2015 ORS 215.253¹
Restrictive local ordinances affecting farm use zones prohibited
  • exception

(1) No state agency, city, county or political subdivision of this state may exercise any of its powers to enact local laws or ordinances or impose restrictions or regulations affecting any farm use land situated within an exclusive farm use zone established under ORS 215.203 (Zoning ordinances establishing exclusive farm use zones) or within an area designated as marginal land under ORS 197.247 (1991 Edition) in a manner that would restrict or regulate farm structures or that would restrict or regulate farming practices if conditions from such practices do not extend into an adopted urban growth boundary in such manner as to interfere with the lands within the urban growth boundary. "Farming practice" as used in this subsection shall have the meaning set out in ORS 30.930 (Definitions for ORS 30.930 to 30.947).

(2) Nothing in this section is intended to limit or restrict the lawful exercise by any state agency, city, county or political subdivision of its power to protect the health, safety and welfare of the citizens of this state. [1973 c.503 §8; 1983 c.826 §12; 1985 c.565 §31; 1995 c.703 §10]

Atty. Gen. Opinions

Effect of constitu­tional pro­vi­sion requiring pay­ments based on govern­ment regula­tions restricting use of prop­erty, (2001) Vol 49, p 284

Chapter 215

Notes of Decisions

Published notice is adequate if prop­erty owners can reasonably ascertain that prop­erty in which they hold interest may be affected. Clackamas County v. Emmert, 14 Or App 493, 513 P2d 532 (1973), Sup Ct review denied

Statutory scheme es­tab­lishing LCDC and granting it authority to es­tab­lish state-wide land use planning goals does not unconstitu­tionally delegate legislative power where both standards (under this chapter) and safeguards ([former] ORS 197.310) exist. Meyer v. Lord, 37 Or App 59, 586 P2d 367 (1978)

Where county had not yet adopted comprehensive plan but had zoned certain por­tions "primarily agricultural," county had not enacted adequate interim measures to protect its agricultural land until exclusive farm use zoning was completed. Columbia County v. LCDC, 44 Or App 749, 606 P2d 1184 (1980)

Atty. Gen. Opinions

Fasano v. Bd. of County Commrs., applica­tion to county governing bodies and planning com­mis­sions, (1974) Vol 36, p 960; binding effect on govern­mental agencies of the adop­tion of interim Willamette River Greenway boundaries, (1975) Vol 37, p 894

Law Review Cita­tions

36 EL 25 (2006)


1 Legislative Counsel Committee, CHAPTER 215—County Planning; Zoning; Housing Codes, https://­www.­oregonlegislature.­gov/­bills_laws/­ors/­ors215.­html (2015) (last ac­cessed Jul. 16, 2016).
 
2 Legislative Counsel Committee, Annotations to the Oregon Revised Stat­utes, Cumulative Supplement - 2015, Chapter 215, https://­www.­oregonlegislature.­gov/­bills_laws/­ors/­ano215.­html (2015) (last ac­cessed Jul. 16, 2016).
 
3 OregonLaws.org assembles these lists by analyzing references between Sections. Each listed item refers back to the current Section in its own text. The result reveals relationships in the code that may not have otherwise been apparent.