Link

Social

Embed

Disable autoplay on embedded content?

Download

Download
Download Transcript

[A. Call to Order]

[00:00:06]

>> ALL RIGHT. I'M GOING TO CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER. WE WILL START WITH THE PLEDGE OF

ALLEGIANCE. >> I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS, ONE NATION UNDER GOD INDIVISIBLE WITH

LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL. >> ROLL CALL?

>> GREG GRABOW? >> PRESENT.

>> JAMES HAWKINS? >> PRESENT.

>> ALAN POTASNIK? >> PRESENT.

[D. Declaration of Quorum]

>> LLEE LEAH YORK? >> PRESENT.

[E. Approval of Minutes and Findings of Facts of Previous Meetings]

>> PRESIDENT DIRKMAN? DIERCKMAN?

>> YES. >> MR. PRESIDENT, YOU DO HAVE FINDINGS OF FACT APPROVAL FOR VARIANCE REQUESTS BZ2023-0031V AND PZ-2023-0037D. AS A NEG TY FINDINGS OF FACT.

>> THANK YOU. ANY COMMENTS?

DISCUSSION? >> MOVE TO APPROVE THE MINUTES AS CIRCULATED AND THE FINDINGS OF FACT FOR THE TWO VARIANCES

NUMBERED. >> SECOND.

>> ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, STATE AYE.

>> AYE. >> ANYONE OPPOSED, SAME SIGN.

HEARING NONE, MOTION CARRIES. COMMUNICATION, BILLS, AND

[G. Reports, Announcements, Legal Counsel Report, and Department Concerns]

EXPENDITURES. ALL RIGHT.

REPORTS, ANNOUNCEMENTS, LEGAL COUNSEL REPORT.

NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING LETTERS WERE REGULAR POSTAGE-MAILED RATHER THAN CERTIFICATES OF MAILING POSTAGE.

WE WANT TO EXPLAIN THAT, WHOEVER CAN DO THAT?

>> SURE. FOR THE RULES OF PROCEDURE, THE PETITIONER IS REQUIRED TO SEND THE LETTERS TO THE PROPERTY OWNERS WITH THE CERTIFICATES OF MAILING, RATHER THAN REGULAR MAIL. JUST TO SHOW PROOF OF MAILING.

WE DO RECOMMEND THAT THE BZA VOTES TO SUSPEND THE RULES OF

PROCEDURE. >> YUP.

GO AHEAD. >> QUICK QUESTION.

THE PROPERTY SURROUNDED PRIMARILY BY COMMERCIAL.

CORRECT? >> THAT IS CORRECT.

>> HOW ABOUT A MOTION TO SUSPEND THE RULES?

>> MOVE TO SUSPEND THE RULES WITH RESPECT TO PUBLIC NOTICE.

>> SECOND. >> A MOTION AND SECOND.

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, STATE AYE. AYE.

ANYONE OPPOSED, SAME SIGN. HEARING NONE, MOTION CARRIES.

THANK YOU. PUBLIC HEARINGS.

ALL RIGHT. WE ARE GOING TO GIVE THE PETITIONER 15 MINUTES IF THEY NEED IT.

AND THEN SUPPORTERS WILL HAVE FIVE MINUTES.

IF THERE IS ANY REMONSTRATORS, WE WILL HAVE 15 MINUTES, DEPENDING ON THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE.

WE WILL HAVE A REBUTTAL, IF NECESSARY.

THEN ADMINISTRATION DEPARTMENT WILL GIVE US A REPORT.

[H. (V) Majestic Care Sign Variance]

THEN WE WILL HAVE DISCUSSION HERE.

HAVING SAID ALL OF THAT, MAJESTIC CARE SIGNAGE VARIANCE, APPLICANT, APPROVAL FOR A WALL SIGN.

DOCKET NUMBER PZ20022UDO SECTION THE SITE IS LOCATED AT 1299 PENNSYLVANIA STREET, FORMERLY CALLED SUMMER TRACE AT MANOR CARE. IT IS ZONED UR, URBAN RESIDENTIAL BY JOHN SEIB, MAJESTIC CARE OF CARMEL.

YOU WILL NEED TO USE THE MIC TO STATE YOUR CITY OF RESIDENCE AND THEN IF YOU NEED ALL 15 MINUTES, YOU ARE WELCOME TO IT.

YOU KNOW, SHORT IS ALWAYS APPRECIATED.

>> MY NAME IS JOHN SEIB. TIME ADMINISTRATOR OF MAJESTIC CARE OF CARMEL. MY PLACE OF RESIDENCE IS 10566 GREENWAY DRIVE IN FISHERS, INDIANA.

THE PROPERTY IN QUESTION IS NORTH PENNSYLVANIA, CARMEL, INDIANA. I OPERATE THERE AS THE ADMINISTRATOR. AS PART OF A LARGER ARCHITECTURAL CHANGE THAT WE HAVE WORKED ON WITH THE ZONING COMMITTEE, PRIOR TO THE FILING OF THIS PETITION.

I BELIEVE THIS WAS ACTUALLY FILED LONG BEFORE ANYTHING ELSE.

BUT TO SORT OF FINISH OFF WHAT WE WERE WORKING WITH, WE ARE ASKING FOR THE ADDITION OF A WALL SIGN AND EXCEPTION TO THE VARIANCE. AFTER WORKING ON THIS WITH THE COMMITTEE AND THE ZONING/PLANNING COMMITTEE AND SEEING THE RECOMMENDATION THAT IT BE APPROVED, I WOULD LIKE TO OPEN IT TO ANY QUESTIONS YOU MIGHT HAVE.

