Prince George County Planning Commission on Thursday voted to forward RZ25‑0005, a request to rezone about 27 acres near Fountain Drive and New Bohemia Drive for up to 206 townhouses, to the Board of Supervisors with a recommendation of denial.

Staff told commissioners the proposal — to rezone parcels currently zoned M‑1 (limited industrial), M‑2 (general industrial) and B‑1 (general business) to RTH (residential townhouse) — is not consistent with the county’s comprehensive plan and raises demands on public services, including schools, water and wastewater capacity, and additional traffic. Planning staff recommended denial in the staff report.

The applicant and attorney, William Shumek of Wood Rodgers, said the project is meant to provide for‑sale townhomes targeted to first‑time homebuyers and argued the development would fit a mixed‑use area and generate fewer students than typical single‑family subdivisions. "This is designed to target first time home buyers," Shumek said, and noted the proposal includes underground utilities, public water and sewer connections if available, a cap of 206 units and proffered conditions intended to bind the conceptual layout and amenities.

Shumek and staff described the proffers: a maximum of 206 dwelling units, a cash proffer of $4,692 per unit, a minimum dwelling size of 1,200 square feet, public water and sewer with underground utilities when available, two off‑street parking spaces per unit, a mandatory homeowners association to maintain 9.2 acres of common open space and developer responsibility for required entrance road improvements. Phasing proffers state no certificate of occupancy may be issued before March 2027 and a maximum of 100 certificates of occupancy may be issued before March 2028.

Residents who testified opposed the rezoning, citing potential effects on an adjacent working farm, traffic and public‑service capacity. Scott Barringer, speaking on behalf of property owner Marie Hanslick, said the neighboring parcel "is actively farmed" and urged commissioners to consider impacts on the farmer, schools, water and solid waste. Diane Hanslick said the farm is actively used and asked that, if the project moves forward, the developer provide "a 6 feet berm and privacy fence" between the farming operations and the new homes.

Planning staff summarized comment submissions: two written comments in opposition were on file, one included in the staff report and a second submitted after the report’s publication. Staff also noted VDOT comments requiring three external connections and sidewalks on both sides of internal streets, and utility comments about current constraints on public water and wastewater capacity while projects to add capacity are in progress.

After discussion, the commission voted to recommend denial. The roll call on the motion to forward RZ25‑0005 to the Board of Supervisors with a recommendation for denial recorded Yes votes from Commissioners Bresco, Womack, Anderson, McDonough and Howell and a No vote from Commissioner Coneppa (tally: Yes 6, No 1). The commission’s recommendation is advisory; the Board of Supervisors will hold its own public hearing before making a final decision.

The staff report and proffer package, including the conceptual site plan, are available in the planning commission packet. The case will next appear on the Board of Supervisors’ public hearing agenda.