City Council - Regular Meeting

Okay.

Thank you.

Thank you. Yeah. Thank you. Thank you. Okay. Okay. Thank you. Thank you.

All right. Welcome, everybody. It's a little past time. We're ready to start our city council meeting tonight. We're going to go ahead and get started. Started out right tonight. We have Captain Johnny Hepler from the St. George Police Department, also whom we call Washington County Sheriff Elect. He's going to give us our invocation.

Our dear Father in heaven, we're so very grateful to be gathered here together in this beautiful building with our teammates, with our friends and our coworkers, and the citizens in our wonderful community. We're thankful for the freedom that we enjoy living in the United States of America. We're thankful for the blessings that we have living in St. George City in Washington County. And we're thankful for the relationships that we have and for the strong bonds that we have with our community. We ask that that would bless this meeting, that it would have a portion of my spirit to be with us and to help us discern the things that we need to so that we can make the best decisions for our citizens. We ask that that would bless us with safety as we travel to and from and bless us with safety and our community with safety throughout this weekend. Bless. all of those that care so much for the individuals and the citizens in our communities, and bless them all with the discernment to do what Thou would have us do. We ask for these blessings in the name of our Savior, Jesus Christ. Amen.

Thank you, Captain Hepler. Now, we're going to go ahead and have the pledge. And rather than have someone do that, I'm just going to handle that, just reminding you that this is America's 250th birthday. So as we were reminded this morning in our event, we're going to say the Pledge of Allegiance with some fervor and some meaning. So if you'll please all arise with me, and we'll repeat the Pledge of Allegiance with me. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Thank you. Okay, we have a special recognition this evening that I'm going to go ahead and read this so I make sure we get everything in there. Lila Miner is a 12-year-old student at Dixie Intermediate School who recently achieved something truly remarkable. The Elks Hoop Shoot is a nationwide free throw competition open to youth ages 8 through 13 and has been inspiring young athletes for more than 50 years. This year, Lila competed in her first hoop shoot contest here in St. George. Through hard work, grit, and determination, Lila won the local competition, then advanced to win at the district, state, and regional levels. Her success earned her a place at the Elks National Hoop Shoot Contest in Chicago, where she proudly represented Utah, St. George, and the Dixie Elks. While Lila did not take home the national title, her accomplishment is extraordinary. She competed with grace, determination, and sportsmanship every step of the way. She is also the first female from St. George to compete in the national contest. In recognition of her outstanding achievement and the example she has set for young people in our community, we are pleased to present Lila with the Mayor's Special Recognition Award. And Lila, I'm going to have you come up here, and we'll present that to you, and we'll take a picture. But I want to say one other thing. I talked to her for just a minute outside, and she's very humble as well. I asked her if she knew how good she was, and she was like, what? I'm not that. So very cool accomplishment, and I want you to come up. We'll take a picture, and then if you or your parents want to say something, you're welcome to say something, okay? Come on up. We also have a little swig card here attached to the back of the certificate.

We're filing in.

oh there you go yeah i got some yep

Thank you, Lila. And thank you to the Elks. Thank you for all you do for the youth in our community and everything else you do in our community. So the Elks has been a longtime supporter of everything St. George. Okay, do we have any other agenda items besides comments? Okay, this is our first meeting of the month where we have it open for public comment. If you have come to make public comment, we have a sheet that you fill out. I only have one up here, so if you would like to fill one out, you're welcome to. We know all the rules. I'm just gonna go ahead with this one. You have to be a resident of St. George Public input is not allowed on any agenda item or a pending land use application. Comment should relate to city business. Speaker shall be courteous and show respect, which should go without saying. And no obscene or profane language or no attacks on individuals. So this one I have is Jimmy Wood. Are you here? Come on up.

Good evening, Mayor, City Council. My name is Jimmy. And the reason I'm here tonight is because tonight's agenda includes several investments in parks, trails, and roadway safety, public safety partnerships. I just want to speak a little briefly about why these kinds of decisions matter so much for the well-being of our youth. As a father raising kids here, and as someone who has worked with behavioral health and crisis response, I see every day how much environmental change it shapes, environment shapes the safety and confidence of young people. So kids don't always talk about what they're going through, but they feel it in their neighborhoods, in their schools, and in the places where they spend time after school. So when the city invests in safe parks, safe crossings, and safe public spaces, it sends a message to our youth that they matter, that their safety matters, and that their mental health matters. And this community is paying attention to the things that help them grow healthy and grounded adults. So I'm especially encouraged to see projects like the Lizard Wash Park, the pedestrian bridge, and roadway improvements on the agenda. These aren't just construction items, they're prevention. They're the kinds of investments that keep kids active, connected, and out of crisis long before a police officer or clinician ever has to step in. I also want to acknowledge the continued support for the Drug Task Force. Substance abuse touches families in every neighborhood, and prevention starts before law enforcement when the city supports both safety and healthy outlets for youth. It creates a balanced approach and protects our kids on both ends, reducing risk and increasing opportunity. My ask tonight is simple. As you continue making decisions about parks, infrastructure, and public safety, please keep youth and well-being in the center. Our kids are growing up in a world that is tougher, faster, and more stressful than the world that we grew up in. They need safe places to be themselves, to move, to breathe, and to feel connected to their community. Thank you for the work that you're doing, and thank you for your continuing investment in safety and well-being of our next generation of St. George.

Thank you, Jimmy. Good reminder.

That's all you had, Christina? Yes. Okay. John, any changes to the agenda?

No changes this evening, Mayor.

Take us away.

