Approved Subregion 6 Master Plan and Sectional Map AmendmentSub 6 approved book web upload by Maryland-National Capital Park & Planning Commission

ABSTRACT TITLE:

Approved Subregion 6 Master Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

AUTHOR:

The Maryland-National Capital Park and Planning Commission

SUBJECT:

Approved Subregion 6 Master Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

DATE:

December 2013

SOURCE OF COPIES: The Maryland-National Capital Park and Planning Commission 14741 Governor Oden Bowie Drive, Upper Marlboro, Maryland 20772 SERIES NUMBER:

621132405

NUMBER OF PAGES: 282 ABSTRACT:

The Approved Subregion 6 Master Plan and Sectional Map Amendment comprises text, maps, illustrations and pictures. The plan amends portions of the 1993 Approved Subregion VI Study Area Master Plan and Sectional Map Amendment (Planning Areas 79, 82A, 82B, 86A, 86B, 87A and 87B); 1994 Approved Melwood and Westphalia Master Plan and Sectional Map Amendment (Planning Areas 77 and 78) and Planning Area 85B in the 1993 Approved Subregion V Master Plan and Sectional Map Amendment. Developed with broad public participation, this document presents background information, and goals, strategies, and actions pertaining to land use, zoning, rural preservation, environment, parks and recreation, transportation, trails, public facilities, historic preservation. The Sectional Map Amendment (SMA) includes zoning changes to implement the master plan’s recommendations.

Note: On October 26, 2012, the Circuit Court for Prince George’s County reversed and voided Prince George’s County Council resolution CR-62-2009, which had previously approved the 2009 Subregion 6 Master Plan and Sectional Map Amendment (SMA). Consequently, the County Council remanded the master plan and SMA to the Prince George’s County Planning Board for the purposes of meeting the affidavit requirements pursuant to Md. Annotated Code, State Government Article SS 15-831 and re-releasing the 2009 Preliminary Subregion 6 Master Plan and SMA for public review and comment at a duly advertised Joint Public Hearing held on April 22, 2013. The Planning Board adopted and endorsed the Subregion 6 Master Plan and SMA on June 27, 2013 and transmitted it to the Prince George’s County Council. On July 24, 2013, the Prince George’s County Council approved the Subregion 6 Master Plan and Sectional Map Amendment.

APPROVED SUBREGION 6 MASTER PLAN AND SECTIONAL MAP AMENDMENT December 2013

The Maryland-National Capital Park and Planning Commission Prince Georgeâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s County Planning Department 14741 Governor Oden Bowie Drive Upper Marlboro, MD 20772 www.mncppc.org/pgco

THE MARYLAND‑NATIONAL CAPITAL PARK AND PLANNING COMMISSION Elizabeth M. Hewlett, Chairman Françoise Carrier, Vice Chairman Officers Patricia Colihan Barney, Executive Director Joseph Zimmerman, 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. Montgomery County Planning Board Prince George’s County Planning Board Elizabeth M. Hewlett, Chairman Françoise, Carrier, Chairman Dorothy F. Bailey, Vice Chairman Marye Wells-Harley, Vice Chairman Manuel R. Geraldo Casey Anderson John P. Shoaff Norman Dreyfuss A. Shuanise Washington Amy Presley

PRINCE GEORGEâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;S COUNTY Rushern L. Baker, III, County Executive

County Council The County Council has three main responsibilities in the planning process: (1) setting policy, (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 Mary A. Lehman, 1st District Will Campos, 2nd District Eric Olson, 3rd District Ingrid M. Turner, 4th District Andrea C. Harrison, 5th District, Council Chair Derrick Leon Davis, 6th District Karen R. Toles, 7th District Obie Patterson, 8th District, Council Vice Chair Mel Franklin, 9th District Clerk of the Council Redis C. Floyd

iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction 1 Background and Planning Process

Project Area Boundary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 Plan Purpose . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 Planning for a Sustainable Subregion 6. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 The 2002 General Plan and Development Tiers. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 Prior Plans and Initiatives. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .9 State Planning Initiatives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 Public Participation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 History of the Area . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 Settlement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 Tobacco. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 Military Influence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 The Town of Upper Marlboro. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 African-American History. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 Architecture. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16

Subregion Analysis

A Sustainable Subregion 6. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 Planning Area Profile. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 Existing Conditions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 Communities. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 Environmental Profile. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 Economic Profile . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 Land Use and Transportation Summary. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 Key Planning Issues. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36

Development Pattern and Land Use

Future Land Use Map . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 Rural Tier. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41 Modifications to the Rural Tier. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41 Rural Preservation: Tools and Programs. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44 Residential Development. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54 Developing Tier . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56 Joint Base Andrews Naval Air Facility, Washington. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59

Environment 63 Green Infrastructure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64 Special Conservation Areas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65 Wildlife and Habitat . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67 Water Quality and Stormwater Management. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69 Chesapeake Bay Critical Area . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74 Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76 Green Building/Energy Efficiency. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78 Noise Intrusion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80 v

Transportation Systems

Roads . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84 Major Roads. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84 Adequacy. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87 Transportation Needs Based on Growth Trends. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89 Scenic and Historic Roads. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 94 Conservation and Enhancement of Special Roadways. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 94 Scenic Byways. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101 Sidewalks and Trails. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105 Bicycle/Pedestrian Corridors. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105 Bike Routes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107 Hiker/Biker/Equestrian Trails. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 108 Thematic Trails . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111 Transit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 115 Existing Transit Service. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 115 Future Service . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 116

Public Facilities

119

Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 119 Public Schools. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 122 School Site Recommendations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 123 Libraries. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 125 Public Safety . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 127 Police . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 127 Fire and Rescue . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 127 Parks and Recreation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 130 Needs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 135 Prince Georgeâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Equestrian Center and the Show Place Arena. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 137 Solid Waste Management/Recycling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 139 Water and Sewer Service . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 142 Drinking Water . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 142 Wastewater. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 143

Economic Development

145

Employment. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 145 Agriculture. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 148 Equine Industry. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 154 Forestry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 156 Sand and Gravel. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 158

Historic and Cultural Resources

161

Themes. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 162 Agricultural Heritage. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 163 Archeological Areas. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 163 African-American History. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 164 Early Towns/Communities. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 164 Military History. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 164 Historic, Cultural, and Recreational Assets. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 166

Living Areas and Community Character

175

Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 175 Suburban/Developing Tier Communities. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 177 Rural Tier Communities. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 180 Eagle Harbor. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 182 Town of Upper Marlboro and Vicinity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 183 Town Core. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 184 Residential Neighborhoods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 186 Town of Upper Marlboro Vision and Action Plan. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 186 Transportation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 188 Public Open Space. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 192 Economic Development and Land Use. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 193 Historic Preservation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 197 Greater Upper Marlboro. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 199 MD 725 Corridor. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 199 Marlton. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 207

Sectional Map Amendment

213

Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 213 Comprehensive Rezoning Policies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 214 Public Land Policy. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 214 Zoning in Public Rights-of-Way . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 214 Limitations on the Use of Zones. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 214 Guidelines for Commercial Zoning. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 215 Conditional Zoning. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 216 Comprehensive Design Zones. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 216 Mixed-Use Zones . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 217 Comprehensive Rezoning Changes. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 218 Approved Zoning Changes. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 219

Appendix 245 Appendix A—Subregion 6 Master Plan Facility Cost Estimates. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 245 Appendix B—Official Plan Amendment–Marlton. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 252 Appendix C—Official Plan–Marlton R-P-C Zone . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 256 Appendix D—Marlton Towne Center–L-A-C Basic Plan. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 257 Appendix E—Proposed L-A-C Basic Plan (Amendments #2 and 3). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 258 Appendix F—Glossary of Terms. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 259 Appendix G—Procedural Sequence Chart. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 270

vii

List of Maps 1. Subregion 6 Planning Area Boundary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 2. County Tiers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 3. Regional Context. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 4. Rural Legacy. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 5. Green Infrastructure. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 6. Watersheds. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 7. Rural Tier Amendments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43 8. Priority Preservation Area . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46 9. Major Sand and Gravel Resources. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53 10. Joint Base Andrews Naval Air Facility Washington (JBA) Noise and Accident Potential . . . . . . . . . 60 11. Environmental Corridors and Special Conservation Areas. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66 12. Chesapeake Bay Critical Area. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75 13. Approved Road Network. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85 14. US 301 Corridor Road Improvements. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 86 15. Future Road Improvements, Conditioned, Funded or Unfunded . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88 16. Scenic and Historic Roads. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 95 17. Existing Transit Service . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 114 18. Public Facilities. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 120 19. Recommended Locations for Underground Water Tanks. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 129 20. Public Parks, Recreation, and Open Space. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 134 21. Western Branch Wastewater Treatment Plant Service Area . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 141 22. Historic and Cultural Resources. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 165 23. Heritage Themes. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 168-169 24. Town of Upper Marlboro. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 185 25. Greater Upper Marlboro . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 202 26. Approved Zoning Changes. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 219 27. Future Land Use. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Back of Plan

List of Tables

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15.

viii

Land Area by General Plan Policy Tier . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 Demographic Profile . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 Age Range. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 Educational Attainment (Persons Age 25 and Over) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 Land Use/Land Cover in Subregion 6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 2007 AADT on Major Roadways, Subregion 6. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36 Future Land Use Map Designations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40 Primary Environmental Concerns. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70 Inadequate Intersections in Subregion 6. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88 Proposed Road Facilities. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90 Designated and Proposed Scenic and Historic Roadways in Subregion 6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 96 Major Long-Distance Bicycle Routes in Subregion 6. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 106 Prince Georgeâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s County Public School Facilities within the Subregion 6 Study Area. . . . . . . . . . . . 121 The 3D/I Condition Ranking of Prince Georgeâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s County Public School Facilities within Subregion 6 . . . 124 Capacity Analysis Western Branch Wastewater Treatment Plant. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 142

FOREWORD The Prince George’s County Planning Board is pleased to make available the Approved Subregion 6 Master Plan and Sectional Map Amendment. The approved plan contains recommendations on future land uses and development; environmental conservation and stewardship; and transportation systems including various types of trails, public facilities, and preservation strategies for cultural resources. Policy guidance for this plan came from the 2002 General Plan for Prince George’s County. This master plan is the county’s first to place a special focus on the General Plan’s principle of creating sustainable development with supporting actions throughout all components of the master plan. Specifically, appropriate to this subregion is the goal to retain, preserve and protect sustainable agricultural land. The area represents a special opportunity given its location and accessibility to the greater Washington metropolitan area since the vast majority of rural land in the county is still being used agriculturally. The plan promotes both preserving rural lands for agricultural use as well as identifying opportunities to promote compact and industrial development along the two major highways that run through the subregion, US 301 and MD 4 in the Developing Tier, which will help stop suburban sprawl. During the planning process, we asked the residents of this area to envision how Subregion 6 can participate in the county’s growth and to propose the changes necessary to make that happen. On April 22, 2013, the District Council and the Planning Board held a joint public hearing on the preliminary master plan and sectional map amendment. The Planning Board adopted the plan with modifications per PGCPB Resolution No. 13-70 in June of 2013. The District Council approved the plan with additional modifications per CR-82-2013 and the sectional map amendment per CR-83-2013 (DR-2) on July 24, 2013. The Planning Board and the District Council appreciate the participation and insight provided by the community and other stakeholders throughout the plan development phase and at public hearings. We look forward to this plan providing the foundation for quality growth management and conservation policies that will benefit not only the Subregion 6 area residents but all Prince George’s County citizens for years to come. Sincerely,

Dorothy Bailey Vice-Chairman, Prince George’s County Planning Board

INTRODUCTION

Subregion 6 Approved Master Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

The Approved Subregion 6 Master Plan and Sectional Map Amendment covers a land area that constitutes almost one-third of the county. Almost two-thirds of this area is rural in character and has been designated for rural preservation in both the area’s last master plan and in the county’s 2002 General Plan. In this rural area, largely east of US 301, are also over half of the county’s designated historic sites and resources, as well as regionally significant environmental assets including the Patuxent River, which forms the eastern boundary of the subregion and the county. The existing master plans for the communities in the Subregion 6 plan were last completed over 15 years ago. Some things have changed since these master plans were completed—there is considerably more housing, particularly west of US 301; employment areas have grown around Joint Base Andrews Naval Air Facility Washington and in Upper Marlboro; and new commercial shopping centers have been developed. At the same time, much of the historic and rural fabric of this large area has not yet been altered. This plan presents the opportunity to strengthen and improve the developing communities, as well as to develop much-needed policies and tools to ensure that this rural and historic character can be strengthened and preserved for future generations. This diversity in Subregion 6 represents both unique opportunities as well as challenges which are identified and analyzed in this master plan. Two major highways run through the subregion, MD 4 and US 301, and offer special challenges in terms of the regional traffic they bring and the resulting separation of neighborhoods. But the existence of these roads also provides opportunities to promote compact commercial and industrial development in strategic locations that brings jobs and services to this area of the county. It is by concentrating this development in the Developing Tier that we can stop suburban sprawl and preserve the remaining rural assets in this area. In an effort to preserve historic sites, sensitive environmental features, productive land, and other resources, the Subregion 6 master plan is taking a different, sustainable approach to guide economic development, land preservation, and residential development. Recent climate, economic, and energy changes require communities to reassess how they use land and energy resources. Rural land near major urban areas is an increasingly valuable resource and commodity for food, energy production, and, potentially, for offsets for development activities, emissions, or pollution.

Introduction 1

A number of key issues were identified during the plan preparation process and are discussed in more detail throughout the plan and as recommendations: • Preserving agriculture through a period of transition with declining farm income as a result of the Maryland tobacco buyout program. • Conserving natural resource lands. • Incorporating sewer capacity considerations into future planning since the ability to expand capacity is increasingly difficult. • Modifying the Rural Tier/Developing Tier boundaries. • A ssuring the adequacy of public facilities given the constrained availability of public resources. • P romoting the subregion’s extensive historic, cultural, and recreational assets. • C harting a new future for the Town of Upper Marlboro and vicinity. • D efining and planning for sustainability in suburban and rural communities. Included in this plan is a detailed discussion of the area’s important characteristics—including its historic assets, existing land use pattern and transportation network, public facilities, and tremendous environmental assets. The plan provides a vision for the future development of the communities that compose the large subregion. This is the first master plan in the county to focus on creating sustainable development with supporting actions throughout all components of the master plan. This master plan was developed in collaboration with many community partners, including broad-based representation from the area’s residents, business and property owners, developers, and county, state, and federal agencies with jurisdictional interest in the area. The Subregion 6 master plan and sectional map amendment will guide development and public investment in the area for the next 10 to 20 years. It identifies short- and long-term policies and strategies to realize a land use, preservation, and development vision that reflects the aspirations of the county and the region’s residents and businesses, within the framework provided by the 2002 General Plan for Prince George’s County.

2 Introduction

This document is organized around ten chapters. The Background and Planning Process chapter defines the project boundary, its relationship to other plans and policies, and the public participation process and presents an overview of the rich history of this area. The Subregion Analysis chapter discusses one of the underlying themes of this plan in terms of planning for sustainable communities. It also presents a brief demographic profile of the area as well as a description of existing conditions for land uses and development, transportation, the environment, and economic development along with a description of the major issues addressed by the plan. Subsequent chapters present plan recommendations for the functional elements of this plan: the development pattern and land use, the environment, transportation, public facilities, economic development, historic preservation, and community development. The final chapter is the sectional map amendment, which identifies zoning changes necessary to implement the land use recommendations.

PLAN ORGANIZATION

Introduction 3

4 Introduction

BACKGROUND AND PLANNING PROCESS The master plan area comprises the southeast portion of Prince George’s County and is approximately 151 square miles, or 31 percent, of the land area of the county. The southern boundary of the subregion is Charles County and the Patuxent River is the eastern boundary. Joint Base Andrews Naval Air Facility is located on the western edge of the subregion. The subregion includes two municipalities: Upper Marlboro, the county seat, and Eagle Harbor. It is home to a number of older established communities including Aquasco, Baden, Brock Hall, Croom, Marlboro Meadows, Marlton, Melwood, Perrywood, Rosaryville, and Villages of Marlborough. There are also newer communities, primarily north of MD 4, including two large comprehensively designed developments: Balmoral and Beechtree. The purposes of this plan and sectional map amendment are:

Subregion 6 Approved Master Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

PROJECT AREA BOUNDARY

PLAN PURPOSE

• To implement the policies and recommendations contained in the 2002 Prince George’s County Approved General Plan. • To amend portions of the 1993 Approved Master Plan and Sectional Map Amendment for Subregion VI Study Area (Planning Areas 79, 82A, 82B, 86A, 86B, 87A and 87B), the 1994 Approved Master Plan and Sectional Map Amendment for Melwood Westphalia(Planning Areas 77 and 78), and Planning Area 85B, which was previously included in the1993 Approved Master Plan and Sectional Map Amendment for Subregion V. • To analyze existing development and the current zoning pattern for consistency with the county’s development policies. • To amend the zoning map to implement the land use recommendations through a sectional map amendment. • To set policies that will guide future development in the master plan area. The master plan for Subregion 6 is the county’s first plan to place a special focus on the General Plan’s principle of sustainability. Specifically, appropriate to this subregion is the goal to retain sustainable agricultural land. The area represents a special opportunity given its location and accessibility to the greater Washington metropolitan area since the vast majority of rural land in the county is still being used agriculturally. At the same time, one-third of the area has Developing Tier communities, more Background and Planning Process

PLANNING FOR A SUSTAINABLE SUBREGION 6

MAP 1: SUBREGION 6 PLANNING AREA BOUNDARY

Background and Planning Process

suburban in nature. The challenge of this master plan is to develop recommendations that strengthen the established communities and promote new development while at the same time preserving the more rural landscape. Although a guiding principal of the General Plan, the concept of sustainability is both complex and difficult to implement. The 2002 General Plan expanded on the 2000 Biennial Growth Policy Plan to set forth new goals, objectives, policies, and strategies for the county. This General Plan established three growth policy areas for the county: the Developed, Developing, and Rural Tiers that, in combination, designate areas of significant economic development, residential development, and preservation. Subregion 6 contains parts of both the Developing Tier and the Rural Tier (Map 2).

THE 2002 GENERAL PLAN AND DEVELOPMENT TIERS

The Developing Tier is envisioned as an area of low- to moderate-density suburban residential communities, distinct commercial centers, and transit-serviceable employment areas. Growth policies in the Developing Tier encourage compact residential neighborhood design and limit commercial uses to designated centers. The vision for the Rural Tier is protection of large amounts of land for agricultural pursuits and preservation of rural character and vistas, recreation, woodland, and wildlife habitat. Land use, environmental, transportation, and public facilities policies recommended for the Rural Tier are intended to balance pressure for residential development and landownersâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; equity with the desire to maintain rural environments and character. Based on the boundaries established in the General Plan, the Developing Tier portion of the subregion is generally located west of US 301, except for the communities of Marlton and Marlboro Meadows. The Rural Tier comprises the remaining land area of Subregion 6, including a small portion of land west of US 301

Table 1: Land Area

General Plan Policy Tier Total Square Miles Prince Georgeâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s County (acres)

Percent

Total Square Miles Subregion 6 (acres)

Percent

Developed Tier

87.22

(54,929.80)

17.98

0.00

(0.00)

0.00

Developing Tier

235.81

(151,808.45)

48.61

47.61

(30,471.85)

31.66

Rural Tier

162.06

(103,719.86)

33.41

102.75

(65,759.16)

68.34

Total

485.09

(310,458.11)

100.00

150.36

(96,231.01)

100.00

Background and Planning Process

MAP 2: COUNTY TIERS Howard County

I-9 5

Montgomery County

Anne Arundel County

US 50

Washington, D.C. US

Prince George's County

I-49

I-66

MD 4

Subregion 6 MD

MD 5

301

MD 210

Fairfax County

38 2

MD 38

Calvert County

Charles County

Legend Subregion 6 Major Roads

2.5

Scale in Miles

Developed Tier Developing Tier Rural Tier

Background and Planning Process

and south of MD 4. Table 1 compares the amount of land in each growth policy area in the county to Subregion 6. Note that the 102.75 square miles of Rural Tier in Subregion 6 constitutes 68.34 percent of the overall 162.06 square miles designated as Rural Tier in the entire county. In addition, the subregion has 47.61 square miles of the Developing Tier in this planning effort, once the 9.4 square miles covered by the 2007 Westphalia sector plan are taken from this number. As such, a central concern in the update of this master plan is developing policies to implement the General Plan objectives for the Rural Tier.

PRIOR PLANS AND INITIATIVES

This Subregion 6 master plan is the third major comprehensive plan developed specifically for southeastern Prince George’s County. The first master plan for Subregion VI, adopted in 1973, implemented and amended the 1964 Prince George’s County Plan’s recommendations for location, type, and intensities of different land uses. Both of these plans recommended that the rural areas in the southeast portion of the subregion remain rural, encourage agriculture as the economic mainstay of the area, and expand the functional role of agricultural lands into agriculturally compatible recreational uses. That was followed in 1977 by the Upper Marlboro Special Treatment Plan and in 1980 by the Melwood Special Treatment Plan, both of which provided more-detailed guidance to development within these respective communities. In 1993, the Subregion VI Study Area master plan was completed for the communities of Marlboro, Mount Pleasant, Queensland, Marlton, Rosaryville and the rural planning areas. The associated Subregion VI approved sectional map amendment was adopted in May 1994. This plan implemented and amended the 1982 General Plan, giving priority to conserving the region’s rural and historic landscapes along the Patuxent River through the protection of agriculture and natural resources and the use of rural conservation subdivisions and comprehensive design zones (CDZs) for land development. It included measures to maintain water quality in the Chesapeake Bay, incorporated a trails plan, and addressed issues related to the agricultural economy, scenic road corridors and highway improvements, and sand and gravel operations.

Background and Planning Process

Rural churches and cemeteries are located throughout Subregion 6. They provide residents with community gathering places and contribute to Subregion 6’s rural character. 9

Also in 1994, the Melwood-Westphalia master plan and sectional map amendment was approved. This plan superseded the 1973 Subregion VI master plan and 1980 Melwood Special Treatment Area Plan within its study area. This plan addressed land use issues in detail for the area to the north and east of Joint Base Andrews Naval Air Washington.

State Planning Initiatives

The 1992 Maryland Economic Growth, Resource Protection and Planning Act This legislation was enacted to encourage economic growth, limit sprawl development, and protect the stateâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;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 stateâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;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 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 10

Background and Planning Process

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 that requires that state funding for projects in Maryland municipalities, other existing communities, industrial and planned growth areas designated by counties will receive priority funding over other projects. These Smart Growth Areas are called priority funding areas (PFA). Meaningful public participation is one of the guiding principles in the General Plan. The public participation process was essential in identifying and understanding the various community concerns and issues. Community involvement began with a series of “listening sessions” in the summer of 2007. The sessions were topic driven: Joint Base Andrews Naval Air Washington (JBA), sand and gravel industry, environmental interest groups, historic preservation community, equine community, and agricultural community. Although JBA and the Globecom/Brandywine, both Air Force properties, are located in Subregion 6, the major concerns coming out of these meetings were encroachment of inappropriate civilian uses near the sites’ perimeters. Environmental concerns, such as the stewardship of the Patuxent River, were also echoed by the equine and historic preservation communities. These listening sessions helped guide the development of the goals and objectives for this plan. In fall 2007, the first set of communitywide workshops was held at James Madison Middle School, the Prince George’s Equestrian Center, and the Baden Volunteer Fire Department (VFD). These community workshops were the focus of the overarching participatory process. The District Council approved the plan’s goals, concepts, guidelines, and the public participation on November 20, 2007. A second set of community workshops in was held in March 2008 to discuss the results of the previous workshops at the Equestrian Center and Baden VFD. In addition to community workshops, interviews with major landowners, developers, public officials, and civic association leaders were conducted on specific land use and zoning issues. All community workshops’ results were posted on the project’s website so that those who could not attend would be able to understand the information presented and the issues raised. Subregion 6 is defined by a strong sense of history that is reflected in the important historical, architectural, archeological, and cultural sites found throughout the region. Native American sites, historic plantations, tobacco barns, and early port towns illustrate the evolution of settlement and trade, while sites Background and Planning Process

PUBLIC PARTICIPATION

A visitor to the historic Mount Calvert site reviews interpretative signage that describes the activities that once took place here.

HISTORY OF THE AREA

and people associated with military engagements, churches, and recreational sites represent the gradual solidification of communities. Natural, cultural, historic, and scenic treasures combine to provide an impressive collection of historic sites and resources. Pristine rural landscapes are a lasting symbol of the rural heritage of the area and provide outstanding opportunities for conservation.

Settlement

Boat launches and docks provide recreational access to the Patuxent River.

Several Native American archeological sites discovered in the area bear evidence of thousands of years of human activity. The “Nottingham Site,” located along Nottingham Road, was listed in 1975 in the National Register of Historic Places as an archaeological site. The site is noted for its collection of materials from the Middle Archaic (circa 6000 B.C.) through the Late Woodland (1600 A.D.) periods. Also significant is the Middle Woodland Selby Bay and Late Woodland component that may correspond to the village of Mattpament, which was shown on John Smith’s 1608 map.1 Prior to settlement by colonists in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, Native Americans occupied much of the land near the Patuxent River. Numerous prehistoric sites along the river bear evidence of villages established by them.2 “Man and the River—Footprints Along the Shore,” a historical marker near Croom, part of the Chesapeake Bay Critical Area Driving Tour, provides a brief history of the Patuxent River from the time of the Native Americans through its use today.3 European settlers in the beginning of the eighteenth century began to establish early towns in the region with gradual settlement along the Patuxent River. Many of the early towns were largely planned around churches. The church was not only a place of worship, but also a town hall or meeting place. St. Paul’s Episcopal Church, built in 1735 in Baden, is the oldest surviving church in the county. The church was built to replace the older and deteriorating church in Charles Town that was once the county seat.4 In 1799, after the death of George Washington, St. Paul’s Church was designated by the county as the church for the official observance for the late president.5 Maryland Historic Trust, “Site of Milltown Landing,” The Maryland Historic Trust Historic Sites Survey, http://www.mdihp.net/cfm/index. cfm, accessed May 28, 2008. 2 Susan G. Pearl, “Three Hundred Years of County History,” Landmarks of Prince George’s County, The Maryland-National Capital Park and Planning Commission, Upper Marlboro, MD 1996, 14–19. 3 “Man and the River—Footprints Along the Shore,” Historical Marker Database, http://www.hmdb.org/marker.asp?MarkerID=6613, accessed May 28, 2008. 4 Alan Virta, Prince George’s County—A Pictorial History, The Conning Company/Publishers, Virginia Beach, VA 1984, 51. 5 Robert J. Kapsch, “Documenting a County’s Legacy,” Landmarks of Prince George’s County, The Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, MD 1993, 42. 1

Background and Planning Process

In the late eighteenth century landowners began to establish plantations, many of which still provide elegant pastoral landscapes. Mount Airy, built by Charles Calvert circa 1740, remains one of the oldest Calvert mansions in Maryland. Its surrounding land was eventually turned into Rosaryville State Park and the vast grounds continue to accommodate outdoor recreation including equestrian activities for the area. Such plantations were often sites of tobacco production, but production was not limited to plantations. Many early towns contain various remnants of this booming agricultural trade. Tobacco barns from the pre-Civil War period through the 1940s were constructed rapidly to meet the demand for tobacco, as the area became an important producer of the crop. Tobacco barns along Croom Road benefited from the higher elevations that created ideal wind circulation. Additionally, the region’s unique barns have ventilation systems with operable slats that, combined with the wind circulation, were ideal for air-cured production. The barns that remain today represent a crucial chapter in the agricultural history of this region, and Maryland as a whole. Between 1683 and 1742, eight towns were established in Prince George’s County.6 Many of these early towns were located within the area of Subregion 6 including Charles Town, Milltown, Nottingham, and Upper Marlboro. Each became a vital site for the tobacco trade and commerce in the region. Nottingham, for example, located on the Patuxent River east of Croom Road, was established when the General Assembly of the Province of Maryland passed the “Act for the Advancement of Trade and Erecting Ports and Towns” in 1706 and 1707 in order to establish commercial centers along the rivers in Maryland. In 1747, Nottingham was designated as an inspection site for tobacco. This was part of a larger attempt to regulate the quality of exported tobacco; all tobacco grown in Maryland had to pass through inspection sites at Nottingham, Piscataway, Upper Marlboro, or Bladensburg before it was allowed to be publicly sold.7 Other small landing communities grew as commercial activity flourished around the tobacco warehouses located

Tobacco

Tobacco barns remain a dominant feature in the landscape of the rural portions of the subregion.

This view out over the Patuxent River shows the rural conditions common in the subregion.

Susan G. Pearl, “Early Towns in Prince George’s County, 1683–1787,” Historic Contexts in Prince George’s County: Short Papers on Settlement Patterns, Transportation and Cultural History, The Maryland-National Capital Park and Planning Commission, Upper Marlboro, MD, 1991, 1–6. 7 Marina King, “The Tobacco Industry in Prince George’s County, 1680– 1940,” Historic Contexts in Prince George’s County: Short Papers on Settlement Patterns, Transportation and Cultural History, The MarylandNational Capital Park and Planning Commission, 1991, Upper Marlboro, MD, 69–71. 6

Background and Planning Process

on the banks of rivers and nearby creeks. The Aquasco-Woodville community is an example of this. Established at the end of the eighteenth century, the crossroads of Aquasco Road and St Mary’s Church Road resulted in the formation of a small village known as Woodville.8 With the construction of the Woodville Town Hall in the early twentieth century, the village remained a small, closelyknit community. The area’s close proximity to the Patuxent River not only contributed to the fertility of the land, but also allowed access for the shipment of goods in and out of the community. By 1746, the production of tobacco was significant enough in the area that a tobacco inspection warehouse was proposed for construction close to the community at Trueman’s Point. Although the inspection station was never established, the landing played an integral role to commerce and trade in Prince George’s County.9 Despite fewer families farming their land in recent generations, the majority of land in the Woodville-Aquasco area continues to be used for farming, and the community remains a rural agricultural village. The influence of the tobacco industry on the development of communities can be seen in the converse in the case of Milltown. Under the same act that established Nottingham and other towns in Prince George’s County, Milltown was founded in 1706. While the town continued to develop after 1706, Milltown was excluded in 1747 from becoming a tobacco inspection site. The town never reached the level of success that other communities of its time were able to reach. Today, the remnants of this port town are found on Milltown Landing Road. Milltown Landing and the Milltown Landing tenant house, thought to be built by John R. Tayman in the early twentieth century, are situated at the end of Milltown Landing Road. Today both buildings are part of a large sprawling complex of farm buildings that line both sides of the road.

Military Influence

While communities within the area did not experience the Revolutionary War firsthand, several sites and residents of that period are associated with the war. John Rodgers, for example, a native of Upper Marlboro, sat in congress and voted for the adoption of the Declaration of Independence. During the War of 1812, Nottingham and Upper Marlboro became camping sites as the British soldiers advanced through the county as they navigated up the Patuxent.10 Upper Marlboro was the site of the first meeting between the British Army and the Navy during the war. On another occasion, Dr. William Beanes, friend of Francis Scott Key, hosted the meeting between Admiral George Cockburn and Major General Robert Ross in Upper Marlboro where the decision to attack Pearl, African-American Heritage Survey, 106. Susan G. Pearl, African-American Heritage Survey, The MarylandNational Capital Park and Planning Commission, Upper Marlboro, MD, 106. 10 Pearl, Landmarks of Prince George’s County, 18. 8 9

Background and Planning Process

Washington was made.11 Historic events in the region are examples of the important role towns played in the war. A number of these sites are points along the Star-Spangled Banner Trail and Driving Tour recently created by the Chesapeake Bay Gateways Network. As war technologies advanced in the early twentieth century the region became part of the defense operations of the nation. Significant sites associated with movements in aviation and missile defense quickly arose. Camp Springs Army Field, known today as Joint Base Andrews Naval Air Facility Washington, served in the early 1940s as a training facility for the air defense of Washington, D.C. Because of the close proximity of the base to the city, its function and mission have changed considerably over the years. Joint Base Andrews is home to the Air Force District of Washington’s 316th Wing—the base’s host wing—with several partner units on base including Air Mobility Command’s 89th Airlift Wing, the Air Force Office of Special Investigation headquarters, Air Force Reserve Command’s 459th Air Refueling Wing, D.C. Air National Guard’s 113th Wing, the Naval Air Facility, and Army and Marine Corps detachments, which provide air transportation for the White House and foreign dignitaries.12 New missile defense tactics created during World War II found their way into Croom and Brandywine during the 1950s through the Nike missile project. Nike missile testing sites were established in both areas as the project worked through its developmental phase. Since its designation as the county seat in 1721, Upper Marlboro has maintained its position as the center of government and politics in Prince George’s County. It is representative of the evolution of an early town that flourished with sustained commercial and political activity. Though the tobacco trade within the area waned as the Patuxent River silted in the late eighteenth century, the town was able to maintain its status as a center of commerce and politics. The community is an exceptional example of a town that reflects development over time, from the eighteenth to the twentieth centuries.

The Crain Highway Monument is located at the intersection of Main Street, Old Marlboro Pike, and Crain Highway at the western end of Upper Marlboro’s historic downtown. This well-known local landmark was constructed in 1922 to commemorate the location where construction of the Robert Crain Highway was begun.

The Town of Upper Marlboro

From the 1930s to present day, Crain Highway, and its successor US 301, brought increased traffic through the area that Maryland Office of Tourism, “Star Spangled Banner Map,” www. mdisfun.org/resources/brochures/Star_Spangled_Banner_mapside_O.pdf, Accessed 28 May 2008. 12 Marina King, “Aviation in Prince George’s County, 1784 and 1909–Present,” Historic Contexts in Prince George’s County: Short Papers on Settlement Patterns, Transportation and Cultural History The MarylandNational Capital Park and Planning Commission, Upper Marlboro, MD, 1991), 55–59. 11

Background and Planning Process

in turn encouraged commercial development along its length. The commercial development often took the form of entertainment establishments, including nightclubs, casinos and restaurants, and travel-related services such as motels and gas stations for the people traveling along this major East Coast, north-south corridor. These resources represent a significant phase in twentieth century development characterized by the improvement of transportation networks and the popularity of tourism and roadside architecture.

African-American History

The Woodville School, a one-story school building with three classrooms, was built in 1934 to serve local African-American students.

Architecture

Many sites and landmarks in the area represent the advancement of the African-American community within Prince George’s County. This section of the county, always primarily agricultural, had the largest ratio of enslaved population prior to the Civil War. After Emancipation, many freedmen stayed in the area as tenant farmers and continued to make up a significant percentage of the population. The Poplar Hill School site in the Westwood area, established in 1877 for African-American children, was proposed by J. Allen Hawkins, a freedman and former slave. The Poplar Hill School exists today as a testament to the progress of African-American education in Prince George’s County. Also, the Woodville School in Aquasco is a rare and outstanding example of a rural school. This school is the third school built to serve the African-American children in Woodville/Aquasco area. The site of the first chapel for African-American Episcopalians was St. Phillip’s in Aquasco. It was established in the mid-nineteenth century. The church no longer exists, but the bell, cast in 1884, still stands in a freestanding bellcote. Just south of Westwood, the town of Eagle Harbor also accounts for the progress in the AfricanAmerican community. In the 1920s the area around the Trueman’s Point quickly became a popular resort community for AfricanAmerican Washingtonians.13 Walter L. Bean purchased much of the land with the idea of creating this community for AfricanAmericans. In 1925–26 there were many advertisements for the new resort. There would be a sandy beach, boating, fishing, hunting, and various sports provided. People began building small cottages for their summertime use. The town was incorporated in 1929. A cohesive rural and agricultural setting remains in many of the communities in the Rural Tier. Collections of early-eighteenthto mid-twentieth-century vernacular dwellings, farmhouses, barns, smokehouses, and other associated outbuildings each represent the rural and agricultural foundation of the area. Weatherboard cladding, corrugated metal roofs, and concrete blocks commonly found on vernacular or common buildings within the area showcase readily available construction materials. Stylistically, 13 George D. Denny, Jr., Proud Past Promising Future: Cities and Towns in Prince George’s County, Maryland, Jr., Brentwood: Tuxedo Press, Brentwood, MD, 1997), 154.

Background and Planning Process

the vernacular resources represent expressions of then-fashionable architectural styles such as Greek Revival, Italianate, Gothic Revival, Queen Anne, and Colonial Revival. Today, many portions of Subregion 6 remain rural with strong roots in its agricultural history. Historic landscapes and vernacular architecture represent the regionâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s rural heritage through the presence of barns, outbuildings, woodlands, scenic roads, and vistas. Much of the area remains undeveloped, allowing for the preservation of farmsteads and the agricultural economy. Small villages, such as Aquasco, Croom, Naylor, Eagle Harbor, and the vast array of historic resources retain their historic significance and importance to the region. While the older architecture is evident in a great portion of the subregion, there is also evidence of suburbanization which has occurred primarily in the middle to late twentieth century. The planned development of Marlton was envisioned as a complete community which provided for commercial and employment uses within the plan. In the latter quarter of the twentieth century new housing developments have been built which are isolated and dependent on the automobile.

Historic farmhouses such as those pictured here are common sites around Subregion 6. These buildings provide a direct link to past residents and contribute to the preservation of the areaâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s rural character.

Background and Planning Process

MAP 3: REGIONAL CONTEXT

Background and Planning Process

SUBREGION ANALYSIS

The 2002 General Plan and 2003 Biennial Growth Policy Plan established countywide goals, principles, and priorities that provide a foundation for all future planning and development activities in the county.

Subregion 6 Approved Master Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

A SUSTAINABLE SUBREGION 6

The goals that guided the development of this plan are to: • Encourage quality economic development. • Make efficient use of existing and proposed county infrastructure and investment. • Enhance quality and character of communities and neighborhoods. • Preserve rural, agricultural, and scenic areas. • Protect environmentally sensitive lands. Since the approval of these goals, guiding principles, and priorities worldwide attention to the idea of sustainability has continued to grow. Although many have defined and redefined this expansive concept over the years, it is perhaps still best understood through the statement that sustainable development is development that “meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.”1 Conceptually, it is a useful organizing principle for discussing how to approach the implementation of the county’s social, economic, and environmental goals as expressed in the General Plan. As researchers and practitioners have tried to determine how to best achieve sustainable development, they have identified three factors which must be considered in every policy decision: the environment, the economy, and social equity (sometimes referred to as the “three Es”). The General Plan also notes a fourth: efficiency—efficient use of energy and resources with little or no waste.

This vista, showing agricultural fields and farm buildings in Baden, is typical of the rural landscape in Subregion 6

Prince George’s County and its citizens desire equal opportunities for all, a healthy environment for current and future generations, and opportunities for economic advancement. A central goal of the As defined by the 1987 Brundtland Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development and recognized in the 2002 Prince George’s County Approved General Plan. 1

Subregion Analysis

Subregion 6 master plan is to create sustainable communities supportive of a high quality of life for residents. Recognizing that the subregion plays a unique and pivotal role in maintaining the county’s diverse economic, social, and environmental landscapes, sustainability principles are built into the policies and recommended strategies within each plan element. For example, in the Environment chapter one of the strategies to protect, preserve, and restore green infrastructure network gaps is to protect priority areas that will meet multiple protection objectives. Countywide resources should be used efficiently by recognizing the interconnections among community well-being, land use, building, transportation, housing, food systems, and the natural environment and by adopting a holistic long-term view of our investments that includes social and environmental costs. The county should develop a design and sustainability guidelines and standards document as part of educational outreach to educate citizens on the principles of sustainable communities throughout the county. Rehabilitating/ restoring older buildings conserves resources, reduces waste, spares landfills, reuses embodied energy, eases energy-consumptive transportation and manufacturing processes (which almost always produce toxic by-products). Most historic buildings were designed for maximum heating, cooling, light, and ventilation. Building community awareness, responsibility, involvement, and education as key elements of successful policies and programs are key to a preservation program.

PLANNING AREA PROFILE

This section contains a detailed demographic profile comparing the subregion to the county as a whole. Table 2 details projected growth, based on existing zoning, for both the subregion and the county. The population of the subregion is projected to increase by 24 percent by 2030, while Prince George’s County is projected to grow by only 16 percent. The population of Subregion 6 comprises approximately 49.8 percent males and 50.2 percent females. In terms of age breakdown, the largest segment of the subregion’s population (35.4 percent) falls within the 25- to 44-year range. The next largest segment, those aged between 45 and 64, constitutes 22 percent of the population. These figures are roughly equivalent to the entire county where 265,541 people, or 33.3 percent, of the county’s population, are between the ages of 25 and 44. A further 176,342 people, or 22.0 percent of the county’s population, are between the ages of 45 and 64. (See Table 3.) Table 4 provides some basic information on educational attainment in Subregion 6 and Prince George’s County. Approximately one-half of the subregion’s population over the age of 25 has a high school diploma or has completed some college. Almost 30 percent of the subregion’s population over the age of 25 either has a bachelor’s or master’s degree. These percentages

Subregion Analysis

Table 2: Demographic Profile Change 2008-2030 1

2000

2008

2030

Number

808,060

852,884

992,868

139,984

60,181

63,155

78,115

14,960

8,908

9,443

10,615

1,172

51,273

53,712

67,500

13,788

306,190

328,928

392,490

63,562

19,699

21,096

28,000

6,904

3,191

3,325

3,900

575

16,508

17,771

24,100

6,329

338,296

347,886

518,386

170,500

24,478

25,366

32,368

7,002

Population Prince George’s County Subregion 6 Rural Tier in Subregion 6 Developing Tier in Subregion 6 Dwelling Units Prince George’s County Subregion 6 Rural Tier in Subregion 6 Developing Tier in Subregion 6 Employment Prince George’s County Subregion 6 Notes: 1

Population and Dwelling Units are for 2008, Employment data are for 2005.

Sources: 2000 from Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments Round 7.0; 2008, 2030 and Buildout from M-NCPPC Community Planning Division

Table 3: Age Range Subregion 6

Prince George’s County

Age Range:

Total

Percent

Total

Percent

Under 5 Years

5,021

7.5

57,664

7.2

5-17 Years

13,516

20.3

156,858

19.6

18-24 Years

5,471

8.2

83,295

10.4

25-44 Years

23,596

35.4

265,541

33.3

45-64 Years

14,677

22.0

176,342

22.0

65 and over

4,392

6.6

61,815

7.7

Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, Census 2000.

Table 4: Educational Attainment (Persons Age 25 Education Level:

and

Over)

Subregion 6:

Prince George’s County

Total:

Percent:

Total:

Percent:

4,915

11.5

76,141

15.1

High School Graduate

11,463

26.9

137,265

27.3

Some College

11,465

26.9

126,033

25.0

Associate Degree

2,846

6.7

27,471

5.5

Bachelor Degree

7,580

17.8

85,325

16.9

Graduate Degree

4,396

10.3

51,463

10.2

42,665

100.0

503,698

100.0

No High School Diploma

Grand Totals:

Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, Census 2000.

Subregion Analysis

are roughly even with the county’s educational attainment. The biggest difference between Subregion 6 and the county is that about 15 percent of the county’s population over the age of 25 has no high school diploma, while 11.5 percent of the subregion’s population does not have a high school diploma. According to the U.S. Census Bureau, the per capita income in Subregion 6 is $26,548, which compares favorably to the countywide per capita income of $23,349. The average family income in the subregion is $75,244, which is also higher than the county’s average family income, which is $62,063. As of the 2000 census, there were 383 families living in poverty within the subregion and 10,641 families living in poverty in the county; this means that only 3.6 percent of all families living in poverty in Prince George’s County live within Subregion 6. Likewise, a similar percentage of individuals living in poverty reside in the subregion as compared to the county. Of the 60,196 people living in poverty in the county, only 2,287 (3.8 percent) live within Subregion 6. According to the U.S. Census Bureau, the racial composition of the subregion compared to the county for African-Americans was 38,176, or 57 percent, in the subregion; countywide is 501,431, or 63 percent. The white population countywide is 216,774 or 23 percent, while in the subregion it is 24,689 or 37 percent. Other populations such as Asian account for four percent countywide and only two percent in the subregion, while other groups make up the rest of the populations.

EXISTING CONDITIONS

Prince George’s County is one of Maryland’s largest and most diverse counties. Located in the southeastern portion of the county, the subregion is a transition area between the heavily developed Washington, D.C., area and the rural landscapes of Southern Maryland (Map 4). Reflecting this transitional identity, the subregion is home to a range of communities in the Developing and Rural Tiers.

Communities

The Developing Tier, for analysis purposes, in the subregion is divided into five communities, all of which are discussed in greater detail in subsequent sections of the plan. Generally, low density residential development that is suburban in character, along with a variety of institutional uses, predominate in the Developing Tier communities. The Rural Tier has several historic centers of varying sizes, which mostly have small clusters of houses, commercial establishments and public or community facilities.

Developing Tier Most of the subregion west of US 301 is in the Developing Tier (Map 2). It contains considerable amounts of developable land which includes woodlands, residential subdivisions, several large institutional uses, and some scattered business and commercial 22

Subregion Analysis

MAP 4: RURAL LEGACY

Subregion Analysis

uses. Since the 1950s, the Developing Tier has predominantly become a bedroom community for the region’s major employment centers, particularly Washington, D.C. Most of these communities were subdivided in the second half of the twentieth century, with the newer, comprehensively designed communities such as Beechtree and Perrywood being built in the last quarter and into the twenty-first century.

Town of Upper Marlboro and Vicinity This suburban home is typical of many houses in the Developing Tier portions of Subregion 6.

The Town of Upper Marlboro is the heart of this community, which also encompasses the Villages of Marlborough residential area west of town and the rural communities to the east along US 301 from MD 4 north to Swanson Road. The town is regionally significant as the county seat, home to the county government and courts, as well as the Prince George’s County Board of Education administrative offices and service functions, The Maryland-National Capital Park and Planning Commission, Prince George’s County Planning Department, and the Prince George’s County Equestrian Center. It also has a number of shopping centers and provides other retail services, particularly auto related. Hidden behind the main roads are also a number of large and small private employment uses. The Show Place Arena/Equestrian Center is a worldclass venue for equestrian events, including the Capital Challenge Horse Show and Grand Prix, as well as other non-equestrian public events. This facility is on the historic Marlboro Race Track and celebrates the long history of the equine community in Prince George’s County.

The Upper Marlboro branch of the Prince George’s County public library system is located on Main Street in downtown Upper Marlboro. This building was originally built in 1936 to serve as the local post office. Its conversion to a library protected a historic building and retained an important Main Street civic function.

Northern Subregion 6 The area north of MD 4 (excluding the Town of Upper Marlboro and vicinity) contains a mix of older and newer subdivisions, interspersed with large institutional uses and woodlands. Within this community are three residential areas: • East of US 301 is the Marlboro Meadows subdivision, originally built with a private water/sewer system, but has been incorporated into the WSSC system. • West of US 301 and east of MD 202, a collection of newer developments such as Beechtree, a comprehensively designed planned community which has a mix of housing types and commercial component which is to serve the local residents and Brock Hall. • Further west between MD 202 and Ritchie-Marlboro Road, also known as Eastern Westphalia, is the location of older

Subregion Analysis

A new residential subdivision in the Developing Tier.

Marlboro Meadows is a neighborhood with mature trees that form an attractive canopy over the street and houses.

subdivisions, such as Perrywood, Brock Hall Gardens, and Ramblewood, interspersed with institutional uses such as the Brown Station Road Landfill and the University of Maryland’s Central Maryland Research and Education Center.

Joint Base Andrews Naval Air Facility Washington (JBA)/Melwood and Vicinity This community encompasses all of JBA and the nearby employment areas, made up of mostly light industrial uses, to the north and east. It also covers residential communities along MD 223 (Woodyard Road) and other areas of the Developing Tier north of Rosaryville State Park. JBA is a nationally significant military facility and one of the county’s and Washington, D.C., region’s major employers. Its impact is expected to grow in the future due to employment gains resulting from the 2005 Base Realignment and Closure

Subregion Analysis

Commission’s recommendations as well as realignment within the Washington Military Region.

Marlton

A comfortable suburban home in Marlton.

The Marlton community is generally bounded by US 301 (west), Croom Road (north and east), and Duley Station Road (south). The largest single land use is the master-planned mixed residential community of Marlton that started developing in the 1960s. There is a variety of housing types in the community including single-family detached, townhouses, and multifamily buildings. Though Marlton is entirely east of US 301, it was placed in the Developing Tier because it is served with water and sewer.

Rosaryville This community is generally bounded by US 301 to the east and the subregion boundary to the west. It incorporates the residential communities to the south and west of Rosaryville State Park, as well as the park itself and the Cheltenham institutional cluster. It is primarily developed with single-family detached houses, some of which have recently been built.

Rural Tier

A scenic view looking over the Patuxent River.

Most of the subregion east of US 301 falls within the 2002 General Plan’s Rural Tier (Map 2). Like much of the land bordering Subregion 6 in southern Anne Arundel, northern Charles and Calvert Counties, the Rural Tier is also sparsely developed and rural in character. This area forms a significant part of the large block of forest, agriculture, and open space areas that surrounds the Washington, D.C., metropolitan area to the east and south, a portion of which falls under the state’s Rural Legacy Program in Prince George’s County and the aforementioned jurisdictions. This program, administered through the State of Maryland’s Department of Natural Resources, is intended to protect large, contiguous tracts of land rich in natural and cultural resources in areas selected by local interests. State and local land conservation efforts are focused in these areas. In the subregion, the area east of Croom Road, the CSX railroad tracks, and US 301 is Prince George’s County’s Rural Legacy area (Map 4). This area forms a significant part of the large block of forest, agriculture, and open space areas that surround the Washington, D.C., metropolitan area to the east and south. The portion of the Patuxent Rural Legacy Area (Prince George’s County) within the subregion (Map 4) is a contiguous block of O-S (low-density) zoned properties located between Croom Road and the western shore of the Patuxent River, which was designated by the state in 1998

Subregion Analysis

based on an application and plan submitted by the county. The original legacy area proposed included almost 35,000 contiguous acres located within the Rural Living Areas delineated in the 1993 Subregion 6 Master Plan. The Rural Legacy Program, administered by the state, provides annual granting opportunities for protection of lands within designated Rural Legacy Areas on a competitive basis to local jurisdictions. The local sponsor of the Rural Legacy Area is M-NCPPC, and the program is administered by the Prince George’s County Soil Conservation District. The Patuxent River and its tributaries are important environmental resources in the Subregion 6 Rural Tier. It is the largest river whose watershed is entirely in Maryland and is tidal in Subregion 6 and therefore subject to Chesapeake Bay Critical Area requirements. The river has been a focus of state and regional water quality improvement efforts since the 1980s. Subregion 6 has an undulating topography varying in elevation from 0 feet mean sea level (msl) to approximately 300 feet msl. The lowest elevations are found along the Patuxent River. Higher elevations are primarily confined to the northwestern quadrant of the subregion in and around JBA although a ridgeline generally follows US 301. This topography causes steep slopes which are generally found along the banks of the smaller streams that feed the subregion’s major stream systems. Steep slopes are inherently unstable land forms that, when disturbed, become susceptible to soil erosion. The adverse effects of steep slope disturbance are more pronounced when the slope is adjacent to a stream or other water body, where erosion can lead to decreased water quality and negative impacts on riparian plant and animal species.

Much of Subregion 6 is covered by woodlands, which provide a unique habitat for local wildlife.

Environmental Profile

The effects can be seen in the water quality of all the county’s watersheds reported in the 2005 Green Infrastructure Plan (Map 5) in which water quality in the subregion was generally poor. The subregion lies within the Patuxent River and Potomac River Basins with approximately 82 percent of the subregion draining to the Patuxent River and 18 percent to the Potomac River Basin (Map 6). The Patuxent River is fed by several major stream systems including Western Branch, Collington Branch, Charles Branch, Mataponi Creek, and Swanson Creek. The subregion also contains the headwaters of several ecologically important tributaries that drain to the Potomac River. These include Piscataway Creek, which contains a reach of Tier II water2; Mattawoman Creek, which supports an important bass fishery; and Zekiah Swamp Creek, which contains a state-designated Rural Legacy Area in Charles

Tier II waterways exceed the minimum water quality thresholds and are subject to Maryland’s Antidegradation Review Policy, which regulates new amendments to water/sewer plans or discharge permits to ensure maintenance of the water quality within these waterbodies. 2

Subregion Analysis

MAP 5: GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE

Subregion Analysis

MAP 6: WATERSHEDS

Subregion Analysis

County. Water quality in the subregion is discussed in further detail in the Environment chapter of the plan. The Patuxent River is also subject to several regional planning initiatives. The Patuxent River Policy Plan, overseen by the Patuxent River Commission, is a multicounty, multiagency effort to protect the river through land management and pollution control practices. All land within 1,000 feet of the Patuxent River, including the lower 2.5 miles of Swanson Creek (approximately), is part of the Chesapeake Bay Critical Area (CBCA), and subject to protection regulations. Outside of the CBCA, the Prince Georgeâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s County Patuxent River Primary Management Area Preservation Area establishes a protective buffer which includes perennial streams, wetlands, floodplains, steep slopes, highly erodible soils, and sensitive wildlife species within the portions of the Patuxent River watershed. A feature of waterways are their floodplains, which are relatively low, flat areas adjoining rivers, streams, and other bodies of water. They are usually naturally formed and subject to partial or complete flooding on a periodic basis. Floodplains are important because they store and moderate the speed and impact of floodwaters and, in conjunction with wetlands and stream buffers, also help to maintain water quality and recharge groundwater. Approximately 8,750 acres of floodplains occur within the subregion, 90 percent of which are associated with the Patuxent River system. The subregion also supports large tracts of woodlands and both tidal and nontidal wetlands. Woodlands cover a little over half the subregion and include approximately one-third of the 108 Champion trees3 in the county. Woodlands benefit the subregion by reducing runoff and erosion, providing for aquifer recharge, reducing the effects of air pollution, and sequestering carbon dioxide, one of the major contributors to climate change. Woodlands also provide wildlife habitat and act as visual and noise buffers in developed areas. Cedarville State Forest, located at the headwaters of the Zekiah Swamp, is a largely undisturbed river and wetland complex flowing south through Charles County. The complex supports diverse plant and animal populations including many rare, threatened, or endangered species. Wetlands are valuable natural resources that provide habitat for plants, fish, and wildlife, maintain water quality (by slowing and collecting sediment and pollutants), act as ground water recharge areas, and control flooding and erosion. The Patuxent River and its tributaries support the majority of tidal and nontidal wetlands within the subregion. The Jug Bay Complex, which includes the Jug Bay Natural Area and Merkle Wildlife Sanctuary, is one of the largest â&#x20AC;&#x192; Champion trees are the largest identified trees (based on diameter at breast height [dbh]) in the County. http://www.pgparks.com/info/park_ rangers.html#champ 3

Subregion Analysis

wetland systems on Maryland’s western shore. Other large wetland areas occur along Piscataway Creek, Mattawoman Creek, and their tributaries. Small, isolated wetland pockets can also be found throughout the subregion. A number of these biodiverse and fragile habitats across the subregion have been designated as special conservation areas (SCA) through the Countywide Green Infrastructure Plan. SCAs are preservation areas in need of special attention. The largest SCA is the Patuxent River Corridor (PRC), which extends along the entire eastern side of the subregion. The PRC, along with the other SCAs—Jug Bay Complex, the Cedarville State Forest, and the Mattawoman Creek Stream Valley—are discussed in greater detail in the Environment chapter of the plan. Subregion 6 is diverse with a broad range of employment including government, industrial, agricultural, and mining jobs. Employment in the subregion has remained steady in recent years. In 2005 there were approximately 25,780 jobs in the subregion, an increase of approximately 640 jobs since 2000.

Economic Profile

Two main employment clusters account for approximately 75 percent of the employment in the subregion. The largest cluster is Joint Base Andrews Naval Air Facility Washington (JBA) and nearby industrial and mixed commercial uses, accounting for 57 percent (approximately 14,800 jobs) of the jobs in the subregion. JBA is the predominant employer in the cluster and the county with approximately 9,800 jobs4. Industrial employment in the cluster is primarily in the Penn-Belt South Industrial Center north of JBA. The second employment cluster is located in and around the Town of Upper Marlboro, with approximately 19 percent (4,850 jobs) of the employment in the subregion. As the county seat, Upper Marlboro is home to the county’s judicial and administrative functions. The majority of the employment in Upper Marlboro is government-related. Other employment is associated with convenience goods and personal service establishments along US 301 andMD 725 (Marlboro Pike). In addition to the two main employment clusters, there are three smaller retail and commercial centers in the subregion. Marlboro Crossroads and Marlboro Square shopping centers at the intersection of MD 4 and US 301 each include a grocery store, other convenience stores, restaurants, and a bank. Osborne Shopping Center is a neighborhood center with a grocery store, bank, and other convenience stores located at the intersection of 4

R & D Cross is a local familyowned business that provides a wide variety of lawn and garden, farming, construction, and other goods and services to area residents.

Economic Impact Report, FY06, Andrews Air Force Base.

Subregion Analysis

South Osborne Road and US 301. The third center, Marlton Plaza, is located on US 301 south of Marlton, and includes a grocery store, bank, and other convenience shopping. Agriculture is a geographically expansive and culturally important economic activity in the subregion. According to the 2002 U.S. Census of Agriculture, the subregion supported approximately 210 farms generating approximately $5.7 million in production value and approximately 525 jobs. Farms in the subregion are still feeling the effects of the 1999 Tobacco Buyout that impacted both the structure and profitability of the industry (see the Economic Development chapter). The effects of the buyout are easily seen in the declining farm income, predominantly driven by crop losses due to decreasing tobacco production, which has the average farm losing nearly $3,500 per year according the Census of Agriculture. Agriculture in the subregion serves as the anchor for the rest of the county by accounting for nearly 50 percent of all agricultural economic activity.5 The subregion also supports a small cadre of agricultural support businesses, such as veterinarians and crop service companies that provide an additional 22 jobs and $1.3 million in agriculturally related output. A small number of output businesses such as food manufacturing, food distribution, and nurseries create a demand for local agricultural production.

Historically, the equine industry was one of the county’s major agricultural activities. Today, the county’s landscape and cultural events show the influence of horse racing and breeding.

