← All documents

town of centreville comprehensive plan 2040 revised draft

Other August 2, 2023 · 86 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.

Town of Centreville
Comprehensive Plan: 2040
Planning & Zoning Commission
Draft for Town Council
August 2, 2023
1

Adopting Resolution
Left blank
2

Acknowledgement Page
Left Blank
3

Table of Contents
GLOSSARY OF ABBREVIATIONS .............................................................................................................................. 6
I. INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................................................. 7
PURPOSE OF THE PLAN UPDATE ........................................................................................................................................ 7
PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT ..................................................................................................................................................... 8
MARYLAND VISIONS FOR COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING ........................................................................................................... 8
ORGANIZATION OF THE PLAN ............................................................................................................................................ 9
II. THE POPULATION OF CENTREVILLE .................................................................................................................. 10
LOCATION ................................................................................................................................................................... 10
POPULATION ............................................................................................................................................................... 10
AGE ........................................................................................................................................................................... 12
HOUSEHOLDS .............................................................................................................................................................. 12
HOUSING UNITS........................................................................................................................................................... 13
III. MUNICIPAL GROWTH ..................................................................................................................................... 14
PROJECTIONS OF HOUSEHOLD GROWTH ........................................................................................................................... 14
A PLAN FOR MUNICIPAL GROWTH ................................................................................................................................... 19
IV. LAND USE ....................................................................................................................................................... 25
INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................................................ 25
EXISTING PATTERN OF USE ............................................................................................................................................. 25
A PLAN FOR LAND USE .................................................................................................................................................. 27
V. HOUSING ......................................................................................................................................................... 33
INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................................................ 33
EXISTING CONDITIONS ................................................................................................................................................... 33
FAIR HOUSING ............................................................................................................................................................. 37
A PLAN FOR HOUSING ................................................................................................................................................... 38
VI. COMMUNITY FACILITIES ................................................................................................................................. 41
INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................................................ 41
EXISTING CONDITIONS ................................................................................................................................................... 41
A PLAN FOR COMMUNITY FACILITIES ................................................................................................................................ 45
VII. WATER RESOURCES ....................................................................................................................................... 49
INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................................................ 49
EXISTING CONDITIONS ................................................................................................................................................... 49
A PLAN FOR WATER RESOURCES ..................................................................................................................................... 51
VIII. NATURAL ENVIRONMENT ............................................................................................................................. 54
4

INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................................................ 54
A PLAN FOR NATURAL RESOURCES .................................................................................................................................. 59
IX. TRANSPORTATION .......................................................................................................................................... 61
INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................................................ 61
EXISTING CONDITIONS ................................................................................................................................................... 61
A PLAN FOR TRANSPORTATION ....................................................................................................................................... 65
X. IMPLEMENTATION ........................................................................................................................................... 72
INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................................................ 72
ZONING AND SUBDIVISION AMENDMENTS ........................................................................................................................ 72
WATER AND SEWER ALLOCATION PROGRAM ..................................................................................................................... 74
STUDIES AND SPECIFIC PLANS ......................................................................................................................................... 74
FUNDING MECHANISMS ................................................................................................................................................ 74
INTERJURISDICTIONAL COORDINATION .............................................................................................................................. 75
CONCLUSION ............................................................................................................................................................... 77
ANNEX: ENLARGED MAPS .................................................................................................................................... 78
5

Glossary of Abbreviations
• AMI — Area Median Income
• CBD — Central Business District
• CIP — Capital Improvement Program
• EDU — Equivalent Dwelling Unit
• FEMA — Federal Emergency Management Agency
• GPD/gpd — Gallons per Day
• HAQAC — Housing Authority of Queen Anne’s County
• HOA — Homeowners Association
• HUD — United States Department of Housing and Urban Development
• IDA — Intensely Developed Area (within the Critical Area Zone)
• LDA — Limited Development Area (within the Critical Area Zone)
• LID — Low-impact Land Development
• LIHTC — Low Income Housing Tax Credit program
• LPPRP — Queen Anne’s County Land Preservation, Parks, and Recreational Plan
• MDE — Maryland Department of the Environment
• MDOT SHA — Maryland Department of Transportation State Highway Administration
• MPDU — Moderately Priced Dwelling Unit
• NOAA — National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration
• PBD — Planned Business Development
• POS — Program Open Space
• PRA — Planned Revitalization Area
• PUD — Planned Unit Development
• QAC — Queen Anne's County, Maryland
• R-1, R-2, R-3 — Density Based Residential Zoning Districts
• RCA — Resource Conservation Area (within the Critical Area Zone)
• TND — Traditional Neighborhood Development
• USDA —United States Department of Agriculture
• WRAS — “Corsica River Watershed Restoration Action Strategy”
• WWTP — Wastewater Treatment Plant
6

I. Introduction
Purpose of the Plan Update
This is the 2022 Update of the 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 Update not only refines and details long held and prevailing ideas, but it also resolves to
provide a guide to 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 about it. 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, as we
look to the year 2040, we also focus on five specific goals, as follows:
1. 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 water and sewer systems are nearing their capacities and must be
improved and expanded to achieve the long-standing community planning goals.
2. 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 regional development and transportation trends.
3. 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.
4. 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 physically expand. 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.
5. Guide the location, layout, and character of future neighborhoods. Open lands in and around
Centreville 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.
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

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
The Planning Commission conducted near monthly work sessions through 2021 and 2022 as it worked to
update the 2009 Community Plan and assemble this document. It held a public workshop on a draft
version on this document October 5, 2022. Following the public workshop, the Commission voted to
publicize the Plan for a Public Hearing, which was held on (January 18, 2023). [To be completed following
the public review process.]
Maryland Visions for Comprehensive Planning
The State’s guiding statutory visions for comprehensive planning summarize the minimum criteria by
which any comprehensive plan in the State is judged to be valid. These visions 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 or the need for housing. Local governments in Maryland
that regulate land use development must adopt comprehensive plans aligned with the 12 Visions:
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.
8

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 Visions also form the context for coordination between Centreville 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 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.
Organization of the Plan
Following the next chapters about population, this report is organized into seven interrelated chapters,
each focusing on a major functional or policy area: Municipal Growth, Land Use, Housing, Community
Facilities, Water Resources, Natural Environment, and Transportation. Each chapter contains objectives
and recommendations. The last chapter is about Implementation, including sections on land use
regulations, interjurisdictional coordination, and areas of critical State concern.
9

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 Maryland’s population) and 123,400 jobs2. Centreville is the county seat of
Queen Ann’s County.
Town of
Centreville
Queen Anne’ s
County
Figure 1
Population
Decade by decade, between 1960 and 2000, Centreville’s population remained within a narrow band
changing only by plus 107 residents as shown in Figure 2 below. But between 2000 and 2010 the Town’s
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 2020 U.S. Census population count for Centreville is 4,727.
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.
3 By comparison, over the full 60 years since 1960, the Town’s average annual rate of growth approximated 1.6%.
10

Figure 2, Source US Census
For decades, the Town’s share of Queen Anne’s County’s population fell, from a high of 12.4% in 1950 to
a low of 4.9 % by 2000 as shown in Figure 3. This was primarily the result of the County’s build-out of Kent
Island combined with essentially no growth in Town (or in any of the County’s municipalities). However,
by 2010, the Town’s share of the County’s population had been restored to its 1960 level before dropping
recently to about 10.6%. As of 2020, the latest year data are available, the population of all the towns in
the County, made up 14.2% of the County’s population4. Centreville, as the County’s largest town,
accounts for the majority of municipal growth and plays a significant role in the County’s efforts to
concentrate growth in areas that can be served cost-effectively with public services, protect farmland,
and preserve overall rural character.
12.2%
11.2% 11.2%
10.6%
10.1%
7.9%
6.2%
4.9%
1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020
Figure 3, Source US Census
4 Comparatively, 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.
11

Age
Along with the development of new houses, between 2000 and 2010, the share of the Town’s population
under 18 years of age increased 5%, while the share of residents 65 years and older decreased by 4%. The
household growth during that decade accounted for a younger Town population and the median age
dropped from 41.3 to 39.55. The 2020 U.S. Census Bureau finds the median age has increased to 42.1,
indicating an overall 20-year trend toward an older population. Those under 18 now comprise only 22.9%
of the Town’s population. Centreville's recent slower pace of household formation may account for this
change as younger families have aged without the offsetting effects of new households with children.
Figure 4, Source US Census
Households
Like the Town’s population, households, which are occupied housing units, also increased rapidly between
2000 and 2010. During that decade, 761 households were added to the Town bringing the total to 1,568
households. Then, between 2011 and 2020, 268 more were added, bringing the number to 1,836.
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 demand for domestic municipal
water. In the next chapter, Municipal Growth, we look to the future and present projections using this
estimated number of households as the baseline.
5 The median age in 2010 in Queen Anne’s County was 42.6.
12

