Council directs $20,000 structural assessment of Noble building, asks for stamped report in 60 days

The Livonia City Council voted unanimously Tuesday to allocate up to $20,000 for a stamped structural assessment of the Alfred Noble building, ordering that a licensed structural engineer produce a report for council within 60 days.

The motion, offered by Council President Brandon McCullough and supported by Councilwoman Carrie Budzinski, directs the administration to procure a contractor to perform a foundation- and structure-focused inspection “stamped by a qualified and licensed engineer or structural engineer,” and return findings to council within the 60‑day window.

Council members and members of the public said the vote responds to persistent concern about water in the Noble building’s basement, mold and long-standing deferred maintenance. “I want a stamped inspection that shows the foundation … if it is good or bad,” McCullough said during debate. Councilwoman Budzinski said the community’s repeated requests for information and action motivated the motion: “The reason why we’re doing this … is a desperate plea for action.”

During extended discussion council members disagreed about whether an assessment would be a useful expense because previous studies have described the building as functionally obsolete. Councilmember Scott Morgan said he was skeptical that another report would change conclusions that the building is dilapidated. Budzinski and others said a stamped structural opinion limited to the foundation and load-bearing elements was necessary to determine whether the building can be saved.

Several residents who asked to speak urged action to stabilize the building. Jeff Duca, who identified himself with the Save Alfred Noble group, said the administration had not acted and urged the council to allow community groups to partner on stabilization. Another resident urged council control of the procurement process, saying the administration had previously “cherry picked” consultants.

The motion includes an instruction that the assessment be stamped and sealed. The council’s vote was recorded as Toye — Aye; Donovan — Aye; McCullough — Aye; Budzinski — Aye; Schiel — Aye; Morgan — Aye; Tashnick — Aye. The motion passed 7-0.

Council members said they expect the administration to follow procurement rules; the city attorney indicated that allocation of budgeted funds is a separate step from directing an expenditure and that contracts may still need council approval if they exceed the city’s procurement threshold.

If the engineer’s report finds the structure unsound, no explicit demolition instruction was included in the motion; council members said any next steps would be brought back for council consideration.

The council took the vote after reading and debating an administrative memorandum that concluded $20,000 would not be sufficient to reroof or waterproof the entire building but recommended issuing a request for proposals to determine actual costs. McCullough said he and council colleagues would seek to ensure the assessment is produced promptly and in a form the public can review.

A follow-up report from the administration or the contracted engineer is expected to be provided to the council within the 60‑day timeframe specified in the motion.