[{"_1":2,"_98":-5,"_99":-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",[32,74,86],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":42,"_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":67,"_71":72,"_73":72},"mediaId",5975024,"mediaKeyId","5829579-b48658ada2a71c9c4412cb8a571068d3","parentId",5829579,"title","Audit of draft articles and revisions applied","audioSeconds",0,"startMs","endMs",-1,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=5829579-b48658ada2a71c9c4412cb8a571068d3&start=0&end=0","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5829579-b48658ada2a71c9c4412cb8a571068d3/thumbnail_0.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/5975024/Prince-George-County/Virginia/Audit-of-draft-articles-and-revisions-applied","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/5975024-32ce79731cfcab343ffa5f0119d33296/orig.mp4?Expires=1770511574&Signature=ZRjMJtxEkmpPLrWD0ycz8s7kZUGA23aCFQZ2na7u93IRvrvYcj-mMp8onB-suEk7TFQQ5viGMZZATxORkSgAeOIghCfOIHzeKQAFoLLkSf7xWNmU9W3c3yHk6AU-r4F8NMz6A8bq75s1H0ClpBid-hQlgk2yE6c5aMwUwq5nrERswmLZSfiHKbzdWD0Ci-7G2VCQWAlVsjMikNzWWjJowURdjEZ7ppaIFNqU3y1DBq12xSs97obQ9fGwfBV5TcgZ2qMUAl3EIVUgqxJvCXLGLSHvJzC9KZcGIbjmvm-zLvR8uHRqaQOGnRKnhjL~8WBkEMkJVhT7TAV1TiRgpjtN4w__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Prince George County","date","2025-09-25T00:00:00Z","article","This audit summarizes issues found in the initial draft and the corrective edits made in the final articles. The draft review focused on spelling, clarity, chronology, framing, misidentification, out-of-context quotations, quantitative precision, process clarity, question emphasis and omission.

Key issues found and fixes applied:
1) Name spellings and speaker IDs: the transcript contained multiple inconsistent spellings for several commissioners (examples: Wamec/Womack/Waymack; Canepa/Coneppa/Canessa). Fix: normalized to consistent spellings used at the first clear full-reference in the transcript (Chairman Bresco; Commissioner Waymack; Commissioner Canepa; Commissioner McDonough; Commissioner Howe; Vice Chair Miss Anderson). The audit flags transcript variants but the article uses a single consistent spelling.
2) Attribution lock: ensured every direct quote and attribution in the article comes only from speakers listed in the article\u0000speaker arrays. If a statement could not be tied to a named speaker, it was reported as \"staff said\" or \"residents said\" without inventing a speaker name.
3) Chronology and framing: the public comments were recorded during the public hearing; the article explicitly states that and that the commission did not take a final vote on the special-exception application during the Sept. 25 hearing. This fixes an earlier draft that implied a final decision had been made.
4) Quantitative precision: numbers discussed in the transcript (258 acres; 205 sites; 110 park-model sites; petition of 121 signatures; applicant's $10\u0000$12 million estimate) were preserved and labeled as \"applicant stated\" or \"staff reported\" as appropriate; where the transcript provided ranges or \"about\" values the article marked them as applicant estimates.
5) Regulatory references: the staff presentation and commenters referenced county code sections (50-71, 50-76, 50-77) and a zoning provision (90-53-22). The article cites those specific references rather than paraphrasing them as unspecified \"state\" or \"local\" rules.
6) Omission correction: several substantive points raised during public comment were missing from the draft (public-safety response times, petition with 121 signatures, VDH and DEQ permit requirements). Those items were added to the final article.

Severity summary by category (high / medium / low):
- Spelling/name variants: medium (fixed by normalization).
- Attribution lock: high (fixed; ensured quotes only from listed speakers).
- Chronology: low (fixed to show hearing and no final action).
- Quantitative precision: medium (numbers preserved and labeled as estimates where appropriate).
- Process clarity: medium (specified that commission recommendation is advisory and Board of Supervisors will decide).

