Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutH_1999_AnnualReportBoard 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, 1998 through June 30, 1999. 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 1999 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, Robert C. Arch, Planning Director RCA/dsk/bds RECYCLED PAPER THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN Implementation of policies associated with the Comprehensive Plan continued through FY 1999. Items, which are outlined in greater detail in other sections of this report, are directly related or reflect some aspect of the implementation of the policy and goals of the Comprehensive Plan. During FY 1999 the Planning Commission worked to implement the policies of the Comprehensive Plan through adoption of amendments to the Zoning Ordinance, Subdivision Ordinance and Water and Sewer Plan. Work also has continued on the update of the Comprehensive Plan in accordance with the requirements of the Planning Act of 1992. Information received from public informational meetings held in FY 1988 was used as basis for development of goals and objectives. A detailed analysis of current land use patterns and trends in the County was completed. A number of maps for inclusion in Comprehensive Plan update began being compiled and supporting text developed. Work on the Comprehensive Plan update was anticipated to continue throughout the next fiscal year. In compliance with State growth management initiatives a priority funding areas map was adopted by the Board of County Commissioners and forwarded to the State Office of Planning. Since the Comprehensive Plan adoption in 1981, the Planning Commission and the Planning Staff have worked continuously to implement its strategies for growth management in Washington County. The attached work program for FY 2000 is designed to continue that effort. 1 w 5 0 P4 P4 G4 0 ril H U W h 0 a a a H U W P4 w vl 0 W cn zz o H w w qzw a a 7 W 0 H N W V H 0 - - U z N rPPr�4i a Q H H e" fL S H v) fk N a a H z l+ >C H w a Ll z E :� Q ips7 H E z m uEA pi F o U xwH>y o�tuz as :7 H a 0 9 m m 4z.1 z 'Wj Wir7- WErl 7 3 W z a w a H z H a 0 ''ST H-�i 7 H z 0 NW P'. w> H to a U r W Ea a R H H W U W U W H - - H a ,7 H r7 H U4 H O r7 W Dd W z N 0 H H 94 H z 8 a U H a a m a P: f>'..- m N O '�'�ra CA W ix7y]i N RHi � 9 `p.A z O 0 9 w I 0 P4 N 9 9 E mi SIA a > 4 .3'� R: \ a n'i a'T'. U U] C/l N ,'F. 1-4 4 a � ry' U W .3: pH 54 N 0 tH1l W H O F a r.1 E 1] U1% C4 14 04v) f4 R a Z . 14 m x U' 0 U U 2 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 2-541 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. If purchased by the State of Maryland, the easement will remain effective in perpetuity. During FY 1999, total acreage in the program increased to 26,334 acres with a total of 194 agricultural districts. 3 Under the MALPP easement purchase program, contracts were issued during FY 1999 for eight (8) additional farms, bringing total easement properties in the program to 34 equaling 6,348 acres. In addition, ongoing Federal, State and private conservation easements around Antietam Battlefield effectively preserve an additional 5,451 acres of agricultural land in perpetuity. The Battlefield figure includes properties from the newly funded Rural Legacy Program (RLP). In FY 1999 option contracts were written under RLP for 626 acres. 4 AGRICULTURAL SIGNIFICANT LAND CONVERTED TO DEVELOPMENT 1980 TO JUNE 30, 1999 Total Developed Total Converted TOTAL 21,172.2 8,298 4,771.7 1,230 22.4 22.4% of the land developed between 1980 and June 30,1999 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. 5 ACREAGE LOTS 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 1,769A 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 1997 760.8 224 174.0 39 22.9 1998 754.8 395 151.0 40 20.0 1999 793.9 242 33.1 12 4.2 TOTAL 21,172.2 8,298 4,771.7 1,230 22.4 22.4% of the land developed between 1980 and June 30,1999 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. 