WE BELIEVE IT IS AN ESSENTIAL THING, THE STRICT APPLICATION OF

[00:05:01]

THE UNIFIED VARIANCE, THE SETBACK HAS BEEN CONFUSING FOR DIFFERENT PARTIES. THEY HAVE BEEN COMING TO THE SPACE. ESSENTIALLY, THAT IT IS EASY TO MISTAKE IT FOR AN APARTMENT COMPLEX.

OR AS A COMMERCIAL PROPERTY. WE BELIEVE TH T THAT THAT IT ISN THE PUBLIC INTEREST TO HAVE A SIGN, TO BETTER DIFFERENTIATE A PUBLIC HEALTH FACILITY AS OPPOSED TO AN APARTMENT COMPLEX.

AND THAT, YOU KNOW, WE ACTIVELY RELY ON TOURS AND PEOPLE FINDING THE PROPERTY WHEN THEY ARE SEARCHING FOR HELP FOR THEIR LOVED ONES. SO FOR THEM TO HAVE EASY ACCESS INSTEAD OF HAVING TO CALL THE FRONT DESK AND LOOK FOR US IS-- ALLOWS US TO FULLY USE PRACTICAL USE OF THE PROPERTY BECAUSE THEY HAVE TO BE ABLE TO FIND IT IN ORDER TO TOUR.

ALSO IN RELATION TO THE OTHER ADJOINING PROPERTIES, THEY ARE PPRIMARILY COMMERCIAL IN NATURE. THE SIGN AS PROPOSED, AND IN THE PACKET BROUGHT BEFORE YOU, IS A PRODUCT OF US WORKING WITH THE SIGN DEPARTMENT. IT MEETS THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE ZONING COMMITTEE, AND WE DON'T BELIEVE, BECAUSE THE SIGN IS FACING TOWARD THE COMMERCIAL OFFICE PARK AND U.S. 31, THAT IT WILL NOT OTHERWISE INTERFERE WITH THEIR USE OF THE PROPERTY.

OR ENJOYMENT OF THEIR OWN. AND THAT BEING SAID, I DON'T HAVE A LOT ELSE TO GO. I WOULD BE OPEN TO ANY QUESTIONS

YOU MIGHT HAVE. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

ANYBODY HERE IN SUPPORT OF THIS? SEEING NONE, ANYONE REMONSTRATING AGAINST THIS SIGN? SEEING NONE, NO REBUTTAL.

DEPARTMENT REPORT. >> THANK YOU.

THE PETITIONER WOULD LIKE A WALL SIGN.

IN ADDITION TO AN ALREADY APPROVED GROUND SIGN.

AND THE SITE IS A LITTLE OVER EIGHT ACRES.

IT IS PRETTY LARGE. PLANNING STAFF DOES FEEL THAT THIS VARIANCE SHOULD BE GRANTED, SO WE DO RECOMMEND POSITIVE CONSIDERATION OF THE VARIANCE. THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU. DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE, HOW ABOUT A MOTION?

>> MOVE TO APPROVE. >> NEED A SECOND?

>> I'LL SECOND. >> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, STATE AYE.

>> AYE. >> ANYONE OPPOSED? HEARING NONE, MOTION CARRIES. ONE OPPOSED.

MR. GRABOW. THANK YOU.

[H. (V) L’Etoile Variances]

YOU ARE APPROVED. NEXT ITEM FOR BUSINESS IS L'ETOILE VARIANCE. THE APPLICANT SEEKS APPROVAL, DOCKET PZ2023-0083V. UDO SECTION 2.38.

SETBACK FOR SURFACE PARKING REQUIRED FOUR FEET REQUESTED.

THE DOCKET NUMBER PZ20223-0084V. UDO SECTION 5.012.

NO PROJECT SHALL HAVE MORE THAN MORE FLOOR AREA THAN PARKING UNITS CAN PROVIDE. AND ONE PARKING SPACE PER 350 SQUARE FEET OF RENTAL REQUIRED. 66 SPACES TOTAL REQUIRED.

36 REQUESTED. PZ2023-0085V.

40-FOOT MINIMUM. SETBACK SURFACE PARKING REQUIRED. THREE FEET REQUESTED.

20 MAXIMUM. 43 REQUESTED.

THE SITE IS LOCATED AT 833 WEST MAIN STREET.

IT IS ZONED UC URBAN CORE. BY BEN BEMIS.

ON BEHALF OF THE OWNER AZIZ MAMAEV.

OKAY. DO WE HAVE THE PETITIONER HERE?

YOU HAVE 15 MINUTES. >> HI.

I'M DAN MORIARTY FROM STUDIO M ARCHITECTURE HERE IN TOWN TO REPRESENT THE DEVELOPER, AZIZ MAMAEV.

THE PROPERTY OWNER FOR THE PROPERTY.

THIS PROJECT HAS A LONG AND VARIED HISTORY.

THIS IS A 2018 JOB NUMBER FOR US.

WE STARTED WITH AZIZ BACK IN 2018 TO GET SOMETHING BUILT ON THE SITE. WE STARTED WITH A SIX-STORY BUILDING. AND IN 2020, THREE YEARS AGO, WE WENT THROUGH ADLS AND WERE APPROVED FOR A SIX-STORY BUILDING WITH TWO LEVELS OF PARKING.

THE SITE IS THE SAME. YOU SEE HERE IT IS ON MAIN STREET. ACROSS FROM THE NEW SIGNATURE PROPERTY RIGHT ACROSS FROM FAT DAN'S TAVERN THERE.

THAT EMPTY PROPERTY AT 833 MAIN STREET.

WE STARTED WITH A SIX-STORY BUILDING.

