City Council Minutes

Thursday, October 21,2004



ST. GEORGE CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
REGULAR MEETING
OCTOBER 21, 2004, 4:00 P.M.
CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS

PRESENT:
Mayor Daniel McArthur
Council Member Larry Gardner
Council Member Bob Whatcott
Council Member Rod Orton
Council Member Gail Bunker
Council Member Suzanne Allen
City Manager Gary Esplin
Deputy City Attorney Ron Read
City Recorder Gay Cragun

OPENING:
Mayor McArthur called the meeting to order and welcomed all in attendance. The pledge of allegiance was led by Ron Read, and the invocation was offered by Pastor Bernie Larsen of the New Covenant Christian Center.

Mayor McArthur read a proclamation designating October 18-22 as National Business Women?s Week. Tiffany LaJoice, representing the local association, accepted the proclamation.

Mayor McArthur expressed appreciation to Public Works, Water, and Police Department staff for their assistance during the recent flooding.

Mayor McArthur announced that this Saturday was Debris Free Dixie Day for the east side of the City.

WATER CONSERVATION REQUEST:
Barry Barnum, Water Services Director, explained that the Quail Creek Water Treatment Plant will be out of service of three months in order to make the connection to the expansion project. During this time he asked citizens to conserve water, as last week?s usage was higher than has historically been used.

CONSENT CALENDAR: Consider approval of the financial statement for September, 2004.

MOTION: A motion was made by Council Member Gardner to approve the financial statement.

SECOND: The motion was seconded by Council Member Orton.

VOTE: Mayor McArthur called for a vote, and all voted aye. The motion carried.

BID OPENING:
Consider award of bid for Bluff/Diagonal right-turn lanes.

City Manager Gary Esplin explained that the City is still debating with the State over funding for the project. He recommended that the matter be tabled.

BID OPENING:
Consider award of bid for construction of a radio tower foundation and building pad and erection of the radio tower at the Webb Hill site.

Purchasing Agent Sue Swensen explained that four vendors picked up bid packets, but only two bids were received, as follows:

Radian Communications $64,373
Wasatch Electric $66,900

She recommended award of the bid to the low bidder, Radian Communications, in the amount of $64,373.

MOTION: A motion was made by Council Member Gardner to award the bid to the low bidder, Radian Communications, in the amount of $64,373.

SECOND: The motion was seconded by Council Member Whatcott.

VOTE: Mayor McArthur called for a vote, and all voted aye. The motion carried.

ORDINANCE:
Consider approval of an ordinance amending Title 6 Chapter 2, Title 10 Chapter 19, and Title 10 Chapter 2, St. George City Code, with regard to parking regulations.

This item was tabled.

MOBILE CATERING LICENSE:
Consider approval of a mobile catering license. Sun City Catering, applicant.

City Manager Gary Esplin explained that this was an existing business, but a new owner.

St. George City Council Minutes
October 21, 2004
Page Two

MOTION: A motion was made by Council Member Orton to approve the license.

SECOND: The motion was seconded by Council Member Bunker.

VOTE: Mayor McArthur called for a vote, and all voted aye. The motion carried.

ORDINANCE:
Consider approval of an ordinance amending Title 2, Chapter 2, St. George Code with regard to the Employee Appeals Board.

City Manager Gary Esplin recommended approval of the ordinance to bring the City into conformance with State law. One major change is the provision that the Mayor and City Council will now constitute the Employees Appeal Board; previously only two members of the City Council served on the Employees Appeal Board.

MOTION: A motion was made by Council Member Gardner to approve the ordinance.

SECOND: The motion was seconded by Council Member Whatcott.

VOTE: Mayor McArthur called for a roll call vote, as follows:

Council Member Gardner - aye
Council Member Whatcott - aye
Council Member Allen - aye
Council Member Orton - aye
Council Member Bunker - aye

The vote was unanimous and the motion carried.

SPECIAL EVENT PERMIT:
Consider approval of a special event permit for a vehicle sale at the Red Cliffs Mall October 27- November 6. La Mesa RV, applicant.

City Manager Gary Esplin explained that the mall is allowed a certain number of special events each year. Staff?s major concern is that one reason the special events are granted is in order to highlight local businesses. The applicant in this case is located outside of St. George.

Laura Woolsey, Business License Officer, explained that according to state law, in order to hold a vehicle sales event, three dealerships are needed, and it is her understanding that three dealerships will be participating, including a local dealership, Painter Sun Country.

Council Member Whatcott commented that when the issue of special events was originally discussed, the City Council did not want a proliferation of events such as this, but if they were going to be held, they should highlight local businesses. He inquired why the mall was advertising businesses not located within the City instead of local vendors.

Laura Woolsey, Business License Officer, advised that she just received La Mesa RV?s information yesterday, but has not received an application from Painter. A representative from the mall is present to answer questions.