Forestry is an equally important economic activity in the subregion. Forest cover accounts for approximately 49,700 acres, of which 30,765 acres are in deciduous tree stands, 1,204 acres are in evergreen stands, and 16,630 acres are in mixed forest types.6 Much of this forest cover is under public management yet still supports a small but vibrant industry employing approximately 40 persons and generating $4.2 million in annual output. Primary forest products activity includes the selective harvest of hard wood species for dimension lumber such as oak, cherry, and yellow poplar, for which Prince George’s County is known nationally, as well as the harvest of pulpwood. With only one sawmill in the subregion, further manufacturing of wood products generally occurs outside of the area. Mineral extraction is a historically important industry in the subregion and county based on the presence of large sand and gravel deposits affiliated with the Brandywine formation (see I-Market Fourth Quarter 2007. All current economic data in this section comes from this source. 6 2002 Maryland Department of Planning, Land Use/Land Cover database. 5

Subregion Analysis

the Economic Development chapter). Regionally, this industry is undergoing significant change as small mine operations are transitioning out of the industry and being replaced with larger, more consolidated operations. Within the subregion, there are currently five mine operators, generating approximately 60 jobs, which represent approximately 14 percent of the total state output in the mining industry sector. Given the presence of large outside operators, whose income and employment may be reported in other jurisdictions, the job and wealth creation fostered by the mining industry may be larger than reported in currently available data. The mining industry also employs other independent businesses in the region, predominately in the trucking industry, generating significant spin-offs to the local economy. Output activities in the industry, such as washing and processing, generally occur outside of the subregion though some do exist here.

Land Use Approximately three quarters of the land in the subregion today is in agriculture and forest (see Table 5). Forest alone makes up more than half of the subregion, with county parks and several institutional uses accounting for a number of major forest tracts. Development lands comprise less than one quarter of the subregion. Low density residential is the most common type of developed land use.

Land Use and Transportation Summary

Developing Tier The Developing Tier portions of the subregion are characterized by an evolving mix of residential subdivisions and scattered pockets of commercial, industrial, and employment uses, interspersed with farms, wooded areas, and large institutional uses. Farms and forest areas cover more than half of the Developing Tier, but are fragmented by developed land uses. Residential areas in the Developing Tier are generally developed at low to medium densities and are suburban in character. The Town of Upper Marlboro and its environs, along with the community of Marlton, have the most diverse and dense residential development, with some concentrations of multifamily units and townhouses at densities upwards of seven units per acre. Other residential areas south of MD 4 and in the vicinity of Rosaryville State Park consist primarily of single-family attached and detached units at densities of three to eight units per acre. The remainder of the developed portions of the Developing Tier in the subregion is low- to moderate-density residential, typically two or fewer units per acre. JBA is the largest institutional use in the subregion. Other major blocks of institutional land in the Developing Tier include Rosaryville State Park, the Cheltenham institutional cluster Subregion Analysis

described in the Regional Facilities section, the Brown Station Road landfill (closing by 2011), the Prince George’s County Corrections Center, and the University of Maryland’s agricultural research center on Largo Road.

Rural Tier Land use in the Rural Tier is dominated by large, contiguous areas of active farms and woodland, interspersed with largelot subdivisions and a few active and reclaimed surface mineral extraction sites. As shown in Table 5, forest accounts for more than half of the land in the Rural Tier, while agriculture accounts for another quarter. Of the approximately 21,240 acres of agriculture, approximately 16,900 acres are utilized for crops, 3,900 acres for pastureland, and the balance in other agricultural activities such as orchards, vineyards, and minor crop uses.7 Table 5: Land Use/Land Cover

Subregion 6 Developing Tier

Land Use/Land Cover (2002)

Acres

Rural Tier

Percent

Acres

Total

Percent

Acres

Percent

Resource Lands Agriculture Forest Extractive/Barren Water, Wetlands Development Lands

3,785

12.7

17,454

26.1

21,238

12,651

42.6

37,038

55.5

49,689

338

1.1

916

1.4

1,255

176

0.6

2,926

4.4

3,102

Residential

6,636

22.3

7,104

10.6

13,741

Non-residential

6,144

20.7

1,318

2.0

7,462

29,730

100.0

66,756

100.0

96,486

100

Total 1

Residential, commercial, industrial, institutional, extractive, urban open space, and transportation

Source: Maryland Department of Planning, 2002 Land Use/Land Cover database.

The Rural Tier in the subregion also contains several small rural communities: Aquasco, Brandywine, Baden, Croom, and the Town of Eagle Harbor. With the exception of Eagle Harbor, they have centers which generally contain commercial establishments and public or community facilities, surrounded by a small number of homes. Baden, at the intersection of Aquasco Road and Baden-Westwood Road, has a convenience store, a fire station, an elementary school, a health center, and several churches. Along the Patuxent River major parks and other publicly owned lands preserve much of the forest land, habitats, and sensitive environmental resources. Other major blocks of publicly owned land are the 1,600-acre United States Air Force’s Globecom site, more than 920 acres of the 3,500-acre Cedarville State Forest (the remainder is in Charles County). The Chalk Point power generating station occupies more than 1,100 acres (much 2002 Maryland Department of Planning, Land Use/Land Cover database. 7

Subregion Analysis

of it forested) at the extreme southeastern tip of the county.

Transportation US 301 and MD 4 are the subregion’s major transportation routes, primarily serving longdistance traffic. As a primary route to Washington, D.C. and the Capital Beltway, MD 4 (Pennsylvania Avenue) is largely a commuter route from the subregion and southern Anne Arundel, Calvert, and St. Mary’s Counties. It carries heavy traffic volumes through the subregion and is often congested during peak hours (typically, during the morning and evening commute).

The local grocery store is a key focal point in the hamlet of Aquasco.

US 301 (Robert Crain Highway) is a major regional thoroughfare that links Baltimore (via I-97 and MD 3) with Richmond, Virginia (via Charles County). US 301 passes through Bowie, Upper Marlboro, and Brandywine, linking the subregion and the entire eastern half of Prince George’s County to the broader region. Like MD 4, overall traffic volume on US 301 is also heavy, but its role as a regional truck route and lack of connectivity to I-95 result in lower peak-hour and average daily traffic, compared to MD 4. MD 4 intersects with US 301 in Upper Marlboro. Other major roads in Subregion 6 are: • MD 202 (Largo Road) connects Upper Marlboro with Largo, Landover, and I-95. • MD 223 (Woodyard Road) links MD 4 to MD 5 (Branch Avenue) in Subregion 5. • MD 382 (Croom Road) is the primary road serving the Rural Tier, running from US 301 north of Marlton to MD 381 Brandywine/Aquasco Road. • MD 381 (Brandywine Road/Aquasco Road) links the Brandywine area in Subregion 5 to the southern end of Croom Road and northeastern Charles County. In keeping with the relatively low-intensity land use pattern, the transportation network in the subregion is built around only a few major facilities. Table 6 shows the Average Annual Daily Traffic (AADT) on the major roadways in Subregion 6. There is no rail transit service in the subregion, but stations on WMATA’s Metrorail system are nearby Largo Town Center and Branch Avenue, both near the Beltway, 9 and 10.5 miles, respectively, from Upper Marlboro. Transit service in the subregion is largely dependent upon bus service. The Prince George’s County Department of Public Works and Transportation’s “The Bus” system operates routes connecting Upper Marlboro to Metrorail stations. The Maryland Transit Administration operates several Subregion Analysis

Table 6: 2007 AADT on Major Roadways, Subregion 6 Location

AADT 2007

US 301 (0.2 miles north of MD 725)

42,590

MD 4 (0.3 miles north of US 301)

48,090

MD 202 (0.2 miles north of MD 725)

18,190

MD 223 (0.2 miles north of Rosaryville Road)

18,500

MD 381 (0.2 miles south of MD 382)

5,910

MD 382 (0.1 miles north of MD 381)

1,631

I-495, south of MD 4

183,921

AADT on the segment of I-95 in the vicinity of MD 4 is included for reference, although I-95 itself is not in Subregion 6 1

Source: Maryland State Highway Administration.

commuter bus routes from Southern Maryland to Washington, D.C. One had stopped in Upper Marlboro; however, this park and ride was required to be relocated due to its negative impact on employee and event parking. Sidewalks and pedestrian/bicycle trails are present in some neighborhoods, although a subregion-wide network is not yet developed. Sidewalks in many of the areaâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s older subdivisions are either lacking or in need of major repair. Some off-road pedestrian/bicycle and equestrian trails exist in Rosaryville State Park, Patuxent River Park/Merkle Wildlife Sanctuary, the Town of Upper Marlboro, and the Villages of Marlborough neighborhood, but connections are generally lacking.

Sidewalks and street trees are useful and attractive pedestrian amenities that should be provided in all suburban residential areas of the subregion.

CSX operates a freight rail line that generally parallels US 301 from Bowie to southern Charles County, via Upper Marlboro and Brandywine. There has been interest in giving more consideration to utilizing this rail right-of-way for much needed commuter transit service. A spur of this rail line runs along the northern boundary of the USAF Globecom site en route to the Chalk Point facility. There are no public airports in the subregion, although JBA is a major source of military and diplomatic flight operations.

KEY PLANNING ISSUES

During preparation of the plan, at the listening sessions, public workshops, and community meetings, participants raised a large number and broad range of issues and concerns related to the future of the subregion. Although all the issues and concerns raised are considered in the plan, the following have been identified as the key issues: 1. Preserving agriculture through a period of transition. Subregion 6 contains most of the farmland in Prince Georgeâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s County. The number of farms and amount of farm income generated Subregion Analysis

have been declining as a result of the Maryland tobacco buyout program. Despite the challenges experienced by farm operations during this period of transition, they still benefit from productive soils, the capacity to support a wide range of agricultural operations, and proximity to the large urban markets such as Washington, D.C., Baltimore, and Annapolis. Strategies to ensure the future of agriculture in Subregion 6 are discussed in the Development Pattern/Land Use and Economic Development chapters. 2. Conserving natural resource lands. Subregion 6 has extensive natural resource lands including farmland and forests, some of which are underlain with extensive mineral resources. Recent state legislation8 requires counties to consider Priority Preservation Areas to protect the agricultural and forest land base so that development does not convert or compromise these critical resources. This issue is discussed in the Development Pattern/Land Use chapter. 3. Incorporating sewer capacity considerations into future planning. Western Branch serves most of the Developing Tier in Subregion 6 as well as areas as far as Bowie. In the past wastewater treatment plant expansions to accommodate growth were generally routine. However, expanding plants is likely to be more difficult and take more time in the future because of nutrient discharge caps associated with improving water quality in the Chesapeake Bay and its tributaries. Therefore, future growth must be carefully planned in light of potential wastewater treatment capacity limitations. This issue is discussed in the Development Pattern/Land Use and Public Facilities chapters. 4. Modifications to the Rural Tier/Developing Tier boundaries. During the plan process some property owners requested their land be removed from the Rural Tier and be placed in the Developing Tier. Such modifications could have significant impacts on portions of the Rural and the Developing Tiers. This issue is addressed in the Development Pattern/Land Use chapter. 5. Assuring the adequacy of public facilities. A number of questions were raised at public meetings about public facilities, especially roads. A number of participants raised concerns that new communities were being approved prior to the provision of adequate public facilities (APF) needed to support this development. This issue is discussed in the Public Facilities chapter. 6. Promoting historic, cultural, and recreational assets. Subregion 6 has a rich heritage of historic, cultural, and scenic sites, areas, and resources, as well as environmental assets, and parks and recreational facilities. Integrating these resources 8

â&#x20AC;&#x192; HB 1141, 2006

Subregion Analysis

into a cohesive, interrelated program can promote community awareness, pride, and a sense of place, and can attract visitors, and increase economic development opportunities. This issue is discussed in the Historic and Cultural Resources chapter. 7. Charting a new future for the Town of Upper Marlboro and the surrounding area. Growth is occurring around this small, historic town that serves as the county seat and its center of government. Managing this growth, promoting revitalization within the town, and improving gateways to the town, all while protecting the small town character, are significant challenges. These issues are discussed in the Living Areas and Community Character chapter. 8. Addressing immediate concerns versus long-term planning. Somewhat related to the APF issue is the concern that the master plan address immediate concerns, such as problem intersections and neighborhood maintenance, while also focusing on planning issues that might not be realized for 20 years or more. This issue is addressed throughout the plan. 9. Defining and planning for sustainability in suburban and rural communities. The low-density development pattern in the Developing and Rural Tiers, as well as the countyâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s overall jobs/housing balance, requires that most citizens use their cars to get to work and to meet their daily needs, or that they use their cars to access mass transit options for getting to work or shopping. Recognizing the unique environmental, social, and economic benefits that the subregion provides, the plan should address ways to support carpooling, trip chaining, and other conservation behaviors related to personal vehicle use to reduce green house gas (GHG) emissions from this source. At the same time, the preservation of rural lands offers an important mechanism for offsetting the impact of GHGs in the subregion and the rest of the county. In addition, these rural lands, close in to major urban centers, offer an unparalleled opportunity to supply local agricultural products to these markets, potentially reducing the GHGs and fuel costs associated with the transport of food from farm to table. Other considerations for promoting sustainability include revitalizing and enhancing existing commercial and office spaces in the subregion as a priority over greenfield development. Minimizing the impact of future development on critical land and water resources is a central component of this plan. The plan also addresses ways to support and incentivize lifestyle changes that conserve resources, such as retrofitting homes and neighborhoods with new, energy-saving technologies and promoting on-site stormwater management opportunities, among others.

Subregion Analysis

DEVELOPMENT PATTERN AND LAND USE

Subregion 6 Approved Master Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

Land use and development are a key component of an area’s sustainability, particularly as they impact the environment and create the need for particular types of transportation systems, other types of infrastructure, and public facilities. The development pattern defines how much land is developed for residential, employment, and institutional purposes, how much is conserved for agricultural and other natural resource uses, and how much is preserved for environmental, scenic, and recreational purposes. The following goals provide a basis for planning for a more sustainable development pattern in Subregion 6: • Use county resources wisely by recognizing the interconnections among land use, transportation, the natural environment, public health, well-being, and equity. This includes adopting a holistic, long-term view of our investments that includes social and environmental costs, not just short-term economic considerations. • Require the efficient use of tax revenues; avoiding as much as possible the need to increase public expenditures to build and service new infrastructure when the fiscal demands for maintaining and improving existing infrastructure are already tremendous. • Maintain and improve the diversity of living, employment, mobility, and recreational options available to current and future residents in the subregion through decision-making that supports and reinforces the development goals of the General Plan across tiers. • Promote a development pattern that improves mobility options by making transit service more accessible, preserves irreplaceable agricultural and natural resource lands, concentrates commercial centers, and sustains a diverse and vibrant economy. • Continue to create and offer incentives to reward land owners for conservation and stewardship of critical resource lands; recognizing the benefits that these behaviors provide to the current and future generations. Map 7 (in the back of this book) is the Future Land Use Map for Subregion 6. The map has several purposes. • It reflects land use policies that provide the basis for a more refined classification of land into districts for zoning purposes that regulate the use of land (that is, what uses can occur where and under what conditions), as well as the subdivision and development of land. Development Pattern and Land Use

FUTURE LAND USE MAP

• It serves as a guide to the county’s future desires and interests for land development, preservation, and conservation. Where land is not currently zoned in accordance with the future land use map, the map shows where applications for floating zones or comprehensive design zones would be supported provided the proposal was in accordance with the subregion plan’s goals and objectives. • The map includes the boundary dividing the Developing Tier and Rural Tier. This line is an important policy line affecting, for example, eligibility for public water, and sewer service, transportation, and fire standards under the county’s APF requirements. • It serves as a guide to decision-makers regarding public facilities—primarily water and sewer—as well as schools, economic development, and transportation. Maps showing existing and future public facilities are in the Public Facilities chapter. The Future Land Use Map divides the region into ten land use designations (Table 7).

Table 7: Future Land Use Map Designations Land Use Designation

Intent/Types of Land Uses

Commercial

Retail and business areas, including employment uses such as office and service uses.

Industrial

Manufacturing and industrial parks, warehouses and distribution. May include other employment such as office and service uses.

Institutional

Uses such as large military installations, colleges, schools, and churches.

Mixed-Use

Areas of mixed residential, commercial, employment, and institutional uses. Residential uses are expected to dominate overall land use in the designated area and may include a range of unit types.

Public and Private Open Space

Parks and recreation areas, publicly owned natural areas (such as state forests).

Rural

Agricultural land (cropland, pasture, farm fields), forest, very lowdensity residential. The county’s intent is for these areas to remain rural and to conserve these areas’ natural resources, primarily forest and forest resources, for future generations. New residential development is permitted at a maximum density of one dwelling unit per five acres.

Residential Low

Residential areas of up to 3.5 dwelling units per acre. Primarily singlefamily detached dwellings.

Residential Medium

Residential areas between 3.5 and eight dwelling units per acre. Primarily single-family dwellings (detached and attached).

Residential Medium-High

Residential areas between 8 and 20 dwelling units per acre. Mix of dwelling unit types including apartments.

Residential High

Residential areas over 20 dwelling units per acre. Mix of dwelling unit types including apartments

Development Pattern and Land Use

The Rural Tier comprises almost 70 percent of Subregion 6 and is the largest contiguous rural area in the county, containing much of the countyâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s remaining farmland as well as forest land and other environmental, scenic, and historic resources. It is under development pressure due to its strategic location close to existing or planned regional centers including Washington, D.C., Annapolis, Bowie, Largo, and Westphalia; the easy access to major highways, especially US 301 and MD 4; and the regional traffic these roads carry. New policy incentives and regulatory controls are needed to conserve the remaining agricultural and other natural resource lands that are increasingly subject to fragmentation within the Rural Tier. Nearly all of the Rural Tier is designated rural on Map 7, reflecting the countyâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s goal to preserve rural resources, character, and open space. Some large tracts are designated institutional, such as the Western Branch Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP), USAF Globecom site, and Chalk Point Power Plant. A few small, scattered areas such as in Aquasco, Baden, and Croom have designated commercial uses to serve the needs of residents in those communities. In the future, these communities could benefit from a more in-depth look at their existing market conditions, opportunities for small-scale economic development projects that complement rural character, and ways to integrate these areas with the promotion of the heritage and agritourism themes identified later in this plan.

RURAL TIER

Horses are a common sight in the subregion.

Map 7 also shows public and private open space. In the Rural Tier these spaces are primarily land in the Patuxent River Park and Cedarville State Forest. This chapter also identifies land use policies to allow agriculture to continue and flourish in the subregion. The Economic Development chapter discusses other policies and strategies that are needed in the areas of economic and business development and support, strategic planning, and marketing. The 2002 General Plan established the boundaries for the Rural Tier. As noted earlier, the Rural Tier and Developing Tier each have their own set of General Plan policies and priorities that are intended to guide growth and development by controlling, for example, eligibility for public water and sewer service, investments in transportation and transit, and more. The plan placed the Town of Upper Marlboro in the Rural Tier. As a part of this master plan process review, it has become evident that the town, which is served by public water and sewer, does not meet the criteria for Rural Tier designation. This master plan supports the recommendations Development Pattern and Land Use

Modifications to the Rural Tier

outlined in a recently completed study done in partnership with the Town of Upper Marlboro, the 2008 Upper Marlboro Town Vision and Action Plan, for maintaining Upper Marlboro’s small town character and rich heritage, while also promoting compatible redevelopment and infill development to increase the tax base. For the above reasons, the Town of Upper Marlboro has been placed in the Developing Tier. During preparation of the subregion plan an analysis was made of removing properties from the Rural Tier to the Developing Tier. It was determined that minor changes to the tier boundaries could be supported (Map 8); changes that resolve problems with properties that are split between tiers and changes to reflect properties that are served by public sewer. Other than these, the plan does not support changes to the Rural Tier area for the following reasons: • Making the Rural Tier significantly smaller will increase pressure on remaining resource lands. Maintaining the connectivity of the resource and fragile lands that remain is critical to reinvigorating the rural economy, strengthening communities, and preserving the diversity of options that current and future residents have for housing and recreation. • Climate change and energy needs require communities to reassess how they use land resources. Rural land near major urban areas is an increasingly valuable resource and commodity for food and energy production and, potentially, for offsets for development activities, emissions, or pollution. Given its value, reductions in rural land should only be made for the most compelling reasons. • There is a large amount of approved development in the pipeline in the Developing Tier portion of Subregion 6 and other parts of the county. In addition, there are significant opportunities for infill and redevelopment in and around the county’s General Plan centers, most of which are serviced by a world-class transit system. • Moving land from the Rural Tier to the Developing Tier makes it eligible for public sewer. Most if not all the sewer flow would be to Western Branch WWTP which will exceed its current capacity based on planned and pipeline development (see Public Facilities chapter). This subregion plan recommends caution in changing land use designations that would increase demand for sewers because of the uncertainties surrounding the effects of Maryland’s nutrient caps on WWTP discharges and the time it may take to expand capacity if and when it is needed. • This subregion plan’s policy is stronger support for redevelopment and infill development in existing and planned development areas rather than for “green field” development that takes up natural resource lands. This includes encouraging cooperative partnerships between government and business to redevelop 42

Development Pattern and Land Use

MAP 7: RURAL TIER AMENDMENTS Subregion 3 L

Inset A

a rg o

Oak G rov eR

Road

Bowie and Vicinity

oa d

Marlboro Pi ke

Ritchie R

in Hw y)

bo oa ro R

1 (Cra

arl

Westphalia

US 3 0

ie M

oad

Ri tch

y C ap ita l B eltwa

P ennsylvania Avenue

Joint Base Andrews

ain H

)

Inset B

ch A ran

5 (B

ard

)

vil

ry Cr a in

Subregion 5

U S

22 3

(P isc

at aw ay R

)

oo (W

ANNE ARUNDEL COUNTY

Map Amendments

38 2

ra n

dy wi

) ad

38 1

3: Reclassification of approximately 10 acres from the Rural Tier to the Developing Tier (see Inset A).

2: Reclassification of approximately five acres from the Rural Tier to the ) ek Rd oke Developing Tier (see Acc Inset A) 3( MD

Road ys Ke

r No

(Cr

1: Reclassification of the Town of loral P Upper Marlboro Ffrom aRural rk Road Tier to Developing Tier

CALVERT COUNTY

)

4: Reclassification of approximately 22 acres from the Rural Tier to the Developing Tier (see Inset B). 5: Reclassification of approximately 565 acres from the Rural Tier to the Developing Tier.

CHARLES COUNTY

6: Reclassification of approximately 84 acres from the Rural Tier to the Developing Tier.

PATUXE NT

Legend

RIV

Approved Rural Tier Boundary, 2013 Approved Rural Tier Boundary, 2002

Development Pattern and Land Use

2.5

Subregion 6

Scale in Miles

existing commercial areas before the development of new sites to avoid the proliferation of aging, underutilized properties. This is a trend evident along the US 301 corridor in the study area, as well as throughout the county. â&#x20AC;˘ Changes to the Rural Tier line to allow for large new commercial areas would be inconsistent with the General Plan and may have negative effects on commercial areas in nearby designated centers such as Bowie, Westphalia, and Brandywine. There are no compelling reasons to amend the General Plan for this purpose in this subregion plan. One of the general stores along Croom Road provides for some commercial needs in the community.

Policy 1 Limit amendments to the General Plan tier boundaries to resolve problems with properties that are split between tiers and properties that are served (or programmed to be served) by public sewer (see Map 8). Strategies 1. Reclassify the Town of Upper Marlboro from Rural Tier to Developing Tier. 2. Reclassify property in the northeast quadrant of US 301 and Marlboro Pike from the Rural Tier to the Developing Tier. 3. Reclassify property south of Brandywine Road by Air Force Road from the Rural Tier to the Developing Tier. 4. The contiguous parcels located south of MD 4 between South Osborne Road and Old Crain Highway should be examined for the application of an equestrian and agricultural heritagethemed, R-L CDZ, which could serve as a gateway to this portion of the Rural Tier in the county and make use of the recently approved community well and septic systems.

Rural Preservation: Tools and Programs

Priority Preservation Area All Maryland counties must have a certified priority preservation element as part of their General Plans if their agricultural land preservation programs are to be eligible for certification by the state. Once certified by the state, these areas

Development Pattern and Land Use

become eligible for a greater amount of public funding to preserve these lands. A priority preservation area1 (PPA) is an area that: • Contains productive agricultural or forest soils, or is capable of supporting profitable agricultural and forestry enterprises where productive soils are lacking. • Is governed by local policies that stabilize the agricultural and forest land base so that development does not convert or compromise agricultural or forest resources. • Is large enough to support the kind of agricultural operations that the county seeks to preserve. • Is accompanied by the county’s acreage goal for land to be preserved through easements and zoning in the PPA equal to at least 80 percent of the remaining undeveloped areas of land in the area. In 2008 Prince George’s County applied to the State Department of Planning and the Maryland Agricultural Land Preservation Foundation to certify its agricultural land preservation programs. Certification would enable the county to retain 75 percent of agricultural land transfer tax funds for use in land preservation, compared to 33 percent without certification. Between FY 2004 and FY 2007 the difference between the percentages averaged $1.2 million per year. Successful certification is an increasingly rigorous process and beginning in FY 2009 must include establishment of a PPA. The proposed PPA in Subregion 6 would cover approximately 39,000 acres, or 58 percent of the Rural Tier in the study area. It generally covers the outer portions of the subregion along the Patuxent River, the border area with Charles County, and from Marlton south to Brandywine. (Map 9). (Other subregion plans may recommend additional PPAs in other parts of Prince George’s County.

A private indoor facility is used both for practice and competition of equestrian events.

A horse heads back to the stable.

It is important to note that the county’s goals of preserving rural resources, character, and open space also apply not only within the PPA, but also to areas in the Rural Tier outside the PPA.

The full definition is in the Annotated Code of Maryland Agriculture Article. See also HB 2-2006. 1

Development Pattern and Land Use

MAP 8: PRIORITY PRESERVATION AREA Bowie and Vicinity

I-49

I-9 5

Subregion 4

Anne Arundel County

Westphalia

301

MD 4

Subregion 5 MD 5 MD 38 2

MD 38 1

Charles County

Legend Subregion 6

1.5

Calvert County

Scale in Miles

Priority Preservation Area Major Roads

Development Pattern and Land Use

Consequently, properties outside of the PPA should be eligible for the preservation tools listed below. Given the limited resources that might be available to implement these tools, areas within the PPA would be given the highest priority. In July 2012, the county approved the “Priority Preservation Area Functional Master Plan” to achieve the protection goals. The major actions that are recommended in this plan are described below.

Parks and open space acquisitions: The county expects to continue its long-term policy of acquiring land for recreation and natural resource protection in Subregion 6, especially in Patuxent River Park. Many of these acquisitions will be within the PPA.

Purchase of development rights—agricultural easements: Purchase of development rights (PDR) is expected to be a major source of financing for land preservation. The county’s first easements were sold in 2004 (in Subregion 5). In the first half of 2008, three easements under the Maryland Agricultural Land Preservation Program (MALPF) were sold in Subregion 6. The county adopted its own PDR program in 2006. Easement applications totaling over 2,000 acres are pending within the area of the PPA. Interest is expected to be stimulated further if the county can add an installment purchase agreement option, in which easement payments are made over time rather than in one lump sum.

Protective easements: A variety of other types of easements can contribute to land preservation in the PPA. These include easements in the Patuxent River Rural Legacy area, historic preservation easements through the Maryland Historic Trust, and environmental easements through organizations such as the Maryland Environmental Trust. In many parts of the country such easements may be donated or acquired at small cost. In many parts of Maryland, local land trusts play an important role in land preservation as easement holders or as brokers between landowners and the eventual easement holders. Organizations such as the Trust for Public Land and The Conservation Fund may also become active just as they are in other parts of the state.

Conservation subdivisions: Although the easement programs and resource mitigation requirements are intended and expected to direct development out of the PPA, some development can be expected to take place in the PPA. Under the county’s conservation subdivision regulations adopted in 2006, subdivisions in the Rural Tier are required to conserve, and place under easement, at least 60 percent of the land within the subdivision. Within the PPA consideration should be given to increasing the open space requirement to ensure that the goals of the PPA are met. Development Pattern and Land Use

Woodland conservation: The county’s Woodland Conservation and Tree Preservation Ordinance requires mitigation for development activities that affect woodland. This program, together with enhancements proposed in other strategies, could lead to additional land preservation in the PPA from both on-site and off-site mitigation. On-site preservation will result from mining and from conservation subdivisions. Offsite preservation will result partially from mining and partially from mitigation for development from outside of the PPA. Off-site woodland conservation banks are directed toward locations within the green infrastructure network to the greatest extent possible. Continuing conservation of off-site woodlands in the Subregion 6 PPA can be expected to occur in response to ongoing development occurring throughout the county.

The subregion also is home to a few alpaca farms.

Soil mitigation: Recognizing that soil is irreplaceable as a nonrenewable resource, development, including other activities such as mining, occurring on class I, II, and III agricultural or forest soils in the Rural Tier in Subregion 6 will be required to mitigate for that loss. Class I, II and III soil types are the most fertile soils and are required to be present in order to be granted certain state easements. Land development should be directed away from land with these soil classifications. The mitigation may take the form of either purchasing easements on resource lands elsewhere in the Rural Tier, within the PPA preferred, or paying a fee-in-lieu to support the county’s PDR program. The precedent for such action is the county’s Woodland Conservation and Tree Preservation Ordinance which requires mitigation for development that affects woodland anywhere in the county. In the future the county expects there to be demand for land for other types of mitigation such as carbon offsets (planting trees or preserving woodlands to offset greenhouse gas emissions) or for nutrient trading (planting trees or preserving woodlands to compensate for nitrogen phosphorus loading that exceeds watershed load limits).

Environmental easements ensure that land will be preserved in perpetuity.

In addition to these recommended programs, the plan also recommends further study of two other emerging programs.

Transfer of development rights (TDR): During preparation of this subregion plan much consideration was given to TDRs2. Indeed, several bills were drafted in 2007 and 2008 for consideration by the County Council. As demand increases for The transfer of development rights from a sending (rural) area to a receiving (development) area. 2

Development Pattern and Land Use

the use of TDRs in the Developed and Developing Tiers, TDRs could become a useful tool. Should a TDR program be approved and implemented, it should be considered as another option for preserving valuable resource lands and open space alongside the policies recommended by this plan.

Relationships Between Easements and Overlays: To encourage participation in land conservation and stewardship opportunities available in the PPA, property owners should be made aware of the range of programs available and their applicability and interrelationship in the protection of natural land resources. Different protection mechanisms may be applicable to different portions of a site and may coexist without difficulty. Overlaying easements may be in conflict with county and state laws regarding the various easements but should be permitted in the instances where they are not in conflict. The relationship between different land protection mechanisms needs to be carefully evaluated when determining the best mechanisms for a site.

Rural Legacy Program: The Rural Legacy Program provides the focus and funding necessary to protect large, contiguous tracts of land and other strategic areas from sprawl development and to enhance natural resource, agricultural, forestry, and environmental protection through cooperative efforts among state and local governments land trusts and willing property owners. Protection is provided through the acquisition of easements, and purchases from willing landowners, and the supporting activities of Rural Legacy Sponsors and local governments. The Rural Legacy Programâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s goals are to establish greenbelts of forests and farms around rural communities in order to preserve their cultural heritage and sense of place; to preserve critical habitat for native plant and wildlife species; to support natural resource economies such as farming, forestry, tourism, and outdoor recreation; and to protect riparian forests, wetlands, and greenways to buffer the Chesapeake Bay and its tributaries from pollution run-off. The Patuxent Rural Legacy Area, Prince Georgeâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s, was approved in 1999 for an area of almost 39,000 acres, is contained within the Rural Tier of Subregion 6, and is also part of the portion of the PPA which drains into the Patuxent River. Consideration should be given to the establishment of a second Rural Legacy area for the headwaters of the Zekiah Swamp Watershed in Prince Georgeâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s County, which would protect contiguous O-S zoned lands in the Rural Tier. This would include most of the PPA area in Subregion 6 that drains into the Potomac watershed and provide a green infrastructure linkage

Development Pattern and Land Use

with the Zekiah Watershed Rural Legacy Area in Charles County. Policy 2 Develop preservation programs for Subregion 6 to protect critical resources and offer property owners a range of options for receiving compensation for good stewardship of the land. Utilize all available federal and state programs in Subregion 6 for achieving the same purposes. Strategies 1. Gain state certification for the PPA. • Identify needed revisions to the zoning code and programmatic changes required to implement the PPA and draft legislation to make necessary changes. 2. Require mitigation for activities that propose development on soil productivity classes I, II, III agricultural or forest soils in the Rural Tier in Subregion 6. 3. Increase funding for, and participation in, programs for the purchase of development rights for agricultural easements. • Create an installment purchase agreement option. 4. Stimulate and facilitate landowner interest in selling easements under the county’s Woodland Conservation and Tree Preservation Ordinance. 5. Raise the profile of opportunities for landowners to participate in other easement programs. • Identify a county clearinghouse for information on land preservation opportunities available to landowners. 6. Investigate the use of easement overlays to encourage and provide incentives for land owner participation in land conservation.

Treatment of Agriculture by the Zoning Ordinance and other Regulatory Requirements This plan uses the term “agriculture” to cover the broadest range of agricultural enterprises including cropland, livestock, nurseries, equine, forestry, and other specialty enterprises such as vineyards and wineries. Farming on the urban fringe is changing. As discussed further in the Economic Development chapter, the structural change is to smaller farm operations that offer a more diversified basket of goods such as produce, livestock, equine, value-added products and services, and agritourism activities than did traditional grain and tobacco operations. 50

Development Pattern and Land Use

Zoning requirements need to support this by allowing flexibility for farm operations to use land in ways that might not be suitable in less rural environments. While few farms in the county are currently experimenting with these kinds of nontraditional agricultural activities, the trend is growing, there is citizen interest, and the county should ready itself by having supportive zoning in place. There are federal, state, and county permit requirements for food preparation, processing, marketing, and sales as there are for other activities that will interest farmers in pursuing new agricultural ventures. Determining the extent and appropriate authority for these requirements can be time-consuming and confusing. In addition to amending the Zoning Ordinance, the county should assess whether it can streamline permit requirements within its purview to provide further incentives to agricultural and resource industry development. Policy 3 Increase property owner options for profitable agricultural and forestry enterprises by amending the treatment of agriculture in the Zoning Ordinance and examining other regulatory processes for streamlining. Strategies 1. Revise the Zoning Ordinance to: • Remove or revise the “on the premises” provision in the definition 3, which limits a farm to processing, treating, etc., only what is produced on that farm. • Include value-added processing in the definition. Assess the appropriateness of using the following definition of value added: “the processing of an agricultural product in order to increase its market value, including such processes as canning, milling, grinding, freezing, heating and fermenting.” The term should include cheese and wine production.

Current definition: “The “Use” of land for farming, dairying, pasturage, apiaries, horticulture, floriculture, and animal husbandry, which may include “Accessory Uses” for processing, treating, selling, or storing agricultural products produced on a farm (on the premises). The term “Agriculture” shall not include the commercial feeding of garbage or offal to animals, the slaughtering of livestock for marketing, or the disposal of sludge except for fertilization of crops, horticultural products, or floricultural products in connection with an active agricultural operation or home gardening.” Prince George’s County Zoning Ordinance, Definitions 27-107(a)(9). 3

Development Pattern and Land Use

• Add the following to the table of permitted uses: equine activities such as boarding, veterinary medical and rehabilitation services, training, showing, and recreational riding activities. • Include other activities in the table of permitted uses such as pick-your-own produce operations, corn mazes, cut-yourown Christmas trees farms and flower operations, sales of decorative plant materials, farm tours for a fee, and petting zoos. • Include necessary safeguards to protect the use and enjoyment of adjoining property when making changes to the definition of agriculture. 2. Investigate opportunities for streamlining county regulatory processes for activities related to new and emerging agricultural enterprises. Requirements for sales and marketing for all agriculturally-related products should be examined for reform opportunities which will support these enterprises. 3. Develop an outreach strategy to apprise farmers of the full set of land use and other regulations related to agricultural and forestry activities.

Mineral Resources Under state law a comprehensive plan must incorporate land use policies and recommendations to balance mineral resource extraction with other land uses and prevent the preemption of mineral resources extraction by other uses. Subregion 6 contains extensive mineral resources based on the presence of large sand and gravel deposits affiliated with the Brandywine formation (see Map 10, note that the resource extends into much of Subregion 5). The resources provide an economic base that provides jobs, value-added services such as cement and concrete production, and other economic benefits (see also the Economic Development chapter). It should be noted that the availability of these resources is limited in the state and that Prince George’s County is one of a few counties that has sand and gravel deposits. An overlay zoning district is a tool that would help preserve access to the resource and prevent the preemption of mineral resources extraction by other uses4. Such a district would also support the PPA by directing development elsewhere. Mining projects can have significant negative impacts on nearby communities and property owners, particularly with respect to noise, dust, and truck traffic. To address these issues, new and expanding projects go through an extensive review and approval An overlay district “lays over” the base zoning district or districts. Within the overlay special zoning regulations apply. 4

Development Pattern and Land Use

MAP 9: MAJOR SAND AND GRAVEL RESOURCES

process at the state and county level. At the county level a special exception is also required. As part of the special exception process the county reviews the effects of the project on the environment as well as potential effects on noise, dust, and traffic. Even with all of these reviews, the need for additional efforts to ensure minimal adverse impact on the community and adjacent property owners has been raised by residents. Policy 4 Preserve access to mineral resources where sufficient and economically viable mining potential exists. Strategies 1. Develop a mineral overlay zoning district that corresponds to the unexploited sand and gravel deposits avoiding already developed lands.

Development Pattern and Land Use

• Delineate boundaries for the district that are limited to the portion of the PPA that does not border the Patuxent River and consider extending the district into Subregion 5. 2. Within the overlay district, for parcels 50 acres or larger: • Require resource surveys of mineral resources prior to development for other uses. • Guarantee access to mineral resources, if present, prior to development. • Require mitigation for development projects that proceed without extracting the resource by placing a protective easement on other land in need of protection, or payment of a fee-in-lieu to support the county’s land preservation programs. Policy 5 Minimize the short- and long-term impacts of mining operations on adjacent properties and communities. Strategies 1. Evaluate the need to increase setback and buffering requirements for adjacent mining and developing residential properties to minimize potential efforts of noise and dust from future mining. 2. Evaluate the necessity for additional post-mining reclamation requirements, above those already required by law, which would match preservation, community recreation, and environmental needs. Within the PPA these should include consideration of reclamation for agricultural preservation or the establishment of woodlands. 3. Update the inventory of reclaimed and abandoned mine sites in the county and develop an inventory of reclaimed and abandoned sites, assess compliance with current reclamation requirements, determine the suitability of reclaimed properties for supporting high quality woodlands, and identify mechanisms for financing the reclamation of abandoned sites.

Residential Development

Residential development in the Rural Tier must balance development pressures and landowners’ equity with the desire to maintain rural environments and character. To do this, policies have been created to encourage residential development at low densities in limited amounts to occur in ways that help preserve the features that contribute to rural character. One of the General Plan objectives is to limit development annually in the Rural Tier to less than one percent of the dwelling unit growth in the county. This objective acknowledges that due to limited fiscal resources and the desire to revive the agricultural

Development Pattern and Land Use

economy, residential growth should be directed away from the Rural Tier with its valuable agricultural and other natural resource lands. It also recognizes that public funds for additional public facilities should not be used to encourage further development in the Rural Tier. In 2007 county legislation was passed to require the application of conservation subdivision techniques for all new residential development proposed in the Rural Tier with a goal of retaining and enhancing the rural character. The initial results of this program are unclear because there have been few applications which have been processed to date. Further evaluation should be carried out in the future to determine if the existing requirements are adequate to achieve the stated objectives. Policy 6 Ensure that conservation subdivisions strengthen the rural character of the surrounding area. Identify an effective approach to managing growth in the Rural Tier and to evaluate the impact of preservation measures over time. Strategies 1. Reexamine the one percent goal for its appropriateness for the Rural Tier. Use a data- and evidence-driven process to consider its impact on land equity, how it should be achieved or enforced, or whether a different approach might be more effective for managing growth in the county. 2. Conduct public outreach to solicit input on identified growth measurement alternatives that will allow time for preservation and other programs to conserve critical resources and offer landowners more options than residential development for receiving equity from their land. 3. Consider the effect of increasing the open space required in the conservation subdivision within the PPA from the 60 percent gross tract area now required. 4. Strengthen the existing requirements for the preservation of open space in conservation subdivisions to include items such as existing or potential contiguity (with afforestation) to woodlands, historic sites and their environmental settings, preservation of viewsheds, potential for protecting biodiversity and/or unique agricultural or environmental features. 5. Create an education and outreach program for developers and real estate agents to promote the development and marketing of housing products and communities which are environmentallyfriendly and context sensitive.

Development Pattern and Land Use

Policy 7 Limit roadway lighting improvements in the Rural Tier to those consistent with preservation and safety goals. Strategies 1. Continue a collaborative effort with the countyâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Department of Public Works and Transportation, the Planning Department, and the State Highway Administration to meet transportation safety goals while protecting rural character and designated scenic and historic roads. 2. Develop road standards for the Rural Tier that require the use of full cut-off optics and dark-sky techniques. 3. If updates to the existing guidelines for scenic and historic roads are considered in the future, include a public participation component.

DEVELOPING TIER

The Developing Tier portion of the subregion is generally west of US 301. The land use recommendations for the residential densities in this portion of the subregion are primarily Residential Low and Residential Low Medium. The Future Land Use Map (Map 7) makes few changes to the future land use pattern established in the 1993 Subregion VI Study Area Master Plan and Melwood â&#x20AC;&#x201C;Westphalia Master Plan. Consistent with these 1993 plans, this plan maintains the designation of most of the land in the Developing Tier as Residential Low, Institutional, and Public and Private Open Space. Additional small areas in Marlton and Upper Marlboro have been designated for open space for stream buffers, and parklands acquired since the last master plans were approved are designated for open space as well. Commercial shopping areas in the Developing Tier are located at strategic locations throughout the tier along Old Marlboro Pike next to MD 4 in Melwood, on US 301 at Osborne Road in Rosaryville, at Fairhaven Drive near Marlton, and around the interchange of US 301 and MD 4. Many of these shopping centers are older and in need of upgrades. Commercial centers are proposed in a number of comprehensive planned communities with mixed results. The shopping center at the Villages of Marlborough has consistently experienced significant vacancies since it was built. A new Amish market recently opened in the center. Although it has drawn shoppers from outside the area, it has not seemed to help the overall vitality of the shopping center as even more businesses have closed. In addition, two local activity centers in Woodyard Estates and in Marlboro Meadows have developed only the residential portion of the proposed development. The 2002 General Plan recognizes that countywide there is an excessive amount of land zoned for commercial uses. Throughout the county as new commercial centers are developed, older ones lose

Development Pattern and Land Use

tenants and the shopping center often deteriorates. The Osborne shopping center on US 301 is currently in such a state; although plans have been developed for expansion and enhancement, they have not moved forward. The plan recognizes the need to focus efforts on improving and strengthening existing centers and thus concentrate commercial development rather than allowing it to sprawl along major roads in Subregion 6. Employment areas in the Developing Tier are located around Joint Base Andrews Naval Air Facility Washington (JBA) and the Town of Upper Marlboro. These areas are well served by major highways, including the Capital Beltway, and support a mix of public and private development. They offer increased employment opportunities for area residents. Around JBA, the industrial land uses will be maintained and that additional areas be designated for industrial land use to create a consistent and compatible land use pattern. In the Upper Marlboro area, a mix of uses will be promoted at the entrance to this area at US 301 and MD 725. Mixed-use development in this location can take advantage of its close proximity to the MD 4 and US 301 interchange and create an attractive gateway development to the town. New commercial and residential development would also be supportive of the proposed upgrade of USÂ 301 when the existing highway will become a service road. The commercial core in the Town of Upper Marlboro, which is already a mix of uses, is also designated for mixed use to provide the flexibility this area needs to promote compatible infill development and revitalization.

Multifamily housing complexes in the Developing Tier provide for a choice of living options for county residents.

Development Pattern and Land Use

This plan recognizes that the industrial area to the east of the Town of Upper Marlboro between MD 725 and MD 4 needs further study. Development in the existing industrial and commercial areas is a mix of uses that is now housed predominantly in older buildings. Although there has been some new investment in this area, the development is fragmented and it presents an unattractive front door to the Town of Upper Marlboro, the county seat. Much of the newer development, including a Home Depot and McDonalds, serve a commercial use rather than an industrial use even though these uses are on properties zoned for industrial uses. The need for property consolidation and redevelopment to enhance and improve this area, which is strategically located at the intersection of two major roadways, should be further studied and a plan for implementation should be developed. Policy 1 Promote a development pattern that allocates appropriate amounts of land for residential, commercial, employment, industrial, and institutional land uses in accordance with county development goals by considering local and regional needs, the integration of land uses wherever possible, and the impact of development proposals on the economy, environment, equity, and efficiency. Strategies 1. Maintain low to moderate-density land uses except as part of mixed-use development and planned communities. 2. Preserve and expand areas of institutional and public and private open space. 3. Appropriately expand and enhance employment areas by expanding industrial land use designation around JBA and designating mixed land use for appropriate areas in the Town of Upper Marlboro and at the gateway to the town on US 301. 4. Ensure that new commercial office and shopping development in the Beechtree community meets high quality design standards and includes the appropriate mix of uses. Policy 2 Support redevelopment and infill development in existing and planned development areas rather than â&#x20AC;&#x153;green fieldâ&#x20AC;? development that takes up natural resource lands. Strategy Further study the Upper Marlboro area to determine the most appropriate land uses for a comprehensive revitalization and implementation plan that will build on the foundation in this plan to create a well-designed, attractive, and economically vibrant node. 58

Development Pattern and Land Use

Joint Base Andrews Naval Air Facility Washington (JBA) is a highly significant national, regional, and local facility, and this plan promotes policies and objectives to preserve and strengthen the base. The base provides employment for many residents of Subregion 6 and Prince George’s County and provides strong support to the local economy. Prince George’s County initiated a Joint Land Use Study (JLUS) with JBA in fall 2008. The purpose of the JLUS is to balance community interests with the military mission of the base. The JLUS includes the Globecom site in Brandywine in addition to JBA and a half mile radius around the base.

Joint Base Andrews Naval Air Facility, Washington

In December 2007, the US Air Force updated its 1998 Air Installation Compatible Use Zone (AICUZ) study for JBA. The purpose of the AICUZ program is to promote compatible land development in areas subject to aircraft noise and accident potential and its findings and recommendations have been used as the basis for land use recommendations in this plan. Below is a summary of these from the study and pertinent background information.

Runway Airspace Imaginary Surfaces Imaginary surfaces are surfaces in space around airfields that need to be kept obstacle free. There are seven types of surfaces that need to be regulated to prevent uses, activities or structures that might be hazardous to aircraft operations. The outermost surface, the Outer Horizontal Surface, and the Approach Departure Clearance Surface extend out as far as six miles horizontally from the base, east of US 301 and south of Globecom. From a land use perspective the key uses of concern are5: • Structures within ten feet of some of the surfaces • Uses that would attract birds or waterfowl • Light emissions that would interfere with pilots • Noise Federal and state ordinances and guidelines have been developed to ensure that noise levels are at acceptable standards. The consensus of these standards is that 65 “A-weighted”6 decibels (dBA) is the maximum noise level generally acceptable for residential areas. Other uses of concern not regulated directly or wholly through land use are light emissions that would interfere with pilots, air emissions, and electrical emissions. 6 Day-Night Average A-Weighted Sound Level (DNL) is the measure of the total noise environment. DNL averages the sum of all aircraft noise producing events over a 24-hour period, with a ten dB upward adjustment added to the nighttime events (between 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m.). 5

Development Pattern and Land Use

MAP 10: JOINT BASE ANDREWS NAVAL AIR FACILITY WASHINGTON (JBA) NOISE AND ACCIDENT POTENTIAL

Development Pattern and Land Use

Map 11 shows the area within the Day-Night-Level DNL65 dBA or greater noise exposure area for aircraft operations at JBA. Portions of Subregions 4, 5, and 6 are exposed to off-base noise. Subregion 6 is affected east of the base as far as portions of Melwood Road and Rosaryville Road.

Clear Zones and Accident Potential Zones The Clear Zones and Accident Potential Zones (AICUZ) program also includes three aircraft accident safety zones in both incoming and outgoing directions from the base runways: the Clear Zone (CZ) and Accident Potential Zones (APZ) I and II (Map 11). The CZ has the highest accident potential of the three zones, followed by APZ I and APZ II. Federal land use compatibility guidelines have been developed for each noise zone and accident potential zone. In APZ I the guidelines allow reasonable economic use of the land, such as industrial/manufacturing, transportation, communication/utilities, wholesale trade, open space, recreation, and agriculture. Uses that concentrate people in small areas are not acceptable. In APZ II acceptable uses include those of APZ I, as well as low-density, single-family residential and low-intensity personal and business services and commercial/retail uses.

Land Use Compatibility The Penn-Belt South Industrial Center north of the base is partially within the CZ and partially within the APZ I. The area in the CZ is south of Burtons Lane and is very small. The base either owns or holds restrictive easements for all property in the CZ. The area in the APZ 1 is industrial, consistent with the land use compatibility guidelines. Fire and Rescue Company 23 (Forestville) is located in APZ I. The county has planned and programmed funding to relocate this facility to the vicinity of Melwood Road and MD 4 (see Public Facilities chapter). As noted above, this plan expands the industrial area east of JBA in three areas near Foxley Road consistent with the goal of achieving compatible land uses and development in areas subject to noise potential. Land west of Sherwood Forest Community Park has been designated for open space to help make its use more compatible with its noise level and because of its proximity to the headwaters of Piscataway Creek. This site may be also be eligible for protection/ preservation under the Department of Defenseâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Readiness for Environmental Protection Initiative (see the Living Areas chapter). It will be difficult to make all uses around the base in Subregion 6 fully compatible with the noise guidelines. This is particularly true for developed subdivisions, however, many of these were built with noise attenuation requirements. A portion of the DNL 70 dBA and greater noise exposure area extends east of Dower House Road to MD 223 into some established residential neighborhoods (such as Development Pattern and Land Use

Sherwood Forest), institutional uses (such as Clinton Bible Baptist), and planned developments (such as Equestrian Estates). At the Globecom site in Brandywine only helicopter sorties are flown. There are no CZs or APZs, and noise does not exceed DNL 65 dB and, thus, there are no land use compatibility issues. Policy 3 Achieve compatible land uses and development in areas subject to noise and aircraft accident potential. Strategies 1. Implement the JLUS recommendations, including establishing strategies to balance community interests with the military mission at JBA and minimize conflicts. 2. Continue to work with JBA to promote compatible land development in areas subject to aircraft noise and accident potential. • Formalize JBA participation in the development review process. • Require development within DNL 65 dBA and greater noise exposure areas to be properly protected from the transmission of noise with barriers that affect sound propagation and/or the use of sound-absorbing materials in construction. • Evaluate development and redevelopment proposals in areas subject to noise using Phase I noise studies and noise models and Phase II noise analysis as deemed appropriate. • Provide for the use of noise reduction measures when issues are identified indicating that the design and construction of building shells will attenuate noise to an interior noise level of 45 dBA (Ldn) or less. See additional recommendations for reducing noise impact in the Environment chapter. • Where exterior noise mitigation from overhead sources is not possible, certification from an acoustical engineer will be needed to ensure that acceptable noise levels can be obtained. • Expand the industrial area and rezone to an appropriate industrial zone near the base perimeter to ensure nonencroachment.

Development Pattern and Land Use

ENVIRONMENT

Subregion 6 Approved Master Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

Subregion 6 contains environmental assets of county, state, and even national importance, particularly near and along the Patuxent River. As discussed earlier in the plan, it is also home to the most substantial portion of the countyâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Rural Tier, which includes large tracts of land in forests, agriculture, and open space. These areas offer unique opportunities in the Washington metropolitan region for preserving essential habitat, strengthening the local food system, mitigating the impacts of climate change, and more. At the same time, protecting and enhancing the ecological integrity of the subregion depends upon smart transportation and land use development choices both in and around the study area, as well as individual decisions on energy and water consumption, waste disposal, etc. The term green infrastructure is used to encompass the interconnected system of public and private lands containing significant areas of woodlands, wetlands, wildlife habitat, and other sensitive areas that provide valuable ecological functions to current and future generations. Maintaining the longevity of the assets within this environmental infrastructure requires minimal intrusions from land development, light, and noise pollution, as well as an overall orientation to creating a sustainable subregion.

The water of the Patuxent River adds to the serenity of the shoreline.

The following sustainability goals relate to restoring the integrity of environmental infrastructure in Subregion 6: â&#x20AC;˘ Preserve, protect, restore, and enhance the quality of air, water, and land to preserve biodiversity and environmental health while providing a natural resource base for current and future generations. â&#x20AC;˘ Implement a watershed-level approach to preserving, restoring, and enhancing the natural environment in order to mitigate the land use-related impacts of climate change and development on ecological functions.

Environment 63

GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE

The green infrastructure network, identified in the 2005 Approved Countywide Green Infrastructure Plan, is a comprehensive framework for conserving significant environmental ecosystems in Prince George’s County. The network is divided into three categories: countywide significant regulated areas, evaluation areas, and network gaps.1 Approximately 37 percent of the countywide green infrastructure network is located within Subregion 6, accounting for approximately 64 percent of the subregion’s land area (see Map 7 in back of plan). This is an indication of the vast areas of environmentally sensitive lands in the subregion. One of the strategies for implementation of the Green Infrastructure Plan states that the network boundaries should be refined during the master plan process to reflect areas of local significance and consider additional opportunities for connectivity and resource protection. This subregion plan identifies twelve primary and secondary corridors within the local Green Infrastructure network (Map 12): Primary

and

Secondary Corridors

Primary Corridors

Secondary Corridors

Patuxent River

Mattaponi Creek

Mattawoman Creek

Hotchkins Branch

Collington Branch

Spice Creek

Western Branch

Rock Branch Creek

Piscataway Creek

Black Swamp Creek

Swanson Creek

Charles Branch

With the exception of Piscataway Creek, which flows east to west toward the Potomac River, the environmental corridors support stream systems that flow generally west to east through the subregion toward the Patuxent River. The corridors include the mainstems of the major waterways within the subregion and receive most of the depositional runoff from surrounding land uses. These corridors are areas where connectivity is critical to the longterm viability and preservation of the overall green infrastructure network and are critical to preserving the subregion’s water quality. Conservation and preservation of these corridors, particularly the headwater areas, will preserve and improve downstream water quality.

Regulated areas are environmentally sensitive features (streams, wetlands, 100-year floodplains, severe slopes, and buffers) protected during the development review process. Evaluation areas contain environmentally sensitive features (interior forests, colonial waterbird nesting sites, and unique habitat) not currently protected. Network gaps are areas critical to the connection of the regulated and evaluation areas. 1

64 Environment

The Green Infrastructure Plan places special attention on special conservation areas (SCA), which are areas of countywide significance. Four of the ten SCAs in the county are in Subregion 6 (Map 12). The largest is the Patuxent River primary corridor, which extends along the entire eastern boundary of the subregion. This corridor in Subregion 6 is part of the larger Patuxent River watershed and multicounty and agency initiatives to preserve the woodlands, marshes, grasslands, and swamps critical to the health of the watershed and the Chesapeake Bay.

Special Conservation Areas

Within the Patuxent River primary corridor is the Jug Bay complex, the second of the subregion’s four SCAs. Jug Bay is part of the Chesapeake Bay Reserve and National Estuarine Research Reserve System, one of 25 such reserves with federal protection through the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. The Chesapeake Bay is the largest estuary in the country and with fully half of it lying within the state, its environmental, economic, and cultural importance has been recognized for decades. The reserve system in Maryland is comprised of nearly 5,000 acres of diverse estuarine habitats at three different locations throughout the state. Jug Bay, the largest freshwater tidal marsh in the state, serves as a laboratory for tidal, riverine ecosystems;2 receiving researchers and visitors from all over the world every year. The Patuxent River corridor and Jug Bay also offer unique opportunities for passive recreation and environmental education through a variety of programming options operated through the Department of Parks and Recreation and the state. The other countywide SCAs are Cedarville State Forest/Zekiah Swamp Watershed and the Mattawoman Creek Stream Valley. The Mattawoman Creek watershed is shared by Charles and Prince George’s Counties, with a larger portion of the stream corridor on the Prince George’s side falling within the adjacent Subregion 5 planning area. Due to the limited amount of development in the watershed and its still relatively pristine condition, it has been recognized in recent years by the state, as well as environmental groups, for its high level of biodiversity and fish-spawning habitat.3 Successfully protecting Mattawoman Creek will require cross-county collaboration to limit the impact of future planned development in the Mattawoman Creek watershed. Cedarville State Forest and the Zekiah Swamp watershed are other important resources shared with Charles County and the subregion. According to the county’s Green Infrastructure Plan, Zekiah Swamp is 2 3

Merkel Wildlife Management Area, along the Patuxent River, is home to flocks of Canadian Geese and other species of wildlife.

http://www.nerrs.noaa.gov/ChesapeakeBayMD/ Cite MDNR, Sierra Club, and Smart Growth Coalition recognition.

Environment 65

MAP 11: ENVIRONMENTAL CORRIDORS AND SPECIAL CONSERVATION AREAS

66 Environment

the largest freshwater swamp in the state, with its headwaters in Cedarville Forest. Many other areas of the Zekiah Swamp watershed are in private ownership. The Green Infrastructure Plan recommends that any development of these lands maintain and protect the existing water hydrology given the sensitive and vulnerable nature of this SCA.4 Portions of several of the primary and secondary corridors and the countywide SCAs are within this plan’s proposed priority preservation area (see Development Pattern/Land Use chapter). Subregion 6 is home to diverse terrestrial habitats including large tracts of woodlands, grasslands, pastures, and wetlands that support a rich diversity of wildlife. Woodland characteristics vary across the subregion with a combination of dominating deciduous forests and mixed deciduous/coniferous forests. Woodlands act as a buffer from nutrient runoff, reduce erosion, improve air quality, and provide habitat for wildlife. The largest contiguous interior forest tracts are along the Patuxent River, Mattawoman Creek, and Zekiah Swamp Run, including the Jug Bay Natural Area/Merkle Wildlife Sanctuary and Cedarville State Forest. The majority of the forests in the subregion are included in the regulated and evaluation areas of the green infrastructure network, though significant fragmentation exists and efforts to consolidate woodlands are needed. Open grasslands and pastures, while not prevalent within the subregion (approximately 5.4 percent of the total land area), provide unique habitat for a variety of species such as ground nesting birds. This habitat is quickly disappearing due to development pressure on open lands. The state has identified grasslands as a key habitat and grassland breeding bird species, including grasshopper sparrow, Henslow’s sparrow, and vesper sparrow (grassland birds known to occur in Maryland) as species in great need of conservation.5 There is concern that Henslow’s sparrow may have already disappeared from the subregion, though increasingly infrequent encounters with well-known species like the Northern Bobwhite and Eastern Meadowlark highlight further the critical importance of preserving this vital habitat.6 Grasslands are also stopover habitat for migratory songbirds.