No new substantive facts were added beyond the transcript and named agency references. The final articles avoid speculation and clearly separate discussion, directions and decisions as required.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Prince George County - Planning Commission","oneSentenceSummary","Audit found inconsistent name spellings and incomplete attributions in the draft; final articles applied corrections to ensure attribution only to named speakers and clarified that no final decision was made on the special exception during the Sept. 25 hearing.","taxTitle","Prince George County, Virginia","taxId",51064,"location","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":75,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":76,"_41":77,"_43":78,"_44":79,"_46":80,"_48":81,"_50":82,"_52":83,"_54":55,"_56":57,"_58":84,"_60":61,"_62":63,"_64":85,"_66":67,"_68":69,"_70":67,"_71":72,"_73":72},5975032,"Planning commission hears residents—concerns over proposed 205-site Lebanon Road RV park",3087,563000,3650000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5829579-b48658ada2a71c9c4412cb8a571068d3&start=563&end=3650","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5829579-b48658ada2a71c9c4412cb8a571068d3/thumbnail_563000.jpg","/articles/5975032/Prince-George-County/Virginia/Planning-commission-hears-residentsconcerns-over-proposed-205-site-Lebanon-Road-RV-park","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/5975032-d2c0f3bb05ba2aa6d21feb07fbf6f7fd/orig.mp4?Expires=1770511573&Signature=BxECKB~jHU3VLzF4T~mtlOYLVFyVFjXMGqcAhltZ92A5LYahGkkCeN-WJTd0vvwRq72Dsu2S-br1eIVnYqSPfNiU3nDlpfndJ8G6up2lbRmDFA3jkQplyb5UK7L84kMlvRp3lrDbsD~Kew9wzTJ~lVbbBLO5~tI5AQ30OYlmlErFDJmpEnLExBbYtVUHozPWeRX1ev5UUz5OaFlL-IjZm5Z0eNWLd-VQTlSfJ2QEgYHwdTFnPPKyNtVxw2WqMMsRZC--GcgU-n9XfFzECZzYDk1SIE~zulYGJCKpnUePC6Ae3h~dU6SE-75p5~vm8k~P7Qe4FZ-Sl1r7pfxXrcIqoQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Prince George County Planning Commission members on Sept. 25 heard more than a dozen residents oppose a special-exception request to allow a commercial recreational-vehicle park with 205 campsites on a 258-acre parcel on Lebanon Road at Lake Lebanon.

County staff told commissioners the application (SC25-0004) requests a commercial RV campground of 205 campsites on a 258-acre A-1 (general agricultural) parcel and that staff finds the request consistent with the comprehensive plan and surrounding zoning if recommended conditions are imposed. Staff said the proposal includes 110 park-model RV sites, 41 pull-through sites and 54 back-in sites, and that park-model units are built and used for seasonal or extended-stay accommodations. The staff presentation referenced zoning review under a provision cited as 90-53-22 and summarized comments from other agencies, including VDOT, the fire/rescue agency, the environmental review section and the health department.

The applicant, Lindsey Bridal, told the commission she and a partner propose to build and operate the campground as a seasonal facility that would open April 1 and close Nov. 30, with no year-round occupancy. Bridal said she expects most guests to be weekend visitors from the Richmond and Hampton Roads metropolitan areas and said she is prepared to invest $10\u0000$12 million to build the project. She said campsites would be clustered in the center of the parcel, away from adjacent residences, and that she will prohibit off-road vehicles and a range of disruptive activities. Bridal asked the commission to modify some proposed permit conditions and said she and her engineer would provide additional traffic information and coordinate with VDOT.

Residents who live near the property or along Lebanon Road and in the Bursville/Newville communities gave detailed testimony opposing the project. The primary concerns raised by multiple speakers included:
- Traffic and public-safety risks on narrow local roads (speakers cited Lebanon Road, Route 10 and other connecting roads and described previous collisions and long emergency response times);
- Water supply and stormwater: residents and speakers told commissioners the ponds on the property are fed by pumps and expressed concern that additional withdrawals or new wells could affect neighboring private wells and wetlands;
- Sewage management and wastewater risk from seasonal and extended-stay occupancy, especially if \"park-model\" units were used as de facto permanent residences;
- Noise, light and visual impacts, including generators and late-night use of recreational facilities such as a clubhouse; several residents said a clearcut on the property removed an existing tree buffer;
- Enforcement and operational concerns, including whether a manager would be on-site, how the county would enforce a 30-day limit referenced in county code, and whether the campground would create transient or McKinney-Vento school enrollments;
- Environmental impacts to Wards Creek and wildlife and uncertainty about required permits from state agencies.

Speakers said they provided the commission a petition in opposition containing 121 signatures and multiple written letters; staff confirmed those documents were in the commission\u0000packet. Staff also reported that no written comments were received before the staff report was published but that comments and the petition were submitted after publication and are part of the record.

On technical and agency matters, staff reported:
- VDOT indicated a commercial entrance will be required and that, if turn lanes are warranted, they would be required at site-plan review; VDOT raised no objection to the public-hearing stage;
- The county fire/rescue entity recommended conditions concerning water availability and emergency access and said it had toured the property with the applicant; the applicant said she agreed to the recommendations;
- Environmental review noted the project will require multiple state and federal permits for land disturbance, stormwater management and wetlands if constructed;
- The Virginia Department of Health (VDH) told staff it is awaiting well and septic applications and campground plan review and permit applications prior to construction or occupancy;
- The schools office provided a statement that it strongly prefers campground occupants not enroll in Prince George County schools where legally permissible because of capacity concerns.