Number three is the consent calendar. There's 11 items on the consent calendar this evening. These are administrative items. Staff has reviewed these and recommend approval. However, if the council would like to remove any of these for a specific consideration or discussion, we can accommodate that. Otherwise, staff recommends approval.

Mayor, yes, John, I'd like to ask that we remove the Ezra Drive portion of item 3B from THE CONSENT CALENDAR SO WE CAN HAVE FURTHER DISCUSSION IN A WORK MEETING TO DISCUSS SOME OF THE ISSUES SURROUNDING IT.

SO THAT'S ITEM 3B.

DO YOU WANT THE WHOLE THING? I NEED TO TAKE THE WHOLE THING?

CAN WE REMOVE JUST THE EASTER DRIVE BUT NOT THE 3430?

I THINK YOU'D HAVE TO REMOVE IT TO MAKE ANY MODIFICATIONS TO THAT ITEM.

cleaner probably okay then I'm asking that we remove item 3b for further consideration and that's my ask second so just to make that clear you're making a motion to approve the consent caller calendar with the exception of 3b that is correct okay and so we have a motion by Steve and a second by Natalie removing item B mayor I wanted to discuss something on here but I actually don't need to remove anything so I can discuss it after we make the motion if that's okay with you Yeah, Ryan says yes. Okay. All right, so we have everybody clear on the motion? Moving to item B. All in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Motion carries. So item 3B.

Oh, you voted?

just wanted to discuss the the consent calendar i just wanted to point something out if that's okay okay so we've had a lot of um attention paid to the amount of money that we pay for um things like uh playground equipment as all of you are aware and i just i i really appreciate mr wood's comments tonight thank you so much for being here and for saying what you did because i totally agree with you and i do think that everyone up here agrees with you that we build these community spaces because we're building a community and we know that we're raising children in this community and that we're you know creating our future residents at america's 250 we're creating the the future of our nation and so i just went through our lizard wash just on our consent calendar tonight there's $3.2 million going, this is just for one park. And I just wanted to point out what it actually takes to build a park and why it's so important for us to do this. So Caliber Construction, $3.2 million. The pavilions that we started buying on our own because it saved a little bit of money, still $154,000. The play equipment, $540,000. consulting 257 000 so that brings us up to about 4.1 million then we have the bike park portion 350 000 the pickleball shades or 50k landmark geotech 60 about a 65 000 we're going to do in-house installation which is going to cost us about 50 000 but that saves us a lot of money Let's see, our signs and benches and all the extra furniture that we have in the park ends up being about another 100K. So that brings us up to about 4.7 million for Lizard Wash Park. then we have a pedestrian bridge and the design of that about 400 000 so that brings us up to about 5.1 million and then our parks department worked really hard to get a grant which they did receive from uorg which is a very rare grant they got a million dollar grant to go towards this park so then that is also applied but i just wanted to point that out because i feel like um there was you know we've heard this criticism like how why would we spend this much money we want these parks to last long term they have to be commercial grade and this is just our reality and so i'm hoping that people will you know watch our meetings call and ask us questions if you have questions about these things because we can explain why the cost and why it matters for our community and i appreciate that our residents voted for the geobond and that these parks and community spaces matter and i appreciate again mr wood's comments

Thank you. Now back to item 3B for discussion.

On item 3B, I went out and looked at these two different projects. It looks like the main project is the 3430, widening, creating some more asphalt, creating a sidewalk on the west side and creating a paved trail on the east side. to deal with a lot of pedestrian traffic as well as the vehicular traffic that just this morning I witnessed there was quite a bit of After discussion with staff, I think that's obviously the best way to go. The Ezra Lane, I think that we need to have further discussion on this part of item 3B and talk about what is it we want our cross sections to look like for our roads and is it necessary that we have curb gutter sidewalk and whatever with the asphalt in this particular case services five houses. And in the near future, it will probably never serve as more than these five houses. Now, things can change, always do. The one constant is change. But I would like to propose that we move forward with the 3430 portion and that we have further discussion in a work meeting about the Ezra Lane. And I can make a motion to that effect if you'd like. That is my motion.

Is that clear?

Does everybody understand? The motion is that we move forward with the 3430 portion of 3B and that we hold on the Ezra Lane portion, which are two completely different roads in different locations, and they do not need to be done at the same time, and that we bring Ezra Lane to a future work meeting.

I'll second that motion, Mayor.

So we have a motion by Steve, a second by Danielle, sorry. I'm just, I was thinking here, does that change on the bid amounts?

Yeah. It probably does. That's what I was thinking about. Because the bids combined.

Right. So how do we handle that? Sorry.

so councilman kemp maybe if you re refine your motion if we're going to have a discussion it probably doesn't hurt to just wait for two weeks and discuss it and then bring the whole thing back i know the time is of the essence on the other portion before getting it done before school starts with that school area and um

It's making me rethink the whole process of having to re-bid the whole thing was going to create substantial delays where we will be in construction during school. And part of the process was that we moved forward. Wes.

Yeah, shed some light on this for us.

Pipe up as I recall the items within Ezra are also in part of the 3430 East. And so we can just change order those items out of the project. And use that as a bit and just put together a change order retracting those, those quantities from the bed. so that they're aware that this is really all the project is and have them sign the change order pulling those items out, that quantity out.

Without causing a major delay.

Yeah, I don't think it would be too big of an issue.

I'd recommend that the council vote on it, and we can go back, and if we have any issues, then we'll bring it back to the council. But if the council chooses, go ahead and consider that motion, and then if we have to, we'll bring it back.

So we do have a motion on the table by Steve, seconded by Danielle, to the fact that we're approving item 3B with removal of the Ezra Lane portion. It's Ezra Lane, not Ezra Drive, correct?

