HomeMy WebLinkAbout~Master - March 10, 2020, Regular Meeting of the Ames City Council Minutes MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE AMES CITY COUNCIL
AMES, IOWA MARCH 10, 2020
The Regular Meeting of the Ames City Council was called to order by Mayor John Haila at 6:00 p.m.
on March 10, 2020, in the City Council Chambers in City Hall, 515 Clark Avenue, pursuant to law.
Present were Council Members Gloria Betcher, Bronwyn Beatty-Hansen, Amber Corrieri, Tim
Gartin, Rachel Junck, and David Martin. Ex officio Member Devyn Leeson was also in attendance.
CONSENT AGENDA: Moved by Corrieri, seconded by Martin, to approve the following items on
the Consent Agenda.
1.Motion approving payment of claims
2.Motion approving Minutes of Special Meetings of February 18, 2020, and Regular Meeting
of February 25, 2020
3.Motion approving certification of Civil Service applicants
4.Motion approving ownership change for Class E Liquor License - Wal-Mart Store #749, 3105
Grand Avenue
5.Motion approving renewal of the following Beer Permits, Wine Permits, and Liquor Licenses:
a.Class C Liquor License with Outdoor Service and Sunday Sales - Sips and Paddy's Irish
Pub, 126 Welch Avenue - pending dram shop
b.Class E Liquor License with Class B Wine Permit, Class C Beer Permit (Carryout Beer),
and Sunday Sales - Wal-Mart Store #749, 3105 Grand Avenue
6.RESOLUTION NO. 20-105 approving appointments to various Boards and Commissions
7.RESOLUTION NO. 20-106 approving reallocation of an unfilled Coal Handler FTE to create
a temporary 11th Auxiliary Operator position
8.RESOLUTION NO. 20-107 approving policy for external requests to use U. S. Hwy 30/S.
Dayton Avenue light towers
9.RESOLUTION NO. 20-108 approving Conflict of Interest Waiver for Ahlers & Cooney Law
Firm to represent the Iowa Association of Municipal Utilities (IAMU)
10.Request for Spring Fest on Friday, April 3, 2020, with a rain date of April 10, 2020:
a.Motion approving blanket Temporary Obstruction Permit and blanket Vending License
for the closed area
b.RESOLUTION NO. 20-109 approving closure of Welch Avenue from 100 feet south of
the intersection of Chamberlain Street to Hunt Street from 1:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m.
c.RESOLUTION NO. 20-110 approving closure of 14 metered parking spaces in the
closed area from 1:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m.
11.Requests for Greek Week:
a.Greek Race on Sunday, March 29, 2020, with April 5, 2020, as rain date:
i.Motion approving blanket Temporary Obstruction Permit for the closed area from 9:00
a.m. to 1:00 p.m. on March 29
ii.RESOLUTION NO. 20-111 approving closure of Ash Avenue from Sunset Drive to
Gable Lane, Sunset Drive from Ash Avenue to Gray Avenue, and the portion of Pearson
Avenue adjacent the Greek Triangle from 9:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m.
b.Greek Week Olympics, Saturday, April 4, 2020, with April 5, 2020, as rain date:
i.Motion approving blanket Temporary Obstruction Permit for the closed area
ii.RESOLUTION NO. 20-112 approving closure of Sunset Drive; Ash Avenue from Gable
Lane to Knapp Street; Gray Avenue from Gable Lane to Greeley Street; Greeley Street;
Pearson Avenue from Sunset to Greeley; and Lynn Avenue from Chamberlain to Knapp
from 7:30 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.
12.Request from Campustown Action Association for Summerfest in Campustown on June 6:
a.Motion approving a 5-day Class B Beer License and Outdoor Service (June 5 - 9) for
Campustown Action Association, 304 Main Street
b.Motion approving blanket Temporary Obstruction Permit
c.Motion approving blanket Vending License
d.RESOLUTION NO. 20-113 approving waiver of Vending License fee
e.RESOLUTION NO. 20-114 approving closure of the 200 block of Welch Avenue and
Chamberlain Street from Welch Avenue to the exist of Chamberlain Lot Y from 7:00
a.m. and 10:00 p.m.
f.RESOLUTION NO. 20-115 approving the closure of parking spaces in the 200 block of
Welch Avenue on Chamberlain Street between Welch Avenue and the Chamberlain Lot
Y exit, Welch Lot T, and Chamberlain Lot Y from 7:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m.
g.RESOLUTION NO. 20-116 approving waiver of parking meter fees for the closed area
h.RESOLUTION NO. 20-117 authorizing access to City-owned electrical outlets and
approving a waiver of fees for electricity used
13.RESOLUTION NO. 20-118 approving preliminary plans and specifications for Power Plant
Maintenance Services Contract; setting April 15, 2020, as bid due date and April 28, 2020, as
date of public hearing
14.RESOLUTION NO. 20-119 approving preliminary plans and specifications for CyRide 2020
Pavement Improvements - Middle School Turnaround Project; setting April 2, 2020, as bid due
date and April 14, 2020, as date of public hearing
15.RESOLUTION NO. 20-120 approving purchase of two Ford Escape SE Hybrid 4x4 vehicles
for the Administrative Division for CyRide from Ames Ford Lincoln of Ames, Iowa in the
amount of $53,840
16.RESOLUTION NO. 20-121 approving contract and bond for South Grand Avenue Extension
(0.1 miles North of South 16th Street North 0.54 Miles to South 5th Street)
17.RESOLUTION NO. 20-122 approving contract and bond for Homewood Golf Course
Clubhouse Project
18.RESOLUTION NO. 20-123 approving Plat of Survey for 2125 Greeley Street
19.RESOLUTION NO. 20-124 approving Plat of Survey for 224 Ash Avenue
Roll Call Vote: 6-0. Motions/Resolutions declared carried/adopted unanimously, signed by the
Mayor, and hereby made a portion of these Minutes.
