[0:09] Good afternoon.

[0:11] The meeting of the mdc hearing

[0:12] examiner for AUGUST 27th 2026

[0:16] will now come to order. Couple

[0:17] of announcements reminders

[0:19] before I read the rules of

[0:21] procedure. If you have

[0:21] electronic devices, make sure

[0:24] they earn silent. And if you

[0:25] do have to have conversation,

[0:26] please go out in the hall to

[0:29] do that. The indices rules of

[0:32] procedure provide that the

[0:32] administrator MAY limit the

[0:34] number of new petitions

[0:35] docketed for the hearing

[0:39] examiner. The current planning

[0:40] staff is currently limited.

[0:40] Shunning limiting the number

[0:43] of new petitions to 10. This

[0:43] will be in effect for an

[0:48] indefinite period. The public

[0:48] hearing today will be

[0:49] conducted in accordance with

[0:51] the rules of procedure of the

[0:51] Metropolitan Development

[0:55] Commission. The petitioner and

[0:56] the rim on traders will each

[0:58] have a total period of 15

[1:00] minutes for their sworn

[1:02] testimony. We will hear the

[1:04] staff recommendation and then

[1:05] the petitioner and reminds

[1:06] traders will each have a total

[1:07] period of 5 minutes for a

[1:11] rebound. Reasonable,

[1:13] additional time will also be

[1:13] allowed for any member of the

[1:15] City County Council to provide

[1:16] testimony regarding a

[1:20] petition. Any party who has

[1:21] just spent satisfied with any

[1:22] recommendation or decision

[1:23] made today has an automatic

[1:26] right to an appeal. The

[1:28] dissatisfied party must file

[1:31] the appeal with the Department

[1:31] of Metropolitan Development

[1:32] within 5 business days after

[1:36] today. Additional notice of

[1:37] the appeal is required to be

[1:38] made to the individuals who

[1:40] are required to be notified

[1:40] under the mdc rules of

[1:45] procedure. Please contact

[1:46] staff within one to 2 days

[1:49] after today's hearing to

[1:50] discuss giving timely notice

[1:55] using the designated appeal

[1:56] also approval and modification

[1:58] petitions for which I make a

[1:59] recommendation to the

[2:01] Metropolitan Development

[2:02] Commission for approval or

[2:03] denial will be placed on the

[2:06] mdc agenda for Wednesday,

[2:11] SEPTEMBER. 16th 2026. Any

[2:11] commitments agreed to for such

[2:14] put it for such petitions must

[2:15] be submitted to step before

[2:17] the designated in dc meeting

[2:18] date and no later than

[2:23] SEPTEMBER 9th. 2026. Please

[2:26] note that any variance plat

[2:27] and vacation petition for

[2:29] which I approve or deny today

[2:30] will not be scheduled for

[2:33] further hearing. And the

[2:35] decision will be final unless

[2:35] an appeal is filed in

[2:36] accordance with the rules of

[2:40] procedure. We'll now begin

[2:41] with special requests,

[2:43] including withdraws in

[2:44] continuances. I'm first going

[2:46] to ask Nancy to read into the

[2:48] record all of the special

[2:50] request of which she is aware

[2:51] then will take special request

[2:52] from the audience. And finally

[2:55] special requests from staff.

[2:55] Thank you, Man. Im hearing

[3:03] examiner. Chris, we have 2026

[3:06] 0, 0, 7, 2, 76. 44 Big Ben

[3:06] Boulevard Center Township

[3:09] Council District 19 and on a

[3:12] medic continues to SEPTEMBER

[3:13] 24th 2026. Has been filed by

[3:14] Register neighborhood

[3:18] organization. Is there anyone

[3:21] here today on 2026 e u n 0, 7,

[3:23] 2 at 76. 44 Big Ben Boulevard.

[3:24] Again, that is an automatic

[3:26] continuance. Michael, any

[3:29] comments from staff? Thank

[3:30] you, MADAM Hearing examiner,

[3:33] no additional comments. Am

[3:36] going to acknowledge the

[3:39] automatic continuance of 2026,

[3:40] 0, 1, 0, 7, 2, to the

[3:48] SEPTEMBER 24th hearing. Thank

[3:50] you, 2026. Easy. 8, 3, 6 2026.

[3:56] Cbre 3, 6, at 23. 26 East 44th

[3:56] Street where she Township

[4:00] Council district 8. We have a

[4:02] staff requests for continues

[4:05] for Costa SEPTEMBER 24th 2026.

[4:07] And is there anyone here today

[4:09] on companion petitions 2026

[4:12] easy cv or 8.36, the 23. 26

[4:15] East 41st Street risking it.

[4:16] Good afternoon. MADAM Hearing

[4:18] Examiner Justin King addresses

[4:22] 27 22 maker Street

[4:22] Indianapolis, Indiana, 4, 6,

[4:24] 2, or We're green mint and

[4:26] supportive of staff's request

[4:30] to the SEPTEMBER 24th docket.

[4:30] And I believe this would be

[4:34] without additional notice. I

[4:35] might also add that we are

[4:36] seeking a four-day waiver of

[4:39] the mailing requirements.

[4:40] Okay. Happy to answer any

[4:40] questions you might have.

[4:47] Okay. So lets to the waiver

[4:50] request first again, is there

[4:51] anyone else here on 2026, tz

[4:56] it and cvr 8.36 Kathleen

[4:59] staff's No way thank you,

[4:59] Judy, of this waiver is

[5:03] required due to Some delay on

[5:05] our part. What's the staff

[5:06] would have no objection to the

[5:07] four-day waiver. And then

[5:08] again, the continuance is to

[5:10] request some additional time

[5:11] to work with the committee of

[5:14] the Petitioner on this one.

[5:16] Okay. In that is the way just

[5:17] for written are also for

[5:24] posted. Notice. I believe we

[5:24] got the signs up 2 days after

[5:25] the deadline. They were up

[5:30] before the notice went out. So

[5:31] today's after the deadline.

[5:32] Correct? Okay. Today we on the

[5:32] signs for day on the legal

[5:39] case. All right. I going to

[5:41] grant the today waiver of the

[5:42] posted notice in 40 waiver of

[5:45] the written notice for

[5:47] companion petitions 2026 easy

[5:52] cvr 8.36 And then I am going

[5:56] to continue those petitions to

[5:56] the SEPTEMBER 24th hearing. Is

[5:58] that without notice? Cut And

[5:59] that would be without

[6:01] additional notice. All right.

[6:05] Thank you. Like you're up

[6:12] next. And it said the

[6:16] petitions are 2026. Easy. And

[6:20] 8, 3, aged 2026. Cbre 3, 8,

[6:21] That's 69, 15 east. Washington

[6:22] Street. One Township Council

[6:26] district 20. Staff is

[6:27] requesting that continues for

[6:31] cars to OCTOBER. 29 2026. In

[6:33] his anyone else here today on

[6:37] companion petitions 2026 see

[6:39] cnn Cbr 8.38 At 69 15 east

[6:43] Washington street. Kate is

[6:44] ticking once again. Justin

[6:47] King in at just 27. 22 maker

[6:47] Street Indianapolis, Indiana,

[6:51] for 6, 2 or 3. Again, we're

[6:53] supportive of the request made

[6:53] by staff to continue this case

[6:57] to the OCTOBER 29th hearing

[7:00] dates. We anticipate that

[7:01] legal notice might or the

[7:02] request MAY change and

[7:02] therefore legal notice would

[7:05] be need to be. Modified. And

[7:09] recent we're not to that point

[7:10] We know that that request will

[7:12] change. So will could have to

[7:13] deal with that as

[7:14] conversations take place with

[7:19] staff. This one would also

[7:20] require us to request a

[7:20] one-day waiver of both the

[7:22] legal notices and the sign

[7:27] regulation. Okay. Again, you

[7:29] and anyone else here on the

[7:30] petitions at 69 15 east,

[7:36] Washington street. Kathleen

[7:37] comments on the Thank you

[7:38] staff would have no objection

[7:39] to the one-day waiver of the

[7:43] notice and posting the sign.

[7:45] And again, this would be with

[7:46] additional notice if required

[7:51] to the OCTOBER 29th hearing.

[7:52] So am going to grant a windy

[7:53] waiver of the written and

[7:56] posted notice for 2026. See

[8:00] cnn cvr 8.38 And continue

[8:02] those petitions to the OCTOBER

[8:04] 29th hearing with notice if

[8:16] necessary. Next is 2026. Easy

[8:19] and 8.44 In 2026, ebr 8. 44 66

[8:23] 20 north Human Way Xi Jin

[8:26] Township Council District 3

[8:28] the night and then it

[8:30] continues to 9/24/2026. Been

[8:30] filed by city County

[8:35] Councilor. There anyone else

[8:37] here today on companion

[8:40] petitions 2026? Easy cvr 8.44

[8:44] at 66 20 north few way. Good

[8:45] afternoon, MISS Sports Hall

[8:47] Joe Calder and 11 South

[8:48] Meridian, Indianapolis

[8:49] representing the petitioner in

[8:51] this matter. We are in contact

[8:53] with counselor boots and the

[8:57] other umbrella. Neighborhood

[8:58] organizations were holding a

[8:59] committee community meeting

[9:01] next Tuesday. So we anticipate

[9:02] being in good shape. By the

[9:07] time we return next month. And

[9:08] Kathleen, any additional

[9:09] comments from Thank you, This

[9:12] would require is your meant?

[9:14] Can going to acknowledge the

[9:17] automatic continuance of

[9:17] companion petitions 2026? Easy

[9:24] cvr 8.44, thank you. Are there

[9:25] special request from the

[9:26] audience for continuing won't

[9:30] withdraw. All expediting. Good

[9:32] afternoon. Good afternoon,

[9:35] office at 16. 38 Shelby Street

[9:35] Suite. One, Indianapolis,

[9:36] Indiana, on behalf of Punjab

[9:39] property for petition 2026.

