City Council Minutes

Thursday, December 1,2005



ST. GEORGE CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
REGULAR MEETING
DECEMBER 1, 2005, 4:00 P.M.
CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS

PRESENT:
Mayor Daniel McArthur
Council Member Rod Orton
Council Member Bob Whatcott
Council Member Suzanne Allen
Council Member Gail Bunker
City Manager Gary Esplin
City Attorney Shawn Guzman
City Recorder Gay Cragun

EXCUSED:
Council Member Larry Gardner

OPENING:
Mayor McArthur called the meeting to order, welcomed all present, and led the pledge of allegiance. The invocation was offered by Bishop Hansen.

Finance Director Phil Peterson introduced the City?s new Treasurer, Tiffany LaJoice. Mayor McArthur recommended that she be appointed as the City Treasurer.

MOTION: A motion to appoint Tiffany LaJoice as the City Treasurer was made by Council Member Allen.
SECOND: The motion was seconded by Council Member Whatcott.
VOTE: Mayor McArthur called for a vote, and all voted aye. The motion carried.

TABLE ITEMS:
City Manager Gary Esplin advised that item 6E to consider approval of a conditional use permit to construct a club house, driving range, two story T-box, outdoor lighting, poles and netting for a driving range, and a new maintenance building located at the Twin Lakes Golf Course on Red Hills Parkway and Twin Lakes Road, and item 6F to consider approval of a conditional use permit for a new office building with a height above 35' located at 400 North Bluff, were tabled from the agenda.

AWARD OF BID: Consider award of bid for placement of facilities, conduit placement, boring, placement and disposal of material, asphalt work, rock excavation and fiber splicing for the Energy Services Department.

Purchasing Director Sue Swensen explained that bid packets were sent to several contractors, but only two bids were received, one of which was incomplete. She recommended award of a blanket contract to Niels Fugal & Sons in the amount of $50,000 for the year.

MOTION: A motion was made by Council Member Allen to award the blanket contract to Niels Fugal & Sons in the amount of $50,000 for the year.
SECOND: The motion was seconded by Council Member Bunker.
VOTE: Mayor McArthur called for a vote, and all voted aye. The motion carried.

AWARD OF BID:
Consider award of bid for mega lugs and fittings for the Water Services Department.

Purchasing Director Sue Swensen explained that bid packets were sent to three local suppliers, but only two bids were received, as follows:

Mountainland Supply $75,835.87
Scholzen?s $74,646.61

She recommended that the blanket contract be awarded to the low bidder, Scholzen?s, in the amount of $74,646.61.

MOTION: A motion was made by Council Member Orton to award the bid to Scholzen?s in the amount of $74,646.61.
SECOND: The motion was seconded by Council Member Whatcott.
VOTE: Mayor McArthur called for a vote, and all voted aye. The motion carried.

AWARD OF BID:
Consider award of bid for 10-wheel dump bodies.

Purchasing Director Sue Swensen recommended purchase of three 10-wheel dump bodies from H&K Truck Equipment in the amount of $65,224 for the Irrigation, Wastewater and Streets Departments.

MOTION: A motion was made by Council Member Bunker to award the bid to H&K Truck Equipment in the amount of $65,224.
SECOND: The motion was seconded by Council Member Orton.
VOTE: Mayor McArthur called for a vote, and all voted aye. The motion carried.

AWARD OF BID:
Consider award of bid for an excavator, loader, dump truck and milling machine work.

Purchasing Director Sue Swensen explained that bid packets were sent to several vendors. She recommended that blanket contracts in the amount of $50,000 for the year each be established with each of them: JP Excavating, Bryce Christensen, Desert Hills Construction, and Sunland Construction.

St. George City Council Minutes
December 1, 2005
Page Two

MOTION: A motion was made by Council Member Orton to award blanket contracts to JP Excavating, Bryce Christensen, Desert Hills Construction, and Sunland Construction in the amount of $50,000 each for the year.
SECOND: The motion was seconded by Council Member Whatcott.
VOTE: Mayor McArthur called for a vote, and all voted aye. The motion carried.

AWARD OF BID:
Consider approval of a sole source purchase of ballfield lights for The Fields.

Purchasing Director Sue Swensen explained that Musco Lighting has provided ballfield lights for the City over the past 20 years. She recommended award of the bid to Musco Lighting in the amount of $284,000.

City Manager Gary Esplin explained that staff has researched the issue extensively, and the lights provided by Musco are the most environmentally sensitive available at this time. Musco is also providing a $15,000 discount to the City.

Leisure Services Director Kent Perkins explained that in exchange for a study by the City to help evaluate the impact of the lights and cost savings, Musco offered the City a $15,000 discount. Musco will also guarantee the lights for 20 years, and replace the bulbs at their cost.

MOTION: A motion was made by Council Member Allen to award the bid to Musco Lighting in the amount of $284,000.
SECOND: The motion was seconded by Council Member Whatcott.
VOTE: Mayor McArthur called for a vote, and all voted aye. The motion carried.

Purchasing Director Sue Swensen explained the City?s local preference bidding policy.

RENTAL ORDINANCE:
Consider approval of a rental ordinance.

City Manager Gary Esplin explained that the proposed rental ordinance is not the final product and can be amended in the future.

City Attorney Shawn Guzman explained that with regard to code enforcement over the past few years, some problems with rental units have come to light, with complaints both from tenants and landlords. One of the provisions of the proposed ordinance is the requirement that an agent be specified for landlords living outside of Washington County. The definition of agent is someone who can received notice of a violation and pass it along to the owner of the property as quickly as possible. The ordinance will take effect March 1, 2006. Time is needed to assess the fees, if any, and a resolution setting the fees will be considered at a future City Council meeting. The proposed ordinance also requires the payment of a business license fee for those who have three or more rental units, with a reasonable inspection fee for three or more units.