PUBLIC FORUM: Linaya Wright and Maddi McCullough, Community Outreach Co-Directors for
the Iowa State Dance Marathon explained that Dance Marathon is the largest student-run organization
on the Iowa State Campus. The money they raise goes toward the University of Iowa Stead Family
Children’s Hospital. In the past two years, the Iowa State Dance Marathon made a promise to the
hemodynamics program at the Stead Family Hospital, which helps neonatal heart and lungs, to raise
$700,000 over the span of two years. Ms. Wright stated that they met that goal last year by raising
$340,000 at its final event of the year. Ms. McCullough explained that they wanted to extend an
2
invitation to the Council to attend their “Tealgate” event on October 3, 2020. The event is a tailgate
for an away game where they will have live music, food trucks, games, and the Iowa State football
game played live on a jumbo screen. She mentioned that their goal is to spread their mission to the
Ames Community. Ms. Wright commented that they would look forward to any partnership that the
City of Ames would have with Dance Marathon, and would like to engage with a broader audience to
spread the mission of the Iowa Stead Family Children’s Hospital. Ms. Wright asked the Council if they
thought of any ways that the ISU Dance Marathon could spread their mission or any businesses they
should reach out to for sponsorships, to send them an email with that information. A handout was given
to the Council Members that included the Tealgate information, their Big Event date of January 23,
2021, and Maddi McCullough and Linaya Wright’s email addresses. Council Member Gartin inquired
as to how many students were involved in the Dance Marathon. Ms. McCullough stated that last year
there were a little over 300 “Miracle Makers,” who are students who raise money and come to the
event, and then over 100 committee members and executive members.
Brett McLain, 1431 Douglas Avenue, Ames, stated he lives on the corner of 15th Street and Douglas.
He noted it was a big surprise to hear about the installation of sidewalks on 15th Street. Mr. McLain
mentioned he was invited to a meeting on January 30, 2020, which he attended, and noted it was a brief
meeting and blueprints were shown and nothing indicated sidewalks would be put in. After that meeting
no further communication was received until February 25 at 4:45 p.m. when he received a call from
City staff letting him know that the Council was going to speak about putting in sidewalks along 15th
Street at the City Council meeting that night. He was unable to make it to that meeting, and that is why
he wanted to speak tonight. Mr. McLain stated he is not sure what happened between the meeting on
January 30 until the meeting on February 25, and wondered if there was a “Plan A” and a “Plan B” and
all they were shown on the 30th was “Plan A.” He urged the Council to reverse the decision they made
on February 25 to install sidewalks on 15th Street, as no one on 15th street would like to have sidewalks
installed. He noted that the sidewalks would be relatively close to the houses, there would be a cost
to remove some of the trees, more snow removal, and not sure if the sidewalks would be utilized as the
streets are wide. The residents on 15th Street would like to work with City Council and would like to
have better communication going forward. A public forum was suggested to have the residents come
and speak regarding their concerns about the installation of sidewalks.
Merlin Pfannkuch, 1424 Kellogg Avenue, Ames, stated that he was unhappy with the process used to
foist sidewalks potentially on 14th and 15th Street for the requirement of connectivity, and it was
disheartening that most of the Council seemed unable to grasp what he is complaining about. He noted
that the attitude seems to be to “suck it up, and deal with it.” Mr. Pfannkuch thanked the Mayor and
Council Member Betcher for coming to the neighborhood to discuss the situation and to Council
Member Gartin for coming by as well. He acknowledged that the City can put in sidewalks in the rights-
of-way if that is what they want. Mr. Pfannkuch stated that the map that was shown at the last meeting
was not accurate and contrary to what the map showed. The residents do not want a sidewalk on the
south side of 15th Street. He also noted that Mr. Sayre, City Civil Engineer, told him that he never made
contact with Sherry Dickerson, who lives across the street from 1429 Kellogg Avenue, partially because
her lot had no large trees, yet the map showed her as consenting to a sidewalk. He doesn’t see what else
can be done besides separating the street resurfacing from whatever else may need to be done. Mr.
Pfannkuch stated that the way this item was handled by Council, pulling it from the Consent Agenda
and then deciding that night, was not adequate. He mentioned that he was told that the Council will not
3
reconsider their vote, and it was satisfactory since it would have been how they would have voted
regardless if any of the neighbors appeared before the Council. He noted that the processes used by
Council need extensive reviewing for adequacy and fairness, and he is glad the Mayor is at least looking
at the City’s processes.
STAFF REPORT REGARDING MICROMOBILITY (MOTORIZED SCOOTERS): Assistant
City Manager Deb Schildroth stated that at the June 18, 2019, City Council meeting, the Council
directed staff to investigate how other cities have regulated micromobility transportation to
determine if there are ordinances that may be considered to offer this type of transportation in Ames.
Ms. Schildroth stated that there was a committee assembled that included Iowa State University
representatives, as well as City staff that included: Law Enforcement, Legal Staff, Parks &
Recreation, Transportation, the Traffic Engineer, and also the ISU Parking Division. She explained
that the committee pulled information together about what information had been heard or known
about this mode of transportation. The committee then started looking at what were some of the
positives and the concerns. The positives would be job creation, address a transportation need, some
reduction in carbon emissions over time, and compatibility with the goal of supporting multi-modal
forms of transportation. The concerns the committee had were the safety of the rider and public,
scooters being left randomly throughout the City on sidewalks and streets, where the scooters could
be ridden, who is going to handle enforcement, and that it may replace the physical activity that
comes with walking or bicycling.
Assistant City Manager Schildroth mentioned that she did have a discussion with a scooter company,
Bird Scooters. Bird Scooters was able to provide what they were doing in some other communities.
The company is working with city officials and university officials on what makes sense in that
community in regards to where the scooters are ridden, parked, safety, messages to residents and
students, and liability. Bird Scooters is also looking at geo-fencing and other options as to how
compliance can be forced. She noted that the company does offer a pilot project approach to see
what works for the community and what needs to be worked on. Outreach was done to five
university communities to collect and review examples of policies and ordinances that were being
used. When it comes to contracting with the scooter companies and longer-term policy development,
there are several issues for the City Council to consider:
1.Number of scooter companies allowed: The number of scooter companies allowed in the
community varied from city to city based on anticipated use determined by the city.
2.Number of scooters: The number of scooters allowed to be deployed is outlined in Agreements
that each city has with the scooter companies. Cities consider population, areas of operation,
and the number of intended riders when determining the number of scooters allowed.
3.Permitting: In addition to Operation Agreements with the scooter companies, all but one city
had implemented some type of permit requirement.
