HomeMy WebLinkAbout~Master - Ames Area Metropolitan Planning Organization (AAMPO) Transportation Policy Committee Meeting 10/11/2005 MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE AMES AREA METROPOLITAN PLANNING
ORGANIZATION TRANSPORTATION POLICY COMMITTEE
AND REGULAR MEETING OF THE AMES CITY COUNCIL
AMES, IOWA OCTOBER 11, 2005
AMES AREA METROPOLITAN PLANNING ORGANIZATION
TRANSPORTATION POLICY COMMITTEE MEETING
The Ames Area Metropolitan Planning Organization (AAMPO) Transportation Policy Committee
met at 5:30 p.m. on the 11th day of October, 2005, in the City Council Chambers in City Hall, 515
Clark Avenue, pursuant to law with Mayor Ted Tedesco presiding. Voting members present were
Cross, Goodman, Mahayni, Tedesco, Vegge, and Wirth, representing the City of Ames; Don Toms
of the Story County Board of Supervisors, and Dennis Kroeger of the Ames Transit Agency. Mike
Clayton, Iowa Department of Transportation, and Transit Director Bob Bourne were also present.
Council Member Goodhue arrived at 5:35 p.m. Mike O’Brien, representative of the Boone County
Board of Supervisors, was absent.
LONG-RANGE TRANSPORTATION PLAN: Public Works Director John Joiner explained that
an update to the AAMPO Long-Range Transportation Plan had been completed. The purpose
of the update was to have a document that embodied the community’s vision for transportation
while being consistent with the provisions of the Land Use Policy Plan (LUPP). The revisions
made to Sections 6, 7, and 10 were reviewed. Mike Gorman, HWS Consulting Group, Inc.,
explained the public involvement process followed. He advised which projects were eliminated
and gave the reasons therefor. Base projects under Improvement Groups 1, 2, and 3 were
summarized and justification given as to their inclusion. Funding projections were also
announced. Mr. Gorman next described the Proposed Roadway Improvement Plans for 1-5
years, 6-15 years, and 16-25 years.
Council Member Cross asked if the existing school district boundaries and Land Use Policy Plan
(LUPP) were taken into consideration when the revisions were suggested. Mr. Gorman advised
that the goal of the consultants was to determine what would best accommodate the people of
the area given the current traffic patterns. School district boundaries were not taken into
account.
Mr. Gorman defined the short- and long-term policies followed in making the recommendations
for the Transit Facilities Element. Phase I and II Bicycle Facilities (paths) were also described.
Mr. Joiner stated that the revised Plan, as presented tonight, reflected the work of the Technical
Committee; it was a cooperative effort of all entities.
Council Member Goodhue asked to know the process to be followed if improvements to the
intersections at 20th and 24th Streets near the High School were wanted. Mr. Joiner advised that
City staff would continue to work with the neighborhoods abutting that area.
Council Member Wirth, who is the Council’s Transit Board representative, stated that the Board
did not approve the Plan Updates at this time. The Board members were concerned about
eliminating the Yellow Route.
Stan Peterson, 1703 Burnett, Ames, strongly encouraged the AAMPO Transportation Policy
Committee not to adopt the Plan tonight. He felt that there had not been proper opportunities for
public perusal; it was impossible for him to obtain a copy of the Plan. Additionally, he stated
that the report was “sloppy” (full of misspelled words, grammatical errors, mathematical errors,
etc.) and information on the maps was wrong. Mr. Joiner explained that public meetings on this
topic had occurred, the last one being in August, 2005. Mr. Gorman advised that the Plan
Update was available on the city’s website, and the errors had been corrected.
Mr. Goodman did not agree with eliminating the Transit Yellow Route due to the segment of the
population it serves. He noted that it is the only Route that leads to a major home improvement
store; no other route would accommodate passengers with that destination.
Mr. Cross said he felt this Plan Update was “reactive” and would encourage growth in the
northwest portion of the City. He pointed out that there are few public improvements
recommended for the Southwest Growth Priority Area. Mr. Gorman said that there is strong
evidence that there is a large traffic demand in areas of North Ames.
Moved by Goodman, seconded by Vegge, to amend the Long-Range Transportation Plan to
eliminate both projects involving Bloomington Road.
Council Member Cross stated that he was not necessarily opposed to the Bloomington Road
projects; however, he is more concerned about the timing. Elaborating, he said that during the
first five years, a study would be performed; then, during the 6- to 15-year window, one portion
of Bloomington Road would be improved. Traffic studies may show by then that the project is
not needed. Mr. Cross said he is not certain when those improvements needed to be made.
Council Member Goodman preferred to amend the Plan again if the improvements to
Bloomington Road would become justified. Mr. Joiner explained that if it were decided to
eliminate those projects, they could be revisited in three years when the process starts over.
After being questioned by Council Member Mahayni, Mr. Joiner stated that eliminating those
projects would have an impact on the rest of the Plan; it would definitely have a long-term effect
on the transportation network. Council Member Goodhue recommended that if the two
Bloomington Road projects were eliminated, the Plan needed to be referred back to staff and the
consultants to revisit the intersection improvements. He preferred to include the projects at this
point.
