Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

So, welcome everyone to the That's interesting to the meeting. Um, we'll start with the pledge of allegiance. Amber, would you lead us in there? Sure. All right. I aliance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Okay, we could use a motion for the approval of minutes. They didn't motion. Thank you.

I'll second. Second. Motion and second. All in favor? I I I. All right. Great. Uh we'll move next to the It looks like our main course tonight is the public hearing with dessert down below. We'll probably get to the dessert tonight. So, we'll start with go civil. Oh, hang on.

Dallas doesn't want You're a movie star. You need the camera. That's right. He's on He's on a most wanted poster. It's not true. You what? Not true. I can't come down to the chamber. No, but I think you do. You're rolling now. All right, you're up. I don't know.

Dallas Buckner Go Civil. So, this is an annexation out off of 3000 North. Um, and the blue that you see on there is the current city boundary. Um and so and then the red is what we're looking to annex. So my client has two parcels right there. We're within the city's declaration boundary. Um the intersecting roads Northfield. I forget what it's forget what Northfield's number name is. 400 West. Um and that's pretty much it. It's pretty pretty simple one. Where where is this? So, it's 3000 North and Northfield Road up by the school garage.

Yeah, bus. School garage. and he is planning to do what with this or just um so we're we're planning to come through with a zone change as this keeps progressing so we can stack the timeline a little bit but it's general planned for um residential estates I believe and we're planning to do a zone change to commercial or to industrial to light industrial um but it's at the extent of the airport zones So, so they kept build residential.

Yeah. So, these So, these par this field right here is what we're annexing and then this is what's in the city. So, this is everything north of 30,000 for a for a small portion is zoned for residential estates, but this zone I think only allows for one unit per five acres. Um, is that cuz no utilities or something or No, it's because of the airport zones in that particular zone. Yeah, in the in the cuz that one's the that's the instrument zone and then Well, so the instrument zone and then the I I forget what the zone there's the traffic or the

zachroach zone, right? Yeah. So the approach zone would allow to Dallas's point one unit per five acres. And that's that's basically due to aircraft operations. And so that's that's in this little triangle right here. And then the instrument zone, does it have the same requirements? If I recall correctly, we there would be no housing in that area. Yeah. Uh so it would be limited to commercial industrial type uses. Yeah. I can ask you, do we have any say in those or is that just you want an airport, this is what you're going to do?

Well, currently that's that's the ordinance that we have. Um, to be frank with you, I thought a lot of this was was really dictated by the FAA, you know, thou shalts. But it it looks to be that we do have a little bit more say um in what goes on. And I I know Reed Reed at the county is potentially working on some changes that he'd like the city to entertain, but there's there would still be restrictions and and and the idea is obviously there's nuisances associated with the airport. We want the airport to be able to be successful and operate freely without a lot of complaints. And then the other issue is um you know just a danger to the folks on the ground and the airplanes above. So,

so with some of the uh discussions that we're in with the county and our airport director and we've got one of our council members who's also been involved in those discussions with us, we'll I anticipate that there will be some type of revision to these airport overlay zones. It'll be coming to you for for your input and consideration. Good. Thank you. I have a question for the good coun the good chairman. Was the school district still planning to move your bus garage? Yes. Somewhere out in that. Yeah, it'll just be by the um where the ware school warehouse is now. Just consol.

We're just going to consolidate everything. Okay. So, yeah, as you as you zoom in and you can see the parcel areas. So, this line right here, everything southeast of that. So, this would be eligible for one house per five acres. and our total area is 18. So this is maybe five acres and some change and then beyond that there'd be no residential. So

yeah and so that's why we're planning to come through probably in the coming weeks and start through sketch and then planning commission as the annexation gets a little further along uh for a zone change to zone change both of those both of these parcels to industrial. So, you're looking at bringing it in initially as annex transition then and then you'll request the appropriate zone or does the city allow us to establish a zone with uh with the annexation now? It uh the way I read the ordinance, it prefers that method. Okay. But you're but you're on city council tomorrow. Okay. So, we'll have to Yeah, probably we

probably better to just go through with the annexation for now. Okay. Yeah, because I know in the past it always had to come in annexation transition and then so we always did annexation first and then zone change after. Um which if that's changed then going forward I'll Yeah, we can run them concurrently. Okay. Yep. Yeah, I guess for now with the timeline we're on just annexing but we plan to bring it in for industrial city. Any concerns? What are your No, I uh I think we've it's been noticed properly. Um I believe this one even went to the county for approval. Yes. Um we had

Why is that? Can you zoom out a little bit, Kent? Just trying to be giant. See where it says the instrument I instrument approach zone there. Yes.

That's what the state code would define as a county peninsula. I.e. county land is creating a peninsula of city land on three sides. Uh so we can't uh create or exasperate that unless the county approves. So this peninsula of city land created a peninsula uh and and the math is a little convoluted in state code, but he's already been to the county to get that approved. Okay. Thank you. Every day I learn something new. Excuse me. I forgot what happened yesterday. Yeah.

I just have a general question uh for engineering and city planning and legal if possible. When when these proposals come up to annex in, what are the pros and cons to annexing little spots here and there as far as cost to the city? Are there assets? Is it uh would we get some taxation off that or is it a negative because we have to take care of snow removal and all that stuff or uh does it just kind of X out? What are the pros and cons?

Well, um certainly the more hodge podge annexations are, the the more expensive it is to provide services, right? It's always best if we can kind of grow out in a in an organized fashion. Um, however, you know, we we do have even in this case, the in this particular case, the roadway along their frontage on 3000 North is already annexed into the city. It came in with the annexation of the property to the south of the roadway. So, this doesn't change anything um with the roadway responsibilities that we would have. We already have those um you know the utilities you know that we have some utilities are existing others that are planned but that's that is um you know that that's all in place. We we know how this can be served with city utilities. So they're not really a concern there.

Have there been some annexations in that last few years that have gone through that have really burdened the city or not too bad? Not that I'm aware of. I I think Ken hit the point is one of the primary concerns is can we serve this? You know, can can we adequately especially from a public safety standpoint? Sure. The utilities are there and and the state kind of gives us some guidelines by telling us not to create county islands, not to create county peninsulas unless it makes sense to do so. Um, so I I don't see any major issues with this particular proposal. And we do have the water and sewer both there already. Okay. Thank you.

So, there are homes right there um that we can see and I I know right where that's at, but I mean how does that affect the homes and do we you know I mean does their opinion matter? You know, we're talking about industrial. Is there a way to, you know, to have it be kind of conducive to

I think that's a good question. Um, you know, we're we're still quite rural out there. Uh, we have it mastered plan for very low density now. Uh, with the airport overlay as it's currently written, it certainly restricts that residential uh, capacity out there. But with the zone change not following that general plan, uh I think when they do come in for a zone change, uh that is open for discussion if they want to go to industrial. Um how do we mitigate potential uses? I mean, are we looking at a I know they're not going to do a gravel yard, but we're going to talk about these things in a little bit. Um are we looking at noxious uses right next to residential? I think that's on the table with a general plan proposal. I think one thing you'd want to look at and maybe Ken if you could flip back to the zoning one and then turn on the general plan. So the way that the city's general plans laid out based on that airport zone is it puts almost everything in so if you zoom into like if we look at the south side of 3000 where those houses are at what's the that purple is probably INM2

this one. Yeah, maybe turn maybe turn off the zoning layer. Looks like can't make it easier to read. There we go. Oh yeah. Okay, there we go. So basically the Yeah. So light manufacturing.

