Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutVA200300005 Review Comments 2003-06-03 STAFF PERSON: John Shepherd PUBLIC HEARING: June 3, 2003 STAFF REPORT VA-2003-005 OWNER/APPLICANT: Charles and Flemming Lunsford, Owners/ Applicants TAX MAP/PARCEL: 99/10 ZONING: VR, Village residential, FH, Flood Hazard Overlay ACREAGE: 3.645 LOCATION: 4769 Plank Road TECHNICAL REQUEST AND EXPLANATION: The applicant requests a variance from Section 12.3 which requires a 25 foot front setback. This variance is necessary to allow the replacement of the existing roof with a new roof that provides additional space within the building envelope on a nonconforming dwelling that is located 8-3 feet from the right-of-way of Plank Road, a variance of feet. Although the dwelling will be no closer 9 to the right-of way as a result of the work, the variance is determined to be required because the addition of the space under the proposed roof is an expansion of a non- conforming structure that is located less than 25 feet from the right-of-way. Staff notes that it would have been possible to replace the existing roof at the same pitch, or even at a slightly taller pitch without the need for a variance. RELEVANT HISTORY: Special Permit 2002-12 was approved on December 4, 2002. This permit allowed the construction of a driveway in the floodplain. The applicant applied for this variance on April 17, 2003. Building Permit 2003-503-AR was issued in error on April 18, 2003. The scope of work was described as the removal of two bedrooms and the addition of two bedrooms, attic storage and a new roof system. It was known that the dwelling was in the flood plain. The review of the building permit included a determination, pursuant to section 30.3.02.1 (e), that the value of the work was less than half of the value of the house. The review of the building permit did not include consideration of Section 30.3.04 (4) which prohibits human habitation in the flood plain. The review of the permit did identify the setback encroachment and the need for the variance. However, the building permit was issued, in error, prior to the disposition of the variance request. The issue of the expansion of the use for human habitation in the flood plain was identified during the course of the review of the variance application. It is important to note that the applicant acted in good faith to resolve the setback and flood plain issues throughout this process. The applicant is working with the Zoning Department to resolve a complaint involving the location of a storage building. A stop work order was issued on May 22, 2003. At that point, the new roof was framed and under tar paper. The gable walls and interior partitions were not completed. I:IDEPT\BCZS12003 staff reportstVA-2003-5 Lunsford.doc 2 APPLICANT'S GENERAL DESCRIPTION AND JUSTIFICATION: "We would like to return the slope of our mill, originally built in 1819, back to a state close to the original lines. This is for aesthetic, structural, and historical reasons. We are not adding square footage through height increase, just changing the slope. In a renovation in the early 1920s, much of the architecture/slope of the original roof was removed. The current slope is nearly flat, less than 1 foot per 12 feet. Our architect says it is "unviable, guaranteed to deteriorate, asking for trouble, etc." "We are currently at a point of necessity in replacing the roof. We have several severe leaks at the moment, one of which is threatening the structure. Another reason the slope/height of the roof needs to be changed is that the "bearing plates" of the outside walls need to be adjusted. Approximately 95% of the structure