Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutH_1996_AnnualReportWASIINGTON COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION County Administration Building 100 West Washington Street, Room 320 Hagerstown, Maryland 21740-4727 Telephone: (301) 791-3065 TDD/Hearing Impaired: (301) 791-3070 FAX: (301) 791-3193 Board of County Commissioners for Washington County, Maryland 100 West Washington Street Hagerstown, MD 21740 Dear Commissioners: This report submitted pursuant to the provisions of Article 66B of the Annotated Code, summarized the activities of the Commission from July 1, 1995 through June 30, 1996. In addition to the routine review and approval of subdivisions and site plans, the Commission continued to implement the Comprehensive Plan that was adopted in 1981. The various elements of the Plan worked on by the Commission in Fiscal Year 1995 are described in this report along with the numerous other tasks undertaken during this fiscal year. As in the past, the new Work Program that has been formally adopted by the Planning Commission lists all those tasks the Commission plans to address. BLI/dsk Sincerely, XW;ashington and L. Iseminger, Chai anG County Planning Commission 41* RECYCLED PAPER WASHINGTON COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION County Administration Building 100 West Washington Street, Room 320 Hagerstown, Maryland 21740-4727 Telephone: (301 ) 791.3065 TDD/Hearing Impaired: (301) 791-3070 FAX: (301) 791-3193 Board of County Commissioners for Washington County, Maryland 100 West Washington Street Hagerstown, MD 21740 Dear Commissioners: This report submitted pursuant to the provisions of Article 66B of the Annotated Code, summarized the activities of the Commission from July 1, 1995 through June 30, 1996. In addition to the routine review and approval of subdivisions and site plans, the Commission continued to implement the Comprehensive Plan that was adopted in 1981. The various elements of the Plan worked on by the Commission in Fiscal Year 1995 are described in this report along with the numerous other tasks undertaken during this fiscal year. As in the past, the new Work Program that has been formally adopted by the Planning Commission lists all those tasks the Commission plans to address. Sincerely, BLI/dsk ,sion RECYCLED PAPER TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE Planning Organizational Chart .................................................... i Agency Inter-Relationships..................................................... ii The Comprehensive Plan ..................................... ..................1 Planning Commission Work Program .............................................. 2 Agricultural Land Preservation Program ............................................ 3 Metropolitan Planning Organization ....................... I ........ I .............. 6 Town Planner Assistance Program ................................................ 7 Forest Conservation Program .................................................... 9 Water and Sewerage Plan ...................................................... 11 Highway Interchange Study.....................................................12 Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance ............................................. 1 a ParkPlanning................................................................14 Recycling - Solid Waste ........................................................ 15 Historic District Commission ................................................... 16 Development Activity......................................................... 18 Rezoning Cases..............................................................19 Board of Zoning Appeals Statistics ............................................... 20 Agriculturally Significant Land Converted to Development ............................ 21 Agricultural Preservation Districts ............................................... 22 FY 1995 Subdivision Summary .................................................. 24 FY 1995 Subdivision Detail .................................................... 25 Subdivision Trends...........................................................27 Planning Sector Map .................................................... Appendix FY 1996 Development Map ............................................... Appendix FY 1996 Rezoning Map .................................................. Appendix Agricultural Preservation District Map ...................................... Appendix Washington County Planning Commission 1996 Annual Report Board of County Commissioners Gregory I. Snook, President John S. Shank, Vice -President Ronald L. Bowers R. Lee Downey James R. Wade Planning Commission Bertrand L. Iseminger, Chairman Donald L_ Spickler, Vice -Chairman James R. Wade, Ex -Officio Bernard L. Moser Robert E. Ernst, II Andrew J. Bowen, IV Paula Lampton Don Ardinger R. Ben Clopper Published, October 1997 Washington County Planning Commission 100 West Washington Street Hagerstown, Maryland 21740 H u Q H H N H O 1 Q Z a zP4 H 134w ru A 0.� .z.1 P4 z 0 H � a � w a w � H � � � H w w � w N � H G -F � � x U7 ra w a iJI w W � 4-1 0 o 344 0. W fx �'+ H o a>w k7 (W H Q .> � M4 E x � w >1 0 w t-4 w G$ F' W� � C� o Z Hrr4 C:)H P O rx z r� pF` aa�nCw F{2;;a pa ul Q Z r� a W HCw wrxa az mcQn �Qh n a W 1 Q Z a zP4 H 134w ru A 0.� .z.1 P4 h WAIF 0i c 0.r Ilk CD z 16 r z b Yd, vp I. V 4 J y 4 a 4 � z o ?d ,� d4y !