4.Areas and hours of operations and parking: The majority of the communities use geo-fencing
to control the areas where scooters can go, and the scooters are required to be parked upright
in an orderly manner on hard surfaces, such as existing sidewalk extension area, and cannot
obstruct the sidewalk for pedestrian travel, ADA ramps, fire hydrants, utility poles or box, etc.
Scooter operations varied from 7:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. Some of the scooters have lights and
4
reflective tape.
5.Policy and ordinance enforcement: Police and/or Code Enforcement staff are commonly used
in all of the communities to enforce scooter-related ordinances. The cities all shared situations
in which scooters were impounded. The issue of liability around the scooter use in the
community is being handled by including indemnity clauses in the Agreements between the
cities and scooter companies.
Council Member Martin stated that Iowa State University is opposed to having scooters on Campus,
and the ISU Student Government, in 2018 voted against it in some measure. He inquired as to if
there was more information as to why the Student Government voted against scooters. Ms.
Schildroth explained that she believed it was Bird Scooters that reached out to the Student
Government and the Student Government passed a resolution that they did not support or have
interest in scooters being in campus at that point in time. She noted that the representatives on the
committee also echoed that ISU Administration was not interested in having the scooters on Campus
at this time. Council Member Martin asked for clarification on what was considered “Campus” and
if it included the streets and sidewalks around Campus. Ms. Schildroth stated that was correct.
Council Member Corrieri inquired if ISU had an opinion about other university properties around
campus and how they could be used in those area. Ms. Schildroth stated they did not, but that would
be an enforcement issue.
Council Member Betcher asked if whether Bird Scooters was asked if there were any instances
where Bird Scooters was interested in going into a community, but the university said they would
not want them on Campus; therefore, they did not bring its business there. Ms. Schildroth stated
there were those situations, and then also times where the cities cancelled the contract and Bird
Scooters had to leave the city. Council Member Betcher also inquired whether, if ISU isn’t interested
in pursuing the scooters, would the Bird company still be interested in coming to Ames. Ms.
Schildroth stated there are limitations when there is not connectivity between the City and the
University. The thought is that there are areas where students could ride the scooters, but the
utilization would not be the same. Council Member Betcher inquired as to how much the other cities
had expended on enforcement. Assistant City Manager Schildroth explained she did not have that
information available for enforcement, but when a scooter company had applied for a permit or a
license there is an initial fee in some cities of $10,000 and then a per scooter fee is charged. Council
Member Junck asked if it would be possible to have the companies do their own enforcement instead
of it being City staff. It was noted that could be done as part of the Cities Agreement with the
scooter company. Ms. Schildroth noted that she was told that it was really important to make sure
the scooter company has a local representative and not a 1-800 number.
Council Member Martin stated that in other communities, scooter use is starting to replace walking
and other forms of transportation, and he wanted to know if there were any studies that show what
modes of transportation are being replaced through scooter use in similar communities. Ms.
Schildroth explained she had not seen any of those studies, and the only knowledge she has is
through communication with the communities and what they have observed through utilization.
5
Council Member Betcher questioned if the other communities were asked what their impression was
regarding the success of their ordinance. Ms. Schildroth explained that many of them had ordinances
put in place, and have made changes, but what they could tell from conversations with the
communities, it was similar to putting a Band-Aid on issues that keep coming up and with the data
they are getting from the scooter companies will be able to make better policy and ordinance
decisions. She noted it is more of a fun factor right now and hasn’t really seen any real
transportation needs that it has addressed.
Fred Vogtlin, 819 Idaho Avenue, Ames, explained that he noticed this topic was going to be
discussed tonight and red flags came up in his mind. He was concerned about safety, especially
lighting at night, and recommends if having the scooters to allow them only during sunrise to sunset.
He noted that within the last 12-15 months he was glad to have his wife with him in the car as he
could have run over a couple of bicyclists that had no lighting or reflective clothing on. Mr. Vogtlin
stated he travels along Lincoln Way a lot and there are a lot of kids with skateboards. He explained
that along Lincoln Way, there are semi-trucks unloading in the morning and are parallel parking and
it is a mess. Mr. Vogtlin commented that he wasn’t sure if the City of Ames had ever had a
conversation with ISU about sharing an expense to create walkovers.
Mayor Haila asked the Council if there was any interest in continuing this conversation and having
a trial period, and if so, they would need to discuss policies, but if there is not an interest they can
move on.
Ex-officio Devyn Leeson stated he would like to clear one thing up regarding how students are
concerned. The decision that was made in 2018 from the Student Government, he felt that the main
concerns were that of safety, accessibility, blocking walkways, congestion, and uncertainty. He
explained that if you ask a group of people if they like an idea without giving any details, they are
going to assume the worst. Mr. Leeson stated if the City was going to develop a pilot program and
then go back to Student Government with the restrictions that have been placed on the scooter etc.,
there would be a lot more support with the Student Government. He noted that with students he has
heard only support for scooters as they think it would be fun. Mayor Haila asked Mr. Leeson if the
opinion of the overwhelming support for the scooters would apply even if the scooters were not
allowed on Campus. Mr. Leeson stated that off Campus there would be an overwhelming support,
and on Campus there would be a lot more support if there were restrictions and limitations already
in place, and to see a pilot program in place first. Ex-officio Leeson stated one of the most
compelling issues was the hindrance on students with disabilities and how they would be affected.
Council Member Beatty-Hansen stated this item is something that she brought up. She noted that
she is still in favor of bringing this to Ames and she understands everyone’s concerns about safety
and understands the risks, but she also thinks that there is a lot of really smart use of data, and
controls to try to minimize the risk and nuisances with the risk of scooters. Ms. Beatty-Hansen
explained that she thinks Iowa State students would use them a lot, but believes there is a big part
of the community that would use the scooters as well. She noted that ISU is even restrictive on
where they can have a bicycle and she hopes that maybe down the road ISU would change its mind.
6
Ms. Beatty-Hansen still feels these scooters would be fun.
Council Member Gartin asked if Council Member Beatty-Hansen had received any feedback from
the Ames Bicycle Coalition as they would be a competing use for the multi-use trails. Ms. Beatty-
Hansen stated she did not.