[9:44] And Modi. 0, 0, 3, With

[9:44] regards to property. 8600

[9:47] comes road. And we are

[9:51] requesting a continuance and

[9:53] unfortunately based on some of

[9:54] the people in attendance, I

[9:55] believe there was a MISS

[9:56] Communication on that part of

[10:02] it. But staff informed us a

[10:03] few days ago that dpw is

[10:04] requesting a traffic impact.

[10:08] Study. And and that will take

[10:09] some time for the petitioner

[10:13] to complete. And and there's

[10:18] also been. Wetland delineation

[10:20] report that some of the

[10:26] neighborhood committee. And

[10:28] has, but it has been unable to

[10:28] provide a copy of staff. Does

[10:32] not have a copy of. And so we

[10:34] would like to see that as well

[10:35] since our engine. The

[10:39] petitioners engineer and

[10:40] that's not have any of the

[10:40] property designated as

[10:44] wetlands in there report. So

[10:46] what does the continuance

[10:53] request? 2 OCTOBER 29th? Okay.

[10:55] I actually saw the email

[10:56] exchange and I know that that

[10:56] was requested a couple weeks

[10:59] ago. I was there such a delay

[11:04] in getting that under way.

[11:05] That was a couple weeks ago,

[11:07] but it would typically they

[11:10] take 30 to 60 days, too. Yeah,

[11:11] but you said the staff you

[11:12] just found out a couple days

[11:16] ago. Oh, no. Sorry, okay. Into

[11:19] debt. You tried to make the

[11:22] rim on traders aware the

[11:23] continuances of 2 said he is.

[11:24] think there was MISS

[11:25] Communication. I told them

[11:27] about the request for the and

[11:31] traffic impact. Study. Okay.

[11:34] Is there anyone but here that

[11:37] wants to speak on the

[11:39] continuance request for 2026.

[11:42] Him. Od. 0, 0, 3. 8600 Combs

[11:42] Road. And again, the content.

[11:46] The request is to continue to

[11:47] OCTOBER. 29th from today's

[11:48] hearing. Is there anyone here

[11:48] on those petitions? Yes,

[11:51] ma'am. If you would, please

[11:55] state your name and address.

[11:57] Robin Heldman. 88 24 Combs

[12:01] Road Indianapolis, Indiana.

[12:03] Today is the first day that I

[12:05] heard that he was asking for a

[12:06] continuance. We have

[12:10] communicated via e-mail. He

[12:11] did discuss that they had a

[12:12] traffic study which I was

[12:13] aware that was a couple of

[12:18] weeks ago, but communication

[12:19] there was no further

[12:20] communication. We do have

[12:21] several people here that we're

[12:27] ready to testify in opposition

[12:30] I'm just curious what if it is

[12:31] continued? What does this

[12:32] whole process just start

[12:34] again, where we come here

[12:35] before you and then it

[12:38] proceeds. But if if say we

[12:39] don't want it to be continued

[12:43] and move for what? What

[12:44] happens? That's good question.

[12:46] I show of hands. Can I see who

[12:47] else is here today on this

[12:49] petition on Combs wrote, ok,

[12:52] so dozen people or so? Yeah,

[12:56] and I understand it. It's very

[12:57] much an inconvenience with

[12:57] driving here and paying for

[13:01] parking and all that I would

[13:05] say that. First of all, I'm

[13:06] I'm disappointed that it was

[13:07] not communicated to you that

[13:12] that this. In my opinion, this

[13:14] is not something that I can

[13:14] here today because there is a

[13:16] vital piece of information

[13:17] that that is not going to be

[13:21] ready for a couple months so I

[13:24] don't think it would be best

[13:25] served to hear the petition

[13:29] today. Another option that I

[13:30] have, which is still going to

[13:35] involve everybody coming back.

[13:36] Is to send the petition

[13:37] directly to the Metropolitan

[13:38] Development Commission for an

[13:41] initial hearing. But if I do

[13:42] that, it has to be their

[13:44] SEPTEMBER 16th date because

[13:49] that that. As I announced to

[13:51] my rules, anything heard today

[13:54] goes to SEPTEMBER 16th and out

[13:55] Lee. It's gonna have to be

[13:56] continued from them because

[13:58] studies can be done yet. So my

[14:02] preference would be go ahead,

[14:04] continue it out. And let's

[14:05] make sure that OCTOBER 29th

[14:10] is. Far enough out because

[14:14] after that date, I wouldn't be

[14:15] likely to grant any more

[14:15] continuances on behalf of the

[14:20] petitioner. So again, I know

[14:21] it's an inconvenience. I

[14:26] apologize for that. Do you

[14:27] feel like that's something you

[14:28] and your group could work west

[14:32] on that OCTOBER 29th date.

