Section II:

Defining the Context

⬚ figure

SECTION II: DEFINING THE CONTEXT

State, Regional, and Local Planning and Initiatives ........... 30

The 2002 General Plan ............... 36

Plan Engagement ....................... 42

Indicates that the definition of a word or term may be found in the Glossary of Terms, which starts on page 282.

State, Regional, and Local Planning Initiatives

There are a number of state, regional, and local planning initiatives that establish a framework for and guide the development of local general plans.

STATE PLANNING INITIATIVES

The State of Maryland has numerous programs that inform state and local planning, including the Maryland Department of Transportation’s Priority Transit-Oriented Development Program and the Department of Housing and Community Development’s Sustainable Communities Program. Three recent statewide initiatives—PlanMaryland, the 2012 Sustainable Growth and Agricultural Preservation Act, and the Smart and Sustainable Growth Act of 2009—have significant bearing on the future of land use planning across the State of Maryland and within Prince George’s County.

PlanMaryland

⬚ figure

PlanMaryland was adopted in 2011 and is the State of Maryland’s long-range plan for sustainable growth. It promotes best practices in smart growth and the vision set forth by the legislature by protecting Maryland’s environment, enhancing communities, and focusing economic development and revitalization on towns, cities, and established neighborhoods that have facilities to support growth. It accomplishes this by improving coordination between state agencies and local governments.

PlanMaryland establishes a framework and guidelines for local governments to identify areas—referred to as designated places—for growth and preservation. The five designated place categories are: Targeted Growth and Revitalization Areas, Established Community Areas in Priority Funding Areas, Future Growth Areas, Large Lot Development Areas, and Rural Resource Areas. The state has since adopted guidelines for designating these areas and directed local jurisdictions, including Prince George’s County, to rely on comprehensive planning efforts, such as Plan 2035 and future master and sector plans, to identify or amend the areas within the context of their desired growth patterns.

STATE, REGIONAL, AND LOCAL PLANNING INITIATIVES

2012 Sustainable Growth and Agricultural Preservation Act (Senate Bill 236)

The 2012 Sustainable Growth and Agricultural Preservation Act, also known as Senate Bill 236 (SB 236) or “the septics bill,” was the culmination of several years of statewide efforts to reduce the impacts by large subdivisions constructed on septic systems on farm and forest¹ land, streams, rivers, and the Chesapeake Bay. The act requires each county to designate septic Growth Tiers that limit the number of dwelling units built based on available tier-specific septic or sewer service.

Prince George’s County adopted the bill in 2012 and designated its Growth Tiers using the local priority preservation area designation and sewer boundaries (see Map 3). The Growth Tiers encourage the majority of new growth to occur in established areas with existing sewer capacity.²

The Smart and Sustainable Growth Act of 2009

The Smart and Sustainable Growth Act of 2009 clarifies the link between local comprehensive plans and local land use ordinances. The act reinforces the importance of planning for sustainable growth and development in all local jurisdictions within the state and replaces the 1992 Maryland Planning Act visions with the following:

1. Quality of Life and Sustainability: A high quality of life is achieved through universal stewardship of the land, water, and air, resulting in sustainable communities and protection of the environment.
2. Public Participation: Citizens are active partners in the planning and implementation of community initiatives and are sensitive to their responsibilities in achieving community goals.
3. Growth Areas: Growth is concentrated in existing population and business centers, areas adjacent to these centers, or strategically selected new centers.
4. Community Design: Compact, mixed-use, walkable design consistent with existing community character and located near available or planned transit options is encouraged to ensure efficient use of land and transportation resources as well as preservation and enhancement of natural systems, open spaces, recreational areas, and historical, cultural, and archeological resources.
5. Infrastructure: Growth areas have the water resources and infrastructure to accommodate population and business expansion in an orderly, efficient, and environmentally sustainable manner.

