Central to the meeting was the ongoing review of the Rural Vista guidelines—a document designed to merge aspects of the original guidelines with new clarifications for developers. The council debated whether the new guidelines should serve as a flexible reference or be codified into the existing Unified Land Code (ULC), which would make future amendments more complex. This sparked discussions about the best approach to ensure the guidelines remain adaptable yet authoritative, with some members favoring a resolution to allow easier modifications.

A significant portion of the meeting was devoted to the preservation of existing tree canopies, an essential element of the town’s rural aesthetic. Members expressed concerns about the criteria used to assess tree quality, especially regarding invasive species that may compromise canopy health. The council discussed the necessity of arborists evaluating tree viability to maintain the rural landscape effectively. There was also a strong emphasis on enforcing landscape plans to ensure developers preserve the town’s aesthetic, particularly the integration of canopy trees and thoughtful landscaping into new projects.

The architectural design standards were another focal point. Participants discussed the need for clear definitions of roofing styles and other design elements to avoid misinterpretation. The conversation included the potential elimination of ambiguous terms like “hip on deck” in favor of more precise descriptions such as “manor roofs,” with a consensus that all proposed designs should undergo approval to maintain compliance with the town’s vision.

The council also addressed pedestrian pathways and outdoor gathering spaces. They debated the feasibility of requiring developments, regardless of size, to include pathways for pedestrian safety and connectivity. This raised questions about how smaller parcels could contribute to overall community connectivity without compromising practicality.

The conversation extended to parking design, with suggestions to innovate parking layouts to avoid the typical “sea of cars.” The council encouraged placing parking areas behind buildings and using landscape features to soften visual clutter, aligning with the rural character they wish to preserve.

Signage and lighting standards were reviewed, focusing on ways to ensure compatibility with the rural aesthetic. The council considered how existing codes could be adjusted to maintain a consistent design ethos across new developments, discussing the potential impact on the community’s overall look.

Finally, the meeting touched on the complexities of the sign code, particularly regarding regulations that affect larger lots and farm signs. Members acknowledged the challenges in regulating content and size while considering constitutional limitations. The necessity of reviewing the existing sign code was highlighted, with plans to revisit it before the next council meeting.