Manila council narrows draft ‘glamping’ rules, sends revised draft back to planning and zoning

The Manila Town Council directed staff to send the draft "glamping" ordinance back to Planning & Zoning with a package of council recommendations following a lengthy discussion on site size, density and operational standards.

Council members focused on minimum lot size and density, saying a one-acre minimum was too small and four acres was excessive for hotel-style, stationary lodging. Mayor Kathy Knight said, "I think 2 would be acceptable," and the council agreed to ask Planning & Zoning to consider a 2-acre guideline while retaining the ability to handle smaller parcels through zoning changes or stricter unit-per-acre limits.

Why it matters: The ordinance sets rules for a new lodging category that the council expects will look and operate more like hotel/motel-style, stationary units (yurts, cabins, sheep wagons) rather than transient RV parks. The rules will shape where investors can locate these operations, what infrastructure they must provide, and what buffers neighbors can expect.

Key council directions to Planning & Zoning

- Minimum recommended lot guideline: 2 acres as the baseline for the council's recommendation (Planning & Zoning to refine language). - Density: the council accepted a working maximum of 10 units per acre (some members preferred 8 for smaller parcels); Planning & Zoning was asked to provide alternative language tying density to acreage (for example, 8 units per acre if less than 2 acres). - Parking: require at least one designated on-site parking space per glamping unit (specified as a 24-by-10 on-site space in the draft); staff asked to recalculate parking and overflow requirements consistent with density limits. - Unit spacing/setbacks: council asked staff to define "unit" precisely and to clarify measurement (edge-to-edge vs. centerline). Council generally favored a minimum of 25 feet between units, with several members endorsing 30 feet; Planning & Zoning should propose definitive setback language. - Development-review process and fees: add the Development Review Committee to the approval flow, and require developers to pay associated attorney and engineering fees (matching the approach used for earlier developments). - Utilities and services: clarify restroom and laundry standards (options include one fully furnished bathroom per unit or shared facilities such as one bathroom per two tents; council suggested minimum laundry and bathroom provisions scaled to unit counts and asked Planning & Zoning for precise thresholds). - Waste and screening: require a centralized, fully screened, bear-safe trash enclosure; staff recommended a commercial dumpster provision (one commercial dumpster per 10 units as a starting point) with no overflow. - Fencing and buffers: require a 6-foot privacy fence along residentially zoned property lines; front-yard fencing should be optional and limited to 4 feet where used. - Safety and review: explicitly include the fire marshal on the Development Review Committee to ensure hydrant placement, emergency access and site layout meet safety needs.

Public comment and legal concern

Local resident Justin Von Eberstein questioned whether lodging-related zoning restrictions are supported by objective data as required by the Utah Land Use and Development Act, urging the council to ensure the ordinance is legally defensible. Council asked staff and Planning & Zoning to confirm the data and legal basis when they redraft the ordinance.

Next steps

Planning & Zoning will incorporate the council's direction (2-acre guideline, density/parking/setback clarifications, review committee, fee language, utilities, trash and fence rules, and explicit fire-marshal input) and return the revised draft to the council for further action, followed by the required public hearing(s).