71-20cs1)
2)
*For ofmce
*REVIEW BY P. C.
APPLICATION FOR AMENDMENT TO THE
CHESTERFIELD COUNTY ZONING ORDINANCE
~he,,,,,fol~ow~,ng information ,Is, to,,be typedor .printed
A) NAM OF APPLICANT:. Z,~, ,~4o_~,<~J ~ ~
C) ~PHONE NO.: ~WZ d'70 G ............
n) N~ o~ ~s¢~ o~¢. o~ ~.o~¢.~ o~ w.zc~ ~.~s ~s~ w~
occu.: ,,,~[~ I N. cDo~~ I~ ...........
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.)
........... o,,,', L,~ ~ 4 ~o ~ +~~'.
3)
LOCATION OF PROPERTY IN QUESTION
(Following information to be obtained by the applicant
from the Office of the County Assessor)
A) MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT ~% "b, B) TAX MAP NO. [~
C) SEC. NO. D) SUBDIVISION NO. E) BLOCK NO.
F) t:~1~--8~ PARCEL NO. 2_ G) STREET ADDRESS ,,~--_ .........
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
(PAGE 1)
4)
5)
6)
THE PETITIONER REQUESTS THAT THE ZONING ORDINANCE BE AMENDED TO
RECLASSIFY THIS PROPERTY FROM 'R- 2 TO T ~- ~, .
....... NO./NAME -~ No./NAME
STATE THE REASON FOR THIS REQUEST: ,~N ~$¢% F~,~ -{~/e ~/~
STATE HOW THIS REQUEST WILL NOT BE MATERIALLY DETRIMENTAL TO
THE ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS OR THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOOD:
#
' z / /
7)
STATE ANY EXISTING USE PERMIT OR VARIANCE GRANTED Pi~IOUSLY ON
THE PARCEL IN QUESTION:
8)
EXISTING LAND USE:
(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 ~FFECTED
IS SITUATED AT OR WITHIN 100 FEET ON THE INTERSECTION OF ANY
TWO OR MORE ROADS OR ~IIGHWAYS, AT OR WITHIN 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 0F ANY SUCH INTERSECTION.
A) PROPERTY OWNER'S N~ME: ~,.,~z~ ,~ ~ ~-~.'/~
~AILING ADDRESS'
~AX MAP NO.:/~~/L
BLOCK NO.: ,, ~
SEC. NO.:
LOT OR ~O.: , [.
PROPERTY OWNER'S NAME:
MAILING ADDRESS:
TAX MAP NO.: /~-I?, SEC. NO.: ~ __ SUBDIVISION
BLOCK NO.' .~ LOT OR P-A~.: ~2-
c)
PROPERTY OWNER'S NAME: O7~ ~
TAX MAP NO.: /~SEC. NO.: ~ SUBDIVISION NO.:
d. £
D)
PROPERTY OWNER' S NAME: Dr~A//~ / /F~... ~ .Z ~.'~ ~' .~.*"?
M~ILING ADDRESS: ~ 7~'~ ~¢~'~ ~'
TAX MAP NO.: /~ SEC. NO.: ,,~ SUBDIVISION' NO.: ~, ~, ~ _
(P~GE B)
E)
F)
PROPERTY OWNER'S NAME: C/q~z/%~J, /,~, ~../~/~,-',~ ,, ~,,~/';//,
MAILING ADDRESS: ,,~~ ~'d~~ ~ ~,
TAX MAP NO.: ~ ,SEC. NO.: ~ S~DIVISION NO.: ~, ~. ~.
BLOCK NO.: ..~ LOT OR P~.: ~ /~
PROPERTY OWNER'S NAME:~/
MAILING ADDRESS:,,
TAX MAP NO.: /~-~ SEC. NO.:
BLOCK NO.: ~. LOT OR ~O.: /7
G) PROPERTY OWNER' S NAME: _~%V/,,,r*~
MAILING ADDRESS: ~ 3~
TAX MAP NO.: ~.. SEC. NO.:
BLOCK NO' ~ LOT OR
H) PROPERTY OWNER'S NAME: ~F~
MAILING ADDRESS: ~ ~
TAX ~P NO.: /~-~ SEC. NO..' ~ SUBDIVISIONTM/ ~, ~-~
LOCK No.: , , LOT OR
I) PROPERTY OWNER'S NAME:
MAILING ADDRESS:
TAX MAP NO.:
BLOCK NO.: /~. .LOT OR B~.:
NAILING ADDRESS:
TAX MAP NO.:
BLOCK NO.:
(PAGE 4)
E)
PROPERTY OWNER'S NAME: /~/~
MAILING ADDRESS:
TAX MAP NO.: /~2.
