City Council Minutes

Thursday, April 20,2006



ST. GEORGE CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
REGULAR MEETING
APRIL 20, 2006, 4:00 P.M.
CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS

PRESENT:

Mayor Daniel McArthur
Council Member Larry Gardner
Council Member Suzanne Allen
Council Member Gail Bunker
Council Member Rod Orton
Council Member Robert Whatcott
City Manager Gary Esplin
City Attorney Shawn Guzman
Deputy City Recorder Judith Mayfield

OPENING:
Mayor McArthur called the meeting to order and welcomed all present. The invocation was offered by Council Member Rod Orton.

The Mayor asked Rene Fleming, Water & Energy Conservation Coordinator, to talk about the new Ultra Low Flow High Efficiency Toilet Rebate program. Ms. Fleming explained that if someone replaces a toilet from 1995 or earlier with one off of an approved list, they will get a $100 rebate on their water account. For people who are in homeowner?s associations the rebate will be on their electric account. She said several vendors throughout the City carry the model of toilets listed or they can be ordered. Mr. Fleming also said that the information can be found on the City web site under the Conservation link.

AWARD OF BID:
Consider award of bid for a TV pipeline inspection system for the Wastewater Department.

Purchasing Manager Connie Hood explained that some concerns had been raised about warranty issues with Pearpoint, the company who was originally awarded the bid. Service and reliability were discussed and re-evaluated. She said calls were made to customers of the second vendor, Cues, and they reported excellent service. Ms. Hood recommended award of the bid to Cues in the amount of $147,480 which is a savings of $2,500 over the original bid award to Pearpoint.

MOTION: A motion was made by Council Member Gardner to award the bid to Cues in the amount of $147,480.
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 a 95 ft. articulating aerial device for the Energy Services Department.

Purchasing Manager Connie Hood advised that three bidders demonstrated their products in the work environment, then submitted bids for evaluation using the point criteria set forth in the bid package specifications. She recommended award of the bid to Altec who was the only one of the three bidders who met or exceeded the expectations, in the amount of $288,939 with a $5,000 trade in allowance for a current piece of machinery.

Council Member Whatcott asked what an articulating aerial device was.

Phil Solomon, Director of Energy Services, explained that it is a bucket truck and material handler. It has two buckets on it that can move in all directions that can extend up to 95 ft. He stated that the cost of the truck will be shared between two budget years. Mr. Solomon said that they are trading in a 1988 Altec, an old bucket truck, that requires semi-annual certification because of its age.

City Manager Gary Esplin suggested that the old truck be kept for other purposes within the City since the trade-in value was very low.

MOTION: A motion was made by Council Member Whatcott to award the bid to Altec in the amount of $288,939 plus the $5,000 trade in allowance for a total of $293,939.
SECOND: The motion was seconded by Council Member Allen.
VOTE: Mayor McArthur called for a vote, and all voted aye. The motion carried.

AWARD OF BID:
Consider award of bid for a road overlay project.

Purchasing Manager Connie Hood explained that only two vendors submitted bids for this project. She recommended award of the bid to the lowest bidder, Western Rock, in the amount of $391,775.

MOTION: A motion was made by Council Member Whatcott to award the bid to Western Rock in the amount of $391,775.

St. George City Council Minutes
April 20, 2006
Page Two

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 installation of a 30" water line in 3000 East.

Purchasing Manager Connie Hood stated that the Council had already approved installation of this line at a cost of $595,600. She explained that since that approval an improved design has been developed which results in a more secure installation for the difficult ground water conditions.

Barry Barnum, Director of Water Services, explained that they were not only going to put the new line in but now they will connect the water line, put it into service and get all of the existing connections onto the new line. He said the advantage of doing this now is that when they abandon the old line they won?t have to go back and remake the connections.

Mayor McArthur asked how soon the project would be completed.

Mr. Barnum said that it would be between 4 - 6 weeks.

Mayor McArthur said that he had some complaints from residents in the area that people who are doing the work are parking in their driveways and are blocking access to their property.

Mr. Barnum stated that he would contact the contractor and that it would be taken care of.

MOTION: A motion was made by Council Member Orton to award the bid in the amount of $858,605.
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 15,000 ft. of Okonite 750 primary line for the Energy Services Department.

Purchasing Manager Connie Hood stated that there were two bidders. She recommended award of the bid to the lowest bidder, Northern Power, in the amount of $74,550.

MOTION: A motion was made by Council Member Orton to award the bid to Northern Power in the amount of $74,550.
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 purchase of electrical materials for the Energy Services Department.

Purchasing Manager Connie Hood recommended setting up blanket orders with Northern Power and Codale for the yearly purchase of electrical materials for the Energy Services Department. Ms. Hood recommended approval of blanket orders with both vendors. She explained that they would like to use the low bidder for whatever items they were ordering at the time.

Council Member Gardner asked if the split had to be $100,000 to Northern Power and $350,000 to Codale Electric or could it be an approximate.

City Manager Gary Esplin said that they would have to come back to the Council if the amounts would go over either of the amounts to the vendors.

MOTION: A motion was made by Council Member Gardner to set up a blanket order with Northern Power in the amount of $350,000 and with Codale Electric in the amount of $100,000.
SECOND: The motion was seconded by Council Member Orton.
VOTE: Mayor McArthur called for a vote, and all voted aye. The motion carried.

RESOLUTION:
Consider approval to relinquish a power line easement located along a portion of the Red Cliffs Mall.

Charles Tapia, representing Red Cliffs Mall, stated that they are in the process of selling that portion of the property to another retailer. Mr. Tapia explained that currently there is a vacant easement that runs under the building and in order to complete the sale of the building the easement needed to be abandoned and relocated.
St. George City Council Minutes
April 20, 2006
Page Three

Mayor McArthur clarified that the easement is not needed and that there is currently nothing in the easement.

Council Member Gardner asked City Manager Esplin if the staff had any issue with the request.

City Manager Esplin stated that they did not have any problems with the request.

MOTION: A motion was made by Council Member Whatcott to approve the resolution relinquishing the power line easement located along a portion of the Red Cliffs Mall.
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
Council Member Gardner - aye
The vote was unanimous and the motion carried.

BEER LICENSE:
Consider approval of a beer license for the Sunset West Bowling Center. Hiram A. Smith, applicant.

City Manager Gary Esplin explained that this request had been tabled from the last Council meeting. He said that since the last meeting Captain Lorin Johnson, the applicant and Laura Woolsey, Business License Specialist, have met and addressed the previous issues. City Manager Esplin recommended approval of the beer license application.

MOTION: A motion was made by Council Member Bunker to approve the request for a beer license for the Sunset West Bowling Center.
SECOND: The motion was seconded by Council Member Orton.
VOTE: Mayor McArthur called for a vote, and all voted aye. The motion carried.

AGREEMENT:
Consider approval of an agreement to upsize sewer and water lines in 2070 South near Tonaquint.

City Manager Gary Esplin explained that the developer is required to put in an 8" sewer line but the City would like to upgrade to 12" lines and pay the additional cost under the City?s current policy of using impact fees to plan for future growth in that particular area.

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

AGREEMENT:
Consider approval of a construction engineering agreement with Alpha Engineering for the 100 West storm drain project.

City Manager Gary Esplin explained that the 100 East storm drain project was bid out but only one bid was received which was way over the estimate so staff is redesigning and rebidding. The City still needs a contract with Alpha to do the construction engineering services, staking, inspections, etc.

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.

FINAL PLATS:
Associate Planner Mark Bradley advised that the Planning Commission, at its meeting held April 11, 2006, recommended approval of the following five final plats:

Paragon Cove Townhomes Phase 5, located off of Cliff Point Drive, south of 1450 South Street. Mr. Gail Maxwell is the representative.

Stone Cliff Phase 10 located at the southwesterly portion of the development off of 1450 South street, east of River Road. Mr. Gail Maxwell is the representative.

The Cliffs of Snow Canyon Plat H located east of Snow Canyon Parkway at approximately 3052 North. Mr. Ryan Cowley is the representative.



St. George City Council Minutes
April 20, 2006
Page Four

Franklin Place Phase 1 located at 2450 South and Little Valley Road. Quality Development is the applicant.

Sun River St. George Phase 18 located off of Arch Angel Drive, south of the Sun River Parkway. Mr. Darcy Stewart is the applicant.

