RENOTICE OF DECISION

Transcription

1 MULTNOMAH COUNTY LAND USE AND TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM 1600 SE 190 TH Avenue Portland, OR PH: FAX: RENOTICE OF DECISION This notice concerns a Planning Director Decision on the land use case(s) cited and described below. Case File: Permit: T CFU Development Standards Permit and Administrative Decision Vicinity Map e Cr L N IN E NW SKYLINE BLVD Location: NW Saltzman Road Tax Lot 300, Section 22, Township 1N, Range 1W, W.M. Tax Account #R SUBJECT PROPERTY NW SALTZMAN RD Applicant: Allen Pearce Owner: Richard and Mary Jaffe Summary: Decision: Applicant has requested a CFU Development Standards permit for the construction of a 2,184 square foot agricultural building in the Commercial Forest Use-2 (CFU-2) zone, and approval to allow the placement of three demountable livestock shelters on four separate development sites. Approved, with conditions. Unless appealed, this decision is effective Tuesday, March 18, 2008, at 4:30 PM. Issued by: By: Kenneth Born, AICP, Planner For: Karen Schilling- Planning Director Date: Tuesday, March 4, 2008 Instrument #: T Page 1

2 Opportunity to Review the Record: A copy of the Planning Director s Decision, and all evidence submitted associated with this application, is available for inspection, at no cost, at the Land Use Planning office during normal business hours. Copies of all documents may be purchased at the rate of 30-cents per page. The Planning Director's Decision contains the findings and conclusions upon which the decision is based, along with any conditions of approval. For further information on this case, contact Kenneth Born, AICP, Staff Planner at , ext Opportunity to Appeal: This decision may be appealed within 14 days of the date it was rendered, pursuant to the provisions of MCC An appeal requires a $ fee and must state the specific legal grounds on which it is based. To obtain appeal forms or information on the procedure, contact the Land Use Planning offices at 1600 SE 190th Avenue (Phone: ). This decision cannot be appealed to the Land Use Board of Appeals until all local appeals are exhausted. This decision is final at the close of the appeal period, unless appealed. The deadline for filing an appeal is Tuesday, March 18, 2008 at 4:30 pm. Applicable Approval Criteria: Multnomah County Code (MCC): Definitions (Lot of Record); Lot of Record; (C) - Allowed Uses; Forest Practices Setbacks and Fire Safety Zones; Development Standards for Dwellings and Structures; ORS (2)(a) Copies of the referenced Multnomah County Code sections can be obtained by contacting our office at or by visiting our website at Scope of Approval 1. Approval of this land use permit is based on the submitted written narrative(s) and plan(s). No work shall occur under this permit other than that which is specified within these documents. It shall be the responsibility of the property owner(s) to comply with these documents and the limitations of approval described herein. 2. This land use permit expires two (2) years from the date the decision is final if; (a) development action has not been initiated; (b) building permits have not been issued; or (c) final survey, plat, or other documents have not been recorded, as required. The property owner may request to extend the timeframe within which this permit is valid, as provided under MCC or , as applicable. The request for a permit extension must be submitted prior to the expiration of the approval period. Conditions of Approval The conditions listed are necessary to ensure that approval criteria for this land use permit are satisfied. Where a condition relates to a specific approval criterion, the code citation for that criterion follows in parenthesis. 1. Within 30 days of this decision becoming final and prior to building permit sign-off, the property owner shall record the Notice of Decision (pages 1 3 of this decision and the Site Plan (Exhibit A.2) with the County Recorder. The Notice of Decision shall run with the land. Proof of recording shall be made prior to the issuance of any permits and a copy filed with Land Use Planning. Recording shall be at the applicant s expense. [MCC ] T Page 2

