HomeMy WebLinkAbout~Master - September 22, 2020, Regular Meeting of the Ames City CouncilAGENDA
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*
SEPTEMBER 22, 2020
*DUE TO THE COVID-19 PANDEMIC, THIS CITY COUNCIL MEETING WILL BE
CONDUCTED AS AN ELECTRONIC MEETING. IF YOU WISH TO PROVIDE INPUT ON
ANY ITEM, YOU MAY DO SO AS A VIDEO PARTICIPANT BY GOING TO:
https://zoom.us/j/826593023
OR BY TELEPHONE BY DIALING: US:1-312-626-6799 or toll-free: 1-888-475-4499
Zoom Meeting ID: 826 593 023
YOU MAY VIEW THE MEETING ONLINE AT THE FOLLOWING SITES:
https://www.youtube.com/ameschannel12
https://www.cityofames.org/channel12
or watch the meeting live on Mediacom Channel 12
NOTICE TO THE PUBLIC: The Mayor and City Council welcome comments from the public
during discussion. If you wish to speak, please see the instructions listed above. 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.
AMES AREA METROPOLITAN PLANNING ORGANIZATION (AAMPO)
TRANSPORTATION POLICY COMMITTEE MEETING
CALL TO ORDER: 6:00 p.m.
1. Motion approving appointment of Public Works Director John Joiner to Statewide Urban Design
Specifications (SUDAS) Board of Directors
2. Resolutions certifying projects in Iowa Clean Air Attainment Program grant application conform
to MPO’s regional transportation planning process
3. Motion approving FY 2017-2021 Safety Performance Targets established by the Iowa Department
of Transportation in coordination with Iowa MPOs
4. Presentation of Draft 2045 Metropolitan Transportation Plan:
a. Resolution approving Draft Plan and setting date of public hearing for October 27, 2020, for
approval of Plan
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 “Watershed Awareness Month” - October 2020
2. Proclamation for “Fire Prevention Week” - October 4 - 10, 2020
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.
3. Motion approving payment of claims
4. Motion approving Minutes of Special Meeting of September 1, 2020, and Regular Meeting of
September 8, 2020
5. Motion approving Report of Change Orders for period September 1 - 15, 2020
6. Motion setting the following Special City Council meeting dates/times:
a. January 19, 2021, at 5:15 p.m. for CIP Workshop
b. January 29, 2021, at 2:00 p.m. for Budget Overview
c. February 2, 3, and 4, 2021, at 5:15 p.m. for Budget Hearings
d. February 9, 2021, at 5:15 p.m. for Budget Wrap-Up
7. Motion approving Class E Liquor Ownership Change for Hy-Vee Food Store #1, 3800 W.
Lincoln Way
8. Motion approving renewal of the following Beer Permits, Wine Permits, and Liquor Licenses:
a. Class E Liquor License with Class B Wine Permit, Class C Beer Permit (Carryout Beer), and
Sunday Sales - Hy-Vee Food & Drugstore #2, 640 Lincoln Way
b. Class E Liquor License with Class B Wine Permit, Class C Beer Permit (Carryout Beer), and
Sunday Sales - Hy-Vee Food Store #1, 3800 W. Lincoln Way
c. Class C Liquor License with Sunday Sales - Bullseye Restaurant Group LLC, 114 South
Duff Avenue
d. Class E Liquor License with Class B Wine Permit, Class C Beer Permit (Carryout Beer), and
Sunday Sales - CVS/pharmacy #10452, 2420 Lincoln Way, #104
e. Class C Beer Permit with Class B Wine Permit and Sunday Sales - Aldi Inc., #48, 108 South
5th Street
f. Class B Beer with Sunday Sales - Macubana, 116 Welch Avenue
g. Class B Liquor License with Catering, Outdoor Service and Sunday Sales - Hilton Garden
Inn Ames, 1325 Dickinson Avenue
9.Motion approving request from ISU Athletics Marketing for fireworks displays from Jack Trice
Stadium (northwest endzone) for ISU Home Football Games on the following dates:
a. October 3
b. October 10
c. November 7
2
d. November 21
e. December 5
10. Title VI Compliance:
a. Motion approving U. S. Department of Transportation Standard Title VI Assurances
b. Motion approving Title VI Non-Discrimination Agreement between Iowa Department of
Transportation and City of Ames
11.Resolution approving FY 2019/20 Annual Street Finance Report
12. Resolution approving FEMA License/Use Agreement for temporary Disaster Recovery Center
serving Ames and Story County
13. Resolution approving preliminary plans and specifications for District Geothermal Vertical
Closed Loop at Baker Subdivision, setting October 14, 2020, as bid due date and October 27,
2020, as date of public hearing
14. Resolution approving contract and bond for Unit 8 Precipitator Roof Repair and Replacement
15. Resolution approving contract and bond for Unit 8 Crane Renovation
16. Resolution approving Change Order No. 1 with Electrical Engineering and Equipment Company,
Windsor Heights, Iowa, for Motor Repair Contract for the Power Plant in the not-to-exceed
amount of $43,000
17. Resolution approving Plat of Survey for 4000 Cochrane Parkway and 600 Bellflower Drive
18. Resolution accepting completion of East Highway 30 Force Main Improvement Project
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.
PUBLIC WORKS:
19. Presentation of Draft Airport Master Plan:
a. Resolution approving Draft Plan and setting date of public hearing for October 27, 2020
PLANNING & HOUSING:
20. Staff Report regarding East University Urban Revitalization Area
21. Resolution approving Remote Parking Agreement to provide the required six parking stalls at
708 Douglas Avenue for the existing four-unit apartment complex at 700 Douglas Avenue
ELECTRIC:
22. Energy Management Services:
a. Resolution approving Asset Management Agreement/Pipeline Services for Power Plant with
Interstate Power & Light, Madison, Wisconsin, from October 1, 2020, through September
30, 2023, with two additional one-year renewals in an amount not to exceed $18,000, to
manage a) pipeline capacity under contract with Northern Natural Gas Company; b) natural
gas supply from Macquarie, and c) scheduling/balancing natural gas and authorizing
3
purchase of additional natural gas, plus delivery, as needed, an amount not to exceed
$300,000
b. Resolution approving North American Energy Standards Board Agreement with Interstate
Power & Light (parent company)
c. Resolution approving North American Energy Standards Board Special Provisions
Agreement with Interstate Power & Light
HEARINGS:
23. Hearing on Amendments to Fiscal Year (FY) 2020/21 Adopted Budget for carry-overs from FY
2019/20:
a. Resolution amending FY 2020/21 Budget for carry-over amounts from FY 2019/20
24. Hearing on vacation of all easements over Outlot P, Sunset Ridge Subdivision, 5th Addition
(5521 Allerton Drive):
a. Resolution vacating all easements
b. Resolution approving Final Plat for Sunset Ridge Subdivision, 10th Addition, with conditions
25. Hearing on 2018/19 Shared Use Path System Expansion (Trail Connection south of Lincoln
Way)
a. Resolution approving final plans and specifications and awarding contract to Howrey
Construction, Inc., of Rockwell City, Iowa, in the amount of $264,834.60, contingent upon
receipt of Iowa DOT concurrence
ORDINANCES:
26. Second passage of ordinance rezoning 2200 Oakwood Road from Agricultural (A) to Planned
Residence Development (F-PRD)
DISPOSITION OF COMMUNICATIONS TO COUNCIL:
COUNCIL COMMENTS:
ADJOURNMENT:
4
ITEM # MPO 1
DATE: 09-22-20
AMES AREA METROPOLITAN PLANNING ORGANIZATION (AAMPO) TRANSPORTATION POLICY COMMITTEE ACTION FORM SUBJECT: SUDAS BOARD OF DIRECTORS REPRESENTATIVE APPOINTMENT BACKGROUND:
The Ames Area Metropolitan Planning Organization is allocated one member on the
Statewide Urban Design and Specifications (SUDAS) Board of Directors, as is each metropolitan planning organization (MPO) in the state. A total of 37 members make up
the Board of Directors. It is required that the individual serving on the board must be a registered professional engineer in Iowa. The City of Ames Public Works Director has served as the AAMPO representative on the Board of Directors since the inception of
SUDAS in June of 2004. ALTERNATIVES:
1. Approve the appointment of the City of Ames Public Works Director, John Joiner, as
the AAMPO representative to the SUDAS Board of Directors.
2. Appoint another staff representative to the SUDAS Board of Directors.
ADMINISTRATOR’S RECOMMENDED ACTION:
The City of Ames Public Works Director has served ably as the Ames Area MPO
appointed representative to the SUDAS Boards of Directors since SUDAS was
established and incorporated in 2004.
It is recommended by the Administrator that the Ames Area MPO Transportation Policy
Committee adopt Alternative No. 1, as noted above
ITEM # MPO 2
DATE: __09-22-20
AMES AREA METROPOLITAN PLANNING ORGANIZATION
TRANSPORTATION POLICY COMMITTEE ACTION FORM
SUBJECT: FY 2022 IOWA’S CLEAN AIR ATTAINMENT PROGRAM (ICAAP)
BACKGROUND:
The Iowa’s Clean Air Attainment Program (ICAAP) helps to fund transportation projects
and programs that result in attaining or maintaining the national ambient air quality
standards (NAAQS). The Ames Area MPO is in attainment of the NAAQS, however,
ICAAP funds are available for projects in the area which result in reductions in vehicle
emissions and traffic congestion.
The Ames Area MPO is to review all potential ICAAP applications within the area for the
following three items: 1) completeness; 2) financial feasibility; 3) conformity with Ames
Area MPO transportation planning processes and plans. If these three items criteria are
met, the MPO is to adopt formal resolutions stating that the proposed projects conform
to the regional transportation plan. These resolutions are needed by the project
sponsors in order to submit their project to the Iowa Department of Transportation for
consideration. Project sponsors are responsible for delivering their completed
application to the Iowa DOT by the deadline of October 1, 2020.
The following projects have been submitted for the 2020 ICAAP grant cycle:
Project Sponsor Sponsor
Priority
Project Name ICAAP
Request
Total Cost
Project
#12 Lilac; Added Frequency of
Service: #1 Red, #7 Purple & #11
Awards are made by the Iowa Transportation Commission in early 2021. Funds will
become available in FY 2022, which begins on October 1, 2021.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Certify that the projects shown in the Iowa Clean Air Attainment Program grant
application conform to the MPO’s regional transportation planning process.
2. Do not move forward with approving either of both grant applications.
ADMINISTRATOR’S RECOMMENDED ACTION:
The Ames Area MPO Transportation Technical Committee has reviewed the proposed
grant applications and unanimously recommended approval. The work accomplished
under this grant could lead to future ICAAP funding that will free up local funds to be
reprioritized for other local regional projects.
Therefore, it is the recommendation of the Administrator that the Transportation Policy
Committee adopt Alternative No. 1 as described above.
City of Ames
TRAFFIC SIGNAL COMMUNICATION NETWORK
Second Phase – September 2020
IOWA CLEAN AIR ATTAINMENT PROGRAM
2 | P a g e
A – INTRODUCTION
This grant application is for the deployment of the Second Phase of the Traffic Communication
Network Master Plan for the City of Ames, utilizing the ITS Systems Engineering Process and the
Ames Area Metropolitan Planning Organization (AAMPO) Regional Intelligent Transportation
Systems (ITS) Architecture, to provide communication, coordination, and management of the
traffic signals systems along a short segment of Dayton Avenue, continuing west on E Lincoln
Way, south on S University Boulevard, and eastward on Airport Road. This project will continue
the program for the City of Ames to improve their ability to monitor, manage, and change traffic
signal timings along major arterials in real time to provide optimum traffic signal operations and
promote efficient traffic flows. Detailed literature reviews and engineering evaluations have
been completed by gbaSI for the City to provide technical information for this grant application.
The majority of transportation related air pollution and emissions occur when traffic is stopped,
during initial acceleration after stopping, and during stop and go traffic operations. This Second
Phase Deployment will offer opportunities to improve air quality by providing monitoring and
management capabilities to City staff for the implementation of optimized signal coordination,
reducing congestion, eliminating unnecessary vehicle stops, encouraging uniform traffic flows,
and reducing the amount of time traffic waits at signals. This Second Phase Deployment will
continue the expansion of the fiber optic communication backbone begun as Phase One of this
program and will facilitate the expansion of the Advanced Traffic Management System (ATMS)
to other corridors with future projects.
These improvements also fall in line with the City’s existing EcoSmart strategy, which strives to
reduce energy consumption and decrease the City’s carbon footprint. This strategy involves
several programs including Smart Ride, which focuses on efforts to reduce carbon emissions
through increasing efficiency in transportation services both in city operations and in public
services. The City of Ames has already moved to purchasing fuel-efficient vehicles including sub-
compacts, hybrids, and an all-electric Zenn vehicle for fuel-efficient driving and carbon footprint
reduction.
Another benefit of improving the City’s overall Traffic Network and allowing them to remotely
manage and monitor their network systems is providing more consistent, reliable, shorter travel
times along a corridor for their existing and already thriving city-wide bus transit system (CyRide).
3 | P a g e
B - BACKGROUND
The City of Ames has an on-going initiative to create a city-wide high speed fiber optic (FO)
communication network that will link existing city traffic signals, school crossing signals and
flashers, pedestrian crossings, and traffic data collection devices to allow remote monitoring,
communication, and control. Additionally, this fiber network could provide communication to
other public facilities, such as Police, Fire and Maintenance buildings, other city government
building, schools, and libraries.
Planning, design, and implementation of a city-wide high speed fiber optic network would enable
City to more efficiently and responsively manage the City’s traffic network and to implement
optimized signal coordination, reduce congestion, eliminate unnecessary vehicle stops,
encourage uniform traffic flows, and reduce the amount of time traffic waits at signals.
Phase 2 of the Ames Traffic upgrade project will expand the communication backbone of the
traffic network to enhance and improve the Traffic Department’s ability to manage traffic flow
and respond to events. This phase also affords upgrades to the traffic management devices and
software that will provide the ability institute the latest in traffic management protocols and
practices. This will result in improved traffic flow on a regular basis and the capacity to adjust
traffic plans to match increased demands created by special events, incidents, or construction.
Real time monitoring of traffic operations and improved management practices, such as traffic
adaptive programs, will combine to ease congestion and provide management capabilities that
will boost the capacity of the current roadways, ease congestion and the resulting air pollution,
and reduce fuel consumption. The most noticeable improvement to the general public, will be
the reduction in time spent driving to their destination or sitting in traffic. 20% of the
intersections included in the Phase 2 Deployment were found to be below acceptable levels of
operations per the Ames Mobility 2040 Final Report (Table 19 - Existing Conditions Intersection
Capacity Utilization Analysis Results).
PROJECT DETAILS
This Second Phase will provide a fiber optic connection from the Public Works Building to Dayton
Avenue, then south on Dayton Avenue to E. Lincoln Way, then westward along E Lincoln Way to
University Boulevard, then turning southward along University Boulevard to Airport Road, and
finally back east on Airport Road to S. Duff Avenue. There will also be a short spur cable installed
north on Grand Avenue between E. Lincoln Way and 6 th Street. This fiber expansion project will
provide the required communication network necessary to continue the expansion of the traffic
network to improve the entire traffic operations for the city of Ames. The connection from the
4 | P a g e
Public Works Building to University Boulevard and Airport Road provides the circuits for
communication and management protocol.
This phase expands the network begun in Phase 1 to include the eastern portion of Lincoln Way
out to the University and then down to Airport Road. This connects 3 of the 4 primary corridors
in the city into a redundant network that will allow modern network management and
segmentation. This will allow for the advanced Traffic Adaptive traffic management program to
interoperate the corridors and coordinate the traffic operations along the corridors to maximize
traffic flow and reduce congestion. By coordinating the flow along the individual corridors with
the adjoining corridors the Traffic Department will have the ability to further reduce congestion
and pollution.
As this project encompasses the four corridors noted, there will be ancillary benefits to the city
besides the improved traffic management ability. Here are a few examples of possible uses:
• The CCTV capacity can be shared with Police, Fire, Dispatch, and Emergency Services to
allow for monitoring of the corridors.
• The dark fiber that is not used by the Traffic Department could be allocated for use by
other city departments or governmental agencies. This could eliminate the need to use
commercially available fiber and be subjected to future increased cost and limited
availability as the demand for fiber increases.
• With the onset of “Smart City” and “Connected Vehicle” technology the dark fiber from
this project could be valuable to both governmental entities (City, IDOT, ISU, County,
USDA, as examples) and commercial interests.
• The ability to test “Connected Car” technology with a modern traffic system that includes
Advanced Traffic Controller capacity could be of great value to Iowa State University in
attracting research grants for their Engineering Department.
• The ability to monitor the areas around events (football and basketball games, concerts,
and special events) would allow the timely implementation of traffic management
measures to expedite the exit of the vehicles associated with these events.
In reality, with the availability of technology today and the explosion of technology that will soon
be coming, one of the constant requirements will be a robust fiber optic network. In the vast
majority of cases, regardless of the technology, it requires a high capacity communication
medium. The fiber optic backbone that will begin with this project will be a big step in providing
that solution for the City of Ames.
5 | P a g e
Figure 1 - First Phase Fiber Routing
(shown in Yellow)
This Phase also encompasses improvements to the necessary traffic control devices on these
corridors and connection to the Traffic Operations Center at the Public Works Building. This will
give the City of Ames the capability of managing traffic flow on a “real time” basis through Traffic
Adaptive Programs or by using the VPN function and communication capacities to monitor and
adjust timing plans at the individual intersections to meet the traffic demands.
SECOND PHASE DEPLOYMENT
The Second Phase Deployment of the Traffic Network Master Plan will create a management
corridor along one of the busiest and most congested traffic corridors in the City of Ames while
also providing the core fiber optic communication and traffic management components and
software that will be the basis for future expansion of the traffic management system. This phase
affords the ability to connect to the Lincoln Way Corridor which will provide a communication
pathway to the University Boulevard Corridor and Airport Road.
This communication system will permit the Traffic Department to connect to individual
intersections on a “real time” basis which will permit traffic monitoring and changes to the timing
of the intersection, if necessary, from the central office location without traveling to the actual
intersection. This will provide a much more efficient and accurate method of traffic management
and will reduce stops and delays along the corridor. By being able to remotely monitor and adjust
6 | P a g e
the traffic timing plans the personnel from the Traffic Department will reduce the need to travel
to the individual intersections which will save the City time and fuel.
The Second Phase Deployment communication network will allow the Traffic Department to
continue to deploy Advanced Traffic Controllers (ATC), along project corridors and have access
to the latest traffic management programs and systems. Advanced traffic management
programs such as Traffic Adaptive Systems require fast robust communication abilities to
function effectively as an exchange of detection information and platoon numbers are passed up
and down the corridor. This exchange of detection information and platoon numbers provides
the basis for the amount of time allotted to a direction of travel within the intersection and allows
the Traffic Adaptive System to adjust traffic plans according to the demands of the traffic flow.
Traffic Adaptive Systems operate on a “real time” basis and can provide an efficient and effective
traffic management protocol that reduces delays and stops along the traffic corridor. The
deployment of ATCs and a fiber optic communications network with connections to the Public
Works Building and City Hall will facilitate the collection of data from the corridor on a live basis,
video feed to Police and Fire Departments, and monitoring of traffic flow from areas where
congestion or accidents could occur.
The Second Phase Deployment will expand the backbone of the full city-wide traffic
management system.
C - IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
The Ames Traffic Network Master Plan project is made up of several separate components and
items that together create an integrated signal communication and coordinated traffic
operations system. The key components of the system are:
• Fiber optic cable and conduit system along arterials
• Communication hardware and switches located within new signal cabinets
• Procurement of ATMS management software licenses (as needed) for arterial traffic
signal control and CCTV system control
7 | P a g e
AMES SECOND PHASE DEPLOYMENT
Estimate of Project Implementation Costs – Total for Project - $1,750,000 +/-
Item 1: Fiber Cost: $925,000
144 strand Single Mode Fiber Optic Cable
Hand Holes and Conduit Installation
$25 @ foot at approximately 36,000 ft.
Item 2: Fiber Terminations Cost at Cabinets: $50,000
30 terminations per cabinet at 14 cabinets at $45 @ termination - $19,000
Miscellaneous patch cords and splice panels - $28,000
Item 3: Traffic Cabinet and Controller Cost: $450,000
Traffic Signal Cabinet with Controller at 14 cabinets at $29,657 @ cabinet - $416,000
Installation cost at 14 cabinets at $2000 @ cabinet - $28,000
Item 4: Network Switches Cost: $45,000
1 Layer 3 Network Switches @ $12,500
14 Layer 2 Network Switches @ $2000 - $28,000
Item 5: Traffic Operations Center Costs: $105,000
Central Office Software (ATMS)/ for 14 intersections - $28,000
Traffic Adaptive Modules and Intersection Implementation at $4418 @ - $62,000
One Year Maintenance and Support - $14,500
Item 6: Consultant Costs: $175,000
Infrastructure Design - $100,000
Network Design and Programming - $75,000
Second Phase Deployment Cost Estimate
ICAAP
Grant
City
Contribution
Items Description Quantity Items Cost (80%) (20%) Total Cost
1-6 Second Phase Deployment 1 6 $1,750,000 $1,400,000 $350,000 $1,750,000
8 | P a g e
D - PROJECT TIMELINE
The Ames Second Phase Deployment will commence in the summer of 2021 upon award of a
grant from the ICAAP program. It is anticipated that this Phase of deployment will be finalized in
the Winter of 2021. Future ICAAP grant applications for fiber optic infrastructure, traffic signal
upgrades, ATMS software, and TOC improvements are expected to be requested based upon the
completion of the First Phase Deployment.
PROJECT SUMMARY
The Second Phase Deployment of the Traffic Network Master Plan will create a management
corridor along one of the busiest and most congested traffic corridors in the City of Ames while
also providing the core fiber optic communication and traffic management components and
software that will be the basis for future expansion of the traffic management system. This
communication system will permit the Traffic Department to connect to individual intersections
on a “real time” basis which will permit traffic monitoring and changes to the timing of the
intersection, if necessary, from the central office location without traveling to the actu al
intersection. This will provide a much more efficient and accurate method of traffic management
and will reduce stops and delays along the corridor.
E - TRAFFIC SYSTEM OPERATION AND MANAGEMENT
The proposed Traffic Network Master Plan would outline and define the communication network
that would become a critical component of a responsive and efficient traffic management
system. The Second Phase Deployment will be the beginning of the process to create a city-wide
traffic network and provides value as a stand-alone project because of the reduction in
congestion and the accompanying fuel consumption and air pollution. This system would be
supervised, maintained, and controlled by the Traffic Operations Department for the City of
Ames. The additional capabilities provided by the network will allow the city personnel to
upgrade their traffic management practices to include central office abilities. This will allow them
to more effectively implement management practices in each of the corridors tha t will reduce
congestion and delays. By allowing communication and control capacities to each intersection
the efficiency of both the personnel and the intersection will be vastly improved. The ability of
city personnel to monitor intersections from a central office location will save time and money
and will more than offset the expenditure of funds from the Traffic Department Budget to match
the ICAAP funding.
9 | P a g e
F - INTEGRATION WITH AMES MOBILITY 2040
The concept of an efficient traffic control system that is connected to a communication network
that allows for a more flexible and adaptive approach is a concept that is consistent with the
goals put forth by the Ames Area Metropolitan Planning Organization in their Ames Mobility 2040
Long Range Transportation Plan. As noted in the minutes for the September 22, 2015 meeting of
the AAMPO Transportation Policy Committee:
Traffic Adaptive Signal Systems are included in the Ames Mobility 2040 Long Range
Transportation Plan as a short term, high priority under the Roadway portion of the plan.
This statement recognizes the importance of the need for a Traffic Adaptive System to help
manage the traffic flow within the City of Ames. This Second Phase Deployment is the next step
in reaching that goal by including the 14 intersections on the project corridors into the Traffic
Adaptive signal system the fiber optic communications network.
The Lincoln Way intersections with Duff and Clark received unacceptable Level of Service ratings
of D/E level in the Ames Mobility 2040 Final Report (Table 19 Existing Conditions Intersection
Capacity Utilization Analysis Results). The ability to monitor, adjust, and improve the capabilities
of the traffic control system provides a key component towards attaining a more efficient and
responsive transportation system. That is the overall objective of the Ames Mobility 2040 Plan.
This can be accomplished by reducing the congestion along the Lincoln Way, Grand Avenue, Duff
Avenue, and University Boulevard through coordination based on communication. The capacity
to communicate between the traffic control mechanisms at the intersections in those corridors
and a central traffic management system will provide the city with control and management
abilities that will optimize the intersections’ capabilities to handle traffic demands more
effectively. As a result, Ames will be able to mitigate some of the corresponding pollutants
associated with vehicles dealing with congestion and delays.
The project also has 4 intersections that rank in the top 25 intersections for crash frequency
according to the Ames Mobility 2040 Long Range Transportation Plan (Table 11 Intersection
Crash Frequency 2009-2013). With an improved traffic flow and better usage of the existing
roadway infrastructure provided by a Traffic Adaptive Traffic Management System the frequency
of crashes would be expected to be reduced.
10 | P a g e
Location City Ranking Number of Crashes 2009-2013
3 59 Lincoln Way / Walnut
6 44 Lincoln Way/ Duff
11 39 Lincoln Way/ University
23 29 University / S 4th St
G - AIR QUALITY IMPROVEMENT
The Ames Traffic Network Master Plan defines the requirements and steps necessary to create
an integrated traffic control system made up of traffic signals, ITS devices and systems, and other
traffic management assets. This central control system will greatly enhance and expand the
abilities of the City to quickly understand and respond to traffic operational and safety concerns.
The Traffic Network Master Plan will improve the ability of the City of Ames to monitor, manage,
and change traffic signal timings along in real time to provide optimum traffic signal operations
and promote efficient traffic flows. As the next step in fulfilling the Ames Traffic Network Master
Plan, this Phase Two Deployment project will begin the necessary improvements in the traffic
and communications systems to facilitate the technology and innovations that will allow for the
mitigation of air quality issues as they relate to traffic congestion.
Numerous studies and reports have been completed in the recent past which documents the
benefits and effectiveness of advanced signal control systems and TOC management centers.
Some studies have shown that delays can be reduces by up to 42% (1). Others noted reduced
stops by between 18 – 29% (2). In Tysons Corner, Virginia, system enhancements and
management activities decreased total annual emissions VO, CO, VOC, and NOx by 134,600
kilograms (3). A study using ITS Deployment Analysis Software (IDAS) was conducted by Eugene,
Oregon to evaluate the potential benefits of a hypothetical adaptive signal control system along
one corridor with 8 signalized intersections resulted in a 5:1 benefit-to-cost ratio (4).
In general, most studies have shown an 8-13% decrease in fuel consumption, a 7-14% decrease
in emissions, 20-40% reduction in vehicle stops, 10-20% reduction in travel times, 10-15%
increases in average speed, and a 20-40% decrease in average delay. While no detailed
calculations for potential air quality improvement have been completed for the addition of a TOC
and ATMS in Ames, it is inarguable that the implementation of traffic management technologies
and procedures will significantly improve traffic operations and decrease vehicle emissions.
11 | P a g e
Below are the results of emissions calculations and summaries completed for Lincoln Way and
the norther portion of University Boulevard. This shows the emission reductions that the
evaluated project corridors could be expected to experience with the implementation of
coordinated signal control of intersections on this route. With the addition of overall signal
system management and control practices through the implantation of a citywide ATMS,
additional savings will be recognized.
The analysis of the traffic signal operations along this corridor used SYNCHRO models that were
developed using historic (2006) peak hour traffic volumes and signal timings provided by the City
of Ames, along with the existing lane configurations at each intersection. Traffic volumes were
updated to reflect 2020 traffic conditions. To determine the impacts of the traffic signal
interconnection and coordination projects the following assumptions were used:
• Peak hour traffic volumes occur during six hours per weekday and for two hours on
Saturdays and Sundays, for a total of 34 hours per week.
• The traffic volumes warrant coordination during 14 hours on weekdays and 10 hours on
weekend days. During the other hours of the days, signals would operate more efficiently
as free, non-coordinated intersections and no benefits would be expected from signal
interconnection.
Analysis of the project corridors determined that the implementation of the managed and
coordinated traffic signal system would immediately create a nearly 11% estimated decrease in
VOC, CO, and NOx.
12 | P a g e
Lincoln Way/University Boulevard Emission Reduction Summary - total kilogram amounts and
percent improvements expected per peak hour, per off -peak hour, per day, and per year.
Table 2 – Project Corridors
Peak Hour Emissions
No Build Build Delta % Improvement
CO (kg) 36.25 32.31 -3.94 10.87%
NOx (kg) 7.05 6.29 -0.76 10.78%
VOC (kg) 8.40 7.49 -0.91 10.83%
Off-peak Hour Emissions
No Build Build Delta % Improvement
CO (kg) 27.19 24.23 -2.96 10.87%
NOx (kg) 5.29 4.72 -0.57 10.78%
VOC (kg) 6.30 5.62 -0.68 10.83%
Daily Emissions
No Build Build Delta % Improvement
CO (kg) 362.5 323.1 -39.4 10.87%
NOx (kg) 70.5 62.9 -7.6 10.78%
VOC (kg) 84 74.9 -9.1 10.83%
Yearly Emissions
No Build Build Delta % Improvement
CO (kg) 132,313 117,932 -14,381 10.87%
NOx (kg) 25,733 22,959 -2,774 10.78%
VOC (kg) 30,660 27,339 -3,322 10.83%
13 | P a g e
REFERENCES
1. Gresham/Multnomah County Phase 3: Traffic Signal System Optimization. November
2004, DKS Associate Transportation Solutions, and Siemens Intelligent Transportation
Systems.
2. Greenough and Kelman, ITS Technology Meeting Municipal Need – the Toronto
Experience, in 6th World Congress Conference on ITS, 1999, Toronto, Canada
3. White, J., Traffic Signal Optimization for Tyson’s Corner Network Volume I: Evaluation and
Summary, March 2000, Virginia, DOT
4. Regional ITS Operation & Implementation Plan for the Eugene-Springfield Metropolitan
Area, November 2002, Oregon Department of Transportation, Prepared by DKS
Associates.
5. Ames Area MPO 2015-2040 Long Range Transportation Plan September 2015, HDR, page
102,table 19
ITEM # MPO 3
DATE: __9-22-20
AMES AREA METROPOLITAN PLANNING ORGANIZATION
TRANSPORTATION POLICY COMMITTEE ACTION FORM
SUBJECT: SAFETY PERFORMANCE TARGETS 2017 – 2021
BACKGROUND:
As required by the FAST Act, the Iowa Department of Transportation was required to
establish safety measures for five metrics. The Iowa Department of Transportation has submitted the State Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) annual report to the
Federal Highway Administration which is deemed submitted as of August 31, 2020. The report included the State’s 2017-2021 safety targets for the performance measures
established in 23 § 490.207 as follows:
Performance Measure Five Year Rolling Averages
2015-2019 Baseline 2017-2021 Target
Number of Fatalities 342.0 336.8
Fatality Rate* 1.019 0.983
Number of Serious Injuries 1,420.0 1,370.8
Serious Injury Rate* 4.230 4.002
Non-Motorized Fatalities and Serious Injuries 132.6 131.0
*Rates are per 100 million vehicle miles traveled (VMT)
Like the process last year, the Ames Area MPO is required within 180 days of the State’s submission of the safety performance measures (by February 27, 2021), to adopt safety performance targets.
The performance measures apply to all public roadways within the Ames Area MPO, regardless of classification or ownership. Upon approving safety measures, the Ames
Area MPO will be required to reflect the performance measures and targets in all Long-Range Transportation Plans and Transportation Improvement Programs. Upon adoption, this update will be reflected in the final Forward 2045 Long-Range
Transportation Plan.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Approve supporting the safety performance targets established by the Iowa Department of Transportation in coordination with Iowa MPOs 2. Direct staff to make quantifiable modifications to the safety performance targets.
ADMINISTRATOR’S RECOMMENDATION:
The Ames Area MPO participates in coordination meetings with the Iowa Department of Transportation and other Iowa MPO’s so that these performance measures are developed in a coordinated manner. Therefore, it is recommended by the Administrator that the Transportation Policy Committee adopt Alternative No. 1, as noted above.
ITEM # MPO 4
DATE: 09-22-20
AMES AREA METROPOLITAN PLANNING ORGANIZATION (AAMPO) TRANSPORTATION POLICY COMMITTEE ACTION FORM
SUBJECT: DRAFT 2045 Metropolitan Transportation Plan “Forward 45”
BACKGROUND:
On July 14, 2020, the Ames Area MPO Policy Committee was given a presentation on
the progress of the 2045 Metropolitan Transportation Plan (MTP). At that meeting, the
MPO’s consultant, HDR, went through the public input process for the plan, the “universe
of alternatives” list of potential projects, and the performance measures (scoring criteria)
for the plan.
On September 8, 2020, the Ames Area MPO Policy Committee was given a presentation
from HDR that went through utilizing the performance measures and the scoring the
“universe of alternatives” list of potential projects for prioritization. An overview of the
estimated budget for funding federally aided transportation improvements over the 25-
year planning period of was discussed (known as fiscal constraint). The Policy Committee
had the opportunity to comment and give direction for any desired changes to the projects.
Following a 30-day public comment period, the Policy Committee will be presented with the Final 2045 MTP for approval on October 27, 2020. A formal presentation is not planned at that time unless substantive changes are needed based on the public
comments received.