Cindy, representing the Red Cliffs Mall, commented she thought a representative from La Mesa RV would be in attendance. She advised that events such as this bring traffic to the mall as well as to the factory outlets. This is a marketing event, and because Stephen Wade chose not to come this year, there was a window of opportunity. The event will be limited to RV sales.

Council Member Orton commented he did not think the City wanted to promote outside businesses which competed with local businesses.

City Manager Gary Esplin commented that perhaps local RV sales businesses would also like to participate in the event.

MOTION: A motion to deny the request was made by Council Member Orton.

SECOND: The motion was seconded by Council Member Whatcott.

Council Member Gardner commented that the City allows outside vendors to participate in other events, such as the art festival.

VOTE: Mayor McArthur called for a vote, and all voted aye. The motion carried and the request was denied.

AGREEMENT:
Consider approval of an Amended Interlocal Cooperation Agreement establishing the Washington County Drug Court Support Agency.

City Manager Gary Esplin explained that there are no major changes, and the agreement simply updates the existing interlocal agreement.

St. George City Council Minutes
October 21, 2004
Page Three

Deputy City Attorney Ron Read advised that the changes are minor and the agreement has been updated according to state law.

MOTION: A motion was made by Council Member Whatcott to approve the agreement.

SECOND: The motion was seconded by Council Member Gardner.

VOTE: Mayor McArthur called for a vote, and all voted aye. The motion carried.

SET PUBLIC HEARINGS:
Associate Planner Mark Bradley explained that the Planning Commission, at its meeting held October 12, 2004, recommended that a public hearing be scheduled for November 18, 2004 at 5:00 p.m. to consider a zone change from A-1 to RE-12.5 with a deed restriction of two dwelling units per acre on 54.18 acres located at 3000 East and 2450 South. Ken Miller and Brad Oliverson, applicants. The Planning Commission, on a three to three vote, recommended that a public hearing not be scheduled to consider a request to amend the General Plan Land Use Map on 278.20 acres located east of Little Valley Road to about 3200 East and between 3000 South and 3700 South. Dr. Michael Signorelli, applicant.

City Manager Gary Esplin explained that amending the general plan from rural residential to low density residential in this area of Little Valley would be a significant decision.

MOTION: A motion was made by Council Member Allen to schedule a public hearing for November 18 at 5:00 p.m. to consider a zone change from A-1 to RE-12.5 with a deed restriction of two dwelling units per acre on 54.18 acres located at 3000 East and 2450 South.

SECOND: The motion was seconded by Council Member Orton.

VOTE: Mayor McArthur called for a vote, and all voted aye. The motion carried.

MOTION: A motion was made by Council Member Whatcott to not schedule a public hearing to consider an amendment to the general plan from rural residential to low density residential on 278.20 acres located east of Little Valley Road to 3200 East and between 3000 South and 3700 South, commenting that the request was out of character with what the City was trying to accomplish in this area.

SECOND: The motion was seconded by Council Member Orton.

VOTE: Mayor McArthur called for a vote, as follows:

Council Member Whatcott - aye
Council Member Orton - aye
Council Member Bunker - aye
Council Member Allen - aye
Council Member Gardner - no

The motion carried.

FINAL PLAT:
Associate Planner Mark Bradley explained that the Planning Commission, at its meeting held October 12, 2004, recommended approval of the final plat for Shadow Mountain Townhomes, and the road dedication plat for Heritage Drive.

MOTION: A motion was made by Council Member Orton to approve the final plats and authorize the Mayor to sign them.

SECOND: The motion was seconded by Council Member Bunker.

VOTE: Mayor McArthur called for a vote, and all voted aye. The motion carried.

PRELIMINARY PLAT:
Associate Planner Mark Bradley explained that the Planning Commission, at its meeting held October 12, 2004, recommended approval of the preliminary plat for Sun River at St. George Phase 15. The purpose of the amendment is to add four additional units off a new street which will be a cul-de-sac off ?B? Street, and eliminate a cul-de-sac off ?A? Street and replace it with a 20 ft. golf cart path. The cart path will also serve as access to the wash.

MOTION: A motion was made by Council Member Gardner to approve the plat.

SECOND: The motion was seconded by Council Member Allen.

VOTE: Mayor McArthur called for a vote, and all voted aye. The motion carried.


PRELIMINARY PLAT:
Associate Planner Mark Bradley explained that the Planning Commission, at its meeting held October 12, 2004, recommended approval of the preliminary plat for Pinebrook North

St. George City Council Minutes
October 21, 2004
Page Four

subject to improving the area for the turnaround on the north stub street, and modification of the boundary line between the Pheasant Springs Subdivision and this plat to address setbacks for the three existing dwellings on the south side of the Pheasant Springs Subdivision. The boundary adjustment will require at least an eight foot setback from the existing dwellings. The City Council recently approved an amendment to the Pheasant Springs PD to allow for the church site and single family residential lots. It was suggested at the Planning Commission meeting that all three entities work together on the turnaround improvements.