Council Member Goodhue advised that he would not support removing the Bloomington Road
projects; however, he would endorse moving them back. Mr. Goodman reiterated that he
strongly believed this Plan conflicted with the City’s LUPP goals and objectives. It was pointed
out by Mr. Goodhue that this was an “Ames Area” Plan; it is not just about the city limits of
2
Ames – it includes Story County and Boone County as well.
Council Member Cross asked if the study needed to be performed in the first five years. Mr.
Joiner advised that it could be moved back if the City Council so desired. Council Member
Goodman said he would support directing staff to look for other ways to relieve stressors on
those intersections that don’t philosophically conflict with the LUPP. Mr. Cross pointed out that
the study needs to be done before either of the projects could be done, and that still doesn’t mean
that either of the projects would be done; however, it is important to discuss them.
Vote on Amendment: 1-8. Moving aye: Goodman. Voting nay: Cross, Goodhue, Mahayni,
Tedesco, Vegge, Wirth, Toms, Kroeger.
Amendment failed.
Moved by Cross, seconded by Mahayni, to move the Bloomington Road (environmental) Study
into the 6- to 15-year time period.
Council Member Vegge asked about the individual projects. Mr. Cross said they could be
moved back further. It was quite appealing to Council Member Mahayni that an environmental
study be done first.
Vote on Amendment: 9-0. Amendment declared carried unanimously.
Moved by Goodman, seconded by Mahayni, to amend the Plan to not eliminate the Yellow
Transit Route in the Plan.
Council Member Wirth explained that the Transit Board was concerned about the ridership
group most affected if the Yellow Route were eliminated; that group is quite dependent on it due
to their income and their mobility issues. She is aware that the Yellow Route does not have
sufficient ridership, so the cost-benefit ratio does not warrant retaining the Route. The Transit
Board did not endorse the elimination of the Yellow Route at this point; alternatives will be
looked into at the appropriate time. Bob Bourne indicated that there really is no alternative to
service delivery in that Southeast Ames area.
Vote on Amendment: 9-0. Motion declared carried unanimously.
Moved by Goodhue, seconded by Cross, to approve the Ames Area Metropolitan Policy
Organization Long-Range Transportation Plan Update, with the above amendments.
Vote on Motion: 9-0. Motion declared carried unanimously.
REVISIONS TO 2006 TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM: Recommended
revisions to the FY 2006 TIP were described by John Joiner as: [1] Northwestern Avenue
Reconstruction Project, from 6th to 13th Street: increasing the cost of the project; and, [2] U. S.
69 Widening, from Dawes to 190th Street: account for Story County’s $200,000 match to the
project.
3
Moved by Goodhue, seconded by Cross, to approve the revisions to the FY 2006/08
Transportation Improvement Program.
Vote on Motion: 9-0. Motion declared carried unanimously.
ADJOURNMENT: 6:56 p.m.
REGULAR MEETING OF THE AMES CITY COUNCIL
The Ames City Council met in regular session at 7:05 p.m. on the 11th day of October, 2005, in the
City Council Chambers in City Hall, 515 Clark Avenue, pursuant to law with Mayor Tedesco
presiding and the following Council members present: Cross, Goodhue, Goodman, Mahayni, Vegge,
and Wirth. Tony Borich, ex officio member, was also present.
Mayor Tedesco announced that Item #38, which pertained to waiving alternate-side parking
regulations on Sunset Drive, was pulled; the developer had withdrawn his request.
PROCLAMATION FOR FIRE PREVENTION WEEK, OCTOBER 9 - 15, 2005: Mayor
Tedesco proclaimed October 9 - 15, 2005, as Fire Prevention Week. Accepting the Proclamation
on behalf of the City of Ames Fire Department were Lieutenant Mike Bryant and Fire Fighters
Steve Bennett and Troy Buchman.
PROCLAMATION FOR CHARACTER COUNTS WEEK, OCTOBER 16 - 22, 2005: The
Mayor read a proclamation for Character Counts Week, October 16 - 22, 2005. Members of the
Ames Character Counts Executive Committee Jim Hallihan, Mary Jo Mattila, and Frankee
Oleson accepted the proclamation.
