HomeMy WebLinkAboutSP201900009 Review Comments Special Use Permit 2020-05-08COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road, North Wing
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596
Phone (434) 296-5832 Fax (434) 972-4176
May 8, 2020
Valerie Wagner Long
321 East Main St. Suite 400
Charlottesville, VA 22902
vlongka,williamsmullen.com / (434) 951-5709
RE: Review Comment Letter #2: SP-2019-00009 S.L. Williamson Replacement Asphalt Plant
Ms. Long:
Staff has reviewed your initial submittal for the special use permit (SP), SP201900009 S.L. Williamson Replacement
Asphalt Plant. We have a number of questions and comments which we believe should be addressed before we can
recommend favorably on your SP request. We would be glad to meet with you to discuss these issues. Our comments are
provided below:
General Application Comments:
Please revise the title of the plan to "Concept Plan" and include the application number, SP201900009. Rev. 1:
Comment addressed.
2. Project narrative/Concept Plan:
i. Under A. Proposal, the narrative states that the lease area of the asphalt plant is 5.6 acres. However,
Sheet 1 of the Concept Plan states that the SP area is 4.4 acres and follows the limits of the S.L.
Williamson lease area. Please clarify this discrepancy and revise either the narrative or Sheet 1 of the
Concept Plan so that the acreages match and are correct. Rev. 1: Comment addressed. S.L.
Williamson's lease area crosses into TMP 88-13B and that is why the narrative states the total lease
area is 5.6 acres. The SP application is only proposing improvements on TMP 88-18 and this
portion of the lease area measures 4.4. acres.
ii. Please provide a more detailed explanation regarding the anticipated benefits to air and water quality that
will result from upgrading the existing asphalt mixing facilities. This information is important because it
will identify the tangible benefits that will result from the new equipment and make the operation more
consistent with objectives and strategies specified in Chapter 4 of the Comprehensive Plan. Rev. 1:
Comment not fully addressed. Staff acknowledges that the revised narrative and states that the
replacement plant will protect air and water quality because it will feature modern equipment. Is
there any technical evidence that can be supplied demonstrating this? For example, information on
air discharges of the current plant vs. the improvements that will be realized with the new
equipment? Current levels of runoff and contamination into water bodies from the current plant
vs. the replacement plant? This information would demonstrate consistency with Objectives 1-2,
and 4-6 from Chanter 4 of the Comprehensive Plan. Staff acknowledges that the noise stud
provides evidence that the proposal is generally consistent with Objectives 3 and 7 of Chapter 4.
iii. Specifically, state how the proposal is consistent with Objectives 1-4, and 6-7. Rev. 1: See previous
comment. If the applicant provides more specific technical information on these topics, it should be
added to the narrative.
3. Flood Hazard Overlay District (FH) — Per the application narrative and notes on Sheet 1 of the Concept Plan,
the applicant is pursuing a floodplain study to determine the true extent of the 100-year floodplain within the
extent of the SP project. Once completed, and in consultation with the County Engineer, a Letter of Map
Revision (LOMR) will be filed with FEMA. This will identify the true extent of the 100-year floodplain, and the
proposed plant will be located outside of the floodplain.
i. On Sheets 2-4 of the Concept Plan, please identify the existing extent of the FH District (100-year
floodplain) per FEMA FIRM panel, and label this feature with the FIRM panel number. Rev. 1:
Comment addressed.
ii. If the LOMR is completed prior to the Board of Supervisors public hearing (as the applicant anticipates
according to the project narrative), Sheets 2-4 will need to identify the boundaries of the 100-year
floodplain in accordance with the LOMR. Rev. 1: Comment stands. Staff acknowledges the LOMR
note that is on Sheet 1. Please verify whether the LOMR is completed vet or still underway. If the
LOMR has been completed, please revise the extent of the 100-year floodplain on all applicable
sheets and reference the LOMR number. The County Engineer has also offered some comments
about the LOMR, please see their comments attached below.
iii. Please explain how the proposal will be consistent with Strategy #7a from Chapter 4 of the
Comprehensive Plan through the approval of the LOMR. Rev. 1: Comment stands. Staff acknowledges
the LOMR note that is on Sheet 1. Please verify whether the LOMR is completed vet or still
underway. Per applicant's comment response letter dated April 6, 2020, the LOMR will ensure
that the replacement asphalt plant will be located outside of the 100-year floodplain. If the LOMR
has been approved by FEMA and the improvements proposed by this SP will now located outside
of the floodplain, the proposal is consistent with Strategy #7a. If the LOMR has not vet been
approved, by FEMA, then condition b stated below will still apply to staffs recommendation on
this application.