Council Member Betcher stated that the University’s Council, the National Leagues of Cities, has
had presentations about scooters, conversations with Bird Scooters, and have heard from
communities. One thing they have heard is that visitors love to use the scooters, but the people who
live in the communities are left with the problems. Ms. Betcher stated that she believes this is due
to enforcement issues, and while this has improved some, due to geo-fencing, there are still scooters
that are left all over that still need to get impounded, etc. She explained that the enforcement has
been more reactive than solving the problem of scooters being left on sidewalks or where they don’t
belong. Council Member Betcher stated that they did get at least one email from a citizen explaining
that the reduction in carbon emissions is a false argument due to the short life span and what goes
into the production of the scooters. She noted that it is difficult to do a small pilot program if a
community wants only 150 scooters. Ms. Betcher stated she is very hesitantly supporting this
because she has heard too much about the problems elsewhere, and hasn’t heard enough about the
benefits.
Council Member Corrieri stated she agrees with Council Member Beatty-Hansen to try a pilot
program as there have been lessons learned in other communities and the technology has improved
to add restrictions and other things that can be done to mitigate some challenges. She noted that she
had several people come by her office today asking her to support the need for scooters in the
community.
Council Member Martin stated he is thinking about the policy pros and cons. The main pro to having
scooters is they are fun; however, there are significant risks associated with a program like this one.
Mr. Martin explained that one thing that would help really push to having a pilot program would be
if the Council was able to fully show that the presence of scooters in the community would really
reduce the percentage of solo car trips in town, but that information is not available. He explained
that scooter rental companies have been around for a while and he would have thought there would
be more data available that would show a benefit. Council Member Martin stated that if the Council
proceeds with a program, the City would be entering into a partnership with the scooter company.
He mentioned that when he reviewed some of the contracts that the companies have with their
customers, he is not impressed and doesn’t feel it would be a good benefit to the community.
Council Member Gartin stated he is concerned about what happens to the scooters when they are not
properly placed. He stated he was in San Antonio for a conference and the scooters were everywhere,
and he had asked the city staff in San Antonio how they dealt with it and was told they are having
a hard time getting people to put away the scooters. He doesn’t want to change the look of the
community when they are left everywhere. Council Member Gartin explained that he is very
concerned about how the scooters will interface with the walkers, runners, and cyclists on the bike
7
trails. He noted he may be supportive of this later, but at this time he is having trouble getting
behind the idea.
Council Member Junck stated she would be supportive of having a pilot program, but she is not sure
if it would work in Ames as it is a smaller community compared to other cities that use them. She
pointed out that Iowa has long winters and the scooters wouldn’t be used during this time, and the
question about how that would be handled has not come up or has been answered yet. Ms. Junck
stated that a lot of the policy questions with enforcement and geo-fencing could be the answer. She
would be interested in doing a pilot program with limiting the number of scooters and the number
of companies that can come into Ames to start. By doing so the Council can understand how the
ordinance, polices, and enforcement will work.
Council Member Beatty-Hansen explained that she is supportive of a pilot program with heavy
controls in place.
Council Member Betcher stated that the Council have not discussed how having the scooters in the
city will affect people with disabilities, and run into scooters that are not supposed to be there,
whether in a wheelchair, blind, or any other mobility challenge.
Mayor Haila inquired if any of the other communities had ever made the decision to terminate an
Agreement with a scooter company, and if so what happened. Ms. Schildroth explained that the early
Agreements were terminated with a couple of the companies, and the communities followed the
termination clause, and then contracted with another company. She noted she can get more
information if needed, but she got the sense that once the scooters were in the community they were
there to stay. Mayor Haila commented that he had heard from one person that stated it was hard to
get a scooter company to leave.
Mayor Haila explained that he is trying to envision where the scooters would be ridden to and from
if they can’t go on Campus. Council Member Beatty-Hansen mentioned she thinks the perfect use
for the scooters would be from Campustown to Downtown or student living to Downtown. She
noted that the City of Ames has two separate business districts that often create a divide, but a
scooter ridden down 6th Street would be a path the scooters could take.
Council Member Betcher stated that if the Council voted “No,” it doesn’t prevent Bird or any other
company from coming in. Council Member Corrieri commented that is correct unless the Council
banned them by an ordinance. Council Member Betcher asked if an ordinance needs to be in place
regardless if a contract is done with a scooter company for a pilot program. City Attorney Mark
Lambert stated that any company could come in, but they would have to set up on private property
as they wouldn’t be able to set up in the rights-of-way. He commented that the City could put
something in place to ban scooters. Ms. Betcher mentioned that she is not suggesting banning
scooters, but asked if the City would still need ordinances in place because of the number of personal
electric scooters. Council Member Betcher wanted to clarify if the Council was voting to partner
8
with someone to do a pilot program or voting to see if they need to put an ordinance in place for
electronic scooters. Ms. Beatty-Hansen stated that this vote would be whether or not the Council is
interested in a pilot program, which would be coming up with an ordinance, but if a motion fails to
do a pilot program, the Council would still want to make a motion to come up with a policy for
personal scooters.
Mayor Haila asked City Attorney Mark Lambert to explain what the City’s role would be in a pilot
program. Mr. Lambert stated that with a pilot program, a Request for Proposals (RFP) would be sent
out and a company would be selected to set up its services and see how it goes. Council Member
Betcher asked if the contracts would be viewed as a partnership. Attorney Lambert mentioned that
he had not looked at the contracts with the other companies yet, but his understanding is that the City
would permit a company to operate in the City. Ms. Schildroth noted that there would be a
permitting process, but the Agreements would cover the hours of operation, parking, deployment
locations, data sharing, etc. Council Member Betcher explained that she is trying to figure out the
relationship between the City and a scooter company as to if it is a partnership or not. Mr. Lambert
stated that the City would probably have a contract with a company that would have stipulations.
Moved by Beatty-Hansen, seconded by Corrieri, to direct staff to pursue the development of a pilot
program for motorized scooters.
Vote on Motion: 3-3. Voting Aye: Corrieri, Junck, Beatty-Hansen. Voting Nay: Betcher, Gartin,
Martin. Motion failed.
Moved by Beatty-Hansen, seconded by Betcher, to direct staff to come back with a list of topics for
a micromobility ordinance.
Council Member Gartin mentioned he would like to reach out to the Ames Bicycle Coalition, as a
courtesy, to show a draft of the micromobility ordinance for their input.