5 METROPOLITAN PLANNING ORGANIZATION During FY 1999, the Hagerstown/Eastern Panhandle Metropolitan Planning Organization continued to move forward. The Organization is composed of representatives from Washington County, Maryland; Berkley County, West Virginia; Jefferson County, West Virginia; and Franklin County, Pennsylvania. The organization's home base is in the Washington County Planning Department. During the fiscal year, special studies were completed on several projects. These included: an impact analysis of the new 1-70 & MD 632 Interchange on Hagerstown intersections, identification of four optional alignments for the Funkstown Bypass, development of three optional alignments for hiker/biker trails from Harper's Ferry to Charles Town in West Virginia, and completion of Civil War Route map for the years 1862-1864. One change order to the studies was exercised and that was an extension of the Civil War Route Mapping project to include the years for 1861 and 1865. A new Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) for the years 2000 - 2002 was adopted and a UPWP work program was adopted that identified several new special studies. These include: realignment of Rench Road with MD 65 and Battlecreek Boulevard intersection; alignment for Eastern Boulevard extension to Marsh Pike; alignment of a potential bicycle pedestrian trail between Hagerstown and Williamsport, a study to evaluate the feasibility of a downtown Hagerstown trolley system, and a study to look at ways of promoting the telecommuting center in downtown Hagerstown in order to reduce commuter trips. The MPO's presence as a transportation planning agency continued to evolve with letters of support requested from various local communities applying for Federal Transportation Enhancement Funds. These included downtown pedestrian facility rehabilitation projects in Hagerstown, Maryland and Charles Town, West Virginia. C TOWN PLANNER ASSISTANCE PROGRAM The Town Planner Assistance Program is nearing its eight-year of service and assistance to municipal governments in Washington County. The Town of Boonsboro remained the most active participant in the program with the Town of Smithsburg also participating. The Towns have found the program to be a viable option to employing a full-time staff person. The Town Planner organizes the monthly agenda, anaylzes and coordinates the review of development proposals and assists in long term or comprehensive planning goals of the Town. The position also provides assistance with other issues such as annexations, forest conservation application, utility planning and transportation planning. During the fiscal year the Town of Boonsboro primarily focused on minor updates to the Zoning Ordinance and a major rewrite of the Subdivision Ordinance. The Town of Smithsburg remains emphasis this year was on development of a new Zoning Ordinance for the town. 7 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 preferences are to prevent the disturbance of existing forest or to plant 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 217 subdivision and site plan applications covering 4,459.18 acres of land. 159 or 73% of those applications were exempt from the requirements of the Forest Conservation Ordinance (FCO), approximately equal to the previous year's exemptions. The chart below indicates the number and type of exemptions granted in the past fiscal year. A. < 40,000 SQUARE FOOT PARCEL 2 B. SIMPLIFIED PLAT 49 C. APPLICATION BEFORE EFFECTIVE DATE 2 D. OWNERIIMMEDIATE FAMILY MEMBER DWELLING 41 E. EXISTING LOT OF RECORD 9 F. PUD BEFORE EFFECTIVE DATE 6 G. AGRICULTURAL ACTIVITY 0 H. REAL ESTATE TRANSFER 12 I. REPLATS 337 J. MINING I TOTAL SUBDIVISION AND SITE PLAN REVIEW EXEMPTIONS 159 0 58 plans remain that must comply with the Ordinance in some other manner. Payment of the fee in lieu of planting is chosen most often. Of the 58 plans that were not exempt, 21 used the fee in lieu of planting choice, a 32% decrease from the previous fiscal year. The approved payments will generate over $144,000 for the Forest Conservation Fund although only $ 118,579.19 in actual payments were collected during the fiscal year. The collected fees are equivalent to 27.22 acres of forest that were not required to be planted on development sites. Instead, these funds are used in a program developed and administered cooperatively with the Soil Conservation District to expend fee in lieu of funds to create new forest or permanently protect existing forest on private properties. Use of the fund is restricted by Maryland law to these efforts. This year's activities saw an additional 26.31 acres of new forest planted and 1.88 acres of forested stream buffer permanently protected by easements at a total cost of $103,676.36 or approximately $3,677.77 per acre. The amount of new forest or permanently protected existing