To the editor:
The Review has published a series of news items and editorials about the city’s plans for sale of the Suzuki property, furnishing citizens with useful information and raising some questions. This should build attendance at the public meeting on Feb. 9 and the council meeting on Feb. 23.
In one important respect, however, I think the coverage has fallen short: the property’s “fair market value” is presumed to be much more than is being offered in any of the proposed plans for development — the implication being that the public’s interests will be poorly served by any development unless the city receives a higher price for the land.
If the city were interested in getting the highest possible price for the Suzuki property, it would be marketed without conditions, without any expectation of benefits to the public, and the result might be a gated community, with homes priced high enough to guarantee a profit commensurate with the high price for the land.
Wisely, however, the city didn’t just offer the land to the highest bidder, but asked for proposals that would be evaluated with reference to nine “preferred priorities.”
As described in the Review’s news article on Jan. 1, those priorities include “a varied housing mix; permanent affordability; green and sustainable construction; open space, community gardens, buffers and connectivity; easement for a safe route to schools; a project that is integrated into the neighborhood.”
I’m not an appraiser, or any other kind of real estate expert, but I’ve learned a couple of things about the value of acres of undeveloped land. One is that a large tract doesn’t increase in value at the same rate as a vacant lot in a desirable location. And the reason is that the land’s value is determined by what is going to be built on it and by the other costs of development relative to the market value of the homes when built.
The only appraisal that could be relevant to the city’s decision-making would be one that takes into account the costs and constraints imposed by those “preferred priorities.”
JON QUITSLUND
Bainbridge Island
