HomeMy WebLinkAboutHearing - Simpson - Farm Help DwellingsDeschutes County Board of Commissioners
1300 NW Wall St., Suite 200, Bend, OR 97701-1960
(541) 388-6570 -Fax (541) 385-3202 -www.deschutes.org
AGENDA REQUEST & STAFF REPORT
For Board Business Meeting of February 25, 2013
DATE: February 19,2013
FROM: Cynthia Smidt Community Development Department 317-3150
TITLE OF AGENDA ITEM:
A public hearing to hear Board initiated review of Planning Division's approval of Cross Anchor S
Ranch LLC's (Steve and Kathy Simpson) land use permit to establish two farm-help dwellings in the
Exclusive Farm Use zone. File Nos. MA-12-1 and AD-II-II.
PUBLIC HEARING ON THIS DATE? Yes
BACKGROUND AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS:
Before the Board is the land use application filed by Cross Anchor S Ranch LLC (Steve and Kathy
Simpson) requesting two farm-help dwellings in the Exclusive Farm Use zone. The Planning Division
approved the application by decision dated December 28,2012. The review ofthis application is in
response to the Board's Order no. 2013-003, to initiate review of the request.
See attached staff memo for further background information.
FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:
Staff time and mailing notices to conduct the public hearing.
RECOMMENDATION & ACTION REOUESTED:
The Board needs to hold a de novo hearing and make a decision based on the record below and the
written and oral testimony to be presented.
ATTENDANCE: Nick Lelack & Cynthia Smidt
DISTRIBUTION OF DOCUMENTS:
Cynthia Smidt
Community Development Department
Planning Division Building Safety DIvision Environmental Soils DIvIsion
P.O. Box 6005 117 NW Lafayette Avenue Bend, Oregon 97708-6005
(541)388-6575 FAX (541)385-1764
http://www.co.deschutes.or.us/cdd/
MEMORANDUM
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
RE:
February 19, 2013
Board of County Commissioners
Cynthia Smidt, Associate Planner
Public Hearing for Administrative Determination request for two farm-help
dwellings in the Exclusive Farm Use zone. File nos. MA-12-1 and AD-11-1.
Before the Board is a request for a land use application to establish two farm-help dwellings on the
subject property. The subject property is within the Exclusive Farm Use zone. The applicant is
Cross Anchor S Ranch LLC. The review of this application is in response to the Board's decision to
initiate review of the request via Order 2013-003, which is based on Planning staff
recommendation.
BACKGROUND
The 834.43-acre subject property is located at 71300 NW Lower Bridge Way and is further
identified on County Assessor tax map 14-12-00 as tax lot 800. The property is owned by Cross
Anchor S Ranch LLC (Steve and Kathy Simpson). The applicants have requested through file
nos. MA-12-1 and AD-11-11, to establish two farm-related dwellings customarily provided in
conjunction with the existing farm use on the subject property. The site currently is developed
with three homes, two of which are manufactured homes. The property owners and primary
farm operators, Steve and Kathy Simpson, will occupy the 1990 Fuqua manufactured dwelling
(North home). The 1932 site built home is proposed to be a Relative Farm Assistance Dwelling,
occupied by Eldon and Marilynn Tobiasson, Kathy Simpson's father and stepmother,
respectively. The request also includes the second manufactured home (South home) be used
as an Accessory Dwelling for farm assistance. Current occupants of this home are David and
Terry Page. This land use application is a result of three Code Enforcement files, C11-28, C11
29, and C11-30. The original complaint questioned the legality of manufactured homes on the
property. Case C11-28 addresses the issue of multiple dwellings on the subject property. Cases
C11-29 and C11-30, respectively, address the issue that manufactured homes were replaced
without proper permits and connected to a septic system without authorization.
In addition to reviewing the request for two farm-help dwellings on the subject property, based on
comments received and the complaint presented to County Code Enforcement, Planning staff
evaluated the historical development patterns (single-family dwellings, in particular) and the legal
Quality Services Perfonned 'with Pride
status of three dwellings on the subject property. Planning staff issued a decision approving the
requestfor two farm-help dwellings on December 28, 2012. On December 31,2013, the decision
was appealed by Jeny L. Aplin (file no. A-12-4). Mr. Aplin listed arguments as to why the
administrative decision should be reversed or reevaluated. On January 2, 2013, Planning
Division staff requested the Board initiate review of the administrative decision through a de
novo review. On January 2, 2013, the Board decided to initiate review and, under its own
motion, decided to hear the review de novo as referenced in Board Order 2013-003.
Mr. Aplin's appeal is based on three assertions of error in the staff decision. The assertions are
listed here and further detailed in the attached Notice of Appeal.
1. The people living in the homes on the Simpson property do not playa pre-dominate role
in the management and fann/ranch use of the property, and their prinicpal income does
not come from the work on the fann as required by EFU rules.
2. The condition of approval does not require enough proof from the Simpson's to prove
that these homes are no longer being used as rentals for non-fann help.
3. Proof that these homes are used by the fann help need to be by payroll stubs, W2
fonns, [and] workman compensation fonns and need to be submitted to Deschutes
County on an annual basis.
Staff believes the Planning Division's administrative decision was sufficiently thorough and
accurate in the review. However, staff recommends the Board discuss the above assertions
and any other issues presented in the hearing.
Background information on the record to date is available for inspection at the Planning Division.
Attachments
1. Staff Decision on file nos. MA-12-4/AD-11-11
2. Notice of Intent to Appeal (file no. A-12-4)
3. Order No. 2013-003
File Nos.: MA-12-1 and AD-11-11 Page 2 of2
Community Development Department
117 MN Lafayette Avenue. Band, OR 97701-1925
(541}3B8-6575 _Fax (541} 385-1764
Planning Division
http://WNW.deschutes.org/cdd
APPEAL APPLICA TION
7J. 00FEE:a?50
EVERY NOTICE OF APPEAL SHALL INCLUDE:
1. A statement describing the specific reasons for the appeal.
2. If the Board of County Commissioners is the Hearings Body, a request for review by the Board stating
the reasons the Board should review the lower decision.
3. If the Board of County Commissioners is the Hearings Body and de novo review is desired, a request
for de novo review by the Board, stating the reasons the Board should provide the de novo review as
provided in Section 22.32.027 of Title 22.
4. If color exhibits are submitted, black and white copies with captions .or shading delineating the color
areas shall also be provided.
It Is the responsibility of the appellant to complete a Notice of Appeal as set forth in Chapter 22.32 of the County Code •
. The Notice of Appeal on the reverse side of this fann must include the Items listed above. Failure to complete all of the
. above may render an appeal invalid. Any additional comments should be included on the Notice of Appeal.
Staff cannot advise a potential appellant as to whether the appellant Is eligible to file an appeal (DCC Section 22.32.010,
.or whether an appeal Is valid. Appellants should seek their own legal advice conceming those issues.
\,.
J 61e,R'? J., /ff£ /, ,J
Mailing Address:""""'--J~::"';;;"--l--_.....::::;...;:w:...-.._L_o_~_6f2....-;..--=-~;...;....:;.:;;;.~~~
M
Appellanfs Signature: --l~~w::::...LL..;~-\--P'<--I--".q!bo'::.""""'=--=---___________
D IN S CTiON 22.32. 24, APPELLANT SHALL PROVIDE A COMPLETE
TRANSCRIPT OF A HEARING APPEALED, FROM RECORDED MAGNETIC TAPES PROVIDED BY THE
PLANNING DIVISIO UPON REQUEST (THERE IS A $5.00 FEE FOR EACH MAGNETIC TAPE RECORD).
APPEL.LANT SHALL SUBMIT THE TRANSCRIPT TO THE PLANNING DMSION NO LATER THAN THE
CLOSE OF THE DAY FIVE (5) DAYS PRIOR TO THE DATE SET FOR THE OE NOVO HEARING OR, FOR
ON-THE-RECORD APPEALS, THE DATE SET FOR RECEIPT OF WRITTEN RECORDS.
(over)
NOTICE OF APPEAL
CD ~6-f6s>p/6-LLU/~ I~ 7f/6-~6-S 6)~
~J!? ~1>'>~,J EkOL>~:cC Pt!> ~f)1 PL-1P
(This' page may be photocopied if additional space is needed.)
