Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

SPINE IS .6 IN. 8.5

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

LANDOVER GATEWAY

9.1

Approved

Landover Gateway

$9.50

Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

May 2009

May 2009

The Maryland-National Capital Park and Planning Commission Prince George’s County Planning Department www.mncppc.org/pgco

LANDOVER GATEWAY

LANDOVER GATEWAY

Abstract

Acknowledgments

TITLE:

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

AUTHOR:

The Maryland-National Capital Park and Planning Commission

SUBJECT:

Approved Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment for the Landover Gateway Sector Plan (portion of Planning Areas 72 and 73)

DATE:

May 2009

SOURCE OF COPIES:

The Maryland-National Capital Park and Planning Commission

SERIES NUMBER:

436102306

NUMBER OF PAGES:

202

ABSTRACT: This document is the Approved Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment (SMA) for the Landover Gateway area. The sector plan and SMA amend portions of the 1993 Approved Landover and Vicinity Master Plan (Planning Area 72) and the 1993 Approved Largo-Lottsford Master Plan and Sectional Map Amendment (Planning Area 73). Developed with the assistance of the community, property owners, residents and elected officials, this document recommends goals, policies, strategies, and actions pertaining to development patterns, zoning, environmental infrastructure, transportation systems, public facilities, parks and recreation, economic development and urban design. The SMA proposes zoning changes to implement the recommendations of the sector plan.

Prince George’s County Planning Department Fern V. Piret, Ph.D., Planning Director Albert G. Dobbins, III, AICP, Deputy Planning Director Project Team Vanessa C. Akins Mosley, Chief of Community Planning North Division Gary Thomas, Principal Planning Technician Robert J. Duffy, AICP, Planning Supervisor Nancy Mattingly, Principal Administrative Assistant *Joseph Chang, Project Facilitator *Marcia Daring, Principal Administrative Assistant Christine A. Osei, Project Manager Briana Davis, Principal Administrative Assistant William Washburn, AICP, Planner Coordinator Gena Tapscott, Principal Administrative Assistant Sam White, Senior Planner Lisa Washington, Principal Administrative Assistant Sonja Ewing, AICP, Planner Coordinator Resource Team Carol Binns, Senior Planner, Parks and Recreation Christopher Lindsay, Senior Planner *Brandon “Scott” Rowe, Planner *Emily Clifton, Planner Coordinator Karen Buxbaum, Planner Coordinator Michael Asante, Ph.D., Planner Coordinator Faramarz Mokhtari, Ph.D., Planner Coordinator *Lum Fube, GIS Specialist I Fred Shaffer, Planner Coordinator Technical Assistance Information Management Division Susan Kelley, Administrative Manager Asfaw Fanta, Supervisor Ralph Barrett, Clerk/Inventory Operations Supervisor Sheri L. Bailey, GIS Specialist II Robert Meintjes, Publications Specialist Mishelle Carson-Reeves, Program Analyst I *Terri Plumb, Publications Specialist Martin Howes, Asst. Mapping and Graphics Supervisor Susan Sligh, Publications Specialist Manching Li, Programmer Analyst III M’balu Abdullah, Senior IT Support Specialist La’Tasha Harrison, Senior Clerical/Inventory Operations Assistant James Johnson, Senior Clerical/Inventory Operations Assistant Consultant Team Deana Rhodeside, Ph.D., Rhodeside & Harwell, Inc. Anita Morrison, Bay Area Economics Anne M. Randall, (Nancy) AICP, Wells & Associates Special Appreciation to: Citizens, property owners, community associations, and elected officials Department of Public Works and Transportation Department of Environmental Resources Economic Development Corporation Department of Housing and Community Development Prince George’s County Police Department State Highway Administration Washington Metropolitan Transit Authority Washington Suburban Sanitary Commission *Former Planning Department employee

Approved

Landover Gateway

May 2009

Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

The Maryland-National Capital Park and Planning Commission www.mncppc.org/pgco

Prince George’s County Planning Department 14741 Governor Oden Bowie Drive Upper Marlboro, Maryland 20772

LANDOVER GATEWAY

The Maryland-National Capital Park and Planning Commission Samuel J. Parker, Jr., Chairman Royce Hanson, Vice Chairman Officers Oscar Rodriguez, Executive Director Patricia Colihan Barney, Secretary-Treasurer Adrian R. Gardner, General Counsel The Maryland-National Capital Park and Planning Commission is a bicounty agency, created by the General Assembly of Maryland in 1927. The Commission’s geographic authority extends to the great majority of Montgomery and Prince George’s Counties: the Maryland-Washington Regional District (M-NCPPC planning jurisdiction) comprises 1,001 square miles, while the Metropolitan District (parks) comprises 919 square miles, in the two counties.

The Commission has three major functions: •

The preparation, adoption, and, from time to time, amendment or extension of the General Plan for the physical development of the Maryland Washington Regional District;

•

The acquisition, development, operation, and maintenance of a public park system; and

•

In Prince George’s County only, the operation of the entire county public recreation program.

The Commission operates in each county through a Planning Board appointed by and responsible to the county government. All local plans, recommendations on zoning amendments, administration of subdivision regulations, and general administration of parks are responsibilities of the Planning Boards.

The Prince George’s County Department of Planning (M-NCPPC): •

Our mission is to help preserve, protect, and manage the county’s resources by providing the highest quality planning services and growth management guidance and by facilitating effective intergovernmental and citizen involvement through education and technical assistance.

•

Our vision is to be a model planning department of responsive and respected staff who provide superior planning and technical services and work cooperatively with decision-makers, citizens, and other agencies to continuously improve development quality and the environment and act as a catalyst for positive change.

Prince George’s County Planning Board Samuel J. Parker, Jr., Chairman Sylvester J. Vaughns, Vice Chairman Sarah Cavitt Jesse Clark John H. Squire

Montgomery County Planning Board Royce Hanson, Chairman Joseph Alfandre Jean B. Cryor Amy Presley John M. Robinson

ii

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

LANDOVER GATEWAY

Prince George’s County Jack B. Johnson, County Executive County Council The County Council has three main responsibilities in the planning process: (1) policy setting, (2) plan approval, and (3) plan implementation. Applicable policies are incorporated into area plans, functional plans, and the General Plan. The Council, after holding a hearing on the plan adopted by the Planning Board, may approve the plan as adopted, approve the plan with amendments based on the public record, or disapprove the plan and return it to the Planning Board for revision. Implementation is primarily through adoption of the annual Capital Improvement Program, the annual budget, the water and sewer plan, and adoption of zoning map amendments.

Council Members Thomas E. Dernoga, 1st District, Council Vice Chair Will Campos, 2nd District Eric Olson, 3rd District Ingrid M. Turner, 4th District Andrea Harrison, 5th District Samuel H. Dean, 6th District Camille Exum, 7th District Tony Knotts, 8th District Marilynn Bland, 9th District, Council Chair Clerk of the Council Redis C. Floyd

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

iii

LANDOVER GATEWAY

iv

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

LANDOVER GATEWAY

Table of Contents Plan Highlights.......................................................................................................... 1 The Vision. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Development Pattern Recommendations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Housing Recommendations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Infrastructure Recommendations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Community Development Recommendations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Implementation Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

1 1 1 2 2 3

Chapter 1: Introduction.............................................................................................. 5 Plan Purpose. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 Planning Area Boundary and Regional Setting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 Background. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 Existing Conditions and Trends. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 Relationship to Other Plans. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 Plan Making Methodology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 Planning Process (timeline) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10

Chapter 2: Vision—Concept Plan.............................................................................. 17 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 Vision Statement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 Vision Elements. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17

Chapter 3: Development Pattern Elements................................................................ 25 Overall Sector Plan Area . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Areawide Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Urban Design. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Neighborhood Character . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Landover Civic Center-Capital Beltway Area. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Main Street Commercial Core. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Downtown Neighborhood. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Park Slope Neighborhood . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Gateway North. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Gateway South. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Focus Areas. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Core Areas. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Design Guidelines . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

25 25 29 33 34 34 35 35 35 36 36 36 50

Vision . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Background. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Existing Housing Stock. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Active Adult Housing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Housing Goal and Guidelines . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Goal. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

65 65 67 68 68 68

Chapter 4: Housing................................................................................................... 65

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

v

LANDOVER GATEWAY

Guidelines . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68 Housing Policies and Strategies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68

Chapter 5: Infrastructure Elements............................................................................ 71 Environmental Infrastructure. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71 Vision. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71 Goals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77 Transportation Systems. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80 Vision. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80 Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80 Goals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81 Overall Transportation Policies and Strategies. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81 Roads. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82 Transit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85 Trails and Pedestrian Access. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 95 Public Facilities. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 98 Schools. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 98 Libraries. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103 Police/Fire/EMS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105 Parks and Recreation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 106

Chapter 6: Community Development Elements....................................................... 113 Market Potential. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 113

Chapter 7: Implementation..................................................................................... 117 Introduction: A Strategy for Progressive Implementation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Implementation Strategies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Best Practices from Other Communities. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Public/Private Partnerships . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Plan Sequencing. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Technical Manual for Implementation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Sectional Map Amendment (SMA). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

117 117 117 118 123 127 127

Arts Integration Center Proposal. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Arts Integration Defined . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

The Value of Arts Integration in Education. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

The Purpose of the Arts Integration Center. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

The Arts Integration Center as a Critical Need. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

157 157 157 157 158

Appendix A: Procedural Sequence Chart.................................................................. 155 Appendix B: Cultural Elements............................................................................... 157

Appendix C: Glossary of Term................................................................................. 159 Appendix D: Buildout Scenario Assumptions........................................................... 165 Projected Landover Gateway Regional Center Buildout and Land Use Mix. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 165 Range of Floor Area Ratios Utilized for Sector Plan Buildout Scenario. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 166

Appendix E: Resolution CR-20-2009....................................................................... 179 Appendix F: Certificate of Adoption and Approval................................................... 191 vi

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

LANDOVER GATEWAY

List of Maps, Figures, and Tables List of Maps

Map 1: Sector Plan Boundary. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 Map 2: Existing Zoning. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 Map 3: Existing Land Use . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 Map 4: Approved Zoning. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 Map 5: Access and Circulation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 Map 6: Land Use Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 Map 7: Illustrative Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 Map 8: Transportation Network Vision. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 Map 9: Illustrative Community Open Space . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 Map 10: Green Design Concept. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 Map 11: Illustrative North, Core, and South Neighborhoods and Primary Thoroughfares . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 Map 12: Illustrative Streetscapes. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 Map 13: Design District Boundaries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51 Map 14: Existing Communities Within One Mile of Sector Plan Area . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66 Map 15: Local Green Infrastructure. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73 Map 16: Natural Features. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74 Map 17: Environmental Considerations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75 Map 18: Environmental Infrastructure. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76 Map 19: Transportation Functional Classification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84 Map 20: Existing and Planned Transit Routes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87 Map 21: Woodmore Towne Centre Required Improvements. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88 Map 22: Recommended Roadway Improvements for Short-Term Stage. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91 Map 23: Existing and Funded Highway Network . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 92 Map 24: Recommended Transit Service Route Changes. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93 Map 25: Trails. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 94 Map 26: Public Facilities. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 104 Map 27: Recommended Parkland. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111 Map 28: Recommended Development Sequencing Plan. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 125 Map 29: Approved Zoning Changes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 131 Map 30: Approved Zoning Changes LG-1a, 1b, 1c. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 133 Map 31: Approved Zoning Changes LG-2a . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 135 Map 32: Approved Zoning Changes LG-3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 137 Map 33: Approved Zoning Changes LG-4a, 4b. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 139 Map 34: Approved Zoning Changes LG-5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 141 Map 35: Approved Zoning Changes LG-6a, 6b. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 143 Map 36: Approved Zoning Changes LG-7 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 145 Map 37: Approved Zoning Changes LG-8 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 147 Map 38: Approved Zoning Changes LG-9 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 149 Map 39: Approved Zoning Changes LG-10a, 10b. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 151 Map 40: Approved Zoning Changes LG-11 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 153 Map 41: Density Projections. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 167

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

vii

LANDOVER GATEWAY

List of Figures Figure 1A: Project Timeline—18-Month Process Chart. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Figure 1B: Plan Refinement Schedule . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Figure 2: Illustrative Main Street and Connecting Street Sections. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Figure 3: Illustrative Boulevards in Park Slope and Commercial Core. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Figure 4: Focal Plaza. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Figure 5: Public Garden Plan Detail. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Figure 6: Boulevard Green Detail. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Figure 7: Public Green Plan Detail. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

11 11 38 39 41 41 42 42

List of Tables Table 1: Highway Network. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85 Table 2: Public Schools Currently Serving the Sector Plan Area. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99 Table 3: Public Schools at Full Buildout. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99 Table 4: 2013 Projected Enrollment: Schools Currently Serving Sector Plan Area. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100 Table 5: 2013 Projected Enrollment: Schools to Serve Sector Plan Area at Buildout. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101 Table 6: Summary of Proposed Changes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 102 Table 7: Current Pupil Yield Factors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103 Table 8: Parkland Needs Assessment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105 Table 9: Recommended Park Acquisitions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 110 Table 10: Proposed Acquisitions for Public Facilities. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 112 Table 11: Public Facilities Cost Analysis and Estimates. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 119 Table 12: Existing and Approved Zoning Inventory (in acres). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 130 Table 13: Projected Landover Gateway Sector Plan Buildout and Comparison to 2002 General Plan Recommended Range for Regional Center Land Use Mix. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 165 Table 14: Density Projection—Core Focal Office . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 168 Table 15: Density Projection—Core Main Street. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 169 Table 16: Density Projection—Core General Center. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 170 Table 17: Density Projection—Core General Edge . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 171 Table 18: Density Projection—Core Park Slope. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 172 Table 19: Density Projection—North Area. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 173 Table 20: Density Projection—South Area Local Streets. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 174 Table 21: Density Projection—South Area General Edge. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 175 Table 22: Density Projection—South Area Southside Sites. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 176 Table 23: Density Projection—Final Buildout . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 177

viii

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

LANDOVER GATEWAY

Foreword The Prince George’s County Planning Board of The Maryland-National Capital Park and Planning Commission is pleased to make available the Approved Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment for the Landover Gateway area.

The approved sector plan and zoning map amendment creates a new development plan for the Landover Gateway area.

The approved plan also contains recommendations for future land use and development in the area.

Policy guidance for this plan came from the 2002 Prince George’s County Approved General Plan. The goals and outreach strategy report, which outlined the major issues in the area and provided the structure for the plan, was presented to the Planning Board and District Council on June 17, 2008. The land use recommendations are primarily the result of an extensive pre-planning effort that engaged stakeholders through one-on-one interviews and meetings, the communitywide pre-charrette workshops (April 21, 2007 and June 16, 2007), a five-day community design charrette held from May 9, 2007, through May 15, 2007, and three communitywide meetings (May 21, 2008; July 23, 2008; and September 24, 2008), which provided valuable input and helped to define the sector plan’s vision and strategies.

This plan contains recommendations for land use, environment, transportation systems, (including roadways, transit and bicycle, pedestrian, and trail facilities), public facilities, parks and recreation, historic preservation, and urban design. A vision describing future desirable conditions, policies stating the intent upon which government decisions are evaluated, and strategies providing a general course of action to achieve stated goals are provided for each plan element. The plan’s driving force has always been the creation of a new development plan for the former Landover Mall site and vicinity to attract new development to the area.

Landover Gateway area is an untapped opportunity to create a livable, pedestrian-friendly, and vibrant community and represents the future of Prince George’s County. During this planning process, we asked the residents of this area to envision how Landover Gateway can participate in the county’s growth and propose the changes necessary to make that happen. We are continuing this effort countywide through an Envision Prince George’s initiative to engage a broad cross section of stakeholders in developing a shared vision for the county’s future direction and growth. We invite you to visit the Envision Prince George’s web site at www.mncppc.org/Envision to learn more about how to participate in this exciting initiative.

On February 10, 2009, the District Council and Planning Board held a joint public hearing on the preliminary plan and sectional map amendment. The Planning Board adopted the plan with modifications per PGCPB Resolution No. 09-55 in April 2009. The District Council approved the plan with no additional changes per CR-20-2009.

The Planning Board appreciates the contributions of the community and stakeholders throughout the plan development phase and at the public hearing. We look forward to seeing this plan become a development catalyst for a vibrant, mixeduse, transit-oriented community in the Landover Gateway sector plan area that will improve the quality of life for Prince George’s County residents of the area and citizens for years to come.

Sincerely,

Samuel J. Parker, Jr., AICP Chairman Prince George’s County Planning Board Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

ix

LANDOVER GATEWAY

x

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

LANDOVER GATEWAY

Plan Highlights The Vision Landover Gateway is a vibrant, 24-hour activity center with a dense urban form and a mix of uses.

The core area is anchored by a complex of signature office towers offering a range of civic uses, ranging from governmental to cultural facilities adjacent to the Capital Beltway and including a mixed-use main street area. The downtown core transitions into outer neighborhoods with a range of high- and moderatedensity residential neighborhoods and complementary mixed-use development. Landover Gateway serves as a major multimodal transportation hub with the addition of direct transit service to support the new development.

Development Pattern Recommendations • C reate a vibrant new downtown for Prince George’s County in the area on and around the former Landover Mall site.

• Improve connectivity in the sector plan area by creating a compact network of pedestrian-friendly streets.

• Establish new transit connections to the area, and encourage transit-oriented development and design.

• Integrate open spaces, green connections, and public focal places into Landover Gateway’s neighborhoods; develop and provide neighborhood access to a greenway in the Cattail Branch stream valley.

• Develop the civic center as a visible and identifiable icon for Landover Gateway with an imaginative mix of uses, including government, educational, cultural, hotel, commercial office and residential uses.

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

• Create a mixed-use, pedestrian-oriented east–west main street that serves as the commercial core of Landover Gateway and extends onto Brightseat Road.

• Create a mixed-use, pedestrian-oriented, north–south street that serves the core of Landover Gateway and extends from Evarts Streets to Brightseat Road south of MD 202.

• Develop high- and moderate-density residential areas to the north and west of the commercial core.

• Create a mixed-use, pedestrian boulevard running parallel to main street.

• Develop a signature, high-density residential neighborhood west of Brightseat Road and a new north–south road along the edge of the Cattail Branch open space and overlooking the adjacent stream valley linear park.

• Develop a neighborhood of moderate-density housing surrounding a mixed-use core at Brightseat Road.

• Develop a neighborhood composed of mixed-use and moderate-density residential development south of MD 202, as well as mixed office and residential uses, wrapped around shared, structured parking, at the southernmost end of the study area.

Housing Recommendations • Provide a variety of housing types for a range of incomes, including workforce housing and active adult housing.

• Reduce any high concentration of distressed/desolate housing in and outside the sector plan area.

• Seek opportunities for the Department of Housing and Community Development (DHCD) to invest in new housing by providing financial incentives for the development of mixed-income housing, inclusive of workforce and starter-homeownership and rental units.

1

LANDOVER GATEWAY

• Encourage development of preretirement and retirement housing suited to the needs of active adults, including units with low maintenance and adaptable design to accommodate future mobility limits and other disabilities.

• Provide homeownership and financial training and counseling, both before and after the purchase, for current area renters wishing to purchase homes.

• Develop and implement funding strategies for singlefamily rehabilitation programs that attract moderateincome homeowners.

Infrastructure Recommendations • Protect, preserve, and enhance the identified green infrastructure network within the Landover Gateway study area, particularly the Cattail Branch stream valley; restore and enhance water quality; implement environmentally sensitive design building practices.

• Provide a transportation network that is comprehensive, multimodal, safe, efficient, accessible, and convenient, while fully accommodating transit, automobiles, pedestrians, and bicyclists. Recommended actions include: –– Implement the recommended highway improvements.

–– Minimize traffic congestion on major thoroughfares and explore ways to reduce through-traffic along the existing and planned residential streets.

–– Plan and implement the recommended bus service enhancements and eventual extension of fixed guideway transit or light rail transit (Purple Line) to and from the Landover Gateway area.

–– Improve pedestrian and bicycle access and safety.

2

and be reviewed for transit, bicycle, and pedestriansupportive design.

• Provide public facilities that efficiently serve existing and future populations, including: –– Construction of new urban school models and renovation of deteriorated school facilities.

–– Development of an architecturally and culturally significant central or headquarters branch of the Prince George’s County Memorial Library System.

–– New and renovated public safety facilities.

• Provide park and recreation facilities that comply with national, state, and county standards and include a variety of open space types and recreational facilities; conserve stream valleys as resource-based open space.

Community Development Recommendations • Build a new downtown Prince George’s County with pedestrian activity and vitality that attracts consumers, residents, and visitors.

• Design for a multiplicity of uses that reinforce each other and are flexible enough to respond to changing markets.

• Plan for phased development that builds mixed uses at each stage that takes advantage of the Beltway location and preserves the potential to capitalize on future transit access.

• Develop a residential community that accommodates residents of all incomes, emphasizes homeownership for long-term stability, and provides links to jobs, retail, restaurants, services, and cultural/entertainment activities.

–– Create new trail connections within the sector plan area.

• Encourage amenities that support both new and existing residents, including retail, entertainment, and cultural uses as well as public open space and schools.

–– Encourage transit-oriented development (TOD) within the sector plan area. All new development and redevelopment applications should incorporate

• Develop a community cultural center to attract youth and adults from across the county.

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

LANDOVER GATEWAY

• Ensure high-quality design for all new construction by implementing design guidelines for building form and design character.

• Enhance Landover Gateway’s sense of place through the creation of unique neighborhoods and thoroughfares with high-quality pedestrian environments, thematic architectural elements and consistent street walls.

• Develop distinct neighborhood character areas (see Map 11: Illustrative North, Core, and South Neighborhoods and Primary Thoroughfares on page 32 and see Map 12: Illustrative Streetscapes on page 37) and associated specifications for each area and corresponding thoroughfare types.

Implementation Recommendations • Pursue public-private partnerships, such as business improvement districts, nonprofit development corporations, and local government authorities.

• Provide public development incentives, including financing tools such as tax-increment financing, special assessment districts, tax abatement, and tax credits.

• Sequence development for portions of the sector plan area west of the Capital Beltway (I-95/I-495) to meet or exceed all applicable APF laws, regulations, and requirements, in accordance with the sector plan’s transportation-based staging analysis.

• Extend Evarts Street across the Capital Beltway (I-95/I-495) from Brightseat Road to the planned Ruby Lockhart Way as a major collector.

• Implement the recommended new bus routes and service modifications recommended by the current and subsequent DPW&T Five-year Transit Service and Operations Plan.

• Satisfy the established adequate public facilities (APF) requirements for all development and redevelopment, prior to the designation of Landover Transportation Priority Growth District by the District Council, • Reestablish a Transportation Demand Management District (TDMD) under Subtitle 20A for portions of the sector plan area west of the Capital Beltway (I-95/I-495), Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

when deemed appropriate, to ensure that levels of service for applicable transportation infrastructure serving this area do not exceed the acceptable levels of service (E) and satisfy all applicable APF requirements.

• Encourage all new development and redevelopment within the sector plan area west of the Capital Beltway (I-95/I-495), prior to the establishment of the recommended TDMD under Subtitle 20A, to identify and include as part of any new development or redevelopment, appropriate and applicable TDM strategies and measures that will reduce the projected vehicular traffic, particularly single-occupant vehicles.

The applicable TDM strategies may include measures such as on-site parking reduction, share parking, transit use incentives, or any other appropriate trip reduction strategies.

• Recommended that the development community coordinate with the Maryland State Highway Administration (SHA) and Prince George’s County to begin initiation of a project planning, design, and construction of the most effective and efficient configuration for this intersection, in accordance with the sector plan’s vision to improve safety, mobility, and increase capacity of the MD 202 and Brightseat Road intersection. This would include a comprehensive evaluation of a wide range of alternatives including the approved grade-separated interchange concept, the recommended urban diamond interchange concept, or the provision of a new north-south roadway extending from Evarts Street to Brightseat Road south of MD 202 and east of the Brightseat Road and Sheriff Road intersection.

• Extend Evarts Street as a collector roadway from Brightseat Road in south westerly direction to intersect with MD 202 directly opposite of the MD 202 and Barlowe Road intersection.

• Construct a new four-lane divided roadway (the main street) within the core area of the sector plan area extending from Brightseat Road south of Evarts Street, east to I-95/I-495.

• Construct a new four-lane divided north-south roadway extending from Evarts Street to Brightseat Road south of MD 202.

3

LANDOVER GATEWAY

• Designate the Landover Gateway Sector Plan area as a Transportation Priority Growth District (TPGD), when deemed appropriate and/or warranted, as recommended by the preliminary countywide MPOT. This designation would provide flexibility for managing congestion and implementing effective vehicle trip reduction measures within the Landover Gateway Sector Plan area.

• Work with appropriate agencies to plan and extend fixed-guideway transit (Purple Line) to the sector plan area to reduce vehicular traffic from the New Carrollton Metro Station south to either Morgan Boulevard, or Largo Metro Stations.

4

• Coordinate implementation actions in cooperation with responsible agencies.

• Assist public and private entities in implementing the sector plan’s vision by applying the design guidelines.

• Propose to change existing zoning on all properties west of the Capital Beltway, (I-95, I-495) from R-18, C-O, C-A, C-S-C, R-55, C-M, I-1, I-3 to the M-X-T (Mixed-Use-Transportation Oriented) Zone to allow for compact, mixed-use development of office, retail, and residential uses.

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

LANDOVER GATEWAY

Chapter 1: Introduction This sector plan is prepared in response to the 2006 Urban Land Institute (ULI), Technical Assistance Panel Planning Study recommendation for redevelopment of the area. The ULI study (completed in March 2006) identified planning issues and developed a long-range vision for the study area that could be implemented through a sector plan process.

The sector plan also responds to the 2002 Prince George’s County Approved General Plan goals for the Developed Tier and Regional Centers. Upon the approval by the District Council, this sector plan will amend the applicable portions of the 1993 Approved Landover and Vicinity Master Plan and Sectional Map Amendment, Planning Area 72, and the 1990 Largo-Lottsford Master Plan and Sectional Map Amendment, Planning Area 73, and applicable functional plans.

Plan Purpose • Identify future uses for the former Landover Mall site, and plan for the revitalization and redevelopment of the site and adjacent properties, thereby enhancing the quality and character of the Landover Gateway area.

• Encourage quality economic development, identify needed transportation and pedestrian improvements, ensure efficient use of existing infrastructure and investment in and around the Landover Mall site, and protect environmentally sensitive land.

• Fulfill the General Plan vision for the Developed Tier as a network of sustainable, transit supporting, mixeduse, pedestrian-oriented, medium- to-high density neighborhoods.

acres, which are partly within the incorporated area of the City of Glenarden, including Woodmore Towne Centre at Glenarden and Glenarden Apartments. The City of Glenarden lies directly west, east, and north of the sector plan area. The City of Glenarden is a stable residential community incorporated as a municipality in the State of Maryland in 1939. This sector plan focuses generally on the former Landover Mall site and the commercial and residential properties located within approximately a halfmile radius of the former mall site. The 88-acre mall site, located west of the Capital Beltway and northeast of the intersection of MD 202 and Brightseat Road, comprises the heart of the sector area. Other adjoining properties include Landover Crossing Shopping Center (19.55 acres) on the south side of MD 202; a used car dealership (3.88 acres), south of Brightseat Road; Glenarden Apartments (27.2 acres) and Maple Ridge Apartments (18.4 acres), west of Brightseat Road; a handful of surviving retail and service businesses; and the future Woodmore Towne Centre development site (245 acres), east of the Capital Beltway.

The sector area also includes a 49.6 acre parcel owned by WFI Stadium, Inc., located to the south of Brightseat and Sheriff Roads. The sector plan area is located within 2.2 miles of four existing Metro stations: Landover (Orange Line), New Carrollton (Orange Line), Largo Town Center (Blue Line), and Morgan Boulevard (Blue Line).

Background Existing Conditions and Trends

The sector planning area boundary (see Map 1: Sector Plan Boundary on page 7) covers approximately 591

The evolution of the sector plan area is closely tied to changes that have occurred at the former Landover Mall, which was once a thriving commercial center and one of the region’s largest shopping destinations. Home to three major department stores, a movie theater, a Sears store, and other destinations in its heyday, Landover Mall experienced decline during the 1990s as regional competition and negative perceptions of the area contributed to poor sales and vacant retail space. The mall officially closed in 2002, and currently, all that remains on the property is a Sears store and two small auto-related businesses.

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

5

• Produce a comprehensive plan and a redevelopment phasing plan for the sector plan.

Planning Area Boundary and Regional Setting

LANDOVER GATEWAY

Many of the defining structures in the Landover Gateway area were constructed during the 1960s and 1970s. The former Landover Mall opened in 1972, and the Landover Crossing Shopping Center was completed a few years later in 1975. Residential development both preceded and followed this commercial development, such as the construction of the Maple Ridge apartment complex in 1964 and the later development of Glenarden Apartments I and II from 1969–1970.

Since 1993, when the county initiated the previous planning effort for the area, substantial new development has occurred, including FedEx Field, the Prince George’s County Sports and Learning Complex, and the recent development of townhomes on Brightseat Road. Aside from changes in the tenant mix of the area’s commercial properties, the major land uses in the area remain largely the same.

The 88-acre former Landover Mall site is now largely cleared of its former structures and offers a unique development opportunity on an unusually large site inside the Capital Beltway. To understand the full scale and potential of the Landover Mall site and the sector plan area as a whole, it is helpful to compare Landover Gateway to other notable regional centers. For example, at approximately 591 acres, the entire sector plan area represents land that is larger than the Village at Shirlington in Arlington, Virginia. It is also comparable in size to the Clarendon community of Arlington, Virginia, the Federal Triangle portion of downtown Washington, D.C., and most of Old Town, Alexandria.

The former mall holds a prominent location, highly visible and served by major roadways, such as the Capital Beltway (I-95/I-495) and MD 202. The Landover Mall site is also well-positioned to build upon and complement the alreadyapproved 245-acre Woodmore Towne Centre mixed-use development, which will include a total of 684,617 square feet of retail (including Costco and Wegmans as anchors), 1,000,000 square feet of office use, two hotels and a conference center, and residential development consisting of 191 singlefamily homes and 731 townhomes and condominiums.

Relationship to Other Plans The 1992 Maryland-Economic Growth, Resource Protection, and Planning Act This legislation was enacted to encourage economic growth, limit sprawl development, and protect the state’s natural resources. It establishes consistent general land use policies to be locally implemented throughout Maryland. These policies are stated in the form of eight visions: 1. Development is concentrated in suitable areas.

2. Sensitive areas are protected.

3. In rural areas, growth is directed to existing population centers, and resource areas are protected.

4. Stewardship of the Chesapeake Bay and the land is a universal ethic.

5. Conservation of resources, including a reduction in resource consumption, is practiced.

6. To assure achievement of one through five above, economic growth is encouraged, and regulatory mechanisms are streamlined.

7. Adequate public facilities and infrastructure under the control of the county or municipal corporation are available or planned in areas where growth is to occur.

8. Funding mechanisms are addressed to achieve these visions.

The eight visions are a set of guiding principles that describe how and where growth and development should occur. The act acknowledges that the comprehensive plans prepared by counties and municipalities are the best mechanism to establish priorities for growth and resource conservation.

Once priorities are established, it is the state’s responsibility to support them.

The 1997 Smart Growth and Neighborhood Conservation Act This act builds on the foundation of the eight visions adopted in the 1992 act, as amended. The act is nationally recognized as an effective means of evaluating and

6

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

LANDOVER GATEWAY

Map 1: Sector Plan Boundary Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

7

LANDOVER GATEWAY

implementing statewide programs to guide growth and development.

In 1997, the Maryland General Assembly enacted a package of legislation collectively referred to as the Neighborhood Conservation and Smart Growth Initiative. The Maryland Smart Growth program has three basic goals: to save valuable remaining natural resources, to support existing communities and neighborhoods, and to save taxpayers millions of dollars in unnecessary costs for building infrastructure to support sprawl. A significant aspect of the initiative is the Smart Growth areas legislation, which requires that state funding for projects in Maryland municipalities, other existing communities, and industrial and planned growth areas designated by counties will receive priority funding over other projects. These Smart Growth Areas are called Priority Funding Areas.

2002 General Plan A number of previously approved plans and policy documents provide background information and framework for the Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment. The 2002 Prince George’s Approved General Plan provides broad guidance for the future growth and development of Prince George’s County. The countywide goals of the 2002 General Plan are to encourage quality economic development, make efficient use of existing and proposed county infrastructure and investment, enhance the quality and character of communities and neighborhoods, preserve rural agricultural and scenic areas, and protect environmentally sensitive lands.

The Landover Gateway sector plan area is located in both the Developed and the Developing Tiers. The portion of the sector area located west of the Capital Beltway (I-495/I-95) falls within the Developed Tier. The area east of I-495/I-95 falls within the Developing Tier. This portion of the Developed Tier falls within a state-designated enterprise zone and, hence, qualifies for priority funding, the highest priority for expending public funds.

Goals for the Developed Tier include strengthening existing neighborhoods; encouraging appropriate infill; encouraging more intense, high-quality housing and economic development corridors.

In the Developing Tier, the 2002 General Plan seeks to reinforce existing suburban residential areas; to reinforce 8

planned commercial centers as community focal points; to develop compact, planned employment areas; to preserve and enhance environmentally sensitive areas; to increase utilization of transit; and to balance the pace and expansion of development with provision of adequate transportation and public facilities.

The 2002 General Plan also designates the Landover Gateway sector plan area as a community center within the Landover Gateway sector area. As described in greater detail in Chapter 3 (Development Pattern Element), the land use mix and development intensity recommended for community centers in the 2002 General Plan are incompatible with the new downtown area envisioned in this sector plan. Therefore, this sector plan recommends redesignating the Landover Gateway area as a regional center.

A regional center designation allows for a higher concentration of land uses and economic activities, including a higher density and intensity of development. For regional centers, the 2002 General Plan does not impose a maximum residential density or maximum floor area ratio.

The Landover and Vicinity Master Plan (1993) and the Largo-Lottsford and Vicinity Master Plan (1990) The 1993 Approved Master Plan and Sectional Map Amendment for Landover and Vicinity (Planning Area 72) designates the former Landover Mall site as a regional shopping area with uses such as retail, office, and hotels and/or motels as supporting uses that could strengthen this retail destination center. In addition, the 1990 Approved Largo-Lottsford and Vicinity Master Plan and Sectional Map Amendment (Planning Area 73) includes recommendations for the portion of the sector plan area located east of I‑95/I-495. The sector plan area is also located in a statedesignated Smart Growth area, a priority funding area, and one of the county’s enterprise zones (specifically, the Cabin Branch sub-zone).

Urban Land Institute Technical Assistance Panel This sector plan builds on concepts developed by the Urban Land Institute (ULI) special panel that explored and evaluated potential development scenarios for the former Landover Mall. In early 2006, ULI established a Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

LANDOVER GATEWAY

technical assistance panel composed of design, planning, and economic development professionals to brainstorm alternative land–use concepts for the former Landover Mall site. Working with The Maryland-National Capital Park and Planning Commission (M-NCPPC) staff over a twoday period, the panel developed three preliminary concepts for the area. This effort represented the first attempt to think about the future potential of the former Landover Gateway sector plan area and served to kick-off the sector planning process. The three preliminary scenarios developed by the ULI panel included a “mixed-use urban village,” an “induced demand” scenario that featured the development of a medical mall complex, and an “interim holding” strategy emphasizing interim uses of the mall site until the market could support more intensive development. It should be noted that the current sector boundaries encompass a larger land area than the area considered as part of the ULI effort. Since the ULI study, various property owners have made new decisions and commitments pertaining to key properties in the sector plan area, adding new variables and opportunities to influence planning decisions.

Plan Making Methodology Planning Partners From the outset, and throughout the planning process, there was close collaboration with key county agencies and elected officials, both of whom will play a critical role in implementing the development strategies envisioned in the plan. The key agencies involved were the Department of Public Works and Transportation (DPW&T), SHA, Maryland Department of Transportation, Police Department, DHCD, Department of Environmental Resources, and Economic Development Corporation.

The M-NCPPC project team and county agency staff met regularly to plan for community workshops. Working together, the team understood the issues affecting the study area and the need to work with stakeholders to create a community vision for future redevelopment of the Landover Gateway area.

Public Outreach and Public Participation Process

Post Charrette up to the initiation of the sector plan and its associated public participation program. The public participation process began in July 2006 and continued through February 2007. During this time, the project team held one-onone meetings, communitywide workshops, and a five-day planning and design charrette/post-charrette to develop the vision for this area.