3 2. Primary fire safety zones shall be established and maintained around the new two-story agricultural structure, and at the four sites approved for the use of three demountable livestock shelters, consistent with the applicant s site plan (Exhibit A.8). Trees within the primary fire safety zone shall be spaced with greater than 15-feet between crowns. Installation of the fire safety zones shall occur prior to construction. All fire safety zones shall be continuously maintained. [MCC (D)(1)] 3. Secondary fire safety zones shall be established and maintained surrounding all primary fire breaks. This secondary fire breaks shall extend 100 feet from the primary fire zone in all directions, consistent with the applicant s site plan (Exhibit A.8). Vegetation should be pruned and spaced in the secondary zone so that fire will not spread between crowns of trees. Small trees and brush growing underneath larger trees should be removed to prevent the spread of fire up into the crowns of the larger trees. [MCC (D)(2)] 4. The proposed structure shall be constructed with a fire retardant roof. This shall be clearly noted on the building plans prior to County authorization of a building permit. [MCC (C)] 5. A Grading and Erosion Control Inspection fee shall be paid at the time of zoning approval of the building permit. The plans shall show the location of ground disturbing activities and erosion control measures consistent with the Erosion Prevention Sediment Control Plans Technical Guidance Handbook. The property owner shall maintain best erosion control practices through all phases of development, consistent with the approved Grading and Erosion Control Permit (T ). Erosion control measures are to include the installation of sediment fences/barriers at the toe of disturbed areas and post construction re-establishment of ground cover. Straw mulch, erosion blankets, or 6-mil plastic sheeting shall be used as a wet weather measure to provide erosion protection for exposed soils. All erosion control measures are to be implemented as prescribed in the current edition of the Erosion Prevention Sediment Control Plans Technical Guidance Handbook, copies of which are available for purchase at our office, or through the City of Portland. [MCC (B)] Note: Based on the narrative and other application materials provided by the applicant, and as addressed under Finding 7.1 of the staff report, the proposed use of the structure will be for the primary purpose of obtaining a profit, consistent with the definition of farm use pursuant to ORS (2). Therefore, the proposal will be exempt from Significant Environmental Concern Permit requirements [MCC (A)], and building permit requirements [ORS (2)]. However, Multnomah County must review and sign off the final plan set before issuing an Exempt Farm Building Land Use Permit. Two (2) sets each of the site plan and building plans are needed for this sign off. Please contact Ken Born at (ext ) to obtain an appointment for sign-off review. Notice to Mortgagee, Lien Holder, Vendor, or Seller: ORS Chapter 215 requires that if you receive this notice it must be promptly forwarded to the purchaser. T Page 3

4 Findings of Fact FINDINGS: Written findings are contained herein. The Multnomah County Code criteria and Comprehensive Plan Policies are in bold font. The applicants statements are identified below as Applicant:. Staff comments and analysis are identified as Staff: and address the applicable criteria. Staff comments may include a conclusionary statement in italic. 1.0 Project Description Applicant: We have two major farming activities at the present time on our property. One is a blueberry field of about 830 plants, still a couple years from maturity. Last year s crop was profitable, producing approximately one ton of marketable fruit, which was wholesaled to a berry stand operator. At maturity we should produce about two tons of fruit. The other farming operation is Skyline Alpacas, a business of breeding alpacas for sale. Alpaca businesses are livestock operations. We have a herd of about 75 alpacas presently. The business has two full-time employees in addition to the approximately 30-hours a week spent on this by Mary Jaffe, owner of the business. Mary takes up to 12 animals at a time to shows around the country about 4-6 times a year, and hosts events for groups of other alpaca farmers to come to our farm several times a year. Individual customers come to the farm on a regular basis. Income is generate from the sale of animals as well as breeding fees of our herdsires. Please feel free to look online at this farming operation at We presently have one tractor, one smaller farm vehicle (a gator), one small alpaca trailer, and various tractor mounted accessories for planting and maintaining our pastures and fields. These are used for both the alpacas and blueberries. We store a great deal of seed, fertilizer, bagged animal feed (grain) as well as many tons of hay. We have two vehicles used mostly for the business, one pick-up truck and one minivan (minivans are used to transport small numbers of alpacas). We anticipate purchasing additional pieces of equipment in the near future, including at least another small tractor and a much larger trailer for transporting larger number of alpacas, and perhaps another tractor. This farm will benefit from another barn and more storage in the following ways. We need more protected storage space for vehicles and farm equipment, some of which are now stored under the porch area at the entrance to our existing barn. This is inconvenient and unsightly at the least (both important to farm customers) and somewhat unsafe as they must be worked around and stepped over. We will be able to remedy this situation with additional space for equipment and vehicle storage in the new barn. The more important benefit relates to the care of the alpacas. Alpaca farms need to divide their animals into smaller groups, remote from one another, hersires from breeding females, newly weaned crias (young) from their mothers, etc., and often have several barns for this reason. WE are currently providing shelter for our alpacas with the demountable livestock shelters shown on the site plan. This new barn will improve the efficiency of our workers and care of the animals in the area of the three shelters it will replace. The new barn will allow storage of large quantities of hay and grain at this location, a problem now. It will provide space for tools and care materials, in addition to the feed, nearer the animals. It will provide workspace for care and training procedures drier indoor shelter, and covered outdoor shelter now lacking. Although alpacas are well adapted to cold weather, they are not as well adapted to wet environments, and significant T Page 4