REVIEWED
LEGit&UNSEL
For Recording Stamp Only
BEFORE THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF DESCHUTES COUNTY, OREGON
An Order Initiating Review of Administrative '"
Decision in File No. MA-I2-J (AD-I I-II ). ORDER NO. 2013-003'"
WHEREAS, staff issued an Administrative Decision on Application No. MA-12-1 (AD-II-II); and
WHEREAS, Section 22.28.050 of the Deschutes County Code allows the Board of County
Commissioners ("Board") to initiate review of any administrative action within 12 days of the date of mailing of
the final written decision of the Planning Director; and
WHEREAS, the Board has given due consideration as to whether to initiate review of this application;
now therefore,
THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF DESCHUTES COUNTY, OREGON, HEREBY
ORDERS as follows:
Section I. The Board hereby initiates review of application MA-12-1 (AD-I I-I I) pursuant to Title
22 of the Deschutes County Code and other applicable provisions of the County land use ordinances.
Section 2. The review shall be heard de novo.
Section 3. Staff shall set a hearing date and cause notice to be given to all persons or parties
entitled to notice pursuant to DCC 22.24.030 and DCC 22.32.030.
J
Dated this] ~ BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISS)O~ERSOf~.20Il
OF DESCHUTES COUNTY, OREGON
ALA~
TAMMY BANEY, Vice half
ATTEST:
~~
Recording Secretary ANTHONY DEBONE, Commissioner
PAGE 1 OF I -ORDER NO. 2013-003
FINDINGS AND DECISION
FILE NUMBERS: MA-12-1 (AD-11-11)
APPLICANTS: Kathy and Steve Simpson
71300 NW Lower Bridge Way
Terrebonne, Oregon 97760
PROPERTY OWNER: Cross Anchor S Ranch LLC 1
71330 NW Lower Bridge Way
Terrebonne, Oregon 97760
REQUEST: The applicants are requesting approval to establish two farm-
related dwellings on non-high value farmland in the Exclusive
Farm Use zone.
STAFF CONTACT: Cynthia Smidt, Associate Planner
I. APPLICABLE CRITERIA:
Title 18, Deschutes County Zoning Ordinance
A. Chapter 18.16. Exclusive Farm Use Zones
1. Section 18.16.010. Uses Permitted Outright
2. Section 18.16.025. Uses Permitted Subject to the Special Provisions Under DCC
Section 18.16.038 and a Review Under DCC Chapter 18.124 where applicable
3. Section 18.16.050. Standards for dwellings in the EFU zones
4. Section 18.16.060. Dimensional Standards
5. Section 18.16.067. Farm Management Plans
6. Section 18.16.070. Yards
Title 22, Deschutes County Development Procedures Ordinance
1 The applicant, Kathy Simpson, and husband Steve Simpson, have 50 percent each of ownership
interest in Cross Anchor S Ranch, LLC as indicated in the Operating Agreement of Cross Anchor S
Ranch, LLC, which was filed on January 20, 1998 with the Oregon Secretary of State (Registry
No. 613864-89).
MA-12-1 (AD-11-11), Simpson Page 2
II. BASIC FINDINGS:
A. LOCATION: The subject property is located at 71300 NW Lower Bridge Way,
Terrebonne, and is identified on Deschutes County Assessor's map 14-12-00 as tax lot
800. There are two additional addresses assigned to the property and include 71280
and 71340 NW Lower Bridge Way.
B. LOT OF RECORD: Deschutes County has recognized this subject property as a legal
lot of record because it has land use and development permits issued to the property
(see, for example, CU-91-171 and MH3525).
C. ZONING: The subject property is zoned Exclusive Farm Use – Lower Bridge subzone
(EFU-LB). This property is designated Agriculture on the Deschutes County
Comprehensive Plan.
D. LAND USE HISTORY: Based on a comments received by a party of interest and the
citizen complaint presented to County Code Enforcement, the Planning Division will
evaluate the legal status of three dwellings on the subject property in the Conclusionary
Findings under Section 18.16.010. In this Land Use History section, staff will provide a
historical outlook to understand the development patterns (single-family dwellings, in
particular) on the property. Planning staff has reviewed County Assessor’s records,
County building and land use permit information, aerial photos, and miscellaneous
documentation submitted by the applicants and parties of interest. For reference, the site
is currently developed with a 1932 single-family dwelling, two manufactured homes, and
one singlewide mobile home (currently being demolished and removed based on a March
2012 site visit). There are several accessory farm buildings on the property, in addition to
a historic schoolhouse, an uninhabited historic house and bunkhouse (neither structure
meets the definition of a dwelling, as defined in DCC 18.04) that are currently used for
storage, and there are other associated historic buildings. A hand-drawn map, dated June
22, 2011, was submitted with the application materials. This map does not include the
entire 834.43 acres. However, it does illustrate the layout of a majority of the homes
located on the property on June 22, 2011 and on March 21, 2012 when Planning staff
conducted visits to the property. Staff will refer to this map for reference.
• Date Unknown – County Assessor’s records illustrate an old school house on the
property up until the late 1970’s. A historical assessment record indicates this
structure was for general purpose (GP) and noted as “GP (old school house)”.
In addition, an old homestead house, a possible bunkhouse, and other historical
structures are on-site. The homestead and bunkhouse do not meet the definition of
a dwelling as defined in DCC 18.04. These structures are used for storage.
• 1932 – A single-family dwelling was constructed on-site around 1932 and, according
to the Assessor’s records, remodeled in 1975. This home is currently being used as
a single-family dwelling. The applicants have requested a Relative Farm Assistance
Dwelling for this 1932 dwelling (files MA-12-1 and AD-11-11)
MA-12-1 (AD-11-11), Simpson Page 3
• 1973 – A 1973 Statler manufactured (mobile) home (20 feet by 42 feet) was placed on
the property sometime in the 1970’s. 2 However, permit history is incomplete during
the early 1970’s. The residential appraisal from the 1979 County Assessor’s records
indicates the Statler home on the property. Furthermore, the mobile home was
transferred to a “personal property” tax account in 1986. The Assessor’s records
indicate that this home is no longer on the property as confirmed by a site visit.
• 1977-1978 – A 1978 Fuqua manufactured home (23 feet by 60 feet) was placed on
the property. County permit records from 1977 show a plumbing permit (77-
476MHP) and septic permit (09-1770-77 or S18814). County records also indicate a
possible placement permit, MH3525. Assessor’s records show this home, as
‘personal property’, on the land until 1986 with notes of its removal on record.
• 1981 – County permit records indicate two manufactured home permits at this time.
o Permit no. 81-408MHP (or MH3556) and septic 09-840-81 was for a single-wide
manufactured home and noted to be replacing an existing manufactured home.
The home proposed in 1981 may have been replacing the above noted 1973
Statler home (the 1978 Fuqua also noted above did not leave the County records
until approximately 1986). The site plan submitted with the 1981 permit
illustrates this home was placed in the general vicinity of the main 1932 home.
This manufactured home no longer exists on the property.
o Permit no. 81-92MHP (or MH3564) and septic 09-192-81 (or S19690) was for a
14-foot by 70-foot manufactured home and noted for “temp use emergency
purpose.” The site plan submitted with the 1981 County permit(s) coincides with
the map referenced here. This home no longer exists on the subject property.
According to the map submitted by the applicants, this home is noted as the
“1981 Gramma until approx 1983, No home on this site since 1983 .”
• 1984 – Permit nos. 700120 (or MH2053) and septic 09-48-84 (or S9769) were issued
at this time for a 24-foot by 60-foot doublewide manufactured home. The 1984
permit notes the following, “A mobile home has been used as a farm dwelling since
1977.” There are no historical on-ground photos of this home. Staff believes this
homesite is noted as the “ Mobile Home Grandfathered in ” on the submitted map and
has its own access driveway from NW Lower Bridge Way, located south of the other
development on-site. For ease of reference, staff will refer to this home site as the
“South” home. The manufactured home currently located at this site is
approximately 28 feet by 48 feet, which is different from what was approved in 1984.
County records do not show building, septic, or land use permits obtained on the
current house in this location. This homesite is the subject of a code enforcement
complaint and is reviewed below. Through file no. MA-12-1, the applicants are
requesting approval of this manufactured home as an Accessory Dwelling for farm
help in conjunction with the residents of the South home.
• 1985 – An aerial photo from 1985 illustrates structures located on the property where
homes are noted in County records. The structures visible in the photo do not
appear to match some dwellings currently on-site.
