Hello all
This council meeting has one item on the agenda that will generate significant discussion. This item is to change the LUPP to allow growth to the north. North being defined as the land to the north and west of Ada Haydan. See the map below.
The council has been dealing with this subject for the last 3 months or so (see my April 1st comments and my May 12th comments). At the May 12th meeting the council, on a simple motion, directed the staff to draft a change to the LUPP to include the north. The vote was 3 to 3 with the Mayor breaking the tie. I voted against the inclusion of the northern land at that time. The change has come back to the council and is in the form of a resolution. The Mayor is not allowed to break a tie when the council is voting on a resolution.
This action would allow homes to be built around the edge of Ada Hayden Park to the north and west. 
Many would like to allow growth in all three directions. However there is a cost of development that is born by the city for each of these areas. It is more efficient for the tax payer to have directed growth because the infrastructure will be built shortly before it is needed. If the city of Ames were to grow in all three directions at once the infrastructure costs to the city would be quite large. The result would be that much of that infrastructure would not be in use for at least 20 years. That is, there are no homes using much of that infrastructure and with no homes there are no additional tax dollars paying for that infrastructure. These infrastructure costs are both one time capital costs and on going costs. Infrastructure costs include roads, bridges, sewer, water, storm water, police and fire protection. Efficient use of city dollars is the reason for targeted growth policies.
The city staff report indicates the least cost to the city is in the Northwest. This is for both one time capital cost and the annual recurring operation cost. Note that much of the North annual operating cost is due to the yearly expense of a fourth fire station that would be needed in the North.
| Cost of Development (see report) | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Southwest | Northwest | North | |
| Annual Operating Cost | $263,699 | $97,131 | $977,544 |
| Oversize Cost Per Developable Acre | $8,978 | $6,421 | $13,730 |
| Infrastructure Cost Per Developable Acre | $27,355 | $15,528 | $30,134 |
Another consideration is the impact to local schools. More single family homes means more students and in some cases more school buildings. It is important to note that the school district boundaries do NOT expand with the change in city boundaries.
| Projected Additional Housing Units per Area (see report) | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Southwest | Northwest | North | |
| Ames Schools | 2308 | 1098 | 10 |
| Gilbert Schools | 0 | 1812 | 2318 |
| United Community Schools | 1768 | 1001 | 0 |
The current city policy (see LUPP) is to direct growth to the Southwest and Northwest. Council directed staff to update the council on the cost of growth because the city has had many requests to grow North by developers. While North has attractions for development, the question before the public and the council is "does the city want to grow North?" and "do the citizens (tax payers) want to pay extra to support Northern growth?".
There are environmental concerns in regard to development going north and it's impact on Ada Hayden water quality. The concern is phosphorus contamination causing excessive algae blooms resulting in oxygen depletion of the lake. Many people argue that development of the area (in the county) is inevitable so the city needs to annex the land to divert part of the phosphorus into the city's sanitary sewer system around Ada Hayden. The city is able to reject subdivision of land within the 2 mile fringe of the city limits. If I believe that development in the county would harm Ada Hayden, I would vote to reject the subdivision of land.
I voted against the LUPP change to the north on May 12th because:
- Additional operating cost of $900,000 per year ( $750,000 of that to operate a new fire station for that area).
- Northern growth would result in virtually no additional children in the Ames School District (see letter from Ames School Board). Growth north west would result in a mixture of students in Gilbert and Ames.
- Northern growth will accelerate the road network cost. This would require a much earlier extension of Bloomington to I35. The project will likely require the removal of a church, bridging the Skunk river and an I35 interchange.
- The city can reject subdivisions to protect the Ada Hayden water shed if need be.
- The current LUPP has designated adequate land to accommodate Ames projected residential growth to 2030 (without the northern land).
The council is being lobbied heavily to grow north. It should be a meeting with a lot of public input. It will be interesting to see how it comes out.
Jim Popken
City Council At Large
Disclaimer: My intent of this communication is to give you a heads up on items coming to the city council. I may state some of my impressions and leanings here. I will, however, try to avoid staking out a position on issues before the council meeting occurs. I feel that I should avoid committing to any positions until I have heard and considered all the public input at the council meeting before a vote.
If you know others who would like to receive this news letter please direct them to http://jimpopken.org/ames/newsletter
See JimPopken.org for past postings.