BLOCK NO.:
SEC. NO.:
SUBDIVISION NO.:
LOT OR BA~.: 25
F)
TAX MAP NO.: /~-~ SEC. NO.: ~ SUBDIVISION NO.:
BLOCK NO.: ~. LOT OR P~.: ~
G)
PROPERTY OWNER'S NAME: fl~,,gu,,~,~ ~/..s~.Z~ /~ ~,~-~
MAILING ADDRESS: ,,?7~d ,,~,~~ , ~.
TAX MAP NO.: /~-/~ SEC. NO.: ~ SUBDIVISION NO.: ~ ~ ~
BLOCK NO.: ~. LOT OR P~.: ~
H)
PROPERTY OWNER' S NAM..,E~
MAILING ADDRESS: '
TAX MAP NO.: /~-/ SEC. NO.: SUBDIVISION NO.:
BLOCK NO.: L~ PARCEL NO.:
I) PROPERTY OWNER'S NAME: /~/~/b. /~.-..,{"[~/;;~'~/ ~~,s
MAILING ADDRESS:
TAX MAP NO.: /~-,,~
BLOCK NO.:
SEC. NO.: -- SUBDIVISION NO.: ~~',~
LOT OR P..A-BGE4~--~O.: ~--
J)
PROPERTY OWNER'S NAME: ~.~w ~ ?F~/e./~, /P/~/g',~ l$5~P--ff'7
MAILING ADDRESS: ~ H~,~Z ~V ~.
BLOCK NO.: ~ LOT OR P~CEL NO.~: ~
(PAGE 4)
E)
PROPERTY OWNER' S NAME: ~/~:~ ~ ~,,, /~//v ~ ........
BLOCK NO.: ,,~. LOT OR ~NO.:
F)
PROPERTY OWNER' S NAME: ~7~ ~,v -~'. /4////~
TAX MAP NO.:/~, ~ SEC. ~0.: -- SU~DZVISION NO.: ./Fr~//~
BLOCK NO.: ,~ LOT OR PARCEL NO.:
G)
PROPERTY OWNER'S NA~E: ~_~.~.,~ ~/.~-'~~/~ /~/~
MAILIN~ ADDRESS: ~d~ ~/,~,'~c~/~--,~. ~.~.
TAX ~AP NO.: ~-~,,, SEC. NO.: -- SUBDIVISION ~0.:~~~~
BLOC~ NO.: /~ LOT OR P~.: ~. ,! .....
MAILING ADDRESS: / '3~ J~-~<~ .~-/; / // A, / /.. -
TAX MAP NO.: /'-~ -SE~, NO i --i SUBD~ISI~/NO~ ~Y~ ~--~'' ......
I)
PROPERTY OWNER' S NAME:
TAX MAP NO.: /~-f SEC. NO.: - SUBDIVISION NO.:
BLOCK NO.: -- ,I~ PARCEL NO.: ~
J) PROP'~ OWNER'S NAME: ~S ~11~-.,~~ . [F~kJ",~
MAILI~ ADDreSS: 3,90,~, ,g¢~.~ ¢ ,,4~¢,
TAX MAP NO.: i~-% SEC. NO.: -- SUBDIVISION
BLOCK NO.: ~ LOT OR ~.: & ~
(PAGE 4)
lO)
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 PdgQIJEST. CHECK OR MONEY ORDER MUST BE MADE PAYABI.~
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.
SIGNATURE OF APPLICANT
(Same name as used in item I-A,
page 1. )
SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO BEFORE ME THIS // .... DAY OF ~ 19//.
~ co~ss~o~ ~,x~s ~ ~ ~ ~. ~~ ~~
NOTARY
(PAGE 5)
I~aroh 24~, 1971
Chester field County
C he ster fie ld, Virgin ia
Attention: County Planner's Office
Gentlemen:
This is to certify that I, John J. McDonald, Jr., owner of 14 acres
(tax map no. 18-8-Parcel ~2) North of Rock Creek Park - have entered
into an agreement with L. A. McDonald whereby he will IzAre~ase and
develop this property if the applied for zoning is granted by the
Board of Supervisors.
This is your authority to continue the processing of the zoning
re que st.
Sincerely,
Dear I~1r. Dietsch, - '~\
o~oos~.~, ~ ~ :i~h~'i$1~-~g~, of To~ouses in our area. We
We
are
feel they will doV~,4m¢~~o, our property.
April 29, 1971
April 29, 1971
Dear ~r. Nartin,
We are opposed to the building of Townhouses in our area. We
feel they will down the value of our property.
Case No. 71-20-C °
Mrs. D. E. Bishop
7916
~!C Road
Richraond, Va. 23235
~.~rs. ~,enneth B. Cofc~
7932 Epic Rd.
R1C~.ir:,.'OBt, , Va.. o~o-~r.
Mr. & Nr., J ~;, S!edoe
7905 Whitwort]~ '~,.o ~.
Richmond, Va. 23235
J. G. Hanes
8117 Stiles Road
Richmond,
Hr.& hrs. F. D~ Caravetta
947 Cowar,. Roi.
Ri,3 ......... , Va.
