2 Reginald F. Lewis African American Museum Lobby ....................................................... 7 
Figure 3 Reginald F. Lewis African American Museum Caf? .......................................................... 9 
Figure 4 Reginald F. Lewis African American Museum Gift Shop................................................ 10 
Figure 5 Holocaust Museum Research Center ................................................................................. 11 
Figure 6 Gallery Exhibit, Pier 21 Museum ....................................................................................... 12 
Figure 7 Multi-purpose classroom space........................................................................................... 13 
Figure 8 United States Holocaust Museum, Auditorium Space ...................................................... 15 
Figure 9 Typical Office Space ............................................................................................................ 16 
Figure 10 Proposed Immigration Gateway Heritage Park Rendering ........................................... 18 
Figure 11 Topological Program Diagram ......................................................................................... 21 
Figure 12 Aerial View of Site.............................................................................................................. 22 
Figure 13 Site Location on Neighborhood Edges ............................................................................. 23 
Figure 14 Site Aerial and Context...................................................................................................... 24 
Figure 15 Site Relationship to Heritage Park ................................................................................... 25 
Figure 16 View across site to Bond Street Wharf building.............................................................. 25 
Figure 17 Existing Walkway and Pier ............................................................................................... 26 
Figure 18 Frederick Douglass Isaac Myers Maritime Park Courtyard ......................................... 26 
Figure 19 Site Relationship to Existing Baltimore Promenade ....................................................... 27 
Figure 20 View of Promenade along Site........................................................................................... 28 
Figure 21 Water Taxi stops around the inner harbor...................................................................... 29 
Figure 22 Master Plan for Harbor East ............................................................................................ 30 
Figure 23 Aerial Rendering of Master Harbor Point....................................................................... 31 
Figure 24 Site Model of Harbor Point ............................................................................................... 31 
Figure 25 Rendering of Wills Pier ..................................................................................................... 32 
Figure 26 Rendering of Wills Pier ..................................................................................................... 32 
Figure 27 Immigration Gateway Heritage Park Panorama ............................................................ 33 
Figure 28 Rendering of Park Pier...................................................................................................... 33 
Figure 29 Immigration Gateway Heritage Park Plan ...................................................................... 34 
Figure 30 Model of Immigration Gateway Heritage Park............................................................... 34 
Figure 31 Ellis Island Immigration Museum, atrium ...................................................................... 36 
Figure 32 Ellis Island, aerial............................................................................................................... 36 
Figure 33 Pier 21, museum exhibit .................................................................................................... 37 
Figure 34 Pier 21, exterior.................................................................................................................. 37 
Figure 35 United States Holocaust Museum, atrium ....................................................................... 38 
Figure 36 Reginald F. Lewis Museum, central stair......................................................................... 39 
Figure 37 Reginald F. Lewis Museum, exhibit displays................................................................... 39 
Figure 38 House of Sweden, exterior ................................................................................................. 40 
Figure 39 House of Sweden, exterior lighting ................................................................................... 40 
Figure 40 Dunfermline Museum, interior perspective..................................................................... 41 
Figure 41 Dunfermline Museum, longitudinal section..................................................................... 41 
Figure 42 MARCO, exterior perspective .......................................................................................... 42 
Figure 43 MARCO, courtyard and sculpture................................................................................... 42 
Figure 44 Seaman?s Church Institute, aerial .................................................................................... 43 
Figure 45 Seaman?s Church Institute, gallery space........................................................................ 43 
Figure 46 Model, parti #1 ................................................................................................................... 45 
Figure 47 Site Plan, parti #1 ............................................................................................................... 46 
Figure 48 Model, parti #2 ................................................................................................................... 47 
Figure 49 Site Plan, parti #2 ............................................................................................................... 48 
Figure 50, Section, parti #2................................................................................................................. 48 
Figure 51 Ground Floor Plan, parti # 2............................................................................................. 49 
Figure 52 Upper Floor Plans, parti #2............................................................................................... 49 
Figure 53 Model, parti #3 ................................................................................................................... 50 
 v 
 
Figure 54 Ground Floor Plan, parti #3.............................................................................................. 52 
Figure 55 2
nd
 and 3
rd
 Floor Plans, parti #3........................................................................................ 52 
Figure 56 4
th
 and 5
th
 Floor Plans, parti #3......................................................................................... 52 
Figure 57 Section, parti #3.................................................................................................................. 53 
Figure 58 Interior Elevation, parti #3................................................................................................ 53 
Figure 59 North Elevation, parti #3................................................................................................... 53 
Figure 60 Entry, parti #3 .................................................................................................................... 54 
Figure 61 Skywalk, parti #3................................................................................................................ 54 
Figure 62 Circulation, parti #3........................................................................................................... 54 
Figure 63 View from Pier, parti #3 .................................................................................................... 55 
Figure 64 View down S. Caroline St., parti #3.................................................................................. 55 
Figure 65 View down New Thames St., parti #3............................................................................... 55 
Figure 66 View Corridors Diagram................................................................................................... 62 
Figure 67 Five Corners Diagram ....................................................................................................... 62 
Figure 68 Solid vs. Void 1 ................................................................................................................... 63 
Figure 69 Solid vs. Void 2 ................................................................................................................... 63 
Figure 70 Bar Buildings Diagram...................................................................................................... 64 
Figure 71 Street and Water Relationship.......................................................................................... 64 
Figure 72 Figure Ground.................................................................................................................... 65 
Figure 73 Site Plan .............................................................................................................................. 66 
Figure 74 Ground Floor Plan ............................................................................................................. 67 
Figure 75 2
nd
 Floor Plan...................................................................................................................... 68 
Figure 76 3
rd
 Floor Plan...................................................................................................................... 69 
Figure 77 4
th
 Floor Plan ...................................................................................................................... 70 
Figure78 5
th
 Floor Plan ....................................................................................................................... 71 
Figure79 Sectional Perspectives ......................................................................................................... 72 
Figure 80 View of Entry...................................................................................................................... 73 
Figure 81 View from Skywalk............................................................................................................ 74 
Figure 82 View of Exhibit Space ........................................................................................................ 75 
Figure 83 View from Street ................................................................................................................ 76 
Figure 84 View from Pier ................................................................................................................... 77 
Figure 85 View from Pier at Night..................................................................................................... 78 
Figure 86 Aerial Perspective............................................................................................................... 79 
Figure 87 Model, aerial....................................................................................................................... 80 
Figure 88 Model, view from pier........................................................................................................ 81 
Figure 89 Model, view down S. Caroline Street................................................................................ 82 
 1 
 
INTRODUCTION 
Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, the 
wretched refuse of your teeming shore, send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed, to 
me: I lift my lamp beside the golden door. 
-American poet, Emma Lazarus 
 
 
 Baltimore has long been known as one of the nation's great "gateway" cities. 
Since the 17th century, Baltimore's protected port has provided an important entry 
and exit point for moving people and cargo to and from across the great Atlantic. 
Many of the immigrants who arrived in Baltimore came voluntarily, seeking religious 
or political freedom, or they simply for the promise of a better life across the sea. 
Others were moved under force, such as the thousands of African slaves who were 
shipped to the port of Baltimore and sold at the foot of Broadway Street in Fell's 
Point.  Over the course of the 19
th
 century, transportation networks including the 
railroads, canals, and steamships improved, and thus Baltimore's role as a gateway 
became even more important and began to draw an increasing variety of new 
arrivals
1
. From 1880 until the 1920?s, approximately two million immigrants arrived 
in America through the Port of Baltimore
2
.  People and goods came to Baltimore 
from all over; and while they also spread out to an increasing variety of destination, 
Baltimore was not just a city to pass through or a ?gateway? city.   
 Baltimore's immigration history can logically be divided into two phases by 
the Civil War. The early immigrants disembarked at Henderson?s Wharf in Fell?s 
Point. In 1868, just after the war had ended, this activity shifted across the harbor to 
Locust Point for several reasons.  First, as the steamship had for the most part 
replaced sails, the ships had outgrown the size of the piers at Fell?s Point.  Secondly, 
 2 
 
the vast increase in the number of people immigrating to Baltimore necessitated 
larger facilities
3
.  The remnants of the immigration piers built at Locust Point are still 
visible, and are the site of the proposed Baltimore Immigration Project Memorial.  
During this great wave of immigration, Baltimore was clearly a city full of 
opportunity that became home to immigrants of all races.  Baltimore?s status as one 
of the most important sites for commerce and exchange in the nation, helped to bring 
about its surge of immigration in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, 
resulting in ethnic and racial diversity that remains the city?s legacy.   
 To date, little research has been conducted on Baltimore?s role as a major 
immigrant point of entry.  Over the past decade, however, interest in this fascinating 
portion of history has spiked and much research is being undertaken, particularly by 
the Baltimore Immigration Project.
4
  This thesis explores how architecture can be 
used to celebrate immigrants, past and present, through the design of a waterfront 
immigration museum and resource center. This museum and resource center serve to 
honor the immigrants who settled in or passed through Baltimore and bring awareness 
to the city?s role as a major port of entry.  The building also serves to celebrate the 
city?s cultural diversity by telling the story of how Baltimore came to be the ethnic 
melting pot it is today and by providing a variety of services for contemporary 
immigrants. The building is situated in Fell?s Point, between the Bond Street Wharf 
and the Frederick Douglass Isaac Myers Museum.  The memorial is located across the 
harbor, visually connected to the museum and resource center. 
 
