AGENDA REGULAR MEETING OF THE AMES CONFERENCE BOARD AND REGULAR MEETING OF THE AMES CITY COUNCIL COUNCIL CHAMBERS - CITY HALL* DECEMBER 8, 2020
*DUE TO THE COVID-19 PANDEMIC, THE CONFERENCE BOARD MEETING AND CITY COUNCIL MEETING WILL BE CONDUCTED AS ELECTRONIC MEETINGS. IF YOU WISH TO PROVIDE INPUT ON ANY ITEM, YOU MAY DO SO AS A VIDEO PARTICIPANT BY GOING TO: https://zoom.us/j/826593023 OR BY TELEPHONE BY DIALING: US:1-312-626-6799 or toll-free: 1-888-475-4499 Zoom Meeting ID: 826 593 023
YOU MAY VIEW THE MEETING ONLINE AT THE FOLLOWING SITES: https://www.youtube.com/ameschannel12 https://www.cityofames.org/channel12 or watch the meeting live on Mediacom Channel 12
REGULAR MEETING OF THE AMES CONFERENCE BOARD
NOTICE TO THE PUBLIC: The Conference Board welcomes comments from the public during discussion. If you wish to speak, please see the instructions listed above.
CALL TO ORDER: 6:00 p.m.
1. Roll Call 2. Appointments to Examining Board: a. Motion appointing member to the Examining Board by Ames City Council b. Motion appointing member to the Examining Board by Story County Board of Supervisors c. Motion appointing member to the Examining Board by School Districts (Ames, Gilbert, Nevada, United)
CONFERENCE BOARD COMMENTS:
ADJOURNMENT:
REGULAR MEETING OF AMES CITY COUNCIL* *The Regular Meeting of the Ames City Council will immediately follow the Regular Meeting of the Ames Conference Board.
NOTICE TO THE PUBLIC: The Mayor and City Council welcome comments from the public during discussion. If you wish to speak, please see the instructions listed above. The normal process on any particular agenda item is that the motion is placed on the floor, input is received from the audience, the Council is given an opportunity to comment on the issue or respond to the audience concerns, and the vote is taken. On ordinances, there is time provided for public input at the time of the first reading.
CONSENT AGENDA: All items listed under the Consent Agenda will be enacted by one motion. There will be no separate discussion of these items unless a request is made prior to the time the Council members vote on the motion. 1. Motion approving payment of claims 2. Motion approving Minutes of November 24, 2020 3. Motion approving Report of Change Orders for period November 16 - 30, 2020 4. Motion approving New 12-month Class E Liquor License with Class B Wine Permit and Sunday Sales: Kum & Go #7706, 2320 Lincoln Way 5. Motion approval renewal of the following Beer Permits, Wine Permits, and Liquor Licenses: a. Class C Liquor License with Sunday Sales,1 Night Stand, 124 Welch, Pending DRAM b. Class E Liquor License, Class B Wine Permit, Class C Beer Permit with Sunday Sales: Cyclone Liquors, 626 Lincoln Way, Pending DRAM c. Class C Liquor License with Outdoor Service & Sunday Sales: Café Beau, 2504 Lincoln Way d. Class B Beer with Outdoor Service & Sunday Sales: Torrent Brewing Co LLC, 504 Burnett Avenue e. Class C Liquor License, Class B Wine Permit with Sunday Sales, Outdoor Service: Mickey’s Irish Pub, 109 Welch Avenue 6. Resolution setting date of public hearing for December 22, 2020, to vacate Public Utility Easement located across portions of Southtown Subdivision (300 and 310 S. 17th Street) 7. Resolution approving Professional Services Agreement with CGA Consultants, of Ames, Iowa, for Flood Mitigation - River Flooding - Land Acquisition Services in an amount not-to-exceed $74,800 8. Resolution approving Agreement with Iowa Department of Transportation for Traffic Safety Improvement Program Funding (S. 16th Street/S. Duff Avenue) in the amount of $495,000 9. Resolution approving Amendment to the Intergovernmental Agreement between the City of Ames and City of Nevada for Emergency Response Coverage of Interstate 35 and Highway 30 outside of the Ames city limits and extending the expiration date to December 31, 2030 10. Resolution approving FY 2020/21 Commission On The Arts Spring Special Project Grants 11. Sunsmart Ames Community Solar Farm: a. Resolution approving Memorandum of Agreement b. Resolution approving Notice and Acknowledgment of Assignment with ForeFront Power 12. Resolution approving preliminary plans and specifications for 2020/21 Pavement Restoration - Slurry Seal Program; setting January 6, 2021 as bid due date and January 12, 2021 as date of public hearing 13. Baker Subdivision Geothermal Heat Pump System: a. Motion rejecting bid b. Resolution approving preliminary plans and specifications for Baker Subdivision Geothermal Well Installations; setting January 27, 2021, as bid due date and February 9, 2021, as date of public hearing
2 14. Resolution approving Change Order No. 1 with TEi Construction Services, Inc., for Unit 8 Boiler Repair Project, in the amount of $369,324 15. Resolution approving Change Order No. 1 to contact with Anderson Process & Instrumentation Solutions, LLC, for Maintenance Services Contract for Power Plant, in an amount not-to-exceed $443,889.50 16. Resolution approving contract renewal for Furnishing Gases and Cylinders to the Power Plant with Airgas USA, LLC for a total amount not-to-exceed $32,000 17. Resolution accepting completion of 2017/18 Right-of-Way Restoration 18. Resolution accepting completion of Teagarden Drainage Improvements 19. Resolution approving partial completion of public improvements and reducing security for Crane Farm Subdivision, 2nd Addition 20. Resolution approving partial completion of public improvements and reducing security for Crane Farm Subdivision, 6th Addition 21. Resolution approving partial completion of public improvements and reducing security for Scenic Valley Subdivision, 4th Addition 22. Resolution approving partial completion of public improvements and reducing security for Scenic Valley Subdivision, 5th Addition 23. Resolution approving partial completion of public improvements and reducing security for Sunset Ridge Subdivision, 8th Addition 24. Resolution approving partial completion of public improvements and reducing security for Sunset Ridge Subdivision, 9th Addition 25. Resolution approving completion of public improvements and releasing security for South Fork Subdivision, 9th Addition 26. Resolution approving completion of public improvements and releasing security for South Fork Subdivision Wrap-Up
PUBLIC FORUM: This is a time set aside for comments from the public on topics of City business other than those listed on this agenda. Please understand that the Council will not take any action on your comments at this meeting due to requirements of the Open Meetings Law, but may do so at a future meeting. The Mayor and City Council welcome comments from the public; however, at no time is it appropriate to use profane, obscene, or slanderous language. The Mayor may limit each speaker to three minutes.
ADMINISTRATION: 27. Motion approving Request for Proposals for Climate Action Plan Scope of Services 28. Motion approving Request for Proposals for the Waste-to-Energy Options Study Scope of Services 29. Staff Report regarding Iowa Reinvestment District Program
PLANNING & HOUSING: 30. Resolution approving Downtown Facade Grant 31. Special request for Urban Revitalization tax abatement in 2021 from 311 Ash Avenue (Farmhouse Fraternity) 32. Staff Report regarding Outreach Related to Small Lots and Increasing Housing Type Diversity
3 POLICE: 33. Staff Report regarding cameras in Campustown
HEARINGS: 34. Hearing on an Amendment to the Annexation Moratorium Agreement with the City of Nevada: a. Resolution approving Amendment of 28E Agreement regarding establishment of a division line between corporate boundaries 35. Revisions to short-term rentals necessitated by a new state law that prohibits local governments from regulating short-term rentals differently from other residential uses: a. Public Hearing on amendment to Chapter 29: i. First passage of ordinance amending Chapter 29 b. First passage of ordinance amending Chapter 13 (Rental) c. First passage of ordinance amending Chapter 35 (Guest Lodging) d. Resolution repealing fee for Guest Lodging Licensure 36. Hearing on 2019/20 Traffic Signal Program (Lincoln Way/Beach Avenue): a. Resolution approving the reallocation of $20,000 from the savings in the 2018/19 Signal Program to the 2019/20 Traffic Signal Program (Lincoln Way/Beach Avenue) b. Resolution approving final plans and specifications and awarding contract to Van Maanen Electric, Inc., of Newton, Iowa, in the amount of $274,254.18 37. Hearing on Inis Grove Sidewalk Project: a. Resolution approving final plans and specifications and awarding contract to Pillar, Inc., of Huxley, Iowa, in the amount of $157,199.11
ORDINANCES: 38. Second passage of Ordinance amending the East University Impacted Urban Revitalization Area boundary by adding 313 Lynn Avenue and adding an expiration date of April 1, 2024 39. Second passage of zoning text amendments regarding the extension of building features into required setbacks 40. Second passage of Face-Covering Ordinance extending sunset clause to June 30, 2021
FINANCE: 41. Budget Issues/Guidelines
DISPOSITION OF COMMUNICATIONS TO COUNCIL:
COUNCIL COMMENTS:
ADJOURNMENT:
4
MEMO
Caring People Quality Programs Exceptional Service
To: Conference Board
From: Mayor John A. Haila, Chairperson
Date: December 4, 2020
Subject: Process to Appoint New City Assessor
After following up with the Director of Revenue a/k/a Department of Revenue, it was verified that the first step in appointing a new City Assessor is to create an Examining Board. After appointing its members, the Examining Board will request the register of names of all individuals eligible for appointment as Assessor. Only those individuals listed on the register may be appointed to the Assessor’s position.
The process includes:
1. The Conference Board shall meet and appoint three members to the Examining Board: one member represents the Ames City Council; one represents the Board of Supervisors; and one represents all the school districts (not one from each school district, but one representing all school districts). The appointees to the Examining Board must be residents of the City of Ames (..."resident of the assessor jurisdiction"...) [Code of Iowa 441.3]. 2. Within seven days of the occurrence of a vacancy, the Examining Board must meet (441.6.1). In this situation, the position of Assessor will not be vacant until January 1, 2021, so the Examining Board will not be constrained by the seven-day time limit. 3. The Examining Board will meet, appoint a chairperson and secretary, and formally issue a request to the Department of Revenue. Once the register is received, the Examining Board can solicit those on the registry for interest in the position.
515 Clark Ave. Office of the Mayor 515.239.5105 main 515.239.5142 fax Ames, IA 50010 www.CityofAmes.org
4. Per the Code of Iowa, the Examining Board decides on whether they want to "...conduct a further examination, either written or oral, of any person whose name appears on the register, and shall make written report of the examination and submit the report together with the names of those individuals certified by the Department of Revenue to the Conference Board within 15 days of receipt of the register” (441.6.1). 5. The Chairperson of the Conference Board will call for a Conference Board meeting by written notice. The Conference Board will meet and appoint an Assessor from the register of eligible candidates submitted to it by the Examining Board (441.6.2). 6. The Chairperson of the Conference Board notifies the Director of Revenue in writing of the Conference Board's Assessor appointment and effective date (within ten days of the Conference Board's decision).
The item on the Conference Board's Agenda for December 8, 2020, will be to appoint the three individuals to the Examining Board (as set forth in 1 above).
JAH/drv
MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE AMES AREA METROPOLITAN PLANNING ORGANIZATION TRANSPORTATION POLICY COMMITTEE AND REGULAR MEETING OF THE AMES CITY COUNCIL
AMES, IOWA NOVEMBER 24, 2020
AMES AREA METROPOLITAN PLANNING ORGANIZATION (AAMPO) TRANSPORTATION POLICY COMMITTEE MEETING Mayor Haila announced that it is impractical to hold an in-person Council meeting due to the Governor of Iowa declaring a public health emergency because of the COVID-19 pandemic. Therefore, limits have been placed on public gatherings, and this meeting is being held as an electronic meeting as allowed by Section 21.8 of the Iowa Code. The Mayor then provided how the public could participate in the meeting via internet or by phone.
CALL TO ORDER: The Ames Area Metropolitan Planning Organization (AAMPO) Transportation Policy Committee meeting, which was being held electronically, was called to order by Ames Mayor and voting member John Haila at 6:01 p.m. on the 24th day of November, 2020. Other voting members brought into the meeting were: Bronwyn Beatty-Hansen, City of Ames; Gloria Betcher, City of Ames; Amber Corrieri, City of Ames; Tim Gartin, City of Ames; Rachel Junck, City of Ames; David Martin, City of Ames; Bill Zinnel, Boone County Supervisor. Lauris Olson, Story County Supervisor; Jacob Ludwig, Transit Board; and Jon Popp, Mayor of Gilbert, were absent.
AMENDMENT TO FY 2021/24 TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (TIP): Public Works Director John Joiner explained that an Amendment to the current year Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) was necessary. The Amendment is to allow CyRide to apply for a COVID-19 Research Demonstration Grant that will allow them to incorporate automatic passenger counters in the buses. Mr. Joiner mentioned that the automatic passenger count will allow potential passengers to look at the number of people on a bus for the route they want to take. This way the potential passenger can decide to take the bus that is coming or take a later one that might not be as crowded.
Mayor Haila pointed out that when he had served on the Transit Board, they had looked at having an automatic passenger counter added, but it was very expensive to implement. Another benefit would be that they would be able to do studies and look at ridership as the counter will give real-time data.
Moved by Betcher, seconded by Junck, to set the date of the public hearing for the Amendment to the FY 2021/24 Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) for January 12, 2021. Vote on Motion: 8-0. Motion declared carried unanimously.
POLICY COMMITTEE COMMENTS: There were no comments from the Policy Committee. ADJOURNMENT: Moved by Zinnel to adjourn the Ames Area Metropolitan Planning Organization Transportation Policy Committee meeting at 6:05 p.m.
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE AMES CITY COUNCIL
CALL TO ORDER: Mayor John Haila called the Regular Meeting of the Ames City Council, which was being held electronically, to order at 6:05 p.m. with the following Council members participating: Bronwyn Beatty-Hansen, Gloria Betcher, Amber Corrieri, Tim Gartin, Rachel Junck, and David Martin. Ex officio Member Nicole Whitlock was also present.
Mayor Haila stated that it is impractical to hold an in-person Council meeting due to the Governor of Iowa declaring a public health emergency because of the COVID-19 pandemic. Therefore, limits have been placed on public gatherings, and this meeting is being held as an electronic meeting as allowed by Section 21.8 of the Iowa Code. The Mayor then provided how the public could participate in the meeting via internet or by phone.
The Mayor announced that the Council was working off an Amended Agenda. City staff had removed the wording “Pending Final Inspection” from Item No. 7 and corrected the year on Item No. 35b to April 1, 2024. Mayor Haila mentioned that staff had also pulled Item 31and Item 34b from the Agenda.
PROCLAMATION FOR “SMALL BUSINESS SATURDAY,” NOVEMBER 28, 2020: Mayor Haila declared November 28, 2020 as “Small Business Saturday.” The Mayor asked that residents of the community support the local small businesses and merchants on November 28, 2020, and throughout the year with their patronage.
Accepting the Proclamation was John Hall, Chamber of Commerce Senior Director of Business Development. Mr. Hall thanked the Mayor and Council for the Proclamation. He explained that he had submitted the Proclamation on behalf of Ames Main Street, but the Proclamation speaks broader than just Ames Main Street. The Ames Chamber, the Farmer’s Market, Ames Main Street, and Campustown Action Association all appreciate the small businesses that exist in the Ames community. Mr. Hall reminded everyone to shop small and shop local this holiday season. He noted that many retailers across the community have found new ways to provide online services or the ability to purchase items online during the pandemic.
CONSENT AGENDA: Moved by Gartin, seconded by Betcher, to approve the following items on the Consent Agenda. 1. Motion approving payment of claims 2. Motion approving Minutes of Regular City Council Meeting held November 10. 2020 3. Motion approving Report of Change Orders for period November 1 - 15, 2020 4. Motion approving certification of Civil Service applicants 5. Motion setting Conference Board meeting for December 8, 2020
2 6. Motion approving new 12-month Class C Beer Permit, Class E Liquor License, Class B Wine Permit with Sunday Sales for Neighborhood Liquor & Smokes Inc 3505 Lincoln Way Ste 105 7. Motion approving Class C Liquor License with Sunday Sales Ownership Change for Texas Roadhouse Holdings Inc 519 Duff Avenue 8. Motion approval renewal of the following Beer Permits, Wine Permits, and Liquor Licenses: a. Class C Liquor License with Outdoor Service & Sunday Sales - Aunt Maude’s 543- 547 Main St b. Class C Liquor License with Outdoor Service, Sunday Sales and Catering Privilege - The Café 2616 Northridge Parkway c. Class C Liquor License with Outdoor Service, Sunday Sales and Catering Privilege - Thumbs Bar 2816 West Street d. Class C Liquor License with Outdoor Service & Sunday Sales -Tip Top Lounge 201 E Lincoln Way 9. RESOLUTION NO. 20-593 adopting revised FMLA and Parental Leave Policies for City employees, effective October 19, 2020 10. RESOLUTION NO. 20-594 approving 2020 Urban Renewal Report: a. RESOLUTION NO. 20-595 approving certification of TIF Debt for Campustown and annual appropriation of Kingland TIF Rebate b. RESOLUTION NO. 20-596 approving certification of TIF debt and appropriating payment of a rebate of incremental taxes for the Barilla TIF District 11. ASSET Contract with Primary Health Care: a. RESOLUTION NO. 20-597 approving Agreement with Primary Health Care for FY 2020/21 City ASSET funds in the amount of $95,000 to assist with purchasing equipment for Dental Clinic 12. RESOLUTION NO. 20-598 approving Amendment to FY 2020/21 Ames Historical Society Outside Funding Contract due to COVID-19 13. RESOLUTION NO. 20-599 approving Professional Services Agreement with WHKS & Co., of Ames, Iowa, for 2020/21 S. Dayton Avenue Improvements in an amount not to exceed $86,100 14. RESOLUTION NO. 20-600 approving Encroachment Permit Agreement for awnings & building paneling at 330-5th Street & 412 Burnett Avenue 15. RESOLUTION NO. 20-601 approving extension of waiver of parking regulations for parking spaces at Ames Public Library to facilitate curbside pick-up 16. Unit 8 Boiler Repair: a. RESOLUTION NO. 20-602 awarding contract for Unit 8 Boiler Repair to TEi Construction Services, Inc., of Duncan, South Carolina, in the amount of $6,690,271 b. RESOLUTION NO. 20-603 approving contract and bond for the Unit 8 Boiler Repair 17. RESOLUTION NO. 20-604 approving preliminary plans and specifications for Maintenance Facility Fabric Structure; setting December 29, 2020, as bid due date and January 12, 2021, as date of public hearing
3 18. RESOLUTION NO. 20-605 approving preliminary plans and specifications for Auditorium HVAC Replacement; setting December 29, 2020, as bid due date and January 12, 2021, as date of public hearing 19. RESOLUTION NO. 20-606 approving preliminary plans and specifications for Homewood Slope Stabilization Project; setting December 16, 2020, as bid due date and December 22, 2020, as date of public hearing 20. RESOLUTION NO. 20-607 approving Change Order No. 2 for 2019/20 Asphalt Pavement Improvements in an amount not to exceed $133,061.22 21. RESOLUTION NO. 20-608 approving Change Order for FY 2020/21 Right-of-Way Tree Trimming & Removal Contract in the amount of $72,091 22. Inis Grove Restroom Project: a. RESOLUTION NO. 20-609 approving Change Orders No. 1-8 resulting in a credit of $1,845 b. RESOLUTION NO. 20-610 accepting completion of Inis Grove Restroom Project 23. 2017/18 Arterial Street Improvements (13th Street): a. RESOLUTION NO. 20-611 approving Change Order No. 3, a deduction in the amount of $58,153.60 b. RESOLUTION NO. 20-612 accepting completion of 2017/18 Arterial Street Improvements (13th Street) 24. 2018/19 Collector Street Pavement Improvements (Hickory Drive): a. RESOLUTION NO. 20-613 approving Change Order No. 5, a deduction in the amount of $50,951.70 b. RESOLUTION NO. 20-614 accepting completion of 2018/19 Collector Street Pavement Improvements (Hickory Drive) 25. RESOLUTION NO. 20-615 accepting completion of 2018/19 Storm Water Facility Rehabilitation (Little Bluestem) 26. RESOLUTION NO. 20-616 accepting completion of Scaffolding and Related Services and Supply 27. RESOLUTION NO. 20-617 accepting completion of Specialized Wet Dry Vacuum, Hydro Blast, and Related Cleaning Services 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: Merlin Pfannkuch, 1424 Kellogg Avenue, Ames, stated he had comments reagrding the East Industrial Area, that do not pertain to the East Industrial Zoning item on the Agenda. He explained that he has been asking for more transparency on the East Industrial Area project. Mr. Pfannkuch would like to see some community discussion on the project before the City spends $6-7 million. He mentioned that from the start, the project had been treated as if the Ames Economic Development Commission (AEDC) and the Council are insiders and the public is supposed to trust that the City is doing a good job looking out for taxpayers. Mr. Pfannkuch stated that the Council approved the funding for the project six years ago, and to this day, there is still not any company that has publicly announced that they want to build in the area. When the project was started, the City thought there was going to be more spinoffs and that has not happened, and he
4 thought that the public should get more assurances that the project is a good investment before a lot of money is spent. There is now a pandemic and maybe in a few months there will be a clearer idea on if there is a vaccine, but how fast the economy is going to recover is still uncertain. There are numerous communities in Iowa that are trying to attract businesses and industries by getting ready to build infrastructure, but he doesn’t see any great demand for building industry in Iowa or the United States. He would like to know who is “chomping at the bit” to build at this location. He maintained that if a company wanted to build, it would be willing to say so publicly so the community has some assurance that it would be a worthwhile endeavor. Mr. Pfannkuch would like to have a special meeting to discuss this topic further as a community.
REQUEST FOR THE CITY TO PURCHASE ROSE PRAIRIE PROPERTY: City Manager Steve Schainker stated a report was given to the Council that was divided into three different categories. The three categories were: 1) Water quality in the Ada Hayden Watershed; 2) Park needs in the north growth area; and, 3) Development impacts of making the Rose Prairie property a park. Mayor Haila asked for each Department to give a brief summary of the Staff Report.
Water and Pollution Control Director John Dunn stated staff utilized several different modeling tools to estimate the water quality leaving the Rose Prairie site under four different scenarios. The baseline scenario looked at the water quality leaving the site under the existing row-cropped agricultural conditions. The second scenario looked at the likely water quality leaving the site based on the “Rose Prairie - Revised Master Plan.” The third scenario looked at the water quality that could be expected to leave the site if the entire parcel were converted using a combination of beneficial treatment practices. The fourth scenario looked at the possibility of making additional targeted water quality improvements while working within the general land uses laid out in the Rose Prairie Master Plan. Staff had found that the original design capacity of the north wetland complex mirrored very closely with what staff estimated the nutrient export would be from Rose Prairie if it was developed as envisioned. If the property was fully retired, the nutrient protection already covers 75-90%, depending on what type of pollutants are looked at. Mr. Dunn explained that a question would be if the dollar amount to get the final pound of nutrient is worth it or not. Staff’s conclusion that was reached with the modeling is that the existing wetlands are adequately protective of the lakes of Ada Hayden if the Rose Prairie complex is developed as originally envisioned.
Planning and Housing Director Kelly Diekmann explained that Rose Prairie was included as part of the north growth Tier 1 area in relation to the Ames Plan 2040. Staff moved forward assuming that build-out would occur in the Hyde Avenue area. In the west and south are the other Tier 1 and Tier 2 areas that were prioritized as expansion areas, the east was also included, but is further out. Director Diekmann mentioned that there wasn’t as much readily available land in Rose Prairie as there is land that needs to be developed and some extensions of infrastructure would be necessary. The focus would mainly be on water and sewer. Staff identified, without knowing what properties would want to be annexed, that about $2.5 million to $6 million capital improvement plan would need to be set up in the budget within the next couple of years. Mr. Diekmann explained that the Rose Prairie Development Group had contacted staff earlier this summer after being silent for two years due to issues with the assessment and connection fees with financing the project. The Rose
5 Prairie Development Group does plan to come forward and ask the City Council to look at some updates to its Master Plan and other amendments, and hopefully move forward in 2021 with construction of a housing development.
Mayor Haila asked for clarification if the proposed changes to the Master Plan would affect the Conservation Overlay or the calculations that the Water Pollution Control staff had done. Mr. Diekmann stated that in terms of footprint of development, the Rose Prairie Development Group is trying to work within the housing units that they have already been entitled with and rearrange them to a more efficient layout. The Rose Prairie Development Group will still have to meet the Conservation Subdivision Ordinance and a lot of green space in the project that would meet both the Chapter 5B Stormwater standards as well as the Conservation Ordinance. Mr. Diekmann mentioned that what the Water Pollution Control Department had for modeling was to have a large pond in the middle and the Rose Prairie Development Group is re-visiting some of its design choices, but does not have an updated concept to share with the Council. He noted that a new concept should be coming within the next month.
Parks and Recreation Director Keith Abraham stated that in the current Park Master Plan, there is nothing identified in the north area for either a community or regional park, but in the Ames 2040 Plan, it was discussed that in the growth areas to the north, west, and south, a community park should be added. A community park is roughly a 40-60-acre park with a service area of one to two miles with amenities that would service the community (ball diamonds, tennis courts, etc.). With the Ames 2040 Plan a community park could be added to the north growth area. Mr. Abraham noted that if the Council decided to do something with the land, a community park should be part of the Plan.
City Manager Schainker reminded the Council that given the magnitude of the expenditures needed to purchase the land for only wetlands, develop it as a community park, or both, a bond referendum would be needed.
Council Member Betcher asked Director Dunn how often they have had to access Ada Hayden as a back-up water supply. Director Dunn stated that they have used Ada Hayden as a back-up where they have had to pump from the lakes to the river on two occasions. He explained that it would only be during an extreme drought that this would be done. Mr. Dunn pointed out that they are moving water from the lakes at the park into the river. North River Valley Park had been identified as a primary recharge zone for the downtown wells. The water then percolates down into the a quifer for formation; staff would be pulling the water out of the ground as they normally would.
Council Member Betcher stated that Rose Prairie has been under development for several years and asked how much of the infrastructure had already been installed that has impacted the ability for developers to see the property as a feasible development. Director Diekmann stated that before 2015 when the City put the street in and extended water and sewer, development was completely infeasible, but the land has been able to be developed for five years. The City had set certain development fees to recoup the costs related to the street paving and water and sewer connection fees. He stated that during conversations with the developers, he believed the reason a project has
6 not moved forward was because of the timing of how some of the fees were adopted. The developer has been trying to find a way to spread those fees out without having to pay for everything up front. Mr. Diekmann stated he believed the other issue is the Conservation Subdivision. There is a lot of water that goes through the property and it makes it unique as to how the street patterns have to be done. Ms. Betcher commented that one of the options was to possibly pursue a 40-60-acre park and wanted to know if that would complicate matters more for the developers. Mr. Diekmann stated that the developer is aware that the request came in asking the City to purchase the property, but he has not spoken with the developer in great detail.
Council Member Gartin asked if, instead of having the property developed into residential properties and take it off the tax rolls, there was a way to estimate the fiscal impact. City Manager Schainker explained he would have to see the overall development, what the average priced home would be, and how many apartments there would be. He noted that it would all be speculative, but would be going from zero to a lot of money. Mr. Gartin stated the fiscal impacts would be a variable that the Council would want to understand. Mr. Schainker noted that there would be an upfront cost of purchasing the land and developer costs to make the land a park, but also the lost revenue would be part of the equation. Mr. Gartin wanted to know if the Finance Department could provide the Council with a rough estimation on the amount of lost revenue, with having to make some presumptions. Mr. Schainker stated that they could try to do that, but it is easy to know that if it is going to be development of a wetland and a park, there is going to be zero revenue opposed to a substantial amount with a subdivision.
Council Member Gartin explained that there has been a lot of work on the Ames 2040 Plan and the Staff Report indicated that there would be about 620 residential units. Mr. Gartin inquired if the number of units was correct. Mr. Diekmann stated that is the maximum amount allowed on the property under the current zoning.
Council Member Gartin asked Director Diekmann how would it impact taxpayers with the cost of adding the additional infrastructure if the Council were to push development out further. Director Diekmann mentioned that is a strategy question that the Council would have to grapple with. He mentioned that if the Council followed the model in the Staff Report, it showed that development was expected to carry most of the costs through connection fees and assessments. The City did pay for about a quarter of the street paving costs. Staff identified in the Ames Plan 2040 that certain parts of the trunk line extensions, over-sizing of water main extensions, and road widening would probably be a City cost, but there are some costs that would go back to the developer. A trunk line is always needed and will more than likely be a City charge.
Council Member Gartin wanted to know the approximate number of acres in the Ada Hayden park system. Director Abraham explained there are 437 acres at Ada Hayden and 130 of that is the lake.
Council Member Corrieri stated the Staff Report indicated that if the City were to purchase the property, a community park would be put in to include several different amenities that would include an athletic field. She wanted to know if the intent of the property would be used for a variety of
7 community activities and amenities. Director Abraham explained it would, as a community park, have amenities, e.g. a ball diamond. He stated staff has been looking at moving away from the floodplain. The six ball diamonds in the River Valley Park are in a floodplain. Staff discussed if they removed the ball diamonds from River Valley Park and put them in this area, then they could re- purpose River Valley Park into something else. He noted that these were just ideas that were discussed. Ms. Corrieri wanted to know if the Council pursued a smaller 40-50-acre option, would there still be an intent to put different uses and amenities on the property. Mr. Abraham stated that yes, some amenities could go there, but not all of them. Mr. Schainker stated the policy decision for the Council would be if this is the correct location for a community park.
Council Member Betcher asked how big River Valley was for the softball complexes. Director Abraham explained there was about 14-15-acres with green space.
Mayor Haila opened public comment.
James Pease, 3840 Stagecoach Road, Ames, President of the Friends of Ada Hayden Heritage Park, thanked staff for meeting with him to discuss some of the modeling that was done. The reason the Friends of Ada Hayden Heritage Park brought the request to the Council was because it was in the best interest of the City. Mr. Pease noted there were three primary reasons he put in his email to the Mayor and Council as to why the City should purchase the property. He stated the first was the human need for parks, commenting that if anyone has gone to a park in the last few months, there have been a lot of people that have returned to nature. The second reason was biodiversity as humans expand its footprint on the landscape, other species tend to suffer. He noted the Staff Report did not even touch on that subject. The third was lake protection. He noted that in his report he sent to the Mayor and Council, the land is highly erodible in the Ada Hayden Watershed. Drainage from the land will not only include the nutrients, but will also include heavy metals, hydrocarbon, plastics, and everything that will run off from an urban landscape. Mr. Pease stated the Friends of Ada Hayden Heritage Park agree that the thought of housing is better than the current agricultural production, but the best would be for some permanent vegetation. Modeling is what someone thinks will happen, but will not account for all the impacts. The developer has now re-contacted the City to move forward. He urged the Council to not proceed with the development of the property. Mr. Pease mentioned that having a gas station put onto this property should not be considered.
Wendy White, 3702 Ashton Drive, Ames, stated that she wanted to advocate that the land should be purchased by the City and placed into permanent wetlands. She commented that the Council has a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to make a difference of historical importance in preserving the nature of Ada Hayden. The extraordinary nature of Ada Hayden relates to the opportunity to experience wildlife and native prairie savannah on a daily basis within the Ames city limits. Ms. White stated it would be a treasure and tribute to Ames commitment to the sustainable future. In addition to the concerns regarding the harm to the water quality and the wildlife she is equally concerned about the damage to the pristine aesthetics of a park in terms of destroying the sweeping prairie views. She stated the Council has a priceless treasure that should not be traded for another nondescript residential development or manicured baseball diamond. In terms of considering the lost
8 revenue calculations, she asked to please consider the loss of revenue due to diminishing the appeal of a major regional attraction.
Erv Klaas, 2200 Hamilton Drive, #508, Ames, mentioned that he has been involved with the property known now as Rose Prairie since 1999. Mr. Klaas reviewed the history of the land and the area around Rose Prairie. He noted that the area will not support 620 homes and still protect Ada Hayden Park. Mr. Klaas asked Director John Dunn how he could conclude that the north wetland complex is functioning well enough when the first and second wetland is almost completely filled with sediment. Mr. Klaas explained that both wetlands will need to be dredged if the City wants to move forward with development in the area. He noted that he is an Ecologist and has had training in wetland ecology. When he saw the sign up for sale, he thought it would be a wonderful opportunity for the City to protect the Park and have a real class park for biodiversity. He mentioned that biodiversity is very important, and the earth needs to be protected. Mr. Klaas urged the Council to think longterm and think of their grandchildren who would be using the land.
Jeri Neal, 916 Ridgewood Avenue, Ames, stated she had already written to the Mayor and the Council about her concerns regarding making space for biodiversity. She mentioned her letter raised some serious concerns about citizens’ understanding of the development and conservation overlays. Ms. Neal mentioned she put in her letter a few ideas/options that other people had mentioned that might bring everyone to the table for a discussion. She stated that if the Council decided to retain the current commitment for the Rose Prairie development, her overall concern would be how to keep the crown jewel of Ames, (Ada Hayden) looking and functioning as it already is. So many communities would fall over sideways to have something like Ada Hayden to claim for their community. Ms. Neal stated that the Friends of Ada Hayden Heritage Park report that was submitted showed a deeper look at the science. She noted that the Report and conversations with City of Ames staff suggests that the City doesn’t have a handle on how the developed Rose Prairie property uses may impact the water quality and Ada Hayden in general. Ms. Neal explained the way she read the report is that future development will incur unmeasured and ongoing risks to Ada Hayden. She thought that the City should be willing to choose extra investment to ensure that the City is being responsible for the land use and the water quality. She noted the importance of monitoring and sampling the water and the City should take it more seriously.
Merlin Pfannkuch, 1424 Kellogg Avenue, Ames, commented that what is striking to him is the Council’s hesitancy to invest in the property versus its willingness to ask the public to spend $6-8 million to extend the infrastructure as far as the Verbio plant. Mr. Pfannkuch didn’t understand why the City wants to continually chase dollars when there are other values that a dollar value can’t be put on.
Council Member Betcher stated this is an interesting question that was proposed to the Council as they have gone along with the original plan for so long. She wondered how much the Council is doing is inertia as opposed to thinking seriously about the potential to do something different with the Rose Prairie property. Ms. Betcher mentioned that she has seen the property over the years and it had never occurred to her that there could be an opportunity for the land to be a park or an
9 additional wetland for Ada Hayden. Her main concern about the property was it is going to damage the Watershed if the development happens. She was also concerned about the potential placement of a gas station and felt that more water monitoring should be done. Ms. Betcher recognized that, during the Ames Plan 2040, the Council had discussed this property for housing and housing is needed in Ames. Ms. Betcher pointed out that within the last 20 years nothing has been done to the property. She appreciated the Friends of Ada Hayden Heritage Park bringing this property to the City for further discussion.
Moved by Betcher, seconded by Junck, to move Alternative 2: to approve, in concept, the request from the Friends of Ada Hayden Heritage Park to acquire the 170 acres of the Rose Prairie property for purposes of a wetland and a community park, and direct staff to prepare an action plan to implement this alternative.
Council Member Gartin stated this is a very important topic and wanted to hear the reasoning behind the motion Ms. Betcher made. Ms. Betcher stated she made the motion based on having grave concerns about the Watershed and having seen a number of years that development has not happened. She is not convinced that the property, as it stands, is financially viable for development, but she thought the best means to protect Ada Hayden is to put the property in the hands of the City.
Council Member Gartin explained that the Staff Report had addressed the issue of water quality. He asked if Ms. Betcher had information that would support the contention that the Staff Report was incorrect. Ms. Betcher mentioned that the report from the Friends of Ada Hayden stated that the City didn’t have longitudinal data. Ms. Betcher explained that she is not saying that the model that the staff used was wrong, but she thought it was a time for grave climate changes.
Council Member Beatty-Hansen commented that this was a tough decision as there is a lot to consider. She liked the idea and will be supportive of Council Member Betcher’s motion. Ms. Beatty-Hansen mentioned that she understood the financial concern, but if decisions about land protection were made on a financial basis, there wouldn’t be some of the great land conservation across the country. Ms. Beatty-Hansen stated there is a value in nature in its pure form. It is costly to purchase the property, but she is skeptical about going into a costly bond especially given that the City of Ames needs a pool.
Council Member Corrieri stated she is glad the bond issue was brought up. She is concerned about the feasibility going forward. Ms. Corrieri commented that she was concerned about the housing aspect as Rose Prairie was identified as a piece of land in the Ames 2040 Plan for housing; there was no discussion about doing anything different with this property. She agreed that Ada Hayden is a great asset for the community, but staff had said that they would still be able to protect the water quality and the environment around Ada Hayden, even with housing being developed. Ms. Corrieri is not sure a community park fits within the nature of what the City intended for Ada Hayden. She thought there would be a better place for that type of amenity down the road. The bond issue is a huge piece and she felt there were other priorities in terms of asking the community to pay for
10 amenities. She did not see the bond issue being a feasible option. Ms. Corrieri stated that due to those reasons she would not be in support of the motion.
Council Member Martin explained he felt the tax revenue would be a wash because if housing is not built on Rose Prairie the City will build houses somewhere else. He noted that the tax revenues are going to happen based on population change. Mr. Martin stated there is some cost regarding the construction of the infrastructure with the anticipation that it will serve human needs, and the City will have to swallow the cost. He had two main concerns and one was the emails the Council had received from residents concerned about water quality and some of the emails were confused with the quality of the water drinking supply, but that is not at risk at all. The nutrient levels in the lake are a concern and they do not have the perfect longitudinal data, but that doesn’t say that the modeling they have is wrong. Mr. Martin stated that it would be a great opportunity to expand a wonderful park into an even more wonderful park. He noted that the Council received the recommendation to purchase the land and this is the first meeting the Council has had to discuss the topic and he thought they should get more feedback from the public. This project is a major allocation of resources and normally something that is taken up under goal setting. Mr. Martin explained that the Council should wait a year and if no development happens then the City could step in and do something. He didn’t believe the time was right to ask staff to change the course.
Council Member Gartin stated he is not completely sure that the tax revenues are a wash. He pointed out that there is only so much land that is readily available. The City is currently losing opportunities for housing to Ankeny every day. Mr. Gartin mentioned that one third of the workers in Ames live outside of Ames and have to commute. If the Council is concerned about the environment and have less fossil fuels, they need to find opportunities to have the citizens live closer to where they work. He felt the tax consequences are important to consider and there are a lot of infrastructure costs that the Council is voting on and they don’t have a clue. Mr. Gartin stated the Council needs to look at the other costs, the viability of the bond, and the impact to the Ames 2040 Plan. He pointed out that there has been very little public input and would like to put a pause on the request.
Vote on Motion: 3-3. Voting Aye: Betcher, Beatty-Hansen, Junck. Voting Nay: Corrieri, Gartin, Martin. Motion failed.
Council Member Betcher moved to remove the gas station approval from the zoning that the Council had approved. Director Diekmann commented that there are several reasons as to why that would not be possible tonight. Ms. Betcher withdrew her motion.
Council Member Beatty-Hansen asked if it would be possible to move to have staff ask the potential developers about their willingness to compromise. Director Diekmann mentioned that he will communicate the outcome of the meeting to the developer, but the Council will see the developer soon and will be able to ask questions at that time.
Council Member Betcher asked if there was any interest in pursuing Scenario 4 in the Staff Report with some of the targeted protection measures. She wanted to know if this will be something that is
11 discussed with the developer as the Plan emerges or if it is something that needs to be voted on before the Plan emerges. Mr. Diekmann explained that the concept is evolving, and it would need to be discussed as the Plan moves forward. He noted that they have the water quality issue before with the developer and how the design would benefit Ada Hayden.
Council Member Beatty-Hansen wanted to know if there was a budget/plan to dredge the wetlands as they become filled in. Mr. Abraham stated they do have a Management Plan for Ada Hayden that Mr. Pease and Mr. Klaas had put together. He does not remember about the wetlands, but knows they need to dredge them and will work on getting this done. Mr. Abraham explained that he has spoken with Mr. Dunn about getting an assessment done.
Council Member Gartin stated a good discussion was had about the water quality at Ada Hayden, and he wanted to know more about frequent water testing. Mr. Dunn stated that they budget every five to seven years in the Capital Improvement Plan, and two back-to-back years of water quality monitoring in the wetlands. He explained the reason it is not done every year is because they are looking for trends in the watershed and it is easy from year to year to get lost in the seasonal variations. It was about being fiscally responsible when doing the sampling and trying to do it close enough together to pick up trends, but not so often that they are generating a lot of data without gathering a lot of information from the data.
STAFF REPORT REGARDING EAST INDUSTRIAL ZONING: Planning and Housing Director Kelly Diekmann stated that the request before the Council is from the Ames Economic Development Commission (AEDC) to move forward on establishing zoning for the East Industrial Area. Director Diekmann explained that this has been in the Planning Divisions Work Plan for a number of years, but has not been prioritized due to the need for completing water and sewer extensions to serve the area. Considering zoning options for this area is now appropriate as the City has budgeted for water and sewer extensions with the intent of starting construction in 2021. He explained that the East Industrial Area is targeted for a larger industrial set than what is seen in the City, and the three industrial zones don’t fit the targeted large user that is envisioned for the area. Staff believed that creating an additional zoning district is preferable compared to modifying the existing Planned Industrial (PI) Zoning District designation and changing the range of uses and standards that apply to PI zoned properties in the City. Staff is recommending the Council direct staff to prepare a Zoning Text Amendment to create a new industrial zoning district for the Prairie View Industrial Center based on the concepts that were described in the Staff Report. Mr. Diekmann noted that if they move forward, staff will go through a zoning review with the Planning and Zoning Commission and there will also be a public hearing with the Council for a formal Ordinance to establish the exact mix of uses and standards for the area. He explained that staff would be able to accomplish bringing the Zoning Text Amendment back to staff within the next 6-8 weeks.
Mayor Haila inquired if the entire 1300 acres would be zoned the same. Director Diekmann stated that in the past they stated they would hold off on zoning the property, and keep it as Agriculture until they had a user for the area. The City is putting in trunk line utilities and there would be over 1200 acres with no formal subdivision plan or anything else. If they apply everything at once it
12 would be one zoning district as they don’t have a pattern for development or they could choose to zone the large pieces as the development project comes forward, and this will be determined after staff writes the zoning district.
Mayor Haila opened public comment.
Dan Culhane, 304 Main Street, Ames, representing the Ames Chamber of Commerce and Ames Economic Development Commission, explained he had listened with interest tonight and appreciated the Council referring his letter for discussion. The attributes of the area are many and they are obvious to anyone who lives in the area. Prairie View is a focal point for several of their partners. The Iowa Economic Development Authority has made Prairie View a certified site and Alliant Energy, who services the area for natural gas and electricity, has spent over a million dollars to date in securing over 700 acres of property under option. He pointed out that the reason there is nothing yet is because there is no sewer or water to connect to. Mr. Culhane mentioned that there have been several prospects for this site, but the City has lost them due to not having the infrastructure ready and the property not being zoned. He noted that businesses like certainty, and when they choose a location and go public, they want to be able to do what they say they are going to do. Mr. Culhane stated he has done this for a long time and businesses like the surety of what the property offers.
Moved by Martin, seconded by Betcher, to direct staff to prepare a Zoning Text Amendment to create a new industrial zoning district for the Prairie View Industrial Center based upon the standards described in the Staff Report.
Vote on Motion: 6-0. Motion declared carried unanimously.
DOWNTOWN FACADE GRANT: Mayor Haila explained that this item had been pulled from the Agenda by staff.
STAFF REPORT REGARDING SPLASH PAD WATER CONSUMPTION: Parks and Recreation Director Keith Abraham stated that the Staff Report had a lot of information regarding the three options for water management systems. Each system has pros and cons to them and have are standards that need to be met. It was explained that the Iowa Department of Public Health (IDPH) governs the code requirements related to pools in Iowa and splash pads with a recirculation system are viewed as a pool and requires agencies to adhere to the IDPH Pool Code. One option is a recirculation system that is a closed-circuit system that recycles and disinfects the water to and from the play area. This system is currently used at Brookside Wading Pool, Municipal Pool, and the Furman Aquatic Center. Another option is a flow-through system; these are easy to operate, low maintenance, and an eco-friendly way to manage water. These systems use potable water that goes through the play area and effluent water is then returned to the municipal wastewater system or percolated back to the water table. The last option is a repurposing system. The repurposing systems are sustainable solutions that are designed to reuse the effluent water for surface or subsurface irrigation. These systems are simple to operate and require minimal maintenance.
13 Council Member Martin stated that he had sent a report out earlier stating that the Brookside Wading Pool would be kept and asked Mr. Abraham if that was correct. Mr. Abraham explained that the whole idea has been to demolish the wading pool. The wading pool has an antiquated water management system, loses more water than it should, has to be staffed, and is in the flood plain. Those were the reasons given as to why the wading pool would be demolished when a splash pad is put in. Mr. Martin asked for further explanation about the UV system for anyone using the splash pad. The idea of having showers is that people will take a shower before utilizing the splash pad. A shower will wash off any fecal matter and other contaminants. The UV system is an Ultra-Violet system where the water will pass over the UV bulbs and will disinfect the water. Mr. Martin clarified that the UV system is part of the filtration system and users wouldn’t even know it was there. Mr. Abraham stated that was correct.