MOTION: A motion was made by Council Member Orton to approve all five final plats.
SECOND: The motioned was seconded by Council Member Gardner.
VOTE: Mayor McArthur called for a vote, and all voted aye. The motion carried.

LOT SPLIT:
Associate Planner Mark Bradley advised that the Planning Commission, at its meeting held April 11, 2006, recommended approval, with conditions, of a request to split one lot into two parcels located at approximately 250 East and 825 South (Dixie High School property). Mr. Dennis Patten is the representative. Mr. Bradley explained that the lot split would improve pedestrian traffic at the Dixie High School campus. He explained that the Planning Commission?s approved the lot split 5-0 with the standard conditions of recording a lot split with the respective easements and deeds and also a reciprocal access agreement from the school property to the new parcel and all access issues to be resolved with the City Traffic Engineer.

MOTION: A motion was made by Council Member Allen to approve the lot split with conditions recommended by the Planning Commission.
SECOND: The motion was seconded by Council Member Gardner.
VOTE: Mayor McArthur called for a vote, and all voted aye. The motion carried.

SITE PLAN & BUILDING ELEVATION:
Associate Planner Mark Bradley explained that the site plan & building elevation is for the Blackridge Office Building #2 located within the Blackridge Planned Development Commercial zone at 250 West and Black Ridge Drive. Mr. Steve Brown is the applicant. Mr. Bradley stated that this is an amended portion of the planned development. He said that originally it was going to be a theater and then a three-story office building. Mr. Bradley said that this went before the Planning Commission to determine whether this proposed request would be considered a significant change to the planned development. The Planning Commission recommends approval with the suggested conditions:(1) the applicant must resolve the parking discrepancy during the plan check process (SPR application), (2) platting of the lots is required, (3) rooftop mechanical units (HVAC) shall not exceed the parapet wall height, (4) the east elevation (the side facing Bluff Street) shall have additional varied architectural relief added to the center of the building to break up the long uninteresting expanse, the applicant may vary the wall plane with a facade or by offsetting the floor plan, and (5) the building shall be twenty feet (20') lower in elevation than the existing building.

Council Member Bunker asked what the difference was in the new revised addition.

Mr. Mark Wilson, architect with MRW Design, explained that they were using different materials with color and texture of different stucco material and that it also pops out two feet (2').

MOTION: A motion was made by Council Member Gardner to approve the request with the conditions made by the Planning Commission.
SECOND: The motion was seconded by Council Member Whatcott.
VOTE: Mayor McArthur called for a vote, and all voted aye. The motion carried.

CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT:
Consider approval of a conditional use permit for a new LDS seminary building located at approximately 250 East and 825 South, south of Dixie High School. Dennis Patten, agent for the LDS Church, applicant.

Bob Nicholson, Director of Community Development, advised that the applicant proposes to construct a 9,210 square foot, single story church seminary building for students to attend classes and for related administration. He explained that the building would be accessed by a drive lane that comes off 400 East. Mr. Nicholson said that the site plan shows an area set aside for a potential future road that could be put through to 900 South if it is determined to be necessary. The Planning Commission recommends approval with the following conditions: (1) provide a cross access agreement between the School District and the LDS Church, (2) provide fourteen parking spaces, (3) process a lot split application and meet conditions, (4) submit a SPR application, and (5) comply with the City Traffic Engineer requirements for access and circulation.

City Manager Gary Esplin suggested making a condition with the School District that they would agree to leave an area open for a possible connection to 900 South.




St. George City Council Minutes
April 20, 2006
Page Five

MOTION: A motion was made by Council Member Gardner to approve the Conditional Use Permit with the conditions made by the Planning Commission and that if future needs require it, the LDS Church will provide the ability to connect with a future possible road that would go to 900 South.
SECOND: The motion was seconded by Council Member Orton.
VOTE: Mayor McArthur called for a vote, and all voted aye. The motion carried.

CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT:
Consider approval of a conditional use permit to construct an LDS church stake center at approximately 2400 East and 3400 South, west of Little Valley Road. Dennis Patten, agent for the LDS Church, applicant.

Bob Nicholson, Director of Community Development, explained that the applicant proposes to construct a 24,459 square foot, single story church building with an associated outdoor pavilion. He said that the Planning Commission has recommended approval with the following conditions: (1) submit a SPR, (2) comply with City Traffic Engineer requirements for access and circulation, (3) coordinate with affected utilities to provide appropriate infrastructure; sewer, water, electrical, gas, etc., to the site, (4) coordinate with the Development Services Department to ensure that roads comply with the master road plan and coordinate utilities with the road construction, (5) mitigate the canal that bisects the property to the satisfaction of the Development Services Department, and (6) comply with the City?s concurrency policy for offsite roadway and sewer improvements.

Council Member Allen asked if the canal was going to part of a trail system.

Mayor McArthur said that the canal on this property was not part of the Washington Canal and would not be included in the trail system.

MOTION: A motion was made by Council Member Gardner to approve the Conditional Use Permit with the conditions as stated.
SECOND: The motion was seconded by Council Member Bunker.
VOTE: Mayor McArthur called for a vote, and all voted aye. The motion carried.

CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT:
Consider approval of a conditional use permit to construct an indoor go-cart track, snack bar, conference rooms, and possible indoor climbing wall within an existing building in the Millcreek Industrial Park located at 3146 East Deseret Drive. David Robinson, applicant.
City Manager Gary Esplin explained that at the March 16, 2006 City Council meeting, the City Council approved amending Title 10 Zoning Regulations, Chapter 11 ?Manufacturing Zones,? Section 10-11-2 ?Uses?, to add ?Recreational Enterprises? as a conditional use within the M-2 zone.

Bob Nicholson, Director of Community Development, stated that the applicant proposes to establish and operate an indoor go-cart track, restaurant, and three conference rooms inside of a leased industrial building. The applicants also wish to be considered for a possible future indoor climbing rock wall. He said that the Planning Commission recommended approval with the following conditions: (1) the site be approved only for two indoor go-cart tracks, associated ancillary restaurant (snack shop) and conference rooms, (2) a future indoor rock climbing wall may be permitted by staff, (3) 75 parking spaces have been determined to satisfy the parking requirements based upon submitted parking calculations, (4) the applicant shall obtain a city business license, (5) existing outside lighting shall comply with dark sky lighting design, (6) additional outside lighting shall be added to the front of the building and shall also comply with dark sky lighting design, and (7) signage shall be under a separate permit.

Mayor McArthur asked about the hours of operation.

The applicant said that the hours of operation would be 11:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. Monday through Thursday, Friday and Saturday hours would be 11:00 a.m. to midnight and they would be closed Sunday.

Council Member Bunker asked about the exhaust system.

The applicant said that they have upgraded to six fans which will turn over the air in the building every 10 minutes instead of every 30 minutes. Four of the fans are on an automatic sensor and two of the fans will be manual so they can be turned on and left on.

MOTION: A motion was made by Council Member Whatcott to approve the Conditional Use Permit with the stated conditions.
SECOND: The motion was seconded by Council Member Orton.
VOTE: Mayor McArthur called for a vote, and all voted aye. The motion carried.



St. George City Council Minutes
April 20, 2006
Page Six

CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT:
Consider approval of a conditional use permit to construct a new Children?s Justice Center at approximately 450 East and 500 South. Patricia Sheffield, applicant.

Bob Nicholson, Director of Community Development, explained that the Planning Commission first determined that a ?Children?s Justice Center?, a private/public partnership is similar to ?Public Buildings? as listed as a conditional use in residential zones. Mr. Nicholson stated that the Planning Commission than had a lengthy discussion on the merits of the application and the conditional use. Mr. Nicholson said that one of the complaints the neighbors had at the Planning Commission meeting was the parking. The CJC has weekly and monthly meetings and in the existing facility there is not enough off-street parking so there has been parking on the street. The new proposal has 18-20 parking spaces behind the proposed building. The building is a large two story house with a driveway on the left side, typical front yard, playground area and parking lot.

Council Member Allen asked if the existing Justice Center will be removed or left there.

Mr. Nicholson said that he thought the current facility would be razed but stated that the applicant would be able to address that question.