2 A 1984 permit states, “A mobile home has been used as a farm dwelling since 1977.” Staff is unsure if
the 1973 Statler home is the one referenced in the 1984 permit noted in this decision.
MA-12-1 (AD-11-11), Simpson Page 4
• 1991 – Theodore Williams, applicant and son of the then property owner Don
Williams, received approval of a Conditional Use permit for a secondary accessory
farm dwelling on the subject property (file no. CU-91-171). In the County decision,
the proposal states the following.
The applicant is proposing to add a second secondary accessory dwelling for farm
help on the property. There is already a primary site built farm dwelling, and existing
manufactured home as an accessory residence, and several accessory structures
(barn, shop, etc.). The proposed residence would be located in the vicinity of the
existing residences and accessory structures. [Emphasis added]
On page 4 of the 1991 decision one criterion states, “ no more than one secondary
accessory farm dwelling is permitted for each 40 acres of the farm unit. ” The County
recognized in this 1991 decision that there is one accessory farm dwelling per 40
acres. Based on the decision in CU-91-171, at that time, two manufactured homes
were recognized as legal secondary accessory dwellings. The home approved
through CU-91-171 is noted as “ CU-91-171 Mobile Home ” on the submitted map.
For reference, staff will refer to this site as the “North” home.
In 1991, a manufactured home placement permit, MH11451 (septic S31430), was
issued for a 1,308 square foot 1992 Fuqua home. County Assessor’s records indicate
this Fuqua home was removed in August 1995. However, there is currently a dwelling
(1990 Fuqua that is about 1,973 square feet and further described below) at this
location. Assessor’s records also include a photo of the manufactured home, which
does not match any existing manufactured home on-site. The North home is subject
to a code enforcement complaint. Through applications MA-12-1 and AD-11-11, the
applicants intend this home to be the primary farm-related dwelling on the property.
• 1993 – The County Assessor’s records indicate the presence of the 1932 site built
home and two manufactured homes, taxed as personal property, on the property. The
Assessor’s information also notes at this time that the property has three home sites.
• 1995 – Several events occurred during this year.
o May 1, 1995 – Emerald Exchange Co. enters a Memorandum of Real Estate
Contract of Sale (County Document No. 95-14697) with Donald and Myrtl
Williams. 3 This contract included the sale of the property. Additionally, the
contract included the sale of several items used in the farm operation such as
irrigation lines, motors, pumps and baler, cattle chute, irrigation pipe trailer,
among other things. However, the contract did not list personal property such as
manufactured homes as noted in the 1993 Assessor’s records.
o May – October 1995 – A statement signed by Myrtl Williams, dated March 16,
2012, and witnessed by two individuals, was submitted into the record. The
statement notes the following.
The property at 71300 Lower Bridge Rd in Terrebonne Oregon was sold to Steve
Simpson in 1995. At the time it was sold there were no mobile homes left on the
property or when Don & Myrtl Williams left the property….
3 In 1997, Emerald Exchange Co. then transferred an undivided 51 percent interest of the property to K.
Steve Simpson through County Doc. 97-28013. However, according to the submitted application,
Steve and Kathy Simpson purchased and moved to the property in 1995.
MA-12-1 (AD-11-11), Simpson Page 5
o June 3, 1995 – A party of interest submitted an aerial photo dated June 3, 1995
into the file. The aerial photo illustrates a long and narrow manufactured home
with a tan roof at the South homesite. The dimensions of the structure likely
match those permitted in 1984, which was about 24 feet by 60 feet.
o August 23, 1995 – The County Assessor’s records indicate the 1992 Fuqua
(related to file CU-91-171) was removed from the property and relocated to
Jefferson County. The Oregon Department of Transportation issued a trip permit
(permit MH 293260) on August 23, 1995. The County Assessor received a copy
of the trip permit on September 11, 1995.
o August 28, 1995 – A statement signed by Ted Williams, dated March 16, 2012,
and witnessed by two individuals, was submitted into the record. Mr. Williams
states the following.
On August 28th 1995 the Mobile Home next to the hay barn on the Williams
Ranch on 71300 Lower Bridge Road was moved to a new site in Crooked River
Ranch. There were only 2 mobile homes on the property & the other mobile
home was my sisters & was originally placed there for her to take care of our
parents and was removed prior to the sale of the Ranch to the Simpsons. The
only home on the property after the sale to the Simpson was the old stick built
ranch house.
o October 1995 – Submitted into the record was a letter noting that neighbor Glen
Cooper assisted Lavina Williams, daughter of Don and Myrtl Williams, in
removing/moving the decking that surrounded the manufactured home she lived
in before the property sold to Simpson. 4 Moving the decking allowed the mobile
home to be removed.
• 1996 – The applicants submitted Oregon Vehicle Certificate of Title for a 1996
Redman manufactured home (Vehicle Identification Number (VIN) 11823239). The
certificate was processed on July 15, 1996. The certification indicates the home
location 71300 NW Lower Bridge Way (subject property). In addition, the applicants
submitted the vehicle registration for the 1996 Redman manufactured home, which
was issued on June 28, 1996. Both these documents show the owner of the home
as Steve and Kathy Simpson. According to the applicants, the 1996 Redman was
placed in the South home location in 1996. County records do not show building,
septic, or land use permits obtained for the placement of the 1996 Redman. This
home continues to exist in this location.
• 1998 – The County Assessor’s records indicate the presence of the 1932 site built
home and two personal property homes, including a 1990 Fuqua home. The photo
documentation from the County Assessor’s records, dated September 15, 1998,
visually matches the 1990 Fuqua home in the North home location. The Assessor’s
records note the dwelling to be approximately 1,973 square feet with the main portion
of the house being 25 feet by 62 feet.
The applicants submitted Oregon Vehicle Certificate of Title for a 1990 Fugua
manufactured home (VIN 11075). The certificate was processed on June 25, 1998.
The certification notes the home location at 71300 NW Lower Bridge Way (subject
property). This certification has the owner of the home listed as Steve and Kathy
4 This letter was not written or submitted by Glen Cooper himself.
MA-12-1 (AD-11-11), Simpson Page 6
Simpson. According to the applicants, the 1990 Fugua is the manufactured home
currently located at the North home site. As indicated previously, the North homesite
is subject to a code enforcement complaint. The applicants have indicated, through
file nos. MA-12-1 and AD-11-11 that this home is the primary residence on the
property. According to the applicants, the 1990 Fugua was placed on-site in 1998 in
the North home location and is the currently existing manufactured home in that
location. As indicated previously, County records do not show proper building, septic,
or land use permits obtained for the 1990 Fuqua home.
• 1998 to Present – The County Assessor’s records note three on-site development
areas, which are typically associated with home sites having septic, electric, etc.
• 2000 to 2009 – Aerial photos from 2000, 2005, and 2009 illustrate structures on the
property where the existing on-site homes are currently located. The photos further
illustrate the same appearance as that of dwellings currently on-site. An aerial photo
dated August 2, 2004 was submitted into the record by a party of interest. The aerial
photo illustrates a short manufactured home with either gray or white roof at the
South home site. The dimensions of the structure likely match what is currently in
place, which is about 28 feet by 48 feet.
• 2011 – Based on a code enforcement complaint regarding several manufactured
homes placed on the subject property without proper permits, the applicants request
approval of the land use permits under review here, file nos. MA-12-1 and AD-11-11,
for the approval of two farm-related dwellings.
• 2011 – A submitted code enforcement complaint indicated a fourth manufactured
home east of the main developed area of the property. Based on a site visit in March
2012, a singlewide manufactured home was in the process of being demolished.
The County Code Enforcement Division is reviewing the removal of this dwelling.
• 2012 – Based on the above information, staff preliminarily found the North and South
homes were replaced without proper permits. As a result, on November 20, 2012
through file MA-12-1, the applicants submitted a request to modify application AD-
11-11. The modification includes the request that the South home be approved as
an Accessory Dwelling for farm help. In addition, the modification includes the
request to switch the Relative Farm Assistance Dwelling from the North home to the
1932 home.
E. SITE DESCRIPTION: The subject property is approximately 834.43 acres with varying
topography. The property abuts NW Lower Bridge Way along its western boundary.
The parcel has approximately 189 irrigated acres from Three Sisters Irrigation District.
Irrigation is used for the production of grass and alfalfa hay (approximately 1,000 tons)
and is distributed using eight wheel- and seven hand-lines and two pivots. Irrigated
lands are located in the southwest and northeastern regions of the property. Ranching
operations on-site, according to the applicants, include livestock of approximately 35
head of horses, 35-75 head of cattle, and an average of 200-275 head of Rocky
Mountain Elk. Approximately seven miles of fencing encompass and cross the subject
property. Native vegetation consisting of trees, shrubs, and grasses are throughout the
property in those areas not irrigated. Development on-site is located primarily in the
southwestern region of the property, within 850 feet of NW Lower Bridge Way. The site
MA-12-1 (AD-11-11), Simpson Page 7
is currently developed with a 1932 single-family dwelling, two manufactured homes and
a one singlewide uninhabitable mobile home. The site also has several accessory farm
buildings and historic structures including a historic schoolhouse, uninhabited
homestead house and bunkhouse, and other associated historic buildings. A circle
driveway provides two driveway access points from NW Lower Bridge Way to a majority
of the on-site development, including two of the dwellings. Approximately 350 feet south
of the circle driveway is another driveway access to one manufactured home. According
to the Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) for Deschutes County and the National
Wetlands Inventory (NWI), respectively, the subject property is not located in the 100-
year flood plain and contains wetlands. As illustrated on the NWI map, small pond-like
wetlands are located throughout the 834.43 acres. However, the proposal does not
impact mapped wetlands.
F. SURROUNDING LAND USES: The area surrounding the subject property consists of
farm-zoned properties of varying sizes. The land abutting the property to the south and
east are farm-zoned properties, either developed or vacant. The property abuts NW
Lower Bridge Way along its western boundary. Properties beyond NW Lower Bridge
Way are either developed or vacant and zoned for farm use. Surrounding properties
involved in farm-use that contain irrigated pastures and livestock. Zoning in the area is a
mixture of Exclusive Farm Use (EFU-LB and EFU-TE).
G. SOILS: According to Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) maps of the
area there are six soil units mapped on the subject property and include 31A –
Deschutes sandy loam, 100C – Redcliff-Lickskillet complex, 101D – Redcliff-Lickskillet-
Rock Outcrop complex, 106D – Redslide-Lickskillet complex, 138B – Stukel sandy loam,
and 141C – Stukel-Deschutes-Rock Outcrop complex. Soil Unit 31A is designated high
value soil when irrigated. This soil unit is located in the northeastern region of the
property and is associated with one area of irrigated lands. Soil Unit 31A is not located
near the proposed farm related dwelling. The other five soil units listed above are not
designated high value soils when irrigated.
H. PROPOSAL: The applicants propose to establish two farm-related dwellings
customarily provided in conjunction with the existing farm use on the property.
According to the application materials, the property owners and primary farm operators,
Steve and Kathy Simpson, will occupy the 1990 Fuqua manufactured dwelling (referred
to as the North home). Through files MA-12-1 and AD-11-11, the applicant proposes the
1932 site built home be a Relative Farm Assistance Dwelling. Kathy Simpson’s father
and stepmother, Eldon and Marilynn Tobiasson, will be the farm help who will occupy
the site-built home. The request also includes the proposal for an Accessory Dwelling
for farm assistance at the South home location. Current occupants of this home are
David and Terry Page. The applicant has submitted a burden of proof statement, and
other documents, and a plot plan, which are incorporated herein.
This land use application is a result of Code Enforcement files C11-28, C11-29, and
C11-30. The original complaint questioned the legality of manufactured homes on the
property. Case C11-28 addresses the issue of multiple dwellings on the subject property.
Cases C11-29 and C11-30, respectively, address the issue that manufactured homes
were replaced without proper permits and connected to a septic system without
authorization.
MA-12-1 (AD-11-11), Simpson Page 8
I. PUBLIC AGENCY COMMENTS: The Planning Division mailed notice to several
agencies and received the following comments for files AD-11-11 and the modification of
MA-12-1:
1. City of Redmond Fire and Rescue: Not in [Redmond’s] fire district.
2. Deschutes County Assessor: Currently under [farm tax] deferral.
3. Deschutes County Transportation Planner: In regarding to file AD-11-11, the
following comments were submitted by Peter Russell, Senior Transportation Planner,
on October 24, 2011.
I have reviewed the transmittal materials to create a relative farm dwelling on EFU land
on an 843-acre parcel on the NE corner of Holmes/Lower Bridge Road. The parcel is
located at 14-12-00, TL 800. The 8th edition of the ITE Manual indicates a single-
family home generates 9.57 trips per day. As this application will generate less than
50 new weekday trips, under DCC 17.16.115(C)(4) no traffic analysis is required.
As I understand it, while the dwelling is a pre-existing use, there is a code enforcement
case as the dwelling was sited without permits. In code enforcement situations, the
County has approached the land use as if the property were undeveloped. There was
a secondary home approved under CU-91-171, which was followed by a succession of
manufactured mobile homes being placed, removed, and replaced. While a
secondary home was approved, if the time between the removal of the use and then
the re-establishment of the secondary home use was greater than two years, then a
transportation system development charge (SDC) is applicable.
Deschutes County has developed a countywide transportation system development
charge (SDC). BOCC Resolution 2008-059 sets the SDC for a single-family home.
Beginning July 1 and until June 30, 2012, therefore the SDC would be $3,528.
STAFF COMMENT: Mr. Russell submitted additional comments regarding File
MA-12-1. The following comments were submitted on December 19, 2012.
I have reviewed the transmittal for MA-12-1/AD-11-11 for a farm assistance dwelling
at 71300 NW Lower Bridge Way, Terrebonne, aka 14-12-00, TL 800. Deschutes
County Code (DCC) 17.16.115(C) requires traffic analysis if the use will generate
more than 50 new weekday trips. The 9th edition of the Institute of Traffic Engineers
(ITE) Trip Generation handbook indicates a single-family home (Land Use 210) will
generate 9.52 trips a day. Even if both houses are combined the land use will
generate 19.04 trips, which is under the traffic study threshold. Also, if both houses
were legally established, then they would be considered pre-existing and no traffic
study would be required.
Board of County Commissioners (BOCC) Resolution 2008-059 as amended sets a
transportation System Development Charge (SDC) of $3,673 per p.m. peak hour trip.
Normally, SDC’s are triggered by building permits. If the use is illegal and is being
brought into compliance via land use, then as a matter of policy the Board has found
SDC’s apply. So, in this case, if the dwellings were legally established, then no SDC
applies; if the uses were not legally established, then an SDC would apply. The
single-family home SDC is $3,673.
MA-12-1 (AD-11-11), Simpson Page 9
4. Oregon Department of Forestry: Comments were submitted by Brian Huff, Deputy
State Fire Marshal, on April 20, 2012. Mr. Huff’s comments are below:
Since the proposal is located outside of the structural protection response for any Fire
Department, they are not obligated to respond in the event of a structure fire. If a
structural fire department does respond to an emergency they have the legal authority
to bill the responsible parties for that response. Local wildland agencies should be
contacted for the appropriate wildland response if any.
Acceptance in to a fire district is always dependent on the fire department; they are not
required to annex anyone unless they meet the minimum water supply, access
requirements and reasonable response requirements. I recommend using the state
fire code requirements for access and water supply in the rural area and also following
Senate Bill 360 for spacing any structures from the natural surrounding wildland fuels.
This would assist fire departments in the event of a State declared fire emergency and
the building may be protected in that declared emergency. The use of noncombustible
siding and roofing, if not already required by another code, is also strongly
recommended.
In the event of a County or State declared emergency for fire, the applicants structures
may be declared “undefendable” for the protection from wildfire, unless certain
precautions have been made to mitigate the wildland fuels. Recommendations can be
made through the Office of State Fire Marshal or the local wildland agency office.
Under ORS 476.280 fire permits as it relates to permission to burn, can only be
obtained from the County Commission or their designee. If protected by the Oregon
Department of Forestry, permission to burn must also be obtained from them. In the
event that a fire permitted or not becomes out of control, and it requires suppression
by a fire protection agency, the owner/occupant becomes responsible for suppression
cost and any other administrative cost under ORS 476.280 and 476.290.
I recommend that a fire sprinkler system be installed to minimize and extinguish
interior fires that may occur. Also, the installation of a fire sprinkler system would allow
for safe exiting in the event of a fire and should lower the occupant’s fire insurance.