Wildlife and Habitat

Forests cover much of the subregion.

Approved Countywide Green Infrastructure Functional Master Plan, Prince George’s County Planning Board, June 2005, p. 25. 5 Maryland Wildlife Diversity Conservation Plan, 2005. 6 Personal interview with Greg Kearns, Patuxent Riverkeeper. 4

Environment 67

A flock of Canadian Geese are resting at Merkel Wildlife Management Area.

Maryland is located within the Atlantic Flyway, which is one of the four major bird migration routes in North America, and several locations within the subregion are known as exceptional birding locations. The Jug Bay Natural Area and wetland complex is nationally recognized and designated as an important bird area (IBA)7, cataloging over 290 observed species including more than 100 confirmed nesting species such as the least bittern, a state-identified species in need of conservation. It is also a major stop over for unique wetland species such as the sora rail and more than two dozen species of waterfowl. The Merkle Wildlife Sanctuary, combined with the Patuxent River Park Jug Bay Natural Area, is one of the Smithsonian’s top ten significant natural areas within the Chesapeake Bay and is the largest Canada goose wintering area on the western shore of the Chesapeake Bay.8 State Sensitive Species Project Review Areas (SSPRA) identify known occurrences of rare, threatened, or endangered species and other sensitive habitats. These occur primarily along the major waterways in the subregion with other documented occurrences within the headwater tributaries of Piscataway Creek, Charles Branch, and Black Swamp Creek. All or portions of all of these SSPRAs are included within the green infrastructure network. A notable SSPRA is the Upper Patuxent Marshes Natural Heritage Area (see below under Chesapeake Bay Critical Area). The county’s Woodland Conservation and Tree Preservation Ordinance places a priority on the preservation of woodlands in conjunction with floodplains, wetlands, stream corridors, and steep slopes and emphasizes the preservation of large, contiguous woodland tracts. The Planning Department is currently coordinating an update to the development parameters of the Woodland Conservation Ordinance to assist in the implementation of the Green Infrastructure Plan. Policy 1 Protect, preserve, and restore the identified green infrastructure network and areas of local significance within Subregion 6 in order to protect critical resources and to guide development and mitigation activities. National Audubon Society http://iba.audubon.org/iba/viewSiteProfile. do?siteId=371&navSite=state 8 Approved Countywide Green Infrastructure Functional Master Plan, Prince George’s County Planning Board, June 2005, p. 23. 7

68 Environment

Strategies 1. Protect priority areas that will meet multiple protection objectives such as those related to green infrastructure, the priority preservation area, and the Patuxent River Rural Legacy Program. • Update and centralize geographic information from county, state, and other agencies to allow for an efficient, initial evaluation of potential protection measures as they relate to land development proposals and potential sites for acquisition with public funds for conservation easements or passive recreation. 2. Protect primary corridors (Patuxent River, Charles Branch, Collington Branch, Piscataway Creek, Mattawoman Creek, and Swanson Creek) during the review of land development proposals to ensure the highest level of preservation and restoration possible, with limited impacts for essential development elements. Protect secondary corridors to restore and enhance environmental features, habitat, and important connections. 3. Preserve and connect habitat areas to the fullest extent possible during the land development process. 4. Preserve or restore regulated areas designated in the green infrastructure network through the development review process for new land development proposals. 5. Protect portions of the green infrastructure network outside the primary and secondary corridors to restore and enhance environmental features, habitat, and important connections. 6. Evaluate land development proposals in the vicinity of SCAs to ensure that the SCAs are not negatively impacted and that green infrastructure connections are either maintained or restored. 7. Preserve and enhance, where possible, grassland habitats that are of critical importance to native and migratory bird species. Water quality within the subregion is generally poor. 13 of the 17 watersheds in the subregion (See Map 6, Subregion Analysis chapter) were ranked “poor” to “very poor” for either or both aquatic habitat and the Benthic Index of Biological Integrity (IBI)9. Black Swamp Creek was the only watershed in the subregion rated “fair” for measures of aquatic habitat and

WATER QUALITY AND STORMWATER MANAGEMENT

Benthic Index of Biological Integrity (IBD) is a method standardized by the Maryland Department of Natural Resources of assessing the health of streams in Maryland. Bethnic macroinvertebrates are sampled from the stream and the composition of the species present provide information on the overall health of the system based on their sensitivity to pollution. 9

Environment 69

Table 8: Primary Environmental Corridors Corridor

Subwatershed

Index of Benthic Integrity RatingA

Aquatic Habitat QualityA

Middle Patuxent River

Poor

Very Poor

Biological, nutrients, sediments, toxins

Lower Patuxent River

Poor

Very Poor

Bacteria, biological, metals, nutrients, sediments, toxins

Collington Branch

Poor

Biological, nutrients, sediments

Western Branch

Poor

Very Poor

Biological, nutrients, sediments

Western Branch

Poor

Very Poor

Biological, nutrients, sediments

Piscataway Creek

Fair

Poor

Bacteria, biological, nutrients, sediments

Mattawoman Creek

Poor

Fair

Biological, nutrients, sediments

Zekiah Swamp Creek

Poor

Fair

Biological, nutrients, sediments

Swanson Creek

Fair

Poor

Bacteria, biological, metals, nutrients, sediments, toxins

Swanson Creek

Fair

Poor

Bacteria, biological, metals, nutrients, sediments, toxins

Lower Patuxent River

Poor

Very Poor

Biological, metals, nutrients, sediments, toxins

Patuxent River

Collington Branch

Swanson Creek

303(d) list categoriesB

Countywide Green Infrastructure Plan, 2005.

Maryland Department of the Environment, 2006. The 303(d) list is Maryland’s list of impaired surface waters submitted in compliance with section 303(d) of the 1972 Federal Clean Water Act B

IBI. Swanson Creek, Spice Creek, and Piscataway Creek were ranked fair under the IBI measure. Swanson Creek, a portion of Rock Creek, and an unnamed tributary of Mataponi Creek are tributaries listed as Tier II waters by the Maryland Department of the Environment.10 Table 8 summarizes three major indicators of ecological health for the primary corridors in the subregion. Major contributors to poor water quality are sediments, nutrients, and toxins from development and other land uses. Particular concerns in Subregion 6 are: • Buffering of streams. Stream buffer requirements currently vary with stream location. Within the Chesapeake Bay Critical Area the buffer combines the individual buffers for wetlands, streams, floodplains, steep slopes, erodible soils, and rare or sensitive wildlife habitats to an overall buffer requirement. Within the Patuxent River watershed (82 percent of the Tier II waters are currently the highest quality waters in Maryland and planning initiatives and development proposals are required to review all new or modified discharges according to the state’s antidegradation policy. 10

70 Environment

The waters of the Patuxent River and its tributaries are protected from water runoff by vegetative buffers.

subregion) a Patuxent River Primary Management Area Preservation Area (PMA) is established within which a similar, but variable, conglomerate buffer is required. • Nutrient-leaching. Septic systems may not adequately process their nutrient intake. As systems age, they may leach nitrogen to the surrounding environment, including surface waters. Excessive nitrogen deposition in streams, rivers, and lakes can lead to eutrophication,11 which impairs water quality and ecosystem functioning, sometimes to the point where fish and other aquatic species cannot survive. • Nutrient deposition. Fertilizer and pesticide applications to both agricultural areas and lawns contribute significantly to pollution of streams and the Chesapeake Bay. • Lack of stormwater management. Some areas of the subregion were developed without, or with poorly performing, stormwater management facilities. As areas develop or redevelop, proper stormwater management techniques will assist in addressing water quality and quantity issues. Through HB 1141, the state has mandated that each county develop a water resources functional plan to address stormwater issues on a watershed basis, addressing in particular how much development the county’s watersheds can accept before pollutant thresholds are exceeded. These could include nutrient load thresholds (i.e., the amount of nitrogen and phosphorus discharged from wastewater treatment plants, stormwater runoff, and septic systems) or other types of pollution such as bacteria, biological, fecal coliform, metals, sediments, Eutrophication refers to the increase in plant growth and decay caused by increased nutrient run-off to water bodies. This growth and decay results in oxygen depletion and a corresponding decline in water quality, fish, and other populations. 11

A typical stream flowing through the subregion.

Environment 71

or toxins, some of which may be covered by total maximum daily loads (TMDL). These plans are expected to make countywide recommendations regarding stormwater design and the use of environmentally sensitive design techniques. The Prince George’s County Department of Environmental Resources (DER) has undertaken or is planning several stream restoration initiatives in the subregion: • Complete Watershed Restoration Action Strategies (WRAS), in coordination with the Maryland Department of Natural Resources, for watersheds of which portions are in Subregion 6: Western Branch and Lower Patuxent River watersheds (finished). • Design stream restoration projects along Western Branch. • Assess a stream corridor for the Piscataway Creek watershed (currently underway), with the Henson Creek watershed to be evaluated following the completion of this work. • Assess a stream corridor to identify potential restoration sites within the Western Branch watershed. • Create a countywide inventory of restoration and mitigation sites. These areas would be targeted during future development and permitting processes as priority mitigation projects (ongoing).

The beautiful and placid Patuxent River is available for all to enjoy.

The Washington Suburban Sanitary Commission (WSSC) is responsible for two environmental protection/restoration projects within Subregion 6: an upgrade to the Western Branch Wastewater Treatment Plant–to reduce nitrogen discharges into Western Branch–and assisting residents to disconnect storm drains that contribute to sewer overflows and backups during storm events. Policy 2 Restore and enhance water quality in degraded areas and preserve water quality in areas not degraded. Strategies 1. Protect and restore groundwater recharge areas such as wetlands and the headwaters areas of streams and watersheds. 2. Develop an interjurisdictional development and management plan with Charles County for the protection of the Mattawoman watershed. 3. Require retrofitting of locations without stormwater management, or with poorly performing facilities, as they are identified during the development review process. 4. Define and identify operations and activities that create stormwater management “hot spots” to adjust development and enforcement as necessary for pollution prevention.

72 Environment

5. Require private developers to perform stream corridor assessments, where one has not already been conducted, when development along stream corridors without completed assessments is proposed. Use the outcome of these assessments to guide restoration requirements upon which development approval will be contingent. 6. Complete stream corridor assessments for all watersheds in the subregion in support of the countywide watershed restoration efforts. 7. Require environmentally-sensitive site design which includes limiting impervious surfaces and implementing best practices in on-site stormwater management to reduce the impact of development on important water resources. 8. Update the county road code and parking standards to reduce impervious surface requirements, without compromising safety, in watersheds where development pressure is great and impervious surface coverage is, or is projected to reach, more than ten percent of the watershed (e.g. Western Branch, Mattawoman, etc.). 9. Evaluate current right-of-way requirements and opportunities for bioretention and on-site stormwater management in watersheds with ten percent or greater impervious surface. Policy 3 Increase planning and informational data collection efforts at the watershed level, raising the profile and awareness about the importance of shared aquifers and other resources to water quality and supply. Strategies 1. Promote agricultural and other resource industry practices which support environmental restoration such as conservation tillage, intercropping, and crop rotation, integrated pest management, etc., to contribute to healthier waterways and provide wildlife habitat. 2. Centralize and disseminate information to landowners about best practices in land management, as well as financial and other program incentives available to do so. 3. Educate homeowners about alternatives to conventional lawn care to reduce the runoff of nutrients to waterways, including the use of rain gardens to promote bioretention and provide backyard habitat. 4. Require the application of a conglomerate stream buffer, similar to the one that applies in the Patuxent PMA, in all areas of the subregion.

Environment 73

5. Work with the Patuxent River Commission to implement the Patuxent River Policy Plan, a multi-agency effort to protect the river through land management and pollution control practices. 6. Monitor the shortâ&#x20AC;&#x201C; and longâ&#x20AC;&#x201C;term impact of climate change on the Patuxent River, including increased saltwater intrusion and potential impacts to aquifers and drinking water supplies. 7. Require the use of low-nitrogen septic systems in the Rural Tier portion of the subregion within 1,000 feet of any stream or tributary. 8. Investigate the status and number of monitoring wells in the county to determine if support for a greater number is required.

CHESAPEAKE BAY CRITICAL AREA

The Maryland General Assembly enacted the Chesapeake Bay Critical Area law in June 1984 to foster more sensitive development along the shorelines of the Chesapeake Bay so as to minimize damage to natural habitats and degradation of water quality. State-wide goals for protection of the critical area include minimizing water quality impacts from pollutants in runoff; conserving fish, wildlife, and plant habitat; and establishing land use development policies that accommodate limited growth while also addressing adverse environmental impacts inherent to human activity. The Chesapeake Bay Critical Area is defined as the land 1,000 feet landward of the mean high tide line along tidal waters. It extends the entire length of the Patuxent River within Subregion 6 and into the tidal reaches of several tributary streams. All of the critical area in the subregion is within the green infrastructure network (see Map 13). Natural heritage areas (NHAs) are plant or animal communities within the critical area that are considered to be among the best statewide examples of their kind. All NHAs are designated by the Code of Maryland Regulations (COMAR) and contain at least one-half dozen species designated or proposed as endangered, threatened, or in need of conservation. The Upper Patuxent Marshes NHA extends along the Patuxent River from Ferry Branch to Mattaponi Creek and is the only NHA within the subregion.

The Patuxent River at sunrise is a beautiful sight.

Overlay zoning districts apply within the critical area. Nearly all the critical area in Subregion 6 is in the Resource Conservation Overlay (R-C-O) Zone, which allows residential development at a density of one dwelling unit per 20 acres. Some small areas are in the Intense Development Overlay (I-D-O, Chalk Point Power Plant) or in the Limited Development Overlay (L-D-O, Eagle Harbor) Zones, which allow development at a density of one dwelling unit per four acres.

74 Environment

MAP 12: CHESAPEAKE BAY CRITICAL AREA

Environment 75

The county periodically revises and updates its critical area program. Many of the recommended actions elsewhere in this chapter also support and encourage protection and resource enhancement when applied to the critical area. Policy 4 Protect, restore, and enhance the Chesapeake Bay Critical Area. Strategies 1. Ensure that the primary buffers and secondary buffers are protected and enforced to the fullest extent possible. 2. Increase enforcement activities as needed within the critical area.

AIR QUALITY AND GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS

The 2002 General Plan discusses air quality primarily in relation to improving air quality in the Developed Tier by enhancing environmental features and green infrastructure elements. Since 2002 climate change and greenhouse gas emissions have emerged as major issues at the international, national, and local levels. The General Plan describes development patterns that, if implemented, will help curb greenhouse gas emissions. Growth is targeted where infrastructure elements already exist and away from areas such as Subregion 6 where infrastructure expenditures are not planned. The Washington Metropolitan area is a nonattainment area for ground-level ozone, an invisible gas formed when volatile organic compounds (VOC) and nitrogen oxides (NOx) react in sunlight. Ozone is also a greenhouse gas. The primary sources of VOCs and NOx are utilities and other industrial activity, motor vehicles, small gasoline-powered engines, solvents, cleaning solutions, paints, and insecticides. Gases that trap heat in the atmosphere are called greenhouse gases (GHG). Some GHGs such as water vapor, carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, and ozone occur naturally but are also emitted to the atmosphere through human activities. Other GHGs such as fluorinated gases are created and emitted solely through human activities. The Maryland Climate Action Plan was developed in August 2008. It recommends a 90 percent reduction in GHG emissions by 2050. A report from the Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments recommends a regional 80 percent reduction from 2005 levels by 2050. Finally, at the county level, in 2008, the Prince George’s County Council adopted a goal of reducing countywide GHG emissions below 80 percent of 2008 levels by 2050 (CR‑24‑2008).

76 Environment

The county has an important role to play in reducing GHG emissions and preparing for the impacts of climate change through policies and actions in the areas of land use planning, transportation, woodland conservation, and energy use. Prince George’s County recently hired an energy manager, whose responsibilities include the completion of a greenhouse gas emissions inventory to account for county GHG emissions. DER will develop an accountability program to implement reduction strategies and monitor the achievement of program goals. Although it is difficult to quantify the subregion’s contribution to degraded air quality and greenhouse gas emissions (versus the county’s contribution) at this time, several observations suggest that the subregion plays a complex role in these issues and will continue to do so. For starters, Subregion 6 contains the largest coal-fired power plant in the state, generating electricity at Chalk Point as well as a significant amount of carbon and other greenhouse gas emissions. Given the rural and suburban character of much of the subregion, residents are largely dependent upon personal vehicles for transportation. At the same time, it is precisely because of the character of the Rural Tier in Subregion 6 that significant woodlands exist, serving as critical resources for sequestering or storing carbon now and in the future. With increased agricultural production, remaining open space and agricultural areas can play a greater role in the future (see Economic Development chapter) by reducing the miles that food must travel between farms and the plates of Prince George’s County residents. In addition, these areas, along with woodlands, hold potential for serving as sources of renewable forms of energy that would generate fewer emissions than fossil fuels such as coal. There is certainly a role that all residents of the subregion can play in reducing their personal emissions from vehicle use, home energy consumption, and more. Residents can and should actively help the county as a whole to reduce its overall emissions so that it can turn its attention to mitigating the impact of climate change. At the same time, the county must take the lead in not only promoting more environmentally-conscious behaviors in its own operations, but it must promote a development pattern that facilitates opportunities for current and future residents to generate fewer emissions in their daily activities. This means, among other things, protecting and enhancing critical environmental resources such as woodlands and open space and approving compact, walkable development patterns, particularly as outlined by the General Plan. Policy 5 Promote compact, walkable development patterns in appropriate locations such as the Town of Upper Marlboro,

Environment 77

Marlton, and rural centers and communities such as Baden, Aquasco, Eagle Harbor, Cedar Haven, and Croom. Strategies 1. Design development and redevelopment projects to minimize the need for motor vehicle trips (see Development Pattern/Land Use and Living Area chapters) 2. Provide pedestrian and bicycle facilities (see Transportation System chapter). 3. Provide for extremely limited bus service to Marlton. Policy 6 Increase awareness regarding air quality and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and the unique role that the Developing and Rural Tiers in Subregion 6 have to play in this effort. Strategies 1. Engage citizens, businesses, and public agencies through educational outreach efforts to raise awareness on how they can address air quality and climate change at the subregion level. • Maximize reductions in energy use and GHG emissions from government and institutional operations in the subregion. 2. Encourage the use of clean and renewable energy sources such as biomass and solar and wind power.

GREEN BUILDING/ ENERGY EFFICIENCY

The 2002 General Plan includes in its vision for the future of the environment in Prince George’s County a reduction in overall energy consumption and implementation of more environmentally sensitive building techniques. Among the plan’s policy recommendations are to reduce sky glow and minimize spill-over light between properties and from roadways. Among the strategies for implementing this policy are calls for the development of lighting standards appropriate for each tier that also consider safety and energy conservation. Similar strategies for the Rural Tier portion of Subregion 6 are discussed in the Development Pattern/Land Use chapter. Buildings have a huge impact on energy use and resource consumption. In the U.S., buildings account for 39 percent of total energy use, 12 percent of the total water consumption, and 68 percent of total electricity consumption12. In September 2007, County Executive Johnson established a Green Building Executive Steering Committee and Energy Efficiency Council as part of the county’s Going Green initiative. The committee was tasked with evaluating the feasibility of 12

Prince George’s County Going Green Initiative.

78 Environment

the following green building goals and developing goal-specific implementation guidelines, actions, and financial strategies: • Reduce 2007 energy consumption per square foot in all existing county buildings by 20 percent by the year 2015. • Design and construct all new county buildings and public schools in accordance with the Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED)13 silver rating. • Establish incentives for both new and existing private commercial buildings to achieve a LEED silver rating or an equivalent rating under a comparable green building performance measure. • Establish a green building education and outreach program, working with county and other agencies to identify opportunities for demonstration projects in schools, parks, community centers, etc. • Ensure that a sufficient number of development and permit review staff possess LEED accreditation and are able to sign off on tax credits and certifications, and to adequately assist commercial developers or large-scale property owners in meeting performance measures. LEED has developed standards for neighborhood development (LEED-ND) that allow for evaluation and certification of neighborhoods regarding their level of energy and environmental design. Policy 7 Encourage the use of green building techniques and community designs that reduce resource and energy consumption. Strategies 1. Support this subregion plan’s policy of redevelopment and infill development in existing and planned development areas rather than “green field” development (See Development Pattern/Land Use chapter). 2. Initiate a project that meets the full standards of the LEEDND in the subregion. Consider this for a development/ redevelopment project near Upper Marlboro (see Living Areas chapter). Policy 8 Reduce energy usage from lighting, as well as light pollution and intrusion into residential, rural, and environmentally sensitive areas. The LEED Green Building Rating System™ is a voluntary national standard developed by the U.S. Green Building Council for the design, construction, and operation of high performance green buildings. 13

Environment 79

Strategies 1. Encourage the use of alternative and energy-saving lighting technologies for athletic fields, shopping centers, gas stations, and car lots so that light intrusion on adjacent properties is minimized. Limit the amount of light output from these uses. 2. Require the use of full cut-off optic light fixtures for all proposed uses to reduce sky glow.

NOISE INTRUSION

Noise is generally defined as any form of unwanted sound. Noise is a composite of all background noises, which emanates 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. Federal, state, and local ordinances and guidelines have been developed to ensure the reduction of noise levels to acceptable standards. The consensus of these standards is that 65 “A-weighted” decibels (dBA), measured using a “level day and night” penalty or Ldn, is the maximum noise level generally acceptable for outdoor activity areas within residential uses. The indoor noise standard is 45 dBA or Ldn. In Subregion 6, major sources of noise are Joint Base Andrews (JBA), construction and mining operations, and vehicular traffic. Noise and accident potential zones restrict the type of development that can occur around the base in the interest of health and human safety. These zones are discussed in detail in the Development Pattern/Land Use chapter. While mining and construction operations generate noise, sometimes large amounts owing to the necessary use of heavy equipment and trucks, their relatively small numbers and intermittent nature result in their impact not being as significant as the impact from vehicular traffic along roadways. Local highways generate noise according to the speed and volume of traffic carried as well as other factors including noise reception location and topography. Freeways are normally the noisiest facilities. The use of sound-deadening barriers or other sound attenuation measures can reduce noise to acceptable residential levels to meet the state noise standards of 65 dBA Ldn in outdoor activity areas and 45 dBA Ldn in interior living areas. Site design that separates the noise generator from the noise receptor also can reduce noise levels on a site. Policy 9 Reduce adverse noise impacts to meet acceptable state noise standards.

80 Environment

Strategies 1. Evaluate development and redevelopment proposals using Phase I noise studies and noise models where noise levels exceed 65 dBA. 2. Provide for adequate setbacks for development exposed to existing and proposed noise generators and roadways of arterial classification or greater. 3. Provide for the use of approved attenuation measures when noise issues are identified. 4. Continue to work with JBA to promote compatible land development in areas subject to aircraft noise and accident potential. 5. Require development within Ldn 65 dBA and greater noise exposure areas to be properly protected from the transmission of noise through the use of appropriate site designs, the use of barriers that affect sound propagation, and/or the use of soundabsorbing materials in construction. 6. Work with the State Highway Administration to ensure that as state roads such as MD 4 and US 301 are upgraded, appropriate noise reduction measures are incorporated into the roadway design.

Environment 81

82 Environment

TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS

Subregion 6 Approved Master Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

Transportation systems are a critical component of creating a sustainable community. The complementary networks of roads, rail and bus transit, and trail facilities for pedestrians, bikers, and equestrians that make up the county’s transportation system allow for the movement of people and goods, provide opportunities for recreation, and create permanent physical links between and within communities. In a time of constrained financial resources and increasing awareness about the impact of transportation patterns on environmental issues like climate change, it is essential that county and other resources be used efficiently and strategically to provide residents and workers with opportunities to access a safe, multimodal, convenient, and energy efficient transportation network. Today’s transportation network in the subregion consists largely of roadways, supported by limited mass transit options in and around Upper Marlboro, as well as hiker/biker/equestrian trails. The future transportation network will consist of improved levels of service on several key roads, new roads, increased opportunities to access mass transit, and new connections and improvements to existing hiker/ biker/equestrian trails and sidewalk networks. The automobile will continue to play a prominent role in the mobility of many of the subregion’s residents and workers. As such, it is critical that future transportation network enhancements support: • integrated land uses that complement daily life. • alternatives to automobile use for meeting everyday needs whenever possible. • multiple trip purposes to be served within a single vehicular trip. • convenient alternatives to single occupancy vehicle use. The following goals relate to creating a safe, efficient, and accessible transportation network supportive of sustainability goals in Subregion 6: • Coordinate transportation system planning with land use, environmental, and economic planning to ensure that all transportation modes, including roads, rail, sidewalks, paths, and transit systems, support sustainable development patterns. • Maximize transportation modes whenever possible by planning and building facilities for automobiles, transit, bicycles, pedestrians, and horses. • Recognize the importance of transportation for recreational purposes by expanding the on- and off-road trail system. Transportation Systems

ROADS

The road system in Subregion 6 primarily accommodates local trips and links the subregion to the regional transportation network. A few significant regional roads, such as US 301, MD 4, MD 202, and MD 223 serve regional through traffic and commuter traffic (see the Subregion Analysis chapter). The land use plan for Subregion 6 has evolved since the 1993 subregion plan (see Development Pattern chapter). However, the basic transportation needs in Subregion 6 remain largely unchanged. The key road system issues addressed by this master plan and the transportation recommendations (largely retained from previous plans) are discussed below. The full list of recommended road upgrades (including future freeway interchanges) is listed in Table 10 and is shown on Map 14. (See Appendix A)

Major Roads

Pennsylvania Avenue connects the subregion to the heart of Washington DC.

• US 301 (Crain Highway): As it is a major link between Baltimore and Southern Maryland, this plan recommends the upgrade of Crain Highway to freeway status for its entire length, from Leeland Road to the Charles County line. Interchanges in Subregion 6 are planned at Leeland Road (MC‑600 on Map 14), MD 4, and Rosaryville Road. Within Subregion 6, the US 301 freeway would use some portions of the existing US 301 alignment and would also include new segments off of the existing alignment. An arterial road (A-61) paralleling the freeway would provide local accessibility in the subregion (see Map 15). • MD 4 (Pennsylvania Ave): This plan recommends the upgrade of MD 4 to freeway status from I‑495 to the Anne Arundel County line. Part of this upgrade is complete in Subregion 6, although interchange upgrades are still necessary to achieve freeway status. In particular, interchanges to replace at-grade intersections of MD 4 with Westphalia Road, Suitland Parkway, and Dower House Road have not been completed, and several existing interchanges, such as those at MD 223 and US 301, need to be upgraded. • MD 202 (Largo Road): This plan recommends that Largo Road be upgraded to a four- to six-lane expressway from I-495 to Upper Marlboro. As part of this upgrade, the segment of the road near Upper Marlboro (E6 on Map 15) would be relocated along the existing SHA right-of-way between Kent Drive and the proposed F-10. This relocation is necessary to make the connection to MD 4 within the proposed F-10/MD 4. Transportation Systems

MAP 13: APPROVED ROAD NETWORK

Transportation Systems

MAP 14: US 301 CORRIDOR ROAD IMPROVEMENTS

Transportation Systems

• MD 5 (Branch Avenue): MD 5 is a major commuter route linking Southern Maryland to Washington, D.C. The short segment of MD 5 within Subregion 6 (along the southwest boundary of Joint Base Andrews (JBA)) has already been upgraded to freeway status. This plan and the Subregion 5 master plan both recommend that it be upgraded to a freeway from I-495 to Charles County. A transitway along MD 5 is in the early planning stages. • MD 223 (Woodyard Road): This plan recommends that MD 223 be upgraded to a four- to six-lane arterial between MD 4 and MD 5 (in Subregion 5). This road currently experiences heavy traffic volumes from local traffic and commuter traffic from JBA and other employment centers in the Washington, D.C., area. MD 223 has several failing intersections in the subregion, and continuous traffic flows make turning on to or off of the road difficult. An extension of Woodyard Road from MD 4 to MD 202 was proposed in the 1993 master plan, but is no longer recommended, due to recommendations of the Westphalia sector plan (2007). • Rosaryville Road: Like Woodyard Road, Rosaryville Road primarily serves local traffic, but carries high traffic volumes relative to its geometry, due to commuter through traffic that uses it as a link between US 301 and MD 223. This plan recommends that Rosaryville Road be upgraded to a four-lane collector. The capacity of roadways to accommodate traffic is an important consideration of the development review process. In order for a subdivision to be approved, a developer must show that traffic generated by the proposed subdivision will be accommodated by nearby intersections and roadways without exceeding the county’s established adequacy standards, or that developer funded roadway improvements and/or trip reduction programs will alleviate the inadequacy.1

Adequacy

During master plan workshops, residents of the subregion raised concerns about several heavily congested roads in the Developing Tier and the impact of additional planned development on these roads, and key intersections. Some questioned the effectiveness of the county’s current adequacy tests for roads, as well as the required timing for improvements. This plan proposes several strategies for addressing these concerns. As of 2008, a total of nine intersections (six signalized, three unsignalized) in Subregion 6 failed to meet adequacy standards, resulting in very long waits and delays at peak hours for citizens to move through these areas, difficulty in completing turns on to or off of affected roads, etc. These failing intersections are shown in Table 9 and Map 16. Detailed guidelines on adequacy standards are found in the M-NCPPC’s “Guidelines for the Analysis of the Traffic Impact of Development Proposals,” September 2002. 1

Transportation Systems

Table 9: Inadequate Intersections Map Key

Primary Link

Subregion 6 Cross Street (or segment end)

Intersection Type (after upgrade)

Funding

Failing Intersections (2008) 1

US 301

Swanson Road

Signalized

County CIP, developer

US 301

MD 725

Signalized

County CIP, developer

US 301

Old Crain Highway

Unsignalized

Developer

MD 4

Suitland Parkway

Interchange

State CTP

MD 4 Westphalia Road

Interchange

Developer

MD 4 Dower House Road

Interchange

None identified

MD 202 MD 193

Signalized

Developer

MD 223 Rosaryville Road

Signalized

Developer, county CIP

Rosaryville Road Williamsburg Road

Unsignalized

Developer

MAP 15: FUTURE ROAD IMPROVEMENTSâ&#x20AC;&#x201D;CONDITIONED, FUNDED, OR UNFUNDED

Transportation Systems

These intersections are located along the subregion’s major roads: US 301, MD 4, MD 223, and MD 202. Improvements to five other intersections will be developer funded as a condition of development approval and are intended to be constructed concurrent with the development. One of those developer-funded intersections would be partially funded through the county’s Capital Improvement Program (CIP). Funding sources for the remaining three intersections have not been identified. Projects to widen a portion of MD 223 and to reconstruct a portion of Trumps Hill Road (A-53 and P-606 in Table 10) are in the county’s Capital Improvement Program, but are not funded for construction. The proposed road facilities in Table 10 show the road network that will be needed to accommodate traffic at buildout—when no additional land capacity exists to accommodate additional homes or businesses. However, not all of these facilities will be needed as this master plan’s horizon year (2030) approaches.

Transportation Needs Based on Growth Trends

To ensure that funding is prioritized for new road improvements for both state and county roads the following roads are top priority in Subregion 6: State roads - MD 4 Corridor, Pennsylvania Avenue widening and interchange improvements to: 1. Suitland Parkway 2. Westphalia Road 3. Dower House Road 4. MD 223/Woodyard Road Improvements to MD 223/Woodyard Road from MD 4 to Subregion 5, and MD 725/Water Street County roads: 1. Whitehouse Road between Beltway and MD 4 2. Dower House Road between MD 4 and Foxley Road By 2030, Subregion 6 will contain approximately 6,900 more dwelling units than are present in 2008 (Subregion Analysis chapter), a growth of 33 percent. However, this growth will not be evenly distributed throughout the subregion. Nearly half of all new units would be built north of Upper Marlboro, between US 301 and MD 202, while less than ten percent of new dwelling units would be built in the Rural Tier. Development in the eastern portion of Marlton (between Croom Road and the CSX railroad) would account for more than ten percent of new units. The development of Westphalia, which adjoins Subregion 6, is expected to add more than 14,000 homes and 5.3 million square feet of commercial, office, and retail space. Much of this projected development would rely on employment and commercial activity outside of Subregion 6 (including in Westphalia). Thus, the subregion’s major roads, US 301, MD 4, and MD 202, are expected to bear a large share of the increased Transportation Systems

Transportation Systems

Crain Highway (US 301) Largo Road (MD 202) White House Road Ritchie Marlboro Road Dower House Road Woodyard Road (MD 223) Crain Highway (US 301) Heathermore Boulevard New Major Collector Oak Grove Road/Leeland Road Brown Station Road Old Crain Highway Old Marlboro Pike William Beanes Road Extended Osborne Road Relocated Rosaryville Road Duley Station Road Surratts Road Frank Tippett/Cherry Tree Crossing Roads Lake Marlton Boulevard Grandhaven Avenue Brandywine/Aquasco Road (MD 381) Dille Drive Extension Croom Road (MD 382) North Keys Road Cedarville Road Candy Hill Road Baden-Westwood/Westwood/Bald Eagle School Road

F-10 E-6 A-36 A-39 A-52 A-53 A-61 MC-601 MC-602 MC-600 C-602 C-603 C-604 C-605 C-606 C-607 C-608 C-609 C-610 C-611 C-612 C-613 C-614 C-615 C-616 C-617 C-618 C-619

Leeland Road/MC 600 to Subregion 5 Capital Beltway to MD 4 Capital Beltway to MD 202 White House Road to MD 4 A-66 to Foxley Road Piscataway Creek to MD 4 Oak Grove Road to MD 197 MC-602 to East Marlton Avenue Old Crain Highway to Croom Road MD 193 to US 301 Old Marlboro Pike to White House Road MC-602 to Old Marlboro Pike Brown Station Road to MD 223 Old Crain Highway to MD 223 MC-602 to MD 223 MC-602 to MD 223 MC-602 to MD 382 Frank Tippett Road to Brandywine Road (Subregion 5) Rosaryville Road to A-63 (Subregion 5) Duley Station Road to Heathermore Boulevard MC-602 to Heathermore Boulevard Charles County to Subregion 5 Ritchie Marlboro Road to Brown Station Road MC-602 to Charles County MD 381 to Molly Berry Road MD 381 to A-63 (Subregion 5) MD 382 to Molly Berry Road MD 381 to MD 382

Allentown Road to Old Alexandria Ferry Road

Branch Avenue (MD 5)

F-9

Limits Capital Beltway to Anne Arundel County

Road Name

New and Upgraded Roads F-6 Pennsylvania Avenue (MD 4)

Recommended Recommended Recommended Recommended Recommended Recommended Recommended Partially Complete Recommended Recommended2 Recommended Recommended Recommended Recommended Recommended Recommended Recommended Recommended Recommended Recommended Recommended Recommended Recommended Recommended Recommended Recommended Recommended Recommended

Partially Complete

Status, 20081

300’ (including transit ROW) 300-450’ 150-200’ 120-140’ 100-120’ 120’ 120-150’ Varies 120’ 100’ 100 80’ 80’ 80’ 80’ 80’ 80’ 80’ 80’ 80’ 80’ 80’ 80’ 80’ 80’ 80’ 80’ 80’ 80’

300’

Proposed Right-of-Way

4-8 4-8 6-8 4-6 6 4-6 4-6 4 2-4 4 2-4 4 2-4 2-4 4 4 4 2-4 4 4 4 2-4 2-4 2-4 2 2-4 2

6-8

Proposed Lanes

Table 10. Proposed Road Facilities (Note: Alternative transportation improvements should be considered before proceeding to widen a rural road designated as historic or scenic.)

Transportation Systems

Road Name

Limits

MD 202 at Woodyard Road (MD 223) Extended (A-37)

Interchange

No longer recommended No longer recommended No longer recommended

Recommended Recommended Recommended Recommended

Recommended Recommended Recommended Recommended Recommended Recommended Recommended Recommended Recommended Recommended Recommended Recommended Recommended Recommended Recommended Recommended

Status, 20081

Proposed Right-of-Way 80’ 80’ 80’ 80’ 80’ 80’ 70’ 70’ 70’ 60’ 60’ 60’ 70’ 60’ 70’ 70’

Facilities listed in this as “recommended” have not been completed

Listed as C-600 in the 1993 Subregion VI Study Area master plan

Note: Alternative transportation improvements should be considered before proceeding to widen a rural road designated as historic or scenic.

Note: Road identifications indicate the classification of road after upgrade. F = Freeway, A = Arterial, MC = Major Collector, C = Collector, P = Primary

Woodyard Road Extended

A-37

C-620 Molly Berry Road MD 382 to Candy Hill Road C-621 Eagle Harbor Road MD 381 to Trueman Point Road C-622 Doctor Bowen Road MD 381 to Charles County C-623 Horsehead Road MD 381 to Charles County C-624 Cross Road Trail Frank Tippett/Cherry Tree Crossing to North Keys Road C-629 Marlboro Pike/Old Marlboro Pike MD 223 to Dower House Road P-600 Water Street (MD 717) MD 4 to MD 725 P-601 Ring Road/Governor Oden Bowie Drive Water Street to MD 725 P-602 Largo Road (Existing MD 202) E-6 to Ring Road P-603 Wallace Lane MC-602 to Midland Turn P-604 Tam-O-Shanter Drive Muirfield Drive to Wallace Lane P-605 Midland Turn Fairhaven Road to Wallace Lane P-606 Trumps Hill Road Heathermore Boulevard to MD 382 P-607 US 301 Service Road Frank Tippett Road to Rosaryville Road P-608 Main Street/Marlboro Pike (MD 725) A-61 to P-602 P-609 Chrysler Way Extended E-6 to MD 725 New Interchanges Interchange MD 4 at MD 223 (reconstruction) Interchange MD 4 at Richie Marlboro Road Interchange MD 4 at US 301 Relocated (F-10) Interchange Rosaryville Road at US 301 Relocated (F-10) Roads and Intersections Included in 1993 Subregion VI Master Plan, but No Longer Recommended P-609 Chrysler Way Extended South of MD 725

Proposed Lanes 2 2 2 2 2 4 2-4 2 2-4 2 2 2 2 2 2-4 2

transportation burden. Upgrade of these roads is therefore a high priority. The Department of Defense’s (DOD) Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) program will also have a significant impact on roads in Subregion 6, particularly around JBA, which will gain approximately 2,700 jobs as a result of BRAC and other DOD job reassignments within the metro Washington area. In addition to the major highways described above, the arterial and collector roads in Subregion 6 listed below will be heavily impacted by the combination of BRAC-related and non-BRAC-related traffic. • Ritchie-Marlboro Road (A-39). • Dower House Road (A-52): Since April 2007, all commercial traffic entering Andrews AFB is required to use the Pearl Harbor Gate, located on Dower House Road. This has brought increased commercial traffic to Dower House Road. • MD 223 (Woodyard Road) (A-53). • Old Marlboro Pike (C-604). Policy 1 Develop a road network that balances regional mobility and local accessibility needs. Strategies 1. Continue to manage existing and future traffic by building the Subregion Plan’s road network (as shown in Table 9 and Map 14). Give priority to key roads that would be heavily impacted by growth (including BRAC-related growth): • US 301 • MD 4 • MD 202 • Dower House Road • MD 223 (Woodyard Road) • Old Marlboro Pike • Ritchie Marlboro Road 2. Conduct a traffic analysis for the proposed solid waste transfer station near the Western Branch Wastewater Treatment Plant. Focus specifically on road improvement needs (such as direct access ramps from a future US 301 freeway). 3. Obtain rights of way for the roads recommended in this master plan (Table 10) through dedication or other methods. 4. Encourage street connections between adjacent subdivisions. 5. Disseminate information to citizens about how to request maintenance to existing roads, as well as the different processes by which county and state priorities for road improvements are 92

Transportation Systems

determined and included in their respective capital improvement budgets. 6. The county and state should study and reconsider the MD 202 realignment and flyover from north of MD 725 to US 301 as studied and recommended in the 2012 Greater Upper Marlboro Revitalization and Development Strategy. Policy 2 Ensure that the road system is improved concurrently with development, so that road and intersection capacities match demand. Strategies 1. Identify financing strategies that will provide funding for roads concurrently with development. Ensure the intersection of Woodyard Road/MD 223 and Rosaryville Road is upgraded to handle additional traffic demand and reduce congestion. This improvement is necessary to not only handle local traffic but is also in response to the Pearl Harbor Gate at Joint Base Andrews opening for employees at the base. 2. Complete construction of, or upgrades to, the primary roads and intersections listed in Table 9 that currently fail to meet adequacy standards. 3. Ensure the intersection of Woodyard Road/MD 223 and Rosaryville Road is upgraded to handle additional traffic demand and reduce congestion. 4. Enhance the county’s adequate public facilities requirements with regard to roads. 5. Support land use policies that reduce vehicular travel demand, such as mixed uses, transit-oriented development, and increased employment within the Developing Tier in the subregion (see Development Pattern/Land Use chapter). Policy 3 Maintain and improve both the arterial and nonarterial systems to provide for safe and efficient travel. Strategies 1. Fund and construct the following road projects listed in the Capital Improvement Program and MDOT Consolidated Transportation Program. • Reconstruction of Trumps Hill Road. • Reconstruction of MD 4 (including interchanges at Suitland Parkway and Dower House Road). • Widening of MD 223.

Transportation Systems

Policy 4 Provide new funding for road improvement and maintenance. Strategies Expand the transportation funding techniques available to the county by considering the following options: • Establish incentives and requirements to forward-fund transportation improvements so that roads are upgraded before new development occurs. • Determine the feasibility of requiring developers to contribute to mitigation measures that address existing inadequacies, as well as future inadequacies caused by their proposed development. • Protect and maintain rural villages by promoting compatible development that conserves rural character.

Many country roads throughout the subregion have retained their rural feel.

• Establish impact fees and/or an excise tax for transportation facilities, either countywide or in areas in need of road, pedestrian/bicycle, and transit improvements. Policy 5 Ensure that all road improvements follow environmentally sound construction practices. Strategies 1. Implement the planned road system in an environmentally sustainable manner by minimizing stream, wetland, and floodplain crossings. 2. Work with SHA and DPW&T to explore the use of more environmentally-friendly materials for building and resurfacing roads. (New technologies and materials are being developed that use less energy and emit fewer greenhouse gases when they are produced than do traditional road materials.)

SCENIC AND HISTORIC ROADS Conservation and Enhancement of Special Roadways 94

The preservation of existing roads, as historic and scenic assets related to roadways, is important to retaining the heritage and community character of the county and in Subregion 6. Several reports have inventoried the countywide historic and scenic assets for conservation and enhancement. These include the 1984 Scenic Roads Study, the 1988 Rural Historic Landscapes and Scenic Roads Study, Subregion VI; the 1992 Historic Sites and Districts Plan, and the 2005 Analysis of the 1828 Levy Court Road Survey. As a result, roadways have been designated as scenic and/or historic in area master plans, the General Plan or through separate resolutions of Transportation Systems

MAP 16: SCENIC AND HISTORIC ROADS

Transportation Systems

Local Local

Charles County to “Timothy Branch” (Kathleen Lane) Aquasco Road to end

Aquasco Road/Brandywine Road (MD 381)*

Aquasco Farm Road

Nottingham Road to Croom Rd (MD 382)

Candy Hill Road

Croom Acres Drive to Duvall Road Duvall Road to Selby’s Landing/Patuxent River

Croom Airport Road

Local

Collector

Primary

Collector

Collector C-602

Collector

Local

Primary

Major Collector/ Collector (C614)

Local

Collector

1828 Levy Court Survey

1992 HS&D Plan

1984 Scenic Roads Study

1828 Levy Court Survey 1993 Sub VI

1828 Levy Court Survey 1993 Subregion VI

1992 HS&D Plan

1828 Levy Court Survey

1992 MelwoodWestphalia

1828 Levy Court Survey

1992 HS&D

Scenic Roads Survey 1984

1828 Levy Court Survey

Source

Yes

Source: M-NCPPC. 1984. Scenic Roads Study

Yes

Designated Designated Historic Scenic

*These roads were added through the Master Plan of Transportation (MPOT) CR-89-2009, approved on November 17, 2009.

Croom Station Rd to Popes Creek RR

Chew Road

Old Indian Head Road to Duley Station Road

Croom Road (MD 382) to Molly Berry Road

Candy Hill Road

Cheltenham Road

Marlboro Pike (MD 725) to White House Road

Brown Station Road*

Brandywine Road to A-63 (Brandywine Emp. Spine Road)

Brown Station Road to Ritchie Marlboro Road

Brown Road*

Cedarville Road/McKendree Road (same as 5-17B)*

Collector

Baden Naylor to Croom Road (MD 382)

Brooks Church Road

Chalk Point RR to Brandywine Road (MD 381)

Ritchie Marlboro Road to Brown Station Road

Brooke Lane*

A-63 to Accokeek Road

Charles County to Subregion 5 boundary

Brandywine Road (MD 381)

Cedarville Road*

Baden Westwood Road to Croom Road (MD 382)

Bald Eagle School Road*

Cedarville Road/McKendree Road (same as 5-17B)*

Local

Croom Road (MD 382) to Horsehead Road

Baden-Westwood Road

Collector

Baden-Westwood Road to Croom Road (MD 382) Horsehead Road to Aquasco Road

Baden- Naylor Road

Baden- Westwood Road

Major Collector/ Collector (C614)

Limits of Roadway

Road Name

Functional Class

Table 11: Designated and Proposed Scenic and Historic Roadways in Subregion 6

Scenic Byway Connection

Comments

Transportation Systems

Duley Station Road to Mount Calvert Road Mt. Calvert Road to Duley Station Road Nottingham Road to Duley Station Road Charles County to Tanyard Road Croom Station Road to Mount Calvert Road Tanyard Road to Nottingham Road and Chew Road to Popes Creek Crain Highway (US 301) to Croom Road and Chew Road to Popes Creek Baden Naylor Road to Nottingham Road North Keys Road to Cherry Tree Crossing Road Charles County to Cedarville Road Aquasco Road (MD 381) to Swanson Creek/Charles County Croom Road to Cheltenham Road Croom Airport Road to Mt. Calvert Road Trueman Point Rd to Patuxent River Aquasco Road (MD 381) to Trueman Point Rd South Osbourne Rd to Old Crain Highway Nottingham Road to St. Thomas Church Road Brandywine Road to North Keys Road Aquasco Road (MD381) to Charles County Aquasco Road (MD 381) to Baden Naylor Road MD 301 to Oak Grove Road Croom Road (MD 382) to Patuxent River Old Marlboro Pike (Wells Corners) to Crain Highway Largo Road to Crain Highway Main Street to Brown Station Road

Croom Road (MD 382)

Croom Station Road

Cross Road Trail

Dent Road

Doctor Bowen Road

Duley Station Road

Duvall Road

Eagle Harbor Road

Farm Road

Fenno Road

Gibbon’s Church Road*

Horsehead Road

Leeland Road South

Magruder’s Ferry Road

Marlboro Pike

Primary

Local

Major collector

Local

Rural collector

Local

Collector

Local

C-608 Collector

C-622 Rural collector

Local

Collector C-624

Collector

Local

Collector

Functional Class

1828 Levy Court Survey

1984 Scenic Roads Study

1828 Levy Court Survey

Community Planning Staff

1828 Levy Court Survey

1984 Scenic Roads Study

1828 Levy Court Survey

1993 Sub VI

1828 Levy Court Survey

Source

Yes

Source: M-NCPPC. 1984. Scenic Roads Study

Yes

Designated Designated Historic Scenic

*These roads were added through the Master Plan of Transportation (MPOT) CR-89-2009, approved on November 17, 2009.

Limits of Roadway

Road Name

Table 11: Designated and Proposed Scenic and Historic Roadways in Subregion 6

Scenic Byway

Comments

Transportation Systems

North Keys Road to Van Brady Road Van Brady Road to Croom Road (MD 382) Baden-Naylor Road to Candy Hill Road Candy Hill Road to North Keys Road Duvall Road to End Croom Road to Duvall Road Bald Eagle School Road to Baden Naylor Road Molly Berry Road to Gibbons Church Road

Gibbons Church Rd to Brandywine Road

Molly Berry Road to Cross Road Trail Cross Road Trail to Martin Road Tanyard Road to Candy Hill Road

Molly Berry Road*

Molly Berry Road

Mount Calvert Road

Nelson Perrie Road

North Keys Road

Nottingham Road

Collector

C-600 Major Collector

Local

Collector

Collector C-616

Rural collector

Local

Collector C-620

Collector

Collector C-620

Collector

Local

Trail

Local

Functional Class

1828 Levy Court Survey

1992 HS&D Plan

1828 Levy Court Survey

1992 HS&D Plan

1828 Levy Court Survey

1984 Scenic Roads Study

1828 Levy Court Survey

1984 Scenic Roads Study

Source

No Yes

Yes

Source: M-NCPPC. 1984. Scenic Roads Study

Yes

Designated Designated Historic Scenic

*These roads were added through the Master Plan of Transportation (MPOT) CR-89-2009, approved on November 17, 2009.

Old Marlboro Pike to Crain Highway (US 301)

Baden-Naylor Road to Croom Road (MD382)

Molly Berry Road

Old Crain Highway

Croom Road (MD 382) to End (Patuxent River)

Milltown Landing Road

Candy Hill Road to Croom Road (MD 382)

Old Marlboro Pike to Westphalia Road

Mellwood Road

MD 193 to Leeland Road

Croom Road (MD 382) to St. Thomas Church Road

Mattaponi Road

Oak Grove Road*

Molly Berry Road to North Keys Road

Martin Road

Nottingham Road

Limits of Roadway

Road Name

Table 11: Designated and Proposed Scenic and Historic Roadways in Subregion 6

Scenic Byway Connection

Expands limits of current designation.

Scenic Byway Connection

Comments

Transportation Systems

Upper Marlboro Town Line south to Crain Highway (US 301) Crain Highway (US 301) to Duley Station Road Wells Corners to Hills Bridge Main Street to Roblee Acres Subdiv Croom Road to Patuxent River Park At Last Farm Road to Aquasco Road (MD 381) Aquasco Road to end Mattaponi Road to Croom Road (MD 382) and Fenno Road to Mattaponi Road 0.1 mile south of Carroll Way to William Beans Road 301 to Swanson Road Spur Swanson Road to Patuxent River (end) Croom Road (MD 382) to Nottingham Road Brandywine Road to Old Indian Head Road Croom Road (MD 382) to Heathermore Blvd. Heathermore Blvd. to U 301 Crain Highway (US 301) to Croom Road Molly Berry Road to Old Indian Head Road Baden Westwood Road to Bald Eagle School Road Croom Road (MD 382) to End (Patuxent River) Old Crain Highway to Old Crain Highway

Old Crain Highway

Old Indian Head Road

Old Marlboro Pike

River Airport Road

Saint Maryâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Church Road

St. Phillip Road

St. Thomas Church Road

South Osbourne Road

Swanson Road

Swanson Road Spur

Tanyard Road

Tower Road*

Trumps Hill Road*

Van Brady Road

Westwood Road

Whites Landing Road

Wyville Road

Local

C-619 Rural Collector (1993)

Local

1988 Scenic Roads Study

1828 Levy Court Survey

1992 HS&D Plan

1828 Levy Court Survey

CR-60-2007

1993 Subregion VI

1828 Levy Court Survey

Local Local

1984 Scenic Roads Study

1828 Levy Court Survey

1984 Scenic Roads Study

1828 Levy Court Survey

1988 Rural Landscape Study

1828 Levy Court Survey

CR-39-1999

Source

Local

Collector

Primary

Local

Collector

Functional Class

Yes

Source: M-NCPPC. 1984. Scenic Roads Study

Yes

Designated Designated Historic Scenic

*These roads were added through the Master Plan of Transportation (MPOT) CR-89-2009, approved on November 17, 2009.

Limits of Roadway

Road Name

Table 11: Designated and Proposed Scenic and Historic Roadways in Subregion 6

Scenic Byway Connection

Comments

the County Council. A state-designated scenic byway also crosses the subregion and acts as a major north-south circulation corridor. The conservation and enhancement of these speciallydesignated roadways are intended to provide safe and enjoyable travel, while preserving the scenic and historic features, both within the rights-of-way and on adjacent land. It is also necessary that all road designs and construction provide, insofar as practicable, a consistently safe but visually varied environment that is pleasing to all road users and adjacent property owners. The designated scenic and historic roadways, the scenic byway and scenic byway connectors, historic roadways proposed for designation with the Master Plan of Transportation, and scenic roadways proposed for designation under this plan are shown on Map 17 and provided in Table 11. A scenic road is defined in the County Code, Subtitle 23 as “a public or private road which provides scenic views along a substantial part of its length through natural or man-made features, such as forest or extensive woodland, cropland, pasturage, or meadows; distinctive topography including outcroppings, streambeds and wetlands; traditional building types; historic sites; or roadway features such as curving, rolling roadway alignment and leaf tunnels.” A historic road is defined in Subtitle 23 as “a public or private road which has been documented by historic surveys, and which maintains its historic alignment and landscape context through views of natural features, historic landscape patterns, historic sites and structures, historic farmstead groupings, or rural villages.” Historic roads are designated through an action of the County Council. Historic features may include brick and stone boundary walls, gateposts, boundary posts or stones/mile markers, fences, steps, commemorative markers, monuments, pedestrian or vehicular tunnels, and other similar features. Scenic and historic roads were first designated in Subregion 6 with the approval of the 1993 master plan, which included 34 historic road segments and one scenic road segment. Since that time, one additional scenic road (Old Crain Highway from the Town of Marlboro south to US 301) was designated by Council Resolution (CR-39-1999) in response to a citizen initiative. The historic roads designated in the prior Subregion 6 master plan were based on a listing of early roads included as an appendix to the Historic Sites and District Plan (1992). In June 2005, the Natural and Cultural Resources Division, Department of Parks and Recreation, completed an analysis of the 1828 Levy Court Road Survey, Prince George’s County, to identify locations where the early roads of the county still exist. This evaluation was used during preparation of the preliminary Master Plan of

100

Transportation Systems

Transportation as the basis for recommending the designation of 31 additional historic roads segments. A review of candidate roadways listed in previous scenic road inventories and recommendations of staff were used compiling a listing of 59 scenic road segments which are proposed for designation with this master plan. The guidelines for scenic and historic roadways previously contained in the Circulation and Transportation chapter of the Subregion VI master plan have been consolidated in the Guidelines for the Design of Scenic and Historic Roadways in Prince Georgeâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s County, Maryland (Department of Public Works and Transportation [DPW&T], 2006) and includes scenic-historic road sections from the DPW&T standards for applications on scenic and historic roadways The Master List of Scenic and Historic Roads is a listing of roads that have been designated as scenic or historic by the County Council, which is maintained by the Planning Department, M-NCPPC. The listing is consulted in the review of applications to determine if scenic and/or historic concerns are applicable.

Scenic Byways

When an application is proposed on a designated scenic or historic road, an Inventory of Scenic and Historic Features, which is comprised of text and maps necessary to describe significant visual features of the site, is requested. Guidance in the preparation of visual inventories can be found in the document Guidelines for the Design of Scenic and Historic Roadways in Prince Georgeâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s County, Maryland and in publications such as National Register Bulletin 18: How to Evaluate and Nominate Designed Historic Landscapes and National Register Bulletin 30: How to Identify, Evaluate and Register Rural Historic Landscapes. Natural and cultural resources within the rights-of-way and adjacent to scenic and historic roads are important and are in need of protection. The predominant encroachment on these resources occurs when new development proposals are submitted. Extensive efforts have been made to preserve and enhance the viewsheds of designated scenic and historic roads through the careful evaluation of these proposals and the placement of new development out of the viewsheds as much as possible and through the preservation or enhancement of the existing vegetation along the roadway. Scenic easements have been established to provide permanent protections to the viewsheds adjacent to scenic and historic roadways. Transportation Systems

Croom Road is a state designated Scenic Byway and is also part of the Star Spangled Banner Trail Driving Tour. 101

The Maryland State Highway Administration (SHA) has designated 31 state scenic byways, dubbed with names that reflect the rich heritage of the region surrounding each of the routes. By driving these byways, visitors and residents can explore the history of the area and appreciate the county’s significant place in history. SHA is not only promoting scenic byways but is also encouraging the preservation of the heritage resources along these routes by offering communities assistance in applying for competitive grants through the national Scenic Byways Program to create communitydriven corridor management plans (CMP). With a CMP in place, project sponsors may apply for funding for safety improvements, rest areas, interpretive facilities, overlooks, recreational areas, access enhancements, and protection in the form of easements. In Prince George’s County, the Lower Patuxent River Tour was designated a state scenic byway, which included Croom Road from US 301 south to the Charles County line. The theme of this scenic byway was based on the path of the British troops from Benedict, in Charles County, to Washington, D.C., in 1814, passing by many historic sites which mark the early history of the county, state, and nation. The Lower Patuxent River Tour has recently been incorporated into the Star-Spangled Banner Scenic Byway, which provides interpretation for the War of 1812 Chesapeake Campaign and extends through other areas of the county outside of Subregion 6, connecting to Washington, D.C., and Baltimore. Under the state Scenic Byways Grant Program, two preliminary tasks related to the development of a corridor management plan for the Lower Patuxent portion of the byway have been accomplished by M‑NCPPC. A Lower Patuxent Scenic Byway Intrinsic Quality Inventory Report was completed in 2007, and the Croom Road Tobacco Barn Survey Report was completed in 2006. The next step is the completion of the remaining required elements of a CMP prescribed by the Federal Highway Administration for the 17-mile stretch previously known as the Lower Patuxent Scenic Byway. Goal To conserve viewsheds and other natural and cultural features of scenic and historic roads and scenic byways, to the extent possible when considering transportation improvements and when reviewing new land development proposals. Policy 1 Conserve and enhance the scenic and historic values along special roadways. Strategies 1. Designate additional scenic or historic roads for protection and enhancement with the approval of the Subregion 6 master plan. 102

Transportation Systems

2. Require submission of an inventory of scenic and historic features with all applications that propose work within the right-of-way of a designated roadway. 3. Utilize the “Guidelines for the Design of Scenic and Historic Roadways in Prince George’s County, Maryland” (DPW&T, 2006) and the scenic-historic road sections from DPW&T standards when evaluating applications within the rights-of-way of scenic and historic roadways. 4. Consider a variety of techniques in order to protect the scenic and historic qualities of the designated roads during the review of applications that involve work within the right-of-way of a designated roadway. These techniques include alternative ways to circulate traffic, the use of the historic road section as one leg of a needed dual highway, provision of bypass roads, and limiting certain types of development and signs in the viewshed. 5. Review existing county code and related standards for conflicts with the conservation and enhancement of designated roadways and make recommendations for code changes as necessary. 6. Maintain a database and a GIS layer of designated roadways. 7. Utilize existing county code provisions for scenic easement tax credits by establishing a voluntary easement program to protect viewsheds along designated roadways. 8. Prepare corridor management plans for significant designated roadways. 9. Implement the recommendations of established corridor management plans. 10. Develop road lighting standards for the Rural Tier that require the use of full cut-off optics and dark-sky techniques. 11. Limit street lighting along designated roadways to only that necessary to address safety concerns. 12. Require new and replacement lighting along designated roadways to utilize full cut-off optic luminaries to minimize glare and light pollution. 13. Work with the Maryland State Highway Administration in applying the guidance provided by the document, Context Sensitive Solutions for Work on Scenic Byways (SHA, April 2005), to state roadways that are also designated roadways in Subregion 6.