 
 3 
 
 
 
Figure 1 Immigrants disembarking in Locust Point  
[Maryland Historical Society].
 4 
 
 
CHAPTER 1: PROGRAM 
Immigration Museum and Resource Center Program 
 The main program of this thesis consists of two parts, a Baltimore 
Immigration Museum which memorializes past immigrants and a Resource Center 
which assists the immigrants of today.  This museum features facilities for the 
collection of historic documents and oral histories, conservation and display of 
donated immigrant artifacts. The museum also houses the Baltimore Immigration 
Project?s planned Family Heritage Center which serves as public research space and 
allows for the creation and compilation of a computer database featuring entries from 
ship passenger manifests and other immigrant records.  The Resource Center 
functions as a liaison between current immigrants and multiple outreach organizations 
in the city.  The center offers legal aid, health information, educational information, 
information on employment opportunities, and many other services to Baltimore?s 
immigrant population.  (For more information on these different organizations, refer 
to Appendix A.) 
 5 
 
Baltimore Immigration Project 
 The Baltimore Immigration Project is a complex program whose activities 
include funding original research, collecting and conserving historic documents, 
artifacts and oral histories, as well as offering public programs to interpret local 
immigration history.  The project will actively encourage descendants to establish or 
renew connections to Baltimore through exploration of their family histories. 
Other planned objectives and features of the Baltimore Immigration Project include: 
 
 ? commissioning and coordinating original scholarly research into the largely 
 neglected subject of immigration through Baltimore. This will include 
 documentation of oral histories which otherwise may soon be lost forever. 
 
 ? developing major attractions that offer interpretation in an effort to raise 
 public awareness and understanding of the subject. Venues are to include the 
 Immigration Gateway Heritage Park at Tide Point, adjacent to the site of 
 Locust Point?s historic immigration piers (a state Heritage Areas grant has 
 been awarded and planning is underway); future Baltimore Immigration 
 Museum to offer in-depth interpretation and facilities for conservation and 
 display of donated immigrant artifacts. 
 
 ? creation of an Immigrant Monument to honor every immigrant ancestor who 
 settled in or passed through Baltimore and to celebrate the resulting ethnic 
 and racial diversity that remains our city?s legacy. 
 
 ? establishment of the Family Heritage Center to create and compile a 
 computer database featuring entries from ship passenger manifests and other 
 immigrant records. The database will be accessible for genealogical research 
 by the public on the Immigration Project website. 
 
 6 
 
 ? sponsoring or coordinating an ongoing series of special events and 
 programmed activities relating to Baltimore?s immigration history and living 
 ethnic traditions. This includes a walking tour program beginning September 
 2002 and highlighting important immigration-related sites in Locust Point 
 and Fell?s Point. 
 
 ? commissioning a full-length television documentary based upon project 
 research and which could be edited to serve as an introductory multi media 
 presentation for the future museum
5
. 
 
 This thesis will help the Baltimore Immigration Project to meet some of these 
goals through its location and program.  The museum and resource center will be 
located in historic Fell?s Point, close to the Baltimore Historical Society?s 
headquarter.  The building?s accessible location and proximity to other museums in 
the area will help foster links between the different venues and societies devoted to all 
of Baltimore?s diverse communities.  The museum program will help to promote 
awareness of the city?s major role in immigration history, and will serve as a database 
for immigration research accessible to the public.  The resource center aspect of the 
program will help to establish educational programs and other resources to help 
document and preserve the history of all of Baltimore?s immigrant communities, both 
past and present.  Finally, the relationship of the site to the proposed monument 
across the harbor will help enhance the visitor?s understanding of the Baltimore?s 
exciting immigration history. 
 
 
 7 
 
Detailed Program Descriptions 
 
Lobby and Information: 
 Museum 1500 sq. ft. 
Resource Center 1000 sq. ft. 
 
Usage: 
 The lobby area of the museum includes the information desk where visitors 
can acquire information and tickets.  This area includes a grand space welcoming 
visitors to the museum.  The museum security personnel are also located in this space 
to control access to the museum exhibits. 
 The lobby area of the learning and resource center includes a reception desk 
and waiting area for visitors. 
 
 
Figure 2 Reginald F. Lewis African American Museum Lobby 
Baltimore, MD [Kari Glassmire] 
 
Access and Adjacency Requirements: 
 The museum lobby and information desk should be easily accessed by the 
public from the street as it is the first area that visitors to the museum enter.  The 
 
 8 
 
lobby area of the museum is the heart of the museum circulation, as it is the most 
public area of the museum and the starting point for most visitors.  The information 
desk, security area, and ticket booth must be adjacent to this space. 
 The resource center lobby is not located in the museum area.  The center?s 
lobby is accessible from the street as the learning and resource center serves the local 
immigrant population.   
 9 
 
Museum Cafe: 
1800 sq. ft. 
 
Usage: 
 The museum caf? provides refreshments and light fare to museum visitors.  
The caf? may also be used by museum employees and tourists not necessarily visiting 
the museum exhibits.   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Figure 3 Reginald F. Lewis African American Museum Caf? 
Baltimore, MD [Kari Glassmire]. 
 
  
Access and Adjacency Requirements: 
 The caf? should be accessible from the lobby area of the museum as well as 
from the street for museum visitors and public access.  The caf? is thus located on the 
ground floor. 
 
 10 
 
 
Museum Gift Shop: 
2500 sq. ft. 
 
Usage: 
 The museum gift shop allows visitors to purchase books, souvenirs, and other 
special gifts to remember their unique experience.     
 
 
Figure 4 Reginald F. Lewis African American Museum Gift Shop  
Baltimore, MD [Kari Glassmire] 
 
Access and Adjacency Requirements: 
 
 The museum gift shop should be accessible from the lobby area of the 
museum near the exit, as most visitors will likely enter the gift shop after touring the 
museum on their way out of the museum.   
 
 
 11 
 
Family Heritage Center: 
4000 sq. ft. 
 
Usage: 
 The Family Heritage Center consists of research databases of immigration 
records, ship passenger manifests, and oral histories.  The center also contains a 
library and oral history recording studio.  
 
 
 Figure 5 Holocaust Museum Research Center 
Washington D.C. [Kari Glassmire]. 
 
 
Access and Adjacency Requirements: 
 The Family Heritage Center is located in the museum, preferably near the 
administrative area as it has different hours and special security than the museum 
exhibits.  It is accessible to the public, even those that are not visiting the exhibit area 
for those who wish to research family histories or contribute their own history. 
 12 
 
 
Gallery Spaces: 
25,000 sq. ft. 
 
Usage:  
 The gallery spaces within the museum hold the museum exhibitions and 
artifacts.  There is an orientation gallery, special exhibits gallery, and then the 
permanent gallery.  The orientation gallery holds video and introductory displays.  
The special exhibits gallery holds temporary and traveling displays.   
 
 
Figure 6 Gallery Exhibit, Pier 21 Museum  
Halifax, Canada [photo sent from Pier 21 Archives] 
 
 
Access and Adjacency Requirements: 
 The museum gallery spaces comprise the bulk of the museum program.  They 
are accessed from the lobby to enhance security.  The orientation gallery is the first 
gallery the museum visitor reaches, and from there can explore the other exhibits.     
 13 
 
 
Classrooms: 
 Museum 1000 sq. ft. 
Learning and Resource Center 2500 sq. ft. 
 
Usage: 
 The museum classroom is a multi-purpose space for orientations, school and 
tour groups, as well as other public programs.   
 The learning and resource center classrooms are used by different community 
organizations to benefit local immigrants.  Language, health, employment, and legal 
services classes and seminars will be held in any of the several classrooms in the 
learning and resource center. 
 
 
Figure 7 Multi-purpose classroom space  
[http://www.isu.edu/ctl/nutshells/IdealClass_files/Museum2322.jpg] 
 
 
Access and Adjacency Requirements: 
 The museum classroom is located near the museum entry for orientation 
purposes, particularly when a school group is visiting. 
 14 
 
 The learning and resource center classrooms are not located in the main 
museum area for security reasons, as they are easily accessed by the public and may 
be used at different times by outside organizations in the community.  Multiple 
classrooms exist and are different sizes to suit the different needs of the community. 
 
 15 
 
 
Theater/Auditorium: 
3000 sq. ft. 
 