• �. Li. � S kp�ssih�� I � 1 1 1 t 4FnI i m i TOURtsbi i cu z = a = i DEPARTMENT i r t CDa i a d ■rrw 1 �r m if � r ` op of cc a�5 � °s. ��'�• /� ► 'Pa OA '�,G��roBD pp�Z°4 � m ebb a zxarS p4` �Q}¢ J5 o p� pe m =dt a y `F 1� mai J' ii 1p b~ F� •� ;��• W 4r4 t� qQC p Q p�vtee? s x z n �a ao W. F x ,c m +� J am ii THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN Implementation of policies associated with the Comprehensive Plan continued through FY 1996. Many items which are outlined in greater detail in other sections of this report are directly related or reflect some aspects of the implementation of the policy and goals of the Comprehensive Plan. During FY 1996 the Planning Commission worked to implement the policies of the Comprehensive Plan through adoption of amendments to the Zoning Ordinance and completion of the rezoning process for Group IV of the Highway Interchange Comprehensive rezoning. The Planning Commission's focus remains to facilitate development within the Urban and Town Growth Areas while preserving agriculture and historic areas within the County's rural landscape. Continued work on adopting the "Seven Visions and the Sensitive Area Element" in accordance with the Planning Act of 1992 reflect this objective. Work toward updating the Transportation Element also continued during this Fiscal year. The Consultant for this project Bellomo-McGee, Inc. also finished development of the transportation analysis for the non -urbanized areas of the County. Since the Comprehensive Plan adoption in 1981, the Planning Commission and the Planning Staff have worked continuously to implement its strategies for growth management and improvement of the quality of life in Washington County. The attached work program for FY 1997 is designed to continue that effort along with meeting the planning requirements of the Planning Act of 1992. 1 to Ch H tm a+ rn H y 0 y W O A N M C9 'L�M f70z �Hi p� IU' E V1 y Aa pOHV1 UPO H 'X. ii+ P' f� EM+E HOd WE OW E b -MOM MOM 'ri tVl�7 (pol 0 � E cQaoWC7 od i-�Eaj flzCP:T. Paced P4 P4 rA�y6���"z+�•`qq'Ha�+� OC90GG F+ H� z o U AGRICULTURAL LAND PRESERVATION PROGRAM Washington County's efforts to preserve valuable farmland via the Maryland Agricultural Land Preservation Program (MALPP) began in April 1978 and has continued to date. The Program was established and is regulated by Agricultural Article, Sections 2-501 through 2-515 of the Annotated Code of Maryland. It is administered through a Planning Commission staff member, by the Washington County Agricultural Land Preservation Advisory Board, the County Commissioners, and the Maryland Agricultural Land Preservation Foundation (MALPF) of the Maryland Department of Agriculture. The Program encourages landowners to voluntarily enter into an Agricultural Land Preservation District in which it is agreed that the land will not be developed for a period of at least five years (to receive County tax credits, the landowner is required to commit his property to agricultural use only, for a period of ten years). In return for the restriction, the landowner receives protection from nuisance complaints and becomes eligible to sell a Development Rights Easement. A landowner may exercise the option of selling a Development Rights Easement to the Agricultural Land Preservation Foundation provided that his offer to sell is recommended by the County's Advisory Board and the County Commissioners. At the local level, the Agricultural Advisory Board reviews and ranks easement applications, assigning point value to such items as farm size, soil quality and development pressure indicators on its easement checklist. The Board of County Commissioners again limited the number of applicants sent to Annapolis for easement sale since funds are still in short supply. If purchased by the State of Maryland, the easement will remain effective in perpetuity. During 1996, total acreage in the program increased to 22,567 acres with a total of 162 agricultural districts. In the Easement Purchase Program, contracts were issued during FY'96 for two more farms, bringing total easement properties in the program to 20, equaling 4,167 acres. The Agricultural Land Preservation Advisory Board is continuing to work with the Planning Commission to monitor the success of the easement program and to consider other options for the long term success of the Agricultural Land Preservation Program. The enclosed figures show that we lost 191.9 acres of agriculturally significant land last year. In comparison, we preserved 403 acres during the same period. Also, Federal Transportations/Open Space (ISTEA) funds have purchased easements on over 3,000 acres at Antietam Battlefield. An additional source of Federal money through the Farmland Protection Programa. (FPP) has become available for easement purchases in Maryland. Funds are being handled through the MALPF and will total $1 million the first year statewide. 4 AGRICULTURAL SIGNIFICANT LAND CONVERTED TO DEVELOPMENT 1980 TO JUNE 30, 1996 Total Developed ACREAGE LOTS Total Converted ACREAGE LOTS .CONVERTED 1980 1,359.6 365 487.8 95 36.0 1981 1,137.1 332 251.3 59 22.0 1982 964.9 150 194.4 33 20.1 1983 895.3 220 305.6 127 34.1 1984 1,092.3 235 409.6 68 37.5 1985 1,144.6 231 439.8 65 38.4 1986 946.9 250 138.8 60 14.6 1987* 2,254.6 995 363.1 94 16.1 1989 1,714.8 770 301.3 86 17.5 1990 1,769.1 820 318.6 102 18.0 1991 1,115.4 339 321.6 104 28.8 1992 1,246.9 565 203.5 46 16.3 1993 793.5 1,005 156.8 45 19.8 1994 833.2 312 121.0 42 14.5 1995** 598.6 342 208.6 76 34.8 1996 995.9 506 191.8 37 19.3 TOTAL 18,862.7 7,437 4,413.6 1,139 23.4 23.4 of the land developed between 1980 and June 30, 1996 has been converted from agriculturally significant land. *Reporting period of 18 months was used to change the Planning Commission's Annual Report from a calendar year to a fiscal year. **Figures revised 11-4-96 5 METROPOLITAN PLANNING ORGANIZATION During FY 1996 the County Commissioners sat as the governing body for the Hagerstown Urbanized Area Metropolitan Planning Organization, with Staff being provided by the City and the County. During this period the Long Range Transportation Plan for the MPO has been under development for the urbanized area of the County as well as portions of Jefferson and Berkeley County in West Virginia. The draft plans for the urban and non -urbanized sections of the County will be synthesized into the new Transportation Element of the Comprehensive Plan. The Planning Staff spent a great deal of time with the consultant, Bellomo & McGee, in developing the background information for the document. In addition, work was also completed on a corridor analysis in the Robinwood Drive area of the County. During FY 1996 work continued on reorganization of the MPO with communication being made with the governors of the three states associated with the MPO concerning their endorsement for a reorganization. 