Yeah.

Well, would we, before you remove it, wouldn't we want to discuss it? In in 2 weeks or now.

We can discuss it in 2 weeks. So, I don't know Vanessa, we're just removing it for 2 weeks and then we're going well, I think I think at that point we discussed it decide we want to move forward. But the important part is that part by the school goes forward.

Well, yeah, well, my, my understanding is this motion says to remove it. So you're discussing that now you're removing it. It's not going to be in there.

I want to retract my motion and restate that we approve item 3B with instructions to staff to work with the contractor on a potential change order to modify and remove Ezra Lane from the project.

Okay, so we have a second.

Does that make more sense?

We have a second. What do you feel here, Siegel? Ryan?

it's very squishy right now for my comfort that's a legal term of art well telling to work with staff versus you can make a conditional approval approve the whole amount condition upon Ezra further consideration on that part so it's conditionally approved as opposed to telling the applicant to work with staff, unless you're going to articulate certain benchmarks you want them to talk about or factors or, I mean, what the crux is to be addressed?

I maybe haven't looked at this item close enough to, can we pull it up and look at it?

I'm not sure what exactly. I think if it's my preference, I would approve it, conditioned on that, and we'll come back and present the ESRO portion in a work meeting. If you choose to say, no, let's not finish the road, then we can just do a change order and reduce the amount of pavement, curb, gutter, and sidewalk that's in the project, which in essence would...

take out the ezra project and in two weeks if the council decides to do the ezra portion we can change order and add it back in yeah i think that's what you're saying austin you don't want to pull it out without having a discussion that's disappearing forever right yeah we just i just want to see it before you say no yeah gotcha did this guy introduce himself at the microphone like who he is and what his position is

That's a hard time.

We're kind of somewhere here. I'm not sure. Does that motion work then? How does this work?

Is it going to start within two weeks? Do you see them starting within two weeks?

I don't see them starting the Ezra portion. I see them starting the 3430 East because that's the one we're focused on because we're trying to get it done as soon as school starts.

We could approve the contract As it is, and in two weeks we can look at it closer, and if at that time we want to remove it, we can still remove it.

Yes, and we just do a change order. They shouldn't be working on Ezra. The focus is getting 3430 East done by the time school starts or soon thereafter.

That sounds like a good motion.

Can I hear the motion?

Yeah, Steve's going to give it right here.

Can we hear the motion again? I just want to say what he said.

My motion is that we approve item 3B of the consent calendar as stated, period. I would like to add, not part of my motion, I would like to ask that staff work, bring this forward to the next work meeting so we can discuss a potential change order to this item.

I like it. Daniel?

Seems messy, but sure.

Ryan? Ryan? Wes says it's okay.

The engineer Wes?

I would prefer it to be conditioned on staff bringing it back in two weeks. So it's a conditional approval, and if staff concurs, then in a work meeting, so that way it's tied to that second part on Ezra Drive.

Got it. Let me try one more time. I'd like to approve, make a motion that we approve item 3B, conditioned on staff bringing the Ezra Lane portion of the project to a work meeting in two weeks for further discussion and approval or not.

Further direction.

Further direction, yes.

Okay, that sounds less messy, so second.

Okay, so we have a super clear motion from Steve, a second from Danielle. All in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Motion carries.

Okay, item number four. CONSIDER APPROVAL OF THE ST. GEORGE ARTS COMMISSION WRAP TAX ART GRANTS DISTRIBUTION LIST FOR FY2027. AND PEYTON IS GOING TO PRESENT THIS ITEM.

THANK YOU, EVERYONE, MAYOR, COUNCIL. I AM PEYTON LEE, THE COMMUNITY ARTS MANAGER FOR THE CITY. So each year, the St. George Arts Commission reviews grant applications from arts-related nonprofits in St. George that directly serve the city's residents and community. This year, the Arts Commission received 31 applications, totaling $404,000. $404,425, sorry, in requests. After a month-long process of reviewing and scoring by the commission members individually, the Arts Commission is recommending allocations totaling $250,000 across 30 organizations. City staff and the Arts Commission recommend approval of the disbursement amounts at this time. And I'm happy to answer any questions you might have.

Questions for Peyton? I only have one question and then I'd like to make a motion to approve. What is the line item L-I-E-T-O? It's the what? It's a singing group?

It's called voices. It's a singing group.

Okay, great. Knowing that, I'd like to make a motion to approve this item.

Second.

We have a motion by Steve, a second by Natalie. All in favor say aye.

Aye.

Any opposed? Motion carries.

Thank you.

Thank you, Payton.

Item number five is consider approval of resolution number 2026-015R, approving the form of a lease agreement with ZMFU2E for the purpose of new golf carts for city golf courses.

mark mortensen has this item if you have questions he's available any questions for mark i only had one question mark i i read through this and i didn't see what are we anticipating is the lease rate the 30-day locked-in rate that we're shooting for do you know right now it looks like that rate's about 4.41 percent okay

as of a couple days ago, but after the council, if the council approves the resolution, then we'll lock that in as early as tomorrow. Okay.

Any other questions?

I don't have any.

Look for a motion.

Mayor, I'll make a motion that we approve resolution number 2026-015R, approving the form of a lease agreement with ZMFU2 Incorporated for the purchase of new golf carts for the city golf courses.

Second. We have a motion by Austin, a second by Danielle. This is a resolution requiring a roll call vote, starting with Danielle. Daniel are can I. Natalie Larson I Steve can buy Austin Anderson I motion carries unanimously.

I'm not 6 consider approval of a hillside development permit to establish the location of the ridge line on approximately 0.44 acres located on lot 59 of South remit for master.

