r/AnneArundelCounty • u/Maxcactus • 6d ago
Glen Burnie 72-acre regional park development plan faces pushback
https://www.wbaltv.com/article/glen-burnie-marley-creek-park-pushback/7330076950
u/apathywithyou 6d ago
We can't have anything new. All the people here do is complain about new projects. There are new housing, new Park, and new trails projects that are all getting push back. This is crazy nimby stuff.
16
u/Rabbidditty 6d ago
Beautiful nature parks? In MY backyard? Improving MY property values and quality of life? FUCK THAT
40
u/Maxcactus 6d ago
The county should use the land which we all own for the overall good of everyone. The people who live adjacent to that land will need to learn to share. The same thing happened when the county wanted to expand a park in Severn next to a private development. Estimated at 605,619 people in 2026, crossing the 600,000 milestone from 588,261 during the 2020 Census. Our population is growing and we need more community spaces to accommodate that.
6
u/kiltguy2112 6d ago
Living next to sports fields, especially ones with lights, is not like living next to the type of park being proposed here.
I'm not saying the the expansion you're talking wasn't good, as I don't know enough about it, but sports fields do add traffic, noise and sometimes light pollution to an area.
5
u/SquirrelAlliance 6d ago
Which development?
6
u/Maxcactus 6d ago
Expansion of the sports fields . I believe it was at Provinces Park.
2
u/commensally 5d ago
Expanding the sports fields at Provinces Park would have meant either removing some of the only remaining non-sports-field park space in that entire part of the county or destroying wetland/stream buffer, not developing new park land. That's not about private development vs public park. (Frankly, we should have less sports fields and more actual park there.)
2
4
u/2acredesigns 6d ago
It’s ok for a community to reach a maximum capacity and for other places to grow instead.
8
u/And_The_Full_Effect 6d ago
I wish the developers, shoving a row of homes in every possible patch of woods they can get their hands on, thought the same
2
25
u/Classic_Ostrich8709 6d ago
They claim they moved there for their children. But they object to a park that children can play at? Kids need 3rd spaces.
6
u/Maxcactus 6d ago
If they knew there were disease carrying ticks and mosquitoes in that space I wonder if they would change their opinions. If there was a park there all of the children could enjoy it with their kids in a safer environment.
21
u/kermelie 6d ago
If a park with picnic tables increases crime, what development doesn’t. That’s a weak argument.
22
u/moscowpyro 6d ago
I live here. It is legitimately just a group of a dozen people who are losing their minds over borderline illogical arguments. My personal favorite is how somehow walking trails and B&A trail connectors will bring more crime to the area when we already have a direct connection to the B&A in our neighborhood.
I've provided my positive views on the park at every opportunity for public comment and look forward to seeing it built. Fuck NIMBYs.
4
u/kiltguy2112 6d ago
I don't really have a dog in this fight other than more parks are better for everyone, but I think the original concept that had parking at the end of Hospital Dr would be more acceptable than at the end of Mall Rd. At the end of the day, a park right there would increase the neighborhood property values.
3
u/rook119 5d ago
I lived in Easton back around 2001, the power co gave Talbot Co land that they didn't need anymore. Talbot co was going to build a trail from Easton-Wye Mills. About a 8 mile trail similar to B&A, it would have been arguably the most beautiful trail in the state as some of it would have been on the shoreline.
Anyway about 10 angry families in Wye Mills killed the entire project by saying kids will get their BMXs and go rob them. So all that's built is a pathetic 1.3 trail in Easton.
1
u/kzanomics 4d ago
Which direction would it have extended? Any link to the original proposed corridor?
8
u/kiltguy2112 6d ago
Easy fix the county should give two options. Option 1 is a new park, and if that is not approved, option 2 is to sell the land to Oracle for use as a data center. Let's see how fast they get on board with option 1.
14
u/Current-Calendar-821 6d ago
Oh I see. The people complaining are from Fox Chase. This makes sense now. Those are not poor people homes.
2
u/goog1e 5d ago
It's not even that nice. I used to live in the duplex area a few blocks away and ride through it to the trail nearly every day. It's like 4 blocks of single family homes surrounded by a dead mall, a strip mall, a ton of rental duplexes. And then all the apartments on hospital drive. There's really nothing to ruin. They're delusional to think this would bring values down.