CONSENT AGENDA: Moved by Goodhue, seconded by Vegge, to approve the following items
on the Consent Agenda:
1.Motion approving payment of claims
2. Motion approving minutes of the regular meeting of September 27, 2005
3. Motion approving certification of civil service applicants
4. Motion approving renewal of the following beer permits and liquor licenses:
a. Class C Beer & Class B Wine - Aldi #48, 1301 Buckeye Avenue
b. Special Class C Liquor - Hunan Palace, 823 Wheeler Street, Ste. 1
c. Class C Beer & Class B Wine - Hy-Vee Food Store #1, 3800 Lincoln Way
d. Class C Beer & Class B Wine - Hy-Vee Food and Drugstore #2, 640 Lincoln Way
e. Class C Liquor - Sips/Paddy’s Irish Pub - 124 Welch Avenue
f. Class C Beer & Class B Wine - Village Wine Market, 2613 Northridge Parkway
5. Motion approving new Class C Liquor License and Outdoor Service Privilege for Hazel’s Kitchen,
1407 Elwood Drive, pending receipt of background checks
6. Motion approving new Class C Liquor License and Outdoor Service Privilege for Element/
Chasers, 2401 Chamberlain Street
7. Motion approving encroachment permit for new stairways and awnings at 402 Main Street
4
8. RESOLUTION NO. 05-419 approving revisions to Purchasing Policies, as required by Federal
Transit Administration (FTA)
9. RESOLUTION NO. 05-420 approving blanket authorization for the Housing Coordinator to
negotiate and purchase properties that meet the overall CDBG Program objectives
10. RESOLUTION NO. 05-421 rescinding contract with Heartland Senior Services (HSS) for Dial-A-
Ride service, effective December 12, 2005
11. RESOLUTION NO. 05-422 approving Engineering Services Agreement with Fox Engineering
of Ames, Iowa, for Youth Sports Complex Wells
12. RESOLUTION NO. 05-423 approving preliminary plans and specifications for Contract No. 15 -
Combustion Turbine GT 1 Control System Upgrade; setting November 9, 2005, as bid due date
and November 22, 2005, as date of public hearing
13. RESOLUTION NO. 05-424 approving contract for three 40-foot, low-floor buses to Orion Bus
Industries, subject to Iowa DOT concurrence and receipt of FTA certifications from Orion
14. Installation of Communication Hardware for Wide-Area Network (WAN) Project (delayed award
to 10/11/05):
a. Motion rejecting the sole bid from Divane Bros. Electric Co. and directing staff to re-bid
15. RESOLUTION NO. 05-425 approving Change Order No. 4 and accepting completion of
Combustion Turbine Generator Project Contract No. 10 – Site Preparations, Foundations, and
Underground
16. RESOLUTION NO. 05-426 approving Change Order Nos. 1 thru 6 and accepting completion of
Contract No. 2 – Combustion Turbine Generator
17. RESOLUTION NO. 05-427 approving contract and bond from RESCO to furnish Post Insulators
for Ames Substation Project
18. RESOLUTION NO. 05-428 approving contract and bond from Ritz Instrument Transformers to
furnish Instrument Transformers for Ames Substation Project
19. RESOLUTION NO. 05-429 approving contract and bond from Trachte, Inc., to furnish Control
Enclosure for Ames Substation Project
20. RESOLUTION NO. 05-430 approving contract and bond from V & S Schuler Engineering, Inc.,
to furnish Steel Structures and Control Panels for Ames Substation Project
21. RESOLUTION NO. 05-431 approving contract and bond from Turner Electric to furnish GOAB
Switches for Ames Substation Project
22. RESOLUTION NO. 05-432 approving contract and bond for Stange Road 161/69 kV Substation
Construction
23. RESOLUTION NO. 05-433 approving completion of 2004/05 Neighborhood Curb Replacement
Program
Roll Call Vote: 6-0. Resolutions declared adopted unanimously, signed by the Mayor, and
hereby made a portion of these minutes.
PUBLIC FORUM: Sue Ravenscroft, 455 Westwood, Ames, Iowa, spoke on “overlapping debt.”
According to Ms. Ravenscroft, after looking at the June 30, 2004, Comprehensive Annual
Financial Report for the City, the overlapping debt of Ames for the Gilbert Community School
District was 31.13%. She said that it means 31.13% of the assessed value of land in the Gilbert
School District falls within the boundaries of Ames; thus, 31.13% of the property tax revenues
taken in by the Gilbert School District are paid by people who live in Ames. Ms. Ravenscroft
pointed out that the further Ames builds to the north, the higher that percentage will become.
5
The same result will occur if the new “lifestyle center” is built, as houses will inevitably follow.
She said that education is critical to a town’s growth – employers want a well-educated
workforce. To attract more companies to town, a good educational system must be provided.
Ms. Ravenscroft reminded the Council that every time Ames grows to the north and to the east,
it is harming Ames School District; she urged the Council to prevent the 31.13% from growing.
Elizabeth Koziel, 3902 Westlawn, Ames, stated that, although they love their home, they are
looking at other locations to live due to a train sitting on the tracks for over three hours every
day. Although they knew their home’s proximity to the tracks would mean that they would have
to deal with the train horns, her family must also deal with the bright lights of the trains and the
reverberations, air brakes, etc., during the entire time the train is just sitting on the tracks behind
their home. Ms. Koziel advised that they had contacted the Union Pacific railroad and were told
that there was nothing that could be done due to the train schedule. She feels that it is an
environmental hazard and asked how to address this issue. Mayor Tedesco suggested that she
contact the Department of Transportation, Railroad Division, and the Federal Railroad Agency
in Washington, D.C.
HEARING ON VOLUNTARY ANNEXATION OF 2999 SOUTH RIVERSIDE DRIVE:
P
l
a
n
n
e
r
R
a
y
A
n
d
e
r
s
o
n
a
d
v
i
s
e
d
t
6
h
a
t
s
t
a
f
f
w
a
s
n
o
t
r
e
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
i
n
g
a
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
t
h
i
s
a
n
n
e
7
x
a
t
i
o
n
.