ALTERNATIVES:
1.Approve the Draft 2045 Metropolitan Transportation Plan and set October 27,2020, as the date for the public hearing.
2. Modify the Draft 2045 Metropolitan Transportation Plan and set October 27, 2020,
as the date for the public hearing.
ADMINISTRATOR’S RECOMMENDED ACTION:
The current draft of the 2045 Metropolitan Transportation Plan is a result of previous and
ongoing coordination between AAMPO, local agencies, HDR, the Iowa Department of Transportation, and prior public feedback. Therefore, the Administrator recommends that
the Transportation Policy Committee adopt Alternative No. 1 as described above.
Ames Area MPO
Policy Committee
Draft Plan Presentation
09/22/20
Presentation Agenda
•Draft Plan Structure
•Public Input Summary
•Fiscally Constrained Plan
•Illustrative/Developer-Driven Projects
•Next Steps
•Questions
Draft Plan Structure
•Chapter 1: Introduction and
Goals
•Chapter 2: Regional Trends
•Chapter 3:Existing System
Performance
•Chapter 4:Future Trends &
Needs
•Chapter 5:Financial Plan
•Chapter 6:Alternatives
Development and Evaluation
•Chapter 7:Fiscally Constrained
Plan
Chapter 1: Introduction & Goals
•Introduction
•Ames Area MPO
•Metropolitan Transportation
Plan
•Related Planning Efforts
•Goals & Objectives
•Forward 2045 Goals &
Objectives
•Federal Planning Factors
Goal Area Description
Accessible
Safe
Sustainable
Efficient &
Reliable
Placemaking
Preservation
Chapter 2: Regional Trends
•Historical Regional
Trends
•Population Growth
•Employment Growth
•Current Demographics
•Population & Employment
Data
•Socioeconomic Conditions
& Transportation Planning
•Inner-City Commute
Patterns
Chapter 3: Existing System Performance
•Roadway System
Conditions
•Bicycle/Pedestrian
•Transit
•Freight
•Existing Regional
Connections
•System Performance
and Targets
Level of Service Definitions
Chapter 4: Future Trends & Needs
•Future System
Performance
•Travel Demand Model
•Future Multi-Modal
Opportunities
•Emerging Trends &
Technology
Chapter 5: Financial Plan
•Time Frames
•Federal, State, and Local
Funding Programs
•MPO Historical Funding
Levels
•Future Funding
Forecasts
•System Preservation
and Improvement
Spending
Historical STBG and TAP Funding Levels ($ 1000's) for
the Ames Area MPO
Chapter 6: Alternatives Development &
Evaluation
•Strategy Development
and Prioritization
Process
•Potential Alternatives
•Alternatives Scoring
Results
•Emerging Trends &
Technologies
Alternative Roadway Projects by Scoring Tier
Chapter 7: Fiscally Constrained Plan
•2020-2045 Fiscally-
Constrained Plan
•Illustrative Projects
•Developer-Driven Projects
•Potential Iowa DOT
Projects
•Future Planned System
Performance
•Regional Policy &
Strategies
Fiscally-Constrained Roadway Projects
Chapter 8: Environmental Mitigation
•Environmental Analysis
•Physical Environmental
Constraints
•Human Environmental
Constraints
•Environmental Justice
Assessment
Chapter 9: MTP Engagement
•Public and Stakeholder
Engagement
•Website
•Social Media & Email
•Statistically Valid Travel
Survey
•In-Person and Online
Events
•Transportation Policy
Committee Meetings
Chapter 10: FAST Act Compliance
•National Planning
Factors
•System Performance
Measures
•Summary of
Conformance with
Requirements
Public Input Summary
•Website
•Social Media & Email
•Statistically Valid Travel Survey
•In-Person and Online Events
•Transportation Policy Committee Meetings
•Comprehensive Plan Coordination
Website
•Two Videos
•Overview of MTP
•Overview of Goal Areas
•Project Schedule
•Links to Open House &
Online Meeting Materials
Social Media & Email
•Promote Awareness &
Input Opportunities
•Facebook & Twitter
•Press Releases
•Direct Mail
Statistically Valid Travel Survey
•Purpose:
•Perceptions on Transportation
Issues
•Methods of Transportation
Used
•Concerns Regarding Traffic
Safety
•Method:
•Random Sample of
Residents
•404 Surveys Completed
•+/-4.8% at the 95% Level of
Confidence
In-Person and Online Events
•Visioning
•Open House
•11/14/2019
•40 Attendees
•Online Open House
•11/5/2019 – 11/27/2019
•91 Visits
•Alternatives & Strategies
•Virtual Open House
•3/31/2020 – 4/14/2020
•443 Visits
•>200 Unique Comments
Transportation Policy Committee
Past Meetings:
•July 14, 2020
•Issues/Visioning Process
•Vision, Goals, & Objectives
Development
•Performance Based Planning
Approach
•Alternatives Development
•September 8, 2020
•Alternative Evaluation
•Draft Fiscally Constrained
Plan
Current Meeting:
•September 22, 2020
•Present draft Metropolitan
Transportation Plan
Future Meeting:
•October 27, 2020
•Adopt Metropolitan
Transportation Plan
Comprehensive Plan Coordination
Ames Plan 2040
•In-progress Comprehensive Plan
Fiscally Constrained Plan
•Roadway
•Bicycle/Pedestrian
•Transit
•Regional Policy Options
& Strategies
Fiscally-Constrained Roadway Projects
Roadway
Roadway Plan
Bicycle/
Pedestrian
Bicycle / Pedestrian Plan
Bicycle / Pedestrian Plan
Transit Plan
Note: All Projects are Rolling Stock and Facilities / Stations Improvements
Future Planned Performance
•Existing plus Committed Network (E+C)
•Existing plus Committed plus Planned Network (E+C+P)
Existing
and 2045
E+C+P
ADTs
2045
E+C+P
Roadway
Level of
Service
Illustrative, Developer-
Driven and Potential Iowa
DOT Projects
Illustrative Roadway Projects
Illustrative Transit Projects
Illustrative Transit Projects (Continued)
Developer-Driven Roadway Projects
Unfunded Iowa DOT Roadway Projects
Fiscally
Constrained
and
Alternative
Roadway
Projects
Next Steps:
•Public Comment Period
•9/23/2020 to 10/22/2020
•Transportation Policy Committee
•10/27/2020
•Adopt Final MTP
Questions?
DRA
F
T
DRA
F
T
DRA
F
T
DRA
F
T
DRA
F
T
DRA
F
T
DRA
F
T
• •
• •
• •
•
•
•
DRA
F
T
DRA
F
T
DRA
F
T
DRA
F
T
DRA
F
T
DRA
F
T
DRA
F
T
DRA
F
T
DRA
F
T
Goal Objectives 1
-
E
c
o
n
o
m
i
c
V
i
t
a
l
i
t
y
2
-
S
a
f
e
t
y
3
-
S
e
c
u
r
i
t
y
4
-
A
c
c
e
s
s
i
t
i
l
i
t
y
a
n
d
M
o
b
i
l
i
t
y
f
o
r
P
e
o
p
l
e
a
n
d
Fr
e
i
g
h
t
5
-
E
n
v
i
r
o
n
m
e
n
t
a
n
d
E
n
e
r
g
y
C
o
n
s
e
r
v
a
t
i
o
n
,
Qu
a
l
i
t
y
o
f
L
i
f
e
,
E
c
o
n
o
m
i
c
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
6
-
S
y
s
t
e
m
I
n
t
e
g
r
a
t
i
o
n
a
n
d
C
o
n
n
e
c
t
i
v
i
t
y
f
o
r
Pe
o
p
l
e
a
n
d
F
r
e
i
g
h
t
7
-
E
f
f
i
c
i
e
n
t
O
p
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
a
n
d
M
a
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t
8
-
P
r
e
s
e
r
v
e
t
h
e
E
x
i
s
t
i
n
g
T
r
a
n
s
p
o
r
t
a
t
i
o
n
Sy
s
t
e
m
9
-
S
y
s
t
e
m
R
e
s
i
l
i
e
n
c
y
a
n
d
R
e
l
i
a
b
i
l
i
t
y
;
R
e
d
u
c
e
or
M
i
t
i
g
a
t
e
S
t
o
r
m
w
a
t
e
r
I
m
p
a
c
t
s
10
-
E
n
h
a
n
c
e
T
r
a
v
e
l
a
n
d
T
o
u
r
i
s
m
Improve walk, bike, and transit system connections p p p p
Provide appropriate arterial and collector spacing p p p
Improve bicycle and pedestrian access to CyRide routes p p p
Provide improved access to transit for transit dependent, disabled, and disadvantaged populations p p p
Incorporate bicycle, pedestrian, and transit-friendly infrastructure in new developments p p p
Reduce number and rate of crashes p
Reduce the number of bicycle and pedestrian crashes p
Reduce number and rate of serious injury and fatal crashes p
Identify strategies and projects that improve user safety for all modes p
Prioritize projects that improve the Ames Area Safe Routes to School Program p
Reduce transportation impacts to natural resources p p
Make transportation infrastructure more resilient to natural and manmade events p p
Limit transportation system emissions of greenhouse gases p p
Promote financially sustainable transportation system investments p p p
Promote transportation decisions that follow State of Iowa Smart Planning Principles p p
Safe
Sustainable
Federal Planning Factors
Accessible
DRA
F
T
Goal Objectives 1
-
E
c
o
n
o
m
i
c
V
i
t
a
l
i
t
y
2
-
S
a
f
e
t
y
3
-
S
e
c
u
r
i
t
y
4
-
A
c
c
e
s
s
i
t
i
l
i
t
y
a
n
d
M
o
b
i
l
i
t
y
f
o
r
P
e
o
p
l
e
a
n
d
Fr
e
i
g
h
t
5
-
E
n
v
i
r
o
n
m
e
n
t
a
n
d
E
n
e
r
g
y
C
o
n
s
e
r
v
a
t
i
o
n
,
Qu
a
l
i
t
y
o
f
L
i
f
e
,
E
c
o
n
o
m
i
c
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
6
-
S
y
s
t
e
m
I
n
t
e
g
r
a
t
i
o
n
a
n
d
C
o
n
n
e
c
t
i
v
i
t
y
f
o
r
Pe
o
p
l
e
a
n
d
F
r
e
i
g
h
t
7
-
E
f
f
i
c
i
e
n
t
O
p
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
a
n
d
M
a
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t
8
-
P
r
e
s
e
r
v
e
t
h
e
E
x
i
s
t
i
n
g
T
r
a
n
s
p
o
r
t
a
t
i
o
n
Sy
s
t
e
m
9
-
S
y
s
t
e
m
R
e
s
i
l
i
e
n
c
y
a
n
d
R
e
l
i
a
b
i
l
i
t
y
;
Re
d
u
c
e
o
r
M
i
t
i
g
a
t
e
S
t
o
r
m
w
a
t
e
r
I
m
p
a
c
t
s
10
-
E
n
h
a
n
c
e
T
r
a
v
e
l
a
n
d
T
o
u
r
i
s
m
Efficient and Reliable
Identify context-sensitive strategies and projects that improve traffic flow in corridors with high
levels of peak period congestion. p p
Maintain acceptable travel reliability on Interstate and principal arterial roadways p p
Provide frequent transit service to high trip generation locations p p p
Increase the regional share of trips made by walking, biking, and transit p
Improve freight system reliability p p p
Identify technology solutions to enhance system operation p p p p
Placemaking
Provide transportation strategies and infrastructure that support current adopted plans p p p
Increase the percentage of population and employment within close proximity to transit and/or
walking and biking system p p
Provide transportation investments that fit within their context p p
Connect activity centers and adjoining developments with complete streets p p p p p
Preservation
Maintain NHS routes in good condition while minimizing routes in poor condition p
Maintain NHS bridges in good condition while minimizing bridges in poor condition p
Federal Planning Factors
DRA
F
T
DRA
F
T
DRA
F
T
DRA
F
T
DRA
F
T
DRA
F
T
DRA
F
T
DRA
F
T
DRA
F
T
DRA
F
T
DRA
F
T
DRA
F
T
DRA
F
T
DRA
F
T
DRA
F
T
DRA
F
T
DRA
F
T
•
•
DRA
F
T
DRA
F
T
•
•
•
DRA
F
T
DRA
F
T
DRA
F
T
•
•
DRA
F
T
DRA
F
T
DRA
F
T
DRA
F
T
DRA
F
T
DRA
F
T
DRA
F
T
DRA
F
T
DRA
F
T
DRA
F
T
DRA
F
T
• •
• •
• •
• •
• •
• •
• •
• •
•
•
•
•
•
DRA
F
T
DRA
F
T
DRA
F
T
DRA
F
T
•
•
DRA
F
T
•
DRA
F
T
• •
o o
o o
o o
o
DRA
F
T
DRA
F
T
•
•
•
•
•
•
DRA
F
T
•
•
DRA
F
T
•
•
DRA
F
T
DRA
F
T
DRA
F
T
DRA
F
T
DRA
F
T
DRA
F
T
DRA
F
T
DRA
F
T
DRA
F
T
DRA
F
T
•
•
•
DRA
F
T
•
•
•
•
•
DRA
F
T
DRA
F
T
DRA
F
T
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
DRA
F
T
DRA
F
T
DRA
F
T
DRA
F
T
DRA
F
T
DRA
F
T
DRA
F
T
5 Wright TP, (1936). “Factors affecting the costs of airplanes.” Journal of Aeronautical Sciences 10: 302-328.
6 Nagy B, Farmer JD, Bui QM, Trancik JE (2013) Statistical Basis for Predicting Technological Progress. PLoS ONE 8(2): e52669. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0052669
DRA
F
T
DRA
F
T
DRA
F
T
7 https://venturebeat.com/2020/01/06/waymos-autonomous-cars-have-driven-20-million-miles-on-public-roads/
DRA
F
T
https://www.sightline.org/2019/12/27/zombie-scooters-are-coming/
9 https://www.nhtsa.gov/press-releases/nuro-exemption-low-speed-driverless-vehicle
DRA
F
T
DRA
F
T
DRA
F
T
12 https://about.bnef.com/electric-vehicle-outlook/#toc-viewreport
DRA
F
T
DRA
F
T
13 https://sharedusemobilitycenter.org/what-is-shared-mobility/
14 https://www.grandviewresearch.com/press-release/global-shared-mobility-market
15 https://nacto.org/shared-micromobility-2018/
DRA
F
T
16 https://www.marketwatch.com/press-release/mobility-as-a-service-maas-market-size-will-reach-35835-billion-usd-by-the-end-of-2025-2019-10-17
17 Previous HDR research for Florida DOT
18 Urban Freight Challenges with the Rise of E-Commerce. https://carolinaangles.com/2019/03/21/urban-freight-challenges-with-the-rise-of-e-commerce/
19 Iowa State Rail Plan. https://iowadot.gov/iowainmotion/railplan/2017/IowaSRP2017_Ch2.pdf
DRA
F
T
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
DRA
F
T
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
DRA
F
T
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
DRA
F
T
•
•
•
DRA
F
T
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
DRA
F
T
DRA
F
T
DRA
F
T
DRA
F
T
DRA
F
T
DRA
F
T
DRA
F
T
DRA
F
T
DRA
F
T
DRA
F
T
Time Period/Years
Non-Federal Aid Revenue*
Bike / Pedestrian Funding Roadway Funding
System
Preservation
System
Improvement
System
Preservation
System Improvement
Fed Aid
System Local System
TIP Years 2021-2024 $68,417 $19,318 $12,878
Short-Term 2025-2029 $2,362 $5,512 $56,691 $8,503 $5,669
Mid-Term 2030-2037 $4,165 $9,718 $99,960 $14,994 $9,996
Long-Term 2038-2045 $4,692 $10,947 $112,602 $16,890 $11,260
Total* $11,219 $26,177 $269,253 $40,387 $26,925
DRA
F
T
•
•
•
•
•
DRA
F
T
•
•
•
DRA
F
T
DRA
F
T
DRA
F
T
DRA
F
T
DRA
F
T
DRA
F
T
DRA
F
T
•
•
•
DRA
F
T
DRA
F
T
DRA
F
T
•
•
•
•
•
•
DRA
F
T
DRA
F
T
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
DRA
F
T
DRA
F
T
DRA
F
T
DRA
F
T
DRA
F
T
DRA
F
T
DRA
F
T
DRA
F
T
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
DRA
F
T
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
DRA
F
T
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
DRA
F
T
DRA
F
T
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
DRA
F
T
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
DRA
F
T
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
DRA
F
T
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
DRA
F
T
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
DRA
F
T
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
DRA
F
T
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
DRA
F
T
DRA
F
T
DRA
F
T
DRA
F
T
DRA
F
T
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
DRA
F
T
•
DRA
F
T
DRA
F
T
DRA
F
T
DRA
F
T
DRA
F
T
DRA
F
T
DRA
F
T
DRA
F
T
DRA
F
T
DRA
F
T
DRA
F
T
DRA
F
T
DRA
F
T
DRA
F
T
DRA
F
T
DRA
F
T
•
o
•
o
•
DRA
F
T
•
o
•
o
o
DRA
F
T
DRA
F
T
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
DRA
F
T
DRA
F
T
•
•
•
•
•
•
DRA
F
T
DRA
F
T
DRA
F
T
DRA
F
T
DRA
F
T
•
•
DRA
F
T
DRA
F
T
DRA
F
T
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
DRA
F
T
•
•
•
•
•
DRA
F
T
DRA
F
T
DRA
F
T
DRA
F
T
•
•
DRA
F
T
DRA
F
T
DRA
F
T
DRA
F
T
DRA
F
T
DRA
F
T
DRA
F
T
DRA
F
T
DRA
F
T
DRA
F
T
DRA
F
T
DRA
F
T
•
•
DRA
F
T
DRA
F
T
DRA
F
T
DRA
F
T
DRA
F
T
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
DRA
F
T
•
•
DRA
F
T
pp
ppp
pp
pp
ppp
pp
ppp
ppp
ppp
pp
DRA
F
T
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL MEETING OF THE AMES CITY COUNCIL
AMES, IOWA SEPTEMBER 1, 2020
The Special Meeting of the Ames City Council was called to order by Mayor Haila at 6:00 p.m. on the
1st day of September, 2020. The Mayor announced that due to the Governor of Iowa declaring a public
health emergency because of the COVID-19 pandemic, City Council meetings are being held
electronically, as allowed by Section 21.8 of the Iowa Code. He explained how the public could
participate in the meeting via the internet or by phone. City Council members participating in the
meeting electronically were Bronwyn Beatty-Hansen, Gloria Betcher, Amber Corrieri, Tim Gartin,
Rachel Junck, and David Martin. Ex officio Member Nicole Whitlock was also present.
Mayor Haila commented that he had stated at the August 25, 2020, meeting that the Council would not
be considering the first reading of the Mandatory Face Covering Ordinance until next week. He said
that he had made that comment not knowing or anticipating how much could change in the course of
a few days. However, the COVID-19 infection rate has skyrocketed, and the Governor has now closed
bars. Reflecting on that, the Mayor felt it was important for the Council to consider the Ordinance
earlier. A Press Release was issued and social media was used in an attempt to get notice of the Special
Meeting out as soon as possible. Mayor Haila noted that he does not take lightly making changes to
what has been told to people during Council meetings; however, it was an extraordinary situation that
he believed warranted the calling of a Special Meeting. There is one item on this meeting’s Agenda,
which is the first reading of a Mandatory Face Covering Ordinance, as prepared by the City Attorney
at the direction of the City Council .
PUBLIC FORUM: Mayor Haila opened Public Forum. There being no one indicating that they
wished to speak, the Mayor closed Public Forum.
MANDATORY FACE COVERING ORDINANCE: Mayor Haila asked City Attorney Mark
Lambert to provide highlights of the proposed Ordinance.
City Attorney Lambert explained that he had drafted the Ordinance with the recommendations made
by the City Council members after they had reviewed the Draft at their meeting held August 25, 2020.
He specifically noted that he had added language as directed, which was to:
1. Clarify that a childcare facility is not considered a public setting or a facility where the
public is invited in.
2. Remove any penalties and replace with language saying that compliance with the
Ordinance shall be obtained through education and encouragement only. There is no
penalty for a violation of the Ordinance.
Moved by Junck, seconded Corrieri, to reconsider the motion made at the Council’s last meeting,
specifically the motion to approve the Draft Ordinance, but replace Section 4 with a statement
explaining that there will be no penalty.
Roll Call Vote: 3-3. Voting aye: Beatty-Hansen, Corrieri, Junck. Voting nay: Betcher, Gartin, Martin.
Motion failed.
Mayor Haila stated that the Council had received an email from a member of the public requesting
clarification about members of a household being out walking around together. The Mayor felt the
author’s intent was to ask if it might be an exemption if a person was walking with someone they live
with. He asked Attorney Lambert to comment. Mr. Lambert pointed out that under Section (1)a., it
states, “Outside whenever the person cannot stay at least six (6) feet away from others.” He felt the
author of the email seemed to be suggesting to add to that “who are not family members.”
Council Member Martin said that the suggestion was to modify Section (1)a. The Ordinance currently
reads that every person must wear a face covering under the following circumstances:
“(1)a. Outside whenever the person cannot stay at least six (6) feet away from others;”
The proposal is to change that to read, “Outside whenever the person cannot stay at least six (6) feet
away from others not in the person’s household.”
Moved by Martin, seconded by Corrieri, to modify Section (1)a. so that it reads “Outside whenever the
person cannot stay six (6) feet away from others not in the person’s household.”
Council Member Gartin asked how someone would know who is in someone’s household and how
would they go about proving that. He believes people from the same household should be able to walk
on the streets together. Mr. Gartin recognized that there is no enforcement at this time, but if there ever
was an enforcement mechanism, it would make it very difficult for the Police to enforce. City Attorney
Lambert stated that the idea is to put the rule in place and hope that people comply. He does not think
the Police will be pulling people over to check to see if they are family members. Council Member
Gartin questioned if that would include roommates. Mr. Lambert replied that it would include
roommates.
Roll Call Vote: 6-0. Motion declared carried unanimously.
Moved by Martin, seconded by Gartin, to state that the Ordinance would sunset on December 31, 2020,
unless the date is amended or the Ordinance is sooner repealed.
Roll Call Vote: 6-0. Motion declared carried unanimously.
Public Comment: Cynthia Paschen, 2117 Graeber Street, Ames, stated that she was married to Dr.
Paschen, who is the Chair of Story County Board of Health. Ms. Paschen said that Dr. Paschen had
gotten a lot of international press today about the opening up of football games at Iowa State; 25,000
people are expected at the first home football game on September 12, 2020. People were indicating in
the comment sections of newspapers from Great Britain to Germany to New York what they thought
about that decision; it mostly was not good. Ms. Paschen said she was speaking as a surrogate for her
husband because he was at work taking care of patients. The question was asked by Ms. Paschen that,
if the City Council passes an ordinance with no teeth (no penalty), how does that interface with an
ordinance passed by the Story County Board of Supervisors, based on the recommendations of the
Board of Health, that may have a penalty or may have a stronger recommendation than what is being
considered by the Ames City Council. Mayor Haila advised that City Attorney Lambert will be asked
to answer that question after all public input had been received.
2
Lissa Rosengren, 614 Hodge Avenue, Ames, asked if the role of government is to protect people from
themselves; and at what point, is it to guard liberties. She questioned if government was more or less
effective when it creates more laws. Ms. Rosengren indicated that she was opposed to the mask
mandate, in general, but definitely as written. She also questioned if the purpose of masking was to
have fewer positive cases or fewer hospitalizations. Ms. Rosengren said she would like to see
parameters added to the Ordinance so that the decisions are based on data in context. It was also asked
by Ms. Rosengren what else could be expected or anticipated in future ordinances regarding COVID,
e.g., requiring eye wear. Ms. Rosengren stated that she would also like to see exemptions, in writing,
for places of worship.
Vanessa Burnett, 2805 Northridge Parkway, #104, Ames, stated that she had sent, on March 27, 2020,
a letter to every City Council member; however, had received no indication that any of them had read
it with the exception of Mayor Haila. According to Ms. Burnett, her letter was full of information about
how Ames could get ahead of the virus based on her experience as a disaster management professional.
She alleged that the Council cannot even pass the most basic public health measure to mandate the
wearing of masks in Ames with a penalty, which point she didn’t even include in her March 27th letter
because she assumed that was commonsense. Noting that it was now September and now Ames is a
world’s coronavirus hotspot because it took five months for the Council to get to this point. Ms.
Burnett said that she moved to Ames from the Washington, D.C., area because she thought it would
be the safest place to be in the case of a huge catastrophe, which she felt was likely to be inevitable;
however, she believes she would be safer back in the D.C. area with 5.5 million people than she is back
here “in the sticks” with a bunch of people who don’t believe in science. Ms. Burnett commented that
the Council members were elected to serve, which means to her trying to keep its residents alive, not
trying to protect freedoms for people who are too selfish to help others by following even the most
basic virus mitigation measures. She asked the Council to please take care of those living here.
Abbie Berger, 420 Ash Avenue, Ames, stated that she is against the Mask Ordinance in all forms. She
believes it is an infringement of individual liberties that are very important. Ms. Berger commented
that she does not believe it is healthy, specifically for children, but for all people to wear masks. She
said she is not anti-science; however, science needs to look at actual facts and actual numbers in
context, and she does not believe the virus necessitates the wearing of masks.
Dickson Jensen, 4611 Mortensen Road, Ames, Iowa, acknowledged the trauma, destruction, and even
death that has been caused by the virus in Ames, in the State, Country, and World; the consequences
have been overwhelming and have changed the world as it functions. He stated his belief that the City
Council and the citizens of Ames all want the same thing: they want the virus to go away and life to
be normal again; however, that is not going to happen in the near future. Medical experts are stating
that to help lessen the spread of the virus, people should live differently by using higher hygiene
standards and wearing face coverings. Mr. Jensen noted that the main goal of the Ordinance, according
to the City Council, is to educate and encourage Ames citizens on how important face coverings are
to slow the spread. The Ordinance has no penalty for violations for not wearing a mask. Mr. Jensen
said he was offering an additional idea for educating citizens on social distancing and wearing face
coverings. The idea is not to add a penalty for violation of the Ordinance, but instead, publicize through
signage, social media, etc., the importance of the Ordinance. He also suggested offering rewards in the
form of gift certificates to be handed out by the Police Department to those individuals abiding by the
Ordinance. The safety and well-being of Ames citizens is of the utmost importance, but as stated by
3
the Council, so is a strong economy. Ames needs the students of Iowa State University (ISU) living in
Ames, ISU football games played in Ames, and events and activities occurring in Ames. Mr. Jensen
stated that Ames businesses are hurting, and some businesses are dying because of the virus. He offered
to donate $10,000 tonight to buy gift certificates from Ames restaurants and to start a strong campaign
to educate citizens on the importance of wearing masks. Likewise, he wants the City to add to that fund
to help pay for the education and for more gift certificates. He suggested that other contributions to the
fund be made by the City in the amount of $100,000; by ISU in the amount of $100,000, as ISU needs
Ames just like Ames needs ISU; other organizations, such as the Ames Chamber and Visitors Bureau,
Mary Greeley Medical Center, McFarland Clinic, financial institutions, other large business owners,
churches, and other concerned citizens, who should all give freely to help stop the spread and to keep
the hospitality industry alive. Mr. Jensen believes an obtainable goal of $500K or more is very realistic.
He asked that Ames find a way to come together and be an example for other cities that is positive and
encouraging, not negative. Mr. Jensen asked that the City “jump on board” and help get the community
back to normal.
Ernie Brown, 1219-24th Street, Ames, asked if the houses of worship were going to be exempted from
the mandate. He said he was not going to give his opinion on masks or no masks, but said he does have
a concern about houses of worship.
Paige McGovern, 531Crystal Street, Ames, expressed her disapproval of moving forward with a mask
mandate. She asked the Council to implicitly describe the end goal and what numbers would be looked
at in order to end the mandate. Ms. McGovern recalled that the Council had previously given three
factors that would need to be present before they would move forward with a mask mandate, but none
of those factors have been met and yet the Council decided to move forward with issuing the mandate.
Ms. McGovern asked that the Council communicate the end goal to the citizens.
Mayor Haila noted that some of the Council members were having internet issues; however, they were
all still participating in this meeting.
Sasha Aarsen, 3320 Weston Drive, Ames, stated that she is strongly against the mask mandate, face
coverings, and masking on anyone who is healthy. She believes that those who are not can be
protected, as has been done before. Ms. Aarsen commented that the virus can be passed around to the
healthy people, who can get over it and build up their immunities; herd immunity is real. According
to Ms. Aarsen, hospitalizations dropped a while ago, and she questioned why the City Council was even
discussing a mask mandate now. She asked that she be sent what the Council is seeing to make these
decisions. In all the material that she has searched, not one has shown that a mask prevents viral spread.
According to Ms. Aarsen, the fear that is being pushed and the comments from a few in the medical
field are being outweighed by the hundreds, and there are answers: Vitamin C, Vitamin D, and several
other things that people who take care of themselves use on a regular basis. She doesn’t believe she
needs to wear a mask because she is not a sick person; she does everything to keep herself and her
family healthy. She takes pride in her body, and if others are going to fast-food restaurants for every
meal of the day, they are not taking pride in their health. Ms. Aarsen asked why she should have to
wear a mask because others are making poor choices. To her, that makes no sense. She further
commented that she has children, and she is not going to allow this to be normalized for them. Ms.
Aarsen questioned who is looking at the social, emotional, and psychological damage being caused.
It is her belief that her children should be in school, but she is home-schooling this year and she is not
4
a home-school parent. In Ms. Aarsen’s opinion, this has gone too far; when fear is the driving force,
decisions are not made correctly.
Naomi Maynes, 427-13th Street, Ames, said that she would like to know the metrics to show when the
mandate is to be over, specifically, when is everyone going to get to stop wearing masks. She asked to
see the science that is being used to make the decisions. All the research that she has done indicates
that masks, especially those made of cloth, seem to spread the illness. Ms. Maynes has been told how
much children, and adults as well, are touching their masks, adjusting them, and taking them on and
off repeatedly. She has small children and requested to know how much research the Council has done
in regards to the emotional, psychological, and even physical damage that could possibly be caused
because there are no studies on that. Ms. Maynes stated that she was also greatly concerned about the
lack of religious exemption. The ability to worship how and where people please is a source of pride
for many Americans. According to Ms. Maynes, an article in the New York Times stated that there is
concern over the COVID-19 tests as they are showing evidence of someone being infected, but in such
a small amount that they are not actually spreading the virus. Ms. Maynes said that for people who are
sick and think that they could be spreading the virus, it makes perfect sense to her that they should wear
a mask and avoid contact with others if they are not able to stay home. However, to require people who
are healthy and to require three-year-old child who is healthy to wear a mask and not be able to see
people’s faces or see people smile is wrong and is not acceptable.
Ashley Smith, 4144 Eisenhower Lane, Ames, spoke in favor of the mask mandate. She has seen some
people taking this lightly and citing the low death rate as the reason; however, she thinks it is very
important to note there is not a binary between “living happily after or dying from COVID.” Ms. Smith
commented that there is a lot that is unknown about the long-term effects: there is evidence now that
people who recover from COVID have permanent neurological or heart damage. She recalled that there
were some legal ramifications that prevented Council from moving forward with the mask mandate;
however, she thinks that the federal and state governments have failed its people, and if city
government is not willing to move forward with something to protect its people, there is no one left to
provide that protection. Ms. Smith encouraged the Council to move forward with the mandate. She
would like to see a penalty because she does not think people will comply without one. She noted that
she has heard that grocery store workers have been assaulted when they have required shoppers to put
on a mask. Even though she wants a penalty included, if it is the path of least resistance to do something
with positive reenforcement, that would be helpful. Ms. Smith noted that a few of the speakers had
commented that healthy people do not need to wear masks; however, that is exactly the issue: it is not
known when they could be spreading the virus, so masks are needed at all times. If everyone is not
compliant, it will not work. Noting the comments about places of worship, Ms. Smith said her personal
opinion is that there should be no exemptions; the virus does not care where you are, especially if
people are indoors.
Jon Rosengren, 614 Hodge, Ames, stated that he is very much against the mask mandate. He said that
the thresholds for triggering a mandate have never been met and the thresholds for ending it have never
been stated; however, if the Council is basing its decision on science, he believes there needs to be
actual measurable triggers in place. At this point, it appears to him that actions are being taken out of
fear, panicking to rush and get the Ordinance in place as soon as possible to deal with something that
there is not a lot known about. Mr. Rosengren commented that Ames has been dealing with this for
over five months. Statistics have shown that there are spikes, and Ames may be having a higher
5
percentage of positives at the moment, but the general trend is that this is on the downside; the virus
is declining and death rates are declining. The rates of testing have changed because they are no longer
testing those who are asymptomatic per CDC recommendations. Naturally, there are going to be higher
positivity rates because the only people who are being tested are sick. In the opinion of Mr. Rosengren,
the trigger that Ames is a hotspot is an artificial statistic; it should be a randomized statistic, not simply
testing a group of people who are sick to find out how many people are sick with a particular disease.
Mr. Rosengren reiterated that he is very much opposed to the mask mandate in any form.