5. Oregon Watermaster – District 11: The subject property has irrigation rights on it. If
applicant builds on irrigated lands, they should consider filing a transfer to avoid
possible cancellation due to non-use.
6. The following agencies did not respond or had no comments: Central Electric
Cooperative, Deschutes County Building Safety Division, Deschutes County Code
Enforcement, Deschutes County Environmental Soils, Deschutes County Forester,
Deschutes County Property Address Coordinator, Pacific Power and Light, and
Watermaster – District 11.
J. PUBLIC COMMENTS: The Planning Division sent notice of this proposal to all property
owners within 750 feet of the subject property. Written comments and supporting
documents were received and are incorporated in the record by reference and
addressed below in this decision. 5
5 Several comments submitted into the record state that the applicants/owners are falsifying information.
However, not all of these comments are supported with evidence. Pursuant to DCC 22.24.050, the
burden of proof rests on the applicant.
MA-12-1 (AD-11-11), Simpson Page 10
K. NOTICE REQUIREMENT: For both AD-11-11 and MA-12-1, the applicants complied
with the posted notice requirements of Section 22.23.030(B) of Deschutes County Code
(DCC) Title 22. The applicants submitted a Land Use Action Sign Affidavit for MA-12-1,
dated December 7, 2012, indicating the applicants posted notice of the land use action
on December 5, 2012.
L. REVIEW PERIOD: The application for AD-11-11 was submitted to the Planning Division
on October 3, 2011. An incomplete application letter was sent on October 28, 2011 and
the applicant responded on March 16, 2012. The applicant placed the 150-day review
clock on hold beginning June 29, 2012. The applicants applied for a Modification of
Application on November 20, 2012 thus agreeing to restart the 150-day review clock for
file AD-11-11 on the submitted date. The Planning Division deemed the Modification of
Application request complete and accepted it for review on December 20, 2012. As of
the date of this decision, December 28, 2012, staff estimates 111 days remain on the
150-day review clock for this land use application (April 18, 2013).
III. CONCLUSIONARY FINDINGS:
Title 18, Deschutes County Zoning Ordinance.
A. CHAPTER 18.16. EXCLUSIVE FARM ZONE
1. Section 18.16.010. Uses Permitted Outright.
The following uses and their accessory uses are permitted outright:
J. Alteration, restoration or replacement of a lawfully established dwelling
that:
1. Has intact exterior walls and roof structure;
2. Has indoor plumbing consisting of a kitchen sink, toilet and bathing
facilities connected to a sanitary waste disposal system;
3. Has interior wiring for interior lights;
4. Has a heating system; and
5. In the case of replacement, is removed, demolished or converted to an
allowable use within three months of completion of the replacement
dwelling. A replacement dwelling may be sited on any part of the same
lot or parcel, and shall comply with all applicable siting standards. If
the dwelling to be replaced is located on a portion of the lot or parcel
not zoned for exclusive farm use, the applicant, as a condition of
approval, shall execute and record in the deed records for the county a
deed restriction prohibiting the siting of a dwelling on that portion of
the lot or parcel. The restriction imposed shall be irrevocable unless a
statement of release is placed in the deed records for the county. The
release shall be signed by the county or its designee and state that the
provisions of the statute and county code have changed to allow the
siting of another dwelling; and
6. The replacement dwelling is subject to OAR 660-033-0130(30), as follows:
The County shall require as a condition of approval of a single-family
replacement dwelling that the landowner for the dwelling sign and
record in the deed records for the county a document binding the
landowner, and the landowner’s successors in interest, prohibiting
MA-12-1 (AD-11-11), Simpson Page 11
them from pursuing a claim for relief or cause of action alleging injury
from farming or forest practices for which no action or claim is allowed
under ORS 30.936 to 30.937.
1. An applicant for a replacement dwelling may request a deferred
replacement dwelling permit.
a. The dwelling to be replaced shall be removed or demolished within
three months after the deferred replacement permit is issued.
b. A deferred replacement permit allows construction of the
replacement dwelling at any time. If, however, the established
dwelling is not removed or demolished within three months after the
deferred replacement permit is issued, the replacement permit
becomes void.
c. The replacement dwelling must comply with applicable building
codes, plumbing codes, sanitation codes and other requirements
relating to health and safety or to siting at the time of construction.
d. A deferred replacement permit may not be transferred, by sale or
otherwise, except by the applicant to the spouse or child of the
applicant.
FINDING : Regarding existing dwellings that are habitable and occupied with
residents, the subject property contains a site-built single-family dwelling and two
manufactured homes. The history detailed in the Basic Findings section above is
complicated. Although not completely clear, staff finds that during the time that Don
and Myrtl Williams owned the property, the County records do provide good insight
into permits obtained for most development on the property. 6 Approximately 1995
when the Williams sold the property, the permit history becomes muddled. Based on
the submitted materials by the applicant, code enforcement history, and comments
submitted into the record for files AD-11-11 and MA-12-1, staff will review these
three dwellings to determine whether they have been lawfully established.
1932 Home
Staff finds the 1932 site built home is a lawfully established residence on the
property as it was established prior to the placement of any manufactured home on
the property and prior to permit requirements. 7 Furthermore, County records
acknowledge the existence of intact exterior walls and roof structure, indoor
plumbing, heating system, and interior wiring as noted in the criteria above. The
applicants request that the 1932 site built home be a Relative Farm Assistance
Dwelling for Kathy Simpson’s father and stepmother, Eldon and Marilynn Tobiasson,
who will be the farm help who will occupy this home. Compliance with DCC 18.16
for a relative farm assistance dwelling is addressed below in this report.
North Home
Regarding the North homesite, based on County records and the written statements
by Myrtl Williams and Ted Williams, staff finds the manufactured home approved with
permit CU-91-171 was removed in 1995. County records noted on September 15,
6 Don Williams purchased the property in the 1950’s.
7 The original homestead house was the first dwelling on the property. However, it appears uninhabitable
and does not meet the definition of a dwelling as defined by Deschutes County Code. Staff recognizes
the home purely as a historic structure on the property.
MA-12-1 (AD-11-11), Simpson Page 12
1998 the presence of a 1990 Fugua manufactured home. The applicants submitted
a Vehicle Certificate of Title from the State of Oregon for the 1990 Fugua
manufactured home that was processed on June 25, 1998. In addition, the
certification notes the home location would be 71300 Lower Bridge Way, which is the
subject property, and the owner as Steve and Kathy Simpson. According to the
applicants, the 1990 Fugua replaces the home that was previously approved through
CU-91-171, and is the same home that is currently located at the North homesite.
As indicated previously, the North homesite is subject to a code enforcement
complaint because the manufactured home was placed without benefit of building,
septic, or land use permits. The applicants acknowledge this replacement and thus
have requested a Relative Farm Assistance Dwelling with this permit (AD-11-11 and
modified with MA-12-1) in order to legitimize this dwelling. Through file MA-12-1, the
applicants indicate the North homesite will be the primary residence and the site built
home noted above is to be the Relative Farm Assistance Dwelling. Based on the
above information, the manufactured home that exists at the North home location
was established without proper permits. It will be made a condition of any approval
that the applicants obtain any necessary permits from the Deschutes County Building
Division and Environmental Soils Division prior to initiation of use.
South Home
Regarding the home referred to as South home, staff first notes that the County
acknowledged a farm help dwelling on the property in 1984, dating the use back to
1977. This pre-existing use is acknowledged further in permit CU-91-171. Staff
believes that this previous farm help dwelling was established without a specific land
use decision because the zoning regulations at the time (1984 and 1991), Public Law
5 (PL-5) and Public Law 15 (PL-15), permitted such uses outright. A June 1995 aerial
photo illustrates a home that matches the size description (24 feet by 60 feet) of the
manufactured home permitted in 1984. As noted above, Myrtl Williams indicates that
all manufactured homes on the property were removed in 1995. 8 It is not until 1998
that two manufactured homes were noted with the County Assessor’s office. 9 These
two homes are visible when viewing aerial photos starting in the year 2000. 10 The
manufactured home currently in the South home location is approximately 28 feet by
48 feet, which is slightly wider and shorter than the home permitted in 1984. Staff
found this difference to be evident when viewing the aerial photos. In addition, the
aerial photos illustrate both homes in relatively the same footprint on the property,
which makes staff believe the two homes were not on the property in this location at
the same time. Based on this information, staff finds the South homesite became
vacant sometime after June 3, 1995 and replaced without permits before September
15, 1998, when it showed up on the County Assessor’s records. Based on this
discrepancy, the applicants submitted an Oregon Vehicle Certificate of Title for a 1996
Redman manufactured home that was processed on July 15, 1996. According to the
certification, the home location was noted as 71300 Lower Bridge Way. The applicant
8 Although a contract was entered in May 1995 for the Simpsons to buy the property, the history documented
in this case give staff reason to believe that the Williams family did not move off the property until August
1995 or later.