Council Member Bunker inquired if a family member or friend could be specified as the resident agent.

Mr. Guzman replied that a family member or friend or neighbor, or anyone living within Washington County could be specified as the resident agent.

Council Member Allen clarified that it was not the City?s intention to drive up the cost of rental units or burden the affected renter, and the fees which will be proposed will not be exorbitant, but are a part of the cost of doing business.

MOTION: A motion was made by Council Member Whatcott to approve the ordinance.
SECOND: The motion was seconded by Council Member Orton.
VOTE: Mayor McArthur called for a roll call vote, as follows:
Council Member Whatcott - aye
Council Member Orton - aye
Council Member Bunker - aye
Council Member Allen - aye

The vote was unanimous and the motion carried.

RESOLUTION:
Consider approval of a resolution establishing rates for the new community building at the Senior Citizens? Center.

City Manager Gary Esplin explained that the City and County are jointly constructing a building next to the Senior Citizens Center. The City has agreed to schedule the building and must establish fees for its use. Staff recommends the rate be set at $10 an hour to cover the City?s costs for cleaning and electric power, with the recommendation that the Leisure Services Department set the deposit requirements to protect the City?s interests in case the building is damaged.

MOTION: A motion was made by Council Member Allen to approve the resolution.
SECOND: The motion was seconded by Council Member Bunker.
VOTE: Mayor McArthur called for a vote, and all voted aye. The motion carried.

VARIANCE FROM SIGN CODE:
Consider a request for variances from the Sign Code. Young Electric Sign Co., applicant.


St. George City Council Minutes
December 1, 2005
Page Three

City Manager Gary Esplin explained that the Sign Review Board unanimously recommended approval of the request.

Enforcement Officer Brad Young explained there were two issues: (1) a request for additional pole signs at the Sunset Corner Commercial Center, and (2) a modified pole sign for the Zion Factory Stores.

City Manager Gary Esplin explained with regard to the request for the Sunset Corner Commercial Center, the applicant has agreed that in exchange for two additional signs with heights of 35' and 27' and with an overall size of 300 sq. ft., he will not request additional free standing signs.

MOTION: A motion was made by Council Member Orton to approve the two additional signs as recommended by the Sign Review Board.
SECOND: The motion was seconded by Council Member Bunker.
VOTE: Mayor McArthur called for a vote, and all voted aye. The motion carried.

Enforcement Officer Brad Young explained that the second sign is located at the Zion Factory Stores. The applicant is requesting an additional 50' tall sign. The Sign Review Board recommended approval of a 42' tall sign because of its good visibility from the freeway in lieu of any additional free-standing signs. The existing Outback sign will be replaced with a multi-tenant sign.

Ray Draper, representing Young Electric Sign Co., advised that a 42' sign was acceptable.

Council Member Whatcott inquired about cladding.

Mr. Draper replied that the bottom section could have something added, such as rock, and something could be worked out on the pylon pole cover.

MOTION: A motion was made by Council Member Bunker to approve the sign at the Zion Factory Stores.
SECOND: The motion was seconded by Council Member Orton.

City Manager Gary Esplin clarified that the City Council was asking for something to be added to the bottom of the sign to dress it up.

AMENDED MOTION: Council Member Bunker agreed to add this stipulation to her motion.
VOTE: Mayor McArthur called for a vote, and all voted aye. The motion carried.

Gilbert Jennings stated he did not agree with the way his sign issue was presented. He stated his sign plan was approved four years ago. His project has over 4,000 feet of frontage and he cannot get tenants because of the sign issue. He stated he did not agree to not have any more free-standing signs. He is entitled to six pylon signs and is only asking for three, but he has to have the ability to have more freestanding signs.

City Manager Gary Esplin stated that the recommendation of the Sign Review Board is for approval of signs with additional height and square footage in consideration of no more freestanding signs. This does not include identification signs on the interior of the project, however, as the City does not enforce CC&Rs.

Enforcement Officer Brad Young clarified that the City does not regulate interior priority directional signs.

Mr. Jennings stated he had to have more directional signs on U-18.

City Manager Gary Esplin advised Mr. Jennings that he could then withdraw his request which was just approved by the Council, and abide by the City?s current sign ordinance which would allow him more signs along his frontage,

Council Member Orton offered to withdraw his motion and let the provisions of the City?s new Sign Ordinance stand.

City Manager Gary Esplin advised that the Sign Review Board was simply responding to the applicant?s request for taller and larger signs in exchange for no more signs along the frontage. However, the applicant has the choice of withdrawing his request and conforming to the new Sign Ordinance.

Council Member Orton again offered to withdraw his motion if desired by the applicant.

Mr. Jennings clarified that he is only asking for additional free-standing monument signs.

Mr. Young clarified that Mr. Jennings did not agree to no other freestanding signs along Bluff Street and Sunset Blvd., but that was the recommendation of the Sign Review Board.

City Manager Gary Esplin explained that Mr. Jennings is asking permission to place monument signs along his frontage identifying businesses within the interior of the project and without frontage on the streets.

Council Member Orton inquired of Mr. Jennings if he was suggesting that he would place monument signs on the frontage advertising interior businesses.

Mr. Jennings replied that he might be, but not pylon signs.


St. George City Council Minutes
December 1, 2005
Page Four

Council Member Orton explained to Mr. Jennings that the City?s new sign ordinance will allow a lot more signs on the frontage, and he again offered to withdraw his motion.

Mr. Jennings stated he would rather have the three larger, taller pylon signs and be able to read them than 13 smaller signs and not be able to read them.

City Manager Gary Esplin explained that the City?s sign ordinance addresses large 26 acre projects with large frontages by allowing multiple signs.