Table 1 shows the general make up of households. Since 2000, the number of households with children
(persons under 18 years of age) has risen both numerically and as a percent of total households. By 2020,
601 households, or 32.7% of all households, had children. The Table also shows that households with
seniors (65 and older) increased sharply between 2000 and 2020. In fact, during this period, the number
of households with seniors increased from 234 households (or 29% of all households) to 716 households,
(or 38.9% of all households). Also worth noting, between 2000 and 2010, the average size of a households
in Town increased from 2.25 persons per household to 2.60. By 2000 it had fallen slightly to 2.49.
Table 1, Source US Census
Housing Units
The number of housing units counted by the U.S. Census increased from 866 in 2000 to 1,694 in 2010 and
to 1,989 by 2020. Housing units increased modestly over the last two decades from 6.8% of all units in
2000 to 7.7% of all units in 2020. The homeowner vacancy rate has remained quite low over time and only
3.1% of homeowner units were vacant in 2020, compared to 7.8% of rental units. There is no dominant
reason for why housing units are vacant, mostly it is just because they happen to be “for sale” or “for
rent” during the U.S. Census Count. “Seasonal, recreational, and occasional” housing units represent just
1.4% of the Town’s housing stock. Of the Town’s 1,836 occupied housing units in 2020, 1375 (or 74.9%),
were owner-occupied and 461 (or 25.1%) were rental occupied. This is about the same split recorded in
both 2000 and 2010.
13

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 plan forecast of household 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 for the growth area.
Projections of Household Growth
Zoned Development Capacity
A household is an occupied housing unit. It is the main “demand unit” considered when contemplating
change and its impacts on community facilities. With a reasonably accurate forecast of households, for
example, a town can estimate future residential demand for water and sewerage, classroom space in
schools, and parkland. As noted in Chapter I., Population, there were 1,836 households in 2020.
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. The Providence Farm subdivision has 2 vacant lots
remaining.
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 a zoning classification that permits residential development.
• It is mapped within either a current or planned water and sewerage service area.
• It is otherwise not actively in another use.
It is not uncommon to find large parcels of residentially zoned land being used for religious, institutional,
or recreational purposes, including schools and parks. Such parcels are not counted when estimating
development capacity.
Table 2 shows the acreage and potential new housing units within each of the Town’s residential zoning
districts today. As shown, there is capacity for 875 housing units6. The unit counts are mostly distributed
among the R-1, R-3, and TND zones, with only 30 lots remaining in the R-2 zone. Most of the residential
development potential shown in Table 2 is found on five major tracts of land. Figure 5 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 tracts, comprising 253 acres, account for 94% of
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.
14

the estimated capacity for new housing units7. The other 6% is comprised of lots that are platted but
vacant and several small tracts which could be subdivided.
Existing Residential Development Capacity by Zoning District
Max.
Density by Potential Computed
Code Total Housing Density
Zone (units/acre) Acreage Units (units/gross acre)
R-1 3.00 162 340 2.1
R-2 5.00 8 30 3.6
R-3 - Turpin Farm 8.00 66 290 4.4
TND - Carter Farm 5.00 43 215 5.0
sum 279 875 3.1
Table 2, Source Jakubiak & Associates, Inc.
Figure 5, Source Town of Centreville
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.
15
CB uu
(C a rte r F a rm )
C u rre n t Z o n in g : T N D
B u ild O u t E stim a te : 2 1 5
C u rre n t Z o n in g : R -1
B u ild O u t E stim a te : 1 3
5
rre n t Z o n in g : R -1
ild O u t E stim a te : 1 0 5
0
2
3
1
4
C u
B u
(T u
C u
B u
rre n
ild O
rp in
rre n
ild O
t Z o n in g
u t E stim
F a rm )
t Z o n in g
u t E stim
: R -1
a te :
: R -3
a te :
7
2
0
9 0
MP
T o
a jo r R e
a r c e ls
ta l P o te n tia
s
l D
id
w
e n
e llin
t
g
ia
U
l I n f
n its : 8
ill
1 0

Alternative Growth Projections
Three projections are shown in Table 3 and graphed in Figure 6. 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 as it has since 2000.
• As noted in Table 3, 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 454 between 2020 and 2040 at an average annual rate of 1.11%.
• Under Projection #2, the Town would grow 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 that 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 4.25% per year. By 2040 the Town’s share of total County households
would approximate 18%.
• Under Projection #3, the Town would grow between 2020 and 2040 along the same trend
recorded between 2010 and 2020, which was a period of moderate growth. Under this scenario,
the number of households in Centreville would increase by about 724 at an average annual rate
of 1.68%. By 2040 the Town’s share of total County households would approximate 11%.
Table 3, Source Jakubiak & Associates, Inc.
16

Figure 6, Source Jakubiak & Associates, Inc.
Impacts of Projected Growth
Tables 4-5 below show the impact of the projected household increase 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—that is, enrollment is anticipated to be under
capacity.
As shown in Table 4, current enrollments approximate 74% at Centreville Elementary, 89% at Kennard
Elementary, 83.5%% at Centreville Middle and 96% at Queen Anne’s County High. By 2040 enrollment
would remain under capacity at the elementary and middle school 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 #2.
Table 4
17

Table 5 shows the estimated impact to the Town’s water and wastewater treatment capacities. As shown,
current public water usage plus commitments total 393,412 gallons per day or about 61% of permitted
extractive capacity. The remaining capacity is sufficient to serve growth under Projections #1 and #3, but
under Projection #2 expanded extractive (and storage) capacity would be required under those scenarios.
With respect to public sewer, the existing demand for wastewater treatment plant capacity approximates
542,000 gpd, representing 93% of available capacity. In each projection scenario, an 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 treatment 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 larger
capacity—approximating 1.7 million gpd.
Table 5
Forecast 2040
Having evaluated three alternative projections, the Planning Commission selected one of them to be its
forecast or guide through 2040. A reliable forecast allows a Town to anticipate and prepare for the impacts
of growth and the needs of future residents. The Commission selected Projection #3 from the previous
section—a projected rate of growth of 1.68% per year on average, which would result in about 724 new
households by 2040.
At this level of growth, 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 and the County
Board of Education has ample time to plan for and adjust as it deems necessary. At this level of growth,
the Town would need to expand its wastewater treatment capacity to 1.25 million gallons per day.
18

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 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.
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 1,835 acres and is shown on Map 1.
Map 1
19

The Growth Area, as drawn in the 2009 Community Plan, encompassed about 1,720 acres. The newly
drawn and updated Growth Area is about 1,835 acres in size. This new size reflects the net effect of an
approximately 205-acre reduction of the boundary and elimination of two large farm tracts on the
southwest side between MD Route 213 and Hibernia Road and an approximately 320-acre expansion of
the boundary on the east side primarily through the addition of acreage previously planned as a “County
Businesses Park” located on the west side of U.S. Route 301.
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.
Planned Land Use
The generalized land use plan for the Growth area is shown in Map 2 and each of the recommended land
use designations are described below.
Resource Conservation / Open Space
The Resource Conservation designation encompasses
those natural resource lands that exist today including
wetlands, streams and their buffers, steep slopes,
shorelines, and forested areas (See Chapter VIII,
Natural Environment). 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
VIII, 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, the Centreville neighborhoods of the future 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 IV, Land Use. The recommended PUD
approach represents a departure from the standard zoning districting in which each zone is set aside
20

Map 2
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.
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 too, and zoning, subdivision,
and infrastructure standards may need to be modified to guide development where energy efficiency,
affordability, and very economical utility delivery will be driving Forces in community 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 road mileage and less mileage of
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 to the Town’s wastewater treatment
plant (WWTP) and open spaces may accommodate community scale wind and solar projects to supply
some portion of the demand for residential energy.
This complete neighborhoods planning approach may require that the Centreville Planning Commission
have more discretion in the development plan review and approval process, and it will require that future
developers use more creativity in neighborhood design. More specific objectives to be achieved by PUDs
in the Growth Area are as follows:
21

• To encourage cohesive, functional, and aesthetic use of open spaces including the enlarging
resource areas, connecting existing and planned open spaces on adjoining tracts of land, and
preserving 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.
Employment Areas, Economic Development
Technology Enterprise District
This Plan recommends the creation of a Technology Enterprise District (TED) to be reserved for master
developed and cohesively planned projects. 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. Corporate, business, and professional office complexes, along with medical
or technology campuses are some uses envisioned, contained within a parklike setting. This area can
strongly contribute to the economic well-being of the Town and region. This new TED is referenced in
Map 4 and Chapter IV, Land Use. With competent business 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 a TED at this location is that it can thrive
without major downtown traffic congestion. It could also contribute significantly to the Town’s assessable
tax and supply a source of employment and economic development to the larger area.
8 These estimates are arrived at by assuming at least 75% of the 134 acres designated for Employment Use on the 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.
22

Commercial: 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 Street 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, which is visible on Map 2 but discussed in more detail in Chapter
IX, Transportation. Both the planned East Side Collector and MD Route 304 are envisioned as future
parkways and the arrangement of the 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, generally set within a park-like 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. This
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.
MD Rt. 213 & 301 Interchange
The interchange of US Route 301 and MD Route 213 is regarded as a gateway to Centreville in spirit, if not
in body. The Plan recognizes that the area is outside of the planned Municipal Growth Area, however, this
Plan holds that it is in Centreville’s best interests the Town should be included in decisions made by QAC
regarding development at that area. Centreville may at some point decide to amend this Plan to extend
its Growth Area and its water and sewer services along MD Route 213 south to the properties near the
interchange in the event that proposed development would provide a direct benefit that fits the values
and priorities of the Town.
Greenbelt
Figure 7 shows the planned Greenbelt, carrying forward the concept from the 2009 Community Plan. The
Greenbelt encompasses areas beyond the 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.
23