is outside VDOT's prescriptive easement and it is unclear whether the roof design currently will be going up higher in the area in question, but it may. (An engineer's sketch is attached, along with a fact sheet, that shows a bird's eye view of the 25 foot border with VDOT's easement- whether we will ultimately increase the vertical height inside the 25 foot area is unclear." PROPERTY DESCRIPTION AND QUALIFYING CONDITIONS: This 3.645-acre parcel is improved by a dwelling and three small outbuildings. The dwelling is entirely within the flood plain of the South Branch of the Hardware River. The County's records indicate this house was constructed circa 1824. This property is nonconforming in two respects. The location of the dwelling is nonconforming to the 25-foot front setback r because the original house is located-8-3-feet from the front. The Board of Zoning IL Appeals may reduce this setback upon a finding that the request meets the criteria for a variance set forth in Section 34. The use of the dwelling for human habitation is nonconforming to Section 30.3.04.4 of the floodplain regulations that prohibits structures designed or intended for human habitation in the flood plain. Section 30.3.10 (1) states that "No variance, modification or waiver shall be granted to Section 30.3.4. Nonconformity with respect to the use of human habitation in the floodplain: Since this structure is located in a flood plain it is subject to 30.3.9.2. This section provides that if a substantial improvement is made to a nonconforming structure, the structure or activity must thereafter comply with flood hazard overlay district regulations (i.e., no human habitation). A substantial improvement is an improvement that exceeds 50% of the market value of the structure. Based on the owner's valuation of the work and an appraisal, this project was found not to be a substantial improvement requiring the use to become conforming ( i.e., no human habitation). This project is also subject to 30.3.04 (4). This section prohibits human habitation as a use in structures located in the flood plain. This application is complicated by the fact that the building plans that were approved with BP-2003-503 show new, conditioned space in the attic and additional usable square footage on the second floor. These I:IDEPT BCZS12003 staff reportslVA-2003-5 Lunsford.doc 3 elements expand the square footage of habitable space in the dwelling. It has been determined by the Zoning Administrator that the creation of the finished space in the attic is a violation under section 30.3.04 (4). However, this area would not violate the ordinance if it were converted to storage space. This could be accomplished by replacing the proposed fixed stairs with "pull-down" attic stairs, insulating the attic floor and providing no heat or air-conditioning to this space. The Zoning Administrator's determination is not a part of this request and therefore, recommended conditions regarding the attic space may not be modified as part of this variance proceeding. The expansion of the second floor requires further analysis. Section 6.2 B provides: B. Enlargement or extension of a nonconforming use. A nonconforming use shall not be enlarged or extended such that the character of the use existing on the effective date of the zoning regulations applicable to the district in which the use is located is changed. The zoning administrator's determination of whether the character of a nonconforming use has changed shall be based on the magnitude of the change in the size and scope of the use and the effects these changes have upon the purposes of this chapter. In evaluating the change in the size and