T
h
e
r
e
i
s
n
o
p
r
o
p
o
s
a
l
f
o
r
d
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
o
f
t
h
e
8
p
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
a
t
t
h
i
s
t
i
m
e
,
a
n
d
t
h
e
d
e
v
e
l
o
p
e
r
h
a
s
n
o
t
i
n
d
i
9
c
a
t
e
d
w
h
a
t
t
y
p
e
o
f
l
a
n
d
u
s
e
i
s
e
n
v
i
s
i
o
n
e
d
a
t
t
h
e
t
i
m
e
o
10
f
d
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
.
A
t
t
h
i
s
p
o
i
n
t
,
t
h
i
s
l
a
n
d
i
s
n
o
t
n
e
e
d
e
11
d
t
o
m
e
e
t
t
h
e
C
i
t
y
’
s
f
u
t
u
r
e
g
r
o
w
t
h
n
e
e
d
s
,
i
t
i
s
n
o
t
l
o
c
12
a
t
e
d
w
i
t
h
i
n
a
n
y
G
r
o
w
t
h
P
r
i
o
r
i
t
y
A
r
e
a
,
a
n
d
w
o
u
l
d
n
o
t
b
13
e
p
a
r
t
o
f
t
h
e
c
o
m
m
u
n
i
t
y
’
s
f
u
t
u
r
e
p
l
a
n
s
f
o
r
g
r
o
w
t
h
t
o
t
14
h
e
y
e
a
r
2
0
3
0
.
M
r
.
A
n
d
e
r
s
o
n
p
o
i
n
t
e
d
o
u
t
t
h
a
t
a
n
n
e
x
a
t
15
i
o
n
o
f
t
h
i
s
p
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
i
s
n
o
t
c
o
n
s
i
s
t
e
n
t
w
i
t
h
t
h
e
g
o
a
l
s
16
a
n
d
p
o
l
i
c
i
e
s
o
u
t
l
i
n
e
d
i
n
t
h
e
L
a
n
d
U
s
e
P
o
l
i
c
y
P
l
a
n
.
T
17
h
e
r
e
i
s
n
o
r
e
a
s
o
n
t
o
b
r
i
n
g
l
a
n
d
i
n
t
o
t
h
e
C
i
t
y
t
h
a
t
i
s
p
r
18
o
p
o
s
e
d
f
o
r
c
o
n
t
i
n
u
e
d
f
u
t
u
r
e
u
s
e
a
s
a
g
r
i
c
u
l
t
u
r
a
l
l
a
n
19
d
.
Mayor Tedesco opened the public hearing.
Sarah Meyer, 4125 S. 530th Street, Ames, said that she is opposed to the annexation at this point,
without knowing the intentions of the developer.
Chuck Winkleblack, 105 S. 16th Street, Ames, stated that the developer desired only to bring the
property into the City limits and get it on the City’s tax rolls. They are not requesting any
extension of infrastructure at this time as the use is intended to remain agricultural.
City Attorney John Klaus advised that the City is under no obligation to provide services to
annexed land within a certain amount of time. There could be an issue with rural water in that
there is a requirement to provide service to annexed territory within a certain number of years.
Mr. Klaus pointed out that developers are required to provide for infrastructure at the time of
development; that is not a legal issue for the City at this time.
There being no one else wishing to speak, the Mayor closed the hearing.
Council Member Goodhue said that this land is located south of the Iowa State University
Research Park. He advised that long-range planning for this land could intend to accommodate
future demand for new industrial growth in this area, and the City would not want to wait until
the year 2030 to annex it.
Council Member Goodman pointed out that this land is not in the City’s Growth Priority Area
and is not shown in the Land Use Policy Plan; therefore, he would not support this request for
annexation.
Mr. Winkleblack, on behalf of the owners, withdrew the request.
HEARING ON REZONING OF PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED AT THE
INTERSECTION OF STANGE ROAD AND BLOOMINGTON ROAD: Mr. Flynn described
the request of the applicant to rezone the property located on the north side of the intersection
of Stange Road and Bloomington Road from “FS-RM” (Suburban Residential Medium Density)
to “CVCN” (Convenience Commercial Node). He advised that the proposed Convenience
Commercial Node would provide commercial services to suburban residential areas as called
for in the LUPP. The zoning standards would ensure that it is integrated aesthetically and
physically with residential subdivisions; however, the proposed location on the north side of the
intersection of Stange Road and Bloomington Road is not consistent with the locational criteria
in the LUPP. Mr. Flynn stated that City staff feels that the overall area in North Ames is already
adequately served by existing and planned commercial land uses.
Mr. Flynn stated that the concept of a Convenience Commercial Node within this larger
20
suburban residential area does fit the community’s land use vision; however, it does not fit with
the “bigger picture” of this region of the community. The LUPP recommends “that much of the
new convenience/neighborhood-scale commercial be associated with Village Residential” areas.
Mr. Flynn pointed out that the Planning & Zoning Commission recommended denial of this
rezoning request at its meeting of September 21, 2005.
The Mayor opened the public hearing.
