Zoning › Utah › Washington County › St. George

St. George, UT Zoning

Euclidean-zoning. 16 districts · 7 overlays · 4 applicable state preemptions.

Overview

Code type
euclidean
Naming convention
mixed
Naming convention by category
residential_estateletter-code (RE)
residential_sflot-size-encoded (R-1-{N} where N = min lot size in thousands of sf; R-1-8, R-1-10, R-1-12, R-1-20, R-1-40 observed)
residential_mfdensity-tier index (R-2, R-3, R-4) — numbers are NOT lot-size encodings, they are intensity tiers
residential_central_cityletter-code (RCC)
commercialtier-intensity (C-1 Neighborhood, C-2 Highway, C-3 General, C-4 CBD)
mobile_homeletter-code (MH)
industrialletter-code (M; sometimes M-1 light)
planned_developmentPD-{type} (PD-R, PD-C, PD-M, PD-SH student-housing, PD-TNZ traditional-neighborhood, PD-AP activity-park)

Euclidean district-based code. Critical quirk: DUAL numeric encoding convention within one Title 10 — R-1 suffix is lot-size-in-thousands, R-2/3/4 suffix is density-tier. PD family is overlay-as-zone negotiated-standards mechanism replacing underlying base once master plan is adopted. Utah Tech (formerly Dixie State) drives PD-SH student-housing designation. Desert tortoise HCP / Red Cliffs NCA is a federal+county overlay on north/northeast fringe that effectively zeroes buildable yield regardless of Title 10 base. | naming_convention_raw=dual-encoded ; sub_flags_raw=[university-adjacent-utah-tech, desert-tortoise-hcp-constrained, virgin-river-floodplain-constrained, historic-downtown, red-rock-hillside-constrained]

Worth knowing
  • DUAL numeric encoding convention within Title 10: R-1-{N} encodes min lot size in thousands of sf (R-1-8, R-1-10, R-1-12, R-1-20, R-1-40); R-2/R-3/R-4 encodes density intensity tier (NOT lot size). Two different conventions coexist in one code and must be respected. — [St. George City Code Title 10 district-name pattern]
  • Virgin River and Santa Clara River riparian buffer (100-150 ft no-build) removes 30-40% of developable area on some near-downtown parcels. Must be checked parcel-by-parcel before any density math. — [Title 10 riparian chapter + Washington County FIRM]
  • Red Cliffs Desert Reserve / desert tortoise HCP on north/northeast fringe effectively zeros buildable yield on mapped parcels regardless of Title 10 base district. Federal ESA overlay preempts local zoning on take. Not cross-referenced inside Title 10; documented via Washington County HCP and Red Cliffs NCA enabling legislation. — [Washington County HCP for Mojave desert tortoise; Red Cliffs NCA (Omnibus Public Land Management Act of 2009); federal ESA §10(a)(1)(B)]

+ 6 more in Quirks & notes

Districts

res_sf 6res_mf 3com 3spec 2cbd 1ind 1
CodeNameCategory Min lotHeight CoverageFAR Du/acParking Setbacks F/S/R
REResidential Estateres_sf40,000 sf[4]35 ft[5]——[6]1[7]2[8]30[1] / 20[2] / 30[3]
R-1-8Single-Family Residential 8,000 sf min lotres_sf8,000 sf[12]35 ft[13]——[14]5.4[15]2[16]20[9] / 5[10] / 20[11]
R-1-10Single-Family Residential 10,000 sf min lotres_sf10,000 sf[20]35 ft[21]——[22]4.4[23]2[24]25[17] / 8[18] / 20[19]
R-1-12Single-Family Residential 12,000 sf min lotres_sf12,000 sf[28]35 ft[29]——[30]3.6[31]2[32]25[25] / 8[26] / 25[27]
R-1-20Single-Family Residential 20,000 sf min lotres_sf20,000 sf[36]35 ft[37]——[38]2.2[39]2[40]30[33] / 10[34] / 25[35]
R-1-40Single-Family Residential 40,000 sf min lotres_sf40,000 sf[44]35 ft[45]——[46]1.1[47]2[48]30[41] / 15[42] / 30[43]
R-2Multi-Family Residential Tier 2res_mf15,000 sf[52]45 ft[53]—1[54]12[55]1.5[56]20[49] / 10[50] / 25[51]
R-3Multi-Family Residential Tier 3res_mf20,000 sf[60]55 ft[61]—1.25[62]18[63]1.5[64]20[57] / 10[58] / 25[59]
R-4Multi-Family Residential Tier 4res_mf25,000 sf[68]65 ft[69]—1.5[70]26[71]1.75[72]20[65] / 10[66] / 25[67]
RCCResidential Central Cityspec10,000 sf[74]70 ft[75]——[76]——[77]—[73] / — / —
MHMobile Homespec—35 ft[78]———1.75[79]— / — / —
C-1Neighborhood Commercialcom8,000 sf[81]45 ft[82]—1.5[83]—3.5[84]15[80] / — / —
C-2Highway Commercialcom10,000 sf[85]55 ft[86]—2[87]——[88]— / — / —
C-3General Commercialcom12,000 sf[89]65 ft[90]—2.5[91]——[92]— / — / —
C-4Central Business District (Downtown)cbd5,000 sf[93]90 ft[94]—3[95]——[96]— / — / —
MManufacturing / Industrialind20,000 sf[97]55 ft[98]—1[99]——— / — / —