City Manager Gary Esplin commented that the final plat will not be approved until it is determined who will be required to complete the turnaround improvements.

MOTION: A motion was made by Council Member Gardner to approve the plat subject to the recommendations of the Planning Commission.

SECOND: The motion was seconded by Council Member Orton.

VOTE: Mayor McArthur called for a vote, and all voted aye. The motion carried.

MINOR SUBDIVISION:
Associate Planner Mark Bradley explained that the Planning Commission, at its meeting held October 12, 2004, recommended approval of a minor subdivision for three single family residential lots in the downtown area and a request for a reduced frontage width for proposed parcels 2 and 3. Penny Cluff is the applicant. He explained that the property is located in an R-1-8 zone. The request is consistent with what has been approved kitty-corner to the proposed project. The School District would need to work with the applicant to provide access to the homes.

Council Member Allen inquired if staff had contacted the School District to hear any concerns they may have with the request.

Mr. Bradley replied that this is the burden of the applicants.

Council Member Whatcott commented that the street in question is public, so the School District would not have the right to close it off.

Walter Cluff commented that it was his understanding the street was public and that he would have a right to use it, even though the School District has it blocked off.

Council Member Allen explained that the ribbon or chain across the street is to protect the children as they are dropped off and picked up from school.

Walter Cluff stated that he has not had any discussion with the school, and there is a possibility the gate can be moved.

City Manager Gary Esplin commented that something could be worked out, perhaps by placement of signs which limit use of the street to local traffic only.

MOTION: A motion was made by Council Member Allen to approve the minor subdivision.

SECOND: The motion was seconded by Council Member Bunker.

VOTE: Mayor McArthur called for a vote, and all voted aye. The motion carried.

Mr. Cox stated it was his understanding that the deeds would have to be stamped by the City.

Deputy City Attorney Ron Read directed Mr. Cox to work with Planning staff. He commented that easements would also be needed.

PUBLIC HEARING/LANDMARK SITE/RESOLUTION:
Public hearing to consider a request to designate the home at 162 South 300 West as a landmark site. Barbara Greene, applicant.

City Manager Gary Esplin explained that Community Development Director Bob Nicholson?s daughter was in a serious traffic accident but is now doing well. Mr. Nicholson is in northern Utah with her and has asked to be excused.

Associate Planner Mark Bradley explained that the Greenes purchased the adobe home and restored it and added a front porch. The Historic Preservation Commission recommends approval.

Council Member Gardner encouraged the City Council to look at the types of uses allowed in landmark sites as recommended by Gloria Shakespeare.

Sam Charter, representing the Greenes, explained that the home has and is being used for family reunions and receptions since 1976. The home has a swimming pool, tennis court, and sleeps 28 people. There is no plan to change the use of the home.

St. George City Council Minutes
October 21, 2004
Page Five

Mayor McArthur opened the public hearing. There being no public comment, he closed the public hearing.

MOTION: A motion was made by Council Member Orton to approve the landmark site designation by resolution.

SECOND: The motion was seconded by Council Member Gardner.

VOTE: Mayor McArthur called for a roll call vote, as follows:

Council Member Orton - aye
Council Member Gardner - aye
Council Member Allen - aye
Council Member Whatcott - aye
Council Member Bunker - aye

The vote was unanimous and the motion carried.

PUBLIC HEARING/LANDMARK SITE/RESOLUTION:
Public hearing to consider a request to designate the home at 212 South 200 East as a landmark site. Barbara Greene, applicant.

Associate Planner Mark Bradley advised that the home also has a pool, and the Historic Preservation Commission recommends approval.

Council Member Bunker commented that if the home is used for receptions, parking might be a problem.

City Manager Gary Esplin replied that if the site were to be used for receptions, the applicants would have to present a site plan and satisfy other requirements.

Mayor McArthur opened the public hearing. There being no public comment, he closed the public hearing.

MOTION: A motion was made by Council Member Allen to approve the landmark site designation by resolution.

SECOND: The motion was seconded by Council Member Gardner.

VOTE: Mayor McArthur called for a vote, and all voted aye. The motion carried.

PUBLIC HEARING/ZONE CHANGE/ORDINANCE:
Public hearing to consider a zone change from R-2 to PD Residential with two tri-plex buildings with a total of six dwelling units on 0.76 acre located at 400 North and approximately 450 West. Chuck Spilker, applicant.