Yeah. So everything So if you X out of that now and you see all that purple, that's all general planned for industrial. And then our argument for going to industrial is just saying that hey even though this is shown as residential estates or low density residential the city's ordinance doesn't allow us to build residential there anyways because of the the airport zones and so we were more so looking to just extend the purple through our site. Dallas, do you have any idea what kind of industrial they're looking to do there? I I don't. So,

I think that's key when you're trying to change a general plan. I mean, this is coming later, but Yeah. So, the this property owner, as far as I know from other projects I've done with him, is uh is a storage type. That's what his main business is. And so, um I think there's some going in next door there if I'm not mistaken. Right. Yeah. And so there's on the on the previous question of does annexing these smaller parcels in and that kind of thing. This property as it currently sits is kind of land like locked as not being able to be developed

in any capacity because as soon as we go in and try to pull a permit with the build with the county, they're going to say you're adjacent to the city. you've got to go talk to the city and make sure you don't want to annex. They don't want you to annex. And then we come to the city and the city says you're within the city's annexation declaration boundary. And so even if there were So this is not a there's no imminent plans to do any development. It's more so, hey, if you want to ever do something on here, the city's going to make you annex. annexation takes six monthsish or longer and then you've got to come through and zone change and that takes a couple months. And so this is really just forward thinking saying, "Hey, if I ever get a wild hair to develop here, I might as well have my ducks in a row and have

it annexed and zoned." So yeah, I certainly know and I haven't read this in a while and I don't want to question you, Dallas, but if they do a subdivision here, I think that's when the county really pushes you to annex into the city. Yeah,

I'm not convinced that's the case on a building permit, but I could be mistaken. Yeah, and you you might be right, but it's to have a long skinny 18 acres like that is and not do some kind of subdivision when you have sewer and water at the front door is a little unusual. So, but the the main reason I wanted to just flip this on was just to show Jennifer that those houses are in future light industrial. Yeah. whether they know it or not.

Right. Right. I just have to protect the homeowners. Um so with this, so the general plan right now is for residential acre low low which generally translates to residential estates, right? Okay. Um, and the master plan, I mean, and then the city's ordinance says low density residential is fine and good, but you're in the airport zone. Yeah. And in the airport zone, you can only go as dense as one unit per five acres, right?

So, I'm going to ask a silly question and and I love dialogue. Is any of what they're going to potentially do with this gerine to annexation or not annexation? I'm sorry, Tom. What was what was the question? What the potential use of this property? Could we factor that into our decision for annexation or non-anexation?

Uh, you you can consider factors, you know, in our annexation policy plan. It it certainly talks about being able to serve the property. What is the character of the proposal? You you can look at these things. Uh, it does meet the criteria, I think, to be annexed. Uh, I think maybe the zone change would be a different discussion. Right. That's that was more for future knowledge. If we could use that as part of our But it it it does say you should consider certain factors. I don't have them off the top of my head. We can bring it up, Ken, if you'd like. Um, but there's there's kind of a laundry list we can take a look at

because I think it's important to know have some ideas. I just this for in the future there might be some that are a little more controversial or something. And so I don't think people knowing that that's in that airport zone are going to want to buy five acres and build a ranch with your acreage. That's three lots, four lots, whatever. I just can't imagine people with that kind of foresight and money wanting to build a five acre ranch underneath an airport unless they're in love with airplanes.

Yeah. Right. Yeah. And then 3000 also is a 75 foot master plan road. Yeah. And right off the north exit. So I mean as things keep Yeah. develops and that's going to be a pretty busy I think you're looking forward I I think you I think what you may see from the county and Ken tell me if I'm off base uh is some a proposal for higher density in these residential areas than than the one per five I we're still not looking at town homes or apartments but again that's a proposal airport view

no but equestrian 5acre parcels that are in the The other the other factor with this is just that 3000 North does have water and sewer in it, but the the sewer is not is generally not very deep. It might be deep, but 30,000 North is built up several feet and then all the land falls off to the north. So, it's not like this property would not be a great candidate for developing because you can't sewer more than probably the front third of that I wouldn't think without putting some kind of lift private whatever which is another argument for more of an industrial where you don't have

that's good to know. So, and just uh kind of as an FYI, this same zone that takes up most of the property they're talking about annexing, that that's the airport overlay zone that we're in at the Diamonte Industrial Subdivision on the south side of Highway 56. And and that ends up being a good use for property within that overlay, right? Yeah. So, any other questions from the council?

Uh, well, is it is it okay to to talk about um just annexing it but not changing the zoning at this time? Our our application is just for zone for annexation. Just for annexation. Right now, you're just saying what you would like to go do in the future. Yep. Okay. Yeah. And we plan to come through with a zone change application. Okay. That way your neighbors and everybody out there, these homeowners would come at that time and Yeah. be able to put it.

Yeah. So, as this has been advertised and as it is on your agenda, it it really is just annexation. So, it would default to the annex transition and then they'll need to request a zone in the future. It would just be nice. I know you're thinking highest and best use and I get it. I'm just hopeful that, you know, the the homes are in that area. you know, they are rural and there I mean, not that everything remains rural, it doesn't uh but if there's a way that we can um look at a light industrial type of thing, you know, like you're talking about rather than a gravel pit or rather than something that's going to be noisy and and

Yeah. Yeah. And that's and that's the plan is just to basically just because of the restrictions with the airport zone where everything south of 3000's already for light industrial that's where we intend to come in for INM1. Yeah. So and I would encourage you to maybe if these homeowners are outside the minimum requirement for notification just as a courtesy go out to those homeowners that are Yeah. any of those residents that are in the county would have received a notice. Okay.

Um and once you get to the zone change, you know, we can look at the general plan for guidance. As an example, it does say in the INM1 we should consider buffering residential uses that are next door. Um certainly storage is a very benign use. Um, but as we'll talk about in just a little bit, the INM1 zone is is a quite an open zone now. So, it could potentially allow for a lot of uses that a residential property would consider noxious, which sounds like it's a presentation for a future day. Is that right?

That's I think that would be appropriate. that work for you? Okay. Yes. What to do with the zone change? Well, what did we'll just consider the zone change future and anything you wanted to attach to that? Maybe that might be the time for Yes, absolutely. Let's see what the public has to say. Yes. I was going to say this is a public hearing. Come on, Tyler. You're our only Tyler, you're our only public. You got any comment? Oh, yes. We woke. He's swinging at that beach.