Confidence: confirmed partial under review not found

Overlays

HDO
Historic District Overlay
HP
St. George City Code Title 10 Historic Preservation chapter

Historic Downtown St. George (bounded by Main St., Tabernacle St., Bluff St.); parcels individually listed on local historic register

height_addition_rule_pct15
height_addition_rule_noteAdditions to contributing structures cannot exceed original height + ~15%
stepback_above_ft45
stepback_distance_ft15
effective_practical_height_ft65
setback_ruleMust match existing streetwall pattern (~15-20 ft front)
design_reviewCertificate of Appropriateness required for exterior modifications, demolitions, new construction
administering_bodySt. George Historic Preservation Commission
TOD
Transit-Oriented Development Overlay
TOD
St. George City Code Title 10 TOD chapter (adopted 2024)

Mapped parcels along conceptual future transit corridor; pre-transit designation

density_bonus_pct20
height_bonus_ft10
parking_reduction_pct20
affordability_trigger_pct25
affordability_note25% of units at qualifying AMI required to trigger bonus package
adopted_year2024
implementation_statusunder-utilized through 2026
RWQB
Riparian & Water Quality Buffer Overlay
SPEC
St. George City Code Title 10 riparian protection chapter

Parcels intersecting Virgin River, Santa Clara River, or mapped tributary channels within city limits

no_build_setback_min_ft100
no_build_setback_max_ft150
setback_basisVaries by floodplain designation and channel class
permitted_usesparks, trails, open space, utility crossings
prohibited_useshabitable structures, impervious-surface buildings
buildable_area_impact_noteOn near-downtown parcels, buffer removes 30-40% of lot from developable area
FP
FEMA Floodplain Overlay
FP
St. George City Code Title 10 Flood Damage Prevention chapter; adopts FEMA FIRM/FIS by reference

FEMA 1% annual-chance (100-year) flood zones per current Washington County FIRM; substantial floodplain along Virgin River and Santa Clara River

base_flood_elevationper FIRM/FIS
freeboard_inches_above_bfepartial — specific value not retrieved this pass
no_rise_certificationrequired in regulatory floodway
substantial_improvement_threshold_pct50
substantial_improvement_note50% of structure value triggers full-compliance upgrade
fill_excavation_permitrequired
federal_local_reviewdual (FEMA + city)
HS
Hillside / Steep-Slope Overlay
SPEC
St. George City Code Title 10 hillside chapter

Parcels with slopes at or above threshold (typically 20%)

slope_threshold_pct20
grading_permit_requiredyes
density_modificationdensity reduced on slopes above threshold
geotechnical_reviewrequired on constrained lots
cut_fill_limitspartial — specific limits not retrieved this pass
HCP
Red Cliffs Desert Reserve / Desert Tortoise HCP Constraint
SPEC
Washington County Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) for Mojave desert tortoise; federal ESA §10(a)(1)(B) incidental-take permit; Red Cliffs National Conservation Area enabling legislation (Omnibus Public Land Management Act of 2009)

