Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Show Low selects developer-donated Site 2 for sports and event center after resident objections
Summary
After public comment and staff presentations, the Show Low City Council unanimously selected a developer-donated 13.7-acre parcel (Site 2) for the Show Low Sports and Event Center, citing utilities access, zoning and future roadway access as deciding factors.
The Show Low City Council voted unanimously Sept. 16 to select Site 2 — a roughly 13.7-acre parcel offered for donation by the project developer — as the location for the Show Low Sports and Event Center.
City staff and the project architect presented four candidate sites and recommended Site 2 based on existing utility proximity, predicted future roadway access and zoning compatibility. Staff said utilities are available at the north end of Site 2, and that the developer has committed to donating the parcel; in the developer agreement staff said there is potential for an additional 16 acres to be donated if the city builds the event center.
Residents who spoke during the meeting urged the council to consider Site 3 (across Penrod Road) or otherwise to place the facility away from planned residential areas. Resident Ravon Ballens, who said she lives in the Show Low Bluff neighborhood, criticized the developer’s influence and argued the selection process favored the developer: "These 2 sites, 1 and 2, help our developer. They also help his representative, the engineer that wants that road across Show Low Creek," Ballens said, and cited figures she had reported about property valuations for the parcels.
City staff cautioned that alternative locations would carry greater utility-extension costs. Staff estimated Site 1 utilities were within about 700 feet and Site 2 utilities are at the north end of the parcel; Site 3 would require utility extensions on the order of thousands of feet — "million dollar, million $2,000,000 plus" sewer and water extensions, staff said — making Site 3 substantially more expensive to develop. Public commenters also raised concerns about traffic, proximity to a proposed Christian school and potential alcohol sales.
Mayor (name not specified) moved to select Site 2; Councilman Judd seconded the motion. The council voted unanimously to adopt Site 2. Staff said the city will proceed with site-related design decisions and further geotechnical and utility analysis for the chosen location.
