[*This meeting was joined in progress*]
[Land Use and Special Studies Committee Meeting on July 7, 2025]
[00:00:05]
♪ >>> THIS HAS BEEN PRESENTED TO COUNCIL AND A LAND USE MEETING TO DISCUSS. THEY'RE HERE TO GIVE INFORMATION ON THE PROJECT.
>> THANK YOU AND GOOD EVENING, COMMITTEE MEMBERS.
JUST A FOLLOW- UP ON THE INFORMATION THAT WE FORWARDED OUT TO THE COMMITTEE LAST WEEK.
WE WERE ASKED AT THE LAST COMMITTEE MEETING TO TO AGREE TO ADDITIONAL COMMITMENTS.
THOSE WERE CIRCULATED AND TWO COMMITMENTS INVOLVED AND PROHIB IGSZ AGAINST SEEKING TAX INCREMENT AND FINANCING WITH THE CITY OF CARMEL OR HAMILTON COUNTY AND THAT'S THE FIRST COMMITMENT AND THE SECOND COMMITMENT IS THE DRIVE- THROUGH SERVICE ON THE REAL ESTATE. ALL OF THE PUD DOESN'T PROVIDE FOR IT. BY RIGHT, IT WOULD ALLOW THE PLAN COMMISSION TO APPROVE A DRIVE-THROUGH AND THE COMMITMENT IS NOT WITHSTANDING THOSE COMMISSIONS WITH THE ZONING ORDINANCE OR THE PUD AND THE DRIVE- THROUGH SERVICE SHALL BE PROHIBITED IN THE REAL ESTATE AND THAT WOULDN'T BE PERMITTED AND THE PETITIONER WOULD SEEK THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S AUTHORITY TO ALLOW THAT TO TAKE PLACE. I DID DISCUSS EARLIER WITH STAFF, BOTH ALEXIA LOPEZ ANDAND THOSE PROVISIONS AND THE LATEST DISCUSSION I HAD WITH MIKE JUST SO HE WAS AWARE THAT IT WAS INCLUDED IN THE COMMITMENT. IT'S BECAUSE THERE WERE TWO VEHICLES AVAILABLE IN THAT CHANGE AND ONE WOULD BE TO AMEND THE ORDINANCE AND THE OTHER WOULD BE TO INCLUDE IT IN THE COMMITMENTS, AND MIKE INDICATED THAT WHILE IT WAS IN THE STAFF'S PREFERENCE STANDPOINT THE END POINT IS IF IT'S A COMMITMENT OR AN AMENDMENT TO THE ORDINANCE, AND WE INDICATED TO MIKE THAT HE SAID HE WOULDN'T OBJECT TO THIS THAT WE WOULD INCLUDE IT IN THE COMMITMENT AND IN THE DECISION OF THE COUNCIL IF THEY WERE TO TAKE THE FINAL DECISION AND THE ORDINANCE WOULDN'T REQUIRE A RETURN VISIT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION BECAUSE WE WERE ADVISED THAT IF IT WAS AN AMENDMENT TO THE ORDINANCE IT WOULD GO BACK TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION FOR RATIFICATION AND POTENTIALLY BACK TO THE COUNSEL FOR FINAL ACTION IN A FUTURE DATE AND THE CONCLUSION OF THAT PROVISION AND THE COMMITMENT ELIMINATES THE NEED FOR THAT TO TAKE PLACE IF THE RESULT IS THE SAME EITHER WAY. WITH THAT, I'LL CONCLUDE THOSE WERE THE TWO MODIFICATIONS THAT WERE MADE SINCE THE LAST MEETING AND I'LL BE GLAD FOR MYSELF AND JOHN, AND THE POMP ND CIRCUMSTANCE AT THE ROUNDTABLE AND WE WELCOME TO ADDRESS ANY QUESTIONS. WE WOULD RESPECTFULLY REQUEST THAT AT THE CONCLUSION OF THE DISCUSSION THIS EVENING BY THE COMMITTEE THAT YOU WOULD FORWARD THIS MATTER BACK UP TO THE FULL COUNCIL FOR ADOPTION CONSIDERATION LATER THIS EVENING AT THAT MEETING STARTING AT 6. THANK YOU.
>> YOU BRING UP ONE GOOD POINT AND CONSISTENCY IS KEY, AND THIS IS THE FIRST LAND USE MEETING THAT WE'VE ACTUALLY HAD IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS MOSTLY BECAUSE I AND THE SUPPORT OF THE COMMITTEE MEMBERS DON'T LIKE THIS FORMAL SETTING.
WE'D LIKE TO BE MORE CONVERSATIONAL WITH THE PUBLIC AND BETTER CONVERSATION THAT WAY.
ONE THING THAT WE'VE DONE IS EVERY LAND USE MEETING SINCE THIS WAS REQUESTED OF US IS INTRODUCE TO US IN THE ROOM AND IF WE CAN DO THAT JUST FOR CONSISTENCY'S SAKE, I WOULD
APPRECIATE IT. >> SHANNON ARCE, CITY COUNCIL AND PLAN COMMITTEE MEMBER.
>> RICH TAYLOR, CITY COUNSELOR.
>> JESSICA COMP, DEPUTY CLERK. >> SERGEI, OFFICE OF COOPERATION COUNCIL.
>> THANK YOU ALL. IT IS IN THIS SOMETHING THAT WE WERE REQUESTED TO DO SEVERAL MONTHS AGO, AND I HAVE TO HONOR THAT REQUEST.
OKAY. SO THE PROJECT'S BEEN PITCHED.
I THINK THERE ARE SOME INCREMENTAL QUESTIONS.
THE FIRST ONE I HAVE THOUGH IS WHEN DO YOU ANTICIPATE BREAKING GROUND? THE NEXT STEP AFTER APPROVAL IS TO REPORT BACK TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND THAT WOULD OCCUR THE REMAINDER OF THIS YEAR AND THEN DEMOLITION
[00:05:02]
AND CONSTRUCTION WOULD OCCUR IN 2026.>> AND THERE'S A POTENTIALPOTENTIAL THERE ARE AMOUNT ATTACHED TO PARKING FEES. MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT CHECK GETS CUT WITH THE BUILDING
PERMIT? >> THE ISSUANCE OF AN IMPROVEMENT LOCATION AND BASED UPON THE 2026 NUMBERS AND THE FEE CHANGES ON JANUARY 1, TO
IT DOESN'T JUMP TO THE OTHER? THAT'S THE NEXT JUMP?