Map 3. Prince George's County Sustainable Growth and Agricultural Preservation Act of 2012 (SB236) Map, Adopted November 20th, 2012

⬚ figure

LEGEND

Sustainable Growth Act Tier

	Tier 1 (Approved for sewer service)
	Tier 2 (Planned for public sewer service)
	Tier 3 (Not planned, zoned for public sewer service or preservation)
	Tier 4 (Not planned, zoned for public sewer service; planned for conservation)

Source: M-NCPPC, 2012

STATE, REGIONAL, AND LOCAL PLANNING INITIATIVES

6. Transportation: A well-maintained, multimodal transportation system facilitates the safe, convenient, affordable, and efficient movement of people, goods, and services within and between population and business centers.

7. Housing: A range of housing densities, types, and sizes provides residential options for citizens of all ages and incomes.

8. Economic Development: Economic development and natural resource-based businesses that promote employment opportunities for all income levels within the capacity of the state’s natural resources, public services, and public facilities are encouraged.

9. Environmental Protection: Land and water resources, including the Chesapeake and coastal bays, are carefully managed to restore and maintain healthy air and water, natural systems, and living resources.

10. Resource Conservation: Waterways, forests, agricultural areas, open space, natural systems, and scenic areas are conserved.

11. Stewardship: Government, business entities, and residents are responsible for the creation of sustainable communities by collaborating to balance efficient growth with resource protection.

12. Implementation: Strategies, policies, programs, and funding for growth and development, resource conservation, infrastructure, and transportation are integrated across the local, regional, state, and interstate levels to achieve these visions

⬚ figure

Together, these twelve visions guide how and where growth can best occur without compromising the state’s natural and cultural resources. The act acknowledges that the comprehensive plans prepared by counties and municipalities are the best mechanism to establish priorities for growth and resource conservation. Once priorities are established, it is the state’s responsibility to support them.

REGIONAL PLANNING INITIATIVE

Region Forward

Published in 2010 by the Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments (MWCOG), the Region Forward plan lays out a collaborative framework and vision for how the region can meet its future challenges. Critical issues discussed include where to house two million more residents by 2050, how to maintain aging infrastructure, how to promote sustainable growth, and how to secure regional socioeconomic equity. The plan encourages leaders and Plan 2035 to think regionally when acting locally and will help Prince George’s County remain competitive in the greater metropolitan area.

⬚ figure

The vision outlined in Region Forward is of a more accessible, sustainable, prosperous, and livable Washington metropolitan area.

Accessibility: Walkable, mixed-use communities with housing and transportation choices.

Sustainability: Healthy air, water, and land; abundant renewable energy sources; and a smaller carbon footprint.

Prosperity: Resilient economy and preeminent knowledge hub.

Livability: Vibrant, safe, and healthy neighborhoods.

⬚ figure

STATE, REGIONAL, AND LOCAL PLANNING INITIATIVES

⬚ figure

LOCAL PLANNING INITIATIVE

Role of Functional Master Plans and Master Plans

Since 2002, numerous master plans and sector plans have been approved, along with three transit district development plans (TDDPs), and seven functional area plans. These master plans, sector plans, and TDDPs include implementation strategies relevant to specific geographies in the County. The functional plans include specific implementation strategies for initiatives related to transportation, green infrastructure, water resources, agricultural preservation, parks and recreation, public facilities, and historic sites and districts. The multimodal coordination of capital improvement and transportation projects is critical to accommodate and support the development, such as that within the MD 210 corridor, to support the Plan 2035 vision and land use pattern.

In addition to M-NCPPC functional plans, county agencies also prepare functional plans that inform Plan 2035 and master plans. Examples of these plans include the Water and Sewer Plan, Solid Waste Plan, Health Improvement Plan, and the consolidated Plan for Housing and Community Development. The policies and strategies for the elements of Plan 2035 were informed by these existing plans and do not seek to repeat the information contained within them. The end of each element contains a list of supporting documents, including the relevant functional plans.

For more specific strategies related to the various functional plans, see the functional plans referenced in the supporting document section at the end of each element.

