Click here to skip to main content.
scenic picture from Washington state
Subjects › Planning › Rural Land Use and Development
Updated 03/2010

Rural Land Use Regulation/Development

Contents

Introduction

This Web page provides information on rural land use and development in Washington. This page particularly focuses on providing information helpful in planning and shaping development patterns in those rural areas that are not designated for long-term resource uses such as agricultural and timber production or mineral extraction. Webster's New World Dictionary defines "rural" as "of or relating to the country, country people or life, or agriculture, which may represent a common understanding of the term "rural." However, Washington's Growth Management Act (GMA) creates a separate category for rural areas, which are outside of designated urban areas and which are not in long-term resource use. By creating a separate category, the GMA focuses attention on how these non-resource lands, may be developed, and on their relationship to resource lands. 1994 amendments to the GMA (ESHB 6094) sought to give further definition to the concept of "rural" and added definitions for "rural character," "rural development," and "rural governmental services." The 1997 and 2005 amendments also provided further detail about what should be included in rural elements of a comprehensive plan, including guidelines for limited areas of more intensive development.

These amendments provide flexibility for more varied economic uses in rural areas, while maintaining rural character and scale. Some local jurisdictions are tailoring regulatory and/or non-regulatory tools to address rural and resource areas, where urban solutions typically have not worked. At times, inflexible regulations have made resource operations more difficult, despite goals for protecting farmlands, resource areas, and open space. Urban, suburban or rural settings will likely require different types of approaches to be effective and gain acceptance. Greater flexibility regarding uses and performance standards, and strategic incentives, may better meet the needs of rural areas and resource-related operations.

Included on this page are several guidebooks prepared for the Department of Community, Trade and Economic Development for the purpose of helping counties plan for and control development while preserving rural character on the non-resource rural lands. The two guides are Defining Rural Character and Planning for Rural Lands A Rural Element Guide, (Adobe Acrobat Document) and the Keeping the Rural Vision: Protecting Rural Character and Planning for Development. The article Avoiding Sprawl in Rural Areas, summarizes and comments on Growth Management Hearing Boards cases that have struggled with interpreting Washington laws related to rural development issues. A number of other articles, statutes, growth management hearing board cases, and examples of plan policies and ordinances related to rural issues are also presented on this page.

If you have information to share or are aware of other websites that we should link to, please contact Sue Enger, Planning Consultant at senger@mrsc.org, or call at (206) 625-1300.

Statutes, Administrative Rules and Selected Cases

General Background

Flexibility for Varied Economic Uses

Limited Areas of More Intensive Rural Development (LAMIRD) Under RCW 36.70.070(5)(d) - General

The 1997 and 2005 amendments to Sec. RCW 36.70A.070(5)(d) of the Growth Management Act (GMA) provided further direction for the rural element of a comprehensive plan, including guidelines for limited areas of more intensive development. These amendments provide flexibility for more varied economic uses in rural areas, while maintaining rural character and scale.

Most Washington county has examples of existing areas of more intensive development such as unincorporated hamlets, villages, crossroads, shoreline development or other areas built or vested prior to the adoption of GMA comprehensive plans. Certainly, every county has some some isolated cottage industries or small-scale businesses that do not specifically serve resource uses and that predate current plans. These developments may or may not be served by sewer, water, fire, and other public services. The uncontrolled expansion of such areas of intensive, non-rural uses tends to promote sprawl and threaten the rural character that GMA seeks to protect. Counties found these existing developments difficult to reconcile with newly adopted goals and requirements for rural areas. At the same time, many of the resource industries that have traditionally provided jobs and income to rural residents have cut back operations or even disappeared. Many rural residents expressed a need for more employment opportunities and convenient services in rural areas.
The 1997 amendments recognized the opportunity that existing developed areas might offer to provide additional jobs, services and a varied housing choices for rural residents while limiting impacts. The amendments allowed limited areas of more intensive rural development ((LAMIRDs) as exceptions to the rural plan element requirements, while retaining protections for rural character and the operation of resource uses. Most significantly, the amendments required that counties establish logical outer boundaries, based on the boundaries of existing development, to contain more intense development.

RCW 36.70A.070(5)(d) describes three different types of LAMIRDs. The first type is rural development consisting of the infill, development, or redevelopment of existing commercial, industrial, residential or mixed use areas, as provided in RCW 36.70A.070(5)(d)(i). This type of LAMIRD may range in character from shoreline development to villages, hamlets, rural activity centers or crossroad developments, provided the development or redevelopment occurs within the logical outer boundaries of the LAMIRD, as defined by the local jurisdiction. In addition, the intensification of development on lots containing, or new development of, small-scale recreational or tourist uses that rely on a rural location and setting are generally allowed in the rural area per RCW 36.70A.070(5)(d)(ii). Finally, the intensification of development on lots containing isolated nonresidential uses, or new development of isolated cottage industries and isolated small-scale businesses may be generally allowed in the rural area under RCW 36.70A.070(5)(d)(iii). For the later two LAMIRD types, intensification, or expansion, of these businesses will be limited to the existing lot.