1263 7'~oo.'q~';-,','r't '-":
}.'ic.}4:~onc], V;3. 2 .:, Z .'~ 5
793.7 Epic
140n Air \,' i :.",: ~ J l ~ J. o
~,u,,, oxl ltd
t~c,r~ AJ.r, Va~.
R:i..c:],,:~ont~, Vt:,, 23235
Opposing rezoning Zion Hill Church.~i-i-r' ~
520!
R:;.chn,onc~, Vi:c~}:~.:):;a 23234.
April 28th, 1971
Mr. Stanley R. Balderson, Jr. Secretary
Chesterfield Planning Commission
Chesterfield, Virginia 23832
Letter Rezoning from R 2 to TH i for L. A. McDonald
Re: Tax map sec. 18-$ Parcel 2
Dear Mr. Balderson,
We are opposed to this rezoning.
We bought our property at 608 Scarlet Oak Road to
get away from over population, traffic and to have
a more peaceful surrounding. This will defeat our
purpose for locating in Chesterfield County.
Any multi family project in our small area not only
creates more traffic, noise and discomfort but would
destroy the use of the small lake.
Again, we are opposed to the rezoning and if it is
allowed, we will be forced to offer our property for
sale and relocate to an area out of Chesterfield County.
Sincerely,
W. A. Ramos,
608 Scarlet Oak Road
Richmond, Virginia 23235
1017 Somtham Drive
Rzchmond~ Vzrgznla 23235
!,lay 6~ 1971
Board of Supervisors
Chesterfield County, Virginia
Reference: Rezoning Case 7i-ZOCS
Attention: ~. N. W. Bmrnett: Executive Secretary
Gentlemen:
I am opposed to the rezoning case 71-20CS as described in your
notice. My husband and I choose this area to live in because of the type
of ueighborhood this area ~'~as zoned for. I do not like the idea of living
iu an area of compacted population. I have lived in a single family
dwelling neighborhood all of my life and this is what I am accustomed to.
To change this would not be to my liking.
I feel that if you allow this rezoning other property owners of
undeveloped land would follow suit iu such a request. Existing roads in
this area will not take care of a large influ~ of traffic and the quiet
type of neighborhood wo~ld be destroyed forever. I believe that we need
to keep the population spread out to some extent in order to preserve
our heratige which is quickly being squalshed. You as a leader in our
county are charged with the responsibility to keep certain invested rights
protected by wise planning and holdind the line on carefully laid plans
previously laid. I trust that you will act accordingly when this rezoning
case co]zes
Thank you for considering this matter as an important one to the
cormnunity in distress over rezoining.
Sincerely,
Evelyn M. White
cc F. F. Dietsch
1240 Apex Road
Richmond, Virginia 23235
May 3, 1971
Mr. M. W. Burnett, Executive Secretary
Board of Supervisors
Chesterfield County, Virginia
Gentlemen~
We would like for it to be ~ade known through this Letter
that we object to the proposed rezoning from Residential ( R-2 )
to Tovnhouse ( TH-1 ) a parcel of land fronting approximately
190 feet on Brovn Road and extending soutlneesC~ardLy to a depth of
approximately 2,400 feet, being located at the southern terminus
of Stiles, Sykes andWhiL~orthRoads.
Our main objection is the increased traffic and safety
hazards this will cause in the Southam area.
Yours truly,
r
t1'
1232 Apex Road
Richmond, Virginia 23235
May 3, 1971
Hr. H. W. Burnett, Executive Secretary
Board of Supervisors
Chesterfield County, Virginia
(~e~t leme~ ~
We ~ould like for it to be made known through this letter
that we object to the proposed rezoning from Residential ( R-2 )
to To~nhouse ( TH-1 ) a parcel of land fronting approximately
190 feet on Brown Road and extending south~est~a~dly to a depth
of approximately 2,400 feet, being located at the southern terminus
of Stiles, Sykes and Whibeorth Roads.
Our main objection is the increased traffic and sa£ety
hazards this ~r~ll cause in the Southamarea.
Yours truly,
939 Kennerly Road
Richmond, Virginia 23235
May 7, 1971
Board of Supervisors
Chesterfield County
Virginia
Reference: Rezoning Case 71-20 CS
Attention: Mr. M. W. Burnett, Executive Secretary
Gen ~ 1 ~eE:
I strongly protest the passing of Rezoning Case 71-20 CS.
The integrity of our single family dwelling neighborhood
would be eliminated. The injection of multi fa mily units
on the parcel of lend in question would Seriously impair
the already congested traffic situation in the Southam
subdivision. Also the rezoning for townhouses offered in
71-20 CS would lay the groundwork for further such
rezoning in surrounding areas which would further complicate
the traffic situation.
I hope that you will seriously consider denying Rezoning
Case 71-20 CS.
Sincerely,
Earl B. Spurr, Jr.
Narjorie C. Spurr
~201 S utn,..m Drive
O ~ ~
may 4, ~971 ~-"='~P
BOard Of Supervisors
Chesterfield County, Va.