scope of the use, an increase in the volume or intensity of the use and any alteration or variation in the use, such as the provision of additional goods or services, shall be considered. A mere increase in the volume, intensity or frequency of the use that is trivial, insubstantial or reasonably customary or incidental, and that is not accompanied by an alteration or variation in the use, shall not be deemed to be an enlargement or extension of the use. The second floor of the original dwelling had a knee wall that limited the habitable space on that floor. That area contained four small bedrooms, two bathrooms, a studio and storage. The proposed plan shows four larger bedrooms, a studio and three bathrooms. The raising of the roof added square footage beyond the knee wall to the habitable area of the dwelling. The ordinance recognizes a direct relationship between intensity of residential use and the number of bedrooms. It is staff opinion, based on section 6.2 B, that the increase of the volume of the use could be permitted if the second floor bedrooms were merely enlarged. It is staff opinion that the addition of the guest bathroom does not intensify the human habitation in this nonconforming dwelling. Also, staff notes that section 30.3.9.2, which limits the value of the substantial improvement, provides a financial criterion by which to measure the permitted scope of expansion of a structure in the flood plain. Therefore, it is staff opinion that if the building plans are modified as described above, this enlargement of the dwelling can be found to be in compliance with the flood plain regulations set forth in section 30.3. Discussion of the request for a variance from the 25 foot front setback: 1:IDEPIIBCZSI2003 staff reportslVA-2003-5 Lunsford.doc 4 This 3.645 acre parcel is improved by a dwelling and several small outbuildings. It is staff opinion that the owners now enjoy reasonable use of their property. Therefore, it is staff's opinion that this request does not meet the criteria for a finding of undue hardship as provided in section 34 of the ordinance. However, there are other factors the Board may wish to consider. It must be acknowledged that the owners have proceeded with the construction of the addition in good faith, relying on the building permit that was issued. A denial of the variance will result in the necessity to remove the new construction and replace it with a structure that matches the original. Clearly, this would be a financial burden to the applicants. Approval of this request will not result in the enlargement of the footprint of the existing structure. All of the expansion is in the height of the building. APPLICANT'S JUSTIFICATION AND STAFF COMMENT: A review of the variance criteria provided by the applicant and comments by staff follows: Hardship The applicant comments that the variance is necessary: "We need a new roof and a new roofline. The existing roof and roofline have been deemed not viable by both a structural engineer as well as an architect. In addition, the unnatural slope of the roof (less than 1 foot slope per 12 feet) has caused several problems, including the current leaks and structural deterioration." Staff accepts the applicant's assertion that the roof needed to be repaired and further accepts that roofs with low pitches can be problematic. However, these factors do not address the criteria for hardship. Staff acknowledges that to require the removal and replacement of construction performed under a valid building permit would constitute a significant financial burden to the applicants. 