Pre-Planning Community Meetings As a bridge between the ULI technical assistance panel’s outreach and the start of the sector plan process, M-NCPPC staff organized two community meetings in October and November 2006 for residents of the Town of Glenarden and neighboring community groups, including Royal Gardens, Kenmore, and Palmer Park. The purpose of these meetings was to inform residents of the status of the planning process and gather information on sector area issues and opportunities, which generated meaningful early feedback regarding current conditions in the sector area and opportunities for the future.

Stakeholder Interviews

Public outreach began in January 2006 with stakeholder interviews, and community meetings convened for the ULI technical assistance panel. The dialogue about the future of Landover Gateway continued in the months leading

Beginning in January 2007, the planning team conducted interviews and briefings with property owners, elected officials, state and county agency staff, community groups,

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

9

LANDOVER GATEWAY

and school representatives. In addition to bringing key stakeholders up-to-date on the sector plan process, these meetings also yielded useful information on the sector area that would be incorporated into the analysis and visioning that follow. A second round of key stakeholder interviews occurred during the charrette process as part of the stakeholder feedback loop during plan development.

Pre-Charrette Workshop At the community brainstorming workshop held on Saturday, April 21, 2007, participants provided feedback on four preliminary concept alternatives, each based on a particular theme (government center, education/cultural campus, lifestyle center, and medical mall/senior living).

Although participants responded favorably to elements of each concept, most preferred a hybrid of all four concepts.

Participant comments also provided a mandate for “thinking big” and generating a development concept that would respect the value and visibility of the land, while creating a destination and promoting economic development.

The Charrette Utilizing the vision established at the pre-charrette meeting and refined in the weeks that followed, participants collaborated with the project team during a five-day design charrette from May 9-15, 2007, to further develop the sector plan concepts. The event included two briefings to property owners and elected officials, a public progress report meeting on the second day of the charrette, and a series of key stakeholder interviews.

Post-Charrette Following the charrette, the project team further refined the concept developed during the charrette and presented the final concept to the community on Saturday, June 16, 2007. Comments provided at this session were the basis for additional plan revisions, as reflected in this document.

letters from stakeholders and public agencies. The letters from public transportation agencies did not support recommended land use densities due to inadequate road capacity concerns. The Planning Board declined to adopt the Preliminary Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment and directed staff to undertake a transportation staging analysis.

The Planning Board reinitiated the sector plan on May 29, 2008, and the District Council’s initiation followed on June 17, 2008, which authorized the project team to prepare a transportation staging analysis. A plan refinement process was approved to engage stakeholder (property owners, residents, elected officials, and interested parties) participation through three additional communitywide meetings to discuss the transportation infrastructure issues.

The plan process chart outlines the major project milestones (see Figure 1A: Project Timeline—18-Month Process Chart on page 11 and see Figure 1B: Plan Refinement Schedule on page 11).

Challenges Key planning challenges identified during the planning process included:

Land Use, Zoning, and Urban Design Issues • Identifying appropriate future uses for the former Landover Mall site.

• Bringing new transit service to Landover Gateway to support planned development.

• Improving the overall physical appearance of the area and its image throughout the region.

• Maximizing the advantages of proximity to the Capital Beltway while mitigating the extent to which the Beltway serves as a physical barrier and noise generator.

Planning Process (timeline)

• Creating a development program that incorporates the existing Sears store, which plans to remain on the site.

The project team completed the preliminary sector plan within eight months of its initiation and obtained Planning Board Permission to print in November 2007.

A joint public hearing was advertised and held on January 22, 2008. At the public hearing, Planning Board and District Council heard oral testimonies and received

• Determining the future of nearby apartment complexes and achieving needed redevelopment while preserving affordable housing and enabling existing residents to remain in the area (see Map 2: Existing Zoning on

10

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

LANDOVER GATEWAY

Pre-Planning July 2006–February 2007

Pre-Planning—Community Outreach May 2008–September 2008

Authorization/Initiation/GCG and PPP February 2007–March 2007

Authorization/Initiation/GCG and PPP Planning Board and District Council May 29, 2008–June 17, 2008

Prepare Preliminary Sector Plan and SMA April 2007—November 2007 Permission to Print November 2007

First Joint Public Hearing January 2008

Planning Board Adoption and Endorsement April 2008

Planning Board did not adopt the Sector Plan and recommended reinitiation

Second Joint Public Hearing (if necessary) June 2008

District Council Approval September 2008

Figure 1A: Project Timeline—18-Month Process Chart See Pages 9-10 for details on Plan Making Methodology and Schedule.

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

Prepare Preliminary Sector Plan and SMA June 2008—November 2008

Planning Board Permission to Print and Public Facilities Consistency (60 Day Referral) December 11, 2008

Joint Public Hearing Planning Board and District Council February 10, 2009

Planning Board Worksession April 2, 2009 Adoption of the Sector Plan April 16, 2009 Transmission to the District Council April 24, 2009

District Council Worksession May 5, 2009 District Council Final Plan Approval/Amendments May 7, 2009

Figure 1B: Plan Refinement Schedule 11

LANDOVER GATEWAY

page 13, Map 3: Existing Land Use on page 14, and Map 4: Approved Zoning on page 15).

Housing Issues • Creating opportunities for mixed-income housing throughout the sector plan area.

• Reducing the concentration of low-income housing in the sector plan area.

Transportation Issues • Transforming the roadways, especially the major thoroughfares of Brightseat Road and MD 202, into pedestrian-friendly environments with continuous sidewalk networks.

• Improving public transportation linkages to the sector plan area.

Environmental Issues • Preserving environmentally sensitive land while incorporating these areas as natural assets to the community.

• Addressing poor water quality in local waterways by limiting the amount of paved surfaces in the sector area and incorporating best practices in stormwater management into all new development.

Public Facility and Safety Issues • Expanding the amount of accessible open space to complement the existing Henry P. Johnson Park.

• Ensuring that the quality and capacity of school facilities meet the needs of future residents.

• Improving public safety in the sector area.

• Mitigating traffic congestion, especially during events at FedEx Field.

(See Map 5: Access and Circulation on page 16.)

Economic Development Issues • Addressing the existing vacant and underutilized retail space and the current lack of community-serving retail.

• Reconciling market realities with the community’s and county’s visions for the area and identifying strategies to induce market demand as needed.

(See Map 3: Existing Land Use on page 14.)

12

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

LANDOVER GATEWAY

Map 2: Existing Zoning Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

13

LANDOVER GATEWAY

Map 3: Existing Land Use 14

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

LANDOVER GATEWAY

Map 4: Approved Zoning Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

15

LANDOVER GATEWAY

Map 5: Access and Circulation 16

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

LANDOVER GATEWAY

Chapter 2: Vision—Concept Plan Introduction The decline and eventual demolition of the former Landover Mall in 2002 marked a major loss to nearby residents/property owners, Prince George’s County, and the Washington Metropolitan region. Once a thriving regional attraction, the former Landover site is now a mostly vacant land awaiting redevelopment.

In an attempt to focus attention to this area of Prince George’s County, the Councilman of Council District 5 sought the assistance from The Maryland-National Capital Park and Planning Commission (M-NCPPC to facilitate an evaluation of the issues that affect the area in the absence of the former Landover Mall. In January 2006, M-NCPPC joined efforts with the Urban Land Institute (ULI), to explore alternative development concepts for the area. In March 2006, a ULI panel completed an assessment of the area and produced a document (Urban Land Institute, Technical Panel Planning Study) that recommended the need for a sector plan process to evaluate and address the issues that affect this area after the closure of the mall.

In June 2006, M-NCPPC sought and retained outside planning and design assistance to work with staff on a sector plan for the Landover Gateway area. M-NCPPC staff then embarked on a six-month community outreach program to engage major stakeholders—elected officials (local, federal, state, and county), property owners, residents, and interested parties.

After six months of community outreach, the Prince George’s County Planning Board and District Council initiated the Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment. Immediately following the initiation, community brainstorming workshops and a five-day planning and design charrette were conducted to lay the groundwork for the sector plan vision.

Vision Statement The plan envisions a transformation of the Landover Gateway area into a vibrant 24-hour activity center with Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

a dense urban form and a mix of uses. The core area is anchored by a complex of signature office towers offering a range of civic uses, ranging from governmental to cultural facilities adjacent to the Capital Beltway and including a mixed-use main street. Landover Gateway features a variety of businesses and attractions, from businesses that serve the needs of citizens who reside within a short walking distance from downtown to others that attract visitors throughout the region. The downtown core transitions into outer neighborhoods with a range of high- and moderate-density residential neighborhoods and complementary mixed-use development.

Landover Gateway serves as a major multimodal transportation hub, with the addition of direct transit service to support the new development. The area is buffered by a network of trails and open spaces that provides a needed amenity for residents that preserves sensitive stream valleys.

The roadway network is transformed for pedestrian use with improved connectivity throughout (see Map 6: Land Use Plan on page 19 and see Map 7: Illustrative Plan on page 20).

Vision Elements A new mixed-use downtown that centers on the former Landover Mall site and Brightseat Road.

The downtown features a compatible and complementary mix of uses that fosters round-the-clock activity and a genuine sense of place. A compact, connected grid of streets includes many small blocks and a variety of street and building types. The downtown functions as a place to live, work, play, and visit, with a variety of interrelated pieces forming a cohesive whole. The main street commercial district includes destination and neighborhood-oriented retail uses on ground floors, with offices and residences on the upper floors. The civic center serves as an employment and cultural destination with a mix of government, cultural, educational, and office uses. The downtown is accessible by transit and on foot. The urban grid is punctuated and complemented by civic places that accommodate a variety of needs, from public gatherings and activities to quiet contemplation (see 17

LANDOVER GATEWAY

Map 8: Transportation Network Vision on page 21 and see Map 9: Illustrative Community Open Space on page 22).

Civic Center at Landover, a complex of government, cultural, educational, and office uses.

The civic center will serve as a new icon for Prince George’s County and a premier institutional, business, cultural, and residential neighborhood. The tallest structures, located adjacent to the Capital Beltway, are architecturally distinctive and visible from passing vehicles. Visually identifiable and attracting both office workers and visitors throughout the region, the civic center is a key component in establishing Landover Gateway’s regional presence. Although the civic center is envisioned as a possible government mix of uses, it also includes educational uses (i.e., a community college or higher education satellite campus), a range of corporate and service-oriented (i.e., medical) offices, residential and hotel uses, and an attractive urban plaza at its center.

A vibrant Main Street and commercial core.

The downtown features a walkable and economically vital main street that forms the central commercial spine of Landover Gateway. Mixed-use buildings, with commercial uses on the ground floor and residential and office uses above, are oriented to the street to create a continuous street wall. Wide sidewalks, ground floor retail, and a distinctive streetscape make the main street a pleasant, comfortable, and engaging place to stroll and shop.

A variety of neighborhoods with a range of housing types.

Landover Gateway includes a variety of neighborhoods, ranging from housing, integrated into mixed-use districts; high-density residential neighborhoods; and neighborhoods of town homes. These neighborhoods achieve a successful housing mix, offering housing opportunities across a broad spectrum of ages and incomes. The area includes mixedincome and workforce housing in a variety of housing types, which range from single-family attached townhomes to higher-density apartment buildings of various sizes. The housing mix accommodates older adults and families with children, as well as singles and couples seeking an urban lifestyle in Prince George’s County.

18

Economic development and a vital economic mix.

The area offers a variety of employment opportunities and generates substantial tax-based revenue for the county. Landover Gateway accommodates a diverse mix of business opportunities, having attracted anchor office tenants to destinations providing retail and restaurants, while reserving space for needed neighborhood-oriented services. By combining uses, the area achieves a synergy between uses and a vitality that continues well past the end of the workday; residents patronize local businesses, cultural uses enliven the downtown and attract visitors, and major employers provide a daytime population to support businesses.

A fully-integrated, multimodal transportation system.

The vision for Landover Gateway provides a comprehensive, multimodal transportation network that fully accommodates transit, automobiles, pedestrians, and bicyclists. A key component of the vision for Landover Gateway is the delivery of new transit service to the area in order to support the development envisioned area. The transportation system links Landover Gateway to other key destinations in the region, while encouraging travel on foot within the area by providing a safe pedestrian environment. The vision accommodates the addition of light-rail transit on Brightseat Road. New streets and road connections further limit traffic congestion by providing alternatives to the Brightseat Road and MD 202 intersection. New bridges across the Capital Beltway serve to unite the two sides of the sector area while fostering a complementary relationship between Landover Gateway and Woodmore Towne Centre (see Map 8: Transportation Network Vision on page 21).

An enhanced and expanded network of open space and civic places.

Landover Gateway includes an expanded open space network that comprises public greens and plazas, linear parks, promenades, natural resource-based parkland, and recreational amenities. The open space system provides public focal places in the hearts of neighborhoods, settings for public gatherings and events, opportunities for quiet contemplation and appreciation of nature, attractive connections between destinations, and opportunities for

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

LANDOVER GATEWAY

Map 6: Land Use Plan Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

19

LANDOVER GATEWAY

Map 7: Illustrative Plan 20

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

LANDOVER GATEWAY

Map 8: Transportation Network Vision Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

21

LANDOVER GATEWAY

Map 9: Illustrative Community Open Space 22

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

LANDOVER GATEWAY

passive and active recreation. The open space system is tied together by expanded trail connections linking Landover Gateway with surrounding areas (see Map 9: Illustrative Community Open Space on page 22).

including mixed-use development and walkable streets, to focus more “eyes on the street,” and design approaches that implement Crime Prevention through Environmental Design principles.

Improved pedestrian, bicycle, and trail connections.

A model of environmentally sensitive site design that preserves, enhances, and restores the environment and ecological functions.

The Landover Gateway area encourages residents and visitors alike to leave their automobiles behind. All destinations are accessible by a continuous network of sidewalks, safe pedestrian crossings, bicycle routes, and new trail connections along the Cattail Branch greenway and neighborhood connector trails. New development emphasizes linkages to schools, parks/recreational areas, commercial and employment centers for all ages.

Planned public facilities to support, protect, and educate current and future residents of Landover Gateway.

The sector plan recommends the development of new “urban model” schools in the area and the replacement of deteriorated school facilities with new, state-of-the-art facilities. A new, architecturally-significant central library branch is envisioned within the urban core of Landover Gateway. In addition to new and renovated police, fire, and EMS stations, the physical fabric of Landover Gateway is designed with features that may help prevent crime,

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

Landover Gateway incorporates the leading edge of environmentally sensitive stormwater management practices that minimize and manage stormwater at its source, thereby protecting local and regional watersheds from harmful runoff. The area includes open spaces that combine stormwater management functions and public amenities. New development minimizes impervious surfaces and employs other low-impact design techniques.

Following a “green streets” model, Landover Gateway features many street trees and multipurpose green spaces that function as community amenities, as well as areas for stormwater infiltration. Landover Gateway also preserves and enhances valuable networks of green infrastructure and associated ecological functions by protecting sensitive regulation areas along the Cattail Branch stream valley on the western perimeter of the sector area. Moreover, the area features an expanded network of green spaces and places that connect with natural resource areas (see Map 10: Green Design Concept on page 24).

23

LANDOVER GATEWAY

GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE

Map 10: Green Design Concept

Stormwater Planters 24

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

LANDOVER GATEWAY

Chapter 3: Development Pattern Elements Overall Sector Plan Area This chapter describes the sector plan vision for land use, development, and community character in the Landover Gateway area. Following the goals of the 2002 General Plan, the Development Pattern Element seeks to promote economic vitality, promote a sustainable pattern of development that encourages a balanced use of existing and proposed public facilities, enhances the quality and character of communities and neighborhoods, and protects environmentally sensitive lands.

Areawide Development Background The Landover Gateway sector area falls within both the Developed and Developing Tiers, with the Capital Beltway serving as the dividing line between the two tiers. The 2002 General Plan currently designates the former Landover Mall site and its vicinity as a community center in the Developed Tier. As the goals for the sector plan evolved during the planning process, it became clear that upgrading the sector area to a regional center designation would better accommodate the emerging downtown vision for the area.

As such, this sector plan recommends changing the area’s 2002 General Plan designation to regional center, and the recommendations of the sector plan are based on the assumption that such a change will occur.

According to the 2002 General Plan, regional centers are locations for regionally marketed commercial and retail centers, office and employment areas, some higher educational facilities, and possibly sports and recreation complexes primarily serving Prince George’s County. Highdensity residential development may be an option at these centers if needed public facilities and services, particularly schools and transit, can be provided. Regional centers should be served by rail or bus mass transit systems. The 2002 General Plan goals for centers call for capitalizing on public investment in the existing transportation system, promoting compact mixed-use development at moderate Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

to high densities, ensuring transit-supportive and transitserviceable development, requiring pedestrian-oriented and transit-oriented design, and ensuring compatibility with surrounding neighborhoods.

Land uses in the sector plan area include vacant land (the former Landover Mall site); residential, commercial, and religious/institutional uses; a Prince George’s County public school property; public parkland; and undeveloped parcels.

Although the majority of the former mall structures have been demolished, remaining uses on the former Landover Mall site include the Sears department store and auto center and an auto maintenance business fronting on Brightseat Road. Surrounding the former mall site, land uses are primarily residential with the exception of a liquor store on Brightseat Road and M‑NCPPC’s Henry P. Johnson Park north of the mall site. Residential uses consist of apartment complexes along the west side of Brightseat Road and single-family homes just outside the study area boundaries to the north and west (south of Barlowe Road).

Current uses east of Brightseat Road and north of MD 202 include a church and the Bonnie F. Johns Educational Media Center, a Prince George’s County public school building that is now used primarily for administrative and training functions. South of MD 202, land uses include the partially vacant Landover Crossing Shopping Center, vacant or undeveloped properties to the southwest of the Brightseat Road/MD 202 intersection, and a 50-acre undeveloped parcel owned by WFI Stadium, Inc. and located at the southernmost tip of the sector plan area.

The Woodmore Towne Centre development is located to the east of the former mall site, across the Capital Beltway. When fully developed, this 245-acre, mixed-use development will include a total of 684,617 square feet of retail (including Costco and Wegmans as anchors), 1,000,000 square feet of office uses, two hotels and a conference center, and residential consisting of 191 singlefamily homes and 731 townhomes.

The majority of land in the sector plan area is privately owned, including several large properties under single ownership. The only publicly owned parcels are existing 25

LANDOVER GATEWAY

M-NCPPC open space, north of the mall site, and the educational center property located southwest of MD 202.

The former Landover Mall site consists of nine parcels, with the majority of the site (all but three parcels) now owned by a single entity.

Goals • Encourage a high concentration of land uses and economic activities that attract employers, workers, and customers.

• Encourage high- and moderate-density residential development.

• Ensure that Landover Gateway can be effectively served by mass transit and that future development is transitsupportive.

• Capitalize on public investment in the existing transportation system.

• Promote compact, mixed-use development at moderate to high densities.

• Ensure transit-supportive and transit serviceable development.

• Require pedestrian-oriented and transit-oriented design.

• Ensure compatibility with surrounding neighborhoods.

• Provide a variety of housing types for a range of incomes, including affordable and workforce housing.

Policy 1. Create a vibrant new downtown for Prince George’s County in the area on and around the former Landover Mall site.

Strategies • Develop a mix of uses and activities that will foster a vibrant, 24-hour downtown environment.

• Encourage densities high enough to foster economic vitality and support transit service.

• Design a downtown core that is both centrally located and accessible.

• Provide a range of amenities and services that cater to a variety of consumers, including local residents and recreational, service, and business-related visitors and workers.

• Encourage a vertical mix of uses in the downtown core.

• Incorporate a wide variety of neighborhoods in the downtown area.

Policy 2: Improve connectivity in the sector area by creating a compact network of pedestrianfriendly streets.

Strategies • Create a network of connecting streets that open up large parcels of land to innovative development patterns in the sector plan area.

• Encourage a walkable, connected pattern of streets throughout the area.

• Create a range of block sizes with many small blocks that foster an urban, walkable environment.

• Pursue opportunities to enhance road connectivity by providing alternate routes that bypass major thoroughfares, such as Brightseat Road and MD 202.

• Upgrade Brightseat Road and MD 202 as pedestrianfriendly thoroughfares, employing traffic-calming measures and improving the safety and comfort of pedestrian crossings on Brightseat Road and MD 202.

Policy 3: Establish new transit connections to the area and encourage transit-oriented development and design.

Strategies • Work with federal, state, and county officials to deliver light rail connections into Landover Gateway.

• Ensure a compact, walkable design with key destinations within walking distance.

26

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

LANDOVER GATEWAY

• Establish frequent bus circulatory service as an interim measure to provide regular connections to nearby Metro stations.

• Locate light rail and bus stops to provide direct, safe, and efficient access to proposed mixed-use areas.

Policy 4: Integrate open spaces, green connections, and public focal places into Landover Gateway’s neighborhoods.

Strategies • Ensure that all public open space and neighborhood focal places are fully integrated with and connected to the street system.

• Create a distinct public focal place for each neighborhood.

• Ensure that all focal places remain in the public domain.

• Collaborate with the private sector to build and maintain these focal places.

• Ensure that all open spaces and focal places are bounded by streets on at least two sides.

Policy 5: Establish a complementary relationship between Landover Gateway and the Woodmore Towne Centre development.

Strategies • Approve and construct new pedestrian and vehicular connections between Landover Gateway and Woodmore Towne Centre, including a heavily landscaped promenade along the Evarts/Campus Way over the Capital Beltway (I-95/I-495) connection.

• Ensure that future uses west of the Capital Beltway and the Woodmore Towne Centre development are complementary to each.

• Identify and develop potential market niches that could be a focus for Landover Gateway.

• Link Landover Gateway and Woodmore Towne Centre through future transit connections, including interim

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

circulatory bus shuttle service and future light rail transit service.

Policy 6: Encourage a variety of housing options at varying densities for a range of income levels.

Strategies • Vary the residential densities and building types allowed by the sector plan and its development standards.

• Encourage private housing development that incorporates affordable workforce housing.

• Seek opportunities for the Department of Housing and Community Development to invest in and partner in new housing by providing financial incentives for inclusion of affordable units.

• Fund the Housing Trust Fund to support private provision of affordable housing.

• Require developments that receive major county financial support to include affordable units.

• Partner with nonprofit housing developers to increase affordable housing opportunities.

• Provide for both owner-occupied and rental housing to accommodate young households starting out.

• Encourage development of preretirement and retirement housing suited to the needs of active adults; units with low maintenance burdens and universal design so that units can be modified to accommodate future mobility limits and other disabilities.

Policy 7: Identify policies and mechanisms that give existing residents the option of remaining in Landover Gateway as the area redevelops.

Strategies • Provide home ownership training and counseling for area renters wishing to buy homes, both before and after the purchase.

• Provide financial incentives to support first-time homeowners.

27

LANDOVER GATEWAY

• Work with residents who might be displaced by future development.

• Provide foreclosure prevention counseling and assistance.

• Fund the single-family rehabilitation program to assist moderate-income homeowners to maintain and upgrade their homes.

Policy 8: Encourage the application of environmentally sensitive and sustainable site design techniques to all future development.

Strategies

• Employ the techniques for environmentally sensitive design and green infrastructure preservation and enhancement, as described in the Environmental Infrastructure section in Chapter 5.

Policy 9: Improve public safety by encouraging development that helps reduce the perception and reality of crime in the area.

Strategies • Incorporate defensible space and Crime Prevention through Environmental Design (CPTED) principles into all new developments.

• Ensure that stormwater has an opportunity to be filtered back into the local water table prior to its collection into the regional stormwater management system.

• Develop a pedestrian-friendly environment with a multiplicity of uses to ensure continuous activity and “eyes on the street.”

• Incorporate stormwater management functions as part of attractive and accessible public amenities.

• Maintain properties, pick up litter, and remove graffiti to enhance individuals’ sense of personal security.

• Create a public-private partnership for maintaining all biofilters in public open space.

• Enhance the pedestrian environment with good street lighting, clear sight lines, and strategic orientation of buildings for views into parks and other public spaces, such as outdoor restaurant seating

• Filter street runoff in streetscape features, street medians and planted open spaces. (See photos starting on page page 34.)

28

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

LANDOVER GATEWAY

Urban Design Vision Landover Gateway is envisioned as a vibrant and walkable downtown for Prince George’s County with a distinctive sense of place. The downtown area is organized around distinct neighborhoods and a network of corresponding thoroughfare and public places. Unique architectural and streetscape elements further contribute to the area’s sense of place (see Map 11: Illustrative North, Core, and South Neighborhoods and Primary Thoroughfares on page 32, Map 12: Illustrative Streetscapes on page 37, Figure 2: Illustrative Main Street and Connecting Street Sections on page 38, and Figure 3: Illustrative Boulevards in Park Slope and Commercial Core on page 39).

Background Three fundamental design principles provide the basis for the policies and strategies described below. These principles include:

Pedestrian-Oriented Design Pedestrian-oriented design addresses the design details that are essential to creating places where people can and will walk safely and pleasurably. Key principles of pedestrian-oriented design include compact neighborhoods; the proximity of residential and civic/commercial uses; a consistent street wall, influenced by the placement of buildings on the lot in relation to the street; complete and interconnected sidewalks, trails, and transportation facilities; human-scale architecture; and the provision of consistent eye-level details and amenities (i.e., lighting, benches, signage, decorative paving and railings, windows that engage the street, street trees, water fountains, etc.) that make sidewalks inviting and comfortable for pedestrians and encourage people to explore local businesses and public places on foot. (See new design guidelines.)

Place-making Place-making entails the creation of a setting that imparts a sense of place to an area. This process is achieved by establishing identifiable neighborhoods, unique architecture, aesthetically pleasing views and public places, identifiable landmarks and focal points, and a human element established Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

by compatible scales of development and ongoing public stewardship. Other key elements of place-making include lively commercial centers, mixed-use development with ground-level retail uses, human-scale and context-sensitive design, safe and attractive public areas, and image-making (i.e., decorative) elements in the public realm.

Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) CPTED was developed out of the realization that the built environment influences both the reality and perception of crime. CPTED is defined as the proper design and effective use of the built environment in ways that reduce the incidence and fear of crime and improve overall quality of life. CPTED is not just for architects and planners but involves the participation of everyone: police, employees, neighbors, business owners, service organizations, professional groups, students, and residents.

Implementation of CPTED focuses on the core principles of territorial reinforcement, natural surveillance, activity support, access control, and maintenance, while emphasizing the physical environment, people’s behavior, the productive use of space, and crime/loss prevention.

• Territoriality is based on the principle that people protect territories that they identify as their own and respect the territory of others. Territoriality can be established through design elements, such as the clear delineation of public and private areas (through low walls, fences, sidewalks, private yards, etc.) and consistent maintenance of both public and private spaces.

• Natural surveillance draws on the principle of “eyes on the street” and the idea that public spaces are safer— and criminal activity is riskier—when others can view them. Natural surveillance can be achieved by design elements (windows, balconies, porches, outdoor activity areas) that increase visibility of the street, as well as by preserving sightlines through appropriate maintenance of trees and shrubbery and by ensuring the provision of adequate lighting.

• Activity programming involves locating uses and amenities so that they foster natural surveillance, creating opportunities that will increase the legitimate use of spaces (i.e., festivals, farmers markets, recreation activities 29

LANDOVER GATEWAY

in parks, and other activities) in order to discourage or displace illegitimate uses in these places.

• Access control means creating limitations that discourage illegitimate access to public or private areas.

Access control measures include ensuring the visibility of commercial and residential entrances and exits; controlling access through use of manned or otherwise controlled access points or through limiting the number of units per entrance to reduce anonymity; and installing traffic-calming measures that minimize speeding and easy getaways.

• Maintenance involves efforts to create a sense of order and attentiveness to the condition of the physical environment. It involves reinforcing territoriality through attention to the upkeep of properties and public spaces, while also ensuring regular, scheduled maintenance of amenities, such as lighting and landscaping, that could create an environment more hospitable to crime if not attended to at regular intervals.

Goals • Promote high-quality design.

• Establish a sense of place.

• Protect, enhance, and physically integrate existing residential neighborhoods.

• Create pedestrian-friendly thoroughfares.

• Establish a cohesive network of connected trails and open spaces.

• Create public focal places.

• Provide safe neighborhoods through design that deters criminal activity.

• Promote “green” design and conservation of natural resources.

Policy 1: Ensure high-quality design for all new construction by implementing design guidelines for building form and design character.

Strategies • Encourage a consistent build-to line for each neighborhood character area and thoroughfare type to ensure a coherent street wall, appropriate scale, and proper relationship to the street.

• Ensure appropriate form, massing, use, height, siting, fenestration, and relationship to the street for all new buildings.

• Establish well-defined public space through the incorporation of a continuous street wall of building façades, as well as through fences, walls, and landscaping that define public spaces.

• Ensure appropriate use of design elements, such as entrances, porches, stoops, canopies, and roof profiles, to discourage the negative appearance of monotonous structures.

• Encourage adjacent stores to share ramps and stairs.

• Encourage flexible and creative individuality rather than monotonous uniformity.

• Establish a Landover Gateway architectural review board or committee to evaluate and advise on all architectural and landscape design proposals.

• Encourage all buildings to utilize high-quality building materials, including brick, stone, cast stone, or pre-cast concrete, as the primary materials.

Policy 2: Enhance Landover Gateway’s sense of place through the creation of unique neighborhoods and thoroughfares with highquality pedestrian environments, thematic architectural elements, and consistent street walls.

Strategies • Establish six conceptual neighborhoods—Landover Civic Center, Main Street Commercial Core, Downtown Neighborhood, Park Slope Neighborhood, Gateway

30

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

LANDOVER GATEWAY

North, and Gateway South—as illustrated on Map 11. Establish four urban design districts to guide the implementation of the desired building form within these neighborhoods.

• Create a hierarchy of character areas and corresponding thoroughfare types, each with its own unique form, architectural character, and streetscape.

• Establish well-defined and welcoming gateways to the downtown area that announce entry to Landover Gateway and introduce a discernable downtown character.

• Implement streetscape enhancements to improve the pedestrian environment and establish a sense of place along each thoroughfare.

• Incorporate distinctive architecture that contributes to Landover Gateway’s sense of place, especially in highly visible locations and at important destination areas.

Policy 3: Design an efficient, safe, and interconnected thoroughfare system.

Strategies • Use street grid systems to create compact blocks and easy connectivity to all downtown destinations.

• Provide rear access to lots via service drives or alleys.

• Establish alternate routes that bypass major thoroughfares through development of a connected street system.

Policy 4: Incorporate traffic-calming techniques to promote a pedestrian-friendly character.

Strategies • Promote on-street parking along residential and retail streets.

• Provide bump-outs at residential intersections to shorten street crossings.

• Break up continuous lines of on-street parked vehicles with island projections, if appropriate.

Policy 5: Encourage parking that is multiuse and does not interfere with streetscape aesthetics.

Strategies • Screen free-standing parking structures from public walks and streets by locating them behind or below primary structures.

• Provide ground-floor retail in parking structures located adjacent to the street.

• Disguise or screen any structured parking that is visible from the street.

• Encourage shared parking that enables convenient parking and the ability to access a variety of commercial and civic destinations.

• Minimize single-purpose, reserved parking that is fragmented, uncoordinated, and inefficient.

• Avoid adverse parking impacts on neighborhoods adjacent to the downtown area.

• Maximize on-street parallel parking.

• Ensure the visibility and accessibility of public parking and provide bike racks.

• Incorporate convenient bicycle parking.

• Encourage legislation, where appropriate, to establish maximum parking levels for development or redevelopment within the sector plan area, in lieu of the current minimums in Section 27, Part 11.

Policy 6: Create a network of trails and open spaces with clearly delineated connections, safe pedestrian and bicycle routes, and places for public gatherings.

Strategies

• Incorporate raised or flush crosswalks into paving programs to encourage crossing at designated intersections or crossing areas, to alert drivers to pedestrian activity.

• Ensure that each neighborhood includes appropriate urban spaces, including a central public focal place.

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

31

LANDOVER GATEWAY

Map 11: Illustrative North, Core, and South Neighborhoods and Primary Thoroughfares 32

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

LANDOVER GATEWAY

• Consider other smaller public spaces within residential and commercial areas.

• Encourage distinct lettering styles, artwork, and logos in legible type fonts and colors.

• Ensure that public spaces are well-defined by surrounding buildings and streets.

• Ensure that signs are mounted no more than one story above the sidewalk level within internal streets and higher in the Landover civic area.

• Integrate open spaces with other amenities and attractions, including sidewalks, seating, landscaping, and lighting.

• Construct inviting public amenities (such as fountains, gazebos, public art, bandstands, and ornamental landscaping) in all civic and public places.

• Clearly define pedestrian routes with identifiable landmarks to ensure that they are visible and accessible.

• Ensure that all improvements conform to accessibility standards established by the Americans with Disabilities Act.

Policy 7: Create signage for marketing services, and ensure that all signage does not compromise aesthetics or safety.

Strategies • Provide signs only to advertise a service, product, or business on the site where the sign is located or to provide, as a public service, directional guidance to nearby public destinations.

• Design signs to be compatible in style or character with the primary structure.

Neighborhood Character The urban design framework for Landover Gateway is developed around the creation of six distinctive neighborhoods. Each neighborhood contains a significant diversity of building types and thoroughfares, achieved in part through the application of the Mixed-UseTransportation Oriented (M-X-T) guidelines. These principles guide the key place-making features in ways that ensure the creation of vibrant and humane public spaces.

The sector plan also identifies primary neighborhood thoroughfares and focus areas, which include a range of plazas, greens, and urban gardens. Neighborhoods transition into one another along the thoroughfares through a shift in building and/or streetscape type. Many neighborhood edges are defined by drives (with their adjacent linear parks) and the larger parks. The sector plan discusses each neighborhood in terms of the character of its focal thoroughfares, focal places, transitions, and edges.

The designated neighborhoods of Landover Gateway are: • Landover Civic Center • Main Street Commercial Core

• Discourage large wall signs.

• Downtown Neighborhood

• Encourage appropriately scaled monument signs.

• Park Slope Neighborhood

• Prohibit pole signs, except as directional signs.

• Gateway North

• Discourage fluorescent, reflective, neon, blinking, animated, and flashing rotating signs that may compromise motorists’ safety.

• Gateway South

• Prohibit roof signs.

(See Map 11: Illustrative North, Core, and South Neighborhoods and Primary Thoroughfares on page 32.)

• Encourage appropriate blade and awning signs, and use windows to display merchandise.

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

33

LANDOVER GATEWAY

Landover Civic Center-Capital Beltway Area

Proposed

Main Street Commercial Core

Proposed

Existing

Landover Civic Center-Capital Beltway Area The Civic Center is envisioned as a new downtown icon for Prince George’s County. This neighborhood is planned to be a premier institutional, business, cultural, and residential neighborhood located at the county’s epicenter and adjacent to the Capital Beltway.

Existing There will be a well-placed open space or plaza centrally located to provide a multipurpose community gathering space. Buildings will face this space on all sides. Adjoining sidewalks will be wide enough to allow for outdoor dining.

This place should be the most intensely urban part of Landover Gateway.

The conceptual vision includes a focal north–south street (see Center Street on Map 11: Illustrative North, Core, and South Neighborhoods and Primary Thoroughfares on page 32) running through the Civic Center and an east–west boulevard (see Central Boulevard on Map 11: Illustrative North, Core, and South Neighborhoods and Primary Thoroughfares) that connects the Civic Center to the western neighborhoods. The buildings on the east side of Center Street may rise up to 20 stories adjacent to the Capital Beltway and contain mainly commercial uses directly adjacent to the Beltway. Along Center Street, at the heart of the neighborhood, the buildings step down to between 4 and 12 stories and have commerce on the ground level and residential or office above. Several thoroughfares intersect with Center Street, including Central Boulevard.

Streetscapes throughout the neighborhood should promote pedestrian activity through a mix of hardscapes and softscapes (see Map 12: Illustrative Streetscapes on page 37).

34

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

Main Street Commercial Core The main street commercial core is the busiest neighborhood of Landover Gateway. The neighborhood’s focal thoroughfare is bounded by the general center building form with continuous retail store fronts facing the street.

The buildings range in height from 4–10 stories. The upper floors contain residential and office uses. Sidewalks should allow for outdoor dining in a variety of settings. Some buildings may be up to 12 stories along main thoroughfares.

A variety of sustainable paving materials and pedestrianscaled lighting should be used.

LANDOVER GATEWAY

Downtown Neighborhood

Proposed

Existing

Downtown Neighborhood The downtown neighborhood provides a calmer place to live, next to the hustle and bustle of the Civic Center and the main street commercial core. An east–west residential street serves as the focal of the downtown neighborhood.

The residential street crosses Brightseat Road, extending the downtown neighborhood east to the Park Slope neighborhood and west to the Civic Center neighborhood.