Usage: 
 The museum theater/auditorium is a multi-purpose space for films, lectures, 
performances, panel discussions, and other various needs.     
 
 
Figure 8 United States Holocaust Museum, Auditorium Space 
Washington D.C.  [Kari Glassmire] 
 
 
Access and Adjacency Requirements: 
 The theater/auditorium is accessible from the museum displays, as it may be 
used to feature different museum exhibits, films, etc.  The theater/ auditorium do not 
need light. 
 16 
 
 
Administration: 
Museum 2900 sq. ft. 
Learning and Resource Center 3000 sq. ft. 
 
Usage: 
 The administration space in the museum holds offices for the museum director 
and other employees.  The space also contains reception, conference areas, and 
employee kitchen lounge area. 
 The administration space in the learning and resource center contains the 
offices of the multi-faceted liaison center as well as conference areas and an 
employee kitchen/lounge area. 
 
Figure 9 Typical Office Space  
[http://www.giving.cornell.edu/_images_gifts/650x340/west_dean_office.jpg] 
 
 
Access and Adjacency Requirements: 
 The museum administrative area is located away from the public spaces and 
museum exhibits, yet easily accessible from the main circulation for employee 
convenience.   
 17 
 
 The administration area for the learning and resource center is located off of 
the learning and resource center lobby.  The offices are easily accessible to the public 
from the lobby for better public service and counseling. 
 
 
 18 
 
 
 
Immigration Gateway Heritage Park 
 
Monument/Memorial: 
 
 The park includes a memorial wall/plaza inscribed with the names of 
Baltimore?s immigrants.  This thesis responds to the proposed plaza by its orientation 
and architectural extension across the water. 
 
Urban Plaza: 
 The park also features a paved plaza with a reflecting pool and garden located 
at Tide Point, at the end of the Baltimore Promenade.  The plaza also contains an 
outdoor exhibit space. 
 
Ceremonial Space: 
 The park contains a glass pavilion that will be used to swear in new citizens.   
 
 
Figure 10 Proposed Immigration Gateway Heritage Park Rendering  
[Baltimore Immigration Project, image received indirectly from Pennington Parker] 
 
 
 
 19 
 
 
 
 
Spatial Requirements Summary 
 
Museum Program       41,000 sq.ft. 
 Lobby       1500 sq.ft. 
  Information Counter   200 
  Storage Room    200 
  Public Restrooms   500 
  Security Office   200 
  Coat Room    150 
 
 Classroom      1000 sq.ft. 
  
 Caf?       1800 sq.ft. 
  Dining Area    1000 
  Kitchen    500 
  Kitchen Staff Lockers/Storage 300 
 
 Gift Shop      2500 sq.ft. 
 
 Theater/Auditorium     3000 sq.ft. 
  Seating Area    2100 
  Stage Area    500 
  Projection Room   200 
  Storage    200 
  
 Family Heritage Center    4000 sq. ft. 
  Library    1000 
  Research Area    2000 
  Oral Recording Studio  1000  
 
 Exhibit Spaces               25,000 sq.ft. 
  Orientation Exhibit   2000 
  Special Exhibits   5500 
  Permanent Exhibits   14,000 
  Restoration/Prep   1500 
  Storage    2000 
 
 Administration     2900 sq.ft. 
  Director    250 
  Assistant Director   200 
  Public Relations   250 
  Financial    250 
 20 
 
  Offices for General Staff  500 
  Secretary and Reception Area  650 
  Conference Area   500 
  Kitchenette    100 
  Supply Storage   100 
  Copy Area    50 
  Coat Rom    50 
   
   
 
Resource Center Program                6500 sq.ft. 
 
 Lobby       1000 sq.ft. 
  Reception Desk   400 
  Waiting Area    600 
 
 Classrooms      2500 sq.ft. 
 
 Administration     3000 sq.ft. 
  Director    300  
  Assistant Director   250 
  Public Relations   300 
  Financial    250 
  Offices for General Staff  700 
  Conference Area   600 
  Kitchenette    100 
  Supply Storag    100 
  Copy Area    50 
  Coat Rom    50 
  Toilets     300 
 
Service/Mechanical        4550 sq.ft. 
 Maintenance Crew?s Office   150 
 Receiving Clerk?s Office   150 
 Locker Room/ Toilets    500 
 Receiving Room    500 
 Trash Room     250 
 HVAC Equipment Rooms   3000 
 
Total Program                            52,050 sq. ft. 
 
 +15% (circulation, fire stairs, etc.)                                      approx. 7,800 sq. ft. 
 
TOTAL SQUARE FOOTAGE              59,850 sq. ft. 
 
 
 21 
 
 
 
 
 
Figure 11 Topological Program Diagram  
Diagram indicates size, access, and adjacency requirements.  Museum program is represented by the 
darker shade. Resource Center program is represented by the lighter shade.
 22 
 
 
CHAPTER 2: SITE 
Site Selection 
 Site selection for this thesis is crucial for the success of the proposed building, 
a museum and resource center.  The building is primarily used by the public, and 
therefore must be easily accessible.  The chosen site is located in Fell?s Point on the 
waterfront between the Frederick Douglass and Isaac Myers Maritime Museum and 
the Bond Street Wharf.  The site was chosen above other potential sites in Locust 
Point and Canton due to its accessibility and historical significance, as well as for its 
relation to the proposed Liberty Park located directly across the harbor.   
 
Figure 12 Aerial View of Site 
[Local.live.com image] The aerial view shows the lack of development in this area.  The immediate 
existing context includes the Bond Street Wharf, the Frederick Douglass Isaac Myers Maritime Park, 
the Ferndale Fence and Awning Co., and the Caroline St. Townhomes.  The area to the west of the site 
is the site of future mater planned development. 
 23 
 
Existing Conditions 
 The current site is a desolate parking lot situated in an area slated for future 
development.  The site lies on the edge of the historic Fell?s Point neighborhood and 
the neighborhood of Harbor East, which is slated for a large amount of future master 
planned development.   
 
 
 
 
Figure 13 Site Location on Neighborhood Edges 
The above diagram shows the site?s location on the edge of Fell?s Point and Harbor East.  This location 
is highly significant due to the great contrast between the historical charm of Fell?s Point and the 
proposed new high rise development of Harbor East.  The figure ground depicts the proposed 
development. 
 24 
 
 
Figure 14 Site Aerial and Context 
The above images show the site and its relationships to the existing surrounding buildings.  While the 
Bond St. Wharf, Frederick Douglass Isaac Meyers Maritime Museum, and Caroline St. Townhomes 
are pleasant surroundings, the Ferndale Fence and Awning Co. features an unsightly garage.  This 
thesis removes the garage aspect of the building, leaving only the quaint historical home situated on 
the east end of this building complex, holding the corner. 
 
 
 25 
 
 
 
Figure 15 Site Relationship to Heritage Park 
 
The above diagram shows the site?s prominent relationship to the proposed Immigration Memorial and 
Plaza across the harbor in the neighborhood of Locust Point.  The memorial is situated near the 
remains of the original immigration piers. 
 
 
Figure 16 View across site to Bond Street Wharf building. 
 26 
 
 
Figure 17 Existing Walkway and Pier 
[Kari Glassmire] The above image shows the existing walkway along the Baltimore Promenade that 
spans a small slip of water as well as existing pier in the background.  This slip is generally full of still 
water and trash.  This thesis removes the slip in order to improve the site?s relation to the waterfront.  
The thesis design also incorporates the repairing of the pier so that it is useable by pedestrians. 
 
 
Figure 18 Frederick Douglass Isaac Myers Maritime Park Courtyard 
[Kari Glassmire] This photo shows the neighboring courtyard and its view under and through the 
skywalk to the water.  This photo also shows the museum?s connection between the historic building 
on the right, and the newer museum addition on the left. 
 
 27 
 
Accessibility 
 
 The site selected is highly accessible by all means of transportation.  The site 
is located at the intersection of S. Caroline St. and Thames St. in Fell?s Point, 
Baltimore.  The site is located at the water?s edge along the Baltimore Promenade.  
The Baltimore Promenade is a highly unique feature in Baltimore.  The promenade is 
a paved brick pathway along the waterfront that connects the diverse neighborhoods 
along the harbor.  Once it is completed, it will be a seven mile stretch complete with 
signage to improve and enliven the waterfront
6
.  The site is also within a five minute 
walking distance from the local Water Taxi stop.  Fell?s Point is a highly popular 
tourist destination in Baltimore, making the site ideal for a museum.  The 
neighborhood of Fell?s Point has a notably high Hispanic immigrant population in the 
city of Baltimore, thus making the addition of a Resource Center highly useful.   
 