Mr. Nicholson said that the Planning Commission recommended approval with conditions that would include but not be limited to the following: (1) determination that the use is similar to a public building, (2) redesign the driveway to avoid close proximity to an existing power pole, (3) 20 parking spaces are adequate for this application, (4) any proposed future expansions would require additional review by the Planning Commission and City Council, (5) obtain a city business license, (6) submit a Site Plan Review application, (7) a lot merger is required to combine SG-928-A and SG-928-B, (8) staff to determine whether a privacy wall is necessary, (9) there shall be no overnight use or residency in the building, (10) the site shall be used only for interviewing and training purposes, (11) make all possible effort to keep the mature tree(s) on the site, particularly in the front, (12) no signage, and (13) there shall be no therapy services performed on site.

Mr. Nicholson explained that a letter, signed by some of the neighbors, opposing the request was in the packets of information.

Patricia Sheffield, Director of the Children?s Justice Center (CJC), explained that the Center?s mission is to offer a safe, neutral, child-friendly environment where children can be interviewed by professionals from law enforcement and Child Protective Services when there are allegations of sexual abuse, severe physical abuse, drug endangered children and internet crimes against children. Ms. Sheffield stated that in the proposed new location nothing about the operation of the Center will change. The new location will provide an environment that will better meet the needs of the growing community. She said that when the house was first donated for the Center it was assumed that 100 - 150 children would be interviewed in a year. In calendar year 2004, there were 266 children interviewed; in 2005 there were 324 children interviewed, an increase of 18%. The current facility is not adequate to handle the number of children being interviewed. Ms. Sheffield stated when they vacate the current building it will go back to IHC.

Council Member Orton asked how many people attended the monthly and weekly meetings that are held at the Center.

Ms. Sheffield stated that the weekly meeting is attended by approximately 25 professional people from various agencies that work with the CJC. There is an advisory meeting once a month attended by approximately 20 people and a 501c3 Friends Board meeting held once a month that is attended by 10 people.

Council Member Orton asked how many staff members worked at the Childrens Justice Center.

Ms. Sheffield said that there were 3 staff people - herself as Director, a Victim Services Coordinator, and an Office Coordinator.

Council Member Orton asked Ms. Sheffield what happens when a child needs a place to stay.

Ms. Sheffield explained that if a child is removed from their family it goes through Child Protective Services. She stated that the Children?s Justice Center does not house children.

Council Member Bunker asked if the meetings Ms. Sheffield discussed are held at the current location and why they feel they need a 6,000 sq. ft. facility for the new location.




St. George City Council Minutes
April 20, 2006
Page Seven

Ms. Sheffield acknowledged that the new location would be much larger than the current location. She explained that at the current facility if there is more than one family in the Center at one time she has to give up her office or have them go out to the porch or backyard in order to accommodate the one family in the living room. She stated that in a community as small as ours it is important that the people feel comfortable coming into the facility and if there?s too much interaction between families it can be very awkward for everyone, especially the children. The new facility would allow them to keep the families separated in staff offices that are private. Ms. Sheffield said that right now the Victim Services Coordinator is working in the kitchen and there is no privacy for conversations and confidentiality. The Center currently has two interview rooms and it is generally not adequate to get the interviews done without scheduling people very close together. She said that they want to build for the future.

Council Member Bunker asked Ms. Sheffield about the ages of the children who were served by the Center.

Ms. Sheffield said that the ages of the children interviewed are between 3 and 17 with an average age of 8 ? years. About 98% percent of the cases are sexual abuse cases.

City Attorney Shawn Guzman stated that the way it used to work, the funding would go through the County so the employees of the Center were actually County employees. He asked Ms. Sheffield if that were still the case.

Ms. Sheffield said that was still the case. She explained the agreement with the Attorney General?s office and Washington County and that the State Legislature gives the appropriation through the Attorney General?s office and the Children?s Justice Center is under the County?s umbrella. The staff of the Center are considered County employees but it is State money. It?s a pass-through.

Attorney Guzman raised the question about why the Center would need a Business License since they are County employees and it is a County operation even though the State funds it. He stated that for all intents and purposes it?s a County facility.

Attorney Guzman noted that the criteria set forth by the Planning Commission limited the Center to ?interviewing and training? purposes. He explained that he knows that some Children?s Justice Centers have medical exam rooms and he said that he would not want to preclude that from happening in the future. He stated that if they limit it to ?interviewing and training? purposes only, if the Center wanted to make such a move in the future to help in detecting crimes and wants to do it in a way that helps the children feel comfortable when they?ve gone through a traumatic event, they may not be able to do that. He stated that a big concern seems to be the overnight use of the facility. He explained that by law the Center cannot take custody of children. He asked Ms. Sheffield if she thought those things would limit their ability to make changes in their program in the future.

Ms. Sheffield stated that at the present time they have an arrangement with a Pediatrician in town who does all of the medical exams. The 501c3 Board purchased the forensic medical equipment that is required. If it were necessary in the future it would be one small room where the forensic medical equipment would be located and the doctor would come to the Center when it was necessary to do one of those exams.

Attorney Shawn Guzman asked Ms. Sheffield if she wanted to include the ability to have the exams done at the Center in the request.

Council Member Orton asked Ms. Sheffield if she thought having therapy as a service should be part of the request.

Ms. Sheffield said that to have the flexibility of the exam room would be very helpful. She stated that they do not provide on-site therapy. She explained they are concentrating their efforts on providing core services and those are spelled out in State statute and providing therapy is not one of those functions. She said that providing referrals to therapy is and they coordinate that kind of program for children and their families. Ms. Sheffield said that she believed that the recommendation of the Planning Commission was for ?investigation, prosecution, administrative and training?.

Mayor McArthur asked if there was a spokesman for the neighbors to present their concerns to the Council. He stated that he would allow the spokesman to speak for 5-6 minutes and he would allow the other individuals who wanted to speak 3 minutes.

Debra Clark stated that she lives in the neighborhood that would be impacted by this facility.

Council Member Allen asked Ms. Clark exactly where she lives.



St. George City Council Minutes
April 20, 2006
Page Eight

Ms. Clark said that she lives at 549 South 400 East. She stated that when she walks out her front door she sees the hospital. Ms. Clark said that she represents a large number of citizens of the community who are concerned about the application for another Conditional Use Permit in the neighborhood. She stated that they strongly believe that residential zoning areas should and must be preserved for the protection of both current and future families to support and strengthen neighborhoods and also to preserve the value of current and future homes in the area. She said that there is not one person who is against the building of a new Children?s Justice Center. She said that their goal is the firm preservation of the existing zoning to support and promote a family-style neighborhood such as has been in existence there for many years. Ms. Clark stated that granting Conditional Use Permits, exceptions to existing law, parallels the destruction of an ecosystem or habitat. She said that it is a slowly encroaching, gradual takeover of established family centered neighborhoods into a conglomeration of isolated homes among inharmonious, inappropriate, out of place office buildings. She explained that they had done some searching in the General Plan that supports their position and mentioned how St. George had been carefully laid out by the pioneers with broad streets and beautiful homes in the older, established neighborhoods. She said that they read that development should respect patterns and precedence and boundaries and districts. She said that they feel that they live in one of the older districts of St. George and need help in protecting that. Ms. Clark talked about having pride in the appearance of their neighborhood and community and stated that there is a relationship between that and community pride, security and a sense of well-being.

Ms. Clark stated that it says in the General Plan that the present planning challenge is to direct and manage growth in order to preserve the quality of life now enjoyed by residents. It also says that the residents of every community have the right to determine the quality of life they wish to preserve and that all land use decisions shall be consistent with the General Plan. She said that they researched what happens when a Conditional Use Permit is approved and found that the proposed use will contribute to the general well being of the community, it will not be detrimental to the health, safety, welfare or aesthetics of persons residing or working in or injurious to property or improvements in the vicinity and in harmony with the intent and purpose of the Master Plan. Ms. Clark said that their zone is R-1-8, a single-family residential zone the purpose of which is to provide low density, residential neighborhoods with proper controls of public and semi-public uses. She said that they still questioned that the CJC is a public entity. She said that the definition of public is ?open to the community at large? and she understands that everyone could go to the Center but she said that the usage is by such a small amount of the population. Ms. Clark continued with the description of public uses which lists churches, schools, libraries, parks and playgrounds which serve the requirements of families. They are intended to prohibit those uses that would be harmful to a single-family neighborhood, which she stated, is what their neighborhood is. She said the General Plan outlines permitted uses as single-family dwellings, gardens and trees, pets, accessory buildings, home occupations and residential facilities for the disabled. She said that the Conditional Uses are churches, schools, child nurseries, parks and playgrounds, public utilities, residential facilities for the elderly, public buildings and other uses in harmony with the intent of the zone and similar in nature to those listed.

