Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Design Guidelines topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission weighs tighter Main Street design rules; staff proposes permitted-materials list and 60% stucco limit
Summary
Commissioners reviewed a proposed zoning ordinance amendment to replace 'preferred' language with a clear list of permitted, accent and prohibited building materials for Main Street and 200 North. Staff proposed permitted primary materials, a 60% limit on any single primary material (e.g., stucco) and a 25% cap for accent materials; commissioners urged clarifications and recommended shortening a proposed 30-foot wrap to ~5–10 feet.
The Cedar City Planning Commission spent extensive time reviewing proposed amendments to the zoning ordinance that would tighten material and facade standards for Main Street and 200 North.
Don, a planning staff member, said the draft replaces vague 'preferred' and 'discouraged' terms with a list of permitted materials and clearer numeric thresholds. He summarized staff's approach: permitted primary materials would include quarried stone, cultured stone, full brick veneer and composite lap siding; accent materials would be limited to 25% of the street-facing facade; prohibited materials would include plain gray CMU, plywood siding and mirrored glass. On stucco, staff proposed limiting any single primary material so as “we would not have a complete stucco building,” and said the draft starts with a 60% cap as a practical guideline.
Developers and commissioners pressed staff on specifics. Developer Tyler Melling supported the more flexible approach, saying opening stucco up to 60% can reduce costs for smaller tenants and accelerate projects: "Opening up stucco up to 60% is a huge, savings because you can do a lot of nice things where you're using stucco to infill." Commissioners debated how to define the 'frontage' elevation and whether the first 30 feet of an adjoining side should be regulated. Several commissioners and members of the development community objected to a 30-foot wrap requirement as too deep and suggested 5–10 feet (a number of participants recommended 8–10 feet as a practical minimum for construction module reasons). Staff said they will return with revised text, and commissioners asked staff to run the downtown‑core language past the downtown economic/stakeholder committee before forwarding a recommendation to council.
If adopted, the changes would tighten architectural guidance for a narrow commercial corridor (historic Main Street/200 North) while explicitly allowing a broader set of modern materials that emulate traditional masonry when they meet the stated aesthetic intent. The commission provided direction to reduce the wrap depth, clarify what constitutes the applicable elevation, and preserve a staff appeal/variance path for special circumstances.