Associate Planner Mark Bradley explained that the applicant originally requested eight units, but the Planning Commission felt the request was not consistent with the General Plan. The applicant then modified the request to two tri-plexes with tile roofs, double garages, stonework, and sidewalk on one side of the street. The Planning Commission recommended approval subject to verification of building setbacks for the existing buildings on the remnant parcels and showing the existing trees on the site plan.

Chuck Spilker, applicant, advised that he met with concerned property owners and came up with this latest proposal. He received their blessing to reduce the density and increase the size of the units, with a reasonable driveway to preserve a residential feeling in the area. All the old trees will be preserved except for one in the middle of the driveway.

Mayor McArthur explained that the City received the applicant?s request before the pending ordinance doctrine was imposed in this area. He then opened the public hearing. There being no public comment, he closed the public hearing.

MOTION: A motion was made by Council Member Whatcott to approve the zone change by ordinance.

SECOND: The motion was seconded by Council Member Gardner.

VOTE: Mayor McArthur called for a roll call vote, as follows:

Council Member Whatcott - aye
Council Member Gardner - aye
Council Member Allen - aye
Council Member Bunker - aye
Council Member Orton - aye

The vote was unanimous and the motion carried.



St. George City Council Minutes
October 21, 2004
Page Six

PUBLIC HEARING/ZONE CHANGE/ORDINANCE:
Public hearing to consider a zone change from R-1-10 to PD Commercial on 3.62 acres located at approximately 1400 West and Snow Canyon Parkway.

Associate Planner Mark Bradley explained that the Planning Commission recommended approval on a four to one vote subject to: (1) removal of automobile parts sales store, employment agency, coin laundry and sign sales uses from the proposed list of uses; (2) add stone to the back side (west side) of the building facade; (3) rear lighting be directed downward; (4) consider the trash dumpster location; and (5) no exterior P.A. system. He explained that in 2001 a commercial zone change request for this same piece of property was denied by the City Council. The proposed project will consist of one story retail with 172 parking stalls. Surrounding property is zoned residential to the west and south. Neighboring property owners expressed concern at the Planning Commission meeting about restaurant uses and resultant odors, traffic, and lighting. The applicant has agreed to all the recommendations made by the Planning Commission.

Rick Rosenberg, representing the applicant, explained that the project was designed in accordance with the General Plan to fit in the area. The applicant went the extra mile to hire the best consultants, realizing that it is a sensitive location. Neighborhood commercial fits the need of the area, the landscaping is consistent with the area, and will reduce cross-town traffic. There will be no rear entries to the units, and the dumpster site will be relocated to the middle of the project. There will not be a gas station, and the applicant is hoping that a bank will locate within the project. He inquired if a drive-through as part of a bank would be considered a P.A. system. A traffic impact study was completed, and a traffic signal is not warranted at this time. The applicant has agreed to work with the City on a signal when needed in the future. Lighting will be low impact to protect the night sky and will be directed straight down.

Greg Griffin, applicant, explained that when he purchased the property a year ago he was looking for a neighborhood commercial site for a high-end product. He stated the proposed project will be a benchmark of quality for Snow Canyon Parkway.

Mayor McArthur opened the public hearing.

Tom Lukow, a resident of Paradise Canyon, presented a petition with 423 signatures in opposition to the project. He stated that there were commercial developments within 3/4 of a mile at Bluff and Sunset and at Dixie Downs and Snow Canyon Parkway. Another commercial location is located a half mile away at Bluff and Snow Canyon Parkway. He commented that Snow Canyon Parkway is scenic and picturesque, and another commercial development will mar the beauty of the site. Increased traffic flow will require a signal light and stall traffic. Royal Oaks Park is located across the street from the site and he expressed concern that his grandchildren could be in jeopardy from the increased traffic. Neighborhood sentiment is strong, and there is not a handful of people who are in favor of the project. At the Planning Commission meeting, he was told that this shopping center is patterned after a similar venture in Las Vegas. He commented he moved here to get away from Las Vegas. He stated he felt the concept of encouraging planned development commercial within residential areas is flawed because each area should be weighed on a case by case basis. He stated there appeared to be ample vacant property for commercial ventures, and he urged denial of the request.

Paula Lukow expressed opposition to the proposed mall, or any commercial development along Snow Canyon Parkway. She read comments made three years ago when a zone change request for this same property was denied. She commented it was clear that the original plan of the Parkway was to move people from residential areas to relieve the traffic on Sunset, without any commercial or lights to impede the movement of traffic. However, this plan has apparently been abandoned as the City has already approved commercial areas along the Parkway, and a traffic light will be needed next.

Mayor McArthur explained that as property along Snow Canyon Parkway continues to develop, the Parkway will be expanded to four lanes.

Council Member Whatcott commented that he has not changed his mind since the last zone change hearing on this property, and he would vote against a stop light anywhere on Snow Canyon Parkway.

