Flood Recovery
Rebuild Cedar Rapids city hall, or build new one?
Posted on Aug 18, 2009 by Rick Smith.
Portions of the walls are torn out on the first floor of the Veterans Memorial Building Aug. 13. The building was also the former home of Cedar Rapids' City Hall. (Crystal LoGiudice/The Gazette)
The city estimates it will cost city taxpayers $50 million-plus to build a brand-new City Hall or up to $4.3 million for a $39 million renovation before the flood-damaged Veterans Memorial Building/City Hall can return to life with better flood protection and room for program growth.
But over 50 years, the city’s financial analysis says the cost to local taxpayers of the two options, once “ongoing” costs and flood-insurance costs are factored in, will be close to the same — $94.5 million for the Veterans Memorial Building and $91.1 million for a new City Hall.
The calculation for the build-a-new-City-Hall option becomes more attractive by the way flood insurance is figured against the Veterans Memorial Building and by an estimated savings of $23.2 million over time because city departments like parks, recreation and engineering will be in a newly constructed City Hall and not in separate city buildings like they are now.
These estimates and many more related to the city’s key flood-damaged facilities and its parks and recreation system will on view today at an open house from 4 to 7 p.m. in the ballroom at the Crowne Plaza Five Seasons Hotel, 350 First Ave. NE, and again from 11:30 a.m. to 1:30 p.m. Wednesday.
Dan Thies, president/CEO of OPN Architects Inc. of Cedar Rapids, says that this week’s open houses are intended to prompt input from citizens and show just how “very complex” the variables are that are part of making decisions about the city’s flood-damaged buildings.
“Is there a better way to provide the services that the city delivers, and what does that look like?” he asks. “Does everybody just kind of reoccupy a former existing building they were in? Is there a different existing building that they can reoccupy? Is there a combination?”
Among the variables is flood insurance: The total cost estimate over time for returning City Hall to the flood-damaged Veterans Memorial Building includes a $23.5 million cost for flood insurance while there is no cost for flood insurance at a new City Hall because it would be built in a spot that doesn’t require flood insurance.
The city must renovate the historic, flood-damaged Veterans Memorial Building even if it builds a new City Hall. The Federal Emergency Management Agency will pay most of the cost of that work, estimated between $36 million and $39 million. Tenants apparently would pay the cost of flood insurance if city government was in a new City Hall.
Another City Hall option would be to put all that would go in a newly built City Hall at Westdale Mall. This option is the most costly to taxpayers: At least $63 million of an initial cost of $71 million and $115 million over time.
At this week’s open houses, the city will display 126 poster boards of information on city facilities.
The one on the Veterans Memorial Building notes that the seven-story building prevented the expansion of department spaces due to the building’s site and historic constraints even before the June 2008 flood. Altering the building’s large, little-used auditorium now would be a “detriment” to the building’s history. Post-flood, the building “carries an inherent risk for future occupants.”
As for building a new City Hall, a poster board states, “By creating a ‘one-stop’ facility, it can offer greater services and increase its presence in the community. All new state-of-the-art technology and building practices can be incorporated to make this new building one of the most sustainable in the state.”
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=15a6d0b2-b1d2-47ac-a306-ee846935345d)
I feel it is ludicrous to ask taxpayers to kick in to rebuild in the middle of the river that will inevitably flood that building again. At the same time, I hate the notion of this current administration getting the green light for an extravagant new city hall. Is there any other option to rebuild in an existing vacant location at a cheaper price than starting totally new or rebuilding in the middle of the flippin' river? Once again, Westdale mall seems idyllic to have the 'one-stop' services available between city and county, but for whatever reason the collective brain-trust will have nothing to do with that. It would be interesting to see some unbiased independent research on cost-analysis for all these options. Seems lately the numbers are skewed by whatever side the proponents of their favorite project lean to.
The problem with Westdale is that to make it into a functional space, there would need to be a major renovation to it. There are no offices, conference rooms, or room for a sizable cube farm and there would need to be a major demolition and reconstruction of the existing space to make it usable. It might be nice for smaller offices like the assessors but trying to get 500+ office workers in there would prove to very expensive and time consuming.
Remove river pinch points elevate the railroad bridge down by the Shack Tavern, do not allow rail cars to be parked on rail bridges ( huge damming effect) Go look at the rail bridge down by the Shack you will see it is solid, basically when water started to hit it it was in effect a dam.
Does anyone else wonder why none of these issues are even being discussed?
Remove river pinch points elevate the railroad bridge down by the Shack Tavern, do not allow rail cars to be parked on rail bridges ( huge damming effect) Go look at the rail bridge down by the Shack you will see it is solid, basically when water started to hit it it was in effect a dam. Then the water would flow instead of backing up.
Does anyone else wonder why none of these issues are even being discussed?
Coralville is receiving money to elevate a rail bridge, evidently they don't stick their heads in the sand as CR is doing, so their(CR) grand master plan will stand a chance
A_congitator is does not suit the city leaders to do that, they have an agenda that they are following, thats why the flood and recovery has happened they way it has. Oh yeah the "master plan" is river run with a few tweaks…………..