0 TOWN PLANNER ASSISTANCE PROGRAM The Assistance Program is nearing its fifth year of service and assistance to municipal governments in Washington County. The Town of Boonsboro continues to be active in the program and has found the program to be a viable option to employing a full-time staff person. The Town Planner organizes the monthly agenda, analyzes and coordinates the review of development proposals and assists in long term or comprehensive planning goals of the Town. In early FY 1996, the Mayor and Council and Boonsboro Planning Commission conducted public information meetings and a public hearing on a comprehensive rewrite of the Town's Zoning Ordinance. The new Ordinance became effective October 2, 1995. The Commission anticipates minor amendments in the future as a result of the Comprehensive Plan Update (mandated by the Planning Act of 1992). A complete rewrite of the `background studies' for the Plan was completed by staff during FY 1996. The Commission has scheduled workshop meetings during the first part of FY 1997 to draft the goals, objectives and recommendations for the Plan. The Plan will then be presented to Mayor and Council with public hearings to occur during the latter half of FY 1997. The most significant development approved by the Commission during the fiscal year was the preliminary plat approval of Crestview Subdivision Section C. Section C is an 86 lot single family development which represents a continuation of Section B (75 lots). Section B is approximately 60 percent occupied. The Crestview subdivision represents the first major subdivision to occur since the mid -1980's. The Town Planner also assists the Utilities Commission on water and wastewater planning issues and presents quarterly updates to the Commission on capacities and utilization of the systems. The Town Planner continues to provide assistance to the Mayor and Council and Town Manager on various projects. 7 The Town of Smithsburg also participated in the Town Planner Assistance Program for the second year. The focus of the Smithsburg Planning Commission's efforts this year has been to complete the Comprehensive Plan update. The Mayor and Council and Commission conducted a public hearing on the Plan which was adopted July 1, 1996. The staff's responsibility was to serve as co -manager with oversight duties on the drafting of the new Plan. The Town Planner, at the direction of the Smithsburg Mayor and Council developed Subdivision and Zoning Ordinance amendments which specified certain financial responsibilities of developers during the development review and construction phase of a subdivision or site. The proposed amendments are scheduled for public hearing in the early part of FY 1997. N. FOREST CONSERVATION PROGRAM Washington County continues to implement the local version of Maryland's Forest Conservation law. Through the inventory of existing forest on development sites and the calculation of minimum forest cover based on existing forest and proposed development, the law is designed to slow the loss of valuable forest land in the State of Maryland. Several options for meeting obligations under the Ordinance are available. The first preference is to prevent forest disturbance and the retention of existing forest or planting of new forest on the development site. Planting new forest and placing easements on existing forest off site are also available. Payment of a fee in lieu of planting or retention is also allowable. In the past fiscal year the Washington County Planning Department processed 240 subdivision and site plan applications covering 4606.11 acres of land. 187 or 78% of those applications, a decrease from the previous year's 86%, were exempt from the requirements of the Forest Conservation Ordinance (FCO). The chart below indicates the number and type of exemptions granted in the past fiscal year. A. < 40,000 SQUARE FOOT PARCEL 7 B. SIMPLIFIED PLAT 55 C. APPLICATION BEFORE EFFECTIVE DATE 4 D. OWNERIIMMEDIATE FAMILY MEMBER DWELLING 36 E. EXISTING LOT OF RECORD 10 F. PUD BEFORE EFFECTIVE DATE 3 G. AGRICULTURAL ACTIVITY 0 H. REAL ESTATE TRANSFER 18 I. REPLATS 54 TOTAL SUBDIVISION AND SITE PLAN REVIEW EXEMPTIONS 187 Subtracting four applications that are counted twice due to multiple stage reviews leaves 49 plans to comply with the Ordinance in some other manner. Payment of the fee in lieu of planting is chosen most often. Of the 45 plans not exempt, 17 used the fee in lieu of planting choice. The payments generated an additional $ 91,100.22 for the Reforestation Fund which, at this time, is earmarked for additional reforestation of the West Woods at Antietam National Battlefield. The fee is payment for 911,002.20 square feet or 20.91 acres of forest that was not required to be planted on the development sites. Since adoption of the Forest Conservation Ordinance in February 1993 the fee in lieu of option has generated a total of $158,035.31 for the Reforestation Fund. 27 plans, a 100% increase from the previous year, required no fees or planting because there was sufficient forest on the site to allow some clearing with no mitigation