Loading...
068-06ESTABLISHMENT Action: PLANNING COMMISSION: February 1, 2006 -Recommended approval BOARD OF SUPERVISORS: Apri126, 2006 ~ APPROVED^ DENIED ESTABLISHMENT OF THE RED BUD AGRICULTURAL & FORESTAL DISTRICT WHEREAS, a proposal to create the Red Bud Agricultural & Forestal District to consist of 834.98 acres, was considered. The properties are located along Redbud Road (Route 661), Pine Road (Route 661), and Burnt Factory Road (Route 659), straddling Redbud Run east of Interstate 81 and north of Berryville Pike (Virginia Route 7), and are identified by Property Identification Numbers 43-A-154, 43-A-159, 44D-2-6, 44-A-28, 44-A-28A, 44-A-28C, 44-A-28D, 44-A-28F, 44- A-28G, 44-A-28I, 54-A-87, 54-A-88, 54-A-89C, 54-A-90, 55-A-5, 55-A-SA, 55-A-SB, 55-A-SC, 55-A-SD, 55-A-6, 55-A-7, 55-A-7A, 55-A-7B, 55-A-7C, 55-A-7D, 55-A-7E, 55-A-8, 55-A-14, 55- A-18, 55-A-19, 55-A-20, 55-A-21, 55-A-109B, 55-A-115, 55-A-117, 55-A-118, 55-A-129, 55-A- 129A, 55-A-138, 55-A-139, 55-A-151, 55-A-151A, in the Stonewall Magisterial District. This application was reviewed by the Agricultural District Advisory Committee (ADAC), and the Planning Commission during their regularly scheduled meetings; and WHEREAS, The Agricultural District Advisory Committee (ADAC) recommended approval of this proposal on January 10, 2006; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing and recommended approval on this proposal to establish the Red Bud Agricultural & Forestal District on February 1, 2006; and WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors held a public hearing on this proposal to establish the Red Bud Agricultural & Forestal District on February 22, 2006; and WHEREAS, the Frederick County Board of Supervisors finds the establishment of this Red Bud Agricultural & Forestal District contributes to the conservation and preservation of agricultural and forestal land in Frederick County; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Frederick County Board of Supervisors as follows: The Frederick County Board of Supervisors hereby establishes the Red Bud Agricultural & Forestal District to consist of 834.98 acres in the Stonewall Magisterial District, with an expiration and renewal date of May 1St, 2010. This Agricultural & Forestal District is as described on the attached map. PDRes. #04-06 This ordinance shall be in effect on the day of adoption. Passed this 26th day of April, 2006 by the following recorded vote: Richard C. Shickle, Chairman Aye Barbara E. Van Osten Aye G W. Dove Aye Bill M. Ewing Aye ~' Gene E. Fisher Aye Charles S. DeHaven, Jr. Aye Philip A. Lemieux Aye A COPY ATTEST ~, , ~~,~. John R! ' iley, Jr. ~^ Frederick County Administrator PDRes. #04-06 Board Resolution No.: 068-06 •L d N ~ a m _ }I .a ~ N ~ N O ~ a O ~ y N e L Q M~ W iJ W ~ O ~ c d ¢` c m E c m E m_ 7 o o o j a'c>" N~Y,o vU~~oau~iwn ~ v N m 2 m y U tV ~ ~p I,, I+I I ....~ V ~~ 3 O ~~~ H ~ C O Q V tll' ~ ~ U .C C 2 W IL m~~ON mCLLn f N N Li ei' in w ~ m~ m~ d ~ E v ~E c Y d ~ c a E n m' ~ Q' ~ C ° V i ~LLa'_ c' 'p< 0 _ o .°3 a` N~~ ~ w a ty ~ , ~ ~ ) O >i o ~ rn U • `s~ 1 ' m s ?` n ti ~ ~ ¢ o n c W l } I ~ 1 f 0 J~ / 1 `I ~~ _.... u'r_ B ~ ~ £ 99 f i4" a ~ 1.._ ~~`+~ / ` / ~ ~~ ~ ~V '.. Y~06T 6 f ~ ~~ /, ~ ~ ~f J`j31I p ~ `£ I ~[ p : ~ 462 ~nrr \ i.cA ~~1j... \~/ ~6 ~ / J^~ A6 ec_ 'Y :A ' lam'/ m ,/. •/ t._ I ~~~ Jam/ <e / ~° ~ t rv n i .^- ~, a 1 / 1 e. ' ep 1 ~,~ 84~ 10 ^ e `~O By d' ~ ~ ~ ~ a n < m i ~ p~ +i ~ \ e Vi E . M 0- ,... ~6 , ,< 12 p6 sc_ -. n I ^ r o ~a 4, y o fq ~ 1 y ~ --~ r ~`F"~ ,t 1 ' 9 ed ~1 ~ A ~ ~ ~ W 95 `` ~ o py~9 7 '' y ''eI~ Je z ` ~ sy Iri ` 2£ I e , ~ ~ \ Y 1 b ~' ,,,~ J yq s ~ ~ 1 • d ~ ` ' 1 //~-._ ~ b t y \ 4 ~ ` j / 'O 1 S6 A 1 12.86 en e I \ Qa I 1 f l , ~ /~ ~ ! }B ems' Al / y ~ ~ S ~ ~ ~ , ' Y 82 p ~ ~ br A6e~ ~. ~ y 1 , a , ` 1 / nm \ e1M1 ~ l` °~ I It f I ry f ~ ° ae °0 ~ ' I 9I,e~, !`~, 1 e, a °pe 10 ti rv f r 1 0o I / ~3 / ~ aY' Y N~ 9 N P e~ B -` p. 4 ~ +7 s°O1s ~ b g I ~ 1 ~~ ~ ~p ,, ~ ~ a ' 4 I <e C . e 1 m a i c ~P~gy r ~ N ' T' ~ 1 ~ ~ J ~ t s o ... ' . ~ v~g i o ~ , ~ ~~ m ' i , io (/ ~ x \.~ !/rife/(~l a .~ % ', i ~~ f i nF ~ 9 ^± ~l iii l ~ ~ err ye ' l\ p ~ ~. i I // ~'ei ~ ~l ti . ~/ //- 'i/~/f / 6 m ~ i ~e~~~~/' T J/ ;~ At~~ /~ ~~~ A 08 (r / ~ p^ OwOS ! / /530 ~0+0'F 0 e der // j ~e ~ c // 152 • a ~ 43 s1 W. ` l ~: ~ A `ti 6Q' f,,. ~ 1 ~°~ .c O u ~ ~"W ~ 3 i J ~ - 'Be ZL'9Z ' ~ ~ BB r n ~ ,F ~. ~ o / O ~ f /\ ' ~~~ p3ti6 1 an a~ \ ! 