The downtown neighborhood includes the General Center, General Edge, and Local Frontages building forms, as detailed in the guidelines. The building heights range from 2–8 stories. The civic open space is the central gathering space in the community and is open to the public. Residential buildings and their entrances form the major walls of the civic open space. Pedestrian promenades connect through the neighborhood to provide a link to the Evarts Street linear park, provide a way through to Brightseat Road, and directly connect to a hierarchy of neighborhood parks. All pedestrian promenades are front door public space with residential unit entrances facing directly onto them.

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

The streetscapes of the downtown neighborhood range from mostly paved, at the residential street intersections, to mostly planted, along the middle of the blocks with front door gardens and long, planted tree wells. The streetscapes feature a variety of plantings, fences, and sidewalk pavings.

In the vicinity of the urban garden, streetscapes focus on it to create a residential mixed-use garden district next to the commercial and institutional mixed-use districts.

Park Slope Neighborhood Park Slope is a high-density residential neighborhood that overlooks Cattail Creek Drive, the Cattail Branch linear park, and the adjacent stream-related natural resource area.

Although the neighborhood is predominantly residential in character, limited amounts of neighborhood-oriented commercial development are allowed on ground floors.

This residential neighborhood is located directly adjacent to both the main street commercial core and the downtown neighborhood to the east. The Park Slope neighborhood is built on land that slopes down to Cattail Branch from Brightseat Road. The tallest buildings face the creek and park and are centered on the Central Boulevard connection to Cattail Creek Drive. The Central Boulevard widens in this neighborhood to include space for a large internal public green. The 4–8 story buildings that face Cattail Creek Drive turn the corner and face the public green. The green is bounded by the Central Boulevard roadway and Cattail Creek Drive. Stormwater is funneled into a series of stormwater management gardens that step down the slope to absorb and filter water before it enters the creek.

The streetscape in this area includes a combination of boulevard character, mostly paved areas, and mostly green areas with 8-foot-wide sidewalks between a curb edge planting strip and front-door gardens that border the residential buildings. At the northern end of the neighborhood, an east–west pedestrian promenade connects to a Brightseat Road streetscape that is mostly green with paved corners. A park overlook streetscape frames the western edge of the neighborhood.

Gateway North Gateway North includes both single-family attached townhomes and neighborhood mixed-use development on the west side of Brightseat Road. The townhome neighborhood is a community of 2–3 story, attached, single35

LANDOVER GATEWAY

family homes that face the public streets and feature auto access and service via rear alleys. At a new entrance to Brightseat Road, just north of the Evarts Street intersection, a small neighborhood mixed-use area serves this community.

Here at the location of a regional transit stop, taller (4–8 stories) buildings cluster on both sides of the new entrance road located to the west of Brightseat Road. Retail uses occupy the ground floor of these buildings, and office or residential uses occupy the upper floors. The upper floors overlook Brightseat Road and the Henry P. Johnson Park, an existing M-NCPPC facility that is upgraded and expanded as part of the sector plan to include all land to the west between Brightseat Road and the existing western boundaries of the park.

The residential thoroughfares in Gateway North are characterized by attached residential structures. All lots should back up to an alley that provides access for surface parking or enclosed garages that are located directly off of the alley. All streets allow for parallel parking on both sides and two-way traffic.

Gateway North should feature public greens as neighborhood entry features at the core of the neighborhood. A series of pedestrian promenades connect the adjacent Cattail Creek Drive to the center of the neighborhood. Townhomes with a wall facing the promenade should have entrances off of the promenade. Cattail Creek Drive and its adjacent and contiguous linear park define the western and northern edges of the Gateway North neighborhood.

Streetscape character in this neighborhood is mostly green with interspersed pedestrian promenades and a park overlook along the western edge of the area.

Gateway South Gateway South is situated between Landover Road to the north, Sheriff Road to the south, and Brightseat Road to the south. The neighborhood is bounded by Cattail Branch and Palmer Park to the west and by the Capital Beltway to the east. The scale of this neighborhood ranges from 2–3-story, single-family attached residences in the western areas to a high-density residential and mixed-use street that straddles Brightseat Road, east of its intersection with Sheriff Road.

Streets in Gateway South, south of Landover Road (MD 202), are primarily mixed-use in character. To the east of its intersection with Sheriff Road, Brightseat Road serves as the 36

focal thoroughfare for this area. This segment of Brightseat Road is defined by mixed-use development with commercial activities planned on the ground floor and residential or office uses located on the upper floors. To the south of Brightseat Road is a mixed business and residential area. To the north of Brightseat Road, a public green is envisioned that serves as a focal area and calm interior for the primarily residential mixed-use area surrounding it.

Streetscape character is mostly green with areas of paved corners. A mostly paved area runs along Sheriff Road, and pedestrian promenades provide key connections south of Sheriff Road and south of the western portion of MD 202.

Focus Areas For the purpose of providing more detailed recommendations that further distinguish Landover Gateway’s proposed neighborhoods, the sector plan defines distinct focus areas within specific neighborhoods that have the potential to establish their own unique character. These focus areas include a variety of diverse building, street and streetscape characteristics that are described by the accompanying visions, goals, and strategies and illustrated by Figure 4: Focal Plaza on page 41, Figure 5: Public Garden Plan Detail on page 41, Figure 6: Boulevard Green Detail on page 42, and Figure 7: Public Green Plan Detail on page 42.

Core Areas Core Focal Office—Landover Civic Center (Capital Beltway) Vision This focus area contains an imaginative mix of government, educational, cultural, hotel, commercial office, and residential uses. This area serves as a regional draw and economic magnet that brings employers, visitors, workers, and residents to Landover Gateway. The building structures envisioned for Landover Gateway have distinctive designs, are prominently visible from the Capital Beltway, and function as identifiable visual icons. Ground-floor retail and high-density residential, office, and hotel uses on the upper floors should ensure round-the-clock activity and create a safe and dynamic urban icon at the Civic Center.

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

LANDOVER GATEWAY

Map 12: Illustrative Streetscapes Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

37

LANDOVER GATEWAY

Figure 2: Illustrative Main Street and Connecting Street Sections 38

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

LANDOVER GATEWAY

Figure 3: Illustrative Boulevards in Park Slope and Commercial Core Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

39

LANDOVER GATEWAY

Background

Goals

This focus area includes the parcels that line the eastern edge of the former Landover Mall property, all of which contain no structures at this time. A significant challenge related to the development of these parcels is the noise generated by the adjacent Capital Beltway, a factor which makes this location most appropriate for commercial and institutional uses and tall structures that can raise high above the Beltway traffic. The Beltway also serves as a barrier between these parcels and the future location of Woodmore Towne Centre, thus making it necessary to seriously consider future pedestrian and vehicular connections. Unique development opportunities for the Civic Center area include the potential for tall structures that are visible from the Beltway, an advantage that would appeal especially to commercial office tenants. Moreover,

• Design a signature complex of governmental, educational, cultural, hotel, and commercial office uses.

• Create an identifiable icon for Landover Gateway, such as tall, architecturally distinctive structures.

• Seek high-profile anchor tenants to establish a regional presence and significance for Landover Gateway.

• Design a vibrant and attractive public realm focused on a significant urban plaza and major street.

Policy 1: Develop Civic Center as a visible and iconic core for Landover Gateway.

Strategies • Maximize visibility from the Capital Beltway and surrounding roadways.

• Ensure that new development is architecturally distinctive.

• Locate the tallest structures in the Landover Gateway along the easternmost parcels of the sector plan area.

• Recruit high-profile tenants that seek visibility, which would help increase the potential of making Landover Gateway a regionally recognizable destination.

• Provide tenant and public parking in structured or underground facilities incorporated into the surrounding development.

Policy 2: Identify and recruit potential anchors.

Core Focal Office Photo by Payton Chung, as licensed under Creative Commons the eastern edge of the former mall property is especially appropriate for tall structures due to the lack of properties immediately adjacent to the east. These structures can also serve as a buffer between Beltway traffic and the rest of Landover Gateway.

40

Strategies • Pursue opportunities to bring some government offices to Landover Gateway area.

• Explore the relocation of some of Prince George’s County gateway offices to Landover Gateway, possibly as part of a new “government center” that consolidates key county offices in one location.

• Explore opportunities to locate federal or state offices at Landover Gateway.

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

LANDOVER GATEWAY

Figure 4: Focal Plaza • Comprehensively and aggressively plan for interim shuttle bus service and future light rail transit services in order to meet transit needs and requirements for government offices.

• Identify and pursue opportunities to locate higher education or adult education facilities at Landover Civic Center.

Figure 5: Public Garden Plan Detail

• Engage in discussions with regional higher education institutions, such as University of Maryland, Johns Hopkins University, and Prince George’s Community College regarding the possibility of locating satellite campuses at the Landover Civic Center.

• Market hotel and/or commercial office uses in the southeastern corner of the Civic Center area.

• Explore opportunities to locate technical and vocational schools or for-profit educational institutions (e.g., Strayer University or University of Phoenix) at Landover Civic Center.

• Identify opportunities to locate community-oriented adult education facilities at Landover Gateway, possibly as part of a share-use arrangement with another institution.

• Collaborate with local cultural organizations to identify and recruit the county’s significant and diverse cultural uses and facilities to the Civic Center.

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

Policy 3: Develop a visually attractive and welcoming public plaza to serve as a venue for public gatherings and passive recreation and as the symbolic core of Civic Center.

Strategies • Create a centrally located, focused urban plaza or open space defined by adjacent buildings.

• The plaza may be bounded on all sides by public streets.

• Incorporate wide sidewalks at the surrounding building edges.

41

LANDOVER GATEWAY

Figure 6: Boulevard Green Detail

Figure 7: Public Green Plan Detail

• Create a central design feature, surrounded by a mostly paved space, as a focal point at the plaza’s center.

• Incorporate on-road bicycle facilities on Evarts Street and on Landover Gateway’s Central Boulevard, and extend these routes across the proposed Evarts Street bridge and proposed pedestrian bridge respectively.

Policy 4: Ensure direct pedestrian and vehicular access to Civic Center from Woodmore Towne Centre and from other parts of Landover Gateway.

Strategies • Extend Evarts Street, providing a new pedestrian and vehicular bridge connection across the Capital Beltway.

Core Main Street—Main Street Commercial Core Vision

• If pedestrian access cannot be achieved across the Evarts bridge extension, construct a pedestrian bridge across the Capital Beltway that connects Woodmore Towne Centre at Glenarden to the Civic Center development and to Landover Gateway as a whole.

This focus area serves as the primary commercial corridor of Landover Gateway. Commercial activity is organized around a walkable, economically vital main street that forms the central commercial spine of Landover Gateway. Main Street buildings and uses are oriented to the street to create a continuous street wall. An attractive and comfortable streetscape with wide sidewalks, distinctive street furniture, street trees, and other amenities make the main street a

42

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

LANDOVER GATEWAY

pleasant, comfortable, and engaging place to stroll. The upper floors of main street buildings include both residential and commercial uses to help create a dynamic urban main street.

Background Although much of this focus area consists of vacant parcels, once occupied by the former Landover Mall, it also includes the parcels owned and occupied by the Sears department store. It is assumed that this site will continue to be occupied

by Sears as the plan reaches implementation. A central planning challenge for this area is identifying a way to incorporate the Sears store, a vestige of the area’s suburban and automobile-oriented past, into a downtown concept that is more urban and pedestrian-oriented. The area also includes parcels along Brightseat Road—the current locations of an apartment complex on the west side and an automobile mechanic business on the east side—that are envisioned as potential redevelopment sites as the real estate development market matures.

Goals • Establish a vibrant and walkable Main Street.

• Encourage mixed-use development at high densities.

• Design attractive open-space areas activated by surrounding uses.

• Maintain 24-hour activity that caters to a variety of users.

• Incorporate Sears as a fully integrated retail anchor.

Policy 1: Create a mixed-use pedestrian-oriented east–west Main Street that serves as the commercial heart of Landover Gateway.

Strategies • Ensure a continuous retail edge on the ground floors along a main street with office and residential uses located on the upper floors.

• Design buildings to form a consistent street wall with all building entrances leading directly to the sidewalk.

Example of a Mixed-Use Pedestrian-Oriented Core Street • Include wide sidewalks and distinctive, visually appealing streetscape elements, including landscaping, street trees, benches, lighting, and other visually appealing street furniture.

• Provide outdoor dining areas along the main street.

• Ensure a high degree of fenestration at the sidewalk level.

• Retain and improve the existing Sears store, integrating the structure into future development on the south side of Main Street.

• Identify themes and market potential tenants for retail space.

• Surround Main Street buildings with mixed-use office and residential uses to the north and south.

• Encourage the location of residential and office lobbies on the side streets off Main Street.

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

43

LANDOVER GATEWAY

Policy 2: Extend the commercial core along Brightseat Road and to the west along a continuation of Main Street.

Strategies • Extend Main Street environment onto Brightseat Road by encouraging mixed-use development with ground floor retail uses on both sides of Brightseat Road between MD 202 and the downtown neighborhood.

• Extend Main Street commercial activity across to the west of Brightseat Road, parallel to MD 202.

• Ensure that ground floors are occupied by retail uses that engage the street and sidewalk.

• Consider retail space near transit stations as locations for neighborhood- and transit-serving retail, such as sidewalk cafes, newsstands, dry cleaners, small groceries, etc.

• Enliven transit station areas and bus stops with development that is transit-oriented and pedestrianaccessible.

• Create a walkable, visually appealing streetscape on Brightseat Road that mirrors that of Main Street with its retail frontage (see Figure 2: Illustrative Main Street and Connecting Street Sections on page 38).

Policy 3: Create a mixed-use, pedestrian boulevard running parallel to Main Street.

Strategies • Design a central urban boulevard intersecting Brightseat Road with wide sidewalks and visually appealing streetscape elements as illustrated in Figure 3.

• Encourage the location of residential and office lobbies facing the central boulevard.

• Design buildings that engage the sidewalk and form a consistent street wall with all building entrances on the sidewalk.

• Design a central planted median with multiple opportunities for pedestrian access.

44

Policy 4: Plan for a possible light rail transit stop in the vicinity of Brightseat Road.

Strategies • Assess alternatives for accommodating light rail transit on Brightseat Road, including potential alignments and whether transit would occupy dedicated or shared lanes.

• Identify locations for one or more transit stops along Brightseat Road.

• Design pedestrian-accessible, attractive, and well-lighted transit stops.

• Study the potential impact of proposed light rail alignments on neighborhoods located to the north of the study area.

Policy 5: Ensure that all intersections with Brightseat Road are pedestrian oriented and “calm” traffic.

Strategies • Provide appropriate pedestrian access, marked intersections, and refuge areas around transit stops.

• Employ appropriate traffic-calming measures to slow traffic on Brightseat Road.

• Create safe and comfortable pedestrian crossings at the intersection of Main Street and Brightseat Road.

Policy 6: Create a public gathering place and focal point adjacent to Main Street.

Strategies • Design a flexible public green near the center of the Main Street neighborhood.

• Create a public market building at the Main Street edge of the public green to ensure retail continuity along Main Street.

• Create a focal point (i.e., public monument or sculpture) at the center of the public green.

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

LANDOVER GATEWAY

Goals • Provide a neighborhood with opportunities to live and work in an urban environment.

• Provide a neighborhood composed of a variety of housing types.

Policy 1: Develop high- and moderate-density residential areas to the north and west of the commercial core.

Strategies

Example of a Commercial Streetscape

Core General Center and Core General Edge Focus Areas—Downtown Neighborhood Vision Create a prime, residential focus area to the north of the main street commercial core neighborhood. The neighborhood straddles Brightseat Road and ranges from 4–10-story, mixed-use buildings next to the Main Street commercial core and the Civic Center, with some buildings up to 12 stories along Brightseat Road. This neighborhood provides a quieter place to live adjacent to the activity of the commercial core. The neighborhood is defined by a variety of streetscape types, ranging from the commercial streetscape along Brightseat Road to more intimate internal streets. There should be a centrally located open space and a linear park along the northern edge of this neighborhood.

Background The downtown focus area includes the northwestern portion of the former mall site and a portion of Brightseat Road south of Evarts Street. The area is currently occupied by undeveloped land on the former mall site, the northern section of the existing Maple Ridge Apartments property, and the site currently occupied by a liquor store.

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

• Develop the land west of Brightseat Road into a highdensity residential neighborhood.

• Allow the flexibility to include either residential use or neighborhood-oriented commercial uses on ground floors within the higher density residential areas, as market conditions permit.

• Frame the intersection of Brightseat Road and Evarts Street with moderate-density housing on the southeast and southwest corners.

• Encourage development that decreases in height as it approaches lower-density neighborhoods to the north and west.

Policy 2: Develop a network of open spaces and streetscapes that is integrated into the neighborhood and provides connections to nearby open space areas and destinations.

Strategies • Develop a public urban garden at the core of the downtown neighborhood.

• Provide a linear park along Evarts Street that connects the Cattail Branch stream valley trail network with the Evarts Street bridge connection to the Woodmore Towne Centre.

• Develop a network of streetscapes that incorporate plantings along the middle section of each block.

45

LANDOVER GATEWAY

• Provide pedestrian promenades that provide connections to the urban garden, as well as to Brightseat Road and surrounding open spaces.

Although the environmentally sensitive stream valley and existing floodplain areas limit the area that is suitable for future development, these areas also offer the potential to enhance nearby neighborhoods by providing easily accessible natural and recreational amenities.

Goals • Create a signature, high-density residential neighborhood.

• Provide an alternative north–south vehicular route that bypasses the intersection of Brightseat Road and MD 202 to provide a secondary means of access.

• Develop a neighborhood that maximizes the recreational and quality-of-life benefits of the adjacent Cattail Branch stream valley and linear park.

• Design a vibrant and attractive public realm focused on a public green and linear park.

Policy 1: Develop Park Slope as a signature, highdensity residential neighborhood.

Example of an Urban Residential Neighborhood

Core Park Slope Focus Area—Park Slope Neighborhood Vision Develop a signature, high-density residential neighborhood to the west of the downtown core that serves as the premiere residential-only neighborhood in the Landover Gateway core. The neighborhood faces the new drive along the Cattail Branch linear park with views of the stream valley possible from upper floors. A large public green that incorporates innovative stormwater management facilities serves as the terminus of the Central Boulevard.

Background

Strategies • Maximize building heights along the Cattail Branch linear park and new north–south drive.

• Ensure that new development is architecturally distinctive.

• Consider the construction of a small number of high-rise “point” towers overlooking the Cattail Branch stream valley that serve to frame the western extension of the Central Boulevard.

Policy 2: Create a new north–south drive along the edge of the Cattail Branch open space and linear park to link MD 202, Evarts Street, and the northern segment of Brightseat Road; and enable traffic to bypass the intersection of Brightseat Road and MD 202.

This area slopes upward from the Cattail Branch stream valley and connects with the western portion of the existing Maple Ridge Apartments property. The existing Cattail Branch stream valley and associated steep slopes constitute both assets and challenges from a planning perspective.

• Study potential alignments for a new drive located outside of and to the east of the existing floodplain area.

46

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

Strategies

LANDOVER GATEWAY

• Design and landscape the drive to emphasize its residential parkway character.

• Include amenities such as wide sidewalks, improved lighting, an on-road bicycle trail, and pedestrian crosswalks at all intersecting streets.

• Provide clear connections to the adjacent linear park.

Policy 3: Create a large public green at the western end of the Central Boulevard.

Strategies • Create a wide (95 feet at a minimum, curb to curb) central median to house the public space.

Photo by Payton Chung, as licensed under Creative Commons

• Include plantings, lawn areas, walkways, seating, and other amenities into this area.

Background

• Incorporate public gardens that serve as stormwater management in facilities within the public park.

Policy 4: Create a new linear park adjacent to the new drive, parallel to the Cattail Branch stream valley.

Strategies • Incorporate plantings, walkways, benches, and playgrounds in the area between the drive and the regulated environmental protection areas along Cattail Branch.

• Provide pedestrian access across Cattail Branch to connect with the Glenarden neighborhoods to the north and west.

Core North Focus Area—Gateway North Neighborhood Vision

This focus area encompasses the land currently occupied by the Glenarden Apartments, as well as the undeveloped northernmost edge of the former Landover Mall site.

Planning challenges in this area include defining strategies for the redevelopment of the existing housing stock, as well as protecting and enhancing the residential areas to the north of the study area with an appropriate scale and mix of development that will complement and fit within the new Landover Gateway downtown area.

Goals • Plan to redevelop a moderate-density residential neighborhood.

• Design a mixed-use core with amenities and services for the surrounding neighborhood.

• Establish a pedestrian-oriented street network.

• Establish an enhanced, expanded, and accessible open space network.

A moderate-density neighborhood of townhomes surrounds a mixed-use neighborhood area on the west side of Brightseat Road that includes office, residential, and neighborhoodserving retail uses. Development in this area incorporates a variety of attractive open space areas. The existing Henry P. Johnson Park is upgraded and expanded westward to the east side of Brightseat Road.

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

47

LANDOVER GATEWAY

Policy 1: Develop a neighborhood of moderatedensity housing surrounding a mixed-use core at Brightseat Road.

Strategies • Redevelop the site currently occupied by Glenarden Apartments with a neighborhood of moderate-density townhomes.

• Upgrade and expand the existing Henry P. Johnson Park such that the parkland extends westward to Brightseat Road.

• Support and enhance residential uses with mixed-use development on Brightseat Road, north of Evarts Street.

• Include neighborhood-serving retail at the ground floor of the mixed-use development.

• Establish a pedestrian-oriented network of streets that enhances connectivity.

• Establish a relocation policy that encourages existing residents to remain in the area when existing housing is redeveloped.

Policy 2: Create a network of diverse, attractive and accessible open spaces.

Strategies • Develop a gateway park to serve as a transition between neighborhood commercial mixed-use and residential areas.

• Develop a hilltop public green to serve as the central public space for the surrounding neighborhood.

• Connect the neighborhood to the drive and linear park along the Cattail Branch stream valley with pedestrian walkways and public streets.

• Provide a linear park along Evarts Street that connects the Cattail Branch stream valley trail network with the Evarts Street bridge connection to the Woodmore Towne Centre.

48

Example of a Public Green Space

Core South Focus Area—Gateway South Neighborhood Vision The area south of MD 202 is transformed into a neighborhood of mixed-use, residential and educational uses that support and complement the downtown. Mixed residential, office, and other uses, surrounding a new public space, extend commercial activity to the south across MD 202 from the downtown. Further south, mixed office and residential uses wrap a shared parking structure.

Moderate-density residential development and a new school are recommended in the southwestern corner of the study area.

Background This focus area includes the existing Landover Crossing Shopping Center site, a 50-acre undeveloped parcel owned by WFI Stadium, Inc.; vacant and/or transitional commercial properties; and additional privately-owned, undeveloped land. The area also includes the existing Bonnie F. Johns Educational Media Center, a former school that is now used for administrative and training purposes

by Prince George’s County Public Schools. Planning challenges include encouraging development that protects Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

LANDOVER GATEWAY

and enhances the adjacent Palmer Park neighborhood with compatible development and identifying uses in the southern end of the study area that can be compatible with FedEx Field events.

Goals • Establish a mixed-use and residential neighborhood that supports and complements the Landover Gateway downtown.

• Encourage commercial activity to the south of MD 202.

• Build a new school to accommodate future residential growth.

• Create a network of passive and active open space areas.

Policy 1: Develop a moderate- to high-density mixed-use neighborhood in the area south of MD 202.

Strategies • Redevelop the existing Landover Crossing Shopping Center site as a mixed-use development with office, residential, and retail uses.

• Redevelop the east side of Redskins Road with mixed office, residential and retail uses.

• Locate retail uses on the ground floors of all mixed-use development that includes retail uses.

• Establish a pedestrian-oriented network of streets that enhances connectivity.

Policy 2: Maximize the redevelopment potential of the publicly owned Bonnie F. Johns Educational Media Center.

Strategies • Engage in discussions with Prince George’s County Public Schools regarding potential future uses of the Bonnie F. Johns Educational Media Center.

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

• Explore opportunities to build a new urban model school on the site of the existing Bonnie F. Johns Educational Media Center.

• Encourage the inclusion of an active recreational open space as part of any school development.

Policy 3: Develop moderate-density housing south of MD 202.

Strategies • Construct moderate-density housing along the south side of MD 202, between the intersection of Barlowe Road and MD 202 and the proposed school site.

• Ensure that future development provides an appropriate transition to the lower-density Palmer Park neighborhood.

Policy 4: Develop continuous pedestrian linkages and ensure that the pedestrian network fosters safe routes to school.

Strategies • Expand the street network to establish a pedestrianoriented network of streets that enhances connectivity.

• Prioritize pedestrian safety and traffic calming in the vicinity of the proposed school site.

• Consider a potential pedestrian bridge across MD 202 in the area west of Brightseat Road.

Policy 5: Develop mixed office and residential uses, wrapped around structured parking at the southern end of the study area.

Strategies • Ensure that parking is hidden from view by the office and residential uses wrapped around it.

• Explore parking management strategies that enable the shared use of the new garage to accommodate office and residential, as well as FedEx Field event parking.

49

LANDOVER GATEWAY

Policy 6: Integrate a variety of open space areas as part of the larger open space and environmental network.

Strategies • Protect and enhance the Cattail Branch stream valley, while providing linkages to the proposed resource-based greenway.

• Create linear parks at the edges of resource-based greenways and outside of environmentally regulated areas.

• Incorporate stormwater facilities as attractive and accessible planted amenities.

Design Guidelines In order to achieve the goals of the sector plan and create a coherent street space throughout the sector plan area, the following design guidelines have been formulated to guide development in the approved M-X-T Zone (see Map 4: Approved Zoning on page 15), which encompasses the entire sector planning area. Four distinct design districts (see Map 13: Design District Boundaries on page 51) are established based on the sector plan’s vision, neighborhoods, and focus areas. Each district includes design principles and building envelope guidelines. The build-to line (BTL) is referenced to ensure building siting at the street throughout the plan.

For each district, the BTL should be the inside edge of the sidewalk, no matter the sidewalk width. Fenestration is understood as the transparent or translucent elements of a building’s façade. The building’s façade is all of the building’s faces except those that directly adjoin an adjacent building.

Development applications in the Landover Gateway sector should respond to and be in harmony with the design guidelines. The sector plan area is divided into four different districts, each of which is envisioned to contain a different density and building form. Development applications should propose a street network that is similar to the illustrative street network in the size and regular orientation of blocks. Alleys should be utilized for access to parking

and service areas. All streets should provide for a range of transportation modes.

Land that is rezoned to the M-X-T Zone is subject to the regulations of Section 27-544(a) and 27-548, and uses are limited to those permitted in the M-X-T Zone. However, existing uses may remain where new development is not proposed, and general maintenance of existing building and surface parking is allowed. New development, including expansion of existing buildings and major changes to existing parking lots, requires approval of a conceptual site plan and detailed site plan in accordance with Section 27-546.

Policy 1: Establish four mixed-use design districts, each with appropriate density and height recommendations for a downtown environment.

Each should have a logical distribution of density, while respecting existing lower density neighborhoods. Each district’s density is transit supportive. (See Map 13: Design District Boundaries on page 51.)

Strategy 1: Beltway Focus Design District Develop a core area that contains an imaginative mix of government, education, cultural, hospitality, commercial office, and residential uses. This area serves as a regional draw and economic magnet that brings employers, visitors, workers, and residents to the Landover Gateway area. The buildings envisioned for the area of the Beltway Focus District have distinctive designs, are prominently visible from the Capital Beltway, and function as identifiable visual icons.

• Range of Land Use Mix: –– Office/Educational/Cultural: 80–85 percent –– Retail: 7–20 percent –– Residential: 1–10 percent –– Hospitality: 7–10 percent • Building Height Ranges: 6–20 stories with most buildings a minimum of eight stories

50

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

LANDOVER GATEWAY

Map 13: Design District Boundaries *See Appendix D: Buildout Scenario Assumptions on page 165 for description of blocks Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

51

LANDOVER GATEWAY

Design Principles • Locate the tallest structures in the Landover Gateway area, up to 20 stories tall, along the Capital Beltway.

• Use street grid pattern to create compact blocks of development.

• Develop major north–south and east–west axis streets for the development.

–– Develop a pedestrian-oriented street grid of regularly sized and spaced blocks that creates a block range of 250–650 feet to encourage alternative modes of transportation.

• Construct buildings to a minimum of six stories.

–– Prohibit culs-de-sac.

• Recruit high profile tenants that seek visibility, which would help increase the potential of making the Landover Gateway area a regionally-recognizable destination.

• Design buildings to form a consistent street wall with all building entrances leading directly to the sidewalk.

• Create a pedestrian-oriented environment that encourages walking and biking rather than driving.

–– Design complete streets to support bicyclists, pedestrians, and automobiles. ºº Line all streets with sidewalks.

• Include wide sidewalks and distinctive, visually appealing streetscape elements, such as benches, planters, and ornamental lighting.

–– Ensure that all sidewalks on main streets are a minimum of 15 feet wide.

• Maximize visibility from the Capital Beltway and surrounding roadways.

ºº Provide a minimum of 18-foot-wide sidewalks to accommodate outdoor dining on major axial streets.

–– Provide building-mounted signage opportunities for iconic buildings along the Beltway where appropriate.

ºº Provide a maximum of six-foot-wide sidewalks on all alleys.

–– Identify locations for high-intensity office/ educational/cultural and mixed-use buildings visible from the Capital Beltway.

–– Design at least one main street to support fixed guideway transit.

• Ensure buildings are not set back to provide a continuous street wall for pedestrians.

ºº Provide the necessary right-of-way for transit and transit stops.

–– Prohibit drive-through commercial services

–– Provide direct access to all buildings from the public sidewalk.

–– Hide from public view the service and garbage elements of buildings in parking structures or alleyways.

–– Promote on-street, parallel parking to decrease vehicle speed and increase pedestrian safety.

• Ensure that new development is architecturally distinctive.

• Feature extensive vertical mixing of uses to include ground-level retail and upper-level office/educational/ cultural, residential, or hospitality uses.

–– Encourage distinctive iconic architecture.

–– Encourage the use of high-quality, sustainable building materials.

–– Provide architectural variation.

52

• Build structured parking that does not break up or impose on the consistent street wall.

–– Screen above-grade parking structures from view of streets with primary buildings and architectural screen walls.

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

LANDOVER GATEWAY

–– Include on-street parallel parking on all streets except alleys.

–– Encourage shared parking services where appropriate.

–– Charge a parking fee.

–– Create an effective wayfinding system to help visitors safely navigate from parking to their destination.

–– Discourage surface parking.

• Incorporate sustainable building technologies, building management, and construction techniques to promote low energy use, minimize construction waste, minimize water usage, and utilize advanced stormwater management.

–– Promote innovative water management systems for indoor water usage.

–– Incorporate new stormwater management technologies, such as collection systems, rain gardens, green roofs, and graywater reuse.

–– Investigate site opportunities for geothermal systems.

–– Encourage the use of district power generation for larger tenants or buildings.

• Develop well-placed open space throughout the district to serve for formal and informal gatherings.

–– Allocate open space within approximately a fiveminute walk from all points in the district.

–– Ensure all hardscape plaza space has pervious paving and utilize sustainable stormwater management principles.

–– Line open space with sidewalks.

–– Allow retail uses to engage open space where appropriate.

• Create accessible public transit stations.

–– Encourage retail space near transit stations to be neighborhood and transit serving, such as sidewalk cafes, newsstands, dry cleaners, etc.

–– Design development to support and take advantage of mass transit (fixed guideway transit).

Building Envelope Guidelines Height: • Building Height: The height of the building is measured in stories. Each principal building should be at least six stories but no more than 20 stories in height. Most buildings should range between 8–20 stories.

The minimum floor-to-floor story height should be ten feet.

An attic story should not count against the story height.

• Parking Structure Height: Where a parking structure is within 40 feet of any principal building (built after 2008), that portion of the structure should not exceed the building’s ridge or parapet height.

• Mezzanines: Mezzanines having a floor area greater than one-third of the floor area of the story in which situated should count as full stories.

• Street Wall Height: A street wall not less than four feet or greater than 18 feet in height should be constructed along any BTL frontage that is not otherwise occupied by a building on the lot.

Siting: • Street Façade: On each lot, the building façade should be built to the BTL for at least 70 percent of the BTL length.

The building façade should be built along the BTL to within 30 feet of a block corner. The ground floor façade, within seven feet of the block corner, may be chamfered to form a corner entry.

–– Encourage walking connections throughout the sector plan area with transit stop locations.

• Buildable Area: Buildings may occupy the portion of the lot specified by these standards.

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

53

LANDOVER GATEWAY

A contiguous open area equal to at least ten percent of the total buildable area should be preserved on every lot.

Except overhanging eaves, awnings, blade signage, light fixtures, or balconies, no part of any building should be located outside the buildable area.

• Alleys: There is no required setback from alleys. On lots having no alley access, there should be a minimum setback of 25 feet from the rear lot line.

• Site Lot Setbacks: There are no required site lot setbacks.

Where a Beltway Focus District site has a common lot line with a single-family residential property, there should be a 40-foot setback on the Beltway Focus District property.

• Garage and Parking: Curb cuts or driveways should be located at least 75 feet away from any block corner or another garage entry on the same block face. These requirements are not applicable along alleys. Off-street parking should be structured and should not be located along the street frontage.

Elements: • Fenestration: There should be no more than 20 continuous linear feet of blank wall on the BTL. • Fenestration–Ground Story: Fenestration on façades should comprise 40–90 percent of the façade.

• Fenestration—Upper Stories: Fenestration on the upper story façades should comprise 20–75 percent of the façade area per story.

No window may face or have direct views toward a common lot line within 30 feet unless that view is contained within the lot (e.g., by a privacy fence/garden wall) or the sill is at least six feet above its finished floor level.

• Building Projections: Balconies and stoops should not project closer than five feet to a common lot line.

No part of any building, except overhanging eaves, awnings, balconies, bay windows, and stoops, should encroach beyond the BTL. 54

Awnings that project over the sidewalk portion of the street space should maintain a clear height of at least ten feet.

Awnings may have supporting posts at their outer edge, provided that they have a minimum of eight feet clear width between the façade and the support posts or columns of the awnings, and provide for a continuous public access easement that is at least four feet wide running adjacent and parallel to awning columns/posts.

• Doors/Entries: At least one functioning entry door should be provided along each ground story façade at intervals not greater than 100 feet.

• Street Walls: A vehicle entry gate no wider than 20 feet or a pedestrian entry gate no wider than five feet should be permitted within any required street wall.

Use: • Ground Story: The ground story should house commercial uses.

• Upper Stories: The upper stories should house residential or commercial uses.

• Neighborhood Compatibility: Where a Beltway Focus District site has a common lot line with a single-family residential property, a garden wall/street wall, four to six feet in height, should be constructed within one foot of the single-family residential property.

Where a Beltway Focus District site is located within 50 feet of an existing single-family residential zoning district, the maximum eave or parapet height for that edge of the site should be 32 feet. This requirement should supersede the minimum story height requirement.

Strategy 2: General Center Design District Create a mixed-use, pedestrian-oriented district focused on a main street that serves as the retail-commercial heart of the district. This district should serve as the primary retail main street core organized around a walkable, economically vital main street that forms a central spine for the Landover Gateway. Attractive and comfortable streetscapes with wide sidewalks, distinctive street furniture, street trees, and other amenities make this district a pleasant, comfortable, and Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

LANDOVER GATEWAY

engaging place to stroll. Upper floors of the main street buildings include both residential and commercial uses to create a dynamic urban residential and commercial district.

• Range of Land Use Mix: –– Office/Educational/Cultural: 25–40 percent –– Retail: 20–35 percent –– Residential: 35–55 percent • Building Height Ranges: 4–10 stories, up to 12 stories along major east–west and north–south streets.

Design Principles • Design buildings that provide a transition from the higher density Beltway Focus District and range from 4–12 stories tall.

• Design buildings to form a consistent street wall along the BLT with all building entrances leading directly to the sidewalk.

• Include wide sidewalks and distinctive, visually appealing streetscape elements.

• Provide outdoor dining areas along the main street.

• Surround main street buildings with mixed-use office/ educational/cultural and residential uses.

• Extend the main street environment onto Brightseat Road by encouraging mixed-use development with ground floor retail uses on both sides of Brightseat Road.

• Enliven transit station areas and bus stops with development that is transit oriented and pedestrian accessible.

–– Hide from public view the service and garbage elements of buildings in parking structures or alleyways.

• Ensure that new development is architecturally distinctive.

–– Encourage distinctive iconic architecture.

–– Encourage the use of high-quality, sustainable building materials.

–– Provide architectural variation.

• Use street grid patterns to create compact blocks of development.

–– Develop a pedestrian-oriented street grid with regularly-sized, oriented blocks with a range of 250–400 feet to encourage alternative modes of transportation.

