Ames city staff and local developers spent the council meeting detailing infrastructure needs and incentive requests tied to several planned residential projects, and council directed staff to keep negotiating specific packages rather than take immediate action. Kelly (staff member) said developers’ requests total roughly $10,000,000 and cover projects across north and south growth areas, and she presented options that range from limited oversizing matches to a larger pioneer‑infrastructure approach that could be partly funded with ARPA or other city financing. "At this point, I guess, I wanna know where the council wants to start," Kelly said.

The most urgent items discussed were sewer and road projects in the city’s northern growth corridor — including an East‑West sewer to serve Hayden’s Preserve and the newly annexed Greenbrier area, and an intersection and road work near GW Carver and Cameron School Road — plus a smaller “slip‑lining” sanitary improvement in Moore Memorial Park that staff estimated could enable roughly 100 additional homes without building the full East‑West sewer.

Nut graf: The council did not approve incentives at tonight’s meeting; instead it asked staff to package options and continue negotiations with developers, recognizing a tradeoff between investing now to accelerate roughly 325 homes over three years and the constraints of the city capital improvement program and ratepayer impacts.

Staff framed three broad funding options: (1) limited oversizing/connection district matches, (2) a larger package paid partly from existing city funds and ARPA, and (3) using tax increment financing (TIF) or a TIF‑style structure to direct value to developers. Kelly cautioned that using TIF on greenfield residential projects triggers a statutory low‑ and moderate‑income set‑aside under Iowa urban renewal practice and Story County’s demographic formula, which staff estimated could divert a substantial portion — roughly 40% in Story County’s calculation — of the TIF proceeds to affordable housing obligations.

Developers told council they face low lot inventories and tightened construction markets. Justin Dodge of Hunsicker Company said his firm had only one lot left inside Ames immediately available to sell to another builder, and described two “low‑hanging” opportunities if infrastructure obstacles are addressed: slip lining that could yield an initial 25–30 lots and earlier phases of Auburn Trail that could add about 30 lots. "We have the lowest number of lot inventory for Hunsicker companies as long as I've been around," Dodge said.

Council and staff discussed precedent and comparisons with other Iowa suburbs. Kelly summarized recent local practice — from oversizing matches to assessment and connection districts on Hyde Avenue and ARPA‑funded sewer extensions under the Ames Plan 2040 — and briefed differences with Ankeny and Waukee, where some pioneer infrastructure is planned through CIP and repaid via connection districts rather than TIF.

Discussion also addressed timing and implementation risk: staff said the package of near‑term projects the city could act on in years 1–3 would cost about $6.2 million and, if implemented, staff estimated it could set conditions for about 325 single‑family lots over three years; longer‑term Pioneer infrastructure would continue to require sequencing with the CIP. "You have to set up the development. You have some of those initial costs. But they're gonna be available for the next 3 or 4 years after the first 3 years," Kelly said.

Rather than vote on a specific incentive allocation, council members signaled general support to keep the conversation moving. Staff will return with packaged options tied to the CIP, clearer cost allocations by fund (water, sewer, general obligation), and timelines if council wants items programmed in upcoming budget years. The exact mix of funding — whether ARPA backfill, direct city investment, or TIF‑based developer incentives — will require additional council direction before formal action.

Ending: Staff recommended prioritizing the slip‑lining and other near‑term fixes while preparing options that show the fiscal impacts on rates and property taxes; council requested packages and a path to incorporate any chosen projects into the CIP and budgeting schedule.