Mr. Jennings stated he wanted the pylon signs to be 300 sq. ft., but he is bothered by the fact that the recommendation from the Sign Review Board is different than when he left that meeting.

Mayor McArthur advised Mr. Jennings that he was always welcome to address the City Council in the future about other signs.

Council Member Orton advised Mr. Jennings that the motion which was just approved limited the number of additional signs on his frontage. If the motion is withdrawn, Mr. Jennings could follow the City?s new Sign Ordinance and have additional signs on his frontage.

Community Development Director Bob Nicholson advised that the matter could be tabled until a master sign plan is submitted for the entire project. Additionally, not all tenants in large projects have their names out on the frontage; an example of this is the Red Cliffs Mall.

Mayor McArthur advised Mr. Jennings that he had two options - the City Council could repeal its motion, or the motion could stand as passed.

Mr. Jennings advised that he presented a master sign plan for the project four years ago.

Council Member Allen inquired of Mr. Jennings if that master sign plan was adequate for the entire project.

Mr. Jennings replied that it was.

Council Member Allen inquired of Mr. Jennings how that master sign plan conflicted with the City?s new sign ordinance.

Mr. Jennings replied that the master sign plan shows monument signs along 1250 North, and there was no restriction against the use of features.

Mayor McArthur advised Mr. Jennings that a motion was made and approved to allow the three signs as he requested with no other signs allowed on the perimeter of the project. He suggested that the motion stand and the applicant work with staff, as he can always come back to the City Council.

PUBLIC HEARING/PRELIMINARY PLAT: Public hearing to consider approval of a preliminary plat for Phase 25 of Sun River St. George located on Arrowhead Canyon Drive south of Sun River Parkway. Darcy Stewart, applicant.

Associate Planner Mark Bradley advised that the Planning Commission recommended approval.

City Manager Gary Esplin stated that before future development takes place, the issue of locating a fire station in the Sun River area needed to be addressed. An agreement for a site has not been able to be worked out with the developer.

Mayor McArthur explained that the City offered to purchase a site in the project.

City Manager Gary Esplin replied that staff has met with Darcy Stewart and he knows that the City is concerned about a fire station site, parks and trails in the area.

City Attorney Shawn Guzman advised that a fire station is a health and safety issue, and the City Council can decide whether it wants to approve any plats or not based on this issue.

Fire Chief Robert Stoker advised that Matt Loo has been working with Sun River the last few weeks to locate sites for a fire station. The site now proposed is by the commercial center and church.

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

Council Member Whatcott inquired of Chief Stoker is he was comfortable with the site proposed for the fire station.

Chief Stoker replied that he was. While the site proposed is not specific, it is in an area closer to the main road. The sites previously proposed by Sun River which were rejected by the City did not meet the distance requirement for an acceptable ISO rating.

City Manager Gary Esplin advised that staff will be presenting for City Council approval a master plan of the City showing areas where fire station sites are needed so that anyone developing in these areas will be put on notice that they need to plan for a fire station site. Staff is not suggesting that the property be given to the City, and in theory the City will purchase the sites.


St. George City Council Minutes
December 1, 2005
Page Five

Chief Stoker advised he has been working with developers of The Ledges, and a site there has been identified next to the church.

MOTION: A motion was made by Council Member Orton to approve the preliminary plat.
SECOND: The motion was seconded by Council Member Whatcott.
VOTE: Mayor McArthur called for a vote, and all voted aye. The motion carried.

PUBLIC HEARING/SITE PLAN AND BUILDING ELEVATION:
Public hearing to consider approval of a site plan and building elevation for a proposed 8,000 sq. ft. retail building on pad #5 in the Walmart PD zone at Pioneer Road and 2710 South Cr. Watson Engineering Co., representative.

Assistant Planner Ray Snyder explained that in 2000 when the Walmart project was approved, one of the stipulations was that the City would have to approve use of the outlot pads. The site in question is one acre, and staff does not know the actual uses being proposed for the site. The Planning Commission recommended approval subject to (1) signage being approved under a separate permit, (2) earth tone colors shall be used as depicted in the October 19, 2005 submittal, (3) the elevations shall include 8x8x16 single scored CMU columns which project 1'0" from the face of the building on all sides as depicted in the October 19, 2005 submittal, (4) an EIFS overhang shall be added as depicted in the October 19, 2005 submittal, (5) the HVAC systems will be split systems with compressors on the ground and screened by landscaping, with no mechanical units on the roof, (6) a landscape plan or typical c-section, and (7) the inside of the parapet wall colored.

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 site plan and building elevations subject to the recommendations of the Planning Commission.
SECOND: The motion was seconded by Council Member Bunker.
VOTE: Mayor McArthur called for a vote, and all voted aye. The motion carried.

PUBLIC HEARING/ZONE CHANGE/ORDINANCE:
Public hearing to consider approval of a zone change from R-2 to RCC for the area referred to as ?Sandtown? located approximately north of 150 North, east of Bluff Street, south of the Red Hills Golf Course, and west of the Red Hill.

Community Development Director Bob Nicholson explained that in October 2004 the residents in Sand Town petitioned the City to adopt a pending ordinance moratorium on building within the R-2 zone. The RCC zoning ordinance has been tweaked since then to add design standards. Staff sent out 700 letters informing owners and residents of the Planning Commission and City Council meetings. The area is mostly built-out. R-2 zoning allows a single family dwelling on 6,000 sq. ft. lots and duplexes on 8,000 sq. ft. lots. Lots with 50' frontage are subject to design standards. Duplexes, townhomes, condominiums and apartments are allowed in the RCC zone with a conditional use permit, and the RCC zone allows more flexibility than an R-2 zone. The Planning Commission recommended approval on a four to two vote.

Mayor McArthur commented that the purpose of the RCC zone is to encourage single family residents to remain in the area without disallowing present uses of property. He then opened the public hearing.

