Residents Air Concerns Over New Service Road At Route 113 Public Meeting

SNOW HILL — Interest in the ongoing dualization of Route 113 between Berlin and Snow Hill is still high with a steady stream of visitors starting early for Wednesday’s public information meeting.

Concern over whether the intersection of Langmaid Road and Route 113 will get a stop light was common though many attendees said they were most interested in how their own property might be impacted by dualization.

The information meeting did not feature a formal presentation but instead invited the public to the Snow Hill Middle School cafeteria where maps and dualization goals were available for viewing. State Highway Administration (SHA) staff was also on hand to answer questions. There were a lot of questions, the most popular of which being what’s the plan for Langmaid.

Just this week the Worcester County Commission lent their support to an SHA backed initiative to install a traffic signal at the intersection of Langmaid and Route 113. Though the SHA’s own traffic study recommended J-turns, the administration has applied for a waiver from the state to install a light instead.

“As someone who has driven these paths, driven down US 113 a lot, I think a stop light is a good idea. I really do,” said Chip Bertino, a candidate running for the County Commission who attended Wednesday’s meeting.

County Commissioner Virgil Shockley, who also attended the meeting, asserted that the Langmaid intersection without a stop light has the potential to be a repeat of another Snow Hill intersection, Routes 12 and 113, a site that saw an uncommon number of accidents and fatalities until a traffic signal was installed.

“You roughly had the same scenario at Route 12 and US 113 when it was just a two-lane road,” he said. “You had roughly the same number of accidents. They went in and tried to fix the thing and it was a disaster.”

Worries about Langmaid aren’t reserved for just commissioners. Resident Nancy Donoway, who lives adjacent to Route 113 near Newark, said she was attending the meeting for a variety of reasons, including the Langmaid intersection and interest over how the dualization might touch her property.

“I just wanted to see what they’re going to take away from my yard mainly,” she said. “And I do want it safe at Newark Station because there’s a lot of congestion there anyway.”

The dualization is likely going to impact several properties, some much more than others. One such majorly affected parcel of land belongs to Don Westbrook and his wife. The current dualization plan would put a service road directly through his property, necessitating the loss of his house.

“They decided to take our house, our property, even though there are some very obvious other routes to go,” said Westbrook.

Westbrook quickly clarified that he both understands and accepts the need for SHA to exercise eminent domain or purchase property to facilitate the dualization, but his. frustration stems from his belief it doesn’t make sense to use his property when there are others he believes would be more efficient for the service road to be built near the intersection of Langmaid and 113.

“We want it to be safe. It’s just that there’s not commonsense in the design,” said Westbrook.

Instead, he hopes that SHA will take a closer look at his neighbor’s property. which would not need to be completely taken away to install a service road. That neighbor, John Shipe, agreed and also voiced concerns about what’s going to happen to the Langmaid intersection.

“It’s ridiculous taking their home from them the way they’re doing it and on top of that not putting in a traffic light. And the worst part about it is that we already had a flashing light there,” he said.

Shipe admitted that he hasn’t brought his property to SHA’s attention but said that he’d be open to a discussion about granting some of its use. In the meantime, Westbrook is pushing back against losing his property. Whether the location of the service road is ever revised, Westbrook was critical of the process up to this point.

“They told us five years ago that they were thinking about this, which put us in limbo for five years. We couldn’t sell our house,” he said, explaining that no one would want to purchase a new home that they might have to leave to make room for a highway within a few years.

The current service road plan isn’t just inconvenient for one family, Westbrook continued, but could potentially disrupt farmers from reaching their land as well. While obviously frustrated, Westbrook did take a moment to note that his beef is with the SHA office in Annapolis and its overall state operation. The local office, which hosted Wednesday’s meeting, has been cooperative and professional, in his opinion.

“At least the Eastern Shore, the Salisbury office, seems to be decent people to talk to. But people from other places, the state level, I don’t trust them,” he said.

The dualization has been split into five phases, with Phases 1, 2A and 2B complete. Next on the radar is Phase 3, which is the dualization of the highway North of Massey Branch to North of Five Mile Branch Road. That will be followed by Phase 4, the dualization from North of Five Mile Branch Road to North of Md. 365. Phase 5 calls for the construction of a grade-separated interchange at the Md. 12 and Route 113 intersection.