Parcels within or adjacent to Red Cliffs Desert Reserve / Red Cliffs NCA boundary; HCP Zone 6 and other HCP-mapped habitat polygons on north/northeast fringe of St. George

take_prohibitiondevelopment within mapped critical habitat requires mitigation or habitat offset
mitigation_feeper-acre fee set by Washington County HCP administrator (fee schedule outside Title 10 scope)
survey_requirementtortoise clearance survey prior to disturbance in habitat-overlap areas
federal_local_reviewFWS + county + city
effect_on_zoningparcels mapped into Reserve effectively non-developable regardless of underlying Title 10 base district
PD
Planned Development (PD) Family
SPEC
St. George City Code Title 10 Planned Development chapter

Specific mapped parcels with adopted master plan; applied at rezone

PD-R_residential_noteCustom density per master plan; dimensional variations negotiated at adoption
PD-C_commercial_noteCustom intensity per master plan
PD-M_mixed_use_du_ac_range20-40
PD-M_ground_floor_retail_requiredyes
PD-SH_student_housing_du_ac_max_approx50
PD-SH_parking_ratio_with_shuttle0.5
PD-SH_driverUtah Tech University (formerly Dixie State) catchment
PD-TNZ_traditional_neighborhood_du_ac_range15-25
PD-TNZ_mixed_use_requiredyes
PD-AP_activity_park_noteMixed commercial / recreational; custom
planning_commission_discretionhigh

State preemptions

UT-§10-9a-505.5applies
Qualifying condition
Statewide; applies to all Utah municipalities. St. George qualifies.
Effect
Floor of 3 unrelated persons for single-family occupancy. St. George Title 10 'family' definition (Title 10 §10-2 definitions) cannot be set below 3 unrelated persons.
UT-HB82-internal-ADUapplies
Qualifying condition
Statewide; residential zones in municipalities with population over 1,400 must permit internal ADUs within owner-occupied primary dwellings. St. George (pop ~110,000) qualifies.
Effect
Internal ADUs must be permitted by right in residential zones within owner-occupied primary dwellings. Detached ADUs remain a local-discretion item. St. George retains authority over size, design, and parking for internal ADUs but cannot prohibit them.
UT-HB462-moderate-income-housingapplies
Qualifying condition
Population + transit thresholds. St. George (~110,000) is in the standard MIHA reporting tier; no FrontRunner station so the transit-eligible higher strategy count does not apply — St. George is in the non-transit tier for strategy minimums.
Effect
St. George must adopt and implement a Moderate Income Housing (MIH) element in its General Plan, select the statutory minimum number of strategies (non-transit tier), and report annually to Utah Department of Workforce Services. Non-compliance gates state transportation funding. Does NOT directly preempt base-district KPIs.
UT-SB174-single-family-modificationsapplies
Qualifying condition
Statewide; applies to St. George.
Effect
Latent procedural constraint on future attempts to tighten single-family lot-size and design standards. No direct numeric preemption on current Title 10 values.
Non-applicable laws (1)
UT-generalized-density-preemptionunder_review
Qualifying condition
Utah has NOT adopted a generalized statewide density or height preemption on base residential districts (unlike CA/WA/OR/MT/AZ). St. George retains full local discretion over base-district dimensional KPIs outside narrow ADU/occupancy carve-outs.
Effect
none

Adopted building codes

Statewide; local may lag

IBC
2021
IRC
2024
NEC
2023
IFC
2021
IECC (Residential)
2021
IECC (Commercial)
2021

Click a code label to open its state-by-state adoption atlas.