The following are examples of LAMIRD provisions adopted by Washington counties. The two sections that follow this Sec. illustrate specific types of LAMIRDs.

  • King County Comprehensive Plan Update Rural Commercial Centers, Excerpt from Ch. 3, 2004 , Rural Legacy and Natural Resource Lands (See especially policies R-401 through R-411)
  • Mason County Comprehensive Plan Ch. III-3 - Rural Lands, updated 2005 (See especially policies RU-100 through RU-218) and Ch. III-1 policies GL-17 through GL-20
  • Mason County Code Ch.17.04 - Rural Lands Development Standards
  • Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan Land Use & Rural Element, as amended through 2004 (see especially Rural Commercial Lands" and "Logical Boundaries of Rural Commercial Areas" and "Industrial Lands Strategy")
  • Jefferson County Code Sec. 18.15.015 - Rural Lands; Sec. 18.15.035 - Table 3-1, Allowable and Prohibited Uses (rural areas); Sec. 18.20.140(1)(e) & (2) (rural commercial); and Sec. 18.30.050 Density, Dimensions & Open Space Standards
  • Jefferson County Code Sec. 18.15.455 - 470, Article VI-L. Remote Rural Overlay Districts for the West End Planning Area and the Brinnon Planning Area; and Sec. 18.15.475 - 490, Article VI-M. Planned Rural Residential Developments (PRRDs)
  • Yakima County Comprehensive Plan Rural Settlements (Adobe Acrobat Document), Plan 2015: A Blueprint for Yakima County Progress (scroll to page I-65; See policies LU-R-6 & LU-R-7)
  • Yakima County Code Ch. 15.37 - Rural Settlement Zoning District
  • Spokane County Comprehensive Plan Ch. 3 - Rural Land Use (See especially "Residential Limited Development Areas" Policy RL 1.3 & "Rural Activity Centers" Policies R-2.1 - RL 2.4)
  • Clark County Unified Development Code Sec. 40.210.030 - Rural Center Residential Districts (RC-2.5, RC-1)
  • San Juan County Comprehensive Plan Sec. 2.3.B, Activity Centers, Element 2 - Land Use Element,updated through Dec. 20, 2008 - Policy 2.3.B includes areas of more intensive development; See also Policy 2.3.C(10)(d) & (e) - Rural Industrial and Rural Commercial)
  • San Juan County Code Sec. 18.30.070 - Rural, resource, and special districts - Special provisions
  • San Juan County Code Sec. 18.30.040 - Land use table - Rural, resource, and special land use districts; and Sec. 18.30.200 - Interim controls in village and hamlet activity centers; and Sec. 18.30.230 - Residential development standards in island centers, rural industrial and rural commercial districts
  • San Juan County - Lopez Village Planning Alternatives (Includes comparison of UGA vs. LAMIRD)
  • Thurston County Limited Areas of More Intensive Rural Development (LAMIRDs)

Rural, Commercial, Industrial and Mixed Use within LAMIRDs

This Sec. includes examples of infill, development, or redevelopment of existing commercial, industrial, residential or mixed use areas, as provided in RCW 36.70A.070(5)(d)(i), and the intensification of development on lots containing isolated nonresidential uses, or new development of isolated cottage industries and isolated small-scale businesses as allowed under RCW 36.70A.070(5)(d)(iii)

Small Scale Recreation & Tourist Use LAMIRDs (RCW 36.70A.070(5)(d)(ii))

Many of Washington's rural areas offer magnificent scenic settings and natural amenities with potential to attract tourists and recreational enthusiasts. Small-scale recreational or tourist uses (SSRTs) provide the opportunity for additional sources of rural jobs and income. When carefully planned and sited, some of these recreation-related uses can be developed without jeopardizing neighboring resource uses or sacrificing rural character. Small-scale recreational or tourist uses rely on a rural location and setting. They generally involve a more limited investment and a smaller scale of development than master planned resorts. SSRTs occupy an individual parcel and focus on offering one or several activities rather than broad range of activities or services. They may be a Ma & Pa type operation, but they still must provide access to a high-quality recreational opportunity to be successful. They can include commercial but not permanent residential uses. Washington has numerous examples of small-scale uses such as bed and breakfast lodging, campgrounds, fishing or river rafting guide services, and equipment rental (such as boats, cross-country skis or sail boards) in areas bordering park, forest, or recreational areas. SSRTs are different from master planned resorts, which are larger scale developments that are more fully discussed in a following Sec..