Council Member Betcher stated she is having a hard time differentiating this item from the discussion of the Spray Pads mentioned later in the Downtown Plaza report. She inquired about what the difference was from the Splash Pads versus the Spray Pads. Mr. Abraham explained that a Splash Pad has a lot of above ground amenities (dump bucket, mushroom of water, etc.), and Spray Pads are more ground features (water is bubbling up from the ground, possibly have lights, etc.). Ms. Betcher stated she is trying to understand whether they are going to need two different facilities or if a Splash Pad and a Plaza are compatible with each other. Mr. Abraham stated they potentially could be, but staff is looking at the Splash Pad to be more of an amenity out in the park system. He noted that there are only two places that are recommended for the Splash Pad due to the need for restrooms, which would be Daley Park or Emma McCarthy Lee Park. The Splash Pad will be approximately 400.
Mayor Haila opened public comment and closed it when no one came forward.
Moved by Beatty-Hansen, seconded by Corrieri, to direct staff to pursue the recirculation system.
Vote on Motion: 6-0. Motion declared carried unanimously.
Mayor Haila recessed at 7:51 p.m. and reconvened at 7:56 p.m.
DISCUSSION OF DOWNTOWN PLAZA VISION: Parks and Recreation Director Keith Abraham explained that in the Staff Report, there is some background information noting that one of the goals the Council has for Downtown community space. He mentioned that before they start the process of hiring a firm, staff wanted to get the Council’s input on what they envision the Downtown Plaza to be. Staff would like to know what goals the Council wanted to accomplish and what activities they would like to see. Mr. Abraham noted that in terms of locations the parking lot across from City Hall is an option with 1.2 acres, but depending on the Council’s vision and goals, the space might not accomplish everything the Council would like. Mr. Abraham asked the Council what they envisioned for the Downtown Plaza.
14 Council Member Corrieri stated that she would like to see a year-round attraction. She would like it to be a natural attraction for people Downtown or compliment other activities that are happening Downtown. Ms. Corrieri also liked the idea for the space to hold smaller events.
Mr. Abraham showed several pictures of a few ideas of items that could be included in the plaza. The pictures showed a spray feature that could be a play feature during the day and provide ambience in the evening for activities and/or special events. Another picture showed how the space could be used as a spray pad in the summer and converted to an ice-skating venue during the winter season. The last pictures showed a more contemporary shade structure and a traditional shelter structure. Director Diekmann mentioned that a few ideas that were not shown were displaying art or kinetic elements or flowing water instead of a spray pad. His opinion was to ask if the space was more for organized participation or an area that anyone could stumble across and find something interesting to see or do at different times of the day.
Council Member Gartin stated that the Council should just brainstorm right now. He would like to see the City of Ames hooked into the bike trail system with the Des Moines Metro area. Mr. Gartin commented that if people are coming from the Metro area on the High Trestle Trail to Ames they need a destination. He explained that if you take the High Trestle trail in Ankeny you would end up in a nice area that has restrooms and a nice destination. He would like to see a welcome to Ames destination that would bring them Downtown and now the Downtown Plaza could tie into the bike trail.
Council Member Beatty-Hansen stated she would also like to see something that could be used year- round. She liked the idea of the ice-skating rink in the winter and then having something that performers could use. She mentioned that she liked Mr. Gartin’s idea as well to become more connected to the bike trail. She explained there was an email the Council received about having public restrooms available and would recommend that as well.
Council Member Betcher also liked the idea of having a year-round space. She mentioned that she gets depressed by Plazas that are all concrete and would appreciate having some green space along with whatever feature is decided. She liked the idea of a Spray Pad, but is unsure of the cost. Ms. Betcher stated that a few ideas that came from the Community Regional Planning students last Spring were intriguing to her; there was artwork and interactive pieces of furniture. Those features had an artistic feel to them and invited engagement with them. The most important thing about the space is it can’t be sterile as there is nothing more than a cold, unwelcoming place. She would like to see some trees or a small stage. She also questioned parking and if there was going to be difficulty having somewhere to park. In adding this feature to the City, they need to think about how people will get to the area. She wanted to know if placing the Plaza across from City Hall would be difficult to find parking or are they going to be inviting people to be biking in or riding the bus. Ms. Betcher mentioned that wherever the Plaza is put they need to think about the ways that people will get to the Plaza.
15 Council Member Junck explained that she agrees with the year-round element as it would be the best way to get the most use of the space. She would like to see something in the Downtown Plaza that can be enjoyed for all age groups. Ms. Junck liked the idea of having a small stage to create a small Downtown hub. She commented that she had liked a lot of what had been brainstormed so far.
Council Member Martin stated he liked the location across from City Hall as it says a lot to have a joyful Plaza across from City Hall, and the City already has the space. He liked the light spray feature at night, but was worried about traditional fountains as they may be a little too noisy. Mr. Martin mentioned that people should be able to have conversations at this location and maybe a small stage or a small corner with good acoustics would work. He agreed that the location should not be all hard scape. Mr. Martin explained he would also like to see informal seating areas and an ice rink in the winter. He would prefer more innovative than traditional looks for the structures.
Ex Officio Whitlock explained she would agree with Council Member Betcher to make sure that people have access to the Plaza. She noted that a lot of the students don’t have cars so they wouldn’t be able to drive to the Plaza, and recommended having a bus stop nearby or places students could park their bike. Ms. Whitlock agreed with Ms. Beatty-Hansen that bathrooms would be needed. She would recommend marketing the area for the entire community.
Mayor Haila asked for “The Exchange” in Fort Collins, Colorado, to be brought up on screen. He explained that he was on a peer-city visit last year and he saw “The Exchange” and was impressed by the concept. He noted it was a vibrant hub of activity. The Mayor stated he doesn’t think the City of Ames should recreate this, but to have a mix of items that would bring people in would be beneficial. Mr. Diekmann noted that he was on that trip as well and “The Exchange” was interesting as it gave small entrepreneurs a chance. Ms. Beatty-Hansen mentioned that “The Exchange” was privately owned and developed.
Council Member Beatty-Hansen inquired about having outdoor exercise equipment for adults and something else to engage children.
Mr. Abraham stated that the next thing would be from a goal standpoint what would the Council want to accomplish and what are the measurables to know if the Plaza is successful or not.
Council Member Beatty-Hansen wanted something to help draw people into the area and shop Downtown and to hopefully extend the stay of someone shopping Downtown. She explained that if a destination could be built where someone would drive to visit it would be nice, but not sure if anyone outside of Ames would come.
Council Member Gartin mentioned he would like it to be an amenity to improve the attractiveness of Downtown as a place to work.
Council Member Betcher thought if they could do something to enable the space for people who are working Downtown, like there is at Tedsco, where there are solar powered stations where people can
16 plug in their phones or computers. She would like to be able to give people the opportunity to work outside if possible.
Council Member Gartin was concerned about the space outside City Hall and wondered if it would be big enough to accomplish something that is worth doing. He would like for staff to consider approaching First National Bank about taking over their space. Mr. Gartin stated they need more space than what City Hall affords. He felt they should “swing the bat hard and do something bold.” Director Abraham explained that was a great point as that brings them to the next topic about locations. Is 1.3 acres enough or should staff be looking at different spaces.
Council Member Corrieri mentioned she kind of agreed with Mr. Gartin. She thought the location across from City Hall is a perfect location. She pointed out that the location is central, good proximity to Main Street, and a natural extension of the retail area to help keep people Downtown. Ms. Corrieri explained that if there is an opportunity to speak with First National that would be great. She noted that the discussion of a Downtown Plaza has been discussed for the past seven years and would like to see the City pursue options.
Council Member Martin stated he would like the space to be open for anyone to use at no cost and would like this to be mostly the case. He noted that there may be some Special Events, but doesn’t like the idea that someone could show up to the Plaza and wouldn’t be able to use it.
Council Member Junck mentioned staff should investigate having more space, but does agree that the City Hall location is perfect. She agreed with Ms. Betcher’s recommendation about having solar panels available for people to work outdoors.
Ex Officio Whitlock commented that if they want people to come outside and use the area to work there needs to be good Wi-Fi available and for it to be free.
Mr. Abraham inquired if there were any other kinds of activities the Council would like to see besides music, interactive art, and ice skating that were already mentioned.
Council Member Gartin asked if there would be interest in having the Farmer’s Market in the Plaza. Mr. Schainker stated that would take a lot more concrete and doesn’t believe the Council wants more hard scape, but that could maybe be put around the area. Mr. Gartin stated the Iowa League of Cities had a trip to Council Bluffs a couple years ago and they had a park where parents could walk children along a path with a page from a children’s book. He liked the idea of working with the Library and encouraging literacy. Director Abraham mentioned that staff has already been in contact with the Library about doing a Storybook Trail.
Council Member Betcher stated it would be nice to develop a festival of some kind.
17 Council Member Gartin asked if anyone from the public wanted to provide other ideas how they would be able to do that. Mr. Abraham stated he can be emailed at [email protected] or by phone at 515-239-5349, and as part of the process staff will have more public outreach.
Mr. Abraham stated that the last item to consider is the location. Mr. Abraham stated that the site across from City Hall would be able to expedite the process for a Reinvestment District Incentive Program from the State. City Manager Steve Schainker mentioned that he and the Mayor will be giving the Council a briefing on the possibility of some outside funding through a Reinvestment District Program through the State that can be linked into the development that may occur along the north side of Lincoln Way from Clark to Kellogg Avenue. Mr. Schainker noted there is a small window to get the application in, but the City will have to hire a consultant quickly. He noted that even though things need to move quickly within the next month or two, they will make time for public outreach.
Mr. Abraham wanted to know if the Council thought the location across from City Hall was too removed from Main Street. Council Member Betcher stated it is not too far from Main Street as it is only a block away and if it is a great space, people will seek it out. Council Member Beatty- Hansen stated that it’s only a block and thought everything was already tied well together. Ms. Betcher pointed out the CyRide already has a bus stop at City Hall. Council Member Gartin stated that more development will happen along the west end of Main Street and Lincoln Way. He felt that longterm, the location across from City Hall would be great.
WATER PLANT DEHUMIDIFICATION PROJECT: Mayor Haila mentioned that Item 35b was removed from the Agenda, due to Staff having the authority to approve the Amendment to the contract with KFI Engineers of St. Paul, Minnesota in the amount of $11,500 without Council action.
Mayor Haila opened public comment. It was closed when no one came forward.
Moved by Junck, seconded by Corrieri, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 20-618 approving the preliminary plans and specifications for the Water Plant Dehumidification Project; setting December 23, 2020, as the bid due date, and January 12, 2021, as the date of public hearing. Roll Call Vote: 6-0. Resolution declared adopted unanimously, signed by the Mayor, and hereby made a portion of these Minutes.
HEARING ON CHANGES TO THE EAST UNIVERSITY IMPACTED URBAN REVITALIZATION AREA: Mayor Haila opened the public hearing.
Ellen Chestnut, 120 Lynn Avenue, Ames, representing Kappa Kappa Gamma, explained they were requesting a potential later date of an approval process other than the January 1, 2021, to accommodate the time of year and actions needed to get a new approval. She asked for a new recommended date of March 31, 2021. Ms. Chestnut explained that Kappa Kappa Gamma had recently submitted and received approval of a site plan for demolition and to rebuild the sorority at 120 Lynn Avenue. When further proceeding with the approved Site Plan and the unforeseen increase
18 costs due to COVID and other factors they have currently priced out of its initial budget. She mentioned that the sorority will need to resubmit and seek a new Demolition Permit if they don’t believe they can get everything done that is needed by January 1, 2021. The sorority is asking the Council to approve a later date to the end of March 2021.
Mr. Diekmann explained that staff has been in contact with Kappa Kappa Gamma and is aware that some changes would need to be made. He stated the proposed date of January 1, 2021, was made back in August 2020 when the idea was first introduced, and no other sororities or fraternities have responded as being affected by the date. Staff did not have an opinion if January 1, 2021, was essential or to delay for a couple of months to accommodate a party; it didn’t seem like a significant change to staff.
Mayor Haila inquired if the Council wanted to change the end date from January 1, 2021, to April 1, 2021, would the proposed change fall under Item 35a on the Agenda. Director Diekmann explained that it would as it is part of the Resolution amending the Plan Criteria.
Council Member Martin explained he doesn’t see any reason to interrupt Kappa Kappa Gamma’s plan due to their misfortune of being delayed, but wanted to know if there would be any other side effects to changing the date. Mr. Diekmann stated he didn’t believe so as no other Greek houses have reached out.
Moved by Betcher, seconded by Gartin, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 20-619 amending the Plan Criteria for the East University Impacted Urban Revitalization Area and changing the date from January 1, 2021, to April 1, 2021. Roll Call Vote: 6-0. Resolution declared adopted unanimously, signed by the Mayor, and hereby made a portion of these Minutes.
Moved by Beatty-Hansen, seconded by Junck, to pass on first reading an Ordinance amending the East University Impacted Urban Revitalization Area boundary by adding 313 Lynn Avenue and adding an expiration date of April 1, 2024. Roll Call Vote: 6-0. Motion declared carried unanimously.
HEARING ON ZONING TEXT AMENDMENTS REGARDING THE EXTENSION OF BUILDING FEATURES INTO REQUIRED SETBACKS: (CONTINUED FROM OCTOBER 27, 2020) Planning and Housing Director Kelly Diekmann stated that they had identified a lot of minor language changes that will help clarify how encroachments and setbacks are going to work. He stated the main goal he had was for single-family homes to have more of an opportunity to improve the front of their homes, especially properties that were non-conforming, for front setbacks to allow for porches or front decks. There were some conflicts with zoning. He noted that on the commercial side they did have some interpretation issues and staff believed they have now made some clarifications.
Mayor Haila opened public input. No one requested to speak, so he closed public input.
19 Moved by Beatty-Hansen, seconded by Gartin, to pass on first reading an Ordinance regarding the extension of building features into required setbacks. Roll Call Vote: 6-0. Motion declared carried unanimously.
FACE-COVERING ORDINANCE EXTENDING THE SUNSET CLAUSE TO JUNE 30, 2021: City Attorney Mark Lambert stated that staff did reach out to the various City partners to see how they felt about the City extending the sunset clause. Assistant City Manager Deb Schildroth explained there was overwhelming support from the partners for continuing the Face-Covering Ordinance, and there were a few suggestions from the Story County Board of Health. It was recommended to add some penalty language to help enforcement of the Face-Covering Ordinance. Ms. Schildroth pointed out that she had reached out to the Story County Board of Health, Iowa State University, McFarland Clinic, and Mary Greeley Medical Center for their recommendations.
The Mayor opened public comment. It was closed when there was no one wishing to speak.
Moved by Corrieri, seconded by Beatty-Hansen, to pass on first reading a Face-Covering Ordinance extending the sunset clause to June 30, 2021. Roll Call Vote: 5-1. Voting Aye: Beatty-Hansen, Betcher, Corrieri, Gartin, Junck. Voting Nay: Gartin. Motion declared carried.
ORDINANCE ON PROPOSED TEXT AMENDMENTS REGARDING THE NEW FLOOD PLAIN MAPS, UPDATED DEFINITIONS, AND AMENDED TERMINOLOGY USED IN CHAPTER 9 OF THE AMES MUNICIPAL CODE: Moved by Corrieri, seconded by Beatty- Hansen, to pass on third reading and adopt ORDINANCE NO. 4422 regarding the new flood plain maps, updated definitions, and amended terminology used in Chapter 9 of the Ames Municipal Code. Roll Call Vote: 6-0. Ordinance declared adopted unanimously, signed by the Mayor, and hereby made a portion of these Minutes.
ORDINANCE REPEALING CERTAIN URBAN REVITALIZATION AREAS (URA), EFFECTIVE 12-31-20: Moved by Betcher, seconded by Corrieri, to pass on third reading and adopt ORDINANCE NO. 4423 repealing the following Urban Revitalization Areas, effective 12-31-2020 for each of the following: a. South Lincoln “Sub-Area”/Neighborhood Urban Revitalization Area, established 09-23-03 by Ordinance No. 3733 b. 405 & 415 Hayward Avenue Urban Revitalization Area, established 11-20-2007 by Ordinance No. 3932 c. 517 Lincoln Way Urban Revitalization Area, established 02-24-2015 by Ordinance No. 4209 d. Roosevelt School Site and City of Ames Park 921 9th Street Urban Revitalization Area established 11-12-2013 by Ordinance No. 4162, and Program Policy established by Resolution No. 13-265 And effective 01-02-2021 for the following: a. 415 Stanton Crawford School Urban Revitalization Area established 06-12-2018 by Ordinance #4357
20 And additionally, by establishing a sunset date of 12-31-2021 for each of the following: a. Walnut Ridge, 3505 and 3515 Lincoln Way Urban Revitalization Area, established 04-26-16 by Ordinance No. 4254 b. 2700, 2702, 2718, and 2728 Lincoln Way; 112 and 114 South Hyland Avenue; and 115 South Sheldon Avenue Urban Revitalization Area, established 12-13-2016 by Ordinance No. 4284 Roll Call Vote: 6-0. Ordinance declared adopted unanimously, signed by the Mayor, and hereby made a portion of these Minutes.
DISPOSITION OF COMMUNICATIONS TO COUNCIL: Mayor Haila mentioned there were five items on dispositions. The first item was a letter from the Farmhouse Fraternity requesting permission to pursue tax abatement at 311 Ash Avenue and proceed with submitting a program application.
Planning and Housing Director Kelly Diekmann mentioned that the request is not really a policy change. He explained that the Farmhouse Fraternity did not apply timely to receive the full benefit of the tax abatement program. To take advantage of any remaining years the Farmhouse Fraternity would need to have special action by the Council. Director Diekmann commented that if the Council was interested in the request then he would recommend putting it on a future agenda for the City Council to authorize the Farmhouse Fraternity to apply for tax abatement. He pointed out that if the Council decided to do that the tax abatement would not be for the full ten years, but only for the remaining years.
Moved by Gartin, seconded by Martin, to place the request from the Farmhouse Fraternity on a future agenda. Vote on Motion: 6-0. Motion declared carried unanimously.
The second request was a memo from the Historic Preservation Commission and Planning and Housing Department requesting to initiate consideration of recommended changes to formally amend the Ames Comprehensive Historic Preservation Plan (ACHPP).
Planning and Housing Director Kelly Diekmann explained that the Historic Preservation Commission (HPC) had spent some time over the past few years going over the Preservation Plan. The Plan is summarized in the memo and the Commission is asking for the Council to place its item on a future agenda to approve the recommended changes. City Manager Schainker inquired if staff was supportive of the recommended changes made by HPC. Mr. Diekmann commented that staff supported the changes.
Moved by Betcher, seconded by Corrieri, to place the request from the Historic Preservation Commission and Planning and Housing Department to initiate consideration of recommended changes to the Ames Comprehensive Historic Plan on a future Agenda. Vote on Motion: 6-0. Motion declared carried unanimously.
21 The Mayor mentioned that the third request was an email from Rachel Breyfogle requesting a location for a 24/7 publicly accessible box/receptacle to dispose of retired American flags. City Manager Schainker explained that there is access already for flags to be disposed of, free of charge, at the Resource Recovery Plant. Mr. Schainker commented that he believed that the request was to place a box somewhere on Main Street to dispose of flags, and he is not sure that is the best location. Mayor Haila mentioned that one option may be to use City Side to mention where flags can be disposed of and educate the public. Mr. Schainker stated that the Council could ask him to write a memo or place the item on a future agenda.
Council Member Gartin stated his hesitation is taking up space on the sidewalk as that can be a hazard. He liked the idea on principle and appreciated the fact that some young ladies are trying to do something for the community, but is not sure Main Street is the right location.
Council Member Betcher stated that one of the concerns the young girls had was having the disposal at the Resource Recovery Plant might make people think the flags are not being incinerated improperly. She would be interested in getting a memo from staff about whether there is an appropriate location for a box and if there isn’t then the Council could reject the request and thank them very politely.
Moved by Betcher, seconded by Gartin, to ask staff for a memo to see if there is an acceptable location for a receptacle.
Mr. Gartin stated they are not sure if any other communities have anything like this and maybe it would be beneficial to see what other communities are doing.
Vote on Motion: 5-1. Voting Aye: Beatty-Hansen, Betcher, Gartin, Martin, Junck. Voting Nay: Corrieri. Motion declared carried.
The fourth item was a letter from Kevin Bourke, President and CEO, Ames Convention and Visitors Bureau requesting a one-time ask of $35,000 for them 1% hotel/motel tax received by the City for the pursual of events and conferences, as well as for contractually obligated incentives to support groups already committed to hold their events in Ames. City Manager Steve Schainker recommended that this request be handled during budget time as it is not that far away, and would be the first week in February.
Moved by Betcher, seconded by Junck, to discuss the request from the Ames Convention and Visitors Bureau for a one-time ask of $35,000 during budget time.
Council Member Gartin explained that he is supportive of the motion, but wanted to know if there was anything from a timing perspective that the Ames Convention and Visitors Bureau may need. City Manager Schainker explained that they could have Mr. Bourke speak, but he thought the request was to replenish a fund balance that was decimated by the downturn in the hotel industry.
22 Kevin Bourke stated that the fiscal year for the Ames Convention and Visitors Bureau goes from January to December. The request would be in support for their budget in 2021 and would be in conjunction with its own reserve. He explained that there was no immediate need and to discuss during the regular City budget cycle would be fine.
Vote on motion: 6-0. Motion declared carried unanimously.
The last item was a memo from Mark Lambert, City Attorney on clarification on President Trump’s Executive Order on Combating Race and Sex Stereotyping (issued on September 22, 2020). This item was informational only.
COUNCIL COMMENTS: Council Member Gartin thanked the graduating Seniors for making Ames their home.
Council Member Betcher reminded everyone to shop local and shop small and take advantage of Small Business Saturday.
Mayor Haila stated that every year the Human Relations Commission awards a Humanitarian Award to someone in the community who contributes to the extraordinary quality, especially efforts to promote diversity, inclusion, and equity. If anyone in the community or the Council knows of someone who should be considered to go online to the City Clerk’s site, click on Boards and Commission and select the Human Relations Commission where there is an application to complete.
ADJOURNMENT: Moved by Corrieri to adjourn the meeting at 9:03 p.m.
______Amy L. Colwell, Deputy City Clerk John A. Haila, Mayor
______Diane R. Voss, City Clerk
23 Item No. 3 REPORT OF CONTRACT CHANGE ORDERS 1st – 15th Period: 16th – End of Month Month & Year: November 2020 For City Council Date: December 8, 2020
Contract Purchasing General Description Change Original Contract Total of Prior Amount this Change Contact Department of Contract No. Amount Contractor/ Vendor Change Orders Change Order Approved By (Buyer) Public Works 2018/19 Storm Water 1 $133,233.00 J & K Contracting $0.00 $-(13,480.00) T. Peterson MA Facility Rehabilitation (Little Bluestem)
Parks & Inis Grove Park Restroom 1 $378,000.00 HPC, LLC $0.00 $-(1,845.00) K. Abraham MA Recreation Project
$ $ $
$ $ $
$ $ $
$ $ $ Item No. 4
MEMO
Smart Choice Item No. 5
To: Mayor John Haila and Ames City Council Members From: Lieutenant Tom Shelton, Ames Police Department Date: November 30, 2020 Subject: Beer Permits & Liquor License Renewal Reference City Council Agenda
The Council agenda for December 8, 2020 includes beer permits and liquor license renewals for:
• Class C Liquor License with Sunday Sales - 1 Night Stand (124 Welch) • Class C Liquor License with Sunday Sales - Cyclone Liquors (626 Lincoln Way) • Class C Liquor License with Outdoor Service, Sunday Sales, & Catering - Café Beau (2504 Lincoln Way) • Class C Liquor License, Class B Native Wine with Outdoor Service & Sunday Sales – Mickey’s Irish Pub (109 Welch) • Class B Beer with Outdoor Service & Sunday Sales - Torrent Brewing Co (504 Burnett Ave)
Thank you,
A review of police records for the past 12 months found no liquor law violations for any of the above locations. The Ames Police Department recommends renewal of licenses for all the above businesses.
Police Department 515.239.5133 non-emergency 515 Clark Ave. P.O. Box 811 515.239.5130 Administration Ames, IA 50010 515.239.5429 fax www.CityofAmes.org ITEM # ___6 __ DATE: 12-08-20
COUNCIL ACTION FORM
SUBJECT: VACATION OF PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENT ACROSS PORTIONS OF SOUTHTOWN SUBDIVISION (300 AND 310 S 17TH ST)
BACKGROUND:
In 1974, with the Final Plat for Southtown Subdivision, a public utility easement was recorded along the north/south lot line between Lots 3 (300 S 17th St) and Lot 4 (310 S 17th St). Recently, a developer of the area has submitted a Plat of Survey to move this lot line which would mean that the public utility easement would fall well within the lot area and could hinder development of that lot. The developer has therefore requested this portion of easement be vacated.
Staff has reached out to right-of-way users to inventory what utilities (private and public) exist within the easement area. Ames Electric has private service lines that feed the existing parking lot lights. Ames Electric is supportive of vacating the easement and any changes to the parking lot light service will be paid for by the developer of the area. All other responses indicated the area to be clear of private utilities.
Attachment A is a map showing the location of the existing easement and Attachment B shows the proposed lot configuration and new easement. A new public utility easement will be included as part of the new plat, which will be recorded once approved.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Set the date of public hearing as December 22, 2020 to approve the vacation of the aforementioned easement.
2. Do not proceed with the vacation of the aforementioned easement.
CITY MANAGER'S RECOMMENDED ACTION:
The public utility easement can be vacated because Electric is the only owner of existing facilities (parking lot lights), which will be relocated at the developer’s expense.
Therefore, it is the recommendation of the City Manager that the City Council adopt Alternative No. 1, as noted above.
1 INDEX LEGEND PARCEL 'B' AND LOT 3, ALL IN SOUTHTOWN SUBDIVISION, LOCATION CITY OF AMES, STORY COUNTY, IOWA
REQUESTOR: CHUCK WINKLEBLACK
PROPRIETOR: SOUTH 17TH STREET, LLC
SURVEYOR: LUKE D. AHRENS, P.L.S. #24413
SURVEYOR COMPANY: BOLTON & MENK, INC.
LUKE D. AHRENS, BOLTON & MENK, INC. RETURN TO: 1519 BALTIMORE DRIVE, AMES, IA 50010 (515)-233-6100
FOR RECORDER USE ONLY SOUTH 17TH STREET - 80' RIGHT-OF-WAY EXISTING DRIVE
EXISTING 5.03' NW CORNER, DRIVE APRON PARCEL 'B', APRON N 89°43'30" W, 206.36' (R) SOUTHTOWN SD, S 89°59'09" E 89.98' S 89°59'09" E 206.30' FOUND 1/2" NE CORNER, LOT 3, REBAR WITH YPC NW CORNER, LOT 3, SOUTHTOWN SD #17161 N 89°43'30" W, 90.00' (R) SOUTHTOWN SD POINT OF BEGINNING PARCEL 'D'
11.88'
EXISTING BUILDING
LOT 3 232.39' E 00°15'52" S
PARCEL 'B' N 00°00'00" W, 232.35' (R) 310 S 17TH STREET 300 S 17TH STREET 34,188 SQ. FT. 60,853 SQ. FT. PARKING LOT 0.785 ACRES 1.397 ACRES 5' UTILITY EASEMENT PER PLAT OR S 00°01'20" W 355.52' N 00°15'19" E, 355.58' (R) 5' ELECTRIC EASEMENT PER B.125, P.672
S 00°15'43" W, 402.56' (R) SE CORNER, LOT 3, SOUTHTOWN SD, FOUND 1/2" REBAR POINT OF BEGINNING PARCEL 'E'
10' UTILITY EASEMENT PER PLAT
OR 10' ELECTRIC EASEMENT PER B.125, P.672
5' UTILITY EASEMENT PER PLAT OR R 5' UTILITY EASEMENT PER PLAT OR 5' ELECTRIC EASEMENT PER B.125, P.672 5' ELECTRIC EASEMENT PER B.125, P.672 N 59°19'04" E 232.18' N 59°32'20" E, 232.20' (R)
0 20 40 HORZ. SCALE FEET
IOWA DOT RIGHT-OF-WAY LEGEND: RAIL FOUND MONUMENT AS NOTED L=9.08' 8.97' (R) SET 1/2"x24" REBAR WITH PINK PLASTIC R=1066.00' 1066.00' (R) CAP #24413 (UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED) Δ=0°29'17" 10' UTILITY EASEMENT PER PLAT (R) RECORDED DIMENSION OR 10' PERELECTRIC B.125, EASEMENT P.672 CH=9.08' YPC YELLOW PLASTIC CAP SW CORNER, CB=S 59°31'22" W 4' 1.5 ' LOT 3, 10 .00 L= 66 " SOUTHTOWN SD, 0 '28 LEGAL DESCRIPTION - WARRANTY DEED INST. #2017-06467 =1 7 0' FOUND 1/2" REBAR R 5°2 .5 W LOT 3, SOUTHTOWN SUBDIVISION TO AMES, STORY COUNTY, IOWA; Δ= 01 5" =1 9'4 SW CORNER, CH °2 AND 62 PARCEL 'B', =S CB PARCEL 'B' OF LOT 4 IN SOUTHTOWN SUBDIVISION IN THE CITY OF AMES, SOUTHTOWN SD, L = 101.59' (R) STATE HWY #30 STORY COUNTY, IOWA, AS SHOWN ON THE "PLAT OF SURVEY" FILED IN FOUND 1/2" R = 1066.00' (R) THE OFFICE OF THE RECORDER OF STORY COUNTY, IOWA, ON JULY 19, 1993, IN BOOK 11 AT PAGE 204. REBAR WITH YPC #17161 RIGHT-OF-WAY VARIES I hereby certify that this land surveying document was prepared by me and the related field work was performed by me or under my direct personal supervision and that I EXISTING CONDITIONS IONA am a duly licensed Land Surveyor under the laws of the ESS L L State of Iowa F AN RO D PARCEL 'B' & LOT 3, SOUTHTOWN SUBDIVISION, CITY OF AMES, STORY COUNTY, IA P S D LUKE D. U
E R SHEET
S AHRENS V LUKE D. AHRENS L.S.
E N
Y E
O
C 24413
I R REG. NO. 24413 DATE: 1519 BALTIMORE DRIVE
L AMES, IOWA 50010 1 MY LICENSE RENEWAL DATE IS 12/31/2021 I O A (515) 233-6100 OF W R PAGES OR SHEETS COVERED BY THIS SEAL: 1
Bolton & Menk, Inc. 2018, All Rights Reserved THIS SHEET © H:\HUNZI\0A1122980\CAD\C3D\FIGR-122980-BLA.DWG 11/30/2020 9:01 AM JOB NUMBER: 0A1.122980 INDEX LEGEND PARCEL 'B' AND LOT 3, ALL IN SOUTHTOWN SUBDIVISION, LOCATION CITY OF AMES, STORY COUNTY, IOWA
REQUESTOR: CHUCK WINKLEBLACK
PROPRIETOR: SOUTH 17TH STREET, LLC
SURVEYOR: LUKE D. AHRENS, P.L.S. #24413
SURVEYOR COMPANY: BOLTON & MENK, INC.
LUKE D. AHRENS, BOLTON & MENK, INC. RETURN TO: 1519 BALTIMORE DRIVE, AMES, IA 50010 (515)-233-6100
FOR RECORDER USE ONLY N 00°15'52" W 144.68' SOUTH 17TH STREET - 80' RIGHT-OF-WAY N 00°00'00" W, EXISTING 144.65' (R) EXISTING DRIVE NW CORNER, DRIVE APRON PARCEL 'B', APRON SOUTHTOWN SD, S 89°59'09" E 140.77' N 89°59'09" W 155.51' FOUND 1/2" NE CORNER, LOT 3, NW CORNER, REBAR WITH YPC 89.98' SOUTHTOWN SD LOT 3, #17161 SOUTHTOWN POINT OF SD BEGINNING PARCEL 'D' THE AMES CITY COUNCIL APPROVED THIS PLAT OF SURVEY ON ______, 20______, WITH RESOLUTION NUMBER ______. I CERTIFY THAT IS CONFORMS TO ALL CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL.
______PLANNING & HOUSING DIRECTOR PARCEL 'B'
5' PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENT
PARCEL 'D' PARCEL 'E' 310 S 17TH STREET 300 S 17TH STREET
51,481 SQ. FT. 43,560 SQ. FT. N 00°15'52" W 232.39' W 00°15'52" N 1.182 ACRES 1.000 ACRES N 00°00'00" W, 232.35' (R)
R
S 00°01'20" W 325.41'
0 20 40 HORZ. 5' UTILITY EASEMENT PER PLAT OR SCALE FEET 5' ELECTRIC EASEMENT PER B.125, P.672 LOT 3
N 00°01'37" E 402.42'
S 00°15'43" W, 402.56' (R) SE CORNER, LOT 3, SOUTHTOWN SD, FOUND 1/2" REBAR POINT OF BEGINNING PARCEL 'E'
LEGEND: 10' UTILITY EASEMENT PER PLAT FOUND MONUMENT AS NOTED SET 1/2"x24" REBAR WITH PINK PLASTIC CAP #24413 (UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED) OR 10' ELECTRIC EASEMENT PER B.125, (R)P.672 RECORDED DIMENSION N 59°19'04" E 182.22' YPC YELLOW PLASTIC CAP NOTES: 1. THIS SURVEY MEETS OR EXCEEDS IOWA CODE 355. 2. THIS SURVEY IS SUBJECT TO EASEMENTS APPARENT OR OF RECORD. 3. BEARINGS SHOWN ARE IOWA REGIONAL COORDINATE SYSTEM, ZONE - AMES/DES MOINES (8), US SURVEY FOOT. 4. DATE OF SURVEY - OCTOBER 23, 2020 5. CURRENT DEED OF RECORD IS INST. #2017-06467 6. RECORDED BEARINGS AND DISTANCES WERE TAKEN FROM: INST. #2017-05983 INST. #02-09903 IOWA DOT BOOK 1, PAGE 204 BOOK 154, PAGE 642 S 59°19'04" W 49.97'RIGHT-OF-WAY RAIL 8.97' (R) 1066.00' (R) LEGAL DESCRIPTION - PARCEL 'D' A PARCEL OF LAND LOCATED IN SOUTHTOWN SUBDIVISION, CITY OF AMES, 10' UTILITY EASEMENT PER PLAT STORY COUNTY, IOWA, THAT IS MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: OR 10' PERELECTRIC B.125, EASEMENT P.672 ' SW CORNER, BEGINNING AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF PARCEL 'B' IN SAID SOUTHTOWN 63 0. 0' LOT 3, SUBDIVISION; THENCE S89°59'09"E, 140.77 FEET; THENCE S00°01'20"W, 11 .0 325.41 FEET; THENCE S59°19'04"W, 49.97 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A 1066 L= 66 5" SOUTHTOWN SD, 10 '4 ' FOOT RADIUS CURVE, CONCAVE NORTHWESTERLY; THENCE ALONG SAID R= 56 8 FOUND 1/2" REBAR CURVE 110.63 FEET, LONG CHORD BEARS S62°15'06"W, 110.58 FEET; THENCE 5° .5 " W Δ= 10 6 N00°01'37"E, 402.42 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. =1 5'0 CH °1 SW CORNER, 62 LEGAL DESCRIPTION - PARCEL 'E' =S PARCEL 'B', CB A PARCEL OF LAND LOCATED IN SOUTHTOWN SUBDIVISION, CITY OF AMES, SOUTHTOWN SD, L = 110.56' (R) STATE HWY #30 STORY COUNTY, IOWA, THAT IS MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: R = 1066.00' (R) FOUND 1/2" BEGINNING AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF LOT 3 IN SAID SOUTHTOWN REBAR WITH YPC SUBDIVISION; THENCE N00°15'52"W, 232.39 FEET; THENCE N89°59'09"W, #17161 155.51 FEET; THENCE S00°01'20"W, 325.41 FEET; THENCE N59°19'04"E, 182.22 RIGHT-OF-WAY VARIES FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. I hereby certify that this land surveying document was prepared by me and the related field work was performed by me or under my direct personal supervision and that I PLAT OF SURVEY - BOUNDARY LINE ADJUSTMENT - PARCELS 'D' & 'E' IONA am a duly licensed Land Surveyor under the laws of the ESS L L State of Iowa F AN RO D PARCEL 'B' & LOT 3, SOUTHTOWN SUBDIVISION, CITY OF AMES, STORY COUNTY, IA P S D LUKE D. U
E R SHEET
S AHRENS V LUKE D. AHRENS L.S.
E N
Y E
O
C 24413
I R REG. NO. 24413 DATE: 1519 BALTIMORE DRIVE
L AMES, IOWA 50010 1 MY LICENSE RENEWAL DATE IS 12/31/2021 I O A (515) 233-6100 OF W R PAGES OR SHEETS COVERED BY THIS SEAL: 1
Bolton & Menk, Inc. 2018, All Rights Reserved THIS SHEET © H:\HUNZI\0A1122980\CAD\C3D\FIGR-122980-BLA.DWG 11/30/2020 9:26 AM JOB NUMBER: 0A1.122980 ITEM # ___7______DATE 12-08-20
COUNCIL ACTION FORM
SUBJECT: FLOOD MITIGATION – RIVER FLOODING PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT (LAND ACQUISITION)
BACKGROUND:
Following the 2010 floods, the City Council established a goal to mitigate the impact of future flooding in Ames. A comprehensive Flood Mitigation Study was completed in 2013 that considered many possible mitigation alternatives.
On December 10, 2013, the City Council approved a series of flood mitigation measures. These included elements targeted at: A) Undertaking a stream bank restoration of Squaw Creek; B) Working with IDOT to improve the conveyance capacity of the US Highway 30 bridge; C) Working through the Squaw Creek Watershed Management Authority to pursue flood mitigation alternatives in the upper reaches of the watershed; and D) Conducting a workshop to review and discuss the range of possible floodplain regulatory approaches.
The stream bank restoration project involves flood mitigation in the Squaw Creek channel, including conveyance improvements within the channel approximately 2,000 feet either side of the South Duff Avenue bridge. In working with Iowa Department of Homeland Security & Emergency Management, the City received FEMA grant funding in the spring of 2020 for this project. The cost share amounts for this grant are as follows:
Funding Source Funding Amount % of Cost Federal (FEMA): $ 3,747,450.00 75% Local: $ 1,249,150.00 25% Total: $ 4,996,600.00 100%
In October 2020, staff initiated a Request for Proposals process in accordance with the City’s purchasing policies and Federal requirements for the Flood Mitigation – River Flooding Land Acquisition Services. The professional services will provide land acquisition services as required by Federal requirements, due to the project having FEMA grant funding.
Proposals for this work were received from five firms. The proposals were evaluated on their qualifications according to the following criteria: Project Understanding, Project Team, Previous Experience, Project Approach, Ability to perform work, and Proposed project schedule.
The evaluation scores of that qualification-based selection process are as follows:
1
Qualifications Qualifications Firm Fee Based Score Based Rank CGA 76.8 1 $74,800 A&R Land Services 73.0 2 $97,900 JCG 73.0 2 $69,140 Ulteig 66.0 4 $60,885 Snyder 62.3 5 $67,947
After weighing the qualifications and estimated fees for these five firms, staff has negotiated a contract with CGA of Ames, Iowa. CGA scored highest based on its proposal including more project specific detail than the rest of the proposals received and being more responsive to the requirements and timelines for this project. CGA included information showing previous experience with federally funded land acquisitions and eminent domain, should the City need it. Staff is confident that a contract with CGA will provide the best value at this time for professional land acquisition services considering the firms qualifications.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Approve the professional services agreement for the Flood Mitigation – River Flooding Land Acquisition services with CGA of Ames, Iowa, in the amount not to exceed $74,800.
2. Direct staff to re-negotiate land acquisition services contract with a different company.
CITY MANAGER’S RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Based on staff’s evaluation using the noted criteria and having received concurrence from Iowa Homeland Security, CGA is recommended for professional land acquisition services following federal requirements for the Flood Mitigation – River Flooding project.
Therefore, it is the recommendation of the City Manager that the City Council adopt Alternative No. 1, as described above.
2 ITEM#: 8 DATE: 12-08-20
COUNCIL ACTION FORM
SUBJECT: SOUTH 16TH STREET AND SOUTH DUFF AVENUE IMPROVEMENTS FUNDING AGREEMENT WITH IOWA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
BACKGROUND:
The City of Ames has been awarded a $495,000 grant through the Traffic Safety Improvement Program (TSIP) by the Iowa Department of Transportation (Iowa DOT). The grant project is to construct dedicated left turn lanes on South 16th St at the S Duff Ave signalized intersection and restrict Buckeye Avenue and the frontage road along South Duff Avenue to a right-in/right-out movements. This project is part of the overall improvements associated with the S Grand Ave Extension.
The summary of the revenues and expenses for this project are shown below:
Activity Expenses Revenue Engineering (overall total w/amendments) $2,625,350.00 South 5th Street Project (Awarded) $3,159,304.15 S Grand Extension (Awarded) $9,368,716.27 S 16th St/S Duff project (Estimated) $3,000,000.00 GO Bonds $11,580,000 MPO/STP Funds $5,500,000 Federal/State Grants *$2,791,485 TOTAL $18,153,370.42 $19,871,485 *The $495,000 grant proceeds are included in this amount.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Approve the Iowa DOT TSIP funding Agreement for the South 16th Street and South Duff Avenue Improvements project in the amount of $495,000.
2. Reject the Agreement.
CITY MANAGER’S RECOMMENDED ACTION:
This agreement with the Iowa DOT must be approved before proceeding with construction of this project in the 2021 construction season. Delay or rejection of this agreement could delay this street reconstruction project and will require additional funding.
Therefore, it is the recommendation of the City Manager that the City Council adopt Alternative No. 1, as described above.
1 ITEM # __9 _ DATE: 12-8-20
COUNCIL ACTION FORM
SUBJECT: AMENDMENT TO CONTRACT WITH CITY OF NEVADA FOR FIRE AND EMS SERVICES TO SECTIONS OF HIGHWAY 30 AND INTERSTATE 35
BACKGROUND:
On May 11, 2010, the City entered into an Intergovernmental Contract with the City of Nevada (Attachment A). This contract transferred Fire and Emergency Medical Service (EMS) responsibilities for sections of Highway 30 and Interstate 35 that exist within the far western boarders of the Nevada Fire District from the Nevada Fire Department to the Ames Fire Department. The objective of the contract was to provide the fastest Fire and EMS response time possible to victims involved in accidents within the area addressed by the agreement.
The “Covered Area” subject to the agreement is designated as:
1. The entire area of the I-35 and U.S. Highway 30 Interchange, including all entrance and exit ramps.
2. U.S. Highway 30, both Eastbound and Westbound, from the Dayton Road Interchange, including all exit and entrance ramps, through the area described in item #1 above.
3. I-35, both Northbound and Southbound from Lincoln Highway, the present Ames City limits on I-35, through to the I-35 merge lane with the Southbound I-35 entrance ramp and the Northbound Interstate 35 exit in the I-35 interchange with Highway 30.
The original term of the contract ended December 31, 2010, at which time it automatically renewed for additional 12-month periods until December 31, 2020, unless terminated prior to renewal.
With the contract nearing its final expiration on December 31, 2020, City staff discussed the contract with the Nevada Fire Department. Given the proximity of Ames Fire Station #3 (2400 South Duff Avenue) and Ames Fire Station #1 (1300 Burnett Avenue) to the area described in the contract, staff believes it is still in the best interest of both parties and their customers for the Ames Fire Department to continue to provide Fire and EMS to the area described in the contract.
Staff has prepared an amendment to the existing agreement that would allow the agreement to automatically renew for additional 12-month periods through December 31, 2030 (Attachment B). All other language in the existing contract would be maintained.
1
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Approve the attached amendment to the Intergovernmental Contract and extend the expiration date to December 31, 2030.
2. Direct staff to modify the amendment.
3. Do not approve an amendment to the Intergovernmental Contract, and allow the responsibility for Fire and EMS services in this area to revert to the Nevada Fire Department beginning January 1, 2021.
CITY MANAGER’S RECOMMENDED ACTION:
The proposed amendment would extend the ability of the Ames Fire Department to continue to provide exceptional customer service through Fire and EMS responses to one of the City’s busiest and most recognizable corridors for an additional 10 years. Both the Nevada and Ames Fire Departments are dedicated to providing customers with the fastest Fire and EMS response time possible to victims and potential victims in the Covered Area. Even with this agreement, the Nevada Fire Department will provide backup assistance when needed in the designated areas.
Therefore, it is the recommendation of the City Manager that City Council approve Alternative No. 1 as described above.
2 INTERGOVERNMENTAL CONTRACT
WIIEREAS, the City of Ames,Story County,Iowa (hereafter"Ames") andthe City of
Nevada,Story County, Iowa (hereafter"Nevada") are both lowa MunicipalCorporations located in StoryCounty,Iowa, both operatingtheir separate,individual Fire andEMS Departments;and
WIIEREAS, U.S. Highway 30 runs East and West throughStory County and connects the citiesof Amesand Nevada; and
WHEREAS, U.S. InterstateHighway I-35 runs North and Souththrough Story County, but lies substantiallycloser to the City of Amesthan to the City of Nevada;and
WIIEREAS, prior to the effectivedate of this contract,Nevada has been responsible for providing Fire and EMS servicesto that portion of InterstateI-35 locatedin Grant Township pursuantto a prior agreementwith the townships;and
WIIEREAS, due to the heavy traffic on I-35 and U.S. 30, frequent motor vehicle accidentsoccur on thesehighways, many involving seriouspersonal injuries to the occupants andoccasionally involving life threateningmotor vehiclefires; and
WHEREAS, both partiesdesire to renderprompt Fire and EMS responsesto travelers invoivedin acoidentson thesehighways; and
WIIEREAS, Iowa CodeSection 288.12 allows municipalities as governmentalagencies to contractwith each other to perform and provide servicesthat both agenciesare otherwise authoized fo perform.