4. Critical Slopes: Please make the symbology representing areas of critical slopes darker/more visible on Sheets 2-
4 of the Concept Plan. Rev. 1: Please clarify what the dark symbology represents on Sheets 3-5. Is that
supposed to represent ground cover that has already been disturbed? It overlaps with steep slopes and
other lavers such as the 100-year floodplain and WPO buffer.
Critical Slopes: The proposed layout of the asphalt plant and associated travelways/improvements encroaches
into areas of critical slopes. Furthermore, staff cannot verify that grading or construction activity that will be
performed to establish the asphalt plant and improvements will not encroach into critical slopes as required by
Section 18-4.2.3(b). Therefore, two special exception applications are needed:
i. 18-4.2.3(a) — waive or modify the requirement that "no structure or improvement shall be located on any
lot or parcel in any area other than a building site." Rev. 1: Comment not fully addressed. Staff
acknowledges the applicant's response regarding how the critical slopes as shown in Albemarle
County GIS were created. See comment #5 (ii) and #5 (iv) below for follow-up comments on the
critical slopes.
Building site: the revised plan still does not demonstrate that a building site which complies with
Section 18-4.2.2 (a)(2) exists on site: "Each buildiniz site in a development subiect to section 32 of this
chapter shall have an area of 30,000 square feet or treater and shall be of such dimensions that no one
dimension exceeds any other by a ratio of more than five to one as described by a rectangle inscribed
within the buildinz site. The buildinz site shall have adequate area for all buildings and structures, two
subsurface drainfields approved by the Virzinia Department of Health if the lot will be served by a
conventional onsite sewage system, parkinz and loading areas, storage yards and other improvements,
and all earth disturbing activity related to the improvements."
A building site complying with the size, dimension, and composition elements described in the
italicized text must be provided for staff to verify that a waiver or modification to Section 18-4.2.2
(a)(2) is not needed. A building site should be drawn on Sheets 4 and 5 of the SP plan to verify
compliance with this code section. Otherwise, a waiver or modification approval is needed, per
Section 18-4.2.3 (a). Please attached comments from Josh Kirtley with the Virginia Department of
Health (VDH). VDH cannot currently state whether drainfields are feasible within the proiect
area, and this is a requirement of the building site regulations.
ii. 18-4.2.3(b) — waive or modify the requirement that "no structure, improvement, or land disturbing
activity to establish the structure or improvement shall be located on critical or preserved slopes except
as otherwise permitted under sections 4.2.5, 4.2.6, 4.3.1, and 30.7.4." Rev. 1: Comment not fully
addressed. Per the applicant's comment response letter, some of the areas on the western side of
the S.L. Williamson lease area that show up as critical slopes on Albemarle County GIS are man-
made stockpiles of overburden that have been excavated from the quarry. The applicant stated
that per the definition of critical slopes in Section 18-3.1 of the Zoning Ordinance, these areas are
"man-made piles of materials that are part of the quarry operations, which is a legal, permitted and
thus approved use. As such, the construction and installation of the asphalt plant will not impact
any actual critical slopes as defined by the Ordinance, such that a critical slope waiver is not
required."
Staff agrees with the applicant's assertion that Section 18-3.1 states that "Slopes of 25 percent or
greater which are lawfully created within a development that was approved by the County shall not be
considered critical slopes." However, the existing asphalt plant has never been approved by the
County as a use on this site either through a site plan or special use permit. Therefore, the critical
slopes visible in GIS are the official locations of critical slopes because these areas are not within a
"development that was approved by the County."
Per the definition in Section 3.1 of the Zoning Ordinance, the critical slopes requirements of Section
18-4.2 can be waived administratively if "a more accurate field survey certified by a professional
surveyor or enzineer." See Zoning Division comments for additional information. If a topographic
survey is provided, staff can evaluate that and better determine the true extent of critical slopes.
It's possible that this will find that the areas of critical slopes visible in GIS, are not actually critical
slopes and eliminate the need for the waiver. Otherwise, a critical slopes waiver is still needed to
disturb those areas which show up as critical slopes on the official GIS map since the development
has never been approved by the County.
Furthermore, the site layout on Sheets 4-5 and the exhibit titled "Proposed Layout- Colored
Exhibit" show an 8' x 14' recycle bin, six 10' x 14' skidded cold feed systems, and a 30' x 55'
skidded aggregate access conveyor extending into the areas of critical slopes that the applicant
agrees are actually critical slopes. If those features are to be installed over critical slope areas, a
waiver or modification approval is still required. Again, the topographic survey may result in this
comment no longer being applicable.
iii. 18-4.2.5(a)(1) and 18-33.44 — Please submit an Application for a Special Exception. The special
exception application will run with and as part of the SP application. Submit all required information
identifying how the request would satisfy one or more of the findings set forth in Section 18-4.2.5(a)(3).
