Planning commission denies Good Timber Ranch setback variance after public testimony alleging wetland damage

Teton County’s Planning and Zoning Commission denied a variance request for work at Good Timber Ranch that would encroach into the county’s 50‑foot riparian setback, after extended public comment alleging prior unauthorized grading and significant downstream environmental harm.

The commission concluded the application before it — a request for a 10‑foot, 6‑inch encroachment by a covered patio — did not capture the full extent of development activity on the site, including proposed grading and fill. Commissioners said the broader grading and site preparation must be considered under the LDC’s definition of development and found the variance did not meet the code’s review criteria.

Why it matters: Commissioners framed the decision around the LDC’s riparian protection rules and the legal meaning of “development,” concluding that grading and fill that alter drainage or vegetation are within the setback and cannot be ignored by narrowly scoped variance applications. Neighbors testified they already suffered downstream damage they attribute to prior work on the parcel.

Staff presentation Dan Leeman, senior planner, summarized the variance request. The applicant, Good Timber Ranch LLC (represented by Stillwater Design Group), sought relief from Teton County Code 5‑4‑2C (riparian buffer setback) for approximately 320 square feet of encroachment by a covered patio adjacent to Big Spring Creek. Staff noted the parcel is about 8.63 acres and that the proposal also shows onsite wetlands.

Public comment: allegations of prior grading and downstream damage Multiple nearby landowners and residents told the commission they had been harmed by prior earthmoving on the subject property. Anna Trinidadu, speaking for seven downstream property owners, said: “For about 2 weeks last summer, Good Timber illegally scraped away 14 acres of land, including 1.8 acres of wetland and about a half mile of stream channel with no erosion control measures in place… The preliminary cost estimate on the damage is $814,000 which they have said they will not pay 1 dime. Teton County issued a stop work order. It is still in effect for this parcel.”

Other neighbors described increased sediment, loss of trout, turbid wells and algae-choked channels. A longtime neighbor said the stream, which previously did not freeze in winter, froze solid this year — a change they attribute to the altered streambed and reduced flow.

Applicant testimony and technical questions Amber Rounds of Stillwater Design Group said the variance request was limited to the permanent covered patio structure and that, in their view, the patio columns and roof require the variance while patio hardscape alone could extend up to 10 feet into the setback without that same variance. Rounds said the applicant could remove the cover and proceed with an uncovered patio if the commission denied the variance.

Commission inquiry focused on whether the application had acknowledged grading, fill and other construction activities that the LDC defines as “development.” Commissioners and staff noted the application did not provide a full lot plan showing the house and grading in relation to the 8.63‑acre parcel and that a recorded lot‑line adjustment had been made but was not depicted in the submitted drawings.

Legal and code interpretation Commissioners debated whether “development” in the LDC — a term that the code defines to include grading and excavation — requires the commission to consider all site disturbance, not merely the permanent roof columns. Several commissioners concluded that the application was incomplete because it focused narrowly on the covered patio while omitting grading plans and other ground‑disturbing elements that would affect riparian protections.

Deliberation and motion Commissioners said the request failed key variance criteria, including that it was not the minimum necessary and that the special circumstances were largely the result of applicant choices. One commissioner summarized: “If you take into consideration the size of the home that’s being proposed is a choice in that specific location…[t]his is not the minimum variance.” After extended deliberation, a motion to deny the variance passed. Commissioners also directed staff to consult with legal counsel about whether grading and broader development activity must be considered in this variance and whether this particular development should have been presented differently to the county.

Ending: follow-up and enforcement context The commission’s denial stops the specific covered‑patio relief requested. Staff noted there are pending building‑permit and grading/erosion control permit reviews related to the property; commissioners said those separate reviews should reflect the commission’s determination that grading and excavation fall within the setback rules. Neighbors asked the county to pursue enforcement of the stop‑work order and remediation for alleged past damage; commissioners asked staff and legal to investigate the broader compliance questions raised in testimony.

Quotes Anna Trinidadu (representing seven downstream property owners): “For about 2 weeks last summer, Good Timber illegally scraped away 14 acres of land, including 1.8 acres of wetland and about a half mile of stream channel with no erosion control measures in place… The preliminary cost estimate on the damage is $814,000.”

Amber Rounds (Stillwater Design Group): “The variance request is for that 320 square foot patio space within the setback… If the variance was denied, then we’d still propose the 10 feet of patio extending out so that we could have a place for our AC condensers, and a place to come out from those doorways.”