5 health problems can result from inadequate protection from the rain. Better shelter and more efficient care translate into healthier and cleaner animals, more valuable work by our employees, and a better opportunity to market our alpacas and services. Staff: The applicant is proposing to construct a 2,184 square foot agricultural structure. The new structure will be two stories in height, and is proposed to be used in conjunction with an active alpaca breeding operation and blueberry farm. The applicant is also seeking approval of four separate sites to be used for the housing of alpacas inside three demountable livestock shelters. 2.0 Site Description Staff: The subject property is approximately acres in size, located south and adjacent to the cul-de-sac at the far western end of Saltzman Road. The parcel is currently developed with a single family residence constructed in 1996 (HDP 44-94), and a barn (HDP 6-99/SEC 7-99). The easterly property line abuts the corporate limits of the City of Portland. The new structure is to be constructed in the center of the property, in an area that contains moderately steep slopes (18-22%). Development is proposed on lands currently devoted to demountable alpaca shelters and attached pen area. Access to the barn would be provided via an existing 12-foot gravel road. The zoning of the parcel is Commercial Forest Use (CFU-2), a designation that has been established for lands suitable for commercial forest operations. The property is also subject to a Significant Environmental Concern overlay for Wildlife Habitat (SEC-h) and a Hillside Development overlay on steeper portions of the property (Exhibit B.4). The development sites are not located in the Hillside Development overlay, however. 3.0 Public Comment MCC (B) - Type II Decisions (B) Type II decisions involve the exercise of some interpretation and discretion in evaluating approval criteria. Applications evaluated through this process are assumed to be allowable in the underlying zone. County Review typically focuses on what form the use will take, where it will be located in relation to other uses and natural features and resources, and how it will look. However, an application shall not be approved unless it is consistent with the applicable siting standards and in compliance with approval requirements. Upon receipt of a complete application, notice of application and an invitation to comment is mailed to the applicant, recognized neighborhood associations and property owners within 750 feet of the subject Tract. The Planning Director accepts comments for 14 days after the notice of application is mailed and renders a decision. The Planning Director s decision is appealable to the Hearings Officer. If no appeal is filed the Planning Directors decision shall become final at the close of business on the 14th day after the date on the decision. If an appeal is received, the Hearings Officer decision is the County's final decision and is appealable to LUBA within 21 days of when the decision is signed. Staff: An opportunity to comment was mailed to property owners within 750-feet of the property lines on January 22, 2008 (Exhibit C.3). No comments were received. Procedures met. T Page 5

