Page 96 - Rural Tourism Report Washington County
P. 96
CHAPTER 4: RURAL TOURISM REGULATORY FRAMEWORK
Although this work was put on hold to make from having to make administrative
way for this broader study of rural tourism interpretations, which then can lead to
in the County, the results of this work should inconsistent, and potentially unfair outcomes
not be lost. The County could review the over time. Amendments to the CDC can be
work done in 2014 in light of the findings in augmented by identifying a planning staff
this rural tourism study, and carry forward expert/navigator, creating a website, and
regulatory approaches and/or specific developing pamphlets, fact sheets and other
provisions that appear warranted. Should written materials .
the County proceed in this direction, once • In any code amendments to implement new
an acceptable program for the EFU and AF- regulations, the “devil is in the details.” Some
20 districts is developed, the County could substantive considerations:
consider using it as a template for the other
rural districts. » The County’s rural areas are primarily
intended to support farm, forest, and
• In its Issue Paper, the County analyzed the natural resource uses, and thus must be
provisions of five other Oregon counties and, protected in perpetuity, especially in rural
undoubtedly, identified concepts/provisions reserves. According to SB 960, agritourism
that might be workable within Washington and related commercial activities must
County’s regulatory framework. The County be "incidental and subordinate" to the
may want to consider borrowing concepts, primary agricultural/forest use. There
definitions, and process/substantive is some question whether the state
provisions from other Oregon jurisdictions legislation was intended to encourage
that have already adopted code provisions agritourism only in areas primarily devoted
to implement ORS 215.213, as modified by SB to agricultural, not forest, use. As a result,
960. In doing so, the County could review this range of uses must be regulated
the track record for these regulations and carefully and artfully to minimize adverse
the degree to which the incorporation of impacts on neighboring farm/forest
such provisions would fit into Washington operations and rural residences.
County’s overall CDC framework and specific
goals for this project. » Regulations must be carefully crafted
to address impacts. This can be done
• Land use regulations should be clear, for event-based activities by regulating
concise, and adequately detailed so that all at various levels of permitting by land
stakeholders can be assured that all permit use district, location, site size, intensity,
applications will be treated consistently duration, frequency, operational
using the same set of rules. A community characteristics, and cumulative impacts of
development code that explicitly describes overlapping events.
applicable substantive and process
requirements relieves the planning staff
92 WASHINGTON COUNTY RURAL TOURISM STUDY