Reference: Rezoning Case 7~-20~S
A~ untlon: Mr. M. %~. Burnett, Executive Socret:u~y
Gentlemen:
I san a res:denS of ~he Southam neighborhood and plm~ to make this my perm~ment
home after my reti"cmont from the U. S. Harine Corps. I ~m against any plans to
rezone this area for apartment comple~es for the benefit Jmd profit of Mr. L A.
McDonald or ~yono else who desires to do so. '
The grJffic tiirougii this area is already a problem and d~oil~er to child, ten
s~u'.?ys in fear. of :,v children being struck o~ a ~,?.r. People speed through here
as if this were a raceway, i would also ~iiontion the creel: that is forever eve/~_
~o~in~ in my yalm ,- m
~v.~n with the smallest of rains. ;;ore constructiSn u~ill only
~e~ve to worsen a oa~ situation.
~¢~oh your ~gineers were see~ing an easement for the sowaje line, I cave the
Coun~ ~nis Eight of Way without no Charge. i was ~o~ the pure-ese of this
easement was to cerve the people of our community 'md was told the.~'e ?vas no
imnediate plans for further building above ou~ area, now Sir, I as;t you %'fere your
. be.no truthful to tho poo~le in tiii~ area? Is t~:is o ........
- ~e,,~e roal~v only to
serve tho planned itousing Comple~ be~.ng built 'by mr. McDonald???
Th~ j.?eople of this co ::men:by are good '~:i,'~
- ~ ,.- pa~.~ulit pectate, but a lot
ns:~a,~ oi bi:em lc'Lely .' '-
.fun ~he ' ",n.'-.'- - ~
of our children ~.iid now ..... ' l)r,~i-~uc, conso!id tion of schools, p:m::,bablo bussing
~,;,is rezoning of t;i';s area.. Iilope the County
~,a opin.L>ns of its citizens. VIE ~RE AG,~I~,,ol IT.
RE£t~CTFO LL~ ~UBMI TTED .~
~"~,. & 2.ii:h,. ,{. H. BLA~K
CC: F. F. DIETLCH
,3 ~? 19 7/
c~' EF
D>
cc.:
May 4, 1971
Reference: 71-200S
Mr. M. W. Burmett
Executive Secretary
Board of Supervisors
Chesterfield County, Virginia
Dear Sir:
As a homeowner adjacent to the property located at the
southern end of Brown Road, I am opposed to the rezoning
of this land to TH-1. Thio approach of "spot zoning" can
only lead to a general deterioration of the surrounding
living areae. We who enjoy working in the yard, the
growing of flowers will be eubJected to large increases
in traffic flow and noise levele. The current population
density of approximately eight persons per acre will bm
increased by a factor of four or five.
I requelt your support im oppoeing thim change in zoning
w~e~ it comes before the Board.
Si~c erely,
Marvim R. Boots, Ph.D.
7801 Brown Road
Richmond, Virginia 2~3235
May 4, 1971
Mr. M. W. Burnett
Executive Secretary
Board of Supervisors
Ohemterfield Oounty, Virginia
Dear Sir:
Am a homeowner next to the property to be rezoned
(71-2OOS), I am very concerned about this zoning
change. We originally purchased our home at 7801
Brown Road because we liked the rural atmosphere,
treem, open spacem and low population denmity. Thim
rezening would caume our mtre~tm to be used beyond
capacity, increase the crime rate in our area and
lower our property values.
I hope you too will oppose thim zoning change.
Regards,
Sharon G. Boots Ph.D.
7801 Brown Road
Richmond, Virginia 23235
Mr. a~ud Mrs. Richard Roy Theisen
900 Southam Drive
P~ chmond, Virginia
May 3, 19~1
Board of Supervisors
Chesterfield County, Virginia
Attention: Mr. W. W. Burnett, Executive Secretary
Re: Rezoning Case 71-2OCS
Gentlemem:
I am appalled to think of waking up one morning with myhome sitting in
the middle of a compacted population area. I chose the Southam Sub-
division as a place to live and let my children grow up in a quiet neigh-
borhood. This type of luxury comes with a lot of hard work, and I don't
want any man to take this away or destroy the very nature of it. I
therefore ask that you, the Board of Supervisors of Chesterfield County,
deny the request hy Mr. L. A. ~acDonald to reaone a parcel of land as
described in your notice under case ?1-20CS..
I want t~ go on record at this time as opposing any subsequent request
for the rezoning of any parcel of land bounded by Powhite Creek, Buford
Road and Jahnke Road.
Thank you for considering this matter as per our request.
Sincerely,
Richard Roy Th~isen
cc: F. F. Dietsch
.T~affie ~u1~ ~e greaf~!y i~~ a.~ a eo~pa~e~ develops% ef +Jaia ~tu~e
~1~ l¢~r p~ope~y val~e in the area,
We, the undersi~ned, resi¢tents of Che~erfme!d County, do hereby ask the Board
of Suyoervisors of Chesterfield County to deny the request for rezoning (?1-20CS)
from Residential (R-2) to Townhouse (TH-I).
