71-96cs1)
*For office use onl~
The followin information is to be t ed or tinted
A) NAME OF APPLICANT:... Willi.a.m A.,,Brown ........
B) MAILING ADDRESS: 3805 Cutshaw Avenue, Richmond, Virginia
C) TELEPHONE NO.: 358-2361
D) NAME OF PRESENT OWNER OF PROPERTY ON WHICH THIS REQUEST WILL
OCCUR:_ !,Same as__ abo~ve )
E) MAILING ADDRESS:
F) TELEPHONE NO.:
IF THE APPLICANT IS NOT THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY IN QUESTION,
EXPLAIN: (Copy of pending contract or option agreement shall
be attached hereto and made a part of this application.)
3)
LOCATION OF PROPERTY IN QUESTION
(Following information to be obtained by the applicant
from the Office of the County Assessor)
39-3
A) MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT Clover Hill B) TAX MAP NO. 28-15
C) SEC. NO. D) SUBDIVISION NO. E) BLOCK NO.
F) LOT OR PARCEL NO~9'3-(1)'SG) STREET ADDRESS
2s- s l). Pt. 3 & 4 .... ........
-A PLAT OF THIS PROPERTY SHALL BE ATTACHED HERETO AND MADE A PART
OF THIS APPLICATION SHOWING THE FOLLOWING:
LOCATION BY REFERENCE TO NEAREST ROAD INTERSECTION
DIMENSIONS OF SiTE
THE PETITIONER REQUESTS THAT THE ZONING ORDINANCE BE AMENDED TO
RECLASSIFY THIS PROPERTY FROM A-~griculture TO TH-1
NO./NAME NO./NAME '
5) STATE THE REASON FOR THIS REQUEST'
Demand for housing.~in this area
6)
STATE HOW THIS REQUEST WILL NOT BE MATERIALLY DETRIMENTAL TO
THE ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS OR THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOOD:
The development will enhance the value of the adjacent property
7)
STATE ANY EXISTING USE PERMIT OR VARIANCE 0RANTED PREVIOUSLY ON
THE PARCEL IN QUESTION:
~ .... None
8) EXISTING LAND USE:
~griculture
(PAGE 2)
9)
GIVE NAMES OF ALL OWNERS ADJACENT, ACROSS THE ROAD OR HIGHWAY
AND FACING THE PROPERTY AND ANY OWNERS ACROSS ANY RAILROAD RIGHT
OF WAY FROM SUCH PROPERTY. IN THE EVENT THE PROPERTY AFFECTED
IS SITUATED AT OR WITHIN 100 FEET ON THE INTERSECTION OF ANY
TWO OR MORE ROADS OR HIGHWAYS, AT OR WZTHIN ONE HUNDRED FEET
OF THE INTERSECTION OF ANY ROAD OR HIGHWAY WITH A RAILROAD RIGHT-
OF-WAY OR AT OR WITHIN ONE HUNDRED FEET OF THE INTERSECTION OF
· ..THE RIGHTS-OF-WAY OF ANY TWO RAILROADS, GIVE NAMES OF PROPERTY
OWNERS AT ALL CORNERS OF ANY SUCH INTERSECTION.
A) PROPERTY OWNER'S NAME:
MAILING ADDRESS:
(See attached sheet/~'2~f
TAX MAP NO. :__ SEC. NO.: SUBDIVISION NO ·
BLOCK NO.:
LOT OR PARCEL NO.:
B)
PROPERTY OWNER'S NAME:
MAILING ADDRESS:
TAX MAP NO.: SEC. NO.:
BLOCK NO.:
SUBDIVISION NO.:
LOT OR PARCEL NO.:
c)
PROPERTY OWNER' S NAME:
MAILING ADDRESS:
TAX MAP NO.:
BLOCK NO.:
SEC. NO.: SUBDIVISION NO.:
LOT OR PARCEL NO.:
D)
PROPERTY OWNER'S NAME:
MAILING ADDRESS:
TAX MAP NO.:
BLOCK NO.:
SEC. NO.: SUBDIVISIONNO.:
LOT OR PARCEL NO.:
(P6GE 3)
E) PROPERTY OWNER ' S NAME
MAILING ADDRESS:
TAX MAP NO.:
BLOCK NO.:
SEC. NO.: SUBDIVISION NO.:
LOT OR PARCEL NO.:
F) PROPERTY OWNER'S NAME:
MAILING ADDRESS:
TAX MAP NO.:
BLOCK NO.:
SEC. NO.: SUBDIVISION NO.:
LOT OR PARCEL NO.:
G) PROPERTY OWNER'S NAME:
MAILING ADDRESS:
TAX MAP NO.:
BLOCK NO,:
SEC. NO.: SUBDIVISION NO.:
LOT OR PARCEL NO.:
H)
PROPERTY OWNER'S NAME:
MAILING ADDRESS:
TAX MAP NO.: SEC. NO.:
BLOCK NO.:
SUBDIVISION NO.:
LOT OR PARCEL NO,:
I) PROPERTY OWNER'S NAME:
MAILING ADDRESS:
TAX MAP NO.:
SEC. NO.: SUBDIVISION NO.:
LOT OR PARCEL NO.:
BLOCK NO.:
J) PROPERTY OWNER' S NAME:
MAILING ADDRESS:
TAX MAP NO.:
BLOCK NO.:
SEC. NO,: SUBDIVISION NO.:
LOT OR PARCEL NO.:
(PAGE 4)
THE APPLICANT HEREWITH DEPOSITS THE SUM OF TWENTY DOLLARS
($20.00) ATTACHED TO THIS APPLICATION, TO PAY THE COST OF
ADVERTISING NOTICE OF THE HEARING OF SAID BOARD TO ACT ON
THIS REQUEST. CHECK OR MONEY ORDER MUST BE MADE PAYABLE
TO: TREASURER~ COUNTY OF CHESTERFIELD.
