Streamlining Development Review Work Group Meeting – June 11, 2026

The fourth meeting of the Streamlining Development Review Work Group was held on June 11, 2026, from approximately 1:15 PM to 3:00 PM. Members discussed the first draft of recommendations, debated the need for additional data and input from the Planning Department and Council Chair Oriada, and reviewed several specific proposals. No formal votes were taken, but several items were left for consideration at a future meeting.

Discussion Items

• Committee Composition and Data Needs

  • Mr. Smith raised concerns that the work group is heavily weighted toward the development community, with limited representation from civic, environmental, or public health groups. He argued that the group lacks sufficient data on why reviews take longer in Prince George's County compared to other jurisdictions, including staffing levels, applicant errors, and remand impacts.
  • Ms. Camp and Ms. Baristolo suggested waiting for input from the Planning Department and Council Chair Oriada before finalizing recommendations, especially given potential budget cuts to park and planning capacity.
  • Mr. Tedesco noted that the committee was statutorily created to streamline the process, and the composition is outside the group's control.
  • Ms. McNeil provided anecdotal evidence that remands can add six months to project timelines, even when no application deficiencies exist.

• Combined Preliminary Plan and Detailed Site Plan Application

  • Mr. Villegas and Mr. Tedesco proposed allowing preliminary plans and detailed site plans to be submitted as a single combined application, rather than just concurrent filings. They argued that the new subdivision regulations have created overlapping requirements that could be consolidated.
  • Several members (Mr. Villegas, Mr. Tedesco, Mr. Benton, and others) expressed support. Mr. Smith raised concerns about collapsing public review steps and cited a court case that distinguished planning and zoning processes. Mr. Villegas responded that the current code has already blended those processes, making consolidation appropriate.
  • No decision was made; the item was left for consideration.

• Natural Resource Inventory (NRI) and Floodplain Delineation Review

  • The recommendation proposed allowing NRI review to begin while floodplain delineation is under review, rather than requiring sequential approval. Mr. Jim Campbell initially questioned the logic, but Mr. Alex clarified that currently an approved floodplain delineation by DPI is required before Park and Planning will accept an NRI application, causing delays.
  • Mr. Smith asked about public notice and transparency implications. Others argued this would streamline the process without harming public input. Mr. Smith did not take a firm position pending more information.
  • The item was left for consideration.

• Pre-Application Requirements – Conceptual Boundary Exhibits and Mailing Lists

  • The recommendation proposed accepting conceptual boundary exhibits instead of finalized surveys for pre-application review and releasing mailing lists earlier to allow concurrent community outreach. Mr. Alex noted that a final boundary survey can take three to six months, delaying case numbers and community notification.
  • Mr. Smith questioned neighborhood meeting timing, but others argued this would accelerate early outreach without sacrificing meaningful information.
  • The item was left for consideration.

• Document Posting and Future Meetings

  • Mr. Smith noted that many presentations from staff were not posted on the council's website. The facilitator acknowledged the issue and promised to email the documents and upload them.
  • The group agreed to hold at least two more meetings. The next meeting will include Council Chair Oriada.

Key Outcomes

• No formal votes or decisions were made. All discussed recommendations were left “for consideration” pending further review and input from Council Chair Oriada and the Planning Department.
• The facilitator will compile duplicate recommendations and circulate an updated list via email.
• The next work group meeting is scheduled for the following week (date not specified) with the expectation that Council Chair Oriada will attend.
• Documents from the Planning Department will be posted to the council website as soon as technical issues are resolved.
• The group will continue to review recommendations and may hold a voting session on June 24, 2026, though this was not confirmed.