WE COVERED 100% OF THE SITE. WHEN WE STARTED, THIS WAS GOING TO BE A CRC PROJECT, AND IT WAS GOING TO BE REZONED AS C-2, I BELIEVE. AND THROUGH THE PROCESS WITH THE

[00:10:04]

CRC, AND AS THE FINANCING OF THE PROJECT DEVELOPED, COVID HIT AT THAT POINT. OR RIGHT ALONG THAT TIME.

AND BECAUSE OF THE HIGH COST, IT WAS NECESSARY TO SCALE THE PROJECT BACK. SO THIS LAST FALL, AZIZ RESTARTED THE PROJECT AND ASKED US TO LOOK AT A SMALLER BUILDING WITH SMALLER FOOTPRINT AND LESS UNITS.

TO SEE IF WE COULD MAKE THE BUILDING WORK.

THE PROPERTY IS CURRENTLY ZONED UC FOR URBAN CORE.

THE FORMER PLAN THAT WE HAD APPROVED BACK IN 2020, YOU SEE SEVERAL VARIANCES WE NEED NOW THAT WE DIDN'T NEED BEFORE.

ALL THE SETBACK VARIANCES, AND THE PARKING VARIANCE, BACK WHEN IT WAS C-2. OF COURSE, THOSE STANDARDS DIDN'T APPLY. SO TODAY, WHAT WE ARE HOPING TO GET ACCOMPLISHED TODAY OR TONIGHT IS ALSO-- I WANT TO CLARIFY A COUPLE OF STATISTICS ALONG THE WAY HERE.

ONE, I DON'T KNOW IF ANYBODY PICKED IT UP.

I JUST NOTICED TODAY THERE WAS A TYPO IN OUR SUMMARY ON THE BUILDING HEIGHT. IT SAYS 83 FOOT 8.

IT WAS 83 AT ONE POINT WHEN WE HAD SIX OR SEVEN STORIES.

I WANT TO MAKE SURE FOR THE REPORT THAT THE BUILDING IS ESSENTIALLY FOUR STORIES TALL. THE SECOND THING IS, SINCE WE ALREADY HAVE ADLS APPROVAL OR WE DID, WE NEEDED TO-- AND WORKING WITH PLANNING, WE HAVE BEEN WORKING TO AMEND THE ADLS.

THAT REQUIRES US TO GO THROUGH COMMERCIAL COMMITTEE.

WE HAD ONE COMMERCIAL COMMITTEE HEARING, AND WE WORKED WITH ALEXIA. IN THE PLANNING OFFICE.

AND HAVE ACTUALLY ADDED MORE PARKING THAN WHAT WE HAD WHEN WE INITIALLY WENT INTO THAT MEETING.

WE HAVE ADDED EIGHT NEW SPOTS. WE HAVE 45 UNITS.

AND WE HAVE 45 PARKING SPACES. AND THEN WE REDUCED THE SIZE OF THE RETAIL. SO THAT IS THE STATISTICS THAT WE ARE WORKING WITH RIGHT NOW. TO GIVE YOU AN IDEA OF THE APARTMENTS AND UNITS, IT IS A LITTLE HARD TO SEE.

HERE IS THE ENLARGEMENT OF THE GARAGE.

THERE IS ALSO A DRAINAGE EASEMENT THAT FOLLOWS THIS DRIVE RIGHT HERE. THEN THERE IS UNDERGROUND DETENTION BACK HERE. SO THIS GOES UNDER THE BUILDING AT THIS POINT. THEN THIS PORTION OF THE PARKING IS COVERED. THEN THERE IS ANOTHER LOT BEHIND THE BUILDING. THAT IS WHAT GENERATED SOME OF THESE VARIANCES. ABOUT UNCOVERED PARKING.

OR SURFACE PARKING LOT. THE APARTMENTS THEMSELVES ARE ALL WHAT I WOULD CALL KIND OF STUDIO STYLE.

THEY ARE ONE-BEDROOM. THEY ARE SHOTGUN UNITS.

THEY ARE SMALLER IN SIZE. AS YOU CAN SEE, THE BEDROOM IS HERE. THERE ARE NO TWO-BEDROOM UNITS IN THE BUILDING. THERE IS ONLY ONE WHAT I WOULD CALL TRADITIONAL ONE-BEDROOM. I'M SORRY.

ONE ON EACH FLOOR. THREE RIGHT HERE.

THE BEDROOM IS BESIDE THE LIVING.

BUT THESE UNITS ARE KIND OF A SHOTGUN STYLE LOFT-TYPE UNIT.

THAT IS ONE OF THE REASONS THE OWNER FEELS COMFORTABLE WITH THE ONE SPACE PER APARTMENT. IT IS INTENDED TO BE-- IT IS A SMALLER UNIT THAT WOULD NOT ATTRACT A FAMILY OR A BIGGER-- SOMEONE NEEDING MORE SPACE. SO THAT IS A LITTLE BIT OF THE BACKGROUND ON THE PROJECT. I WOULD BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MIGHT HAVE. OH, THERE IS ONE OTHER THING I WANTED TO NOTE QUICKLY. ADDITIONAL PARKING.

SO LOOKING THROUGH-- I RECEIVED A LETTER TODAY FROM A CONCERNED CITIZEN, I GUESS HERE. AND I WANTED TO ANSWER A FEW OF THOSE QUESTIONS IF I COULD. JUST FOR THE-- IF WE LOOK AT OUR SITE AGAIN, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT, AGAIN, HAS CAUSED A HICCUP IN THE PROJECT AT THE BEGINNING WAS AZIZ' PROPERTY ACTUALLY WENT TO THE MIDDLE OF MAIN STREET. BY THE OLD PLAT.

BECAUSE IN THE THOROUGHFARE PLAN, THE CITY WAS PLANNING TO WIDEN OR AT LEAST CHANGE THE RIGHT-OF-WAY ON MAIN STREET, AND ADD, TO MY UNDERSTANDING, PARKING.

PARALLEL PARKING ON EACH SIDE. IT TOOK 40 FEET OF THE GROUND AT THE FRONT. TO ALLOW FOR THAT FUTURE EXPANSION. THAT WAS KIND OF REVERSED ISSUE TO DEAL WITH. WE HAD TO MOVE THE BUILDING BACK TO GET OFF OF THAT EASEMENT. WE DO ANTICIPATE THAT WHEN MAIN

[00:15:07]

STREET IS EVENTUALLY BUILT OUT, THERE WILL BE STREET-PARKING ON MAIN STREET. AS THERE IS DOWN IN THE ARTS AND DESIGN DISTRICT. THIS GARAGE HERE HAS A PUBLIC COMPONENT. WE ARE ALSO CONSTRUCTING A GARAGE RIGHT HERE FOR EDWARD ROSE COMPANY.

A GARAGE THAT HAS A PUBLIC COMPONENT.

BOTH OF THOSE ARE WITHIN, I WOULD SAY, LESS THAN 800 FEET FROM THE BUILDING. SO AGAIN, ONE OF THOSE REASONS THE OWNER FEELS CONFIDENTBLING WITH THE ONE PER UNIT.

LET'S SEE. I GUESS WE WILL TRY TO ANSWER A FEW QUESTIONS ON THE LIST HERE. I THINK I HAVE CLARIFIED THE NUMBERS INVOLVED. THERE IS A QUESTION THAT WAS ASKED ABOUT FIRST-FLOOR COMMERCIAL AROUND PARKING.

FIVE MINUTES FROM THE BUILDING. ONE OF THE NICE THINGS ABOUT MIXED-USE APARTMENTS AND RETAIL, IN TERMS OF TIMING, MIXES WELL.

THIS IS A SMALL RETAIL SPACE. ABOUT 2,000 SQUARE FEET.

SO LIMITED NUMBER OF PARKING. WE WOULD ANTICIPATE THAT ANYONE USING THAT RETAIL WOULD PARK ALONG MAIN STREET AS THAT PARKING BEGINS. IN THE EVENT THAT DOESN'T HAPPEN FOR A WHILE, THERE ARE THE SPACES, OF COURSE IN THE GARAGE AND BEHIND THE BUILDING. WE HAVE NOT GOT A PARKING AGREEMENT WITH A-- A FORMAL PARKING AGREEMENT WITH ANY OF THE ADJOINING NEIGHBORS. THERE IS MANY QUESTIONS ABOUT THE SETBACKS WHICH, AGAIN, ALL I CAN SAY IS WE HAD A CHANGE-- NOT A CHANGE BUT WE DIDN'T HAVE A CHANGE IN ZONING, I GUESS, AS WE WENT THROUGH THE PROCESS. IT GENERATED SOME OF THOSE VARIANCES. AND SAME WITH THE SETBACKS.

THERE ARE NO SETBACK REQUIREMENTS IN THE C2 ZONING.

WITH THAT, IF I CAN ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS OR PROVIDE CLARITY FOR

THE GROUP. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

ARE THERE ANY SUPPORTERS HERE? REMONSTRATORS? ONE, TWO. RAISE YOUR HAND IF YOU WANT TO SPEAK. ONE, TWO, THREE, FOUR PEOPLE.

OKAY. YOU GET ABOUT THREE, FOUR MINUTES EACH. IF YOU COULD GO AHEAD AND WALK UP. PLEASE GET IN LINE.

AND USE THE MICROPHONE. >> GOOD AFTERNOON.

MY NAME IS RON WHILEBURN. I LIVE AT SOUTH PARK TRAIL DRIVE, ADJACENT TO THE PROPERTY. FIRST OF ALL, WE HAVE SEEN THIS EYESORE FOR THE LAST THREE YE YEARS, AND NOTHING HAS BEEN DONE TO CLEAN IT UP. THERE ARE RATS THERE.

WHICH-- IT IS AFFECTING SALES PRICES OF OUR UNITS.

SECONDLY, I DON'T THINK THAT IS ENOUGH PARKING.

I HAVE BEEN IN PROPERTY MANAGEMENT FOR MANY YEARS.

YOU CAN'T UNDERSTAND IT. ONE PERSON IS GOING TO LIVE IN A ONE-BEDROOM APARTMENT. THERE IS GOING TO BE COUPLES.

AND WHATEVER. THERE IS NO PARKING THERE.

THIRDLY, YOU HAVE MAIN STREET. I DON'T THINK THERE WILL BE ANY PARKING ALONG THAT STREET. I DON'T KNOW HOW THEY PLAN TO PUT ANY PARKING IN. SO ALL IN ALL, THIS PROJECT HAS BEEN GOING ON FOR THE LAST SEVERAL YEARS.

WE ARE TIRED OF LOOKING AT IT. WE HAVE COMPLAINED, AND SOMEBODY SAID THERE WAS GOING TO BE SOMETHING DONE ABOUT IT.

I DON'T KNOW IF YOU HAVE SEEN PICTURES OF THE PROPERTY.

AS IT STANDS NOW. IT IS JUST A PILE OF RUBBLE.

THAT IS WHAT WE ARE LOOKING AT. WITH THE FENCE.

THE FENCES COME DOWN. IT IS JUST AN EYESORE.

THANK YOU. >> HI.

KEITH VERNER. I LIVE IN THE SAME APARTMENT-- OR TOWNHOUSE COMPLEX. 844 SOUTH PARK TRAIL DRIVE.

MY CONCERN IS MAINLY THE PARKING.