The 2002 General Plan

2002 Prince George's County Approved General Plan

The 2002 Prince George's County Approved General Plan¹ made comprehensive recommendations to guide future growth and development in Prince George's County. It provided land use policy direction, development priorities, and broad strategies for the master, sector, and functional plans developed between 2002 and 2014. This section provides an overview of the 2002 General Plan's envisioned development pattern along with a summary of an assessment of the plan's progress towards meeting its goals and objectives.

Overview of 2002 General Plan

Development Tiers

The 2002 General Plan established three development tiers within the County—the Developed, Developing, and Rural Tiers—and tailored policies and goals to guide economic and residential development and land preservation (see Map 4). Each tier is characterized by target densities and intensities and objectives to gauge the success of its implementation. The vision for each of the tiers is described below.

⬚ figure

The vision for the Developed Tier² was a network of sustainable, transit-supporting, mixed-use, pedestrian-oriented, medium- to high-density neighborhoods. The growth objective for the Developed Tier was to capture at least 33 percent of the County's dwelling units by 2025.

The vision for the Developing Tier³ was to maintain a pattern of low- to moderate-density suburban residential communities, distinct commercial centers, and employment areas that are increasingly transit serviceable. The growth objective for the Developing Tier was to capture no more than 66 percent of the County's dwelling units by 2025.

The vision for the Rural Tier⁴ was the protection of large amounts of land for woodland, wildlife habitat, recreation, and agriculture pursuits, as well as preservation of the rural character and vistas that exist. The growth objective for the Rural Tier⁵ was to capture no more than one percent of the County's dwelling units by 2025.

Map 4. 2002 General Plan Centers and Corridors Map (as amended)

⬚ figure

LEGEND

	General Plan Center
	General Plan Corridor
General Plan Tiers
	Developed
	Developing
	Rural

General Plan Center and Center Designation

1. Konterra, Regional Center
2. Greenbelt Metro, Metropolitan Center
3. College Park / UM Metro, Metropolitan Center
4. Riverdale MARC (Possible Future), Community Center
5. Prince George's Plaza Metro, Regional Center
6. West Hyattsville Metro, Community Center
7. Port Towns, Community Center
8. Cheverly Metro, Community Center
9. Landover Metro, Regional Center
10. New Carrollton Metro, Metropolitan Center
11. Seabrook MARC (Future Possible), Community Center
12. Landover Mall, Regional Center
13. Bowie, Regional Center
14. Largo Town Center Metro, Metropolitan Center
15. Morgan Boulevard Metro, Regional Center
16. Addison Road Metro, Community Center
17. Capitol Heights Metro, Community Center
18. Southern Avenue Metro. Community Center
19. Naylor Road Metro, Regional Center
20. Suitland Metro, Regional Center
21. Branch Avenue Metro, Metropolitan Center
22. Westphalia Center, Regional Center
23. Oxon Hill, Regional Center
24. National Harbor, Metropolitan Center
25. Brandywine, Community Center
26. Langley Park, Regional Center
27. Bowie State MARC, Community Center

Source: M-NCPPC, 2013

Centers

Within the Developed and Developing Tiers, the 2002 General Plan designated 21 centers and five possible future centers as focal points of concentrated mixed-use and pedestrian-oriented (re)development to capitalize on public investments in existing infrastructure and transportation facilities, in particular mass transit. (With the approval of several subsequent master and sector plans, the number of centers increased to 25 plus two possible future centers). All 27 General Plan centers are categorized according to three broad market orientations—metropolitan, regional, or community—to guide the recommended mix of land uses, the definition of core areas, and the development of appropriate intensity targets. The vision for each of the centers is described below.

⬚ figure

Metropolitan Centers have a high concentration of land uses and economic activities that attract employers, workers and customers from other parts of the metropolitan Washington area, such as large government service or major employment centers, major educational complexes, or high-intensity commercial uses. High- density residential development may also be located in or very near Metropolitan Centers. Metropolitan Centers can effectively be served by mass transit.

Regional Centers are locations for regionally marketed commercial and retail centers, office and employment areas, some higher educational facilities, and possibly sports and recreation complexes primarily serving Prince George’s County. High-density residential development may be an option at these Centers if the needed public facilities and services, particularly schools and transit, can be provided. Regional Centers should be served by rail or bus mass transit systems.