Ms. Clark that said she looked up ?public? in the dictionary and it said ?pertaining to the people at large; open to or shared by all the people; known to all, not secret; engaged in service to the people of the community.? She said that she also added ?public spirited, seeking the best interest of the community of people.? Ms. Clark stated they are seeking the best interests of the neighborhood and community. She referred to slides that showed some things that are already impacting their neighborhood on Conditional Use Permits. She stated that the critical issue is that the proposed building will begin a change that will eventually result in other office-type buildings and businesses with a few homes of greatly depreciated value remaining among the large buildings. She stated that the majority of families will have either been pressured or chose to move away in order to find family-style neighborhoods in which to raise their children. She said she expected the elected officials to represent and support the neighbors in this endeavor.

Ms. Illa May Blake stated that she lives at 494 East 500 South directly across the street from the proposed site. Ms. Blake said that the neighbors were not against the Children?s Justice Center but they are against encroaching on the neighborhood. She said that the area is saturated with traffic and mentioned surrounding schools, the hospital and doctor?s offices. Ms. Blake said that if the City allows this change to take place they might as well zone the entire street for commercial use. Ms. Blake stated that the neighbors strongly believe in the Children?s Justice Center but they feel that everyone would be better served if it were moved to an outlying area. Ms. Blake said that many years ago the residents were promised that the businesses would never cross 400 East. She asked the City Council to deny the Conditional Use Permit and let the property be sold to developers who would build single-family homes.

Mr. Mike Alton stated that he lives at 535 South 440 East Circle which is about one-half block from the proposed CJC. Mr. Alton expressed concern about two predators in the last nine years who have been caught near the Children?s Justice Center. He stated that even one predator in the neighborhood is too many. Mr. Alton said that

St. George City Council Minutes
April 20, 2006
Page Nine

the persons who are involved in the regrettable trauma of the workings of the CJC could likely be attracted to the building and hang around in the neighborhood. Mr. Alton said that it is a well-known fact that there are many registered sex offenders throughout the town.

Mayor McArthur stated that after the citizens spoke he would like the Chief of Police to address the concerns about the predators and registered sex offenders.

Mr. Kenneth Poulson stated that he lives directly across the street from the proposed CJC. He said that he just bought a home that had been a rental for years. They bought the home and have been remodeling it as a single-family home. Mr. Poulson said that his concerns as a homeowner directly across from the empty lot is the landscaping. He said that the proposed building is a 5,000 sq. ft. house compared to his 1,100 sq. ft. home. He said that it will out-look the existing homes in the neighborhood. He also wanted to know about what type of landscaping there will be. He said that he heard that it was going to be desert landscaping compared to most of the other homes in the neighborhood that have grass and trees in the front. He said that he would want the proposed building to blend in with the existing homes.

Another neighbor came forward and stated that the CJC presented plans to build on only two lots but she stated that they could be divided into three large 9,000 sq. ft. lots for three homes and three families. She said that a new cul de sac could also be added that could accommodate another seven family homes. The neighbor said that the proposed building is 6,000 sq. ft. and that the CJC wants to be unpretentious and an unknown location but she feels that it will stand out and will be known. She said that she feels that there will be traffic and parking issues as well. She stated that she wants IHC to plan it all together at once and that the rest of it be zoned residential. She said that Patricia Sheffield said that IHC has first rights to buy back the land if it were ever to be sold. She asked that the Conditional Use Permit not be granted.

Ms. Chris Brubaker stated that she lives at 432 East 500 South right across from the present Children?s Justice Center. She said that she wanted to speak to a possible compromise that would: (1) scale the building down so it would be harmonious in size to the existing homes, (2) the built space which includes the structure and the parking area needs to be matched with equal or at least adequate green space as already planned, (3) build the new building next to the Jubilee House, (4) require a legally binding agreement that IHC consent to sell the remaining property in the block to a developer who would build single-family homes that would abide by the R-1-8 zone, and (5) table the issue at this time to look at a compromise or viable working alternatives.

Mr. Lloyd Cannon lives directly behind where the proposed building will be built. He stated that the parking lot will be right next to his fence. He said that people who live on the east side of the building will not be able to get into the back end of their property. Mr. Cannon recommended that they change the driveway from the middle of the block to the east side of the block for access. Mr. Cannon said that part of the block is an eyesore and something needs to be done to beautify the area.

Mr. Richard Merrill stated that he lives on 700 South. Mr. Merrill said that his concern is when the Children?s Justice Center outgrows its needs in the proposed building and reverts back to IHC. He said that he wants the City Council to look at what the building will be used for. He asked if it would be compatible with the single-family resident neighborhood. He stated that he thought they would use it for an office building or doctor?s offices which is out of the realm of a single-family unit. Mr. Merrill implored the Council to turn down the Conditional Use Permit.

Ms. Clark returned to the podium and stated that in preparing the presentation many people whom they spoke to felt the same way except that they had given up hope. They said that promises had been broken by IHC in the past and that it was a ?done deal.? Ms. Clark said that she loves the neighborhood but they are inundated with Conditional Use Permits. She asked that the Council put themselves in their place and think about their own neighborhoods and what they envision for the environment surrounding your own private homes. She said that they are asking the Council to allow them their own vision. She said that the Children?s Justice Center could go some place else but that the people who lived in the neighborhood could not. She concluded by stating that the neighborhood is not against the Children?s Justice Center, it is against more Conditional Use Permits in their neighborhood. She asked the Council to please deny another Conditional Use Permit.

Council Member Orton asked Ms. Clark if the Children?s Justice Center was a bad neighbor.

Ms. Clark stated that it is not a bad neighbor but some of the comments made in the neighborhood meetings mentioned seeing police cars at the facility in the middle of the night. She said some people have alleged that there is activity there during the night.

Council Member Orton said that it is his understanding that the CJC is not getting a new Conditional Use Permit; they are just moving to a new facility.


St. George City Council Minutes
April 20, 2006
Page Ten

Mayor McArthur said that it is not a new use.

Ms. Clark said that it was her understanding that there was going to be a granting of a Conditional Use Permit for this brand new facility and that the neighbors want to say they don?t want any more Conditional Use Permits. She said that it was their understanding that the Council was going to grant or not grant a Conditional Use Permit for the new building at this meeting.

Mayor McArthur said that was true. He said that it was on the Agenda as a request for a Conditional Use and that presentation has been made.

Council Member Orton stated that in the past he served on the hospital board for several years and the neighborhood is better now than when it was the main facility. He said that the neighborhood is quieter, has less traffic and is drastically improved with IHC moving their main campus.

Council Member Gardner said that he knew because of the pressure from the neighbors and some lines that were drawn, IHC made the decision to move outside of the neighborhood and not impact the area anymore. He said that it doesn?t mean that there still isn?t appropriate uses associated with the neighborhood too. Council Member Gardner stated that he knew of a couple of Conditional Use Permits that were turned down and building applications that were denied. He stated that everything hasn?t gone against their neighborhood. The Council is very sensitive to that. Council Member Gardner asked Ms. Clark if anyone has had a conversation with IHC about the issues raised.

Ms. Clark said that they hadn?t had time. Some of the neighbors felt that they didn?t get adequate notification. She said that they had gotten the presentation together at the very last minute. She said that they would like to.

Council Member Allen stated that she is on the Board and that it is no longer IHC, it is Intermountain Health. She stated that the neighbors are associating the Children?s Justice Center with IHC. She said that the land had been purchased by IHC years ago and things have drastically changed over time. She said that she has seen and has worked on the plan for the long-term future of hospital facilities and nothing is included in this area of town. She said that things will probably lessen in that area of town as the hospital builds up more on its main campus. She said that she thought they could set up a meeting with hospital administration and some members of the Board and have a discussion with the neighborhood. Council Member Allen stated that the land has sat there for quite some time and the hospital has not used it and that is not the direction they are moving in. She stated that she thinks this is mute to the conversation about the Justice Center. She stated that she doesn?t feel that the Children?s Justice Center is a detriment to the neighborhood.

Ms. Clark said that they never called it a detriment to the neighborhood. She said that what they are worried about is the fact that Intermountain Health has the first rights to buy back the property if something were to happen.

