← All documents

draft 2022 community plan

Other October 5, 2022 · 90 page(s)

View original PDF ↗ Meeting

Full extracted text

The document's complete text, exactly as extracted — not a summary. Use “Summarize this document” above for the short version.

Preliminary Draft
Centreville Comprehensive Plan
2040
Preliminary Draft
For the October 5, 2022 Public Workshop
This is only a preliminary working draft. This document has not been approved and it will be revised and
refined further as the Centreville Planning and Zoning Commission completes its work. Following the
October 5, 2022 public workshop, the Commission will proceed to finish this Draft, make it available for
public review and comment, and hold a Public Hearing as required by the Annotated Code of Maryland.
These are steps necessary before the Commission can approve the Plan and recommended it to the
Town Council for official adoption. Upon the final adoption by the Town Council, the eventual final draft
of this Plan will become the official update to the currently adopted Centreville Community Plan, which
was adopted in 2009.
1

Adopting Resolution
Left blank
2

Acknowledgement Page
Left Blank
3

Table of Contents
I. INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................................... 7
PURPOSE OF THE PLAN UPDATE ........................................................................................................................................ 7
PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT .................................................................................................................................................... 8
CENTREVILLE, DOING ITS PART ......................................................................................................................................... 8
VISION STATEMENT ...................................................................................................................................................... 10
ORGANIZATION OF THE PLAN ......................................................................................................................................... 10
CONCLUSION .............................................................................................................................................................. 11
II. THE POPULATION OF CENTREVILLE ................................................................................................................. 12
LOCATION .................................................................................................................................................................. 12
POPULATION AND HOUSEHOLDS ..................................................................................................................................... 13
Age ..................................................................................................................................................................... 15
Household Structure and Families ...................................................................................................................... 16
III. MUNICIPAL GROWTH .................................................................................................................................... 18
PROJECTIONS OF HOUSEHOLD GROWTH ........................................................................................................................... 18
Zoned Development Capacity ............................................................................................................................. 18
Development Pipeline ......................................................................................................................................... 18
Capacity for New Housing .................................................................................................................................. 19
Alternative Growth Projections .......................................................................................................................... 21
Impacts of Projected Growth .............................................................................................................................. 22
Forecast 2040 ..................................................................................................................................................... 24
A PLAN FOR MUNICIPAL GROWTH .................................................................................................................................. 24
Objectives ........................................................................................................................................................... 24
DESIGNATED GROWTH AREA ......................................................................................................................................... 25
Size and Location ................................................................................................................................................ 25
Planned Land Use ............................................................................................................................................... 26
Greenbelt ............................................................................................................................................................ 30
IV. NATURAL ENVIRONMENT .............................................................................................................................. 32
EXISTING CONDITIONS .................................................................................................................................................. 32
Corsica River, Tributary Streams, and Stream Buffers ........................................................................................ 32
Floodplains ......................................................................................................................................................... 33
Wetlands ............................................................................................................................................................ 34
Steep Slopes ........................................................................................................................................................ 35
Forests ................................................................................................................................................................ 35
Chesapeake Bay Critical Area ............................................................................................................................. 36
Impacts of Sea Level Rise .................................................................................................................................... 38
A PLAN FOR NATURAL RESOURCES ................................................................................................................................. 39
Objectives ........................................................................................................................................................... 39
Recommendations .............................................................................................................................................. 39
V. WATER RESOURCES ........................................................................................................................................ 42
4

INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................................................... 42
EXISTING CONDITIONS .................................................................................................................................................. 42
Water Source ...................................................................................................................................................... 42
Corsica River Watershed ..................................................................................................................................... 43
Public Water ....................................................................................................................................................... 44
A PLAN FOR WATER RESOURCES .................................................................................................................................... 44
Objectives ........................................................................................................................................................... 44
Recommendations .............................................................................................................................................. 44
VI. LAND USE ............................................................................................................................................... 45
INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................................................... 45
EXISTING PATTERN OF USE ............................................................................................................................................ 46
THE PLAN FOR LAND USE .............................................................................................................................................. 48
Objectives ........................................................................................................................................................... 48
Future Land Use Map ......................................................................................................................................... 50
RESIDENTIAL, HIGH DENSITY .......................................................................................................................................... 51
Special Area Recommendations ......................................................................................................................... 53
VII. HOUSING ...................................................................................................................................................... 56
INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................................................... 56
EXISTING CONDITIONS .................................................................................................................................................. 56
Affordability in Centreville .................................................................................................................................. 56
Other Characteristics of Housing in Centreville .................................................................................................. 58
Housing for Lower Income Households .............................................................................................................. 60
Senior Housing .................................................................................................................................................... 62
A PLAN FOR HOUSING .................................................................................................................................................. 63
Objectives ........................................................................................................................................................... 63
Recommendations .............................................................................................................................................. 63
CONCLUSION .............................................................................................................................................................. 65
VII. TRANSPORTATION ........................................................................................................................................ 66
INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................................................... 66
EXISTING CONDITIONS .................................................................................................................................................. 66
Functional Roadway System ............................................................................................................................... 66
Highway Traffic Volumes and Conditions ........................................................................................................... 67
Local Streets ....................................................................................................................................................... 71
Public Transit ...................................................................................................................................................... 71
Trails ................................................................................................................................................................... 71
A PLAN FOR TRANSPORTATION ....................................................................................................................................... 72
Objectives ........................................................................................................................................................... 72
Recommendations .............................................................................................................................................. 73
VIII. COMMUNITY FACILITIES .............................................................................................................................. 80
INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................................................... 80
EXISTING CONDITIONS .................................................................................................................................................. 80
Public Water ....................................................................................................................................................... 80
Public Sewerage ................................................................................................................................................. 81
5

Public Schools ..................................................................................................................................................... 82
Public Library ...................................................................................................................................................... 83
Parks ................................................................................................................................................................... 83
Police and Fire Protection ................................................................................................................................... 86
A PLAN FOR COMMUNITY FACILITIES ............................................................................................................................... 86
Objectives ........................................................................................................................................................... 87
Recommendations .............................................................................................................................................. 87
XI. IMPLEMENTATION ......................................................................................................................................... 90
6

I. Introduction
Purpose of the Plan Update
This is the 2020 Update of the 2009 Centreville Community Plan, the Town’s official
comprehensive plan and guide to growth and development. It was written by the Centreville
Planning Commission as required by Maryland law and in service to the people of Centreville,
those here today and those that will be here in the future.
This is an update of the current 2009 Plan; it is not a wholesale reappraisal. It keeps the course
we set a decade ago while recognizing that, from time to time, it is essential to turn the boat
into the wind to make progress. So, this 2020 Plan Update, not only refines and details long
held and prevailing ideas, it resolves to make difficult policy decisions that will shape the Town
through 2040.
The general purpose of comprehensive planning is to bring about the careful development of a
community and the conservation of what residents find exceptional. This has been the
continuous goal of Centreville’s Community Plan since it was first adopted in 1966 and it
remains so today1. But now, in 2020, we also focus on five specific goals, as follows:
Provide direction on how to expand the municipal water and sewer system. No other class of
infrastructure is as essential to the sound and healthy development of a town as its water and
sewer systems. The Town’s systems are nearing their capacity and must be improved and
expanded to achieve the long-standing goals of the Community Plan.
Develop the local economy, the commercial tax base, and ensure the strong and resilient fiscal
health of our local government. The Town’s reserve of land for commercial or light industrial
development is mostly developed. Some intensification may be feasible in the future but
additional space for employment will be needed for the future and to position the Town to
capitalize on broad regional trends in development and transportation.
1 The Town adopted its first comprehensive plan (and zoning ordinance) in 1966, with amendments in 1974 and 1981. The first Plan
Update was adopted in 1988, which then was amended in 1992 and 1998. The next Update, which is the Plan in effect at the time of
this writing, was adopted in 2009.
7

Organize the character and function of the Town’s existing and future streets and the
development that will front them. People fully experience a place by moving through it and a
community’s streets and avenues shape its enduring character. The Town is poised to grow so
planning now for the intended character and function of major streets will guide development
in lasting ways.
Show how to interconnect existing and future neighborhoods with outstanding open spaces
and greenways that will impart a character of good health, small town vitality, and scenic
beauty. The Town is planned to expand, mostly to the northwest, west, south, and southeast. It
could grow as fragmented and separated places or in a way that brings about interconnected
parks, walkways, and the far-reaching conservation of natural resources.
Guide the location, layout, and character of future neighborhoods. Open lands in and around
the Town could be developed as conventional single-use residential subdivisions or in ways that
distinguish them as excellent neighborhoods unique to Centreville. Left to chance, land
development seldom organizes itself into coherent extensions of existing or historic patterns.
This Plan Update does not depart significantly from the current 2009 plan. Instead, it provides
more detailed guidance, while addressing the needs of today and aiming to create the best
conditions for the Town’s future. Each of the above ideas represents some refinement to the
policy guidance and goals in the current plan.
Public Engagement
To be completed
Centreville, Doing Its Part
The State’s guiding visions for comprehensive plans summarize the minimum criteria by which
any comprehensive plan in the State is judged to be valid. These explain why no town, city, or
county can shut its doors to growth, or allow haphazard development, or disregard planning for
public infrastructure, or neglect economic development. Local governments that regulate land
use development must adopt comprehensive plans aligned with these 12 Visions:
8

Vision - 1. 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.
Vision - 2. Citizens are active partners in planning and implementing community initiatives and are
sensitive to their responsibilities in achieving community goals.
Vision - 3. Growth is concentrated in existing population and business centers, growth areas adjacent
to these centers, or strategically selected new centers.
Vision - 4. 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 and preservation and enhancement of natural systems,
open spaces, recreational areas, and historical, cultural, and archeological resources.
Vision - 5. Growth areas have the water resources and infrastructure to accommodate population and
business expansion in an orderly, efficient, and environmentally sustainable manner.
Vision - 6. 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.
Vision - 7. A range of housing densities, types, and sizes provides residential options for citizens of all
ages and incomes.
Vision - 8. 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.
Vision - 9. Land and water resources, including the Chesapeake and coastal bays, are carefully
managed to restore and maintain heathy air and water, natural systems and living
resources.
Vision - 10. Waterways, forests, agricultural areas, open space, natural systems, and scenic areas are
conserved.
Vision - 11. Government, business entities, and residents are responsible for the creation of sustainable
communities by collaborating to balance efficient growth with resource protection.
Vision - 12. 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.
The above visions also form the context for coordination between the Town and Queen Anne’s
County in both planning and “implementing strategies”. For example, the towns in Queen
Anne’s County are among “the existing population centers” to which the County is called to
9

direct growth. And just as the County’s planning directs growth to Centreville, the State’s
visions oblige the County to implement complementary strategies, such as sharing in the
municipal costs of providing essential facilities and services, which is recommended in this Plan
Update.
Vision Statement
While State law outlines the essential and shared focus for comprehensive planning in
Maryland, it is a local and publicly supported vision that gives life and meaning to a plan. A
local vision is future oriented. It explains why one town’s plan is, at its heart, different than all
other plans. A vision is a marker in time against which each succeeding generation can compare
their experience. The vision statement below, that emerged from the work of the Planning
Commission with public input was written from the perspective of 20 years in the future. It is as
follows:
Text to be inserted
Organization of the Plan
Following the next two chapters about population and existing conditions respectively, this
report is organized into five interrelated chapters, each focusing on a major functional or policy
area: Municipal Growth, Natural Environment, Land Use, Mobility, Community Facilities, and
Water Resources. Each chapter contains goals and recommendations. The last chapter focuses
on implementation, including a section concerning the regulation of land use and development.
10

Conclusion
In conclusion, we understand that the Plan described in this report will not be realized in the
short term or exactly as conceptualized. Our aim is to anticipate the needs of the future and
encourage growth, development, and conservation toward the greatest good possible.
Departures from this Plan may, from time to time, be suggested; future information and a wider
knowledge may point to better solutions or unforeseen opportunities. In such cases, it is our
intention that such departures be studied and if found justified considering the Plan’s long term
goals, they should be accepted by amending this Plan in the same way it was adopted.
11

II. The Population of Centreville
Location
The Town of Centreville is centrally located within Maryland’s upper eastern shore region, 55
miles south of Wilmington, Delaware and 35 miles east of Baltimore along U.S. Route 301. (See
Figure 1.) The upper eastern region, composed of five rural counties—Cecil, Kent, Queen
Anne’s, Caroline, and Talbot), is home to 243,245 people (or 4% of the Maryland population)
and 123,400 jobs2. Centreville is the county seat of Queen Ann’s County.
Town of
Centreville
Queen Anne’ s
County
FIGURE 1
2 Source of population estimate is U.S. Census, Maryland State Data Center (2019). Source of employment data is Jobs by Place,
Maryland State Data Center, 2020 projected.
12

Population and Households
Decade by decade, between 1960 and 2000, Centreville’s population remained within a narrow
band changing only by plus 107 residents as shown below. But between 2000 and 2010 the
population surged, growing at an unprecedent average annual rate of 8.1%, adding 2,315
residents and more than doubling in just 10 years3. The current 2020 population is estimated to
be 4,815.
Households, which are occupied housing units, increased rapidly too between 2000 and 2010,
as would be expected. During the decade, 761 households were added to the Town bringing
the total to 1,568. Between 2011 and 2020, 278 more units were added, bring the total for 2020
to 1,846. Households are the “demand units” for most municipal facilities and services. For
example, the number of households is multiplied by the average water demand to estimate
3 By comparison, over the full 60 years since 1960, the Town has grown at an average annual rate of 1.6 percent.
13
368,1 358,1
810,2 790,2 079,1
582,4
518,4
POPULATION CENTREVILLE: 1960-2020
1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020

demand for municipal water. In the next chapter (Municipal Growth) as we look to what future
conditions may bring, we will prepare projections using the number of households.
For decades the Town’s share of Queen Anne’s County’s population and households fell, from
a high of 12.4 percent in 1950 to a low of 4.9 percent by 2000 as shown in the chart below. This
was the primarily the result of the County build-out of Kent Island combined with essentially no
growth in Town (or in any of the County’s municipalities). But by 2010, the Town’s share of the
County population had been restored to its 1960 level before dropping recently to about 10.5
percent. As of 2018, the latest year data are available, the population of all the towns in the
County, made up only 14.2 percent of the County’s population4.
12.2%
11.2% 11.2%
10.5%
10.1%
7.9%
6.2%
4.9%
1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020
4
This is in stark contrast to the other counties in the Upper Eastern Shore region: 29% of Cecil County’s 2018 population is
municipal; 36.3% in Caroline County; 40.2 % in Kent County, and 52.0% in Talbot County, per MD Department of Planning , State
Data Center and Source U.S. Census Bureau, Population Estimates, May 2019.
14

Age
Between 2000 and 2010, the share of the Town’s population under 18 years of age increased
five percentage points to 27%, while the share of residents 65 y ears and older decreased from
22% to 18%. Household growth during that decade accounted for a younger population and
the median age dropped from 41.3 to 39.55.
Recent statistical analyses by the U.S. Census Bureau however suggests some reversal since
2010; the median age may have risen to 44.3 years. Those under 18 are estimated now to
comprise only 20 percent of the Town’s population.
Age Distribution : 2000
Under 18
22%
Everyone Else
56% 65 + Older
22%
Age Distribution: 2010
Under 18
27%
Everyone Else
55%
65 + Older
18%
5 The median age in 2010 in Queen Anne’s County was 42.6.
15

The Town’s recent very slow pace
Age Distribution: Estimated 2018
of household formation may
account for this change as
younger families have aged
Under 18
without the offsetting effects of 20%
new households with children.
Indeed, 2018 estimates suggest Everyone Else 65 + Older
59% 21%
there are 260 fewer children now
than in 2010. The new 2020
Census will provide a more
reliable data set based on direct
survey methods, but it is clear the
Town’s population is not
becoming more youthful like it had been in the previous decade.
Household Structure and Families
Like population, the number of households and age, the makeup of households is an important
indication of community character. Data on household structure are available only from the
decennial census, so we note here that the data below are 10 years old.
As shown above in 2010, 1,102 households, or about 70% of all households, were families--that
is, the occupants were related to the householder by birth, marriage, or adoption. About 30%
then were non-families, unrelated people living together or one-person households. By
comparison, in 2000, there were 497 family households, making up 61.2% of the total.
Householders living alone (one-person households) made up nearly 25% (or one in four) of all
households in 2010. By comparison in 2000 there were 265 one-person households, making up
32.8% of all households.
In Queen Anne’s County (not shown in the table above) family households made up 73.9% of
households and one-person households make up 20.6%.
16

Other relevant findings from the 2010 Census about Centreville’s households:
• 38% of households had children.
• 30% of households had a person over 65 years of age.
• Average family size was 3.1 persons per family.
• Average household size was 2.6 persons per household.
• Owner-occupied housing units made up 69% of all units with an average household size
of 2.71.
• Renter occupied units made up 23.6% of all units with an average household size of 2.26.
• Vacant units made up 7.4% of all units.
17

III. Municipal Growth
The chapter presents alternative projections of household growth, estimates the number of
housing units that could be developed within Town under current zoning rules, evaluates
alternative growth scenarios, adopts a forecast of household levels for the year 2040, assesses
the impact of growth on key community facilities, and updates the Town’s Municipal Growth
Area boundary and land use plan.
Projections of Household Growth
TABLE 1
Zoned Development Capacity
A household is an occupied housing unit. It is the main New Housing Units: 2011-2020
“demand unit” considered when contemplating change
Year Units
and its impacts on community facilities. With a reasonably
2011 26
accurate forecast of households, for example, a town can
2012 48
estimate future residential demand for water and
2013 38
sewerage, classroom space in schools, and parkland.
2014 48
2015 53
In 2010 the U.S. Census recorded 1,568 households in
2016 17
Centreville, and over the subsequent ten years the Town 2017 17
added 278 new housing units (see Table 1). For preparing 2018 21
2019 2
projections each of these new units is assumed to be
2020 8
occupied, therefore, the level of 1,846 households is the
278
2020 baseline.
Development Pipeline
Centreville presently has no housing units in the development pipeline, which is to say there
are no unbuilt housing developments with final plan or plat approval. However, the Providence
Farm subdivision continues to build out and has less than12 lots remaining.
18

Capacity for New Housing
The term “Zoned Development Capacity” refers to the acreage within the Town that is available
for development and the housing units which could be built on that land under current zoning
rules. In estimating the Town’s capacity for development, only “buildable land” is considered,
which refers to acreage that meets each of the following criteria:
• It is not encumbered by serious environmental constraints.
• It is undeveloped or clearly under-developed as evidenced for example by the presence
of only one building on a large tract of land.
• It has the zoning to permit residential development.
• It is mapped within either a current or planned water and sewerage service area.
• It is otherwise not actively in use.
It is not uncommon to find large
TABLE 2
parcels of residentially zoned land
Residential Development Capacity by Zoning District
being used for religious, institutional,
or recreational purposes, including
Max. Computed
schools and parks. Such parcels are Density by Potential Density
Code Total Housing (units/gross
not counted when estimating
Zone (units/acre) Acreage Units acre)
development capacity.
Table 2 shows the acreage and
R-1 3.00 162 340 2.1
potential new housing units within
R-2 5.00 8 30 3.6
each of the Town’s residential zoning
districts today. As shown, there is
R-3 - Turpin Farm 8.00 66 290 4.4
capacity for 875 housing units6. The
unit counts are mostly distributed TND - Carter Farm 5.00 43 215 5.0
among the R-1, R-3, and TND zones,
sum 279 875 3.1
with only 30 lots remaining in the R-2
zone.
6 It is important to note that Town zoning does allow housing units above commercial space, but a parcel-by-parcel evaluation of the
redevelopment potential of existing commercial buildings was not undertaken. It is thus possible that a limited number of apartments
would be developed in the Central Business District (CBD) through the renovation or adaptive reuse of existing buildings.
19

Most of the residential development potential shown in Table 2 is found on five major tracts of
land. Figure 1 shows each tract, its current zoning district and potential yield of new housing
units. Each was as designated a major infill area in the 2009 Community Plan and remains so
today. It is estimated that there is potential for 810 dwelling units on these five major parcels
alone. These five tracts, comprising 253 acres, account for 94 percent of the estimated capacity
for new housing units7. The other six percent is comprised of lots that are platted but vacant
and several small tracts which could be subdivided.
(Carter Farm) Major Residential Infill
Current Zoning:TND
BuildOutEstimate:215 Current Zoning:R-1 Parcels
BuildOutEstimate:70
4
3
(Turpin Farm)
Current Zoning:R-3 Total Potential Dwelling Units: 810
Current Zoning:R-1 BuildOutEstimate:290
BuildOutEstimate:130 1
5
Current Zoning:R-1
BuildOutEstimate:105
2
EFIXGHUIBRIET 21
7 The recognition of the development potential on each major tract is not an endorsement of any development plan or an assurance
that required public water and sewer allocation will be made to support such potential, or even that the zoning will remain
unchanged. A developer must ultimately submit a plan for each tract for Town review and approval. In each case the actual
development of the tract may provide less than its theoretical potential.
20

Alternative Growth Projections
Three projections are shown in Table 3 and graphed in Figure 2. Each represents a plausible
future track for household growth through 2040, unconstrained by limitations on the availability
of public water and sewer or zoning restrictions. However, the highest projection (Projection 2)
serves mostly to bracket the upper limit potential for growth. Given County land use policies
that direct housing development into towns and the availability of land in Centreville and its
growth area, it would seem likely the Town’s share of the County’s residential base will increase
over time as it has since 2000.
• As noted in the Table, Projection #1 fixes the number of households in Centreville so
that by 2040 the number of households in Town would comprise the same share of the
County’s total households, 9.9%, as it did in 2020. Under this scenario the number of
households in Centreville would increase by about 444 between 2020 and 2040 at an
average annual rate of 1.08 percent.
• Under Projection #2, the Town would growth between 2020 and 2040 along the same
trend recorded between 2000 and 2020, which was a period of significant residential
growth in Centreville, particularly during the first decade of this period. Under this high
growth scenario, the number of households in Centreville would more than double (like
it did between 2000 and 2020), increasing by about 4.2 percent per year. By 2040 the
Town’s share of total County households would approximate 18 percent.
• Under Projection #3, the Town would grow between 2020 and 2040 along the same
trend recorded between 2010 and 2020 a period of more modest growth. Under this
scenario, the number of households in Centreville would increase by about 714 at an
average annual rate of 1.65 percent. By 2040 the Town’s share of total County
households would approximate 11 percent.
TABLE 3
Alternative Household Projections 2020 - 2040
Change 2020-2040
Projection Past Current Future
Ave Annual
% #
Rate
2000 2010 2020 2030 2040
1. Fixed Share of County Households (at 9.9%) 807 1568 1846 2070 2290 24.0 444 1.08
2. Replicate Town's Growth Trend Between 2000 and 2020 807 1568 1846 3000 4220 128.6 2374 4.22
3. Replicate Town's Growth Trend Between 2010 and 2020 807 1568 1846 2200 2560 38.7 714 1.65
21

Household Projections: 2020 -2040
4500
4000
3500
3000
Projection 2
2500
Projection 3
2000 Projection 1
1500
1000
500
0
2000 2010 2020 2030 2040
FIGURE 3
Impacts of Projected Growth
The Tables below show the estimated impact of the projected increase of households on the
capacities of local schools and public water and sewer facilities. Table 4 shows the impact to
pupil enrollment on the capacity of area public schools. The table does not account for the
potential impact of changes (increase or decrease) in enrollment that may occur in the parts of
the school districts outside the Town’s boundaries. It is worth noting that the Queen Anne’s
County School Facilities Master Plan projects declining enrollments through 2028 and utilization
rates well below state rated capacities.
As shown in Table 4, current enrollments approximates 74% at Centreville Elementary, 89% at
Kennard Elementary, 83.5% percent at Centreville Middle and 96% at Queen Anne’s County
High. By 2040 enrollment would remain under capacity at the elementary and middle schools
levels with Projections #1 and #3. By contrast, enrollment would exceed capacity with Projection
#2 at each of the schools, likely creating needs for new or expanded schools. The high school,
with little existing capacity to spare, is expected to be near its capacity with Projections 1 and 3
and exceed it with Projection #3.
22

TABLE 4
Estimated Impact of Projected Growth on Public School Capacity By Projection: 2040
Projection 1 Projection 2 Projection 3
State
2020 Fall % Use in
Public School1 Rated Enrollment 2020 Increased Capacity % Use in Increased Capacity % Use in Increased Capacity % Use in
Capacity Enrollment Remaining 2040 Enrollment Remaining 2040 Enrollment Remaining 2040
Centreville Elementary 5 81 432 74.4%
89 1 17 89% 475 ( 269) 125% 143 64 94%
Kennard Elementary 5 03 446 88.7%
Centreville Middle 6 59 550 83.5% 44 65 90% 237 ( 357) 119% 71 38 94%
Queen Anne's County High 1 ,263 1 ,214 96.1% 67 (18) 101% 356 ( 925) 124% 107 (58) 105%
1The "Projected Increased Demand" (for student enrollment) reflects the following assumed pupil yields for new dwelling units: 0.2 students per unit (for elementary school), 0.1 students per unit (for middle school) and 0.15 students
per unit (for high school).
Source of State Rated Capacity and Enrollment data is the Queen Anne's County Public Schools Educational Facilities Master Plan, 2022
Table 5 shows the estimated impact to the Town’s water and wastewater treatment capacities.
As shown the existing demand for wastewater treatment plant capacity approximates 542,000
gallons per day (gpd), representing 93% of available capacity. In each projection scenario,
expanded plant capacity would be required. Projections #1 and #3 would each create demands
that would significantly exceed available capacity. As a practical matter, an expanded
wastewater plant, sized to accommodate approximately 1.18 to 1.25 million gallons per day,
would be required by 2040 under these more modest growth scenarios. Projection #2, the high
growth projection, would require an even large treatment plant capacity--more than 1.6 million
gpd.
TABLE 5
Impact of Projected Growth on Public Water and Sewer Capacity by Projection: 2040
Projection 1 Projection 2 Projection 3
Community Facility Non- Non- Non-
Capacity D E e x m ist a i n n d g 1 % 2 U 0 s 2 e 2 in R In es c i r d e e a n se ti d a l R In e c s r i e d a e s n e t d ia l R C em ap a a in ci i t n y g % Use in R In es c i r d e e a n se ti d a l Increased R C em ap a a in ci i t n y g % Use in R In es c i r d e e a n se ti d a l I D nc e r m ea a s n e d d R C em ap a a in ci i t n y g % Use in
2040 Demand (gpd) 2040 2040
Demand Demand (gpd) (gpd) Demand (gpd) Demand (gpd) (gpd)
(gpd) (gpd) (gpd)
Public Water (gallons per day) 2 5,000 5 93,500 2 5,000 178,500
Public Sewer (gallons per day)2 5 42,000 5 03,000 93% 2 5,000 1 11,000 ( 183,000) 118% 2 5,000 5 93,500 ( 579,500) 207% 2 5,000 178,500 ( 164,500) 130%
Implications A WWTP with a capacity of at least 1.18 million gpd would be A WWTP with a capacity of at least 1.66 million gpd would be A WWTP with a capacity of at least 1.25 million gpd
required. required. would be required.
1Includes actual flow plus commitments to provided service equivalent to 26,000 gpd.
23

Forecast 2040
A reliable forecast allows a Town to anticipate and prepare for the impacts of growth and the
needs of future residents. The forecast presented here is Projection #3 from the previous
section--a forecast rate of growth of 1.65 percent per year on average resulting in about 714
new households by 2040.
At this level, Centreville’s population would approximate 6,670 in 2040. As noted above, this
level of growth would keep public school enrollment well within current capacities at the
elementary and middle school levels. Highschool capacity would likely be exceeded, but only
modestly. At this level of growth, the Town would need to expand its wastewater treatment
capacity to 1.25 million gallons per day.
A Plan for Municipal Growth
Objectives
1. To grow both in a measured way--through deliberate and strategic planning--to
maximize the benefits that accrue to both existing and future residents.
2. To grow only in a manner that assures essential public facilities and infrastructure remain
adequately sized and equipped with capacities to deliver exceptional services without
compromise to existing residents, institutions, and businesses.
3. To prioritize the protection, conservation, and even restoration of natural resource lands,
and the natural services they provide, as the Town expands its boundaries.
4. To bring about logical extensions of the Town, its streets, infrastructure, parks, and trails,
and connect future neighborhoods with those already existing to form a cohesive
community.
5. To preserve the growth area in farming and other open space and natural resource uses
until such time as annexation takes place.
24

Designated Growth Area
Size and Location
A designated growth area is a planned extension of the municipal boundaries to encompass
lands that may be annexed in the future. Under Maryland planning law, properties must be
within the growth area to be eligible for annexation. This Plan’s growth area contains about
2,250 acres and is shown on Map 1.
MAP 1
The Growth Area as drawn in the 2009 Community Plan encompassed about 1,720 acres, nearly
390 acres of which are environmentally sensitive and thus not available for development. The
updated Growth Area is about 310 acres larger primarily because it includes acreage previously
planned as a “County Businesses Park” located on the west side of U.S. Route 13 and land
along the growth area’s south side between Rolling Bridge Road and Symphony Village.
25

This Plan includes the planned business park in the Growth Area to signal the Town’s intention
that such development occur within the municipal limits under Town development rules. The
Growth Area is also enlarged along the southern side so that it now follows the stream rather
than the planned Taylor Mill Road Extended. Allowing development to occur on both the north
and south sides of Taylor Mill Road Extended can facilitate the major upgrade of this road which
is an important collector roadway for Centreville’s future. Further, using a natural features like a
stream to establish the boundary is consistent with how the Centreville growth area is drawn
elsewhere.
Planned Land Use
The generalized land use plan for the Growth area is shown in Map 2 below and each of the
recommended land use designations are described here.
MAP 2
26

Resource Conservation
The Resource Conservation designation encompasses those natural resource lands that exist
today including wetlands, streams and their buffers, steep slopes, shorelines, and forested
areas. The generalized land use plan also envisions an expansion of resource lands as
development takes place, through the widening of stream buffers and planned forest
regeneration, and the designation of lands for future conservation area especially when
connections can be made between natural areas. As future neighborhoods are developed, land
along existing streams and forest areas would be set aside for conservation and parks and open
space amenities could be provided such as trails to link neighborhoods together.
Complete Neighborhoods
The yellow areas on Map 2 show the location of the Town’s future neighborhoods. These areas
would allow for a diverse set of housing types, open spaces and parks, institutional uses, and,
where applicable, a limited amount of neighborhood level retail, office, and commercial service
uses. As noted in Chapter IV, Natural Environment, this Plan recommends substantial forest
regeneration, clustering home sites to minimize the coverage of the land in impervious surfaces,
connecting areas with bike and walking trails, using the stormwater practices designed to treat
stormwater associated with the most significant rainfall events, right-sizing the design of Town
streets and infrastructure, and developing renewable energy neighborhoods—that is, future
Centreville neighborhoods could be powered by renewable energy sources. These goals may
require approaches that are fundamentally different than conventional zoning and subdivision
procedures provide for.
To implement complete neighborhoods for the future, the Town would apply new planned unit
development (PUD) standards as recommended in Chapter VI, Land Use. The recommended
PUD approach represents a departure from the standard zoning districting in which each zone is
set aside primarily for one main use to the exclusion of most others. This PUD approach
provides site plan flexibility, as well as special requirements, on the use and development of
land.
27

This Plan prepares for a future when neighborhoods may look substantially different than the
conventional single-family subdivisions now in Town. In the future, homes may be clustered in
higher density arrangements and in attached buildings which will leave more open space to be
preserved. Housing types and architecture are likely to be different than they are today, and
zoning, subdivision, and infrastructure standards may need to be altered to guide development
where energy efficiency, affordability, and very economical utility delivery will be the driving
forces in residential architecture and site design.
It is important to clarify that this Plan does not envision a future of residential subdivisions
covering the entire growth area. Instead, it envisions pockets of well-planned and denser
development interconnected with major preserved open spaces. This will result in substantially
less miles of roads and public water and sewer lines to be installed and maintained. In the
future, clusters of residential development may even be able to exist without a hard connection
the Town’s WWTP and open spaces may accommodate community scale wind and solar
projects to supply a portion of the demand for residential energy.
This complete neighborhoods planning approach requires that the Town’s Planning
Commission have more discretion in the development plan review and approval process, and it
requires that future developers use more creativity in neighborhood design. More specific
objectives to be achieved by PUD’s in the Centreville Growth Area are as follows:
• To encourage cohesive, functional, and aesthetic use of open spaces including the
enlargement of resource areas and connections with existing and planned open space
on adjoining tracts of land and the preservation of broad open vistas.
• To encourage flexibility in the design of neighborhoods and construction of buildings so
they are responsive to the unique environmental, cultural, and scenic resources that
characterize a property and its surroundings.
• To encourage intergenerational neighborhoods, where housing is provided to meet the
needs of area residents through many stages of life.
• To encourage innovations in the development of land to bring about very low impact
and highly energy-efficient patterns of development, especially in or near
environmentally sensitive areas.
• To tie the development of land more closely to the goals and recommendations of this
Comprehensive Plan.
28