Andrew Piltser Cowan, Somerville, Massachusetts, stated that his parents live at 2015 Clark Avenue
in Ames, which is where he grew up. Mr. Piltser Cowan indicated that he had not intended to speak
during this meeting; however, he has watched with alarm the rising number of cases in Story County
over the past days and weeks. He shared his experience in living in the most dense city in New England
where they have been under a mask mandate since April. His view, after living under that mask
mandate for the past several months, is that it is the smallest of the impositions upon people’s liberties
and helps to save lives. Mr. Piltser Cowan stated that a range of civil penalties were included in the
Massachusetts mask mandate; however, since April, the number of coercive enforcement actions of that
mask mandate statewide has been in the tens. Their mask mandate has been enforced, like Ames is
proposed to be done, by education and encouragement, and it has worked. Mr. Piltser Cowan
encouraged the Council to adopt the proposed mask mandate.
Vivian Cook, 2316 Aspen Road, Unit #102, Ames, voiced her support for an enforceable mask
mandate. She acknowledged that this is a City of Ames meeting, but pointed out that it, above all else,
is due to the dangerous decisions of Iowa State University that have resulted in Ames’ recent listing
as the No. 1 worst COVID outbreak in the nation. However, Iowa State University Administrators have
also informed the community that they had been in close conversation with the City of Ames in making
these decisions. Ms. Cook pointed out that Iowa State University is not self-contained, and its actions
will affect the entire community as a whole and is already doing so. She encouraged the Council to
apply pressure to Iowa State University to discourage in-person gatherings of any kind. It is more than
clear to Ms. Cook that the actions of the nation, Iowa, and ISU, are showing disregard for the scientific
evidence and the lives of those in all communities. Ames has far exceeded the thresholds of other
communities that have slowed the spread by taking actions such as mandating face coverings, and
federal public health guidelines are being disregarded. Ms. Cook urged the Council members to do
everything they can, including passing a face covering mandate, to mitigate the spread.
Reid Kruger, 1160 Oklahoma Drive, Ames, stated that he has been a small business owner in Ames
since 1982. He is really concerned about the lack of consequences of the Ordinance. Mr. Kruger
commented that he loved the idea of the gift certificates and would like to chip in some money himself.
He noted that, in his own business, there are signs that ask people to wear masks; however, it is a daily
battle with some of the people entering his shop. The same people who are touting their liberties don’t
even respect other people’s own liberties to run their businesses how they want. He has heard of young
people being berated in front of HyVee and Target because they are trying to enforce the store’s policy.
Mr. Kruger sees it as being hypocritical of these people to fight for only their own liberties. It is his
opinion that those people who are so set against a mandate are still not going to wear masks. He noted
that he personally cannot get sick because he is a small essential business owner with one employee,
and if gets sick, he and his one employee will have to close down his business. On a personal level,
his wife has a severe underlying condition and is at high risk; he can’t bring the virus home. His family
6
has been social distancing and has basically sequestered in their home since March, hoping that other
people will do the right thing and care for other people, but that hasn’t happened in the past five
months. The science is out there and it’s not going away. He is tired of going to work scared out of his
mind. Everyone wants it to be over. Mr. Kruger said he would like the Council to consider some kind
of consequence in order to help for helping to enforce a mask mandate.
Leanne Wilson, 5326 Springbrook Drive, Ames, thanked the Council for holding this Special Meeting
as she believes this is a decision that cannot be delayed. She pointed out that the number of active
COVID cases was coming down until mid-August, but now it is rising rapidly due to spread inside
Ames. According to Ms. Wilson, if there are no changes, about 2,500 more cases will be identified in
Story County in the next two weeks. The lag between new cases and hospitalizations is about ten days;
therefore, there will be a rise in hospitalizations. However, if the slope can be changed now, a much
worse rise could be avoided. Ms. Wilson urged the City Council to pass the mandate in whatever form
they can agree on as soon as possible to avoid a much worse situation; action is needed now.
Rebekah Bunting, 5247 Harvest Road, Ames, voiced her opposition to a mask mandate in any form.
She asked those who are citing statistics and science to state where they are getting their statistics. Ms.
Bunting said that she works in clinical trial drug development and management, specifically for fatty
liver disease where she sees morbidly obese patients on a global level, but also in many sites in the
United States. She manages 23,000 patients and has only seen six patients with COVID, and those six
patients have recovered and continued on with their trial studies. Ms. Bunting believes that a lot of
economic decisions and decisions regarding individual liberties are being based on a 2.4% positivity
rate and out of fear. According to Ms. Bunting, Story County has a 2.4% positivity rate; statistically,
that is an insignificant number. She clarified that she was not saying that it was insignificant if someone
were to contract COVID and become severely ill or even die. There have been a lot of tests coming
back positive, but it doesn’t mean that those people are symptomatic and it doesn’t even mean that these
people are in the hospital. Ms. Bunting said that the numbers don’t even show that Story County is
having a “crazy” increase in numbers, but that is what the media is wanting people to think. She
suggested that people look at the COVID website for information. Gift cards are a wonderful idea, but
that would still be encouraging making decisions based on fear, rather than confidence. Ms. Bunting
asked the Council to consider the consequences to children, families, churches, and businesses. She
also noted that it is the owner’s right to require people to wear masks in order to come into their
businesses, which do need to be respected. That means she won’t give her business to those
establishments, just like she won’t give her business to Wheatsfield because she’s not welcome in that
store now.
Yonas Michael, 3001 Heathrow Drive, Ames, said he was shocked to hear that people are so passionate
about not wearing masks. He believes that the science is clear that wearing masks helps to slow the
spread of the coronavirus. Mr. Michael commented that he kept hearing statements about acting out
of fear, but he is fearful that the lack of responsibility as a community will not keep him and his
neighbors safe. He is fearful that he will succumb to his underlying health condition if he contracts the
virus. Mr. Michael said that what is being talked about is wearing a mask to help keep people healthy
and alive. After hearing the last speaker talk about how they are not going to shop at certain places
because masks are required, he commented that those are the places where he does shop and supports
because he does feel comfortable and safe there. From an economics perspective, he now has turned
to buying most of what he needs online because he is too worried about entering businesses because
7
he is afraid of being exposed to the virus. In Mr. Michael’s opinion, there are so many reasons why
the mask mandate is needed; however, the reality is that the science is clear: currently, the Ames
community is not healthy. The positivity rate in Ames continues to go up, and to return to business as
usual, everyone has to do their part now. He said he lacks faith in people using the commonsense that
science has put out there. Mr. Michael encouraged the Council to support a mask mandate.
John Carter, 619 Duff Avenue, Ames, indicated that was speaking on behalf of himself and his wife,
Chelcie. Mr. Carter indicated that they moved to Ames approximately a year ago from East Central,
Indiana, for graduate school. He initially wasn’t sure he wanted to live in a larger community, but he
actually really loves Ames. The thing that has shocked him the most this evening is the disregard some
community members seem to have for other members of the community. In his opinion, individual
liberties stop where others can begin to be harmed. He is amazed at the lengths that people go to in
order not wear a mask on their face. Mr. Carter urged the Council to not only pass a mask mandate, but
to have one “with teeth.” For him, it was really disheartening to know that there are so many
community members who seem to not care about the impact of the virus on other people’s lives,
specifically that it can harm and kill people. He believes the psychological trauma that needs to be
considered is that which will occur when friends or family members become sick, die, and or have life-
long aftereffects.
Sehba Faheem, Ames, advised that she is in favor of the mask mandate. She wants to make sure that
throughout this discussion they are not losing sight of the overall goal, which is to save people’s lives.
The CDC has said that masks will stop the spread of the virus; the CDC is the best source of
information. Ms. Faheem pointed out that it is a novel coronavirus and some things are unknown;
however, masks have been proven to reduce the spread of the virus as they form a barrier from droplets
from the mouth of a person who might be carrying the virus to everyone else. Having everyone wear
a mask will reduce the spread of the virus overall. Ms. Faheem believes that it is a simple ask to save
lives. It should have been implemented months ago, but it is still being discussed. She wants to ensure
that, if a mask mandate is implemented, it actually puts some enforcement behind it; it needs an actual
penalty for not having a mask on. Ms. Faheem asked the Council to make the right decision to keep
citizens safe. Citizens need the Council’s help to keep them safe; the Governor has failed the citizens
of Iowa, and it is on the Council’s shoulders now to protect community members’ lives.
Tim Sklenar, 320 S. 2nd Street, Ames, voiced his support of a mask mandate “with teeth.” He has a
compromising condition and is at risk. Mr. Sklenar noted that people do not have a personal liberty
right to drink and drive because it endangers other people’s lives, but he doesn’t fear it because there
are rules against it with penalties. Mr. Sklenar believes the same thing should apply to a mask mandate.
According to Mr. Sklenar, it worked in the influenza outbreak in 1918. He would like to go out in the
Ames community and not be worried that others are going to be selfish and potentially kill him. Mr.
Sklenar added that he has been religiously wearing a mask since February, and wearing a mask has not
affected him negatively or physically at all.
Lena Menefee-Cook, 3105 Bayberry Road, Ames, stated that she is in favor of enacting an enforceable
mandate. She is deeply concerned about now many of her friends, family members, teachers, students,
and other Ames community members are going to get COVID-19 and could possibly die, partially due
to a lack of community-oriented safety measures. She asked the Council to please protect the people
of Ames with an enforceable mandate.
8
Luke Gran, 65584-260th Street, Nevada, advised that he is a business owner in Story County and
employs people who work in Ames. He has a company-wide mask mandate. Mr. Gran shared that one
of his employee’s roommates was infected with COVID. He had ridden in a car for over an hour with
that employee, who could have potentially transmitted the virus to him. Mr. Gran specified that he had
a mask on. According to Mr. Gran, he has now had two tests and both were negative. Of the three
people who were riding in the vehicle, one person is at home for two weeks with terrible symptoms of
the virus, but he is healthy and free of the virus. From his personal experience, Mr. Gran believes that
masking works. He feels that it is very important to mandate masks be worn in public spaces, and the
mandate needs to “have teeth” so people will do it.
Aditya Ramamoorthy, 2634 Somerset Drive, Ames, said he strongly supports a mask mandate “with
teeth.” Something that he knows as an academic, is that even though the 2.4% might currently be a low
positivity rate, there is the possibility of exponential growth in the number of positive cases. Mr.
Ramamoorthy cautioned that people need to be very, very careful, and having a mask mandate is not
something that is extremely infringing on people’s rights. As others have pointed out, if his wearing
of a mask is helping someone else not get sick, he thinks he should be doing it. Mr. Ramamoorthy
believes that Ames is in a situation of a pandemic and needs to learn from what countries around the
world have done. He advised that Singapore, which has 5.7 million people, has had under 60,000
COVID cases because of extreme discipline by the people in wearing masks and strong contact tracing.
While Ames cannot do contact tracing at that level, people can certainly wear masks; scientific
evidence clearly shows that it helps. Mr. Ramamoorthy reiterated his support for a mask mandate. He
noted that Ames is an extremely welcoming community; he has lived in Ames for over 14 years, and
he has nothing but good things to say about Ames, as a whole. However, in this one aspect, he noted
his disappointment. He believes that Ames should work together and have a mask mandate that helps
everyone.
Serena Paulson, 3213 West Street, Ames, thanked some of the Council members for stepping up to fight
for a mask mandate “with teeth.” Se said her level of disappointment in some of Ames’ residents rises
every day. Some are only concerned about themselves, not about protecting others, especially when
they say that people with underlying health conditions don’t deserve to be protected. If someone can
save one life by wearing a mask, they should do so. Ms. Paulson believes that someone’s right to
freedom to not wear a mask does not supersede another person’s right to live. Long-term consequences
from the virus are still being discovered. She believes that an enforceable mandate would save lives.
Adopting one “without teeth” does nothing. Ms. Paulson asked the Council to pass an enforceable mask
mandate and to do it now.
Kiley Waite, 4231 Cartier Avenue, Ames, said she and her husband continue to stand in opposition to
the Mask Ordinance. She stated that before that should be recommended, people need to understand
whether masks are helpful or not. Ms. Waite read a CDC article called, “Effectiveness of Cloth Masks
for Protecting Against Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome - Coronavirus II.” In summary, the article
noted that cloth masks “may provide some protection if well-designed and used correctly...Multi-layer
cloth masks designed to fit around the face and made of water-resistant fabric may provide protection.”
Ms. Waite commented that her conclusion after reading the article was that there is not enough clear
evidence to support mandating masks in the City of Ames. She advised that the article also stated that
only one randomized controlled study has been done to determine the efficacy of cloth masks.
According to Ms. Waite, the study also stated that the risk for infection was higher for those wearing
9
cloth masks. She also alleged that citizens of Ames do not wear masks correctly. Wearers touch and
adjust their masks repeatedly, and once the mask is touched by the wearer, it is contaminated. Ms.
Waite commented that some people never wash their masks. Taking the mask on and off is high-risk
because pathogens may be on the outer surface of the mask and may result in self-contamination. Ms.
Waite questioned whether a three-year-old or a ten-year-old can wear a mask correctly if an adult
cannot wear a mask correctly, She asked for the Council to strongly consider not including children ten
and under in the Ordinance.
Julianna Starling, 1428 Walton Drive, #106, Ames, explained that she had moved to Ames from another
country and has lived in Ames for ten years now. She was born in a communist country; it was
shocking to her that this is being pushed on people at the local level. Ms. Starling said that she has a
degree in Health Information Management. She stated her belief that the biggest thing out of this is that
people are living in fear because of confusion and panic, and as a result, there is a lot of tension here.
Ms. Starling asked that people take a look at the science that the Governor has provided, which very
clearly states that there is no evidence that masks provide protection from the virus. She also noted that
CDC has issued a statement saying that research indicates that masks may be helpful to those who are
infected, but there is less information as to whether or not masks offer any protection to those exposed
to anyone who is symptomatic or asymptomatic. Ms. Starling noted that the virus is spread by droplets;
it can come from any fluid that the body excretes, not just from the nose or mouth. She believes that
people should not be looking at positive tests, but at deaths. The number of deaths is decreasing, not
only in the country, but in Iowa as well. Ms. Starling quoted Benjamin Franklin saying, “Those who
would give up an essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor
safety.” She believes that the job of Council members is not to protect people, but to ensure order in
the City. It is the job of people to protect themselves and to take care of themselves. Ms. Starling said
that they have chosen to home-school this year, not because they are scared of the virus, but because
they are scared of the physical, emotional, and mental impact it is going to have on children because
this doesn’t affect them. According to Ms. Starling, it has been noted in scientific studies that it is very
rare that children even spread the virus. In conclusion, Ms. Starling pointed out that there is so much
that they don’t know, and mask-wearing is really just an experiment on the American people because
there is really nothing to prove that masks truly work on the majority of the population. She does not
think that a mask mandate is the right thing to do, not only for the City, but for the whole country.
Jennifer Hill, 3807 Columbine Avenue, Ames, shared that her husband was in China in January 2020,
and after he came home, they didn’t get sick. She offered that her husband, her daughter, and she all
have underlying health conditions. They have been mask-free the entire time, not because they don’t
care about society, but it was the decision that they made. Ms. Hill shared that she had ensured an
horrific incident at the age of nine during which her mouth was covered. Every time she puts a mask
on, she re-lives that traumatic incident. She now works at a school and has to put a mask on. It is very
difficult for her to do so, but she does it because she loves teaching and she wants the students to be
educated and feel the connection of personal teaching. People not wearing masks does not mean that
they are selfish; like her, they may have other reasons. Ms. Hill said that it is very important for people
to be in charge of themselves. She doesn’t rely on the City Council to make her children behave; that
is her responsibility. Ms. Hill asked the Council members to hear people on both sides before they make
their decision.
10
Sarah Carney, 320 S. 2nd Street, Ames, stated her support for an enforceable mask mandate in Ames.
She said that there is scientific consensus on the effectiveness of cloth face coverings in controlling
the spread of the virus, and the sooner Ames comes together as a community and wears masks, the
more lives and livelihoods can be saved. Ms. Carney thinks that a mask mandate will improve freedom
of movement throughout Ames for all people. Taking measured precautions against the spread of the
pandemic to protect the most-vulnerable people is not necessarily an act of fear, but an act of love. Ms.
Carney urged the Council to pass the mask mandate.
Brandy Howe said she lives in Story County, but her daughter lives at 905 Dickinson Avenue in Ames
and is a 21-year-old college student. Ms. Howe said that, in talking with her daughter this afternoon
about this meeting, her daughter shared that six of her friends are not doing well mentally or
emotionally because the CDC has recently released a study that showed that 25% of adults ages 18 to
24 have considered suicide in the last 30 days with everything that is associated with the pandemic.
According to Ms. Howe, there is a .05 chance of dying from COVID and 90% of those who die of
COVID are of an advanced age. She said that the average age of those dying from COVID is 78, which
is also the average life span of people in the United States. She believes that children are not doing well.
It is the belief of Ms. Howe that a mask mandate can be passed, but a week after the masks come off,
there will be another spike in positive cases. According to Ms. Howe, the nature of a virus is that it
mutates to become less deadly, but spreads faster. All people have thousands of viruses in their bodies
every day, and she believes if tests for something are done, you will find it. Ms. Howe thinks that masks
are very de-humanizing to especially children and young adults. It is extremely harmful, especially
when you combine a mask mandate with not allowing people to gather in groups larger than ten. Ms.
Howe asks the Council to keep in mind that everyone is responsible for their own health, and that
includes their mental health.
Mayor Haila asked Ms. Howe to clarify whether the 18- to 24-year-olds who were contemplating
suicide within the last 30 days was because of having to wear a mask. Ms. Howe answered that it was
specific to the pandemic and everything that young people are faced with, whether that it is because
they now can’t gather in groups, and they can’t go to college as they expected, as well as having to
wear masks, which are de-humanizing; every aspect of their lives has been changed. Ms. Howe stated
that she was 100% against the mask mandate.
April Finley, 4701 Todd Drive, Unit #205, Ames, said that the first thing she heard when she and her
husband moved here from Alabama was “Iowa Nice” and that some of the people here are some of the
nicest people. Ms. Finley said that truly “Iowa Nice” means to do whatever it takes to protect your
fellow Iowa citizens. She pointed out that she is a neighbor, her husband is a neighbor, and they both
have underlying health conditions. Ms. Finley commented that she and her husband are members of
the Ames community and are both strongly in favor of the mask mandate. She believes that having a
mask mandate is not living in fear; it is living in safety. Ms. Finley noted that Ames has a high
positivity rate, but it also has an opportunity to correct that and be an example for the rest of the country
to follow. She agreed that it is a little bit overdue, but encouraged Ames to be that example of how it
corrected that through dynamic leadership. The mandate can be adapted as circumstances change. Ms.
Finley shared that in her home state of Alabama, a mask mandate was implemented with a rolling
deadline; it can be extended or lifted depending on the number of cases. According to Ms. Finley, it
has dramatically taken down the number of cases in the entire state of Alabama; there are examples that
11
show that mask mandates do work. She urged the Council to pass the mask mandate for the safety of
all Ames citizens.
Andrew Mizerak, 3306 Preston Circle, Ames, stated that he does support the wearing of masks, but
does not support a mask mandate, and he is strongly opposed to a mask mandate “with teeth.” He
believes that a mask mandate “with teeth” could cause unintended consequences, including, but not
limited to, patients being less likely to be honest with their physicians about wearing a mask or sharing
where they have been if they have had an exposure. Mr. Mizerak also thinks that putting the force of
law behind a mask mandate could empower both sides to experience unintended consequences. He
acknowledged that he is a front-line health care worker who has worked with COVID-positive patients.
There are people who are going to be sick with COVID, and the most-vulnerable people should be
protected. The most-vulnerable people are over the age of 60 with pre-existing health conditions. Those
people should be wearing masks and others should be wearing masks around those people.
Jennifer Flugge, 1304 Alberta, Ames, voiced her strong support for a mask mandate. She still has
lingering issues from having COVID in May. She was out in the community when she was positive
and infected, and if she had not been wearing her mask, she would have spread it to others. Ms. Flugge
said she can sleep at night because she knows that she was wearing her mask and not infecting others.
She said she will continue to wear her mask because it is unknown whether she can get COVID again
or be infectious again. She sees wearing a mask as the very least that a person can do for their
community.
Katie Bents, 2147-160th Street, Ames, asked that the Council look at the people beyond COVID -
those who have severe anxiety attacks every time they put on a mask, the people who can’t wear them
because it just sends them into a full-on meltdown. These people may have Asperger’s Syndrome or
autism or other conditions that other people can’t see. Ms. Bents shared that her older two sons have
conditions where they can’t wear a mask. If people see them in public, they won’t know that; the
public won’t know that wearing a mask will send them “into orbit” and will cause them physical pain
to be restricted in that way. Ms. Bents said that if they are made to wear a mask, they won’t be able to
function. They are trying their hardest; they are washing their hands, using hand sanitizer, and social-
distancing. Ms. Bents said that there are many people in this community who have underlying issues
and won’t be able to wear a mask. She also shared that she has younger children and pointed out that
on every cartoon, “bad guys wear masks.” Small children have been conditioned that bad guys wear
masks, and even if they are told that it is ok to wear masks now, it will be hard for them to understand.
Ms. Bents is also concerned that children could actually be kidnapped and people are not going to know
it because their mouths will be taped shut under their masks; those are the types of things that the
Council needs to think about. She again urged the Council to take into consideration the fact that there
are people with underlying conditions who cannot wear masks.
Dan Bell, 419-18th Street, Ames, said that after hearing a previous caller’s horrific experience and from
the most-recent caller about the issues that could occur if certain people are made to wear masks, he
was reminded that what really needed to be focused on was compassion. He doesn’t know what the
answer is, but he believes it involves allowing some people to go out in public without a mask and
additional guidelines. However, if the Ames community, which has to be one of the most-educated
communities anywhere, can’t figure this out, he doesn’t know who can.
12
Jeremie Knutson, 2117 Stevenson Drive, Ames, wanted to address the effectiveness of cloth masks
against acute respiratory syndrome - coronavirus. He noted that several people had quoted that study,
but they had left out the part that said, “until cloth masks’ design is proven to be equally effective as
the medical N95 masks, wearing cloth masks should not be mandated for healthcare workers. In
community settings, however, cloth masks may be used to prevent community spread of infections by
sick or asymptomatically infected persons and the public should be educated about their correct use.”
Mr. Knutson strongly encouraged that, if the Council chooses to implement a City-wide mandate, they
should also engage in educating the community as a part of that. In closing, Mr. Knutson said he
wanted to leave the Council with the number 16, which is the number of Story County residents who
have died because of contracting COVID-19.
Mayor Haila asked Mr. Knutson to clarify what he was suggesting the community receive education
on specifically. Mr. Knutson replied that it should be specifically on the proper wearing of masks and
which cloth masks are most effective.
Dan Marks, 2307 Timberland Road, Ames, stated that he had written to the Mayor and Council
repeatedly since early July asking for a mask mandate to keep Iowa from becoming another New York.
Florida, Arizona, or Texas. Now Ames is ranked as having the third highest positive COVID cases in
the world and first in the U. S. Mr. Marks believes that if a mask mandate would have been put in place
before ISU opened, they wouldn’t have to be concerned about the University being shut down or with
sending students home early; bars would not be shut down for a second time, and most people would
be more comfortable going into businesses knowing that a mask mandate was in place. According to
Mr. Marks, the Story County Board of Health is going to vote on a mask mandate with a fine, and it
is his desire that the City Council include a fine in the mask mandate in Ames. He feels that that is the
only way to get people who don’t wear a mask to do the right thing. In Mr. Marks’ opinion, if everyone
would wear a mask, the virus would have a difficult time spreading. The CDC, WHO, IDPH, the Story
County Board of Health, and nearly all epidemiologists and scientists agree that masks work. When
Ames has a mask mandate, it will also help the University to succeed, and Ames needs the University
to succeed, which in turn helps the Ames community to succeed. Mr. Marks strongly encouraged the
Council to vote yes on the mandate.
Nick Paul, 1015 Curtis Avenue, Ames, advised that he had been a resident of Ames for 34 years. It was
disheartening for him to hear some of the comments tonight, as he always thought that he lived in a
community that cared. Mr. Paul said that he grew up with “No Shirt. No Shoes. No Service,” and there
were no complaints about that because it made sense. Another example he gave was that people are not
allowed to walk around in public naked. He hears people asking why masks work, and he thought the
Ames community would be educated enough to understand it. Mr. Paul noted that surgeons have to
wear a mask during surgeries, which can last many hours; however, you don’t hear them complaining.
He also brought up an article that he had read about the Civil Rights Act of 1964 as some people are
claiming it is their civil right to not wear a mask. Mr. Paul said that the author of the article pointed out
that there is no civil right to do as you choose if, by doing so, you present a risk of harm which
infringes on the rights of others. He encouraged the passing of a mask mandate. Mr. Paul noted that the
number of cases in Ames is not being compared to other states; the number is being compared to other
countries.
Mayor Haila closed public input.
13
The Mayor asked the City Attorney to comment on how the proposed Ames Ordinance would interface
with one passed by the Story County Board of Supervisors should the Board decide to implement a
mask mandate that may have different aspects or enforcement measures than the one proposed for
Ames. City Attorney Lambert cited a provision in the Iowa Constitution that makes it clear that the
City ordinance would supersede the County one within the City limits in Ames. The County’s would
be effective everywhere else within the County, but not in Ames. Also, the County’s would be
enforced by the County Sheriff’s Department.
Mayor Haila asked whether there were any exceptions in the proposed face covering ordinance that
would cover the type of concerns that were raised by Katie Bents regarding persons with Asperger’s,
autism, or other underlying issues. Mr. Lambert stated that the exemption noted in Section (3)d. would
cover those concerns, which states, “Anyone who has been advised by a medical or behavioral health
professional not to wear face coverings.” If anyone had received that advice, they would be exempt
from the Ordinance. Council Member Gartin asked what proof or documentation a person would have
to carry with them of that advice. City Attorney Lambert stated that there is no requirement in the
Ordinance that a person carry proof. If this was an ordinance with a penalty and a citation was issued,
they would have to provide evidence and the prosecution of the citation would be dropped. Mr. Lambert
said that since there will be no citations with the Ordinance in question, he did not believe that is even
a real-world issue. Mr. Gartin noted that he felt the point is that there seems to be a stigma attached.
He told of one of his clients being in a store yesterday. He did not have a mask on because he has
difficulty breathing, and a store clerk berated him in front of a crowd, which was very embarrassing
for him. Eventually, he was able to explain that he can’t physically wear a mask, but it was long after
the damage was done. Mr. Gartin recognized that people will be judging others based on whether they
are wearing a mask or not.
Mayor Haila asked if any of the Council members wanted to follow-up after hearing from the 36 people
who spoke earlier.
Council Member Junck noted that she had heard a lot of people talking about a mandate “with teeth,”
and she wanted to explain what had happened at the start of this meeting. She said that she had made
a motion to reconsider the motion that the Council had approved at its meeting of August 25, which was
to proceed with a mask mandate with no penalty. Ms. Junck said that she had voted in the affirmative
for that on August 25, 2020, because she thought it would be better than nothing. However, after seeing
the number of cases spike during the last week and getting more information from the Story County
Board of Health, she wanted to bring it back up to be reconsidered. However, there were not enough
votes to allow them to proceed with the reconsideration; so, right now, the Council will be voting on
the Ordinance with no enforcement.
Council Member Martin commented that he had noticed people in the community felt very strongly
about this issue. He noted that one of the things he heard was that people were afraid that a mandate
without a penalty was not even worth doing, and there were a lot of people on the calls tonight who
were feeling an enormous amount of pressure from a mandate without a penalty. Mr. Martin asked
City Attorney Lambert to confirm that his advice to Council hadn’t changed regarding whether adding
penalties would be exceeding the City’s authority. Mr. Lambert confirmed that it was still his advice
that an ordinance that has a penalty would infringe upon the Governor’s authority under the Emergency
Management and Public Health Chapters of the Iowa Code. An ordinance with no penalties does not
14
infringe upon the Governor’s authority, and he does not believe that there is any case that can be made
that it does if it doesn’t have penalties.
Mr. Martin also inquired about the possibility that a different type of ordinance would come down from
Story County, which would then be displaced by a local ordinance in Ames, if the Council does pass
the Ordinance in question. Council Member Martin stated that he had heard one of the Story County
Attorneys offering similar advice to the Board of Supervisors or the Board of Health that Mr. Lambert
was offering to the Council, i.e., the County, in his opinion, would not have the authority to issue a
mandate, which Mr. Martin assumed it to mean a mandate with penalties, although that was unclear at
the time. Mr. Martin asked if City Attorney Lambert had any opinions about whether Story County’s
abilities to pass an ordinance differ from Ames’ abilities with respect to penalties being in the
ordinance. Mr. Lambert replied that he did not have any indication that they do differ. Continuing, Mr.
Lambert stated that the Assistant Attorney General’s Opinion stated that County Boards of Health have
authority to pass regulations, as provided in the Iowa Code, and those regulations have to be adopted
by the County Boards of Supervisors; however, they would have the authority to do that only “if the
Governor’s Proclamations went away.” If the Governor’s Proclamations are still in effect, they would
not have the authority to do that. Mr. Lambert said that he had not studied the issue beyond that.
It was also noted by Council Member Martin that the Council had actually earlier considered exempting
houses of worship from the Draft Ordinance. He had made the motion, but it didn’t get the votes, so
he is not going to bring it up again.
Council Member Gartin said that he was struck by the division in the Ames community over this issue.
He noted that the Council needs to recognize that people are in different spots on this. Mr. Gartin
expressed his frustrations with people who are very dismissive of people’s different perspectives on
this. He feels it is very unfair to criticize people for having those very passionate positions; there is a
lot of pain on both sides of this.
Council Member Betcher noted that there seems to be some misconception that she doesn’t support an
enforceable ordinance. Ms. Betcher clarified that she does support the Ordinance, as written, but she
would also support an ordinance that actually had “teeth in it” that she thinks would deter people from
breaking the Ordinance. Her vote last week was not because she doesn’t support an enforceable
ordinance, but it was because she doesn’t think a $50 penalty is going to change people’s behavior, and
it could result in the worst of all possible worlds, which is that there is a fine that doesn’t change
behavior and the police would be interacting with citizens because there is now an enforcement
situation. She does not see that as a good situation; however, the Council has been advised that a
penalty can be added to the Ordinance if it turns out that there is not compliance or if Story County
decides that it is going to mandate masks with a different sort of enforcement mechanism. Council
Member Betcher would like the Ordinance to be passed quickly, so they can begin educating the public.
She is open to adding a penalty clause in the future.
Council Member Beatty-Hansen commented that she liked Dickson Jensen’s suggestion about the
positive reinforcement; however, that could be discussed separately from the Ordinance. She does
want to revisit it, however.
15
Mayor Haila asked about the option of adding to the Ordinance in the future. City Attorney Lambert
advised that it is always possible to amend an ordinance. The Council cannot pass two motions to
reconsider the same topic at the same meeting; however, that doesn’t mean that changes can’t be made
to the Ordinance in the future. He stated that the Council could come back at a future meeting to add
penalties, if desired; however, it would not be allowed to consider penalties to the Ordinance at this
meeting since the Council already decided not to reconsider the original motion made on August 25,
2020.
Moved by Betcher, seconded by Beatty-Hansen, to pass on first reading the Face Covering Ordinance,
as amended as follows:
1. Modify Section (1)a. so that it reads, “Outside whenever the person cannot stay at least six (6) feet
away from others “not in the person’s household.”
2. Change the sunset clause from May 31, 2021, to December 31, 2020.
Council Member Corrieri stated that she had been very strongly opposed to any sort of ordinance that
did not include enforcement because she thinks that the times call for some significant action.
However, she is going to support the Ordinance, as written, only because of the need to take some
action to try to get back to some sort of normalcy in the community. Ms. Corrieri shared that she had
taken her son to the doctor for a sports injury. The sports injury doctor went through a list of
precautionary measures that her son should go through to stay healthy, and at the end, he asked her son
if he knew the one thing that he could do to keep playing this season and into the winter. Her son had
replied that he did not know, and the doctor told him that he needed to wear a mask, and if he wore a
mask, it was likely that the season could continue. Ms. Corrieri pointed out that it is unknown yet what
other consequences will occur because of the positivity rates and numbers, so she is going to support
the Ordinance in the hopes that the Ames community will start to step up and do the right thing for one
another, not just for the sake of public health, but for the sake of the Ames economy and community.
Council Member Gartin stated that he would not be supporting that motion because they would be
doing it in the face of the City Attorney and in the face of the County Attorney, who have advised the
Council not to do it because they don’t have the authority, and in the face of the Attorney General who
has stated that cities do not have the authority. He also stated that also does not nullify the fact that
all Council members took an oath to uphold the Constitution, and that is being ignored. Mr. Gartin
recognized that if a Council member is voting in favor of the Ordinance, he does respect that they are
doing it for the right reasons: that they care about the community and they want to do what’s best. He
wanted to make it clear that even though they may disagree on the legal aspect of it, they all have his
respect because they are doing it for the right reasons.
Council Member Junck pointed out that the City Attorney has made it very clear to the Council that an
ordinance with no enforcement would not be in conflict with the Governor’s orders.
Mr. Gartin replied that he doesn’t know what a mandate without penalties does. He said that honestly
what the Council will be doing is actually adopting a Resolution without any teeth to it. He indicated
that he would have supported a Resolution, but instead they took a different path, perhaps to give it the
16
appearance of more importance, but it is difficult for him to understand the seriousness of this with no
penalty.
