Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
~Master - July 12, 2022, Regular Meeting of the Ames City Council
AGENDA REGULAR MEETING OF THE AMES AREA METROPOLITAN PLANNING ORGANIZATION (AAMPO) TRANSPORTATION POLICY COMMITTEE AND REGULAR MEETING OF THE AMES CITY COUNCIL COUNCIL CHAMBERS - CITY HALL JULY 12, 2022 NOTICE TO THE PUBLIC: The Mayor and City Council welcome comments from the public during discussion. If you wish to speak, please complete an orange card and hand it to the City Clerk. When your name is called, please step to the microphone, state your name for the record, and limit the time used to present your remarks in order that others may be given the opportunity to speak. The normal process on any particular agenda item is that the motion is placed on the floor, input is received from the audience, the Council is given an opportunity to comment on the issue or respond to the audience concerns, and the vote is taken. On ordinances, there is time provided for public input at the time of the first reading. CALL TO ORDER: 6:00 PM AMES AREA METROPOLITAN PLANNING ORGANIZATION (AAMPO) TRANSPORTATION POLICY COMMITTEE MEETING 1. Hearing on Final Federal Fiscal Years (FFY) 2023-2026 Transportation Improvement Program (TIP): a. Resolution approving Final FFY 2023-2026 TIP POLICY COMMITTEE COMMENTS: ADJOURNMENT: REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING* *The Regular City Council Meeting will immediately follow the meeting of the Ames Area Metropolitan Planning Organization Transportation Policy Committee. PROCLAMATIONS: 1. Proclamation for “Summer Learning Week,” July 11 - 15, 2022 2. Proclamation for “Parks and Recreation Month,” July 2022 PRESENTATION: 3. Presentation by Robert Denson, President of Des Moines Area Community College (DMACC) regarding the “State of DMACC” CONSENT AGENDA: All items listed under the Consent Agenda will be enacted by one motion. There will be no separate discussion of these items unless a request is made prior to the time the Council members vote on the motion. 4. Motion approving payment of claims 5. Motion approving Minutes of Special City Council Meeting held June 21, 2022, and Regular City Council Meeting held June 28, 2022 6. Motion approving Report of Change Orders for period June 16 - 30, 2022 7. Motion approving ownership update for Class C Liquor License with Sunday Sales - Welch Ave Station, 207 Welch Avenue 8. Motion approving temporary Outdoor Service for Class C Liquor License with Outdoor Service and Sunday Sales - Tip Top Lounge, 201 E. Lincoln Way for August 25, 2022 9. Motion approving the renewal of the following Beer Permits, Wine Permits and Liquor Licenses: a. Class C Liquor License with Sunday Sales - Applebee’s Neighborhood Grill & Bar, 105 Chestnut b. Class C Liquor License with Living Quarters and Sunday Sales - Sportsman’s Lounge, 1236 Main Street c. Special Class C Liquor License with Sunday Sales - Huhot Mongolian Grill, 703 S Duff Avenue, Suite 105 d. Class C Liquor License with Sunday Sales & Outdoor Service - La Casa Maya, 631 Lincoln Way - Pending Dram Shop Insurance 10. Requests from Youth & Shelter Services for Youth Recovery Campus Unveiling on July 19, 2022: a. Motion approving Blanket Vending License b. Motion approving Blanket Temporary Obstruction Permit c. Resolution approving waiver of fee for Blanket Vending License d. Resolution approving suspension of seven parking meters and waiver of parking meter fees on Kellogg between Main Street and Fifth Street from 3:00 p.m. to 7:00 p.m. e. Resolution approving closure of Kellogg Avenue between Main Street and Fifth Street from 3:00 p.m. to 7:00 p.m. 11. Resolution approving the final construction loan application to borrow an amount not to exceed $3,500,000 in Water Revenue Bonds (SRF loan) for demolition of the Old Water Treatment Plant 12. Resolution amending Purchase Agreement with Habitat for Humanity of Central Iowa to extend the time for completion for the rehabilitation and sale of the single-family home located at 241 Village Drive 13. Resolution authorizing staff to administratively close Lynn Avenue as necessary to install utility services for 120 Lynn Avenue 14. Resolution approving preliminary plans and specifications for 2021/22 Shared Use Path System Expansion (South of Lincoln Way Path Expansion); setting August 3, 2022 , as bid due date and August 9, 2022, as date of public hearing 15. Resolution awarding contract to Wulfekuhle Injection and Pumping of Peosta, Iowa, for FY 2022/23 WPC Biosolids Disposal Contract using unit prices bid in a total amount not to exceed $120,312.50 16. Padmount Switchgear for Electric Services: a. Resolution awarding contract to WESCO Distribution, of Des Moines, Iowa, for the purchase of line item 1, Electric Services Padmount Switchgear in the amount of $22,799.61 (inclusive of Iowa sales tax) 2 b. Resolution awarding contract to Power Line Supply, of Williamsburg, Iowa, for the purchase of line items 2 & 3, Electric Services Padmount Switchgear in the amount of $44,500.61 (inclusive of Iowa sales tax) 17. Resolution awarding contract to WESCO Distribution, of Des Moines, Iowa, for the purchase of Electric Services Aluminum Cable and Copper Wire in a total amount of $210,243.23 (inclusive of Iowa sales tax) 18. Resolution approving contract and bond for Water Treatment Plant Demolition 19. Resolution approving contract and bond for 2021/22 Clear Water Diversion 20. Resolution approving contract and bond for 2017/18 Low Point Drainage Improvements (GW Carver Avenue & Bloomington Road) 21. Resolution approving Change Order No. 3 for Ioway Creek Restoration and Flood Mitigation project in the amount of $223,713.72 22. Resolution accepting completion of 2020/21 Multi-Modal Roadway Improvements (Vet Med Trail) 23. Resolution accepting completion of Year Five of the Water Plant Well Rehabilitation Contract 24. Resolution approving Major Final Plat for Hayden’s Ridge located at 2098 W. 190th Street PUBLIC FORUM: This is a time set aside for comments from the public on topics of City business other than those listed on this agenda. Please understand that the Council will not take any action on your comments at this meeting due to requirements of the Open Meetings Law, but may do so at a future meeting. The Mayor and City Council welcome comments from the public; however, at no time is it appropriate to use profane, obscene, or slanderous language. The Mayor may limit each speaker to three minutes. PARKS & RECREATION: 25. Fitch Family Indoor Aquatic Center Property Acquisition Update (IDOT site) ORDINANCES: 26. Fines for Nuisance Parties: a. First passage of ordinance increasing fines for nuisance parties on certain occasions (second and third passages and adoption requested) 27. Towing for Illegal Parking: a. First passage of ordinance allowing towing for illegal parking on certain occasions (second and third passages and adoption requested) 28. Third passage and adoption of ORDINANCE NO. 4472 rezoning 3005 - 3125 Grove Avenue and 3209 Duff Avenue from Residential High Density (RH) to Residential Medium Density (RM) HEARINGS: 29. Hearing on proposal to vacate electric easement at 1404 and 1410 Buckeye Avenue: a. Resolution approving vacation of electric easement at 1404 and 1410 Buckeye Avenue 30.Hearing on Integrated Site Plan Subdivision with concurrent Final Plat and Major Site Development Plan Amendment for 1404 and 1410 Buckeye Avenue: a. Resolution approving Major Site Development Plan Amendment, with conditions 3 31. Hearing on Rezoning, with Master Plan, 798-500th Street from “A” (Agricultural) to “FS-RL” (Floating Suburban Residential Low Density)[Continued from June 28, 2022]: a. Motion to continue the hearing for the Contract Rezoning Agreement for Adoption of the Master Plan and first passage of ordinance to July 26, 2022 32. Hearing on Proposed Amendment to the City’s Planning Project Review and Notification Process and Approval Process related to Chapters 20 and 29 of the Ames Municipal Code (Continued from June 14, 2022): a. First passage of ordinance 33. Hearing on proposed granting of underground electrical utility easement on the Prairie View Industrial Lift Station site located at 207 S. Teller Avenue to Interstate Power and Light Company (Alliant Energy): a. Resolution granting easement to Interstate Power and Light Company (Alliant Energy) PUBLIC WORKS: 34. 2020/21 and 2021/22 Intelligent Transportation System Program (Phases 1 & 2): a. Resolution awarding contract to Van Maanen Electric Inc., of Newton, Iowa, for the 2020/21 and 2021/22 Intelligent Transportation System Program (Phases 1 & 2) in the amount of $3,800,582.00 b. Resolution approving the use of local funding from FY 2022/23 Intelligent Transportation System Program to cover the funding shortfall for Phases 1 & 2 c. Motion directing staff to reprogram Phases 3 to 6 in the FY 2024/29 Capital Improvements Plan DISPOSITION OF COMMUNICATIONS TO COUNCIL: COUNCIL COMMENTS: CLOSED SESSION: 35. Motion to hold Closed Session as provided by Section 21.5(1)c, Code of Iowa, to discuss matters presently in or threatened to be in litigation ADJOURNMENT: Please note that this agenda may be changed up to 24 hours before the meeting time as provided by Section 21.4(2), Code of Iowa. 4 ITEM#: AAMPO 1 DATE: 07-12-22 AMES AREA METROPOLITAN PLANNING ORGANIZATION TRANSPORTATION POLICY COMMITTEE SUBJECT: FINAL FFY 2023 - 2026 TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (TIP) BACKGROUND: To receive Federal program funds for transportation improvement projects, it is necessary for projects to be part of the approved statewide plan. The initial step in this process is for the Ames Area MPO to develop a Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP). The TIP includes four-years of programming, and a new TIP is created annually. Projects included in the TIP involve street improvements, transit projects, and trail projects. In spring 2022, the Ames Area MPO distributed regional applications for new funding for Surface Transportation Block Grant (STBG) and Transportation Alternative Program (TAP) projects. These were due on March 31. STBG (Surface Transportation Block Grant) Applications: Two (2) applications were received for regional STBG funding. TPMS ID Project Sponsor Project Name Fund Project Year 52481 City of Ames Pavement Improvements $1,400,000 $1,960,000 FFY26 Total New STBG Requests: $1,625,000 TAP (Transportation Alternatives Program) Applications: One (1) application was received for regional TAP funding. TPMS ID Project Sponsor Project Name Fund Project Year 52482 $520,000 $650,000 FFY26 Total New TAP Requests: $520,000 MPO Staff have reviewed the received applications to ensure conformity to the 2045 Metropolitan Transportation Plan (MTP) and regional transportation planning goals. The recommendation is to fully award the requested amounts for the project applications. FISCAL CONSTRAINT: The following tables demonstrate fiscal constraint for STBG and TAP funding programs in fiscal years 2023 through 2026 by summarizing anticipated new funding targets and programmed projects amounts. A map and full list of the programmed projects are shown starting on page 21 (highway/trail projects) and page 25 (transit projects) of the attached TIP document. STBG Fiscal Constraint 2023 2024 2025 2026 UNOBLIGATED BALANCE (CARRYOVER) $3,944,621 $404,579 $1,556,579 $330,579 STBG TARGET $1,860,958 $1,897,000 $1,933,000 $1,971,000 SUBTOTAL $5,805,579 $2,301,579 $3,489,579 $2,301,579 PROGRAM FUNDS $5,401,000 $745,000 $3,159,000 $1,625,000 BALANCE $404,579 $1,566,579 $330,579 $676,579 TAP Fiscal Constraint 2023 2024 2025 2026 UNOBLIGATED BALANCE (CARRYOVER) $19,157 $195,697 $335,697 $559,697 TAP TARGET $176,540 $180,000 $184,000 $188,000 SUBTOTAL $195,697 $375,697 $559,697 $747,697 PROGRAM FUNDS $0 $0 $0 $520,000 BALANCE $195,697 $375,697 $559,697 $227,697 DEVELOPMENT SCHEDULE: The Transportation Policy Committee unanimously approved the Draft TIP on May 24, 2022. During the public comment period, the draft document and projects map were available online and a virtual public input session was held. No public comments were received by staff. Staff received and addressed minor comments from the Iowa Department of Transportation. The Final FFY 2023-36 TIP is due to the Iowa Department of Transportation by July 15, 2022. Once approved, this TIP will become effective starting October 1, 2022, and will be incorporated in the statewide TIP. ALTERNATIVES: 1. Approve the Final FFY 2023-2026 Transportation Improvement Program for submission to the Iowa Department of Transportation. 2. Approve the Final FFY 2023-2026 Transportation Improvement Program, with Transportation Policy Committee modifications, for submission to the Iowa Department of Transportation. ADMINISTRATOR’S RECOMMENDATION: The FFY 2023-36 TIP was open to public comment and was reviewed by State and Federal agency partners. All received comments were incorporated into the final document. Therefore, it is recommended by the Administrator that the Transportation Technical Committee adopt Alternative No. 1, as shown above. 1 | P a g e Transportation’s Federal Highway Administration and Federal Transit Administration, and in part through local matching funds of the Ames Area MPO member governments. These contents are the responsibility of the Ames Area MPO. The U.S. government and its agencies assume no liability for the contents of this report or for the use of its contents. The FINAL FFY 2023-2026 Transportation Improvement Program 2 | P a g e | AAMPO CONTENTS 1 - Introduction ........................................................................................................................................... 4 1.1 Document Overview .......................................................................................................................... 4 1.2 AAMPO Overview and Planning Area ............................................................................................... 4 1.3 Transportation Policy Committee ..................................................................................................... 5 1.4 Transportation Technical Committee ............................................................................................... 6 2 - Public Participation ................................................................................................................................ 7 2.1 Website ............................................................................................................................................. 7 2.2 Outreach ............................................................................................................................................ 7 2.3 Public Involvement Opportunities .................................................................................................... 7 3 - Performance-Based Planning ................................................................................................................ 8 3.1 Overview ........................................................................................................................................... 8 3.2 Safety (PM1) ...................................................................................................................................... 8 3.3 Pavement and Bridge (PM2) ............................................................................................................. 9 3.4 System and Freight Reliability (PM3) .............................................................................................. 10 3.5 Transit Asset Management ............................................................................................................. 11 3.6 Transit Safety ................................................................................................................................... 12 3.7 Regional Transportation Goals ........................................................................................................ 12 3.8 Air Quality ........................................................................................................................................ 13 4 - Project Selection .................................................................................................................................. 14 4.1 Overview ......................................................................................................................................... 14 4.2 Regional Applications ...................................................................................................................... 14 4.3 STBG Selection Criteria .................................................................................................................... 14 4.4 TAP Selection Criteria ...................................................................................................................... 14 4.5 Transit Projects ................................................................................................................................ 15 5 - FFY 2022 Project Status Report ........................................................................................................... 16 6 - Financial Analysis ................................................................................................................................. 17 6.1 Overview ......................................................................................................................................... 17 6.2 Iowa DOT O&M Estimated Expenditures and Funding ................................................................... 17 6.3 Fiscal Tables ..................................................................................................................................... 18 7 - FHWA Program (FFY 2023 – 2026)....................................................................................................... 21 3 | P a g e | AAMPO 7.1 Overview ......................................................................................................................................... 21 7.2 Programmed Highway Projects ....................................................................................................... 22 8 - FTA Program (FFY 2023-2026) ............................................................................................................. 25 8.1 Overview ......................................................................................................................................... 25 8.2 Programmed Transit Projects.......................................................................................................... 26 8.3 FFY 2023 Transit Project Justifications ............................................................................................ 30 9 - Changing an Approved TIP ................................................................................................................... 33 9.1 Amendments ................................................................................................................................... 33 9.2 Administrative Modifications .......................................................................................................... 33 Appendix A – Resolution of Adoption ....................................................................................................... 35 Appendix B – Self-Certification of Planning Activities .............................................................................. 36 Appendix C – List of Federal and State Funding Programs ....................................................................... 37 Appendix D – STBG & TAP Application Forms .......................................................................................... 43 Appendix E – Public Comments ................................................................................................................ 48 4 | P a g e | AAMPO 1 - Introduction 1.1 Document Overview The Federal Fiscal Year 2023 - 2026 Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) is the short-range implementation program for federally funded and regionally significant transportation projects. The TIP is a requirement of 23 CFR 450.326 for metropolitan planning organizations to develop a program, covering at least four years, which reflects the investment priorities established in the metropolitan transportation plan. The Ames Area Metropolitan Planning Organization (AAMPO) develops a new TIP annually in coordination with the Iowa Department of Transportation (DOT), Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), Federal Transit Administration (FTA), the City of Ames, the City of Gilbert, Story County, Boone County, Ames Transit Agency (CyRide), other local agencies and stakeholders, as well as the public. The Ames Area TIP is included in the State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP), which is developed by the Iowa Department of Transportation. 1.2 AAMPO Overview and Planning Area AAMPO was officially designated the MPO of the Ames urbanized area by the Governor of Iowa in March 2003. This designation was the result of the Ames urbanized area having a population greater than 50,000 in the 2000 Census. As a result of the 2010 Census, the urbanized areas of Ames and Gilbert were combined into one urbanized area, therefore requiring the Metropolitan Planning Area to be expanded to encompass this area in its entirety. The Ames Area MPO approved the current Metropolitan Planning Area boundary on November 13, 2012 (shown in Figure 1). The City of Gilbert and Iowa State University were added to the Transportation Policy Committee on March 26, 2013. Figure 1: AAMPO Boundary (Adopted Nov 13, 2012) 5 | P a g e | AAMPO The Ames Area MPO provides and coordinates various transportation planning and improvement efforts throughout the Ames urban area. Ames is in central Iowa and is served by Interstate 35, US Highway 30, and US Highway 69. Surface transportation needs are met through over 251 centerline miles of streets. The community has a very progressive transit system, CyRide, which prior to the COVID-19 pandemic carried more than six million bus passengers each year. CyRide’s ridership dropped to 4.57 million passengers in FY 2020 and then 1.86 million in FY 2021 because of reduced travel within the Ames community. CyRide believes ridership levels will increase back to approximately 3.5 million passengers by the end of FY 2022. Since over 90% of CyRide’s ridership is university students, future transit ridership increases will heavily depend upon how many classes are held in-person on campus instead of virtually. While most transit users have Iowa State University ties, CyRide serves the entire Ames community. The Ames Area MPO area includes the Ames Municipal Airport, which serves general aviation needs for business, industry, and recreation users. On average, 145 aircraft operations occur per day at the Ames Municipal Airport. Railroads provide freight service to the area by dual east-west mainline tracks and a northern agricultural spur. The Ames Area MPO consists primarily of two standing committees: The Transportation Policy Committee and the Transportation Technical Committee. 1.3 Transportation Policy Committee The Transportation Policy Committee (TPC) is the policy setting board of the MPO and the membership consists of local officials. Voting membership on the committee includes city and county governments located, wholly or partially, in the Ames Area MPO planning boundary, as well as the local transit agency. Currently the TPC membership includes: City of Ames, City of Gilbert, CyRide, Boone County, and Story County. The Iowa Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Federal Transit Administration, and Iowa State University serve as advisory, non-voting, representatives. Transportation Policy Committee Membership Representative Agency Member Representative Agency Role City of Ames (Chair) City of Ames City of Ames City of Ames City of Ames City of Ames City of Ames Boone County Story County Ames Transit Agency (CyRide) City of Gilbert Iowa Dept. of Transportation ‡ Iowa Dept. of Transportation ‡ Iowa Dept. of Transportation ‡ Federal Highway Administration ‡ Federal Highway Administration ‡ 6 | P a g e | AAMPO Daniel Nguyen Region 7 Community Planner Brandi Latterell Director for Planning Services ‡ Non-voting 1.4 Transportation Technical Committee The Transportation Technical Committee (TTC) consists of technical personnel from various agencies involved in transportation issues within the planning area. The TTC formulates the procedural details of the Transportation Planning Work Program. The committee reviews and monitors the output of various MPO activities identified in the work program and makes recommendations to the policy committee. The committee is also responsible for assisting in developing the short and long-range transportation plans. The Iowa Department of Transportation, the Federal Highway Administration, and the Federal Transit Administration serve as advisory, non-voting, representatives. ‡ Non-voting Transportation Technical Committee Membership Representative Agency Member Representative Agency Role City of Ames (Chair) City of Ames (Vice-Chair) City of Ames City of Ames City of Ames Ames Transit Agency (CyRide) Iowa State University Boone County Story County Ames Community School Dist. Ames Economic Development Commission Iowa Dept. of Transportation ‡ Iowa Dept. of Transportation ‡ Iowa Dept. of Transportation ‡ Federal Highway Administration ‡ Federal Highway Administration ‡ Federal Transit Administration ‡ 7 | P a g e | AAMPO 2 - Public Participation This document was developed in coordination with AAMPO member agencies, regional stakeholders, and members of the public using the process described in the AAMPO Public Participation Plan. This process includes strategies to disseminate information about the project selection process and provides opportunities for interested parties to provide information to the policy committee. 2.1 Website The Ames Area MPO utilizes its website at www.aampo.org to make documents, maps, and other materials accessible anytime of any day in a format that is adaptable to mobile devices and website text which can be translated into any language available through translation services. There is a subpage of the website dedicated to the Transportation Improvement Program. Here, both current and past versions of Transportation Improvement Programs can be found, and public meetings and comment opportunities are posted. 2.2 Outreach Anyone may sign-up to receive notifications of news and events published from the MPO with an e- notification system. During the development of this program, users received e-notifications pertaining to FFY 2023-2026 TIP public meetings, public comment periods, and draft documents. Additionally, AAMPO utilizes local publications, such as the Ames Tribune, to publicize public input opportunities and public hearing dates. 2.3 Public Involvement Opportunities There were three primary opportunities for public involvement and feedback including: • Public Input Session: A public input session provided members of the public the opportunity to drop-in to view projects, meet with staff, and leave comments on the proposed program. The event, hosted on May 25, 2022, was held virtually via Microsoft Teams. No formal presentation was given allowing for visitors to come and go at any time during the event. • Public Comment Period: A public comment period was made available from May 25, 2022, to June 30, 2022. The draft TIP document was made available online and members of the public could submit their comments on the draft document or listed projects via email or via mail. Public comments received by staff are shown in Appendix E. • Public Hearing: During the July 12, 2022, Transportation Policy Committee meeting, a public hearing was held prior to final adoption of this TIP. This hearing provided time for anyone to address the committee prior to consideration and adoption of the TIP. Public participants could join the meeting via Zoom. Transportation Policy Committee meetings are currently livestreamed on Ames Channel 12 and on YouTube. 8 | P a g e | AAMPO 3 - Performance-Based Planning 3.1 Overview With the passing of the Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st-Centurty (MAP-21) transportation bill, and continuing in the FAST-Act, states and MPOs are required to use performance-based transportation planning practices. MPO Transportation Improvement Programs are required to document compliance with each of the performance-based planning categories including safety (PM1), pavement and bridge (PM2), system and freight reliability (PM3), transit asset management, and transit safety. 3.2 Safety (PM1) Compliance with safety performance-based planning requirement began May 27, 2018, for MPOs. MPOs can choose to support the DOT safety targets or the MPOs can set their own unique targets. Rather than setting its own safety targets, AAMPO has chosen to support the Iowa DOT’s safety targets as published in the most recent Iowa Highway Safety Improvement Program Annual Report and shown in Table 1. The MPO supports those targets by reviewing and programming all Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) projects within the MPO boundary that are included in the DOT’s TIP. Any Iowa DOT Sponsored HSIP projects within the MPO area were selected based on the strategies included in the Strategic Highway Safety Plan and safety performance measures and were approved by the Iowa Transportation Commission. The Iowa DOT conferred with numerous stakeholder groups, including AAMPO, as part of its target setting process. Working in partnership with local agencies, Iowa DOT safety investments were identified and programmed which will construct effective countermeasures to reduce traffic fatalities and serious injuries. The Iowa DOT projects chosen for HSIP investment are based on crash history, roadway characteristics, and the existence of infrastructure countermeasure that can address the types of crashes present. The Iowa DOT continues to utilize a systemic safety improvement process rather than relying on “hot spot” safety improvements. Table 1: Safety (PM1) Targets (adopted by AAMPO on 10/26/21) Performance Measure 2016-2020 Baseline 2018-2022 Target 345.2 337.8 1.053 1.037 1,391.6 1,327.2 4.241 4.073 128.6 129.8 9 | P a g e | AAMPO 3.3 Pavement and Bridge (PM2) Compliance with PM2 performance-based planning requirements began on May 20, 2019, for MPOs. MPOs can choose to support the DOT PM2 targets, or they can set their own unique targets. Rather than setting its own pavement and bridge targets, the AAMPO has chosen to support the Iowa DOT’s pavement and bridge targets as submitted in the most recent baseline period performance report and shown in Table 2. The MPO supports those targets by reviewing and programming all Interstate and National Highway System projects within the MPO boundary that are included in the DOT’s Transportation Improvement Program. Any Iowa DOT sponsored pavement and bridge projects within the MPO area were determined in alignment with the Iowa Transportation Asset Management Plan (TAMP) and the pavement and bridge performance measures. The TAMP connects Iowa in Motion 2045 and system/modal plans to Iowa DOT’s Five-Year Program and the STIP. Iowa in Motion 2045 defines a vision for the transportation system over the next 20 years, while the Five-Year Program and STIP identify specific investments over the next four to five years. The TAMP has a 10-year planning horizon and helps ensure that investments in the Five-Year Program and STIP are consistent with Iowa DOT’s longer-term vision. Starting in 2019, the TAMP began to integrate the pavement and bridge performance targets. The Iowa DOT conferred with numerous stakeholder groups, including the AAMPO and local owners of NHS assets, as part of its target setting process. The methodology used to set targets used current and historical data on condition and funding to forecast future condition. Asset management focuses on performing the right treatment at the right time to optimize investments and outcomes. Management systems are utilized to predict bridge and pavement needs and help determine the amount of funding needed for stewardship of the system. The TAMP discusses the major investment categories that the Commission allocates funding through. Once the Iowa Transportation Commission approves the funding for these categories, the Iowa DOT recommends the allocation of the funds to specific projects using the processes described in the TAMP. Pavement and bridge projects are programmed to help meet the desired program outcomes documented in the TAMP. Table 2: Pavement and Bridge (PM2) Targets (adopted by AAMPO on 09/25/18) Performance Measure 2017 Baseline 4 Year Targets N/A 49.4% N/A 2.7% 50.9% 46.9% 10.6% 14.5% 48.9% 44.6% 2.3% 3.2% 10 | P a g e | AAMPO 3.4 System and Freight Reliability (PM3) Compliance with PM3 performance-based planning requirements began on May 20, 2019, for MPOs. MPOs can chose to support the DOT PM3 targets or MPOs can set their own unique targets. Rather than setting its own system and freight reliability targets, the AAMPO has chosen to support the Iowa DOT’s system and freight reliability targets as submitted in the most recent baseline period performance report and shown in Table 3. The MPO supports those targets by reviewing and programming all Interstate and National Highway System projects within the MPO boundary that are included in the DOT’s Transportation Improvement Program. The Iowa DOT conferred with numerous stakeholder groups, including AAMPO, as part of its target setting process. Variability within the existing travel time dataset was used to forecast future condition. Projects focused on improving pavement and bridge condition also often help improve system reliability and freight movement. Additional projects focused specifically on improving these areas of system performance are developed in alignment with the target-setting process for related performance measures, and the freight improvement strategies and freight investment plan included in the State Freight Plan. This plan includes a detailed analysis and prioritization of freight bottlenecks, which are locations that should be considered for further study and possibly for future improvements. The process also involved extensive input from State, MPO, RPA, and industry representatives. State projects identified in the freight investment plan and programmed in the STIP were highly ranked freight bottlenecks. Table 3: System and Freight Reliability (PM3) Targets (adopted by AAMPO on 03/23/21) Performance Measure 2017 Baseline Targets reliable 100% 98.5% are reliable N/A 95.0% 1.12 1.21 11 | P a g e | AAMPO 3.5 Transit Asset Management Compliance with transit asset management performance-based planning requirements began on October 1, 2018. MPOs can choose to support the targets set by their local urban transit provider or set their own unique targets. The AAMPO has chosen to support the targets set by the region’s transit provider, CyRide as shown in Table 4. CyRide publishes these targets in their own TAM plan which they review and amend, if needed, each fall by October 1st. The infrastructure performance measure element which FTA requires is limited to rail fixed guideway assets of which there is not any rail passenger service with Ames. Table 4: Transit Asset Management Targets (adopted by AAMPO on 10/26/21) TAM Performance Measure Class 2021 Target Year-End Target 2023 2024 2025 2026 Revenue Vehicles 40% 30% Revenue Vehicles 89% 22% Revenue Vehicles 0% 0% Equipment 0% 0% Facilities 0% 0% Facilities Ames 0% 0% Public transit capital projects included in the STIP align with the transit asset management (TAM) planning and target setting processes undertaken by the Iowa DOT, transit agencies, and MPOs. The Iowa DOT establishes a group TAM plan and group targets for all small urban and rural providers while large urban providers (i.e. CyRide) establish their own TAM plans and targets. Investments are made in alignment with TAM plans with the intent of keeping the state’s public transit vehicles and facilities in a state of good repair and meeting transit asset management targets. The Iowa DOT allocates funding for transit rolling stock in accordance with the Public Transit Management System process. In addition, the Iowa DOT awards public transit infrastructure grants in accordance with the project priorities established in Iowa Code chapter 924. Additional state and federal funding sources that can be used by transit agencies for vehicle and facility improvements are outlined in the funding chapter of the Transit Manager’s Handbook. Individual transit agencies determine the use of these sources for capital and operating expenses based on their local needs. 12 | P a g e | AAMPO 3.6 Transit Safety Compliance with transit safety performance-based planning requirements begins on July 20, 2021. MPOs can choose to support the targets set by their local urban transit provider or set their own unique targets. AAMPO has chosen to support the targets set by the region’s transit provider, CyRide as shown in Table 5. CyRide publishes these targets in their Public Transportation Agency Safety Plan (PTASP), which will be certified each year. Table 5: Transit Safety Targets (adopted by AAMPO on 10/26/21) Mode of Transit Service Fatalities (Total) (per 100 thousand Injuries (Total) (per 100 thousand Safety Events (Total) (per 100 thousand System Reliability (VRM/Failures) 0 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 42,273.16 0 0 0 0.00 0 0.00 38,450 Public transit projects included in the STIP align with the transit safety planning and target setting processes undertaken by the transit agencies and MPOs. While the Iowa DOT aided with the development of the initial Public Transportation Agency Safety Plans (PTASPs), each large urban transit provider is responsible for implementing its PTASP, which includes transit safety targets. Investments are made in alignment with PTASPs with the intent of keeping the state’s public transit operations, vehicles, and facilities safe and meeting transit safety targets. State and federal funding sources that can be used by transit agencies for operations, vehicles, and facility improvements are outlined in the funding chapter of the Transit Manager’s Handbook. Individual transit agencies determine the use of these sources for capital and operating expenses based on their local needs. 3.7 Regional Transportation Goals In AAMPO’s latest Metropolitan Transportation Plan, Forward 45, a performance-based transportation planning approach was utilized by tying in the regional vision of the transportation system with the aforementioned federally-required metrics and federally-required planning processes. The six primary region-specific goals, identified from public input, were accessibility, safety, substantiality, efficiency & reliability, placemaking, and preservation. The Forward 45 Report provides a detailed explanation of the regional goals and objectives as well as the performance-based planning approach utilized in the identification, selection, and prioritization of projects. The vision statement stated in Forward 45 is: 13 | P a g e | AAMPO 3.8 Air Quality The Clean Air Act requires the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to set limits on how much of a particular pollutant can be in the air anywhere in the United States. National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) are the pollutant limits set by the Environmental Protection Agency; they define the allowable concentration of pollution in the air for six different pollutants: Carbon Monoxide, Lead, Nitrogen Dioxide, Particulate Matter, Ozone, and Sulfur Dioxide. The Clean Air Act specifies how areas within the country are designated as either “attainment” or “non-attainment” of an air quality standard and provides the EPA the authority to define the boundaries of nonattainment areas. For areas designated as non-attainment for one or more National Ambient Air Quality Standards, the Clean Air Act defines a specific timetable to attain the standard and requires that non-attainment areas demonstrate reasonable and steady progress in reducing air pollution emissions until such time that an area can demonstrate attainment. No part of the Ames Area is within nonattainment; therefore, it is not subject to air quality conformity requirements. However, the Ames Area MPO will perform activities to monitor and promote air quality issues in the region. The State of Iowa provides grant opportunities through the Iowa Clean Air Attainment Program (ICAAP) to promote clean air in Iowa’s transportation system. 14 | P a g e | AAMPO 4 - Project Selection 4.1 Overview This Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) serves as a list of federal-aid eligible transportation improvements within the Ames region from the federal fiscal years 2023 to 2026. Projects in the Ames Area MPO’s TIP must be consistent with the latest regional Metropolitan Transportation Plan, Forward 45. The final AAMPO TIP, approved by the AAMPO Transportation Policy Committee, will be consolidated into the State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) along with the programs from the other planning agencies in the State of Iowa. Projected identified in this TIP utilize, or are based upon, several different sources of federal funding. While AAMPO is responsible for the regional selection of projects eligible for STBG and TAP funding, which the undermentioned selection procedure discussions will focus on, there are several other Federal and State funding programs which are listed and described in Appendix C. 4.2 Regional Applications AAMPO solicits regional applications for two primary transportation funding programs: Surface Transportation Block Grant (STBG) and Iowa’s Transportation Alternatives Program (TAP). For projects to be eligible for these applications, they must conform with the latest regional Metropolitan Transportation Plan, Forward 45. Both these applications are made available on the AAMPO website at www.aampo.org. A notification email is also sent out to contacts from all the AAMPO regional member agencies that are eligible to apply. These applications are due annually on March 31st. The application templates for both STBG and TAP can be found in Appendix D. 4.3 STBG Selection Criteria STBG funds are typically awarded to projects which improve capacity through construction, reconstruction, and rehabilitation of the highway network. However, Transit capital projects are also eligible for STBG funds. Projects must be listed in, or conform with, the latest Metropolitan Transportation Plan. All projects are evaluated and prioritized within the Metropolitan Transportation Plan using a performance-based planning process. This evaluation is heavily weighed when determining whether to award STBG funding to a project. Staff will make an initial review of all received STBG applications. Next, the Transportation Technical Committee (TTC) collectively reviews and recommends to the Transportation Policy Committee which projects should be selected. 4.4 TAP Selection Criteria Regional TAP funds are generally awarded to smaller-scale projects such as pedestrian and bicycle facilities, recreational trails, and safe routes to school projects. Like the STBG funding selection process, TAP projects must conform to the latest Metropolitan Transportation Plan (MTP) and the performance- based evaluation results in the MTP are weighed heavily in the TAP selection process. TAP projects should provide connectivity with existing facilities, provide a reasonable cost in relation to public benefit, and enhance the current transportation system. Like the STBG funding selection process, staff 15 | P a g e | AAMPO makes an initial review of the received applications. Next, the Transportation Technical Committee (TTC) reviews and recommends to the Transportation Policy Committee which projects should be selected. 4.5 Transit Projects In addition to FHWA program projects, the TIP includes all projects which Federal Transit Administration (FTA) funding may be utilized. A portion of Federal fuel tax revenue is placed in the mass transit account of the Federal Highway Trust Fund for this use. These funds, along with General Fund appropriations, are reserved for transit purposes and are administered by the Federal Transit Administration. The transit portion of the TIP was developed in cooperation with CyRide, the urban transit operator in the Ames Area MPO planning area. The transit projects identified in the FFY 2023- 2026 TIP were included within the Passenger Transportation Plan (PTP), meeting the requirement to have the Enhanced Mobility for Seniors and Individuals with Disabilities formulized Federal funding within an approved PTP prior to TIP approval. Please refer to pages 25-32 for the transit project justifications for FFY 2023 as well as the list of transit projects programmed for FFY 2023-2026. 