Well, just again, this is where my family's farm has been forever. It's just a little west of there. Um, the airport really restricts just about everything you can do. Um, I guess it's the government's position that it's better that people die in an airplane crash if they're at work but not asleep in their beds. It's kind of weird. So, industrial uses are fine, just not residential, whatever. Um but uh no the the other issue that you run into is if even if they didn't want to subdivify but wanted to build in the county there's a dollar figure I can't remember what it is it's in the half million 3/4 million range if you're doing that much at capital improvements you have to get the city's consent before the county will let you get a permit even without subdividing. So it's it's if you're within the city's declaration boundary your hands are really tied. Um, and yeah, I mean, people build out there cuz it's rural. Uh, I don't think they paid attention that they're in the middle of a master aster plan medium density area or that they're in the middle of a flood plane or anything else. But, and like Dallas said, the sewer is a major concern out there, too. So, everything north of 3000 really uh has to have a private lift station or extend all the way to Three Peaks Elementary with their sewer line. So, that ain't going to happen. And so really you can unless the city wants to buy the property, it needs to be an industrial use.

Thank you. We'll close the public hearing, come back to the council. Does anybody want to make a motion or have a thought? I'll make a positive recommendation for the annexation of this property. I'll second it. We have a motion and second. All in favor? I. Okay. Thank you. Serious. Thanks, Dallas. Thanks, Dallas. Have a good night. Thanks, Tyler. You convinced us completely. Pro like, well, he's he was what pushed us over the top. He showed up. He just missed being in this room. He wanted to get involved. Yeah.

Okay. Next on the agenda, looks like we have some time to hit these two tonight. Um, uh, ordinance text amendment. So, may I may I look at your Yeah. Is Tyler, were you planning on speaking with regard to item number four that on pertaining to building materials tonight? I'm here for number four. Could we move that so Tyler go home to his young family for? Yeah, let's do it. All right. Tell her she owes Tom. So, let's move that she now.

Okay. Should I leave? I think. Yeah. That' be great.

Just so as we talk about these, we would make I know it's not for recommendation, but eventually it would be a recommendation to consider these to the city council. So, this is just a discussion item tonight. Thank you. All right. So, thank you, chair, members of the commission. So, this has been around the block a couple times. I think last time we talked about this, we had some folks from the audience that were doing a survey of sorts and we decided to punt this down the road until we got some feedback. I've reached out to those folks. Uh they said they were going to get us some some findings from their surveys and I haven't heard anything. So, here we are. That's that's like the findings from the survey.

I don't know. I haven't seen them. Um, so before we go into this, I thought we might just take a quick look at the general plan. And I'll I'll try to be brief and not read all this verbatim. K, could you go to the next slide? So the the general plan's full of goals and objectives and and and uh and uh anyways, goals and objectives. Um so if you look at this first goal land use goal 091.7 it talks about regulating setbacks landscaping art appropriate lighting signs and other design amenities that complement and enhance the streetscape and design of new development through the zoning ordinance. So when we go through these the general plan it's in its name it's general what implements these things that we worked a couple years on back in 2022. It's the zoning ordinance. So that's that's where the rubber meets the road so to speak. Uh you can go to the next slide, Kent. It talks about cultural and aesthetic enrichments or hallmarks of Cedar City. Um it says these factors combined to produce a community identity that's often the envy of cities throughout Utah. And when we were going through the general plan, uh I believe it was the chamber. They had done a a survey uh that was called the vision 2050. And it says not part of I mean there's many findings in this this is just a snippet but not the least of these was that Cedar City should focus on maintaining improving the community aesthetics in order to enhance its festival city and brand um and reestablish its reputation as the gateway to the parks. Next slide. Kent it talks about identifying architectural and other visual qualities that will contribute to the understanding of the city's unique identity. It talks about identifying unique architectural design, natural features, land use activity, and other characteristics that are desirable for preservation.

Uh, and it certainly is one of these areas mentions the downtown core talks about in goal 52 that we should develop design guidelines and development standards and ordinances as appropriate to protect the qualities within these areas that are valued by the citizens. And lastly, goal here, 0523 says, allow for the consideration of alternative design and building materials where appropriate. That's kind of right where we're at. So, it's talking about the visual quality of the city is important, but we also shouldn't be absolutely too restrictive in in what we're asking for, right? So, we're trying to find that balance here, I think. Uh, next slide talks about area specific opportunities, continuing the momentum of facade improvements, infill development, street trees, and high design standards. And then it specifically mentions along historic Main Street, 200 North and the Center Street corridors. Uh, next slide. So when we when going through those quickly, obviously they're I'm kind of repeating myself. They're general. So what do we have in the zoning ordinance currently that tries to implement these overarching goals and policies? And in section 26416, we have the ordinance starts to break down building materials and what is required specifically along Main Street and 200 North. It uses these terms preferred building materials, preferred accent materials, and discouraged, which doesn't give us a whole lot of guidance because it doesn't say required, but it is required along Main Street and 200 North. And these these so if we replace preferred with required, these are the areas that we're focusing on. Talks about cy stone, cultured

stone, full brick veneer, composite lab sighting, i.e. the Hardy plank. I don't care for having brand names in the zoning ordinance. I don't think they need to be there. Uh architectural concrete, colored CMU, and it it goes on for accent materials. It talks about pre-cast concrete, uh stucco or ephus, and then it indicates only if the quality of the design merits such consideration. That is difficult for staff to deal with that kind of language. Uh in I have a question. How how old is this ordinance? Uh it's been around as long as I have. Okay. So, it there's a chance that that you contractors have,

you know, better better ways toward some of these building materials that would still make it very appealing for what we're looking for. And that's that's where we're trying to head. So, yeah, this that's the whole point of the discussion. Um prohibited materials, plain gray, flat CMU wall, brick tiles. I'm not convinced I know what a brick tile is. If anybody else does, let me know. Metal walls and wood or glass. Use this more than a functional purpose or as an accent material. So, there's some subjectivity in this ordinance as well that without a design review board or something along those lines, it is difficult for staff to enforce subjectivity. Right. Uh, next slide, Kent. So I think if you look at the way the ordinance is written now, I think it it's certainly pushing you towards more traditional materials. U and and again these are just my opinions. I think these type the two buildings you see in front of you is is what they what it's pushing uh builders to produce uh on Main Street and and 200 North. You see the brick, you see the concrete accents, little limited use of stucco. That bottom building would certainly be cultured stone, I imagine. But that's I think that is the goal. Next slide, Kent. I think these are the types of things that the ordinance is saying we don't want to see on Main Street in 200 North. You know, a corrugated metal building. I think that's great in an industrial zone. You know, mirrored glass buildings. There's another metal building. Probably that one in your the right hand corner of your screen is probably what I might consider the overuse of Stuckco. That's uh what the ordinance is telling us we're we're trying to avoid on these streets.

May I ask what is the the the concern with Stuckco? You know, you use the term overuse. What what is our our So I I don't profess to be an archite architect, Tom, but I think if you look at that building where it's completely stuckcoed, um I just in California and everything is stuckco.

I know, right? Uh it's pushing you to to use, you know, some rock, some stone, place some visual interest in that building. Uh, a lot of cities will will push much farther than we do as far as having offset planes and porches and other types of materials. All we're doing is talking about the materials. Um, I don't I don't see that there's anything wrong with Stuckco. We're talking about the aesthetic impact of these structures. Right.

