[{"_1":2,"_110":-5,"_111":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75,87,98],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},"mediaId",6536752,"mediaKeyId","3681886-bdb628dcee0faecc8faf9b0b6ba5a13e","parentId",3681886,"title","Votes at a glance: PHED committee actions on June 5","audioSeconds",1000,"startMs",2778000,"endMs",3778000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=3681886-bdb628dcee0faecc8faf9b0b6ba5a13e&start=2778&end=3778","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3681886-bdb628dcee0faecc8faf9b0b6ba5a13e/thumbnail_2778000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6536752/Prince-Georges-County/Maryland/Votes-at-a-glance-PHED-committee-actions-on-June-5","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6536752-eaf50701e7c322a5fb5ca82e7781e60e/orig.mp4?Expires=1771141849&Signature=RuIuRdLzBOjG3KuicfvI2UhfEJj9qXmIrOKDwt~ybWqi8N5SASZzd7qmN-4N8v4P-HjojeOhh3q166YKaLGfqXDEmk2f~8djRdn2Mku65gCiNyvb17TUYG69G174JAyN0gXchh4EJY7mCn4H8YySjkBUJrTu20STo1grTQ3FSOftlRCC~3F~ARn4oCbmdczmK4aCMSCn5Y3IbrEmJa01sHTT5BNBLd2LkMmcYr0hS5-YxtZkUm15UsdBEMZ6lNBMcFpFa6K1x6474kNizUA5O0fLC1WDFJAyVVkSqbiu5TTePt-Rg2MWsQJA9bwbbCjbzDDokWON9SEOgstOw~bdbg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Prince George","date","2025-06-05T00:00:00Z","article","At its June 5 meeting the Planning, Housing and Economic Development Committee recorded the following formal outcomes:

- CB-40-2025 (grading permits in LCD zone): Favorable recommendation on draft 2 (vote 5-0). Motion by Council Member Olsen; second by Council Member Harrison.

- CB-42-2025 (master-plan consistency for detailed site plans and special exceptions): Motion to hold for further work with planning staff and incoming county executive (vote 5-0).

- CB-27-2025 (use regulations for opioid treatment services): Motion to hold for further study and transmit substitute draft 2a to the planning board for comment (vote 4-0; one member absent).

- CR-43-2025 (emergency resolution related to CB-27-2025): Motion to hold (vote 4-0).

- CB-26-2025 (sponsor requested hold): Motion to hold (vote 4-0).

The meeting concluded after a motion to adjourn. These items will return to committee after staff coordination or be transmitted to the planning board as noted.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Prince George - Planning, Housing and Economic Development Committee - Jun 05, 2025","oneSentenceSummary","Summary of formal committee outcomes on multiple agenda items, including favorable recommendation for CB-40-2025 and holds for CB-42-2025, CB-27-2025, CR-43-2025, and CB-26-2025.","taxTitle","Prince George's County, Maryland","taxId",3378,"location","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6536755,"Committee holds opioid-treatment zoning change to seek planning-board review and clearer definitions",1363,2433000,3796000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3681886-bdb628dcee0faecc8faf9b0b6ba5a13e&start=2433&end=3796","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3681886-bdb628dcee0faecc8faf9b0b6ba5a13e/thumbnail_2433000.jpg","/articles/6536755/Prince-Georges-County/Maryland/Committee-holds-opioid-treatment-zoning-change-to-seek-planning-board-review-and-clearer-definitions","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6536755-1ded8047424ee4fedeceb67c7175f870/orig.mp4?Expires=1771141849&Signature=fXYTYVjr1Sqiw4kO75QQkM-e92V5saX5D4ju6lJ0LvUzn9fGCL3wxaSUSwcOEMqzUC6GgC355OlfTZdZVVLsL4YR7F7~NShc7yS2P6xcCpi7ckkFjWCAUU380edRUqneMzPRUKv8VS5HD9-OzfmuBkteXzyiYCrm7QvOP3vpVEdF~-nLz4ouHKSRmG44LjFvnoWdCwcqaSPjtlSwrpqyNg3qEfdE2b3EG3hRaVDjU0-dVKUwDj51GevnbOFXeVx0BNF5net1OQCZLB8giapltqXEIjW212FCnT8qCoKMqfmjySnEQ28rHApsfyI~rUIdRJHO6CI7thVMPoDph45T~g__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Planning, Housing and Economic Development Committee on June 5 held CB-27-2025, a proposed ordinance to define opioid treatment centers as a new principal use type, set conditions for their approval and establish off-street parking standards.

Why it matters: Committee sponsors said the bill aims to preserve access to opioid treatment services while setting locational and operational standards; staff and health-care commenters flagged definitional questions and existing providers that may operate as physician offices rather than regulated clinics.

