City Council Minutes

Thursday, November 29,2007



ST. GEORGE CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
SPECIAL MEETING
NOVEMBER 29, 2007, 4:00 P.M.
ADMINISTRATION CONFERENCE ROOM

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

OPENING:
Mayor McArthur called the meeting to order and welcomed all in attendance. The pledge of allegiance was led by Gay Cragun and the invocation was offered by
Mayor McArthur.

FINAL PLAT:
Consider approval of the final plat for The Flats at South Pointe located at 2750 East on 450 North. Linda Kirkpatrick, applicant.

Mayor McArthur advised that the City Council?s previous action was to allow the applicant to build 17 units with a bond to finish 450 North to 2720 East.

Community Development Director Bob Nicholson advised that the preliminary plat approval was based on the road being installed in nine months.

City Manager Gary Esplin advised that final plat approval would have to be based on improvement of 450 North all the way to 2720 East within nine months, with a bond in place.

Jay Sandberg commented that after the preliminary plat was reviewed by the Council, the next morning staff met to discuss the motion, and staffs? interpretation
of the motion is that the road needed to be dedicated with phase one. This is not the applicant?s understanding. The applicant submitted a final plat with completion of the road adjacent to the first phase only, and a development agreement to finish the road.

Council Member Orton clarified that his motion was that the applicant had to bond for the road so that it would get done.

Mr. Sandberg commented that staffs? interpretation is that the road needs to get dedicated so that it gets built, but perhaps a development agreement could be worked out.

Mayor McArthur commented that when the City Council first looked at this project and the applicant was represented by Jonathan Wright, Mr. Wright indicated the road was too wide and if it was narrowed, the applicant would complete it.

Linda Kirkpatrick, applicant, advised that she originally presented a 94 unit townhome project. She now has a new project with fewer units.

Council Member Whatcott arrived.

Ms. Kirkpatrick stated that she was going to build 450 North as one phase, but the market and the project have changed.

Council Member Gardner commented that the applicant?s request was altered to allow for phasing. The Council determined that the phasing was alright. The discussion broke down with regard to how much of the road needed to be done and when. Her request is that the applicant?s project be treated like any other phased project which requires improvements in front of the approved phase only. The Council wanted the road finished in nine months, with a bond, and this is beyond what is required of other developers.

Council Member Orton commented that this discussion was already had at the last City Council meeting and the motion was to bond for completion of the remainder of 450 North so the City would have assurance that the road would be done.

Council Member Gardner commented that he felt the Council went beyond what should have been done and needs to only require of the applicant what it would require of anyone else. The applicant is requesting that she not be required to have a bond.


St. George City Council Minutes
November 29, 2007
Page Two

Council Member Orton replied that if this is the case, it should to go back through the process as there were a lot of people in attendance when the matter was decided.

Council Member Gardner replied that there not many people in attendance, and their request was to let the project continue.

City Manager Gary Esplin commented there were others who did not speak at the meeting because they understood they were going to get at least one more road for access.

City Attorney Shawn Guzman commented that when the applicant?s original plat was proposed, the traffic study said that having 450 North completed to 2720 East would alleviate a lot of concerns and traffic pressures in the area. The Council approved that preliminary plat showing a full width dedication of the roadway. The applicant came back and did not want to do the full width, and her traffic study did not show the full width. She wanted to be compensated for it, and the City agreed to compensate her. In the midst of drafting the development agreement, the applicant again came back and said she would prefer not to have the full width, even if the City bought it from her. She said if the City narrowed the width, she would build the narrower full width of the roadway to 2720 East. Once again the City agreed to those conditions. Now the applicant is back to phasing which was initially proposed to staff to get the parade home built. But staff never intended to relieve her of her offer to extend the roadway and build the full width to 2720 East. Subsequent to that, she submitted a plat showing phasing, which the Council did not agree to, without the road being completed as planned, and without a traffic study.

City Manager Gary Esplin commented that the City should then require the road to be built to its original full width.

Council Member Gardner commented that the City should not do this, nor require bonding.

Council Member Orton commented that the City has done favors for the applicant throughout the entire process. The City has done everything she has wanted and even
approved phasing for the home show. He stated his motion was to require a bond so the road is completed.

Council Member Allen inquired if dedicating the road rather than requiring a bond would help.

City Manager Gary Esplin replied that staff?s position is if the road is not built to 2720 East, then the matter should go back for a public hearing on the entire project. There is a history of things that have happened on this project, and the City has changed its zoning ordinance to allow this type of development, narrowed the road, and is only asking her to do what she proposed to do.

Council Member Orton advised that the Council agreed to allow 17 units to be built because the road was going to be built.

Council Member Bunker commented that the applicant should be treated like everyone else and to hold her hostage for the bond is not going to get the road done.