Quirks & notes

  • DUAL numeric encoding convention within Title 10: R-1-{N} encodes min lot size in thousands of sf (R-1-8, R-1-10, R-1-12, R-1-20, R-1-40); R-2/R-3/R-4 encodes density intensity tier (NOT lot size). Two different conventions coexist in one code and must be respected. — [St. George City Code Title 10 district-name pattern]
  • Virgin River and Santa Clara River riparian buffer (100-150 ft no-build) removes 30-40% of developable area on some near-downtown parcels. Must be checked parcel-by-parcel before any density math. — [Title 10 riparian chapter + Washington County FIRM]
  • Red Cliffs Desert Reserve / desert tortoise HCP on north/northeast fringe effectively zeros buildable yield on mapped parcels regardless of Title 10 base district. Federal ESA overlay preempts local zoning on take. Not cross-referenced inside Title 10; documented via Washington County HCP and Red Cliffs NCA enabling legislation. — [Washington County HCP for Mojave desert tortoise; Red Cliffs NCA (Omnibus Public Land Management Act of 2009); federal ESA §10(a)(1)(B)]
  • 2019 Title 10 amendment raised R-1 height from 35 ft to ~40+ ft in some subzones. Older subdivisions may have recorded CC&Rs capping at 35 ft; recorded private restrictions override zoning on a per-parcel basis. Always confirm recorded covenants before assuming the post-2019 height is available. — [Title 10 amendment history; parcel-level CC&R records]
  • Utah Tech University (formerly Dixie State) drives a PD-SH student-housing planned-development designation allowing up to ~50+ du/ac with reduced parking (≈0.5 spaces/unit if shuttle service provided). Limited mapped geography; high demand. — [Title 10 PD chapter]
  • TOD overlay adopted 2024 offers +20% density, +10 ft height, -20% parking for 25% affordable set-aside. Adopted but under-utilized through 2026 — very limited applied use to date. — [Title 10 TOD chapter]
  • Historic District Overlay stepback (15 ft above 45 ft) caps effective downtown height around 60-65 ft in HDO-overlap portion of C-4 even though C-4 base allows up to 110 ft with incentive. HDO wins. — [Title 10 HP chapter + C-4 district table]
  • Planned Development family is the de facto variance pathway for non-conforming projects. Planning Commission discretion is high; politically sensitive; outcomes vary by case. PD-M, PD-R, PD-C, PD-SH, PD-TNZ, PD-AP all observed. — [Title 10 PD chapter (practice pattern)]
  • codelibrary.amlegal.com (American Legal Publishing) returns 403 on scripted WebFetch under current agent environment; chapter-root and section URLs not directly retrievable for structured dimensional tables. Browser MCP or city-hosted PDF required for full numeric confirmation. Constrains numeric-KPI confidence on this research pass to [partial] for most values. — [Research pass 2026-04-18 tool-call pattern]

Formulas

Definitions

height
Grade to highest point of structure per Title 10 definitions; rooftop mechanical exclusion language not retrieved this pass
lot_coverage
Building footprint / lot area; accessory-structure inclusion not confirmed this pass
far
Gross floor area / lot area; used on C-1..C-4 and R-2/R-3/R-4 tiers; NOT used on single-family base
du_ac
Gross dwelling units per acre; inferred for single-family from min_lot_sf
setback_front
Front property line to nearest building face
setback_side
Side property line to nearest building face
setback_rear
Rear property line to nearest building face
parking
Spaces per dwelling unit residential; per 1000 sf commercial; Title 10 parking chapter governs
family
Title 10 §10-2 definition; floor set by Utah Code §10-9a-505.5 at 3 unrelated persons

Capacity calculations

max_footprint_sf
lot_area_sf * lot_coverage_pct (where lot_coverage_pct is retrieved)
max_gfa_sf
lot_area_sf * far (C-1..C-4 and R-2/3/4 only)
buildable_width_ft
lot_width_ft - setback_side_ft * 2
buildable_depth_ft
lot_depth_ft - setback_front_ft - setback_rear_ft
max_stories_approx
max_height_ft / 10 (typical residential; C-4 downtown may use taller floor plates)
riparian_buildable_yield
subtract 100-150 ft RWQB buffer from any parcel intersecting Virgin River / Santa Clara River before capacity math
hcp_buildable_yield
parcels mapped into Red Cliffs NCA / HCP Zone 6 are effectively zero buildable yield regardless of base district

Massing explorer

Interactive 3D comparison across every district. Drag to orbit, scroll to zoom, use the slider to walk districts, and toggle applicable overlays in the right-side panel.

—
—
Sort by —
LOW
HIGH
drag to orbit · scroll to zoom
Max height
— ft
——
Floor area ratio
—
——
Lot coverage
—%
——
Setbacks (F / S / R)
— ft
——
Parking
— /unit
——
Max density
— du/ac
——
Min lot size
— sf
——
◄
prev
►
next
Copy zoning profile
Loading…
District Category Height FAR Coverage Setbacks Parking Density Min lot Overlays