9 Although the County Assessor's records indicate the removal of a home in 1995, an actual physical site
visit to the property does not occur until 1998. Therefore, County records do not show placement of a
manufactured home that may have occurred between the site visits of 1993 and 1998.
10 Planning staff did not have access to aerial photos taken between June 1995 photo and the year 2000.
MA-12-1 (AD-11-11), Simpson Page 13
also submitted an Oregon vehicle registration for the 1996 Redman manufactured
home. The registration was issued on June 28, 1996. Both documents show the
owners of the home as Steve and Kathy Simpson. The applicants state that the 1996
Redman was placed on-site in 1996 in the South home location. In addition, the
applicant states that the 1996 Redman is the manufactured home that currently
resides in the South home location. The Code Enforcement Complaint form dated
March 9, 2011 that was submitted into the record indicates the southernmost
manufactured home was replaced in 1995 with a doublewide manufactured home.
The applicants state that this home is the 1996 Redman. Furthermore, the March 16,
2011 notes of a conversation County Code Enforcement staff had with a party of
interest, Jerry Aplin, indicates that the Mr. Aplin lived for nine years in the
manufactured home that was illegally replaced in 1995. The applicants state and staff
agrees, that although the year (1995) quoted by Mr. Aplin is one year (1996) off from
when the dwelling was actually placed on the property, it is clear that the home was on
the property for a considerable period of time prior to 1998. This is further supported
by the certificate of title submitted by the applicant. Therefore, this manufactured
home is not a lawfully established dwelling. The applicants acknowledge this
replacement. Therefore, they request an Accessory Dwelling for farm help through
file MA-12-1 in order to legitimize the South home.
2. Section 18.16.025. Uses Permitted Subject to the Special Provisions Under DCC
Section 18.16.038 and a Review Under DCC Chapter 18.124 where applicable.
A. Dwellings customarily provided in conjunction with farm use (farm-related
dwellings), subject to DCC 18.16.050.
B. A relative farm assistance dwelling, subject to DCC 18.16.050.
FINDING : The applicants have applied for approval of a Relative Farm Assistance
Dwelling and an Accessory Dwelling on an 834.43-acre ranch in the EFU-LB zone.
The subject property contains approximately 189 acres of irrigated land that is used
for the production of grass and alfalfa hay. Irrigated lands are located in the
southwestern and northeastern regions of the property. According to the applicants,
the ranching operations on the property consists of approximately 35 head of horses,
35-75 head of cattle, and an average of 200-275 head of Rocky Mountain Elk. This
proposal is being reviewed against the approval criteria in DCC 18.16.050(D), which
is addressed below in this decision. Section 18.16.038 has no criteria that apply to
the proposed farm help dwellings, and consequently no findings for the proposed
dwelling are necessary under that section.
3. Section 18.16.050. Standards for dwellings in the EFU zones.
Dwellings listed in DCC 18.16.025 and 18.16.030 may be allowed under the
conditions set forth below for each kind of dwelling, and all dwellings are subject
to the landowner for the property upon which the dwelling is placed, signing and
recording in the deed records for the County, a document binding the landowner,
and the landowner’s successors in interest, prohibiting them from pursuing a
claim for relief or cause of action alleging injury from farming or forest practices
for which no action or claim is allowed under ORS 30.936 or 30.937.
FINDING: The applicants shall be required as a condition of any approval to sign
and record a Farm and Forest Management Easement in the deed records for the
MA-12-1 (AD-11-11), Simpson Page 14
County. The document will bind the landowner and the landowner's successors in
interest, prohibiting them from pursuing a claim for relief or cause of action alleging
injury from farming or forest practices for which no action or claim is allowed under
ORS 30.396 or 30.397.
C. Accessory dwelling. A dwelling, including a manufactured home in
accordance with DCC 18.116.070, is considered to be an accessory farm
dwelling customarily provided in conjunction with farm use when:
1. The accessory dwelling meets the following criteria:
a. The accessory farm dwelling will be occupied by a person or
persons who will be principally engaged in the farm use of the land
and whose seasonal or year-round assistance in the management of
the farm use, such as planting, harvesting, marketing or caring for
livestock, is or will be required by the farm operator; and
FINDING: The applicant requests approval of an Accessory Dwelling at the South
home location. The applicants have indicated that the Accessory Dwelling will be
occupied by a person or persons engaged in the farm use of the land. Current
occupants of this home are David and Terry Page. The current occupants provide
both seasonal (spring/summer months) and year-round assistance in the
fundamental management of the farm use, as required by the farm operator. Duties
include dehorning assistance, calving records and management, irrigation and
livestock water monitoring, weed and grounds management, bookkeeping, and farm
equipment maintenance. A condition of approval requires that the Accessory
Dwelling shall be occupied only by a person or persons who are principally engaged
in the farm use as required by the farm operator.
Based on a foregoing finding, the manufactured home that exists at the South home
location was established without proper permits. It will be made a condition of
approval that the applicants obtain any necessary permits from the Deschutes
County Building Division and Environmental Soils Division prior to initiation of use of
the Accessory Dwelling.
b. The accessory farm dwelling will be located:
i. On the same lot or parcel as the primary farm dwelling; or
ii. On the same tract as the primary farm dwelling when the lot or
parcel on which the accessory farm dwelling will be sited is
consolidated into a single parcel with all other contiguous lots
and parcels in the tract; or
iii. On a lot or parcel on which the primary farm dwelling is not
located, when the accessory farm dwelling is limited to only a
manufactured home and a deed restriction substantially in
compliance with the form set forth in Exhibit A to DCC 18.16 is
filed with the County Clerk. The deed restriction shall require the
manufactured dwelling to be removed when the lot or parcel is
conveyed to another party. The manufactured home may remain
if it is reapproved under DCC 18.16.050; or
iv. On a lot or parcel on which the primary farm dwelling is not
located, when the accessory farm dwelling is located on a lot or
parcel at least the size of the applicable minimum lot size under
DCC 18.16.065 and the lot or parcel complies with the gross farm
MA-12-1 (AD-11-11), Simpson Page 15
income requirements in DCC 18.16.050(A)(3) or (B)(1), whichever
is applicable; and
FINDING : The subject property consists of 834.43-acres. The primary farm dwelling
is located on the subject property at the North home location. The applicant is
proposing to use the existing manufactured home, known as the South home, for the
Accessory Dwelling.
c. There is no other dwelling on land zoned EFU owned by the farm
operator that is vacant or currently occupied by persons not
working on the subject farm or ranch and that could reasonably be
used as an accessory farm dwelling; and
FINDING: There is no other dwelling on land zoned EFU owned by the property
owners that could be used as an accessory farm dwelling.
2. The primary farm dwelling to which the proposed dwelling would be
accessory meets one of the following:
a. On land not identified as high-value farmland, the primary farm
dwelling is located on a farm or ranch operation that is currently
employed in farm use and produced $32,500 in gross annual sales in
the last two years or three of the last five years. In determining
gross income, the cost of purchased livestock shall be deducted
from the total gross income attributed to the tract; or
b. On land identified as high-value farmland, the primary farm dwelling
is located on a farm or ranch operation that is currently employed
for farm use, and produced at least $80,000 in gross annual income
from the sale of farm products in the last two years or three of the
last five years. Gross income shall be calculated by deducting the
cost of purchased livestock from the total gross income attributed to
the tract; and
FINDING: The subject property consists of six soil units. Soil Unit 31A, in the
northeastern region of the property, is designated high value when irrigated. However,
a majority of the property, which includes the five other soil units (100C, 101D, 106D,
138B, and 141C) are not designated high value soils when irrigated. Based on this
information, the subject property is not considered high value farmland.