Sweet. Kaylee, as John indicated, this is for, here's lot 59 at 4 Master. As all of these properties have out there that are along the ridge, the ridge line is defined as their back property line. So the applicant requested to take the hillside out there and review that with them. Here's the plat. So here's the lot. And this is what the applicant originally proposed. So this is what the Hillside recommended when they went out with this red line here. The applicant then came back and he proposed. Sure. Yes, it is. And I should have memorized it for you. Dan taught me a little trick. Okay, so this is the ridge line setback. This is the 30 foot ridge line setback. This is the one off of the property line. So the property line, the rear property line is basically what they called the ridge line setback at the time. And they drew that when they platted that. So this line right here, I can't tell you the color of it. It is the 30 foot ridge line setback. This is what the ridgeline was proposed by the applicant, this other color. And then this was the 30 foot setback that the 30 foot setback. Does that make sense? So this was the ridgeline originally when the plat was done. and that would have been a 30-foot setback. This is the ridgeline the applicant proposed when we went to Hillside, and that would make that the 30-foot ridgeline setback, where you can construct, the limits of where you can construct any structure.

So right now it's the Aqua line. If we go with the proposed ridgeline from the applicant, it's the Red line.

Right, and so then after Hillside, Oh, man, I hope I can make this work for you. Then, after hillside, this red line is what the hillside recommended as the ridge line after we went out there and visited on site. So we brought that back, took it to planning commission, the applicant at the planning commission. He proposed he proposed a different bridge line. And that would be this line right here, this extension over to here. So this was the red again was what went to hillside. He came back and felt like, no, over here on this northwesterly side, really the ridgeline's there. So he proposed that, went to the Planning Commission, Planning Commission tabled the item. We actually went out two weeks later and did a site visit where we walked the site and he showed all the lines. Planning Commission then came back and they agreed, I think it was a five to two vote with the applicant, that this really was the ridge line right there. So that's what Planning Commission proposed. So I took some pictures. So the white line represents what the applicant proposed that the Planning Commission approved. The orange line, which is a little difficult to see, goes right up through there. You can see it starts over here. This is further down. So this is about, let me go back. This point right here where they deviate, which is about right there, This point is about right here and you can see that the red then deviates this way, which is what the hillside recommended. The white. Comes from here and goes this way and that's what the applicant proposed. which is this line shown on your map, and that's what the Planning Commission recommended approval was, this line here. And then this is further, this is closer to the property line. Again, there's your white line, and then this is the red line that comes right through there. So that's the deviation or the change is that distance there back to this point right here. So that's when we took the planning commission, we walked it with them, then they came back and they agreed with the applicant and proposed and agreed with them and that's what they approved.

Wes, I went and looked at it and the white line, And what it allows is, from what I could see, when he does the walls, it'll be able to tie into the neighbor's existing wall. And so I think it's going to look better to go with the white line and not just be a smooth transition into the neighbor.

Right. And that's part of what prompted him to go back and ask the planning commission is because of that, is he felt the look would be better. And so that's why he proposed a different ridge line, because it got him closer to that. ability to tie into the existing wall. Correct. Andy indicated that, no, he just said, he talked about painting this wall here black too, if you could get them to match up and so forth.

What is that that you just highlighted? That looks like it's more of an abrupt edge than the other ones. What is that?

This right here is a wall that was built on the property just to the north. Okay. This is the adjacent property.

that's where this wall will tie in it won't be on the white line it'll be way off the white line well the white line would be where you're set back and then they'll measure 30 feet from there yeah and that will become where the wall can be placed yeah i thought it made sense when i went looked at it so i'll make a motion that we approve item number six

I second the motion by Austin, the second by Steve. This does not require a roll call. All in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Motion carries unanimously.

Item number seven, consider approval ordinance number 2026-051 amending the White Dome commercial PDC zone on approximately 3.29 acres generally located east of River Road on White Dome Drive.

Okay, so this is the location here outlined in red. The general plan is commercial and the zoning is PDC, plan development commercial. In September of 2024, they came forward with an application to approve the conceptual site plan to get approved the accesses. And this site that they're coming forward with today had a conceptual retail and restaurant. Today they're coming through with their application for two medical office buildings here. It is... It is interesting to note that when they had the public hearing on this conceptual state plan, the residents out there did make comments saying they thought there were too many restaurants on this site and they had some expressed some concerns about that. So they might be more happy about medical office buildings. Medical office is an approved use with this. The uses were approved with the original Southern Hills East Zone Plan, which was approved in 2021. So this is the site plan. They're required to provide 159 spaces. The site provides 177 spaces. It'll be done in two phases. And phase one has enough parking spaces to stand alone. They'll have 93 spaces with phase one. And then when phase two is completed, of course, they'll have the whole 177. It appears to meet code in all the other code sections. Of course, we'll review that during the site plan review and confirm. Here's the conceptual landscape plan. We'll review it with the code during the site plan review and confirm that all the landscape code is met. Here are the elevations. The buildings are 35 feet high. The buildings will match each other, so they're going to look the same. This is the north elevation, the south, the east, and the west. These are renderings of the buildings and the other side. And then this is the materials. And there is a materials board in front of the podium. I can pass it up to you if you want to see the materials more closely. Planning Commission held a public hearing on June 9th. There were no public comments received. They recommended approval with a unanimous vote of six to zero. I can answer any questions you might have. The applicant is also here if you have any questions for them.

Questions for Brenda or the applicant? If there are none, I'll entertain a motion.

