An open letter to the Common Council of the City of Noblesville:
First of all, I want to thank the Council for approaching the Levinson proposal in an open and transparent manner. Providing an opportunity for the citizens to be heard and providing the information necessary to understand the rationale for the City’s participation in this project is a critical part of local government and I appreciate your approach. I agree with Councilor Wiles that more of us should be here on a regular basis to observe the operation of our Council, and I will do my best to keep that commitment.
Secondly, to be clear, I believe this is a project that is needed and it is the right concept at the right time in the right place. However, the devil is in the details, and that is why I have several questions that I hope can be answered.
- According to industry information, the average cost in the Indianapolis area for the construction of a parking space within a parking structure is just over $18,000. If, as shared on Aug. 28, the total number of parking spaces is 337 and the Noblesville share of the total project cost is $15.4 million, that is over $45,000 per parking space, unless Noblesville taxpayers are being asked to pay for something else. What is the reason for this disparity? At $18,000 per space that would suggest a cost closer to $6 million for the City. Is there a parking charge? For residents of the apartments? For citizens who park there to shop? What are those costs? If there is a reserved spot for residents, how is the monetary value of that reserved space being considered between the City and the developer?
- According to industry information, the cost to construct an 800 square-foot apartment within an apartment structure is approximately $86,000 per unit. If, as we were told, the total number of apartment units in the structure is 83, that would be a projected cost of slightly over $7 million. This does not include the 5,100 square feet of retail that will also be constructed by the developer. According to industry averages, the per square-foot cost of this type of construction is in the range of $200 per square-foot, or, just over $1 million. There is no attribution of the contributed land value owned by the city. If we knew what the developer paid for the privately-owned portion which will be demolished, we would have some idea of what the value is for the city portion of the real estate. How are these numbers reconciled? The City-owned land clearly has a value and it should be recognized.
- What are the specific incentives being offered to the developer? It would seem that the total project cost does not equal the amount proposed: $6 million + $8 million = $14 million, not $24.3 million. Even allowing for the various costs associated with the project (legal fees, architectural and engineering costs, etc.) that should NOT equal an additional $10 million. What accounts for that difference? What is the amount of monetary benefit to the developer from the tax abatement over what period of time? Surely the City has made this calculation in order to know precisely what this benefit is worth to the developer. Applying the current City tax rate, 2.7420, to the attributed cost to the developer – that is a huge amount of tax benefit or savings while the City is expected to immediately provide City services to the new structure at a cost to someone.
- Given the fact that the City appears ready to make this substantial investment to create a parking garage on this site, a decision with which I agree, was any consideration given to making a request for proposals (RFP) in order to see if there are other developers that might have an interest in participating in such a venture? Perhaps that route would result in a better deal for the City. This should not be viewed as a binary option: Do this project or not. All options to achieve the objective should be given consideration.
- What consideration has been given to maintaining safe access to the fire station during construction?
- Is the City prepared to engage an independent architect that will ensure that the look and feel of the structure is consistent with the historical nature of the area? If the parking garage portion is visible, it will clearly not be consistent with the historic architecture. As the City has expanded into other buildings to house its necessary offices, the old Post Office façade and the old Library façade and look were retained. It is clear that for a long time, the City has recognized and affirmed its historic character in the downtown.
It is my hope that the consideration for this project will be done in an appropriate and thorough manner and that citizen input will be taken into account. In the end, we all want what is best for Noblesville. I look forward to hearing more at the Council meeting on Sept. 11.
Respectfully,
Julia Church Kozicki
Noblesville