But do we want as a as a as a government, do we want to get that deep into people's architectural choices? Well, I I think I've given you what the general plan says. I don't want to get I don't want to get into a political question, not about this isn't directed toward you, directed toward the overall conversation. Do we how deep do we want to get into one's personal business when it comes to what they consider architecturally pleasing?

I think I answered that question. Well, architecturally pleasing is very subjective, but I think you got to get into it deep enough to preserve the intent of what you want it to look like as a city.

Yeah. I I think it's not just do I personally think this is a good look good-looking building or is Mr. Meling or somebody else? It is also what is the overall impact of what you want Cedar City to look like. Now a trained architect may look at that glass building and think it is beautiful personally I disagree but I I don't know right is you know a New York looking style building is is that the image of cedar when we go through all those goals and policies in the general plan right uh the the quality of what people see and Dave's not here our economic development director but it's also an economic development issue. What if if he or someone else if they are trying to uh relocate, let's say, to southwest Utah and they're bringing their their business here, their families here, probably trying to get their top dogs to come along with them, whoever they he or she may be, what they see does affect where they're going to put their money. It really does. Um, so if they see a main street in St. George that is beautiful, it's treelined, it has XYZ amenities, and then they see Cedar and they're competitive, where might they go? Those are considerations uh that business,

of course. I mean, Oldtown Fort Collins, I mean, it's an attraction. It's beautiful. It's old, and we're a tourist city, too. So, these are important things. I think

I think that I think that uh um you know part of this kind of comes down to what is Cedar City known for? What do people think about when they when they think of driving through Cedar City? It's it's not the modern glass building. I personally think those buildings look pretty cool. That's just my own personal opinion. But that's not the character of of you know what you expect to see driving down the main drag of Cedar City, right? And so I can kind of see why the general plan would steer us away from that into something that more traditionally fits Cedar City. The same goes for the Stuckco. um you know when you're in you know parts of California that is the historical um you know look of of the of of that community right and so that's that's much different than that type of a treatment in Cedar City. So that's really what we're trying trying to kind of figure out is what what makes sense for Cedar City. We have something right now in our ordinance. Is that what's best or does that need some adjustment? Right.

And I have first of all no objection to some reasonable ideas and thoughts. I just I just want to see how far we want to go because there's there's places that will dictate you down to, you know, what color brick you're going to use. Yeah. And I think this discussion was had about the time they someone on the south end of town started building a lighthouse in Cedar City because that is that is foreign to

and it shows how fickle everybody is because at first everybody hated it and now when you say you're gonna tear down everyone all of a sudden loves it. for it used to be an eyes sore and you couldn't have lights spinning and nobody was allowed inside and they wanted to turn it into a restaurant and have you know meals and entertainment up there but now it's a it's an icon.

So what what's good back then is not good now. My my only my only concern is in in in government dictating designs is all of us are I'm I'm not colorb blind but I I call myself color irrelevant. I don't really care. But everybody, it used to be grays and then it was limes and then it was you know all these different colors and different shapes and that stuff changes so rapidly with the trends that we're that you know we're we're showing and oh I want to do this now and that's my only concern with how deep into the weeds we want to get because things constantly change. I mean, geez, in in 30 years from now, power bills may be so high that we want all glass buildings because they're all the glass made by Tesla and that's what operates the building, you know, for the energy. I mean, who knows? And

it's also not citywide. It says certain streets that they want to Yeah. Right. look a certain way and and so but if we opened up here, we have the the crawl, you know. Well, it it worked for this. So, let's let's continue to crawl in in into more areas. So, so in in our discussions, in our minds, please keep in mind how far we want government to to play that how deep we want to get. So, we so it doesn't become limiting, but it doesn't become a ghetto. So I think one thing to I guess where my mind kind of went as you were talking about that Tom is that um

most people's mind just went off someplace else.

Yeah. So, you know, there are I would say in most areas of town allowing things to follow architectural trends is, you know, may not be a bad thing, right? But what do we want along these main drags? You know, do we want these main drags following architectural trends which ends up very much dating each each facility along there as to what era it was built in? or do we want to try to maintain some type of consistency in the aesthetic? Right? And so that that's I guess uh in my mind that's kind of the question. And if we want to try to keep some consistency in the aesthetic, is what we have now appropriate or is there something we can do to improve it? Right.

So in 97, this ordinance has been around before that. In 97, uh, Steve Corey, Terry Jones, the Carter brothers built a beautiful glass story building at 337, uh, South Maine. Uh, today that building would not be allowed, but it wasn't allowed then. And and then we go to the the extreme on the north end we have Lebar cabinets and I don't think it's an unattractive building but it's a I think it's orange if I'm not mistaken. Anybody know what I'm talking about? Yeah.

You know it's it's a it's a straight metal building. And then we have a brand new building that was built two years ago. Um, oh my gosh, it's not Imperial window. Right next to the jail directly elite elite door and window elite door and window. That's a, you know, a metal building and and the ordinance existed then. Again, I don't think they're unattractive. I'm I'm just wondering, isn't that what we're trying to do is try to spell out what takes away some of the ambiguity and gives the city kind of tools to enforce

I think that is part of it. Um it now has has it been completely enforced on some of those buildings in years past? Obviously no. Right. And I'm not throwing stones. I'm No, no. I I don't think you are. I'm just trying to answer that question why we have but we're think what what's the thought this is before you you know a lot of these buildings so we're too restrictive where are we too restrictive I mean what's well I mean I get I get the whole it's ambiguous a little bit well let's let's move forward a little bit if you don't mind chair y next slide Kent

um these are just some examples of different building materials and I think uh and I threw these He's in there. These are these are three different Walmarts, three different towns. I think they're all Utah if I'm not mistaken. None of them are ours. But there is quite a I think there's a a stark difference in what you see here. Right. So probably the one in the top right hand corner, I don't know, that's probably 90%, you know, architectural block CMU type product. Um, I think these other two, and this is my humble opinion, go somewhere else are a much better fit if it was on Main Street money. We just don't or 200 North again. Oh, definitely warmer

than the top right. Yeah, definitely warmer. Um, anyways, next slide, Kent. I threw these in for fun, you know. I mean, architecture. But I'm sure these are beautiful buildings and I think they're all by famous architects and they probably fit where they're built. But I don't think it's Maine and 200. I don't I don't think that building from Las Vegas would I don't know where you could put it in this valley that it would fit other than the landfill. It would look good out at the landfill. Let's go burl.

You you should be in you should be doing this presentation. I think not not me. All right, next slide, Kent. So, if we go back go back to that one last picture of the U, could that building with all that glass across the front, could that be on Main Street? Not under our current ordinance? No. Okay. There's a new one that looks similar to it right there on the corner of 300 West and Center or 300 West and 200 South that new music building. It's not on me. Yeah. Yeah. It's not on name, but it it fits. It's We don't have any say over the university.