Rev. 1: Comment stands, see previous comments above.
iv. 18-4.2.5(a)(1) — The special exception application must also shall state the reason for the modification or
waiver, explaining how the modification or waiver, if granted, would address the rapid and/or large-scale
movement of soil and rock, excessive stormwater run-off, siltation of natural and man-made bodies of
water, loss of aesthetic resources, and, in the event of septic system failure, a greater travel distance of
septic effluent (collectively referred to as the "public health, safety, and welfare factors") that might
otherwise result from the disturbance of critical slopes. Rev. 1: Comment stands, see previous
comments above.
6. Grading: Please revise the Concept Plan so that it includes information showing proposed grading and the extent
of disturbed areas. This information is needed in order for staff to evaluate the proposal's consistency with
Objectives 3, 4, and 6 of Chapter 4 of the Comprehensive Plan. Rev. 1: Comment stands, see comments from
the Countv Engineer regarding grading and other mitigation measures that may be necessary within the
entire 50' buffer that extends throughout the lease area.
i. This is also a requirement for all special use permit applications in accordance with Section 18-33.33(F)
of the Zoning Ordinance. Rev. 1: Comment stands, see comments from the County Engineer
regarding grading and other mitigation measures that may be necessary within the entire 50'
buffer that extends throughout the lease area.
7. Natural Resources Extraction Overlay District (NR): There are several Zoning Ordinance Code sections that
establish different standards that apply to uses within the NR Overlay District. Please provide more information
that identifies how the proposal is consistent with these requirements:
i. 18-30.4.05 — Percentage of lot coverage. All operations associated with the extraction of natural
resources as well as the provision of parking areas and access roads and driveways shall not occupy more
than eighty (80) percent of the total site. Rev. 1: Per applicant comment response letter, the percent
lot coverage is 63%, or 2.8 acres of the 4.4 acre site. Please add a calculation to Sheet 1 of the
Concept Plan stating the acreage/square footage of lot coverage for improvements within the site.
It should state the parking, travel way, buildings, etc. and provide a calculation of the percentage.
ii. 18-30.4.06 — No uses or structure shall be located within two hundred (200) feet of any occupied
dwelling. Please provide information demonstrating the replacement use and associated structures will be
located a minimum of 200 feet from any occupied dwelling. Rev. 1: Comment addressed.
iii. 18-30.4.09 - Existing trees and ground cover along public road frontage shall be preserved, maintained
and supplemented by selective cutting, transplanting and addition of new trees, shrubs and other ground
cover for the depth of any roadside setback (100 ft.). What is the extent of the existing tree line and
groundcover within the 100 ft. roadside setback within the SP area? Providing notes on proposed
landscaping (specifically by providing native vegetation) will make the proposal consistent with
Objective 4, Strategy #4e of Chapter 4 of the Comprehensive Plan. Rev. 1: Comment partially
addressed. Staff acknowledges that applicant's response regarding adding additional landscaping
along the road frontage and the security concerns this poses for the applicant. It appears that most
of the SP limit area along Red Hill Road contains existing vegetation that satisfies this requirement.
There is only a small area that appears to need additional landscaping, and staff has circled this on
the attached exhibit. It would be best if a note was added to the concept plan stating something like
"Additional trees and/or shrubs will be installed where existing vegetation is missing, per
requirements of Section 18-30.4.09 of the Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance. Landscaping
materials and locations will be evaluated during site plan review."
iv. 18-30.4.10 —See Zoning Division comments regarding hours of operation. In similar SP applications for
asphalt plants in the Rural Areas and NR Overlay District, hours of operation have been restricted to 7:00
a.m. and 10:00 p.m., Monday through Saturday, provided that for no more than sixty days per year, the
hours of operation may be between 7:00 a.m. and 12:00 a.m., Monday through Saturday. Staff will be
recommending those hours as a condition of approval of the SP. Rev. 1: Comment not fully addressed.
The applicant has stated that they cannot agree to this condition. Staff understands that the
operation has been in existence for decades and has operate during hours different from the
recommended condition. Please be aware that this comment was made because the hours of
operation are an actual Zoning Ordinance regulation and cannot be altered unless a special
exception is approved. Zoning staff have provided an updated comment with a revised condition
that could be supported if the applicant agrees: "hours shall be between 7:00 a.m. and 12:00 a.m.,
Monday through Sunday, provided that for no more than sixty days per year, the hours of
operation may be between 12:01 a.m. and 12:00 a.m., Monday through Sunday." However, staff
cannot recommend an unlimited 24-hour operation. The Special Use Permit for the Luck Stone
asphalt plant located at 2981 Richmond Road was previously approved with limited hours of
operation, and these recommendations are based on those conditions.
