09202400_CR OPEN HOUSE 2_Online Feedback_City Services

8/14/2019 09202400_CR OPEN HOUSE 2_Online Feedback_City Services

1/18

CITY OF CEDAR RAPIDSCOMMUNITY FACILITIES PLANNING

CR OPENHOUSE #2ONLINE FEEDBACK

AUGUST 31, 2009

35 Online Respondents

CITY SERVICES

What are your comments on our evaluation process?

_fantastic level of detail - sometimes I got lost in it and "lost the forest for the trees".

_I think it is important to consider the intersection of social environmental and economicfactors in your evaluation. I think the city has done a good job here.

_I was pleased to have the opportunity to review the options. The information providedeconomic data that enabled me to make an informed decision. Making this available on-linewas greatly appreciated and allowed more people to participate.

_It is very important to get information out to the public. The use of this evaluation processserved that purpose

_Too long

_I found it very complex but I appreciate the opportunity to give my opinion. I'm not surehow you could make it simpler but I felt there was way too much information and notenough time to digest it. It does make me aware of the amount of information that theCouncil has been dealing with. I don't know how they have time to breathe. I appreciate the

many city employees who were there to answer questions. It was truly a major effort to getpeople involved. I don't know how else you could do it except to simplify it in some way.

_taking way too long to make decisions

_Question Why are the assessors not going through every home as they said they would?Why is this happening again as it did when the city hired Vanguard?

_Too much focus on improvements, as opposed to reshuffling our existing facilities andservices to be efficient.

_Scoring system helpful when trying to compare benefits of different plans.

_It's probably a good idea to consolidate some of these service locations, but if it gets toobig, it's hard to find what you need. Have you ever been down to the U of I Hospitals? Whata nightmare to find where you are going!

_I appreciate that you are taking feedback online for those of us that didn't make it to eitheropen house.

_Absolutely Excellent, couldn't be better!


2/18

_As usual, too much talking and not enough "doing". When does the city actually start doingsomething?

_While the evaluation process intent of including public feedback is admirable, it seemed tobe quite long and cumbersome at times.

_I don't have any concerns. I think it is an important process you are going through to gatherfeedback and engage citizens in their community.


3/18

Please share your thoughts on the City Services Center/Veterans MemorialBuilding.

_with the tight parking that has always been a factor here (I would not reopen theunderground parking) I feel the old US Court Building would be a better City Hall

_It is outdated, and really hard to figure out how to get in, how to get around. A veryunfriendly building that emphasized that city gov't is not there for its citizens. Start over -this is the proverbial "front door" for the city's services, and should reflect that. Option C

_Option B is best in my opinion. The initial cost is very reasonable given the value receivedand given that available moneys need to stretch, and with HVAC and other building updates,would be environmentally better than completely building new, given the natural resources

needed for new construction. I attended the open house but was unable to give all feedbackdue to time constraints. It was a very valuable presentation.

_It is not necessary to return to the Veterans Memorial building. But if City Hall is movedaway, there needs to be a plan for use of the building. It must not be allowed to fall intodisrepair.

_The existing City Services Center/Veterans Memorial Building is in need of substantialupgrading, it is not easily accessible to the public (very limited parking), and is at risk forfuture flooding.

_Being the existing building is in need of extensive updating and repair, and the fact that itis in the flood plain does not make it a good option. Moving the Administrative functions to

Westdale Mall could provide the best solution.

_The current management structure of Veteran Memorial is what is prohibitive to the citymoving back in. Having a highly functioning and efficient city government constantly at themercy of a building management team and commission that in the past politically was atodds with the goals of city hall is a constant thorn in the side of city government. The Vetsshould give the building to the City, the City should help pay for the creation of a Vet'smuseum in the building and put a end to the bickering.

_I think the Veterans Memorial Building should be fixed up for our Vets. You are gettingmoney from FEMA to do so.

_It is much more logical to choose option C (a new building) Room for growth, out of floodplain, centrally located, build for energy efficiency (Alliant Energy refund for going green)Option D is an option but certainly NOT A or B

_Option B is the one I'd vote for. That building stands for CR government and ,moreimportantly, it is in the middle of the city. I don't live on the west side but I think we must tryto unite the city and that island is in the middle of the river and the middle of the city. WithFEMA willing to put in money it seems like an opportunity to remodel so the building couldbe used more efficiently and more of it.