forest has risen to 181.47 acres. Expenditures from the Forest Conservation Fund now total $394,168.56. Since adoption of the Forest Conservation Ordinance in February 1993, the fee in lieu of option has generated over $ 550,000.00 for the Forest Conservation Fund. A portion of the Forest Conservation Fund is earmarked for reforestation of the West Woods at Antietam National Battlefield, an arrangement that was approved by the Planning Commission and the Board of County Commissioners in November 1994. There were no disbursements for planting at the Battlefield in this fiscal year. 17 plans required no fees or planting because there was sufficient forest on the development site or another one under developer control to allow some clearing with no mitigation or no clearing was proposed or necessary. 9 An additional 17 plans met forest conservation obligations in a previous phase of the development or plan review. New planting, a final method of compliance was used three times in the past fiscal year and produced 30.62 acres of new forest planted in environmentally sensitive or priority areas. All methods of compliance generate a plan review fee. There is no fee when a plan is exempt. The Planning Department collected $ 5,723.25 in Forest Conservation Plan review fees during the past fiscal year. An additional 16 exemptions from the Forest Conservation Ordinance were granted for timber harvest activities which are not considered development activities. Lug WATER AND SEWERAGE PLAN There were no applications for amendments to the Water & Sewerage Plan received during FY 1999. Work on the State mandated update of the Water and Sewerage Plan which began in FY 1997 and suspended in FY 1998 remained suspended pending the drafting of a new Comprehensive Plan for Washington County. 11 PARK AND ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING Park and environmental planning during FY 1999, as in previous years, including a diverse series of projects and activities. A greenway concept plan for the Hopewell Valley development area was produced. A site plan sketch of the Pinesburg Ballfield Complex was provided to the Parks department to aid in a Zoning appeal case, as well as a landscaping and cost estimate plan for perennial flowers and ground cover in Marty Snook Park. Plans for stream access ramps at Devils Backbone and Wilson Bridge Park, along with the necessary WRA permit applications were prepared for the Parks Department. Several Forest Ordinance related project were completed in FY 1999; forest sampling and preparation of a detailed FSD and report for the Kemps Mill Park Site, as well as for a parcel at the County Water & Sewer Department, Forest Stand Delineation/Forest Conservation Plan review was completed for the Hunter's Green development in the Hopewell Valley area, and for the Hagerstown Washington County Industrial Foundation comprehensive FCP. Updating and streamlining of the Forest Conservation Ordinance was started with the objective of including appropriate amendments allowed by state legislation. Any amendments will require a public review process before final adoption. Presentations to each of the town councils requesting endorsement of the joint application with Frederick and Carroll County for a Civil War Heritage theme Heritage Area was completed early in 1999. The Resolutions of Endorsement were included in the application to the Maryland Heritage Preservation and Tourism Area Program, as the first step in the process of achieving State certification. Revision and updating of sections of the County Comprehensive Plan was begun. Chapters discussing Environmental Resource Management and Community Facilities were selected for revisions. 12 HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION The Washington County Historic District Commission continues to pursue its responsibilities and concerns regarding historic preservation through a variety of permits, applications and assignments from individuals and agencies. The Commission and the County can influence and encourage preservation through several different levels of review, incentives and education. Property tax credits are available for restoration, preservation or improvements to structures located in the County's Historic Preservation or Antietam Overlay zoning designations. Proposals must be designed according to adopted standards and approved by the Commission. Although no new