Well, no, nobody does. That the building on Third West by the University. I think that's one day building in town. My son thinks it's the coolest building in town. So it is very agree with you. You have this and this. You have those two buildings just I don't want to tell somebody why they can't build within reason. I

the architectural design to me doesn't matter anywhere near as much as how do I want to say this? Some of the garbage I see uh around some of the rentals that are just kind of thrown together. Uh I don't I don't know how we would regulate that. Uh, but uh I don't know. I I've built houses where I have not liked what the owner put on the outside, but they wanted it. So, fair enough. So, I I don't know. I I I agree with Tom. I'm not sure how much government wants to be involved here. So, I don't know. Uh tough deal. There's homes in this town that I really like. There was a home up on the hill that people really highly criticized up on Lelay Hill because of the color. They didn't like it. And I didn't like it either. But fair enough, that owner liked it, so I I didn't have a problem with it. So, I don't know. I don't know how much would you want to get involved. That's an interesting conundrum, isn't it?

Luckily, Utah passed their own legislation for residential homes that kind of prevented cities from cracking down too much on on any of this kind of stuff, but it doesn't apply to historic districts or commercial buildings. Say, say that again, Jayce. What? So, House Bill 10003 prevents cities from from mandating certain um architectural materials or colors for residential and residentials. Okay. Thank you.

Yeah. And I I get that, you know, we don't want government to come in and, you know, regulate everything. That being said, we do want um like these guys have said, we do want the main street to look point.

Nice and presentable because that's that's where people come in and they're, you know, and they're willing to stay, willing to put money down on something, willing to move their businesses here um and provide jobs and and things like that. We have several um companies that have actually relocated their employees here um because of Cedar City. And it's not just because of Main Street, but it's it's because of everything. It's the complete package.

But I think every style of building, well, maybe not every style, but almost every style of building can look really nice. I think Elite Door and Windows is a great looking building. I really like it. Even though it's a, you know, it's a steel building. There's a lot of steel build for them. They built Absolutely. They built their needs, not for Yeah. what their neighbors and uh Oh, the graphics place across the street. Rainbow. Rainbow. Is that what it is? That's a good looking building. So, I like those buildings. So, I don't know. It's That's an interesting deal. Yeah, it it is tough. It is tough. It is tough. I I admit.

And I agree. I really appreciate what Maverick did. We didn't like what they were doing. They came back with a change and and uh said, "What do you want?" And they said, "Well, well, you'd like this." And they said, "Okay." And they did it. So, uh even though I'm opposed to the Maverick being there, they did a great job with it and we made the best of it. So, it's good stuff. I think it looks fantastic. It looks good looking building. Very good looking building. But I think that Maverick's a good example of it's going to take me six months to get used to not going to the 19800 West, but it's a good looking building. Prime example, though, is the hotel that we're doing the Hampton in. Otherwise, we would have just followed the Hampton prototype and it would have been all stuckco. I'm glad that we had to do the brick. I think it looks nicer. I think I think it fits. It look better. It blends in. It welcomes people to our community.

Good point. This thing in Las Vegas. Can you imagine something like that on Main Street or people get off and say, "Holy, those people are insane. I'm I'm going to fill with gas and I'm out of here." I can't imagine any local where that fit in fits in. I just I mean, it's just urban gets away with a lot more. San Francisco and I spent a lot of time in Vegas. I can't think of a place in Vegas I'd like to see that. That's just me. The landfield. The landfill is a good point. Well, do agree with Jennifer though. The charm plays a role, right? Good point.

In the city. And if you drive if you drive throughout Utah and go through certain little cities, you're like, "Okay, it's charming here. I like it." Others you go through and like, "Yeah, feels so. Sorry guys, I have a date." So, I look at that. I look at that Las Vegas photo and and the main thing I I think when I look at that is I'm just glad our climate doesn't allow for those upside down toilet bowl brushes that line the street right there. So you don't like the date. H those toilet bowl brushes. Yeah, I'm not real fond of those as a decoration. I think I'm not a big fan of palms either, but those are like the best looking ones. Okay,

the Dave palms. Uh let's let's do the next slide if you guys don't mind. Ken. So we've had some uh input from uh Mr. Meling and we really spun our wheels as staff too. I in consideration of trying to think about what makes the most sense, right? Uh the first thing we thought is we should get rid of this preferred and and discouraged kind of language. either we're asking for something or we're not. Right? So,

what we ended up with and staff is not married to this. That's that's why we're here is permitted building materials. So we have our traditional materials, cori stone, cultured stone, uh full brick veneer, composite lap siding. We struck hardy plank, architectural concrete or stucco uh with recess recess panels and reveal lines. And then we there there's no perfect magic number here, but uh we thought we'd start with 60%. So we would not have a complete stucco box. aluminum composite a building can be up to 60%. Yeah, it would be up to 60 as we wrote this. Yeah. Right.

I mean, I think we all recognize that stucco is a desired material to use. I mean, there's there's no doubt about it,

but a complete stucco building, I don't think, is Cedar City. Uh, and then we threw this in and and staff has kind of enforced it this way. Um, other materials that emulate the permitted materials. I mean it there's I mean there's there's new products coming online every day. You know, something that's superior, better, potentially cheaper. Um so our thought is if the intent is the aesthetic impact of these materials, if we have a different material that achieves that intent, um and Reynolds's not here, so I can say intent today all I want. uh then we thought that would be appropriate. Uh we changed accent materials to permitted materials at no more than 25% of the facade. So pre-cast concrete which certainly we'd like to see downtown as accent glass accents except for mirrored glass, wood, metal walls, colored architectural block and other materials that emulate these materials. So we we kind of went down that same road. Uh there can be um I think you mentioned um uh the sign company and their names escaping. They have some metal. There's no doubt they're using it.

We've seen some come in where they they do use some corrugated metal as as an accent. It's not the full building. Doesn't look like it belongs in industrial zone that uh can work quite well. Uh we landed on prohibited materials. prohibited materials as your uh plain gray, flat face, CMU, vinyl siding, obviously plywood siding, and mirrored glass. Um, the one that Mr. Mi may want to speak to under the preferred material, I'm sorry, permitted materials would be aluminum composite. I'm not super familiar with those materials. And then if you'd go down one more there, Kent, and and you guys feel free to jump in anytime. We was we're trying to give some better guidance for staff here a little bit. Um so what we said is when we're looking at these plans if they come by our desk we would look at it on one plane.

So if let's say a a commercial building had a porch and they've got columns and those columns are wrapped in brick or stone or something like that. We're not pushing in beyond that. We're just looking at it on one plane and do the percentages that way. uh that the frontage shall mean the elevation facing the streets where it's applicable and for the first 30 ft of any side similar to the way it's written now. We would not be looking at people's storefront windows as glass. People need their storefront windows and we landed on you had at least used two of these materials. Um down to letter C. I I think

Hey, Don, can I ask you a question on Yeah. on uh B2. Um I guess the my my question on that we had a lot of discussion on that uh dance studio. We did out in the Fiddler's Canyon area. Mhm. Um the um the way this is written, that side that is exposed to Main Street, that's not the front of the building. Are we saying that that would that the material requirements would not apply?