16 | P a g e | AAMPO 5 - FFY 2022 Project Status Report It is required to provide a status report for all federal-aid and Swap funded highway projects included in the first fiscal year or the previous TIP. This status report indicates whether the project was authorized/let, is being rolled over to the current TIP, or if the project is being removed from programming. This status report is useful for monitoring the progress being made in implementing the MPO’s transportation program. See Table 6 for the project status report for FFY 2022. Table 6: FFY 2022 Project Status Summary Funding Source TPMS ID Project Description Federal-Aid Total Cost Local Sponsor Status STBG 38304 $225,000 $850,000 CyRide Authorized SWAP-STBG 36919 Cherry Ave (E Lincoln Way – SE 5th St) $1,890,000 $2,400,000 City of Ames FFY 2023 SWAP-STBG 38303 Dr to 24th St) & 24th St (Pinehurst Rd to Hayes $1,600,000 $4,200,000 City of Ames Roll-Over to FFY 2023 (STBG-SWAP) SWAP-STBG 35616 $900,000 $1,500,000 TAP 38306 th $159,000 $500,000 TAP 19249 th $560,000 $1,082,000 SWAP-CMAQ 45239 $1,176,518 $1,470,648 SWAP-CMAQ 48394 $1,400,000 $1,750,000 CMAQ 52477 $89,697 $112,122 CyRide Authorized PL 17 | P a g e | AAMPO 6 - Financial Analysis 6.1 Overview Projects programmed in the current TIP must demonstrate fiscal constraint. This section focuses on demonstrating that the program is fiscally constrained as well as documents nonfederal-aid revenues and expected operations and maintenance costs on the federal-aid system. All project costs are adjusted into year of expenditure dollars using an assumed annual inflation rate of 4 percent. This same inflation rate is used to project revenues and operations and maintenance costs. PL funds are shown to remain constant through the 4-year period and are based on the first fiscal year’s target. The Iowa DOT provides AAMPO with STBG, TAP, and STBG/TAP Flex funding targets for each of the four years in this program. The Iowa DOT also provides information from their five-year program including estimated statewide revenues/allocations and funds available for right-of-way and construction. Lastly, Iowa DOT provides forecasted non-federal-aid revenues as well as operations and maintenance data for the federal-aid system. See the following section for more detail on the Iowa DOT’s programming process regarding expenditures and funding. The Ames City Council has programmed city sponsored projects in the City of Ames 2022-2027 Capital Improvements Plan (CIP) for the local funding allocation. These funds are generated from the City of Ames annual Road Use Tax Fund (RUTF) distribution, Local Option Sales Tax, and General Obligation (GO) bonds. The transit program does not have targets; therefore, the requests involve significant costs in the anticipation of maximizing the amounts received either through formula or discretionary funding. 6.2 Iowa DOT O&M Estimated Expenditures and Funding Each year prior to development of the Iowa DOT’s Five-Year Program and the Statewide Transportation Improvement Program both state and federal revenue forecasts are completed to estimate the amount of funding available for programming. These forecasts are a critical component in the development of the Five-Year Program and as such are reviewed with the Iowa Transportation Commission. The primary sources of state funding to the DOT are the Primary Road Fund and TIME-21 Fund. These state funds are used for the operation, maintenance, and construction of the Primary Road System. The amount of funding available for operations and maintenance is determined by legislative appropriations. Additional funding is set aside for statewide activities including engineering costs. The remaining funding is available for right of way and construction activities associated with the highway program. Along with state funds, the highway program utilizes a portion of the federal funds that are allocated to the state. A federal funding forecast is prepared each year based on the latest apportionment information available. This forecast includes the various federal programs and identifies which funds are allocated to the Iowa DOT for programming and which funds are directed to locals through the MPO/RPA planning process, bridge programs, and other various grant programs. 18 | P a g e | AAMPO The following webpage provides additional insight into the DOT’s programming process and can be found at https://iowadot.gov/program_management/Five-Year-Program. 6.3 Fiscal Tables The following describes each of the six fiscal tables presented in this document: Table 7: Table 7 summarizes the total project costs and associated federal-aid amounts by funding program. Table 8 & Table 9: These tables demonstrate fiscal constraint for their respective funding programs. Table 8 summarizes the STBG program while Table 9 summarizes the TAP program. This incorporates the programmed project costs from Table 7 as well as the funding targets provided by the Iowa DOT. Table 10 & Table 11: These tables summarize projections based on 2021 operations and maintenance data provided by the Iowa DOT. This includes forecasted operations and maintenance data on the federal-aid system (Table 10) and forecasted non-federal-aid revenues (Table 11). The base year for the data was 2021. The shown projections utilize an assumed annual inflation rate of 4 percent. Table 12: Table 12 shows the Iowa DOT’s Five-Year Program funding amounts including statewide revenues, allocations, and funds available for right-of-way and construction. Table 7: Summary of Costs and Federal-Aid 2023 2024 2025 2026 PROGRAM PL STBG TAP NHPP CMAQ HBP Table 8: STBG Fiscal Constraint 2023 2024 2025 2026 BALANCE $404,579 $1,566,579 $330,579 $676,579 19 | P a g e | AAMPO Table 9: TAP Fiscal Constraint 2023 2024 2025 2026 BALANCE $195,697 $375,697 $559,697 $227,697 Table 10: Forecasted Operations and Maintenance (O&M) Costs on the Federal-Aid System 2023 2024 2025 2026 TOTAL O&M $3,718,875 $3,834,550 $3,953,708 $4,079,933 Table 11: Forecasted Non-Federal-Aid Revenue 2023 2024 2025 2026 TOTAL NON-FEDERAL-AID ROAD FUND RECEIPTS $40,846,624 $42,480,489 $44,179,709 $45,946,897 20 | P a g e | AAMPO Table 12: Iowa DOT Five-Year Program Funding ($ MILLIONS) REVENUES 2023 2024 2025 2026 TOTAL $1,395.10 $1,409.20 $1,422.70 $1,438.30 STATEWIDE ALLOCATIONS 2023 2024 2025 2026 TOTAL $540.60 $553.60 $567.10 $580.40 FUNDS AVAILABLE FOR ROW/CONSTRUCTION 2023 2024 2025 2026 TOTAL $854.50 $855.60 $855.60 $857.90 21 | P a g e FFY 2023-2026 TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM 7 - FHWA Program (FFY 2023 – 2026) 7.1 Overview The following pages contains a complete list of projects utilizing FHWA-based funds programmed for FFY 2023 through FFY 2026. These projects are shown on a map in Figure 2. Figure 2: Project Locations (by Project ID) 22 | P a g e | AAMPO 7.2 Programmed Highway Projects 23 | P a g e | AAMPO 24 | P a g e | AAMPO 25 | P a g e FFY 2023-2026 TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM 8 - FTA Program (FFY 2023-2026) 8.1 Overview The following pages contains a complete list of projects utilizing FTA-based funds programmed for FFY 2023 through FFY 2026. The justification for all FFY 2023 transit projects is also provided. 26 | P a g e | AAMPO 8.2 Programmed Transit Projects 27 | P a g e | AAMPO 28 | P a g e | AAMPO 29 | P a g e | AAMPO 30 | P a g e FFY 2023-2026 TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM 8.3 FFY 2023 Transit Project Justifications General Operations (5307/STA) This funding supports the day-to-day transit operations of the Ames Transit Authority from Ames’ urbanized area formula apportionment, Small Transit Intensive Cities (STIC), and State Transit Assistance (STA) funding. Contracted Paratransit (Dial-A-Ride) Service (5310) According to federal regulations, public transit agencies providing fixed-route transit service in their community must also provide door-to-door transportation service within a ¾ mile area of that fixed- route service. Therefore, CyRide purchases transportation service for its Dial-A-Ride operations in order to meet this ADA requirement. This requirement has been expanded to the entire city limits of Ames. Infotainment LED signage (5310) In the fall 2019, CyRide integrated automated vehicle annunciator (AVA) system synced with voice annunciators (audible announcements only) to help keep all passengers, disability or not, better informed of where the bus is located along the bus route(s). This system was in response to a request from Iowa State University’s Alliance for Disability Awareness group which communicated their desire to have more bus stops announced throughout the Ames’ community. Bus drivers must comply with the Americans with Disability Act (ADA) laws and manually announce major transit locations along transit routes along with any stops the public request. CyRide then added visual LED signage within each bus to deploy visual signage within each bus mirroring the LED audible stop announcements. The bigger infotainment LED signage allows more information to be displayed for this visual signage on CyRide’s articulated buses while also allowing advertising on these vehicles. This project will be deployed in FY2023 and is over and beyond ADA requirements. Annunciator Annual Service Fees (5310) CyRide plans to utilize portions of its elderly & disabled funding towards its annual service fees for the automatic annunciator system to ensure compliance with its ADA announcement requirements. This is a non-traditional project but will allow compliance with the ADA law and improve awareness of where the bus is within the community for passenger’s knowledge. Heavy Duty Forty-Foot Bus Replacement (5339) Twenty-three large forty-foot buses have exceeded FTA guidelines for useful life. Buses are identified as: 09070, 09071, 09072, 09073, 09074, 09075, 09076, 09077, 00418, 00419, 00420, 00421, 00422, 00423, 00424, 00425, 00126, 00127, 00128, 00186, 00187, 00188, and 00189. These units, if ranked high enough within the state’s PTMS process or funded within a discretionary grant, will be replaced with 40’ heavy-duty low-floor buses. These replacement vehicles will all be ADA accessible. 31 | P a g e | AAMPO Heavy Duty Articulated Bus Expansion (STBG, 5339) Currently, CyRide has seven articulated buses within its bus fleet, with two more currently being procured, with a goal to attain a total of ten to operate on its #23 Orange route. One additional articulated bus will complete the goal of having ten articulated buses within CyRide’s fleet for this bus route. Specifically, the #23 Orange route transit route carries the highest number of passengers of any route in the State of Iowa at nearly 1.8 million passengers. CyRide will add Surface Transportation Block Grant (STBG) funding to an already approved contract for a 40-foot bus awarded through a direct national discretionary federal award for an articulated (60-foot) bus expansion within the fleet. The forty-foot bus specifically identified to be replaced and upgraded to an articulated bus through a federal award is 00502. The Ames Area Metropolitan Planning Organization has approved funding at $225,000 for FY2023 for this upgrade. Heavy Duty Forty-Foot Battery Electric Bus Replacement (5339, 5307) Ten large diesel forty-foot diesel buses have exceeded FTA guidelines for useful life and will be replaced with battery electric buses. Three will be requested with formula funding and the other seven with federal discretionary funding. Bus numbers are: 00949, 00950, 00951, 00501, 00503, 00504, 00429, 00430, 00431, and 00432. If funded, this will further CyRide’s efforts throughout the Ames community making it even more sustainable. All battery electric buses will be ADA accessible. Miscellaneous Equipment (5339) To support additional battery electric bus purchases, CyRide plans on installing additional charging equipment and dispensers to adequately charge these vehicles throughout the facility. Facility Construction (5339) To support additional battery electric bus purchases within the fleet, CyRide plans on rehabilitating the facility with additional electrical wiring between the transformer and the charging equipment as necessary to charge these new vehicles. Concrete platforms will be necessary as well to help keep the chargers out of flood waters if the facility floods in the future. Architectural and Engineering (5339) To support a battery electric bus project, architectural and engineering design services will be needed in order to assemble bid documents for the facility construction of this project. Project Management (5339) To support a battery electric bus project, project management will be necessary from a nationally renowned consultant to help navigate through the project implementation and results benefits as well as learn more about the latest technology in electric buses available to CyRide. 32 | P a g e | AAMPO Workforce Training (5339) To support a battery electric bus project, workforce training will be necessary to train mechanics and drivers on how to drive and maintain the new electric technology. This project is required as part of future discretionary grant applications. Shop Rehabilitation Improvements (PTIG) Separation of CyRide’s shop and shop offices areas is greatly needed to provide distinct office space for critical work functions while also reducing employees’ exposure to diesel particulates and loud noises that require hearing protection. CyRide is requesting funding to rehabilitate its shop area totaling $750,000 from the Iowa DOT under its public transit infrastructure grant (PTIG) program specifically for: 1) Removing existing half walls within the maintenance fabrication area and repair the floor as necessary, 2) Install new precast concrete floor panels to connect the east and west maintenance mezzanines allowing stair access to the east mezzanine area and creating additional storage space, 3) Construct a new wall on ground level and add two doors to isolate the repair bays from office/parts areas which will help control sound pollution and vapors between the two spaces, 4) Move the eye wash, mop sink, wash fountain and supplies closer to the shop repair bays to improve mechanic work flow and improve safety, 5) Switch the welding and fabrication areas with the current parts room to isolate airborne particulates thereby improving safety, 6) Rework the maintenance offices/cubicles for a more practical layout and create space for Maintenance Coordinator Supervisor to have private conversations and 7) Rework the fire alarm and suppression system to bring the reworked spaces up to code. 33 | P a g e | AAMPO 9 - Changing an Approved TIP Often after development and subsequent adoption of the TIP, changes may need to be made to the list of programmed projects. Examples of changes might be adding or deleing projects., moving a project between years in the TIP, adjusting project cost, or changing the vehicle numbers of transit vehicles. A major requirement of a project receiving Federal transportation funds is for the project to be included in the TIP and Statewide Transportation Improvement Program (STIP). Once a project has received Federal Authorization for construction it does not need to be included in the TIP. This is one of two major reasons for adding or deleting a project from the TIP. The other major reason for adding a project is the awarding of a grant for a project, which can happen throughout the year. Changes to the TIP are classified as either amendments or administrative modifications and are subject to different AAMPO Transportation Policy Committee and public review procedures. 9.1 Amendments Amendments are major changes that may involve the following: Project Cost: Projects in which the recalculated project costs increase Federal aid by more than 30 percent or increase the Federal aid by more than $2 million from the original amount. Schedule Changes: Projects added or deleted from the TIP. Funding Source: Projects receiving additional Federal funding sources. Scope Changes: Changing the project termini, project alignment, the amount of through traffic lanes, type of work from an overlay to reconstruction, or a change to include widening of the roadway. Amendments are presented to the Transportation Policy Committee and a public comment period is opened, which continues until the next policy committee meeting. The Transportation Policy Committee meets on an as needed basis, providing a 3–4-week public comment period for amendments. Public comments are shared with the Transportation Policy Committee and action is taken on the amendment. 9.2 Administrative Modifications Administrative modifications are minor changes that may involve the following: Project Cost: Projects in which the recalculated project costs do not increase Federal aid by more than 30 percent or does not increase the Federal aid by more than $2 million from the original amount. Schedule Changes: Changes in schedule for projects included in the first four years of the TIP. Funding Source: Changing funding from one source to another. 34 | P a g e | AAMPO Scope Changes: Any changes to the scope require an amendment and cannot be approved through an administrative modification. Administrative modifications are processed internally and are shared with the Transportation Policy Committee, the public, and AAMPO stakeholders as information items. 35 | P a g e | AAMPO Appendix A – Resolution of Adoption <Insert Resolution Here> 36 | P a g e | AAMPO Appendix B – Self-Certification of Planning Activities 37 | P a g e | AAMPO Appendix C – List of Federal and State Funding Programs Federal Funding Sources Projects identified in TIPs utilize, or are based upon, several different sources of federal funding. The primary sources of FHWA funding to Iowa, which are in parted used to fund local efforts, include: • Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement Program (CMAQ). CMAQ provides flexible funding for transportation projects and programs tasked with helping to meet the requirements of the Clean Air Act. These projects can include those that reduce congestion and improve air quality. • Demonstration funding (DEMO). Demonstration funding is a combination of different programs and sources. The FHWA administers discretionary programs through various offices representing special funding categories. An appropriation bill provides money to a discretionary program, through special congressionally directed appropriations or through legislative acts, such as the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA). • Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP). This is a core federal-aid program that funds projects with the goal of achieving a significant reduction in traffic fatalities and serious injuries on public roads. A portion of this funding is targeted for use on local high-risk rural roads and railway-highway crossings. • Metropolitan Planning Program (PL). FHWA provides funding for this program to the State of Iowa based on urbanized area population. The funds are dedicated to support transportation planning efforts in urbanized areas with a population of 50,000 or greater. For programming purposes MPOs should program only the new PL target provided by the Systems Planning Bureau. Any carryover funds identified by Systems Planning need not be added to, or subtracted from, the PL target. • National Highway Performance Program (NHPP). NHPP funds are available to be used on projects that improve the condition and performance of the National Highway System (NHS), including some state and U.S. highways and interstates. • State Planning and Research (SPR). SPR funds are available to fund statewide planning and research activities. A portion of SPR funds are provided to RPAs to support transportation planning efforts. 38 | P a g e | AAMPO • Surface Transportation Block Grant Program (STBG). This program is designed to address specific issues identified by Congress and provides flexible funding for projects to preserve or improve the condition/performance of transportation facilities, including any federal-aid highway or public road bridge. STBG funding may be utilized on: o Roadway projects on federal-aid routes o Bridge projects on any public road o Transit capital improvements o TAP eligible activities o Planning activities Iowa targets STBG funding to each of its 27 MPOs and RPAs on an annual basis for programming based on regional priorities. Iowa also targets a portion of its STBG funding directly to counties for use on county bridge projects. Iowa’s Swap program swaps federal STBG funding for state Primary Road Fund dollars. These funds can be used on either on-system or off-system bridges however off-system bridge investments must be continued to maintain the ability to transfer the federal STBG set-aside for off system bridges. • Transportation Alternatives Set-Aside Program (TAP). This program is a setaside from the STBG program. The TAP program provides funding to expand travel choices and improve the transportation experience. Transportation Alternatives Program projects improve the cultural, historic, aesthetic, and environmental aspects of transportation infrastructure. Projects can include creation of bicycle and pedestrian facilities, and the restoration of historic transportation facilities, among others. It is important to note that some types of projects eligible under the SAFETEA-LU program Transportation Enhancements are no longer eligible, or have modified eligibility, under the TAP. All projects programmed with TAP funds should be verified to ensure compatibility with TAP eligibility. • Federal Lands Access Program (FLAP) and Tribal Transportation Program (TTP). The FLAP Program provides funding for projects that improve access within, and to, federal lands. The FLAP funding will be distributed through a grant process where a group of FHWA, Iowa DOT, and local government representatives will solicit, rank, and select projects to receive funding. The TTP provides safe and adequate transportation and public road access to and within Indian reservations and Indian lands. Funds are distributed based on a statutory formula based on tribal population, road mileage, and average tribal shares of the former Tribal Transportation Allocation Methodology. 39 | P a g e | AAMPO • National Highway Freight Program (NHFP). NHFP funds are distributed to states via a formula process and are targeted towards transportation projects that benefit freight movements. Ten percent of NHFP funds will be targeted towards non-DOT sponsored projects. Iowa DOT-Administered Grant Program Funding Sources In addition to the federal funding sources listed above, the Iowa DOT administers several grant programs that are funded, in part, with the federal sources identified above. Projects awarded grant funding must be documented in the region’s TIP. These grant awards are distributed through an application process. State administered grant programs include: • City Bridge Program. A portion of STBG funding dedicated to local bridge projects is set aside for the funding of bridge projects within cities. STBG funding is swapped for state Primary Road Fund dollars. Eligible projects need to be classified as structurally deficient or functionally obsolete. Projects are rated and prioritized by the Local Systems Bureau with awards based upon criteria identified in the application process. Projects awarded grant funding are subject to a federal-aid obligation limitation of $1 million. • Highway Safety Improvement Program – Secondary (HSIP-Secondary). This program is funded using a portion of Iowa’s Highway Safety Improvement Program apportionment and funds safety projects on rural roadways. Federal HSIP funding targeted towards these local projects is swapped for Primary Road Fund dollars. • Iowa Clean Air Attainment Program (ICAAP). The ICAAP funds projects that are intended to maximize emission reductions through traffic flow improvements, reduced vehicle-miles of travel, and reduced single-occupancy vehicle trips. This program utilizes $4 million of Iowa’s CMAQ apportionment. • Recreational Trails Program. This program provides federal funding for both motorized and nonmotorized trail projects and is funded through a takedown from Iowa’s TAP funding. The decision to participate in this program is made annually by the Iowa Transportation Commission. • Iowa’s Transportation Alternatives Program (TAP). This program targets STBG funding to MPOs and RPAs to award to locally sponsored projects that expand travel choices and improve the motorized and non-motorized transportation experience. 40 | P a g e | AAMPO Federal and State Transit Funding Programs Like the FHWA programs listed above, the transit funding authorized by the FAST-Act is managed in several ways. The largest amount is distributed, by formula, to states and large metropolitan areas. Other program funds are discretionary, and some are earmarked for specific projects. Program funds include: • Metropolitan Transportation Planning program (Section 5303 and 5305). FTA provides funding for this program to the state based on its urbanized area populations. The funds are dedicated to support transportation planning projects in urbanized areas with more than 50,000 persons. • Statewide Transportation Planning program (Section 5304 and 5305). These funds come to the state based on population and are used to support transportation planning projects in nonurbanized areas. They are combined with the Section 5311 funds and allocated among Iowa’s RPAs. • Urbanized Area Formula Grants program (Section 5307). FTA provides transit operating, planning and capital assistance funds directly to local recipients in urbanized areas with populations between 50,000 and 200,000. The funding is suballocated from the State for transit agencies serving a population of this size. Assistance amounts are based on population and density figures and transit performance factors for larger areas. Local recipients must apply directly to the FTA. • Bus and Bus Facilities Program (Section 5339). This formula program provides federal assistance for major capital needs, such as fleet replacement and construction of transit facilities. All transit systems in the state are eligible for this program. • Enhanced Mobility of Seniors and Individuals with Disabilities Program (Section 5310). Funding is provided through this program to increase mobility for the elderly and persons with disabilities. Part of the funding is administered along with the nonurbanized funding with the remaining funds allocated among urbanized transit systems in areas with a population of less than 200,000. Urbanized areas with more than 200,000 in population receive a direct allocation. • Nonurbanized Area Formula Assistance Program (Section 5311). This program provides capital and operating assistance for rural and small urban transit systems serving under 50,000 in population (not available for Ames). Fifteen percent of these funds are allocated to intercity bus projects. A portion of the funding is also allocated to support rural transit planning. The 41 | P a g e | AAMPO remaining funds are combined with the rural portion (30 percent) of Section 5310 funds and allocated among regional and small urban transit systems based on their relative performance in the prior year. • Rural Transit Assistance Program (RTAP) (Section 5311(b)(3)). This funding is used for statewide training events and to support transit funding fellowships for regional and small urban transit staff or planners. (Not available for Ames) • Flexible funds. Certain Title 23 funds may be used for transit purposes. Transit capital assistance is an eligible use of STBG funds. Transit capital and startup operating assistance is an eligible use of ICAAP funds. When ICAAP and STBG funds are programmed for transit projects, funding is transferred from FHWA to the FTA for dispersing either directly to the transit system or to the Iowa DOT. The Ames MPO distributes its own STBG funding throughout the Ames metropolitan area. The ICAAP funds are applied for and administered by the Iowa DOT’s Public Transit Bureau. STBG funds for small urban and regional transit systems are also administered the Public Transit Bureau. • State Transit Assistance (STA). All public transit systems are eligible for State funding. These funds can be used by the public transit system for operating, capital, or planning expenses related to the provision of open-to-the-public passenger transportation. The majority of the funds received in a fiscal year are distributed to individual transit systems on the basis of a formula using performance statistics from the most recent available year. o STA Special Projects. Each year up to $300,000 of the total STA funds are set aside to fund “special projects.” These can include grants to individual systems to support transit services that are developed in conjunction with human services agencies. Grants can also be awarded to statewide projects that improve public transit in Iowa through such means as technical training for transit system or planning agency personnel, statewide marketing campaigns, etc. This funding is also used to mirror the RTAP to support individual transit training fellowships for large urban transit staff or planners. STA Coordination Special Projects. Funds provide assistance with startup of new services that have been identified as needs by health, employment, or human services agencies participating in the passenger transportation planning process. 42 | P a g e | AAMPO • Public Transit Infrastructure Grant Fund. This is a state program that can fund transit facility projects that involve new construction, reconstruction, or remodeling. To qualify, projects must include a vertical component. 43 | P a g e | AAMPO Appendix D – STBG & TAP Application Forms 44 | P a g e | AAMPO 45 | P a g e | AAMPO 46 | P a g e | AAMPO 47 | P a g e | AAMPO The Ames Area MPO utilizes Iowa DOT Form 240004 for its regional TAP applications. This form can be found at the following link: • Iowa DOT Form 240004 48 | P a g e | AAMPO Appendix E – Public Comments The Ames Area MPO did not receive any public comments on the Draft FFY23-26 TIP during the public comment period or at the virtually held public input session. MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL MEETING OF THE AMES CITY COUNCIL AMES, IOWA JUNE 21, 2022 The Special Meeting of the Ames City Council was called to order by Mayor John Haila at 6:00 p.m. on the 21st day of June 2022, in the City Council Chambers in City Hall, 515 Clark Avenue, pursuant to law. Present were Council Members Gloria Betcher, Bronwyn Beatty-Hansen, Amber Corrieri, Tim Gartin, Rachel Junck, and Anita Rollins. Ex officio Member Bryce Garman was also present. RESOLUTION APPROVING CHANGE ORDER NO. 1 TO RESCO OF ELKHART, IOWA IN THE AMOUNT OF $18,247.64 (inclusive of sales tax) FOR PURCHASE OF TRANSFORMERS FOR ELECTRIC SERVICES IN ACCORDANCE WITH REVISED UNIT PRICES Mayor Haila stated Don Kom, Director of Electric was present if the City Council had questions for Staff. There were no questions. MOTION TO APPROVE RESOLUTION: Moved by Gartin, seconded by Junck to accept the Resolution approving the change order as submitted. Roll Call Vote: 6-0 Motion declared carried unanimously. HEARING ON PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO ZONING ORDINANCE SECTION 19.809 REGARDING CAMPUSTOWN SERVICE CENTER (CSC) REQUIREMENTS THAT 50% OF EACH BUILDING FAÇADE SHALL HAVE CLAY BRICK: The Mayor opened the public hearing and stated that it has been requested by Staff to continue the hearing until June 28, 2022 Moved by Beatty-Hansen, seconded by Junck, to continue the hearing to June 28, 2022. Vote on Motion: 6-0. Motion declared carried unanimously. WORKSHOP REGARDING INCLUSION AND DIVERSITY IN ESTABLISHING ASSET FUNDING PRIORITIES Assistant City Manager Deb Schildroth recapped the purpose of the workshop. She stated that the City Council approved the Analysis of Social Services Evaluation Team (ASSET) Funding Priorities for Fiscal Year 2022/23 and took action on considering ways in which the City Council’s vision and goals, related to inclusion and creating a diverse community, should or should not be used to establish the Fiscal Year 2023/24 ASSET priorities. This action stemmed from a discussion at the November 10, 2020, City Council meeting where recommendations from the “Policing in Ames…A Path Forward” report were considered. One of the recommendations in that report was, “If the City Council wishes to do so, the allocation of ASSET funds could be reprioritized in the next budget cycle and concentrated in human services that better meet the City Council’s social justice goals.” In lieu of reprioritizing the ASSET funding allocation, the City Council approved 2 including social justice into the discussion of ASSET priorities at the November 10, 2020, meeting. This was briefly revisited a year ago and, at that time, the City Council stated they wished to have a Workshop that is dedicated to this topic so it can be discussed thoroughly in time for the Fiscal Year 2023/24 ASSET priorities. Ms. Schildroth stated that the ASSET priorities are typically presented to the City Council in July after being reviewed by City staff and volunteers. She elaborated that the discussion tonight is to see if there is anything the City Council wants included as the priorities are drafted. Assistant City Manager Schildroth stated that the priorities will then be presented in July for final consideration. Mayor Haila asked Assistant City Manager Schildroth to highlight what work is being done at this time regarding the topics listed in the memo from Staff. Ms. Schildroth reviewed the types of reporting the ASSET volunteers ask the agencies to complete through the budget submittal process. She noted that the volunteers ask for the number of people being served that have mental or physical disabilities and the number of people that fall within certain levels of the federal poverty guidelines. The ASSET volunteers are also in year two of asking agencies to report on the number of people they are serving in race and ethnicity groups, as explained my Ms. Schildroth. She stated caution in the data regarding race and ethnicity groups because most of that reporting was during the pandemic and services were limited or not provided during that time, thus that information is not the best base line to use but the ASSET volunteers are asking agencies to continue to collect that information so a more solid and useful trend line can be established moving forward. Council Member Betcher asked about volunteers reviewing the data collected and then relating it back to the City Council priorities, the services needed, and the rebalancing of allocations. Her concern was that the City Council has not examined their role in the funding process and is not asking enough or the right questions. She said that because of this, the City Council is leaving those actions to the ASSET volunteers or to the agencies themselves. Ms. Betcher stated that she is not sure that is an accurate depiction of what is happening with the process. She asked Assistant City Manager Schildroth what she sees as the City Council’s role exploring those priorities with the volunteers and the wider community. Ms. Schildroth stated that ASSET is intended to be a funder driven process. The funders have the authority to set policies, which are reviewed on an annual basis, and any changes made to the Policies and Procedures Manual is presented to the funders for final approval. The funder priorities are another area of the policy setting process, and each funder handles that differently in terms of involving volunteers and areas of service to focus on, Ms. Schildroth explained. She noted that recently one of the sources of information utilized was the 2020 Community Needs Assessment. An ASSET agency looking at a new or expanded service is asked to refer to the most recent assessment, to justify their request. Ms. Schildroth explained she is the liaison between the City Council, the ASSET Administration Team and all the volunteers. She stated that she communicates the conversations and ideas that the City Council discusses and the information that comes forth during the budgeting process to serve as a guide during Agency hearing. She also stated ASSET holds a Joint Funders meeting in January and September. Ms. Schildroth explained that those 3 meetings are the perfect venue for funders to bring up issues and items of concerns that they want to discuss with the Administration Team, volunteers, or other funders. Council Member Betcher asked if the 2020 Community Needs Assessment is the primary way the City is getting information from the larger community about what the City Council’s priorities need to focus on or if information is gathered from other surveys or agencies. Ms. Schildroth stated that it is mainly from agencies. She explained that the ASSET volunteers ask the agencies to provide outcomes. The agencies also conducted individual surveys on the constituents they serve on quality of services, access to services, and satisfaction of those services. A Clear Impact score is calculated for each agency. The scorecard database rests with United Way of Story County, and it is funded by Story County, the City of Ames, and United Way for the purposes of collecting outcomes and reporting information. Assistant City Manager Schildroth noted that the ASSET volunteers can provide the City Council access to the scorecards to review the agency outcomes and identify trends lines. Council Member Corrieri noted that agencies are required to meet with Anneke Mundel annually to review the agency outcomes and the United Way and ASSET priorities. She stated that adjustment to services are made if needed. Council Member Betcher stated her concern is that she doesn’t see the City Council asking questions about the impact of what the City Council is doing. Ms. Betcher stated as the City moves to hire a Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) Coordinator, she is hoping that person looks at the community strategic plan and that all services will start looking at the way the City budgets and interacts. She feels that the City Council is distanced from the process and the City Council is not asking the questions about how City funds are impacting the community. Ms. Betcher stated that she also does not think that City Council is asking the community members what they need in terms of priorities from the City Council. She mentioned the need to have meetings to listen to citizen input on priorities for the City Council. She wondered if the City Council needs to ask those questions or if that needs to be the responsibility of the DEI Coordinator. Ms. Betcher then referred to the memo she sent to the Council Members that included examples of questions that the City Council might think about asking. She would like the City Council to discuss the memo because the City Council has the responsibility to make some sort of stand on the topic. Council Member Rollins asked for clarification on what kind of data the ASSET volunteers are gathering from the agencies. Assistant City Manager Schildroth clarified data from the Budget Manual. She highlighted that the Budget Manual explores age, race ethnicity, income level, mental health, physical disabilities, and location of residence. This is information within the agency’s budget explained Ms. Schildroth, and some of the information will be moved to the scorecard so a trendline can be created. Ms. Schildroth noted that ASSET no longer collects gender data. Outcome information is also included on the scorecard, i.e. what kind of an impact is MICA’s food pantry having in the community. Each scorecard has three years of data, which includes the pandemic and thus is skewed, explained Ms. Schildroth. Council Member Corrieri said she is seeing the Mainstream Living data just starting to show results. She stated Mainstream Living is submitting the same information to the City, County and 4 State. Mainstream Living is also tracking people who can find and keep affordable and safe housing, explained Ms. Corrieri. Council Member Rollins discussed trying to identify the gaps between ASSET and the City Council’s Priorities. Assistant City Manager Schildroth stated ASSET focuses on services and identifying those services through the priorities. Each ASSET volunteer is a liaison to an agency and is required to visit one or two agencies in the fall after the budget has been submitted and attend a board meeting of that agency. Ms. Schildroth discussed the assorted topics the agencies collect data on and noted that ASSET asks them to identify their strengths, and if it meets the projections that had been set. She stated that ASSET also asks if they did not receive ASSET funding, how it would impact their services and operations. She noted that ASSET wants the agencies to be able to diversify their funding, and to identify where else can they get funding. Mayor Haila inquired about the County wide survey and mentioned that there is a process in place the City Council goes through to set priorities. Ms. Schildroth stated that the Community Needs Assessment, which started in late 2019 and wrapped up almost a year later during the pandemic, was used primarily for the last review of priorities. ASSET allowed an extension because of the pandemic and saw mental health push to the top. ASSET also looked at the Annual Resident Satisfaction Survey, but the data was a year old. During the agency hearings in January, ASSET asked the agencies what they were seeing as their priorities; the common theme right now is workforce as there is not enough staff to fill the vacancies. Council Member Corrieri indicated that United Way of Story County holds several listening sessions with representatives from agencies as well as other representatives they invite from the community when discussing priorities. Mayor Haila said there is an alignment as well between Iowa State University, Story County, United Way of Story County, and the City of Ames where similar priorities can be seen. There was discussion around how people access the available services and how community members are made aware of what is available. It was noted that marketing and promotion happen on different levels, with word of mouth being the primary way people hear about services and also the 211 hotline that provides information and resource referral services. It was discussed that Ames is a service rich community and the school district is instrumental in referring families to agencies as well as the Department of Human Services. Additionally, it was mentioned that there is a list provided at the customer service counter at City Hall and agencies cross refer individuals. Mayor Haila thought seeing the scorecard would be useful. Council Member Corrieri stated that all scorecard information is on United Way of Story County website and if the City Council members would read through the scorecard they would have a solid understanding of the functionality of the services provided. It was noted that ASSET has allowed the agencies to identify what data points they want to collect information on, which is always being reviewed and enhanced. 5 The City Council members discussed if anyone has heard from individuals that have been discriminated against, unable to access services, or not aware of the services. Council Member Rollins noted that an opportunity to review the data is a good way to identify if there are any gaps and if so why, is it a language barrier or something else. The City Council also discussed how to collect the data, review it, and then determine gaps since the agencies are collecting real time data and information, which is put on the scorecard. It was agreed that the City Council needs to determine what they want to do with that information. Council Member Beatty-Hansen asked how the City Council can keep this discussion on the forefront and not forget about it down the road. The City Council members discussed hosting goal setting sessions twice a year, and potentially adding ASSET Priorities as a conversation at that time or perhaps the DEI coordinator would have suggestions as well. First, The City’s ASSET volunteers review the current priorities based on what they learned during the agency hearings in January and determine if changes need to be made. The volunteer’s feedback is provided to Council typically at the first Council meeting in July, if needed. Priorities need to be finalized so that they can be presented to the agencies at the annual agency training in August as well as the volunteer orientation in September. Mayor Haila said specificity and clarity are key. Ms. Schildroth indicated prioritizing the categories was a step the City Council took a couple years ago, not only the three ASSET funding priorities but each of the services listed under the priorities. Council Member Beatty Hansen suggested the City Council should change “low to moderate” income to encompass all three of the priorities. It was noted that NAMI services are not covered by insurance. Mayor Haila stated that there is a mental health epidemic in the Ames community, as well as nationwide, especially for youth. He highlighted that there may be youth who are not getting the help they need and if the low to moderate umbrella is moved, it will it adversely affect a group. Assistant City Manager Schildroth stated there are 32 local agencies with well over 100 available services. She noted that the City of Ames is not funding all of them but is funding most of them. YSS is the primary organization within the ASSET process, as explained by Ms. Schildroth, that provides mental health services and outpatient substance abuse. She stated that the ARC of Story County and NAMI are advocate organizations, which serve individuals with mental health issues, and brain injury and intellectual disability services, which services two different population groups through advocacy, education, and support. Mayor Haila asked what the City Council members objective was and how they would like to direct staff to proceed. Moved by Council Member Beaty-Hansen, seconded by Betcher, to strike the phrase “low to moderate income” from Priority #2 and add a general phrase encompassing all three priorities with emphasis on social justice and low to moderate income. 