Traffic would be grestly increased mhd a cor, pacted deve!o~ment of this nature
~,~ould lower property value in the area.
Address
SOUTHAM CIVIC ASSOCIATION
May 7, 1971
Chesterfield County Board of Supervisors
Chesterfield Court House
Chesterfield, Virginia Z383Z
Reference: Rezoning Case 71-ZOCS
Attentiorg Mr. M. W. Burnett, Executive Secretary
Gentlemen:
Enclosed herein, you will find letters written to you expressing
the feelings of citizens in the Southam Sub-division on the rezoning of
a parcel of land, Case 71-ZOCS, from Residential (R-2) to Townhouse
(TH-i). Opinions and expressions are varied but all say one thing in
common. They oppose the rezoning of land in this area and in particular
Case 71-ZOCS.
Enclosed herein, you will also find a petition bearing the signa-
tures of residents of the Southam Sub-division opposing rezoning Case
71-20CS.
As President of the Southam Civic Association, representing
107 homes in the Southam Sub-division, I request that you, the Board
of Supervisors of Chesterfield County, deny the rezoning case 71-20CS.
No one has opposed the development of the property in question or of
the surrounding area as it is presently zoned.
Thank you for taking this matter into consideration for the con-
cerned people.
HWW -SLM
Sincerely, ~
Harry W, rWhite, President
Southam Civic A s s oc iation
1017 Southam Drive
Richmond, Virginia 23235
cc: Mr. F. F. Dietsch
/O~y~./ ~ April ~0,' 1971
We, the undersigned ~esidents of the Somtham S~b-divisieu, comprising
Southam Drive, Chiswich Road, Joliette Road, Apex Road, Bl~ften Drive
and part of Brown R~ad, do hereby request the Board of Supervisors of
Chesterfield County, Virginia to deny the request, ?I-~0CS in Nidloth-
i~ Nagisterial District, by L. A. NcDonald. We feel that the rezoning
f~om Residential (R-B) to ~Townhouse (TH-l) of this parcel of land, des-
cribed in 71-BOCS, is not ~o the best interest of the area bounded by
Powhite Creek, B~ford Road and Jahnke Road as the majority of this area
is of a mere restrictive zoning.
We, the mudersigne6 esidents ef %he Semtham S~'.dtvisien, comprising
Seutham Drive~ Chiswich Read~ Jeliette Road, Apex Road, Bluft~n Drive
and par~ of Brown R~ad, do hereby request the Boa~d of Supe~viser~ ef
Chesterfield County, Virginia to deny the request, ?i-20CS in Nidleth-
lan Nagisterial District, by L. A. NcDonald. We feel that the rezoui~g
f~om Residential (R-2) to Townho~se (TH-l) of thi~ parcel of land, des-
cribed in ?I-~.0CS~ is not to the best interest of the area bounded by
Powhite Creek~ Buferd Road and Jahnke Road as ~he majority of thim a~ea
i~ of a more restrictive zoning.
April BO, 1971
We, the undersigned residents of the Southam Sub-division, comprising
Southam Drive, Chiswlch Road, Joliette Road, Apex Road, Blufton Drive
and part of Brown Road, do hereby request the Board of Supervisors of
Chesterfield County, Virginia to deny the request, ?1-20CS in Midloth-
lan Magisterial District, by L. A. McDonald. We feel that the rezoning
from Residential (R-2) to Townhouse (TH-i) of this parcel of land, des-
cribed in 71-20CS, is not to the best interest of the area bounded by
Powhite Creek, Buford Road and Jahnke Road as the majority of this a~ea
is of a more restrictive zoning.
NAME
April 80, 19?l
We, the undersigned residents of the Southam Sub-division, comprising
Son,ham Drive, Chiswich Road, Joliette Road, Apex Road, Blufton Drive
and part of Brown Road, do hereby request the Board of Supervisors of
Chesterfield County, Virginia to deny the request, ?1-20C$ in Nldloth-
ian Magisterial District, by L. A. McDonald. We feel that the rezoning
from Residential (R-2) to Townhouse (TH-l) of this parcel of land, des-
cribed in ?i-20CS, is not to the best interest of the area bounded by
Powhite Creek, Buford Road and Jahnke Road as the majority of this area
is of a more restrictive zoniug.
NA~E
ADDRESS
.....
April 30, l~?l
We, the umdersigned residents of the Somtham Sub-division, comprising
$outham Drive, Chiswich Road, Joliette Road, Apex Road, Blufton Drive
and part of Brown Road, do hereby request the Board of Supervisors of
Chesterfield County, Virginia to deny the request, 71-20CS in Midloth-
lan Magisterial District, by L. A. McDonald. We feel that the rezouing
from Residential (R'2) to Townhouse (TH-i) of this parcel of land. des-
cribed in 71-20CS, is not to the best interest of the area bounded by
Powbite Creek, Buford Road and Jahnke Road as the majority of this area
is of a more restrictive zoning.
NAME
!
Apr il B0, 197t
We, the undersigned residents of the Southam Sub-division, comprising
Southam Drive, Chiswich Road, Joliette Road, Apex Road, Blufton Drive
and part of Brown Road, do hereby request the Board of Supervisors of
Chesterfield County, Virginia to deny the request, 71-20CS in Midloth-
lan Magisterial District, by L. A. McDonald. We feel that the rezoning
from Residential (R-2) to Townhouse (TH-I) of this parcel of land,, des-
cribed in 71-20CS, is not to the best interest of the area bounded by
Powbite Creek, Buford Road and Jahnke Road ~ the majority of this a~ea
is of a more restrictive zoning.
ADDRESS
?~ ~. ~ Apr il 30, 1971
We, the undersigne~ ~esidents of the Southam S. ~-division, comprising
Southam Drive, Chiswich Road, Joliette Road, Apex Road, Blufton Drive
and part of Brown Road, do hereby request the Board of Supervisors of
Chesterfield County, Virginia to deny the request, 71-20CS in Midloth-
lan Magisterial District, by L. A. McDonald. We feel that the rezoning
from Residential (R-2) to TownhoUSe (TH-l) of this parcel of land, des-
cribed in 71-20CS, is not to the best interest of the area bounded by
Powbite Creek, Buford Road and-Jghnke Road as 'the majority of this. ames
is of a more restrictive zoning.
~ ~' / it ' ~' . ~ ~z,~l~ "
May 3, 1971
Mr. Mo W. Burnett, Executive Secretary
Board of Supervisors
Chesterfield County, Virginia 23235
Dear Mr. Burnett:
I have learned about the possibility of rezoning a parcel of land
in Midlothian Magisterial District where L. A. McDonald requests
~oning from Residential (R-2) to Townhouse (TH-l), a parcel of land
located at southern terminal of Stiles, Sykes and Whitworth Roads.
This ness is very disappointing to me since I know such a development will
,~ a detr~m-~ to all of us living in this area adjacent to that land.
I have discussed this matter with a number of persons in this area and it
appears such a project would perhaps benefit 100 families, yet over 200
families would, in one way or another~ suffer by such development. There
would be only two streets, Southern Drive and Brown Road that would serve
as an entrance or outlet to these townhouses. There are many families with
children living along these streets~ so traffic serving 100 more families
alomg these routes would be very %msafe to the children that are usually on
these streets. You should drive along these streets at school bus pick-up
time and you could readily see how unsafe it would be with that much more
traffic. These families, as well as I~ moved in this community because it
was residential and we feel we have the right to anticipate it to continue
to be residential. The average family in this area has about %-acre or
more of land where their homes are, so it stands to reason they would ex-
pect an additional 14-20 families (not 100) to occupy the 14 acres in
question.
The Bon Air and Southern areas have been very civic and community minded.
Such interest has made Chesterfield County what it is today, so I thought
I would write you this letter to let you know the feeling of the civic-
minded persons tn this com~nity.
JBK:wk
cc: Mr. F.F. Dietch
Dr. A. R. Martin
Very truly yours,
WILLIAM C.
1015 CHISWlCK I:tOAD
I%ICHMOND, VII:tG:INTA 23235
April 29, 1971
Mr. M. W. Burnett
Executive Secretary
Board of Supervisors
Chesterfield County, Virginia
Gentlemen:
Being a resident of the Southam Sub-division, I oppose
the rezoning from Residential (R-Z) to Townhouse (TH-i) of
a parcel of land located in the Midlothian Magisterial
District as described in your notice under ca~~Q~.
I feel that the rezoning of this parcel of land would tend
to be detrimental to the existing community and to future
development under the existing residential zoning.
I invested in this area because it was an area of
single family dwellings and I do not want this status
changed. I request that the Board of Supervisors deny this
rezoning in case 71-20CS.
~~S incerely, (
i
cc: F. F. Dietach
PETER B. BAHL~!R
8053 SYKES ROAD
RICHMOND, VIRGINIA 23235
7,917
t~on ~.r, V~., 232~5
&p,r[1 27, 1971
Chesterf;eld County Board oF Supervisors
Chester,;eld County Court t{o,~se
Chesterfield County, V:.r~;n;.,q,, q,qqRg~
(}entlemen:
My hushq, nd a~nd I w;sh to go on record a,s opDos[n~ the rezon[n~
of our a, rea, fro~ res;.dent:.~,l to townhouse~ C~se N~. 71-20-C. S.
~e object to the ~ncre~se i.n popu[~.~[on density q, nd the
resulting traffic ;.ncrease.