8. Water Protection Ordinance (WPO): The proposed layout encroaches into the WPO stream buffer within the
SP area. Under the WPO Ordinance, the furthest that any structure, improvement, or activity can encroach into
the WPO buffer is the most landward 50' feet, in accordance with Section 17-604(A). The travelway and portions
of the stormwater facilities are located beyond the most landward 50.' The layout needs to be revised to the
satisfaction of the County Engineer before staff can recommend approval. This will strengthen the application's
consistency with Objective 1, Strategy #la and Objective 3, Strategy #3a from Chapter 4 of the Comprehensive
Plan. See Engineering and Zoning Division comments for further information. Rev. 1: Comment stands, please
see comments from the County Engineer regarding the 50' buffer throughout the lease area. There are
additional soil amendments and mitigation measures such as landscaping that will help establish a 50'
buffer which staff could support.
9. Natural Resources: David Hannah, Natural Resources Manager, has reviewed the application and has no
objections so long as proposed grading and improvements do not extend further northward into the site. There are
existing wetlands and other sensitive ecological features along the stream north of the improvements shown on
the Concept Plan. Please be aware of this issue when addressing comment #8. If certain features can only be
relocated north of where currently shown, they should be located to be entirely outside of the 100' WPO stream
buffer. Rev. 1: Comment addressed, the reconfigured site appears to lie outside of wetland areas on the
north end of the S.L. Williamson lease area/SP limits.
i. There appears to be a rectangular -shaped area north of the proposed travelway that is located between the
500'-600' contour lines that could be utilized for relocating the travelway turnaround and/or SWM
facilities, as mentioned in the previous comment. This area measures approximately 8,100 sq. ft. and is
located outside of the WPO 100' stream buffer. If necessary in order to address comment #8, staff could
support the northward relocation of improvements to this area. Rev. 1: Comment no longer applicable.
Planning
Planning staff s comments are organized as follows:
• How the proposal relates to the Comprehensive Plan
• Additional comments from reviewers (See attached)
Comprehensive Plan
Comments on how your project conforms to the Comprehensive Plan will be provided to the Planning Commission and
Board of Supervisors as part of the staff report that will be prepared for the work session or public hearing. The comments
below are in preparation for the Planning Commission review and may change based on direction from the Commission
and/or with subsequent submittals.
The proposal is located within an approximately 5.5-acre size lease area on Tax Map Parcel (TMP) 08800-00-00-01800.
This property is zoned RA Rural Area and is located within Rural Area 4 of the Comprehensive Plan. The property is also
located within the Flood Hazard (FH) Overlay Zoning District, and the Natural Resource Extraction (NR) Overlay Zoning
District. Several businesses lease portions of the property for mining activities, including the S.L. Williamson company.
The property is commonly referred to as the Martin Marietta Red Hill Quarry. S.L. Williamson's current on -site activities
include the production of plant mix asphalt that is sold and used for road paving and construction. The existing machinery
and facilities within TMP 88-18 that belong to the S.L. Williamson operation are located at the southwestern corner of the
property, north of Red Hill Road (State Route 708).
The Rural Area chapter (Chapter 7) of the Comprehensive Plan has designated the subject property for Rural Area land
use. The intent of the Rural Area designation is to allow uses that preserve and protect agricultural, forestal, open space,
and natural, historic and scenic resources; and also to allow residential uses at a density of up to 0.5 acres per dwelling
unit.
Asphalt mixing plants are not a permitted use within the RA Zoning District and are not explicitly recommended as a land
use type by the Rural Areas chapter of the Master Plan. However, TMP 88-18 is located within the NR Overlay Zoning
District, which allows asphalt mixing plants through approval of a Special Use Permit. There are approximately ten
properties throughout the entire County that are within the NR Overlay District. All of these properties are also located
within the Rural Area of the Comprehensive Plan and have a base zoning of RA.
As stated in Section 18-30.4.01 of the Zoning Ordinance, the purpose of the NR Overlay District is "to provide for the
utilization of spring water for off -site consumption, sand, gravel, stone or other mineral deposits within the county in a
manner compatible with adjacent land uses. " The NR Overlay District has been established on properties where deposits
of sand, gravel, stone or other minerals exist; where the uses permitted hereunder are unlikely to create effects adverse to
public health, safety and welfare or to the value of adjacent properties; and specifically where existing roads will not make
it necessary to conduct trucking operations through developed residential areas or areas likely to be developed for
residents during the course of any extractive use.
Therefore, the mineral extraction activities that occur on TMP 88-18 are permitted by -right on the subject property.
Furthermore, an asphalt mixing plant that is co -located with a by -right use in the NR Overlay District is consistent with
Objective #3a from Chapter 4 of the Comprehensive Plan, provided that certain Zoning Ordinance performance standards
are adhered to, and the use does not result in detrimental effects on surrounding properties that conflict with the goals and
objectives of Chapter 7.