6 The City Council then discussed the definition of social justice. Council Member Gartin stated that ASSET has served the Ames community for several years. The volunteers need clarity in their mission so do not ask them to define and apply social justice, he said. Ms. Schildroth noted that the volunteers would ask for a threshold regarding what the City Council looking for as far as underrepresentation. Discussion was had around how to track and collect data as some agencies have big staff, and some agencies have one person staff so the City Council cannot ask them to provide same data. Council Member Beatty-Hansen withdrew her motion. Council Member Beatty-Hansen moved to move the qualifier “low to moderate income” from Priority #2 to be an overarching qualifier of all three categories. Seconded by Betcher. The City Council discussed the clarity of that motion. Beatty Hansen clarified on Priority #2 where it states “meet basic needs, with an emphasis on low to moderate income” would move “low to moderate income” to the top under the title so it would be in effect for all three of the priorities and not just Priority #2. Council Member Gartin asked Ms. Schildroth how that would change the way the volunteers did their work. Ms. Schildroth stated she believes it is an assumption that the agencies are currently providing services with an emphasis on low to moderate income. Council Member Gartin asked if the City Council is moving for a change or clarifying what is already being done. Council Member Beatty-Hansen said clarifying what is already being done, stating Ms. Schildroth said that was assumption volunteers are already making. Mayor Haila confirmed the City Council is changing “Categories 1, 2, and 3 are in priority order as are the lettered services in each category with an emphasis on low to moderate income”. Mayor Haila asked the City Council if they have any questions regarding this wording. Vote on Motion: 6-0. Motion declared carried unanimously. Council Member Beatty-Hansen inquired about removing the word “quality” before childcare on Letter D of Priority #2. Beatty-Hansen moved to strike the word “quality” from on Letter D of Priority #2. Seconded by Betcher. Vote on Motion: 6-0. Motion declared carried unanimously. Ms. Schildroth asked if she could share these changes with the ASSET volunteers. Council Member Betcher moved to get a recommendation from staff on an appropriate time for the City Council to have a discussion like tonight’s on an annual basis so that the City Council understand the ASSET priorities and how they align with the City Council goals. Seconded by Rollins. Council Member Gartin said the City Council needs to have an annual time where members step back and ask how they are doing. 7 City Manager Schainker said that the City Council can have this discussion every year at the priority setting meeting for ASSET or it can be made a discussion for a City Council workshop. Betcher withdrew the motion. Moved by Betcher to have a City Council Workshop on ASSET priorities and outcome data in June of 2023. Seconded by Gartin. Voted on motion: 6-0. Motion declared carried unanimously. Council Member Gartin encouraged the City Council to volunteer with these agencies to better understand the needs of our community. DISPOSITION OF COMMUNICATION TO COUNCIL: Mayor Haila noted that there was one item to consider. The item was a request from Kevin J. Foley, Executive Director Des Moines International Airport for local support for the Des Moines International Airport terminal project. City Manager Schainker recommended that the City Council refer the item to staff for staff to respond directly to the individuals who made the request. City Manager Schainker told the City Council that there are three options: deny the request, invite the Director to a future Council meeting, or delay a response until budget time. The City of Ames’ share would be approximately $900,000, which would be paid over four years in approximately $250,000 increments. Mr. Schainker indicated he understands this would be a difficult decision for the City Council to make. Council Member Gartin asked Mr. Schainker if the City had been asked to fund something like this before. Mr. Schainker said he does not recall funding a project like this in the past. He noted that Ames residents all use the Des Moines airport and that the City would like to participate in regional projects, but this is a big request. He explained that the City has sustainability projects to work on. Mr. Gartin said the airport is an amenity that is important to Ames, but it is difficult to understand a cost benefit analysis on this. Mayor Haila stated there are rumors that legislation is going to come back with a hard cap on property tax again. He said that there are issues with the local option sales tax and guaranteeing that the State will fund the investment back to the City. Mayor Haila said the City Council are all elected to represent the citizens of Ames, and there is pressure to balance the City’s budget. Mr. Schainker stated many projects are being delayed and he is supportive of regional growth, but many projects need to be completed within the City. Council Member Gartin moved to bring back at budget time in context of other priorities of the Community. Seconded by Council Member Beatty-Hansen. Council Member Betcher stated that the City Council has enough issues and is concerned if projects within the City of Ames can be funded. Mr. Schainker said the City Council could allow 8 a presentation in November or December during a budget guideline session. Mayor Haila stated that the City Council set policy that December 31st is the cut off request for funding. Mayor Haila stated the motion on the floor is Kevin Foley, Executive Director of Des Moines International Airport make a presentation before the end of 2022 and it has been seconded. Vote on Motion: 1-5. Voting Aye: Gartin. Voting Nay: Beatty-Hansen, Betcher, Corrieri, Junck, Rollins. Motion failed. Moved by Beatty-Hansen, seconded by Corrieri, to deny request for presentation. Vote on Motion: 5-1. Voting Aye: Beatty-Hansen, Betcher, Corrieri, Junck, Rollins. Voting Nay: Gartin. Motion carried. COUNCIL COMMENTS: Rollins thanked everyone who attended the Juneteeth event. She thought they had a great first collaborative community event. Gartin expressed kudos to Rollins for leading the Juneteeth event. He also asked the Mayor to mention what he will be doing Sunday June 26, 2022. Betcher thanked the City Council for the discussion to ASSET priorities. She also thanked everyone who collaborated on the Juneteeth event, saying it was a great community event. Betcher mentioned that her and Beatty-Hansen will bring back recommendations for the staff wage package for the next fiscal year at the next meeting. She said that she will be sending information on that prior to the meeting. Mayor Haila talked about the Ames Triathlon at Ada Hayden on June 26, 2022. He will be offering opening remarks at that event. He has also interviewed two individuals for the Ames Resident Police Advisory Committee (ARPAC), with more in the coming week, and will be submitting recommendations to the City Council on seven individuals in the City Council packet next week. Garmin stated he had been gathering comments from student government members about Welcome Back weekend. ADJOURNMENT: Moved by Betcher, seconded by Beatty Hansen, to adjourn the meeting at 7:47 p.m. Vote on Motion: 6-0. Motion declared carried unanimously. __________________________________ ____________________________________ Renee Hall, Recording Secretary John A. Haila, Mayor __________________________________ Diane R. Voss, City Clerk MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE JOINT MEETING OF THE AMES HUMAN RELATIONS COMMISSION AND REGULAR MEETING OF THE AMES CITY COUNCIL AMES, IOWA JUNE 28, 2022 JOINT MEETING OF THE AMES HUMAN RELATIONS COMMISSION AND AMES CITY COUNCIL The Joint Meeting of the Ames City Council and Ames Human Relations Commission was called to order by Mayor John Haila at 6:00 p.m. on the 28th day of June, 2022, in the City Council Chambers in City Hall, 515 Clark Avenue, pursuant to law. In addition to the Mayor, City Council Members Bronwyn Beatty-Hansen, Gloria Betcher, Amber Corrieri, Tim Gartin, Rachel Junck, and Anita Rollins were present. Bryce Garman, ex officio, was also present. Representing the Ames Human Relations Commission (AHRC) were Jahmai Fisher, Wayne Clinton, Madesh Samanu, and Chunhui Chen. PRESENTATION OF ANNUAL REPORT: Jahmai Fisher, Ames Human Relations Commission (AHRC) Chairperson, provided highlights of the Annual Report. She noted that last year the Commission focused on visibility and representation as one of its main goals. It was noted that in the Annual Report it highlights the number of events the Commission Members had attended to let citizens know who they are. Another area of focus was education and highlighting the different members of the community. Ms. Fisher stated that one area that they had noted from last year’s Iowa Civil Rights Commission Report (ICRC) was that a lot of complaints were coming from the employment side, and the Commission is still strategizing on ways to help. Moving forward, the Commission will continue to increase its visibility, education, and partnering with businesses around town. Council Member Beatty-Hansen asked what upcoming events the Human Relations Commission would be attending. Ms. Fisher said they will be attending National Night Out and WelcomeFest. Council Member Betcher stated the Commission was working with the Ames Chamber of Commerce on the Symposium for Building Inclusive Organizations and wanted to know if there was potential to expand the partnership and provide education to the businesses in order to help bring down the employment-related complaints. Ms. Fisher commented that she believed there were opportunities for the Commission to provide more education, and they are working on brainstorming ideas. Commission Member Clinton stated that the businesses that attend the Symposium tend to be the same ones every year. He explained that the Report they get doesn’t list which businesses are having issues. The AHRC has done a great job in expanding its horizons and will continue to do so. Assistant City Manager Deb Schildroth mentioned that on Page 12 of the Report is the AHRC 2020/22 Strategic Plan. The AHRC will be working on revising and renewing the Strategic Plan. Under Strategic Goal B - Information and Analysis, Objective 2 states “AHRC will partner with City and Community members to learn about discrimination and how to decrease the risk,” specifically partnering with community employers and human resource specialists. She stated that the groundwork that has been done during the past year was helpful to get people to understand what the Human Relations Commission does and what its mission is. Council Member Gartin asked if the AHRC works with ISU and their efforts to promote a diverse and welcoming community. Ms. Fisher said they did and explained that there have been some changes in leadership. That person is still new and learning their role. Mr. Gartin mentioned that he had met the new person at the Juneteenth celebration and was told ISU is getting ready to kick off its new Climate Action survey, so he felt it would be a good time to partner with ISU. Ms. Fisher commented that once they know what the survey is going to look like, the Commission can look at how they can partner with ISU to support each other. Council member Rollins noted that the Strategic Plan was comprehensive and wanted to know what else the Council or the City could do to make sure that the AHRC can be as effective as it can be. Ms. Fisher mentioned the AHRC had discovered, while supporting some of the cultural/heritage month celebrations, the AHRC have learned what their needs are and a lot of time that is resources and/or support. She noted that they are looking over their budget and trying to find the best way to use the funds to support partnerships and goodwill. The AHRC wants to think about intentional resource management and doing so in a meaningful way to help foster sustainable relationships. Commission Member Samanu said that his term is ending on AHRC as he graduated from ISU. He thanked the Mayor and Council for all their support. Moved by Betcher, seconded by Corrieri, to accept the Ames Human Relations Commission Annual Report. Roll Call Vote: 6-0. Motion declared carried unanimously. AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE AMES HUMAN RELATIONS COMMISSION AND IOWA CIVIL RIGHTS COMMISSION REGARDING INTAKE AND INVESTIGATION OF CIVIL RIGHTS COMPLAINTS: Assistant City Manager Deb Schildroth stated this is an annual Agreement that runs on a fiscal year. The Agreement with the Iowa Civil Rights Commission is to have them manage the intake and resolution of civil rights complaints. The Agreement allows the City to use these resources to assist complainants with obtaining and filling out complaint forms and ensuring that they are complete and valid. Moved by Gartin, seconded by Rollins, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 22-340 approving the Agreement between the Ames Human Relations Commission and the Iowa Civil Rights Commission regarding the intake and investigation of Civil Rights Complaints. Roll Call Vote: 6-0. Resolution declared adopted unanimously, signed by the Mayor, and hereby made a portion of these Minutes. COMMISSION COMMENTS: None. ADJOURNMENT: Moved by Corrieri, seconded by Junck, to adjourn the Joint Meeting at 2 6:23p.m. REGULAR MEETING OF THE AMES CITY COUNCIL The Regular Meeting of the Ames City Council was called to order by Mayor John Haila at 6:25 p.m. on June 28, 2022, in the City Council Chambers in City Hall, 515 Clark Avenue, pursuant to law. Present were Council Members Gloria Betcher, Bronwyn Beatty-Hansen, Amber Corrieri, Tim Gartin, Rachel Junck, and Anita Rollins. Ex officio Member Bryce Garman was also in attendance. PRESENTATION ON AMES WATER AND NEW PER-AND POLYFLUOROALKYL SUBSTANCES (PFAS) STANDARDS: Water and Pollution Control Director John Dunn stated that last week a Press Release was issued regarding the new U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) health advisories that were issued for per-and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS). Director Dunn explained what PFAS are. PFAS compounds have been extensively used for more than 70 years in applications such as: non-stick coatings; stain-resistant carpeting; water-repelling clothing and fabrics; paper packaging for food; metal plating operations; and, aqueous fire-fighting foams (AFFFs). He said that a challenge is that the carbon-fluorine bond is incredibly difficult to break; it is one of the strongest chemical bonds known. There is emerging evidence that indicates that PFAS is a health risk at lower levels than the EPA had originally established. Director Dunn said that the health advisory levels are not regulatory limits, but are advisory limits. Before June 15, 2022, “the combined concentration of PFOA and PFOS should be compared to the 70 parts per trillion health advisory level.” After June 15, 2022, the EPA significantly lowered the health advisory levels to four-parts per quadrillion. He commented that when comparing the City of Ames results to the new standards, the City cannot measure anywhere near where the new health advisory levels are. Staff had done four rounds of sampling since December 2021, and when comparing the samples to the new standards, the City of Ames is comfortably below the new health advisory levels for PFBS (Perfluorobutane sulfonate) and HFPA (Hexafluoropropylene oxide); however, the City is above the new standards for PFOA and PFOS. Director Dunn stated that staff has been taking action since January 2022, but there are more questions than answers right now. He said that the first thing they can do is to be a transparent utility when it comes to PFAS levels. There are five specific things that staff is going to do in order to be transparent: 1) Have a dedicated website page for PFAS level tests results; 2) Performing in-depth testing of all City wells; 3) Signed a Cooperative Agreement with researchers from Iowa State University to do a source characterization for the City; 4) Modify the City’s source water and stopped the use of Well 17 due to higher than normal levels of PFAS; and 5) Evaluate treatment technology options and costs. Director Dunn stated he wanted to answer the two most common questions they have been receiving. The first question was “Is water with PFAS safe?” He said that the EPA put out a statement that said “Current scientific research suggests that exposure to high levels of certain PFAS may lead to adverse health outcomes. However, research is still ongoing to determine how different levels of 3 exposure to different PFAS can lead to a variety of health effects.” The other question was “Should I drink bottled water?” The US EPA stated, “We are not recommending bottled water solely based on PFAS that exceed the health advisory levels.” However, the International Bottled Water Association (IBWA) said that there are no U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Standards of Quality or testing requirements for PFAS in bottles.” The USDA controls the bottle water companies not the EPA. Council Member Beatty-Hansen asked if the City had moved to a fire-fighting foam that is non- PFAS. Director Dunn indicated that Fire Chief Rich Higgins had told him that several years ago the Fire Department had switched over to non-PFAS foam. Ms. Beatty-Hansen asked if other industrial lubricants were still allowed to be used. Director Dunn said that they can still be used, but the manufacturers of the chemicals have started to voluntarily remove the chemical from use. Council Member Betcher asked about the testing and trying to understand how the testing equipment can’t even test at the new levels. Director Dunn mentioned that the detection limit is 1.9 parts per trillion (ppt) so for the two new chemicals (PFBS and HFPA) they can test down to the new health advisory limits, but are unable to get anywhere close to the new advisory levels of PFOA and PFAS. Ms. Betcher said she is not sure how the City can adequately monitor the levels if unable to test down to the levels needed. Mr. Dunn commented that every utility in the country is going to land in one of two buckets; it will either be above the detection limits or it will be below the detection limit. Council Member Gartin asked how the City of Ames compared to other parts of Iowa. Director Dunn stated that the Department of Natural Resources started doing testing in rounds. The City of Ames was part of the first round and the highest concentration was 63, which was in Central City. All the rest of the utilities were similar to Ames. Council Member Junck wanted to know where Well 17 was and if it was known where the source of the chemicals came from. Director Dunn noted that Well 17 is on ISU Campus and is located just south of College Creek by the Recreation Center. He said that he is not sure of what caused the contamination, but based on ground water flow, there is the suspicion that it might be coming from the old fire training safety school that was on Haber Road. Director Dunn will be meeting with ISU to discuss the levels in Well 17. Council Member Gartin inquired how the community was being notified about the changes. Director Dunn indicated a Press Release was done along with social media posts. He indicated that communication will be continuous. Director Dunn referred anyone to www.cityofames.org/pfasfor anyone who wants more information. The Mayor noted that they were working from an Amended Agenda. Two items were added to the Consent Agenda: “Motion approving salaries for Council Appointees for FY 2022-23,” and a Resolution setting the date of public hearing for July 12, 2022, to consider vacation of the existing 10' Electric Easement at 1404 and 1410 Buckeye located in Lots 8 & 9, Southwood Subdivision. 4 CONSENT AGENDA: Moved by Betcher, seconded by Gartin, to approve the following items on the Consent Agenda. 1.Motion approving payment of claims 2.Motion approving Minutes of Regular Meeting held June 14, 2022 3.Motion approving Report of Change Orders for period June 1 - 15, 2022 4.Motion certifying Civil Service candidates 5.Motion approving salaries for Council Appointees for FY 2022-23 6.Motion approving new 5-Day Class C Liquor License with Outdoor Service (July 7-11, 2022) Your Private Bartender, LLC, (for Midnight Madness) at Ames Fitness Center South, 3600 Grand Avenue 7.Motion approving new 5-Day Class C Liquor License - (July 14-18, 2022) - Your Private Bartender, LLC, at Reiman Gardens, 1407 University Boulevard 8.Motion approving new Class B Native Wine Permit with Sunday Service - Oak Lane Candle Co., LLC, 121 Main Street 9.Motion approving new Class C Liquor License with Sunday Service - Celaya, LLC 217 S Duff 10.Motion approving the renewal of the following Beer Permits, Wine Permits and Liquor Licenses: a.Class C Liquor License with Sunday Sales - Red Lobster #0747, 1100 Buckeye Avenue b.Class C Liquor License with Sunday Sales - Welch Ave Station, 207 Welch Avenue c.Class C Beer Permit with Class B Native Wine Permit and Sunday Sales - Hampton Inn & Suites Ames, 2100 SE 16th Street d.Class B Beer with Sunday Sales - Panchero’s Mexican Grill, 1310 S Duff Avenue 11.RESOLUTION NO. 22-341 approving and adopting Supplement No. 2022-3 to the Ames Municipal Code 12.RESOLUTION NO. 22-342 setting date of public hearing for July 12, 2022, regarding granting an underground Electrical Utility Easement to Interstate Power and Light Company on the Prairie View Industrial Lift Station site located at 207 S. Teller Avenue 13.RESOLUTION NO. 22-343 setting date of public hearing for July 12, 2022, to consider vacation of the existing 10' Electric Easement at 1404 and 1410 Buckeye located in Lots 8 & 9, Southwood Subdivision 14.RESOLUTION NO. 22-344 approving Agreement for Joint and Cooperative Action for Waste Disposal Operations by Boone County and the City of Ames through June 30, 2025 15.RESOLUTION NO. 22-345 approving the addition of ten 45-watt LED street lights on 35-foot dark bronze steel street light poles in the Domani Subdivision at a total cost of $78.50 plus energy charge and taxes per month to the existing Alliant Energy Electric Tariff #1 16.RESOLUTION NO. 346 accepting quote from Holmes Murphy & Associates for coverage with Midwest Employers Casualty Company for Excess Worker’s Compensation Insurance Renewal for 2022/23 at a renewal premium of $135,175 17.RESOLUTION NO. 22-347 approving Joint Use Parking Agreement and Parking Easement Agreement between Hope Lutheran Church at 3329 Lincoln Way, and First National Bank at 3334 Lincoln Way on Wednesday evenings to allow for expansion of the Church’s worship area 18.RESOLUTION NO. 22-348 approving request from Emergency Assistance to close Clark 5 Avenue between 6th and 7th Street from 1:00 p.m. - 9:00 p.m. on Sunday, July 3, 2022, for “25 Years in the Neighborhood” Celebration 19.RESOLUTION NO. 22-349 approving preliminary plans and specifications for Cooling Tower Blowdown Sanitary Sewer Modifications, with liquidated damages, setting July 27, 2022, as bid due date and August 9, 2022, as date of public hearing 20.RESOLUTION NO. 22-350 awarding contract to Diamond Oil Company of Des Moines, Iowa, for Oils, Lubricants, and Fluid Analysis for Fleet Services and Transit in accordance with unit prices bid for fiscal year 2022/23 with the option of four additional 12-month renewal periods 21.RESOLUTION NO. 22-351 awarding contract to Houck Advertising of Shoreview, Minnesota, for Transit Advertising Services for contract period of July 31, 2022, through June 30, 2025, with the possibility of two additional 12-month renewal periods 22.RESOLUTION NO. 22-352 awarding contract to Ames Trenching and Excavating of Ames, Iowa, for Emergency Utility Repair and Other Services for various City Departments from date of award to April 1, 2023 23.Purchase of Electric Meters: a.RESOLUTION NO. 22-353 approving renewal of contract with Vision Metering of York, South Carolina, for purchase of electric meters in Groups 1, 3, and 4, in accordance with unit prices bid b.RESOLUTION NO. 22-354 approving renewal of contract with VanWert Company of Grundy Center, Iowa, for purchase of electric meters in Groups 2, 5, and 6 in accordance with unit prices bid c.RESOLUTION NO. 22-355 authorizing staff to purchase electric meters from the contracts listed above as needed, with payments based on unit prices bid and actual quantities ordered, plus applicable sales taxes, in a total amount not to exceed $119,579 24.RESOLUTION NO. 22-356 approving contract renewal for supplying diesel fuel to the City’s gas turbine units to Diamond Oil Company, Inc., of Des Moines, Iowa, in an amount not to exceed $300,000 25.Asbestos Maintenance Services for the Power Plant: a.RESOLUTION NO. 22-357 approving renewal of contract with Earth Services & Abatement, LLC, of Des Moines, Iowa, from July 1, 2022, through June 30, 2023, in an amount not to exceed $150,000 b.RESOLUTION NO. 22-358 approving Performance Bond 26.RESOLUTION NO. 22-359 approving contract and bond for 2022/23 Right-of-Way Restoration 27.RESOLUTION NO. 22-360 accepting completion of contract with Henkel Construction Company of Mason City, Iowa, for Unit 8 Precipitator Roof Replacement 28.RESOLUTION NO. 22-361 accepting completion of public improvements and reducing security for Hayden’s Crossing, 2nd Addition Roll Call Vote: 6-0. Motions/Resolutions declared carried/adopted unanimously, signed by the Mayor, and hereby made a portion of these Minutes. PUBLIC FORUM: Mayor Haila opened Public Forum. 6 Lucas Bleyle, 4212 Phoenix Street, Ames, said he was present on behalf of the Ames Climate Action Team (ACAT). He said the Team was excited about the steps that the City has taken regarding climate change in the community. Mr. Bleyle wanted to highlight one way the City could start working toward its goals. ACAT believes that Ames can mitigate its contribution to climate change through innovative city planning. Ames is already moving in the right direction with the Ames Plan 2040. The challenge now is that Ames development actually reflects these goals into the future and does so in a way to encourage low-carbon development. Mr. Bleyle said it wouldn’t be enough to switch the City’s energy system to renewables or the internal combustion engine cars to electric vehicles, but comprehensive changes to the design of the City to encourage walkability and alternative transportation while reducing the emissions from residential buildings. The Ames Climate Action Team is working on ideas to do this and will present them to the City Council at a later date. ACAT wanted to emphasize the importance of designs and to factor climate change into every decision that is being made. Mr. Bleyle said that some questions to think about were: 1) Could parking requirements be changed to encourage alternative transportation; 2) Could the City adjust residential density limits to encourage lower carbon development; and 3) Could the City decrease minimum lot sizes, to reduce the per-capita emission? He indicated that he didn’t have the answers to these questions. Richard Deyo, 505-8th Street, #2, Ames, said, “You are better than Einstein, you are better than Jesus, you are better than God, and you are better than I am.” He said that Einstein used to say he is God. It was his idea to have all the world’s political, military and religious leaders experience a nuclear explosion. He felt that now-a-days people are made to act like computers and computers like people. Mr. Deyo said he didn’t know how to relate to people, and they don’t know how to relate to him. Two weeks ago, a placard was placed on his property that Hunziker wanted to do something to the back of the property and when he went to Hunziker to find out what, they didn’t know what he was talking about. The Mayor closed public forum when no one else came forward to speak. CONFIRMING APPOINTMENT OF MEMBERS TO THE AMES RESIDENT POLICE ADVISORY COMMITTEE: Mayor Haila gave a brief recap of the selection process and mentioned that there had been 63 applications. Using the requirements outlined in the Ordinance, each application was evaluated, and eight individuals were selected to be interviewed. One of the candidates ended up withdrawing due to Ames Resident Police Advisory Committee (ARPAC) time commitments. At the conclusion of the interview process, the Mayor was impressed with each candidate’s sincerity, expressed dedication to objectivity, desire to serve the Ames community through ARPAC, and willingness to commit personal time to participate in extensive training. The list of recommended appointees met the intent of the Ordinance’s “Diversity of the Community” requirements. The following individuals were recommended for appointment: 1.Roberto Dubiel - One year term through March 31, 2023 2. Emily Rebollozo - One year term through March 31, 2023 3.Virginia Speight - Two year term through March 31, 2024 4.Chunhui Xiang - Two year term through March 31, 2024 7 5.William Arce - Two year term through March 31, 2024 6.Edna Clinton - Three year term through March 31, 2025 7.Tim Rasmussen - Three year term through March 31, 2025 Council Member Betcher asked how the 63 applications compared to other boards and commission applications. The Mayor indicated there are normally around 30-40 applications received a year and this has been the largest number of applications received. Council Member Junck commented that when the Council first thought of creating ARPAC she wanted to voice the idea to have students be a part of the Committee, but out of the 63 applicants there were not any ISU students who applied, but she is hopeful that in upcoming years, the City will add ISU students hom may apply. Moved by Gartin, seconded by Corrieri, to confirm the recommended appointment of members to the Ames Resident Policy Advisory Committee. Roll Call Vote: 6-0. Resolution declared adopted unanimously, signed by the Mayor, and hereby made a portion of these Minutes. DISCUSSION REGARDING “CYCLONE WELCOME WEEKEND:” City Manager Steve Schainker said that the Saturday before the first day of Iowa State classes had become known as “801 Day.” This unofficial “celebration” has morphed into a raucous day-long event that has resulted in numerous complaints from residents in the community. Fearing that some of the behavior exhibited during this day will result in injury to participants, the Mayor, Police Chief, and the City Manager had been working with ISU President Wintersteen and administrative staff in an attempt to create a new event that will encourage more positive behavior. As a result of these discussions, the University is planning to introduce a new program called “Cyclone Welcome Weekend” on Friday, August 19, 2022, and Saturday, August 20, 2022. The two day even will be designed to help welcome new and returning students to Ames and ISU at the start of the 2022/23 academic year through fun and safe events. Events being considered include entertainment, sporting competitions, games, food experiences, and access to deals and discounts throughout the City. With the bulk of the responsibility for this event will reside with ISU, the City had been asked to assist in the following four ways: 1.Contribute $5,000 towards the cost of hosting the “Cyclone Welcome Weekend” matched by a $5,000 contribution each from the Ames Chamber of Commerce and ISU. 2.Consider a change in the Municipal Code to increase the penalties for a nuisance party during the first weekend prior to the start of ISU classes from $100 for the first violation and $200 for a repeat violation to $750 for the first violation and $1,000 for any repeat violation. 3. In the University-Impacted neighborhoods where there is alternate-side parking, change the Municipal Code to allow for an illegally parked car to be towed immediately during the first weekend prior to the start of ISU classes. 4.In order to facilitate exposure of the ISU students to other major entertainment, social, shopping areas in the City, assign a CyRide bus to an express route from Memorial Union to the Farmer’s Market from 9:00 a.m. until 1:00 p.m. and from the Memorial Union to the Mall 8 from 1:00 p.m. until 5:00 p.m. during the first weekend prior to the start of ISU classes. Mr. Schainker stated regarding the request to change the Municipal Code to increase penalties the City Attorney could be asked to prepare an Amendment to the Nuisance Party Ordinance to reflect the increased fines. Staff recommended the Amendment be worded more broadly to impose the higher fines for other times of the year, but only with prior approval from City Council. As for the Amendment to the Parking Ordinance, the City Attorney could be asked to prepare that Amendment during this welcoming event and other situations where prior City Council approval is needed. City Manager Schainker mentioned that he had been advised that CyRide cannot provide a shuttle that runs a direct route, because it could be construed to be a charter. The good news is that CyRide could market the Red route service. On Saturday, August 20, this standard fixed route runs every 20 minutes from West Ames to the Mall, following a route that is close to a direct route among the three locations. Service on the route starts at 7:00 a.m. and operates until 10:00 p.m. This route would be free to ISU students as part of their activity fees. Mr. Schainker said that given the large number of citizen complaints received, he would recommend that the City support these positive changes. Ex officio Garman noted it is hard to figure out what to do and how effective it is going to be considering nothing has been tried before to combat the increased attendance of what “801 Day” has become. He felt that they needed to do something as that is better than doing nothing. Some of the comments received from the Chief Officers of the Student Government were concerned about the high increase of towing fees as it would be hard for any student to pay these fees. He asked if there was going to be advertising done as to the increase of the fines, so the community is aware. Mr. Garman voiced that he was also concerned with the towing right away as the streets are already compacted and would having the trucks come through make it worse. Mayor Haila stated that the Council met with the Student Government, and Chief Huff and Chief Newton had made it very clear about the growing issue of “801 Day” and the Student Government echoed its concerns. He noted that they don’t want to discourage students from celebrating being back at school, but not with 500 people in attendance in one place. Police Chief Geoff Huff said that if the Nuisance Party increase did go into effect, they would immediately start providing education. Every year before school the Police Department partners with ISU to go door-to-door in the more troublesome areas of town to provide education. Regarding the possible parking change, they would add signage to the defined areas that would warn people “violators will be towed.” He mentioned that anyone that has been towed from private areas has been charged around $300 to get your vehicle back; however, the City has a contract with Central Iowa Towing (CIT), and anyone who got their vehicle towed by the City would be charged $50.00 or less. Council Member Junck asked where a vehicle would be towed to, and if a student had a car to pick up, how would they get to it. Chief Huff explained that if a vehicle was towed by the City, it would 9 go to CIT on east Lincoln Way. The hope is that by putting signs up it would deter someone from parking in that area. Ms. Junck noted it was not an easily accessible location for someone to get to if they needed to pick up their car. Chief Huff stated he didn’t disagree, but there would have been a warning with the sign. The Mayor asked if the majority of the people attending “801 Day” were ISU students or if its other citizens. Chief Huff mentioned that “801 Day” used to be organized around ISU, but has now become a lot more; people are coming from out of town. Chief Huff indicated that the majority of the people whom he spoke with last year were not ISU students, but were from out of town. It was noted that the University of Iowa started classes a week later and that may have caused some of the increase in people; however, this year everyone is on the same academic calendar and this may decrease some attendance. Chief Huff said that the outreach will not be to only students, but also to landlords and property owners. Staff knows where the problem areas are and will target any education outreach to those areas. Sharron Evans, Associate Vice President for Student of Affairs and Dean of Students at ISU, and she is part of the task force that is working on the new “Cyclone Welcome Weekend.” ISU will be aggressive with its “Good Neighbor” campaign. This campaign is where they go out prior to students moving in during the fall to surrounding communities (Campustown). She noted this is not just an ISU event as there have been high school students in attendance and other surrounding community colleges. They are going to reach out to the other institutions to ask for help in deterring their students from coming and to make them aware of the situation. Ms. Evans said she wanted to set some expectations and there are advisory boards that reach out to students and they are aware of what the students are concerned about. The reality is that the effort this year will not completely wipe out “801 Day,” but they need to start somewhere. Chief Huff pointed out that staff is looking at a lot of different strategies as it is not just enforcement. Council Member Betcher wanted to know how staff was determining the University impacted areas. Chief Huff said it was a little different from where the yearly “football parking” signs are located. He anticipated it would be between Beach, Hyland, Lincoln Way and Mortensen for parking issues. City Manager Steve Schainker stated it would be a two-part process as the Council would need to pass the Ordinance first and then this event would come before the Council for approval. He mentioned that it would be done this way as the areas may not be the same every year. Council Member Betcher asked what was being done to promote the Welcome festival as opposed to the education about the increase in fines. She wanted to know how ISU was including the students to help change the culture and encourage students to do the welcome activities. Ms. Evans stated they are engaging with the student leadership on Campus and Student Government is a part of that. They will be working on sorority and fraternity engagement, student organizations, and student ambassadors. Ms. Evans mentioned that they will be working to exhaust every medium of communication that they can think of to get the information. There will be a heavy marketing campaign. 10 Council Member Beatty-Hansen wanted to know if the City had the capacity to tow people with the potential for increased capacity. Chief Huff stated it would be similar to snow route capacity; they may be overwhelmed, but the City will work with them to make sure they are ready if needed. Council Member Beatty-Hansen inquired how often the clock resets for nuisance party violations. Chief Huff indicated that it goes by year from August 1 of one year to August 1 of the next year. He said that a new violation at a separate address is considered a first violation. Council Gartin asked for clarification if the infraction for a nuisance party would be a civil penalty or a criminal penalty. City Attorney Mark Lambert said that municipal infractions by definition are civil penalties. Mr. Gartin was concerned that the City would be able to effectively communicate the increase in the fines. He commented that he viewed the increased fee as a disproportionate sanction. Mr. Lambert explained that the fines for nuisance parties would only be increased for the “Cyclone Welcome Weekend” or maybe other events, but the City would publicize and use it as a deterrent. Mr. Gartin inquired who would be subject to the sanction; would it be the landlord, the tenant, or the attendees. Attorney Lambert said it could be any of them. Chief Huff commented that they normally don’t cite anyone unless the attendees absolutely refuse to leave, but it doesn’t happen very often. He also explained that they don’t just show up and start citing people, but staff will show up and tell them there is a problem that needs to be fixed, and if it is not fixed, they will fix it for them. Chief Huff said that even if someone didn’t know about the increase in fines, there will be a warning before anything else is done. Officers will try to catch any parties early and educate them to the rules of the day. Mr. Gartin asked about how any landlord would be affected. Chief Huff said that what had been done in the past is every time they cite a tenant, a letter is sent to the landlord/property owner to let them know what happened on the property. If there is a second offense, a letter is sent again with the tenant being cited, and if there is a third offense, the landlord is cited. Attorney Lambert clarified that $750 for the first offense and $1,000 for the second offense is the maximum amount that a city is allowed by Iowa law to charge for a municipal infraction. Mr. Gartin commented that he understood the need to increase the fines; however, he felt there are going to be some unintended consequences that the Council may have to face. Council Member Junck asked for the composition of the task force because the impression she got was there were not any students involved in forming the recommendations. Mayor Haila said that the Task Force makeup was comprised of ISU administration, law enforcement, City Manager Schainker, City Attorney Lambert, Chief Huff and himself; however, ISU administration had advisory groups. Ms. Evans explained that Chief Newton, herself, and Senior Vice President Toyia Younger have advisory boards that meet on a monthly basis. Every time the Task Force met, they brought the information back to the advisory boards and got feedback from the students. Ms. Evans indicated that the student advisory board’s feedback was highly represented in the process. Ms. Junck mentioned that as a student herself she has “feedback channels”and asked if the feedback Ms. Evans received was positive or negative. Ms. Evans stated it was both, but seemed to be more positive; however, she noted there was some hesitancy as no one knows what will work for sure. Ms. Junck said that the majority of the feedback she received was negative. Ex Officio Garman stated that he got negative feedback as well, but did agree with Mayor Haila that the students are adults, and 11 agreed that they need to try something. Ms. Junck asked if there was a contingency plan. Ms. Evans noted that you can’t prepare for every scenario, but you can respond to each scenario. Moved by Beatty-Hansen, seconded by Gartin, to contribute $5,000 towards the cost of hosting the event from Council Contingency. Roll Call Vote: 6-0. Resolution declared adopted unanimously, signed by the Mayor, and hereby made a portion of these Minutes. Moved by Beatty-Hansen, seconded by Corrieri, to direct the City Attorney to draft an Amendment to the Nuisance Party Ordinance that would allow the higher fines of $750 for the first violation and $1,000 for any repeat violation, at select times with prior approval from City Council. Vote on Motion: 4-2. Voting Aye: Beatty-Hansen, Betcher, Corrieri, Rollins. Voting Nay: Gartin, Junck. Motion declared carried. Moved by Beatty-Hansen, seconded by Corrieri, to direct the City Attorney to prepare an Amendment to the Parking Ordinance that would specify specific streets where immediate towing would be allowed during special times approved by the City Council. Vote on Motion: 5-1. Voting Aye: Beatty-Hansen, Betcher, Corrieri, Gartin, Rollins. Voting Nay: Junck. Motion declared carried. REQUEST REGARDING AMES PLAN 2040 AMENDMENT WITHIN THE FRINGE AREA FOR THE BROCK PROPERTY LOCATED AT 2359-210TH STREET IN BOONE COUNTY: Planning and Housing Director Kelly Diekmann stated at the June 14, 2022, meeting, City Council had reviewed a staff memo regarding a proposal to split a property owned by Anthony Brock and Suzanne Leaf-Brock at 2359-210th Street in Boone County. In May 2021, the property owners first approached the City regarding subdivision of the property; however, the City Council had determined that it was not appropriate to take action at that time since the Ames Plan 2040 was not complete. Now that the Ames Plan 2040 has been adopted, the owners would like the Council to consider their request again. It was mentioned that Attorney Joel Wallace had sent a letter to the Council explaining that the property owners would like to split the existing 21-acre property into two parcels with one parcel being 6.5 acres and the second parcel being a 14.5-acre flag lot. One house has recently been built on the site and access for both proposed sites would be from 210th Street. The Preliminary Sketch has access for the flag lot adding a crossing of Onion Creek. The primary issue with the proposal is the division of land within the Natural Resources designation, which is inconsistent with the policies of Ames Plan 2040. The Plan describes Natural Areas as intended for areas in the fringe that include forested land, floodplain, wetlands, and slope areas. The existing property has a significant amount of land that qualifies as Natural Area. Exceptions do exist near the southern portion of the property where row crop land is located and the far northeastern portion of the property near the north property line. Natural Areas are not intended to have additional homes built on them, and thus, do not permit property splits. Ames Plan 2040 does not encourage 12 converting Natural Areas into designations that allow for development. It was staff’s recommendation to decline the property owner’s request and retain the existing Land Use Designations on the property. The Mayor opened public comment Joel Wallace, Attorney at Hastings, Gartin, and Boettger Law firm, Ames stated that the property owner Anthony Brock was present as well. Mr. Wallace said that Mr. Brock had built a home in the northwest corner of the property and the cost of that driveway was very expensive as it also included creating a bridge over the creek. Part of recouping the cost for the work is to carve a 6.5-acre subdivided property to be sold for rural subdivision purposes. Mr. Wallace explained there were three main reasons as to why or why not to allow for the subdivision. One was that the requested subdivision did not further the goals of Ames Plan 2040. He referred to Page 43 of the Ames Plan 2040 regarding Guiding Principles of Land Use. It was mentioned that right now the property is 2/3 tillable land. Mr. Wallace indicated from his point of view they are convinced that putting a single-family home on a 6.5-acre lot is not going to cause any problems with the Ames Plan 2040 goals. The second argument made by the Ames Planning and Zoning Commission was that the proposed one-lot subdivision is prohibited by the current policies of the Ames Plan 2040. He then referred to Page 68 of the Plan where it mentioned Urban Fringe. Mr. Wallace indicated that the current Fringe Plan has been in place is from 2006. The new Fringe Plan is not yet in place so the rules that are presently being followed are from 2006. He said that under the 2006 map, there are a few different natural areas. He read an excerpt from that Plan. Mr. Wallace pointed out that based on the clear language that he read from the existing code regarding Natural Areas, there is not any violation. Anthony Brock said that this family has been farming the farm in his family since the 1930s. The two fields in the back are two parcels that have very good tillable land and will become in the future land- locked. Mr. Brock stated they had put in a bridge to create a road to make sure that he can get to his land to continue to till. He noted that they are trying the best they can to keep the land to be as natural as possible. Mr. Wallace said the third main point was that granting a change of land use would set a precedent of the integrity of the Land Use Plan. He stated if a new Fringe Plan goes into place, there would be no precedent as it would go into effect prior to the new Plan taking effect. Mr. Wallace asked for the Mayor and Council to support for the change. Director Diekmann disputed the interpretations of the policies by Mr. Wallace. He believed the Ames Plan 2040 applies to this property. The Urban Fringe Policy 2 (UF2) for Natural Areas prohibits subdivisions for new development. He stated that if they went along with the 2006 Fringe Plan it states under Natural Areas Policy 2 (NA2) and the first part says, “prevent subdivisions for new non-farm residential development.” Director Diekmann said it was clear to him what the intent was for natural areas. He mentioned that Mr. Brock could request to initiate a Rural Character land use classification amendment to the southern portion of the property near 210th Avenue. 