Publications

The objective of this study, commissioned by the Prince George’s County Planning Department of the Maryland-National Capital Park and Planning Commission (M-NCPPC), is to provide policy/decision makers with a better understanding of occupational changes and workforce development needs and to develop a strategy to meet these needs and promote regional growth and business development. To carry out the analysis, M-NCPPC retained the services of the Battelle Technology Partnership Practice, working together with the University of Baltimore’s Jacob France Institute and Market-Economics, Inc. The analysis undertaken included both in-depth quantitative assessments of industry workforce demand and labor supply in the county, along with outreach to industry, educational institutions, and government and economic development leaders encompassing one-on-one interviews and focus groups.

Related Documents:

A-Study-of-Occupational-Shifts-and-Workforce-Characteristics-for-Prince-Georges-County

This general plan for the physical development of the Maryland-Washington Regional District in Montgomery and Prince George’s Counties was adopted pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 780, Laws of Maryland, 1958, as amended, by resolution of January 22, 1964 after 8 duly advertised public hearings held between January 3, 1963 and February 28, 1963.

Related Documents:

Front Matter Introduction Part 1-Goals Part 2-Zoning Part 3-Trends part4 part5 Table of Contents Why

The Maryland-National Capital Park and Planning Commission (M-NCPPC), recognizing the value of 3D modeling and Planning Decision Support Systems (PDSS) as well as the challenges involved with implementing these tools, issued an RFP for a “Plan for Capacity Building Using 3D Modeling Applications & Planning Decision Support Systems” for the Prince George’s County Planning Department. The RFP stipulated that the Plan included an in-depth needs assessment of the Department, an evaluation of available tools, and a survey documenting the use of 3D modeling and PDSS tools by other planning departments across the nation. As a resource for other planning agencies, the first half of the report is available for download using the links below. The posted chapters summarize the findings and recommendations of the report (Chapter 1), give an overview of the methodology used (Chapter 2), document the results and findings of the national online survey and agency interviews (Chapter 3), and describe and evaluate many of the leading tools in the industry (as of early 2010, Chapter 4).

Related Documents:

Plan for Capacity Building

This report is the second part of a multiyear study of the rural village of Piscataway. The first part, published in 1991, documented the history of the village, defined its unique character, and proposed design concepts and methods to protect its rural and historic qualities. The purpose of this report is to provide detailed design guidelines to assist the residents of the community in protecting the character of the village. The study was begun in late 1991, and completed in February 1995. This report, as well as the earlier study, was requested by the Historic Preservation Group of the Piscataway Citizens’ Association. The historic Village of Piscataway is located in the southwest portion of Prince George’s County, on Floral Park Road between Livingston Road and Piscataway Road. Of the remaining buildings, the earliest date from the mid-eighteenth century and the most recent from the first half of the twentieth century, all of which retain their significant architectural detail. This report is divided into four primary sections: Background, Historic Preservation in Piscataway, Village Design Guidelines and Conclusions. The report includes a summary of the historical development of Piscataway, an analysis of the village’s existing character, and an overview of existing development regulations and recent development proposals. It also includes an examination of existing preservation regulations affecting the village, as well as a building-by-building review of the village’s historic resources. Design Guidelines are provided for general maintenance, rehabilitation, additions, site improvements, new construction and streetscape improvements. The report concludes with a list of additional measures for protecting the character of Piscataway. The report is supplemented with photographs, maps and illustrations.

Related Documents:

Piscataway Village Rural Conservation Study February 1995

This report details the findings of a study on the 18th century village of Piscataway, requested by the Piscataway Citizens Association. The goals of the project were 1) to document the history of the village, using land records research and early maps to define the extent and size of the village since its establishment; 2) to define the character of the village; 3) to propose design concepts to guide new construction in order to retain village character; and 4) to propose methods to help retain a buffer zone around the village and the open space within the village. This report begins with a history of Piscataway, including its significance as a port and government tobacco inspection location during the 18th century, and a documentation of the location of its schools and post office. Next, the existing conditions within the village are described and the historic, rural character of the village defined. The architecture of the buildings within the village is discussed and analyzed. Design concepts for sympathetic new construction within the village are proposed and strategies for protection of the open space within and around the village are offered. The report is supplemented by photographs and maps.