I agree
Stay in the old building, cost is about the same chances of another flood is very slim, and the city does not need a city hall, which would actually cost more when you figure there would be 2 buildings city hall and vet memorial. Aside from that the location for the new city hall would not really be to far out of floods way, and if there is another flood it will be isolated, The city is getting the old Federal court house, which can house other city offices and other functions, a little better planning will ensure more safety of the valuables in city hall
Aside from that I do not trust their numbers they already approved the building plans for a new city hall, and really want one, so its not to hard to play with the numbers to push their agenda
the city council made the decision early on that they wanted a new modern facility. we all know it. if they had really wanted to, they could have moved into the federal courthouse back in march. too many of the city council want to leave a "legacy" behind.
and full fill the promises to the special interest
To me I say stay in the old location. There is a third option that no one on the council seems to want to look at…. One of the MANY vacant larger buildings, not have to be old either. Lets face it we have several EconoFoods builds that are HUGE and would not take all that much to renovate to update since they are not that old to begin with. There is the lost cause Westdale location I still think it would be smart to move into that one, and then take some of that ample parking take it up and convert into parks and splash pads, perhaps a dog park area.Keep in mind when I say that I am talking some of the corner areas of that vast westdale parking area, I mean then you would be next to the library, movie theaters, places to eat and it would encourage growth in that old mall. As for a legacy this city council has already made a legacy of ineptness, falling asleep on the job, and mismanagement during a disaster. I am still to this day curious what would happen if there was a federal audit on FEMA money use, wonder how much has been misapplied already.
Kill two birds with one stone: Make the city hall/.Veterans Memorial building the center piece of it's giant park system, use the auditorium as a gym and center piece for larger group programing, the remaining offices could hold non-essential city operations that if we had a flood would not affect the overall operation of the city in its hour of need. Allow space for neighborhood organizing efforts that strengthen the neighborhoods and the city at the same time, such as a local master gardner group, a tool library for all the neighborhoods, that sort of thing. Make the building what it used to be, a viable center that was affordable for the citizens of Cedar Rapids.
No where in any of the material put together by the local government do I see the cost savings that city departments get by moving back into the Vets building. The departments that were housed in the Vets bldg did not have to factor into their budgets rent or utility costs as they were housed free in the Vets building. Currently they are now having to factor in rental costs and utility costs for where they are currently at. If and when they move once again they will have to factor these additional costs that they never had to factor in when they were housed in the Vets building. Thus their budgets would go up and obviously a need for additional taxes to meet these costs. I say move them back into the Vets building or at the very least tell the public the truth – paint the whole picture not paint by number.
I agree, but then again there is the agenda. Time to rain in city hall also
Stay and rebuild!!!
Too bad they didn't include another option: build a financially responsible new city hall instead of a $50 million palace. I believe the numbers they've given about as much as I believe the county's. That is, I think they made up some numbers to justify the conclusion they want to reach.
I believe they should stay. It would be crazy to rebuild. If I can't put siding on my house to prevent kids from getting LEAD POISONING, cause I live in the Historical District. They can't get a new building. Is the building not a Historical Building? Wouldn't be better for morale if they move back in. Letting some of the HOMEOWNERS see the light at the end of the tunnel.
I say it would be better to place city hall in FEMA trailers (like the school district) instead of paying $40k for rent a month, and then rebuild build new or relocate homes instead but hey what do I know
Why attend any of these meetings as the City Manager and Council have already made up their minds that they are going to build a new City Hall.They have been saying for a long time,even before the flood,that they wanted to build a "Taj Mahal".I say either move back into the Vets' Building or into Westdale Mall.If they decide against the Vets' Building,then renovate it and use it as a community center.
You are so right when you say Jim Processor and the part-time city council have already made up there minds – that is why I say they aren't painting the entire picture to the public – they are only presenting a slanted side to the general public. They are trying to justify ahead of time their reasons – then once they get what they want and costs run over they will justify those as well. Jim Processor and the part-time city council are forcing individuals to go in and gut their old homes, rebuild and make do and yet they can't do the same for themselves – noooo – they have to have a brand new building – they are like kids if their toy gets broke they don't want it anymore – they want something newer and shinier.
Personally I am so bitter with the city council I wouldn't believe a damn thing that comes out of there mouths. just look at some of the b.s. that has already been spewed, first we get an option tax that I have found no one I have talked with that voted yes, then we are told there is plenty of money for flood victims, then a few months later written in this very paper, there is an article about the budget going to be short 8 million or so because when there is a utility tax credit there can not be a local option sales tax… If this that is true then why are we still paying an additional 1 cent. I would like to see a third party come in and do a cost analysis for this new building vs renovated vets/other location, I mean crap we paid to have consultants consult or consultants, why not a viable third party cost analysis. Then a audit of all the Federal funds that were suppose to go to the Flood Victims Many that are still in the dark about buyout, then see what happens.
I am glad you understand what these people are doing. Look for the new candidates, some of them maybe just what you are looking for.
Aren't these the very same people who continually shout REBUILD DOWNTOWN CEDAR RAPIDS!!! They want everyone else to rebuild downtown, but aren't willing to return themselves…
Not sure where the 500 office workers figure comes from since there are only about 1500 non union workers on the city payroll… don't think 1/3 of them worked in the old city hall.
Yeah, we can see what the rebuild is doing — there are two "new" used car lots within 6 blocks of downtown (the old Dairy Queen location and the old Asian Food and Gift shop). The old church next to Maid-Rite is gone — will that be a car lot soon? How about the 2 gas stations (1st Ave and 1st St; 1st Ave and 6th St) that still aren't functioning — used car lots? The house at 1st Ave and 2nd St that used to be an attorney's office is torn down — used car lot? So, is the purpose of rebuilding downtown to turn it into a used car lot??
car lots like those generally go to where land is cheap, or a dead downtown area.
[...] Rebuild Cedar Rapids city hall, or build new one? Future Of C.R. City Hall And Library On Display CR Looks to Revamp Recreation & Parks Post Flood [...]