The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints’ plans to build a temple in Cody remain in limbo, as city planning and zoning officials want changes to the building’s height and lighting.

At a Tuesday meeting at the Cody Auditorium, the city’s Planning, Zoning and Adjustment Board directed staff to negotiate with church officials about modifications to the proposed 101-foot-high tower and the facility’s nighttime lighting.

Greg Rasmussen, the church’s director of special projects, offered the possibility of entering into a development agreement with the city after the board again declined to approve the church’s plans. Rasmussen said the agreement would allow the church and city to work together and dig into the specifics of the project.

“It’s a little difficult to do in an environment like this,” Rasmussen said at the public meeting, which drew more than 100 attendees.

An earlier meeting on the temple drew an even bigger crowd, as the project has attracted significant controversy. Hundreds of residents signed a petition asking for the temple to be moved to a different spot, while hundreds of supporters — mostly church members from the area — signed a petition backing the plans. Neighbors to the proposed temple site off Skyline Drive, on the edge of a residential neighborhood around the Cody golf course, have offered the most vocal opposition to the 9,950 square foot temple, citing concerns that include views, traffic and lighting.

The planning board has approved a conditional use permit for the project, allowing the church to build a house of worship at the site. However, the board has not approved the specific design. On Tuesday, the members again rejected motions that would have allowed the church to build a proposed 100-foot, 11-inch tower.

Board member Kim Borer noted that a similarly sized temple in Monticello, Utah, tops out “at 66 feet, not 102 feet.”

“They wanted to be good neighbors,” Borer said of the church’s approach there.

As for the project in Cody, she said the proposed height is an issue for not just “NIMBY” (Not In My Backyard) neighbors, but “the whole community of Cody.”

“And they’re not addressing the issues,” Borer said of the church, “so my vote would definitely be no, right now.”

Matt Moss was the only board member to support the plans as presented, making the case that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints’ proposal complied with all of the city’s regulations and codes.

City Planner Todd Stowell, City Building Official Sean Collier, and Park County Fire Marshal Sam Wilde, “they all say that it is within code, it all complies with the law and we as a board seem to be rejecting that,” said Moss, who is a member of the church. “I find that … tough.”

After a motion to approve the 101-foot-high steeple failed, Moss proposed a 70-foot cap, in-line with the tallest existing steeple in Cody, but no one seconded the motion.

“I don’t believe we should be dictating. I think the applicant [the church] needs to bring to us something that’s workable,” Borer said.

A question of height

Stowell, the planner, continued to argue that the board doesn’t have the authority to regulate those elements. 

The rural residential zoning area where the church is seeking to construct the temple caps building heights at 30 feet. However, Stowell and other building officials say the tower isn’t subject to that limit, because it’s an unoccupied structure that will be built on top of the completed roof; it is, they say, a “rooftop projection” that could reach an unlimited height under city code and the International Building Code.

“Again, it’s not what someone wishes it [the code] said, it’s, how do you interpret the formal language of the definition?” Stowell said. “My frustration with the board right now is [that] no one has provided an alternate explanation or logic to why the interpretation that has been provided is invalid, nor have they provided any alternatives for discussion.”

Collier, the building official, told the board there’s no other way to interpret the code and that the church’s proposal is “definitely” in compliance, since the main building is about 26 feet tall at its highest point.

But a majority of the board members again rejected that interpretation.

Board member Dan Schein said that if you were to ask a citizen on the street about the meaning of the city’s 30-foot building height restriction, “they would include that spire.”

Board member Josh White, who missed the June 15 meeting on the temple, joined the majority vote against the height interpretation and an exemption to the height limit.

Stowell suggested that the board had inadvertently approved the tower height at its earlier meeting because they’d failed to remove a section of his proposed findings of fact, but the board didn’t go along with that, either.

Design and lighting

Board Chair Carson Rowley proposed striking or modifying many of Stowell’s suggested findings for the conditional use permit. For example, Stowell, who is a member of the church, wrote that “many view the temple and its grounds as aesthetically pleasing,” while Rowley suggested saying “some.” White echoed that, saying he didn’t think there was data to support references to “many” and “significant.”

In another section, Stowell proposed finding that “the teachings given in the temple promote the attractiveness (e.g. well-kept properties due to the concept of stewardship) and the welcoming attitude for fellow residents and visitors, that is so important”; Rowley instead suggested revising it to say, “the grounds proposed will be well kept and the arched doorways and windows fit architecture consistent with Cody’s history.”

However, other board members critiqued the temple’s design.

Borer said “there needs to be more design that’s pertinent to our community,” noting the new temple in Helena, Montana, incorporated buttercups because of the flower’s importance to that community.

“I don’t know that we really looked at Cody’s character and heritage when we designed it,” she said.

Meanwhile, Moss praised the design as well-laid out and “beautiful.” Rowley echoed Moss’ compliments for the oversized parking area that will avoid the need for church members to park on the street. 

However, Rowley said he wanted more restrictions on the lighting, starting a discussion about warmer, downcast lighting or requirements that lights be shut off or dimmed when the building is not in use.

Although the City of Cody has not adopted so-called dark sky regulations, Stowell said the church’s proposal complies with those more stringent standards. Moss, meanwhile, said the board typically doesn’t get into those details.

“Are we really going to start dictating when people need to turn on their lights, how bright they should be?” he asked.

Stowell made a similar argument, bringing up a years-old meeting in which he said the board directed staff not to regulate architectural lighting on commercial buildings. In the current discussion about the temple, “what you’re talking about is saying when people can turn on and off their Christmas lights,” he said. “That’s really what you’re talking about here.”

Schein took exception to that statement, noting the temple requires a conditional use permit to be built in the rural residential zone.

“I do not believe that what we’re describing here … are applicable to Christmas lights in our other residential zones,” he said.

Stowell said the board had misunderstood what conditions it could impose on the project, saying the city only has the authority to regulate lighting related to parking. However, board member Scott Richard noted the city has encouraged downcast lighting for years, while Rowley noted the city worked with the Hampton Inn’s owners to install warmer lights.

It was toward the end of the roughly two-hour meeting that Rasmussen, from the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, was given an opportunity to speak and suggested the development agreement.

“These are difficult discussions,” Rasmussen said.

The board unanimously voted to table the site plan and have staff negotiate an agreement. What they come up with will ultimately be presented to the board for its review and approval.