13 Moved by Beatty-Hansen, seconded by Junck, to approve Alternative 1, which was to decline the request and retain the existing Land Use Designations on this property. Vote on Motion: 5-0-1 - Voting Aye: Beatty-Hansen, Betcher, Corrieri, Junck, Rollins. Voting Nay: None. Abstaining Due to Conflict of Interest: Gartin. Motion declared carried. Mr. Brock asked if a letter could be sent to Boone County letting them know of the decision made. Director Diekmann commented that he will notify Boone County of the outcome. The Mayor recessed at 8:23 p.m. and reconvened at 8:35 p.m. AMES URBAN FRINGE PLAN 28E AGREEMENT: Planning and Housing Director Kelly Diekmann stated tonight is to see if they should focus on extending the Ames Urban Fringe Plan. The Agreement is due to expire on July 11, 2022. The Draft Plan was made available for public review on May 16,2022, and closed on June 14, 2022. In addition to the public comments, a letter from the Mayor of Gilbert was emailed to Story County on June 22, 2022, requesting changes to the Draft Map that would designate lands north of 190th Street as an exclusive area to be annexed to Gilbert. Director Diekmann said that what he needs from the City Council is a decision about extending the current Plan, in its current form, for a period of time. He felt that at least three to four months is needed in order to work through all the comments and to get a new Agreement adopted. Staff recommended approving the Amendment to extend the 28E Agreement, modifying the expiration date to November 7, 2022. Moved by Betcher, seconded by Gartin, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 22-363 approving the Amendment to the Ames Urban Fringe Plan 28E Agreement, modifying the expiration date to November 7, 2022; requesting that Story County and Gilbert also approve the Agreement to extend the 28E Amendment; and submitting the signed Agreement to the Iowa Secretary of State by August 10, 2022. Roll Call Vote: 6-0. Resolution declared adopted unanimously, signed by the Mayor, and hereby made a portion of these Minutes. AMENDING THE DOWNTOWN FACADE GRANT PROGRAM: City Planner Benjamin Campbell said that on May 24, 2022, the Council directed staff to amend the Downtown Facade Program by tying grant-eligible rehabilitation work to a non-rehabilitation grant for the first round of funding (fall) and allowing for a stand-alone rehabilitation grant in the second round of funding (spring). The rehabilitation is for historically significant character defining features. Mr. Campbell explained that this would mean that in the fall, the rehabilitation grant may only be applied for in conjunction with work eligible for the standard grant, meaning in combination with an already eligible activity. In the spring, the grant option also applies to historically significant, character- defining features by themselves, and doesn’t need to be in conjunction with other work. Council Member Gartin said he was supportive of the change, but was concerned that the amount of money being awarded was not enough. 14 Council Member Betcher asked about the relationship between the first page of Attachment 2 in the Report and the second page of Attachment 2. She wanted to know what the relationship was between those two pages and if the applicant is going to see both pages. Mr. Campbell explained that Page 1 is what is already available to an applicant while Page 2 pertains to the new historically significant, character-defining features grant. Ms. Betcher said that the Page 2 has most of the information the applicants need; however, she felt that an applicant would only read over Page 1 and not the rest and may miss out on an opportunity for the rehab grant since it is not mentioned on Page 1. Director Diekmann noted that the actual application packet states that there are two types of grants available, Attachment 2 in the Report is more administrative information. Ms. Betcher noted that helped, but felt that Page 1 and Page 2 should be combined. City Manager Steve Schainker stated that staff can clean it up by putting an opening paragraph introducing both grant options. Mr. Campbell stated that an opening paragraph can be added. The Mayor opened public input and closed it when no one came forward to speak. Moved by Betcher, seconded by Beatty-Hansen, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 22-364 amending the Downtown Facade Grant Program with the discussed amendments to the messaging for the grant review that is shown in Attachment 2. Director Diekmann wanted to clarify that there are no changes to the programming and Attachment 2, but it is the messaging and how it is tied together, which will be done administratively. Ms. Betcher confirmed that was correct. Roll Call Vote: 6-0. Resolution declared adopted unanimously, signed by the Mayor, and hereby made a portion of these Minutes. PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH STRAND ASSOCIATES OF MADISON, WISCONSIN, FOR WPC NUTRIENT MODIFICATIONS PHASE 1 PROJECT: Water Pollution Control Director John Dunn stated that in early April 2022, staff released a Request for Proposals (RFP) for engineering services for the design and bidding phases of the project. In the RFP document the scoring Rubric was included. On May 5, 2022, a total of three proposals were received. A nine-member internal team reviewed and scored each proposal and Strand Associates was the preferred firm. Once that selection was made, the fee proposal envelope was opened, and the preferred firm was the lowest bidder. Members of the internal team made reference calls, talking to project managers with cities where Strand had performed similar work, and all references were positive. There were a few items that were not included in Strand’s scope that staff felt were necessary. Following those discussions, Strand was asked to update both their formal Scope of Work and fee proposal to incorporate the additions requested by staff, which totaled an additional $166,000. Therefore, the updated fee for Strand Associates’ design and bidding services is a lump sum fee of $1,655,000, plus $20,000 hourly services for extraordinary permitting assistance as needed. 15 Council Member Gartin said that this was a big price tag, but wanted to let the public know that this is an engineering piece of a project that is a lot bigger. Director Dunn said that the overall total project cost will be around $55 million over the next 15 years. Mayor Haila opened public input. It was closed when no one came forward to speak. Moved by Corrieri, seconded by Junck, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 22-365 approving the Professional Services Agreement with Strand Associates of Madison, Wisconsin, for the WPC Nutrient Modifications Phase 1 Project in a lump sum of $1,655,000 plus on-call services at staff’s direction billed on an hourly basis not to exceed $20,000. Roll Call Vote: 6-0. Resolution declared adopted unanimously, signed by the Mayor, and hereby made a portion of these Minutes. RENEWING FIXED BASE OPERATOR MANAGEMENT CONTRACT WITH CENTRAL IOWA AIR SERVICE AT THE AMES MUNICIPAL AIRPORT: Traffic Engineer Damion Pregitzer stated that on April 1, 2017, the Ames Municipal Airport changed its Fixed Based Operator (FBO) to Central Iowa Air Service (CIAS). Since this was the first time the City had done business with CIAS the contract was limited to five years, expiring on June 30, 2022. Over the last five years, CIAS has done an exceptional job operating the Airport. There have been numerous positive comments from local airport users, as well as those visiting Ames. CIAS has hosted several highly attended community events at the Airport. Also, its staff members are active members of the Ames Chamber and support other local businessowners. For the past several months, City staff and CIAS have been negotiating a new long-term FBO contract to begin July 1, 2022. It is structured with an initial 15-year period, with the City’s option to extend the contract for another 15 years under the same terms. The extended lease will allow the FBO to potentially invest in the growth of its business here in Ames. Mr. Pregitzer pointed out in Section 1B, under Winter and Summer Maintenance, it states that the City is responsible for providing equipment, parts, and fuel for the pieces of equipment used at the Airport; the FBO will operate and perform minor maintenance on the equipment as well as perform mowing, trimming, and snow and ice removal on City-owned property at the Airport. Under Section 3 of the Agreement, it stated that the FBO is provided several facilities to provide the required services to the Airport, some of which generate revenue to their private business, such as selling fuel, servicing aircraft or conducting flight training. In return for use of these City-owned facilities, the FBO is also required to pay an annual fee. The Contract provides for two five-year lease rate adjustment periods, one on July 1, 2027, and the other on July 1, 2032, which will be adjusted using the Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers from September of each 60-month period. Council Member Gartin said that he has received positive comments regarding the Airport and noted one way to show the positive support is the amount of fuel sold at the Airport. Mr. Pregitzer stated he didn’t have the exact number, but when looking at the budget forecast, it is around $30,000 in revenue; the number was about two-thirds lower with the previous FBO. 16 Public comment was opened by the Mayor and closed when no one came forward to speak. Moved by Betcher, seconded by Corrieri, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 22-366 renewing the Fixed Base Operator Management Contract with Central Iowa Air Service at the Ames Municipal Airport. Roll Call Vote: 6-0. Resolution declared adopted unanimously, signed by the Mayor, and hereby made a portion of these Minutes. HEARING ON LONG-TERM PRIVATE HANGAR LEASES AT THE AMES MUNICIPAL AIRPORT: Traffic Engineer Damion Pregitzer said that on June 30, 2022, the land leases for five private hangars will expire at the Ames Municipal Airport. The proposed new leases will include rate schedules covering five, five-year periods for a total of up to 25 years. All private hangar leasees pay the same rate based on the square footage of their respective buildings. The leases will go into effect on July 1, 2022, to coincide with the City’s fiscal year. During the 2020 update to the Airport Master Plan, airport users requested a change to the metric for establishing lease rates. Therefore, the Airport Leases will be changing from a leased parcel area to a building footprint square-footage as the metric for establishing lease rates. This change is expected to bring the Ames Municipal Airport’s private hangar leases closer to current market rates and practice. It should be noted that this will come with an initial reduction in revenues. For FY 2022/23 and future fiscal years, the Airport is projected to operate with a net positive budget. Council Member Gartin asked how it is determined who gets a 25-year lease. Mr. Pregitzer noted that each lease is 25 years and the length was based on customer feedback. Mr. Gartin inquired if the leases were assignable. Mr. Pregitzer stated there is the potential for the leases to be assignable; however, the tenant is bound to the terms of the City’s lease and the buildings have to be used as aviation services. It was pointed out that any owner’s use has to be approved by the City. Public Works Director John Joiner commented that the land is public property, but the hangars belong to the tenants. The Mayor opened the public hearing and closed it when no one came forward to speak. Moved by Corrieri, seconded by Betcher, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 22-367 approving the long- term land leases for five private hangars covering five, five-year periods, effective July 1, 2022, through June 30, 2047, for: 1) Ames Hangar Club; 2) Brian Aukes; 3) Plane Crazy, LLC; 4) Linda A. Sommerfeld; and 5) Viking Aviation. Roll Call Vote: 6-0. Resolution declared adopted unanimously, signed by the Mayor, and hereby made a portion of these Minutes. HEARING ON REZONING, WITH MASTER PLAN, 798-500TH STREET FROM “A” (AGRICULTURAL) TO “FS-RL” (FLOATING SUBURBAN RESIDENTIAL LOW DENSITY): Planning and Housing Director Kelly Diekmann stated that tonight is a public hearing to change 798-500th Street from “A” (Agricultural) to “FS-RL” (Floating Suburban Residential Low Density). A Master Plan is used to depict the planned development of a property, the intent is to 17 show where development will occur and where open spaces are planned to occur. In this case, it also helps to identify what building types are planned as well as the range in density. Staff found that the Master Plan is consistent with the Zoning Ordinance requirements and recommended that the rezoning move forward with the Master Plan. He explained the one unique element will be an oversized sewer that the City wants to have developed through the property. With Ames Plan 2040, the City evaluated infrastructure needs to serve the westward expansion of the City. During the tier’s analysis stage of the Comprehensive Plan staff had identified that an additional oversized sewer was needed in order to get to Boone County and serve the development. A Contract Rezoning Agreement has been drafted that outlines the terms of the sanitary sewer construction as an “oversizing” cost-share agreement. After discussion with the applicant about the Agreement, they have decided they preferred to have additional meetings with staff about the design of the sanitary sewer system that may result in changes to the Agreement. Therefore, no signed Agreement will be provided to the City for this meeting. Staff recommended that the City Council open the public hearing and take any comments from the public, and then continue the hearing to July 12, 2022, in order to finalize the Contract Rezoning Agreement. The Mayor declared the public hearing to be open. David Vaknin, 4929 Utah Drive, Ames wanted to understand how a portion of the creek can be public or private property. Brent Sinclair, 5112 Springbrook Circle, Ames, stated that the developer has stated that they would like to maintain the integrity of the neighborhood that is already developed. When looking at it now, there is green space on the backs of houses and that green space is not prevalent in the Master Plan. As a property owner, they would like the neighborhood to be maintained as it currently is with a lot of green space. He noted that he would like to see the green space flipped from the north side to the south side in order to maintain the feel of the neighborhood. Moved by Corrieri, seconded by Gartin, to continue the hearing on the Rezoning, with Master Plan, of 798-500th Street from “A” (Agricultural) to “FS-RL” (Floating Suburban Residential Low Density) until July 12, 2022. Vote on Motion: 6-0. Motion declared carried unanimously. The Mayor asked Director Diekmann to address Mr. Vaknin’s question about ownership of the creek. Director Diekmann stated that, in Iowa, there is no obligation that waterways are public property. Mayor Haila inquired about the green space question. Director Diekmann explained that the City does not have a mandatory buffer between subdivisions that would dictate a particular width. HEARING ON PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO ZONING ORDINANCE SECTION 19.809 REGARDING CAMPUSTOWN SERVICE CENTER (CSC) REQUIREMENTS REGARDING CLAY BRICK (CONTINUED FROM JUNE 21, 2022): City Planner Julie Gould 18 indicated that staff has been before the Council a couple of times regarding the proposed Amendment. As part of the Text Amendment process, staff presented options to the Planning and Zoning (P&Z) Commission at its May 18, 2022, meeting. Subsequent to the P&Z recommendation, staff presented options to the City Council at its May 24, 2022, meeting to obtain feedback regarding the preferred choice. City Council directed staff to continue with the Text Amendment and to include draft language that would incorporate three adjustments that were: 1.Allow a non-clay brick facade only when the building is placed at a zero-lot line interior setback. 2.Allow a non-clay brick facade when the overall building would meet the 50% requirement with priority placement of clay brick in highly visible locations 3.Add a material requirement that side walls would be higher quality materials than plain unfinished concrete masonry units. The proposed Amendment would apply to all properties in the Campustown Service Center (CSC) Zoning district. Ms. Gould indicated the request for this change was brought forward from a project at 2516 Lincoln Way, which will be Brothers Bar & Grill. She presented a map showing the elevations of the property. Director Diekmann explained that the property owners have made the front and west side of the building 100% brick. Council Member Gartin wanted to know if there would be any unintended consequences in Campustown. It was determined there were not any that staff was aware of. Mayor Haila opened the public hearing and closed it when no one came forward to speak. Moved by Corrieri, seconded by Junck, to pass on first reading a proposed Amendment to Zoning Ordinance Section 19.809 regarding Campustown Service Center (CSC) requirements regarding clay brick. Roll Call Vote: 6-0. Motion declared carried unanimously. Moved by Corrieri, seconded by Junck, to suspend the rules necessary for the adoption of an ordinance. Roll Call Vote: 6-0. Motion declared carried unanimously. Moved by Betcher, seconded by Corrieri, to pass on second reading an ordinance Amending the Zoning Ordinance Section 19.809 regarding Campustown Service Center (CSC) requirements regarding clay brick. Moved by Corrieri, seconded by Junck, to pass on third reading and adopt ORDINANCE NO. 4471 approving the Amendment to Zoning Ordinance Section 19.809 regarding Campustown Service Center (CSC) requirements regarding clay brick. Roll Call Vote: 6-0. Ordinance declared adopted unanimously, signed by the Mayor, and hereby made a portion of these Minutes. 19 HEARING ON 2021/22 CLEAR WATER DIVERSION: The Mayor opened the public hearing. It was closed when no one else came forward to speak. Moved by Betcher, seconded by Corrieri, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 22-368 approving final plans and specifications and awarding a contract to Ames Trenching of Ames, Iowa, in the amount of $98,415. Roll Call Vote: 6-0. Resolution declared adopted unanimously, signed by the Mayor, and hereby made a portion of these Minutes. HEARING ON 2017/18 LOW POINT DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENT - ALMOND ROAD (GW CARVER AVENUE & BLOOMINGTON ROAD): The public hearing was opened by Mayor Haila and closed it when no one came forward to speak. Moved by Corrieri, seconded by Rollins, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 22-369 approving final plans and specifications awarding a contract to Ames Trenching of Ames, Iowa, in the amount of $98,415. Roll Call Vote: 6-0. Resolution declared adopted unanimously, signed by the Mayor, and hereby made a portion of these Minutes. HEARING ON 2020/21 SHARED USE PATH SYSTEM EXPANSION - VET MED TRAIL (S. 16TH STREET TO S. GRAND AVENUE): The Mayor opened the public hearing. It was closed when no one else came forward to speak. Moved by Rollins, seconded by Junck, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 22-370 approving final plans and specifications awarding a contract to Jasper Construction Services, Inc., of Newton, Iowa, in the amount of $333,928.60, contingent upon receipt of Iowa Department of Transportation’s concurrence. Roll Call Vote: 6-0. Resolution declared adopted unanimously, signed by the Mayor, and hereby made a portion of these Minutes. HEARING ON 2020/21 AND 2021/22 INTELLIGENT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM PROGRAM (PHASES 1 & 2): Mayor Haila opened the public hearing. It was closed when no one came forward to speak. Moved by Corrieri, seconded by Junck, to accept the Report of Bids and delay award until a future date within 30 days of the Iowa Department of Transportation letting date (6-21-22). Vote on Motion: 6-0. Motion declared carried unanimously. HEARING ON THE OLD WATER TREATMENT PLANT DEMOLITION: The public hearing was opened by Mayor Haila and closed it when no one came forward to speak. Moved by Betcher, seconded by Corrieri, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 22-371 approving the final plans and specifications and awarding a contract to LinnCo. Inc., of Sartell, Minnesota, in the amount of $2,398,000. 20 Roll Call Vote: 6-0. Resolution declared adopted unanimously, signed by the Mayor, and hereby made a portion of these Minutes. Moved by Beatty-Hansen, seconded by Rollins, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 22-372 approving Change Order No. 1 to the Professional Services Agreement with Strand Engineering of Madison, Wisconsin, for additional construction phase engineering services for the Old Water Treatment Plant Demolition Project in an additional amount not to exceed $119,700, Roll Call Vote: 6-0. Resolution declared adopted unanimously, signed by the Mayor, and hereby made a portion of these Minutes. IOWA STATE UNIVERSITY REPRESENTATIVE ON TRANSIT BOARD: Moved by Beatty- Hansen, seconded by Corrieri, to approve on first reading an ordinance changing the Iowa State University Representative on the Transit Board. Roll Call Vote: 6-0. Motion declared carried unanimously. Moved by Beatty-Hansen, seconded by Corrieri, to suspend the rules necessary for the adoption of an ordinance. Roll Call Vote: 6-0. Motion declared carried unanimously. Moved by Betcher, seconded by Corrieri, to pass on second reading an ordinance changing the Iowa State University Representative on the Transit Board. Roll Call Vote: 6-0. Motion declared carried unanimously. Moved by Corrieri, seconded by Junck, to pass on third reading and adopt ORDINANCE NO. 4470 changing the Iowa State University Representative on the Transit Board. Roll Call Vote: 6-0. Ordinance declared adopted unanimously, signed by the Mayor, and hereby made a portion of these Minutes. ORDINANCE REZONING 3005 - 3125 GROVE AVENUE AND 3209 DUFF AVENUE FROM RESIDENTIAL HIGH DENSITY (RH) TO RESIDENTIAL MEDIUM DENSITY (RM): Moved by Betcher, seconded by Corrieri, to pass on second reading an ordinance rezoning 3005 - 3125 Grove Avenue and 3209 Duff Avenue from Residential High Density (RH) to Residential Medium Density (RM). Vote on Motion: 5-0. Motion declared carried unanimously. ORDINANCE ON ZONING TEXT AMENDMENT TO REMOVE THE CAMPUSTOWN SERVICE CENTER (CSC) ZONING DISTRICT MID-BLOCK 20-FOOT SETBACK STANDARD ALONG LINCOLN WAY: Moved by Rollins, seconded by Junck, to pass on third reading and adopt ORDINANCE NO. 4468 for a Zoning Text Amendment to remove the Campustown Service Center (CSC) Zoning District mid-block 20-foot setback standard along Lincoln Way. Roll Call Vote: 6-0. Ordinance declared adopted unanimously, signed by the Mayor, and hereby made a portion of these Minutes. 21 ORDINANCE MODIFYING CHAPTER 18 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE FOR PARKING CHANGES TO VARIOUS LOCATIONS: Moved by Betcher, seconded by Junck, to pass on third reading and adopt ORDINANCE NO. 4469 modifying Chapter 18 of the Municipal Code for parking changes to various locations. Roll Call Vote: 6-0. Ordinance declared adopted unanimously, signed by the Mayor, and hereby made a portion of these Minutes. DISPOSITIONS OF COMMUNICATIONS TO COUNCIL: Mayor Haila mentioned there was one item. It was a request from Loren Nicholls requesting consideration for resident owned solar panel systems that enable energy independence. City Manager Steve Schainker stated he was confused when he read the email from Ms. Nicholls as the resident was misinformed. Prior to the City Council meeting Mr. Schainker had reached out to Electric Services Director Don Kom asking him to speak with Ms. Nicholls to help her get started with residential solar panels. COUNCIL COMMENTS: Council Member Junck said she wanted to follow-up on the discussion regarding the “Cyclone Welcome Weekend.” She felt the discussion was productive and she hoped all the efforts go really well when it is implemented. Ms. Junck wanted to know a little more about the logistics of the towing of the car and if there is any way to make it more accessible to those who are affected by the immediate towing. She felt the price was reasonable, but concerned with the location. Moved by Junck, seconded by Betcher, to ask staff to look into the logistics and potential accessible options for towed vehicles during the weekend prior to the start of ISU classes. Vote on Motion: 5-1. Voting Aye: Betcher, Corrieri, Gartin, Junck, Rollins. Voting Nay: Beatty- Hansen. Motion declared carried. ADJOURNMENT: Moved by Betcher, seconded by Corrieri, to adjourn the meeting at 10:02 p.m. Vote on Motion: 6-0. Motion declared carried unanimously. ___________________________________________________________________ Amy L. Colwell, Deputy City Clerk John A. Haila, Mayor __________________________________ Diane R. Voss, City Clerk 22 REPORT OF CONTRACT CHANGE ORDERS Department General Description Change Original Contract Total of Prior Amount this Change Contact Finance CentralSquare Cloud Based Software Services Transmission Modifications Extend Completion to Services Maintenance (Various) Services Options Study Construction Schmidt Services MISO Transmission Rate Review and Calculation Solutions LLC Period: For City Council Date: % #!%& '()*+++,-)./#012"#+% %3 !)*+++,454.6768699:<;++#!?#<;+++*@<*); & #$&* +% A B<4==5:8====-;++#+%#C5=5<) D & #$+ E B<4==5: !M< #$3N#!% O <P,454.:458:>Q9 RST(3 E U $!(1 G);&+@<; <&0 $$&3[? 31#!$#;56 !%2 +*++?S 3%%#N% 1 0?%2 3%A-]<;-L?0A9=M6=66 +- )*+++ Item No. 7 * ./0/+/12$%3 = >6?@ ?;?= A6B B16?61: C1D1E:=FG6B HII>6?6A=:&MK ,N+ /O PQRQP + RQQSQQ *L $V6$! 3U # $.XY W(*,+./ X .*ZZ.) [W) X .*\ W) X([W) [W) X')[XX .ZZ.) [W)X')[XX .\ W) X([W).) [W) )Y ) W(Z ZZ.) [W))Y ) W(Z \ W) X([W) !"""#$ %&'('()*+, !"""#-.-%/0.1202243""89:43"""!;4! 3 <,= ! ">(?:@4-55.5$3""&? !?D9*E97,"(F9 @4-50/04M#-.-%/0.12022 FC&>,6(?N9(7O6(< H 3 ";43 4 79== &U)(?&6,*=,3./(*>C "!"4,*E&*+$?9<=C('3,V&,F$Z43$$,60.Y/5//"$ !""" Item No. 8 ##. 2/3 </ < !(A=(%$6@! '$(2C B,.<B/ 2.EE2- FB- 2.G B- ,FB- FB- +-F 2EE2- FB-BHIJIKII +-F 2G B- ,FB-BHILIKII2- FB- -C - B,E EE2- FB--C - B,E G B- ,FB- Smart Choice 515.239.5133 non-emergency Administration fax To: Mayor John Haila and Ames City Council Members From: Lieutenant Heath Ropp, Ames Police Department Date: July 6, 2022 Subject: Beer Permits & Liquor License Renewal Reference City Council Agenda The Council agenda for July 12th, 2022, includes beer permits and liquor license renewals for: •Applebee’s Neighborhood Grill & Bar (105 Chestnut St) – Class C Liquor License with Sunday Sales •Sportsman’s Lounge (123 Main St) – Class C Liquor License with Living Quarters & Sunday Sales •Huhot Mongolian Grill (703 S Duff Ave Ste 105) - Special Class C Liquor License with Sunday Sales A review of police records for the past 12 months found no liquor law violations for the above locations. The Ames Police Department recommends the license renewal for the above businesses. Item No. 9 Smart Choice 515.239.5133 non-emergency Administration fax To: Mayor John Haila and Ames City Council Members From: Lieutenant Heath Ropp, Ames Police Department Date: June 22, 2022 Subject: Beer Permits & Liquor License Renewal Reference City Council Agenda The Council agenda for July 12, 2022, includes beer permits and liquor license renewals for: •La Casa Maya (631 Lincoln Way) – Class C Liquor License with Sunday Sales & Outdoor Service A review of police records for the past 12 months found 1 liquor law violation. During a compliance check on February 11th, 2022, an employee sold alcohol to a minor and was cited accordingly. A follow-up compliance check was completed, and no violations were recorded. The Police Department will continue to monitor the above location by conducting regular foot patrols, bar checks and by educating staff through training and quarterly meetings. The Ames Police Department recommends license renewal for the above business. Item No. 9d 1 ITEM # 10 DATE 07-12-22 COUNCIL ACTION FORM SUBJECT: YSS YOUTH RECOVERY CAMPUS UNVEILING EVENT BACKGROUND: YSS is hosting an event to unveil its renderings and vision for a new YSS Youth Recovery Campus. The event will take place at the YSS main office building located at 420 Kellogg Avenue. The event will be open to the public and include a food truck, games, and snow cones. The event is scheduled for Tuesday, July 19th from 4:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m. In order to facilitate this event, YSS has requested approval for the following: • Blanket Vending License and waiver of fee ($50 loss to City Clerk’s office) • Closure of Kellogg Avenue between Main Street and Fifth Street from 3:00 p.m. to 7:00 p.m. • Blanket Temporary Obstruction Permit for Kellogg Avenue between Main Street and Fifth Street from 3:00 p.m. to 7:00 p.m. • Closure of seven metered parking spaces between Main Street and Fifth Street from 3:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m. and waiver of fees (estimated loss of $5.25 to the Parking Fund). YSS has contacted the other affected business within the closed area (10Fold Architecture) regarding the event plans and the approval process. Other businesses not directly impacted but in the vicinity of the event area have also been notified by YSS. The Council’s policy regarding parking waivers is to consider requests such as this one on a case-by-case basis, as opposed to requiring reimbursement for lost parking revenue. Lost parking revenue is only required to be reimbursed under this policy when the parking waiver is District-wide. ALTERNATIVES: 1. Approve the requests from YSS Unveiling Celebration on July 19, 2022, including the waiver of fees. 2. Approve the requests as outlined above but require YSS to pay for lost parking meter revenue and the blanket Vending License. 3. Deny the requests. 2 CITY MANAGER'S RECOMMENDED ACTION: The event organizers have taken appropriate steps to plan an event that is open to the public and showcases YSS and the services it provides to the Ames community. Given the negligible amount of potential lost parking revenue in relation to the administrative effort required to collect the fees, a waiver of fees is appropriate in this instance. Therefore, it is the recommendation of the City Manager that City Council adopt Alternative No. 1, as described above. July 5, 2022 Honorable Mayor John Haila and Ames City Council Ames City Hall 515 Clark Ave Ames, IA 50010 RE: YSS Youth Recovery Campus Unveiling Dear Honorable Mayor Haila and City Council, YSS is planning to host a YSS Youth Recovery Campus Unveiling event on Tuesday, July 19, from 4-6 p.m. The event is open to the public, and we encourage the community to attend. Further information is available on the recently submitted Special Events Application. We would like a Temporary Obstruction Permit, seven requested parking spaces and waiver of parking meter fees, waiver of fee for Blanket Vendor Permit, and street closure on Kellogg Ave. between Main St. and 5th St. from 3-7 p.m. Thank you for your consideration of this request and continued to support. Regards, Andrew Allen YSS President and CEO 1 ITEM # 11 DATE: 07-12-22 COUNCIL ACTION FORM SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF STATE REVOLVING FUND (SRF) FINAL CONSTRUCTION LOAN APPLICATION FOR THE DEMOLITION OF THE OLD WATER TREATMENT PLANT BACKGROUND: During the design of the new water treatment plant, City staff made a commitment to demolish the old treatment facility as soon as practical to prevent it from becoming an abandoned eyesore for the neighborhood. The new water treatment plant started operation in Fall 2017, and it is time to demolish the old water treatment plant. This project will demolish the filter building, chemical feed building, external treatment basins, administrative offices, and ¾ million-gallon ground reservoir. Improvements to the site distribution and raw water piping will be included in this project as well. The high service pump station, two-million-gallon storage reservoir, and five-million-gallon storage reservoir will remain. The authorized project funding is as follows. Fiscal Year Amount FY 2018/19 – FY 2020/21 Actual $ 141,916 FY 2021/22 CIP Adopted 1,288,560 FY 2022/23 CIP Adopted 1,233,000 Total $ 2,663,476 A State Revolving Fund (SRF) Drinking Water Loan in an amount not to exceed $3,500,000 has been identified as the funding source for the demolition of the old water plant. Repayment of the loan will be from water utility revenues. The not-to-exceed amount was established to cover any potential cost increases and change orders; the City will only borrow the amount actually needed to fund the project. A public hearing to proceed with the SRF loan was held on June 14, 2022. Staff has now completed the loan application and it is ready for approval. The cost breakdown regarding the loan is shown below. Total Project Loan Engineering Services (design/bidding/const.) $ 277,200 Loan Origination Fees (0.5%) 17,413 Construction 2,398,000 Contingency 807,387 Total Project Cost $ 3,500,000 2 ALTERNATIVES: 1. Approve the final construction loan application to borrow an amount not to exceed $3,500,000 in Water Revenue Bonds (SRF loan) for demolition of the old water treatment plant. 2. Do not approve the final construction loan application and provide staff additional direction on the financing of the project. CITY MANAGER’S RECOMMENDED ACTION: Approving the construction loan will allow the City to access State Revolving Funds to finance the demolition of the old water plant facilities. This is the most cost-effective approach to completing this demolition work. The principal and interest payments related to this loan have been accounted for in the Water Fund rate design. Therefore, it is the recommendation of the City Manager that the City Council approve Alternative No. 1, as described above. ITEM #: 12 DATE: 07/12/22 COUNCIL ACTION FORM SUBJECT: AMENDMENT TO PURCHASE AGREEMENT WITH HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF CENTRAL IOWA FOR PROPERTY AT 241 VILLAGE DRIVE BACKGROUND: At its meeting on April 12, 2022, the City Council, approved the sale of the City-owned property at 241 Village Drive to Habitat for Humanity of Central Iowa (HHCI) for $100,000. The closing was scheduled to occur on or before July 29, 2022, if all conditions of the purchase agreement for the rehabilitation of the single-family home and sale of the property were satisfied. The City recently received an email from HHCI requesting an extension to complete the rehabilitation and closing. The requested extension would amend the purchase agreement deadlines from July 29, 2022, to the dates outlined below: • Rehabilitation to be completed on or before October 15, 2022. • Closing with the City of Ames to be completed on or before October 31, 2022 • Closing to a qualified homebuyer to be completed on or by October 31, 2022 HHCI indicated two reasons for the request: 1) Habitat for Humanity of Central Iowa had to reopen the homeowner application process due to a first unsuccessful attempt at finding a financially viable partner family for the project, and 2) Because of unforeseen challenges in securing adequate volunteer and subcontractor labor for the project, the renovation work that is being planned will take longer than initially anticipated. The City’s Legal Department has prepared an amendment to the Purchase Agreement to implement these changed timelines (attached). ALTERNATIVES: 1. Approve the attached Amendment to the Agreement between the City of Ames and Habitat for Humanity of Central Iowa to extend the time for completion for the rehabilitation and sale of the single-family home located at 241 Village Drive for affordable housing. 2. Do not approve the Amendment. 3. Direct staff to make modifications to the proposed Amendment. CITY MANAGER'S RECOMMENDED ACTION: The sale and rehabilitation of the single-family home located at 241 Village Drive to HHCI will assist the City in its efforts to continue to address the housing needs for low- and moderate-income first-time home buyers. An extension is necessary in order to allow for Habitat for Humanity to select a qualified homebuyer and complete the needed improvements to the property. Therefore, it is the recommendation of the City Manager that the City Council approve Alternative #1, as described above. AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF AMES AND HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF CENTRAL IOWA, INC., FOR THE REHABILITATION OF PROPERTY AT 241 VILLAGE DRIVE , AMES, IOWA THIS IS AN AMENDMENT to an Agreement made by and between the City of Ames, Iowa and Habitat for Central Iowa, Inc., upon the following terms and conditions: 1 DEFINITIONS. When used in this Amendment, unless otherwise required by the context: 1.1 “City” means the City of Ames, Iowa, an Iowa Municipal Corporation, the seller of the property herein. 1.2 “Habitat” means Habitat for Humanity of Central Iowa, Inc., an Iowa Nonprofit Corporation. 1.3 “Agreement” means the recorded Agreement, and any existing amendments thereto, presently in force between the City and Habitat, filed in the office of the Recorder of Story County, Iowa, on April 19, 2022, as Instrument No. 2022-03669, and authorized by Resolution No. 22-178 governing the rehabilitation of certain improvements upon the Real Property by Habitat and the sale by the City to Habitat of the Real Property. 1.4 “Amendment” means this instrument as signed by the City and Habitat. 1.5 “Real Property” means the real property (together with all easements and servient estates appurtenant thereto) situated in Story County, Iowa, locally known as 241 Village Drive, Ames, Iowa, and legally described as follows: Lot 11, West Campus Village Addition, Ames, Story County, Iowa. 2 AMENDMENT. The Agreement, at Part I, paragraph (E), is hereby amended by removing “July 29, 2022” and substituting “October 31, 2022” in lieu thereof. 3 AMENDMENT. The Agreement is hereby amended by deleting therefrom Part II, paragraph (A)(3), the second full sentence in its entirety and by substituting in lieu thereof the following: All property improvements shall be completed on or before October 15, 2022. S P A C E A B O V E R E S E R V E D F O R O F F I C I A L U S E Return document to: Document prepared by: 2 4 AMENDMENT. The Agreement, at Part II, paragraph (C)(3), is hereby amended by removing “July 29, 2022” and substituting “October 31, 2022” in lieu thereof. 5 AMENDMENT. The Agreement is further amended by deleting therefrom Part II, paragraph (C)(3), the final full sentence in its entirety and by substituting in lieu thereof the following: Upon verification that the new construction upon the property has been satisfactorily completed, the City of Ames will schedule the closing date to convey title to the property to Habitat on or before October 31, 2022. 6 AMENDMENT. The Agreement is further amended by deleting therefrom Part II, paragraph (D), in its entirety and by substituting in lieu thereof the following: D. Completion Date and Terms. Habitat shall be permitted to commence rehabilitation as soon as the nonrefundable down payment has been paid to the City of Ames. Habitat shall complete rehabilitation of the Property by October 15, 2022. Habitat shall promptly sell the Property to qualified homebuyers on or before October 31, 2022. 7 AMENDMENT. The Agreement is further amended by deleting from Part III, Paragraphs A, B, C(1) and (2), and D, each and every reference to the date July 29, 2032, and substituting in lieu thereof the date October 31, 2032. 8 AMENDMENT. Exhibit A of the Agreement is further amended by changing the stated date of “July 15, 2022” to “October 15, 2022” as it refers to the walk-through inspection, and by changing the stated date of “July 15, 2022” to “October 15, 2022” for the final inspection. 9 CONTINUED FULL FORCE. The Agreement shall continue to have full force and effect in accordance with the terms thereof, subject, however, to this Amendment. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the City and Habitat have executed this Third Amendment on this ________ day of ________________, 2022. HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF CENTRAL IOWA, INC. By: By: , Board President , Executive Director STATE OF IOWA, COUNTY OF STORY, SS.: This instrument was acknowledged before me on ___________________________, 2022, by Tom Prochnow and Dan Nutini, as Board President and Executive Director, respectively, of Habitat for Humanity of Central Iowa, Inc. NOTARY PUBLIC 3 Passed and approved on ______________________, 2022, by Resolution No. 22-______________, adopted by the City Council of Ames, Iowa. CITY OF AMES, IOWA Attest: By: Diane R. Voss, City Clerk John A. Haila, Mayor STATE OF IOWA, COUNTY OF STORY, SS.: This instrument was acknowledged before me on ____________________________, 2022, by Diane R. Voss and John A. Haila, as City Clerk and Mayor, respectively, of the City of Ames, Iowa. NOTARY PUBLIC ITEM # __13___ DATE: 07-12-22 COUNCIL ACTION FORM SUBJECT: TEMPORARY STREET CLOSURE FOR LYNN AVENUE BACKGROUND: The owner of 120 Lynn Avenue (Kappa Kappa Gamma) needs to install a stormwater manhole and pipes, requiring the removal and replacement of street pavement. Due to safety concerns and the location of the existing storm sewer, a closure of Lynn Avenue is required. It is customary to obtain City Council approval for street closures that affect CyRide routes. CyRide’s Brown Route operates along this portion of Lynn Avenue. It is estimated that the street will need to be closed for five days. Staff will work with the contractor to complete the work during summer break if possible, when there will be less traffic in the area. Public Works will work with the owner and specified contractor to minimize the disruption to the traveling public and adjacent properties and coordinate public notification of the street closure. ALTERNATIVES: 1. Authorize staff to administratively close Lynn Avenue as necessary to complete the stormwater and pavement work at 120 Lynn Avenue 2. Deny the request, and direct the property owner to bring back a request for specific days to close Lynn Avenue. CITY MANAGER'S RECOMMENDED ACTION: The work on Lynn Avenue is required for the completion of the demolition of the existing building at 120 Lynn Avenue. Flexibility to close the street on short notice will aid in completing the work quickly and during an ideal construction window. Therefore, it is the recommendation of the City Manager that the City Council adopt Alternative No. 1, as described above. ITEM # 14 DATE: 07-12-22 COUNCIL ACTION FORM SUBJECT: 2021/22 SHARED USE PATH SYSTEM EXPANSION (SOUTH OF LINCOLN WAY PATH EXPANSION) BACKGROUND: This program provides for construction of shared use paths on street rights-of-way, adjacent to streets, and through greenbelts. The Long Range Transportation Plan (LRTP) identifies those paths that separate bicycle traffic from higher-speed automobile traffic. This project is the phase of project OFF 5 in the 2040 LRTP through Franklin Park to S Wilmoth Avenue (see attached map). WHKS & Co. of Ames, Iowa, and City staff developed plans and specifications with an estimated budget as shown below: Revenues Expenses Local Option Sales Tax $290,000 Administration $25,000.00 Design $32,800.00 Construction (est) $228,101.50 Total $290,000 Total $285,901.50 ALTERNATIVES: 1. Approve plans and specifications for the 2021/22 Shared Use Path System Expansion (South of Lincoln Way Path Expansion) project and establish August 3, 2022 , as the date of letting with August 9, 2022, as the date for report of bids. 2. D o not approve this project. CITY MANAGER’S RECOMMENDED ACTION: By approving these plans and specifications, it will be possible to move forward with the shared use path expansion. Therefore, it is the recommendation of the City Manager that the City Council adopt Alternative No. 1, as described above. BEYER CT LINCOLN WAY TRIPP ST STATE AVE DOTSON DR COY ST BEEDLE DR S WILMOTH AVE S FRANKLIN AVE MARIGOLD DR HARRIS ST WOOD ST APLIN RD HILLTOP RD STORY ST S SHELDON AVE HICKORY DR LETTIE ST HYLAND AVE CAMPUS AVE HOWARD AVE WILMOTH AVE FRANKLIN AVE SUNFLOWER DR COLORADO AVE HUNT ST COCHRANE PKWY S HYLAND AVE MARSHALL AVE KNAPP STVILLAGE DR FRONTAGE RD MCDONALD DR TRAIL RIDGE RD MORNINGSIDE ST BELLFLOWER DR STORY ST N 1 inch = 583 feet Shared Use Path System Expansion South of Lincoln Way Path BEYER CT UNION DR LINCOLN WAY TRIPP ST WEST ST WOODLAND ST COY ST STATE AVE DOTSON DR BEEDLE DR HYLAND AVE CAMPUS AVE SHELDON AVE ARBOR ST HICKORY DR FRANKLIN AVE S WILMOTH AVE S FRANKLIN AVE MARIGOLD DR HARRIS ST WOOD ST APLIN RD HILLTOP RD STORY ST S SHELDON AVE CRANE AVE LETTIE ST ELLIS ST HOWARD AVE WILMOTH AVE WESTWOOD DR SUNFLOWER DR COLORADO AVE HUNT ST COCHRANE PKWY S HYLAND AVE MARSHALL AVE KNAPP ST OLIVER AVE VILLAGE DR TRAIL RIDGE RD FRONTAGE RD HILLCREST AVE MCDONALD DR MORNINGSIDE ST BELLFLOWER DR LATIMER LN STORY ST Se gmen t Complete d Th is Project (2022 -23 Completion) Constructio n w ith Baker Sub division 1 ITEM # __15____ DATE 07-12-22 COUNCIL ACTION FORM SUBJECT: WATER POLLUTION CONTROL FACILITY 3-YEAR BIOSOLIDS HAULING PROJECT BACKGROUND: The City of Ames Water Pollution Control Facility (WPCF) produces approximately 30,000 gallons of Class II biosolids each day. Throughout the year, biosolids are stored in the facility’s biosolids storage lagoon and secondary digester and ultimately dispo sed of by land application as fertilizer on City-owned farm ground directly adjacent to the WPCF. The bulk of the land application occurs in the fall after crops have been harvested; however, some land application is performed throughout the year to maint ain adequate storage capacity. Primary hauling in the fall is conducted by a contracted hauler and periodic hauling throughout the year is performed by City staff. The current three-year Biosolids Hauling contract expired on June 30, 2022. On May 27, 2022, a request for proposals was issued for a new three-year Biosolids Hauling contract. The work was bid on a unit price basis, as the exact number of gallons disposed may vary from year to year. On Friday, June 17, 2022, three bid submittals were received: Bidders Lagoon Cleaning Digester Cleaning Total Bid Amount Mobilization/ Demobilization Unit Price per Gallon Bid Mobilization/ Demobilization Unit Price per Gallon Bid Nutri-Ject Systems, Inc. $2,000.00 $0.0468 $2,000.00 $0.215 $158,625.00 Midwest Injection, Inc. $5,000.00 $0.03 $5,000.00 $0.05 $93,750.00 Wulfekuhle Injection & Pumping $5,000.00 $0.0275 $5,000.00 $0.10 $96,250.00 The prices listed above are for the 2022/23 fiscal year. Based on the total bid amount presented above, Midwest Injection, Inc. of Cascade, Iowa, would be the lowest bidder for a one-year period of services. However, the cleaning of digesters is only anticipated to be done one time over the 3-year period, while the lagoon cleaning is expected to be done annually. Taking this into consideration, Wulfekuhle 2 Injection & Pumping would then be the lowest evaluated option over the three-year life of the contract. Bidder Lagoon Cleaning (completed annually) Mobilization Unit cost X 2.5 million gallons/year Annual Cost Total over 3 years (annual cost x 3) Nutri-Ject Systems, Inc. $2,000 $0.0468 $117,000 $119,000 $357,000 Midwest Injection, Inc. $5,000 $0.03 $75,000 $80,000 $240,000 Wulfekuhle Injection & Pumping $5,000 $0.0275 $68,750 $73,750 $221,250 Bidder Digester Cleaning (completed one time over 3-year period) Mobilization Unit cost X 175,000 gallons/year Annual Cost Total over 3 years Nutri-Ject Systems, Inc. $2,000 $0.215 $37,625 $39,625 $39,625 Midwest Injection, Inc. $5,000 $0.05 $8,750 $13,750 $13,750 Wulfekuhle Injection & Pumping $5,000 $0.10 $17,500 $22,500 $22,500 Bidder Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Total Over 3 Years Lagoon Cleaning Digester Cleaning Lagoon Cleaning Digester Cleaning Lagoon Cleaning Digester Cleaning Nutri-Ject Systems, Inc. $119,000 $39,625 $119,000 $0 $119,000 $0 $396,625 Midwest Injection, Inc. $80,000 $13,750 $80,000 $0 $80,000 $0 $253,750 Wulfekuhle Injection & Pumping $73,750 $22,500 $73,750 $0 $73,750 $0 $243.750 Wulfkuhle declined to include an annual cost escalator for the second and third years of the contract; their pricing is fixed for all three years of the agreement. Midwest Injection included a complicated escalation clause that would increase the unit prices by 3% for every $1 that fuel prices increase above $5.50/gallon. Nutri-Ject’s proposal did include a Construction Cost Index (CCI)-based escalation clause. Therefore, the cost escalation calculations for Midwest Injection and Nutri-Ject made both of their pricing less competitive. The adopted FY 2022/23 operating budget includes $103,000 for this work. Award of the second and third years of the contract will be made annually based on satisfactory performance of the contractor and on the appropriation of funding. 3 Because the work takes place in a very short window each fall, staff is recommending that the award include a “not to exceed” amount that is higher than the budget amount. The rationale for this unusual step is that it would not be possible to obtain Council approval for a change order on short notice if one was necessary during the fall hauling window. Staff is recommending that the contract’s not-to-exceed amount be 25% higher than the contract amount, or $120,312.50 for FY 2022/23. Any expenses in excess of the budgeted amount would need to be offset by savings elsewhere in the WPC operating budget. ALTERNATIVES: 1. Award the FY 2022/23 contract for biosolids disposal to Wulfekuhle Injection & Pumping of Peosta, Iowa, with payment based on the unit prices bid of $5,000.00 lump sum for mobilization/demobilization, $0.0275 per gallon for annual lagoon biosolids hauling operations, $0.10 per gallon for annual digester biosolids hauling, and with the total contract amount not to exceed $120,312.50. 2. Award a contract to one of the other bidders. 3. Do not award a contract and direct staff to obtain spot market pricing for biosolids disposal. 4. Do not award a contract for biosolids disposal and direct staff to purchase the additional equipment necessary to perform the work with City staff. CITY MANAGER’S RECOMMENDED ACTION: Disposal of biosolids at the WPC Facility is necessary for uninterrupted operation of the facility and continued compliance with the facility’s permit. Assuming the contract is renewed into the second and third optional years, Wulfekuhle Injection & Pumping was determined to be the lowest evaluated bid over the life of the agreement. Therefore, it is the recommendation of the City Manager that the City Council adopt Alternative No. 1, as described above. ITEM # ___16_ DATE: 7/12/22 COUNCIL ACTION FORM SUBJECT: AWARD CONTRACT FOR PADMOUNT SWITCHGEAR FOR ELECTRIC SERVICES BACKGROUND: This bid is for the purchase of three padmount switchgears to replenish inventory for the Electric Services Department. Padmount switchgear is kept on hand in order to ensure availability for the needs of the department. The three padmount switchgear needed each have distinct specifications. On June 13, 2022, an Invitation To Bid (ITB) was issued to 144 vendors. The ITB was advertised on AmesBids. On June 20, 2022, bids were received from four firms: 1. Power Line Supply, Williamsburg, IA 2. WESCO Distribution, Des Moines, IA 3. IRBY UTILITIES, Rapid City, SD 4. RESCO (Rural Electric Supply Cooperative), Ankeny, IA ITEM 1 ITEM 2 ITEM 3 FUSE/2-600A SWITCH FUSE/4-600A SWITCH 200E FUSE/3-600A SWITCH Power Line Supply WESCO IRBY UTILITIES RESCO *Price inclusive of 6% State of Iowa Sales Taxes Plus 1% Local Tax Staff reviewed the bids and concluded that the apparent low bid for Item 1 in the amount of $22,799.61 (inclusive of Iowa sales tax) submitted by WESCO Distribution, is acceptable. The apparent low bid for Item 2 in the amount of $21,943.56 (inclusive of Iowa sales tax) submitted by Power Line Supply, is acceptable. The apparent low bid for Item 3 in the amount of $23,992.61 (inclusive of Iowa sales tax) submitted by Power Line Supply, is acceptable. Padmount switchgears are standard Electric Services Department inventory items. Lead times for delivery of these items has increase to 22-34 weeks which is why staff is asking that we order each of these types now in order to meet customer requests more quickly. Inventory items are purchased from an Electric Department inventory asset account and charged to the appropriate operations expense/project accounts as the materials are taken out of inventory and put into the various work orders. The prices bid for these switchgears appear higher than the prices the utility has paid in the past for the same items. However, it has been several years since these specific switchgears have been purchased (up to 8 years in one instance). In addition, the range of the prices bid is fairly close. Therefore, it is difficult to determine if the price increases are unusually inflated in this bid, or if the increases are a result of longer-term equipment cost increases. ALTERNATIVES: 1. A. Award a contract to WESCO Distribution, Des Moines, IA., for the purchase of line item 1, Electric Services padmount switchgear in accordance with bid in the amount of $22,799.61 (inclusive of Iowa sales tax). B. Award a contract to Power Line Supply, Williamsburg, IA, for the purchase of line items 2 and 3, Electric Services padmount switchgear in accordance with bid in the amount of $45,936.17 (inclusive of Iowa sales tax). 2. Reject all bids and attempt to purchase padmount switchears on an as needed basis. CITY MANAGER'S RECOMMENDED ACTION: It is important to purchase padmount switchgears at the lowest possible cost with minimal risk to the City. It is also imperative to have padmount switchgears available to meet department’s needs for commercial and residential application. Therefore, it is the recommendation of the City Manager that the City Council adopt Alternative No. 1 A-B, as stated above. ITEM # __17____ DATE: 7/12/2022 COUNCIL ACTION FORM SUBJECT: AWARD CONTRACT FOR CABLE AND WIRE FOR ELECTRIC SERVICES DEPARTMENT BACKGROUND: This bid is for the purchase of 2,300 feet of 15kV 4/0 triplex aluminum cable and 6,000 feet of 750 kcmil copper wire to replenish inventory for the Electric Services Department. Cable and wire of this type is kept on hand in order to ensure availability for the needs of the department. Typically, this cable is used to provide service for commercial and residential applications and is necessary to meet the anticipated needs of the Electric Services Department for new construction and maintenance projects. On June 13, 2022, an Invitation To Bid (ITB) was issued to 144 vendors. The ITB was advertised on AmesBids. On June 27, 2022, one bid was received as shown below: BIDDER TOTAL COST WESCO Distribution, Des Moines, IA $210,243.23 *Price inclusive of 6% State of Iowa Sales Taxes Plus 1% Local Tax Since the City received only one bid, staff reviewed past awarded contracts to determine the reasonableness of the bid. For the 15 kV 4/0 triplex, the City paid $13.52/foot in November 2021. The quoted price for this bid is $19.43/foot, a 44% increase. For the 750 kcmil copper wire, the City paid $21.52/foot in November 2021. The quoted price for this bid is $25.30/foot, an 18% increase. Considering the recent increase in metal costs, and the need to have this critical supply of cable and wire on hand, staff has concluded that the bid in the amount of $210,243.23 (inclusive of Iowa sales tax) submitted by WESCO Distribution, is acceptable. This cable is a standard Electric Services Department inventory item. Inventory items are purchased from an Electric Department inventory asset account and charged to the appropriate operations expense/project accounts as the materials are taken out of inventory and put into the various work orders. ALTERNATIVES: 1. Award a contract to Wesco Distribution, Des Moines, IA., for the purchase of Electric Services aluminum cable and copper wire in accordance with bid in the amount of $210,243.23 (inclusive of Iowa sales tax). 2. Reject the bid and attempt to purchase aluminum cable and copper wire on an as needed basis. CITY MANAGER'S RECOMMENDED ACTION: It is important to purchase aluminum cable and copper wire at the lowest possible cost with minimal risk to the City. It is also imperative to have aluminum cable and copper wire available to meet department’s needs for commercial and residential application. Therefore, it is the recommendation of the City Manager that the City Council adopt Alternative No. 1, as stated above. Smart Choice MEMO 515.239.5105 main fax To: Mayor and Members of the City Council From: City Clerk’s Office Date: July 12, 2022 Subject: Contract and Bond Approval There is/are no Council Action Form(s) for Item No(s). 18, 19, and 20. Council approval of the contract and bond for this/these project(s) is simply fulfilling a State Code requirement. /alc 1 ITEM # __ 21___ DATE: 07-12-22 COUNCIL ACTION FORM SUBJECT: FLOOD MITIGATION – RIVER FLOODING (CHANGE ORDER) BACKGROUND: On February 11, 2020, City Council approved the FEMA grant funding agreement for the stream bank restoration project, providing flood mitigation in the Ioway Creek channel. The central component of the project includes channel conveyance improvements approximately 2,000 feet either side of the South Duff Avenue bridge. On November 9, 2021, the project was awarded to Keller Excavating, of Boone, Iowa, in the amount of $3,327,523.50. On December 10, 2021, City Council approved Change Order No. 1 in the amount of $107,410 to properly dispose of vehicle parts that were discovered buried in the southeast quadrant of the project. Change Order No. 2 was administratively approved in the amount of $19,572.20 to install an 8-inch valve on the existing water main, add a major manhole adjustment south of U-Haul in the new berm, and replace a sanitary sewer manhole cone section that was more deteriorated than anticipated. Change Order No. 3 (this change order) is in the amount of $223,713.72. This change order includes a variety of additional work and quantities, as well as changes to the contract completion. The additional work addressed in Change Order No. 3 includes the following components: 1. Rip rap and storm sewer pipe relocation necessary for the upcoming Ioway Creek Trail project along the north side of Ioway Creek 2. Cleaning a storm sewer pipe found to be completely blocked with silt 3. An increased quantity of wattles and a stabilized construction entrance to prevent erosion and tracking due to rainy spring weather 4. Removal of an unknown concrete foundation near Howe’s 5. Cutting/partial removal of existing steel sheet pile to improve water user safety 6. Disposing of garbage on the north side of Ioway Creek 7. Increased quantity of non-regulated waste disposal 8. Balancing a majority of the field quantities encountered as part of the project. 2 Funding for this work is available in the unobligated balances of the Water System Improvements, Sanitary Sewer Improvements, and Storm Water Improvements CIP programs. Change Order No. 3 also extends the completion date to November 11, 2022. The original contract documents stated that if FEMA granted an extension, this would be reflected with the contractor to extend the completion date of the project. The City received a one-year extension to have the entire project closed out by June 19, 2023. The area has been graded and seeded; however, items remaining include landscaping that is best planted in the Fall (once weather cools). Also, a steel handrail to be mounted on top of the retaining wall is delayed due to a long lead time to be fabricated. The estimated costs and funding are as follows: Flood Mitigation - River Flooding 2015/16 2016/17 2018-2022 Expenditures Total Expenditures Design Contract (WHKS)$138,000 $181,200.00 $319,200.00 Land Acquisition Agent (CGA)$74,800.00 $74,800.00 Land Acquisition $2,090,402.40 $2,090,402.40 Tree Clearing Contract $164,085.00 $164,085.00 Construction Contract Awarded $3,327,523.50 $3,327,523.50 Change Order No. 1 $107,410.00 $107,410.00 Change Order No. 2 $19,572.20 $19,572.20 Change Order No. 3 $223,713.72 $223,713.72 Engineering/Constr Admin (City Staff)$243,128.53 $243,128.53 $6,569,835.35 Funding Shown in CIP Total CIP Funding 20/21 Storm Water Utility Funds $500,000 $500,000 GO Bonds $644,000 $504,000 $700,000 $1,848,000 FEMA Hazard Mitigation Grant $3,747,450 $3,747,450 21/22 Water System Improvement Funds $55,000 $55,000 21/22 Sanitary Sewer System Improvement Funds $140,000 $140,000 21/22 Storm Water Improvement Funds $200,000 $200,000 GO Bonds - CO 1 Council Authorized 12/10/21 $100,000 $100,000 $6,590,450 Fiscal Year 3 ALTERNATIVES: 1. a. Approve Change Order No. 3 for the Ioway Creek Restoration and Flood Mitigation project in the amount of $223,713.72. b. Authorize utilizing up to $200,000 in Storm Water Improvement Funds, $140,000 in Sanitary Sewer Improvement Funds, and $55,000 in Water System Improvement Funds for this project. 2. Do not approve this change order to the project. CITY MANAGER’S RECOMMENDED ACTION: Approving this Change Order reflects the additional and unexpected work encountered on the project and continues moving toward meeting the FEMA close-out deadline of June 2023. Therefore, it is the recommendation of the City Manager that the City Council adopt Alternative No. 1, as noted above. ITEM # 22 DATE: 07-12-22 COUNCIL ACTION FORM SUBJECT: 2020/21 MULTI-MODAL ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS (VET MED TRAIL – SOUTH 16TH STREET) BACKGROUND: This program improves roadways to create a safer interaction between various transportation modes using alternatives such as improved crossing visibility at intersections, bike detection, and on-street facilities (e.g., bike lanes, sharrows). This project installed a new pedestrian hybrid beacon at the Vet Med Trail crossing of S. 16th Street. On June 8, 2021, City Council awarded the project to Voltmer, Inc. of Decorah, Iowa in the amount of $66,436.66. One change order was approved by staff in the deduct amount of ($344.97) to reflect final measured quantities, bringing the final construction cost to $66,091.69. Revenues and expenses for this project are shown below: Revenues Expenses Construction $66,091.69 Total $180,000 Total $179,692.69 ALTERNATIVES: 1. Accept the 2020/21 Multi-Modal Roadway Improvements (Vet Med Trail – South 16th Street) project as completed by Voltmer, Inc. of Decorah, Iowa in the amount of $66,091.69. 2. Direct staff to pursue modification to the project. CITY MANAGER’S RECOMMENDED ACTION: The project has now been completed in accordance with the approved plans and specifications. Therefore, it is the recommendation of the City Manager that the City Council adopt Alternative No. 1, as described above. ITEM # __23___ DATE: 07-12-22 COUNCIL ACTION FORM SUBJECT: ACCEPT COMPLETION OF YEAR FIVE OF WATER PLANT WELL REHABILITATION CONTRACT BACKGROUND: On May 25, 2021, City Council awarded a contract to Northway Well and Pump Company of Waukee, Iowa, in the amount of $104,923.37 to complete the fifth and final year of a five-year renewable contract for the rehabilitation of drinking water wells. This fifth year of the contract included the rehabilitation of five wells. After reviewing data from past rehabilitations, staff decided not to rehabilitate Well 12, as it is the lowest producing well and has shown limited pumping recovery from past rehabilitations. Eliminating the rehabilitation of this well resulted in a net savings in FY 21/22 of $6,200.69, even after executing three change orders for repairs. Original Contract $104,923.37 CO #1 – Repairs to #26 and 27 10,425.00 CO #2 – Repairs to #26 1,460.00 CO #3 – Repairs to #26 2,800.00 Savings from omitting #12 - 20,984.69 Net Contract $ 98,623.68 The Water Plant operating budget (FY 2021/22) allocated $104,925 for well cleaning, with an additional $27,500 available for well repair work, as needed, during the well rehabilitations. All work for this year’s contract has been successfully completed as of June 23, 2022. During this overall five-year contract, a total of 21 wells were cleaned and rehabilitated. This resulted in a total five-year cost of $424,542.24 for cleaning, with an additional $48,637.70 for repairs. With the rehabilitation process complete, the average production yield of all 21 wells resulted in a 51% gain. ALTERNATIVES: 1. Accept final completion of year five of the Water Plant well rehabilitation contract in the final amount of $98,623.68. 2. Do not accept completion of year five of the Water Plant well rehabilitation contract at this time. CITY MANAGER’S RECOMMENDED ACTION: All work associated with year five of the Water Plant’s well rehabilitation contract has been successfully completed in accordance with the City’s plans and specifications. Therefore, it is the recommendation of the City Manager that the City Council adopt Alternative No. 1, as described above. 1 ITEM #__24___ DATE: 07-12-22 COUNCIL ACTION FORM SUBJECT: MAJOR FINAL PLAT FOR HAYDEN’S RIDGE - TOWNHOME COMMUNITY SUBDIVISION BACKGROUND: The City’s subdivision regulations are included in Chapter 23 of the Ames Municipal Code. Once the applicant has completed the necessary requirements, including providing required public improvements or presenting financial security for their completion, an application for a “Final Plat” may then be made for City Council approval. The Final Plat must be found to conform to the ordinances of the City and any conditions placed upon the Preliminary Plat approval. An approved Final Plat must then be recorded with the County Recorder to become an officially recognized subdivision plat. 574 Investments LLC, represented by Kurt Friedrich and Luke Jensen, has submitted a final major subdivision plat for the Planned Unit Development known as Hayden’s Ridge Townhome Development. Hayden’s Ridge is currently addressed as 2098 W. 190th Street as shown on the location map in Attachment A. The Preliminary Plat and Major Site Development Plan for this PUD subdivision were approved on February 22nd, 2022. The project was approved as a PUD and a conservation subdivision with private streets, stormwater treatment, public water and sanitary sewer infrastructure, and a mix of public and private sidewalks. The review of the proposed Final Plat finds that it complies with the approved Preliminary Plat and Major Site Development Plan lotting and improvement requirements of the approved PUD rezoning. Hayden’s Ridge Subdivision includes 44 residential lots and two outlots. Outlot A (0.36 acres) includes area for open space and conservation easement along the northern edge of the subdivision. Outlot B (1.93 acres) includes area for open space and private streets (Attachment B). The residential lots include 32 single-family attached lots in the northern half of the subdivision and 12 bi-attached lots along the south portion of the site. The site is accessed from 190th Street via a shared driveway easement with the Vintage Co-op. The subdivision is located within a conservation area for Ada Hayden Watershed and as a result must conform to the Conservation Subdivision standards. The east and south boundaries of the subdivision abut the Quarry Estates Conservation area. The existing outlot that this subdivision is being created from is an outlot within the Quarry Estates Conservation Subdivision. The projected stormwater flows from the new homes and associated development within this subdivision have been reviewed by the City’s engineer and can be handled by the existing conservation areas and detention pond to the south in Quarry Estates. A conservation easement extending across the proposed 2 Outlot A along the north edge of the site also satisfies the design and treatment standards for Hayden’s Ridge. The remaining required improvements in Hayden’s Ridge Subdivision include, sidewalk paving, street signage, topsoil spread, seeding and some landscaping. Financial security in the amount of $138,425.32 has been provided for the necessary improvements. The financial security includes the costs of installing all the remaining sidewalk along 190th Street across the site and connecting across the abutting outlot to the existing sidewalk to the east. Additionally, a second sidewalk connection from the southeast corner of the site to McFarland Avenue through the abutting outlot is required. The Quarry Estates Outlot conservation areas allow for sidewalks to be placed in those areas. The streets within Hayden’s Ridge- Townhome Community are private streets. As a result, they are not included in the financial security for Public Improvements. The City staff has confirmed that the developer’s improvement plans (design and material thickness of the proposed private streets) meet the City’s private street standards. Additionally, Chapter 23 requires that upon completion, a qualified engineer must certify the construction of the street is consistent with the approved plans. A stipulation is included with this project to put the developer on notice that this must occur prior to occupancy of a dwelling in the project. The City Council is being asked to accept the signed Improvement Agreement with financial security for those improvements. Financial security can be reduced by the City Council as the required infrastructure is installed, inspected, and accepted by the City. A Conservation Management Plan update is a requirement of the Subdivision Code for this Addition. The Conservation Management Plan (CMP), prepared by Inger Lamb of Prairie Landscapes of Iowa, details the installation, long-term maintenance, public outreach and education, and lawn care coordination of the prairie and woodland areas. An updated CMP reflecting Hayden’s Ridge- Townhome Community was required and has been accepted by the Municipal Engineer. 3 ALTERNATIVES: 1. Approve the Final Plat of Hayden’s Ridge Subdivision, based upon the staff’s findings that the Final Plat conforms to relevant and applicable design standards, ordinances, policies, and plans with acceptance of the: a. Public Improvement Agreement, b. Financial security of $138,425.32 for public improvements and sidewalks, c. Updated Conservation Subdivision Management Plan, and d. Stipulation by the developer for an engineer to certify to the City prior to occupancy of a dwelling that the construction of the private streets were completed consistent with the approved plans. 2. Deny the Final Plat for Hayden’s Ridge Subdivision based on the finding that the development creates a burden on existing public improvements or creates a need for new public improvements that have not yet been installed. CITY MANAGER’S RECOMMENDED ACTION: City staff has evaluated the proposed final Major Subdivision plat for the Planned Unit Development known as Hayden’s Ridge-Townhome Community. The proposed Major Final Plat is consistent with the Major Site Development Plan and Preliminary Plat approved by City Council as part of rezoning as a PUD. An updated Conservation Management Plan has been submitted and reviewed and complies with the City’s Conservation Management policy. The Major Final Plat conforms to the adopted ordinances and policies of the City as required by Code and other agreements. Because this Final Plat is the first project since the City Council adopted private street standards in 2021, staff has included a stipulation to put the developer on notice of the code requirement to verify that construction of the private streets were accomplished in accordance with the approved plans prior to occupancy of the homes. This is a departure from how the City treats public streets with financial security, but is similar to how a condition for a multi-family development with private improvements would be finalized with City staff. Therefore, it is the recommendation of the City Manager that the City Council adopt Alternative #1 to approve the final plat for Hayden’s Ridge Subdivision. 4 Attachment A- Location Map 5 Attachment B- Final Plat 6 Attachment B- Excerpt of PUD Major Site Plan Layout 7 Attachment C- Applicable Laws Applicable Laws and Policies Pertaining to Final Plat Approval Adopted laws and policies applicable to this case file include, but are not limited to, the following: Ames Municipal Code Section 23.302 1 ITEM: __25___ Staff Report FITCH FAMILY INDOOR AQUATIC CENTER PROPERTY ACQUISITION UPDATE (IDOT SITE) July 12, 2022 BACKGROUND: At the May 10, 2022 City Council meeting, staff provided an update regarding the proposed new warm-water Indoor Aquatic Center (IAC) at 122 North Oak Avenue. This update included a section discussing the status of the land acquisition. Based on the information obtained in the Phase I and Phase II environmental site assessments (ESAs), staff requested and Council approved pursuing further environmental investigation. The City retained a contractor, Impact7G, to complete an environmental analysis of the 122 North Oak Avenue property. Preliminary information presented to the City Council on May 10 is summarized below; activities completed since that date have been outlined in the section that follows the information below (beginning on page 3 of this report). PHASE 1 ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT (ESA): The ESA reviews records to determine the history of the site. Of concern is a coal gas company which was located north of the property along 2nd Street, as well as a variety of petroleum activities (bulk oil stations, filling stations, and several gasoline tanks) to the north and east. The Assessment identified several Recognized Environmental Conditions (RECs) which are defined as “the presence or likely presence of any hazardous substances or petroleum products in, on, or at a property: 1) due to release to the environment; 2) under conditions indicative of a release to the environment; or 3) under conditions that pose a material threat of a future release to the environment.” The following RECs were identified: • Historical records indicate that, for several decades in the 1900s, multiple sites north, northeast, and east of the Property were occupied by manufacturing, gas, and oil facilities. Fire insurance maps show the Property itself had a gas filling station and storage tanks near its northeastern corner between at least 1947 and 1963. • A former Leaking Underground Storage Tank (LUST) site (821 Lincoln Way) was closed in the State regulatory program. Contaminant plume and pathways maps indicate contamination, or the potential for future contamination, to have reached the Property’s southeastern corner. Past reports show two soil samples and 2 groundwater monitoring wells were installed immediately east of the Property. In 2001, the two samples indicated a low contaminant concentration in soil. • Regulatory records for a State-regulated contaminated site immediately north of the Property (903 2nd Street) included a Phase II report that was conducted on the Property in 1994, which included nine testing locations that showed petroleum contamination in the northeastern corner of the Property. Investigations for the north-adjoining site included six monitoring wells to delineate contamination in the northeastern corner of the Property. That case was closed in 2021, but with contaminants of concern exceeding Statewide Groundwater Standards in the far northeastern corner of the site as recently as September 2020. Impact7G considers the documented contamination a REC under a condition indicative of a release to the environment. As a result of these findings, Impact7G recommended performing additional investigation. This resulted in the City retaining Impact7G to complete a Phase II Environmental Site Assessment. Key findings from this assessment include: ASBESTOS CONTAINING MATERIAL (ACM) INSPECTION – NORTH ANNEX: This inspection found approximately 460 square feet of membrane adhesive and 70 linear feet of tar on the roof that contain asbestos. HAZARDOUS MATERIAL INVENTORY: Hazardous materials were identified throughout the structures. The DOT has agreed to remove some, but not all, of these items prior to vacating the premises. GROUND PENETRATING RADAR SURVEY (GPRS): When researching the site, it was noticed there is no record that the filling station’s underground storage tanks were ever removed. This is not uncommon, thus a GPRS was conducted and no storage tanks were identified. However, a DNR representative indicated GPR is ineffective in the state of Iowa due to the general soil composition. GEOTECH/ENVIRONMENTAL PHASE II STUDY: Geotechnical borings are conducted to survey the soil and groundwater conditions to determine if the site is suitable for construction. Findings suggest the soils are suitable for all types of construction. However, groundwater was detected 7-10 feet below the surface and there are some sand seams in some of the borings. This may require special footings to be constructed which will increase cost. This will be accounted for in the project budget. It should be noted that only nine borings were completed over a nearly three-acre site (Exhibit 1 below). It should be emphasized, unforeseen problems with soil conditions could still be detected once construction starts. 3 Exhibit 1 – Locations of Borings Conducted in April 2022 LIMITED SUBSURFACE INVESTIGATION (LSI)/ENVIRONMENTAL PHASE II STUDY: Three environmental and Geotech borings (TMW -1, TMW-2, and TMW -3) were drilled on the east side of the property as shown in Exhibit 1. Environmental borings check for color and odor of the soil, as well as testing the ground water for contaminants. The tests from these borings identified several contaminants that exceeded the limits included in the State-Wide Standards (SWS). Monitoring wells previously on the site also detected contaminants that exceeded SWS as recently as 2020. These monitoring wells were abandoned in 2021. 4 UPDATE REGARDING ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES: Since the May 10 report to City Council, staff has taken several specific actions to better understand the implications of the environmental contamination identified on the site. These include: 1. Reviewing in detail the findings of the environmental studies and historical documents 2. Retaining Impact7G to conduct additional environmental borings and groundwater samples 3. Consulting with DNR regarding: a. Geophysic Survey b. Formal comments relating to the proposed aquatic center project 4. Investigating the potential costs to address the contamination, in addition to the land acquisition costs 5. Discussing the findings of these reports and their impact on the sale with DOT representatives 1. DETAILED FINDINGS OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONTAMINATION: The Iowa DNR publishes a set of standards called “Statewide Standards” (SWS), which “represent concentrations of contaminants in groundwater and soil for which normal, unrestricted exposure is considered unlikely to pose a risk to human health.” The SWS include different contaminant concentration limits for: 1) Protected groundwater sources (SWS-PGWS), which are areas that could be tapped by a well for drinking water production, and 2) Non-protected groundwater sources (SWS-NPGWS), which are areas where the soil or groundwater conditions would not allow for a productive drinking water well to be drilled, so limits are higher. It should be noted that although several of the earlier environmental reports regarding the property utilize the more stringent SWS-PGWS, the City’s environmental consultant, Impact7G, expressed an opinion in April 2022 that the site is subject to the less stringent non-protected groundwater source standards. Therefore, those standards are used in this section of this report. Additionally, concentrations referred to in this staff report have all been converted to parts per billion (ppb) for consistency. The DOT purchased the 122 N. Oak site from St. Cecilia Church in January 1995 for $655,000. Prior to the purchase, the DOT retained a firm to conduct a limited Phase II ESA. Nine soil borings were conducted in 1994, and contamination was detected in two 5 of the bores (with subjective evidence of contamination in a third). The contaminated borings were located in the northeast quadrant of the site. The highest concentration of detected contamination was found in borehole “BH3.” (See Exhibit 2) Exhibit 2: Locations of Borings Conducted in 1994, Prior to Sale to DOT The report indicates 18 contaminants were detected at that test well (BH3). Of those 18, the contaminants exceeding present-day Statewide Standards at BH3 were: Exhibit 3: Contaminants Detected in 1994 that Exceed Present SWS Benzene 1 3,930 64 trans-1,3,-Dichloropropene2 352 35 The DOT ultimately purchased the site. The property to the north of the site location was a coal gasification plant operated in the early 20th century. Around 2018, the subsequent 1 https://wwwn.cdc.gov/TSP/ToxFAQs/ToxFAQsDetails.aspx?faqid=38&toxid=14 Benzene is a colorless liquid with a sweet odor. It evaporates into the air very quickly and dissolves slightly in water. It is highly flammable and is formed from both natural processes and human activities. Benzene is widely used in the United States; it ranks in the top 20 chemicals for production volume. Some industries use benzene to make other chemicals which are used to make plastics, resins, and nylon and other synthetic fibers. Breathing benzene can cause drowsiness, dizziness, and unconsciousness; long-term benzene exposure causes effects on the bone marrow and can cause anemia and leukemia. 2 https://wwwn.cdc.gov/TSP/ToxFAQs/ToxFAQsDetails.aspx?faqid=835&toxid=163 1,3-Dichloropropene is a colorless liquid with a sweet smell. It is used mainly in farming as a pesticide. 1,3-Dichloropropene is quickly broken down in air, usually within several days. Some of the 1,3-dichloropropene in soil and water will evaporate into the air. The rest will be broken down. Dichloropropenes cause irritation at the point of contact. Ingestion of high amounts of 1,3-dichloroprene can cause severe stomach damage. 6 owner, Interstate Power and Light (IPL), undertook a groundwater monitoring project to delineate the extent of contamination and determine whether the plume related to the former gasification plant was expanding or had stabilized. This monitoring included the installation of testing wells on the northeast perimeter of the site, which were periodically sampled (Exhibit 4). Exhibit 4: Locations of Several Monitoring Wells Sampled Between 2018 and 2020 The results of the sampling were provided to DNR, IPL, and the DOT. Between 2018 and 2020, the wells were sampled on seven occasions. Two wells on the DOT site recorded samples indicating contamination in excess of the SWS-NPGWS (Exhibit 5): 1) MW -04, located approximately 100 feet west of the intersection of North Elm and North Second Street along the north property line 2) MW -05, located approximately 60 feet east of MW -04 Exhibit 5: 2018-2020 Study Samples Exceeding SWS Compound Well Standard (non-protected ground water source) 8/13/18 11/7/18 12/17/19 3/17/20 6/10/20 9/15/20 Dibenz(a,h)anthracene 3 MW -04 0.48 0.628 Benzene MW -05 64 1820 1010 932 1150 366 845 3 https://wwwn.cdc.gov/TSP/ToxFAQs/ToxFAQsDetails.aspx?faqid=121&toxid=25 Dibenz(a,h)anthracene is a polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon (PAH). PAHs are a group of over 100 different chemicals that are formed during the incomplete burning of coal, oil and gas, garbage, or other organic substances like tobacco or charbroiled meat. Some PAHs are manufactured. These pure PAHs usually exist as colorless, white, or pale yellow-green solids. The Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) has determined that some PAHs may reasonably be expected to be carcinogens. 7 After repeated samples, the analysis of IPL’s consultant indicated that the contaminant plume was stable (i.e., non-expanding). Therefore, in April 2021, the ten monitoring wells associated with the former manufactured gas plant were sealed and abandoned, including the monitoring wells located on the DOT property. The DNR later approved the close-out of the monitoring activities related to the site. 2. PRELIMINARY AND ADDITIONAL CITY-DIRECTED BORINGS AND SAMPLES: In April 2022, the City’s environmental consultant, Impact7G, issued a report of its findings from the Limited Subsurface Investigation of the site. Three environmental borings were completed and analyzed (TMW -1, -2, and -3). The boring in the northeast corner of the property, “TMW -1,” detected a variety of compounds, including four of note (Exhibit 6): Exhibit 6: Contaminants of Concern Detected in April 2022 at TMW-1 Hexane 4 739 2,100 Naphthalene5 116 700 1,2,4-trimethylbenzene 6 476 350 1,3,5-trimethylbenzene 7 143 350 However, only the concentration of 1,2,4-trimethylbenzene exceeded the statewide standards for non-protected groundwater sources (476 ppb detected, compared to the SWS-NPGWS limit of 350 ppb). TMW-2 also indicated the presence of waste oil at 244 ppb which is below the SWS-NPGWS of 1,500 ppb. Based on these initial results, City staff retained Impact7G again to obtain four additional environmental borings along the northern edge of the property (TMW-4, -5, -6, and -7) and to collect groundwater samples from three sump basins located in the existing buildings. These samples were collected on June 7, 2022 and the locations are shown in Exhibit 7. 4 https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2016-09/documents/hexane.pdf Hexane is primarily used as a solvent to extract edible oils from seed and vegetable crops (e.g., soybeans, peanuts, corn). (6) Commercial grades of hexane are used as solvents for glues (rubber cement, adhesives), varnishes, and inks. Acute (short-term) inhalation exposure of humans to high levels of hexane causes mild central nervous system (CNS) effects, including dizziness, giddiness, slight nausea, and headache. EPA has classified hexane as a Group D, not classifiable as to human carcinogenicity 5 https://wwwn.cdc.gov/TSP/ToxFAQs/ToxFAQsDetails.aspx?faqid=239&toxid=43 Naphthalene is a white solid that evaporates easily. Fuels such as petroleum and coal contain naphthalene. Exposure to large amounts of naphthalene may damage or destroy some of your red blood cells. Naphthalene has caused cancer in animals. Based on the results from animal studies, the Department of Health and Humans Services (DHHS) concluded that naphthalene is reasonably anticipated to be a human carcinogen. 6 https://pubchem.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/compound/1_2_4-Trimethylbenzene 1,2,4-trimethylbenzene is present in gasoline and occurs in coal tar and many petroleum products. It is a clear, colorless liquid with a distinctive, aromatic odor. Exposure can cause irritation to the eyes, skin, nose, throat, and respiratory system; bronchitis; hypochromic anemia; headache, drowsiness, lassitude (weakness, exhaustion), dizziness, nausea, incoordination; vomiting, confusion; chemical pneumonitis (aspiration liquid) 7 https://pubchem.