tax credit applications were submitted or approved during the fiscal year, three property owners were able to use Historic Preservation property tax credits left over from the previous year. Following a policy adopted by the Board of County Commissioners in 1989, the Historic District Commission reviewed ten proposed demolition applications with varying outcomes. Upon further study, two of the applications were determined to not be subject to the policy. On one occasion the Commission presented no opposition to the application because the subject building was to be dismantled and reconstructed in a safer location. Three applications involved structures at the site of the Kammerer house, a late 18th century stone dwelling attributed to an early German immigrant and generated strong opinions in favor of and opposed to the demolition. Three additional applications concerned a complex of buildings consisting of a spring Douse, smoke house and stone dwelling which the Commission did not oppose due to the severe deterioration of the structures. Finally, the Commission reviewed, after the fact, a demolition application for a large log house believed to date from the early 19th century on Mt Aetna Road. The building had been demolished prior to Commission review. 13 The Commission completed only one design review application and approved an addition to a modern dwelling located in the Antietam Overlay zone. Among the many responsibilities accompanying the Commission's Certified Local Government (CLG) status is participation in the National Register of Historic Places nomination process. Six additional properties were evaluated and recommended for listing including Cedar Grove, the Clagett Farm, St. Mark's Episcopal Church, the Johann Ludwig Kammerer house, the Piper House and the Goad -Hartle Farm. The Board of County Commissioners concurred with the HDC in recommending all for listing in the National Register. Other CLG activities included conducting Phase Il of the Rural Community Survey, a detailed historic sites survey and documentation of Pen Mar, Highfield, Cascade, Fairplay and Tilghmanton. The Commission's participation in the development review process remained level over this past fiscal year. It reviewed Preliminary Consultations, subdivisions and site plans and occasionally made recommendations to protect existing structures listed in the Historic Sites Survey. 14 Community Development The Division of Community Development provides direct assistance to individuals, organizations and municipalities in providing housing opportunities for low and moderate income families, community infrastructure and facilities, and assists in the economic development of the county where federal and state funds are utilized. These programs and activities provide a general framework for combating neighborhood and community deterioration through sound redevelopment efforts. Housing Repair Loan Programs Housing Preservation Grant Maryland Housing Rehabilitation Program Washington County Revolving Loan Program Emergency Grant Repair Program These loan programs have been effective tools for providing essential home repairs and stabilizing the housing stock in neighborhoods and small communities. Rehabilitation expands the community's tax base, extends the economic value of the housing stock and stimulates additional construction activities. Housing Preservation Grant: This program of the Rural Development Administration, provides assistance to low and very low income homeowners in the County. Funds are mostly reserved for use by the County's elderly population who have a fixed income and no affordability to support conventional loan terms. Loans are available to help with property repairs which are primarily health and safety related issues. Maryland Housing Rehabilitation Program The Maryland Department of Housing and Community Development, offers this program for the rehabilitation of homes and rental properties that serve income eligible occupants. Health, safety, structural and code violations receive first priority. Revolving Loan Fund Utilizing the repayments from previous loans, we can continue to assist eligible households with rehabilitation efforts. This program is more flexible in the use of its funds and can be used for residential, business, and public renovations. Emergency Grant Repair Program Washington County has an emergency repair grants program available to qualified homeowners. An "emergency repair" is a life threatening situation which prohibits someone from living in a safe, decent or sanitary condtions. 