web analytics

MDC and IHPC Quick Hits – 9/15/11

Here’s what I’ve come across in City filings as of 9/15/11 (click links to read staff reports on these cases):

1. MDC Hearing Examiner 9/15/11 – a developer requests rezoning of land at 1450 N Pennsylvania (former Payton Wells body shop) for a multifamily residential project. No details are provided at this time. This site is within the Regional Center overlay district, and as such, any project will receive a thorough review by the Regional Center Hearing Examiner.

2. MDC Hearing Examiner 9/15/11 – CityWay (previously North of South) developers want to vacate portions of Louisiana and Alabama. This is a pretty standard request when developers build large multi-block projects with small streets interior to the project.

3. MDC Hearing Examiner 9/15/11 – request to rezone 117 N East from I-3-U to CBD-2. Little detail is provided here and this property also lies within the Regional Center overlay district. The staff report notes that this is one of the last properties in that area with an industrial zoning designation and the CBD-2 designation brings it in line with surrounding properties and the Regional Center 2020 land use recommendation.

4. MDC Hearing Examiner 9/15/11 – request to rezone 531 Virginia from C-3C to CBD-S. This is the site of the former BMV location on Virginia Ave. and developers are proposing to build a residential and commercial project. The case will be continued to the next hearing on 9/29/11 and the staff report at that time will hopefully contain more information.

5. Regional Center Hearing Examiner 9/15/11 – Regional Center approval is requested for renovation of the Campus Apartments complex owned by Van Rooy Properties (720 W 10th St). This complex is immediately adjacent along 10th St. to the new Buckingham multi-use project The Avenue. Van Rooy was the losing bidder for the land where that complex is being built — their proposal would have used that land as well as the Campus Apartments land for an apartment project. Having failed in that bid, Van Rooy appears to be going the renovation route with their existing property. The project includes an extensive expansion of parking spaces as shown in the siteplan below.

A siteplan for the Campus Apartments renovation project.

6. Regional Center Hearing Examiner 9/15/11 – Regional Center approval is requested for a Jack in the Box restaurant at 1521 N Meridian St. Like the Board of Zoning Appeals case profiled in the previous Quick Hits, this case is also continued to the next hearing on 10/13/11.

See the previous Quick Hits post here.

14 Responses to “ “MDC and IHPC Quick Hits – 9/15/11”

  1. Curt Ailes says:

    Wow, so there is no actual capacity improvements going on at the Campus Apartments and they are adding all that parking? 152 parking spaces for 104 apartment. Who is paying for all of this parking? Isn’t Campus Apartments a section 8 housing site? Are taxpayers on the hook for paying fo rthis additional parking? Will rents go up for those not on assistance? Maybe I have some incorrect assumption, but this thing stinks like a hog farm on a hot summer day…. Van Rooy should know better.

  2. Joe says:

    Good, I was concerned they were going to improve the site. So long as we keep it business as usual we will all survive………This could be a very unique and interesting inetersection for the city. The Avenue is a great addition, though it too has quite a bit of parking infrastructure in the garage, this complex should redevelop along the lines of the Aveneue and 1201 (design critique unsure) and the mono rail floats right by. The park could be spruced up as a gathering point and the large scale medical projects going on to the southwest make for an exciting space.

  3. Curt Ailes says:

    I still contend that a station on the people mover in this area could help people get around a little better. Obviously, this would take some cooperation with Clarian/IU Helath/WTF-name they are today to make it happen. Encourage better access to the existing stations and that sort of thing. It could be a tremendous community improvement good-will project. And also help to drive down parking requirements such as those asked for in the Van Rooy proposal.

  4. ahow628 says:

    I across the street from the former BMV site on Virginia. I am all for development there, especially residential in contrast to what is currently there. However, there are some pretty major issues that are arising there that we have expressed to the developer and have so far gone unheeded.
    .
    1) Merrill St is a one-way eastbound residential street. From what I hear, it is tertiary and therefore does not get plowed in the winter. It is not capable of handling 70 residents plus traffic from a proposed breakfast/lunch spot (Patachou maybe?). Not to mention that people already occasionally go the wrong way down the street. This will only get worse with the development within 50 feet of Virginia. There really needs to be access from Virginia Ave.
    2) Merrill St occasionally floods due to 100+ year old drainage pipe. Putting more run-off from the proposed development’s parking lot will only exacerbate that.
    3) The alley that runs parallel to Virginia is supposed to have parking adjacent to it. However, there is a house and utility poles back there. Could be issues with property damage.
    .
    The current ratio of parking to units is 1-to-1 which I applaud but that does not alleviate parking concerns for those in the neighborhood, especially since about half the residents on the street do not have garage or other off-street parking. The developer hopes this will encourage more bikes and walking, but it is that whole chicken/egg thing and I’m not sure people are going to dump their cars as readily as the developer is hoping.
    .
    From the sounds of it, the neighborhood association (as well as some of the HOAs are opting not to support the development and I, personally, am on the fence.

    • Chris Barnett says:

      ahow, help me out here: the old BMV site is currently 100% hard surfaced (roof and pavement). How would the redevelopment add to the burden on drainage?

      • ahow628 says:

        Currently there is a 4-6 foot wall along the alley running parallel to Virginia. The runoff from the building and the north parking lot goes to the Virginia gutters and only part of the smaller south parking lot drains toward Merrill St. The developer originally planned on grading everything from the back of the building down to the alley. The new plan involves a bio swale and a 2 foot retaining wall which will help, but I don’t think it will alleviate the problem.

  5. Curt Ailes says:

    Again, a city buy-in on RELIABLE (read: not the current IndyGo schedules) would make developments that hedge on this much easier to stomach for people who live around it. Andy, you make a plausible case. However, if there was a bus everyh 10-15 minutes, instead of 30-45 currently, there might be a real change to how people perceive these types of developments

    • ahow628 says:

      Exactly. One of the target markets for this development of 700 sqft one bedrooms is students over at IUPUI. They is definitely an easy bike ride in the nice months, but once winter rolls around it will be a problem. Buses could be an option, especially if they ran on 10-15 minute headway, but there would still be a transfer on the downtown loop or a 10 minute walk over to campus from there.

  6. T.Donaldson says:

    I hope this means the end for the Campus Apartments as it stands now. My guess is that instead of demolishing the complex and trying to build something similar to The Avenue, they are just going to rehab the existing buildings and hopefully move some students/IUPUI employees/IU Health employees into them. If that doesn’t work, they can always go back to Section 8 and actually enforce some rules on the tenants. The place is a dump, and a good number of robbers who rob a business across the street are last seen running into the Campus Apartments complex. Hopefully the rehab of this complex will mean an end to some crime in the area.

  7. Paul says:

    Alabama and Louisiana Streets are not interior to the CityWay project. They form the eastern and part of the southern boundary. It appears they are attempting to narrow the public right-of-way down to a pair of driving lanes, so that they can perpendicular park cars on private property that will back into the street. This would also appear to eliminate public sidewalks running along the perimeter of the project.

  8. Paul says:

    Interesting. Now the adjacent property owners will control it. The plans I saw show 90-degree parking, which really screams “not an urban environment”.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *