City Planner Brian McCain presented a detailed proposal to revise several sections of the zoning code, including regulations for fences, signs, and commercial districts. These changes were prompted by the repeal of commercial districts last year and increased activity in the South growth commercial area. The proposed amendments aim to ensure that fences are maintained safely and aesthetically, with specific requirements such as being painted a single color and constructed with a high standard of quality. The ordinance also introduces a vision clearance triangle to improve sight lines at intersections, addressing safety concerns raised by recent issues with obstructive fences. The proposal included strict guidelines on the placement of fences relative to sidewalks, trails, and essential infrastructure to avoid damage and ensure adequate snow storage.

Fence height regulations were also detailed, with a maximum height of four feet in front yards and up to eight feet in rear and side yards under certain permit conditions. The city council had previously requested that surveys be mandatory for all fence permits to prevent encroachments onto neighboring properties, a measure that sparked some debate among the commissioners. One member raised concerns about the additional cost to residents, but McCain clarified that surveys are usually required for building permits over seven feet and that the city often has existing surveys on file.

The sign ordinance revisions aimed to simplify language and provide clear definitions to reduce clutter and improve clarity. The current 30 subsections would be consolidated into about 10, with a focus on ensuring that regulations are non-content controlled and compliant with state statutes. The commercial districts were also redefined, introducing a neighborhood district for low-intensity uses and a community district for larger establishments like grocery stores. Height limits for buildings were generally increased across various districts, and new design standards were proposed to ensure that mechanical equipment is screened and that materials meet specific aesthetic requirements. Lighting regulations were included to mitigate light pollution, particularly in the Central Business District.

The discussion on conditional use permits (CUPs) highlighted the need for clearer definitions and compliance with state law, particularly regarding the sunset dates on CUPs. A link to the Shoreland District was introduced to ensure that specific conditional uses were recognized appropriately.

Following McCain’s presentation, the public hearing was opened, but no public comments were made, leading to a motion to close the hearing, which passed. The commission’s internal discussion included questions about the practicality of requiring surveys for fence permits and the need for clarity in cannabis dispensary regulations, noting that while CBD oil rules were included, cannabis flower dispensaries were omitted due to an ongoing moratorium.

A significant portion of the meeting also addressed the setbacks required for residential and commercial properties adjacent to railroads. A commissioner suggested that the current 30-foot setback might be insufficient for residential properties, referencing the Victoria South development’s 60-foot setback from the railroad tracks. The debate emphasized the potential nuisance and property valuation impacts of living near railroads and the need for a reasonable setback distance.

Another topic of interest was the regulation of fence heights around swimming pools. The current ordinance allows a four-foot maximum height for front yard fences, while pool enclosures require a five-foot fence. Commissioners discussed whether a five-foot fence should be permissible in front yards with pools, considering the potential for creating an “attractive nuisance.”

Drive-through establishments in the Central Business District were also debated, with a proposal suggesting they should be classified as not permitted uses to prevent the area from becoming dominated by such businesses. This raised concerns about essential services like banks and coffee shops that rely on drive-through accessibility. The distinction between conditional and non-permitted uses was clarified, noting that designating drive-throughs as not permitted would prohibit future proposals for such establishments.

The meeting also included a public hearing on a variance request for a septic system on Fox Glove Circle. The proposed aerobic treatment unit would require a reduction in the minimum separation distance from periodically saturated soil due to the site’s unique topography. The system’s installation above grade was necessary to avoid extensive land disruption, which would be impractical given the area’s characteristics. The absence of municipal sewer services further complicated the situation, making it financially unfeasible to extend a municipal sewer line.

The commission heard from the contractor, who argued that variances should not be necessary and suggested that the county consider aligning its ordinances with neighboring counties. The proposal aimed to replace the existing system with a more environmentally effective aerobic system without causing unreasonable disruption to the property.