15 Elderly Rental Housing Development The department promotes the production of affordable rental housing for the elderly and non elderly disabled which may be unavailable through the private sector due to income limitations. Our developments provide coordinated supportive services to allow the elderly population to maintain their independence and avoid costly alternatives. The department is proactive in project oversight throughout the development process. Community Development Block Grant Program This federal program provides grants and loans to counties and municipalities for the development or expansion of economic opportunities, public facilities and various housing activities. Local government can apply directly or undertake in joint projects on behalf of a larger application. The department can provide assistance with application preparation, project development, financial packaging and project management. Technical Assistance The department is available to assist public, private, not for profit groups and individuals who may be interested in gaining access or better understanding of the state and federal programs. Assistance is available to examine the feasibility of projects, funding avenues and regulatory requirements. 16 DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITY Development proposals were reviewed by the Planning Commission in both concept and final form. The Commission reviewed and approved 93 residential, commercial, industrial or institutional subdivision plats involving 242 lots representing 379 dwelling units on 793.9 acres. In addition, the Planning Commission approved 29 site plans and Feld 9 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 or development plats of significance (final approval of twenty or more lots or dwelling units) approved during FY 1999. They include: Cross Creek South, Lakeside Park Motel Home Park, The Village at Robinwood, and Sterling Oaks Phase Ill. Site Plans representing significant private investment within the County were approved for: RPS Distribution, Microtel Motel, Waffle House (two sites), Phoenix Color, Kiplinger Automotive, DOT Foods, Prime Outlets, Saint James Square, Sharpsburg Pike Inn, Cracker Barrel, and Crosspoint Shopping Center. Site Plan reflecting significant public investment were approved for the Washington County Water and Sewer Department, Hagerstown Regional Airport, Clear Spring Elementary School, and Kemps Mill Park. 17 REZONING CASES AND ORDINANCE AMENDMENTS Between July 1, 1998 and June 30, 1999, the Planning Commission acted on 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 map amendments and text amendment to the Zoning Ordinance, 2 text amendments to the Subdivision Ordinance and 1 map and text amendment to the Water and Sewer Plan. A listing of the Planning Commission's recommendations and the Board's actions for the cases heard in FY 1999 are as follows: CASE APPLICANT TYPE OF ACREAGE REQUEST COMMISSION BOARD AMENDMENT ACTION ACTION RZ-98-10 Planning Map 10.59 acre PI to A App'd App'd Commission RZ-98-11 Planning Text Cellular Towers WITHDRAWN Commission HI -2 and RU RZ-98-12 Triad Properties Map 41,382 sq.ft. A to BT App'd App'd RZ-98-13 Hickory Corner Map .640 acres BS to BL App'd App'd RZ-98-14 Gerald & Carolyn Map 2.022 acres RS to BT App'd App'd Cump RZ-98-15 County Map/Text Add Sec. 19C Commissioners C to SED App'd App'd RZ-98-16 Sharpsburg Pike LLC Map 9.62 acres Hl -2 to HI -1 App'd App'd 0.44 acres RZ-98-17 H.B. Mellot Map 79 acres C to IM App'd App'd RZ-98-18 Marcella Klinger Text Section 22.51 Denied Denied 18 CASE APPLICANT TYPE OF ACREAGE REQUEST COMMISSION BOARD AMENDMENT ACTION ACTION RZ-99-01 Board of County Text Cellular Towers App'd App'd Commissioners RZ-99-02 Board of County Text Art. 22, Div. IX App'd App'd Commissioners RZ-99-03 Board of County Text Sec. 5.1a;5.3b;6.3g; 7.1a; 7.3f; Commissioners 13.1 b; 15.1 a and 4.13 App'd App'd RZ-99-04 Planning Commission Text Sec. 22.21 App'd App'd SO -99-01 Planning Commission Text Art. IV Sec. 405.1116.1 App'd App'd SO -99-02 Planning Commission Text Sec. 318 App'd App'd WS -98-1 City of Hagerstown Map & Text Centre of Hagerstown App'd App'd ILI BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS STATISTICS FISCAL YEAR 1998199 GRANTED VARIANCES 