Mayor, I'd like to make a motion that we approve item number seven, ordinance number 2026-051, amending the White Dome Commercial PDC planned development commercial zone on approximately 3.29 acres located at Eastern River on White Dome Drive.

Second.

We have a motion by Steve, a second by Natalie. This is an ordinance requiring a roll call vote starting with Austin.

Austin Anderson, aye.

Steve Kemp, aye.

Natalie Larson, aye.

Danielle Larkin, aye.

Motion carries unanimously.

I have number eight. Consider approval of ordinance number 2026-052 amending the Riverfront Medical Center Plan Development Commercial Zone on approximately 1.28 acres located at 585 East Riverside Drive. Thank you.

Thank you. Property under consideration tonight is phase three of the Riverfront Medical Center. This is a piece of the property that's kind of been set aside from the beginning for a third and final medical office building. This one's smaller than the other two that are already out there at about 17,700 square feet. combined square footage. Here on the map is the area or the site. You have Riverside Drive here to the south. The land use map calls for commercial and the zoning is PDC. This is a site that's being proposed. You can see the existing buildings on the western property. There are two, by the way, two properties, this parcel here and then this parcel over here. This is on that southern portion, and again, it's about 17,700 square feet is the size of the building. That's combined, two stories. The only thing that's a little... It's not even goofy. It's just different. They're going to remove some of the parking stalls that are already there, and then they will replace those. In the end, combined with the shared parking with the other building, there's still going to be in excess of a little over 20 parking stalls altogether. So they will remove some, but then they will add some more, and combined, it'll meet the code requirement of parking. one stall for every 250 square feet. This is just a closer up look at the site. They will be required to have a block wall along this portion of the property. It's actually already there. This is residential, so we want to make sure we have that buffer and the 10 foot buffer along this property line as well. So the landscape plan, again, we'll look at it in more detail. They'll need to provide some street trees along Riverside Drive. And then we'll need to make sure that this existing is up to code. But that said, this is just kind of a conceptual landscape plan. And same with the photometric plan. We'll look at that in more detail with the site plan approval. These are the elevations. You can probably see more from the renderings here, kind of what this will look like. There's the materials board right down here. But this is basically the same thing. And then just the materials and the elevations again.

31-foot building.

Just for reference, the other two buildings that are out there already are 42 and 44 feet. So this one's considerably shorter than the other two that are out there. These again, these are the renderings of the building. Planning Commission held a public hearing. There were no comments that were received. They recommended approval unanimously to you for approval of the PD amendment. I can answer any questions and the applicant is here if you have any questions for them as well.

Questions for Dan and the applicant?

I don't have any questions. I'll make a motion.

that we approve ordinance number 2026-052, amending the Riverfront Medical Center Plant Development Commercial Zone on approximately 1.28 acres. Second. Second. Ooh. It's tight. Yeah.

We have a motion by Austin and a second by Danielle. This is an ordinance requiring a roll call vote, starting with Steve. Steve Kanpai.

Natalie Larson, aye. Daniel Larkin, aye.

Austin Anderson, aye. Motion carries unanimously.

Item number nine, consider approval of ordinance number 2026-053, amending the Sun River PDR zone on approximately 3.24 acres, generally located south of Angel Arch Drive and west of Pearl Vista Drive.

Good evening, everyone. So Angel Arch Church Edition, as John said, so located south of Angel Arch Drive and west of Pearl Vista Drive. Current land use is LDR, low density residential. Current zoning is part of that PDR for the Sun River zone plan. This is the original site plan. I just wanted to point out a few things on this original approved site plan is that it may be a little hard for you to see and I can zoom in if you'd like but there is so obviously with the solid black line is the existing church. The black area here is the existing parking lot. You can see over here on that south side that there's that dashed line as well as some notes here talking about a future addition. as well as some of those dashed lines over on the west side where future parking would be placed. So in the original approvals, they did realize that this building was going to need to be extended, and they did have a plan for that as part of the original approval. The proposed site plan, again, kind of just showing you that that 3,600 square foot addition will be on that south side, kind of like it showed on that original approval. Parking here on that west side, again, just as shown, the only difference that you'll see is that there's gonna be a pavilion in that southwest corner. Another site plan that was provided that'll also show you a couple different things is, if you remember on the site plan, there was some grass over here on the southwest corner of the church. That's gonna be removed and replaced with desert landscaping. And then as well as that pavilion. And then from what I understand, applicant, correct me if I'm wrong, but I understand that this will just be some turf over here on that southwest corner. Site and utility plan. Let me know if you want me to slow down through any of those. Landscape plan appears to meet code. One thing that they will have over here is that 10-foot buffer between the single-family homes to the west. They will be required to have a six-foot privacy block wall there as well. There is a wall that is there now. As the property slopes up towards the southwest, that block wall is kind of tiered, and the point where it goes up to that next tiered portion is measured just a little bit shorter than that six foot, so we just want to make sure that that six foot buffer is in place, or six foot block wall, excuse me. Photometric plan appears to meet code. We'll go through it real well through the site planner view. And then a lot of these elevations, really the only thing that they're doing is basically extending what's already there. Same heights, same materials. This would be from that south parking lot, the smaller parking lot. The view from the bigger parking lot to the west. Again, all the new stuff to the right. And then the existing to the left stucco brick, some of the cement tile roof. View from Vista Pearl Drive. some of the materials. The materials board is a little bit smaller, so I did place it behind Councilmember Kemp. If you did want to take a look at it, I got a little bit closer so you can take a look at it. They do meet parking. They're required 150 parking spaces. They provide 151. Again, we talked about the height matching what's currently there. On June 9th, Planning Commission held a public hearing. It was approved six to zero with no conditions. There were two public comments that were provided. They are in your packet if you wanted to take a look at those if you haven't already. And there were no public comments made at that public hearing. With that, I can answer any questions. And again, the applicant, Jared Madsen from Sky Engineering is here if you have any questions for him as well.