Bob Cummings, 2616 Northridge Parkway, Ames, explained that he knows the parties on both
sides of this issue, and respects them. It is his opinion that the proposal to rezone this 12.97
acres of land is interesting because Somerset Village is not built-out. Mr. Cummings advised
that, after a great deal of persuasion from both the City and developers, he invested a great deal
of time and money into his business in Somerset (The Café restaurant). There is still commercial
and office space available for sale and/or rent within Somerset Village. Mr. Cummings pointed
out other areas of Ames properly zoned and available for commercial use. He said the City
planned a Village that developers went along with, but it is not yet done yet, and he asked what
was wrong with a thriving village business district. Mr. Cummings asked the City to take a look
at the LUPP and decide where the Convenience Commercial Nodes should be located. He asked
the City not to play “hopscotch” with commercial ground; the City needs to determine where
the commercial nodes should be and live with that decision. He does not believe that more
ground needs to be rezoned when existing buildings are empty. It was Mr. Cummings’ opinion
that if the Commercial Node in question were approved, it would “cannibalize” Somerset, and
he urged the Council to deny this request for rezoning.
Dr. Wendy White, 3702 Ashton Drive, Ames, said that she felt misled by the City. She thought
that she was purchasing a home in an upscale residential neighborhood, but has since learned
that there may be a number of commercial uses bordering her neighborhood in the future. She
questioned the need for additional commercial uses on the land in question. Dr. White also
questioned whether all the affected residents had been informed; only those on her side of the
street realized that this issue was on tonight’s agenda. She also wondered why the proposed
development would be acceptable on the north end of Somerset when it wasn’t acceptable in
Somerset itself.
Joe Lynch, 3700 Onion Creek, Ames, spoke as a member of Ames Smart Growth. He
acknowledged that this was a very complicated issue, but felt there was clear guidance in the
City’s LUPP. In Mr. Lynch’s opinion, there are probably ways to make Somerset Village meet
some of the needs of the developers who are making this request. The City has established
Somerset Village, and the City needs to make it work.
Chuck Winkleblack, 105 S. 16th Street, Ames, stated that there are over 2,600 dwelling units in
the vicinity and surrounding Somerset, so the population base is there to support the rezoning
of this property for commercial use. Mr. Winkleblack said that this rezoning request was
discussed at a homeowners’ association meeting, and approximately 80% of those present were
in support of the concept of commercial uses in this area. He described the efforts taken by the
21
developers to survey the area residents; the majority of those surveyed supported commercial
development. Mr. Winkleblack explained that this particular development concept was
discussed with Mr. Cummings prior to his building his restaurant. He said that they are not
abandoning those commercial entities already located in Somerset Village; they are proposing
services that will enhance Somerset.
Mr. Winkleblack also explained that the owners of commercial property in Somerset Village and
North Ames have told him that they want more traffic through their areas; they want to keep the
area people shopping there. The lots available in Somerset do not support construction of a
convenience/grocery store. Building a convenience/grocery store at the proposed location would
enhance the area, not detract from it; the developers would not propose anything that would be
detrimental to Somerset Village.
Elizabeth Koziel, 3902 Westlawn, Ames, said that she does not understand the concept of
needing a convenience/grocery store a half block from every residence. She urged the City not
to approve this rezoning.
Bob Friedrich, Jr., 619 E. Lincoln Way, Ames, said that they want to see development continue
in Somerset Village. He described the difficulty developers have had in getting a
convenience/grocery store and/or a carwash to develop in Somerset; there have always been
issues.
Kurt Friedrich, 100 Sixth Street, Ames, read from the staff report, i.e., “...the developers were
advised by City staff to directly pursue the rezoning request,” and ...”the proposed land use is
acceptable.” He advised that this information was incorrectly portrayed at the Planning &
Zoning Commission meeting. Mr. Friedrich said that it was incorrectly stated at that meeting
that this request would necessitate a Land Use Policy Plan change. Had the Commission
members had the correct information, he believed that the vote would have been different. Mr.
Friedrich said that he would be a neighbor to this area, and the neighbors with whom he has
spoken endorse the construction of a convenience store at the proposed location. He asked the
City to ask itself, as this and other issues come before the City Council, what kind of reputation
is being created in this community towards development.
Mr. Winkleblack explained that the developers have worked for eight years to get a convenience
store to locate in Somerset. The buildings they propose to build north of Somerset are few and
would not be competing with those in Somerset. He showed the public the Master Plan for the
land west of the Stange Crescent (in Somerset). This indicated that most of the lots are 1,800
square feet; putting a 25,000 - 35,000 square-foot building is not feasible in this area. Mr.
Winkleblack said that they are willing to restrict the number of uses for the land if this rezoning
were approved, e.g., only allow convenience/grocery store, bank, carwash, drugstore for a period
of 24 months or until Somerset Village is completely developed. The mandatory build-to line
in Somerset is an obstacle for a convenience/grocery store or carwash. Mr. Winkleblack said
the developers are not supportive of changing the design guidelines in Somerset. The developers
would ensure that the property in question blended with those guidelines.
22
Mr. Cummings presented a petition, for the record, signed by 12 owners of businesses in
Somerset. Council Member Goodman asked Mr. Cummings how long he felt the City Council
should wait before allowing residents to have commercial services close to their homes. Mr.