Rural Area Major Industrial Developments (RCW 36.70A.365) and Industrial Land Banks (RCW 36.70A.367)

Major Industrial Developments Outside of Urban Growth Areas

Counties may establish a process for approval of a major industrial development outside of the UGA for a specific business. A "major industrial development" is defined as a "master planned location for a specific manufacturing, industrial, or commercial business" (RCW 36.70A.365). The process for approval must be established in consultation with cities. Major industrial developments must require a parcel of land so large that no suitable parcels are available within the UGA or must be a natural resource-based industry that requires a location near the resource lands on which it is dependent. Upon approval, the development will be designated as a UGA. A major industrial development must meet the statutory criteria specified in RCW 36.70A.365.

Industrial Land Banks for Counties That Meet Certain Conditions

In addition to major industrial developments, the GMA allows certain counties to designate industrial land banks outside of UGAs (RCW 36.70A.367). In 1996, the Legislature authorized Clark County to designate a bank of no more than two master planned locations for major industrial activity outside UGAs. This authority was later extended to Whatcom County in 1997, to Lewis, Grant, and Clallam counties in 1998, to Benton, Columbia, Mason, Jefferson, Franklin, Garfield and Walla Walla Counties in 2002, and to Jefferson and Clallam Counties in 2003 (Clallam, Jefferson and Mason Counties no longer met the eligibility criteria established in 1998, until the criteria was revised in 2003 to make Clallam and Jefferson Counties eligible). Note that a county's eligibility based statute criteria may vary over time, especially if population size or unemployment rates change, making a county ineligible under the criteria specified in (RCW 36.70A.367(5).
Counties must designate locations suited to major industrial development in an adopted county comprehensive plan, and then adopt development regulations for the approval of specific major industrial developments through a master plan process. The development regulations must ensure that the criteria specified in RCW 36.70A.367(3) are met.
Counties choosing to identify land banks must take action to designate them and adopt regulations on or before the deadline for completion of the county's next periodic comprehensive plan and development regulations review that occurs before December 31, 2014. The authority of a county to designate a land bank area in its comprehensive plan expires if not acted upon within these time limitations.

Master Planned Resort Information and Examples

According to the GMA definition, master planned resorts (MPRs) are "self-contained and fully integrated
planned unit development(s), in a setting of significant natural amenities, with primary focus on destination resort facilities consisting of short-term visitor accommodations associated with a range of developed on-site indoor or outdoor recreation facilities (RCW 36.70A.360(1))." In other words, MPR's are more than just overnight lodging for visitors or a single recreation use. They are carefully planned and integrated developments, centered on special recreational opportunities and natural settings. They provide a package of facilities, services and amenities that largely meet the daily needs of visitors. Visitors are drawn for extended stays because of the high quality and varied recreational opportunity and the area's natural splendor. In several other states, they are called destination resorts to emphasize their special attractions and ability to draw visitors from distant places.

Careful planning and siting of resort facilities coupled with design excellence are essential ingredients to the success of an MPR. Successful resorts must balance development of an attractive package of amenities with preservation of the features and natural settings that are a major key to attracting visitors.

Other Strategies to Expand Rural Economic Uses

As noted above, the number of jobs and associated income in the natural resource industries that traditionally anchor rural economies has declined in recent years. This decline, in turn has precipitated a decline in the rural commercial service centers that support farm, forest and mineral extraction operations. As a result, many rural residents that wish to stay in their communities are seeking other ways of making a living.

As described above, amendments to the Growth Management Act have opened new opportunities for small-scale commercial, industrial and recreation-oriented uses within LAMIRDs, and for master planned developments, major industrial development and industrial land banks outside of urban growth areas. The challenge for Washington counties will be to facilitate new economic uses that are viable in low-density, more remote rural locations that lack an urban level of services and facilities. At the same time, any such new development should be scaled, designed and sited in a manner compatible with resource and critical areas protection goals and with rural character.

The following reports analyze the changing economic conditions, needs and opportunities in rural areas. The King County reports, in particular, examine the market, infrastructure and regulatory factors that affect the rural economy. The report describe a program to support and advance existing and new resource-related operations, including small-scale farming catering to new market demands, farmer-chef connections, and grass fed beef and poultry processing facilities. It outlines programs to increase other types of viable economic uses in rural areas, including home-based businesses, animal specialty services and recreation and tourism uses.