6 4.0 Proof of Ownership MCC Initiation of Action. Except as provided in MCC , Type I - IV applications may only be initiated by written consent of the owner of record or contract purchaser. PC (legislative) actions may only be initiated by the Board of Commissioners, Planning Commission, or Planning Director. Staff: The proposed project is located on Tax Lot 300, Section 22, Township: 1 North, Range: 1 West. Assessment & Taxation records show that the land is owned by Richard and Mary Jaffe (Exhibit B.1). Mr. Jaffe has signed the General Application Form authorizing the County to process the application on the subject property, and designated Allen Pearce as the applicant in this case (Exhibit A.1). This criterion has been met. 5.0 Code Compliance MCC Code Compliance And Applications. Except as provided in subsection (A), the County shall not make a land use decision, or issue a building permit approving development, including land divisions and property line adjustments, for any property that is not in full compliance with all applicable provisions of the Multnomah County Land Use Code and/or any permit approvals previously issued by the County. Staff: A site visit was conducted by county staff on January 24, A violation of the zoning code was observed at the location of the proposed development site. Three demountable temporary livestock shelters and an attached pen area had been placed on the property without prior authorization from the county. However, the applicant has sought county authorization of these shelters at four alternative locations, as shown on Exhibit A.8. If this request is approved, the subject property will be full compliance with applicable provisions of the land use code. If application is approved, this criterion can be met. 6.0 The Subject Property is a Lot of Record Definitions Lot of Record Subject to additional provisions within each Zoning District, a Lot of Record is a parcel, lot, or a group thereof that, when created or reconfigured, (a) satisfied all applicable zoning laws and (b) satisfied all applicable land division laws, or (c) complies with the criteria for the creation of new lots or parcels described in MCC Those laws shall include all required zoning and land division review procedures, decisions, and conditions of approval. (a) "Satisfied all applicable zoning laws" shall mean: the parcel, lot, or group thereof was created and, if applicable, reconfigured in full compliance with all zoning minimum lot size, dimensional standards, and access requirements. T Page 6

7 Lot of Record (A) In addition to the Lot of Record definition standards in MCC , for the purposes of this district a Lot of Record is either: (1) A parcel or lot which was not contiguous to any other parcel or lot under the same ownership on February 20, 1990, or (2) A group of contiguous parcels or lots: (a) Which were held under the same ownership on February 20, 1990; and (b) Which, individually or when considered in combination, shall be aggregated to comply with a minimum lot size of 19 acres, without creating any new lot line. 1. Each Lot of Record proposed to be segregated from the contiguous group of parcels or lots shall be a minimum of 19 acres in area using existing legally created lot lines and shall not result in any remainder individual parcel or lot, or remainder of contiguous combination of parcels or lots, with less than 19 acres in area. See Examples 1 and 2 in this subsection. 2. There shall be an exception to the 19 acre minimum lot size requirement when the entire same ownership grouping of parcels or lots was less than 19 acres in area on February 20, 1990, and then the entire grouping shall be one Lot of Record. See Example 3 in this subsection. 3. Three examples of how parcels and lots shall be aggregated are shown below with the solid thick line outlining individual Lots of Record: 4. The requirement to aggregate contiguous parcels or lots shall not apply to lots or parcels within exception or urban zones (e.g. MUA-20, RR, RC, R-10), but shall apply to contiguous parcels and lots within all farm and forest resource zones (i.e. EFU and CFU), or (3) A parcel or lot lawfully created by a partition or a subdivision plat after February 20, (4) Exceptions to the standards of (A)(2) above: (a) Where two contiguous parcels or lots are each developed with a lawfully established habitable dwelling, the parcels or lots shall be Lots of Record that remain separately transferable, even if they were held in the same ownership on February 20, (b) Where approval for a Lot of Exception or a parcel smaller than 19 acres under the Lot Size for Conditional Uses provisions has been given by the Hearing Authority and the parcel was subsequently lawfully created, then the parcel shall be a Lot of Record that remains separately transferable, even if the parcel was contiguous to another parcel held in the same ownership on February 20, (B) In this district, significant dates and ordinances applicable for verifying zoning compliance may include, but are not limited to, the following: (1) July 10, 1958, F-2 zone applied; (2) December 9, 1975, F-2 minimum lot size increased, Ord. 115 & 116; (3) October 6, 1977, MUF-20 and CFU-38 zones applied, Ord. 148 & 149; (4) August 14, 1980, MUF-19 & 38 and CFU-80 zones applied, Ord. 236 & 238; (5) February 20, 1990, lot of record definition amended, Ord. 643; (6) January 7, 1993, MUF-19 & 38 zones changed to CFU-80, Ord. 743 & 745; (7) August 8, 1998, CFU-2 zone applied, Ord. 916 (reenacted by Ord. 997); (8)May 16, 2002, Lot of Record section amended, Ord. 982, reenacted by Ord. 997; (C) A Lot of Record which has less than the minimum lot size for new parcels, less than the front lot line minimums required, or which does not meet the access requirements of T Page 7

