HomeMy WebLinkAboutA027 - Request to amend Development Agreement to Change Paving of Cedar Lane to Aurora AvenueITEM #:31
DEPT:P&H
May 12, 2026
Staff Report
REQUEST TO AMEND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT TO CHANGE PAVING OF CEDAR
LANE TO AURORA AVENUE
BACKGROUND:
City Council received the attached letter from the Burgasons, developers of the Ansley
development located on Cedar Lane, requesting Council amend their previous funding request
related to the paving of Cedar Lane. The Cedar Lane agreement calls for the City to be
responsible for the future paving of approximately 700 feet of Cedar Lane as an off-site
improvement. Note that the Cedar Lane paving is only 50% City-responsibility, with the
remaining 50% an ISU obligation per a prior development agreement for the Ringgenberg
Subdivision west of Cedar Lane.
Staff anticipated in December when the agreement was approved that the City's
estimated financial obligation for Cedar Lane paving would not be needed for at least
three years based upon the timing and phasing of the development, but ultimately the
timing of its construction is at the discretion of the City Council.
The developer now is requesting that the Cedar Lane agreement be cancelled and
replaced with an agreement that the City would pave approximately 650 feet of Aurora
Avenue located at the northeast corner of the site and extending into the site (See map
in letter). The developer has indicated that this street project would facilitate near term
development in FY 2027/28 with townhomes and detached housing lots within the project. If
the new request is approved, the developer would commit to extending two other street
segments in conjunction with the City extension of Aurora to plat additional lots for
dev e lo p m e n t . The Aurora paving would be contingent on the developer platting these
additional areas for development.
The developer believes this request for supporting near term development is in line with other
development incentive requests reviewed by City Council in December 2025.
Staff agrees that the paving of Aurora is more beneficial for near-term development
benefits, but there are new financial aspects that must be considered. The Public Works
Department estimates that 650 feet of Aurora paving, sidewalks, and storm sewer would
be approximately $371,000 of cost to the City compared to approximately $250,000 for
the current Cedar Lane obligation. Since the original proposal by the developer, staff
discussed the practicality of the extension with their planned improvements and has
concluded that the extension by the City might be marginally less when accounting for
the developer's street improvement obligation.
1
Secondly, the developer requests a commitment that the improvements occur in FY
2027/28 rather than defer to a later undefined date, as is the case with Cedar Lane.
Because of the deferred and contingent timing of the Cedar Lane extension, there is no
paving project in the 5-year CIP for it. Adding a project in FY 2027/28 could displace
another project in order to prioritize the paving or increase the total financial commitments for
CIP paving projects. Staff believes this request would have to be paid with G.O. Bond
revenues.
An alternative to City financing of a paving project is possible: the use of a Residential TIF
rebate for the developer to be reimbursed for this cost. The developer would be rebated future
tax increment as development occurs. Because of the city budget legislation recently
approved by the Iowa Legislature, staff does not know the full ramifications of the new
law and cannot yet make a recommendation about whether to utilize this mechanism
for this project. The Developer has indicated to staff they do not desire to rely on TIF
rebates for the work.
OPTIONS:
Option 1: Direct Staff to Prepare an Agreement for Paving Approximately 650 Feet
Ansley Lane in Lieu of Cedar Lane
This option matches the developer's request and would have an estimated cost to the City of
approximately $350,000 to $370,000, after accounting for the developer's street extension
work. The City paving would be contingent upon the developer completing platting and other
street extension work first. The City work would be projected to occur after July 1, 2027 as
part of Fiscal Year 2027/28. City Council would add the project to the CIP as part of the FY
2027/28 budget process.
Option 2: Direct Staff to Prepare an Agreement for Paving Ansley Lane in Lieu of Cedar
Lane at an Estimated Cost to the City Equal to the Current Cedar Lane Agreement
This option would allow for a swap of obligations of an estimated equal dollar amount and be
planned for FY 2027/28 the same as Option 1. Based upon the estimated cost above, this
would equate to approximately 440 linear feet for $250,000.