Council Member Martin stated that there had been a discussion and the Council agreed that it was
unusual to have an ordinance without a penalty, and legally speaking, it was more like a Resolution,
so the Council could stop everything and change it to a Resolution. However, he felt that the Council
did not want to do that. He said that is completely different than saying that the City Attorney has
advised the Council members that they do not have the authority to do this; that is just not what is going
on here. Council Member Martin has said that the point of this compromise is to get them to a place
where they actually have faith in what the Ordinance says: that it is the intent and belief of the Ames
City Council that the Ordinance does not conflict with provisions of the Governor of Iowa’s Public
Health Disaster Emergency Proclamation, which is currently in effect. He advised it was crucial to him
to clarify that.
Roll Call Vote: 5-1. Voting aye: Beatty-Hansen, Betcher, Corrieri, Junck, Martin. Voting nay: Gartin.
Motion declared carried.
Moved by Corrieri, seconded by Junck, to suspend the rules necessary for the passage of an ordinance.
Roll Call Vote: 6-0. Motion declared carried unanimously.
Moved by Corrieri, seconded by Junck, to pass on second reading the Face Covering Ordinance, as
amended.
Roll Call Vote: 5-1. Voting aye: Beatty-Hansen, Betcher, Corrieri, Junck, Martin. Voting nay: Gartin.
Motion declared carried.
Moved by Corrieri, seconded by Junck, to pass on third reading and adopt the Face Covering
ORDINANCE NO. 4420, as amended.
Roll Call Vote: 5-1. Voting aye: Beatty-Hansen, Betcher, Corrieri, Junck, Martin. Voting nay: Gartin.
Ordinance declared adopted, signed by the Mayor, and hereby made a portion of these Minutes.
DISPOSITION OF COMMUNICATIONS TO COUNCIL: Mayor Haila noted that the first item
that had been included in the Council’s Non-Agenda Packet was a copy of his letter to landlords,
property owners, and managers of rental housing units that he had sent on August 28, 2020. There was
no action necessary to be taken by the Council.
The second item was an email from Brigitta Malczovich requesting that all ragweed types be added to
the noxious weed list.
Moved by Beatty-Hansen, seconded by Corrieri, to request a memo from staff regarding the request.
Vote on Motion: 6-0. Motion declared carried unanimously.
COUNCIL COMMENTS: Moved by Gartin, seconded by Corrieri, to request staff to look at the
available balance in the Council Contingency account and propose an amount that could be used to
purchase masks for the community and to follow the example of Des Moines in helping distribute the
masks to the community.
Vote on Motion: 6-0. Motion declared carried unanimously.
17
Council Member Gartin indicated that he would like the privilege of working with Dickson Jensen’s
proposal in a way to find a positive reinforcement of the behavior that is being sought. Mr. Gartin
asked for City Manager Schainker to comment on whether it should be referred to staff first. Mr.
Schainker indicated that there would be a lot of logistics involved. Council Member Corrieri
commented that Council needed to recognize whether the City should be asking some of its partners
to contribute as she knows the Chamber and the ACVB, in particular because they were mentioned, are
struggling like a lot of entities and have had to lay-off staff. She thinks that is important to keep in
mind when they would be asking them to donate to something that just might not be realistic for them.
Ms. Corrieri pointed out that they also have the United Way campaign starting next week, and she
doesn’t necessarily want the Council to fund-raise for something that would compete with the funds
that support the human service agencies and all of the businesses that will be participating in that. Mr.
Gartin asked Mr. Schainker if he had any thoughts on what the Council could do to accept Mr. Jensen’s
generous offer of $10,000. Mr. Schainker replied that the Council would have to come up with some
parameters as far as what amount would be on each card, where they want to get the cards from, who
they want to give them to, etc.
Moved by Gartin, seconded by Beatty-Hansen, to direct staff to visit further with Dickson Jensen about
his offer and come back to the Council at its next practicable meeting with additional details that they
might move on.
Council Member Beatty-Hansen suggested that they ask who might be interested in chipping in if they
have the means to.
Council Member Betcher said that, overall, she likes the motion and she appreciates Mr. Jensen’s offer.
She hopes that they can work something out even if it is not exactly what is proposed in the email.
Mayor Haila suggested that perhaps staff could check with a few of the people suggested by Mr. Jensen
to see if they have resources available; all that would take would be a phone call.
Council Member Gartin thanked Dicksen Jensen for his leadership and creative thinking.
Vote on Motion: 6-0.
Noting a recent article in The Sun, Council Member Martin recognized and thanked the First National
Bank for its recent donation of $10,000 to the Ames Public Library for the purchase of another 50
hotspots for the Ames community.
Moved by Martin, seconded by Betcher, to ask staff to design signage referring to the Ordinance for
placement in businesses and to consider the possibility of paying for the production and delivery of the
signs to interested businesses.
Vote on Motion: 6-0. Motion declared carried unanimously.
Ex officio Council Member Nicole Whitlock stated that she was glad that the Ordinance was adopted
tonight.
18
Moved by Betcher, seconded by Martin, to request the City Manager to contact ISU Athletic Director
Jamie Pollard to see if it is possible for messages to be sent to the season ticket-holders regarding the
requirements of the new Ordinance, as was done with the new “Game Day” parking fines.
Vote on Motion: 6-0. Motion declared carried unanimously.
Mayor Haila noted that 36 people had addressed the Council this evening. He requested that the
community pull together and work together and avoid division like the City pulled together on August
10 and thereafter after the derecho hit. Council was aware that there would be people who would be
pleased and those who would not be pleased, but it was being done with the intent to do what is best
for the community of Ames. The Mayor noted that one thing that was brought up was education.
Tomorrow, he will be discussing with staff ways to try and publicize that there are exemptions. There
is no intent to put people with certain conditions in a position that would cause them to have issues.
Mayor Haila expressed that he was disheartened to hear about potential shaming going on. It is his
hope that through encouragement and discussion, there would be embracing through partnership with
individual entities, starting with the Chamber, Iowa State, Main Street, and others, to get the message
out that we are in this together and shaming is not an appropriate way to approach the situation.
The Mayor reiterated that the Ordinance will be published on Friday, September 4, 2020, and be
effective on that date.
ADJOURNMENT: Moved by Martin to adjourn the meeting at 8:42 p.m.
________________________________ ____________________________________
Diane R. Voss, City Clerk John A. Haila, Mayor
19
MINUTES OF THE JOINT MEETING OF THE AMES HUMAN RELATIONS
COMMISSION AND AMES CITY COUNCIL, REGULAR MEETING OF THE AMES
AREA METROPOLITAN PLANNING ORGANIZATION (AAMPO)
TRANSPORTATION POLICY COMMITTEE, AND
REGULAR MEETING OF THE AMES CITY COUNCIL
AMES, IOWA SEPTEMBER 8, 2020
JOINT MEETING OF THE AMES CITY COUNCIL AND
AMES HUMAN RELATIONS COMMISSION
Mayor Haila announced that it is impractical to hold an in-person Council meeting due to the
Governor of Iowa declaring a public health emergency because of the COVID-19 pandemic.
Therefore, this meeting is being held as an electronic meeting as allowed by Section 21.8 of the
Iowa Code. The Mayor then provided how the public could participate in the meeting via
internet or by phone.
CALL TO ORDER: 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 8th day of September,
2020, in the City Council Chambers in City Hall, 515 Clark Avenue, pursuant to law. In addition
to the Mayor, City Council Members Gloria Betcher, Amber Corrieri, Tim Gartin, Rachel Junck,
and David Martin were present along with Ex officio Member Nicole Whitlock. Council Member
Bronwyn Beatty-Hansen was absent. Representing the Ames Human Relations Commission
(AHRC) were Madesh Samanu, Jahmai Fisher, Wayne Clinton, and Jill Crosser.
PRESENTATION OF 2019 ANNUAL REPORT: Assistant City Manager Deb Schildroth
stated that she was pleased to have all the Human Relations Commission members available to
review the 2019 Annual Report. She noted that this Report is normally given in the spring, but it
was pushed back a few months due to the pandemic.
Jill Crosser, AHRC Chairperson, pointed out that on the first page of the Report it states
AHRC’s purpose, which is to “implement the provision of the Iowa Civil Rights Act and to
further provide for the general welfare of persons in the City of Ames, Iowa, by prohibiting
certain discriminatory practices, and to establish a commission for the investigation of
complaints of discrimination; and to undertake projects of education to prevent discrimination;
and to establish procedures for the conciliation of such complaints, and to enforce the provision
hereof.”
Ms. Crosser highlighted a few activities that were completed by the AHRC in 2019. The
Commission continued its partnership with Inclusive Ames and the Chamber while working on
the Symposium on Building Inclusive Organizations. She noted that AHRC’s previous chair Joel
Hochstein did a lot of the planning each week for with the Chamber for the Symposium and
helped at the event. Two annual awards were given out, and the “A Home for Everyone” Award
was given to Cassandra Kramer and the “Humanitarian” Award was given to Janet Hopper. Ms.
Crosser mentioned that the AHRC reviews discrimination cases in partnership with the Iowa
Civil Rights Commission (ICRC). Most of the claims that came through in 2019 fell under
employment-related concerns and housing. Similar to 2018's Report, race was one of biggest
complaints. It was noted that this year the Committee had noticed some retaliation. Ms. Crosser
explained that in the 2020 Annual Report, it will show that towards the end of 2019, the AHRC
put together some focus groups, but it still has some work to do.
Commission Member Wayne Clinton mentioned that the Council has a copy of what the
Commission had submitted, and Ms. Crosser covered the highlights. He noted that they are
already into 2020 and are continuing to expand outreach and communication to the citizens of
Ames and explain who they are and what they do. Mr. Clinton mentioned, from his experience, it
is always a major challenge to increase awareness of what any Commission or Board does. He is
thrilled with the leadership of Ms. Crosser.
Council Member Betcher stated that she was excited to see the Strategic Plan. One of the things
she noticed that might need to be adjusted is the way the role of the Commission seems to be
crossing over to what the Public Information Officer Susan Gwiasda does, and those items
would be releasing news, updating the website, etc. Ms. Crosser stated they have been working
with Ms. Gwiasda and one of their goals was to get the Commission name out, as there are
currently not a lot of events or opportunities to do so. The Commission is trying to increase its
social media usage. They will be showing a video later in the presentation that the Commission
worked on with the City of Ames regarding discrimination, the Coronavirus, and the Chinese
population. There will be some Facebook posts introducing the Commission members. The
Commission will also be going through the website to make recommendations and make sure
there are different languages available for the complaint process as currently there is only
English and Spanish available. Council Member Betcher commented that she is looking forward
to seeing all the new changes
One thing that stood out to Council Member Betcher in the Strategic Plan was Objective No. 3
which states “HRC will identify opportunities for obtaining information related to community
member perceptions and experience,” and the Council has been trying to improve its outreach
and input especially from under-represented populations. Ms. Betcher wanted to let the AHRC
Commission know that the Council recently approved a partnership with the Community and
Regional Planning program at ISU. The City Manager and Ms. Betcher have been working with
a class that is being taught in Community and Regional Planning (CRP), and they are working
on some strategies to improve community outreach and targeted outreach. This may be
something that AHRC could play a role in at some point. Ms. Crosser commented that the
Commission did take out some of the more specific language in the Strategic Plan, and gave it
more of an overview to be able to go outside of what was already in the Plan, and ISU is a
partner.
Mayor Haila mentioned that under Advocacy it states, “The Commission will undertake
activities to discover, conduct analysis on, and circumvent instances that may lead to prohibited
discrimination so that the community can be warned and assist in preventing it.” He wanted to
know how that would be undertaken and accomplished. Ms. Crosser explained that originally it
was a “watchdog” goal and the Commission spent a lot of time with that word and didn’t feel
they were “watchdogs” they felt they were more gatherers of information and advocates of
change. The Commission worked together to try and reword what a “watchdog” really was, and
the language quoted by Mayor Haila is what the Commission came up with. She mentioned that
2
through the focus group work they had been doing and other strategies they were working on,
the Commission felt that by compiling information by interviewing people in the community and
different outreach opportunities, they would work with other partners in the community to see
what the Commission can do to make a change. Mr. Clinton explained that one of the challenges
is how the Commission can be more effective in partnering with the City Administration as
another conduit. He noted that generally people are unsure of how to get their ideas across and
who to communicate with. The Commission wants to be a bridge and work with the Council and
other departments to help citizens. He commented that if you look at the Commission, there is an
extreme diversity of people and they will continue to reach out to members of the community.
Mayor Haila stated that he liked Objective 2 under the Strategic Goal B that states that the “HRC
will partner with City and Community members to learn about discrimination and how to
decrease the risk.” The first bullet explains that the HRC will partner with community employers
and human resource specialists to identify concerns and opportunities,” and wanted to know how
the Commission was going to work to accomplish that. Ms. Crosser explained the Commission
has not really gotten to that section yet and how they want to implement it, but through the
Symposium they will be able to connect and see what has changed since last year. What business
partners are seeing and hearing from diversity and inclusion teams is that through partnerships
with ISU and different community leaders, they will be able to get people to the resources they
need.
Council Member Gartin commented that the Council is about to do a lot of work in thinking
about policing and matters of race and the community. They don’t have a direct avenue with
HRC, but would like to invite the Commission to watch carefully, as the Commission will have
an area of interest in the discussion. Mr. Gartin commented that he would welcome the
Commission’s input.
Moved by Betcher, seconded by Junck, to accept the 2019 Annual Report and the Strategic Plan.
Vote on Motion: 5-0. Motion declared carried unanimously.
A video was shown that will be published on YouTube which showed the Human Relations
Commission Statement regarding the Ames Asian Community and COVID-19. Ms. Crosser
stated that once the video is posted, Liming Pals will also translate it in Chinese.
COMMISSION COMMENTS: Mayor Haila advised that Liming Pals will be leaving the
Ames Human Relations Commission and thanked her for her commitment to the Commission.
ADJOURNMENT: The Joint Meeting of the Ames City Council and the Ames Human
Relations Commission adjourned at 6:28 p.m.
AMES AREA METROPOLITAN PLANNING ORGANIZATION (AAMPO)
TRANSPORTATION POLICY COMMITTEE MEETING
CALL TO ORDER: The Ames Area Metropolitan Planning Organization (AAMPO)
3
Transportation Policy Committee meeting, which was being held electronically, was called to
order by Ames Mayor and voting member John Haila at 6:29 p.m. on the 8th day of September,
2020. Other voting members brought into the meeting were: Gloria Betcher, City of Ames;
Amber Corrieri, City of Ames; Tim Gartin, City of Ames; Rachel Junck, City of Ames; David
Martin, City of Ames; Lauris Olson, Story County Supervisor; Bill Zinnel, Boone County
Supervisor. Bronwyn Beatty-Hansen, Council Member; Jacob Schrader, Transit Board; and Jon
Popp, Mayor of Gilbert, were absent.
REVIEW OF SCORED PROJECT RANKING AND FUNDING SUMMARY FOR THE
2045 METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN: Traffic Engineer Damion Pregitzer
gave a quick overview of what will be presented. He explained that tonight’s meeting is one of
the final steps in the Plan development before they present the Draft Plan to the Policy
Committee. The scoring and fiscal constraints will be shown.
Brian Ray with HDR recalled that a presentation of the draft alternatives was given a couple
months ago; they have made some changes based on the feedback received. He will be going
over the analysis, the draft constrained plan, and what the next steps will be.
As discussed at the last meeting, Long-Range Transportation Plans are required by the federal
government based on the Ames area being a metropolitan planning organization. As part of the
regulations a Performance-Based Planning Approach must be done. Mr. Ray mentioned that they
had worked with the public in order to identify the goals and objectives for the Ames area along
with using some of the federal requirements. With that information, they were able to develop
performance measures. Those performance measures help the analysis of potential projects to be
included in the Long-Range Transportation Plan. Performance measures are also used to help set
up System Performance Goals, which the Ames Area Metropolitan Planning Organization
(AAMPO) is required to submit on an annual basis. Different performance measures were used
to analyze the different alternatives. Some of the performance measures were used for roadway
alternatives and some were for bicycle and pedestrian alternatives. He noted that some of the
performance measures were qualitative and some were quantitative, but those two analyses are
combined to develop a project score to determine which projects score high, medium, or low
priorities.
Mr. Ray displayed the Roadway Project scoring results, which were put into three tiers: high,
medium, and low. He emphasized that just because a project scores high doesn’t mean the
project met all the objectives; there could be projects that scored as medium that are still
valuable projects, but may not check every box. They used the tiers in order to identify projects
that would be included in the Constrained Plan. There were 54 different roadway projects that
were scored. The same process was used for the Bicycle and Pedestrian Project Scoring Results.
Mr. Ray explained that on the scoring results, the CR refers to crossing projects, OFF means off-
street projects, and ON means on-street projects. He noted that some of the OFF and ON may be
one or the other or both.
Mr. Ray stated that the next step was to develop the anticipated funding levels. A requirement
4
for an AAMPO is to develop what the anticipating funding will be over the next 25 years. They
looked at federal, state, and local funding sources. They developed the following time periods:
Current Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) that is from 2021-2024, Short-term is 2025-
2029, Mid-Term is 2030-2037, and the Long-Term is 2038-2045. As the levels are developed,
they have to look at how the funds are being spent; this was done by looking back on historical
funding, how much goes into system preservation, and system improvement projects. Mr. Ray
pointed out that under the Roadway projections, the time periods have three areas of funding.
There is formula-based funds, discretionary funds, and local funds. A breakdown was done for
the bicycle and pedestrian projects as well. In order to develop the Constrained Plan, multiple
criteria were used to identify which project should be in the Plan. HDR applied project scoring,
current issues/future issues, anticipated growth in the near future, project timing coordination,
and project costs. An Illustrative Plan will be included (this is not considered part of the MPO
Plan), to show projects beyond the fiscally constrained plan, but are still a priority to the
community. A table was shown for the Draft Roadway Plan showing the short-term, mid-term,
and long-term plans along with the costs. Mr. Ray pointed out that the potential funding is an
estimation and would be changed based on available funding. He then showed the Draft
Bicycle/Pedestrian Plan for short-term, mid-term, and long-term. The MPO staff had worked a
lot with the Ames Bicycle Coalition to find the biggest needs in the City of Ames. Mr. Ray
presented a draft Transit Plan for the short; mid; and long-term. He noted that all the projects are
rolling stock and facilities/stations improvements.
The next steps will be to collect any comments on the Draft Constrained Plan and then develop
the Draft Plan to be presented on September 22, 2020, to the Policy Committee. It will also go
out for public review. HDR will collect comments from the public and the Policy Committee and
then finalize the Draft Plan, which will be presented to the Policy Committee on October 27,
2020, for final approval.
Mayor Haila questioned why, on the Bicycle & Pedestrian Improvement Funding Summary, the
local funds amount showed $0. He thought that the Council spent about $1 to $3 million per year
on bicycle and pedestrian improvements. Mr. Pregitzer explained that the funding for the rest of
the term goes back to more averages. The first line is what gets programmed into the MPO’s
TIP, which means only the local dollars will be matched with federal aid. He mentioned that
$96,000 doesn’t go very far so what they do with MPO funds to make it more efficient is to pool
the funds. The current TIP has the funding pooled to do one of the bike projects as a federal
project.
Mayor Haila noted that on the Draft Roadway map, on Dayton Road, there is a blue line that
goes from S. 16th Street to Lincoln Way, but there is no project number assigned to that line. Mr.
Ray explained that is project 40, which is 16th Street, Grand Avenue, and Dayton Avenue Traffic
Signals.
The Mayor mentioned there is a lot of congestion along GW Carver going north. The Cameron
School Road and the GW Carver intersection had previously been discussed and the Ames 2040
Plan shows some potential growth in the area. He was surprised to see that nothing is scheduled
5
to be worked on in that area. Mr. Ray explained that on the project scoring it was rated a medium
tier, and further discussion was had, and it was determined that the area would be more of a
developer-driven project. Mr. Pregitzer stated that projects No. 3 and No. 43 would be
developer-driven and another north intersection project No. 2 rated really high and is included in
the plan. They may need to closely monitor project No. 1, and if the City grows as anticipated, a
traffic impact study would be done, which could trigger a project. Project No. 1 is not shown
because of what the Plan’s growth shows, but that doesn’t mean that a development, large
annexation, or something else that could come in may change that. Story County Supervisor
Lauris Olson explained that her problem with that explanation is that they are talking about the
area being developer-driven. Project No. 3 along Cameron School Road is already developed
and the only development available would be on the southeast side. She is concerned that in not
putting this area in the Plan, the area could be missed. Ms. Olson stated that as far as the County
is concerned, they appreciate the area being looked into, but what is shown is not realistic. Mr.
Ray stated when HDR did its analysis, the needs far exceeded the funding available for the
Long-Range Transportation Plan. It is a balance and there are a lot of intersections that have
scored high, and have a lot of congestion and expected to get worse. It was explained that is why
they are presenting the information tonight to see if some projects need to be added to the
Constrained Plan. Mayor Haila asked for help understanding the criteria that make it more
objective than subjective to arrive at a prioritization. Mr. Ray explained that when they did the
analysis, they looked at all the different scoring criteria. On the qualitative side, they look at
areas that currently have congestion, and from their analysis, that area did not show any current
congestion. The areas that were showing current congestion received higher scoring because that
congestion could be addressed. Other areas that received higher scoring were projects that were
on the National Highway System. The National Highway System is of high importance to the IA
DOT. Mayor Haila inquired if traffic counts were done and asked how they analyzed the volume
of traffic. Mr. Ray stated that the IA DOT has an extensive traffic count program that they
utilized, and they also have a travel demand model that was used to project the year 2045 traffic
volumes.
Ms. Olson wanted to know about the financial numbers. She wanted to know if the total amounts
were just what the City of Ames is anticipated to receive from the various sources, or if it
includes money that Story County may have to actually contribute to some of the projects. Mr.
Ray commented that it includes a combination, but the majority of it would be from the City of
Ames. Ms. Olson mentioned that they need to look at a couple areas and see if there is anything
this Plan could do to address their concern.
The Mayor asked what the next steps would be and what they are looking for from the
Committee. Mr. Pregitzer stated they are requesting feedback from the Committee. As a
Technical Committee, they have already made comments and given them to HDR. He wanted to
know if the Policy Committee was comfortable with the overall grouping of projects that were
shown. It was pointed out that when talking about roadway projects or bike projects, the plans
tend to emphasize the investment on the core of metropolitan areas, where there is the
accumulation of traffic and congestion. If there is anything in the Plan as far as the projects that
are going to be funded that the Policy Committee has a strong opinion on, they would like to
6
know about it now. Changing or moving the fiscal constraint of the Plan is very complicated to
do and get approved by the DOT and the Federal Highway. Mr. Pregitzer commented that they
worked closely with Planning staff and the Ames Plan 2040 Commission. He is hoping that the
timing of the projects shown will match up with how they are anticipating the fringes of the
region will grow. When the Draft Plan is presented, it will include all the details about the public
involvement and the process of development. Public Works Director John Joiner pointed out that
it is easy to confuse MPO projects with a longer-term CIP process. It is a planning tool to look at
where the federal dollars should be spent.
Mayor Haila mentioned that the Council hasn’t had a conversation yet about the road diet, and
Project No. 19 shows a road diet from four lanes to three lanes. He noted that the project could
be a conversation within itself. He wanted to know if the project on 13th and Grand Avenue
scored higher because it was a state project. Mr. Ray commented that the 13th and Grand Avenue
project scored high due to being a state roadway, congestion, and the amount of it being a safety
issue. Mayor Haila stated that the area will have a lot of public input and inquired if some
properties were going to be removed to widen the road. Mr. Pregitzer stated that there have been
issues in the past, but by taking a more complete streets approach, a more content sensitive
approach for design would be beneficial. He noted that Project Nos. 16 and 13 would have to go
through an extensive planning phase and design phase before any construction would be done.
Mayor Haila wanted to know if Project No. 16 wasn’t able to move forward would the money be
lost or would it be available for a different project. Mr. Pregitzer stated that the funds would
never leave the account and would go to another project
Ms. Olson stated she had a question about Project No. 22, which lists that Story County may be a
potential sponsor. She wanted to know why as that area is all City property. Mr. Pregitzer stated
it was a typo and they will get it fixed.
Boone County Supervisor Bill Zinnel asked how the scoring was done. Traffic Engineer
Pregitzer stated that the consultant took the scoring criteria that is a combination of the national
performance measures and feedback from the public input process. The raw scoring was done by
the consultant and its team, and then the Technical Committee reviewed the projects to make
sure it met the needs of the City.
Council Member Gartin questioned why the recommendation for a road diet on Lincoln Way
from four lanes to three lanes would be beneficial when they are trying to increase economic
activity on those roads. He felt it would be counterintuitive to go from four to three lanes when
there is potential growth to that area. Mr. Pregitzer explained that the road diet is from Gilchrist
Street to Duff Avenue, and the thought process was that if the area did become a heavy
commercial area that a four-lane undivided road with a bunch of turning traffic has a lot of safety
issues and effectively operates no differently than a three-lane road. He noted that another thing
that could become a benefit would be to reconstruct the street to have three lanes of traffic and
have additional space in the right-of-way to provide street or pedestrian scaping. Mayor Haila
stated that the area is also Highway 69 and asked if the IA DOT would approve a road diet. Mr.
Pregitzer stated that would have to be part of the design and justification process.
7
Council Member Gartin stated he appreciated the fact that they received input and guidance from
the Ames Bicycle Coalition, but it seemed as if there could be a couple of different fundamental
ways to prioritize the way in which they work on the bike trail system. He spends a lot of time
on the trails and there are some unconnected parts. Mr. Gartin mentioned that one approach
could be they want to connect the recreational areas, could prioritize the trail system for
commuting, or look at how to get students to Iowa State University. He wanted to know how to
take the three different types of approaches and build them into a strategy. Mr. Pregitzer pointed
out that on the bicycle and pedestrian scoring map, the red lines show a lot of the recreational
connections and potentially the Iowa trail system. Part of the reason that those were not part of
the Plan was due to his comment made earlier about not federalizing all projects. Traffic
Engineer Pregitzer stated that they could still make the park connections, but would likely do
those trails with local money. They want to be able to accommodate all users.
Council Member Betcher mentioned that she had a question regarding the Bicycle & Pedestrian
Plan. She stated that on Project No. 30, which is the Avenue bike boulevard that connects the
stub that is currently there to Lincoln Way, it is listed as a mid-term project. Ms. Betcher
mentioned that the City has had that stub of the bike boulevard on Ash Avenue for several years;
was done as a trial project. She wanted to know if the City has accessed the trail and if it is
something that bikers appreciate and use. Some of the residents in the Ash area have been
concerned about the vehicle speed in the area. Mr. Pregitzer stated that bike boulevard was done
in response to the athletic fields that were done as part of ISU, and as far as he has heard, it has
been a positive route if you are on the route. The difficulty is getting in and out of that section,
and there are accessibility enhancement funds in the CIP to build a better connection on the
south end by Mortensen Parkway. It would have to build a crossing on the north end. Mr.
Pregitzer mentioned that speed etc., will need to be something else that they will have to study
before they finalize any designs.
Mr. Pregitzer said to email him with any other concerns or questions.
POLICY COMMITTEE COMMENTS: Ms. Olson thanked Brian Ray and Damion Pregitzer
for their hard work.
ADJOURNMENT: Moved by Gartin, to adjourn the AAMPO Transportation Policy Committee
meeting at 7:35 p.m.
REGULAR MEETING OF THE AMES CITY COUNCIL
CALL TO ORDER: Mayor John Haila called the Regular Meeting of the Ames City Council,
which was being held electronically, to order at 7:37 p.m. with the following Council members
present: Gloria Betcher, Amber Corrieri, Tim Gartin, Rachel Junck, and David Martin. Ex
officio Member Nicole Whitlock was also present. Council Member Bronwyn Beatty-Hansen
was absent.
CONSENT AGENDA: Mayor Haila stated that staff had requested to pull Item No. 14, the
contract and bond for Unit 8 Crane Renovation due to staff not receiving the contract and bond.
8
Moved by Gartin, seconded by Betcher, to approve the following items on the Consent Agenda.
1. Motion approving payment of claims
2. Motion approving Minutes of Regular Meetings of August 18, 2020, and August 25, 2020
3. Motion approving Report of Change Orders for period August 16 - 31, 2020
4. Motion approving certification of Civil Service applicants
5. Motion authorizing Mayor to send Letter of Support for Main Street to pursue funding
through a Main Street Challenge Grant for 412 Burnett and 330-5th Street
6. Motion approving 5-day (September 15 - September 20) Class C Liquor License - Gateway
Hotel & Conference Center, 2100 Green Hills Drive
7. Motion approving renewal of the following Beer Permits, Wine Permits, and Liquor
Licenses:
a. Class E Liquor License with Class B Wine Permit, Class C Beer Permit (Carryout Beer),
and Sunday Sales - Kum & Go #0217, 3111 S. Duff Avenue
b. Class C Liquor License with Catering Privilege and Sunday Sales - Hy-Vee #1
Clubroom, 3800 West Lincoln Way
c. Class B Liquor License with Outdoor Service and Sunday Sales - The Love Club, 4625
Reliable Street
d. Class E Liquor License with Class B Wine Permit, Class C Beer Permit (Carryout Beer),
and Sunday Sales - Southgate Expresse, 110 Airport Road
e. Class C Liquor License with Class B Native Wine Permit, Outdoor Service, and Sunday
Sales - AJ’s Ultra Lounge, 2401 Chamberlain Street
8. Motion approving Water Quality Grant Application through the State Revolving Fund
sponsored project for refund of interest for use for future storm water improvements and
designating Municipal Engineer Tracy (Warner) Peterson as the authorized representative
9. RESOLUTION NO. 20-477 accepting the report of the Rapid Need Purchases for repairs to
the 161 KV tie line for Electric Services
10. RESOLUTION NO. 20-478 awarding contract for On-Call Architectural and Engineering
Services to ASK Studio of Des Moines, Iowa, for a period of two years, with hourly rates
between $50-$150 depending on the staff member, and annual renewal options for up to
three additional years for Cy-Ride
11. RESOLUTION NO. 20-479 awarding contract for 15kV 1/0 Stranded Aluminum for
Electric Services to Wesco Distribution, of Des Moines, Iowa, in the amount of $80,892.00
(inclusive of Iowa sales tax)
12. RESOLUTION NO. 20-480 approving contract for Fiber Optic Cable Installation for the
Solar Farm to Communication Innovators, of Pleasant Hill, Iowa, in the amount of $52,900
13. RESOLUTION NO. 20-481 awarding for Unit 8 Precipitator Roof Replacement to Henkel
Construction Company, of Mason City, Iowa, in the amount of $487,784 (inclusive of Iowa
sales tax)
14. RESOLUTION NO. 20-482 approving contract and bond for 2020/21 Seal Coat Program
(Franklin Avenue)
15. RESOLUTION NO. 20-483 approving contract and bond for 2020/21 Seal Coat Program
(East 8th Street)
16. RESOLUTION NO. 20-484 approving contract and bond for 2020/21 Right-of-Way
Restoration (Standard Vegetation)
9
17. RESOLUTION NO. 20-485 approving contract and bond for 2020/21 Right-of-Way
Restoration (Native Vegetation)
18. RESOLUTION NO. 20-486 approving contract and bond for 2018/19 Storm Water Facility
Rehabilitation (Little Bluestem)
19. RESOLUTION NO. 20-487 approving contract and bond for 2020/21 Traffic Signal
Program (S. Duff & S. 5th Street)
20. RESOLUTION NO. 20-488 approving contract and bond for 2019/20 Multi-Modal
Roadway Improvements (13th Street & Clark Avenue)
21. RESOLUTION NO. 20-489 approving contract and bond for Baker Subdivision
Improvements
22. RESOLUTION NO. 20-490 approving contract and bond for 2019/20 Multi-Modal
Roadway Improvements (Mortensen Road, West of South Dakota Avenue)
23. RESOLUTION NO. 20-491 approving Plat of Survey for Bishop Farms at 831 E. Riverside
24. RESOLUTION NO. 20-492 approving Final Plat for Northridge Heights Subdivision, 19th
Addition
25. RESOLUTION NO. 20-493 approving partial completion of public improvements and
reducing required security for Quarry Estates, 2nd Addition
26. RESOLUTION NO. 20-494 approving partial completion of public improvements and
reducing required security for Quarry Estates, 4th Addition
Roll Call Vote: 5-0. 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. No one requested to speak, so he closed
Public Forum.
STAFF REPORT ON DELINQUENT UTILITY ACCOUNTS RELATED TO COVID-19:
City Manager Steve Schainker explained that a plan was laid out regarding communicating with
utility customers on the status of delinquent utility accounts. The Council had approved staff’s
recommendation and gave permission to move ahead. Mr. Schainker mentioned that he had put a
hold on the delinquent accounts until the Housing Coordinator Vanessa Baker-Latimer and her
staff were prepared to administer the new CDBG funds. They were going to start implementing
the process of attempting to recover funds for past-due accounts, but staff was notified that there
was some doubts that the City would be able to use the CDBG funds to help pay back past-due
utility bills. He reminded the Council that the City was told to utilize the funds before any rules
were in place. Due to the new information, the City is going to ask for an appeal or a waiver and
is not sure how long it will take. The amount of delinquent utility bills has grown to
approximately $750,000. City Manager Schainker stated his recommendation was to move ahead
in resuming the disconnection process as previously approved. Any utility customer who
contacts the City and applies for the funds, their account will be placed on hold until they hear
further. The hope is that the citizens who don’t qualify for the program will make their payments
or work with the City and set up a payment plan. If the Council delays this action, the Low-
Income Heating Assistance Program (LIHEAP) rules will allow qualifying customers to delay
utility payment until April 2021, thereby further increasing the magnitude of the outstanding
bills.