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/compound/7947 The characteristics and hazards of 1,3,5-trimethylbenzene are similar to those indicated for 1,2,4- trimethylbenzene, above. 8 Exhibit 7: Locations of Samples Collected in April (blue) and June (red) 2022 A report was issued June 16, which indicated the presence of the following additional contaminants: 1) Sump #3 indicated the presence of waste oil in excess of statewide standards, which Impact7G believes “[…] is likely associated with leaking elevator equipment versus historical contamination from past uses of the Property.” The waste oil was detected at 9,400 ppb compared to the SWS-NPGWS limit of 1,500 ppb. Since the waste oil is isolated inside the building and can be removed, staff is less concerned about the impact to the surrounding soil and ground water. 2) TMW-4 indicated a concentration of benzene in excess of statewide standards for a non-protected groundwater source (651 ppb detected, compared to the state limit of 64 ppb). 3) Sump #2 indicated the presence of methylene chloride 8, although less concentrated than the SWS-NPGWS limits. 8 https://wwwn.cdc.gov/TSP/ToxFAQs/ToxFAQsDetails.aspx?faqid=233&toxid=42 Methylene chloride is a colorless liquid with a mild, sweet odor. Methylene chloride is used as an industrial solvent and as a paint stripper. It may also be found in some aerosol and pesticide products and is used in the manufacture of photographic film. The Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) has determined that methylene chloride can be reasonably anticipated to be a cancer-causing chemical. 9 Impact7G’s report contains a risk evaluation that uses the detected concentrations of contaminants and measures cancer and non-cancer risks using published Iowa DNR resources (the cumulative risk calculator). The report describes the Cumulative Risk calculation as follows: “567 IAC 137.10(7) specifies cumulative risk criteria that must be complied with to acquire a no further action certificate under the Iowa Land Recycling Program (LRP). Cumulative risk is the summation of cancer and non- cancer risks, determined separately, based on exposure to multiple contaminants from the same medium and exposure of the same individual contaminants in multiple media. Evaluation of cumulative risk is conducted using the cumulative risk calculator on the IDNR Contaminated Sites Section website. The cumulative risk calculator assesses risk to potentially exposed parties, based on three standard exposure scenarios, from multiple contaminants and multiple media (i.e., groundwater, soil, and air). To evaluate compliance with the acceptable risk criteria, the cumulative concentrations of contaminants must meet standards limiting increased cancer and non-cancer health risk. The cumulative risk criteria are as follows: • Cumulative cancer risk shall not exceed 1 in 10,000. • Non-cancer health risk to the same target organ shall not exceed a cumulative Hazard Quotient of 1. […] This evaluation was conducted using the Site Worker and Construction Worker exposure scenarios to comply with site-specific standards in a commercial setting. Per the IDNR’s Cumulative Risk Calculator glossary, a “Site Worker” is an adult who is assumed to work at the site for 25 years. The site-worker scenario may include drinking water from an on-site well, exposure to soil less than 2 feet deep by both ingestion and dermal contact, and exposure to contaminants in the air. A “Construction Worker” is an adult who is assumed to be involved in construction work involving excavation at the site for 200 days during the course of 1 year. The construction worker is assumed not to drink contaminated water from the site, but is exposed to soil greater than 2 feet deep via both ingestion and dermal contact and may be exposed to contaminants in air.” Based upon that standard methodology, Impact7G calculates 1) Total Cancer Outputs and 2) Non-Cancer Outputs by Target Organ as described below: “The maximum concentrations for those substances above SWS were input into the IDNR’s online Cumulative Risk Calculator. According to the results (refer to Appendix F), the Total Cancer Output is 1.15 for the Site Worker 10 scenario for groundwater, and 0.0 for the Construction Worker scenario. A cumulative cancer risk shown as a value less than one equal to 1.00 (a value of 1 being equivalent to a 1 x 10-4 cancer risk) represents an acceptable cumulative cancer risk for that exposure party. As such, the Cumulative Cancer Risk for the Site Worker exposure pathway, indicates additional action is needed to address the observed groundwater contamination.” The Non-Cancer Risk calculation is presented as a hazard quotient. The hazard quotient is the ratio of the contaminant concentration divided by the concentration below which no adverse health impact is expected. The “sum” value for each target organ must be less than or equal to 1.00 to achieve compliance with the cumulative non- cancer risk criterion. Impact7G’s analysis indicates the Non-Cancer Output by Target Organ for the Construction Worker scenario is less than 1.00. However, the Non-Cancer Outputs by Target Organ for the Site Worker scenario is 1.43. The conclusion Impact7G reaches based on these results is that: “it is the opinion of Impact7G that the detected groundwater contamination at the Property represents a minor risk to human health and the environment. Best management practices (BMP) in the form of a Soil/Groundwater Management Plan and consideration of building materials (vapor barrier, impermeable piping/utility conduits, etc.) should be considered if construction will be disturbing the northeast area of the Property.” 3. CONSULTATION WITH IOWA DNR: City staff discussed the results of the April 2022 findings from Impact7G with representatives of Iowa DNR. DNR issued a letter dated May 6, 2022 outlining DNR’s policy stance related to the development of the site. City staff held a call with DNR to discuss this letter in more detail. The comments from DNR include: 1. Due to the soil and groundwater contamination, development activities in the northeast quadrant of the site, except simple grading activities, will require DNR oversight. DNR also cautions that utility work through this portion of the site (such as for parking lot lighting or relocating the electric line through the property) will be subject to this oversight. 2. The construction oversight that would be required by Iowa DNR includes: a. Submit a work plan for approval regarding activities in the areas where contamination has been identified b. Develop and implement a plan for soil and/or groundwater testing c. Develop and implement a plan for disposal of contaminated soils and/or groundwater encountered d. Submit a post-construction report documenting completed actions, test results, and disposal documentation. 11 3. Dewatering activities during the construction process, and the completed building’s sump system, may need to be tested for contaminants prior to discharge. In discussions, DNR indicated that construction dewatering in particular tends to cause movement or infiltration of contamination. If contamination from either construction or the building sump is discovered, it would likely need to be discharged to the Water Pollution Control Facility rather than the stormwater system. 4. DNR indicated the use of the Cumulative Risk Calculator, which Impact7G used to analyze potential cancer and non-cancer risk, is to be used in sites administered under the Iowa Land Recycling Program. The 122 N. Oak Avenue site is being administered under DNR’s General Ground Water and Soil Cleanup Rule. Therefore, according to DNR, the Cumulative Risk Calculator may not be the appropriate tool to assess risks on this site. DNR issued a revised letter on June 21, 2022, following a review of the additional borings and samples conducted by Impact 7G. The DNR notes that: “Overall, Iowa DNR still agrees the proposed water park plan as presented would be a good fit for the site.” In conversations with DNR, it was emphasized that the City would only be responsible for properly handling any contamination disturbed by the City on the site. The City would not be obligated to clean up contamination that exists now, so long as it does not become exposed or begin to migrate due to activities such as construction and operation of the aquatic center. Based on discussions with Impact7G and DNR, City staff is aware that additional project design components may be impacted by the contaminated areas. These include the location and design of the stormwater detention and treatment facilities on the site (which must be created in a way that does not draw contaminated water into waterways). Additionally, the facility may require the installation of a vapor mitigation system (akin to a radon mitigation system), to ensure that any vapors that make their way through the soil into the building have ventilation to the outside. The contaminants identified in the site are odorous, and therefore the adjacent neighborhood may be temporarily impacted by unpleasant odors encountered during excavation. City staff also discussed with DNR the challenge with definitively identifying whether a former underground storage tank on the northeast portion of the property had been removed. Records do not exist confirming the tank’s removal, and the ground-penetrating radar system used by the City’s environmental consultant was unable to reach the depth where the tank would be located. DNR staff volunteered to use the site as a training experience for its staff to use EM-31 Geophysical Testing equipment, which could more effectively determine whether the tank remained. Following testing, DNR concluded: “Overall, the survey results indicate no clearly defined underground storage tanks under the survey area. The survey does 12 indicate a buried electrical cable for the parking lot street lamps and disturbed soil on the central left side of the study area.” The study indicates that the disturbed soil mentioned may be a metallic object such as a buried manhole cover or a water shutoff valve. 4. POTENTIAL COSTS FOR CONTAMINATION MITIGATION IN ADDITION TO LAND ACQUISTION COST: In order to proceed with construction on the site in light of the contamination, staff has identified a variety of additional measures that would need to be incorporated into the design of the facility/site, the construction process, and the ongoing operations of the facility. Information has been collected from Impact7G, DNR, the Water and Pollution Control Department, Public Works Department, Electric Services, Stecker-Harmsen, and various contractors to identify what measures would need to be incorporated and their potential costs. The list below includes rough cost estimates, based on a worst-case scenario. The actual costs may vary greatly, depending on factors such as the building design and configuration and the City’s appetite for risk of potential contaminant intrusion or movement into the future. The costs indicated for these measures are in addition to the purchase price of the land that would be agreed to by the DOT. Double Cased Geothermal Well (Additional Outer Casing) $367,080 This entails adding an outer casing to the closed loop geothermal wells, which would normally not have such a casing. The outer casing prevents contamination moving vertically through the soil as a result of the geothermal boreholes. Geothermal wells are overseen by the DNR’s Contaminated Soils Section and Water Quality Section. Therefore, DNR has the authority to determine to whether the double casing would be required. This determination is dependent upon the proposed location of the geothermal wells in relation to the known contamination. However, if DNR determines the outer casings are not necessary, nothing would prevent the City from exercising the additional caution to include them. Mitigation System with Vapor Barrier for all Petroleum Contaminants $54,000+ Perforated tiles, a thick (40 mil) membrane, and a mitigation system (similar to a radon mitigation system) would be included in this option. All pipe openings through the barrier will need to be sealed tight. A manometer which monitors negative pressure under the building would be installed in the building as well. The $54,000 estimate indicated above includes only the estimated cost for the membrane; the additional costs for piping, fans, and the manometer are not included in this cost. This system is recommended regardless of where the building is placed on the site, as ground water contamination can migrate through the sand layers and vapor can migrate through any piping trench leading to the building. During the design phase, it will need to be determined with DNR whether a permitting process is necessary regarding air quality. 13 Contaminated Soil Removal and Disposal TBD There is no requirement to pre-emptively remove contaminated soil from the site; however, any stained and/or odorous soil that is encountered will need to be disposed of at the landfill. Disposal of contaminated soil is estimated to average approximately $66 per ton for the combined disposal and trucking costs. If there is no construction in the northeast corner of the site, it is very likely contaminated soil will not be excavated. If contaminated soil is excavated, the landfill determines the testing requirements based on the Resources Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) Hazardous Waste Characterization. On-Demand Soil and/or Groundwater Testing $500-$600 per Sample This estimate includes sample collection and analysis. These samples may be required during the construction process if odorous or stained soils are encountered. They may also be desired post-construction to monitor for ongoing contamination migration. It is unknown how many samples may need to be collected during the construction process. Special Piping for All Service Lines $84,642 PVC piping cannot be used for underground utility service lines on the property because PVC can deteriorate when it comes in contact with benzene. Therefore, utility lines must instead be made of materials such as copper and iron, and special gaskets may be required. If utilities are brought to the building from the south, where it is believed contamination does not exist, these measures may not be necessary. However, since it is not known whether benzene will migrate south during construction, it may be prudent to avoid PVC piping for service lines. Monitoring Wells During Construction $10,000-$20,000 It is recommended to add monitoring wells between the area of known contamination and the area where the building will be placed. These wells will be periodically sampled during construction to provide an early warning that contamination is migrating towards to area where construction dewatering will be taking place. Once contamination is detected in these wells, it would be time to begin testing the construction dewatering and mobilize the equipment to treat that water prior to discharge into the sanitary sewer. It would not be necessary to keep these wells in place after construction. Based on the costs in the Phase II ESA of approximately $1,500 per well for installation and sampling, staff believes a series of wells and routine sampling can be expected to cost between $10,000 and $20,000. Construction Dewatering TBD In the building construction area (south end of the site), the trench for the pool basin will create a low spot and ground water will flow to the area. Sand seams throughout the site will allow ground water to flow to the basin. This portion of the construction process, in DNR’s opinion, is the most likely to cause the contamination to be disturbed. The volume of water encountered is dependent on the weather around the time of the construction. 14 If the ground water accumulating in the basin is not contaminated, the dewatering can go directly to the storm sewer. If contamination is identified in this water, the dewatering can be directed to the sanitary sewer for treatment at the City’s Water Pollution Control Facility. There are no surcharges for sanitary discharges containing benzene, BTEX (combined concentration of benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene and xylene), or Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (TPH). However, the concentrations of the contaminants discharged to WPC must remain below certain limits (<50 ppb for Benzene; <75 ppb for BTEX; and <1,000 ppb for Total Petroleum Hydrocarbon). If any of these contaminants exceed these limits, a contractor specializing in treating contaminated water will need to collect the water and treat it before it can be disposed of in the sanitary sewer. The steps necessary to treat the water, and therefore the cost, varies based on the volume of water and the concentration of the contaminants. Staff has learned that costs to treat similarly contaminated ground water at a typical gas station site are approximately $20,000. The volume of excavation at the aquatic center site is much larger and could result in costs as much as ten times higher. Sump Pump Monitoring $400/Year If sump pumps are included in the building, it is recommended the water be tested quarterly by the City’s Water Lab. If contamination is found (and it remains below the limits described previously), the water can be sent to the sanitary sewer rather than the storm water system. However, the building design will need to ensure the piping exists to accomplish this. Stormwater Management TBD The City’s storm water ordinance will require that stormwater on the completed site be appropriately collected, treated, and discharged into the storm water system. Normally, this would be accomplished on site. Given the contamination, however, it is likely that an exception in the storm water ordinance would be pursued to allow the storm water management to occur elsewhere in the watershed. If this occurs, the costs to complete an equivalent storm water improvement may be equal or less than the cost to complete the storm water management on the site. However, if storm water management cannot be completed off-site, then the storm water management on the property will need to be constructed in a way that prevents contaminated groundwater from being conveyed into the storm water system. The costs to accomplish this are not yet clear to City staff. 5. DISCUSSION WITH DOT STAFF REGARDING FINDINGS: On June 20, staff from the City Manager’s Office and Parks and Recreation Department met with DOT representatives to discuss the environmental reports and findings. A key issue is the appraisal that concludes the property value is $2,900,000. The DOT’s policies do not allow for negotiation to accept a value lower than this appraised amount. 15 However, the appraisal’s Assumptions and Limiting Conditions states: “To our knowledge, there have been no environmental studies performed on the subject property. We are appraising the property assuming it does not suffer from soil or groundwater contamination. Our estimate of market value, and other findings presented in this report, is contingent upon this assumption.” The appraiser further indicates: “Unless stated otherwise, we did not observe and are not aware of the existence of hazardous or toxic materials or wastes at the subject property. The existence of such materials may have an affect (sic) on the estimate of value. The client should retain an expert in these fields, if desired.” City staff’s initial review of the appraisal document indicated that the value of the property was not adjusted in recognition of the environmental contamination. Staff was confused by this lack of value adjustment, given the recurring reports of environmental contamination. In addition, staff reviewed the Iowa DOT’s “Appraisal Operational Manual,” which is referenced by the appraiser, to determine how the appraiser would have approached environmental issues on the site and what policies exist to later account for contamination coming to light. This manual indicates: “In the scope of work, the appraiser is instructed to appraise the property to be acquired “as if free and clear of contamination” unless otherwise specified. In those cases where the property has been identified as being contaminated by the Iowa DOT or DNR, the appraiser may invoke a hypothetical condition.” In conversations with appraisal experts, City staff understands that typically an environmental or engineering firm would identify the costs to mitigate the environmental contamination, which would then be used as the basis for an appraiser to consider the impacts of the contamination on the property’s value. It appears this section of the manual was not considered by the appraiser in determining the value of the property. City staff’s concern, given the extensive record of environmental contamination on the site, along with the sampling that confirms the contamination’s presence, is that this property will require mitigation on three different levels: 1) Changing the design of the facility, 2) Monitoring and disposing of contaminated materials encountered during construction, and 3) Ongoing monitoring of the facility once it is occupied. Because of the increased cost expected to accomplish the levels of mitigation described above, City staff suggested at the June 20 meeting with DOT staff that the $2.9 million asking price be reduced to account for these detriments to the site. Alternatively, City staff proposed that the $2.9 million be paid up front with the commitment 16 the City be reimbursed for the cost of the three mitigation levels described above, once the costs are incurred. On July 8, City staff was informed by DOT staff that, at the City’s urging, the appraiser had been asked about the value of the property in light of the environmental contamination. DOT staff conveyed that the appraiser acknowledged that the environmental contamination was not expressly considered in the appraisal; however, the appraiser contends that the estimated market value of the site was discounted on the basis that it is “public land.” To accomplish this “public land” discount, DOT staff stated that the appraiser excluded the two highest cost-per-square-foot sales from the comparable sales analysis. However, City staff can find no statement in the comparable sales analysis—nor anywhere else in the appraisal—indicating that higher comparable land sales were excluded as part of a “public land” discount. The appraisal states a different rationale altogether for excluding those two sales (underlined for emphasis below): “After adjustments, the comparable sales indicate a value range for the subject site from approximately $16.90 to $39.10 per square foot. Sales #1 and #2 are part of the assemblage of parcels for the redevelopment of the area between Clark and Kellogg along Lincoln Way and appear to be outliers. The remaining sales indicate a tighter range of $16.90 to $25.50 per square foot. We have given consideration to all of the sales and reconcile to a value of $24.00 per square foot.” The appraisal’s stated analysis regarding the two parcels is that they appear to be outliers, not that they were excluded because of a “public land” discount process. Further, the appraisal does not indicate that these sales were entirely excluded, because the appraisal states “we have given consideration to all of the sales and reconcile…” No reference to the existence of a “public land” discount or deduction can be found in the Iowa DOT’s Appraisal Operational Manual. Therefore, City staff remains unable to follow the appraiser’s line of thinking regarding the valuation of this property. As indicated above, DOT’s policies require reliance on the formal appraisal to establish the sale price. Given the unwillingness of the appraiser to modify the appraisal, it appears that the price to acquire the property remains $2.9 million. NEXT STEPS: The City Council must next determine whether to proceed with the acquisition of this property for the construction of the Indoor Aquatic Facility. In order to allow more time to consider the information presented in this report, the City Council will not be asked to take action on July 12 regarding the property purchase. Staff 17 intends to ask the City Council for direction regarding the property acquisition on July 26. FACTORS FOR THE CITY COUNCIL TO CONSIDER: The City Council will need to weigh several factors as it considers this significant decision. These include: 1. Potential Health Impacts – Although measures can be taken during and after the construction of the facility to protect against the encroachment of contaminants, there is risk that the level of contamination is greater than we currently believe to exist. Additional measures may be required to ensure the facility is safe to construct and occupy. 2. Potential Environmental Impacts – If the City proceeds with purchasing the property and commencing construction, the City will be responsible for disposing of any contaminated soil or water that is encountered during construction. This would need to involve knowledgeable and capable consultants and contractors. If the City were to proceed with the construction of the aquatic center, one advantage in this regard is that contamination encountered would be properly removed and remediated, as opposed to other development that might occur on this site which simply requires encapsulating the contamination in place and not mitigating it. 3. Costs – In addition to the $2.9 million purchase price for the property, pursuing the IDOT site will cost more to develop as compared to a clean site, due to the contamination. The City will incur costs to develop plans for the handling of contaminants encountered during construction, including testing and disposal of soil, testing and treatment of water, and post-construction reporting. Additionally, the facility will need to incorporate measures to prevent the encroachment of contaminated vapor and groundwater. These measures include the installation of vapor barrier, a soil vapor ventilation system, copper water service line into the facility, and the use of special sleeves when the ground-source heat pump loops are installed. The facility’s storm water detention and treatment system will also need to be constructed in a manner that does not concentrate the contaminants into waterways. It is important to note that these are the special testing and construction steps that are needed based on our current knowledge of the contamination. If the contamination exists in larger and/or more concentrated areas, or if pathways are opened for it to begin to move, additional costs may need to be incurred to protect construction workers, patrons, and site workers. Unfortunately, it is not possible at this time to know precisely what the additional costs may be. 4. Impacts of Delay – The first issuance of bonds for the indoor aquatic center is anticipated to take place in September 2022. If the bonds are issued but the project 18 does not proceed because the property cannot be acquired, the City is subject to arbitrage penalties. Delaying the decision to move ahead with this site may also increase the costs of construction, as a result of a continuing volatile market for construction materials. Even if the decision is made immediately to acquire the property, retain the design consultant, and proceed with design, it will be difficult to complete the design in time for construction in 2023, which means that the opening of the new facility would be delayed until 2025 at the earliest. 5. Possibility of Grant Funding – DOT administrators have offered to help the City by arranging a meeting with IDNR officials regarding the possibility of grant funding to address environmental contamination at this site. If this meeting is able to be arranged prior to the July 26 Council meeting, staff will report back regarding the discussions and outcomes. 1 ITEM # ____26_ DATE: 07-12-22 COUNCIL ACTION FORM SUBJECT: ENHANCED PENALTIES FOR NUISANCE PARTY VIOLATIONS ON DATES DESIGNATED BY CITY COUNCIL BACKGROUND: For several years, the Police Department has observed an increase in alcohol consumption, illegal parking, nuisance parties, and other high-risk activities on the Saturday before Iowa State University classes begin. This phenomenon began many years ago when alcohol was prohibited in fraternities and sororities during the week leading up to the start of classes. The prohibition ended at 8:00 A.M. on the Saturday before classes began. At 8:01 A.M. (801 day), some students chose to begin drinking. In the late 2010s, these behaviors on the Saturday before classes began to grow beyond a small segment of the ISU population. The date has increasingly become a destination for people from outside Ames and is no longer limited to ISU students. Complaints from residents in the area have also grown. In 2021, City leadership, ISU leadership, and both the Ames and ISU Police Departments began to discuss ways to refocus the event in a way to reduce harm, reduce noise complaints, reduce parking complaints, etc. The unofficial event of 801- day is being transitioned to an official ISU event, Cyclone Welcome Weekend. The University has created several activities to take the focus off alcohol use and overuse and steer activities towards community events and safer alternatives. An additional strategy resulting from these discussions is a focus on nuisance party enforcement. The Police Department has seen an increase in party sizes on this day, estimating some parties of 400-500 people at private residences. Many of these parties include underage drinking, fights, noise above what is allowed by the noise ordinance, public intoxication, spilling onto neighboring property, public urination, and other inappropriate activities. These behaviors are grounds for citation under the City’s nuisance party ordinance, which may be cited as either a municipal infraction or a simple misdemeanor. Currently, the fine for a 1st violation of the ordinance is $100 and $200 for 2nd and subsequent violations. It is believed this fine structure is an insufficient deterrent to nuisance parties on the Saturday before classes. Therefore, the City Council has requested that staff prepare an ordinance that would allow the penalties for violation of the nuisance party ordinance to be increased on certain days designated in advance by the City Council. The proposed citation amounts would be increased on designated days to a municipal infraction of $750 for a 1st offense, and $1,000 for a 2nd or subsequent offense. If the 2 infraction was cited as a simple misdemeanor, the fines would be commensurate to the municipal infraction once the required criminal surcharges are added. The City Attorney’s Office has drafted an ordinance to accomplish the Council’s direction, which is attached. ALTERNATIVES: 1. Approve first reading of an ordinance increasing fines for 1st offense violation of the Nuisance Party code to $750 and $1,000 for a 2nd or subsequent offense on designated dates/times as passed by resolution by City Council. The City Council should note that Cyclone Welcome Weekend is August 19-21, 2022. Therefore, staff recommends that the City Council suspend the rules and approve the ordinance on second and third readings at this time. This will allow City staff to prepare an item for the meeting on July 26 to approve the implementation of the higher fines for Cyclone Welcome Weekend, and provide sufficient time to advertise and educate residents about the changes. 2. Approve first reading of the ordinance increasing fines for 1st and 2nd offense violations of the nuisance party code, but modify the citation amounts. 3. Do not approve the ordinance. CITY MANAGER’S RECOMMENDED ACTION: The increase of risky behaviors surrounding large parties during 801-day is troubling. These large parties are disruptive to neighborhoods and have been increasing for several years. The City and University have worked very hard over the past year to create an event to welcome students to Ames (Cyclone Welcome Weekend) and to turn the unofficial event into a planned event with better alternatives to consumption of alcohol and risky behaviors. Increasing the fines for nuisance parties at designated times will provide another tool for City staff in deterring the disruptive behaviors that have become associated with this weekend. Therefore, it is the recommendation of the City Manager that the City Council adopt Alternative No. 1 as described above. ORDINANCE NO. _________ AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE MUNICIPAL CODE OF THE CITY OF AMES, IOWA, BY AMENDING SECTION 17.30(4) AND ENACTING A NEW SECTION 17.30(5) THEREOF, FOR THE PURPOSE OF ESTABLISHING ENHANCED NUISANCE PARTY REGULATIONS, REPEALING ANY AND ALL ORDINANCES OR PARTS OF ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT TO THE EXTENT OF SUCH CONFLICT; PROVIDING PENALTY AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. BE IT ENACTED, by the City Council for the City of Ames, Iowa, that: Section One. The Municipal Code of the City of Ames, Iowa shall be and the same is hereby amended by amending Section 17.30(4) and enacting a new Section 17.30(5) Nuisance Party Regulations as follows: Sec. 17.30. NUISANCE PARTY REGULATIONS. *** “(4) Except on dates specified by an Enhanced Penalties For Nuisance Parties Resolution of City Council, violation of this section shall be a municipal infraction punishable by a penalty of $100 for a person’s first violation thereof and $200 for each repeat violation. Alternatively, violation of this section can be charged by a peace officer of the City as a simple misdemeanor. (5) The City Council may establish by Resolution enhanced penalties for nuisance parties occurring on certain specified dates. A violation of this section during the effective dates of an Enhanced Penalties For Nuisance Parties Resolution shall be a municipal infraction with a fine of $750 for the first violation, and $1,000 for each repeat violation. Alternatively, violation of this section can be charged by a peace officer of the City as a simple misdemeanor with a fine of $650 for the first violation and $855 for each repeat violation.” Section Two. Violation of the provisions of this ordinance shall constitute a municipal infraction punishable as set out by law. Section Three. All ordinances, or parts of ordinances, in conflict herewith are hereby repealed to the extent of such conflict, if any. Section Four. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage and publication as required by law. Passed this day of , . ______________________________________ _______________________________________ Diane R. Voss, City Clerk John A. Haila, Mayor 1 ITEM # ____27_ DATE 07-12-22 COUNCIL ACTION FORM SUBJECT: IMMEDIATE TOWING OF ILLEGALLY PARKED VEHICLES ON DATES DESIGNATED BY CITY COUNCIL BACKGROUND: For several years, the Police Department has observed an increase in alcohol consumption, illegal parking, nuisance parties, and other high-risk activities on the Saturday before Iowa State University classes begin. This phenomenon began many years ago when alcohol was prohibited in fraternities and sororities during the week leading up to the start of classes. The prohibition ended at 8:00 A.M. on the Saturday before classes began. At 8:01 A.M. (801 day) some students chose to begin drinking. In the late 2010s, these behaviors on the Saturday before classes began to grow beyond a small segment of the ISU population. The date has increasingly become a destination for people from outside Ames and is no longer limited to ISU students. Complaints from residents in the area have also grown. In 2021, City leadership, ISU leadership, and both the Ames and ISU Police Departments began to discuss ways to refocus the event in a way to reduce harm, reduce noise complaints, reduce parking complaints, etc. The unofficial event of 801- day is being transitioned to an official ISU event, Cyclone Welcome Weekend. The University has created several activities to take the focus off alcohol use and overuse and steer activities towards community events and safer alternatives. An additional strategy resulting from these discussions is a focus on immediately removing vehicles that have been illegally parked on residential streets and have become a safety hazard. Illegal parking on residential streets has increased to the point that in some cases emergency vehicles are unable to travel down the street safely due to cars parked on both sides. The current penalty for this kind of illegal parking is $10-$15. This amount has not been a sufficient deterrent to the illegal parking that creates a safety hazard. In addition, a parking ticket does not relieve the safety issue until the violator decides to move the vehicle; except in rare instances, the Police Department is not authorized to order an illegally parked vehicle to be towed immediately. To provide a deterrent to illegal parking and to address instances of it on certain days in a more timely manner, the City Council has directed staff to draft an ordinance authorizing immediate towing of specified types of illegally parked vehicles on certain days and in certain areas designated in advance by the City Council. Staff has prepared an ordinance, which has been attached to this report. 2 The ordinance provides that the City Council can, by Resolution, specify the dates and geographic area of the city where immediate towing will be authorized, and also specify the type of parking violations subject to immediate towing. The ordinance also makes clear that the passage of such a Resolution does not prevent the immediate towing of vehicles when they would otherwise normally be subject to immediate towing, such as blocking traffic or access, or presenting a public-safety risk. The draft ordinance does not extend the immediate towing of illegally parked vehicles to other parking circumstances (e.g., Game Day Parking violations, overtime violations, etc.) If the City Council wishes to address those types of circumstances, staff can be directed to add them to this ordinance at a later time. ALTERNATIVES: 1. Approve first reading of an ordinance authorizing immediate towing of illegally parked vehicles on designated dates/times as passed by resolution by City Council. The City Council should note that Cyclone Welcome Weekend is August 19-21, 2022. Therefore, staff recommends that the City Council suspend the rules and approve the ordinance on second and third readings at this time. This will allow City staff to prepare an item for the meeting on July 26 that will authorize immediate towing for illegal parking on Cyclone Welcome Weekend in a specified area, and provide sufficient time to advertise and educate residents about the changes. 2. Do not pass the ordinance. CITY MANAGER’S RECOMMENDED ACTION: The increase of illegal parking puts the public at risk by making it difficult for emergency vehicles to respond to medical calls, fire calls, and law enforcement calls for service. The City and University have worked very hard over the past year to create an event to welcome students to Ames (Cyclone Welcome Weekend) and to deter others from attending who create this hazard. Therefore, it is the recommendation of the City Manager that the City Council adopt Alternative No. 1 as described above. ORDINANCE NO. _________ AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE MUNICIPAL CODE OF THE CITY OF AMES, IOWA, BY ENACTING A NEW SECTION 18.34 IMMEDIATE TOWING BY RESOLUTION OF CITY COUNCIL THEREOF, FOR THE PURPOSE OF ALLOWING IMMEDIATE TOWING OF ILLEGALLY PARKED VEHICLES, REPEALING ANY AND ALL ORDINANCES OR PARTS OF ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT TO THE EXTENT OF SUCH CONFLICT; PROVIDING A PENALTY; AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. BE IT ENACTED, by the City Council for the City of Ames, Iowa, that: Section One. The Municipal Code of the City of Ames, Iowa shall be and the same is hereby amended by enacting a new Section 18.34 Immediate Towing by Resolution of City Council as follows: *** “18.34 IMMEDIATE TOWING BY RESOLUTION OF CITY COUNCIL The City Council may establish by Resolution that vehicles parked unlawfully in violation of any parking ordinance are subject to immediate towing. The Resolution shall specify the types of parking violations for which immediate towing is authorized and list the dates and the geographic area of the city where immediate towing of unlawfully parked vehicles is authorized. The vehicle towing will be in addition to any other penalty. Such a Resolution being in effect does not prevent the immediate towing of a vehicle that is blocking traffic or access, or is presenting a public safety risk, or towing for any other reason for which an immediate tow might normally be necessary.” Section Two. Violation of the provisions of this ordinance shall constitute a municipal infraction punishable as set out by law. Section Three. All ordinances, or parts of ordinances, in conflict herewith are hereby repealed to the extent of such conflict, if any. Section Four. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage and publication as required by law. Passed this day of , . __________________________________ ____________________________________ Diane R. Voss, City Clerk John A. Haila, Mayor ITEM # ___29__ DATE: 07/12/22 COUNCIL ACTION FORM SUBJECT: VACATE ELECTRIC EASEMENT AT 1404 AND 1410 BUCKEYE AVENUE BACKGROUND: The property located at 1404 and 1410 Buckeye Avenue is owned by NLA Duff, LLC (see Attachment A). The owner proposes to construct a car wash. An electric easement exists in the area where the car wash is being proposed (see Attachment B). The construction cannot occur unless the electric easement is vacated. The easement was first established as part of the approval of the Final Plat for Fourth Addition to Southwood Subdivision, Ames. On June 12, 2019, as per Instrument 2019- 07692, an electric easement was granted to the City of Ames described as the North five feet (5’) of Lot Eight (8); AND the South five feet (5’) and the East thirty-six feet (36’) of the South Twenty-One (21’) of Lot Nine (9), (see Attachment C). While the purpose of the easement was to provide access for electric services to serve Lot 8 and Lot 9, this electric easement has not been utilized since it was first established by the Final Plat. As part of the Final Plat of Southwood Subdivision, Sixth Addition the owner proposes the replat of Lots 8 & 9, in order to combine the lots to form Lot 1 for the purpose of building the Car Wash, (see Attachment B). The Electric Department has reviewed the easement vacation request and has determined it is only an unutilized Electric Easement and that no other facilities will be affected and/or would be in conflict with the construction of the car wash. ALTERNATIVES: 1. Approve vacation of the existing ten feet (10’) electric easement at 1404 & 1410 Buckeye located in 8 & 9, Southwood Subdivision, Ames. 2. Do not approve the request to vacate the existing ten feet (10’) electric easement at 1404 & 1410 Buckeye located in, lots 8 & 9, Southwood Subdivision, Ames. 3. Refer this item back to City staff for additional information. MANAGER'S RECOMMENDED ACTION: Since the existing easement do not provide electric services to Lots 8 & 9 at 1404 &1410 Buckeye Avenue, vacating the easement will enable the combining of lots 8 & 9 and the construction of a Car Wash. Therefore, it is the recommendation of the City Manager that the City Council adopt Alternative No. 1 approving the vacation of the existing ten feet (10’) electric easement at 1404 & 1410 Buckeye located in 8 & 9, Southwood Subdivision, Ames Subject Property Sources: Esri, HERE, Garmin, Intermap, increment P Corp., GEBCO, USGS, FAO, NPS, NRCAN, GeoBase, IGN, Kadaster NL, Ordnance Survey, Esri Japan, METI, Esri China (Hong Kong), (c) OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS User Community, City of Ames, IA M© City of Ames, Iowa makes no warranties, expressed or implied, including without limitation, any warranties of merchantability or fitness for a particular purpose. In no event shall the City of Ames be liable for lost profits or any consequential or incidental damages caused by the use of this map.1:2,257 ArcGIS Web Map 1/2" IPF No ID 1/2" IPF No ID 1/2" IPF ID: 17181 N0.20'-E1.80' 1/2" IPF No ID, Being the SW Cor. of Lot 8 Fifth Addition to Southwood Subdivision S 89°50'55" E 240.04' S 0 0 ° 2 3 ' 4 5 " E 81 . 1 2 ' S 0 0 ° 2 3 ' 2 1 " E 89 . 7 7 ' N 89°53'23" W 240.00' N 0 0 ° 2 4 ' 3 0 " W 8 9 . 8 7 ' N 0 0 ° 2 4 ' 3 0 " W 8 1 . 1 9 ' 9. 5 ' U T I L I T Y EA S E M E N T BK 2 7 8 , P G 1 3 8 IN S T R . N O . 20 1 9 - 0 7 6 9 0 9. 5 ' U T I L I T Y EA S E M E N T BK 2 7 8 , P G 1 3 8 IN S T R . N O . 20 1 9 - 0 7 6 9 0 ACCESS EASEMENT (LOT 9) (INST. NO. 2019-07689) S. D U F F A V E N U E (R / W V A R I E S ) AMES COMMUNITY BANK 104 CHESTNUT ST AMES IA 50010 1416 BUCKEYE LLC 105 S 16TH ST STE A AMES IA 50010-8094 CUT "X" SET IN SIDEWALK 1/2" IPF No ID 9.5' BU C K E Y E A V E N U E (6 0 ' R / W ) (LOT 8) (INST. NO. 2019-07689) LOT 1 0.942 AC± 41,036 SF± 5. 0 ' 5. 0 ' 9.5' 75 . 3 7 ' L7 10' ELECTRIC EASEMENT PER THIS PLAT10 . 0 ' EXISTING LOT LINE & EASEMENT TO BE VACATED BY THIS PLAT 20 ' S E T B A C K L I N E 20 ' S E T B A C K L I N E N 90°00'00" W 214.72' N 90°00'00" E 201.53' L1 LINE BEARING DISTANCE L1 N 52°15'51" W 32.16' L2 L2 N 00°24'30" W 10.00' L3 L3 N 00°00'00" W 10.00' L4 L4 N 90°00'00" E 12.00' L5 L5 S 00°00'00" E 6.37' L6 L6 S 52°15'51" E 33.66' L7 S 00°23'21" E 12.71' LINE BEARING DISTANCE EL1 N 00°24'30" W 30.00' EL2 N 89°35'30" E 39.98' EL3 S 00°24'30" E 34.47' EL4 N 89°35'30" E 189.01' EL5 S 00°24'12" E 100.95' EL6 N 89°53'23" W 41.83' EL7 N 00°24'30" W 32.59' EL8 N 89°35'30" E 27.83' EL9 N 00°24'30" W 43.97' EL10 S 89°35'30" W 200.08' EL11 N 00°23'53" W 28.47' EL12 S 89°35'30" W 14.90' EL 1 EL2 EL 3 EL4 EL 5 EL6 EL 7 EL8 EL 9 EL10 EL 1 1 EL12 24 . 