NOW THEREFORE, it is mutuallyagreed as follows: t
1. The purposeand objectiveof this contractis to provide the fastestFire and EMS
responsetime possibleto victims and potentialvictims involved in accidentsthat may occurin
the "CoveredArea" asdesignated in the attached"Exhibit A," incorporatedby referenceherein.
2. Eachparty to this contractshall retainall of the powersand rights it presentlyretains
asan Iowa MunicipalCorporation operating a Fire andEMS Service.
3. On and after the effective date of this contract,Ames shall be responsiblefor
respondingto Fire andEMS calls to andwithin the CoveredArea.
4. When respondingto calls in the CoveredArea, all Ames Fire Fightersand EMS
personnelshall be underthe commandand supervisionof their usualAmes superiorsand shall
makeall emergencydecisions pertaining to servicesprovided on the sitein accordancewith their
own establishedprocedures and protocol. All vehiclesand equipment used during the call shall
be Amesvehicles and equipment.
5. All liability to third partiesfor allegedacts and omissionsof Ames Fire and EMS
personnelwhile respondingto calls in the CoveredArea, all responsibilityfor personalinjuries
sustainedby Ames Fire and EMS personneland all damageto Ames vehiclesand equipment
shallbe the responsibilityof Ames,the sameas if the CoveredArea werewithin the boundaries
of the City of Ames.
6, Amesmay chargeservice fees to the personswho receiveFire andEMS servicesas it
deemsappropriate and as provided for by the AmesMunicipal Code.
7. This contractshall be approvedby City CouncilResolution. The contractfirst shallbe
approvedby the City of Ames and two executedoriginals delivered to the NevadaCity Clerk.
Following approvalby the City of Nevada,the contractbecomes effective at 12:01.AM on the first Sundayfollowing deliveryof a fully-executedoriginal to the AmesCity Clerk. 8. This contractshall remainin full force andeffect until December31, 201A,at which time it shall automaticallyrenew for additional 12 month periodsuntil December31, 2020.
Provided,however, that eitherpafiy may terminatethe contracton any of its annualtermination dateson December31 by giving the otherparty noticeon or beforeNovember I of the year in which the party intendsto terminateon December31. Notice shall be in writing and shall be mailedby certifiedmail, returnreceipt, properly addressed to the appropriateCity Clerk at City
Hall.
9. Nevadashall continue to respondto Fire andEMS calls in the remainderof the areait is presentlyresponsible for.
10. This contractshall hive no effect on any existingIntergovernmental Mutual Aid or similar contractor agreementthat may exist betweenthe partiesor betweenone of the parties andanother community or agency.
11. Although this contractis formed pursuantto the authorityof Iowa Code Section
288.12,it shallnot be consideredor construedas a*288 Agreement";shall not be subjectto the requirementsof Chapter 28F.and shall not be recordedwith the Secretaryof State. The considerationfor the contractshall be the mutual desireof both partiesto renderthe fastest responsetime to personsand property in distresswithin the CoveredArea. This contractdoes not requirethe reimbursementof any expensesor costsbetween the partiesor the sharingof costs, it does not provide for the acquisitionof any joint real or personalproperty, the designationof an Administratoror Board of Directorsnor the creationof any joint budgetor chainof commandinvolving personnelof both parties.
12. This contractmay be amendedfrom time to time, providedthe amendmentis in writing andis approvedby the City Councilsof both partiesprior to its effectivedate. Approved by City Council on the llth day of May, 2010, pursuantto
ResolutionNo.
Approvedby the NevadaCity Council on the i{l\ day of ...T."*."s ., ,
2010, pursuantto ResolutionNo. to3 (2009-2Uq.
THE CTTYOF AMES. IOWA THE CITY OF NEVADA. IOWA
/fil,."-f"*,-f I(t^r* Mayor "r, " "r,
, rrro
APPROYEDAFTOFQRM Ff DOUGI.ASR. MAREK CIW ATTORNEY EXHIBIT A
The CoveredArea
l. The entire area of the I-35 and U.S. Highway 30 Interchange, including all entranceand exit ramps.
2, U.S. Highway 30, both Eastbound and Westbound, from the Dayton Road
Interchange,including all exit and entranceramps, through the area describedin ltem #1 above.
3. I-35, both Northbound and Southbound from Lincoln Highway, the present
Ames City limits on I-35, through to the I-35 merge lane with the Southbound I-35 entranceramp and the Northbound Interstate 35 exit in the I-35 interchangewith Highway
30. AMENDMENT NO. 1 To AN INTERGOVERNMENTAL CONTRACT BY THE CITY OF AMES, IOWA, AND THE CITY OF NEVADA, IOWA Effective Date: December 15, 2020
This AMENDMENT No. 1 is by and among the City of Ames, Iowa, and the City of Nevada, Iowa, and amends the Intergovernmental Contract by the City of Ames, Iowa, and the City of Nevada, Iowa, approved by the Ames City Council on May 11, 2010 and approved by the Nevada City Council on June 14, 2010 (“Intergovernmental Contract”). In consideration of the mutual covenants herein made, the Parties agree as follows:
SECTION 1. PURPOSE OF AMENDMENT 1. The Parties agree that an amendment should be made to the duration of the Intergovernmental Contract in order to extend the renewal period of the agreement for an additional ten years.
2. Section 8 of the Intergovernmental Contract is amended to replace “it shall automatically renew for additional 12 month periods until December 31, 2020” with the following: “it shall automatically renew for additional 12-month periods until December 31, 2030”.
SECTION 2. AMENDMENT ALLOWED. 1. The Intergovernmental Contract provides for this Amendment with the approval of both city councils. All other terms and conditions of the Intergovernmental Contract shall remain in full force and effect except as specifically modified by this Amendment.
Remainder of page intentionally left blank
Approved by the Ames City Council on the 8th day of December 2020, pursuant to Resolution No. ______.
Approved by the Nevada City Council on the 14th day of December 2020, pursuant to Resolution No. ______.
THE CITY OF AMES, IOWA THE CITY OF NEVADA, IOWA
By: By: John A. Haila, Mayor Brett Barker, Mayor
By: By: Diane Voss, City Clerk Kerin Wright, City Clerk
ITEM # ____10___ DATE 12-08-20
COUNCIL ACTION FORM
SUBJECT: SPRING 2021 COMMISSION ON THE ARTS (COTA) SPECIAL GRANTS
BACKGROUND:
On November 2, the Commission on the Arts (COTA) finalized its recommendations for the Spring 2021 Special Project Grants. Three grant requests were received, totaling $2,600 in requests. COTA has $2,453 in funding available for these grants.
Based on the merits of each application and the criteria established for the special grants, COTA recommended the allocations indicated below. Contracts were sent to the awarded organizations for approval and have been returned. The contracts are now presented for City Council’s approval.
ORGANIZATION REQUEST PROJECT AWARD Beethoven 250th Birthday Ames Town & Gown $ 600 $ 570 Celebration Community Lecture
Ames Community Arts Council 1,000 Mobile Music Stage 953 Story Theater Company 1,000 Virtual Workshop Materials 930 Total $ 2,600 $ 2,453
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Approve the COTA special project grant contracts as recommended.
2. Refer these contracts to COTA for further information.
3. Do not approve the contracts.
CITY MANAGER’S RECOMMENDED ACTION:
These projects help advance participation in and awareness of the arts in the Ames community, which is a key goal of the Commission on the Arts. COTA has reviewed the requests and has recommended the approval of the contracts now presented to the City Council.
Therefore, it is the recommendation of the City Manager that the City Council adopt Alternative No. 1, as described above.
1 ITEM # __11___ DATE: 12-08-20
COUNCIL ACTION FORM
SUBJECT: SUNSMART AMES COMMUNITY SOLAR FARM MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT AND NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT
BACKGROUND:
On July 23, 2019, the City Council approved an Energy Services Agreement with ForeFront Power (FFP Origination, LLC) for the SunSmart Ames community solar farm. The construction of the solar farm is nearing completion and should be operational before the end of this month. There are two documents ForeFront is requesting the City to execute in order to meet certain obligations with its Tax Equity Partner and allow for commercial operation of the farm. These two documents are outlined below.
Memorandum of Agreement This will give public record notice of the Energy Services Agreement the City and ForeFront signed on July 23, 2019, and ForeFront’s right, title and interest in the solar farm equipment. This would be recorded at the Story County Office of the Recorder- County Clerk. The provisions of this Memorandum do not in any way change or affect the terms, covenants and conditions of the original Energy Services Agreement.
Notice and Acknowledgement of Assignment Per the Energy Services Agreement, ForeFront is required to give the City notice if ForeFront has collaterally assigned any rights, title or interest in the solar project. This specific Notice, once signed by the City, documents that the City consents to the assignment of rights from ForeFront to Signature Financial, LLC. Signing the Notice and Acknowledgment of Assignment does not in any way change or affect the terms, covenants and conditions of the original Energy Services Agreement.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Approve the Memorandum of Agreement and the Notice and Acknowledgment of Assignment.
2. Do not approve the Memorandum of Agreement or the Notice and Acknowledgment of Assignment.
CITY MANAGER'S RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Executing these documents does not change or affect the existing Energy Services Agreement, and provides necessary documentation for the solar developer to begin commercial operation of the solar farm. Therefore, it is the recommendation of the City Manager that the City Council adopt Alternative No. 1 as stated above.
1
DO NOT WRITE IN THE SPACE ABOVE THIS LINE, RESERVED FOR RECORDER Prepared by: ForeFront Power, 100 Montgomery St., Suite 725, San Francisco, CA 94104 Return Document to: ForeFront Power, 100 Montgomery St., Suite 725, San Francisco, CA 94104
MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT
THIS MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT (this “Memorandum”) is made this ____ day of ______, 2020, by and between The City of Ames, Iowa, as licensor (“Licensor”), and FFP Fund V Lessee2, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company, as licensee (“Licensee”).
W I T N E S S E T H :
WHEREAS, Licensor owns certain real property situated at 405 and 623 Airport Road, Ames, Story County, Iowa, as more particularly described on EXHIBIT A attached hereto and made a part hereof, together with all buildings, site improvements, fixtures and all other rights, privileges and appurtenances thereto (collectively, the “Property”);
WHEREAS, Licensor and, by virtue of assignment, Licensee are parties to that certain Energy Services Agreement, dated as of July 23, 2019, and amended as of August 21, 2020, regarding the Property (as amended, the “Agreement”), which Agreement is for a term of twenty (20) years, commencing on the date thereof (the “Commencement Date”), and expiring on the date which is twenty (20) years from the Commercial Operation Date (as defined in the Agreement), subject to earlier termination and Licensee’s option to renew the Agreement for one (1) successive five (5) year period on and subject to the terms and conditions set forth therein; and
WHEREAS, Licensor and Licensee desire to execute this Memorandum to give public record notice of the Agreement and Licensee’s right, title and interest in and to the Property.
NOW, THEREFORE, this Memorandum is hereby executed for the sole purpose of recording in the Office of the Recorder-County Clerk in the County of Story, Iowa, in order to give public record notice of the Agreement and notice that Licensee has certain rights relating to the Property, as set forth in the Agreement. The provisions of this Memorandum do not in any way change or affect the terms, covenants and conditions of the Agreement.
[Signature pages follow.] IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Memorandum has been executed and delivered as of the date first set forth above.
LICENSOR: THE CITY OF AMES, IOWA
By: Name: Title:
LICENSEE: FFP FUND V LESSEE2, LLC
By: ______Name: Title:
[Signature Page to City of Ames Memorandum of Agreement] ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF LICENSOR
A notary public or other officer completing this certificate verifies only the identity of the individual who signed the document to which this certificate is attached, and not the truthfulness, accuracy, or validity of that document.
STATE OF CALIFORNIA } } S.S COUNTY OF ______}
On ______, ______before me, ______, Notary Public, personally appeared, ______, who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument.
I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct.
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
Signature: ______
(Notary Seal)
[Acknowledgement Page to City of Ames Memorandum of Agreement] ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF LICENSEE
A notary public or other officer completing this certificate verifies only the identity of the individual who signed the document to which this certificate is attached, and not the truthfulness, accuracy, or validity of that document.
STATE OF CALIFORNIA } } S.S COUNTY OF ______}
On ______, ______before me, ______, Notary Public, personally appeared, ______, who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument.
I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct.
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
Signature: ______
(Notary Seal)
[Acknowledgement Page to City of Ames Memorandum of Agreement]
EXHIBIT A
Legal Description
Real property in the City of Ames, County of Story, State of Iowa, described as follows:
BEGINNING AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER (NW¼) OF SECTION FOURTEEN (14) TOWNSHIP EIGHTY-THREE (83) NORTH, RANGE TWENTY-FOUR (24) WEST OF THE 5TH P.M., IN THE CITY OF AMES, STORY COUNTY, IOWA; THENCE NORTH 00°19'10" EAST, 1,025.79 FEET ALONG THE WEST LINE OF THE SOUTHWEST ¼ OF THE NORTHWEST ¼ OF SAID SEC. 14 (TO A POINT 120 FEET NORMALLY DISTANT SOUTHERLY FROM PRIMARY ROAD NO. U.S. 30 CENTERLINE, ON THE WEST LINE OF THE NORTHWEST ¼); THENCE NORTH 83°25'38" EAST, 467.74 FEET ALONG THE SOUTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY OF SAID U.S. #30 (TO A POINT 60 FEET NORMALLY DISTANT SOUTHERLY FROM STATION 2236 + 75, EDGE OF SLAB, RAMP "B"); THENCE NORTH 88°40'55" EAST, 550.80 FEET CONTINUING ALONG THE SOUTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY OF U.S. #30 (TO A POINT 70 FEET NORMALLY DISTANT SOUTHERLY FROM STATION 2242 + 25.7, EDGE OF SLAB, RAMP "B"); THENCE SOUTHEASTERLY, ALONG A 1,567.1 FOOT RADIUS CURVE, CONCAVE SOUTHWESTERLY, AN ARC DISTANCE OF 300.09 FEET (THE LONG CHORD BEARS SOUTH 86°52'26" EAST, 299.63 FEET TO A POINT ON THE EAST LINE OF THE WEST ½ OF THE NORTHWEST ¼ WHICH IS 70 FEET RADIALLY DISTANT SOUTHERLY FROM THE EDGE OF SLAB OF RAMP "B"); THENCE SOUTH 00°01'00" EAST, 403.25 FEET ALONG THE EAST LINE OF THE WEST ½ OF THE NORTHWEST ¼; THENCE NORTH 89°32'23" WEST, 816.6 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 00°01'00" EAST, 683.0 FEET; THENCE NORTH 89°32'23" WEST, 504.0 FEET ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF THE NORTHWEST ¼, TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING; AND BEGINNING AT A POINT 504.0 FEET EAST AND 33.0 FEET NORTH OF THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER (SW¼) OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER (NW¼) OF SECTION FOURTEEN (14), TOWNSHIP EIGHTY-THREE (83) NORTH, RANGE TWENTY-FOUR (24) WEST OF THE 5TH P.M., CITY OF AMES, STORY COUNTY, IOWA, THENCE NORTH 650.0 FEET, THENCE EAST 816.6 FEET, THENCE SOUTH 650.0 FEET, THENCE WEST 816.6 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING.
NOTICE AND ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF ASSIGNMENT
November 24, 2020
FFP FUND V LESSEE2, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company (as assignee of FFP Origination, LLC, “ForeFront Power”) hereby gives notice to The City of Ames, Iowa (“Purchaser”) that it has collaterally assigned or will collaterally assign to Signature Financial, LLC, a New York limited liability company (and its successors and assigns, “Financing Party”), all of ForeFront Power’s rights, title and interest in, to and under the Energy Services Agreement dated as of July 23, 2019 (as amended, modified or supplemented from time to time, together with all exhibits, schedules, annexes and other attachments hereto, the “Assigned Agreement”) (all such assigned rights, the “Assigned Rights”) as security for its obligations under a financing transaction (the “Transaction”) between Financing Party and ForeFront Power pursuant to which ForeFront Power has, among other things, sold and assigned the System to Financing Party. Defined terms used herein and not defined have the meanings given to them in the Assigned Agreement.
1. Purchaser hereby consents to ForeFront Power’s assignment of the Assigned Rights to Financing Party and agrees to deliver all Energy Services Payments and other amounts payable by Purchaser under the Assigned Agreement in accordance with the terms thereof, from the date of this Notice and Acknowledgment of Assignment until Financing Party notifies Purchaser that the Release Date (as defined below) has occurred, into a revenue account designated by Financing Party and as further described on Schedule I hereto.
2. Purchaser acknowledges that Financing Party is a “Financing Party” as defined in the Assigned Agreement, and that Financing Party shall have all rights of a Financing Party under the Assigned Agreement, including, without limitation, all rights granted a Lender under Sections 13.1 and 13.2 of the Assigned Agreement, subject to the terms and conditions therein.
3. Purchaser agrees that the term “Force Majeure Event” shall not include any decision by Purchaser to close or change the use of its facilities located on the Premises as a result of COVID-19, any related “stay at home” orders or their effects on the Purchaser’s operations.
4. Purchaser agrees that, until Financing Party notifies Purchaser that the Release Date has occurred, it will send all communications with respect to the Notice and Acknowledgement and all material notices (including any notice of breach) under the Assigned Agreement to Financing Party at the address set forth in Schedule II hereto simultaneously with the delivery of such communication or notice to ForeFront Power.
5. Purchaser acknowledges and agrees that Financing Party has not assumed and does not have any obligation or liability under or pursuant to the Assigned Agreement unless and until Financing Party assumes the same in writing.
6. Purchaser represents and warrants that (a) each of the representations and warranties of Purchaser set forth in the Assigned Agreement are true and correct as of the date hereof; (b) the Assigned Agreement is in full force and effect and has not been amended or otherwise modified since the date thereof; (c) there is no other agreement or understanding between Purchaser and ForeFront Power that would alter the Assigned Agreement, other than as listed on Schedule III; (d) to Purchaser’s knowledge, there exists no event or condition which constitutes a breach or default, or that would, with the giving of notice or lapse of time, constitute a default, under the Assigned Agreement; (e) Purchaser is not aware of any event, act, circumstance or condition constituting a Force Majeure Event; (f) there are no actions or proceedings pending or, to Purchaser’s knowledge, threatened against or affecting Purchaser in any court, by or before any governmental authority, arbitration board, or tribunal that purport to affect the ability of Purchaser to perform its obligations under, or that purport to affect the legality, validity or enforceability of, the Assigned Agreement; (g) there are no actions or proceedings, whether voluntary or involuntary, pending against Purchaser under the bankruptcy or insolvency laws of the United States of America or any state thereof; (h) Purchaser is the [fee owner][sole leaseholder] of the Premises where the System is and will be located; and (i) Purchaser intends that, pursuant to Section 7701(e)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of
WBD (US) 50319112 1986, as amended, the Assigned Agreement shall be deemed to be a services contract with respect to the sale to Purchaser of electrical energy produced at an alternative energy facility.
7. Purchaser further represents and warrants that (a) all payments, costs and expenses required to be made or paid by ForeFront Power under the Assigned Agreement as of the date hereof have been made or paid by or on behalf of the ForeFront Power; (b) Purchaser has no knowledge of any facts entitling ForeFront Power to any material claim, counterclaim, offset or defense in respect of the Assigned Agreement, and there are no disputes or legal proceedings between the ForeFront Power and Purchaser; (c) neither Purchaser nor ForeFront Power owes any indemnity or warranty payments under the Assigned Agreement; and (d) Purchaser has not made any payments to ForeFront Power in respect of any indemnity or warranty provision under the Assigned Agreement.
8. All obligations of Purchaser hereunder shall expire upon the termination of that certain Security Agreement entered into between ForeFront Power and Financing Party in connection with the Transaction (such date of termination, the “Release Date”). Financing Party hereby agrees that it shall promptly notify Purchaser of the occurrence of the Release Date.
9. This Notice and Acknowledgement of Assignment may be executed in one or more counterparts and when signed by all the parties listed below shall constitute a single binding agreement. Delivery of an executed counterpart of a signature page of this Notice and Acknowledgement of Assignment by facsimile or .pdf shall be effective as delivery of a manually executed counterpart of this Notice and Acknowledgement of Assignment.
[Signatures on following page]
2
108307409.3 0066655-00007
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, each of the undersigned has duly executed this Notice and Acknowledgment of Assignment as of the date first above written.
FFP FUND V LESSEE2, LLC
By: ______Name: Title:
Accepted and Agreed:
THE CITY OF AMES, IOWA
By: ______Name: Title:
Financing Party:
SIGNATURE FINANCIAL, LLC
By: ______Name: Title:
[Signature Page to Notice and Acknowledgment of Assignment]
SCHEDULE I
Revenue Account
Account Name: FFP Fund V Lessee2, LLC Account Number: 1503687182 Routing Number: 026013576 Account Type: Operating
SCHEDULE II
Financing Party Address
Signature Financial, LLC 225 Broadhollow Road, Suite 132W Melville, NY 11747
SCHEDULE III
Other Agreements
Production Update Letter dated November 24, 2020.
ITEM#: 12 DATE: 12-08-20
COUNCIL ACTION FORM
SUBJECT: 2020/2021 PAVEMENT RESTORATION – SLURRY SEAL PROGRAM
BACKGROUND:
The Slurry Seal Program is an annual program for preventative and proactive maintenance activities on City streets. This program allows for a wide variety of pavement maintenance techniques to preserve and enhance City street infrastructure. The techniques in this program are typically more specialized or larger in scope than can be performed by City street maintenance staff. The goal of projects in this program will be to repair and extend the lifespan of the City streets.
The project will level dips in joints and provide a new thin wearing surface for traffic. This work will take place predominately on residential streets with the disruption to residents being typically no more than one day. Work in all locations will be coordinated with other local projects to minimize traffic disruptions. A list of the project location is attached.
Staff has completed plans and specifications with estimated costs of $215,055. There is $250,000 of Road Use Tax funding allocated to this program annually in the Capital Improvement Plan, which along with carryover savings leaves $373,306.60 in total funds available for the project. Remaining revenue will be utilized for other pavement restoration priorities.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Approve the 2020/21 Pavement Restoration – Slurry Seal Program by establishing January 6, 2021 as the date of letting and January 12, 2021 as the date for the report of bids.
2. Direct staff to make changes to this project.
CITY MANAGER’S RECOMMENDED ACTION:
This project will repair and extend the lifespan of the City streets in the program and provided a better travelling experience for users of the corridors and for those living in the neighborhoods.
Therefore, it is the recommendation of the City Manager that the City Council adopt Alternative No. 1, as described above.
1 Street Name and Location (Full Width Slurry) Estimated SY Actual SY Carroll Avenue E 13th to E 14th St 1,085 Carroll Avenue E 14th to E 16th St 2,540 Carroll Avenue E 16th to Duff Ave 1,845 Paulson Drive E 20th to George Allen Ave 1,540 Paulson Drive George Allen to 1,635 George Allen Ave Maxwell to E 20th 2,280 Wilson Ave 16th to 20th 4,120 Clark Ave 13th to 16th 4,520 Franklin Ave Oakland to Woodland St 2,225 12th St Grand to Kellogg 5,060 Gray Ave Sunset to Greeley St 2,530 Greeley St Beach to Pearson Ave 3,255 Story St Colorado to Wilmoth Ave 1,280 Story St Wilmoth to Howard Ave 2,700 Story St Marshall to Crane Ave 2,075 Pearson Country Club to Sunset 4,400 Westwood Dr Story to Woodland St 2,365 Hawthorne Ave Oakland to Woodland St 1,700 Ellis St Hillcrest to dead end 2,000 Hillcrest West to Woodland St 1,110 Edison Street Carnegie to Whitney Ave 2,250 Stafford E 13th to dead end 2,935 Briarwood Place 650 Oliver Ave Woodland to Circle 3,085 TOTAL 59,185
Street Name and Location (Joint Leveling Slurry) Estimated LF Actual LF Various Locations throughout Ames 15,000 TOTAL 15,000 ITEM # ___13__ DATE: 12-08-20
COUNCIL ACTION FORM
SUBJECT: BAKER SUBDIVISION GEOTHERMAL HEAT PUMP SYSTEM RECOMMENDATION TO REJECT BIDS AND RE-BID
BACKGROUND:
City staff has been pursuing the installation of a geothermal heat pump system to be installed in Baker Subdivision. The geothermal system would provide space heating and cooling and boost water heating efficiency for all the homes in the subdivision. This project proposal was motivated by an effort to advance environmental sustainability of the subdivision developed by the City, while maintaining affordable utility costs for the mixed- income neighborhood. The system would help to balance the seasonal load and utilization of existing electric infrastructure and reduce community greenhouse gas emissions.
On September 22, 2020, City Council approved the preliminary plans and specifications for the District Geothermal Vertical Closed Loop Project at Baker Subdivision. On October 21, 2020, one bid was received as shown below.
Sales and/or Evaluated Bid Bidder Bid Price Use Taxes Price Included Thorpe Water Development Co. $755,237 $10,320 $765,557 Ankeny, IA
The bid was reported to Council on October 27, 2020. This bid was significantly higher than the available budget for the project. City Council delayed taking action on the bid to allow staff to study the bid and specifications further. City staff now recommends that the bid received from the initial bidding process be rejected and the Baker Subdivision Geothermal Heat Pump System be rebid.
Staff met with the engineering consultant and other industry experts to compare the allocation of expenses in the engineer’s estimate to those in the bid received. The consultant determined that the disparity was caused by elements of the system that can be omitted by changing the design. This change in design is not expected to affect the original budget or timeline of the project. The design change will create individual geothermal well fields for each property rather than a large, single well field serving the entire subdivision.
Staff has worked with the consultant to make these changes to the plans and specifications for the project. The construction costs of the redesigned system are estimated at $267,000, with a project life of over 50 years.
1 A monthly customer charge would be based on the size of the customer’s system. The proposed charge would start at $5.25, with Council-approved rate increases as appropriate, resulting in a payback time of around 27 years. One goal of the project would be to keep the utility costs of homes in the neighborhood comparable to or lower than those with more traditional heating and cooling systems.
The approved Demand Side Management budget contains $405,756 carried forward from the FY 2019/20 budget to cover this project cost.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. A. Reject the bid received for the District Geothermal Vertical Closed Loop Project at Baker Subdivision
B. Approve preliminary plans and specifications for rebidding Baker Subdivision Geothermal Well Installations, establishing January 27, 2021, as the bid due date and February 9, 2021, as the date of hearing and award of contract.
2. Reject the bid and abandon the Baker Subdivision Geothermal Heat Pump Project.
CITY MANAGER'S RECOMMENDED ACTION:
A district geothermal system will provide highly efficient, affordable, and sustainable space heating and cooling to the new development. This application of geothermal heating and cooling would introduce more local contractors and residents to the technology and model an innovative project structure for other communities. Rejecting the bid at this time has allowed staff the ability to incorporate changes to the bid document that will produce clearer, more complete bids once the project is re-introduced to the market.
Therefore, it is the recommendation of the City Manager that the City Council adopt Alternative No. 1 A and B, as stated above.
2 ITEM # __14___ DATE: 12-08-20
COUNCIL ACTION FORM
SUBJECT: UNIT 8 BOILER REPAIR PROJECT – CHANGE ORDER NO. 1
BACKGROUND:
Unit 8 is one of two boilers at the City’s Steam Electric Plant and is now 38+ years old. Due to age, a history of firing coal and natural gas (since 2016), along with co-firing refuse derived fuel (RDF), the boiler is in critical need of repair, especially the tubes in the superheater.
At its regular meeting on November 24, 2020, the Ames City Council approved awarding the Unit 8 Boiler Repair Project to TEi Construction Services, Inc. (TEiC) of Duncan, South Carolina, for the bid amount of $6,690,271.
During the evaluation of TEiC’s bid, it was noticed that the sales tax amount did not appear to be correct. After several conversations with TEiC, the bidder determined that the total sales tax obligation was $409,231, not the $39,907 that was included in the bid. Therefore, in addition to the bid amount of $6,690,271, a Change Order needs to be approved in the amount of $369,324 to account for the additional sales tax obligation. The total price necessary to complete the scope of work is now $7,059,595 as a result of adding the Change Order for the increase in the amount of sales tax to the bid proposal.
City staff was aware of the sales tax calculation issue at the time the bids were awarded, and the City Council was alerted in the November 24 bid award Council Action Form that a change order would be requested to correct the sales tax. As noted in that Council Action Form, even with the adjustment for sales tax, TEiC’s bid is $1,335,760.05 less than the next bid, and $1,514,405 less than the Engineer’s Estimate.
Funding in the amount of $7,399,455 is available in the Capital Improvements Plan for this project, which is sufficient to cover the original bid amount plus this change order.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Approve Change Order No. 1 to TEi Construction Services, Inc. of Duncan, SC in the amount of $369,324.00 to adjust the additional sales tax obligation that was not included in the original bid.
2. Do not approve the requested change order.
1
CITY MANAGER'S RECOMMENDED ACTION:
This project will greatly improve the availability and reliability of Unit 8. It is crucial that the project proceed in order to increase the Power Plant’s reliability to produce electricity and burn refuse derived fuel. Therefore, it is the recommendation of the City Manager that the City Council adopt Alternative No. 1, as described above.
2 ITEM # ___15__ DATE: 12-08-20
COUNCIL ACTION FORM
SUBJECT: CHANGE ORDER #1 TO MAINTENANCE SERVICES CONTRACT – RDF BIN REPAIR
BACKGROUND:
The Power Plant has two natural gas-fired, high-pressure steam turbine electric generating units which are referred to as Units No. 7 and 8. These units require regular professional maintenance and repair. This consists of both emergency and planned repairs and service. Services include a variety of boiler maintenance and repairs, structural steel, pump and piping work, and other miscellaneous mechanical Power Plant work.
On August 11, 2020, the City Council approved a contract with Anderson Process & Instrumentation Solutions, LLC., Marshalltown, Iowa, for Maintenance Services at the Power Plant for the period from September 1, 2020, through June 30, 2021 in the amount not to exceed $125,000 plus $8,700 tax. This contract addresses routine repair and maintenance work to keep Power Plant components in operation.
A major project has been programmed into the Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) to perform significant repairs on the Refuse Derived Fuel (RDF) bin in FY 2021/22. The bin is used to receive RDF from Resource Recovery and convey the material into one of the boilers within the Power Plant where it is burned to produce electricity. The bin is made up of a large amount of structure and panel steel and a majority of those steel pieces are badly corroding. Staff is currently in the engineering/design stage and preparing to issue bids for the CIP project.
Some areas within the bin have now corroded enough to where immediate safety and structural failure concerns exist. Staff is concerned that waiting to complete these particular repairs through the Capital Improvement project is not prudent. To complete these repairs in a timely and cost-effective way, staff is proposing to accomplish the work under the existing Maintenance Services contract with API.
The action being requested is to approve Change Order No. 1 to the Maintenance Services Contract. This change order will add an additional $414,850 plus $29,039.50 tax to the current contract for FY 2020/21 and allow API to procure materials and provide needed labor. This will bring the total contract amount to $577,589.50 which will allow for urgent repairs at the RDF bin.
There is $300,000 budgeted in the FY 2020/21 Power Plant operating budget for RDF bin maintenance. The additional $143,889.50 will come from the Operations account used for water treatment. This account has available funds because the Power Plant is not using chemicals at the rate anticipated for the current fiscal year. This decrease in chemical use is a result of operating Unit 7 instead of the larger Unit 8 through the current fiscal year.
1 REVENUES EXPENSES Source Amount Source Amount Power Plant Maint. Services Account $133,700.00 Original Maint. Services Contract $125,000.00 Original Contract Taxes 8,700.00 RDF Bin Maint. Account 300,000.00 Subtotal $133,700
Water Treatment Operations Account 143,889.50 Change Order #1 414,850.00 Change Order #1 Taxes 29.039.50 Subtotal $443,889.50
TOTAL $577,589.50 TOTAL $577,589.50
Invoices will be based on contract rates for time and materials for services actually received. API’s pricing for time and materials has already been competitively bid under the Maintenance Services contract and was found to be the best value.
It should be emphasized that while this change order is significant in comparison to the original contract amount, the alternatives would be to either wait to repair the bin under the major planned repair project or develop a separate project bid for this work and wait to initiate repairs until bids were received. Both options increase the possibility that a safety incident could occur in the meantime. Additionally, the risk increases that bin components could fail and result in an inability to operate the bin, which would halt Resource Recovery operations until repairs could be made.
The repairs proposed to be completed through this change order would otherwise be completed through the upcoming major CIP repair project. Therefore, staff expects the major CIP bin repair project to be reduced in cost as a result of increasing the scope and cost of the Maintenance Services contract now.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Approve contract Change Order No. 1 with Anderson Process & Instrumentation Solutions, LLC., Marshalltown, Iowa for the Maintenance Services Contract for Power Plant in the not-to-exceed amount of $443,889.50. This will bring the total FY 2020/21 contract value to a not-to-exceed amount of $577,639.50.
2. Do not approve the change order and direct staff to seek separate quotes for repairs.
3. Do not approve the change order and direct staff to continue using the RDF bin until it fails or deemed completely unsafe to work in. At that time, the Resource Recovery Plant would have to be shut down until the major overhaul project can be completed in the next year.
2 CITY MANAGER'S RECOMMENDED ACTION:
The condition of some structural components of the RDF bin is creating safety concerns and threatening the ability of the Power Plant to burn RDF. This change order is necessary to reduce major safety risks to Power Plant staff and ensure that the Power Plant does not lose the ability to receive and use RDF. The rates for time and materials have already been competitively bid and found to be an acceptable value.
Therefore, it is the recommendation of the City Manager that the City Council adopt Alternative #1 as stated above.
3 ITEM # ___16__ DATE: 12-08-20
COUNCIL ACTION FORM
SUBJECT: RENEWAL OF CONTRACT TO FURNISH GASES AND CYLINDERS TO POWER PLANT FOR 2021
BACKGROUND:
This is a renewal of a contract for the purchase of gases and cylinders when needed at the City’s Power Plant. The gases required for Power Plant operations include hydrogen, nitrogen, carbon dioxide, and commercial methane.
This contract is to furnish gases and cylinders for the Power Plant for the period from January 1, 2021 through December 31, 2021. The average increase in gas costs for this renewal is approximately 4%. The contract includes a provision that would allow the City to renew the contract for up to four additional one-year terms. This would be the first out of the four maximum renewals.
The benefits of having a contract for these services in place include the following:
1) Consistency of work and quality from a single contractor 2) Reduction in the City’s exposure to market forces regarding prices and availability for gases 3) Rapid contractor mobilization when gas is needed in emergency situations, thus reducing generation downtime 4) City staff time saving in obtaining quotes, evaluating bids, and preparing specifications and other procurement documentation.
Council should note that actual cost invoices will be based on the amount of gases and cylinders purchased. The approved FY 2020/21 and Requested FY 2021/22 operating budget each include $32,000 this purchase.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Approve the first renewal of the contract for supplying gases and cylinders to the Power Plant to Airgas USA, LLC with a total amount not-to-exceed $32,000.
2. Decline to renew the contract and purchase gases and cylinders on an as- needed basis.
CITY MANAGER'S RECOMMENDED ACTION:
This contract offers the City flexibility in purchasing gases and cylinders and will maintain standards of performance for gas and cylinder content and delivery. Detailed
1 ordering and delivery procedures are part of this contract. The renewal costs are favorable compared to purchasing gases and cylinders on an as-needed basis.
Therefore, it is the recommendation of the City Manager that the City Council adopt Alternative #1 as stated above.
2 Pricing Sheet for 2020-042 (Renewal #1 2021) Furnishing Gases and Cylinders to the City of Ames Estimated Annual Minimum Cylinder Lease Cylinder Capacity Gas Usage Gas Purchase Price Inventory of Price Pricing per Description (Cubic Feet, except (Cubic Feet, (Cubic Feet, except Total Cylinders at (unit price per cylinder where noted) except where where noted) Pricing for Power Plant cylinder) noted) 2021 Hydrogen, 99.95% pure, commercial quality. CGA 350. 215 56 340,345 $0.038 $0.036 $28.00 $13,606.12 $7.64 Note: Rate of $28.00 for 54 cylinders, not 56 remaining balance lease/rent free Nitrogen, 99.98% pure, commercial quality. To be available in cylinders of approximately 304 cubic feet and 304 2 2,432 $0.028 $0.028 $0.00 $68.00 $8.50 152 cubic feet each, CGA 580 . Carbon dioxide, 99.95% pure, commercial quality, CGA 75 24 9,000 $0.146 $0.149 $0.00 $1,342.80 $11.19 320. (Quantities in pounds) Commercial Methane, 99.5% pure, commercial quality, 360 10 17,280 $0.347 $0.358 $0.00 $6,180.00 $128.75 CGA 350. EPA Protocol 1 Specialty gas cylinders E03NI99E15A07C0 Must include Certificate of Analysis and meet all EPA specifications. Contents: 144 1 144 $3.750 $3.750 $0.00 $540.00 $540.00 5.5 PPM Sulfur Dioxide 55 PPM Nitric Oxide Balance Nitrogen EPA Protocol 1 Specialty gas cylinders E04NI81E15A0058 Must include Certificate of Analysis and meet all EPA specifications. Contents: 360 PPM Sulfur Dioxide 154 1 154 $4.042 $3.506 $0.00 $540.00 $540.00 450 PPM Nitric Oxide 18% Carbon Dioxide Balance Nitrogen EPA Protocol 1 Specialty gas cylinders E04NI88E15A0018 Must include Certificate of Analysis and meet all EPA specifications. Contents: 55 PPM Nitric Oxide 150 2 300 $3.487 $4.150 $56.00 $1,357.00 $622.50 55 PPM Sulfur Dioxide 11% Carbon Dioxide Balance Nitrogen EPA Protocol 1 Specialty gas cylinders E04NI88E15A0015 Must include Certificate of Analysis and meet all EPA specifications. Contents: 220 PPM Sulfur Dioxide 150 1 150 $2.736 $3.487 $0.00 $523.05 $523.05 275 PPM Nitric Oxide 11% Carbon Dioxide Balance Nitrogen EPA Protocol 1 Specialty gas cylinders 145 1 145 $2.820 $2.830 $0.00 $410.34 $410.34 E03NI99E15A07C1 EPA Protocol 1 Specialty gas cylinders E03NI99E15A07C1 Must include Certificate of Analysis 145 2 290 $2.820 $2.917 $56.00 $958.00 $423.00 and meet all EPA specifications. Note: Rate of $56.00 for 4 cylinders, not 7 remaining balance lease/rent free Acetylene 130 4 3,120 $0.252 $0.330 $0.00 $1,028.16 $42.84 Acetylene (City owns 3 cylinders) 10 3 120 $0.606 $1.581 $18.00 $189.72 $15.81 Acetylene 40 1 120 $0.329 $0.281 $0.00 $33.66 $11.22 Airgas does not provide a 40 cu.ft. acytlene cylinder Oxygen (City owns 3 cylinders) 20 3 400 $0.203 $0.213 $18.00 $85.20 $4.26 Oxygen 251 4 9,036 $0.023 $0.023 $0.00 $203.40 $5.65 75% argon / 25% CO2. 376 4 1,504 $0.062 $0.065 $0.00 $97.92 $24.48 100% argon 336 1 4,704 $0.063 $0.066 $0.00 $311.22 $22.23 Nit-Co 800PPM 144 2 288 $1.808 $1.808 $0.00 $520.82 $260.41 Nit-Oxy 215 2 430 $1.085 $1.211 $0.00 $520.82 $260.41 Helium –Argon 336 2 672 $0.106 $1.148 $0.00 $771.28 $385.64 Contractor maintains minimum of ten (10) extra hydrogen filled cylinders at their local branch (total based on 10 cylinders) $0.00 $0.00
Monthly fees for cylinder rentals. Fees for overages associated with cylinder counts exceeding the contract terms will be assessed at the per Cylinders rate per Cylinder, $0.00 rate per cylinder, per month, for those cylinders in excess, as counted on the last day of each month per month as axcess Trip/Delivery charge for deliveries, if applicable (total will be based on 104 deliveries) $10.00 $1,560.00 $15.00 Trip/Delivery charge for emergency deliveries other than normal delivery days stated above $10.00 per delivery $15.00 Annual Hazmat Fee: $100.00 $125.00
Contract total 2020 $29,726.82 Contract Total $30,972.51 ITEM # 17 DATE: 12-08-20
COUNCIL ACTION FORM
SUBJECT: 2017/18 RIGHT-OF-WAY RESTORATION CONTRACT
BACKGROUND:
This program is for restoration of the right-of-way areas associated with various Capital Improvements Plan (CIP) projects. Some areas were restored with sod, while others were restored using seed or dormant seed. Success using these various types of restoration varies depending on the weather following the installation.
On September 25, 2018, City Council awarded the 2017/18 Right-of-Way Restoration contract to Green Tech of Iowa of Grimes, Iowa, in the amount of $117,370. Two change orders were administratively approved by staff. Change Order No. 1 was approved in the amount of $13,405.95 for additional restoration. Change Order No. 2 in the amount of $190.25, was to reflect the actual measured quantities. Restoration was completed in the amount of $130,966.20. Funding not utilized by this project will be allocated to other locations and projects as needed to ensure properly restored rights of way.
Revenue and expenses associated with this program are estimated as follows:
Available Revenue Estimated Expenses Road Use Tax $ 125,000 Water Utility Fund 75,000 Sewer Utility Fund 75,000 Storm Sewer Utility Fund 50,000 Restoration Work $ 130,966.20 Engineering/Administration 20,000.00 TOTAL $ 325,000 $ 150,966.20
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Accept the 2017/18 Right-of-Way Restoration Contract (Various Locations) as completed by Green Tech of Iowa of Grimes, Iowa, in the amount of $130,966.20.
2. Direct staff to pursue modification to this project.
CITY MANAGER'S RECOMMENDED ACTION:
This project was completed in accordance with the approved plans and specifications. Therefore, it is the recommendation of the City Manager that the City Council adopt Alternative No. 1, as described above.
1 ITEM # ___18 _ DATE: 12-08-20
COUNCIL ACTION FORM
SUBJECT: TEAGARDEN AREA DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS
BACKGROUND:
This program provides for stabilization of areas that have become eroded in streams, channels, swales, gullies, or drainage ways that are part of the storm water system with a more permanent control of the erosion and reduces recurring maintenance costs in these areas. The location for this project was the Teagarden Area in the southeast corner of Ames. The area consists of three drainage branches that eventually meet near the dead-end of Patricia Drive, where a concrete cunette (paved channel) conveys the storm water southeast to a drainage ditch, which in turn drains to the South Skunk River.
On June 25, 2019, City Council awarded the contract to Con-Struct, Inc., of Ames, Iowa in the amount of $333,494. Three change order were administratively approved by staff. Change Order No. 1 in the amount of $3,780 was for adding temporary straw mulch to protect disturbed areas over the winter. Change Order No. 2 in the amount of $6,664.38 was to install a chain link fence. Change Order No. 3 (balancing), a savings in the amount of $8,850.20, was to reflect the actual measured quantities completed during construction. Construction was completed in the amount of $335,088.18.
Available Estimated
Revenue Expenses Storm Sewer Utility Fund (carried over) $ 430,692 G.O Bonds $ 503,063 Construction (Low Bid) $ 335,088.18 Engineering/Administration (Est.) $ 115,500.00 Engineering (Teagarden Area FEMA Letter of Map Revision) $ 45,000.00 $ 933,755 $ 495,588.18
Remaining funds from this project will be used for additional future project(s).
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Accept the Teagarden Area Drainage Improvements project as completed by Con- Struct Inc. of Ames, Iowa, in the amount of $335,088.18.
2. Direct staff to pursue modifications to the project.
1 CITY MANAGER’S RECOMMENDED ACTION:
This project was completed in accordance with the approved plans and specifications. Therefore, it is the recommendation of the City Manager that the City Council adopt Alternative No. 1, as described above.
2 Item No. 19
Smart Choice Public Works Department 515 Clark Avenue, Ames, Iowa 50010 Phone 515‐239‐5160 Fax 515‐239‐5404
December 3, 2020
Honorable Mayor and Council Members City of Ames Ames, Iowa 50010
RE: Crane Farm 2nd Addition LOC Reduction #4
Ladies and Gentlemen:
I hereby certify that portions of the public sidewalk required as a condition for approval of the final plat of Crane Farm Subdivision 2nd Addition have been completed in an acceptable manner by various homebuilder sub‐contractors. The above‐mentioned improvements have been inspected by the Engineering Division of the Public Works Department of the City of Ames, Iowa, and found to meet City specifications and standards.
As a result of this certification, it is recommended that the financial security for public improvements on file with the City for this subdivision be reduced to $7,227. The remaining work covered by this financial security includes portions of the public sidewalk.