Transportation Systems

103

Policy 2 Conserve and enhance the viewsheds along designated roadways. Strategies 1. Require submission of an inventory of scenic and historic features with all applications that propose work adjacent to the right-of-way of a designated roadway. 2. Require the conservation and enhancement of the existing viewsheds of designated roads to the fullest extent possible during the review of land development or permit applications, whichever comes first. Elements to be considered shall include views of structures from the roadway; design character and materials of constructed features; preservation of existing vegetation, slopes, and tree tunnels; use of scenic easements; and limited access points. 3. Develop guidelines for the design of activities adjacent to designated roadways to include building setbacks, landscaping, scenic easements, and utility clearing. Sidewalks, such as this one in the Beechtree development, link neighborhoods and help define a sense of place for residents.

Policy 3 Preserve, protect, and enhance the right-of-way and viewshed of the Star-Spangled Banner Scenic Byway within Subregion 6. Strategies 1. Complete the development of the Lower Patuxent Corridor Management Plan and the implementation of the recommendations. 2. Work with the Maryland State Highway Administration in applying the guidance provided by the document Context Sensitive Solutions for Work on Scenic Byways (SHA, April 2005) to state roadways that are a part of the designated scenic byway. 3. Coordinate protection of the intrinsic scenic and historic qualities of the scenic byway through application of the countyâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s, Guidelines for the Design of Scenic and Historic Roadways, where appropriate. 4. Develop design guidelines to conserve and enhance the viewshed of the scenic byway when development is proposed.

104

Transportation Systems

Trails and sidewalks provide opportunities for nonvehicular circulation, as well as recreation, in and between communities and in the park system. Sidewalks and neighborhood trails are important for providing safe routes to school and for building connected, walkable communities. Roadways should be designed to safely accommodate bicycle traffic, in addition to motor vehicles. By providing accommodations for all modes of transportation, walking and bicycling can be promoted for some trips, reducing the need for driving and increasing opportunities to build physical activity into daily life.

SIDEWALKS AND TRAILS

Trails also serve as recreational facilities for a variety of users including hikers, bicyclists, equestrians, mountain bikers, naturalists, and other park users. This plan recommends multiuse trails along several stream valley corridors. Natural surface trails are recommended along other stream valley corridors, as well as along established equestrian routes. Connectivity is crucial to the overall usability of the trail network, and an emphasis has been placed on connectivity to Jug Bay, Merkle Wildlife Management Area, Rosaryville State Park, the Prince George’s Equestrian Center, and the Patuxent River. Equestrian connections are a crucial component of the overall network, and it is important that this access be preserved throughout the subregion. Within the Developing Tier, roadways must include safe accommodations for bicyclists and pedestrians. Continuous sidewalks are necessary to provide safe access to schools and parks, link communities with commercial areas, and achieve the goal of providing “walkable” communities.

Bicycle/Pedestrian Corridors

The county should provide continuous sidewalks and bicyclecompatible road improvements along roads within the Developing Tier. Major roads where continuous facilities for bicycles and pedestrians are needed include the roads listed below. These facilities can include continuous sidewalks with on-road bicycle facilities such as wide curb lanes/designated bike lanes/sidepath construction. Policy 7 Expand, encourage, and promote hiker/biker/equestrian recreational activities. Strategies 1. Provide continuous sidewalks and bicycle-compatible road improvements for cyclists and pedestrians on identified road segments (below). 2. Connect fragmented sidewalks and designate bike lanes, or wide outside curb lanes, at the time of road improvement, at the following locations: • Dower House Road from MD 4 to MD 223. Transportation Systems

105

Table 12: Major Long-Distance Bicycle Routes

Subregion 6

Bikeway

Extent

Description

MD 382 (Croom Road) Bikeway

US 301 to MD 381

Primary route through Rural Tier; provides access to parkland and historic sites along the Patuxent River.

MD 381 (Aquasco Road) Bikeway

US 301 to Swanson Creek at the Charles County line

Heavily used corridor for long-distance cyclists, provides access to Eagle Harbor, Aquasco, and destinations in Charles County.

Croom Station Road Bikeway

Old Crain Highway to MD 382

Access from Upper Marlboro to the Rural Tier, important access point for cyclists traveling from the north.

Croom Airport Road Bikeway

MD 382 to the Chesapeake Bay Critical Area Driving Tour between Jug Bay Park and Merkle Wildlife Management Area

Access to the Jug Bay Visitorâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Center and surrounding natural areas.

St. Thomas Church Road Bikeway

MD 382 to Fenno Road

Access to Merkle Wildlife Management Area and the southern part of the Chesapeake Bay Critical Area Driving Tour.

Nottingham Road Bikeway

MD 382 to Watershed Drive

Access to area historic sites and the Patuxent River.

Tanyard Road Bikeway

MD 382 to Watershed Drive

Access to area historic sites and the Patuxent River.

Fenno Road Bikeway

St. Thomas Church Road to Nottingham Road

Important scenic connection for cyclists in the vicinity of Merkle Wildlife Management Area.

Candy Hill Road Bikeway

Molly Berry Road to Nottingham Road

Baden Naylor Road Bikeway

MD 381 to MD 382

Access through the central portion of the subregion.

Baden Westwood Road Bikeway

MD 381 to MD 382

Access through the central portion of the subregion.

North Keys Road Bikeway

MD 381 to Molly Berry Road

Access through the central portion of the subregion.

Molly Berry Road Bikeway

MD 382 to Baden-Naylor Road

Access through the central portion of the subregion.

Van Brady Road Bikeway

Old Indian Head Road to Molly Berry Road

Access through the central portion of the subregion south of Marlton.

Cedarville Road Bikeway

US 301 to MD 381

Access to Brandywine and Cedarville State Forest.

Duley Station Road

MD 382 to Wallace Lane

106

Transportation Systems

• Rosaryville Road from MD 223 to US 301. • Frank Tippett Road from Rosaryville Road to US 301. • South Osborne Road from Marlboro Pike to US 301. • Brandywine Community: MD 381 from Mattawoman Drive (Subregion 5) to Tower Road, as well as other locations detailed in the Subregion 5 master plan. • Aquasco Community: MD 381 from Edwards Place to Orme Road. Baden-Westwood Road from MD 381 to St Phillips Church. Horsehead Road from Orme Road to Baden-Westwood Road. 3. Provide shared-use sidepaths or wide shoulders at the time of road improvements at the following locations: • MD 223 from MD 4 to Livingston Road (Subregion 5). • Brown Station Road from Old Marlboro Pike to White House Road.

Bike Routes Roads within the Rural Tier are used by recreational and longdistance cyclists. The scenic, rural, relatively low-volume roads are ideal for long-distance cycling and can be used as routes to area parks, natural areas, and as part of long-distance tours such as the Patuxent Rural Legacy Area Bicycle Route. However, as development occurs and traffic volumes increase, it is important that bicycle-compatible road improvements are incorporated into frontage improvements or road construction projects. Bicycle signage and safety improvements (if necessary) should be incorporated into any frontage improvements along designated shared-use roadways. Appropriate bikeway improvements may include paved shoulders, designated bike lanes, signage, and wide outside curb lanes. Designated bikeways in Subregion 6 are included on the plan map and major routes are highlighted in Table 12. The county and state should provide accommodations for bicycles as roads are improved or frontage improvements are made consistent with the AASHTO2 “Guide for the Development of Bicycle Facilities.” Policy 8 Promote and encourage cycling and walking as an alternative to the car for commuting and recreational purposes. Strategies 1. Incorporate bicycle-compatible road improvements with future frontage improvements or road construction projects.

AASHTO is the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials. 2

Transportation Systems

107

Hiker/Biker/Equestrian Trails

2. Provide bicycle signage and safety improvements (if necessary) concurrent with frontage improvements on designated shareduse roadways along the following roads and bikeways as listed in Table 12: Major Long-Distance Routes in Subregion 6. Multiuse trails are designed to accommodate pedestrians, bicyclists, and equestrians and provide the backbone for the overall trails network. These trails are envisioned for park trail corridors and will require the acquisition of the stream valley land by the Department of Parks and Recreation. In addition to providing long-distance trail routes, the planned stream valley trails will also provide access to Rosaryville State Park, Jug Bay, the Upper Marlboro Equestrian Center, and other destinations in the subregion. Major planned stream valley trail corridors in the subregion include:

Chesapeake Beach Rail Trail. The rail trail project will utilize the former right-of-way of the Chesapeake Beach railroad to provide a major east/west trail connection through central Prince George’s County. In Subregion 6, the trail has already been constructed through the Winshire, Kings Grant, and Fox Chase subdivisions. The trail will link residential communities in the Developed, Developing, and Rural Tiers with existing and planned trails in the Westphalia area and Jug Bay. Additional right-of-way acquisition is required.

Dower House Branch Stream Valley Trail. This trail will preserve equestrian access to Rosaryville State Park from surrounding residential communities.

Piscataway Creek Stream Valley Trail. This stream valley runs through the middle of a rapidly developing portion of southern Prince George’s County. It is one of the primary recommendations in this part of the county and crosses through both Subregions 5 and 6. Significant segments of the stream valley have been acquired by the Department of Parks and Recreation as development has occurred. In conjunction with the Charles Branch Trail in Subregion 6, the Piscataway Creek Stream Valley Trail will provide part of a planned “cross-county” connection linking the Potomac River at Fort Washington with the Patuxent River Greenway near Jug Bay. This trail will also provide nonmotorized access to the extensive trail system and recreational facilities at Cosca Regional Park.

Charles Branch Stream Valley Trail. This trail will connect from Dower House Road to the Patuxent River. This is a long-term project where much land remains to be acquired. The trail will provide access to Rosaryville State Park and the Patuxent River, as well as serve as part of the cross-county connection with the Piscataway Creek Stream Valley Trail. The

108

Transportation Systems

Charles Branch corridor serves as an important connection for equestrians to the state park.

Collington Branch Stream Valley Trail. This trail will extend from MD 214 south to Upper Marlboro. It will serve the developing residential communities on the west side of US 301 and will connect to the Western Branch Trail near Upper Marlboro. Several segments of this trail have either been constructed or approved for construction through recent development proposals.

Western Branch Stream Valley Trail. This trail will provide access to Upper Marlboro and the Prince George’s Equestrian Center. It will also provide a nonmotorized connection between the Largo area and Upper Marlboro, a link to the Folly Branch, Collington Branch, and Patuxent River trails, and a connection to Watkins Regional Park. Policy 9 Provide multiuse trails accommodating hikers, bikers, and equestrians along major stream valley corridors. Strategy Provide high-quality, hiker/biker/equestrian trails as development occurs through the acquisition of dedicated parkland and public use trails easements Policy 10 Promote the equestrian heritage of Prince George’s County, focusing on trails that facilitate access to the Prince George’s Equestrian Center, Jug Bay, and Rosaryville State Park. Strategies Provide high-quality, multiuse trails along critical stream valley corridors through the acquisition of land prior to development along the following corridors: • Chesapeake Beach Rail Trail • Dower House Branch Stream Valley Trail • Piscataway Creek Stream Valley Trail • Charles Branch Stream Valley Trail • Collington Branch Stream Valley Trail • Western Branch Stream Valley Trail Equestrian trails form a major component of the trails network in Subregion 6. Some of these connections are proposed within M-NCPPC parkland or other public lands. Within the subregion, another type of trail is important to the overall trail network. Public-use walking, jogging, and riding trails need to be preserved Transportation Systems

109

that are not owned by the government and for which the trail users normally provide the maintenance. These types of trails are particularly important in the Rural Tier, where equestrian use is widespread. It is important to preserve these trail corridors, a number of which are used by the community to reach nearby park facilities such as Jug Bay and Rosaryville State Park. In some areas these trails can be accommodated on dedicated parkland. However, in areas of large-lot development where dedication is not required, trail easements should be acquired to accommodate the equestrian and walking connection. Major trail corridors that need to be preserved or acquired include those listed below. Additional neighborhood trail connections are noted on the plan map.

Black Swamp Creek Hiker-Equestrian Trail. A natural surface hiker-equestrian trail is recommended along Black Swamp Creek from Baden Elementary School to the Patuxent River. This trail will require additional parkland acquisition, as well as public use trail easements in some rural, low-density areas. This trail will provide access to parkland and trails along the Patuxent River as well as the existing elementary school.

Tom Walls Branch Hiker-Equestrian Trail. This trail will preserve equestrian access along the stream valley to the Patuxent River greenway from MD 382 to Letcher Road. It will also provide part of a long equestrian loop within the Rural Tier.

Mattaponi Hiker-Equestrian Trail. A natural surface hikerequestrian trail is recommended along Mattaponi Creek from Old Indian Head Road to Merkle Wildlife Management Area. This trail will connect to the existing trails at Jug Bay and Merkle Wildlife Management Area, as well as provide a long equestrian trail route within the Rural Tier.

Rock Creek Hiker-Biker Equestrian Trail. This trail will preserve equestrian access along the stream valley to the Patuxent River greenway from MD 381 to the Patuxent River.

“Marlboro Country” Equestrian Trails. The plan recommends the preservation of existing equestrian trails in the vicinity of the Prince George’s Equestrian Center and Rosaryville State Park. These proposed trail connections link the surrounding communities with the existing equestrian facilities located at the equestrian center and state park.

“Croom Country” Equestrian Trails. The plan recommends the preservation of existing equestrian trails that link the Prince

110

Transportation Systems

George’s Equestrian Center with Jug Bay and the Patuxent River Park. Policy 11 Preserve existing equestrian trail corridors. Strategy The county and state should provide natural surface trails accommodating pedestrians and equestrians throughout the subregion with an emphasis placed on connectivity to Rosaryville State Park, Jug Bay, the Prince George’s Equestrian Center, and the Patuxent River. Policy 12 Encourage equestrian uses and equestrian-themed developments in Subregion 6 to maintain an economically viable form of rural land use for local property owners.

Trails through natural areas, like this one in Rosaryville, can be enjoyed by walkers, cyclists and equestrians.

Strategies Provide high-quality, hiker/equestrian and equestrian trails as development occurs through the acquisition of dedicated parkland and public use trails easements along the following routes: • Black Swamp Creek Hiker-Equestrian Trail • Tom Walls Branch Hiker-Equestrian Trail • Mattaponi Hiker-Equestrian Trail • Rock Creek Hiker-Biker Equestrian Trail • “Marlboro Country” Equestrian Trails • “Croom Country” Equestrian Trails

Thematic Trails

Subregion 6 includes an abundance of resources and features that make it uniquely suited for historic interpretation, recreational opportunities, and thematic trails. Much of the Patuxent River corridor has been acquired by M-NCPPC or the State of Maryland and includes trails, water access, scenic visits, and stunning natural areas. Jug Bay is a unique natural area offering multiple opportunities for historic interpretation, nature observation, and trail use. This plan recommends building upon those many resources to promote recreational activities, interpretation, preservation, and eco-tourism. Several different thematic trails may be appropriate for development within the subregion to emphasize and connect routes

Transportation Systems

111

or sites related to a specific theme or idea.3 Some thematic trails are recommended below which complement the thematic trails recommended in the historic resources portion of this plan.

Patuxent River Birding Trail. Some of the premiere bird watching and nature observation sites in the state are along the Patuxent River corridor. As noted in the Environment chapter of this plan, Jug Bay has been designated as an Important Bird Area (IBA) by the American Bird Conservancy due to its significance as a habitat for birds and other wildlife, not just locally, but on a national scale. Other attractive and significant sites exist along the Patuxent River in Prince George’s County that include nature trails, water access, scenic vistas, and access to a wide range of habitats and wildlife. The Patuxent River Birding Trail will map and highlight the significance of these sites, their relationships to the Patuxent River, and the wide range of bird life and other wildlife that the corridor supports.4 Eco-tourism is increasingly popular and many sites in Subregion 6 are appropriate for inclusion in a similar trail along the Patuxent River. In addition to mapping, this trail should also involve wayfinding signage, specific facility or site improvements, and possible natural surface trail construction in some locations.5

Patuxent River Rural Legacy Area Bicycle Route. Many of the roads in Subregion 6 are ideal for long-distance bicycling due to their relatively low volumes, scenic nature, and access to parks and historic sites. Area bicycle groups frequently organize long-distance tours in southern Prince George’s County. Rides focusing on the Patuxent River Rural Legacy Area have been organized in the past, and it may be appropriate to formalize these bike routes in the future. This bicycle route could identify the roads and routes most suitable for bicyclists; connect historic, scenic, and natural resources; provide access throughout the subregion; and highlight the importance of the continued Local examples of thematic trails can be found in the Approved Anacostia Trails Heritage Area Management Plan. Trails include the African-American Heritage Trail, the Agricultural History Trail, Natural History Trail, Mail-Order House Trail, Streetcar Suburbs Trail, Champion Tree Trail, and the War of 1812 Trail. 4 One national example of this concept is the Great Texas Coastal Birding Trail. This trail includes an attractive and informative map with information on site access, habitat, facilities such as trails or visitors centers, and habitat information. The trail also highlights the various birdlife and other wildlife that can be seen at each site. This trail has attracted millions of tourist dollars to the state and led to the establishment of similar trails across the country. 5 Sites which may be appropriate for inclusion in this trail include Mount Calvert, Jug Bay, Merkle Wildlife Management Area, Milltown Landing Wildlife Management Area, Magruders Ferry Park, Aquasco Farm Park, and Cedar Haven Park. 3

112

Transportation Systems

preservation of the features that make the rural legacy area unique. Most of the roads in the possible rural legacy route are already identified as master plan bike routes in the Subregion 6 master plan. Bicycle-compatible road frontage improvements should be made as properties develop or road improvements are made. Designating an official bike route can further highlight the resources along the corridor and provide for a long-distance bicycling route that is attractive to both area bicycle groups and bicyclists visiting from other areas. In addition to the mapping and bicycle-compatible road improvements that may be necessary along the route, wayfinding signage and mapping may also be appropriate. This plan also recommends enhancing existing trails, through additional parkland acquisitions and creating unified thematic interpretation programs. These trails include:

Patuxent River Water Trail. The M-NCPPC Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR) and the Maryland Department of Natural Resources (DNR) have done significant work toward establishing a water trail or blueway along the Patuxent River for kayaks and canoes. Work on this trail should build upon improvements that have already been made. M-NCPPC has recently implemented site improvements to the Mount Calvert site that include parking, interpretative signage, and a new boat ramp. Similar improvements may be necessary elsewhere.

Patuxent River Hiker/Equestrian Trails. Extensive networks of natural surface trails exist at several existing M-NCPPC parks and DNR parks along the Patuxent River. These trails are utilized by hikers and equestrians, as well as those seeking to explore the natural environment or other historic or cultural resources. Jug Bay, Merkle Wildlife Management Area, Milltown Landing Wildlife Management Area, and Aquasco Farms Park all include extensive systems of trails, paths, and farm lanes. These trails can be used for hiking and equestrian activity, but can also be utilized and enhanced as part of the proposed thematic trails by providing access to resources and features within the corridor. Policy 13 Work with the state and other stakeholders to develop recreational and interpretative programs, facilities, and thematic trails that build upon the recreational, natural, historic, and scenic attributes of the Rural Tier. Strategies 1. Convene a work group to study the feasibility of creating the following thematic trails: â&#x20AC;˘ Patuxent River Birding Trail â&#x20AC;˘ Patuxent River Rural Legacy Area Bicycle Route Transportation Systems

113

MAP 17: EXISTING TRANSIT SERVICE

114

Transportation Systems

2 Provide maps and other way-finding guides for established corridors that include facility information (such as hours of operation, facilities, and trail access) where applicable, as well as information on natural, historic, scenic, and other resources along designated routes. 3. Build upon the ongoing work of M-NCPPC and DNR to enhance the Patuxent River Water Trail. • Create and market maps to show public land, water access points, facilities such as camping, water, or restrooms; and other scenic, historic, or natural features that can be explored from the river. • Consider additional water access points. • Provide water-resistant maps along the trail to highlight features along the corridor. 4. Expand the Patuxent River hiker/equestrian trails along the Patuxent River as additional land is purchased or otherwise placed into public ownership from willing sellers. • Prioritize connectivity between parks and existing trails. 5. Utilize the Lower Patuxent Scenic Byway Corridor Management Plan and develop implementation strategies under this policy. The transit network in Subregion 6 is relatively limited and primarily links Upper Marlboro to the Washington, D.C., metropolitan area. Map 18 shows existing transit service in and around Subregion 6.

TRANSIT

The Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority (WMATA) Metrorail system does not directly serve Subregion 6; its Largo Town Center Station (near the intersection of I-495 and Largo Road) and Branch Avenue Station (near the intersection of I-495 and MD 5) are the nearest Metrorail stations. Both stations are about nine miles north of the subregion boundary.

Existing Transit Service

“The Bus,” operated by DPW&T, has three routes which connect residents to the Metrorail stations: #20, connecting Upper Marlboro to Largo Town Center Metrorail Station; #21, connecting Upper Marlboro to Largo Town Center and New Carrollton Metrorail Stations (near the I-495/US 50 interchange); and #21 express, connecting Upper Marlboro directly to the New Carrollton Metrorail Station. Two additional routes (#51 and #53) serve as circulator routes within and around the Upper Marlboro area. Maryland Transit Authority (MTA) Commuter Bus Route 904 operates along MD 4 between Washington, D.C., and North Beach, stopping at the Equestrian Center in Upper Marlboro. Several other MTA bus routes from other areas in Southern Maryland to Washington, D.C., travel along MD 4 but do not stop in the subregion. Transportation Systems

115

The parking lot at the Prince George’s County Equestrian Center in Upper Marlboro is the only park-and-ride located along MD 4 in Subregion 6. In addition to MTA Route 904, all The Bus routes stop at the Equestrian Center. Free shuttles also link the Equestrian Center parking lot to the county’s government center, alleviating parking demand within Upper Marlboro. DPW&T also offers paratransit services throughout the subregion. Call-A-Bus offers demand-response, curb-to-curb service for all residents who are not served by or cannot use existing bus or rail services. Priority is given to senior and disabled persons. Senior Transportation Services (STS) provides regularly scheduled transportation throughout Prince George’s County to senior and disabled county residents.

Future Service

Several opportunities exist to expand transit service in the Developing Tier within Subregion 6, particularly to extend The Bus routes to growing residential areas such as Marlton and the AAFB/Melwood area. Beyond these expansions of existing service, other opportunities for new transit service are: • Westphalia, which adjoins Subregion 6, is envisioned as a major employment center and transit-oriented, mixed-use development. The transit systems that will serve Westphalia will also provide expanded service for nearby residents of Subregion 6. • The Maryland Department of Transportation is developing alternatives for Bus Rapid Transit or Light Rail Transit along the MD 5 corridor, linking southern Maryland to the Branch Avenue Metrorail Station. Portions of this route could pass through Subregion 6. In addition, this service could be attractive for some residents of Rosaryville and the Woodyard Road corridor. • In the long term, bus service along US 301 could also connect Subregion 6 to northern portions of Prince George’s County and Waldorf. • Several existing MTA bus routes that pass through the subregion without stopping could add stops in Upper Marlboro, further increasing transit choices for commuters. Policy 14 Reduce private automobile traffic demand and carbon monoxide, volatile compounds, nitrogen oxide, and greenhouse gas emissions by increasing transit route coverage and frequency, and broadening the choice of travel modes to, from, and within the Developing Tier portion of Subregion 6. Strategies 1. Explore the potential, in conjunction with DPW&T, to expand The Bus to serve population and employment centers in the Developing Tier, such as AAFB, Melwood, and Marlton.

116

Transportation Systems

â&#x20AC;˘ Work with DPW&T to review existing service (The Bus), to ensure that bus routes and frequency of service align with residential and employment needs. 2. Consider dedicated right-of-way for transit along MD 4 and US 301, as part of planned future upgrades of these roads to freeways. 3. Encourage alternatives such as carpools, vanpools, and bicycles that are energy efficient and reduce dependency on the automobile. â&#x20AC;˘ Explore ways to encourage car pooling where transit service does not exist, including the addition of park and ride lots with plug in ports to recharge electric cars. 4. Encourage compact development patterns to reduce transit operating costs and increase ridership, and reduce dependency on the automobile and auto emissions. 5. Encourage street connections between subdivisions to broaden the availability of bus transit within the Developing Tier.

Transportation Systems

117

118

Transportation Systems

PUBLIC FACILITIES

Public facilities are an essential element in providing a livable community for all Subregion 6 residents. These facilities provide essential services such as education and public safety as well as opportunities for community involvement and enrichment. The area is well served by a network of existing facilities in both the Developing and Rural Tier portions of the subregion. The analysis that was done as part of this master plan, however, showed an existing need for some additional facilities as well as the need for facilities to serve projected growth in the subregion. The results are presented below for schools, libraries, police and fire stations, parks and recreation; and solid waste, water, and sewer facilities.

Subregion 6 Approved Master Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

BACKGROUND

Development of all future public facilities in the subregion should utilize sustainable policies. Facilities should be located so that they are convenient to both existing residents as well as projected population growth areas. Sustainable building practices should be incorporated into the building of all public facilities including consideration of long-term alternative uses for public facility infrastructure, consideration of reuse or infill development sites rather than building on greenfields, construction of high-quality public facilities to ensure facilities have long life spans, and incorporation of green building practices where possible. Goals 1. Provide residents of Subregion 6 needed public facilities in locations that serve existing and future populations. 2. Ensure that all new public facilities will be constructed to LEED standards and existing buildings will be retrofitted to make them as energy efficient and sustainable as possible. 3. Maintain the high level of service by providing essential equipment and professional training for personnel. 4. Priority will be given to funding public facilities to support development in the Developing Tier.

Public Facilities

119

MAP 18: PUBLIC FACILITIES

120

Public Facilities

Table 13: Prince George’s County Public School Facilities SCHOOL NAME

ADDRESS

within the

Subregion 6 Study Area

ENROLLMENT 2007-2008

STATE RATED CAPACITY

BUILDING SIZE IN SQUARE FEET

SITE SIZE (IN ACRES)

Arrowhead Elementary School

2300 Sansbury Road, Upper Marlboro

489

426

59,923

Baden Elementary School

13601 Baden Westwood Road, Brandywine

257

341

56,625

19.6

Francis T. Evans Elementary School

6720 Old Alexandria Ferry Road, Clinton

501

452

57,742

Mattaponi Elementary School

11701 Duley Station Road, Upper Marlboro

468

460

48,912

24.5

Marlton Elementary School

8506 Old Colony Drive, South, Upper Marlboro

512

455

81,750

Melwood Elementary School

7100 Woodyard Road, Upper Marlboro

725

643

68,142

Patuxent Elementary School

4410 Bishopmill Drive, Upper Marlboro

606

460

58,579

Rosaryville Elementary School

9925 Rosaryville Road, Upper Marlboro

692

750

76,200

10.1

James Madison Middle School

7300 Woodyard Road, Upper Marlboro

996

816

129,348

Croom Vocational High School

8520 Duvall Road, Upper Marlbroro

103

100

33,695

27.6

Dr. Henry A. Wise Jr. High School

12650 Brooke Lane, Upper Marlboro

2,492

2,606

432,579

Frederick Douglass High School

8000 Croom Road, Upper Marlboro

1,137

1,283

184,417

Public Facilities

121

PUBLIC SCHOOLS

There are 11 public schools in the subregion: seven elementary, one middle, two high schools, and one vocational high school (Map 19 and Table 13). Table 13 only shows information for schools within the subregion. It should be noted that area students are also served by some schools, such as Gwynn Park Middle and High Schools, which are located in Subregion 5. In addition to the schools listed, one new elementary school is currently under construction adjacent to the Dr. Henry Wise, Jr. High School and is expected to open in August 2009. Prince George’s County Public Schools owns four unimproved possible future school sites in the subregion: • Perrywood Farm site located on MD 202 north of Hollow Log Drive. • Two sites in the Beechtree development north of Upper Marlboro. • Brandywine Marlton site located south of Croom Road on the east side of the CSX railroad and Southwest Branch. Future elementary, middle, and high school needs were calculated based on this subregion’s dwelling unit projections (see Subregion Analysis chapter), average pupil generation rates by dwelling unit1, and taking into account current seating capacities.

Mattaponi Elementary School on Duley Station Road is one of eight elementary schools in the subregion.

This plan projects the development of an additional 6,400 dwelling units by 2030. These units will generate need for approximately 1,024 elementary, 832 middle, and 896 high school seats. When taking into consideration the current excess and deficit of school seats in the subregion schools, the area is projected to need an additional 1,287 elementary, 1,012 middle, and 636 high school seats in 2030. This results in the need for one elementary school, one middle school, and one high school. The attendance areas for the high school and middle school are large enough to encompass areas outside of this subregion; therefore, their locations should take into account the fact that they will serve areas beyond Subregion 6. There is an identified need for some additional high school capacity in neighboring Subregion 5. Consequently, a high school should be located in an area that will serve the needs in both subregions in Brandywine. It is anticipated that there will be a need for an additional middle school; it should be located in the Beechtree development to serve areas north of this subregion. The development of new elementary schools is somewhat problematic; although the statistics indicate that there is a need for one more, the subregion is relatively large and bussing students long distances to school is an undesirable practice and does not promote neighborhood schools. This plan is 1 Pupil school yield rates per dwelling unit are 0.16 pupils for elementary schools; 0.13 pupils for middle schools; and 0.14 pupils for high schools.

122

Public Facilities

recommending locating schools in three main growth areas: north of MD 4 in the Beechtree Development; the central part of the subregion in the Andrews-Melwood, Marlton, and Rosaryville area; and in the northern portion of the Rural Tier between Rosaryville and Croom to meet the needs for 2030.

Elementary Schools 1. Beechtree: site is to be conveyed to the Board of Education when a portion of the development is constructed in accordance with the conditions of approval of the subdivision.

School Site Recommendations

2. Brandywine/Marlton site: site is owned by the Board of Education. 3. Rosaryville/Croom: site needs to be acquired.

Middle School Beechtree: site is to be conveyed to the Board of Education when a portion of the development is constructed in accordance with the conditions of approval of the subdivision.

High School Cheltenham: acquire site to serve the students in Subregions 5 and 6. The following standards should be used when considering new sites for schools: • Elementary schools: 10–15 acres • Middle schools: 20–30 acres • High Schools: 40–50 acres The original plan for Marlton recommended a number of school sites that were later determined to be not needed for educational facilities. These sites were later surplused to the county. It is important that the county and the Board of Education work cooperatively with other public agencies to ensure that these properties are not transferred before a full assessment can be made as to whether they may be needed for other public facilities. This is particularly important with the limited availability of public funding for new public facilities. In regard to Marlton, M‑NCPPC has indicated an interest in most of the former school sites for parkland. The use of these sites for public purposes would also keep to the spirit of the Marlton plan to have public facilities at these locations. In addition to assessing school capacities, the physical condition of school buildings and grounds should be studied to determine where resources for upgrades should be allocated. In 2007–2008 Parsons 3D/International, a consulting firm specializing in public facilities planning, conducted a detailed facilities Public Facilities

123

condition assessment of public schools for the Prince George’s County Public Schools. Parsons 3D/I investigated the physical condition of each school facility, both internal and external, and identified which schools required improvements based upon age and the cost of renovation versus the replacement of the facility. The study measured schools based upon a Facilities Condition Index (FCI) which is a measurement of “a facility’s condition represented by the ratio of the cost to correct a school facility’s deficiencies to the current replacement value of the facility.” Schools with an FCI of 0–40 percent are considered to be in good condition. Schools with an FCI of 40–75 percent are considered to be in fair condition. Lastly, schools with a 75 percent or greater FCI are considered to be in poor condition. Schools constructed since 1993 were not evaluated. Table 14 provides the FCI for public schools within the subregion. It should be noted that most of the schools in this subregion are rated in fair condition. Many in fact are very close to being rated poor in condition and should be considered for renovation on a priority basis as funding becomes available.

Table 14 The 3D/I Condition Ranking

Prince George’s County Public School Facilities

SCHOOL NAME

within

Subregion 6

ADDRESS

2008 - 3D/IFCI

Arrowhead Elementary School

2300 Sansbury Road, Upper Marlboro

63.91%

Baden Elementary School

13601 Baden Westwood Road, Brandywine

65.52%

Francis T. Evans Elementary School

6720 Old Alexandria Ferry Road, Clinton

72.06%

Mattaponi Elementary School

11701 Duley Station Road, Upper Marlboro

68.51%

Marlton Elementary School

8506 Old Colony Drive, South, Upper Marlboro

63.45%

Melwood Elementary School

7100 Woodyard Road, Upper Marlboro

66.26%

Patuxent Elementary School

4410 Bishopmill Drive, Upper Marlboro

55.09%

Rosaryville Elementary School

9925 Rosaryville Road, Upper Marlboro

N/A

James Madison Middle School

7300 Woodyard Road, Upper Marlboro

61.81%

Croom Vocational High School

8520 Duvall Road, Upper Marlboro

68.83%

Dr. Henry A. Wise Jr. High School

12650 Brooke Lane, Upper Marlboro

Frederick Douglass High School

8000 Croom Road, Upper Marlboro

124

N/A 25.15%

Public Facilities

Policy 1 Provide residents with conveniently located schools that efficiently serve the population. Strategies 1. Construct public schools of appropriate size and location in order to achieve a school system that operates at 100 percent of capacity or less at each school and meets the needs of the resident population. 2. Construct one elementary school in a location that will serve future residential development without extensive bussing of students. 3. Construct one middle school in the Beechtree development. 4. Acquire a site and construct one high school in the Developing Tier. Locate the proposed high school site on Surratts Road in Cheltenham northwest of US 301 to serve high school students in both Subregions 5 and 6.

Patuxent Elementary School, located in Marlboro Meadows development, shares the facility with the Parks Department as a Park/School.

Policy 2 Combine, when possible, school and community center facilities when renovating or building new facilities. Strategy Consider the renovation or expansion of existing facilities rather than the construction of new schools. The Prince Georgeâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s County Memorial Library System has informed the Planning Department that it has maximized its ability to physically accommodate computers in its existing branches. Access to computers and the internet is becoming a necessity in the 21st century. Providing computers in libraries is especially important for moderate-income communities where families may not own a personal computer or have internet access. New development in the county has had minimal impact on the circulation of print materials according to the Library System. However, internet usage has grown rapidly over the past few years. The library system has recently begun collecting data on computer and internet use in the libraries. That data indicates that public access computers are being fully utilized by the public in the libraries. The growing demand for public access to computers will necessitate larger buildings or other means to provide this service. With the changing use of libraries by county residents, a countywide functional master plan for the library system should be considered to fully explore all of the alternative ways to provide library Public Facilities

LIBRARIES

Multiâ&#x20AC;&#x201C;use public buildings, especially in the rural tier, are an integral part of the communities. 125

services to the public and their implications for new and existing facilities. There are two library branches located in the subregion, one in each development tier: the Baden branch located on BadenWestwood Road in Brandywine and the Upper Marlboro branch located in the former Post Office Building on Main Street in Upper Marlboro (Map 19). These two libraries are among the smallest branches in the countyâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s system. Current library standards recommend one library branch per 40,000 to 80,000 population. The plan projects that by 2030 the population in the subregion will reach approximately 78,000 people. Policy 1 All residents in the Developing Tier should be within ten minutes driving time to a library. Strategies 1. Locate an additional 25,000-square-foot library facility in Subregion 6 in the Developing Tier in close proximity to the Rural Tier to support the projected increase in population past the year 2030. Place a floating symbol on the Future Land Use Map to indicate the need for this facility in the vicinity of Rosaryville, Marlton, and Melwood. Health Service buildings are another community focal point in rural areas.

2. Consider alternative methods of providing services and alternative facilities to meet todayâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s technological needs including the adaptive reuse of existing buildings where appropriate. Consider co-locating the new library facility in the planned new community center. Policy 2 Continue to meet the increasing demand for computing and internet technology. Strategies 1. Continue alternative methods of providing services to meet todayâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s technological needs of communities. 2. Investigate ways to enhance the Baden library service center to meet the needs of the rural community.

126

Public Facilities

The Public Safety Facilities Master Plan (PSFMP), approved in March 2008, contains standards for police facilities. That plan states that “The International Association of Chiefs of Police (IACP) recommends that space requirements for specific public safety agencies are based on the particular use and function of the structure. Generally, the IACP recommends 250–300 square feet of space per staff member in the building. A number of police departments in the country are conducting in-depth space requirement studies and constructing buildings based on the operational functions conducted in the space, as well as staff growth projections.” The PSFMP recommends that a space study be conducted prior to the construction or renovation of any police facility.

PUBLIC SAFETY Police

The Prince George’s Police Department is the primary law enforcement agency in the county. The Sheriff ’s main office is currently located in Largo with another office east of the Town of Upper Marlboro. The PSFMP recommends as a longer-term priority the relocation of the Sheriff ’s office to Upper Marlboro. The Sheriff provides building security for the courts, which requires a significant number of employees to be present in Upper Marlboro. Subregion 6 is served by two county police stations. The District II station, located on US 301 in Bowie, serves the portion of the subregion north of MD 4, including the Town of Upper Marlboro. The remainder of the subregion is served by the District V station located on Groveton Drive in Clinton. The PSFMP recommends relocating this station to Subregion 6. The District V station is located along the outer edge of the patrol area and is not in the center of its area of responsibility. This remote location and lack of visibility in the community has led to a perception in the community that there is lack of police presence, according to the PSFMP. Moving the station to a more central and visible location will reduce travel times and reassure the community as to its presence. The Prince George’s County Correctional Center is located on Dille Drive in Upper Marlboro. The facility has a capacity of approximately 1,300 inmates in minimum-, medium-, and maximum-security sections. In order to respond to the rising trends in incarceration the county experienced from 2005 through 2007, the FY 2009 CIP calls for improvements to the Correctional Center, including construction of additional inmate housing and a residential treatment and detoxification center. Five fire and rescue stations are located in the master plan area: Company 20 (Upper Marlboro—Pratt Street), Company 45 (Upper Marlboro—Croom Road), Company 40 (Brandywine), Company 36 (Baden), and Company 23 (Forestville) (see Map 19). The volunteer fire stations and personnel play an important role in the community and subregion in addition to responding to emergencies. Public Facilities

Fire and Rescue

127

Their facilities serve as community focal points providing meeting spaces and other services the area would otherwise not have. According to the PSFMP, based on current service demands and facility adequacy as well as future projected need, all five existing stations in the subregion will need to either be renovated or replaced by the year 2030. In addition, the construction of two additional facilities will be necessary to support projected population growth. The Volunteer Fire Departments, like this one in Baden, serve the residents of the area and are highly supported by the community.

Portions of Subregion 6 do not have fire hydrants because these areas are not served, and are not planned to be served, by a public water system. In these areas the PSFMP recommends the construction of 19 underground water tanks to hold water for use in fighting fires (see Map 20). To ensure that funding is prioritized for public safety the following are top priority projects for fire/EMS and police facilities in Subregion 6: 1. Complete the relocation of Brandywine Fire/EMS station (Company 40) to the vicinity of Brandywine Road and Dyson Road. 2. Construct 19 strategic underground water tanks capable of holding 30,000 gallons of water to provide an emergency water supply to areas without fire hydrants 3. Relocate District V police station with Fire/EMS Company 45 in the vicinity of the US 301 and Rosaryville Road. The following policies and strategies reaffirm the recommendations of the PSFMP.

The rural tier portion of the subregion is not served with water and there are dry hydrants throughout the area to provide the volunteers with water.

Policy 1 Locate police, public safety and fire and rescue facilities to meet the needs of the community as determined in the PSFMP. Strategies 1. Construct planned improvements at the County Correctional Center. 2. Complete renovation of the Baden Fire/EMS station by 2009. 3. Relocate the Office of the Sheriff to Upper Marlboro to better meet its security responsibilities for the court system.

128

Public Facilities

MAP 19: RECOMMENDED LOCATIONS FOR UNDERGROUND WATER TANKS

Public Facilities

129

Policy 2 Provide fire and rescue facilities that meet the needs of the community based upon established county standards and their ability to accommodate modern vehicles and equipment. Strategies Brandywine VFD is located on the western edge of the subregion on Brandywine Road.

1. Give highest priority to the relocation of the Brandywine Fire/ EMS Station (Company 40) to the vicinity of Brandywine Road and Dyson Road. 2. Acquire sites for the future construction of the following rural fire stations identified in the PSFMP as long term proposals: • Aquasco Fire and EMS Station to be located in the vicinity of Aquasco Road and Doctor Bowen Road. • Nottingham Fire and EMS Station to be located in the vicinity of Croom Road and Tanyard Road. 3. Construct strategic underground water tanks capable of holding 30,000 gallons of water to provide emergency water supply to areas without fire hydrants. 4. Relocate the District V police station to a shared facility with the Fire/EMS Company 45 in the vicinity of US 301 and Rosaryville Road in Subregion 6. 5. Relocate the Marlboro Fire/EMS Station (Company 20) to a more centrally located site.

M-NCPPC has many neighborhood parks throughout the subregion.

6. Relocate the Forestville Fire/EMS Station (Company 23) to the vicinity of Melwood Road and MD 4 identified in the PSFMP. 7. Construct a new fire/EMS station at Beechtree,which is needed to provide service to an area that is currently underserved.

PARKS AND RECREATION

The Prince George’s County Department of Parks and Recreation is committed to providing attractive, safe, functional park spaces, and wide-ranging recreation programs to the county’s citizens. Within Subregion 6, a comprehensive network of parks and open spaces fulfills this commitment by providing opportunities for both passive and active recreation. These facilities range from small neighborhood parks and playgrounds to scenic historic sites to the vast Patuxent River Park. To ensure that funding is prioritized for park development a fifty-acre addition to the approximately 14 acres of park land acquired from the Winshire development is a top priority project in Subregion 6.

130

Public Facilities

The list below describes the seven basic categories of M-NCPPC facilities in the subregion: 1. Neighborhood Park and Recreation Areas— includes miniparks, playgrounds, parks, recreation centers, and park/schools with acreage of less than 20 acres. These parks are designed to serve residents who live in their immediate vicinity. The following park and recreation facilities in Subregion 6 fall into this category: Brandywine Country Neighborhood Park Federal Springs Neighborhood Park Hollaway Estates Neighborhood Park Marlboro Meadows Neighborhood Park Marlton Neighborhood Park Marlton Neighborhood Park/School Mellwood Pond Neighborhood Park Sasscer Neighborhood Park Turkey Branch Neighborhood Park Village Drive Neighborhood Park Windsor Park Neighborhood Playground

The Patuxent River.

2. Community Park and Recreation Areas—includes community parks, recreation centers, and cultural centers between 20 and 200 acres. Neighborhood and community park areas are classified as local parks. The following park and recreation facilities in Subregion 6 fall into this category: Beechtree East Community Park Beechtree West Community Park Brandywine-North Keys Community Park Brock Hall Gardens Community Park Cheltenham woods Community Park Foxchase Community Park King’s Grant Community Park Marlton Community Park Mellwood Hills Community Park Melwood-Westphalia Community Park Sherwood Forest Community Park South Marlton Community Park 3. Community Centers—includes all community center facilities, which offer indoor amenities such as gymnasiums, meeting rooms, kitchens, multipurpose activity rooms, weight/fitness rooms, and preschool rooms. Outdoor amenities vary from site to site and typically include combinations of play equipment, athletic fields, multipurpose courts, picnic areas, and trails. The

Public Facilities

The Patuxent River view from a canoe.

Mount Calvert is one of the most significant historical and archaeological sites in Prince George's County. It's rich archaeological and historical resources represent over 8000 years of human culture. 131

following park and recreation facilities in Subregion 6 fall into this category: Baden Community Center Patuxent Community Center Upper Marlboro Community Center

Darnall's Chance House Museum is dedicated to the interpretation and study of the history and culture of 18th century Prince George's County with special emphasis on the lives of women.

4. Regional Park and Recreation Areas—includes stream valley parks and regional parks (parks with more than 200 acres). These facilities serve residents of an entire region within the county. The following park and recreation facilities in Subregion 6 fall into this category: Charles Branch Stream Valley Park Collington Branch Stream Valley Park Mattawoman Watershed Stream Valley Park Piscataway Creek Stream Valley Park Western Branch Stream Valley Park 5. Countywide Park and Recreation Areas—includes large river parks. Parks in this category are available to all county residents. Patuxent River Park in Subregion 6 falls into this category. The following areas are distinct sites within the extensive Patuxent River Park: Aquasco Farm Cedar Haven Natural Area Jug Bay Natural Area Magruder’s Ferry

Nottingham Schoolhouse, in the old town of Nottingham, stands where the British troops camped on their way to Bladensburg during the summer of 1814.

6. Historic Sites—includes all historically significant sites and landmarks. Some of these locations are part of larger parks, but they are distinct sites within those parks. The following park and recreation facilities in Subregion 6 fall into this category: Billingsley Historic Site Darnall’s Chance Historic Site Mount Calvert Historic Site Nottingham School Historic Site The Woodyard Historic Site 7. Special Park and Recreation Areas—includes aquatic facilities, ice rinks, golf courses, shooting centers, athletic complexes, equestrian centers, airports, marinas, and reclamation areas. In addition, this category includes unique natural features, conservation areas, and small park areas in developed settings. These facilities are available to all county residents. The following park and recreation facilities in Subregion 6 fall into this category: Chesapeake Beach Railroad Trail School House Pond Conservation Area Showplace Arena at Prince George’s Equestrian Center Upper Marlboro Pedestrian Mall

132

Public Facilities

In addition to park and recreation facilities operated by M-NCPPC, there are two large state parks and a state wildlife management area within Subregion 6. The state parks are Cedarville State Forest and Rosaryville State Park. These parks provide extensive trail networks for hiking, biking, horse-back riding, and birding. In addition, a fishing area, picnic shelters, and camping facilities are available at Cedarville State Forest. The historic Mt. Airy Mansion is located within Rosaryville State Park. Mt. Airy is available to the public by reservation for special events. The Maryland Department of Natural Resources operates Cheltenham Wildlife Management Area (WMA), located along US 301 in Cheltenham. This WMA offers walking trails, an archery range, and a designated area where dove hunting is allowed by permit. There are approximately 13,700 acres of local and regional parks, recreation and public open space land in Subregion 6 (Map 21). Of this total: • Approximately 60 percent is owned by M-NCPPC and 40 percent is owned by the state. • Approximately 2,750 acres are in the Developing Tier and approximately 10,950 acres are in the Rural Tier2.

Many acres of publically owned park land are rented to farmers to keep the land productive in agriculture throughout the subregion.

• Approximately 12,970 acres are “regional” park land (e.g., Patuxent River Park, Cedarville State Forest, and Rosaryville State Park) and approximately 740 acres is local park land consisting mainly of neighborhood and community parks. There is one freestanding community center in Subregion 6 in Upper Marlboro, and two community facilities co-located with elementary schools in Marlboro Meadows and Baden. Private open space helps satisfy local recreation demand in the subregion, including golf courses in Marlton, the Villages of Marlborough, and Beechtree, as well as the open space network

A flock of Canadian Geese are resting at Merkel Wildlife Management Area.

Part of the Rural Tier is located outside of the Metropolitan Planning District (MPD). Residents living within the MPD pay taxes which support both the Recreation Fund (primarily acquisition) and the Park Fund (primarily development), while those living outside of the district contribute solely to the Recreation Fund. Acquisition of park land outside the MPD is allowed; however, development of park land in this area cannot be funded with monies collected within the MPD. 2

Public Facilities

133

MAP 20: PUBLIC PARKS, RECREATION, AND OPEN SPACE

134

Public Facilities

in planned developments such as Marlboro Meadows and Beechtree. The majority of local park land is located in the Developing Tier. Approximately 315 acres are north of MD 4 in Upper Marlboro and communities to the north. Approximately 390 acres are south of MD 4 in the communities of Andrews Air Force Base-Melwood, Marlton, and Rosaryville. The Prince Georgeâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s County Department of Parks and Recreation is continually working to expand and improve park facilities throughout the county. The supply of parklands is based on state formulas, which evaluate park acreage per 1,000 residents. Two strategies are pursued. The local parks formula stipulates setting aside 15 acres of local parkland for every 1,000 residents. The regional parkland formula recommends that 20 acres of parkland, or open space, be set aside for every 1,000 residents.

Needs

The Subregion 6 population is projected to be approximately 78,000 by 2030 (Table 2). Based on county park and recreation acreage standards, a total of approximately 1,170 acres of local park land and 1,560 acres of regional park land will be needed to serve this population. Currently, Subregion 6 meets the future criteria for the regional parkland totals. This is largely due to the expansive Patuxent River Park area and other features such as Rosaryville State Park, Collington Branch Stream Valley Park, Charles Branch Stream Valley Park, and the Western Branch Stream Valley Park. Local parkland acquisition should still be pursued. This is especially true in Planning Areas 79 and 82A. These areas, which are inside the Metropolitan Planning District, are expected to have the greatest increase in population. More local parkland acquisition is required to meet the minimum standards recommended by the stateâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s formula. The current inventory shows an abundance of regional park land (12,970 acres), greatly exceeding projected need (1,560 acres) for this type of land. Population growth in the subregion will increase the demand for recreational programs and activities at community centers. An expansion to the existing Baden Community Center has been proposed. In addition, residents have expressed the desire and the Department of Parks and Recreation has identified a need for a community center to serve the Rosaryville, Melwood, and Marlton communities.

Public Facilities

135

Policy 1 Provide adequate park and recreation acreage consistent with the following standards:3 • A minimum of 15 acres of M-NCPPC local park land for every 1,000 residents (or the equivalent amenity in parks and recreation service). • A minimum of 20 acres of regional, countywide, and special M-NCPPC parks for every 1,000 residents. Strategies 1. Develop the 50-acre addition to the approximately 14 acres of park land acquired from the Winshire development. 2. Develop the 160-acre community park on the east side of Ritchie Marlboro Road. 3. Develop the 25 acres for a neighborhood park and trailhead southeast of Ritchie Marlboro and White House Roads. 4. Develop the 100-acre parcel within proposed Beechtree (northern part) with potential access from Town Farm Road. 5. Develop the 100-acre park located on both sides of Brown Station Road just south of the landfill. Policy 2 Provide a variety of recreational facilities and programs based on the needs and interests of the community. Strategies 1. Develop the 30 acres for a neighborhood park north of Charles Branch. 2. Develop the .28-acre addition to Windsor Park Neighborhood Playground. 3. Develop the 50-acre community park west of Frank Tippet Road, adjoining Dower House Pond Branch and Piscataway Creek 4. Develop the eight-acre Marlton Middle School/Park. 5. Develop the 30-acre community park north of Osborne Road. 6. Develop the two-to-three acre addition to Melwood Community Pond. 7. Develop the 150-acre Lake Marlton Community Park. The standards are established in the 2002 Prince George’s County Approved General Plan based on recommended standards by the National Recreation and Parks Association and the State of Maryland. 3

136

Public Facilities

8. Develop a 200-acre regional community park facility with a variety of active recreational programs and activities within the southern, rural portion of the subregion. Policy 3 Develop park and recreation facilities that are functional, safe, and sensitive to the surrounding environment. Strategies 1. Construct a new community center to serve the communities of Rosaryville, Marlton, and Melwood. 2. Construct the addition to the Baden Community Center. 3. Combine community centers with schools. Policy 4 Conserve stream valleys and other valuable natural resource areas. Strategies 1. Acquire land for active and passive parkland in the Collington Branch, Charles Branch, Western Branch, Hotchkins Branch, and Rock Branch Creek Stream Valley Parks. 2. Acquire land for natural resources preservation and passive recreation along Black Swamp Creek, Mataponi Creek, and Patuxent River Park. For the past 15 years, the Prince Georgeâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Equestrian Center has been home to the Show Place Arena. When construction was completed in November 1993, the Show Place Arena opened a new venue and brought new life to the aging thoroughbred racetrack.

Prince Georgeâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Equestrian Center and the Show Place Arena

Located adjacent to the historic outdoor track, the Show Place Arena was built to accommodate indoor equestrian events. Since that time, the Show Place Arena has hosted sporting events, trade shows, banquets, graduations, family entertainment, and conferences. To provide flexibility for such a large range of events, the arena is designed as a top-loaded facility. This means that the floor sits 12 to 15 feet below ground level. As a result, a large number of seats are at street level. Additionally, the arena features retractable floor seating. While the arena can accommodate 3,000 people in a theater-style setting, an additional 3,000 bleacher style seats double the indoor seating capacity. The concrete floor provides unlimited loading so that the arena can host a wide variety of venues and is suitable for many types of functions.

Public Facilities

137

Economic Impacts

The Equestrian Center is home to the nationally renowned Capital Challenge Horse Show and is known as one of the best horse show facilities in the United States.

The Show Place Arena has proven to be an economic engine for the Town of Upper Marlboro and Prince George’s County. In 2007, more than one-quarter million people visited events held there. This generated a financial stream of more than $7.2 million dollars for the Equestrian Center. Coupled with the business that this arena drives to other areas of the county, through food, beverages, gas purchases, shopping, hotel rentals, and job creation, the financial impacts of this facility provide millions of dollars to the local economy. The Capital Challenge Horse Show hosted by the arena each year brings people from across the United States. Hotel rooms throughout the county fill to capacity as a result of this show. In past years, up to 11,000 rooms have been booked to participants of this event. This brings the Prince George’s Equestrian Center and the Town of Upper Marlboro nationwide recognition. The facility is known as one of the best horse show facilities in the United States. As a result, the Equestrian Center and the Show Place Arena enjoy national notoriety while catering to the region as well.

Equestrians of all ages compete at mounted games at the Equestrian Center/Show Place Arena.

The immediate plans for the Prince George’s Equestrian Center and the Show Place Arena are to attract bigger shows with a longer duration and shows with more national appeal. The question remains as to how to best accomplish this effort. Policy Expand and enhance the Show Place Arena to create a unique attraction that maximizes its economic potential to the area and the county and its role in promoting the equine industry in Subregion 6. Strategies 1. Provide an up-scale hotel on the Prince George’s Equestrian Center site. 2. Provide a minimum of 2,000 parking spaces. Develop structured parking if necessary. 3. Expand areas around the Equestrian Center to allow for more trailer and RV parking. 4. Create shopping and dining experiences (in town and within walking distance of the Equestrian Center). 5. Develop strong pedestrian ties to town.

138

Public Facilities

6. Develop strong pedestrian ties to the Show Place Arena. 7. M-NCPPC should collaborate with the Town of Upper Marlboro to work across the board to make improvements to the Town of Upper Marlboro so that all events and historic and nonhistoric features work for each other and combine to form a new synergy. 8. Tie Prince George’s Equestrian Center and the Upper Marlboro Community Center to town via a pedestrian bridge across the Western Branch near the courthouse. Pedestrians from town could visit the community center or the Soil Conservation District Offices; 9. Tie Prince George’s Equestrian Center to downtown Upper Marlboro through the use of a trail system that connects the new community center with the town. Create a loop trail that connects the center and new development at the Equestrian Center with strong pedestrian circulation components. 10. Ensure that all proposed site improvements at the Prince George’s Equestrian Center and the Show Place Arena follow green building principles and include permeable parking surfaces, stormwater retention, and lighting in compliance with dark sky initiatives. Sustainable communities conserve, reduce consumption, reuse products, and recycle. The community looks at the long-term consequences of its consumption practices. Waste is disposed of in a way that has the least environmental impact that will not pollute the land, water, or air.

SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT/ RECYCLING

The Waste Management Group (WMG), a section of the Department of Environmental Resources, manages solid waste in Prince George’s County. In Subregion 6 solid waste pickup is provided in most of the Developing Tier, generally north of MD 4, west of US 301, and in Marlton. The county contracts with private waste haulers to collect the waste. The county’s primary waste facility is the Brown Station Road Municipal Solid Waste Facility about four miles north of the Town of Upper Marlboro. The facility will reach its permitted capacity in 2011. The county has decided not to develop a new landfill within the county, and instead intends to ship its refuse to one of the large, commercial landfills operating in the Mid-Atlantic region. Consequently, the county needs to develop a transfer facility where refuse would be consolidated for shipment. The site for the new facility is off Maude Savoy Brown Road, southeast of Upper Marlboro, to be co-located with the yard waste composting facility and Western Branch WWTP. Truck traffic will increase on US 301 through Upper Marlboro. The Transportation Systems chapter recommends a traffic analysis be conducted, including

Public Facilities

139

consideration of off-ramps from the future US 301 freeway to the transfer station access road. The county has an aggressive recycling program that as of 2008 achieves a recovery rate of 39 percent. A trash and recycling drop-off convenience center is located on Brown Station Road, just north of Upper Marlboro. Another center, located in Subregion 5 on Missouri Avenue in Brandywine, is in close proximity to the southern portion of Subregion 6. A private construction and demolition material recycling facility is located on Dower House Road. Policy 1 Promote conservation of resources by minimizing the solid waste stream through source reduction and recycling. Strategies 1. Create an education and outreach program with local business to promote source reduction, re-use/recycle (i.e., decrease packaging). 2. Increase recyclingâ&#x20AC;&#x201D;consider mandatory recycling where cost effective. 3. Continue to monitor the needs for recycling. Policy 2 Minimize traffic impacts from a proposed waste transfer facility in the subregion. Strategies 1. Finalize planning for the solid waste transfer facility to determine access routes that are the least intrusive to residential areas. 2. Coordinate traffic access to the transfer facility site with future planning of US 301. Policy 3 Promote safe disposal of hazardous waste throughout the subregion. Strategies 1. Provide educational forums for the public on safe alternatives to using toxic compounds.