115 6*ywxill_1l EXCEPTIONS 51 EXPANSION OF 0 NON -CONFORMING USE 1 CHANGE OF 0 NON -CONFORMING USE 7 ADMINISTRATIVE 0 ERROR 2 APPEAL FROM 4 PLANNING COMMISSION 5 APPEAL FROM ADEQUATE 7 PUBLIC FACILITIES 0 APPEAL FOR FLOOD PLAIN 0 APPEAL SPECIAL CONDITION 0 TOTAL 181 FISCAL YEAR 1996.1997 159 DENIED DENIEDWP WITHDRAWN VOID TOTAL 7 1 2 6 131 5 0 3 0 59 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 7 4 0 1 0 7 3 0 1 0 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 19 1 7 6 214 18 4 9 5 195 20 WASHINGTON COUNTY MD AGRICULTURALLY SIGNIFICANT LAND CONVERTED TO DEVELOPMENT FOR PERIOD 07/01/98 THRU 06/30/99 PLANNING ELECTION AGRICULTURAL NEW USE SECTOR DISTRICT ACREAGE LOST LOTS (TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT) 2 6 2.7 1 SF 19 10.1 1 LL TOTAL 12.7 2 3 4 5 8 3.0 1 SF TOTAL 3.0 1 7 6.3 4 SF TOTAL 6.3 4 4 7.0 3 SF 23 4.1 2 SF TOTAL 11.1 6 GRAND TOTAL 33.1 12 21 WASHINGTON COUNTY AGRICULTURAL PRESERVATION DISTRICTS DISTRICT NO DISTRICT NAME FARM TYPE ACRES RECORDED TYPE EASEMENT DATE AD -80-001 FORD CROP 178.59 07/11/80 10 02/24/83 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 06/01/00 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 ROBBINS 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 10 051/01197 AD -88-004 RITCHIE DAIRY 237.99 04/12/89 10 09/24/90 AD -89-001 GOLDEN ORCHARD 457.67 06/20/89 5 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 04/01/00 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 924.70 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 04/30/98 AD -90-022 HEIMER CROP 67.00 08/05/91 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 44.38 03/20/91 10 AD -90-027A BARR CROP 30.00 03/20/91 10 AD -90-028 BAKER BEEF 17.06 03/20/91 10 AD -90-031 BARR ORCHARD 70.72 05/29/91 10 AD -90-032 BARR ORCHARD 115.62 05/29/91 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 -90-041 MARTIN DAIRY 120.00 03/20/94 10 AD -90-042 FAITH FOREST 132.63 03/20/91 10 04/30/98 AD -90-043 FAITH BEEF 129.62 03/20/91 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 22 DISTRICT NO DISTRICT NAME FARM TYPE ACRES RECORDED TYPE EASEMENT DATE 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 10/01/99 AD -90-063 MARTIN DAIRY 100.61 05/29/91 10 AD -90-064 BOWERS 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 10/19/91 10 AD -90-070 STIVERS BEEF 135.00 08/05/91 10 AD -90-073 SCHULTZ BEEF 189.55 08/05/91 10 06/01/00 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 09/16/91 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 DEBAUGH 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 10/11/91 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 12/03/91 10 AD -91-024 TRITAPOE CROP 81.00 12/03/91 10 AD -91-026 CLINE BEEF 65.00 12/03/91 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 12/03/91 10 AD -91-031 FLOOK DAIRY 126.25 12/03/91 10 AD -91-032 WARNER CROP 79.30 12/16/91 10 AD -91-033 ERNST 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 12/16191 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 04/30/98 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 -91-048B 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 23 DISTRICT NO DISTRICT NAME FARM TYPE ACRES RECORDED TYPE EASEMENT DATE AD -91-053 KEFAUVER DAIRY 167.52 03/26/92 -TO-- AD-91-054 KEFAUVER CROP 114.00 03/26/92 10 AD -91-055 CAVANAUGH DAIRY 237.76 07/03/92 10 AD -917056 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 06/01/00 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 10/17/99 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 AD -95-006 CARBAUGH CROP 190.30 07/24/96 10 AD -95-007 CARBAUGH CROP 199.51 07/24/96 10 AD -96-002 HERSHEY CROP 100.95 03/06/97 10 AD -96-003 GARDENHOUR ORCHARD 153.20 01/07/97 10 AD -96-004 MYERS CROP 142.00 03/06/97 10 AD -96-005 YOUNG CROP 43.00 08/19/97 10 AD -96-006 FISHER CROP 57.00 08/19/97 10 AD -97-001 MORGAN FOREST 24.20 08/19/97 10 AD -97-002 MORGAN FOREST 6.04 08/19/97 10 AD -97-003 CLARK DAIRY 101.00 08/11/97 10 AD -97-004 ARENA CROP 130.20 08/11/97 10 AD -97-005 NORRIS CROP 48.31 08/11/97 10 AD -97-006 MARTIN DAIRY 128.04 12/22/97 10 AD -97-007 SHRIVER DAIRY 100.41 12/22/97 10 AD -97-008 HARDING CROP 123.56 12/22/97 10 AD -97-009 CLINE BEEF 253.90 02/25/98 10 AD -97-010 HULL FOREST 175.89 02/25/98 10 AD -97-012 SHRIVER BEEF 177.18 02/25/98 10 AD -98-001 KENDLE CROP 129.00 09/28/98 5 06/01/00 AD -98-003 STRITE DAIRY 111.96 07/29/98 10 AD -98-004 MARTIN