[{"_1":2,"_99":-5,"_100":-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],{"_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",6619292,"mediaKeyId","2838320-891c8899e1a336567333293670be1b44","parentId",2838320,"title","Prince George’s County council hears arguments, community opposition on proposed McDonald’s at Ager Road; decision taken under advisement","audioSeconds",6950,"startMs",66490,"endMs",7017145,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2838320-891c8899e1a336567333293670be1b44&start=66&end=7017","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2838320-891c8899e1a336567333293670be1b44/thumbnail_66490.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6619292/Prince-Georges-County/Maryland/Prince-Georges-County-council-hears-arguments-community-opposition-on-proposed-McDonalds-at-Ager-Road-decision-taken-under-advisement","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6619292-0dee7a0c53b994ae8294b4fa23149739/orig.mp4?Expires=1771158653&Signature=J5nrKDIsax4Z9cJ17C1hNEWFF~80KeFfMRFnyFBMv-5iV8Ftuvn890xZbEgOv4OuEVz-9Q4dYUcWoYhnvfXJ8Sj5KjlrI2bFGs4Xs-y6tkuNma0gnQL7wQnJ3joVOutPOh6a2R9QJQEgFIt8rhwq3~kCpSxxlcn8BRzCsBW32kv2iM~2CRaaOPi7KjGHgnY837QHm9b2oHxzprGl8yzM-sFfiU9iIF3PIVXLIItFInNW7KGPcQR-xCihsvLFgcDYhI9cd~ySkcenB5FeeGtb0Ow97FymIxvaGD-boAVGBFr2bOlnRlpO~qixZFjvKGZFX7fGyklNohI6hVzHWphfzw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Prince George","date","2025-04-01T00:00:00Z","article","The Prince George’s County District Council heard oral arguments April 1 on Detailed Site Plan (DSP) DSP-22001, a proposal from McDonald’s USA LLC to demolish a small building at the southern end of the Green Meadows Shopping Center and replace it with a 3,683‑square‑foot McDonald’s with drive‑thru on a 4.16‑acre parcel at the northeast quadrant of East‑West Highway (MD‑410) and Ager Road/Van Buren Street.

Planning staff and the Prince George’s County Planning Board supported approval of the DSP with conditions. Jill Kozak of the county’s Urban Design Section summarized the plan, saying the larger existing building at the north end of the shopping center would remain while the southern free‑standing building would be replaced by the proposed McDonald’s. Kozak noted the planning board approved the DSP with conditions on Jan. 16, 2025, and that the site is subject to the prior CSC zone standards, the 2010 Landscape Manual and a required Type 2 tree conservation plan.

Edward Gibbs, counsel for McDonald’s, told the council the applicant withdrew a previously filed departure and that the DSP conforms to the prior zoning ordinance’s site design requirements. Gibbs said applicant experts performed multiple supplemental reviews—including queuing analyses and transportation adequacy tests—and that a consultant archaeologist found no evidence requiring archaeological investigation. “We have a site plan that conforms in every respect to the zoning ordinance,” Gibbs said.

Opponents, including parents and residents, urged the council to deny or remand the DSP. Ilse Catalan, president of the Cesar Chavez Dual Spanish Immersion Elementary PTO, said the site is about a third of a mile from the school and described the intersection as hazardous. “Adding a McDonald’s drive‑thru would actually be detrimental to the safety precautions that we have been able to win for our community and our children,” Catalan said, citing pedestrian safety concerns, air quality and local health statistics for childhood asthma.

Other speakers from the community and public‑interest groups echoed concerns about traffic, pedestrian and bicycle safety at the five‑point intersection, the adequacy and timing of traffic counts, the scope of outreach (noting no Spanish‑language outreach early in the process), stormwater and cumulative public‑health impacts in a community opponents described as already overburdened.

Applicant traffic consultant Michael Lenhart said the queuing exhibit shows 12–14 vehicles can stack between the order board and the drive‑thru entrance and an additional 5–6 vehicles between the pickup window and the order board, and that his analyses used SHA (State Highway Administration) counts from SHA’s database. He said the site produces more queuing capacity than the measure in the new zoning ordinance and that the on‑site queue would be located behind the building away from pedestrian circulation.