4/18

_there may be valid reasons (cost, symbolism, location) to restore the upper floors of Vetsfor the purposes that were previously served there. If that is the case, it seems that seriousconsideration should be given to utilizing the old federal courthouse as an adjunct facility.

The 2 combined should provide adequate space, and allow for growth

_not on flood plain

_rebuild the current building

_Consolidation of facilities is important. I would like to see it be maintained, but only withgood use of space. However, any increased use would require consideration of parking.

_I believe that both of the buildings should be refurbished and reoccupied.

_I do not want to see any city government offices at this location. Using it as free or minimalcharge meeting space for local clubs, groups, non-profits, etc would be ok. So would soundproofing some areas, putting in transparent walls and offering it as free or low-cost practicespace for instrumentalists, vocalists, bands. Could also be used for art classes, craft sales,etc. What I don't want to see is expensive equipment there on a 24 hour basis. I believe it'sgoing to flood again. If it's too expensive to operate this way, see if the Grant Wood Windowand gold flame can be moved to a newly constructed building outside the 500 year floodplain, raze the building and offer the space for community gardens.

_Re-use the buildings, just not the lower floors.

_I would rather see city government move back to City Hall. Maybe after the new courthouseis built some city services could be located there.

_The Veterans Memorial Building needs to be rebuilt and protected from Higher Water if apermanent levee is built. The first floor could be used as a roller skating/ice skating rinkbecause one of the things that the Veterans did when they came home from WW11 wasstart making a city that was great for young people to grow up in!

_Option B is obviously the best choice. This is a great building and can be redesigned fromthe ground up to provide efficiency.

_As a citizen, I support Option C, construct a new "one-stop" City Services facility on anundetermined, centrally-located site. Option C is my first choice. Option D, Remodel aportion of Westdale Mall to accommodate a new "one-stop" City Services facility is mysecond choice.


5/18

Please share your thoughts on the City Operations Center/Public WorksBuilding.

_reoccupy

_Operations / back office should be run at the most efficient cost possible. Pick the optionwith the lowest long-term cost (not total $, but a discounted 'net present value' figure).Looks like Option A

_This city owned building has an acceptable location. Future needs and expansions of thevarious departments can be accommodated at this location.

_I think that this building is satisfactory and can accommodate the needs of the departmentsthat use it.

_I'm torn between B and C. If a new facility were built on the same place, which would be

practical, it would have the same flood possibilities as the present one so why not just takethe FEMA money and make the existing one better?

_not on flood plain

_I think this building should be refurbished and reoccupied.

__Mixed feelings. It looks and feels sort of like a rabbit warren. Eventually would like to see amore user and employee-friendly building, probably at a new site (Westdale Mall??)

_If the Public Works Building is adequate at its sixth street location, then so be it, otherwiselocate it on higher ground in a new or empty existing building!

_A hybrid using primarily option B but with an appropriate new building as needed toconsolidate city services at this site to provide co-location operating efficiencies.


6/18

Please share your thoughts on Fleet Maintenance.

_find a better existing building

_Go cheapest - this is an operational issue. Option A.

_This is one to let the department heads make the decision.

_Option B because it seems that it spreads the maintenance in various parts of the citywhere the vehicules are used.

_not in flood plain

_It makes sense to keep the current space for the really large equipment.

_Fleet Maintenance needs a new or existing bigger building so that all the entities that needmaintenance can fit into the building. New or existing bigger building should be on higherground!

_C or D seem to be the most efficient models.


7/18

Please share your thoughts on the Animal Care and Control Center.

_find a better existing building

_No need to build a large, new center. While it would be nice, it is a low priority. Go with lowcost Option A.

_Kirkwood College location is the best option. The original location in the flood plain wouldnot be a good solution

_We need to work with Kirkwood to provide a learning experience and care of stray animals.Work with them to share building costs and give the college students some firsthandexperience taking care of animals. This is an excellent opportunity for both the city andKirkwood.