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.
Figure 7
24

IV. Land Use
Introduction
This land use plan focuses on the pattern, distribution, and character of activities through 20409. It is a
guide to the use and development of land, showing the preferred generalized use of every parcel within
the Town. It is especially interrelated with the other elements of this Plan 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, Municipal Growth and
should be read in concert with this chapter to appreciate the full scope of Centreville’s long range land
use 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, which are identified in Chapter VIII, Natural Resources. While embracing growth, it seeks to
sustain Centreville’s traditional small-town character and charm.
As noted in Chapter III, Municipal Growth, 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
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.
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 3. An overview of the existing pattern of
land use follows.
• 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 and other
professional offices, restaurants, and shops. It is designated as “central business district” on Map
3.
• From the downtown core, residential neighborhoods extend westward along Chesterfield Road
and eastward between Water Street and Kidwell Avenue. These neighborhoods are primarily
9 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.
25

made up of single-family detached houses but also include institutional uses including churches
and schools. Occasionally there are 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 “Residential High Density” on Map
3. 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 3. Much of the business park is still 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 nearly completed a major indoor / outdoor recreational facility, and the County Board
of Education has obtained conditional site plan approval for a new building to replace the existing
Board of Education facilities currently located on Chesterfield Avenue.
Map 3
26

• As documented in Chapter III, Municipal Growth 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 VIII, Natural Resources and
shown in a dark green color on Map 3.
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, Municipal Growth.
A 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 Comprehensive 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 4 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:
• 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 community,
which features a variety of housing types instead of neighborhoods separated by age or income.
27

• 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.
Future Land Use Map
Map 4 shows the 2040 future land use plan. Each of the major use categories within the Town’s current
boundaries are described below. Map 4 also shows the more generalized land use plan for the Growth
Area, which is discussed in more detail in Chapter III, Municipal Growth.
Map 4
Open Space / Resource Conservation
Areas planned for Open Space / Resource Conservation include improved public and private 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
VIII, Natural Resources for a discussion of these resource areas and recommendations for their protection.
28

Residential
The light-yellow areas shown on Map 4 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 and shown in Figure 5. As discussed later in this chapter, the Plan recommends that
these infill tracts be developed as residential planned unit developments (PUDs) with an overall density
approximating 3.5 housing units per acre. The exception to this is the Carter Farm, where development
should feature a lower density of housing units, which is discussed below.
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. 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. The Planning Commission has reviewed multiple development plans
and its experience has informed the Commission that standard TND provisions should not be applied to
the Carter Farm. Although the TND concept is reminiscent of the existing patterns of the Chesterfield Ave
neighborhood, citizen concern regarding traffic circulation, commercial competition with the CBD, and
possible long term negative environmental impacts have led to a recommendation where a lower density
for that infill parcel is more appropriate. 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.
Residential, High Density
The primary purpose for the “high density” designation is to signal this 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 downtown, and its development should support the economic vitality of
downtown. The current allowable density of housing units in the R-3 district is eight housing units per
acre.
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 also 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. This 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. 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.
29

Commercial
As shown on Map 4, 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 4 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 Town’s other Commercial zoning district is called 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. 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
map and text 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 4. 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. A Master Plan for the business park indicates a mix of parcel size, the majority
of which will accommodate large scale commercial buildings and site operations, large office and flex-
space buildings, and to a lesser degree, retail and hospitality.
Other 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.
• 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 where possible. In this regard the
30

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 buildings10.
• Where feasible, without disrupting the historic
character, this Plan encourages development (and
re-development where relevant) that seeks to
replicate the look of the west side of Pennsylvania
Avenue. This is inclusive of mixed-use commercial
buildings at street level, with residential
apartments above. The concept should place
emphasis on attached buildings where possible.
• As noted on the Future Land Use Map 4, this Plan
recommends that the CBD be extended along the
north side of Railroad Avenue to Little Hut Drive,
and the full length of the east side of Pennsylvania
Avenue.
Promote the Development of Complete Neighborhoods
This recommendation applies to the large infill tracts as described in Chapter III, Municipal Growth;
generally, tracts of 10 acres or more in size, which are designated on the Map 4. 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 currently 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, a
qualifying tract, (such as parcels 10 acres or more in size) would be granted flexibility in certain pre-defined
development standards and are required to use that flexibility to achieve what the Town regards as
exceptional community design.
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 new 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.
10 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.
31

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 evaluated and revised as necessary to fulfill the
recommendations of this plan, and activity implemented in the review and approval of future residential
development.
Incorporate Open Space into Neighborhood Design
The Town's current subdivision regulations do not outline minimum open space requirements across all
zoning districts. This Plan recommends they be revised to lead to development that will ensure both
active open and passive open spaces shape future neighborhood development as well as provide for the
connection of trails and greenways throughout the Town. This recommendation lies in conjunction with
Open Space/ Resource Conservation discussed earlier in this chapter, this however is intended for open
space to play a deliberate and major role in good neighborhood design.
Evaluate Residential Zoning Densities
This Plan encourages re-evaluation of existing residential zoning densities given the projections provided
in Chapter III., Municipal Growth, and the preliminary WWTP expansion plan outlined in Chapter VI.
Community Facilities. Infill parcels abutting environmentally sensitive areas should be considered for a
creation of a Residential Conservation floating zone. In general, reassessing permitted maximum
densities will easily allow beneficial infill development when using PUD zoning principals, while also
maintaining a responsible rate of growth through 2040.
32

V. 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 $105,10011. By comparison, the 2021 median annual income for Centreville was $94,744.
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 States.
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.
For the Town’s renter households, 39.7% 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% or 254 households pay
more than 30%.12 Therefore, relative to the State and Region, a smaller share of the Town’s households
is burdened by housing costs.
Workforce housing is housing that is affordable for a household making between 60% and 100% 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.
The median rent for a two-bedroom apartment in Centreville is $1,38413, 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 US Census, American Community Survey 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
11 “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.
12 “Census Profile: CENTREVILLE, MD Urban Cluster.” Census Reporter, censusreporter.org/profiles/40000US15090-centreville-md-urban-
cluster/.
13 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.
33

are paying rents between $2,000 and $2,499 and 18 are paying more than $3,00014. This explains the
finding that 39.4% 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 assessment can be for owner occupied housing. As of early 2023, for a house valued at the
current estimated median sales price of $354,00015 a household would pay about $2,555 per month, in
mortgage, taxes, and insurance, exceeding the 30% affordability standard.
Other Characteristics of Housing in Centreville
Housing Unit Type
The US Census, American Community Survey (2019) provides an estimate of housing units and a break
down among the various housing types16. As shown in Table 6, about 85% are single-family detached units
and 5% are single-family attached units (townhouses). Combined, single-family units comprise 90% of the
Town’s housing units. The remaining 10% is found in buildings with two or more housing units.
Table 7 shows the share of the Town’s existing housing units constructed in each decade since before
1940. It is striking that 41% of housing units were built in one decade alone, 2000 to 2009. About 14% of
total units are in structures built before 1940.
Table 6, Source US Census, American Community Survey Table 7, Source US Census, American Community Survey
14 “Census Profile: CENTREVILLE, MD Urban Cluster.” Census Reporter, censusreporter.org/profiles/40000US15090-centreville-md-urban-
cluster/.
15 “Census Profile: CENTREVILLE, MD Urban Cluster.” Census Reporter, censusreporter.org/profiles/40000US15090-centreville-md-urban-
cluster/.
16 The data published by the U.S. Census, American Community Survey is based on statistical methods and, at the smaller geographic sample
size such as the Town, such data contain substantially high margins of error. The data should be used here as a basis for general
characterization only.
34