Cummings replied that he had not had adequate time to think about this situation, as he just
learned about this issue last Friday. He pointed out that there is a grocery store located within
a mile and one-half from Somerset, and he questioned where the next commercial node was
going to be located. Mr. Goodman pointed out that the Village concept calls for these type of
services to be very close to the residential development.
Council Member Cross pointed out that tax abatement was specifically approved by the City
Council for convenience/grocery stores in Somerset Village; however, it is now realized that
specific design guidelines and lot sizes preclude that type of development. Those types of uses
were anticipated when the village concept was approved.
Council Member Mahayni pointed out that restricting the number of uses is not the issue before
the City Council at this meeting. There are too many questions that need to be resolved before
this request could be approved.
Council Member Vegge said that he did not believe the rezoning was “a bad thing” to do, but
believed that this proposal was premature at this point.
The hearing was closed after no one else wished to speak.
Moved by Wirth, seconded by Mahayni, to deny the request to rezone property generally located
at the intersection of Stange Road and Bloomington Road from “FS-RM” (Suburban Residential
Medium Density) to “CVCN” (Convenience Commercial Node).
Roll Call Vote: 5-1. Voting aye: Cross, Goodman, Mahayni, Vegge, Wirth. Voting nay:
Goodhue. Motion declared carried.
HEARING ON TEXT AMENDMENT TO ZONING ORDINANCE TO ALLOW RENTAL
SERVICES OFFICES: The hearing was opened by the Mayor. He closed same as no one
requested to speak.
Moved by Goodhue, seconded by Cross, to pass on first reading an ordinance making a zoning
text amendment to allow rental services offices, limited to a maximum of 5,000 square feet, as
a permitted accessory use in the Planned Residence (F-PRD) Zoning District.
Roll Call Vote: 6-0. Motion declared carried unanimously.
HEARING ON VACATING EASEMENT IN SOMERSET SUBDIVISION, 2ND ADDITION:
Mayor Tedesco opened the public hearing. No one asked to speak, and the hearing was closed.
Moved by Wirth, seconded by Goodhue, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 05-435 vacating a ten-
foot public utility easement in Somerset Subdivision, 2nd Addition (on the west side of Stange
Road from Northridge Parkway to Aspen Road).
23
Roll Call Vote: 6-0. Resolution declared adopted unanimously, signed by the Mayor, and
hereby made a portion of these minutes.
The meeting recessed at 9:10 p.m. and reconvened at 9:15 p.m.
DISCUSSION OF DEFINITION OF “COMMUNITY BETTERMENT:” Moved by Cross,
s
e
c
o
n
d
e
d
b
y
M
a
h
a
y
n
i
,
t
o
t
a
b
l
e
t
h
i
s
i
t
e
m
u
n
t
i
l
24
t
h
e
s
e
c
o
n
d
m
e
e
t
i
n
g
i
n
O
c
t
o
b
e
r
o
r
f
i
r
s
t
m
e
e
t
i
n
g
i
n
N
o
v
25
e
m
b
e
r
.
Vote on Motion: 6-0. Motion declared carried unanimously.
ROOF REPLACEMENT AT WATER TREATMENT PLANT AND WATER POLLUTION
CONTROL PLANT: Moved by Cross, seconded by Vegge, to table this item until October 25,
2005.
Vote on Motion: 6-0. Motion declared carried unanimously.
RESOLUTION APPROVING CONTRACT FOR ARCHITECTURAL SERVICES FOR
ANALYSIS OF INDOOR RECREATION AND OUTDOOR AQUATIC FACILITIES
DEVELOPMENT: Moved by Wirth, seconded by Goodhue, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 05-436
approving a contract for architectural services with RDG Planning & Design in an amount not
to exceed $24,650 for analysis of indoor recreation and outdoor aquatic facilities development.
Roll Call Vote: 6-0. Resolution declared adopted unanimously, signed by the Mayor, and
hereby made a portion of these minutes.
RESOLUTION APPROVING WAIVER OF PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS FOR
NORTHWOOD HEIGHTS SUBDIVISION, 3RD ADDITION: Moved by Goodhue, seconded
by Cross, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 05-437 approving the waiver of public improvement
requirements for Northwood Heights, 3rd Addition.
Roll Call Vote: 6-0. Resolution declared adopted unanimously, signed by the Mayor, and
hereby made a portion of these minutes.
TOWN CENTER WEST URBAN REVITALIZATION AREA (SOMERSET): Moved by
G
o
o
d
h
u
e
,
s
e
c
o
n
d
e
26
d
b
y
C
r
o
s
s
,
t
o
a
p
p
r
o
v
e
t
h
e
a
p
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
f
o
r
u
r
b
a
n
r
e
v
i
27
t
a
l
i
z
a
t
i
o
n
.
Vote on Motion: 5-1. Voting aye: Cross, Goodhue, Mahayni, Vegge, Wirth. Voting nay:
Goodman. Motion declared carried.
Moved by Goodhue, seconded by Cross, to direct City staff to prepare an Urban Revitalization
Plan.
Vote on Motion: 5-1. Voting aye: Cross, Goodhue, Mahayni, Vegge, Wirth. Voting nay:
Goodman. Motion declared carried.
Moved by Goodhue, seconded by Cross, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 05-438 setting November
22, 2005, as the date for public hearing.