_Option C even though it's way to the south of the city.

_I fully support a new building for the Animal Control and shelter services. The pre-floodfacility was woefully inadequate in ways too numerous to mention them all. Highlights of theinadequacies are: 1) It was too small to serve the animals in need 2) dogs had be keptoutside in frigid winter temperatures because the indoor kennels were full 3) There was noroom to have separate kennels areas for incoming stray dogs and dogs already vetted andcleared for adoption. This had serious health consequences because parvovirus could spreadfrom an incoming dog and other airborne diseases could easily spread because a sanitary airflow system was non-existent. 4) Everything about the building was old, dumpy and

depressing. If you want people to feel good about coming to the shelter to adopt orvolunteer, it has to be a place that's welcoming. The new facility is miles ahead of the oldone in this regard (brighter, cleaner, etc.) but a new building can be designed specifically forwhat's needed, including education rooms and adoption rooms where families can interactone-on-one with a potential new dog or cat away from the noisy kennel area. 4) the pre-floodbuilding was too remote. I've heard countless people say over the years that they didn'twant to drive "way out there". Top that off with an old, depressing building where diseasecannot be controlled in the most effective way, and it's a wonder any dog or cat was everhealthy and adopted. 5) The pre-flood building/ area floods regularly. Going back there would


8/18

be irresponsible. A new building would better serve the animals who are there through nofault of their own. A new building would be better for the staff who are there to care for theanimals. And a new building would better serve the public through better accessibility andfoster pride in a facility designed to save, protect and adopt family pets.

_I think the animal control facility should stay in its current location or be move to the

Kirkwood Campus.

_Move it to Kirkwood.

_The city cannot do enough to help abandoned animals. They desperately need a bigpermanent space and more help. The flooded building was not convenient for peoplewanting to adopt animals.

_Needs to be more centralized. Before it was way out in the boonies!

_The animal care and control center needs a new building with a yard that can allow severaldogs to be played with at the same time. This will increase their adoptability and keep themcalmer when people show up. The new building also needs a very large cat area so theyaren't all crammed in crates, which makes for some very crabby cats. i think something likea petsmart set up would be good. Also, put it in a location that is close to town (like on theedge), not going to flood every year, and is convenient for people to get to.

_When I first moved to Cedar Rapids I was disappointed at how far out of town, on an oldroad, in an old dirty building, animal control was housed. I can't imagine how anyone couldeven think of going back to that location. I am now a volunteer at the temporary CR shelterand that is an improvement. I strongly feel that the Kirkwood location would benefit our city.It would have ample parking, it would be a new building, and hopefully the vet tech programcould continue to help the shelter out as they do now, by pulling dogs and getting themready to be adopted.

_A new shelter is needed. It would be nice if it would be more centrally located than clearout at Kirkwood. The facility now is in a good location how the facility is way too small. Themetal building is far from desirable. I am a current volunteer. How the would end if thefacility was at Kirkwood as it is way to far away from where I live.

_I think that option C would be best, with D coming in second. The old location was too farout of town. A new location should be more at the heart of CR. In a building that more peoplesee, it could lead to more volunteers and more awareness of the need in CR to helphomeless animals.

_Cedar Rapids needs a new Animal Care & Control Center. One that's actually designed as ashelter. One that will help us meet the needs of the animals and people of our community.

_The Animal Care and Control Center should be centralized and definitely on Higher Ground!

_C is by far the obvious choice.

_I would like to see the new animal shelter located at Kirkwood community college. It wouldbe a win win situation for all.

_It should not be even an OPTION to go back to the building on the SW side. The flood of2008 devastated that building, but it floods EVERY year. Earlier in 2008, the road to theshelter had been flooded over completely and the animals were not cared for several days.Once the workers were able to get back in, they found dead dogs, dogs with no food or


9/18

water and other sick animals as a result. This cannot happen again. The current building isfine for now, but it's not a permanent solution. My suggestion would be to haveconversations with the Humane Society off of Mt Vernon Road and explore a joint building.

Their building is inadequate as well and the public would be best served to have 1 fullfunctioning building and services.