–– Prohibit culs-de-sac.

• Create a pedestrian-oriented environment that encourages walking and biking rather than driving.

–– Design complete streets to support bicyclists, pedestrians, and automobiles. ºº Line all streets with sidewalks.

–– All sidewalks on main streets should be a minimum of 15 feet wide. ºº Provide a minimum of 18-foot-wide sidewalks to accommodate outdoor dining on main commercial streets. ºº Line alleys with a maximum of six-foot-wide sidewalks.

• Ensure a continuous retail edge in the ground floors along a main street with office, educational, cultural, and residential uses located on the upper floors.

–– Design at least one main street to support fixed guideway transit.

• Ensure buildings are not set back to provide a continuous street wall for pedestrians

ºº Provide the necessary right-of-way for transit and transit stops.

–– Prohibit drive-through commercial services.

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

–– Provide direct access to all buildings from the public sidewalk.

55

LANDOVER GATEWAY

–– Promote on-street, parallel parking to decrease vehicle speed and increase pedestrian safety.

• Feature extensive vertical mixing of uses to include ground-level retail and upper-level office/educational/ cultural or residential uses.

• Build structured parking that does not intrude on or break up the consistent street wall.

–– Screen above-grade parking structures with primary buildings and architectural screen walls.

–– Encourage on-street parallel parking on all streets except alleys.

–– Encourage shared parking services where appropriate.

–– Charge a parking fee.

–– Create an effective wayfinding system to help visitors safely navigate from parking to their destination.

–– Discourage surface parking.

–– Ensure all hardscape plaza space has pervious paving, and utilize sustainable stormwater management principles.

–– Line open space with sidewalks.

–– Allow retail uses to engage open space where appropriate.

• Create accessible public transit stations.

–– Encourage walking connections throughout the sector plan area with transit stop locations.

–– Encourage retail space near transit stations to be neighborhood- and transit-serving, such as sidewalk cafes, newsstands, dry cleaners, etc.

Building Envelope Guidelines Height: • Building Height: The height of the building is measured in stories.

• Incorporate sustainable building technologies, building management, and construction techniques to promote low-energy use, minimize construction waste, minimize water usage, and utilize advanced stormwater management.

Each principal building should be at least four stories but no greater than 10 stories in height. Buildings may rise up to 12 stories, framing the public open space.

–– Promote innovative water management systems for indoor water usage.

The minimum floor-to-floor story height should be ten feet.

–– Incorporate new stormwater management technologies, such as collection systems, rain gardens, green roofs, and graywater reuse.

• Parking Structure Height: Where a parking structure is within 40 feet of any principal building (built after 2008), that portion of the structure should not exceed the building’s ridge or parapet height.

–– Investigate site opportunities for geothermal systems.

–– Encourage the use of district power generation for larger tenants or buildings.

• Develop well-placed open space throughout the district to serve for formal and informal gatherings.

–– Allocate open space within approximately a fiveminute walk from all points in the district.

56

An attic story should not count against the story height.

• Ground Story Height: The average finished floor elevation for residential units should be no less than three feet and no more than seven feet above the exterior sidewalk elevation at the BTL. The first story should be a minimum floor-to-floor height of 12 feet as measured from the sidewalk.

• Mezzanines: Mezzanines having a floor area greater than one-third of the floor area of the story in which situated should count as full stories.

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

LANDOVER GATEWAY

• Street Wall Height: A street wall not less than four feet or greater than 18 feet in height should be constructed along any BTL frontage that is not otherwise occupied by a building on the lot.

Siting: • Street Façade: On each lot, the building façade should be built to the BTL for at least 80 percent of the BTL length.

The building façade should be built along the BTL to within 30 feet of a block corner. The ground floor façade, within seven feet of the block corner, may be chamfered to form a corner entry.

• Buildable Area: Building may occupy the portion of the lot specified by these standards.

• Fenestration—Upper Stories: Fenestration on the upper story façades should comprise 20–75 percent of the façade area per story.

No window should face or have direct views toward a common lot line within 30 feet unless that view is contained within the lot (e.g., by a privacy fence/garden wall) or the sill is at least six feet above its finished floor level.

• Building Projections: Balconies and stoops should not project closer than five feet to a common lot line.

No part of any building, except overhanging eaves, awnings, balconies, bay windows, stoops, and shop fronts, should encroach beyond the BTL.

A contiguous open area equal to at least ten percent of the total buildable area should be preserved on every lot.

Awnings should project a minimum of six feet and a maximum of within one foot of the back of curb (where there are no street trees) or one foot into the tree lawn (where there are street trees).

Except overhanging eaves, awnings, blade signage, light fixtures, or balconies, no part of any building should be located outside the buildable area.

Awnings that project over the sidewalk portion of the street space should maintain a clear height of at least ten feet.

• Alleys: There is no required setback from alleys. On lots having no alley access, there should be a minimum setback of 25 feet from the rear lot line.

Awnings may have supporting posts at their outer edge provided that they have a minimum of eight feet clear width between the façade and the support posts or columns of the awnings and provide for a continuous public access easement that is at least four feet wide running adjacent and parallel to awning columns/posts.

• Site Lot Setbacks: There are no required site lot setbacks.

Where a General Center District site has a common lot line with a single-family residential property, there should be a 40-foot setback.

• Garage and Parking: Curb cuts or driveways should be located at least 75 feet away from any block corner or another garage entry on the same block face. These requirements are not applicable along alleys. Off-street parking should be structured and should not be located along the street frontage.

Elements: • Fenestration: There should be no more than 20 continuous linear feet of lank length of wall on the BTL. • Fenestration–Ground Story: Fenestration on façades should comprise 40–90 percent of the façade.

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

• Doors/Entries: At least one functioning entry door should be provided along each ground story façade at intervals not greater than 100 feet.

• Street Walls: A vehicle entry gate no wider than 20 feet or a pedestrian entry gate no wider than five feet should be permitted within any required street wall.

Use: • Ground Story: The ground story should house commercial uses. See height specifications above for specific requirements unique to each use.

• Upper Stories: The upper stories should house residential or commercial uses.

57

LANDOVER GATEWAY

Additional habitable space is permitted within the roof where the roof is configured as an attic story.

• Neighborhood Compatibility: Where a General Center District site has a common lot line with a single-family residential property, there should be a 40-foot setback.

• Include wide sidewalks and distinctive, visually appealing streetscape elements.

Where a General Center District site abuts a singlefamily residential property, a garden wall/street wall, four to six feet in height, should be constructed within one foot of the single-family residential property.

• Ensure buildings are not set back to provide a continuous street wall for pedestrians.

Where a General Center District site is located within 50 feet of an existing single-family residential zoning district, the maximum eave or parapet height for that edge of the site should be 32 feet.

–– Hide from public view the service and garbage elements of buildings in parking structures or alleyways.

Strategy 3: General Edge Design District Develop a medium- to high- density urban, largely residential neighborhood. This neighborhood is defined by a variety of streetscape types ranging from commercial streetscapes, along the shared edges of the Beltway Focus District and the General Edge District, to more intimate internal streets. This district includes some retail and provides opportunities to live and work in an urban environment.

• Range of Land Use Mix: –– Office/Educational/Cultural: 2–5 percent –– Retail: 7–10 percent –– Residential: 80–90 percent • Building Height Ranges: 4–8 stories

Design Principles • Buildings should range from four–eight stories tall.

• Allow the flexibility to include either residential use or neighborhood-oriented commercial use on ground floors within the higher density residential areas, as market conditions permit.

• Encourage development that decreases in height as it moves from the shared border of the General Edge and Beltway Focus Districts.

58

• Design buildings to form a consistent street wall along the BTL with all building entrances leading directly to the sidewalk.

–– Prohibit drive-through commercial services.

• Ensure that new development is architecturally distinctive.

–– Encourage distinctive iconic architecture.

–– Encourage the use of high-quality, sustainable building materials.

–– Provide architectural variation.

• Use street grid pattern to create compact blocks of development.

–– Develop a pedestrian-oriented street grid with regularly-sized, oriented blocks with a range of 250–400 feet to encourage alternative modes of transportation.

–– Prohibit culs-de-sac.

• Create a pedestrian-oriented environment that encourages walking and biking rather than driving.

–– Design complete streets to support bicyclists, pedestrians, and automobiles. ºº Sidewalks should line all streets.

–– Design all sidewalks to be a minimum of ten feet wide. ºº Provide a minimum of 18-foot-wide sidewalks to accommodate outdoor dining on main commercial streets.

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

LANDOVER GATEWAY

ºº Line alleys with a maximum of 6-foot-wide sidewalks.

–– Provide the necessary right-of-way for transit and transit stops.

–– Provide direct access to all buildings from the public sidewalk.

–– Promote on-street parallel parking to decrease vehicle speed and increase pedestrian safety.

–– Allow retail uses to engage open space where appropriate.

• Create accessible public transit stations.

–– Encourage walking connections throughout the sector plan area with transit stop locations.

–– Encourage retail space near transit stations to be neighborhood and transit serving, such as sidewalk cafes, newsstands, dry cleaners, etc.

• Feature vertical mixing of uses to include ground-level retail and upper level office/educational/cultural or residential uses.

Building Envelope Guidelines

• Build structured parking that does not intrude on or disrupt the consistent street wall.

• Building Height: The height of the building is measured in stories.

–– Screen above-grade parking structures with primary buildings and architectural screen walls.

Each principal building should be at least four stories but no greater than eight stories in height.

–– Include on-street parallel parking on all streets except alleys.

An attic story should not be against the maximum story height.

–– Encourage shared parking services where appropriate.

The minimum floor-to-floor story height should be ten feet.

–– Charge a parking fee.

–– Create an effective wayfinding system to help visitors safely navigate from parking to their destination.

–– Discourage surface parking.

• Encourage sustainable building technologies, building management, and construction techniques to promote low energy use, minimize construction waste, minimize water usage, and utilize advanced stormwater management.

• Develop well-placed open space throughout the district to serve for formal and informal gatherings.

–– Allocate open space to be within approximately a five-minute walk from all points in the district.

–– Ensure all hardscape plaza space has pervious paving, and utilize sustainable stormwater management principles.

–– Line open space with sidewalks.

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

Height:

• Parking Structure Height: Where a parking structure is within 40 feet of any principal building (built after 2008), that portion of the structure should not exceed the building’s eave or parapet height.

• Mezzanines: Mezzanines having a floor area greater than one-third of the floor area of the story in which situated should count as full stories.

• Street Wall Height: A street wall not less than five feet in height or greater than 18 feet in height should be constructed along any BTL frontage that is not otherwise occupied by a building on the lot.

Siting: • Street Façade: On each lot the building façade should be built to the BTL for at least 75 percent of the BTL length.

The building façade should be built along the BTL to within 30 feet of a block corner. The ground floor façade, 59

LANDOVER GATEWAY

within seven feet of the block corner, may be chamfered to form a corner entry.

• Buildable Area: Building may occupy the portion of the lot specified by these standards.

A contiguous open area equal to at least 15 percent of the total buildable area should be preserved on every lot.

Except overhanging eaves, awnings, blade signage, light fixtures, or balconies, no part of any building should be located outside the buildable area.

• Alleys: There is no required setback from alleys. On lots having no alley access, there should be a minimum setback of 25 feet from the rear lot line.

• Site Lot Setbacks: There are no required site lot setbacks.

Where a General Edge District site has a common lot line with a single-family residential property, there should be a 40-foot setback.

• Garage and Parking: Curb cuts or driveways should be located at least 75 feet away from any block corner or another garage entry on the same block face. These requirements are not applicable along alleys. Off-street parking should be structured and should not be located along the street frontage.

Elements: • Fenestration: There should be no more than 20 continuous linear feet of blank length of wall on the BTL. • Fenestration Ground Story–Commercial Uses: Fenestration on façades should comprise between 40–90 percent of the façade.

• Fenestration Ground Story–Residential Uses: Fenestration on façades should comprise between 30–75 percent of the façade.

• Fenestration: Upper Stories: Fenestration on the upper story façades should comprise between 20–75 percent of the façade area per story.

No window should face or have direct views toward a common lot line within 30 feet unless that view is 60

contained within the lot (e.g., by a privacy fence/garden wall) or the sill is at least six feet above its finished floor level.

• Building Projections: Balconies and stoops should not project closer than five feet to a common lot line.

No part of any building, except overhanging eaves, awnings, balconies, bay windows, stoops, and shop fronts should encroach beyond the BTL. Awnings should project a minimum of six feet and a maximum of within one foot of the back of curb (where there are no street trees) or one foot into the tree lawn (where there are street trees).

Awnings that project over the sidewalk portion of the street space should maintain a clear height of at least ten feet.

Awnings may have supporting posts at their outer edge provided that they have a minimum of eight feet clear width between the façade and the support posts or columns of the awnings and provide for a continuous public access easement that is at least four feet wide running adjacent and parallel to awning columns/posts.

• Doors/Entries: At least one functioning entry door should be provided along each ground story façade at intervals not greater than 100 feet.

• Street Walls: A vehicle entry gate no wider than 20 feet or a pedestrian entry gate no wider than 5 feet should be permitted within any required street wall.

Use: • Ground Story: The ground story should house commercial or residential uses.

• Upper Stories: The upper stories should house residential or commercial uses.

Additional habitable space is permitted within the roof where the roof is configured as an attic story.

• Neighborhood Compatibility: Where a General Edge District site has a common lot line with a single-family residential property, there should be a 40-foot setback.

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

LANDOVER GATEWAY

Where a General Edge District site abuts a single-family residential property, a garden wall/street wall, four to six feet in height, should be constructed within one foot of the single-family residential property.

• Ensure that new development is architecturally distinctive.

Where a General Edge District site is located within 50 feet of an existing single-family residential zoning district, the maximum eave or parapet height for that edge of the site should be 32 feet. This requirement should supersede the minimum story height requirement.

–– Encourage the use of high-quality, sustainable building materials.

Strategy 4: Local Frontage Design District This district is a medium-density residential district that serves as a transition from the higher density General Edge, General Center, and Beltway Focus Districts. This district provides a quieter place to live adjacent to the activity of the commercial core. It is defined by intimate, walkable streets and includes neighborhood parks.

• Range of Land Use Mix: –– Retail: 2–5 percent –– Residential: 95–98 percent • Building Height Ranges: 2–4 stories

Design Principles This is a medium-density residential neighborhood with mostly four-story buildings.

–– Encourage distinctive iconic architecture.

–– Provide architectural variation.

• Use street grid pattern to create compact blocks of development.

–– Develop a pedestrian-oriented street grid with regularly-sized, oriented blocks with a range of 250–400 feet to encourage alternative modes of transportation.

–– Prohibit culs-de-sac.

• Create a pedestrian-oriented environment that encourages walking and biking rather than driving.

–– Design complete streets to support bicyclists, pedestrians, and automobiles. ºº Line all streets with sidewalks at a minimum of five feet wide. ºº Line alleys with a maximum of six-foot-wide sidewalks.

–– Provide direct access to all buildings from the public sidewalk.

• Ensure that circulation through the district well connects residents to the mixed-use amenities of the General Edge, General Center, and Beltway Focus Districts.

–– Promote on-street parallel parking to decrease vehicle speed and increase pedestrian safety.

• Design buildings to form a consistent street wall with all building entrances leading directly to the sidewalk.

• Build structured parking that does not intrude on or break up the consistent street wall where appropriate.

• Ensure buildings are not set back to provide a continuous street wall for pedestrians.

–– Screen above-grade parking structures with primary buildings and architectural screen walls.

–– Prohibit drive-through commercial services –– Hide from public view the service and garbage elements of buildings in parking structures or alleyways.

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

–– Include on-street parallel parking on all streets except alleys.

–– Discourage surface parking.

61

LANDOVER GATEWAY

• Develop well-placed open space throughout the district to serve for formal and informal gatherings –– Allocate open space within approximately a fiveminute walk from all points in the district.

–– Ensure all hardscape plaza space has pervious paving, and utilize sustainable stormwater management principles.

–– Line open space with sidewalks.

–– Allow retail uses to engage open space where appropriate.

• Create accessible public transit stations.

–– Encourage walking connections throughout the sector plan area with transit stop locations.

Building Envelope Guidelines: Height: • Building Height: The height of the building is measured in stories.

Each principal building should be at least two stories or 25 feet to the eaves or the parapet but no greater than four stories in height.

An attic story should not be counted against the maximum story height.

The minimum floor-to-floor story height should be ten feet.

• Parking Structure Height: Where a parking structure is within 40 feet of any principal building (built after 2008), that portion of the structure should not exceed the building’s eave or parapet height.

• Street Wall Height: A street wall not less than four feet in height or greater than 18 feet in height should be constructed along any BTL frontage that is not otherwise occupied by a building on the lot.

Siting: • Street Façade: On each lot, the building façade should be built to the BTL for at least 70 percent of the BTL length. For buildings with front porches, the main façade should be set four feet behind the BTL. The building façade should be built along the BTL to within 20 feet of a block corner.

The building façade may include jogs to allow bay windows, shop fronts, and balconies.

• Buildable Area: Buildings may occupy the portion of the lot specified by these standards.

A contiguous open area equal to at least 20 percent of the total buildable area should be preserved on every lot.

Except overhanging eaves, awnings, blade signage, light fixtures, or balconies, no part of any building should be located outside the buildable area.

• Site Lot Setbacks: There are no required site lot setbacks.

• Garage and Parking: Curb cuts or driveways should be located at least 75 feet away from any block corner or another garage entry on the same block face. These requirements are not applicable along alleys. Off-street parking should be located at the rear of the lots and should be provided in garages.

• Alleys: There is no required setback from alleys. On lots having no alley access, there should be a minimum set back of 25 feet from the rear lot line.

Where a local frontage site has a common lot line with a single-family residential property, there should be a 40-foot setback.

Elements: • Fenestration: There should be no more than 20 continuous linear feet of blank wall on the BTL. Fenestration on all façades should comprise at least 25 percent but not more than 75 percent of the façade.

No window may face or have direct views toward a common lot line within 30 feet unless that view is

62

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

LANDOVER GATEWAY

contained within the lot (e.g., by a privacy fence/garden wall) or the sill is at least six feet above its finished floor level.

• Building Projections: Balconies and stoops should not project closer than five feet to a common lot line.

No part of any building, except overhanging eaves, awnings, balconies, bay windows, stoops, and shop fronts should encroach beyond the BTL .

• Doors/Entries: At least one functioning entry door should be provided along each ground story façade of each building at intervals not greater than 100 linear feet.

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

• Street Walls: A vehicle entry gate no wider than 18 feet or a pedestrian entry gate no wider than 5 feet should be permitted within any required street wall.

Use: • Ground Story: The ground story should house residential uses.

• Upper Stories: The upper stories should house residential uses.

Additional habitable space is permitted within the roof where the roof is configured as an attic story.

63

LANDOVER GATEWAY

64

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

LANDOVER GATEWAY

Chapter 4: Housing Vision The Landover Gateway Sector Plan area is envisioned to be a vibrant, mixed-use community that includes a variety of high-quality mixed-income housing.

Background Residential building permit data for 2000–2006 reflect a relatively consistent level of development activity in the Prince George’s County housing market.1 However, the activity has primarily been limited to single-family housing development. Almost 96 percent of all housing unit permits in the county were issued for single-family dwellings. The remaining four percent were issued for a total of less than 900 multifamily units in about 65 buildings. The data show that no permits for duplex, triplex, or quadruplet units were issued in the county since 2000. The Landover Gateway Sector Plan/SMA is positioned to reverse the trend through its implementation of the 2002 General Plan housing policies for the Developed Tier and Regional Center.

Prior to the current downturn, the housing market in the county as a whole, including the Landover Gateway vicinity, was strong overall. The median price of singlefamily homes in the county increased from $137,000 in 1999 to $347,000 by October 2006, representing a 153 percent increase over seven years or an average of almost 22 percent per year. There were even more dramatic increases in the sales and prices of condominiums and cooperatives.

During the same period, 1999 to 2006, the median price of condominiums increased by 191 percent, from $69,900 to $203,600. While sales of single-family homes peaked in 2004, sales of condominiums continued to increase into 2006, suggesting continuing strong demand. Compared with the county as a whole, however, the median sales price of houses sold within the immediate vicinity of the former Landover Mall site was lower; $305,000 for single-family homes and $200,000 for townhouses.

Overall, the median sale price of single-family homes in the communities east of the Landover Gateway Sector Plan area was approximately $160,000 higher than in the communities west and south. The difference in prices could be explained by the fact that, generally, the houses in communities, such as The Village of Collington, Bell Haven Estates, and Enterprise Forest, were relatively newer and larger than the houses in Kenmore, Glenarden Woods, and Palmer Park. The median sale prices of townhouses and condominiums reflected a similar difference.

Prior to the current housing market slowdown beginning in 2006, sale prices and overall market performance indicated strong demand for housing in Prince George’s County.

The rapid pace sale of townhouses in the Hamlin Park townhouse project (completed in December 2006, and located a few blocks from the former Landover Mall site) illustrated the potential for the housing market in the area.

This project includes 52 townhouses that sold out within three months of opening, at an average of $308,540, which is more than $100,000 above the $200,000 median sales price of townhouses within the sector plan area.

The 2002 Prince George’s County Approved General Plan provides the basis for the housing policies proposed in this sector plan. The 2002 General Plan reiterates the county’s housing goal of creating an adequate supply of mixedincome housing, including elderly housing, throughout the county. To realize this goal, the 2002 General Plan recommends two key policies: • Provide opportunities for high-density housing within centers at selected locations along corridors and in mixed-use areas.

1 Bay Area Economics, Market Analysis for the Landover Gateway Sector Plan Area, Prince George’s County, Maryland, February, 2007, Page A-10.

• Ensure high-quality housing for all price ranges while encouraging development of a variety of highvalue housing. Specific goals include: encouraging appropriate infill; encouraging more intense, highquality housing and economic development; promoting transit-supporting, mixed-use, pedestrian-oriented neighborhoods; and ensuring compatibility with surrounding area.

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

65

LANDOVER GATEWAY

! ( 704

GLENARDEN BELLEHAVEN ESTATES

DODGE PARK GLENARDEN APTS.

! ( 202

MAPLE RIDGE

PALMER PARK

LANDSDOWNE VILLAGE

§ ¦ ¨ 95

Legend Sector Plan Boundary Singlefamily Housing Multifamily Housing

Map 14: Existing Communities Within One Mile of Sector Plan Area

66

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

LANDOVER GATEWAY

Existing Housing Stock The housing analysis area covers the sector plan area, including neighboring communities, (see Map 14: Existing Communities Within One Mile of Sector Plan Area on page 66), such as the City of Glenarden, Palmer Park, Lansdowne Village, Dodge Park, and Bellehaven Estates.

With the exception of the Glenarden and Maple Ridge apartments, the majority of the existing housing is located outside of the sector plan area. The housing stock in this

area is proportionally divided into three types: singlefamily detached, townhouses, and apartments. Many of the single-family detached houses were built in the early twentieth century. In addition, there are pockets of new infill developments throughout the area, such as the Hamlin Park townhouse community.

Maple Ridge apartments

Single-family detached housing

Glenarden apartments

Hamlin Park townhouses

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

67

LANDOVER GATEWAY

Active Adult Housing

Guidelines

The findings of two recent studies show a growing future demand for age-qualified housing within the market area surrounding Landover Gateway. The market analysis conducted by Bay Area Economics, to support this sector plan, shows that within the broader area extending between US 50 and Pennsylvania Avenue (MD 4), the population that is 55 years and older is projected to increase by 2,400 per year to 12,000 by the year 2011.2 In addition, the recent Prince George’s County Senior Living Market Study3 estimates that, among age and home-qualified households countywide, demand for housing in active adult (agequalified) communities is projected to increase by 1,455 households per year beginning in 2009. Approximately 98 percent of this demand is projected to occur in the Developed and Developing Tiers.

• Ensure that new developments are compatible with surrounding neighborhoods.

The Landover Gateway Sector Plan provides an excellent opportunity to capture the anticipated growth in demand for active adult housing. Stakeholders who participated in charrettes and community workshops that were organized in connection with this sector plan voiced support for active adult housing in the sector plan area. They cited the area’s location and accessibility to other activity centers, such as existing Metro stations at New Carrollton, Landover, Morgan Boulevard, and Largo Town Center. Current senior housing development trends and best practices will guide the creation and design of age-qualified housing that offers a full range of high-quality housing products with the amenities, facilities, and services desired by this growing market niche.

• Market and attract high-quality residential development to the sector plan area.

Housing Goal and Guidelines Goal Implement policies from the 2002 General Plan and the sector plan recommendations for mixed-income housing.

2 Bay Area Economics: Market Analysis for the Landover Gateway Sector Plan Area, cited in footnote 1.

3 M-NCPPC: Report of the Senior Living Market Study, Prince George’s County, Maryland (prepared by ProMatura), 2005.

68

• Provide a variety of housing types for a range of incomes, including workforce housing and active adult housing.

• Promote mixed-use development in order to establish a healthy community where housing, employment, retail, and civic uses are located close to each other.

• Reduce any high concentration of distressed/desolate housing in and outside the sector plan area.

• Design and build a safe pedestrian network to connect existing neighborhoods, schools, and other public facilities, such as community centers and libraries.

• Encourage residential builders to use brick, stone, cast stone or precast concrete as primary building materials throughout the sector plan area.

Housing Policies and Strategies Policy 1: Work with developers to make sure they build a variety of housing types in and around the core area in order to enhance the vitality and character of the community and establish a market base for local businesses. The proposed neighborhoods should become the cornerstone of Landover Gateway as a community.

Strategies • Vary the residential densities and building types allowed by the plan and its development guidelines.

• Provide incentives to private developers to include workforce and active adult housing within the sector plan area.

• Seek opportunities for the Department of Housing and Community Development to invest in new housing by providing financial incentives for the development Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

LANDOVER GATEWAY

of mixed-income housing, inclusive of workforce, and starter home ownership, and rental units.

• Provide financial incentives to support first-time homeowners.

• Partner with nonprofit and for-profit housing developers to formulate and implement innovative strategies to expand workforce housing opportunities.

• Develop a retention strategy to work with residents who might be displaced by future development to relocate to housing units in the plan area and vicinity.

• Encourage development of preretirement and retirement housing suited to the needs of active adults, including units with low maintenance and adaptable design to accommodate future mobility limits and other disabilities.

• Provide foreclosure prevention counseling and assistance.

• Develop and implement funding strategies for singlefamily rehabilitation programs that attract moderateincome homeowners.

• Promote the development of communities with highquality design and amenities.

Policy 2: Identify and implement policies and mechanisms that give existing residents the option of remaining in Landover Gateway as the area redevelops.

Strategies • Provide homeownership and financial training and counseling, both before and after the purchase, for current area renters wishing to purchase homes.

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

69

LANDOVER GATEWAY

70

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

LANDOVER GATEWAY

Chapter 5: Infrastructure Elements Environmental Infrastructure Vision The vision of the future environmental infrastructure in the sector plan area is an interconnected system of public and private lands that contains locally significant areas of woodlands, wetlands, wildlife habitat, and other sensitive areas that are connected to compact urban communities.

It incorporates design concepts that limit paved surfaces, reduce vehicle trips, and increase urban tree canopy.

Green Infrastructure The 2005 Approved Countywide Green Infrastructure Plan was developed to protect, enhance, and/or restore important environmental features of countywide significance. For this sector plan, the countywide network was not modified to include any additional areas of local significance because these areas were already included in the countywide network.

The designated Green Infrastructure network for this sector plan is shown on Map 15: Local Green Infrastructure on page 73, Map 16: Natural Features on page 74, and Map 17: Environmental Considerations on page 75.

The designated green infrastructure network is divided into three environmental assessment categories: regulated areas, evaluation areas, and network gaps. Regulated areas contain environmentally sensitive features, such as streams, wetlands, buffers, the 100-year floodplain and steep slopes that are currently regulated (i.e., protected) during the land development process. Evaluation areas contain environmentally sensitive features, such as unique wildlife habitats that are not currently regulated (i.e., protected) during the development review process. Network gaps comprise areas that are critical to the connection of regulated and evaluation areas and are targeted for restoration in order to support the overall function and connectivity of the green infrastructure network. Networks need to be connected to provide the best possible environment for the preservation of all aspects of an ecosystem: vegetation, wildlife habitat, and water quality. In addition, during the development of Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

the green infrastructure network, special conservation areas of countywide significance were designated and defined.

It should be noted that the environmental resources shown on all the maps are conceptual in nature and have not been validated in the field. They are based on the best available mapping information. Before detailed plans are developed for any property, an approved natural resource inventory (NRI) is required.

The Built Environment Portions of the sector plan are proposed for redevelopment and some will be developed for the first time. It is important to the environment as a whole, not just the environment of the sector plan area, that careful consideration is given to the types of buildings that are built and the types and sources of materials chosen. Much has been written about the health concerns of both old and new buildings. The United States Building Council has set parameters for “green buildings” and espouses that all buildings, whether new or renovated, can contain green building elements from choosing local sources of materials to using paints and carpets, which give off fewer chemicals that can cause human health problems.

Recycling of building materials should also be considered for any development project.

Urban Tree Canopy The term “urban forest” includes trees that grow individually, in small groups or in forested conditions, located on public or private lands in cities and towns. Urban tree canopy provides many benefits to communities; it reduces the overall temperature of built spaces, it provides oxygen, it removes pollutants from the air and, when strategically planted or preserved, improves water quality by absorbing pollutants from stormwater runoff. Trees also provide beauty and a sense of proportion to the built environment.

The sector plan area lies within the Developed Tier as designated in the 2002 General Plan. The area contains a high amount of impervious surfaces, such as roads, driveways, buildings, parking lots, and rooftops, and contains minimal 71

LANDOVER GATEWAY

individual tree and forest cover. The existing tree and forest cover in the sector plan area is approximately 27 percent (excluding the vegetation to be cleared for Woodmore Town Centre). The goal in the Developed Tier is 26 percent urban and forest cover as stated in the 2002 General Plan. The small amount of tree canopy coverage in this area lends to degraded environmental conditions of the existing natural resources. The quality of life would be significantly improved by planting and preserving trees as development occurs. A community tree planting project should also be encouraged to increase the amount of tree canopy over time.

Water Quality The sector plan area falls primarily within the Lower Beaverdam watershed and the larger Anacostia River basin, which drains to the Potomac River and eventually to the Chesapeake Bay. A small area at the southeastern edge of the planning area falls within the Southwest Branch watershed, which is part of the larger Western Branch watershed that then drains to the Patuxent River and eventually to the Chesapeake Bay. The Lower Beaverdam watershed has a water quality rating of “very poor,”1 based on water quality sampling data. The Southwest Branch watershed has a water quality rating of “very poor,” based on the same sampling data. One of the challenges in this sector plan area is how to address the degraded water quality of existing streams while shaping the desired development pattern.

Cattail Branch has been identified as a primary corridor in the sector plan area due to its position in the landscape as a large stream system that ultimately drains to the Anacostia River. Cattail Branch flows north–south and meets the main stem of Lower Beaverdam Creek just west of the planning area. The main branch of Lower Beaverdam Creek has less than 20 percent forest cover, an amount not suitable for proper fish habitat due to increased temperatures associated with lack of shade cover from trees.2 As a primary corridor, preservation and restoration of Cattail Branch and its tributaries should be a priority in this planning area. Map 15: Local Green Infrastructure on page 73 shows Cattail Branch as the primary corridor within the context of the planning area and the identified locally significant green infrastructure elements.

During the land development process, existing natural resources are evaluated on a site-by-site basis to ensure protection to streams and water quality. For example, Woodmore Town Centre is a large development project within the sector plan area. The site contains a stream and associated environmental buffers, which are proposed to be preserved. The road crossing over the stream is designed as a bridge, which maintains the stream channel and the current water quality by preserving the natural vegetation and maintaining the stream in an open channel.

Impervious surfaces and the lack of stormwater management in the sector plan area have contributed to poor water quality in the receiving streams. In the study area, the percentage of impervious surfaces is currently approximately 20 percent, with a measurable increase expected with the construction of Woodmore Town Centre. At 10 percent impervious surfaces, the quality of the runoff without treatment is considered adequate. With impervious surface percentages reaching 20 percent, stormwater management methods need to be implemented to address both water quality and quantity effects on the receiving streams. Impervious surfaces must be managed—both in the amount of impervious surfaces allowed and in the methods of stormwater management— in order to improve on the existing water quality of the receiving streams.

Noise Noise is generally defined as any form of unwanted sound.

Noise is a composite of all background noises emanating from point and nonpoint sources and is transferred to a receptor or receiver. The amount of noise transmitted can vary considerably due to elevations, the existence of barriers, and project design. In general, the noise environment of the sector plan area is within the parameters set by the state of 65 dBA Ldn for residential outdoor activity areas and 45 dBA Ldn for indoor living areas in residential uses.

1 Scale includes “good, fair, poor, and very poor.” Prince George’s County has no streams rated “good.”

2 http://mapping.orr.noaa.gov/website/portal/AnacostiaRiver/

The major source of noise is the Capital Beltway (I-95/495), an eight to ten lane freeway that carries a high volume of traffic and is a major noise generator. The Beltway produces noise levels above 65 dBA Ldn, the state standard for residential uses. The 65 dBA Ldn noise contour extends approximately 1,000 feet from the centerline of the roadway, as determined using a noise model. The noise model does not account for noise reductions that may be achieved by changes in topography or intervening structures and

72

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

envsetting_landuse.html

LANDOVER GATEWAY

Map 15: Local Green Infrastructure Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

73

LANDOVER GATEWAY

TOWN OF GLENARDEN

RKWAY

GLENARDEN PA

OAD

LTWAY APITAL BE I-95 / 495 C

R TSEAT BRIGH RTS

EVA

LA

WOODMORE TOWNE CENTRE AT GLENARDEN

ET

STRE

LOWER BEAVERDAM CREEK WATERSHED

ND

WE

LO BAR D A RO

BALDHILL BRANCH WATERSHED

OV

ER

RO

AD

I-95 /

OAD

AD RO NS

AY

ELTW

AL B

SKI

LEGEND

APIT

RED

495 C

BRIGHTSEAT ROAD

IFF R

SHER

SOUTHWEST BRANCH WATERSHED

SECTOR PLAN BOUNDARY WATERSHED BOUNDARY 10 FOOT CONTOURS VEGETATION KNOWN STREAMS KNOWN WETLANDS

BISH

0'

400'

800'

1600'

IVE

S DR

BLE

EE OP P

3200'

Map I: Natural Features

Map 16: Natural Features 74

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

LANDOVER GATEWAY

Map 17: Environmental Considerations Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

75

LANDOVER GATEWAY

Map 18: Environmental Infrastructure 76

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

LANDOVER GATEWAY

TOWN OF GLENARDEN

RKWAY

GLENARDEN PA

OAD

LTWAY APITAL BE I-95 / 495 C

R TSEAT BRIGH RTS

EVA

LA

WOODMORE TOWNE CENTRE AT GLENARDEN

ET

STRE

LOWER BEAVERDAM CREEK WATERSHED

ND

WE

LO BAR D A RO

BALDHILL BRANCH WATERSHED

OV

ER

RO

AD

I-95 /

OAD

AD RO NS

AY

ELTW

AL B

SKI

LEGEND

APIT

RED

495 C

BRIGHTSEAT ROAD

IFF R

SHER

SOUTHWEST BRANCH WATERSHED

SECTOR PLAN BOUNDARY WATERSHED BOUNDARY 10 FOOT CONTOURS VEGETATION KNOWN STREAMS KNOWN WETLANDS

BISH

0'

400'

800'

1600'

IVE

S DR

BLE

EE OP P

3200'

Map I: Natural Features

Map 16: Natural Features 74

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

LANDOVER GATEWAY

TOWN OF GLENARDEN

RKWAY

GLENARDEN PA

TSEAT

APITAL BE I-95 / 495 C

BRIGH RO AD

LTWAY

RTS

EVA

LA

ND

WE

LO BAR D A O R

WOODMORE TOWNE CENTRE AT GLENARDEN

ET

STRE

OV

ER

RO

AD

I-95 /

OAD AD RO NS SKI

AY

ELTW

AL B

APIT

RED

LEGEND

495 C

BRIGHTSEAT ROAD

IFF R

SHER

SECTOR PLAN BOUNDARY NOISE BARRIER 10 FOOT CONTOURS KNOWN STREAM FEMA FLOODPLAIN M-NCPPC PARK

OP P

BISH

0'

400'

800'

IVE

S DR

LE EEB

1600'

STEEP SLOPES 25% SLOPE AND GREATER

3200'

Map 17: Environmental Considerations Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

75

D JEFF RO A

LANDOVER GATEWAY

TOWN OF GLENARDEN

RKWAY

GLENARDEN PA

ROAD

LTWAY APITAL BE I-95 / 495 C

TSEAT BRIGH

WOODMORE TOWNE CENTRE AT GLENARDEN

EVAR

LA

ND

TS STRE ET

OV

ER

RO

AD

WE

LO BAR D A RO

LEGEND SECTOR PLAN BOUNDARY I-95 /

AD RO NS

AY

ELTW

AL B

SKI

M-NCPPC PARKS

APIT

RED

NATURAL RESOURCES

495 C

IF

SHER

BRIGHTSEAT ROAD

D F ROA

OPEN SPACE LINKS

GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE REGULATED AREA

BISH

0'

400'

800'

1600'

IVE

S DR

BLE

EE OP P

3200'

Map 18: Environmental Infrastructure 76

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

LANDOVER GATEWAY

vegetation, so the actual levels of noise may vary from site to site. As development proposals are evaluated for the impacts of noise from the Beltway, existing topography may provide sufficient noise mitigation or noise walls may need to be constructed by the applicants.