1. The applicant has not provided evidence that the strict application of the ordinance would produce undue hardship. Uniqueness of Hardship The applicant notes: "The gristmill was built around 1819 prior to the existence of the applicable codes and regulations. In addition, it underwent an unfortunate renovation in the 1920s which greatly impaired the structure's integrity and aesthetic qualities, especially the roofline. Because of its former life as a working mill, it was placed unnaturally close to the road. However, the closest corner of the road (after which it slopes away from the road quickly) is over 31 feet from the road." I:IDEPT1BCZSI2003 staff reports\VA-2003-5 Lunsford.doc 5 Staff finds the circumstances of this request to be unique. 2. The applicant has provided evidence that such hardship is not shared generally by other properties in the same zoning district and the same vicinity. Impact on Character of the Area The applicant offers: "The rural character of the North Garden area should not suffer and the mill will look much closer to its original lines. We are spending a great deal of money and time on the aesthetic qualities so the construction will match the time period in which the mill was built, along with the rural character of the area ( both of which are very important to us). Additionally, the mill is surrounded by several old growth trees which will not be affected, but do screen the property from neighbors. Hopefully, all, or certainly most people, could easily agree that the house will look nicer and improve the character of the area." Staff agrees that the restoration of a traditional roofline to the building will not have a negative impact on the adjacent property or the district. Also, staff notes that the building will be no closer to the right of way as a result of this construction. 3. The applicant has provided evidence that the authorization of such variance will not be of substantial detriment to adjacent property and that the granting of the variance will not change the character of the district. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Since not all three criteria for approval have been met, staff can not recommend approval of this variance. However, if the Board approves this request, staff recommends the following conditions. The building plans associated with BP-2003-503 must be amended as follows: 1 . The fixed attic stairs must be replaced with "pull-down" attic stairs; 2. The attic floor must be insulated, the insulation in the attic knee walls and the roof system must be removed and the space shall not be heated or cooled. 3. The second floor must be configured in general accord with the attached plan, showing no more than four bedrooms. 1:I DEP7l8CZS12003 staff reports I VA-2003-5 Lunsford.doc • ' \ \ / BRIDGE Aiii \ \ irir . OutcrRockop \ V . . -1--- \ / , , \ • / , (AREA IN SETBACK=S4 SF r>"'"'t' is j l ,I/ i/ ,f i% ; ,, . RT. 6'12 CENTER LINE A / AyJ `I l (IS' PRESCRIPTIVE EASEMENT 411,, PO "CH 4 I Alr/ A/ I i • . iii /: / LUNSFORD RESIDENCE 4-1661 PLANK ROAD -WY / (OLD MILL BUILDING) / FFE=b78 (I ,781 SF) 0``` 1 (25' SETBAG I 30" Maple • vA 1 2 0 03.-00 5 • . .. ,, 0 (1) LAP ALL RAFTERS 1 COMIECT W) (6)16d NAILS I 2X4 BEARING WALL _ I I ••4 NEW II- •LVL BEAR. PROP5GD \• SEE PLAN FOR POST I I , R-30 INSULATION LOCATIONS I �45•O—C R-l3 INSULATION ,,._ riiro ,.IYhn„� 2x8 JOISTS 16'OL. LYS:1 ,�ii' I ,il . • COLUUN(4X4 I 9 2X4 BEARING WALL MIN)BEYOND I AI SEE FLAN FOR NEW ATTIC I v 1 LOCATION Slp ?+� I Rq� Ai 1 ) CNRNET TO BEICNN?ET TO BE �' R-19 QJSULA�i fS•0�TNil I REMOVED I RErtovEDI I I H R•30 MSIA ATION I REMOVED,SEE GENERAL Ah S A 2x12 JOIST I6'O.C. )b'd1]I I 2xI2 JOIST'•'OL._ —�. I 2x12 •1ST 8'O.G. 1,1%, r 2x12 JOIST 16'OL. I „w`` NOTE 2 '1�� II _ -s - II IL�_�� Lip����51� NEW E)(TERIORSTUDWALL. II.