BASED ON WHAT WE BELIEVE TO BE THE NUMBERS IT'S APPROXIMATELY 2 MILLION AND BASED UPON THE NUMBER --
$2.18 MILLION. >> THAT'S THE NEXT JUMP. THE ANTICIPATION IT WAS 26.
>> SO I RE- READ THE ORDINANCE FOR THE PARK AND PASS JUST TO QUALIFY THE DOLLAR AMOUNTS AND FOR THE FIRST YEAR THROUGH -- THE FIRST YEAR, BASICALLY, ONE THROUGH 12, 6,000 AND SOME CHANGE AND THEN THE 13TH MONTH OF THE ADOPTION OF THE ORDINANCE WHICH WAS JUNE 4, 2024, 13 MONTHS TO 24 MONTHS AND $6,700 AND THEN IT GOES UP AGAIN AFTER THE 24 MONTHS AND AFTER 25 MONTHS IT GOES UP AGAIN.
>> AND EIGHT AND CHANGE MAY HAVE BEEN THE LAST INCREMENT.
>> SO YOU THINK YOUR PERMITTING IS NOT GOING TO BE UNTIL THAT
>> AND THE NUMBER I THINK I PROVIDED I DON'T HAVE A CALCULATOR WITH ME.
>> BUT 6700 WOULD BE THE NUMBER THAT YOU WOULD BE LOOKING AT IF I'M CORRECT AND I READ THE ORDINANCE. YOU KNOW I READ.
>> I HOPE YOU'RE RIGHT. MICHAEL, THE PARKS DIRECTOR SENT ME $4,025 UNTIL DECEMBER 21, 2025 AND AFTER THAT IT GOES TO 2026.
HOPEFULLY, HE'S MISTAKEN AND YOU ARE CORRECT.
>> THE CHECK GETS CUT WITH THE BUILDING PERMIT AT WHATEVER THE TWO- PLUS MILLION DOLLAR AMOUNT IS.
>> IT INCREASES FROM 5425 THIS YEAR TO $6,029 IN 2026 AND THE NUMBER WOULD BE $2.17 MILLION AND CHANGE AND ABOUT $400 ADDITIONAL DOLLARS.
I WANTED TO MAKE SURE I HAD IT ON PAPER.
>> JOHN, THANK YOU FOR COMING. I HAD SOME QUESTIONS.
IN THE LAST COMMITTEE MEETING YOU THREW AROUND SOME ESTIMATED ASSESSED VALUE NUMBERS AND REVENUE. COULD YOU REPEAT THOSE FOR ME?
>> I CAN. AN ESTIMATE FOR THE PROPERTY TAXES FOR THE RETAIL FAMILY DEVELOPMENT IS 1.38 MILLION A YEAR AND THAT DOESN'T INCLUDE ESTIMATED $396,000 ANNUALLY FOR N.I.T. BY THE RESIDENTS WHO LIVE
>> WHAT WAS THE NET ASSESSED VALUE ESTIMATED FOR THE PROPERTY?
>> THE NET ASSESSED VALUE OR THE
GROSS? >> BOTH WOULD BE GREAT.
>> THE ANTICIPATED NET ASSESSED VALUE FOR THE PROPERTY IS ON THE MULTI- FAMILY SIDE, 57 MILLION, AND THE RETAIL COMPONENT OF THAT IS APPROXIMATELY 60.
>> 3 MILLION IN RETAIL AND 57 ON THE NET ASSESSED ON THE MULTI-FAMILY.
>> AND IN YOUR -- IN YOUR CALCULATIONS HAVE YOU GUYS REVIEWED THE ROLL BACK ONE? AND THE DEDUCTIONS WERE THOSE CALCULATED IN YOUR ASSESSMENTS?
>> SO IT INCLUDED GOING DOWN TO A 33. 4% NET PROPERTY TAX DEDUCTION IN 2031 WHEN IT HAD ACTUALLY HIT OUR TAX ROLES?
>> BECAUSE WE DON'T COLLECT ANY OF THAT UNTIL THE ALLOCATION AREA FALLS OFF IN FIVE YEARS. SO THE PROPERTY TAX REVENUE TO
[00:10:01]
THE CITY OF CARMEL WOULDN'T COME UNTIL2031, PAY 32. >> I BELIEVE THAT'S
SO THAT -- THAT PROPERTY TAX DEDUCTION BASED ON SENATE ROLLBACK 1 WOULD BE AN ADDITIONAL 33. 4% DEDUCTION AND THE ASSESSED VALUE FOR THAT YEAR WHEN WE FINALLY START COLLECTING PROPERTY TAXES FROM THE PROPERTY, AND THAT WILL ONLY BE THE CITY'S PORTION OF THE PROPERTY TAX RATE.
THE 77 CENTS PER 100. WAS THAT WHAT YOU USED IN YOUR CALCULATION?
>> I WANT TO SEE IT ON PAPER BEFORE I CAN COMMENT.
>> THEN YOU ALSO PROVIDED SOME NUMBERS RELATED TO I BELIEVE INDUSTRIAL ASSESSED VALUES.
COULD YOU RESTATE WHAT THAT NUMBER WAS?
>> IT WAS 462,000 WOULD BE INDUSTRIAL WAREHOUSE USE.
>> BASED ON ASSESSED VALUE OF WHAT?
>> BASED ON ASSESSED VALUE -- WELL -- ASSESSED VALUE OF -- IT'S APPROXIMATELY 23. 1 MILLION.
>> ARE YOU GUYS FAMILIAR WITH GM PFAS ILITIES INCLUDING FISSURES AND THOSE ASSESSED VALUES IN PER SQUARE FOOT DOLLAR AMOUNTS? IT'S SIGNIFICANTLY DIFFERENT THAN WHAT WAS THE PER SQUARE VALUE QUOTED? $70?