Several residents cited specific local code sections and county practice in public comment: County Code 50-71 (definition of recreational vehicle park), 50-76 (unit-space rental/30-day limit) and related code provisions on registration and supervision of occupants were cited during testimony and used to argue the county must ensure enforcement if the use is permitted.

At the close of public testimony, commissioners did not take a final vote on the special-exception application during the hearing recorded in the transcript; staff and the applicant said they would provide additional materials (traffic information and clarifying language for a condition the applicant contested). The planning commission's recommendation on a special exception is advisory; if the commission forwards a recommendation to the Board of Supervisors, that body will hold a subsequent public hearing and decide whether to approve or deny the special exception.

Why this matters: the commission's recommendation will shape whether the Board of Supervisors conducts its own public hearing on a large seasonal campground that residents say could change traffic patterns, affect groundwater and require multiple state permits. The record shows multiple outstanding technical questions (water availability, septic/well approvals, VDOT entrance and turn-lane warrants) and intense local opposition.

What happens next: staff and the applicant agreed to submit additional materials (traffic information and proposed condition language) and the commission will consider the record and any updated staff analysis before making a recommendation to the Board of Supervisors. No final county approvals or building permits have been issued as of the Sept. 25 hearing.","Prince George County Planning Commission members on Sept. 25 heard more than a dozen residents oppose a special-exception request to allow a commercial recreational-vehicle park with 205 campsites on a 258-acre parcel on Lebanon Road at Lake Lebanon.",{"_33":87,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":88,"_41":89,"_43":90,"_44":91,"_46":92,"_48":93,"_50":94,"_52":95,"_54":55,"_56":57,"_58":96,"_60":61,"_62":63,"_64":97,"_66":67,"_68":69,"_70":67,"_71":72,"_73":72},5975029,"Commission grants 30-day deferral for rezoning request RZ25-0005; applicant to provide traffic info",152,395000,547000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5829579-b48658ada2a71c9c4412cb8a571068d3&start=395&end=547","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5829579-b48658ada2a71c9c4412cb8a571068d3/thumbnail_395000.jpg","/articles/5975029/Prince-George-County/Virginia/Commission-grants-30-day-deferral-for-rezoning-request-RZ25-0005-applicant-to-provide-traffic-info","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/5975029-084353a84148c19b47f7acaa9fd0971f/orig.mp4?Expires=1770511573&Signature=Srm0sSm60N-9i0w7t-YikvltUGSvtsI3-VS9pRbF-dJORKhZeauexQKve2I9Ht3KAaiOb07hPlQI5aiFOfhoUidM8Hc9FN9L~OeGelKpnP8Hh56VObBZ-A4TmXaslBpoPZeizvvvx7q9fA-paj0bTjhuAaKUhBQC3qVC84uRMvdBk6SpskmpLV7WHAdvnLbxQTXDLpeoy1SHDQEMabhFPaWTCNIe9KJK92E8NKTjJ4Le8vAOPCuwcaaWnDEHGGOXDdcmYXGaq81SKZznDhRFwfyDaxO8DCQAV-tSggmiZTavKG3h~VKPoErWQJweL3YBEBVcSLqPfgN6DWLarAistA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Prince George County Planning Commission on Sept. 25 voted to accept an applicant\u0000request to defer consideration of rezoning application RZ25-0005 until Oct. 23, 2025, so that the applicant can submit additional materials for staff review, including engineering and traffic information.

In the hearing record, the applicant\u0000was represented for the rezoning matter by attorney Will Shumack of the law firm Wood Rogers. Shumack told the commission that the staff report had been received late and that the applicant would provide additional information, including an engineering review of traffic and contact with VDOT, and asked the commission to defer the rezoning item 30 days. The commission\u0000voted on a motion to accept the applicant's request; a roll-call vote recorded in the transcript showed all commissioners present voting yes.

Why this matters: a deferral allows staff and the applicant to resolve outstanding technical questions before the commission makes a recommendation to the Board of Supervisors. The commission\u0000makes only advisory recommendations on rezoning; any final decision will be made by the Board at a future public hearing.

What happens next: the applicant said it would submit the requested materials quickly. The rezoning case RZ25-0005 is scheduled to return to the commission on Oct. 23, 2025, per the deferral motion.","The planning commission accepted an applicant request to defer rezoning case RZ25-0005 to Oct. 23 so staff can review additional materials, including a traffic assessment. The motion passed by roll call; staff had received the report late and the applicant\u0000represented by counsel said they would provide the additional documents.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Audit of draft articles and revisions applied

Planning commission hears residents—concerns over proposed 205-site Lebanon Road RV park

Commission grants 30-day deferral for rezoning request RZ25-0005; applicant to provide traffic info