Community members and other speakers disputed the adequacy of off‑site traffic analysis for this intersection, urged a fuller health impact review and said Spanish outreach was insufficient for a neighborhood in which many residents speak Spanish. Residents also questioned whether increased lighting or tree trimming would address loitering and public‑safety concerns at the shopping center.

Councilmembers asked for documentation and clarifications. Councilmember Olson described the intersection as a “complete disaster” during morning commute hours and pressed whether State Highway Administration could or should change turn movements there; counsel and consultants said SHA was consulted and had requested consolidation of two southern driveways into a single right‑in/right‑out driveway in front of the proposed restaurant. Councilmember Fisher asked for traffic study dates and stormwater details; applicant consultants said counts were obtained from SHA’s database and that stormwater will be treated with micro‑bioretention and underground storage sized to avoid increasing existing site runoff.

No final district council vote was taken. Councilmember Fisher said she would take the matter “under advisement” for further review.

Votes and formal actions discussed during the hearing were primarily prior decisions by the Planning Board (approval with conditions) and referrals to agency reviews; the district council held the case for further consideration rather than rendering an immediate decision.

Why it matters: The council’s decision will determine whether the McDonald’s drive‑thru moves forward where residents and a nearby school say safety, air quality and outreach need more review. The case raises questions about how on‑site detailed site plans intersect with off‑site traffic, pedestrian safety and community health concerns.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Prince George - District Council - Apr 01, 2025","oneSentenceSummary","The Prince George’s County District Council heard oral arguments April 1 on Detailed Site Plan DSP‑22001, a proposal to build a 3,683‑square‑foot McDonald’s with drive‑thru at Green Meadows Shopping Center (MD‑410/Ager Road/Van Buren Street); the Planning Board had approved the plan with conditions, but residents and school representatives urged further review because of traffic and health concerns.","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},6619283,"District Council minutes approved and two planning items referred to staff; other procedural votes recorded",8823,36330,8860305,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2838320-891c8899e1a336567333293670be1b44&start=36&end=8860","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2838320-891c8899e1a336567333293670be1b44/thumbnail_36330.jpg","/articles/6619283/Prince-Georges-County/Maryland/District-Council-minutes-approved-and-two-planning-items-referred-to-staff-other-procedural-votes-recorded","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6619283-c3b4b79b8aefcb9b5d9254466389a369/orig.mp4?Expires=1771158653&Signature=FsKuBAN0M1L9hWEWvSecihugBfla48aju9YsoXBQ4rmFE0NqxW~cr9tAucOShop5ChduXIaTR3EvETgtTD5UrBUUsqjzfxTTJlBxZvG~mgyw14bzk-f~m6f51B6x1bE3dt5VfMUEtuldWQhz3JielyBcOCd3U21jxS~Y8z3DLZfxgj5HSCeR2re7CQQiRcR3XywE-09n-e10j9rbYdYDv45zf9JQGTbJUXwGHon2fSI9f9rIcedyloqASuDAXsM-4qerZyaPN3YF~3h5ZqvGVknN~AtZhfsuRQzsmVh0kx9DHxGFMY5JMAJ50LonzQP0g8dRuCyq2I8A2IbYBLB45A__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Prince George’s County District Council completed several procedural actions during its April 1 session, including approval of minutes and waivers related to planning cases.

Approval of minutes: The council voted to approve the District Council minutes dated March 24, 2025. Councilmember Watson moved to approve; Councilmember Fisher seconded. The roll call vote recorded Chair Sam Burrows and six colleagues voting “aye” and the motion carried, 7‑0.

Waiver/referral actions: The council waived its election to review and referred staff to prepare an order for a Woodside Village basic‑plan amendment (case A‑9973‑03) that would separate approximately 184 acres into a separate basic plan for residential development; the motion to refer was approved by roll call (7‑0). The council also waived election to review DSP 24009 for the International Church of Christ and referred that case to staff for preparation of an approval order (roll call 7‑0). The council scheduled arguments or hearings as noted in staff backup for other pending DSP and subdivision matters.

Adjournment: The council adjourned following a motion (moved by Councilmember Harrison, seconded by Vice Chair Orietta). The meeting was recorded as adjourned by voice vote.