Community Centers are concentrations of activities, services and land uses that serve the immediate community near these Centers. These typically include a variety of public facilities and services—integrated commercial, office and some residential development—and can include mixed-use and higher intensity redevelopment in some communities. Community Centers should also be served by mass transit.

Corridors

The 2002 General Plan designated seven corridors along key transportation routes in the County; the number of corridors has since increased to eight. The purpose of these designations was to encourage compact pedestrian-friendly, higher intensity development at select nodes (with one quarter-mile of major intersections or major transit stops) and build on existing infrastructure.

The 2002 General Plan also recommended goals, objectives, policies, and strategies for the following plan elements: environmental infrastructure, transportation systems, public facilities, economic development, housing, revitalization, urban design, and historic preservation. It addressed plan implementation through future intergovernmental coordination, public participation, planning, regulatory measures, and plan monitoring.

Looking Back, Moving Forward

(An Assessment of the 2002 General Plan)

⬚ figure

In December 2012 the Planning Department published Looking Back, Moving Forward, an assessment of the County’s progress toward achieving the goals of the 2002 General Plan. This report analyzed the successes and shortcomings of the 2002 General Plan and was utilized to inform the policies includied in Plan 2035. The report identified County land use challenges and opportunities related to its development pattern, environmental and transportation infrastructure, public facilities, economic development, housing, and community character. It also summarized national, regional, and County economic and demographic trends relevant to Plan 2035.

Looking Back, Moving Forward concluded:

1. The County’s current development trends for its tiers are not consistent with the 2002 General Plan’s vision and are not meeting growth targets (see Table 1).

Table 1. Assessment of the County’s Progress Towards Meeting 2002 General Plan Residential Growth Targets

Source: M-NCPPC, 2011

Since October 2002, approved master plans have used the 2002 General Plan as a framework for developing policies, strategies, objectives, and growth targets. However, when examined in aggregate, it appears unlikely that most of these plans have the potential to fully realize their prescribed visions and proposed levels of (re)development over the next twenty five years. As a result, achieving many of the recommendations presented in the plans in the near- to medium-term has proven difficult. The assessment found that an unprecedented level of investment from both the public and private sectors would be required to implement the development envisioned in the 2002 General Plan and subsequent plans.

2. Development has not been concentrated to effectively capitalize on our existing transportation network, and decision makers have not strategically prioritized public investment. Growth, development, and investments in public infrastructure and facilities have been allowed to spread thinly across a large number of locations throughout the County—in the Developed and Developing Tiers, 27 centers, and eight corridors—and, overall, have failed to create a critical mass of residents, economic activity, and amenities essential to fostering vibrant and sustainable communities and regionally competitive business environments (see Table 2).

Table 2. 2002 General Plan Centers: Average Densities

Source: M-NCPPC 2013

Gross FAR is the square footage of non-residential buildings divided by the square footage of all the land in the center. *Average of core densities (30/24/15) over 1/4 mile and edge densities (20/8/4) over 1/4-1/2 mile **Average of core FAR (2/1/0.25) over 1/4 mile and edge FAR (0.5/0.25/0.15) over 1/4-1/2 mile

3. One of the challenges with implementing the 2002 General Plan is that much of the data necessary to evaluate progress of the plan’s objectives has not been readily available. Developing measurable anticipated outcomes is imperative to assisting decision-makers, guide plan implementation, and track the general plan’s achievements.

THE 2002 GENERAL PLAN

Looking Back, Moving Forward identified several issues for consideration during the Plan 2035 planning process. These issues included prioritizing the 27 centers, updating the center classification system, identifying measurable metrics, and removing or renaming the 2002 General Plan tier categories.

⬚ figure

Plan Engagement

Comprehensive public participation was critical to the preparation of Plan 2035 and was based on a four-pronged approach.