Light Pollution Light pollution is defined as light that causes a glow in the night sky from artificial sources, such as street lights, lights from commercial uses, and light from residential sources. Light pollution also includes “light spill-over” when one property is more brightly lit than an adjacent one. According to the widely accepted Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design guidelines, which were written to address how built environments can be built to reduce crime, light levels should be kept as constant as possible from one property to the next in order to reduce the amount of time that the human eye needs to adjust to the different light levels. This lighting scheme has the ability to reduce crime by providing an even level of light across various properties. Reducing light pollution also serves to reduce overall energy costs by directing the correct light levels in the right places and reducing the need for higher wattage fixtures. The main sources of light pollution in the sector plan are the existing commercial uses, in particular the auto-related uses. As new and redevelopment proposals are evaluated, light levels should be considered, and overall lighting should be minimized and properly directed.

Air Pollution At the sector plan level of planning, it is difficult to address the regional problem of air pollution. The Washington metropolitan area is considered a “nonattainment area” by the Environmental Protection Agency for air quality, mainly due to levels of ozone. One of the sources of ozone is the mixing of vehicle exhaust in the atmosphere and the heating effect of the earth. If the overall number of vehicle trips can be reduced, the amount of ozone formed can be reduced, therefore, reducing overall air pollution.

9.8 percent), and asthma is generally higher in urban and African-American communities.3 There are several small steps that could be taken to improve air quality in the sector plan: reduce the overall number of vehicle miles traveled, provide a network of linkages for alternative forms of transportation, and provide more opportunities for ride sharing. When combined with increases in tree canopy, localized air quality could be improved.

Proposed Environmental Infrastructure Building on the natural assets of the sector plan, Map 18: Environmental Infrastructure on page 76 shows the proposed environmental infrastructure. It includes an emphasis on the connection of open spaces, parks, and regulated areas.

As green areas are planned throughout the sector plan area, attention should be paid to the many opportunities to create these connections. Landscape buffers, street trees, and overall landscaping of the area contribute to this network.

Goals • Preserve, enhance, where appropriate, and restore environmentally sensitive features.

• Implement the sector plan’s desired development pattern, while protecting environmentally sensitive features.

• Restore and enhance water quality in areas that have been degraded, and preserve water quality in areas not degraded.

• Reduce energy consumption, light pollution, air pollution, and noise impacts.

• Utilize environmentally sensitive design solutions for development and redevelopment.

Asthma, the respiratory ailment most related to air pollution, has been increasing over the last few decades. According to the Centers for Disease Control, Maryland has one of the highest percentages of teenage asthma in the U.S. (over 3 Center for Disease Control statistics regarding asthma, 2006 Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

77

LANDOVER GATEWAY

Policy 1: Protect, preserve, and enhance the identified local green infrastructure network within the Landover Gateway planning area.

Strategies •

P rotect the planning area’s primary corridor of Cattail Branch during the review of land development proposals to ensure the highest level of environmental quality and ecological health possible and by limiting negative environmental impacts.

• Preserve, restore, and enhance regulated areas throughout the development review process by requiring stream restoration and the planting of riparian stream buffers.

78

• Through the development review process, carefully evaluate properties that drain into the Anacostia River for use of environmentally sensitive site design techniques, with an emphasis on making connections to the local green infrastructure network elements.

• Consider the use of bridges and other techniques that minimize impacts to features within the network.

• Target public land acquisition programs to acquire and/ or protect land within the designated green infrastructure network as appropriate in order to preserve, enhance, or restore essential features.

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

LANDOVER GATEWAY

Policy 2: Restore and enhance water quality in areas that have been degraded and preserve water quality in areas not degraded.

Policy 4: Implement environmentally sensitive design building techniques and reduce overall energy consumption.

Strategies • Identify opportunities for ecologically significant stream and water quality restoration projects within and adjacent to the Cattail Branch primary corridor.

• Target required mitigation from site development projects in the area to the Cattail Branch watershed, where necessary, to include expanded vegetative buffers and stabilization of the main stem or tributaries.

• Utilize existing or require new stream corridor assessments as part of the development review process and include them with the submission of a NRI as development is proposed for each site. Mitigate areas identified in the assessments during the land development process.

Policy 3: Require the use of environmentally sensitive stormwater management techniques in order to control and/or reduce volumes of urban stormwater runoff and improve water quality.

• Require environmentally sensitive design stormwater techniques, such as rain gardens, bioretention and infiltration areas, innovative stormwater outfalls, underground stormwater management, green streets, cisterns, rain barrels, grass swales, and stream stabilization to the fullest extent possible.

• Require the use of shared environmentally sensitive stormwater management facilities, where appropriate.

• Require street tree plantings to be recessed so that they are able to intercept surface stormwater flow from surrounding impervious areas.

• Establish maximum impervious surface percentages in urbanized areas during the evaluation of development proposals.

Strategies •

Encourage

the use of green building techniques as designated by the U.S. Green Building Council.

New building designs should incorporate the latest environmental technologies in project buildings and site designs. As redevelopment occurs, the existing buildings should be reused and redesigned to incorporate energy and building material efficiencies.

•

Require the use of at least three green building techniques

on each new and redevelopment project, including but not limited to: –– Creation of gray water reuse system.

–– The use of low volatile organic compound materials.

–– Recycled and/or sustainable building materials as designated by the U.S. Green Building Council.

–– Green roofs.

–– Renewable/alternative energy sources, such as wind, solar, and geothermal.

• Support the development of a countywide green building program that provides incentives for reducing the overall impacts of buildings on the environment and to provide cleaner, healthier buildings to support the health and wellness of county residents and workers.

• Reduce energy consumption through the use of more effective and energy efficient indoor and outdoor lighting and air movement systems.

Policy 5: Preserve and enhance the existing urban tree canopy.

Strategies

• Design parking areas as either shared or as structured lots. The use of parking garages and/or underground parking shall be priorities.

• Require a minimum of 10 percent tree canopy coverage on all development projects and encourage the preservation of existing specimen trees (trees 30 inches or greater in diameter at breast height).

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

79

LANDOVER GATEWAY

• Encourage the use of conservation landscaping techniques that reduce water consumption and the need for fertilizers or chemical applications.

Policy 8: Reduce adverse noise impacts to meet State of Maryland noise standards.

• Encourage the development of community-based tree planting programs and, where possible, direct fee-in-lieu monies collected for conformance with the Woodland Conservation Ordinance to those programs.

• Evaluate development and redevelopment proposals using Phase I noise studies and noise models.

• Increase the percentage of urban tree canopy by planting trees and other vegetation, especially along roadways, in median strips, and within residential communities.

• Plant trees in strategic locations to cool buildings and reduce overall energy consumption.

Policy 6: Reduce light pollution into residential communities and environmentally sensitive areas.

Strategies • Encourage the use of lighting techniques to provide safety at athletic fields, shopping centers, gas stations, and vehicle sales establishments.

• Require the use of full cut-off optic light fixtures.

• Require a detailed lighting plan to be submitted for all new projects.

Policy 7: Reduce air pollution to support community health and wellness and champion nonmotorized alternatives by placing a high priority on transit-oriented development and transportation demand management projects and programs.

Strategies • Design development and redevelopment projects to minimize the need for motor vehicle trips and to prevent conditions that may create local air pollution nuisances.

• Provide an improved, continuous network of sidewalks and bikeways to facilitate pedestrian use and access.

Strategies

• Provide for adequate setbacks for projects located adjacent to existing and proposed noise generators and roadways of arterial classification or greater.

• Provide noise attenuation measures when noise issues are identified.

• Provide sound barriers between incompatible uses.

• Restrict hours of operation for uses that produce excessive noise.

Transportation Systems Vision The transportation infrastructure is a comprehensive multimodal network that is safe, efficient, accessible, convenient, and fully accommodates mass transit, automobiles, pedestrians, and bicyclists. This system of roads, sidewalks, trails, and mass transit is integrated with the recommended land use plan to encourage a user-friendly system that would link the Landover Gateway sector plan area with other key destinations in the region. It plays an important role in attracting quality development that is envisioned in the sector plan and the 2002 General Plan policies for regional centers.

Background The sector plan area is within close proximity to four existing Metrorail stations: Landover (Orange Line), New Carrollton (Orange Line), Largo Town Center (Blue Line), and Morgan Boulevard (Blue Line). The linear distance between the sector plan area and these Metro stations ranges from 1.3 miles to 2.2 miles. None of these stations is within a 10-minute walking distance of the sector plan area.

• Provide park-and-ride lots along major roads for carpools, vanpools, and transit users.

The most recent master plans for the area are the 1993 Approved Master Plan and Sectional Map Amendment for Landover and Vicinity (Planning Area 72), the 1990 Approved

80

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

LANDOVER GATEWAY

Largo-Lottsford and Vicinity Master Plan and Sectional Map Amendment (Planning Area 73), and the 2002 Minor Public Facility Amendments for the MD 202 Corridor. At the time, the recommended transportation improvements were deemed sufficient to handle through traffic and buildout densities. These improvements were intended to be staged over time by travel demands and funding availability.

These improvements included modifications to existing interchanges along the Capital Beltway (I-95/I-495); the extension of Campus Way to Evarts Street, a new east–west roadway across the Capital Beltway; and the reconstruction of Brightseat Road as an arterial facility (A-31), with a gradeseparated interchange at its intersection with MD 202.

Most of these recommended road improvements have not been implemented. The approval of the Woodmore Towne Centre at Glenarden is conditioned on the construction of the Campus Way/Evarts Street Bridge over the Capital Beltway and the widening of MD 202 to six lanes at the Capital Beltway interchange.

In the Purple Line study, the Maryland Department of Transportation is examining future transit service connections from Bethesda to New Carrollton. An alternatives analysis and draft environmental impact study has been prepared for the Bethesda to New Carrollton route.

In the preliminary countywide master plan of transportation (MPOT), it is envisioned that this service will be extended to the Landover Gateway sector plan area and beyond.

Goals • Improve existing and planned roadways to safely and efficiently manage current and forecast traffic volumes.

• Provide access to all existing and planned developments.

• Design appropriate streetscape treatments to encourage pedestrian and other nonmotorized transportation.

• Design and build a system of trails, sidewalks, and crosswalks that is pedestrian-friendly.

• Provide direct bus services, fixed guideway transit and/ or light rail transit (LRT) (Purple Line) to nearby Metrorail and MARC rail stations and connecting the sector plan area to New Carrollton Metro Station (Orange Line), Morgan Boulevard, and/or Largo Metro Stations (Blue Line).

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

Overall Transportation Policies and Strategies Policy 1: Provide an integrated multimodal transportation system that attracts high-quality transportation-oriented design development.

Strategies • Promote nonmotorized travel between all existing and planned residential and commercial activities throughout the area. Safe and convenient pedestrian access is particularly essential between the planned light rail transit stations and adjoining communities.

• Provide a safe, direct, and well-maintained bicycle trail network that links residents with employment centers, schools, parks, shopping areas, and transit stations.

Provision of on-road bicycle lanes should be considered on all roadways serving the Landover Gateway area, except for MD 202, where a parallel off-road trail would be more appropriate.

• Discourage through-traffic movement and unsafe speeds along neighborhood streets by providing traffic calming measures, as deemed appropriate by the responsible operating agency along internal roadways within the sector plan area.

• Work with appropriate agencies to plan and extend fixed guideway transit (Purple Line) from New Carrollton to the sector plan area, and extend it south to either Morgan Boulevard and/or Largo Metro stations as proposed in the MPOT or subsequently approved master plans.

• Plan for effective on-site travel demand management strategies that include parking reduction, shared parking, transit ridership incentives, flexible working hours, and telecommuting.

• When deemed appropriate, establish a Transportation Demand Management District (TDMD) under Subtitle 20A for portions of the sector plan area west of the Capital Beltway (I-95/I-495) to ensure that levels of service for roads serving this area do not exceed the minimum acceptable level-of-service E, as recommended by the 2002 General Plan.

81

LANDOVER GATEWAY

• When deemed appropriate, designate the Landover Gateway sector plan area as a Transportation Priority Growth District (TPGD), which is a strategy recommended in the preliminary countywide MPOT. This designation would provide flexibility for managing congestion and implementing effective vehicle trip reduction measures within the Landover Gateway sector plan area, especially when development levels exceed the recommended levels for the short-term transportation stage.

• Develop advanced parking management for parking facilities within the sector plan area. Also explore electronic parking management systems that include sensors to guide motorists to available parking spaces. A local example is the Baltimore-Washington International Thurgood Marshall Airport parking garages.

• Work to attract public and private investment to the sector plan area. Consider all feasible financing mechanisms for provision of the recommended fixed guideway transit line from New Carrollton to the sector plan area and south to either Morgan Boulevard and/ or Largo Metro Stations.

Roads The proposed roadway system consists of the recommended improvements to the existing roadways and construction of planned transportation facilities that support the development pattern envisioned by the sector plan.

Background The basic road infrastructure for the Landover Gateway area is in place (see Table 1: Highway Network on page 85), and very few new roadways are currently planned. The construction of the nearby FedEx Field and the opening of the Largo Town Center and Morgan Boulevard Metro stations called for a new Capital Beltway (I-95/I-495)/ Arena Drive interchange and other roadway improvements.

This interchange will be upgraded to full-time operation status by mid-2009. As part of the interstate access point approval for the conversion of Arena Drive interchange to full-time operation, the county supports the connection of Campus Way/Ruby Lockhart Way to Evarts Street over the Capital Beltway (I-95/I-495). The proposed connection 82

is in accordance with District Council and the Planning Board resolutions approving the Woodmore Towne Centre development.

The current average daily traffic volume on the Capital Beltway (I-95/I-495) within the Landover Gateway sector plan area ranges from 199,400 to 216,900, which operates at level-of-service E. The average daily traffic on MD 202 through the sector plan area ranges from 39,900 to 54,000, which operates at level-of-service D. Brightseat Road carries an average daily traffic volume of 13,200 to 17,000, which operates at a level-of-service range from C–F. The following six-level system (A–F) defines the transportation level-of-service on a given transportation roadway segment.

Policy 1: Provide roadway improvements that are fully integrated with land use recommendations in the sector plan to achieve accessibility, circulation, and development goals.

(See Map 19: Transportation Functional Classification on page 84.)

Strategies • Create a balanced, multifunctional network of streets and highways.

• Provide attractive and safe shared road spaces that accommodate pedestrians, bicyclists, transit vehicles (bus, fixed guideway transit), and other motorized vehicular traffic.

Freeways Freeways are divided highways for through traffic with full control of access and grade-separated interchanges at selected public roads. Rights-of-way range from 300–400 feet.

I-95/I-495 (Capital Beltway) The sector plan does not recommend any additional changes or modifications to the planned widening of this facility to ten lanes as proposed in the State Highway Administration (SHA) Capital Beltway Corridor Study or its existing and planned interchange configurations.

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

LANDOVER GATEWAY

Expressways Expressways are divided highways for through traffic with full or partial control of access and interchanges at selected public roads with some at-grade intersections at 1,5002,000 foot intervals. Rights-of-way range from 200 to 300 feet.

MD 202 (Landover Road) Improve MD 202 to a six-lane expressway between the Capital Beltway and Barlowe Road. Amenities within the right-of-way should include an off-road trail, improved lighting, and special pedestrian crosswalks at the signalized intersection of MD 202 with Barlowe Road/Cattail Creek Drive/Evarts Street extended.

The sector plan recommends that the development community coordinate with the Maryland SHA and Prince George’s County Department of Public Works and Transportation (DPW&T) to begin initiation of project planning, design, and construction of the most effective, efficient, pedestrian-friendly configuration that accommodates the recommended fixed guideway transit (Purple Line extension) at the intersection of MD 202 with Brightseat Road. To do this, the plan recommends a comprehensive evaluation of a wide range of alternatives, including the approved grade-separated interchange concept, the recommended urban diamond interchange, and/or the provision of a new north–south roadway with a grade separated at MD 202, extending from Evarts Street to Brightseat Road south of MD 202 and east of the Brightseat Road and Sheriff Road intersection. Until a final concept is selected, the plan recommends all new development and redevelopment applications within the sector plan area consider an urban diamond interchange as the preferred concept.

Arterials Arterials are highways for through and local traffic, either divided or undivided, with controlled access to abutting properties and at-grade intersections. Rights-of-way are generally 120 feet.

and pedestrian crosswalks delineated with special pavement or markings. The reconstructed road should be sufficiently wide to accommodate the recommended fixed guideway transit (Purple Line extension) serving the sector plan area.

Major Collectors Major Collectors are four-lane divided roadways with controlled access to abutting properties and at-grade intersections. They generally have 90–100 foot rights-ofway. Direct access to abutting properties is controlled by DPW&T policy on major collectors.

Ruby Lockhart Boulevard extended/Evarts Street and Bridge over I-95/I-495 Reconstruct and extend Evarts Street across the Capital Beltway (I-95/I-495) from Brightseat Road to the planned Ruby Lockhart Boulevard as a major collector. Amenities within the right-of way should include wide sidewalks, improved lighting, on-road bicycle lanes, and pedestrian crosswalks with special pavement or marking at all intersecting streets.

New North/South Boulevard Construct a new north-south roadway with a tunnel under MD 202 extending from Evarts Street to Brightseat Road east of its intersection with Sheriff Road.

New East/West Boulevard (Main Street) Extend a new four-lane divided roadway (referred to as the main street) within the core area of the sector plan area between Evarts Street and MD 202, extending east from Brightseat Road.

Collectors Collectors are two- or four-lane roadways with minimal control of access providing movement between developed areas and the arterial system. They generally have 70–80 foot rights-of-way.

Brightseat Road

The plan recommends reconstruction of Brightseat Road as a six-lane divided roadway between MD 202 and Sheriff Road. Amenities within the right-of-way should include wide sidewalks, improved lighting, on-road bicycle lanes,

Improve Brightseat Road from Evarts Street to ArdwickArdmore Road and from Sheriff Road to Arena Drive as an undivided four-lane collector facility. Amenities within

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

83

LANDOVER GATEWAY

Map 19: Transportation Functional Classification 84

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

LANDOVER GATEWAY

Table 1: Highway Network

Roadway Name

Limits

Number of Through Lanes

Rights-ofWay (ft.)

F-5: I-95/I-495

MD 202 to North of Evarts Street

10-12

300 min.

E-6: Landover Road (MD 202)

St. Joseph Drive to Barlowe Road

6

150-200

A-31: Brightseat Road

Sheriff Road to Evarts Street

6

120

MC-417: Evarts Street/Ruby Lockhart Boulevard

Brightseat to St. Joseph Drive

4 Divided

90-110

MC-418: Campus Way North

Eastern Boundary of Woodmore Towne Centre to Ruby Lockhart Boulevard

4 Divided

90-110

MC-419: New North/South Boulevard

Evarts Street to Brightseat Road south of MD 202

4 Divided

90-110

MC-420 Main Street

West of I-95/I-495 to Brightseat Road north of MD 202

4 divided

90-110

C-345: St. Joseph Drive

MD 202 to Campus Way North

4

80

C-400: Brightseat Road

Evarts to Ardwick Ardmore Road

4

80

C-401:Evarts Street Extended

Brightseat Road to Cattail Creek Drive

4

80

C-412: Brightseat Road

Sheriff Road to Redskin Drive

4

80

C-416: New road (Cattail Creek Drive)

Evarts Street to MD 202

4

80

the right-of way should include wide sidewalks, improved lighting, on-road bicycle lanes, and pedestrian crosswalks at all intersecting streets.

Cattail Creek Drive/Evarts Street Extended

Transit Background

Improve and extend Evarts Street from Brightseat Road, in a southwesterly direction, to intersect with MD 202 directly opposite of Barlowe Road.

The sector plan recommends provision of an integrated local transit service (The BUS), regional transit service (Metrobus), fixed guideway transit (Purple Line extension) that provides convenient, efficient, and user-friendly service to supplement the private automobile and buses as a mobility option. There are four existing Metro stations—Landover,

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

85

LANDOVER GATEWAY

New Carrollton (Orange Line), Largo Town Center, and Morgan Boulevard (Blue Line)—all located within 1.3 miles to 2.2 miles from the core of the Landover Gateway sector plan area. The existing Metrobus service within the sector plan area includes the Landover Road line (Routes A11 and A12), and the Sheriff Road line (Route 21X). The Prince George’s County DPW&T operates The BUS in the area. Routes 21 and 21X of The BUS, currently travel along Brightseat Road and connect Upper Marlboro and Prince George’s Community College to New Carrollton and Largo Metro Stations (see Map 20: Existing and Planned Transit Routes on page 87).

Policy: Provide transit services integrated with land use recommendation and transit-supporting development policies and practices.

Strategies • Plan for additional local bus routes and undertake route modifications to the routes to be closely coordinated by the current and future Five-Year Transit Service and Operations Plans developed by DPW&T. • Plan and design internal roadways to ensure safe and adequate accommodations for bus transit and fixed guideway transit (Purple Line extension).

• Work with all public agencies to ensure that the future Purple Line is extended to the Landover Gateway sector plan area. This can be done either by ensuring that the planning, design, and location engineering for the extension of the Purple Line retain the option of extending fixed-guideway transit (FGT) service to the Landover Gateway sector plan area or as a stand-alone FGT service connecting New Carrollton Metro Station to the Largo Town Center Metro Station, with stops along Brightseat Road, to serve the Landover Gateway sector plan area.

• The plan recommends that during plan implementation and as part of review of any development application, all options be evaluated for increasing the attractiveness and use of all forms of transit and nonmotorized mode of transportation both to and within the plan area.

86

Transportation-Based Staging Plan The proposed development staging plan for the Landover Gateway sector plan envisions a three-stage program (shortterm, mid-term, and long-term). Although the short-term and mid-term stages can be realized with some level of transportation improvement, major regional infrastructure enhancements, including the Capital Beltway and extension of the Purple Line south to the Landover Gateway sector plan area and beyond, would be essential in achieving the full development potential envisioned by the sector plan.

The Capital Beltway Corridor study initiated by the Maryland SHA, examined an alternative that would add two additional through lanes to the Beltway. The Maryland Transit Authority’s ongoing planning study for the Purple Line extension is limited to evaluation of FGT alternatives for bus rapid transit or LRT between Bethesda and New Carrollton, linking Bethesda, Silver Spring, Takoma– Langley Crossroads, the University of Maryland, College Park, Riverdale Park, and New Carrollton.

The 2002 General Plan included a strategy for an “Inner Purple Line” transit facility that would extend the Purple Line south from New Carrollton linking to other centers.

This is also a recommendation in the MPOT. The MPOT recommends the extension of the Purple Line as an FGT south from New Carrollton, linking Landover Gateway, Largo Town Center, the planned Westphalia Town Center, Andrews Air Force Base, the Suitland or Branch Avenue Metro Stations, the proposed Oxon Hill Center, and National Harbor.

In 2006, the Woodmore Towne Centre at Glenarden development was approved with transportation improvement conditions (see Map 21: Woodmore Towne Centre Required Improvements on page 88) that were needed to support the approved development levels. These improvements included additional lanes at the intersections of MD 202, widening of the MD 202 bridge over I-95/I-495 to include three through lanes in each direction, and a new four-lane divided roadway across the Beltway connecting Brightseat Road with the planned Ruby Lockhart Way (see Map 23: Existing and Funded Highway Network on page 92). In 2007, SHA began construction of necessary improvements to the Beltway and nearby interchanges with MD 202 and MD 214 to convert the existing limited-use

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

LANDOVER GATEWAY

Map 20: Existing and Planned Transit Routes Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

87

LANDOVER GATEWAY

Map 21: Woodmore Towne Centre Required Improvements 88

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

LANDOVER GATEWAY

Arena Drive interchange to full-time use (see Map 23: Existing and Funded Highway Network on page 92).

• Constructing Cattail Creek Drive as a new collector facility, extending from Evarts Street to MD 202.

Transportation Staging Analysis

• Make any interim transportation improvements to the intersection of MD 202 and Brightseat Road, deemed most feasible by the recommended project planning and design study, to satisfy the applicable APF requirements prior to the full construction funding of the preferred design.

The transportation staging analysis (available upon request) conducted for this sector plan is broad and general in nature. It provides useful information on the amount of development yields at each stage of development along with recommended and needed transportation infrastructure improvements. However, more detailed analysis is required to satisfy the adequate public facilities (APF) test for any development proposal within the core area of the Landover Gateway Sector Plan.

The baseline condition for this plan includes: (1) Woodmore Towne Centre development; (2) Woodmore Towne Centre required transportation improvements; and (3) I-95/I-495 and Arena Drive interchange conversion to full-time operation. Since the baseline transportation alone does not create additional capacity for full development of the core area as envisioned by the sector plan, an additional analysis was performed. The transportation staging analysis was conducted to identify appropriate stages of development levels and associated transportation improvements that satisfactorily address concerns raised by the Planning Board and the transportation agencies.

Short-Term Stage The short-term stage consists of the following needed roadway improvements and development levels:

Recommended Improvements (See Map 22: Recommended Roadway Improvements for Short-Term Stage on page 91.)

• Rerouting The BUS Route 22, suggested by the county’s Transit Service and Operations Plan, and the existing The Bus Route 21X (see Map 24: Recommended Transit Service Route Changes on page 93).

• Widening Brightseat Road from Evarts Street to Ardwick-Ardmore Road to a four-lane collector roadway.

• Widening Brightseat Road from Sheriff Road to Arena Drive to a four-lane collector roadway.

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

Recommended Development Levels The recommended development levels can be divided into two parts: Part One includes any additional development beyond the existing development levels and the levels approved for the Woodmore Towne Centre that generate up to 28,000 new daily vehicle trips. The transportation staging analysis showed that, with this level of additional development, all evaluated baseline roadway links, including the Capital Beltway segments between Arena Drive and US 50, will operate at or below the LOS E. Once the approved development levels within the core area exceed the development levels recommended for Part One, the sector plan recommends the establishment of a TDMD in accordance with the provision of Subtitle 20A of the Prince George’s County Code. The establishment of a TDMD is needed to maintain an LOS-E standard along roadways serving the Landover Gateway sector plan area without the need for any additional off-site roadway widening.

Part Two includes any additional development beyond the recommended levels for Part One that generates up to 26,500 additional new, daily vehicle trips. Considering the development levels recommended for Part One and Two levels, the short-term development stage would consist of all allowed development that would generate up to a total of 54,500 new daily vehicle trips.

The transportation staging analysis showed that with all Part One and Part Two additional development, all evaluated roadway links, including the above-recommended improvements, would operate at or below LOS-E, except for the Capital Beltway segments between Arena Drive and US 50.

89

LANDOVER GATEWAY

Prior to the designation of Landover TPGD by the District Council, all development and redevelopment must satisfy the established APF requirements.

The Mid-Term Stage In order to allow any mid-term stage development, the County Council should enact legislation for creation of a TPGD, which provides flexibility for managing congestion and implementing effective vehicle trip reduction measures.

When the approved development levels within the Landover Gateway core area reach the maximum recommended levels for the short-term stage (Part One and Part Two combined), the District Council should designate the Landover Gateway sector plan area as a TPGD, as well as establish the maximum development levels allowed for the midterm stage. The additional mid-term development levels should be allocated to the sector plan property owners by a set of agreements. The sector plan recommends that these

90

agreements be executed by Prince George’s County, the management authority of the Landover Gateway TDMD, if established, and the property owners of interest. The sector plan envisions that these agreements would be negotiated with direct input from the Planning Department and the operating agencies (SHA, DPW&T, and Washington Metropolitan Area Transportation Authority).

The Long-Term Stage The sector plan recommends that, once the approved development levels reach (1) either the recommended short-term development stage level without an established TPGD or (2) the District Council’s maximum mid-term development stage levels with an established TPGD for the Landover Gateway area, any additional development up to the recommended buildout levels envisioned by the sector plan would require major regional infrastructure improvements. The sector plan recommends these improvements—at the very least—include the extension of the Purple Line south to the Landover Gateway sector plan area and the planned improvement to the Capital Beltway within the county.

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

LANDOVER GATEWAY

Map 22: Recommended Roadway Improvements for Short-Term Stage Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

91

LANDOVER GATEWAY

Map 23: Existing and Funded Highway Network 92

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

LANDOVER GATEWAY

Map 24: Recommended Transit Service Route Changes Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

93

LANDOVER GATEWAY

Map 25: Trails 94

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

LANDOVER GATEWAY

Trails and Pedestrian Access

• Designated bike lanes

Background

• Side paths

Pedestrian safety and walkable communities were identified as priorities by the community at the Landover Gateway planning charrette. Residents expressed the desire to walk safely and conveniently between neighborhoods, as well as to shopping, recreation facilities, and mass transit. Providing safe routes for children walking to area schools is also a priority and community need. Currently, the sidewalk network is fragmented; pedestrians are not accommodated along many corridors, and several intersections and road crossings need pedestrian amenities and/or safety enhancements. The intersection of Brightseat Road and MD 202 was specifically identified as an area needing pedestrian safety improvements. Additionally, major roads, such as MD 202 and the Capital Beltway, divide the study area and make nonmotorized transportation extremely difficult. A desire was expressed by the community to provide additional pedestrian or trail connections linking the study area and providing access across these major roads in order to have a more unified community and regional center.

Several types of pedestrian, trail, and bicycle facilities are evaluated as part of the Landover Gateway sector plan. The types of facilities considered include on-road bike facilities, such as designated bike lanes, neighborhood connector trails, and standard and wide sidewalk connections. A complete summary of facility types is listed below.

Park Trails • Natural surface paths for equestrians, hikers, and mountain bikes.

Trails also serve as transportation connections.

Sidewalks The sidewalk network is incomplete in many areas, and pedestrian safety features are needed at many locations. Roadway striping frequently does not include accommodations for bicycles. Pedestrian connectivity is poor between neighborhoods, and trail connections may be necessary to connect adjacent communities and land uses.

Pedestrian safety across MD 202 is a major issue. Providing for enhanced pedestrian safety across this corridor should be addressed. Accommodations for pedestrians at the MD 202 and Brightseat Road intersection are minimal, and safety at this intersection is a major concern. There are existing trails at FedEx Field and in the nearby Summerfield community.

• Multisurface, multiuse trails for all users.

• Stream valley trails.

• Neighborhood trail connections to parks and schools.

On-Road Bicycle Facilities • Paved shoulders • Shared-use roadways (typically low volume roads)

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

Existing path along Redskins Road.

95

LANDOVER GATEWAY

Policy 1: Provide opportunities for residents to make some trips by walking or bicycling.

Strategies • Provide standard sidewalks along both sides of all internal roads within the study area. The provision of sidewalks and trail connections will enhance the walkability of the neighborhood, as well as ensure that adequate pedestrian facilities exist to schools. Brightseat Road and Evarts Street are designated as priority sidewalk corridors due to their access through and around the planned regional center and their access to local community facilities. For the sector plan area to be walkable, pedestrian facilities and safety need to be improved along these corridors.

• Incorporate trails or bikeways into the proposed “Boulevard” and other urban linear greenways designed into the study area.

• Provide continuous sidewalks and on-road bicycle facilities on the Evarts Street extension. This extension will provide pedestrian access between the Woodmore Town Center and the Landover Civic Center and commercial core. In addition, this pedestrian connection across the Capital Beltway will provide for a more unified, walkable study area by providing access across a major pedestrian barrier.

• Provide continuous sidewalks/wide sidewalks and onroad bicycle accommodations along Brightseat Road.

Brightseat Road is a major north–south connection through the sector plan area, and currently, facilities for pedestrians are fragmented. The road currently does not include striping for bicycle facilities. However, due to the speed and volume of vehicles along the road, its connectivity through the sector plan area, and its connection to FedEx Field, designated bike lanes are recommended. Brightseat Road should also include accommodations for bicycles and pedestrians at the planned interchange with MD 202. These facilities will provide safe nonmotorized connectivity to the Landover Civic Center and commercial core from surrounding neighborhoods.

96

Policy 2: Incorporate appropriate pedestrian, bicycle, and transit-oriented design and transit-supporting design features in all new development within centers and corridor nodes.

Strategies • Sidewalks and designated bike lanes should be provided along Brightseat Road through the proposed interchange at MD 202 and Brightseat Road. These improvements will enhance pedestrian safety across MD 202 along this busy corridor and provide better connectivity to the Landover Civic Center and commercial core. These improvements will also address an existing pedestrian safety issue within the study area. This intersection can be extremely difficult for pedestrians to negotiate due to the volume of traffic, the number of lanes, and the speed of traffic. Until the implementation of the recommended interchange at MD 202 and Brightseat Road, significant pedestrian safety enhancements are recommended to address existing safety and mobility concerns for pedestrians. These improvements may include a pedestrian refuge, pavement markings, or other appropriate measures.

• A primary goal of the sector plan is to improve pedestrian safety across MD 202. Traffic calming, pedestrian refuges, improved crosswalks, curb extensions, and other safety features should improve the safety of pedestrians crossing MD 202. These improvements may also include countdown lights, contrasting crosswalk materials, and other safe crossing devices for key crosswalks at all major intersections. Improvements along MD 202 should have a primary goal of improving the safety of the at-grade pedestrian crossings. However, a pedestrian bridge over MD 202 may be considered in the vicinity of the Barlowe Road intersection, if warranted by the density of future redevelopment. The feasibility of a pedestrian bridge at this location should be explored only after the at-grade improvements and safety features have been implemented and there is a continued documented need for a grade-separated pedestrian crossing.

• Provide a second pedestrian bridge across the Capital Beltway upon the provision of transit service through the area. This bridge will ensure that both sides of the Capital Beltway have convenient and direct access to the recommended FGT facility and to the regional center.

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

LANDOVER GATEWAY

This bridge will connect the Landover Civic Center and commercial core with Woodmore Town Centre and provide additional pedestrian connectivity within the sector plan area. The pedestrian bridge should be located just to the north of the entrance/exit ramps between the Capital Beltway and MD 202. MD 202 is proposed to be a limited access, high-speed road between the Capital Beltway and Barlowe Road and will not provide pedestrian access between communities inside and outside the Capital Beltway.

• Incorporate pedestrian-oriented design and transitoriented design into the concept for the Landover Civic Center and commercial core. Sidewalks, walkways, green space, and trail connections between land uses should be considered. Attractive and convenient pedestrian connections should be provided to future mass transit locations.

and Planning Commission (M-NCPPC) along the stream valley. Connector trails should also be provided to the adjoining Kenmoor Elementary School and Kenmoor Middle School. These trails will provide direct pedestrian access from the Glenarden Apartments site to the existing schools, as well as provide access to the planned stream valley trail network.

• Provide a connector trail through the M-NCPPC Henry P. Johnson Park from Reicher Street to Evarts Street.

Connector trails may also be appropriate to any future recreational facilities from Brightseat Road.

• Provide a stream valley trail connection along the tributary of Cattail Branch, from Cattail Branch south to Sheriff Road. This trail will provide access to the Sports and Learning Complex from communities to

Policy 3: Provide adequate pedestrian and bicycle linkages to schools, parks, recreation areas, commercial areas, and employment centers.

Strategies • P rovide a master plan trail along the Cattail Branch greenway. This trail can be implemented as a stream valley trail and a side path along Barlowe Road extended.

Where the trail is implemented in conjunction with Barlowe Road extended, an attractive and inviting streetscape is recommended with appropriate pedestrian and trail-related amenities that highlight the Cattail Branch and surrounding open space. This trail/greenway should include connections to surrounding schools and neighborhoods. Upon its completion along its entire length, this stream valley trail will provide access to Kenmoor Elementary School, Kenmoor Middle School, Matthew Henson Elementary School, the Palmer Park Community Center, and the Kentland Community Center. This stream valley trail will also connect to the Beaverdam Creek Stream Valley Trail, which will ultimately connect into the Anacostia Tributaries Trail Network and the planned river-walk along the Anacostia River.