Vote on Motion 6-0. Motion declared carried unanimously.
Council Member Martin asked if the City’s Ordinance would make it clear that it would prevent a
company from doing ride-share commerce by leaving things in the rights-of-way. City Attorney
Lambert explained that nothing can be left in the right-of-way without the City’s permission. City
Manager Steve Schainker mentioned that the wording will be tricky.
STAFF REPORT REGARDING LAND USE POLICY PLAN REQUEST FOR PROPERTY
LOCATED AT 802 DELAWARE AVENUE: Planning and Housing Director Kelly Diekmann
explained that at the January 28, 2020, City Council meeting, the Council referred to staff a request
submitted by Justin Dodge with Hunziker Companies seeking to change the land use for the property
at 802 Delaware Avenue from Low-Density Residential to Medium-Density Residential. The
property is approximately .75 acres and accessed from Delaware Avenue. The Land Use Policy Plan
map shows this particular site and the immediately surrounding area as Low-Density Residential.
The property is currently zoned Residential Low-Density (RL), which allows for only single-family
9
residential uses.
The site is currently vacant with single-family homes to the north and south and a mix of two-family
and single-family homes to the west. The two-family homes are allowed as “Pre-existing” with RL
zoning and the nearest multi-family property is located approximately two blocks to the north.
Director Diekmann explained that what the real issue comes from the conversation about the Ames
Plan 2040 and what is infill for the future of Ames, and is that something that the City will be
looking at in the future. He noted that the word “infill” does not exist in Chapter 2 in the Land Use
Policy Plan (LUPP) until it was added with the Lincoln Corridor Plan. The idea of infill outside of
a larger sub-area plan is not really a notion that is included in the current Plan. This has been a
planned discussion as part of the Ames Plan 2040, but currently the LUPP does not give any
indication of how to address this issue. Mr. Diekmann stated that if the Council does move forward,
he would advocate for a Minor Amendment process.
Council Member Gartin commented that there has been consensus regarding infill from Council
about making it a priority. Council Member Beatty-Hansen stated she would feel the same way and
this would be a good opportunity for getting a little more density. She does want to be careful and
trust that the City will get the townhomes that are planned for the property. City Manager Steve
Schainker explained that the Council would not be able to do that at this time, but when the request
to rezone comes through then the Council could require a contract rezoning. Mr. Diekmann stated
that they could do that, but as they go through the process, they are going to learn more of how all
the regulations would apply to a site like this one. Council Member Beatty-Hansen just wanted to
clarify that there would be a step later that the Council would be able to require the townhomes. Mr.
Diekmann confirmed that was correct. Director Diekmann explained that the process would start
with the Council approving the initiation of the LUPP Amendment and then the property would
change to Medium-Density Residential; this will apply to the map and will allow the property owner
to apply for a medium-density rezoning. The medium-density rezoning allows for single-family
attached, which is individual lots for townhomes; however, there are minimum density standards,
set-backs, and other things about site work that will come into play, and how that will turn out with
the project has yet to be determined. Mr. Schainker inquired as to what new techniques are in the
new Plan that would facilitate a circumstance like this one. Mr. Diekmann stated the most likely tool
would be to not have a Planned Residence Development (PRD), which is a large scale planned
development, but have some idea of a small PUD or a small planned development permit that is not
a rezoning, but some kind of permit that would give some flexibility for attached housing.
Mayor Haila noted that there are duplexes across the street and there are probably not that many lots
in Ames where there is a similar situation. He is concerned that townhomes will be put up in single-
family areas, surprising the residents. Mr. Diekmann stated this is something that still needs to be
discussed. Mayor Haila wanted to know if the Ames 2040 Plan would give more tools in the toolbox
to work with instances such as this one. Mr. Diekmann stated the Ames 2040 Plan will not give the
rezoning tool, but will give the policy to support the zoning tool. Mr. Schainker asked, if the tool is
going to be made available later, would Mr. Diekmann recommend moving forward on this request
10
or waiting until that tool is available. Mr. Diekmann stated he has not worked through the site with
the developer at all so he would be speculating about what would or would not work.
Council Member Betcher stated she is concerned about outreach, especially after the comments made
earlier during Public Forum; and in this case, there has been no outreach. Mr. Diekmann explained
that there is no outreach that could be done at this point, but the process does still have a public
hearing with the Planning and Zoning Commission and the meeting with City Council at the LUPP
level and then again with the rezoning and subdivision. He noted there will be plenty of time for
feedback from the neighborhood.
Council Member Gartin stated that his support for this project would be different depending on
where it is, but this location is unique with North Dakota on the east side, access to transportation,
and the higher density in the general vicinity. He noted that he gets comments all the time from
citizens asking for more townhomes.
Council Member Corrieri explained that the building type is a good discussion and how people view
townhomes is very different from how an apartment building is perceived. Mayor Haila agreed that
the whole spectrum of going from low density to medium density is a big change, and the need to
have some ironclad details on the process is expected.
Mayor Haila opened public comment.
Justin Dodge, 105 S. 16th Street, Ames, Hunziker Companies, stated he hoped the Council saw his
letter he emailed yesterday. He mentioned that when transitioning from a single-family home to
townhomes, he wanted to reference a location off of Mortensen on Big BlueStem Court. There are
two separate townhome projects that are flanked all the way around by single-family homes. Mr.
Dodge explained when looking at the townhomes, he thought they are unique and do get bought up
really quick. He explained that this would be a great test case to help the City find what kind of tool
is needed for future infill and that going through this process may help.
Public input was closed when no one else came forward.
Council Member Betcher stated she wished there was more certainty about the project that is going
to be put on this location, but if it is not possible to put a townhome there, and the property has been
rezoned, they could put anything on the property. Mr. Diekmann stated that at the rezone stage the
Council can ask for certainty. He commented that once they get to the rezoning stage knowing that
the Council is expecting some certainty, he is 100% sure that the applicant will be in with staff to
talk through what their choices are knowing they will never get a rezone without a buildable idea.
Mayor Haila noted that the Staff Report gave two options and inquired if those were still the two
options that Mr. Diekmann would recommend to Council. Director Diekmann stated that a third
option would be to create a rezoning tool and avoid the Land Use Policy Plan Amendment process,
if that is what the Council would prefer. He stated that Option 1 or 2 would be ideal for the property
11
owners as those tools are already in place.