8 MCC , may be occupied by any allowed use, review use or conditional use when in compliance with the other requirements of this district. Staff: The subject property was created by Partition Plat , and was recorded with the County on December 4, 1992 (Exhibit B.5). The property was known as Parcel 3, and remains in the same configuration as originally approved. The property owner purchased the subject property in 1992, and does not own any contiguous lots or parcels. Therefore, the property when created (a) satisfied all applicable zoning laws and (b) satisfied all applicable land division laws when created. The subject property is a lot of record. This criterion has been met 7.0 The Proposed Structure is Defined as a Farm Use 7.1 ORS (2)(a) As used in this section, "farm use" means the current employment of land for the primary purpose of obtaining a profit in money by raising, harvesting and selling crops or the feeding, breeding, management and sale of, or the produce of, livestock, poultry, furbearing animals or honeybees or for dairying and the sale of dairy products or any other agricultural or horticultural use or animal husbandry or any combination thereof. "Farm use" includes the preparation, storage and disposal by marketing or otherwise of the products or by-products raised on such land for human or animal use. "Farm use" also includes the current employment of land for the primary purpose of obtaining a profit in money by stabling or training equines including but not limited to providing riding lessons, training clinics and schooling shows. "Farm use" also includes the propagation, cultivation, maintenance and harvesting of aquatic species and bird and animal species to the extent allowed by the rules adopted by the State Fish and Wildlife Commission. "Farm use" includes the on-site construction and maintenance of equipment and facilities used for the activities described in this subsection. "Farm use" does not include the use of land subject to the provisions of ORS chapter 321, except land used exclusively for growing cultured Christmas trees as defined in subsection (3) of this section or land described in ORS (1)(e) or (5). Staff: The entirety of the subject property is enrolled in the county farmland deferral program, a primary indicator of whether land is employed for the primary purpose of obtaining a profit. In order to qualify for the special assessment program, the County Assessment and Taxation Division is required to verify that the subject property is currently used, and had been used for the two previous years, for farm use, consistent with the definition provided above under ORS (2)(a). The property must have also met a farm income requirement for three of the five previous years prior to enrolling in the deferral program. The applicant has detailed the types of farm uses occurring on the property under Finding 1.0 above, and in a memo sent to the County Division of Assessment and Taxation included as Exhibit A.4. Staff also observed the extent of farm uses on the property during a January 24, 2008 site visit. This criterion has been met. T Page 8

9 8.0 A Farm Use is Allowed in the CFU-2 District Allowed Uses (C) Farm use, as defined in ORS Staff: As discussed in Finding 7.1 above, the proposed agricultural structures meet the definition of a farm use, per ORS (C). A farm use is an allowed use in the Commercial Forest Use- 2 (CFU-2) zoning district. This criterion has been met. 9.0 The Proposed Improvements Meet Applicable Forest Practice Setback and Fire Safety Zone Standards Forest Practices Setbacks and Fire Safety Zones The Forest Practice Setbacks and applicability of the Fire Safety Zones is based upon existing conditions, deviations are allowed through the exception process and the nature and location of the proposed use. The following requirements apply to all structures as specified: Table 1 Use Forest Practice Setbacks Fire Safety Zones Front Property Line Adjacent All Other Fire Safety Zone Description of use and Nonconforming to County Setbacks Requirements location Setbacks Maintained (feet) (FSZ) Road (feet) Other Structures N/A Primary & Secondary required Staff: The applicant is proposing to site two-story agricultural structure greater than 100 feet from an existing dwelling. The applicant is also proposing to locate, on a rotational basis, three demountable livestock shelters at one of four other sites which are also greater than 100 feet from the existing dwelling. According to Table 1 above, the applicant is required to establish and maintain a 130-foot Forest Practice Setback, and to establish both a Primary and Secondary Fire Safety Zone surrounding these structures. Findings address consistency with these requirements. 9.2 (A) Reductions to a Forest Practices Setback dimension shall only be allowed pursuant to approval of an adjustment or variance. Staff: No reductions to the required 130-foot Forest Practice Setbacks are needed. The applicant has enough space on the property to accommodate this setback requirement, as shown on the site plan submitted alongside this application (Exhibit A.8). This criterion has been met. 9.3 (B) Exception to the Secondary Fire Safety Zone shall be pursuant to MCC only. T Page 9