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 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 mixed-use district though only one tract (Carter Farm) 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.
Table 8, Source Town of Centreville
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% of the area median household income and rents are generally capped
at 30% of a household’s income.
Renaissance Chase has 64-units consisting of one, two, and three-bedroom options17. This property was
developed using the LIHTC program and 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, which allows for renters to pay no more than 30% of their adjusted income towards
17 The Renaissance Chase project is located within the R-2 zoning district and is a non-conforming use since the R-2 district does not permit
multi-family buildings.
35

rent. Not all units at Renaissance Chase may qualify for this program but some units are eligible18. The
Willows at Centreville consists of ten two-story buildings with a mix of one-, two-, and three-bedroom
options for a total of 70 units. LIHTC is the only program for this property19.
Housing Authority of Queen Anne’s County
Most of the affordable options in QAC are owned and operated by the Housing Authority of Queen Anne’s
County (HAQAC). In fact, there are five communities in the County owned and operated by the Housing
Authority, though none are in Centreville. 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 throughout the County. The program however is no longer
funded, and no vouchers have been approved since 2017. The waiting list for a voucher is 10 years20.
Queen Anne’s County Department of Housing and Community Services
The County’s 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 loans21.
• 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 loans22.
Senior Housing
Between 2010 and 2019 the share of the Town’s population 65 years or older rose from 18% to 22%.
Projections by the State 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% to 26%23. It is
reasonable to conclude that the aging expected at the County level will continue to occur in the Town
through 2040.
There is one renter-subsidized senior living community in Centreville called Tilghman Terrace; apartments
for seniors subsidized by the Federal Housing and Urban Development (HUD). Renters typically pay 30%
of gross income for rent. There are 42 units available that vary between one and two-bedroom options24.
Multiple national studies and surveys indicate that seniors generally 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, can
encounter difficulties with living at home and can benefit from specialized health care and interacting
18 “Renaissance Chase In Centreville, Maryland.” Affordable Housing Online, affordablehousingonline.com/housing-
search/Maryland/Centreville/Renaissance-Chase/15459.
19 “THE Willows at CENTREVILLE IN Centreville, Maryland.” Affordable Housing Online, affordablehousingonline.com/housing-
search/Maryland/Centreville/THE-WILLOWS-AT-CENTREVILLE/10106359.
20 Queen Anne's County Department of Community Services. Housing Strategy for Queen Anne's County, Maryland, Partners for Economic
Solutions, 20 Apr. 2020.
21 “Affordable & Workforce Housing Unit.” Affordable & Workforce Housing Unit | Queen Anne's County, MD - Official Website,
www.qac.org/1212/Affordable-Workforce-Housing-Unit.
22 “Affordable & Workforce Housing Unit.” Affordable & Workforce Housing Unit | Queen Anne's County, MD - Official Website,
www.qac.org/1212/Affordable-Workforce-Housing-Unit.
23 Explore Census Data, data.census.gov/cedsci/table?tid=ACSDP5Y2019.DP05&g=0400000US24_0500000US24035.
24 “Tilghman Terrace Apartments In Centreville, Maryland.” Affordable Housing Online, affordablehousingonline.com/housing-
search/Maryland/Centreville/Tilghman-Terrace-Apartments/10005981.
36

with other people. Traditional large scale assisted living facilities or convalescent homes are one option
but other, smaller housing options, might fit well within the Town’s existing neighborhoods. In fact, other
options may become a necessity as the cost of private assisted living can be considerable and outpace the
savings of middle- and lower-income seniors.
Fair Housing
In 2021, the Land Use Article of the Maryland Annotated Code was amended to require that
comprehensive plans contain a fair housing assessment to ensure they “affirmatively further fair housing”.
Fair housing refers to the ability of persons with similar incomes to have the same housing choices
regardless of the following characteristics: race, color, religion, sex, age, national origin, familial status,
disability, sexual orientation, gender identity, marital status, and source of income. “Affirmatively
furthering fair housing,” per Section 2-401 of the Housing and Community Development Article of the
Maryland Annotated Code, means preventing discrimination and taking actions aimed at overcoming
patterns of segregation and fostering communities free from barriers that restrict access to housing and
opportunity based on the above-mentioned characteristics. Here are a number of relevant findings:
• For background, the Town does not operate a housing authority, subsidize housing or the
residents of any housing, develop property, or license or inspect rental housing. The Town’s
Zoning Ordinance and Subdivision Regulations are the principal means for implementing land use
and housing goals.
• The Housing Authority of Queen Anne’s County owns and operates five housing communities in
the County, though none are in the Town.
• The term “group home” is a residential structure used to provide community living for persons
with physical or mental disability. A group home provides an opportunity for persons with
disabilities to live as a unit within the same residential neighborhoods as other residents. While
the Zoning Ordinance does address group homes expressly, any group of up to five un-related
persons constitute a “single-family” by definition in the Zoning Ordinance and the Town cannot
prohibit a group of five disabled persons from living together wherever single-family housing is
otherwise permitted. State and Federal law and regulations further provide that an applicant for
a group home may petition for a reasonable accommodation from the strict application of local
zoning so as to avoid being discriminated against25. Upon a properly filed request for a reasonable
accommodation, the Town may be asked to approve occupancies in group homes greater than
five residents.
• The Zoning Ordinance expressly permits “elderly housing” within the R-1 and R-2 zoning districts
at densities up to twice that applicable to non-elderly housing—that is, up to six units per acre.
There is one elderly housing project now in the R-2 zoning district. Within the R-3 zoning district,
25 For a survey of the law and principles governing this topic see the following: Determination of No Reasonable Cause in the Case of Humble
House Recovery v. Town of Chestertown MD, et. al., United States Department of Housing and Urban Development, February 2021; Civil Rights
and Discrimination, Housing-Applicability of Fair Housing Amendments Act to Fire Safety Code Requirements, MD Attorney General J. Joseph
Curran, Jr. June 25, 1999; Sober Homes and the Opioid Epidemic Federal and State Laws Affecting Local Governmental Ability to Regulate Sober
Homes/Recovery Residences, International Municipal Lawyers Association, 2018 Mid-Year seminar, Work Session I, April 20, 2018; Reasonable
Accommodations Policies and Procedures, City of Baltimore Office of the Zoning Administrator; Principles to Guide Zoning for Community
Residences for People with Disabilities in Fort Lauderdale, Florida, Daniels Lauber, AICP, February 13, 2018.
37

such housing is also permitted, capped at the maximum density allowed in the district. The Zoning
Ordinance also permits housing for individuals 55 years and older on the same lot as an approved
assisted living or convalescent care facility in the Planned Business Development District.
• All public-school students in Centreville track through the same schools regardless of residency
location within the Town. Municipal water and sewer services are ubiquitous within the Town and
no households are excluded from the benefits of this public service or facility. As documented in
Chapter VI., Community Facilities, the Town is somewhat deficient in neighborhood parks, but
this issue is applicable throughout the Town. In general, no household’s access to basic Town
services and facilities is inequitable or unfair relative to anyone else in Centreville.
• The income-restricted affordable housing project called Renaissance Chase Apartments and the
income restricted senior housing project called Tilghman Terrace are both centrally located within
the R-2 zoning district in a predominantly single-family neighborhood. The other, income
restricted housing development, Willows at Centreville, is located on Little Hut Drive in the R-3
zoning district near market rate apartments. All three developments are in walkable parts of Town
where shopping, institutions, and public services are accessible.
• The Zoning Ordinance contains planned unit development (PUD) regulations which create the
opportunity that developers will submit plans that provide a mix of housing types within future
developments. The R-3 zoning district also allows for a mixing of such housing types. Currently
however, the PUD approach, in which different housing types could be placed within the same
development, is not required.
With respect to fair housing, the above assessment indicates that the zoning ordinance does not
discriminate against persons based on race, color, religion, sex, age, national origin, familial status,
disability, sexual orientation, gender identity, marital status, and source of income. In order to “further
fair housing”, the recommendations of this Plan that address land use and housing and especially that
encourage the use of PUDs in future developments, should be followed. This can help ensure there is a
variety of housing types for persons across the income spectrum while preventing the formation of
development patterns that distribute housing (and future town residents) by income and age.
A Plan for Housing
Objectives and recommendations for land use and municipal growth are set forth elsewhere in this report,
while this Chapter’s recommendations focus mostly on 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.
38

• 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
The current Zoning Map classifies the Turpin Farm as R-3, a zoning district that allows a large variety of
housing types. The Zoning Ordinance also currently allows certain tracts to be developed as planned unit
developments or traditional neighborhood developments and both districts allow flexibility in housing
types. Taken as a whole, Centreville’s zoning allows duplexes, townhouses, apartments in combination
with commercial buildings, and stand-alone multi-family buildings. In practice, however, specific
standards 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 however and the Town should continue to
encourage a mix of housing types by reducing unwarranted regulatory obstacles where possible. 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 zones
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, which is an obstacle. Accessory apartments in
separate buildings are not allowed in the R-1 district 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 can have no adverse
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 house26.
Create an Inter-generational Housing Taskforce
A town that is intergenerational will have housing and social options that allow older residents, 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
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. As noted previously, there is a rental-assisted senior housing community in Centreville,
26 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.
39

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.
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 needs
of its residents and their family members through their full cycle of life.
40

VI. Community Facilities
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 can 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 two operating wells.
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
720,000 gpd. The facility at the Business Park has a treatment capacity of 750,000 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) with a daily average
capacity of 775,400 gpd for the month of maximum use. Current average daily use approximates 360,912
gpd. Commitments made by the Town to ongoing development projects and to ensure all lots have at
least one allocation approximate 261,688 gpd. This leaves an effective excess capacity of about 22,400
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 rate of 250 gallons per day27.
Assuming 250 gallons per day per EDU, the Town has excess capacity for 90 EDU’s28.
Public Sewerage
The Town operates a public sewerage system. It consists of a wastewater treatment plant (WWTP), five
pumping stations and distribution lines29. 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
27 This demand factor is higher than that actual per household daily use so that it provides a conservatively higher estimate of demand for
comprehensive planning purposes given the critical nature of water infrastructure.
28 At 200 gpd, a less conservative estimate, though still greater than actual household use, effective remaining capacity is 112 EDU’s.)
29 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 consists 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.
41