WE ACTUALLY, I BELIEVE, HAD A VARIANCE IN OUR SUBDIVISION.

THERE IS NO GUEST PARKING IN OUR SUBDIVISION.

IF ANYONE WANTS TO PARK, THEY HAVE TO PARK AT THE MIDDLE SCHOOL OR IN ONE OF THESE GARAGES.

AND I'M NOW MORE CONCERNED THAT THERE IS GOING TO BE PEOPLE TRYING TO PARK IN OUR PROPERTY AS WELL.

IF THERE IS NOT SPACES AT THIS BUILDING.

VERY CLEARLY, 45 SPACES FOR 45 UNITS.

THERE IS GOING TO BE COUPLES LIVING IN THESE APARTMENTS.

THERE IS NOT GOING TO BE ENOUGH SPACE FOR THEM AND RETAIL AS

[00:20:03]

WELL. AND I'M ALSO VERY CONCERNED IF THERE IS NO AGREEMENT IN PLACE WITH OTHER PROPERTIES THAT HAVE PARKING. YOU AREN'T GOING TO HAVE PEOPLE ABLE TO PARK ANYWHERE IN A REASONABLE WALKING DISTANCE OTHER THAN POTENTIALLY IN OUR SUBDIVISION AS WELL.

WHICH AGAIN, AS I MENTIONED, THERE IS NO GUEST PARKING TODAY.

I HAVE SERIOUS CONCERNS ABOUT THE PARKING SITUATION, IN PARTICULAR. I DO WANT IT TO BE DEVELOPED.

I WANT THIS TO LOOK NICE FOR OUR SUBDIVISION.

I DON'T THINK IT WILL BE A GOOD LONG-TERM SOLUTION IF THERE IS

NOT ENOUGH PARKING. >> HI.

I'M TRACY BURNES. I LIVE IN THE SAME DEVELOPMENT.

I DITTO EVERYTHING THEY SAY. MY CONCERN IS WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE NOW. WE MOVED TO CARMEL THINKING THIS WAS A PLACE THAT ACTUALLY CARES ABOUT WHAT IS AROUND, WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE. WALKING UP AND DOWN THE MONNAN.

THERE IS A PLACE THEY ARE GETTING READY TO BUILD.

THE GROUND IS LEVELED. NICE FENCING.

IT LOOKS LIKE A BOMB WENT OFF. I'M EMBARRASSED TO HAVE PEOPLE OVER AT MY HOME. I HAVE WRITTEN A LETTER IN.

I'M SURE IT IS GOING TO AFFECT MY PROPERTY VALUE.

WHEN WE TRY TO SELL. AND THERE WAS A GUY WALKING AROUND WITH A MACHETE THE OTHER DAY, JUST WALKING AROUND DOING THINGS. THAT IS NOT SAFE.

AND IT KIND OF INVITES THAT TYPE OF PERSON TO BE WALKING AROUND.

MAYBE HE WAS DOING SOMETHING HE WAS SUPPOSED TO BE DOING.

IT IS EMBARRASSING. I DON'T KNOW IF YOU HAVE ALL DRIVEN BY IT. IT IS-- I CAN'T BELIEVE-- ALL I WANT RIGHT NOW IS FOR IT TO LOOK NICE.

THAT IS OUR FIRST STEP. THEN AFTER THAT, YES, YOU KNOW, IT SOUNDS LIKE IT CAN BE A NICE BUILDING.

DITTOING EVERYTHING THEY HAVE SAID.

YOU KNOW, I'M SURE THERE IS MOSQUITOES COMING OUT OF IT.

IT IS HORRIBLE. I CAN NOT STRESS ENOUGH HOW UGLY IT IS. I HOPE THERE IS SOME WAY THE DEVELOPER OR SOMEONE CAN GO IN THERE AND AT LEAST MAKE IT LOOK NICE FOR US FOR NOW UNTIL SOMETHING HAPPENS.

I DON'T KNOW IF THAT IS SOMETHING WE CAN DISCUSS TODAY.

THANK YOU. >> HI.

I LIVE WITHIN THE SAME COMPLEX. I MOVED TO THE COMPLEX ABOUT TWO YEARS AGO. AND I LOVE CARMEL.

I FEEL GOOD WHEN I DRIVE AROUND AND SEE THINGS.

I DON'T FEEL THAT WAY WHEN I DRIVE BY THAT LOT.

I'M NOT EVEN THINKING ABOUT RESELLING.

I'M THINKING ABOUT FORECAST FEELING GOOD ABOUT WHERE I AM.

AND THAT ONE PLACE IS LIKE-- I DON'T LIKE IT.

HE IS TALKING ABOUT 45 PARKING SPOTS.

I MEAN, IF WE ARE TALKING ABOUT YOUNG PEOPLE LIVING THERE, THEY WILL HAVE PARTIES. THEY WILL HAVE PEOPLE OVER.

I LIVE HERE. I'M ONE PERSON.

I WILL HAVE ONE CAR. SOME PEOPLE HAVE MORE CARS.

THERE IS A POSSIBILITY OF COUPLES.

SO WE ALREADY HAVE LIMITED-- WHEN I HAVE GUESTS, I HAVE TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO GET THEM IN BEHIND MY GARAGE AND ORGANIZE HOW TO GET IN AND OUT. IT IS ENOUGH HUSTLE.

I DON'T WANT TO DEAL WITH THE HUSTLE OF SOMEBODY ELSE AND MAKE MY LIVING MORE UNPLEASANT. I WOULD LOVE TO SEE NICER.

I WOULD LOVE TO SEE THE NEIGHBORHOOD NICER.

I'M GRATEFUL, BUT I DON'T LIKE IT.

