Joint Public Hearing on Central Branch Avenue Sector Plan Amendment and Sectional Map Amendment – 2026-06-29
Joint Public Hearing on Central Branch Avenue Sector Plan Amendment and Sectional Map Amendment – 2026-06-29
On 2026-06-29 (June 29, 2026), the Prince George's County Council, sitting as the District Council, and the Prince George's County Planning Board of the Maryland-National Capital Park and Planning Commission (M-NCPPC) held a joint public hearing on CR-035-2026, a preliminary minor plan amendment (MPA) to the 2013 approved Central Branch Avenue Corridor Revitalization Sector Plan and a proposed concurrent sectional map amendment (SMA). The MPA would codify recommendations from the 2026 Medical Innovation District Feasibility Study and correct sector plan boundaries; the SMA proposes 43 zoning changes across planning areas 76A, 76B, and 81A. The hearing agenda listed a 6:00 p.m. start; the minutes state the meeting was convened at 6:14 p.m. and the joint hearing at 6:11 p.m., with nine council members present. Chair Krystal Oriadha and Council Member Edward Burroughs arrived at 6:19 p.m.; Council Members Wala Blegay and Wanika Fisher were absent. Planning Board Vice-Chair Dr. Billy Okoye and Commissioners Brittany Jenkins and Lori Matthews were present. The public record will remain open until 5:00 p.m. on Tuesday, July 14, 2026.
Staff Presentation & Procedural Overview
- Vice Chair Eric Olson presided and explained that the District Council initiated the MPA and concurrent SMA on May 5, 2026 through CR-035-2026, with notices mailed in May 2026 to property owners affected by proposed zoning changes and a legal ad published in the papers of record.
- Michael Calomese, M-NCPPC project manager, presented the staff proposal. He described the 2013 sector plan's six focus areas — Beach Road, Allentown Road, Suitland Road, Camp Springs, Coventry Way, Clinton Commercial Core, and Southern Maryland Hospital Center — and four proposed future Southern Maryland Rapid Transit (SMRT) stations.
- Calomese explained that the 2013 plan was adopted without a concurrent SMA. After the county zoning rewrite (2018) and countywide map amendment (2021), the proposed SMA is intended to close the gap between plan policies and zoning on the ground.
- The MPA incorporates the 2026 Medical Innovation District Feasibility Study, launched in spring 2025 after 2024 community engagement showed resident support for an innovation district around MedStar Southern Maryland Hospital Center. The study was finalized in 2026 and was informed by land-use and market analyses, institutional interviews, a survey, and open houses.
- Staff used a five-step methodology for the SMA: (1) check for approved development applications; (2) follow explicit zoning recommendations in the 2013 plan; (3) reconcile conflicts between approved future land use and existing zoning; (4) avoid creating or resolve non-conforming uses where feasible; and (5) resolve split-zoned properties where feasible.
- The proposed 43 zoning changes are intended to concentrate density near future SMRT stations, increase open-space zoning, expand economic development opportunities, and shift from auto-oriented uses toward neighborhood-serving retail.
Public Comments & Testimony
No elected or appointed officials testified. The following public speakers registered:
- Peter Goldsmith, attorney for Lincoln Avenue Communities, requested that 4500 St. Barnabas Road be removed from proposed zoning change BR2 and retain CGO zoning because the proposed CN zone would not allow apartment housing for the elderly. He said Lincoln Avenue is developing a 72-unit senior housing community, Holly Place, in Temple Hills and that the project is midstream; he noted the committee of the whole passed two financing resolutions for Holly Place earlier that day.
- Matthew Tedesco, attorney for property owners including 4500 St. Barnabas LLC and MVK Enterprises, aligned with Goldsmith on 4500 St. Barnabas Road and argued the CN zone would narrow permitted uses and reduce long-term economic potential. On behalf of MVK Enterprises, he said the Chem Met Company at 641 Yulkinson Place in Clinton has operated since 1950 and is currently IH-zoned; the proposed CGO zone would make its long-established manufacturing use non-conforming, limiting long-term certainty. He asked that the properties retain their current zoning.
- Delanta Harrison, president of the Camp Springs Civic Association, encouraged council members to reach out to civic associations and present the proposal to the community before it becomes widely known, saying things change and community leaders have changed.