_To return the CR Animal Shelter to the old facility, even if renovated would place it back inan area that requires staff to be boated in when the river reaches flood stage which is farbelow the levels of 31 feet in 2008. The Temporary Facility is not adequate to house anoperation of a city this size. There are many fewer kennels for dogs at this facility yet thepopulation of CR has not declined. Disease control with isolation rooms and separated areasfor incoming animals from general healthy animal populations cannot be achieved. This is asub standard facility that was set up in haste to provide a fast and temporary solution to theproblem. The only cost effective solution for the long term is to build a new facility and thathas been proposed at Kirkwood. The shelter and control functions will need to remainautonomous from Kirkwood however. A regional, state of the art facility that gives comfortand a clean disease free environment to the city's homeless animal population andreassurance to the citizens that these animals are properly cared for and given every chancefor adoption, is the only logical choice. A destination shelter facility is long overdue in CedarRapids. This can go a long way for a city who has overlooked the shelter/control functions forthe last 40 years.

_I am a volunteer at the CR Animal Shelter. The work being done by the volunteers and staffis very impressive and the care shown for the animals is amazing. But we need a biggerbuilding and it should be a permanent place. As our city grows, so does the pet population,and the problems that may bring. We have to be ready to take on more animals. In thefuture, our Shelter may be able to help out those surrounding areas that don't have a placeof their own, perhaps at a minimal cost to them and a way to keep ours going withoutraising taxes.

Please share your thoughts on the Central Fire Station.

_not sure

_It looked like Option C was probably the low cost option for the very long-term, in terms ofoperating costs. Go with it.

_This is one to let the fire officials determine the best solution.

_Fix up the one that is there.

_Option B, since I'm not sure how many centrally located sites there are left.

_build on stilts with parking under


10/18

_remain at same location

_It needs to be in roughly this area but might be able to create a one city-block sizemounded up area 15 feet or so higher than the current ground level to place the building on.Sort of like the Police Station. Need to replace the building.

_Renovate & keep it at it's current location.

_The Central Fire Station was not big enough and should be centrally located in a bigger newor existing building on Higher Ground!

_A and D are not reasonable choices. B is workable, but C might be the best choice if areasonable site is found.

Please share your thoughts on the Main Public Library.

_one of the First Ave sites would be a good move

_This could and should be a city landmark. Not just to store books, but to establish theLibrary as a center of learning, culture and meetings. Option C gives us the ability to createa truly landmark, architecturally significant building.

_The Library should be an important draw to downtown Cedar Rapids. It would be best to putit as close as possible to the old site.

_The location needs to be outside the flood area. The First Avenue, between Seventh andEight Street site appears to provide the best location and accessibility.


11/18

_The library's location needs to be outside the flood plain.

_Option B or C. I think centrally located is really key and again, I don't know how many ofthose sites there are.

_The True North option is intriguing, but only if True North can be retained as citizen of the

Central Business District. We cannot afford to have any more outmigration from downtown;the critical mass necessary for a thriving city center is dangerously near the tipping point.The old Emerald Knights location seems to be convenient, and would remove blightedproperties. It is intriguing. The Skogman site is less appealing in that it removes multiplebuildings from the tax rolls.

_not in flood plain

_remain at same location. Why do they need a parking ramp

_The good condition of this facility warrants that it continues to be used, with improvements.Building a new facility is a poor use of tax dollars.

_I think the public library should be rebuilt on it current location with adjustments made forfuture flood risk. I think raising the library and building over a parking facility (like the CedarRapids Surgery Center) would be an adequate solution. This would allow more parking forpatrons and flood protection. The current location is good because proximity to publictransit.

_Need a new building at a new location, FEMA insurance too expensive long term to makecurrent site worth considering. I like the Green Square area best but the easy access to Hwy380 location on First Ave might also be ok.

_I don't think we need a bigger library downtown that what we previously had. We shouldkeep a Westdale branch(it doesn't have to be as big as it is now) and build somethingsmaller downtown or more central. The Marion and Hiawatha branches cover a lot of theeast side as it is now. Make sure there is adequate parking, too!