Employment Areas
Light industrial uses are recommended near the western side of the interchange of U.S. Route
301and MD Route 304. This has long the site of the planned “County Business Park” since the
1988 Centreville Community Plan. Nearly 135 acres are so designated for office and light
industrial use. This does not include vegetated buffers and open spaces that have long been
envisioned along the highway frontage.
This area can readily support a business park and/or multiple light industrial uses. With
competent business / industrial park design and infrastructure planning, this acreage could
readily accommodate up to 1.3 million square feet of floor area and about 1,460 jobs8. Greater
intensity of development and/or a mix of office uses would increase the overall potential floor
area and employment. One of the objectives of encouraging light industry at this location is
that it can thrive without causing truck traffic or commuting in Town. It could also contribute
significantly to the Town’s assessable tax and supply a source of employment and economic
development to the area.
This Plan recommends that the land in this area be reserved for employment generating
industrial and corporate office uses that may not be compatible elsewhere in Centreville and
which can strongly contribute to the economic well-being of the Town and region. The Plan
recommends that a Town zoning district be established to ensure that only industrial and
related employment type uses are permitted and not uses such as a gasoline stations,
restaurants, convenience stores, institutional uses, or other non-industrial uses.
The Growth Area Plan also designates the interchange of U.S. Route 301 and MD Route 213 as
a potential employment area. This is a more conceptual designation, and it signals the Town’s
openness to considering uses that would contribute to the area’ economic development near
this interchange. The Plan recognizes that area is outside of the planned municipal growth
area, however, this Plan holds open the possibility that annexation may be found in Centreville’s
best interests and the Town may at some point decide to extend its growth area and municipal
water and sewer services along MD Route 213 south to the properties near the interchange.
8 These estimates are arrived at by assuming at least 75% of the designated 134 acres designated for Employment Use on Growth
Area Plan Map are developed; that such land develops at a floor-to-area-ratio (FAR) of 0.3; and that the uses generate one job per
900 square feet of industrial floor area.
29

Commercial Areas – MD Route 304 Corridor
Commercial uses are recommended in the MD Route 304 Corridor, on the south side of Route
304 roughly extending from Vincit Road 0.75 mile eastward. About 35 acres of land is so
designated on Map 2 . This would be a central commercial corridor for the growth area at a
highly accessible location intersected by the planned East Side Major Collector. Both the
planned East Side Collector and MD Route 304 are envisioned as parkways and the
arrangement of the planned corridor’s buildings and sites should take on the character of
parkway, with coordinated landscaping, trees, screening of parking lots, and buildings along
MD Route 304 set within a parklike environment.
A collector road running parallel to MD Route 304 is shown on Map 2. Its purpose is to
interconnect all future commercial sites and eliminate the need for multiple driveway
connections to MD Route 304 and thereby secure the parkway function of the street. The
service collector street is mapped roughly 400 feet back from MD Route 304 creating a compact
linear form along the parkway. The Town will need to prepare a small area master plan and
design standards and adopt zoning and site development requirements to guide the
development of this area to avoid uncoordinated and sprawling commercial development.
Greenbelt
Figure 3 shows the planned Greenbelt, carrying forward the concept from the 2009 Community
Plan. The Greenbelt encompasses areas beyond the planned growth area that are intended to
be left undeveloped through the foreseeable future in open space, natural area, and farming.
As an intact land use zone, the Greenbelt creates a unified edge to development and ensures
the Town remains set within a rural preserve of natural lands and agriculture.
30

Preservation of the Greenbelt in naturalized and farming uses also helps ensure the Town has
space available for treated wastewater spray irrigation allowing for the necessary increases in
the capacity of the municipal sanitary sewer system. One farming tract in the Greenbelt is
currently being used as a spray irrigation field. The use of other parts of the Greenbelt for this
purpose is encouraged as needs may arise.
G
Planned re
Greenbelt Greenbelt
MD
Route 213 e n b
e
lt
Resource Conservation /
Open Space
Gr e e n
b
elt
Chesterfield
Rd.
Railroad Ave. MD Route 305
G re
e n b
C
C
Em
o
o
m
m
pl
p
m
o
l
y
e
e
m
t
rc
e
e
i a
N
n
l
t
eighborhood
e
lt Town Limits (2022)
Little Kidwell
Ave. Municipal Growth
MD
Route
18 B
G
o
re
u
e
n
n
d
b
a
e
ry
lt
Coursevall
Dr. MD Route
304
EXHIBIT 2
Greenbelt
312
etuoR
DM
Taylor Mil
G
l Rd
r
.
eenbelt U.S. Route 301
.dR
egdirB
gnilloR
FIGURE 4
31

IV. Natural Environment
The Town of Centreville lies within the gently rolling landscape of the Corsica River watershed,
at the confluence of the Corsica River and its main tributary streams. All rainwater that falls
within the Town and the 40-square mile watershed makes its way to the Corsica River through
many small and intermittent streams that extend eastward from the River to points beyond
Centreville. The natural resources and environmentally sensitive areas within the Town are
discussed in this section of the report.
Existing Conditions
Corsica River, Tributary Streams, and Stream Buffers
The Corsica River flows northwest about five miles from the Watson Road Bridge, near the
western edge of Town, before entering the Chester River. The Chester River is one of the
Chesapeake Bay’s major tributaries, merging with the Bay at Love Point. The River’s main tidal
tributaries are Yellow Bank and Mill Stream. Three-Bridge Branch and Gravel Run extend from
the Yellow Branch eastward as non-tidal streams and the Old Mill Stream extends from Mill
Stream southeastward as a non-tidal stream to points east and south of U.S. Route 301. Map
___ shows the major streams in and around Centreville along with their wetlands and
floodplains.
The Town’s streams are generally buffered in woody vegetation and have natural shorelines. A
stream buffer (riparian buffer) is an integral part of the natural resource. It is the area of land
extending outward from the top of the stream bank. Wide and naturally vegetated buffers
protect the health and vitality of streams, while narrow and urbanized buffers, allow the water
temperature to rise and excess pollutants and sediments to pass into the water. To achieve the
optimum protection of a stream’s water quality, buffers would be naturally vegetated, fully
encompass their floodplains and, where possible, be at least 100 to 300 feet wide.
32

Floodplains
Map 3 also shows the floodplains in Centreville. The Federal Emergency Management Agency
(FEMA) regularly maps the 100-year floodplains, areas having a 1% chance of flooding in any
given year. Within its boundaries, the Town regulates development activities in the floodplain
through the Floodplain Management Ordinance.
MAP 3
The Town’s floodplains are directly associated with the Corsica and its tributary streams. As
shown on Map ___, it is also generally the case that the Town’s floodplains are undeveloped
and mostly in a forested or wetland condition. During flooding events the most noticeable part
of the floodplain is the location where S. Commerce and S. Liberty Streets join to form the two-
way section of MD Route 213. Here the floodplain covers Mill Stream Park on the west of MD
213, and two undeveloped parcels on the east side. The floodplain is also extensive along Front
Street from Wharf Lane to and including the Centreville Wharf Park.
33

Wetlands
Map 3 also shows the Town’s tidal and non-tidal wetlands which for the most part are closely
associated with the Corsica and its tributaries. These wetlands attenuate flooding, prevent
shoreline erosion, help maintain the water quality of the Corsica River, Chester River and by
extension the Chesapeake Bay, and provide habitat for native plants and wildlife.
Tidal (Estuarine) wetlands line the banks of the
General Location of Tidal (Estuarine) Wetlands Along Mill
Yellow Branch and Mill Streams and are quite Stream on the Town’s Western Boundary
e
C
x
o
t
r
e
s
n
ic
s
a
iv
N
e
e
a
c
lo
k
n
R
g
o
t
a
h
d
e
t
T
o
o
M
w
i
n
ll
’ s
S
w
tre
e
a
st
m
er
P
n
a
b
rk
o
.
r d
Th
e
e
r from
Mill
Stream
Trail
C
El
e
e
n
m
tr
e
e
n
v
t
i
a
ll
r
e
y School
aerial photograph here shows the location of
tidal wetlands in this area.
The non-tidal (Palustrine) wetlands in Centreville
are generally forested and extend into slightly
higher elevations at greater distance from tidal
action. The Town’s non-tidal wetlands, whether
populated by trees or just herbaceous plants,
provide vital basins for retaining and filtering
N
rainwater that flows from upland locations.
These are generally located on the east side of
MD 213 and coincide with the forested corridors
that are a prominent part of the area’s natural
setting. The aerial photograph here shows non-tidal wetlands associated with Gravel Run
located just north of the Turpin Farm.
General Location of Non-Tidal (Palustrine) Wetlands Along Gravel Run Hope Rd.
King
Ct.
34

Steep Slopes
The Town’s landscape, like the Corsica River watershed generally, is gently rolling. Steep
slopes, which are hillsides with grades 15% or greater, are confined to the wooded shorelines of
the Yellow Bank Stream, Mill Stream and the other streams that extend into forested or
otherwise undeveloped portions of the Town. These areas of steep slopes can be seen on Map
3 within the green corridors that coincide with the streams. On the map, the differences in the
land’s surface elevation is revealed using contour lines which connect points of equal elevation
above sea level. Where contour lines are spaced far apart, the land is relatively level with little
change in elevation. Where contour lines run closely together, the land is sloping, and the
closer they are, the steeper the grade. Land disturbance on the steep slopes in Centreville
including clearing trees can lead to stormwater and pollutant runoff into the streams soil
erosion, and stream bank failures.
Forests
Map 3also shows areas in Town covered in forests including very small forest stands and
wooded backyards. Forests provide many ecological benefits including producing oxygen,
protecting streams and groundwater quality, moderating localized temperatures, providing
habitat for wildlife and birds, and capturing carbon dioxide (CO2) from the air and sequestering
carbon. A single tree can remove many tons of carbon from the air over its lifetime.
The remaining forested lands in and around Centreville are aligned with streams and wetlands,
typically areas that could not readily be put to aquicultural use. In fact, the three most
significant forested areas extend along streams radiating eastward from the Corsica River. They
are fragmented into long corridors that extend into and beyond the Town’s Growth Area. While
they provide residual water quality benefits, they bear no resemblance to their pre-agricultural
extent and function. The preservation of these remaining forests is vital to the maintain the
current health of the Corsica River; their expansion is vital to restoring the River’s health.
35

Chesapeake Bay Critical Area
The Town is required by the State of Maryland to administer regulations limiting the use and
development of land within 1,000 feet of tidal waters, an area known as the Chesapeake Bay
Critical Area (see Map 4). All lands within 1,000 of the Bay, its tributaries, and tidal marshes are
designated as the Critical Area. Properties within the Critical Area are designated one of three
categories: Intensely Developed Area (IDA), Limited Development Area (LDA), and Resource
Conservation Area (RCA)9.
Intensely Developed Area: The IDA is meant for the intensely developed areas where houses,
businesses, marinas, parking lots, etc. were constructed mostly before the State’s adoption of the
Critical Area Program in the 1980’s. The IDA generally coincides with development that has
substantially altered the natural capability of the land to protect the quality of water. This area is
shown in red on the Map. The IDA classification does not significantly restrict development but
does require that applicants for development / redevelopment put measures into place when
developing land that can reduce stormwater pollutant runoff by at least 10% below pre-
development conditions.
Limited Development Area: The LDA designation is meant for those areas, where limiting the
amount of additional land development (i.e., the coverage of the land with impervious surfaces
such as buildings and parking lots), will protect water quality. This coincides with areas of less
intensive development than the IDA and is shown in yellow on the Map. The LDA classification
places significant limitations on development, requiring for example that no more than 15% of a
lot be covered with impervious surfaces and requiring the protection of forests.
Resource Conservation Area: The RCA is meant to cover the most sensitive parts of the Critical
Area, such as intact riverine forests, natural shorelines, wetlands, and wildlife habitats; areas that
function naturally to protect the Bay’s water quality and wildlife. These area are shown in green
on Map 4.
9 The rules and criteria for classifying properties into these categories are set forth in the Critical Area regulations (found in the
Town’s Zoning Ordinance,. https://ecode360.com/9532220)
36

MAP 4
37

Impacts of Sea Level Rise
The Chesapeake Bay is rising but because of the Town’s limited amount of developed
shoreline, the Town is not as vulnerable to the effects of sea level rise like coastal
communities10. However, sea level rise will impact the Town’s tidal shorelines, wetlands and the
floodplains of the Corsica River and the tidal parts of other streams. Impacts may include
shoreline erosion, deterioration of tidal wetlands, rising groundwater, and nuisance flooding in
lower lying riverine areas.
Existing Open Water Open Water with 2 Foot Sea Level Rise:
Projected 2050
FIGURE 5
Figure 5 above is a composite of images from the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric
Administration (NOAA) Sea Level Rise Viewer. The image on the left shows the current extent of
open water, which coincides with the Corsica River and the main branches of its tributary
streams. The second exhibit shows an expanded open water scenario under the assumption
that sea levels rise 2.0 feet above the year 2000 levels.
10 In its 2018 report, Sea Level Rise Projections for Maryland, the Maryland Commission on Climate Change (MCCC) noted that the
Bay’s water levels have been rising for a long time, since Last Ice Age actually, as the Bay filled up and coastal Maryland settled
(which is still happening). But during the 20th century, with warming waters and glacial melt, the oceans began to expand their
volumes steadily and rise. Now, well into the 21st century, the warming of the earth is accelerating and so is the rise of the tidal
water throughout the Chesapeake Bay region.
38

The Maryland Commission on Climate Change projects, with high confidence, that by 2050 area
sea levels will rise 2.1 feet over the levels measured in 2000. Should this come to pass, the
Town could expect through the lifetime of this Plan that floodplains will expand, flooding will be
more severe and frequent, and tidal wetlands will extend further upland as hydrologic
conditions change. As a general guide, protecting these areas over the next decades would
become increasingly.
A Plan For Natural Resources
Objectives
• To ensure that the Centreville Growth Area is designed and built to avoid and/or
minimize adverse impacts to environmentally sensitive areas.
• To preserve, protect, and grow the remaining natural resource features and sensitive
areas and the key roles they play in sustaining life and property in and around
Centreville.
• To use the preservation of natural areas as a means of linking the Town as it grows with
natural and recreational assets.
• To facilitate the natural migration of wetlands and natural vegetation as Bay water levels
rise along the tidal portions of streams, so that buffers can continue to function to
improve water quality and minimize flooding.
• To cultivate a love for the outdoors and promote greater public recreational access to
and use of shorelines and forested steam buffers throughout the Town.
Recommendations
Modernize Critical Area Regulations, Forest Conservation
The Town should continue to update its Critical Area Program and Ordinance, as required by
State law, to be consistent with changes that occur to the State Critical Area law and to reflect
the unique context of Centreville. Likewise, the Forest Conservation Ordinance needs to be
updated especially considering the opportunities arising from development in the Town and
other recommendations related to forest regeneration and stream protection.
39