Related Documents:

Piscataway Rural Conservation Study June 1991

This document is the third party of a multiyear study of the rural village of Piscataway, located in south Prince George’s County on Floral Park Road between Livingston Road and Piscataway Road. T1 report, published in July 1991, documented the history of the village, defined its unique character proposed design concepts and methods to protect its rural and historic qualities. The second report, put in February 1995, provided detailed architectural design guidelines to assist the residents of the com in protecting the character of the village. The third part of the study continued the previous efforts in : of community visioning workshops with local residents. Through a collaborative approach with parti< the workshops used drawings, photographs, images and charts to develop a consensus about the conm visual and physical qualities. This report documents the community visioning process undertake February to June 1995. This report is divided into seven sections, with each section documenting one of the community vi workshops. A process chart illustrating the chronology of the seven workshops is included in this doc The structure of the workshops was organized around the following broad categories: History and Inv Analysis, Alternatives, Implementation and Next Steps. Each section begins with the meeting minutes j workshop, followed by charts, sketches, maps and diagrams relating to the topics discussed by the we participants. Several workshops focused on identifying and analyzing the physical design features wit village. Topics included village integrity/character, infill development, open space, a "community" center, gateways, landscape setting, streetscape elements and circulation patterns. Other workshop disc concentrated on methods for protection of historic resources, implementation strategies and funding ( Products of the visioning workshops included design guidelines, landscape master plan recommendation< an implementation strategy chart. The letter requesting this work effort from the Piscataway Historic Preservation Group is included document. The project was carried out under the Planning Department's FY 1995 Community Preset and Design Workshops Work Program.

Related Documents:

Picataway Village Community Vision Process June 1995

During the 1996 celebration of the county’s Tricentennial, the Maryland-National Capital Park and Planning Commission published the African-American Heritage Survey. The publication documented 107 historic properties and 14 historic communities of significance to Prince George’s County African-American history and heritage including residences, schools and lodge halls, churches and cemeteries, and urban and rural communities.The interviews are filled with rich detail about day-to-day life in Prince George’s County and will assist in the efforts of many groups to document and perpetuate the county’s African-American heritage for future generations.

Related Documents:

AA Heritage Survey

Located just inside the Capital Beltway and south of Branch Avenue (MD 5), the St. Barnabas-Beech Road study area encompasses a strip commercial corridor and a small industrial center flanked by mid-to-late twentieth century residential and commercial development. As with many of the county’s post-World War II commercial areas, new investment has moved away from St. Barnabas Road to farther-out suburbs, leaving behind obsolete commercial buildings, older infrastructure, and a corridor designed primarily for automobiles. The Beech Road industrial area has fared somewhat better since its development in the 1950s, but the proximity of residential development and the southern barrier of Henson Creek and the Capital Beltway has limited the expansion of industrial uses. Many of the industrial area properties also contain older structures, and its public infrastructure shows signs of deterioration. Additionally, development standards of previous decades have created an area with minimal landscaping and screening of operations areas.

Related Documents:

St Barnabas Ind Study

The Information Center of the Prince George’s County Planning Department of The Maryland-National Capital Park and Planning Commission engaged the ProMatura Group, LLCto conduct an analysis of the senior housing market in Prince George’s County.

Related Documents:

Part 1- Overview Part 2 - Trends in Age-Qualified Housing Part 3. Age-Qualified Service-Enriched 05 09 06 BW2 Part 4. Age-Qualified Active Adult Part 5. The Active Adult Market Part 6. Estimates of Demand Part 7a - Prospective Locations 05 09 07 Part 7b Prospective Locations 05 09 07 Part 8. Conditions for Active Adult Development

From October 1, 1986 through September 30, 1987, the Prince George’s County Historic Preservation staff conducted a field survey of Sears, Roebuck and Company mail-order houses in the County. The Sears, Roebuck mail-order house survey and a companion study of Victorian pattern book houses in Prince George’s County were comp orients of ongoing research projects of the Prince George’s County Historic Preservation Commission, implemented by the Planning Department of M-NCPPC with a matching grant from the Certified Local Government program of the Maryland Historical Trust. This survey of Sears mail-order houses was conducted with the advice and ongoing involvement of Raymond W. Bellamy, Jr., Cheverly Town Historian and Prince George’s County Historic Preservation Commissioner from September 1986 through January 1989. Mr. Bellamy became knowledgeable about Sears mail-order houses through his study of the 25 models constructed in the Town of Cheverly. His extensive research on those structures is incorporated into this report. I would like to acknowledge his help and thank him for his assistance on this project. Thanks also goes to the many Sears mail-order house owners who supplied information on their houses for this study, and to members of the Prince George’s County Historical Society who “found” and reported on Sears houses in the County for this study. The eighty-two Sears mail-order houses identified during this survey are not the total number of Sears houses standing in the County. More have been identified since this study’s completion. Identification and cataloging of Sears and other mail-order houses in the County will be an ongoing project of the Historic Preservation Commission. Some original drawings and text in this report are from Houses by Mail, by Katherine Cole Stevenson and H. Ward Jandl. These include pages 30, 34, 39, 42, 43, 45, 47, 49, 54, 56, 60, 64, 67, 70, 72, 74, 76, 77, 79, 83, 89, 91, 93, 95, 100, 102, 104, 105, 107, 109 and 111 of this study. These pages are reproduced with the permission of the Preservation Press of the National Trust for Historic Preservation. Prints of the above pages can be ordered from the Preservation Press at a cost of $10 for each print. Contact Chris O’Neil at (202) 673-4057.

Related Documents: