72-35csl)
3)
-" *For office
*C SE NO.
REVIEW c.
NTY ZONING ORDINANCE
The followin info~atlon Is to be t ed o~ P~n~ed
C) TE~PHONE NO.: ~ ~/ OF ~ ~~..
D) NA~ OF PRESENT OWNER OF PROPERTY ON WHICH THIS ~Q~ST WILL
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.)
LOCATION OF PROPERTY IN QUESTION
(Following information to be obtained by the applicant
from the Office of t~Dunty~s~sor)
~~/~ ~///
C) SEC. NO. D) SUBDIVISION NO, E) BLOCK NO.
F) LOT OR PARCEL NO. G) STREET ADDRESS
A PLAT OF THIS PROPERTY SHALL BE ATTACHED HERETO AND MADE A PART
OF THIS APPLICATION SHOWING THE FOLLOWINO:
LOCATION BY REFERENCE TO NEAREST ROAD INTERSECTION
DIMENSIONS OF SITE
(PAGE 1)
4)
5)
THE PETITIONER REQUESTS THAT THE ZONING ORDINANCE BE AMENDED TO
RECLASSIFY THIS PROPERTY FROM ~AM~ TO
"NO~ .......... /N'AME
STATE THE REASON FOR THIS REQUEST: , /~-~,v~/~,~-t,_/~__. ~,~'n/_ _
/. -
6)
STATE HOW THIS REQUEST WILL NOT BE MATERIALLY DETRIMENTAL TO
THE ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS OR THE SURROUNDINO NEIGHBORHOOD:
STATE ANY EXISTING USE PERMIT OR VARIANCE GRANTED PREVIOUSLY ON
THE PARCEL IN QUESTION:
8) EXISTING LAND USE:
(PAGE 2)
9¸)
GIVE NAMES OP 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 WITHIN ONE HUNDRED FEET
OF THE INTERSECTION O? 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.
BLOCK NO.: LOT OR PARCEL NO.:
BLOCK NO,: LOT OR PARCEL NO.:
BLOCK NO.: LOT OR P~RCEL NO.:
BLOCK NO.: LOT OR PARCEL NO.:
(PAGE
E)
PROPERTY OWNER'S NAME:
MAILING ADDRESS:
TAX MAP NO.:
BLOCK NO.:
SEC. NO.: SUBDIVISION NO.:
LOT OR PARCEL NO.:
PROPERTY OWNER'S NAME:
MAILING ADDRESS:
TAX MAP NO.:
BLOCK NO.:
SEC. NO.: SUBDIVISION NO.:
LOT OR PARCEL NO.:
G) PROPERTY OWNER'S NAME:
H)
I)
J)
MAILING ADDRESS:
TAX MAP NO.:
BLOCK NO.:
SEC. NO.:
SUBDIVISION NO.:
LOT OR PARCEL NO.:
PROPERTY OWNER'S NAME:
MAILING ADDRESS:
TAX MAP NO.:
BLOCK NO.:
SEC. NO.: SUBDIVISION NO.:
LOT OR PARCEL NO.:
PROPERTY OWNER'S NAME:
MAILING ADDRESS:
TAX MAP NO.:
BLOCK NO.:
SEC. NO.:,,, SUBDIVISION NO.:
LOT OR PARCEL NO.:
PROPERTY OWNER'S NAME:
MAILING ADDRESS:
TAX MAP NO.:
BLOCK NO.:
SEC. NO.: SUBDIVISION NO.:
LOT OR PARCEL NO.:
(PAGE
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.
19
SIGNATURE OF APPLICANT .......
(Same name as used in item l-A,
page 1.)
SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO BEFORE ME THIS
MY COMMISSION EXPIRES 19
DAY OF
19 .
NOTARY
(PAGE 5)
COUNTY OF CHESTERFIELD
(For Intracounty Correspondence)
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
DATE: March 6, 1972
Mr. M. W. Burnett, Executive Secretary
Mr. S. R. Balderson, Jr., Senior Planner
(Case 72-35C) Rezoning Request of Mr. C. K. Wilson
As you recall on February 15, 1972 the Planning Commission
reviewed the request of Mr. C. K. Wilson to rezone property owned
by him northeast of the intersection of Walmsley Blvd. and Hull
Street Road (Tax Map Sec. 39-1 parcel 6.) The request asks that
the property be rezoned from the Agricultural (A) classification
to General Business (C-2). After reviewing the application site
and hearing testimony concerning this matter, the Planning Commis-
'sion resolved that the Board of Supervisors consider denying the
request for rezoning the property and~instead grant a special use
permit allowing the Garage operation to continue, it further re-
commends that the following conditions be made part of the granting
of the permit:
The developer shall provide an accurate account of
the drainage situation, showing existing drainage and
the impact this project will have on the site and the
surrounding area. The developer shall submit a plan
to the County Engineering Department which will provide
for on and off site drainage control. The plan shall
explain the method and show the facilities to be uti-
lized in the hydraulic engineering of this project.
