Downtown apartment developers take divergent paths to financing

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

It took J.C. Hart Co. more than a year to secure a $5 million bank loan to expand its downtown apartment community, The Waverley, despite an occupancy rate above 90 percent and a prime location a few blocks from corporate giants Eli Lilly and Co. and WellPoint Inc.

Fellow apartment developer Buckingham Cos. took a different approach in lining up financing for its project in the neighborhood: It teamed with Lilly to persuade Mayor Greg Ballard to offer the city’s priciest package of taxpayer support for a private development project since Circle Centre mall.

The city in October offered to provide an $86 million loan and build $9 million in infrastructure to get the $150 million North of South project off the ground. Plans call for a boutique hotel, retail space, a YMCA branch, and 320 upscale apartments that would go head-to-head with the privately financed J.C. Hart development.

Carmel-based Hart—which finalized its financing deal with Warsaw-based Lake City Bank and State Bank of Lizton the same month the mayor announced the Buckingham deal—plans to add 48 one-bedroom apartments to its 164-unit project at 151 S. East St. The first phase of Waverley, launched in 2007, cost about $18 million.

hart-file-photo15col J.C. Hart Co. plans to start construction soon on a 48-unit expansion of The Waverly. (IBJ File Photo)

North of South, which still requires City-County Council approval, would be built a few blocks away on a Lilly-owned parking lot between Delaware Street, South Street and Virginia Avenue.

The larger project should stimulate interest in other nearby developments, helping make that portion of downtown a more popular place to live, said John C. Hart Jr., president of J.C. Hart Co.

He applauded Buckingham’s creativity in landing the support of Lilly and the city and structuring a “financing vehicle” so the project could move forward quickly. But he’d also like to know more about the economics that justify so much taxpayer support where private lenders balked.

“It’s frustrating to the extent it’s taken us months and months to get our project lending commitment, frustrating to know the city was willing to offer something that might free up capital and make it easier to start a project,” Hart said.

“As a developer who has built a project downtown without any assistance and another 48 units without any government assistance, it would be a bit frustrating to be competing with a project that is getting government assistance.”

The city rarely offers incentive packages for multifamily developments. A recent exception was the Cosmopolitan on the Canal project by Flaherty & Collins Properties. The developers in that case won tax abatements in 2007 worth $2.7 million in exchange for providing public parking and rest rooms along the canal and street-level retail space.

North of South will go far beyond a standard multifamily development, providing an amenity with intangible benefits private lenders simply don’t consider, said Deron Kintner, executive director of the Indianapolis Public Improvement Bond Bank.

Intangible No. 1: providing an amenity that might stem job cuts by Lilly, the city’s largest employer, which is vacating its 465,000-square-foot Faris Campus and moving workers to the Lilly Corporate Center.

Kintner said the city will not take an equity interest in North of South and will not charge the developer a spread above the municipal borrowing rate, both moves designed to increase the likelihood the project is successful. For at least 10 years, all property taxes on the development would go toward paying down the project debt.

“If Lilly had come to us and told us The Waverley was important to their future, we would have listened just the same,” Kintner said. “This is a unique project to the city. It’s not just another multifamily project or a hotel. I don’t want people to think this type of funding will be the norm now. Every project is unique in its own way.”

Hart understands some projects will need government help, particularly for infrastructure needs such as parking. He also can relate to hoteliers’ bristling at the city’s support for North of South’s new boutique hotel, wondering whether another hotel will spread the market’s existing room-nights too thin.

But if Hart had to do it over again, he still would invest in The Waverley.

“We believe very strongly in our location and that side of town and aren’t surprised others would be interested in adding to the inventory,” Hart said. “Activity has a way of breeding other activity. We welcome the competition, and we look forward to building our addition.”•


  • thanks
    Our city is very fortunate to have such strong support from Lilly and from people like John Hart

Post a comment to this story

We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. By Mr. Lee's own admission, he basically ran pro-bono ads on the billboard. Paying advertisers didn't want ads on a controversial, ugly billboard that turned off customers. At least one of Mr. Lee's free advertisers dropped out early because they found that Mr. Lee's advertising was having negative impact. So Mr. Lee is disingenous to say the city now owes him for lost revenue. Mr. Lee quickly realized his monstrosity had a dim future and is trying to get the city to bail him out. And that's why the billboard came down so quickly.

  2. Merchants Square is back. The small strip center to the south of 116th is 100% leased, McAlister’s is doing well in the outlot building. The former O’Charleys is leased but is going through permitting with the State and the town of Carmel. Mac Grill is closing all of their Indy locations (not just Merchants) and this will allow for a new restaurant concept to backfill both of their locations. As for the north side of 116th a new dinner movie theater and brewery is under construction to fill most of the vacancy left by Hobby Lobby and Old Navy.

  3. Yes it does have an ethics commission which enforce the law which prohibits 12 specific items. google it

  4. Thanks for reading and replying. If you want to see the differentiation for research, speaking and consulting, check out the spreadsheet I linked to at the bottom of the post; it is broken out exactly that way. I can only include so much detail in a blog post before it becomes something other than a blog post.

  5. 1. There is no allegation of corruption, Marty, to imply otherwise if false. 2. Is the "State Rule" a law? I suspect not. 3. Is Mr. Woodruff obligated via an employment agreement (contractual obligation) to not work with the engineering firm? 4. In many states a right to earn a living will trump non-competes and other contractual obligations, does Mr. Woodruff's personal right to earn a living trump any contractual obligations that might or might not be out there. 5. Lawyers in state government routinely go work for law firms they were formally working with in their regulatory actions. You can see a steady stream to firms like B&D from state government. It would be interesting for IBJ to do a review of current lawyers and find out how their past decisions affected the law firms clients. Since there is a buffer between regulated company and the regulator working for a law firm technically is not in violation of ethics but you have to wonder if decisions were made in favor of certain firms and quid pro quo jobs resulted. Start with the DOI in this review. Very interesting.