I/WE HEREBY DEPOSE AND SAY THAT ALL OF THE ABOVE STATEMENTS
AND THE STATEMENTS CONTAINED IN ANY EXHIBITS TRANSMITTED ARE
TRUE.
BREMNER, YOUNGBLO'OD, SHARP INC.
CONSULTING ENGINEERS.
197/ 5719 MECHANICSV~LLE PIKE
.... MECHANICSVILLE, VIRGINIA 23111
SIGNATURE OF .... :-'
page 1. )
(PAGE 5)
PETITION
To
Board of Supervisors of Chesterfield County
TO THE HONORABLE MEMBERS OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF
CHESTERFIELD COUNTY:
Being advised that, by an application designated 71-96CS,
William A. Brown has requested the rezoning from Agricultural (A)
to Townhouse (TH-i) of a certain parcel of land in Clover Hill
Magisterial District containing 25.5 acres and fronting approxi-
mately 1,415 feet on Twilight Lane, located approximately 1,740
feet south of the intersection of Twilight Lane and Elkhardt Road;
We, the undersigned, being concerned citizens of Chester-
field County and residents of the area immediately adjacent to
the tract of land sought to be rezoned, do, by affixing our names to
this petition, respectfully but earnestly oppose the aforesaid
petition to rezone and do hereby request the members of the Board of
Supervisors of Chesterfield County to deny the said application
71-96CS of William A. Brown.
In support of our opposition and our request that the said
petition to rezone be denied, we set forth the following:
(1) A 40-acre tract of land on Twilight Lane immediately opposite
the area now sought to be rezoned has already been rezoned
for a townhouse project.
(2) The erection of further townhouses in this immediate area
will result in an intense concentration of a tremendously
large number of families in a small geographical area since
townhouses produce a concentration of people which will be
four times as gr¢at as that produced by single-family
residences.
(4)
(5)
(6)
The further concentration of a large number of families
in the area will result in an overcrowding of the school
facilities serving the area.
The public roads in the vicinity of the land sought to be
rezoned are narrow and are already crowded with existing
traffic and the erection of a townhouse project in the
area would introduce an additional volume of traffic
that would be a threat to the safety of the area residents.
The erection of a townhouse project on the area sought to
be rezoned will depreciate the value of the individually
owned residences on Providence and ~lkhardt Roads as the
result of the tremendous increase in volume of noise and
vehicular traffic in the area.
The area sought to be rezoned is contiguous to Surreywood
Subdivision, a well established and attractive development
of single-family residences in the $35,000 to $50,000 price
range. The granting of the zoning applied for would ser-
iously depreciate the value of property in Surreywood Sub-
division, in that;
(a) The streets required to be placed in the rezoned tract
would connect with the dedicated streets of Surreywood
Subdivision and the single main residential street
crossing Surreywood Subdivision would form the main
traffic artery between the tract proposed to be rezoned
and U. S. Route~60;
(b) This tremendous volume of vehicular traffic composed of
residents of the proposed townhouses through a residential
area would be a threat to the children and to the resi-
dents of this Subdivision;
(c)
The existing homes in the Surreywood area would
depreciate in value as the result of this increased
noise and traffic;
Builders and Developers would be unwilling to construct
additional high priced homes, which produce substantial
tax revenue to the County, in Surreywood Subdivision
due to the tremendous increase in traffic and the
proximity of the townhouse project.
We submit that the rezoning application of William A. Brown,
designated ?1-96CS, should be denied.
Respectfully submitted,
PBTITION
To
Board of Supervisors of Chesterfield County
TO THB HONORABLB MBMBBRS OF THE BOARD OF SUPBRVISORS ON
CHBSTBRFIBLD COUNTY:
Being advised that, by an application designated 71-96CS,
William A. Brown has requested the rezoning from Agricultural (A)
to Townhouse (TH-i) of a certain parcel of land in Clover Hill
Magisterial District containing 25.5 acres and fronting approxi-
mately 1,415 feet on Twilight Lane, located approximately 1,740
feet south of the intersection of Twilight Lane and Elkhardt Road;
We, the undersigned, being concerned citizens of Chester-
field County and residents of the area immediately adjacent to
the tract of land sought to be rezoned, do, by affixing our names to
this petition, respectfully but earnestly oppose the aforesaid
petition to rezone and do hereby request the members of the Board of
Supervisors of Chesterfield County to deny the said application
71-96CS ~f William A. Brown.