Ruth Sirika, a resident in the area, commented that the busy corner in question is no place for a strip shopping center with 172 parking spaces.

Hope Clyde, a resident in the area, commented that she grew up on 400 West and once Smith?s grocery store came in, the whole neighborhood changed. Her parents are still living in the home and are dealing with the problems created by commercial property across the street from their home. She stated she did not want commercial in the neighborhood, and she was mad to think she had to again fight to keep the area residential.

Jan Mower, an owner of properties in Paradise Canyon and a realtor at Entrada, stated she did not see anything wrong with a nicely done strip mall. She stated she was for the project.



St. George City Council Minutes
October 21, 2004
Page Seven

Barbara Faust, a resident of the area, stated the project will be located directly behind her home. She stated that the project would bring more traffic, and because there is a park across the street, children would be running back and forth across the street. She stated there were no caution signs or cross walks. She stated she agreed with Tom Lukow.

Mayor McArthur commented that the City could put up ?Children At Play? signs.

Sue Ballam advised that she drives the Parkway twice a week and that the Parkway suited the residential areas and she has never had a problem getting quickly where she needed to go. She commented it would be a contradiction to place a strip mall on the Parkway, and no matter how pretty it was, it would still be commercial.

John Westbrook, a resident of Paradise Canyon, commented he agreed with Mr. Lukow. The proposed project is beautiful, however, one of the fastest ways to blight a neighborhood is with empty storefronts. He stated he felt there was already a lot of surplus commercial space in St. George. Restrictions on this proposal might cause it to eventually fail, and this would be more of a concern than actually having it there.

Doug Hardy, a resident of Sedona Hills, commented that the applicant was already advertising for space before the project is approved. He expressed concern about the traffic flow, and stated that building a block wall along the back of the project will create a place for kids to hide and do things. He stated that commercial projects increase the crime rate possibility, and he was against the project.

Linda Lang, a resident of Sedona Hills, advised that she was also speaking for several neighbors, all very opposed to the idea of commercial development. She agreed with Mr. Lukow and stated that property not occupied 24 hours a day, such as residential, leads to loitering, skateboarding, and other negative things. She stated she did not want it in the area and preferred residential.

Barbara Matheson, a resident of Paradise Canyon, explained that she signed the petition, and since then has done some research. She said she agreed with Mr. Lukow and also Jan Mower, and is torn by some of the things the future might bring. If the property remains residential, it could end up as high density residential, which is far worse than a strip mall. High density would bring more crime, garbage, and interference with Paradise Canyon. She stated her concern was with the clubhouse, and she stated she did not want a high density population at that corner. Traffic is light at the moment, but it is still impossible to get out of Paradise Canyon between 7-8 a.m. and 5-6 p.m. If the strip mall is put in, she stated she could see a the need for a traffic light soon. She commented that it looked like a good development, but was opposed to a fast food establishment or a garage, or facilities to repair large equipment.

Larene Jones advised that she presented a petition at the last zone change hearing on this property to keep the area residential. She stated she did not think it was fair that once zoning has been turned down it is heard again. She stated she would like to see the whole area remain residential. Lin?s and Albertson?s and shopping on Sunset is already close by. She stated she used Snow Canyon Parkway several times a day and would hate to see any business located along it that has the potential of failing.

Tom Childers, a resident of Paradise Canyon, explained that he attended a meeting in the summer where the developer presented his plan. He stated there was enough shopping within minutes of the site in question, and commercial is not needed in the middle of a residential area. If housing should not be located on busy corners, he inquired why the City issued building permits for two new homes on 1500 West on corner lots fronting Snow Canyon Parkway. He stated the issue was not locating homes on corners or the odd shape of the lot, the issue was money as the applicant wants to maximize his investment and does not feel he can do that with housing. 423 people have signed a petition against the commercial development, and he urged denial of the request.

Glen Penrose commented it would be a tragedy to put anything on the property in question other than residential.

Mayor McArthur explained that when the area in question was annexed to the City, it was zoned R-1-10 as a holding zone. He explained that the master plan can be amended four times a year and is constantly being changed. Property that is now annexed is brought in under Mining and Grazing zoning as a holding zone.

Tim Bettridge, a resident of an apartment complex off Valley View Drive, commented he felt the proposal was a great idea as it would make shopping more convenient for people who did not have transportation.

Rick Rosenberg commented that the peak traffic component impact on the intersection is the afternoon peak, and it indicates that only 75 vehicles will be generated from the commercial center during that hour at that intersection. The traffic that the shopping center will be putting on Snow Canyon Parkway is minor compared to the traffic that is already coming from the residential areas along Snow Canyon Parkway and south of the proposed commercial center. The commercial center is only about 10% of the traffic component in the intersection during the peak. In the past communities have been designed to require people to get in their cars and drive to their destination, taking away

St. George City Council Minutes
October 21, 2004
Page Eight

pedestrian-friendly, regional neighborhood centers. He reiterated that this development does not warrant a traffic signal, but one will be required in the future with or without this commercial development.

