Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Rezoning Agritourism topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Applicant seeks form-based rezone for Eden property; commission discusses flag lots, street access and agritourism rules
Summary
During a work session the commission reviewed an applicant request to rezone two parcels in Eden to the form‑based zone, discussed technical questions about access (flag lots vs. shared private drive) and reviewed draft agritourism language that would limit overnight lodging and higher-impact events on smaller farms.
The Ogden Valley Planning Commission held a work session on a rezoning request and on draft agritourism code updates. An owner seeking form-based zoning for approximately 2.76 acres in the Newtown/Eden street-regulating area presented the conceptual idea; commissioners and staff discussed access, subdivision constraints and how agritourism uses should be limited by scale.
Applicant Sal (presenter) explained the property lies within the form-based street-regulating plan polygon and is across the street from an area already rezoned to form-based standards. The applicant said a rezone would let them subdivide to 44,000-square-foot lots rather than remain limited by existing septic constraints on the house site. Staff noted that at the rezoning level the commission reviews the policy fit and that subdivision-level survey accuracy, frontage, shared-driveway or flag-lot compliance and the canal easement that bisects part of the parcel would be evaluated if the rezone is requested and moves forward.
Commissioners raised several recurring technical concerns: whether the narrow parcel geometry and the canal rights-of-way would permit compliant frontage or require a shared private driveway; whether a public street extension might be required in the future; and how to prevent the spread of ad hoc flag-lot development that could result in fragmented access or longer dead-end roads. Staff said the most practical next step would be for the applicant to provide a concept subdivision sketch showing how two lots could meet form-based and subdivision standards, and staff offered to review options (shared private driveway with conditional deferred right-of-way; short public street extension; or other solutions) before a public hearing.
The commission also reviewed proposed agritourism clarifications in the county code. Commissioners and staff agreed on this principle: small-scale farm activities (farm stands, apiaries, pick-your-own) should be permitted at small acreages, but higher-impact uses — overnight lodging, weddings, large amusements — should be tied to larger, actively farmed parcels and should require stricter qualification. Staff proposed tying the agricultural qualification to a simplified, local definition of "active agricultural use" (for example, a minimum acreage plus an active-production test modeled on the state's Farmland Assessment Act) and to retain an exceptions pathway where the tax-assessment process could also be considered. The commission recommended clarifying the draft so that apiaries, farm stands and low-impact retail remain allowable on small parcels while limiting lodging, large events and amusement operations to larger agritourism properties that demonstrably generate agricultural production.
No final decisions were made; commissioners asked staff to prepare more precise language on flag-lot/shared-driveway limits and to refine agritourism thresholds (acreage, production tests, and which uses require conditional use review). The applicant was encouraged to return with a concept layout for the two‑lot division before the item is scheduled for a public hearing.