I APPRECIATE YOU ALL. >> THANK YOU.

REBUTTAL? DAN?

YOU HAVE FIVE MINUTES. >> SO I GUESS ALL I CAN OFFER REALLY IN REBUTTAL IS I UNDERSTAND, AND I APPRECIATE THE CONCERNS. I GUESS A COUPLE OF THINGS.

JUST TO THINK ABOUT. ZONING ONLY REQUIRES 1.2.

SO WE HAVE 45 UNITS. IF AT 1.2, WE NEED 54.

WE ARE NINE SHORT OF WHAT ZONING REQUIRES.

I DON'T KNOW THAT SOME OF THE ISSUES THAT FOLKS ARE RAISING, YOU KNOW, REALLY-- I'M NOT SURE WHAT THEY ARE LOOKING FOR.

I DON'T THINK WE WOULD EVER GET TO, YOU KNOW, TWO SPACES PER UNIT. OR SOMETHING LIKE.

THAT THAT IS NOT THE TREND THAT HAS BEEN PROVIDED IN ANY OF THE SURROUNDING, ANY OF THE COMPETING PROPERTIES.

AND AGAIN, THIS IS MAYBE A LITTLE BACKGROUND ON THE CLIENT.

PART OF THE REASON-- I UNDERSTAND, AGAIN, WE WOULD LIKE NOTHING BETTER THAN TO SEE SOMETHING DEVELOPED.

I HAVE BEEN TRYING TO GET IT GOING FOR A TU YEARS HERE.

PART OF THE CONCERN-- BUT PART OF THE PROBLEM FOR AZIZ, HIS

[00:25:02]

BUSINESS IS IMPORT-EXPORT FROM UKRAINE.

HE IS FROM KYIV. HIS BUSINESS IS IN KYIV.

DURING THIS PROCESS, OF COURSE, THE WAR BROKE OUT.

AND HE WAS FORCED TO CLOSE HIS BUSINESS AND RELOCATE ALL HIS EMPLOYEES FROM KYIV TO POLAND. HE KEPT THEM ON SALARY.

MOVED THEM ALL TO POLAND. THAT HAS BEEN ONE OF THE THINGS HE HAS BEEN DEALING WITH AS HE HAS BEEN TRYING TO DEAL WITH GETTING THIS APPROVED ON THIS PROPERTY.

NOT THAT THAT IS AN EXCUSE. HERE IS A GUY THAT IMMIGRATED HERE FROM-- TO NEW JERSEY, NEW YORK 25 YEARS AGO.

AND IS PRETTY MUCH THE EMBODIMENT OF THE AMERICAN DREAM. HE HAS BUILT FROM NOTHING A GREAT BUSINESS IN NEW YORK. HE WANTS TO MOVE IT HERE.

HE SAID HE HAS LOOKED ALL OVER THE UNITED STATES.

HE HAS FOUND CARMEL. HE WANTS TO BE HERE.

HE WANTS TO BE A GOOD CITIZEN. HE WANTS TO BE EVERY PART OF THE COMMUNITY. SO JUST FOR WHAT IT IS WORTH, THAT IS WORTH EMBRACING AND TRYING TO HELP HIM DO WHAT WE CAN. THIS IS A RENDERING OF THE BUILDING WITH THE FIRST-FLOOR RETAIL.

AND THE PARKING BEHIND. HOPEFULLY, THAT WILL MAKE FOR A BETTER-- OBVIOUSLY, BETTER THAN THE RUBBLE THAT IS THERE RIGHT NOW. I UNDERSTAND AND APPRECIATE THE COMMENTS. I JUST HOPE WE CAN COME TO A PLAN TO GET SOMETHING BUILT ON THE SITE.

THIS IS VERY DIFFICULT TO MAKE PROJECTS WORK FINANCIALLY NOW.

AND IT IS DEFINITELY A STRUGGLE TO GET IT-- LIKE I SAID, IT HAS TAKEN US SINCE 2018 TO GET TO THIS POINT.

I DON'T KNOW HOW MUCH LONGER IT WILL TAKE US TO GET TO A BUILDABLE PROJECT. WITHOUT APPROVAL.

SO TO THE EXTENT THAT THAT IS A CONSIDERATION, AGAIN, I WOULD ASK FOR THE COMMISSION'S UNDERSTANDING.

>> ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU.

DEPARTMENT REPORT. >> THANK YOU.

I DID WANT TO BRING UP THE FACT THAT THIS AREA IS ZONED URBAN CORE, AND SO A DIVERSITY OF MODES OF TRANSPORTATION IS PROMOTED. SUCH AS BIKING, WALKING, AND DRIVING. YES.

YES. >> YES.

>> SO THIS SITE IS ZONED URBAN CORE.

DISTRICT. THE WHOLE AREA IS.

AND THE POINT OF THIS DISTRICT IS TO PROMOTE DIFFERENT MODES OF TRANSPORTATION. SO BIKING, WALKING, DRIVING.

AND SO THEY ARE PROPOSING 45 PARKING SPACES.

THERE WOULD BE 45 APARTMENT UNITS.

AND THEN FOR THE VARIANCE REQUEST OF 21 SPACES, THERE ARE POTENTIAL PARKING LOCATIONS AS THE PETITIONER STATED IN THE SIGNATURE AND THE ICON AT THE CORNERS OF OLD MERIDIAN AND MAIN. PLANNING STAFF DID CRUNCH SOME NUMBERS. SO TRY AND COMPARE APPLES TO APPLES. AND SO WITH THE ICON ON MAIN, AFTER ALL RESIDENTIAL AND FORECAST BUSINESS BASES ARE ACCOUNTED FOR, THERE IS STILL A SURPLUS OF AROUND 183 PARKING SPACES. IN THAT PARKING GARAGE.