Many comments mentioned earlier in this letter are related to protection of sensitive environmental features and
waterbodies near the proposal. TMP 88-18 is located within the North Fork Hardware River Watershed, which is not a
water -supply watershed. Nearby streams drain into the Hardware River, which belongs to the Middle James River Basin.
In order for staff to make a favorable recommendation on the proposal, the application must demonstrate that it is
consistent with the following objectives from Chapter 4 of the Comprehensive Plan:
• Objective 1: Ensure clean and abundant water resources for public health, business, healthy ecosystems, and
personal enjoyment by preventing shortages and contamination;
• Objective 2: Protect air quality;
• Objective 3: Recognize the economic value of the County's mineral resources while giving due consideration to
the potential harm mineral extraction activities and byproducts can have on human health and property values.
• Objective 4: Protect the biological diversity and ecological integrity of the County in both the Rural Area and
Development Areas.
• Objective 6: Retain and improve land cover near rivers and streams and protect wetlands.
• Objective 7: Protect residents and properties from damage that can be prevented when natural hazards are
present.
Recommended Conditions
Staff will be recommending that the following conditions be approved by the Board for this application. See Zoning
Division comments for further information.
a) SP201900009 shall be developed in general accord with the concept plan titled "Proposed Layout Plan Special
Use Permit SL Williamson Asphalt Plant @ Red Hill Quarry," with the layout changes recommended by staff.
The Zoning Administrator may approve revisions to the concept plan to allow compliance with the Zoning
Ordinance; Rev. 1: Comment addressed, applicant agrees to this condition.
b) Approval of the special use permit is contingent on the acceptance and approval of a Letter of Map Revision
(LOMR) or Letter of Map Amendment (LOMA) to the County's 100-year floodplain map to remove the plant and
all its associated construction and land disturbance from the 100-year floodplain; Rev. 1: Comment addressed,
applicant agrees to this condition.
c) Use of the asphalt plant authorized by this special use permit shall expire when the adjacent quarry is no longer in
operation; Rev. 1: Per applicant's comment response, the applicant is not agreeable to this condition. Please
contact the Zoning staff member to further discuss this condition.
d) Hours of operation of the asphalt plant shall be between 7:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m., Monday through Saturday,
provided that for no more than sixty days per year, the hours of operation may be between 7:00 a.m. and 12:00
a.m., Monday through Saturday; Rev. 1: Comment not fully addressed. Per applicant's comment response,
the applicant is not agreeable to this condition because the plant has been operating for 24 hours a day, 7
days a week for over 50 years. Staff understands that this is how the plant has been operating, but this is
technically a violation of Section 18-30.4.10, which is why staff recommended this condition. The
recommended hours are consistent with hours of operation imposed on other recently approved asphalt
mixing plants in the County. Staff cannot recommend an unlimited 24 hours operation. Zoning staff have
offered a revised condition and hours. Please see their comments below and indicate whether the applicant
is agreeable to those hours.
e) Sound/noise barriers and attenuation measures will be provided as necessary to comply with the County's noise
ordinance (section 18-4.18); Rev. 1: Comment addressed, applicant agrees to this condition.
f) Plant site lighting will comply with the County's outdoor lighting ordinance (section 18-4.17). Rev. 1: Comment
addressed, applicant agrees to this condition.
g) Height of the asphalt plant and all associated structures will be limited to 80 feet. Rev. 1: Comment addressed,
applicant agrees to this condition.
In addition to consistency with the Comprehensive Plan, please also be advised that all zoning map amendment
applications are evaluated relative to the "factors to be considered" specified in County Code § 18-33.40(B). This
evaluation will be written in the staff report to the Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors once the application
moves forward to public hearings.
Community Meeting
A community meeting was held on December 19, 2019 at Red Hill Elementary School. The applicant provided a thorough
and detailed explanation of the proposed replacement plant facilities and the benefits that would result related to air and
water quality, as well as the reduction in noise pollution. Approximately 5 community members attended, and no
objections were expressed to the proposal. Community members made comments in support of replacing the plant with
modern equipment since it would reduce noise, air, and water pollution.
Department of Community Development — Zoning Division
Please see the attached comments from Lea Brumfield, lbrumfieldgalbemarle.org.
Department of Community Development — Engineering Division
Please see the attached comments from the County Engineer, Frank Pohl, fpohl(aDalbemarle.org.
Department of Community Development — Inspections Division
Inspections has no objections to the proposal. Please see attached comments from Michael Dellinger,
mdellingergalbemarle.org.
Albemarle County Department of Fire & Rescue
Fire Rescue has no objections to the proposal. Please see attached comments from Shawn Maddox,
smaddox(iDalbemarle.org.