0 ' ACCESS EASEMENT LINE TABLE EL13 S 89°53'23" E 11.01' EL13 ELECTRIC EASEMENT LINE TABLE 1/2" IPF No ID, Being the SE Cor. of Lot 8 Fifth Addition to Southwood Subdivision TO T A L 1 7 1 . 0 6 ' VICINITY MAP NOT TO SCALE BASIS OF BEARINGS IOWA STATE PLANE COORDINATE SYSTEM NAD 83 SPC (1401 IA N) USING GEOID18 SITE NOTES: CONTACT PROPER AUTHORITIES BEFORE BUILDING NEAR UTILITY LINES, FOR EASEMENT WIDTH AND RESTRICTIONS. UTILITIES ARE APPROXIMATE AND SHOULD BE VERIFIED PRIOR TO ANY CONSTRUCTION. THIS IS A COMMERCIAL/HIGH RISK SURVEY, WITH A HORIZONTAL ACCURACY BETTER THAN 1:20,000. SOIL BORINGS ARE REQUIRED IN AREAS WITHIN THIS PLAT WHICH HAVE BEEN IDENTIFIED BY THE CITY OF AMES AS HAVING SOILS THAT MAKE CONSTRUCTION OF BUILDINGS DIFFICULT. THE HORIZONTAL AND VERTICAL DATA SHOWN HEREON WERE OBTAINED UTILIZING A TRIMBLE S6 SERIES TOTAL STATION AND TDS DATA COLLECTION SOFTWARE. UNLESS STATED OTHERWISE, ANY MONUMENT REFERRED TO HEREIN AS A "IRON PIN SET" IS A SET 1/2" DIAMETER, REBAR 18" IN LENGTH, WITH A CAP STAMPED "22467". I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS LAND SURVEYING DOCUMENT WAS PREPARED AND THE RELATED SURVEY WORK WAS PERFORMED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULY LICENSED PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR UNDER THE LAW OF THE STATE OF IOWA. _________________________________________________ DAVE R. HOBBS IOWA REG. NO. 22467 My license renewal date is ____________________. CA R D I N A L R D DU F F A V E BU C K E Y E A V E DU F F A V E KE L L O G G A V E MEADOW LN CT MEADOW LN CT CHESTNUT ST CH E S T N U T S T 0'50'100'150' FINAL PLAT SIXTH ADDITION TO SOUTHWOOD SUBDIVISION PARCELS: 911-380-035 & 911-380-0459-20-2021 (Field) Job No.: Date: 176-2112-21-2021 (Office)Date: ACRES NEW ROAD TOTAL ACRES TOTAL LOTS MILES NEW ROAD0 0.942 1 0 1202 CROSSLAND AVE. * CLARKSVILLE, TN 37040 PHONE 931-645-2524 * FAX 931-645-2768 YOUNG, HOBBS & ASSOCIATES OWNER/DEVELOPER: 0.#&7((..% 6#..#2115#56 57+6' /106)1/'4;#.Ä #FLCEGPV2TQRGTV[.KPG LEGEND: +TQP2KP(QWPF $QWPFCT[.KPG %GPVGTNKPGQH4QCF Source of Title: Instrument Number 2019-07803 PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: PART OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF SECTION 11, TOWNSHIP 83 NORTH, RANGE 24 WEST, OF THE 5TH P.M., BEING LOTS 8 AND 9 OF THE FINAL PLAT, FOURTH ADDITION TO SOUTHWOOD SUBDIVISION, RECORDED IN INSTRUMENT NUMBER 2019-07689, OFFICE OF THE RECORDER, CITY OF AMES, COUNTY OF STORY, STATE OF IOWA. SHEET 1 OF 1 REDUCED SIZE, NOT TO SCALE ATTACHMENT 1 ATTACHMENT 2` ITEM #: 30 DATE: 07-12-22 COUNCIL ACTION FORM REQUEST: AMENDMENT TO INTEGRATED SITE PLAN SUBDIVISION FOR 1404 AND 1410 BUCKEYE AVENUE INCLUDING FINAL PLAT OF SIXTH ADDITION TO SOUTHWOOD SUBDIVISION AND MAJOR SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR A CARWASH. BACKGROUND: Driven Brands is the owner of properties located at 1404 and 1410 Buckeye Avenue. These properties are part of a larger commercial subdivision, Southwood Subdivision, originally platted in the 1980s. The overall commercial development is known as the Duff Plaza. In 2018, an Integrated Site Plan Subdivision was approved that included retrofitting the former Kmart building into retail tenant spaces on the front, interior climate-controlled storage in the rear, construction of five addition commercial buildings, and associated parking and landscaping improvements. The subject site was approved for two small commercial buildings, including one drive thru restaurant use, on separate lots as part of the original approval. The first phase of redevelopment of the Kmart building and site improvements for parking and landscaping is complete. An amendment to the Integrated Site Plan Subdivision was approved in 2021 on the west side of Buckeye Avenue, across from the proposed car wash, for the second phase and it includes a 53,132 square foot building divided into five tenant spaces. This second phase is under construction. The applicant has requested approval of a Major Site Development Plan and Final Plat as an amendment to the Integrated Site Plan for the area along South Duff Avenue and north of South 16th Street, within the Southwood Subdivision (former Kmart site). The Major Site Development Plan is processed concurrently with the Final Plat for Sixth Addition to Southwood Subdivision, to consolidate the two existing lots into one complete platted lot for development of the site with the “Take Five Express Car Wash” (Attachment A: Location Map & Attachment B: Zoning Map). The proposed amendment only affects the two parcels located between S. Duff Avenue and Buckeye Avenue. STANDARDS: An Integrated Site Plan Subdivision (Section 23.704) allows for subdivision of a site into individual lots, but considers the site as a single site for purposes of evaluating access, circulation, maintenance, and compliance with certain zoning development standards (setbacks, landscaping, parking, floor-area-ratio, etc.) that would otherwise be applicable to individual lots. Approval of an Integrated Site Plan allows for more flexible application of most development standards through the approval of the Major Site Development Plan, although the overall site must meet all minimum standards. As an amendment to an Integrated Site Plan, the project must be consistent with the overall Integrated Site Plan approval as it relates to the use of the proposed site as well as meet all the criteria of a Major Site Development Plan. The proposed Sixth Addition to Southwood Subdivision Final Plat combines the two existing undeveloped parcels into one. A Final Plat is required per Section 23.706 and is to be reviewed by the City Council concurrent with the Major Site Development Plan (Attachment D: Applicable Subdivision Law). Although an Integrated Subdivision allows for shared zoning compliance across all sites within the development, this site will meet all standards on site and does not rely on features located west of the site for compliance. The existing shared in-common shopping center sign for the Duff Plaza located at the southwest corner of the site along Duff Avenue will remain on this site for the overall benefit of the development. SITE AND APPLICANT PROPOSAL: The site is vacant, except for a large pylon sign, and includes a total of 41,036 square feet (0.944 acres). The proposed development (Attachment F: Site Plan) includes a car wash building (4,024 square feet) and associated parking spaces and landscaped area. The car wash building has one single automatic wash bay. The site also includes customer vacuum spaces in the middle of the site. The applicant proposes three (3) parking spaces and two (2) handicap-accessible spaces, as well as stacking area to meet the City’s requirement of two parking spaces and five stacking spaces. The stacking area is at the north end of the site and consists of three rows for vehicles with eight (8) vehicles in each row at the pay stations. Fourteen (14) spaces for vehicles using vacuums are proposed in the middle of the site. The proposed parking and stacking exceed the minimum ordinance requirements. Access to the site will be provided from Buckeye Avenue. No access will be allowed from S. Duff Avenue on the east boundary of the site. The driveway into the site will align with the main driveway into the shopping center on the west side of Buckeye. An existing Cy- Ride stop will be moved approximately 54 feet to the north because of the proposed driveway location. The relocation of the loading area by the developer is a condition of approval. Cy-Ride staff has asked to work directly with the applicant once it is time to construct the new pad for the bus stop. Sidewalk will be constructed in the right-of-way for Buckeye Avenue next to the west boundary of the site. This will connect to existing sidewalk that extends south to S. 16th Street and north to Chestnut Street. A shared use path exists in the right-of-way for S. Duff Avenue on the east side of the subject property. Building elevations are included in Attachment H: Building Elevations. Exterior wall materials are primarily concrete masonry units (CMU) of two types (gray and brown colors), and prefabricated architectural metal panels on the west wall and a tower located on the southwest corner of the building. A cornice is proposed for the exterior walls. The colors and style are a departure from that of main shopping center buildings that were previously approved, but does utilize some of the same materials. Other than general consistency with buildings in the area and prior Duff Plaza development, there are no specific design guidelines for the site. The site requires front yard landscaping along all street frontages (Buckeye Avenue and S. Duff Avenue) and parking lot landscaping for the complete maneuvering, loading, and parking area of the plan. The proposed landscaping plan complies with the front yard and parking lot landscaping requirements with its arrangement of trees, ornamental grasses, and shrubs. (Attachment G: Landscape Plan). A complete analysis and details of the development with the Major Site Development Plan criteria is included in Attachment C: Major Site Development Plan Criteria. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION: At its meeting on April 20, 2022, the Ames Planning and Zoning Commission reviewed the proposed Amendment to the Integrated Site Plan at a public hearing. Staff described the proposed changes to the Site Plan and compared to the existing approved plan, including comments on building design, shared landscaping, pedestrian connectivity, and parking. Staff recommended approval with three conditions related to relocating the CyRide stop, submit a lighting plan for review, and that all previous approvals related to the developer are unchanged. The Commission voted 6-0 to recommend approval of the Amendment to the Integrated Site Plan with conditions of approval related to finalizing plans for Council approval. Note the developer has since submitted a lighting plan for staff review. ALTERNATIVES: 1. Approve the request for an Integrated Site Plan Subdivision, which includes concurrent Final Plat and Major Site Development Plan Amendment approval, for the properties at 1404 and 1410 Buckeye Avenue, subject to the following conditions: A. The Applicant shall work directly with CyRide regarding the installation of a new bus stop concrete pad for sidewalk access to the bus prior to a building permit being issued. Paving of the improvement completed at the cost of the developer. Final occupancy permits for the site will not be granted without completion of the bus loading area to the City of Ames specifications. B. Pevious conditions of the Integrated Site Plan Subdivision approvals that are not herein modified shall continue to apply to the site(s). 2. Approve the request for an Integrated Site Plan Subdivision, which includes concurrent Final Plat and Major Site Development Plan Amendment approval, for the properties at 1404 and 1410 Buckeye Avenue, with modified conditions. 3. Deny the request for an Integrated Site Plan Subdivision, Final Plat, and Major Site Development Plan. 4. Refer the request back to City staff and/or the applicant for additional information. CITY MANAGER’S RECOMMENDED ACTION: The proposed Integrated Site Plan Amendment is to approve a Major Site Development Plan for construction of a new car wash and Final Plat for consolidating two existing lots. The purpose of the Integrated Site Plan Subdivision review is to determine the overall layout, function, and building design meets City standards as a collective site and not as individual lots. Key considerations for the proposal are the design and location of buildings along street frontages, appropriate landscaping and screening, inter-connectivity, mix of uses, access and circulation, and overall parking supply. The proposed site development is typical for a commercial project with off-street parking and landscaping improvements. This plan enhances pedestrian connectivity along Buckeye Avenue, increases landscaping between Buckeye Avenue and S. Duff Avenue, and provides adequate parking, including queueing space for vehicles without interfering with traffic circulation on Buckeye Avenue. Staff finds that the project meets the design principles of an Integrated Site Plan, subdivision standards, and the standards for a Major Site Development Plan. Therefore, it is the recommendation of the City Manager that the City Council adopt Alternative #1, as described above. ADDENDUM Project Description. The applicant, Driven Brands, is requesting approval of a Major Site Development Plan as an amendment to the approved Integrated Site Plan Subdivision for 1404 and 1410 Buckeye Avenue. A car wash is proposed for the site, and a Final Plat to consolidate the two lots into one complete lot for building purposes. The Major Site Development Plan and Final Plat must be processed concurrently for consideration by the City Council as required by Section 23.706 Amendments, Modifications, and Vacations for Integrated Site Plan Subdivisions . Site Layout/Circulation/Access. The site plan improvements are proposed on the proposed Lot 1, Sixth Addition to Southwood Subdivision, the two existing and undeveloped lots. The total area of the proposed lot is 41,036 square feet (0.94 acres). The two lots are presently vacant, except for the pylon sign. The development will include a drive-through car wash on the south portion of the lot, parking spaces with and without vacuums in the center portion of the site, and a queueing area for vehicles waiting to proceed through the car wash at the north end of the site. Access to the site will be from Buckeye Avenue. No access is allowed from S. Duff Avenue. It will be necessary to relocate the Cy-Ride bus stop presently located next to this site on Buckeye Avenue. The bus stop must be moved approximately 54 feet to the north. The developer will work with CyRide at the time of installation of the bus stop. The improvement is paving to allow for access to the bus from the sidewalk. The developer is responsible for the cost of the improvements to meet CyRide bus stop access requirements. The sidewalk along Buckeye Avenue presently has a gap with no sidewalk next to the subject properties. As part of this project, the developer will construct new sidewalk along Buckeye Avenue to fill in the gap. This improvement will result in sidewalk on the east side of Buckeye between S. 16th Street and Chestnut Street. A shared use path presently exists along S. Duff Avenue on the east side of the site. An on-site sidewalk connects the car wash building to Buckeye Avenue. There is no crossing of Buckeye Avenue at the driveway intersection. Parking. Required parking for the site is minimal. Two (2) parking spaces and five (5) stacking spaces per washing bay are required for the proposed car wash. The proposed site plan includes three (3) standard (9’x19’) parking spaces and two (2) handicap- accessible spaces with one designated as “van-accessible.” The stacking spaces are proposed along the north boundary of the site in three (3) rows with eight (8) spaces in each row for a total of twenty-four (24) stacking spaces. Fourteen (14) additional spaces with vacuums are proposed north of the car wash building in the middle of the site. Landscaping. The minimum required landscaped area in the (HOC) Highway-Oriented Commercial zoning district is 15%. The proposed site plan and landscape plan shows that approximately 30.3% of the site is landscaped area. The open space is comprised of front yard landscaping areas along Buckeye Avenue and S. Duff Avenue, and a landscaped median separating the vehicular stacking area and the parking spaces with and without vacuums. In addition to the general landscape percentage requirements for the site, the City applies both a front yard landscaping and parking lot landscaping requirement. The front yard landscaping requirements are met along Buckeye Avenue and S. Duff Avenue with the appropriate mix of trees, shrubs, and grasses. The front yards require one tree for every 50 feet of frontage and a mix of grasses and shrubs for the calculated area of each front yard, up to a maximum depth of 30 feet. Parking lots include all parking and maneuvering areas of the site. The parking lot landscape standard is based upon calculating 10% of the parking lot area and provide one overstory tree for every 200 square feet of the 10%. In this case, there is approximately 22,000 square feet of parking lot area, which require 11 trees to be dispersed across the parking lot area. The applicant has met dispersal with trees located along the north property line near the stacking area as well as with landscaped islands in the middle of the site and near the carwash building. The Landscape Plan meets the quantity requirements and standards for arrangement of landscaping. Building Elevations. Typical building elevations have been included to define the building materials, entrance/exit to the building, and façade design. The car wash building is approximately 125 feet in length and the widest portion of the building is approximately 36.5 feet wide. The primary exterior building material is concrete masonry units (CMU). There are two designs of CMU for the walls. One would be painted gray and the other would be brown to accent the primary gray color. Red and blue stripes would be added to the south building elevation. Prefabricated metal panels are proposed for a tower on the southwest corner of the building and on an upper portion of the west building façade. Signage is proposed for the upper portion of the metal tower. The tower is designed to extend approximately nine (9) feet above the top of the building for a total height of approximately thirty-one (31) feet. Overhead doors would have a bronze finish. The cornice is shown as black. A blue canopy is shown above the car wash entrance on the east façade and across the west façade above the car wash exit. The building design for commercial buildings of the Duff Plaza rely upon use of concrete block with brick pilasters to provide for architectural interest and relief to the large walls of the buildings. Other office buildings abutting the site use primarily brick as the building materials. The proposed car wash design differs from the looks of the Duff Plaza but incorporates materials that can be found compatible in quality and of contemporary style with the metal panels and a tower element. One point of emphasis with Duff Plaza was the aesthetic of buildings lining the street frontages as backs of buildings. In this case the building orientation is perpendicular to the street and has minimal building exposure along the streets. The ends of the buildings are primarily entrances and exits of car wash tunnel. The site also includes a trash enclosure on the Buckeye side of the site adjacent to the car wash. The trash enclosure uses the same materials as that of the car wash building. Infrastructure. The site is fully served by City infrastructure. All public utilities are available to serve the development. The subject properties are in the City of Ames electric service territory. Storm Water Treatment. The site is subject to conformance with Municipal Code Chapter 5a and 5b requirements for storm water control and treatment. The site must not increase release rates for the overall site and must treat water quality for all new impervious areas of the site. Underground detention beneath the parking lot surface is proposed. The Public Works Department has reviewed the proposal for storm water and finds that it meets the Best Management Practices of the City. Major Site Development Plan Criteria. The standards are found in Ames Municipal Code Section 29.1502(4)(d) and include the following requirements. When acting upon an application for a Major Site Development Plan approval, the Planning and Zoning Commission and the City Council shall rely upon generally accepted site planning criteria and design standards. These criteria and standards are necessary to fulfill the intent of the Zoning Ordinance, the Comprehensive Plan, and are the minimum necessary to safeguard the public health, safety, aesthetics, and general welfare. See Attachment C for individual Development criteria for the Major Site Development Plan. Public Notice. Notice was mailed to property owners within 200 feet of the subject site and a sign was posted on the subject property. As of this writing, no comments have been received. Attachment A Location Map Attachment B 2018 Major Site Plan – Building B Attachment C Major Site Development Plan Criteria 1. The design of the proposed development shall make adequate provisions for surface and subsurface drainage to limit the rate of increased runoff of surface water to adjacent and downstream property. The proposed development includes an underground detention system beneath the parking lot. The Public Works Department has reviewed the proposal for storm water detention and finds that it meets the requirements of Chapter 5a and 5b, of the Municipal Code, for storm water control and treatment. 2. The design of the proposed development shall make adequate provision for connection to water, sanitary sewer, electrical, and other utility lies within the capacity limits of those utility lines. The existing utilities were reviewed and found adequate to support the anticipated load of the proposed development. There are no off-site upgrades needed to serve the site for any utility. 3. The design of the proposed development shall make adequate provision for fire protection through building placement, acceptable location of flammable materials, and other measures to ensure fire safety. The fire inspector has reviewed access and fire truck circulation and found that the needs of the fire department are met for access and circulation. 4. The design of the proposed development shall not increase the danger of erosion, flooding, landslide, or other endangerment to adjoining and surrounding property. It is not anticipated that this proposed development will be a danger due to its location on the site. 5. Natural topographic and landscape features of the site shall be incorporated into the development design. The developer is working with the existing topography of the site. There are no notable features on the site. The disturbed areas of the site are required to come into compliance with current landscape requirements. 6. The design of the interior vehicle and pedestrian circulation shall provide for convenient flow of vehicles and movement of pedestrians and shall prevent hazards to adjacent streets or property. The proposed development will provide for vehicular access off Buckeye Avenue. The sidewalk on-site will connect with the public sidewalk to be constructed in the Buckeye Avenue right-of-way. 7. The design of outdoor parking areas, storage yards, trash and dumpster areas, and other exterior features shall be adequately landscaped or screened to minimize potential nuisance and impairment to the use of adjoining property. The parking area is screened to meet front yard landscaping requirements along Buckeye Avenue and S. Duff Avenue. The enclosure proposed for the refuse container and the enclosure for the vacuum equipment are constructed of concrete masonry units to match the car wash building materials with a cast stone cap on the walls of the enclosures. Spring loaded corrugated steel gates are proposed for each enclosure. These enclosures meet the zoning requirements for solid waste collection areas. 8. The proposed development shall limit entrances and exits upon adjacent streets in order to prevent congestion on adjacent and surrounding streets and in order to provide for safe and orderly vehicle movement. The access to the proposed development will be from Buckeye Avenue. No access will be allowed from S. Duff Avenue. 9. Exterior lighting shall relate to the scale and location of the development in order to maintain adequate security, while preventing a nuisance or hardship to adjacent property or streets. All lighting will be required to comply with the City’s Outdoor Lighting Code (Section 29.411). The applicants preliminary plan includes pole lights, building lights, and lighting with the vacuum units with calculations for foot candles of illumination across the site. Parking lot lighting and lighting on the exterior walls of the building are required to meet requirements of the Code for glare which include dark sky-based provisions for control of the light emittance from the luminaires, principally all light is directed down with less than 5% of total lumens emitted at a horizontal angle from the light source. 10. The proposed development shall ensure that dust and other forms of air pollution, noise disturbances, odor, glare, and other nuisances will be limited to acceptable levels as prescribed in other applicable State and City regulations. The site must be operated within the City of Ames noise standards. As designed the car wash openings face east and west and there are not users directly across from the car wash to be impacted by noise from the dryers or headlights of the vehicles. The vacuums are in the middle of the site and are not anticipated to create disturbing noise levels. The proposed development is not expected to generate any nuisances. 11. Site coverage, building scale, setbacks, and open spaces shall be in proportion with the development property and with existing and planned development and structures, in adjacent and surrounding property. Development in the area consists of a mix of office buildings along Buckeye and larger commercial buildings set further to the west. All these buildings are between 15 and 50 feet in height. The carwash building is small in area with a maximum height of 31 feet for its tower element. The proposed development meets the zone development standards for the (HOC) Highway-Oriented Commercial zone, including standards for maximum floor area ratio, minimum lot frontage, minimum building setbacks, maximum building coverage, minimum landscaped area, and maximum height. The same HOC zone development standards apply to adjacent and surrounding properties in all directions. Attachment D Applicable Subdivision Requirements 23.700 SUBDIVISION FOR INTEGRATED SUBDIVISIONS 23.702. APPLICABILITY. (1) The subject site shall consist of one or more legally created lots. (2) The property must be zoned commercial, industrial, medium density residential or high density residential. (3) Residential development under these provisions is limited to apartment dwellings only. (4) The subdivision must be associated with a Major Site Development Plan under Chapter 29.1502. Within this context, the Major Site Development Plan will be considered and referred to as an Integrated Site Plan. AMENDMENT PROCEDURE. (23.706) (1) Amendments or modifications to an Integrated Site Plan Subdivision are processed as both an amendment to the subdivision plat and the associated Integrated Site Plan, being processed simultaneously and under the same review criteria and procedures specified for an initial application for an Integrated Site Plan Subdivision (per Section 23.703), except for Site Plan Amendments. Site Plan Amendments do not require a new Preliminary Plat. (a) Site Plan Amendments include the following: Sup #2021-3 23-40 Rev. 07-1-21 i. Minor Subdivision Plat for a boundary line adjustment of a lot(s) within the Integrated Site Plan. ii. Site Development Plan changes to site improvements, such as parking, landscaping, building design, stormwater treatment measures that do not affect lot dimensions and infrastructure capacity. iii. Amendments qualified as a Major Amendment per 23.306 are not Site Plan Amendments. (2) The following types of amendments require the consent of all owners within the subdivision: (a) Major amendments as defined in Section 23.306. (b) Amendments that are not consistent with recorded covenants and maintenance agreements. (3) Amendments pertaining to the layout or improvements on individual lot(s), and that do not otherwise fall under the provisions of subsection 1 above, require only the consent of the individual affected lot owners. (4) If a portion of an Integrated Site Plan Subdivision is vacated, the property subject to the vacated portion shall constitute one lot unless the property is subsequently divided by an approved subdivision. Development of the vacated lot is subject to an amendment to the Integrated Site Plan Subdivision and associated Integrated Site Plan. (Ord. No. 4441, 6-22-21) Attachment E Final Plat Attachment F Site Plan Attachment G Landscape Plan Attachment H Building Elevations Memo Department of Planning & Housing TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Kelly Diekmann, Planning & Housing Director DATE: July 8, 2022 SUBJECT: Continuance of Public Hearing for Rezoning with Master Plan for 798 N 500th Avenue. The proposed rezoning from Agriculture (A) to Floating Suburban Residential Low Density (FS-RL) with Master Plan includes a contract rezoning agreement for cost share of an oversized sanitary sewer extension. At the June 28th City Council meeting, Council opened the public hearing and took comment on the proposal, but at staff’s recommendation continued the public hearing until July 12th to allow for revisions to the contract rezoning agreement. The applicant and staff met on June 29th to discuss the design of the sanitary sewer and it was agreed that more specific pricing information would be beneficial to both parties. The applicant has reached out to two contractors for pricing information, but we have not received the information back and, therefore, we are not able to update the proposed agreement by the July 12th Council Meeting. Therefore, staff recommends that the hearing be continued to the July 26th Council meeting in order to allow time to obtain updated pricing information needed to modify the proposed agreement for oversizing of the sanitary sewer. Item No. 31 1 ITEM #: __32__ DATE: 07/12/22 COUNCIL ACTION FORM REQUEST: AMENDMENTS TO THE AMES MUNICIPAL CODE FOR APPLICATIONS REQUIREMENTS AND APPROVAL AUTHORITY BACKGROUND: The Planning Division along with the City Manager’s Office have recently reviewed some of the City’s planning project review and notification procedures and approval processes. Staff determined that modifications to defined roles would improve the administration of the Ames Municipal Code and better serve our customers. City Council on April 13, 2021, directed staff to move forward with drafting the proposed amendments. The changes relate to the Zoning Board of Adjustment, Zoning Enforcement Officer, Planning and Zoning Commission, references to the Comprehensive Plan, and various application procedures in Chapter 29, including the addition of a formal Annexation initiation procedure. The proposed ordinance amends the following parts of the Ames Municipal Code: • Chapter 20-Planning and Zoning Commission authority • Chapter 29-Article 15- Application requirements • Chapter 29-Article 14- Procedures, notification, and administration • Chapter 29-Articles 1, 4, 12- Comprehensive Plan references and Planning Director authority The Planning and Housing Department is identified in the Municipal Code as the responsible entity for the administration of the Subdivision Code and for the administration of the Zoning Ordinance. However, the Zoning Ordinance currently designates the Building Official as the Zoning Enforcement Officer responsible for the interpretation and enforcement of zoning standards related to building permits and code enforcement. Planning staff is responsible for other activities related to Site Development Plans, Zoning Board of Adjustment applications, and Rezonings. The current Municipal Code further assigns the City Clerk the responsibility for intake of certain applications and for administrative support for the Zoning Board of Adjustment. The proposed changes assigns the Planning and Housing Department the responsibility for support of the Zoning Board of Adjustment rather than the City Clerk’s Office, and empowers the Planning Director to have final authority on 2 interpretations of the Zoning Ordinance, in lieu of the Zoning Enforcement Officer. The Planning Director will also be responsible for approval of front yard paving related to driveways and parking. It should be emphasized that for the public, there will be no outward change in how applications are handled as a result of these modifications. Changes related to the Zoning Board of Adjustment include: 1. Modification of voting standards to follow state law for an affirmative vote of three members to approve a project, anything less would be a denial. Current language appears to indicate three votes are needed for any type of decision, which has been problematic when a full Board is not present. The proposed language also allows for an applicant to obtain up to a 45-day continuance if the full Board is not present at a meeting. Staff originally proposed to change voting rules to allow for a 2-1 vote to be a definitive action, however per state law three votes are required to approve a project and would not allow for a 2-1 vote. 2. There is no change to the Zoning Board of Adjustment notification requirement for publication of public hearing items (e.g. Special Home Occupations, Variances, Special Use Permits, etc.) in the newspaper. Staff originally proposed to remove the newspaper publication requirement for the Zoning Board of Adjustment applications while maintaining the 200-foot mailed notice and sign posting requirement. After further review it was determined that Iowa Code Section 362.3 applies to all ZBA public hearing items and it requires a between 4-20 day newspaper publication requirement. 3. Assigning Planning and Housing Department as administrative support to the ZBA will eliminate the confusion of a customer having to communicate with both the Planning and City Clerk staff. Under the proposed changes, an Assistant City Attorney would still attend meetings and prepare Decision and Orders (D&Os), while the City Clerk would remain responsible for retaining the D&Os. Application requirements are proposed to be adjusted to add some discretion related to scope of a project and the needed submittals. Other changes are designed to update requirements. 3 1. Currently, all application requirements are mandatory regardless of the scope of a project, which at times can be overkill in terms of process for a small project. The proposed changes allow the Planning Director to modify submittal requirements for only relevant information. The ability to modify the submittal requirements will alter any of the actual zoning standards that would apply to a project. 2. Staff also proposes to add an application section for initiating Annexations. Currently, annexations are processed per State requirements and City Council directed procedures, but not included in the Municipal Code. Establishing the process by ordinance helps establish uniformity for review of annexation petitions. The proposed process includes review by the Planning and Zoning Commission of annexations only when there is an 80/20 proposal. If an annexation is 100% consenting, the P&Z would not review the annexation petition, and the matter will go directly to the City Council for consideration. State law does not require the Commission to review any annexations. 3. Currently, minor changes to approved Major Site Development Plans and Special Use Permits are allowed to be approved by staff in limited circumstances. At the time the PUD Overlay was adopted in 2021, a new set of minor change standards were adopted for PUDs. Staff is recommending to use the PUD language for all types of Major Site Development Plans, PRDs, and Special Uses so there is one common set of criteria. 4. Site Plan criteria and application requirements have been updated to reflect current practices and relationships to the Comprehensive Plan. 5. Application requirements are modified to allow for on-line submittals as part of our permitting software, rather than requirements to submit plans of certain sheet sizes. Staff also proposes to clarify the sign posting notification process and the grant of access to a property requesting. The proposed ordinance clarifies the lack of a sign posting does not invalidate the notice requirements if the other requirements are met. Changes also address that the posting requirement only apply to an applicant- initiated map amendment, not a City Council initiated change, which usually involves a broad area involving numerous lots. The posting requirement will also apply to a “site” or contiguous properties, not for each property. Article 15 of the Zoning Ordinance includes these amendments. 4 Planning and Zoning Commission The Planning and Zoning Commission reviewed the scope of the amendments at its May 18th meeting. The Commission voted 5-1 to support the full scope of changes presented by staff. The dissenting vote was based on a desire to not change the proposed sign posting requirement which would consider adequate notice to have occurred without the posting of a sign. As a result of the City Attorney’s review, the proposed language was refined from the draft that went to the P&Z. For example, the ZBA voting and publication requirements were modified. ALTERNATIVES: 1. City Council can approve on first reading the attached draft ordinance amending the Ames Municipal Code Chapter 20 and Chapter 29. 2. The City Council can direct staff to modify the proposed text changes and return with an updated draft ordinance. 3. The City Council can defer action on this item and request more information from staff. CITY MANAGER RECOMMENDATION: Staff believes the amendments listed above are beneficial to clarify a number of planning processes. The most significant changes proposed by staff relate to updating application procedures along with adjustment to the interpretation of the Zoning Ordinance by the Planning and Housing Director, rather than the designated Zoning Enforcement Officer. Changes to the voting requirements of the ZBA will be consistent with typical rules for approving a project and state law for having three affirmative votes. The changes in application process, staffing, and roles are not anticipated to have any significant impact on the public or customers of the City. Therefore, the City Manager recommends the City Council act in accordance with Alternative #1. ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE MUNICIPAL CODE OF THE CITY OF AMES, IOWA, BY AMENDING SECTIONS 20.8, 20.9, 2.10, 20.11, 2.102, 29.104, 29.406, 29.1200, 29.1201, 29.1202, 29.1203, 29.1401, 29.1402, 29.1403, 29.1404, 29.1405, 29.1500, 29.1501, 29.1502, 29.1503, 29.1504, 29.1505, 29.1506, 29.1507, ENACTING A NEW SECTION 29.1509 AND REMOVING SECTION 20.14 THEREOF, FOR THE PURPOSE OF UPDATING THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMISSION CHAPTER AND THE ZONING CODE; REPEALING ANY AND ALL ORDINANCES OR PARTS OF ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT TO THE EXTENT OF SUCH CONFLICT; AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. BE IT ENACTED, by the City Council for the City of Ames, Iowa, that: Section One. The Municipal Code of the City of Ames, Iowa shall be and the same is hereby amended as follows: “Sec. 20.8. POWERS OF COMMISSION. The commission shall have power and authority to make or cause to be made surveys, studies, maps, plans or charts of the whole or any portion of the municipality or of any land outside thereof which in the judgment of the commission bears relation to a comprehensive plan, and shall bring to the attention of the council and may publish its studies and recommendations. Staff support shall be provided by the department of Planning and Housing Community Development from the budget of that department in accordance with the budget approved by City Council. Sec. 20.9. AUTHORITY OVER SUBDIVISIONS. The Commission shall review Preliminary Plats as specified by Ames Municipal Code Chapter 23 Any plans, plats or replats of subdivisions or resubdivisions of land within the city or adjacent thereto, laid out in lots or plats with the streets, alleys, or other portions of the same intended to be dedicated to the public, shall first be submitted to the commission and its recommendations obtained before approval by the city council. Sec. 20.10. PREPARATION, USE OF COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. For the purpose of making a comprehensive plan for the physical development of the city, the commission shall make careful and comprehensive studies of present conditions and future development of the city and with due regard to its relation to neighboring territory. The plan shall be made with the general purpose of guiding and accomplishing a coordinated, adjusted and harmonious development of the city and its environs which will, in accordance with the present and future needs, best promote health, safety, order, convenience, prosperity and general welfare, as well as efficiency and economy in the process of development. The commission shall make an annual report of its activities to the city council. Sec. 20.11. ADOPTION OF COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. . . . (2) After adoption of the plan by the commission, an attested copy thereof shall be certified to the city council and the council may approve the same. When the plan or any modification or amendment thereof shall receive the approval of the council, the plan, until subsequently modified or amended as hereinbefore authorized, shall constitute the official city Comprehensive Plan. . . . Sec. 20.14. COMMISSION TO MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS RELATIVE TO LOCATION OF CITY FACILITIES AND STREETS. The commission may, from time to time, make recommendations to the city council relative to the location of municipal buildings and other facilities and the location of city streets, alleys, parking lots and open spaces. The 2 recommendations of the commission shall be obtained before enactment or revision of a comprehensive plan for city streets. . . . Sec. 29.102. PURPOSE, INTERPRETATION AND APPLICATION. (1) Purpose. The Ordinance regulates and restricts the height, number of stories, and size of buildings and other structures, the percentage of lot that may be occupied, the size of yards, courts, and other open spaces, the density of population, and the location and use of buildings, structures, and land for trade, industry, residence, or other purposes in order to promote the health, safety and the general welfare of the City in the following ways: (a) To direct the development of the City in accordance with the Land Use Policy Comprehensive Plan, which is the City's comprehensive plan; . . . Sec. 29.104. RELATIONSHIP TO OTHER LAWS. In addition to the requirements of the Ordinance, all uses of land, buildings and structures must comply with all other applicable City, county, state and federal statutes or regulations. All references in the Ordinance to other City, county, state or federal statutes or regulations are for informational purposes only and do not constitute a complete list of such statutes or regulations. The Ordinance is expressly designed to supplement and be compatible with, without limitation, the following City plans, regulations or ordinances, including but not limited to: (1) Land Use Policy Comprehensive Plan (known as Ames Plan 2040, or as amended). (2) Subdivision Regulations. (3) Historic Preservation Ordinance. (4) Flood Plain Ordinance. (5) Building, Sign and House Moving Code. (6) Rental Housing Code. (7) Transportation Plan. (8) Park Master Plan. (9) Bicycle Route or Pedestrian Master Plan. . . . Sec. 29.406. OFF-STREET PARKING. . . . (7) Locating Parking Spaces in Front Yard . . . (e) Under no circumstances shall vehicular parking be permitted in the front yard of any Household Living or Short Term Lodging uses in any "RL", "RM", "RH", "UCRM", "FS-RL", or "FS-RM" zones, except upon a driveway that leads to the side or rear yard or to an attached garage; and, one parking space is permitted in the front yard in the case where there is an existing, one car attached garage and there is insufficient room between the side of the attached garage and the side property line. Such space shall meet the following requirements: i) The parking space shall not exceed nine (9) feet in width; ii) The parking space shall be contiguous to and parallel to the existing driveway; and, iii) The parking space shall be located between the existing driveway and the side property line. There shall be no installation at grade of any expanse of asphalt, concrete, gravel, brick, or other form of paving by any material whatsoever without the written authorization of by the Zoning Enforcement Officer Planning Director for the dimension and configuration of paving. Such authorization shall be granted only if under the facts and circumstances of the particular situation it is unlikely that the paving will facilitate the use of the front yard, or any part thereof, for the parking of vehicles, except on a driveway as stated. . . . 