Board denies rezoning for proposed 309‑unit townhouse development near Food Lion; residents cite schools, traffic and safety
Get AI-powered insights, summaries, and transcripts
Sign Up Free
Summary
The Board of Supervisors upheld the Planning Commission’s recommendation to deny a conditional rezoning that would have allowed 309 townhouses, after extensive public comment raising concerns about school capacity, fire/EMS staffing and traffic impacts.
Prince George County supervisors on March 31 voted to deny a conditional rezoning request (RZ250008) that would have rezoned about 43.62 acres for up to 309 townhouse dwellings. The Planning Commission had recommended denial; the board upheld that recommendation after a lengthy public hearing in which residents and staff highlighted infrastructure gaps.
Planning staff summarized the application and proffers: the applicant proposed townhouses and some commercial frontage, with proffers including cash proffers of $3,500 per unit and on‑site amenities, but the Planning Commission advised denial by a 5–2 vote due to elementary‑school capacity concerns and insufficient fire apparatus and staffing in the affected district.
The applicant’s representative, Jeff Geiger, asked the board to remand the application to Planning Commission so the developer could revisit the plan and address concerns. He said the proposal aligned with the county’s 2018 comprehensive plan and offered for‑sale housing targeted at essential‑workforce price points; he also proposed reducing unit count and shifting some acreage to commercial use in subsequent iterations.
More than a dozen residents spoke against the rezoning. Speakers cited traffic congestion at Bridal Road/Route 156 and the Food Lion intersection, concerns that the area’s schools and fire/EMS staffing are already overstretched, potential conflicts with a draft comprehensive plan, and doubts whether the project would produce for‑sale homes rather than rentals. Several speakers urged a Traffic Impact Analysis and pointed to past staff recommendations that denial was appropriate without further traffic study.
Board members discussed staff reports, Planning Commission findings and recent internal reports noting strain on fire and EMS services in high‑density areas. The board majority concluded the proposal’s infrastructure impacts were not addressed and voted to deny the rezoning. Roll call recorded unanimous support among voting members to uphold the Planning Commission denial.
The decision leaves the applicant able to revise the proposal and re‑file; staff noted public‑notice requirements for any future hearing.