Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Setback Variance topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Cody planning board denies garage setback reduction after neighbors cite irrigation line

Cody Planning, Zoning and Adjustment Board · May 7, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

After extensive public comment about a private raw-water irrigation line and access concerns, the Cody Planning, Zoning & Adjustment Board voted 4–1 to deny a request to reduce the rear-yard setback at 2114 Gale Lane from 15 feet to 5 feet to allow a 40x30 garage.

Neighbors who live along Gale Lane told the Cody Planning, Zoning & Adjustment Board on May 7 they oppose a requested reduction of the rear-yard setback at 2114 Gale Lane from 15 feet to 5 feet. Several residents said a privately maintained raw-water irrigation pipe runs near the south lot line and that a 5-foot setback would not provide adequate space to access and maintain the line. Stan Strike, a neighbor, told the board: “5 feet is not enough to work, get equipment in and maintain it and to repair it.”

Staff confirmed with the Cody Canal Irrigation District that an irrigation line exists along the south property edge but that no recorded easement or survey is on file. Jenny (staff) told the board the city cannot enforce a setback from a private irrigation line without a recorded easement and recommended an official locate and, ideally, a recorded private irrigation easement to protect infrastructure and clarify ownership. The applicant, Barbara Atkinson, who said she owns 2114 Gale Lane, responded that she is aware of the pipe’s location and “We would never do anything to cover that up,” and told the board she expected to position the building to avoid interfering with the pipe.

Board members debated alternatives — rotating the building, reducing its size or requiring additional buffer — and stressed the difficulty of approving a minimum deviation without evidence that the requested 10-foot reduction is necessary. Citing special-exemption standards (detriment to nearby properties, minimum deviation and availability of other methods), a motion to deny the variance carried 4–1. Staff noted the property’s lot and building coverage figures (the proposed garage and existing residence would combine to roughly 2,600 square feet of building area on a 20,000-square-foot lot, well under the R-2 district’s 50% coverage threshold). The board also encouraged neighbors and the applicant to secure a recorded easement or survey to clarify the irrigation-line location before any future work.