Meeting colors

OPENPUBLICA · PUBLIC MEETING RECORD

Record of Proceedings

Committee of the Whole: Subregion 5 Master Plan & SMA – September 15, 2026

County Council & Boards — Tuesday, September 15, 2026

BodyPrince Georges County, Maryland

SessionCounty Council & Boards

DateTuesday, September 15, 2026

StatusFILED

Video Record

0:00 / 40:23

Transcript — VerbatimClick a timed line to jump · ⧉ to share it

0:01

All right, colleagues.

0:04

We have returned and now are in committee of the whole.

0:07

Again, today is Tuesday, September 15th.

0:10

Clerk, can I have a roll call?

0:14

Madam Chair.

0:15

Here.

0:16

Mr.

0:16

Adams.

0:17

Here.

0:19

Mr.

0:20

Adams staff from your stepped away.

0:22

Ms.

0:22

Blagay.

0:24

Present.

0:26

Mr.

0:27

Danoga.

0:29

Ms.

0:30

Fisher.

0:31

Present.

0:32

Mr.

0:33

Harrison.

0:35

Present.

0:36

Ms.

0:37

Hunton.

0:38

Here.

0:39

Miss Ivy.

0:40

Here.

0:41

Vice Chair Olson.

0:42

Here.

0:44

Non members present at Roll Call.

0:46

Thank you.

0:47

Now we have transcript analysis, minor amendment to the 2013 approved sub-region 5 master plan and sectional map amendment and proposed sectional map amendment CR 282, excuse me, 26.

1:01

Pass it to staff for an overview.

1:05

Good morning, Madam Chair, members of the committee.

1:07

Karen Zabaco is here.

1:10

Is one of the winding up steps in the statutory process related to minor amendments to an approved plan for an area as well as sectional map amendment, which is a comprehensive zoning plan.

1:28

If it recall in April and you adopted initiation initiating resolution directing the planning board to prepare this minor amendment to the sub-region five master plan and sectional map amendment, which is enclosed entirely in Councilmatic District 9.

1:46

Uh within that resolution, we advertised that there would be a joint public hearing on the proposed changes that was held on June the 9th before yourselves and the planning board.

1:58

After that, the record closed, staff went back, summarized, digested the testimony, presented it to planning board with their feedback on what they thought the planning board might want to do with it.

2:11

Thereafter, on September the third, the planning board considered uh all of that, and they adopted and endorsed the proposed changes to the approved sector, excuse me, master plan and the sectional map amendment and transmitted it to you.

2:29

We're here today to hear what we got in the record of public hearing testimony, what staff thought of it and how planning board reacted, and ultimately look to this body for direction on how to approve, disapprove, or send out for another public hearing this proposed minor amendment.

2:49

The council, I might want to add, has 90 days from the date that the planning board transmitted, which is on or about the 4th of September.

2:57

So you got 90 days from there.

2:59

So there you are.

3:04

Good morning, Chair Oriada and members of the district council.

3:08

My name is Corey Arsenal with the planning department.

3:10

I'm the project manager for the sub-region 5 minor plan amendment and sectional map amendment project.

3:16

I'm joined today by Michael Calamis, the deputy project manager.

3:19

Today's presentation should be viewed as an open dialogue.

3:23

We welcome questions from the council on the active slide at any point.

3:26

You do not need to wait until the end.

3:29

If I can get the presentation on screen.

3:57

So here's the agenda for today's work session.

3:59

First, Michael walked through how we arrived at this point in the process.

4:03

Second, we will highlight the changes adopted and endorsed by the planning board in response to the key issues raised in testimony.

4:10

And finally, we'll close the proposed schedule and next steps.

4:13

Now I'll pass the presentation over to Michael.

4:17

Thank you, Corey.

4:18

Next slide, please.

4:21

This slide summarizes the key milestones since the launch of this project in the fall of 2025.

Discussion Breakdown — Share of Meeting

Zoning And Land Use█████████████████████████████████████████████57%

Procedural████████████████20%

Affordable Housing██████8%

Historic Preservation████5%

Transportation Safety███4%

Community Engagement██3%

Economic Development██3%

Summary of Proceedings

Committee of the Whole Meeting on Subregion 5 Minor Master Plan Amendment and Sectional Map Amendment – September 15, 2026

The Prince George's County Council, sitting as the Committee of the Whole, met on Tuesday, September 15, 2026, from 11:12 a.m. to 11:53 a.m. to consider the Minor Amendment to the 2013 Approved Subregion 5 Master Plan and the associated Sectional Map Amendment (SMA) (CR-028-2026). The meeting focused on a staff presentation summarizing public testimony, Planning Board recommendations, and council deliberation leading to two separate votes. The plan area lies entirely within Council District 9.

Public Comments & Testimony

Thirteen speakers provided verbal testimony at the June 9, 2026 joint public hearing, generating over 32 pages of transcribed testimony. Additionally, 40 pieces of written testimony were received.
Testimony covered land use, environment, transportation, public facilities, and historic preservation, but not economic development.
While some testimony opposed specific rezonings (e.g., zoning changes 3, 4, 12, and 13), most testimony requested additional rezonings—often for higher density residential, industrial, or scattered commercial zones in rural and agricultural areas.