The applicants submitted an accountants’ report and financial statements for the
years ending December 2011, 2010 and 2009. These documents indicate that the
applicant made the following gross income for those years, respectively:
$246,916.96, $291,266.02, and $201,789.34.11 The applicant has had a gross farm
income well over the $32,500 amount listed in (a) above
3. A lot or parcel approved for an accessory farm dwelling under DCC
18.16.050 shall not be approved for a division of land except as
provided for in DCC 18.16.055(B).
11 The gross income does not include the deduction of the cost of purchased livestock. Cross Anchor S
Ranch is primarily an elk ranch that is regulated by ODFW. The selling and buying of live elk is restricted.
MA-12-1 (AD-11-11), Simpson Page 16
FINDING: The applicant is not proposing a division of land with this application. The
subject property, at 834.43-acres, would be eligible for a land division under the
provisions in DCC Chapter 18.16.055(B).
4. An accessory farm dwelling approved pursuant to this section cannot
later be used to satisfy the requirements for a nonfarm dwelling
pursuant to DCC 18.16.050(G).
FINDING: As a condition of any approval, the accessory farm dwelling cannot be
used to satisfy the requirements for a nonfarm dwelling pursuant to DCC
18.16.050(G).
D. Relative farm assistance dwelling.
1. A dwelling listed in DCC 18.16.030(B) is allowed when:
a. The subject tract is at least 40 acres in size, unless it is
demonstrated to the Planning Director or Hearings Body that a
smaller unit of land is a commercial agricultural enterprise.
FINDING: The applicants have applied for approval of a Relative Farm Assistance
Dwelling on the 834.43-acre ranch in the EFU-LB zone. The subject property is not
part of a tract. 12 As indicated in a foregoing finding, the subject property is 834.43
acres with approximately 189 acres of irrigated land associated with it. The subject
property meets the above standard.
b. The subject tract is used for farm use;
FINDING : The subject property consists of 834.43-acres and has about 189 acres of
irrigated land, located in the southwestern and northeastern regions, used for the
production of grass and alfalfa hay. According to the applicants, the ranching
operations on the property consists of approximately 35 head of horses, 35-75 head
of cattle, and an average of 200-275 head of Rocky Mountain Elk. The applicant
provided an accountants’ report and financial statements for the years ending
December 2011, 2010 and 2009. The statement includes revenues and expenses in
the current year-to-date and the prior year-to-date. In addition, the applicant
provided a sample of a Type 1 Cervid Propagation License Renewal, in this case for
year 2012, submitted to the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW). Steve
and Kathy Simpson are listed under License No. 1303. The renewal lists an
inventory of Rocky Mountain Elk under their license and status of that animal.
Oregon Revised Statute (ORS) 635, Division 49 regulates private holdings or
propagation of cervid species (cervid are animals in the Cervidae family including
deer, elk, moose, reindeer, and caribou). Staff finds the subject property is used for
farm use.
c. The dwelling is a manufactured home and is sited in accordance
with DCC 18.116.070, or is a pre-existing site-built home that: (1) was
established at least 30 years prior to the date the land use permit
12 The Deschutes County Code, Section 18.04.030, defines “tract” as follows:
"Tract" as used in DCC 18.16, 18.36 and 18.40, means one or more contiguous lots or parcels in the
same ownership….
MA-12-1 (AD-11-11), Simpson Page 17
was submitted and (2) is located on a parcel of at least 40 acres in
size and that meets the minimum irrigated acres standard for the
subzone within which it is located;
FINDING: Through file MA-12-1, modifying AD-11-11, the applicants request the
existing site built home be used as the Relative Farm Assistance Dwelling. The
existing single-family dwelling was built in 1932, more than 30 years prior to the date
of this land use permit. Furthermore, the site-built is located on the subject property,
which is 834.43 acres, thus more than the 40-acre minimum. The property also has
about 189 acres of irrigated land, more than the minimum irrigated acres standard
(130 acres) for the Lower Bridge subzone. These criteria are satisfied.
d. The dwelling is located on the same lot or parcel as the dwelling of
the farm operator, and is occupied by a relative of the farm operator
or farm operator’s spouse, including a grandparent, step-
grandparent, grandchild, parent, step-parent, child, brother, sister,
sibling, step-sibling, niece, nephew, or first cousin of either, if the
farm operator does, or will, require the assistance of the relative in
the management of the farm use.
1. Notwithstanding ORS 92.010 to 92.190 or the minimum lot or
parcel size requirements under ORS 215.780, if the owner of a
dwelling described in this subsection obtains construction
financing or other financing secured by the dwelling and the
secured party forecloses on the dwelling, the secured party may
also foreclose on the homesite, as defined in ORS 308A.250, and
the foreclosure shall operate as a partition of the homesite to
create a new parcel.
2. Prior conditions of approval for the subject land and dwelling
remain in effect.
3. For purposes of this subsection, “Foreclosure” means only
those foreclosures that are exempt from partition under ORS
92.010(7)(a).
FINDING: The applicants are proposing to use the existing 1932 home as the
Relative Farm Assistance Dwelling. This dwelling is located on the same parcel as
the primary farm dwelling. The relative farm help in this case is Kathy Simpson’s
father and stepmother, Eldon and Marilynn Tobiasson. According to the applicant,
Eldon Tobiasson assists on the ranch with the following items, which is noted as
necessary to keep the ranch running.
Repairs fencing • Aids in fabrication of repairs • Tractor driving (discing, seeding,
raking, baling) • Moving of irrigation (handlines, wheelines) • Planting of seed •
Gopher control in the hay fields • Ground keeping • Firewood cutting and hauling
for shop • Rock picking • Driving dump truck • Feeding livestock
Based on personal knowledge of the applicant’s relatives, a party of interest, Jerry
Aplin, indicates that Eldon Tobiasson is in his 80’s and has advanced Parkinson’s
Disease and thus not able to do the work listed by the applicant. Although staff does
not discredit the personal information provided here by Mr. Aplin, staff is uncertified
and unable to make a decision on Mr. Tobiasson’s health and ability to do work. The
burden is on the applicant to prove they are in need of farm assistance and by whom
MA-12-1 (AD-11-11), Simpson Page 18
the assistance is provided. In this case, the applicant is seeking assistance from the
applicant’s father, Eldon Tobiasson.
e. The farm operator plays the predominant role in the management
and farm use of the farm and will continue to do so after the relative
farm help dwelling is approved.
FINDING: The applicant indicates that the farm operators, Steve and Kathy
Simpson, will continue to operate the ranch/farm and play the predominant role in the
management and ranch/farm use on the property, and will continue to do so after the
Relative Farm Assistance Dwelling is approved.
f. Any approval granted under DCC 18.16.050 shall be conditioned with
a requirement that the farm operator annually submit a report to the
Planning Division identifying the resident(s) of the dwelling, their
relationship to the farm operator, the assistance the resident
provides to the farm operator, and verifying the farm operator’s
continued residence on the property and the predominant role the
farm operator continues to play in the management and farm use of
the farm.
FINDING: It will be made a condition of final approval that the farm operator submits
annually to the Planning Division a report that details the above noted information.
2. A manufactured home permitted under DCC 18.16.050 shall be
considered to be a temporary installation, and permits for such home
shall be renewable and renewed on an annual basis. The manufactured
home shall be removed from the property if it no longer meets the
criteria of DCC 18.16.050 and the approval shall be so conditioned.
FINDING: The applicant has not proposed to designate a manufactured home as
the Relative Farm Assistance Dwelling.
3. A pre-existing dwelling approved under DCC 18.16.050 shall be
removed or converted to an allowable use within one year of the date
the relative farm help dwelling no longer meets the criteria of DCC
18.16.050 and the approval shall be so conditioned.
FINDING: The proposed Relative Farm Accessory Dwelling will use the pre-existing
dwelling built in 1932. The applicant shall remove or convert the 1932 dwelling to an
allowable use within one year of the date the Relative Farm Assistance Dwelling no
longer meets the criteria of DCC 18.16.050. Final approval of this application will be
conditioned to this effect.
4. Upon approval of a dwelling under DCC 18.16.050, a Conditions of
Approval Agreement shall be recorded with the Deschutes County Clerk
prior to issuance of any building or placement permit for the new
dwelling on the property.
MA-12-1 (AD-11-11), Simpson Page 19
FINDING: A Conditions of Approval Agreement will be required under this criterion
to be recorded with the County Clerk prior to initiation of use of the 1932 dwelling as
a Relative Farm Assistance Dwelling.
