Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Solid Waste Transfer topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board delays decision on Culpeper Recycling request to accept municipal solid waste
Summary
After hours of testimony from neighbors, consultants and the applicant, the Culpeper County Board of Supervisors voted to postpone a conditional-use permit request for Culpeper Recycling so the company can work with VDOT on traffic analyses and site-distance issues.
The Culpeper County Board of Supervisors on May 6 postponed for 90 days a conditional-use permit request from Culpeper Recycling to accept municipal solid waste at its Brandy Road facility, directing the applicant to work with VDOT on traffic, left-turn-lane and sight-distance studies.
The board’s postponement follows hours of testimony from the applicant, county staff, adjacent property owners and two competing waste interests. The county’s planning staff recommended approval with ten conditions, including a 600-tons-per-day cap for municipal solid waste, tarping of trailers, restricted truck routes and site-plan approval before operations begin.
County environmental services staff told the board the facility holds a DEQ “permit by rule” (PBR 600) and has operated as a material-recovery/construction-debris facility; the applicant seeks a modification to accept up to 600 tons per day of municipal solid waste while keeping up to 600 tons per day of construction and demolition debris. The applicant said the existing reinforced concrete building and site controls would be used and that municipal waste would be loaded into transfer trailers and hauled to permitted incinerators or landfills outside the county, not to the county transfer station.
Opponents — including an attorney and technical consultants representing AMRF and residents near the site — stressed health, vector and traffic concerns. James Downey, attorney for AMRF, said the board must determine whether the proposed use would harm “health or safety of persons residing or working in the neighborhood,” and said the scale of truck traffic and vector risks made that finding difficult. Consultant Chuck Terry cited the risks of combining mulch production with municipal solid waste on the same parcel.
Supporters and industry voices argued the business would create competition and reduce tonnage sent through the county-owned Laurel Valley transfer station. Applicant Jake Klitenik described existing operations and said current daily throughput is often about 150–200 tons; he said the requested municipal-waste allocation would not increase on-site traffic beyond the parcel’s permitted 1,200 tons per day capacity and that operation would follow 9 VAC 20-81 regulations.
After board members debated the adequacy of traffic information and VDOT’s role in site review, Vice Chairman Gary Deal moved to postpone for 90 days and have the applicant work with VDOT on a left-turn-lane analysis, trip-generation/site-distance work and any off-site mitigation VDOT recommends. The motion was seconded and carried unanimously.
The postponement does not approve or deny the conditional-use permit; it requires the applicant to return with the requested traffic analyses and any VDOT comments for further board consideration.
The board’s staff recommended, should the board approve a permit in the future, conditions including: compliance with 9 VAC 20-81; no diversion of county transfer-station residuals to this site; a 600-ton-per-day municipal solid waste limit; operating hours of Monday–Saturday, 6 a.m.–6 p.m.; VDOT-approved truck routes; tarping of trailers; on-site queuing space so trucks do not back onto Business Route 29; litter-control measures; and required site-plan approval prior to operation.
The board’s action sends the application back to the applicant with a clear direction to produce VDOT-reviewed traffic and safety analyses; no vote was taken on the underlying permit.