Sincerely,
John C. Joiner, P.E. Director
JJ/tp
cc: Finance, Contractor, Planning & Housing, Subdivision file
Public Works Department 515.239.5160 main 515 Clark Ave. P.O. Box 811 Engineering 515.239.5404 fax Ames, IA 50010 www.CityofAmes.org
Crane Farm Subdivision, 2nd Addition December 3, 2020 Page 2
Description Unit Quantity Sidewalk, PCC, 4” SY 1419
Item No. 20
Smart Choice Public Works Department 515 Clark Avenue, Ames, Iowa 50010 Phone 515‐239‐5160 Fax 515‐239‐5404
December 3, 2020
Honorable Mayor and Council Members City of Ames Ames, Iowa 50010
RE: Crane Farm 6th Addition LOC Reduction #2
Ladies and Gentlemen:
I hereby certify that a portion of the public sidewalk required as a condition for approval of the final plat of Crane Farm Subdivision, 6th Addition has been completed in an acceptable manner by various homebuilders. The above‐mentioned improvements have been inspected by the Engineering Division of the Public Works Department of the City of Ames, Iowa, and found to meet City specifications and standards.
As a result of this certification, it is recommended that the financial security for public improvements on file with the City for this subdivision be reduced to $18,907. The remaining work covered by this financial security includes installation of public sidewalk/pedestrian ramps and street trees.
Sincerely,
John C. Joiner, P.E. Director
JJ/tp
cc: Finance, Planning & Housing, Subdivision file
Public Works Department 515.239.5160 main 515 Clark Ave. P.O. Box 811 Engineering 515.239.5404 fax Ames, IA 50010 www.CityofAmes.org
Crane Farm Subdivision, 6th Addition December 3, 2020 Page 2
Description Unit Quantity SIDEWALK, PCC, 4" SY 44
Item No. 21
Smart Choice Public Works Department 515 Clark Avenue, Ames, Iowa 50010 Phone 515‐239‐5160 Fax 515‐239‐5404
December 3, 2020
Honorable Mayor and Council Members City of Ames Ames, Iowa 50010
RE: Scenic Valley 4th Addition Financial Security Reduction #2
Mayor and Council Members:
I hereby certify that the asphalt surface pavement, streetlights, partial quantities of each COSESCO, PCC sidewalk 4” and 6”, and detectable warning panels required as a condition for approval of the final plat of Scenic Valley 4th Addition have been completed in an acceptable manner by Con‐Struct Inc., Manatt’s Inc., and Ames Trenching of Ames, Iowa. The above‐ mentioned improvements have been inspected by the Engineering Division of the Public Works Department of the City of Ames, Iowa, and found to meet City specifications and standards.
As a result of this certification, it is recommended that the financial security for public improvements on file with the City for this subdivision be reduced to $71,050. The remaining work covered by this financial security includes water valve adjustments, public sidewalk, ADA sidewalk ramps, COSESCO (erosion control), and street trees.
Sincerely,
John C. Joiner, P.E. Director
JJ/tp
cc: Finance, Planning & Housing, Subdivision file
Public Works Department 515.239.5160 main 515 Clark Ave. P.O. Box 811 Engineering 515.239.5404 fax Ames, IA 50010 www.CityofAmes.org
Scenic Valley 4th Addition December 3, 2020 Page 2
Description Unit Quantity Pavement, HMA Surface, 2” SY 5,122 Manhole Adjustments EA 9 Water Valve Adjustments EA 6 PCC Sidewalk, 4” SY 1,775 PCC Sidewalk, 6” SY 78 Detectable Warning Panels SF 174 COSESCO (erosion control) AC 15.85 Streetlights LS 1 Street Trees EA 80
Item No. 22
Smart Choice Public Works Department 515 Clark Avenue, Ames, Iowa 50010 Phone 515‐239‐5160 Fax 515‐239‐5404
December 3, 2020
Honorable Mayor and Council Members City of Ames Ames, Iowa 50010
RE: Scenic Valley 5th Addition Financial Security Reduction #1
Mayor and Council Members:
I hereby certify that the subgrade preparation, curb and gutter, and asphalt base pavement required as a condition for approval of the final plat of Scenic Valley 5th Addition have been completed in an acceptable manner by Manatt’s Inc. of Ames, Iowa. The above‐mentioned improvements have been inspected by the Engineering Division of the Public Works Department of the City of Ames, Iowa, and found to meet City specifications and standards.
As a result of this certification, it is recommended that the financial security for public improvements on file with the City for this subdivision be reduced to $38,693. The remaining work covered by this financial security includes asphalt surface pavement, utility adjustments, public sidewalk, ADA sidewalk ramps, COSESCO (erosion control), streetlights, and street trees.
Sincerely,
John C. Joiner, P.E. Director
JJ/tp
cc: Finance, Planning & Housing, Subdivision file
Public Works Department 515.239.5160 main 515 Clark Ave. P.O. Box 811 Engineering 515.239.5404 fax Ames, IA 50010 www.CityofAmes.org
Scenic Valley 5th Addition December 3, 2020 Page 2
Item Quantity Unit Subgrade Preparation, 12" 1,092 SY PCC Curb & Gutter, 30" 651 LF Pavement, HMA Base, 6" 760 SY
Item No. 23
Smart Choice Public Works Department 515 Clark Avenue, Ames, Iowa 50010 Phone 515‐239‐5160 Fax 515‐239‐5404
December 3, 2020
Honorable Mayor and Council Members City of Ames Ames, Iowa 50010
RE: Sunset Ridge 8th Addition Financial Security Reduction #3
Mayor and Council Members:
I hereby certify that portions of the public sidewalk, street trees and COSESCO (erosion control) required as a condition for approval of the final plat of Sunset Ridge 8th Addition have been completed in an acceptable manner by various sub‐contractors of Ames, Iowa. The above‐ mentioned improvements have been inspected by the Engineering Division of the Public Works Department of the City of Ames, Iowa, and found to meet City specifications and standards.
As a result of this certification, it is recommended that the financial security for public improvements on file with the City for this subdivision be reduced to $10,437. The remaining work covered by this financial security includes installation of portions of the public sidewalk, street trees and COSESCO (erosion control).
Sincerely,
John C. Joiner, P.E. Director
JJ/tp
cc: Finance, Planning & Housing, Subdivision file
Public Works Department 515.239.5160 main 515 Clark Ave. P.O. Box 811 Engineering 515.239.5404 fax Ames, IA 50010 www.CityofAmes.org
Sunset Ridge 8th Addition December 3, 2020 Page 2
Description Unit Quantity Utility Adjustments LS 1 PCC Sidewalk, 4” SY 1,053 Street Trees EA 26
Item No. 24
Smart Choice Public Works Department 515 Clark Avenue, Ames, Iowa 50010 Phone 515‐239‐5160 Fax 515‐239‐5404
December 3, 2020
Honorable Mayor and Council Members City of Ames Ames, Iowa 50010
RE: Sunset Ridge 9th Addition Financial Security Reduction #2
Mayor and Council Members:
I hereby certify that portions of public sidewalk, erosion control (COSESCO) and street trees required as a condition for approval of the final plat of Sunset Ridge 9th Addition have been completed in an acceptable manner by various sub‐contractors. The above‐mentioned improvements have been inspected by the Engineering Division of the Public Works Department of the City of Ames, Iowa, and found to meet City specifications and standards.
As a result of this certification, it is recommended that the financial security for public improvements on file with the City for this subdivision be reduced to $15,283. The remaining work covered by this financial security includes installation of the remaining street trees, public sidewalk and ramps, and COSESCO (erosion control).
Sincerely,
John C. Joiner, P.E. Director
JJ/tp
cc: Finance, Planning & Housing, Subdivision file
Public Works Department 515.239.5160 main 515 Clark Ave. P.O. Box 811 Engineering 515.239.5404 fax Ames, IA 50010 www.CityofAmes.org
Sunset Ridge 9th Addition December 3, 2020 Page 2
Description Unit Quantity PCC Sidewalk, 4” SY 178 COSESCO (erosion control) AC 2.2 Street Trees EA 4
Item No. 25
Smart Choice Public Works Department 515 Clark Avenue, Ames, Iowa 50010 Phone 515‐239‐5160 Fax 515‐239‐5404
December 3, 2020
Honorable Mayor and Council Members City of Ames Ames, Iowa 50010
RE: South Fork Subdivision 9th Addition Financial Security Final Release
Mayor and Council Members:
I hereby certify that the street trees required as a condition for approval of the final plat of South Fork Subdivision 9th Addition has been completed in an acceptable manner by Country Landscapes, Inc. of Ames, Iowa.
As a result of this certification, it is recommended that the financial security for public improvements on file with the City for this subdivision be released in full.
Sincerely,
John C. Joiner, P.E. Director
JJ/tp
cc: Finance, Planning & Housing, Subdivision file
Public Works Department 515.239.5160 main 515 Clark Ave. P.O. Box 811 Engineering 515.239.5404 fax Ames, IA 50010 www.CityofAmes.org Item No. 26
Smart Choice Public Works Department 515 Clark Avenue, Ames, Iowa 50010 Phone 515‐239‐5160 Fax 515‐239‐5404
December 3, 2020
Honorable Mayor and Council Members City of Ames Ames, Iowa 50010
RE: South Fork Wrap Up Financial Security Final Release
Mayor and Council Members:
I hereby certify that South Fork Subdivision street trees required as a condition for approval of the final plats of various additions of the South Fork Subdivision have been completed in an acceptable manner by Country Landscapes, Inc. of Ames, Iowa.
As a result of this certification, it is recommended that the financial security for public improvements on file with the City for this subdivision be released in full.
Sincerely,
John C. Joiner, P.E. Director
JJ/tp
cc: Finance, Planning & Housing, Subdivision file
Public Works Department 515.239.5160 main 515 Clark Ave. P.O. Box 811 Engineering 515.239.5404 fax Ames, IA 50010 www.CityofAmes.org
South Fork Subdivision Wrap Up December 3, 2020 Page 2
Description Unit Quantity REMAINING STREET TREES LS 1
ITEM # __27___ DATE 12-08-20
COUNCIL ACTION FORM
SUBJECT: CLIMATE ACTION PLAN REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS
BACKGROUND:
City staff is seeking the City Council’s approval to issue a Request For Proposals (RFP) for a Climate Action Plan (CAP). Developing a CAP addresses the City Council value of “Environmental Sustainability,” and specifically the of goal developing and adopting a CAP. For decades, the City of Ames has actively engaged in saving resources, reducing energy demand, and promoting diversified waste management and landfill diversion. There is a growing movement in the Ames community to promote conservation of finite natural resources to achieving a greater global good -- a more sustainable future.
Recently, the City completed a community greenhouse gas (GHG) inventory, which is a foundational piece for development of a CAP.
Through the RFP, the City expects to develop community GHG reduction goals and a CAP to achieve them. More specifically, the City is seeking relevant, achievable, and cost-effective emission goals, milestones, and an execution timeline. This will be based on input gathered through the completion of a robust, multi-faceted, and inclusive community-input process that encourages feedback from all community sectors. The plan should engage and empower residents, businesses, and institutions toward ownership and responsibility in ensuring a resilient and sustainable future.
The consultant services City staff has requested are:
Determine Community GHG Emission Reduction Goals – With assistance from City staff as well as input gathered through a robust, multi-faceted, and inclusive community-input process, the consultant is asked to develop GHG reduction goals for the Ames community. The consultant should consider the following sustainability standard resources when developing the alternatives:
• Global Covenant of Mayors for Climate & Energy • STAR Community Rating System • City of Ames Community Greenhouse Gas Inventory • City of Ames Climate Vulnerability Assessment • City of Ames Citywide Solar PV Energy Potentials Study
Develop Climate Action Plan - The plan will establish relevant, achievable, and cost-effective strategies to achieve reduction goals within a timeline, designate milestone reduction achievements along the timeline, and specify metrics to track
1 and measure progress. Strategies should be filtered through a cost-benefit analysis and address target emissions sectors, as reported in the City of Ames Greenhouse Gas Inventory, including:
• Energy (residential, commercial, industrial) • Transportation (ground, airport) • Solid Waste • Water (water and wastewater)
Outreach and Engagement Process - Consultant will develop, oversee, and facilitate a plan to solicit input and achieve meaningful engagement with the Ames community. The City considers citizen input essential to developing a CAP.
The Consultant is encouraged to propose a creative and interactive for soliciting diverse and inclusive input from all community sectors including building/development, business, civic/non-profit, faith-based, non-city government, residential, schools, and Iowa State University. The preferred process will use a holistic approach to public participation to ensure open public dialogue throughout the development of the plan.
Because of the importance of this CAP and the impact it will have on the total community, under this RFP the Mayor and City Council members will serve as the Steering Committee for the consultants. In this capacity the Steering Committee will advise the consultants on interim proposals and policy considerations during goal setting and plan development, will provide direction and guidance to the consultants regarding key decision points, and will make final decisions related to the consultants’ recommendations. This is the same role the Mayor and City Council are playing in regard to the development of the City’s new 2040 Comprehensive Plan.
A cross-departmental project team of City staff will evaluate the proposals, interview finalists, and recommend an award of contract to the City Council for this study. Once the study is complete, a presentation of the results will be made to the City Council.
Funds totaling $130,000 are available for a Climate Action Plan and have been identified from the FY 2019/20 General Fund ending fund balance.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Authorize staff to issue the RFP for the Climate Action Plan based upon the attached draft Scope of Services.
2. Authorize staff to issue the RFP with modifications identified by the City Council.
3. Do not authorize staff to proceed with this project.
2 CITY MANAGER’S RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Moving forward on this RFP to produce a Climate Action Plan continues progress on the City Council value of “Environmental Sustainability,” and builds off the recently completed Community Greenhouse Gas Inventory.
Therefore, it is the recommendation of the City Manager that the City Council adopt Alternative No. 1 as described above.
3 CLIMATE ACTION GOAL SETTING AND PLAN - DRAFT
PROJECT REQUIREMENTS
SECTION I: BACKGROUND
For decades, the City of Ames (COA) has actively engaged in saving resources, reducing energy demand, and promoting diversified waste management and landfill diversion. There is a growing movement in the Ames community to promote conservation of finite natural resources as a means to achieving a greater global good -- a more sustainable future.
Toward this vision, COA has adopted EcoSmart, a comprehensive strategy to reduce energy consumption and decrease our carbon footprint. COA joined other cities across the country in signing the U.S. Mayors’ Climate Protection Agreement in 2007 and contracted services of a sustainability coordinator in 2010.
In 2020, Ames completed a community GHG inventory, climate vulnerability study, and solar PV energy potentials study and City Council directed the development of a climate action plan.
SECTION II: OBJECTIVE
The COA seeks a qualified Consultant to facilitate the development of community greenhouse gas (GHG) reduction goals and a Climate Action Plan (CAP) to achieve them. The Consultant will develop recommendations for relevant, achievable, and cost-effective emission goals, milestones and an execution timeline. This will be based on input gathered through the completion of a robust, multi- faceted, and inclusive community-input process that encourages feedback from all community sectors.
The resulting plan should engage and empower residents, businesses, and institutions toward ownership and responsibility in ensuring a resilient and sustainable future. COA anticipates that the term of any resulting contract will not exceed 18 months.
The Consultant shall have experience with projects of similar scope and size. The Consultant must have strong facilitation and communication skills and working knowledge or subject matter expertise in relevant topic areas. Previous experience in facilitating community groups, knowledge around climate change, and creating community-wide climate mitigation and adaptation plans in similar-sized cities is necessary.
SECTION III: SCOPE OF SERVICES
Consultant is to provide the framework for establishing reduction goals for community GHG emissions and a timeline for completion, as well as develop a plan to guide the process. The Consultant shall perform the following tasks:
Task 1 Kick-Off and Progress Meetings - Consultant will lead an on-site or virtual project kick-off meeting (pending COVID-19 precautions and guidelines) and complete on-going progress meetings with the City CAP Project Team for the duration of the project. The CAP Project Team, headed by the
1
Assistant City Manager Deb Schildroth, includes a core group of City staff who serve as a liaison between the committees and consultant.
In addition to the CAP Project Team, three committees will assist the project: • Steering Committee – made up of Ames Mayor and City Council members, the Steering Committee will act in three distinct roles during preparation: advising on interim proposals and policy considerations during goal setting and plan development, direction and guidance on key decision points, and final decision-making approval.
• Technical Advisory Committee – made up of cross departmental representation of City staff, the Technical Advisory Committee will provide technical information and analysis to assist in determining goals and finalizing plan development.
• Community Input Committee – made up of diverse and inclusive representation from all community sectors, including but not limited to building/development, business, civic/non- profit, faith-based, non-city government, residential, schools, and Iowa State University, the Community Input Committee will, in addition to the citizen input received in Task 4, serve as a focus group to provide input and feedback to assist in guiding goal setting and plan development.
Task 2 Determine Community GHG Emission Reduction Goals – Consultant will utilize input from project committees as well as input gathered through a robust, multi-faceted, and inclusive community-input process to develop GHG reduction goals for the Ames community. The goals should consider current GHG emissions levels and address all sectors, as outlined in the City of Ames Community Greenhouse Gas Inventory and include a timeline for completion. Consultant will offer to the Steering Committee goal alternatives for consideration and approval. This will be based on current emissions and community input. The consultant should consider the following resources when developing the alternatives:
• Global Covenant of Mayors for Climate & Energy • STAR Community Rating System • City of Ames Community Greenhouse Gas Inventory • City of Ames Climate Vulnerability Assessment • City of Ames Citywide Solar PV Energy Potentials Study
Resource Documents: • City of Ames Community Greenhouse Gas Inventory • City of Ames Climate Vulnerability Assessment • City of Ames Citywide Solar PV Energy Potentials Study
Task 3 Develop Climate Action Plan - Consultant will be develop a Climate Action Plan to achieve GHG emission reduction goals. The plan will establish relevant, achievable, and cost-effective strategies to achieve reduction goals within timeline, designate milestone reduction achievements along the
2 timeline, and specify metrics to track and measure progress. Strategies should be filtered through a cost-benefit analyses and address target emissions sectors, as reported in the City of Ames Greenhouse Gas Inventory, including:
• Energy (residential, commercial, industrial) • Transportation (ground, airport) • Solid Waste • Water (water and wastewater)
The CAP will be presented in a format that is visually appealing, easy to understand, and can be translated to a variety of media for different audiences. Provided with the CAP will be educational and marketing strategies, processes and product templates to assist the COA in increasing awareness, building support, and motivating commitment throughout all community sectors. Also, a template for annual reporting will be provided.
Task 4 Outreach and Engagement Process - Consultant will develop, oversee and facilitate a plan to solicit input and achieve meaningful engagement with the Ames community throughout Tasks 2 and 3. The COA considers citizen input essential to developing a CAP.
The Consultant is encouraged to propose a process that is both creative and interactive for soliciting diverse and inclusive input from all community sectors including building/development, business, civic/non-profit, faith-based, non-city government, residential, schools, and Iowa State University. The preferred process will use a holistic approach to public participation to ensure open public dialogue throughout the development of the plan. Strategies expected include an interactive project website, focus groups, town hall meetings, social media platforms, workshops, pop-up events, collaboration opportunities with community partners, publicly viewable events (and timeline) calendar, and public education displays.
Task 5 Presentation of Climate Action Plan - Consultant will present a final plan to the Steering Committee following project completion. Following final approval, a presentation of the plan will also be presented to the community through public forum, in digital format and two hard copies available for reference at Ames Public Library and City Hall.
Consultant shall maintain complete and accurate records with respect to services performed under this Agreement.
A cost not to exceed budget for all services requested in this RFP is $130,000.
SECTION IV: PROPOSED SCHEDULE
Proposed Timeline: Work to start upon award, with a final Climate Action Plan by October 1, 2022.
3
SECTION V: PROPOSAL REQUIREMENTS
To be considered, each proposal will contain the following information:
A. Qualifications including organization, experience and personnel.
1. Organization: Provide the full name, address and telephone number of the person in your organization who had primary responsibility for developing this proposal and to whom technical questions may be addressed.
2. Experience: The City seeks a Consultant that has experience with successful Climate Action Planning for similar-sized cities. Proposals shall include a description of the Consultant’s specific experience in handling projects similar in character or scope to this project. A list of no fewer than three different references listing the entity name, address, phone number and contact person for each reference shall be provided.
3. Personnel: The proposal shall identify each member of the Consultant’s staff who would work on the project and the role they will be performing. A resume stating the background and qualifications of each individual will be provided. Particular attention will be given to the individual named as the Project Manager. Changes to the Consultant’s staff named in the response must be agreed to by the City.
4. Describe the qualifications, services or other information that distinguishes the Consultant from other similar Consultants.
B. Approach Based on the information contained in the Request for Proposal, Consultants will prepare a preliminary work plan identifying the specific tasks they believe will be necessary to accomplish the objectives of the City. The plan shall detail in a simple and straightforward manner the step- by-step approach the Consultant proposes and the rational for selecting a particular methodology. The Consultant will note any exclusions or elective tasks that can be identified at the onset.
C. Schedule The proposal shall include a timeframe for completion of Tasks 1 through 5. It is expected to be an onsite kick-off meeting with project team members. It is expected there are regular meetings scheduled for updates with project team members.
D. Reports/Presentations The proposal shall contain a chronology of the presentations and reports to be provided. Details of the contents of the reports or presentations will be provided.
4
E. Owner Support Detail the level of assistance, support and involvement that is expected of the City and its agencies, and any space or facility requirements, necessary to perform the work.
F. Cost of Services The proposal shall include a fixed price for performing the tasks outlined in the Scope of Services section above. The fixed price will be an all-inclusive fee including travel, incidentals and all other costs associated with the project.
G. Statement of Objectivity Proposals will be accepted only from qualified independent Consultants. Responses must clearly state the independence and objectivity of the Consultant. The Consultant must disclose any relationships with entities that might have an interest in the Climate Action Plan project.
H. Meetings Consultant will provide a list of meetings required to complete the tasks. Consultants should indicate the purpose, format, and attendees for each meeting.
SECTION VI: EVALUATION CRITERIA & SELECTION
An evaluation team made up of members of the City Administration, Sustainability Coordinator, Utility Customer Service, Planning, and Electric Services departments and one or more subject matter experts may review submittals. Evaluation factors shall be applied to all eligible, responsive Consultants in comparing proposals and selecting the Successful Consultant.
Criteria for evaluation of the responses and selection of a Consultant will include, but not be limited to:
A. The Consultant’s ability to provide the type and quality of services that best meets the needs of the City.
B. The Consultant’s proposed plan to solicit input and achieve meaningful citizen engagement with the total Ames community.
C. The Consultant’s ability to provide educational materials and marketing strategies to assist in increasing awareness, building support, and motivating commitment to the plan. In addition, the Consultant will provide a template to communicate ongoing progress of the plan.
D. The organization, suitability, consistency and clarity of the response.
E. The experience, past performance, customer satisfaction and references of the Consultant and the qualifications of the personnel assigned to this project.
F. The proposed timeline for completion of the work.
5
G. Cost will be a factor considered in the proposal evaluation but will not be the sole determining factor in the selection of a Consultant.
H. If interviews and formal presentations are scheduled; they will be also evaluated and scored.
The City reserves the right to award this contract not necessarily to the Consultant with the lowest cost but to the Consultant which provides the necessary expertise for the project and provides the City the best value in meeting the requirements of this Request for Proposal. By submitting a proposal, the Consultant authorizes the City to contact references and make such further investigations as may be in the best interest of the City.
SECTION VII: AWARD
Based on the responses submitted to this Request for Proposal, the City may select a single Consultant for further negotiations with, or may select a group of finalists who may be required to partake in an interview process that would include the key personnel designated in the response to provide a formal presentation regarding their qualifications and their ability to furnish the required services. The City may enter into negotiations and ultimately reach an agreement with a Consultant who demonstrates expertise in Climate Action Plan for the City and do so at a fair and reasonable cost.
The City reserves the right to negotiate all elements that comprise the apparent successful proposal to ensure that the best possible consideration is afforded to all concerned. The City and the finalist will review in detail, all aspects of the requirements and the proposal. During the review of the successful proposal, the Consultant may offer and the City may accept revisions.
END OF SECTION
6
ITEM # __28___ DATE 12-08-20
COUNCIL ACTION FORM
SUBJECT: WASTE-TO-ENERGY OPTIONS STUDY REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS
BACKGROUND:
City staff is seeking the City Council’s approval to move forward with issuing a Request for Proposals (RFP) for a Waste-to-Energy (WTE) Options Study. The purpose of this study is to evaluate options to dispose of municipal solid waste in a waste-to- energy facility into the future, providing community-wide sustainability with minimum impact to the environment. A copy of the draft Scope of Services for the RFP is attached (Attachment A).
Currently, most municipal solid waste in Story County is transported to the City’s Resource Recovery Plant (RRP), which has been in operation since 1975. Recyclable materials are removed from the waste through processing, and lighter, combustible materials are shredded into refuse-derived fuel (RDF), which is transferred to the Power Plant and used as a supplemental boiler fuel in conjunction with natural gas.
The current co-firing process has operational limitations. Since the RDF cannot be effectively stored long-term, one of the Power Plant’s units must be in near constant operation to dispose of the RDF as it is produced. This limits the electric utility’s ability to take full advantage of market energy at times when rates are low. There are also corrosion and maintenance issues with the storage and combustion of the RDF.
Through this study, City staff expects a consultant to develop projections regarding the quantity and characteristics of municipal solid waste for the County into the future, and evaluate five staff-identified options for waste-to-energy systems to dispose of that waste into the future. For each option, the consultant is asked to evaluate capital costs, operational and maintenance costs, environmental impacts and permitting, externalities (such as truck traffic, odor, and noise), and the timeline to design and construct. The ability to provide redundant systems and re-use existing components is also to be evaluated. Additionally, the consultant is asked to identify the impacts of each option on the existing diversion programs (glass and food waste).
The five options City staff has requested to be evaluated are:
1. Resource Recovery and Power Plant As-Is – This will form a comparative base case scenario.
2a. Dedicated RDF Unit inside the Power Plant – This option would move all RDF combustion from Units 7 and 8 into a new, smaller unit dedicated to RDF
1
combustion, allowing Units 7 and 8 to be turned off when not needed for power generation.
2b. Dedicated RDF Unit inside the Power Plant with 20” RDF Sizing – This option is similar to option 2a above, but would use much larger RDF compared to the current ~3” RDF. This increased sizing would reduce the amount of processing required at the Resource Recovery Plant.
3a. Dedicated RDF Unit on a Greenfield Site – This would involve construction of a new Materials Recovery Facility to remove recyclable metals on the front end of the process, before shredding the waste for combustion in a new boiler to generate electricity. This option involves construction at a greenfield industrial site or potentially at the former coal site across the railroad tracks from the Power Plant. Re-use of existing Resource Recovery Plant equipment would be considered.
3b. Dedicated Municipal Solid Waste Unit on a Greenfield Site – This option is similar to option 3a above but would recover recyclable metals after the combustion process. Like option 3a, it would explore a new site or the former coal pile, along with potential re-use of existing Resource Recovery System equipment.
The consultant will have the opportunity to suggest alternative options for evaluation, which City staff may accept or decline as part of the proposal. A team of staff members from the Electric Department, Public Works Department, and the City Manager’s Office will evaluate the proposals, interview finalists, and recommend an award of contract to the City Council for this study. Once the study is complete, a presentation of the results will be made to the City Council.
Funds totaling $250,000 are available for this study, with $200,000 in funding from the Electric Department Capital Improvement Project budget and $50,000 from the Resource Recovery operating budget.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Authorize staff to issue the RFP for the Waste-to-Energy Options Study based upon the attached draft Scope of Services.
2. Authorize staff to issue the RFP with modifications identified by the City Council.
3. Do not authorize staff to proceed with this project.
CITY MANAGER’S RECOMMENDED ACTION:
The existing waste-to-energy system utilized to dispose of nearly all Story County’s municipal solid waste has been in operation for over four decades. The system has
2
some operational shortcomings that staff believes could potentially be rectified with a different approach to waste processing and waste-to-energy. This study will identify the needs for the system in the next several decades and identify which technologies would be best suited to address the waste disposal and waste-to-energy needs for the community into the future. The study will also provide detailed construction and operational cost estimates, along with environmental information and other crucial data to consider.
Therefore, it is the recommendation of the City Manager that the City Council adopt Alternative No. 1 as described above.
3
SCOPE OF WORK SUMMARY
The City of Ames is soliciting the services of a consultant with vast and current knowledge and experience pertaining to the design, engineering, costs, and application of equipment associated with waste-to-energy systems, municipal solid waste disposal, materials recovery and diversion, and electric power generation, including environmental control processes and equipment.
The City is in need of a study to assess the options to satisfy the City’s future waste-to-energy requirements, especially in light of the variables and constraints that currently exist and for those that are expected in the future.
The City of Ames views this study as a critical tool in determining how best to continue generating energy from municipal solid waste into the future.
The detailed requirements of the final study are described beginning on page 6, (Study Report and Instructions). The basic scope of work is summarized as follows:
Starting with the City’s existing Resource Recovery Plant and Electric Utility infrastructure, including the waste processing, waste storage, power generation, and ash storage assets and resources; evaluate all possible, credible options for disposing municipal solid waste in a waste-to-energy system and satisfy the county’s solid waste disposal needs for 2023 and beyond. All options will serve as a reliable solution for waste disposal and allow the City of Ames to perform as a leader/innovator in the Waste to Energy Industry, focusing on providing community wide sustainability with minimum impact to the environment.
The fundamental output of the study will be a report that identifies and discusses the following:
1) The options considered 2) An estimate of the capital costs for each option 3) An estimate of annual Operating & Maintenance (O&M) costs for each option 4) An estimate of the environmental impacts for each option 5) A discussion of the advantages and disadvantages of each option, including impacts and disruptions to the City (e.g., truck traffic, ease of access to the facility, odor, noise, etc.) 6) A timeline of completion for each option, including time for design, engineering, specifying, bidding, evaluating bids and awarding work, fabrication, and installation of equipment including startup
NOTE: The consultant’s report shall include items 1-6 above but shall not form conclusions nor make recommendations of what option(s) the City should select.
1 BACKGROUND AND OVERVIEW OF THE CITY, RESOURCE RECOVERY PLANT, AND AMES MUNICIPAL ELECTRIC SYSTEM
City of Ames, Iowa
The City of Ames, Iowa is located in central Iowa, approximately 30 miles north of Des Moines. Its population is approximately 67,000. Ames is the largest city in Story County, which has a total population of approximately 97,000. The City is home to Iowa State University, a land grant university with approximately 33,400 students. The City is in the process of developing a new comprehensive plan, which is intended to accommodate a potential population of approximately 82,000 in Ames alone by the year 2040. Story County can be expected to potentially reach a population of 119,500 by the year 2040.
Major employers in Ames include Iowa State University, Mary Greeley Medical Center, the City of Ames, the Iowa Department of Transportation (headquartered in Ames), Danfoss, Barilla, and 3M. Ames is also home to the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s National Animal Disease Laboratory and National Centers for Animal Health, the U.S. Department of Energy’s Ames Laboratory, and a number of technology and research firms in the ISU Research Park.
Current Operation - Resource Recovery Plant
The Arnold O. Chantland Resource Recovery Plant (Resource Recovery Plant or RRP), located at 110 Center Avenue, is owned and operated by the City of Ames under the Public Works Department. The facility began operation in 1975. The facility receives approximately 52,000 tons of municipal solid waste (MSW) each year from throughout Story County. MSW is received from the communities of Ames, Nevada, Story City, Huxley, Slater, Roland, Gilbert, Maxwell, Cambridge, Zearing, McCallsburg, and Kelley. MSW from Iowa State University and rural Story County is also received at the Resource Recovery Plant. Waste collected within other communities in Story County is disposed of at other facilities. Waste collection in Ames is provided by private haulers, with the exception of Iowa State University, which provides in- house waste collection services.
Upon arrival to the facility, incoming trucks are weighed, and waste is tipped onto a receiving floor where it is manipulated by a front-end loader. Bulky and other undesirable materials are removed and landfilled. The remaining waste is loaded into a conveyor. Through processing, the waste is shredded, ferrous and non-ferrous metals are removed and recycled, and heavy materials are rejected and landfilled. The remaining, lighter fraction of the material is refuse-derived fuel (RDF).
The Resource Recovery System has a separate program to divert container glass from the RRP. Glass cannot be effectively processed by the Resource Recovery Plant. Through a system of collection bins placed throughout the County, approximately 10% of the container glass in the Resource Recovery System area is collected and sent for recycling. Additionally, the City is in the pilot stages of a food waste diversion program. The City has a designated yard waste disposal
2 site operated by a private contractor; the City finances several free yard waste drop off days each year.
As of Fall 2020, the Resource Recovery Plant is financed through tipping fees ($58.75 per ton), a per capita property tax subsidy from each of the participating communities ($10.50), sales of recyclable materials, and the sale of RDF to the Electric Utility.
Neither the City of Ames, nor Story County, has a licensed MSW landfill. Therefore, the Boone County Landfill is the final disposition of MSW generated by the City of Ames and Story County, Iowa that has been rejected from the processing of MSW into RDF by the City’s Resource Recovery Plant and burning the RDF produced as fuel in the City’s Power Plant. At times when the Resource Recovery Plant is not accepting waste, commercial waste haulers transport MSW directly to the Boone County Landfill, located approximately 18 miles to the west.
The average nominal Btu content of RDF, based upon tests of monthly samples taken in 2020, is 6,265 Btu/lb, with a sulfur content of 0.15% and an ash content of 9.0%.
A waste sort conducted in June 2016 indicated the MSW collected at the Resource Recovery Plant contains the following proportions of materials:
MATERIAL PROPORTION Paper 22.16% Plastic 16.17% Wood 12.16% C&D 4.94% Organic 15.67% Bulky 7.40% Glass 0.99% Metals 5.69% Textiles 3.28% Desirable Other 1.73% Undesirable Other 4.34% Grit 5.48%
RDF Bin
After it is produced at the Resource Recovery Plant, RDF is conveyed pneumatically to an RDF bin at the Power Plant. The bin was constructed primarily of Cor-ten steel and is approximately 25 years old. The bin is divided into two sides, allowing one side to be emptied while the other is filled. Each side holds approximately 100 tons of RDF. The bin provides some measure of surge capacity between the RDF production at RRP and RDF consumption at the Power Plant.
3 Steam Electric Plant
The electric utility for the City of Ames, Iowa is a full service municipal electric utility, consisting of generation, transmission, and distribution assets. The utility currently has electric generating resources totaling 145.1 megawatts and serves approximately 27,500 metered customers. The utility’s all-time peak (summer) demand was 130.7 megawatts, reached on July 25, 2012. The utility’s service territory roughly approximates, but is not coterminous with, the corporate limits of the City of Ames. The electric utility is interconnected to the electric grid at three transmission connection points, with MidAmerican Energy Company at 69,000 volts and 161,000 volts, and with Central Iowa Power Cooperative at 161,000 volts. The utility is a transmission owner in the Midcontinent Independent System Operator power group.
The utility operates two (2) power generation facilities with a total of four (4) generating units (two natural gas-fired steam units co-firing RDF, and two combustion turbine peaking units firing #2 fuel oil). All generating units are used as capacity for the electric utility.
The Steam Electric Plant, located at 200 East Fifth Street, consists of two (2) natural gas-fired steam units, Unit 7 and Unit 8, co-firing refuse derived fuel.
Unit 7 consists of a Combustion Engineering tangential-fired boiler supplying steam to a 33,000- kilowatt rated General Electric non-reheat turbine generator. Particulate emissions are controlled by a cold-side Research-Cottrell electrostatic precipitator which was retrofitted to the unit in 2002. Unit 7 was placed into commercial operation in 1967. The boiler was originally capable of firing on natural gas and coal. Following the construction of the Resource Recovery Plant in 1975, equipment was retrofitted to co-fire RDF with coal in the Unit 7 boiler.
Unit 8 consists of a Babcock & Wilcox wall-fired boiler supplying steam to a 65,000 kilowatt rated General Electric non-reheat turbine generator. Particulate emissions are controlled by a hot- side UOP electrostatic precipitator. Unit 8 was placed into commercial operation in 1982. The boiler was originally fired on pulverized coal and co-fired RDF.
Both Unit 7 and Unit 8 originally used #2 distillate fuel oil for light off during start up and for flame stabilization.
Following the completion of an Energy Resource Options Study in 2013, the utility took steps to convert both Unit 7 and Unit 8 from coal to natural gas in 2016. Through the conversion process, the burners and ignitors for fuel oil were removed. RDF continues to be co-fired in the boilers, at a maximum rate of 30% RDF to natural gas by weight as per the operating permit. This maximum rate requires a large amount of natural gas to be burned while co-firing RDF. RDF is co-fired in only one unit at a time. Unit 7 can burn up to approximately 85 tons of RDF per day under normal operating conditions; Unit 8 can burn up to approximately 120 tons of RDF per day under normal operating conditions.
Since the RDF cannot be effectively stored long-term, one unit must remain in near-constant operation to dispose of the RDF as it is produced. This limits the electric utility’s ability to take full advantage of market energy at times when rates are low. The minimum mega-watt load for
4 Unit 8 when burning RDF is 42 MW and Unit 7 must run at full load when burning RDF. These minimum loads create negative economic impacts for the utility, limiting the ability for purchasing lower cost energy from the market rather than producing it.
The natural gas is provided by the Northern Natural Gas Company. The average nominal Btu content of natural gas delivered, based upon gas gate information from Northern Natural Gas Company, is 1,092 Btu/cf with a sulfur content of 0.015 gr/ccf.
The former coal pile site, located across the railroad tracks from the Power Plant (and adjacent the Resource Recovery Plant), is no longer in use. The overall parcel upon which the coal pile was situated is approximately 305,000 square feet, and includes the RDF bin, storage buildings, and water detention areas. The portion of this site formerly used to store coal is approximately 100,000 square feet.
Within the Steam Electric Plant, two retired units remain in place (Unit 5 and Unit 6). Both units were decommissioned in 1986. Through a project planned for 2021/22, the Utility intends to remove the Unit 5 turbine/generator, Unit 5 boiler, and Unit 6 boiler. The Unit 6 turbine/generator will remain in place until the possibility of its re-use is ruled out. Unit 6 turbine/generator is a 12,650-kilowatt rated General Electric non-reheat turbine generator placed into commercial operator in 1956. The unit last generated electricity in 1986.
Ash Disposal
Flyash and bottom ash from the combustion process at the Power Plant is sluiced to an ash disposal site east of the Power Plant. Since the conversion of the Power Plant from coal to natural gas, the volume of ash generated has decreased, and the ash now generated is exclusively composed of the remnants from the combustion of RDF.
The current ash disposal site is approximately 12 acres in size and is located 2,960 feet ENE of the power plant. The site is lined with approximately three (3) feet of natural clay and is operated as a “zero discharge” basin, in that it does not have an outfall to surface water, such as a pond or stream. Periodically, accumulated ash has been excavated for disposal in a landfill.
5 STUDY AND REPORT INSTRUCTIONS
The study will consider all viable options to dispose of MSW in a waste-to-energy facility to meet disposal demands for the time period between 2023 through at least 2040. Five options to be considered are presented in Table 1, in addition to any options identified by the consultant and agreed to by the City as worthy of exploration.
The consultant is encouraged to recommend other viable options in addition to those identified in Table 1.
For each option, the consultant will analyze and provide the following information:
1. List, describe and estimate the capital costs (January 2023 dollars) for each option related to: 1) land acquisition, 2) construction of structures, 3) existing structure demolition, and 4) equipment fabrication and installation.
List, describe, and estimate annual operating and maintenance costs (January 2023 dollars) associated with each option for each utility (Electric and Resource Recovery). This should include all costs associated with the option that are different than that of the base case (the Resource Recovery System, Power Plant, and all auxiliary facilities as-is prior to the changes made by the option). NOTE: This analysis should consider the avoided cost of electricity production at times when market rates are lower than Ames Electric Services’ electricity production rates.
For example, if the option allows the electric utility to turn down/off a generation unit and purchase lower cost energy rates from the market, there would be an avoided higher cost of continuing to generate electricity for the sake of burning RDF. Unit 7 must run at full load (35MW) to burn RDF. If the production price on Unit 7 is $10/MWh more than the average market purchase price for a 24hr period, the utility would lose out on an opportunity cost savings of $8,400 because of needing to continue generating to burn RDF.
2. A written discussion of the relative advantages and disadvantages of each option. For example: reliability, redundancy, expansion opportunities, automation, etc.
NOTES:
a) All assumptions and factors for estimating costs, etc. must be shown so the analyses and estimations can be followed and understood. Examples include interest rates, rate of inflation, etc.
6 b) Equipment chosen should be sized and selected to optimize the fit for the City of Ames’ particular application. Any reliance on MSW or other waste being imported into the County to economize the proposed system, or exported out of the county to a landfill as a contingency when the City’s waste-to-energy system is down, should be explained in detail to illustrate feasibility.
c) Realize that the waste disposal capacity sufficient for the present day may not be sufficient at some point in the future. The study shall account for anticipated changes in the production of MSW, accounting for local historical trends, anticipated population changes, changes in the waste habits of consumers, trends in the content of MSW and its Btu value, and alternative markets for waste that result in diversion.
d) The consultant selected to perform the study will be forwarded information and data as contained in APPENDIX A. This information will be made available following the award of contract for the work.
e) For options that involve construction of a dedicated boiler(s) or new processing equipment, evaluate the costs of retaining the existing Resource Recovery System and Power Plant operation as a back-up system to dispose of waste at times when the primary system is down for repairs or maintenance. If the existing Resource Recovery System and Power Plant equipment are not retained for RDF production and combustion, evaluate options to create redundant systems for maintaining a 24/7 reliable, operating facility.
f) For options that involve the installation of a dedicated unit inside the Power Plant, evaluate both 1) the possibility of the re-use of the existing Unit 6 turbine/generator and 2) the construction of a new turbine/generator.
3. List, describe, and estimate the environmental impacts. List and describe the estimated air emissions including Greenhouse gas emissions, PM, CO, dioxins/furans, SO2, NOx, acid gases, and metals. A description of the expected wastewater effluents and processing requirements. The City of Ames contributions to air emissions and wastewater if utilizing a landfill. A written discussion of the relevant state and/or federal permits necessary for the work. For options that include discontinuing the combustion of RDF in the existing Unit 7 and Unit 8 boilers, the consultant should discuss any potential ramifications to the Electric Utility’s existing air permitting for those units.
NOTE: The City of Ames will be responsible for estimating the time necessary to acquire any required permits.
7 4. The time necessary for all equipment or facilities to be installed and ready for operation. This timeline must include the time to design, engineer, specify, bid, evaluate, award, fabricate, deliver, install, and start-up all necessary equipment (for each option).
NOTE: The City of Ames is prohibited by State of Iowa law from bidding and undertaking any project as a “design-build” project. For any new installation or equipment modification project, the entity performing the work must be different from the entity that performed the design and/or engineering.
The City is also required to formally and publicly bid all projects exceeding $139,000 in cost and defined as a “public improvement” in Chapter 26 of the Iowa Code.
5. Analyze the volume of MSW that can be processed with each option, including the proportion of MSW that must be separated and landfilled compared to the proportion of MSW that can be diverted from the landfill for electrical production or other beneficial use.
The study shall consider whether, for each option evaluated, the City’s existing waste diversion programs (glass recycling, food waste diversion) could be collapsed into the waste-to-energy system without negative technical or permitting implications (and estimate the resulting cost savings of discontinuing such programs), or if those diversion programs would need to be expanded, and to what extent. The study shall also consider whether other combustible materials that are currently sent to the landfill, such as wood, heavy plastics, or constructions and demolition debris, could be incorporated into the processing for each option.
6. Describe the storage capacity and needs of processed material, and any expectation to transport material from a processing facility to a combustion facility. Identify the impacts of truck traffic from the importation of MSW or the movement of processed material or reject material.
7. Describe the potential for ferrous and non-ferrous metals recovery for each option, including any impact the processing has to the quality of such metals for resale on the scrap market.
8. Describe the potential for steam sales to industrial customers or other commercially desirable byproducts generated for each option.
8 Table 1: Options to be Evaluated
Option Description 1 Resource Recovery and Power Plant As-Is
Dedicated RDF Unit Inside PP – Install a new, dedicated boiler and turbine/generator inside the Power Plant, combusting RDF, minimally using natural gas for start-up, shutdown, and if required, for operational stability. 2a The new boiler would be located in the space of currently retired Unit 5 and 6 boilers. The fuel would feed into the boiler similarly to the way it is fed into Unit 7 or Unit 8 currently, using pneumatic blowers located at the RDF bin. The RDF bin and RRP would continue to operate as is.
Dedicated RDF Unit Inside PP with RRP providing 20” RDF Sizing – Install a new, dedicated boiler and turbine/generator inside the Power Plant, combusting up to 20” RDF, minimally using natural gas for start-up, 2b shutdown, and if required, for operational stability. The new boiler would be located in the space of currently retired Unit 5 and 6 boilers. The current RDF bin and fuel feed system going to the power plant would be modified or replaced to accommodate the larger RDF material.
Dedicated RDF Unit on Greenfield Site – Install a new, dedicated waste-to- energy boiler and turbine/generator on a greenfield industrial site (including 3a potentially the former Power Plant coal yard). The facility would operate with a Materials Recovery Facility (MRF) located at the front of the process. Explore possible re-use of existing RRP facility and/or equipment for MRF.