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.
Public Schools
There are four public schools in Centreville. As shown in Table 9, current (2020) full time enrollment
approximates 89% at Centreville Elementary, 89% at Kennard Elementary, 83% 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 the High School.
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
202030. Kennard would operate at 96.4% of capacity in 2030.
Table 9
30 Queen Anne’s County Public School Educational Facilities Master Plan, July 2021.
42

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. Town residents are well served by the library
and no capacity expansions to the building are currently planned, though it is recognized that long term
future expansions may be needed to serve the area’s growth31. 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 QAC, it
provides passive amenity open space for
residents, employees, and visitors to
downtown. The property includes the
historic courthouse building, which was
built in 1793. The other mini-park is
Nickerson Park, at 420 N. Commerce Steet
along the southern bank of Gravel, which 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 that apartment community.
Neighborhood Parks
Neighborhood parks generally serves residents within a distance ¼ to ½ mile, 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 that 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 parkland and open space amenities. The Willows at Centreville
Community along Little Hut Drive also owns and maintains neighborhood level improved parkland.
3120-year Facilities Master Plan for the Maryland Eastern Shore Libraries, Queen Anne’s County, 2013.
43

Community Parks
Community parks are larger than neighborhood parks and serve residents drawn from a larger area32.
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 QAC. The property contains 318 acres. Though not fully
improved, it contains multiple athletic fields and baseball diamonds.
Natural Resource Areas
A fourth type, natural resource areas, 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.
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 QAC. 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 Street. While, the YMCA operates as a private fee-based membership
32 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.
44

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 Marsh community park is located just to the north
of the Town. These represents substantial progress on the Town’s long-term objectives of securing
recreational assets, greenways, and trails.
The Town has a Parks Advisory Board that has developed a Master Plan for parks showing the proposed
alignments for bike trails, walking trails and greenways, which was an important source of information for
this Comprehensive Plan.33 The Town also maintains a set of proposed Design Guidelines for the
development of Parks. Later in this Chapter is a recommendation that the Master Plan and Design
Guidelines be evaluated in light of this Comprehensive Plan and incorporate its recommendations.
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 13 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 Fire Company provides fire protection and emergency services 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
Chapter III, Municipal Growth discusses the impacts that planned growth would have on the local facilities
through 2040 and notes that the capacity of municipal sewer facilities will need to be expanded and the
capacity of the high school will need to be thoughtfully tracked over the next decades. 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.
33 A current Parks Master Plan is available upon request of Town Hall
45

Objectives
• To upgrade and expand the Town’s 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 Public Water and Wastewater Treatment Capacity
The highest priority for community facilities is modernizing the WWTP and its effluent discharge capacity.
This Plan recommends that the plant be expanded as well as modernized to meet the Town’s development
goals. 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 and expanding it to 750,000
gpd, 1.0 million gpd, or 1.25 million gpd. As discussed in Chapter III, Municipal Growth, a capacity of 1.25
million gpd would be necessary to serve the Town’s forecast growth through 2040.
Extending Municipal Water and Sewerage Services
Chapter III, Municipal Growth, 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 development to the private timelines of the owners of these
tracts or even to specifically reserve capacity for them. As a matter of policy, as opportunities arise to
develop the Town in smart and sustainable ways, 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 the Growth Area irrespective of any residual 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. As development is
proposed in the Growth Area, the Town should require that each new development make a meaningful
contribution to building the municipal water and sewer systems. In each case, the details of these
contributions would be made part of a binding annexation agreement between the developer and Town
of Centreville. For example, some future annexations may be required to build new capacity within the
Town’s wastewater treatment plant while others may be required to reimburse the Town for public costs
already expended. Others may be required to deploy advanced wastewater treatment technologies such
as localized effluent treatment in combination with deep well injection. This Plan’s vision of
interconnected clusters of development set among a landscape of open spaces and forest conservation
zones, is compatible with systems-based technological advances in wastewater treatment and disposal.
46

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 the Town’s Park Advisory Board continue to update the Town's existing Park Design
Guidelines for consistency with this Comprehensive Plan. The Park Advisory Board along with the Planning
Commission should develop a review process for when new trails and parks are being designed as part of
a site plan proposal. An updated Park Plan should assess the availability of public-school grounds for
recreation, incorporate the resource conservation, land use, growth area and other recommendations
discussed throughout this Plan. The Park Advisory Board should also coordinate with Queen Anne’s
County on a regular basis in the update of the County Land Preservation, Parks, and Recreational Plan.
The Town aspires to develop a greenway and trail network along with public neighborhood parks in all
future neighborhoods. Figure 8 shows existing parks and the recommended general location of future
greenways and parks. Where greenways are shown on land to be developed, such land should be
dedicated by the developer to the Town as public resources to be preserved in perpetuity and improved
for public recreational and educational purposes and managed for environmental protection.
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
47
W harf
Park
Approx.
Alignm ent, M ill
Stream Park Trail
M ill Stream
Park
Sym phony
Village,
H O A
Courthouse G
N
reen
ickerson Park
N orth Brook,
H O A
YM CA
Approx. Alignm ent,
M ill Stream Park Trail, Phase II
G e n e ra l T o w n G re e n w
M in i P a rk , E x istin g
N e ig h b o rh o o d P a rk
E x istin g
P ro p o se d
N a tu ra l R e so u rc e A re
E x istin g
P ro p o se d
P u b lic S c h o o l
T ra ils
E x istin g T ra il
P ro g ra m m e d fo r
C o n stru c tio n
P la n n e d
G re e n w a ys
a y a n
a P a rk
d P a rk P la n
Figure 8

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 contributes 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 2030-31 school year (except
for Kennard Elementary), it is vitally important to the 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 growth and that excellent schools remain in Centreville.
48

VII. Water Resources
Introduction
This chapter addresses both the quality of the Town’s drinking water and the water quality of local
waterways. 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 Corsica River Watershed. The recommendations set forth
in Chapter IV, Land Use and Chapter VIII, Natural Environment 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
Aquia Aquifer34
Groundwater, drawn from the Aquia Greensand Formation (aquifer), is the sole source for potable water
supplies in Centreville. According to the QAC Comprehensive Water and Sewer Plan, this formation is the
most important source of groundwater in QAC, 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
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—including within the Centreville area—on a
case-by-case basis. The aquifer has a band a few miles wide within its formation wherein water exceeds
the Federal drinking water standard for arsenic. This band extends from the Prospect Bay community in
southern QAC northeast through Centreville. Centreville’s water treatment therefore requires arsenic
removal.
Public Water
Centreville operates a municipal water supply and distribution system. It consists of two operating wells.
The Town has three water storage tanks: a 200,000-gallon tank near Goodwill Fire House, a 300,000-gallon
tank on Comet Drive, and a 100,000-gallon tank in Northbrook Subdivision. 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
720,000 gpd. The facility at the Business Park has a treatment capacity of 750,000 gpd. Both include the
removal of arsenic. The entire municipal limits are served with water.
The systems' maximum extractive capacity is 645,000 gallons per day (gpd) for the month of maximum
use. Current average daily use approximates 360,912 gpd. Commitments made by the Town to ongoing
development projects and to ensure all vacant lots enrolled in the Town's vacant lot fee payment plan
have at least one allocation approximate 26,000 gpd. This leaves an effective excess capacity of about
258,088 gpd. For comprehensive planning purposes, this excess capacity can be converted into equivalent
34 The source of information on source water is the Queen Anne’s County Comprehensive Water and Sewerage Plan, 2011.
49

dwelling units (EDUs) where dwelling units are assumed to demand water at a rate of 250 gallons per
day.35 Assuming 250 gallons per day per EDU, the Town has excess capacity for 1032 EDU's.36
Corsica River Watershed and Non-Point Source Water Pollution37
The Corsica River Watershed, shown in Figure 9, 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%).
Figure 9, Source Maryland Department of Environment
The term “non-point source” refers to pollutants that are carried off the land by rainfall and washed into
streams or make their way into ground water. There is no single discharge point for these pollutants; their
sources mostly include farm fields, but also parking lots, streets, roofs, and other impervious surfaces.
Nutrients, fertilizers, sediments, bacteria, oil, and other contaminants degrade stream quality and the
Chesapeake Bay.
Nutrients are the principal contributor to poor water quality from non-point sources. The two chemical
nutrients that are most frequently associated with pollution in the Chesapeake Bay and its tributaries are
nitrogen and phosphorus. Excessive concentrations of these can grow algae and deplete oxygen making
the water unsuitable for most aquatic life. The farm fields throughout the Corsica River watershed are the
primary contributors to pollutant loadings in the Corsica River, but within town limits impervious surfaces
are the primary source.
Because non-point water pollution flows from impervious surfaces, the amount of impervious coverage
is a general indicator of the health of a watershed and its streams. When impervious coverage within a
35 The demand factor is higher than that actual per household daily use so that it provides a conservatively higher estimate of demand for
comprehensive planning purposes given the critical nature of water infrastructure.
36 At 200 gpd, a less conservative estimate, though still greater than actual household use, effective remaining capacity is 1,290 EDU's.
37 The primary source for information on the Corsica River Watershed is the report titled, Updating the Statistical Analysis of Non-Tidal Nutrient
Monitoring Data in the Corsica River Watershed, Final Report, 2019, by Carlington W. Wallace, Interstate Commission on the Potomac River
Basin for the Maryland Department of the Environment.
50