This plan shall be approved by the Engineering Depart-
ment prior to the issuance of any building permit and
implemented prior to the issuance of any occupancy
permit.
The developer shall submit a plan for erosion and sedi-
ment control to the County Engineering Department.
Such a plan is to be comprised of vegetative and engi-
neering practices (as outlined in the "Erosion and Sed-
iment Control Technical Handbook" published by the James
River Soil and Water Conservation District) to be-uti-
lized as erosion and sediment control measures for the
project. The plan shall be approved by the Engineering
Department prior to the issuance of any building permit.
Ail plan measures shall be instituted prior to the
issuance of any occupancy permit. ~.
Mr. M. W. Burnett
Page 2
March 6, 1972
Utility (water & sewer) plans shall be submitted to
and approved by the County Engineering Department
prior to the issuance of any building permit.
No junked or abandoned automobiles, or parts thereof,
shall be stored on the property.
No outside storage of materials or supplies shall be
permitted.
Ail inoperable automobiles shall be stored within an
enclosure (fence) having 100% solidity. Such struc-
ture shall be no less than 7 ft. in height and setback
at least 75 ft. from the existing right-of-way.
7. Ail driveways and parking areas shall be paved.
The permit shall be granted for a period of 3 years,
renewable upon satisfactory re-application.
Ail site plans shall be approved by the Planning
Department prior to the issuance of any building permit.
Subsequent, to the Planning Commission hearing, Mr. Wilson contacted
our office expressing his concern over two of the conditions should
the use permit be granted and said conditions imposed. A second
site inspection was made by this Department and as a result it is
my feeling that some modification to the conditions instituted by
Planning Commission might be made. This modification would still
fulfill the intent of Commission, in securing proper land use con-
trols, and at the same time enable the applicant to proceed with his
operation.
The recommended changes are as follows:
Recommendation #6 could more properly be instituted if the
following wording were substituted: Ail inoperable automobiles shall
be stored within an enclosure (fence) having 100% solidity. Such an
enclosure shall be no less than 7 ft. in height and shall be erected
flush with the front bearing wall of the existing structure and shall
extend eastwardly and westwardly to enclose those areas utilized in
the operation. Recommendation #7 should be made to state that all
driveways and parking areas shall be paved or graveled. Should the
Board consider granting the use permit to allow the continuance of
this operation then the above noted and aforementioned conditions
should be imposed.
If any further information is needed with regard to this matter, I
remain at your service.
WEDNESDAY A.M.
MR. BURNETT'
MR. ~__~,=~=:~_~_.~).:::W]~ 18 TO APPEAR BEFORE THE BOARD THIS P.M.
IN REGARD TO A ~T, TO OPERATE A GARAGE ON ROUTE 360.(THIS
GARAGE HA8 BEEN IN OPERATION FOR Y~ INCIDENTLY)
REF: (39-12) (1) 6
THIS~£1TTLE~FELLOW HAS BEEN WORKING AT REYNOLDS AND O~ERATING THIS GARAGE=
PAR~ ME...
RECENTLY~ HE FOUND IT NECESSARY TO TRY TO OPERATE THIS BUSINE88, FULL
TIME~ BECAUSE OF THE WORK HE WAS GETTING~ THEREFORE, HE BOUGHT THE
PROPERTY AND GAVE UP HIS JOB---(DEED RECORDED DEC ~0~?~ )... THAT IS
WHEN HE FOUND OUT THAT THE PROPERTY WAS ONE OF THOSE OLD- NON-
CONFORMING ZONING, AND HAD TO GET IT ZONED C-2 .... ( STAN HA8 TALKED
WITH MR. WILSON, AND I UNDERSTAND THAT THE ZONING BOARD RECOMMENDED
THE USE PERMIT RATHER THAN THE C-2 ZONING)(YOU PROBABLY REMEMBER THE
CASE)...
MR. WILSON HAS CALLED ME SEVERAL TIMES IN REGARD TO THIS~ NOT THAT I
COULD DO ANYTHING ...... ANYWAY... ANYTHING THAT YOU CAN DO TO HELP
HIM GET THIS I~t~UGH, SO 1HAT HE CAN KE~P HIS BUSINESS , I WOULD
APPRECIATE AND I~M SURE HE WOULD GREATLY APPRECIATE ........ HE~S
AFRAID THAT HE WILL ~LOOSE HIS SHIRT~ IF THIS DOI~N~T GO THROUGH .....
THANKS A LOT .......
SI NCERELY~
FRANCES (COLE)