Virginia Department of Health
Requested changes from Josh Kirtley, Joshua.kirtley@vdh.virginia.gov, are provided below:
1. I do not see anything in the way of soils work or where they have a proposed drainfield site for this project.
Without this information, I am unable to say whether or not the project is feasible.
Action after Receipt of Comments
The applicant voluntarily requested a deferral of final Board action on this application. Final Board action must occur on
or before August 31, 2022.
After you have read this letter, please take one of the actions identified on "Action After Receipt of Comment Letter"
which is attached.
Resubmittal
If you choose to resubmit, please use the attached form. There is a $1,075 resubmittal fee for the next submittal and each
subsequent submittal made thereafter. The resubmittal date schedule is provided for your convenience. Additional
notification fees will not be required unless a deferral takes place and adjoining owners need to be notified of a new date.
Feel free to contact me if you wish to meet or need additional information. My email address is blan ig llekalbemarle.org.
Sincerely,
Cameron Langille
Senior Planner
Planning Division, Department of Community Development
enc: SP201900009 Action After Receipt of Comments
2020 Special Use Permit Resubmittal Schedule
Special Use Permit Resubmittal Form
County of Albemarle
Department of Community Development
Memorandum
To: Cameron Langille, Senior Planner
From: Lea Brumfield, Senior Planner
Division: Zoning
Date: 5/5/2020
Subject: 2nd Zoning Comments for SP201900009 I S.L. Williamson Replacement
Asphalt Plant
The following comments are provided regarding the above noted pre -application meeting:
1)
HGweyer, the SiteData on shoot 4 of the peoial I Ise PerMit oonnent n/on shows the
,
lease area is not the size of the requested area of the SpeGial Use Oe *t Comment
resolved.
2) The applicant's proposal to replace the existing S.L. Williamson Company, Inc. asphalt plant
on TMP 08800-00-00-01800 requires the following considerations:
Zoning 2nd Comments SP201900009
fi,,edplain Ynay net be further disturbed or developed. The applicant has asserted that
the floodplain will be adjusted following the acceptance of a LOMR which will be
accepted prior to the Board hearing.
e) P-a*ing, lighting, appr-epFiateness of use. The GUFFeRtly proposed plan satisfies these
elms.
3) Suggested conditions of approval will likely include:
a) SP201900009 shall be developed in general accord with the concept plan titled
"Proposed Layout Plan Special Use Permit SL Williamson Asphalt Plant @ Red Hill
Quarry," with the layout changes recommended by staff. The Zoning Administrator may
approve revisions to the concept plan to allow compliance with the Zoning Ordinance;
b) Approval of the special use permit is contingent on the acceptance and approval of an
Letter of Map Revision (LOMR) or Letter of Map Amendment (LOMA) to the County's
100-year floodplain map to remove the plant and all its associated construction and land
disturbance from the 100-year floodplain;
c) Use of the asphalt plant authorized by this special use permit shall expire when the
adjacent quarry is no longer in operation;
d) .,
Monday tht;qugh SaturdW, provided that A9F pig met:ee Man s4ty days peF year-, the hours
In
light of the applicant's prior operation without noise complaints, and the remote
location of the application in question, staff recommends hours of operation of
the asphalt plant shall be between 7:00 a.m. and 12:00 a.m., Monday through
Sunday, provided that for no more than sixty days per year, the hours of operation
may be between 12:01 a.m. and 12:00 a.m., Monday through Sunday. However,
staff cannot recommend an unlimited 24-hour operation. The Special Use Permit
for the Luck Stone asphalt plant located at 2981 Richmond Road was previously
approved with limited hours of operation, and these recommendations are based
on those conditions.
e) Sound/noise barriers and attenuation measures will be provided as necessary to comply
with the County's noise ordinance (section 18-4.18);
f) Plant site lighting will comply with the County's outdoor lighting ordinance (section 18-
4.17).
g) Height of the asphalt plant and all associated structures will be limited to 80 feet.
4) The supporting documentation for the authorized signatories are: (1) for a board of directors,
the articles of incorporation or a shareholders agreement may limit the board's statutory
authority (Virginia Code § 13.1-673); (2) for a person expressly authorized by the board of
directors, written evidence of that authorization, such as a board resolution or board
minutes; (3) for a committee, an action of the board of directors authorizing the committee to
act; the articles of incorporation or the by-laws may limit the statutory authority (Virginia
Code § 13.1-689); (4) for a corporate officer, the by-laws or the delegating resolution of the
board of directors (Virginia Code § 13.1-694).
Zoning 2nd Comments SP201900009
5) Critical slopes shown on the County GIS's Steep Slopes Overlay may be determined to
have been created as part of the prior development and operation of the asphalt plant by a
field survey prepared by a licensed surveyor.