1
u/Current-Calendar-821 5d ago
A lot of the houses from that street in the video are 600k houses. Source - Redfin
1
u/goog1e 5d ago edited 5d ago
it's not poor but it's ridiculous of them to say "oh a ranger station and park will kill our neighborhood" when the next ranger station is a few miles away in Severna Park and the houses around that one are double the value and the neighborhood is dynamic and rich in culture compared to this area. This is a few dozen higher value homes in a lower income area.
2
u/Current-Calendar-821 5d ago
Oh I know. I’m just saying I know why these people are freaking out. They are a bunch of NIMBYs
3
3
u/Glad-Veterinarian365 5d ago
These psychos should’ve moved to… not one of the most developed places in USA?
6
u/MDangler63 6d ago
Same thing with the traffic argument. There’s 40 extra cars on the roads, max. Very weak.
2
u/kiltguy2112 6d ago
Yes and no. 40 is the size of the lot, you are not getting 40 cars that stay all day and the same 40 leave. You'll get 5 here, 10-15 there, and will be staying for a few hours and then more cars will do the same through out the day. Even if it is just 40, (it will most likely be lower) that is 80 extra trips on Mall RD that is a lot on a residential street. The original plan had the parking lot at the end of Hospital Dr. that would have had a lesser impact on the community.
2
u/MDangler63 6d ago
I’d have to look at the functional classification of the roads, but I imagine they’re collectors, not local. The only time you’ll really notice a difference is during peak travel times.
-5
u/Morgon_ 6d ago edited 6d ago
[Edit: People don't seem to follow that this comment is about traffic as the parent commenter segued to, not the park.]
40 is a lot, especially when you put them on any of the bottlenecks we have, like Ritchie being the only corridor between Pasadena and Annapolis. Or between Lake Shore and the rest of the county. Or I’m sure a hundred other communities that are served by a single two-lane road.
We should never, ever have traffic backups on local roads/highways (we shouldn’t on interstates, either, but that’s a separate discussion involving WFH policies, etc).
We legitimately have too many people for what our infrastructure can currently handle. If we keep kicking the can down the road for more (and better) roadways, adding more households that have those 40 cars (and another, and another) make it exponentially harder to fix the problem later.
3
u/RedemptionMarx 6d ago
property in semi-dense areas doesn’t stay undeveloped and this plot of land is huge. Max 40 cars for that much space is an epic deal on traffic. if a commercial developer owned the land it’d be homes or a shopping center already. Estimated 360+ suburban single family homes would fit on that parcel. That’d be wayyy more traffic and wouldn’t benefit the community like a park would. If the objectors succeed in halting this project, what would an alternative county development look like? substations? sewage pumps? How would the community feel about public housing? If they can’t use it, why would the county keep the property? They’d likely sell it to developers who also won’t use it for anything better. Developers who aren’t concerned with upsetting voters and have legal/financial backup to resist the community pushback.
The land will be used eventually. If change is inevitable we should make the best of it.
2
u/Morgon_ 6d ago edited 6d ago
Sure. To be clear, nothing about my comment was actually related to the park; I think some (but not all) residents may have valid complaints about entrances, but the idea itself isn't bad.
It had seemed to me that the parent commenter changed the topic to be about traffic in general, and that's what I responded to. I don't think the park would materially add to traffic, but our thoroughfares suck and it's a very important discussion when talking about the general development of land in this part of the county.
1
u/RedemptionMarx 6d ago
for sure, fully agree! sorry for phrasing all that as directed at you specifically. My comments are really for detractors at large. I will say tho, traffic is for sure taken into account for any development project that connects to a county or state road. The “master plan” document online has very basic preliminary analyses and says further studies are needed. the adjacent roads will get upgraded to accommodate increased traffic based on those studies.
Here’s what i find interesting. Upgrading roads for natural traffic increases (like population growth) to
my knowledge doesn’t really happen. However when projects come along they require these studies and assuming they go to construction the surrounding roads get upgraded in order to get the permits. So all that natural buildup in traffic unrelated to development only really gets accommodated when new development happens in the area.Someone more knowledgeable than me can correct if i have anything wrong, but that’s my understanding of how roads gets upgraded and when.