Um well, if I wrote this correctly, in my opinion, it would be the elevation that is facing Main Street. Now, if it's not clear, we got to make it clear. So, and also the applicable streets. And we're talking just about Main Street and 200 North to 56. Okay. Because when that when I read that I thought well the the street that it actually fronts on so to speak I have an out is that local street to the east of it. So that that that and maybe there's some clarification there. Yeah there certainly need no doubt no doubt we could use some clarification. Uh I I think these again this is my opinion. I think

politics

the material requirements become even more important when we get between 200 north and 200 south where where we really it's it's the last remaining of our historic core. So we we tightened it a little bit. Um and this isn't perfect by any means. We should probably run this by our downtown economic committee. But where we landed today was uh permitted building materials are limited to cy stone, cultured stone, full brick veneer and comp and composite labs sighting. Other materials may be used at no more than 25%. Um and then we thought the entire building should be treated as such. So this that would just be this narrow corridor where we're sitting right now. um I think a more traditional look without writing lofty language that you should meet the character of the neighborhood which is difficult to do. We're trying to tighten that strike zone so to speak right in this historic area. I I'm not saying this is perfect by any means. And then lastly, I don't want to beat folks up that are rehabiting rehabbing exist an existing building that doesn't comply. So, if you're fixing up your stucco or you're stripping it off and putting new and it doesn't comply, I don't want uh staff to be in the business of chasing those. So, that's where we're at. It's it's open to the commission. I know Melanie's got some comments for sure.

Just one one one final thought, then I'll shut up. Go ahead, Steve. Yeah, I because I have to run, but I think this is quite phenomenal, something that's really needed. And I like the way you've uh couched the wording, you know, and I think the intent is right where we want to where where we want to go. So, hats off.

I agree. I I just want to one one quick keep one keep one thing in mind and and and Jayce this would is directed toward Jace because Jace does a lot of his and his family do a lot of building. Make sure the building they can do off of Main Street and I'm just picking on you because you're building a new building right now. there won't be a significant cost difference enough assuming he chooses to go, you know, less less premium materials. There won't be a cost difference enough in on the overall project that I'm trying to rent mine and get a return and he won't have a problem renting his and get a return. If that makes any sense what I'm trying to say.

Does. Yeah. and it's not directed towards your building. You're just building a new one.

And I think um correct me if I'm wrong, but Mr. Meling did go over that with um your group of people, you know, of doing some cost comparisons and things of is it even logical to try to produce this, you know, things like that. But you can clear that up. But I did see that in your notes. Yeah. So, um, yeah, Tyler Meling. Um, I we we have a few different people and different trades that we've ran things by. I think we're really close to where this needs to be. It's it's really hard to tell someone, you know, if you have property, we're we're developing a few different areas of Maine right now, and it's really hard to tell a business owner, sorry, you can't be on Main Street. the city doesn't want you there because you can't pay the price to have it look the way Cedar City wants you to have it look, right? That's that's a hard conversation to have. And and I, you know, I I think if if you don't want metal buildings, there are some businesses that you're just not going to have anymore. And that's that's that's why we have elected officials. They get to make the decision on whose rights matter more than others, right? That's that's how it works. Um, but um I think it's good to revisit this and and look at some of the things we have. I I think I I really appreciate Don working on this because it's it's we're really close. I think opening up Stuckco up to 60% is a huge uh savings because you can do a lot of nice things where you're using stucco to infill. You want something that, you know, we have wind and we when we do have precipitation, it falls hard and it falls at an angle and stucco is very good at um generally as long as they do

the flashing right. It's very good at preventing moisture from entering the building, right? Um a lot more than a lot of types of siding or or other materials. Um opening up aluminum composite, which is a premium product. It's certainly not a cost savings, but it's a nice accent. Um, and it, you know, they make it to look like wood, they make it to look like metal panels, they make it to look like siding. There's there's a lot of things that can be used for. Um, I think, you know, opening it up and and because a lot of people, if you have an architect that's not familiar with working with the city, they may not know, oh, that, you know, this is the city's practice as as long as it looks like this, right? So they may so so to look at something and say, "Oh, well, if these materials look like these other things," then that really helps a lot. Um the um I I think also specifying that lap sighting doesn't mean necessarily hardy plank. Um, I can't think of any commercial applications we'd be using it on right now, but you're seeing in Saddleback a lot of um uh um now I'm blanking on it. LP LP sighting um is being used uh in lie of kind of the old vinyl sighting. It's it's more than vinyl sighting traditional, but it's um it's a better look and it's generally a little cheaper than Hardy board. Um the um one of the things I would like to touch on though that that we'd um I think would help a lot on the architectural side because I in in practice um it's it's on Yeah, it's on this page. Uh that B2 where frontage will mean the elevation facing the streets and the first 30 feet of any side. A lot of times if you have an architectural wrap, you're not going 30 feet, right? You're going between eight and 15 generally

depending on the size of your column. Um, but whatever you're doing, you're going to want it to match up to that point. And then maybe you're going to use another primary material like for certain hotels, uh, maybe they do have more of a stucco type of look. We see that a lot with hotels again because of the water issues and and some other stuff, right? How do you how do you classify the new Sizzler and your new building? Cuz underneath that facade, they're stuck buildings, aren't they? They're as I saw them go up, they look like stucco and then you've put the brick veneer on them. So, I think they look fantastic.

Yeah. And the it's it's for this it would be classified by what you see. So the veneer, right? And and even though there's there is a layer between the building and the so protective you know as they're going up I thought stuckle holy holy moly what are just doing and then they put the veneer on it and I said I know exactly what they're doing.

Yeah. And a lot of times even if you do leave a stucco layer with that synthetic coat you have a lot more options now than you used to. I grew up in San Antonio where everything was masonry because you could exploit illegal labor at below minimum wage. So, it was a lot cheaper to build everything out of full block masonry, right? Um but um it it just it just depends on where you're at, right? Here we don't really do that as much. So, it is a lot more expensive to uh to do full block masonry. So, you'll do a veneer instead.

But, um no, I I think um anyway, I think we're really close. Um we would our our company would love to see this work through the process sooner than later just because we're still working on lease negotiations with different um a mix of local companies and national chains that are looking at the North Main area. Um but we can't lock in rates as it stands because we're, you know, just as as the ordinance is written now, it is about a 5% cost difference on their lease rate. um if if it has to be primarily masonry or or otherwise look like the building we just did for Starbucks and Johnny Max. Um we would like to have a similar style, but if we could use a little bit more stucco and and lap siding, um it it certainly lowers the cost drastically and it's and it you know 5% on a on a lease rate is is a big difference for for a small company. So, one quick

silly question. Um, does this apply to all four sides of the building?

No. Well, and that's what we were getting at with this is is it it's just the side fronting main. You're going to want it to match architecturally, but that would be my only critique of of that B2 is is you're also looking at the first 30 feet on either side as you go come off of the street. But architecturally that might be harder to match because a lot of times your wrap on a column or a projection only is 8 to 15 feet. So I would like to maybe see that closer to say 10 feet knowing again if you have the main street face look a certain way. You're going to roughly match that but especially on whatever wrap you're using for that corner. Um but it would be nice to start with whatever other material you're using. Generally, in a lot of them, it would probably be primarily stucco with some other lap or other siding um uh accents, but you may exceed the 60% off of that main street facade. I'd like to see the sides to be allowed to not have any of the requirements and just strictly stucco and the front that faces the the 200 or faces Main Street because that's people aren't looking at the side of the building. They're looking at the front of the building.