A Town Forestry Program
Institute a continuous town forestry program to promote forest health and vitality and greater
tree canopy coverage by (1) creating funding mechanisms for protecting existing and future
forests, (2) planting street trees, (3) encouraging the voluntary planting of native species trees
on public and private lands, (4) encouraging property owners to conserve forested areas to the
extent possible, and (5) growing local forests through strict enforcement of the Town’s Forest
Conservation Ordinance. Tree planting within the Town can enhance the aesthetic quality of
streetscapes, cool impervious surfaces, create wildlife habitat, promote stormwater
management, reduce energy consumption, and improve air quality. The Town has a Tree
Ordinance, Section __ of the Town Code. In 2021 Planning Commission recommend
amendments to the ordinance along with detailed specifications to guide the installation of
street trees on the town’s public streets. This Plan recommends the adoption of these
amendments.
Protect Stream Buffers
This Plan aims to establish naturalized stream buffers along all streams that run through Town
and the designated growth area. Where redevelopment and the intensification of existing uses
of land is proposed or where new development is proposed on properties containing streams,
the Plan recommends that expansive stream buffers be established both within and outside of
the Critical Area. Amend the Zoning Ordinance to require non-disturbance buffers: at
minimum, 100-foot wide for perennial streams and 50-foot wide for intermittent streams,
expanded as needed to account for steep slopes and floodplains. Naturalized buffers play a
significant role in protecting water quality and accommodating the migration of wetlands and
flood zones as sea levels rise. Also, the Plan recommends that the Town and other units of
government or public agencies plant wide stream buffers on publicly owned properties where
feasible.
Protect Sensitive Environmental Areas
To ensure that regulations and standards related to environmental protection are implemented
the Town must insist on high quality site design, professionally engineered land planning, and
thoughtful early reviews of concept plans. Thoughtful land planning can promote the growth
and resilience of natural areas, for example by designating lands adjacent to existing streams
for afforestation and land preservation.
40

Perennial and intermittent streams and adjoining natural buffers, habitats of threatened and
endangered species (where present), wetlands, steep slopes, and the forests shown on Map __
should be protected from the adverse effects of development. With respect to each of these
“sensitive areas” within Centreville some level of protection is already in place through either
local, state, and/or federal regulations. But the value of identifying sensitive area early in the site
planning process for review by the Planning Commission is vital to drawing up plans that offer
the greatest long term protection.
Transform the Growth Area into High Value Ecologically Sustainable Neighborhoods
Over the long term as the Growth Area is developed, this Plan recommends that the Town
guide community development into high value ecologically sustainable ways: for example,
substantial forest regeneration, clustering home sites to minimize the coverage of the land in
impervious surfaces, connecting areas with bike and walking trails to minimize vehicle trips,
using the most advantageous stormwater practices designed to treat stormwater associated
with the most significant rainfall events not just typical rain events, right-sizing the design of
Town streets and infrastructure, and developing 100% renewable energy neighborhoods—that
is, Centreville future neighborhoods would be powered by renewable energy sources.
Facilitate Access to Natural Resource Areas
Chapter X, Community Design, of this Plan describes and maps existing and proposed
Greenways. The Greenways encompass natural resource lands such as stream buffers and
forested areas within the Town and its Growth Area. The Greenways provide access to and
through these areas to shorelines, parks, and recreational opportunities and address a central
organizing feature of this Community Plan – that natural areas should interconnect the Town as
its grows providing town residents with public access to and through natural areas.
Coordinate with the County, State, and Federal Agencies and Non-Profits
The Town of Centreville provided leadership to the “Corsica River – Watershed Restoration
Action Strategy – Final Report, September 2004”, (WRAS). The effort led to measurable
improvements in water quality. More information about this is provided in the Chapter V, Water
Resources.
41

V. Water Resources
(Technical review by Centreville Public Works of public water and sewer conditions pending. Chapter not complete or reviewed by the Planning
Commission.)
Introduction
This section addresses both the quality of the Town’s drinking water and the water quality of
local waterways11. In this chapter we discuss the Town’s municipal wells in the Acquia aquifer
which are naturally protected from land-based pollution, being deeply set below ground, and
shielded by a packed layer of sand and silt. We also review information on the Town’s two sub-
watersheds and discuss how the Town’s residents, builders, and developers, by following State,
County and Town regulations and guidance, are with each zoning permit issued, improving the
area water quality by reducing the pollutants that wash off property with stormwater.
The recommendations set forth in the Natural Environment and Land Use chapters are integral
to this chapter. In their entirety, these three chapters advance a comprehensive policy aimed at
improving and sustaining the water related natural resources that protect the health and well-
being of the Town.
Existing Conditions
Water Source12
Groundwater, drawn from the Aquia Greensand Formation (aquifer), is the sole source for water
supplies in Centreville. According to the Queen Anne’s County Comprehensive Water and
Sewer Plan, this formation is the most important source of groundwater in Queen Anne’s
County, with several hundred wells, mostly on Kent Island and in the Grasonville and
Queenstown areas. Because of heavy pumping of water on Kent Island in the Talbot County
towns of Easton and St. Michael’s, brackish water intrusion has affected water quality on the
11 The infrastructure related to the supply, production and distribution of drinking water is discussed in Chapter VIII, Community
Facilities. Existing streams, stream buffers and wetlands and the roles they play are discussed in Chapter IV, Natural Resources.
12 The source of information on source water is the Queen Anne’s County Comprehensive Water and Sewerage Plan, 2011.
42

northwestern half of Kent Island. The State does not allow any new Aquia aquifer appropriations
on Kent Island and will only consider them east of the Kent Narrows on a case by case basis.
The aquifer has a band of a few miles wide within its formation wherein water exceeds the
drinking water standard for arsenic. This band extends from the Prospect Bay community in
southern Queen Anne’s County northeast through Centreville. As such Centreville’s water
treatment requires arsenic removal.
The Town’s municipal water system is described in Chapter __ Community Facilities. In summary
it consists of three operating with a combined extractive capacity and permitted withdrawal of
645,000 gallons per day (gpd) with average use approximating ___ gpd. It also consist of two
treatment facilities and three storage tanks, with a fourth in the planning stages.
Corsica River Watershed13
The Corsica River Watershed
encompasses Centreville and has a
drainage area approximating
25,600 acres (40 square miles). The
River, with its headwaters just east
of Town is about 6.5 miles long and
is a tributary to the lower portion of
the Chester River which flows into
the Chesapeake Bay. Land use in
the watershed is distributed among
primary classifications as follows:
agricultural (66%), forests (26.3%),
residential (4.5%), nonresidential
urban (3.3%) and wetlands (0.3%).
The River is a tidal estuary, and it
enters the Chesapeake Bay FIGURE 6, SOURCE MARYLAND DEPT. OF ENVIRONMENT
between Betterton in Kent County
and Grove Point in Cecil County. Its watershed area (including the water surface) is 97 square miles, and it
drains 83 square miles of land.
13 The primary source for information on the Corsica River Watershed is, Updating the Statistical Analysis of Non-Tidal Nutrient Monitoring Data
in the Corsica River Watershed, Final Report, 2019, Carlington W. Wallace, Interstate Commission on the Potomac River Basin for the Maryland
Department of the Environment.
43

Along the northern Kent County shoreline, the Sassafras is comprised of many tributaries, including
Lloyd’s Creek, Turner's Creek, Freeman Creek, Woodland Creek, Dyer Creek, Mill Creek, Swantown
Creek, Jacobs Creek, and Herring Branch. In 2004, the Sassafras River Watershed was added to the
Maryland List of Impaired Waters for biological impairments. None of the tributary streams to the
Sassafras River, including the two closet streams to the Town’s municipal border--Dyer Creek and Mill
Creek, qualify as high quality (Tier II) streams under State and federal water quality standards14.
Public Water
Centreville operates a municipal water supply and distribution system. It consists of three
operating wells (in the North Brook Subdivision, the Centreville Business Park and near Queen
Anne’s County High School). The Town also has three water storage tanks with storge capacities
of 100,000, 200,000 and 300,000 gallons. The Town plans to construct a fourth elevated tank
near MD Route 304 along the eastern edge of the Town’s current limits with a capacity of up to
600,000 gallons.
The Town has two water treatment facilities. The facility at North Brook has a treatment capacity
of 750,000 gpd. The facility at the Business Park has a treatment capacity of 720,000 gpd. Both
include the removal of arsenic. The entire municipal limits are served with municipal water as is
the Queen Annes’ County High School and Centreville Middle School which are located just
outside the Town’s eastern limits.
A Plan for Water Resources
Objectives
Recommendations
14 Tier II is a designation assigned to high quality streams to assist the State of Maryland in implementing federal stream anti-degradation
regulations (40CFR131.12). The Maryland Department of the Environment maintains the list of all Tier II streams and considers the potential
impacts of certain permitting activities on their quality including impacts associated with water and sewer plan amendments, non-tidal wetland
and waterways permits, and new or modified pollution discharge permits. There are no Tier II streams in Galena or its planned growth area,
and none that would be impacted by development or permitting activities related to the Town.
44

VI. Land Use
Introduction
This land use plan focuses on the pattern, distribution, and character of activities through
204015. It is a guide to the use and development of land, showing the preferred generalized use
of every parcel within the Town. It is interrelated with many of the other elements discussed in
this report and some of the land use ideas and recommendations highlighted here are detailed
further in other sections. Land use recommendations for the municipal growth area are
provided in Chapter III and should be read in concert with this chapter to appreciate the full
scope of Centreville’s long range planning.
The land use plan guides commercial and residential uses into downtown, along Railroad
Avenue and MD Route 213 and within the Centreville Business Park. It endeavors to make
downtown a vibrant center of economic, cultural, and civic life within the region. It seeks to
enhance the potential for the private housing market to deliver a variety of housing types to
meet the needs and preferences of residents of different income levels and life stages. It
recommends open spaces and seeks to protect the Town’s remaining forests identified in
Chapter IV. While embracing growth, it seeks to sustain Centreville’s traditional small town
character and charm.
As noted in Chapter III, Centreville will absorb an increasing share of household growth in
Queen Anne’s County. Over the next two decades, this is likely to happen through the
conversion of large tracts of land to new neighborhoods within the Town’s boundaries and to
some extent within the planned growth area. With the existing settlement pattern as a general
model for future development, Centreville should remain a relatively compact community within
a greenbelt of farms and forests.
15
A land use plan is not a zoning map. Instead, it is a guide to the use and development of land. The zoning map is more than a
guide, it is part of the Town’s laws and divides the Town into districts, each having its own set of use and development regulations.
While a zoning map is not a land use plan, it derives its substance and content from the adopted land use plan.
45

Implementation of the objectives and recommendations of this Plan will occur in many ways, but
the most prominent way is through the Town’s Zoning Ordinance. Following adoption of this
Plan, a new zoning map and amendments to the Zoning Ordinance would be adopted as is
customary.
Existing Pattern of Use
The term “land use” refers to the way property owners use land and therefore it reflects the
cultural, economic, and environmental character of an area. A land use map is the visual
expression of that character. Centreville’s existing land uses are shown on Map 5. An overview
of the existing pattern of land use follows:
MAP 5
• As the County seat, Centreville is a center of governmental uses which are concentrated
in downtown around the historic courthouse and green. Downtown is also home to law
46

and other professional offices, restaurants, and shops. It is designated “central business
district” on Map 5.
• From the downtown core, residential neighborhoods extend westward along
Chesterfield Road and eastward between Water Street and Kidwell Avenue. These
neighborhoods are made up primarily of single-family detached houses but also include
institutional uses including churches and schools. Occasionally there are also
commercial uses in these neighborhoods, whose establishment predate modern zoning
laws.
• During the past couple of decades, land further removed from downtown was
subdivided, creating neighborhoods such as Providence Farms to the east, Symphony
Village to the south, and North Brook to the north.
• Residential apartment buildings and complexes are designated “multi-family
residential” on Map 5. Since adoption of the 2009 Community Plan, the east side of
Little Hut Drive has been developed as a multi-building apartment complex known as
the Willows at Centreville.
• The Centreville Business Park is a significant area of commercial and light industrial use,
including a community shopping center fronting Centreville Road (MD Route 213).
Business offices and light industrial uses are situated internal to the business park.
Existing commercial uses are shown in red and light industrial uses in purple on Map 5.
Much of the business park is vacant.
• An institutional center is emerging along Railroad Avenue (MD Route 304) at its
intersection with Kidwell Avenue near the County middle and high school complex.
Since the adoption of the last community plan, the County has constructed its main
governmental office building there, the YMCA has obtained site plan approval for a
major indoor / outdoor recreational facility, and the County Board of Education has
appeared before the Planning Commission to discuss a conceptual plan to develop an
office complex.
• As documented in Chapter 3, there remains a significant amount of undeveloped land
within Town limits zoned for residential use. Nearly 280 undeveloped acres are zoned for
residential use. This land is shown in light green on the map as Open Space. There are
also about 30 platted vacant lots zoned for residential use.
• Lastly, the extent of natural resource land, including shorelines, wetland and forested
stream buffers within municipal limits is substantial. This land use reflects the presence
of underlying natural conditions. It is mapped and discussed in detail in Chapter IV,
Natural Resources and shown here in a dark green color.
47

Outside of Town, agriculture is the prominent land use. Scattered housing lots and residential
subdivisions can also be found throughout the countryside just beyond Town limits. The Town’s
designated growth area is comprised of very large tracts of land. Each has significant
development potential, and with thoughtful planning and coordination, an interconnected
arrangement of open spaces and naturalized areas can be preserved for recreational use and
environmental protection. The planning goals for this area are found in Chapter III.
The Plan for Land Use
This section of the Plan focuses on the future use of land located within the current Town
boundaries. This updated land use plan signals that Centreville will be especially intentional and
purposeful in its decisions about development through 2040. The term land use “development”
is defined here as the conversion of vacant land to another use, or the redevelopment or re-use
of existing buildings and sites, in ways that advance the Town’s improvement, progress, and
enhancement as described by the Objectives incorporated throughout the Community Plan.
To ensure that proposed land use changes meet this definition, this Plan recommends that all
major proposals proceed through a deliberative process during which the benefits that are
delivered to the Town are investigated and established. The Town is receptive to allowing
flexibility where needed to achieve quality and competent community design, but where
individual proposals fail to meaningfully advance the Town’s development (as defined above),
they will not comply with this Plan and should not be approved.
Through 2040, Map __ and the supporting text of this Chapter are to be used to guide the
location, type, intensity, and character of development and redevelopment. This means the
Planning Commission will evaluate new land development proposals in light of this Plan.
Objectives
The main goal of the land use plan is that Centreville develops as a healthy, prosperous, and
beautiful town with a continual improvement in the quality of life for its residents and the vitality
of its businesses. The supporting objectives are as follows:
48

• To create a network of open spaces and resource conservation lands which will secure
important environmental functions, form the basis of a town wide recreational asset, and
promote community health, vitality, and scenic beauty.
• To guide future neighborhoods into patterns that encourage an intergenerational
Centreville community, which features a variety of housing types instead of
neighborhoods separated by age or income.
• To foster an economically vibrant downtown, preserve its historic elements, promote
residential uses in and near downtown and link downtown to other parts of the Town
with an efficient system of streets, walkways, community open space, and public utilities.
• To foster continual real estate investment, the redevelopment of vacant or underutilized
properties, and the redevelopment or improvement of properties that do not contribute
to the Town’s overall wellbeing.
49

Future Land Use Map
Map 6 shows the 2040 future land use plan. Each of the major use categories are described
below.
/ Resource Conserv.
MAP 6
Open Space / Resource Conservation
Areas planned for Open Space / Resource Conservation include improved public and private
outdoor recreational areas, specialized open areas like the Chesterfield Cemetery, and natural
resource areas such as the shorelines and 100-year floodplains associated with the Corsica River
and its tributaries. These areas are, to the extent possible, meant to be protected so they can
perform their resource functions, like retaining flood waters, recharging ground water supplies,
and protecting downstream water quality. See Chapter IV, Natural Resources for a discussion of
these resource areas and recommendations for their protection.
50