Review Comments for SP201900009
Project Name: S- L. WILLIAMSON - REPLACEMENT ASPHALT PLANT
Date Completed: Wednesday. May 06, 2020 aepartmentUvision/Agency: Review Status:
Reviewer: Frank Pohl
CDD Enaineerina Requested Changes
1. It appears grading is shown within the inner 50-ft of the stream buffer to remove/relocate existing settling basins and material
stockpiles. Grading within the inner 50-ft will be minimized and the buffer restored by removing all unsuitable materials
(grave Ifstoneletc..), providing soil amendments where topsoil has been removed, and providing mitigation plantings. The 50-ft
stream buffer requirements shall apply to the entire lease area, which may require additional mitigation measures for areas
upstream of the plant location. Please show the entire lease area on this plan and additional areas to be mitigated. Add a note
indicating a 50-ft stream buffer will be restored and that mitigation will also be provided for impacts to the landward 50-ft of
stream buffer.
2. Please copy the County with all documents submitted to FEMA as they occur to allow adequate time for County review.
Page: 1 County of Albemarle Printed On: 1 05l0812020
Review Comments for SP201900009
Project Name: S- L. WILLIAMSON - REPLACEMENT ASPHALT PLANT
Date Completed: Wednesday, April 29, 2020 DepartmentQvisiorMgency: Review Status:
Reviewer: Michael Dellinger
CDD Inspections v
No Objection El
Page: 1 County of Albemarle Printed On: 04I2912020
Review Comments for SP201900009
Project Name: S- L. WILLIAMSON - REPLACEMENT ASPHALT PLANT
Date Completed: Wednesday, April QS, 2020 DepartmentUivisiorVAgency: Review Status:
Reviewer: Shawn Maddox
Fire Rescue v
No Objection El
Page: 1 County of Albemarle Printed ❑n: 04I2912020
L I IitI1I I I /I
' 1110790y., �
tF
------------
\ \ \ \ \ \\ \ \\ \\ \ \ 1- • \
\\ \\ \\ \\ �.• \mil \ `�\ \ i' � \ \ \ I 1 \\ -- \
\ \\ �\\ \\ \\ \\ ice• Y `.� \ \ 1 \ \ ;\ \\ \ .1 \\ \\ •.
� \\ � \\ \\ \\ \\\ \\ \\ \\ \\ \\ ♦ ♦♦ \ \\ \ '�\� \\ \---------�--_\ .�,�,Rti�p1,,
\\ \ \\ � \\ \\ \\ \ \ \ \•\� \\ \\\� 1 \\ \\ \\ \\--------_� I ''' - Fes`
\ \ \ \ \ \ \\
O \ \ \st,_
�T JyT ---_--��_ -----T ..
�1+r fr .' 'l• •.--_-_ - --- ------ ___-- ----------�.-------------- .
P� f- - ,f�_l•� _k - -------------��.-�\_ �_�------ ------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
ACTION AFTER RECEIPT OF COMMENT LETTER
RESUBMITTAL
Within 10 days, please do one of the following:
(1) Request a Planning Commission public hearing date be scheduled
(2) Resubmit in Response to Review Comments
(3) Withdraw your application
(1) Request a Planning Commission public hearing date be scheduled
You may request that your application to be scheduled for public hearing with the Planning
Commission. Please note, once a Planning Commission date is requested, no additional information,
revisions, documents, etc will be accepted for review and analysis.
(2) Resubmittal in Response to Review Comments
Make sure that the resubmittal is on or before a resubmittal date as published in the project review
schedule. The full resubmittal schedule may be found at www.albemarle.org in the "forms" section at
the Community Development page. In your comment response letter with your resubmittal, please
indicate whether or not you would like to proceed straight to the Planning Commission without getting
comments back, or if you prefer to have comments. If you choose to go straight to the Planning
Commission, please note that no additional information, revisions, documents, etc will be accepted
after your resubmittal. Be sure to include the resubmittal form on the last page of your comment letter
with your submittal.
The application fee which you paid covers staff review of the initial submittal and one resubmittal.
Each subsequent resubmittal requires an additional fee. (See attached Fee Schedule.)
(3) Withdraw Your Application
If at any time you wish to withdraw your application, please provide your request in writing.
Failure to Respond
Revised 9-17-19 MCN
An application shall be deemed to be voluntarily withdrawn if the applicant requests deferral pursuant
to subsection 33.52(A) and fails to provide within 90 days before the end of the deferral period all of
the information required to allow the Board to act on the application, or fails to request a deferral as
provided in subsection 33.52(B) or (C).
Fee Payment
Fees paid in cash or by check must be paid at the Community Development Intake Counter. Make
checks payable to the County of Albemarle. Do not send checks directly to the Review Coordinator.
Fees may also be paid by credit card using the secure online payment system, accessed at
http://www.albemarle.org/department.asp?department=cdd&relpage=21685.