watershed exceeds 10%, the most sensitive stream qualities are lost. When coverage reaches 25 to 30%,
stream quality is generally significantly degraded. In 2016, Queen Anne’s County estimated impervious
coverage in the Corsica River watershed at only 4.5%38. This is not meant to suggest the Corsica River is in
pristine condition; it is not as non-point source runoff from farm fields overwhelms the benefits of low
imperviousness and the River is classified as an impaired waterway.
Wastewater Treatment
The Town operates a public sewerage system39. The WWTP, a point source of water pollution in the
Corsica River Watershed, is permitted to discharge an average of 542,000 gallons per day of treated
domestic wastewater, but only between December 1 and March 31. The plant discharges to Gravel Run
which is a “Use 1 Waterway” where water quality is protected for human contact and nontidal warmwater
aquatic life. The Town operates a spray irrigation system for effluent disposal year-round in combination
with the approved seasonable discharge to Gravel Run. More information on the Town’s public sewerage
system is found in Chapter VI, Community Facilities.
A Plan for Water Resources
The State of Maryland entered into the 2014 Chesapeake Bay Watershed Agreement committing to
achieve targeted reductions in the amount of pollution entering the Bay, especially nitrogen and
phosphorous by 202540. The focus is on the reduction of excess nitrogen flowing into tributary waters and
the Bay. Each of the counties in Maryland have a targeted reduction to achieve including QAC.
Centreville will contribute to the overall efforts in Queen Annes County to meet the State’s pollution
targets by minimizing the pollutant loadings generated within Town limits. Over the longer term, the Town
will work to reduce or minimize pollutant runoff through new development with Environmental Site
Design under modern stormwater management rules. It will also seek to bring about water quality
improvements by following this Plan’s recommendations including those related to open space
preservation, forest retention, the creation of stream buffers and modernization of the wastewater
treatment plant.
Objectives
1. To ensure the long-term safety and quality of Centreville’s drinking water.
2. To protect water quality of the streams in and around Centreville as the Town develops.
3. To reduce water pollution by retrofitting antiquated stormwater management, adding new green
solutions to address untreated impervious areas, planting trees, restoring stream buffers and
other approaches.
4. To encourage low impact land development (LID) techniques to the greatest extent possible to
minimize development’s impact to area water resources.
38 2022 Update, Queen Anne’s County Comprehensive Plan, Appendix D (Water Resources Element).
39 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 consists 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.
40 Maryland entered into the Agreement with the five other states, and the District of Columbia, within the Chesapeake Bay watershed and with
the United States Environmental Protection Agency.
51

Recommendations
Wellhead Protection
To optimally protect underlying water sources, the Town could, in coordination with the County,
prepare a Source Water Protection Plan and then adopt a Wellhead Protection Ordinance. Such an
ordinance works by designating zones that encompass source water protection areas and regulating
land use activities to reduce contamination risks. MDE has published a model ordinance which the Town
could customize and adopt. The other aspect of wellhead protection is to mitigate, to the extent
possible, currently identified contamination sources on the land. These potential sources would be
identified as part of the Source Water Protection Plan.
Ensure Abandoned Wells are Closed
Coordinate with the Queen Anne’s County Department of Health and the State of Maryland in ensuring
that any abandoned wells in the area are properly and permanently sealed to prevent the potential for
pollutants to enter the water supply.
Protect Remaining Forest Areas and Streams
Forests left in a natural condition are optimally suited to protect water quality both surface water (such
as Three-Bridge Branch, Gravel Run, and Mill Stream) and groundwater reserves. The Town should work
to prevent them from being cleared, graded, and developed to urban uses. As noted in the Land Use and
Municipal Growth chapters, certain parts of the Growth Area are currently forested. This Plan
recommends that, through the processes of annexation and development plan review, these forests be
protected and expanded.
This Plan aims to establish broad vegetated buffers along all streams that run through the Town and its
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 broad stream buffers be established wide enough to provide optimal water quality
improvement and preservation. Naturalized buffers play a significant role in protecting water quality.
Also, the Plan recommends that the Town plant buffers along streams that are on publicly owned
properties where feasible.
Modern Stormwater Management
Redevelopment under modern stormwater management regulations generally improves the quality and
reduces the quantity of runoff. The Town will continue to adhere to stormwater management
regulations that reduce water pollution through its agreement with QAC by which the County
administers State stormwater management and sediment and erosion control regulations within Town
limits. This Plan does recommend that in the early or conceptual parts of development site planning, the
Planning Commission guide developers to use low impact development and environmental site design.
Minimize Impervious Surfaces
Non-point water pollution refers to the chemicals, fertilizers, and sediments that wash off impervious
surfaces into streams. As previously noted about 4.5% of the watershed is now covered by buildings,
streets, driveways, and parking lots. The long-term goal of this plan is to remain under 10% as the Town
develops and expands into its growth area.
As Centreville is the only urban center in the watershed, it will impact the health of the Corsica River. To
keep the watershed from exceeding the 10% impervious coverage, while allowing responsible growth,
about 1,320 more acres of land in the watershed (the equivalent to 2.0 square miles) can ultimately be
52

converted to impervious coverage. So, over the next 20 years, as development takes place in Town and
its growth area, the Town must aim to minimize the amount of new impervious surface area created.
See Chapter III., Municipal Growth for supporting recommendations.
The Town has made strides in this regard by modifying zoning standards to allow for narrower
neighborhood streets and clustering of houses on small lots within planned unit developments (PUDs).
These efforts, reduce the length of streets and private driveways. Other methods that the Town might
consider include reducing standard parking requirements, requiring pervious materials for parking lots,
prioritizing the use of pervious materials in parks and in major developments, requiring clustering of
houses in proposed subdivisions, and incentivizing the use of green roofs and the voluntary removal of
unused or unnecessary lot coverage.
53

VIII. Natural Environment
Introduction
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.
Corsica River, Tributary Streams, and Stream Buffers
The Corsica River flows northwest about five miles from the Watson Road Bridge, which is 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 US Route 301.
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.
Floodplains
Map 5 shows the floodplains in Centreville. The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) regularly
maps the 100-year floodplains. These are areas where mapped flood elevations have a 1% chance of being
matched or exceed in any given year by flood events. Within its boundaries, the Town regulates
development activities in these floodplains through its Floodplain Management Ordinance.
The Town’s floodplains are directly associated with the Corsica and its tributary streams. It is 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 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.
The floodplain is also extensive along Front Street from Wharf Lane to and including the Centreville Wharf
Park.
54

Map 5
Wetlands
Map 5 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 Yellow Branch and Mill Streams and
are quite extensive along the Town’s
western border from Corsica Neck Road to
Mill Stream Park. Figure 10 shows the
general 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 influence.
Figure 10
55

Centreville's non-tidal wetlands, whether
populated by trees or just herbaceous
plants, provide vital basins for retaining
and filtering 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. Figure 11
shows non-tidal wetlands associated with
Gravel Run located just north of the Turpin
Farm.
Figure 11
Steep Slopes
The Town’s landscape, like the Corsica River watershed generally, is gently rolling. Steep slopes, which
are hillsides with grades of 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 5 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 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 5 also shows areas 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
these are 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 status of the Corsica River; their expansion is
vital to restoring the River’s health.
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 6).
All lands within 1,000 of the Bay, its tributaries, and tidal marshes are designated as the Critical Area.
56

Properties within the Critical Area are designated one of three categories: Intensely Developed Area,
Limited Development Area, and Resource Conservation Area41.
Intensely Developed Area (IDA): The IDA is meant for 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 water quality. This area is shown in red on Map 6. The IDA
classification does not 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
(LDA): 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 Map 6. The LDA
classification places
significant limitations on
development, requiring for
example that no more than
15% of a certain sized lots be
covered with impervious
surfaces and requiring the
protection of forests.
Resource Conservation Area
(RCA): 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 areas are
shown in green on Map 6.
Map 6
41 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 170-30. https://centreville.municipalcodeonline.com/book?type=ordinances#name=Ch_170_Art_IIIA_Critical_Areas
57

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 sea level rise as coastal communities42. However, sea level rise will impact the
Town’s tidal shorelines, wetlands, 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.
Figure 12 is a composite of two 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 exhibit on the right
shows an expanded open water scenario under the assumption that sea levels rise 2.0 feet above the year
2000 levels.
Figure 12
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. Lands at or below the
elevation of 2.1 feet are projected to be inundated. As a general guide, protecting these areas over the
next decades will become increasingly important. Sea level rise is project to continue through this century.
42 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.
58