[14:33] Yes. So we have your the

[14:34] SEPTEMBER 16th. They would be

[14:36] a problem for okay. So get

[14:38] that my only other question or

[14:41] request is that we have

[14:42] communicated with the

[14:45] petitioners rep attorney and

[14:48] there were supposed to be

[14:49] revised site plans time and

[14:51] that was back in JUNE, I think

[14:52] is when they initially said

[14:53] they were going to have those.

[14:54] He still has not submitted

[14:55] those. I don't believe to

[14:58] staff and he is not. And so we

[14:59] have not seen those. I've

[15:01] invited him to the Franklin

[15:03] Township Land Use Committee

[15:05] meeting and he hasn't come

[15:05] because he doesn't have those

[15:06] revised plans. But he didn't

[15:10] mention that here. So I'm just

[15:10] questioning. When will those

[15:13] be submitted as well the track

[15:14] study? Okay. All right. Thank

[15:18] you. Thank you. Does anyone e

[15:19] else want to speak to this

[15:22] continuance request? She could

[15:25] state your name and address

[15:26] right City County Council for

[15:30] District. 25. I would also

[15:32] like let me know that I am

[15:32] here in opposition of this

[15:37] proposal. So I think we've had

[15:38] it I'm going to budget season

[15:39] right now the city. So forgive

[15:40] me for I know how has been

[15:43] continued so far. However, I

[15:45] think it's time we start to

[15:47] move forward with hit traffic

[15:48] study is going to show us that

[15:50] this is going to be a feasible

[15:51] use of the land given the

[15:52] restrictions of the plane of

[15:58] of. County line and that

[16:00] turning point right there is

[16:01] simply just too tight for

[16:02] something like this co into a

[16:06] semis. So well, it MAY or MAY

[16:06] not be able to make this

[16:09] actually goes forward before

[16:10] you like it be noted, along

[16:12] with the letter of submitted

[16:13] in your packet that I am in

[16:15] saying opposition of this, ok,

[16:16] thank you. And I appreciate

[16:18] coming today. Anybody else

[16:22] want to speak to the

[16:22] continuous request of this

[16:25] petition? Okay. And Kathleen

[16:27] comments from staff. Thank

[16:30] you, Judy. I just want to

[16:31] clarify that what is being

[16:34] requested by dpw is a traffic

[16:37] which is a traffic operation

[16:40] analysis and not a full-blown

[16:43] traffic impact. Study. They

[16:44] hit as specifically to look at

[16:48] the intersections of stop 11

[16:50] and Combs Road and county and

[16:50] Combs wrote. So I just wanted

[16:54] to get that clarified. As you

[16:56] know, this has been continued.

[16:58] This is initially set for

[16:59] hearing in APRIL. And this has

[17:00] been continued throughout the

[17:05] summer, Steph. We'll support a

[17:06] continuance to the OCTOBER

[17:08] 29th but will not support any

[17:09] more continuances if they are

[17:11] not ready to go forward and

[17:12] they either need to withdraw

[17:14] or this needs to be dismissed.

[17:19] Okay. Do you think that this

[17:21] should be with notice since

[17:23] there's been? I think that

[17:26] would be appropriate given

[17:27] fact that it has on for so

[17:28] long in Chile. Assume you you

[17:31] don't have that revised site

[17:32] plan. No, okay. Nothing new

[17:35] has been submitted to the

[17:38] okay. The the petitioner to

[17:39] the file since was initially

[17:40] filed folk and I know that MR.

[17:44] Rooney indicated the e.

[17:44] Wetlands so many Asian it

[17:45] would be appropriate for him

[17:46] to forward that. So it can be

[17:50] filed. Okay. All right, MR.

[17:55] Rooney, clarify, we don't have

[17:59] the wetland delineation. We we

[18:00] are told by the neighborhood

[18:03] that they have the wetland

[18:05] delineation designating the

[18:05] property as wetlands, but

[18:08] they've been unable to provide

[18:08] a cop because they only have

[18:11] one hard copy and they thought

[18:12] staff might have it. Staff

[18:16] says they do not. Noticed

[18:18] staff does not have a copy of

[18:21] that. That is one of the

[18:24] commitments Seth is going has

[18:26] requested as part this

[18:28] petition. So, yes, hasn't been

[18:32] conducted then. I mean, it's

[18:33] be required me. So that sounds

[18:34] like titian or yesterday that,

[18:38] yes, it would be up to the

[18:38] petitioner. He is just

[18:40] clarifying the neighborhood

[18:45] stated they had a previous

[18:45] report stating that it was

[18:47] wetlands in our engineer. It

[18:54] saying it is not. Would appear

[18:56] that engineer needs to submit

[18:56] documentation that it is not a

[19:00] wet one. Because if you look

[19:02] at the site is clear that

[19:04] there is a wetland that

[19:09] occupies most of this site.

