The original concept of the Mixed-Use Transit Oriented Development (as shown above) for the Woodmore Towne Centre at Glenarden is intended to create a "vibrant urban environment" that brings compatible land uses, public amenities and utilities together at various scales. This development seeks to create pedestrian-friendly environments, higher-density development, and a variety of uses that enable people to live, work, play, and shop in one place in the City of Glenarden and Prince Georges County.
The "Main Street" Residential/Commercial type of mixed-use development planned in the Conceptual Site Plan consisted of a group of vertical mixed-use buildings.
The intended development combines different uses in the same building. The lower floors are intended to have shops, outdoor cafes, restaurants, live music, museums, children's lerning centers and other public uses that the city of Glenarden encourages for the Woodmore Towne Centre’s new multi-family town center residential community.
The Developer, Petrie Ventures, does not want to provide the intended Towne Centre core of retail shops, restaurants, live entertainment and residential "vibrant lifestyle" originally proposed for the citizens of Glenarden. Even further, they are expanding the Big Box retail area to include yet another single tenant with large parking areas as shown below, to replace the multi-family/retail buildings on the two lots at the core of the Towne Centre. Join concerned residents of the Woodmore Towne Centre in saying no to the Developer and let the City Council of Glenarden and the County District County know that we are tired of unfulfilled promises!
To the Honorable Members of the Prince Georges County District Council and Glenarden City Council:
Pursuant to Section 27-228.01 Appeals from Planning Board, as a person in support of preventing the destruction of the vibrant "Main Street" concept of the Woodmore Towne Center, I am supporting this partition which objects to a final Planning Board decision to the District Council, and request a review a Board decision for a Conceptual Site Plan, Section 27-280. My appeal is based on specific evaluation criteria findings that the planning board did not take into consideration based on the information presented at the hearing. The following is a review of the urban design evaluation criteria that was omitted, ignored or not considered in determining the final decision of the required findings in compliance with the evaluation criteria for the original Conceptual Site Plan.
As a petitioner in favor of developing the original Conceptual Site Plan with a vibrant Town Center Core, suggest that the Planning Board findings for projects in the M-XT Zone and the required criteria for the approval of an amendment to the Conceptual Site Plan, was not sufficiently met and satisfied by the Applicant for the Planning Board to recommend approval with conditions in a final Planning Board decision to the District Council.
By signing, you accept Care2's Terms of Service.
You can unsub at any time here.
Having problems signing this? Let us know.