Dedicated MSW Unit on Greenfield Site – Install a new, dedicated waste- to-energy boiler and turbine/generator on a greenfield industrial site, (including potentially the former Power Plant coal yard), combusting 3b unprocessed MSW, recovering metals after the combustion process. Explore possible re-use of existing RRP facility and/or equipment for materials recovery.
9 PROPOSAL CONTENTS
The contents of the responses submitted to the Request For Proposal should contain at minimum the following information for consideration:
Cover Letter
The cover letter shall include complete contact information for the authorized agent of the offeror. The consultant needs to demonstrate in the cover letter their general understanding of COA needs, requirements, work scope, and supply scope for this project and how they plan to meet those needs, including highlighting unique aspects or benefits of what is being proposed.
Proposal
1. The listing and descriptions of similar studies the consultant has conducted in the past ten (10) years.
2. The resume and related work experience of the project manager or team leader.
3. The resumes and the pertinent work experiences of the staff that will be assigned to perform the study.
4. A schedule or timeline of the study, including any significant milestones and meetings. The City will require a minimum of four (4) meetings with the selected consultant. The four meetings are: 1) the study kickoff meeting, 2) at the ½ point, 3) a final report stage technical meeting with City staff, and 4) a final report stage for the presentation to the City Council at the conclusion of the study.
5. Describe the availability of your top-quality staff and other resources necessary to complete the study on time.
6. Describe any and all special tools, including software programs, which will be used to analyze any portion of the study.
7. If information or data is needed beyond what is contained in this Request For Proposal in order to make your proposal, contact Karen Server, Purchasing Manager at [email protected] or call 515-239-5127 as soon as possible.
NOTE: A large amount of data will be provided to the finalist selected to perform the study once the contract is awarded. Refer to Appendix A at the end of this Request For Proposal.
8. Describe the firm’s personnel or other resources that will be called upon to provide knowledge and expertise in the following areas necessary to complete the study:
10 a. EPA and Iowa DNR regulations affecting sanitary landfills, recycling facilities, electric generating units, mass burn units, and other forms of waste-to-energy facilities in commercial operation.
b. The pollution control equipment necessary to control emissions in accordance with current environmental regulations.
Cost Proposal
The consultant shall state the cost components with a total “not to exceed” amount that it would invoice the City for completing the scope of work as described herein (analyzing the options listed in Table 1). Prices shall be inclusive of all labor and other component costs necessary to complete the “SCOPE OF WORK” as described herein and no greater amounts will be paid unless authorized by written change order. Time, material, travel, and any other anticipated costs intended to be billed to the City of Ames for performing this study shall have rates or unit prices clearly stated.
Exceptions to the RFP
Any exception which the consultant may take to the Request For Proposal, including the terms of the sample agreement form, shall be clearly set forth in the Proposal. All features and conditions wherein the offering is unlike the Request For Proposal shall be fully explained. A value adjustment to the fee shall be included in the proposal, if applicable, should the City accept the exception. Any exception may render the proposal invalid and disqualify the proposal at the City’s sole option.
PROPOSAL EVALUATIONS, PRESENTATION, AND SELECTION OF FINALIST
An evaluation team comprised of representatives from the City Manager’s Office, Electric Services Department, and Public Works Department will review and evaluate submittals, in consultation with representatives of the Finance Department and Legal Department.
Method of Award – Best Evaluative Score Based on Written Response and Presentations
From the initial submittal of proposals the City of Ames will evaluate and select those firms that the City deems worthy of being chosen as semi-finalists to come to Ames, Iowa and make a presentation to City staff regarding their proposals and how they would perform the study.
Step 1: Criteria rated on weighted scores:
1) Proposal Evaluation Criteria
11 a) Assigned staff’s knowledge and experience – especially pertaining to environmental regulations, electrical power, material recovery and diversion, and engineering and costing of waste-to-energy facilities b) Firm’s experience and capability to perform the study c) Comprehension of the Request For Proposal and the completeness of the submission d) Availability of staff and other resources to meet the schedule proposed by the consultant e) Cost Step 2: Semi-Finalist(s) Presentation:
1) Each consultant invited as a semi-finalist to make a presentation will be expected to bring as many key members (especially the team leader or project manager) of their study team to the presentation as possible. 2) Each consultant will be allowed up to four (4) hours of time to make their presentation to the City. a. Each semi-finalist shall allow enough time, in addition to the presentation, to take a tour of the City’s facilities on the same day as their presentation, including the Steam Electric Plant and the Resource Recovery Plant.
1) Presentation Evaluation Criteria
a) Knowledge and relevant experience of staff assigned to perform the study b) Study process and methodology c) Commitment and enthusiasm for the project d) Comprehension of the scope of work e) Quality and thoroughness of the presentation Once all the presentations have been made, the City will choose the consultant it deems most able and committed to perform the study and provide the report in the timeframe required based upon the proposal and presentation evaluation criteria. The City reserves the right to conduct negotiations with the finalist(s) in order to reach an agreement that meets the City’s needs and to accept revisions of proposals and costs.
12 APPENDIX A: Information and Data to be Supplied to the Finalist
Unit 7 1) Gross Output 2) Hours of Operation 3) Capacity Factor 4) Heat Rate 5) Gas Usage 6) RDF Usage 7) Annual Emissions 8) Stack Test Results 9) Maintenance Costs Unit 8 1) Gross Output 2) Hours of Operation 3) Capacity Factor 4) Heat Rate 5) Gas Usage 6) RDF Usage 7) Annual Emissions 8) Stack Test Results 9) Maintenance Costs
Fuel Statistics 1) Natural Gas Analyses 2) Natural Gas Costs 3) RDF Analyses 4) RDF Costs
Ash Disposal 1) Landfill Tipping Fees 2) Hauling Costs
MSW Collection 1) Landfill Tipping Fees (Rejects) 2) Hauling Costs 3) RRP Tipping Fees, Per Capita Information 4) Sales of Recoverable Metals 5) Glass Diversion Program Costs 6) Food Waste Diversion Program Costs
13 Purchased Power 1) Purchased Power (Annual Total) 2) Purchased Power Pricing (Annual Average)
Wholesale Power Sales 1) Wholesale Power Sales (Total) 2) Wholesale Power Sales Pricing (Annual Average)
Native Demand Sales 1) Native Sales (Annual Total) 2) Native Sales Forecast
14 Item No. 29
Staff Report
IOWA REINVESTMENT DISTRICT PROGRAM
December 8, 2020 BACKGROUND:
As you might have noticed, site work has begun on the northwest corner of the Clark and Lincoln Way intersection that will eventually house the relocated Starbucks. This project signals another step in the redevelopment of the property north of Lincoln Way from Clark to Kellogg. While staff has not heard from the project developers for many months, we know they have been working very hard to finalize the Starbucks relocation, identify new partners for their project, and complete a market study to determine the square footage and uses that will assure a financially sustainable project. Assuming the developers proceed with this project, the following unique incentive opportunity is available to the City of Ames.
THE IOWA REINVESTMENT DISTRICT PROGRAM:
The Iowa Legislature recently renewed its Reinvestment District Program (RDP). This program allows new state sales and hotel/motel taxes generated by new development(s) constructed within a City Council-created Reinvestment District to be rebated in a pre- approved amount to that municipality over a 20-year time period. The sales tax and hotel/motel tax rates are not increased for retailers within that area, and the City’s hotel/motel and local option sales taxes will continue to be collected into the Hotel/Motel Tax Fund and LOST Fund; only the state portion of the taxes will be rebated.
By rebating the newly generated state taxes, the City may finance (in part or in full) construction of new projects to improve residents’ quality of life, create and enhance unique opportunities, and substantially benefit the community, region, and state through transformative projects.
In order for that to occur, projects included in this program have to be awarded the incentive by the Iowa Economic Development Authority (IEDA) via a competitive application and award process. The following competitive scoring criteria is used to determine the award and amount of the incentive:
- Uniqueness of the Project = 25 points - Economic Impact of the Project = 25 points - Project Feasibility = 10 points - Capital Investment = 10 points - Funding Leverage = 10 points - Nonretail Focus = 10 points - Additional Factors (readiness, geographic diversity, and funding need) = 10 points
1
REQUIRED NEXT STEPS:
With the potential Lincoln Way Project coming closer to reality, and the fact that it will likely generate significant amounts of new sales and hotel/motel tax, it may help the City receive the incentive under the RDP. Unfortunately, there is very little time to prepare and submit a pre-application to be considered for an award. The IEDA has set February 22, 2021 as the pre-application submission deadline. If provisional approval is given to the pre- application, revised information can be submitted prior to the following year’s filing deadline (early 2022) when the final award is made. The following steps need to occur to complete the pre-application:
Step 1 - The developer of the Lincoln Way project must declare what will be built
Staff has been informed that a final decision regarding the types and quantities of the uses for the proposed Lincoln Way development will not be available to the City staff until January 2021, and the development plan will not be finalized until the City and developer consummate an incentive agreement. This information is required in order for staff to calculate the estimated new additional sales and hotel/motel tax revenue generated from this private development that must be in the Reinvestment District pre-application.
Step 2 – Determine the project elements for the Reinvestment District Program
City staff considered a number of project combinations to propose for the RDP and that could garner the requisite points needed to receive an award. These included a new indoor aquatics center, downtown plaza east of City Hall, a new green space north of Main Street on Burnett Ave., a parking garage in the CBD parking lot south of Wells Fargo Bank, a pedestrian bridge over the railroad tracks connecting downtown south to the new development along Lincoln Way, and improvements to the Bandshell Park.
Preliminary discussions between a representative of the Iowa Economic Development Authority (the awarding agency) and officials from the Ames Economic Development Commission regarding the array of projects that were being considered indicated that a qualified transformative project mix from Ames could receive up to $15 million in this incentive, however the inclusion of an indoor aquatic center is mandatory.
In order for any project(s) to be funded by rebated taxes, the project must be located within the Reinvestment District. Thus, in the case of an indoor aquatic center, in order to be considered for funding under the RDP, it must be located in close proximity to the Lincoln Way Redevelopment project and in the Reinvestment District. This explains why the other projects that are being contemplated are also located in the downtown area.
Given this information, the RDP parameters, and the input received from the IEDA representative, should the City Council want to pursue this incentive opportunity, then the three projects staff would propose to be included in a pre-application are:
2 1) The mixed-used redevelopment project along Lincoln Way,
2) The downtown plaza in the parking lot east of City Hall, and
3) A new indoor aquatics center on the property owned by the Iowa Department of Transportation that is north of Lincoln Way directly across the street from the main DOT entrance (122 North Oak Ave.).
This prospective indoor aquatics center site has the advantage of being 1) available for sale, 2) large enough to accommodate an indoor aquatics facility and accessary parking, 3) currently zoned for government use that does not generate any property taxes, and 4) a favored site of the IEDA because of its close proximity and interconnection with the downtown.
Step 3 – Selection of consultants to prepare materials to help visualize the projects, along with cost estimates
The relatively short period of time to prepare the necessary supporting documentation and to submit the pre-application makes it imperative that the City Council approves an expedited process to hire the three consulting firms needed to provide the required services. Therefore, staff is recommending that rather than soliciting proposals from multiple qualified firms (a process that typically takes several weeks), that the City Council waive its Purchasing Policy and allow staff to negotiate contracts with:
1) RDG Planning and Design for the aquatic center concept
2) Confluence, a landscape architecture firm with offices in Des Moines, for the downtown plaza concept, and
3) Decision Innovative Solutions for the required economic impact and feasibility analysis of the proposed elements of the project.
RDG completed the conceptual plans for the Healthy Life Center and is able to work quickly with City staff to develop an aquatic center concept. Confluence has experience developing concepts for plazas. Decision Innovative Solutions has prepared the required analysis for other cities who previously submitted applications for the RDP. It is recommended that funding for these consulting services come from the available balance in the Hotel/Motel Tax Fund that includes monies earmarked for economic development initiatives.
Step 4 – The City Council will need to initiate the process to establish an urban renewal area before the pre-application is submitted and ultimately establish a reinvestment district after the incentive is approved
3 WHY THESE THREE PROJECTS FOR THE RDP?:
Funding for the plaza is already included in the approved Capital Improvements Plan. While the downtown plaza project and the private Lincoln Way redevelopment will most likely occur without the Reinvestment District incentive, including these two projects in the pre- application will help garner points under the economic impact, capital investment, funding leverage, and non-retail evaluation criteria. In addition, the downtown indoor aquatic center seems to qualify for uniqueness points.
If we are successful in receiving the incentive from this highly competitive process, it could be possible to fund the City’s much-needed indoor aquatics center without raising property taxes to build it.
The funding scenario for this strategy is as follows:
Estimated Expenditures*: Construction Cost For Indoor Aquatics Center $ 19,000,000 Land Purchase Cost From IDOT (will be based on appraisal) $ 2,000,000 Site Preparation $ 1,000,000 Total Estimated Expenditures $ 22,000,000* *It should be emphasized that this project total will have to be updated based on consultant’s new project estimates.
Revenues: City Funds from Winakor Donation Account $ 2,000,000 Private Donations $ 8,000,000** G.O. bonds (Abated by the RDP Incentive) $ 12,000,000
Total Estimate Revenue: $ 22,000,000
** The Executive Director of the Ames Economic Development Commission has committed to take the lead in securing the commitments for these private donations prior to the February 2021 pre-application deadline.
RISK INVOLVED:
This incentive program does not involve advancing state funds to accomplish a project. Rather, the RDP would rebate the additional new increased state sales and hotel/motel taxes to the City in the amount actually received by the State each year. Therefore, to purchase the land and construct the aquatics center, the City will have to issue General Obligation bonds up front. The GO bonds would then be paid for by the annual rebates from the State, from the taxes actually generated in the Reinvestment District for up to twenty years.
The risk involved with this arrangement is that should the actual rebated amount not be sufficient to cover the principal and interest payments for these bonds, property
4 taxes would have to cover any shortfall. Therefore, it is important that very conservative estimates be made regarding the amount of new taxes that will be generated from the proposed redevelopment on Lincoln Way (the sole source of the new taxes for rebating) and that generous boundaries are considered when the Reinvestment District boundaries are drawn. This would allow capturing new sales and hotel/motel taxes from any other future retail development in the Reinvestment District in addition to the forthcoming Lincoln Way development.
One final note: A stand-alone aquatic center project (such as the previous Healthy Life Center concept) requires an up-front bond referendum because of the requirements under state law for issuing GO bonds for general corporate purposes. This RDP project is different because the bonds will be issued as part of an Urban Renewal project, which is an essential corporate purpose. Therefore, in this instance the bond issuance can be approved by the City Council rather than by a referendum vote from the public. However, the issuance of the bonds is subject to a reverse referendum whereby the submittal of a qualifying petition would force a bond election.
WHY NOT WAIT UNTIL NEXT YEAR?:
Given the short time available to develop a pre-application, some might question why not wait until next year to submit a project for consideration. Waiting poses two problems. First, there are no assurances that the program will exist next year. The last time this state program was available was in 2015 and it was subsequently discontinued by the Iowa Legislature. Second, there is no guarantee that an additional new development project will be introduced next year that will generate the same magnitude of rebated taxes that are anticipated from the Lincoln Way project.
OPTIONS:
Option 1:
The City Council can agree that the effort is worthwhile to pursue the Iowa Reinvestment District Program incentive by:
a) Directing staff to prepare a pre-application including: • the Lincoln Way redevelopment project • the downtown plaza east of City Hall • an indoor aquatics center on IDOT property
b) Waiving the Purchasing Policy, allowing staff to select Confluence for the plaza, RDG for the aquatics center, and Decision Innovative Solutions for the economic impact and feasibility analysis
c) Indicating to the IDOT our willingness to purchase its property north of Lincoln Way at the appraised price subject to the RDP incentive being awarded to the City and private donations being secured in an amount sufficient to construct a new indoor aquatics center
5 Option 2:
The City Council can agree that the effort is worth it to pursue the Iowa Reinvestment District Program incentive by:
a) Directing staff to prepare a pre-application for some other combination of projects
b) Waiving the Purchasing Policy, allowing staff to select RDG for the aquatics center, a different consultant(s) for the Council-selected other projects, and Decision Innovative Solutions for economic impact and feasibility analysis
c) Indicating to the IDOT our willingness to purchase its property north of Lincoln Way at the appraised price subject to the RDP incentive being awarded to the City and private donations being secured in an amount sufficient to construct a new indoor aquatics center
Option 3:
The City Council can decide to not pursue the Reinvestment Program at this time because:
• Too much staff time is required to pursue the RDP and the compressed time frame to complete the pre-application,
• Too many outstanding and uncertain issues such as, but not limited to, the commitment of the Lincoln Way developers, ability of the AEDC to obtain private donation commitments of $8 million, the ability to purchase the IDOT site for a reasonable amount, and the uncertainty that our proposed project elements may not score high enough on the evaluation criteria to warrant award of the RDP funding.
STAFF COMMENTS:
As the Council is aware, in Spring 2022 the Ames School District intends to demolish the City’s Municipal Indoor Pool to allow site improvements related to the new high school to continue. Therefore, the community is faced with the prospect of having no public indoor aquatic facility in two years’ time. Our recent effort to incorporate an indoor aquatics center into the Healthy Life Center failed with the defeat of that proposed bond issue. With the negative impact that COVID-19 is having on our economy, the likelihood of passing a bond issue for an indoor aquatics center in the near future is questionable at best.
There is no doubt that many pieces of this strategy must fall into place for us to be successful:
1. The Lincoln Way redevelopment project must come to fruition
2. IDOT must agree to sell its property at a reasonable price
6
3. The economic analysis must indicate there will be sufficient tax revenue to help pay for the new indoor aquatics center
4. The AEDC must secure commitments from private donors in the amount of $8 million to fill the financing gap for the new aquatics facility
5. The Iowa Economic Development Authority must approve our pre-application for the incentive.
However, since the RDP offers the City a unique opportunity to fund a high priority for the City Council (a new indoor aquatics center) that will benefit our residents without requiring property tax revenue to build the facility or purchase the land, Option 1 appears to be too good an opportunity to pass up.
Please remember, like all City Council decisions, not everyone will be happy should the Council decide to pursue this State incentive. Some will not like the site. Others will question how you could move ahead without a public referendum regarding a project where a bond election was recently defeated. Even though the initial capital costs will be addressed by this incentive program, an indoor aquatic facility will require a significant amount of annual tax subsidy and/or user fees to operate.
7 ITEM # 30 DATE: 12-08-20
COUNCIL ACTION FORM
SUBJECT: AWARD OF DOWNTOWN FAÇADE GRANT
BACKGROUND:
The Downtown Façade Grant Program was introduced in 2000 to facilitate private improvements to downtown retail and other commercial storefronts. The City Council annually budgets $50,000 as matching funds for eligible projects. This program is available to property owners within the area generally described as from 6th Street to the railroad tracks, from Duff Avenue to Northwestern Avenue, and along Kellogg Avenue to Lincoln Way (Attachment 1).
The program allows for up to $15,000 of dollar-for-dollar matching funds per front façade and up to $1,000 for additional architectural services. The program requires compliance with specified Design Guidelines that can be found on the Planning Division website at this link. The program requirements include a prerequisite of a ground floor use of office or retail trade. Additionally, grant eligibility includes a requirement for proposed improvements to retain the historic façade or for the removal of non-compliant elements consistent with the guidelines or pursue eligibility under the other façade guidelines. The program does not allow for maintenance activities or replacement of compliant elements with new in-kind elements as eligible activities on their own. Proposed improvements are intended to have a significant positive visual impact on the building and the district overall. If grant requests exceed the available funding, the program criteria include preferences for façades that have not received previous funding, for front façades. Attachment 2 provides an overview of the intent and process for the façade grant program.
The program is designed to operate with two application cycles. The first cycle is typically in the summer/fall and if there are remaining funds after awards are granted in the first round, then a second application round occurs in the winter/spring. The summer grant round is intended to provide funding for new projects with one grant per building. The second round is intended to fund new projects and potentially second façades for properties that have already received a grant. There were two applications during the previous winter round. The current application was solicited in late summer / early fall and is considered a first-round application.
GRANT APPLICATION RECEIVED:
The City solicited applications for this round in September 2020 and received a grant request for one property. The total requested grant funding is $16,000 for a project at 409 Douglas Avenue. LCM Properties, LLC owns the building at 409 Douglas Avenue. The tenant space on the ground level was recently vacated by Heroic Ink Tattoo and
1 Piercing and has not been filled. The second story contains an apartment. County records state that the building was constructed in 1902. The subject building and the abutting Masonic Temple to the north (now the Octagon Center for the Arts) have a unified façade, though these structures were built independently (County records show the Masonic Temple was built in 1916). Photographs from the 1900s show a different façade from the present one; a picture from 1928 shows the present façade when the building housed Tilden’s Grocery. It is understood that the façade of 409 changed when the neighboring building was constructed. The building is a contributing property in the Ames Main Street National Register Historic District.
The application proposes to make the following grant-eligible changes:
- Replace the sash windows on the second story with windows that fill the space as originally designed (the current windows do not fill the opening in the façade and have infill at the top), - Add an awning, - Replace the kickplate below the plate glass display windows (replacing plank and plywood with brick) along with the windows themselves, and - Replace plywood fill next to the doors with glass.
Of these changes, only the second story windows, awning, kickplate, and storefront glass are eligible for a grant, which is intended to bring non-compliant façade elements into compliance with the Downtown Design Guidelines. The other work, such as replacing the current transom, are viewed as maintenance activities. The other proposed changes that are not grant-eligible may be done in conjunction with the eligible work. The proposed non-eligible work is estimated to cost between $14,000 to $16,000 for the Douglas Avenue and alley façades. This does not include work already done on tuckpointing and new windows facing the alley. Zoning rules do not prohibit alterations outside of compliance with the Guidelines and the grant may not be used for maintenance.
The total cost for 409 Douglas Avenue exceeds the costs presented in this report; only grant-eligible costs are shown. The project is eligible for the maximum of $15,000 and $1,000 in design fees. The applicant will need to provide cost breakdowns to ensure only eligible activities are funded with the façade grant.
If the façade grant request is approved, the applicant will need to secure encroachment permits for the awning. Awnings and canopies are routinely approved as encroachment permits and encouraged in Downtown.
2 Project summaries, a location map, and project design illustrations are attached.
Amount Total Address Business or Building Name Requested Project 409 Douglas Avenue (Formerly) Heroic Ink $15,000 $30,450 Design Fees $ 1,000
$16,000 $30,450* *Additional, non-eligible work is also proposed.
ELIGIBLE WORK COST ESTIMATES FOR ELIGIBLE WORK MATERIALS Double Hung Windows $6,800 Awning $3,500 Brick Kickplate $1,000 Storefront Glass $9,000 Materials Sub-Total $20,300
INSTALLATION Double Hung Windows $2,400 Awning $2,000 Brick Kickplate $2,000 Storefront Glass $3,750 Installation Sub-Total $10,150 Subtotal for Eligible Work $30,450
City Match Total $15,000
Professional Fees $1,000 Total Grant $16,000
3 ALTERNATIVES:
1. Approve a Downtown Façade Improvement Grant for 409 Douglas Avenue for estimated eligible costs up to $15,000 for second-story windows, an awning, a kickplate, and storefront glass, plus $1,000 in design fees.
2. Determine the proposed grant request is not compliant with Downtown Façade Improvement Grants program goals and objectives or is not visually significant and make a different grant award.
3. Refer this request to staff or the applicant for additional information.
CITY MANAGER'S RECOMMENDED ACTION:
The fiscal year 2020/21 permits two rounds of grant solicitations: one in the summer and one in winter. The current round resulted in one request for one grant in the amount of up to $16,000 at 409 Douglas Avenue.
City staff has determined that the proposed Downtown Façade Improvement project for the building at 409 Douglas Avenue comply with the design requirements of the program. The Façade Program funding has enough funds to match the requested amounts.
Therefore, it is the recommendation of the City Manager that the City Council approve Alternative #1, thereby approving a Downtown Façade Improvement Grant for the one façade grant as noted above.
4 Attachment 1: Eligibility Map
5 Attachment 2: Downtown Façade Grant Review
Requirements for all Façade Grants
. The building must be located downtown within boundaries established by City Council. . The ground floor must be Office Uses or Trade Uses as defined by the Ames zoning ordinance. . The façade design must comply with Downtown Design Guidelines. . Improvements to historic façade shall include replacing non-compliant elements with compliant elements. . Residential structures and buildings owned by the government, churches and other religious institutions are not eligible. . No façade grant shall exceed $15,000.
Program Logistics
The following process for review of applications for façade grants provides time to inform all potential applicants of the opportunity, to work with applicants, applicants to prepare submittals and for staff to review applications and report to City Council. Two grant periods will be planned for each fiscal year.
First Grant Period For this first grant period, preference for grant awards will be given to: - façades that have not received any previous grant funding - front façades
Action Steps: . Staff will inform all property and business owners of grant availability, process, and deadlines. . Staff will work with applicants to define the project, ensure that it meets the guidelines, and assure that it is feasible and can be completed within the time frame. . Applications will be accepted in May and June. . Staff will review and score applications and report to City Council in July or August for awarding grants. . Projects may then start in the fall and be potentially completed before the holiday shopping season.
Second Grant Period If the entire budget is not committed in the first grant period in each year, a second grant period will begin in October for projects to be implemented the following spring. While façades on Main Street and façades for which no previous grants have been awarded will still receive first preference in this second grant period, all downtown grant requests will be considered and potentially approved if funds remain after all first-preference proposals are awarded.
Conditions of Grant Approval . Grant projects must be completed within one year from award of grant. . Any required building code and/or safety improvements to a structure must be completed before grant work proceeds or before grant funds are paid.
6 Attachment 3: Scoring Criteria
For each category, the following criteria shall be used to award points:
VISUAL IMPACT Maximum Score 30 Points
. Improvements apply to more than one story on one façade . Improvements apply to more than one 25-foot wide bay on one façade . Improvements will create more visual significance because: - key, highly visual elements of the building are being improved - the building is prominently visible due to its location (E.g., it serves as a focal point from a street, is at a prominent intersection, or is larger than other buildings around it)
FINANCIAL IMPACT Maximum Score 30 Points
. Matching funds exceed the minimum dollar-for-dollar match . The project includes improvements being made to - ensure public safety, - establish or preserve the building’s structural integrity - resist water and moisture penetration - correct other serious safety issues . The façade project is part of a larger project that improves other exterior or interior parts of the building . The project helps to make use of space that has been unoccupied or used only for storage
EXTENT OF IMPROVEMENTS Maximum Score 20 Points
The number points granted in this category shall be based upon the number of elements from the Downtown Design Guidelines being improved. More improved elements deserve more points.
HISTORIC FAÇADES (such as Café Diem): OTHER FAÇADES: (such as Wheatsfield) . Display windows . Quality materials . Transoms . Façade modulation . Masonry (includes removing cover-up) . Fenestration . Upper floor windows . Roof . Parapet and cornices . Awnings . Awnings and canopies . Building entrances . Entrance . Kickplate
HISTORIC DESIGN Maximum Score 20 Points
. Project includes historically appropriate materials and restoration techniques . Project goes beyond basic rehabilitation and re-establishes a more historically accurate appearance than other projects
7
Attachment Attachment Façade Design 4: Proposed
8 ITEM # 31 DATE: 12-08-20 _
COUNCIL ACTION FORM
SUBJECT: SPECIAL REQUEST FROM FARMHOUSE FRATERNITY, 311 ASH AVENUE FOR COUNCIL PERMISSION TO RECEIVE URBAN REVITALIZATION TAX ABATEMENT IN 2021
BACKGROUND:
The City Council established Urban Revitalization Areas (URAs) which allow for the granting of tax exemption for the increased valuation of a property for projects that meet the criteria of each URA’s Urban Revitalization Plan. In most cases, these criteria set certain standards for physical improvements that provide public benefits. When property within one of these URAs is developed, redeveloped, rehabilitated, or remodeled, the property owner is eligible for abatement of property taxes on the incremental increase in property value after the improvements are completed. This abatement can extend for three, five, or ten years, depending on the Urban Revitalization Plan for each URA.
The FarmHouse Fraternity is requesting tax abatement for work finished in 2016 to that expanded the facility at 311 Ash Avenue. The property lies within the University Impacted – East URA (Attachment 1). State Law (Sec. 404.4) states that the tax abatement must be requested within 2 assessment years of the completion to be eligible for the full exemption. State Law further stipulates that the property owner may request the governing body consider an exemption after the 2-year period for a reduced exemption. If approved, a property owner may use the exemption schedule minus the number of years that have elapsed. In this case, FarmHouse would receive seven years of abatement.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Approve the request from the FarmHouse Fraternity to be allowed to apply for a tax exemption at a reduced exemption schedule as outlined in State Law (Attachment 4). The formal application would need to be submitted no later than February 1, 2021.
2. Deny the request to proceed with a tax exemption for FarmHouse Fraternity.
CITY MANAGER'S RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Although the applicant did not timely file the request for abatement, the improvements do qualify under the existing criteria and such as request would have been approved if requested. Council can choose to grant special permission to apply for the remaining years of eligibility.
1 Therefore, it is the recommendation of the City Manager that the City Council accept Alternative #1, thereby permitting the FarmHouse Fraternity to proceed with its application for a tax exemption as allowed under State Law Sec. 404.4.
2 ATTACHMENT 1: UNIVERSITY IMPACTED - EAST URA CRITERIA
FarmHouse Fraternity 311 Ash Avenue
3 ATTACHMENT 2: FARMHOUSE FRATERNITY
4 ATTACHMENT 3: APPLICANT LETTER TO COUNCIL
5 ATTACHMENT 4: RELEVANT STATE LAW
404.4 Prior approval of eligibility. 1) A person may submit a proposal for an improvement project to the governing body of the city or county to receive prior approval for eligibility for a tax exemption on the project. The governing body shall, by resolution, give its prior approval for an improvement project if the project is in conformance with the plan for revitalization developed by the city or county. Such prior approval shall not entitle the owner to exemption from taxation until the improvements have been completed and found to be qualified real estate; however, if the proposal is not approved, the person may submit an amended proposal for the governing body to approve or reject.
2) An application shall be filed for each new exemption claimed. The first application for an exemption shall be filed by the owner of the property with the governing body of the city or county in which the property is located by February 1 of the assessment year for which the exemption is first claimed, but not later than the year in which all improvements included in the project are first assessed for taxation, or the following two assessment years, in which case the exemption is allowed for the total number of years in the exemption schedule. However, upon the request of the owner at any time, the governing body of the city or county provides by resolution that the owner may file an application by February 1 of any other assessment year selected by the governing body in which case the exemption is allowed for the number of years remaining in the exemption schedule selected. The application shall contain but not be limited to all of the following information: a) The nature of the improvement. b) The cost of the improvement project. c) The estimated or actual date of completion. d) The tenants that occupied the owner’s building on the date the city or county adopted the resolution referred to in section 404.2, subsection 1. e) Which exemption in section 404.3 or in the different schedule, if one has been adopted, will be elected.
3) The governing body of the city or county shall approve the application, subject to review by the local assessor pursuant to section 404.5, if the project is in conformance with the plan for revitalization developed by the city or county, is located within a designated revitalization area, and if the improvements were made during the time the area was so designated. The governing body of the city or county shall forward for review all approved applications to the appropriate local assessor by March 1 of each year with a statement indicating whether section 404.3, subsection 1, 2, 3, or 4 applies or if a different schedule has been adopted, which exemption from that schedule applies. Applications for exemption for succeeding years on approved projects shall not be required.
6 Item No. 32
Staff Report
DEVELOPER OUTREACH RELATED TO SMALL LOTS & INCREASING HOUSING TYPE DIVERSITY
December 8, 2020
BACKGROUND:
The City Council adopted a goal during its annual goal setting session to “Increase the stock of diverse housing types for a variety of income levels through zoning,” including changes to minimum lot size. Staff presented a report to the City Council regarding “small lots and increasing the diversity of housing types” on June 23, 2020. The report provided background regarding a range of housing issues and comparisons to other cities, but ultimately the focus was how to support housing diversity in new developing areas, as the City grows. The Council showed interest in three of the described options in June:
• Reducing minimum lot area
• Adding lot size variation for 20% of lots in a subdivision
• Creating a Planned Unit Development (PUD) focused on small lots
Council directed staff to reach out and get input from developers regarding these options. Council was interested in Developer input in order to determine if a full City Council workshop is needed or if proceeding with a zoning text amendment is desirable.
Staff met with developers on October 28, 2020, to gauge interest and discuss concerns related to text amendments in support of small lot development in Ames. Staff notified a list of local developer interests and civil engineering professionals from central Iowa. Five people attended the discussion. Staff provided a summary of the report from June and included a draft description of the options for discussion by the participants (Meeting Invitation-Attachment A). A summary of the comments and discussion follows with individual issue bullets included within Attachment B.
Allowing for smaller lots was desirable to all participants in order to add housing development flexibility. The current Planned Residence District (PRD) zoning allows for flexibility, but does not allow land efficiency due to the open space expectations. Developers felt that something more is needed to effectively allow for smaller home options. The general opinion was that to some degree, changes in minimum lot area to 5,000 square feet may be beneficial, but reducing the lot width would be more beneficial. Reducing lot width to less than 50 feet would create greater efficiencies related to infrastructure costs. The example of the Genesis Smart Homes PRD was discussed where lots are on a private street and as narrow as 43 feet.
1 One issue highlighted regarding lot variability was a desire for variation of lots along arterials (for example GW Carver) to create a range of lots sizes and price points. One comment addressed a concern about mandating a mix of lot sizes and house sizes within individual developments compared to allowing developers to propose the mix.
The discussion of reduced lot width included opinions from staff regarding the design trade-offs and the process for approving reduced lot widths. This included comments concerning alley-loaded homes, shared driveways, zero lot line setbacks for yard space, and garage/parking appearance. Generally, developers are in favor of greater flexibility and fewer mandatory requirements related to smaller lots that allow them to address market preferences. Allowing zero lot line by right versus a PRD (for example the recent Domani PRD) was discussed.
Staff voiced interest in providing for public parking, streetscapes, and the front home façade appearance along public streets, while accommodating reduced lot widths. These were the same discussion points brought up during the June discussion with City Council about being intentional with design features with smaller lot widths. Generally, the process of having reduced lot size or widths was not the concern of those in attendance- just that there was an option to pursue the reduced lots sizes.
Developers were concerned about HOA fees built into private developments related to extra features for smaller lots such as alleys, amenities, or maintenance. These are often viewed as tradeoffs in a development to allow for more efficient density and less private space to enhance long term livability qualities. Concern over a negative buyer response was conveyed about the benefits vs. the costs for paying for alleys. Staff noted that alleys have only been developed in Somerset and are maintained by the HOA. No recent projects have included alleys- public or private. Encouraging alleys would likely require some kind of tradeoff for other development standards.
Staff identified options for non-traditional housing such as courtyard homes, shared access, or “pocket” neighborhoods as other options for small lots. Developers were not confident these would be viable in the Ames market given the market’s lack of familiarity with these concepts. An example of a Grinnell project with shared access was mentioned by one designer. Developer’s expressed their opinion that the combination of smaller lot sizes in Somerset in combination with mandated standards did not fit the developers’ or market interest. Staff also discussed how Prairie Trail in Ankeny includes many of the same features with alleys, mandatory design requirements, common area, yet is popular in a competitive market; however, Prairie Trail is not designed around small lots.
Staff originally proposed allowing for smaller lot areas while maintaining setback and lot coverage standards of the FS-RL zoning districts. Doing so would likely create smaller houses as a result of limitations in relationship to lot size. Developers and staff noted that very small lots, in the range of 40 feet or approximately 4,000 feet would likely need different standards to build a marketable home, but with minimal to no yard area. These
2 are issues that would still need to be explored when considering a new small lot development option.
The specific issue of a Planned Unit Development was discussed as being differentiated from the PRD. Questions arose on using it for infill versus new development areas. The focus of discussion was on new growth areas of the city. A PUD would be based on the allowed density range of the underlying zoning. It would allow for specific design variations to address specific layout issues of a project. Overall open space set-asides would not be the focus. Addressing open space and common areas would likely still be needed for larger projects. There was also some support for creating private street standards. Doing so would give predictability for developers and future buyers about the quality of the infrastructure. There was not an overall concern about using a PUD to design for small lots as it is a common tool in other communities.
NEXT STEPS In summary, developers were extremely supportive of having added flexibility in the Code. There was no strong preference for a particular direction. Rather, they shared what they saw as being generally problematic. Questions arose about infill, but staff said this is an issue to be taken up separately. The tools for achieving increased diversity of housing types in new growth areas is likely somewhat different from what will be required in infill areas. The focus at this time is on how to address new growth areas.
Option 1: Add PUD Overlay Zone as a New Zoning Tool
Based upon staff’s research and the developer comments, staff believes this option is preferred. This method of reviewing small lots would afford the most flexibility for the developer and would require less time to develop a new ordinance. The PUD would be applied as a combining district or overlay to an existing base zone so as not to change the range of permissible density on a site the way a F-PRD allows for changes in density. Some basic expectations or guidelines for open space and design would be part of draft ordinance. Staff would include defining private street expectations as part of this option as well.
As with the current F-PRD zoning, in exchange for PUD flexibility, the approval process is lengthier and there is less certainty of the outcome. However, developers did not express any concern about the uncertainty or lengthier approval process required of a PUD. Staff believes the F-PRD process would likely be modified along with creating a PUD so as to make them distinct options, or potentially replace the F- PRD if it is found to be duplicative.
Option 2: Modify Base Zoning Standards for Lot Size
Based upon the previous report and discussion amongst City Council along with the developer input, we could proceed with drafting zoning text amendment changes.
3 Modifying the base zoning standards allows for greater predictability and certainty in what the outcome will produce. The primary questions would be the degree of reduced lot area and or lot widths. Staff does not believe wholesale changes to all setback and lot development standards would be appropriate within a base zone as it would apply to many other areas within the City. Creating new lots with frontage on public streets less than 50’ may require corresponding standards for more intentional placement of structures and driveways.
Option 3: Modify Base Zoning Standards for Lot Size Variability of 20%
This option was discussed in June as a hybrid allowing for lot size variation throughout a subdivision compared to a PUD or base zone changes. This option would defer lot design issue until the Subdivision stage rather than zoning. The degree of allowed change would need to be defined through the text amendment process. Based upon the developer comments, staff believes this option has a lower value for encouraging housing diversity compared to the other options.
Option 4: Modify Base Zoning Standards for Lot Area and Add a PUD Overlay Zone
Minor changes could be accommodated with amendments to the base zoning and also creating a new PUD tool. Staff does not feel it is necessary to create more than one path to accomplish the goal of greater housing diversity in new growth areas of the city. While some increase in options and flexibility is needed, increasing options by modifying base zoning and adding a PUD would likely not increase the total amount of diversity in housing product.
Option 5: Hold A City Council Workshop
The City Council could choose to schedule a formal workshop and invite the public to comment on conceptual options before proceeding with changes related to small lots. However, based on the developers’ comments supporting proceeding with changes in general, such a workshop may not be needed at this time.
STAFF COMMENTS:
Staff is in support of creating additional means for detached small lot homes by providing more flexibility within the zoning ordinance. The first four options presented above have a distinct approach to increasing housing diversity and allowing for smaller lot development and have merit. Staff believes Option 1 (creating a PUD) is preferred since it would address the widest range of interests and issues related to small lot home development.
If City Council chooses an option and directs staff to proceed with a creating a zoning text amendment, staff will develop draft language that could then be site-tested and available for comment as part of the review process with the Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council.
4 Attachment A
5 Attachment B- Comments by Issues Lot Sizes -Smart Homes were as small as 43- foot wide lots, could envision a 40-foot lot for same homes -Zero lot line homes of Domani discussed, wider lots with larger homes compared to Smart homes -Discussed impacts on proportions or buildings and spaces with narrow lots -Smaller lot widths and area may need setback reductions and greater coverage allowances -Could zero lot line homes be allowed by right vs. a PRD? -Concern about mandating a mix of lot size or house sizes -Providing for parking on site and/nearby -Greater variability in lot size along arterials for lower value lots would be desirable.
Planned Unit Development (PUD) vs. current Planned Residence District (PRD) -PUD should not require open space like a PRD, does not allow for efficient density -Could density be mixed to get some larger home or estate lots? -Specific design requirements could discourage smaller lots -Could they be used for infill, change the minimum site size from 2 acres. -No concern about the process of a PUD, level of detail up front may be an issue.
Design Features-alleys, shared driveways, design features -Staff discussed design features and treatments for small housing such as courtyard housing, “pocket” neighborhoods, use of alley, shared driveways, etc. -Developers were unsure of marketability of non-traditional home concepts for ownership housing -Staff noted from the June report other comparable city’s emphasis on standards addressing design along a street, for example Iowa City. -Developers expressed concerns on buyer interest resale for shared access -Discussed Grinnell example of shared courts for homes -Effect of fire access lane on design, 150-foot dead end limitations. -Support to define private street standards -What about allowing for three car garages on narrow lots, aesthetics only seeing a garage and minimal to no house.
6 ITEM # __33___ DATE 12-08-20
COUNCIL ACTION FORM
SUBJECT: SECURITY CAMERAS IN CAMPUSTOWN
BACKGROUND:
In 2017, the City Council directed staff to proceed with a concept for the installation of security cameras in Campustown. This decision was reached following a series of staff reports provided to the Council dating back to 2011 regarding camera technologies, operations, and policies. The concept of implementing cameras in Campustown was discussed with and had the approval of the ISU Student Government and Campustown Action Association (CAA).
Following the City Council’s direction to proceed with this concept, City staff obtained cost and technical information about camera placement and operations. Although the proposal in 2017 indicated the possibility of connecting the cameras using a secure wireless mesh network, City staff has obtained cost information using fiber connections, which will increase video quality and be more secure compared to wireless connections. Staff took advantage of the Welch Avenue Reconstruction project to install conduit for fiber optic cabling at a minimal cost.
Proposals for the placement of four cameras are $15,751 for the installation of fiber cabling and $21,535 for the installation of cameras and storage equipment, for a total project cost of $37,286. Funding in the amount of $49,000 is available from a prior budget year allocation that has been carried forward for this project.
NEW ISSUES TO CONSIDER:
During previous discussions regarding cameras with the City Council, a key issue was the manner in which the cameras would be operated. In particular, concerns were raised by community members about the possibility of the cameras being operated and monitored in real-time by Ames Police Department officials. To address this concern, City staff in 2017 proposed having the cameras owned by the City but having recordings managed and stored by non-police entities at Iowa State University. Access to the recordings would be granted as needed to investigate or prevent crimes in the Campustown area, but Ames Police would not have routine access to live video feeds.
City staff has now learned that ISU will charge the City ongoing fees in exchange for managing the camera system. These fees will total approximately $2,880 per year. Additionally, an agreement would need to be negotiated with ISU regarding the access and retrieval of stored recordings. By housing the recordings at ISU, Ames Police would not have immediate access to camera footage as an emergency situation develops.
1 In the time since cameras were last discussed with the City Council, the Police Department has experienced several Campustown incidents in which on-demand access to camera footage would have assisted in an investigation or in crime prevention efforts. These have included several large fights and a number of assaults that were difficult to reconstruct based on witness statements alone. Additionally, there has been an uptick in large gatherings with the emergence of “801 Day.” There was also a drive-by shooting in 2017 on this corridor of Welch Avenue in which immediate camera access may have assisted in the investigation.
Given 1) the ongoing fees proposed if the camera system is housed at ISU, and 2) the numerous incidents in this area in which instantaneous access to camera footage could assist in an investigation, City staff is now proposing that the camera recordings be housed and managed by the City.
City staff has consulted with Campustown Action Association and the ISU Student Government regarding the revised concept of the City managing the camera system as opposed to the earlier concept of a university-operated system. Representatives of both organizations have indicated their continuing support of the camera proposal.
It should be noted that the Police Department has neither the need nor sufficient staffing to actively monitor these cameras on a constant basis. Except when large gatherings or an active public safety hazard is taking place, staff proposes that the camera footage would only be reviewed to investigate a report of an incident after- the-fact. City staff has drafted a proposed policy to address circumstances in which these cameras would be accessed (attached).
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Direct staff to proceed with the installation of the Campustown security camera system and house the recordings on the City’s network. Access to the cameras would be based upon the attached policy.
2. Direct staff to proceed with the installation of the Campustown security camera system and house the recordings on the ISU network. Staff would develop an agreement with ISU regarding how the recordings would be accessed.
3. Do not authorize staff to proceed with the camera project.
CITY MANAGER’S RECOMMENDED ACTION:
The installation of cameras in the Campustown area has been a discussion of the City Council for the past nine years. Although the original intent was to house the recordings on servers owned by the City and operated by Iowa State University, it is evident now that this approach would increase ongoing operational costs and lead to delays in
2 investigating time-sensitive incidents. City staff has developed a policy outlining the circumstances in which camera recordings would be accessed.
Therefore, it is the recommendation of the City Manager that the City Council adopt Alternative No. 1 as described above.
3 Policy Ames Police Department 336 Policy Manual
Public Safety Video Surveillance System
336.1 PURPOSE AND SCOPE This policy provides guidance for the placement and monitoring of department public safety video surveillance, as well as the storage and release of the captured images. This policy only applies to overt, marked public safety video surveillance systems operated by the Department. It does not apply to mobile audio/video systems, covert audio/video systems or any other image-capturing devices used by the Department.