Moved by Gartin, seconded by Junck, to move Option 2; that directs staff to initiate an LUPP
Amendment to Medium-Density Residential.
Council Member Martin asked if it made sense that the Council should ask for more specifics about
the project considering the Council is indicating that when the project gets to the rezoning stage they
want to have some control to make sure it comes out acceptable. He asked if it would make sense
to ask the applicant to see something informally before they make a decision on an LUPP
Amendment. Mr. Diekmann stated that the Council can defer action on this item and ask the
applicant to visit with staff about a preliminary review. Mr. Martin inquired whether the Council did
ask for more information would it save any work for the Planning Staff. Mr. Diekmann stated it
would not; it would just reorder it.
Council Member Betcher explained that she will be voting “No” on this item, but not because she
doesn’t support infill. It will be because she prefers the idea of developing a tool that is going to be
used across the City opposed to rezoning one piece of land.
Vote on Motion: 5-1. Voting Aye: Beatty-Hansen, Corrieri Gartin, Junck, Martin. Voting Nay:
Betcher. Motion declared carried.
PLANNING & HOUSING DEPARTMENT WORK PLAN UPDATE: Planning and Housing
Director Kelly Diekmann explained that it had been about 18 months since the Council had reviewed
the Planning and Housing Work Plan. In that time, staff has started working on the Ames 2040 Plan
and the Council recently adopted new Values and Goals that changed certain Council priorities. The
Staff Report shows the items that the Council put on a committed list in 2018, and then the rest are
considered the “parking lot” list. He noted that based on the committed project list and the Councils
goals, he is not advocating to start another large initiative. He noted that if the Council Members
didn’t like where he placed an item on the Work Plan, they should let him know to move it up or
down.
Council Member Gartin noted that, when looking at the non-prioritized list, there are some items that
he no longer has an interest in. Council Member Corrieri questioned items listed that are four to five
years old and have not been done yet, whether there really is a need to keep it.
Council Member Betcher stated that the two older ones are about the Greek houses and if the
Council is reconsidering their incentives and revitalization then the review of demolition criteria
relating to life cycle evaluation, which is sustainability are more timely now than they were in the
past. She stated that she is adamant about leaving those two items on the list as a reminder that they
need to be discussed and worked on at some point.
Mayor Haila inquired if Attachment A, that showed tentative project milestones, is in priority order.
Mr. Diekmann stated they were not, but he tried to put them in to show the basic steps of each
12
project.
Council Member Corrieri stated that Attachment A consists of items that should be left on the list,
but when looking at Attachment B, she questioned if there was something that needed to be added
to the Attachment A list or are there other items on Attachment B that need to be removed.
City Manager Steve Schainker stated if the Council wants to move anything from Attachment B to
Attachment A, they may need to remove something from Attachment A to allow staff the time to do
the projects. Mayor Haila asked if someone came in with a large project. Planning would come back
to Council to re-prioritize. Director Diekmann stated that if a project comes in that can go through
the normal established requirements, that would be top priority, but if something larger comes in
(example: Downtown Gateway Plan), the Planning and Housing Work Plan would come back to
Council for review.
Council Member Corrieri stated she didn’t remember what “review RH zoning and design
guidelines/standards” was and asked Mr. Diekmann for an explanation. Mr. Diekmann explained,
that in 2015, there were a lot of Land Use Policy Plan Amendments and the RH matrix was
developed. A RH rezoning checklist and one of the follow-up items was to look at adding design
standards for apartment buildings; that is what this item was.
Moved by Corrieri, seconded by Betcher, to remove the “Review RH zoning and design
guidelines/standards” from the non-prioritized list (Attachment B).
Vote on Motion: 6-0. Motion carried unanimously.
Council Member Corrieri asked for a reminder as to what “Update the Planned Residential
Development” was for. Mr. Diekmann stated it came out of a discussion about Rose Prairie, and it
was a staff response to whether PRD’s were workable or not. He noted that the City does not see a
lot of these instances.
Moved by Corrieri, seconded by Martin, to remove the “Update the Planned Residential
Development” from the non-prioritized list (Attachment B).
Vote on Motion: 6-0. Motion carried unanimously.
Council Member Martin asked for a brief explanation about the “William Underwood Fringe Plan
Industrial Amendment & Annexation Dayton Avenue.” Mr. Diekmann stated when he gets to the
draft land use map and shows this property on it, he will remove this item from the list. He
mentioned that staff received a request about two years ago for just north of the current BASF Plant
on Dayton to allow the land to be annexed into the city and there was not an immediate need so they
planned on adding in when doing the Ames Plan 2040. He will be able to check this item off soon.
Moved by Betcher, seconded by Corrieri, to remove the “Request for the Planning staff to reach out
to engineers in the community to solicit feedback about proposed changes to the new Landscape
Ordinance after the other priority projects of the Council have been completed.” from the non-
13
prioritized list (Attachment B).
Vote on Motion: 6-0. Motion carried unanimously.
Moved by Gartin, seconded by Corrieri, to remove the “Review Downtown Facade Program
Requirements and consider “Development Grants.” from the non-prioritized list (Attachment B).
Council Member Corrieri inquired as to why that item says it would take anywhere from 40-200
hours. Director Diekmann stated that the 200 hours would be to recreate the entire program where
the shorter hours are just changing some items from the list. Mayor Haila asked if it would be
helpful, if this motion fails, to give more specifics.
Motion withdrawn.
Moved by Gartin, seconded by Betcher, to revise the wording of “Review Downtown Facade
Requirements and consider Development Grants,” to “Review Downtown Facade Program
Requirements.”
Council Member Betcher stated that in her conversations with Drew Kamp he had indicated that the
feeling about the facade grants has shifted since the first request came in, so shifting what the
Council is specifying makes sense.
Vote on Motion: 6-0. Motion declared carried unanimously.
Mayor Haila asked for an explanation about the “Review zoning requirements for landscaping on
private property to determine if they are compatible with CPTED principles.” Director Diekmann
advised that this item was something that the Police Chief asked the Council to add to the Planning
& Housing Work Plan as it means Community Policing through Environmental Design (CPTED).
Council Member Gartin asked if there was any interest in keeping the first two items on the list.