10
Council Member Junck asked if the City would shut off a person’s electricity or if they would be
able to get assistance if that person is out of work and unable to pay their bill. Ms. Baker-
Latimer stated that the funds are for COVID-related events; if they can prove they lost their job
or their wages were cut back, they should be eligible to receive assistance under the guidelines.
Council Member Betcher wanted to clarify that the issue with the HUD rules applies only to the
utility accounts, because the City of Ames is a Municipal Utility and would not apply to the
rental and homeowners relief programs. Ms. Baker-Latimer stated that a city that operates a
municipal utility cannot distribute these funds to customers to be used to pay for utilities
operated by the city administering the grant. She stated the City has asked for a waiver in order
to allow the City to use the funds during COVID only. In talking with the professionals in the
field there are only 240 municipally owned utilities in the country. Ms. Baker-Latimer explained
that the guideline was buried so deep that the field office was not even aware of the guideline.
Mr. Schainker stated that the mortgage and rental assistance would not be affected. Ms. Baker-
Latimer explained that the City cannot pay the property taxes on a mortgage.
Mayor Haila mentioned that they do have a relationship with Senator Joni Ernst’s office and
Senator Grassley’s office and if the Council wants him, a motion could be made to have him
reach out to the Senators to see what they could do to help. Mr. Schainker explained that Ms.
Baker-Latimer would be happy to join in on a phone call with them.
Council Member Betcher asked if any of the customers who were in the arrears have contacted
Ms. Baker-Latimer. Ms. Baker-Latimer stated that there have been four customers who are
getting help with their rent, and Alliant gas bill. She stated that when speaking with the field
office they didn’t think the City would be approved for a waiver. Ms. Betcher asked if they
knew how many people were not qualified for the program, but had been in contact with the City
to set up payment arrangements. Mr. Schainker explained memos were previously sent out
reminding customers of their balances, but they do not currently have that information available.
Mr. Schainker stated notices will go out in the next couple of days stating the City does not want
to shut their electricity off, but they need to contact the City to set up a payment plan or apply for
assistance. The Finance Department will try to reach out at least three times to see if there is
something that the City could do, but if there is no response, they will proceed to shut off the
electricity. Mr. Schainker explained he may come back to the Council regarding two groups.
Mayor Haila asked when the moratorium would kick in. Mr. Schainker stated that if it doesn't
start soon, they would not be able to shut people’s electricity off starting in November due to the
colder weather; the City wants to help before the bill keeps growing.
Council Member Martin stated that they were looking at $400,000 in delinquency and wanted to
know if there are a number of delinquent accounts. Mr. Schainker stated he is not sure of the
current number.
Council Member Gartin stated that in July, the unemployment rate was 2.9 and there was a
11
significant decrease to 8%. Things are getting better, but there is still financial stress. There are
substantial resources available.
Moved by Gartin, seconded by Martin, to ask the Mayor to reach out on behalf of the Council to
the various sources of authority to advocate on the City’s behalf.
Vote on Motion: 5-0. Motion declared carried unanimously.
STAFF REPORT REGARDING SIDEWALK CONSTRUCTION FOR BRICKTOWNE
DEVELOPMENT: Planning and Housing Director Kelly Diekmann explained they are
following up from the Council’s request to table Mr. Jensen’s request to waive the sidewalk
requirement for the Bricktowne Development. The main issue is the condition of a ditch along
the frontage on the southern part of the property as well as a vacant commercial lot on the north
side of the property. In the Agreement there was a requirement to construct a sidewalk. There
were a couple of stipulations in the Agreement: one was to have the sidewalk completed within a
year of construction of Highway 69; the Highway 69 project was deemed completed in the fall of
2019. Mr. Diekmann stated the deferral of the sidewalk was until October of this year. Mr.
Jensen is asking for a waiver because of the ditch and the inability to install the sidewalk in the
ditch, which has been limited by the DOT. Staff has reviewed the ditch further per Council’s
request to see what it would cost to enclose the ditch. Due to the conveyance of the ditch a storm
sewer would need to be built and would cost over $400,000. Mr. Diekmann stated that, in the
Staff Report, there were a few other examples given of other areas of town that had similar
circumstances. Staff supports Option 3, which is to have the developer complete their sidewalk
improvement requirements per City standards.
Mayor Haila noted that when reviewing the other examples in the Staff Report it shows that
easements were granted. Mr. Diekmann stated with all the other examples they had been
working administratively with the applicant to find a solution that worked best for them. He
noted that the majority of the applicants had found it easiest to have an easement on their
property and place a sidewalk through it. When this happens, they obtain a Sidewalk Easement,
which has the language that the public has the right to walk over the sidewalk just like the right-
of-way. The developer is responsible for maintaining the sidewalk, and the benefit to the
developer is the City would measure setbacks from the property line; this way they don’t use
front-yard setbacks. In Mr. Jensen’s case, the developer meets or exceeds the setback
requirements, but it would be the lowest cost option.
Council Member Gartin mentioned that if the sidewalk was offset from Highway 69, it would be
safer. He wanted to know why this sidewalk was being placed so close to the road. Mr.
Diekmann stated he would defer to the Public Works Department as the original plan did meet
the SUDAS separation requirement, but now the DOT is requesting more shoulder room next to
the path. Mr. Gartin stated it was brought up at the last meeting that if the sidewalk was placed
adjacent to the ditch, it might be a problem in regards to the stability of the bank. Director
Diekmann explained that if the developer proposed to move the sidewalk to a different area, staff
would be happy to work with them.
12
Council Member Gartin wanted to know about the sidewalk in front of the cemetery, asking to
know the timing of that project. Mr. Diekmann mentioned they tried to anticipate the other
project at the time of the Developer's Agreement and had hoped that Bricktowne would complete
the gap as part of their sidewalk. The language in the Agreement stated that it would have only
been necessitated if a right-of-way would have been dedicated in time to build a sidewalk; this
has not happened and Mr. Jensen is not obligated to do so. The area is currently not
programmed into the CIP. Public Works Director John Joiner explained that it would be staff
responsibility to program the project into a CIP, but that has not been done. Staff would need to
look at the area in the context of other projects that need to be completed. Unfortunately, the
time frame is undetermined at this time.
Mayor Haila opened public comment and closed it when no one spoke up.
Moved by Corrieri, seconded by Martin, to approve Option 3, which states to have the developer
complete their sidewalk improvement requirements per City standards.
Council Member Gartin stated that he will support this motion because at the end of the day the
cost is going to be the same. The difference is the City will be asking for an easement where they
would not have before. He commented that it would be a small thing to justify.
Council Member Betcher stated she will support Option 3, but her main concern was that the
citizens in Teagarden have voiced their concerns about the ditch and the drainage on the east
side of Highway 69. She is hoping as the sidewalk is constructed, staff will continue to monitor
the drainage in the area.
Mr. Diekmann stated that they will work with the developer about the decision made tonight.
Vote on Motion: 5-0. Motion declared carried unanimously.
REQUEST OF VERBIO TO ANNEX TO THE CITY OF NEVADA: Planning and Housing
Director Kelly Diekmann stated that the request to Annex Verbio to the City of Nevada is a two-
part request. The first part is to allow the City of Nevada to annex a piece of property on the west
side of 590th. He pointed out that there is currently an Agreement with the City of Nevada that
they would not annex west of 590th Street. The City of Nevada is proposing to extend the
Agreement for another ten years if the City of Ames will allow the Verbio property to be
annexed to Nevada. Staff supports the request for annexation. The piece of land in question does
not affect the Ames 2040 Plan. The proposal by Verbio is to use the property as a rail loading
loop for their own property on the south side of the tracks. Director Diekmann stated that the
ten-year extension would be a great benefit to the City.
Council Member Gartin mentioned that he had concerns about this request. He noted the
property is a 100-acre site. Mr. Gartin asked to see a map that shows the area in relation to the
East Industrial Area. Director Diekmann showed the East Industrial Area and where the potential
growth is for the Ames Plan 2040 in relation to the Verbio property. Council Member Gartin
13
stated that they should err on the side of caution on giving up the rights to have control of this
land. He noted that the land may not have a specific need at this time, but as a 100-acre property,
he is not recommending the City release the property.
Mayor Haila inquired where the growth would go in correlation to the railroad tracks if there
was industrial growth in the area within the next 20 to 30 years. Mr. Diekmann stated that it is
interesting as they were not aware of rail access on the north side of the tracks; this may have
been discussed by Verbio and Union Pacific. They looked at the employment base and it would
be along the north side of the tracks with housing to the north. The core industrial would be on
the south side next to Highway 30. The sewer is planned to run south and any growth to the
south would be beneficial. In the Verbio request, its water needs would be really low.
Council Member Gartin stated he is supportive of Verbio and excited for the project, but the City
doesn’t know who is going to own the property in the long term. He noted part of the reason he
wanted to have the City maintain control of the property is so the City can set the building
standards, and the use of the property is consistent with the growth of Ames. Mr. Gartin wanted
to know what is driving the annexation for development. City Manager Schainker stated this was
a piece of land that fit Verbio’s need next to the railroad. Mr. Gartin wanted to know if the
project could move forward without annexation. Mr. Diekmann stated he doesn’t believe it could
as the property would need a rezoning, and the Fringe Plan would preclude the county from
rezoning the property. The property is currently zoned as Agricultural.
Council Member Betcher stated that there is an opportunity to extend the Agreement for another
ten years on the moratorium and she wanted to know if the Agreement extension would still be
on the table if the City refused their request. Mr. Schainker mentioned that question was never
asked, and he is not sure what their reply would be. Ms. Betcher thought it would be valuable to
have the extended Agreement, especially since staff had indicated that it doesn't seem that this
piece of property would be valuable to the City.
Council Member Martin stated he is hesitant to assume too much about people's interests, but it
does make sense to him that Verbio would want to have both parts of its properties in the same
city. He noted it seemed like a reasonable request as the area is not in the City’s immediate
plans.
Council Member Corrieri stated she doesn’t see any reason not to support the request as her
conclusions are similar to Council Member Betcher’s.
Council Member Junck stated she agreed with what had already been said; she is supportive of
staff's recommendation.
City Manager Schainker explained that the next step would be for staff to put together a new
Agreement with the new boundaries, which would come back to the Council for final approval.
Council Member Gartin mentioned that a ten-year horizon is nothing in the life of a city. They
14
are talking about defining the boundaries of the community. He feels that part of the reason why
they have the train wreck of transportation north of Ames is because a prior Council said the
City would never grow north, but the City has. Mr. Gartin stated that the fact that the Council
doesn’t foresee what development will happen in the area is not the issue. The issue is where is
this land is in proximity to the growth of the City. This is a 100-acre parcel that is going to be
annexed to the City of Nevada without knowing what the City’s cost would be if the City wanted
to annex the property and provide services. That information is not available tonight and Mr.
Gartin felt the Council was making a major decision for the City, and he is stunned by the
gravity of the decision since the Council lacks the information that they have to make it.
Mayor Haila opened public comment. He closed it when no one came forward.
Moved by Betcher, seconded by Junck, to approve Alternative 1, which states to direct staff to
prepare an Amendment to the Annexation Moratorium Agreement to allow Verbio to annex to
Nevada and extend the Agreement until 2030.
Vote on Motion: 4-1. Voting Aye: Betcher, Corrieri, Junck, Martin. Voting Nay: Gartin.
Motion declared carried.
PRIVATE WATER MAIN AGREEMENT BETWEEN HARVESTER LAND
HOLDINGS, LC, AND DICKSON AND LUANN JENSEN FOR USES ON THE SEVEN
EXISTING LOTS: Public Works Director John Joiner explained that the area in question is on
South Duff Avenue on the southern edge of the City limits, between Highway 69 and South
Duff, and the Airport. This Agreement would initially provide a rural water main that would
provide service to three homes and seven lots. In 2018, this request was initially brought forward
and then subsequently twice pulled from an agenda.
Council Member Martin mentioned that the proposed service would serve up to seven lots, and
he thought he had read somewhere that it was going to be a temporary main and would be eight
inches. Mr. Martin wanted to know if that big of a water main was needed for only seven lots.
Director Joiner stated that the eight-inch main is the standard size for anywhere that would be
developed in town. It is larger than what is needed for serving seven lots, but he is not sure of the
intent of the developer. Mr. Joiner stated that the developer is following SUDAS.
Public input was opened by Mayor Haila and closed when no one spoke.
Moved by Betcher, seconded by Corrieri, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 20-495 approving a
private Water Main Agreement between Harvester Land Holdings, LC, and Dickson and Luann
Jensen for uses on the seven existing lots, thus denying the Xenia Rural Water Service request.
Roll Call Vote: 5-0. Resolution declared adopted unanimously, signed by the Mayor, and hereby
made a portion of these Minutes.
Mayor Haila recessed at 8:34 p.m. and reconvened at 8:40 p.m.
HEARING ON THE DOMANI PROPERTY LOCATED AT 2200 OAKWOOD ROAD:
15
Planner Benjamin Campbell explained that the property owner Pinnacle Properties Ames, LLC,
is requesting the rezoning of a parcel comprising of 23.784 acres. The parcel is addressed as
2200 Oakwood Road. It also has frontage along street stubs for Suncrest Drive and Cottonwood
Road (in two places). The site was annexed to the City in 2019 and is zoned Agricultural (A).
The applicant is requesting rezoning it to Planned Residence District (F-PRD) with a Residential
Low Density (RL) base zone to allow for a single-family residential development with mostly
zero-lot-line homes. There will be 63 residential lots: 51 zero-lot-line lots and 12 custom-built
sites at the south end. The proposed plan also includes a resident clubhouse with swimming pool,
five common area outlots, and one subdivision sign outlot at the corner of Oakwood Road and
Green Hills Drive. The land for Domani is currently primarily used as a farm field, with a small
amount as farm yard, adjacent to an old farmhouse on Oakwood Road. The City’s Christofferson
Park abuts the property along most of the development’s eastern edge. The western edge is
primarily bordered by single-family homes developed as part of the Suncrest Subdivision during
2002-2006. Several of the abutting properties along the western edge of the site have extended
their rear-yard use onto the subject property.
The development of Domani will be broken into three phases. The first phase will include the
northern part of the property, plus several drainage outlots. It will also include a temporary sales
trailer at the east side of the property, at the end of the current street stub for Cottonwood Road.
This structure will serve as the sales office for the development until the clubhouse is
constructed, which will then serve as the sales office. The second phase of development will
complete the zero-lot-line homes and the final phase will be the 12 custom home lots. The
Clubhouse is required through a proposed condition to be under construction prior to
development and construction of homes in the 2nd phase and completed prior to initiation of
construction of homes in the 3rd phase.
Council Member Betcher stated when she was looking at the phasing map, she questioned the
timing of the road construction along with the location of the sales trailer as it seems the road
will not be completed and is unsure of how anyone would get to the sales trailer. Mr. Campbell
stated the developer wanted the sales trailer to be available right away, and believes they wanted
it off of Cottonwood as it would be on an existing street. Ms. Betcher commented that the sales
trailer is more important to be set up for accessibility as opposed to the developed part of Phase
1. Mr. Campbell believed that was correct.
Mr. Arneson stated he is available for questions. He wanted to respond to Council Member
Betcher’s question about the sales trailer. He explained that the sales trailer is ADA compliant
and there will be a ramp and an ADA bathroom. They will need to connect to electricity and
water, so he felt the least disruptive location would be on Cottonwood. He wanted to be
respectful to the people who lived on the Suncrest side.
Mayor Haila wanted to know if all the paved roads would be developed at the same time. Mr.
Arneson stated he was not intending to take Cottonwood at the same time. The first half
developed would be 51 homes, and the second and third phase are fed by the same completion of
Cottonwood. He does not see many developers opening at the same time. Mayor Haila asked if
16
there is a tentative schedule for Phase 1, Phase 2, and Phase 3. Mr. Arneson would like to see
each addition to open up 12 months apart, but it will depend on sales.
Council Member Gartin explained that this is an exciting project and wanted to know how this
project correlates with the Ames Complete Streets program and how the bicycle infrastructure
included in the Subdivision. Mr. Arneson explained they are trying to create a better way for
people in the existing neighborhoods to get across, but the most important part is the Tedesco
Park and the bike trail in the area. On the northern end, they tried to make an interesting area to
traverse from the new neighborhood, around a pond, and over to the new path.
Council Member Betcher stated that she noticed in the Powerpoint that most of the houses would
be slab on grade and wanted to know if there would be basements. Mr. Arneson stated that 50%
of the lots in the Subdivision could accommodate a basement. The national rate for basements is
only 4%. There are solutions for putting a free-standing storm shelter in.
Mayor Haila wanted to know what the thin blue line was on the map from Outlot C to the east.
Mr. Campbell stated that line would indicate where drainage work would be done. The applicant
has worked with the Parks and Recreation Department on drainage. Mr. Arneson stated he would
defer that question to Greg Broussard with Bolton and Menck. Mr. Broussard explained that the
thin blue strip is some regrading work along the existing channel in the park and along Wessex
to help improve water control. They are still working on the final plan with the Parks and
Recreation Department and what type of seeding they want.
Mayor Haila mentioned that he had read that with the increased improvements, additional
development could happen upstream. He inquired where upstream would be. Mr. Broussard
stated upstream is about 130 acres of drainage area coming to their site to the west. There are
some existing low-lying areas south of Cottonwood that they are improving to make sure their
site can handle the water flowing through the site. Mayor Haila inquired about the Ringgenberg
farm. Mr. Broussard stated they are not doing any storm water management for them, but
providing a path for the existing and any future water to their site.
Council Member Betcher stated that the concern from citizens is about the storm water along
Cottonwood. She likes the idea about helping with some of the storm water issues and
appreciates the increased water transfer that this project allows.
Mayor Haila asked if there were walk-out basements along the south side of Cottonwood Drive.
Mr. Broussard stated that there are; they worked with several of the property owners and were
able to get survey shots of their finished basement and to compare to existing elevations. They
will be lowering the 100-year water level by 1.8 feet due to the pipe they are putting in.
Mayor Haila stated that over the last eight years water has flowed over Cedar Lane twice.
There's a lot of water through the area, and he wanted to make any developer aware of potential
problems.
17
Council Member Betcher asked what the price points were for the homes as they looked very
nice. Mr. Arneson is looking to start selling at $350,000. This is a new development for the City
of Ames, but not a new concept.
Mayor Haila opened the public hearing.
Diana Ripple, 3002 White Oak, Ames, stated she appreciated Mr. Arneson’s comments and the
development. She explained she lives at the southeast corner of Suncrest and White Oak. Her
concern with the development, as proposed, is the disparity it creates, especially with Lots 23
and 36 that are off Suncrest. There is an eight-foot setback between the structure and the
property line for those two lots. Ms. Ripple believed the development would be really nice, but
she would like the developer to consider a reconfiguration so those homes along White Oak are
treated equitably as opposed to having two homes that have eight-foot setbacks and all the other
homes having at least 60-foot setbacks.
Council Member Gartin mentioned that he wasn’t quite sure what Ms. Ripple’s concerns were.
Mr. Diekmann stated that what she is asking for is to not have a home lot exist in their rear
yards. In order to accommodate the level of setbacks that Ms. Ripple is asking, the developer
would need to lose two lots or reconfigure the Subdivision. Mr. Gartin asked if something is
being done differently with this Subdivision as opposed to other subdivisions in Ames. Mr.
Diekmann stated from a zoning compliance perspective what the Council is seeing is 100%
consistent with City Subdivision Standards. Mr. Diekmann pointed out that Ms. Ripple would
like open space similar to the other lots. Council Member Betcher asked if the Lots 23 and 36 are
the zero-lot-line. Mr. Diekmann stated the homes meet the eight-foot setback that is expected of
any home regardless if a zero lot line or not.
Moved by Corrieri, seconded by Gartin, to pass on first reading an Ordinance rezoning the
property generally located at 2200 Oakwood Road from Agricultural (A) to Planned Residence
District (F-PRD).
Roll Call Vote: 5-0. Motion declared carried unanimously.
Mr. Diekmann stated that the Council had spoken before about small lots and this is a great
project for staff to look at with the developer that is market driven. Everyone will learn from this
project within the next couple of years. This request fits in with the Council Goals.
Moved by Betcher, seconded by Gartin, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 20-496 approving the
Major Site Development Plan for the property generally located at 2200 Oakwood Road,
allowing for the construction of single-family residential development comprised of 63
residential lots.
Roll Call Vote: 5-0. Resolution declared adopted unanimously, signed by the Mayor, and hereby
made a portion of these Minutes.
Moved by Corrieri, seconded by Gartin, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 20-497 approving the
Preliminary Plat for 2200 Oakwood Road.
18
Roll Call Vote: 5-0. Resolution declared adopted unanimously, signed by the Mayor, and hereby
made a portion of these Minutes.
HEARING ON 2017/18 MAIN STREET PAVERS (CLARK TO BURNETT): City Manager
Schainker stated this project is good news for the City and recommended going with Alternative
B, which is a little more expensive, but is the curved design that was preferred.
The Mayor opened public comment. It was closed when there was no one wishing to speak.
Moved by Betcher, seconded by Junck, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 20-498 approving the final
plans and specifications and awarding a contract to Pillar, Inc., of Huxley, Iowa, in the amount
of $175,408.46.
Roll Call Vote: 5-0. Resolution declared adopted unanimously, signed by the Mayor, and hereby
made a portion of these Minutes.
DISPOSITION OF COMMUNICATIONS TO COUNCIL: Mayor Haila explained that the
first request was an email from Jim Pease, Board of Directors, Friends of Ada Hayden Heritage
Park, to acquire Rose Prairie land as an expansion to Ada Hayden Heritage Park.
Moved by Betcher, seconded by Junck, to have staff provide a memo.
Council Member Gartin wanted to know if the Council was interested in turning 170 acres into a
park. Council Member Betcher explained she would like to know what the pros and cons would
be from a staff perspective, and that is why she asked for a memo.
Vote on Motion. 3-2. Voting Aye: Betcher, Junck, Martin. Voting Nay: Gartin, Corrieri.
Motion declared carried.
The second item was a memo from Brian Phillips, Assistant City Manager, providing an update
on Metronet service in the Ironwood and Kingman neighborhoods. The memo was informational
only.
Council Member Martin wanted to take a moment to thank Mr. Phillips for following up on the
Council’s request as it is wonderful to see the City working with MetroNet to potentially bring
the service to the neighborhoods.
Mayor Haila explained that the last item was a memo from Deb Schildroth, Assistant City
Manager, regarding resources from local business groups to help support a gift card promotion
related to the Mask Ordinance.
Council Member Corrieri stated that Mr. Jensen’s offer to the City was incredibly generous, but
when thinking about the practicality of making this work, she has more and more concerns. She
is not sure how such a program could be implemented or how the gift cards could be audited and
tracked. Ms. Corrieri mentioned she would like to know what the rest of Council thinks about
19
asking staff to no longer pursue the gift card option, and if Mr. Jensen still wants to donate
money, it could be used to purchase masks or Mr. Jensen could be asked to work with the
Chamber instead of having the City be the coordinator of the process.
Moved by Corrieri, seconded by Betcher, to ask the staff to no longer pursue and to politely
decline the donation and thank Mr. Jensen for the donation.
Council Member Betcher thought it would be appropriate to have something like the gift cards to
be pursued by private organizations, and she really appreciated Mr. Jensen’s offer.
Vote on Motion: 5-0. Motion declared carried unanimously.
COUNCIL COMMENTS: Council Member Gartin explained that he had asked staff a couple
times to look into a problem intersection. There is a railroad crossing on 24th Street and Hayes.
On the north side there is a continuous sidewalk, but there is no crossing for pedestrians. If you
are walking along the sidewalk, you will have to walk out into the street because there is
nowhere to walk. The railroad company has been unresponsive to the Council’s previous
requests. Mr. Gartin mentioned this is a safety issue. He noted he would be happy to have the
City pay to have this area fixed.
Moved by Gartin, seconded by Corrieri, to ask staff to make a further effort to reach out to the
railroad to begin conversations again to complete a sidewalk in the area.
Mayor Haila wanted to know if the problem was on the north or south side of the road. Mr.
Gartin commented that the south side of the road is fine; it is just the north side. It looks like the
project was never finished.
Vote on Motion: 5-0. Motion declared carried unanimously.
Council Member Betcher stated she is happy that the Council will be doing the ITGA training
tomorrow and Thursday. She also pointed out that an email was received about the definition of
face coverings. It may not be clear that face covering includes face shields. In education efforts,
she believes they have focused on masks and not the alternatives. She hopes this will be defined
more. Ms. Betcher has been working with the National League of Cities University Communities
Council on advocating for accurate census counts for college towns, which has gone largely
unheard since March. She had heard that at the end of August the Office of the Inspector General
had put out a memo stating that it is likely that there will be an inaccurate count of college
students in college towns. She is not sure how this will be accounted for going forward in the
latest COVID discussions, but is hoping there will be some relief.
ADJOURNMENT: Moved by Corrieri to adjourn the meeting at 9:40 p.m.
__________________________________ ____________________________________
Amy L. Colwell, Deputy City Clerk John A. Haila, Mayor
20
REPORT OF
CONTRACT CHANGE ORDERS
Department
General Description Change Original Contract Total of Prior Amount this Change Contact
Water &
Pollution
Control
Generator Replacement
Project
Corporation
Pollution
Control
Handrails Company
Services Services
Period:
License Application (Applicant
Name of Applicant:Hy-Vee, Inc.
Name of Business (DBA):Hy-Vee Food Store #1
Address of Premises:3800 W Lincoln Way
City
:
Ames Zip:5001400
00
State
:
IA
County:Story
Business
Phone:
(515) 292-5580
Mailing
Address:
5820 Westown Parkway
City
:
West Des Moines Zip:50266
)
Contact Person
Name
:
Kelly Palmer
Phone:(515) 267-2949 Email
Address:
kpalmer@hy-vee.com
Status of Business
BusinessType:Privately Held Corporation
Corporate ID Number:XXXXXXXXX Federal Employer ID
#:
XXXXXXXXX
Classification
:
Class E Liquor License (LE)
Term:12 months
Effective Date: 10/20/2020
Expiration Date:
Privileges:
Class E Liquor License (LE)
Randy Edeker
Urbandale Iowa 50322
CEO, President
0.00%
Michael Skokan
Waukee Iowa 50263
CFO, Treasurer
0.00%
Jeffrey Pierce
West Des Moines Iowa 50265
Asst. Treasurer, Financial
Reporting0.00%
Insurance Company Information
Policy Effective Date:10/20/2019 Policy Expiration
Date:
01/01/1900
Dram Cancel Date:
Outdoor Service Effective
Date:
Outdoor Service Expiration
Date:
Temp Transfer Effective Date:Temp Transfer Expiration Date:
Bond Effective
Continuously:
2
Insurance Company:EMPLOYERS MUTUAL CASUALTY COMPANY
Andrew Schroeder
First Name:Andrew Last Name:Schroeder
City:Johnston State:Iowa Zip:50131
Position:AVP, Assistant Controller
% of Ownership:0.00%U.S. Citizen: Yes
Michael Jurgens
First Name:Michael Last Name:Jurgens
City:Des Moines State:Iowa Zip:50312
Position:Vice President, Secretary
% of Ownership:0.00%U.S. Citizen: Yes
Smart Choice
515.239.5133 non-emergency
Administration
fax
To: Mayor John Haila and Ames City Council Members
From: Lieutenant Tom Shelton, Ames Police Department
Date: September 7, 2020
Subject: Item No. 8: Beer Permits & Liquor License Renewal Reference City
Council Agenda
The Council agenda for September 22, 2020 includes beer permits and liquor license
renewals for:
• Class E Liquor License with Class B Wine Permit, Class C Beer Permit (Carryout
Beer), and Sunday Sales - Hy-Vee Food & Drugstore #2, 640 Lincoln Way
• Class E Liquor License with Class B Wine Permit, Class C Beer Permit (Carryout
Beer), and Sunday Sales - Hy-Vee Food Store #1, 3800 W Lincoln Way
• Class C Liquor License with Sunday Sales - Bullseye Restaurant Group LLC, 114
South Duff Avenue
• Class E Liquor License with Class B Wine Permit, Class C Beer Permit (Carryout
Beer), and Sunday Sales - CVS/pharmacy #10452, 2420 Lincoln Way, #104
• Class C Beer Permit with Class B Wine Permit and Sunday Sales - Aldi Inc., #48,
108 South 5th Street
• Class B Liquor License with Catering, Outdoor Service, and Sunday Sales –
Hilton Garden Inn, 1325 Dickinson Avenue
• Class B Beer with Sunday Sales - Macubana, 116 Welch Avenue
A review of police records for the past 12 months found no liquor law violations for
any of the above locations. The Ames Police Department recommends renewal of
licenses for all the above businesses.
ITEM#: 10
DATE: 09-22-20
COUNCIL ACTION FORM
SUBJECT: TITLE VI CIVIL RIGHTS COMPLIANCE AGREEMENT AND
ASSURANCES
BACKGROUND:
Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits discrimination in providing government
services. Every five years, the City is subject to a compliance review by the Iowa
Department of Transportation Title VI /Civil Rights Bureau to ensure the City meets all
requirements of Title VI. This review was conducted in November 2019 and the City was
deemed to be in compliance.
Recently, the Civil Rights Bureau randomly queried its Local Public Agencies (LPAs)
database and the City of Ames was selected for verification of its Administrative Head
and Title VI Coordinator on the following documents:
• U.S. Department of Transportation Standard Title VI/Non-Discrimination
Assurances
• Title VI Non-Discrimination Agreement
By approving and signing the Assurances and Agreement documents, the City is ensuring
that its contractors will comply with Title VI and that a Title VI Coordinator is appointed to
oversee the implementation and compliance of the City’s Title VI plan.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Approve the Standard Title VI/Non-Discrimination Assurances and Agreement.
2. Do not approve the Standard Title VI/Non-Discrimination Assurances and
Agreement.
CITY MANAGER’S RECOMMENDED ACTION:
The City is required to comply with Title VI regulations and was deemed in compliance
following the review conducted last year. Upon random selection this year, the City is
being asked to verify the Administrative Head and Title VI Coordinator.
Therefore, it is the recommendation of the City Manager that the City Council adopt
Alternative No. 1, as described above.
The United States Department of Transportation (USDOT)
Standard Title VI/Non-Discrimination Assurances
DOT Order No. 1050.2A
The ___________________ (herein referred to as the “Recipient”), HEREBY AGREES THAT, as a
condition to receiving any Federal financial assistance from the United States Department of Transportation
(DOT), through the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), is subject to and will comply with the
following:
Statutory/Regulatory Authorities
• Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (42 U.S.C. § 2000d et seq., 78 stat. 252), (prohibits
discrimination on the basis of race, color, national origin);
• 49 C.F.R. Part 21 (entitled Nondiscrimination In Federally-Assisted Programs Of The Department
Of Transportation—Effectuation Of Title VI Of The Civil Rights Act Of 1964);
• 28 C.F.R. section 50.3 (U.S. Department of Justice Guidelines for Enforcement of Title VI of the
Civil Rights Act of 1964);
The preceding statutory and regulatory cites hereinafter are referred to as the “Acts” and “Regulations,”
respectively.
General Assurances
In accordance with the Acts, the Regulations, and other pertinent directives, circulars, policy, memoranda,
and/or guidance, the Recipient hereby gives assurance that it will promptly take any measures necessary to
ensure that:
“No person in the United States shall, on the grounds of race, color, or national origin, be
excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be otherwise subjected to
discrimination under any program or activity,” for which the Recipient receives Federal
financial assistance from DOT, including the FHWA.
The Civil Rights Restoration Act of 1987 clarified the original intent of Congress, with respect to Title VI
and other Non-discrimination requirements (The Age Discrimination Act of 1975, and Section 504 of the
Rehabilitation Act of 1973) by restoring the broad, institutional-wide scope and coverage of these non-
discrimination statutes and requirements to include all programs and activities of the Recipient, so long as
any portion of the program is Federally assisted.
Specific Assurances
More specifically, and without limiting the above general Assurance, the Recipient agrees with and gives the
following Assurances with respect to its Federally assisted Federal Highway Program:
1. The Recipient agrees that each “activity,” “facility,” or “program,” as defined in §§ 21.23 (b) and
21.23 (e) of 49 C.F.R. § 21 will be (with regard to an “activity”) facilitated, or will be (with regard to
a “facility”) operated, or will be (with regard to a “program”) conducted in compliance with all
requirements imposed by, or pursuant to the Acts and the Regulations.
2. The Recipient will insert the following notification in all solicitations for bids, Requests For
Proposals for work, or material subject to the Acts and the Regulations made in connection with all
Federal Highway Programs and, in adapted form, in all proposals for negotiated agreements
regardless of funding source:
“The ___________________, in accordance with the provisions of Title VI of the Civil
Rights Act of 1964 (78 Stat. 252, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000d to 2000d-4) and the Regulations,
hereby notifies all bidders that it will affirmatively ensure that any contract entered into
pursuant to this advertisement, disadvantaged business enterprises will be afforded full
and fair opportunity to submit bids in response to this invitation and will not be
discriminated against on the grounds of race, color, or national origin in consideration for
an award.”
3. The Recipient will insert the clauses of Appendix A and E of this Assurance in every contract or
agreement subject to the Acts and the Regulations.
4. The Recipient will insert the clauses of Appendix B of this Assurance, as a covenant running with
the land, in any deed from the United States effecting or recording a transfer of real property,
structures, use, or improvements thereon or interest therein to a Recipient.
