Planning commission advances Main Street design overhaul and opens public hearing on C2/C3 code changes

The Mendon Planning Commission voted to consider a city-initiated code text amendment to Section 16.05 affecting the C2 and C3 commercial zones and opened a public hearing on the measure.

Michael (planning staff) told commissioners the draft aims to align zoning with the city’s 2023 general plan and to strengthen Main Street’s walkable, boutique character by changing setbacks, landscaping requirements, building-mass limits and design standards. “The idea is to increase that front setback so we end up with more green area in front of a structure,” Michael said, describing a proposal to raise the C3 front setback minimum from 10 feet to 20 feet while keeping a 30-foot maximum and allowing covered single‑story porches to extend as close as 15 feet if the building foundation meets the 20‑foot requirement.

The draft would also add required side and rear setbacks to break up continuous façades, increase the buffer from abutting residential zones (from 15 to 30 feet), and retain rules that mixed‑use ground‑floor space along sidewalks be occupied by commercial uses (residential or short‑term rentals would be set back from the front 50 feet). In the C2 zone the proposed rules are stricter: staff described a possible 30‑foot front setback, side setbacks up to 20 feet and a 30‑foot rear setback.

To limit building mass, staff proposed a floor‑area ratio (FAR) cap of 0.3 for building footprint (for example, a 15,000‑square‑foot lot would be limited to a roughly 4,500‑square‑foot ground‑floor footprint). The draft also would cap impervious surfaces at 70 percent of a lot (requiring roughly 30 percent landscaping) in some commercial areas. Michael said the goal is to prevent full‑lot paving and create more green space to address urban heat and pedestrian comfort.

Design standards in the draft include required staggered setbacks (a 10‑foot step when a street‑facing wall exceeds about 40 feet) and a minimum of 30 percent fenestration (windows, doors or other openings) on street‑facing façades. The code would restrict vivid primary roof colors and require rooftop equipment to be screened or painted to match the roof.

Commissioners pressed staff about tradeoffs between required setbacks and small lot sizes. One commissioner noted that many Main Street parcels are narrow (about 70 feet wide), and that increasing setbacks and adding drive aisles could make single‑parcel development impractical unless parcels are combined. Another commissioner asked whether the 30‑foot front maximum for C3 remained in the draft; staff said he would confirm the final wording.

Several commissioners raised parking as an unresolved issue. Michael said parking changes would likely come through a separate code amendment or through city acquisition of shared, central parking areas; he also noted UDOT (which controls some stretches of the main roadway) resists angled parking and favors parallel parking for safety, limiting options on those streets.

Public comment included resident Andrew Rossmore, who urged commissioners to study successful examples from other towns and to “sculpt what this town can be” as Midway grows and prepares for increased visitation. The commission voted to consider the amendment and opened a public hearing; no remote commenters spoke and the hearing was closed.

Next steps: the planning commission will take additional public testimony, refine the draft language and return a formal recommendation to the city council. The record before the commission includes specific numeric proposals (front setback increases, 70% impervious limit, FAR 0.3, 30% fenestration, 35‑foot height limit in commercial zones) that will be finalized in subsequent formal draft ordinance language.