>> I DON'T THINK WE QUOTED A DOLLAR ON SQUARE-FOOT BASIS.
>> I THOUGHT NATHAN JUST STATED A $07 PER SQUARE FOOT NUMBER.
>> SO WHAT I UNDERSTAND IS THE $23. 1 VALUE BASED ON A 270,000 SQUARE- FOOT FACILITY AT $70 PER SQUARE FOOT. IS THAT CORRECT?
>> PLUS THE LAND. SO LAND IS NOT INCLUDED IN THAT NUMBER? LAND IS INCLUDED IN THE NUMBER.
>> JUST FOR THE RECORD, I WANT TO STATE SOME TYPE OF DEVELOPMENTS THAT FISSURES IS OBTAINING AND NOBELSVILLE IS OBTAINING AND INDIANAPOLIS IS OBTAINING AND WE HAVE VERY LIMITED I- 4 AT ALL, LET ALONE I- INDUSTRIAL ZONING IN THE CITY OF CARMEL FOR WHICH WE'RE MISSING OUT ON. STEBANATO IS A $5 MILLION PROJECT AT $531 A SQUARE FOOT ASSESSED VALUE. LIST THERAPEUTICS WAS A $125 MILLION PROJECT AT $1,136 PER SQUARE FOOT.
INCOG BIOPHARMA WAS AT $1,125 A SQUARE FOOT.
JENSON LABS, $5 MILLION PROJECT AT $550 A SQUARE FOOT.
$667 A SQUARE FOOT. SPEAKING TO AN EXPERT AT CUSHMAN WAKEFIELD WHO DEALS SPECIFICALLY IN GMP FACILITIES AND BIOTECH FACILITIES WHICH THERE'S SIGNIFICANT DEMAND FOR IN INDIANA AT THE MOMENT AS WE SEE WITH THE LEAP PROJECT IN LEBANON, THEIR ESTIMATES ARE ANYWHERE FROM 500 TO 250 SQUARE FEET AND A 250-FOOT -- 250,000 SQUARE- FOOT FACILITY LOCATED AT THAT LOCATION WHICH WOULD MEAN A PROJECT ANYWHERE FROM $125 MILLION TO $312 MILLION AT A 3% CAP WHICH MEANS THAT WITH NO AV DEDUCTIONS BASED ON SENATE ROLLBACK ONE ADD A 2% AV.
SO I WANT TO CLARIFY THOSE NUMBERS PRESENTED ON THE LAND USE BECAUSE THEY'RE NOT ACCURATE TO THE TYPE OF USE THAT WE WOULD BE LACK LOOKING AT IN THE CITY OF CARMEL.
>> IF YOU LOOKED AT A SUBARU LOGISTICS, AND IN A TILTED PRE- CAS BUILDING YOU'RE GETTING
[00:15:01]
CLOSER TO TWO FOOT, ACTUALLY, 250, FOR THE AREA THAT WE'RE ATTRACTIONING FOR I- 4 USE.>> YOU MENTIONED THE I- 4 USE, IS THAT IN OTHER JURISDICTIONS?
>> IT'S AN INDUSTRIAL JURISDICTIONS THAT WOULD ALLOW FOR THIS TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT IN OTHER JURS DIKSZS.
>> RICH, CAN I ASK YOU A QUESTION?
>> YES. >> HOW BIG WERE THESE BUILDINGS THAT YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT, IF YOU DON'T MIND ME ASKING.
>> THEY VARY. WE CAN GO THROUGH THEM.
>> THE ONES THAT WOULD FIT ON THE SITE --
STEVANATO, YOU MAY NOT BE ABLE TO GET TO THAT EXACT SQUARE FOOTAGE BECAUSE IT WAS 574,000 TOTAL SQUARE FEET AND THE LIST, AND INCOG PHARMA WAS $170,000 SQUARE FEET. ABBOTT LABORATORIES IS 120,000 SQUARE FEET, A $38 MILLION PROJECT AT $317 A SQUARE FOOT. MERCK, IN INDIANAPOLIS, WAS 40,000 SQUARE FEET AT $41 MILLION OR $1,025 A SQUARE FOOT. JENSEN LABS WAS $75,000 PER SQUARE FOOT. NOVARTIS WAS A $6 MILLION PROJECT AT $639 PER SQUARE FOOT. LET'S SEE HERE. THE RONO MED WAS A 667 SQUARE FEET AND THE AVERAGE INCOMES FOR THESE TYPE OF JOBS AND USES EARNINGS DATA FROM CUSHMAN WAKEFIELD -- AVERAGE $196,383 PER YEAR.
>> SO A QUESTION I WOULD ASK, THEN, WHAT ARE THE SURROUNDING ECOSYSTEM LOOK LIKE IN THOSE PARTICULAR BUILDINGS AND BIOTECH FIRMS. THESE ARE FIRMS THAT USUALLY REQUIRE A GREAT DEAL OF OTHER COMPANIES AROUND THEM, A VARIETY OF OTHER INFRASTRUCTURES AROUND THEM AND NOT USUALLY CAR DEALERSHIPS AND STRIP MALLS. SO THIS SEEMS A LITTLE FAR-FETCHED. THE LEAP PROJECT ITSELF WAS A BILLION DOLLAR INVESTMENT FROM TAXPAYERS AND ALSO A NINE -- I BELIEVE ACRE I DON'T EVEN REMEMBER HOW LARGE IT WAS.
>> MY MENTION OF THE LEAP PROJECT IS THERE ARE A NUMBER OF SUPPLIERS AND HEADQUARTERS IN INDIANA TO SUPPLY THAT PROJECT. THE FISSURA PROJECTS I NOTED WERE GREENFIELD REDEVELOPMENT FOR WHICH THEY CREATED INDUSTRIAL PARKS WITH THIS ZONING SPECIFICALLY TO ATTRACT BUSINESSES. SO IF WE'RE LOOKING AT TO TRY TO REENVISION THESE, IT WOULD BEHOOVE US TO ATTRACT FOR TO THAT PARK AND FOR THE REDEVELOPMENT OF THAT PARK.