Planning and Design Tailored to Rural Areas

  • Issue Paper on Rural Areas, Puget Sound Regional Planning Council, August 25, 2005 - Helpful discussion of planning issues related to rural character, exception areas such as LAMIRDs, rural services, special purpose district siting and rural economic development
  • Rural Design Workbook, southern Tier Central Regional Development Board (Descriptions of programs & incentives; Good site design examples) 2002
  • Planning for Rural Areas in Tennessee Under PC 1101, Tennessee Advisory Commission on Intergovernmental Relations, January 2001. See especially Ch. 5 - Strategies for Guiding the Uses of Rural Areas
  • Planning for Sustainable Rural Areas, Futurewise, March 21, 2005 - useful analysis and references to statutes and hearings board cases related to rural area planning

Rural Subdivision Regulation

Rural Subdivision Code Examples - Washington

  • Clallam County Code Title 29 - Subdivisions
  • Jefferson County Code Ch. 18.35 - Land Divisions; and Ch. 18.30 - Development Standards
  • Okanogan County Code Title 16 - a good non-GMA code
  • Pacific County Ordinance No. 149
  • San Juan County Code Ch. 18.70 - Land Divisions, and Ch. 18.60 - Development Standards - Includes transfer of development rights, rural cluster development, extension of services into rural areas, affordable housing bonus density
  • Spokane County Code Title 12 - Subdivisions
  • Whatcom County Code Title 21
  • Douglas County Code Title 17
  • Grant County Code Title 22
  • Cowlitz County Code Title 18 - Land and Development (I've included this code primarily because the county has developed a separate procedure and set of requirements for subdivisions of rural classified lands in Ch. 18.50)

Rural Subdivision Code Examples - Model Codes or Codes from other States

Selected Examples of Rural Subdivision Flexibility

  • Okanogan County Code Sec. 16.34.010 Subdivisions - Deviations - applicants may propose a deviation from certain standards, if criteria are met)
  • Pacific County Ordinance No. 149, Sec. 2B38, Sec. 3B4, and Sec. 3D, (Special category lots, set aside for preservation or other specified purposes, are exempt from subdivision requirements)
  • San Juan County Code Sec. 18.70.040 - Simple Land Divisions (Simplified procedure for division of parcel by gifting to family and certain other circumstances
  • Clark County Code Sec. 40.540.030(H) - Waiver of Survey Requirement
  • Kitsap County Code Sec. 16.40.020 (Innocent Purchaser Provision)
  • Walla Walla County Code, Ch. 16.95 - Large Lot Subdivisions (simplified procedure)
  • Woodinville Municipal Code Sec. 20.06.055 - Incentives for flexible lot standards for large subdivisions
  • Flexible Subdivision Regulations, Toolkit of Best Practices, Georgia Quality Growth Project
  • Flexible Residential Development, Massachusetts Citizen Planner Training Collaborative

Rural Cluster Development/ Conservation Subdivisions Codes

Guidebooks, Articles, and Model Codes - Conservation Subdivisions

Rural Zoning and Land Use Planning Examples

Rural Zoning Flexibility

  • Yakima County Code Sec. 15.24.030 - Lot size and density (applies in Valley Rural and Mountain Rural Zoning Districts, among other rural districts; Lot size may vary depending on water availability, soil suitability for septic systems, access conditions and proximity to fire stations); See also Sec. 15.37.030 (applies in Rural Settlement District)
  • Spokane County Code Sec. 14.618.220 - Rural Zones Matrix (Table 618-1) and Sec. 14.618.230 - Uses with Specific Standards (a variety of uses are permitted, some subject to conditions to assure compatibility with rural scale)
  • Douglas County Code Sec. 18.16.220 - Agricultural Support (Flexibility for accessory agricultural employee housing, transfer of land for agricultural use, and family support divisions)
  • Douglas County Code Ch. 14.98 - Definitions (See "accessory agricultural housing," "agriculture to agriculture transfers," and "family farm support divisions.")
  • Skagit County Code Sec. 14.16.300 - Rural Intermediate - (includes long list of permitted uses, administrative special uses, and hearing examiner special uses)
  • Major Programs to Add Flexibility to Regulatory Systems, MRSC webpage

Rural Land Stewardship Programs

Some communities are providing the option to develop a rural stewardship plan, tailored to a specific property, as an alternative to strict adherence to development regulations. Modification of buffers, a streamlined permit process and/or other departures from standards may be permitted on properties that provide a plan of alternative actions that will protect environmental resources and avoid environmental harm.

Rural Ombudsman/Resource Teams/Permit Coordinator

King County has hired a rural ombudsman, to conduct impartial investigations into rural citizens' complaints about zoning, land-use and other property-related complaints. The Rural Ombudsman may mediate disputes and make formal recommendations for procedural or legislative changes to address situations that trigger complaints. King County also appointed a rural permit coordinator who will focus on development permit application review and assistance in unincorporated rural areas.

Links to Other Rural Issues Sites