Right. I do agree more with you to wrap it a little. Maybe not 30 feet, but 30 feet almost seems like it would be weirder than 10. And it it is weird. It's like not enough to be like the whole thing, but it just stops. It It does. Yeah. 10 is still part of the front. Um just wrap it five feet around the the front. Then just Yeah, it it depends on the depth of your structure, what angle, what oblique angle you may be sitting at. Yeah, really.

That would be my I everything else I I think is great. And sorry if I sound like I'm opposed to everything. I just want to know what we're what we're trying to think of our in ourselves because we're still a relatively conservative community. We want to limit too much government. But I I would like to see it maybe five feet on the sides, maybe even and on and on the rear. zero on the rear, of course, because Tony, the lower that side wrap, the the more architectural freedom you have to make the wrap look natural, right?

The the wider it is, the harder you're going to be trying to shove that square nail into the circular hole. So is that are we is 5T within the I I think I think anything less than about 8 ft you're not you're going to no longer be restricting the architectural decisions because you're just going to wrap it in a way that looks more natural um I think even 5T is great. Um I I don't I can't think of any applications where you're not going to have some kind of return

to match the style because for weather proofing and everything else that it just makes sense. Um, but depending on the types of projections you're doing, um, 30 feet kind of makes it a little those who aren't building commercial buildings are involved. Everybody thinks landlords are rich. Well, they can be, but the they take a huge a huge financial risk and enslave themselves for a long time with debt. And would there no one's out here guaranteeing that we're going to be able to rent our buildings out or get a return

significant enough to to carry you know carry us through. So I think we need to show certain level of respect to the people that are willing to take the risk.

So I have a question Tyler for you if you don't mind on that question of the 30 ft and you saying maybe something less makes more sense. I mean, we definitely don't want the idea that, well, there's just this sharp corner right at at the corner of the building and we're going to have one material that comes right to this point and then another going the other way, right? We want some kind of corner treatment that makes sense that helps pull it all together. Is there a way to accomplish that without trying to specify a minimum number of feet? Is there something in the industry that makes sense that say your this treatment has to be has to match this but and I don't know what that's called.

Yeah. I mean depending on what you're using a projection wrap a column wrap. I'm not an architect. You know that and and I think I think what Don has tried to state here gets really close to that. I think I I think really what you do is is if you state this and you just have a lower number of feet extension, then the architect cuz because we have to use architects for any commercial jobs anyway, then the architect has the freedom to do whatever makes sense with that application that's still going to make sense because at the end of the day, their stamps on it, they don't want it to look ugly. Um, so they're going to want it to match. But I I know, you know, for example, the Starbucks building, we ran into a little bit of a hiccup. Don was good to work with us on it. Um we we had some metal paneling that didn't really match the ordinance. It looked nice. It just, you know,

it fine aluminum product that we No. And then so we looked at an alternate product and and at the end of the day, we just said screw it. We're going to use Hardy Board. And that's what we did. So rather than put our planning our our planner in maybe we need to get because every time in the past it's all oh see your design professional see your design friend right

maybe we need to give the planner if something doesn't quite work some authority because they don't like and you've seen it hey look we follow the rules this what the ordinance says and don't don't ask me to vary because I don't want to lose my job or be criticized or favoritism Or maybe we need to give the planner some authority and then if it doesn't work the plan the developer could go directly without going through planning commission directly to the the city council. So ask for a variance on that type material.

So there there are a couple things that I think help um in in this that weren't in place a year ago or maybe it was a little over a year ago that we were getting permitting for that. Uh, one of those changes would be to shorten the amount of the return because the return made sense, but then that metal paneling started within 30 feet, right? Cuz you don't usually have a wrap that goes 30 feet back, right? It I think it went back maybe 15 and we picked up another 15 of that metal paneling which was exclusively, you know, prohibited. It would now be allowed. But in addition to that, it does say that um staff can approve other materials that look like the permitted materials. And we've now added enough permitted materials, we we've factored in, I think, just about every architectural style.

We've given staff a little bit of leeway then. Yeah. So I I think I think is there an appeal if I mean we could always appeal stuff but that certainly on something like this if if Meling and I were arm wrestling about does this emulate something uh you can always appeal that decision to the board of adjustments. Right. And but at the end of the day, I mean, if you're waiting on a permit, I mean, for us, we were in the penalties stage of of permitting because we had tenants that we owed to as well. So, we we just had to move forward. So,

so they could feel comfortable giving some I'm going to use the word variance and without without sinking the developer, right? and and

and I think this new language gives a lot more breadth to that. Um so I I think I mean we ran this by several people in our office and in the trades that we work with and and this encompasses just about everything that we're that we're looking at. I mean we do have another site that is much more difficult to develop um much less desirable for development. Um, so we can't command the same rent. And that one's still going to be tough. It's going to be tough with any design standards cuz really that location, the only thing that pencils out is a metal shed, right? Um, but Cedar doesn't want that on Main Street. So, we'll just have to find something else that'll work.

So, if you changed B2 from 30 to what would make you happy? I I think the lower the better because So, it's like lot widths, right? So the city changed lot widths oh a year and a half two years ago. Yeah. Uh so in R21 it's now 50 ft. I don't know of anyone who's doing 50 ft. Right. Um we saw a lot of lots at 70 ft when the minimum was 70. Now that the minimum is 50. We're seeing a lot of them at like 55 to 65. Your setbacks impact that.

Right. Your setbacks impact that. There's other restraints. Right. So if you see everybody trying to meet the minimum, then your minimum maybe isn't set the right way, you know, and and I I would think the same for this. 30 ft is going to create some wonky architectural decisions. I think if you set it at something like five, you're almost never going to see five. You're going to see something between 8 and 15, maybe more. But it allows more architectural flexibility.

It does. Do do keep in mind that it does the ordinance. Let's say we have a brick facade on the front. It doesn't say you must continue brick 30 feet. You would certainly want some return to make it look right. But it does say you have to use one of these other materials or it could be brick or other materials. U so we're not dictating the length of a wrap so to speak, but we are dictating the materials apply in that 30 ft. That's the difference,

right? Yeah. And I I think if anyway, so I would just think if you if you have it lower, you're going to get a better work product than at 30. And I don't know what the magic number is. It's certainly higher than five. Um I'm not sure anything over 15 is going to have the result you want. So whatever you decide on that is fine. That'd be 10. 15. I think 10 is also safe. 10 always sounds official. Uh, so leave it at 5T. If I'm hearing direction from the commission, it seems like the commission would like to entertain less than 30. Is that what I'm hearing? Yeah.