1. Continue where Envision Prince George’s left off.
2. Build on past planning efforts. These include 24 community plans, six functional plans, the County’s Water and Sewer, Watershed Implementation Plans, and numerous completed research studies.
3. Pursue an innovative outreach program. Plan 2035 relied heavily on cutting-edge public participation tools, including social media, live video streaming, scenario planning, and a large-scale Town Hall meeting to engage a broad audience, disseminate information, and solicit feedback.
4. Conduct targeted outreach to immigrant communities and municipalities.

A number of high profile initiatives, such as Formula 2040 and Envision Prince George’s, yielded significant community input and engagement. Plan 2035 deemed it vital to leverage this input and avoid, to the extent possible, duplicating outreach and exhausting resources and community energy.

Plan 2035 is not starting from scratch; it builds on all the planning efforts conducted during the last decade in Prince George’s County.

⬚ figure

ENVISION

Envision Prince George’s is a call to action to develop and implement a vision for the future of Prince George’s County with a vibrant economy and high quality of life for all. The Envision process involved a very ambitious public outreach and communication strategy that culminated in the Envision Prince George’s Twenty-First Century Town Meeting that involved more than 1,000 participants. The results of the engagement process were the development of a long-term County vision built around six broad Envision areas and an Action Agenda.

Envision Prince George’s Vision Statement

“We are proud of what we have in Prince George’s—our people, communities, historical heritage; our natural, recreational, business, and transportation resources; our higher education institutions; our proximity to Washington, D.C.—the world’s most powerful capital and its surrounding region.”

PLAN ENGAGEMENT

The Envision Action Agenda, released in 2010, is built around the top 14 goals identified during the engagement process and prioritized as critical to the long-term success of the County. Each goal has a 10–20 year time frame and supports one or more of the six Envision areas.

Six Envision Prince George's Areas

We LIVE in safe and flourishing communities that have quality housing, affordable to all; healthy surroundings; and abundant amenities, services, schools, and jobs. Our communities continue to include a diverse mix of new and existing residents and families of all ethnicities, incomes, and ages with great access to quality health care.

We WORK in a thriving economy in balance with the natural environment and with ample jobs in the County for County residents. The County capitalizes on new and existing industries that meet the needs of a globalized economy, including green and other cutting-edge technologies; systems that access and deliver renewable energy; and higher education, federal hubs, and the industries and businesses that grow around them. We are known nationally as a great place to live and work.

We LEARN in a culture that emphasizes lifelong learning with one of the best systems of Pre-K to graduate education in the country, including a high-performing public school district, a world-class center for higher education institutions, career and technical training programs, a strong focus on multilingual education, and other learning activities for everyone.

We SERVE the needs and aspirations of our residents with responsive government; thriving non-profit and business sectors; an active faith-based community; excellence in public safety; high levels of citizen, resident, and youth engagement; and robust community service. We work in powerful, effective, and inclusive ways to address our differences and make effective public decisions that are accountable and benefit all.

We ENJOY Prince George's County with its expanded network of recreational facilities and activities, entertainment opportunities, tourist destinations, unique heritage sites, wide array of parks and open spaces, and a vibrant arts community, all of which increase the quality of life for our residents and visitors.

We SUSTAIN our county with greener communities, protected natural resources and rural areas, transit-oriented development, green jobs and other sustainable development practices. We proudly utilize resources in ways that allow our people and communities to meet their current needs while ensuring that those of future generations of Prince Georgians are also met. We have the will, the capacity, and the resources to fully implement the vision for the next decade and beyond.

⬚ figure

⬚ figure

SOCIAL MEDIA

Plan 2035 used social media to share and exchange information and ideas through virtual communities and networks. It distributed reports, presentation, videos of team briefings, news articles, and information about upcoming events via Twitter, Facebook, and its project web page—www.PlanPGC2035.com. Plan 2035 also relied on social media to solicit public comments and answer questions related to issues concerning Prince George’s County.

MUNICIPAL ENGAGEMENT

Prince George’s County contains 27 incorporated municipalities whose elected officials are responsible to voters for various local services through budget and policy setting. Plan 2035 conducted at least one briefing with each of the County’s municipalities to survey attitudes, concerns, opinions, and preferences related to the growth of and long-term development priorities for the County.