THERE IS AN INDUSTRIAL ECOSYSTEM THERE FOR WHICH THE USES ARE THERE AND TO ATTRACT THESE DEVELOPMENTS AND I THINK THE CITY OF CARMEL AS OTHERS HAVE NOTED HAVE SORT OF NEGLECTED THIS AREA AND NOT REALLY FOCUSED ON THIS TYPE OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT BEFORE, BUT IT'S FINE TIME TO LOOK AT ATTRACTING THIS TYPE OF JOBS AND FACILITIES INTO OUR COMMUNITY OR WE'LL HAVE A VERY LIMITED AND NOT VERY DIVERSE ECONOMY AND JOBS THAT ARE LOCATED IN OUR CITY AND WE'RE PRETTY HEAVY ON FINANCIAL SERVICES AND SERVICES BUSINESSES AND I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO ATTRACT THE BOOMING BIOTECH INDUSTRY THAT OTHERS HAVE WORKED ON FOR MANY YEARS TO CREATE THESE OPPORTUNITIES IN CENTRAL AGAIN.
>> CAN I ASK YOU ANOTHER QUESTION, RICH? SINCE WE'RE GOING BACK AND FORTH
>> SO QUESTION FOR YOU. I'M GOING TO USE THE CNO PROPERTY AND THE SEEK SYSTEM THAT EXISTS ON THE 31 CORRIDOR RIGHT NOW WHICH THREE OF OUR MAJOR HOSPITALS ARE THERE AND AS WE'RE LOOKING AT THE 31 OVERLAY, IF THIS IS -- IF THIS PROJECT IS A REZONE FROM I- 1 TO A PUD, ISN'T IT POSSIBLE TO USE PART OF THAT CAMPUS THROUGH THE MASTER PLANNING OF THAT CAMPUS TO INCORPORATE A FIVE- ACRE LOT AND JUST THROWING IT OUT THERE, A FIVE-ACRE LOT AND DURING THE REZONE PROCESS PUT A BIOMEDICAL FIRM OR SOMETHING
[00:20:01]
LIKE THAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT WITH A CAMPUS THAT'S AT LARGE, AND I'M JUST USING IT BECAUSE IT'S ONE OF THE BIGGEST LOTS OF LAND THAT'S OPEN AT THIS POINT.IS IT SOMETHING THAT'S FEASIBLE IN THE ECOSYSTEM THAT THE HOSPITALS ARE.
>> IT'S MORE DIFFICULT TO INCORPORATE RESIDENTIAL INTO THESE TYPE OF USES. THEY'RE ATTEMPTING IT IN PLAINFIELD WITH SOMEWHAT LIMITED SUCCESS AND ONE APPROACHED TO CN ORE LATED CNO RELATED TO AN OFFICE.
YOU ARE THINKING ABOUT INDUSTRIAL SPACES WHICH COULD WORK, BUT THESE HIGH- TECH MANUFACTURING THAT ARE DEALING WITH PEPTIDES AND LARGE ENERGY USES AND CHEMICALS THAT YOU PROBABLY DON'T WANT AROUND YOUR HOME, IF YOU LOOK AT THE SUCCESS OF WHAT'S HAPPENING ON THE ZIONSVILLE SIDE OF THE PARK, THEY'RE ATTRACTING AND WORKING TO ATTRACT A LOT OF THIS TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT ON THE ZIONSVILLE SIDE OF THIS INDUSTRIAL PARK.
>> SO YOU'RE SAYING JUST FROM YOUR BACKGROUND IN BUILDING AND MUNICIPALITIES THAT THE SITE THAT WE HAVE RIGHT NOW, THIS FIVE-ACRE SITE THAT'S UNDER REVIEW, THAT COULD NOT FIT IN AN AREA.
>> YOU WOULDN'T WANT TO BUILD WITH LIST THERAPEUTICS AND STEVANATO IS BUILDING NEXT TO TOWNHOMES.
NO, YOU WOULD NOT WANT TO DO THAT.
>> OKAY. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU, RICH.
>> WHAT IS THE -- I KNOW ACE'S OPINION ON THIS.
DO YOU HAVE OTHER JEN -- TWO QUESTIONS.
DO YOU HAVE FEEDBACK FROM THE OTHER BUSINESSES THAT AREN'T ACES, AND FURTHERMORE, HAVE YOU HEARD ANYTHING FROM OTHER LAND OWNERS, BUSINESS OWNERS IN THAT AREA THAT MIGHT WANT TO REDEVELOP IN THE FUTURE? THERE ARE TWO WAYS TO LOOK AT THIS. ONE, IT'S A DEVELOPMENT THAT IS NOT CLEARLY LOVED BY ALL OR IT'S THE KICKOFF FOR THINGS TO COME IN THE FUTURE.
WHAT IS THE REST OF THE PARK, AND I KNOW ACE IS --
>> WE REACHED OUT NOT ONLY TO ACES, BUT ALSO TO THE OWNERS ASSOCIATION IN THE PARK AND THEY HAD AT LEAST ONE MEETING WITH THEM, IF NOT A COUPLE.
THEY DIDN'T PROVIDE A LETTER TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND THERE WERE A TOTAL OF TEN THAT WE DID AND THOSE LETTERS ARE INCLUDED IN YOUR PACKET AND I WOULDN'T CLASSIFY AS MOST GENERAL SUPPORT.
I KNOW THAT EVER GROWS REACHED OUT IN PERSON TO SOME OF THE BUSINESSES, BUT ALSO WENT ABOVE AND BEYOND IN HAVING A CONVERSATION WITH THE HOA, NOT HOA, BUT THE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION WITH THE FLOWER PARK AND OTHER ACES.
>> COUNCIL MEMBER, I HAVE A COMMENT RELATED TO THAT. IT'S -- I WISH I WOULD HAVE HAD A LOT MORE QUESTIONS DURING ACE'S ABATEMENT REQUEST IF THE INTENT OR THEIR VISION FOR THIS CAMPUS WAS THE REDEVELOPMENT FOR MIXED- USE DEVELOPMENT AND WALKABLE COMMUNITY. IF THAT WAS THE CASE THEN JUST LIKE MANY OF OUR OTHER DEVELOPMENTS IN CARMEL, WE INCENTIVIZE THOSE TYPE OF DEVELOPMENTS BY CREATING SPACE, CREATING WALKABILITY, AND I WOULD HAVE ASKED A LOT DIFFERENT QUESTIONS DURING THE PROCESS IF THIS WAS THE POSITION OF ACES TO REDEVELOP PARCELS AROUND THEIR FACILITY INTO A MIXED USEUSE IN THIS CASE PRIMARILY A GARDEN- STYLE MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPMENT.