I mean, I see a lot of heads nodding. So, um, we can certainly return. Entertain five, something like that. And then if we need if the developer needs it more, then that's up to them. Yeah. In in practice, you're going to get most of them 8 to 15 is for for any kind of column or pro projection, you'll see it at 8 to 15 feet generally, right? And so I don't want it to say 10 and have the 8 to 15 already cut at the knees. So

yeah. Well, because that is because OSB comes in 4 by eight sheets, right? So that's why 8 feet is a nice if you're going to set a minimum eight would would probably be the highest I would like to go just because you do have some that's another several sheets of OSB that have to be cut. If the minute you go above eight, you might as well go to 16. So what do you want? I'm not an architect. What were you saying? I I said five feet. And then if you if people need more, they need more. And I I think five feet would be nice. In most situations, eight is going to be cheaper than five, right? But as a minimum, as a minimum,

you say five, you're only you're only going to see eight. But Right. I still would rather that than 10 when No, you can't do eight. Right.

Right. We will come back. One other thing actually like and Melie talked touched on it a little bit with the LP siding, but think back 20 years ago and uh go into your grandma's house and look at the lenolum flooring and you just think to yourself like vinyl flooring is the worst stuff on earth. Um, fast forward and almost every single building you see that has any kind of uh cheap flooring is is vinyl planks now and they look fantastic. Um, we're going to see the same thing in vinyl sighting in the next few years. We're already starting to see it.

So, I'm a little hesitant on the previous page to have vinyl in there. But, at the same time, I think you need to say something because if you just allow any vinyl, there's some hideous, terrible vinyl out there. But there's also kind of like what LP is to Hardy board. Um there are some luxury l some luxury vinyl planks right now that you could put up that would look better than LP even. Um and so it's just it's just tough to kind of get into the weeds. It is and that's why we're trying that emulate. Do you think maybe that's difficult

maybe on that permitted if instead of composite lap sighting we just said lap siding like wood or metal grain lap siding something that's just going to allow just flat smooth now granted that's what I'm saying is a lot of the vinyl now has wood grain and and looks really nice and and granted with with a lot of the vinyl sighting now I I think you're right Jace the Um, like in a commercial application, if we were building a property that we were going to own and be a landlord for, we probably wouldn't do vinyl sighting today, right? Um, but if we wanted that look and something a little more durable. I've seen a lot of it,

right? We we do an LP product or a Hardy product or something like that. How durable? And you can educate me how durable. You know, I haven't used it yet, but I mean it's it seems like the new stuff's pretty durable. It's attractive. Yeah. Like it's only getting better because they're starting to realize like there's some value into creating a a manufactured product that looks real and looks legit but is also nearly indestructible. Right. And I think that's where vinyl sighting is going to end up. I'm not positive because I haven't used it yet.

I I agree. In 10 years it's going to be a different story. And I mean we already see that with fencing, right? Vinyl fences today are completely different than vinyl fences. Now they cost about as much as blocks. So yeah. So um but yeah, I maybe we would like I'm not using it. So like it's not restricted to me to have that word in there, right? But I'm just thinking like yeah, in a few years it's we're probably going to see it more and more. But we can also change that in when it happens.

Yeah. Okay. Well, as staff, I I think uh we've got some decent direction here. Um we can bring something back. I think we'd probably be looking at the first part of January and and try to get a recommendation out of this. I mean, Tyler and I could talk I'd still like to talk a little bit more about that uh composite aluminum. Is that how we wrote it? Yeah. ACM. Yeah. So, are we taking the rough edges off this and eventually the the city council will I think it's ready to bring back to you guys in some shape or form here.

Yeah. And we would love to see that because we we would love to I mean, I was I was just talking to Kent a couple weeks ago. We're working on submitting a master site plan for for everything between that new Starbucks and Western AD credit. I mean, my my only my only small hesitation is what we've changed for the downtown um I mean the downtown core. Uh I'll talk to uh talk to Dave tomorrow and see if maybe if they're having a meeting this December. Well, if it's not going to affect We're not asking really to make any changes to our downtown core. The way it's written, it's actually more restrictive than what it was.

Mhm. So that might in our downtown core. That's the way I crafted it. Okay. Um we're we're we're kind of loosening it and and well we have to make we have so thank you for clarifying that. Yeah. So I I I don't want to speak for them. I I think most of them would like the more traditional the brick the the concrete etc etc. But if we are making it more restrictive it would be nice to have some input from them. I think uh if they have a meeting in December, uh I'll get it in front of them for some comments in December.

And I think I think Don I I I think with the downtown what you've put in here pretty much matches all of the recent projects downtown except for maybe you know what we see in some of the older buildings there is stucco on that back side and and maybe that's something there is you see some of the brick covered up. Um, I would imagine that the new hotel wouldn't quite meet this either, right? With the amount of Stuckco utilized on the hotel and the hotel looks pretty nice. So, uh, but I'll I'll try to make that effort and see see what we come up with. That works for you then. You feel like you can

progress a little bit. I think we've got good direction and I I do want to see what if I can get some input from Well, and I think based upon what Tyler said too, sooner rather than later is better. So, yeah. I will say though, if there isn't a meeting with the downtown folks, we can get in in December, then we probably need to push far enough into January that we can meet with them before bringing it to you. Fair enough. Or we could separate that part the downtown port part. So if you take out the more restrictive, my concern for the downtown folks is the opposite.

No, I'm saying separate take the downtown section out and make that two different areas so we don't put any limitations or or slow down uh a potential development. Well, and maybe maybe if if if I could suggest maybe the schedule be that you know this come back to planning commission, you know, first cycle because I know there because of the because of the public notice requirement if it came back to planning commission first cycle of of January um and also went, you know, at some time before the the before it went to council for a decision um it also went to that downtown or just to look at that one paragraph. Um then um you know then then we may still be able to get on at I I think the key would be getting it on the second cycle of January for council's agenda. Um so they won't be making a decision till the last Wednesday of January. Um but that way you know that way our timeline's good but then you'll have time to also get with downtown before then. We'll we'll see if we can hurt all those cats and

Yeah. into a box. Get a go. And if we do get it with city council, if we could if we do get it with planning commission, if we could schedule on the um the closest city council work meeting there is. So it could like like it could go today and then the meeting would be tomorrow. That type of of situation. Yeah. And I and I know many on the council have already expressed interest in looking at this. It's just a matter of what it is when it's all done, right? So, um, anyway, appreciate all your work on this and the time you all spent tonight on this. So, good. Thank you. We appreciate your work and enjoy

staff. Um, speaking of timelines, my hourglass runs out in about two minutes. Can we punt the do how how big of a discussion do we need to have on the I can be super quick. I or we cannot and wait for the other members to come that might have some input. That's true. That's a good point. Yeah. Let's It's hard this time of year because parties and and activities. Yeah. And I know you said we're for sure to it, but we weren't planning on having No. Well, this was a good discussion. I think this is the kind of discussion we need to have when we have the time and the uh inclination to think about it, right? you know,

right? And we are all running out of inclination at the moment. Anyway, so uh let's push that one and maybe we can put on the, you know, keep moving it and we'll have a whole lot. So, all right. I think we've done great on this. I love it. These things, the materials and stuff you put in some time and thought, and I think it's going to work. Amber had a lot to do with this, too. It's going to make the city inviting the people. That's what it's all about is if nobody likes it, it's Amber. Exactly. We like her. She does good. Awesome. Thank you everybody.