Council Member Whatcott asked if they are selling the property or is the Children?s Justice Center has a land lease.

Ms. Sheffield said that the land has been donated to the Children?s Justice Center and is being deeded to them in the name of the Friends of the Washington County CJC, which is the 501c3 IRS designated fund raising organization. The building is being built with private donations. She said that the hospital has given them the land after working for more than two years with them.

Mayor McArthur clarified that it says that if the CJC is not successful or if they move the property would be deeded back to the hospital.

Ms. Sheffield stated that the hospital has the first right to buy the property from them.

Council Member Orton asked if the Conditional Use Permit were not approved would they look for another piece of property.

Ms. Sheffield said that they would but she didn?t know how they would do it. She stated that they have outgrown the current facility and there have been many people involved in trying to help them move forward to help protect the kids in this community. She said that they have architects, Southern Utah Homebuilders, and a contractor all on board with only $249,000 left to raise in order to build the facility. They have a grant pending for the remaining $50,000. She asked if the Chief of Police could talk about statistics as far as perpetrators.

Council Member Whattcott said that he agreed that this was a business use in a residential area. He said that he recognizes the need for children to go into an environment that is a comfortable setting and not walk into a commercial office building to do interviews. He asked Ms. Sheffield if this was their way of protecting the children or if it was an opportunity to use a piece of property that has been donated to them.


St. George City Council Minutes
April 20, 2006
Page Eleven

Ms. Sheffield stated that it was their opportunity to protect the children and to continue to do exactly what they are doing now in a facility that will better meet the needs of a growing community.

Council Member Whatcott asked if an office building was built that was nice and didn?t look like a commercial, sterile environment would provide the services just as well as this home.

Ms. Sheffield said that she knows of one Children?s Justice Center that is in more of a commercial looking building and comments from parents is that it brings up apprehension on the part of the child when they go there because it looks more like they are walking into a Police Station or a doctor?s office. All of the other facilities are in home settings.

Mayor McArthur asked Ms. Sheffield if the interior of the building looked like a home.

Ms. Sheffield stated that it did with the exception of the offices that will be located in the back.

Council Member Whatcott asked if the three Children?s Justice Center staff members are among those doing the interviewing.

Ms. Sheffield explained that the staff at the Children?s Justice Center do not do any interviewing. She said that the interviewing is done by law enforcement and Child Protective Service workers who are specifically trained in child interviewing techniques.

Council Member Whatcott asked if they would be successful if they were going into an office building versus a residential looking facility to interview the children who have been abused.

Ms. Sheffield stated that she did not believe so.

Mayor McArthur asked Police Chief Stratton to come up and address some of the issues that had been raised.

Police Chief Marlon Stratton stated that he felt strongly the children need to be in a residential setting. He said that it is more effective for the police. He stated that they used to bring the children to the Police Department but the objective with the Children?s Justice Center is to bring them into a more comfortable environment.

Mayor McArthur asked Chief Stratton to address the issues of the sexual predators and registered sex offenders. The Mayor asked him to discuss what the police are doing in the community about these things.

Chief Stratton stated that in St. George, the police are identifying the registered sex offenders within the City. He said that officers are assigned to specific areas of the City and the Community Action Teams are going to the homes to confirm that they are living where they say they are. He said that they are required by law to register. If they are not living there, the Police Department will file criminal charges against the individual and will issue a warrant.

Mayor McArthur asked if the Police were finding many registered sex offenders that weren?t living where they were supposed to.
Chief Stratton said that there aren?t a lot but there are some. He said that when this happens the Police pursue criminal complaints through the County Attorney?s office for those who have left or moved without updating the registry.

Council Member Bunker asked Chief Stratton about the concerns about perpetrators being around the facility. She asked what kinds of problems there are currently and what the Chief of Police would perceive would happen with the new facility.

Chief Stratton stated that in his opinion he believes that perpetrators would stay as far away from the facility as possible due to the presence of the Police Department. He said that he felt the new facility was a beautiful addition to the neighborhood.

Council Member Gardner asked the Chief to explain how the police are involved with the Children?s Justice Center.

Chief Stratton stated that the police work through Child Protective Services to transport the children to the Center. He said that the police officers are trained to conduct interviews with the children. Chief Stratton said that most of the children they bring to the Children?s Justice Center are small children who have been abused either physically or sexually.

Mayor McArthur asked County Attorney Brock Belnap to address the Council.

County Attorney Brock Belnap said that he would like to add his support for the Children?s Justice Center. He said that it provides an incredible service to young children who are in a traumatized and victimized state by making available in one place at one time experts who are trained in interviewing and in social work to

St. George City Council Minutes
April 20, 2006
Page Twelve

appropriately interview them and find out the truth. It helps minimize the trauma that would otherwise face them if they were preceding under a traditional system where they would be interviewed by the Police, then by DCFS, then by prosecutors, and then re-interviewed. He stated that all through that process there is the risk of suggestion and additional traumatization to the child. He explained that by taking the children to a residential, non-threatening system, having people who are trained in the methods of talking to children and not leading them or suggesting things to them, he is able to get at the truth which helps prosecutors when the cases are taken to court. He said it all centers around having a facility that is in an appropriate residential, non-threatening place to start the process.

Mayor McArthur said that he understands that the neighborhood is not against the Children?s Justice Center, it?s the value of the neighborhood as a residential area. The Mayor talked about how the neighborhood has changed since the time that he lived close to it and recognizes that the hospital has encroached on the area. He stated that he liked that the purposed building looked like a home. Mayor McArthur said that he had spoken to one of the executives from IHC about giving something back to the neighborhood. The Mayor stated that the Council is very concerned about neighborhoods and understands that this is a touchy issue.

Mr. Bill Freeman stated that he lives at 1035 Coyote. He said that he knows that the people who live in the area are against the proposed building even though they?re for the children being taken care of. He said that he believes the new facility will be a plus for the neighborhood. He stated that in the 84770 area there are 75 registered sex offenders. He said that children who have been abused need a place to go where they can feel comfortable because their life has been destroyed. He said that if the Children?s Justice Center can turn one child around then he feels the neighbors need to be behind it.

Ms. Clark stated that she appreciates the Mayor?s comments and that she has spent her life time working and teaching children. She said that if the large building is approved she is concerned about what happens to all the rest of the land. She asked what could be done to assure that the rest of the land would be used for single-family homes.

Council Member Allen said that she would contact Intermountain Health to arrange a meeting with the neighbors.

Council Member Gardner stated that his concern about the proposed building is that if the way it is placed doesn?t take into consideration the rest of the property they might not be able to use it the way they are intending to. He said that he would like to see the issue tabled for a week or two in order for all of the interested groups to get together an analyze future alternatives for the property.

Council Member Orton stated that he thinks they have addressed that by placing the home near the street and putting a play yard and parking in the back.

Council Member Gardner said that he didn?t know if the original plan would work without some analysis if a cul de sac were proposed in the future.

Mayor McArthur stated that he felt there was time for that type of meeting while the Children?s Justice Center continued to raise funds.

Council Member Bunker said that some of the suggestions the neighbors have made should be critically analyzed so everyone could feel more secure about it. She said that she is still concerned about the size of the proposed building.

Council Member Allen stated that she felt that the actual size of houses can be deceiving just by the way they look from the outside.

Council Member Bunker stated that she perceives a problem with the vacant piece of property between the Jubilee Home and the proposed facility.

Mayor McArthur stated that Intermountain Health has already donated the property to the Children?s Justice Center so they don?t own it any more.

Council Member Gardner said that Intermountain Health does own the rest of the property that is in question and he stated that he would like to see if they would be willing to change the boundary to make something work.

County Attorney Brock Belnap stated that he had the opportunity to be involved in the negotiations to acquire the property and it has been donated in its entirety. He stated that talking to IHC about subdividing the property or putting a cul de sac in place would be a mute exercise because it belongs to the Friends Board of the Children?s Justice Center. He said that the Conditional Use Permit request should be separated from any issues that the neighbors have with IHC. He said that they are not in a position to go back to IHC and request a different piece of land to be donated.

Council Member Gardner asked County Attorney Belnap if IHC had a desire to improve their relationship with the neighborhood.
St. George City Council Minutes
April 20, 2006
Page Thirteen

County Attorney Belnap stated that he would encourage the community to have their dialogue with IHC. He said that any change in the location would set the Children?s Justice Center?s plans back dramatically. He requested that the Council act on the Conditional Use Permit request and not table the request.