140

Public Facilities

MAP 21: WESTERN BRANCH WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT SERVICE AREA 1 97

MONTGOMERY COUNTY

270

270 95

495

DISTRICT OF 1COLUMBIA 66

ANNE ARUNDEL COUNTY

301

395

66 395

301

495

395 395

295 395 395 395

CALVERT COUNTY CHARLES COUNTY

Legend

301

Western Branch WWTP Service Area

Major Roads

2.5

Scale in Miles

Subregion 6

RIV P AT UX E NT

Western Branch WWTP

Map 22: Western Branch Wastewater Treatment Plant Service Area Public Facilities

141

Table 15 Capacity Analysis Western Branch Wastewater Treatment Plant Millions of Gallons/Day 1

Current Design Capacity

30.0

Current Flow (source: WSSC, Second Quarter 2008)

20.4

Pending Allocations/Requests for Service (WSSC)

5.3

Committed Flow (WSSC)

0.2

Total (sum of lines 2-4)

25.9

Remaining Capacity (source:WSSC; line 1 minus line 5)

4.1

M-NCPPC planned and pipeline not included in WSSC data

3.7

Remaining capacity (WSSC and M-NCPPC, line 6 minus line 7)

0.4

Sources: ERM, M-NCPPC, and WSSC

2. Investigate creating local drop-off centers at least twice a year for hazardous wastes. 3. Support an annual household hazardous waste collection day program and consider expanding to more days throughout the year.

WATER AND SEWER SERVICE

Areas eligible for public water and sewer service are designated in the Prince George’s County Water and Sewer Plan prepared by the county’s Department of Environmental Resources. In general, the Developing Tier is eligible for service and the Rural Tier is not. Prince George’s County is developing a countywide water resources functional plan, The plan is expected to be completed for the Planning Board to approve permission to print the document for public review in late 20094. The purpose of that plan is to analyze the relationship between existing and future development, the drinking water sources and waste water facilities that will be necessary to serve that development, and measures to limit or control the stormwater and nonpoint source water pollution that will be generated by new development. The water and sewer section in this chapter is intended to inform the countywide plan.

Drinking Water

Public water in the Developing Tier portion of the subregion is provided by the Washington Suburban Sanitary Commission (WSSC) from its system of reservoirs along the Patuxent River and from direct withdrawals from the Potomac River. No specific concerns have been raised about WSSC’s future ability to provide drinking water to its service area, including Subregion 6. The countywide water resources functional plan is expected to provide a more detailed discussion of future water supplies. H.B. 1141 approved by the Maryland legislature in 2006 requires that a comprehensive plan contain a “Water Resources Element.” 4

142

Public Facilities

Wastewater from most of the Developing Tier in Subregion 6 flows by gravity and is treated at Western Branch Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP) located southeast of the Town of Upper Marlboro. Wastewater from the remaining, western portions of the Developing Tier, including most of Andrews Air Force Base, is treated at Piscataway WWTP located in Subregion 5. Western Branch WWTP’s service area is large, extending north of Subregion 6 into portions of Bowie (Map 22).

Wastewater

The current treatment capacity of Western Branch is 30 million gallons per day (mgd). Flows in 2008 were approximately 20.4 mgd. Pending allocations/requests for service for approved development plus committed flows total 5.5 mgd for a total of 25.9 mgd, leaving approximately 4.1 mgd of remaining capacity (Table 15). An additional 3.7 mgd of capacity will be needed to serve planned and pipeline development that WSSC is not yet counting as pending allocations or requests for service. Future development in Westphalia accounts for the largest portion of this. When this 3.7 mgd is added, the remaining capacity at Western Branch WWTP will be only 0.4 mgd. In the past, until approximately the mid-2000s, expanding WWTPs was a fairly routine procedure. However, the state has now capped nutrient load discharges from WWTPs and new point source nutrient loads must be offset, making future WWTP expansions more difficult than in the past5. Therefore, the county will likely need to consider more carefully than in the past the effect of land use on sewer demand. Increasing demand for sewer in one part of the subregion or in another subregion may mean that in the future sewer capacity will not be available in places such as Westphalia that are designated for growth. Plans for WWTP expansions usually begin when a plant approaches 80 percent of capacity. Based on past average increases in flow at the Western Branch WWTP, the plant will reach the 30 mgd capacity in about 24 years. However, capacity could be reached sooner if Westphalia builds out as rapidly as hoped, if the housing market rebounds and results in higher demand for sewer in the subregion, and/or if significant additional development not currently in the pipeline occurs elsewhere in the Western Branch service area. Policy 1 Provide adequate public water and sewer service to areas eligible for service. Strategies 1. Consider carefully land use changes in the subregion in view of the potential effects on sewer demand. Maryland Policy for Nutrient Cap Management and Trading in Maryland’s Chesapeake Bay Watershed (February 2008) 5

Public Facilities

143

2. Complete the countywide water resources functional plan. 3. Develop a strategy to work with WSSC on updated unit projections and start discussions about how capacity can be expanded. Policy 2 Ensure that sewer capacity at Western Branch WWTP is available to meet regionally important growth needs. Strategies 1. Keep future sewer service expansions conservative until the potential to increase capacity at Western Branch is better understood. 2. Carefully monitor flows to Western Branch WWTP. Policy 3 Promote conservation of resources to conserve water Strategies 1. Provide public education on water conservation to reduce demands on aquifers and wastewater disposal. 2. Identify and require the correction of malfunctioning septic systems. 3. Require demand modification (reduction in water usage per capita) by installing conservation in public buildings and encourage individuals to do the same in their houses.

144

Public Facilities

ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT

Subregion 6 Approved Master Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

The 2002 General Plan for Prince George’s County states that, except for the provision of high-quality schools, quality economic development is the highest countywide priority. In Subregion 6, the recognition is that rural areas also act to strengthen urban and suburban areas by serving as a local, secure source for agricultural and forest products, mineral resources, tourism and recreation opportunities, etc. Reinvigorating these industries will provide jobs and contribute to a more diversified economy in the subregion and county. Creating a sustainable region requires developing a dynamic, sustainable economy to support the communities that participate in it, while also finding ways in which economic activity can contribute to restoration of ecological function rather than environmental degradation. Solutions must address problems creatively and holistically, conserving resources while providing economic development opportunities for current and future generations. The long-term implications of decisions must be considered in addition to the short-term ones, particularly as they relate to providing needed infrastructure and development opportunities, creating a favorable business climate with predictable regulations and adequate incentives, having a dynamic, trained workforce, and more. Sustainability goals that relate to economic development in Subregion 6 include: • Work toward an economy that is healthy, diversified, and globally competitive, that enhances ecosystems rather than degrades them, that provides all citizens with ample opportunities for fulfilling work, and that increases the county’s tax base. • Preserve the current and future diversity of opportunities for economic development available in the Developing and Rural Tiers through strategic planning and clustering of industry, employment, and retail around existing development and transportation networks. The development pattern recommendations in the General Plan and the land use recommendations in this master plan set the framework for future economic development. With the public employment at Joint Base Andrews (JBA) and in Upper Marlboro, along with the private employment around those areas, Subregion 6 has a strong employment base from which to work. Economic development in the Developing Tier portion of the subregion is focused on these employment areas. Economic Development

EMPLOYMENT

145

Industrial development around JBA is a mix of smaller businesses, many operating out of former single-family homes, and larger employment parks. The Future Land Use Map expands industrial lands east of JBA in acknowledgement of the potential for future employment growth in this area as well as the need to promote a land use that is compatible with the negative noise impacts from JBA. New industrial development should be focused on consolidating parcels to create new employment parks to attract major employers with higher-paying jobs.

An office building just outside the Town of Upper Marlboro.

Industrial employment areas are conveniently located near Joint Base Andrews.

This area represents a significant opportunity for employment growth because of the reallocation of personnel to JBA related to the Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC). The number of personnel assigned to JBA is expected to increase by 2,700 before 2020. A portion of this increase (400 positions) is due to BRAC and is expected by 2011. The balance is related to Department of Defense reassignments to be completed by 2018. In addition, “spin-off ” jobs can also be expected. While much of this growth can be absorbed by the new development planned for Westphalia, some employment uses are expected to locate in the area of Subregion 6 north and east of the base. Prince George’s County initiated a Joint Land Use Study (JLUS) with JBA in fall 2008. This study will make recommendations to ensure a future balance between community interests and the military mission at JBA. The traffic patterns in this area, which have changed with the upgrading of the base’s commercial entrance on Dower House Road, will be closely investigated as part of this study. In order to more adequately serve both the base and future employment uses in this area, the widening of Dower House Road will need to be addressed. The area to the east of the Town of Upper Marlboro along MD 725 also represents an opportunity for increased employment. In addition to government employment, there is a significant amount of industrially zoned land in the northwest quadrant of MD 4 and US 301. Development of this area is fragmented and much of the land is underutilized with older commercial miscellaneous uses that have developed over the last 40 years. Given its key location, the area offers an opportunity for revitalization and redevelopment to attract higher quality jobs. With the upgrading of US 301, planned relocation of MD 202, and the area’s location at the entrance to the county seat, plans should be developed to promote and incentivize

146

Economic Development

a better mix of uses. This plan recommends that an action plan for the US 301/MD 725 industrial area and the commercial shopping centers along US 301 be conducted to build on recommendations in this master plan. Additional infrastructure improvements will be necessary to support new development in this area. In order to attract new development and retain existing businesses, the county should promote a modern communications system to serve the area. The installation of fiber optic cable to provide broadband service is essential to attracting modern industries. The county must also develop and implement economic development strategies and programs to attract more private employers that will improve the tax base as well as provide quality jobs to area residents. Policy 1 Intensify and grow economic development at strategic locations zoned for industrial and commercial uses to increase employment opportunities, income, and the tax base within Prince Georgeâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s County and the subregion. Strategies 1. Ensure that adequate amounts of land are available for economic development while avoiding over-zoning land as commercial that encourages sprawl and inhibits revitalization efforts. 2. Capitalize on employment growth at Joint Base Andrews and the Town of Upper Marlboro government employment center to promote compatible infill development that will attract an improved mix of private employment. 3. Work with business and property owners to take advantage of county, state, and other incentives; financing programs, grants, etc., to spur redevelopment. 4. Support redevelopment and revitalization of existing employment areas rather than greenfield development. 5. Encourage the consolidation of properties to promote the development of planned employment parks to attract major employers. 6. Investigate the appropriateness of creating minimumsize standards in industrially zoned areas to discourage the development of small, fragmented employment areas, particularly the conversion of single-family homes to industrial uses. 7. Promote public/private partnerships to encourage private development near government facilities. Economic Development

147

8. Create incentives, including the funding and construction of critical roads, to promote the intensification of employment growth in these centers. 9. Study further development opportunities and strategies for redeveloping the industrial areas. 10. Study the Melwood commercial area to develop recommendations for the revitalization and potential new development. Consider future improvements to Dower House Road and compatibility with Joint Base Andrews Naval Air Facility Washington. Policy 2 Attract a diversity of new jobs and employers to the subregion, retaining and supporting existing employers so that residents have employment options near their homes. Strategies 1. Plan for the installation of modern communications infrastructure throughout key employment and industry clusters in the subregion. 2. Continue to support the attraction and retention of federal government installations at Joint Base Andrews, especially those which spin off and support business in the private sector. 3. Use public and private resources and partnerships to attract, support, and train employees in all employment sectors, but especially those that support BRAC needs. 4. Encourage the development of business incubators that can support other employment or community revitalization goals. 5. Implement incentive programs to attract new businesses that employ high-wage earners in Subregion 6. 6. Expand the countyâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s minority-owned businesses as part of the development of employment uses. 7. Reduce energy demand from employment activities by colocating enterprises that can convert waste to energy, attracting employers committed to reducing energy usage in their operations, using local suppliers whenever possible. 8. Investigate opportunities for promoting green industries.

AGRICULTURE

Agriculture in Subregion 6 is an important rural industry with countywide economic impacts. It is a geographically expansive and culturally important economic activity in the subregion. As of 20021, the subregion supported approximately 210 farms generating nearly $5.7 million in sales and supporting approximately 525 1

148

â&#x20AC;&#x192; The most recent Census of Agriculture Economic Development

jobs. The success of agriculture in the subregion, and indeed the county, is predicated on access to high-quality agricultural soils, strong markets for farm output, and access to service and supply industries. The State of Maryland’s Tobacco Buyout Program, initiated in 2000, has created a period of realignment and uncertainty in the agriculture industry that has impacted both its structure and profitability. Farm income fell, with the average farm losing nearly $3,500 per year between 1997 and 2002. The consequences are a dramatic decline in farm profitability and investment as farmers seek alternatives to tobacco production as the primary cash crop, which historically provided up to 65 percent of farm income. Farmers are looking toward their suburban and urban neighbors as a source of new markets, and are crafting their farm transition plans to meet the demands of these consumers. The structural change is toward smaller and more nimble farm operations that often offer a more diversified array of goods such as produce, livestock, equine, and agritourism events rather than traditional grain and tobacco operations. Through the public input for the Subregion 6 plan, farmers and other rural landowners raised several issues that are important to the future growth of the agricultural industry: • In order to effectively manage an agricultural transition, farmers need to have a suite of regulatory and incentive-based tools available to them to protect access to productive land as a means for expansion and growth. In addition, farmers are concerned that land use policies such as down-zoning would reduce the equity in the land base and their ability to use that equity to finance growth and retirement. • Farmers indicated a need to adapt to modern production and marketing techniques by integrating processing, retailing, agritourism, and production into their on-site operations. • With the increased residential development that has occurred in the Rural Tier, farmers indicated a strong desire to have the necessary legal protections to practice the business of agriculture. Such protections include better protection from nuisance claims and an arbitration system to keep such claims out of the courts and reduce the cost of legal defense.

A cluster of agricultural buildings near Nottingham.

• Farmers need the ability to use land for a greater variety of agriculturally related uses such as farm-based marketing and processing, consolidation of livestock for shipment or sales, wine grapes, and agritourism. This would allow farmers to specialize their production base and production infrastructure Economic Development

149

while expanding their capacity to sell local farm products (some produced by other farmers in Prince George’s County) at onfarm retail stands. • The service and supply industries in the county have significantly diminished since the loss of the tobacco market. The lack of infrastructure particularly influences emerging industry clusters such as equine, wineries, organic produce, and horticulture, whose small size makes scale-efficient purchases difficult and forces farmers to travel farther and pay more for inputs. Increasing the presence of support industries is important to the overall redevelopment of the agricultural economy. • Young and beginning farmers, and nontraditional agricultural operations such as agritourism and aquaculture, need access to capital to finance their operations. They typically cannot access traditional funding sources such as commercial banks but are critical players in today’s agricultural economy that should not be overlooked. In response to the above issues, M-NCPPC worked with a consultant to produce an agricultural market analysis in the fall of 2008.The findings are intended to become a cornerstone of future agricultural development programming and market support. The report, entitled Prince George’s County Strategic Program for Agricultural Development (SPAD), was completed in early 2009. Recognizing both the prominence of Subregion 6 in the agricultural sector, as well as the other critical resource lands and unique agricultural industry sectors outside of the subregion, the report and recommendations are countywide in scope. Many of the recommendations were already included in the plan in this chapter and, to some extent, in the Land Use and Development Pattern chapter. SPAD offers additional detail on the transition that the agricultural industry continues to undergo and the challenges and opportunities at hand as the tobacco buyout comes to an end. Strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats (SWOT) to the industry are enumerated fully in the SPAD. Weaknesses identified parallel many of those mentioned in this plan (e.g., an aging farm population, high land values, and parcel fragmentation). Strengths include the county’s large, relatively wealthy population, strong local demand, strong food manufacturing employment, and more. Also elaborated on are external opportunities and threats, such as growth in the demand for “local” food, the rise of nontraditional sectors, the continued rising cost of agricultural inputs, and uncertainty in labor laws. In addition to the SWOT analysis, the countywide economic impact of agriculture is discussed on a sector-by-sector basis looking at equine, livestock and poultry, horticulture, produce, field crops and forage, and dairy activity in the county. Data on food 150

Economic Development

manufacturing is also provided, which together with food wholesale in the county, remain prominent but weakening sectors and sources of employment. Although broader than Subregion 6, implementing the SPAD recommendations could leverage these existing industries to increase markets for rural production, enhancing the position of both. Recommendations fall into four broad development categories: market, business, economic, and regulations and policy. All major recommendations are mentioned in the master plan policies and strategies in this chapter. Recommendations for regulatory reform to the Zoning Ordinance to permit a broader range of modern agricultural activities, identified as a top priority by community members in the subregion, are discussed earlier in the Development Pattern and Land Use chapter. Policy 3 Improve economic options for farmers by expanding the uses and activities that can be undertaken on farms and the regulatory protections for their operations. Strategies 1. Amend the Zoning Ordinance to expand the definition of agriculture and ensure it permits a broad array of agricultural and agricultural-related uses to support the economic viability of farming (see Development Pattern and Land Use chapter). 2. Minimize conflicts between agriculture and non-agricultural uses. • Limit development in the Rural Tier. • Strengthen the county right-to-farm policy (Code Section 30‑101) to include the following measures: • An affirmative declaration of the county’s intent to protect the rights of farms to carry out generally accepted agricultural practices. • Notification requirements for new residents in the Rural Tier that it is an agricultural industry area and that agriculture, as a normal course of business, may produce inconveniences, odors, and disruptions to other uses. • A provision for dispute resolution through an agricultural arbitration board to protect farmers from spurious claims. 3. Work with elected leaders and state officials to advocate for farm-friendly changes to state health policy and programs to enhance on-farm processing capacity, develop voluntary, scale-appropriate traceability standards to enhance consumer confidence in food safety, implement a local food purchasing preference standard for county institutions, and more. Economic Development

151

4. Support state-level changes to tax policy to better facilitate intergenerational farm transfer and create additional incentives for forestry and equine breeding. 5. Investigate state and county-level transportation policies and programs that require clarification and modification to enhance the competitiveness of county farmers. Policy 4 Modernize the county’s agricultural economy by transitioning it from its historic tobacco base to a more urban, market-driven agricultural base comprised of new enterprises and product markets. Strategies 1. Create an agricultural marketing position to lead the implementation of the Prince George’s County Strategic Programs for Agricultural Development (SPAD) in the county and subregion to support agricultural transition and local farmers, equine interests, and other resource industries. • Identify and convene partners from the county, state, nonprofit, and private sectors to assist in implementation efforts. 2. Develop an agricultural marketing program to implement the broad recommendation of the SPAD for enhanced market access. • Improve regional market access at wholesale and retail levels. • Leverage the Southern Maryland Trails tourism brand, coordinated by the Southern Maryland Agricultural Development Commission, to better integrate county agricultural programs with this, and other, region wide agricultural development and marketing initiatives. Integrate the promotion of county historic resources to capitalize on shared opportunities for agritourism and heritage tourism, where appropriate. • Create retailer-supported marketing system. • Improve long-term functionality of the Cheltemham Farmers Market. • Evaluate the feasibility of development a public/private agritourism, retail, and culinary arts center. • Create an outreach and public relations program for agricultural and equine enterprises to raise citizen awareness.

152

Economic Development

3. Implement SPAD recommendations for business development, agricultural producers in the subregion, industry sector, and county.’ • Develop a farmer recruitment program to both attract farmers to Subregion 6 and assist with the development and financing of new and expanding operations. • Support agribusiness concept incubation and technology transfer to encourage entrepreneurship at the farm level. • Create a small farm research and training board. • Support entrepreneurship and on-farm skills development. • Facilitate integration of agriculture within broader capital markets. 4. Implement SPAD recommendations for economic development to develop policies and infrastructure to support agricultural industry sector growth. • Develop an agribusiness retention, expansion, and attraction plan that includes improved linkages between agricultural production and the research and development capacity at the University of Maryland College of Agriculture and the Beltsville Agricultural Research Center, among other regionally significant institutional partners. • Integrate agriculture within economic development lending programs to enhance access to development capital, such as those provided by the Small Business Initiative Program administered by Prince George’s County Economic Development Corporation. • Support agribusiness cluster development. • Enhance labor force motivation. • Support regional agricultural leadership development. • Create an alternative energy development program. Policy 5 Adopt a broader food systems2 approach to be applied in land use and economic development planning which will put the subregion at the center of opportunities to produce and process food for individual businesses (restaurants) and institutional consumers in Prince George’s County and beyond. Food systems generally refers to activities beginning with food production to processing, distribution, wholesaling/retailing, consumption, and, eventually, the disposal of food waste. Attention to food systems planning is growing and is of interest to a number of different individuals and entities concerned about access to local supplies of safe, reliable, affordable, and healthy food. 2

Economic Development

153

Strategies 1. Encourage participation in a countywide effort to develop a framework for food systems planning that recognizes the challenges and assets of urban, suburban, and rural areas. 2. Identify market, community garden, and other agriculturally related opportunities for development and implementation in the Developing Tier portion of the subregion.

EQUINE INDUSTRY

Equestrian activities are an important part of the culture and history of Prince George’s County, yet this rural industry sector remains disaggregated, invisible to many segments of the community, and poorly understood, largely due to its structure. Because the industry is more fragmented and therefore less cohesive than other agricultural sectors, its needs and interests are not as clearly understood, and there is often no representative voice. Despite recent efforts by the State of Maryland and Prince George’s County to develop a profile of the industry’s private and public assets, there are still information gaps in what is known about the equestrian industry in the county. As of 2007, Prince George’s County had the fourth largest inventory of horses in the state with nearly 7,500 horses, valued at $63 million, housed, trained, and otherwise maintained on 1,170 equine operations covering 11,700 acres3. Data is needed on industry investment and expenditure patterns, as well as its growth potential. The equine racing industry in Prince George’s County is an important subsector and is closely related to the success of Maryland’s equine racing industry, which provides a source of purses and sales. This sector, however, is declining as larger purses in West Virginia and Delaware are drawing breeding and training activity out of Maryland. The downstream effects may be felt in other segments of the equine industry that rely on a local supply of thoroughbred genetics. These include the performance horse including hunts, dressage, and hunter/jumpers, all of which are popular in the region.

One of the many horse farms in the subregion.

The Prince George’s Equestrian Center is a major industry asset in the Mid-Atlantic states and has long been a center of activity for the performance horse industry in Subregion 6. Changes in the facility and its use over the last decade, however, have led to fewer equestrian activities occurring on-site, with some events moving to sites outside of Maryland. The facility is developing a new master plan to address the change in facility use and configuration which may further influence equestrian development in the subregion. 3

154

2002 Maryland Equine Census Economic Development

Much of the equine-related-activity occurs in the Rural Tier and contributes to the success of general agricultural operations through the sale of hay and forage. Horse boarding revenue is an important nonfarming source of revenue for some farmers and the sale of feed and tack keep agricultural operations such as Southern States and Gayer’s Saddlery active in the subregion. These impacts strongly influence the economic health of the traditional agricultural sectors. The following policies and strategies are designed to support the preservation and development of the equine industry. Policy 6 Improve the understanding of equine activities in the county and improve access to existing infrastructure for equestrian users. Strategies 1. Improve the equestrian facilities at the Prince George’s County Equestrian Center to compete with similar equestrian facilities in the MidAtlantic with a focus on reestablishing the Prince George’s Equestrian Center as a premier show and event facility. 2. Work with the Department of Parks and Recreation and industry partners to develop additional equestrian trails to enhance the reputation of the county as an equestrian activity center (see the Transportation Systems and Public Facilities chapters.) • Improve access to existing park infrastructure by expanding horse trails and outdoor arena capacity in Patuxent River Park.

The track at the Equestrian Center/ Show Place Arena was at one time a premier training facility for thoroughbred race horses.

3. Develop a marketing and education program to promote the industry and improve the community’s understanding of its role in the local economy and opportunities for recreational uses and enjoyment. Policy 7 Facilitate the economic development of the equine industry by making the county a center of activity at all levels of the industry. Strategies 1. Conduct an equine survey to assess the conditions, financial impact, and needs of the industry and support marketing efforts. • Inventory the full range of industry activities from recreational trail riding and performance events, to training and breeding facilities, to equine subsectors, including service and support infrastructure. Economic Development

155

2. Facilitate land access for equestrian activities and the development of equestrian infrastructure through the creation of financial and business development incentives. Such programs could include breeder incentives and capital financing for arenas and event facilities, as well as financing trail development and access easements. • Support state-level policy enhancements in the equine industry centered on the development of a Maryland Breeders Incentive Program that improves the financial returns for thoroughbred and standard-bred racing in Maryland. Such incentives will allow Maryland breeders and trainers to remain competitive in the marketplace and stem the loss of the industry to neighboring states. 3. Develop and implement a marketing campaign in collaboration with the recommended agricultural marketing program to recruit additional equine operations and retain existing operations. • Develop a database and interactive map of publicly accessible equine facilities such as riding arenas, boarding stables, leg-up facilities, and lay-ups.

FORESTRY

Forestry is a small but significant economic activity in Subregion 6. Forest cover accounts for approximately 50,000 acres, or nearly 52 percent, of total land cover in the subregion, a little over 30,765 acres (60 percent) of which is in deciduous tree stands. Forestry therefore represents an important economic use that provides income opportunities for land owners as well as environmental benefits. Greater consolidation of woodlands in the future can yield additional environmental benefits and competitive advantages for industry. Some large forested areas are in public ownership and management such as at the federal Globecom site, Cedarville State Forest, and Patuxent River Park. The forestry industry employs approximately 40 persons and generates $4.2 million in annual output (see Subregion Analysis chapter). There is one sawmill in Brandywine, though further manufacturing of wood products generally occurs outside the area. Forest quality in the subregion is mixed. According to the United States Forest Service’s Forest Inventory Assessment only 50 percent of the forestland productivity is rated as “good” or “fair” and none is rated “excellent.” This situation is a subset of several management and environmental issues beginning with poor timber stand management, limited local markets for forest products, and dispersion of forestry soil types.

156

Economic Development

Policy 8 Utilize a multifaceted approach to improve forest productivity. Strategies 1. Protect the resource. Producing high quality forest resources begins with protecting high quality forest soil types while improving the landowner management techniques. The priority preservation area (PPA) is intended in part to protect forest soil types (see Development Pattern and Land Use chapter). 2. Improve timber quality. Since the subregion currently supports many low-value species, improving timber quality may involve the harvest of invasive species and low-value succession trees that overgrow old farm fields. Such a harvest lends itself to onsite lumber milling, pulpwood operations, and biomass energy development. There is no current biomass4 market in the county, and on-site milling requires a special exception, making it unlikely given the dispersed nature of the resource. 3. Enlarge the market. Without improvement to the forest products marketplace, there will be little demand for local timber products beyond removal of the highest value hardwood species and cyclical pulpwood extraction. While this will not mean the end to the forest products industry in the subregion, it will contribute to low productivity forestry activities and limit the income opportunities of rural landowners.

Forest at Aquasco Farm site.

The following actions are designed to support the preservation and development of the forestry industry. Policy 9 Protect, maintain, and create large contiguous blocks of timberland capable of supporting long-term commercial forestry activities by protecting prime forestry subsoil types. Strategies 1. Develop the PPA program which is intended in part to protect forest soil types. 2. Explore options to create additional tax incentives that will support timber management activities. â&#x20AC;&#x192; Forest biomass generally consists of noncommercial thinning, logging waste, brush removal, sawdust, and urban wood sources. 4

Economic Development

157

Policy 10 Promote economic development opportunities for private forest holdings that employ a sustained yield and harvest approach to forest stand management. Strategies 1. Develop landowner outreach and training programs to improve forest management as well as the adoption of best management practices relative to environmental conservation. 2. Increase financial returns to landowners by encouraging more active timber stand management and improvements to timber stand quality. • Evaluate the Zoning Ordinance to ensure it contains relevant definitions of commercial and noncommercial forest uses and activities, as well as provisions supportive of forest industry development, best commercial forest management practices, etc. • Include right-to-forest provisions in the strengthened rightto-farm policy recommended in the agriculture section of this chapter. • Develop a forestry industry marketing campaign in collaboration with the recommended agricultural marketing program. 3. Improve the markets for timber and biomass materials that support long-term succession of forests and improvements to forest quality. • Evaluate the potential for use of biomass fuels at county facilities such as schools, administrative, and recreational facilities to create a baseline demand for local biofuels. • Consider county economic development incentives to the forest products industry to include incentives for commercial adoption of biomass heat and power. 4. Recruit new forest product businesses to Subregion 6 that fit within the community context, add value to local timber markets, and support the retention of existing businesses. • Attract timber management operations and wood products manufacturing to improve service and supply infrastructure and enhance market outlets.

SAND AND GRAVEL

158

Sand and gravel deposits are significant generators of economic activity in Subregion 6 with five mine operators generating approximately 60 jobs and representing approximately 14 percent of the total state output in the mining industry sector (see Subregion Economic Development

Analysis chapter). The major sand and gravel deposits are associated with the Brandywine geological formation (see Map 10). Subregion 6 continues to have development potential for sand and gravel due to its large undeveloped resource reserves and relatively low development pressure. As of August 2008, the subregion supported approximately 2,600 acres of active mines plus an active application for an additional 27 acres of new activity. There were approximately 4,440 acres of closed and reclaimed mines. As a key input to construction, sand and gravel is an essential element of the development in the Washington region. Because of its high weight-to-size ratio, sand and gravel is most cost effective to extract, process and transport near its end use: that is, locally. Aggregates contribution to the local economy is likely to increase as neighboring counties, particularly Anne Arundel County, reduce sand and gravel output due to mine closures. Furthermore, as transportation costs continue to rise, sand and gravel operations located within the Washington, D.C., metropolitan marketplace will have a competitive advantage over outlying sources of aggregates in Virginia and the Eastern Shore. The region’s sand and gravel industry faces several issues and challenges:

This former sand and gravel mine is in the process of being reclaimed.

• Access to new mining capacity is becoming limited as land is parcelized for development and broken up into uneconomical units of production. • Mining places a traffic burden on a rural road system that is also increasingly used by commuters, creating traffic conflicts. • Public opinion of the effectiveness of mine reclamation often puts the community at odds with the industry, although many of the mine reclamation issues cited by the public as poor practice are, in fact, related to mining activities that predated current regulations. • As land resources become scarce, sand and gravel operators increasingly compete for land with other resource-based industries, such as agriculture and forestry. Of particular concern to the industry is the growing demand for permanent agricultural land conservation activity whereby easement language may restrict access to sand and gravel resources. Such restrictions are common in state land conservation programs. Over time, costs associated with these issues could lead to disinvestment in the industry and its eventual relocation.

Economic Development

159

Policy 11 Provide commercially viable access to sand and gravel resources and direct economic development support to associated operations. Strategies 1. Prevent the preemption of mineral resources extraction by other uses through the implementation of a mineral overlay zone (see Development Pattern and Land Use chapter). 2. Improve access to financial and work force development incentives. â&#x20AC;˘ Integrate sand and gravel industry within traditional economic development programming such as tax credits and abatements, workforce assistance, streamlined permitting, and assistance with state and federal small business financing. Policy 12 Improve community integration of the sand and gravel industry. Strategies 1. Conduct community outreach to improve understanding of the sand and gravel industry and to improve industry integration within the rural communities. Traffic, noise, and dust generated by operations must be addressed, along with post-extraction uses. The financial benefits that property owners can receive from pursuing mineral extraction prior to development or some other compatible, rural land use, should also be considered. 2. Involve community members in reviewing new and expanding projects, and in developing requirements for identifying postreclamation uses as part of an amended special exception process. This work should be done in conjunction with the sand and gravel industry, landowners, government officials, etc., so that post-reclamation land use activities are established in the PPA and all other land where septic systems will be the only means of sewage disposal.

160

Economic Development

HISTORIC AND CULTURAL RESOURCES Preservation of Subregion 6’s historic and cultural heritage has an important role in ensuring the longevity and health of the county’s environment, economy, and social resources. Sustainable communities value their heritage, which is essential in developing and maintaining a sense of identity and place. Protecting historic resources and encouraging adaptive use provides the community with an opportunity to embrace and celebrate pieces of history that define and unite the region. Encouraging reuse and rehabilitation of older structures not only helps in reducing the subregion’s carbon footprint but also stimulates the local economy. This “repair first” approach seeks to reduce the waste associated with demolition and rebuilding and to promote reusing existing materials. Repairing older buildings encourages the use of skilled local labor, often at higher wages, to carry out rehabilitation efforts. The key to sustainability is the utilization of the resources that already exist. While it is important to protect major landmarks and monuments, the safeguarding of vernacular, or common style, architecture is also essential, as these buildings provide unique insight into the agricultural heritage and represent the cultural landscapes familiar to many of the residents of the area. Reinvestment in communities through the reuse and rehabilitation of existing buildings can potentially decrease sprawl associated with new construction and support the local economic base. By protecting and encouraging adaptive use of historic resources, the community can create opportunities to embrace and celebrate the history that defines and unites the residents in the county and the subregion. There are ninety-three resources designated historic in the subregion. Of these sites, 28 are listed in the National Register of Historic Places; the rest are locally designated. This chapter will provide the framework to reaffirm, update, and expand upon previous recommendations to ensure that the heritage within the communities of the subregion are represented in the goals for future preservation and development. Locally designated historic resources fall under several categories: historic sites—properties that are subject to the Historic Preservation Ordinance (HPO) and are also eligible to receive county preservation tax credits and grants for approved rehabilitation projects; historic resources— which must be evaluated to become eligible for tax credits and grants and fully protected by the HPO; documented properties— which have inventory forms on file but have no status for protection.

Historic and Cultural Resources

Subregion 6 Approved Master Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

Smith Farm, within the subregion but also within the Westphalia master plan area, was until recently a working farm which is now slated for a mixed use development.

Tobacco barns still dot the landscape despite the tobacco buyout nearly halting all tobacco production. 161

This plan will not be recommending additions to the Inventory of Historic Resources. Subregion 6 offers a unique opportunity for preservation because of a wealth of historic and cultural resources. The wide range of resources is evidenced in the landscape and built environment. The historic properties of Mount Calvert and Billingsley overlook the Patuxent River and have pre-historic Native American archeological sites and historic buildings from the mid- to late-eighteenth century. Agricultural buildings are also important landmarks, such as the Ashland Hay Barn in Upper Marlboro. The subregion also has two Victorian Gothic mansions which are listed in the National Register of Historic Places: Bowling Heights in Upper Marlboro and Villa de Sales in Aquasco. Goals 1. Encourage local stewardship and pride by implementing strategies that will increase public knowledge of the area’s cultural assets and historic preservation procedures. State historic markers tell the story of early Prince George’s County.

2. Ensure that historic sites and resources as part of the subregion’s rich cultural heritage are properly documented and protected from the onset of new development through proper and consistent historic preservation practices. 3. Incorporate the region’s historic, cultural, and recreational assets into land use planning and the local resource-based economy to support a sustainable way of life. In 1981, The Maryland-National Capital Park and Planning Commission (M-NCPPC) adopted, and the District Council approved, the Historic Sites and Districts Plan. This plan identified the actions necessary for preservation of historic resources in the county. The HPO was enacted to protect properties on the Inventory of Historic Resources. Today, historic preservation not only stands to preserve historic sites, it is also seen as one of several tools of revitalization and protection of communities and rural areas. Since 1981, additional legislation in the county continues to incorporate historic preservation issues into future planning and smart growth initiatives. Numerous nonprofit organizations active within the community also provide guidance and promote a sense of urgency in the preservation of the county’s historic assets through research, grant programs, and community outreach.

THEMES

This plan seeks to build on these many activities by promoting stewardship of historic resources while also preserving the rural landscape of the subregion. To achieve these goals the plan proposes a variety of means including strategies to promote cultural tourism through the use of themes bringing heritage into the toolbox of economic development. Within the subregion several significant sites and resources shed light upon the history and development of Prince George’s

162

Historic and Cultural Resources

County and the nation. Protecting these historic assets from underutilization or demolition is critical to sustaining cultural capital in the area. Cultural capital is defined as an asset that symbolizes or generates cultural value within a given community in addition to any economic value it may have. The reuse of historic resources and the education of the public today can set the standards for the development of tomorrow. To better understand the variety and breadth of these resources, the master plan divides them into two categories: sites and resources that have been officially designated, and sites and resources that have been identified for further study (and in some cases have been documented to some degree) but have not been officially designated. The diversity of major themes found within the subregion provides opportunities to reach wider audiences of both residents and visitors. Increasing public awareness and appreciation for historic sites and resources can lead to connection with points of attraction in nearby areas outside of the subregion such as heritage tours and trails found in the county. Promoting cultural and heritage tourism can rejuvenate community pride, encourage maintenance of resources, and moreover produce considerable economic returns for the area. The themes below are promoted in this plan.

The historic stable at Villa de Sales in Aquasco features a slate roof, matching the roof on the main house.

The subregion remains rooted in its agrarian history and is connected by a network of historic scenic roads and byways. The historic landscapes represent the rural heritage through the presence of plantations, early twentieth century vernacular farmsteads, barns, outbuildings, woodlands, and scenic roads and vistas. These sites and resources provide the subregion with several opportunities to promote its agricultural history along with the chance to utilize these assets as recreational and educational sites. Many rural historic landscapes remain especially in the Rural Tier and also in the Developing Tier, including the Woodland rural agricultural community to the northeast of MD 4 and US 301 as well as the Clagett Agricultural Area to the west of US 301. To promote understanding and appreciation of these unique landscapes, preservation activities and education could be better encouraged through inclusion in school curriculum and property tours of historic properties in public ownership.

Agricultural Heritage

One hundred-ninety archeological sites found mainly along the Patuxent River (pre-historic and historic) bear evidence of Native American and early colonial settlement. With careful planning and consideration for impact on the sites, trails for pedestrians and bikes near these areas connected by markers could be used as educational tools. Promoting awareness of sensitive archeological

Archeological Areas

Historic and Cultural Resources

Barns and other agricultural buildings outside of Nottingham.

163

sites in the subregion is important if these significant remnants of history are to be safeguarded.

African-American History

The Woodville School, now owned and occupied by Knights of St. Johnâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Commandery #373, was built in 1934 to educate the African-American children in the Woodville/Aquasco area.

The advancement and growth of African-American communities is recognized in the abundant historic sites and resources within the subregion. The historic properties include residences, schools, churches and cemeteries, and museums. These sites and resources span throughout the areaâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s historic towns in Croom, Naylor, Upper Marlboro, Eagle Harbor, and Aquasco. With research, these important topics of history have the potential for additional designations as historic sites and properties. Collectively, historic assets related to the African-American community have the potential to connect to broader thematic tours and heritage tourism destinations.

Early Towns/ Communities

The history of many communities in the subregion is being subsumed by new development and modern buildings. Small villages, such as Aquasco, Croom, and Eagle Harbor, retain much of their historic character and many of the historic resources have been identified through survey and documentation. Landings and river crossings related to trade and the development of industries within several communities showcase development patterns associated with arterial transportation routes. General stores, shops, and churches provide insight into the day-to-day lives of those who lived in these early towns and helped establish the foundation for communities that exist today. These assets offer several opportunities for nomination as historic resources.

Military History

Historic sites and resources reveal the role the subregion played in several military engagements. Historic resources associated with the Revolutionary War and the War of 1812, combined with the presence of Joint Base Andrews, present opportunities for thematic tours associated with the military. Currently, the Bicentennial of the War of 1812 is being celebrated throughout Maryland and promoted through the Star-Spangled Banner Trail driving tour, which traverses through Subregion 6. Many efforts have been made to document the historic and cultural resources of Prince Georgeâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s County and of the subregion (see Map 23). Viewing the resources of the subregion as a whole presents the opportunity to connect these resources both, thematically and within proximity to one another. Highlighting these connections can add to the visitors overall experience and foster appreciation for these assets. For example, the Patuxent River Rural Legacy Bike Route begins near Mount Calvert and

164

Historic and Cultural Resources

MAP 22: HISTORIC AND CULTURAL RESOURCES Subregion 3

L ar go R o a d

Oak Gro v

Bowie and Vicinity

hie M

RitchieR oad

Ri tc

o ro ar l b Ro

ad Ro nd i tla Su

Subregion 4

ro P bo

M ar l

ay eltw C a p it al B

a Av enue Penn s ylvani

ANNE ARUNDEL COUNTY

5 (B h ran c

e) Av R ard dy oo

il ryv

le a Ro

sa Ro

3(W 22 MD

S3 01 (C

ra i nH

22 3(

Pi sc at aw

ay R

R oad

oad

N o

d oa M D 381 (B ra ndyw ine

Rd )

i ng t on

P ar

Ke ys

Subregion 5 F lor al

c (Ac

e ek Rd ) ok

2 (C 38 room R oa

CALVERT COUNTY 0

2.5

CHARLES COUNTY

Scale in Miles

Legend National Register

Archaeological Areas 1 - Billingsley / Hills Bridge

Scenic Byway

2 - Mt. Calvert / Patuxent River Park

Scenic Byway Sidetrack

3 - Nottingham

Enclosed/Canopy Views

4 - Woodville / Aquasco

Scenic & Historic Roads

5 - Woodyard

Existing Trails

6 - Forestville / Longold Fields

Parks

7 -Upper Marlboro/Collington/Western Branch Watersheds

oR sc

a qu

PATU XE

Historic Site

VE R

Map 23: Historic and Cultural Resources

Historic and Cultural Resources

165

ends in Aquasco and provides opportunities to link numerous African-American sites and resources in the area. The trail follows Aquasco Road where numerous sites and resources exist, such as the Woodville School, and continues south along Trueman Point Road where cyclists can find sites such as Trueman Point Landing and Eagle Harbor.

HISTORIC, CULTURAL, AND RECREATIONAL ASSETS

Promoting cultural and heritage tourism can rejuvenate community pride, encourage maintenance of resources, and produce considerable economic returns for the area. To aid in understanding how these resources are connected, they are organized on Maps 24A and 24B by the heritage themes. Cultural landscapes can be categorized under three categories: landscapes that have organically evolved, that have been designed or manipulated, or that are associated with a particular event or group. This plan seeks to link recreation opportunities such as parks and trails to cultural landscapes that have evolved organically to promote public awareness of the richness of the subregionâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s history as demonstrated in its abundant historic and cultural resources. Scenic roadways along roads such as Croom Road and Old Crain Highway traverse fertile land while historic roads showcase historic sites and resources. Safeguarding and promoting awareness of these assets will help to protect the regionâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s pastoral landscape. Extensive natural surface trails exist at many parks along the Patuxent River such as Jug Bay, Merkle, Aquasco Farms, and Milltown Landing. As additional lands are publicly acquired, these trails can be expanded and connected.

Picturesque two lane rural roads wind through the subregion.

In addition to trails, equestrian areas and concentrations of tobacco barns have also been highlighted. While there are few historic resources that remain relating to equine activities in the area, large areas of pastures, fields, and woodland in the area accommodate equestrian activities. Various areas also represent the reuse of historic properties for equinerelated activities such as the land surrounding Mount Airy in Rosaryville, now known as Rosaryville State Park. Tobacco barns that dot the landscape along much of Croom Road, as well as other areas within the subregion, not only represent the agricultural roots of the area, but also present opportunities for adaptive use. There are also opportunities to link archeological clusters and themes throughout the subregion. Archaeological sites in the subregion are important resources for the interpretation of Native American, African-American, and European-American heritage

166

Historic and Cultural Resources

in Prince George’s County. For 9,000 years, the Patuxent River and its tributaries have provided the necessary natural resources for human settlement. Cultural resources include hundreds of temporary Native American base camps and permanent Native American villages (7,000 BC–1670 AD), countless small and large tobacco plantations based on enslaved labor (1650–1864), small towns supported by agriculture (1684–1950s), and increasingly mechanized farms based on wage labor and crop share agreements (1865–1950s). Each of these resources has left a significant archaeological presence on the landscape. These archaeological resources are scattered throughout the subregion but several areas were identified for their potential interpretive value. Areas containing multiple archaeological components crossing numerous heritage themes have been identified as interpretive clusters. Each of these clusters contains important archaeological resources owned by The Maryland-National Capital Park and Planning Commission or another public entity that has potential for interpretive public programs. Archaeological resources identified in future surveys and excavations could add to and greatly enhance the public interpretive programming already in place for each of the clusters.

Billingsley/Hills Bridge Cluster The Billingsley and Hills Bridge cluster contains 11 identified archaeological sites. Interpretive themes tied to this cluster include nineteenth- to twentieth-century steamboat trade and commerce, late seventeenth-century Native American settlement, tobacco plantations, and Barney’s Flotilla and the War of 1812.

Mount Calvert/Patuxent River Park Cluster The Mount Calvert cluster just south of Billingsley contains two major public parks owned and administered by M-NCPPC. Public archaeology programs are regularly conducted at Mount Calvert Historical and Archaeological Park, interpreting themes ranging from Native American heritage, early colonial towns, eighteenth- through twentieth-century African-American heritage, and twentieth-century tenant farming. A second resource is Patuxent River Park containing thousands of acres of parkland and interpretive programs linked with archaeological research conducted at Mount Calvert. Ten archaeological sites have been identified in the cluster.

Historic and Cultural Resources

The historic site Mount Calvert is the only historic structure remaining at the site of Charles Town, the first seat of the Prince George’s County government. It is also distinguished by its scenic location overlooking the confluence of the Western Branch and the Patuxent River. 167

MAP 23A: HERITAGE THEMES Subregion 3

Oak Gro v

L ar go R o a d

Bowie and Vicinity

hie M

RitchieR oad

Ri tc

o ro ar l b Ro

ad Ro nd i tla Su

Subregion 4

ro P bo

M ar l

ay eltw C a p it al B

ANNE ARUNDEL COUNTY

a Av enue Penn s ylvani

MD 5 (B h ran c

e) Av R ard dy oo

Inset 1 Map 24B

sa Ro

il ryv

3(W 22 MD

a Ro

Pi sc at aw

ay R

Legend MD

22 3(

Agricultural Heritage Sites

i ng t on

w ra i nH S3 01 (C U

Ke ys

oad

d oa

M D 381 (B ra ndyw ine

National Register Historic Site, Early Church c Ac 3(

R oad

Early Churches

P ar

N o

F lor al

National Register Historic Site Historic ResourceSubregion 5 Tobacco Barn

Rd )

e ek Rd ) ok

African American Sites MD

2 (C 38

Historic Site Historic Resource

room R oa d)

Commerce Historic Site Historic Resource

CALVERT COUNTY

Early Plantations National Register Historic Site Historic Site Historic Resource

2.5

oR sc

Invasion Route Possible Route Return Route

a qu

I T R

Historic Communities Historic Environmental Setting

War of 1812 Route

Other Resources

N PATU XE

Scenic Byway Scenic Byway Sidetrack Scenic & Historic Roads

Military History National Register Historic Site

Inset 2 Map 24B

Roads

Landings & River Crossings

CHARLES COUNTY

Scale in Miles

Map 24A: Heritage Themes 168

Historic and Cultural Resources

MAP 23B: HERITAGE THEMES

ro om

)

VE PATUX EN T RI

Inset 1 (see Map 24A) Legend

Agricultural Heritage Sites National Register Historic Site Historic Resource Tobacco Barn National Register

African American Sites Historic Site Historic Resource Historic Resource National Register Historic Resource

War of 1812 Route Invasion Route Possible Route Return Route

(C ro 82

ad )

Scenic & Historic Roads

Roads

Historic Communities Historic Environmental Setting

Other Resources

oa oR sc

Scenic Byway Scenic Byway Sidetrack

Inset 2 (see Map 24A)

Map 24B: Heritage Themes Historic and Cultural Resources

169

Nottingham Cluster M-NCPPC owns parkland in and around the historic town of Nottingham including archaeological resources that contribute to the interpretation of town development from the early eighteenth through the twentieth century, seventeenth-century industry, the international slave trade during the eighteenth century, historic Native American villages, and the War of 1812. Forty-three archaeological sites have been identified in the cluster.

Aquasco/Woodville Cluster Mount Calvert Historical and Archeological Park features ongoing archeological research and provides programs and hands-on activities for the public.

The Aquasco/Woodville cluster covers the southeastern terminus of the subregion. Numerous public properties are located in the area including Aquasco Farm and land associated with Patuxent River Park. There is enormous interpretive potential in the area including early colonial settlement, early eighteenth-century African-American heritage, late nineteenth- and early twentieth-century rural AfricanAmerican communities, nineteenth-century town development, and agriculture. Nineteen archaeological sites have been identified in the cluster.

Woodyard Cluster The Woodyard served as a central hub of human activity from the seventeenth century to the end of the Revolutionary War. The anchor of the cluster is the Woodyard Archaeological site consisting of Stephen West’s Revolutionary War factory. Henry Darnall’s seventeenth-century plantation was also located at the Woodyard and contained one of the largest complexes of slave quarters in early Prince George’s County. Three archaeological sites have been identified in the cluster.

Long Old Fields/Forestville Cluster British troops stopped at Long Old Fields on their way to Washington during the War of 1812. Long Old Fields is also important in the development of towns and interior plantations in Prince George’s County from the late eighteenth through the nineteenth century. Forty-eight archaeological sites were identified in the cluster.

Upper Marlboro and Western Branch Collington Drainage Cluster Upper Marlboro and the area directly north of the town were important to the history of Prince George’s County from the beginning of the eighteenth through the twentieth century. Some

170

Historic and Cultural Resources

of the themes present in the cluster include town development, the War of 1812, early eighteenth-century commerce and nineteenthcentury industry, and development of interior tobacco plantations. Twenty-three archaeological sites have been identified in the cluster. Policy 1 Promote understanding, appreciation, and pride in the areaâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s assets and cultural heritage as well as historic sites and resources. Strategies: 1. Enhance school curriculum to incorporate local history through hands-on experiences including visits to cultural sites to promote the subregionâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s history to wider audiences and engage a larger cultural base. 2. Research the history of general stores and country markets and develop interpretive materials to help the public appreciate the contributions of these buildings to the evolution of the rural communities and their importance to the economics of the subregion. Policy 2 Encourage private and public preservation activities for the education and enjoyment of current and future generations.

The Charles S. Early House is a short distance from the railroad village of Brandywine.

Strategies 1. Introduce community-based programs in the school system to promote cultural heritage such as thematic oral history projects. 2. Interpret the history of individual buildings, archeological sites and communities through signage, banners, booklets, educational programs, and heritage trails while making connections with national trail and heritage projects. 3. Promote the establishment of historic preservation or conservation districts in areas threatened by incompatible growth throughout the subregion. Policy 3 Encourage stewardship and the adaptive use of historical sites and other cultural capital. Strategies 1. Create a citizen task force to promote cultural heritage in the subregion. Historic and Cultural Resources

The historic Wyvill House, also known as Linden Hill, is one of several dwellings built by local carpenter John C. Wyvill.

171

2. Create a community volunteer program to assist in the repair of old buildings and barns and maintenance of cemeteries. 3. Provide workshops on architectural styles and rehabilitation techniques for property owners. 4. Encourage programs that promote the survival of traditional skills/trades such as traditional building techniques and agriculture. 5. Promote the use of the Historic Property Grant Program, which provides grants for up to $100,000 for the rehabilitation, restoration, preservation, or acquisition of historic properties. 6. Maximize and expand the use of the county historic preservation tax credit program. Policy 4 Promote economic development through heritage tourism and recreation. Strategies 1. Participate in the Maryland Heritage Preservation and Tourism Areas Program, a state program designed to stimulate economic development through tourism. 2. Develop a logo and promotional literature for directing the public to cultural heritage sites. 3. Enact the BARN AGAIN! Program sponsored by the National Trust for Historic Preservation. 4. Encourage and facilitate civic and historic sites to make available literature on local tourism sites. 5. Celebrate agriculture through establishment of a regular farmers market and annual farm days/tours. 6. Utilize existing incentive programs tied to agriculture such as various grant and loan programs sponsored by state agencies to layer the programs to maximize the benefits to the property owner. 7. Encourage the expansion of existing, and the establishment of new, agricultural uses such as creative â&#x20AC;&#x153;boutique agricultureâ&#x20AC;? and other possibilities for adaptive re-use and preservation of tobacco barns and other agricultural buildings. 8. Develop interpretive materials, thematic driving tours and walking tour maps, and distribute broadly within the local and Washington metropolitan region. 9. Develop interpretive themes for archeological sites.

172

Historic and Cultural Resources

Policy 5 Participate in regional, state, and national programs related to cultural heritage and historic preservation. Strategies 1. Actively market the tax credit programs (local, state, and federal) for rehabilitation of historic buildings and enhance the benefits of the existing tax credit program by an extension over a longer time period. 2. Provide for no increase in tax assessments for the specific improvements of the project following a restoration project until the next regular tax assessment cycle. 3. Establish density credits or tax credits for retention of open space around historic sites. 4. Amend the zoning ordinance to require larger buffer areas around historic sites and the environmental setting associated with them. 5. Establish a regular schedule for evaluating and re-evaluating historic resources. Policy 6 Preserve historic farmsteads, barns, and other structures which have historical significance and define the rural heritage of the county. Strategies 1. Work with agricultural, environmental, and land trust organizations to promote protection of resources through easements or other preservation strategies. 2. Establish conservation easements for historic properties with easement-holding organizations. Policy 7 Maintain and protect scenic and historic roads as valuable contributions to the character of the historic communities. Strategies 1. Expand and introduce new multiuse trails that follow heritage themes and routes. 2. Provide support for small business growth that supports historic communities and provides complementary uses especially at stores or markets located at crossroads.

Historic and Cultural Resources

173

174

Historic and Cultural Resources

LIVING AREAS AND COMMUNITY CHARACTER While there are broad similarities among all living areas, primarily residential communities, in the subregion, each living area is a distinctive place with its own characteristics, advantages, and needs. Living areas in the Developing Tier are primarily suburban in character and therefore quite different from those in the Rural Tier that include more undeveloped land/open space, agricultural uses and lower-density residential development. Living areas in the Developing Tier include major subdivisions and neighborhoods along US 301, MD 202, and MD 223 including Marlboro Meadows, Beechtree, Perrywood, and Sherwood Forest. Living Areas in the Rural Tier include Aquasco, Baden and Croom. At the separate workshops that were held for the communities, issues and concerns were raised that are addressed in this chapter of the plan. Goals, policies, and strategies to ensure a high quality of life for all communities in the Developing Tier and the Rural Tier are presented in this chapter.

Subregion 6 Approved Master Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

INTRODUCTION

This chapter also includes detailed recommendations for areas that were identified during the planning process as having special development opportunities. These include the Town of Upper Marlboro and vicinity, Greater Upper Marlboro, and Marlton, one of the countyâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s first planned communities. The Town of Upper Marlboro and vicinity presents a unique opportunity for new development, redevelopment, and revitalization. The town, with its historic, small-town character and long-term identity as the county seat, is an underutilized asset, as is the industrially-zoned area east of town along US 301 in what is called Greater Upper Marlboro. This plan includes recommendations for the town that was recently studied as part of a joint effort with the Planning Department and the Town of Upper Marlboro. The study area for the Town of Upper Marlboro revitalization and action plan was slightly larger than the municipal boundary and included properties on the western side of town. The action plan includes recommendations for the study area, identified as the Town of Upper Marlboro and vicinity, aimed at maximizing the areaâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s development opportunities and setting the stage for a long-range strategy for establishing a new development pattern which builds on this areaâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s strategic location. In addition to the Town of Upper Marlboro and vicinity, recommendations for the area identified as Greater Upper Marlboro are also presented in this chapter. Greater Upper Marlboro includes properties north of MD 4 along US 301 and MD 725 that were the subject of a separate community workshop. At the workshop, Living Areas and Community Character

175

Main Street in the Town of Upper Marlboro.

alternatives for future land uses along US 301 and MDÂ 725 were discussed, as well as the impacts of the various alternatives consisting of commercial and mixed-use development on the east and west sides of US 301. As discussed in the Subregion 6 Transportation chapter, future plans for MD 202 and US 301 include a realignment of these highways through this area as road upgrades occur. This realignment requires careful planning for new development opportunities that support the improved road system while taking advantage of the areaâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s strategic location at the entrance to the county seat and at the intersection of two major roadways. The plan includes recommendations to encourage development, redevelopment, and other improvements in close proximity to the US 301/MD 4 interchange that will provide new employment and appropriate retail and residential opportunities that will complement the town and surrounding area. Marlton is the only Developing Tier community located on the east side of US 301 south of MD 4. It is an older planned community, approved in the 1960s, that has slowly been built over time but still has a significant amount of undeveloped properties. Although originally planned to have a mix of residential densities, a commercial center and an employment park, requests were made during the planning process for changes to this mix of recommended land uses. In addition, the original plan has been modified over time as school sites that were determined not needed were surplussed by the Board of Education and later sold for development. To ensure that Marlton continues to develop as the planned community that was originally envisioned, community workshops were held during the planning process to update the Marlton plan. Workshop participants identified the most appropriate land uses for the remaining undeveloped properties, including former school sites, and developed other recommendations to enhance existing neighborhoods. The following broad goals and policies apply to all the living areas discussed in this chapter, except where specified by tier designation. They provide the foundation on which the individual policies and strategies in the chapter are based. Goals 1. Increase civic activism and organizations in communities in the subregion. 2. Protect and improve the quality of life in all living areas in the subregion. 3. Encourage private investment in older communities. 4. Preserve, protect, and enhance important community assets

176

Living Areas and Community Character

Policies 1. Create new and strengthen existing programs that celebrate the diversity and encourage positive interaction and engagement in the life of the communities. 2. Link open spaces and trails to stream valley parks and ensure road interconnections and sidewalk and trail connections between existing developments. 3. Provide adequate public facilities to meet the needs of existing and future residents that encourage and support infill development and not sprawl. 4. Provide commercial development in strategic locations to serve the needs of communities giving preference to improving existing centers. 5. Promote attractive and compatible development with particular attention to the architecture and layout of development that is visible from primary, collector, and arterial roads. 6. Support the growth and development of civic organizations in older communities. The Developing Tier in the subregion comprises a network of older and newer suburban communities, interspersed with large institutional uses and open or wooded lands. The 1960s and 1970s saw the start of increased housing development in this area of the county. Some of the communities that were developed during this time are Melwood (east of Joint Base Andrews [JBA], south of MD 4, and west of MD 223), Rosaryville, Marlboro Meadows, and Marlton, a residential planned community. The condition of the older housing stock and infrastructure are important issues that were identified by residents. Ensuring that these neighborhoods remain stable and attractive requires consistent maintenance of both the private properties in these neighborhoods as well as the public facilities which serve them. The development pattern and community character in the Melwood area is mixed. Close to JBA there are older residential developments interspersed with industrial and commercial service uses and open or wooded land. This development character is expected to change over time. Residentially zoned areas of Melwood are expected to continue to develop and build out following the approved development plans for Mill Creek and Windsong. Over time, undeveloped, infill parcels can be expected to develop, and as they develop it is important that they are designed to connect neighborhoods through an integrated road and sidewalk/trail system. Living Areas and Community Character

SUBURBAN/ DEVELOPING TIER COMMUNITIES

Well maintained neighborhoods contain a variety of house styles.