Council Member Betcher stated she will make the same argument to leave the two items on the list
as she does believe they relate to the ongoing discussions about sustainability and what the City is
incentivising. She noted that it doesn’t hurt to leave them on the list.
Moved by Gartin, seconded by Corrieri, to remove the first two items from the non-prioritized list
(Attachment B).
Vote on Motion: 2-4. Voting Aye: Gartin, Corrieri. Voting Nay: Betcher, Junck, Martin, Beatty-
Hansen. Motion failed.
Council Member Betcher asked if the requested staff memo regarding the old KFC lot on Lincoln
Way would be something that the Council could get. Mr. Diekmann stated this item is related to the
Squeaky Clean site that remains zoned DGC after the change of the corner property. Ms. Betcher
stated it shows it would take ten hours to complete and wanted to know if that could be done and
removed from the list. Director Diekmann stated it could and suggested putting it on Attachment
14
A. Council Member Martin stated that this whole situation is due to the Downtown Gateway Project
that is in the queue right now. He would like to take care of it eventually, but recommended seeing
how things unfold first.
Moved by Corrieri, seconded by Martin, to approve the Planning & Housing Work Plan, as amended.
Vote on Motion: 6-0. Motion declared unanimously.
Council Member Gartin noted it had been awhile since the Council had seen the Planning & Housing
Work Plan, and asked if it could be brought back to the Council every year. Council Member
Corrieri stated it would be helpful to have the Planning & Housing Work Plan during the same time
as the Council Goal setting. Mayor Haila explained that it is easy to refer items to staff and not
realize all the items on the Departments list that need to be completed, and seeing the Work Plan
more often will help. Director Diekmann stated that he can send it to the Council every six months,
and if they want to change anything, it can be brought before a Council meeting.
HEARING ON GENERAL OBLIGATION CORPORATE PURPOSE AND REFUNDING
BOND ISSUES: Mayor Haila opened the public hearing. He closed the hearing after there was no
one wishing to speak.
Moved by Betcher, seconded by Beatty-Hansen, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 20-125 entering into
a Loan Agreement in a principal amount not to exceed $23,500,000 and authorizing Debt Service
Levy.
Roll Call Vote: 6-0. Resolution declared adopted unanimously, signed by the Mayor, and hereby
made a portion of these Minutes.
HEARING ON AMENDMENTS TO FISCAL YEAR 2019/20 BUDGET: The Mayor opened
the public hearing and closed it after there was no one wishing to speak.
Moved by Betcher, seconded by Corrieri, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 20-126 amending the Budget
for the current Fiscal Year ending on June 30, 2020.
Roll Call Vote: 6-0. Resolution declared adopted unanimously, signed by the Mayor, and hereby
made a portion of these Minutes.
HEARING ON ADOPTION OF FY 2020/21 BUDGET: The public hearing was opened by the
Mayor. He closed the hearing after no one asked to speak.
Moved by Betcher, seconded by Corrieri, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 20-127 approving the FY
2020/21 Budget.
Roll Call Vote: 6-0. Resolution declared adopted unanimously, signed by the Mayor, and hereby
made a portion of these Minutes.
HEARING ON IOWA STATE UNIVERSITY RESEARCH PARK PHASE IV ROAD AND
UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT: The public hearing was opened by Mayor Haila and
15
closed after no one came forward to speak.
Moved by Gartin, seconded by Junck, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 20-128 approving the final plans
and specifications and awarding a contract to Con-Struct, Inc., of Ames, Iowa, in the amount of
$2,823,757.81.
Roll Call Vote: 6-0. Resolution declared adopted unanimously, signed by the Mayor, and hereby
made a portion of these Minutes.
HEARING ON FUEL FORWARDING PUMP HOUSE FIRE PROTECTION UPGRADE AT
POWER PLANT: Mayor Haila opened the public hearing. He closed the hearing after there was
no one wishing to speak.
Moved by Gartin, seconded by Betcher, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 20-129 approving the final
plans and specifications and awarding a contract to The Waldinger Corporation of West Des Moines,
Iowa, in the amount of $129,071.00.
Roll Call Vote: 6-0. Resolution declared adopted unanimously, signed by the Mayor, and hereby
made a portion of these Minutes.
HEARING ON EAST INDUSTRIAL UTILITY EXTENSION: City Manager Steve Schainker
explained that staff is not asking for the Council to award the project, but only to accept the report
of bids at this time. This will give staff time to speak with the design engineers to see why the project
came in over budget. Public Works Director John Joiner stated they will be talking with the
consultant and staff to reach out to the bidders to see what their thought processes were when putting
in their numbers and to see what the options are.
Council Member Gartin wondered if there was some kind of physical barrier as typically this is a
process of time and unit prices. Director Joiner stated that is exactly what they need to find out and
if there are any potential modifications that can be made. Mr. Gartin stated there are some timing
issues with this project and asked what the process would be to rebid. Mr. Joiner stated it would
depend on how extensive the time to redesign would be. If staff was confident they could do a
redesign within the budget and what the scope of the redesign would be, they would expedite it.
Council Member Gartin wanted to know if there was any feedback from Dan Culhane about the
timing of this project. Mr. Schainker stated he is sure they would want the project to be done as soon
as possible, but the bids came in way over budget for the City to recommend proceeding with
awarding the project at this time. Council Member Gartin inquired if the project was rebid would
there be opportunities to cast the net wider to see if more bids could come in. Director Joiner stated
they if they are able to find out what lead to only the two bidders, they can change that in the project
scope. Mayor Haila commented that he is concerned about the workforce as there are not enough
construction workers anymore, and this may cause a problem in the future.
The public hearing was opened by the Mayor. He closed the hearing after no one asked to speak.
Moved by Gartin, seconded by Betcher, to accept the report of bids for the East Industrial Area
16
Utility Extension Project.
Vote on Motion: 6-0. Motion declared carried unanimously.
HEARING ON CYRIDE 2020 HVAC IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT: The Mayor opened the
public hearing and closed it after there was no one wishing to speak.
Moved by Beatty-Hansen, seconded by Corrieri, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 20-130 approving the
final plans and specifications and awarding a contract to Mechanical Comfort, Inc., of Ames, Iowa,
in the amount of $539,500 for the base bid.