_Renovate & update the current building. Since there are plans to build an Intermodal TransitFacility, you could even increase parking by tearing down the GTC. I would rather have thattorn down than tearing down the former furniture store. If the new library 'must' be in a newlocation I would vote for option B because it is close to the current location. The other twooptions are on 1st Ave which is a busy road & not many options for parking. Also option D istoo far from downtown.

_The Main Public Library should be centrally located in a bigger new or existing building onHigher Ground!

_Parks and Recreation got it right with their Hybrid plan. A "midsize" but not overpoweringcentral "activity center" with good distributed multi-neighborhood cluster sites. The library

should be split in to three or possibly four nearly equal sized locations. A big central library isonly a monument, not an example of good customer service. Since the planning did notinclude this very reasonable approach to good public service, we are left to choose amongfour very similar plans. 1. There should always be a branch in the Westdale Mall area. 2. TheSkogman 1st Ave site is totally ridiculous. Far too many negatives. 3. The other three sitesare workable. 4. Second story library at Site A is not enticing 5. "Free" parking only availableat site D.


12/18

_I am most excited about having a new, more technologically advanced library build in theheart of downtown. My favorite location is the TrueNorth location as I think it will enhancethe Green Square/Museum area. Plus I appreciate the historic value of locating the newlibrary just a block from where our library started in this community. I think the library is oneof downtown's most important attractions and is a vital service in this community thatpeople of all ages can utilize and appreciate.

_The Library at Westdale is very cheery. It is brighter and better lit than the downtown mainlibrary ever was. Free parking abounds, downtown had meters to feed. Everything is easy tofind. The one thing that should be added is more computer terminals to check the catalog tosee what is on the shelves.

Please share your thoughts on the Community Safety Center concept.


13/18

_not opposed

_Combining the Linn County and Cedar Rapids safety departments into one location thatwould provide one communication system for both should be strongly considered.

_I'm not sure that bigger is better in this case. Communication is such that I don't think

everyone has to be physically side by side. Our new police station was just built.

_I like any concept that causes us to use centralized common space. The multiple locationsfor services makes no sense.

_The Community Safety Center should be centrally located in a bigger new or existingbuilding on Higher Ground!

_Couldn't this be combined with the Central Fire Station planning or the space that is freedup at the Police Station now that we have no helicopters and the fleet maintenance will becentralized.


14/18

Please share your thoughts on the Neighborhood Centers concept.

_these are needed

_Having a center in each quadrant of the city would provide better accessibility for all agesof the population.

_Cedar Rapids is a city of neighborhoods. You need to build in both neighborhoods and in thecity's central core. "Just Do It."

_It might be good if people would use them.

_The Neighborhood Centers concept is an excellent idea and should be implemented!

_This sounds similar to the Parks and Recreation Hybrid plan. Branch libraries would be agreat fit here. Much better idea than just one "Multigenerational" facility.


15/18

Please share your thoughts on the Intermodal Transportation Facility.

_SE side just past 5th ave somewhere

_Get it out of the core of the downtown, and put it on the long-term edge of DT. With bus

traffic so disruptive, and the clientele not conducive to retail or office growth, it shouldprobably adjoin industrial and be next to the rail if we get to light-rail options

_Apparently we have the money for it so we should go ahead. I'd surely like to see someinovation in design and appearance. We should make our new buildings beautiful andunique, not just practical.

_If I am not mistaken, $9,000,000 was earmarked for this project pre-flood. The old Pepsibldgs. appeared to be a logical and non-controversial choice. therefore, why wait. Putpressure on our congressional delegation to free up those funds and get this projectunderway.

_not in flood plain

_Unneeded remodel the current GTC.

_Enough longer term parking for commuters cars and bikes and for employees importantand also shorter term parking for people picking up passengers from non-local buses? Couldthis also be a place for car-pooling vans or buses to pick up passengers going to Universityof Iowa, Kirkwood College, Meskwaki Casino, rec dept trips to Brookfield Zoo, etc.

_Keep it away from the main library.

_The Intermodal Transportation Facility should be centrally located in a bigger new orexisting building on Higher Ground!