or no clearing was proposed or necessary. The final method of compliance is new planting, either to provide a predetermined minimum or to replace existing forest removed during development. Five development proposals used afforestation or reforestation to satisfy FCO requirements. A total of 21.59 acres of new forest will result on the sites of these development proposals. All methods of compliance generate a plan review fee. There is no fee when a plan is exempt. The Planning Department collected $ 4,711.75 in Forest Conservation Plan review fees during the past fiscal year. An additional 23 exemptions from the Forest Conservation Ordinance were granted for timber harvest activities which are not considered development activities. The reforestation of the West Woods at the Antietam National Battlefield continues although no additional disbursements from the Reforestation Fund occurred during the past fiscal year. To date, the National Park Service has used $8,184.14 from the reforestation fund to reforest 4 acres of the West Woods, a cost of $2,046.04 per acre. In this case, spending fee in lieu of funds equivalent to 1.88 acres produced 4 acres of new forest. It must be noted that the labor was volunteered. 10 WATER AND SEWERAGE PLAN The Planning Department did not receive any requests for individual amendments to the Washington County Water and Sewerage flan during FY 1996. The Planning Department Staff reviewed and approved several requests from service providing agencies for certification of consistency with the Plan in order to obtain State funding for various projects. The next State mandated update of the Plan will be due in 1997. 11 HIGHWAY INTERCHANGE STUDY During FY 96 the Board of Commissioners and the Planning Commission took action to approve Group IV of the Highway Interchange Comprehensive Rezoning Project. Group IV included the following interchanges: I-81 & Halfway Boulevard, 1-81 & I -70,1-81 & US 11, 1-81 & MD 68, and 1 -70 & MD 63. The Group IV area also included a major expansion of both Hl -I and IG in the area surrounded by Hopewell Road, MD 63, and US 40. This area has become a prime focal area for economic development with the creation of the Newgate Industrial Park and the Hunter's Green Business Park. The Planning Commission also held public information meetings concerning Groups III and V during FY 1996. Comments during the Public Informational meeting for Group V have generated requests for revisions which will be reviewed by Staff. It was the intent of the Planning Commission and the Board of Commissioners to have finished the comprehensive rezoning of all the interchanges during FY 1997. 12 ADEQUATE PUBLIC FACILITIES ORDINANCE During FY 1996, the adequate Public Facilities Ordinance (APFO) was assessed by the Planning Commission for need and recommended for continuance. The Planning Commission also recommended that the Board of Commissioners revisit the issue of adoption of impact fees. A presentation was made by Jim Shaw, Planning Director for Frederick County, regarding their experience with the adoption of impact fees. At the request of the Board of Commissioners the Planning Staff analyzed the school adequacy provision for items which should be considered for revisions to ensure more equitable application of the APFO. The Staff identified three areas which may be readily addressed: a) making the school provision applicable to all development types inside of the Urban and Town Growth areas and not just multi -family units; b) adopting the necessary ordinances to expand APFO application for schools inside the municipalities located in the County; and c) reviewing methodology to integrate into the analysis of future school capacity the number of approved but undeveloped lots or units. fixture. It is the intention of Staff to make recommendations concerning these issues in the 13 PARK PLANNING Park Planning during FY 96 included a diverse range of projects and activities. Forest sampling was carried out at the Hopewell Road industrial site, and a comprehensive Forest Stand Delineation report was prepared to assist the site development process. A FSD Report was also prepared for a site at the Western Maryland Business Park, and a forest evaluation was done near Benevola Road. Coordination between the Engineering Department and MINI, Inc. was assisted with the objective of providing a privately funded, accessible nature/recreation trail around a planned water management pond to be located at Black Rock Regional Park. A revised, updated concept plan for the Agricultural Education Center, including future phased development was provided to the Parks Board and Agricultural Land Preservation Advisory Board, as well as a Zoning Appeals application and construction permit for the Pinesburg Park sign. Site location search criteria for a zoo site in the County was established for use by the GIS technician. Coordination was provided between the various County departments and the County Library to obtain information for the new County Home Page on the World Wide Web. Detailed information about each department was provided on computer disk. Photographs of several County parks and historic sites were also taken and converted to data files for use on the Page. Descriptions and photographs of available industrial sites are an example of the extensive County information now accessible around the world to any computer connected to the Internet. Discussion about criteria for development of a new county bicycle tour map using GIS data has begun. 14 SOLID WASTE AND RECYCLING An extensive comment, update and review process started May, 1995 was finally completed with adoption of the Solid Waste and Recycling Plan by the County Commissioners, following a public hearing in July. The document for the first time combines the Solid Waste Plan and the Recycling Plan, and will now be updated on a three year cycle. 