Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning Variance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board of Zoning Appeals approves reduced setback for pool at 202 West Wybie Street with conditions
Summary
On June 9, 2025 the Board of Zoning Appeals approved a variance reducing an accessory-building setback to 5 feet so petitioner Catherine Woodward can install a roughly 15-foot pool; approval is contingent on resolving fence code violations and obtaining a pool permit.
Get email alerts on the Zoning Variance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Board of Zoning Appeals on June 9, 2025 approved a variance to reduce an accessory-building setback to 5 feet at 202 West Wybie Street, allowing petitioner Catherine Woodward to locate a roughly 15-foot pool near the corner of her lot. The board voted 3-0 to approve the request with two conditions: existing fence violations must be corrected or the owner must apply for separate fence variances, and the petitioner must obtain a pool permit from the building division.
The variance request, filed as petition BZA2025-018, sought relief from Section 10.02.26(a) of the Unified Development Ordinance (Old Town Residential Development Standards) to place a small pool in a rear corner that the petitioner said is treated as a front yard because the house sits on a corner lot. “We would like to reduce the setback to 5 foot from the property line back there just at Smart Street,” petitioner Catherine Woodward told the board.
Staff recommended approval subject to conditions after noting the site’s corner-lot constraints but also flagged an unrelated fence that violates multiple zoning rules. During a site visit staff observed a newly constructed six-foot privacy fence that, according to staff, violates three rules: fences must be at least 2 feet behind the sidewalk, front-yard fences are limited to 4 feet in height, and front-yard fences must be at least 50% transparent. Staff told the board that the fence violations must be resolved separately and cannot be folded into the pool setback variance.
Woodward said she and her neighbors had been notified and that nearby residents had told her they had no objection. “A lot of them came up to us in the weeks ahead of this meeting and said that they were okay with what we were proposing to do,” she said. Board members asked procedural questions about permits and clarified that a pool permit from the building division is a separate requirement beyond the zoning setback approval.
Board member King moved to admit the evidence into the record and then moved to approve the request with the two staff conditions; the motions passed 3-0. The board also directed the corporation counsel’s office to draft written findings of fact for adoption at the board’s next meeting in two weeks. Staff told Woodward she would need to work with planning staff to complete the outstanding steps if she wished to proceed with the pool installation.
The approval covers only the setback variance; any work related to the fence or the pool permit will require separate reviews and approvals.