Revised 9-17-19 MCN
2020 Submittal and Review Schedule
Special Use Permits and Zoning Map Amendments
Resubmittal Schedule
Resubmittal Dates (1st,
3rd, and 5th Monday of
the month)
Comments given to the
Applicant
Applicant requests PC
Public Hearing AND
Payment Due for Legal
Ad (no additional
resubmittals)
Planning
Commission Public
Hearing No sooner
than* COB Auditorium
Monday
Wednesday
Friday
Tuesday
Jan 06
Feb 05
Feb 14
Mar 10
Jan 21
Feb 19
Feb 28
Mar 24
Feb 03
Mar 04
Mar 13
Apr 07
Feb 18
Mar 18
Mar 27
Apr 21
Mar 02
Apr 01
Apr 10
May 05
Mar 16
Apr 15
Apr 24
May 19
Mar 30
Apr 29
May 08
Jun 02
Apr 06
May 06
May 08
Jun 02
Apr 20
May 20
May 22
Jun 16
May 04
Jun 03
Jun 12
Jul 07
May 18
Jun 17
Jun 26
Jul 21
Jun 01
Jul 01
Jul 10
Aug 04
Jun 15
Jul 15
Jul 24
Aug 18
Jun 29
Jul 29
Aug 07
Sep 01
Jul 06
Aug 05
Aug 07
Sep 01
Jul 20
Aug 19
Aug 28
Sep 22
Aug 03
Sep 02
Sep 11
Oct 06
Aug17
Sep 16
Sep 25
Oct 20
Aug 31
Sep 30
Oct 16
Nov 10
Sep 08
Oct 07
Oct 16
Nov 10
Sep 21
Oct 21
Oct 30
Nov 24
Oct 05
Nov 04
Nov 06
Dec 01
Oct 19
Nov 18
Nov 13
Dec 08
Nov 02
Dec 02
Dec 18
Jan 12 2021
Nov 16
Dec 16
Dec 18
Jan 12 2021
Dec 21
Jan 20 2021
Jan 29 2021
Feb 23 2021
Jan 04 2021
Feb 03 2021
Feb 05 2021
Mar 02 2021
Bold italics = submittal/meeting day is different due to a holiday.
Dates with shaded background are not 2020.
2021 dates are tentative.
*Public hearing dates have been set by the Planning Commission; however, if due to unforeseen
circumstances the Planning Commission is unable to meet on this date, your project will be moved to
the closest available agenda date.
FOR OFFICE USE ONLY SP # or ZMA #
Fee Amount $ Date Paid By who? Receipt 4 Ck# Bv:
4 01" Atp
o r
� �8cruta�
Resubmittal of information for Special Use Permit or
Zoning Map Amendment
PROJECT NUMBER: PROJECT NAME:
❑ Resubmittal Fee is Required ❑ Per Request ❑ Resubmittal Fee is Not Required
Community Development Project Coordinator
Signature
Date
Name of Applicant
Signature
FEES
Phone Number
Date
Resubmittal fees for Special Use Permit -- original Special Use Permit fee of $1,075
❑ First resubmission
FREE
❑ Each additional resubmission
$538
Resubmittal fees for original Special Use Permit fee of $2,150
❑ First resubmission
FREE
❑ Each additional resubmission
$1,075
Resubmittal fees for original Zoning Map Amendment fee of $2,688
❑ First resubmission
FREE
❑ Each additional resubmission
$1,344
Resubmittal fees for original Zoning Map Amendment fee of $3,763
❑ First resubmission
FREE
❑ Each additional resubmission
$1,881
❑ Deferral of scheduled public hearing at applicant's request — Add'l notice fees will be required
$194
To be raid after staff review for public notice:
Most applications for Special Use Permits and Zoning Map Amendment require at least one public hearing by the Planning Commission
and one public hearing by the Board of Supervisors. Virginia State Code requires that notice for public hearings be made by publishing
a legal advertisement in the newspaper and by mailing letters to adjacent property owners. Therefore, at least two fees for public notice
are required before a Zoning Map Amendment may be heard by the Board of Supervisors. The total fee for public notice will be
provided to the applicant after the final cost is determined and must be paid before the application is heard by a public body.
MAKE CHECKS TO COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE/PAYMENT AT COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COUNTER
Preparing and mailing or delivering up to fifty (50) notices $215 + actual cost of first-class postage
County of Albemarle Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road Charlottesville, VA 22902 Voice: (434) 296-5832 Fax: (434) 972-4126
1/24/17 Page 1 of 1
$1.00 for each additional notice + actualcost
Preparing and mailing or delivering each notice after fifty (50)
of first-class postage
Legal advertisement (published twice in the newspaper for each public hearing)
Actual cost
minimum of $280 for total of 4publications)