Ames council approves rezoning for 113 North Dakota over neighborhood objections about trees and runoff

Ames City Council on Tuesday approved rezoning, a major site development plan and preliminary plat for 113 North Dakota Avenue, allowing a 16‑unit townhome project after the applicant reduced an earlier proposal from 20 units.

The proposal drew sustained public comment from residents of the adjacent West Bend neighborhood, who said the development would remove old‑growth oak trees that form a wooded ravine behind their homes and could increase stormwater runoff onto Munn Woods and Clear Creek. Dozens of residents attended the hearing; several described wildlife, longstanding canopy and the neighborhood’s visual character as reasons to oppose the plan.

The council’s approval follows changes the applicant made after a Planning and Zoning Commission recommendation to deny the project. Planning staff and the applicant removed the four northernmost units, increasing open space by roughly a quarter‑acre and preserving an additional 12 trees, the planner said. Staff also reported the smallest street setback on the plan would be roughly 6 to 7 feet at the tightest point and that other units have setbacks of about 11 to 13 feet from the property line.

Neighbor Don Eichner, who owns a home on West Bend Drive, described the woods behind his house as “a beautiful view from our back porch” and urged council members to walk the site before approving development. Resident Matt Stevenson, a wildlife ecologist who reviewed the application, told the council the parcel contains “an old growth oak grove” and said the revised plan “still does not fit the context of the neighborhood.”

Applicant representative Luke Jensen said the property was acquired on the open market, that the project had been adjusted to address key concerns and that some trees could legally be cleared by any owner. “I could go over there tomorrow and cut every single one of those trees down,” Jensen told the council as part of his remarks about property rights and the design tradeoffs the developer faced.

City staff told council members the project did not require a full stormwater management plan under current thresholds because disturbance is below the city’s one‑acre threshold; the applicant submitted a stormwater memo that shows runoff directed to storm inlets on the east side of the site and conveyed to the city system. Public works staff emphasized the plan proposes two check dams in a conveyance swale to slow concentrated flows but said a larger detention facility would be expensive and typically is not required for a project of this size.

Several council members said they were sympathetic to neighbors’ concerns about trees and erosion, but that the city must balance housing goals and property owners’ rights. Councilmembers who supported the project said the applicant reduced density to address massing and buffering concerns and that the site’s urban corridor land‑use designation supports infill housing.

The council voted to approve the rezoning and related entitlements; the motion passed 5–1. Councilmembers set the typical two sequential readings: a first reading and a second reading are scheduled for June 10 and June 24, respectively, per staff. Council and staff said they would monitor project permitting and construction to assess stormwater and erosion outcomes once work begins.

Known next steps include final engineering, detailed grading and issuance of building permits; staff noted a supermajority (five votes) was required on the rezoning because a petition opposing the change had been filed by adjacent property owners.

The project record shows the revised plan: 16 units (down from 20), an approximate 0.25‑acre increase in open space, about 29 trees listed for removal in the applicant’s inventory with roughly 12 newly retained trees identified by staff along the northwest buffer, and setback deviations at the closest point of about 6–7 feet from a property line where the right‑of‑way jogs.

Council members and staff emphasized the city’s tree canopy and Tree City USA award in speakers’ remarks and said they would continue to consider canopy preservation in future policy work.

The council’s vote authorizes the applicant to proceed to the required readings and subsequent permitting steps; if entitlements are recorded, construction permits may follow.