- Victor Fox, owner of the Kemet Company in Clinton, opposed the proposed CGO rezoning. He said the third-generation business has been at the same location for 76 years, manufactures critical materials for the industrial and defense base, supports local employment, and intends to expand; he called creating non-conforming uses "anti-business" and said the change would put him out of business.
- Blady McKispey, speaking with Johnny Marconi for Marconi Motors LLC, opposed the proposed change from commercial services (CS) to commercial general/office (CGO) for a licensed wholesale motor vehicle dealership at 6811 Old Alexandria Ferry Road in Clinton. He said the business has operated since 2018, is in a county approval process to build a new garage, and is surrounded by automotive-related businesses; the rezoning would harm expansion plans.
- Alejandra Hogans, owner of property at 6A07 Old Alexandria Ferry Road (as transcribed), opposed the proposed CS-to-CGO change. She said she purchased the property because CS zoning allowed her planned tire shop, that planning staff had told her a tire shop was allowed, and that the change would hurt her women-owned business.
- Scott Mona, owner of 7905 and 7915 Malcolm Road in Clinton, supported the proposed CS-to-CGO rezoning for his two office buildings (80,000 square feet, owned and operated by his family for over 40 years). He said CGO would provide flexibility for long-term repositioning and better align with the Branch Avenue corridor.
- Blaze Miller, president of BK Miller Meats and Liquors at 9024 Old Branch Avenue, opposed the rezoning. He said the 113-year-old business paid $76,000 in property taxes last year, employs 42 Prince George's County residents, attracts customers from Virginia, DC, and Baltimore, and that his adjacent property at 916 Old Branch Avenue, leased as a cleaners to a young female business owner, would become non-conforming.
- Richard Clifton of 9211 Brandywine Road opposed the proposed change from multifamily to single-family zoning. He said the house was built by his father 69 years ago on property from his grandfather B.K. Miller, that townhouses have been approved around it, and that a DPIE letter proposed road widening with two additional lanes. He said the zoning change would make the property 30 to 70 percent less valuable, and he also spoke for his 98-year-old aunt Mary Ann, who lives next door.
- Kevin Chen, speaking for his family as owners of 8909 Old Branch Avenue in Clinton, opposed the proposed residential single-family rezoning. He said the family leased the property in October 2025 to Dr. Mark Major of The Medical Home, a physician who made substantial personal and financial investments to open a medical practice; the rezoning would force him to abandon those investments before seeing his first patient.
- Abdullah Hijazi, attorney for Czar Sons LLC, opposed the proposed CS-to-CGO change for Zarvo Motors, a family-owned car dealership at 5511 Allentown Road and the corner of Allentown Road and Brown Road. He said the owners purchased the property less than a year ago for $1.6 million, including a $1.2 million loan, a $400,000 deposit, tens of thousands of dollars in renovations, and over $1 million in inventory; the change would make the use non-conforming. He argued there is no need for additional office space in that area and that office use is already permitted under CS.
- Ting Chu Tian, owner/landlord of property at 9000 Old Branch Avenue (as transcribed), opposed the change from commercial to commercial neighborhood. He said his business has operated for over ten years and that small business owners in Clinton have invested significant money and effort; he asked why the zoning was being changed.
- Sandy Hubbard, a new commercial property owner in Clinton with two salon properties, opposed the proposed CS-to-CGO change. She said the zoning change would increase permits and regulation, harm her small business, and hinder her ability to attract a tenant for a building renovated last year.
Discussion Items
- Council Member Edward Burroughs (District 8) asked staff whether they had considered presenting the proposal to the Camp Springs Civic Association, saying Camp Springs residents should not miss the opportunity to weigh in. He noted that Camp Springs was originally envisioned as an arts district but ended up with many gas stations, and he offered to work with staff to present the proposed Camp Springs zoning changes to the community so promised development is realized.
- Michael Calomese responded that the MPA process was intended as a minor plan amendment, not a reopening of the 2013 plan, but he did not rule out outreach to the civic association.
Key Outcomes
- The joint public hearing was held; no substantive votes were taken on the MPA or SMA.
- The public record will close at 5:00 p.m. on Tuesday, July 14, 2026. Written comments may be submitted through the Council's eComment portal, by email, or by fax; testimony is not accepted via social media, U.S. mail, or telephone/voicemail. Speakers in favor of zoning intensification who did not file the required affidavit 30 days before the hearing may still submit an affidavit and written testimony before the record closes.
- The Planning Board is expected to hold a work session and take action in September 2026; the District Council will hold a work session in the fall, with final action likely in October 2026.