[19:09] That, fact, extends to the

[19:13] parcel south of. This site. So

[19:15] it sounds like in the next 2

[19:19] months. You and your client

[19:29] have to. Verify. Where the

[19:29] wetland delineation is or if

[19:30] again, they're saying there

[19:32] isn't one they need to provide

[19:34] documentation of that. You

[19:39] have to prove here that do.

[19:41] You think that OCTOBER 29th is

[19:42] enough time? Because as you

[19:45] have heard, others say a we're

[19:48] not going to grant any more

[19:50] continuances on behalf the

[19:51] petitioner. So do you think

[19:54] that OCTOBER 29th is a

[19:55] reasonable date? If you are

[19:58] willing to continue no further

[19:59] to be safe, we would. But if

[20:03] you're not, we would. Would

[20:04] try to make sure we have

[20:10] everything by OCTOBER 29th.

[20:15] So. Again, do you think

[20:16] OCTOBER 29th is a reasonable

[20:24] date? Or should we? Think we

[20:24] will. We can make the OCTOBER

[20:28] 29th state work. Okay. And I

[20:31] do feel like that should be

[20:32] with notice. But in addition

[20:35] to notice, if you can also

[20:37] keep the counselor and

[20:38] Franklin Township Civic League

[20:39] in, you know, any interested

[20:41] neighbors informed. I think

[20:46] that would be very helpful. So

[20:47] I am going to continue 2026.

[20:49] And Modi, 0, 0, 3, 2, the

[20:50] OCTOBER. 29 tearing and that

[20:52] is with notice. Thank you.

[20:56] Thank you. Any other special

[21:05] request from the audience?

[21:06] Good afternoon. Again we're

[21:09] told Joe Calder and 11 South

[21:10] Meridian, Indianapolis

[21:11] representing Health and

[21:13] Hospitals Corporation. Agenda

[21:19] item 12. That's 2026 easy and

[21:21] cbre. 42 various addresses on

[21:22] world. Temple Meadows Drive

[21:26] and 30 a street. We are

[21:28] requesting a two-day waiver of

[21:29] both written notice and the

[21:33] posted sign. Is there anyone

[21:36] here today on companion

[21:41] petitions, 2026 e cnn cvr 8.42

[21:43] And various addresses on rural

[21:46] Temple Meadows Drive and East

[21:47] 38th Street. And again, the

[21:48] request is for a two-day

[21:53] waiver of the written notice

[21:54] for those petition and the

[21:55] sign in the sand with written

[22:00] and posted. Yes. And Kathleen

[22:01] comments from thank you. To

[22:02] the staff would have no

[22:04] objection to a two-day waiver

[22:05] of the written notice and the

[22:10] posting of the sign. Okay. So

[22:11] I am going to uproot it. Prove

[22:14] a two-day waiver of the

[22:15] written and posted notice for

[22:18] companion petitions 2026 see

[22:23] cnn cvr. 42. Other special

[22:28] request from the audience. Do

[22:29] we have any special requests

[22:39] from the staff? Yes, thank

[22:40] you. Staff would draw your

[22:40] attention to item number 15 on

[22:44] your agenda. Haven't discussed

[22:48] this with both the petitioner

[22:49] and community organizations.

[22:52] They have decided to continue

[22:52] this for one months. And that

[22:56] would be, too. I believe the

[22:57] 24th of SEPTEMBER. And Steph

[23:01] has no objection to that.

[23:02] Okay. And is that without

[23:03] notice? Yes, at this time

[23:06] there would be without notice.

[23:08] Okay. Is there anyone else

[23:11] here today on 2026, 0, 0, 6, 5

[23:15] at to Madison Avenue. And

[23:17] again, that request is for a

[23:19] 30 day. Continuance. Okay in

[23:20] petitioners. Not here.

[23:27] Correct. I am going to

[23:28] continue 2026 year when 0, 6,

[23:32] 5, To the SEPTEMBER 20 force

[23:36] hearing. And that is without

[23:42] additional notice. Any other

[23:42] special requests from staff

[23:55] today? We will now consider

[23:56] the petitions on the expedited

[23:59] portion of the dock. It these

[24:00] are petitions were staff has

[24:02] recommended approval of the

[24:04] request and staff has not been

[24:04] made aware of any opposition

[24:08] to the petitions. If there are

[24:10] reminds traitors present for a

[24:11] particular petition are

[24:12] members of the public who

[24:14] object to a petition being

[24:15] recommended for approval are

[24:16] being approved. We will hear

[24:19] testimony before a decision is

[24:21] made. Ines need to to read

[24:23] into the record all of the

[24:24] petitions on the expedited

[24:26] portion of the docket. She

[24:29] will then ask for you all to

[24:29] stand up and be sworn in. And

[24:33] then I'm call those up in

[24:34] chronological order and ask

[24:35] you to just give very brief

[24:38] comments on each one of those.

