Fountain City Council voted 7‑0 on first reading to approve Ordinance 18‑14, an amendment to Title 17 of the Fountain Municipal Code that permits factory‑built nonresidential structures in the planned industrial (PI) zoning district subject to new performance and architectural standards. Council member Duncan moved approval; Council member Hinton seconded.

Christy Martinez of the City of Fountain Planning Department told the council the amendment focuses on the appearance and performance of factory‑built structures rather than where they were constructed: “This amendment … would be to allow the industrial Zone District. And we're really gonna focus more of the architectural design of what that structure looks like and less on where it was actually constructed,” Martinez said. The proposed code changes modify permitted principal uses in the PI zone (Chapter 17.04) and add definitions to Chapter 17.31.

Key provisions described during the meeting include:
- A construction age limit: structures must have been constructed no more than 10 years prior to adoption of the ordinance as a way to avoid very old factory units being placed permanently on site. Martinez confirmed that, if adopted, the ordinance would reference the adoption date as the cutoff (e.g., 2015 or newer if adopted in 2025).
- Architectural and facade standards: horizontal articulation to break up blank walls; changes in roof form; enhanced customer entrances (canopies or porticoes); and use of varied materials or textures covering at least 50% of a building’s facade to avoid monotonous facades.
- Site and equipment screening: standards to minimize exposed mechanical equipment and blank walls along streets and customer parking areas.
- Scope limitation: the change applies only to properties zoned Planned Industrial, not to other zoning districts.

The council and staff discussed practical examples and boundaries. Martinez showed a zoning map and said planned industrial areas include frontage along Highway 16, the eastern boundary along I‑25, and a large area near I‑25 Exit 132 on the west side of the interstate. Martinez provided a development example: Dutch Brothers uses factory‑built models that can replicate a site‑built look; the proposed code would allow similar factory‑built commercial models in Fountain if they meet the design standards.

A member of the public, Connie Weisenhunt, asked whether churches that currently use prefabricated units would be affected and whether those units would be required to be updated. Martinez replied that religious institutions often occupy premanufactured units under the city’s temporary‑use rules, typically permitted for “one to two years” under the existing code, and that the ordinance before the council targets permanent, nonresidential uses in industrial zones rather than temporary religious uses: “So a lot of what you're seeing out there are under that type of a permitting process,” she said, adding she did not know the exact temporary‑use timeframe beyond the typical one‑to‑two‑year allowance.

Council discussion included questions about the 10‑year cutoff and whether the ordinance could be revisited later; Martinez said the council could amend the standards again in the future if industry practices change. Councilmember Duncan moved adoption on first reading; Councilmember Hinton seconded, and the roll call vote was 7‑0 in favor.

What happens next: The ordinance passed first reading and will return for a second reading/publication as required by city code before becoming final. Staff indicated the amendments are intended to expand developer options while maintaining site design and visual standards for industrial properties.

Meeting context: the item was introduced in new business as Ordinance 18‑14; staff presented slides with before‑and‑after examples to show lower‑ and higher‑quality factory‑built design options. Public comment at the meeting focused on temporary religious uses, aesthetics and potential market effects.