15 HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION During the past fiscal year the Washington County Historic District Commission addressed a multitude of issues through a variety of permits, applications and assignments from individuals and agencies. Three tax credit applications were received. Two were approved resulting in $3,995.07 worth of credit awarded to the property owners and deducted from the County portion of the property tax based on $39,950.70 in improvements to the historic structures. The third application was denied because it was determined to be routine maintenance, and therefore ineligible for credits. The Commission reviewed numerous demolition applications and, following County policy, made recommendations ranging from no opposition to requesting that structures be dismantled and the salvaged parts made available for other restoration projects. Two design review applications for signs in the AO -2 area of the Antietam Overlay zoning district were approved. A building permit to rehabilitate a home in the AO -1 district that was heavily damaged by fire was also approved. Among the many assigned responsibilities of being a Certified Local Government by the State of Maryland, the Commission participated in two National Register Nominations. The properties were ultimately listed based, in part, on recommendations from the Commission with concurrence from the Board of County Commissioners. The Commission's performance as a CLG was evaluated by the Maryland Historical Trust and determined to be adequate on an adequate/not adequate scale. Other CLG activities included completion of the FY 1995 project 16 funded jointly with CLG funds and matched by County and town appropriations was a historic sites survey and documentation of the Town of Funkstown. This project completes the County assisted multi-year effort to survey all of the incorporated municipalities (except Hagerstown). However, the Commission also learned that its FY 1996 project, which would begin the survey effort in rural communities was unsuccessful. The Commission's participation in the development review process has increased over the years and this past fiscal year was no exception. The Commission reviewed a number of Preliminary Consultations, Subdivisions and Site Plans and occasionally made recommendations to protect existing structures listed in the Historic Sites Survey. A proposal to evaluate the potential for a site to yield archeological information related to slave holdings in Washington County was also reviewed prior to approval. The results of that investigation were also evaluated. The Commission also participated in a rezoning application which proposed removal of the Historic Preservation zone from a large area of farmland while retaining the designation, appropriately, on the historic structures. Finally, the Commission discussed at a majority of its monthly meetings the distinction between routine maintenance activities and preservation/rehabilitation/restoration. It is attempting to draw clear lines between the issues in order to make reliable and consistent decisions on tax credit applications. Several Commission members and staff attended training sessions throughout the year to maintain certification requirements and learn of new issues and innovative methods. Staff fielded a multitude of requests for information and direction throughout the year. 17 DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITY Development proposals were reviewed by the Planning Commission in both concept and final form. The Commission reviewed and approved 108 residential, commercial, industrial or institutional subdivision plats involving 506 lots representing 504 units on 995.9 acres. In addition the Commission approved 20 site plans and held seven preliminary consultations. Some of the conceptual forms have not resulted in a firm design while others have proceeded through final approval. There were several subdivisions of significance (final approval of twenty lots or more lots or units) granted during FY 96 and they were: Maple Valley Estates - Section A, St. James Village North Phases I & lI, Sterling Oafs - Phase I, Wagamans Glen, Wintergreen Lots 1-34, and Walnut Point Heights -Section 1. Site Plans representing significant private investment within the County were approved for: Bowman/Trendlines, CES, Phillips Driscoe Pipe, Sun Chemical, Purina Mills, Valley World, Citicorp Credit Services, and Staples A site plan reflecting public project investment was approved for a shell building at the Washington County Airport. 18 REZONING CASES AND ORDINANCE AMENDMENTS Between July 1, 1995 and June 30, 1996, the Planning Commission acted on 9 applications. Joint hearings with the Planning Commission and the Board of County Commissioners were held regularly on a quarterly cycle or special hearings were held as necessary to provide for efficiency in the hearing process. The Commission rendered recommendations on 9 map amendments including comprehensive map amendments for Group IV of the Highway interchange Study. A listing of the Planning Commission's recommendations and the Board's actions for the cases heard in FY 1996 are as follows: CASE APPLICANT TYPE OF ACREAGE REQUEST COMMISSION BOARD AMENDMENT ACTION ACTION RZ-95-05 Ted Kretzer RZ-95-06.01 Planning Map Commission RZ-95-06.02 Planning Map Commission RZ-95-06.03 Planning Commission RZ-95-06.04 Planning Map Commission RZ-95-06.05 Planning Commission RZ-95-07 340 Land Corp RZ-95-08 Prime Retail RZ-96-01 Samuel and Patricia Powell Map 22,000 sq.ft. RS to BL Denied Denied Map HI to HI -1 App'd App'd and IG Map HI to IG, App'd App'd HI -1, HI -2 Map HI to HI -1, App'd App'd HI -2 Map HI to 1-11-1, App'd App'd HI -2, A Map HI to