[24:39] Thank you. MADAM Union Salmon

[24:44] are The petitions to be

[24:47] extradited are just 1, in

[24:52] 2026. App's 0, 1, 5, At 18, 0,

[24:53] 7 Central Avenue Center

[24:59] Township Council District 13.

[25:00] 2026, 0 5, one. 41 50 North

[25:02] High School Road Pike Township

[25:10] Council District 5. 2026, 0,

[25:12] 0, 5, 5 it 16. 24 East 46th

[25:13] Street Washington Township

[25:19] Council District 7. 2026, 0,

[25:21] 0, 5, 9, 3, 3, 7, east, more

[25:22] history. Senator Township

[25:26] Council District 18. 2026, 0,

[25:34] 0, 6, 9, 11,001 50 is 1, 1, 1,

[25:35] 5, 0, Southeastern Avenue.

[25:36] Franklin Township Council

[25:45] district. 25. 2026 0 in 0, 7,

[25:46] 3, 8, 23. 55 North College

[25:49] Avenue and 7, 1, 7 East 24th

[25:50] Street Senator Township

[25:56] Council district 8. 2026, easy

[25:59] and 8 to 7 with 2026. Epl 8 to

[26:04] 7, the 2050 Wagner Lane. And

[26:06] 36, 69 Van Buren Street

[26:07] Senator Township Council

[26:13] District 19. 2026, easy and 8

[26:17] for 2 2026. Cvr 8, 4, 2, at

[26:21] 38. 39 through street. 38

[26:22] zeros. One North Temple

[26:27] Avenue. And 38 30 medals drive

[26:29] and 28, 0, 6 28, 40 East 38th

[26:31] Street, Washington Township

[26:35] Council district 8. Well, all

[26:36] those continued to testify on

[26:38] these petitions this

[26:39] afternoon. Please stand now to

[26:40] be identified. Who's going to

[26:41] speak for these? Please raise

[26:46] your right hands. Do you swear

[26:48] or affirm of the pill? Use a

[26:49] pretty to tell the truth and

[26:50] nothing but the to say I do.

[26:53] Thank you.

[27:01] If the petitioner for 2026, a

[27:04] p p 0, 1, 5, at 18, 0, 7

[27:06] Central Avenue could come

[27:08] forward. Please. And just to

[27:08] make sure there's no one else

[27:11] here on that petition today at

[27:15] 18. 0, 7 Central Avenue. Okay.

[27:18] Yes, use like 23. 0, one

[27:20] Central Avenue, Indianapolis,

[27:21] Indiana. We are seeking

[27:26] approval for. A new

[27:27] construction, single-family

[27:28] home and carriage house of

[27:29] which plans already been

[27:33] submitted for. It is pk to

[27:34] zoning. So we required to get

[27:37] the additional approval here

[27:39] And it looks like staff's

[27:40] recommending approval subject

[27:42] to substantial compliance with

[27:43] the site plan and elevations

[27:44] folded to JULY 2nd. Are you in

[27:45] agreement with that? I agree,

[27:48] ok? Thank you, Robert.

[27:50] Additional comments from

[27:51] staff. Thank you to staff a

[27:55] stuff the additional. All

[27:59] right. So subject to.

[28:00] Substantial compliance with

[28:01] the site plan and elevations

[28:04] filed dated JULY second 2026.

[28:05] I am going to recommend

[28:08] approval of 2026. App's 0, 1,

[28:10] 5, that will be placed on the

[28:12] docket of the Metropolitan

[28:13] Development Commission on

[28:14] SEPTEMBER. 16th. Thank you

[28:20] you. Petition Twenty-twenty 60

[28:20] when 0, 5, one at 41 15 North

[28:23] High School Road. There anyone

[28:24] else here on that petition

[28:35] today? MADAM Hearing Examiner

[28:37] David Gering officers and 9.21

[28:38] East 86th Street Suite 2 or 3.

[28:42] Indianapolis. And this

[28:43] petition petitioners, the

[28:43] upward and although repair

[28:47] shop. They're rezoning from

[28:48] c-four to see 7 so they can

[28:49] repair heavy trucks and sell

[28:53] used cars. Staff has

[28:56] recommended approval staff is

[28:58] imposing 2 conditions which we

[29:01] accept and our 2 commitments

[29:02] and met with the Pact Township

[29:06] residents Association twice

[29:06] and worked out commitments

[29:07] which they would like me to

[29:09] read into the record. Number

[29:13] one, the owner agrees to abide

[29:13] well these are the same there

[29:14] once by the open occupancy,

[29:15] equal employment opportunity

[29:17] commitments. Acquired by the

[29:19] mvc resolution so forth.

[29:23] Number number, 2, agree

[29:24] maintain the site and you need

[29:24] an orderly manner at all

[29:27] times. And provide containers.

[29:29] And the subject for proper

[29:33] disposal. Treshon others waste

[29:34] 3. The owner agrees that the

[29:35] following uses shall be

[29:37] prohibited. Plasma center,

[29:39] substance abuse facility.