Paul Bottema commented he hoped the zone change was approved.

Jay Blake, representing the Ella Blake Trust, commented that his lot consists of over one-sixth of the property on the block, and is the only piece on the block affected by the zone change since the property next door is a law office and the other side consists of two small rental homes. He stated he did not see why any property south of 200 North had to be included in the zone change. He stated he was possibly looking at commercial development of his property.

Mayor McArthur replied that commercial development is allowed in an RCC zone.

Mr. Blake commented that the zone change proposal was poor planning and he saw no reason to change the zone. He stated he would not develop the property, but sell it for likely commercial development.

Council Member Whatcott commented that the City Council did not want to create islands of zoning, and excluding Mr. Blake?s property would create an island of R-2 zoning.

Hylan Kirkland commented that he has lived in Sandtown for 52 years and has commercial zoning all around him. He stated that the required design standards would drive the cost of the houses up.

City Manager Gary Esplin replied that the design standards apply only to anything less than an 8,000 sq. ft. lot and would apply only to someone who wanted an exception to the zoning.
Mr. Kirkland commented that RCC zoning may force some to keep their older homes and rent them which will not help the problem in the Sandtown area and could possibly make it worse. He stated the higher cost of ground and building costs will require more PDs with townhomes and apartments, which will mean more rentals. This will also cost the City more in planning and enforcement which comes out of his tax dollar. He stated he felt the zone change tramples on personal property rights, and he urged the City Council to deny the request.

St. George City Council Minutes
December 1, 2005
Page Six

Gloria Shakespeare commented that the RCC zone is not her ideal as there is enough mixed-use housing already in the downtown area. The only way to protect the socioeconomic balance in the downtown is to keep R-1-8 zoning. However, the RCC zone is a compromise which will benefit Mr. Blake and Mr. Kirkland by not allowing single family homes to be turned into duplexes. The RCC zone is really an R-1-8 zone with a conditional use permit built into it. The purpose of the RCC zone is to provide stability for the downtown area, to encourage single family homes, and provide aesthetical charm and beauty. Every home in Sandtown on an 8,000 sq. ft. can be turned into a duplex unless the RCC zone is approved. The RCC zone benefits the neighborhood and community as a whole, and the City has the right to determine if what is going in is in the best interests of the community.

Lewis Cook commented he was in favor of the zone change.

Doug Alder commented that Ogden, Provo, and Salt Lake City have gone through serious phases of declining city centers and are spending millions of dollars to try and revitalize them. The purpose of the RCC zone is to prevent this before it happens to St. George.

Jay Blake commented that the block on which his property is located is no longer a neighborhood and should not be included in the zone change.

Community Development Director Bob Nicholson clarified that the design standards apply only to 5,000 sq. ft. lots or multiple family projects.

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

Council Member Whatcott commented that Mr. Blake and Mr. Kirkland had legitimate concerns, and there will be isolated cases to look at and adjust accordingly in the RCC area, but overall he felt the zone change was a good thing to do and the design standards made sense to improve and enhance the area.

Council Member Bunker commented that this zone change has been a long time in coming and is beneficial to the community as a whole and not only to Sandtown. She stated there was a lot of flexibility and an applicant can go to the Planning Commission and City Council to have their various needs addressed.

Council Member Allen encouraged staff to work with applicants who may have individual cases needing clarification or change.

City Manager Gary Esplin advised that a caveat could be included in the motion to allow them to request a zone change, with waiver of the fee.

City Attorney Shawn Guzman suggested a time frame within which to waive the fee.

Council Member Allen suggested a six to nine month time frame to waive the fee.

City Manager Gary Esplin advised that the fee waiver would apply to the property, not the individual, to accommodate sale of Mr. Blake?s property.

Mr. Guzman clarified that the time frame for waiver of the fee would be nine months, but an applicant could request a zone change at any time.

MOTION: A motion was made by Council Member Whatcott to approve the zone change by ordinance according to the map as presented, recognizing that there are areas which need to be dealt with on an individual basis. The motion includes a stipulation that the fee waiver will apply for nine months.
SECOND: The motion was seconded by Council Member Bunker.
VOTE: Mayor McArthur called for a roll call vote, as follows:
Council Member Whatcott - aye
Council Member Bunker - aye
Council Member Allen - aye
Council Member Orton - aye

The vote was unanimous and the motion carried.

APPOINT MAYOR PRO TEM:
Mayor McArthur advised that he had to leave the meeting, and suggested that Council Member Whatcott be appointed as Mayor Pro Tem in his absence.

MOTION: A motion was made by Council Member Orton to appoint Council Member Whatcott as Mayor Pro Tem.
SECOND: The motion was seconded by Council Member Bunker.
VOTE: Mayor McArthur called for a vote, and all voted aye. The motion carried.

Mayor Pro Tem Whatcott called for a brief break.

PUBLIC HEARTING/ZONE CHANGE/ORDINANCE:
Public hearing to consider a zone change from R-2 to PD Residential on 1.41 acres located at 449 West 500 North Street. Jeremy Black, applicant.

Community Development Director Bob Nicholson explained that the purpose of the zone change is to allow the project to be platted. It has already been approved and 75% built. The R-2 zone requires the lots to be 6,000 or 8,000 sq. ft. Without changing the density the PD zone allows the platting and sale of just the private envelope area. There is no change in the project size, look or density. The Planning Commission recommends approval.


St. George City Council Minutes
December 1, 2005
Page Seven

Mayor Pro Tem Whatcott 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 zone change.
SECOND: The motion was seconded by Council Member Bunker.
VOTE: Mayor Pro Tem Whatcott called for a roll call vote, as follows:
Council Member Orton - aye
Council Member Bunker - aye
Council Member Allen - aye
Mayor Pro Tem Whatcott - aye

The vote was unanimous and the motion carried.