Committee discussion and staff testimony described substantial changes to the original draft. Council Member DeNova and co-sponsor Council Member Ivy explained the revised approach seeks to align more closely with definitions used in Anne Arundel and Baltimore counties by treating licensed medical clinics under state law similarly and retaining the committee’s 500-foot distance rule in the county’s principal use table. The sponsor said the committee recently learned of at least one Laurel site listed on the county website as a methadone/Suboxone clinic for which the zoning record was not clear; staff said some providers may be functioning as physician offices that prescribe buprenorphine or naltrexone rather than operating as methadone clinics that require a different licensing threshold.

Dr. Levy (county health representative) told the committee the distinction matters because physicians with DEA registration can prescribe buprenorphine in office settings, which may not fall under the same zoning classification as a methadone clinic. Planning Director Lakeisha Hall said staff needs time to review the updated draft and mapping and to coordinate with the health department before returning a quality product to the planning board.

Public testimony included Stacy Jones, who described personal experience with substance-use disorder and urged the committee to adopt measures that increase local access to treatment. \"I have learned the hard way just how important it is to have access to treatment and how much harder it is when that help isn't nearby,\" Jones said.

Legal staff and planning counsel advised that the scale of substantive changes makes review by the planning board appropriate before advancing the bill. David Warner, principal counsel to the planning board, said returning the draft to the planning board for comment would allow the board to review the substantive provisions that were not part of the initial LDR package.

Action: The committee voted to hold CB-27-2025 for further study and to transmit the substitute draft 2a to the planning board for comment, with an expectation to return to committee. The clerk recorded the motion carried 4-0.

Ending: The committee directed staff to coordinate with the health department, planning board and the incoming county executive’s office; staff indicated an intent to return the item before the July 9 committee meeting if possible.","The PHED Committee voted to hold CB-27-2025 and transmit the amended draft to the planning board for comment after discussion about definitions, existing facilities operating under different codes, and the 500-foot distance provision.",{"_33":88,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":89,"_41":90,"_43":91,"_45":91,"_47":92,"_49":93,"_51":94,"_53":95,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":96,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":97,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6536760,"Committee holds bill requiring master-plan consistency for site plans after extended debate",0,2908000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3681886-bdb628dcee0faecc8faf9b0b6ba5a13e&start=2908&end=2908","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3681886-bdb628dcee0faecc8faf9b0b6ba5a13e/thumbnail_2908000.jpg","/articles/6536760/Prince-Georges-County/Maryland/Committee-holds-bill-requiring-master-plan-consistency-for-site-plans-after-extended-debate","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6536760-6aa5f8a8ef53883340baeda7416323d2/orig.mp4?Expires=1771141849&Signature=PaQv6Wb2WyeqkuUtspJV0uMFSqlEV9NHDycYAHN9nvA6sbDHXGp~f6UhTJdMkDcIlz2UihpdsgWDrlC2TpkW3BMwssihx5aZjuLAFX4~YjX7YUp5pTdVnngb2PWjm6nKvOI2mQgcj6HF0VYkar5AbkGkL9xFbCEYIf-~1PJpncBA-hyQAqiUTwwMRp3SyTtPMHa08ErXJ-6Xw0S3mbg20o8jg8qV7~zPfGhFzG7w3B9eJsh6E-ofcdLze9wsBGN5K57fRw2Aaf33pNmVvvffKJiFqFh7u0YSPNdkiWqKzTvczVq55Jzg7f6fiDZwDR-H6l-CKNw5f~D9BxrvJmfekw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Planning, Housing and Economic Development Committee on June 5 voted to hold CB-42-2025, an ordinance that would add master-plan consistency as a required approval standard for detailed site plans and special exceptions.

Why it matters: Sponsors say the change would give residents recourse when developments diverge from master-plan expectations; opponents and multiple planning professionals warned it could create legal uncertainty and conflict with existing zoning and subdivision rules.

Committee discussion ranged widely. Council Member DeNova recounted cases in which master-plan recommendations were not realized and said the county should give master plans more force. \"This bill was to give the citizenry and the council the opportunity to say this is not consistent with what everyone understood in the master plan process,\" DeNova said. Several council members urged a pause to coordinate with the incoming county executive and to plan comprehensively for how master plans should be updated and enforced.

Planning staff told the committee the planning board voted to take no position on the legislation. The administration (represented in the meeting by Miss Skinner) stated it opposed the bill. Thomas Haller and Edward Gibbs, local attorneys who spoke in opposition, argued that the county code already contains a special-exception standard about not substantially impairing master plans and that adding a new, broad consistency requirement at the detailed site-plan stage could conflict with subdivision approvals and create interpretation problems. \"The new ordinance has excruciatingly detailed site design guidelines... and conformance with the master plan is not appropriate at the detailed site plan stage,\" Haller said.

Nate Forman, representing O'Malley, Miles, Nylund & Gilmore, also opposed the proposal on the ground that it would raise uncertainty and could advantage national chains with greater risk tolerance. Multiple council members urged updating master and sector plans and improving front-end planning to reduce reliance on last-minute regulatory blocks.