6 . ~ ~ eL Ol / eM1 f f Pn° w ~ y ~ Y i ~\ _ .-, f ~ ` / I /" e ~ , q1 £ OA w ~~' P 0432 w' ~ 1 eb~~ 6 ~ /\ 1 o a f ` ` ~ . ~i ~ j ` n. e 1~~.. 9V '^ ~B o '~ : / . ~ i ~O ~ ~ ~\rf `` . ~i. r./ ~~! . O`*~` ~ / n ya / 4i0 / ~ / p e~ ~, iAb lld.y~lb' 6~. ,, J ! . rv 7 ~If ~, r'\ ~ oA /~ ^y ~ ` t e i£ F ~t£ J~ f / 0 c e ~ 6 40 `~ y O ~ ~ ~S rixli y' f ^ ~ ~o. R ~, \ S` ^` M1 ~ ~+ PS 1~ f p0eo ~ /`nv' !f ~ v SSW COUNTY of FREDERICK TO: Frederick County Board of Supervisors .~" .~. FROM: Bernard S. Suchicital, Planner I `'-' RE: Proposed Red Bud Agricultural & Forestal District DATE: April 14, 2006 Staff has received a request to establish a new Agricultural & Forestal District: Red Bud. This new District will total 879.98 acres, with an expiration and renewal date of May ls`, 2010. Both the Agricultural District Advisory Conunittee and Pla~ming Conunission have recommended approval of the Red Bud Agricultural & Forestal District. Chapter 43, Section 15.2-4300 of the Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended, enables local governments to establish Agricultural & Forestal Districts to conserve and protect agricultural and forestal lands for production of food and other agricultural products and to provide natural and ecological resources. The Code of Virginia requires the local governing body to establish an Agricultural Districts Advisory Committee (ADAC) for the purpose of reviewing proposals that establish or renew districts to ensure conformity with the provisions of Section 15.2-43000. Ultimately, the Board of Supervisors approves, approves with modifications, or denies the proposal to establish or renew an Agricultural & Forestal District. In working with members of the community and the Extension Services, staff circulated forms for the creation of an Agricultural & Forestal District to the property owners of the lower Stonewall Magisterial District. These forms are important aspects of the Agricultural & Forestal District Program: the program is voluntary, enabling property owners the right to participate should they be interested. On February 22, 2006 the proposed district was presented to the Board of Supervisors at a public hearing. The Board sent the item to the Transportation Committee meeting, which was held on April 5, 2006, to discuss the impact of a realigned Route 37. In addition, there is a new sewer line being installed along Burnt Factory Road that affects two properties. The impact of this sewer line should be minimal. 107 North Kent Street, Suite 202 Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000 Proposed Red Bud Agricultural & Forestal District April 14, 2006 Page 2 Included with this memorandum is information pertaining to the District which includes a district summary and property ownership information table, and a map which delineates the general boundaries of the proposed District. The Board of Supervisors held the required public hearing on February 22, 2006. Action requesting adoption of the agricultural and forestal district was deferred to allow time to evaluate the location for Route 37. On April 12, 2006, the Board of Supervisors approved a location for Route 37 which does not impede the proposed District. Staff will present additional information regarding the application and mapping features for the proposed District during the public meeting. Following the public meeting, a decision from the Board of Supervisors would be appropriate. BSS/bad 2 Proposed Red Bud Agricultural & Forestal District The Frederick County Agricultural District Advisory Committee (ADAC) reviewed the proposed addition to the County's two Agricultural and Forestal Districts. These districts include the South Frederick District, established in 1980, and the Double Church Road District, established in 1995. The Red Bud District was considered at their meeting on January 10, 2006. The ADAC recommends approval of the request to create a new district. Chapter 43, Section 15.2-4300 of the Code of Vir inia, 1950, as amended, enables local governments to establish Agricultural and Forestal Districts to conserve and protect agricultural and forestal lands