Residential
The yellow areas shown on Map 6 encompass existing neighborhoods and residential lots that
are primarily zoned R-1 and R-2. The primary purpose of the designation is to signal the Plan’s
intent that these areas be conserved in residential use and/or continue to be developed for
housing under approved plats. It also encompasses four of the five major residential infill tracts
that are discussed in Chapter III, Municipal Growth. As discussed later in this chapter, the Plan
recommends that these infill tracts be developed as residential plan unit developments (PUDs)
with an overall density approximately five housing units per acre. Supporting recommendations
on Housing can be found in Chapter VI.
The current Zoning Ordinance contains a zoning district and regulations for Traditional
Neighborhood Development (TND) communities. The Town adopted these provisions following
the last comprehensive plan and applied the TND zone to the Carter Farm on Chesterfield
Avenue. Since then, the Planning Commission has reviewed multiple TND development plans
and its experience has informed the Commission that standard TND provisions, as applied to
the Carter Farm, allow residential density that is out of character with the Chesterfield
neighborhood. The purpose of the TND designation was to signal a preference for patterns
consistent with pre-WW II residential neighborhoods that feature a mix of housing types, grid
streets, open spaces, institutional uses, and possibly small-scale complementary commercial
uses. This is still a preferred development pattern generally, but this can be achieved through
the Planned Unit Development recommendations discussed in this report. This Plan
recommends that the Zoning Map be amended to remove the TND zone classification from the
Carter Farm in favor of a lower density residential zone, such as R-1. This plan further
recommends that the TND provisions in the Zoning Ordinance be eliminated and that the
Planned Unit Development approach recommended in this Chapter be pursued.
Residential, High Density
The primary purpose for the “high density” designation is to signal the plan’s intent to conserve
existing multiple-family housing areas in residential use and promote other residential
neighborhoods featuring a variety of housing types. For the most part, this designation covers
existing townhouse neighborhoods and apartment complexes, now zoned R-3, but it also
includes the Turpin Farm. The Turpin Farm is centrally located adjacent to the CBD and its
development as a residential neighborhood should support the economic vitality of downtown.
The recommended overall density of the housing units in R-3 districts is 8 housing units per
acre. Supporting recommendations can be found in Chapter VI, Housing.
51

Institutional
This designation signals the Plan’s intent of keeping the existing institutional uses as the
preferred uses on those properties so designated. The Plan supports the development of
institutional uses such as places of worship, schools, nursing homes, and day care centers in
certain residential and commercial areas, and the Zoning Ordinance should continue to
accommodate them. The Plan recommends that an Institutional zoning district be established
and that the significant institutional properties, especially the publicly held ones, be rezoned to
this new district.
Central Business District (CBD)
This designation encompasses properties within downtown where mixed-use development is
encouraged, and a broad array of commercial and institutional land uses would continue to be
allowed. The Plan also encourages residential apartments above commercial storefronts and
new residential buildings with densities that can meaningfully increase the resident population
in the CBD, such as one housing unit per 1,200 square feet of lot area, or about 36 units per
acre. The Plan recommends that the Zoning Ordinance be amended to allow standalone
residential building within the CBD. More specific recommendations are provided in the next
section of this Chapter.
Commercial
As shown on Map 6 recommended commercial areas are clustered along Water Street and
Railroad Avenue, Pennsylvania Avenue, Centreville Road, south of Town and Church Hill Road
north of downtown. With few exceptions every lot designated on Map 6 for Commercial use is
already developed. The two main exceptions include the 9.8-acre pasture and farmstead
located on the north side of Delmarva Power at 2612 Centreville Road, and the 4-acre parcel at
Ruthsburg Road, opposite the high school which is owned by Queen Anne’s County. Both
parcels are zoned C-2, General Commercial.
The C-2 district is a general commercial zone. It allows retail, service and office uses and is
intended to provide convenient locations for local shopping. The district is located along
Centreville Road, the southern gateway from MD Route 18 to the Mill Stream Bridge, at the
northern gateway into downtown along Centreville Road and near the future YMCA site.
The other Commercial zoning district is C-3 (Intense Commercial). It is located on the south side
of MD Route 18 east of MD Route 213 and along Railroad Avenue from the Acme Shopping
Center to Pennsylvania Avenue. The east side of Pennsylvania Avenue is also zoned C-3.
52

Commercial uses including automotive garages, motor vehicle fuel stations, bottling and
beverage distribution, wholesale businesses and warehousing, and manufacturing are
permitted in the C-3 district. These uses, if located along Railroad or Pennsylvania Avenues,
could adversely impact the character of adjoining residential neighborhoods, and introduce
heavy truck traffic onto local streets. This Plan recommends that zoning amendments be
considered to promote more compatible commercial uses in these areas.
Planned Business District
Intensive business and light industrial uses are recommended in the Centreville Business Park
shown in purple on Map 6. The business park is currently zoned Planned Business Development
(PBD) District which permits a variety of commercial land use activities.
Because only two other sizable commercial parcels remain undeveloped within Town
boundaries and their conversion to commercial use cannot be assured, it is likely that pressure
will mount to develop the remaining lots in the Planned Business Development (PBD) District
through 2040. This plan strongly recommends that space in the business park be reserved
primarily for major and intensive commercial uses that may not be compatible elsewhere in
Centreville and which can strongly contribute to the local economy and employment. The
business park is designed to accommodate large scale commercial buildings and site
operations.
Special Area Recommendations
Promote the Vitality of Downtown
Downtown Centreville, the central business district, is the institutional center for the Town and
Queen Anne’s County. It is also the community’s traditional center for government, shopping,
entertainment, restaurants, and local professional and law offices associated with the
courthouses. Downtown should remain highly walkable.
53

• From a land use perspective, to promote the preservation, upkeep, and adaptive reuse
of historic buildings, the Town should consider incentives to encourage developers to
rehabilitate buildings and to incorporate residential apartments on the upper floors
were possible. In this regard the Town should consider historic districting and the use of
State and federal preservation tax incentives to encourage private sector investment in
and rehabilitation of historic buildings16.
• Where feasible, without disrupting the historic character, this Plan encourages the
development of new mixed-use buildings featuring commercial at street level and
residential apartments above as well as stand-alone residential buildings.
• As noted in the section above on the Future Land Use map, this Plan recommends that
the CBD be extended along Water Street to Little Hut Drive and on both the north and
south sides to Pennsylvania Ave.
Promote the Development on Complete Neighborhoods
This recommendation applies to the large infill tracts as described in Chapter III, Municipal
Growth; generally, tracts of 10 acres or more, which are designated on the Future Land Use
Plan, Map 6. These tracts are intended for master planned communities with a mix of housing
types (single-family detached, duplexes, tri-plexes, attached houses, and apartment buildings)
and supporting non-residential uses, like institutions, parks, open spaces, and limited
commercial buildings under certain conditions.
To achieve this, this Plan recommends residential planned unit developments (PUDs). The
Town’s zoning ordinance currently has a PUD zoning district. It is a “floating zone”, which can
be thought of as a special zoning district that floats over certain pre-qualified tracts of land and
is allowed to settle down onto the tract upon request by the owner. Under current regulations, a
PUD must go through an extensive process of meetings and hearings, involving approvals from
both the Town Council and the Planning Commission.
In an alternative approach, which this Plan recommends be considered, the PUD is not a
separate zone, but instead a set of standards that guide master planned neighborhood
development. In this approach, every qualifying tract, such as parcels exceeding 10 acres would
be granted, by-right, flexibility in certain pre-defined development standards and are required
to use that flexibility to achieve exceptional community design.
16 The Maryland Historic Trust administers an Historic Revitalization Tax Credit Program consisting of three separate programs for
buildings and uses that are either listed on the National Register of Historic Places, are designated as historic properties by local
(town) law or are within a qualifying local (town) historic district.
54

The main difference between the approaches is that the PUD floating zone requires multiple
Town Council meetings to review and approve the project because, in effect, legislation is
needed to establish the special standards for the district. By contrast, with the PUD-standards
approach, parameters for flexibly applying standards are set down within the text of the Zoning
Ordinance from the beginning and thus the plan review and approval function remains within
the jurisdiction of the Planning Commission as is customary. In both cases, the PUD provides
the Town with more discretion in the approval process and the developer with more flexibility in
plan design.
It is this Plan’s general intent with either PUD approach to guide the placement, design, use,
and density of well-planned residential neighborhoods that can offer a variety of building types
and uses with optimal freedom to achieve great community design within the context of a site’s
location and special attributes. The purpose statements for Town’s PUD floating zone are set
forth in Section 170-28 of the Centreville Zoning Ordinance. This Plan recommends that they be
maintained, and activity implemented in the review and approval of future development.
55

VII. Housing
Introduction
This section of the report provides a summary and evaluation of existing conditions, objectives,
and recommended policies on housing. The Land Use Article of the Annotated Code of
Maryland was amended in 2019 to require that comprehensive plans contain a housing element
to address “affordable workforce” and “low-income housing”. Affordability is measured in
relation to the Area Median Income (AMI), a measure set by the federal Department of Housing
and Urban Development (HUD). The “area” in the term AMI, for Centreville, is the Baltimore-
Columbia-Towson Metro Region. The median annual income for the Region is $105,10017. By
comparison, the 2019 median annual income for Centreville was $89,69918 .
Increasing the availability of affordable housing as a goal can conflict with other vital planning
goals but policies about housing are especially important because they directly shape who can
live in a community and who cannot. In this chapter we seek to balance competing goals and
aim to encourage affordable housing options that can fit compatibly within the Town over the
long run and maintain the Town’s zoning and land use framework.
Existing Conditions
Affordability in Centreville
HUD’s “housing cost burden” is the standard measure of housing affordability in the United
Sates . According to the standard, households that are cost-burdened pay 30% or more of their
gross income on housing expenses (such as rent, mortgage, utilities, condominium and HOA
fees, and taxes) and thus have difficulty affording other necessities such as food, clothing,
transportation, and medical care. Not surprising households that are most cost burdened have
the lowest incomes.
17 “FY 2021 Income Limits Documentation System.” FY 2021 Income Limits Documentation System -- Summary for Baltimore-
Columbia-Towson, MD MSA, www.huduser.gov/portal/datasets/il/il2021/2021summary.odn.
18 “Centreville, MD.” Data USA, datausa.io/profile/geo/Centreville-md/#housing.
56

For the Town’s renter households, 39.7 percent of them, or 122 households, are cost burdened.
This is less than the State and Region, where about one-half are. For the Town’s homeowners,
26 percent or 254 households pay more than 30 percent.19 Therefore, relative to the State and
Region, a smaller share of the Town’s households is burdened by housing costs.
Table __ shows the distribution of the Town’s households by annual income. The Town’s
median is $89,699 which means that one-half of all households earn below that and one-half
earn incomes above it. Within the Region median income is $105,100 as noted previously.
Workforce housing is housing that is affordable for a household making between 60 and 100
percent of median income. For the official AMI – that means between $63,300 and $105,100.
Ideally households in this range should be able to find an apartment renting for no greater than
30% of annual income. A renter household earning $63,300 would pay up to $18,990 per year,
or $1,582 per month before becoming cost-burdened. Since the median rent for a two
bedroom apartment in Centreville is $1,38420, or about $199 per month less, one could
conclude the Town is a good value relative to the Region.
However, to appreciate local affordability—that is, the cost for Centreville residents in
particular, the Town’s median income is used. A renter household in Centreville earning 60% of
the Town’s median income or $53,820, would be cost-burdened if paying more than $16,150 per
year in rent, or $1,345 per month. The 2019 American Community Survey by the U.S Census
shows that 44 of the Town’s households are paying monthly rents between $1,000 and $1,499,
40 are paying rents between $1,500 and $1,999, 61 are paying rents between $2,000 and $2,499
and 18 are paying more than $3,000.21 This explains the finding that 39.4 percent of the
Town’s renter households are housing cost-burdened. For lower income households--making
less than 60% of local median income—renter housing is unaffordable in Centreville.
The same applies with respect to owner occupied housing. For a house valued at the current
estimated median sales price of $328,50022 a household would pay about $1,760 per month, in
mortgage, taxes, and insurance. At this median price, a household earning 60 percent of the
Region’s AMI would be paying 33 percent of its income on housing. But closer to home, a
household making 60 percent of the Town’s median income would pay 39 percent of its income
19 “Census Profile: CENTREVILLE, MD Urban Cluster.” Census Reporter, censusreporter.org/profiles/40000US15090-centreville-md-
urban-cluster/.
20 HUD Economic and Market Analysis Division. “FY 2021 Fair Market Rent Documentation System.” FY 2021 Fair Market Rent
Documentation System - Calculation For Centreville www.huduser.gov/portal/datasets/fmr/fmrs/FY2022_code/2022summary.odn.
21 “Census Profile: CENTREVILLE, MD Urban Cluster.” Census Reporter, censusreporter.org/profiles/40000US15090-centreville-md-
urban-cluster/.
22 Zillow.com Median Home Value estimate for Centreville, Maryland
57

on housing. In Centreville households that earn incomes close to the median would find that
the costs of homeownership would exceed the 30% affordability standard. Households earning
less than 60% would not find affordable housing to buy in Centreville. When thinking about the
future, only 3% of land in Centreville is zoned for higher density housing beyond single family
attached and single family detached.
Other Characteristics of Housing in Centreville
TABLE 6
Housing Unit Type
As shown in Table 6, about 85 percent of the Housing Types
Town’s, 1,672 total units are single-family
detached units and 5 percent are single- Total units 1,969 100%
family attached units (townhouses). 1 unit detached 1,672 85%
Combined, single-family units comprise 90 1 unit attached 101 5%
percent of the Town’s housing units.23 The 2 or 4 units 97 5%
remaining 10 percent is found in buildings 5 to 9 units 61 3%
10 to 19 units 0 0%
with two or more housing units. About 8
20 or more units 38 2%
percent are in buildings with nine or fewer
units and 2 percent in buildings with 20 or Source: U.S. Census
more units.24
23 Explore Census Data,
data.census.gov/cedsci/table?q=centreville%2C+maryland&t=Housing&tid=ACSDP5Y2019.DP04&hidePreview=true.
24 Explore Census Data,
data.census.gov/cedsci/table?q=centreville%2C+maryland&t=Housing&tid=ACSDP5Y2019.DP04&hidePreview=true.
58

Table 7 below shows the share of the Town’s existing housing units constructed in each decade
since before 1940. It is striking that 41 percent of the housing units were built in one decade
alone, 2000 to 2009. About 14% of total units are in structures built before 1940.
TABLE 7
Housing Units by Age of Structure
Year Structure Built # %
2014 or later 61 3%
2010 to 2013 119 6%
2000 to 2009 808 41%
1990 to 1999 68 3%
1980 to 1989 122 6%
1970 to 1979 230 12%
1960 to 1969 104 5%
1950 to 1959 101 5%
1940 to 1949 75 5%
1939 or earlier 281 14%
Source: U.S. Census
Housing Types Permitted by Town Zoning
Table 8 below shows the distribution of permitted housing types by zoning district. The Town’s
current Zoning Ordinance generally allows for a variety of housing types including duplexes,
townhouses, apartments in combination with commercial buildings, and stand-alone multi-
family buildings. The Town’s TND zone is a truly mixed use district though only one tract is now
zoned TND and is has yet to be developed. Elderly housing which can be a specialized form of
multi-family housing is permitted in all residential districts and mobile home developments are
allowed in the R-3 and Planned Revitalization Area (PRA) zones.
59