5. For the purposes of DCC 18.16.050(D), a farm operator is a person who
operates a farm, doing the work and making the day-to-day decisions
about such things as planting, harvesting, feeding and marketing.
FINDING: Steve and Kathy Simpson are the primary farm/ranch operators of the
Cross Anchor S Ranch. They make all of the day-to-day decisions about the
ranch/farm. The applicant details farm operator duties in the submitted application
materials and are listed here.
Kathy Simpson…
Provides strategic planning for the breeding program for the elk • Administers all
vaccinations to the elk • Administers all vaccinations to the horses • Timely de-
worming program of elk, horses and cattle • Necropsy of every elk that are
slaughtered for meat sales • Marketing Director for meat sales, Elk Velvet sales,
including shipping/mailing • Hands on daily caretaking and feeding of “bottle baby”
calves (elk and cattle) • Monitoring the calving season for elk, cattle and horses
including observing actual calving with binoculars daily (as many calves as 5-8 per
day) • Training of horses to prepare them for sales including halter breaking of colts,
round penning, first saddling, riding • Maintains all financial records for: Sales (hay,
horses, elk, elk velvet, elk antlers, equipment), Accounts Payable (payroll, equipment
purchases, electrical for irrigation pumps and pivots, parts, repairs and maintenance,
feed, veterinarian supplies, fertilizer, etc.)
Steve Simpson…
Director of all irrigation piping projects • Gathering of elk for veterinarian and
vaccination work • Moving elk in pasture rotation • Marketing of elk antler sales •
Marking of elk breeding stock • Gathers and transports elk to butcher for slaughter •
Feed management for elk and cattle • Excavator work for digging ditches for new
pipelines and general needs • Hay sales • Equipment purchases and sales • De-
horning elk • Welding and fabrication • Equipment repairs and maintenance • Order
of parts and supplies for equipment • Hay delivering • Tagging newborn calves •
Castrating calves • Haying (mowing, raking, baling, hauling) • Fertilizing hay fields •
Fence building • Coordinate and supervise all contract services
4. Section 18.16.060. Dimensional Standards.
E. Building height. No building or structure shall be erected or enlarged to
exceed 30 feet in height, except as allowed under DCC 18.120.040.
FINDING: The proposed manufactured homes in the North and South home
locations are one-story units that will be approximately 16 feet in overall height and
thus meeting the 30-foot height limit.
MA-12-1 (AD-11-11), Simpson Page 20
5. Section 18.16.070. Yards.
A. The front yard shall be a minimum of: 40 feet from a property line fronting
on a local street, 60 feet from a property line fronting on a collector street,
and 100 feet from a property line fronting on an arterial street.
B. Each side yard shall be a minimum of 25 feet, except that for a nonfarm
dwelling proposed on property with side yards adjacent to property
currently employed in farm use, and receiving special assessment for farm
use, the side yard shall be a minimum of 100 feet.
C. Rear yards shall be a minimum of 25 feet, except that for a nonfarm
dwelling proposed on property with a rear yard adjacent to property
currently employed in farm use, and receiving special assessment for farm
use, the rear yard shall be a minimum of 100 feet.
D. In addition to the setbacks set forth herein, any greater setbacks required
by applicable building or structural codes adopted by the State of Oregon
and/or the County under DCC 15.04 shall be met.
FINDING: This segment of NW Lower Bridge Way is classified as a rural local road.
The subject property abuts NW Lower Bridge Way to the east. The County Code
requires minimum yards of 40 feet from a local road. In addition, minimum yards of
25 feet from side property lines and 25 feet from a rear property line. The proposal
indicates the South home (Accessory Dwelling) will have a front yard setback of
approximately 260 feet from NW Lower Bridge Way. The side and rear setbacks are
all over 1,600 feet. The manufactured home (primary farm dwelling) in the North
home location will have a front yard setback of approximately 500 feet from NW
Lower Bridge Way. The side and rear setbacks are all over 2,100 feet. The 1932
site built home (Relative Farm Assistance Dwelling) has a 650-foot front setback
from the road and side and rear setbacks of over 2,000 feet. These comply with the
setback standards of the EFU zone. The proposals also comply with solar setback
standards of 18.116.180(B)(1).
IV. CONCLUSION:
Based on the foregoing Basic and Conclusionary Findings, Staff concludes that the proposed
manufactured home (Accessory Dwelling) and the 1932 site built home (Relative Farm Help
Dwelling) can comply with the applicable standards and criteria of the Deschutes County
zoning ordinance if conditions of approval are met.
V. DECISION:
APPROVAL , subject to the following conditions of approval.
VI. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL:
A. This approval is based upon the application, site plan, specifications, and supporting
documentation submitted by the applicant. Any substantial change in this approved use
will require review through a new land use application.
MA-12-1 (AD-11-11), Simpson Page 21
B. Prior to issuance of manufactured home placement permits, the applicant/property
owner shall sign and record a waiver binding the landowner and the landowner’s
successors in interest, prohibiting them from pursuing a claim for relief or cause of action
alleging injury from farming or forest practices for which not action or claim is allowed
under ORS 30.936 or 30.937. The applicant shall submit a copy of the recorded
document to the Planning Division.
C. The Relative Farm Assistance Dwelling (1932 site built home) shall be occupied only by
a relative of the primary farm operator, as that term is defined under 18.16.050(D)(1)(d),
and whose assistance in the management of the farm use is required by the farm
operator. In this case, the relative providing assistance to the farm operator is Eldon
Tobiasson.
D. Beginning in January 2014, the applicant/property owner shall submit an annual report to
the Planning Division that identifies the following information regarding the Relative Farm
Assistance Dwelling (1932 site built home):
1. Who the resident(s) are that reside in the Relative Farm Assistance Dwelling,
2. What the resident(s) relationship is to the farm operator,
3. What assistance the resident(s) provide(s) to farm operator for the operation of the
farm/ranch,
4. Verification that the farm operator continues to reside on the property, and
5. How the farm operator continues to play a predominant role in the management and
ranch/farm use of the property.
E. The 1932 pre-existing dwelling approved under DCC 18.16.050 shall be removed or
converted to an allowable use within one year of the date the Relative Farm Assistance
Dwelling no longer meets the criteria of DCC 18.16.050.
F. Beginning in January 2014, the applicant/property owner shall submit an annual report to
the Planning Division that identifies the following information regarding the Accessory
Dwelling (South homesite):
1. What assistance the resident(s) provide(s) to farm operator for the operation of the
ranch/farm,
2. Verification that the farm operator continues to reside on the property,
3. How the farm operator continues to play a predominant role in the management and
farm/ranch use of the property, and
4. Verification that the farm/ranch operation is currently employed in farm use and
produced $32,500 in gross annual sales in the last two years or three of the last five
years. In determining gross income, the cost of purchased livestock shall be
deducted from the total gross income attributed to the tract.
G. The manufactured home approved under DCC 18.16.050 as an Accessory Dwelling
(South homesite) shall be removed within 90 days of the date this dwelling no longer
meets the criteria of DCC 18.16.050.
H. Prior to issuance of manufactured home placement permits for the Accessory
Dwelling (South home) and the primary farm dwelling (North home), the
applicants/owners shall sign and record with the Deschutes County Clerk’s Office a
conditions of approval agreement to memorialize conditions C, D, E, F, and G.
MA-12-1 (AD-11-11), Simpson Page 22
I. All lighting on the subject property shall be required to comply with Chapter 15.10 of the
Deschutes County Code, the Outdoor Lighting Control Ordinance. All exterior lights
shall be sited and shielded so that no direct light projects off-site.
J. The applicant shall obtain any necessary permits from the Deschutes County Building
Division and Environmental Soils Division prior to initiation of use of the Accessory
Dwelling (South home) and the primary farm dwelling (North home).
VII. DURATION OF APPROVAL:
All conditions of approval and submission of an application for placement permits for both
manufactured homes must occur within two (2) years from the date this decision becomes
final, or an extension of time pursuant to Section 22.36.010 of the County Code obtained, or
this approval shall be void.
This decision becomes final twelve (12) days after the date of mailing, unless
appealed by a party of interest.
DESCHUTES COUNTY PLANNING DIVISION
Written by: Cynthia Smidt, Associate Planner
Reviewed by: Nick Lelack, Interim Planning Director
Dated this 28 th day of December, 2012 Mailed this 28 th day of December, 2012