for the production of food and other agricultural products and to provide natural and ecological resources. The Code of Virginia requires the local governing body to establish an ADAC for the purpose of reviewing proposals that establish or renew districts to ensure conformity with the provisions of section 15.2-4300. Ultimately, the Board of Supervisors approves, approves with modifications, or denies the proposal to establish or renew an Agricultural and Forestal District. LOCATION This proposed District is located in the Stonewall Magisterial District along Redbud Road (Route 661), Pine Road (Route 661), and Bunn Factory Road (Route 659}, straddling Redbud Run east of Interstate 81 and north of Berryville Pike (Virginia Route 7). SIZE The proposed District contains 879.98 acres within 43 parcels, managed by 24 property owners. AGRICULTURAL & FORESTAL SIGNIFICANCE The predominantly agricultural operations in the new District are 75 percent agriculture (livestock, horses, crop harvest) and 25 percent open-space/woodlands. The area within the District is rural in nature. There are currently 619.29 acres (70%) within the District that are in the County's land use taxation program. LAND USE All parcels in and surrounding the areas are in agricultural or residential use. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN The proposed District lies in an area that is outside the Urban Development Area and the Sewer and Water Service Area, with exception of one (1) two-acre parcel. The area is located within the Northeast Land Use Plan. About half of the District is designated as a Developmentally Sensitive Area in the Northeast Land Use Plan. The remaining parcels have no land use designation, which indicates the area should remain rural. The intent of the Rural. Areas is to maintain agriculture as a significant portion of the County's economy, and to maintain the rural character of areas outside of the Urban Development Area. The Comprehensive Plan can accomplish this by promoting the inclusion of additional land in Agricultural and Forestal Districts. 3 The Comprehensive Plan supports the establishment and renewal of the proposed District, for it provides an opportunity for the agribusiness community to conduct long range planning efforts for the management of their operations, while providing a reserve of agricultural land through the year 2010. ZONING All but two (2) parcels are currently zoned RA -Rural Areas District. The remaining two parcels (222.03 acres) are currently zoned RP -Residential Performance District, that could have the potential to develop approximately 88 single family homes without water and sewer. By allowing the two RP-zoned properties into the proposed Red Bud Agricultural and Forestal District, it will assist in hindering the process to develop this land into a more intense use. The properties to the north and east of the proposed District are zoned R4 -Residential Planned Community District and RA, and those to the south and west are zoned MH1 -Mobile Home Community District and RA. LAKES/PONDS/STREAMS The proposed District lies primarily within the Redbud Run drainage area, and partially within the Hiatt Run drainage area. The establishment of this District will further assist with managing the quality of the County's water resources. SOILS The general relief of the new District varies from a broad rolling valley, to the west of Devils Backbone, to very steep forested land on the eastern parcels and along Redbud Run. This District is within the Redbud Run watershed and water is available from ponds, wells and springs. The soils in the proposed District are of many different kinds and formed in material weathered from limestone and shale. Most of the soils, with the exception of those on the steeper slopes, are suited to a wide variety of farm uses. These steeper slopes are mostly forested and are heavily wooded. Most of the area is in pasture, cultivated crops and hay. A few areas are woodland. (Attached please find a list of specific soil descriptions present in the area.) PRIME AGRICULTURE SOIL There are a limited amount of prime agricultural soils located within the proposed Red Bud Agricultural & Forestal District. The following soils are: Blairton, Carbo, Frederick, Guernesy, Massanetta. Please see attached map. STAFF COMMENTS Based on this information, staff feels that this proposed Red Bud Agricultural District is agriculturally significant as outlined in the Agricultural and Forestal Districts Act. Furthermore, creation of this District would conform to the County's Comprehensive Policy Plan which labels the area as historic and developmentally sensitive and rural. 