Mr. Jason Timberlain stated that he lives at 466 South 500 East. He stated that his property backs up to the proposed parking lot. He said that he is not against the proposed building but has a concern about the proposed parking lot and play area adjoining his property. Mr. Timberlain stated that he would like to have a block wall around the back of the property which would include the parking lot and the play area.

Mr. Dick Mathis stated that he is not a close neighbor but he feels the proposed building is too imposing to be built at the suggested location. He said that if it were next to the Jublilee House it would be a better fit.

Council Member Allen said that this was in the process before the Foundation House burned down which is why it looks like it is in the middle of the property.

A citizen came forward and stated that she felt putting the decision off one month would not set the Children?s Justice Center back that far. She repeated that the neighbors are not against the Justice Center but would like one month to have time to dialogue with the hospital.

Mr. Mike Empey stated that he has been the Chair of the Advisory Board for the Justice Center since 1996. He said that they want to be a good neighbor but stated that it is important that they be in a residential neighborhood. He said that one of the primary missions of the Justice Center is to have a safe, home-like setting and they feel that this plan accomplishes that. Mr. Empey said that he was involved in some of the early discussions with IHC regarding what parcel of property they would donate. He said that they wanted to donate the parcel that was on the edge of the large area they owned so they would have more options to do other things including possible residential. He said that he would encourage the dialogue with Intermountain Health but said that he strongly believes the request for the Conditional Use Permit is a separate issue.

Council Member Whatcott stated that he agrees that the neighbors have valid concerns. He stated that if they were dealing with a business situation, what they presented would be exactly what the Council would need to hear. He said, however, he can?t overlook the fact that with the proposed building the children are in a comfortable environment where they can discuss their problems rather than a sterile setting which would be a disservice to them. Council Member Whatcott said that he didn?t believe that the pictures the neighbors showed of the cemetery, college, churches, parks, and temple are derogatory influences on the neighborhood. He said that he felt those types of additions benefitted the neighborhood. He stated that he agrees that a block wall should be built in order to provide a safe and secure environment for the children. Council Member Whatcott said that the decision should be delayed.

Council Member Gardner asked for clarification on the layout of the property on the plat map. He said that he would like time for the interested parties to be able to have a dialogue about the layout and other possible uses. He asked Ms. Sheffield what issues would be caused by having the decision delayed a short time.

Ms. Sheffield stated that the biggest concern was the fund raising. She stated that they are receiving checks almost every day and that a delay of even two weeks could make a big difference when it comes to keeping up the momentum. She said that land was donated to them by IHC. She stated that the problems between the neighbors and Intermountain Health is a separate issue and not about what the Children?s Justice Center does. She stated that they have looked at how the building is situated on the land. She said the driveway was placed on the west side of the building because of an agreement with Intermountain Health which gives them access to the remaining property.

Mayor McArthur said that he doesn?t think delaying the decision would have a negative impact on the fund raising.

Council Member Gardner said that he appreciates Ms. Sheffield?s passion and commitment to this cause. He said that he doesn?t want to lose track of the mission the City Council has been on to do all they can to revitalize and reinvigorate and to protect neighborhoods. He stated that delaying the decision for a two week period of time would allow the Council to come back and responsibly report to the neighborhood that the City Council has discussed options and identified the most beneficial outcome of the discussion for the remaining piece of property.
Council Member Orton stated that the agrees with the County Attorney that this is a separate issue. He said that he feels the land donation was a very generous contribution from IHC. He stated that the Council has done everything in the last two or three years to try to protect this neighborhood along with the rest of the downtown area.


St. George City Council Minutes
April 20, 2006
Page Fourteen

County Attorney Belnap said that if the hope from a delay is that they would be able to negotiate some change to the parcel, that simply is not going to happen. He said that they have been negotiating with IHC for eight months and finally got the contract signed in early December. He said that its taken until now to get the title reports cleared and ready. He stated that delaying action on the Children?s Justice Center parcel?s Conditional Use Permit will not change things.

Mayor McArthur closed the public hearing.

Council Member Bunker asked Mr. Belnap about the imposing structure that is being proposed. She stated that the neighbors are concerned about the fact that it doesn?t fit into the neighborhood. She asked if a two week delay would make it possible to re-evaluate the building itself.

County Attorney Belnap said that the building has been carefully designed by architects and experts around the State to accommodate programming over a significant period of time. He said that the footprint is appropriate for the area and the neighborhood. He said if they were to scale down it wouldn?t take into account the anticipated growth for the foreseeable future.

Council Member Whatcott asked Mr. Belnap why they didn?t bring the request for a Conditional Use Permit to the Council before they spent so much time negotiating with IHC. He said that he feels that the Council is being backed into a corner to make an immediate decision.

County Attorney Belnap stated that they thought they needed to own the property at the time they came to request the Conditional Use Permit. He said that they went to the Planning Commission and now they are making the request to the City Council. He stated that if the Council wants a delay because they think it may result in negotiating a new deal with Intermountain Health, it isn?t going to happen. He asked that the Council please consider this request on its own merits.

Council Member Whatcott said that the Council has a responsibility to deal with the inner portion of blocks. He said that they are looking at ways to get single-family residences back into the area. He said that the current situation is a prime example of putting a house out front and making it difficult to access the back parcel.

County Attorney Belnap said that the proposed building has the driveway on the west side to provide access for future development.

MOTION: A motion was made by Council Member Orton to approve the Conditional Use Permit for the Children?s Justice Center with the following conditions: (1) removal of the Business License requirement, (2) for uses as permitted by State statues governing Children?s Justice Centers, (3) a block wall to be built behind the property, and (4) landscaping to meet the standards of the neighborhood.
SECOND: The motion was seconded by Council Member Allen.
VOTE: Mayor McArthur called for a vote, as follows:

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

The motion failed.

MOTION: A motion was made by Council Member Gardner to table the request for two weeks in order to register the concerns of the neighborhood with those that own the remaining property to encourage them to be a willing partner in making that an appropriate addition to the neighborhood.
SECOND: The motion was seconded by Council Member Whatcott.

Council Member Allen stated that she had already made arrangements for a neighborhood discussion with Intermountain Health.

City Manager Gary Esplin stated that the Council could grant the approval of the Conditional Use Permit to be in effect 30 days from now. He said that would give them the time to have a discussion with Intermountain Health.

Council Member Gardner withdrew his motion.

MOTION: A motion was made by Council Member Whatcott to approve the Conditional Use Permit for the Children?s Justice Center effective 30 days from today?s date with the following conditions: (1) removal of the Business License requirement, (2) for uses as permitted by State statues governing Children?s Justice Centers, (3) a block wall to be built behind the property, (4) landscaping to meet the standards of the neighborhood, and (5) the property reverts back to residential if the Children?s Justice Center vacates the premises.

St. George City Council Minutes
April 20, 2006
Page Fifteen

SECOND: The motion was seconded by Council Member Gardner.

Council Member Allen asked for clarification regarding the motion.

Council Member Whatcott said that the motion delays implementation of the Conditional Use Permit for 30 days in order for the City to go to Intermountain Health and talk to them about the development of their property next to the donated parcel. He said that this would also give staff time to look at the easement and determine whether it meets City Code.

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

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

The motion passed.

Mayor McArthur called for a ten minute break.

Mayor McArthur reconvened the meeting.

PUBLIC HEARING/AMENDED PLAT:
Public hearing to consider approval of the amended final plats for Lakota Phases 1 and 2, located on the east side of the Snow Canyon Parkway and Dixie Drive intersection, to change from individual lots to individual pads with common and limited common areas. Ence Homes, applicant.

Community Development Director Bob Nicholson explained that this is a change to the recorded plats for phases 1 & 2 to change from lots to building pads with common area between the pads. He said that where lot lines exist, there is a minimum 8' setback to the side lot line. For building pads with common area between the pads the code requires a minimum 10' separation between the homes.

Mr. Nicholson said the applicant wants the 10' separation between the homes rather than two 8' side yards.

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 amended plat.
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/PRELIMINARY PLAT:
Public hearing to consider approval of the preliminary plat for The Joshuas Phase 3 located at approximately 2000 South Tonaquint Drive. Salisbury Homes, applicant.