16/18

Please share your thoughts on the Former U.S. Courthouse.

_I think it would make a good City Hall and Municipal Courts building

_Sell it into private sector for redevelopment - prime waterfront should fetch a good price.

_If it is not feasible to be used for city functions, then it should be sold for private use,precluding any restrictions on the gifting by the US government.

_The possibilities are endless. Youth center, boutique, meeting areas,--something to drawpeople to the downtown. It's an interesting building and working around the NationalRegister shouldn't be a big problem unless you try to change the structure and I'd think youcould work around that creatively.

_not in flood plain

_sell old courthouse. City needs to quit buying property.

_Until flood walls and levees are in place, I'd strongly prefer no government offices in thislocation.

_What were they going to do with it before the flood? Why not stick with the plan, unless itwas going to be torn down? If Smulekoff's isn't going to be torn down, why should all ofthese other buildings be destroyed? This is beautiful building on the outside and it would bea shame if it had to be torn down.

_The Former U.S. Courthouse should become a Museum and/or Halfway House wheretrustee's from the Linn County Jail can conduct tours and/or maintain the building!


17/18

Please share any other thoughts or comments here.

_Combining the Cedar Rapids, government, Linn County government, and the Cedar RapidsSchool System into one campus at Westdale Mall would be best for the future of thecommunity.

_We have such an opportunity to reinvent our city. We can emphasize the positives andeliminate the negatives. I'd like to see a per cent for art ordinance adopted so we would beinsured of a beautiful and exciting appearance that would draw visitors and settlers here.Again, this can be a great opportunity.

_green space in 100 year flood

_Please build a new facility for the animal control and shelter services. The animals deservebetter than what they've had for years in this city.

_Why are we building houses for low income people when there are many low priced homeson the market?

_We have an opportunity to consolidate services and the facilities we use. To maintain ourmultiple locations and uncoordinated services approach is to keep Cedar Rapids in the "oldschool" mode. You don't attract new people by sticking with old, lethargic approaches to Cityservice. Thanks.

_I would really like to see both City and County Government and the Cedar Rapids SchoolDistrict offices out at Westdale Mall. If we provide lots of services and own the building then

potential other tenants would be willing to open businesses at the mall. Guaranteed foottraffic would lure new businesses to the mall, those businesses would pay taxes, this woulddefray the cost of running the structure and maintaining the parking lot. It's true the malland it's parking lot need a lot of work. A new roof, some additional walls, electrical, etc. Butwe also have a skilled workforce that can do a lot of the work in-house. The library'smaintenance staff has done the majority of the renovations needed for several librarystorefronts in the mall and the small downtown branch. OPN architects came up with apreliminary plan, elicited staff input and revised the plan. It CAN be done IF thecity/county/school district decides it wants to do it.

_I think anything rebuilt downtown needs to be remodeled with parking on the first level incase of future flooding.

_Something should be done with the May's Island buildings other than tearing them down.They're just too historical and beautiful to destroy. I think we should reuse as many of thebuildings as we can-fix them up or improve them. Once you figure out how to best protectthem from future flooding, why not reuse them? We're buying out all those residentialproperties, isn't that suppose to help with flooding? It's important to take into considerationthe environmental impact of your decisions. Good luck getting through all these decisions tobe made.


18/18

_I have a business plan for a Renaissance Festival site in the Corridor area, which will providejobs and tourism attractions. In this plan is a tavern, coffee shop, and restaurant with dinnerand a show. Please contact me with questions and concerns. Thank you.

_I find it interesting that you want companies to locate downtown and your not sure if youwant to yourself.

_It is my hope to see as most of the city facilities move back to existing buildings w/ someupgrades. This is preferable because it is more cost effective than building new. Andalthough, the floods were horrible, I do not want to see everything move away fromdowntown just because there is a risk of future flooding. It seems everyone is paranoidabout that.

_The Open Houses are very well done and extremely informative!

_I think most of the public offices should stay at Westdale Mall. The island is too small, toooutdated and too expensive. Plus future flooding issues.

Documents

09202400_CR OPEN HOUSE 2_Online Feedback_City Services