~'e atso feel tha, t our property wtues wit1 decline a,s a, result,
_Very truly yours, ~~~i~/
Mrs. don A. [{oa, ch
Jerry Williams
7925 Epic Road
Richmond Virginia 23235
April 28,1971
County Board of Supervisors
Chesterfield Court House
Chesterfield Virginia 23832
Dear Sir
I am opposed to the proposed construction of the townhouse
apartments or any other type of apartments in the Brown Road area
of Chesterfield County as is in Case ~71-20 cs now before the courts.~
Thank You
~;Gerry Williams
¢~esre~e':¢~ ~?'r, VA,
1231 Peck Road
Richmond, Virginia 23235
April 28, 1971
County Board of Supervisors
Chesterfield County
Chesterfield, Virginia
Re: Case #71-20CS
Gentlemen:
I wish to protest strongly against the proposed zoning change
in the vicinity of Brown*s Lake which would allow the erection of
townhouse apartments in an area now zoned residential R-2 to be
changed to Townhouse TH-1. (Case ~/71-20C$~
This construction would cause greatly increased congestion
of the traffic in an area already highly dangerous to the many
children, would increase the density of population, and most ser-
ious of all would decrease the property value.
Your vote against this proposal will be remembered.
Sincerely,
John E. Stivers
JES:as
7908 EPIC ROAD
RICHMOND, VA. 23235
APRIL 29, 1971
THE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
CHESTERFIELD COURTHOUSE
CHESTERFIELD, VIRGINIA 23832
GENTLEMEN:
PLEASE BE ADVISED THAT THE UNDERS~GN£D OPPOSES THE
REZONING OF THE PROPERTY ~ROM RESIDENTIAL TO TOWN HOUSES,
MULTIPLE DWELLINGS, 71-20-CS.
THERE ARE A NUMBER OF REASONS FOR THIS OPPOSITION, INCLUDING
THE INCREASE IN TRAFFIC AND LACK OF SPACE ALREADY FOR THE
CHILDREN IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD TO PLAY.
VERY TRULY YO~'~,~
(MRS.N~JOAN RD ~
R
1219 Peck Road,
Bon Air, Va.
April 27, 1971
23235
County Board of Supervisors,
Chesterfield County,
Chesterfield County, Va. 23832
Gentlemen:
Case 71-20 CS
As a homeowner in Bon Air, I would like to voice my
strong opposition to changing the area covered in
the subject Case from Zone R-2 Residential to a T-1
Townhouse.
My reasons are as follows:
1 - Increased traffic.
2 - Lowering of Property value.
3 - Increase in the density of population.
Even with the influx of single family dwellings in our
area, the increase over the past ten years has been
tremendous. And, too, homeowners should be given con-
sideration in making such a change, and we are almost
100% unanimous in our opposition to the suggested re-
zoning to T-1.
It will be appreciated if you will consider the dis-
advantages of such a proposal and vote AGAINST this
change.
Very truly yours,
Mr. & Ers. C.D.Atkinson
8061 Brown Road
Bon Air, Virginia 23235
April 28, 1971
Mr. N.W~ Burnett, Executive Secretary
Board of Supervisors
~he~terfield C ~unty, ~irg±nia
De~r Sir,
This letter is written to you in reference to the rezoning case
71-20 CS in Nidlothian Nagisterial District.
Both my husband and I are strongly opposed to the rezoning of
the aforementioned property in case 71-20 CS from Residential R-2
to Townhouse TH-1.
We are basing our oloposition on the fact that such rezoning would
greatly increase traffic in this neighborhood, therefore greater danger
to children playing. It also would undoubtedly lower the ~oroperty values
in the area and cause much increased population density.
East but not least it would without a doubt lead to other property
rezoning in this ~rea.
In the hope that you will bring our wishes to the attention
of the Board of Supervisors at the rezoning hearing, we are,
very truly Yours,
Hermine E. Atkinson
Clyde D. Atkinson Sr.
947 Cowan Road
Riehmond, Va.
April 30, 1971
Boamd of Supervisors
Chesterfield Co., Va.
Deam M~. N. W. Bumnet$,
We are ~ to the rezoning of the
following desCr~--~ pamcel of land,~__~~
0um neighborhood is a quiet, residential
area and we would like to keep it that way.
The rezoning of 71-20CS would increase the
ammunt of t~affic on our streets, it will also
u~aubtedly lower our property value.
Thank you for taking the time to read and
consider this letter.
You t~ ~ ~ i
~m~ a Nms. F. D. Camaro*Sa
8063 Sykes Road
iticbnnond, Virginia
April 27, 1971
~ Secretar~
Mr. Melvin W. ~rnett, Executive ~ 7
Bo~rd of Su.~ervisors
Chesterfield Courthouse
Chesterfield County, Virginia
Dear 1.~. ~rnett:
This letter is to infor~ you of .our intense o:~.oomtmon to the
proposed rezoning of the tract of land ~t the end of Whitworth,
Sykes, and Stiles Roads from Residential (R-2) to To%rehouse (TH-l)
(Case 71-2OCS_~ as proposed by 1~. L. A. McDonald.