Roll Call Vote: 5-1. Voting aye: Cross, Goodhue, Mahayni, Vegge, Wirth. Voting nay:
Goodman. Resolution declared adopted, signed by the Mayor, and hereby made a portion of
these minutes.
PRESENTATION OF REVISED FINAL PLAN FOR THE UNIVERSITY-IMPACTED
OVERLAY DISTRICT (tabled from 6/14/05): Planner Jeff Benson reviewed the revisions that
had been incorporated into the Final Plan since first hearing the concept on June 14, 2005.
Those revisions were:
1. In the Campustown Service District, maintain the current zero-foot front-yard setback,
instead of the mandatory build-to line previously proposed.
2. Change the approach to height and mass of buildings in the Campustown Service District.
3. Balconies would not be allowed above the third floor.
4. Brick is proposed to be “clay brick” wherever it is required.
5. In the Campustown Urban Revitalization Area, allow tax abatement for a qualifying project
even if the project includes demolishing a building built before 1941.
Mr. Benson advised that the Staff Advisory Committee also discussed the prohibition on
28
demolition of Greek houses in the East RH District. He said that the Greek organizations’
support for the demolition prohibition was tied to their support for the financial incentive of tax
abatement to help them save these buildings. The Greek community also requested some
provision be made that would allow a Greek organization to remove an existing Greek house to
replace it with a new Greek house, if that were the only financially feasible option for them.
According to City Attorney Klaus, the demolition prohibition relative to Greek houses is a
foreseeable source of test litigation; however, he feels it is defensible.
Pertaining to the Urban Revitalization Campustown Criteria Matrix, Mr. Benson stated that it
was being recommended to delete, from the eligibility criteria, the use of stone, pre-cast
concrete, and concrete block with relief. It was being recommended to add criteria so that a
project would be eligible if the building on the site were originally built before 1941, if the
building would remain substantially intact, and if the historic materials and designs were
preserved and/or restored.
Discussion ensued over the new requirement to provide open space equal to 15% of the lot area
for buildings with heights above 75 feet and up to a maximum of 115 feet. Mr. Benson defined
“open space” as usable open space designed and intended for the use of all residents of
residential development, including space dedicated to the public. It was pointed out that
buildings up to 75 feet (six stories) would be allowed anywhere in this District, but any portion
above 50 feet (four stories) must step back 30 feet from any street; that requirement did not
change.
Jenn Plagman-Galvin, 2017 Country Club Boulevard, Ames, advised that the revised Plan was
supported by the majority of the Greek community. The Ames Greek community also has
suffered from declining membership, and many of its members are concerned about the growing
number of high-density apartments that are infringing on the area surrounding the Greek
community. They ask that urban revitalization benefits accompany the University-Impacted
Area Plan.
Phil Kaser, 224 Ash Avenue, Ames, representing the Greek Alumni Alliance, said that there is
a strong concern over the abundance of apartments currently available and the effects that
continued growth of off-campus housing will have on the community.
Dick Horton, 2119 Country Club Boulevard, Ames, gave his background and a chronological
history behind Greek chapters and student housing. He, too, stated that Greek membership is
declining, and there is significant concern over the significant construction of off-campus
housing. Significant renovations are needed to Greek houses to provide for life-safety issues.
Mr. Horton urged the City Council to support tax abatement for life-safety issues and schedule
frequent and continuing joint planning meetings for the overall impact of the shared vision for
this “one community.”
29
Cathy Brown, 2309 Hayes Avenue, Ames, said that she was speaking as Program Coordinator
of Facilities Management at ISU. She pointed out that the development guidelines for the core
will likely result in an increase of commercial space that may require further understanding of
the economic and market conditions of this District. Also, there is support for the setback
concept in the core district, but they prefer a two-level streetscape to maintain the existing
character. Also, they encourage consideration for restoration of single-family housing south of
Knapp and west of Hayward through the incentive program.
Moved by Wirth, seconded by Mahayni, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 05-439 approving the Final
Plan for the University-Impacted Area.
Council Member Goodhue was concerned that the developers had not come to a consensus on this.
If the Council were to make a decision on this issue tonight, he believed that the issues would have
to be revisited.
Ex-officio Member Borich stated that he was concerned about the requirement for 15% open
space; it may negatively impact development.
Council Member Cross said that he was concerned about creating too many rules, as then
nothing would happen.
Mr. Borich suggested that staff revisit the 15% open space requirement and reduce the 30'
setback to a lower number.
Council Member Goodhue stated that he would like to hear from the development community.
Moved by Goodhue, seconded by Cross, to table this issue until October 25, 2005.
Vote on Motion: 5-1. Voting aye: Cross, Goodhue, Goodman, Mahayni, Vegge. Voting nay:
Wirth. Motion declared carried.
REPORT ON PRIORITIZATION OF PLANNING AND HOUSING DEPARTMENT
PROJECT: Council Member Cross pointed out that the City Council receives information at a
very late date and is expected to make a decision on major issues in a very short time period.