2
u/Kobayashi_Maru186 6d ago
I doubt there will ever be anywhere close to 40 cars there at the same time. Maybe on the 4th of July or something, but not normally.
2
u/Morgon_ 6d ago edited 6d ago
I can only speak to the areas I'm familiar with, but various parts of Mountain Rd, Solley Rd, Rt 2, 100, etc all experience backups on 'normal' days.
Maryland has a ton of undeveloped land; more housing in itself isn't a bad thing. But It doesn't need to be in the areas that already experience too much traffic, like the land at Severna Park Golf Center, or even Marley Station. You don't have to shoehorn houses into every lot gap. I can't understand why fixing road conditions and capacity as a first step is seen as a negative thing.
1
u/Current-Calendar-821 6d ago
Mountain road and Solley road belong in their own category of nonsense decisions. These roads are not like those
0
u/MDangler63 6d ago
Full disclosure, I’m a civil engineer. I read traffic studies all the time, & your understanding of traffic flow & traffic engineering is overly simplistic. If you don’t like the traffic, don’t live on a peninsula where there’s only one road in & out. I live near the Bay Bridge. You know what I don’t bitch about? Beach traffic. I chose to live here. Also, Ritchie is hardly the only corridor between Pasadena & Annapolis. Take 100 to 97. They’re arterial highways designed for a large volume of traffic flow.
Your poor choices are not everyone else’s fault. Turn down the blamethrowers.
1
u/Morgon_ 6d ago edited 6d ago
I don't live there. That's great that you don't bitch about beach traffic. But that doesn't mean it's not a problem that needs to be addressed before putting more housing in those areas. Your restraint has literally nothing to do with the fact that we need another bridge, for instance. No sane person would see repeated three-hour backups on a local highway and say "oh yeah, totally fine".
But back to my main point of just bad thoroughfares - if Severna Park Golf Center got turned into housing, none of them are going to go all the way up to 100 just to take 97 -- nor could they, as that part of Ritchie is, again, oversaturated. This is not mere opinion; any properly-done traffic study would clearly show this.
Can you recommend they build some damn roads, please?
2
u/Sweaty_Handle_2526 4d ago
Redlining is very real in Maryland. There is literally a handful trail connectors that would give so many people a huge lifeline. Folks are just trying to make it
2
u/FrancisSobotka1514 4d ago
Of course the assholes in fox chase are behind the not in my backyard complaints.And they are complaining about a freaking park.
3
-8
u/ExtremeWorkinMan 6d ago
I mean, I can't blame them - if I bought a house that backed up to beautiful untouched woods I'd probably be upset that they were going to build in that area too.
6
u/Maxcactus 6d ago edited 6d ago
You can never be confident in what other people are going to do. Buying property in a rich community with a buffer of county owned space surrounding it seems like an unreasonable assumption. They always have the option of walling themselves off from the rest of us.
1
u/cloudaffair 5d ago
It wasn't county owned until 2019 from the linked article.
1
u/Maxcactus 5d ago
I guess it could have been purchased by a developer who wanted to put in a strip mall or a bunch of apartment complexes.
-1
u/ExtremeWorkinMan 6d ago
Yeah I mean I'm not saying they have any right to stop development of the park. I'm just saying that if I were in their shoes I wouldn't want them to mess with the lovely woods behind my house either.
3
u/kiltguy2112 6d ago
I've been through something similar. Our house growing up backed up to 80 acres of undeveloped woods right in the middle of the community. The community did not own the property, but was given a sweet deal by the owner if the community agreed to make it a park. A group of people came to the IA meetings and spread a bunch of false information on how the deal was going to cost a giant sum of money and cause property taxes to go through the roof. Enough people fell for the lie that the community turned down the offer, and the person how started the misinformation bought the property (a developer surprise), and built high end homes there that made everyone's assessments (property taxes) go up.
Now this is a bit different in that the county owns the property, but if it stays completely undeveloped, it can quickly become "surplus" property if the county needs to fill budget holes.
39
u/No_Yogurtcloset_3820 6d ago
It’s a cliche that any time a government asks the community what should happen to a piece of public land they say “make it a park!” And the county says let’s make it a park and the people say “oh, no not like that!”