3 Sec. 29.1200. FLOATING ZONES (1) Purpose. The "floating" zone concept provides flexibility in determining the style and layout of residential development in newly-annexed related to the expansion areas of the city that the Land Use Policy Plan designates as Village/Suburban Residential or that the Ames Urban Fringe Plan designates as Urban Residential as described by the Comprehensive Plan. The Floating Zoning Districts established by this ordinance are: . . . (2) Pre-application Conference. . . . (d) Existing conditions within the proposed zoning boundary and within 200 feet of the proposed zoning boundary: Project boundary; all internal property boundaries; public rights-of-way on and adjacent to the site, utilities; easements; existing structures; topography (contours at two-foot intervals); areas of different vegetation types; designated wetlands; flood plain and floodway boundaries; areas designated identified by the Ames Land Use Policy Comprehensive Plan as Greenways and Environmentally Sensitive Areas. . . . Sec. 29.1201. “F-VR” VILLAGE RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT. . . . (4) Establishment. . . . (a) The designation is consistent with the Land Use Policy Comprehensive Plan. . . . (12) Minor Changes. Minor changes to the approved Site Development Plan Major may occur after staff of the Department of Planning and Housing has determined that the proposed changes are minor in nature, and revised plans have been provided to the Department for the purposes of keeping the Site Development Plan Major current, Minor changes are defined as changes that:. Minor changes are defined in Section 29.1502. (a) Do not constitute a change in the land use of the project; or the overall layout and design; (b) Do not increase the density or intensity of use, and the number of buildings or a change in dwelling unit types; (c) Do not change the overall landscape design of the F-VR project; (d) Do not change the height or placement of buildings, or other major features. . . . Sec. 29.1202. “F-S” SUBURBAN RESIDENTIAL ZONE. . . . (2) Suburban Residential Development Principles. . . . (b) An economic and efficient subdivision design with respect to the provision of streets, utilities, and community facilities with limited focus on building and development design integration and a greater emphasis on vehicular mobility.; . . . (f) A development pattern that is compatible with surrounding neighborhoods and is consistent with the Goals and Objectives of the Land Use Policy Plan. Principles, Land Use Categories, and policies of the Comprehensive Plan. (3) Establishment. The F-S is hereby established and applies to all lands that are rezoned to F-S on the Zoning Map. A Zoning Map Amendment as described in Section 29.1507(2) may be approved provided the City Council makes the following findings: (a) The designation is consistent with the Land Use Policy Comprehensive Plan; 4 . . . (7) Site Development Plan Amendments. All site development plans approve hereunder may only be amended pursuant to the same procedure for approving an F-S Plan as provided herein. . . . Sec. 29.1203. “F-PRD” PLANNED RESIDENCE DISTRICT . . . (2) Planned Residence District Development Principles. . . . (b) Result in a more efficient, aesthetic, desirable and economic use of land and other resources while maintaining the density of use and character, as provided for in the Land Use Policy Comprehensive Plan and the underlying base zone regulations; . . . (3) Establishment. . . . (a) The designation is consistent with the Land Use Policy Comprehensive Plan. . . . (9) Minor Changes. Minor changes to the approved Site Development Plan Major may occur after staff of the Department of Planning and Housing has determined that the proposed changes are minor in nature, and revised plans have been provided to the Department for purposes of keeping the Site Development Plan Major current. Minor changes are defined as changes that: in Section 29.1502. (a) Do not constitute a change in the land use of the project; or the overall layout and design; (b) Do not increase the density or intensity of use, and the number of buildings or a change in dwelling unit types; (c) Does not change the overall landscape design of the F-PRD project; or (d) Change the height or placement of buildings, or other major site features. . . . Sec. 29.1401. CITY COUNCIL. The City Council is the elected body that is ultimately responsible for all decisions and actions that establish the overall land use policy and vision for the City. This occurs through the City Council adoption of the Land Use Policy Comprehensive Plan for the City. The Council is also responsible for other policy direction established through the City's long range Transportation Plan, Parks and Recreation Plan, Bicycle Route Master Plan and other functional plans like water distribution and wastewater collection plans. These plans and policies are implemented by Council through a variety of strategies, including zoning and subdivision regulations, the City's operating budget, the Capital Improvements Program, and annexation policies. Sec. 29.1402. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION. The Planning and Zoning Commission is appointed by the Mayor with the approval of the City Council to serve as an independent advisory body to the Council. The Commission is responsible for the preparation and adoption of the official Land Use Policy Comprehensive Plan of the City and gives advice and recommendations on matters involving amendments to the Comprehensive Plan, the City's Zoning Ordinance and historic preservation ordinance and guidelines. The Commission reviews and gives advice on preliminary plats subdivisions occurring within the City and within the extraterritorial jurisdiction of the City. 5 Sec. 29.1403. ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT. . . . (4) Board Action. The concurring vote of three members of the Board shall be necessary to reverse any order, requirement, decision, or determination of any administrative official, or to decide in favor of the applicant on any matter upon which it is required to pass under any such ordinance or to effect any variation in such ordinance. At the request of the person seeking action from the Board and prior to the beginning of the hearing on the person’s matter, the hearing on the matter may be delayed until such time that the full Board is present to hear the person’s request. The hearing may be delayed up to 45 days in an attempt to accommodate the request. However, if a meeting where full the Board is present cannot be held within 45 days of the original hearing date, the hearing on the matter shall proceed at the next Board meeting following the 45 day delay. (5) Officers and Duties. . . . (b) Board Secretary. The City Clerk or his/her designee The Planning and Housing Department is responsible for appointing staff to serve as secretary of the Board. In the absence of the secretary, the chair may appoint one of the members of the Board to act as secretary pro tem for the meeting. The secretary shall keep minutes of the Board's proceedings, showing the vote for each member upon each question. If a member is absent or does not vote on any matter, the minutes shall indicate this fact. The Board shall keep records of all official actions, which shall be on file in the office of the City Clerk as a public record. . . . (9) Applications to the Board. Applications to the Board for a Special Use Permit, Special Home Occupation Permit, or Variance, Exception, or Reasonable Accommodation may be made by any person. Such application shall be made by filing with the secretary of the Board a written notice specifying the grounds therefore. The secretary shall publish notice of the application in a paper of general circulation in the City. Sec. 29.1404. DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND HOUSING. The Department of Planning and Housing provides technical support to the City Council, the Planning and Zoning Commission, Historic Preservation Commission, and the Zoning Board of Adjustment. The Department is responsible for the administration of the zoning and subdivision regulations of the City, including the technical review of site plans, plats of subdivision and other land development requests submitted to the City. Department staff is responsible for the intake, distribution, review, coordination and communication to applicants seeking a decision on a development request application in the City. Department staff is authorized by the Zoning Ordinance in specific instances to review and approve specified permits site plans and Zoning Permits. The Planning and Housing Director, or their designee, is responsible for the interpretation and administration of the Zoning Ordinance. Sec. 29.1405. ZONING ENFORCEMENT OFFICER. (1) This Ordinance shall be enforced by a Zoning Enforcement Officer who shall be appointed by the City Manager. The Zoning Enforcement Officer shall be directly responsible to the Fire Chief,. but for the purpose of administering the Ordinance, shall consult with the Director of Planning and Housing. The Zoning Enforcement Officer shall carry out duties according to law and under such rules and regulations as the city council may from time to time adopt. The Zoning Enforcement Officer may issue building/zoning permits as authorized by this Code. If a question arises about the interpretation of a zoning standard or interpretation of a provision of this Code, the Planning Director shall provide written guidance regarding the issue to the Zoning Enforcement Officer prior to issuing a permit. . . . 6 Sec. 29.1500. GENERAL. . . . (2) Notices and Hearings. The requirements and limitations of this Section shall apply to all hearings and public notice, as applicable, required under this Article. . . . (a) Notices and Hearings. . . . (v) When required mailing and/or publication notices have been provided, the absence of a sign posting shall not invalidate the satisfaction of the notice requirements of this Code. (v)(vi) In the event that . . . . . . (d) Notices. . . . (iii) Posted Notice. Notice required pursuant to this Section shall be posted by the City on signs posted on the subject property. One sign shall be posted for each property; contiguous properties may be considered one property for purposes of this subsection. The required sign shall be posted along the perimeter of the subject property in a location that is highly visible from adjacent public streets in a reasonable time prior to the meeting or hearing, unless conditions prevent such posting, or unless otherwise prescribed by statute. (3) Consent for Site Visit and Public Hearing Notice Posting. By applying for a Plan approval or Permit of this Article, there is consent by the property owner for City staff to visit and walk the site as part of the review of the project, and the property owner consents to the posting of a public hearing notice on the property. Sec. 29.1501. BUILDING/ZONING PERMIT. . . . (2) Submission Submittal Requirements. . . . (d) Deletion or Modification of Submission Submittal Requirements. . . . Sec. 29.1502. SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN REVIEW. . . . (2) General Requirements for Site Plan Review. (b) Exceptions. No Site Development Plan shall be required for the development or redevelopment of a single-family dwelling or a two-family dwelling in any Zone, or for a project that meets the following conditions: (i) The development or redevelopment does not require the provision construction of any additional parking spaces; . . . (c) Number of Copies. . . . (iii) The Planning Director may allow for electronic submittals in lieu of paper copies. . . . (d) Submission Submittal Requirements. . . . (i) Site Plan. It is the intent of the City to ensure that site plans be prepared with a high degree of accuracy and insure proper coordination of the site plan development and review responsibilities, which serve to facilitate compliance with the requirements of the city. To accomplish this intent, the applicant shall provide copies of a site plan, drawn to scale on a sheet not to exceed 24" X 36", prepared by a Civil Engineer, a Land Surveyor, a Landscape Architect, or an Architect. The site plan must be certified as “substantially correct” by 7 a Professional Engineer, Land Surveyor, Landscape Architect, or Architect, licensed by the State of Iowa, showing the following information listed below as of the date of application:. The Planning and Housing Director has the discretion to waive submittal requirements of a Site Development Plan, depending upon the scope of the development proposal, the location, and the type of application, such as an amendment to an existing improved site that has no utility work. . . . e. Specific types of uses, size and location of all existing and proposed buildings, additions, structures, and uses of land, at least one sheet with an overall proposed site plan is required; . . . m. When an application pertains to any new permanent detached building or structure (principal or accessory), include existing and proposed contours at 2 foot intervals based on City Datum accepted Datum standard of NAD 83 or NADV 88; n. When an application is located in a flood-prone area include existing and proposed site grades, contours or elevations, base flood elevation data, top-of-foundation elevations, finished floor elevations, and any proposed watercourse relocation, as required to conform to Chapter 9; . . . q. A landscape plan, showing location of plants, calculations for required landscaping, and a plant list to include: plant species, number of each plant, and plant size; and r. Soils tests, traffic impact studies, utility capacity analysis, and other similar information if deemed necessary by the Department of Planning and Housing to determine the feasibility of the proposed development and compliance with the Design Standards. s. For Village Residential projects, Suburban Residential projects, or Planned Residence District projects that are to develop in phases, the applicant shall provide a phasing plan indicating areas to be developed in each phase and the time frame for the development of each phase. (Ord. No. 3571, 6-27-00) (ii) Building Plan . . . d. All exterior wall elevations, indicating floor heights, overall building height, materials and fenestration . . . f. roof plan, including screening details . . . (3) Procedures for Approval of a Minor Site Development Plan. . . . (e) Upon receipt of a complete application, the Planning Director shall forward copies to the Development Review Committee for a determination of compliance with applicable provisions of this chapter. The Development Review Committee has up to 30 days to provide a determination on compliance. (f) Design Standards. When acting upon an application for minor site plan approval, the Planning Director shall rely upon generally accepted site planning criteria and design standards for functional, convenient, and compatible improvements. These criteria and standards are necessary to fulfill the intent and purposes of the Zoning Ordinance, the Land Use Policy Comprehensive Plan, and are the minimum necessary to safeguard the public health, safety, aesthetics, and general welfare. These criteria and standards include: . . . (xi) Site coverage, orientation, building scale, setbacks, and open spaces shall be in proportion with the development property and with existing and planned development and structures, in adjacent and surrounding property. 8 . . . (h) The Planning Director may impose such reasonable conditions on an approval as are necessary to ensure compliance with applicable regulations. An application shall be considered automatically withdrawn if the Department receives no response from the project contact within thirty (30) days for requested information or required resubmittal. Final action by the Planning Director shall be taken within 30 days of the filing of a complete application or within such further time consented to by written notice from the applicant. If the applicant has been notified of necessary corrections for code compliance and a resubmittal of an updated application is necessary, the 30- day final decision period shall not apply. However, after the Planning Director’s notification of necessary corrections, an applicant may request, in writing, a final decision be issued within 30 days of the request. (i) Applicant’s Appeal of Conditions. An applicant may appeal any conditional approval or denial to City Council upon written notice to the Planning Director. . . . (4) Major Site Development Plan Review . . . (b) Submission Submittal Requirements. . . . (c) Procedures for Approval of a Major Site Development Plan. . . . (v) Development Review Committee. Upon receipt of a complete application the Planning Director shall forward copies to the Development Review Committee for a determination of compliance with applicable provisions of this Chapter. Upon its review the The Development Review Committee, upon its review and upon receipt of necessary revisions to the plan, must forward the application and its recommendations to the Planning and Zoning Commission. (vi) Planning and Zoning Commission. Commission review shall not be concluded until consideration is given to comments at a public hearing, which may be scheduled as part of the regularly scheduled meeting. Notification of the public hearing shall be made by mail, publication, and posting in accordance with Sections 29.1500(2)(d)(i), (ii), and (iii) above. Within 30 days of the hearing the Planning and Zoning Commission shall submit the written recommendation to the City Council setting forth the reasons for its recommendation of acceptance, denial or modification of the application. (vii) City Council Decision. After the transmittal of the recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission, the City Council shall consider the application at a public hearing conducted as part of a regularly scheduled meeting. Notification of the public hearing shall be made by mail, publication, and posting, in accordance with Sections 29.1500(2)(d)(i), (ii), and (iii) above. The City Council must approve, deny or modify the Major Site Development Plan approval application within 60 days of the public hearing. . . . (d) Design Standards. When acting upon an application for a major site plan approval, the City Council shall rely upon generally accepted site planning criteria and design standards for functional, convenient, and compatible improvements. These criteria and standards are necessary to fulfill the intent and purposes of the Zoning Ordinance, the Land Use Policy Comprehensive Plan, and are the minimum necessary to safeguard the public health, safety, aesthetics, and general welfare. These criteria and standards include: . . . (xi) Site coverage, orientation, building scale, setbacks, and open spaces shall be in proportion with the development property and with existing and planned development and structures, in adjacent and surrounding property. 9 . . . (6) Minor Changes. Minor changes to the approved Major Site Development Plan may occur after staff of the Department of Planning and Housing has determined that the proposed changes are minor in nature, and revised plans have been provided to the Department for purposes of keeping the Major Site Development Plan current. However, the Planning Director may refer any change to the City Council for approval. Minor Changes are defined as changes that: A minor change is defined as a change that satisfies all of the following criteria: (a) Does not constitute a change in the land use of the project; (b) Does not change the overall general layout and design of buildings, open spaces, landscaping, parking, and circulation; (c) Does not change the number of buildings or the number of dwelling types by more than 10%; (d) Does not increase the density of units in the project or the intensity of use as related to parking requirements, i.e., floor area of use and bedroom counts, by more than three parking spaces; (e) Does not allow an increase in the height of a building or grading of the site by more than two feet in total. Any height increase must not allow additional stories; (f) Does not exceed the allowed deviation or exception to zoning standards; and does not remove or reduce the quality of architectural character, design features, or use of high-quality building and roofing materials at the time of initial construction. (a) Do not constitute a change in the land use of the project; or the overall layout and design; (b) Do not increase the density or intensity of use, and the number of buildings or a change in dwelling unit types; (c) Does not change the overall landscape design of the M-SDP project; or Change the height or placement of buildings, or other major site features. . . . Sec. 29.1503. SPECIAL USE PERMIT. . . . (2) Submission Submittal Requirements. In accordance with Section 29.1503, Applicants must submi t an Application for a Special Use Permit to the Planning and Housing Department for consideration by the Zoning Board of Adjustment, An application for a Special Use Permit filed in accordance with Section 29.1503, The Application for a Special Use Permit shall be accompanied by: (b) A Site Plan meeting all the submittal requirements stated in Section 29.1502(2), unless no site improvements are required; and (3) If a proposed Special Use is within an existing building and improved site, plans for use of the site and building must be submitted in lieu of the Site Plan requirements. (3) (4) Procedure for Special Use Permits. a. Zoning Board of Adjustment. The Zoning Board of Adjustment shall consider the application at a public hearing conducted as part of a regularly scheduled meeting. Notification of the public hearing shall be made by mail, posting, and publication, in accordance with Sections 29.1500(2)(d)(i), (ii) and (iii) above. The Zoning Board of Adjustment must approve, deny, or modify the Special Use Permit application within 60 days of the public hearing. (4)(5) Review Criteria. . . . (a) General Standards. . . . i. Be harmonious with and in accordance with the general principles and proposals of the Land 10 Use Policy Comprehensive Plan of the City; . . . Sec. 29.1504. VARIANCE. . . . (2) Submittal Requirements. In accordance with Sec. 29.1500(1)(a), Applicants must submit a Variance Application to the Planning and Zoning Department for consideration by the Zoning Board of Adjustment. An application for a variance, filed in accordance with Section 29.1500(1)(b), The Application for a Variance shall include the following: . . . b. How the granting of the requested variance relates to the intent and purposes of this Ordinance and the Land Use Policy Comprehensive Plan. . . . (3) Procedure. . . . (b) Public Hearing Required. Prior to disposition of an application for a variance, the Zoning Board of Adjustment shall hold a public hearing. Notice of the public hearing shall be by mail, posting, and publication, in accordance with Sections 29.1500(2)(d)(i), (ii) and (iii) above. in accordance with Section 29.1500(2)(d)(i) above. Posted notice shall also be provided in accordance with Section 29.1500(2)(d)(iii) above. . . . Sec. 29.1505. REQUESTS FOR REASONABLE ACCOMMODATION. . . . (4) Notice for Request for Accommodation. Written notice that a Request for Reasonable Accommodation shall be given as follows: . . . (c) Notice that such a request has been made shall be made by publication and posting, in accordance with Sections 29.1500(2)(d)(ii) and (iii) above. . . . Sec. 29.1506. EXCEPTIONS. . . . (2) Submittal Requirements. In accordance with Sec. 29.1500(1)(a), Applicants must submit an application for an Exception to the Planning and Zoning Department for consideration by the Zoning Board of Adjustment. An application for an exception, filed in accordance with Sec. 29.1500(1)(a), The Application for an Exception shall include the following: . . . (3) Procedure. Review of an application for an exception shall be considered by the Zoning Board of Adjustment at a public hearing conducted as a part of a regularly scheduled meeting. Notification of the public hearing shall be made by mail, and publication, and posting in accordance with Sec. 29.1500(2)(d)(i), and (ii), and (iii) above. The Zoning Board of Adjustment may approve, deny or modify the request. . . . Sec. 29.1507. ZONING TEXT AND MAP AMENDMENTS . . . (3) Master Plan Determination. . . . (b) The City Council may require a Master Plan to be submitted with a rezoning application if it determines that any one of the following conditions is met: . . . (ii) The area to be rezoned contains designated wetlands; flood plain and floodway 11 boundaries; areas designated by the Ames Land Use Policy Comprehensive Plan as Greenways and Environmentally Sensitive Areas; conservation easements or other documented sensitive environmental conditions or valuable natural resources. . . . (4) Master Plan. When a Master Plan is required, it shall be submitted in compliance with the following: . . . (a) Submittal requirements. . . . (xi) For proposed commercial nonresidential development: placement, size in square feet and approximate dimensions for all buildings, locations and approximate dimensions of all parking areas; areas of landscape, screening, buffer, plaza and open space; circulation pattern for all modes of transportation on the site. City Council may choose to accept and approve a Master Plan that does not contain all of the listed requirements. (b) Number of Copies. Submit seven (7) copies of the Master Plan on a sheet not to exceed 30” x 40”, and one (1) reduced copy of the Master Plan no larger than 11” x 17”. The Planning Director may allow for electronic submittals in lieu of paper copies. . . . Sec. 29.1509. ANNEXATION INITIATION. (1) Petition Requirements. A property owner may submit a petition for annexation with applicable fees to the Planning and Housing Department on forms prescribed by the Department. The petition shall include: (a) Property Owner Identification (b) Authorized Signature(s) (c) Identification of Parcel IDs and Legal Description (d) Annexation Plat depicting real property and rights-of-way (e) Description of desired use of the property upon annexation (2) City Council Decision. Upon receipt of complete petition and review by City staff within 30 days of its submittal, it shall be forwarded to the City Council for acceptance and a determination of whether to proceed with the annexation as proposed within the petition. If the City Council requires addition information, studies, or inclusion of additional territory with the petition, the applicant must provide the additional materials prior to commencing with required noticing requirements. (3) Notice Procedure. In addition to notification requirements of the Iowa Code, if a petition for annexation includes additional non-consenting territory as permitted by the “80/20” rule, the annexation must be reviewed by the Planning and Zoning Commission. The Planning and Zoning Commission must provide City Council a recommendation regarding consistency of the proposed annexation with the Comprehensive Plan. The Commission must make its recommendation within 30 days of holding the initial Planning and Zoning Commission meeting for the annexation petition. City Council shall not hold a hearing for approval of the proposed annexation prior to receiving the recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission. A voluntary annexation petition where 100% of the property owners consent to the annexation does not require a recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission.” Section Two. All ordinances, or parts of ordinances, in conflict herewith are hereby repealed to the extent of such conflict, if any. Section Three. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage and publication as required by law. 12 Passed this day of , . ______________________________________ _______________________________________ Diane R. Voss, City Clerk John A. Haila, Mayor ITEM # 33 DATE: 06-28-22 COUNCIL ACTION FORM SUBJECT: UNDERGROUND ELECTRICAL UTILITY EASEMENT ON THE PRAIRIE VIEW INDUSTRIAL LIFT STATION SITE LOCATED AT 207 S TELLER AVE. BACKGROUND: A sanitary sewer lift station is being constructed at 207 South Teller Avenue to serve the Prairie View Industrial area. Interstate Power and Light Company, an Iowa Corporation, (Alliant Energy) has requested an underground electrical utility easement, located along the east side of the property, and extending west into the lift station. This easement will be used to place switch back gear for the overhead electrical lines on the east side of Teller Ave. With the planned construction of an interchange at US 30 and Teller Ave by the Iowa DOT, Alliant Energy will be relocating overhead powerlines underground from US 30 to the lift station site. The switch back gear that will be placed in the easement will be the point where the new underground will switch back to the existing overhead power lines on the east side of Teller Ave. Public Works staff has had several conversations, including an onsite meeting, with Alliant Energy staff on the placement location of the switch back gear and the concrete pad on which it will be built. The agreed upon location will meet Alliant Energy’s access needs and have minimal impact on the lift station features and landscaping. The switch back gear will also provide a location to tie in the electrical building of the lift station site when complete. ALTERNATIVES: 1. Approve the utility easement at 207 S Teller Ave to Interstate Power and Light Company, an Iowa Corporation. 2. Do not set a date of public hearing to consider granting of the easement at 207 S Teller Ave. 3. Refer this item back to City staff for additional information. CITY MANAGER'S RECOMMENDED ACTION: Approving the easement will allow Alliant Energy to underground a portion of their facilities and place switch back gear for the overhead electrical line tie-in. Therefore, it is the recommendation of the City Manager that the City Council adopt Alternative No. 1, as described above. FORD ST Prairie View Industrial Lift Station at 207 S Teller Ave E LINCOLN WAY Lift Station Site US HIGHWAY 30 ¯ SE 5TH ST SE 16TH ST DA Y T ON A V E S DA YT O N A V E S BE L L AV E BE L L AV E IN T E RS T A T E 35 TE L L ER AV E 58 0 T H AV E Prepared by: Brian DePrez – Ulteig Engineers – 1455 Sherman Rd., Hiawatha, IA 52233 (319) 286-3015 Return to: Heather Dee - Interstate Power and Light Company – PO Box 351 – Cedar Rapids, IA 52406 (319) 786-4514 SPACE ABOVE THIS LINE FOR RECORDER UNDERGROUND ELECTRIC LINE EASEMENT For and in consideration of the sum of One Dollar ($1.00) and other valuable consideration, the receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, CITY OF AMES, an Iowa municipal corporation located in Story County Iowa, (“Grantor(s)”), ADDRESS: 515 Clark Ave., Ames, IA 50010, do(es) hereby warrant and convey unto Interstate Power and Light Company, an Iowa Corporation, its successor and assigns, (“Grantee”) a perpetual easement with the right, privilege and authority to construct, reconstruct, maintain, expand, operate, repair, patrol and remove an underground electric and telecommunications line or lines, consisting of wires, transformers, switches and other necessary fixtures, appurtenances and equipment, (including associated surface mounted equipment) and construction (collectively, the “Line” or “Lines”) for transmitting electricity, communications and all corporate purposes of Grantee together with the power to extend to any other party the right to use, jointly with the Grantee, pursuant to the provisions hereof, upon, under, and across the following described lands located in the County of Story, and the State of Iowa: See Attached Exhibit A, page 3 together with all the rights and privileges for the full enjoyment or use thereof for the aforesaid purpose. Grantor(s) agrees that it will not construct or place any buildings, structures, plants, or other obstructions on the property described above. Grantor(s) also conveys the right and privilege to trim, cut down or control the growth of any trees or other vegetation on said described land and such other trees and vegetation adjacent thereto as in the judgment of the Grantee may interfere with construction, reconstruction, maintenance, expansion, operation, repair, use of the Line or Lines. Grantee, its contractor or agent, may enter said premises for the purpose of making surveys and preliminary estimates immediately upon the execution of this easement. The Grantor(s) also grants to the Grantee the right of ingress and egress to the Line or Lines, under lands now owned by the Grantor(s), for the purpose of constructing, reconstructing, maintaining, expanding, operating, patrolling, repairing and removing the Line or Lines, and the Grantee agrees to pay to the Grantor(s) or its tenants all damages done to the lands (except the cutting and trimming of trees or other vegetation), fences, livestock or crops of the Grantor(s) or its tenants, by the Grantee or its employees while constructing, reconstructing, maintaining, expanding, operating, patrolling, repairing or removing the Line or Lines. ECRM263561 Rev. 3 02/16 Page 1 Signed this day of , 20 . GRANTOR(S): CITY OF AMES By: John Haila, Mayor Attest: Diane Voss, City Clerk ALL PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGMENT STATE OF ) COUNTY OF ) ss: CAPACITY CLAIMED BY SIGNER INDIVIDUAL CORPORATE Title(s) of Corporate Officers(s): On this day of , AD. 20 , before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for said State, personally appeared John Haila and Diane Voss N/A Corporate Seal is affixed No Corporate Seal procured PARTNER(s) Limited Partnership General Partnership ATTORNEY-IN-FACT EXECUTOR(s), to me personally known ADMINISTRATOR(s), or TRUSTEE(s): or provided to me on the basis of satisfactory GUARDIAN(s) evidence or CONSERVATOR(s) OTHER to be the persons(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. SIGNER IS REPRESENTING: List name(s) of persons(s) or entity(ies): NOTARY SEAL (Sign in Ink) (Print/type name) Notary Public in and for the State of . My Commission Expires: . ECRM263561 Rev. 3 02/16 Page 2 Exhibit A PROPERTY DESCRIPTION Parcels "G" and "H" located in the East Half (E½) of the Northeast Quarter (NE¼) of Section Eight (8), Township Eighty-three (83) North, Range Twenty-three (23) West of the 5th P.M., Story County, as described in the certain Plat of Survey dated October 15, 2019 and recorded on Jan 6, 2020 in Inst. 2020-00147 in the records of the Recorder for Story County, Iowa. As described in Warranty Deed filed as Instrument No. 2020-01120 on February 6th, 2020, in the Office of the Recorder, Story County, Iowa. EASEMENT DESCRIPTION A tract of land for easement purposes on, over and across the above described property, more particularly described as follows; Commencing at the Southeast Corner of said Parcel "G"; thence along the easterly line of said Parcel "G", N0° 06' 22"W, 55.65 feet to the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; thence N8g0 51' S0"W, 100.73 feet; thence N0° 00' 00"E, 20.00 feet; thence s ag0 51' 50"E, 20.00 feet; thence S0° 00' 00"E, 15.00 feet; thence s ag0 51' S0"E, 80.72 feet to a point on the easterly line of said Parcel "G"; thence along said easterly line, S0° 06' 22"E, 5.00 feet to the Point of Beginning, containing 803.63 square feet (0.018 acres) more or less. LEGEND ROAD RIGHT OF WAY LINES EXISTING EASEMENT LINES NEW EASEMENT LINES QUARTER SECTION LINE • FOUND SURVEY MONUMENT 'I I I I I I I I I I I N 0° 00' 00"E 20.00' I I I L I hereby certify that this Land Surveying Document was prepared by me or under my direct personal supervision and that i am a duly licensed Land Surveyo under the laws of the State of Iowa. efdii3 5 Jq Zt>Z2- Iowa license number 23712 License renewal date is December 31, 2023 ·- E t! Iii I 0 20 40 80 SCALE: 1" c 80' when Printed on 8½" x 14" Orientation of this bearing system is Iowa State Plane North (NAO 83) This Survey was performed using the Iowa RTN Network OWNER City of Ames Trustee Warranty Deed Instrument No. 2020-01120 SURVEY REQUESTED BY Alliant Energy 200 1st Street SE Cedar Rapids, IA 52401 W I I > <( er: - w _J - w_J ~ I- I t --I- - ::, @ 1 East Line NE¼ 8-83-23 & Centerline S. Teller Ave I 1_45' ANJ I I I S0° 00' 00"E 15.00' S0° 06' 22"E 5.00' N89° 51' 50"W 100.73' -· 1 N 0° 06' 22"W 55.65' _J E Come, P, " JG" P.O.C. - Found #5 Rebarw/ Blue Cap #18381 Cedar Rapids- Lakes - Hiawatha, Iowa 52233 Phone : 319.286.3000 Web: www.ulteig.com Exhibit A Proiect Number: R21.01778 Date: 5/4/2022 Drawn By: _oJK....._ Approved By: -P-JK_._ G:l2019\19.01748\Survey\Orawlng\A19.01748 City of Ames Easement.dwg-SUrvey 8.5x14 Portrait-5/19/20222:01 PM ITEM # 34 DATE: 07-12-22 COUNCIL ACTION FORM SUBJECT: 2020/21 & 2021/22 INTELLIGENT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM PROGRAM (PHASES 1 AND 2) BACKGROUND: This program provides for the construction of fiber optic communication and technology platform for Phases 1 and 2 of the Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) Master Plan. The project will modernize the traffic signal system by providing a high- bandwidth communication system that will integrate connected signals. It will allow the City to leverage technologies such as traffic adaptive and real-time video, while significantly increasing the reliability and resolution of available transportation data. Because the project funding sources include Iowa Department of Transportation (IDOT) Iowa Clean Air Attainment Program (ICAAP) funds, the project must follow IDOT development policies and was let by the IDOT. On June 21st, 2022, bids for the project were received as follows: Bidder Bid Amount The table below shows the overall expenses using low bid: Expenses Total $4,347,947 The table below shows the revenues for this project under the current budget: Revenues Total $3,743,338 *The project will affect several signals needing ADA upgrades. The funds from this program are approximately equally split between Road Use Tax Funds and Local Option Sales Tax. The low bid received was approximately $600,000 over the engineer's estimate for this project. This is due to the pricing volatility of conduit and wiring from the inflation and supply chain issues affecting the construction market. The resulting funding shortfall is $604,609. OPTIONS: Since the June 28th, 2022, report of bids, staff has worked with the IDOT and Finance Department to gather information to develop potential funding options for the project. A. USE LOCAL FUNDING FROM THE FY 22/23 ITS PROGRAM City Council could direct staff to use the local funding budgeted for Phase 3 of the ITS program to make up the shortfall for Phases 1 & 2. FY 22/23 has $462,740 from Road Use Tax Fund (RUTF) and $452,560 from G.O. Bonds. That totals $915,300 in local funding. With $604,609 to cover the shortfall; there would be approximately $310,691 remaining that could be used as contingency or as savings for future years of the ITS program. If City Council chooses to use these funds, staff would recommend reprogramming the ITS Program such that Phase 3 is moved to FY 23/24. That would mean the rest of the phases would shift back at least one fiscal year (depending on future funding availability). This would allow staff time to assess the increases in construction costs and adjust the CIP program's budget accordingly. Staff feels this is the most straightforward approach to funding this shortfall by using resources already allocated to this program. It should be noted that the IDOT ICAAP agreements give the City two years from October 1st in the year the grant was awarded for completing construction. The deadline for Phase 1 is 10/1/2022 for Phase 2 is 10/1/2023. The City would need to request an extension within sixty (60) days before any of the expiration dates, if needed. Staff can do this administratively and does not require City Council to take any action. B. USE UNOBLIGATED GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS The current balance of unobligated bonds is $624,092. If City Council chooses to solely use this funding source to make up the shortfall of $604,609, only $19,483 will remain. The unobligated balance is a rolling amount that increases when bond savings from completed projects and decreases when used to offset overages such as higher bid prices or change orders. Typically, these unobligated funds are used for street projects, which still may be needed as bidding and construction continues for the 2022 season. Therefore, staff does not recommend using these funds for the ITS program. C. USE ROAD USE TAX FUND (RUTF) SAVINGS/FUND BALANCE As of 6/30/2022, the approximate available balance of the RUTF is $7,500,000. It should be noted that Finance is still finalizing expenses from FY 2021/22, and that balance is subject to change. If City Council chooses to use the available balance of the RUTF solely, the $604,609 can likely come from the current estimated balance. It should be noted that there are no Traffic Engineering CIP projects with significant RUTF savings that could be used. Staff does not recommend this option as using unobligated balances of any fund of the City should include a careful review of all priorities affecting those funds and appears not to be warranted in this case. D. USE FUNDS FROM THE ACCESSIBILITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM At the end of the Fiscal Year 2021/22 in the Accessibility Enhancement Program, there is $281,489 from Local Option Sales Tax (LOST) and $201,744 from RUTF. The total is $483,233. This program has accumulated funding in anticipation of ADA upgrades associated with these phases of the ITS program. However, if City Council chose to use the total amount available, it would still leave a shortfall. Also, that would mean that there would be no additional funds for ADA improvements until FY 2023/24. Therefore, staff would not recommend using the funds for FY 2023/24 Accessibility Enhancement Program. E. RE-BID PROJECT AND APPLY FOR U-STEP FUNDS Staff reached out to District 1 at the IDOT regarding any potential grant funding the City could use in addition to the Iowa Clean Air Attainment Program (ICAAP) funds. The only program that may apply is the Urban-State Traffic Engineering Program (U-STEP). The issue is that it is against the IDOT's administrative rules to award U-STEP funds retroactively after a project has been let. The grant program allows a maximum per project amount of $400,000 for linear improvements. The grant also requires a 20% local match on all funds awarded to the project. The City could try to re-bid Phases 1 & 2 while applying for a maximum U-STEP grant of $400,000. However, it is unlikely that these additional grant funds will ensure that the project is fully funded, Given that the low bid was approximately $3.8M and the next bidder was $5.2M, Staff would expect the new low bid amount to increase significantly now that the bid information is publicly available to all potential bidders. Staff would not recommend this option given the current bidding environment due to the likely risk of getting significantly higher bids. F. RE-BID THE PROJECT WITH A REDUCED SCOPE AND REQUEST U-STEP FUNDS This option would be like Option 5, with the main difference being that staff and the consultant could look for areas to reduce the project scope under Phases 1 & 2 and reprogram them into future phases. Staff would again apply for $400,000 in U-STEP funding under this option. However, it should be noted that with a reduction in scope, the Iowa DOT may reduce the amount of ICAAP funds that have been awarded to this project. This is because the grant application was scored based on the pollution reduction benefits of the full scope. Until the City can work on a redesign and submit it to the DOT for review and comments, it is difficult to say what grant funding would be lost. Also, the redesign would likely incur additional consultant fees. Therefore, staff would not recommend this option considering the high likelihood that the City could lose existing grant funds and have increased consultant fees and bid prices for a reduced scope project. ALTERNATIVES: 1. Award the project to Van Maanen Electric, Inc. of Newton, Iowa in the amount of $3,800,582.00, thereby directing staff to: a. Use the local funding from FY 22/23 ITS Program to cover the funding shortfall of Phases 1 & 2. b. Direct staff to reprogram Phases 3 to 6 in the FY 2024-2029 Capital Improvements Plan. 2. Award the project to Van Maanen Electric, Inc. of Newton, Iowa in the amount of $3,800,582.00, thereby directing staff to: a. Direct staff to fund to project using a combination of funding options shown above. b. Direct staff to reprogram Phases 3 to 6 in the FY 2024-2029 Capital Improvements Plan. 3. Re-bid the ITS Phases 1 & 2 and request additional U-STEP funds from the Iowa DOT prior to the new letting date. 4. Do not award Phases 1 & 2 of the ITS program, and direct staff to reprogram the ITS program Phases 1 to 6 in the FY 2024-2029 Capital Improvements Plan MANAGER'S RECOMMENDED ACTION: Given the state of the current construction market, it is unlikely to achieve lower bid prices by re-bidding the project. Also, a reduction in scope will likely come with a reduction in ICAAP funds, given the project scope at the time the two grants were approved. It is the opinion of staff that the ITS program budget should be the first resource area to cover this shortfall. Taking funds from other fund balances or City programs may have unintended consequences and delay other needed improvements that utilize those funds. Therefore, it is the recommendation of the City Manager that the City Council adopt Alternative No. 1, as described above If City Council agrees with staff and chooses Alternative #1, the total project budget would be as follows: Revenues Subtotals Expenses Subtotals Total $4,347,947 Total $4,658,638 Contingency $310,691 [7.1%] 1: 50% RUTF; 50% LOST 2: $462,740 from RUTF; $452,560 from G.O. Bonds .