PUBLIC HEARING/AMEND GENERAL PLAN LAND USE MAP/ORDINANCE:
Public hearing to consider a request to amend the General Plan Land Use Map to change the land use designation from Low Density Residential (up to four dwelling units per acre) to Medium Density Residential (up to nine dwelling units per acre) on 13.2 acres located west of the intersection of Dixie Drive and Mesa Palms Drive. Kelly Erickson, agent.

Associate Planner Mark Bradley explained that this area is part of the Mesa Palms PD area which has not yet been developed. The applicant proposes to have five to nine dwelling units per acre. The site is surrounded by R-1-10 and PD. The General Plan shows potential commercial to the north. The Planning Commission tabled the matter the first time it heard it in order for conceptual renderings to be prepared. The applicant proposes to construct two and three story buildings. The Planning Commission recommended approval with the clarification in the minutes that there is no tie to the exhibits presented because this is just a General Plan amendment. This phase consists of a recreation area for the PD, which the applicant is still willing to do. Staff feels the land use designation should remain as low density residential.

Council Member Bunker inquired if the blue clay was the reason for three story buildings.

Mr. Bradley replied that this was the justification, and is a good reason to have more dense weight instead of separate units spread throughout the area. Piers will be used to address the expansive soils. Staff feels the applicant can still meet the density of up to four dwelling units per acre with the two story units spread throughout the hillside and achieve the same objective.

Mayor Pro Tem Whatcott opened the public hearing.

Rick Wells, architect for the applicant, explained that this is a master plan change for density only, and the applicant is not married to the plans as presented. He stated the proposed density would be six to eight units per acre, and multi-story buildings would be needed to accomplish this, but it could possibly be accomplished with two story units. The only way to provide affordable housing is to increase the density and drop the cost per unit.

Mayor Pro Tem Whatcott commented that this change would result in a spot zone on the General Plan, surrounded by low density residential.

Mr. Wells explained the applicant was trying to provide affordable housing. He explained that the development was similar to the Green Valley development and contiguous to other single family residential areas and harmonious with its neighbors. The intent is to provide individually owned permanent housing and provide a good mix of housing and provide a product for start-up housing or second homes.

Council Member Allen commented that other developers have come before the City Council and requested higher density in order to make the units more affordable, yet the price of the units never came down as the price is driven by the market. She inquired of Mr. Wells what he considered an affordable range.

Mr. Wells replied that the market drives what is affordable and he could not guarantee prices for his client. He commented that the only way to provide affordable housing is to build more units per acre to drive the unit price down. The developer must rely on market value and supply and demand to determine affordability, and everyone will try to get the most return on his or her investment, but the intent is to provide smaller units with a higher density, and build out the project within a year.

Council Member Bunker commented that the units may be individually owned, but how long would it be before they were rented out similar to an apartment complex.

Mr. Wells replied that one of the advantages of a PD is that the City Council has the ability to set the zoning and can put whatever restrictions it wants on it. The footprint becomes the zoning.

Jay Lane, representing the Washington County Board of Realtors, commented he understood why the developer was asking for a change - because of the clay issues. He commented that he had clients who would also be asking for ?spot zoning? in this same area.

Kelly Erickson, applicant, explained that one of the reasons for the proposed product vs. the existing Mesa Palms project is that Mesa Palms has been one of the slowest selling projects in St. George. He stated he was willing to make the recreational facilities available to existing Mesa Palms homeowners. He explained the recreational facilities consisted of a pool and clubhouse. The site has predominantly expansive soils, and everything will have to be built on columns or piers, and the more load the better. The density is proposed at 8.2 units per

St. George City Council Minutes
December 1, 2005
Page Eight

acre, and he likes the idea of having more affordable units and more higher priced units for a nice mix. There will be six to eight different floorplans.

City Manager Gary Esplin commented that he was concerned about granting increased density without a guarantee of addressing the affordable housing issue. The City has no guarantee that by granting additional density that the units will be within the affordable housing range. The City should be looking at some way to protect itself and ensure that affording housing units will be provided. This cannot be done without a development agreement and should be done throughout the entire community.

There being no further public comment, Mayor Pro Tem Whatcott closed the public hearing.

Council Member Allen expressed concerns about the amount of traffic that will be dumped onto Dixie Drive. She commented that there were already problems in this area and it should be addressed.

Mr. Wells replied that he met with Aron Baker who said that the project would not create a considerable increase in traffic on Dixie Drive that would mandate improvements. A deceleration lane was not discussed.

Mayor Pro Tem Whatcott commented that while this particular project may not create a problem, there is a cumulative effect.

Mr. Wells replied that the applicant was willing to work with the City and look at more than just his development.

City Manager Gary Esplin commented that the project to the west was required to do significant traffic improvements on areas which did not even front the project. He questioned whether the City Council was ready to consider eight to nine units per acre throughout the entire valley on property owned by the Plantations, the Burgesses, and State Lands. The entire area must be considered, and while this project may be OK, how it relates to the other hundreds of undeveloped acres in the area must be considered. The City has had offers from others who would be willing to provide affordable housing.

Mr. Wells commented that the affordable housing issue could be addressed in the development phase, but he did not know how to do so now and was open to suggestions. The issue is regional and the applicant is willing to do his share.

MOTION: A motion to deny the request was made by Council Member Orton.
SECOND: The motion was seconded by Council Member Bunker.

Council Member Allen commented that she would feel better if the matter was tabled in order to discuss the entire area. If the applicant?s request is denied, he will have to wait one year before he can bring the request back for consideration, and this may be one place where higher density should be considered.

City Manager Gary Esplin advised that the City Council could waive the one year requirement if it wanted to do so and also waive the resubmittal fee.