 
Figure 19 Site Relationship to Existing Baltimore Promenade 
The above diagram shows the current Baltimore Promenade?s path through the city and the site?s 
relationship to it.  The numbers correspond to the current plazas located along the promenade: 
1)Canton Waterfront Park 2)Broadway Pier 3)Inner Harbor East 4)Bicentennial Plaza 5)Ravens Plaza 
and 6)Coast Guard Plaza. Proposed development will eventually extend the promenade along the 
waterfront adjacent to the site and around the peninsula of Harbor East.
7
 
 
 
 
 28 
 
 
Figure 20 View of Promenade along Site 
[Kari Glassmire] This image shows the construction of the Baltimore Promenade along the site, 
currently blocked off by metal fencing.  The Promenade will eventually continue along the water, 
around the Frederick Douglass Isaac Meyers Museum, and around the currently desolate peninsula of 
Harbor East.  This feature is a great asset to the site in terms of attracting visitors to the museum and 
resource center, and increasing accessibility. 
 
 
 29 
 
 
Figure 21 Water Taxi stops around the inner harbor.  
This diagram shows the site?s proximity to the Fell?s Point water taxi stop increasing accessibility to 
the museum and resource center.  This close proximity also helps to connect the building to the other 
attractions located around the harbor along the water?s edge, particularly the proposed Immigration 
Gateway and Heritage Park located directly across the harbor. 
 30 
 
Proposed Development 
 The area to the west of the site, known as Harbor East and Harbor Point is 
largely undeveloped, but is the site of much future master planned development by 
Ehrenkrantz Eckstut & Kuhn Architects.  The area is one of the last major 
development sites along the waterfront.  The area is a 27.4 acre remediated brown 
field site, which will soon be the final component in the completion of the Baltimore 
waterfront revitalization including office space, retail stores, restaurants, hotels, and a 
signature waterfront cultural use building at the entrance to the Inner Harbor.
8
  This 
thesis largely accepts much of the proposed development, with only minor alterations 
to the master plan in order to strengthen the building design.  
 
 
 
Figure 22 Master Plan for Harbor East  
[Baltimore City Dept. of Planning] The above image shows a potential scheme for the redevelopment 
of the Greater Fell?s Point Area, including Harbor Point and Harbor East.   
 
 31 
 
 
 
Figure 23 Aerial Rendering of Master Harbor Point 
[http://eekarchitects.com/portfolio_projects.cfm]  This image shows the proposed development for 
Harbor Point and Harbor East.  The contrast between this newer high rise development and the older 
historic fabric of the city is clearly visible. 
 
 
Figure 24 Site Model of Harbor Point 
[http://eekarchitects.com/portfolio_projects.cfm] This site model photgraph depicts the new 
development in white.  Proposed development is shown in the chosen thesis site.
 32 
 
 
Figure 25 Rendering of Wills Pier 
[http://eekarchitects.com/portfolio_projects.cfm] This rendering depicts Wills Pier.  The 
groundbreaking for the pair of Morgan Stanley office buildings occurred in January 2008 and begins 
the transformation and development of Harbor Point.
9
 
 
 
 
 
 
Figure 26 Rendering of Wills Pier 
[http://eekarchitects.com/portfolio_projects.cfm] This rendering is also of Wills Pier in Harbor Point.  
The glass box at the waterfront takes advantage of the harbor views as well as provides a visually 
interesting and iconic fa?ade to be seen from the water. 
 33 
 
Immigration Gateway Heritage Park 
 
 
Figure 27 Immigration Gateway Heritage Park Panorama 
The above panorama shows the existing park.  The concrete discs described below can be seen in the 
foreground in front of the Tide Point office complex. 
 
 Locust Point will soon be the home to a major immigration monument called 
Immigration Heritage Gateway Park.  Ron Zimmerman, founder of the Baltimore 
Immigration Project, is the leading visionary behind the idea.  Construction of the 
initial phase is has already begun.  The Park will include Liberty Garden, a 
landscaped sculpture plaza, featuring twenty-one concentric concrete discs that will 
direct the eye to a conical light positioned where thousands of immigrants took their 
first ferry to Broadway Pier in Fells Point. A reflecting pool and memorial wall 
inscribed with the names of the immigrants who settled in Baltimore will also be 
incorporated into the plaza.   
 The project will also feature a contemporary glass pavilion, complete with 
orientation exhibition documenting the history of immigration in the city.  The 
pavilion will also be used by U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services to swear in 
new citizens.
10
 
 This thesis incorporates the proposed park into its design, through the chosen 
site visually connected across the harbor and oriented towards the proposed park. 
 
Figure 28 Rendering of Park Pier 
[http://www.immigrationbaltimore.org/founder_vision.htm]  
 34 
 
 
 
Figure 29 Immigration Gateway Heritage Park Plan 
[Baltimore City Dept. of Planning]   
 
 
Figure 30 Model of Immigration Gateway Heritage Park 
[Urbanite, Issue 3, May / June 2004, 17] 
 35 
 
CHAPTER 3: PRECEDENTS 
 
 The Baltimore Immigration Museum and Resource Center combines two very 
different programs into one unified building.  The building also has a very prominent 
location along Baltimore?s inner harbor with strong visual links to the city and water.   
The building?s image must therefore be clear and memorable, weaving a dialogue 
between the city and waterfront, as well as the old and new neighborhoods of Fell?s 
Point and Harbor Point.  This can be accomplished through the building?s form as 
well as through the way in which the design addresses its program and site. 
 This thesis explored multiple types of precedents throughout the design 
process.  In order to come up with an appropriate program, multiple programmatic 
precedents were initially explored in order to gain an understanding and working 
knowledge of museum spatial organization.  This included researching programmatic 
dimensions, access and adjacency requirements, circulation and service needs, as well 
as security issues.  Two immigration museums, Ellis Island and Pier 21, were 
specifically studied as their programs are very similar to that of this thesis.  The 
Reginald F. Lewis African American Museum was studied as well for its similar 
programmatic elements, circulation systems, and overall size.  Buildings including 
the Ford Foundation Building, the United States Holocaust Museum, and the 
Guggenheim were studied as a reference of potential museum circulation systems.  
Image, character, and site precedents were also researched to help determine the 
building?s form and how it would create a dialogue between the various site factors. 
These studies included the House of Sweden, the Dunfermline Museum, Stockholm 
Town Hall, MARCO, and the Seaman?s Church Institute. 
 36 
 
Ellis Island Immigration Museum 
 Finegold, Alexander, and Associates, Inc. 
 New York, New York 
 
 
Figure 31 Ellis Island Immigration Museum, atrium 
[www.ellisisland.org/] 
 
Figure 32 Ellis Island, aerial 
[www.ellisisland.org/]   
  
 The museum?s location and historical form create the building?s monumental 
and civic image.  The complex program includes a research center similar to that 
which is proposed for Baltimore, where a visitor can research their family history 
through immigration databases.
 37 
 
 
Pier 21 Immigration Museum  
 Halifax, Canada 
 
Figure 33 Pier 21, museum exhibit 
[photo sent from Pier 21 Archives] 
 
 
Figure 34 Pier 21, exterior 
[photo sent from Pier 21 Archives] 
 Pier 21 Immigration Museum in Canada is also programmatically similar to 
that of the proposed museum and resource center.  The museum is located in the 
renovated immigration facility in Halifax and aims to celebrate and communicate a 
deeper understanding of the Canadian immigration experience
11
. 
 38 
 
United States Holocaust Memorial Museum 
 James Ingo Freed 
 Washington, D.C. 
 
Figure 35 United States Holocaust Museum, atrium 
[Kari Glassmire] 
 
 The United States Holocaust Museum is incredibly rich with metaphor.  The 
directed promenade and architecture of each museum space ?provoke intimate and 
visceral responses? from each visitor
12
.  
 39 
 
 
Reginald F. Lewis African American Museum 
 RTKL 
 Baltimore, MD 
 
Figure 36 Reginald F. Lewis Museum, central stair 
[Kari Glassmire] 
 
Figure 37 Reginald F. Lewis Museum, exhibit displays 
[Kari Glassmire] 
 The Reginald F. Lewis museum is organized around a central stair atrium.  
The building utilizes rich metaphor which encompasses all design decisions from the 
exterior ?black box ?to the dynamic ?red stair? to create a narrative appropriate the 
museum?s purpose. 
 40 
 
House of Sweden  
 Gert Wingardh and Tomas Hansen 
 Washington, D.C. 
 