>> RICH, TO YOUR POINT WHEN THIS WAS GOING THROUGH PLANNING COMMISSION, AND WE SPENT A LOT OF TIME IN PLANNING COMMISSION, ONE OF THE THINGS I DID DO WAS HAVE A LONG DISCUSSION AND RE-READ THE MICHIGAN OVERLAY, AND THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND PART OF THE ISSUES THAT --
[00:25:01]
ONE OF THE REASONS I VOTED YES AND SENT IT THROUGH THE PLANNING COMMISSION WERE THE FACT THAT -- AND I TOOK NOTES, AND I JUST WANT YOU TO HEAR THEM FROM ME.THE PROJECT ALIGNS WITH HIGH- QUALITY DESIGN, UNIFIED AESTHETICS AND COORDINATED LANDSCAPING. IT ALSO SUPPLIES THE UNIQUE SENSE OF PLACE BOOSTING PROPERTY VALUES AND FOSTERING COMMERCE. SO TO ME, WHEN I LOOKED THROUGH THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND THIS PROCESS, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT STOOD OUT TO ME WAS, YOU KNOW, EVER ROSE COULD HAVE GONE TO BZA AND WITH THE DISTRICT THERE ARE CERTAIN THINGS YOU CAN'T BUILD IN THE OVERLAY DISTRICT. THIS ISN'T ONE OF THEM.
THEY COULD HAVE VERY EASILY GONE TO THE BZA AND ASKED FOR A CHANGE AND THEY WENT THROUGH THE REZONING AND PUD TO COME TO THE STANDARDS THAT THE CITY OF CARMEL EXPECTS.
SO THAT WAS PART OF THE REASON FOR ME VOTING FOR THIS PROJECT GOING FORWARD WAS KNOWING THAT THEY MADE THAT COMMITMENT DURING THAT PROCESS KNOWING WHAT THE MICHIGAN EVERLAY REQUIREMENTS WERE AND STILL ARE AND ALSO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
SO JUST PUTTING THAT OUT THERE.
>> I JUST -- IF I MAY, NOT TO QUESTION ANYBODY'S UNDERSTANDING OR DESCRIPTION OF WHAT MAYBE GARDEN- STYLE APARTMENTS, THIS IS THE IMAGERY THAT'S INCLUDED IN THE ORDINANCE AND CONSISTENT WITH THIS IMAGERY IS REQUIRED UNDER THE ORDINANCE.
THESE ARE FOUR- STORY BUILDINGS THAT ALONG THE MAIN SIDE OF THE BOULEVARD ARE LOOKING WEST. OTHER IMAGERY THAT'S INCLUDED WITHIN AND REQUIRED FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE SITE, CONSISTENT WITH THE SITE PLAN IS THIS HERE WITH THE STORM WATER FEATURE AND THE BUILDING IN THE BACKGROUND AND LASTLY, ANOTHER IMAGE LOOKING ACROSS. I DON'T KNOW.
I WOULDN'T CHARACTERIZE IT AS GARDEN STYLE. TYPICALLY, THOSE TWO AND THREE- STORY BUILDINGS AND THIS IS CONSISTENT WITH THE ARCHITECTURE WITH THE OTHER PROJECTS THAT EDWARD ROSE HAS WORKED ON IN THE COMMUNITY. NOT TO REBUT, BUT HELP THE STRUCTURE AND BENEFIT THE DISCUSSION.
>> SO MY RESERVATIONS WITH THIS IS THAT FOR 30, 40 YEARS WE'VE COMPLETELY IGNORED THIS AREA. THIS IS CARMEL'S BOUNDARY AND THEN IT SHRINKS, I WISH THAT WE'D PAID MORE ATTENTION TO THIS ENTIRE AREA OVER THE LAST 20 YEARS, BUT WE HAVEN'T. NOW IT'S GOING THROUGH ON 465 DOWN HERE AND THERE WILL BE SUBSTANTIAL CHANGES THERE.
I'VE LIVED IN CARMEL SINCE I WAS BORN, 42 YEARS AND THIS HAS NEVER BEEN UNDER CONSTRUCTION PROVIDING THREE MORE STOPLIGHTS.
REGARDLESS OF HOW THIS PROJECT TURNS OUT THIS EVENING, WE HAVE GOT TO DO A CORRIDOR PLAN HERE BECAUSE IT'S NOT FAIR TO ANYBODY IN CARMEL OR ANYBODY THAT ENDS UP CONSTRUCTING WHAT COUNSELOR TAYLOR IS TALKING ABOUT OR RESIDENTS HERE TO LIVE IN THIS HODGEPODGE MESS OF ROODS.
I COUNTED 31 INDIVIDUAL DETENTION PONDS, I WISH I WERE INVOLVED EARLY ON AND CAN WE ELIMINATE THIS? CAN THE SEWER -- AND NOW WHAT WE'VE GOT IS THIS HUGE SITE 371, OR 360 TOTAL LIVING UNITS. IF IT GOES THROUGH, I AND ALSO ZIONSVILLE AND WHAT ACTUALLY MAKES SENSE HERE? I WAS TRYING TO GO THROUGH AND READ ALL OF THE ZIONS VILLE ANNEXATION SERVICES AND THERE ARE MUDDY AREAS WHERE THEY SORT OF TOOK EVERYTHING AND DIDN'T TAKE SOME AREA, BUT ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE AREA AND I THINK THIS NEEDS TO BE A GLOBAL CONVERSATION BETWEEN BOTH COMMUNITIES ABOUT WHAT'S BEST FOR US, THE PEOPLE OF CARMEL AND FOR THEM, THE FUTURE OF THIS AREA FOR THEM, AND THE QUESTION I GOT IN RUNNING THIS BY
[00:30:01]
A PUBLIC MEMBER -- A MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC WAS, NOBODY ASKED US ABOUT 146TH STREET WHEN THEY PUT THE KROGER UP IN FRONT OF THE NEW LENNAR BUILDING.WE SHOULD BE BETTER THAN WESTFIELD.