4 AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT ADVISORY COMMITTEE The Agricultural District Advisory Committee considered this proposal at its meeting of January 10, 2006. Committee members voted unanimously for the recommendation of approval of this new District. PLANNING COMMISSION The Planning Commission held their public hearing to consider this proposed new Red Bud Agricultural and Forestal District at their meeting of February 1, 2006. One citizen, an adjoining property owner along Pine Road, thought his property designation was being changed and he also had questions on why his property was being surveyed for a sewer line. The staff explained to this citizen that he had received a letter of notif cation because he was an adjoining property owner; the staff explained the intent of the Agricultural & Forestal District and it was pointed out that a property owner would have to sign up to have his property included within the District. A Commission member questioned the significance of adding the two RP-zoned parcels to the District, in terms of restrictions in subdivision and development. The staff explained that enlisting property within the District is completely voluntary by the property owner; by choosing to join the Agricultural District, property owners freeze their right to subdivide their parcel of land. Staffadded that if the property owner wishes to subdivide, they would have to go through the process of meeting with the Agricultural District Committee, the Planning Commission, and the Board of Supervisors to remove their parcel of land from the District. No other issues or concerns were raised and the Planning Commission unanimously recommended approval of the new Red Bud Agricultural and Forestal District, containing 879.98 acres with 43 parcels, and managed by 24 property owners. (Commissioners Thomas, Watt, Oates, and Ours were absent from the meeting.) BOARD OF SUPERVISORS The Board of Supervisors held their public hearing to consider this proposed new Red Bud Agricultural and Forestal District at their meeting of February 22, 2006. Several citizens came forward to give their support for the approval of the District. The Chairman advised the petitioners that he was supportive of the request; however, he was uncomfortable acting on the request until there was clarification regarding the location of Route 37. He wanted to know how this road does or does not relate to this agricultural and forestal district. He asked the Board to delay action. A supervisor stated that if it was the desire of the Board, then the Transportation Committee would move on this issue. No other issues or concerns were raised and the Board of Supervisors unanimously voted to postpone this item for up to 60 days to allow it to be reviewed by the Transportation Committee. 5 ATTACHMENT 1-Proposed Red Bud Agricultural & Forestal District Soils 1 B -Berks channery silt loam, 2 to 7% slopes This soil is moderately deep, gently sloping, and well drained. Permeability of this soil is moderate, and the available water capacity is very low. Surface runoff is medium. Erosion hazard is moderate. Tilth is fair, and natural fertility and organic matter content are low. This soil is fairly well suited to cultivated crops. 1C -Berks channery silt loam, 7 to 15% slopes Same as above except steeper slopes. 3B - Blairton silt loam. 2 to 7% sloes (Prime Agricultural Soil) This soil is moderately deep, gently sloping, and moderately well drained to somewhat poorly drained. Permeability of this soil is moderately slow. The available water capacity is low. Surface runoff is medium. Erosion hazard is moderate. Tilth is fair, but the soil breaks up into clods if tilled when too wet or too dry. Natural fertility and organic matter content are low. This soil is moderately well suited to cultivated crops if drainage is installed. SB -Carbo silt loam, 2 to 7% slopes (Prime Agricultural Soil) This soil is moderately~deep, gently sloping, and well drained. Permeability of this soil is slow, and the available water capacity is low. Surface runoff is medium. Erosion hazard is moderate. The surface layer is friable and easily tilled when moist. Natural fertility is medium, and organic matter content is low. This soil is well suited to hay and pasture. SC -Carbo silt loam, 7 to 15% slopes Same as above except steeper slopes. 