HI -1 App'd App'd HI -2, A, IG Map 4.961 acres C to BL App'd App'd Map 42.85 acres HI -2 to HI -1 App'd App'd Map 0.67 acres RR to BG App'd App'd 19 BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS STATISTICS FISCAL YEAR 1995196 GRANTED DENIED WITHDRAWN TOTAL VARIANCES 134 6 1 141 SPECIAL 34 6 2 42 EXCEPTIONS EXPANSION OF 0 0 0 0 NON -CONFORMING USE CHANGE OF 3 0 0 3 NON -CONFORMING USE ADMINISTRATIVE 1 2 0 3 ERROR APPEAL FROM 0 0 0 0 PLANNING COMMISSION APPEAL FROM ADEQUATE 2 0 0 2 PUBLIC FACILITIES APPEAL FOR FLOOD PLAIN 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 174 14 3 191 FISCAL YEAR 1994-1995 148 14 4 166 20 WASHINGTON COUNTY MD AGRICULTURALLY SIGNIFICANT LAND CONVERTED TO DEVELOPMENT FOR PERIOD 07/01/95 THRU 06/30/96 PLANNING ELECTION AGRICULTURAL NEW USE SECTOR DISTRICT ACREAGE LOST LOTS (TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT) 1 18 76.5 13 SF TOTAL 76.5 13 6 1.5 1 SF 16 1.4 1 SF 20 3.0 1 cm 20 1.1 1 SF TOTAL 7.0 4 3 3.6 2 SF 8 6.6 2 SF 11 48.4 2 LL TOTAL 55.0 4 4 7 29.3 5 SF 14 3.8 3 SF TOTAL 33.1 8 5 4 3.6 2 SF 23 2.0 2 SF TOTAL 5.5 4 6 S 14.7 4 SF TOTAL 14.7 4 GRAND TOTAL 191.8 37 21 WASHINGTON COUNTY AGRICULTURAL PRESERVATION DISTRICTS DISTRICT NO DISTRICT NAME FARM TYPE ACRES DATE TYPE EASEMENT ESTABLISHED AD -80-001 FORD CROP 178.59 07/11/80 10 02124/83 AD -80-002 CARR DAIRY 245.64 07/11/80 10 12/21/82 AD -80-004 ST JAMES SCHOOL INC CROP 279.14 04/21/80 5 AD -80-006 HARSHMAN CROP 232.44 08/07/80 10 04/16/96 AD -80-007 LOHMAN CROP 146.00 08/15/80 10 AD -81-002 MARTIN CROP 140.00 08/28!81 10 05/15/84 AD -82-003 ANKENEY CROP 460.00 05/11/83 10 02/18/86 AD -83-002 WEISENBAUGH BEEF 314.00 06/28/83 10 12/19/86 AD -83-002 WEISENBAUGH BEEF 314.00 06/28/83 10 12/19/86 AD -83-003 HAYES BEEF 200.55 03/19/84 10 09/06/85 AD -84-002 ROBMNS BEEF 448.00 05/14/85 10 12/31/86 AD -85-001 WOLFINGER BEEF 149.63 04/07/86 10 AD -86-001 ROSENBERRY CROP 127.51 08/12/86 10 AD -88-001 MAIN CROP 142.26 06/16/88 10 06/30/89 AD -88-002 ROWLAND FOREST 700.04 03/09/89 10 03/07/91 AD -88-003 CORCORAN CROP 158.42 03/22/89 10 05/01/97 AD -88-004 RITCHIE DAIRY 237.99 04/12/89 10 09/24/90 AD -89-001 GOLDEN ORCHARD 457.67 06/20/89 10 AD -89-002 STRITE DAIRY 192.43 03/18/91 10 AD -89-003 BYERS DAIRY 164.61 09/13/89 10 02/15/91 AD -89-005 HERBST DAIRY 183.99 04/16/91 10 AD -89-005A HERBST DAIRY 172.12 04/16/91 10 07/26/95 AD -90-001 EMSWILER CROP 100.00 09/20/90 10 05/01/97 AD -90-002 CORCORAN CROP 150.14 09/20/90 10 08/30/93 AD -90-005 SCHOOLEY FOREST 101.05 03/20/91 10 AD -90-006 HARP CROP 124.70 09/20/90 10 06/29/92 AD -90-007 HARP CROP 150.51 09/20/90 10 06/30/92 AD -90-008 WILES CROP 190.88 03/20/91 10 AD -90-009 SCHOOLEY FOREST 21.60 03/20/91 10 AD -90-010 ENGSTROM CROP 38.59 04/16/91 10 AD -90-011 BURTNER DAIRY 108.81 04/16/91 10 AD -90-012 DURBIN CROP 100.38 03/20/91 10 01/13/95 AD -90-013 WEAVER DAIRY 174.05 08/05/91 10 AD -90-014 WEAVER BEEF 82.34 11/20/90 10 AD -90-015 CLINE CROP 145.25 08/05/91 10 AD -90-017 PRICE CROP 149.64 11/20/90 10 AD -90-018 LONG DAIRY 163.88 04/16/91 10 AD -90-019 STRITE DAIRY 140.04 11/20/90 5 AD -90-020 TRUMPOWER DAIRY 125.00 11/20/90 10 08/16/94 AD -90-021 SHIFLER CROP 157.00 05/29/91 10 AD -90-022 HEIMER CROP 67.00 08105!91 10 AD -90-023 LITTON DAIRY 145.00 03/20/91 10 AD -90-024 HOWELL FOREST 146.81 03/20/91 10 AD -90-025 CHURCHEY CROP 186.32 05/29/91 10 05/01/96 AD -90-026 FLETCHER CROP 104.80 03/20/91 10 AD -90-027 NIEMYER CROP 75.38 03/20/91 10 AD -90-028 BAKER BEEF 17.06 03/20/91 10 AD -90-031 BARR ORCHARD 70.72 65/29/91 10 AD -90-032 BARR ORCHARD 115.62 65/29/91 10 AD -90-033 STONE DAIRY 165.00 05/29/91 10 AD -90-034 SECREST CROP 117.42 05/29/91 10 AD -90-036 HENDERSHOT CROP 168.83 05/29/91 10 AD -90-037 HENDERSHOT CROP 116.00 08/02/91 10 AD -90-038 ROTH DAIRY 124.27 05/29/91 10 AD -90-039 STOCKSLAGER CROP 144.33 03/20/91 10 AD -90-049 MARTIN DAIRY 120.60 03/20/94 10 AD -90-042 FAITH BEEF 129.62 03/20/99 10 AD -90-043 FAITH FOREST 132.63 03/20/99 10 AD -90-044 FAITH FOREST 17.00 03/20/91 10 AD -90-045 MANUEL CROP 63.63 03/20/91 10 AD -90-046 MANUEL CROP 41.20 03/20/91 10 AD -90-050 RITONDO FOREST 135.00 05/29/91 10 AD -90-051 STONE CROP 109.50 05/29/91 10 AD -90-052 STONE DAIRY 99.50 05/29/91 10 AD -90-053 STONE DAIRY 104.78 05/29/91 10 AD -90-054 STONE CROP 93.15 05/29/91 10 AD -90-055 STONE CROP 129.13 05/29/91 10 AD -90-056 HULL FOREST 107.21 05/29/91 10 AD -90-057 HOSE CROP 26.00 07/02/91 10 AD -90-060 LOHMAN CROP 270.91 05/29/91 10 AD -90-062 LOUDENSLAGER CROP 145.04 05/29/91 10 AD -90-063 MARTIN DAIRY 100.61 05/29/91 10 AD -90-064 SOWERS CROP 118.90 08/05/91 10 AD -90-065 BOWERS DAIRY 141.31 08/05/91 10 AD -90-066 OSWALD DAIRY 75.75 08/05/91 10 AD -90-067 GROSS DAIRY 53.44 09/16/91 10 AD -90-069 GROVE CROP 185.00 10/11/91 10 AD -90-070 STIVERS BEEF 135.00 08/05/91 10 22 DISTRICT NO DISTRICT NAME FARM TYPE ACRES DATE TYPE EASEMENT ESTABLISHED AD -90-073 SCHULTZ BEEF 189.55 08/05/91 10 AD -90-074 OSWALD DAIRY 58.90 08/05/91 10 AD -90-075 OSWALD DAIRY 34.65 08/05/91 10 AD -90-077 SNYDER DAIRY 100.00 08/05/91 10 AD -90-078 KRETZER DAIRY 171.65 08/05/91 10 AD -90-079 WINDERS BEEF 225.00 08/05/91 10 AD -90-084 BURGER CROP 301.00 08/05/91 10 AD -90-086 BURGER FOREST 182.42 08/05/91 10 AD -90-087 BURGER BEEF 119.00 08/05/91 10 AD -91-001 PRICE CROP 274.00 09/16/91 10 AD -91-004 SHOCKEY CROP 72.21 08/05/91 10 AD -91-005 BRITNER CROP 193.20 09/16/91 10 AD -91-006 PRYOR DAIRY 108.51 09/15/91 10 AD -91-007 MARTIN DAIRY 156.84 09/16/91 10 AD -91-008 DEBAUGH DAIRY 122.22 09/16/91 10 AD -91-009 DEBAUCH DAIRY 48.25 09/16/91 10 AD -91-010 OATES CROP 62.98 09/16/91 10 AD -91-011 BUHRMAN HOG 180.46 05/05/92 10 AD -91-012 MCALLISTER BEEF 83.43 03/26/92 10 AD -91-013 WORTHINGTON DAIRY 108.92 09/16/91 10 AD -91-014 NEWCOMER DAIRY 113.28 10/11191 10 AD -91-015 NEWCOMER CROP 21.94 10/11/91 10 AD -91-016 