TABLE 8
New Housing Types Permitted by Mapped Zoning District
Housing Types Zoning Districts
R-1 R-2 R-3 PRA TND PUD CBD C-2 C-3 PBD
Single-family detached permitted permitted permitted permitted permitted permitted
Single-family attached (townhouse) permitted permitted permitted permitted permitted
Accessory dwelling permitted1 permitted permitted permitted permitted permitted
Duplex and two-family permitted permitted permitted permitted
Multi-family2 permitted permitted permitted permitted
Elderly Housing permitted permitted permitted permitted permitted permitted permitted
Mobile Homes permitted permitted
Dwelling units with commercial permitted permitted permitted permitted
1The accessory unit must be within the single-family dwelling, not in a separate stand along building.
2A multi-family dwelling is one that is within a building containing three or more housing units, such as an apartment building.
Note the Light Industrial District (I) does not permit residential uses and is not included in the table.
Housing for Lower Income Households
Housing Developments
There are two low income housing developments in Town that offer housing to all age groups:
Renaissance Chase Apartments and Willows at Centreville Apartments. Both were built under
the federal Low Income Housing Tax Credit program (LIHTC). Under the program, the federal
Department of Housing and Urban Development grants state and local agencies authority to
issue tax credits for the acquisition, rehabilitation, and construction of rental housing for lower
income households. The units are set aside for households making less than 60 percent of the
area median household income and rents are generally capped at 30 percent of a household’s
income.
Renaissance Chase is a 64-unit development consisting of one, two and three bedroom unit
options. It is located within the R-2 zoning district and thus is a non-conforming use since the R-
2 zone does not permit multi-family buildings. This property, which was developed using the
LIHTC program, also provides Section 515 Rural Rental Housing which is available to low
income families and elderly persons with disabilities. Renters are also eligible for Section 521
USDA Rental Assistance. This program allows for renters to pay 30% off their adjusted income
towards rent. Not all units at Renaissance Chase may qualify for this program but some units are
60

eligible.25 The Willows at Centreville consists of ten two-story buildings having a mix of one, two
and three bedroom units for a total of 70 rentable units. LIHTC is the only program for this
property.26
Housing Authority of Queen Anne’s County
Most of the affordable living options in Queen Anne County are owned and operated by the
Housing Authority of Queen Anne’s County (HAQAC). In fact, there are five additional
developments in the County sponsored by the Housing Authority, beyond the two in Town, that
provide rental assistance programs.
The Authority also manages a Housing Choice Voucher program which provides vouchers used
by households to rent houses or apartments from private owners. Presently there are 141
Housing Choice Vouchers active. The program however is no longer funded so that no vouchers
have been approved since 2017. The waiting list is 10 years for a Housing Choice Voucher27.
Queen Anne’s County Department of Housing and Community Services
Queen Anne’s County has the second lowest level of rental housing in the State of Maryland
due to land use decisions prioritizing single-family housing.28 Queen Anne’s County through its
Department of Housing and Community Services operates housing programs for existing and
prospective County residents.
• The Critical Workforce Home loan program helps essential personnel who work and
want to live in Queen Anne’s County. This includes teachers, law enforcement, and first
responders. As of February 2020, the County had distributed 81 Critical Workforce
Home loans.29
25 “Renaissance Chase In Centreville, Maryland.” Affordable Housing Online, affordablehousingonline.com/housing-
search/Maryland/Centreville/Renaissance-Chase/15459.
26 “THE Willows at CENTREVILLE IN Centreville, Maryland.” Affordable Housing Online, affordablehousingonline.com/housing-
search/Maryland/Centreville/THE-WILLOWS-AT-CENTREVILLE/10106359.
27 Queen Anne's County Department of Community Services. Housing Strategy for Queen Anne's County, Maryland, Partners for
Economic Solutions, 20 Apr. 2020. www.qac.org/DocumentCenter/View/15198/QAC-Housing-Strategy--Final-5-3-21_?bidId=.
28 “Housing Authority.” Housing Authority of Queen Anne's County, www.qacha.org/.
29 “Affordable & Workforce Housing Unit.” Affordable & Workforce Housing Unit | Queen Anne's County, MD - Official Website,
www.qac.org/1212/Affordable-Workforce-Housing-Unit.
61

• Moderately Priced Dwelling Unit (MPDU) Rental program. Limited Rental units are
available through this program for renters making 80% of median area income. As of
February 2020, the County has distributed 44 MPDU loans.30
Senior Housing
Between 2010 and 2019 the share of the Town’s population 65 years or older (seniors) rose from
18 percent to 22 percent. Projections by the State of Maryland for Queen Anne’s County
indicate this trend will continue. Between 2020 and 2040 the senior share of the County’s
population is projected to increase from 20 percent to 26 percent31. It is reasonable to
conclude that the population aging expected at the County level will continue to occur in the
Town through 2040.
There is one subsidized senior living community in Centreville. Tilghman Terrace is a housing
apartment for seniors subsidized by the Federal Housing and Urban Development Division
(HUD). Renters typically pay 30% of gross income for rent. There are 42 units available for rent
that vary between one and two bedroom options.32
Multiple national studies and surveys indicate that seniors want to remain at home rather than
relocate to senior housing as they age. And yet seniors, especially as they progress through
their 70’s, do encounter difficulties with living at home and can benefit from specialized health
care and interacting with other people. Traditional large scale assisted living facilities or
convalescent homes are one option but there can be other smaller housing options that might
fit well within the Town’s existing neighborhoods so residents can remain in Centreville. In fact,
other options may become a necessity as the cost of private assisted living care can be
considerable and outpace the savings of middle and lower income seniors.
30 “Affordable & Workforce Housing Unit.” Affordable & Workforce Housing Unit | Queen Anne's County, MD - Official Website,
www.qac.org/1212/Affordable-Workforce-Housing-Unit.
31 Explore Census Data, data.census.gov/cedsci/table?tid=ACSDP5Y2019.DP05&g=0400000US24_0500000US24035.
32 “Tilghman Terrace Apartments In Centreville, Maryland.” Affordable Housing Online, affordablehousingonline.com/housing-
search/Maryland/Centreville/Tilghman-Terrace-Apartments/10005981.
62

A Plan For Housing
Objectives and recommendations for residential land use and growth are set forth in the Land
Use and Municipal Growth sections of this report. This Chapter’s recommendations focus
mostly on the supply of affordable housing types and adapting to changes in housing needs.
The Town’s main goal for housing through 2040 is that Centreville is a place where residents of
all ages and income levels have housing options that allow them to live comfortably and
affordably in the community.
Objectives
• Encourage a variety of housing types to maintain the Town as an inter-generational
community.
• Protect the supply of quality housing to meet the affordable housing needs of the
Town’s households that earn less than 60% of the median household income and thus
face a high-cost burden.
• Remain flexible to accommodate changing housing needs over time in both the
production of new housing and the preservation and repurposing of existing units
especially considering the aging trends in area population.
Recommendations
Maintain a land use pattern that encourages multiple housing types and consider minor zoning
adjustments to facilitate their potential production.
The current Zoning Map classifies a substantial area as R-3 which zone allows for a variety of
housing types. The Turpin’s Farm, for example, discussed in the Land Use chapter, is zoned R-3.
The Town’s Zoning Ordinance also allows tracts of certain sizes to be developed as a Planned
Unit Development (PUD), or a Traditional Neighborhood Development (TND). Both provide
design flexibility to create optimal patterns of residential development. The TND district allows
multiple housing types with overall densities up to 5 units per acre.
63

Overall, as shown in this chapter, current zoning allows for a variety of housing types including
duplexes, townhouses, apartments in combination with commercial buildings, and stand-alone
multi-family buildings. In practice however, specific standards in the code can make it
practically difficult for property owners to deliver these options, even when they would
otherwise be compatible with neighborhood character.
Increasing the supply of new housing, while conserving existing neighborhood character is
possible and the Town should continue to encourage a mix of housing types by reducing
unwarranted regulatory obstacles.
This has the added benefit of
making more efficient use of
available land and municipal
infrastructure and does not
involve land development.
Presently duplexes are prohibited
in the R-1 and R-2 zone and while
they are allowed in the R-3 zone,
each of the two units in a duplex
must have its own minimum lot
area of 5,000 square feet.
Accessory apartments in separate
buildings (such as a garage) are
not allowed in the R-1 and only
permitted as a Special Exception
in the R-2 district provided the lot
is at least 10,000 square feet.
Duplexes and accessory
apartments can be compatible
within all residential
neighborhoods and have
essentially no impact on
neighborhood quality of life. Duplexes can be made indistinguishable from single-family
houses as illustrated in the photographs here and can readily fit on the same lot as a single-
family house33.
33 Credit. The source of these photos and the outline of housing types herein is Opticos Design, “Missing Middle Housing” which is
available at www.missingmiddlehousing.com.
64

Create a Town Inter-generational Housing Taskforce
A town that is intergenerational will have housing and social options that allow older adults and
young people and families to mix within neighborhoods. Because workable solutions to any
important and complex goal requires focused long-term community attention, the Town might
consider sponsoring a citizen committee to study and recommend approaches for addressing
existing and future housing needs for middle and lower income seniors especially.
The committee can suggest ways the Town might facilitate senior housing and aging in place
within existing neighborhoods. Options might include repurposing houses into small senior
living and care arrangements, co-housing options where seniors share expenses, and
encouraging universal design principles in new or rehabilitated housing to make it easier for
seniors to live at home. The committee could also coordinate with HAQAC and Queen Anne’s
County Government to evaluate the needs of low income households in this age group. There
is one senior housing development in Centreville providing rental assistance, but the demand
may increase over time in response to health care costs and the aging of the area population.
Efforts to promote new senior housing within existing neighborhoods should be investigated
and adopted if found workable.
Conclusion
The Town’s land use plan is the overall policy framework within which these housing
recommendations must fit. The intent is that within the land use vision of Centreville, there will
always be housing options that meet the needs of the Town’s households regardless of income
and age. This includes the housing needs of young adults and families who could be putting
down roots in Centreville and the needs of its senior citizens who live in and near Town. The
Town aims to have a housing stock which meets the housing needs of its residents and their
family members through their full cycle of life.
65

VII. Transportation
Introduction
This section addresses existing circulation in Centreville and provide guidance on addressing
future access and circulation for the Town’s long term development. Some existing streets will
need to be improved and several major new streets will need to be constructed when the time
is right in order to sustain municipal growth and expansion. Left unplanned, the street system in
the growth area, especially, would imposes significantly impacts on the existing residents of
Centreville leading especially to gridlock within the MD 213 corridor and Downtown.
Map 7 shows the existing street and highway system in the Centreville area and Map 2 shows
the planned street system focusing on major streets --- called Collectors and Primary Local
streets. The alphanumeric symbols on Map 8 correspond to the discussion of proposed projects
later in this section under the heading “Recommendations”.
Among other things, this section of the Plan also recommends that the Town continue the
course of building an interconnected network of sidewalks, trails, and bikeways and extend that
network into the planned growth area as development take place.
Existing Conditions
Functional Roadway System
Map 7 classifies existing major streets and highways in the Centreville area by their function—
arterials and collectors. Two arterial highways carry higher traffic volumes at relatively high
speeds and connect Centreville to the region: MD Route 213 and U.S. Route 301.
MD Route 213 is the north-south axis through the core of Centreville where it operates with one
lane in each direction: Commerce Street headed north, and Liberty Street headed south. The
Maryland State Highway Administration (SHA) classifies MD Route 213 as a minor arterial
highway. U.S. Route 301, by contrast, is a principal arterial on the federal highway system. It
bypasses Centreville on its southern and eastern sides where it intersects with MD Routes 213
and 304 at grade separated interchanges. U.S. Route 301 in the Centreville area is a four-lane
divided and access-controlled highway.
66

SHA classifies MD Routes 18, 304, and 305 as major collectors. Major collectors collect traffic
from lesser streets and convey it arterial highways and thus to points beyond Centreville, and in
reverse, they collect traffic from the arterial system and distribute it to local neighborhoods.
Within Town, these same collectors—MD Routes 18, 304, and 305--are the primary means of
east-west travel. The efficient movement of areawide traffic is a primary concern on the collector
road network.
Map 7 also shows a set of the Town’s minor collector roads including Wexford Road, Watson
Road, Kidwell Avenue, Little Kidwell Avenue, Coursevall Drive and Taylor Mill Road. These roads
also collect traffic from minor streets but are secondary in that function to the major collectors.
As a network, arterials, and collectors (both major and minor) shape the distribution and
character of travel in and around Centreville.
Highway Traffic Volumes and Conditions
Table 1 shows average daily traffic volumes reported by SHA in 2000, 2010, and 2019 for the
main north-south movements through Town—that is, along MD Route 21334. As shown, traffic
increased over time along MD Route 213, most notably on the section south of MD Route 18,
which is the section of highway fronting the Centreville Business Park and the Town’s busiest
shopping center. The Table shows that the average number of vehicles per day along the
shopping center’s frontage increased by 18% between 2010 and 2019. By comparison, during
the same decade, traffic north of Downtown increased by only 2%.
34 Because the reported 2020 volumes were likely impacted by the economic shut down due to the pandemic and because of the
disruption of normal traffic operations occurred during the period of MD 213 utility construction, data for 2019 are presented
instead of 2020. Note that at each location where volumes were recorded, the 2020 volumes were significantly lower than the 2019
volumes indicating the probable impact on areawide traffic of these two factors.
67

E
Fu
xi
n
s
c
ti
t
n
io
g
n al Watson Rd.
Wexford
Dr.
Classification
of Streets and
Principal Arterial
Highways
Chesterfield
R
L
d.
ittle
B
K
ro
id
ad
w
Pe
w
e
nn a
l
s
l
y y lv
A
an
K v
ia
e
A
id
v
.
e
w
.
ell Ave.
Little
Hut
Dr.
VincitSt.
MD Route 305
M
M
M
i
a
i
n
n
jo
o
o
r
r
r
C
A
C
o
r
o
t
l
l
e
l
l
e
e
ri
c
c
a
t
t
l
o
o
r
r
MD
Route
18 CoursevallDr.
MD Route
304
312
etuoR
DM
Taylor Mill Rd.
.dR
egdirB
gnilloR
U.S. Route 301
MAP 7
TABLE 9
Traffic Volumes in Centreville Over Time
Highway Section
Vehicles per Day Change 2010-2019
Highway Section 2000 2010 2019 # %
At the Gateways to Downtown
MD 213 South of MD 18 (4H Park Rd) 1 4,600 1 3,532 1 6,002 2 ,470 18%
MD 213 North of MD 18 (4H Park Rd) 1 2,150 1 5,042 1 6,674 1 ,632 11%
MD 213 South of MD 305 (Hope Rd) - 1 1,842 1 2,135 293 2%
Within Downtown
Commerce Street (northbound) at Kidwell Ave. - 7 ,272 7 ,665 393 5%
Commerce Street (northbound) at Water St. - 6 ,452 6 ,205 (247) -4%
Liberty Street (southbound) at Church Ln. - 7 ,152 7 ,795 643 9%
Liberty Street (southbound) at Water St. - 6 ,102 6 ,825 723 12%
68

Table 9 shows that traffic within Downtown has increased since 2010 most notably on the southbound
side (Liberty Street). Traffic on Liberty Street increased 12%, measured near Water Street, and 9%
measured further south at Church Lane. The data show that on northbound Commerce Street traffic
volumes drop as vehicles move toward Downtown indicating the role that Kidwell Avenue plays in
intercepting eastbound traffic before it gets to the core of Downtown. Traffic on Commerce Street at its
intersection of Water Street fell by 4% between 2010 and 2019. Peak period congestion and delay remain
a recurring issue in the MD Route 213 corridor through Town and often coincides with the release of
students from area schools in the afternoon.
One of the consequences of the opening of the interchange at U.S. Route 301 and MD Route 213 was the
introduction of a steady flow of traffic northbound into Town during peak periods. (Traffic on MD Route
213 used to stop of the signalized intersection with U.S. Route 301 and entered Centreville in intermittent
cycles.) The signalized intersection at Coursevall Drive was intended, in combination with the signalization
of the Laser Drive intersection, to break up the steady flow of travel to allow upstream traffic in Downtown
(at the Water Street intersection) to dissipate. Laser Drive however has not been completed nor
signalized so the State’s traffic operations strategy has not been implemented. This has complicated the
unsignalized entrance into the Food Lion Shopping Center which SHA determined back in 2004
warranted a traffic signal. This intersection is the site of significant delay and congestion when MD 213 is
carrying high volumes of traffic.
FIGURE 7: MD ROUTE 213 AT THE COURSEVALL INTERSECTION
69

MD Routes 304 (Ruthsburg Road and Water Street) and 305 (Hope Road) connect to U.S. Route 301 east
of Town. As noted above MD Route 304 intersects the U.S. Route 301 at a grade-separated interchange
and MD Route 305 intersects the highway at an on-grade channelized intersection. The distribution of
traffic over time on these main east-west routes and on U.S. Route 301 is shown in Table 10 below. Traffic
has increased on each of these highway sections except for MD Route 305 (Hope Road). Traffic on Hope
Road has trended downward for 20 years and even decreased by 15% between 2010 and 2019 likely
owing to the improved crossing provided by the US 301/ MD 304 interchange.
TABLE 10
Traffic Volumes Area Roadways: 2000, 2010 and 2019
Highway Section Vehicles per Day Change 2010-2019
2000 2010 2019 # %
U.S. Route 301 (south of MD Route 304) 15,126 17,427 24,353 6,926 39.7%
MD Route 305 - Hope Road (East of MD 213) 1 ,900 1 ,743 1 ,481 -262 -15.0%
MD Route 304 - Water Street (East of MD 213) 5 ,400 4 ,260 5 ,000 740 17.4%
Source: Maryland State Highway Administration
MD Route 304 also extends to the west side of Downtown on an alignment made up of W. Water Street,
Chesterfield Road, and Corsica Neck Road. A proper and consistent comparison of traffic volumes on this
route cannot be made using SHA data because the count location has changed frequently over time. For
the W. Water Street section, SHA’s 2019 counts show 3,673 vehicles per day. This roadway section is an
important part of the major collector road network for traffic headed toward southbound MD Route 213
from Shore Lumber Millwork, Centreville Elementary School, and the offices of the Queen Annes County
School Board. These land uses contribute to heavy morning volumes on Chesterfield Avenue.
The most significant change in area traffic volumes is the nearly 40% increase on U.S. Route 301 between
2000 and 2019. This reflects the response of interstate traffic to major highway upgrades in the U.S Route
301 corridor in Delaware, which have provided a viable alternative to the more heavily travelled Interstate
Highway 95 corridor.
70