Mr. Schainker pointed out that decisions on specific issues are taking too long. He
recommended that a specific prototype on the process be developed. It was recommended by
Mr. Cross that information be presented at one meeting and the decision be made at the next
meeting. Council Member Mahayni stated that Steering Committees, if in existence, need to
attend the meeting, or in the alternative, that the Council meet directly with the Steering
Committee prior to the regular Council meeting.
Council Member Wirth left the meeting at 10:40 p.m.
REQUEST TO PURCHASE AIRPORT PROPERTY AT 100 SOUTH RIVERSIDE DRIVE:
John Joiner explained that Dayton Park, L.L.C., had requested to purchase City-owned property
30
at 3100 South Riverside Drive. Clarion Technologies is currently the tenant in the building on
this 12.75-acre parcel. The building is owned by Dayton Park, L.L.C., and the land is being
leased from the City as part of the Ames Municipal Airport.
Dean Hunziker, 105 S. 16th Street, Ames, was present. He advised that Dayton Park, L.L.C., is
the owner of the building, but the City owns the land on which the building has been
constructed. Mr. Hunziker asked, if they are not able to purchase the property, that the lease be
renegotiated. Dayton Park, L.L.C., prefers to purchase the property as it would assist them with
their finances.
City Manager Schainker stated that the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has control over
airport activities due to the use of federal grant monies for development and expansion of airport
operations. The FAA has very stringent regulations for the use and sale of airport property.
Moved by Goodhue, seconded by Vegge, to refer this issue back to staff to order an appraisal
and determine the value or renegotiate the lease.
Vote on Motion: 5-0. Motion declared carried unanimously.
REQUEST FOR TEMPORARY WAIVER OF ALTERNATE-SIDE PARKING
REGULATIONS ON SUNSET DRIVE: This request was withdrawn by the developer.
ORDINANCE REVISING RENTAL HOUSING INSPECTION PROGRAM: Moved by
G
o
o
d
m
a
n
,
s
e
c
o
n
d
e
d
b
y
C
r
o
s
31
s
,
t
o
p
a
s
s
o
n
f
i
r
s
t
r
e
a
d
i
n
g
a
n
o
r
d
i
n
a
n
c
e
r
e
v
i
s
i
n
g
t
h
e
32
R
e
n
t
a
l
H
o
u
s
i
n
g
I
n
s
p
e
c
t
i
o
n
P
r
o
g
r
a
m
.
Roll Call Vote: 5-0. Motion declared carried unanimously.
ORDINANCE REZONING PROPERTY AT 198 AND 199 WILDER AVENUE: Moved by
Mahayni, seconded by Goodhue, to pass on second reading an ordinance rezoning property at
198 and 199 Wilder Avenue from “A” (Agricultural) and “RH” (Residential High Density) to
“CVCN” (Convenience Commercial Node).
Roll Call Vote: 5-0. Motion declared carried unanimously.
ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING THE 4509 AND 4512 TWAIN CIRCLE URBAN
REVITALIZATION AREA: Moved by Goodhue, seconded by Cross, to pass on second reading
an ordinance establishing the 4509 and 4512 Twain Circle Urban Revitalization Area.
Roll Call Vote: 4-1. Voting aye: Cross, Goodhue, Mahayni, Vegge. Voting nay: Goodman.
Motion declared carried.
33
ORDINANCE REZONING PROPERTY LOCATED BETWEEN DAWES DRIVE AND U.
S. HIGHWAY 69 (CALHOUN PARK): Moved by Cross, seconded by Goodman, to pass on
second reading an ordinance rezoning property located between Dawes Drive and U. S. Highway
69 (Calhoun Park) from “A” (Agricultural) and “S-GA” (Government-Airport).
Roll Call Vote: 5-0. Motion declared carried unanimously.
ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING PARKING REGULATIONS ON DALTON STREET AND
DALTON CIRCLE: Moved by Goodman, seconded by Vegge, to pass on second reading an
ordinance establishing parking regulations on Dalton Street and Dalton Circle.
Roll Call Vote: 5-0. Motion declared carried unanimously.
COMMENTS: Moved by Mahayni, seconded by Vegge, to direct staff to schedule a round-table
meeting on the Student Commission concept and the Steering Committee on the University-Impacted
Area preceding the Council’s Regular Meeting on October 25.
Vote on Motion: 5-0. Motion declared carried unanimously.
Moved by Mahayni, seconded by Vegge, to place the request of the Ames Veteran’s Memorial
Committee on the October 25, 2005, agenda.
Vote on Motion: 5-0. Motion declared carried unanimously.
Moved by Goodhue, seconded by Mahayni to refer to staff, for placement on a future agenda, the
letters from the AEDC and Sunset Beach, L.C.
Vote on Motion: 5-0. Motion declared carried unanimously.
Moved by Vegge, seconded by Cross, to refer to staff an e-mail message from Martha Atkins (sent
to Council Member Vegge) dated October 11, 2005.
Vote on Motion: 5-0. Motion declared carried unanimously.
Moved by Goodman, seconded by Cross, to request that John Joiner look into the train issue that
was mentioned during public forum tonight.
Vote on Motion: 5-0. Motion declared carried unanimously.
ADJOURNMENT: 11:10 p.m.
___________________________________ ____________________________________
Diane R. Voss, City Clerk Ted Tedesco, Mayor
34