Figure 38 House of Sweden, exterior 
[http://www.chi-athenaeum.org/archawards/2007/2007photos/AA07-22.jpg] 
 
 
Figure 39 House of Sweden, exterior lighting 
[http://www.sweden.se/templates/cs/Article____15544.aspx] 
 
 The House of Sweden?s form is that of a large box punctured by a tall glass 
atrium space containing vertical circulation.  The exterior makes bold use of lighting 
techniques and was designed to glow at night like the setting Nordic sun
13
. 
 41 
 
Dunfermline Museum  
 Richard Murphy Architects 
 Dunfermline, Scotland 
 
Figure 40 Dunfermline Museum, interior perspective 
[http://www.richardmurphyarchitects.com/projects/446/] 
 
Figure 41 Dunfermline Museum, longitudinal section 
[http://www.richardmurphyarchitects.com/projects/446/] 
 The Dunfermline Museum?s form is punctured by a large glass passage space.  
On upper levels, skywalks connect each side of the building to the other.  The ?thick 
walled architecture of the design contains a staircase, plant and display cabinets and 
framed views of surrounding notable Dunfermline buildings14.? 
 42 
 
MARCO  
 Ricardo Legorretta 
 Monterrey, Nuevo Leon, Mexico 
 
Figure 42 MARCO, exterior perspective 
[Mutlow] 
 
 
Figure 43 MARCO, courtyard and sculpture 
[Mutlow] 
 
 Ricardo Legorretta uses bold shapes and colors to achieve simple, yet iconic 
structures.  His abstraction of forms, layering techniques, and lively use of solids and 
voids produce rich and dramatic facades, as seen here at the Museum of 
Contemporary Art in Monterrey, Mexico
15
. 
 43 
 
 
Seaman?s Church Institute 
 Polshek Partnership 
 New York, New York 
 
Figure 44 Seaman?s Church Institute, aerial 
[Strauss] 
 
 
Figure 45 Seaman?s Church Institute, gallery space 
[Strauss] 
 The Seaman?s Church Institute incorporates the renewed fa?ade of an 18
th
 
century mercantile structure, incorporating its proportions in a modern language.  The 
top two floors clad in white steel metaphorically represent the character of a ship, as 
do many of the interior details
16
. 
 44 
 
CHAPTER 4: DESIGN STRATEGIES 
 
 
 The following design partis encompass several explorations of a broad variety 
of ideas about how the Baltimore Immigration Museum and Resource Center might 
potentially be organized.  The three different partis suggest various design approaches 
aimed at synthesizing the museum and resource center?s complex dual program, the 
unique site conditions, and the form of the building.  The three partis differ greatly in 
terms of site strategy, plan organization, circulation, and massing, however each parti 
relates to both the inner harbor and the urban context.  All three approaches aim to 
preserve the view corridor down S. Caroline Street, as well as address the site?s 
prominent location along the Baltimore Promenade.  Each different organizational 
method came with its own unique set of problems and advantages, however the third 
parti proved to be the most successful and was therefore pursued to the completion of 
the final design proposal. 
 
 45 
 
 
Parti #1 
 
 
Figure 46 Model, parti #1 
 
 The design concept for parti # 1 separates the various aspects of the program 
into different buildings.  The scheme can be regarded as a ?campus? parti.  This parti 
was abandoned early on in the design process, as the separation of the programmatic 
elements of museum and resource center opposes one of the thesis?s main objectives, 
to celebrate immigrants both past and present.  A unified building containing both 
programmatic elements would better represent the process of immigration as an 
ongoing experience that has shaped the city of Baltimore from its beginning.
 46 
 
 
Figure 47 Site Plan, parti #1 
 
 The above diagram is an alteration on the campus parti.  The design 
acknowledges the waterfront through the use of an iconic form.  The design also uses 
the building to create a focal point at the termination of the major streets.
 47 
 
 
Parti #2 
 
 
Figure 48 Model, parti #2 
 
 The design concept for parti #2 can be regarded as the ?atrium? scheme.  This 
parti advocates acknowledging the waterfront through the creation of a glass atrium at 
the water?s edge, relating to the historically significant memorial across the harbor.  
This scheme was explored further in terms of how the program would be arranged in 
order to accommodate such a dramatic space.  The scheme was eventually abandoned 
as the museum program is not well adapted for an atrium space, as exhibits generally 
require low levels of light.   
 
 48 
 
 
Figure 49 Site Plan, parti #2 
 
 The above diagram shows another take on the ?atrium? scheme, this time 
using the atrium as the connecting piece between two other square masses.  This 
scheme attempts to relate to the large open plaza adjacent to the site. 
 
 
 
Figure 50, Section, parti #2 
 
 
 49 
 
 
Figure 51 Ground Floor Plan, parti # 2 
 
 
Figure 52 Upper Floor Plans, parti #2
 50 
 
 
Parti #3 
 
Figure 53 Model, parti #3 
 
 The design concept for parti # 3 can be considered the ?passage? scheme.  This 
scheme uses a central glass bar, or passage, as the connection between two bar 
buildings.  This design allows for a monumental form to visually connect the city to 
the water, and then further visually connect the museum and resource center to the 
memorial across the harbor through the orientation of the glass passage.  This scheme 
was eventually decided upon as being the strongest design parti, and was therefore 
chosen as the diagram for the final design proposal.  Different methods of organizing 
the program were explored, originally attempting to use the two bars to split up the 
highly different museum and resource center programs.  This idea was later 
abandoned in favor of dividing the program up vertically, placing many public 
functions on the ground floor easily accessible from the glass passage.  This strategy 
had many advantages, particularly as the only appropriate location for service and 
 51 
 
loading functions is along the western edge of the site, sharing a service zone with the 
Frederick Douglass Isaac Meyers Museum.  Many different means of circulation were 
explored utilizing this parti, some more successful than others, but each with its own 
unique set of design problems.  The following drawings represent different studies 
associated with this parti. 
 52 
 
 
 
Figure 54 Ground Floor Plan, parti #3 
 
 
Figure 55 2
nd
 and 3
rd
 Floor Plans, parti #3 
 
 
Figure 56 4
th
 and 5
th
 Floor Plans, parti #3 
 53 
 
 
 
Figure 57 Section, parti #3 
 
 
Figure 58 Interior Elevation, parti #3 
 
 
Figure 59 North Elevation, parti #3 
 
 54 
 
 
Figure 60 Entry, parti #3 
 
 
Figure 61 Skywalk, parti #3 
 
Figure 62 Circulation, parti #3 
 55 
 
 
Figure 63 View from Pier, parti #3 
 
 
 
Figure 64 View down S. Caroline St., parti #3 
 
 
Figure 65 View down New Thames St., parti #3 
 
 56 
 
 
Additional Comments 
 
 
 As can be noted in the above section?s drawings, many different means of 
circulation were explored within this design parti.  The final design proposal suggests 
placing the stair in the central passage space, but this obstructs the clarity of the 
diagram, and the stair is not yet designed to a level where it can truly read as an 
object in this space.  Previous schemes had placed the stair alongside the passage 
space, but due to the necessity to also have the elevators located off of this space, 
there always seemed to be too much circulation space in order to allow for elevator 
egress.  Other roadblocks encountered in this exploration were issues of security.  
While the ground floor is occupied by public functions, including the resource center, 
gift shop, classrooms, and caf?, there is a need to have some form of control or 
security to monitor when visitors leave the ?truly public? realm in order to arrive at 
the museum, which is a public space, but only after appropriate payment and security 
clearances have been approved.  Different locations for the museum information and 
ticket office were explored, but these led to issues of way-finding and complicated the 
clarity of dividing the program vertically.   
 After the public presentation and final meetings, it seems that a logical 
solution to the circulation problem can be found by moving the vertical circulation 
out of the central passage and centering it within the building.  This will allow for the 
diagram to clearly read on the museum floors as the visitor loops around the floor via 
the skywalks.  This will also solve issues of security and way-finding, as having the 
vertical circulation centralized within the building will be readily apparent to a visitor 
 57 
 
traveling through the space, and will also allow for security/control for the building 
operators to monitor who ascends into the museum spaces.
 58 
 
 
CHAPTER 5: FINAL DESIGN PROPOSAL 
 
We become not a melting pot but a beautiful mosaic.  Different people, different 
beliefs, different yearnings, different hopes, different dreams. 
-Former President Jimmy Carter 
 