177

The Rosaryville area consists mainly of single-family detached houses set along winding streets in a suburban setting. Many of the streets in Rosaryville are lined with trees and sidewalks, which enhance the neighborhood feel of the place. Rosaryville Elementary School is located in the northern part of the community off of Rosaryville Road. Several churches are located nearby as well. The area has also experienced an increase in the youth population. As a result of increased demand, local elementary schools are partnering with the Department of Parks and Recreation to provide afterschool and summer youth activities.

Housing choices are encouraged within the subregion.

In the last decade the communities north of MD 4 have experienced more residential growth than the rest of the subregion. Much of this residential growth has occurred in the planned community of Beechtree. Beechtree is located in a comprehensive design zone (CDZ), which is a version of planned community, as are many of the newer developments in this portion of the subregion. CDZs provide for a wide variety of density and housing including condominium units in multifamily buildings, townhouses, and single-family detached houses. They may also contain commercial uses intended to serve the needs of residents and the surrounding communities and offer various recreational amenities, such as a golf course, swimming pools, and community parks. Balmoral is another residential community of single-family homes just south of Beechtree on the west side of US 301, north of MD 725. Another new CDZ, Locust Hill, is currently in the development approval process. Locust Hill is located on the northern border of the subregion on Leeland Road and is proposed for low-density development with a range of unit types and sizes. Marlboro Meadows consists of mostly single-family detached dwellings. Patuxent Elementary School, which is a park/school having an M-NCPPC community center in the building, is located in the southern portion of the subdivision. When it was developed, connection to WSSC was not available so it was built with a private water and sewer system. As a result of system failures in the recent past connection to WSSC is underway. The Developing Tier area also has a number of major institutional uses including the Brown Station Road Municipal Solid Waste Facility, which will be closed in 2011. The plan designates this land for future park land/open space which will not only provide land for recreational uses but also for reforestation to further the goals of a sustainable community where not all land is developed. The University of Marylandâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Central Maryland Research and Education Center is located on MD 202. This facility

178

Living Areas and Community Character

has experimental fields for different crops; currently there are many fields with different varieties of grapes, both table and wine varieties. This regional facility is important not only to developing new niche crops for the subregion but also the county and region. It also provides a significant amount of valuable public open space to this developing area of the subregion. The plan recommends that this area remain as publicly owned open space. Policy Continue to build high-quality, suburban development organized around a network of open space and community facilities with attention to site design. Strategies 1. Develop a comprehensive trail/sidewalk system to connect the community. 2. Acquire land for active and/or passive recreation along Charles Branch to help create a community focus and provide trails to connect the community. 3. Expand and enhance recreational activities and opportunities for youth particularly in older communities. 4. Ensure the further study of the health of commercial developments in the subregion to promote improvements at Osborne Shopping Center and Marlton Plaza. 5. Ensure that all new development in the area is compatible with existing development in terms of architecture and scale. 6. Install sidewalks along residential streets that currently lack them. 7. Encourage conservation subdivisions in environmentally sensitive areas and adjacent to parks where additional open space would be beneficial.

Some neighborhoods lack proper pedestrian linkages such as sidewalks.

8. Design site features such as storm water management facilities during the development process so that they become amenities in the development. 9. Provide green edges (woods, and landscaping) in new developments to provide a buffer that blends naturally into surrounding wooded areas. 10. Incorporate historic sites, vistas, archeological resources, and cultural features into development design. 11. Incorporate environmentally sensitive design and green building/energy efficiency techniques. Many neighborhoods contain amenities such as this trail. Living Areas and Community Character

179

Policy Plan for compatible land uses and development around JBA. Strategies 1. Implement the recommendations in the JBA Joint Land Use Study. 2. Consider the Department of Defense’s Readiness for Environmental Protection Initiative to protect/preserve land west of Sherwood Forest Community Park.

RURAL TIER COMMUNITIES

Unimproved private roads are a common site in the rural tier.

The community center is the focal point for community life in the Town of Eagle Harbor. Every summer Eagle Harbor Day is celebrated here. 180

The Rural Tier is an extensive area sparsely settled mostly with isolated homes on larger lots interspersed with farms and other agricultural uses. The historic settlements of Aquasco/ Woodville, Baden, and Croom provide a sense of place and identity for residents. The Baden community, although never developed into a town, has been a crossroads community since 1735 when it grew up around St. Paul’s Parish church, the earliest surviving Anglican Church in the county. The Baden community sits in a triangular space created on Aquasco, Horsehead, and Baden-Westwood Roads at its edges; St. Paul’s Episcopal Church, Baden Community Center, Baden Library, and Baden Elementary School are located at one corner, Immanuel United Methodist Church and St. Michael’s Roman Catholic Church at the second corner, and Baden Volunteer Fire Department, a market, and a florist as the third corner. The Croom community is centered around Croom Road and St. Thomas Church Road. The community developed around St. Thomas Episcopal Church around 1742 and by 1853 had a post office. An old country store still survives as do a small assortment of houses and agricultural buildings. Winding lanes, rolling farmland, and wooded areas are scattered along this mile-and-a-half stretch of this major north-south route through the subregion. The community of Aquasco, known as Woodville in the nineteenth century, is located in the southernmost portion of the county. A church, country store and residents are grouped on both sides of Aquasco Road, the main route between Brandywine to the north and Benedict to the south in Charles County. The setting is a rural village, having structures with a range of uses. This area was first settled in the 1830s and included several stores, churches, a post office, and a school. Any new development in or around these rural villages should blend with the new and old through sensitive design. New development should also reflect the overall density and intensity of this rural part of the county to reflect the goals set forth in the General Plan. The Zoning Ordinance contains development standards that are suburban-oriented and are not sensitive to rural areas. In order to ensure that new development is Living Areas and Community Character

appropriate in the rural villages, new development standards need to be developed. In addition, small area plans with design standards for rural villages identifying uses should be prepared to guide future development so that it strengthens and enhances the existing rural character. The Rural Tier is also the site of Wilmer’s Park, located on Brandywine Road just west of Baden. The 80-acre Wilmer’s Park, one of the major stops along the East Coast “Chitlin’ Circuit” in the 1950s and 1960s, was used historically as an African-American music venue. African American musicians, such as James Brown and Stevie Wonder, and audiences found refuge from Jim Crow discrimination at the outdoor facility, making it a cultural landmark. The park has fallen into disrepair since the long time owner Arthur Wilmer died in 1999. Recently, this locally designated historic site was purchased by the M-NCPPC Department of Parks and Recreation and will remain for public use given the cultural importance of the site (PGCPB13-70). This plan reinforces the recommendations of previous plans to retain the prevailing rural character of the southeastern portion of Prince George’s County. This plan also recommends that the rural land use be implemented through the lowest residential density currently available (Open-Space) with a maximum density of one dwelling unit per five acres. Specific land use recommendations for these areas are contained in various chapters throughout the plan. Development in these communities must have a conservation subdivision approved, except for family conveyance or development of single lots. The conservation subdivision is intended to concentrate homes leaving more open space to preserve vistas and sensitive areas.

Wilmer’s Park was one of the major stops along the East Coast “Chitlin’ Circuit” in the 1950’s. Concerts continued at the site into the latter part of the twentieth century.

Policy Protect and maintain rural villages by promoting compatible development and preservation of scenic and historic roads. Strategies 1. Design of site features such as stormwater management facilities during the development process so that they become amenities in the development and are designed appropriately to preserve the existing rural character. 2. Protect historic sites, vistas, archeological resources, and cultural features through development design guidelines. 3. Promote environmentally sensitive design and green building/ energy efficiency techniques in new development. 4. Amend the lighting requirement in rural villages to maintain “dark sky” lighting. Living Areas and Community Character

181

5. Promote economic development at rural community centers to meet the retail needs at the appropriate density and scale. 6. Ensure that rural development patterns do not force changes to the character of scenic and historic roads in order to meet required road capacities.

Eagle Harbor

Eagle Harbor is the smallest municipality in Prince Georgeâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s County. Incorporated in 1929, it is home to between approximately 60 to 360 residents depending upon the time of year. According to town history, development of the town began in the 1920s when an African-American developer, Walter Bean, purchased the land and began selling parcels from his office in Washington, D.C. In a time of segregation, Eagle Harbor quickly established itself as a vacation retreat for middle-class and upper-middle-class African-American families. John T. Stewart, Sr., a successful black undertaker in the District, was the Board of Commissionerâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s first chairman after incorporation. As of the summer of 2008, there were 60 year-round homes and vacation bungalows in the town. A community center with public access to the Patuxent River is a focal point for town meetings and community events. At the northwest corner and entrance to the town sits a former country store, now closed. Over the years, the Board of Commissioners and residents of Eagle Harbor have worked hard to fund and implement community improvement projects, often in partnership with county and other agencies, as well as the neighboring PEPCO (now Mirant) power plant. Town residents have expressed a desire to identify and implement additional improvements, including, but not limited to a public boat ramp, outdoor lighting in strategic locations, a public pier or dock for fishing, a country store, and more. The waterfront is the townâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s greatest asset, yet access to the water is limited. This portion of the Patuxent River has a lot of silt, which makes it difficult to launch boats from the shore. Whether this siltation is a result of the out flow from the Mirant plant to the south or from runoff upstream to the north needs to be determined and a long-term solution to correct the problem is necessary.

Fishing piers add to the ambiance in Eagle Harbor. 182

One of the challenges the town faces is the age of the majority of the housing stock. Although there have been a few new houses built in recent years, the majority are older houses that are in varying degrees of repair with several currently boarded. Like many communities built in the early 1900s, Eagle Harbor is not served by public water or sewer and the narrow (25-foot) lot Living Areas and Community Character

pattern requires lot assembly in order to build new houses. Both are constraints that have inhibited new development. The inability to expand the tax base by constructing new houses limits the services the town can provide for its residents. Town of Eagle Harbor Day, held the first Saturday each August, continues to showcase this small townâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s pride. Each year it draws together residents, their family members, and other invited guests for a parade and town festival complete with music, food, and games at the community center. Backyard celebrations and reunions of family and friends throughout the town are also common on this day. Policy Strengthen and enhance the Patuxent River waterfront in the Town of Eagle Harbor so that it can be actively enjoyed by all. Strategies 1. Work with the town commissioners and residents to establish public improvement priorities (i.e., lighting, a boat launch, etc.) and identify potential funding sources.

View facing south along the Patuxent River shore in Eagle Harbor with the Chalk Point Power Plant in the distance.

2. Create a public/private partnership with the Board of Commissioners, M-NCPPC Department of Parks and Recreation, DER, and appropriate state agencies for shoreline restoration and stabilization for beautification, halting erosion, and improving fish habitat. 3. Create a partnership with DER and other appropriate county and state agencies to promote energy efficiency improvements among homeowners, as well as environmentally-friendly landscaping techniques for the Chesapeake Bay Critical Area. Policy Provide the public infrastructure to ensure the residents are provided with adequate facilities. Strategy Work with the town commissioners and residents to create a priority listing of needed public improvements and funding sources. With an estimated population of 665 in 2007, the Town of Upper Marlboro covers 284 acres, or roughly 0.44 square miles, in the heart of Prince Georgeâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s County. The town was established in 1706 and became the county seat in 1721. It is a small town surrounded by suburban developments in a metropolitan area. Living Areas and Community Character

TOWN OF UPPER MARLBORO AND VICINITY 183

The Town of Upper Marlboro is the subject of a separate revitalization action plan that establishes a vision for the community and implementation program for inclusion in the subregion plan. The action plan study area includes the municipal boundary of the town and the key properties west of the town that are important to its future. This area is referred to as the Town of Upper Marlboro and vicinity is shown on Map 25. The town is bordered to the north by two developments: the Marlboro Square and the Marlboro Crossroads Shopping Centers, which serves as the primary commercial services hub for the local community. This area is a gateway to Upper Marlboro entering from the north and west on Brown Station Road and Old Marlboro Pike. South of town and the MD 4 gateway interchange lies the Prince Georgeâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s County Equestrian Center and Show Place Arena,

A panoramic view of some of the businesses on Main Street in the Town of Upper Marlboro.

Town Core

184

a major venue for a variety of events, shows, and equestrian activities that is the second largest draw for visitors to Upper Marlboro (the county government center is the largest). A discussion of opportunities to enhance and strengthen this facility and recommendations for improvements are included in the Public Facilities chapter of the plan. Upper Marlboroâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s distinctive town core is generally divided into four quadrants by two primary, commercial-oriented streets: (1) the north-south Elm/Water Street; and (2) the east-west Main Street corridor that is looped by two streets serving major government offices, Governor Oden Bowie Drive to the north and Judges Drive to the south. The northwestern quadrant holds the post office, the Old Marlboro Academy/Marlboro High School, the old Marlboro Primary School, Dr. William Beaneâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s grave site and a variety of Main Street and Elm Street businesses. The southwestern quadrant is primarily dedicated to retail and office uses lining Main and Water Streets. The northeastern quadrant is much larger and is anchored by the County Administration Building (CAB) and its parking garage, the Duvall building (which serves as a county annex) the Upper Marlboro Public Library, and an assortment of law offices, eateries, and retail shops with rear surface parking. The largest town core area, the southeastern quadrant is anchored by the largest user, the county courts (and supporting parking deck) with surrounding offices, sandwich shops, and a few retail establishments lining Water and Main Streets. Living Areas and Community Character

MAP 24: TOWN OF UPPER MARLBORO

Living Areas and Community Character

185

Some commercial buildings in the commercial core of the Town of Upper Marlboro.

Residential Neighborhoods

Town of Upper Marlboro Vision and Action Plan

Public and private employees, along with government services users, swell Upper Marlboro’s daytime population to approximately 6,000 people. These individuals are the primary patrons of town businesses. In 1993, new courthouse construction caused the business composition of the town to change when, after the completion of courthouse renovations, a number of court offices relocated back into the new courthouse from temporary Main Street space. This left a sudden, large inventory of retail/office space available for lease. Instead of this space being leased by small retail establishments or small service businesses—the ideal occupants for Main Street groundfloor commercial space—many court-oriented businesses moved into the space, including law offices and bail bondsmen. These ground-floor uses persist today and detract from street activity. The majority of residential uses are single-family homes and townhouses; these uses occur mainly in the western and northwestern portions of the town. The residential area of Upper Marlboro is generally composed of four distinct west-side neighborhoods: (1) the historic single-family residential areas of Old Mill Road, Elm Street, Main Street, Church Street, Valley Lane and Old Crain Highway; (2) the Rectory Lane/School Lane single-family neighborhood; (3) the Spring Branch Estates single-family neighborhood; and (4) the Marlborough Town neighborhood, a townhouse and apartment community. One small pocket of residences also can be found along East Main Street between Governor Oden Bowie Drive and the Western Branch. The older residential area in the west part of town has recently been designated as an Historic District in the National Register of Historic Places. In 2008, the town and The Maryland-National Capital Park and Planning Commission undertook a joint effort to develop a revitalization action plan for the town. The plan included intensive public involvement: stakeholder interviews, a series of three public meetings, four advisory committee meetings, and a town hall meeting. This community input served as the foundation for a vision for Upper Marlboro’s future that helped shape the recommendations in the action plan: Town of Upper Marlboro Vision “Downtown is the historic heart of Upper Marlboro. In the future, it will be an attractive and vibrant place to work, dine, shop and to enjoy the town’s natural beauty. While still a small town, Upper Marlboro will be known throughout the region as a quaint historic village with a strong reputation as a familyfriendly community. The town’s water and natural amenities will create opportunities for passive recreation, new residential living, and community-based activities that celebrate the town’s heritage. Upper Marlboro will also be a place where

186

Living Areas and Community Character

local residents and visitors will be able to enjoy downtown, whether browsing the local shops, relaxing at a café, attending a community function at the Old Academy building, or meeting friends for an evening meal and walk along the pond. In the future, a new town/county partnership will help address longstanding issues and give Upper Marlboro residents a greater stake in the future of their community.”

Key Principles Building upon the town vision, a number of principles were created to guide plan recommendations for development and enhancements in and around the Town of Upper Marlboro: • All initiatives should support the town’s sustainability. • The Show Place Arena must continue to serve as a regional attraction. • The Marlborough Village Shopping Center is a prime location for larger retail that cannot be accommodated in the smaller, older structures within the town core. Together, the town core retail and the Marlborough Village Shopping Center can fulfill the retail and service needs of the town’s residents and worker population. • Commercial and employment redevelopment to the east and southeast must be held to a higher standard of development which complements—not duplicates—the town’s architecture and character. • The town is currently buffered from surrounding development and roadways by a greenbelt composed of the Western Branch corridor, the Schoolhouse Pond/M-NCPPC park lands, the Villages of Marlborough Golf Course, and undeveloped lands to the west and south. Future development should promote these assets and continue this greenbelt loop in the form of parks, bike trails, open space buffers, etc. • Establish a regular county/town round table discussion on issues and solutions. An implementation action plan was created to guide the town in attracting context-sensitive infill development and making public improvements that will complement the small-town character of Upper Marlboro and enhance the town’s role as the county government center. The plan was based on an evaluation of physical environment and market analysis. Key recommendations have been included below for four major elements: Transportation, Public Open Space, Economic Development and Land Use, and Historic Preservation. Although known throughout the region as a quiet, small town, Upper Marlboro’s daily influx of workers and visitors and frequent weekend events typically create traffic problems associated with larger communities. While the town has good access to regional highways via US 301 and MD 4, its close proximity to these Living Areas and Community Character

187

highways also causes cut-through traffic and congestion when traffic incidents occur, as traffic is diverted through town. Special events at the Equestrian Center/Show Place Arena also cause major congestion. Poor drainage on Water Street and occasional flooding causes traffic and access problems as well.

Transportation

Upper Marlboro currently has a total of two traffic signals in the town core, which is inadequate for peak periods of morning and evening traffic through the town. This results in congested roads as thousands of workers and visitors enter and leave Upper Marlboro each day. Improving the timing of traffic signals would keep traffic speeds lower and staggered queuing would spread vehicle loads over a larger proportion of the street network including behind the town core (in the case of the MD 4 interchange). Traffic circulation in the town core also can be difficult due to the limited street pattern. The vision and action plan recommends transportation improvements that will improve circulation and access to local businesses. It is recommended that Pratt and Main Streets be converted to a short one-way couplet, with Pratt Street running eastbound and Main Street running westbound on the western edge of town (see illustration). This new one-way pair would also allow for parallel parking that is not possible today because of the two-way traffic. The two roads could be redesigned to create an east end elliptical roundabout, so that businesses on either side of the one-way system would be as visible and accessible as they are today. This solution also would create a civic space like that at the Old Crain Highway Monument on the west end. Other road alignment improvements are recommended to enhance vehicular access and circulation at the western entrances to the town on Old Crain Highway and Old Marlboro Pike and on MD 202 (Largo Road) at Race Track Road. Upper Marlboro’s town core environment suffers from an incomplete and inconsistent streetscape system and a poorly-scaled, highway-oriented vehicular directional sign system. For Upper Marlboro to be better perceived it must have a complete, higherquality streetscape that creates a comfortable environment for pedestrians. Although the town core is walkable with a pedestrianscale environment and brick-paved sidewalks, there is a lack of sidewalks on key roadway segments and a total lack of bicycle facilities. Pedestrian system improvements—particularly new and upgraded trails and sidewalks—are essential to the town’s vitality. For example, a poor connection exists between Main Street and the courthouse, two major town core destinations. Although the area south of the courthouse possesses an attractive pastoral character and has manicured street trees and a mature tree canopy, it lacks sidewalks and thus limits pedestrian circulation options. A walkway along the south side of Judges Drive should be constructed to connect Water Street to areas south and west of the town core and Governor Oden Bowie Drive to areas north and east of the town core. This walkway should become part of an overall

188

Living Areas and Community Character

enhanced system that provides safe, comfortable pedestrian access to all parts of town. In addition, connections should be provided between the town core and residential neighborhoods. Walkways linking the town core with the neighborhood areas to the west are virtually nonexistent in Upper Marlboro, with the exception of an east-side walkway along Old Marlboro Pike. Residents need to be better connected with the town core and open space amenities through new sidewalk extensions and/or trails along Old Marlboro Pike, Main Street, and Old Crain Highway out to the Boys and Girls Club recreation park. Valley Lane is a historic lane that passes by Trinity Episcopal Church and its cemetery, and curves around to the historically important African-American cemetery of the Union Memorial Methodist Church. Valley Lane leads to a small AfricanAmerican enclave that developed around the site of the first Union Memorial Methodist Church and a Freedman’s Bureau School that are no longer extant. Union Memorial Methodist Cemetery is subject to erosion from water running downhill from Valley Lane. The overwhelming presence of overhead utility wires and poles on the narrow walkways of Main, Water, and Elm Streets also act as obstacles to pedestrian movement and diminish the town core streetscape. Equally important to implementing new streetscape enhancements is the need to consolidate poles and wires while also relocating utilities either underground or to the rear of properties, whichever alternative is most cost-effective. While this is primarily an aesthetic improvement, it is also functional in that underground utilities fail less in storms and are easier to access on the ground. Policies 1. Improve the efficiency of the town core road network to enhance traffic flow and public safety. 2. Improve vehicular access throughout Upper Marlboro and relieve traffic congestion in the town core. 3. Create a walkable community that promotes alternatives to automobile use. Strategies 1. Prioritize and implement the following transportation improvements: • Transform Main and Pratt Streets into a one-way couplet. • Realign the Old Crain Highway/Old Marlboro Pike/Main Street intersection to form a traffic circle or roundabout. • Improve the three-way crosswalk at the intersection of Elm Street and Governor Oden Bowie Drive.

Living Areas and Community Character

189

• Evaluate installing new traffic signals on (1) Water Street at the MD 4 interchange ramps, (2) Judges Drive at Water Street, and (3) Governor Oden Bowie Drive at Elm Street. • Evaluate realigning Judges Drive to connect with Governor Oden Bowie Drive at Main Street/Marlboro Pike and create a four-leg signalized intersection. • Support the future relocation of existing businesses on MD 725 to allow for the realignment of Race Track Road with MD 202. 2. Evaluate the following improvements for future implementation: • Consider widening the existing Water Street Bridge or constructing a new parallel bridge. • Consider extending School Lane and linking it to the future Brown Station Road Extension and Old Crain Highway. • Consider constructing a neighborhood street connection from Valley Lane through Water Street and continuing to the Judges Drive intersection. • Evaluate the historic character of Valley Lane and maintain its historic alignment to protect the historic Union Memorial Cemetery from further erosion. • Explore constructing a new frontage road along the southern side of MD 4 as part of a future development adjacent to the Prince George’s County Equestrian Center. • Consider realigning and including a traffic circle at the intersection of Water Street and the Show Place Arena entrance at the MD 4 eastbound ramps. • Construct a new neighborhood street along the old railway right-of-way that connects the Valley Lane extension to Old Crain Highway. • Construct Brown Station Road Extension between Old Marlboro Pike and Old Crain Highway and establish stop control at the new intersection with Old Crain Highway. • Improve and realign Marlboro Race Track Road to connect with MD 202 (Largo Road) at Marlboro Pike (MD 725). • Study the impact of county employee parking on traffic conditions in the town. • Consider connecting Judge’s Drive to Race Track Road to provide additional access to the town and relieve traffic congestion. 3. Develop and implement wayfinding signage for vehicles to encourage a “Park Once” approach whereby visitors park at a central location and have an easy walk to all destinations within Upper Marlboro’s town core. 190

Living Areas and Community Character

4. Develop and complete a pedestrian/bicycle network. • Create an interconnected sidewalk/walkway/trail system. The system should connect all parts of town, including the Western Branch, Schoolhouse and Depot Ponds, Judges Drive, Marlboro Race Track Road, the Boys and Girls Club property, and new development on the western side of town on the Clagett and Smith sites. • Provide sidewalks for pedestrian access to connect residential neighborhoods along Old Marlboro Pike, Main Street, and Old Crain Highway and new neighborhood crosswalks at Spring Branch Road, Old Mill Road, and the Rectory Lane intersections of Old Marlboro Pike. • Construct bicycle improvements: on-street bike lanes or “share the road” lanes on Main and Water Streets, including one-way pairs along Pratt Street and Main Street. • Install bicycle racks in public buildings and parking lots to encourage transportation by bicycle. 5. As new development is completed, including the buildout of the Equestrian Center/Show Place Arena Complex, investigate upgrading and branding a unique town “trolley” with new bus stops, bus shelters, and real-time “next bus” information to connect town destinations. The Town of Upper Marlboro is fortunate to have a variety of park, plaza, and open space amenities in the town core and surrounding neighborhood areas. The Old Duvall Courthouse park, county mall area, brick streetscapes, Marlboro Academy/ Dr. Beane’s grave hillside, Schoolhouse Pond amenities, Darnall’s Chance amenities, landmark gateways, recreation areas, cemeteries, and greenway corridors all create an attractive public realm framework that is unique and extremely valuable, for a town of this size. The condition, design, and connectivity of these facilities varies greatly. Many of the brick sidewalks are uneven and in need of repair. Overall maintenance is lacking and there is a need to better maintain and upgrade these facilities. Schoolhouse Pond, centrally located across from the County Administration Building, is a community gathering point. Its boardwalk is used for active recreation, including walking, jogging, and fishing. While it has a few benches for picnicking, it lacks many amenities. A facility upgrade can fulfill the needs of the community for an outdoor gathering space and encourage more recreational activities. This upgrade could include the construction of a community amphitheater that is compatible with adjacent residential uses. Opportunities also exist to create new open space amenities as part of town core infill development or development of larger Living Areas and Community Character

191

Public Open Space

vacant lots. Developing a new park/plaza at Main Street and Governor Oden Bowie Drive on county and M-NCPPC property should be a top priority, as it will help link Governor Oden Bowie Drive visually and physically with Main Street, creating an inviting new northeastern gateway to the town core. In addition, development on the Clagett and Smith tracts on the western side of town should incorporate new neighborhood open space. Although the town is surrounded by significant natural assets, including the Western Branch, Schoolhouse, and Depot Ponds, they often are hidden and/or difficult to access. Better connections should be provided to these environmental amenities. The Western Branch trail system should be upgraded with passive recreation and trailhead parking facilities at the East Main Street/MD 725 crossing as well as at the Water Street crossing near the Old Port site. These site improvements should follow green building principles and include permeable parking surfaces, stormwater retention and remediation, and lighting compliance with the dark skies initiatives.

The Old Academy/Upper Marlboro High School, sits on a prominent piece of land at the end of Elm Street. This site could be redeveloped with a new park or plaza.

Policy Enhance public access to and use of the town coreâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s natural amenities and provide additional places for community gatherings and improve the aesthetic appearance of the public realm. Strategies 1. Enhance the Schoolhouse Pond park with new amenities, such as a community amphitheater, park, playground, and pavilion and ensure consistent maintenance and improvement of the Schoolhouse Pond boardwalk. 2. Create a new pocket park/plaza on the corner of Main and Elm Streets. 3. Extend the Judges Drive walkway loop along the new Western Branch trail system with passive recreation and trailhead parking facilities at the East Main Street/MD 725 crossing and the Water Street crossing at the Old Port site. 4. Create a gateway park/plaza at Main Street and Governor Oden Bowie Drive. 5. Provide a new neighborhood park and walkway/bikeway linkages within new single-family residential infill projects on the Clagett and Smith sites. 6. Develop an attractive pedestrian connection from the town core to the Show Place Arena. 7. Upgrade the Depot Pond trail system to connect to the community center and proposed Western Branch trail.

192

Living Areas and Community Character

8. Develop and implement a site and landscape plan to enhance access to Dr. Beane’s grave with an appropriate pathway and interpretive signage, and ensure consistent maintenance of the hillside and gravesite. The future vitality of Upper Marlboro relies on compatible new residential development and commercial/mixed-use development in the town core. Given the largely “built out” nature of Upper Marlboro, future redevelopment within the town must respect existing use patterns within the neighborhood areas, while looking to infill and strengthen the gaps in use within the town’s business core.

Economic Development and Land Use

Town Core Economic Development Given Upper Marlboro’s relatively small land area and the large percentage (approaching 60 percent) of the town dedicated to county administration, courts, the School Board, library, parking, historic, and open space usage, as well as federal post office and courts uses, limited opportunities for economic development exist in the town core. However, several potential sites for infill development/redevelopment exist along Main and Water Streets and at the county daycare site, the fire department site, the town maintenance garage site, the Old Marlboro Academy site, and possibly some small frontage sites along Judges Drive and Governor Oden Bowie Drive. A new land use designation of mixed use is recommended for the town core. This would allow maximum flexibility to promote a mix of commercial development (retail and office) as well as infill residential development where appropriate. Rezoning will be required to encourage and facilitate this mix of new development that will complement and strengthen the town core’s existing character. It is recommended that a Mixed-Use Town Center (M-U-TC) development plan be completed to rezone the area to an M‑U‑TC district. This development plan would include design standards, such as building heights, and the possibility for the creation of a local committee to review development proposals. Although major rezoning for this area is not recommended in this plan, small changes are proposed to ensure that new development is compatible and enhances the area. Of particular importance are the properties at the entrance to the town on MD 725. These properties are currently zoned Commercial Miscellaneous (C-M). The properties currently contain a mix of uses—a dry cleaning establishment, car service shop, and two houses. C-M zoning is not appropriate at this location since it focuses on highway-oriented uses. The plan recommends the rezoning of the commercially zoned properties to a more appropriate zoning category for retail uses, Commercial Shopping Center (C-S-C). In addition, properties owned by the county and M-NCPPC along the Western Branch that are used for floodplain Living Areas and Community Character

193

control and park and open space are recommended to be rezoned to Reserved-Open-Space (R-O-S). The vision and action plan identifies a number of sites in Upper Marlboro where efforts should be focused to attract new private development. Four key sites on Main Street have been identified as critical for filling in gaps that currently exist in the street wall and providing floor space for additional commercial uses, which in turn will generate more street activity for residents and businesses. These sites include (1) the existing surface lot on the corner of Water and Main Streets, (2) the surface parking lot adjacent to China Taste, (3) the front part of the surface parking lot adjacent to the volunteer fire department, and (4) the corner of the County Administration Building parking deck. A new mixed-use building is also recommended for Water Street near the courthouse. A new infill building in this location will help create a cohesive entryway to the town core and link the courthouse site with Main Street. Opportunities for new condominiums and townhouses at appropriate locations should be considered to improve the mix of housing available in the town core. New infill housing development in downtown districts is becoming more popular around the country and could be an attractive option for Upper Marlboro in the right location. Upper Marlboro has been a small town that primarily caters to single-family homeowners. Over time, the town’s lack of housing diversity has limited options for young singles, young couples, and seniors looking to downsize from their current single-family homes. According to local real estate professionals, there is pent-up demand for other housing types that meet the needs of people who are not inclined, nor ready, to purchase singlefamily homes. The town’s ability to attract younger households, particularly households headed by workers employed by the county court system or administration, should be considered an important goal. This could reduce the amount of daily commuting traffic into and out of the town. It would also bring new local consumers to town to support local retailers, which is critical to ensuring the improvement of the town core’s business mix. County employees, young professionals, and “empty-nester” households are the primary targets for non-single-family housing. New residential condominiums and townhouses should be developed along the Western Branch off a realigned and extended Judges Drive. Most town core infill will occur on underutilized properties, such as surface parking lots. Surface lots detract from the town core streetscape and diminish the pedestrian experience. For example, the presence of surface parking lots on both sides of the mall visually impairs the quality of the space and discourages pedestrian activity. Two new infill buildings and/or an outdoor farmers market pavilion are recommended to help define the edges of the existing open space. The proposed structures are not meant to reduce any of the existing open space but rather to introduce and encourage public use and activity in the plaza. 194

Living Areas and Community Character

At the same time, however, providing adequate parking is critical to new development. Although there are a large number of parking spaces available throughout the town, these spaces are spread out. In addition, with the exception of the two public garages for the county and courthouse employees, all other parking is located in surface lots. Much of this parking lot is privately owned and for employees in existing buildings. Visitor parking is limited to metered public parking in several surface lots, onstreet parking, and in the Equestrian Center/Show Place Arena lot off MD 4 south of the town core. It should be noted that the Equestrian Center/Show Place Arena parking availability is becoming more limited and that a need exists for additional parking spaces to support the townâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s activities. The town, in conjunction with the county, should implement a shared parking program which includes structured parking, particularly as part of new development in town. In addition to focusing on new development in the town core, the town should work on improving its mix of businesses and provide programs to retain and support those that provide community-serving retail and services. This might include hiring a part-time Main Street business marketing manager whose primary role would be to help market existing town core businesses and recruit new businesses to fill vacancies. In a parallel effort, the Town Commissioners and county must encourage the business community to organize an Upper Marlboro merchants association to better coordinate and communicate the needs of the businesses to the Town Commission and marketing manager. While new development will be initiated by the private sector, the town may have to encourage urban infill development by creating partnerships with private property owners and developers. One way for the town to improve the town coreâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s redevelopment potential is to reinvest in its streetscape (e.g., streets, sidewalks, pedestrian benches, signage, landscaping, etc.).

Residential Development New residential development also can help the town expand its tax base. Future residential infill should reinforce the existing single-family development pattern on the western side of town. The current land use and zoning for these residential areas should not be changed. Instead, emphasis must be placed on appropriate design of new residential infill to ensure its compatibility with existing neighborhood character. The vision and action plan recommends that new development on the western edge of town consist of housing to strengthen the areaâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s residential character. In some cases, properties are landlocked and new road construction is necessary to provide access. The connection of Brown Station Road with Living Areas and Community Character

A National Register property in the Town of Upper Marlboro is an example of an early town dwelling associated with many prominent local families. 195

Old Crain Highway would provide access to the Sasscer farmland property that is currently zoned Rural-Residential (R-R) for single-family home development. This road project is in the county Capital Improvement Program, and priority should be given to constructing the road (which would also improve circulation in the town). The new development should be compatible in scale and character with the adjacent established neighborhoods and should be linked with the existing town street network. The new Brown Station Road Extension should be planned to ensure that it preserves mature trees in the area to the greatest extent possible and should be designed as a greenway with a landscaped median. The undeveloped area on the south side of Old Crain Highway is currently zoned Rural-Residential (R-R) as well. If residential development were to occur on that site, it should ensure the retention of the largest possible amount of mature trees and should be planned with larger, rural-style lots. The proposed development should guarantee compatibility with adjacent residences, provide appropriate connectivity with the existing street network, and encompass a neighborhood green space. Policies 1. Improve the town core’s business mix to better serve the needs of Upper Marlboro residents, workers, and visitors. 2. Promote infill and site redevelopment in the town core to discourage commercial encroachment in residential areas. 3. Diversify the town’s residential products to attract young professionals, young families, and “empty-nester” households. 4. Seek a more efficient use of the town core’s parking resources. 5. Improve the availability and appearance of parking in the town core. Strategies 1. Create a program to retain current community-serving businesses and recruit new businesses to fill existing building vacancies. 2. Consider hiring a main street business manager. 3. Promote and incentivize mixed-use infill development at priority locations: • Four vacant sites along Main Street (two-story maximum buildings). • Water Street (three-story maximum building). • Mall plaza (two-story maximum building and/or farmers market pavilion).

196

Living Areas and Community Character

4. Work with the county to promote the adaptive re-use of the Old Marlboro Academy building to a publicly or privately owned community civic use. 5. Construct a new surface parking lot on the northeastern corner of Old Mill Road and Elm Street to support the Old Marlboro Academy re-use and create structured parking on the Water Street shared surface parking lot to support new mixed-use infill buildings. 6. Encourage single-family residential infill vacant sites at key locations: • The northwestern corner of Elm Street and Old Mill Road. • The Clagett and Smith sites on the western side of town. • The vacant site along Old Marlboro Pike.

The Traband House, built in the 1890’s in the Town of Upper Marlboro is a good example of late Victorian architecture.

• The site south of Old Crain Highway zoned RuralResidential (R-R). 7. Promote residential infill development overlooking the Western Branch (maximum three stories). Relocate the county daycare facility and volunteer fire department to enable this redevelopment. 8. Pursue shared parking agreements and parking reconfigurations to optimize both public and private surface and structured parking resources in the town core. 9. Develop an effective parking system by consolidating town core parking into centralized, shared, consumer-oriented facilities in each block. 10. Upgrade surface parking lots in town with paving and striping, landscaped screening, lighting, and signage. 11. Increase and improve parking at the Equestrian Center/Show Place Arena parking lot for town core – off site parking. Upper Marlboro began as a tobacco port town along the banks of the Western Branch of the Patuxent River when it was a much larger, less silted, and navigable body of water. Like most historic communities, Upper Marlboro has evolved since it was first created in the eighteenth century, although its function as a government center has endured. In the mid- to late-twentieth-century the town core saw major changes, including multiple tear-downs, modern construction, and severe alterations to existing historic resources. These changes have impacted the town’s historic character to the degree that the overall architectural integrity of the town has been compromised. Upper Marlboro may no longer retain enough historic fabric to qualify as a local or National Register of Historic Living Areas and Community Character

HISTORIC PRESERVATION

197

Places historic district. The community needs to look at other options to protect its remaining historic properties. Individually listing buildings is one possibility, as is a multiple listing in the National Register of Historic Places. Specific areas of the town should be reviewed for their potential to form smaller historic districts (e.g., a residential historic district). This is particularly true given the large number of historic sites in the residential areas of the town. Even with the building alterations in the town core, the town’s appearance is still that of a small historic town. New development should build on this theme and can enhance the building fabric that is left. Appropriate design standards should be developed that respect the historic character that remains. The town also should develop activities to promote and celebrate its rich history, such as walking tours and marketing materials. Policies 1. Maintain the integrity and character of Upper Marlboro’s historic neighborhoods and town core. 2. Celebrate Upper Marlboro’s extensive history and historic resources. Strategies Tobacco barns are found throughout the subregion.

1. Conduct a survey to identify additional properties that may be individually eligible for local or National Register listing. In addition, evaluate the residential areas of the town to determine if there is potential to create a residential historic district. 2. Develop a preservation plan for the town. 3. Create voluntary design guidelines for the town’s undesignated historic resources and incorporate design standards for these resources into a future M-U-TC design standard. 4. Encourage creative adaptive use of older buildings in town. Work with the Parks Department to transform the Old Marlboro Academy’s headmaster’s house into a town visitors center. 5. Document the Old Marlboro Academy building through measured drawings and large-format photography to the standards of the Historic American Buildings Survey (HABS). 6. Create a walking tour highlighting existing historic buildings and historic sites in Upper Marlboro. 7. Create interpretive panels or wayside signs for installation at key locations in Upper Marlboro. 8. Create brochures illustrating the history and architecture of the town.

198

Living Areas and Community Character

The area east of the Town of Upper Marlboro was also analyzed in detail as part of the Subregion 6 plan process. This area is referred to as Greater Upper Marlboro and is strategically located just north of the intersection of US 301 and MD 4 and offers a unique opportunity for new development and redevelopment. As described in the Development Pattern/Land Use chapter, this plan supports redevelopment and infill development in existing and planned development areas over “green field” development that takes up natural resource lands. This plan emphasizes the need to develop strategies with a focus on the industrial area east of the Town of Upper Marlboro, concentrating on improving the gateway MD 725 corridor leading into the town and county seat as well as the four quadrants of the US 301 and MD 725 intersection.

GREATER UPPER MARLBORO

MD 725 at the intersection with US 301 is a gateway into the Town of Upper Marlboro and an important part of the greater road system in the area. The new interchange at US 301 and MD 4 highly impacts the land to the west of present US 301. Policies and strategies have been developed to guide future development and redevelopment for the land on the west side of US 301 that can best support the Town of Upper Marlboro’s revitalization. This area represents an opportunity for the public sector to maximize the use of existing and planned infrastructure while promoting attractive and compact development. MD 725 west of US 301 is a primary access road into the Town of Upper Marlboro, the county seat, and as such, has a high degree of visibility. It is an important image corridor for Upper Marlboro and Prince George’s County because of its prominent role in transportation and its linkage from US 301 and MD 202 to the downtown area.

MD 725 CORRIDOR

Uses along the street include retail, service commercial, residential, and industrial. Land uses are varied, building and parcel relationships to the roadway are not uniform, and some properties are poorly maintained or vacant. Many of these properties are located in the floodplain and are subject to periodic flooding. These conditions do not provide a pleasant travel experience through the corridor and convey a poor image of Upper Marlboro. Private investment in this gateway area is desirable to upgrade the mix and type of uses. Barriers to investment include current market demand and costs, design, and policy issues related to development in the floodplain. In the short-term, improvements to site and corridor design would significantly upgrade the appearance of the corridor, improve gateway image to the county seat, and help prime the area for future investment. One of the most effective methods to improve a corridor is to develop a corridor aesthetic that softens adjacent land uses, defines the corridor, and directs/keeps views within the defined travel corridor. Living Areas and Community Character

199

Southwest Quadrant The area on the west side of US 301 south of MD 725 conveys a mixed image of Upper Marlboro. Uses such as Home Depot, built in 2004, mixed with older 1950s and 1960s warehouse/storage and industrial uses create a haphazard, disjointed appearance, lacking visual identity or continuity. There are approximately 17 parcels north of Home Depot with an average size of 1.7 acres and 4 larger parcels to the south averaging 5.8 acres. A large part of the area is in the 100-year floodplain, which complicates the redevelopment investment and reinvestment potential. Immediately north of Home Depot is the right-of-way for the future MD 202 relocation (See Map 26: Greater Upper Marlboro). The area’s businesses range from retail establishments (McDonald’s, 84 Lumber) to warehouse/storage facilities (Ripple’s Service and Fort Knox) to professional service business (Enterprise Rent-a-car and Limousines, Inc.) to industrial uses (Chaney Concrete and Davenport Insulation). A class “B” office building shares a parcel with a heavy equipment rental company at the northwest quadrant of US 301 and MD 4. This disparate grouping of uses is the result of the historic uses in the area combined with an evolving marketplace. The area historically housed tobacco warehouses, creating the industrial/ warehouse base. However, these businesses eventually became untenable, opening opportunities for new uses. A good example is the Shell gas station site at the corner of MD 725 and US 301, which formerly housed a tobacco warehouse. Redevelopment and reinvestment potential is mixed. Interviews with businesses revealed the following: Several businesses are not dependent upon their current locations; they have regional customers/clientele and could relocate; several businesses noted inadequacies about their current site, such as needing a larger site and/or desire to have better access from US 301, suggesting opportunities to work with the businesses to improve their situation; and some businesses/property owners will be less interested in change/relocation because they benefit from their current location, rent, and/or property valuation. A comprehensive reinvestment strategy might nevertheless be attractive to them. While investment and redevelopment would improve the image and appearance of the area and increase property values, it would need to be done very carefully. Comprehensive redevelopment would likely need government support and would not be inexpensive. While redevelopment would create new opportunities and improve the image of the area, the loss of existing businesses and their related jobs could negate gains. Redevelopment of the study area faces four primary challenges. 1. A large percentage of the study area is in the floodplain. As such, particular attention will need to be placed on the final 200

Living Areas and Community Character

design of the redevelopment strategy to incorporate local, state, and federal interests and requirements. A comprehensive approach is recommended considering the entire floodplain on the east side of the Town of Upper Marlboro. 2. The county will have to actively participate in parcel assembly to create larger, more easily developable land bays. It is very unlikely that a private interest will undertake this effort. 3. Almost all of the sites in this area are occupied by viable businesses. The county would have to develop a relocation program to assist any businesses that would be displaced. 4. Redevelopment will need to consider future plans for US 301. The current limited access and relocation plan could adversely impact the long-term viability of these sites, particularly the fast-food restaurants and the gas stations, by greatly reducing the direct access of pass-by traffic. This area is recommended for future study to determine the best strategy to enhance and revitalize this area. Opportunities for redevelopment and the most appropriate land use for this area should be addressed as part of this study.

Northwest Quadrant The Future Land Use Map designates a mixed-use area in this quadrant north of MD 725 and east of US 301. This area represents an opportunity to promote new development in close proximity to the interchange of MD 4 and US 301. The new development would provide an attractive gateway as well as new retail, office, and residential uses. This new development would also serve the increased demand generated from the new residential developments north of Upper Marlboro in Beechtree, Balmoral, and Locust Hill. A new road network is proposed as part of the mixed-use development to provide better circulation and improve access to the Town of Upper Marlboro. Opportunities for development in this area are discussed below.

Development Concepts Map 26 shows the development framework for the area, which includes five development bays, or areas. These bays represent the most appropriate areas for development as they are in the Developing Tier and outside of known environmentally sensitive areas and floodplains. The concepts are suggestions for ways these bays could develop. The concept descriptions include design principles which should be incorporated into any development that is proposed, even if different from the concepts illustrated here.

Development Bay 1. This bay is envisioned as a mixed-use or commercial development focusing on retail with a potential office component. Designed as a village center, it will open directly to the US 301 access road. Building placement would Living Areas and Community Character

201

MAP 25: GREATER UPPER MARLBORO

202

Living Areas and Community Character

line the west, north, and south edges with an internal road traversing the site east/west from the “new” US 301 access road into Development Bay 2. The development character is envisioned as two-story retail with a potential office component above. Store fronts would be human in scale with retail shops having awnings on the first floor. The adjacent sidewalks between the stores and parking bays would be intensively landscaped with ample seating areas for pedestrians. Outparcels would have a strong connection to other retail stores and have the same architectural character as the dominant building.

Development Bay 2. This bay is a high-ground peninsula bordered to the north and south by relatively significant drainage corridors; the western most edges are in floodplain. This area could be an extension of the commercial development in Development Bay 1. This bay also provides an opportunity for residential development with a high number of “amenity” lots; lots backing-up to or adjacent to open space, in this case the drainage corridors. Single-family lots of approximately 7,000 feet square could be developed, yielding approximately 60 lots. The western most edge of the parcel provides an opportunity to connect to the floodplain and any development should provide an open space lot and trail connection and utilize this area as an amenity to the development.

Development Bay 3. This bay is another high-land peninsula bordered to the north and south by significant drainage corridors. Its proximity to an existing commercial development site and US 301 suggests that a higher density, alternative type of residential development may be appropriate such as zerolot line residential. An average lot size of approximately 6,800 square feet is envisioned, yielding approximately 30 lots.

Development Bay 4. This bay is a high-land peninsula bordered to the north with a significant drainage corridor and to the south by a large floodplain area which is consistently wet or marshy. It is the westernmost end of a larger area peninsula of land—west of Development Bay 3. This prime land provides an opportunity for a redevelopment to a higher grade of housing. The westernmost edge of the parcel provides an opportunity to make a pedestrian path to the larger floodplain. Redevelopment should provide an open space lot or trail connection to the floodplain. It should be noted that the development concept includes a possible new road south from Development Bays 3 and 4, creating an intersection with Chrysler Way Extended (P609).

Development Bay 5. This bay is located directly behind (to the north and west) of the existing Dunkin Donuts store. As an adjunct to that property, its proximity to US 301 and the gateway US 301/MD 725 intersection, this parcel would best be served by extending the existing commercial development into Living Areas and Community Character

203

it. Preliminary studies suggest that two outparcels appropriate for restaurants (one adjacent to US 301 and the other to MD 725) could be developed with an interior retail building of approximately 26,000 square feet.

Northeast Quadrant The northeast quadrant is primarily located in the Rural Tier and developed mostly with single-family houses. The intersection of US 301 and MD 725, which is in the Developing Tier, has two businesses located there, a gas station and a Southern States store. The east boundary is Old Crain Highway, a county-designated historic road. This section of road is designated as Historic Road 19 (Road 26 in 1739 and Road 3:1 in the 1828 Road Surveys). The west boundary is US 301. The north boundary is Village Drive and to the south is Old Marlboro Pike. As discussed in the Transportation chapter the proposed new alignment of US 301 impacts this quadrant, being located directly east of the Southern States store and continuing north to Village Drive. Along this part of Old Crain Highway there are four designated historic sites, one of which, Bowling Heights, is also listed in the National Register of Historic Places. This area of the subregion is primarily the only area north of MD 4 that retains its rural character with historic 1830s tobacco barns and horse pastures intermingled with a few modern houses on large parcels of land. This plan is not proposing changes to this quadrant to ensure the continuance of the current character of the community following the policies of the General Plan for the Rural Tier and also accounting for the US 301 realignment.

Southeast Quadrant The southeast quadrant, like the northeast quadrant, is primarily located in the Rural Tier. The portion of land in the Developing Tier is west of the realigned MD 202 and developed with a car dealership as well as a small parcel of land at the southeast corner of US 301/MD 725, which is developed with a fast-food restaurant and other commercial uses. The majority of the proposed new US 301/MD 4 interchange north of MD 4 is in this quadrant. This proposed interchange lies directly over the car dealership and will take almost a third of the land area of the quadrant. The east/west boundaries are Marlboro Pike and US 301 and the north/south boundaries are Marlboro Pike and MD 4. Similar to the northeast quadrant, there are historic resources in the Rural Tier portion of the area. Wells Corner, at the southwest corner of Marlboro Pike and Old Crain Highway, has had a tavern and country store for many years and serves the local community. South of the corner on the west side of old Marlboro Pike is Ashland, and on the east is Compton-Basset, both of which are also listed in the National Register of Historic places.

204

Living Areas and Community Character

This plan is not proposing any changes in this quadrant to ensure the preservation of the current character following the policies of the General Plan for the Rural Tier and also accounting for the US 301 realignment. The county should undertake a sector plan and SMA when the final location of the alignment of US 301 is determined or when other circumstances arise, to recommend a better mix of development to take advantage of the new alignment or to address these new circumstances, and to assess the appropriate uses and tier designation of property on the east side of US 301 from north Village Drive to MD 725. This sector plan should determine the most appropriate boundary for the Rural Tier and create design guidelines so that development on the edge of the Developing Tier creates an adequate buffer to protect rural communities. The sector plan should include all of the area impacted by the realigned highway so that a complete evaluation of land use and zoning can be undertaken to determine the most appropriate long-term development pattern for the greater Upper Marlboro area. Policy Promote high-quality development and redevelopment around the Town of Upper Marlboro at the intersection of US 301 and MD 725 Strategies MD 725 Corridor 1. Develop an implementation program that includes development requirements and necessary road improvements for the MD 725 corridor from US 301 to the Town of Upper Marlboro. This plan should include: • Incorporation of street trees and planting zones into design elements. • Develop a pedestrian safe zone with sidewalks and crosswalks. • Minimize parcel access points and consolidate curb cuts. • Focus efforts to improving signage: remove abandoned signs, consolidate signs when possible. 2. Work with business/property owners and develop incentives to improve facades, signs, and property appearance for businesses along the MD 725 corridor. 3. Promote signage and landscape improvements to “gateway” intersections: US 301/MD 725 and MD 202/MD 725. 4. Achieve consistent design and setbacks for public and private improvements along MD 725.

Living Areas and Community Character

205

5. Develop a comprehensive streetscape program for MD 725 which would include: • Installing curbs along MD 725 to create a safety barrier, define parcel entrances, and generally define the roadway corridor. • Screening surface parking with hedges, walls, or fences. • Installing ornamental street lighting. • Burying overhead utilities. • Creating a street tree planting buffer zone adjacent to the back of the curb. Southwest Quadrant Undertake a study and prepare an implementation plan for revitalizing the industrially and commercially zoned properties south of MD 725 west of US 301. As part of this study consider appropriate land use recommendations and site configurations in consideration of the floodplain. Northwest Quadrant 1. Rezone the properties south of Balmoral to MD 725 to the M-X-T Zone to maximize opportunities for high-quality, mixeduse development. 2. Provide a mix of development opportunities, including different types of housing that complement and support the Town of Upper Marlboro in the M-X-T Zone. 3. Incorporate development and redevelopment with the new US 301 limited access highway alignment and proposed parallel local access road. 4. Develop a secondary road network to provide access to development bays west of US 301 and minimize traffic impacts to US 301/MD 725 intersection. 5. Respect the extensive system of floodplain “fingers” by preserving natural drainage corridors and limiting development to upper level plateau areas. 6. Incorporate environmentally sensitive design techniques to reduce stormwater impacts. 7. Decrease development density/intensity as development moves away from MD 301 toward the floodplain. 8. Provide open space access into floodplains from edges of development parcels. 9. Consider county relocation assistance for residents of Peerless Avenue as this area develops.

206

Living Areas and Community Character

Marlton is a residential planned community (R-P-C) located south of Croom Road and east of US 301. The community was conceptualized in 1965 when a local developer, Orville Ritchie, bought a large tract of land and began building homes. Mr. Ritchie then applied for rezoning of 2,000 acres. In 1969 negotiations with regard to density, community character, and buffers led to the approval of the R-P-C by the County Council. The provisions set forth approved for Marlton allowed 6,392 single-family and multifamily dwellings units not to exceed 16.8 persons per acre. The approved plan was for a mix of housing densities and types throughout the site. The area included multifamily high density residential (Râ&#x20AC;&#x2018;10), medium-family medium density (R-18), townhouse (R-T), and any combination of single-family residential uses (R-80 and R-R) ranging from two to four units per acre. Marlton has always had a center commercial core and an area for employment as it was envisioned as being a completely selfsufficient and sustainable community in the then-rural countryside. Over the past 40 years there have been a number of amendments to this approved R-P-C making changes to the mix of uses and the density allowed in some areas. Sections known as Rollingwood, Rosaryville Estates, and part of Curbside were the first to develop while the remaining land was sold to other developers that eventually built single-family homes, townhouses, and garden apartments. Residential development did not occur quickly due to factors such as lack of adequate road infrastructure, water, sewer, and physical barriers such as the CSX railroad track and creeks. Furthermore, weak economic conditions also slowed development during the 1970s and 1980s. The pace of development increased in the late 1980s. Several developers bought over 1,000 acres of land to build townhouses and single-family detached homes. As Marlton continued to grow, the main entrance proved inadequate for the increased traffic flow. Heathermore Boulevard was built to accommodate new residents and today there are plans to expand this road southeast toward Duley Station Road. Heathermore Boulevard is the main corridor connecting the town center with the rest of the community. While West Marlton is developed, East Marlton has not developed, primarily because of the need to cross over the CSX railroad tracks that physically divide the community.

MARLTON

The entrance feature to the planned community of Marlton.

Today, Marltonâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s character can be described as an inclusive suburban residential community that integrates various residential densities and commercial uses. These factors, along with the mature trees and tranquil atmosphere, define the makeup of Marlton. Marltonâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s final phases of development includes a commercial center as envisioned in the original plans, although at a smaller scale. Significant residential development is expected on the east side of Marlton. Heathermore Boulevard now stops at the tracks and a bridge is planned to provide access to the new residential development as well as the planned linear community park which Living Areas and Community Character

207

is just to the east of the railroad tracks. It is estimated that an additional 1,328 dwelling units are to be built in the eastern part of Marlton, which would result in 4,500+ units at the time of buildout excluding any county-owned land that could be a surplus property in the future. This number is below the originally approved density.

These townhouses are an example of the diversity of housing types available in the subregion.

Property maintenance and code enforcement in the older neighborhoods has been an issue in Marlton as well as the rest of the subregion. Ensuring that owners keep up their property in a consistent manner is vital to the well being and vitality of these neighborhoods within the larger Marlton community. When first conceived in the 1960s, Marlton was planned to become a city of the future; having a civic space is the first step and this was the plan. This commercial area is one of the last pieces of undeveloped properties in West Marlton. With the existence of two shopping centers in close proximity to Marlton on US 301, special attention was focused on this commercially zoned property to determine the most appropriate land use to best serve the needs of the community. This commercial area presents the opportunity to develop into a civic center providing a much-needed community gathering place with a mixture of residential, neighborhood retail, and public land uses. Options such as townhouses, apartments, and senior citizen living spaces should be considered. Since the original approval of the R-P-C in 1965, there have been numerous revisions to the official plan. It became evident as new development applications are reviewed for the undeveloped properties remaining in Marlton, that it is necessary to consolidate all of the relevant changes and conditions that have been made to the Marlton Plan over the last 40 years into one document. This will help us update conditions to meet current regulations. As a result of this effort, a revised Official Plan Amendment for Marlton has been included in the appendix to this master plan. The new official plan will update conditions that are still applicable, clarify issues that have been addressed while working with the community, and provide more concise mapping and guidance for the buildout of Marlton. (See Appendix B & C) The area is currently zoned for retail businesses with an older zoning classification of C-2. This type of zoning designation allows businesses such as restaurants and ice cream shops, dry cleaners, and other neighborhood businesses that are desired by the community. Ultimately, a comprehensive design zone, L-A-C, which

208

Living Areas and Community Character

would permit the mix of residential and commercial is envisioned for this site. This comprehensive design zone would also allow for a specific design plan that could incorporate a high-quality design for the buildings and public spaces that would be necessary to create the civic core appropriate for the Marlton community. The civic core should provide public spaces that offer residents the opportunity to organize events and socialize with their neighbors in an attractive and safe outdoor setting. It should serve as a focal point for the community and help bring the residents of the older developed areas of Marlton on the west side together with the newer residents from the developing neighborhoods to the east. This civic core should include transit stops to reduce traffic congestion on the main thoroughfare and provide alternative transportation choices for residents. A basic plan showing major land uses in the proposed L-A-C is shown in the accompanying illustration. (See Appendix D) The employment portion of Marlton has not developed for a number of reasons, the main one being its location on the east side of the railroad tracks dividing West and East Marlton. With no industrial development opportunities around Marlton and the conclusions of the 2007 Prince Georgeâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s County Industrial Land Needs and Employment Study, which states that the county has a surplus of industrially zoned land, this plan is recommending that the approved Marlton plan be amended to change the employment land use to residential use. At the time Marlton was initially developed, pedestrian and environmental considerations were not taken into account as much as these issues are planned for today. Sections of streams were routinely enclosed by piping and developers used limited stormwater management controls. Current developments within Marlton are more mindful of the environment due to new state and county environmental regulations that are designed to mitigate development impacts such as providing larger setbacks from streams than previously required. Nonetheless, new housing should not only mitigate but also restore environmental assets. The Marlton area is currently characterized by wellestablished residential neighborhoods. However, some of these neighborhoods are disconnected from one another. Marltonâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s civic core and the Marlton Community Park are inaccessible to southern Marlton residents by foot or bicycle. The railroad tracks and Marlton golf course are two physical barriers that force residents to drive even within their community. The following policies and strategies will address these concerns and try to implement the vision for Marlton.

