Planning board recommends rezoning Home View parcel to R‑4 to increase housing capacity

The City of Cody Planning, Zoning and Adjustment Board voted March 5 to recommend that the City Council rezone Lot 1 of Home View Addition No. 6 (6.62 acres) from medium‑high density residential (R‑3) to high‑density residential (R‑4). The board’s recommendation follows a staff presentation that said the change would allow smaller net lot area per dwelling and greater building height and coverage, enabling more housing units on the parcel.

Jenny, a city staff presenter, told the board the R‑4 standard permits higher density — "1,800 square feet per unit versus 4,000 square feet in R‑3" — and that using the master plan’s gross acreage method and the city code’s developable lot area method staff calculated an allowance of approximately 53 dwelling units on the site’s roughly 2.2 net developable acres. Jenny said the site is designated an "area of change" in the Cody master plan and that staff found the requested R‑4 zoning "could be an appropriate use of the land that addresses the city's need for attainable housing potentially and provides and would provide a public benefit without detrimental impact on historic preservation."

Board members questioned how much of the parcel’s steep hillside would count as open space versus developable land. Jenny explained supplemental standards allow unusable hillside to be eligible as required open space and noted multifamily open‑space requirements of 200 square feet per dwelling unit; she calculated roughly 10,600 square feet of open space for a 53‑unit buildout.

Traffic and utilities were raised as concerns. A board member asked whether the Sheridan/29th intersection and nearby collectors could handle additional trips. Chris, the city staff engineer, said the 29th Street right‑of‑way is "quite a wide right of way," noted a bike path within the public right‑of‑way that could be removed and replaced to build turning lanes, and said water, sewer and electric appear adequate for initial review but that a more detailed review would occur when a development application is submitted. He also said some private utilities (natural gas, cable) would be handled by private providers (Black Hills Energy, CenturyLink/Spectrum).

Several members voiced support for more housing while also warning zoning alone does not guarantee affordability. One board member said Cody needs housing stock but warned R‑4 could yield taller, larger buildings that might not meet the community’s idea of "attainable" housing; that member said it could "end up having to be a great big box." Jenny and other staff noted multi‑unit standards and supplemental requirements would apply at the development review stage and that a planned unit development (PUD) or site plan would be reviewed under existing procedures.

The chair entertained a motion to recommend the rezone to city council. The chair recorded the motion as "motion by Ian, second by Aaron" and called for the vote; the chair declared the motion carries. The transcript does not record a full roll‑call tally. The recommendation now advances to the City Council for final action.

Next steps: if an applicant submits a development plan or PUD, staff said the project would receive detailed review of site layout, open space, parking, and traffic mitigation at that time.