Zoning Board: Why It Should Deny Mining Co Permit

(The following is an open letter to each member of the Pittsylvania County Board of Zoning Appeals from Karen B Maute, a local environmentalist and SCC Affiliate. This board will meet Tuesday, January 8, 2008 at 6:30 pm in Chatham to hear an appeal from the multi-national and local corporations seeking to mine uranium in Pittsylvania county. The meeting will be held at the Education Cultural Center on Bank Street. The public is invited to attend and make their opinions known to the board.)

To the members of the Pittsylvania County Board of Zoning Appeals,
Thank you for taking time to read observations and concerns regarding the Special Use Permit requested by Southside Cattle Company, LLC (Virginia Uranium, Inc.-VUI). Southside Cattle Company, LLC and Virginia Uranium, Inc. will be viewed as the same entity in this correspondence.
The exploratory permit issued by the Department of Mines Minerals and Energy does not exempt Southside Cattle Company, LLC (Virginia Uranium, Inc.) from our local laws and ordinances. Neither does this permit relieve the Planning Commission, Board of Zoning Appeals or Board of Supervisors from enforcing our local laws. It appears that Virginia Uranium, Inc.(VUI) has used the issuance of the state permit to ignore local law. VUI does not posses a Certificate of Zoning Compliance and appears to be conducting waste management activities in violation of our Solid Waste Ordinance, which is also a part of our Zoning Ordinance.
On January 3, 2008, Planning Commission member Dr. Miller asked what VUI would do with the core samples if the SUP was denied. VUI's legal representative and geologist were speechless. Neither know how to respond to his question regarding exploratory drilling and the potential of catastrophic weather anomalies carrying contamination offsite and into water sources. Has VUI registered pertinent information with the local emergency planning committee (LEPC)?
Like many human health and environmental catastrophes in history, VUI appears unprepared for the devastating consequences of their actions. Are we to expect the same incompetence when exploratory drilling for uranium becomes uranium mining and tailings disposal? We must hold them accountable to our existing local laws. At this time, in the Commonwealth of Virginia, this is the only reliable protection we have regarding exploratory drilling for uranium.
At the January 3rd Planning Commission public hearing Planning Commission members raised many pertinent questions regarding exploratory drilling for uranium, waste management and on-site storage of radioactive materials. I believe that each of the voting members of the Planning Commission had the best interest of the citizens of Pittsylvania County at heart. Even so, the vote was not unanimous to deny the Special Use Permit.
However, the question at hand remains; is a Special Use Permit as outlined by the permit application appropriate for the R-1 property in question? The following pages outline questions and concerns which lead me to believe that this special use permit should be denied.
Sincerely,
Karen B. Maute


Case for denying Southside Cattle Company, LLC's request for a Special Use Permit
The application states the Existing Land Use as R-1.
Proposed Land Use by Southside Cattle Company, LLC
An acronym for '"Limited Liability Corporation". This type of business organization protects the owners from being personally liable in the event that their company gets sued'. This is a concern.
According to the Application for Special Use Permit, the applicant is asking that 3 acres of an 8.17 R-1 (Residential ) be granted a SUP for a proposed land use of:
1. Portable buildings for office, equipment and material storage.
2. Accessory use to #1 such as wells for water and septic field for sewer.
3. Storage yard for drilling, construction and related equipment.
No concept plan, no site development plan was offered.
#1
Portable buildings- Define a "portable building." How many portable buildings for offices, for equipment, for material storage? Somehow this has been termed as a temporary situation. I see no mention of temporary on the permit application.
office-Sec. 35-40-A room or building in which a person transacts his business or carries on his stated occupation. Is this the type of office they are seeking?
Professional offices- The office of a person engaged in any occupation, vocation or calling, not purely commercial,, mechanical or agricultural, in which a knowledge or skill in some science or area of learning is used in its practical application to the affairs of others, either advising or guiding them in serving their interests or welfare through the practice of an act founded thereon. Is this the type of office they are seeking? (Allowed in M-2 zoning designation.)
equipment- what kinds of equipment, for what purpose will they be used? This should be clearly enumerated and stated.
material storage -what types of material will be stored and how will it be stored? Again, this should be clearly enumerated and stated.


#2
Accessory use (to # 1)
Accessory Use Sec. 35-40 -A use incidental to, and customarily associated with, the principal use of the lot
Use, Accessory- A subordinate use, customarily incidental to and located upon the same lot occupied by the main use. Examples of accessory uses are private garages, storage sheds, playhouses and swimming pools.
(Such as) wells for water- This is not an accessory use according to definitions in zoning ordinance. How many wells, locations, amount of water to be drawn from wells? As I understand it, water is currently being drawn from a nearby creek. Has a water withdrawal permit been issued?
septic field (for sewer) This is not considered an accessory use according to the zoning Ordinance.
On-site Sewerage System requires Health Department approval. Is the cattle company requesting an individual on-site sewerage system or mass drainfield on-site sewerage?
If permitting of such systems is determined by the Health Dept. why would the cattle company ask you to grant well and septic as accessory use (which it isn't anyway)?
In addition the fact that these are not considered accessory uses in our ordinance, they are permanent...not temporary or portable. Port-a-johns are portable.
#3
Storage yard (for)
drilling- What does that mean? What will be stored and how will it be stored? In the open, in a portable building, in a permanent structure?
construction- What types of construction equipment? What will be constructed? Perhaps the permanent structures to house the drilling equipment?
related equipment- what does this mean? Related to what?
More information is required to determine if a Special Use Permit is appropriate for this case. Even if we didn't know that Southside Cattle Co, LLC (Virginia Uranium,) is in the process of exploratory drilling and are lobbying legislators to further their goal of mining Uranium, the information supplied by this limited liability company falls far short of what is needed to consider the granting of a SUP.
Southside Cattle Company, LLC is trying to fit a square peg in a round hole. The cattle company is trying to fit a residential SUP square peg into a Heavy Industry (M-2) rezoning hole. A special use permit, especially as vague as this request, on residentially zoned land is a poor fit. They are requesting M-2 uses disguised as a Special Use Permit.
How can they conduct any type of business or U drilling activity on this property without a certificate of Zoning Compliance? How is it that they are allowed to violate Sec. 35-140 Solid Waste Disposal? Mr. Sleeper advised me that a legal opinion regarding compliance VUI's on-site waste management activities has been requested. Please request that opinion before ruling on the SUP. Your ruling should take into account VUI's waste practices and the requirements of Pittsylvania County's Waste ordinance as outlined in the County's Zoning Ordinance.
The danger that Southside Cattle Company, LLC, VUI, poses is not limited to human health and the environment.
*Promises of safe mining and milling yet no science presented to verify the claim,
*Promises of a proposed tax revenue from mining and milling to fill local county coffers.
*Promises of using part of that tax revenue for school debt, roads, environmental and conservation,
*Offering to pay for the General Assembly's study regarding U-mining and Milling safety;
At present, these are hollow promises to win support for uranium mining.
It has been hinted that if citizens of Pittslvania County oppose VUI's U mining that the Commonwealth of VA, even the federal government, can exercise their powers to deprive us of the use of our local laws. I'd rather them try to force us to accept U exploration and mining than give up our right to demand control of our destiny through enforcement of local laws.
I ask that you deny this special use permit which will only serve to enable M-2 activity on R-1 land in Pittsylvania County.

Karen B. Maute
Westover District
434-797-3460