 
 The decisions that led to the final proposed form of the Baltimore Immigration 
Museum and Resource center were based on ideas about the site?s relationship to the 
city and waterfront, the site?s location on the edge of two distinct neighborhood, 
Fell?s Point and Harbor Point, and the development of forms which convey the 
immigrant experience. 
Site Strategy 
 The site strategy for the museum and resource center utilizes the major view 
corridors leading from the city out to the water both, through the design of a covered 
walkway along the eastern side of the building extending out to the water along the 
pier and by creating an interior glass passage connecting the city to the waterfront 
along the Baltimore Promenade.  The building takes advantage of its prominent 
location on a major intersection of five corners by creating an entrance plaza to hold 
the corner and terminate the major axis along S. Caroline Street.  The building also 
relates to its immediate neighbor, the Frederick Douglass Isaac Meyers Maritime Park 
through the design of another means of entry through a covered porch that leads from 
the neighboring courtyard.  Furthermore, the building?s orientation on the site 
replicates that of its neighbor and that which is typical of waterfront industrial 
 59 
 
buildings by the creation of two bar pieces oriented perpendicularly to the water?s 
edge.  More importantly, this site strategy orients the glass passage piece to point 
directly across the harbor to Tide Point, the site of the future Immigration Gateway 
Heritage Park and the home of the original immigration piers.  This relationship is 
further enhanced by the placement of beacons extending the visual connection of the 
passage piece into the water and across the harbor to the memorial. 
Plan Organization 
 The plan organization of the proposed museum and resource center is divided 
into two buildings connected by the glass passage.  The program is organized 
vertically throughout the five floors of the museum.  The ground floor is dominated 
entirely by public functions, accessible from the interior passage.  These functions 
include the museum lobby, gift shop, museum caf?, multi-purpose spaces, and the 
resource center.  The second and third floors house the museum exhibits.  The fourth 
floor contains the semi-public Family Heritage Center and library, as well as the 
museum administration.  The fifth floor takes advantage of the excellent views of the 
city and water that the site commands, containing potential rental spaces including a 
restaurant and board rooms, all of which feature outdoor rooftop terraces.   
Circulation 
 Circulation throughout the museum and resource center is focused in and 
around the main passage piece.  The primary means of vertical circulation is via the 
grand staircase located within the passage.  The horizontal circulation between the 
two bars is by way of skywalks that cross over the interior street.  These skywalks are 
 60 
 
intended to represent the transition and change of moving from one place to another, 
as reflective of the immigrant experience.  The skywalks also hover over the public 
realm used by visitors and current immigrants alike, conveying the idea that 
immigration is not an event of the past, but rather one that is ongoing and continuing 
to shape our nation.  Other transitional spaces within the building occur in the exhibit 
spaces, where the large glass windows extend beyond the walls of the building to 
utilize views of the harbor and city.  Here the visitor can occupy this space, which is 
neither inside nor outside, and reflect on the major role Baltimore?s immigrants have 
played in the shaping of the city.    
Interior and Exterior 
 The interior and exterior of the Baltimore Immigration Museum and Resource 
Center are detailed to further celebrate the immigrant experience.  On the east side of 
the interior passage, the elevation is designed as a very solid thick masonry wall 
punctured by openings entered via the skywalks.  The west side is detailed as a 
porous wall along which the visitor circulates.  This dichotomy between solid and 
void dramatizes the tall passage space, and the contrast between the differing 
compositions is reflective of the change involved in the immigrant experience, as well 
as the relationship between old and new that pervades the building on multiple levels 
from site location to its programmatic intent.  The exterior of the building is detailed 
in brick and zinc paneling.  The brick walls on the ground and fifth floor are 
reflective of the building?s context as well as Baltimore?s historical past.  The zinc 
paneling is pulled away from this surface, and encloses the museum floors.  The zinc 
relates to the roof and shutters of the Frederick Douglass Isaac Meyers Maritime 
 61 
 
Museum as well as Baltimore?s past as an industrial port, yet they give the building a 
contemporary look, and the change that the metal will undergo over time is intended 
to represent the change that is fundamental to the process of immigration.  The glass 
passage is taller than the two bar buildings it connects, creating a focal point from 
both the water and the street.  The passage also serves as the threshold to the building, 
as all primary circulation to, from and through the building takes place within this 
form. 
  
 62 
 
Diagrams 
 
Figure 66 View Corridors Diagram 
 The diagram above shows the perpendicular orientation of the buildings along 
the waterfront allowing for view corridors from the city fabric out to the water. 
 
 
 
Figure 67 Five Corners Diagram 
 The above diagram shows the significant intersection at which the building is 
located, and how the recessed entry helps to define the corner. 
 
 
 63 
 
 
 
Figure 68 Solid vs. Void 1 
 The above diagram shows the relationship of the solid bar buildings to the 
transparent passage piece. 
 
 
 
 
Figure 69 Solid vs. Void 2 
 The above diagram shows the relationship between the interior elevations of 
the glass passage.  The eastern fa?ade is depicted as solid, whereas the western fa?ade 
is shown as void. 
 
 64 
 
 
Figure 70 Bar Buildings Diagram 
 The above diagram shows the parallel relationship between the two bar 
buildings and their connecting glass passage piece.  These ?bars? are oriented 
perpendicular to the water and point across the water to the proposed immigration 
memorial. 
 
 
Figure 71 Street and Water Relationship 
 The above diagram shows how the glass passage piece relates simultaneously 
to both the street (city/current immigration) and the water (past immigration).
 65 
 
 
Drawings 
 
 
Figure 72 Figure Ground
 66 
 
 
 
Figure 73 Site Plan 
 67 
 
 
Figure 74 Ground Floor Plan 
 68 
 
 
Figure 75 2
nd
 Floor Plan 
 
 69 
 
 
Figure 76 3
rd
 Floor Plan 
 
 70 
 
 
Figure 77 4
th
 Floor Plan 
 
 71 
 
 
Figure72 5
th
 Floor Plan 
 
 
 72 
 
 
Figure73 Sectional Perspectives 
 
 73 
 
 
Figure 4 View of Entry 
 
 74 
 
 
Figure 81 View from Skywalk 
 
 
 75 
 
 
Figure 82 View of Exhibit Space 
 
 
 76 
 
 
Figure 83 View from Street 
 
 77 
 
 
Figure 84 View from Pier  
 
 78 
 
 
Figure 85 View from Pier at Night 
 
 
 79 
 
 
Figure 5 Aerial Perspective 
 
 80 
 
 
Figure 6 Model, aerial 
 
 
 81 
 
 
Figure 7 Model, view from pier 
 82 
 
 
Figure 8 Model, view down S. Caroline Street
 83 
 
 
CHAPTER 6: CONCLUSION 
 
 This thesis presents a particularly difficult design problem: how can 
architecture be used to celebrate both immigrants, past and present, and Baltimore?s 
resulting ethnic and racial diversity?  The proposed building tries to solve this 
problem through many different means, each posing its own distinctive set of design 
complications.  Through the combination of unique site conditions, a complex dual 
program of museum and resource center, and using architecture as metaphor, the 
building attempts to solve this challenging problem and create a rich learning 
experience commemorating the process of immigration for all who use its facilities. 
 The final public review of this thesis was immensely helpful, and the 
proposed design generated highly interesting discussion.  Most of the discussion was 
focused on the central passage space that connects the two bar buildings and enhances 
the building?s relationship with both the immigration memorial across the water and 
the major view corridor down South Caroline Street.  The jury questioned the 
introduction of the stair in this passage space, commenting that this move detracts 
from the space?s clarity and purpose.  One juror questioned the relationship of the 
passage to both the street and the water, adding that perhaps the gesture to the street 
should be different than that to the water.  One way of accomplishing this would be to 
crank the glass passage entry piece so that it more directly related to the street and its 
corresponding movement zones.  However, this move could potentially disrupt the 
strong clarity of the building?s diagram.  Further discussion advocated keeping the 
glass passage as a rectilinear piece, but intensifying its composition so that ?it is more 
 84 
 
exciting? and dramatic.  As the dialogue continued, one juror pointed out that the 
glass passage could be read as an interior pier, further referencing the process of 
immigration.  This concept could be expressed in a variety of ways, including using 
wood for the floor material.  
 The discussion gradually shifted from the role of the passage space to that of 
materiality and representation.  The jury advocated further exploration of materials 
and fa?ades.  The fa?ades of the building could make better use of layering 
techniques to create a dialogue through concealing and revealing different elements 
of the building.  One juror suggested strengthening the elevations by literally using 
the zinc paneling as a ?legwarmer? surrounding the brick walls.  The jury also raised 
several good points about the choices made in representing the building.  One juror 
pointed out that the by rendering the context as white in the exterior perspectives, the 
material relationships between the proposed and surrounding buildings could not be 
readily discerned.  The chosen views and oversaturated color of the interior 
perspectives did not accurately express the intended drama of the space.   
 Overall, the discussion generated at the public review was truly significant 
and valuable in further developing this project.  The discussion raised awareness of 
several missed opportunities that could have been explored throughout the project.  
For example, the building?s diagram is very strong, but it should have been 
challenged more throughout the investigation of the building experience.  While the 
thesis?s objectives are very honorable and the diagram is very clear and powerful, the 
final design proposal does not fully take advantage of previous research and therefore 
the building does not fully construct the intended experience.  Many challenges were 
 85 
 