Meeting Results

Leaders articulated challenges that were often specific to their municipality’s geographic location, demographic composition, and fiscal challenges. Many of the issues raised have been identified in existing master plans which proposed relevant strategies that addressed their concerns. Issues ranged from a lack of higher-quality restaurants to the difficulty meeting the demand for affordable retirement and family housing.

The most common point expressed during the municipal briefings was the desire for the County to grant municipalities greater control over land use and zoning¹ decisions. Several municipalities requested zoning authority over properties within their boundaries.

⬚ figure

IMMIGRANT FOCUS GROUPS

Given the growing immigrant population in the County, it was particularly important to solicit input from Asian-Pacific Islander, Caribbean, Latino, and West African immigrant communities. Collectively, these four immigrant groups account for nearly 27 percent of the County’s population. Plan 2035 solicited input through a series of focus groups held in Hyattsville, Fort Washington, and Suitland and conducted individual interviews to gain a better understanding of the communities’ concerns related to housing, transportation, employment, job training, land use, and quality of life.

Meeting Results

The focus groups highlighted several shared concerns with regard to housing and employment. The consensus among participants—the majority of whom lived in rental apartments—was that the County has a shortage of quality affordable housing and

employment opportunities. Participants identified high rental rates and poor housing conditions as a major problem and felt that the County lacks a variety of housing options to meet their needs.

Participants also experienced difficulties finding work in the County and often were forced to accept jobs in neighboring counties. Some noted that the costs of childcare and transportation were a barrier to employment as the costs could exceed participants’ earning potential.

TOWN MEETING "WHERE IS DOWNTOWN PRINCE GEORGE'S"

Approximately 300 Prince George’s County residents, community, and business leaders, as well as elected and appointed officials, gathered on Saturday, June 15, 2013, for the Plan Prince George’s 2035 Town Meeting titled, “Where is Downtown Prince George’s?” The interactive town meeting was held at the University of Maryland’s Samuel Riggs IV Alumni Center and was also broadcast live on the internet. Utilizing wireless polling devices, participants were encouraged to vote on challenges and opportunities related to a wide range of land use topics.

The meeting was supplemented with table discussions to facilitate open dialogue among stakeholders from various parts of the County with diverse backgrounds. It educated participants on key planning issues and culminated by asking participants to select three top places for the development of a downtown in the County.

Meeting Results

The majority (79 percent) of Town Meeting participants were in favor of the County annually targeting investment in two to three “downtowns”. When specifically asked to identify the top two locations that they felt best primed to become a real downtown, results showed a three-way tie with College Park/University of Maryland Metro, Prince George’s Plaza Metro, and Largo Town Center Metro each receiving 21 percent of the votes (see Table 3).

Table 3. Breakdown of “Where is Downtown Prince George’s?” Votes

Source: M-NCPPC, 2013

⬚ figure

SCENARIO PLANNING

Plan 2035 designed a scenario-planning tool to help identify a preferred County growth scenario. It utilized specialized, interactive software to help stakeholders understand how our decisions today impact our priorities in the future and to analyze the impacts of potential countywide growth options or “scenarios.”

The scenario planning game tested various assumptions to see how well outcomes matched stakeholders’ 20-year vision for the future. The game mapped and analyzed six potential growth scenarios focused on stakeholders’ preferences regarding where they would like to see the majority of the County’s future residential growth locate. The six scenarios included options for the majority of residential growth to occur inside the Capital Beltway, the suburbs (outside the Capital Beltway), or evenly throughout the County. These options were combined with the option to prioritize new residential growth in four of the County’s existing 27 centers. (see pages 44 and 45).

The game was accessed by approximately 1,046 visitors, the majority of whom identified themselves as residents of Prince George’s County. User priorities were ranked and recorded. The Keep My Neighborhood As Is ranked the highest (see Table 4). When website users were asked to rank the scenarios, the Grow Primarily in the Beltway With Prioritized Centers earned the highest ranking, with an average score of 4.44 on a scale of 1 to 5 (see Table 5).

