MOUNT VERNON — Developer Joel Mazza told Mount Vernon council members on Monday that he needs their help moving forward on the development of the former school at 301 N. Mulberry St.
He wants that help to come in the form of revised CRA (Community Reinvestment Area) guidelines relating to tax abatements for historic structures.
Under the CRA, a historic abatement is 75% for 20 years. Mazza asked council to amend it to 100% for 20 years.
Mazza wants to split the school property into two parcels: a front lot containing the existing structure and a back parcel containing the rest of the property. He then intends to apply for a historical abatement on the front parcel and a new multi-family construction abatement on the back parcel.
As a whole parcel, the project qualifies for a new multi-family construction abatement: 100% for 15 years with a PILOT agreement (Payment in Lieu of Taxes). The time clock for the abatement starts when the structure is occupied.
“This high school, I think, is historically the most significant project in the county. I think it’s in line with the Woodward with the amount of people who went through it,” he told council, referencing Paul Lynde as a graduate and a renowned architect designing it.
Describing the development project as challenging, Mazza said, “I don’t think there’s anyone in this room that would refute we are in unprecedented times with Covid, the cost of gas, and the cost of construction materials.”
Since learning on April 1 that the state officially approved the city-wide CRA, Mazza has reconnected with contractors, secured financing, and updated bids. He said the new cost of the first phase, renovating the existing structure into apartments, has proved to be extremely expensive.
Mazza said subcontractors will not give him final numbers; they say they will update costs every 30 days.
“Fuel, labor, it’s the great unknown. No one wants to give a definitive bid,” he said. “So what I am asking with a project of this size and scope, I need help.”
“It would be easier to vote yes on this if we saw some significant progress,” Councilman Josh Kirby said. “I mean, there has been a significant change up there … but it just seems like there’s always one more thing in the way to getting something done. “
“You’re already asking for an extension and the project hasn’t even started yet,” Council member Tammy Woods said.
Regarding a time frame if council does not grant the CRA revision, Mazza said he plans to start construction this year. He also said a lack of revision “will change the level of our investment in the property.”
Councilman John Francis said he sees the project as a housing development, not an old school.
“I get the historical building part, but it was a historical building when you applied for the CRA,” he told Mazza. “It was a historical building when you decided to take on what you were taking on. I think we went above and beyond trying to help you out. … It’s still sitting there with nothing being done.”
Francis said that Mazza is stalling his own progress by asking for a CRA revision.
“You say you’ve got everything in place,” Francis told Mazza. “I would say build it.”
Designating historical structures
Compounding the issue is the problem of getting a historic designation for the school. The Historical Review Commission does not have the authority to decide what is a historical property outside of the historic districts.
“There needs to be a separate piece of legislation — and that has been drafted — that empowers the Historic Review Commission to declare things outside of the historic districts,” Jeff Gottke, president of the Area Development Foundation, said.
Gottke said the intent of the historical designation in the CRA was mostly for single-family homes.
“We did not anticipate a large multi-family project to be declared historic to get that extra five years of tax abatement,” he said. “The intent was for historic homes because historic homes and historic homeowners need that little extra to get them through.”
Noting that during that extra five years of abatement tax money would go to other entities in addition to the city, Gottke said that he believes council owes it to the schools to re-engage if council considers changing the CRA provisions for historic.
“They did buy into this on an assumption, so we do owe it to them to go back to them and say ‘hey, would you weigh in on this particular situation?’” he said. “So, it does open up some more procedural issues.”
The plan is to have legislation at the next council meeting that gives the Historical Review Commission authority to designate historic structures outside of the historic districts. If council adopts the legislation, the following issues then need to be decided:
•Whether to grant a historic designation to the school (Historic Review Commission)
•Whether to grant a lot split (Municipal Planning Commission)
•Whether to grant the CRA revision (city council)