met throughout the design process.  Finding a functioning circulation system was one 
such complication encountered.  This problem was highly complicated as the building 
needed to reconcile the two different program elements of museum and resource 
center as well as connect the two separate bar buildings.  Finding an appropriate 
circulation system was further complicated by issues of egress, security, service, and 
the complexities of private and public spaces dictated by the program, as explained in 
chapter four.   
 The design process undertaken throughout the year was valuable in that it 
shed light upon many important architectural lessons.  The thesis revealed the 
necessity of a good relationship between architect and client.  The museum is a highly 
complex program, and the process clearly showed how vital good communication and 
understanding between architect, client, and exhibit designers truly is in order to 
develop an exceptional and cohesive building.  One missed opportunity throughout 
the design process was not meeting with any potential clients, such as a member of 
the Baltimore Immigration Project, or perhaps speaking with an exhibit designer. 
Another significant lesson learned through the design process, was the notion to take 
an idea and have it permeate all parts of the design from overall concept down to the 
minute details.  In this project, the building?s narrative about the process of 
immigration is not fully instilled in all parts of the design.   
 If the thesis could be further advanced, the exhibits and installations need 
more exploration.  For example, the proposed building design is essentially forcing 
the exhibit designer to bifurcate the museum displays, which could potentially create 
a very exciting dialogue about the process of immigration, such as ?where I?ve been? 
 86 
 
vs. ?where I?ve come?.  Furthermore, the thesis could explore different lighting 
techniques to illuminate the installations as well as interactive hardware commonly 
used in modern museums.  Finally, the building?s tectonics and material choices need 
extra investigation in order to further develop the meaning and symbolism embedded 
in the building and its external connections to the city and the water, as well as its 
internal connections between the two bar sections. 
 In conclusion, the research and work undertaken to complete this project was 
a highly valuable process.  The conversations generated throughout the design 
process were both dynamic and highly educational.  While selected areas of the final 
design proposal would benefit from further exploration, the overall process of 
selecting and analyzing a site, choosing a suitable program, creating an appropriate 
narrative, and designing a building to accommodate the thesis?s intentions, was a 
truly invaluable and rewarding experience.
 87 
 
APPENDICES 
Appendix A: Resource Center - Potential Liaison Offices (as described in chapter1) 
Below are listed several of the multiple organizations dedicated to providing aid to 
today?s immigrants. 
 
Immigration Outreach Services Center at St. Matthews Roman Catholic Church 
 Provides immigration counseling and information regarding adjustment of 
 status and naturalization.  Acts as liaison to connect immigrants with other 
 Organizations that provide health care, education and employment services. 
 5401 Loch Raven Boulevard  
 Baltimore, MD 21239  
 410-323?8564 
 
Baltimore District Office of US Citizenship and Immigration Services 
Processes all immigrant and non-immigrant benefits provided to visitors of the 
United States.  
Fallon Federal Building  
31 Hopkins Plaza  
Baltimore, MD 21201  
1 (800) 375-5283.  
 
Casa De Maryland: Baltimore Worker?s Right Center 
Works with the community to improve the quality of life and fight for equal 
treatment and full access to resources and opportunities for low-income 
Latinos and their families. Offers services for day laborers and domestic 
workers, as well as workshops and orientations on legal rights, and 
information and referrals on other issues such as consumer protection, debt 
forgiveness, landlord/tenant relations, domestic affairs, police misconduct and 
criminal matters.  
6 North Broadway, Suite #1  
Baltimore, MD 21231  
(410) 732-7777  
 
Catholic Charities Immigration Legal Services 
Immigration Legal Services (ILS) provides low or no cost legal advice and 
representation in a wide range of immigration related matters. The program 
assists clients to obtain, extend, or retain his/her legal status or a family 
member in the United States.  
430 S. Broadway Street  
Baltimore, MD 21231  
(410) 534-8015  
 
Centro de la Comunidad 
 88 
 
A community-based Latino organization which serves as an accessible, 
bilingual gateway into programs such as health, education, advocacy, 
employment, job bank referral database, housing, immigration, and other 
social services.  
3021 Eastern Ave.  
Baltimore, MD 21224  
410-675-8606 / 1-866-872-3021  
 
Education Based Latino Outreach (EBLO) 
Offers various educational and culturally sensitive programs to the Hispanic 
community and the general public. Provides back to school supplies, computer 
classes, ESOL classes, and Spanish classes.  
606 South Ann Street  
Baltimore, Maryland 21231  
(410) 563-3160  
 
Hispanic Apostolate 
Provides English as a second language classes, immigration legal services, 
health care initiatives, and workforce development.  
403 S. Broadway  
Baltimore, MD 21231  
410-522-2668  
 
Korean Resource Center 
Offers English classes, computer classes, smoking cessation classes, cancer 
screening and education, youth internship and community leadership 
conference.  
425 E. Federal St.  
Baltimore, MD 21202  
410-347-0311  
Lutheran Social Services/ Refugee & Immigrant Services 
Provides job counseling, training and placement to immigrants who have 
refugee, asylum or are a victim of child trafficking status.  
3516 Eastern Ave.  
Baltimore, MD 21224  
410-558-3168  
 
Maryland Latino Coalition for Justice 
Promotes and advocates for human rights, civic participation, and well-being 
of the Latino community in the state of Maryland. Services include charitable, 
educational, literary, political, and social activities.  
P.O. Box 39096  
Baltimore, MD 21212  
410-625-9409  
 
Maryland Office for New Americans (MONA) 
 89 
 
MONA plans, administers, and coordinates transitional services aimed at 
helping refugees become self-sufficient as quickly as they can. MONA service 
providers instruct refugees on life skills as well as prepare refugees for the 
American working environment.  
311 W. Saratoga St. Suite 222  
Baltimore, MD 21201  
410-767-7514  
 
The Academy of Languages 
Offers a comprehensive range of language services, including individual and 
group language classes, translation, and interpretation services, plus 
customized consulting services.  
20 S. Charles St, Ste 405  
Baltimore MD 21201  
410 685 8383  
 90 
 
ENDNOTES
                                                 
1 Timothy Jacobs, The History of the Baltimore and Ohio: America?s First Railroad (New York: 
 Brompton Books Corp., 1989), p.12. 
 
2
 Parker Pennington, ?Immigration Era, Part I: Port of Pleasant Landings,? Baltimore City Historical 
 Society  3, no. 1  (2004): p. 1. 
 
3
 Robert C. Keith, Baltimore Harbor: A Picture History (Baltimore: Ocean World Publishing Co., 
 1982), p.74 
 
4
 Dean Krimmel. ?Making a Milestone in the History of Immigration,? Urbanite. Issue 3.  May/June 
 2004: 17. 
 
5
 ?Our Mission and Goals,? 2006. < http://www.immigrationbaltimore.org> (17 October 2007). 
 
6
 ?Welcome to the Promenade,? ,?  Waterfront Partnership of Baltimore Inc, 2006, 
 <http://www.waterfrontpartnership.org/promenade_plazas.aspx> (19 November 2007). 
 
7
?Our Brick Plazas,?  Waterfront Partnership of Baltimore Inc, 2006, 
 <http://www.waterfrontpartnership.org/promenade_plazas.aspx> (19 November 2007). 
 
8
 Ehrenkrantz Eckstut & Kuhn Architects. ?Baltimore?s Harbor Point,? 2007, 
 <http://eekarchitects.com/portfolio_projects.cfm?ProjectID=48937&Region=2> (12 February 
 2008).   
 
9
 ?New Morgan Stanley Project and Harbor Point Redevelopment,? Honeywell Remediation and 
 Evaluation Services, Honeywell Online Newsletter, Issue 2, January 2008, 
 <http://www.baltimoreswannparkcleanup.com/_resources/pdfs/newsletter/E-
 Newsletter_issue2.pdf >  (14 February 2008). 
 
10
 Dean Krimmel. ?Making a Milestone in the History of Immigration,? Urbanite. Issue 3. 
 May/June  2004: 17. 
 
11
 ?Pier 21 ? Canada?s Immigration Museum,? Pier 21, 2007. <https://www.pier21.ca/about> , (13 
 December 2008.) 
 
12
 ?United States Holocaust Memorial Museum,? Wikipedia Foundation, Inc., 12 January 2008, 
 <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Holocaust_Memorial_Museum#References>, ( 
 12 January 2008). 
 
13
 David Wiles. ?House of Sweden, a New Meeting Place in Washington D.C.,? 20 October 2006, < 
 http://www.sweden.se/templates/cs/Article____15544.aspx> (18 March 2008). 
 
14
Richard Murphy Architects, ?Dunfermline Museum and Art Gallery,? 2008, < 
 http://www.richardmurphyarchitects.com/projects/446/> (18 March 2008). 
 
15
 John V. Mutlow, ed. Ricardo Legoretta Architects. New York: Rizzoli International  Publications, 
 1997, p. 38. 
 
16
 Susan Strauss and Sean Sawyer, ed. Polshek Partnership Architects. Princeton:  Princeton 
Architectural Press, 2005, p. 12-15. 
 91 
 
                                                                                                                                           
 
 92 
 
BIBLIOGRAPHY 
 
Basarab, Stephen, et al.  The Ukrainians of Maryland. Baltimore: Ukrainian 
 Education Association of Maryland, 1977. 
 
Bednar, Michael J.  The New Atrium.  New York: McGraw Hill Book Co., 1986. 
 