• Provide a neighborhood connector trail from Evarts Street to the Cattail Branch Trail as additional land is acquired by The Maryland-National Capital Park Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

Pedestrian bridges can be effective if properly incorporated into development.

Raised sidewalks calm traffic and increase visibility of the crossing.

97

LANDOVER GATEWAY

the north, as well as provide an additional connection into the larger stream valley trail network (see Map 25: Trails on page 94).

Public Facilities Vision Public facilities are provided in locations that serve and promote a livable community in the sector plan area.

Landover Gateway, as a new downtown for Prince George’s County, contains signature public facilities, such as a new, architecturally significant central library. Schools offer cutting-edge instructional programming in modern facilities that promote learning and attract families to the sector plan area. Fire and emergency medical services facilities are planned to handle increased demand from denser development.

Goal Provide public facilities that efficiently serve the existing and future population.

Schools Vision Sufficient school capacity exists to accommodate current and future sector plan residents. Deteriorated facilities are replaced with new, technologically and environmentally advanced centers of learning. Schools serve not only as focal points for education but also as centers of community.

Background

Public facilities in Prince George’s County and the delivery of public services are largely based upon suburban and rural models. These models do not apply to, and are insufficient for, urban development at the regional center scale. Land for new public facilities within the Developed Tier is scarce, held by multiple property owners, and relatively expensive.

Many existing public facilities were constructed in the 1950s and 1960s and are underutilized, deteriorated, and do not efficiently serve the existing and future population.

There are no comprehensive schools within the sector plan area. The Prince George’s County Public Schools (PGCPS) owns a property in the southwest portion of the sector plan area, which is the site of the Bonnie Johns Educational Media Center. The Bonnie Johns Center is a 44,083 square-foot former elementary school, which was constructed on an environmentally constrained 14-acre site in 1960. Area students currently attend Kenmoor and Matthew Henson Elementary Schools, Kenmoor Middle School, and Charles Herbert Flowers High School. The Woodmore Towne Centre is situated within the attendance areas for Ardmore Elementary School, Ernest Everett Just Middle School, and Charles Herbert Flowers High School.

98

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

Background

LANDOVER GATEWAY

Table 2: Public Schools Currently Serving the Sector Plan Area School Name

Address

Building Size (sq. ft.)

Site Acreage

Year Built

Major Renovations

Ardmore Elementary

9301 Ardwick Ardmore Road

54,047

9.1

1960

1965, 1967, 2000, 2004

Kenmoor Elementary

3200 82nd Avenue

43,997

9.0

1966

1969

Matthew Henson Elementary

7910 Scott Road

57,857

10.1

1969

N/A

128,381

24.5

1973

N/A

332,500

39.1

2000

Kenmoor Middle Charles Herbert Flowers High

2500 Kenmoor Drive 10001 Ardwick Ardmore Road

N/A

Source: PGCPS School facilities are located in the vicinity of the sector plan area.

Table 3: Public Schools at Full Buildout School Name

Address

Building Size (sq. ft.)

Site Acreage

Year Built

Major Renovations 1951, 1955, 1962, 1967, 1974, 1989

Columbia Park Elementary

1901 Kent Village Drive

57,372

8.0

1928

Cora L Rice Elementary

950 Nalley Road

83,482

32.5*

2002

N/A

John Carroll Elementary

1400 Nalley Terrace

56,505

10.0

1971

N/A

William Paca Elementary

7801 Sheriff Road

54,868

10.9

1963

1964, 1969, 2000

G James Gholson Middle

900 Nalley Road

115,86

32.5*

2002

N/A

Central High

200 Cabin Branch Road

168,366

60.5

1961

Fairmont Heights High

1401 Nye Street

174,128

15.1

1951

Source: PGCPS

1963, 1982, 1996, 2006 1951, 1956, 1983, 2003, 2005

* Rice Elementary School and Gholson Middle School share the same 32.5-acre site.

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

99

LANDOVER GATEWAY

Table 2: Public Schools Currently Serving the Sector Plan Area on page 99 lists the public schools that currently serve the Landover Gateway sector plan area. Table 3: Public Schools at Full Buildout on page 99 lists the public schools near the Landover Gateway sector plan area that may be needed to serve future development.

The new, intense residential development envisioned in this sector plan requires consideration of a larger regional context when determining the available capacity for existing schools. PGCPS forecasts a significant local and countywide reduction in middle and high school enrollment

through 2013 (see Table 4: 2013 Projected Enrollment: Schools Currently Serving Sector Plan Area on page 100 and see Table 5: 2013 Projected Enrollment: Schools to Serve Sector Plan Area at Buildout on page 101). Elementary school enrollment is expected to gradually increase through 2013 in the Landover Gateway area, while a more significant increase will occur countywide.

Enrollment patterns and the ongoing shift of sixth graders to middle schools require school facilities that are flexible in their ability to accommodate students in grades prekindergarten (Pre-K) through five, as well as grades six through eight.

Table 4: 2013 Projected Enrollment: Schools Currently Serving Sector Plan Area 2013 Projected Enrollment

2013 Projected Capacity

2013 Projected Percent Capacity

2007-2013 Enrollment Change

2013 Available Seats

Ardmore Elementary

577

503

114.7

34

-74

Kenmoor Elementary

341

435

78.4

0

94

Matthew Henson Elementary

294

456

64.5

45

162

Kenmoor Middle

480

795

60.4

-186

315

Charles Herbert Flowers High

2,264

2,200

102.9

-520

-64

School Name

Source: PGCPS

100

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

LANDOVER GATEWAY

Table 5: 2013 Projected Enrollment: Schools to Serve Sector Plan Area at Buildout

School Name

2013 Projected Enrollment

2013 Projected Capacity

2013 Projected Percent Capacity

2007-2013 Enrollment Change

2013 Available Seats

Columbia Park Elementary

334

525

63.6

-10

191

Cora L Rice Elementary

347

709

48.9

-181

362

John Carroll Elementary

305

456

66.9

49

151

William Paca Elementary

388

689

56.3

-38

301

G James Gholson Middle

423

990

42.7

-478

567

Central High

780

1,118

69.8

-444

338

Fairmont Heights High

609

900

68.0

-452

291

Source: PGCPS The age and physical condition of many of these schools allow for the possibility of near total renovation or demolition and on-site replacement. An analysis of school sites located in the vicinity of the sector plan area identifies 12 current school sites that could serve the study area (see Table 6: Summary of Proposed Changes on page 102). In

addition, the existing Fairmont Heights High School is planned for replacement in a newly constructed building in the South Columbia Park area.

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

101

Table 6 provides a summary of the existing and proposed State Rated Capacity (SRC) analyses for these school sites.

LANDOVER GATEWAY

Table 6: Summary of Proposed Changes School

Existing SRC

Proposed SRC

Difference

Proposed Change

Elementary Schools Ardmore

503

503

0

Renovate

Columbia Park

525

525

0

None

Cora L. Rice

709

709

0

None

John Carroll

456

456

0

None

Kenmoor

435

435

0

None

Matthew Henson

456

456

0

Renovate

William Paca

689

689

0

None

3,773

3,773

0

G. James Gholson

990

990

0

None

Kenmoor

795

795

0

None

1,785

1,785

0

New PreK–8

0

750

750

Total

0

750

750

Charles Herbert Flowers

2,200

2,200

0

None

Fairmont Heights

1,139

1,600

461

Relocate to new site

Total

3,339

3,800

461

Total Middle Schools

Total PreK–8 Schools

New construction

High Schools

Source: PGCPS SRC=State-rated capacity 102

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

LANDOVER GATEWAY

Dwelling Unit Forecast The primary factor for determining capacity needs for schools is an analysis of the dwelling unit projections.

The projected number of dwelling units is multiplied by the pupil yield factors to determine the future number of students. The current pupil yield factors are defined by the accompanying Table 7.

Table 7: Current Pupil Yield Factors Dwelling Unit Elementary Type School

Middle School

High School

for schools in centers and corridors and other landconstrained communities.

• Research, analyze, and select several urban school models that take into account varying site sizes, capacity needs, and educational levels, and provide guidelines for site acquisition, design, and construction of urban schools in Prince George’s County.

Policy 2: Renovate or replace, as needed, school facilities nearest the study area, creating new, modern, and state-of-the-art facilities independent of residential development in the sector plan area.

Single-family detached

0.164

0.130

0.144

Single-family attached

0.140

0.113

0.108

Multifamily with structured parking

• Add a floating symbol1 to the sector plan map for a future Pre-K–8 school (incorporating urban school design features) adjacent to Henry P. Johnson Park.

0.042

0.039

0.033

• Renovate Ardmore and Matthew Henson Elementary Schools.

Multifamily, other

0.137

0.064

0.088

In 2013, the schools serving the sector plan area are forecast to have the capacity to accommodate 1,187 elementary school students, 882 middle school students, and 1,265 high school students.

Goal Provide the residents of the Landover Gateway sector plan area and surrounding communities with schools that are not overcrowded, feature cutting-edge technological and instructional opportunities, and serve as focal points.

Policy 1: Develop a variety of urban school models for use in centers and corridors, as well as in other land-constrained areas of Prince George’s County.

Strategies • Create a working group consisting of representatives of PGCPS, M-NCPPC, County Council, and other county agencies to address current and future demand Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

Strategies

Libraries Vision The Prince George’s County Memorial Library System (PGCMLS) is a valuable county asset, and its branches provide integral services to the national capital region.

Landover Gateway has a unique location that provides a singular opportunity for a new central Prince George’s County Library.

Background Currently, the Glenarden Branch Library provides library services for the Landover Gateway sector plan area. This library is one of the smallest library facilities in the county and is located on a 1.7-acre site partially owned by the City of Glenarden.

Internet usage at county libraries has grown rapidly over the past few years, while circulation of print media has remained 1 Floating symbols represent conditional school sites within the study area. They are used as cushions for future growth as replacement sites.

103

!

LANDOVER GATEWAY

£ ¤ 50

!

! !

# " þ

c Æ

! ( 202

! ¯

!

! (

!

704

#

!

! ( " þ 202

! ]

n c

WOODMORE TOWNE CENTRE AT GELNARDEN

§ ¦ ¨

!

! (

I-95

202

! !

!

!

! ¯

! ( 214

LEGEND EXISTING

ELEMENTARY SCHOOL

!

MIDDLE SCHOOL

"

PRE-K-8 SCHOOL HIGH SCHOOL POLICE STATION FIRE STATION LIBRARY

# ! ]

RENOVATION or REPLACEMENT

ACQUIRED SITE

n # þ

c

Sector Plan Boundary

PROPOSED

þ c

Town of Glenarden

Roadway

Map 26: Public Facilities 104

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

LANDOVER GATEWAY

rating, adjacent to Henry P. Johnson Park (incorporating urban school design features).

stable. To meet this demand, the PGCMLS added new computers and workstations and has now maximized its ability to physically accommodate computers in its existing branches. The inability of existing facilities to accommodate additional computers coupled with the increased demand for computer services will have a considerable impact on library facility planning over the next 15–20 years.

The PGCMLS does not have a central library; its various features and services are spread out among several branches.

Goal Provide state-of-the-art library facilities in the sector plan area.

Policy 3: Design and construct all new public schools in accordance with the Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) silver rating or an equivalent rating under a comparable green building performance measure.

Strategies • Construct a 900-seat-capacity high school (incorporating some urban school design features) with a LEED silver, or the equivalent rating, at South Columbia Park to replace the existing Fairmont Heights High School.

• Add a floating symbol to the sector plan map for a future Pre-K–8 school with a LEED silver, or the equivalent

Policy 1: Construct an architecturally and culturally significant central/headquarters branch of the PGCMLS. Strategies • Add a floating symbol to the sector plan map, and obtain a site for a 100,000-square-foot signature central library within the urban core of the sector plan area.

• Relocate the headquarters of the PGCMLS and other specialized functions currently spread out at various branches to the central branch.

• Incorporate extensive multimedia capabilities into the facility, providing a centralized location for county residents to access the internet and computer services.

• Provide a central repository for historically or culturally significant media.

Police/Fire/EMS Vision Public safety facilities are located in areas that allow for minimal response time. Facilities are capable of accommodating staffing, equipment, and apparatus in a safe and efficient manner.

Table 8: Parkland Needs Assessment

Analysis Areas

Existing M-NCPPC Parkland

Public School Acreage Counted for Parkland

Total Existing Parkland Provided

Parkland Needs by Year 2030

Surplus or (Deficit) Parkland

Sector Plan Area

7 acres

0 acres

7 acres

50 acres

(43 acres)

Primary Analysis Area

238 acres

36 acres

274 acres

336 acres

(62 acres)

Secondary Analysis Area

735 acres

44 acres

779 acres

954 acres

(175 acres)

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

105

LANDOVER GATEWAY

Background

Tier: Developed

Police District III covers all of Subregion 4, including the Developed Tier part of the sector plan area. The District III-Palmer Park headquarters is located in the Police Services Complex at 7600 Barlowe Road in Palmer Park.

This complex is also the location of the Prince George’s County Police Department Headquarters and is 128,608 square feet in size. The Woodmore Town Centre lies in Police District II. The District II headquarters, which is 11,565 square feet in size, is located at 601 Crain Highway in Upper Marlboro.

Strategy: Construct a new Fire/EMS station in the Landover Gateway urban core near Brightseat Road.

Woodmore Towne Centre lies within the City of Glenarden and within the jurisdiction of the Glenarden Police Department, which is headquartered in the Glenarden Municipal Center at 8600 Glenarden Parkway.

Justification: A new Fire/EMS station is needed to meet increased demand resulting from buildout at Landover Gateway.

Staging Priority: Long-Term—The project is recommended for funding after 2021.

Policy 2: Construct police facilities that meet the needs of the Landover Gateway community.

Strategy

The entire sector plan area is in the first due response area of Kentland Company 33 fire station at 7701 Landover Road in Landover. The nearest ambulance services are provided

by Kentland Company 46, 10400 Campus Way South, Upper Marlboro; and Landover Hills Company 30, 6801 Webster Street, Hyattsville. Community residents have raised concerns about inadequate ambulance service to the Palmer Park area.

• Reaffirm the 2008 Approved Public Safety Facilities Master Plan recommendation to renovate the Prince George’s County Police Department Headquarters and District III Station.

Goal

Public parks and open spaces provide recreation, relaxation, and socialization opportunities. Recreational opportunities contribute to the quality of life, personal health and wellbeing, and livability of a community.

Provide needed public safety facilities in locations that efficiently serve Landover Gateway.

Policy 1: Provide Fire/EMS facilities for current and future Landover Gateway residents to ensure that each residence and business is within a fiveto seven-minute travel time.

Strategies • Reaffirm the 2008 Approved Public Safety Facilities Master Plan recommendation for a Fire/EMS station at St. Joseph’s Drive (County CIP item LK510163).

• Amend the 2008 Approved Public Safety Facilities Master Plan by adding a floating symbol in the urban core near Brightseat Road for a new Fire/EMS station: Landover Gateway Fire/EMS Station PA: 72 106

Parks and Recreation Vision

Background The goals, policies, and strategies governing the planning and provision of park and recreation facilities in the sector plan area are based on the expressed requirements and interests of area residents, sensitivity to the surrounding environment, and the county’s commitment to preserve, enhance, and protect public open space and natural resources.

A parkland needs assessment for the sector plan and vicinity (shown in Table 8: Parkland Needs Assessment on page 105) was conducted for three geographic areas to analyze parkland needs for local parkland, known as neighborhood parks (up to 20 acres) and community parks (between 20–200 acres) only. The three geographic areas are (1) the sector plan area (TAZ 732); (2) the primary analysis area (Transportation Analysis Zones (TAZs) 725, 731, 812); Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

LANDOVER GATEWAY

and (3) the secondary analysis area (TAZs 698, 723, 724, 726, 727, 728, 729, 730, 809, 810, 813, 814).

The sector plan area currently has only seven acres of local parkland. There is no additional Board of Education acreage that can be counted toward parkland. The projected need in year 2030, based on a population of 3,319 residents, will be 50 acres of local parkland, which is a deficit of 43 acres.

The primary analysis area contains 238 acres of local parkland and 36 acres of public school properties that count for parkland. This area will need 336 acres of local parkland by the year 2030, based on a population of 22,430 residents, which is a deficit of 62 acres of parkland.

In the secondary analysis area, there are 735 acres of local parkland and 44 acres of public school properties that count for parkland. Based on a projected population of 63,622 residents, there will be a need for 954 acres of local parkland by the year 2030, which is a deficit of 175 acres.

It should be noted that only one-third of the total acreage of public school properties in each analysis area is counted for parkland.

Park and recreation facilities are divided into six categories, which are as follows: 1. Neighborhood Park and Recreation Areas—This category includes mini-parks, playgrounds, parks, unstaffed recreation centers, and park/schools with acreage of less than 20 acres in size. These parks typically contain a multi-age play area, a picnic area, perhaps a tennis court or basketball court, and serve residents in the immediate vicinity.

2. Community Park and Recreation Areas—This category includes staffed community center buildings, parks, recreation centers, and cultural centers between 20–200 acres in size. A park of this size would contain competitivesized athletic fields for organized play in addition to the amenities typical of a neighborhood park. A community park serves a larger population from several adjacent neighborhoods. Neighborhood and community parks are classified as local parks.

3. Regional Park and Recreation Areas—This category includes stream valley parks, regional parks (parks with more than 200 acres), cultural arts centers, and service facilities. A developed regional park would have all of Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

the amenities included in neighborhood and community parks as described above, but they would have more of each amenity. These facilities serve residents of an entire region within the county.

4. Countywide Park and Recreation Areas—This category includes river parks, historic sites and landmarks, hiker/ biker/equestrian trails, unique natural features, conservation areas, and service facilities. Parks in this category are available to all county residents.

5. Urban Park and Recreation Areas—This category includes urban parks and urban nature centers that serve county residents with severely limited access to outdoor nature areas.

6. Special Park and Recreation Areas—This category includes aquatic facilities, ice rinks, golf courses, shooting centers, athletic complexes, equestrian centers, airports, marinas, and reclamation areas. These facilities are available to all county residents.

Areas of constraint in the sector plan are identified as follows: • There is a lack of available undeveloped parcels of land inside the Capital Beltway that are suitable for park development.

• New communitywide stormwater management facilities are sometimes located on parkland because of the lack of land elsewhere, which reduces the area available for recreational facilities.

• Environmental regulations limit and add substantial cost to developing additional park facilities.

Opportunities include:

• Stream valleys provide a resource where trail connections can be built to create walkable access to existing developed parks.

• O lder

parks can be renovated and upgraded to accommodate changing recreation demands in established neighborhoods.

• Some parkland can be left undeveloped to provide a green space or buffer for residents to enjoy.

107

LANDOVER GATEWAY

Goals • Provide park and recreation acreage that complies with the standards established by the National Recreation and Parks Association, the State of Maryland, and the 2002 Prince George’s County Approved General Plan: –– A minimum of 15 acres of M-NCPPC local parkland (or the equivalent amenity in parks and recreation service) for every 1,000 residents.

–– A minimum of 20 acres of regional, countywide, and special M-NCPPC parks for every 1,000 residents.

• Provide a variety of recreational facilities and opportunities in the sector plan area.

• Conserve areas in the Cattail Branch Stream Valley and other natural heritage sites in the sector plan area.

Policy 1: Develop recreational facilities on existing and future parkland.

Strategies • Add active recreational facilities within the Cattail Branch Stream Valley Park, after acreage has been acquired.

• Add trail connections to Cattail Branch and continue westward to create a connection to the Palmer Park Community Center Park.

• Expand Henry P. Johnson Park to the west, adding an additional 4-acre parcel (at the intersection of Evarts Street and Brightseat Road) and a 1.5-acre parcel north of the existing park to create an 11.2 acre park.

Policy 2: Using the General Plan as a policy guide, parkland shall be provided in the locations needed to serve existing and future residents and businesses of the sector plan area.

Strategies

• Require developer contributions to fund a greater portion of those recreational amenities needed in the sector plan area, where mandatory dedication is not practical or feasible.

• Identify land acquisition, facility development, and recreational programming that can be funded through public sources, such as private donations, grants, and joint public/private partnerships.

• Identify publicly-owned properties that have been, or will be, declared surplus by other government agencies and that can be acquired to meet the identified future needs for parkland.

Policy 3: Parkland that is deemed to be necessary through the application of the acres-perpopulation formula should be provided in an efficient manner.

Strategies • Seek opportunities for co-location (either in single buildings or single properties) of compatible and complementary facilities in future capital programming and planning efforts. For example, the combination of park community centers and public schools has proven to be a win-win situation for parks patrons, as well as schoolchildren, because a greater number of shared facilities can be provided for the use and enjoyment of all.

• Acquire parcels of land within the sector area, where possible, to create urban parks. These urban parks will occur at any natural juncture with high visibility, contain some central amenity that attracts visitors, and provide a place where people can naturally gather to sit and interact.

Policy 4: The planning and provision of public parkland and recreation facilities should further and strengthen county land use, growth, and economic development policies and priorities.

Strategies

• Identify land for planned parkland sites that can be put into reservation or obtained through mandatory dedication during the development review process.

• Undertake the acquisition and adaptive reuse of existing public facilities for recreational purposes as a means of

108

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

LANDOVER GATEWAY

redevelopment or economic revitalization of an emerging area, wherever possible.

on page 112) for the proposed Fairmont Heights High School, Landover Gateway Fire/EMS Station, and Central Library.

• Coordinate parkland acquisition and facility planning with the 2005 Countywide Green Infrastructure Plan. • Provide the parkland and open space recommended in order to meet the parkland deficits (see Table 9: Recommended Park Acquisitions on page 110 and see Map 27: Recommended Parkland on page 111) NOTE: The sector plan defines the following locations (see Table 10: Proposed Acquisitions for Public Facilities

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

109

LANDOVER GATEWAY

Table 9: Recommended Park Acquisitions Park

Comments

1.

Henry P. Johnson Neighborhood Park, north side of Evart Street

4.2

Per the 1993 Landover and Vicinity Master Plan and Sectional Map Amendment (SMA)

2.

Highland Park Neighborhood Park

5

Board of Education parcel (lease option), per the 1993 Landover and Vicinity Master Plan and SMA

3.

Hill Road North Neighborhood Park, north of Arena Drive

10

Per the 1993 Landover and Vicinity Master Plan and SMA

4.

John Carroll Community Park/School

14

Per the 1993 Landover and Vicinity Master Plan and SMA

5.

Proposed parks at Woodmore Towne Centre

28

Per the 1990 Largo-Lottsford Master Plan and SMA

6.

Largo-Lottsford Neighborhood Park, northeast quadrant of Landover Road and Lake Arbor Way

80

7.

Willow Grove Neighborhood Park

19

South of USÂ 50 at the terminus of Cleary Lane

8.

Lottsford Vista Community Park

50

South of Cleary Lane

9.

Former Landover Mall Site

7

Urban park site

10.

Woodstream Community Park

44

East of Landover Road and north of Lottsford Road

14

Acquire developable parcel of land within the Cattail Branch Stream Valley Park that can be used as either active or passive parkland

11.

110

Acreage

Cattail Branch Stream Valley Park

North of the existing Lake Arbor Community Center

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

LANDOVER GATEWAY

Map 27: Recommended Parkland

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

111

LANDOVER GATEWAY

Table 10: Proposed Acquisitions for Public Facilities Facilities

Approximate Location

Site Requirements

New Fairmont Heights High School

South Columbia Park, Columbia Park Road across from Columbia Terrace

Board of Education must obtain school site from M-NCPPC

Landover Gateway Fire/EMS Station

Along Brightseat Road north of Landover Road and south of Evarts Street

12,500 square feet or more of operational and storage space including 4 apparatus bays and other support space and access to parking and transit.

Central Library

At the Brightseat Road/Landover Road interchange quadrant closest to transit stop

100,000 square feet of library space with on-site or adjacent public parking and transit

112

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

LANDOVER GATEWAY

Chapter 6: Community Development Elements Market Potential Vision Stakeholders and the community envision future development of a mixed-use center that incorporates opportunities to live, work, and play. By combining uses, the area will achieve a vitality that continues well past the end of the workday. Synergy among uses will create a stronger whole as residents patronize local restaurants and retail shops, and the mix of commercial, entertainment, and cultural uses makes Landover Gateway an attractive residential location. Cultural uses will enliven the district and attract users from around the region. Major governmental, institutional, and other offices will provide a daytime population to support retailers and restaurants.

Finally, transit extensions will link the Landover Gateway area to the Metro system, providing access for area residents and reducing impacts of auto traffic.

Background Landover Gateway area was once the county’s retail center, taking advantage of the superior access and visibility provided by the Capital Beltway. Currently, the area is ripe for redevelopment with a series of major land holdings available for new uses. The Woodmore Towne Centre at Glenarden project promises to bring major new retail, office, hotel, and residential development to the area. FedEx Field brings tens of thousands of fans to the area 10 to 15 times per year. Area development has been constrained by the lack of rail transit, public safety concerns, and the blighting impact of older apartment complexes. Office demand has been limited in recent years, indicating a need to recruit major governmental or institutional tenants to anchor the new development.

Goals • Design a new downtown Prince George’s County with pedestrian activity and vitality that attracts consumers, residents, and visitors.

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

• Create a vibrant mix of retail, office, cultural, and residential uses that reinforce each other.

• Design phased development that builds mixed uses at each stage, takes advantage of the Beltway location, and preserves the potential to capitalize on future transit access.

• Provide enhanced residential community that accommodates residents of all incomes, emphasizes homeownership for long-term stability, and provides links to jobs, retail, restaurants, services, and cultural/ entertainment activities.

• Provide an enhanced quality of life with significantly reduced crime levels and a heightened sense of personal safety.

• Provide amenities that support both new and existing residents, including retail, entertainment, and cultural uses, as well as public open space and schools.

• Design for a multiplicity of uses flexible enough to respond to changing markets.

Policy 1: Change the area’s image.

Strategies • Redevelop Glenarden Apartments and Maple Ridge Apartments. Coordinate public actions to address the needs of the existing tenants that will be relocated during redevelopment and the homeowners surrounding the area who may be adversely impacted during the effort.

• Enhance the appearance of the former Landover Mall site with permanent landscape improvements at entry points and interim landscaping on other parts of the site.

• Improve other gateways to the area with landscape, signage, and civic art elements.

113

LANDOVER GATEWAY

Policy 2: Enhance public safety.

Strategies • Incorporate Crime Prevention through Environmental Design principles into all new development to discourage future crime.

• Facilitate neighborhood watch programs to empower local residents.

• Establish police foot patrols in the redevelopment area.

• Enforce building and maintenance codes to assure adequate upkeep of area businesses and buildings.

Policy 3: Improve transit access.

Strategies • Work with private developers to institute a shuttle bus operation to link portions of the Landover Gateway area to each other and to the New Carrollton and Largo Town Center Metro stations.

• Work with the Maryland Transit Administration and the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority to provide light rail transit service to the area to improve accessibility for area employees and residents.

Policy 4: Develop mixed uses at each phase of development.

Strategies • Link new residential development to commercial and retail development so that each phase includes a balanced mix of uses.

• Design blocks and buildings for a multiplicity of uses.

• Given that Landover Gateway buildout may take as long as 20 years to complete, the sector plan should provide flexibility for inevitable changes in market demand over that period.

Policy 5: Market the “focal” attractions.

Strategies • Work with congressional and state leaders to recruit a federal agency to the area.

• Work with state legislators to bring a state agency to the area.

• Explore the feasibility of consolidating selected county agencies in a new Landover Gateway facility or relocating the county seat to the area.

• Contact regional colleges and universities to present the Landover Gateway site opportunity and to secure commitments to establish an urban campus in the area.

• Organize festivals and other events on the new shopping street and public green.

• Market the site for temporary public uses.

Policy 6: Streamline the review process and provide incentives for private investment.

Strategies • Reduce impediments to development by addressing Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance limitations that constrain redevelopment in urban areas impacted by pass-through traffic.

• Pursue partnerships with private developers and landowners to encourage timely redevelopment.

• Provide incentives for provision of public amenities within the new development.

Policy 7: Improve public facilities to support redevelopment and enhance residents’ quality of life.

Strategies • Construct and upgrade public schools and libraries.

• Develop public open space and recreation facilities to serve new and existing residents.

114

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

LANDOVER GATEWAY

• Improve accessibility with new streets and intersection improvements.

• Encourage private developers (and new tenants) to give hiring priority to local area residents.

• Pursue shared parking facilities to support new development.

• Market the availability of workforce services for employee recruitment and training, such as the Maryland Workforce Exchange System and the Economic Development Corporation’s One-Stop Job Career Center.

Policy 8: Develop housing for all income levels and ages.

Strategies • Provide for a variety of housing types and styles to accommodate households at different life stages and income levels.

• Provide financial and other incentives to private developers to incorporate affordable housing units within market-rate developments. Increase public funding commitments to the housing trust fund and single-family rehabilitation programs.

Policy 9: Create business and employment opportunities for area residents.

Strategies • Expand the Technical Assistance Center business incubator activities to Landover Gateway.

• Market the availability of small business assistance to new and existing businesses.

Policy 10: Develop a community cultural center to attract youth and adults from across the county.

Strategies • Bring together cultural organizations to pursue development of a joint community cultural center (akin to the Prince George’s County Sports & Learning Complex) that provides rehearsal space, music and art studios, office space for arts organizations, equipment storage, and a small, flexible performance space.

• Evaluate opportunities for an arts integration center that would help teachers to incorporate art into their curriculum and provide community arts classes, afterschool arts programs, and summer arts camps (described in Appendix B: Cultural Elements on page 157).

• Pursue private fundraising, governmental, and foundation grants and county/state capital funding.

• Coordinate workforce training with construction activity and new businesses attracted to Landover Gateway.

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

115

LANDOVER GATEWAY

116

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

LANDOVER GATEWAY

Chapter 7: Implementation Introduction: A Strategy for Progressive Implementation In order to achieve successful long-term implementation of the Landover Gateway sector plan, it is critical to establish an adequately staffed and funded public/private entity responsible for implementing the sector plan vision. Private developers and landowners need a forum in which to come together with public-sector decision-makers in order to collaboratively market and promote the area, fund shuttle bus service, and implement other strategies that can ensure a successful downtown Landover. Without public sector involvement, the private sector lacks access to financing and other tools essential to achieving the vision of the sector plan. Day-to-day implementation of the plan requires project-dedicated staff and resources.

Implementation Strategies Best Practices from Other Communities Public/private partnerships can take a number of forms depending on the area’s status, vision, and resources. These organizations include: • Business Improvement Districts (BIDs) • Nonprofit development corporations • Local government authorities

BIDs BIDs are formed voluntarily by petition of property owners that desire to support additional services and are willing to self-fund those services through additional property taxes.

Examples of the kinds of services that may be provided include: supplemental security, additional street cleaning, and unique marketing events/support within the district.

BIDs are funded through special assessments collected from property owners in the defined boundaries of the district. The assessment is levied on the property owners Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

who can, if the property lease allows, pass it on to their tenants. Typically, an individual property owner will pay an assessment of approximately six percent of his/her annual real estate tax charge.

The job of local government is to establish the district, collect the special tax assessments or fees, and then transfer funds over to the BID organization to be administered.

Washington D.C., New York City, and many other cities in the United States and around the world have used BIDs to revitalize established communities and reinvigorate metropolitan centers.

BIDs are usually governed by a Board of Directors that includes a combination of public and private stakeholders of the district. Therefore, they are not inhibited or controlled by either the public or the private sector but are a true partnership between individuals with a vested interest in the success of the area.

Development Corporations Focusing on the implementation of development and redevelopment plans, public/private development corporations are staffed with experienced real estate development professionals. They negotiate specific development agreements for projects developed on public land and/or developed with public financial assistance.

Development corporations also may conduct the same functions as BIDs—providing clean and safe operations, special events, and marketing.

Typically, these development corporations are organized as 501(c)(3) nonprofit entities. Their boards involve both public and private sector representation with funding directly from both sectors and from grants, fees, and development profits.

Development corporations are empowered to acquire and dispose of property, to contract for construction and services, and to receive appropriations, grants, and gifts. Few have eminent domain and taxing authority.

117

LANDOVER GATEWAY

Local Government Authorities A variation of development corporations is the local government authority empowered to implement approved redevelopment plans. Relying on local government funding and staffing, a development authority may combine the development of government-owned land, negotiation of development agreements for other parcels, and coordination of public infrastructure improvements. The County Executive and/or County Council appoints the Board of Directors, which then implements the redevelopment plan with relative autonomy. Board membership is often specified to include representatives of the real estate, finance, and marketing industries. Depending on their enabling legislation, such authorities often have the power to acquire property through eminent domain, issue bonds, and contract for construction and other services. As government agencies, many are subject to personnel and procurement processes. The Redevelopment Authority of Prince George’s County is a local example. The Prince George’s County Redevelopment Authority and Economic Development Corporation should assume leading roles and collaborate to identify and assess potential implementation strategies.

Public/Private Partnerships Landover Gateway could benefit greatly from having several major landowners with development capabilities and resources. Ideally, one of these major landowners would spearhead the formation of an implementation entity by joining with other property owners to petition for the creation of a BID. The BID could then take the lead on: • Public safety.

• Marketing to the federal and state governments, colleges, universities, and other institutions.

• Developing branding and a logo for the area.

• Working with the Department of Public Works and Transportation, Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority, and the Maryland Transit Administration to plan transit service to the area.

• Developing financial partnerships between the county and developers, including tax-increment financing and special assessment districts as appropriate.

118

• Developing shuttle bus service within Landover Gateway and to the New Carrollton and Largo Town Center Metro stations.

• Working with cultural organizations for creation of a new cultural center.

• Working with The Maryland-National Capital Park and Planning Commission (M-NCPPC) and developers in creating public open space.

• Working with the Department of Public Works and Transportation and the State Highway Administration on planning and funding public infrastructure improvements, including gateway and other streetscape improvements.

Public Development Incentives The historically weak market for office and commercial development in the greater Landover area has resulted in depressed rents and, consequently, undermined the private sector’s ability to fund all of the major public realm improvements that are inherent to achieving the community’s vision for Landover Gateway. The required improvements include extensive road and transit infrastructure, environmental enhancement through the creation and enhancement of major open spaces and trails, a cultural center, schools, and other public facilities.

In addition, the new street grid, structured parking, wide sidewalks, and streetscape improvements within the new development areas will cost more than standard features.

Several financing tools are potentially available to support the proposed development. They include tax-increment financing, special assessment districts, and tax abatement and tax credits: Tax-Increment Financing (TIF). TIF earmarks the property taxes generated by the increase in property values to fund public improvements. Tax revenues, which would not be generated without the development improvements, are diverted to a special fund for a period of 30–40 years until the bonds financing the improvements have been repaid.

Special Assessment Districts. Within special assessment districts as with BIDs, property owners agree to be subject to an additional tax to finance specific improvements.

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

LANDOVER GATEWAY

Such assessments work well in commercial districts with sophisticated property owners who understand public finance. They are less suitable for homeowners, who often do not understand or budget for the additional taxes. Several jurisdictions use special assessment districts to fund the initial years’ debt service on tax-increment bonds before the new development is generating sufficient tax revenue to fully fund the bonds.

Public Facilities Cost Analysis and Estimates. Per Section 27-646(b)(4) of the Zoning Ordinance, all approved sector plans must contain an estimate of the cost of all public facilities that must be acquired or constructed in order to carry out the objectives and requirements of the sector plan.

Table 11: Public Facilities Cost Analysis and Estimates exhibits the public facility cost estimates. The estimates are based on current (2007) dollars.

Tax Abatement and Tax Credits. Though unsuitable for combination with TIF, which depends on new property tax revenues, short- and midterm abatement of property taxes on new development or redeveloped property can provide an important incentive for private investment. With a reduced tax burden, the project can support a higher level of private investment by devoting a larger share of the project’s operating revenues to repayment of development costs.

“New” indicates new or modified public facilities. “Existing” indicates existing and proposed recommendations in current county or state funding programs or carried over from the 1993 Approved Landover and Vicinity Master Plan and Sectional Map Amendment and 1990 Approved LargoLottsford Master Plan and Sectional Map Amendment.

Table 11: Public Facilities Cost Analysis and Estimates New/ Existing

Recommended Public Facilities

Location and Description

County CIP/ State CTP

Estimated Cost

Transportation Facilities—Roads New

Internal roadways

Throughout the sector plan

Not in current CIP

100% Developer Funded

New

Campus Way/Evarts Street

Extension of Campus Way/ Evarts Street over the Capital Beltway to Brightseat Road

Not in current CIP

$13,000,000 required improvement to be funded and constructed

by WTC

Existing

MD 202, Enhancement

Planned 6-lane expressway between Capital Beltway and Barlowe Road

Not in current CIP

$2,600,000 -$4,000,000

Existing

Brightseat Road, Enhancement

Planned 4-lane collector facility between Evarts Street and Ardwick-Ardmore Road.