10 No reduction is permitted for a required Primary Fire Safety Zone through a nonconforming, adjustment or variance process. Staff: No reductions to the required 100-foot Secondary Fire Safety Zones are needed. The applicant has enough space on the property to accommodate setback requirements, as shown on the site plan submitted alongside this application (Exhibit A.8). This criterion has been met. 9.4 (C) The minimum forest practices setback requirement shall be increased where the setback abuts a street having insufficient right-of-way width to serve the area. The county Road Official shall determine the necessary right-of-way widths based upon the county Design and Construction Manual and the Planning Director shall determine any additional setback requirements in consultation with the Road Official. Staff: The County Transportation Program reviewed the proposal at a February 5, 2008 internal meeting, and does not object to this proposal and does not require any conditions of approval at this time. NW Saltzman Road has sufficient right-or-way width to serve the area. This criterion is not applicable. 9.5 (D) Fire Safety Zones on the Subject Tract (1) Primary Fire Safety Zone (a) A primary fire safety zone is a fire break extending a minimum of 30 feet in all directions around a dwelling or structure. Trees within this safety zone shall be spaced with greater than 15 feet between the crowns. The trees shall also be pruned to remove low branches within 8 feet of the ground as the maturity of the tree and accepted silviculture practices may allow. All other vegetation should be kept less than 2 feet in height. (b) On lands with 10 percent or greater slope the primary fire safety zone shall be extended down the slope from a dwelling or structure as follows: Percent Slope Distance In Feet No additional Less than 10 required Less than additional Less than additional Less than additional (c) The building site must have a slope less than 40 percent. (2) Secondary Fire Safety Zone A secondary fire safety zone is a fire break extending a minimum of 100 feet in all directions around the primary safety zone. The goal of this safety zone is to reduce fuels so that the overall intensity of any wildfire is lessened. Vegetation should be pruned and spaced so that fire will not spread between crowns of trees. Small trees and brush growing underneath larger trees should be removed to prevent the spread of fire up into the crowns of the larger trees. Assistance with planning forestry practices which meet these objectives may be obtained from the State of Oregon Department of Forestry or the local Rural Fire Protection District. The secondary fire safety zone required for any dwelling or structure may be reduced under the provisions of Staff: Consistent with Table 1 above, the agricultural structure and demountable livestock shelters T Page 10

11 area subject to compliance with both Primary and Secondary Fire Safety Zone standards. The applicant is proposing to site the two-story agricultural structure greater than 100 feet from an existing dwelling. The applicant is also proposing to locate, on a rotational basis, three demountable livestock shelters at one of four other sites which are also greater than 100 feet from the existing dwelling. The Table also requires that the 30-foot safety zone be extended downslope when slopes are greater than 10% within the zone. Slope steepness between the edge of the twostory agricultural structure and the downslope side of the primary zone ranges between 30 and 35%, as shown on Exhibit A.8, and as observed by staff on-site. Further, slope steepness between the footprint edge of the demountable livestock shelters and the downslope side of the primary zone ranges between 20 and 25% at three of the four proposed sites. A fourth site contains slopes between 10 and 20% within the zone. Therefore, a primary fire safety zone must extend 130 feet downslope and south/southwest of the proposed two-story agricultural structure. A secondary fire safety zone must extend a minimum of 100 feet in all directions around the primary safety zone. Likewise, a primary fire safety zone must extend 105 feet downslope at three of the four proposed sites, and 75 feet at the fourth site. A secondary fire safety zone must extend a minimum of 100 feet in all directions around the primary safety zone at these locations as well. The applicant s site plan demonstrates the required fire safety zones surrounding the proposed twostory agricultural structure and footprints of the demountable livestock shelters at each proposed site. A condition of approval will require the applicant to construct and maintain the primary fire safety zone and secondary zone as illustrated on the site plan (Exhibit A.8). As conditioned, this criterion can be met. 9.6 (3) No requirement in (1) or (2) above may restrict or contradict a forest management plan approved by the State of Oregon Department of Forestry pursuant to the State Forest Practice Rules. Staff: According to County Assessment and Taxation records, the subject property is not enrolled forestland deferral program (Exhibit B.1), and therefore does not restrict or contradict a forest management plan approved by the Department of Forestry. This criterion has been met. 9.7 (4) Required Primary and Secondary Fire Safety Zones shall be established within the subject tract as required by Table 1 above. Staff: Consistency with Primary and Secondary Fire Safety Zone requirements is addressed in Finding 9.5 above. This criterion has been met. 9.8 (5) Required Primary and Secondary Fire Safety Zones shall be maintained by the property owner in compliance with the above criteria listed under (1) and (2). Staff: If approved, a condition of approval will require that a primary fire safety zone be established at each development location, extending out 30 to 130 fee consistent with the applicant s site plan, which will stipulate that all trees within this zone be spaced greater than 15 feet between the crowns. The condition will also require trees in the zone must be pruned to remove low branches within 8 feet of the ground. All other vegetation must be kept less than 2 feet in height. A condition will also require a secondary fire safety zone be established at each development T Page 11