Living Areas and Community Character

Freight railroad tracks crisscross the subregion. 209

Policy 1 The county should undertake traffic-calming, pedestrian, and transportation improvements on key roads. Strategies 1. Install traffic-calming features along major roadways and streets within Marlton when possible. 2. Retrofit streets to provide sidewalks within half a mile from elementary schools to provide safe walking routes to school and public facilities. 3. Create a maintenance plan to expand the existing tree canopy within Marlton by planting and replacing trees within the rightof-way. Trees provide shade and encourage walking. Also trees tend to slow traffic by giving a sense of narrow roads which reduces speeds. 4. Enforce the scenic road guidelines when development proposals are submitted to ensure that the rural character of Croom and Duley Station Roads is preserved. Policy 2 Maintain and enhance current park and trails systems. Strategies 1. Incorporate exercise circuits within trails to provide residents with a multipurpose experience while on the trail. 2. Consider land swap of county-owned former school site north of Heathermore Boulevard and on the east side of the railroad tracks with the privately owned site on the west side to enlarge the Marlton Linear Park.

Residential street with parking on both curbs.

Policy 3 Preserve and enhance the housing stock within Marlton. Strategies 1. Ensure that new development matches the scale and character of existing Marlton residences. 2. Ensure that new development adjacent to the Rural Tier has similar scale and character as existing Rural Tier houses. New development should not disturb the scenic views. 3. Ensure that new development has an interconnected network of pedestrian-friendly streets, sidewalks, and bikeways with multiple connections to nearby neighborhoods and commercial centers. 4. Enforce private property standards and maintenance of public property to ensure that houses are kept in good repair.

210

Living Areas and Community Character

Policy 4 Encourage high-quality design of mixed-use development within Marltonâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s commercial and civic core. Strategies 1. Encourage new development to include mixed-use vertical development that provides for upper level residential opportunities and/or office uses. 2. Encourage housing options for senior residents to age in place within the civic core. 3. Consider L-A-C zoning to promote a mix of uses with high quality design. 4. Incorporate attractive and appropriate public spaces to create a focal point for the community to gather. Policy 5 Expand opportunities to encourage alternative modes of transportation. Strategies 1. Develop a network of trails and sidewalks leading to activity centers. 2. Retrofit and require new developments to have sidewalk and trail connections to neighborhoods, parks, activity centers, and public transportation. 3. Investigate feasibility of providing a park and ride stop near MD 301 and Heathermore Boulevard for The Bus. 4. Study the possibility of purchasing easements along the railroad tracks, PEPCO right-of-way, and Marlton golf course to provide crossings and improved connectivity to allow bicycling and walking throughout Marlton. Policy 6 Protect green infrastructure network within the Marlton area. Strategies 1. Promote low-impact development to protect stream water quality. 2. Avoid using pervious surfaces for trails near stream corridors to help mitigate stormwater runoff that can degrade the water quality. 3. Restore and protect network gaps during development and redevelopment. Living Areas and Community Character

Bucolic paths are found throughout the subregion. 211

4. Preserve natural features including mature trees and sensitive sites that surround new development. 5. Encourage the use of native plants in HOA open space and in landscaping in existing and new development. 6. Preserve viewsheds and promote greenway trails to access natural areas allowing the community to maintain a connection with the green infrastructure network. Policy 7 Provide areas to support local community civic spaces and community gardens. Strategies 1. Establish a public/private initiative to identify community garden spaces for family food production in public parkland and community open space. 2. Identify possible locations and open space areas for nature and environmental demonstration centers.

212

Living Areas and Community Character

SECTIONAL MAP AMENDMENT

This chapter reviews land use and zoning policies and practices in Prince Georgeâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s County and presents the approved zoning in the sectional map amendment (SMA) to implement the vision of this master plan. It identifies all rezoning changes, provides justifications, and presents the existing and proposed zoning inventory for the master plan area. The land use recommendations in the preliminary Subregion 6 master plan (see Land Use Map) are reinforced by the comprehensive rezoning proposal, also known as a Sectional Map Amendment (SMA), which brings the zoning of the area into conformance with the land use plan (see Zoning Map). This is critical for allowing and encouraging the type of development desired at these locations.

Subregion 6 Approved Master Plan and Sectional Map Amendment

INTRODUCTION

The District Council initiated the concurrent preparation of this master plan and SMA on November 20, 2007 via CR-89-2007. The procedure followed is in accordance with Council Bill CB-39-2005, which amended the framework for the process, whereby the District Council approves the master plan and SMA concurrently. Comprehensive rezoning through the SMA is a necessary implementation step in the land use planning process. It attempts to ensure that future development will be in conformance with county land use plans and development policies, reflecting the countyâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s ability to accommodate development in the immediate and foreseeable future. The approval of the zoning pattern proposed by the master plan and implemented by this SMA will bring zoning into greater conformity with county land use goals and policies as they apply to the Subregion 6 plan area, thereby enhancing the health, safety, and general welfare of the area residents. Approval of the SMA will result in revision of the official zoning map for Planning Areas (PA) 77, 79,82A, 82B, 85B, 86A, 86B, 87A, 87B and the portion of PA 78 not covered by the 2007 Approved Westphalia Sector Plan and SMA. Future comprehensive examinations of the zoning within the master plan area will occur in accordance with the procedures established for SMAs. The last comprehensive rezoning for the Subregion 6 plan area took place in 1994 as part of the Approved Master Plan and Sectional Map Amendment for the Subregion VI Study Area (PA 79, 82A, 82B, 86A, 86B, 87A and 87B); in 1994 as part of the Approved Master Plan and Sectional Map Amendment for Melwood Westphalia (PAs 77, 78) and in 1993 as part of the Approved Master Plan and Sectional Map Amendment for Subregion 5 (PA 85B). Sectional Map Amendment

213

The following are comprehensive rezoning policies established by the Planning Board and District Council for preparation of the SMA.

COMPREHENSIVE REZONING POLICIES

The established policy states that all public land should be placed in the most restrictive 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 and provide for appropriate and preferred future uses.

Public Land Policy

A distinction is made where large parcels of land are set aside specifically as public open space. In these cases the R-O-S (Reserved Open Space) Zone or the O-S (Open Space) Zone is applied as the most appropriate zone, depending on the size of the property. Although federal and state government property is not subject to the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance, the comprehensive rezoning process is meant to apply a zoning category to all land, including government property. The R-O-S (Reserved Open Space) Zone is generally applied to federal and state properties, unless specific uses or the intended character of the property or area should warrant another zoning category. This policy is in compliance with Section 27-113 of the Prince George’s County Zoning Ordinance, which states that any land conveyed in fee simple by the United States of America or by the State of Maryland shall immediately be placed in the R-O-S Zone until a zoning map amendment for the land has been approved by the District Council.

Zoning In Public Rightsof-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 proposed SMA has been prepared in accordance with this section.

Limitations on the Use of Zones

Zoning classifications proposed in the SMA are limited only by the range of zones available within the Zoning Ordinance 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, also known as downzoning, 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 zoning;” or

214

Sectional Map Amendment

(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.” In order to clarify, the extent to which a given parcel of land is protected from rezoning to a less intense zone by virtue of existing physical development, the Zoning Ordinance Section 27-223(h) states that: “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.” Limitations to placing a parcel of land into the R-T Zone is subject to the Zoning ordinance Section 27-223(i) which states that: “(i) No property may be zoned R-T if it was not classified in that zone prior to the initiation of the Sectional Map Amendment, except where the most recent Sectional Map Amendment involving the property was approved prior to 1990, unless: (1) The proposed development on the property to be rezoned to R-T will consist only of one-family attached metropolitan dwelling units; or (2) The property to be rezoned to R-T is located within a mixed-use activity center designated as a “Transit Village” in the applicable Area Master Plan.” The comprehensive rezoning proposal will recommend the most appropriate of the “use-oriented” commercial zones listed in the Prince George’s County Zoning Ordinance. The choice of zone is determined by the commercial needs of the area, the master plan recommendations, and the type of use and status of the development on the property and surrounding area.

Guidelines for Commercial Zoning

The inclusion of safeguards, requirements, and conditions beyond the normal provisions of the Zoning Ordinance that can be attached to individual zoning map amendments via “conditional zoning” cannot be utilized in SMAs. In the piecemeal rezoning Sectional Map Amendment

215

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) to 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 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)).

CONDITIONAL ZONING

In theory, zoning actions taken as part of the comprehensive zoning (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 an SMA. 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

Comprehensive design zones (CDZs) may be included in an SMA. Normally, the flexible nature of these zones requires a basic 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; 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 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 an SMA without the filing of a formal rezoning application. The recommendations of the master 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,

216

Sectional Map Amendment

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(a)(5), 27-225(b)(1), 27-226(a)(2), 27-226(f )(4), 27-478(a)(1), 27-480(g), and 27-521(a)(1) of the Zoning Ordinance.) Although there are several mixed-use zoning categories defined in the county Zoning Ordinance, none contains an ideal combination of use, design, and administrative regulations necessary to efficiently and effectively implement the mixed-use, pedestrian- and transit-oriented development pattern recommended by the 2002 Prince George’s County Approved General Plan and recent master and sector plans, including this approved Subregion 6 master plan.

Mixed-Use Zones

The Mixed-Use Infill (M-U-I) Zone provides design flexibility, permits a mix of uses, and requires the use of a Development District Overlay Zone (DDOZ) that sets area-specific design standards and modifies the table of uses permitted in the affected area. This technique essentially creates a different “mini-zoning ordinance” with each application throughout the county, making administration unwieldy. The Mixed-Use Town Center (M-U-TC) Zone provides for a mix of commercial and limited residential uses geared toward low- to medium-scale infill development in a smaller geographic area, establishes a citizen design review committee that is often difficult to convene and administer in an unincorporated area, and mandates approval of a development plan at the time of zoning approval that includes minimum and maximum development standards and guidelines in both written and graphic form for administration of the zone. The Mixed-Use-Transportation Oriented (M-X-T) Zone allows design flexibility and a mix of land uses with high densities and intensities, provides for a variety of residential, commercial and employment uses, and mandates at least two out of the following three use categories: (1) retail businesses; (2) office/research/ industrial; and (3) dwellings, hotel/motel. The M-X-T Zone also encourages a 24-hour functional environment and builds on existing public infrastructure investments by limiting application of the zone to properties located near a major intersection, major transit stop/station, or at a location for which the sector plan recommends a mix of uses. However, the M-X-T Zone is limited in its requirements and application to “place-making” because it lacks standards necessary to ensure the creation of a pedestrian-friendly environment. For example, there are no regulations to ensure a consistent build-to wall to help define the streets, or to establish an inviting streetscape environment with adequate pedestrian Sectional Map Amendment

217

amenities such as lighting or street furniture. It lacks standards for proportion of uses, concurrency, or phasing of different uses during project construction, parking standards at Metro stations, etc. Most of these elements are negotiated during concept and detailed site plan phases. New mixed-use zoning tools are being explored that will implement the policy recommendations of the 2002 General Plan and recent master and sector plans, streamline and standardize regulations and development review procedures, and supplement or replace existing mixed-use zones and overlay zones. This effort is currently focused on a tool for mixed-use development at designated centers and corridors; future efforts will focus on tools to facilitate mixed-use development at noncenters and corridors. Meanwhile, specific modifications to the existing mixed-use zone categories have been adopted as necessary to achieve land use recommendations in plans primarily adopted or scheduled for adoption before a new zoning tool can be implemented.

COMPREHENSIVE REZONING CHANGES

To implement the Subregion 6 master plan 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 master plan. The comprehensive 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 master plan approval. Below are the zoning recommendations for the Subregion 6 master plan. The Zoning Changes map below identifies the location of proposed zoning changes in the Subregion 6 master plan area. Specific changes to existing zoning are shown on the individual maps described in the accompanying tables. The maps are included for illustrative purposes only.

218

Sectional Map Amendment

Approved Zoning Changes

Sectional Map Amendment

219

Change Number

Zoning Change

Approved SMA/ZMA/SE

Area of Change

Number

200 Ft. Scale Index Map

Date

1.011 ac. SMA 1 R-A to C-M 5/24/1994 205SE14 Use and Location: Commercial property located at 3507 S.W. Crain Highway (PA 79; Tax Map 93C2; and Lot 1). Discussion: This commercial business currently has C-M (Commercial Miscellaneous) and R-A (Residential Agricultural) split zoning. A zoning change for the R-A portion of this property is recommended. The zoning change from R-A to C-M will upgrade and correct previous zoning categories. Tax ID: 0204479 Change Number

Zoning Change

Approved SMA/ZMA/SE

Area of Change

Number

200 Ft. Scale Index Map

Date

L-A-C to O-S 1.0563 ac. SMA 5/24/1994 205SE14 2 Use and Location: Vacant land on the east side of US 301, on the south side of Village Drive (PA 79; Tax Map 93C1; and Parcel A). Discussion: A zoning change is recommended from L-A-C (Local-Activity-Center) to O-S (Open-Space) to reflect the current development and policies of the Rural Tier. Tax ID: 0205724

1: R-A to C-M 2: L-A-C to O-S

P.C 16

8 8

L PL BOSW EL

45 45

P.A P.B

50 P.21

49 35

MCCONN

PRESIDENTIAL

ELL DR

MARSH

AM DR

GOLF DR

1 16

5 3

69 70 67

BRO OKS HIR

75 76 77

E CT

81 84

82 83

80 85

10 9

112

P.A

111

110 109

P.A

Part of Lot 1

113

87 88 89

108

17 15 16

103

107

13 18

102

100

105 106

104

101

95 94 96

33 34

39 36

44 28

27 46

26 24

25 23

P.A

20 18

IN H

T DC EA 61 KM OO 66 64 63 62 R B

P.B

CRA

55 60

58 57 56

P.C

L VIL

P.I

R ED AG

NIN

N EA

P.A P.A

OLD CRAIN HY

O EH AN

P.6

P.47

P.5

P.214

P.86

RD NT SA EA PL T P.33 UN

250

P.98 P.10

220

P.6 P.33

P.33

Feet

Sectional Map Amendment

Change Number

Zoning Change

Approved SMA/ZMA/SE

Area of Change

Number

Date

200 Ft. Scale Index Map

C-S-C/R-A to C-M 4.775 Ac. SMA 5/24/1994 206SE14 3 Use and Location: Commercial property located at 15610 Marlboro Pike (PA 79; Tax Map 93B4; and Lot 2). Discussion: This commercial business currently has a C-M (Commercial Miscellaneous) and R-A (Rural Agricultural) split zoning. A zoning change for the R-A (Rural Agricultural) portion of this property is recommended. The zoning change from R-A to C-M will reinforce the existing commercial development pattern within this intersection as well as upgrade and correct previous zoning categories. Tax IDs: 3229176 and 3238672 Change Number

Zoning Change

Approved SMA/ZMA/SE

Area of Change

Number

Date

200’ Scale Index Map

R-R, R-80 and C-M 5/24/1994 228SE14 144.68 Ac. SMA to M-X-T Use and Location: Single family homes, commercial properties and undeveloped lots located at the northwest intersection of Marlboro Pike and Crain Highway (PA 79; Tax Map 93B4; Parcels A, B, 12, 17, 20, 28, 30, 38, 69, 96, 101, 102, 103, 104, 105, 106, 107, 108, 109, 110, 111, 112, 113, 114, 115, 116, 117, 118, 119, 141, 145, 146, 182, 201, 202, 901; and Lots 1 & 2, 1-11, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 11, and 13). Discussion: A zoning change is recommended for this area. The zoning change from R-R (Rural Residential), R-80 (One family Detached Residential), C-M (Commercial Miscellaneous) to M-X-T (Mixed Use) will create new opportunities for development. Tax IDs: 0192054, 0196592, 0197269, 0197699, 0198143, 0198150, 0198168, 0200832, 0202986, 0202994, 0203000, 0203349, 0204065, 0204735, 0205104, 0205146, 0205153, 0215053, 0215061, 0227223, 0228106, 0228916, 0229526, 0231159, 0235036, 0237776, 0237792, 0237800, 0237818, 0237826, 0237834, 0237842, 0237859, 0237867, 0237875, 0237883, 0237891, 0237909, 0237917, 0237933, 0237941, 0237966, 0237982, 0238337, 0244038, 0244046, 0246199, 0247031, 0247403, 0247478, 0248641, 0248740, 0248898, 0249383, 2999654, 2999670, 3620341). 4

P.T

P.K

3: C-M and R-A to C-M 4: R-R, R-80 and C-M to M-X-T

K 5

P.D- 2

P.Q

4 20

P.8

RTH

P.P

22 22

27 6

6 5

35 26

B B

P.N

P.G

P. N

P.J

P.D 3

P.8 P.D 7

7 8

P.N

P.H

L 3

55 54

P.G -1

NORSC

P.N

WALES

CRATHIE

LN PARK

GOVER

8 7

25 10

8 7

P.D- 2

50 49

P.O

45 15 16 16 18

DS ARA DW

P. 182

P.1 82

19 20

P.8 7

P.C

P. 12 P.1 2

P.E

30 19

R SI

P.C

P.2 02

P. 202

17 22 16

E HIR LS RA DO

35 5

AIN

B P.B P.3 8

P. 38

P.4 5

P.1 3

P.F

P.A

P. 201

P.1 4

P.2 01

P.3 8

P.4 2

P.1 56

P.8 2

P.1 30

7 8

P.B

WYVILLE RD

P.1 31

13 P. B

P.9 0

P.1 29

9 10 6 11 5 4 32 1

Lots Lots 3&4 5&6 P. 142

LOTS 5& 6

LOTS 3& 4

P.1 41

P.1 42

Lots 7&8 9

P.1 55

LOTS 7& 8

LOTS 5& 6

P.4 1

11 9 10

P.1 66

P.F

P. 114

P.1 4

P.1 45 P.A

P. 115

P. 96

P. A

P. 146

Part of Lot 2

P.9 0 P.8 1

P.1 48

LOTS 1& 2

Lots 1&2

P.1 07

P.7 1

P. 111 P. 108

P. 116

P.2 0

P.1 15

P.1 14

P.1 12

P.1 8

P.1 16

P.1 92

P.1 14

P.1 21

P.1 18 P.2 0

P.1 17

P.9 6

P.1 13

P.3 0

P.1 12

P.2 4

P.7 8

P.4 9 P.2

P.1

P.1 84

P.2 04 P.7 5

P.3

P.205

P.3 0

P.7 6 P.2

P.1

P.3

P.7 7

P.2 4

P.1 15

P.1 19

P.1 84

P.7 8

P.2 05

P.7 9

P.1 20

P.8 3

P.7 4

P.1 10

P.1 22

P.1 8

P. 20

P.5 9

MARLBORO PE

P.1 11

1 10 2 P. . 10 P 3 10 P. 4 10 P. 06 1 9 P. 0 10 P. 110 P. 3 P. 2 13 7 11 . 1 P. P . 11 P 18 1 P.

BUCK LN

P.1 92

P.4 6

P.7 2 P.9 6

P.1 09 P.1 6

P.6 0

P.1 06

P.1 13

P.1 16

P.1 96

P.7 0

P.6 9

P.1 02 P.1 04 P.1 03

P.1 23

P.2 8

P. 69

P.1 01

P.1 24

P.1 08

P.1 94 P.43

P.1 95

P.1 46

P.G

P.6 4 P.6 7

P.6 8

P.1 4

P.1 60

P.1 79

P.2 5

P.2 3

P.9

P.1 7

P.5 8

P.A

P.6 5

P.2 1 P.2 03 P.2 2 P.17

P.4 9

P.5 1

P.9 9

P.1 07 P.1 00 P.7 7 P.1 01

9 11 P.

P.3

P.4 4

P.7 4

P.5 0

P.4 9

DEP OT

P.5 5

P.4 P.3 8 1

P.2 P.4 6 P.4 6 P.9 5 P.4 3

P.4 0

P.3 9

P.4 7 P.4 0 P.3 1 P.7 9

P.77

P.3 7

P.4 7

550

P.D P.5 2

P.4 1 P.7 2

P.1 10

P.5 2 P.4 9

Sectional Map Amendment

Feet

221

Change Number

Zoning Change

Approved SMA/ZMA/SE

Area of Change

Number

Date

200 Ft. Scale Index Map

O-S and R-R 58.91 Ac. SMA 5/24/1994 207SE13 to R-O-S Use and Location: County owned land 14900 Pennsylvania Avenue (PA82A; Tax Map 102A2; Parcels 32, 99, 92, 75, 95, and 44). Discussion: A zoning change is recommended for these parcels in order to reinforce the development pattern and protect environmental features. A change from O-S and R-R to R-O-S will reinforce county policy of protecting county owned land. Especially those parcels used as floodplains, flood controls, and open space. Tax ID: 0238873 5

Change Number

Zoning Change

Approved SMA/ZMA/SE

Area of Change

Number

Date

200 Ft. Scale Index Map

0.423 Ac. SMA 5/24/1994 207SE13 6 C-M to C-S-C Use and Location: Commercial property located on 14934 - 48 Main Street (PA82A; Tax Map 102; Grid A1; Part of Parcel 80, Parcel 259, and 265). Discussion: A zoning change is recommended from C-M to C-S-C. The C-M zoning is not appropriate at this location since it focuses on highway-oriented uses. This zoning change will place these properties in a more appropriate zoning category for retail uses. Tax IDs: 0196600, 0202309, and 0202283 P.23 P.9

5: R-R and O-S to R-O-S 6: C-M to C-S-C

P.17 P.1

P.4

R LA

P.203 P.22

P.17 P.99 P.50

P.101

P.77

P.4 P.285

P.100

LB O

P.107 P.44

P.3

P.102

P.65

P.21

P.2

P.75

P.250

Part of P. 80

P. 265

P.95 P.43

P.4 0

P.39

P.265

P.80

P.70

P.40

P.259 P.37 P.12

P.79

P.92

P.77

P.79 P.77 P.74

P. 259

P.78

P. 92

P.253

P.76

P.41

GOVERN OR OD EN BO

P.72

P.246

P. 32

P.73

P.268

P.6

P.170

P.27

LB O

P.171

7 P.166

P.68

P.88

P.83

P.175

P.41

P.85

P.82

P.17

P.18

P.17

P.84

P.176

P.40

P.87

P.81

2 P.24 P.89

P.67

P.174

P.65

5 P. 32 P.32

OUTLOT B

P.39 P.38

R RO RACE T

P.16

P.70 P.69

P.65

P.85

MA R

P.169

68 P.1

P.7 1

P.7 2

P.64

P.61

P.110

P.75

WIE D

P.287

P.36

P.59

P.57

JUD

P.58

ST RCH CHU

P.60

P.78 P.32

P.60 P.215 P.96

P.A

P.213

P.214

P.245

TE WA

P.266

AN PENNSYLV

T RS EQUEST

IA AV

RD RIAN CTR

P.32 1

P.78 3

350 2

Feet

222

Sectional Map Amendment

Change Number

Zoning Change

Approved SMA/ZMA/SE

Area of Change

Number

200 Ft. Scale Index Map

Date

7 C-M to R-R 1.68 Ac. SMA 5/24/1994 207SE12 Use and Location: Vacant land on the north side of the 13400 block of Old Marlboro Pike(PA 79; Tax Map 101B1; Lot 31). Discussion: A zoning change is recommended from the C-M (Commercial-Miscellaneous) to the R-R (RuralResidential) to reflect the dominant surrounding zoning and promote compatible development. Tax IDs: 1739523, and 1785146 C-M to R-R

10A

8 8A

L DE HA

S PLE MA

25 7A

E PL MA

E AD

I NG

NT A

MOU

R SP

35 55

N IRY L

22 23

Lot 31

P.280

P.114

OR OLD MARLB

O PE P.113 1

P.110

P.109 1

P.231

P.A

P.B

P.234

C RIT E HI R MA LB

P.286

OR O

P.234

RD P.234

PENNSYLVANIA AV

250 Feet

Sectional Map Amendment

223

Change Number

Zoning Change

Approved SMA/ZMA/SE

Area of Change

Number

200 Ft. Scale Index Map

Date

8 R-A to R-O-S 246.36 Ac SMA 5/24/1994 209SE12 Use and Location: Vacant land owned by The Maryland-National Capital Park and Planning Commission located on the south west quadrant of US 301 and Croom Station Road (PA 82A; Tax Map 110D3; Parcel 142). Discussion: Parcel 142 was purchased by the M-NCPPC on 10/11/2007. This proposed change is in compliance with the countyâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Public Land Policy. Tax ID: 3472131 P.D 62

R-A to R-O-S

ND AL 15

OUTPARCEL 53

P.12 3 OU T L OT

A 60 54 10

P.29 3

R EW CH

P.12 6

P.12 6 16 57 11

P.148 P.10 6 12 18 17 14

P.47

P.1

P.26 3

P.2 P.96

P.156 6

P.2

P.172

P.155

P.1

P.13 5

P.157

P.154

P.158

P.1

P.294

P.159

P.144 P.10 5

P.38

P.13

P.41 P.32

P.13 0 P.12

P.10

P.14 1

P.14 2

P.11

P.163 P.162 P.46

2 3

P.137

P.145

P. 142

P.137 P.137

P.13

P.145

P.145 4 5

P.164

P.166 P.52

P.167

P.165

P.14 2

P.69

P.168

P.169

P.85

E SSC

P.11 0

P.170 1

P.171 P.82

P.18

P.13 6

P.57

P.69

P.36 P.10 9 1

P.70

P.35

P.62

P.90

P.35

P.58

P.87

P.14 7

P.10 7

P.34

P.74

P.91 P.66

P.27 P.66

P.99

P.3 P.98

P.97

P.63 1

P.28

P.30 P.64 P.59

P.11 1 P.94

P.26

P.K

P.29

P.88

P.54 P.48

P.75

P.60

P.64 2

P.91

P.60

P.11 1 P.75

P.63

P.30 P.29

P.54

650

P.48

P.K

Feet

P.64

P.19 P.31 P.12 4 P.10 2

224

Sectional Map Amendment

Change Number

Zoning Change

Approved SMA/ZMA/SE

Area of Change

Number

200 Ft. Scale Index Map

Date

I-3 and R-R 95.77 Ac. SMA 5/24/1994 212SE12 to R-E Use and Location: Vacant land between the CSX right-of-way and Croom road, directly below Marlton Community Park (PA 82A; Tax Map 119C1; Parcel 97 and Part of Parcel 109) Discussion: A zoning change is recommended from the I-3 (Planned Industrial employment Park) to R-E (Residential Estate). This zoning change will reinforce the existing residential development pattern within this community. Tax IDs: 1750488 and 1750629 9

P.70

P.17

BACON LN

I-3 and R-R to R-E

P.90

P.58

P.87

SASS C

P.107

P.24 P.99

STA TI O N R D

ER L N

P.14 7

P.74

P.91 P.27

P.97

P.28

P.25

P.154

P.25

P.30

P.111

P.63 P.64 P.59

P.94

P.26

P.29

P.88

P.54

P.95

P. 71

CRO

STATION DR

P.25

P.3

P.98

P.34

P.75

P.60

P.64

P.48 2

P.91

P.111

P.63

P.60 1

P.75

P.95

P.30 P.29

P.54 P.48

P.64

P.19

P.72

P.31 P.19

P.124 1

P.102 2

P.44

P.51 P.103 P.124

P.154

P.132 P.102

P.77

17 17

P.61

P.120

P.26

P.45

P.80

3 2

P.129 1 3 3

P.60 P.83 6

P.51

P.154

P.118

P.2 13 10 15

P.30

10 11

P. 97 P.97

19 17

13 13 13 23

P.2

P.98 P.31

177 176

P.98 184

P.109

P.154 P.53

P.52

Part of P. 109

P.104

T HEA

H ER

BL RE MO

P.99 P.107

P.15 4 P.B

P.108

P.154 P.99 P.B P.107

P.139

P.144 21

20 10

P.A

P.68

P.1

10 15

P.108

P.53

BURTO N CI

OLD

Sectional Map Amendment

600 Feet

225

Change Number

Zoning Change

Approved SMA/ZMA/SE

Area of Change

Number

200 Ft. Scale Index Map

Date

10 C-1 to C-S-C 4.2735 Ac. A-6696 4/18/1991 212SE10 Use and Location: Gas station with convenience store located at 9220 SE Crain Highway and 9550 Fairhaven Avenue (PA 82A; Tax Map 118D3; and Parcel 95). Discussion: A zoning change is recommended from C-1 (Local Commercial Existing) to C-S-C (Commercial Shopping Center). This zoning change will update zoning to reflect current zoning categories. Additional case: SE-4193. Tax ID: 1750595 Change Number

Zoning Change

Approved SMA/ZMA/SE

Area of Change

Number

200 Ft. Scale Index Map

Date

C-1 to C-S-C 10.1672 Ac. A-6696 4/18/1991 212SE10 11 Use and Location: Shopping center, fast-food restaurant, bank, and vacant land located at 9450, 9500, 9590 SE Crain Highway and 9550 Fairhaven Avenue (PA 82A; Tax Map 118D3; and Parcels A-1, A-2, A-3, A-4). Discussion: A zoning change is recommended from C-1 (Local Commercial Existing) to C-S-C (Commercial Shopping Center). This zoning change will update zoning to reflect existing zoning categories. SE-3394 and SE3819 for the fast-food restaurant and SE‑4501 and DSP-83054/04 for the senior housing. Tax IDs: 1752641, 1752617, 1752633, and 1752625 10: C-1 to C-S-C 11: C-1 to C-S-C P.28

P.14

P UM TR

P.14

1 6

FA IR

FA IR GR EE N

P. 95

P.8 P.B

HY AIN

P.53

P.95

2 1 5 6

P. A-2

P.52

E 14

AV VEN IRH A

1 2

P. A-2

P. A-3

P. A-1 P.50

P.A

P. A-1

P.51

E TIB

P.12

T ASSYRIA S A OT OU

TAM

5 P.8

RIA

P. A-4

ASSISI ST 12 2

P.51 16

P.23

P.56

14 19

TYRE ST 14

P.21

P.56

ANTIOCH ST

P.21

NTE

P. A-4

P.22

1 15

OU TLOT A

15 16

P.27

P.105

P.E

P.99 52

P.8

OLD IN 15

P.88

P.178 6

P.88

LD DR

DIA

P.D

MUIRFIE

NH EA

350

226

P.26

Feet

Sectional Map Amendment

Change Number

Zoning Change

Approved SMA/ZMA/SE

Area of Change

Number

200 Ft. Scale Index Map

Date

12 C-A to C-S-CÂ 1.2054 Ac. SMA 5/24/1994 213SE12 Use and Location: Country store/groceries at 9701 Croom Road (PA 82A; Tax Map 119D4; and Parcel 117). Discussion: A zoning change is recommended from C-A (Ancillary Commercial) to C-S-C (Commercial Shopping Center). This zoning change will update zoning to reflect current zoning categories. Tax ID: 1716216 3

C-A to C-S-C

KE 10 11

AL WO

P.39

P.110

P.86

P.84

P.111

OO M

P.110

P.69

P.72

P.22 1

P. 117

P.117

P.90

P.77 P.51 P.87

P.86 P.2 P.85

W AL

P.63

P.35

P.77

LN P.53

P.78

P.1

P.52 P.88

P.36

P.74

P.40

ON OKE

ST AT I

BRO

MAS

DU L

THO

OU TLOT A

250 Feet

Sectional Map Amendment

227

Change Number

Zoning Change

Approved SMA/ZMA/SE

Area of Change

Number

Date

200 Ft. Scale Index Map

13 L-A-C to R-T 26.02 Ac. SMA 5/24/1994 210SE8 Use and Location: Townhouse development in the northeast quadrant of the intersection of Woodyard Road and Rosaryville Road (PA 82A, Tax Map 108E3, Parcels A, B, C, D, E, and Lots 1â&#x20AC;&#x201D;143 Block A). Discussion: A zoning change is recommended from L-A-C (Local-Activity-Center) to R-T (ResidentialTownhouse) to reflect the current residential development pattern and delete the commercial component of the development that has never developed. Tax IDs: 3075371, 3075389, 3075397, 3075405, 3075413, 3075421, 3075439, 3075447, 3075454, 3075462, 3075470, 3075488, 3075496, 3075504, 3075512, 3075520, 3075538, 3075546, 3075553, 3075561, 3075579, 3075587, 3075595, 3075603, 3075611, 3075629, 3075637, 3075645, 3075652, 3075660, 3075678, 3075686, 3075694, 3075702, 3075710, 3075728, 3075736, 3075744, 3075751, 3075769, 3075777, 3075785, 3075793, 3075801, 3075819, 3075827, 3075835, 3075843, 3075850, 3075868, 3075876, 3075884, 3075892, 3075900, 3075918, 3075926, 3075934, 3075942, 3075959, 3075967, 3075975, 3075983, 3075991, 3076007, 3076015, 3076023, 3076031, 3076049, 3076056, 3076064, 3076072, 3076080, 3076098, 3076106, 3076114, 3076122, 3076130, 3076148, 3076155, 3076163, 3076171, 3076189, 3076197, 3076205, 3076213, 3076221, 3076239, 3076247, 3076254, 3076262, 3076270, 3076288, 3076296, 3076304, 3076312, 3076320, 3076338, 3076346, 3076353, 3076361, 3076379, 3076387, 3076395, 3076403, 3076411, 3076429, 3076437, 3076445, 3076452, 3076460, 3076486, 3076494, 3076502, 3076510, 3076528, 3076536, 3076544, 3076551, 3076569, 3076577, 3076585, 3076593, 3076601, 3076619, 3076627, 3076635, 3076643, 3076650, 3076668, 3076676, 3076684, 3076692, 3076700, 3076718, 3076726, 3076734, 3076742, 3076759, 3076767, 3076775, 3076783, 3076791, 3076809, 3076817, 3076825, 3076833, 3076841, 3076858, 3076874 and 9999999 5 25

HO O

17 31 30

VICT O

RIA D

P.A

8 1

1 1

KI NG

P.A

D DR

RI CH AR D

ROBIN

L-A-C to R-T

P.204

OO DY AR D

C 7

P.12

P.A

P.7

P.A 3 8

MB GA

P. A 1

P.A

115

P.A

34 11

114

119

120

18 80

A 86

86 75

P.A 100

P. E

129

HE AL Y

106 125

P.A

107

124

W OO DY A

IER

P. B

P.B

87 74

P. C

PL 21

P.C

130

P.E

92 69

99 93

135

P.D

31 68

P.177 143

P.171

140

139 136

64 63 36

P. D 37

P. G

P.A

P.D

U CT

IP SL

P.F

P. F

P.F

PARN

P.48

P.G

P.49

50 14

8 9

59 15

ILYN

IVY C T

16 18

IL L

29 8

P.A 17

LORD

LOCRIS CT

HIS

WOO

P.11

SA RY V

TALLIN

P.B

DYAR D FAR MR

MAR

P.B

B P.3

N CT

SHIPS

K IN D

P.158

N ESS

P.229

P.159

P.236 6

C 5

A 1

300

228

Feet

2 4

Sectional Map Amendment

Change Number

Zoning Change

Approved SMA/ZMA/SE

Area of Change

Number

200 Ft. Scale Index Map

Date

14 R-R to I-4 4.321 Ac. SMA 5/24/1994 209SE08 Use and Location: Undeveloped parcels located at the 9200 block of Kernan Court (PA 77; Tax Map 108D1; and Parcel 23-37). Discussion: These properties are currently undeveloped and experience noise levels of 80 decibels or more which is not suitable for residential development. A zoning change is recommended from R-R to I-4 in order to allow development that is more compatible with the surrounding development and noise levels. Tax IDs: 2944411, 2944403, 2944395, 2944379, 2944312, 2944387, 2944361, 2944353, 2944346, 2944338, 2944320, 2944296, 2944288, and 2944270, 2944304 LN

P.C

P.28 2

P.25

C OD NR DE OL

IN E

MB to I-4 R-R LU CO

P.27

EL I

P.26

P.64

P.A

P.25

P.26 P.27

FO XL EY

P.64

Lot 34 Lot 35 Lot 33 33

14 35

Lot 36

Lot 32

Lot 31

P.B

Lot 30

Lot 29

Lot 28

Lot 27

1 30

P.C

Lot 23

Lot Lot 25 24

MONTROSE ST

Lot 26

P.64

8 1

SHER W

LEAPLEY RD

OOD FOREST WY

Lot 37

CON 18

COR

D DR

P.G

8 6

P.A

K 5

D DR

SHIE L

D DR

8 9

Sectional Map Amendment

RIA P

WH E A

VICT O

ARRO 10

JOUS T

SHER

WO O

D DR

ING L

250 B

16 15 22

Feet

229

Change Number

Zoning Change

Approved SMA/ZMA/SE

Area of Change

Number

200 Ft. Scale Index Map

Date

15 R-R to C-S-C 1.042 Ac. SMA 5/24/1994 214SE09 Use and Location: Office located at 11191 Old Crain Highway (PA82A, Tax Map 268B, Parcel 16). Discussion: This property currently has C-S-C (Commercial Shopping Center) and R-R (Rural Residential) split zoning. A zoning change for the R-R portion of this property is recommended. The change from R-R to C-S-C will reinforce the existing commercial development pattern at intersection.

Tax ID: 1142603 17 6

R-R to C-S-C

CT OS SIN

13 1

OR RL B

3 1

WO ST

P.A

LA ND

ING

P.B

DR 10

P.215

P.118

P.134

P.215

P.15 P.135

P.134

P.65

Part of P. 16

P.135 P.15

P.16

P.155

RA C

P.65

P.17

P.17 P.88 P.125

200 P.122

230

Feet

Sectional Map Amendment

Change Number

Zoning Change

Approved SMA/ZMA/SE

Area of Change

Number

200 Ft. Scale Index Map

Date

16 C-A to C-S-C 0.6664 Ac. SMA 5/24/1994 221SE10 Use and Location: Country store/groceries and deli located at 11800 Cedarville Road (corner of Cedarville Road and Ashbox Road) (PA 86B, Tax Map 166E1, Parcel 70) Discussion: A zoning change is recommended from the C-A (Ancillary Commercial) to the C-S-C (Commercial Shopping Center). This zoning change will update the zoning to reflect current categories. Tax ID: 1174341

P.102

C-A to C-S-C

P.32

P.33

P.33 P.28

P.26 P.34

P.34 P.27

P.104

P.35

ASH

P.24

P.25 P.128

P.73

P.35 P.36

2 P.7

P.119

P.37

P.22

Part of P. 70

P.20

P.19

P.74

16P.70 CEDARVILLE RD

P.21

P.46

P.47

P.52

P.68

A R IL O A

P.48

D D R P.86 P.52

P.49 P.50

P.131 P.132

200 Feet

Sectional Map Amendment

231

Change Number

Zoning Change

Approved SMA/ZMA/SE

Area of Change

Number

200 Ft. Scale Index Map

Date

17 C-S-C to O-S 2.215 Ac. SMA 5/24/1994 228SE14 Use and Location: Single family homes located at 22110 and 22106 Aquasco Road. (PA 87B, Tax Map 180D3, Parcel 35 and Parcel 33) Discussion: Parcel 33 has C-S-C (Commercial Shopping Center) and O-S (Open Space) split zoning, Parcel 35 has C-S-C zoning. Both properties currently are developed with single-family homes. A zoning change is recommended from C-S-C and O-S to O-S in order to correct the split zoning on Parcel 33. A zoning change is recommended from C-S-C to O-S for parcel 35 in order to bring both single family homes into the appropriate zoning which will reinforce the rural character of this area. Tax IDs: 0833848 and 0833830 P.32

C-S-C to O-S P.77

P.28

P.127

P.137 P.133

P.29 P.74

P.97

P.145

P.33

P.92

P.34 P.90

P.27

AQUASCO RD

P.30

P.31

Part of P. 33 17

P.107 P.35

P.36

DR BOWEN RD

ST MARYS CHURCH RD

P.55 P.128 P.134

P.56

P.48 P.57

P.46

P.49

200

P.84 P.108

232

Feet

Sectional Map Amendment

Change Number

Zoning Change

Approved SMA/ZMA/SE

Area of Change

Number

200 Ft. Scale Index Map

Date

18 C-O to L-A-C 15.32 Ac. SMA 5/24/1994 208SE09 Use and Location: Undeveloped at 10600 Marlboro Pike (PA 82A; Tax Map 100 B-2; and Parcel A). Discussion: Basic plan - appendix E. Tax ID: 3876778 Change Number

Zoning Change

Approved SMA/ZMA/SE

Area of Change

Number

200 Ft. Scale Index Map

Date

19 O-S to L-A-C 0.718 Ac. SMA 5/24/1994 208SE09 Use and Location: Undeveloped at 5760 Woodyard Road (PA 82 A; Tax Map 100 B-3; and Parcel 34). Discussion: Basic plan - appendix E. Tax ID: 1734847 105

MA R

P.C

1: C-O to L-A-C 2: O-S to L-A-C

Y CA

RRO

LL C

P.L

133

128

109

P.E

111

113

185

114

106 127

186 139

112

124

134

T ABE ELIZ

122

117 118 121

H PA

120

R NU

M PL

180

119

HENRY DARNALL CT

P.K

176 125

128

132

129

P.A 75

76 80

191

179

P.10

133

136

137

142 11

DANIEL SIM CT

WO MEL

PE CHA

70 44 69

MELWOOD RD

143

148

149 152

P.B

153

P.J

158

1 159

164

52 165

50 170 51

P.A

171

175

PE N

YLV AN

M IA A V

OL D

W EL

RK PA

AV 1

P.51

P.C

P.A

P.10

P.C

P.A

P.32

P. A P.A

P.10 P.10

PE BORO MARL

P. 34

P.35

P.34

19 P.D

P.46

B 17

P.7

P.D

WOODYARD RD

P.5

P.6

P.36

P.75

RICH MAN OR T

P.58

P.47

P.A 25

P.8

P.75

A 10

P.71 5

Sectional Map Amendment

WELSHIRE PL

9 18

350 1

Feet

233

Change Number

Zoning Change

Area of Change

Approved SMA/ZMA/SE Number

200 Ft. Scale Index Map

Date

20 R-S to C-O 11.1636 SMA 5/24/94 207SE14 Use and Location: Club House at 3151 Presidential Golf Drive in Beechtree (PA 79; Tax Map 85 B-2; and part of Parcel B-1). Discussion: Development of Club House occurred after 2009 approval and prior to courtâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s voiding that approval. Tax ID: 3322922 49 1

P.O

OUTPARCEL 10

OTP

RES

P.21

P.O

OUTPARCEL 3

BE E

MOO

TR EE

PLA

INS

R-S to C-O BL

50 51

P.21

OL FD R

P.AA

PR ES ID EN T IA LG

P.21

P.AA P.F-1 P.B-1

Part of P. B-1

P.B-1

P.F-1

P.B-1

P.F-1

P.B-1

P.21

P.F-1

11 11

9 10

P.B-1

P.BB 4

INGF IEL

D WY

FINC H

P.B-2

P.CC

250 P.L

23 22

234

Feet

Sectional Map Amendment

Change Number

Zoning Change

Approved SMA/ZMA/SE

Area of Change

Number

200 Ft. Scale Index Map

Date

21 L-A-C to R-S 28.0 Ac. A-9726-C 1989 203SE14 Use and Location: Undeveloped at the southwest corner of US 301 and Leeland Road (PA 79; Tax Map 85 C-1 and C-2; Part of Lot 1; and Parcel 16). Discussion: Development applications were approved after 2009 approval and prior to courtâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s voiding that approval. Tax IDs: 0192484, 0192492, and 5513431 L-A-C to C-S-C and R-S P.2

P.25

P.76

P.19

AN DR D P.3

OUTPARCEL 11

Part of Lot 1

P.4

P.5

S P.T

P.B-6

Part of 29 24

Part of Lot 30

P.V

P.R 31

P.1

P.16

P.X

P.41 P.V

P.D

28 25

P.44 P.42

Sectional Map Amendment

EAD

LES H

P.43 P.E P.72

P.X

P.73

P.74

P.75

280

3 14

Feet

1 5

EC H

NH PE IP

5 15

ON ST

CO PP ER

N EE

SH BI

1 8 10

P.16

P. 16

P.E

P. 1

P. 16

P.B-6

NBURY

P. 16

GLASTO

SLot

Part of Parcel R Part of Lot 34

21 P.16

MOO RES PL AINS BL

BARNSTABLE DR

CRAIN

P.S

235

Change Number

Zoning Change

Approved SMA/ZMA/SE

Area of Change

Number

200 Ft. Scale Index Map

Date

22 C-2 to L-A-C 26.5 Ac. SMA 5/24/1994 211SE11 Use and Location: Currently vacant land located between Woodstock Drive and Marlton Center Drive (PA 82A; Tax Map 119A2; and Parcel 102). Discussion: A zoning change is recommended for Parcal 102 to change from the C-2 (General Commercial) Zone to the L-A-C (Local Activity Center) Zone. This zoning change will reinforce the mixed-use town center vision for Marlton. See basic plan in appendix D. Tax ID: 1750538 9

5 23 14

C-2 to L-A-C

39 12

36 5 15

WD STVIE

17 17

13 11 10 2

17 1

2 8

G 20

NO R

TH W

OOD

3 14

T KINLOCH C

26 5

21 17

10 22

OLD COLONY DR

R D

18 14

P.34

24 4

293 292 302 285

201

193

284 1

50 1

202

192

P.A

LR D

8 7 1

184

177

176

150 157 16

P.35

183

151 1

158 170

143

11 1 5

P.31

142

WE DG ED AL E

P.A

164

163

TR U

26 55

P.30

136

135

P.A

209 7 270

276

269

210

P.2

250

233

215 18

13 226

216

222 221

19 55 56 240

241

63 74

P.C

169

CT P.A

130 177

120

106 11

303 10

100 99 6

P.19

5 9 10

163 144

P.C

P.B 61

143

133 132

127 45 123 122

NA RC H

51 50 52

103

P.C

O DS

WS VIE

108

210 205

P.102

L N P M PTO

Y NW TOW B NEW

233

109

37 1

P.C

P.E

238 239

223

P.C

23 13

185

29 15

P.7

20 5

23 22

P. 102

P.102

EE L IN

P.B

P.D

17 18

LL N

P.154

232

P.D

RC I

P.154

P.B

PENSACO LA PL

P.8

P.7

P.7 40

P.8

228

244

227

P.104

199

192

204

198

193

P.154

59 60

55 58

P.9

HA BING

12 17 4

TER

79 104

P.C 116

EN NC

P.29

45 44

O RLT MA

128

P.E

117

52 35 36

43 40

38 20

155

149 137 22 23

156

138

67 68 72

32 51

148 62

A 46

170

P.C

BA SK ER VIL LE

184

P.C

30 31

P.10

P.35 8

PA VIL LIO

88 82

171

164

MONMOUTH

P.103 1

ST OC

124

176

125

119 107

P.A 307

30 5

P.A

251

P.33 232

227

P.101

13 13 13

131 114

113

P.98

H IL

277

RHEIMS CT

P.32 3

261 260

PARAGON CT

P.154

BERRY

THORN

E AT RG MA

18 1

56 55 84

HEATHERMORE BL

111

112

87 115

108

88 104

119

P.6A 95

103 20

6 99

10 3

15 1

16 16

P.6B

P.A

P.24 8

173

9 5 12 170

P.4

130

129

147

166

102

122

121

141

152

114

113 109

143

FLORIN

P.16 101

98 94

P.G

P.21

P.2

52 55 80

P.20

P.18

P.13

N AV E

RH 17

5 2

P.19 10

P.15

BAR

P.17

108

159 1

FA I

D AN MI DL

NW E

P.115

17 20

13 47

124

10 OTL

P.I

21 101

130

SO UT HM OO R

136

236

21 P.H

97 99 28

132

13 OTL

40 2 23

126

P.J 7

105

119

A 1

LIVE OAK LN

117

121

NDON

P.77

115

KETT

31 14

CARE

15 26

C R OC

CURTIS CT

DORSEY LN

P.F

111

5 13

P.3

P.G

OLD 12

110

LL PL

HI NE S

30 34

BURTON CI

P.1 P.23

64 45

138

160

71 137

125

151

P.22

P.14 179

16 21

GRANDHAVEN AV

TRUMBULL DR

144

167

174

59 2 60

81 83

MIDSTOCK LN 1

13 15

500 25

Feet

12 14

Sectional Map Amendment

Change Number

Zoning Change

Approved SMA/ZMA/SE

Area of Change

Number

200 Ft. Scale Index Map

Date

23 R-R to R-30 12.1999 Ac. A-6696-01 4/18/91 211SE12 Use and Location: Undeveloped at Heathermore Boulevard (PA 82A; Tax Map 119 C-1; and Parcel 104). Discussion: Development Applications were approved after 2009 approval and prior to courts voiding that approval. Tax ID: 1712819 1 29

D DR

R-R to R-30 9

C 33

3 14

6 12

P.60

26 5

NORTHTON CT

OLD CO 9

2 8

LO N

R 20

24 4 27

293

P.154

AINTREE CT

P.2 13

10 15

APPLEBY CT

P.34

THORNBERRY

BERWICK RD

OO R TH W

292

302 17

285

201 193 284 1

202

192

13 13

261 260

WES TOVE R CT 23

P.32

PARAGON CT

277

183 177 151

176

150 157

170

164

270

276

269 251

P.A

28 23

P.33

P.2

250

232

227

22 233

215 13 226

216

222 221

18 19 55 56

240

241

63 74

P.C

169

131

P.A

125 119 120

177

P.101

ST O

130

210

163

P.A

P.98

158

P.31

42 6 209

RHEIMS CT

184

176

P.103 171

O OD

163 144

P.C

P.B

CT TO W N

184

P.C

170

VIE W

P.98

164

124

148 62

143

156

155 138 149

T CEN

137

67 68

133 132

72 23

ON RLT MA

128 127 45 123 122

29 30

P.154 P.53 87

P.E

ER D

ST VIEW ODS WO

103

117

L VIL

P. C

104

P.C

ES AG

ARE

P.C

198

199

193

210

51 108

205

192

P.104

204

116

P.102

Y NW TOW B NEW

109

P.C

P.E

23 13 10

TE CEN

AR RP B

223

P.C

P.99

244

227 228

P.154

232

P.D

P.B

P.D

B P.102

238 239

185

T EA

P. 104

233 44

R HE

R MO

L EB

P.154 P.99 P.B

130

5 12 16 20

P.22

129

102

P.23

125 64

108

P.20

P.18 60

113 109

98 94

P.21

P.2

52 55

OLD

1 12

80 59

5 2

86 85

P.19

P.17

NW E

LL PL

10 15

19 P.53

BA R

BURTON CI

FLORIN

P.16

121 114

P.1

EN AV

45 122

V DHA

L L DR T RUMBU

P.A

N GRA

P.24

VIEW

15 45 10

P.115

13 47

111

70 110 69

Sectional Map Amendment

T ON C END CAR

P.3

P.G

43 5 20

400

21 P.154

Feet

237

Change Number

Zoning Change

Approved SMA/ZMA/SE

Area of Change

Number

200 Ft. Scale Index Map

Date

I-1 and C-M to 10.7 Ac. SMA 5/24/1994 207SE13 C-S-C Use and Location: Currently a car dealership located at 5300 SE Crain Highway (PA 79; Tax Map 102B2, and Parcel C). Discussion: This property currently has a split I-1 (LIght Industrial) and C-M (Commercial-Miscellaneous) zoning. A zoning change is recommended to consolidate this property into the C-S-C (Commercial Shopping Center) Zone and encourage commercial redevelopment of this site that is more appropriate for this key location. Tax ID: 3433273 24

P.22 P.51

I-1 and C-M to C-S-C

P.74

P.50

P.49

DEPOT

P.101

P.55

P.38 1

P.46 P.46

P.47

P.D P.52

P.41 P.52 P.49

P.C P.83 P.85

CHRY

SLER

OT L. A

P.83

CHEV YD R

P.46

OUT L OT B

RY SL

P.57

P.C

P.78

P. C IN HY

P.C

CR A

P.A

PENNSYLVANIA

P.B-1

P.59

P.78 3

P.B-1

P.59

P.A

P. B-1 P.23 5

P.109 P.107

P.A

P.27

P.33 P.84

P.35

P.27

400 P.45

238

Feet

Sectional Map Amendment

Approved SMA/ZMA/SE 200 Ft. Scale Index Map Number Date 25 R-O-S to C-S-C 0.857 Ac. SMA 5/24/94 207SE08 Use and Location: Vacant land. 9429 Marlboro Pike (PA 77, Tax Map 99 E-1, Parcel 164) Discussion: Formerly owned by the United States of America, this parcel was purchased by the current owner in 2010. Section 27-113 of the Zoning Ordinance requires: “(a) Property conveyed in fee simple by the United States of America or the State of Maryland shall immediately be placed in the Reserved Open Space (R-O-S) Zone until the District Council approves a Zoning Map Amendment for the property.” Tax ID: 4061826 Change Number

Zoning Change

Area of Change

MOO

R-O-S to C-S-C

RES

P.93

P.168

WY ACC PEN N

ESS R

SYL VAN IA

P.42

P.C P.110

P.B

P.A

P.B P.17

P.102

P.A

P.C

P.120

P.162

P.41 P.40

RLBP.10 OR O

P.12

P.164 P. 164

P.1

P.44 P.54

P.86

OLD MA

P.157

RLBORO PE

P.89 P.33

P.58 P.90

P.61

P.53

P.52

P.56 P.62 P.16 P.57 P.55

200 Feet

Sectional Map Amendment

239

Change Number

Zoning Change

Approved SMA/ZMA/SE

Area of Change

Number

200 Ft. Scale Index Map

Date

26 R-A to C-S-C 12.39 Ac. SMA 5/24/94 208SE13 Use and Location: Vacant Land - wooded at 6100 Block SE Crain Highway (PA 82A; Tax Map 102 A-4; Parcel 116) Discussion: Revision #1 CR-83-2013(DR-2) Tax ID: 3951068 TE WA

N PE

AV R-A to C-S-C NIA VA YL

P.32 P.109

P.78

P.99

P.11 P.35

P.32

P.53

P.34 P.89

P.69

P.13 P.108

P. 116

P.81

P.82

P.67

P.116

P.12

N AI

HY P.14

P.67

P.22 P.270 P.78

P.126

P.10

P.17

P.21

P.111 P.76

P.149

U R S TI D

P.18 P.137

P.281

P.34

P.127 P.282

P.128

P.113

P.243

P.226

P.19

P.129

MA U

P.68

P.19

P.A

P.20

P.76

Y VO SA

P.A

P.19 P.19

P.129

P.76

R B W O N

P.20

P.B

4 8

2 10

P.D

9 12

240

400 Feet

Sectional Map Amendment

Change Number

Zoning Change

Approved SMA/ZMA/SE

Area of Change

Number

200 Ft. Scale Index Map

Date

27 R-R to C-S-C 1.52 Ac. SMA 3/15/94 209SE09 Use and Location: Auto body shop/convenience store and single family dwelling at Dower House Road/MD 223 6905 Dowerhouse Road (PA 77; Tax Map 108 F-2; Parcel 65) Discussion: Amendment Revision #2 CR-83-2013(DR-2) Tax ID: 0916288 24

R-R to C-S-C

ST ON EH IL L

23 1 2

P.2

P.A

DUB

LIN PL

P.241

4 4 9

T TS

SEM

H 14

M R

CO C

NT R

P.242

P.14

P.235 P.234 19 1

SEM

ON T

P.15

27 1

12 6

P.14 P.F

28 2

P.C

P. 65

N GL

27 P.65

P.A 11

P.C

A 51

D LU

17 8

ARETHU SA LN

P.193

ERY D R

OOD

CA VE

SHER W

P.233

DY AR

P.199

8 8

55 28

FA R

P.E

4 31

ARCH

A P.