Not in current CIP

100% Developer Funded

New

Grade-Separated Interchange

Planned urban diamond interchange at MD 202 with Brightseat Road

Not in current CIP

$13,000,000 required improvement to be funded and/or constructed by WTC or others

New

Cattail Branch/Evarts Street

Extend to Barlowe Road as a 4-lane collector

Not in current CIP.

100% Developer Funded

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

119

LANDOVER GATEWAY

Transportation Facilities—Transit

New

Reroute and expand bus service from New Carrollton Metro to Largo Town Center Metro serving the Landover Gateway sector plan area

Extend the planned and existing bus service from New Carrollton Metro station to connect with the Largo Town Center Metro Station serving the Landover Gateway sector plan area and the WTC

Not in current CIP

To be determined. (This is part of a larger project currently being studied

by MD-MTA.)

Not in current CIP. 1993 master plan recommendation (p. 83)

$360,000

$60,000

Transportation Facilities—Trails

Existing

Cattail Branch Stream Valley Trail

A multiuse trail within a park corridor along Cattail Branch. Cost estimate for study area only

New

Neighborhood Trail Connection

Evarts Street to Cattail Branch and Kenmoor Elementary School

Not in current CIP

Stream Valley Trail along tributary of Cattail Branch

A multiuse trail within a park corridor from Sheriff Road to Cattail Branch

Not in current CIP. 1993 master plan recommendation (p. 83).

Pedestrian Safety Improvements across MD 202 at Brightseat Road

Improve pedestrian safety at this crossing. Improvement types and costs will vary depending upon the type of intersection improvements made.

New proposal

To be determined.

Existing

Brightseat Road sidewalks and designated bike lanes

Sidewalk and bikeway improvements along Brightseat Road within the study area. Improvements may include completing gaps in the sidewalk network, providing wider sidewalks in areas of high pedestrian traffic, pedestrian safety improvements, and designated bike lanes.

1993 master plan (p.84). Funded in current CIP from MD 214 to Spectrum Drive (FD669711).

$240,000. Costs may be included within larger road improvement project.

New

H. P. Johnson Park Connector Trails

Trail connections through the neighborhood park connecting surrounding communities

New proposal

$60,000

Pedestrian Bridge

Woodmore Town Centre to Landover Mall site

New proposal. To be constructed in conjunction with transit.

$3,000,000

Existing

New

New

120

$108,000

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

LANDOVER GATEWAY

Existing

New

New

Evarts Street

Sidewalks and on-road bike accommodations along Evarts Street. This facility will provide bike and pedestrian access across the Beltway.

1993 Comprehensive Plan map.

Developer funded

Trail/bikeway along “Boulevard”

Trail or pedestrian accommodations should be incorporated into the “boulevard” proposal of the center, as well as other linear greenways

New proposal

To be determined

Standard sidewalks along all internal roads

Standard sidewalks are recommended along both sides of all internal roads within the study area.

Improvements may be implemented through development projects, CIP projects, and individual retrofit projects.

New proposal

To be determined.

Costs may be included within larger road improvement projects.

Schools—Short-term Existing

Ardmore Elementary School renovation

9301 Ardwick Ardmore Road, renovation of existing structure

Sector plan recommendation.

TBD

Existing

Matthew Henson Elementary School renovation.

7910 Scott Road, renovation of existing structure

Sector plan recommendation

TBD

New

New Fairmont Heights High School.

South Columbia Park, Columbia Park Road, construction of new 900seat high school

CIP AA779826

$70,757,000

Obtain appropriate acreage or building floor space for a new 100,000-square-foot central library, adjacent to public parking and transit

Sector plan recommendation

TBD

Obtain a site for a new Fire/ EMS station

Sector plan recommendation

TBD

Library—Short-term

New

Obtain Prince George’s County Central Library site

Fire/EMS Stations—Short-term New

Obtain Landover Gateway Fire/EMS Station site

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

121

LANDOVER GATEWAY

New

St. Joseph’s Drive Fire/ EMS Station

St. Joseph’s Drive and Ardmore Road, new Fire/ EMS station

Approved County FY 2007-2012 CIP Item # LK510163; 1990 Approved Largo-Lottsford Master Plan recommendation.

$2,617,000

Police Station—Long-term Existing

Police Headquarters/ District III Headquarters renovation

7600 Barlowe Road, renovation of existing structure

2008 Public Safety Facilities Master Plan recommendation

$10,000,000

Obtain appropriate acreage and construct a new 200,000-square-foot PreK–8 school adjacent to H.P. Johnson Park, sufficient parking for faculty and staff, and access to transit

Sector plan recommendation.

TBD

New construction

Sector plan recommendation

TBD

New construction

Sector plan recommendation

TBD

School—Long-term

New

New Urban PreK–8 School

Library—Long-term New

Prince George’s County Central Library

Fire/EMS Station—Long-term New

Landover Gateway Fire/ EMS Station

Parks and Recreation Existing

Henry P. Johnson Neighborhood Park (P25)

Add 4.2 acres on the south side of the existing park.

1993 Landover and Vicinity Master Plan recommendation

$60,000/acre or $252,000

Existing

Highland Park Neighborhood Park (P14)

Add 5-acre Board of Education parcel (lease option)

1993 Landover and Vicinity Master Plan recommendation

$100,000/acre or $500,000

Existing

Hill Road North Neighborhood Park

Propose 10-acre park located to the north of Arena Drive

1993 Landover and Vicinity Master Plan recommendation

$90,000/acre or $900,000

Existing

John Carroll Community Park/School (P33)

Add 14 acres to the east of the existing park

1993 Landover and Vicinity Master Plan recommendation

$200,000/acre or $2,800,000

Existing

Woodmore Towne Centre at Glenarden

Propose new 28-acre park between St. Joseph’s Drive and the Beltway

1990 Largo-Lottsford Master Plan/SMA recommendation

$250,000/acre or $7,000,000

122

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

LANDOVER GATEWAY

Existing

Largo-Lottsford Community Park

Add 80-acre parcel to an existing park, located north of the Lake Arbor Community Park/School Center

1990 Largo-Lottsford Master Plan/SMA recommendation

$40,000/acre or $3,200,000

New

Willow Grove Neighborhood Park (O47)

Add 19 acres to an existing park south of US 50 at the terminus of Cleary Lane

Sector plan recommendation

$40,000/acre or $760,000

New

Lottsford Vista Community Park

Propose new 50-acre park south of Cleary Lane

Sector plan recommendation

$40,000/acre or $2,000,000

New

Former Landover Mall Site

Propose new 5-acre urban park site

Sector plan recommendation

$10/square foot or $3,049,000

New

Woodstream Community Park

Propose new 44-acre park east of Landover Road and north of Lottsford Road

Sector plan/SMA recommendation

$100,000/acre or $4,400,000

Cattail Branch Stream Valley Park

Acquire 14-acre developable parcel of land within the Cattail Branch Stream Valley Park that can be used as either active or passive parkland

Sector plan/SMA recommendation

$60,000/acre or $840,000

New

Plan Sequencing

Short-Term (5–15 Years)

Actions recommended as part of the sector plan are divided strategically into four stages: immediate actions, shortterm (5-15 years), midterm (10-20 years), and long-term (15-30 years). (See Map 28: Recommended Development Sequencing Plan on page 125.)

Short-term actions are designed to provide an initial “big bang” of highly visible projects that signal positive changes in the area and establish upfront key components of the larger vision for Landover Gateway. Elements of the sector plan implemented in the short-term include:

Immediate Actions

• Develop the first phase of the civic center with initial anchor tenants to establish Landover Gateway’s presence in the county and region.

• Form a BID including all properties located west of the Capital Beltway with the option of future expansion, followed by policy and legislation by the county.

• Establish a tax increment financing district for all properties west of the Beltway.

• Implement aesthetic improvements to the undeveloped portion of the former Landover Mall site.

• Install new lighting and street trees along Brightseat Road.

• Implement circulatory shuttle bus service, connecting Landover Gateway to Woodmore Towne Centre and nearby Metro stations.

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

• Initiate redevelopment of the Glenarden Apartments property to address existing negative perceptions of the area.

• Establish the main street streetscape.

• Construct extension of Evarts Street across the Capital Beltway, connecting Landover Gateway with Woodmore Towne Centre.

• Develop entrances and exits to the former Landover Mall site.

• Develop distinctive and welcoming gateways to the area from the north and south.

123

LANDOVER GATEWAY

Actions Requiring Public Funds • Upgrades to and expansion of the Henry P. Johnson Park.

• Develop an urban model school on the existing Prince George’s County Public Schools property. Include school in Capital Improvement Program (CIP) list for future consideration.

• Initiate a detailed infrastructure needs study, including a study of proposed improvements to the existing offramp from I-95/I-495 to MD 202, a study of road improvements at the intersection of Brightseat Road and MD 202, and a study of the proposed Cattail Creek Drive.

• Establish initial portions of the planned street network, including portions of the main street commercial core, the area around the proposed new school, and the Gateway North Neighborhood. (SHARED COSTS) • Initiate a study of potential alignments for light rail transit.

• Fund the housing trust fund and single-family rehabilitation program to provide housing for all incomes.

• Market Landover Gateway to government, institutional, and educational tenants.

• Market Landover Gateway to retailers and hotels.

• Pursue development of a community cultural center and arts integration center by organizing a task force of cultural organizations.

• Organize festivals and other public events to animate and market the area.

Midterm (10–20 Years) Midterm actions will complete the main street commercial core and Park Slope neighborhood, while also establishing the presence of a viable new mixed-use area at the intersection of MD 202 and Brightseat Road. Elements of the sector plan implemented during the midterm include:

124

• Complete the main street and southwest quadrant of the former Landover Mall site.

• Complete redevelopment of Glenarden Apartments property.

• Redevelop the area west of Brightseat Road (Maple Ridge Apartment property and adjoining properties) as a mixed-use and residential neighborhood.

• Continue buildout of residential and mixed-use portions of the downtown neighborhood.

• Continue buildout of the civic center.

• Redevelop the existing Landover Crossing Shopping Center site.

• Develop portions of the Gateway South Neighborhood, north of Sheriff Road.

• Construct an additional pedestrian walkway to Woodmore Towne Centre.

• Develop an additional entrance to the main street commercial core off MD 202.

• Continue development of the street network, including connections north and south of Landover Road at the western edge of the sector area, portions of the downtown and Park Slope neighborhoods, and at the location of the existing Landover Crossing Shopping Center site.

• Assess needs for construction of a pedestrian crossing across MD 202.

Actions Requiring Public Funds • Construct proposed Cattail Creek Drive connecting Evarts Street with MD 202 (SHARED COSTS).

• Improve the intersection of Brightseat Road and MD 202 (SHARED COSTS).

• Improve Brightseat Road/Redskins Drive, north and south of MD 202 (SHARED COSTS).

• Construct exit ramp improvements (SHARED COSTS).

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

LANDOVER GATEWAY

Map 28: Recommended Development Sequencing Plan Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

125

LANDOVER GATEWAY

• Construct a new central library in the downtown core area.

• Prepare schematic plans for light rail transit.

• Fund the housing trust fund and single-family rehabilitation program to provide housing for all incomes.

• Market Landover Gateway to government, institutional, and educational tenants.

• Market Landover Gateway to retailers and hotels.

• Organize festivals and other public events to animate and market the area.

Long-Term (15–30 Years)

• Complete the downtown neighborhood.

• Complete the Civic Center up to Evarts Street.

• Complete buildout of the Gateway South neighborhood, south of Sheriff Road, including development of mixed office and residential uses and shared parking.

• Complete build-out of the Gateway South neighborhood at the intersection of MD 202 and Barlowe Road.

Actions Requiring Public Funds • Implement light rail transit.

• Fund the housing trust fund and single-family rehabilitation program to provide housing for all incomes.

Long-term actions will complete the remaining elements of the plan. Actions implemented during this stage include:

126

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

LANDOVER GATEWAY

Technical Manual for Implementation The sector plan provides the overall vision for Landover Gateway and includes design guidelines to assist public and private entities in implementing the sector plan’s vision. These guidelines provide the sector plan’s specific recommendations and expectations for building height, siting, elements, uses, and the relationship of buildings to the public space. (See Chapter 3.)

Sectional Map Amendment (SMA) Introduction The comprehensive rezoning process, also known as the SMA pro­cess in Prince George’s County, allows for the rezoning of a section of the overall county zoning map in order to bring zoning into conformance with adopted county plans and policies. This chapter contains the proposed SMA for the Landover Gateway sector plan. The SMA is intended to implement the land use recom­mendations of the approved sector plan for the foreseeable future.

The SMA was initiated via Council Resolution CR-20-2007, with the expressed intent to process the SMA concurrent with the sector plan. The procedure followed is in accor­ dance with Council Bill CB-33-1992, which establishes the framework for the process. The SMA formally incorporates the zoning recommendations as an amendment to the official zoning maps. Existing zoning that hinders such development will be corrected, and piecemeal rezonings will be minimized by this comprehensive approach. The procedural sequence chart for this concurrent process is illustrated in Appendix A. The approval of the zoning pattern recommended by the sector plan and implemented by this SMA brings zoning into greater con­formity with county land use goals and poli­cies as they apply to the Landover Gateway and vicinity area, thereby enhancing the health, safety, and general welfare of all Prince George’s County citizens.

The County’s CIP and Ten-Year Water and Sewerage Plan, as well as existing land use and zoning, and pending zoning applications were examined and evaluated in the preparation of both the land use plan and the SMA. Consideration has also been given to the environmental and economic impact Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

of the land use and zoning recommendations. The approval of the SMA results in the revision of the official 1"=200’ zoning map(s) for this portion of Planning Area 72 that includes the sector plan boundary. Future comprehensive examinations of the zoning within the area will occur in accordance with the procedures established for SMAs. The last comprehensive rezoning of this area took place on July 27, 1993, with the approval of the SMA for Landover and Vicinity (Planning Area 72) by Council Resolution CR-57-1993.

Comprehensive Rezoning Implementation Policies A number of established comprehensive rezoning implementation policies are utilized as necessary guidelines for developing the SMA.

Public Land Policy The established public land policy states that all public land should be placed in the most restrictive and/or dominant adjacent zone, whichever bears the closest relationship to the intended character of the area. Therefore, the zoning of public land, just as private land, should be compatible with surrounding zones. This policy should eliminate any “islands” of inharmonious zoning, while still providing for the public use. It should further assure compatibility of any future develop­ment or uses if the property is returned to private ownership.

A distinction is made where a large parcel of land has been set aside specifically for public open space. In this case the R-O-S Zone is applied.

Federal and state government property, which is scattered throughout the county, is not subject to the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance. The intent of the comprehensive rezoning process is to apply a zoning cate­gory to all land, including federal and state property, without regard to its unique zoning status. The R-O-S Zone is generally applied to federal and state properties, unless specific uses of the property or intended character of the property and/or area should warrant an­other zoning category. The Prince George’s County Board of Education and M-NCPPC own land within the sector plan boundary. The base zone

127

LANDOVER GATEWAY

for the Board of Education property is the C-O Zone, and the base zone for M-NCPPC property is the R-55 Zone.

Zoning in Public Rights-of-Way Policies governing the zoning of public street and railroad rights-of-way (both existing and proposed) are contained in Section 27-111 of the Prince George’s County Zoning Ordi­nance. This SMA has been prepared in accordance with this section.

Limitations on the Use of Zones Zoning classifications used in this SMA are limited only by the range of zones within the Ordinance available at the time of final action by the District Council. However, there are certain restrictions on when these may be applied to properties (Section 27-223 of the Zoning Ordinance).

Reclassification of an existing zone to a less intense zone is prohibited where: (g)(1) “The property has been rezoned by zoning map Amendment within five (5) years prior to the initiation of the Sectional Map Amendment or during the period be­tween initiation and transmittal to the District Council, and the property owner has not consented in writing to such rezoning;” or (g)(2) “Based on existing physical development at the time of adoption of the Sec­tional Map Amendment, the rezoning would create a nonconforming use.

This rezoning may be approved, however, if there is a significant public benefit to be served by the rezoning based on facts peculiar to the subject property and the im­mediate neighborhood. In recommending the rezoning, the Planning Board shall identify these properties and provide written justification supporting the rezoning at the time of transmittal. The failure of either the Planning Board or property owner to identify these properties, or a failure of the Planning Board to provide the written justification, shall not invalidate any Council action in the approval of the Sectional Map Amendment.”

Finally, in order to clarify the extent to which a given parcel of land is protected from less in­tensive rezoning by virtue of physical development, the Zoning Ordinance states in Section 27-223(h) that: 128

“The area of the ‘property,’ as the word is used in Subsection (g)(2), above, is the minimum required by the Zoning Ordinance which makes the use legally existing when the Sectional Map Amendment is approved.”

Conditional Zoning The inclusion of safeguards, requirements, and conditions beyond the normal provisions of the Zoning Ordinance, which can be at­tached to individual zoning map amend­ ments via “Conditional Zoning,” cannot be utilized in SMAs. In the piecemeal rezoning process, conditions are used to (1) protect surrounding properties from potential ad­verse effects that might accrue from a spe­cific zoning map amendment; and/or (2) enhance coordinated, harmonious, and sys­tematic development of the regional district. When approved by the District Council, and accepted by the zoning applicant, “condi­tions” become part of the county zoning map requirements applicable to a specific property and are as binding as any provision of the County Zoning Ordinance [see Condi­tional Zoning Procedures, Section 27-157(b)].

In theory, zoning actions taken as part of the comprehensive rezoning SMA process should be compatible with other land uses without the use of conditions. However, it is not the intent of an SMA to repeal the addi­tional requirements determined via “conditional” zoning cases that have been approved prior to the initiation of a sectional map amendment. As such, it is appropriate that, when special conditions to development of specific properties have been publicly agreed upon and have become part of the existing zoning map applicable to the site, those same conditions shall be brought forward in the SMA. This is accomplished by continuing the approved zoning with “conditions” and showing the zoning application number on the newly adopted zoning map. This would take place only when it is found that the existing zoning is compatible with the intended zoning pattern or when ordinance limitations preclude a rezoning. Similarly, findings contained in previously approved SMAs shall be brought forward in the SMA where the previous zoning category has been maintained.

Comprehensive Design Zones (CDZ) CDZs may be included in a sectional map amendment.

Normally, the flexible nature of these zones requires a basic Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

LANDOVER GATEWAY

plan of development to be submitted through the zoning application process (zoning map amendment) in order to evaluate the comprehensive design pro­posal. It is only through approval of a basic plan, which identifies land use types, quanti­ties, and relationships, that a CDZ can be recognized. Under this process, an application must be filed, including a basic plan, and the Planning Board must have considered and made a recommendation on the zoning application in order for the CDZ to be included within the SMA. During the comprehensive rezoning, prior to the submission of such proposals, property must be classified in a conventional zone that provides an appropriate “base density” for the development. In theory, the “base density” zone allows for an acceptable level of alternative development should the owner choose not to pursue full development potential indicated by the master plan.

Under limited circumstances, CDZs may be approved in a sectional map amendment without the filing of a formal rezoning application by an applicant. The recommendation of the sector plan and the SMA zoning change, including any design guidelines or standards, may constitute the basic plan for development. In these cases, overall land use types, quantities, and relationships for the recommended development concept should be described in the SMA text and be subject to further adjustment during the second phase of review, the Comprehensive Design Plan, as more detailed information becomes available. See CB-76-2006, CB-77-2006, and Sections 27-223(b), 27-225(b)(1), 27226(a)(2), 27-226(f )(4), 27-478(a)(1), 27-480(g), and 2752(a)(1) of the Zoning Ordinance.

A mixed-use zoning tool currently being developed by M-NCPPC is expected to be completed in FY 2009, which could implement the 2002 General Plan recommendations for centers, streamline and standardize regulations and development review procedures, and supplement or replace existing mixed-use zones and overlay zones. Until a new mixed-use zoning tool or set of mixed-use zones is approved, the Mixed-Use Transportation (M-X-T) zone serves as an adequate zoning technique to implement the recommendations of the sector plan for mixed-use development concentrated in and around the former Landover Mall site.

Mixed-Use Zoning Recommendations Implementation of the long-range land use recommendations of the Landover Gateway sector plan and SMA for mixeduse, pedestrian- and transit-oriented development in designated mixed-use activity centers will require application of mixed-use zoning techniques and possible incorporation of a form-based code. Although there are several mixed-use zoning categories defined in the Zoning Ordinance, none currently contain an ideal combination of use, design, and administrative regulations necessary to achieve the character and vision recommended by the sector plan. The following mixed-use zones are currently available: the Development District Overlay Zone, Transit District Overlay Zone, M-X-T Oriented Zone, Mixed-Use Infill Zone, MixedUse Town Center Zone, and CDZs, including the Local Activity Center, and Major Activity Center.

It is recommended that an appropriate set of mixed-use, form-based zoning categories or techniques be prepared (or existing zones modified), so that there is an effective and efficient set of regulations to implement the mixeduse, pedestrian- and transit-oriented development patterns recommended by the 2002 General Plan and recent master plans, including the Landover Gateway sector plan and SMA. The land use map (see Map 6: Land Use Plan on page 19) includes (striped) areas where applications for a mixed-use zone (or other appropriate zoning tool) are appropriate, based on the visions, goals, policies, and planning strategies contained in this sector plan.

Comprehensive Rezoning Changes To implement the sector plan’s policies and land use recommendations contained in the preceding chapters, many parcels of land must be rezoned to bring the zoning into con­formance with the sector plan. The compre­ hensive rezoning process (via the SMA) provides the most appropriate mechanism for the public sector to achieve this. As such, the SMA is approved as an amendment to the official zoning map(s) concurrently with sec­tor plan approval.

The approved SMA includes 11 recommended zoning changes based on the land use and development policies described in the previous chapters of this sector plan. The

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

129

LANDOVER GATEWAY

SMA is organized using the sector plan’s subareas identified on Map 29: Approved Zoning Changes on page 131. The 11 zon­ing changes result in a new zoning inventory for the area. Table 12: Existing and Approved Zoning Inventory (in acres) lists the ag­gregate changes in zoning by zone classifica­tion and indicates the acreage comprising each zoning change. Specific zoning changes are shown on individual subarea page-size maps (see Maps 29-40) and

are described in tables. Also, these maps and the approved SMA zoning map (see Map 4: Approved Zoning on page 15) are included for illus­trative purposes only. The 1"=200’ scale zoning maps will represent the official zoning boundaries.

There were no zoning applica­tions pending during the preparation of this SMA.

Table 12: Existing and Approved Zoning Inventory (in acres) Zone

Net Change

Approved Zoning

R-55 (One Family Detached Residential)

27.97

-15.70

12.27

R-18 (Multifamily Medium Density Residential)

45.15

-45.15

0

C-A (Ancillary Commercial)

0.72

-0.72

0

C-O (Commercial Office)

15.82

-15.82

0

C-S-C (Commercial Shopping Center

114.04

-114.04

0

C-M (Commercial Miscellaneous)

23.23

-23.23

0

I-1 (Light Industrial)

31.81

-31.81

0

I-3 (Planned Employment Park)

0.25

-0.25

0

244.67

+246.72

491.39

O-S (Open Space)

4.94

0

4.94

Right-of-Way

81.99

0

81.99

Total

590.59

0

590.59

M-X-T

130

Existing Zoning

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

LANDOVER GATEWAY

R-18, C-O, C-A, C-S-C, R-55, C-M, I-1, I-3 to M-X-T

Map 29: Approved Zoning Changes Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

131

LANDOVER GATEWAY

Proposed Zoning Changes LG-1a, 1b, 1c Change Number

Zoning Change

LG-1a

C-S-C to M-X-T

Area of Change 69.07 ac.

Approved SMA/ZMA/SE

200’ Scale

Number

Date

Index Map

SE-2466

7/15/71

203NE08 204NE08

Use and Location: Vacant property, demolished Landover Mall Shopping Center (Tax Map 60 Grid C-2, LANDOVER MALL, PARCEL C-1, E, F; 60C3, LANDOVER MALL, PARCEL A, D, H) Discussion: The property is in the core of the sector plan area designated as a regional center in the 2002 General Plan and appropriate for mixed-use development in accordance with the sector plan’s goals and the 2002 General Plan recommendation for regional centers.

Change Number

Zoning Change

LG-1b

C-S-C to M-X-T

Area of Change 13.74 ac.

Approved SMA/ZMA/SE

200’ Scale

Number

Date

Index Map

SE-2518

9/1/71

203NE08

SE-4357 Use and Location: Retail commercial, Sears store at 2101 Brightseat Road (Tax Map 60 Grid C-3, LANDOVER MALL, PARCEL B) Discussion: The property is in the core of the sector plan area designated as a regional center in the 2002 General Plan and appropriate for mixed-use development in accordance with the sector plan’s goals and the 2002 General Plan recommendation for regional centers.

Change Number

Zoning Change

LG-1c

C-S-C to M-X-T

Area of Change 0.64 ac.

Approved SMA/ZMA/SE

200’ Scale

Number

Date

Index Map

SE-2466

7/15/71

203NE08

Use and Location: Service commercial, tire installation at 2487 Brightseat Road (Tax Map 60 Grid C-2, LANDOVER MALL, PARCEL C-2) Discussion: The property is in the core of the sector plan area designated as a regional center in the 2002 General Plan and appropriate for mixed-use development in accordance with the sector plan’s goals and the 2002 General Plan recommendation for regional centers.

132

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

LANDOVER GATEWAY

LG-1a. C-S-C to M-X-T LG-1b. C-S-C to M-X-T LG-1c. C-S-C to M-X-T

Map 30: Approved Zoning Changes LG-1a, 1b, 1c

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

133

LANDOVER GATEWAY

Proposed Zoning Changes LG 2 Change Number

Zoning Change

LG-2

C-S-C to M-X-T

Area of Change 19.17 ac.

Approved SMA/ZMA/SE

200’ Scale

Number

Date

Index Map

SE-2888

9/15/75

203NE08

Use and Location: Retail commercial, Landover Crossing Shopping Center at 8501-8585 Landover Road (Tax Map 60 Grid C-3, LANDOVER ROAD K-MART-HENRY J KNOTT PROP P/O LOT 1) Discussion: The property is recommended for mixed-use development to encourage land use options that include office, residential, and retail uses as discussed in the Development Pattern Elements chapter and consistent with the goals of the sector plan and the 2002 General Plan recommendations for regional centers. Rezoning of the property to the M-X-T zone will fulfill the sector plan’s goals and the 2002 General Plan recommendations for regional centers.

134

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

LANDOVER GATEWAY

LG-2. C-S-C to M-X-T

Map 31: Approved Zoning Changes LG-2

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

135

LANDOVER GATEWAY

Proposed Zoning Changes LG-3 Change Number

Zoning Change

Area of Change

LG-3

I-1 to M-X-T

48.09 ac.

R-55 to M-X-T

1.43 ac.

Total

49.52 ac.

Approved SMA/ZMA/SE

200’ Scale

Number

Date

Index Map

A-9640C

1/9/84

202NE08 203NE08

Use and Location: Vacant property at 1802 Brightseat Road (Tax Map 60 Grid C-4, LANSDOWNE VILLAGE, P/O PARCEL A, Parcel 277. p/o Parcel 29) Discussion: The plan proposes mixed-use development with offices/limited retail and residential uses for the WFI Stadium Inc. property. However, parking for future mixed-use development for the Gateway South neighborhood may be permitted at the WFI Stadium Inc. property, provided that the required mixed-use elements are satisfied by other properties adjoining the subject site. In the long run, the plan envisions the parking lots being replaced with appropriate mixed uses designed to accommodate a large-scale parking facility.

136

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

LANDOVER GATEWAY

LG-3. I-1 to M-X-T

Map 32: Approved Zoning Changes LG-3

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

137

LANDOVER GATEWAY

Proposed Zoning Changes LG-4a, LG-4b Change Number

Zoning Change

Area of Change

LG-4a

C-M to M-X-T

3.79 ac.

Approved SMA/ZMA/SE

200’ Scale

Number

Date

SMA

7/27/93

Index Map 203NE07 203NE08

Use and Location: Abandoned auto dealership at 2000 Brightseat Road (Tax Map 60 Grid B-3, VOLKSWAGON SALES & SERVICE INC, P/O PARCEL A) Discussion: The property is in an area determined to be appropriate for mixed-use development to encourage land use options that include office, residential, and retail uses as discussed in the Development Pattern Elements chapter and consistent with the goals of the sector plan and the 2002 General Plan. Rezoning to the M‑X-T zone will create flexible development opportunities along this critical corner of the MD 202 and Brightseat Road intersection.

Change Number

Zoning Change

Area of Change

LG-4b

C-M to M-X-T

19.57 ac.

Approved SMA/ZMA/SE

200’ Scale

Number

Date

Index Map

SMA

7/27/93

203NE07 203NE08

Use and Location: Graded property at 8300 Sheriff Road (Tax Map 60 Grid B-3, p/o Parcel 51) Discussion: The plan proposes mixed-use development with offices/retail and residential uses for the property. However, a temporary graveled surface parking lot is currently allowed in anticipation of future mixed-use development as envisioned by the sector plan.

138

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

LANDOVER GATEWAY

LG-4a. C-M to M-X-T LG-4b. C-M to M-X-T

Map 33: Approved Zoning Changes LG-4a, 4b

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

139

LANDOVER GATEWAY

Proposed Zoning Changes LG-5 Change Number

Zoning Change

LG-5

C-O to M-X-T

Area of Change 13.75 ac.

Approved SMA/ZMA/SE

200’ Scale

Number

Date

Index Map

SMA

7/27/93

203NE07 203NE08

Use and Location: Bonnie F. Johns Educational Media Center at 8437 Landover Road (Tax Map 60 Grid B-3, Parcel 56) Discussion: A portion of this property is recognized as a school, and the frontage is recommended for a mixed-use zone to encourage land use options that include office, residential, retail, and uses as discussed in the Development Pattern Elements chapter and consistent with the goals of the sector plan and the 2002 General Plan recommendations for centers. Rezoning to M-X-T zone will create flexible development opportunities.

140

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

LANDOVER GATEWAY

LG-5. C-O to M-X-T

Map 34: Approved Zoning Changes LG-5

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

141

LANDOVER GATEWAY

Proposed Zoning Changes LG-6a, LG-6b Change Number

Zoning Change

LG-6a

C-S-C to M-X-T

Area of Change 10.24 ac.

Approved SMA/ZMA/SE

200’ Scale

Number

Date

Index Map

SMA

7/27/93

203NE07

Use and Location: Vacant property on Landover and Barlow Roads (Tax Map 60 Grid B-3, p/o Parcels 18, 47) Discussion: The property is recommended for residential development to support the employment core of the sector plan.

Rezoning to C-S-C to M-X-T zone will create more housing choices in the sector plan area.

Change Number

Zoning Change

LG-6b

C-S-C to M-X-T

Area of Change 0.29 ac.

Approved SMA/ZMA/SE

200’ Scale

Number

Date

Index Map

SMA

7/27/93

203NE07

Use and Location: Single-family detached residential at 8201 Barlow Road (Tax Map 60 Grid B-3, Parcel 11) Discussion: The property is recommended for residential development to support the employment core of the sector plan.

Rezoning from C-S-C to M-X-T zone will create more housing choices in the sector plan area.

142

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

LANDOVER GATEWAY

LG-6a. C-S-C to M-X-T LG-6b. C-S-C to M-X-T

Map 35: Approved Zoning Changes LG-6a, 6b

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

143

LANDOVER GATEWAY

Proposed Zoning Changes LG-7 Change Number

Zoning Change

Area of Change

Approved SMA/ZMA/SE

200’ Scale

Number

Date

Index Map

LG-7

R-18 to M-X-T

17.43 ac.

SMA

7/27/93

203NE07

C-O to M-X-T

0.80 ac.

203NE08

Total

18.23 ac.

204NE07 204NE08

Use and Location: Multifamily residential, Maple Ridge Apartments, 400 units at 2200-2500 Brightseat Road (Tax Map 60B2, LARBRIGHT MANOR, PARCEL A, B; Tax map 60 Grid B-3, Parcel 37) Discussion: The property is recommended for higher residential densities to provide different housing choices in the sector plan area as discussed in the Development Pattern Elements chapter and consistent with the goals of the sector plan and the 2002 General Plan.

144

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

LANDOVER GATEWAY

LG-7. C-O, R-18 to M-X-T

Map 36: Approved Zoning Changes LG-7

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

145

LANDOVER GATEWAY

Proposed Zoning Changes LG-8 Change Number

Zoning Change

Area of Change

LG-8

C-O to M-X-T

0.24 ac.

C-A to M-X-T

0.72 ac.

Total

0.96 ac.

Approved SMA/ZMA/SE

200’ Scale

Number

Date

Index Map

SE-402

5/21/58

203NE08 204NE08

Use and Location: Retail commercial, liquor store at 2600 Brightseat Road (Tax Map 60 Grid B-2, LARBRIGHT MANOR, PARCEL C, E) Discussion: The property is within an area determined to be appropriate for medium density residential housing; density to be consistent with the goals of the sector plan and the 2002 General Plan recommendations for centers.

146

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

LANDOVER GATEWAY

LG-8. C-O, C-A to M-X-T

Map 37: Approved Zoning Changes LG-8

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

147

LANDOVER GATEWAY

Proposed Zoning Changes LG-9 Change Number

Zoning Change

LG-9

C-O to M-X-T

Area of Change 0.74 ac.

Approved SMA/ZMA/SE

200’ Scale

Number

Date

Index Map

SE-402

5/21/58

203NE08 204NE08

Use and Location: Vacant property at 8505 Evarts Street (Tax Map 60 Grid B-2, LARBRIGHT MANOR, PARCEL D) Discussion: The property is recommended within an area determined to be appropriate for medium density residential housing; density to be consistent with the goals of the sector plan and the 2002 General Plan.

148

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

LANDOVER GATEWAY

LG-9 C-O to M-X-T

Map 38: Approved Zoning Changes LG-9

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

149

LANDOVER GATEWAY

Proposed Zoning Changes LG-10a, LG-10b Change Number

Zoning Change

LG-10a

R-55 to M-X-T

Area of Change 14.59 ac.

Approved SMA//SE

200’ Scale

Number

Date

Index Map

SE-104

11/19/52

203NE07 203NE08

Use and Location: Vacant property at 8410 Landover Road (Tax Map 60 Grid B-2, Parcel 16) Discussion: The property is recommended for high density residential development to provide different housing choices in the sector plan area as discussed in the Development Pattern Elements chapter and consistent with the goals of the sector plan and the 2002 General Plan.

Change Number

Zoning Change

LG-10b

R-55 to M-X-T

Area of Change 1.10 ac.

Approved SMA/ZMA/SE

200’ Scale

Number

Date

Index Map

SE-104

11/19/52

203NE07

Use and Location: Vacant property at 8410 Landover Road (Tax Map 60 Grid B-2, Parcel 12) Discussion: The property is recommended for high density residential development to provide different housing choices in the sector plan area as discussed in the Development Pattern chapter and consistent with the goals of the sector plan and the 2002 General Plan.

150

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

LANDOVER GATEWAY

LG-10a. R-55 to M-X-T LG-10b. R-55 to M-X-T

Map 39: Approved Zoning Changes LG-10a, 10b

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

151

LANDOVER GATEWAY

Proposed Zoning Changes LG-11 Change Number

Zoning Change

LG-11

R-18 to M-X-T

Area of Change 27.12 ac.

Approved SMA/ZMA/SE

200’ Scale

Number

Date

Index Map

SE-1894

1/14/69

204NE07 204NE08

Use and Location: Multifamily residential, Glenarden Apartments, 592 units at 8401-8441 Hamlin Street and 2900-3042 Brightseat Road (Tax Map 60 Grid B-2, GLENARDEN APARTMENTS, PARCEL A, B) Discussion: The property is recommended for medium-density residential development to be consistent with the goals of the sector plan and the 2002 General Plan.