5. That where the Recipient receives Federal financial assistance to construct a facility, or part of a
facility, the Assurance will extend to the entire facility and facilities operated in connection
therewith.
6. That where the Recipient receives Federal financial assistance in the form, or for the acquisition of
real property or an interest in real property, the Assurance will extend to rights to space on, over, or
under such property.
7. That the Recipient will include the clauses set forth in Appendix C and Appendix D of this
Assurance, as a covenant running with the land, in any future deeds, leases, licenses, permits, or
similar instruments entered into by the Recipient with other parties:
a. for the subsequent transfer of real property acquired or improved under the applicable
activity, project, or program; and
b. for the construction or use of, or access to, space on, over, or under real property acquired or
improved under the applicable activity, project, or program.
8. That this Assurance obligates the Recipient for the period during which Federal financial assistance
is extended to the program, except where the Federal financial assistance is to provide, or is in the
form of, personal property, or real property, or interest therein, or structures or improvements
thereon, in which case the Assurance obligates the Recipient, or any transferee for the longer of the
following periods:
a. the period during which the property is used for a purpose for which the Federal financial
assistance is extended, or for another purpose involving the provision of similar services or
benefits; or
b. the period during which the Recipient retains ownership or possession of the property.
9. The Recipient will provide for such methods of administration for the program as are found by the
Secretary of Transportation or the official to whom he/she delegates specific authority to give
reasonable guarantee that it, other recipients, sub-recipients, sub-grantees, contractors,
subcontractors, consultants, transferees, successors in interest, and other participants of Federal
financial assistance under such program will comply with all requirements imposed or pursuant to
the Acts, the Regulations, and this Assurance.
10. The Recipient agrees that the United States has a right to seek judicial enforcement with regard to
any matter arising under the Acts, the Regulations, and this Assurance.
By signing this ASSURANCE, BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB also agrees to comply (and require any sub-
recipients, sub-grantees, contractors, successors, transferees, and/or assignees to comply) with all applicable
provisions governing the FHWA access to records, accounts, documents, information, facilities, and staff.
You also recognize that you must comply with any program or compliance reviews, and/or complaint
investigations conducted by the FHWA. You must keep records, reports, and submit the material for review
upon request to FHWA, or its designee in a timely, complete, and accurate way. Additionally, you must
comply with all other reporting, data collection, and evaluation requirements, as prescribed by law or
detailed in program guidance.
___________________ gives this ASSURANCE in consideration of and for obtaining any Federal grants,
loans, contracts, agreements, property, and/or discounts, or other Federal-aid and Federal financial assistance
extended after the date hereof to the recipients by the U.S. Department of Transportation under the Federal
Highway Program. This ASSURANCE is binding on Iowa, other recipients, sub-recipients, sub-
grantees, contractors, subcontractors and their subcontractors’, transferees, successors in interest, and any
other participants in the Federal Highway Program. The person (s) signing below is authorized to sign this
ASSURANCE on behalf of the Recipient.
____________________________________________________
(Name of Recipient)
by_____________________________________________________
(Signature of Authorized Official)
DATED_________________________________
APPENDIX A
During the performance of this contract, the contractor, for itself, its assignees, and successors in interest
(hereinafter referred to as the “contractor”) agrees as follows:
1. Compliance with Regulations: The contractor (hereinafter includes consultants) will comply with the Acts
and the Regulations relative to Non-discrimination in Federally-assisted programs of the U.S. Department of
Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, as they may be amended from time to time, which are
herein incorporated by reference and made a part of this contract.
2. Non-discrimination: The contractor, with regard to the work performed by it during the contract, will not
discriminate on the grounds of race, color, or national origin in the selection and retention of subcontractors,
including procurements of materials and leases of equipment. The contractor will not participate directly or
indirectly in the discrimination prohibited by the Acts and the Regulations, including employment practices
when the contract covers any activity, project, or program set forth in Appendix B of 49 CFR Part 21.
3. Solicitations for Subcontracts, Including Procurements of Materials and Equipment: In all
solicitations, either by competitive bidding, or negotiation made by the contractor for work to be performed
under a subcontract, including procurements of materials, or leases of equipment, each potential
subcontractor or supplier will be notified by the contractor of the contractor’s obligations under this contract
and the Acts and the Regulations relative to Non-discrimination on the grounds of race, color, or national
origin.
4. Information and Reports: The contractor will provide all information and reports required by the Acts,
the Regulations, and directives issued pursuant thereto and will permit access to its books, records, accounts,
other sources of information, and its facilities as may be determined by the Recipient or the Federal
Highway Administration to be pertinent to ascertain compliance with such Acts, Regulations, and
instructions. Where any information required of a contractor is in the exclusive possession of another who
fails or refuses to furnish the information, the contractor will so certify to the Recipient or the Federal
Highway Administration, as appropriate, and will set forth what efforts it has made to obtain the
information.
5. Sanctions for Noncompliance: In the event of a contractor’s noncompliance with the Non-discrimination
provisions of this contract, the Recipient will impose such contract sanctions as it or the Federal Highway
Administration may determine to be appropriate, including, but not limited to:
a. withholding payments to the contractor under the contract until the contractor complies; and/or
b. cancelling, terminating, or suspending a contract, in whole or in part.
6. Incorporation of Provisions: The contractor will include the provisions of paragraphs one through six in
every subcontract, including procurements of materials and leases of equipment, unless exempt by the Acts,
the Regulations and directives issued pursuant thereto. The contractor will take action with respect to any
subcontract or procurement as the Recipient or the Federal Highway Administration may direct as a
means of enforcing such provisions including sanctions for noncompliance. Provided, that if the contractor
becomes involved in, or is threatened with litigation by a subcontractor, or supplier because of such
direction, the contractor may request the Recipient to enter into any litigation to protect the interests of the
Recipient. In addition, the contractor may request the United States to enter into the litigation to protect the
interests of the United States.
APPENDIX B
CLAUSES FOR DEEDS TRANSFERRING UNITED STATES PROPERTY
The following clauses will be included in deeds effecting or recording the transfer of real property,
structures, or improvements thereon, or granting interest therein from the United States pursuant to
the provisions of Assurance 4:
NOW, THEREFORE, the Department of Transportation as authorized by law and upon the
condition that the ___________________ will accept title to the lands and maintain the project
constructed thereon in accordance with laws of the state of Iowa, the Regulations for the
Administration of Federal Highway Program, and the policies and procedures prescribed by the
Federal Highway Administration of the U.S. Department of Transportation in accordance and in
compliance with all requirements imposed by Title 49, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S.
Department of Transportation, Subtitle A, Office of the Secretary, Part 21, Non-discrimination in
Federally-assisted programs of the U.S. Department of Transportation pertaining to and effectuating
the provisions of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (78 Stat. 252; 42 U.S.C. § 2000d to 2000d-
4), does hereby remise, release, quitclaim and convey unto the ___________________ all the right, title
and interest of the U.S. Department of Transportation in and to said lands described in Exhibit A
attached hereto and made a part hereof.
(HABENDUM CLAUSE)
TO HAVE AND TO HOLD said lands and interests therein unto ___________________ and its
successors forever, subject, however, to the covenants, conditions, restrictions and reservations herein
contained as follows, which will remain in effect for the period during which the real property or
structures are used for a purpose for which Federal financial assistance is extended or for another
purpose involving the provision of similar services or benefits and will be binding on the
___________________, its successors and assigns.
The ___________________, in consideration of the conveyance of said lands and interests in lands,
does hereby covenant and agree as a covenant running with the land for itself, its successors and
assigns, that (1) no person will on the grounds of race, color, or national origin be excluded from
participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be otherwise subjected to discrimination with regard to
any facility located wholly or in part on, over, or under such lands hereby conveyed [,] [and]* (2) that
the ___________________ will use the lands and interests in lands and interests in lands so conveyed,
in compliance with all requirements imposed by or pursuant to Title 49, Code of Federal Regulations,
U.S. Department of Transportation, Subtitle A, Office of the Secretary, Part 21, Non-discrimination
in Federally-assisted programs of the U.S. Department of Transportation, Effectuation of Title VI of
the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and as said Regulations and Acts may be amended[, and (3) that in the
event of breach of any of the above-mentioned non-discrimination conditions, the Department will
have a right to enter or re-enter said lands and facilities on said land, and that above described land
and facilities will thereon revert to and vest in and become the absolute property of the U.S.
Department of Transportation and its assigns as such interest existed prior to this instruction].*
(*Reverter clause and related language to be used only when it is determined that such a clause is
necessary in order to make clear the purpose of Title VI.)
APPENDIX C
CLAUSES FOR TRANSFER OF REAL PROPERTY ACQUIRED OR IMPROVED UNDER
THE ACTIVITY, FACILITY, OR PROGRAM
The following clauses will be included in deeds, licenses, leases, permits, or similar instruments
entered into by the ___________________ pursuant to the provisions of Assurance 7(a):
A. The (grantee, lessee, permittee, etc. as appropriate) for himself/herself, his/her heirs, personal
representatives, successors in interest, and assigns, as a part of the consideration hereof, does
hereby covenant and agree [in the case of deeds and leases add “as a covenant running with the
land”] that:
1. In the event facilities are constructed, maintained, or otherwise operated on the property
described in this (deed, license, lease, permit, etc.) for a purpose for which a U.S.
Department of Transportation activity, facility, or program is extended or for another
purpose involving the provision of similar services or benefits, the (grantee, licensee,
lessee, permittee, etc.) will maintain and operate such facilities and services in
compliance with all requirements imposed by the Acts and Regulations (as may be
amended) such that no person on the grounds of race, color, or national origin, will be
excluded from participation in, denied the benefits of, or be otherwise subjected to
discrimination in the use of said facilities.
B. With respect to licenses, leases, permits, etc., in the event of breach of any of the above Non-
discrimination covenants, ___________________ will have the right to terminate the (lease,
license, permit, etc.) and to enter, re-enter, and repossess said lands and facilities thereon, and
hold the same as if the (lease, license, permit, etc.) had never been made or issued.*
C. With respect to a deed, in the event of breach of any of the above Non-discrimination covenants,
the ___________________ will have the right to enter or re-enter the lands and facilities thereon,
and the above described lands and facilities will there upon revert to and vest in and become the
absolute property of the ___________________ and its assigns.*
(*Reverter clause and related language to be used only when it is determined that such a clause is
necessary to make clear the purpose of Title VI.)
APPENDIX D
CLAUSES FOR CONSTRUCTION/USE/ACCESS TO REAL PROPERTY ACQUIRED
UNDER THE ACTIVITY, FACILITY OR PROGRAM
The following clauses will be included in deeds, licenses, permits, or similar instruments/
agreements entered into by ___________________ pursuant to the provisions of Assurance 7(b):
A. The (grantee, licensee, permittee, etc., as appropriate) for himself/herself, his/her heirs,
personal representatives, successors in interest, and assigns, as a part of the consideration
hereof, does hereby covenant and agree (in the case of deeds and leases add, “as a covenant
running with the land”) that (1) no person on the ground of race, color, or national origin,
will be excluded from participation in, denied the benefits of, or be otherwise subjected to
discrimination in the use of said facilities, (2) that in the construction of any improvements
on, over, or under such land, and the furnishing of services thereon, no person on the ground
of race, color, or national origin, will be excluded from participation in, denied the benefits
of, or otherwise be subjected to discrimination, (3) that the (grantee, licensee, lessee,
permittee, etc.) will use the premises in compliance with all other requirements imposed by
or pursuant to the Acts and Regulations, as amended, set forth in this Assurance.
B. With respect to (licenses, leases, permits, etc.), in the event of breach of any of the above
Non-discrimination covenants, ___________________ will have the right to terminate the
(license, permit, etc., as appropriate) and to enter or re-enter and repossess said land and the
facilities thereon, and hold the same as if said (license, permit, etc., as appropriate) had never
been made or issued.*
C. With respect to deeds, in the event of breach of any of the above Non-discrimination
covenants, ___________________ will there upon revert to and vest in and become the
absolute property of ___________________ and its assigns.*
(*Reverter clause and related language to be used only when it is determined that such a clause is
necessary to make clear the purpose of Title VI.)
APPENDIX E
During the performance of this contract, the contractor, for itself, its assignees, and successors in
interest (hereinafter referred to as the “contractor”) agrees to comply with the following non-
discrimination statutes and authorities; including but not limited to:
• Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (42 U.S.C. § 2000d et seq., 78 stat. 252),
(prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, national origin); and 49 CFR Part 21;
• The Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970,
(42 U.S.C. § 4601), (prohibits unfair treatment of persons displaced or whose property
has been acquired because of Federal or Federal-aid programs and projects);
• Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1973, (23 U.S.C. § 324 et seq.), (prohibits discrimination on
the basis of sex);
• Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, (29 U.S.C. § 794 et seq.), as amended,
(prohibits discrimination on the basis of disability); and 49 CFR Part 27;
• The Age Discrimination Act of 1975, as amended, (42 U.S.C. § 6101 et seq.), (prohibits
discrimination on the basis of age);
• Airport and Airway Improvement Act of 1982, (49 USC § 471, Section 47123), as
amended, (prohibits discrimination based on race, creed, color, national origin, or sex);
• The Civil Rights Restoration Act of 1987, (PL 100-209), (Broadened the scope, coverage
and applicability of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, The Age Discrimination Act
of 1975 and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, by expanding the definition of
the terms “programs or activities” to include all of the programs or activities of the
Federal-aid recipients, sub-recipients and contractors, whether such programs or activities
are Federally funded or not);
• Titles II and III of the Americans with Disabilities Act, which prohibit discrimination on
the basis of disability in the operation of public entities, public and private transportation
systems, places of public accommodation, and certain testing entities (42 U.S.C. §§
12131 -- 12189) as implemented by Department of Transportation regulations at 49
C.F.R. parts 37 and 38;
• The Federal Aviation Administration’s Non-discrimination statute (49 U.S.C. § 47123)
(prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, national origin, and sex);
• Executive Order 12898, Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority
Populations and Low-Income Populations, which ensures non-discrimination against
minority populations by discouraging programs, policies, and activities with
disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental effects on minority
and low-income populations;
• Executive Order 13166, Improving Access to Services for Persons with Limited English
Proficiency, and resulting agency guidance, national origin discrimination includes
discrimination because of limited English proficiency (LEP). To ensure compliance with
Title VI, you must take reasonable steps to ensure that LEP persons have meaningful
access to your programs (70 Fed. Reg. at 74087 to 74100);
• Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, as amended, which prohibits you from
discriminating because of sex in education programs or activities (20 U.S.C. 1681 et seq).
1
ITEM # 11
DATE: 09-22-20
COUNCIL ACTION FORM
SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF FY 2019/20 ANNUAL STREET FINANCE REPORT
BACKGROUND:
Section 312.14 of the Code of Iowa requires each city receiving allotments of Road Use
Tax funds to annually prepare and submit to the Iowa Department of Transportation
(IDOT) by September 30 a Street Finance Report of expenditures and receipts for the
fiscal year then ended. Those cities not complying with this section of the Code of Iowa
will have Road Use Tax funds withheld until the city complies.
The report to be submitted is for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2020.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Approve the 2020 Street Finance Report.
2. Do not approve the 2020 Street Finance Report.
CITY MANAGER'S RECOMMENDED ACTION:
In order for the City of Ames to continue to receive Road Use Tax funds, it is necessary
to submit an annual Street Finance Report to the IDOT. Therefore, it is the
recommendation of the City Manager that the City Council adopt Alternative No. 1,
thereby approving the 2020 Street Finance Report.
Cover Sheet
Now therefore let it be resolved that the city council AMES
(City Name)
(month/day/year)
2019 to June 30,2020
(Year)(Year)
Contact Information
Preparer Information
Name
Jessra Snyder
Mayor Information
Name CityStreet Address ZIP Code
Diane R. Voss
E-mail Address
diane.voss@cityofames.org 515 Clark Avenue Ames, IA 50010
8-5 515-239-5262 515-239-5116
E-mail Address
jessrasnyder@cityofames.org 515-239-5116
515 Clark Ave
City
Ames, IA 50010
E-mail Address
john.haila@cityofames.org
Name
John Haila
Phone
515-239-5105
Signature Mayor Signature City Clerk
City Street Financial Report
Fiscal Year 2020
Page 1 of 9
Road
Use Other
Beginning Balance $6,245,423 $17,770,613 $24,016,036
Expense $935,054 $7,141,693 $577,281 $7,501,656 $7,651,370 $2,037,737 $25,844,791
Revenue $935,054 $7,579,265 $577,281 $7,501,656 $14,513,382 $2,037,737 $33,144,375
Ending Balance $6,682,995 $24,632,625 $31,315,620
Summary Fund
Streets
Debt
Service
(200)
Capital
Projects
(300)
Utilities
(600 & Up)
Grand
Total
City Street Financial Report
Fiscal Year 2020
Page 2 of 9
Road
Use Other
Engineering $519,408 $57,339 $304,491 $881,238
Street Maintenance Expense $9,279 $4,348,276 $319,622 $4,677,177
Other Professional Services $282,999 $6,940 $137,027 $14,766 $441,732
Storm Drainage $779,059 $779,059
Street - New Roadway $2,723,785 $2,723,785
Street - Capacity Improvement $860,767 $570,341 $4,334,387 $5,765,495
Principal Payment $6,135,454 $6,135,454
Interest Payment $1,366,202 $1,366,202
Parking $619,799 $619,799
Street Lighting $866,204 $866,204
Traffic Control/Safety $59,571 $398,832 $458,403
Snow Removal $1,130,243 $1,130,243
Total $935,054 $7,141,693 $577,281 $7,501,656 $7,651,370 $2,037,737 $25,844,791
Utilities
(600 & Up)
Grand
TotalExpensesFund
Streets
Debt
Service
(200)
Capital
Projects
(300)
City Street Financial Report
Fiscal Year 2020
Page 3 of 9
Road
Use Other
Levied on Property $808,552 $7,501,656 $8,310,208
Other Taxes (Hotel, LOST)$577,281 $577,281
Licenses & Permits $17,600 $17,600
Interest $461,188 $137,305 $598,493
Federal Grants $7,261 $264,362 $271,623
State Revenues - Road Use Taxes $7,579,265 $7,579,265
Other State Grants - IDOT $64,376 $1,829,447 $1,893,823
Charges/fees $54,865 $1,644,365 $1,699,230
Assessments $303,640 $303,640
Sale of Property & Merchandise $899 $899
Fines $237,568 $237,568
Proceeds from Debt $11,654,745 $11,654,745
Miscellaneous Expenses Sheet
Utilities
(600 & Up)
Grand
TotalRevenuesFund
Streets
Debt
Service
(200)
Capital
Projects
(300)
City Street Financial Report
Fiscal Year 2020
Page 4 of 9
Bond/Loan
Description Balance Principal Interest Principal
Roads
Interest
Roads Balance
2010 GO BOND $1,740,105 $558,832 $41,378 $558,832 $41,378 $1,181,273
2011B GO BOND $2,380,950 $569,250 $53,094 $569,250 $53,094 $1,811,700
2012 GO BOND $2,603,204 $476,349 $78,096 $476,349 $78,096 $2,126,855
2013 GO BOND $3,205,000 $500,000 $91,150 $500,000 $91,150 $2,705,000
2014 go bond $4,257,962 $632,334 $91,782 $632,334 $91,782 $3,625,628
2015 go bond $4,791,440 $524,064 $168,596 $524,064 $168,596 $4,267,376
2016 GO BOND $3,625,070 $703,158 $115,285 $703,158 $115,285 $2,921,912
2017 GO BOND $5,101,120 $957,851 $202,947 $957,851 $202,947 $4,143,269
2018 GO BOND $6,915,000 $495,000 $287,750 $495,000 $287,750 $6,420,000
2019A GO BOND $10,775,000 $718,616 $236,124 $718,616 $236,124 $10,056,384
Bonds, Notes and Loans Sheet
City Street Financial Report
Fiscal Year 2020
Page 5 of 9
Project Description Contract Price Final Price Contractor Name
2016/17 Traffic Signal Program
(6th Street/Brookridge/Hazel
$236,676 $241,651 Voltmer
$78,437 $85,906 Manatt's
Improvements (Dawes Drive from
$979,912 $983,257 Con- Struct
Maintenance Contract 2: Stange
$129,902 $81,408 Manatt's
Pavement Improvements (Duff to
$211,973 $195,537 Con- Struct
$238,793 $238,027 Van Maanen Electric
Maintenance Contract 1: Daley
Project Final Costs Sheet
City Street Financial Report
Fiscal Year 2020
Page 6 of 9
Description Model Year Usage Type Cost Purchased Status
Layton Paver, Asphalt 1993 Purchased $26,465 No Change
VerMac, PCMS 548, Solar Message Board, Trailer Mount 2019 Purchased $18,260 No Change
Ford F350 Pickup Truck 2010 Purchased $45,507 No Change
International 7300, Dump Truck 2011 Purchased $119,718 No Change
International 7300, Dump Truck 2011 Purchased $116,718 No Change
International 7300, Dump Truck 2011 Purchased $116,643 No Change
International 7300, Dump Truck 2011 Purchased $116,689 No Change
International 7300, Dump Truck 2011 Purchased $116,602 No Change
Honda EB3000CKA, Generator, portabl,e gas powered 2019 Purchased $1,578 No Change
Ford F150, pickup 2010 Purchased $24,237 No Change
Fair B4251, Snowcrete, Snow Blower 2011 Purchased $78,384 No Change
Ford F550 Aerial Truck 2012 Purchased $102,488 No Change
Cherolet Colorado 2012 Purchased $20,638 No Change
Ford Expedition EL, Utility vehicle 2012 Purchased $47,801 No Change
Ring-O-Matic 550-VACEX, Vacuum, Hydro, Trailer Mounted 2012 Purchased $54,618 No Change
Wanco WT5P55-L5AC, Arrow Board 2012 Purchased $5,103 No Change
Cronkhite Trailer, Flatbed, Tandem Axle 2000 Purchased $3,889 No Change
Kubota L4760 HSTC 2014 Purchased $41,120 No Change
ODB LCT650, Leaf Vacuum, trailer mounted 2013 Purchased $27,354 No Change
ODB LCT650, Leaf Vacuum, trailer mounted 2013 Purchased $27,391 No Change
Ver-Mac PCMS-320 Message Board, Trailer Mounted 2014 Purchased $18,320 No Change
Ford F550 Truck 2015 Purchased $125,948 No Change
H&H TC 20, Trailer 2014 Purchased $7,681 No Change
Deere 544K, Wheel Loader 2014 Purchased $120,254 No Change
Ver-Mac PCMS-548, Message Board, Trailer Mounted 2014 Purchased $17,067 No Change
Zetor, Proxima 120 Tractor 2015 Purchased $63,359 No Change
Ver-Mac PCMS-548, Message Board, Trailer Mounted 2014 Purchased $16,043 No Change
Ver-Mac PCMS-548, Message Board, Trailer Mounted 2014 Purchased $16,043 No Change
Ingersoll Rand P185WJD, Air Compressor 2002 Purchased $11,496 No Change
Bobcat WS18, Wheel Saw 2002 Purchased $9,926 No Change
Wanco WTSP55-LSAC Arrow Board 2020 Purchased $5,709 New
ADDCO AD6200, Message Board, Trailer Mounted 2005 Purchased $15,845 No Change
MacLander Trailer, Falt Bed, Tandem Axle, 20TFBW (14)2005 Purchased $6,057 No Change
Wanco WTSP110, Arrow Board 2006 Purchased $5,724 No Change
Peterbilt 220, Johnson Street Sweeper 2016 Purchased $240,788 No Change
Road/Street Equipment Inventory Sheet
City Street Financial Report
Fiscal Year 2020
Page 7 of 9
Description Model Year Usage Type Cost Purchased Status
Road/Street Equipment Inventory Sheet
Caterpillar CB22, Asphalt Roller 2013 Purchased $34,048 No Change
International 7300, Dump Truck 2014 Purchased $133,249 No Change
International 7300, Dump Truck 2017 Purchased $157,839 No Change
Chevrolet, Colorado Pickup 2012 Purchased $21,835 No Change
Chicago Pneumatic 185CU Compressor 2019 Purchased $20,616 New
International 7300, Dump Truck 2017 Purchased $157,807 No Change
Felling FT-12IT, Trailer 2014 Purchased $6,215 No Change
Smith Concrete Grinding machine SPS10 2013 Purchased $4,118 No Change
International 7500 SFA 6X4 2018 Purchased $206,083 No Change
International 7500 SFA 6X4 2018 Purchased $206,307 No Change
Bobcat E50 Miniexcavator 2017 Purchased $68,334 No Change
RAM 5500 Dump Truck 2016 Purchased $68,862 No Change
Ford F150 Pickup Truck 2017 Purchased $34,919 No Change
Ford F150 Pickup 2017 Purchased $33,157 No Change
Stanley Breaker MBX15 2016 Purchased $12,575 No Change
Huskqvarna Concrete Saw FS5000D 2016 Purchased $22,595 No Change
KM International Hot Box Trailer, KM8000 2020 Purchased $31,748 New
Bobcat M7017, Pavement Milling Machine, Hydraulic 2020 Purchased $16,180 No Change
Caterpillar 430F2 Tractor Loader Backhoe 2017 Purchased $124,151 No Change
Ford F150 Crew cab 4x4 Pickup 2017 Purchased $33,898 No Change
RAM 5500 Dump Truck 2018 Purchased $54,328 No Change
Case DV23 Asphalt Roller 2018 Purchased $35,285 No Change
Bobcat S-770, Skid Steer 2020 Purchased $50,304 New
Bobcat Wheel Saw W-18 2020 Purchased $14,996 New
Ford F250, Pickup 2017 Purchased $28,954 No Change
Dodge Ram Pickup 2500 2WD 2018 Purchased $28,115 No Change
Chevrolet Silverado 3500 Truck w/ flatbed DRW 2019 Purchased $50,443 New
Ford F150 Pickup Truck 2018 Purchased $30,004 No Change
Ford F150 Crew cab 4x4 Pickup 2018 Purchased $30,572 No Change
Cimline Mastic Hot Tar Patch Machine 2019 Purchased $77,050 New
Fair 74251, Snowcrete, Snow Blower, 8-feet 2019 Purchased $85,428 New
Case 590SN Tractor Loader Backhoe 2019 Purchased $120,518 New
Chevrolet Silverado 1500 Crew cab 4x4 2020 Purchased $31,022 New
Motor Grader, Cat 12M3 (Dec 1, 2019 - March 31, 2020)2019 Lease $30,000 New
Loader Volvo L90 H (Dec. 1, 2019 - March 31, 2020)2019 Lease $17,400 New
City Street Financial Report
Fiscal Year 2020
Page 8 of 9
Description Model Year Usage Type Cost Purchased Status
Road/Street Equipment Inventory Sheet
Graco Paint Line Lazer 130H 2Gun 2020 Purchased $5,250 New
Graco Paint Line Lazer 130H 2Gun 2020 Purchased $5,250 New
Graco Paint Machine Line Driver HD 2020 Purchased $4,975 New
Graco Paint Machine Line Driver HD 2020 Purchased $4,975 New
City Street Financial Report
Fiscal Year 2020
Page 9 of 9
ITEM#: 12
DATE: 09-22-20
COUNCIL ACTION FORM
SUBJECT: THE DISASTER RECOVERY CENTER LICENSE/USE AGREEMENT
BETWEEN THE FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY
(FEMA) AND THE CITY OF AMES
BACKGROUND:
Story County residents affected by the August 10th derecho storm event may be eligible
for Individual Assistance grant funds offered through the Federal Emergency
Management Agency (FEMA). Assistance can be used to help individuals and business
owners recover from the effects of the disaster. Examples of assistance include
temporary housing, home repairs, medical expenses, legal services, and low-cost loans
to cover uninsured property losses. Application can be made electronically as well as by
regular mail and FAX. In addition to these options, FEMA also wants to establish a
temporary Disaster Recovery Center (DRC) in Story County. The purpose of the
DRC is to offer Ames and Story County residents the option to submit their FEMA
applications and supporting documentation in person. The DRC will be staffed with
FEMA personnel who can answer questions about disaster assistance programs
and scan application documents.
On September 18, 2020, FEMA conducted a site inspection at North River Valley Park,
725 E. 13th Street, along with Keith Abraham, Parks and Recreation Director, and Story
County Emergency Management staff. As a result of that inspection, FEMA wants to
proceed with using the parking lot and concession building at North River Valley Park and
has supplied the City with their License/Use Agreement. The Agreement has been
reviewed by Legal, Risk Management, and Parks and Recreation. It is important to note
that due to COVID-19, the DRC will offer drive-through service only. Residents will be
expected to stay in their vehicles when visiting, and face coverings are required.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Approve the FEMA License/Use Agreement for a temporary Disaster Recovery
Center serving Ames and Story County.
2. Do not approve the FEMA License/Use Agreement.
CITY MANAGER’S RECOMMENDED ACTION:
The DRC is an important option for residents and businesses impacted by the derecho
storm event. It will provide in-person service to help address questions and submit FEMA
applications for assistance. If Council approves the agreement, the anticipated opening
date of the DRC is September 28, 2020.
Therefore, it is the recommendation of the City Manager that the City Council adopt
Alternative No. 1, as noted above.
U. S. Department of Homeland Security
Region IV
11224 Holmes Road
Kansas City, MO 64131
1
LICENSE/USE AGREEMENT
1. Parties. The Parties to this Agreement are the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), Federal
Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), as Licensee and the City of Ames, Iowa (Licensor).
2. Authority. This Agreement is authorized under the provisions of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster
Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 5121-5207, et seq.
3. Purpose. FEMA desires to use, and the Licensor agrees to license and permit FEMA to use the
following described property (hereinafter referred to as the “Premises”) at no cost to FEMA:
North River Valley Park, 725 E 13th Street, Ames, IA 50010. FEMA will utilize the
concession building and the parking lot, to set up cones for 2 lanes to register applicants and
drop off documentation. Hours are Monday-Saturday from 0700 to 1900. The Mobile
Communications Operation Vehicle (MCOV) will be placed in the same parking lot. FEMA
will hire security for 24 hours, 7 days a week surveillance. American Disabilities Act (ADA)
portable restroom(s) will be placed on the Premises and will be utilized during hours of
operation.
4. Scope. The Licensor will authorize FEMA the use of the premises identified above for the
following purposes:
Disaster Recovery Center Document Dropoff center utilizing a Mobile Communications
Operating Vehicle (MCOV) to support applicant registrations.
5. Duration. This Agreement shall become effective upon execution and expire no later than 30
days from execution date, unless, terminated prior to that date with 10 calendar days’ notice from
either party. The Agreement may be extended by mutual consent of the parties.
6. Duties and Responsibilities.
a. Licensor shall:
1) At no cost to FEMA, maintain the premises in good repair and condition;
2) Provide FEMA with any keys or other instruments necessary to access the
Premises, as needed by FEMA, and coordinate with FEMA to assist with limiting
the access of third parties;
3) Maintain at Licensor’s own expense existing electrical service and any existing
lighting for the duration of this Agreement;
2
4) Permit FEMA to install, if necessary: Fencing, portable toilets, additional
lighting, generators, temporary guard shelters, signage and other removable
property necessary to carry out the intended use of the Premises; and,
5) Maintain insurance for liability, and for loss of or damage to the property, arising
from the wrongful or negligent acts or omissions of third parties.
b. FEMA shall:
1) Maintain the Premises in clean and orderly condition;
2) Surrender the Premises in the same state and condition as it was in at the
commencement of FEMA use and occupancy, including the removal of any items
installed in accordance with 6a (4) above;
3) Provide for any required security or cleaning services under separate contract at
FEMA expense; and,
4) Permit the Licensor to enter the Premises with approval of the designated FEMA
Point of Contact, or as otherwise coordinated for routine entry or shared use, as
described in paragraph 3 of this Agreement.
7. Non-Fund Obligating Agreement. Nothing in the Agreement shall authorize FEMA to obligate
or transfer any funds in connection with FEMA’s use and occupancy of the Premises. Any additional
work or activity that would require the transfer of funds or the provision of goods or services among
the parties will require execution of a separate agreement and will be contingent upon the availability
of appropriated funds. Such activity must be independently authorized by appropriate statutory
authority. This Agreement does not provide such authority.
8. Liability. Licensor and the United States each agree to be responsible for the negligent or
wrongful acts or omissions of their respective employees arising under this agreement. The parties
agree -- subject to any limitations imposed by law, rule, or regulation -- to cooperate in good faith to
resolve any claims promptly and, whenever appropriate, without litigation. For all claims or suits
arising under this agreement, each party’s designated legal represent atives will, within (7) calendar
days of receipt, provide each other’s designated legal representatives copies of any documents
memorializing such claims. Nothing in this Agreement shall be construed as a waiver of any
sovereign immunity of the United States. The Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA), 28 U.S.C. §§ 1346
(b), 2671-2680 provides the exclusive monetary damages remedy for allegedly wrongful or negligent
acts or omissions by federal employees within the scope of their employment.
9. Compliance with Applicable Law. The Licensor shall comply with all Federal, State and local
laws applicable to the Licensor as owner, or Licensor, or both of the Premises, including, without
limitation, laws applicable to construction, ownership, alteration or operation of both or either
thereof, and will obtain and maintain all required and permits, licenses and similar items, at no cost
to FEMA. United States law will be applied to resolve any dispute or claim.
10. Proper Use of Premises. Licensor warrants that the Premises may be used for the purposes
intended by FEMA as described in this Agreement. Nothing in this Agreement shall be construed to
3
create a duty on FEMA to inspect for toxic material or latent environmental conditions which c ould
be affected by FEMA’s intended use of the Premises. Any known environmental conditions which
could affect FEMA’s use of the Premises, known to the Licensor, must be disclosed to FEMA.