12 location, extending out 100 feet from all sides of the primary zone, in order to ensure that vegetation will be pruned and spaced so that fire will not spread between crowns of trees. Small trees and brush growing underneath larger trees should be removed to prevent the spread of fire up into the crowns of the larger trees. As conditioned, this criterion can be met CFU Development Standards Have Been Met 10.1 (B) New dwellings, replacement dwellings greater than 100-feet from an existing dwelling, and accessory buildings (or similar structures) greater than 100-feet from a dwelling shall meet the following standards in (1) and (3) or (2) and (3): (2) The structure shall satisfy the following Option 2, Discretionary Type 2 Permit requirements: (a) It has the least impact on nearby or adjoining forest or agricultural lands and satisfies the standards in MCC ; Applicant: Not affecting marketable trees. Fire safety zones shown on site plan. Staff: A 2004 aerial photograph of the area (Exhibit B.4) suggests active timber harvesting operations are occurring on properties in the immediate vicinity of the subject property. Surrounding properties appear to be entirely forested, partially forested and developed with a single family dwelling much like the subject site, or are developed rural residential lots. The proposed two-story agricultural building will be located close to the center of the nearly 40 acre subject property, and the demountable livestock shelters will be sited no closer than 130 feet from any property line, as shown on Exhibit A.8. There will be enough physical separation from the proposed use and nearby forest lands so that impacts to forest practices will be negligible. Consistency with Forest Practices Setbacks and Fire Safety Zones standards are addressed under Findings 9.1 through 9.9. This criterion has been met (b) Adverse impacts on forest operations and accepted farming practices on the tract will be minimized; Applicant: Barn will improve farming operation. Staff: The two-story agricultural building and demountable livestock structures will be sited on areas of the property currently devoted to agricultural activities. The structures themselves will be used in conjunction with these activities, helping to retain the rest of the property for future forest or farm practices if desired. This criterion has been met (c) The amount of forest land used to site the dwelling or other structure, access road, and service corridor is minimized; Applicant: Barn adjacent to existing road and replaces demountable temporary livestock shelters. Staff: Staff concurs with the applicant s statement and finds the proposed two-story agricultural building and demountable livestock shelters will be sited in cleared areas of the property currently devoted to agricultural purposes, in locations not productive as forest land. This criterion has been met. T Page 12