ORCHARD 75.71 07/29/98 10 AD -98-005 MARTIN ORCHARD 55.66 07/29/98 10 AD -98-006 SHANK CROP 101.00 07129/98 10 AD -98-007 PENNINGTON BEEF 56.15 12/22/98 10 AD -98-011 RIDENOUR CROP 104.00 12/22/98 10 AD -98-012 ALEXANDER FAMILY PARTNER DAIRY 155.00 12/22/98 10 AD -98-013 MARTIN DAIRY 124.21 12/22/98 10 AD -99-002 STITZEL CROP 264.13 06/28/99 5 AD -99-003 STUMPF BEEF 116.16 06/28/99 10 AD -99-006 MYERS CROP 151.08 06/28/99 10 AD -99-007 BECKLEYIFORSYTHE CROP 162.65 06/28199 5 AD -99-008 ZEPP/STOLES CROP 201.41 06/28/99 10 Records printed: 192 10/20/00 TOTAL 26128.78 fife: P:VPOLIGYIAGRRAGPRF,3TATD8F 24 PLANNNG DEPARTMENT Activities Processed Fiscal Year 1999 (Juiy 1, 1998 thru June 30, 1999) 93 Development Plats ( Preliminary/Final and Final Plat ) Approved 44 Replats Approved 49 Simplified Plat Approved 4 Preliminary Plat Approved 2 Preliminary Plat / Site Plan Approved 25 Site Plan Approved 11 Preliminary Consultation (Concept Plan) Processed 1 Development Plan (PUD) Processed 19 Variance (Subdivision Ordinance) Processed 36 Forest Stand Delineation Processed 6 Forest Conservation Plan (non -subdivision) Processed 16 Forest Conservation Exemption (non -subdivision) Processed 1 Forest Bond Processed 16 Forest Payment -in -Lieu Processed 173 Agricultural Preservation Tax Credit Processed 77 Receipt for Material (ordinances, maps, postage, copies) Processed Not Shown: Ag Districts, RL Districts, Forest Conservation Plan (as part of subdivision) 25 SECTOR/ TYPE SECTOR 1 cm DX IL IN LL SF TH SECTOR 2 LL SF SECTOR 3 SF SECTOR 4 LL SF SECTOR 5 SF SECTOR 6 SF TOTALS SUBDIVISIONS BY PLANNING SECTOR FOR PERIOD 07/01/98 THRU 06/30/99 DEVELOPMENT PLATS PLATS TOTAL URBAN RURAL 5 5 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 3 3 0 2 1 1 22 6 16 2 2 0 5 0 5 16 0 16 10 0 10 1 0 1 5 2 3 17 1 16 3 0 3 LOTS TOTAL URBAN RURAL 7 7 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 3 3 0 3 1 2 114 62 52 22 22 0 8 0 8 24 0 24 18 0 18 1 0 1 9 2 7 27 1 26 4 D 4 ACREAGE TOTAL URBAN RURAL 73.8 73.8 0.0 0.6 0.6 0.0 29.4 29.4 0.0 80.6 80.6 0.0 43.6 20.0 23.6 133.9 42.5 91.4 4.2 4.2 0.0 208.7 0.0 208.7 78.2 0.0 78.2 42.7 0.0 42.7 11.3 0.0 11.3 13.5 2.3 11.2 62.9 1.2 61.8 10.4 0.0 10.4 93 22 71 242 100 142 793.9 254.6 539.3 TYPE BREAKDOWN CM DX IL IN LL SF TH 5 5 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 3 3 0 i 8 1 7 73 9 64 2 2 0 7 7 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 3 3 0 12 1 11 196 65 131 22 22 0 73.8 73.8 0.0 0.6 0.6 0.0 29.4 29.4 0.0 80.6 8D.6 0.0 263.6 20.0 243.6 341.6 45.9 295.7 4.2 4.2 0.0 TYPES OF DEVELOPMENT PLATS CM COMMERCIAL DX DUPLEX LL INSTITUTIONAL IN INDUSTRIAL LL LARGE LOT SF SINGLE FAMILY TH TOWNHOUSE AVERAGE LOT SIZE URBAN RURAL 10.55 0.59 29.39 26.88 20.00 11.80 0.68 1.76 0.19 I r 26.09 3.26 2.37 11.33 1.16 1.60 1.15 2.38 2.60 2.55 3.80 10.55 0.59 29.39 26.88 20.00 22.15 0.71 2.26 a.19 SUBDIVISION FILE BY PLANNING SECTOR FOR PERIOD 07/01/98 THRU 06130/99 ELEC ZONE TYPE OF URBAN/ DWELL GROSS APPROVAL SUBDIVISION NAME DIST DIST DEVELOP RURAL LOTS UNITS ACRES DATE PLANNING SECTOR 1 ABRAHAM STUART PARCEL A DEV PLAT 18 A IN UG 1 1 1.9 01/27/99 ANTIETAM ACRES LOTS 30 & 40-43 10 A SF RA 5 5 6.8 10/23/98 AUSTIN HILLS 14 LOTS 9 A SF RA 14 14 41.5 07/16/98 BITNER SUBDIVISION LOTS 1 & 2 13 C SF SP 2 2 8.9 11/16/98 BOWERS ANNA F GALE LOT 2 13 A SF RA 1 1 5.0 09/30/98 BOWMAN GL.AYDS B LOT 1 18 A SF RA 1 1 2.0 10/29/98 COUNTRYSIDE SEC B LOT 41 13 RR DX UG 1 2 0.6 08/19/98 CROSS CREEK SOUTH 10 HI -1 SF UG 23 23 11.3 08/07/98 CROSS CREEK SOUTH II LOTS 24-37 10 HI -1 SF RA 14 14 2.2 11/17/98 CROSSPOINT SHOPPING CENTER LOT 1 26 HI -1 CM UG 1 0 8.9 06/01/99 FULTON PROPERTIES INC 27 A CM UG 1 1 51.6 05/19/99 GHATTAS ENTERPRISES LOT 2 27 HI CM UG 1 0 0.8 07/06/98 GORDON ROBERT J & DORIS 2 A SF RA 1 1 1.0 02/10/99 GOSSARD MILL ROAD SUBDIVISION 13 A SF RA 1 1 3.1 01/28/99 HAG WASH CO IND FOUND LOT 1 27 HI SF UG 1 1 0.9 01/27/99 HUNTER'S GREEN BUSINESS PK LOT 3 2 HI IN UG 1 0 6.0 05/20/99 HUNTER'S GREEN LOT 2 & PARCEL A 24 HI -1 IN UG 1 0 72.8 12/22/98 KENT ESTATES LOTS 5A & 5B 13 A SF RA 2 2 2.8 12/07/98 KLICK STANLEY LOT 1 18 RS SF UG 1 1 1.6 09/10/98 MARTIN DAVID LOT 1 13 A SF RA 1 1 2.3 02/03/99 MARTIN DAVID LOTS 2 & 3 13 A LL RA 2 2 23.6 04/16/99 MCCLAIN RICHARD & YEATER FRED 10 A LL UG 1 1 20.0 10/06/98 MELD CHRIS LOT 1 13 A SF RA 1 1 3.1 09/01/98 PINE GLEN, INC. 9 A SF RA 2 2 5.7 09/03/98 PORTNER CHARLES LOT 1 26 RS SF UG 1 1 1.7 10/19/98 