NEWCOMER CROP 72.22 10/11/91 10 AD -91-016A NEWCOMER CROP 25.76 10/11/91 10 AD -91-017 NEWCOMER DAIRY 55.50 10/11/91 10 AD -91-019 POFFENBERGER CROP 78.00 10/11/91 10 AD -91-020 BELZ DAIRY 247.63 10/11/91 10 AD -91-021 COHILL CROP 78.68 10/11/91 10 AD -91-022 CUSHWA CROP 138.90 12/03/91 10 AD -91-023 TRITAPOE CROP 73.86 12J03191 10 AD -91-024 TRITAPOE CROP 81.00 12/03/91 10 AD -91-026 CLINE BEEF 65.00 12103/91 10 AD -91-027 DOWNS CROP 145.00 12/03/91 10 AD -91-028 DOWNS CROP 130.00 12!03/91 10 AD -91-029 DOWNS CROP 118.00 12/03/91 10 AD -91-030 FLOOK DAIRY 280.76 12103/91 10 AD -91-031 FLOCK DAIRY 126.25 12/03/91 10 AD -91-032 WARNER CROP 79.30 12/16/91 10 AD -91-033 ERSNT HOG 143.68 12/03/91 10 AD -91-034 HALLER CROP 23.00 01/08/92 10 AD -91-035 CONOCOCHEAGUE SPORTSMENS FOREST 126.54 02/03/92 10 AD -91-036 MORGAN CROP 134.17 12/16/91 10 AD -91-037 MORGAN FOREST 160.55 12/16/91 10 AD -91-038 MORGAN CROP 152.66 12/16/91 10 AD -91-039 SCOTT DAIRY 227.27 12/03/91 10 AD -91-040 MATHESON BEEF 161.95 01/08/92 10 AD -91-042 BELZ CROP 135.15 01/08/92 10 AD -91-044 BOWMAN DAIRY 175.25 02/28/92 10 AD -91-046 SHANK BEEF 114.33 01/08/92 10 AD -91-047 MURPHY DAIRY 309.50 02/12/92 10 AD -91-048 GREEN CROP 145.10 07/07/92 10 AD -91-048A GREEN CROP 49.73 07/07/92 10 AD -91-0486 GREEN CROP 10.45 07/07/92 10 AD -91-049 CHARLES CROP 59.93 03/26/92 10 AD -91-050 WOLFORD DAIRY 119.59 04/06/92 10 AD -91-052 BARNHART CROP 166.77 02/21/92 10 AD -91-053 KEFAUVER DAIRY 167.52 03/26/92 10 AD -91-054 KEFAUVER CROP 114.00 03/26/92 10 AD -91-055 CAVANAUGH DAIRY 237.76 07103/92 10 AD -91-056 HALL FOREST 30.29 11/16/92 10 AD -91-057 BOWMAN CROP 39.80 07/07/92 10 AD -92-001 LUDLUM FOREST 40.00 12/15/93 10 AD -92-002 WINTERS DAIRY 175.00 09/21/92 10 AD -92-003 WINTERS DAIRY 57.09 09/21/92 10 AD -92-004 SHANK DAIRY 165,00 09/21/92 10 AD -92-005 SHANK CROP 115.90 09/29/92 10 AD -92-006 SHANK CROP 32.10 09/21/92 10 AD -92-007 KENDLE CROP 85.00 12/01/92 10 AD -92-009 WILLIAMS DAIRY 100.75 06/29/93 10 AD -92-010 LEATHER CROP 178.91 03/03/93 10 AD -92-011 ROHRER DAIRY 123.80 06/22/93 10 AD -93-001 CASTLE CROP 56.21 07/12/94 10 AD -94.003 AUSHERMAN DAIRY 176.00 08/10/94 10 AD -94-004 BERGER FOREST 64.02 12/19/94 10 AD -94-005 EBY HOG 120.16 12/19/94 10 AD -94-006 TAULTON DAIRY 130.00 12/19/94 10 AD -94-007 HORNBAKER CROP 107.09 12/19/94 10 AD -94-008 RINEHART DAIRY 145.39 05/19/95 10 AD -94-008A RINEHART DAIRY 96.51 06/28/95 10 AD -94-009 RINEHART BEEF 120.41 05/19/95 10 AD -95-001 REEDER DAIRY 180.61 12/08/95 10 Records printed: 159 10/16/97 TOTAL 22166.97 file: C:SCISDATAIAGPRES%PARCELSIPAT.DBF 23 SECTOR/ TOTALS SUBDIVISIONS BY PLANNING SECTOR FOR PERIOD 07/01/95 THRU 06/30/96 DEVELOPMENT PLATS PLATS TOTAL URBAN TYPE SECTOR 1 0 AP 2 CM 1 IL 0 IN 2 LL 2 SF SECTOR 2 15 CM 1 DX 1 LL 0 SF SECTOR 3 3 LL 0 SF SECTOR 4 2 SF SECTOR 5 10 SF SECTOR 6 1 SF TOTALS SUBDIVISIONS BY PLANNING SECTOR FOR PERIOD 07/01/95 THRU 06/30/96 DEVELOPMENT PLATS PLATS TOTAL URBAN RURAL 1 1 0 3 2 1 1 1 0 2 2 0 2 0 2 23 15 8 1 0 1 1 0 1 3 0 3 27 0 27 2 0 2 13 0 13 10 2 8 12 1 11 7 0 7 1[61109 TOTAL URBAN RURAL 1 1 0 3 2 1 1 1 0 3 3 0 2 0 2 327 287 40 1 0 1 4 0 4 5 0 5 43 0 43 5 0 5 17 0 17 22 3 19 61 48 13 11 0 11 ACREAGE TOTAL URBAN RURAL 2.2 2.2 0.0 13.5 10.5 3.0 8.5 8.5 0.0 18.9 18.9 0.0 28.1 0.0 28.1 289.2 216.8 72.4 3.0 0.0 3.0 1.5 0.0 1.5 177.4 0.0 177.4 102.9 0.0 102.9 90.0 0.0 90.0 87.1 0.0 87.1 59.9 2.8 57.0 60.9 26.7 34.3 52.8 0.0 52.8 108 24 84 506 345 161 995.9 286.3 709.6 TYPE BREAKDOWN AP CM DX IL IN LL SF 1 1 0 4 2 2 1 0 1 1 1 0 2 2 0 7 0 7 92 18 74 1 1 0 4 2 2 4 0 4 1 1 0 3 3 0 12 0 12 481 338 143 2.2 2.2 0.0 16.5 10.6 6.0 1.5 0.0 1.5 8.5 8.5 0.0 18.9 18.9 0.0 295.5 0.0 295.5 652.9 246.3 406.6 TYPES OF DEVELOPMENT PLATS AP APARTMENT CM COMMERCIAL DX DUPLEX IL INSTITUTIONAL IN INDUSTRIAL LL LARGE LOT SF SINGLE FAMILY AVERAGE LOT SIZE URBAN RURAL 2.18 3.00 5.27 3.00 8.50 6.28 14.05 0.76 1.81 3.00 0.37 35.48 2.39 18.00 5.12 0.94 3.00 0.56 2.64 4.80 0.83 4.41 2.18 5.27 3.00 0.37 8.50 6.28 24,62 0.73 2.84 SUBDIVISION FILE BY PLANNING SECTOR FOR PERIOD 07/01/95 THRU 06/30/96 ELEC ZONE TYPE OF URBAN/ DWELL GROSS APPROVAL SUBDIVISION NAME DIST DIST DEVELOP RURAL LOTS UNITS ACRES DATE PLANNING SECTOR 1 ANDY B STAMPER SR PARCEL 3 13 A SF RA 1 1 07 11/30/95 ARNETT WALDO LOT 1 & PARCEL A 10 HI -2 SF UG 1 1 2.9 08/29/95 BEAVER DONALD & SALLY LOT 1 27 RS SF UG 1 1 3.2 10/31/95 BETKER REINHARDT 27 RS SF RA 2 2 0.8 10/20/95 BIVENS HOMER LOTS 3,4,5 & 6 13 A SF RA 4 4 10.5 01/08/96 BLACK ROCK ESTATES LOT 4 SECT B 18 A SF UG 1 1 1.8 11/29/95 BLACK ROCK ESTATES SEC B BLK 1 18 A SF UG 3 3 4.1 05/31/96 BLACK ROCK ESTATES SECT B BLK2 18 A SF UG 11 11 10.5 06/05/96 BLICKENSTAFF THOMAS LOT 1 13 A SF RA 1 1 2.3 01/23/96 CRYSTAL FALLS ESTATES LOTS 1-13 18 A SF SP 13 13 76.5 02/05/96 FIERY LESTER K LOTS 1 & 3 13 A SF RA 2 2 1.8 06/18/96 FULTON PROPERTIES INC 27 A CM UG 1 0 10.2 01/12/96 HOLLAND MERLE LOT 2 2 RR SF UG 1 1 0.9 10/12/95 ISHAM BILL LOTS 1&2 AND REMAIN 13 A SF RA 2 2 4.3 04/02/96 MAIETTA DONNA KAY PARCEL A 9 A CM RA 1 0 3.0 01/31/96 MAPLE VALLEY ESTATES SECT A 27 RS SF UG 37 37 19.7 08/07/95 MARTIN CHESTER H. LOT 13 HI AP UG 1 8 2.2 08/28/95 MCNAIRN PHYLLIS L LOTS 2- 4 9 A SF RA 3 3 7.0 09/12/95 PAZA ANDRIS & LISA SODEE LOT 3 2 A SF UG 1 1 1.8 03/12/96 POFFENBERGER STEVEN LOT 1 13 HI SF UG 1 1 1.7 08/16/95 PURINA MILLS INC LOT 1 24 HI IN UG 1 0 12.4 12/04/95 ROBINWOOD MEDICAL LOT 21REPLAT 1 18 RS IL UG 1 0 6.5 09/11/95 SCRIVENER THOMAS LOT 1 18 A LL RA 1 1 15.7 07/19/95 SCRIVENER THOMAS LOT 2 18 A LL RA 1 1 12.4 03/25/96 ST JAMES VILLAGE NORTH PHASE 1 10 RR SF UG 71 71 40.3 07/13/95 ST JAMES VILLIAGE NORTH PHASE 2 10 RR SF UG 83 83 29.3 04/01/96 STARTZMAN RBT WM LOT 1 & PAR A 26 RU SF UG 1 1 1.2 12/19/95 STERLING OAKS PHASE 1 26 RR SF UG 28 28 12.4 03/04/96 STEWART DISTRIBUTION SERV. 1&2 2 IG IN UG 2 0 6.5 