Five Draft Zoning Bills Are Heading to the Planning Board—Here’s What’s at Stake
- Bradley Heard
- 5 days ago
- 4 min read
On July 23 and July 30, the Prince George’s County Planning Board will consider five proposed zoning bills that could reshape how the County handles transit-oriented development, environmental review, neighborhood commercial uses, and data centers.
GCHIC has reviewed the proposed bills and submitted comments to the Planning Board. For the most part, our conclusions closely align with Planning Department staff, who have recommended opposition to four of the five measures.
We encourage residents and stakeholders to review the bills, summarized below, and submit comments so that their views become part of the public record.
To comment on LDR-149 or LDR-155, submit your written comments by noon on Tuesday, July 21.
Comments on LDR-13, LDR-30, and LDR-153 are due by noon on Tuesday, July 28.
Visit the Planning Board’s participation page for complete instructions, including how to provide oral testimony live or virtually.
GCHIC Has Made It Easy to Comment
Use our simple form to tell the Planning Board where you stand:
For a more granular review of the draft bills and to see GCHIC’s position:
What the Five Bills Would Do
LDR-149 would create a new special exception use in the Residential Estate (RE) Zone combining detached rental housing, controlled-environment agriculture, institutional uses, food production, renewable energy, and other activities. It even requires the use of a patented “dry hydroponics” system—suggesting that this amendment may have been drafted around a particular technology, property, or development proposal.
GCHIC agrees with Planning Department staff that the proposal is incompatible with the purpose of the RE Zone and should not proceed through a special exception text amendment.
In the right locations and at the right scale, sustainable agriculture, renewable energy, and mixed-use development can combine to provide real benefits in rural areas. But this draft zoning text amendment opens the door to outer-Beltway sprawl.
LDR-13 would create a new expedited development-review category for certain large, mixed-use projects near constructed rail stations.
GCHIC strongly supports faster review for quality transit-oriented development. Greater Capitol Heights needs substantial mixed-use investment around the Capitol Heights, Addison Road-Seat Pleasant, and Morgan Boulevard Metro stations.
The problem is that the County already has an Expedited Transit-Oriented Development (ETOD) process. LDR-13 does not clearly explain why we need a second, overlapping category with its own procedures. That would just create needless complexity without addressing why the current process is used so infrequently.
LDR-30 would allow certain places of worship and restaurants by right in Residential, Single-Family-Attached (RSF-A) zones. Currently, worship facilities generally require special exception approval on lots smaller than one acre, and restaurants are not permitted in the RSF-A Zone.
GCHIC supports finding productive new uses for vacant or underused neighborhood buildings. But we agree with Planning Department staff that LDR-30 is not the right way to accomplish that goal.
The Zoning Ordinance already provides workable, more established, and more transparent options. Through the special exception process, an applicant can show that a proposed use is appropriate for the property, compatible with nearby homes, and designed and operated to avoid substantially adverse effects on the surrounding neighborhood.
For a more ambitious redevelopment proposal, the property owner may seek a Planned Development rezoning tailored to the site and supported by an overall development plan.
LDR-153 would combine detailed site-plan and preliminary subdivision review and allow certain environmental and stormwater plans to remain merely “proposed,” rather than approved, during the development review process.
That is a bad idea on several levels, and GCHIC agrees with Planning Department staff that this proposed text amendment should not move forward.
Detailed site plans and subdivision plans serve different legal purposes, require different findings, and follow separate review timelines. Natural Resource Inventories and stormwater drainage concept plans establish the environmental and engineering boundaries within which a project can be designed.
Those plans should be approved before a detailed site plan is filed—not deferred until after major design and public-review decisions have already been made.
Outside the existing Expedited Transit-Oriented Development process, preliminary subdivision approval is and should remain a prerequisite for detailed site plan filing. Although ETOD procedures permit subdivision and DSP applications to be filed concurrently, the applications remain subject to the separate findings, reviews, and approval timelines required by law.
The bill would also make it harder for the County to give genuine priority to transit-oriented development. If ordinary suburban and greenfield projects receive the same broadly “streamlined” treatment as development near transit, ETOD stops functioning as a meaningful incentive.
LDR-155 would allow qualified data centers by right in Agricultural-Residential and Residential Estate zones, where they are currently prohibited. And while the bill would require detailed site-plan review for campuses under 200 acres, larger rural data center campuses would remain exempt from site plan review.
If you are wondering how on earth that could be a good idea…so are we.
GCHIC agrees with Planning Department staff that LDR-155 is inconsistent with the two-year data center moratorium the County Council just passed, the recommendations of the County’s Data Center Task Force, and the purposes of the affected rural zones.
GCHIC supports appropriately scaled, sustainable digital infrastructure in suitable locations. Our Smart Digital Growth framework calls for a comprehensive County approach that distinguishes data centers by scale, electrical load, water demand, operating model, and impacts.
Make Your Voice Part of the Record
Prince George’s County needs faster and more predictable development review. But reform should make good development easier—not weaken environmental review, reward property-specific legislation, or place transit-oriented development and suburban sprawl in the same priority lane.
Use GCHIC’s simple comment form to tell the Planning Board where you stand:
Thank you for doing your part to show that Greater Capitol Heights Matters—and that its residents and stakeholders are informed, engaged, and paying attention.