Table 4. Scenario Planning Game Community Rankings of Priorities

Source: Scenario Planning Tool Results 2013

Table 5. Average Community Ratings of Scenario

Source: Scenario Planning Tool Results 2013

PLAN ENGAGEMENT

Six Planning Scenarios

Primarily in Beltway

In this scenario, 66 percent of new development occurs inside the Beltway, 33 percent occurs in the suburbs, and 1 percent occurs in our rural areas. Over half of the new total housing is multifamily, matching regional demographic demands and, therefore, capturing a much larger share of the region’s residential growth. Most of that growth occurs at densities that support vibrant, walkable communities that attract additional businesses and employment as well.

Primarily in Beltway—Prioritized Centers

This scenario is similar to the “Primarily in Beltway” scenario with 66 percent of new development occurring inside the Beltway, 33 percent occurring in the suburbs, and 1 percent occurring in rural areas. The difference is that about 30 percent of the development inside the Beltway is concentrated in four prioritized centers on the northern Green Line, creating a high-density mixed use corridor. Concentrating growth in these centers results in less land consumed, greater efficiency for bus and transit service, and creates walkable 24/7 communities that attract a larger share of the region’s businesses and residents. To match the projected regional demographic demands, over half of the new total housing is multifamily.

Primarily in Suburbs

In this scenario, 25 percent of new development occurs inside the Beltway, 73 percent occurs outside the Beltway, and 2 percent occurs in rural areas. This scenario assumes that the trends from the last 50 years of development continue, producing more single-family detached suburban homes. The dispersed pattern of suburban expansion requires the expansion of infrastructure (such as roads and schools) and services (such as fire and police protection) to new areas of the County. Low-residential density¹ requires the use of the car to get to critical services, thereby increasing greenhouse gas emissions and congestion.

Primarily in Suburbs—Prioritized Centers

This scenario is similar to the “Primarily in Suburbs” scenario with 25 percent of new development occurring inside the Beltway, 73 percent occurring outside the Beltway, and two percent occurring in rural areas. The difference is that, of the development that occurs outside the Beltway, about 30 percent is concentrated in four prioritized centers. Higher densities in these centers create walkable neighborhoods, but most still require a car for access, because all except Largo are not located on a Metro line. Because these are new centers, the County must invest in building new roads, schools, and other infrastructure.

Grow Everywhere

In this scenario, 50 percent of new development occurs inside the Beltway, 49 percent occurs outside of the Beltway, and 1 percent occurs in rural areas. Redevelopment inside the Beltway revitalizes existing communities and creates more dense and walkable mixed-use neighborhoods that make good use of existing infrastructure, but might require incentives or rezoning in order to spur investment. These revitalized areas are better able to support neighborhood shops and services as well as attract new residents and businesses. Development that falls outside the Beltway will continue to be suburban in nature. The dispersed pattern of suburban expansion consumes more land and requires the expansion of infrastructure (such as roads and schools) and services (such as fire and police protection) to new areas of the County.

Grow Everywhere—Prioritized Centers

This scenario is similar to the “Grow Everywhere” scenario with 50 percent of new development occurring inside the Beltway, 49 percent occurring outside of the Beltway, and 1 percent occurring in our rural areas. The difference is there are four prioritized centers that are the focus of development, both inside and outside the Beltway, which receive 20 percent of all projected growth.

These four centers currently exist, and the use of existing infrastructure would make for an efficient use of infrastructure. All of these prioritized centers are on a Metro line and near the Beltway. Concentrating development in these centers provides them with enough residents and jobs to become true mixed-use, walkable centers. Redevelopment inside the Beltway also makes good use of existing infrastructure and revitalizes existing communities but might require incentives or rezoning in order to spur investment.

The remaining development that falls outside the Beltway will continue to be suburban in nature, consuming more land and requiring the expansion of infrastructure (such as roads and schools) and services (such as fire and police protection) to new areas of the County.

PLAN ENGAGEMENT

Figure 1. Build Your Future Planning Scenario Game

⬚ figure

Figure 2. Scenario Planning Game

⬚ figure

pgc.metroquest.com/

(blank page)