6C -Carbo-Oaklet silt loams, very rocky, 2 to 15% slopes These soils consists of moderately deep and deep, gently sloping and strongly sloping, well drained soils on side slopes, hilltops, and ridgetops. Permeability of this soil is slow, and the available water capacity is moderate. Surface runoff is medium. The erosion hazard is severe. The surface layer is breaks into clods if these soils are tilled when too wet or too dry, and rock outcrops interfere with tillage. Natural fertility is medium, and organic matter content is low. These soils are moderately well suited to hay and pasture. 6 8C - Chilhowie silty clav loam 7 to 15% slopes This moderately deep, strongly sloping soil is well drained. Permeability of this soil is slow, and the available water capacity is low. Surface runoff is rapid. Erosion hazard is moderate. The surface layer is friable and easily tilled when moist. Natural fertility is high, but organic matter content is low. This soil is well suited for hay and pasture. 9B - Clearbrook channery silt loam 2 to 7% slopes This soil is moderately deep, gently sloping, and somewhat poorly drained. Permeability of this soil is moderately slow. The available water capacity is very low. Surface runoff is fair. Tilth is fair. Natural fertility and organic matter content are low. This soil is moderately well suited to cultivated crops, hay and pasture. 9C - Clearbrook channery silt loam 7 to 15% slopes Same as above except steeper slopes. 14B -Frederick-Poplimento loams 2 to 7% slopes (Prime Agricultural Soil) These soils are very deep, gently sloping, and well drained on narrow to broad, convex valley sides. Permeability is moderate in the Frederick soil and moderately slow in the Poplimento soil. The available water capacity is moderate in both soils. Surface runoff is medium. The erosion hazard is moderate. The surface layer is friable and easily tilled. Natural fertility is medium, and organic matter content is low. These soils are well suited to cultivated crops, hay and pasture. 14C -Frederick-Poplimento loams 7 to 15% sloes Same as above except steeper slopes. 20B -Guernsey silt loam 2 to 7% sloes (Prime Agricultural Soil) This soil is very deep, gently sloping, and moderately well drained. Permeability of this soil is moderately slow, and the available water capacity is moderate. Surface runoff is medium. The erosion hazard is moderate. The surface layer is friable and easily tilled when moist, but breaks up into clods if the soil is tilled when too wet or too dry. Natural fertility is medium, and organic matter content is moderate. This soil is well suited to cultivated crops, hay and pasture. 7 25C - Laidi¢ very stony fine sandy loam 7 to 15% slopes This soil is very deep, strongly sloping, and well drained. Permeability in this soil is moderate above the fragipan and moderately slow in the fragipan. The available water capacity is low. Surface runoff is medium. The erosion hazard is moderate. Natural fertility and organic matter content are low. This soil is not suited to cultivated crops, hay because of stone. The soil is well suited to pasture if the surface is cleared of trees and stones. 29 - Massanetta loam (Prime Agricultural Soil) This gently sloping, well drained soil has a silty clay loam surface layer and clay subsoil Permeability of this soil is slow and the available water capacity is moderate. Tilth is fair and the soil is medium in natural fertility. The subsoil is very plastic and has a high shrink-swell potential. This soil has rock outcrops and is a factor in the use of this soil. This soil has a fair potential for farming. 