--6 -- _------ ——I -' SEE ORAL NOTE I _— —- --- —— _ ———— II —_1 II _ NEW BEDROOM NEW EMERIOR STIR ——— z : — —— ,a(EXISTIJG) WALL.SEE GENERAL NEW II-a'LA BEAM •, NOTE I 1 I SEE PLAN FOR POST I ;' Tr--, i �� I LCCATIGNS D - NEVI STAIR '^ GQLU'N(4X6 I I a I MPU 8EYO D 6EQ�f I I rc=I.: = %-"a SEC.aPLAN FOR (EXISTING) I I (EXISTING) I L T104 I ,I Dorm 2. >.. I ———— 1 EXISTNG EXTERIOR WALL ____' I 1% i I� II iiiil og in KITCHEN GIVING RROMIII LIBRART ISTiNG• (EXISTING) (EXISTING) o (EXISTING) Po �7 r _...... _ IAFMI(EXISTINGBA)BASEMENT (EXISTING) ,...r] CONTRACTOR SHALL EXCAVATE AT VARIOUS POTS AROND PIERS TO r { 1 I CONFIRM SIZE 4 DEPTH OF FOOTING'i I— I--4 (REPORT SAID PFOR1ATION TO ARCHITECT) a GENERAL NOTES. vI.ALL EXTERIOR WALLS MUST BE REPFORCED WITH CONTNJOUS STUDS FRq1 FLOOR BUILDING SECTION 2. EXISTING STRUCTURE MIST BE STAEILIZEO PRIOR O TO MT STRUCTURAL DITIOLTON. 1l4'■M1O' • VA - L003 - 3 "7-N ockx 13Q .7") .. T / Iv' _;/). 72\2), If SnACII ° r-r�- `0t f ,.. .._ � .. - - I I 2ND FLOOR (EXSITNG) I/4" = 1f _/11 V Ad 100 --- 00C V 1 n _{ F=Th \7A 2o 03 . 5 I ( i pater , 13 q-J _z-__ _ _.. ___J, C Ir- — -- li- : C 0 N-: 1 ; : • - ..!'''- -- 1a , i 1 / .2 ...E--_-- A j - - r------11 1 14' I _ ► 1 II ' i 1 SILI f 1 J •_ 1 1 II j IG2) 1_ t ,-_. = jj dill d < k - if . -: _r_,9__ _ , . / I = ._ = = Z = - a 1= = s = _ = = i ---' C : 6' rt —8 ''': I 6R,., 1 i- 1 '1 6 i 1 0 _t. i 7 0 L 7- e[JO 1 If - E ` d Flag Cox 4 Associates Architect& 102 Easl Caryl 51.reei Rk}no 4 va 73 P A I Lis Ford f5 ldence 2cC30OSWe. oy o - - „ • k.. rw • • ,1 i, sue! «i .. 4 ' .• _A 111111/ ." 1' 7;* _ 14§ ...• ' `--. . --ler It- • -..;4 ...--: -4 .4; -- '110 IL - ilk ., , .,...... . .4V,444 **!olief.-.' • .. k -Or-40'-'t *r 4 is r s �1'S � _ • « �, 1 it * " )4S ii.,d,".1 •kiN :IN ...•kN 41,41.11111t '‘.4 ...•11.14' .1111*. "i1"11.0(".' . .W 4. '. • ' .itetilil /74It I') /' • 11111111111111* * ' ' '' .4.•:, , ,,,,„ri, 4„. •-• - _4. .4 _. . 4 . 1. -- I. • ) •i.,'► ,,•""1 w 1 • n.+ . ,i Sce . •I _ , , .htiti . •. `• ♦•♦ '' f:I s ". -- •• .. 44. r" �t. '�"', .s,.' `'s • may is ♦ -may tint TES/ x • s .• • •• • r • - ' s! • N . ?P' • • . • ww• ! ' ..r X •w f..r.ek.,, j. IC, • 4. ,I t " • h � ' 1' e t • .� - ..,. .`rty ' .jf•ex•- 1. . y ''y, + .. . ,` r +, 1 f'. _ 'fi,.. xr, ♦�♦ • . I I s • ••y. 7 ` f-- .r • . ... , ic , , ,, - • - e. .. . •. . . • . _. •.:: .., , .. ligr.. .,...4.1‘. .. .. -P.••'''' . ..5,k I it. •. ..., i...,.; . F.:. .0 • . • - ._ • :4 • •dr.... , . - 1 • •• x, • • ,;,1 . it fr. ---•. . , . ..„ ,•,,...- - , , ,... - . . i...., . op- . . 4-, ' •••• .. pt.,OM. ir• .' . ..- . • ,k .tIr''.-- .. , ... • ,-.. . . ... .. Ad . • •• . " , . 24 • ., .111V -- -....... F . 40 - .. . ' ., .• "e-. • - , - • i .." i't. • .II*.• . • . .0 .. . ' - * .-• •- ..4., . 14',1i. *Ile . , • ; - ,. . . ••• . lot - 44 _ . .• • 4Pk• ' ' i —, 11)i,' -•••• . . •• . ..._VIA 0 •rt • - • ..-,l, ...• 1 .. /1144s.... - _. • - --- -•' e"? ' .•-limt . . -40 . • . .1, • .- iv? ..4 . :.. . i, . . . • •1 •. t -IPIA(I:.1 .Nti ii:1...I'.-•'... 'I- 1 2 *1 ' li• . ..:; .• .' • ..c • ''''r*C'fl t 1 • .a.t. 'P.;V• ' 4 44 •.".•Vat -. • I:: , ,...7. . ..,i. . . ... ,...,,, ., ! iork„...c•, ....... iv* , , ' "...:,.' :5., ,i• .-:...111,.. „at!ii,;.. .... ,, • ••;v7. . k - --- 4. • ( . ' .. -' '''' ' 'a ' 1."1. °S. • 41: • • '' ... • •..:' • ....: . Ir. iti . ..,1:1!, -. . -:• '• • ' .e- .;,..,_, ..''4°11....; ' --,..-. -:..- 16-:------1: . ,.. . .. 4 .., , . ,. . . , yr- e 4 .,.., ,.... •. • :. . 'Y- a. .. i f -.- '' • . -.. ' .• . . f= . 4.." , „ k,. ..1• ', • r' _.47. .., - .,,.. .., • :-.".-- ..6- ' ••,f.