PUBLIC PARKING GARAGE. AND THEN FOR THE SIGNATURE, AFTER ALL PARKING SPACES ARE ALLOCATED FOR RESIDENTIAL AND BUSINESS USES, THERE IS A SURPLUS OF 24 PARKING SPACES.

THAT IS QUITE A BIT. WITHIN A TWO-MINUTE WALK.

AVERAGE TWO TO THREE-MINUTE WALK.

FROM THIS SUBJECT'S SITE. PLANNING STAFF IS SUPPORTIVE OF THE VARIANCE REQUEST WITH THAT RESPECT.

AND THEN REGARDING THE OTHER VARIANCES FOR REAR AND SIDE SETBACK, PLANNING STAFF IS SUPPORTIVE OF THOSE AS WELL.

SO WE DO RECOMMEND POSITIVE CONSIDERATION OF THE VARIANCES.

THANK YOU. >> THANKS.

DISCUSSION? ALAN?

>> THANKS, LEO. I'M GOING TO START OUT BY SAYING THIS. YOU KNOW, DAN, WE ARE NOT IN THE BUSINESS, THE BZA, AND AT LEAST IN MY OPINION, TO BAIL SOMEBODY OUT OF A BAD SITUATION. I MEAN, HE MAY HAVE-- EVERYBODY HAS THEIR OWN PROBLEMS, BUT GETTING DOWN TO THE CORE OF WHAT YOUR CLIENT IS ASKING FOR, TO ME, HE CHOSE THE WRONG PLACE TO PUT THIS. WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT-- YOU MAY LOOK AT IT AS NINE FEWER PARKING SPACES.

THE REST OF US ARE LOOKING AT THIS, AND WE SEE IT AS A HUGE PERCENTAGE OF WHAT THE ORDINANCE ALLOWS.

AND THE SAME THING WITH THE SETBACK THAT YOU ARE REQUESTING.

[00:30:03]

AS WELL. A 90% SETBACK DOESN'T SPEAK WELL OF THE FACT THAT THIS PROJECT IS GOING IN ON THE RIGHT PIECE OF GROUND. IT IS JUST, TO ME, NOT THE RIGHT PLACE FOR THIS. AND THAT, TO ME, IS ALL THERE IS. ONE FINAL THING.

I MI KNOW IT DOESN'T AMOUNT TO T IS BEING ASKED FOR HERE.

JUST THE FACT THAT THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORS HAVE TO PUT UP WITH THE MESS THAT IS ON THIS PROPERTY IS INEXCUSABLE.

YOUR CLIENT MAY HAVE DEVELOPED ALL AROUND THE COUNTRY, BUT THIS IS CARMEL. WE HAVE A HIGHER STANDARD HERE.

AND OBVIOUSLY, IT HAS NOT BEEN MET AS FAR AS THIS PROJECT IS

CONCERNED. >> MORE DISCUSSION.

BRIAN? >> ANGIE, DO YOU KNOW IF THE FINAL PROJECT AGREEMENT FOR SIGNATURE-- FOR ICON HAS BEEN AGREED TO WITH THE CRC AND THE DEVELOPER THERE? AND SPECIFICALLY, DO WE KNOW EXACTLY HOW MANY AVAILABLE

SPACES REMAIN UNSPOKEN FOR? >> I DON'T KNOW.

I DIDN'T ASK. THE ONLY NUMBER-CRUNCHING WE DID IS JUST REGARDING THE NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES REQUIRED PER APARTMENT AND PER BUSINESS. IT WAS FROM ZONING STANDARDS.

>> TO SAY THAT THERE WILL BE 183 EXTRA SPACES THERE IS ONE THING.

BUT FOR THE DEVELOPER-- FOR THIS DEVELOPER TO SAY THAT THEY HAVE 15 OR 10 UNDER CONTROL IS A DIFFERENT MATTER.

>> RIGHT. >> THAT MAY BE A POTENTIAL SOLUTION. IT IS NOT ONLY TABLE TONIGHT.

I GUESS-- IS THAT CORRECT? >> SORRY.

I'M NOT SURE I UNDERSTOOD THE MATH THERE.

OR THE QUESTION. >> THERE IS NO FORMAL AGREEMENT.

>> NO. >> THAT YOUR CLIENT CAN POINT

TO? >> NO.

>> IN TERMS OF OFF-SITE PARKING? >> NO.

>> OKAY. AND THE DEPARTMENT REPORT ALSO SAYS WITH RESPECT TO PARKING, BECAUSE I THINK PARKING IS THE REAL ISSUE HERE, TONIGHT, I DON'T DISAGREE ABOUT-- WITH ANY OF THE COMMENTS ABOUT THE EYESORE THAT HAS BEEN FOR THE PAST TWO YEARS. I UNDERSTAND PART OF THAT HAS BEEN A POOR ENFORCEMENT ISSUE ON THE PART OF THE CITY ALSO.

BUT THE RECOMMENDATION FROM THE DEPARTMENT SAYS SPECIFICALLY, IF THE PROPOSED ROW TAIL USE-- RETAIL USE IS NOT A BAR OR RESTAURANT. THE CONCEPT PLANS SHOW OUTDOOR SEATING FOR 12, CLOSE TO 20 PEOPLE ON THE PATIO IN FRONT OF THE RETAIL AREA. THE VISUALS SUGGEST THAT THE RETAIL WOULD BE DIVIDED BY POSSIBLY THREE OUR FOUR DIFFERENT MERCHANTS OR USES. WHICH MEANS MORE EMPLOYEES, NOT FEWER THAN IF IT WERE ONE RETAIL TENANT.