Local Streets
The municipal street system is comprised of original streets like Broadway and Lawyers Row laid out in
the 18th century at the Town’s development, collector streets like Kidwell Avenue and Little Kidwell
Avenue and residential streets constructed at various stages of subdivision development. Overall, travel
speeds and volumes on Town-owned streets are typical of local streets with a residential character. The
roads are adequate to safely handle the traffic they carry, and they are no known safety or capacity issues
that require rehabilitation or roadway expansion. Because of the small blocks, intersecting streets, and
extensive sidewalks, the Town’s core is highly interconnected and very walkable. Most town streets have
sidewalks so walking within neighborhoods is generally convenient. However pedestrian linkages
between the Town’s various residential communities and between them and Downton is not well
developed.
Public Transit
The Queen Anne’s County Department of Aging operates three weekday “deviated fixed routes” within
the County, and one of those routes connects Centreville to Stevensville. These routes operate on a
standard schedule, but the bus driver may deviate from the route up to ¾ mile for any rider. The regular
stops in Town include the Kramer Center, Acme, Tilghman Terrance, and Food Lion. Rides are available
to the general public, as well as disabled persons and senior citizens.
Trails
There are three hiker / biker trails in Town. The first is the Town-owned Millstream Trail which extends
from Mill Stream Park on MD Route 213 (at the merging of Liberty and Commerce Streets) northwest to
Creamery Lane. From that point it is a short distance over existing residential streets to Centreville Wharf
Park via Front Street. The second is the Nature Trail which is a platted open space amenity contained
entirely within in the North Brook Subdivision. The third is the trail connecting Symphony Village to the
shopping center on MD Route 213.
71

A Plan for Transportation
This section addresses future access and circulation needs. Map 2 shows the planned street system. This
section also included a recommended trail network map.
Objectives
• To have a transportation system that allows residents of all stages of life and abilities the freedom
to move about Town and be active participants in the cultural, civic , and business life of
Centreville without unnecessary obstacles.
• To ensure long-term street access and circulation throughout Centreville is protected so that
residents and visitors move efficiently through the community and business goods and
commercial services are efficiently transported.
• To be guided by an overall street system plan where traffic speeds and loadings are compatible
with the local context, and beautiful with the complete set of features that make them a joy to
drive on or walk or bike along.
• To have an interconnected town where the logical extensions of existing and planned streets and
trails are made.
• To promote walkability in Downtown and along all streets extending from downtown where
sidewalks, crosswalks, pedestrian amenities, and parking are strategically located.
• To ensure the problem of heavy truck traffic is continually addressed and to eliminate, to the
extent possible, the mixing of heavy truck traffic with local traffic and pedestrian movement.
• To promote modernized street infrastructure that capitalizes on existing and emerging traffic
operational and safety technologies and supports the use of alternative fuel vehicles.
• To promote a cost effective and system based and holistic approach to development,
improvement, and maintenance of Town streets.
72

Recommendations
Build the Planned Collector Street System as the Town Develops
The Centreville street system will need to evolve to accommodate the Town’s planned development,
especially within the growth area. This Plan is needed to ensure that streets are improved in a way that is
cost effective, delivers lasting mobility benefits to existing and future residents and businesses, and
provides options for minimizing congestion on MD Route 213 through Downtown. The proposed general
alignments for new and upgraded Collector and Primary Local streets are shown on Map 8.
S
H
t
i
r
g
e
h
e
w
ts
a
a
ys
n d
P lan Watson Rd. MD
Route
213
Wexford Dr..
Principal Arterial
Chester P
field R
L
d.
-
B
5
roadway
PL-1 M
M
i
a
n
E jo
o
xi r
r
s t C
A
in o
r
g
t
l
e
le
ri
c
a
t
l
or
Little Kidwell
A
Brow
v
n
e
St.
.
Kid
P
we
L
ll
-
A
2
ve. Little
Hut
Dr.
C-1
C-2
MD Route 305
Mi
N
n
E
o
e
xi
w
r
s t
C
i
o
n
o
r
g
U
lle
p
c
g
t
r
o
ad
r
ed
MD
Route
18 New or Upgraded
PL-4
Coursevall
Dr. C-4
PL-3
MD Route 304
Prim
Ex
a
is
r
t
y
in
L
g
ocal
New or Upgraded
C-5
312 etuoR
DM
Taylor Mill Rd.
U.S. Route 301
.dR
egdirB
gnilloR
C-3 P
N
In
l
e
a
te
w
n
r
n
c
G
e
h
d
a
ra
n
R
d
g
o
e
e
u
S
f
n
o
e
d
r
p
a
S
a
b
r
t
o
u
at
d
u
e
t
y
d
ParkwayDesign
MAP 8
When the large tracts of land within the growth area are proposed for development, developers will be
required to conform their plans with this planned street system and build the new streets or upgrade
existing ones that serve their projects. The Town will coordinate with the Maryland SHA to review traffic
impact studies for developments that impact State owned and maintained roadways. As is its practice,
the Town will continue to require that developers make planned street upgrades as a condition of
development approval. Until they are needed, the mapped street alignments are to be reserved and
protected from development.
73

Map 8 shows the major elements of the future street system which is planned to serve the eventual build-
out of Centreville and its growth area. It shows both new and upgraded streets and the future functional
classification of the street network. The map does not show all future local streets that may be needed;
these would be built as development takes place. Instead, it shows the planned alignments of Collectors
(C) and Primary Local (PL) streets. The planned projects corresponding to Map 2 are described below.
• C-1. This minor collector would run from the planned Oak Street Extended south crossing MD
Route 305 before heading east to connect with the planned East Side Major Collector. It would
address circulation needs of future residents east of the existing Town limits between MD Route
305 and the railroad.
• C-2. This is the planned East Side Major Collector. This major Collector would extend from
Wexford Drive in the north to Rolling Bridge Road south of MD Route 304 before tuning
westward onto the Taylor Mill Road alignment. It would collect traffic throughout the growth area
and distribute it to the arterial road network--that is, to U.S. 301 or to MD Route 213. It would also
function to link existing and future neighborhoods and commercial areas in the growth area. As
this route is constructed in the southern part of the growth area, Rolling Bridge Road could be
downgraded to a Primary Local street and carry slower moving traffic. This route in combination
with other collector routes would provide congestion relief to MD Route 213.
• C-3. This minor Collector would extend from Rolling Bridge Road eastbound before bending
northward and crossing MD Route 304 near the Planned Business Park.
• C-4. This minor Collector would extend Vincit Road southward to the East Side Major Collector at
Taylor Mill Road Extended). This would serve the north-south travel needs of the southeast
portion of the growth area.
• C-5. Taylor Mill Extended-West. This would continue the Eastside Major Collector to MD Route
18.
• PL-1. This is the extension of Oak Street eastward toward the Eastside Major Collector and
westward over MD Route 213, through a narrow portion of the larger tract which has been set
aside for future access.
• PL-2. This is a set of Primary Local streets that connect Commerce Street to Banjo Lane and Little
Hut Drive through the Turpin Farm.
• PL-3. This is a set of Primary Local streets that primarily run parallel to MD Routh 304 providing for
the circulation needs of future mixed use development. This allows MD Route 304 to be an
attractive parkway as commercial driveways, truck loading zones, and parking lots would connect
directly to it rather than to the Route 304.
74

• PL-4. This is a set of Primary Local streets that includes the completion of Laser Drive and its
extension westbound from MD Route 213 to MD Route 18. It also includes a street that would be
extended south on the west side and parallel to MD Route 213 and a separate street connecting
Hibernia Road to MD Route 18.
• PL-5. This Primary Local street would extend from Chesterfield Road to Liberty Street through the
following three properties, Carter Farm, Queen Anne’s County Board of Education, and the Town
owned public works lot. It would include an upgrade to the existing Johnstown Lane which
presently intersects Liberty Street. This roadway would relieve traffic on Chesterfield Avenue.
Apply New Street Development Principles
To promote overall design uniformity, good balance with planned land uses, street design quality, and
functional resiliency, several general principles must guide the development of Collector and Primary
Local streets. These are as follows:
• The primary purpose of each Collector street is to collect traffic from the local street system and
to allow efficient travel throughout the Town as it grows. While the alignments of the planned
streets may vary somewhat from that shown on Map 8, the planned Collector streets are to be
roughly spaced one-half to two-thirds of a mile apart, which is the approximate distance at which
they are mapped. Where possible they should be designed as parkways scales to the context of
the Town’s future development. In other words, they should be landscaped scenic throughfares
with a high degree of emphasis on natural beauty and ease of movement serving the travel needs
of future development.
• Access onto the planned Collectors via public street intersections is preferred over direct
driveways. Public street intersection spacing of about one-quarter mile along major Collectors is
about right. For the minor Collectors shown on Map 8, however the spacing could be less and
should be balanced with the goal of serving the circulation needs of the land uses proposed.
Generally, direct access to adjoining properties (e.g., via driveways) along all existing and
proposed Collector streets shown on Map 2 should be limited in order preserve their capacity,
functionality for cars, bikes and pedestrians, and their scenic beauty.
• Collector and Primary Local streets should provide wide planting strips for large street trees,
landscaped medians where feasible, and separate protected bike lanes or multi-use trails.
• To the extent possible, the right-of-way for each new or upgraded Collector street should be 80
to 100-feet wide which ensures street space for the ultimate buildout of the Town and the
optimal flexibility for configuring travel lanes, turning lanes, bikeways, pedestrian amenities,
street trees, landscaping, and utilities. The current “major and minor collector road” standards in
the Centreville Subdivision Regulations, establish the minimum rights-of-way widths at 60 feet
75

and should be revised. Rights-of-way for Primary Local streets can generally be less wide than
those for the planned Collector streets and should be sized for the land uses they would serve: 50
to 60 feet wide is generally adequate (corresponding to the Secondary Street section in the
Subdivision Regulations).
• To the extent possible, all Primary Local streets should include ample planting strips and street
trees well suited to and selected to complement the design of the street.
• The development of all new streets, primary streets, and local streets and lanes, should follow
required design standards and specifications, including those standards in the Town’s Tree
Ordinance, that the Town maintains and would revise in accordance with this Plan.
• The images here and on the next
page reflect the recommended
character (for Major Collector street
design) for MD Routes 213, 304, 205
and the East Side Major Collector as
indicated with the “parkway”
designation on Map 8. In the
images, note the boulevard median,
the separated bike lanes, the use of
street trees within the median and
along the street, the capacity for on-
street parking, the use of street
lighting and landscaped setbacks
between the street and buildings.
Initial phases of Major Collector
street development may never need
to exactly match the standards
reflected in these images. For
instance, one traffic lane in each FIGURE 8
direction separated by a landscape
medium could generally be sufficient in most cases through the foreseeable future. These image
are for long term guidance however and they help ensure that street development does not
foreclose the possibility for optimal design.
76

FIGURE 9
FIGURE 10
77

• All planned upgrades and improvements should reflect the context and character of the areas
through which they pass and contribute to the sense of place of the local neighborhood or part
of Town. This is especially the case with the Primary Local streets. While these streets, which are
shown in green on Map 8 are intended to carry traffic through and between future
neighborhoods, intersecting residential or commercial driveways would be acceptable. The right-
of-way and the required pavement widths of the Primary Local streets should be balanced against
the land uses they are intended to serve. So, for example Laser Drive as an industrial roadway
would be significantly wider than the local residential streets that would extend through the
Carter and Turpin Farms.
Deploy Smart Street Technologies for Safer and More Effective Streets
New Collector streets should be smart streets—that is, outfitted with sensors that monitor and record
traffic volumes, heavy truck traffic, wear and tear, and conditions such as temperature, ice, and other
factors that would allow for the most efficient long-term care and management of the street system. For
MD Routes 213, 304 and 305, encourage the State Highway Administration to deploy smart street
technologies. Also, for all streets consider the use streetlight technologies that can detect traffic volumes
at signalized intersections and adjust red and green times and pedestrian crosswalk times to improve
overall convenience and safety. Consider streetlights that can adjust to ambient light conditions and
increase in intensity when pedestrians approach on a sidewalk or crosswalk. Consider embedded lights in
crosswalks that light up to signal to oncoming vehicles that a pedestrian is about to enter the crosswalk.
Insist that New Development Build an interconnected Local Street System
It is critical that no major development become an island onto itself; that all neighborhoods and parts of
Town are interconnected. Roads that may be stub-ended in anticipation of future extension into newly
developed areas must not be prevented from being extended when the time comes. New development
must also conform itself to the planned streets shown in this Plan and construct those streets whose
alignments pass through the proposed development tract.
Work to ensure all aspects of the Transportation System are Accessible and Safe to people with
Disabilities, Children, and Seniors.
Through development plan review and attention to the details of street design, the Town can ensure that
new and redeveloped parking lots, sidewalks, crosswalks, transit stops, trails, and entrance ways into
commercial and institutional buildings or sites meet the objectives of the federal Americans with
Disabilities Act.
78

Build A Town-wide Trail Network
Extend the Millstream Trail from Mill Stream Park east into the Growth Area and build an interconnected
trail network as shown on Map 9, “Greenway and Trail Plan”. The Town should require developers to
build multi-use trail linkages within and near their development projects using the exhibit as a guide. This
is relevant within the Town and in the planned growth area.
This Plan recommends that trail alignments be reserved, and the trails be constructed as land
development takes place or sooner where practical. The trails may run within or along the planned
collector road rights-of-way or on separate alignments and ultimately would provide a greenway network
connecting residents to the Town’s park system.
Greenway and Trail Plan
Trails
Existing Trail
Programmed for
Construction
Planned
Greenways
MAP 9
The Town should also consider preparing and implementing a Walking and Bicycle Trail Plan which would
recommend and program specific improvements for pedestrian and bicycle connectivity throughout the
greater Centreville area. This plan should refine and detailed the proposed greenway trail alignments
shown in this Chapter and coordinate with property owners as needed to secure rights of access. The
Town could then actively implement projects recommended in that plan, supported where possible by
grant programs. In the meantime, the major trail alignments shown on Map 9 should be implemented to
the extent possible.
Coordinate with Queen Anne’s County to Ensure Continued Transit
Queen Anne’s County provides bus service to Town residents to Kent Island at Stevensville. Over time
the Town and County should coordinate in the context of the County’s five year transit planning process
to determine if adjustments and expansions of the services would be beneficial to local mobility goals. To
be a vibrant intergenerational community, paratransit service may need to become especially useful
within Centreville given the trends toward an increasingly older population.
79

