Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Adu Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council narrows city ADU flexibility after state law change; eliminates reduced rear setback allowance
Summary
Ames City Council voted to change local accessory dwelling unit rules to comply with a new state law and removed one local allowance that had permitted ADUs to be built as close as three feet to rear property lines.
The Ames City Council voted Tuesday to revise local ADU rules in response to a recent change in Iowa state law that removes several municipal controls over accessory dwelling units.
Staff advised council the state law prevents local governments from requiring owner‑occupancy for either unit, from imposing parking mandates for ADUs and requires cities not to be more restrictive for ADUs than for the principal single‑family structure. The planning manager told council the city’s earlier ADU code had been intentionally more permissive — for example, allowing detached ADUs closer to rear property lines than typical principal structures — and that some local allowances would conflict with the new statute unless the city amends municipal code.
After discussion, council members voted to adopt the minimum necessary local changes to comply with state law but to eliminate one city‑specific allowance that had permitted a three‑foot rear setback for two‑story detached accessory buildings. Staff will treat ADUs like principal homes for rear‑yard setbacks going forward; other required changes from state law will be folded into a draft ordinance.
City staff said the law also raises unanswered questions, notably whether the statute allows an existing house to be converted into two units counted as an ADU + principal unit and whether the city can retain its one‑bedroom limit for ADUs. Staff told council they will coordinate with the city attorney and return with draft language; the council and staff noted that the state law takes effect July 1 and that code changes must be drafted quickly.
Council members debated how permissive the city should remain. Some members said maintaining local discretion to limit bulk and protect neighborhood character was important; others said changes were unavoidable because the law limits local regulation. The council directed staff to prepare ordinance language aligning with state requirements and removing the three‑foot rear‑yard allowance, and to clarify whether the one‑bedroom limit can be retained under the new statute.
No immediate changes to existing permitted ADUs were made; staff will return with a draft ordinance for public hearings and formal readings.