13 10.4 (d) Any access road or service corridor in excess of 500 feet in length is demonstrated by the applicant to be necessary due to physical limitations unique to the property and is the minimum length required; and Applicant: Farm road already exists. Staff: This application does not propose a new access road or service corridor. This criterion is not applicable (3) The risks associated with wildfire are minimized. Provisions for reducing such risk shall include: (a) The proposed dwelling will be located upon a tract within a fire protection district or the dwelling shall be provided with residential fire protection by contract; (b) Access for a pumping fire truck to within 15 feet of any perennial water source of 4,000 gallons or more within 100 feet of the driveway or road on the lot. The access shall meet the driveway standards of MCC (E) with permanent signs posted along the access route to indicate the location of the emergency water source; Applicant: Portland Fire & Rescue Station #27 (1 st responders). Staff: This application does not propose a new dwelling. The property is served by fire protection services by the Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue Department, who verified that there is adequate water amount and pressure available to the building site to fight a structure fire (Exhibit A.5). This criterion has been met (C) The dwelling or structure shall: (1) Comply with the standards of the applicable building code or as prescribed in ORS through relating to mobile homes; (2) If a mobile home, have a minimum floor area of 600 square feet and be attached to a foundation for which a building permit has been obtained; (3) Have a fire retardant roof; and (4) Have a spark arrester on each chimney. Staff: If approved, the decision will be conditioned to ensure that final building plans clearly indicate the type of roofing material for the proposed development. Roofing materials must be fire retardant. As conditioned, this criterion can be met (D) The applicant shall provide evidence that the domestic water supply is from a source authorized in accordance with the Department of Water Resources Oregon Administrative Rules for the appropriation of ground water (OAR 690, Division 10) or surface water (OAR 690, Division 20) and not from a Class 1 stream as defined in the Forest Practices Rules. (1) If the water supply is unavailable from public sources, or sources located entirely on the property, the applicant shall provide evidence that a legal easement has been obtained permitting domestic water lines to cross the properties of affected owners. (2) Evidence of a domestic water supply means: (a) Verification from a water purveyor that the use described in the application will be served by the purveyor under the purveyor's rights to appropriate water; T Page 13

14 or (b) A water use permit issued by the Water Resources Department for the use described in the application; or (c) Verification from the Water Resources Department that a water use permit is not required for the use described in the application. If the proposed water supply is from a well and is exempt from permitting requirements under ORS , the applicant shall submit the well constructor's report to the county upon completion of the well. Staff: Domestic water supply to the subject property is unavailable from public sources. The applicant has provided a 1994 well constructor s report specific to the two water wells located on the property (Exhibit A.5). The locations of these wells are further shown on the applicant s site plan (Exhibit A.8). This criterion has been met (E) A private road (including approved easements) accessing two or more dwellings, a driveway accessing a single dwelling, a Forest Practices road that is utilized as a private road/driveway accessing a dwelling(s), or a new driveway constructed to access a replacement/restored dwelling, shall be designed, built, and maintained to Staff: This application does not propose the construction of a new road or driveway. This criterion is not applicable The Proposed Development Will Not Require a SEC Permit Exceptions (Significant Environmental Concern) An SEC permit shall not be required for the following: (A) Farm use, as defined in ORS (2) (a), including buildings and structures accessory thereto on "converted wetlands" as defined by ORS (9) or on upland areas; Staff: The entirety of the subject property is located within a Significant Environmental Concern subdistrict for Wildlife Habitat (SEC-h). However, as discussed under Finding 8.1, the proposed structures can be defined as a farm use, consistent with the definition provided under ORS (2)(a). Therefore, the use will not require a SEC permit. Exception criterion has been met Conclusion Based on the findings, narrative, and other information provided herein, this application, as conditioned, satisfies the applicable approval criteria required for a CFU Development Standards Permit Exhibits A Applicant s Exhibits B Staff Exhibits C Procedural Exhibits D Comments Received T Page 14

15 A Applicant Exhibits Date A.1 1 CFU Development Standards Permit Application Form B, Type 2 12/06/07 A.2 3 Site Plans 12/06/07 A.3 4 Floor Plans and Elevation Drawing 12/06/07 A.4 3 Farmland Assessment documentation 12/06/07 A.5 21 Service Provider Forms a. Fire Flow Review Form b. Storm Water Certificate c. Certification of Water Service Form / Water Well Report d. Certification of Private On-site Sewage Disposal (3/3/99) 12/06/07 01/03/08 01/18/08 A.6 3 Application Narrative 01/16/08 A.7 5 Narrative (re. demountable livestock shelters) 02/25/08 A.8 1 Revised Site Plan (with demountable livestock shelter sites) 02/28/08 B Staff Exhibits Date B.1 1 A&T Property Information N/A B.2 1 Zoning Map N/A B.3 3 Site Visit Photos 01/24/08 B.4 1 Map of Subject Property w/ 10 ft. contours, Slope Hazard Overlay N/A B.5 2 Partition Plat No N/A C Administration & Procedures Date C.1 2 Incomplete Letter 01/08/08 C.2 6 Opportunity to Comment Notice 01/22/08 C.3 1 Complete Letter Day 1 01/28/08 T Page 15