Council Member Whatcott commented that the shopping center looks great, but he requested that the applicant justify why the property in question could not be used for residential purposes.

Rick Rosenberg replied that he laid out the site under R-1-10 requirements, but if the property had been annexed in under a Mining and Grazing holding zone, a request could not be made to develop the site as single family residential.

City Manager Gary Esplin replied that the master plan says that neighborhood commercial
should be located in a general area, and is not defined by a legal boundary.

Council Member Whatcott commented that there is already commercial property a half mile away from this project, and he requested justification why more commercial is needed.

Rick Rosenberg replied that R-1-10 development will allow eight lots, but due to sight distance restrictions there would have to be a sight distance easement and this has been discouraged by the Engineering Department. A block wall would have to be incorporated on 1400 West and Snow Canyon Parkway, and the project would have to be served by an internal cul-de-sac with lots fronted around the cul-de-sac. The lots would be large, and at disparity with adjacent uses and lots which are smaller and more dense. The lots would end up being around 14,000-16,000 sq. ft. If the project were laid out as R-1-8, this would increase the number of lots by two or three, however, the frontage width is controlling because of the large geographic area on the north end. A PD could be done with a private street, similar to Sedona Hills, and this would be more economically feasible than R-1-10 zoning. In any case, there will be a wall and landscape strips which have to be maintained. He stated that this would not be the highest and best use for the owners, not unless there was an R-1-6 density.

Council Member Whatcott commented that he would like to see the drawings and justification that R-1-8 or R-1-10 zoning would not work on the property.

Greg Griffin explained that the traffic light issue is one of public safety, and he is neither for nor against it. He assured that the lighting would be the best in the industry. The proposed use would serve the neighborhood well and would include a caf? or sandwich shop, woman?s boutique, mail box shop, etc., and the project was designed to maintain the open view corridor. There would be 25' of landscaping, 20% more parking than required, and the project will not become vacant and will always be kept clean.

Gary Kuhlmann, representing the applicant, advised that the property could not be zoned R-1-8 as this is not allowed by the General Plan. The area in question is designated as commercial on the General Plan. Residential zoning would require a General Plan amendment and zone change.

City Manager Gary Esplin disagreed with Mr. Kuhlmann and commented that the General Plan does not designate specifically any zoning and is not site specific.

Council Member Orton commented that he felt this matter was taken care of several years ago when commercial zoning was denied for this piece of property. The City Council determined then that commercial development along Dixie Downs would take care of commercial use in the area.

City Manager Gary Esplin explained that low density residential zoning for the site could be requested without amending the General Plan.

Gary Kuhlmann commented that the General Plan shows the area as commercial. Also, the developer did not just go out and grade the property; when the road was being built the applicant allowed the City to use his property as a staging area. The sign on the property is to determine interest in leasing space in the project, and that interest has helped the developer to reduce the types of uses and has been beneficial to the City and neighborhood. With regard to the petition, public clamor is not the issue, and the developer has been contacted by several people who were called to sign the petition yet did not; their name was signed by their spouse. This is a concern. The issue is what serves the public interest, not the neighborhood interest. The developer of Paradise Canyon indicated that this project is better than a lot of others, and he is not opposed to it. The request is consistent with the General Plan and meets all requirements. Staff and the Planning Commission recommend approval.

Greg Griffin stated he would agree to not locate a stand-alone fast food restaurant with a drive-through in the project.

Council Member Gardner commented that the property in question is a difficult corner to deal with and he felt neighborhood commercial made sense.



St. George City Council Minutes
October 21, 2004
Page Nine

Council Member Bunker commented that it appeared the developers had bent over backwards to make a high-class commercial center, and in spite of the fact that it was a beautiful proposal, she felt there was already a lot of commercial in the area and it would be better for the residents of the area to leave the property residential.

Council Member Allen commented that land use and planning principals being used all over the country are going back to neighborhood commercial, and she is grateful for the commercial in her area.

Council Member Orton commented that commercial is not needed every half-mile along Snow Canyon Parkway.

MOTION: A motion was made by Council Member Orton to deny the request.

SECOND: The motion was seconded by Council Member Bunker.

VOTE: Mayor McArthur called for a roll call vote, as follows:

Council Member Orton - aye
Council Member Bunker - aye
Council Member Whatcott - aye
Council Member Allen - aye
Council Member Gardner - no

The motion carried.

Mayor McArthur called for a brief break.

