CR OPEN HOUSE update

COMMUNITY FACILITIES
September 2, 2009
Sandi Fowler, City Manager’s Office
Dan Thies, OPN Architects
Community Facilities Public Participation Process
 Open House #1 – June 23, 2009
◦ Review the opportunity & process
◦ 200 Attendees
◦ 279 Feedback responses
 Open House #2 – August 18-19, 2009
◦ Review facility options
◦ 591 Citizen attendees
◦ 157 City employee attendees
◦ 850 Feedback responses
 Open House #3 – October 6-7, 2009
◦ Presentation of recommended options
Engaging the public in the facility rebuilding process…
Summary of Feedback from Open House #1

 Protect or relocate vital City services outside of the Cedar River flood
plain.
 Create multiple options for Community Facilities as a component of a
renewed downtown.
 Social sustainability (livability/walkability) should be a priority in future
option considerations.
 Develop options with accessible and centralized services, and plentiful
free parking.
 Demonstrate fiscal responsibility – present financial data in future
options’ considerations.

Open House #1 Feedback

Open House #2 asked for
Input on the Options…
 Return to existing buildings as they were at the time of the flood
 Return to existing buildings as they were at the time of the flood, with
upgrades to improve sustainability and functionality
 Consider new buildings, alternate locations, and the possibility of co-
location of programs and services
 Consider utilizing another existing building
 City Services/
Veteran’s Memorial
Building
 City Operations/
Public Works
Building
 Fleet Maintenance
 Central Fire
 Animal Control
 Main Public Library

Existing Buildings/Programs
 Intermodal Transportation Facility
 Community Safety Center
 Neighborhood Centers
 Former U.S. Courthouse

Potential Facilities Concepts

 Review of Financial Data

 We took a conservative approach to the

financial data presented.
 The numbers presented in Open House
#2 were based on preliminary and
operational benchmark data.
 The University of Iowa and OPN have a
scheduled meeting for evaluation of the
financial model.

Financial Review
Summary of Feedback from Open
House #2

 General Feedback Comment Themes

 Many supportive comments were received, and people

appreciated the chance to give feedback.
 Overall, there is a greater understanding of the complexity of the
issues and of the decisions that have to be made.
 There is a small, vocal minority who still want Westdale Mall to be
evaluated for further use.

Open House #2 Feedback

 Intermodal Transportation
Facility

 Low Response Rate

 Those who responded would like to see expanded
program at the former Pepsi Location.

Potential Facilities Concepts

 Community Safety Center

 Low Response Rate

 Those who responded were positive regarding
the concept.

Potential Facilities Concepts

 Neighborhood Centers

 Low Response Rate

 Those who responded were positive regarding the
concept.
 A handful of respondents feel it should be a lower
priority right now.

Potential Facilities Concepts

 Former U.S. Courthouse

 General majority of respondents had concerns

over/with City Ownership and burdens related to
the building.
 Regarding use, it was preferred to use the
building as overflow space for City Hall.

Potential Facilities Concepts

Summary of Feedback
from Open House #2

 Veteran’s Memorial / City

Services Center
 None of the options received a majority,
however, Option C was preferred.
Option C – New Building with Program Growth at an Undetermined,
Centrally Located Site

 Concern about future flooding of this building

remains high.
 Respondents have are torn between losing a city
landmark versus practical considerations (flood
concerns).

Open House #2 Feedback

Summary of Feedback
from Open House #2

 Public Works Facility/City

Operations
 Option B and Option C were equally preferred.
 Current Site/Property was preferred regardless
of choosing Option B or C.
 A proposed continued use of the Fleck Building
was a reoccurring theme.

Option B - Return to Pre-Flood Conditions with Flood

Mitigation, Code Upgrades, Extensive
Mechanical/Functional Update-With Program Growth

Option C - New Building with Program Growth at an

Undetermined Site

Open House #2 Feedback

Summary of Feedback
from Open House #2

 Fleet Maintenance
 Overwhelming majority prefer to see Fleet
Maintenance consolidated into a single location.
 Option C was favored, although no option had
the majority.
 Single location will allow for efficiencies and
cross training.
Option C – New Building, Contains Co-Location with Growth Needs
(All New Building Campus on Public Works Site)
Option D-Re-Purpose an Existing Building / Site with Co-Location
Concept, Including Growth (Remodel Existing Buildings and Add
Additions on Public Works Site).

Open House #2 Feedback

Summary of Feedback
from Open House #2

 Animal Care and Control

 An overwhelming majority of respondents

favored building a new facility and co-locating
with Kirkwood.
 Respondents were pro Kirkwood
involvement for the shared resources
potential and educational
opportunities.
 People would like to see a facility that is healthy
for both employees and animals.

Open House #2 Feedback

Summary of Feedback
from Open House #2

 Central Fire Station

 Respondents commented & expressed a desire
to defer to the recommendations of the Cedar
Rapids Fire Department and their best practices
criteria.
 Respondents also expressed that the Central
Fire Station offers a vital service and should
never be incapacitated during emergencies.
 A majority of respondents favored Option C.
Option C - New Building with Program Growth (Undetermined Site).

Open House #2 Feedback

Summary of Feedback
from Open House #2

 Main Public Library

 An overwhelming majority of respondents

favored a new building.
 Ample and free parking was a reoccurring theme
across all options.
 Of the 4 possible sites/locations presented, 2
were predominantly favored:
 TrueNorth Block
 Former Emerald Knights
Block
 Future flood risk is still a concern.

Open House #2 Feedback

What are we solving for?

The WHAT
The WHEN
The HOW

What’s Next
What - Development of the Implementation Strategy

 Development of the Implementation Strategy for facilities is based on:

◦ City Vision
◦ City Council Goals
◦ Public & Employee Feedback
◦ Key Financial Strategies
◦ Service Delivery
 Action and implementation then occurs after City Council approval.

What’s Next
When - Development of the Implementation
Strategy

Timing impacts:

 Varies depending upon facility/program

 Based upon available financial information

 Program reconfiguration

What’s Next
How - Development of the Implementation Strategy

Funding impacts:

Minimal v. optimal strategies for facilities recovery

Research and pursue additional funding sources

Context within other financial decisions

FACILITIES + KEY FINANCIAL STRATEGIES + FLOOD CONTROL + FLOOD INFRASTRUCTURE

What’s Next
 What additional information
do you need?

What’s Next
Open House #3 –Recommended Options

Tuesday, October 6
4:00 – 7:00 p.m.

Wednesday, October 7
11:30 a.m. – 1:30 p.m.

Crowne Plaza Ballroom

350 1st Avenue NE