Roll Call Vote: 6-0. Resolution declared adopted unanimously, signed by the Mayor, and hereby
made a portion of these Minutes.
ORDINANCE INCREASING WATER RATES BY 2% AND SEWER RATES BY 5%,
EFFECTIVE JULY 1, 2020: Water and Pollution Control Director John Dunn highlighted a few
points from the FY 2020-21 Water and Sewer Rate presentation. He noted that there have been some
years when there had not been any rate increases at all, and last year there was a 7% adjustment to
the water rate. He explained that over the past five years, the water increases have averaged 2.9%
per year and the sewer increases have increased 1.6% per year. Director Dunn then reviewed the
1999-2019, Iowa trends in water rates for cities with populations greater than 10,000 with lime
softening and consuming 600 cubic feet (cf) per month. City Manager Steve Schainker asked where
the rural water rate would be in comparison to the City’s water rates. Mr. Dunn mentioned that
Xenia Rural Water’s bill would be around $80-90 for the 600 cf per month where the City of Ames,
for the same consumption, would be around $27. Council Member Martin noted that when he looked
at the graph it shows that the City of Ames was slightly above the median and now has been below
it for the past few years. He wanted to know if something changed to explain the transition or was
it just overall excellence. Mr. Dunn explained that over the over the 20-year period of time the
envelope of rates has become very broad. Part of it are cities that are growing and have been added
to the survey of cities with populations over 10,000, and the smaller systems tend to have higher
rates. Mr. Schainker mentioned that some cities have had major capital improvements before the
City of Ames did them, and this timing could have changed the data.
Director Dunn explained that every year staff does a rate model, where they put in the capital
expenses and projecting operating expenses. He then showed what would happen in ten years if
there were no rate adjustments, and then showed what the rate model would like with the projected
rate increases. Mr. Schainker stated they raise the rates in order to cover operating costs and capital
over a period of time. Mayor Haila inquired as to what would happen when Prairie View is up and
running, if there is a need to increase capacity, and how would this factor in when planning to
increase the gallons per day that is put out. Mr. Dunn explained that in the model he had not made
any assumptions about any major growth in consumption.
A sample of a customer’s bill for residential use was shown using the proposed increase of 2% for
water and 5% for sewer with 600kWh of electricity used and 600 cf of water used. Before the
increase, the bill would be $136.48 and after the percentage increases it would change to $138.41
17
for a total impact of a 1.41% increase.
Mayor Haila opened public comment. No one came forward and it was closed.
Moved by Betcher, seconded by Beatty-Hansen, to pass on first reading an Ordinance increasing the
water rates by 2% and sewer rates by 5%, effective July 1, 2020.
Roll Call Vote: 6-0. Motion declared carried unanimously.
DISPOSITION OF COMMUNICATIONS TO COUNCIL: Mayor Haila mentioned that the first
item was a Memo from Planning and Housing Director Kelly Diekmann regarding a referral request
for front-yard parking standards at 2030 Country Club Boulevard.
Moved by Betcher, Corrieri, to ask the Mayor to indicate that the Council has no interest in pursuing
the request for front-yard parking. Vote on Motion: 5-0-1. Voting Aye: Betcher, Junck, Corrieri,
Martin, Beatty-Hansen. Voting Nay: None. Abstaining due to Conflict of Interest: Gartin. Motion
declared carried.
The second request was a request from the Story County Board of Supervisors asking to extend the
Ames Urban Fringe Plan by one year (July 11, 2022). City Manager Steve Schainker noted that no
action is required tonight, but will need to place the extension on a future agenda.
Moved by Beatty-Hansen, seconded by Betcher, to put the extension request on a future agenda.
Vote on Motion: 6-0. Motion declared carried unanimously.
Mayor Haila noted that the third item was a letter from Mediacom about the change in channel
selections. It was for information purposes only.
Mr. Schainker noted that the email from Matt Shuey requesting to have staff review the intersections
of South Wilmoth and Tripp Street as well as South Franklin and Tripp Street does not need to be
referred. He explained that Public Works Director John Joiner has already completed a memo in
regards to this request, and he will send it out to the rest of the Council. No further action is needed.
Item 5 was a staff report from the Planning and Housing Department regarding identified
deficiencies with the Sign Ordinance. City Manager Steve Schainker stated that this item has already
been taken care of as it was incorporated earlier into the Planning and Housing Work Plan. Council
Member Corrieri mentioned that the Council still needed to give direction as the Staff Report asked
for Council to choose from “Option A” or “Option B”. Director Diekmann stated that “Option A”
was a limited scope and was reflective of a shorter time frame and would make a few changes where
“Option B” would be the full scope of where all concerns are addressed and a more complete modern
Sign Code would be created. However, that this process would take 12 months. Council Member
Martin stated that he doesn’t feel any urgency and would rather go slower and more
comprehensively.
18
Moved by Martin, seconded by Corrieri, to go with “Option B,” which states that staff would prepare
changes for Items 1-2 on the Staff Report for Council to review. This process would involve
additional research and outreach beyond Option A as it would create a more complete modern Sign
Code.
Vote on Motion: 6-0. Motion declared carried unanimously.
COUNCIL COMMENTS: Council Member Betcher stated she just got back from the National
League of Cities Conference and she did pick up on some additional tips on diversity, inclusion, and
equity in Emergency Management that she will be passing onto the Council.
Council Member Gartin stated that a memo was sent out from ISU President Wintersteen about
exploring the possibility of delivering classes over the internet. A number of institutions are closing
during the duration of the virus. He wanted to thank the City staff for the proactive planning.
Ex Officio Leeson explained that he had heard from two teachers and isn’t sure if this is the same as
what President Wintersteen had said, but he believes there is the impression that classes are going
to be moved to online at least for two weeks following Spring Break, and then monitored from there.
Mayor Haila wanted to give his appreciation to the City staff, Mary Greeley Medical Center, ISU,
Ames Community School District, Story County, and other partners as a lot of time has been spent
on the planning and preparing for an outbreak of the COVID-19. There is a link on the City of Ames
website with information.
ADJOURNMENT: Moved by Corrieri, to adjourn the meeting at 8:39 p.m.
______________________________________________________________________
Amy L. Colwell, Deputy City Clerk John A. Haila, Mayor
__________________________________
Diane R. Voss, City Clerk
19