- Court: Oregon Court of Appeals
- Area(s) of Law: Land Use
- Date Filed: 01-24-2024
- Case #: No. A182073
- Judge(s)/Court Below: Kamins, J. for the Court, Egan, P.J., and DeVore, S.J.
- Full Text Opinion
Deschutes County approved a parcel redesignation from Agricultural to Rural Residential. The Land Use Board of Appeals (LUBA) determined that the county erred in doing so. Petitioner assigned error.
Petitioner argued that LUBA misconstrued OAR 660-033-0020(1)(a)(C) when they determined that the county had erred in concluding that traffic issues were not a relevant consideration in whether a parcel is protected from redesignation. According to the rule, agricultural land includes land which “[...] is necessary to permit farm practices to be undertaken on adjacent or nearby agricultural lands.” Petitioner argues that this should include only land which itself is necessary to permit adjacent farm practices. Respondent argued that the zoning designation of the land, and any subsequent impacts which may prevent adjacent land from being used accordingly, also falls under the rule.
The Court analyzed the larger legislative scheme and found that “the statutory scheme (1) is predicated on an express policy goal of preserving the ‘maximum amount of the limited supply of [Oregon’s] agricultural land,’ [...] for ‘maximum agricultural productivity,’ (2) expressly recognizes that how a parcel is used can conflict with the viability of farm uses on nearby parcels, and (3) is designed with safeguards to limit use of land designated as agricultural land in ways that conflict with farm uses.” Stop the Dump Coalition v. Yamhill County, 364 Or. 432 at 444 (2019).
The Court held that LUBA’s determination was consistent with these legislative goals and did not err.
Affirmed.