Council Member Orton commented that the General Plan shows the area as low density residential, so the applicant could proceed with a low density residential development without coming back to the City Council.

Council Member Allen commented that areas of higher density were needed.

Council Member Orton replied that the trade-off would be if the applicant wanted to provide some affordable housing, he could be allowed to cluster, leaving the density at four units per acre, and donating property to a non-profit agency for affordable housing.

Mayor Pro Tem Whatcott commented that timing is an issue and in other areas of the City the developers have given something back to the City in exchange for higher density. He stated he did not see the developer giving anything to the City in exchange for higher density in this project, and in his mind the request is premature in consideration of what the City wants to see accomplished with regard to affordable housing.

Council Member Allen suggested that time be taken to look at the whole area with regard to the master plan.

Council Member Bunker commented that the applicant could always come back with a more creative plan with clustering.

Council Member Allen commented she did not want the developer to have to wait a year to resubmit a request if the request was denied as the City is looking to move more quickly with affordable housing.

City Manager Gary Esplin stated that if the developer could guarantee a section of affordable housing, in writing, and not just done with higher density, the City Council could consider it at any time.

Mr. Wells advised that if the matter were tabled, the applicant would be willing to work with Council Member Allen to address affordable housing, as this is the intent of the project.

VOTE: Mayor Pro Tem Whatcott called for a roll call vote, as follows:
Council Member Orton - aye
Council Member Bunker - aye
St. George City Council Minutes
December 1, 2005
Page Nine

Council Member Allen - aye
Mayor Pro Tem Whatcott - aye

The vote was unanimous and the motion carried.

Council Member Allen commented that the applicant could come back to the City Council with a new plan.

PUBLIC HEARING/SIGN ORDINANCE:
Public hearing to consider amendments to the City?s Sign Code.

Community Development Director Bob Nicholson explained that most of the changes have been discussed for a year or more, the Sign Review Board has met on numerous occasions, several meetings have been held with the Chamber, and many accommodations have been made. The ordinance will still allow pole signs on most major commercial streets, and areas around the interchange, with the exception of Exit 4. He reviewed the street map where pole signs are allowed. The ordinance does not address banners, and this is being addressed through a policy. The Sign Review Board still retains authority to grant minor variances to the ordinance.

Mayor Pro Tem Whatcott opened the public hearing.

Scott Hansen stated he hoped the ordinance would beautify the City by eliminating pole signs, and he was sorry it was not going to do that.

Ray Draper, Manager of Young Electric Sign Co., stated that the new ordinance restricts pole signs from 300 sq. ft. to 120 sq. ft. and is a huge change which should be looked at. He also stated the height of monument signs is being reduced and is not adequate and transition requirements should not be mandatory. He commented that requiring a transition takes the creativity out of sign design.

Steve Davis, Rainbow Sign and Banner, suggested that the recommendations of the Small Business Administration for signs be followed. They recommend that monument signs be 25' tall on a 35 mph street, and that a sign begin at 7' from the grade. He recommended that the height limitation on monument signs be increased to 15' and 20', and that the square footage of a sign should be at least 200 sq. ft. in order to be readable in a 35 mph zone.

Dean Terry, owner of the Holiday Inn, suggested the matter be tabled as he is having a new sign designed which will now have to be decreased in square footage and lowered to meet the new ordinance. He requested that his new sign be grandfathered.

Lori Kocinski Puchlik, representing the St. George Area Chamber of Commerce, stated that the Chamber has had a fair amount of input into the new ordinance, but still does not want signs to be shorter and smaller, but does want aesthetics. She requested that the City Council reconsider the size and height proposed in the ordinance.

Kim Campbell inquired if murals were addressed in the new ordinance, as well as entire windows which are ?wrapped? and become a sign.

Community Development Director Bob Nicholson replied that these issues are addressed in the new ordinance.

Jacquie Capon inquired why there were 27 signs around the roundabout at Hope and Main Streets, and commented that the cost of the roundabout, $185,000, could have been used to hire 5.5 new police officers.

City Attorney Shawn Guzman replied that the use of regulatory signs is governed by ASHTOE standards and the MUTCD, and staff is good at not placing signs where they are not needed.

City Manager Gary Esplin commented that the proposed ordinance is a start, and while not everyone will agree, he suggested the City Council move forward and adopt it.

Council Member Bunker commented that she felt the proposed ordinance was a good start in trying to do something that will please both sides of the issue, recognizing that it is impossible to please everyone.

Council Member Orton commented that the proposed ordinance is less restrictive than that of many cities trying to accomplish what the City is trying to do, and anything less would not be a change.

Council Member Whatcott commented that he felt 10' and 15' high monument signs would not be large enough, and signs that are too small are almost as bad as signs that are too large.

Community Development Director Bob Nicholson commented that a single tenant is limited to a sign of 120 sq. ft. Multi tenant signs are allowed up to 200 sq. ft. There is also a provision in the ordinance allowing a multi tenant sign to be 300 sq. ft. under certain situations. The logic behind requiring the second and third signs to be reduced in size is to have less obtrusive signs.

There being no further public comment, Mayor Pro Tem Whatcott closed the public hearing.

Mayor Pro Tem Whatcott commented that the proposed ordinance is an attempt to require improvement when a current owner changes his sign. He stated that while he felt limiting a single tenant sign to 120 sq. ft. was going too far, he felt the proposed ordinance was a great


St. George City Council Minutes
December 1, 2005
Page Ten

start and the committee has done a great job, although there still may be provisions of the ordinance which need to be looked at.

Dean Terry requested that the City Council grandfather his sign or not approve the ordinance.

Council Member Allen stated she would have to vote against it unless the 120 sq. ft. maximum provision were changed.

Council Member Orton commented that ordinances can be amended at any time.