City Manager Gary Esplin advised that the only guarantee that the road will be done is through a bond.

Council Member Whatcott commented that a bond costs one-half of one percent of what is being bonded for. The Council has compromised with the applicant in exchange for the entire road being built. No one is being held hostage. The proposal that came in was just for one little section, but when cars are added as a result of the 17 units, 35 or more cars will be added to that same road, and this is the problem. There is only one access.

Council Member Orton commented that the Council has compromised on everything the applicant has asked for - it changed three ordinances for her, narrowed the road, etc. This was done for the applicant, not the City. He stated he was shocked that the motion passed is now going to be overturned.

Jay Sandberg displayed two final plats - one showing 450 North connected to 2720 East; the other showing 450 North built only in front of Phase One.

City Manager Gary Esplin stated that this does not change the public hearing. In that public hearing the Council adopted the preliminary plat with 450 North connecting to 2720 East.

St. George City Council Minutes
November 29, 2007
Page Three

City Attorney Shawn Guzman advised that the City Council has the authority to change the requirement, but it would have to do so formally in a motion.

City Manager Gary Esplin commented that the Council would have to identify in its motion why the matter is different today than it was at the public hearing. It approved the preliminary plat after a public hearing, and it is now saying that even though the public hearing was held, it is going to approve a different plat.

Council Member Gardner commented that nothing is changing except the conditions imposed.

Mayor McArthur commented that the reasons the plat was approved were based on getting 450 North completed and based on bonding. That is the motion that passed. If the Council now wants to change that action, it should go back through the entire process.

Council Member Orton inquired how the Planning Commission could approve a final plat when a different preliminary plat was approved by the City Council.

Joseph Farnsworth advised that the direction he gave the Planning Commission was with regard to dedication of the road and whether it was for the entire length or just for the first phase.

City Attorney Shawn Guzman advised that the City cannot require someone to place a bond on property that is not going to be dedicated to the City. That is why the bond was required - so the applicant could record the plat. This was implicit in the motion. Jim Raines, the applicant?s own engineer, interpreted the motion to mean that the roadway had to be dedicated. The Planning Commission should have been presented with the plat approved by the Council - the one with the roadway all the way to 2720 East. While the Planning Commission approved the other plat, this does not override the City Council?s decision.

Jay Sandberg inquired if the applicant does now not want to bond for the improvements. He stated he did not know this was an issue and that there should be some sort of bond or development agreement in place to make sure the road is completely built within nine months.

Linda Kirkpatrick stated she understood the motion to mean that upon recordation of the final plat of Phase One, bonding would issue. 2720 was not specifically mentioned.

Council Member Gardner commented that if the applicant does not proceed and build the road, someone else will. The City would not require a bond of anyone else.

Council Member Whatcott replied that this was the compromise made with the applicant in order to shrink the size of the road.

Council Member Allen stated she did not recall that.

Mayor McArthur reminded the Council that Council Member Whatcott stated if the City shrunk the road, the applicant would build the road.

Council Member Whatcott commented that the City budget included funds to finish the road from there on.

City Manager Gary Esplin commented that the City has to obtain the right-of-way. The City has funds to do two lanes from the end to the west. He explained that 450 North is an 80' right-of-way that goes all the way to the mall. This is why the City offered to purchase from the applicant the property outside of what she needed. She is required to put in the width of road needed for her development only, and the City agreed to purchase the difference so it could keep the right-of-way at 80'. The Council decided it did not need the full 80' and agreed to narrow it down in exchange for getting the road built to the next street over. He inquired what would now happen if the road is not built for another ten years. If it is dedicated and not improved, the City will have to improve it.

Council Member Allen stated the applicant said she wanted to complete the road in nine months. If she can?t bond for it, the City would still have an agreement that it will get done in nine months.

City Manager Gary Esplin inquired if the applicant can?t get a bond, who would do the improvements. He stated that 450 North would only get connected if the project is a success; if not, it could be years.


St. George City Council Minutes
November 29, 2007
Page Four

Council Member Whatcott commented that he did not want to kill the applicant?s project, but the overriding premise from day one has been to get the road built. Without bonding, there is no option to get it built.

Ms. Kirkpatrick stated that there has been a change in economics and things are different than 15 months ago. If she cannot do her project, 450 North will not get built.

Council Member Whatcott commented that if the project was not built, there would be no additional cars on 450 North.

Ms. Kirkpatrick replied that without the project, the problem with 450 North would never get cured. There have been concessions on both sides. Trying to build a good road causes her to move in two phases vs. one phase.

Council Member Whatcott commented that no one is asking her to build the road today - she has nine months. This was a condition of the preliminary plat approval.

