Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Parks Expansion topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Memorial Park expansion delayed after state and county rejections; board weighs engineer oversight
Summary
Taneytown parks staff said State Highway and County Forest Conservation again disapproved revised Memorial Park expansion plans, likely delaying construction by 1–2 months while the engineer revises designs; board members asked to be copied on internal engineering reviews and discussed potential contract accountability.
Taneytown parks staff reported on Jan. 14 that revised plans for the Memorial Park expansion were disapproved again by State Highway and County Forest Conservation, a setback that will likely push the project back while the town and its engineer revise submissions.
"State Highway and County Forest Conservation sent us review letters. They disapproved again," said a parks staff member, noting reviewers flagged insufficient detail on reforestation and the use of inappropriate species in bioretention areas. The construction contract with Morton Buildings is signed and a down payment has been made, but grading and permits remain outstanding.
Board members expressed frustration at repeated rejections and sought greater oversight. One member urged the town to require the engineering firm to provide internal review records and to be cc'd on correspondence so town staff can confirm that requested changes were addressed before resubmission. The parks staff said they will ask Andrew (Drew) Gray, identified in the meeting as the town’s director of planning and zoning, to review the next submission before it is sent to agencies.
Members also raised questions about the engineering team's capacity. One board participant said he "get[s] the feeling they're in over their head" and suggested that, if problems persist, the town consider contract remedies or re-soliciting professional services. Staff cautioned that terminating and replacing the engineer could require starting procurement over and further delay the project.
The board discussed the project's budget implications: grants originally secured were expected to cover the majority of construction costs, but repeated delays and rising costs mean the town must front expenditures with general-fund dollars until reimbursed under the grants' reimbursement model. Parks staff said they will track staff time spent reviewing resubmissions to document added costs and will press the engineering firm for a better internal review process.
Next steps: parks staff will have the planning director review the rejected digital submission, request that the engineering firm perform a documented internal review before resubmitting, and attempt to be copied on future correspondence with State Highway and County Forest Conservation. The town expects at least a 30–60 day delay while revisions and agency review windows play out.