Sources & references

Citations
  1. [1] i§Title 10 RE
  2. [2] i§Title 10 RE
  3. [3] i§Title 10 RE
  4. [4] §Title 10 RE
  5. [5] §Title 10 RE
  6. [6] n
  7. [7] i§Title 10 RE
  8. [8] i§Title 10 parking
  9. [9] §Title 10 R-1-8
  10. [10] §Title 10 R-1-8
  11. [11] §Title 10 R-1-8
  12. [12] §Title 10 R-1 table
  13. [13] §Title 10 R-1 table
  14. [14] n
  15. [15] i§Title 10 R-1-8
  16. [16] i§Title 10 parking
  17. [17] §Title 10 R-1-10
  18. [18] §Title 10 R-1-10
  19. [19] §Title 10 R-1-10
  20. [20] §Title 10 R-1 table
  21. [21] §Title 10 R-1 table
  22. [22] n
  23. [23] i§Title 10 R-1-10
  24. [24] i§Title 10 parking
  25. [25] §Title 10 R-1-12
  26. [26] §Title 10 R-1-12
  27. [27] §Title 10 R-1-12
  28. [28] §Title 10 R-1 table
  29. [29] §Title 10 R-1 table
  30. [30] n
  31. [31] i§Title 10 R-1-12
  32. [32] i§Title 10 parking
  33. [33] §Title 10 R-1-20
  34. [34] §Title 10 R-1-20
  35. [35] §Title 10 R-1-20
  36. [36] §Title 10 R-1 table
  37. [37] §Title 10 R-1 table
  38. [38] n
  39. [39] i§Title 10 R-1-20
  40. [40] i§Title 10 parking
  41. [41] §Title 10 R-1-40
  42. [42] §Title 10 R-1-40
  43. [43] §Title 10 R-1-40
  44. [44] §Title 10 R-1 table
  45. [45] §Title 10 R-1 table
  46. [46] n
  47. [47] i§Title 10 R-1-40
  48. [48] i§Title 10 parking
  49. [49] i§Title 10 R-2
  50. [50] i§Title 10 R-2
  51. [51] i§Title 10 R-2
  52. [52] §Title 10 R-2
  53. [53] §Title 10 R-2
  54. [54] §Title 10 R-2
  55. [55] §Title 10 R-2
  56. [56] §Title 10 parking chapter
  57. [57] i§Title 10 R-3
  58. [58] i§Title 10 R-3
  59. [59] i§Title 10 R-3
  60. [60] §Title 10 R-3
  61. [61] §Title 10 R-3
  62. [62] §Title 10 R-3
  63. [63] §Title 10 R-3
  64. [64] §Title 10 parking chapter
  65. [65] i§Title 10 R-4
  66. [66] i§Title 10 R-4
  67. [67] i§Title 10 R-4
  68. [68] §Title 10 R-4
  69. [69] §Title 10 R-4
  70. [70] §Title 10 R-4
  71. [71] §Title 10 R-4
  72. [72] §Title 10 parking chapter
  73. [73] n§Title 10 RCC
  74. [74] §Title 10 RCC
  75. [75] §Title 10 RCC
  76. [76] n§Title 10 RCC
  77. [77] §Title 10 parking chapter
  78. [78] i§Title 10 MH
  79. [79] i§Title 10 parking
  80. [80] i§Title 10 C-1
  81. [81] §Title 10 C-1
  82. [82] §Title 10 C-1
  83. [83] §Title 10 C-1
  84. [84] §Title 10 parking chapter
  85. [85] §Title 10 C-2
  86. [86] §Title 10 C-2
  87. [87] §Title 10 C-2
  88. [88] §Title 10 parking chapter
  89. [89] §Title 10 C-3
  90. [90] §Title 10 C-3
  91. [91] §Title 10 C-3
  92. [92] §Title 10 parking chapter
  93. [93] §Title 10 C-4
  94. [94] §Title 10 C-4
  95. [95] §Title 10 C-4
  96. [96] §Title 10 parking chapter
  97. [97] i§Title 10 M
  98. [98] i§Title 10 M
  99. [99] i§Title 10 M

Research status

Publication gates

primary url presentpassed
no aggregator citedpassed
confidence tags full formpassed
overlays have parameters trigger confidencepassed
preempt section city specificpassed

Verification

last_verified_at2026-04-18T23:45:00Z
verifier_specialistverification-pass
verifier_version1.0
verification_resultpassed
atomic_claims_checked34
atomic_claims_passed34
atomic_claims_failed0
failed_claims
narrative_refnarratives/st-george-ut/b0b4a747-cfe8-4b6a-aa71-4c676d0dc429.json#section-verification-pass

Other cities in this state

Nearest-alphabetical profiles. Click through to compare zoning patterns side-by-side.

Brigham CityOgdenProvoSalt Lake CityTooeleTremontonWest Valley City