Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Annexation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Leonardtown approves annexation of two Johnson parcels after debate over traffic and density (4–1)
Summary
The council approved annexation of two Johnson parcels (Case 40-25: Parcel 235 ~15.18 acres and Parcel 266 ~3.2 acres) by a 4–1 vote after extended public comment on traffic, density and infrastructure; development approvals will follow separate hearings.
The Leonardtown Town Council voted 4–1 on Dec. 8, 2025 to approve annexation petitions for two Johnson parcels included in Case 40-25, moving the parcels into the town boundary while leaving subsequent zoning and development approvals to later proceedings.
Assistant Town Administrator Janine Harrington presented the staff report for Case 40-25, saying the petition was sent to state and county reviewers on Nov. 6, 2025 and that the planning commission recommended the proposed designations at its Nov. 18 meeting. The record shows Parcel 235 is roughly 15.18 acres (proposed PUD zoning) and Parcel 266 about 3.2 acres (proposed RS/RSX zoning), and staff confirmed the town’s comprehensive plan (amended in 2025) includes the parcels in the municipal growth area.
Developer Rodney Herbst, who described prior projects in Leonardtown, said he envisions a mix of townhomes and single-family homes and emphasized the need for housing and economic viability. Residents pushed back at length: concerns included the Cedar Lane/Route 5 intersection safety, school and EMS capacity, the character of nearby neighborhoods, and whether residents’ drives and private easements could be affected by development. Council members repeatedly noted that annexation does not itself approve development plans; any site plan, rezoning or PUD application would require separate public hearings and town review.
Council debate focused on infrastructure readiness and control over future development. Councilors asked about state and county roles, the five-year waiting period for upzoning under county rules versus county waiver processes, and whether annexation would give the town more regulatory control than leaving the property under county jurisdiction. After discussion, a councilor moved to approve the petitions as consistent with the town comprehensive plan and statutory requirements and to authorize the town administrator to execute necessary documents to complete annexation. The motion passed 4–1.
The approval moves the parcels into the town’s corporate limits; it does not itself authorize construction. Developers will still need to submit subsequent concept and site plans, traffic studies, and any necessary waivers or zoning approvals. Council members said they expect further public hearings and technical studies before any building permits are issued.