11. Integrated Agreement: This Agreement contains the entire agreement of the parties. No
agreement outside of this document can alter these provisions. Any changes to this Agreement must
be made in writing with the mutual consent of the parties.
12. Points of Contact.
a. The FEMA Point of Contact is:
Fayne Knobbe
Logistics Section Chief
11224 Holmes Rd, Kansas City, MO 64131
816-304-9651, fayne.knobbe@fema.dhs.gov
b. The Licensor’s Point of Contact is:
Keith Abraham
City of Ames Parks and Recreation Director
1500 Gateway Hills Park Drive
Ames, IA 50010
515-239-5349, Keith.abraham@cityofames.org
13. Other Provisions. Nothing in this agreement is intended to conflict with current law or
regulations or the directives of DHS/FEMA. If a term of this agreement is inconsistent with any such
authority, then that term shall be invalid, but the remaining terms and conditions of this agreement
shall remain in full force and effect.
14. Effective Date. The terms of this agreement will become effective on the date of signature of the
authority representatives of all parties.
15. Modification. This agreement may be modified upon the mutual written consent of the parties.
APPROVED BY:
____________________________________ _________________________________
Keith Abraham Fayne Knobbe
City of Ames Parks and Recreation Director Logistics Section Chief
City of Ames Iowa Federal Emergency Management Agency
Date: _______________________________ Date _____________________________
1
ITEM # __13___
DATE: 09-22-20
COUNCIL ACTION FORM
SUBJECT: PRELIMINARY PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR BAKER
SUBDIVISION GEOTHERMAL HEAT PUMP SYSTEM
BACKGROUND:
On August 5, 2020 the City of Ames signed a professional services contract with Design
Engineers P.C. to design a Geothermal Heat Pump System for the Baker Subdivision.
The subdivision consists of 26 single-family lots and one multi-family lot along Tripp Street
between Wilmoth Avenue and State Avenue. The geothermal system would provide
space heating and cooling and boost water heating efficiency for all the homes in the
subdivision. Ames Electric Services would install, own, and operate the well field and
distribution piping to serve customer-owned appliances in the homes.
The construction costs are estimated at $290,000, with a project life of over 50 years. A
monthly customer charge would be based on the size of the customer’s system. The
average charge would start at $5.25, with Council-approved rate increases as
appropriate, resulting in a payback time of around 27 years. One goal of the project would
be to keep the utility costs of homes in the neighborhood comparable to or lower than
those with more traditional heating and cooling systems.
This project proposal was motivated by an effort to advance environmental
sustainability of the subdivision developed by the City, while maintaining
affordable utility costs for the mixed-income neighborhood. Ground source heat
pumps are highly efficient and reduce both emissions and operating costs of home
heating, cooling, and water heating.
Despite their advantages, ground source heat pumps have seen slow adoption because
they have a high up-front cost and provide a return on investment over many years (10-
25-year ROI, with system lifetimes of 50+ years). That is a difficult investment model for
most individuals, and especially difficult for low-income, first-time homeowners.
With the utility-provided well field and distribution system proposed with this project,
homeowners can connect to the system with no greater up-front costs than traditional
heating and cooling systems. The operating costs are also similar, at today’s natural gas
prices. (The cost comparison would favor geothermal with the projected increase in
natural gas prices and changes to regional climate.) Greenhouse gas emissions are
expected to be 10-14% lower than traditional HVAC systems and water heaters. As Ames’
energy portfolio adds more renewable energy sources, emissions could be reduced even
further.
2
The system would reduce the electric demand of cooling homes during the electric
system’s peak hours compared to standard efficiency air conditioners. It would also help
to balance the seasonal load and utilization of existing electric infrastructure.
The Baker Subdivision is a unique opportunity for a district geothermal model because
the City is acting as the developer of this neighborhood. This allows City departments to
coordinate in the installation of this innovative application of a reliable, proven technology.
The system would also serve as a demonstration of the performance of geothermal
heat pumps and introduce more local contractors and residents to the technology.
This could encourage further adoption of geothermal heat pumps, which would
further reduce summer peak loads and community greenhouse gas emissions.
Customer-owned geothermal systems have been supported with rebates for many
years for those reasons.
The approved Operation and Maintenance budget for Demand Side Management
contains $405,756 carried forward from the FY 2019/20 budget to cover these costs.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Approve the preliminary plans and specifications for the Baker Subdivision
Geothermal Project and set October 14, 2020, as the bid due date and October
27, 2020, as the date of hearing and award of contract.
2. Do not approve the preliminary plans and specifications, and delay the Baker
Subdivision project.
CITY MANAGER'S RECOMMENDED ACTION:
A district geothermal system will provide highly efficient, affordable, and sustainable
space heating and cooling to the new development. The project would reduce
greenhouse gas emissions of the homes by 10-14%, without increasing costs to the
homeowners. This application of geothermal heating and cooling would introduce more
local contractors and residents to the technology and model an innovative project
structure for other communities.
Therefore, it is the recommendation of the City Manager that the City Council adopt
Alternative No. 1 as stated above.
Caring People Quality Programs Exceptional Service
515.239.5105 main
515.239.5142 fax
515 Clark Ave.
Ames, IA 50010
www.CityofAmes.org
City Clerk’s Office
MEMO
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: City Clerk’s Office
DATE: September 18, 2020
SUBJECT: Contract and Bond Approval
There is no Council Action Form for Item Nos. 14 and 15. Council approval
of the contract and bond for these projects is simply fulfilling a Code of Iowa
requirement.
/drv
ITEM # ___16____
DATE: 09-22-20
COUNCIL ACTION FORM
SUBJECT: MOTOR REPAIR CONTRACT FOR POWER PLANT– CHANGE
ORDER NO. 1
BACKGROUND:
The City’s Power Plant has two natural gas-fired, high-pressure steam turbine electric
generating units which are referred to as Units No. 7 and 8. These units require regular
professional maintenance and repair. The units operate under environmental conditions
with high heat and high pressure. Due to these operational conditions, numerous motors
are necessary to safely and reliably operate the Power Plant. All this equipment must be
professionally maintained, serviced, adjusted, repaired, and rebuilt.
On May 26, 2020, Council approved the contract renewal with Electrical Engineering and
Equipment Company, Windsor Heights, Iowa, for the Motor Repair Contract for Power
Plant for the one-year period from July 1, 2020, through June 30, 2021 in the amount not
to exceed $23,000.
This year there was a failure on one of the large 100hp DC motors at the RDF bin. Repair
quote for this motor alone is $26,570.24. Therefore, a Change Order is needed before
repairs can be made.
The action being requested is to approve Change Order No. 1 to the Motor Repair
Contract. This change order will add an additional $20,000 to the current contract
for FY2020/21. This will bring the total contract amount to $43,000 which will allow
for the repair of this motor and provide funding for additional motor failures that
might occur.
Invoices will be based on contract rates for time and materials for services that are
actually received.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Approve contract Change Order No. 1 with Electrical Engineering and Equipment
Company, Windsor Heights, Iowa for the Motor Repair Contract for Power Plant
in the not-to-exceed amount of $20,000. This will bring the total FY2020/21
contract value to a not-to-exceed amount of $43,000.
2. Do not approve the change order. This action will require separate quotes for
future repairs.
CITY MANAGER'S RECOMMENDED ACTION:
This change order is necessary to properly maintain motors and to carry out emergency
and scheduled repairs resulting from equipment failures. This contract should achieve a
consistent, high quality diagnosis, repair, and/or overhaul of a motor to assure the good
operating condition of the equipment with minimum delay and cost.
Therefore, it is the recommendation of the City Manager that the City Council adopt
Alternative #1 as stated above.
1
ITEM # _17 __
DATE: 09-22-20
COUNCIL ACTION FORM
SUBJECT: PLAT OF SURVEY (BOUNDARY LINE ADJUSTMENT) FOR 4000
COCHRANE PARKWAY AND 600 BELLFLOWER DRIVE
BACKGROUND:
The City’s subdivision regulations found in Chapter 23 of the Ames Municipal Code
include the process for creating or modifying property boundaries and for determining if
any improvements are required in conjunction with the platting of property. The
regulations also describe the process for combining existing platted lots or conveyance
parcels in order to create a parcel for development purposes. A plat of survey is allowed
by Section 23.309 for the consolidation of conveyance parcels and for boundary line
adjustments.
This proposed plat of survey (see Attachment C) is for a boundary line adjustment
to consolidate two existing lots, Lots 3 and 4, South Fork Sixth Addition, to create
one 1.52-acre parcel, labeled as Parcel ‘A.’ These lots are located at 4000 Cochrane
Boulevard and 600 Bellflower Drive and are currently vacant (see Attachments A & B).
The property is zoned FS-RL (Suburban Residential Low Density). The existing lots were
approved as part of the Final Plat for South Fork Sixth Addition in August 2014.
The consolidation of the existing lots is necessary to create a legal lot (Parcel ‘A’)
for construction of a new single-family detached dwelling. Sidewalk and street trees
must be installed prior to occupancy of the new dwelling, as part of the subdivision
improvements required for South Fork Sixth Addition.
Approval of this plat of survey (Attachment B) will allow the applicant to prepare the official
plat of survey and submit it to the Planning and Housing Director for review. The Director
will sign the plat of survey confirming that it fully conforms to all conditions of approval.
The prepared plat of survey may then be signed by the surveyor, who will submit it for
recording in the office of the Story County Recorder.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Approve the proposed plat of survey.
2. Deny the proposed plat of survey on the basis that the City Council finds that the
requirements for plats of survey as described in Section 23.309 have not been
satisfied.
3. Refer this request back to staff and/or the owner for additional information.
2
CITY MANAGER'S RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Staff has determined that the proposed plat of survey satisfies all Subdivision Code
requirements for a boundary line adjustment of existing lots and has made a preliminary
decision of approval. No conflict exists with the existing FS-RL zoning standards as a
result of the boundary line adjustment. Completion of sidewalk and street tree installation
will be required for the new Parcel ‘A,’ as part of improvements required for South Fork
Subdivision.
Therefore, it is the recommendation of the City Manager that the City Council accept
Alternative #1, thereby adopting the resolution approving the proposed plat of survey.
3
ADDENDUM
PLAT OF SURVEY FOR 4000 COCHRANE PARKWAY & 600 BELLFLOWER DRIVE
Application for a proposed plat of survey has been submitted for:
Conveyance parcel (per Section 23.307)
Boundary line adjustment (per Section 23.309)
Re-plat to correct error (per Section 23.310)
Auditor’s plat (per Code of Iowa Section 354.15)
The site is located at:
Owner: Hunziker Construction Services, Inc.
Existing Street Addresses: 4000 Cochrane Boulevard
600 Bellflower Drive
Assessor’s Parcel #: 0908196070 (4000 Cochrane Blvd.)
0908196080 (600 Bellflower Dr.)
Legal Description:
Survey Description-Parcel A: “All of Lot 3 and also all of Lot 4, of South Fork Subdivision to the City of Ames, Story County, Iowa
Public Improvements:
The preliminary decision of the Planning Director finds that approval requires all public
improvements associated with and required for the proposed plat of survey be:
Installed prior to creation and recordation of the official plat of survey and
prior to issuance of zoning or building permits.
Delayed, subject to an improvement guarantee as described in Section
23.409.
Not Applicable. (No additional improvements required other than sidewalk
and street trees that are required as part of South Fork Subdivision.)
Note: The official plat of survey is not recognized as a binding plat of survey for permitting
purposes until a copy of the signed and recorded plat of survey is filed with the Ames City
Clerk’s office and a digital image in Adobe PDF format has been submitted to the Planning
& Housing Department.
4
Attachment A- Location Map
5
Attachment B - Existing Conditions
6
Attachment C- Plat of Survey
ITEM # ___18___
DATE 09-22-20
COUNCIL ACTION FORM
SUBJECT: FINAL COMPLETION OF EAST HIGHWAY 30 FORCE MAIN
IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
BACKGROUND:
On March 24, 2020, City Council awarded a contract to Synergy Contracting, LLC in the
amount of $234,655 for the replacement of the East Highway 30 force main. The project was
bid as a unit price contract; one change order was issued to reconcile the final quantities.
The change order was for $960, bringing the final contract amount to $235,615.
All work under this contract was completed in accordance with the plans and specifications.
A copy of the Engineer’s Certificate of Completion is attached. The revised project expenses
and project budget are shown below.
Project Expenses:
Engineering Fees 18,500
Original Contract 234,655
Change Order #1 960
Total Project Cost 254,115
Project Budget:
FY 15/16 CIP 212,000
Savings from Clarifier Drive Replacement 108,340
Total Available Funding 320,340
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Accept final completion of the East Highway 30 Force Main Improvement Project and
authorize final payment, in accordance with the contract, to Synergy Contracting,
LLC.
2. Do not accept completion of the project.
CITY MANAGER’S RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Work for the project has been completed in accordance with 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: ___20__
Staff Report
EAST UNIVERSITY IMPACT AREA URBAN REVITALIZATION AREA
September 22, 2020
BACKGROUND:
At its August 25th meeting, the City Council received a staff report regarding the status of
Urban Revitalization Areas and programs across the City. After discussion of potential
changes to the East University Impact Area URA (Attachment A), City Council directed
staff to reach out to the Greek community to gain input about potential projects that could
be impacted by changes. City Council also requested additional background information
regarding the value of tax abatements that have been approved previously in the area.
Staff identified four projects that are in process to varying degrees and may be eligible for
future partial property tax abatement.
• 2125 Greely (Alpha Delta PI) - Approved Minor Site Development Plan completed
2020
• 224 Ash (TKE) - Approved Minor Site Development Plan for an addition 2021
• 138 Gray (Acacia) - Approved Demolition and Minor Site Development Plan, to be
completed in 2020
• 120 Lynn (Kappa Kappa Gamma) - Approved Demolition and Minor Site
Development Plan, planned construction in 2021
Staff received correspondence back from Steve Jones of Delta Tau Delta (See
Attachment C) describing their experience and the value received to the area from the
program. From his experience he believes significant projects take 3+ years to plan and
execute and the abatement helps to smooth out financial changes as a result of increases
in property taxes as a result of the increased value of the property. In addition, Staff
discussed the potential changes with representatives of Kappa Kappa Gamma. Their
concern is whether or not the City Council deicides to eliminate the tax abatement
incentive prior to them completing the construction of their new house. No other feedback
was received about planned projects for the next two to three years or about the possibility
of eliminating the tax abatement incentive.
Staff also collected data from the past ten years for 15 projects that have received
property tax abatement. Attachment B includes a table identifying the project location
and estimated value of abatements. The estimated value of the abated property taxes
(across all levying authorities) for these 15 projects is $1,140,359. This estimate is based
upon the initial year of abatement with state rollback and levy rates. Rollback and levies
vary over time which means the abated value would be slightly more or less than what is
estimated. Approximately 36% of the Greek Houses in the URA have taken advantage of
the program in the past ten years. This does not include the four potential projected
identified above.
OPTIONS RELATED TO EAST UNIVERSITY IMPACTED URA:
Originally the eligibility criteria were designed to encourage preservation and expansion
of existing Greek houses by incentivizing reinvestment in the area and supporting the
Greek system to maintain its presence near campus. During the rapid expansion of ISU
enrollment during the past decade, several things started to occur more frequently than
were anticipated in the early 2000’s. Staff saw a steady increase in the size of Greek
houses due to a reduction in required parking as a result of 2014 zoning text amendment
along with the desire to upgrade and add amenity space, even if there is little or no
increase in the bed capacity of the facility. Additional new chapters decided to locate in
the area due to its location near campus. There have been three approved demolitions
and new construction approvals in the past five years.
With the change to the URA criteria in 2018 to allow for either additions or new
construction to be eligible for tax abatement, the City created somewhat opposing
policies between its current restrictive demolition standards in the Zoning
Ordinance and its financial incentives for Greek homes in the URA. With the
potential Kappa Kappa Gamma house at 120 Lynn approved for new construction
in December 2019, there would be four new construction Greek homes that would
receive partial property tax abatement. City Council directed staff to address this
difference with proposed adjustments to the URA criteria to not allow for new
construction to be eligible for tax abatement. Council has noted the intent was to allow
for the Kappa Kappa Gamma house at 120 Lynn to proceed under the current rules as it
was approved for demolition in December 2019.
Rather than solely amend the criteria for new construction, it is also possible the Council
could conclude that incentives for Greek house expansions are no longer necessary
either due to the desirability of the area for locating Greek houses or the lack of a need
to support expansion of amenity space. There does not appear to be a push to locate in
other areas that are less costly or easier to develop than these areas adjacent to campus.
Option 1 – “New construction” be eliminated for the tax abatement eligibility.
The change in focus of the URA from preserving existing Greek houses in this area to the
greatest extent possible to now allowing tax abatement after demolition and new
construction, will over time eliminate some of the historic characteristics of the area that
once made it distinctive. Although the URA criteria do not include specific historic
preservation standards, it was one of the reasons for the initial standards for only
addressing expansions. Eliminating new construction as an eligibility criterion
restores tax abatement as an incentive to encourage and support reuse of
buildings or adaptive reuse of Greek houses (some of which are likely to be historically
and architecturally significant).
Even though demolition must be approved based upon financial hardship, concern
has been expressed that the City might be incentivizing the demolition of historic
buildings, contrary to city goals, objectives and policies for cultural resources.
Additionally, with an incentive available to start afresh (with new construction), the
motivation to renovate an existing structure is severely reduced.
This option returns the URA to the former eligibility criteria:
• The building is an existing or former residence recognized by the Iowa State
University as part of the Greek residence system; and
• 70% of the area of the existing exterior walls of the structure will remain.
• Construction of a new Greek residence recognized by Iowa State University as
part of the Greek residence system if built on a site that was formerly a Greek
residence with an approved Minor Site Development Plan and demolition approved
by City Council prior to January 1, 2021.
• Note this language provides a three month window for additional demolition
requests to be approved. In addition, since Kappa Kappa Gamma House
already has received approval for demolition, they will be able to proceed
with construction of the new home in 2021 as anticipated.
Option 2 – Eliminate the East University Impacted URA altogether.
Since the inception of the URA, 14 different properties have received tax abatement with
one property receiving a second approval for a subsequent abatement. Approximately
36% of the eligible properties have benefitted from the program through 2020.
The URA could be eliminated based upon the success of the program in solidifying
the neighborhood with Greek housing and the clear market demand for this type of
housing to be in areas adjacent the ISU campus. Some of the improvements
incentivized by the program have been increases in amenity space more than an increase
in capacity or renovation of the existing facilities to maintain their presence in the area.
Staff believes allowing for improvements completed prior to December 31, 2022 to be
eligible for property tax abatement would allow for planned projects to be completed over
the next two years. This option would set an automatic repeal date of the URA for
April 1, 2023 to accommodate improvements completed through 2022. Under this
option, all approved tax abatement would continue despite the repeal of the URA.
Option 3 – Determine that no changes are needed to meet the City Council’s desired
goals for the East University Impacted URA.
This option leaves the current eligibility criteria as amended in 2017, in place.
• 5% increase in assessed value
• Properties must be located within the designated East University Impacted Urban
Revitalization Area.
• Existing or former residences recognized by Iowa State University as part of the
Greek residence system, and which, following rehabilitation, 70% of the area of
existing exterior walls of the structure will remain; OR
• Construction of a new Greek residence recognized by Iowa State University as
part of the Greek residence system if built on a site that was formerly a Greek
residence.
STAFF COMMENTS:
Staff believes the conflicting policy of demolition and incentives for new construction
should be eliminated. The incentive for new construction did not exist when the recent
new Greek Houses were approved for demolition and started new construction. The
feasibility of the projects originally was based upon no financial incentive. It is only in the
past two years that incentives have affected the financial feasibility of the projects.
It should be understood that if City Council chooses to change the URA as reflected
in Options #1 or #2, all current tax abatements would continue to the end of their
approved abatement schedules.
Attachment A
East University Impacted URA – Purpose: Greek Housing
established 04-25-2006 by ORD # 3880;
amended criteria 12-19-2017 by RES # 17-716; NO EXPIRATION
The value-added requirement is a 5% increase in value. Since its establishment, 13 different
properties have received tax abatement:
• 201 Gray Ave [Alpha Gamma Rho] in 2020;
• 313 Lynn Ave [Delta Gamma] in 2018;
• 2136 Lincoln Way [Sigma Chi] in 2018 (demolition & new construction);
• 2121 Sunset Dr [Delta Tau Delta] in 2018 (demolition & new construction);
• 117 Ash Ave [Delta Upsilon] in 2013;
• 325 Ash Ave [Phi Gamma Delta] in 2012;
• 228 Gray Ave [Sigma Phi Epsilon] in 2012;
• 2125 Greeley St [Alpha Delta Pi] in 2011;
• 2102 Sunset Dr [Kappa Delta] in 2011;
• 233 Gray Ave [Sigma Kappa] in 2011;
• 302 Ash Ave [Delta Delta Delta] in 2010;
• 2007 Greeley St [Alpha Omicron Pi] in 2010;
• 201 Gray Ave [Alpha Gamma Rho] in 2010; and
• 227 Gray Ave [Chi Omega] in 2008.
Current Eligibility Criteria:
• Properties must be located within the designated East University Impacted Urban
Revitalization Area.
• Existing or former residences recognized by Iowa State University as part of the Greek
residence system, and which, following rehabilitation, 70% of the area of existing exterior walls
of the structure will remain; OR
• Construction of a new Greek residence recognized by Iowa State University as part of the
Greek residence system if built on a site that was formerly a Greek residence.
See Map entitled, University Area Urban Revitalization Areas Map
Pending New
Construction
Pending New
Construction
Pending New
Construction
Pending New
Construction
Attachment B
s Amount
Exempted
l
Year
d Rollback
%
Value Tax Rate Abated
Taxes
Share of
Abated
Alpha
Gamma Gray
Avenue
$13,917,200
2020 10 yr 0.550743 $7,664,800 0.031487
$241,343
$76,844
Delta
Gamma Lynn
$7,235,000
2018 10 yr 0.556209 $4,024,172 0.031523
126,852
$40,345
Sigma
Chi Lincoln
$6,252,400
2018 8 yr 0.556209 $ 3,477,641 0.031634
110,013
$34,865
Delta
Tau Sunset
Drive
$14,349,100
2018 8 yr 0.556209 $7,981,099 0.031634
252,478
$80,015
Colonial
s Club Avenue
$7,042,420
2017 10 yr 0.569391 4,009,891 0.031404
125,928
$40,201
Alpha
Phi
307 Ash
Ave
$2,948,000
2016 10 yr 0.556259 1,639,852 0.031634
51,876
$16,440
Phi
Delta Sunset
Dr
$1,361,400
2014 10 yr 0.544002 740,604 0.032236
23,874
$7,425
Delta
Upsilon
117 Ash
Ave
$2,430,000
2013 3 yr 0.528166 1,283,443 0.032255
41,397
$12,867
Sigma
Phi Gray
Avenue
$4,969,000
2012 10 yr 0.507518 2,521,857 0.032401
$81,710
$25,283
Alpha
Delta Pi Greeley
$450,000
2011 3 yr 0.485299 218,385 0.032360
$7,067
$2,189
Kappa
Delta Sunset
$1,042,800
2011 10 yr 0.485299 506,070 0.032360
$16,377
$5,074
Sigma
Kappa Gray
$589,600
2011 10 yr 0.485299 286,132 0.032360
$9,259
$2,869
Delta
Delta Avenue
$909,000
2010 5 yr 0.485299 441,137 0.032300
$14,249
$4,423
Alpha
Omicro Greeley
Street
$568,000
2010 10 yr 0.485299 275,650 0.032300
$8,904
$2,764
Alpha
Gamma Gray
Avenue
$1,852,100
2010 10 yr 0.485299 898,822 0.032300
$29,032
$9,011
$ 1,140,359
9
Attachment C- Minor Site Development Plan
1
ITEM # 21
DATE: 09-22-2020
COUNCIL ACTION FORM
SUBJECT: REMOTE PARKING AGREEMENT FOR 700 DOUGLAS AVENUE
BACKGROUND:
UT Prosim Revocable Family Trust owns the properties at 700 Douglas and 708 Douglas
Avenue. Each property contains a small apartment building (see Attachment A - Location
Map). The property owner is requesting approval of a remote parking agreement to
provide six required parking stalls at 708 Douglas Avenue to fulfill the parking
needs of the existing four-unit apartment complex located at 700 Douglas Avenue.
This request for remote parking requires both: 1) a variance, because the RM zoning
district does not permit remote parking, and 2) City Council approval, as all remote parking
agreements are subject to City Council approval per Municipal Code.
The Zoning Board of Adjustment (ZBA) approved a Variance at its June 10th
meeting to allow for parking needed for 700 Douglas to be located off-site (remote
parking) on the 708 Douglas site. The existing building at 700 Douglas is a
nonconforming apartment building due to the lack of any on-site parking and the applicant
was unable to construct required parking on the 700 Douglas lot outside of the front yard
or as covered parking.
The request was initially motivated by converting one of the apartment units to guest
lodging, which triggered parking improvements for the nonconforming apartment building.
Since the approval by ZBA of the variance and Special Use Permit for a guest lodging
unit, the state has eliminated local licensing and zoning requirements that distinguish
short term rental from other residential uses. However, the applicant desires to complete
the remote parking process because it would create legal parking for the apartment
building at 700 Douglas regardless of its use as guest lodging. Although a Variance
was approved to construct the parking, remote parking is subject to Council
approval of an agreement for the use.
The current apartment building at 700 Douglas includes four units. These four units
require six parking spaces based on the zoning standards for apartments. The parking
required for the neighboring property at 708 Douglas is proposed on site with the parking
required for 700 Douglas. This will create a 13-stall parking lot with eight of the stalls in
garages and five located outside. The required ADA van-accessible stall has also been
provided. The provision of parking stalls for these apartments necessitates the review of
the parking and the need for approval of the requested remote parking agreement as a
result of the granting of the Variance. A Minor Site Development Plan was approved for
the parking improvements and is included as Attachment C.
2
Ames Municipal Code Section 29.406(18) only allows for remote parking to satisfy
required parking offsite, subject to City Council approval. The Municipal Code requires
that parking be within 300 feet of the subject site and a written agreement be signed
that identifies the required amount of parking for the principal use. The approved
variance does not preempt Council authority of approving an agreement. When reviewing
the proposal for remote parking, the City has traditionally assessed the convenience and
use of the area for remote parking as meeting the City’s development standards.
The proposed remote parking site abuts 700 Douglas Avenue. The parking is physically
located 12 feet from the subject property. The applicant proposes to pave the current
gravel parking lot at 708 Douglas Avenue. The current gravel parking lot is non-
conforming in terms of its layout and landscaping. The Minor Site Development Plan
submitted by the owner proposes a compliant parking layout, paving plan, and
landscaping.
Both properties are owned by UT Prosim Revocable Family Trust. (see Attachment B -
Site Plan/Remote Parking at 700 & 708 Douglas Ave.). The applicant has signed the
Remote Parking Agreement that specifies the location of the spaces, number of spaces,
and the terms of the Agreement.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Approve the “Remote Parking Agreement” to provide the required six parking stalls
at 708 Douglas Avenue for the existing four-unit apartment complex at 700
Douglas Avenue.
2. Deny the “Remote Parking Agreement” to provide the required 6 parking stalls at
708 Douglas Avenue for the apartment complex and Guest Lodging use at 700
Douglas Avenue.
3. Refer this item to staff or the applicant for further information.
CITY MANAGER'S RECOMMENDED ACTION:
The subject sites are zoned RM with the Single-Family Conservation Overlay District,
which allows for apartment, one-family, and two-family dwellings on existing lots and
subject to development standards. However, remote parking is not an allowed activity for
these lots. The ZBA granted the variance by finding that all the criteria had been met for
a variance to allow for remote parking on 708 Douglas for the existing apartment buildings
at 700 and 708 Douglas subject to compliance with all parking lot and landscaping
standards.
The two properties currently are licensed rental properties and their status of conformity
with the Rental Code is unaffected by the proposed remote parking. The addition of
parking does improve the condition of the site at 708 Douglas, which informally, has
served as parking for both sites while they have been under common ownership. With
3
approval of the remote parking agreement, the use of the parking is exclusive to these
two properties and it is limited in benefit to the existing configuration of the apartment
buildings. Neither the approved variance nor proposed remote parking would allow for
redevelopment of the site with new apartment buildings that did not meet site
development standards for on-site parking.
Therefore, it is the recommendation of the City Manager that the City Council approve
Alternative #1, thereby approving the attached Remote Parking Agreement to provide
required parking at 708 Douglas Avenue for the apartment complex and Guest lodging
use at 700 Douglas Avenue.
4
Attachment A- Location Map
5
Attachment B- Remote Parking Agreement & Site Plan
6
7
8
1
ITEM # __22___
DATE: 09-22-20
COUNCIL ACTION FORM
SUBJECT: ASSET MANAGEMENT AGREEMENT / PIPELINE SERVICES
FOR POWER PLANT
BACKGROUND:
This contract is to hire a firm to provide energy management services. These services
include managing the City’s natural gas transactions and gas pipeline transportation
contracts. The company will serve as a bridge between the natural gas commodity
already under contract, the delivery services already under contract, and the load
management of the City’s actual gas needs.
This contract is to provide Asset Management Agreement (AMA)/Pipeline Services for
the period from October 1, 2020 through September 30, 2023. The contract includes a
provision that would allow the City to renew the contract for up to two additional one-year
terms.
On May 29, 2020, a Request for Proposals (RFP) was issued to thirteen firms. The RFP
was advertised on the Current Bid Opportunities section of the Purchasing webpage and
was also sent to three plan rooms. On June 26, proposals were received from three firms.
Members of an evaluation committee independently evaluated and scored each proposal
in two separate steps.
STEP 1:
In the first step, all three proposals were scored with respect to the following criteria:
• Experience in the electric generation and natural gas markets
• Customer Service (i.e. hours of operation)
• Ability to make adjustments when needed that will hold the City of Ames harmless
• Assets to provide services
• EMA terms of vendor’s agreement
• Cost to provide base services for managing the City of Ames’ natural gas needs
• Cost, if any, to provide additional services
Overall, there were 1,000 possible points available, with overall weighted scores being a
function of the aforementioned evaluation factors. Based on the results of the committee
members’ evaluations, the average scores for Step 1 were as follows:
2
Offerors Averaged Scores
Alliant Energy
Madison, WI 758
488
Omaha, NE 753
STEP 2:
The evaluation team next invited the three firms from Step 1 to participate in a virtual
interview. Each company included as many key members of their teams (especially the
team leader or project manager) as possible in the interview. The presentations were
evaluated and scored utilizing the following criteria:
• Knowledge and relevant experience of the team
• Commitment for the project
• Understanding of the scope of work that was provided required to manage the
City of Ames’ gas needs
• Quality and thoroughness of the presentation
Based on the results of the committee members’ evaluations, the scores for Step 2 are
as shown in the table below:
Offerors Averaged Scores
Alliant Energy
Madison, WI 82
79
Omaha, NE 78
Scores were assigned following the same process and formula described for the previous
phase, with a maximum possible cumulative score of 100 points.
Based on the average scores and a unanimous decision by the evaluation
committee, staff is recommending that the contract be awarded to Alliant Energy,
Madison, WI.
To accomplish the City’s needs, Alliant Energy has provided three separate agreements,
each providing a different service. These are (1) North American Energy Standards Board
(NAESB) agreement with Interstate Power and Light (Alliant’s Iowa-based company), (2)
North American Energy Standards Board (NAESB) agreement Special Provisions with
Interstate Power and Light, and (3) an Asset Management Agreement. Each agreement
is attached and is described in further detail below.
3
North American Energy Standards Board (NAESB)
This agreement is with the parent company which is Interstate Power and Light (IPL).
The NAESB is a standard contract which controls all transaction within the natural gas
industry.
North American Energy Standards Board (NAESB) Special Provisions
The special provisions allow each party to make specific changes to the wording of the
NAESB. Typically, the changes are based around the details of IPL procedure to
transactions (i.e. billing and gas transactions).
Asset Management Agreement (AMA)
This agreement manages (1) the pipeline capacity the City has under contract with
Northern Natural Gas Company, (2) the natural gas supply the City purchased from
Macquarie, and (3) the scheduling and balancing of our natural gas. “Balancing” involves
matching the amount scheduled with the amount consumed. Alliant (IPL’s parent
company) will charge the City of Ames $18,000 per year for the basic services.
It also outlines the terms and conditions when the actual amount of natural gas burned in
a day is less than 12,000 dekatherms. This can typically occur at times when Unit #8 is
down for maintenance. For these events, Alliant will sell or store the excess gas on behalf
of the City and credit the City the revenue.
Along with the terms and conditions when the actual amount of natural gas burned in a
day is greater than 12,000 dekatherms. For these events, Alliant will purchase both
additional natural gas and additional natural gas transport service on behalf of the
City and charge the City for the gas plus their adder. This can typically occur at peak
times in the summer when Unit #8 is operated at higher generation levels or when both
Unit #7 and Unit #8 are operating at the same time.
Under the AMA agreement, services are charged based on the price of the natural gas at
the time of purchase plus a fee. It is unclear at this time how much of these services will
be required each day. Therefore, staff is requesting that an amount not to exceed
$300,000 be approved so that staff, together with Alliant, can manage the daily gas needs
over the coming year. If the net purchases of additional gas approach this limit, staff will
return to City Council for additional purchasing approval at that time.