336.2 POLICY The Ames Police Department operates a public safety video surveillance system to complement its anti-crime strategy, to effectively allocate and deploy personnel, and to enhance public safety and security in public areas. Cameras may be placed in strategic locations throughout the City to detect and deter crime, to help safeguard against potential threats to the public, to help manage emergency response situations during natural and man-made disasters and to assist City officials in providing services to the community. Video surveillance in public areas will be conducted in a legal and ethical manner while recognizing and protecting constitutional standards of privacy.
336.3 OPERATIONAL GUIDELINES Only department-approved video surveillance equipment shall be utilized. Members authorized to monitor video surveillance equipment should only monitor public areas and public activities where no reasonable expectation of privacy exists. The Chief of Police or the authorized designee shall approve all proposed locations for the use of video surveillance technology and should consult with and be guided by legal counsel as necessary in making such determinations. The emphasis shall be on active investigations primarily used for after-the-fact review. Monitoring may be used in certain investigations when an immediate response is desired.
336.3.1 PLACEMENT AND MONITORING Camera placement will be guided by the underlying purpose or strategy associated with the overall video surveillance plan. As appropriate, the Chief of Police should confer with other affected City divisions and designated community groups when evaluating camera placement. Environmental factors, including lighting, location of buildings, presence of vegetation or other obstructions, should also be evaluated when determining placement. Cameras shall only record video images and not sound. Recorded images may be used for a variety of purposes, including criminal investigations and monitoring of activity around high-value or high-threat areas. The public safety video surveillance system may be useful for the following purposes: (a) To prevent, deter and identify criminal activity. (b) To target identified areas of gang and narcotics complaints or activity.
Copyright Lexipol, LLC 2020/11/14, All Rights Reserved. Public Safety Video Surveillance System - 1 Published with permission by Ames Police Department ***DRAFT*** Ames Police Department Policy Manual
Public Safety Video Surveillance System
(c) To respond to critical incidents. (d) To assist in identifying, apprehending and prosecuting offenders. (e) To document officer and offender conduct during interactions to safeguard the rights of the public and officers. (f) To augment resources in a cost-effective manner. (g) To monitor pedestrian and vehicle traffic activity. Images from each camera should be recorded in a manner consistent with the underlying purpose of the particular camera. The Chief of Police may authorize video feeds from the public safety video surveillance system to be forwarded to a specified location for monitoring by other than police personnel, such as allied government agencies, road or traffic crews, or fire or emergency operations personnel. Unauthorized recording, viewing, reproduction, dissemination or retention of anything documented by public safety surveillance equipment is prohibited.
336.3.2 CAMERA MARKINGS All public areas monitored by permanently installed public safety surveillance equipment shall be marked in a conspicuous manner with appropriate signs to inform the public that the area is under police surveillance. Signs should placed appropriately and without obstruction to ensure visibility.
336.3.3 INTEGRATION WITH OTHER TECHNOLOGY The Department may elect to integrate its public safety video surveillance system with other technology to enhance available information. Systems such as gunshot detection, incident mapping, crime analysis, and other video-based analytical systems may be considered based upon availability and the nature of department strategy. The Department should evaluate the availability and propriety of networking or otherwise collaborating with appropriate private sector entities and should evaluate whether the use of certain camera systems, such as pan-tilt-zoom systems, video enhancement or other analytical technology, requires additional safeguards.
336.4 VIDEO SUPERVISION Supervisors should monitor video surveillance access and usage to ensure members follow department policy and applicable laws.
336.4.1 PROHIBITED ACTIVITY Public safety video surveillance systems will not intentionally be used to invade the privacy of individuals or observe areas where a reasonable expectation of privacy exists. Public safety video surveillance equipment shall not be used in an unequal or discriminatory manner and shall not target individuals or groups based solely on actual or perceived characteristics such as race, ethnicity, national origin, religion, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, economic status, age, cultural group, or disability.
Copyright Lexipol, LLC 2020/11/14, All Rights Reserved. Public Safety Video Surveillance System - 2 Published with permission by Ames Police Department ***DRAFT*** Ames Police Department Policy Manual
Public Safety Video Surveillance System
Video surveillance equipment shall not be used to harass, intimidate, or discriminate against any individual or group.
336.5 STORAGE AND RETENTION OF MEDIA All downloaded media shall be stored in a secure area with access restricted to authorized persons. A recording needed as evidence shall be copied to a suitable medium and booked into evidence in accordance with established evidence procedures. All actions taken with respect to retention of media shall be appropriately documented. The type of video surveillance technology employed and the manner in which recordings are used and stored will affect retention periods. The recordings should be stored and retained in accordance with the established records retention schedule.
336.5.1 EVIDENTIARY INTEGRITY All downloaded and retained media shall be treated in the same manner as other evidence. Media shall be accessed, maintained, stored and retrieved in a manner that ensures its integrity as evidence, including strict adherence to chain of custody requirements. Electronic trails, including encryption, digital masking of innocent or uninvolved individuals to preserve anonymity, authenticity certificates and date and time stamping shall be used as appropriate to preserve individual rights and to ensure the authenticity and maintenance of a secure evidentiary chain of custody.
336.6 RELEASE OF VIDEO IMAGES All recorded video images gathered by the public safety video surveillance equipment are for the official use of the Ames Police Department. Requests for recorded video images from the public or the media shall be processed in the same manner as requests for department public records. Requests for recorded images from other law enforcement agencies shall be referred to the Investigations Commander for release in accordance with a specific and legitimate law enforcement purpose. Recorded video images that are the subject of a court order or subpoena shall be processed in accordance with the established department subpoena process.
336.7 VIDEO SURVEILLANCE AUDIT The Chief of Police or the authorized designee will conduct an annual review of the public safety video surveillance system. The review should include an analysis of the cost, benefit and effectiveness of the system, including any public safety issues that were effectively addressed or any significant prosecutions that resulted, and any systemic operational or administrative issues that were identified, including those related to training, discipline or policy.
Copyright Lexipol, LLC 2020/11/14, All Rights Reserved. Public Safety Video Surveillance System - 3 Published with permission by Ames Police Department ***DRAFT*** Ames Police Department Policy Manual
Public Safety Video Surveillance System
The results of each review shall be appropriately documented and maintained by the Chief of Police or the authorized designee and other applicable advisory bodies. Any recommendations for training or policy should be promptly addressed.
336.8 TRAINING All department members authorized to operate or access public safety video surveillance systems shall receive appropriate training. Training should include guidance on the use of cameras, interaction with dispatch and patrol operations and a review regarding relevant policies and procedures, including this policy. Training should also address state and federal law related to the use of video surveillance equipment and privacy.
Copyright Lexipol, LLC 2020/11/14, All Rights Reserved. Public Safety Video Surveillance System - 4 Published with permission by Ames Police Department ***DRAFT*** 34 ITEM # 8 DATE: 10-27-20 12-08-20 COUNCIL ACTION FORM
SUBJECT: SETTING THE DATE OF HEARING FOR AN AMENDMENT TO THE ANNEXATION MORATORIUM AGREEMENT WITH THE CITY OF NEVADA
BACKGROUND:
On December 14, 2010, the City of Ames entered into an Annexation Moratorium Agreement with the City of Nevada. The two cities agreed for a period of 10 years that neither city would pursue annexation beyond 590th Street, meaning west of 590th would only be annexed by the City of Ames and east of 590th Street would only be annexed by Nevada. This agreement has proven to be successful in eliminating the motivation for a rush by either party to annex up to the city limits of the other municipality as a defensive move to protect their growth future plans.
In August 2020, the City Council received a request from Verbio for the City of Ames to allow Nevada to annex their 100 acres west of 590th Street and north of the railroad tracks. In order to accommodate the request, the existing 28E agreement with Nevada will have to be modified. In addition to the request to modify this Annexation Moratorium Agreement, the City of Nevada indicated support for extending the agreement for an additional ten years.
As Verbio explains in their request, they have a desire to build a rail facility for the transport of ethanol to work with their existing plant located at the corner of 590th/Lincoln Way (formerly known as the Dupont Plant). The site is located north of the Union Pacific rail line and could be annexed to either the City of Ames or Nevada, if not for the current agreement. Verbio indicates minimal city services would be needed to serve the site and the primary improvement would be a rail loop to service tanker cars.
On September 8, 2020, the City Council directed staff to prepare an amendment to the existing Annexation Moratorium Agreement to satisfy Verbio’s request as well as extend the agreement for an additional ten years.
ALTERNATIVES:
1) Approve a resolution setting the date of hearing for December 8, 2020 to consider an amendment to the Annexation Moratorium Agreement with the City of Nevada that satisfies Verbio’s request and extends the agreement until December 14, 2030.
2) Decline Verbio’s request to alter the existing Annexation Moratorium Agreement thereby requiring the company to pursue annexing their 100 acres into the City of Ames.
3) Decline Verbio’s request, but inquire if the City of Nevada would support extending the existing Annexation Moratorium Agreement an additional ten years. CITY MANAGER'S RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Although the 100-acre site could be annexed to Ames, it is not in a critical location related to other future residential or industrial development envisioned by the City. The City is focused on serving industrial development on the south side of the Union Pacific railroad line and the evaluation of East Growth Scenario for Plan 2040 did not contemplate that development would occur up 590th Street north of the railroad during the next 20 years. In addition, extending the agreement would benefit both cities by making it clear what annexation expectations exist in this area to avoid disputes on future boundaries of the cities. Finally, the stated use of the 100 acres for a rail yard will not reflect in a significant tax revenue loss to the City of Ames if it were allowed to be annexed into Nevada.
Therefore, it is the recommendation of the City Manager that the City Council approve Alternative #1 and thereby approving a resolution setting the date of hearing for December 8, 2020 to consider an amendment to the Annexation Moratorium Agreement with the City of Nevada that satisfies Verbio’s request and extends the agreement until December 14, 2030.
.
ITEM: 35 ___ DATE: 12-08-20
COUNCIL ACTION FORM
SUBJECT: TEXT AMENDMENTS TO AMES MUNICIPAL CODE CHAPTER 13 (RENTAL HOUSING CODE), CHAPTER 29 (ZONING ORDINANCE) & CHAPTER 35 (GUEST LODGING CODE) TO ADDRESS CHANGES IN STATE LAW RELATED TO SHORT-TERM RENTALS AND REPEALING FEE FOR LICENSURE
BACKGROUND:
Under House File 2641, a state law adopted in the last legislative session, local governments are no longer able to regulate short-term rentals (locally called “guest lodging”) as a distinct activity differently from other residential uses within dwellings. As a result, licensing fees, special use permits, and separation distances are no longer allowed under the new law. Based on the State’s action, the City has very limited options regarding what it can do to regulate short-term rentals.
The new law does allow local government to “regulate, prohibit, or limit if enforcement is performed in the same manner as enforcement applicable to similar properties that are not short-term rentals” for such things as the “protection of public health and safety related to fire and building safety, sanitation, or traffic control” and “residential use and zoning purposes related to noise, property maintenance, or nuisance issues”.
This means that short-term rentals are still subject to zoning as a residential use and importantly are included under the purview of Chapter 13, Rental Housing. The rules and process established by the City in 2019 had exempted certain licensed Guest Lodging (short-term rental) establishments from full Rental Code compliance. On October 13, 2020, the City Council directed staff to proceed with updating the Ames Municipal Code related to the local regulation of short-term rentals to comply with state law and create a voluntary licensing process for Home Share and Hosted Home Shares.
HOSTED HOME SHARE AND HOME SHARE SHORT TERM RENTALS:
City Council was concerned at its October 13th meeting about the implications of the Rental Code applying to owner-occupied units (those wishing to offer a Home Share or Hosted Home Share) which previously were not required to be in full compliance with the Rental Code. The Council directed that these units be provided an optional process for an exemption from the Rental Code if they voluntarily register as a short-term rental unit. There would be no charge for registration; however, there would be an inspection fee. The intent is that if a homeowner chooses to operate a short-term rental under the constraints of short-term rental standards of Chapter 35, which is primarily a limitation on occupancy, parking, fire safety standards, and days of operation; they would be exempt from the full Rental Code.
1
If someone chose not to voluntarily obtain a license under Chapter 35, they may proceed with registering the property as a rental property and obtaining a letter of compliance under Chapter 13 Rental Code standards. Should the registration be revoked for non-compliance with the terms of registration, the unit would no longer receive exemption from full compliance with the Rental Housing Code.
Only the short-term rental owner-occupied categories of Home Share and Hosted Home Share will be included in Chapter 35. These uses will continue to be included in the Zoning Tables as an Accessory Use under the Household Living category, in the zoning districts where allowed.
VACATION LODGING:
Vacation Lodging will continue to be required to fully comply with Chapter 13, Rental Housing Code, but nothing additional will be required. Vacation Lodging will also continue to be included in the Zoning Tables under the short-term lodging category, in the zoning districts where it is allowed within the Zoning Ordinance, but will no longer be addressed in Chapter 35.
BED & BREAKFAST ESTABLISHMENTS:
The new state law did not address Bed & Breakfast Establishments. Iowa Code recognizes these as a separate and distinct use from short-term rentals. Therefore, the proposed text removes Bed & Breakfast Establishments as a short-term rental use but maintains them as a short-term lodging (hotel/motel) use. The revised text allows them to continue as a standalone use authorized through the Special Use Permit process. The criteria for approval of a Bed & Breakfast Establishment, included under Section 29.1302, remains the same except for the addition of some criteria previously included in Chapter 35.
SUMMARY OF CHANGES:
On November 18, 2020, the Planning and Zoning Commission reviewed the zoning text amendments to Chapter 29, Zoning Ordinance and voted unanimously in support of the changes to address changes in State law related to short-term rentals. These changes are summarized as follows:
Chapter 13, Rental Housing Code Changes • Exemptions are revised to reflect updated Short-Term Rentals
Chapter 35, Short-Term Rental (previously Guest Lodging) Code Changes • Licensing Requirement is Removed • Categories of Vacation Lodging and Bed & Breakfast Establishments are Removed • References to “Guest Lodging” are replaced with “Short-Term Rental”
2 • Voluntary Registration Process is Added for Hosted Home Shares and Home Shares • Require an inspection prior to licensing with a fee, but no annual fee for a license. Inspection required every other year. • Violations & Penalties are Removed, if the license is revoked, they are subject to Chapter 13 for enforcement.
Chapter 29, Zoning Ordinance Changes • Remove Special Use Permit Requirement for Vacation Lodging • Update the Bed & Breakfast Definition and Special Standards of Article XIII • Remove Guest Lodging Terminology and Definitions • Clarify Home Share and Hosted Home Share as Accessory Uses to Household Living
ALTERNATIVES: 1. A. Approve on first reading each of the attached ordinances:
i. Ordinance amending the text of the Short-Term Rental Code (Chapter 35)
ii. Ordinance amending the text of the Zoning Ordinance (Chapter 29)
iii. Ordinance amending text of the Rental Housing Code (Chapter 13)
B. Adopt a resolution repealing the fee for Guest Lodging licensure.
2. Continue the public hearing to a date certain and direct modifications to the draft ordinances prior to first reading.
3. Adopt on first reading a modified version of any of the three attached ordinances and repeal the fee for Guest Lodging licensure upon third reading of the ordinances.
4. Take no action regarding the text amendments, thereby not memorializing changes in state law related to short-term rentals within the Ames Municipal Code.
CITY MANAGER’S RECOMMENDED ACTION:
As previously directed by Council, the proposed text amendments are in response to changes in state law related to short-term rentals (Guest Lodging). Portions of Chapter 35 previously addressing Vacation Lodging and Bed & Breakfast Establishments are eliminated. Bed & Breakfast Establishments will continue as a stand-alone use authorized through the Special Use Permit process of the Zoning Ordinance. Those units that have already received a Special Use Permit for operating as a Bed & Breakfast Establishment will be able to continue to do so.
3 The term “Guest Lodging” is being replaced with the term “Short-Term Rental.” There will no longer be an annual license required for this use.
The revised text allows an optional process for an exemption from the Rental Code with voluntarily registration as a short-term rental unit under Chapter 35 for owner-occupied units, such as Hosted Home Shares and Home Share. If the proposed changes that include the voluntary licensing process are not approved, all short-term rentals would be subject to complete compliance with Chapter 13 Rental Code.
Therefore, it is the recommendation of the City Manager that the City Council adopt Alternative #1 A and B above, thereby approving first reading of the three ordinances and repealing the fee for Guest Lodging licensure.
4 ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE MUNICIPAL CODE OF THE CITY OF AMES, IOWA, BY AMENDING CHAPTER 29 THEREOF, FOR THE PURPOSE OF HARMONIZING CHAPTER 29 WITH THE NEW STATE LAWS REGARDING SHORT-TERM RENTALS; REPEALING ANY AND ALL ORDINANCES OR PARTS OF ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT TO THE EXTENT OF SUCH CONFLICT; PROVIDING A PENALTY; AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
BE IT ENACTED, by the City Council for the City of Ames, Iowa, that:
Section One. The Municipal Code of the City of Ames, Iowa shall be and the same is hereby amended by amending Chapter 29 as follows:
“Sec. 29.201. DEFINITIONS. Except as otherwise defined in this Ordinance or unless the context may otherwise require, the following words are defined for the purpose of this Ordinance as follows: *** (19.1) Bed & Breakfast Establishment means a private residence where the property owner resides and provides a number of bedrooms as a short-term lodging use for paying guests. Breakfast may also be provided for those guests. (19.1) Bed & Breakfast Establishment means the Guest Lodging of a portion of a dwelling unit that is the primary residence of the property owner, where the property owner provides lodging and may provide breakfast for overnight guests. A Bed & Breakfast Establishment is a short-term lodging use and is a category of Guest Lodging licensed under Chapter 35. *** (91.1) Bed & Breakfast Establishment means the Guest Lodging of a portion of a dwelling unit that is the primary residence of the property owner, where the property owner provides lodging and may provide breakfast for overnight guests. A Bed & Breakfast Establishment is a short-term lodging use and is a category of Guest Lodging licensed under Chapter 35. *** (92.1) Guest Lodging means the advertising, offering, or otherwise making available use of a dwelling unit for overnight lodging for a period of thirty-one (31) consecutive days or less in exchange for money, goods., labor or service. Guest Lodging types include Apartment Shares, Home Shares, Hosted Home Shares, Bed & Breakfast Establishments, and Vacation Lodging as licensed under Chapter 35. Guest Lodging does not include any hotel or motel facility. *** (98.1) Home Share and Hosted Home Share, as defined in Chapter 35, are accessory uses to household living, which allow a property owner the ability to offer limited Short-Term Rental to paying guests in their home. *** (235.1) Vacation Lodging means the short-term rental of an entire dwelling unit, which is not required to be the owner’s primary residence and which is commonly, but not exclusively, made available for occupancy through an online marketplace or website as a rental subject to Chapter 13. *** Sec. 29.501. CLASSIFICATION OF USES. (3) Accessory Uses. Unless otherwise stated in this Ordinance or otherwise indicated in the Use Tables for each zone: *** (e) Accessory Uses: are incidental and customary to and commonly associated with the operation of the Principal Use; i. Are clearly incidental and customary to and commonly associated with the operation of the Principal Use; ii. Are operated and maintained under the same ownership or by lessees or concessionaires of the owner, and on the same zone lot as the Principal Use; iii. Do not include structures or structural features inconsistent with the Principal Use; iv. May include the use of Guest Lodging of all or a portion of a dwelling unit that is the primary residence of the property owner as limited Short-Term Rental (Home Share or Hosted Home Share). May also include the use of apartment dwellings for Guest Lodging, consistent with the licensing requirements of Chapter 35, when apartment dwellings are permitted in the base zone; v. Do not include residential occupancy in conjunction with uses other than other than hotels, motels, tourist homes and similar uses offering transient housing accommodations, which is also not permitted except by owners and employees employed on the premises and of the immediate families of such owners and employees; and vi. Have a gross floor area that, in combination with all other uses accessory to Principal Uses located in the same structure or on the same lot, does not exceed 25% of the gross floor area utilized by all Principal Uses. The 25% floor area limitation, however, shall does not apply to off-street parking or Short-Term Rentals. Guest Lodging is exempt from the 25% floor area limitation.
Table 29.501(4)-1 RESIDENTIAL USE CATEGORIES *** Household Living *** Accessory Uses *** Home Share Hosted Home Share *** Short-Term Lodging Definition. Facilities offering lodging accommodations to the general public, where the length of stay is 31 days or less. Short-term lodging is subject to State of Iowa definitions, permits, and rules, including remittance of hotel and motel tax.
Uses Included Bed and & Breakfast Establishment Hotels Motels Recreational Vehicle Park Vacation Lodging Accessory Uses Coffee shops and dining areas primarily for use by guests or residents of the facility.
Sec. 29.600. "A" AGRICULTURAL. *** Table 29.600(2) Agricultural (A) Zone Uses
APPROVAL APPROVAL USE CATEGORIES STATUS REQUIRED AUTHORITY RESIDENTIAL USES *** Short-Term Lodging Bed & Breakfast Establishment Y, subject to Section 29.1302 SP ZBA Y, but only within single and two Vacation Lodging SPZP ZEOZBA family dwellings ***
*** Sec. 29.701. "RL" RESIDENTIAL LOW DENSITY. *** Table 29.701(2) Residential Low Density (RL) Zone Uses
APPROVAL APPROVAL USE CATEGORIES STATUS REQUIRED AUTHORITY RESIDENTIAL USES ***
Short-Term Lodging
Bed & Breakfast Establishment Y, subject to Section 29.1302 SP ZBA Y, but only within single and two Vacation Lodging SPZP ZBAZEO family dwellings *** Sec. 29.702. "RM" RESIDENTIAL MEDIUM DENSITY. *** Table 29.702(2) Residential Medium Density (RM) Zone Uses
APPROVAL APPROVAL USE CATEGORIES STATUS REQUIRED AUTHORITY RESIDENTIAL USES *** Short-Term Lodging Bed & Breakfast Establishment Y, subject to Section 29.1302 SP ZBA Vacation Lodging Y SP/ZP ZBA/ZEO ***
*** Sec. 29.703. "UCRM" URBAN CORE RESIDENTIAL MEDIUM DENSITY ZONE. *** Table 29.703(2) Urban Core Residential Medium Density (UCRM) Zone Uses
APPROVAL APPROVAL USE CATEGORIES STATUS REQUIRED AUTHORITY RESIDENTIAL USES *** Short-Term Lodging Bed & Breakfast Establishment Y, subject to Section 29.1302 SP ZBA Vacation Lodging Y SPZP ZBAZEO ***
*** Sec. 29.704. "RH" RESIDENTIAL HIGH DENSITY. *** Table 29.704(2) Residential High Density (RH) Zone Uses
APPROVAL APPROVAL USE CATEGORIES STATUS REQUIRED AUTHORITY RESIDENTIAL USES *** Short-Term Lodging Bed & Breakfast Establishment Y, subject to Section 29.1302 SP ZBA Vacation Lodging Y SP, ZP ZBA/ZEO ***
*** Sec. 29.801. "NC" NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL ZONING STANDARDS. *** Table 29.801(2) Neighborhood Commercial (NC) Zone Uses
APPROVAL APPROVAL USE CATEGORY STATUS REQUIRED AUTHORITY RESIDENTIAL USES *** Short-Term Lodging Bed & Breakfast Establishment Y, subject to Section 29.1302 SP ZBA Vacation Lodging Y SP/ZP ZBA/ZEO ***
*** Sec. 29.806. "CCR" COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL/RESIDENTIAL NODE. *** Table 29.806(2) Community Commercial/Residential Node (CCR) Zone Uses *** Sec. 29.807. "CVCN" CONVENIENCE COMMERCIAL NODE. Convenience Commercial Node. *** Sec. 29.808. "DSC" DOWNTOWN SERVICE CENTER. *** Table 29.808(2) Downtown Service Center (DSC) Zone Uses
APPROVAL APPROVAL USE CATEGORY STATUS REQUIRED AUTHORITY RESIDENTIAL USES *** Y, except Bed & Breakfast Short-Term Lodging SDP Minor Staff Establishment Vacation Lodging Y SP/ZP ZBA/ZEO ***
*** Sec. 29.809. "CSC" CAMPUSTOWN SERVICE CENTER. *** Table 29.809(2) Campustown Service Center (CSC) Zone Uses
APPROVAL APPROVAL USE CATEGORY STATUS REQUIRED AUTHORITY RESIDENTIAL USES *** Y, except Bed & Breakfast Short-Term Lodging SDP Minor Staff Establishment Vacation Lodging Y SP/ZP ZBA/ZEO ***
*** Sec. 29.903. "RI" RESEARCH PARK INNOVATION DISTRICT. Research Park Innovation District. *** Sec. 29.1003 "S-SMD" SOUTH LINCOLN SUB AREA MIXED-USE DISTRICT. *** Table 29.1003(2) South Lincoln Sub Area (S-SMD) Mixed-Use District
APPROVAL APPROVAL USE CATEGORY STATUS REQUIRED AUTHORITY RESIDENTIAL USES *** Short-Term Lodging Bed & Breakfast Establishment Y, subject to Section 29.1302 SP ZBA Vacation Lodging Y SP/ZP ZBA/ZEO ***
*** Sec. 29.1004. "DGC" DOWNTOWN GATEWAY COMMERCIAL. *** Table 29.1004(2) Downtown Gateway Commercial Uses
APPROVAL APPROVAL USE CATEGORY STATUS REQUIRED AUTHORITY RESIDENTIAL USES *** Short-Term Lodging (stand alone or Y, except Bed & Breakfast SDP Major Staff mixed use) Establishment Vacation Lodging Y SP/ZP ZBA/ZEO ***
*** Sec. 29.1101 "O-SFC" SINGLE FAMILY CONSERVATION OVERLAY DISTRICT. *** (4) Permitted Uses. (a) Subject to the Building/Zoning Permit requirements of Section 29.1501, land, buildings and structures may be used for the following purposes in an O-SFC Zone without City Council approval, in accordance with standards and regulations of the Base Zone: (i) Dwelling – single-Family (ii) Dwelling – Two Family (iii) Bed & Breakfast Establishment (Special Use Permit required: See Section 29.13021503) (iv) Vacation Lodging (Special Use Permit required: See Section 1503) (b) All uses and structures conforming to the Base Regulations and all lawfully vested nonconforming uses and structures that exist in the O-SFC on the effective date of the amendment of the official zoning map to show the O-SFC are hereby deemed to be conforming with the terms of this Section. The O-SFC shall not be deemed to create a nonconforming use or structure within the scope of Section 29.307. *** Sec. 29.1106. "O-SLF" SOUTH LINCOLN FRINGE OVERLAY DISTRICT. *** Sec. 29.1109. "O-GNE" NORTHEAST GATEWAY OVERLAY DISTRICT. *** Sec. 29.1113. "O-LMU" LINCOLN WAY MIXED USE OVERLAY DISTRICT. *** Sec. 29.1201. "F-VR" VILLAGE RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT. *** Table 29.1201(5) Village Residential (F-VR) Floating Zone Uses
NEIGHBORHOOD NEIGHBORHOOD USE CATEGORY NEIGHBORHOOD EDGE CENTER GENERAL *** OTHER USES *** Vacation Lodging, subject to the Y Y Y standards of Section 29.1302 ***
*** Sec. 29.1202. "F-S" SUBURBAN RESIDENTIAL ZONE. *** Table 29.1202(4)-1 Suburban Residential Floating Zoning Residential Low Density (FS-RL) Uses
APPROVAL APPROVAL USE CATEGORIES STATUS REQUIRED AUTHORITY RESIDENTIAL USES *** Short-Term Lodging Bed & Breakfast Establishment Y, subject to Section 29.1302 SP ZBA Vacation Lodging Y SPZP ZBAZEO ***
*** Table 29.1202(4)-2 Suburban Residential Floating Zoning Residential Medium Density (FS-RM) Uses
APPROVAL APPROVAL USE CATEGORIES STATUS REQUIRED AUTHORITY RESIDENTIAL USES *** Short-Term Lodging Bed & Breakfast Establishment Y, subject to Section 29.1302 SP ZBA Vacation Lodging Y SP/ZP ZBA/ZEO ***
*** Sec. 29.1203. "F-PRD" PLANNED RESIDENCE DISTRICT. *** Table 29.1203(4) Planned Residence District (F-PRD) Floating Zone Uses
Permitted Principle Uses Permitted Accessory Uses
Accessory uses of the Household Living category provided for in Table 29.501(4)-1 Garages Open space uses Home occupations subject to standards of Section 29.1304 *** Home Day Care subject to the standards of Section 29.1304 Office and Trade use where the property owner can demonstrate through a written Market Study that the Office and Trade use can be supported by the residents of the Planned Residence District Project Rental services offices not to exceed 5,000 square feet Assisted Living, for the residents of the PRD
Vacation Lodging subject to the standards of Section 29.1302; Bed & Breakfast Establishments
*** Sec. 29.1302. GUEST LODGING REQUIREMENTS. (1) Non-Conforming Uses. Any Apartment Dwelling that is a non-conforming use within its zoning district shall not be approved as Vacation Lodging. (2) Special Use Permit. (a) Bed & Breakfast Establishments and Vacation Lodging must obtain a Special Use Permit from the Zoning Board of Adjustment prior to receiving a Guest Lodging license. (b) Exemptions. Apartment dwellings located in certain zoning districts are exempt from the Special Use Permit requirement. These zoning districts include: F-PRD, F-VR, RM, RH, FS-RM, NC, CCR, DSC, CSC, O-LMU and DGC. This exemption does not apply to apartment dwellings located in zoning district RM / O-SFC. (c) Properties requiring a Letter of Compliance (LOC) must have registered for their LOC and have completed their initial LOC inspection, prior to applying for a Special Use Permit. (d) The Special Use Permit is not transferable to a subsequent owner or to another property. (e) The Special Use Permit shall be deemed expired and void after a one-year period of disuse of the dwelling unit for guest lodging purposes or upon nonrenewal of a guest lodging license. (3) Additional Vacation Lodging Restrictions. (a) Vacation Lodging is not permitted as a second principal use on a site with a single-family dwelling. (b) Only one Vacation Lodging unit may be established for a property with a two-family dwelling. (c) No Vacation Lodging use may be established on the ground floor of a commercial building or mixed use building. (4) Guest Rooms. (a) Bed & Breakfast Establishments may have no more than five approved guest bedrooms. The Zoning Board of Adjustment will determine the number of bedrooms specific to the dwelling unit. (b) Vacation Lodging must be consistent with the occupancy limitations of the Ames Municipal Code Section 13.503. No Vacation Lodging shall exceed a total of five adults per dwelling unit. (5) Off-Street Parking Requirements. (a) Bed & Breakfast Establishments must have one reserved space per guest room, plus one space for the owner. (b) Vacation Lodging must provide one parking space per guest bedroom, with a maximum of five spaces required; an apartment dwelling in a zoning district with less parking required is not subject to this standard. (c) The parking spaces shall meet standards established by Section 29.406 of this ordinance. (6) Local and State Regulations. The Guest Lodging establishment must comply with local and state regulations regarding all applicable permits and licenses including, but not limited to fire, health, food service, hotel, liquor, revenue, building/zoning permits and licenses. *** Sec. 29.1302. BED & BREAKFAST ESTABLISHMENTS. (1) Special Use Permit. (a) Bed & Breakfast Establishments must obtain a Special Use Permit from the Zoning Board of Adjustment. (b) The Special Use Permit is not transferable to a subsequent owner or to another property. (c) The Special Use Permit shall be deemed expired and void after a one-year period of disuse of the property as a Bed & Breakfast Establishment. (2) Primary Residence. The dwelling unit must be the primary residence of the property owner. (3) Occupancy. (a) Limited to a maximum occupancy of two adults per approved bedroom. (b) The Zoning Board of Adjustment will determine the number of approved bedrooms (up to five), specific to the constraints of the property. (c) Guest stays shall be limited to a period of thirty-one (31) consecutive days or less. (4) Off-Street Parking Requirements. (a) One reserved space per guest room, plus one space for the owner. (b) The parking spaces shall meet standards established by Section 29.406 of this ordinance. (5) Registry of Guests. A guest registry is required to be maintained and kept for a period of one year. It shall be made available for examination by the City upon request. (6) Fire Safety Requirements & Inspection. All applications must include verification of having passed a fire-safety inspection. Subsequent inspections may be conducted to verify correction of deficiencies, or as necessitated by complaints. (7) Food Service. Breakfast shall be the only meal served. Only guests residing in the structure or persons living in the premises may be served. Commercial kitchens are prohibited. (8) Local and State Regulations. (a) The Bed & Breakfast Establishment must comply with local and state regulations regarding all applicable permits and licenses including, but not limited to fire, health, food service, hotel, liquor, revenue, building/zoning permits and licenses. (b) Required taxes must be paid pursuant to Ames Municipal Code Section 24.3. Documentation of tax payments may be required. *** Section Two. Violation of the provisions of this ordinance shall constitute a municipal infraction punishable as set out by law.
Section Three. All ordinances, or parts of ordinances, in conflict herewith are hereby repealed to the extent of such conflict, if any.
Section Four. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage and publication as required by law.
Passed this day of , .
______Diane R. Voss, City Clerk John A. Haila, Mayor ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE MUNICIPAL CODE OF THE CITY OF AMES, IOWA, BY AMENDING SECTION 13.100(5)(b) THEREOF, FOR THE PURPOSE OF HARMONIZING CHAPTER 13 WITH CHAPTER 35, SHORT- TERM RENTAL CODE; REPEALING ANY AND ALL ORDINANCES OR PARTS OF ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT TO THE EXTENT OF SUCH CONFLICT; PROVIDING A PENALTY; AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
BE IT ENACTED, by the City Council for the City of Ames, Iowa, that:
Section One. The Municipal Code of the City of Ames, Iowa shall be and the same is hereby amended by amending Section 13.100(5)(b) as follows:
“Sec. 13.100 GENERAL . . . (5) Exceptions. The following residential structures are exempt from these rules: . . .
(b) a dwelling unit wholly or partially used
(i) as a Bed & Breakfast Establishment that has been granted a Special Use Permit under Chapter 29, or
(ii) as a Home Share or Hosted Home Share registered under Chapter 35.
(b) the use of a dwelling unit, wholly or partially, as a Bed & Breakfast Establishment, Home Share, or Hosted Home Share licensed under Chapter 35.
. . ..”
Section Two. Violation of the provisions of this ordinance shall constitute a municipal infraction punishable as set out in Ames Municipal Code Chapter 13.
Section Three. All ordinances, or parts of ordinances, in conflict herewith are hereby repealed to the extent of such conflict, if any.
Section Four. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage and publication as required by law.
Passed this day of , .
Diane R. Voss, City Clerk John A. Haila, Mayor ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE MUNICIPAL CODE OF THE CITY OF AMES, IOWA, BY REPEALING AND REPLACING CHAPTER 35 THEREOF, FOR THE PURPOSE OF HARMONIZING CHAPTER 35 WITH THE NEW STATE LAWS REGARDING SHORT-TERM RENTALS; REPEALING ANY AND ALL ORDINANCES OR PARTS OF ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT TO THE EXTENT OF SUCH CONFLICT; PROVIDING A PENALTY; AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
BE IT ENACTED, by the City Council for the City of Ames, Iowa, that:
Section One. The Municipal Code of the City of Ames, Iowa shall be and the same is hereby amended by repealing and replacing Chapter 35 as follows:
“Sec. 35.100. TITLE, PURPOSE AND SCOPE. These regulations shall be known as the Short-Term Rental Code of the City of Ames, hereinafter referred to as “this code.” This code provides regulations for the voluntary registration and operation of Short-Term Rentals in order to provide a voluntary alternative from full compliance with Chapter 13, Rental Housing Code for owner-occupied dwelling units wishing to offer Short-Term Rental, while ensuring the safety and welfare of guests, owners and neighboring property owners.
Sec. 35.200. DEFINITIONS. For the purposes of this code, the following words, terms and phrases have the meanings set forth herein. Where terms are not defined herein but are defined elsewhere, such as in Ames Municipal Code Chapter 13, Rental Housing Code or Chapter 29, Zoning Ordinance, such terms have the meanings ascribed therein. Applicant means a property owner who registers their Short-Term Rental unit with the City. Bedroom, Approved means any room or space used or intended to be used for sleeping purposes that is found to be in compliance with the standards of Ames Municipal Code Chapter 13, Rental Housing Code. Enforcement Officer means the person or persons designated by the City Manager who is responsible for the administration and enforcement of this code. Dwelling Unit means a single unit providing complete, independent living facilities for one or more persons, including permanent provisions for living, sleeping, eating, cooking and sanitation. Guest Contract means one or more persons who act as a single group and as a single reservation and payment for a Short-Term Rental. Short-Term Rental Registration is the administrative process whereby an applicant memorializes their intent to voluntarily comply with Chapter 35. Voluntary compliance with the requirements of Chapter 35, Short-Term Rental, allows a dwelling unit that is used for Home Share or Hosted Home Share an exemption from having to fully comply with Chapter 13, Rental Housing Code and obtain a Letter of Compliance under Chapter 13. Home Share means the limited Short-Term Rental of the entire dwelling unit that is the primary residence of the property owner, while the property owner is not present. Hosted Home Share means the limited Short-Term Rental of a portion of a dwelling unit that is the primary residence of the property owner, while the property owner is present. For the purposes of this definition, “present” means the property owner is staying in the dwelling overnight during the Short-Term Rental. Letter of Compliance means a document issued by the Inspection Division, stating the premises have been inspected and found to be in compliance with Ames Municipal Code Chapter 13, Rental Housing Code, on the date of inspection. Owner means any person, agent, firm or corporation having a legal or equitable interest in the property; or recorded in the official records of the state, county or municipality as holding title to the property; or otherwise having control of the property, including the guardian of the estate of any such person, and the executor or administrator of the estate of such person if ordered to take possession of real property by a court. Primary Residence means a dwelling unit that is the only place where a person has a true, fixed, and permanent home, and to where, whenever the person is briefly and temporarily absent, the person intends to return. A person may have only one primary residence. Short-Term Rental means the advertising, offering, or otherwise making available use of a dwelling unit for overnight lodging for a period of thirty (30) consecutive days or less in exchange for money, goods, labor or service. Short-Term Rental does not include any hotel or motel facility or Bed & Breakfast Establishment.
Sec. 35.300. OPERATION OF USE.
No person or entity may advertise, offer, let, operate, or otherwise make available a Short-Term Rental without either full compliance with Chapter 13, Rental Housing Code OR registration as a Short-Term Rental unit under this code. 35.400 SHORT-TERM RENTAL STANDARDS (1) Registrant is the Property Owner. Registration for use of a property for Home Share or Hosted Home Share must be submitted by the property owner. (2) Primary Residence. The dwelling unit must be the primary residence of the property owner. (3) Zoning. The dwelling unit is located in a zoning district permitting the unit’s use as either a Hosted Home Share or Home Share, as identified in the zoning use tables found in Chapter 29, Zoning Ordinance. (4) Occupancy. (a) Hosted Home Shares are limited to a maximum of two approved bedrooms and two adults as guests per dwelling unit. The applicant must specify which portions of the dwelling unit will constitute the registered premises available for use for the Short- Term Rental. (b) Home Shares are limited to a maximum of two adults per approved bedroom, not to exceed a total of five adults per dwelling unit. (5) Off-Street Parking. Parking is provided according to the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance Section 29.406 and the following: (a) Hosted Home Shares - No additional parking required. (b) Home Shares - 1 space per bedroom (maximum required - 5 spaces). (6) Tax Compliance. At time of each registration renewal, documentation must be provided indicating that required taxes for the previous year have been paid pursuant to Ames Municipal Code Section 24.3. (7) Fire Safety Requirements. All units registered as Short-Term Rentals under this code must be in compliance with the fire safety regulations included in Ames Municipal Code Chapter 13, Division VIII. Prior to the registration of a unit as a Short-Term Rental, a Special Request Inspection must be conducted on the unit and documentation obtained from the inspector verifying compliance. Special Request Inspections shall be required every other year for continued renewal of registration. Special Request Inspections, when required, may be conducted up to 90 days prior to the initial registration or the renewal registration of a unit as a Short-Term Rental. The Special Request Inspection fee shall be set by resolution and may be found in Appendix L of the Ames Municipal Code. (8) Additional Operational Requirements. In addition to registration, the following also apply: (a) Concurrent Guest Contracts Not Allowed Within a Dwelling Unit. Accommodations must be offered as one guest contract only. (b) Maximum Number of Days per Annual Renewal Period (for Home Shares only). Home Shares are limited to a total of 90 days of use as a Home Share per annual registration period, with each guest contract including a period of 30 days or less. (c) Registry of Guests. Each owner or host must keep a registry of guests accommodated during the year. The guest registry must be available for inspection by the City upon request. (d) Responsiveness to Complaints. The owner must respond to complaints in a reasonably timely manner and shall maintain a record of the actions taken in response. This record must be available for inspection by the City upon request.
Sec. 35.500. ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES. (1) Administrative Rules. The Enforcement Officer shall have the authority to establish administrative rules and regulations consistent with this code, for the purpose of interpreting, carrying out, and enforcing it. (2) Registration. (a) Registration Form. Short-Term Rental Registration must be on forms provided by the City. (b) No Fee. Registration as a Short-Term Rental unit is voluntary and requires no fee. (c) Registration Review. Complete and accurate information must be provided to the City. (i) Staff review. The registration will be reviewed by staff within five working days for completeness. (ii) Incomplete Registration. Registration that does not include all required information will be considered incomplete. In such cases, the City will notify the applicant in writing, explaining the information required. If the applicant does not provide the required information within 31 days of the notice, the registration will be deemed withdrawn for lack of responsiveness. (iii) Approval. Registration in compliance with this code will be approved. (iv) Conditional Approval. A conditional approval may be granted to allow an applicant to operate while coming into full compliance with the registration requirements. A conditional approval is time limited for no more than three months and is not renewable. (v) Denial including Non-Renewal. Any violation of the provisions of this code may be considered during the registration review and may result in denial or non- renewal. Verified complaints with notice of corrective action involving violations of the zoning code, building code, and/or applicable laws or regulations may be a basis for denying registration. If denied, the property is no longer exempt from full compliance with Chapter 13, Rental Housing Code. (3) Inspection. All premises registered as Short-Term Rental units must be subject to inspection by the City for the purpose of investigating and determining compliance with the requirements of this code. (4) Term (a) All registrations shall terminate after one year. Registration renewals must be submitted by the property owner annually, prior to expiration of the current registration. (b) If a Short-Term Rental registration expires, the dwelling unit may not be used or occupied as Short-Term Rental until such time as a subsequent registration has been approved or a Letter of Compliance under Chapter 13, Rental Housing Code has been obtained. (5) Transferability. The registration will be issued in the name of the property owner and is not transferable to a subsequent owner or to another property. (6) Revocation. (a) The Enforcement Officer may immediately revoke or temporarily suspend a Short- Term Rental registration based upon any of the following, if it is found that: (i) The registrant, designated operator, or guest has violated any of the provisions of this code or conditions of the registration; (ii) The applicant has made a false statement of material fact on the registration; (iii) The registrant, designated operator, or guest has violated any federal, state, or city law or regulation pertaining to the use of the property as a Short-Term Rental; or (iv) The Chief of Police or Fire Chief and/or their designees have determined that the Short-Term Rental would pose a serious threat to public health, safety, or welfare. (b) The Enforcement Officer shall send or deliver written notice to the property owner stating the basis for the decision of revocation or suspension, the effective date of the revocation or suspension, the right to appeal the decision, and the procedure for filing an appeal. Any notice of suspension must include information about possible corrective action and time for compliance, as applicable. (c) Upon revocation of the registration, the dwelling unit or parcel described in the registration is ineligible to receive another registration pursuant to this code for one year from the date of revocation. (d) If the Registration is revoked, the use of the dwelling unit as a Short-Term Rental is no longer exempted from full compliance with Chapter 13, Rental Housing Code. The use must cease until a Letter of Compliance under Chapter 13 is obtained. Sec. 35.600. APPEALS. Any party aggrieved by the Enforcement Officer’s decision to deny, suspend, revoke, or issue a registration may appeal the determination to the Zoning Board of Adjustment within thirty (30) days, under the procedures set forth in the Zoning Ordinance Section 29.1403(8).”
Section Two. Violation of the provisions of this ordinance shall constitute a municipal infraction punishable as set out by law. Section Three. All ordinances, or parts of ordinances, in conflict herewith are hereby repealed to the extent of such conflict, if any.
Section Four. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage and publication as required by law.
Passed this day of , .
______Diane R. Voss, City Clerk John A. Haila, Mayor ITEM # 36 DATE: 12-08-20
COUNCIL ACTION FORM
SUBJECT: 2019/20 TRAFFIC SIGNAL PROGRAM (LINCOLN WAY & BEACH AVE)
BACKGROUND:
The Traffic Signal Program is the annual program that provides for replacing older traffic signals and constructing new traffic signals in the City, which will result in improved visibility, reliability, and appearance of signals. This program provides the upgrading of the traffic signal system technology. Traffic signal replacements have included video detection systems instead of in-pavement loop detection systems that had previously been used and were frequently a point of failure. Another advantage of the video-based system is that it detects bicycles in addition to vehicles. This project includes a new signal and pedestrian ramps at the intersection of Lincoln Way & Beach Avenue.