[29:41] Check cashing invalidation

[29:44] service, adult entertainment

[29:45] nightclub, adult

[29:45] entertainment, retail

[29:48] business. Temporary and

[29:51] ongoing firework sales indoor

[29:53] recreation, entertainment.

[29:57] That is an event center daily

[29:58] Emergency Shelter. General

[30:00] outdoor recreation and

[30:00] entertainment indoor

[30:03] recreation. And entertainment

[30:08] and truck. Stop. For the owner

[30:09] agrees to submit a revised

[30:10] site plan showing the required

[30:10] number of spaces for the

[30:14] disabled. For the owner agrees

[30:15] to comply with the lighting

[30:16] standards that the city of

[30:16] Indianapolis can solve. Zoning

[30:19] Subdivision ordinance section

[30:21] 7, 4, 4, Dash 604. And that's

[30:27] the end of the commitments.

[30:30] Kathleen, additional comments

[30:31] from staff. Thank you to the

[30:36] staff has no further comments.

[30:41] So subject to the commitments

[30:43] in the written staff report

[30:45] and commitments requested by

[30:48] Township residents

[30:50] association. I am going to

[30:51] recommend approval of 2026.

[30:53] See a Wind, 0, 5, 1, that will

[30:54] be placed on the docket is the

[30:56] Metropolitan Development

[30:57] Commission for SEPTEMBER 16th.

[31:04] Thank you. Thank you. 2026. Un

[31:05] 0, 5, 5 at 16. 24 East 46th

[31:16] Street. Good afternoon. Here

[31:20] Seminole, we're told when in

[31:21] my address is 2, 1, 1, Avenue

[31:24] suite, 4, 6, 2, 1, 9, I do

[31:27] represent petitions seal when

[31:29] 0, 5, 5, The proposal was to

[31:32] rezone the property from issue

[31:33] one, 2 of the 5 foot to allow

[31:34] the construction of a 2 unit

[31:40] house or duplex. The only

[31:43] thing that we would add to our

[31:48] proposal is in 2,502 1005 seal

[31:50] 0, 5, 4, there was a prior

[31:51] commitment to pave the alley.

[31:53] And I believe that's when the

[31:54] church was proposed on this

[31:55] lot in the adjacent to the

[31:59] East. The alleys good

[31:59] condition. We've talked to

[32:02] staff about it. So we would

[32:04] ask that petition be

[32:05] considered for your

[32:06] recommendation for approval

[32:08] subject to the termination of

[32:11] commitment to pay the alley as

[32:13] previously agreed to under

[32:16] 2005, seal when 0, 5, 4, And

[32:17] with that, we would answer

[32:17] questions that you MAY have of

[32:24] us. So yet just as that

[32:28] require. The approval petition

[32:29] to be filed to terminate for

[32:32] Thank you. MADAM. Hearing my

[32:33] understanding of our

[32:36] conversation with MR. Dimon

[32:40] was that prior to any sort of?

[32:43] Work being done. And a

[32:45] follow-up modification would

[32:47] be filed modification petition

[32:50] to terminate okay. That

[32:50] commitment. Okay. His life and

[32:53] it sounded like we're going to

[32:54] do it right now. And didn't

[32:58] think that was possible. I

[33:00] believe it would just be a

[33:01] commitment that were already

[33:02] get an understanding there

[33:05] that unless a termination of

[33:05] commitment is files, they

[33:07] would think that sounds good.

[33:10] Any other comments, Josh? No

[33:11] additional comments beyond

[33:15] that. Thank you. Okay.

[33:16] Argument. Is that your

[33:18] understanding that you will

[33:19] need to file a and approval to

[33:20] shun to joke that that is

[33:22] correct. All right. So subject

[33:34] to. And approve a petition.

[33:36] Being filed to terminate

[33:39] commitment to pave the uses an

[33:42] ally? Yes, an ally. In the

[33:47] event that the alley, he's not

[33:50] paint. I am going to recommend

[33:54] approval of 2026. 0 Winds, 0,

[33:56] 5, 5, And that will be placed

[33:57] on the docket of the

[33:58] Metropolitan Development

[33:59] Commission on SEPTEMBER. 16th.

[34:06] Thank you so Thank you. Next

[34:08] is 2020 61. 0, 5, 9, 3, 3, 7

[34:11] East Morris Street. Is there

[34:11] anyone else here today on that

[34:16] petition? Good afternoon. Good

[34:17] afternoon. MADAM Hearing

[34:19] Examiner Chris Barnett with

[34:21] greater in the Habitat for

[34:21] Humanity at 31. 35 North

[34:25] Meridian Street. The should be

[34:26] the simplest one on the

[34:31] agenda. This property was

[34:33] donated to Habitat by the

[34:35] United Methodist Conference of

[34:36] Indiana. It formerly had a

[34:40] parsonage on the lot because

[34:41] we're switching the use,

[34:42] obviously from religious used

[34:46] to residential. We are seeking

[34:48] this rezoning and Robert has

[34:49] provided a really thorough

[34:50] analysis. I don't need to say

[34:51] anymore. All right. Sounds

[34:56] good to me. Robert, are there

[34:58] any comments from Seth on this

[34:59] petition? Thank you to know

[35:00] staff doesn't have any

[35:04] additional comments. Okay. So

[35:06] I am going to recommend

[35:09] approval of 2026. 0. When 0,

[35:11] 5, 9, That will be placed on

[35:13] the docket of the Metropolitan

[35:14] Development Commission on

[35:19] SEPTEMBER 16th. Thank you.

