Page 84 - Rural Tourism Report Washington County

CHAPTER 4: RURAL TOURISM REGULATORY FRAMEWORK
» Permits for two to six events and up to 18
events require an additional finding that the
allowable events will not “in combination
with other agritourism or other commercial
events or activities authorized in the area,
materially alter the stability of the land use
pattern in the area.”
Unique to 18 events, the most intense
category above, is that they must also be
“necessary to support the commercial farm
uses or the commercial ag enterprises in
the area” per 215.213(11)(d)(A).
• The regulations allow use of existing
structures and temporary structures and/
or site improvements, but not construction
of permanent structures or permanent
alteration of the land related to grading,
paving, and filling. In other words, once the
event is over, the site must be restored to
its pre-event condition. Existing structures
used for these purposes must have been
designed and properly permitted for human
occupancy.
• All agritourism and related commercial uses
authorized by SB 960 must comply with
conditions of approval related to:
» Types of events, including number and
duration, daily attendance, and hours of
operation;
» Location of existing and proposed
temporary structures;
» Access, egress, parking arrangements, and
traffic management;
» Sanitary and solid waste management;
and
» Other local requirements.
80 WASHINGTON COUNTY RURAL TOURISM STUDY
• SB 960 applies only to exclusive farm use
zones (EFU and AF-20), not other rural
districts. This is because uses in other rural
land use districts besides EFC (i.e. exception
areas) are generally regulated by local
government to a greater degree than by
the state. State restrictions in exception
areas require that land uses be rural in
nature and scale, and generally focus on
minimizing impacts. The issue in such areas
tends to be compatibility — primarily with
farm use. Rural-scale commercial uses that
aren’t allowed on farmland can often be
accommodated on exception lands. In this
case, the County may wish to consider if,
and under what circumstances, acceptable
uses in the exclusive farm districts can be
extended into the County’s other seven rural
districts.
• Unlike SB 841-B in which local adoption
of rules for subordinate uses at wineries
is mandatory, adoption of SB 960 and
the applicable statutes that address the
legislation is optional.
» Although they do not have the authority
to allow what the state doesn’t, counties
have some latitude within the framework
of SB 960. This would include the extent
of uses allowed by the state that the
county will license or permit, definitions,
implementation, and the like. As a
result, SB 960 provides an opportunity
for a legal pathway to legitimize certain
“agritourism” activities, assuming these
can meet the “related to and supportive
of agriculture” test and other baseline
requirements of the bill.