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
remain consistent with State Critical Area law and regulations 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.
A Town Forestry Program
Town implementation of a forestry program would promote forest health and vitality and greater tree
canopy coverage by (i) creating funding mechanisms for protecting existing and future forests, (ii) planting
street trees, (iii) encouraging the voluntary planting of native tree species on public and private lands, (iv)
encouraging property owners to conserve forested areas to the extent possible, and (v) 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 145 of the Town Code. In 2021, the Planning Commission
recommended amendments to that 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
Growth Area. Where redevelopment of land is proposed or where new development is proposed on
properties containing streams, this Plan recommends that expansive stream buffers be established both
within and outside of the Critical Area. This Plan recommends that the Town amend the Zoning Ordinance
to require non-disturbance buffers of at least 100-feet wide on each side of perennial streams and 50-feet
on each side of 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.
59

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 plans, 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.
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 5 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 IX, Transportation, 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 Plan–that natural areas should
interconnect the Town as it grows, providing residents with public access to and through natural areas.
Coordinate with the Queen Anne’s County, the State, Federal Agencies, and Non-Government
Organizations
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.
There may be other opportunities over the next two decades for the Town to coordinate with others on
studies and strategies aimed at environmental improvements within the Corsica River Watershed.
60

IX. Transportation
Introduction
This section addresses existing circulation in Centreville and provides guidance on addressing future
access and circulation for the Town’s long-term development. Some streets will need to be improved and
several will need to be constructed, when the time is right, to sustain smart municipal growth and
expansion. Left unplanned and underdeveloped, the street system could become ill-equipped to handle
traffic and then development could burden residents, leading especially to gridlock within the MD Route
213 corridor and downtown.
Map 7 shows the existing street and highway system in the Centreville area and Map 8 shows the planned
street system focusing on major streets called Collectors and Primary Local streets. The alphanumeric
symbols on Map 8 corresponds 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 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. Arterial highways carry higher traffic volumes at relatively high speeds and connect Centreville
to the region. These are 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 northbound, and Liberty Street southbound. The Maryland Department
of Transportation State Highway Administration (MDOT SHA) classifies MD Route 213 as a minor arterial.
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.
MDOT SHA classifies MD Routes 18, 304, and 305 as major collectors. Major collectors collect traffic from
lesser streets and convey it to 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 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.
61

Map 7
Highway Traffic Volumes and Conditions
Table 10 shows average daily traffic volumes reported by MDOT SHA in 2000, 2010, and 2019 for the main
north-south movements through Town—that is, along MD Route 21343. 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. Table 10 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%.
Table 10 also shows that traffic within downtown has increased since 2010 most notably southbound.
Traffic on Liberty Street increased 12%, measured near Water Street, and 9% measured further south at
Church Lane. The data show that northbound (via Commerce Street) traffic volumes drop as vehicles move
toward downtown demonstrating the role that Kidwell Avenue plays in intercepting traffic before it gets
to the core of downtown. Traffic on Commerce Street at its intersection with Water Street fell by 4%
between 2010 and 2019. Peak period congestion and delay remain a recurring issue in the MD Route 213
corridor and often coincides with the release of students from area schools in the afternoon.
43 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 the MD Route 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.
62

Table 10
One of the consequences of the opening of the interchange at US Route 301 and MD Route 213 was the
introduction of a steady flow of traffic northbound into Town during peak periods. The signalized
intersection at Coursevall Drive, shown in Figure 13, was intended, in combination with the signalization
of Laser Drive, to disrupt the steady flow of travel to allow upstream traffic in downtown to dissipate.
Laser Drive, however, has not been completed nor signalized so the State’s traffic operational strategy
has not been implemented. This has complicated the unsignalized entrance into the Food Lion Shopping
Center, which MDOT SHA determined back in 2004 warranted a traffic signal. This intersection is the site
of significant delay and congestion when MD Route 213 is carrying high volumes of traffic.
Figure 13, MD Route 213 at Coursevall Drive
MD Routes 304 (Ruthsburg Road and Water Street) and 305 (Hope Road) connect to US Route 301 east of
Town. As noted above MD Route 304 intersects U.S. Route 301 at a grade-separated interchange. MD
Route 305 has been reconfigured to allow entrance onto 301 southbound only. The distribution of traffic
over time on these main east-west routes and on US Route 301 is shown in Table 11. 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
63

Table 11, Source MDOT SHA
closure of direct access to northbound 301 at that intersection, and the improved crossing provided by
the US 301/ MD 304 interchange.
MD Route 304 also extends to the west side of Downtown on an alignment made up of W. Water Street,
Chesterfield Avenue, and Corsica Neck Road. A proper and consistent comparison of traffic volumes on
this route cannot be made using MDOT 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 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 US Route
301 corridor in Delaware, which have provided a viable alternative to the more heavily travelled Interstate
Highway 95 corridor.
Local Streets
The municipal street system includes the Town’s original streets like Broadway and Lawyers Row, laid out
in the 18th century, collector streets like Kidwell Avenue and Little Kidwell Avenue, and residential streets
constructed at various stages of 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
volumes they carry, and there are no known safety or capacity issues that require rehabilitation or
roadway expansion. Because of 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 downtown are not 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 a rider. The regular
stops in Town include the Kramer Center, Acme, Tilghman Terrance, and Food Lion. Rides are available to
the public generally, as well as disabled persons and senior citizens.
64

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.
A Plan for Transportation
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 movements.
• To promote modernized street infrastructure that capitalizes on existing and emerging traffic
operational and safety technologies and supports alternative fuel vehicles.
• To promote a cost-effective and system-based holistic approach to development, Improvement,
and maintenance of Town streets.
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.
65

Map 8
When land within the Growth Area is 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 MDOT 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.
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 8 are described below.
• C-1. This minor collector would run from the planned Oak Street Extended southward and cross
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. Route 301 or 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.
66

• 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 Street 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 Route 304 providing
for the circulation needs of future mixed-use development. This allows MD Route 304 to be an
attractive parkway because commercial driveways, truck loading zones, and parking lots would
connect directly to it rather than to the MD Route 304.
• 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 scaled to the context of
the Town’s future development. They should be landscaped scenic streets 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
67

proposed Collector streets shown on Map 8 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 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.
• Figures 14-16 reflect the recommended generalized 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
direction separated by a landscape
medium could generally be sufficient in
most cases through the foreseeable
future. These images are for long term
guidance however and they help
ensure that limited street development
does not foreclose the possibility for
optimal design.
Figure 14
68

Figure 15
• 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.
Figure 16
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 MDOT SHA 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.
69

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 when 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 development tract.
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.
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 in Figure 17, “Greenway and Trail Plan”. The Town should require developers to
build multi-use trail linkages within and near their development projects using the figure as a guide. This
is relevant within the Town and in the 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
Greenway and Trail Plan
Trails
Existing Trail
Programmed for
Construction
Planned
Greenways
Figure 17
70

collector road rights-of-way or on separate alignments and ultimately would provide a greenway network
connecting residents to the Town’s park system.
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 in Figure 17 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.
71

X. Implementation
Introduction
It can be difficult to implement all the recommendations and achieve all the objectives of a
Comprehensive Plan, but significant progress can be achieved through sensible and practical actions and
a commitment to progress tracking. This chapter recommends adopting changes to zoning regulations,
preparing studies, using a capital improvements program, coordinating with the State of Maryland and
QAC to fund infrastructure and promote the planned development of the Centreville growth area, and
annual reporting by the Planning Commission.
Plan implementation in Centreville involves coordination with QAC and the State of Maryland. Queen
Anne’s County administers stormwater management review in the Town. It also administers zoning and
subdivision regulations within the Growth Area so it can play a constructive role in the long-term
development of the community. The State of Maryland is a partner in many initiatives where its interests
overlap those of the Town as discussed later in this chapter.
Zoning and Subdivision Amendments
The Centreville Zoning Ordinance and Subdivision Regulations regulate the use and development of land
within Town boundaries. The Zoning Ordinance establishes the purposes of each zoning district and
specific standards such as the maximum allowable building height, minimum lot size, and the maximum
number of dwellings per acre. The Subdivision Regulations provide standards and procedures for
subdividing land into buildable lots and laying out streets, parks, and other public improvements. Both
laws are extremely important and are amended from time to time following public hearings and
deliberations.
The Zoning Ordinance is Chapter 170 of the Town Code. The Subdivision Regulations are set forth in
Chapter 138. Amendments can help align these essential ordinances with the objectives and
recommendations of this Plan. Some amendments should be made and adopted soon after adopting this
Plan and some require more time for study, consultation with the public, and deliberation. Here are the
main topic areas to be addressed with the recommended time frames for study and adoption.
Immediate Term Amendments
These are among the main amendments that should be evaluated and adopted soon after adoption of
this Plan.
• Comprehensively amend the Zoning Map to bring it into alignment with the land use
recommendations set forth in this Comprehensive Plan, most notably Map 4, Chapter IV, Future
Land Use.
• Create the following two new zoning districts with purposes and standards in accord with this
Plan: Resource Conservation / Open Space District, and Institutional District, and eliminate the
Traditional Neighborhood Development (TND) District.
• Overhaul the current Planned Unit Development (PUD) regulations by converting the current
floating zone into a set of standards and procedures that establish master planned complete
neighborhoods as the preferred and required approach to development within residential zoning
districts.
72