Ms. Kirkpatrick commented that she is proposing to do 17 units in two phases. 17 units was a compromise as she would not do the townhomes to keep the impact on the road at a minimum, and allow her to amass funds to move it along. Bonding costs 2-3%, and the only thing she has of value is the dirt.

MOTION: A motion was made by Council Member Gardner to approve the final plat as recommended by the Planning Commission with the normal requirements for improvements in front of the applicant?s project, and that the bonding issue is not a part of this discussion.
SECOND: The motion was seconded by Council Member Allen.

City Attorney Shawn Guzman clarified that a bond is required for a phase in order to record a plat before the improvements are in. Therefore if the applicant wants to record prior to the improvements, then she would have to bond for the improvements.

Council Member Allen said that is correct, whatever is normally required.

Council Member Gardner agreed, stating he understood this was the case and he was fine with that.

Council Member Bunker commented that she just wanted to get the road in, was tired of all the e-mails, and did not see a possibility of getting the road in without taking a chance.

Council Member Orton commented that the neighbors are his concern. They previously thanked the Council for sticking to what they originally said. The neighbors saw the
Council approve a motion. He stated he was shocked as this is the first time the Council has told the public one thing and reversed it without their input. He stated he was concerned because this is not the way this City government has worked in the past. Staff is saying that they have worked for years on making this deal, and now the council is telling them ?the heck with you, let?s do it this way.? The City has had more public input on this road than any other.

Council Member Allen commented that if the applicant is required to bond, she won?t be able to do the road at all.

Council Member Orton commented that he just did a subdivision in Enoch and if he was not able to bond, he would have been able to do the project. He had to keep his bond in place for the full three year period.

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

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

The motion carried.

City Manager Gary Esplin stated he wanted to clarify one thing. While the City attempts to treat every project the same, not every project can be handled with a standard stamp. He stated he would hate for people to think that the City has singled out this project.


St. George City Council Minutes
November 29, 2007
Page Five

City Attorney Shawn Guzman commented that the City even held this special meeting for the applicant.

City Manager Gary Esplin advised that City has also accelerated the project for the applicant.

City Attorney Shawn Guzman commented that the City also changed ordinances for the applicant.

City Manager Gary Esplin stated the City has not stonewalled this project.

DENSITY BONIS PROGRAM:
Discussion concerning the density bonus program.

City Manager Gary Esplin suggested that the density bonus program be applied beyond Little Valley to other areas of the City where similar conditions exist.

Mayor McArthur explained that a committee consisting of members of the City Council, staff, and developers was formed to look at this issue.

Community Development Director Bob Nicholson distributed a handout entitled Density Bonus Overlay Zone and reviewed it with those present.

Planning Commissioner Ross Taylor inquired how small a lot size would result if all the density bonus factors were applied.

Council Member Orton commented that some of the greatest projects the City Council has seen are projects with a density of ten to 14 units per acre.

City Manager Gary Esplin advised the plan is design driven, not density driven. He advised that any project in the density bonus program would have to have a development agreement. The program allows more flexibility with open space, setbacks, etc.

Curt Gordon, representing Desert Canyons, advised that the current zoning is Mining and Grazing, R-1-10, and Airport Overlay.

Mr. Nicholson commented that one of the things the park impact fee study did was made an assumption that neighborhood parks would be provided by developers concurrent with a development, and then it was decided this was not the route to go.

City Manager Gary Esplin advised that park impact fee funds include funds to build neighborhood and community parks.

Mr. Nicholson said that a fee adjustment or credit was needed for neighborhood park improvements.

Mr. Esplin advised that more options are available for developers under the density bonus program for the Little Valley area. One concern was what other options there might be for affordable housing, etc., but that value could not be defined.

Ron Bracken commented that there are two to three large projects coming to the Planning Commission soon which will want zoning to obtain a higher density before this plan is in place. One project consists of several hundred acres to the south, and they will get a higher density bonus without having to pay for it.

City Manager Gary Esplin commented that staff?s position is that an overlay zone should be done now - if it is good enough for the Little Valley area in determining densities, it is good enough for other similar areas. The City, right now, has nothing on the books. The temporary zoning in Little Valley expires in December, and this should be extended. Other areas to consider include Desert Canyons, the South Block, and areas in Green Valley to be annexed.

Ron Bracken advised that if this overlay zone were now in place Desert Canyons would also have to improve the park in order to get the density they wish.

Ross Taylor commented that the overlay zone would give Desert Canyons more opportunity to redesign some of their work and take advantage of some of the things offered in the overlay zone.

Mayor McArthur suggested that a work meeting be held to discuss the Desert Canyons project.