Community Development Director Bob Nicholson explained that Joshuas Phase 3 has a private street network connecting to the existing private streets established in Phase 1. There is a proposed entrance off Tonaquint Drive which lines up with Mesa Palms Drive to the west. He said the homes are detached units similar to the existing homes in phase 1. Mr. Nicholson said the Planning Commission recommended approval subject to: (1) traffic engineer?s requirements for site distance and decel lane on Tonaquint Drive, (2) meet all PD zone standards, and (3) the storm-water detention meet City Engineer?s 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 Orton to approve the preliminary plat.
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/PRELIMINARY PLAT:
Public hearing to consider approval of the preliminary plat for Tuscan Hills Phase 4 located at Plantations Drive off of Dixie Drive. Guy Haskell, applicant.

Community Development Director Bob Nicholson explained that the phase 4 plat with 58 units is ready for consideration. Tuscan Hills is in a PD zone with both public and private streets. This phase has private streets 29' wide with a 4' sidewalk on one side. He stated the Planning Commission recommends approval subject to compliance with the Hillside Development Permit, meeting traffic site distance

St. George City Council Minutes
April 20, 2006
Page Sixteen

requirements at the intersection with Plantations Drive and compliance with PD building separations and setbacks.

Council Member Gardner asked if there has been master planning for the trail system in this area.

Community Development Director Bob Nicholson said that this was a PD project that has some little private park areas within the development. Mr. Nicholson said that he doesn?t think there is a City trail planned through the development.

Council Member Gardner asked if it is consistent with the PD plan.

Mr. Nicholson stated that it was.

Council Member Whatcott asked for clarification about the number of phases being done in the development. He asked if they have done phases 1 and 2.
Community Development Director Nicholson said that they have done 1 and 2 but he said that he wasn?t sure about phase 3.

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

MOTION: A motion was made by Council Member Gardner to approve the preliminary plat.
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/ANNEXATION ORDINANCE:
Public hearing to consider approval of the Dixie Drive West annexation consisting of 39.33 acres of property located on the west side of Dixie Drive at about 1100 South. Zions First National Bank, custodian.

Community Development Director Bob Nicholson explained that this is the last step in the annexation process for property located on the west side of Dixie Drive at about 1100 South. The annexation petition was accepted by the City Council on 11-3-05, and the certification of the petition was accepted by the City Council on 3-16-06.

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

MOTION: A motion was made by Council Member Gardner to approve the annexation.
SECOND: The motion was seconded by Council Member Orton.
VOTE: Mayor McArthur called for a roll call vote, as follows:

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

The vote was unanimous and the motion carried.

REQUEST FOR A SPECIAL EVENT PERMIT:
Consider approval of a special event permit to hold a concert in the Sunbowl on May 20, 2006. Marty Lane, applicant.

City Manager Gary Esplin explained that this is a request for approval of a special event permit to hold a concert in the Sunbowl on May 20, 2006. He said that the applicant, Marty Lane, will have his own security and will be meeting with the Police Department to fill out the appropriate licenses and pay the appropriate fees.

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

Council Member Whatcott was excused from the Council meeting.

CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT:
Consider approval of a conditional use permit to construct an office building to a height of 35'-38' at 162 North 400 East. Dan Gifford, applicant.

Community Development Director Bob Nicholson explained that the applicant wants to construct a three-story office building adjacent to the existing building at 162 North 400 East. He said that the Planning Commission voted 5-0 to deny the height variance. He stated that adjacent property owners opposed the request and the issue of parking was a critical item. Mr. Nicholson said that since the Planning

St. George City Council Minutes
April 20, 2006
Page Seventeen

Commission meeting, the applicant has proposed lowering the building height from 44' to 35' with about 12 HVAC roof-top units extending 3' above the parapet wall. He stated that staff has recommended to the applicant that the parapet wall should be raised to screen the HVAC units. Mr. Nicholson said that there was also a lot of discussion about parking and they would need to verify that they would be able to meet the parking ordinance. He stated that there are conflicting claims about the parking but that the reason this is being presented to the Council is because of the height issue.

Mayor McArthur stated that he had received letters and exhibits regarding parking. He stated that in order to construct a building they have to meet the parking requirements. He asked if that was something that needed to be debated at the Council meeting.

City Manager Gary Esplin stated that the Council may want to hear how they are going to meet the parking requirements before approving a Conditional Use Permit.

Mr. Nicholson explained that there are some shared parking agreements that exist on the property. He repeated that the parking is one issue that needed to be resolved but the reason it is before the Council is building height. He stated that the applicant has lowered the height from the original 44' to 35' but it appears that the roof top units would still be exposed.

Council Member Allen stated that in the papers she had it says that the property may have been illegally subdivided because the owner of the storage facility has stated to staff that he has purchased the property.

Community Development Director Bob Nicholson replied that he was not aware of that issue. He said that the owners of the storage units were against the proposed building because of visibility issues.

Council Member Allen said that it was in the Planning Commission report under ?Background.?

City Attorney Shawn Guzman said that the attorney for the storage units was present at the meeting and that he could clarify the issue.

Mr. Mike Zundel, stated that he is an attorney with Prince, Yeates & Geldzahler, and that his client is Larkin-Gifford-Overton. Mr. Zundel explained that the proposed building is only 3' taller than the existing three story building. He described where the proposed building would be built in conjunction with the Flood Street Theaters and the storage units. Mr. Zundel stated that the concern expressed by the Planning Commission about the height of the building was being addressed by the request for the Conditional Use Permit for a variance of the parapet or screening to allow for the HVAC system. Mr. Zundel explained to the Council that there is ongoing litigation between his client and Mr. Michael Hughes. Mr. Zundel quoted from a copy of his letter to City Attorney Shawn Guzman dated April 17, 2006 regarding Mr. Hughes? October 6, 2004 deposition. He stated that the litigation is in no way connected to the Conditional Use Permit. Mr. Zundel said that Mark and Janice Taylor, owners of the storage units, had also objected to the Conditional Use Permit. Mr. Zundel said that his client has taken into consideration the concerns about parking and will agree to build an additional 37 parking stalls in the eastern portion of its property.

Mayor McArthur asked Mr. Zundel if there would be extra parking with the proposed plan.

Mr. Zundel stated that there would be. He discussed the illegal use of parking by Caf? Rio employees and customers and how that encumbered approximately 30 spaces. He said that there would be a total of 308 parking stalls with the 37 additional parking stalls his client was willing to build. He said that would be in excess of the 270 that are technically required.

Council Member Orton asked Mr. Zundel if he was using all of the cross easement agreements in calculating the total number of parking places.

Mr. Zundel stated that he was but that it didn?t take into consideration the illegal use by Caf? Rio employees and customers.

City Attorney asked Mr. Zundel if they took the disputed stalls out of the equation would there be enough parking.

Mr. Zundel stated they would not.

Council Member Orton asked for clarification about the purpose of the cross easement agreements.

Mr. Zundel explained that the number of parking spaces is determined by taking the total number of square feet for all of the buildings included in the cross easement agreements.



St. George City Council Minutes
April 20, 2006
Page Eighteen

City Attorney Shawn Guzman said that he thought after Mr. Hughes and Mr. Snow presented their issues the situation would be clearer. He said that they are talking about the height variance but that there are some other concerns that Mr. Hughes wants to address.

Mayor McArthur asked if lowering the height from 44' to 35' brings it into compliance.

City Attorney Guzman stated that the Planning Commission?s position is that the building is 3' above the 35' limit, therefore they require a Conditional Use Permit. He said that the applicant has offered to screen it by raising the parapet or by putting some other type of screening up.