152

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

LANDOVER GATEWAY

LG-11 R-18 to M-X-T

Map 40: Approved Zoning Changes LG-11

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

153

LANDOVER GATEWAY

154

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

LANDOVER GATEWAY

Appendix A: Procedural Sequence Chart PROCEDURAL SEQUENCE CHART

For the Concurrent Preparation of Comprehensive Master Plans, Sector Plans and Sectional Map Amendments*

PREPLANNING

Planning Board

Maximum Times 3-6 mont hs

Project Description,Recommended Goals, Concepts, Guidelines and Public Participation Program

AUTHORIZATION / INITIATION

PREPARE AND PUBLISH PRELIMINARY PLAN AND SMA

Planning Board/District Council (Resolution)

1 month

Planning Staff with Public Participation

8 mont hs

Planning Board permission to print 30 days prior to hearing, Notification to property owners Distribution of Preliminary Plan/SMA 90 days to the County Executive, affected municipalities, and public for comments JOINT PUBLIC HEARING

Planning Board/ District Council

REVIEW AND MODIFICATIO N OF PRELIMINARY PLAN/SMA

Planning Board (Worksession)

Digest of Testimony to the Planning Board within 2 months

60 day referral to the District Council/County Executive for any public facilities amendments

PLAN ADO PTION SMA ENDORSEMENT

Transmittal and Distribution of Adopted Plan and Endorsed SMA

Planning Board Postponement of Zoning Applications Postponement of certain Building Permits District Council (Work Session)

PLAN/SMA A PPROVAL OR DISAPPROVAL OR SET ADDITIONAL JOIN T PUBLIC HEARING

All amendments must be referred to the Planning Board

3 mont hs

30 days

2 mont hs

District Council

Notification to property owners 15 days prior to hearing HEARING(S ) ON PROPOSED PLAN/SMA A MENDMENTS (AND/OR A DOPTED PLAN)

Planning Board/District Council

3 mont hs

District Council (Worksession) PLAN & SMA APPROVED PUBLIC INPUT NOTIFICATIONS *(Optional Procedure as per Sec 27-225.01.05)

District Council 3-6 mont hs

POST APPROVAL

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

155

LANDOVER GATEWAY

156

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

LANDOVER GATEWAY

Appendix B: Cultural Elements Arts Integration Center Proposal Arts Integration Defined The Kennedy Center’s Changing Education Through the Arts Program defines arts integration as, “… instruction that makes natural and significant connections between a subject area (science, social studies, language arts, mathematics) and an aspect of an art form (reader’s theatre, story dramatization, singing, creative movement, drawing).”

Students master learning objectives in both the subject area and the art form.

The Value of Arts Integration in Education The arts engage students in active learning by addressing their various learning styles. The curriculum will support the Maryland State Department of Education’s Voluntary State Curriculum Standards for both the arts and academic subjects. This method of study offers students additional resources to improve their test scores on Maryland State Assessments as mandated by the Federal Government’s “No Child Left Behind Act.” Students who participate in the arts develop self confidence, higher level thinking skills, and problem solving skills.

They learn to work together as a team, therefore learning to compromise and improve in decision-making skills.

Through this process, they increase their ability to see natural connections and look at topics with a more global point of view.

“Research by Catterall, Capleau, and Iwanga has shown that low-income students who have opportunities to regularly participate in the arts fared better in other academic areas than those who were low participators in the arts. Another study by Heath and Roach showed that low-income youth fared better across a wide range of variables from academic achievement to developing leadership skills and talents that foster imagination, critical thought, and teamwork. These skills are transferable to the workplace. In a 1999 study of 91 school districts in 42 states (which was directed by the Arts Education Partnership and the President’s Committee on the Arts and Humanities), evaluators found that the

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

arts contribute significantly to the creation of the flexible and adaptive workers that businesses demand to compete in today’s world economy.” (Testimony of Dr. Ray Zeigler, Fine Arts Specialist for the Maryland State Department of Education to the United States House of Representatives Committee on Education and the Work Place titled, “Maryland Artist/Teacher Institute: Making a Difference Through Arts Integration” on May 18, 2006.)

The Purpose of the Arts Integration Center The purpose of the Arts Integration Center is to service the students, the educators, and the community as a whole. The proposed center will provide a creative and nurturing space where children will be invited to participate in hands-on arts activities that are naturally connected to the Voluntary State Curriculum Standards.

Local, state, national, and international teaching artists will support, reinforce, and enhance skill development in both the arts and academic subject areas. Arts integrated programs will be offered during the school day, after school, evenings, weekends, and summer arts camp for school-aged children.

Professional development courses and workshops will provide many opportunities to meet their professional responsibilities for recertification and graduate work.

Partnerships with local colleges and universities (University of Maryland, George Mason University, Towson State University, and McDaniel College) will encourage the use of the facility for outreach classes that will provide graduate level course work in arts integration. In addition, there will be a new multiinstitutional Post Baccalaureate Certificate, the first of its kind in the nation, where teachers may take advantage of this innovative course of study.

The community will be invited to engage in arts integrated activities, both as individuals and families.

Members of the community will develop their talents 157

LANDOVER GATEWAY

in a nurturing environment where they will be encouraged to expand their creativity and find the artist within them.

Programs will be developed where families can spend quality time together in shared arts experiences.

The Arts Integration Center as a Critical Need Presently, there are no arts integration facilities in the MidAtlantic region that offer in combination: • Arts integrated workshops for schools • Various professional development opportunities

• After-school arts programs for school-aged children • Summer arts camps • Partnerships with local universities and arts organizations Students, adults, and families will participate in a wide variety of arts activities that will promote emotional, social, artistic, and intellectual growth. Educators will have opportunities to expand their repertoire of arts-infused teaching strategies to meet the diversity of learning styles and multiple intelligences of their students. The systemic process will eventually cultivate the community’s appreciation for the arts in which they will actively participate.

• Community arts classes

158

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

LANDOVER GATEWAY

Appendix C: Glossary of Term Arterial: A highway, usually within a 120-foot right-of-way, for through traffic with access controlled to minimize direct connections, usually divided and on a continuous route.

At-Grade: Level for a road, building, or other structure at the same grade or level as the adjoining property (as opposed to a depressed or elevated road, building, or other facility).

Building Envelope: The area where the indoor portions of a building meet the outdoors. The building envelope includes elements of a building, such as the foundation, façade, roof, doors, and windows.

Buildout: A theoretical measure of “full development” for which public facilities are planned.

Charrette: A brief, intense design workshop in which community teams work together with municipal staff, city council members, the landowner, the developer, and all interested citizens in order to produce a plan that addresses the needs of the community.

Collectors: Multilane or two-lane roadways designed to carry medium-speed traffic between arterial and internal local streets and to connect the residential neighborhoods to major traffic generators.

Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED): An approach to crime-prevention that focuses on the ways in which the design of the built environment can reduce the incidence and fear of crime.

Density: The number of dwelling units or persons per acre of land, usually expressed in units per gross acre.

• Single-family detached dwellings (range from less than 1 to 6 per acre) on a single lot.

• Townhouses (range from 7 to 12 per acre) attached in a row.

• Multifamily Apartments (range from 12 to 48 per acre) in one structure.

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

• Garden Apartments: Multiple-unit structure (2 to 4 stories high) with no elevator.

• High-Rise Apartments: Multiple-unit structure (5 or more stories high) with an elevator.

Developed Tier: The subarea of the county consisting primarily of inner-county areas that are largely developed.

Developing Tier: The largely suburban subarea of the county located primarily in the central portion of the county.

Environmentally Sensitive Site Design (ESSD): In April 2007, the Maryland State Legislature enacted the Stormwater Management Act of 2007. The purpose of this act is to mandate a more comprehensive and environmentally sensitive approach to stormwater management on development project sites within the state of Maryland. Environmentally Sensitive Site Design (ESSD), as defined in this legislation, refers to the use of small-scale stormwater management practices, nonstructural techniques, and better site planning to mimic natural hydrologic runoff characteristics and minimize the impact of land development on water resources. It includes: • Optimizing conservation of natural features, such as drainage patterns, soils, and vegetation.

• Minimizing use of impervious surfaces, such as paved surfaces, concrete channels, roofs, and pipes.

• Slowing down runoff to maintain discharge timing and to increase infiltration and evapotranspiration.

• Other nonstructural practices or innovative stormwater management technologies approved by the Maryland Department of the Environment.

Expressway: A divided highway, generally within a 150–200 foot right-of-way, with full or partial control of access and interchanges at selected public roads, with some at-grade intersections spaced at 1,500–2,000 foot intervals.

159

LANDOVER GATEWAY

Façade: Building face; the building elevation facing the street.

Fenestration: Openings in the building wall, including windows and doors, allowing light and views between interior and exterior.

Floodplain: A relatively flat or lowland area adjoining a river, stream, or watercourse, which is subject to periodic, partial or complete inundation.

Focal Place: A public space that serves as a neighborhood gathering point and is generally situated at the heart of a neighborhood or at a prominent location.

Freeway: A divided highway for through traffic with full control of access and interchanges at selected public roads only.

General Plan: The Prince George’s County General Plan, approved by the County Council in October 2002, provides long-range guidance for the future growth of the county. It identifies centers and corridors where intensive mixed use (residential, commercial, and employment development) is to be encouraged. The plan also divides the county into three development tiers (Developed, Developing, Rural) recognizing the different development goals and needs of different parts of the county. The plan also makes recommendations for infrastructure elements: green infrastructure, transportation systems, and public facilities. The plan includes guidance for economic development, revitalization, housing, urban design, and historic preservation. Future implementation efforts are outlined.

Green (Civic Green): A small, formally-configured lawn or park that is primarily unpaved. These spaces are situated at prominent locations within the Landover Gateway area and are often dedicated to important events or citizens.

Green Building: Practices that consider the impacts of buildings on the local, regional, and global environment, energy and water efficiency, reduction of operation and maintenance costs, minimization of construction waste, and eliminating the use of harmful building materials.

Green Infrastructure: The interconnected network of protected land and water that supports native plant and animal species, maintains natural ecological processes, 160

sustains air and water resources, and contributes to the health and quality of life of human communities.

Green infrastructure provides natural feeding areas and migratory routes for wildlife. These areas also form the natural environmental framework within which all other land use planning and development takes place. The 2005 Approved Countywide Green Infrastructure Plan defines green infrastructure as an interconnected network of waterways, wetlands, woodlands, wildlife habitats, and other natural areas of countywide significance. The plan maps and defines what is called the Green Infrastructure Network for Prince George’s County. The network is divided into three categories: 1. Regulated areas containing environmentally sensitive features, such as streams, wetlands, buffers, the 100-year floodplain, and steep slopes that are currently regulated (i.e., protected) during the land development process.

2. Evaluation areas containing environmentally sensitive features, such as interior forests, colonial waterbird nesting sites, and unique habitats, that are not currently regulated (i.e., protected) during the land development process.

3. Network gaps comprising areas that are critical to the connection of the regulated and evaluation areas and are targeted for restoration to support the overall functioning and connectivity of the green infrastructure network.

Greenways: Areas of protected open space that follow natural and manmade linear features for recreation, transportation, and conservation purposes and link ecological, cultural, and recreational amenities.

Impervious Surfaces: In environmental language, a surface, such as pavement or a building, that water cannot penetrate or permeate.

Infill development: Development that takes place on vacant or underutilized parcels within an area that is already characterized by urban development and has access to urban services.

Infrastructure: The built facilities, generally publicly funded, that are required in order to serve a community’s developmental and operational needs. The infrastructure includes such things as roads, water, and sewer systems.

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

LANDOVER GATEWAY

Intensity: A term referring to the gross (total) floor area and/or the degree to which commercial and industrial land uses generate traffic, noise, air pollution, and other potential problems for commercial and industrial uses.

Level of Service (LOS): (1) A set of operating conditions describing the ability of a road network to handle traffic.

Level A specifies the best traffic conditions; Level F indicates gridlock. (2) The adequacy of the road and street network in the county transportation system is generally measured and expressed in terms of its LOS. Each level of service is one in a hierarchy of indices that evaluates the level and severity of automotive traffic congestion on a specific road segment or at specific intersections. The 2002 General Plan recommends the minimum acceptable LOS

by Development Tier.

Light Rail: Light rail (streetcar, tramway, or trolley) refers to lightweight passenger rail cars operating singly (or in short, usually two-car, trains) on fixed rails in a right-ofway that is not separated from other traffic for much of the way. Light rail vehicles are typically driven electrically with power being drawn from an overhead electric line via a trolley or a pantograph. (American Public Transportation Association: www.apta.com) Low-Impact Development: An innovative approach to stormwater management that imitates the response of natural environments to stormwater runoff events. In other words, low impact development is designed to slow down, filter, and reduce the volume of stormwater runoff before releasing it to nearby storm sewers. On the other hand, conventional stormwater management devices (stormwater ponds, drainage culverts, etc.) channel as much runoff as possible into storm sewers as quickly as possible. In locations where most of the land area is paved or roofed over, heavy rains can overwhelm conventional storm drainage systems and lead to local flooding.

from the elements, and reduce heating and cooling costs for occupied building spaces under the green roofs.

Median: A central strip of roadway that separates lanes of traffic running in opposite directions and is not used to accommodate traffic. The median is often raised several inches above the roadways and sometimes contains areas of plantings and, at intersections, refuge areas for pedestrians crossing the roadway.

Mixed-Use Zoning: Zoning that permits a combination of uses within a single development. Many zoning districts specify permitted combinations of, for example, residential and office/commercial uses. The term has also been applied to major developments, often with several high-rise buildings that may contain offices, shops, hotels, apartments, and related uses.

Open Space (land use, not zoning): Areas of land not covered by structures, driveways, or parking lots. Open space may include homeowners association common areas, parks, lakes, streams, and ponds, etc.

Pedestrian-Friendly/Pedestrian-Oriented Design: Land use activities that are designed and arranged in a way that emphasizes travel on foot rather than by car. The factors that encourage people to walk are often subtle, but they most regularly focus upon the creation of a pleasant environment for the pedestrian. Elements include compact, mixed-use development patterns with facilities and design that enhance the environment for pedestrians in terms of safety, walking distances, comfort, and the visual appeal of the surroundings. Pedestrian-friendly environments can be created by locating buildings close to the sidewalk, by lining the street with trees, and by buffering the sidewalk with planting strips or parked cars, small shops, street-level lighting and signs, and public art or displays.

• Green roofs that also include vegetation and function much like bioretention areas. In addition, green roofs reduce runoff, help to protect underlying roof structures

Place-making/Sense of Place: “Place-making” entails the creation of a setting that imparts a sense of place to an area. This process is achieved by establishing identifiable neighborhoods, unique architecture, aesthetically pleasing views and public places, identifiable landmarks and focal points, and a human element established by compatible scales of development and ongoing public stewardship.

Other key elements of place-making include: lively commercial centers, mixed-use development with groundlevel retail uses; human-scale and context-sensitive design;

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

161

The structures that accomplish this include: • Bioretention areas that use vegetation, engineered soil, underground moisture barriers, and underground drainage channels to treat stormwater runoff.

LANDOVER GATEWAY

safe and attractive public areas; and image-making (i.e., decorative) elements in the public realm.

Planning Area: A district geographically defined by natural or manmade boundaries as described in the Zoning Ordinance. It is the smallest geographical area for which a master plan is prepared. Prince George’s County is divided into 37 planning areas, covering all of the county with the exception of the City of Laurel (which is not under M-NCPPC jurisdiction).

Plaza: An outdoor common space that is generally used to describe spaces that have more paved surface area than unpaved surface area.

Public-Private Partnerships: Contractual agreement between a public agency (federal, state, or local) and a private sector entity. Through this agreement, the skills and assets of each sector (public and private) are shared in delivering a service or facility for the use of the general public. In addition to the sharing of resources, each party shares in the risks and rewards potential in the delivery of the service and/or facility. (National Council for PublicPrivate Partnerships: www.ncppp.org) Regional Centers: Areas of the county with a high concentration of land uses (such as government service or major employment, major educational complexes, highintensity commercial uses) that attract employers and customers from other parts of the Washington region.

Regional centers are, or may be, cost-effectively served by mass transit.

subject to an adopted urban renewal plan), either selectively or in its entirety, to implement a master plan and policies to achieve specified planning goals. (2) A legislative act that implements the land use recommendations contained in a master plan by comprehensively rezoning property to reflect master plan policies but need not follow all master plan land use policies or recommendations.

Stormwater Management: The collection, conveyance, storage, treatment, and disposal of stormwater runoff in a manner to prevent accelerated channel erosion, increased flood damage, and/or degradation of water quality.

Streetscape: The environment of the public right-of-way as defined by adjacent private and public buildings, character of the pavement and street furniture, and use of the rightof-way.

Street Wall: The line or wall that is created by the front edges of buildings and landscaping facing the street. The term “continuous street wall� refers to a portion of a street that is lined with buildings set back a common distance from the street.

Transit-Oriented Development (TOD): Land uses that are sited, designed, and combined to maximize transit, particularly rail, ridership.

Transit Supporting Development (TSD): Similar to transit-oriented development (see above), transit-supporting development is land use that is generally sited and designed to increase, as opposed to maximize, transit ridership.

Right-of-Way: (1) A general term denoting land or an interest therein, usually in a strip, devoted to transportation or other public purposes (e.g., utilities). (2) The legal right to pass through the grounds of another; also the public strip of land on which a highway, railroad, transit line, or other public utility (power and sewer lines) is built.

Transportation Demand Management (TDM): Techniques aimed at reducing single-occupant automobile trips and/or reduce overall transportation demand. Examples of TDM include ride sharing programs, transit subsidies, parking management, and improvements to pedestrian and bicycle facilities.

Screening: A method of reducing the impact of visual and/or noise intrusions through the use of plant materials, berms, fences, and/or walls, or any combination thereof.

Screening blocks that which is unsightly or offensive with a more harmonious element.

Urban Design: The process of giving form, shape, and character to the arrangement of buildings, to whole neighborhoods, or the city. Urban design blends architecture, landscape architecture, and city planning concepts together to make an urban area accessible, attractive, and functional.

Sectional Map Amendment (SMA): (1) The rezoning of a planning area (or a combination of planning areas, municipalities, those areas subject to a master plan, or areas

Urban Diamond: A road interchange configuration that is typically used at the intersection of a major freeway with another road. The major freeway is grade-separated to

162

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

LANDOVER GATEWAY

separate the two traffic flows, such that one passes above the other.

Urban School Models: This term refers generally to schools that require less acreage than the traditional, suburbanbased model for school siting.

Watershed: An area of land with a common drainage point (such as the Anacostia River or Potomac River).

Zoning: The classification of land by types of uses permitted and prohibited in a district and by densities and intensities permitted and prohibited, including regulations regarding building location on lots.

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

163

LANDOVER GATEWAY

164

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

LANDOVER GATEWAY

Appendix D: Buildout Scenario Assumptions Projected Landover Gateway Regional Center Buildout and Land Use Mix Based on the Landover Gateway Sector Plan’s land use and urban design vision, goals, polices, strategies, and concept plans, the following Table 13 defines a projected buildout scenario for the 591-acre sector planning area, which includes the previously approved Woodmore Town Centre at Glenarden. Table 13 also compares the projected sector planning area buildout with the 2002 General Plan’s recommended range of mixed land uses for regional centers.

The buildout calculations, as expressed in square feet, are based on areas assigned to conceptual blocks (see Map 41: Density Projections on page 167) formed by the illustrative future plan’s street grid and the range of Floor Areas Ratios (FAR) that have been calculated for the Plan’s Core, Gateway North, and Gateway South neighborhoods (see Map 6: Land Use Plan on page 19, Map 11: Illustrative North, Core, and South Neighborhoods and Primary Thoroughfares on page 32, and Map 13: Design District Boundaries on page 51). The buildout calculations also correspond to the 2002 General Plan’s center core, maximum core edge zones, and on the series of assumptions below that correspond to the land-use and illustrative plans.

Table 13: Projected Landover Gateway Sector Plan Buildout and Comparison to 2002 General Plan Recommended Range for Regional Center Land Use Mix

Land Use Mix

Residential

Retail and Services Employment (Office) Total

Previously Approved

Projected*

2002 General Plan

Woodmore Towne Center

Landover Gateway

Total

Square feet

Square feet

Square feet

Percent

2.186,793

11

2,035,000

10,402,269

12,437,269

1,000,000

4,428,667

5,428,667

3,719,617

16,333,112

20,052,729

684,617

1,502,176

60

27

Regional Center Recommended Land Use Percent 20–70

10–60

10–60

*NOTE: Landover Sector Gateway buildout will be subject to market conditions, adequate public facilities, and site planning and design considerations.

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

165

LANDOVER GATEWAY

Range of Floor Area Ratios Utilized for Sector Plan Buildout Scenario Core Area

1.1–5.5

North Area

0.8–3.5

South Area

0.3–4.31.

1. All building areas are in gross square feet (GSF).

2. Building heights for the medium development scenario are those heights that are midway between the minimum and the maximum heights as outlined in the building envelope standards.

5. The existing Sears is included as two-story retail in block group six. No other existing retail is included in the retail totals.

6. Along the general center and general edge frontages, all upper floors have their proposed gross square foot areas assigned as two-third residential and one-third commerce (office).

7. Local frontages are calculated as 2.5 average floors in the medium build out scenario, with multiple units at 1,500 GSF per unit.

The Medium Development Scenario heights used are as follows:

8. The number of residential units is estimated at 1,500 GSF per unit for all residential areas.

• Beltway Focus—7 floors

9. Public and quasi-public uses are indicated by type and location within the block group.

• General Center—6 floors • Local Frontages—2.5 floors • General Edge—6 floors 3. Open space areas are for proposed open space only.

Open space areas are not included in lot area or in the floor area ratios. Proposed open space totals are for those areas integrated with the Landover portion of the sector area west of the Capital Beltway.

4. Retail is assumed to be continuous in ground floor in the general center frontages. Commerce (retail or

166

office) is assumed to be the predominant ground floor use along all general center frontages.

10. These square foot area totals for the retail and office uses, and all of the Park Slope residential uses, are dependent on below-grade or freestanding structured parking. The use of surface parking to provide access to the regulating standards will result in significantly lower floor area ratios.

NOTE: Tables 14-22 provide density projections for the core, north, and south areas formed by the conceptual blocks associated with the illustrative plan. Table 23 provides a summary of the density projections at final bailout.

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

LANDOVER GATEWAY

BRIGH

55

58

56

BAR

13 ND

61

62

17 12

ER

37 22

11

27

5 6

8

26

2

4 7

10

RO

3 25

23 9

AD

63

39 38 24

21

OV

32

34

Y

16

1

TWA

15

LA

35

43 42 44 36 18 19 20 45

14 60

33

L BEL

South Area

41

31

PITA 95 CA

48 47

AD

30

40

49

46

51 4 I-95 /

Core Area

LOW

52

57 EVART S STREE 50 T

O ER

ROAD

59

North Area

TSEAT

53

54

29

28

65

64

66 67 68

70

69

OAD AT R 73

77

TSE

H BRIG

71

75

OAD

IFF R

SHER

74 78

LEGEND

72 76

KEY TO USE AND AREA PROJECTIONS

79 80

6

BLOCKS AREAS DEVELOPABLE ‘LOT AREAS’ REGULATED AREA PARKS LINEAR PARKS SCHOOL PROPERTY / BLOCK BOUNDARIES

Map 41: Density Projections Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

167

LANDOVER GATEWAY

Table 14: Density Projection—Core Focal Office

Blocks Totals 1 2 3 4

Lot Area Lot Area Square Acre Feet 721,000 395,000 236,000 45,000 45,000

17 9.1 5.4 1.0 1.0

Retail

Office

117,000 2,176,500 38,000 1,186,000 27,000 730,500 26,000 130,000 26,000 130,000

Cultural 26,500 0 26,500 0 0

Building Gross Square Feet 2,320,000 1,224,000 784,000 156,000 156,000

FAR 3.2 3.1 3.3 3.5 3.5

Core Focal Office Buildout Scenario Cultural 4%

Retail 15%

Office 81%

Note: Upon demonstration by applicant that market, adequate public facilities, and design considerations justify additional height/density, additional stories may be approved for each category.

168

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

LANDOVER GATEWAY

Table 15: Density Projection—Core Main Street Blocks Totals 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19

Lot Area Lot Area Square Acre Feet 780,000 39,000 190,000 39,000 37,000 39,000 37,000 23,000 98,000 115,000 27,000 19,000 32,000 54,000 11,000 20,000

Retail

Office

Building Gross Residential Square Feet

18 490,500 867,500 1,735,000 0.9 23,000 38,333 76,667 4.4 168,000 280,000 560,000 0.9 23,000 38,333 76,667 0.8 22,000 36,667 73,333 0.9 34,000 56,667 113,333 0.8 22,000 36,667 73,333 0.5 20,000 33,333 66,667 2.2 44,000 73,333 146,667 2.6 49,000 81,667 163,333 0.6 0 28,000 56,000 0.4 0 22,000 44,000 0.7 25,500 42,500 85,000 1.2 38,000 63,333 126,667 0.3 10,000 16,667 33,333 0.5 12,000 20,000 40,000

3,093,000 138,000 1,008,000 138,000 132,000 204,000 132,000 120,000 264,000 294,000 84,000 66,000 153,000 228,000 60,000 72,000

FAR 4.0 3.5 5.3 3.5 3.6 5.2 3.6 5.2 2.7 2.6 3.1 3.5 4.8 4.2 5.5 3.6

Core Main Street Buildout Scenario Retail 16%

Residential 56%

Office 28%

Note: Upon demonstration by applicant that market, adequate public facilities, and design considerations justify additional height/density, additional stories may be approved for each category.

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

169

LANDOVER GATEWAY

Table 16: Density Projection—Core General Center

Blocks Totals 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29

Lot Area Lot Area Square Acre Feet 517,000 18,000 14,000 35,000 24,000 40,000 40,000 28,000 38,000 23,000 257,000

Retail

Building Residential Gross Square Feet

Office

12 191,500 1,343,000 0.4 10,500 17,500 0.3 10,000 16,667 0.8 25,500 42,500 0.6 16,500 27,500 0.9 24,000 40,000 0.9 23,000 38,333 0.6 18,000 30,000 0.9 24,000 40,000 0.5 16,500 27,500 5.9 23,500 1,063,000

560,000 35,000 33,333 85,000 55,000 80,000 76,667 60,000 80,000 55,000 0

2,094,000 63,000 60,000 153,000 99,000 144,000 138,000 108,000 144,000 99,000 1,086,000

FAR 4.1 3.5 4.3 4.4 4.1 3.6 3.5 3.9 3.8 4.3 4.2

Core General Center Buildout Scenario Retail 9% Residential 27%

Office 64%

Note: Upon demonstration by applicant that market, adequate public facilities, and design considerations justify additional height/density, additional stories may be approved for each category.

170

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

LANDOVER GATEWAY

Table 17: Density Projection—Core General Edge Blocks

Lot Area Lot Area Square Acre Feet

Totals 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42

602,000 39,000 56,000 62,000 85,000 80,000 49,000 22,000 22,000 30,000 30,000 57,000 59,000 11,000

13.8 0.9 1.3 1.4 2.0 1.8 1.1 0.5 0.5 0.7 0.7 1.3 1.4 0.3

Retail

Office

135,000 10,500 13,750 0 16,250 25,250 14,500 8,500 8,500 9,000 9,250 0 15,250 4,250

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Building Gross Residential Square Feet 1,751,250 1,886,250 115,500 126,000 151,250 165,000 206,250 206,250 178,750 195,000 277,750 303,000 159,500 174,000 93,500 102,000 93,500 102,000 99,000 108,000 101,750 111,000 60,000 60,000 167,750 183,000 46,750 51,000

FAR 3.1 3.2 2.9 3.3 2.3 3.8 3.6 4.6 4.6 3.6 3.7 1.1 3.1 4.6

Buildout Scenario for Core General Edge Retail 7%

Residential 93%

Note: Upon demonstration by applicant that market, adequate public facilities, and design considerations justify additional height/density, additional stories may be approved for each category.

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

171

LANDOVER GATEWAY

Table 18: Density Projection—Core Park Slope

Blocks

Lot Area Lot Area Square Acre Feet

Totals 43 44 45 46 47 48 49

414,000 10,000 10,000 13,000 180,000 37,000 46,000 118,000

9.5 0.2 0.2 0.3 4.1 0.8 1.1 2.7

Retail

Office

100,479 2,500 2,750 3,000 37,250 13,250 13,000 28,729

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Building Gross Residential Square Feet 1,105,264 1,205,742 27,500 30,000 30,250 33,000 33,000 36,000 409,750 447,000 145,750 159,000 143,000 156,000 316,014 344,742

FAR 2.9 3.0 3.3 2.8 2.5 4.3 3.4 2.9

Core Park Slope Buildout Scenario Retail 8%

Residential 92%

Note: Upon demonstration by applicant that market, adequate public facilities, and design considerations justify additional height/density, additional stories may be approved for each category.

172

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

LANDOVER GATEWAY

Table 19: Density Projection窶年orth Area Blocks

Lot Area Lot Area Square Acre Feet

Totals 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59

574,000 43,000 17,000 85,000 26,000 76,000 63,000 72,000 72,000 64,000 56,000

13.3 1.0 0.4 2.0 0.6 1.7 1.4 1.7 1.7 1.5 1.3

Retail

Office

Residential

25,000 15,000 10,000

41,667 25,000 16,667

590,833 50,000 33,333 82,500 27,500 75,000 72,500 85,000 55,000 52,500 57,500

Building Gross Square Feet 657,500 90,000 60,000 82,500 27,500 75,000 72,500 85,000 55,000 52,500 57,500

FAR 1.1 2.1 3.5 1.0 1.1 1.0 1.2 1.2 0.8 0.8 1.0

North Area Buildout Scenario Retail 4%

Office 6%

Residential 90%

Note: Upon demonstration by applicant that market, adequate public facilities, and design considerations justify additional height/density, additional stories may be approved for each category.

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

173

LANDOVER GATEWAY

Table 20: Density Projection—South Area Local Streets Blocks Totals

60 61 62 63

Lot Area Lot Area Square Acre Feet 173,000 66,000 47,000 36,000 24,000

4

1.5 1.1 0.8 0.6

Building Gross Retail Office Residential Square Feet 0 0 198,250 198,250 88,750 63,750 12,000 33,750

88,750 63,750 12,000 33,750

FAR 1.1 1.3 1.4 0.3 1.4

South Area Local Streets Buildout Scenario

Residential 100%

Note: Upon demonstration by applicant that market, adequate public facilities, and design considerations justify additional height/density, additional stories may be approved for each category.

174

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

LANDOVER GATEWAY

Table 21: Density Projection—South Area General Edge Blocks

Lot Area Lot Area Square Acre Feet

Totals 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73

1,434,000 198,000 234,000 196,000 117,000 217,000 177,000 100,000 61,000 81,000 53,000

33 4.5 5.4 4.5 2.7 5.0 4.1 2.3 1.4 1.9 1.2

Retail

Academic Office

Residential

296,778

132,000 132,000

2,852,923 409,750 431,750 260,000 398,750 348,500 359,250 139,500 315,000 190,423

37,250 39,250 28,000 36,250 38,500 39,750 19,500 36,000 21,948

Building Gross Square Feet 3,281,370 132,000 447,000 471,000 288,000 435,000 387,000 399,000 159,000 351,000 212,370

FAR 2.3 0.7 1.9 2.4 2.5 2.0 2.2 4.0 2.6 4.3 4.0

South Area General Edge Buildout Scenario Retail 9%

Office 4%

Residential 87%

Note: Upon demonstration by applicant that market, adequate public facilities, and design considerations justify additional height/density, additional stories may be approved for each category.

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

175

LANDOVER GATEWAY

Table 22: Density Projection—South Area Southside Sites Blocks

Lot Area Lot Area Square Acre Feet

Totals 74 75 76 77 78 79 80

617,000 63,000 55,000 57,000 96,000 66,000 83,000 197,000

14.2 1.4 1.3 1.3 2.2 1.5 1.9 4.5

Retail

Office

146,250 15,500 18,250 13,250 10,750 20,250 24,250 44,000

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Building Residential Gross Square Feet 1,608,750 170,500 200,750 145,750 118,250 222,750 266,750 484,000

1,755,000 186,000 219,000 159,000 129,000 243,000 291,000 528,000

FAR 2.8 3.0 4.0 2.8 1.3 3.7 3.5 2.7

South Area Southside Sites Buildout Scenario Retail 8%

Residential 92%

Note: Upon demonstration by applicant that market, adequate public facilities, and design considerations justify additional height/density, additional stories may be approved for each category.

176

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

LANDOVER GATEWAY

Table 23: Density Projection窶認inal Buildout Total Lot Area 5,832,000

Retail Academic Cultural 1,502,176 132,000 26,500

Office 4,428,667

Residential 10,402,269

Final Buildout Scenario Retail 9%

Residential 63%

Academic 1%

Cultural 0%

Office 27%

Note: Upon demonstration by applicant that market, adequate public facilities, and design considerations justify additional height/density, additional stories may be approved for each category.

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

177

LANDOVER GATEWAY

178

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

LANDOVER GATEWAY

Appendix E: Resolution CR-20-2009

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

179

LANDOVER GATEWAY

180

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

LANDOVER GATEWAY

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

181

LANDOVER GATEWAY

182

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

LANDOVER GATEWAY

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

183

LANDOVER GATEWAY

184

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

LANDOVER GATEWAY

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

185

LANDOVER GATEWAY

186

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

LANDOVER GATEWAY

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

187

LANDOVER GATEWAY

188

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

LANDOVER GATEWAY

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

189

LANDOVER GATEWAY

190

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

LANDOVER GATEWAY

Appendix F: Certificate of Adoption and Approval

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

191

LANDOVER GATEWAY

192

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

LANDOVER GATEWAY

LANDOVER GATEWAY

Abstract

Acknowledgments

TITLE:

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

AUTHOR:

The Maryland-National Capital Park and Planning Commission

SUBJECT:

Approved Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment for the Landover Gateway Sector Plan (portion of Planning Areas 72 and 73)

DATE:

May 2009

SOURCE OF COPIES:

The Maryland-National Capital Park and Planning Commission

SERIES NUMBER:

436102306

NUMBER OF PAGES:

202

ABSTRACT: This document is the Approved Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment (SMA) for the Landover Gateway area. The sector plan and SMA amend portions of the 1993 Approved Landover and Vicinity Master Plan (Planning Area 72) and the 1993 Approved Largo-Lottsford Master Plan and Sectional Map Amendment (Planning Area 73). Developed with the assistance of the community, property owners, residents and elected officials, this document recommends goals, policies, strategies, and actions pertaining to development patterns, zoning, environmental infrastructure, transportation systems, public facilities, parks and recreation, economic development and urban design. The SMA proposes zoning changes to implement the recommendations of the sector plan.

Prince George’s County Planning Department Fern V. Piret, Ph.D., Planning Director Albert G. Dobbins, III, AICP, Deputy Planning Director Project Team Vanessa C. Akins Mosley, Chief of Community Planning North Division Gary Thomas, Principal Planning Technician Robert J. Duffy, AICP, Planning Supervisor Nancy Mattingly, Principal Administrative Assistant *Joseph Chang, Project Facilitator *Marcia Daring, Principal Administrative Assistant Christine A. Osei, Project Manager Briana Davis, Principal Administrative Assistant William Washburn, AICP, Planner Coordinator Gena Tapscott, Principal Administrative Assistant Sam White, Senior Planner Lisa Washington, Principal Administrative Assistant Sonja Ewing, AICP, Planner Coordinator Resource Team Carol Binns, Senior Planner, Parks and Recreation Christopher Lindsay, Senior Planner *Brandon “Scott” Rowe, Planner *Emily Clifton, Planner Coordinator Karen Buxbaum, Planner Coordinator Michael Asante, Ph.D., Planner Coordinator Faramarz Mokhtari, Ph.D., Planner Coordinator *Lum Fube, GIS Specialist I Fred Shaffer, Planner Coordinator Technical Assistance Information Management Division Susan Kelley, Administrative Manager Asfaw Fanta, Supervisor Ralph Barrett, Clerk/Inventory Operations Supervisor Sheri L. Bailey, GIS Specialist II Robert Meintjes, Publications Specialist Mishelle Carson-Reeves, Program Analyst I *Terri Plumb, Publications Specialist Martin Howes, Asst. Mapping and Graphics Supervisor Susan Sligh, Publications Specialist Manching Li, Programmer Analyst III M’balu Abdullah, Senior IT Support Specialist La’Tasha Harrison, Senior Clerical/Inventory Operations Assistant James Johnson, Senior Clerical/Inventory Operations Assistant Consultant Team Deana Rhodeside, Ph.D., Rhodeside & Harwell, Inc. Anita Morrison, Bay Area Economics Anne M. Randall, (Nancy) AICP, Wells & Associates Special Appreciation to: Citizens, property owners, community associations, and elected officials Department of Public Works and Transportation Department of Environmental Resources Economic Development Corporation Department of Housing and Community Development Prince George’s County Police Department State Highway Administration Washington Metropolitan Transit Authority Washington Suburban Sanitary Commission *Former Planning Department employee

SPINE IS .6 IN. 8.5

Approved Landover Gateway Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

LANDOVER GATEWAY

9.1

Approved

Landover Gateway

$9.50

Sector Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

May 2009

May 2009

The Maryland-National Capital Park and Planning Commission Prince George’s County Planning Department www.mncppc.org/pgco