Connery, William. ?Point of Entry: Baltimore, The Other Ellis Island.? 2005.  
 <http://www.baltimoremd.com/charm/pointofentry.html> (17 April 2008). 
 
Cunz, Dieter.  The Maryland Germans: A History.  Princeton: Princeton University 
 Press, 1948. 
 
Dewey, John.  Experience and Education.  New York: Touchstone, 1938. 
 
DiLisio, James E.  ?Irish Immigration.?  2005. Maryland Online Encyclopedia. 
 <http://www.mdoe.org/irish_immig.html#> (12 March 2008). 
 
Dobbs, Vincent V. Immigrating to the Port of Baltimore. 2 May 1998. 13 Oct. 2007 < 
 
Duncan, Katie. ?Irish Immigrants in Baltimore.? 2005. 
 <http://teachingamericanhistorymd.net/000001/000000/000131/html/t131.
 html>  (14 December 2007). 
 
Ehrenkrantz Eckstut & Kuhn Architects. ?Baltimore?s Harbor Point,? 2007, 
 <http://eekarchitects.com/portfolio_projects.cfm?ProjectID=48937&Region=
 2> (12 February 2008).   
 
Ellsworth, Elizabeth.  Places of Learning: Media, Architecture, Pedagogy.  New 
 York: Taylor and Francis Group, 2005. 
 
Esslinger, Dean R.  ?Immigration through the Port of Baltimore.? In Forgotten 
 Doors, edited by M. Mark Stolarik. Cranbury: The Associated University 
 Presses, Inc.,  1988. 
 
Faunce, M.L.  ?Ellis Island Records Go Electronic, Baltimore Begins Immigration 
 Tours.? Bay Weekly 10, no. 12. 21-27 March 2002. 
 <http://www.bayweekly.com/year02/issueX12/leadX12b.html> (14 April 
 2008). 
 
Fein, Isaac M.  The Making of an American Jewish Community.  Philadelphia: 
 The Jewish Publication Society of America, 1971. 
 
 93 
 
Frey, Jacob. Reminisces of Baltimore. 1893. The Capital and the Bay: Narratives  of 
 Washington and the Chesapeake Bay Region, ca. 1600-1925. Library of 
 Congress Collection. 
 
Futagawa, Yukio, ed. ?Kevin Roche and John Dinkeloo - The Ford Foundation 
 Building and the Oakland Museum.? Global Architecture. No. 4. Tokyo: 
 A.P.A. EDIT A Tokyo Co, Ltd., 1971. 
 
Gabaccia, Donna R. and Vicki L Ruiz, eds. American Dreaming, Global realities: 
 Rethinking U.S. Immigration History. Urbana and Chicago: University of 
 Illinois Press, 2006. 
 
Golab, Caroline.  Immigrant Destinations. Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 
 1977. 
 
Grosz, Elizabeth and Peter Eisenman.  Architecture from the Outside: Essays on 
 Virtual and Real Space.  Cambridge: Massachusetts Institute of Technology,
 2001.   
 
Hayward, Mary Ellen and Frank R. Shivers, Jr., ed. The Architecture of Baltimore: 
 An Illustrated History.  Baltimore: John Hopkins University Press, 2004.  
 
Henderson, Justin. Museum Architecture. Gloucester,MA: Rockport Publishers, 
 1998. 
 
?History of the Port of Baltimore: Serving Maryland and the World for 300 years.? 
 2007.  Port of Baltimore. <http://www.portofbaltimore300.org/history.htm>. 
 (14 November 2007). 
 
Immigration Station. 1998-2003. Angel Island State Park. 20 Oct. 2007 
 <http://www.angelisland.org/immigr02.html>. 
 
?Immigration Story Finding Roots from Point to Point and in Canton.? Fells Point 
 Citizens on Patrol Newsletter 6, no. 2.  February 2004: 2. 
 
Jacobs, Timothy.  The History of the Baltimore and Ohio: America?s First  Railroad. 
 New York: Brompton Books Corp., 1989. 
.  
Keith, Robert C. Baltimore Harbor, A Picture History.  Baltimore: Ocean World,  
Publishing Co., 1982. 
 
Kliment, Stephen A., ed. Building Type Basics for Museums. New York: John Wiley 
 and Sons, Inc., 2001. 
 
Krimmel, Dean. ?A Timeline of Baltimore Immigration.? Urbanite, Issue 3,  
May/June 2004, 16. 
 94 
 
 
- - -. ?Gateway to Baltimore?s Past.? Urbanite, Issue 3, May / June 2004, 17. 
 
Lin, Maya.  ?Between Art and Architecture.? Boundaries.  New York: Simon and 
 Schuster, 2000. 
 
Locust Point. Produced and directed by John Bright Mann. 26 min.. ITVS/CPBS, 
 Library of American Broadcasting, University of Maryland, 1995. 
 Videocassette. 
 
Maryland Bureau of Immigration. Maryland; Its Lands, Products, and Industries:  the 
 Ideal Home for the Immigrant. Baltimore: Baltimore City Planning and 
 Binding, 1915. 
 
 Mesecke, Andrea and Thorsten Scheer, ed. Josef Paul Kleihues: Themes and 
 Projects.  Basel (Switzerland): Birkhauser ? Verlag fur Architektur, 1996. 
 
Mutlow, John V., ed. Ricardo Legoretta Architects. New York: Rizzoli International 
 Publications, 1997. 
 
?New Morgan Stanley Project and Harbor Point Redevelopment,? Honeywell 
 Remediation and Evaluation Services, Honeywell Online Newsletter, Issue 2, 
 January 2008,  <http://www.baltimoreswannparkcleanup.com/_resources/pdfs/ 
 newsletter/E- Newsletter_issue2.pdf >  (14 February 2008). 
 
Newhouse, Victoria. Towards a New Museum.  New York: The Monacelli Press,
 2006. 
 
Ostberg, Ragnar. The Stockholm Town Hall. P.A. Norstedt and Soner Publishers. 
 1929. 
 
Overland, Orm. Immigrant Minds, American Identities: Making the United States 
 Home,  1870-1930. Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 2000. 
 
Pennington, Parker. ?Immigration Era, Part I: Port of Pleasant Landings.? Baltimore 
 City Historical Society  3, no. 1 (2004): 1. 
 
?Pier 21 ? Canada?s Immigration Museum,? Pier 21, 2007. 
 <https://www.pier21.ca/about>, (13  December 2008.) 
 
Quartermaine, Peter. Port Architecture, Constructing the Littoral. West Sussex:  
Academy Editions, 1999. 
 
Rath, Molly. ?Lukewarm Welcome.? Urbanite, Issue 3, May / June 2004, 10-11. 
 
 95 
 
Rehbein, Leslie and Kate E. Peterson. Beyond the White Marble Steps.  Baltimore: 
 J.W.Boarman Company Inc., 1979. 
 
Richard Murphy Architects, ?Dunfermline Museum and Art Gallery,? 2008, < 
 http://www.richardmurphyarchitects.com/projects/446/> (18 March 
 2008).Saxon, Richard. The Atrium Comes of Age. Essex: Longman Group, 
 1994. 
 
Scharf, J. Thomas. The Chronicles of Baltimore: Being a Complete History of 
 "Baltimore Town" and Baltimore City from the Earliest Period to the Present 
 Time. The Capital and the Bay: Narratives of Washington and the Chesapeake 
 Bay Region, ca. 1600-1925. Library of Congress Collection. 
 
Steele, James, ed. Museum Builders. New York: St. Martin?s Press, 1994. 
 
Stover, John F. History of the Baltimore and Ohio Railroad. West Lafayette, Ind.: 
 Purdue University Press, 1986. 
 
Strauss, Susan and Sean Sawyer, ed. Polshek Partnership Architects. Princeton: 
 Princeton Architectural Press, 2005. 
 
 ?This Was Baltimore, 100 Years Ago.? The Baltimore Sun, 19 August 1973, sec. 
 D. 
 
Turner, Victor.  ?Dewey, Dilthey, and Drama: An Essay in the Anthropology of 
 Experience.? Chicago: University of Illinois Press, 1986 
 
Warren, Marion E. and Mame Warren.  Baltimore: When She Was What She 
 Used to Be, 1850-1930. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1983. 
 
Wheeler, Thomas C. The Immigrant Experience. Baltimore: Penguin Books, Inc.,  
1971.  
 
Wiles, David. ?House of Sweden, a New Meeting Place in Washington D.C.,? 20 
 October 2006, < http://www.sweden.se/templates/cs/Article____15544.aspx> 
 (18 March 2008). 
 
Vecoli, Rudolph J. and Suzanne M. Sinke. A Century of European Migrations, 
 1830-1930. Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1991. 
 
Vidler, Anthony.  Warped Space: Art, Architecture, and Anxiety in Modern Culture. 
 Cambridge: Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 2001.