Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Residential Zoning topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
West Des Moines council previews major rewrite of residential zoning: smaller lots, reduced setbacks and simplified accessory rules proposed
Summary
Staff presented a multi-part residential code rewrite to implement the 2040 plan and encourage ‘missing middle’ housing. Proposals included three residential tiers (small, traditional, estate), narrower front setbacks for new subdivisions, a simplified buildable envelope for accessory structures, and outreach to builders before formal zoning changes.
City planning staff opened a multi-hour workshop to outline a proposal to modernize West Des Moines’ residential zoning, saying revisions are intended to align the zoning code with the city’s 2040 comprehensive plan, increase housing options and simplify a patchwork of existing ‘if/then’ accessory rules.
Staff proposed consolidating many single-family residential districts into three categories: small-lot (28–42 feet wide), traditional (42–100 feet) and estate (100 feet+). The proposal would generally replace minimum lot-area rules with lot-width thresholds to preserve street character while allowing depth and lot area to vary by developer design. Staff told the council that changing setback and build-envelope rules could reduce the share of each lot effectively removed from saleable/usable area and help lower per-unit land costs.
Several specific concepts drew extended discussion: staff suggested reducing front setbacks on new development (examples discussed: 8–15 feet for small lots; 15–20 feet for traditional lots; larger for estate lots) and aligning rear setbacks with front setbacks on new plats to keep development predictable. Council members and staff discussed transition protections for existing neighbors (a 150-foot transition band or a rule requiring that the first three lots adjacent to an existing subdivision match existing lot widths, whichever is greater). Developers, staff and council discussed whether a 150-foot transition or a three-lot rule best protects neighbors while allowing greenfield innovation.
Accessory structures and ‘‘buildable envelope’’: staff said they want to simplify a long set of conditional accessory rules and instead offer a single buildable envelope for rear/sideyards, with clear allowances for decks, sheds and pool houses while preserving fire-safety separation and preventing oversized, multi-story accessory structures that could overlook neighbors. Council members emphasized protecting privacy in existing neighborhoods while granting flexibility in new subdivisions.
Infrastructure and implementation concerns: engineers warned that tighter setbacks and smaller sideyards raise engineering challenges for utility easements, stormwater detention and equipment access; staff said preliminary-plat engineering will be more important and the city will seek to avoid detention basins inside private back yards where feasible.
Next steps: staff will conduct outreach with homebuilders, civil engineers and architects, test the proposals in pilot plats, and return to the planning commission and council after stakeholder feedback. Council members generally expressed openness to piloting smaller lots and reduced setbacks on new developments while protecting existing neighborhoods with transition rules and stronger platting standards.