- The meeting adjourned at 7:08 p.m. on a motion by Vice Chair Olson, seconded by Council Member Adams, carried unanimously by the nine members present; Blegay and Fisher were absent.
Meeting Transcript
Good evening. Um this is the June 29th, 2026 joint public hearing on the preliminary minor plan amendment and proposed sectional map amendment to the 2013 approved Central Branch Avenue Corridor Revitalization Sector Plan. Um, on behalf of the Prince George's County Council and the Prince George's County Planning Board of the Maryland National Capital Park and Planning Commission. I'd like to welcome you to this public hearing on the preliminary minor plan amendment and proposed sectional map amendment to the 2013 approved Central Branch Avenue Quarter Revitalization Sector Sector Plan. I'm Eric Olson, Vice Chair of the County Council. Um the County Council sitting as the District Council and the Planning Board are jointly holding this hearing to obtain public comments on the preliminary minor plan amendment and proposed sectional map amendment to the 2013 approved Central Branch Avenue Corridor Revitalization Sector Plan. I'd like to take a moment to ask each of my colleagues to introduce themselves and indicate which council district they serve, and then we will have the planning board members introduce themselves. Let me turn to my left. Good evening. I'm Connie Council Member Timothy J. Adams and I represent District 4. Good evening. I'm Councilwoman Danielle Hunter, representing District 6. Good evening. My name is Sidney Harrison. I represent County Council District 9. Hello, I'm County Councilwoman Sheila Adam Staffordin. I represent District 5. Good evening, Tom Denoga, Council District 1. Hi, I'm Jolene Ivey. I represent the whole county. I'm an at large member. Okay, we'll go to the Planning Board. Manuel Geraldo. Good evening, everybody. Billy O'Coyen, Planning Board. Good evening, everyone. Lori Matthews, Commissioner, Planning Board. Good evening, Brittany Jenkins, Commissioner Planning Board. Okay, thank you. Uh the testimony you will hear and provide tonight is part of an ongoing process that will lead to an amended sector plan and new sectional map amendment for portions of planning areas 76A, 76B, and 81A. The district council initiated the minor plan amendment to the 2013 sector plan with concurrent sectional map amendment on May 5th, 2026 through the approval of CR 35 2026. Notice of today's hearing was mailed in May 2026 to all owners of property for which is a change in zoning is proposed. Additionally, a legal ad ran in the papers of record further publicizing this hearing. The preliminary minor plan amendment and proposed sectional map amendment we are considering this evening modifies recommendations in the 2013 sector plan for the Southern Maryland Hospital Center Focus Area to include recommendations from the 2026 Medical Innovation District Feasibility Study. The medical innovation district feasibility study was prepared with input from local residents, education and health science professionals, workforce and economic development leaders, and nationally recognized experts in medical innovation districts and mixed use development. These stakeholders participated in a variety of in-person and virtual meetings to inform and guide the planning department in refining the goals, policies, and strategies of the proposed medical innovation district. In addition, the preliminary minor plan amendment modifies certain maps and tables to accurately reflect the boundaries of the sector plan area. The preliminary minor plan amendment to the 2013 approved secret Central Branch Avenue Corridor Revitalization Sector Plan is accompanied by a concurrent proposed sectional map amendment, which recommends 43 zoning changes necessary to implement this plan. The proposed sectional map amendment will amend the county zoning map for portions of planning areas 76A, 76B, and 81A. Now let me provide some information regarding the joint public hearing to ensure compliance with the law. If you intend to speak tonight in favor of an intensification of zoning and you did not file the affidavit form 30 days in advance of today's date, you will not be permitted to speak on this issue. However, you still have an opportunity to complete and submit an affidavit and submit your request or testimony in writing and file it with the clerk of the council prior to the close of the record on Tuesday, July 14th, 2026, 15 days after the hearing. Your testimony will then be considered part of the record. Testimony must be submitted by this date to be considered part of the record. Affidavits that have already been submitted are still valid and do not need to be resubmitted. If you wish to submit written remarks to supplement testimony you may give tonight or prefer submitting written comments, please submit your comments via the council's e-comment portal, email address, or fax number found in the legal notice and on today's agenda. Testimony and comments will not be accepted via social media, U.S. mail, or by telephone or voicemail message. To allow everyone a chance to speak, we are requesting that comments be limited to two minutes per speaker.
openpublica.com