Development in Prince George’s County: Desired Outcomes vs. Current Realities: Lessons from the Zoning Ordinance Transition Period (2022–2025)

Abstract

Prince George’s County’s transition to a new Zoning Ordinance and Subdivision Regulations represented one of the most significant land use policy changes in the County’s recent history. During the transition period, applicants retained the ability to pursue development applications under either the prior zoning framework or the newly adopted ordinance, creating a unique opportunity to examine how developers, landowners, attorneys, and planning professionals responded to changing regulatory conditions. This report analyzes approximately 100 development applications reviewed between April 1, 2022 and April 1, 2025 to better understand the factors influencing applicant decisions regarding ordinance selection and the implications of those decisions for County planning goals, implementation, and future policy refinement. Drawing upon application materials, planning staff analyses, public records, student case analyses, and stakeholder engagement, the study identifies patterns in applicant behavior, implementation barriers, and opportunities to improve development review processes. Several key themes emerged from the analysis. First, applicants frequently prioritized regulatory certainty and predictability when selecting between the prior and new ordinances. In many cases, applicants elected to proceed under the prior ordinance to minimize uncertainty associated with new procedural requirements, interpretation concerns, or evolving implementation practices. Grandfathering provisions and timing considerations frequently influenced these decisions, particularly for projects already in the development pipeline. Second, the findings suggest that ordinance selection often reflected a broader strategic assessment of risk, timing, and flexibility rather than a simple preference for one regulatory framework over another. While some applicants may have embraced the opportunities created by the new ordinance, including updated development standards and streamlined alignment with County planning priorities, others may have viewed the transition period as introducing uncertainty into entitlement and approval processes. Third, the analysis identified important areas where development outcomes aligned with County planning goals and where implementation challenges created friction. Several cases demonstrated strong alignment with transit-oriented development objectives, mixed-use goals, housing diversification, and redevelopment priorities. However, other cases revealed instances where procedural complexity, ambiguity in interpretation, or administrative bottlenecks may have constrained intended outcomes or encouraged reliance on legacy regulatory pathways. Based on these findings, the report recommends a combination of short-term administrative improvements, medium-term ordinance refinements, and long-term monitoring strategies. Immediate recommendations include improving guidance materials, strengthening applicant communication during ordinance transitions, and increasing consistency in implementation. Medium-term recommendations focus on ordinance calibration and process improvements informed by recurring implementation challenges. Long-term recommendations emphasize data tracking, performance measurement, and periodic ordinance evaluation to ensure continued alignment between County planning goals and development outcomes. Ultimately, the transition period provides Prince George’s County with an important opportunity to evaluate not only how applicants responded to new land use regulations, but also how future ordinance transitions and implementation strategies can be strengthened. The findings suggest that effective implementation depends not only on the content of planning regulations but also on predictability, clarity, administrative capacity, and stakeholder confidence in the development review process.