WE SHOULD BE GOOD STEWARDS TO OUR NEIGHBORS. THIS IS THE MEETING POINT BETWEEN THREE MUNICIPALITIES, THREE TOWNSHIPS AND A COUNTIES.
HE'S RIGHT HERE. A LOT OF THIS SPEAKS TO THE MERITS AND NOT MERIT IF -- WHICH IS THERE'S CONSTRUCTION ON MICHIGAN ROAD FOR THE LAST TIME AND NOT THROW STOP LIGHTS AT EVERY INTERSECTION BECAUSE WE PLAYED THAT GAME BEFORE OVER AND OVER AND OVER AGAIN AND THEN WE CAME BACK AND PAID TO UNDO IT ALL. FRANKLY, I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THE STATE RELINQUISH IT MUCH LIKE KEYSTONE AND LET US MANAGE THIS A LEVEL OF CARE THAT FITS CARMEL ON BOTH SIDES.
A COUPLE OF CONCERNS THAT I HAVE ABOUT THAT IS WE ARE NOW PUTTING RESIDENTS OVER HERE, AND WE DON'T HAVE ARTS AND THE PUBLIC SAFETY INFRASTRUCTURE OTHER THAN RELYING ON OTHERS, BUT IF THIS SPURS THAT ON, SO BE IT, BUT THOSE ARE POINTSES THAT I WANT TO BRING OUT GENERALLY, AND IF THIS, WHEN -- AND I FEEL BACK FOR EDWARD ROSE, HE'LL DID A STANDARD, THAT
I JUST WANT TO GET THINGS TO THE.
RECORD AND THEY SHOULD START PAYING ATTENTION TO THIS BECAUSE TO COUNSELOR TAYLOR'S POINT, WE GOT HERE AND MAYBE WE NEVER THOUGHT WE WOULD GET HERE BECAUSE NOTHING'S HAPPENED IN THIS AREA FOREVER, BUT AS FAR AS, AGAIN, FOR ME, AN ADVANTAGE OR DISADVANTAGE, DEPENDING ON HOW YOU LOOK AT IT HERE THE $2.1 MILLION GO TO IMPROVE NEW CAPITAL ARTS AND UNFORTUNATELY, NOT BENEFITING THIS AREA, BUT WILL BENEFIT THE WEST SIDE OF CARMEL FURTHER NORTH WOULD BE MY EXPECTATION AND THE PARKS DEPARTMENT WOULD MAKE THAT. I JUST WANTED TO SPEAK MY PIECE ON THAT.
>> GO AHEAD. YOU'RE ON THE COMMITTEE.
>> TO IMPROVE U. S.-421 HOW DO WE DO THAT WITHOUT THE STATE IMPROVING IT AND DOES THE CITY -- IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF ALL OF THE SIDE STREETS THAT ARE IN CARMEL WOULD THAT HAVE BEEN -- WOULD CARMEL BEY R SPONSIBLE RESPONSIBLE FOR BUILDING THE SIDE STREETS?
>> TO THE EAST, MOST OF THOSE ARE PUBLIC ROADS. TO THE WEST OF THE PARK, IT'S PRIVATE, BUT THEY ARE THE MAYFLOWER OWNERS ASSOCIATION ANDAND I'M JUST SAYING THAT HAS COMMITTED TO IMPROVING THE ROADS AND REALLY IT MEAN THAT ARE DEGRADED BEYOND BELIEF MICHIGAN ROOT.
IT IS A STATE HIGHWAY, IT IS A STATE ASSET AND THE ONLY WAY AND THE LAST OF THOSE DEALS BROKERED AND IT'S A WORTH ENOUGH LONG SHOT THAT IT'S WORTH EXPLORING AND IF THE CITY CAN GET AN $80 OR $90 MILLION CHECK TO TAKE OVER THE ROAD AND BUILD IT IN THE IMAGE OF CARMEL I THINK IT WOULD BE A GOOD DEAL FOR THE STATE IN THE LONG RUN AND AN EXCELLENT DEAL FOR CARMEL, BUT I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE CURRENT STATE GOVERNMENT'S APPETITE IS FOR THAT.
>> MR. CHAIR? MAKING SURE I CAN TALK.
I WANT TO ECHO WHAT COUNSELOR SNYDER SAID AND COUNSELOR TAYLOR, TOO.
I HAD A GREAT CONVERSATION ABOUT THIS PROJECT, TOO, AND GREAT KUDOS FOR EVER ROSE AND REINVESTING IN
[00:35:01]
THEIR PRODUCTS AND CREATING WONDERFUL AMENITIES AND NOT JUST UNDERSELLING AND CUT AND RUN, BUT I THINK WHAT WE'RE LACKING IN THIS KIND OF WHAT COUNSELOR SNYDER SAID. THERE ISN'T LEADERSHIP IN THIS AREA AND I THINK EVERYONE IS WORKING HARD, BUT IS THERE A VISION FOR THIS PART OF TOWN THAT DOESN'T EVEN FEEL LIKE THIS PART OF TOWN.WHEN WE PUT APARTMENTS IN OUR CENTRAL CORE, I KNOW SOME PEOPLE PUSHED BACK ON THAT, BUT I DEFEND IT BECAUSE WE'VE BUILT THE INFRASTRUCTURE. WE'VE BUILT THE CHARACTER AND WE'VE BUILT THE ROADS AND WE DECIDED KIND OF, THIS IS WHAT WE WANT TO SEE THERE, SO IT MAKES IT VERY EASY FOR THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND OTHERS TO SAY DOES THIS MATCH THE CHARACTER OF THIS PART OF TOWN? I DON'T KNOW IF WE'VE CLEARLY DEFINED THAT.
I'LL BE HONEST, BEFORE THIS I HAD NOT PUT A LOT OF THOUGHT INTO THE FUTURE OF THIS PART OF TOWN AND THIS HAS KIND OF OPENED MY EYES TO PERHAPS HAVING FURTHER DISCUSSIONS ABOUT WHAT WE WANT IT TO LOOK LIKE INFRASTRUCTURE WISE AND BUSINESS WISE.