The ho~'~es in this area are all built on wooded lot~. The streets
are n~rrow ~nd were not constructed to bear the lo~d of traffic
such hiEh densitT? housin~ would i~oose.
This kind of develoy~z:'~en% could only? lead to a cenera! decreose in
the property values of this entire area.
Consequentl?~, we respectfully request vlmr denial of this zonirE
cDan~e.
Sincerely,
"~ nd. Krs.
cc: Dr. A. R. M~tin
8000 Brown Road
Richmond, Virginia 23235
April 27, 1971
County Board of Supervisors
Chesterfield Courthouse
Virginia 23832
Re: Case 71 - 20 CS
Gentlemen:
We wish to make known to you our 9pposiD.~on to the
rezoning from Residential R-2 to To~hsuSe~'TH-1 of our
neighborhood.
Our reasons are those of increased traffic, therefore
more danger to children; lowering of property values
and increased population density.
Sincerely,
Robert E. Whitehead, Jr.
Barbara C. V~hitehead
CC: Mr. A. R. Martin, Supervisor
CC: Mr. Frederick F. Dietsch, Supervisor
April 30, 1971
County Board of Supervisors
Attn: Mr. Melvin Burnett
Chesterfield, Virginia 23832
Re! Case No. 71-20CS
Gem~lemen:
Let is be known that we are q~to rezoning from
residential (R2) to townhouse~'in our neighborhood.
Our reasons being increased traffic~ and therefore~ more
danger to children; and lowering of property values and
increased population density.
Very truly yours,
Mr. and Mrs. Thomas T. Huband
7854 Whitworth Road
Richmond, Virginia 23235
cc: Dre Ae Re Martin
Mre Ee Fe Dietsch
APRIL 29, 1971
MR. MELVIN BURNETT
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
CHESTERFIELD COURTHOUSE
CHESTERFIELD, VIRGINIA
DEAR MR. BURNETT:
] UNDERSTAND CONSIDERATION IS BEING GIVEN TO THE ZONING REQUEST
~71-20 C$ TO REZONE FROM R-2 TO TH-I,
I WISH TO GO ON RECORD AS SAYING [ AM I00~ AGAINST THIS REZONING.
[ WILL HAVE TO BE OUT OF TOWN ON MAY I~TH DUE TO MY JOB, BUT AS
A RESIDENT AND HOME OWNER OF ~HITWORTH ROAD~ AGAIN I SAY~ I AM AGAINST
THIS REZONING,
YOURS TRULY;~
7919 WHITWORTH ROAD
E~ON AIR, VIRGINIA 23235
HJS:NH
May 6, 1971
Mr. M. W. Burnett
Executive Secretary
Board of Supervisors
Chesterfield County, VA
Dear Mr. Burnett:
I Understand that a request, No. 71-20CS, has been made by
Mr. McDowell for the re-zoning from Residential (R-2) to Townhouse
(TH-l) of a tract of land in Midlothian District at the southern
terminus of Stiles, Sykes, and ~nitworth Roads.
I have recently built a new home at 8117 Stiles Road, about
a block from this proposed townhouse development and also mwn an
adjoining lot at this location. This subdivision, recorded as Bon
Air Manor, borders the north side of the strip of land which is pro-
posed to be re-zoned. This subdivision consists of large wooded lots
of i to l½ acres each. The traffic to and from the proposed develop-
ment will have to be routed through this area. I do not feel that
this is a proper location for a townhouse development.
I would like to register my objection to this re-zoning
request and to ask that the Board of Supervisors not change the
zoning from the present H-2 status.
JGH/sjb
CC~
Dr. A. R. Martin
Mr. F. F. Dietsch
Hanes "
1220 Woodcroft Road
Richmond, Virginia,23235
May 4, 1971
M.W. Burnett, Executive Secretary
Board of Supervisors
Chesterfield County, Virginia
Dear Sir:
As residents of the Brown Road area we would like to
state our opposition to the proposed rezoning from
Residential to Townhouse the following area: The ~ar-
cel of land fronting approximately 190 feet on Brown
Road, extending southwestwardly to a depth of approx-
imately 2400 feet, being located at the southern term-
inus of Stiles, Sykes and Whitworth Roads.
We feel that not only would the added traffic endanger
the lives of the children in the area but it would also
lower the property value in the area.
Sincerely
c.c. IDoctor A.R. Martin
Mr. F.F. Dietsch
· -~ichmond. Virginia
~Y 5, 1971
County Board of Suoervisors,
Chesterfield Courthouse
Virginia 23832
Dear Sir,
lam opoosed to rezoninK from Residential R-2 to Townhouse TH-l,
because of increased traffic, therefore more danger to children,
lowering of property values and increased population deasity.
Sincerely,
J. M. Rowe
80~1 Brown Road
Richmond, Virginia
Chesterfield