Steve Davis commented that the numbers seemed random and he requested more research, formulas and documentation.

MOTION: A motion to approve the ordinance as proposed by the Sign Review Board was made by Council Member Orton.
SECOND: The motion was seconded by Council Member Bunker.
VOTE: Mayor Pro Tem Whatcott called for a roll call vote, as follows:
Council Member Orton - aye
Council Member Bunker - aye
Council Member Allen - aye
Mayor Pro Tem Whatcott - aye

The vote was unanimous and the motion carried.

AGREEMENT:
Consider approval of a NEBO entitlement transfer agreement.

City Manager Gary Esplin explained that approval of the agreement will allow the City to sell its entitlement in the NEBO generation project if it can find a willing buyer. UAMPS has indicated its willingness to buy the entitlement share. Staff recommends approval subject to legal review.

MOTION: A motion was made by Council Member Allen to approve the agreement.
SECOND: The motion was seconded by Council Member Bunker.
VOTE: Mayor Pro Tem Whatcott called for a vote, and all voted aye. The motion carried.

AGREEMENT:
Consider approval of a reimbursement agreement with Kerry Blake to upgrade a
water line in Indian Hills Drive.

City Manager Gary Esplin explained that the project is being done by Kerry Blake, but the City has need to upgrade the water line in this area. The estimate for the cost was less than $25,000 so he authorized approval. However, after all costs were finalized, the cost was actually $27,000 which requires City Council approval.

MOTION: A motion was made by Council Member Orton to approve the agreement.
SECOND: The motion was seconded by Council Member Bunker.
VOTE: Mayor McArthur called for a vote, and all voted aye. The motion carried.

SET PUBLIC HEARINGS:
Associate Planner Mark Bradley advised that the Planning Commission, at its meeting held November 22, 2005, recommended that public hearings be scheduled for January 5, 2006 at 5:00 p.m. to consider: (1) a zone change from A-1 to R-1-10 on 10.81 acres located at 2350 East 2000 South, and (2) a zone change from R-3 to OS on 7.20 acres, and from C-3 to R-3 on 1.95 acres to clean up zoning in the Twin Lakes Resort Subdivision and the golf course area located at Red Hills Parkway and Twin Lakes Road.

MOTION: A motion was made by Council Member Orton to schedule the public hearings as recommended by the Planning Commission.
SECOND: The motion was seconded by Council Member Allen.
VOTE: Mayor Pro Tem Whatcott called for a vote, and all voted aye. The motion carried.

HILLSIDE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT:
Associate Planner Mark Bradley explained that the Planning Commission, at its meeting held November 22, 2005, recommended approval of a hillside development permit for a proposed single family residential development, Tuscany Shores, located southeast of Foremaster Ridge between the new Riverside Drive extension and the Virgin River at approximately 2000 East Riverside Drive, subject to the following conditions:

1. Reduce the south roadway right-of-way from intersection to intersection from 50' to 45' to establish a greater rear yard setback.
2. Increase the ledge setback from 30' to 35'.
3. Mitigation of the four proposed fill areas along the southerly boundary of the project within the 35' ledge line setback be addressed by providing a detailed landscape plan to be reviewed by city staff. The landscape plan to include boulders to match the natural rock outcropping.
4. Reduce the building size
5. Install the orange fence along the 35' setback line throughout the development prior to issuance of a grading permit. In areas of minimal fill within the setback area, install a second fence to protect the ledge/ridge line.
6. Notes on the final plat to address no additional fill/cut within the 35' setback area from finished grade and label the area as a no build area.


St. George City Council Minutes
December 1, 2005
Page Eleven

Mr. Bradley clarified that a pool can be built within the setback as long as it meets the requirements of the geotech report and without disturbing the ledge line.

Rich Lewis, applicant, expressed concern about the restrictions recommended by the Planning Commission. He stated there were no safety issues, and the only reason to build in the no disturb zone behind the backyards would be for aesthetics. While he agreed with the aesthetics restrictions along the ridge line, there is no reason to restrict what the homeowner can do as far as landscaping their backyards as they cannot be seen from the trail. He stated that block and rock walls have been restricted, and wrought iron fences will be installed all along the ridge painted the color of the terrain. He clarified that there should not be restrictions on filling the 35' area as it cannot be seen from the trail.

Mr. Bradley clarified that hillside issues were addressed on site by increasing the setback and allowing four areas to be filled, but once the fill is in place, it cannot be added to and no more grading is allowed, and no buildings or accessory buildings are allowed within the setback area.

Mr. Lewis stated that the owners should be able to fill for landscape purposes.

Mr. Bradley suggested that the matter be tabled in order to resolve the issue with the applicant.

Mr. Lewis replied he was not interested in delaying the matter any longer.

Mayor Pro Tem Whatcott commented that to him, the issue was no different than that of Foremaster Ridge, and changes to the yards along the ridge line can be seen. If owners are allowed to fill and make changes to the grade, it will be clearly seen from 1450 South and The Springs.

Mr. Lewis expressed concern about landscaping around the pool.

Mr. Bradley replied that this landscaping could be worked out, but the final grading of the site had to be specific.

Council Member Allen expressed concern with possible traffic noise and resultant complaints from homeowners within the project. She suggested a note be put on the plat that traffic noise is to be expected.

Mr. Lewis replied that traffic noise would be mitigated by placement of berms and rock walls.

Council Member Allen commented for the record that Riverside Drive is a busy road and sound walls were suggested as a possible mitigation of the problem.

MOTION: A motion was made by Council Member Orton to approve the hillside development permit subject to the recommendations of the Planning Commission.
SECOND: The motion was seconded by Council Member Bunker.
VOTE: Mayor Pro Tem Whatcott called for a vote, and all voted aye. The motion carried.