Questions for Brian or the applicant? I'll entertain a motion.

Mayor, I'd like to make a motion on item number nine that we approve ordinance number 2026-053 amending the Sun River PDR zone on approximately 3.24 acres south of Angel Arch Drive and West Pearl Vista to expand the religious building located thereon.

Second.

motion by steve second by natalie this is an ordinance requiring a roll call vote starting with austin austin anderson aye steve kemp i natalie larson danielle larkin i motion carries unanimously i'm number 10 consider approval ordinance number 2026-054 amending the city zoning map by changing the zone from a1 to re20 approximately 3.48 acres located on the northwest corner of 2450 South and 3210 East.

All right, just about three and a half acres, again, located on 2450 South and 3210 East on the northwest corner. General plan is AE, Agricultural Estates, and current zoning is A1, as John just stated. You may recall that this came in for a general plan amendment. The property owner wants to develop this as commercial in the future I think he's expanding his horizons and the commercial area might be a little bigger and I think you'll see an amendment to that here soon but getting ahead of myself this is They have looked at this. How do they transition from the property to the east to this commercial property? And initially, they looked at some different options of smaller lots. But when it came down to it, they met with some of the neighbors to the east, and they felt like this was a good compromise. So they're proposing that it be rezoned to R.E., So that would be basically half acre lots. So you have the half acres with the full acres to the east and then kind of going into that commercial area to the west. So that's the proposal. Go from, again, A1 to the RE20. Planning Commission recommended approval of the application after holding a public hearing. Actually, the property owner's here, if you have any questions for him.

Questions, concerns, or a motion?

I think it makes sense. It's a good transition. So I'll make a motion that we approve ordinance number 2026-054, amending the city's zoning map by changing the zone from A1 to RE20 on approximately 3.48 acres. Second.

A motion by Austin, a second by Natalie. This is an ordinance requiring a roll call vote, starting with Natalie.

Natalie Larson, aye.

Danielle Larkin, aye. Austin Anderson, aye.

Steve Kemp, aye.

Motion carries unanimously.

Item number 11, consider approval of ordinance number 2026-055, amending the city's zoning map by changing the zone from A20 to R1. on approximately 55.03 acres, generally located south of the Fort Pierce Wash along the Utah-Arizona border in the far southeastern corner of the city of St. George.

OK, here's the property. The general plan is MDR, medium density residential. And the zoning is a 20. This subject property was part of an approximately 212 acre annexation that occurred in 2019. The A20 zoning designation is the city's default zoning classification for land that's newly annexed in. Excuse me. While the property is located near Desert Canyons, it is not part of the Desert Canyons master plan. So Planning Commission held a public hearing on June 23rd. No public comments were received. They did recommend approval with the NMS vote of seven to zero. I can answer any questions you might have. The applicant is also here if you have questions for him.

Absolutely.

I'll make a motion to approve ordinance 2026-055 amending the city zoning map by changing the zone from A20 to R1 single family no minimum square footage 40 foot minimum square width frontage on approximately 55.03 acres generally located south of the Fort Pierce Wash along the Utah Arizona border in the far eastern corner of the city of St. George.

Second the motion. The motion by Natalie is second by Steve. This is an ordinance requiring a roll call vote, starting with Danielle.

Danielle Larkin, aye. Natalie Larson, aye.

Steve Kemp, aye. Austin Anderson, aye. Motion carries unanimously.

I have number 12, consider approval of ordinance number 2026-056, amending the city zoning map by changing the zone from RE20 to PDR on approximately one acre, generally located north of 1800 north and west of 2100 west.