AND THAT IS WHERE MY PROBLEM IS. THE RETAIL PARKING.

THERE ARE EXAMPLES WHERE .9 OR .8 SPACES PER APARTMENT UNIT CAN WORK, BUT THOSE ARE IN DOWNTOWN INDIANAPOLIS.

VERY URBANIZED AREAS WHERE THERE IS MASS TRANSIT, WALKABLE EMPLOYMENT, WALKABLE ENTERTAINMENT.

WE DON'T HAVE THOSE RESOURCES HERE.

THE PARKING IS A REAL CHALLENGE FOR ME.

IF THERE WERE AN AGREEMENT TO PROVIDE THAT FROM ONE OF THE NEARBY FUTURE PROJECTS THAT, WOULD MAKE THINGS VERY

DIFFERENT. >> MORE DISCUSSION.

YUP. HAWK.

>> YEAH. I HAVE A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS ALSO. IS THERE GOING TO BE ANY RESERVE PARKING OR ANY SORT OF PAID PARKING BY THE RESIDENTS?

>> I'M NOT 100% SURE IF THERE WILL BE A BUSINESS-- IF THAT WILL BE A RESERVE SITUATION OR IF IT WILL BE ONE PER UNIT.

OR HOW THEY WILL DO THAT. >> BECAUSE, I MEAN, IF YOU HAVE ONE PER UNIT OR YOU RESERVE THEM, YOU HAVE NOTHING FOR YOUR

COMMERCIAL. >> IF LIKE MOST MIXED-USE, I THINK AROUND HERE ANYWAY, THE THEORY IS THAT PEOPLE ARE GONE DURING THE DAY. DURING RETAIL HOURS.

AND THAT IS WHERE THE MIXED-USE COMES INTO PLAY.

ON THIS, I GUESS. >> OKAY.

GETTING TO THAT ASPECT OF IT, DO YOU HAVE ANY LLI'S OR ANYBODY LINED UP FOR THAT IMHECIAL SPACE RIGHT NOW?

>> NO. >> ARE YOU MAKING A COMMITMENT THAT THAT WON'T BE A BAR OR RESTAURANT OR ANYTHING OF THAT

NATURE, THEN? >> I THINK WE CAN DO THAT A

[00:35:03]

COUPLE OF WAYS. ONE, THE SEATING SHOWN IN FRONT WAS INTENDED TO BE FOR THE-- THERE IS NOT INTENDED TO BE OUTDOOR SEATING FOR RESTAURANT. AS YOU CAN SEE, THERE IS A FIRE PIT. SOME EMPTY TABLES OR CIRCULAR TABLES AND WHATNOT. IT IS SUPPOSED TO BE FOR RESIDENTS. I DON'T KNOW IF THIS IS THE RIGHT TIME OR THE PROPER FORUM, BUT I THINK I COULD TALK TO THEM ABOUT ELIMINATING THE RETAIL-- THE ONLY REASON THE RETAIL IS THERE IS IT IS REQUIRED BY ZONING.

THE FIRST FLOOR HAS TO BE RETAIL.

LET'S MAKE IT PARKING. I WOULD BE GLAD TO DO THAT.

GET, YOU KNOW, NINE MORE SPACES. IT IS SIX OF ONE, HALF A DOZEN THE OTHER, I SUPPOSE. MAYBE THE SOLUTION OR COULD BE THAT IT BECOMES AN APLENTY SPACE.

A FITNESS ROOM OR CLUB ROOM FOR THE RESIDENTS.

THAT ELIMINATES ANY RETAIL NEED. WHATSOEVER.

I THINK I COULD SELL THAT TO THE OWNER IF I KNEW THERE WAS SUPPORT FOR THAT, I GUESS. BUT AGAIN, IT GOES AGAINST THE

FIRST-FLOOR RETAIL REQUIREMENT. >> OKAY.

AND THEN-- SORRY. ONE QUESTION FOR THE CITY.

WE ARE TALKING ABOUT MAIN STREET EXPANSION.

ARE THERE GOING TO BE PARKING SPOTS ALONG THERE?

IF SO, WHAT IS THAT TIME FRAME? >> YES.

I DID FIND OUT THERE IS MAIN STREET IMPROVEMENT PROJECT THAT WOULD HAVE THE ON-STREET PARALLEL PARKING.

I DO NOT KNOW THE TIMELINE FOR THAT.

>> HOW MANY SPOTS WOULD THAT BE IN FRONT OF THIS SNROT.

>> THERE IS SPACE FOR FOUR IN FRONT OF THE PROPERTY.

>> FOUR. OKAY.

SO DOES HE NEED TO COME BACK FOR A VARIANCE FOR THIS OTHER ISSUE, THEN? IF WE ELIMB H ELIMINATE THAT?

>> IT SOUNDS LIKE HE WOULD. >> OKAY.

I WOULD MOVE TO CONTINUE THIS ITEM FOR THE NEXT MEETING.

>> I WOULD SECOND THAT. >> ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF

CONTINUATION, STATE AYE. >> AYE.

>> ANYONE OPPOSED? >> AYE.

>> ALAN IS NOTED. SO YOU HAVE BEEN CONTINUED TO THE NEXT MEETING. YOU HAVE TIME TO TALK TO YOUR CLIENT AND TRY TO FIGURE THIS THING OUT WITH STAFF.

AND WORK SOMETHING OUT. BUT WE APPRECIATE IT.

WE THINK THERE IS HOPEFULLY, A ROAD TO A BUILDING THERE AT SOME POINT. THANK YOU.

ALL RIGHT. THERE IS NO NEW BUSINESS.

TERE IS NO OLD BUSINESS. I MOVE THIS MEETING ADJOURNED.

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.