•id.. '. r. .., '' ' .-'....45.•'-''''.i ' , I IL.'' '. .11.."Fe.:.•• .• 1. r.- . .*- . • f , • , . 4:- • - • • r• a' ; . '.• 4/8 , • S.. .,. ' 41' • ..., - ..- ... . , .. . , , „ , •. - .. , , • -.. -.. ..- -. 1.&h. • • • ..7 . 1 - I . • . . . ,30 • Mr . • . •• . /...... • - , . /. . • . 4*.: 1..:-.441*`-,-----;,,• ‘401i,i, i..A4-';',.4'11, • * tj, - -,*•. '1-'4- i:iii•W . ..V11.- , .. ,:-.._. . eit i * • . ;'‘', :• :: . ' '.... . '. • I4e: "i`'''r . • ., i , get '. , .. . .i ' .. - , f ' - 'i • ' . d* . '•. . * ' '4E10't, ' ' . . . .. . ' II' • .A. • • . e; 4 1111 Mir 11::- . .!'llifif..:... *... , i, .. - . . • .V.... • ' • .;."...7*.' 4 1 ens .7 .. ... •. - 4- . ..;,,,,:-. • , . . . . ' 14 WIII4n n gran '" /. I It 4.• MOO . . ., .. ,.., ... •P -' .! ..,:, . it,2.• •-, ' '- ''41: 74'- ',, - , • . is 'NNW , • i ,.... •,. . .. . .. , . • '• im, , XVIII,' All, •,',I. ' •*,,- Iliati' i 414;•, 4.'t kri• 1 i lr= . . • iv A .. • . , . • . IL‘L&L 1. -t= . , . " 14r , . talk. ,1,,, wows $ ..„If .,• ,i ' '' 4,_? 4. A 'Ai"' • .. - •,,,••• •' ' 1 .. ' .,01.• Ifirtr• " .. '' '' °' • • 1*11111111111.1FIMV 1 14. '6' - . .• -"" •woo ,,‘ r. - ' et ,. . ,,r a, ,, P• • . "••. •.: i; .•i t '7 ' ' '1 .1.•!..' ) ', ‘11 f . - 1.1*"". •'V •:,.E4aa'4.- . ... 4, , •.'41,4 • ' s' Atf 'k . , to ,,,, .:. . 0,,c,' ,- • ' '\ 01;1110;4. ', . a ,'h • 11,,.I '. {'f, . i s i , 'r tit. ' i • • , i 5..i r , ' I '4 i . • I ,, 1 ''. i'l I .1- • r" 'IA if• , , . „, I, . ,li 0,4. 1 . • ;a. ,Th", , . "t r P " /). " '— r',. 1:.•,,' ,, _. ' ,, 41 - ,.,_ .. .• ' .N..,,,E. i ,iri,„.,, .F- - • ,, . , >�. \ \ \,L � IF % • 1 • /\ / BM•730\ \ • \l•fu �.// � 0 II -7,\ / \ �� \ © 709 ZONE A �/5r \\% C2 11 If 'ZONE A- \\ • ., u Sap _,f/ • �� Middle Branch 77 // / 69N. 6 / /o Tom Mountain 1 • Cem�;..: .1\\•�� Mooreland Ch` o ZONE C ® \ ° • \ ZONE A Cem \, . \ ` °° Cem 1! i \ ___ ' ° 1 •�I / / \ } I / \ \!..// •PRIVATE: K• ; \ t\� �/ ;113 iho. DRIVE e• ;\ 760 // / / t 65 \ I >•• Hill& o \ o'i/• ° • •/ ZO N E C \I clay ' .: N Iv • \\ opt . 12� ZONE A • PRIVATE ROAD ZONE A ' 11! .1 _ ''' ;� • Crossroads \Ij .(/ / rr OTrinity Che II /11 I II -__'�\ �„ PRIVATE DRIVE \• °�` /r I I\\ // / /// __�,'- \\ ��r - PRIVATE '' 9/„........... = / �/� /// / \ \\\-, $- ROAD 1 / I. � // /// / % 7/ / / / °H i 4904,.4 It // ---\ /. /68/ NI J J ' \ ZONE A / • Cem , � P4 \ J�* o \�Qo // E7) a Rc \ �% Ch / -- • 7/�; jII4.0 ii Q' rr -� • ALBEMARLE COUNTY 87 ,k, irtA.,:;" --. . A 1111114 '•11111:211 • N •',1. 3 . A ''''' .4, 8 g imaiAll411 / tril - 52A-*1--------2 ��. 07,1+ SE , �4 0 �� , q 4,4 / 61 (I . .II. ./l'it • 13 7 cd , i 4 al, / CA / `-(-- • . ... �♦ • • ! i 1 i 7 - ; I S2� I ! J vio; /i 1 < • \sBram•, 2 S9 soBl / goo V ..--4-/ ....--"' �� / C 6a 29 � \ )1 'C\ - 59D \ '11 SO I 49A \ 044308 30a /-5\ , ........4,,,,..„-----........ li 49A '.0 Jo '.0• • 30A11 7 �--_� Ye / OE/ 30 \I 11 --- I ��� I � �� 4,- \ , 40 \ 41 f , ` , /— Q —_ 7 ,-/-7y _____---: /t''''''-•, •\ i_____ 445, ' _____-_-_..-_____1_ 4. . 39A 42 — `\ 65 / I/ / I 39 �- 46A 46 `� 1 �. i 1 \ '` Y.- 98 100 ' ,7,/ N----- 1, \ ------/_______ �� ® 657 / _________ N' , ,,_, 7------K----- 7,. / \ 36C .r\ It( 67A ty, I 318 / / , \ 1 / '''`' + A- 0 ( \ • \ I \ —, /6 6 1 / . I Y7 X. \'‘ / 36D 1i'' ' - . ( / 6e \N -* '''.\., - /\ I 7 T ' use 70 / 32 1\ -__________' 7e �!�'76 /75 71) \ \ /74/ / N ' � OJT //' e37� ,�I \ 532A :./7\ 3S 82 1 �BJ': e r I / t 1 91/ 69 BS A- 1 / V:, "ca. / \ /4'..--./ \• 35A j 90 i , S9 34 92P4c 1 • / 33/ \ v \ ..."A97-9J7 • lkex: 105 : 41' e / 1947 i Y, -i081 )ic 05 103 /> -..\ , . J % 4 mil ,\ , to 110 SCALE IN FEET Q .00 i.00 MOO 1.03 SAMUEL MILLER DISTRICT SECTION 99 ♦.♦HARDWARE AGRICULTURAL E FORESTAL DISTRICT