Okay, the Dixie Downs 9 zone change. Kind of as John was talking about, it's kind of in between the Dixie Downs Road and Two Weep Drive, more specifically, corner of 1800 north and 2100 west. Current land use is MDR. You may remember this one from back in February, where these two parcels, both the east and the west, were approved for MDR. Again, MDR is nine units per acre. Each lot is about one acre. Current zoning, as John said, is RE20, and they're looking to go to PDR, so planned development residential. So again, just the site plan here and we can zoom in to the next slide just so you can kind of see it a little bit better. So three buildings, three units per each building. They will have 25 foot driveways. There will be the amenity over on the south side and the amenity, they're required about 1,800 square feet of recreation space and they are providing closer to about 6,500 square feet of recreation space and then the amenity will be that walking trail that is there on the south. There will be, you'll notice on some of the conditions and we'll talk about the landscaping in here in just a second, but there's also the first two conditions where it talks about making sure that the garbage cans basically are screened. There's been other problems in the city and we just want to make sure that we're getting that cleaned up and taken care of. So we'll talk about that maybe a little bit and just when we get to the conditions portion of it. The lots, each unit will be about 1150 square foot footprint. There'll be two stories. So there'll be about a 2000 square foot townhouse unit. You also see in the back that this is limited common area, and they do have proposed fences. So this is actually a pretty big backyard for these townhouses, and each unit will have its own designated space. So a pretty big backyard for some townhouses. Proposed grading plan. Again, just let me know if you want me to slow down through any of those. And then just briefly on the landscape plan, obviously they have the amenity space and recreation space to the south. You'll also notice that one of our conditions is in the PDR sections of code that they need to have 50% of their front setbacks landscaped. And they will need to provide a little extra landscaping, preferably, you'll see another picture of some elevations here where you'll be able to see they can put some landscaping in between the driveways. Driveways have to be a minimum of 12 feet and they're showing 25 foot driveways. So there's definitely a lot of room to put some landscape in there. So we just put that condition in there to make sure that that is met. Also while we're on these slides, just to let you know about parking too. So obviously each unit is required two parking spaces. They're gonna be able to do that with the garage spaces. And then they are required one guest parking space for every three units. So you'll be able to see here, they provide two guest parking spaces there in between those two units and then two additional guest parking spaces in between those two units. So they're providing four required three. Some of the front elevations, you'll see that they do have some of the, actually let me just go to the materials board real quick. So you'll see kind of that stucco color is kind of the lighter color. I think the elevations that were provided show it more as a kind of a darker cream or almost a tan color. You'll be able to see some of the front door color options and some of the garage door options and then some of that manufactured stone. So just to go quickly back to those front elevations, you'll see that the proposed height is about 29 feet. Remember that code will allow 40 feet. One of the conditions that staff has on there was brought up by staff that they would like to provide additional colors and variations to those townhome units. Break it up a little bit. This is a picture of an example over in Washington, the look that they are going for. Again, you can see the different colored garages. You can see some of that landscape that they should be able to provide to meet that 50% standard. We went through that already. And then here is the recommendation. So again, June 9th, Planning Commission held a public hearing. They approved it with a six to zero vote. There was three conditions that staff recommended, which was one, three, and four. One, talking about those garbage cans, making sure that they're screened. Three, talking about those variations in colors. And then four, just making sure that they meet the PDR portion of code in regards to that front landscape. And then item two was also added by the Planning Commission. I think there's been concern in the past where the garbage plan was to put it in the garage, but obviously people either buying bigger vehicles aren't able to fit the garbage cans in there or they're using it for storage or they just don't want to put their garbage cans inside the garage. So we just want to make sure that that garbage plan is well thought out and that we're not going to have issues like we have in the past with other developments. There was one public comment letter was received. No comments were made at the meeting, and I can answer any questions you may have. And Rick Meyer from Bush and Gedule is here if you have any other questions.

Questions, concerns, or a motion?

I'm just curious, Brian, can you show me what that looks like, a screen, that example that you showed us? Where would they put a screened garbage?

It's a good question, and I think there's options to put up on the sides of the building. We've seen some in desert color where they have provided it like along the driveways, just a little screen section. I think there's definitely some options out there, and that's something that we'll require when they come through.

It is pretty tricky in those just because people sometimes garbage is stinky and sometimes garbage doesn't belong in a garage this time of year at Christmas or other times. But it is a little bit tricky. But I don't know where they find on doing that. But usually the builder will make a little cove out and just make it on the side of the house.

You got those middle units, like I don't see where you're going to put a... If we're requiring them to have screen garbage and they've got that middle unit, I don't see where they're going to do that.

It may be on the other side in between those units. Like they may have to bring their garbage. But like for garbage cans on the side.

Hey, good evening. My name is Rick Meyer with Bush and Gudgel. The plan is I wanted to get the new plan to Brian before the meeting, but I messed up and didn't. But I can just describe it. We're going to actually pull that north fence down about 12 feet from the back property line, and we're going to run sidewalks between the buildings, and there will be gates on the back of the building, and so they can just put the trash cans in the backyard. That's the plan for that.

Other questions?

So does that need to be in the motion that we, or can we?

It is one of the conditions, but if you want to follow what kind of Rick was saying.

Yeah, because that's not really technically screened. That's basically saying we expect the garbage cans to be in the backyard.

Is that considered a screen?

Okay.

I'd like to make a motion if there aren't any more questions. Go ahead. I'd like to make a motion that we approve item number 12, ordinance number 2026-056, amending the city zoning map by changing the zone from RE20 to PDR on approximately one acre located at 1800 North and west of 2100 West with the planning commission's recommendations included in my motion. That's it.

You have one question. Just just think about this screening. We don't require it on any house, right? We don't require screening.

That's exactly why I brought it up.

So I just think it's I don't know why we're enforcing it on this. I mean, it's in their best interest to screen it. But why are we picking on the townhomes and not house? We just approved those small, tiny lots. They're getting smaller than these. And we didn't say, hey, screen, and we have to have two garbage cans too. We're forcing two garbage cans on them, and we're telling them to screen it. I mean, I don't know if it's necessary.

Thank you.

Because if the applicant wanted to put them in the garage, we're saying you can't, right? Is that what we're saying?

We've had several problems with neighborhoods where they didn't think about solid waste until after everyone was in. And then they were told they had to put them in their garage, and then people were complaining to us that they had no room in their garage. And so we've been very sensitive to solid ways. Let's make sure that they've got an idea of where they think they're going to put them. Having them screened, that is not in our code, but it is something that...

I definitely agree it's a good idea. I'm just saying, where do we draw the line?

Right, right. And we just, what we would like... I mean, of course, it looks better if it's screened, if they're all going to have them. I don't know if you've seen townhome units. There's a lot of them right now where they all just have them right in front of their garage, you know, or right there in their door. And of course, it doesn't look as pleasant. But, you know, we do want developers to think of this ahead of time. And so that it's not a, wait, where are we going to put the trash cans? And we want it to be a little bit more planned. Okay.

The issues that we've had has been an HOA issue. I was going to say, this is an HOA problem. What's happened is the HOAs have required the homeowners to put their garbage cans inside of the garage. And what's happened is then the people aren't able to park their cars inside of the garage because it's being occupied by a trash can. And so this is a direct problem. That's because of that particular issue is why this is coming out, and it's been something the Planning Commission has wrestled with at third level. Our code doesn't require any screening unless you're a dumpster, then it requires screening. But for individual trash cans, we don't have a requirement for screening.