VIII. Community Facilities
(Technical review by Centreville Public Works of public water and sewer conditions pending.)
Introduction
Community facilities are the part of municipal development that most depends on coordination
between multiple agencies and units of government. Because of their complexity and the
efficiencies that must be obtained, public facilities are provided to all residents within
designated service areas. Often this means residents of separate jurisdictions are served by the
same facilities and services. Community facilities, at least when they are operated optimally and
provided fairly are delivered in such a way that one person’s enjoyment is not diminished by
another person use.
This section of the report focuses on municipal water and sewerage facilities, public education,
libraries, parks, and police and fire protection. These are the primary community facilities that
benefit Town residents. This section of the report provides a summary and evaluation of existing
conditions, a list of objectives, and recommended policies.
Existing Conditions
Public Water
Centreville operates a municipal water supply and distribution system. It consists of three
operating wells (in the North Brook Subdivision, the Centreville Business Park and near Queen
Anne’s County High School). The Town also has three water storage tanks with storge capacities
of 100,000, 200,000 and 300,000 gallons. The Town plans to construct a fourth elevated tank
near MD Route 304 along the eastern edge of the Town’s current limits with a capacity of up to
600,000 gallons.
The Town has two water treatment facilities. The facility at North Brook has a treatment capacity
of 750,000 gpd. The facility at the Business Park has a treatment capacity of 720,000 gpd. Both
include the removal of arsenic. The entire municipal limits are served with water.
The systems’ maximum permitted extractive capacity is 645,000 gallons per day (gpd). Current
average daily use approximates _____ gpd, therefore, there is an existing excess capacity of
_________ gpd. For comprehensive planning purposes, this excess capacity can be converted
into equivalent dwelling units (EDUs) where dwelling units are assumed to demand water at a
80

rate of 250 gallons per day35. Assuming 250 gallons per day per EDU, the Town has excess
capacity for ___ EDU’s.
Public Sewerage
The Town operates a public sewerage system. It consists of a wastewater treatment plant
(WWTP), five pumping stations and distribution lines36. The WWTP is permitted to discharge an
average of 542,000 gpd of treated domestic wastewater but only between December 1 and
March 31. The plant is located within Town limits on Johnstown Lane and discharges to Gravel
Run which the Maryland Department of the Environment (MDE) classifies as a “Use 1 Waterway”
where water quality is protected for human contact and nontidal warmwater aquatic life. The
MDE permits the Town to operate a spray irrigation system for effluent disposal year round,
which the Town is required to do, in combination with discharge to Gravel Run, to provide this
essential service.
For the purposes of capacity estimating, because wastewater flows fluctuate year to year and
can be impacted by weather conditions, a three-year average is used for estimating “current”
flows. The current average annual daily flow of the plant for the period 2018 through 2020
approximates 477,000 gpd, meaning the plant is said to be operating at 88% of permitted
capacity, leaving 65,000 per day remaining. For context, this remaining capacity is equivalent to
the flow generated by 260 equivalent dwelling units (EDUs). The Town has made commitments
to provide service to other potential users, which when considered, leaves an effective capacity
of about 195 EDU’s.
It is important to note that flows at the WWTP have been increasing each year. The WWTP
recorded an average daily flow of 506,000 gpd in 2021, which is well above the three-year
average noted above, and represents 93% of permitted capacity, leaving a remaining capacity
of 36,000 gpd. For context, this is equivalent to the flow generated by 144 more households.
The Town is in the process of actively evaluating and assembling funding for an upgrade and
expansion of the WWTP including effluent discharge and spray irrigation capabilities, which is
discussed later in this chapter and elsewhere in this report.
35 This demand factor is higher than that actual per household daily use so that it provides a conservatively higher estimate of
demand given the critical nature of water infrastructure.
36 As noted in the 2021 Centreville Wastewater Treatment Plant Expansion, Preliminary Engineering Report, which is available for
review at Town Hall, the WWTP was upgraded and expanded in 2003 to achieve biological nutrient removal (BNR) levels of
treatment. The plant’s treatment process consist of a two-tank sequencing batch reactor with chemical addition for phosphorous
precipitation and cloth media filtration. The plant treats wastewater as designed and within in NPDES permit limits.
81

Public Schools
There are four public schools in Centreville. As shown in Table 11, current (2020) full time
enrollment approximates 89% at Centreville Elementary, 89% at Kennard Elementary, 83.5% at
Centreville Middle and 96% at Queen Anne’s County High. Elementary school enrollment is
split between Centreville and Kennard Elementary Schools. Centreville houses Kindergarten
through second grade while Kennard houses grades three, four, and five. The Middle School
houses grades six, seven, and eight and the High School houses grades nine through 12. There
are nine portable classrooms at Queen Anne’s High School.
TABLE 11
Enrollment and Capacity at Centreville Area Schools: 2020
State Rated 2020 Fall
% Use in 2020
Capacity Enrollment
Public School
Centreville Elementary 5 81 5 19 89.3%
Kennard Elementary 5 03 4 46 88.7%
Centreville Middle 6 59 5 48 83.2%
Queen Anne's County High 1 ,263 1 ,214 96.1%
Source of State Rated Capacity and Enrollment data is the Queen Anne's County Public Schools
Educational Facilities Master Plan, July 2021. The enrollment presented here for Centreville Elementary
School includes 87 pupils estimated by Queen Anne's County Public Schools to be enrolled in pre-K in
each of the next 10 years.
The Queen Anne’s County School Educational Facility Master Plan projects full time enrollment
through the 2030-31 school years as follows: Centreville Elementary, including Pre-K (517);
Kennard Elementary (485); Centreville Middle (528); and Queen Anne’s High School (1,210).
With the exception Kennard Elementary School (grades three, four and five) enrollments are
expected to be lower in 2030 than in 202037. Kennard would operate at 96.4% of capacity in
2030.
37 Queen Anne’s County Public School Educational Facilities Master Plan, July 2021.
82

Public Library
Queen Anne’s County operates a library system including the central library at 121 Commerce
Street in Centreville, which serves a population extending well beyond Town limits of about
20,000. The Centreville location has an estimated floor area of 10,480 square feet. The residents
of the Town are well served by the library and no capacity expansions to the building are
currently planned, though it is recognized that future expansions may be needed to serve the
area’s growth38. The County also operates one branch location in Stevensville.
Parks
A community’s parks and recreational land resources are best viewed as a system: a system of
parts that can function together to provide a full suite of recreational amenities. There are three
main levels of municipal parkland: Mini Parks; Neighborhood Parks; and Community Parks. A
fourth type, Natural Resource Areas, can also fit into a larger system of recreational assets and
this is certainly the case in Centreville.
Mini-Parks
A mini-park is a small park that usually addresses specific needs within less than one-quarter
mile walking distance or serves as a memorial or other special place with a town. A mini-park is
typically less than one acre in size and can be either passive or active.
The Queen Anne’s County Courthouse Green—the quintessential courthouse square is an
example. Owned by Queen Anne’s County, it provides passive amenity open space for
residents and employees and visitors to Downtown, benches, and sculptures. The property
includes the historic courthouse building, which was built in 1793. Nickerson Park, at 420 N.
Commerce Steet along the southern bank of Gravel Run is also a mini-park and serves as public
memorial space. Another example of a mini-park is the park and playground at the Renaissance
Chase Apartments on Queen Anne’s Circle which is owned and maintained privately for the
residents of the apartment community.
3820-year Facilities Master Plan for the Maryland Eastern Shore Libraries, Queen Anne’s County, 2013.
83

Neighborhood Parks
Neighborhood parks generally serves residents within a distance ¼ to ½ mile, which is
synonymous with a 5 to 10 minute walk. These parks contain active recreational amenities like
ball fields, tennis or basketball courts, and playgrounds. The Town does not own any
neighborhood parks. The Northbrook Phase II Homeowners Associations owns and maintains
open space tracts within the Subdivision of which about 4.5 acres are dedicated to recreational
space including a soccer field and playground. The Symphony Village Homeowners also owns
and maintains neighborhood level improved parkland and open space amenities. The Willows
at Centreville Community along Little Hut Drive also owns and maintains neighborhood level
improved parkland.
Community Parks
Community parks are larger than neighborhood parks and serve residents drawn from a larger
area39. Generally, community parks contain multiple fields for team sports and amenities
including courts, walking trails, playgrounds, and picnic pavilions. The Whitemarsh Park located
just north of Town along MD Route 213 is a community park owned by Queen Anne’s County.
The property contains 318 acres. Though not fully improved, it contains multiple athletic fields
and baseball diamonds.
Natural Resource Areas
A fourth type of park, the natural resource area, are located where natural and sensitive
environments exist and encompass areas that cannot or should not be developed because of
their resource value or development constraints. The principal function of natural resource areas
is resource preservation and allowing human interaction with and connection to the natural
environment through low impact activities such as hiking, beachcombing, swimming, boating,
fishing, wildlife photography, and picnicking.
39 A source for more information on the community level parks in Queen Anne’s County, and other parks throughout the County, is
the Land Preservation, Parks, and Recreation Plan (LPPRP) which the County maintains and periodically updates. The County
adopted the current version of the LPPRP in 2018.
84

Mill Stream Park is the Town’s major natural resource area park. It encompasses the park
improvements directly accessible at MD Route 213 and the riverine buffer that extend westward
along Mill Creek. The Mill Stream Trail has been constructed through this area. The town-
owned Centreville Wharf Park (2.4 acres) also qualifies as a natural resource area and it lies
adjacent to the Centreville Landing, which is owned by Queen Anne’s County. In the same
vicinity, all but one waterfront property located between Front Street and the Corsica River has
been acquired by the Town or County and improved for parkland. There is a near continuous
park resource extending between Chesterfield Road and Centreville Wharf Park.
Lastly it is worth noting that Nickerson Park, while located on N. Commerce street lies adjacent
to Gravel Run being part of a major Town land holding that extends about 800 feet eastward
encompassing the Gravel Run stream buffer. This Town property lies adjacent to the Turpin
Farm which when developed could help create a much larger public greenway.
Summary
Among the park types noted above, the Town is deficient in neighborhood parks and mini-
parks. There are no neighborhood level parks in Town apart from the private HOA-owned parks
in North Brook and Symphony Village. It is important to note that the Town is home to four
public schools whose grounds may hold potential for park programming, which may be
especially beneficial to the residents that live within walking distance of them. Lastly the Town
Planning Commission recently approved development plans for a YMCA at Vincit Dive. While,
the YMCA operates as a private fee based membership organization, it will be an important
recreational asset to the greater community and include athletic fields.
The Town has developed nature-based recreational resources including the Mill Stream Park
and Centreville Wharf Park and these are significant amenities, unique within Maryland’s
municipalities. The County has developed the boat landing and the White March community is
located park just to the north of the Town. These projects represents substantial progress on
the Town’s long term objectives of securing recreational greenways and trails.
85

Queen Anne’s County Land Preservation, Parks, and Recreational Plan
Queen Anne’s County prepares and updates (every five years) the Queen Anne’s County Land
Preservation, Parks, and Recreational Plan (LPPRP). The LPPRP is required by the State of
Maryland for counties, and the municipalities within them, to remain eligible for local Program
Open Space (POS) grants. POS is a statewide program that funds the acquisition and
improvement of land for parks. In coordination with the County, each year Centreville can
submit land acquisition and development projects for the State’s consideration under the Open
Space Annual Program, which the County submits to the Maryland Departments of Natural
Resources and Planning.
Police and Fire Protection
The Town of Centreville operates a municipal police department with 14 sworn officers. The
department is located on a 2.5 acre town owned lot at 420 N. Commerce Street. The police
building is a two-story structure with approximately 2,800 square feet of floor area.
The Goodwill Volunteer Fire and Rescue Company provides fire protection in Centreville and
within a larger service area in central Queen Anne’s County. The company’s station, constructed
in 1948, is located at 212 Broadway.
A Plan for Community Facilities
Section 3.2 of this report discusses the impacts that planned growth would have on the Town’s
facilities through 2040 and notes that the capacity of municipal water and sewer facilities will
need to be expanded. The Town’s basic goal with respect to community facilities is that they be
expanded, maintained, and managed such that they remain sized and equipped to deliver
exceptional service to existing and future, residents, institutions, and businesses.
86

Objectives
• To upgrade and expand the Town public water and sewer systems.
• To ensure the Town’s community facilities are accessible to and provide benefit and
value to all members of the community.
• To develop a system of interconnected parks and open spaces built on a foundation of
natural resource areas with special emphasis on neighborhood parks.
• To ensure that developers contribute to providing and enhancing community facilities
and essential public services at least commensurate with the expected impact of their
proposed projects.
Recommendations
Upgrade and Expand Wastewater Treatment Capacity
The highest priority for community facilities is to modernize the Centreville wastewater
treatment plant (WWTP) and its effluent discharge capacity. This Plan recommends that the
plant be expanded as well modernized to meet the Town’s development goals and the
demands generated by planned growth. The decision to expand the WWTP will depend on the
availability of funding, and options under current consideration include replacing the plant at
about its same capacity of 542,000 gpd to 750,000 gpd, 1 million gpd, or 1.25 million gpd. As
discussed in Chapter 3, Municipal Growth, a capacity of 1.25 million gpd would be necessary to
serve the Town planned residential and employment growth through 2040.
Extending Municipal Water and Sewerage Services
Chapter 3 of this Plan discusses five tracts of land that have the potential to be converted to
residential use in the future (infill tracts). Generally, there is value in developing lands that are
already adjacent to existing neighborhoods and served by existing roads. However, the intent
of this Comprehensive Plan is not to limit the Town’s community development to the private
timelines of the owners of these tracts or to reserve capacity for them. As a matter of policy, as
opportunities arise to develop the Town in a smart and sustainable way, to achieve
environmental, public health, or economic development benefits, or to obtain contributions to
the expansion and financing of the Town’s infrastructure, Centreville will be open to annexing
land, and extending municipal water and sewer services to properties within Growth Area
irrespective of the infill potential within current boundaries. The Town will develop and
maintain a strict allocation policy through 2040 making final allocation commitments only upon
final site plan or final subdivision plat approvals.
87

Develop A Town Greenway and Park System
Centreville has natural resource related recreational assets and great potential to secure a
system of greenways throughout the Town and Growth Area. However, Centreville lacks
neighborhood parks. This Plan recommends that the Town Council appoint a citizen committee
to study the Town’s recreational needs, develop standards that will shape how parks are
provided and improved overtime including the availability of public schools grounds for
recreation, to assemble a park master plan, and to coordinate with Queen Anne’s County on a
regular basis in the update of the County Land Preservation, Parks, and Recreational Plan.
With or without a more detailed study or plan, as discussed throughout this Plan, the Town
aspires to develop a greenway and trail network along with public neighborhood parks in all
future neighborhoods. Figure 11 shows existing parks and the recommended general location
of future greenways and parks. Where greenways are shown on land to be developed within the
Town and the Growth Area, such land should be dedicated by the developer to the Town of
Centreville as public resource to be preserved in perpetuity and improved for public
recreational and educational purposes and managed by the Town for environmental protection.
GeneralTown Greenway and Park Plan
Nickerson Park
North Brook,
Courthouse Green HOA Mini Park, Existing
Wharf Neighborhood Park
Park
Existing
Approx.
Alignment, Mill Proposed
Stream Park Trail
Natural Resource Area Park
Mill Stream
Park Existing
Proposed
Public School
YMCA
Trails
Existing Trail
Approx. Alignment, Programmed for
Mill Stream ParkTrail, Phase II Construction
Symphony
Village, Planned
HOA
Greenways
FIGURE 11
88

New residential development projects should include the development, improvement, and
dedication of public parks, open spaces, and trails. This Plan acknowledges that the provision of
exemplary park and open spaces within major infill tracts (see Chapter III, Municipal Growth)
and the Growth Area may reduce the land available to developers for new housing units and
that clustering of houses within the landscape is one way to free up land for parks and open
space. Future neighborhood development in Centreville will favor creative arrangements of
open spaces and neighborhood design that prioritize high accessibility to parks over the run-of-
the-mill platting of lots that maximize the yield of lots. Until such time as the Town adopts
specific regulations, the following standard should stand as the minimum amount of parkland in
new developments: 1,000 square feet of parkland should be provided for each proposed
household in a residential development.
This Plan also recommends that the Town coordinate with Queen Anne’s County Public Schools
to program school grounds for recreational purposes especially in areas that lack neighborhood
parks. Centreville Elementary School and Kennard Elementary School are especially accessible
for residents within their respective neighborhoods.
Consider and Adopt Growth Management Tools
This Plan recommends that the Town systematically study, and if found advisable adopt,
regulations such as adequate public facilities ordinances (APFO), impact fees, street, park, and
school ground dedication requirements, and other growth management tools and programs
that could be administered to ensure community facilities are appropriately funded so that their
capacities are retained or expanded. This includes police and fire and emergency medical
services, whose capital facilities and services will need to be expanded as development takes
place to ensure adequate levels of service are maintained. It is the Town’s policy that new
development contribute to maintaining the adequacy and indeed improving community
facilities.
Protecting and Expanding Local Public Schools
While the Queen Anne’s County Board of Education administers the public school system and a
facilities master planning program, the Town of Centreville—home to four public schools--has a
great stake in the outcome of such planning. This Comprehensive Plan recognizes each school
as an essential community asset that contributes to the quality of life and vitality of the Town.
While the Board of Education’s currently published projections show little change in enrollment
through the 2030-1 school year (except for Kennard Elementary), it is vitally important to the
89

Town that new development is balanced with available capacity. It is also important to the Town
that local children be able to attend schools within the Town’s boundaries. Therefore, the Town
will seek to coordinate with the Board of Education to ensure adequate capacities exist for the
Town’s planned growth and that excellent schools remain in Centreville for Centreville’s
children.
XI. IMPLEMENTATION
To be completed
90