On December 2, 2020, bids were received for this project as follows:
Bidder Total Bid Engineer’s estimate $258,084.00 Van Maanen Electric $274,254.18 Voltmer, Inc. $325,487.17
The revenues and expenses for this project are as follows:
Revenues Expenses Road Use Tax $370,750 Administration $20,000.00 18/19 Traffic Signal Savings $19,000 Design $23,995.36 Construction $274,254.18 Signal Cabinet $31,868.00 Signal Poles $35,320.00 Total $389,750 Total $385,437.54
ALTERNATIVES:
1a. Accept the report of bids for the 2019/20 Traffic Signal Program (Lincoln Way & Beach Ave) project.
b. Approve the final plans and specifications for this project.
c. Approve the reallocation of $20,000 from the savings in the 2018/19 Signal Program to this project.
c. Award the 2019/20 Traffic Signal Program (Lincoln Way & Beach Ave) project to Van Maanen Electric, Inc. of Newton, Iowa in the amount of $274,254.18.
2. Award the contract to one of the other bidders.
3. Do not proceed with this project
MANAGER'S RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Proceeding with this project will make it possible to provide better service for residents using this intersection. Therefore, it is the recommendation of the City Manager that the City Council adopt Alternative No. 1, as described above.
ITEM #__ 37__ DATE: 12-08-20
COUNCIL ACTION FORM
SUBJECT: AWARD CONTRACT FOR INIS GROVE PARK SIDEWALK PROJECT
BACKGROUND:
This project is to construct a sidewalk along the north side of 24th St., east of Duff Ave., and along Duff Ave, north of 24th St., adjacent Inis Grove Park, 2500 Duff Ave. As part of the approved Miracle Project site plan, the sidewalk was included as there is currently not a sidewalk that provides access to the Park. Attachment A shows the location of the sidewalk. The FY 2020/21 Capital Improvements Plan (CIP) included $200,000 for the project.
Plans and specifications were developed by the Public Works Department and included an eight-foot wide concrete sidewalk to be installed with accompanying pedestrian ramps that will connect to the sidewalk currently in place adjacent to the Inclusive Playground and Miracle League Field in the park. Also included in the plans are concrete pads for the two bus stops located on Duff Ave.
On October 27, 2020, Council issued a notice to bidders. Staff opened bids on December 2, 2020. The bids are summarized below.
Inis Grove Park Sidewalk Project Bidder Base Bid Pillar Inc., Huxley, Iowa $157,199.11 TK Concrete, Inc., Pella, Iowa $170,984.40 Caliber Concrete LLC., Adair, Iowa $174,787.15 Berkey Homebuilders, Inc., Altoona, Iowa $186,162.60 Woodruff Construction, Ames, Iowa $194,052.03 Synergy Contracting, LLC., Altoona, Iowa $201,887.50
PROJECT COST: The engineer’s cost estimate below includes the base bid, engineering, construction inspection, fire hydrant relocation, and a five percent contingency.
Engineer’s Estimate: Amount Base Bid $197,587 Engineering & Construction Inspection $ 10,000 Fire Hydrant relocation $ 2,817 Contingency (5% of base bid) $ 9,880 Bid Project Estimate $220,284
1 Staff has reviewed the bids and has found the bid from Pillar Inc., Huxley, Iowa, to be acceptable. With this bid, the revised estimated total project costs are as follows:
Total Project Estimate:______Amount Base Bid $157,199.11 Engineering & Construction Inspection $ 10,000.00 Fire Hydrant relocation $ 2,817.00 Total Estimate $170,016.11
With the $200,000 available for this project, there will remain $29,983.89 available in the project budget for contingency.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Award the Inis Grove Park Sidewalk Project to Pillar Inc., Huxley, Iowa, in the bid amount of $157,199.11.
2. Award the contract to one of the other bidders.
3. Accept the report of bids for the Inis Grove Park Sidewalk Project, but do not award a contract at this time.
4. Reject all bids.
CITY MANAGER’S RECOMMENDED ACTION:
The Miracle Project in Inis Grove Park was created for all individuals and abilities. Constructing the sidewalk ensures all bicyclists and pedestrians can safely access the park from Duff Ave. and 24th St. Also, in order to be compliant with the guidelines outlined in the Community Attraction & Tourism (CAT) grant awarded to the Ames Foundation, it is necessary for this project to proceed. Lastly, this project received a very favorable bid below the engineer’s estimate that will allow the project to be completed with budgeted funds.
Therefore, it is the recommendation of the City Manager that the City Council approve Alternative #1 as stated above.
2
Item No. 41
FISCAL YEAR 2021/22 CITY COUNCIL BUDGET ISSUES
Near the beginning of each year’s budget preparation cycle, the City Manager and Finance staff present the City Council with a budget overview. This presentation has four main purposes:
1. Present the “big picture” of the coming year’s budget, including factors that may later impact the Council’s budget decisions
2. Share budget-related input and requests that have been received from local citizens and organizations
3. Seek Council direction on select components of the budget (e.g., overall funding levels for human services and arts)
4. Receive any general funding or service level direction that Council wishes to incorporate into the budget
OVERALL ECONOMIC CONDITION OF THE CITY
Overall economic conditions in the City of Ames remain strong. However, in addition to the health impacts, COVID-19 has had a significant negative impact on many sectors of our local economy. The City of Ames maintains strong reserves which provide a level of financial flexibility and allowed City staff to take action to reduce expenses and mitigate the financial impact of COVID-19, while continuing to provide essential services to Ames residents and visitors. While this is possible in the short-term, it has become more difficult to curtail general economic activity locally and nationally as COVID-19 continues. Though several revenue sources have seen reductions, the funds most impacted by COVID-19 are the Parking and Hotel/Motel funds as these funds are dependent on event and visitor activities which have seen significant reductions. Additional information is provided below regarding these funds.
We expect a continued modest increase in property valuation to have a positive financial impact on the City budget. Taxable valuation for residential property will increase due to the residential rollback rate adjusting slightly from 55.07% to 56.41%. This small change in rollback will result in a small shift in taxes from the commercial and industrial classes of property to the residential class.
We are anticipating smaller than average increases in health care costs at 5% and a continued modest rate of inflation on goods and services. Certain expenses such as fuel have decreased in cost and are expected to remain low which will be reflected in the budget.
Commercial and industrial property will continue to be taxed at 90% of value regardless of what may happen with replacement tax. A new property classification was implemented in FY 2016/17. Multi-residential property, formerly taxed at 90% of value, will take another step toward rollback to the residential rate and will be taxed at 67.5% of value, with no state replacement tax.
Interest revenues for the City investments increased through most of FY 2019/20. However, interest rates fell sharply in spring 2020 and are expected to remain low though FY 2021/22. Though this will reduce interest revenue, rates for G.O. Bonds remain at very favorable levels and refunding of bonds in September 2020 resulted in savings to help offset some of the reduced revenue.
The Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act (CARES) and the FEMA Public Assistance program have helped to offset some of the economic impact of COVID-19 to the City of Ames. In our budget planning we are expecting to return to more normal activity in FY 2021/22; this corresponds with current projections for widespread distribution of COVID- 19 vaccinations. We do expect that the financial impact on property tax and utility rate payers may extend a bit longer and, therefore, the budget planning will include an attempt to hold property tax rates as flat as possible while still providing essential services.
GENERAL FUND
Even with the effects of the pandemic, the General Fund ended FY 2019/20 with a balance of approximately $14.2 million. This created a beginning balance for FY 2020/21 that was almost $4.4 million higher than what was anticipated in the adopted budget. Revenues overall were $758,641 lower than budgeted. The pandemic had a significant negative effect on Parks and Recreation program revenue ($784,669), Hotel/Motel tax revenue ($387,933) and Property Tax revenue ($120,746). Building permit revenue, however, was actually higher than what was budgeted by $235,849, and interest revenue was higher by $421,795. All other revenue in the General Fund netted to an additional loss of $122,937 compared to budgeted revenue.
Departments were directed at final amendment time in FY 2019/20 to do everything possible to lower expenses to offset the revenue reduction caused by the pandemic. Actual FY 2019/20 expenses were $5,152,745 lower than the FY 2019/20 adjusted budget. The largest reductions were in Parks and Recreation ($576,749), Law Enforcement ($576,010), Fire Safety ($200,411), and the transfer of Hotel/Motel tax revenue to the Hotel/Motel Tax fund ($387,933). Savings across all other departments totaled $3,411,642.
Of the $4.4 million additional General Fund balance, approximately $2.9 million has been earmarked for incomplete FY 2019/20 projects that have been carried over into the FY 2020/21 adjusted budget. These projects include funding for the Downtown Plaza ($1,100,000), the Auditorium HVAC system ($400,000), the City Hall security system ($274,515), the new Homewood clubhouse ($250,000), the Climate Action Plan ($130,000), and the Comprehensive Plan update ($80,735), as well as a number of smaller expenditures. Excluding the carryovers, a balance of approximately $1.5 million remains, which is available for programming into the FY 2020/21 adjusted budget.
The Council could decide to use some amount of this additional balance to subsidize operating costs, thereby lowering property tax rates in FY 2021/22. This strategy, however, would only lead to a larger increase in the following year when this one-time balance would
2 need to be replaced with a more permanent revenue source. Therefore, staff recommends that the one-time available balance be used for one-time expenses. The City Manager will present a list of potential projects that could be funded using this balance during the budget review. Please note that in addition to the $1.5 million noted above, there remains a fund balance in excess of the Council-approved minimum balance that is adequate to mitigate contingencies, such as the loss of state replacement tax per Council direction given during the FY 2020/21 budget process.
CYRIDE
Though COVID-19 has caused a significant reduction ridership of CyRide, there were offsetting reductions in expenses and additional revenue available through the CARES Act. The Transit Board is expected to ask for minimal or no increase in property tax funding for FY 2020/21.
PARKS AND RECREATION
Continuing to maintain service levels has been difficult with facility closures, program cancellations, and budget concerns. In response to these difficulties, Parks and Recreation offered outdoor fitness classes which were very popular, virtual programs were started and continue to happen, seasonal part-time staff were not hired and full-time staff were redeployed to fill the gaps, and facility hours were reduced as possible. Modifications were made at all facilities with pre-registration being required for lap swim, open gym, and public skate in order to better control the number of participants in each session. The Ames/ISU Ice Arena has been hit hard as user groups have reduced their rental hours or have cancelled programs altogether. Staff will continue to explore ways to best serve Ames residents during this pandemic.
RESOURCE RECOVERY
After several years of flat fees, the Resource Recovery Plant increased tipping fees from $52.75 per ton to $55.00 per ton on July 1, 2017 and to $58.75 per ton on July 1, 2019. The per capita fee charged to participating communities was increased from $9.10 to $10.50 beginning January 1, 2018. These fee increases primarily offset the general increase in operating costs and the loss of revenue due to reduced capacity to burn refuse derived fuel (RDF) at the Power Plant.
The Resource Recovery Plant was impacted by reduced capacity to burn RDF in the Electric Power Plant boilers. The Electric Power Plant has plans to bring its primary Unit 8 boiler, which has been off-line since 2019, back on-line in FY 2021/22. This will allow for more RDF to be utilized, which will increase the revenue from tipping fees, recycled metal sales, and RDF sales. Though these two utilities operate as separate enterprises, they work closely together and have developed a new formula for RDF that will provide a more stable revenue source for Resource Recovery. To address the inconsistency in RDF revenue, staffs from Electric Services and Resource Recovery have developed a payment formula based on an operational average delivery of 2,500 tons of RDF per month to the power plant. This baseline of 2,500 tons per month equates to $900,000 RDF revenue per year for budgeting purposes.
3
This adjustment in RDF payment still does not provide adequate funding for Resource Recovery operational and capital needs over our five-year planning period. To better provide for these needs and to maintain an adequate on-going fund balance, the current tipping fee of $58.75 per ton is expected to be increased by $3.75 per ton to $62.50 per ton in FY 2022/23. It is anticipated with the new census that per capita revenue will increase approximately $250,000 to $1,071,000 per year beginning in 2020/21. However, as the proposed 2020/21 budget continues to be refined it may be necessary to move forward the proposed increase in the tipping fee from FY 2022/23 to FY 2021/22.
PARKING
The Parking Fund has experienced significant negative impact due to COVID-19. The large reduction in events, retail activity, and more employees working from home has resulted in significant reductions in all revenue sources for the Parking Fund.
The recent policy decision to increase parking fees and begin transferring funds to a Parking Capital reserve has resulted in less fund balance available to help absorb the reductions in revenue. For both FY 2020/21 and FY 2021/22 it appears that the parking system will not generate adequate excess revenue to transfer funds to the Parking Capital Reserve and improvements planned for that fund will be delayed. We are not recommending fee increases for parking and, if needed, the City will utilize funds currently in the Parking Capital Reserve to cover possible shortfalls in the operations fund.
HOTEL/MOTEL TAX FUND
The hospitality industry has been one of the most impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic. With far less travel and events, overnight visitors and associated tax revenue are a fraction of what we would expect in a typical year. With a little over 70% of the Hotel/Motel Tax revenue being passed through to the Ames Convention and Visitors Bureau, most of the loss of revenue to the City is offset by a reduction in expenses. The City has maintained a strong balance in the Hotel/Motel Tax fund and is able to continue to fund all planned expenses and have a balance available to fund one-time expenditures if needed.
FIRE AND POLICE RETIREMENT AND IPERS
-MFPRSI The City contribution rate to the Municipal Fire and Police Retirement System of Iowa (MFPRSI) will be slightly higher. The current rate is 25.11% of covered wages and will be 26.18% for FY 2021/22. The rate remains well above the City’s minimum contribution rate of 17% and is expected to remain so in the foreseeable future. The retirement system has made changes to reduce the volatility in contribution rates and systematically improve the funded status of the pension plan. This has resulted in City contribution rates of around 25% for the past five years. We expect City contribution rates to remain around 25% for the next several years. The employee contribution share remains fixed at 9.40%.
4
-IPERS The City contribution rate to the Iowa Public Employee Retirement System (IPERS) will be unchanged. The current rate is 9.44% of covered wages and will remain at 9.44% for FY 2021/22. The employee contribution will also remain at 6.29% with the fixed 60/40 sharing of the pension cost.
HEALTH INSURANCE
For several years, the City of Ames experienced health insurance increases between 5% and 9% per year. With recent favorable claims experience and a strong self-insured fund balance, we were able reduce the rate of increase to 3.9% rate for FY 2020/21. For FY 2021/22 we are planning to increase self-insured premium rates by 5.0%. With the planned rate increase we expect a modest draw down in the health plan fund balance. Even with a planned draw-down the balance will remain well above the required levels to maintain a self- insured plan and provide an adequate balance to fund possible claims fluctuations.
ROLLBACK AND VALUATION
Since 1978, residential and agricultural property has been subject to an assessment limitation order, or “rollback,” that limits annual growth of property values (all other classes of property were eventually added). For each assessment year beginning in 2013, residential and agricultural property value growth is capped at 3%, or whichever is lowest between the two classes (the coupling provision remains).
Commercial, industrial, and railway property have their own rollback, which began at 95% for valuations established during the 2013 assessment year (affecting FY 2014/15) and 90% for the 2014 assessment year and thereafter. The rollback percentage for these properties will remain fixed at 90%, regardless of how fast or slow valuations grow.
The legislature created a standing appropriation beginning in FY 2014/15, to reimburse local governments for the property tax reductions resulting from the new rollback for commercial and industrial property (railroad not included). The “backfill” was funded by the legislature for the current fiscal year, future backfill appropriations are capped at the FY 2015/16 level. The FY 2020/21 budget assumed a 5% reduction in replacement tax, this reduction did not occur, however, a larger portion of the replacement tax has been allocated to property included in TIF districts. The FY 2021/22 budget will include a full appropriation of replacement tax, but with a larger portion allocated to TIF, the replacement tax will be reduced by approximately 4%. Since the reduction is due to allocation to property subject to TIF, all the reduction will be in the debt service levy and fund balance and savings will be available to fully offset the reduction.
A new property class was established for multi-residential property, which first took effect in FY 2016/17. For buildings that are not otherwise classified as residential property, the definition of multi-residential property is broad and includes:
• Mobile home parks • Manufactured home communities
5 • Land-leased communities • Assisted living facilities • Property primarily used or intended for human habitation containing three or more separate living quarters
The following rollback percentages will be phased in over eight years, beginning in budget FY 2016/17. There is no backfill provision for this class and with an estimated valuation of $124.7 million in Ames the reduction of property tax dollars will be approximately $47,450 in FY 2021/22.
Multi-Residential Property Rollback Schedule January 1, 2015 86.25% January 1, 2016 82.50% January 1, 2017 78.75% January 1, 2018 75.00% January 1, 2019 71.25% January 1, 2020 67.50% January 1, 2021 63.75% January 1, 2022 and thereafter same as residential
The rollback for residential property will increase from 55.07% of taxable value to 56.41% for FY 2021/22. This change in the rollback will result in a small shift of property taxes to the residential class from the commercial and industrial classifications.
Rollback Percentage Rates Property Class FY 18-19 FY 19-20 FY 20-21 FY 21-22 Residential 55.6209 56.9180 55.0743 56.4094 Com. & Ind. 90.0000 90.0000 90.0000 90.0000
LOCAL OPTION SALES TAX
Local Option Sales Tax receipts received a boost in FY 2020/21 due primarily to the November 2020 adjustment payment of just over $1,500,000 for the year ended June 30, 2020. The Iowa Department of Revenue began collection of sales tax on internet transactions beginning January 1, 2019 and started making distributions of internet sales tax collections in late spring of 2019 based on estimates. The Iowa Department of Revenue estimate for current year local option tax is very close to our budgeted amount, but with the large adjustment payment catching up on prior year sales we do have additional fund balance available for one time uses. We are forecasting 5% growth in local option sales tax revenue for FY 2021/22.
A summary of the Local Option Sales Tax Fund with some illustrative options for the FY 2021/22 budget is included in Attachment 1 of this document and is by no means a recommendation for the upcoming budget. Though we do not need specific budget decisions at this time, staff is requesting Council direction on funding levels for ASSET, COTA, and other outside organizations.
6
ASSET HUMAN SERVICES FUNDING
The City Council adopted the following priorities for human services funding in FY 2021/22 (note: priority categories AND sub-bullets are in priority order).
#1 Meet basic needs, with emphasis on low to moderate income: • Quality childcare cost offset programs, including daycare and State of Iowa licensed in-home facilities • Food cost offset programs to assist in providing nutritious perishables and staples • Medical and dental services • Housing cost offset programs, including utility assistance • Sheltering • Transportation cost offset programs • Legal assistance • Disaster response
#2 Meet mental health and chemical dependency needs: • Ensure substance abuse prevention and treatment is available in the community • Provide outpatient emergency access to services • Provide crisis intervention services • Provide access to non-emergency services
#3 Youth development services and activities: • Skill development and enhancement • Summer enrichment/prevention of loss of learning
The following table summarizes each year’s ASSET allocations by funder. It is important to note that Central Iowa Community Services (CICS) withdrew as an ASSET funder effective July 1, 2020. CICS continues to fund services; however, CICS funding is now accounted for separately from the ASSET process.
ISU City Story Student Budgeted City % County CICS United Way Gov’t. Amount Increase Total 2015/16 879,857 349,856 1,002,833 167,339 1,212,375 6.4% 3,612,260 2016/17 1,031,870 430,718 1,084,827 178,882 1,278,973 5.5% 4,005,270 2017/18 1,072,156 448,724 1,193,303 194,430 1,355,711 6.2% 4,264,324 2018/19 1,142,625 602,229 1,228,443 194,430 1,423,497 5.0% 4,591,224 2019/20 1,461,105 477,792 1,265,293 194,430 1,466,202 3.0% 4,864,822 2020/21 1,534,160 0 1,265,293 211,000 1,524,850 4.0% 4,535,303
The prior budget year is not the only way to evaluate the amount to budget for the next fiscal year. The amount budgeted at this time each year can vary if the volunteers do not recommend funding the entire amount authorized by the City Council. Additionally, the amount contracted with agencies is often not entirely drawn down each year. In FY 2019/20, $18,390 (1.2%) of the City allocation was not drawn down by agencies. However, contributing to this was the way in which the COVID-19 pandemic impacted ASSET
7 agencies and their delivery of services. Some agencies temporarily closed their doors while others provided services telephonically, virtually, and/or on a very limited in-person basis. Funds in the amount of $50,835 were carried over into FY 2020/21 by University Community Childcare and Youth and Shelter Services, and are excluded in the amount listed above.
FY 2019/20 City Funds FY 2020/21 City Funds FY 2021/22 Requested Budgeted Contracted Requested Budgeted Contracted Requested
1,667,899 1,466,202 $1,466,202 1,625,097 1,524,850 1,524,850* 1,740,209
*In FY 2020/21, $95,000 had been allocated to MICA for the Dental Clinic. This amount was not included in their contract for services as they had closed the Dental Clinic in March 2020. The services are being transitioned to Primary Health Care and they requested the $95,000 to assist with Dental Clinic equipment expenditures for 6 operatories. City Council has approved this request and agreement for FY 2020/21.
For FY 2021/22, City ASSET funds requested by agencies total $1,740,209, up $215,359 or 14.12% over the current FY 2020/21 contracted services of $1,524,850.
The following requests are noteworthy for the City Council:
• Ames Community Preschool Center (Day Care - Infant, Children, and School Age) – ACPC has requested a 17% increase in City funds for all levels of day care services ($131,150 requested). The City allocated a total of $112,128 in FY 2020/21. ACPC is in their third year of offering families four categories of tuition assistance with the greater assistance going to families with higher financial needs. While enrollment dropped the second half of FY 2019/20 due to the pandemic, the percentage of families needing to utilize the sliding fee scale increased. Additional funding from ASSET could increase the quantity of families served as well as increase the level of support provided to each child.
• Bridge Home/formerly known as Emergency Residence Project (Emergency Shelter and Rapid Re-housing Service Coordination) – Bridge Home has requested a substantial increase for its Emergency Shelter and Service Coordination. Bridge Home continues providing most of its sheltering in hotels due to the pandemic and the need to safely maintain social distancing for clients. This form of sheltering increases costs and given the unknowns with the pandemic, Bridge Home’s shelter request for FY 2021/22 is $100,883 compared to the FY 2020/21 City allocation of $80,706 (25% increase). In FY 2020/21, the City also allocated $4,470 in service coordination and the FY 2021/22 request increased to $6,013 (135% increase) for this service. The increase in request is because 70% of the clients served in this program are Ames/Story County residents. Bridge Home’s requests to United Way and Story County also reflect substantial increases.
• Good Neighbor (Emergency Assistance for Basic Material Needs) – Good Neighbor has requested an increase for its Emergency Assistance for Basic Material Needs which is rent and utility assistance. In FY 2019/20, the City allocated $16,259 for this program. Good Neighbor is requesting $24,100 (48% increase). Issues that Good Neighbor encounters with the clients they are serving include the lack of a living
8 wage and/or affordable childcare, poor physical health conditions, mental health and addiction problems. The organization coordinates services with local churches and other entities. It utilizes 67% of their ASSET funds on basic needs for rent and utilities.
• HIRTA (Transportation - City) - HIRTA is requesting $130,000 from the City, which is a 225% increase over the current year allocation of $40,993. The funding HIRTA has been receiving from the City through the ASSET process goes towards providing general transportation services to City residents for rides within the City limits of Ames as well as out of town trips to communities such as Boone, Nevada, Story City, and Des Moines.
Prior to FY 2020/21, HIRTA had been supplementing the cost of rides with federal transit funds (FTA) and this is what kept the request to the City at a consistently low amount between $38,000 - $40,000 annually. HIRTA received clarification last summer that the FTA could no longer be used to supplement rides provided within City limits since the City’s transit system, CyRide, also receives FTA funds. Therefore, HIRTA’s FTA funds need to be used in the rural areas.
CyRide has contracted with HIRTA for over ten years to provide the Dial-A-Ride (DAR) paratransit service. In reviewing the FY 2021/22 ASSET budget submitted by HIRTA, cost comparisons were made with the DAR contract as many of the riders on HIRTA’s general transportation service could qualify for DAR.
FY 2020/21 FY 2020/21 FY 2021/22 FY 2021/22 ASSET Contract DAR Contract ASSET Request Proposed DAR Contract $40,993 $175,000 $130,000 $175,000 (budgeted) (budgeted)
$17.27 per ride $16.50 per ride* $17.46 per ride $21.52 per ride* Passenger charge: Passenger charge: Passenger charge Passenger charge: $2.50 in town $2.00 in town (anticipated): $2.00 in town $5.00 out of town Out of town - NA $2.50 in town Out of town - NA $5.00 out of town *The DAR contract with HIRTA allows CyRide to access federal funds that offset the cost of the ride by 80%.
HIRTA’s increase in their ASSET request is to address the loss of FTA funds that they can no longer use towards in town rides. However, CyRide also receives FTA funds and is able to offset DAR costs through their contract with HIRTA and could serve additional riders as City staff believes there are general transportation service riders on HIRTA that could qualify for DAR and receive their transportation at a lower cost.
For those rides that are provided outside of the Ames city limits, HIRTA continues to use FTA funds to supplement these rides and is a transportation option for Ames residents as CyRide does not provide this level of service. A review of claims from prior years submitted to the City for reimbursement shows that there are
9 approximately 80 rides provided per month to Ames residents needing transportation to communities surrounding Ames, so funding through the ASSET contract would need to continue as the be needed to support these rides.
It is important to find the right service options (paid for by either CyRide or ASSET) for riders and avoid duplication so the investment in transportation across all funding sources can be maximized.
• Primary Health Care (PHC) (Dental Services) – PHC is a new agency to the ASSET process for FY 2021/22, and its funding request is for dental services. Dental services were previously provided through the MICA Dental Clinic which closed in March 2020. The two agencies have been working together to ensure a smooth transition for services and clients. Since the new Dental Clinic will be co-located with PHC’s medical clinic, PHC anticipates serving up to 2,400 clients within the first full year of providing dental services. PHC is requesting $95,000 which is the same amount of funds that was originally allocated to MICA for dental services in FY 2020/21, but was subsequently withheld from its contract as the Dental Clinic closed.
• Wings of Refuge – Wings of Refuge is another new agency to ASSET. They provide housing and employment support to female victims of sex trafficking. Although approved to be in the ASSET process beginning FY 2021/22, Wings of Refuge decided not to request funds at this time.
• YWCA (Youth Development/Mentoring, Advocacy/Parent and Student Support, Advocacy Against Student Discrimination) – YWCA has participated in the ASSET process for over 20 years and has consistently requested and received funding from United Way. YWCA has also been recognized as a student organization at Iowa State University and has received funding from ISU Student Government. Approximately a year ago, YWCA was notified by ISU Student Government that it would be transitioning YWCA from a student organization to the ASSET process effective July 1, 2021. In anticipation of a reduction in funding from ISU Student Government and other sources, YWCA is requesting funds from both the City and County for the first time. The request to the City is $15,000 ($5,000 for each service).
In previous budgeting cycles, the City Council has requested information as to which services indicated clients were turned away due to a lack of funding. For FY 2021/22, there are 71 individual services for which agencies have requested City funding. The table below shows the breakdown of whether clients were turned away in the last full fiscal year and reasons for being turned away.
Agency Response to Whether Clients Were Turned Away # of Services No clients turned away 45 Clients turned away 19 Clients turned away because service unavailable due to COVID-19 7 No information provided regarding clients turned away 2 Some clients turned away due to ineligibility under criteria or rules violations 5 No clients turned away, but other sources of funding used or services curtailed 3 No data – new service/new request to the City 2
10
The “Clients turned away” category above includes services where there is a waiting list. However, many of the services were impacted the last quarter of FY 2019/20 due to COVID- 19. This created challenges with determining the number of individuals turned away from services since several agencies either temporarily closed, offered services via a virtual platform, or limited capacity for social distancing purposes.
In addition to the amount authorized for human services programs, the City will also budget its share of the ASSET administrative expenses. The City’s estimated share for these expenses in FY 2021/22 is $7,100.
Last year, the City Council authorized a 4% increase in funding. The table below indicates allocation options based on the percentage increases from the FY 2020/21 contracted amount of $1,524,850.
Increase from Current Dollar Increase Total City Funding Authorized 0% 0 1,524,850 1% 15,249 1,540,098 5% 76,243 1,601,093 14.12% (request) 215,359 1,740,209 + ASSET Admin. Share 7,100 In addition to services
The attached spreadsheet (Attachment 2) indicates the services requested from the City compared to the current year.
COTA – PERFORMANCE ARTS FUNDING
The Commission on the Arts (COTA) allocation for FY 2020/21 is $183,898. This was an 8.9% increase compared to the allocation for FY 2019/20. For FY 2021/22, COTA organizations have requested funding in the amount of $218,175 (excluding special spring and fall grants). This is an 18.6% ($34,277) increase from the FY 2020/21 appropriation.
A total of 16 organizations submitted applications for funding this year, compared to 18 in FY 2020/21. Applications were not received from the Ames Chapter of the Des Moines Metro Opera Guild, Central Iowa Touring Ensemble, or Co’Motion Dance Theater. These organizations received funding in FY 2020/21. An application was received from Friends of Ames Strings, which did not receive grant funds in FY 2020/21.
As always, a range of options is available for establishing an authorized allocation for FY 2021/22. It should be noted that the amount authorized by the City Council is used entirely by COTA. COTA sets aside a portion of the funds authorized by the Council for Special Project Grant funds to distribute later in the year.
Increase from Current Dollar Increase Amount Authorized
11 0% - 183,898 1% 1,839 185,737 5% 9,195 193,093 18.6% (request) 34,277 218,175
FUNDING REQUESTS FROM OUTSIDE ORGANIZATIONS
City staff accepts applications from outside organizations wishing to receive funds for their organizations’ operations (attached). The City Council has exempted the Ames Economic Development Commission’s business development partnership, the Ames/ISU Sustainability Coordinator and the Ames Human Relations Commission from this process, since those activities are conducted in an official capacity on behalf of the City government.
Funds for these programs come from two sources. The Hotel/Motel Tax Fund supports the workforce development activities undertaken by the Ames Economic Development Commission. Requests from other outside organizations are supported with funds from the Local Option Sales Tax Fund.
During the February 2020 Budget Wrap-Up meeting, the City Council adopted a new policy regarding reimbursement for parking meters that are closed for special events. The policy indicates that parking will no longer be waived, effective July 1, 2020. Instead, event organizers must reimburse the Parking Fund for lost revenue. The City Council included $5,738 in Local Option Sales Tax funds in FY 2020/21 to cover these costs for FY 2020/21, since the parking reimbursement policy became effective after organizers had submitted their budget requests.
The total amount allocated for these requests in FY 2020/21 was $226,112. The types of request and sources of funds are broken down in the following table:
Purpose Source Allocation General Outside Funding Requests Local Option Sales Tax Fund 205,374 Parking Waivers Local Option Sales Tax Fund 5,738 Local Option Sales Tax Fund Total 211,112 AEDC Workforce Initiatives Hotel/Motel Tax Fund 15,000 TOTAL 226,112
The total FY 2021/22 request is $246,251, which is an 8.9% increase over the FY 2020/21 operating request total. There is no change in the portion of the requests that would be financed from the Hotel/Motel Tax Fund in FY 2021/22 ($15,000). The portion of the requests that would be financed from the Local Option Sales Tax Fund totals $231,251 for FY 2021/22, which is a 9.5% increase over the amount budgeted in the current year from Local Option funds ($211,112).
Organization/Program FY 2020/21 FY 2021/22 % Change Adopted Request Ames Historical Society 46,927 46,927 - Ames International Partner City Assn. 5,525 5,800 5.0% Campustown Action Assn. 35,168 36,000 2.4% Hunziker Youth Sports Complex 31,876 45,000 41.2%
12 Ames Main Street 50,035 50,035 - Story County Housing Trust Fund 35,843 35,000 -2.4% Ames Main Street Farmers’ Market - 7,000 n/a Ames Main Street (Parking Waivers) 5,496 5,489 -0.1% CAA (Parking Waivers) 242 - -100% AEDC Workforce Development* 15,000 15,000 - TOTAL $ 226,112 $ 246,251 8.9%
*funded from Hotel/Motel Tax Fund balance
Highlights from the requests are summarized below:
• Hunziker Youth Sports Complex – HYSC funding has remained relatively level for the past several years (current year allocation = $31,876). HYSC is requesting a substantial increase in FY 2021/22, for a total of $45,000. HYSC indicates the increase will help offset additional expenses for maintenance of additional fields and green space for warmups. This additional space will improve the ability of the organization to host more games and tournaments. HYSC also indicates the COVID-19 pandemic has caused a substantial loss of revenue in the current year.
• Ames Main Street Farmers’ Market – This is a new request for $7,000. The Farmers’ Market is asking for City funds to support musical entertainment, a petting zoo, cooking contest, pony rides, and other market expenses.
The past practice has been to include the amount approved for the prior fiscal year in the recommended budget. The City Council is not being asked to evaluate or approve the merits of these requests at this time. Instead, City staff is seeking direction from the City Council regarding a total amount of Local Option Sales Tax funds available to be allocated for the coming year, including reimbursement for parking meter closures. The applications will be reviewed by staff with that budget authority in mind, and recommendations will be made to the City Council. As with other funding processes, a variety of options are available to the City Council:
Increase from Current ($211,112) Dollar Increase Amount Authorized 1% 2,111 213,223 5% 10,556 221,668 9.5% (all requests)* 20,139 231,251
*excludes the AEDC request, which would be funded from the Hotel/Motel Tax Fund
PUBLIC ART COMMISSION
City Council will receive the Public Art Commission’s request for funding for FY 2021/22 in January. The funding level of $46,000 adopted for FY 2020/21 is currently included as the FY 2021/22 allocation for projecting the Local Option Sales Tax Fund balance.
ROAD CONDITIONS/ROAD USE TAX FUND
In our annual Resident Satisfaction Survey's ranking of capital improvement priorities, the reconstruction of existing streets is the top priority for our residents. This represents a
13 challenge, since the lane-miles of streets continue to expand, existing streets continue to age, and recent winters have been particularly hard on our roadways.
The Road Use Tax Fund (RUTF) is accumulated through motor vehicle registration fees, motor vehicle fuel taxes, an excise tax imposed on the rental of automobiles, and a use tax on trailers. The RUTF revenue is restricted in use and the City uses the funds for operations and maintenance of street rights-of-way as well as capital improvements.
The Road Use Tax receipts fell initially with the COVID-19 outbreak but quickly recovered. The DOT is currently forecasting that RUTF distributions will be lower in FY 2020/21 and are not yet making full forecasts for FY 2021/22. The DOT forecasted a RUTF distribution of $7,429,500 for FY 2019/20. After an initial slowdown with the COVID-19 outbreak, RUT receipts rebounded with lower fuel prices and we ended the year well above budget at $7,961,955. The adopted budget for FY 2020/21 is $7,488,555 and though current revenue is tracking lower than the prior year, we are still forecasting to make the budgeted revenue number.
The FY 2021/22 distributions will be based on the 2020 census and if Ames has a higher relative population growth, we will receive a greater percentage of the distribution. We are currently forecasting Road Use Tax revenue of $7,835,270 for FY 2021/22, or about 4.6% over our current year. This number is in line with our long-term planning for the fund. Past experience has indicated that actual receipts are impacted by fuel prices and general economic activity. Lower fuel prices are expected to continue, the impact of reduced general economic activity is still an unknown so we will continue to closely monitor expenses and revenue for this fund.
TOWN BUDGET MEETING
On November 5, 2020, the annual Town Budget Meeting was held for the first time in a virtual format. Minutes from the meeting are included as Attachment 3 to this document.
City Council’s Input (Given the information provided, the City Council’s input is requested.)
Service Level Increases
Service Level Decreases
Other Issues
14
15 Attachment 1
LOCAL OPTION SALES TAX FUND SUMMARY
+5% ASSET/COTA FY 20/21 FY 20/21 FY 21/22 Adopted Adjusted Estimated Revenues Local Option Sales Tax $ 8,577,268 $ 10,351,680 $ 8,920,360 Transfer from Hotel/Motel 144,200 31,531 144,200 Grants - - - Other Revenue - - - Total Revenues 8,721,468 10,383,211 9,064,560
Transfers Ice Arena 20,000 20,000 20,000 Park Development 100,000 100,000 100,000 60% Property Tax Relief 5,146,361 6,211,008 5,352,216 Total Transfers 5,266,361 6,331,008 5,472,216
Expenses Human Service Agencies 1,524,850 1,480,685 1,601,093 Commission on the Arts 183,898 183,898 193,093 City Council Spec. Alloc. 208,374 223,874 200,000 Human Services Admin 26,363 26,059 24,727 Public Art 46,000 100,940 46,000 Municipal Band 31,882 11,535 31,882 Event Parking Subsidy 5,738 5,738 - Total Expenses 2,027,105 2,032,729 2,096,795
Net Increase/(Decrease) 1,428,002 2,019,474 1,495,549
Beginning Balance 2,061,120 7,136,101 2,554,991
Available for CIP 3,489,122 9,155,575 4,050,540
CIP Projects 1,905,750 6,600,584 1,651,800
Ending Balance 1,583,372 2,554,991 2,398,740
Minimum Fund Bal. Rsv. 1,013,214 2,188,328 967,149
Avail Un-Resv Fund Bal. $ 570,158 $ 1,431,591 Attachment 2
City of Ames Service Statistics 21/22 21/22 Proposed Proposed Contracted Units of Cost per Agency Service Index 20/21 Request 21/22 Service Unit of Service Unit Clients Turned Away in 19/20
ACCESS Emergency Shelter 2.08 $ 54,739 $ 57,476 2,190 24 Hr Period Food/Shelter $ 127.00 COVID-19 impacted service delivery. 137 turned away due to service being at capacity. ACCESS Domestic Abuse Crisis and Support 3.07 $ 29,285 $ 30,749 2,500 Staff Hour $ 102.00 0 ACCESS Sexual Abuse Crisis and Support 3.08 $ 7,815 $ 8,206 1,620 Staff Hour $ 103.00 0 ACCESS Battering Court watch 3.10 $ 5,818 $ 6,109 570 Staff Hour $ 102.00 0 ACCESS Public Education and Awareness 1.12 $ 3,906 $ 4,101 270 Staff Hour $ 101.00 0 $ 101,563 $ 106,641
COVID-19 impacted service delivery. There was a waiting list of approximately 50 families that has been exhausted. Most opted to keep children at home due to changes in work Ames Comm. Preschool Center Day Care - Infant 2.02 $ 7,946 $ 9,297 3,000 1 Full Day $ 71.72 schedules, household finances, etc. There are 6-8 families who may return in January 2021. COVID-19 impacted service delivery. Most opted to keep children at home due to changes in work schedules, household finances, etc. Previous waiting list was exhausted. There are 9 Ames Comm. Preschool Center Day Care - Children 2.03 $ 67,559 $ 79,004 23,750 1 Full Day $ 55.51 families who may return in January 2021 COVID-19 impacted service delivery. Up until March 2020 there were waiting lists at all Ames Comm. Preschool Center Day Care - School Age 2.04 $ 36,623 $ 42,849 48,075 1 Partial Day (3 hrs) $ 15.94 sites. Serving at a reduced capacity but there are openings. $ 112,128 $ 131,150
All Aboard for Kids Out of School Program 1.09 $ 2,714 $ 3,000 350 1 Partial Day (3 hrs) $ 74.29 2 individuals turned away due to elopement issues. $ 2,714 $ 3,000
American Red Cross Disaster Services Program 2.12 $ 9,933 $ 10,000 60 Staff Hour $ 1,637.95 0 $ 9,933 $ 10,000
COVID-19 impacted service delivery. Club was closed March 17 - July 6. Would normally Boys and Girls Club Youth Development and Social Adjustment - Daily Program 1.07 $ 116,724 $ 116,724 16,800 Client Contact/Day $ 35.21 serve 250-300 children. $ 116,724 $ 116,724
Campfire Day Care- School Age 2.04 $ 2,410 $ 2,000 4,500 1 Partial Day (3 hrs) $ 59.20 COVID-19 impacted service delivery. There was a waiting list of 8 youth each week. Campfire Day Care - School Age - Scholarships 2.04 $ 5,360 $ 3,500 341 1 Partial Day (3 hrs) $ 103.09 $ 7,770 $ 5,500
Center for Creative Justice Correctional Services - Probation Supervision 2.09 $ 61,244 $ 64,306 3,870 Client Hour $ 72.06 0 $ 61,244 $ 64,306
Agency reported keeping a waiting list of families looking for childcare services and reviewed list at least monthly. But did not capture the number of qualifying families that ChildServe Day Care - Infant 2.02 $ 6,000 $ 6,000 7,758 1 Full Day $ 57.51 were turned away. Agency reported keeping a waiting list of families looking for childcare services and reviewed list at least monthly. But did not capture the number of qualifying families that ChildServe Day Care - Children 2.03 $ 15,000 $ 15,000 17,375 1 Full Day $ 49.84 were turned away. $ 21,000 $ 21,000
Bridge Home Rapid Re-Housing Emerg. Assistance for Basic Needs 2.01 $ 6,712 $ 3,495 311 Client Contact $ 91.41 0
COVID-19 impacted service delivery. As of March, clients were served in hotel rooms rather than the shelter in order to ensure social distancing. 73 families/individuals were turned away from shelter as follows: 67 due to unavailable shelter space; 1 maxed out length Bridge Home Emergency Shelter 2.08 $ 80,706 $ 100,883 10,411 24 Hr Period Food/Shelter $ 39.28 of stay at shelter; 5 were ineligible for services (ie, no trespass order). Bridge Home Transitional Housing 2.07 $ 15,956 $ 19,945 5,183 1 Full Day $ 23.00 0 Bridge Home Rapid Re-Housing Service Coordination 3.13 $ 4,470 $ 10,483 3,831 Client Hour $ 22.26 0 $ 107,844 $ 134,806
Between September 24, 2019 - November 5, 2019 14 households were turned away due to Good Neighbor Emergency Assistance for Basic Material Needs 2.01 $ 20,349 $ 22,384 3,068 Client Contact $ 80.72 significant numbers of requests and lower-than-usual donations. Good Neighbor Healthy Food Vouchers 2.01 $ 5,500 $ 6,050 3,068 Client Contact $ 20.44 0 $ 25,849 $ 28,434
Heartland Senior Services Day Care - Adults , Adult Day Center 3.02 $ 61,852 $ 61,852 3,900 Client Day $ 79.87 COVID-19 impacted service delivery. Center temporarily closed. Heartland Senior Services Congregate Meals 3.06 $ 25,134 $ 25,134 3,800 Meals $ 18.27 COVID-19 impacted service delivery. Clients receiving HDM instead. Heartland Senior Services Home Delivered Meals 3.05 $ 15,690 $ 16,475 42,500 Meals $ 6.38 0 Heartland Senior Services Home Delivered Meals Under 60 Program 3.05 $ 2,060 $ 2,060 750 Meals $ 8.79 0 Attachment 2
City of Ames Service Statistics 21/22 21/22 Proposed Proposed Contracted Units of Cost per Agency Service Index 20/21 Request 21/22 Service Unit of Service Unit Clients Turned Away in 19/20 Heartland Senior Services Senior Food Program 2.01 $ 4,400 $ 4,400 1,390 Client Contact $ 9.52 0 Heartland Senior Services Service Coordination - Outreach 3.13 $ 45,915 $ 45,915 2,100 Client Hour $ 69.94 0 Heartland Senior Services Activity and Resource Center 3.14 $ 40,080 $ 40,080 5,700 Client Contact $ 13.99 COVID-19 impacted service delivery. Activities not being provided at this time. $ 195,131 $ 195,916
Agency reported not being able to meet 380 requests due to budget cuts with lower driver HIRTA Transportation - City 2.13 $ 40,993 $ 130,254 17,835 One-Way Trip $ 17.46 staff and full schedules.