Action: After discussion, Council Member DeNova moved to hold the bill; the motion was seconded and passed on a 5-0 roll call. \"Motion carries 5-0,\" the clerk recorded.

Ending: The committee held CB-42-2025 for further work with planning staff, the incoming county executive, and community stakeholders; staff noted planning board comments and public testimony will be part of the next steps.","PHED held CB-42-2025 after lengthy discussion over whether detailed site plans and special exceptions should be required to show consistency with master plans; the planning board took no position and the administration opposes the bill.",{"_33":99,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":100,"_41":101,"_43":102,"_45":103,"_47":104,"_49":105,"_51":106,"_53":107,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":108,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":109,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6536765,"Committee backs ordinance allowing grading permits earlier in LCD zone",471,2405000,2876000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3681886-bdb628dcee0faecc8faf9b0b6ba5a13e&start=2405&end=2876","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3681886-bdb628dcee0faecc8faf9b0b6ba5a13e/thumbnail_2405000.jpg","/articles/6536765/Prince-Georges-County/Maryland/Committee-backs-ordinance-allowing-grading-permits-earlier-in-LCD-zone","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6536765-4d591a078d4198bd19a8333332c1ad5d/orig.mp4?Expires=1771141849&Signature=YqueODaVMxKNTUnXzWWCj3DHqBinaJIaYFTz7bMjQOKT4KA3FPk4NqQhCNeo~-4jeBfrkEmr6wfHdyabknt0lTeOGY6NOmzHALOi0c~w77yZSgl2ZzjDmvu3jt4tTpa-BndCfa9~KNXpqll5vJuOsQREBCuLxDzbze16oxfQDjzsBocrgZEQ8UuGpH9iWmVMyEZ~0nRhtg616K9EfV4zh2-iQWdxzQ9nC9PA0vY0K2kmUn77N2mdvhO53~sEm6Mobv-yQtVgou7mbuAgBxQgmRh7J0fTOhsgWbI1FbufRcDmAotwgTc-XdgzuhZw~vCyauLkAF6t~3veOGqeSvPKhg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Planning, Housing and Economic Development (PHED) Committee voted 5-0 on June 5 to recommend draft 2 of CB-40-2025, an ordinance that would authorize issuance of grading permits in the LCD zone under certain circumstances.

The bill, introduced at the committee meeting by Chair Council Member DeNova, would move grading-permit provisions to Section 27-36-10 and permit grading if an approved Conceptual Development Plan (CDP) or an approved Type 1 tree conservation plan exists, the committee was told.

Why it matters: Supporters said the change would let developers begin utility and stormwater work earlier in phased projects and post bonds to insure completion, speeding construction on sites inside LCD zones.

Planning staff described the draft as incorporating planning board and zoning examiner recommendations and including amendments from Council Member McNeil permitting DPW/DPDE (referred to in the draft as DPOT) to issue grading permits when an approved CDP or Type 1 TCP is in place. Lakeisha Hall, planning director, said the planning department supports the proposal. \"We're in support of this. This went to planning board and so we're very happy about this being able to streamline the process,\" Hall told the committee.

Daniel Schlegel of Dewberry Engineers, identifying himself as deputy planning department director in the Lanham office, testified in support, saying the change mirrors prior allowances in the MXT zone and would help coordinated stormwater and roadway connections across parcels. \"Getting started early will allow applicants to also begin to process...with the grading permit, we'll be able to post bonds ensuring that the work is insured,\" Schlegel said.

The office of law advised the committee that the draft was \"improperly to state it for\" in its initial review, and planning staff noted the planning board voted to take no position on draft form (technical staff report cited in the committee record). The committee did not adopt the planning board recommendation to replace the term \"grading permit\" with \"rough grading permit,\" because that term is not defined in the county code; the staff noted it appears in the county's 2014 stormwater management design manual but is not clearly defined for street installation.

Action: Council Member Olsen moved a favorable recommendation with a second from Council Member Harrison. The roll call recorded Chair DeNova, Council Member Harrison, Council Member Hawkins, Council Member Olson and Vice Chair Oriada voting in favor. \"Motion carries 5-0,\" the clerk announced.

Ending: The committee transmitted draft 2 of CB-40-2025 with a favorable recommendation; the ordinance will proceed through the council's legislative process for further consideration.","The Planning, Housing and Economic Development Committee voted 5-0 to recommend draft 2 of CB-40-2025, which would allow grading permits in Prince George’s County LCD zones under specified conditions, including when a Conceptual Development Plan (CDP) or a Type 1 Tree Conservation Plan is approved.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Votes at a glance: PHED committee actions on June 5

Committee holds opioid-treatment zoning change to seek planning-board review and clearer definitions

Committee holds bill requiring master-plan consistency for site plans after extended debate

Committee backs ordinance allowing grading permits earlier in LCD zone