Utah County Commission approves agritourism rule changes, sets vehicle thresholds and storage limits

Utah County commissioners voted to adopt changes to the county's agritourism and seasonal-event temporary-use rules after several hours of staff and applicant discussion.

Bryce Armstrong, community development staff, outlined remaining differences between the county's and the applicant's proposals and presented staff's recommendations, including a 90-day combined cap for agritourism and seasonal events, limits on permanent amusement rides and a requirement for traffic analysis at higher-intensity events. "Staff proposes to have a combined total between the two of 90," Armstrong said, noting individual agritourism permits would still be capped at 65 days.

The commission modified several staff positions during discussion and accepted a package of changes before voting. Key points adopted were: - A combined cap of 90 days for agritourism plus seasonal events while retaining 65 days for agritourism alone. - A daily operating window beginning at 8 a.m.; ending times stayed at 10 p.m. weeknights and 11 p.m. weekends. - On-site storage area capped at 10% of the activity area (commissioners had discussed 5% originally; applicant sought no limit). - Amusement rides allowed if temporary (staff had sought to prohibit permanent amusement rides); permanent structures remain subject to building-code permitting and a 20-foot height limit for permanent buildings in relevant zones. - A traffic analysis regime tied to vehicle volume: an applicant-prepared traffic estimate will be required if average daily traffic increases by 200 vehicles or more because of the event; a full engineer-conducted traffic study will be required if average daily traffic increases by 1,000 vehicles.

Richard Nelson, the county's public works director, described how mass-gathering and event permits interface with state roads and said those larger impacts often require coordination with UDOT. "For mass gathering permits we do require some sort of temporary permit," Nelson said, adding that volume on approach roads is the key concern rather than only parking arrangements.

The applicant's representative urged caution about tying traffic requirements solely to acreage and recommended using vehicle or attendance metrics instead. "Tying it to pure size may not be the right way to do it," the representative said, arguing an event's attendance is the proper metric to predict impacts.

Commissioners also added a two-year exception intended to protect established agritourism events: if a dwelling is built after an event that received an approved temporary agritourism permit within the previous two years, the new dwelling would not automatically block the established event.

A commissioner moved to approve item 1 on the regular agenda using staff recommendations with the discussed changes; another commissioner seconded the motion. After a voice vote, the motion passed. "I will make a motion to approve item number 1 on the regular agenda based off of the proposed changes to the staff recommendations with the following changes," said the mover during the motion. The chair then announced that the motion passed by voice vote.

The changes were presented as countywide standards that staff said will apply to future agritourism permits and are intended to balance rural agricultural operations' viability with neighborhood impacts. The ordinance amendments will become part of the county's land-use code; staff will incorporate the precise language and reference the related subsection numbers in the final ordinance package.

The commission moved to a closed session after the vote; no additional public comment was recorded before the meeting moved into closed session.

Ending: The commission approved the ordinance changes and asked staff to finalize the ordinance language and cross-reference the storage, setback and exception provisions before returning the final wording for codification.