Utah County delays change to agritourism rule to allow permanent structures, asks staff for narrower draft

Utah County commissioners on July 20 voted to continue for two weeks consideration of a proposed change to the county land‑use ordinance that would let certain agritourism operations keep structures on site after their temporary permits expire.

Greg Robinson, community development director, told the commission the application from B and H Properties would amend Section 8.16 to allow some temporary uses — including seasonal events, seasonal sales and agritourism — to leave structures in place. Robinson said staff recommended denying the amendment because the county’s existing rules treat those activities as temporary commercial uses intended not to alter the agricultural and residential character of surrounding areas.

The proposal prompted a lengthy public exchange during which neighbors and operators described competing priorities: several residents warned that allowing permanent structures would let small agritourism operations grow into year‑round, carnival‑style uses that could bring more noise, lights and traffic; operators and the Farm Bureau argued clearer rules were needed so farms can operate safely and remain economically viable.

"If agritourism allows permanent structures and to create permanent structures, that allows it to grow," said Sean Connor, representing the Scott family, neighbors to the Cornbellies site. Connor said his clients accept current seasonal operations but are concerned that permanent, commercially used structures would change the character of agricultural land.

Brady Brammer, attorney for applicant B and H Properties, framed the change as targeted clarification of an ambiguous code provision. He said the county’s current definition of "structure" (cited under Land Use Code 2.04 in the discussion) is broad and can force property owners to remove otherwise ordinary farm items used during permitted days. "Under the ordinance now, you are required to remove it entirely from the property," Brammer said, describing enforcement and storage problems.

Terry Camp, vice president of public policy for the Utah Farm Bureau Federation, said agritourism in Utah has expanded beyond a short seasonal side business and noted a 2024 state agritourism law that added liability protections, a warning sign standard and a registry. "We are supportive of this change," Camp said, while also recommending that the county consolidate and clarify overlapping permit types (seasonal events, holiday events, agritourism, produce stands).

Operators also urged practical safety changes. A Cornbellies representative said temporary features deteriorate and that permitting some durable, safe improvements would help protect visitors. Robinson and county staff responded that structures that remain for a specified period may be treated as permanent under building code and would therefore need to meet commercial‑use safety standards.

Commissioners repeatedly balanced property‑rights arguments with neighborhood impacts and enforcement realities. Multiple commissioners expressed willingness to change the code but emphasized the need to avoid tailoring countywide rules to a single property.

After feedback from staff that the Planning Commission had recommended narrowing any change to agritourism only and adding limiting conditions, a commissioner moved to continue the item for two weeks and directed staff to prepare draft code language that: narrows the amendment to agritourism, allows some permanent structures tied to a temporary agritourism permit, and incorporates reasonable building‑code and safety standards. A second was offered and the motion passed by voice vote.

The commission did not adopt the amendment at the meeting; staff said they expect to bring a proposed draft back within a couple of weeks for further review and potential action.