I DON'T KNOW IF THE THINGS THAT COUNSELOR TAYLOR IS SAYING ABOUT INDUSTRIAL USES WOULD COME TO FRUITION, BUT I DON'T KNOW IF WE'D EVER EXPLORE IT, AND IT WOULD SEEM LIKE A WASTED OPPORTUNITY TO NOT EXPLORE THAT AS AN OPTION CONSIDERING THERE'S SO LITTLE LEFT IN OUR CITY. LAND USE HAS DONE A GREAT JOB ON THIS, AND I REALLY DO COMMEND EDWARD ROSE, BUT GOING FORWARD, HAVING LEADERSHIP FROM THE TOP ON WHAT WE WANT TO SEE IN THESE AREAS I THINK WOULD BE REALLY HELPFUL, NOT ONLY FOR THE COUNCIL, BUT FOR THOSE WHO ARE TRYING TO BUY LAND FOR
PROJECTS. >> I WAS THINKINGING THE OF ABOUT THE WHOLE AREA THAT'S NOT A COM PREHNSIVE THING AND THE OVERLAY DISTRICT, THOSE THINGS HAVE BEEN DONE ALREADY AND HAVING TO DO A PROJECT LIKE THEY'RE DOING AT HOME PLACE RIGHT NOW, TO MASTER PLAN THAT AREA, I DON'T KNOW HOW MUCH THAT COSTS. DIRECTOR HARBALL, DO YOU HAVE AN ANSWER FOR THAT? DO YOU MIND ANSWERING? I'M JUST CURIOUS.
SINCE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT IT, I'M
CURIOUS. >> WE HAVE A QUOTE FROM LAST YEAR DURING BUDGET SEASON THAT WAS AROUND 95,000 FOR THE NEW MASTER PLAN FOR THAT MICHIGAN CORRIDOR.
THAT WOULDN'T DO WHAT COUNSEL SNYDER IS LOOKING FOR AND THE RELINQUISHMENT.
THAT WAS TO ENVGSZ A MORE DETAILED LAND USE AND KIND OF PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNED FOR THAT CORRIDOR.
>> IN YOUR EXPERIENCE, WHAT WOULD SOMETHING LIKE THAT -- DO YOU KNOW? I MEAN, MATT, DO YOU KNOW?
>> YEAH. I WOULD ESTIMATE THE FULL -- THE FULL, WHAT MIKE WOULD DO WITH HIS CONSULTANT AND ON THE ENGINEERING SIDE ALL IN I WOULD ESTIMATE $200 TO $250,000. PERSONALLY, WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT IMPACTING PEOPLE'S LIVES AND THE HUNDREDS OF MILLION, I THINK IT'S MONEY WELL SPENT.
>> I HAD A QUESTION FOR THE HOUSING TASK FORCE.
SO TWO OF YOU ARE HERE. YOU GUYS WORKED ON THIS PRETTY HARD LAST YEAR AND NOW HAVE THE OFFICIAL COMMITTEE MOVING FORWARD, BUT ITEM 6 IN THE FINDINGS WAS ADOPT A DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY FOR NEW APARTMENT CONSTRUCTION. TO ENSURE THAT THE RIGHT MIX OF HOUSING IS ACHIEVED AND NO ASPECT OF HOUSING IS BUILT THE CITY WILL APPLY THE AMOUNT, LOCATION AND DESIGN OF MULTI- FAMILY HOUSING.
IT WILL EMPHASIZE THE NEW APARTMENT -- THAT NEW APARTMENT BUILDING SHOULD SERVE PRIMARILY AS A PART OF THE MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT PROJECT WHENEVER POSSIBLE. FURPTHERMORE, THE CITY SHOULD CAREFULLY CONSIDER THEM OFFERED FOR THE USE OF SINGLE- USE APARTMENT PROJECTS.
THE REASON WHY I AWE -- WE HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO MAKE THIS COME TO LIFE TO DRIVE THROUGH BUSINESS, ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENTS AND BRING IN HIGH- PAYING JOBS BECAUSE WE HAVE THE ZONING HERE. IT'S STRATEGICALLY LOCATED AROUND I- 65 AND OTHER USES AROUND IT THAT WOULD
[00:40:01]
NOT CONFLICT, AND IT REALLY FEELS TO ME THAT JUST BECAUSE SOMETHING HASN'T HAPPENED THERE WE'RE JUST ACCEPTING DROPPING 365 WALK- STYLE APARTMENTS AND NOT GARDEN- STYLE APARTMENTSA TO THE SITE WHERE IF WE DID HAVE A VISION AND WE DID DO TRADITIONAL ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT WE COULD DO SOMETHING DIFFERENT. SO DO YOU GUYS BELIEVE THAT THIS PROJECT BASED ON PRIMARILY A, THERE'S A LITTLE BIT OF RETAIL THERE AND THIS PROJECT MEETS THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE TASK FORCE OF ADOPTING THE STRATEGY RELATED TO NEW PRODUCT CONSTRUCTION? PART OF THAT WAS FOR SHANNON, TOO. SHANNON AND ADAM ARE ON THAT COMMITTEE.>> I'LL SPEAK. SO I THINK I PUT A SIMILAR STATEMENT OUT. I WOULD AGREE.
I THINK THAT THERE'S NOTHING WRONG WITH APARTMENT, BUT WE WERE LOOKING AT, THERE ARE SO MANY OPPORTUNITIES WHEN WE NEED TO INCORPORATE THEM INTO MIXED- USE DEVELOPMENTS. A LOT OF TIMES IF THERE IS A PARKING GARAGE, YOU ALMOST NEEDED TO FLEX THE PARKING AND THE OFFICE WORKERS AND APARTMENTS ARE AT DIFFERENT TIMES TODAY. FOR THAT REASON, AS WE CONTINUE TO BUILD OUT OUR CENTRAL CORE THERE WILL BE ADDITIONAL APARTMENTS BEING CONSIDERED WHICH IS WHY THERE IS A RELUCTANCE TO DO JUST STANDALONE APARTMENTS WITH PART OF THE MIXED- USE PROJECT GOING FORWARD AND KNOWING THAT THE APARTMENTS ARE INCORPORATED INTO CRC PROJECTS THAT COULD COME DOWN
THE ROAD. >> I WANT TO MAKE A CLARIFICATION BECAUSE I MADE A COMMENT AT THE LAST LAND USE MEETING AND WE KEEP REFERRING TO THIS AS I-4.