Why it matters: These procedural actions advance multiple planning cases through the administrative record and set hearings or prepare final orders; approval of minutes is a routine governance action but required formal roll call.","At the April 1 session the council approved district council minutes for March 24, 2025 (7‑0), waived the council's election to review and referred staff for an order on the Woodside Village basic‑plan amendment and the International Church DSP, and adjourned; several other planning items were scheduled for future hearings.",{"_33":88,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":89,"_41":90,"_43":91,"_45":92,"_47":93,"_49":94,"_51":95,"_53":96,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":97,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":98,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6619288,"Council reviews Gilpin Property Phase 3 storage facility DSP; planning board had approved the third self‑storage building",967,7444505,8412405,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2838320-891c8899e1a336567333293670be1b44&start=7444&end=8412","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2838320-891c8899e1a336567333293670be1b44/thumbnail_7444505.jpg","/articles/6619288/Prince-Georges-County/Maryland/Council-reviews-Gilpin-Property-Phase-3-storage-facility-DSP-planning-board-had-approved-the-third-selfstorage-building","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6619288-db404d2ac0c3dfabb2451c75df92f34e/orig.mp4?Expires=1771158653&Signature=j-ekpiixQd3suFNoIhAyXb4bThJ1VbGpNZCYLxvNxoP6P7M8yAFAxPkZ0dRstog4jEXvBgsQOLSHjqySZzUSSCfpyqoIW5kBoLXVP8boPl7fSLi~~Z0MB9ZrXGUB3sRFF3~8HKOoMy6FkDjaRIsJDfsHs~8JqZybiXBw-FD3I7xvr7GqCAqMm3dKbScsBhFjPhf-Hef~ovWxvL2yL5cmPM0Aa5-xq5tkRl1cMUeY~V5bd2x2zCaPh03SBrceZeMiavFXzox3PfVyBrvA7~hntwQzXj5txF~kDyiKFPd-61wnH9BuR2KerkuAT0O7jfNiAh2F~AVHtsvf7ZJxOK-szg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The District Council heard a staff and applicant presentation April 1 on Detailed Site Plan DSP‑13008‑02 for Gilpin Property Phase 3, a proposal to construct a four‑story, 115,364‑square‑foot consolidated storage building (1,103 units) on a 14.44‑acre parcel along Southern Avenue near Wheeler Road (Council District 7).

Dexter Cofield of the Planning Department’s Urban Design Section summarized the DSP, noting the project is reviewed under the prior zoning ordinance (I‑1) and that the Planning Board approved the DSP and Type 2 Tree Conservation Plan (TCP‑2018‑13‑02) subject to conditions. The application proposes building placement closer to Southern Avenue, preserves primary management area and floodplain on the southern and eastern portions of the site, and exceeds the I‑1 green‑area coverage requirement.

Matthew Tedesco, representing the applicant (Arkland Property Company LLC), said the third building is the southern portion of Lot 4 and that existing access points on Southern Avenue will be used. He said all woodland conservation will occur on‑site and that stormwater will be handled by four micro‑bioretention facilities with an approved concept plan from DPIE. Tedesco also presented economic figures provided by the applicant indicating the consolidated site contributes materially to county tax revenue.

Councilmembers asked whether the applicant would consider community benefits associated with self‑storage uses. Councilmember Watson asked whether the applicant could provide space or programs for local nonprofits; the applicant’s attorney replied previous offers to provide reduced‑rate units for community organizations were not used but said the applicant was willing to explore options going forward.

There was no public opposition noted at the Planning Board hearing, and no opposition appeared during the council session. Councilmembers discussed on‑site pedestrian circulation, queuing for any potential on‑site service areas, and whether more examination of stormwater downstream capacity would be necessary if the case were remanded. Councilmember Watson said she would take the matter under advisement.

Why it matters: The proposal would add substantial commercial floor area of a use concentrated in industrial zones; while the Planning Board approved the DSP, council attention focused on community benefit opportunities and site circulation.","A proposed third consolidated storage building (115,364 sq. ft., 1,103 units) on a 14.44‑acre site along Southern Avenue (Gilpin Property Phase 3) was presented; Planning Board approved the DSP with conditions and councilmembers discussed community benefits and site design; councilmember took the case under advisement.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Prince George’s County council hears arguments, community opposition on proposed McDonald’s at Ager Road; decision taken under advisement

District Council minutes approved and two planning items referred to staff; other procedural votes recorded

Council reviews Gilpin Property Phase 3 storage facility DSP; planning board had approved the third self‑storage building