Discussion Items

Staff Presentation: Korey Arsenault (Project Manager, M-NCPPC) and Michael Calomese (Deputy Project Manager) presented the process, key themes of the minor plan amendment (reimagining Brandywine as a transit-oriented hub, enhancing transit for the Southern Maryland Rapid Transit Line, concentrating retail at Akakeek Village, supporting the Medical Innovation District, and promoting agricultural preservation). The proposed SMA included 15 targeted zoning changes affecting less than 1% of the plan area.
Planning Board Actions (September 3, 2026): The Planning Board adopted the minor plan amendment and endorsed the SMA with three modifications:
- Reduced the extent of zoning change 3 (commercial zoning at Akakeek Village) to create a more compact village scale.
- Deleted zoning change 4 (multifamily housing at Akakeek Village) due to opposition.
- Rezoned certain properties along Piscataway Road from AR/RR to RSF-95 to support single-family detached homes.
Clerical Error: Staff identified a minor error in the Planning Board’s resolution regarding tax account numbers for zoning changes 15 and 16 (three omitted numbers and one wrongly included). A correction was recommended.
Councilmember Harrison's Proposed Revisions: Councilmember Harrison moved to direct staff to prepare a resolution of approval for the SMA with four additional revisions:
1. Add a new strategy to the minor plan amendment based on Exhibit 28 to rezone the Dyson property to the RSFA zone.
2. Direct staff to evaluate a parcel (currently in the TACE zone) for potential IE (Industrial Employment) zoning, related to the Timothy Branch road and Brandywine Town Center connectivity.
3. (Implied from context) Possibly include a correction for tax account numbers—though Harrison also explicitly called for correcting the error on tax account numbers for endorsed zoning changes 15 and 16 (Parker properties).
4. (The fourth revision was not separately enumerated but was understood as part of the motion; the motion described “four revisions” including the above and the correction of the SMA resolution error.)
Council Discussion: Councilmember Adams requested clarification on the Timothy Branch property. Councilmember Oriadha stated she would abstain because she needed more time to digest the individual amendments.

Key Outcomes

First Motion (Sectional Map Amendment): A motion by Councilmember Harrison, seconded by Councilmember Ivey, to direct staff to prepare a resolution of approval for the SMA with the four revisions (including staff’s noted correction) and in accordance with the Planning Board’s endorsements. Passed 8-0-1 (Ayes: Olson, Adams-Stafford, Blegay, Dernoga, Harrison, Ivey, Hunter, Adams; Nay: 0; Abstain: Oriadha; Absent: Burroughs and Fisher).
Second Motion (Master Plan Amendment): A motion by Councilmember Harrison, seconded by Councilmember Hunter, to direct staff to prepare a resolution of approval for the minor master plan amendment in accordance with the Planning Board’s adopted recommendations. Passed 8-0-1 (same vote tally).
Next Steps: Staff will draft resolutions incorporating the council’s directions. The council has 90 days from the Planning Board’s transmittal (September 4, 2026) to take final action.

Meeting Transcript

All right, colleagues. We have returned and now are in committee of the whole. Again, today is Tuesday, September 15th. Clerk, can I have a roll call? Madam Chair. Here. Mr. Adams. Here. Mr. Adams staff from your stepped away. Ms. Blagay. Present. Mr. Danoga. Ms. Fisher. Present. Mr. Harrison. Present. Ms. Hunton. Here. Miss Ivy. Here. Vice Chair Olson. Here. Non members present at Roll Call. Thank you. Now we have transcript analysis, minor amendment to the 2013 approved sub-region 5 master plan and sectional map amendment and proposed sectional map amendment CR 282, excuse me, 26. Pass it to staff for an overview. Good morning, Madam Chair, members of the committee. Karen Zabaco is here. Is one of the winding up steps in the statutory process related to minor amendments to an approved plan for an area as well as sectional map amendment, which is a comprehensive zoning plan. If it recall in April and you adopted initiation initiating resolution directing the planning board to prepare this minor amendment to the sub-region five master plan and sectional map amendment, which is enclosed entirely in Councilmatic District 9. Uh within that resolution, we advertised that there would be a joint public hearing on the proposed changes that was held on June the 9th before yourselves and the planning board. After that, the record closed, staff went back, summarized, digested the testimony, presented it to planning board with their feedback on what they thought the planning board might want to do with it. Thereafter, on September the third, the planning board considered uh all of that, and they adopted and endorsed the proposed changes to the approved sector, excuse me, master plan and the sectional map amendment and transmitted it to you. We're here today to hear what we got in the record of public hearing testimony, what staff thought of it and how planning board reacted, and ultimately look to this body for direction on how to approve, disapprove, or send out for another public hearing this proposed minor amendment. The council, I might want to add, has 90 days from the date that the planning board transmitted, which is on or about the 4th of September. So you got 90 days from there. So there you are. Good morning, Chair Oriada and members of the district council. My name is Corey Arsenal with the planning department. I'm the project manager for the sub-region 5 minor plan amendment and sectional map amendment project. I'm joined today by Michael Calamis, the deputy project manager. Today's presentation should be viewed as an open dialogue. We welcome questions from the council on the active slide at any point.

SUMMARIZED BY OPENPUBLICA AI

TRANSCRIPT VIA PUBLIC VIDEO
openpublica.com