HILLSIDE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT:
Associate Planner Mark Bradley explained that the Planning Commission, at its meeting held November 22, 2005, recommended approval of a hillside development permit for Tuscan Hills Phases 3 and 4 located off of Plantations Drive west of Dixie Drive subject to the following stipulations:

Phase 3
1. Lots in the north and westerly portion of the phases are to be lowered approximately 6' to match the existing Phase 2.
2. Lot 322 be reviewed by City staff. No fill slopes to exceed 6'.
3. Lots 314 - 321 are to have no fill within the 30' ridgeline setback.
4. No sloughing of earth or any other material onto the no disturb hillside.
5. Install the orange fence along the natural edge to prevent sloughing of material prior to issuance of a grading permit.

Phase 4
1. Subject to changes drawn on Pages 10 and 12 on the submitted plans.
2. The hillside cut would consist of a 1:1 cut slope, faced with a stacked wall at a maximum height of 8', with a drainage ditch above the rock wall and a 2:1 cut that would tie into the natural hillside. In some areas there would be another stacked rock wall at a maximum 4' terraced behind the drainage ditch offset above the 8' stacked rock wall.
3. Install the orange fence along the no disturb area prior to issuance of a grading permit.

MOTION: A motion was made by Council Member Bunker to approve the hillside development permit 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.

Mayor Pro Tem Whatcott commented that the installation of orange fences should be standard to every project to protect lava and other sensitive areas.



St. George City Council Minutes
December 1, 2005
Page Twelve

LOT SPLIT:
Assistant Planner Ray Snyder explained that the Planning Commission recommended approval of a lot split at 1450 East and Foremaster Drive subject to the following recommendations:

1. The application shall include this site as a part of the plat with the next adjacent property when ready to divide.
2. Provide separate deeds for each created parcel.
3. In addition to the legal descriptions that appear on the record of survey, provide the City with a separate 8.5 x 11 legal description for each parcel.
4. Utilities and drainage easement shall be completed and recorded.
5. The City Engineer shall review the cross access. It shall be recorded by the applicant and a copy provided to the City.
6. The applicant shall submit for review all legal documents to the City Attorney?s Office.
7. Access shall be from 1450 East.
8. A cross access easement shall be prepared for the two lots so access can be achieved between the lots.

MOTION: A motion was made by Council Member Orton to approve the lot split subject to the recommendations of the Planning Commission.
SECOND: The motion was seconded by Council Member Allen.

A unidentified man explained that the building will be two stories and not three as previously planned. The architectural facade of the building will be the same as that of the adjacent building. There will be a 40' setback from the western boundary.

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

CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT:
Consider approval of a conditional use permit to construct a club house, driving range, two story T-box, outdoor lighting, poles and netting for a driving range, and a new maintenance building located at the Twin Lakes Golf Course on Red Hills Parkway and Twin Lakes Road. Jim Haslem, applicant.

This item was tabled.

CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT:
Consider approval of a conditional use permit for a new office building with a height above 35' located at 400 North Bluff. Paul Ellsworth for Highpoint LLC, applicant.

This item was tabled.

CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT:
Consider approval of a conditional use permit to construct an office building with a height of 43' to the midpoint of the sloping roof located at the corner of Sunset Blvd. And Daybreak Drive. Shawn Ferris, agent.

Assistant Planner Ray Snyder explained that the grade and roof have been dropped from the first drawing and will not hamper the view of neighbors. The height is only 2' above the 35' standard. The Planning Commission recommends approval.

MOTION: A motion was made by Council Member Orton to approve the conditional use permit.
SECOND: The motion was seconded by Council Member Bunker.
VOTE: Mayor Pro Tem Whatcott called for a vote, and all voted aye. The motion carried.

ADDENDUM TO CONTRACT:
Consider approval of an addendum to the Water Walk contract.

City Manager Gary Esplin explained that the contract is with GSBS in the amount of $115,000 for construction management services for the Water Walk from the Town Square to the pond at the top of Main Street.

MOTION: A motion was made by Council Member Bunker to approve the addendum.
SECOND: The motion was seconded by Council Member Allen.
VOTE: Mayor Pro Tem Whatcott 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 November 3, 2005.

MOTION: A motion was made by Council Member Orton to approve the minutes as presented.
SECOND: The motion was seconded by Council Member Bunker.
VOTE: Mayor Pro Tem Whatcott called for a vote, and all voted aye. The motion carried.

Consider approval of the minutes of the special City Council meeting held November 10, 2005.

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

St. George City Council Minutes
December 1, 2005
Page Thirteen

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

Consider approval of the minutes of the special City Council meeting held November 15, 2005.

MOTION: A motion was made by Council Member Orton to approve the minutes as presented.
SECOND: The motion was seconded by Council Member Allen.
VOTE: Mayor Pro Tem Whatcott called for a vote, and all voted aye. The motion carried.

ADJOURN TO RDA MEETING:
MOTION: A motion to adjourn to a Redevelopment Agency meeting was made by Council Member Orton.
SECOND: The motion was seconded by Council Member Bunker.
VOTE: Mayor Pro Tem Whatcott called for a vote, and all voted aye. The motion carried.

RECONVENE AND ADJOURN TO EXECUTIVE SESSION:
MOTION: A motion to reconvene and adjourn to an executive session to discuss a land purchase and personnel issues was made by Council Member Orton.
SECOND: The motion was seconded by Council Member Allen.
VOTE: Mayor Pro Tem Whatcott called for a roll call vote, as follows:
Council Member Orton - aye
Council Member Allen - aye
Council Member Bunker - aye
Mayor Pro Tem Whatcott - aye

The vote was unanimous and the motion carried.

Mayor McArthur arrived.

ADJOURN:
Upon conclusion of the executive session, the meeting adjourned.




________________________________________
Gay Cragun, City Recorder