$ 40,993 $ 130,254
Legal Aid Legal Aid - Society , Legal Aid - Civil 2.10 $ 101,432 $ 127,000 3,700 Staff Hour $ 90.74 0 $ 101,432 $ 127,000
Lutheran Services in Iowa Crisis Intervention , Crisis Child Care 3.09 $ 5,700 $ 5,700 60 Contacts $ 822.52 21 families due to not having space in provider's homes and DHS requirements. $ 5,700 $ 5,700
Mary Greeley Home Health Services Community Clinics and Health Education 3.01 $ 17,512 $ 18,000 4,500 Clinic Hour $ 100.02 0 Mary Greeley Home Health Services In-Home Health Assistance 3.04 $ 15,962 $ 16,300 7,600 Hours $ 60.89 0 $ 33,474 $ 34,300
MICA Community Clinics - Child Dental 3.01 $ 1,650 $ 1,650 55 Clinic Hour $ 212.91 0 MICA Community Clinics - Fluoride Varnish 3.01 $ 825 $ 825 572 Clinic Hour $ 66.70 0 MICA Food Pantry 2.01 $ 22,562 $ 27,796 7,375 Client Contact $ 20.05 0
MICA Dental Clinic (funds allocated to Primary Health Care for equipment) $ 95,000 $ - - 0 $ - Dental Clinic closed March 2020. Primary Health Care will be providing the services. $ 120,037 $ 30,271
NAMI Public Education and Awareness 1.12 $ 7,200 $ 7,250 2,200 Staff Hour $ 39.58 0 $ 7,200 $ 7,250
Primary Health Care Dental Clinic 3.01 $ - $ 95,000 3,600 Clinic Hours $ 238.49 $ - $ 95,000
Raising Readers Thrive by Five 1.10 $ 10,937 $ 12,031 2,930 Client Hour $ 22.06 COVID-19 impacted service delivery. Raising Readers Out-of-School Time Learning 1.10 $ 14,666 $ 16,133 900 Client Hour $ 104.50 0 $ 25,603 $ 28,164
RSVP Disaster Services - Volunteer Management for Emergencies 2.12 $ 7,050 $ 7,300 500 Staff Hour $ 30.43 0 RSVP Transportation 2.13 $ 1,400 $ 1,500 1,650 One-Way Trip $ 18.76 0 RSVP Volunteer Management 1.11 $ 23,214 $ 24,000 37,000 Volunteer Hour $ 4.13 0 $ 31,664 $ 32,800
The Arc of Story County Special Recreation - Active Lifestyles 3.19 $ 5,320 $ 5,300 8,200 Participant Hour $ 8.64 COVID-19 impacted service delivery The Arc of Story County Respite Care 3.11 $ 4,000 $ 4,000 700 Client Hour $ 17.14 COVID-19 impacted service delivery The Arc of Story County Service Coordination 3.13 $ 1,400 $ 1,450 440 Client Hour $ 12.50 0 $ 10,720 $ 10,750
The Salvation Army Emergency Asst. for Basic Material Needs (Food Pantry) 2.01 $ 10,003 $ 10,303 2,580 Client Contact $ 237.94 0 1,089 requests were declined due to no available appointment times/no funds available; households who received help within the past year; reside outside of Story County, eviction in spite of assistance, failure to follow program requirements, and a pattern of reliance on The Salvation Army Emergency Asst. for Basic Material Needs (Homeless Prev) 2.01 $ 24,748 $ 25,490 180 Client Contact $ 444.86 emergency assistance. The Salvation Army Disaster Services 2.12 $ 911 $ 938 30 Staff Hour $ 373.70 0 13 clients are on the waiting list; unable to serve additional clients at this time due to limited The Salvation Army Representative Payee Services 2.14 $ 13,880 $ 14,296 2,050 Client Contact $ 36.93 staffing. $ 49,542 $ 51,027
Waiting list as of June 2020: 38 ISU student families and 45 non-student families. Occupancy was 92% for the year, based on licensed capacity. Let families know wait might University Community Childcare Child Care - Infant 2.02 $ 30,720 $ 31,149 3,120 Full Day $ 78.20 be 1 to 1.5 years or longer. Waiting list as of June 2020: 71 ISU student families and 76 non-student families. University Community Childcare Child Care - Children 2.03 $ 36,634 $ 40,297 8,320 Full Day $ 62.60 Occupancy was 90% for the year, based on licensed capacity. University Community Childcare Comfort Zone 2.05 $ 1,165 $ - - Partial Day $ - Agency not requesting funding for this service; plans to discontinue it. $ 68,519 $ 71,446 Attachment 2
City of Ames Service Statistics 21/22 21/22 Proposed Proposed Contracted Units of Cost per Agency Service Index 20/21 Request 21/22 Service Unit of Service Unit Clients Turned Away in 19/20
Volunteer Center of Story County Volunteer Management 1.11 $ 5,250 $ 6,450 2,350 Volunteer Hour $ 34.23 0 Volunteer Center of Story County Advocacy for Social Development 1.02 $ 2,400 $ 3,000 1,040 Volunteer Hour $ 21.97 0 $ 7,650 $ 9,450
YWCA Youth Development and Social Adjustment (Girl Power) 1.07 $ - $ 5,000 36,000 Client Contact/day $ 0.62 0 Advocacy for Social Development (Parent/Student Support) 1.02 $ - $ 5,000 1,800 Staff Hour $ 12.48 0 Advocacy for Social Development (Student Discrimination) 1.02 $ - $ 5,000 1,850 Staff Hour $ 12.14 0 $ - $ 15,000
Youth and Shelter Services Substance Abuse Treatment - Outpatient 3.16 $ 9,184 $ 9,184 650 Client Hour $ 195.77 0 Youth and Shelter Services Primary Treatment /Health Maintenance Family Counseling 3.17 $ 60,038 $ 63,040 6,700 Client Hour $ 149.27 0 8 clients were turned away due to no openings or not meeting eligibility guidelines. The Youth and Shelter Services Emergency Assistance for Basic Needs - TLP 2.01 $ 4,674 $ 6,500 2,600 Client Contact $ 38.00 Lighthouse Program closed by end of 2019.
18 clients were turned away due to appropriate gender bed unavailable, did not meet age Youth and Shelter Services Emergency Shelter - Rosedale 2.08 $ 32,442 $ 32,442 730 24 Hr Period Food/Shelter $ 297.88 criteria, actively suicidal or under the influence of a substance/needed hospitalization Youth and Shelter Services Rosedale Crisis 3.09 $ 5,240 $ 5,250 80 Contact $ 65.63 0 Youth and Shelter Services Storks Nest 2.11 $ 6,905 $ 7,250 540 Client Contact $ 149.46 0 58 youth on a waiting list at the end of the school year due to a variety of reasons such as referral for mentor occurs too late within the year, student with special needs and need to find mentor with certain skill set, no available mentors (scheduling conflicts, not completing Youth and Shelter Services Youth Dev and Social Adjustment - Mentoring 1.07 $ 29,589 $ 31,068 3,000 Client Contact/Day $ 67.99 screening process) Youth and Shelter Services Youth Dev and Social Adjustment - Community Youth Dev 1.07 $ 30,045 $ 31,547 1,952 Client Contact/Day $ 57.57 0 Youth and Shelter Services Employment Assistance for Youth - Skills 1.08 $ 19,934 $ 20,931 1,250 Staff Hour $ 30.08 0 Youth and Shelter Services Out of School Program - Summer Enrichment 1.09 $ 10,475 $ 10,999 11,000 Partial Day $ 7.99 0 Youth and Shelter Services Family Development/Education - Pathways, FADSS 1.10 $ 11,147 $ 11,704 2,600 Client Hour $ 38.01 0 Youth and Shelter Services Public Education/ Awareness 1.12 $ 32,514 $ 35,765 2,200 Staff Hour $ 74.33 0 Youth and Shelter Services Public Education/ Awareness - Child Safety 1.12 $ 8,229 $ 8,640 375 Staff Hour $ 69.49 0 $ 260,416 $ 274,320
TOTAL $ 1,524,850 $ 1,740,209
0 Attachment 3
MINUTES OF THE TOWN BUDGET MEETING
AMES, IOWA NOVEMBER 5, 2020
The Town Budget Meeting was called to order by City Manager Steve Schainker at 7:00 p.m. on the 5th day of November, 2020, in the Council Chambers of Ames City Hall, 515 Clark Avenue. He introduced Finance Director Duane Pitcher and Budget Manager Nancy Masteller.
City Manager Schainker announced that it was impractical to hold an in-person Town Budget meeting due to the Governor of Iowa declaring a public health emergency because of the COVID-19 pandemic. Therefore, limits have been placed on public gatherings, and this meeting is being held as an electronic meeting as allowed by Section 21.8 of the Iowa Code. Mr. Schainker then provided how the public could participate in the meeting via internet or by phone
Members of the Public Participating: Lisa Hovis, 317 Main Street, Ames Catherine Scott, 1510 Roosevelt, Ames Stan Rabe, 219 Wildflower Drive, Ames Heather Johnson, 310 Topaz, Ames Valerie Williams, 703 Carroll, Ames Sam Schill, 2502 Ridgetop Road, Ames Merlin Pfannkuch, 1424 Kellogg Avenue, Ames
City Manager Schainker welcomed the audience and informed them that this meeting was the beginning of the process to prepare the 2021/22 City Budget. He invited the audience watching to join the meeting via internet or by calling in or provide written comments. The can also send their comments or suggestions via email. Mr. Schainker explained that residents will be asked tonight to explain where they would like to see more or less funding.
The 2021/22 budget calendar and budget adoption process were explained by City Manager Schainker. The first step in the budget process is the Resident Satisfaction Survey. The Survey has gone out, responses have been received, and the results were presented at the City Council meeting held in October. According to Mr. Schainker, City Departments have already started gathering information to assist them in preparing their capital improvements and operating budgets for Fiscal Year 2021/22.
Mr. Schainker again emphasized that the purpose of this Town Budget Meeting was to gather input from the community. He made the public aware of important dates for upcoming meetings concerning the 2021/22 City Budget. He stated that, at its meeting to be held on December 8, 2020, the Council will be provided guidance on the City’s budget priorities. Staff will put together the Operating Budget in November and December. On January 19, 2021, the recommended Capital Improvements Plan (CIP) will be presented. On January 26, public comments on the Capital Improvement Plan will be accepted. On January 29, February 2, 3, and 4, the Budget Overview and Department Budget Hearings will be held. Budget Wrap-Up will be on February 9. The final budget hearing and adoption of the FY 2021/22 Budget will be held on March 9. Attachment 3
Finance Director Duane Pitcher explained that the City received approximately one-third (32.23%) of the property taxes that were paid in Ames for 2020/21. The School District received 45.55%; Story County, 20.21%, and DMACC, 2.02%. Mr. Pitcher showed how the taxable valuation of property had changed from FY 2011/12 to the current fiscal year. He explained that the taxable valuation for 2020/21 was only up 1.1%.
Mr. Pitcher provided a summary of the 2020/21 Adopted Revenues and Expenditures. He stated that charges for services equates to approximately 43.4% or nearly half of the Revenues. The total revenues for the 2020/21 Adopted Budget (before transfers) was $230,361,774. Finance Director Pitcher explained where the money is spent: Utilities, 32.2% ($77,326,182); Capital Improvement projects, 25.1% ($60,240,023); Public Safety, 9.0% ($21,532,918); Transportation, 8.2% ($19,656,862); Internal Services: 8.4% (20,154,282); Debt Service, 7.6% ($19,252,430); Community Enrichment, 6.6% ($15,733,875); and General Government, 2.9% ($6,987,200).
Director Pitcher showed how the 2020/21 Property Tax Levy, which is a compilation of the General Fund Levy, Trust and Agency Levy (partial Police/Fire benefits), and Transit Levy, was calculated. The rate per $1,000 taxable value for 2020/21 for the total Tax Levy was $10.14681. The property tax calculated per residence for FY 2020/21 was $559 per $100,000 of valuation.
The cost of services per residence was detailed by service for the last three fiscal years. For 2020/21, the cost of services (per residence per $100,000 valuation) was as follows:
Streets/Traffic $153 Police Protection 132 Fire Protection 86 Library 69 Parks & Recreation 30 Transit 35 General Support Services 28 Planning Services 9 Resource Recovery 6 Storm Sewer System 2 Facilities/Cemetery/Airport 3 Animal Control 5 Building Safety 1
A comparison of the City’s property tax rate with other large communities in the state of Iowa was also shown. Eleven of the 13 largest cities in Iowa are at the $8.10 (per $1,000) General Levy. Ames has the lowest total tax levy at $5.53 per $1,000 valuation.
City Manager Schainker commented on the effects that the COVID-19 pandemic have had on the City’s Adopted Budget. He stated that the City has eliminated some Capital Improvements Plan projects, has instituted hiring freezes, and has canceled all out-of-state training and conferences.
-2- Attachment 3
PUBLIC INPUT: City Manager Schainker asked if there was anyone who would like to provide suggestions on the 2021/22 Budget. He reiterated the ways that the public could participate in this electronic meeting. Another way to make their suggestions known is to email him or Finance Director Duane Pitcher. The email addresses are located on the City’s Web site (cityofames.org).
Lisa Hovis, 317 Main Street, Ames, stated that she is a current member of the Historic Preservation Commission (HPC). She asked that an allocation be made to the HPC for signs to be placed on Main Street in the amount of $2,791.
Catherine Scott, 1510 Roosevelt, Ames, asked that funding be allocated towards building a new Municipal Pool. Ms. Scott also asked that funds to implement a Climate Action Plan be added once the Plan is completed.
Stanley Rabe, 219 Wildflower Drive, Ames, named several arts organizations in Ames that are supported by the City of Ames through the Commission On The Arts. He noted that the City of Ames benefits from Stephens Auditorium, the Octagon, Actors, and other arts organizations. Mr. Rabe would like to see a contribution to support capital improvements for arts organizations. He said he would like a “pot of money” that would be available over a number of years for organizations to apply for competitive funding grants.
Merlin Pfannkuch, 1424 Kellogg Avenue, Ames, asked if there was a document that would indicate where the City made cuts in the current year due to the pandemic. He also asked to know how the pandemic has affected Local Option Taxes. Mr. Pfannkuch stated that he had planned to contact Iowa State University (ISU) to find out how many students are actually in Ames attending ISU, but had not done so yet. City Manager Schainker noted that the City is waiting for the final numbers from Local Option Taxes. He commented that Hotel/Motel Tax has been devastated by the pandemic, and CyRide ridership is down for the first time; it is down approximately 40%. Mr. Pfannkuch indicated that he would like the City to spend less on sidewalk infill. Regarding the document where the City has cut funding due to the pandemic, Budget Manager Nancy Masteller stated that she would email the link to the document to Mr. Pfannkuch.
Heather Johnson, 310 Topaz, Ames, referenced the “Iowa City Model” and asked for the City to incorporate more funding, when things get a little better, into the Community Enrichment (arts/recreation) part of the budget for allocating to the arts.
Valerie Williams, 703 Carroll, Ames, echoed the comments made by Stan Rabe. She said she is feeling a lack of support for small arts programs, i.e., dance, music, theater. According to Ms. Williams, Ames no longer has those spaces available, as many have closed due to the pandemic. Her request is for capital contributions for improvements for the smaller venues (30 - 100 persons) for the arts.
Sam Schill, 2502 Ridgetop Road, Ames, said that he has been trying to come up with what the City could do to create a “spark” for culture and arts in the community. The best thing he could
-3- Attachment 3
think of is to figure out how to have a half-time or full-time staff person to focus on arts and culture in the community. That person would interact with the business community and create momentum for the arts. He noted that a feasibility plan would have to be created first.
City Manager Schainker thanked those who had participated in the Town Budget Meeting. He encouraged the public to stay involved in the budget process. Mr. Schainker reviewed the dates when the Operating Budget and Capital Improvements Plan will be discussed before the City Council. It was noted by Mr. Schainker that this year will be a tough year due to the pandemic.
The meeting concluded at 8:05 p.m.
______Diane Voss, City Clerk
-4- Attachment 4a Attachment 4b Attachment 4c
Shannon Andersen
Subject: FW: Spending priorities
From: Steve Schainker
Please include in packet to be sent to the Council regarding the budget.
SLS
From: David Martin
Hi Steve,
This email came in a while ago but it seems appropriate input for the town budget meeting.
Thanks, David
David Martin Ames City Council, Ward 3 he/him 515.450.1130
From: Deborah Fink
[External Email]
I hope the city will prioritize maintaining, expanding and improving bike trails. I hope the city will de‐prioritize the airport in favor of projects that benefit the majority of Ames residents.
Deborah Fink
‐‐ Deborah Fink 222 South Russell Ames, Iowa 50010
1 Attachment 4c 515‐232‐2763 [email protected]
2 Attachment 4d
Shannon Andersen
Subject: FW: Budget Townhall: Please budget for the creation of an Ames Climate Action Plan in 2021
From: Steve Schainker
For Town Budget Meeting packet to the Council.
SLS
From: Diane Voss
Diane R. Voss, City Clerk/Records Manager 515 Clark Avenue Ames, Iowa 50010 515‐239‐5105 [email protected]
From: Allison B
[External Email]
Date: 11/5/2020
RE: Ames Budget Townhall
FR: Ames Climate Action Team (ACAT)
Dear Ames City Managers, Mayor Haila, and Ames City Council Members:
We are writing because we feel an extreme sense of urgency around moving the Ames Climate Action Planning process forward. We urge you to retain the budget line item for hiring contractors to create an Ames Climate Action Plan by the end of 2021, and further, to expand the budget line to begin accommodating plan implementation.
We see some of the challenging events of 2020 as connected to climate change, and the cascading, interrelated consequences — from viruses to Derechos, from micro-droughts to business supply line disruptions — are already impacting the quality of life for the people of Ames. Climate change impacts are strongly 1 Attachment 4d interconnected with issues of equity, justice and resource accessibility — all recent “hot” topics that have come before council. ACAT firmly believes that prioritizing climate planning will open opportunities to improve social and economic resilience for the people of Ames, while also building an inclusive, vibrant community that attracts and retains people.
As reflected in the Ames Pale Blue Dot Climate Vulnerability Assessment, the issues of climate adaptation and mitigation are complicated. It is clearly in our medium and long-term interest to build climate solutions into all of our ongoing programs and planning, and we need a plan for how to do this.
ACAT continues to support the city retaining our ongoing sustainability investments, such as waste reduction, low-carbon and energy efficiency rebate programs, public transportation, and multi-modal accessibility. These important efforts contribute to community climate resilience.
We look forward to working with you in ongoing climate action and planning.
Thank you for your service to the people of Ames and thank you for the opportunity to comment.
Respectfully,
Ames Climate Action Team Steering Committee:
Allison Brundy, Erv Klaas, Jeri Neal, Shellie Orngard, John Wilson, and Vivian M. Cook (Iowa State University M.S. Candidate, Community Development)
2 Attachment 4e
Shannon Andersen
Subject: FW: Delivery Status Notification (Failure)
From: Diane Voss
Diane R. Voss, City Clerk/Records Manager 515 Clark Avenue Ames, Iowa 50010 515‐239‐5105 [email protected]
From: Bryon Dudley
[External Email]
I was unfortunately not able to attend the budget meeting Thursday night, and was hoping to do so, especially as it relates to the culture of Ames and its entertainment venues.
I've lived in Ames over half of my life, and have been involved with multiple facets of the music community. I was a co‐ owner of the Iowa Music Store that once operated on Main Street, before the pandemic I booked all of the music and events at London Underground, I operate a successful Ames‐based recording studio for musicians across Iowa, I run a local label (Nova Labs) that has released over 130 Iowa albums in 7 years, and do the majority of the booking for the Maximum Ames Music Festival, among other activities in the arts community. My wife and I were the recipients of the 2019 Veronika Rudenberg Cultural Entrepreneur Award from the Ames Community Arts Council.
I have a vested interest in funds being directed towards entertainment venues in Ames, and I would like to encourage you to consider that. I have directly seen how supporting the arts and offering something unique to Ames in conjunction with community events is mutually beneficial. I believe that a thriving culture is the pulse of a city that separates it from other communities, mostly because I've been told this countless times by festival goers, visiting bands on tour, and many slightly (or less slightly!) inebriated citizens of Ames.
And many others.
We have a great city already, and I think that attracts people to move here, and want to be here, but I believe that it is culture that keeps them here, year after year, because they actively WANT to be part of a community that is rich in art and music. Culture keeps graduating students in Ames, and being part of a thriving musical community fosters the next generations of musicians. It's an ecosystem that builds upon itself, and generates goodwill, as well as good business.
1 Attachment 4e I don't think it's any surprise that bars and venues are struggling right now. And performance spaces are at a premium in the music and arts communities. I hope you will keep these in mind during budget considerations.
I apologize if this is overly long, but I feel like it's important right now. Thank you for your time.
Sincerely, Bryon Dudley
2 Outside Funding Request Process Application Applicant Information YES NO Is this request for a program/event sponsored by a student organization? Organization Name: Date: Contact Person: Contact Mailing Address:
City State ZIP Code Phone: E-mail Address: Tax ID#:
Program/Event Information What are the goals of this program/event?:
Date(s) program/event will be held: to Check if continuous or ongoing: Location of the program/event: # of individuals involved in program/event planning: # of individuals who will benefit from program/event: Funding amount requested:
Has the City of Ames funded this YES NO If yes, what year was If yes, what amount of program/event before? it last funded?: funding was received?:
Program/Event Description Please answer each question below using the space provided.
Explain how this request helps accomplish the goals of this program/event. If you are requesting an increase in funding from the last funding cycle, include an explanation of the enhanced or expanded services you intend to provide with the additional funding:
v.9.1.2020 What efforts have you made to obtain funding from other sources? Include fundraising, dues, and any requests to other City- sponsored programs (e.g., ASSET, COTA, Ames Community Grants Program)
Who will be responsible for ensuring compliance with the funding contract? What are his/her/their qualifications?:
Budget Complete the budget for your activity below, including previous fiscal years in columns A, B, and C, and your grant request from the City of Ames in box D10. (A) (B) (C) (D) FY 18-19 FY 19-20 FY 20-21 FY 21-22 REVENUE - ALL SOURCES ACTUAL ACTUAL ADOPTED PROPOSED 1 FUNDRAISING 2 MEMBERSHIP DUES 3 FEES CHARGED 4 INVESTMENT INCOME 5 GRANTS (PRIVATE SECTOR) 6 STATE/FEDERAL FUNDS 7 ISU OR ISU STUDENT GOVERNMENT FUNDS 8 OTHER GOV'T OR NON-PROFIT FUNDS 9 MISC. (Describe): 10 FUNDING REQUEST FROM CITY OF AMES 11 TOTAL REVENUES
FY 18-19 FY 19-20 FY 20-21 FY 21-22 EXPENSES ACTUAL ACTUAL ADOPTED PROPOSED 12 SALARY AND RELATED 13 OCCUPANCY/RENT 14 SUPPLIES/EQUIPMENT 15 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 16 PROMOTION/ADVERTISING 17 MISC. (Describe): 18 TOTAL EXPENSES
v.9.1.2020 Proposed Task/Drawdown Schedule
Funds awarded must be used to benefit the general public. On the lines below, describe the tasks you plan to complete using requested funds, the anticipated task completion date, and the amount you will request in reimbursement for that task. The total should add up to your funding request.
Tasks below should be services and programs that will be provided to the public (e.g., individual events, educational programs, improvements to public spaces, etc.). Tasks should not include costs that primarily benefit the organization (e.g., administrative expenses, overhead, rent, utilities, etc.). The organization should consider such internal costs in the overall cost of providing the specific service or program.
Prioritize the tasks proposed in this list, with the tasks the organization would most like to receive funding for towards the top. Completion Priority Task Participants Date Amount 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
TOTAL
Disclaimer and Submission
By typing in my name below, I certify that my answers are true and complete to the best of my knowledge. I am authorized to submit this application on behalf of the organization named herein.
Name: Title: Date:
Submit completed applications to the City Manager’s Office, 515 Clark Avenue, Ames, IA 50010. Applications must be received no later than 5:00 p.m. on November 15 to be considered for funding.
v.9.1.2020 Outside Funding Request Process Application Applicant Information YES NO Is this request for a program/event sponsored by a student organization? Organization Name: Date: Contact Person: Contact Mailing Address:
City State ZIP Code Phone: E-mail Address: Tax ID#:
Program/Event Information What are the goals of this program/event?:
Date(s) program/event will be held: to Check if continuous or ongoing: Location of the program/event: # of individuals involved in program/event planning: # of individuals who will benefit from program/event: Funding amount requested:
Has the City of Ames funded this YES NO If yes, what year was If yes, what amount of program/event before? it last funded?: funding was received?:
Program/Event Description Please answer each question below using the space provided.
Explain how this request helps accomplish the goals of this program/event. If you are requesting an increase in funding from the last funding cycle, include an explanation of the enhanced or expanded services you intend to provide with the additional funding:
v.9.1.2020 What efforts have you made to obtain funding from other sources? Include fundraising, dues, and any requests to other City- sponsored programs (e.g., ASSET, COTA, Ames Community Grants Program)
Who will be responsible for ensuring compliance with the funding contract? What are his/her/their qualifications?:
Budget Complete the budget for your activity below, including previous fiscal years in columns A, B, and C, and your grant request from the City of Ames in box D10. (A) (B) (C) (D) FY 18-19 FY 19-20 FY 20-21 FY 21-22 REVENUE - ALL SOURCES ACTUAL ACTUAL ADOPTED PROPOSED 1 FUNDRAISING 2 MEMBERSHIP DUES 3 FEES CHARGED 4 INVESTMENT INCOME 5 GRANTS (PRIVATE SECTOR) 6 STATE/FEDERAL FUNDS 7 ISU OR ISU STUDENT GOVERNMENT FUNDS 8 OTHER GOV'T OR NON-PROFIT FUNDS 9 MISC. (Describe): 10 FUNDING REQUEST FROM CITY OF AMES 11 TOTAL REVENUES
FY 18-19 FY 19-20 FY 20-21 FY 21-22 EXPENSES ACTUAL ACTUAL ADOPTED PROPOSED 12 SALARY AND RELATED 13 OCCUPANCY/RENT 14 SUPPLIES/EQUIPMENT 15 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 16 PROMOTION/ADVERTISING 17 MISC. (Describe): 18 TOTAL EXPENSES
v.9.1.2020 Proposed Task/Drawdown Schedule
Funds awarded must be used to benefit the general public. On the lines below, describe the tasks you plan to complete using requested funds, the anticipated task completion date, and the amount you will request in reimbursement for that task. The total should add up to your funding request.
Tasks below should be services and programs that will be provided to the public (e.g., individual events, educational programs, improvements to public spaces, etc.). Tasks should not include costs that primarily benefit the organization (e.g., administrative expenses, overhead, rent, utilities, etc.). The organization should consider such internal costs in the overall cost of providing the specific service or program.
Prioritize the tasks proposed in this list, with the tasks the organization would most like to receive funding for towards the top. Completion Priority Task Participants Date Amount 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
TOTAL
Disclaimer and Submission
By typing in my name below, I certify that my answers are true and complete to the best of my knowledge. I am authorized to submit this application on behalf of the organization named herein.
Name: Title: Date:
Submit completed applications to the City Manager’s Office, 515 Clark Avenue, Ames, IA 50010. Applications must be received no later than 5:00 p.m. on November 15 to be considered for funding.
v.9.1.2020 Outside Funding Request Process Application Applicant Information YES NO Is this request for a program/event sponsored by a student organization? Organization Name: Date: Contact Person: Contact Mailing Address:
City State ZIP Code Phone: E-mail Address: Tax ID#:
Program/Event Information What are the goals of this program/event?:
Date(s) program/event will be held: to Check if continuous or ongoing: Location of the program/event: # of individuals involved in program/event planning: # of individuals who will benefit from program/event: Funding amount requested:
Has the City of Ames funded this YES NO If yes, what year was If yes, what amount of program/event before? it last funded?: funding was received?:
Program/Event Description Please answer each question below using the space provided.
Explain how this request helps accomplish the goals of this program/event. If you are requesting an increase in funding from the last funding cycle, include an explanation of the enhanced or expanded services you intend to provide with the additional funding:
v.9.1.2020 What efforts have you made to obtain funding from other sources? Include fundraising, dues, and any requests to other City- sponsored programs (e.g., ASSET, COTA, Ames Community Grants Program)
Who will be responsible for ensuring compliance with the funding contract? What are his/her/their qualifications?:
Budget Complete the budget for your activity below, including previous fiscal years in columns A, B, and C, and your grant request from the City of Ames in box D10. (A) (B) (C) (D) FY 18-19 FY 19-20 FY 20-21 FY 21-22 REVENUE - ALL SOURCES ACTUAL ACTUAL ADOPTED PROPOSED 1 FUNDRAISING 2 MEMBERSHIP DUES 3 FEES CHARGED 4 INVESTMENT INCOME 5 GRANTS (PRIVATE SECTOR) 6 STATE/FEDERAL FUNDS 7 ISU OR ISU STUDENT GOVERNMENT FUNDS 8 OTHER GOV'T OR NON-PROFIT FUNDS 9 MISC. (Describe): 10 FUNDING REQUEST FROM CITY OF AMES 11 TOTAL REVENUES
FY 18-19 FY 19-20 FY 20-21 FY 21-22 EXPENSES ACTUAL ACTUAL ADOPTED PROPOSED 12 SALARY AND RELATED 13 OCCUPANCY/RENT 14 SUPPLIES/EQUIPMENT 15 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 16 PROMOTION/ADVERTISING 17 MISC. (Describe): 18 TOTAL EXPENSES
v.9.1.2020 Proposed Task/Drawdown Schedule
Funds awarded must be used to benefit the general public. On the lines below, describe the tasks you plan to complete using requested funds, the anticipated task completion date, and the amount you will request in reimbursement for that task. The total should add up to your funding request.
Tasks below should be services and programs that will be provided to the public (e.g., individual events, educational programs, improvements to public spaces, etc.). Tasks should not include costs that primarily benefit the organization (e.g., administrative expenses, overhead, rent, utilities, etc.). The organization should consider such internal costs in the overall cost of providing the specific service or program.
Prioritize the tasks proposed in this list, with the tasks the organization would most like to receive funding for towards the top. Completion Priority Task Participants Date Amount 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
TOTAL
Disclaimer and Submission
By typing in my name below, I certify that my answers are true and complete to the best of my knowledge. I am authorized to submit this application on behalf of the organization named herein.
Name: Title: Date:
Submit completed applications to the City Manager’s Office, 515 Clark Avenue, Ames, IA 50010. Applications must be received no later than 5:00 p.m. on November 15 to be considered for funding.
v.9.1.2020 Ames History Museum Application, City of Ames FY 2021-22 Notes:
TASK LIST on Page 3 – Most tasks listed are ongoing throughout the year. We will compile each quarter’s portion of completed tasks and request approximately 1/4 of the funding each quarter. Some tasks are seasonal, but all listed will be completed by 6/30/22.
BUDGET SECTION AHM financial reports are kept by calendar year on a cash basis. On our application, Column A is 2018 actual revenue and expenses, Column B is 2019 actual revenue and expenses, Column C is 2020 approved budget, and Column D is proposed budget for 2021.
Line 9 – Misc. includes gift shop sales, bank interest, and transfers from cash reserves
Line 10 – Funding Request: Because our Jan-Dec fiscal year overlaps with the City’s July-June fiscal year, the figures on this line represent the sum of half the money from two fiscal years.
Line 17 – Misc. includes expenses associated with programs, events, exhibitions, collections, and transfers to building maintenance reserve Outside Funding Request Process Application Applicant Information YES NO Is this request for a program/event sponsored by a student organization? Organization Name: Date: Contact Person: Contact Mailing Address:
City State ZIP Code Phone: E-mail Address: Tax ID#:
Program/Event Information What are the goals of this program/event?:
Date(s) program/event will be held: to Check if continuous or ongoing: Location of the program/event: # of individuals involved in program/event planning: # of individuals who will benefit from program/event: Funding amount requested:
Has the City of Ames funded this YES NO If yes, what year was If yes, what amount of program/event before? it last funded?: funding was received?:
Program/Event Description Please answer each question below using the space provided.
Explain how this request helps accomplish the goals of this program/event. If you are requesting an increase in funding from the last funding cycle, include an explanation of the enhanced or expanded services you intend to provide with the additional funding:
v.9.1.2020 What efforts have you made to obtain funding from other sources? Include fundraising, dues, and any requests to other City- sponsored programs (e.g., ASSET, COTA, Ames Community Grants Program)
Who will be responsible for ensuring compliance with the funding contract? What are his/her/their qualifications?:
Budget Complete the budget for your activity below, including previous fiscal years in columns A, B, and C, and your grant request from the City of Ames in box D10. (A) (B) (C) (D) FY 18-19 FY 19-20 FY 20-21 FY 21-22 REVENUE - ALL SOURCES ACTUAL ACTUAL ADOPTED PROPOSED 1 FUNDRAISING 2 MEMBERSHIP DUES 3 FEES CHARGED 4 INVESTMENT INCOME 5 GRANTS (PRIVATE SECTOR) 6 STATE/FEDERAL FUNDS 7 ISU OR ISU STUDENT GOVERNMENT FUNDS 8 OTHER GOV'T OR NON-PROFIT FUNDS 9 MISC. (Describe): Interest Income 10 FUNDING REQUEST FROM CITY OF AMES 11 TOTAL REVENUES
FY 18-19 FY 19-20 FY 20-21 FY 21-22 EXPENSES ACTUAL ACTUAL ADOPTED PROPOSED 12 SALARY AND RELATED 13 OCCUPANCY/RENT 14 SUPPLIES/EQUIPMENT 15 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 16 PROMOTION/ADVERTISING 17 MISC. (Describe): 18 TOTAL EXPENSES
v.9.1.2020 Proposed Task/Drawdown Schedule
Funds awarded must be used to benefit the general public. On the lines below, describe the tasks you plan to complete using requested funds, the anticipated task completion date, and the amount you will request in reimbursement for that task. The total should add up to your funding request.
Tasks below should be services and programs that will be provided to the public (e.g., individual events, educational programs, improvements to public spaces, etc.). Tasks should not include costs that primarily benefit the organization (e.g., administrative expenses, overhead, rent, utilities, etc.). The organization should consider such internal costs in the overall cost of providing the specific service or program.
Prioritize the tasks proposed in this list, with the tasks the organization would most like to receive funding for towards the top. Completion Priority Task Participants Date Amount 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
TOTAL
Disclaimer and Submission
By typing in my name below, I certify that my answers are true and complete to the best of my knowledge. I am authorized to submit this application on behalf of the organization named herein.
Name: Title: Date:
Submit completed applications to the City Manager’s Office, 515 Clark Avenue, Ames, IA 50010. Applications must be received no later than 5:00 p.m. on November 15 to be considered for funding.
v.9.1.2020
Outside Funding Request Process Application Applicant Information YES NO Is this request for a program/event sponsored by a student organization? Organization Name: Date: Contact Person: Contact Mailing Address:
City State ZIP Code Phone: E-mail Address: Tax ID#:
Program/Event Information What are the goals of this program/event?:
Date(s) program/event will be held: to Check if continuous or ongoing: Location of the program/event: # of individuals involved in program/event planning: # of individuals who will benefit from program/event: Funding amount requested:
Has the City of Ames funded this YES NO If yes, what year was If yes, what amount of program/event before? it last funded?: funding was received?:
Program/Event Description Please answer each question below using the space provided.
Explain how this request helps accomplish the goals of this program/event. If you are requesting an increase in funding from the last funding cycle, include an explanation of the enhanced or expanded services you intend to provide with the additional funding:
v.9.1.2020 What efforts have you made to obtain funding from other sources? Include fundraising, dues, and any requests to other City- sponsored programs (e.g., ASSET, COTA, Ames Community Grants Program)
Who will be responsible for ensuring compliance with the funding contract? What are his/her/their qualifications?:
Budget Complete the budget for your activity below, including previous fiscal years in columns A, B, and C, and your grant request from the City of Ames in box D10. (A) (B) (C) (D) FY 18-19 FY 19-20 FY 20-21 FY 21-22 REVENUE - ALL SOURCES ACTUAL ACTUAL ADOPTED PROPOSED 1 FUNDRAISING 2 MEMBERSHIP DUES 3 FEES CHARGED 4 INVESTMENT INCOME 5 GRANTS (PRIVATE SECTOR) 6 STATE/FEDERAL FUNDS 7 ISU OR ISU STUDENT GOVERNMENT FUNDS 8 OTHER GOV'T OR NON-PROFIT FUNDS 9 MISC. (Describe): 10 FUNDING REQUEST FROM CITY OF AMES 11 TOTAL REVENUES
FY 18-19 FY 19-20 FY 20-21 FY 21-22 EXPENSES ACTUAL ACTUAL ADOPTED PROPOSED 12 SALARY AND RELATED 13 OCCUPANCY/RENT 14 SUPPLIES/EQUIPMENT 15 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 16 PROMOTION/ADVERTISING 17 MISC. (Describe): 18 TOTAL EXPENSES
v.9.1.2020 Proposed Task/Drawdown Schedule
Funds awarded must be used to benefit the general public. On the lines below, describe the tasks you plan to complete using requested funds, the anticipated task completion date, and the amount you will request in reimbursement for that task. The total should add up to your funding request.
Tasks below should be services and programs that will be provided to the public (e.g., individual events, educational programs, improvements to public spaces, etc.). Tasks should not include costs that primarily benefit the organization (e.g., administrative expenses, overhead, rent, utilities, etc.). The organization should consider such internal costs in the overall cost of providing the specific service or program.
Prioritize the tasks proposed in this list, with the tasks the organization would most like to receive funding for towards the top. Completion Priority Task Participants Date Amount 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
TOTAL
Disclaimer and Submission
By typing in my name below, I certify that my answers are true and complete to the best of my knowledge. I am authorized to submit this application on behalf of the organization named herein.
Name: Title: Date:
Submit completed applications to the City Manager’s Office, 515 Clark Avenue, Ames, IA 50010. Applications must be received no later than 5:00 p.m. on November 15 to be considered for funding.
v.9.1.2020 Program/Event Description – CAA Application for City of Ames Fall Grant Program
Campustown Action Association's programs and events are driven by the goals set forth in our strategic plan.
1. Make Campustown a social center with a broad range of entertainment options for people of all ages while maintaining and strengthening the student experience
2. Promote existing businesses located within the Campustown commercial area while working to broaden the diversity of offerings to strengthen the district as a whole
3. Improve the visual appeal of Campustown and work to create a more defined, unified district
4. Support all modes of transportation within the Campustown district
5. Nurture a strong collaboration between Campustown (business and property owners), Iowa State University Administration, Iowa State University Students, the City of Ames and other stakeholders
The funding being requested will be combined with funding received from Iowa State University, ACVB Community grants, sponsorships and membership funding in order to fulfill the CAA budget. Use of funding will be driven by the 8 milestones listed in the application. Our milestones will always reflect programming and events CAA feels will serve to strengthen the Campustown district.
We are committed to providing a cleaner, safer Campustown. CAA feels strongly that our efforts in the areas of maintenance and beautification directly translate to better experiences for all those who spend time in Campustown. Volunteer efforts help engage the community, often bringing in groups who would not typically spend time here. By working with ISU student groups, we hope to encourage a sense of pride in the district. This is especially important due to the large turnover of students living in Campustown. Disseminating information that directly affects the district helps foster positive communication and neighborhood unity. The organization promotes the Campustown Façade Grant program in an effort to increase awareness of, and participation in, the opportunity for business and property owners to improve their public spaces in the district. We believe a more attractive district not only benefits the existing businesses, but could serve as a powerful tool in recruiting new businesses and services to Campustown.
CAA event programming draws both the Ames community and visitors to the district. All our events are free, open-to-the-public, and include activities and entertainment for a wide-range of participants. We feel by hosting events that bring a diverse mix of attendees, we are providing an important service. Our events emphasize community and strive to make everyone feel welcome in the Campustown district. CAA also provides guidance to other groups wishing to host events within the district boundaries. By sharing our best practices, we hope to see other organizations host fun, safe events that enhance, rather than detract from, the reputation of Campustown.
The Campustown Action Association is proud to partner with the City of Ames. We look forward to continuing our work toward a cleaner, safer, more welcoming environment for all those who spend time in Campustown. Outside Funding Request Process Application Applicant Information YES NO Is this request for a program/event sponsored by a student organization? Organization Name: Date: Contact Person: Contact Mailing Address:
City State ZIP Code Phone: E-mail Address: Tax ID#:
Program/Event Information What are the goals of this program/event?:
Date(s) program/event will be held: to Check if continuous or ongoing: Location of the program/event: # of individuals involved in program/event planning: # of individuals who will benefit from program/event: Funding amount requested:
Has the City of Ames funded this YES NO If yes, what year was If yes, what amount of program/event before? it last funded?: funding was received?:
Program/Event Description Please answer each question below using the space provided.
Explain how this request helps accomplish the goals of this program/event. If you are requesting an increase in funding from the last funding cycle, include an explanation of the enhanced or expanded services you intend to provide with the additional funding:
v.9.1.2020 What efforts have you made to obtain funding from other sources? Include fundraising, dues, and any requests to other City- sponsored programs (e.g., ASSET, COTA, Ames Community Grants Program)
Who will be responsible for ensuring compliance with the funding contract? What are his/her/their qualifications?:
Budget Complete the budget for your activity below, including previous fiscal years in columns A, B, and C, and your grant request from the City of Ames in box D10. (A) (B) (C) (D) FY 18-19 FY 19-20 FY 20-21 FY 21-22 REVENUE - ALL SOURCES ACTUAL ACTUAL ADOPTED PROPOSED 1 FUNDRAISING 2 MEMBERSHIP DUES 3 FEES CHARGED 4 INVESTMENT INCOME 5 GRANTS (PRIVATE SECTOR) 6 STATE/FEDERAL FUNDS 7 ISU OR ISU STUDENT GOVERNMENT FUNDS 8 OTHER GOV'T OR NON-PROFIT FUNDS 9 MISC. (Describe): 10 FUNDING REQUEST FROM CITY OF AMES 11 TOTAL REVENUES
FY 18-19 FY 19-20 FY 20-21 FY 21-22 EXPENSES ACTUAL ACTUAL ADOPTED PROPOSED 12 SALARY AND RELATED 13 OCCUPANCY/RENT 14 SUPPLIES/EQUIPMENT 15 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 16 PROMOTION/ADVERTISING 17 MISC. (Describe): 18 TOTAL EXPENSES
v.9.1.2020 Proposed Task/Drawdown Schedule
Funds awarded must be used to benefit the general public. On the lines below, describe the tasks you plan to complete using requested funds, the anticipated task completion date, and the amount you will request in reimbursement for that task. The total should add up to your funding request.
Tasks below should be services and programs that will be provided to the public (e.g., individual events, educational programs, improvements to public spaces, etc.). Tasks should not include costs that primarily benefit the organization (e.g., administrative expenses, overhead, rent, utilities, etc.). The organization should consider such internal costs in the overall cost of providing the specific service or program.
Prioritize the tasks proposed in this list, with the tasks the organization would most like to receive funding for towards the top. Completion Priority Task Participants Date Amount 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
TOTAL
Disclaimer and Submission
By typing in my name below, I certify that my answers are true and complete to the best of my knowledge. I am authorized to submit this application on behalf of the organization named herein.
Name: Title: Date:
Submit completed applications to the City Manager’s Office, 515 Clark Avenue, Ames, IA 50010. Applications must be received no later than 5:00 p.m. on November 15 to be considered for funding.
v.9.1.2020
Outside Funding Request Process Application Applicant Information YES NO Is this request for a program/event sponsored by a student organization? Organization Name: Date: Contact Person: Contact Mailing Address:
City State ZIP Code Phone: E-mail Address: Tax ID#:
Program/Event Information What are the goals of this program/event?:
Date(s) program/event will be held: to Check if continuous or ongoing: Location of the program/event: # of individuals involved in program/event planning: # of individuals who will benefit from program/event: Funding amount requested:
Has the City of Ames funded this YES NO If yes, what year was If yes, what amount of program/event before? it last funded?: funding was received?:
Program/Event Description Please answer each question below using the space provided.
Explain how this request helps accomplish the goals of this program/event. If you are requesting an increase in funding from the last funding cycle, include an explanation of the enhanced or expanded services you intend to provide with the additional funding:
v.9.1.2020 What efforts have you made to obtain funding from other sources? Include fundraising, dues, and any requests to other City- sponsored programs (e.g., ASSET, COTA, Ames Community Grants Program)
Who will be responsible for ensuring compliance with the funding contract? What are his/her/their qualifications?:
Budget Complete the budget for your activity below, including previous fiscal years in columns A, B, and C, and your grant request from the City of Ames in box D10. (A) (B) (C) (D) FY 18-19 FY 19-20 FY 20-21 FY 21-22 REVENUE - ALL SOURCES ACTUAL ACTUAL ADOPTED PROPOSED 1 FUNDRAISING 2 MEMBERSHIP DUES 3 FEES CHARGED 4 INVESTMENT INCOME 5 GRANTS (PRIVATE SECTOR) 6 STATE/FEDERAL FUNDS 7 ISU OR ISU STUDENT GOVERNMENT FUNDS 8 OTHER GOV'T OR NON-PROFIT FUNDS 9 MISC. (Describe): 10 FUNDING REQUEST FROM CITY OF AMES 11 TOTAL REVENUES
FY 18-19 FY 19-20 FY 20-21 FY 21-22 EXPENSES ACTUAL ACTUAL ADOPTED PROPOSED 12 SALARY AND RELATED 13 OCCUPANCY/RENT 14 SUPPLIES/EQUIPMENT 15 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 16 PROMOTION/ADVERTISING 17 MISC. (Describe): Contract fees for administration 18 TOTAL EXPENSES
v.9.1.2020 Proposed Task/Drawdown Schedule
Funds awarded must be used to benefit the general public. On the lines below, describe the tasks you plan to complete using requested funds, the anticipated task completion date, and the amount you will request in reimbursement for that task. The total should add up to your funding request.
Tasks below should be services and programs that will be provided to the public (e.g., individual events, educational programs, improvements to public spaces, etc.). Tasks should not include costs that primarily benefit the organization (e.g., administrative expenses, overhead, rent, utilities, etc.). The organization should consider such internal costs in the overall cost of providing the specific service or program.
Prioritize the tasks proposed in this list, with the tasks the organization would most like to receive funding for towards the top. Completion Priority Task Participants Date Amount 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
TOTAL
Disclaimer and Submission
By typing in my name below, I certify that my answers are true and complete to the best of my knowledge. I am authorized to submit this application on behalf of the organization named herein.
Name: Title: Date:
Submit completed applications to the City Manager’s Office, 515 Clark Avenue, Ames, IA 50010. Applications must be received no later than 5:00 p.m. on November 15 to be considered for funding.
v.9.1.2020