PUBLIC HEARING/ZONE CHANGE/ORDINANCE:
Public hearing to consider a zone change from A-1 to RE-12.5 on 7.67 acres located at approximately 2580 East 1150 South. Skyler Lawrence, representing M. K. Cox, applicant.

Associate Planner Mark Bradley explained that the Planning Commission recommended approval. Property to the west is zoned RE-12.5 and Open Space, and R-1-10 to the south. The request is consistent to zoning to the west and is in the same realm of lot size to the south.

Mayor McArthur opened the public hearing. There being no public comment, he closed the public hearing.

MOTION: A motion was made by Council Member Whatcott to approve the zone change by ordinance.

SECOND: The motion was seconded by Council Member Gardner.

VOTE: Mayor McArthur called for a roll call vote, as follows:

Council Member Whatcott - aye
Council Member Gardner - aye
Council Member Allen - aye
Council Member Bunker - aye
Council Member Orton - aye

The vote was unanimous and the motion carried.

CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT:
Consider approval of a conditional use permit to construct a detached accessory building for a garage and sun deck that exceeds the allowable height of 15' up to 19'6" located within an A-1 zone at 2453 East 2150 South Cr. Mr. and Mrs. Schmutz, applicants.

Assistant Planner Ray Snyder explained that staff and the Planning Commission recommend approval. The building will not obstruct the view of neighboring homes.

MOTION: A motion was made by Council Member Gardner to approve the conditional use permit.

SECOND: The motion was seconded by Council Member Orton.

VOTE: Mayor McArthur called for a vote, and all voted aye. The motion carried.

The applicant commented that in an A-1 zone, a building 36' high is allowed. He inquired why he had to go through the process.

Mayor McArthur replied that a main residence up to 36' in height is allowed; this building is an accessory building.



St. George City Council Minutes
October 21, 2004
Page Ten

City Manager Gary Esplin explained that there have been several problems with this in the past, and a conditional use permit is now required because of these abuses.

CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT:
Consider approval of a conditional use permit to convert an existing model log home into a used motor vehicle sales business located at 1058 E. Highland Dr. Southwest Auto Brokers, applicant.

Assistant Planner Ray Snyder explained that the property in question is located by Wendy?s near the freeway off-ramp. There is no zoning on the property. The property is leased from the State and will be used someday for additional right-of-way. The Planning Commission felt the zoning should be similar to C-2 and is treating it as such. Traffic circulation is adequate, but the State would have to approve any ingress or egress changes. There is enough parking, but it would need to be striped for customer and employee parking. The Planning Commission recommended approval subject to the following conditions:

1. Provide a minimum of seven street trees along Highland Drive. The street trees shall be planted and acceptable to the City Forester.
2. Provide pine trees at the direction of the City Forester to eliminate visibility of the site from the freeway off-ramp.
3. Provide striped parking spaces per the submitted site plan. One of these spaces will be for handicap parking and conform to current design standards. The vehicle display areas do not require striping, but must not restrict the driveway or required parking spaces for employees or customers.
4. Parking spaces shall be a minimum size of nine feet wide by 18' feet in depth.
5. Drive aisles shall be a minimum of 25' in width.
6. All parking spaces shall have adequate space for turning motions.
7. Display vehicles may not encroach into the public right-of-way.
8. Display vehicles may not be parked in the landscaping.
9. All parking areas shall be asphalt.
10. Site lighting shall comply with Section 10-19-7.
11. The CUP approval applies only to Southwest Auto Brokers, Inc. and the applicants shall notify the City 15 days prior to any change of ownership.

Mayor McArthur inquired about signage.

Mr. Snyder replied that signage is subject to approval under a separate permit.

Ernie Freckleton, applicant, explained that the facility will be modeled after Bluff Street Auto Brokers and will have a subtle sign. He anticipated having 10-20 vehicles at one time. There will not be any outrageous promotions, and signage will be a simple pedestal sign and will be backlit. State requirements require an 8 x 4 sign. He stated he agreed to all conditions recommended by the Planning Commission. He stated he wanted to operate a small family type business selling 20-30 vehicles per month. There will not be any detailing or cleaning facilities on site. The lighting plan will be minimal. There will be two lights attached to the building for security, and lighting will be installed and designed by a lighting engineer.

Mayor McArthur commented that this site is a high profile part of the City, and the City would like a monument sign and no neon signs or glaring lights, and landscaping is important.

MOTION: A motion to approve the conditional use permit subject to the recommendations of the Planning Commission was made by Council Member Orton. He commented he would like to review the CUP in one year to make sure the signage is a monument sign.

SECOND: The motion was seconded by Council Member Gardner.

Council Member Orton suggested that a business license not be issued until all trees are installed to the City Forester?s satisfaction.

CLARIFY MOTION: Council Member Orton clarified that his motion included the condition that staff monitor all conditions imposed as part of the CUP, and that a review be made in one year.