The approved FY 2020/21 operating budget currently includes $16,500,000 for the
purchase of natural gas to operate the power plant. The FY 2020/21 Electric Services
budget will include appropriate funding to cover these contracts.
4
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Award the three contracts described above to Alliant Energy, Madison, WI
beginning October 1, 2020 through September 30, 2023 with two additional one
year renewals, for AMA/Pipeline Services for the City of Ames in an amount not to
exceed $18,000 for the base services. In addition, authorize an amount not to
exceed $300,000 for the purchase of additional natural gas plus delivery as needed
to manage the day-to-day fuel needs of the power plant.
2. Approve one of the other companies who provided bids.
3. Reject all proposals and direct staff to coordinate the nominating and balancing of
the natural gas.
CITY MANAGER'S RECOMMENDED ACTION:
These three contracts provide Electric Services with a crucial service that will manage the
natural gas needed to operate the power plant and burn refuse derived fuel.
Therefore, it is the recommendation of the City Manager that the City Council adopt
Alternative No. 1 as stated above.
1
ITEM # 23
DATE: 9-22-20
COUNCIL ACTION FORM
SUBJECT: AMENDMENT TO FISCAL YEAR 2020/21 ADOPTED BUDGET FOR
CARRYOVERS FROM FISCAL YEAR 2019/20
BACKGROUND:
The Code of Iowa requires that city spending by program not exceed Council
approved budget amounts at any time during the fiscal year. To maintain this level
of compliance, the City’s budget is typically amended three times during the fiscal year.
The first amendment is submitted in the fall for carryovers of uncompleted projects from
the prior fiscal year. A second amendment is approved with the new fiscal year budget in
March, and a final amendment is prepared in May.
At this time, the fall amendment has been prepared for City Council approval. Each year
the City has capital projects and specific operating projects that either span fiscal years
or are delayed due to unforeseen circumstances. A summary is attached describing the
carryovers, which total $89,536,895.
Please note that all the projects and associated budgeted expenditures and
funding sources were approved by City Council as part of the fiscal year 2019/20
budget, but were not completed during the year. This amendment provides formal
Council authority to carry forward the appropriation for projects and other work
that will not be spent until fiscal year 2020/21.
Amending the budget for carryover amounts improves the ability of departments to
monitor project spending and for Finance staff to track budget compliance.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Adopt a resolution amending the fiscal year 2020/21 budget upwards by
$89,536,895 for carryover amounts from fiscal year 2019/20.
2. Refer this item to staff for information or adjustments to the amendments.
CITY MANAGER’S RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Amending the FY 2020/21 budget for carryover amounts from the FY 2019/20
budget early in the fiscal year will provide for improved budget monitoring and
tracking. It will also provide assurance that Council-approved projects and work
not completed in the prior year will not be delayed for spending authority.
Therefore it is recommended that City Council approve Alternative No. 1, thereby
adopting a resolution amending the fiscal year 2020/21 budget upwards by $89,536,895
for carryover amounts from fiscal year 2019/20.
CITY OF AMES, IOWA
2020/21
FALL BUDGET AMENDMENT
SUMMARY
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Expenditure Change Summaries…………….…………………………………………………………1
Explanation of Expenditure Changes…………………………………………………………………..3
Fund Summary..………………………………………………………………………..…………………6
Notice of Public Hearing Publication (Amendment of Current City Budget)………………………..8
1
EXPENDITURE CHANGES BY PROGRAM
Percentage
2020/21 2019/20 2020/21
Change
from
Program: Adopted Carryover Adjusted Adopted
Public Safety:
Law Enforcement 10,596,148 71,595 10,667,743 0.7%
Fire Safety 7,814,863 40,443 7,855,306 0.5%
Building Safety 1,670,718 - 1,670,718 0.0%
Animal Control 533,845 80,645 614,490 15.1%
Other Public Safety 917,344 - 917,344 0.0%
Public Safety CIP 1,375,000 1,350,750 2,725,750 98.2%
Total Public Safety 22,907,918 1,543,433 24,451,351 6.7%
Utilities: Electric Services 59,507,515 1,637,110 61,144,625 2.8%
Water and Pollution Control 8,555,217 25,450 8,580,667 0.3%
Water Distribution System 1,579,364 - 1,579,364 0.0%
Sanitary Sewer System 1,010,513 - 1,010,513 0.0%
Storm Water Management 835,795 - 835,795 0.0%
Resource Recovery 4,033,384 - 4,033,384 0.0%
Utility Customer Service 1,804,394 - 1,804,394 0.0%
Utilities CIP 32,456,100 43,913,026 76,369,126 135.3%
Total Utilities 109,782,282 45,575,586 155,357,868 41.5%
Transportation: Streets/Traffic System 6,410,670 165,322 6,575,992 2.6%
Transit System 12,085,908 - 12,085,908 0.0%
Parking System 1,006,263 - 1,006,263 0.0%
Airport Operations 154,021 - 154,021 0.0%
Transportation CIP 25,089,173 34,464,972 59,554,145 137.4%
Total Transportation 44,746,035 34,630,294 79,376,329 77.4%
Community Enrichment: Parks and Recreation 4,950,550 98,140 5,048,690 2.0%
Library Services 4,995,871 - 4,995,871 0.0%
Human Services 1,551,213
50,835 1,602,048 3.3%
Art Services 229,898 55,940 285,838 24.3%
Cemetery 187,793 - 187,793 0.0%
Housing Programs 1,088,778 - 1,088,778 0.0%
Economic Development 2,729,772 - 2,729,772 0.0%
Community Enrichment CIP 1,219,750 4,566,617 5,786,367 374.4%
Total Community Enrichment 16,953,625 4,771,532 21,725,157 28.1%
2
EXPENDITURE CHANGES
BY PROGRAM, continued
Percentage
2020/21 2019/20 2020/21
Change
from
Program: Adopted Carryover Adjusted Adopted
General Government: City Council 471,481 304,887 776,368 64.7%
City Clerk 443,797
20,000 463,797 4.5%
City Manager 782,757 - 782,757 0.0%
Public Relations 223,216 10,000 233,216 4.5%
Media Production Services 185,501
5,334 190,835 2.9%
Planning Services 887,461 111,032 998,493 12.5%
Financial Services 2,065,888 10,770 2,076,658 0.5%
Legal Services 849,598 6,976 856,574 0.8%
Human Resources 617,953 22,000 639,953 3.6%
Facilities 459,548 41,421 500,969 9.0%
General Government CIP 100,000 810,951 910,951 811.0%
Total General Government 7,087,200 1,343,371 8,430,571 19.0%
Debt Service: General Obligation Bonds 12,519,230 - 12,519,230 0.0%
Electric Revenue Bonds 969,306 - 969,306 0.0%
SRF Loan Payments 4,763,894 - 4,763,894 0.0%
Total Debt Service 18,252,430 - 18,252,430 0.0%
Internal Services: Fleet Services 4,739,095 884,603 5,623,698 18.7%
Information Technology 2,801,532 496,117 3,297,649 17.7%
Risk Management 2,577,215 - 2,577,215 0.0%
Health Insurance 10,036,440 - 10,036,440 0.0%
Internal Services CIP - 291,959 291,959
Total Internal Services 20,154,282 1,672,679 21,826,961 8.3%
Total Expenditures
Before Transfers 239,883,772 89,536,895 329,420,667 37.3%
Transfers 23,637,203 - 23,637,203 0.0%
Total Expenditures 263,520,975 89,536,895 353,057,870 34.0%
3
2020/21 AMENDMENTS BY PROGRAM
Public Safety Program $1,543,433
Public Safety operating expenses are being increased by $192,683 for delayed equipment and
capital purchases for the Police Department ($71,595), the Fire Department ($40,443), and Animal
Control ($80,645).
Funding of $1,350,750 is being carried over in the Public Safety CIP for the following projects:
•
•
•
Utilities Program $45,575,586
Operating expenses of $1,662,560 are being carried over in the Utilities program. Of this amount,
$1,637,110 is for delayed equipment purchases or projects at the Power Plant, Electric Distribution,
and Electric Engineering. The $25,450 balance in Utility operating carryovers is for a delayed
furniture replacement project at the Water Pollution Control Facility.
A total of $43,913,026 of Utility CIP project funds are being carried over for the following projects:
•
o Unit 8 superheat replacement
o Unit 8 turbine/generator overhaul
o Ash pond modifications
o Street light/line Relocations
o Unit 8 precipitator reconstruction
o Other Electric CIP projects
•
o Water distribution improvements
o Old Water Plant demolition
o East Ames water line extension
o N River Valley well field
o Other Water Utility CIP projects
•
o Sanitary sewer system improvements
o East Ames sewer system extension
o WPC cogeneration system
o WPC residuals handling improvements
o WPC digester improvements
o Other Sewer Utility CIP projects
•
•
•
•
4
Transportation Program $34,630,294
Operating expenses of $165,322 are being carried over in the Transportation program. The carryover
amount includes funding to upgrade software and equipment in Public Works Engineering and Traffic
Operations ($64,050) and for the Emerald Ash Borer (EAB) program ($101,272) in Right-of-Way
Maintenance.
Transportation CIP funding carryovers total $34,464,972 and consist of the following programs and
projects:
•
o Grand Avenue extension
o Concrete pavement improvements
o ISU Research Park Phase IV
o Arterial Street improvements
o Campustown improvements
o Asphalt pavement improvements
o Other street improvement projects
•
•
•
•
Airport improvement CIP projects will be reduced by $65,081 from the FY 2020/21 adopted budget.
Funding of $7,659 is being carried over to complete the Airport Master Plan, but the budget is being
reduced by $72,740 for expenses incurred in FY 2019/20 for the early start of the Airport electrical
vault project, which wasn’t scheduled to begin until FY 2020/21.
.
Community Enrichment Program $4,771,532
Community Enrichment operating expenses of $204,915 are being carried forward. Of this amount,
$98,140 is for Parks and Recreation projects and equipment, primarily funded through donations
($89,860). The remaining $8,280 in Parks and Recreation operating carryovers is for equipment for
the Community Center and the Auditorium. Funding of $50,835 is also being carried forward in
Human Services for University Community Childcare ($7,985) and Youth and Shelter Services
($42,850). The Public Art program is also carrying over $55,940 in funding from FY 2019/20.
Funding of $4,566,617 is being carried over for the following Community Enrichment CIP projects:
•:
o Homewood clubhouse
o Downtown Plaza
o Emma McCarthy Lee bridge o Bandshell improvements
o Municipal Pool improvements
o Brookside Park restrooms
o Inis Grove Park restrooms
o Hira Park development
o Other park and facility improvements
•
•
•
5
Funding of $21,000 has also been shifted in Parks and Recreation’s CIP budget from the Carroll
Marty Disc Golf Course improvement project to Homewood Golf Course to replace the pump for the
irrigation system. A budget of $54,000 still remains for improvements at the disc golf course.
General Government Program $1,343,371
Operating expenses of $532,420 are being carried forward in the General Government program. Of
this amount, $111,032 is funding to allow the Planning Department to hire outside professional
assistance for projects such as the Comprehensive Plan update. Funding is also being carried over
in the City Council budget for the Climate Action Plan ($130,000), the Internet Improvement Study
($125,000), and to complete the Greenhouse Gas Inventory ($1,800). Unspent contingency funds
of $32,587 are being carried forward, while another $10,000 in contingency funds have been shifted
to the Public Relations program for the Cyclones Care campaign. Unspent allocations to Main Street
Cultural District ($4,500) and Campustown Action Association ($11,000) have also been carried over
to FY 2020/21. Savings of $22,000 have been carried over in the Human Resources budget for
diversity training, as well as $20,000 in the City Clerk’s Office to upgrade the record management
system. The remaining balance of $64,501 in carryover funds is for delayed equipment purchases
and special projects for Media Production Services, Financial Services, Legal Services, and the
Facilities program.
The General Government CIP carryover of $810,951 is for the following projects:
•
•
•
Internal Services: $1,672,679
Internal Services has $1,380,720 in operating carryovers consisting of the following:
•
•
There is also an Internal Services CIP carryover of $291,959 for improvements at the Fleet
Maintenance facility.
Total Carryovers $89,536,895
6
2020/21 CARRYOVERS BY FUND
Percentage
2020/21 2019/20 2020/21 Change from
Fund: Adopted Carryover Adjusted Adopted
General Fund 39,892,553 2,862,682 42,755,235 7.2%
Special Revenue Funds: Local Option Sales Tax 9,199,216 4,817,109 14,016,325 52.4%
Hotel/Motel Tax 2,330,800 125,000 2,455,800 5.4%
Road Use Tax 8,573,296 2,872,363 11,445,659 33.5%
Public Safety Special
Revenues 90,800 60,116 150,916 66.2%
City-Wide Housing Programs 25,603 - 25,603 0.0%
CDBG Program 581,207 - 581,207 0.0%
HOME Program 481,968 - 481,968 0.0%
Employee Benefit Property Tax 2,241,742 - 2,241,742 0.0%
Police/Fire Retirement
75,000 -
75,000 0.0%
Parks & Rec Grants/Donations 15,150 178,225 193,375 1176.4%
Library Direct State Aid 14,500 14,500 0.0%
Library Friends Foundation 186,011 - 186,011 0.0%
Library Grants/Donations 6,121 - 6,121 0.0%
Utility Assistance 15,500 - 15,500 0.0%
Miscellaneous Donations - 8,289 8,289 Developer Projects - - - Economic Development - - - Tax Increment Financing (TIF) 1,393,681 - 1,393,681 0.0%
Total Special Revenue Funds 25,230,595 8,061,102 33,291,697 32.0%
Capital Project Funds: Special Assessments 315,559 - 315,559 0.0%
Street Construction 6,219,700 9,649,946 15,869,646 155.2%
Airport Construction
397,600 (65,081) 332,519 -16.4%
Park Development - 800,102 800,102 General Obligation Bonds 13,189,909 19,793,556 32,983,465 150.1%
Total Capital Project Funds 20,122,768 30,178,523 50,301,291 150.0%
Permanent Funds: Cemetery Perpetual Care - - - Furman Aquatic Center Trust 5,250 - 5,250 0.0%
Total Permanent Funds 5,250 - 5,250 0.0%
7
2018/19 CARRYOVERS BY FUND, continued
Fund:
Enterprise Funds: Water Utility/Construction 26,741,906 8,045,707 34,787,613 30.1%
Sewer Utility/Construction 12,090,655 12,771,628 24,862,283 105.6%
Electric Utility/Sinking 75,407,842 18,197,555 93,605,397 24.1%
Parking/Parking Reserve 1,128,987 - 1,128,987 0.0%
Transit 19,036,581 2,939,314 21,975,895 15.4%
Storm Water
Utility/Construction 5,362,331 4,700,617 10,062,948 87.7%
Ames/ISU Ice Arena 584,508 - 584,508 0.0%
Ice Arena Capital Reserve 100,000 61,608 161,608 61.6%
Homewood Golf Course 298,485 10,000 308,485 3.4%
Resource Recovery 4,845,002 35,480 4,880,482 0.7%
Total Enterprise Funds 145,596,297 46,761,909 192,358,206 32.1%
Debt Service 12,519,230 - 12,519,230 0.0%
Internal Service Funds: Fleet Services 2,402,395 - 2,402,395 0.0%
Fleet Reserve 2,336,700 1,176,562 3,513,262 50.4%
Information Technology 2,062,416
25,000 2,087,416 1.2%
Technology Reserve 468,092 471,117 939,209 100.7%
Shared Communications 271,024 - 271,024 0.0%
Risk Insurance 2,577,215 - 2,577,215 0.0%
Health Insurance 10,036,440 - 10,036,440 0.0%
Total Internal Service Funds 20,154,282 1,672,679 21,826,961 8.3%
Total Expenditures 263,520,975 89,536,895 353,057,870 34.0%
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
AMENDMENT OF FY2020-2021 CITY BUDGET
Form 653.C1
The City Council of Ames in STORY County, Iowa
will meet at
at 6:00 PM on 9/22/2020
(hour)(Date)
,for the purpose of amending the current budget of the city for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2021
(year)
by changing estimates of revenue and expenditure appropriations in the following programs for the reasons
given. Additional detail is available at the city clerk's office showing revenues and expenditures by fund type
and by activity.
Total Budget Total Budget
as certified Current after Current
or last amended Amendment Amendment
Revenues & Other Financing Sources
Taxes Levied on Property 1 31,743,937 0 31,743,937
Less: Uncollected Property Taxes-Levy Year 2 0 0 0
Net Current Property Taxes 3 31,743,937 0 31,743,937
Delinquent Property Taxes 4 0 0 0
TIF Revenues 5 1,713,308 0 1,713,308
Other City Taxes 6 11,205,339 0 11,205,339
Licenses & Permits 7 1,646,077 0 1,646,077
Use of Money and Property 8 14,377,142 0 14,377,142
Intergovernmental 9 35,097,915 0 35,097,915
Charges for Services 10 304,687,658 0 304,687,658
Special Assessments 11 0 0 0
Miscellaneous 12 593,193 0 593,193
Other Financing Sources 13 25,638,650 0 25,638,650
Tranfers In 14 17,104,285 0 17,104,285
Total Revenues and Other Sources 15 443,807,504 0 443,807,504
Expenditures & Other Financing Uses
Public Safety 16 21,515,574 192,683 21,708,257
Public Works 17 6,597,535 165,322 6,762,857
Health and Social Services 18 1,551,213 50,835 1,602,048
Culture and Recreation 19 9,704,493 154,080 9,858,573
Community and Economic Development 20 4,891,512 111,032 5,002,544
General Government 21 2,982,823 421,388 3,404,211
Debt Service 22 12,519,230 0 12,519,230
Capital Projects 23 23,841,259 40,006,967 63,848,226
Total Government Activities Expenditures 24 83,603,639 41,102,307 124,705,946
Business Type / Enterprises 25 318,972,254 48,434,588 367,406,842
Total Gov Activities & Business Expenditures 26 402,575,893 89,536,895 492,112,788
Transfers Out 27 17,104,285 0 17,104,285
Total Expenditures/Transfers Out 28 419,680,178 89,536,895 509,217,073
Excess Revenues & Other Sources Over
(Under) Expenditures/Transfers Out for Fiscal Year 29 24,127,326 -89,536,895 -65,409,569
Beginning Fund Balance July 1 30 744,281,241 0 744,281,241
Ending Fund Balance June 30 31 768,408,567 -89,536,895 678,871,672
Explanation of increases or decreases in revenue estimates, appropriations, or available cash:
There will be no increase in tax levies to be paid in the current fiscal year named above. Any increase in
expenditures set out above will be met from the increased non-property tax revenues and cash balances not
budgeted or considered in this current budget. This will provide for a balanced budget.
City Clerk/Finance Officer
Diane R. Voss
ITEM # ADDT’L ITEM
DATE: 09-15-20
COUNCIL ACTION FORM
SUBJECT: VACATION OF ALL EASEMENTS AT 5521 ALLERTON DR. (OUTLOT P,
SUNSET RIDGE SUBDIVISION 5TH ADDITION)
BACKGROUND:
A Final Plat for Sunset Ridge Subdivision 10th Addition will be presented for approval by City
Council on September 22, 2020. The 10th Addition includes Outlot S, which is a replatting of
Outlot P, Sunset Ridge Subdivision 5th Addition (5521 Allerton Dr.). Outlot P has a number
of easements over the entire Outlot (public utility, storm sewer, surface water flowage,
shared use path, and open space) that must be vacated prior to approval of the 10th Addition
due to the change in configuration of this outlot with the proposed 10th Addition. The new
10th Addition plat will include dedicating easements across all of Outlot S to continue
accommodating the needs provided by the current easements. From staff’s initial
assessment, there appears to be no utility users in the outlot. Prior to the public
hearing on September 22, 2020, staff will verify that all needs and potential easement
users are covered with the new Outlot S easements. A Location Map showing Outlot
P is attached.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Set the date of public hearing as September 22, 2020 for the vacation of the public
utility, storm sewer, surface water flowage, shared use path, and open space
easements at Outlot P, Sunset Ridge Subdivision 5th Addition (5521 Allerton Dr.).
2. Reconsider the vacation of the easements.
CITY MANAGER'S RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Vacating these easements will allow the developer to proceed with approval of the Final Plat
for Sunset Ridge Subdivision 10th Addition. Newly dedicated easements will assure the
continuing rights and uses of the current easements.
Therefore, it is the recommendation of the City Manager that the City Council adopt
Alternative No. 1 as noted above.
ATTACHMENT ‘A’
Location Map of Outlot ‘P’
1
ITEM # 24b_
DATE: 09-22-20
COUNCIL ACTION FORM
SUBJECT: MAJOR FINAL PLAT FOR SUNSET RIDGE SUBDIVISION TENTH
ADDITION
BACKGROUND:
The City’s subdivision regulations are included in Chapter 23 of the Municipal Code. The
Subdivision Code includes the process for creating or modifying property boundaries and
specifies whether any improvements are required in conjunction with the platting of
property. The creation of new lots is classified as either a major or minor subdivision, with
a major subdivision requiring a two-step platting process to finalize the creation of new
lots. The “Preliminary Plat” is first approved by the City Council and identifi es the layout
of the subdivision and any necessary or required public improvements.
Once the applicant has completed the necessary requirements, including provision of
required public improvements or provision of financial security for their completion, a “final
plat application” may then be submitted for City Council approval. After City Council
approval of the final plat, it must then be recorded with the County Recorder to become
an officially recognized subdivision plat. The final plat must be found to conform to the
ordinances of the City and any conditions placed upon the preliminary plat approval.
Hunziker Land Development, LLC and Sunset Ridge Property Owners Association
are requesting approval of a Major Final Plat for Sunset Ridge Subdivision, Tenth
Addition. The Sunset Ridge Subdivision is located north of Lincoln Way along the
western corporate limits of the city. The subject property is located north and west of
Allerton Road as shown on Attachment 1– Location Map.
The proposed subdivision includes 21 single-family lots and the replatting of “Outlot P” in
Sunset Ridge Subdivision Fifth Addition and “Outlot KK” in Sunset Ridge Subdivision
Sixth Addition which contains 21.71 acres (including 1.21 acres of existing public right-of-
way). “Outlot P” is owned by Sunset Ridge Property Owners Association; “Outlot KK” is
owned by Hunziker Land Development, LLC. Outlot “P” is the subject of a separate
easement vacation item on this same agenda.
Twenty-one (21) lots are proposed in the subdivision for single-family detached dwellings
as shown on Attachment 3 – Final Plat of Sunset Ridge Subdivision Tenth Addition. The
applicant is proposing two more lots along Allerton Avenue than what was
illustrated on the Preliminary Plat and Master Plan for the Subdivision. Attachment
2 illustrates the Preliminary Plat and Master Plan for the Subdivision. The placement of
the additional lots has been accomplished by narrowing the proposed single-family lots
and the connection from Ellston Avenue to Outlots “S” and “T”, thereby reducing the area
of open space. The proposed lot widths meet zoning standards and the s mall reduction
in open space does not affect the minimum 10% requirements of FS-RL.
2
However, the addition of the two lots does not align with the Preliminary Plat and
Master Plan documents and could be considered a Major Amendment per the
standards of Chapter 23. A Major Amendment triggers a new Preliminary Plat and
compliance with current subdivision standards. Notably, the sidewalk for the this
and subsequent additions would need to be widened from four feet to five feet. The
applicant has agreed to widen the sidewalk widths to 5 feet for the 10 th Addition
starting with Ellston Drive and extending to the west. Staff supports deferring the
processing of the Preliminary Plat for a Major Ame ndment until the next addition
due to the agreement of incorporating wider sidewalks as would be required with
a new Preliminary Plat. The applicant indicates that the Preliminary Plat and Master
Plan will be revised to reflect the layout change and change in lot count at the time
of submittal of the Eleventh Addition.
The development includes “Lot A” (1.21 acres) and “Lot B” (1.97 acres) which will be
dedicated to the City for public right-of-way:
• Lot A increases the width of the existing N. 500th Avenue right-of-way by 60 feet.
• Lot B includes:
o Allerton Drive extension westward with a 55’ right-of-way;
o Westfield Drive extension westward with a 66’ right-of-way;
o Ellston Avenue is a new north-south 55’ right-of-way that extends between and
past Westfield Drive and Allerton Drive.
Street extensions connect with existing streets and will not require additional temporary
access and turnaround areas on the end of the streets during the construction phase of
the development.
The existing blanket easement over all of “Outlot P” must be vacated before the Final Plat
is approved. “Outlot S” (2.44 acres) and “Outlot T” (1.78 acres) contain new blanket
easements which include: public utility, storm sewer, surface water flowage, shared use
path, open space, storm water detention, and storm water conveyance. “Outlot LL” (9.40
acres) is reserved for future development. The City will not be responsible for
maintenance of any of the outlots; “Outlot S” will be conveyed to the Sunset Ridge
Property Owners Association and the other properties will remain under Hunziker’s
ownership for the time being. Prior to the conveyance of “Outlot S,” Sunset Ridge Property
Owners Association must deed back “Outlot P” to Hunziker, or at least that portion of
Outlot P that is now included in Lot 3.
The Sunset Ridge Subdivision is bound by several Developer’s Agreements with
Hunziker Land Development Company, LLC, including a 2005 Agreement, a 2010
Amendment, and a 2012 Agreement. Staff believes that the developer has complied with
the terms of these agreements as they relate to the proposed parcels.
3
The Public Works Department confirms that existing public utilities, including water,
sanitary sewer, and storm water are currently being installed in the proposed subdivision
in compliance with the approved preliminary plat. Easements are provided with the final
plat, as required for public utility mains that will serve multiple lots and fire hydrants.
An Agreement for Public Improvements, and an Agreement for Sidewalk and Street Trees
have been prepared for City Council approval with the Final Plat. The Agreement for
Public Improvements identifies the need for financial security for the completion of certain
improvements and utilities including: erosion control (COSESCO), water mains, sanitary
sewers and drains, storm sewers and drains, manhole adjustmen ts, pavement,
pedestrian ramps, street lights, landscaping, and subgrade preparation.
Financial security, in the form of a Letter of Credit, has been submitted to the City in the
amount of $696,002.55, which covers the cost of the remaining improvements, in the
event the developer does not install the required improvements. Sidewalks and street
trees must be installed prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for an individual
lot; however, within three years after final plat approval, all sidewa lks must be installed
per the Agreement for Sidewalk and Street Trees. Financial security can be reduced by
the City Council as the required infrastructure is installed, inspected, and accepted by the
City.
Given that the preliminary plat will be revised for this Addition, the sidewalk width for
Ellston Avenue and west of Ellston Avenue on Westfield Drive and Allerton Drive must
meet the current subdivision standard of five feet. The five-foot sidewalk width is included
in the financial security schedule.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Approve the Final Plat of Sunset Ridge Subdivision Tenth Addition based upon the
findings that the Final Plat conforms to relevant and applicable design standards,
ordinances, policies, and plans with a signed Agreement for Public Improvements and
Agreement for Sidewalk and Street Trees with financial security and the requirement
to provide five foot sidewalks for the 10th Addition starting at Ellston Avenue and to
complete a revised Preliminary Plat and Master Plan reflecting the layout change and
change in lot numbers prior to approval of the 11th Addition.
2. Deny the Final Plat for Sunset Ridge Subdivision Tenth Addition, and direct the
applicant to proceed with a Major Amendment due to the increased lots or because
the development creates a burden on existing public improvements or creates a need
for new public improvements that have not yet been installed.
3. In the event the proposed easement vacation for Outlot P of the 5 th Addition is not
approved, this Final Plat should be tabled to update the final plat or complete the
vacation process.
4
CITY MANAGER’S RECOMMENDED ACTION:
City staff has evaluated the proposed final subdivision plat and determined that the Final
Plat for Sunset Ridge Tenth Addition conforms to the adopted ordinances and policies of
the City as required by Chapter 23 of the Ames Municipal Code with the agreed upon
widening of sidewalks and proposal to process a preliminary plat prior to the 11th Addition.
Additionally, the proposal can move forward with required changes to the master plan
and preliminary plat with the submittal of the planned next and final phase (Sunset Ridge
Eleventh Addition).
Therefore, it is the recommendation of the City Manager that the City Council accept
Alternative #1, thereby approving the Final Plat for Sunset Ridge Subdivision Tenth
Addition.
5
ATTACHMENT 1: LOCATION MAP
6
ATTACHMENT 2: SUNSET RIDGE PRELIMINARY PLAT & MASTER PLAN
7
(OVERALL SUBDIVISION PLAN)
Subject Area
8
ATTACHMENT 3: SUNSET RIDGE SUBDIVISION, 10TH ADDITION
9
ATTACHMENT 4: 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
DATE: 09-22-20
COUNCIL ACTION FORM
SUBJECT: 2018/19 SHARED USE PATH SYSTEM EXPANSION (TRAIL
CONNECTION SOUTH OF LINCOLN WAY)
BACKGROUND:
This program provides for the construction of shared-use paths on street rights-of-way,
adjacent to streets, and through greenbelts. This project will construct a path from Beedle Drive to Franklin Park along an alignment that was approved by the Ames Bicycle Coalition. Staff has been working with WHKS of Ames, Iowa, on this project to
complete plans and specifications, with a total estimated construction cost of $218,116.
Because this project funding source includes Iowa Department of Transportation (DOT)
Transportation Alternatives Program (TAP) funds, the project must follow Iowa DOT
letting policies and be let by the Iowa DOT. On September 15, 2020, bids for the project
were received as follows:
Bidder Bid Amount
Engineer’s Estimate $218,116.00
The table below shows the revenues and expenses for this project:
Revenue Expenses
Construction $ 264,834.60
2
Staff has evaluated the low bid from Howrey Construction, Inc., and determined that it is
acceptable. Although this low bid exceeds the Engineer’s Estimate for construction costs,
sufficient funding exists in the project budget to proceed with this construction contract.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. a. Accept the report of bids for the 2018/19 Shared Use Path System Expansion
(Trail Connection south of Lincoln Way).
b. Approve the final plans and specifications for this
project.
c. Award the 2018/19 Shared Use Path System Expansion (Trail Connection
south of Lincoln Way) to Howrey Construction, Inc. of Rockwell City, Iowa, in
the amount of $264,834.60, contingent upon receipt of Iowa DOT concurrence.
2. a. Accept the report of bids for the 2018/19 Shared Use Path System Expansion
(Trail Connection south of Lincoln Way).
b. Reject award and direct staff to modify the project for a future Iowa DOT bid
letting.
3. Do not proceed with the project at this time.
CITY MANAGER'S RECOMMENDED ACTION:
By awarding this project, it will be possible to provide an important multimodal connection
for residents in the area. 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
ST
A
T
E
A
V
E
DO
T
S
O
N
D
R
COY ST
BE
E
D
L
E
D
R
S
W
I
L
M
O
T
H
A
V
E
S
F
R
A
N
K
L
I
N
A
V
E
MARIGOLD DR
HARRIS ST
WOOD ST
APLIN RD
HI
L
L
T
O
P
R
D
STORY ST
S
S
H
E
L
D
O
N
A
V
E
HICKO
R
Y
D
R
LETTIE ST
HY
L
A
N
D
A
V
E
CA
M
P
U
S
A
V
E
HO
W
A
R
D
A
V
E
WI
L
M
O
T
H
A
V
E
FR
A
N
K
L
I
N
A
V
E
SU
N
F
L
O
W
E
R
D
R
CO
L
O
R
A
D
O
A
V
E
HUNT ST
COCHRANE PKWY
S
H
Y
L
A
N
D
A
V
E
MA
R
S
H
A
L
L
A
V
E
KNAPP STVI
L
L
A
G
E
D
R
FRONTAGE RD
MC
D
O
N
A
L
D
D
R
TR
A
I
L
R
I
D
G
E
R
D
MORNINGSIDE ST
BE
L
L
F
L
O
W
E
R
D
R
STORY ST
N 1 inch = 583 feet
BEYER CT
UNION DR
LINCOLN WAY
TRIPP ST
WEST ST
WOODLAND ST
COY ST
ST
A
T
E
A
V
E
DO
T
S
O
N
D
R
BE
E
D
L
E
D
R
HY
L
A
N
D
A
V
E
CA
M
P
U
S
A
V
E
SH
E
L
D
O
N
A
V
E
HICKO
R
Y
D
R
ARBOR ST
FR
A
N
K
L
I
N
A
V
E
S
W
I
L
M
O
T
H
A
V
E
S
F
R
A
N
K
L
I
N
A
V
E
MARIGOLD DR
HARRIS ST
WOOD ST
APLIN RD
HI
L
L
T
O
P
R
D
STORY ST
S
S
H
E
L
D
O
N
A
V
E
CR
A
N
E
A
V
E
LETTIE ST
ELLIS ST
HO
W
A
R
D
A
V
E
WI
L
M
O
T
H
A
V
E
WE
S
T
W
O
O
D
D
R
SU
N
F
L
O
W
E
R
D
R
CO
L
O
R
A
D
O
A
V
E
HUNT ST
COCHRANE PKWY
S
H
Y
L
A
N
D
A
V
E
MA
R
S
H
A
L
L
A
V
E
KNAPP ST
OL
I
V
E
R
A
V
E
VILLAGE DR
TR
A
I
L
R
I
D
G
E
R
D
FRONTAGE RD
HI
L
L
C
R
E
S
T
A
V
E
MC
D
O
N
A
L
D
D
R
MORNINGSIDE ST
BE
L
L
F
L
O
W
E
R
D
R
LA
T
I
M
E
R
L
N
STORY ST