I can understand having that map because when you go to those properties and there is a lot of them, even to have it protected against a cement pad or something like that instead of rolling down your driveway because then your garbage can is less likely to tip over. I mean, you don't think about that until you're in that situation. So I think it's good planning to have it. I don't know that it's necessary, but it is just like where you're going to put your AC unit, where you're going to put your garbage can.

Yeah, I think it's great to have them screened. I totally agree. But we don't dictate you've got to screen your AC pads. We don't. It's just, you know what I mean.

I'm not disagreeing with screening. I'm just saying that needs to be part of the plan of where are you planning to put this? Because if it's just on a driveway or in a garage, it will get tipped over. We end up with garbage all over those things. Yeah. And they are such small. But to your point, on a small lot, we're not doing it either.

but I think I think Austin's right you know we've never said for a single family home where are you putting your garbage we just don't even ask the question so we already know from the developer what they're planning to do so I just don't think it should say in the motion we're requiring them to screen

I'd like to amend my motion to not include item one. Concerning the it being required that the garbage can be contained and screened.

So the rest of my motion seems to say so to clarify a location, but not necessarily screen or just take it out. Just

item a location I'm just saying where do we do we want it on everything or do we want nothing this is hard to pick one thing and not the other things clarify Steve's motion so take it out take out the comments about okay start over I'd like to recommend that we approve item number 12 Approval of ordinance number 2026-056, amending the city zoning by changing the zone from RE20 to PDR, one acre located north of 1800 north and west of 2100 west, with the planning commission's recommendations number There's a typo, so there's one, two, two, and four. One, three, and four. No, excuse me, three and four be the only recommendations that we will require.

So just to clarify, we're good with the HOA saying they have to be inside? Because that's where they'll end up being, is inside a garage. And then they get fined when they're not inside the garage.

The HOA is not our problem.

I know, but we're looking at residents who are going to live in a house who are not going to be able to, I mean, amongst other things, park in their garage because now they have two garbage cans in it, the recycle one and the gray can. And so we're not watching out for them technically. And I don't think it needs to be screened. I just think there needs to be a pad. I'm good with that.

If we just want to remove the screen and say they can put them on the side of the house, then that's fine.

A plan.

I like to amend my motion that we approve this item to include some kind of a plan for location of the garbage cans and along with items 3 that the applicant utilized additional variations in colors on the building elevations and 4 that the applicant shall meet the PDR front landscape requirements found in Title 10 of the code.

Is that clear? I'll second. So motion by Steve, second by Austin. Are there any other questions? This is an ordinance requiring a roll call vote starting with Austin.

Austin Anderson, aye. Steve Kemp, aye.

Natalie Larson, aye. Daniel Larkin, aye.

Motion carries unanimously.

Is that it? You guys are all done, ready to go. Reports. Anybody have any reports? Austin? I don't. I'm here.

I would like to report for the second time, second meeting in a row, the low, what is that? Jimmy, you were on the board. Low housing, the one that's held at Switchpoint where we decide how many homeless people there are. local local homeless coordinating council yes yes i missed i was 10 minutes late for the first meeting and they made me the chairman congratulations that's what they do to you there and then uh the second meeting uh two hours before the meeting they made it a zoom meeting and i that came to my city email which i didn't read so i showed up for the meeting and uh the zoo meeting had taken place with three with three participants. So I'm over two, but I'm going to keep trying.

Just so you know, that committee has come a long way since my first time there, which my first time there, they used to inform me, no, you are the chairman. They didn't even talk about it. And then they went in a lot of like nothing was ever accomplished. They've come a long way. There's a lot being accomplished there now. So try to keep that going. So they're going to need your help.

It was a great morning on the plaza with the Daughters of the American Revolution. And if people have not been down to see Main Street and 100 South, they should come down and check out that crosswalk. And we're having a parade on Saturday.

Yes, 830 in the morning.

Is that it? Danielle? Yeah, Mayor. I got called out on Facebook by a lady for not commenting on the hard work that our streets crew did on the street because I said, you know, this was an idea that came to us from Councilwoman Tanner. And she said, well, what about the streets crew? So I want to compliment our streets crew. I did go out last night and this morning and compliment them because they were there all night long. So I went and took a picture about 10 p.m., which all of you know was me being up very late. And they were just getting started and they were nervous because they haven't done anything like that before. And this morning when I went back out about 6 a.m., they were finishing up and they were tired and they did a great job. So I just wanted to make sure that they knew how much I appreciated them. And it is really, to Natalie's point, looks fantastic. Come see it.

When I pulled in, there was people with selfie sticks taking pictures of that. So that was pretty cool.

Oh, that's cool.

They did a great job.

And I did get a nice text about it thanking the city and telling me to thank the streets crew for that. It's probably the only nice text I've had in the last several days, but it was a nice text. So did you guys have anything? Just my last thought. This is where we celebrate America's birthday. There's that little phrase. that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, and we all pursue happiness in a different way, so I hope we remember that as we go through this holiday season, that we, that's one of those things that the founders declared as a self-evident truth, which means it's not up for discussion. We all have ways that we pursue happiness, and with that, Happy 250th birthday celebration. Please be safe. Have fun. We have no need for a closed meeting. I need one more motion. Motion to adjourn, Mayor. We have a motion by Austin, second by Steve. All in favor say aye. Aye. Thank you.

Maddie's at the 53,000 views on her Instagram post. On which one?

The firework.

Oh.

That was like. I'm pretty sure it was.

Thank you.