Mr. Freckleton advised that he did not want to install the pine trees for screening from the freeway if he did not have to. He said if his business license is predicated on their installation, this may delay his project.

AMEND MOTION: Council Member Orton amended his motion to include the provision that the applicant work with the City Forester in installation of the pine trees for screening, but the applicant?s business license would not be contingent upon it.

SECOND: Council Member Gardner seconded the amended motion.



St. George City Council Minutes
October 21, 2004
Page Eleven

VOTE: Mayor McArthur called for a vote, and all voted aye. The motion carried.

MODIFICATION TO AGREEMENT:
Consider approval of a modification to a development agreement with River Road Development, LC at 170 South and River Road to reduce the 10' landscape on 170 South along the proposed bank site to 5', and increase the landscape width along River Road to make up the difference. Kevin Ence, applicant.

Associate Planner Mark Bradley explained that the agreement requires 10' of landscaping behind the sidewalk along the public streets within the development, and 20' of landscaping along River Road behind the sidewalk. Due to constraints with the site, the applicant proposes 5' of landscaping along 170 South Street, and to increase the landscaping along River Road to make up the difference. He explained that the site was originally PD Commercial, then changed to C-2 with a development permit.

MOTION: A motion was made by Council Member Gardner to approve the modification to the agreement.

SECOND: The motion was seconded by Council Member Orton.

Council Member Whatcott expressed concern that the applicant building a building next to this one would also want the requirements reduced to 5' of landscaping. He suggested that the building could have been reduced in order to meet the landscaping requirements. He commented the 5' is not a lot of landscaping on the side of a road.

Council Member Orton commented that the City sets standards, but they do not fit each lot.

VOTE: Mayor McArthur called for a vote, as follows:

Council Member Gardner - aye
Council Member Orton - aye
Council Member Allen - aye
Council Member Bunker - aye
Council Member Whatcott - no

The motion carried.

BUILDING PERMIT:
Consider a request for a building permit for a home at the northeast corner of 3000 East and 2000 South outside of sewer service.

City Manager Gary Esplin explained that the City has concurrency requirements for sewer.

Sam Haslam, applicant, advised that he is building a home on a .60 acre lot. The zoning is A-1. He owns a two acres parcel and is building his home on the corner.

City Manager Gary Esplin advised that due to the A-1 zoning, the lot he is building on has to be at least one acre.

Mr. Haslam advised that he wanted to split the piece.

City Manager Gary Esplin explained that a lot split would be necessary, and if the lot was then less than one acre, Mr. Haslam could not get a building permit.

Mr. Haslam advised that he brought in his plat and plan and met with Bob Nicholson and Mark Bradley several times. He stated he would have appreciated knowing this beforehand.

City Manager Gary Esplin explained that the City Council has never allowed concurrecy on less than a one acre parcel in an agricultural zone. He advised Mr. Haslam that he could request to build one home on his two acre parcel.

Mr. Haslam advised that he recorded the plat as two parcels, with one parcel deeded to his daughter and her husband. The total acreage is 1.8 acres.

MOTION: A motion was made by Council Member Gardner to approve the building permit based on the fact that the applicant meets deed requirements prior to issuance of the building permit, and that he hook to the sewer line when possible, and participate in special improvement district costs, as necessary.

Mr. Haslam advised that he would sign an improvement agreement.

Deputy City Attorney Ron Read advised that Mr. Haslam would need to sign a standard road improvement and sewer connection agreement that would require him to hook to the sewer when it comes within 300' of his property.

Mayor McArthur advised that these requirements should be attached to the property so that they pass on with the property.

St. George City Council Minutes
October 21, 2004
Page Twelve

Deputy City Attorney Ron Read advised that development agreements are recorded.

SECOND: The motion was seconded by Council Member Allen.

VOTE: Mayor McArthur called for a vote, and all voted aye. The motion carried.

APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
Consider approval of the minutes of the regular City Council meeting held September 23, 2004.

MOTION: A motion was made by Council Member Allen to approve the minutes as presented.

SECOND: The motion was seconded by Council Member Gardner.

VOTE: Mayor McArthur called for a vote, and all voted aye. The motion carried.

Consider approval of the minutes of the City Council work meeting held September 30, 2004.

MOTION: A motion was made by Council Member Orton to approve the minutes as presented.

SECOND: The motion was seconded by Council Member Whatcott.

VOTE: Mayor McArthur called for a vote, and all voted aye. The motion carried.

ADJOURN:
MOTION: A motion to adjourn was made by Council Member Whatcott.

SECOND: The motion was seconded by Council Member Orton.

VOTE: Mayor McArthur called for a vote, and all voted aye. The motion carried.



__________________________________
Gay Cragun, City Recorder