K OAP.B

P.185

AC TI UM

P.184

INGH AM D R

B 46 45

13 5

A 1 36

D P.A P.D

9 10

31 30

12 18 17

31 30

VICT O

RIA D

13 15

P.A

P.D

P.B

P.C

E TH AT

IER

IAN

C 4

B AM

GEO

P.204

9 10

LU KE

NOTT

TE GA EN

P.E

CT COPPER SKY

P.E

P.193

P.C

OC K

AN T

TIN

P.D

P.F

S JO U

P.222

P.12

P.A

P.A P.A

P.A

325

1 8 3

Feet

Sectional Map Amendment

241

Change Number

Zoning Change

Approved SMA/ZMA/SE

Area of Change

Number

200 Ft. Scale Index Map

Date

28 R-A to M-X-T 37.61 Ac. SMA 5/24/94 208SE09 Use and Location: Undeveloped land SE quadrant MD 223 and South Osborne Road, 5800 Woodyard Road (PA 82A; Tax Map 100 B-3; Parcel 6). Discussion: Revision #3 CR-83-2013 (DR-2) Tax ID: 1716299 50

170 51

P.A

171

R-A to M-X-T

175

P.C

OL DM SY

LVA N

P.32

P.C

P.10

IA A V

P.51

P.B

P.A

LW O

P.C

RK PA

P.A

P.D P.A

P.10 P.10

PE BORO MARL

P.35 P.34

P.D

P.46

RD ES EAN MB LIA WIL

B 68

U SO

P.7

P.D

O TH

P.E

P.5 55

WOODYARD RD

P.6

P.36

P.75

P. 6

NO R

P.58 P.77

P.47 22 23

P.A 25

P.8

RIC

HM A

P.A

P.75

A 10

P.71 9

WEL 17

WELSHIRE PL

P.63

SHIR E DR 15

1 15 9 14

P.2

P.75

P.78

4 7

B 5

P.B 2

P.I

L LE GI

N 1

1 1 5 7

3 5

P.78

P.B

P.75

HE N

1 2

P.75

SU 15

P.27

P.76

P.D P.22

242

P.8

ND PO

P.76

400 Feet

P.D

Sectional Map Amendment

Change Number

Zoning Change

Approved SMA/ZMA/SE

Area of Change

Number

200 Ft. Scale Index Map

Date

29 R-E to R-80 9.97 Ac. SMA 5/24/94 Use and Location: Undeveloped at 11210 Brown Road. (PA 78; Tax Map 83 C-3; and Parcel A). Discussion: Revision #4 CR-83-2013 (DR-2) Tax ID: 1712702 R-E to R-80

P.68

O BR

E IN KA

P.59

204SE10

P.96

IO AT ST

A 1

P.12

P.92

N RD

4 10 2

C 12

L PY

P.68

P.92

P.44

P.57

P.55

P.12

P.96

13 15

P.18 8

P.61

17 19

RE E

BO XT

P.A

6 25 27

P.16 23

P.39

P.A

P.C 30

P.D P.20

P.17

8 P. 5

P.45

P.E

P.19

P. A 50

CHI R IT

P.72

P.21

7 9

P.B

B 5

52 38

P.64 34

29 37

GL OX

B B

28 31

P.A 3

O RD

L VA

N IA ER

E MARLBOR P.66

NIGHTSIDE DR

BROWN RD

15 8

SNOW DROP CT

P.26

E 9

P.30

P.A

RI O

4 3

WESTPHALIA

P.71 6

1 7

35 5

P.27 33 19 32

33 32

P.26

P.15

VE G A

54 2 10 1

P.15

1 11

400

Sectional Map Amendment

Feet 13

243

Change Number

Zoning Change

Approved SMA/ZMA/SE

Area of Change

Number

200 Ft. Scale Index Map

Date

30 R-R to I-1 0.238 Ac. SMA 5/24/94 207SE13 Use and Location: Undeveloped MD 275/Marlboro Racetrack Road (PA 79; Tax Map 102 A-1; Parcel 70). Discussion: Revision #5 CR-83-2013 (DR-2) Tax ID: 0248161

R-R P.102 to I-1

P.44

P.77

P.4 R LA GO RD

P.2

P.75

LB AR

O OR

P.95 P.43

P.39 P.265

P.259

S IN

P.70 30

P. 70 P.37 P.12

P.92

RL BO

KR D

P.253

100 Feet

244

Sectional Map Amendment

Public Safety

Library

High School

Libraries

Construct one middle school in Beechtree to accommodate population growth in the northern portion of the subregion.

Middle School

Construct one library in the subregion to support projected population growth and service needs.

Construct one high school in the Cheltenham area to accommodate projected growth in Subregions 5 and 6

Construct three elementary schools to accommodate population projections in the vicinity of Beechtree, Rosaryville/Croom, and Brandywine/Marlton.

Complete the new 742-seat elementary school located on the existing Dr. Henry Wise, Jr. High School campus.

Acquire sites for the future construction of two rural tier fire and EMS stations in Aquasco and Nottingham.

Relocate the Office of the Sheriff to Upper Marlboro.

Elementary Schools (3) L

Elementary School

Public Safety

Schools

Construct 19 strategic underground water tanks capable of holding 30,000 gallons of water to provide emergency water supply to areas without fire hydrants.

Ongoing

Public Safety

Relocate the District V police station to a shared facility with the Fire/EMS Company 45 in the vicinity of US 301 and Rosaryville Road in Subregion 6. The relocation would move the District V station to the center of its patrolling area, increasing police visibility and reduce travel times for patrol officers.

Relocate the Forestville Fire/EMS station (Company 23) to the vicinity of Melwood Road and MD 4.

Complete the relocation of the Brandywine Fire/EMS station (Company 40) to the vicinity of Brandywine Road and Dyson Road. This project has construction funding in the proposed FY 2009-2014 CIP with an estimated completion date of 2011.

Public Safety

Complete renovation of the Baden Fire/EMS station, scheduled for completion in 2009.

Relocate the Marlboro Fire/EMS station (Company 20).

Public Safety

Construct planned improvements at the County Correctional Center.

Public Safety

Short (S)/ Location and Description Long (L) Term

Public Safety

New/Existing

Subregion 6 Master Plan Facility Cost Estimates

2009 master plan recommendation

1993 Approved Subregion 6 Master Plan and SMA

1993 Approved Subregion 6 Master Plan and SMA (Beechtree site), 2009 master plan recommendation (additional sites)

Approved County FY 2009-2014 CIP Item # AC774713

2008 Approved Public Safety Facilities Master Plan

Approved County FY 2009-2014 CIP Item # LK510403

Approved County FY 2009-2014 CIP Item # LK10420

Approved County FY 2009-2014 CIP Items # JT561573, JT561773, JT561673, JT561973, JT561873

County CIP/State CIP

TBD

$25,583,000

TBD

$5,300,000

$2,660,000

$40,670,000

Estimated Cost

APPENDIX A

Appendix 245

246 Appendix

Road

Intersection

Road

Intersection

Road

Intersection

Road

Intersection

Approved County FY 2009-2014 CIP Item # FD664001

Developer Funded

Developer funded, Approved County FY 2009-2014 CIP Item # FD669451

Developer funded

1993 Approved Subregion 6 Master Plan and SMA

State CTP

Developer Funded

Approved County FY 2009-2014 CIP Item # FD669161

1993 Approved Subregion 6 Master Plan and SMA

County CIP/State CIP

Reconstruction of MD 4 (including interchanges at Suitland Parkway and Approved County FY 2009-2014 CIP Item # FD666951 Dower House Road) for adding additional lanes to to MD 4 in this corridor

Reconstruction of Trumps Hill Road

Upgrade the intersection of Rosaryville Rd.and Williamsburg Rd.

Upgrade the intersection of MD 223 and Rosaryville Rd.

Upgrade the intersection of MD 202 and MD 193

Upgrade the intersection of MD 4 and Dower House Rd.

Upgrade the intersection of MD 4 and Suitland Parkway

Upgrade the intersection of MD 4 and Westphalia Rd.

Upgrade the intersection of US 301 and Old Crain Highway

Upgrade the intersection of US 301 and MD 725

Upgrade the intersection of US 301 and Swanson Road

Extension of Chrysler Way with a 2 lane 70’ right-of-way between E-6 and MD 725

Construction of a 2-4 lane 70’ right-of-way on Main Street/Marlboro Pike (MD 725) between A-61 and the new construction on Largo Road (see above)

Construction of a 2 lane 60’ right-of-way on the US 301 Service Road between Frank Tippett Road and Rosaryville Road

Construction of 2 lane 70’ right-of-way on Trumps Hill Road between Heathermore Boulevard and MD 382

Construction of 2 lane 60’ right-of-way on Midland Turn between Fairhaven Road and Wallace Lane

Construction of 2 lane 60’ right-of-way on Tam-O-Shanter Drive between Muirfield Drive and Wallace Lane

Construction of 2 lane 60’ right-of-way on Wallace Lane between the new arterial MC-602 and Midland Turn

Construction of 2-4 lane 70’ right-of-way on Largo Road between E-6 and Ring Road

Construction of 2 lane 70’ right-of-way on Ring Road/Governor Oden Bowie Drive between Water Street and MD 725

Construction of 2-4 lane 70’ right-of-way on Water Street (MD 717) between MD 4 and MD 725

Short (S)/ Location and Description Long (L) Term

Road

Transportation Facilities- Roads

New/Existing

Subregion 6 Master Plan Facility Cost Estimates

$4,000,000

$2,027,000

TBD

see item #38

TBD

see item #41

TBD

Estimated Cost

Appendix 247

Road

Approved County FY 2009-2014 CIP Item # FD669451

County CIP/State CIP

Construction of 4 lane 80’ right-of-way on Osborne Road (relocated) between the new arterial MC-602 and MD 223

Extension of William Beanes Road with the construction of 2-4 lane 80’ right-of-way between Old Crain Highway and MD 223

Construction of 4 lane 80’ right-of-way on Old Marlboro Pike between Woodyard Road (MD 223) and Brown Station Road

Construction of 4 lane 80’ right-of-way on Old Crain Highway between the new arterial MC-602 and Marlboro Pike

Construction of 2-4 lane 80’ right-of-way on Brown Station Road between Old Marlboro Pike and White House Road

Construction of 4 lane 120’ right-of-way on Heathermore Boulevard between the new arterial MC-602 and Lake Marlton Boulevard (C-611)

Construction of 4 lane 120’ right-of-way on Oak Grove Road/Leeland Road between MD 193 and US 301

Construction of 2-4 lane 100’ right-of-way on a new arterial (MC-602) between Croom Road and US 301

Construction of 4 lane right-of-way on US 301 between Oak Grove Road and MD 4

Construction of 4-6 lane 120-150’ right-of-way on Woodyard Road (MD 223) between MD 4 and MD 5

Construction of 4-6 lane 120’ right-of-way on Dower House Road between MD 4 and Foxley Road

Construction of 4-6 lane 150’ right-of-way on Ritchie-Marlboro Road between White House Road and MD 4

Construction of 4-6 lane 120’ right-of-way on White House Road between the Capital Beltway and MD 4

Construction of 4-8 lane 150-200’ right-of-way on Largo Road (MD 202) between the Capital Beltway and MD 4

Construction of 4-8 lane 300-450’ right-of-way on US 301 from the US 50 to Charles County

Construction of 6-8 lane 300’ right-of-way (including transit ROW) on MD 5 from the Capital Beltway to Charles County

1993 Approved Subregion 6 Master Plan and SMA

1994 Melwood Westphalia Master Plan and SMA

1993 Approved Subregion 6 Master Plan and SMA

2009 Preliminary Master Plan recommendation

1993 Approved Subregion 6 Master Plan and SMA

2009 Preliminary Master Plan of Transportation

1993 Approved Subregion 6 Master Plan and SMA

1994 Melwood Westphalia Master Plan and SMA

2009 Preliminary Master Plan of Transportation

Approved County FY 2009-2014 CIP Item # FD669161, 1993 Approved Subregion 6 Master Plan and SMA

1993 Approved Subregion 6 Master Plan and SMA

Construction of 6-8 lane 300’ right-of-way (2 additional proposed lanes) 1993 Approved Subregion 6 Master Plan and SMA on MD 4 from the Capital Beltway to Anne Arundel County

Reconstruction of Woodyard Road (MD 223) from Rosaryville Road to Dower House Road

Short (S)/ Location and Description Long (L) Term

New/Existing

Subregion 6 Master Plan Facility Cost Estimates

TBD

$24,000,000

TBD

$2,625,000

Estimated Cost

248 Appendix

Road

1993 Approved Subregion 6 Master Plan and SMA

County CIP/State CIP

1993 Approved Subregion 6 Master Plan and SMA

2009 Preliminary Master Plan of Transportation

Construction of 2 lane 80’ right-of-way on Cross Road Trail between Frank Tippett/Cherry Tree Crossing Roads (see above) and North Keys Road

1993 Approved Subregion 6 Master Plan and SMA

Construction of 2 lane 80’ right-of-way on Horsehead Road between MD 1993 Approved Subregion 6 Master Plan and SMA 381 and Charles County

Construction of 2 lane 80’ right-of-way on Doctor Bowen Road between MD 381 and Charles County

Construction of 2 lane 80’ right-of-way on Eagle Harbor Road between MD 381 and Trueman Point Road

Construction of 2 lane 80’ right-of-way on Molly Berry Road between MD 382 and Candy Hill Road

Construction of 2 lane 80’ right-of-way on Baden-Westwood/ Westwood/Bald Eagle School Road between MD 381 and MD 382

Construction of 2 lane 80’ right-of-way on Candy Hill Road between MD 382 and Molly Berry Road

Construction of 2-4 lane 80’ right-of-way on Cedarville Road between MD 381 and the arterial A-63 (Subregion 5)

Construction of 2 lane 80’ right-of-way on North Keys Road between MD 1993 Approved Subregion 6 Master Plan and SMA 381 and Molly Berry Road

Construction of 2-4 lane 80’ right-of-way on Croom Road (MD 382) between the new arterial MC-602 and Charles County

Extension of Dille Drive with construction of a 2-4 lane 80’ right-of-way between Ritchie Marlboro Road and Brown Station Road.

Construction of 2-4 lane 80’ right-of-way on Brandywine/Aquasco Road (MD 381) between Charles County and Subregion 5

Construction of 4 lane 80’ right-of-way on Grandhaven Avenue between 1993 Approved Subregion 6 Master Plan and SMA the new arterial MC-602 and Heathermore Boulevard

Construction of 4 lane 80’ right-of-way on Lake Marlton Boulevard between Duley Station Road Road and Heathermore Boulevard

Construction of 4 lane 80’ right-of-way on Frank Tippett/Cherry Tree Crossing Roads between Rosaryville Road and A-63 (Subregion 5)

Construction of 4 lane 80’ right-of-way on Surratts Road between Frank Tippett Road and Brandywine Road (Subregion 5)

Construction of 4 lane 80’ right-of-way on Duley Station Road between the new arterial MC-602 and MD 382

Construction of 4 lane 80’ right-of-way on Rosaryville Road between the new arterial MC-602 and MD 223

Short (S)/ Location and Description Long (L) Term

New/Existing

Subregion 6 Master Plan Facility Cost Estimates

TBD

Estimated Cost

Appendix 249

Interchange

Trail

Pedestrian/Bicycle

Transportation Facilities- Trails

Interchange

Road

1993 Approved Subregion 6 Master Plan and SMA

Rosaryville Road at US 301 relocated (F-10)

Provide continuous sidewalks and bicycle compatible road improvements on Rosaryville Rd from MD 223 to US 301

Provide continuous sidewalks and bicycle compatible road improvements on Dowerhouse Rd from MD 4 to MD 223

Develop hiker-equestrian Rock Creek Trail connecting MD 381 to Patuxent River

Develop hiker-equestrian Tom Walls Branch Trail connecting MD 382 to Letcher Rd

Develop hiker-equestrian Black Creek Swamp Trail connecting Baden Elementary School to Patuxent River

Connect hiker-equestrian Western Branch Stream Valley Trail to the Equestrian Center

Develop multi-use Piscataway Creek Stream Valley Trail connecting to Subregion 5 Charles Branch Trail

Develop multi-use Mattaponi Trail (Mattaponi Creek) from Old Indian Head Rd to Merkle WMA

Develop multi-use Dower House Branch Stream Valley Trail to preserve equestrian access to Rosaryville State Park from surrounding communities

Develop multi-use Chesapeake Beach Railroad ROW Trail from Subregion 3 to Patuxent River via Upper Marlboro

Develop multi-use Charles Branch Stream Valley Trail from Dower House Road to Patuxent River

1993 Approved Subregion 6 Master Plan and SMA

1994 Melwood Westphalia Master Plan and SMA

1993 Approved Subregion 6 Master Plan and SMA

Approved County FY 2009-2014 CIP Item # EC061055 for 120 ft pedestrian/bicycle bridge over a tributary of Western Branch northwest of the Town of Upper Marlboro, 1993 Approved Subregion 6 Master Plan and SMA

1993 Approved Subregion 6 Master Plan and SMA, 1994 Melwood Westphalia Master Plan and SMA

Develop multi-use Collington Branch Stream Valley Trail from MD 214 to 1993 Approved Subregion 6 Master Plan and SMA Upper Marlboro (approved, not built)

1994 Melwood Westphalia Master Plan and SMA

County CIP/State CIP

MD 4 at US 301 relocated (F-10)

MD 4 at Ritchie-Marlboro Road

MD 4 at MD 223

Construction of 4 lane 80â&#x20AC;&#x2122; right-of-way on Marlboro Pike between MD 223 and Dower House Road

Short (S)/ Location and Description Long (L) Term

New/Existing

Subregion 6 Master Plan Facility Cost Estimates

TBD

Estimated Cost

250 Appendix

Pedestrian/Bicycle

Bicycle

2009 master plan recommendation

2009 Preliminary Master Plan of Transportation

1993 Approved Subregion 6 Master Plan and SMA

County CIP/State CIP

Provide bicycle compatible road improvements on North Keys Rd from MD 381 to Molly Berry Rd

Provide bicycle compatible road improvements on Baden-Westwood Rd from MD 381 to MD 382

Provide bicycle compatible road improvements on Baden-Naylor Rd from MD 381 to MD 382

Provide bicycle compatible road improvements on Candy Hill Rd from Molly Berry Rd to Nottingham Rd

Provide bicycle compatible road improvements on Fenno Rd from St. Thomas Church Rd to Nottingham Rd

Provide bicycle compatible road improvements on Tanyard Rd from MD 382 to Watershed Dr

Provide bicycle compatible road improvements on Nottingham Rd from MD 382 to Watershed Dr

Provide bicycle compatible road improvements on St. Thomas Church Rd from MD 382 to Fenno Rd

Provide bicycle compatible road improvements on Croom Airport Rd from MD 382 to Jug Bay Park

Provide bicycle compatible road improvements on Croom Station Rd from Old Crain Hwy to MD 382

Provide bicycle compatible road improvements on Croom Road (MD 382) from US 301 to MD 381

Provide bicycle compatible road improvements on Aquasco Road (MD 381) from US 301 to Charles County line

1993 Approved Subregion 6 Master Plan and SMA

2009 master plan recommendation

1993 Approved Subregion 6 Master Plan and SMA

Provide shared-use sidepaths or wide sidewalks on MD 223 from MD 4 to 1994 Melwood Westphalia Master Plan and SMA Rosaryville Road.

Provide continuous sidewalks and bicycle compatible road improvements in the Aquasco Community along: MD 381 from Edwards Place to Orme Road, Baden-Westwood Road from MD 381 to St Phillips Church, and Horsehead Road from Orme Road to Baden-Westwood Road.

Provide shared-use sidepaths or wide sidewalks on Brown Station Road from Old Marlboro Pike to White House Road.

Provide continuous sidewalks and bicycle compatible road improvements on South Osborne Rd from Marlboro Pike to US 301

Provide continuous sidewalks and bicycle compatible road improvements on Frank Tippett Rd from Rosaryville Road to US 301

Short (S)/ Location and Description Long (L) Term

New/Existing

Subregion 6 Master Plan Facility Cost Estimates

TBD

Estimated Cost

Appendix 251

Bicycle

New community center to serve Rosaryville, Marlton, and Melwood. Expansion to the Baden Community Center.

on going

Park

Park/Trail

Park

Facility

Rural Convenience Centers

Waste Management

Eight-acre Marlton Middle School/Park.

Park

Facility

50-acre community park west of Frank Tippet Road, adjoining Dower House Pond Branch and Piscataway Creek

Park

Improvements to Brown Station Road and Missouri Avenue Convenience Centers, as well as construction of a new center in the southeastern portion of Subregion 6, exact location to be determined.

150-acre Lake Marlton Community Park.

Two-to-three acre addition to Melwood Community Pond.

30-acre community park north of Osborne Road.

100-acre park located on both sides of Brown Station Road just south of the landfill.

100-acre parcel within Beechtree (northern part) with potential access from Town Farm Road.

25-acres for a neighborhood park and trailhead southeast of RitchieMarlboro and White House Road.

Additional interpretative signage and boat launch improvements for kayaks and canoes for the Patuxent River Water Trail or blueway.

28-acre addition to Windsor Park Neighborhood Playground.

30-acres for a neighborhood park north of Charles Branch.

160-acre community park on the east side of Ritchie Marlboro Road.

S 50-acre addition to the approximately 14 acres of park land acquired from the Winshire development

Provide bicycle compatible road improvements on Duley Station Rd from MD 382 to Wallace Ln

Provide bicycle compatible road improvements on Cedarville Rd from US 301 to MD 381

Provide bicycle compatible road improvements on Van Brady Rd from Old Indian Head Rd to Molly Berry Rd

Park

Parks and Recreation

Bicycle

Provide bicycle compatible road improvements on Molly Berry Rd from MD 382 to Baden-Naylor Rd

Short (S)/ Location and Description Long (L) Term

New/Existing

Subregion 6 Master Plan Facility Cost Estimates

Approved County FY 2009-2014 CIP Item #NX541135

Approved County FY 2009-2014 CIP Item # EC091166

2009 master plan recommendation

1993 Approved Subregion 6 Master Plan and SMA

1994 Melwood Westphalia Master Plan and SMA

2009 master plan recommendation

1993 Approved Subregion 6 Master Plan and SMA

1994 Melwood Westphalia Master Plan and SMA

1993 Approved Subregion 6 Master Plan and SMA

County CIP/State CIP

$5,450,000

$1,300,000

TBD

Estimated Cost

APPENDIX B Feb. 11, 2009

OFFICIAL PLAN AMENDMENT-MARLTON WHEREAS, the Marlton Planned Community (Marlton) was created in 1969 by the County Commissioners of Prince George’s County, sitting as the District Council for the Maryland-Washington Regional District, in Prince George’s County through the approval of Zoning Map Amendment A-6696-C which approved the Marlton R-P-C Zone with an Official Plan, various other plans and a text entitled Marlton Justification Statement providing for an overall density of 6192 various types of dwelling units, commercial space, and facilities; and WHEREAS, in 1985 Lake Marlton Limited Partnership (LMLP) purchased most of the undeveloped portion of Marlton as reflected on a color-coded document entitled “Proposed Official Plan – Marlton R-P-C Zone”, attached hereto, which accurately reflects the existing and proposed developments of the land owned by LMLP. WHEREAS, Marlton is commonly known as West and East Marlton (Sections 18 – 34) with the dividing boundary generally being the PEPCO power line/CSX&T rail line; and WHEREAS, West Marlton was developed by various developers and not solely by LMLP or other related entities; and WHEREAS, the LMLP developed part of West Marlton, the golf course, and portions of the Town Center via several preliminary plans, detailed site plans and corresponding official plan amendments; and WHEREAS, a portion of East Marlton was subject to a rezoning filed by the applicant and subsequently approved by the District Council via ZMA A-9730-C and A-9731-C. The property subject to ZMA A-9730-C and A-9731-C was described as approximately 431.5 acres of land, in the R-P-C (R-10, R-R, R-T, R-80, R-18 and C-1) Zones, located generally along the CSX&T Railroad, between Croom Road and Duley Station Road, Upper Marlboro, and rezoned to the R-P-C (R-R, R-80, R-35, R-T and R-10) Zones; and WHEREAS, a portion of East Marlton containing 90± acres zoned R-P-C/I-3 and R-P-C/R-R shown as Section 33 on the “Proposed Official Plan – Marlton R-P-C Zone” shall be reclassified to the R-P-C/R-E Zone; and WHEREAS, the LMLP also requested rezoning in the 1993 Subregion VI Master Plan and Sectional Map Amendment (SMA) which down-zoned a large portion of the Town Center from the R-P-C/C-2 Zone to the R-P-C/R-30 Zone, and an additional parcel from the R-P-C/C-2 Zone to the R-P-C/R-30 Zone; and WHEREAS, the LMLP received approval of a preliminary plan (4-93078)for a portion of East Marlton said land being rezoned by ZMA A-9730-C and A-9731-C; and WHEREAS, the LMLP filed for Detailed Site Plan approval for Sections 18, 19, 20, 21, and 22 (DSP- Nos.03033 and 03035) which were subsequently approved in 2006; and WHEREAS, the LMLP is requesting that the District Council approve amended and restated conditions to ZMA-A-6696-C, A-9730-C and A-9731-C zoning cases and/or 252 Appendix

any updates or revisions thereto, to create a comprehensive planning and zoning document (with conditions) for the Marlton R-P-C. Such approval of the requested amended and restated conditions, for the aforementioned cases, will not create non-conforming uses or structures but rather will act as a proactive vehicle for further development reviews; WHEREAS, there are conditions unique to certain geographical areas of Marlton which will set up conditions applicable to both East and West Marlton or to East or West Marlton individually; NOW THEREFORE, THE DISTRICT COUNCIL APPROVES THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR THE MARLTON R-P-C ZONE. THESE WILL BE UMBRELLA CONDITIONS AFFECTING ALL OF THE MARLTON R-P-C ZONE. ALL CONDITIONS SHALL AMEND AND RESTATE A-6696-C, A-9730-C and A-9731-C AND/OR ANY UPDATES OR REVISIONS THERETO. THIS RESOLUTION SHALL BE THE GOVERNING ZONING DOCUMENT FOR THE MARLTON R-P-C ZONE. THE AMENDED AND RESTATED CONDITIONS SHALL BE AS FOLLOWS: 1. That this Official Plan designate an area of approximately 100 acres for public park purpose, the same to be dedicated, in stages and at the time of platting, to the Maryland-National Capital Park and Planning Commission. 2. Prior to the issuance of building permits in the undeveloped areas, a Preliminary Plan of Subdivision, Detailed Site Plan and Record Plat shall be approved and recorded. 3. The need for a library within the East Marlton site shall be considered in future Preliminary Plan of Subdivision submittals. 4. During future Detailed Site Plan or Preliminary Plan reviews within East Marlton, the following shall be considered: i.

Extending from the main open space spine are bands of green space as shown on the proposed Official Plan. This provision creates a framework for a community open space system. The internal open space within individual parcels should be provided and planned as branches off these major open space bands. These branches are essential to the completeness of the entire system. With well distributed branches, the open space system can then intimately and harmoniously blend into neighborhoods and greatly enhance the cohesiveness of this planned community.

ii. Stands of mature trees and other environmental features can and should be preserved to the maximum extent possible through careful planning. iii. A 50 foot wide building restriction line Marlton Avenue. Within this 50-foot-wide existing vegetation shall be retained or to buffer and screen the units from East

shall be maintained from East building restriction line landscaping shall be provided Marlton Avenue.

iv. Compliance with the archeological field survey and testing Program outlined in Section VI-C of the Technical Staff Report (8/22/88)of Zoning case A-9730-C. 5. During future Preliminary Plans of Subdivision and Detailed Site Plan reviews within East Marlton, an appropriate system of community-wide

Appendix 253

pedestrian, sidewalks and where practical, bridle trails, and sidewalks, shall be provided. 6. Section 33 in “Proposed Official Plan – Marlton R-P-C Zone” containing approximately 90± acres (including the R-P-C/R-R adjacent sliver) shall be rezoned from R-P-C/I-3 and R-P-C/R-R to R-P-C/R-E. 7. The undisturbed and/or planted buffer from the property line at Croom Road for said R-P-C/R-E (formerly R-P-C/I-3) residential parcel shall be 225 feet in depth, beginning at the CSX property line and extending east along Croom Road for a distance of 250 feet in the area facing the W.W. Duley House historic property. The buffer line shall then make a gradual transition to 125 feet in depth over the next 500 feet or to its intersection with the proposed R-P-C/R-E entrance roadway, whichever is greater, and the remaining buffer on Croom Road to the Duley Farm property line will remain 125 feet in depth. 8. Lots abutting Croom Road zoned R-E shall be a minimum of 1.25 acres, with an average of 1.5 acres. The architectural elevations of the houses on each of these lots shall be coordinated with the owners of the W.W. Duley House historic property. The rear elevations of said lots if facing Croom Road shall be enhanced with additional rear architectural features such as shutters, window trim, and/or masonry fireplaces. 9. Subject to approval by the appropriate agency, where necessary, the applicant shall make the following changes to Heathermore Boulevard and East Marlton Avenue to reduce the environmental impacts and lessen the length and number of stream crossings: a.

Design Heathermore Boulevard to modify the extent of grading to be only 100 feet of the 120-foot right-of-way (ROW), and design East Marlton Avenue to transition from the relocated round-about to an 80foot ROW.

From the end of the existing Heathermore Boulevard dedication on the east side of the PEPCO ROW, Developer shall, beginning at the east side of the PEPCO ROW and merging into the alignment of East Marlton Avenue just before the dedicated Board of Education property, realign Heathermore Boulevard to the south. This realignment shall preserve, outside the limit of disturbance required to construct the realigned Heathermore Boulevard roadway as shown on the approved Detailed Site Plans, the area of the proposed park containing the Southwest Branch and the jurisdictional side branch stream flowing from the east between Sections 18 and 19 and the adjoining Duley property.

Heathermore Boulevard shall be constructed as a four- lane divided arterial beginning at the proposed Grandhaven Avenue round-about through to the proposed round-about at East Marlton Avenue. Any space used as a lane divider shall be constructed as green space with plantings as opposed to concrete or equivalent material.

The Heathermore Boulevard ROW shall transition to a two-lane East Marlton Avenue roadway within an 80-foot ROW from the proposed East Marlton Avenue round-about.

254 Appendix

10. Detailed site plan review, in accordance with Part 3, Division 9 of the Zoning Ordinance, shall be required and include the following: a.

The requirements of Sections 27-171 and 27-176 of the Zoning Ordinance for R-P-C considerations.

Prior to final plat approvals the applicant shall submit a Recreational Facilities Agreement to the Prince George’s County Planning Board or its designee which indicates the recreational facilities which will be provided as part of the development of Marlton. It will further indicate the location of the facilities and include requirements for the timing of the transfer of all proposed parkland to the MarylandNational Capital Park and Planning Commission.

11. No residential building permits shall be obtained by the applicant (or anyone else upon a sale or transfer) for any property within East Marlton in the R-T, R-35, R-10 or R-E Zones, except the area zoned R-T(R-P-C) and R-R(R-P-C) known as Sections 18 and 19, until: a.

The applicant shall rough grade a minimum of two (2) acres and deed to an entity designated by the Citizens Association of Marlton a Youth Center site of approximately 3.3 acres.

The applicant shall develop in West Marlton the two park/school sites according to plans submitted to the Citizens Association of Marlton and dependent on approval by the appropriate County agencies. Sites are located off Grandhaven Avenue (Parcel 25) and Trumps Hill Road (Parcel 5).

The above conditions 11 (a) and (b) may be modified by the Prince George’s County Planning Board as allowed by Section 27-158(b) of the Prince George’s County Zoning Ordinance in furtherance of other recreational opportunities such as the proposed “South Marlton Recreation Area” proposed to be constructed on Maryland National Park and Planning Commission property located on Parcels 144, 145 and 149, Tax Maps 127-C2 and 127-C3.

The above conditions 11(a) and (b) shall be considered satisfied upon approval of an appropriate recreational facilities agreement by the Prince George’s County Planning Board setting forth the location of facilities, requirements for the timing of their provision and the posting of a performance bond(s) with the appropriate governmental agency.

12. Except for the formerly zoned R-P-C/I-3 area (including the R-P-C/R-R zoned sliver) now zoned R-P-C/R-E which will be limited to a single roadway access onto Croom Road, all lots within East Marlton shall have direct access to East Marlton Avenue and/or Duley Station Road from within the Marlton community and shall not connect to Croom Road. 13. The “Proposed Official Plan – Marlton R-P-C Zone”, attached hereto, is hereby adopted as the Official Plan - Marlton R-P-C Zone.

Appendix 255

APPENDIX C

256 Appendix

APPENDIX D

Appendix 257

APPENDIX E

258 Appendix

APPENDIX F Glossary of Terms

for the 2009 Subregion 6 Master Plan and Sectional Map Amendment Accessory Use–The use of a building, structure or land that is subordinate to, customarily incidental to, and ordinarily found in association with, a principal use, which it serves. (See Section 27-107.01 of the Zoning Ordinance.) Accident Potential Zone (APZ)–An area around an airfield that has a statistically higher possibility of aircraft accidents than other areas. Acre–43,560 square feet (about the size of a football field). Activity Center–A community focal point providing for the combination, rather than scatteration, of general retail, service commercial, professional office, higher density housing, and appropriate public/quasi-public uses. Adequate Public Facilities (APF) Ordinance–The ordinance requiring a determination of the adequacy of public facilities to accommodate growth resulting from approval of a subdivision application. Afforestation–The establishment of a tree cover on an area from which it has always or very long been absent, or the planting of open areas that are not presently in forest cover. (See also REFORESTATION.) Agricultural Assessment–A state program in which land used for agricultural purposes is assessed based on its value as agricultural land as opposed to a higher valuation. Air Installation Compatible Use Zone (AICUZ) Study–An extensive analysis of the effects of noise, aircraft accident potential, and land use and development upon present and future neighbors of Joint Base Andrews. Air Rights–The development rights of the space above a piece of land and its existing ground level use. Ancillary–Certain small shops, stores, restaurants associated with larger uses, e.g., office and residential, that supply necessities in frequent demand and the daily needs of an area, with a minimum of consumer travel (e.g., restaurants, dry cleaners in an office or mid-rise residential building). Area Master Plan Or Area Plan–Area Master Plans: Area master plans consist of a plan map along with supporting data, text, and other maps. They provide specific recommendations on a planning area or subregion basis on the environment, historic preservation, living areas, housing, commercial areas, employment areas, urban design, circulation, and transportation. 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). Average Daily Traffic (ADT)–The average number of vehicles passing a specified point on a highway during a 24hour period. Basic Plan–Phase 1 of the Comprehensive Design Zone process. It sets forth general land use relationships, including the approximate number of dwelling units and building intensity. Proposed land uses are also described. Berm–An earthen mound designed to provide visual interest on a site, screening of undesirable views, noise Appendix 259

reduction, etc. Best Management Practices (BMPS)–Conservation practices or systems of practices and management measures that control soil loss and reduce water quality degradation caused by nutrients, animal waste, toxins, and sediment. Bikeway–A lane, path, or other surface reserved exclusively for bikers. Buffer–An area of land designed or managed for the purpose of separating and insulating two or more land areas whose uses conflict or are incompatible (trees separating homes from an expressway). Bufferyard–One of several specific combinations of minimum building setbacks, landscaped yard widths, and plant material requirements set forth in the Landscape Manual for use in buffering incompatible land uses. Build-Out–A theoretical measure of “full development” for which public facilities are planned. (See also HOLDING CAPACITY.) Capacity–The maximum number of vehicles that have a reasonable expectation of passing over a given section of a lane or a roadway during a given period under a specified speed or level of service. Strictly, capacity is an absolute number equivalent to Level-of-Service E. (See also LEVEL OF SERVICE.) Capital Improvement Program (CIP)–A six-year comprehensive statement of the objectives of capital programs with cost estimates and proposed construction schedules for specific projects. The CIP is submitted annually to the County Council by the County Executive. Chesapeake Bay Critical Area–All waters of and lands under the Chesapeake Bay and its tributaries to the head of tide as indicated on the state wetlands maps, and all land and water areas within 1,000 feet beyond the landward boundaries of and heads of tides as indicated on approved Chesapeake Bay Critical Area Overlay Zoning Map Amendments. Clear Zone (CZ)–The safety zone located at the end of air base runways, it has the highest accident potential of the three safety zones. Constrained Long-Range Plan (CLRP)–The approved regional plan for highway, transit, and bikeway projects, as well as major jurisdictional and regional studies. Individual jurisdictional submissions are prepared by the District of Columbia, Maryland, and Virginia for the National Capital Transportation Planning Board. To be eligible for federal financial assistance, a Prince George’s County highway, transit, trail or bikeway project, or major transportation study, such as those proposed or required by the new General Plan or the Master Plan of Transportation (see below), will have to be submitted to the state for inclusion in the Maryland section of the CLRP and the appropriate Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP) (see below). Cluster Development–An alternative development technique under zoning and subdivision regulations. A cluster subdivision is basically one in which a number of residential lots are grouped or clustered, leaving some land undivided for common use. Generally the same number of lots or dwelling units permitted under conventional subdivision procedures are clustered on smaller-than-usual lots. The land remaining from lot reduction is left undivided and is available as common area or open space. Collector–A two- to four-lane roadway, usually within an 80-foot right-of-way, providing movement between developed areas and the arterial system with minimum control of access. Community–A grouping of neighborhoods and villages, the population of which may range from 23,000 to 30,000 in suburban areas and up to 40,000 in corridor communities. Most communities should have as their centers of focal points a Community Activity Center. Community Centers–Concentration of activities, services, and land uses that serve, and are focal points for, the immediate neighborhoods.

260 Appendix

Comprehensive Master Plan–A document that guides the way an area should be developed. It includes a compilation of policy statements, goals, standards, maps, and pertinent data relative to the past, present, and future trends of a particular area of the County including, but not limited to, its population, housing, economics, social patterns, land use, water resources and their use, transportation facilities, and public facilities. In Prince George’s County, master plans amend the county’s General Plan. COMAR (Code of Maryland Regulations)–A compilation of all Maryland state agency regulations. Comprehensive Rezoning–(A) The rezoning of a planning area (or a combination of planning areas, municipalities, those areas subject to a master plan, or areas 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. (B) 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. Comprehensive Ten-Year Water And Sewerage Plan–A plan required by the state and adopted annually by the county that describes county policy related to water and sewerage planning and delineates geographic areas to be serviced over the next ten years. Conservation Agreement–A formal agreement that commits a grading or building permit applicant within the Chesapeake Bay Critical Area to the execution of various approved elements of a Conservation Plan, including a stormwater management concept plan, an erosion and sedimentation concept plan, a vegetation management plan, and other plans that may be required by the Department of Environmental Resources or the Prince George’s County Planning Board. Conservation Easement–A nonpossessory interest in land that restricts the manner in which the land may be developed in an effort to preserve natural resources for future use. Consolidated Transportation Program (CTP)–The state transportation capital improvement plan, including all statefunded or sponsored road, transit, bike/pedestrian projects, and studies to be undertaken in Prince George’s County. Controlled Intersections–Intersections with traffic lights or other traffic control devices. Corridor(s)– A) An uninterrupted path or channel of developed or undeveloped land paralleling the route of a street or highway. B) The land within one-quarter mile of both sides of designated high-volume transportation facilities, such as arterial roads. If the designated transportation facility is a limited access highway, the corridor extends onequarter mile from the interchanges. Decibel “A” Weighted (Dba) (dBA)–A measure of sound levels in average decibels usually over a 24-hour period calculated using a logarithmic average. Density–The number of dwelling units or persons per acre of land, usually expressed in units per gross acre. * Singlefamily detached dwellings (range from less than 1 to 6 per acre) on a single lot. * Townhouses (range from 6 to 12 per acre) attached in a row. * Multifamily Apartments (range from 12 to 48 per acre) in one structure. Developed Tier (As Defined By The 2002 General Plan)–The subarea of the county consisting primarily of innercounty areas that are largely developed. Developing Tier (As Defined By The 2002 General Plan)–The largely suburban subarea of the county located primarily in the central portion of the county. Development (As Defined In Zoning Ordinance)–Any activity that materially affects the condition or use of dry land, land under water, or any structure. Appendix 261

Dwelling Unit–A room or group of rooms, occupied or intended for occupancy as separate living quarters. Easement–A contractual agreement to gain temporary or permanent use of, and/or access through, a property, usually for public facilities and access ways. Ecological Function–The functions of a natural system that includes water, air, soil, flora, fauna, and all related elements. These functions regulate air, water, and soil temperatures and provide appropriate habitat for ecosystem residents and migrants. Environmental Setting–Used in the Historic Sites and Districts Plan to define an area of land (including or within the property boundaries) to which a historic resource relates visually and historically, and which is essential to the integrity of the historic resource. Euclidean Zone–A traditional zone in which certain types of land uses with specific regulations are permitted. Euclidean zones can be granted by the District Council upon approval of a comprehensive rezoning or a piecemeal rezoning application. Through a piecemeal application the property owner must demonstrate 1) either that a change in the character of the neighborhood has occurred since the last comprehensive rezoning; or 2) that a mistake was made in the last comprehensive rezoning. 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 foot to 2,000 foot intervals. Floodplain–A relatively flat or lowland area adjoining a river, stream, or watercourse, which is subject to periodic, partial or complete inundation. Floor Area Ratio (FAR)–The ratio of the gross floor area of a building to the area of the lot on which it is located. Forecast–As defined for use in the Council of Governments (COG) Cooperative Forecasting Program, a projection tempered by stated policy considerations, including the reconciliation of past and current trends with current and future policies. Ideally, forecasts reflect the best professional judgment concerning the impact of trends and present conditions on the future trend of development and the likely effectiveness of policies to alter this trend. Therefore, forecasts should represent the most realistic assessment of the future. Forest Stand Delineation–A detailed accounting of woody vegetation, prepared in document form, as required by the Prince George’s County Woodland Conservation and Tree Preservation Policy Document. Freeway–A divided highway for through traffic with full control of access and interchanges at selected public roads only. Functional Plans–Map and supporting text that comprehensively cover a specific topic (such as public safety, transportation or historic preservation) for the entire county. 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. Geographic Information System (GIS)–An organized collection of computer hardware, software, and geographic data designed to efficiently capture, store, update, manipulate, analyze, and display all forms of geographically referenced information. Green Area–An area of land associated with, and located on the same parcel of land as, a building for which it serves to provide light and air, or scenic, recreational, or similar purposes. 262 Appendix

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 Corridor–A network of large undisturbed land areas (hubs) connected by designated pathways for the movement of wildlife and humans (green corridors). Greenhouse Gases (GHG)–Gases, naturally occurring and/or emitted through human activities, that trap heat in the atmosphere. Green Hub–See “Green Corridor.” Green Infrastructure–See “Green Corridor.” 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. Historic District–A group of historic resources comprised of two or more properties that are significant as a cohesive unit and contribute to the historical, architectural, archeological, or cultural values within the MarylandWashington Regional District and that has been so classified in the county’s Historic Sites and Districts Plan. Historic Resource–An area of land, building, structure, or object that may be significant in American history, architecture, archaeology, or culture. Historic resources, designated as such in the county’s Historic Sites and Districts Plan are considered unclassified and are not protected by the Prince George’s County Historic Preservation Ordinance. Historic Site–An individual historic resource that is significant in American history, architecture, archaeology, or culture and is so designated on the county’s Historic Sites and Districts Plan. A historic site is protected by the Prince George’s County Historic Preservation Ordinance. Holding Capacity–The estimate of the maximum housing and employment development permitted by an area’s zoning. Impervious Surface–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 and water and sewer systems. 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. Land Use (Or Use)–The types of buildings and activities existing in an area or on a specific site. Land use is to be distinguished from zoning, the latter being the regulation of existing and future land uses. Landscape Manual–Part of the County Zoning Ordinance, its purpose is to enhance the appearance of the county by improving the quality of landscaping, buffering, and screening. The manual establishes minimum mandatory standards and provides options that will allow approval of alternative methods of compliance. LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design)–An internationally recognized green building certification system developed by the U.S. Green Building Council. Level Of Service (LOS)–

Appendix 263

A) 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. B) 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 evaluate the level and severity of automotive traffic congestion on a specific road segment or at specific intersections. The General Plan recommends the minimum acceptable LOS by Tier. Light Spill-Over–Light from nonnatural sources that covers areas beyond that needed for the lighting use or that illuminates another person’s property. Lot Coverage–The percentage of a lot that is covered by buildings (including covered porches) and areas for vehicular access and parking. Major Community Activity Center–A commercial center containing 20-50 acres of commercial development on a site area of 30-60 acres, serving a population of at least 150,000. A major community activity center typically includes uses listed under community activity center plus one or more general merchandise anchor stores. Can also be defined as a community focal point providing for a concentration of activities such as general retail, service commercial, professional office, higher-density housing, and appropriate public and open space uses easily accessible by pedestrians. Mandatory (Land) Dedication–Land excluded from subdivision approved for residential development. The land is dedicated to M-NCPPC (or held in private ownership) for the purpose of providing suitable and adequate open space, light, and air to serve the recreational needs of the future occupants of the subdivision. Master Plan–A document that guides the way an area should be developed. It includes a compilation of policy statements, goals, standards, maps, and pertinent data relative to the past, present, and future trends of a particular area of the county including, but not limited to, its population, housing, economics, social patterns, land use, water resources and their use, transportation facilities, and public facilities. In Prince George’s County, master plans amend the county’s General Plan. Master Plan of Transportation (MPOT)–A countywide functional, comprehensive plan of street, road, highway, transit, trail, bike, pedestrian facilities needed to ensure the operational integrity of the county transportation system and to complement the development and growth envisioned and recommended in the General Plan, and adopted and approved area plans, in Prince George’s County. 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. Natural Heritage Area (NHA)–An area within the critical area designated in COMAR that contain at least one-half dozen species designated or proposed as endangered, threatened, or in need of conservation. Natural Reserve Area–A delineation (usually on master plans) of physical features that exhibit natural constraints that make conditions unsuitable for development or that are important to sensitive ecological systems. The physical features that delineate the Natural Reserve Area are: the streams and their buffers, including the 100year floodplain and nontidal wetlands. Also included are severe slopes and steep slopes associated with highly erodible soils, the Patuxent River Primary Management Area, Chesapeake Bay Critical Area buffers, and Marlboro clay on steep slopes. Neighborhood Convenience Center–A commercial center containing 2-6 acres of commercial development on a site of 4-10 acres, serving a population of approximately 8,000 and anchored by a small grocery or drug store. It should also include a limited range of other commercial and residential uses.

264 Appendix

Net Lot Area–The total contiguous area included within a lot, excluding public ways (i.e., streets, alleys) and land with 100-year floodplain. (See Section 27-107.01 of the Zoning Ordinance.) Nonattainment Area–A geographic area in which the level of a criteria air pollutant is higher than the level allowed by federal standards. Portions of Prince George’s County are currently classified as nonattainment for carbon monoxide and all of the county is a nonattainment area for ozone. Nonconforming Use–A use that is prohibited by, or does not conform to, the Zoning Ordinance. Except when construction has occurred in outright violation of the code, nonconforming uses are generally ones that were allowed under the original zoning but have not been allowed since the land was rezoned or the law changed. The use may continue to operate subject to limitations. Nontidal Wetland–An area inundated or saturated by surface or groundwater at a frequency and duration sufficient to support a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions under normal circumstances. Nontidal wetlands are also referred to as swamps, marshes, and bogs. 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. Pattern Of Development–The physical form or shape of land development. Patuxent River Primary Management Area (PMA)–An area along all perennial streams in the Patuxent River watershed within which land use is managed to protect water quality and preserve wildlife habitat. 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. Pipeline Development–A colloquial term encompassing projects that have received development approval and public commitments are in effect, but development has not yet been completed. For example, the number of housing units “in the pipeline” would be accounted for in the construction permits, sewer connection authorizations, or subdivision approval for housing. 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). Pollution–The presence of matter or energy, the nature, location, or quantity of which produces undesirable environmental effects. A) Nonpoint source pollution - Pollution generated by diffuse land use activities rather than from an identifiable or discrete facility. It is conveyed to waterways through natural processes, such as rainfall, stormwater runoff, or groundwater seepage rather than by deliberate discharge. B) Point source pollution—In air pollution, a stationary source of large individual emission, generally of an industrial nature. In water pollution, a stationary source of wastewater discharge into a stream, such as from a factory or sewage treatment plant. Preliminary Plan Of Subdivision–The preliminary detailed drawing (to scale) of a tract of land, depicting its proposed division into lots, blocks, streets, alleys, or other designated areas within a proposed subdivision.

Appendix 265

Priority Funding Area (PFA)–A program administered by the Maryland Department of Planning that designates locations where the State and local governments want to target their efforts to encourage and support economic development and new growth. Priority Preservation Area (PPA)–An area shall:

• Contain productive agricultural or forest soils; or be capable of supporting profitable agricultural and forestry enterprises where productive soils are lacking. • Be governed by local policies that stabilize the agricultural and forest land base so that development does not convert or compromise agricultural or forest resources. • Be large enough to support the kind of agricultural operations that the county seeks to preserve, as represented in its adopted comprehensive plan.

An area may:

• Consist of a single parcel of land, multiple connected parcels of land, or multiple unconnected parcels of land. • Include Rural Legacy Areas.

A county’s acreage goal for land to be preserved through easements and zoning within an area shall be equal to at least 80% of the remaining undeveloped land in the area, as calculated at the time of application for state certification of an area.

Public Facility–A facility such as a road, school, or sewage treatment plant financed by public revenues and available for use by the public. Public Improvements–A variety of facilities and services provided by government such as street lighting, street widening, trash collection, and drainage systems. Reclamation–The action of returning to use, such as the returning of strip-mined land to a new use by recontouring and replanting. Record Plat–An official plat of subdivision as recorded in the Land Records of Prince George’s County, Maryland. Recreation-Active–Includes activities such as swimming, skating, hiking, biking, fitness trails, frisbee or conventional golf, baseball, basketball, etc. Recreation-Passive–Reading, sitting on a park bench, viewing scenery, picnicking, and/or visiting with friends. Reforestation–The replanting of trees on recently forested land as required by the publication, A Technical Manual for Woodland Conservation with Development in Prince George’s County (October 1992). (See also AFFORESTATION.) Regional District Act–An act of the Maryland State Legislature that sets forth the duties and responsibilities for planning, zoning, and subdivision in Prince George’s County (except the City of Laurel). The act (Article 28) delegates these responsibilities to the District Council and The Maryland-National Capital Park and Planning Commission. Right-Of-Way– A) A general term denoting land or an interest therein, usually in a strip, devoted to transportation or other public purposes (e.g., utilities). B) 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) are built. Rural Legacy–The Rural Legacy Program, administered by the Maryland Department of Natural Resources,

266 Appendix

provides the focus and funding necessary to protect large, contiguous tracts of land and other strategic areas from sprawl development. Rural Tier (As Defined By The 2002 General Plan)–The subarea of the county located primarily in the outer undeveloped portion of the county. Scenic Road–A public or private road designated by the County Council which provides scenic views, natural or manmade, such as forest, cropland, pasturage or meadows; distinctive topography; traditional building types; historic sites or roadway features along a substantial part of its length. 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. Sectional Map Amendment (SMA)– A) The rezoning of a planning area (or a combination of planning areas, municipalities, those areas subject to a master plan, or areas 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. B) 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. Sensitive Environmental Features–These features include streams, stream valleys, and their associated features; the habitats of state-listed species that are rare, threatened, and endangered; 100-year floodplains; and certain highpriority forests. Setback–The distance between a building or structure (not including ground-level parking lots or other paved surfaces) from property lines or from other buildings. Severe Slopes–Those slopes that are greater than 25 percent. (Example: a 25-foot change in elevation in a 100-foot horizontal distance.) Sky Glow–Light from nonnatural sources that reflects off the night sky and causes a reduction in the overall darkness of an area. Special Conservation Area (SCA)–A preservation area in need of special attention which is a biodiverse and fragile habitat as designated in the Countywide Green Infrastructure Plan. Staged Development–A timing concept for the staging of private development and growth in an area so that development and growth are coordinated with the provision of needed public facilities, all in accordance with an adopted policy or plan. Steep Slopes–Those slopes that are between 15 and 25 percent. (Example: a 15-foot change in elevation in a 100-foot horizontal distance.) 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. Stream Valleys–Floodplains and adjacent slope areas directly associated with a stream, e.g., the Anacostia River stream valley. Street–A public or dedicated right-of-way at least 30 feet in width or a private road, right-of-way, or easement along which development is authorized pursuant to Subtitle 24. (See Section 27-107.01 of the Zoning Ordinance.) 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 right-of-way. Appendix 267

Structure–Anything constructed or built, including parking lots and fencing. (See Section 27-107.01 of the Zoning Ordinance.) Subdivision–The division by plat or deed of a piece of property into two or more lots, plots, sites, tracts, parcels, or other land divisions in accordance with Subtitle 24 of the Prince George’s County Code. Subregion–A grouping of planning areas into a larger portion of a regional area. Prince George’s County is divided into seven subregions. Sustainability–A concept that supports creating and maintaining a balance between a community and its resources by meeting the needs of the current generation without hindering the ability of future generations to do the same. Sustainable planning means proposing long-term strategies and solutions to ensure that future generations have the ability to meet their needs and to uphold environmental, economic, and social equity values. Sustainable Communities–A community whose prospects for long-term health are good. Residents do not deplete the resources that they depend on faster than those resources can be replenished. Characteristics include:

• Respecting basic individual rights and clearly identifying responsibilities that will make sustainability possible • Improving the minimum standard of living • Advancing equal opportunities for individual development • Providing a vibrant democracy with an informed and involved citizenry • Promoting a diverse economic base • Living within ecological carrying capacity • Protecting natural/bio diversity • Maximizing the use of people’s abilities while minimizing the use of natural resources

Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL)–The amount of pollutant, or property of a pollutant, from point, nonpoint, and natural sources, that may be discharged to a water quality-limited receiving water. The TMDL process provides a planning framework for identifying load reductions or other actions needed to attain water quality standards (i.e., water quality goals to protect aquatic life, drinking water, and other water uses). The Clean Water Act §303(d) established the TMDL process to guide application of state standards to individual water bodies and watersheds. Trade-Off–A balancing or exchange of factors or conditions, not all of which are attainable. Trade-offs are used in decision-making situations when complete satisfaction is not possible. Trade-offs involve sacrifice of one good for the attainment of another. Traffic Levels Of Service (LOS)–(See LEVELS OF SERVICE.) A) 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. B) 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 evaluate the level and severity of automotive traffic congestion on a specific road segment or at specific intersections. The General Plan recommends the minimum acceptable LOS by Tier. Transportation Demand Management (TDM)/Transportation System Management (TSM)–Techniques used to increase the efficiency of the existing transportation system through lower cost programs like ride sharing, bus fare subsidy, parking management, and flextime. Transportation Improvement Program (TIP)–A six-year regional schedule for the study, acquisition, upgrading, or development of major highway, transit, bike and pedestrian facilities, and services. A joint effort of the National Capital Transportation Planning Board and its constituent jurisdictions - principally the state transportation

268 Appendix

agencies of Maryland, the District of Columbia, and Virginia; the TIP complements the CLRP (see above). Any project that is to be a candidate for federal financial assistance must be included in both plans. Tree Conservation Plan–A site map that delineates tree save areas and text that details the requirements, penalties, or mitigation negotiated during the development and/or permit review process. 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, landscaping, and city planning concepts together to make an urban area accessible, attractive, and functional. Village–Consists of several neighborhoods and may vary from 10,000 to 15,000 people where single-family units predominate, and up to 20,000 people in corridor communities. The focal point is a Village Activity Center. (See also NEIGHBORHOOD and COMMUNITY.) Village Activity Center–A commercial center containing 4 to 15 acres of commercial development on a site area of 10 to 20 acres, serving a population of approximately 15,000 and anchored by a supermarket. A village activity center should also include a range of other commercial uses, public/quasi-public uses, and may include residential uses. Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC)–Gases which are emitted from certain solids or liquids. VOCs include a variety of chemicals, some of which may have short- and long-term adverse health effects. Concentrations of many VOCs are consistently higher indoors. The ability of organic chemicals to cause health effects varies greatly from those that are highly toxic, to those with no known health effect. Watershed–An area of land with a common drainage point. Wetland–An area inundated or saturated by surface or groundwater at a frequency and duration sufficient to support a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions under normal circumstances. Nontidal wetlands are also referred to as swamps, marshes and bogs. (See also NONTIDAL WETLAND.) Woodland Conservation Ordinance–A state and county regulation that seeks to preserve high-priority woodlands through the land development process. It includes the designation and protection of woodland conservation areas, as well as mitigation measures and penalties. 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. Zoning Category Or District–An area designated (zoned) for a type of land use and for a certain density or intensity of development within that type. Zoning Map–The official 1”=200’ scale map showing the location of all zoning categories in a given area.

Appendix 269

APPENDIX G

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

270 Appendix

Appendix 271

272 Appendix

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Fern V. Piret, Ph.D., Planning Director Albert G. Dobbins, III, AICP, Deputy Planning Director* Ivy A. Lewis, AICP, Chief, Community Planning South Division

Project Team

Betty Carlson-Jameson, Project Leader, Planner Coordinator, Community Planning Division Teri Bond, Project Facilitator, Supervisor, Community Planning Division Christopher Izzo, AICP, Planner Coordinator, Community Planning Division* Joseph M. Bovenzi, Senior Planner, Community Planning Division* Lindsay L. Smith, Senior Planner, Community Planning Division* MartĂn SalmĂłn, Senior Planner, Community Planning Division* Judelle Campbell, Planner, Communtiy Planning Division* Crystal Thompson, Principal Planning Technician, Community Planning Division* Mark Burt, GIS Specialist II, Community Planning Division

Consultant Team

Environmental Resources Management Agricultural & Community Development Services EHT Traceries, Incorporated

Project Resources

Glen Burton, Planner Coordinator, Transportation Section, Countywide Planning Division Karen Buxbaum, Planner Coordinator, Special Projects Section, Countywide Planning Division* Laura Connelly, Planner Coordinator, Department of Parks and Recreation Daniel Galindo, Intern, Community Planning Division* Don Herring, Senior Planner, Department of Parks and Recreation Ted Kowaluk, Senior Planner, Information Center Division Brandon Rowe, Planner, Countywide Planning Division* Frederick B. Shaffer, III, Planner Coordinator, Transportation Section, Countywide Planning Division Tiffany Williams Jennings, Planner Coordinator, Special Projects Section, Countywide Planning Division Chris Wilson, Planner Coordinator, Historic Preservation Section, Countywide Planning Division*

Technical or Administrative Assistance

Oscar Becerril, Intern, Community Planning Division* James Spatz, Intern, Community Planning Division* Jay Reed, GIS Specialist, Office and Publications Services** Mary Goodnow, Publications Specialist, Office and Publications Services* Dee McChesney, Publications Specialist, Office and Publications Services* Terri Plumb, Publications Specialist, Office and Publications Services* Michael Register, Publications Specialist, Office and Publications Services Shannon Sonnett, Publications Specialist and Publications Services LaTasha Plumb, Stock Clerk II, Office and Publications Services James Johnson, Stock Clerk II, Office and Publications Services* Ralph Barrett, Supervisor, Office and Publications Services Susan Kelley, Administrative Manager, Office and Publications Services Gena Tapscott, Principal Administrative Assistant, Community Planning Division Keisha King, Principal Administrative Assistant, Community Planning Division* * former employee ** deceased