10/02/95 U P ASSOCIATES LTD PTSHP LOT 1 26 PIO CM UG 1 0 0.4 02/05/96 WAGAMANS GLEN 10 A SF RA 25 25 45.1 09/18/95 WINTERGREEN LOTS 1-11 & 12-34 13 HI SF UG 34 34 10.7 02/05/96 32 TOTAL FOR PLANNING SECTOR 1 337 337 360.4 PLANNING SECTOR 2 BARNHART FRED V LOT 1 12 A 02 SF RA 1 1 4.3 02/20/96 BOYER CARROL LOTS 1 R,2R,3 & 4 6 A SF RA 2 2 10.0 10/05/95 BYERS MEADOWS OF DOWNS. PH 2 20 A SF RA 10 10 11.5 03/04/96 CLINE THURMAN LOT 2 1 A 02 SF RA 1 1 1.8 09/18/95 EASTERDAY TODD PARCEL A 19 C 03 SF RA 1 1 1.1 09/11/95 ECKSTINE DAVID & JOHNETTE PAR A 12 A SF RA 1 1 1.0 05/31/96 FAIRPLAY FIREHALL LOT 1 12 A SF RA 1 1 1.5 03/26/96 FARRIE JULIA E 6 A SF RA 1 1 1.6 01/04/96 HAGERSTOWN BEAGLE CLUB LOT 1 20 C CM RA 1 0 3.0 11/30/95 HULSE CHARLES A LOT 1 16 A SF RA 1 1 1.4 08/17/95 KELBLY CHRIS LOT 1 & PARCEL A 20 A SF RA 1 1 1.5 10/30/95 LAWSON WALTER & ANNIE LOTS 1,2,3 6 C SF RA 3 3 10.9 06/03/96 LEWIS ETTA LOT 1 12 A SF RA 1 1 1.1 01/31/96 LONG LAWRENCE C LOT 2 20 A SF RA 1 1 1.1 11/29/95 MILBURN RONALD H & PATSY L 34&A 19 PIO SF RA 2 2 2.7 08/22/95 MONNINGER BETTY J ET AL LTS 1-2 12 A SF RA 2 2 2.9 05/14/96 MOSER ELBERT L ET AL LOT 2 6 A SF RA 1 1 2.7 11/02195 POLK ROBERT LOTS 1A 1 B 2A 2B 1 RR DX RA 4 4 1.5 01/22196 SCHELLER FARMS 19 A LL RA 1 1 54.3 12/19/95 SHAULL JAMES LOT 1 12 A SF RA 1 1 2.5 01/19/96 SHAW THOMAS & JUDITH LOTS 1&2 12 C SF RA 2 2 6.4 08/16/95 SINGLE JOHN LOTS 6 C SF RA 1 1 3.1 06/25/96 SLIFER VERLE V LOT 2 6 A SF RA 1 1 2.8 11/29/95 SMITH JOHN LOTS 1 & 2 16 C SF RA 2 2 6.3 10/17/95 STEELE LESTER 6 A SF RA 1 1 2.5 01/29/96 STILES MIKE LOTS 1 & 2 6 A LL RA 2 2 24.2 05/30/96 STILES NATHAN LOT 1 12 A SF RA 1 1 3.0 03/13/96 STOTLER ROSALIE K LOTS 1 & 2 12 A SF RA 1 1 8.7 01/17/96 STOTTLEMYER MICHAEL & BRYAN LT 1 12 A SF RA 1 1 1.5 01/03/96 STOUFFER SUDIV LOT 2 & PARCEL B 16 C SF RA 1 1 4.7 03112!96 WEIHRAUCH DOTTIE LOT 1 1 C SF RA 1 1 4.5 10/26/95 25 108 GRAND TOTAL gel 506 504 995.9 ELEC ZONE TYPE OF URBAN/ DWELL GROSS APPROVAL SUBDIVISION NAME DIST DIST DEVELOP RURAL LOTS UNITS ACRES DATE WILLIS RICK LOT 4 1 A LL RA 2 2 98.9 12/12/95 32 TOTAL FOR PLANNING SECTOR 2 53 52 284.8 PLANNING SECTOR 3 BODDICKER WILLIAM F LOTS 1,2 & 3 11 C LL RA 3 3 41.6 03/04/96 DEMPSEY VERNON L 11 C SF RA 1 1 8.7 03/27/96 DILLOW JENNIFER LOT 1 8 C SF RA 1 1 3.1 09/26/95 EHRHARDT ESTATES LOTS 3 & 4 11 C LL RA 2 2 48.4 05/13/96 HATCHER JAMES & RHONDA LOT 1 11 C SF RA 1 1 2.0 03/25/96 LADINO PETER 8 C SF RA 1 1 3.1 01/19/96 MILLARD ROBERT & MARY LOTS 1 & 2 8 C SF RA 2 2 11.1 08/15/95 MILLARD ROBERT L LOTS 13 & 14 8 C SF RA 2 2 6.6 12/01/95 MORGAN BONNARD & PEGGY R LOT 1 8 C SF RA 1 1 5.1 07/27/95 OTZELBERGER R & HANES M LTS 1-3 11 C SF RA 3 3 12.7 05/08/96 WHITE OAKS - LOT 13 11 C SF RA 1 1 1.4 03/27/96 WHITE OAKS - LOT 18 11 C SF RA 1 1 1.1 03/28196 WHITE OAKS - ROAD AND OPEN SPACE 11 C SF RA 1 0 29.3 08/14/95 WHITE OAKS LOT 3 11 C SF RA 1 1 1.7 04/01/96 WHITE OAKS LOT 9 11 C SF RA 1 1 1.2 12/27/95 15 TOTAL FOR PLANNING SECTOR 3 22 21 177.1 PLANNING SECTOR 4 APPALACHAIAN ORCHARD ESTATES 7 A SF RA 5 5 29.3 09/18/95 BARR MARTIN JR LOT 1 7 A SF RA 1 1 3.8 01/22/96 BAUSMAN CALVIN C LOTS 1& 2 7 A SF RA 2 2 4.3 01/19/96 CASCADE ENTERPRISES LOTS 2,3,4 14 RR SF RA 3 3 1.6 09/11/95 COOPER WILLIAM LOT 1 PARCEL A 7 A SF RA 1 1 8.3 11/27/95 LEIBOLDT JAMES & BARBARA LOT 1 7 RR SF SM 1 1 2.2 07/10/95 MCINTYRE PROPERTY LOT 1 7 C SF RA 1 1 3.7 12/20/95 PALMER MAE F - LOT 1 & 2 7 RS SF UG 2 2 0.6 06/13/96 STOUFFER J MICHAEL 14 A SF RA 3 3 3.8 12/04/95 SUKER KENDALL & SMITH PROPERTY 14 RR SF RA 3 3 2.4 03/08/96 10 TOTAL FOR PLANNING SECTOR 4 22 22 59.9 PLANNING SECTOR 5 BANZHOFF BETTY & TABLER A LOT 1 23 A SF RA 1 1 2.5 10/17/95 BELZ ROBERT JR & HEDWIG H LOT 1 4 A SF RA 1 1 1.6 08/17/95 HORST ANNA LOT 6 4 HI SF RA 1 1 1.2 08/22/95 MC CUSKER DAVID L & DIANA L 4 A SF RA 1 1 9.5 01/25/96 MELLOTT DOROTHY LOT 1 4 C SF RA 1 1 1.6 09/27/95 MICHAEL DEVELOPMENT LOT 1 15 A SF RA 1 1 3.0 10/10/95 PENNY HOSE 4 A SF RA 1 1 1.3 07/18/95 REVELL LARRY LOT 1 15 C SF RA 1 1 6.0 06/24/96 RIVERWOOD LOTS 3 & 4 23 A SF RA 2 2 2.0 04/25/96 SHANK LEONA L LOT 1 & 2 23 A SF RA 2 2 3.7 02/22/96 WALNUT POINT HEIGHTS SEC 1 FINAL 23 HI SF UG 48 48 26.7 09/22/95 WEBER HELEN I ESTATE LOT 1 4 A SF RA 1 1 2.0 04/15/96 12 TOTAL FOR PLANNING SECTOR 5 61 61 60,9 PLANNING SECTOR 6 DIVEL ROBERT LEE LOT 1 & 2 5 A SF RA 2 2 6.0 11/16/95 DIVEL RUSSELL LOT 1 & PAR. A-1 5 A SF RA 1 1 3.2 06/19/96 DODSON CHARLES LOT 1 5 C SF RA 1 1 9.4 04/29/96 DOUGLAS BRENDA LOT 1 5 C SF RA 1 1 3.5 10/24/95 HOFFMAN ROBERT M LOT 2 5 C SF RA 1 1 6.1 05/15/96 MUNSON LYNN LOTS 1-4 5 C SF RA 4 4 14.7 02/05/96 POWERS RON LOT 1 5 A SF RA 1 1 9.9 10/16/95 7 TOTAL FOR PLANNING SECTOR 6 11 11 52.8 108 GRAND TOTAL gel 506 504 995.9 27 (o rn rn c .N m i U) O a> •a CD CD CL E cor c o i............... ................... i 4} O U CD a� r Mq i r 0 0 o c o Ln O LO CV r r S;eld 27 W. I r €O 63 r I Q1 3 p1 N /CY) \V = W CD CD Uc4 1 CO � N o C GO I li L 0 o ■ om mmw CD CD o o CD CD Q CD o ,n N r r saaoy W. 29 rn I I i i i i Q) I �n n% .N LJ. I 'n I I O C] C. � CD � 7� I CL I CL r � i O7 07 I T C6 •L Qi E E Q U I CD o� I OM) T SMINE 00 00 T O p C Q O p O p 00 co ;# N S}O'I 29 i a G O� o m , -at alp Ca 0 LU dill lit v" a/ 19l '' s W E U E 5) r: �L/L�I Vi CO W N %F df CLSt WIN w 1 b_ l LING i 1houmv {EE of SII SII c of of cF w4 oli of �1 ql of o_Ej nF ai m 6f ;-t{ I I I � I 1! E E 1 i it it I I SII �I x7+f !o Ail j, all �Il � _ � • U3 tib (U (1)0 M � O (� +j =' ® -a o m USE °Ea) \ ) ® © @ 2 .E m @ .J � _ $ O ,@ � % CL o 2 o ® E o E _3 7 `s P� - F2, r a `.1 • U3,, o ' ' Ao VW- tR vt jS r Z5 ul CL w �4 Q0 l0 LO C- 0) ca klo LO C, U) W d' N . :}f U ri rn O LO �s � ¢"� � ❑ � � ,y H C7 U Pa > CQ CQ � z < W OC) 00Qd °u e—I W ma N � F £ J U H + H H p.' €4 a rva+�DrwN • x 0 0 0 0 0 0 CD o o C) W cnrn�,�,rnrnrn �NNNNNNN rn � Lo a Ul rn a a` a 3 N T N O U kLNnoo WVJ7llH