St. George City Council Minutes
November 29, 2007
Page Six

City Manager Gary Esplin advised that there have been a lot of misunderstandings. Staff thought Desert Canyons would sign a development agreement to do the same thing as
The Lakes, but they would not sign one. Staff?s position is that they should comply with build-out just like Little Valley is doing.

Council Member Whatcott inquired about medium density. The overlay zone allows clustering and creates more open space and provides the ability to build parks and trails, but medium density is not being addressed.

Community Development Director Bob Nicholson replied that the committee talked about meeting the first three requirements, and beyond that it is good design and the applicants would have to come in with a PD zone.

City Manager Gary Esplin advised that an applicant will have to provide a neighborhood park in order to get to the next requirement, and then to the next. Beyond that, staff could not figure out how to address it. He suggested that if a project had twice the density of R-1-10, perhaps it would have to do something in addition to the neighborhood park, such as a splash pad, etc.

Council Member Whatcott inquired if the park impact fee was going to addressed, as this will change the Burningham impact fee study.

City Manager Gary Esplin suggested that, for example, in the Little Valley area if someone did a 50 acre project with 10 homes, they would be required to do a park. The impact fee would be paid when the home is built, and a portion of this goes to trails, etc. He suggested that the funds go toward providing something in addition to the park. He stated the committee tried to develop standard for neighborhood parks, assuming it will cost somewhere around $125,000 per acre to build a park. The land for the park would have to be dedicated - and this is what allows the density bonus. This figure does not include amenities, so additional funds would be required for additional improvements to the park.

Ron Bracken inquired about four acre parcels.

Mr. Nicholson replied that the committee talked about private amenities qualifying, such as a horseshoe pit, trails, etc. However, if someone came in with a two acre parcel, this would be a real challenge. He stated the next step would be to get a draft to the Planning Commission for public hearing.

City Manager Gary Esplin commented that this would allow the City to move forward with a development agreement if a project wants to proceed before the overlay zone is in place.

City Attorney Shawn Guzman commented that since there is an ordinance pending, there would be no vested right to zoning other than to Open Space and Mining and Grazing.

A work meeting with Desert Canyons was scheduled for December 13.

Gil Almquist commented that perhaps the City should take a look at other areas on the general plan designated as R-1-10 and if they should be changed to something else to prevent confusion.

DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT:
Discussion concerning a proposed development agreement for The Lakes project.

Matt Ence of Snow, Jensen and Reece, presented a power point presentation. He explained that the proposed project is the result of a four month process and multiple meetings with staff. Key components include the land use plan, parks and open space plan, and mapping process. A bond will be obtained for improvements attached to each plat to make sure they get built.

City Manager Gary Esplin commented that this is a new concept, and timing is key and when it kicks in the challenge. Overall, the developers have offered to meet the spirit of what the City is trying to do in Little Valley with the overlay zone. The property is already zoned R-1-10. The phasing of the parks is the only question. He inquired if a community park would be built by the master developer.

Mr. Ence replied that it would.

Mr. Esplin inquired if this would be triggered by the number of houses.

St. George City Council Minutes
November 29, 2007
Page Seven

Mr. Ence replied that the community park would be built as determined by the individual plats. The regional park is a different question, but there is still room to figure out when that will happen.

An unidentified gentleman advised that more meetings on this issue were needed. A two year bond will be posted for park improvements for every plat that comes in.

Council Member Gardner inquired if one parcel were sold, if there would not be any connectivity for two years.

The unidentified gentleman replied that a bond would be posted to secure road improvements. When the map comes in for platting, the road will be built and a bond posted for the whole road.

City Manager Gary Esplin commented that a traffic study must be done for the entire project with key things that must happen. The applicant would have to build all roads necessary to Plantations Drive and Sunbrook Drive, and then at some point in time a light will be needed at Sunbrook and Dixie Drive based on the volume created. They should also post a bond to pay for the traffic light. He stated the only problem he could see would be connectivity, but he assumes the project will be developed from the top down. The real problem, however, is that the City does not have the right to require them to go out to Plantations Drive as that is in the County. The rest will get built easily as access into developable areas of the project. The real problem is determining when traffic triggers the connection to Dixie Drive.

The unidentified man commented property will not be sold at both ends - the property which makes the most economical sense for the business plan will be sold.

Council Member Orton inquired if water storage is planned.

City Manager Gary Esplin replied that staff could not make it work. There is, however, talk of trading water rights. The applicants have some rights in a well on the other side of the hill by Sunbrook, and there is a possibility of getting some reuse water there.

The unidentified man commented that they have enough water sufficient to develop the lakes and irrigate all the parks.

City Manger Gary Esplin commented that using reuse water will require pumping, but it is the best use for the water.

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

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

The vote was unanimous and the motion carried.

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



________________________________
Gay Cragun, City Recorder