33E - Oneauon-Chilhowie silt lays very rocky 15 to 45% slones This soil is moderately steep to very steep, and well drained on narrow to broad, convex valley sides. Permeability in these soils is moderately slow, and the available water capacity is low. Surface runoff is rapid to very rapid. The erosion hazard is severe. The silty clay surface layer is firm, and tends to break up into clods if tilled. Rock outcrops interfere with tillage. Natural fertility is high, and organic matter content is low. These soils are not suited to cultivated crops, hay, or pasture. 35 - Pagebrook silty clay loam This soil is very deep, nearly level, and moderately well drained. Permeability of this soil is slow, and the available water capacity is moderate. Surface runoff is very slow. The erosion hazard is slight. The surface layer can be worked only in a narrow range of moisture content. Natural fertility is high, and organic matter content is moderate. This soil is moderately well suited to cultivated crops and hay. This soil is well suited to pasture. 36 -Pits, quarries and dumps This consists of open excavations from which limestone, shale, and sand have been mined and of piles of spoil from quarries. Areas of pits, quarries, and dumps are poorly suited to cultivated crops, hay and pasture, and to use as woodland and as habitat for wildlife. 8 41C -Weikert-Berks channe silt loarns 7 to 15% slo es These soils are shallow and moderately deep, strongly sloping, and well drained on rolling landscape and on the tops and noses of ridges. Permeability in the Weikert soil is moderately rapid and in the Berks soil is moderate. The available water capacity is very low. Surface runoff is rapid. The erosion hazard is severe. Natural fertility and organic matter content are low. These soils are poorly suited to cultivated crops and hay, and are moderately well suited to pasture. 41D -Weikert-Berks channe silt loams 15 to 25% slo es Same as above except steeper slopes. 41E -Weikert-Berks channe silt loams 25 to 65% slo es Same as above except steeper slopes. 44C - Zoar silt loam 7 to 15% slo es This soil is very deep, strongly sloping, and moderately well drained. Permeability of this soil is slow, and the available water capacity is moderate. Surface runoff is moderate. The erosion hazard is moderate. Tilth is good, but the soil breaks up into clods if tilled when too wet or too dry. Natural fertility and organic matter content are low. This soil is moderately well suited to cultivated crops, and is well suited to hay and pasture ATTACHMENT 2 -Proposed Red Bud Agricultural & Forestal District Parcels Map # Property Owner Acreage 43 A 154 Shenandoah Valley Battlefield Foundation 36.27 43 A 159 Jenkins, Jeffery G. 8 Roseanna M. 2.00 44D 2 6 Willis, Charles I. 2.37 44 A 28 Werdebaugh, Donna W. & Donald M. 8.72 44 A 28A Jobe, Allen B. & Velda D. 20.46 44 A 28C Boden, Robert R. & Marsha 4.30 44 A 28D Boden, Robert R. & Marsha 5.00 44 A 28F Kugler, Standish P. & Janet E. 9.85 44 A 28G Jobe, Allen B. & Velda D. 5.00 44 A 281 Miller, Voight G. & Bonnie L. 8.00 54 A 87 Britz, William D. & Claudia J. 20.00 54 A 88 Preservation of Civil War Battlefields 181.03 54 A 89C Shenandoah Valley Battlefield Foundation 100.00 54 A 90 Preservation of Civil War Battlefields 41.00 55 A 5 Herring, Kevin L. 33.43 55 A 5A Herring, Stacy A. 3.56 55 A 56 Herring, Vera J. 1.00 55 A 5C Herring, Stacy A. 17.01 55 A 5D Herring, Kevin L. 1.21 55 A 6 Hulver, Joseph F. T. 24.04 55 A 7 Oates, Gary K. & Constance J. 13.48 55 A 7A Oates, Gary K. & Constance J. 9.37 55 A 7B Oates, Gary K. & Constance J. 7.49 55 A 7C Oates, Gary K. & Constance J. 5.00 55 A 7D Oates, Gary K. & Constance J. 5.00 55 A 7E Oates, Gary K. & Constance J. 5.02 55 A 8 Schwartzman, Bernard 25.09 55 A 14 Lam, Ernest L. 2.00 55 A 18 Seipel, Wayne D. & Stephanie P. 12.00 55 A 19 Seipel, Wayne D. & Stephanie P. 22.00 55 A 20 Seipel, Wayne D. & Stephanie P, 10.86 55 A 21 Seipel, Wayne D. & Stephanie P. 58.50 55 A 1096 Jenkins, Jeffery G. &Roseanna M. 8.82 55 A 115 Pine Knoll Construction 1.75 55 A 117 Jenkins, Jeffery G. &Roseanna M. 4.33 55 A 118 McNeil, Debra J. & Dawn M. Stultz 1.13 55 A 129 Childress, Nathan & Diana 33.08 55 A 129A Gregg, David M. & A. Katherine 33.00 55 A 138 Orndoff, Stephanie M. Sempeles 21.50 55 A 139 Orndoff, Stephanie M. Sempeles 7.31 55 A 151 McAllister, John E. & June P. 19.00 55 A 151A McAllister, John E. & June P. 5.00 55 A 152 McAllister, John E. & June P. 45.00 10