Mr. Michael Hughes stated that he is the trustee of the Vera R. Hughes Grandchildren?s Trust. He explained to the Council that after Caf? Rio opened for business, employees and customers began to use the parking spaces that were designated for his business. He said that he put up signs that said ?Parking Dixie Plaza Only.? He said that some time later he heard that Mr. Gifford had been selling parking spaces to Caf? Rio for $2,200 a month. Mr. Hughes quoted from a document entitled Declaration of New Easements and Covenants and stated that the parking was supposed to be common-area parking. Mr. Hughes stated that other than the eight parking spaces that are designated to him, all of the other parking spaces are non-exclusive and can be used by him, Sunroc, the movie theaters and the furniture store. Mr. Hughes said that in paragraph 12 it states that no parking and no structure is to be created at any time that would impede the free flow of traffic or free pedestrian traffic between the parcels. Mr. Hughes stated that the proposed building violates this by having a parking area behind the building. He stated that every other building that Mr. Gifford has previously built on this parcel has been built so that a portion of the building touches the periphery so the parking is central to the businesses. Mr. Hughes said that Mr. Gifford agreed in the year 2000 by a document drafted by his own counsel that all parking would be shared. Mr. Hughes stated that if the Council wanted to give him a permit to build a 38' high building they should do it with the conditions that he build it where parking will remain central and shared and that he be required to deed back into the Boulevard Parking Owners Association the property that he took out of it. He said that the southern 14' of the proposed building is on land that belongs to the Boulevard Parking Owners Association. He said that land was dedicated to parking in accordance and in furtherance of the agreement that Mr. Gifford had with him and with Mr. Gubler who owns the other property. He said that the proposed site implicitly creates a private parking area behind the building.

Mr. Heath Snow stated that he represents Mark and Janice Taylor who are the owners of Boulevard Center Storage. He said that his clients were opposed to the Conditional Use Permit application that came before the Planning Commission. He stated that he learned for the first time that afternoon that they were not dealing with a 44.5' building but a 35' building that may go another 3' - 5'. He said that is a different Conditional Use Permit than the one that was originally submitted to the Planning Commission. Mr. Snow said that there is an issue with parking and the free flow of traffic. He stated that his client?s biggest objection is visibility. He explained that his clients are concerned about the view from St. George Boulevard and how the proposed building would block any view of their storage units and any signage they might install. Mr. Snow stated that his clients, as owners of Parcel 6, have the right to the cross parking easements. He said that the proposed building creates a private, secluded parking lot for the use of the proposed building. He stated that in his opinion the best thing to do would be to re-site the building so it keeps the view corridor open for his clients and centralized parking for everyone which would allow for the free flow of traffic, both pedestrian and vehicular.

Council Member Orton asked Mr. Snow to clarify where his client?s parking was located and who shares in that parking.

Mr. Snow said that his client has some limited parking in a small asphalt area near the parcel and also some parking that is behind a fenced area on the parcel. He stated that they have a secured area due to the nature of their business. He said that he wasn?t sure who actually used the parking outside of the secured area.

City Attorney Guzman asked Mr. Snow if the identified parking is exclusive for his clients or if it is subject to the cross access agreement.

Mr. Snow stated that he wasn?t sure.

Mr. Hughes stated that is was subject to the access agreement. He explained that when Mr. Snow?s clients bought parcel 6 they bought into the Boulevard Parking Owner?s Association.

Council Member Orton said that he would like the City staff to come back to Council when the parking issues have been resolved.

Community Development Director Bob Nicholson said that the parking issue is very confusing and complicated because there are so many conflicting claims. He suggested that a title company get involved to look through the claims to determine if there are some legal issues that will need to be sorted out.

St. George City Council Minutes
April 20, 2006
Page Nineteen

Council Member Orton stated that he would suggest doing that before he would feel comfortable voting on any type of request for this project.

Council Member Gardner said that the placement of the building becomes a legal issue as it relates to the parking agreement and the deeding of the properties. He said that they could make a decision on the height of the building but questioned whether the applicant could build the building because of the parking access agreements.

City Attorney Guzman said that he would assume that someone would seek an injunction from the court because of the view corridor that Mr. Snow?s clients are concerned about. He stated that he wasn?t certain that they have enough parking that is unencumbered to adequately serve the buildings. He said that Mr. Zundel stated that they do and Mr. Hughes stated that they do not. Mr. Guzman said that if a court were to rule in Mr. Hughes favor, it may mean that the City had approved a building that had an insufficient number of stalls as stated by ordinance.

Mr. Zundel said that is why his client offered to build the additional 38 parking stalls. He stated that they can mute the issue by building the extra stalls.

Council Member Orton said that he wanted the City staff to look at the parking issue and not take someone else?s word for it.

Mr. Zundel said that the City staff has already done that.

City Attorney Guzman asked Community Development Director Bob Nicholson what method City Planner Ray Snyder used in counting the parking stalls.

Community Development Director Nicholson said that based on the information the applicants provided to the City, they met the parking requirements. He said that in addition they would put in 38 more parking spaces on the vacant piece of land behind the Caf? Rio. He stated that it appears they do meet the parking requirements. He said that they would have used the aggregate method to determine needed parking spaces because it is all shared parking.

Council Member Orton asked if the Council could make a motion for the height variance but then put a list of restrictions of what the Council would like to see before the project starts.

City Attorney Guzman stated that if they meet codes they could proceed to build once the Council approved the height variance.

MOTION: A motion was made by Council Member Orton to postpone the request until a decision is made by the judge and staff identifies all of the parking requirements.
SECOND: The motion was seconded by Council Member Bunker.

City Attorney Guzman said that there appears to be a pretrial date, but the actual trial could be scheduled quite a distance out. Mr. Guzman asked if the motion could have a date certain in order for staff and legal to review the parking issue.

Council Member Orton agreed to modify his motion.

MOTION: A motion was made by Council Member Orton to postpone the request for a period of four weeks in order to give City staff an opportunity to review the parking requirements.
SECOND: The motion was seconded by Council Member Bunker.

Council Member Gardner said that he thinks it will come back to a legal interpretation by the courts of the cross parking agreements.

City Manager Gary Esplin stated that he agrees with Council Member Orton. He said that the City needs some time to answer some of the concerns expressed. He said that they would like to see the title policy to make sure that the buildings aren?t built on shared parking. He said that he was not prepared to make a recommendation until he had more information.

Mayor McArthur stated that he agreed with what the City Manager said but pointed out that the item before the Council was for a height variance and they had to meet all of the other requirements.

City Attorney Guzman said that the Council could grant the height variance but if there is a question if they meet the parking requirements they could make it subject to a determination by staff. Mr. Guzman said that the direction to the legal staff was to make sure that staff sorts out the concerns about parking requirements.

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

Council Member Orton - aye
Council Member Bunker - aye


St. George City Council Minutes
April 20, 2006
Page Twenty

Council Member Allen - aye
Council Member Gardner - nay

The motion carried.

APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
Consider approval of the minutes of the regular City Council meeting held March 16, 2006.

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

Consider approval of the minutes of the City Council work meeting held March 30, 2006.

MOTION: A motion was made by Council Member Bunker 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 regular City Council meeting held April 6, 2006.

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

NEW BUSINESS:
City Attorney Guzman asked the Council to consider approval of a Commercial Airport Property Lease, a sublease of Dixie Sky Park to Datadex on an airport hangar.

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

Council Member Orton asked for clarification on the permitted use of the hangars.

Mayor McArthur said that it has to be airport related.

Council Member Orton stated that he has driven by the hangars and questions whether the use is airport related.

City Attorney Guzman said that the lease specifies that the use has to be airport related.

Council Member Orton said that he noticed some of the hangers have numerous cars and/or boats and motor homes. He asked if they have ever been inspected.

Mayor McArthur said that the City used to inspect them.

City Attorney Guzman said that he would ask Airport Manager, Michael LaPier, to take a look at the issue to see if the hangars are being used appropriately.

Mayor McArthur asked City Attorney Guzman to contact Mr. LaPier to have him look into the matter.


APPOINTMENTS:
Mayor McArthur recommended Steve Bradbury be appointed as the City?s representative to the County Shooting Park.

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

ADJOURN TO EXECUTIVE SESSION:
MOTION: A motion to adjourn to an executive session to discuss property purchases was made by Council Member Allen.
SECOND: The motion was seconded by Council Member Gardner.
VOTE: Mayor McArthur called for a roll call vote, as follows:



St. George City Council Minutes
April 20, 2006
Page Twenty One

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

The vote was unanimous and the motion carried.

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

MISCELLANEOUS DISCUSSIONS:
Brief discussions were held on Stepping Stones, a drug rehabilitation center, the future of the St. George Musical Theater, Mayor McArthur?s tour of the hospital, a decision by the Downtown Business Alliance not to do the Thursday night events until after Labor Day, the City?s water feature drying up, what art the City had purchased during the St. George Art Festival, a stop work order that was issued to Brian Christensen, and the number of new positions that were being requested for the new budget year.

The meeting then adjourned.





Judith Mayfield, Deputy City Recorder Date