RIDENOUR HAROLD E & NANCY LOT 1 18 A SF RA 1 1 1.7 04/13/99 RITCHEY PAUL & DULCE LOTS 1-3 13 A SF RA 3 3 4.1 01/04/99 ROBINWOOD MEDICAL CAMPUS LOT 3 18 RS IL UG 1 140 29.4 10/08/98 SHARPSBURG PIKE INN LLC 10 HI -1 CM UG 3 3 5.6 06/03/99 SOUTH POINTE PUD PHASE 11 BK Cl 10 RS -P TH UG 14 14 2.2 06/17/99 SOUTH POINTE PUD PII BLK B4 10 PD TH UG 8 8 2.0 07/09/98 ST JAMES VILLAGE N COMMERICAL 10 RR CM UG 1 1 7.0 12/03/98 STERLING OAKS PHASE III 26 RR SF UG 34 34 18.1 11/18/98 SWEENEY PIA A & GEOFFREY L LOT 5 18 A SF RA 1 1 1.0 07/21/98 WILES ROBERT ET AL LOTS 1, 2,3 2 A SF RA 3 3 7.1 10/21/98 WIN -BERRY SUBDIVISION LOT 1 18 A SF RA 1 1 2.0 10/06/98 36 TOTAL FOR PLANNING SECTOR 1 151 287 366.1 PLANNING SECTOR 2 ARTZ JAMES EDWARD LOT 3 12 A SF RA 1 1 1.5 11/19/98 BROWN'S FARM 19 A SF RA 1 1 5.1 10/21/98 EASTERDAY TODD ET AL LOTS 1-4 16 C SF RA 4 4 17.9 08/03/98 GOBER CHARLES & EVA LOT 1 1 C SF RA 1 1 3.2 07/14/98 GOTTERT JAMES H LOT 4 1 A SF RA 1 1 1.4 09/03/98 GROVE/FOLTZ LOTS 1,2,2A & 2B 6 A LL RA 4 4 79.7 02/03/99 HOFFMAN PAUL W LOT D 6 A SF RA 1 1 2.6 04/30/99 KOONTZ MARY JANE LOT 1 16 C SF RA 1 1 6.0 10/01/98 LEGGETT RONALD AND BETTY 6 A SF RA 1 1 1.8 11/06/98 LEMKUHL TAYLOR LOT 1 6 A SF RA 1 1 4.8 01/25/99 MILLER MONTE GENE LOT 1 6 A SF RA 1 1 2.7 05/04/99 PASHEN ELIZABETH LOTS 3 & 4 12 A SF RA 2 2 4.6 03/07/99 PORTERSTOWN MEADOWS LOTS 1-4 19 A SF RA 4 4 14.0 12/07/98 ROBINSON BRIAN LOT 2 12 A LL RA 1 1 80.0 01/15/99 SHAULL JAMES LOTS 4,5 & PARA 12 A SF RA 2 2 5.5 01/13/99 STONER JAMES ESTATE LOT 1 20 A LL RA 1 1 25.0 04/09/99 THOMAS KENT & WENDY 16 A LL RA 1 1 14.0 05/11/99 THOMAS TRACY & BRENDA LOT 7 6 A SF RA 1 1 2.7 03/11/99 WARD HARRY L & JUDY M LOT 1 19 C LL RA 1 1 10.1 12/04/98 27 ELEC ZONE TYPE OF URBAN/ DWELL GROSS APPROVAL SUBDIVISION NAME DIST DIST DEVELOP RURAL LOTS UNITS ACRES DATE WILLIAMSPORT ASSEMBLY OF GOD 20 A SF RA 1 1 1.5 03/31/99 WINDERS KATHLEEN V LOT 1 16 A SF RA 1 1 3.0 07/30/98 21 TOTAL FOR PLANNING SECTOR 2 32 32 287.0 PLANNING SECTOR 3 BEALER GEORGE LOT 3 8 C SF RA 1 1 4.7 08/27/98 JONES HERMAN E & RALPH L JONES 8 A SF RA 1 1 1.3 05/06/99 MORGAN BONNARD J LOT 2 8 A SF RA 1 1 3.3 06/09/99 MORGAN BONNARD LOT 1 8 A SF RA 1 1 3.0 03/11/99 MULLENDOR DENTON K LOT 3 8 C SF RA 1 1 3.0 02/18/99 NEWMAN WILLIAM A TRUST LOTS 1&2 11 C SF RA 2 2 7.9 01122/99 WHITE OAKS LOT 20 11 C SF RA 1 1 2.0 09/08/98 WHITE OAKS LOTS 1,6,10 & 11 11 C SF RA 4 4 7.9 10/05/98 WHITE OAKS LOTS 12, 15, 17, & 19 11 C SF RA 4 4 6.3 10/05/98 WHITE OAKS LOTS 21 & 23 11 C SF RA 2 2 3.3 09/28/98 10 TOTAL FOR PLANNING SECTOR 3 18 18 42.7 PLANNING SECTOR 4 BAIR JEFFREY & CHERYL LOT 1 7 A SF SM 1 1 1.0 05/05/99 BIKLE SUSANNE ET AL LOT 4 7 A LL RA 1 1 11.3 10/23/98 CAVE HILL ESTATES LOTS 1-4 7 A SF RA 4 4 6.3 06/07/99 CLINE CHARLES LOT 3 7 RR SF SM 1 1 1.3 10/14/98 GARDENOUR ORCHARDS INC LOT 1 7 A SF RA 1 1 2.7 07/15/98 WIVELL WILL & HUDSON 7 RR SF RA 2 2 2.2 04/09/99 6 TOTAL FOR PLANNING SECTOR 4 10 10 24.8 PLANNING SECTOR 5 BOWERS SONNY GUY NORMAN & DONNA 4 C SF RA 1 1 3.7 01/15/99 CLOPPER MADELEINE 4 A SF RA 1 1 2.0 01/12/99 COWGILL DARWIN & REGINA LOT 1 23 A SF RA 1 1 1.0 12/04/98 DIVELBISS LOLITA LOT 11 4 A SF RA 1 1 0.9 01/15/99 DIVELBISS RAYMOND LOTS 6-10 4 A SF RA 5 5 7.6 07/06/98 GRIMM KENNETH 23 A SF RA 2 2 7.0 10/07/98 HAMBY GREG LOTS 1 & 2 15 C SF RA 2 2 5.5 09/25/98 MARTIN LEONARD & ESTHER LOTS1&2 4 HI SF RA 2 2 4.4 12103/98 MICHAEL ANDREW & CONNIE LOTS 1 &2 15 C SF RA 2 2 6.7 05/28/99 MILLYVILLE 4 A SF RA 1 1 1.5 06/15/99 PETRE MERLE & PEGGY LOT1 23 A SF RA 1 1 3.3 08/12/98 REED DANIEL SUB 4 C SF RA 1 1 3.1 07/16/98 RIVERWOOD LOTS 10 & 11 23 A SF RA 2 2 4.1 12/28/98 ROHRER CABOT & CAROL LOT 1A 4 A SF RA 1 1 4.0 01/25199 SEIBERT VIRGINIA LOT 5 4 A SF RA 1 1 4.7 10/06/98 SMITH VINCENT LOT 5 23 C SF UG 1 1 1.2 04/06/99 TRU MPOWER MARY LOTS 10 & 11 4 A SF RA 2 2 2.2 09/22/98 17 TOTAL FOR PLANNING SECTOR 5 27 27 62.9 PLANNING SECTOR 6 FLOWERS NADINE Y 5 C SF RA 1 1 1.1 10/21/98 HOCKENBERRY ROLAND & JUDITH 5 C SF RA 2 2 6.2 04/09/99 YOUNG GARY L & MOLLY LOT 1 5 C SF RA 1 2 3.1 12/08/98 3 TOTAL FOR PLANNING SECTOR 6 4 5 10.4 93 GRAND TOTAL 242 379 793.9 29 rn ro rn I � �.G i 0 __ QI 6� kms; CO C 0 N > 4 CCD Q E CD CD w 03LO I� > I 4 � 5 E 0 U _.., Cl) rn ■ rn L N _ 0CD 3 C) O N Sleld 29 30 I r rn m m r 0 tOD _ O rn CD cm N cm 7 Q. rn «5 0 c A rn I r � !�U I L C i 10 N O m O OO O Q O 00. co 30 31 m s � r m I� m rn CL m iC N � C LO I O rn OO O O O O O Cl 00 N N CD V saaay 31