• Establish stand-alone residential buildings as a permitted use within the Central Business District
(CBD).
• Consider incorporation within the Zoning Ordinance of language to require testing and
documentation of the traffic carrying capacity of streets and intersections, the adequacy of
sidewalks, pedestrian routes generally, and bikeways, and the adequacy of municipal water,
sewer, and other facilities and services as a condition precedent to development plan approval.
• Establish a required public comment period and standards for the Town to follow before it can
issue a permit to demolish any building in the CBD.
• Amend the existing common open space provisions in the Zoning Ordinance to establish a
required minimum amount of open space, a minimum amount of improved amenity open space,
and the provision of park amenities.
• Establish standards for buffers on both sides of streams of at least 100-foot wide for perennial
streams and 50-foot wide for intermittent streams and consider minimum buffers along existing
forests.
• Undertake other amendments that would improve the Zoning Ordinance and support
implementation of this Plan.
Longer Term Amendments
These are the amendments that should be evaluated and if found advisable, approved within about three
years of adopting this Comprehensive Plan.
• Amend the subdivision regulations to require the expansion and reservation of broad riparian
buffers and the reservation, improvement, and dedication of planned streets, open spaces, parks,
and school sites as a condition of subdivision approval.
• Amend the Zoning Ordinance to include the protection and preservation of the Centreville historic
district, which is on the National Register of Historic Places44.
• Amend the standards of the Zoning Ordinance that presently make it difficult to provide
compatible and affordable housing options such as duplexes, accessory apartments, and small
senior care homes.
• Adopt architectural, building, and site design guidelines and standards for development and
redevelopment specific to the Central Business District.
• Adopt new standards for public streets as recommended in Chapter IX, Transportation.
• Update regulations including the Critical Area regulations and the Floodplain Management
Ordinance for areas vulnerable to sea level rise.
44 The Centreville Historic District was listed on the United States, National Register of Historic Places on November 13, 2004. The National
Register of Historic Places is managed by the National Park Service as part of a “national program to coordinate and support public and private
efforts to identify, evaluate and protect America’s historic and archeological resources” (National Register of Historic Places (www.NPS.gov). The
District (Centreville’s downtown) was laid out during the 18th century. The inventory description of the District and a listing of the structures that
contribute to the District’s significance are provided at: https://mht.maryland.gov/nr/NRDetail.aspx?NRID=1459.
73

Water and Sewer Allocation Program
This Plan recommends that the Town Council adopt, publish, and regularly update allocation policies for
public water and sewer services immediately. As documented in Chapter VI, Community Facilities,
available water supply capacity only approximates that needed to serve 90 more dwelling units and
wastewater treatment capacity only approximates that needed to serve 144 more dwelling units. It is in
the public interest of responsible and effective growth management, fiscal well-being, and economic
development, to establish procedures for (i) continuously tracking the use of water and sewer services
against design and permit capacities and (ii) for requesting and approving allocations.
It is further recommended that the Town also immediately designate and maintain unallocated
emergency reserves of water and sewer capacities in an amount judged sufficient by the Town Council
upon consultation with its consulting engineers and the Maryland Department of the Environment.
Studies and Specific Plans
The Plan has identified challenges which require further study and coordination with the State of
Maryland and QAC, (and with residents, business owners and other stakeholders) before specific or
detailed recommendations can be made. The most pressing is the study of wastewater treatment
capacity, the design of a new wastewater treatment plant, and acquisition and outfitting of another spray
irrigation field. This study and the plan for financing necessary upgrades is underway.
Traffic Operational Study
A traffic operation study for the MD Route 213 corridor should be undertaken in coordination with the
Maryland Department of Transportation State Highway Administration MDOT SHA with the purpose of
identifying existing and future problem areas and proposing and funding solutions. The study area ought
to include MD Route 213 from the U.S. 301 interchange to the northern municipal limits and the main
intersections along this route. The streets to be studied include Commerce and Liberty Streets and those
that radiate from Downtown such as Broadway, Water Street, Chesterfield Avenue, Kidwell Avenue, Little
Kidwell Avenue, and Turpins Lane. After the initial study, this Plan recommends that traffic conditions be
continuously monitored and traffic counts along key sections and intersections be periodically updated.
Funding Mechanisms
It is advisable that the Town create a five-year Capital Improvement Program (CIP) which is a financial
planning tool for scheduling infrastructure priorities in line with available and projected revenues. A CIP
matches planned capital projects with required revenue sources, which may include general obligation
bonds, the general fund, and QAC, State, and/or Federal payments. The Town should use its CIP to
schedule the improvements recommended in this Plan and those that flow from supporting studies.
Public sewer service and water supply in Centreville are provided through an enterprise fund, which
means that operations and expansions of capacity are to be financed by new system users and grants, but
not funded through the general fund of Town government. There may be times when direct County
assistance in expanding essential facilities is desirable as the optimal way to support planned
development. This Plan recommends that the Town and County jointly study and advance strategies to
fund needed expansions of water and sewer services. After all, Centreville is a vital location for planned
growth within the overall development framework of the County.
The Town should continue to work cooperatively with the funding programs administered by State
agencies to implement key priorities. Each of these agencies has a long-term interest in promoting the
74

harmonious, prosperous, and environmentally sustainable development of Centreville. As discussed
below, this value is illuminated in the State’s overarching blueprint for economic vitality and
environmental stewardship as part of a Maryland Department of Planning program, called “A Better
Maryland.”45
Interjurisdictional Coordination
Centreville and Queen Anne’s County
Growth Area and General Planning
This Plan counts on Queen Anne’s County’s cooperation with the Town in not allowing development
activities within the Town’s Growth Area, without municipal annexation. The Town and County share
interests in the thoughtful and planned development of Centreville over the long term. The Town needs
to develop infrastructure and support patterns of growth that preserve future parkland and resource
areas, open space corridors for trails, the rights-of-way for future streets, and opportunities for the
efficient provision of emergency services, among other things. These essential goals can be blocked by
uncoordinated and unplanned development.
Queen Anne’s County in turn relies on Centreville to absorb a share of the County’s growth so that among
other things: farming areas are not converted to development or fragmented into suburban sprawl;
domestic wastewater is treated at the wastewater treatment thereby delivering water quality benefits
over the alternative of onsite private septic systems; historic investments in schools and other facilities
are optimized and school bussing costs are minimized; and County roadways are not burdened by
commuting traffic. Development in the Town’s Growth Area without annexation and Town infrastructure
would disrupt implementation of this Comprehensive Plan. This Plan recommends that the Town and
County coordinate on:
• The continual review, update, and implementation of the Queen Anne’s County Comprehensive
Water and Sewer Master Plan.
• Strategies for land preservation in the designated Greenbelt around the Growth Area.
• Preserving and acquiring open spaces for use as spray irrigation fields.
• Town review and comment on land use and development proposals within the Growth Area,
which may necessitate the preparation of a Joint Planning Agreement between the Town and
County.
• County funding assistance for municipal water and sewer facilities and wastewater treatment plan
upgrades.
• County funding assistance and cooperation in the reservation of land for and construction of
planned streets, parks, open spaces, and potential school sites.
This Plan further recommends that the separate Town and County Planning Commissions and staff meet
periodically to review implementation of their respective comprehensive plans and work to sustain
existing and develop new cooperative arrangements.
45 https://abetter.maryland.gov/plan
75

Queen Anne’s County Land Preservation, Parks, and Recreation Plan
This Plan recommends that the Town participate with QAC in its regular five-year update of the County
Land Preservation, Parks, and Recreation Plan. The plan is required by the State of Maryland for the
County, and the towns in the County, to be eligible for local Program Open Space (POS) grants. POS is a
statewide program that funds the purchase and development of parkland. In coordination with the
County, each year Centreville can submit land acquisition and park development requests for funding
consideration under the Open Space Annual Program which the County submits to the Maryland
Departments of Natural Resources and Planning for approval.
Areas of Critical State Concern
The State of Maryland has prepared and adopted a statewide plan, A Better Maryland, which seeks to
support a thriving economy and environmental stewardship throughout Maryland. The Plan’s highlight
is its commitment to collaboration between the State and local governments by providing resources and
tools for implementing long-term plans. To facilitate this collaboration, the State’s plan advances certain
“areas of critical state concern.” The most prominent for Centreville are shown in Figure 18. This
Comprehensive Plan recommends close coordination between the State and the Town.
A Continuing Planning Program
Town planning is a continuous process guided by an adopted comprehensive plan, and the primary
responsibility falls to the Planning Commission. The Centreville Planning Commission routinely reviews
site development plans and subdivision plats, and it has the authority to lead more detailed studies and
plans and advise the Town Council and the citizens of the Town on changes to zoning and other
regulations, annexations, and capital improvements. As part of its work, the Planning Commission
should also conduct a yearly assessment of growth and development and a progress report about
implementation of this Comprehensive Plan as part of its Annual Report. The Annual Report should then
be made available to Town residents, neighboring jurisdictions, and the State of Maryland.
76

Figure 18
Conclusion
The Planning Commission understands 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 as best we can
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. It is our goal that this comprehensive
plan update, which is but one in a long series of Centreville Comprehensive Plans, points the Town in the
direction of a sustainable and prosperous future. ***
77

Annex: Enlarged Maps
78