In support of our opposition and our request that the said
petition to rezone be denied, we set forth the following:
(1) A 40-acre tract of land on Twilight Lane immediately opposite
the area now sought to be rezoned has already been rezoned
for a townhouse project.
(2) The erection of further townhouses in this immediate area
will result in an intense concentration of a tremendously
large number of families in a small geographical area since
townhouses produce a concentration of people which will be
four times as great as that produced by single-family
residences.
(3)
(4)
The further concentration of a large number of families
in the area will result in an overcrowding of the school
facilities servin£ the area.
The public roads in the vicinity of the land sought to be
rezoned are narrow and are already crowded with existing
traffic and the erection of a townhouse project in the
area would introduce sn additional volume of traffic
that would be a threat to the safety of the area residents.
The erection of a townhouse project on the area sou£ht to
be rezoned will depreciate the value of the individually
owned residences on Providence and Blkhardt Roads as the
result of the tremendous increase in volume of noise and
vehicular traffic in the area.
The area sought to be rezoned is contiguous to Surrew~ood
Subdivision, a well established and attractive development
of single-family residences in the $35,000 to $50,000 price
range. The granting of the zoning applied for would ser-
iously depreciate the value of property in Surreywood Sub-
division, in that;
(a) The streets required to be placed in the re~oned tract
would connect with the dedicated streets of Surreywood
Subdivision and the single main residential street
crossing Surreywood Subdivision would form the main
traffic artery between the tract proposed to be rezoned
and U. S. Route~60;
(b) This tremendous volume of vehicular traffic composed of
residents of the proposed townhouses through a residential
area would be a threat to the children and to the resi-
dents of this Subdivision;
(c)
The existing homes in the Surrey~ood area would
depreciate in value as the result of this increased
noise and traffic;
Builders and Developers would be unwilling to construct
additional high priced homes, which produce substantial
tax revenue to the County, in Surrey~ood Subdivision
due to the tremendous increase in traffic and the
proximity of the townhouse project.
We submit that the rezoning application of William A. Broom,
designated ?1-96CS~ should be denied.
l~espectful ly submitted
i iC/'
To
PETITION
Board of Supervisors of Chesterfield County
TO THE HONORABLE MEMBERS OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF
CHESTERFIELD COUNTY:
Being advised that, by an application designated 71-96CS,
William A. Brown has requested the rezoning from Agricultural (A)
to Townhouse (TH-I) of a certain parcel of land in Clover Hill
Magisterial District containing 25.S acres and fronting approxi-
mately 1,415 feet on Twilight Lane, located approximately 1,740
feet south of the intersection of Twilight Lane and Elkhardt Road;
We, the undersigned, being concerned citizens of Chester-
field County and residents of the area immediately adjacent to
the tract of land sought to be rezoned, do, by affixing our names to
~his petition, respectfully but earnestly oppose the aforesaid
re~~J'a~a do hereby request the members o£ the Board of
Supervisors of Chesterfield County to deny the said application
71-96CS of William A. Brown.
In support of our opposition and our request that the ~a~.d
petition to rezone be denied, we set forth the following:
(1) A 40-acre tract of land on Twilight Lane immediately opposite
the area now sought to be rezoned has already been rezoned
for a townhouse project.
(2) The erection of further townhouses in this immediate area
will result in an intense concentration of a tremendously
large number of families in a small geographical area since
townhouses produce a concentration of people which will be
four times as great as that produced by single-family
residences.
(73)
C4)
(s)
(b)
The further concentration of a large number of families
in the area will result in an overcrowding of the school
facilities serving the area.
The public roads in the vicinity of the land sought to be
rezoned are narrow and are already crowded with existing
traffic and the erection of a townhouse project in the
area would introduce an additional volume of traffic
that would be a threat to the safety of the area residents.
The erection of a townhouse project on the area sought to
be rezoned will depreciate the value of the individually
owned residences on Providence and Elkhardt Roads as the
result of the tremendous increase in volume of noise and
vehicular traffic in the area.
The area sought to be rezoned is contiguous to Surreywood
Subdivision, a well established and attractive development
of single-family residences in the $3S,000 to $S0,000 price
range. The granting of the zoning applied for would ser-
iously depreciate the value of property in Surreywood Sub-
division, in that;
(a) The streets required to be placed in the rezoned tract
would connect with the dedicated streets of Surreywood
Subdivision and the single main residential street
crossing Surreywood Subdivision would form the main
traffic artery between the tract proposed to be rezoned
and U. S. Route360;
This tremendous volume of vehicular traffic composed of
residents of the proposed townhouses through a residential
area would be a threat to the children and to the resi-
dents of this Subdivision;
(c)
(d)
The existing homes in the Surreywood area would
depreciate in value as the result of this increased
noise and traffic;
Builders and Developers would be unwilling to construct
additional high priced homes, which produce substantial
tax revenue to the County, in Surreywood Subdivision
due to the tremendous increase in traffic and the
proximity of the townhouse project.
We submit that the rezoning application of William A. Brown,
designated 71-96CS, should be denied.
Respectfully submitted,
/
/
/
~ /