Option 3: Direct Staff to Prepare an Agreement for Paving Approximately 650 feet
Ansley Lane in Lieu of Cedar Lane Utilizing Residential TIF Rebate
The Residential TIF allows for the developer to complete the project on their timing with no
City involvement or changes to the CIP. However, the new budget legislation changes how
property tax base is accounted for and staff is not prepared at this point to make a
recommendation on use of TIF for any project. If this is the preferred funding option for the
request, staff recommends tabling the request until June for staff to gain a more
comprehensive understanding of TIF under the new city financial legislation adopted by
the state.
Option 4: Take No Action
If City Council does not want to modify the planned CIP timing of projects or costs, the Council
2
would take no action on this request and maintain the current agreement.
STAFF COMMENTS:
The Developer initially requested the Cedar Lane paving incentive as a consideration of
reducing the development's financial burden in relation to an off-site cost of paving an existing
segment of Cedar Lane as development progressed south. Paving Cedar Lane did not
directly facilitate development. The proposed change by the Developer is intended to create
new term development opportunities similar to other incentives granted to other projects in
December 2025.
As an internal street to a development, the request is most similar to Hayden Preserve or
Auburn Trail that sought general development support. Incentives for these two projects were
a combination of waived connections fees, residential TIF, and use of ARPA funds for
oversizing and pioneer infrastructure. In this case these funding options are not available,
with the exception of the residential TIF. However, staff needs more time to understand
the ramifications of the new law regarding TIF if that is a preferred option.
If Council proceeds with the request, it will likely require use of G.O. Bonds to fund the project.
GO Bonds were used in limited amounts for other projects over the next three years, such as
Cottonwood extension and cost sharing for a Stange Extension, totaling an estimated
$641,000 for the CIP in FY 2027/28.
If Council chooses to move ahead with the Developer's request, a formal development
agreement amendment will be required to be prepared and returned for City Council approval.
ATTACHMENT(S):
Cedar Lane - Aurora Avenue Revision Request.pdf
3
To: Ames City Council
From: Steve and Anne Burgason
Date: March 2, 2026
RE: RequesCng Revision to the Cedar Lane Agreement
We would like to request a revision to the Ansley/Cedar Lane Agreement that the Ames City
Council agreed to on December 5, 2025 at the Ames City Council MeeCng. Our revised request
would be to nullify the Cedar Lane Agreement in exchange for the City of Ames agreeing to pave
a secCon of Aurora Avenue of approximately 650 feet (starCng at the Aurora Ave. current end
point). Ansley would remain responsible for the related improvements and extension of
uCliCes. Ansley Land LLC would also complete the remaining approximately 600 feet secCon of
Aurora Avenue and 200 feet Ansley Avenue to the current Ansley current end point and the 300
feet length of Swan Lane with roundabout. This would allow a complete connecCon from
University Boulevard to Cedar Lane. Also, in accordance with the goals of the “Developer
IncenCves” to open up more lots with home size diversity, this would allow Ansley Land to open
up a total of 38 - 42 lots and one commercial lot:
-6 small single residence Co[age Court Home Lots 1300-1600 sq ^ (Lots 99-104)
-4 small single residence “Shot Gun” Home Lots 1300 - 1600 sq ^ (Lots 119-122)
-10 Townhome Lots 1600 - 1900 sq ^ (Outlots 117,123)
-12 Mews Lots 1400 plus sq ^ (Outlots 117,123)
-9 large residence lots 2000-3000 sq ^ (Outlots 116, 98,32,31)
-1 Commercial Lot #118.
If approved, we would ask for this revised agreement to be put in the City of Ames Budget for
either a revised 2026-27 Budget or 2027-28 budget year.
This revision would accomplish several things. 1) This revised agreement would align be[er
with the goals of the Developer IncenCves to increase lots and diverse home sizes and styles
2) The variety in lot and home sizes would accommodate the current market demand and
increase the city’s property tax revenue. 3) It would allow Ansley Land to be on a more even
“playing field” with compeCng developers receiving incenCves and to be able to receive the
incenCve in a similar Cmeline. 4) We realize that this is ask is more than Cedar Lane Agreement,
but comparable to what has been offered to the development just to our south and actually
opens up more lots.
Thank you for your consideraCon.
Steve and Anne Burgason
Please see a[ached images for visual clarity.
4
5