I USED TO OWN I- 4 PROPER THEY YOU COULD DO ANYTHING YOU WANTED ON INCLUDING PUT IN A HAZARDOUS WASTE LANDFILL. THIS IS NOT I-4.
THIS IS I- 1 UNTIL I PULLED UP THE ZONING MAP AND I CONFIRMED. THIS WAS NOT THE I- 4 THAT I WAS THINKING IT WAS. ONCE IT'S GONE IT'S NEVER COMING BACK. HOWEVER, EVERYTHING WEST OF MICHIGAN ROAD IS I- 1 WITH THE EXCEPTION OF A TINY LITTLE B2 DEVELOPMENT SOUTH OF 106TH STREET. I HEAR YOU LOUD AND CLEAR, RICH.
I DON'T THINK THIS NECESSARILY NEEDS THE HOUSING TASK FORCE, BUT I ALSO PERSONALLY HAVE NO FAITH IN THAT DOCUMENT AT ALL IN THAT IT'S NOT A COUNCIL- DRIVEN DOCUMENT AND HAS NEVER BEEN CODIFIED, AND I SAID THIS TO WIN AN ARGUMENT AGAINST JOHN AND JIM IN THE INVERSE WHEN THEY TRIED TO USE IT AGAINST PEA.
SO I'M NOT GOING TO PLAY IT BOTH WAYS. WE ARE RUNG UP AGAINST COUNCIL MEETING. DOES ANYBODY HAVE LAST POINTS TO MAKE ABOUT THIS? THIS IS A LOT MORE DISCUSSION.
>> THANK YOU. YOU BROUGHT UP SOME VERY INTERESTING AND RELEVANT POINTS AS FAR AS PLANNING THIS OUT, WHAT WE COULD HAVE DONE, WHAT WE SHOULD HAVE DONE, BUT AT THE END OF THE DAY I'M STILL LOOKING AT $2.1 MILLION FOR PARKS. DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY FINAL COMMENTS?
>> YEAH. I THINK THE ONLY FINAL COMMENT I HAVE IS I DO HEAR ABOUT WHAT YOU'RE SAYING ABOUT TRYING TO BRING UP FINANCIAL INCENTIVES FROM THE CITY AT A TIME WHEN WE'RE LOOKING AT A CITY BUDGET THAT MAY BE CONSTRAINED AND ADDITIONAL FINANCIAL INCENTIVES FOR OTHER PROJECTS. THIS PROJECT REQUIRED NOTHING FOR FINANCIAL INCENTIVE AND ACTUALLY MAY BE A REAL BEGINNING OF THE CATALYST IN THAT AREA TO DRIVE SOME HIGHER- END RETAIL. THERE HAVE BEEN SOME CONCESSIONS THAT HAVE BEEN MADE BY EDWARD ROSE BY ENSURING THAT THE RETAIL THAT GOES IN IN FRONT OF THIS BUILDING WILL NOT ONLY BENEFIT THE HIGHER END OF CARMEL, BETTER RESTAURANTS AND THINGS THAT WE'VE NEEDED FOR A LONG TIME ON THAT SIDE. I THINK -- I UNDERSTAND THAT PEOPLE HAVE NOT LOOKED AT THAT SIDE OF THE CITY AND IT IS MY SIDE OF THE CITY AND IT NEEDS ATTENTION, AND IT DOESN'T, AND THE HAZARDOUS WASTE SIDE WITH CHEMICAL PLANTS AND ANYTHING ON THE WEST SIDE WOULD APPRECIATE. THAT IS MY LAST COMMENT ON THIS BECAUSE I BELIEVE THAT THIS IS AN OPPORTUNITY TO ELEVATE THAT AREA OF THE CITY.
AND I'D LIKE TO RESPOND TO COUNSEL TAYLOR'S RESPONSE TO THE HOUSING COMMISSION AND WE HAVE YET TO GET TO NUMBER 6 YET. WE'RE JUST STARTING AND I'LL SAY IT AGAIN, MY LAST REMARK IS THIS IS NOT AROUND ANY RESIDENTIAL AREA. IT'S NOT GOING TO BE AND NOBODY'S AGAINST IT.
[00:45:14]
I HAVEN'T HEARD ANY IT'S $2 BILLION PARK IMPACT FEES AND BEAUTIFIES THE AREA, AND IT SPURRED THE DEVELOPMENT IN THAT AREA. IF THIS IS WHAT IT TOOK TO GET US TO EVEN LOOK AT IT, IT SHOULD TELL US SOMETHING. THAT SHOULD TELL US SOMETHING.>> I WOULD SAY THIS OUT OF RESPECT, DO YOU WANT TO KEEP THIS WITH LAND USE OR WHAT ARE YOUR THOUGHTS?
>> THINK LAND USE IS DONE. EVERYTHING THAT WE CAN DO, I WILL SEND IT BACK TO COUNCIL, AND YOU CAN DECIDE WHAT YOU WANT TO DO.
>> DID YOU WANT TO MAKE A RECOMMENDATION OR WHAT ARE WE THINKING?
>> WELL, WE WOULD PROBABLY VOTE ON IT UNLESS YOU WANT TO PULL IT OUT YOURSELF.
>> WHATEVER YOU WANT. WE'LL VOTE ON IT.
>> ALL THOSE IN FAVOR FOR THE PAUSE IN RECOMMENDATION? WE'LL GO BACK TO COUNCIL WITH A POSITIVE RECOMMENDATION ALTHOUGH I EXPECT THERE WILL BE FURTHER CONVERSATION AND DELIBERATION OVER THIS AT THE DEUS.
THAT'S ALL WE HAVE ON OUR AGENDA.
WE WILL ADJOURN AT 5:48 P.M. THANK YOU.
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.