[35:23] 2020, when 0, 6, 9, and 1, 1,

[35:29] 1, 5, 0 Southeastern Avenue.

[35:30] Good afternoon. Good

[35:32] afternoon. And Howard 1, 1, 1,

[35:34] Southeast Avenue for 6, 2, 5,

[35:39] 9, We're seeking a rezone. 26

[35:41] acres from su one to to allow

[35:42] us to build a single-family

[35:43] home for my wife and my

[35:49] children. It's okay. And did

[35:50] or any neighbors interested

[35:53] when you sent out notice about

[35:53] this? I didn't get any return

[35:54] calls anything. Okay. All

[35:57] right. Are you here in this

[36:03] petition, sir? Okay, come come

[36:09] that Come forward, please give

[36:14] your name and address. Thank

[36:17] you, Jeremy Taurus. 5, 8, 3,

[36:18] 5, Karen Drive. But it is not

[36:22] what I thought it was. So I

[36:22] Don, promise someone building

[36:23] a house for themselves and

[36:25] their family. I was just

[36:26] scared that there's going to

[36:27] be a whole subdivision being

[36:30] built on the 26 acres.

[36:30] Concern. So did you received

[36:32] the notice? I did. That's why

[36:35] I came. Okay. I know I to call

[36:36] anybody. That's a right to

[36:37] just for future use. When you

[36:40] get one of those, it gives you

[36:42] the name of the petitioner

[36:43] that you can contact or if you

[36:44] don't want to do that, you can

[36:45] call the planner that handling

[36:47] it and then they can into your

[36:48] questions and save your trip

[36:49] downtown. Thank you. Okay.

[36:53] Thank you. Josh. Any comments

[36:55] from us. Thank you again.

[37:00] MADAME. Can examine, I would

[37:05] just similar to the last that

[37:06] individual who spoke. There

[37:07] were just a couple questions

[37:09] and I feel I did not receive

[37:12] any formal monster in that

[37:15] case and so that is why staff

[37:16] felt it appropriate to keep it

[37:17] here on the expedited docket.

[37:19] Other than no further

[37:23] comments, ok? So I am going to

[37:26] recommend approval of 2026.

[37:28] See a wind, 0, 6, 9, and that

[37:29] will be placed on the docket

[37:31] of the Metropolitan

[37:32] Development Commission on

[37:32] SEPTEMBER 16th. Thank you.

[37:40] Thank you. 2026. See a Wind 0,

[37:43] 7, 3 at 23. 55 North College

[37:50] and 7.17, East 24th Street.

[37:51] Use like 23. One Central

[37:55] Avenue, Indianapolis, Indiana.

[37:57] We are here to petition to

[37:59] have 23. 55 North College

[38:02] Avenue and 7 on 7 East 24th

[38:05] Street rezone from see one to

[38:08] allow us to build a new single

[38:09] family home and detach

[38:15] structure. Trash. When did you

[38:16] want to? I? Oh, I'm sorry,

[38:23] Robert. Thank you. To staff to

[38:24] 7 administrative request on

[38:26] this petition. The petitioners

[38:28] name was listed incorrectly on

[38:29] the legal notice, therefore,

[38:29] to change that. And then this

[38:30] will require that you waive

[38:33] the commission rules to allow

[38:34] the change. The name change

[38:36] would be from Jacob

[38:37] International investment by

[38:38] and we were, too, Brooke,

[38:41] Bernhardt by Paul muscle lack.

[38:43] Nothing else in the request

[38:45] changes the request and the

[38:46] address and all that is still

[38:46] the correct information. This

[38:49] was just missed. Typed name

[38:51] staff does recommend approval

[38:55] of the petition okay and MR.

[38:55] Mousa, look, I'm assuming that

[38:56] you have no trouble with me

[38:58] acting on this change by all

[39:03] means good. Okay. So I am

[39:05] going to waive the commission

[39:12] rules and allow to change the

[39:13] petitioner's name and

[39:14] representative from Jacob

[39:16] International investment by

[39:18] and reworked to Brooke

[39:23] Bernhardt by Paul Moose elect.

[39:24] So again, I I did approve

[39:26] that. And then I'm also going

[39:29] to recommend approval of 2026.

[39:33] When 0, 7, 3, that will be

[39:35] placed on the docket of the

[39:35] Metropolitan Development

[39:37] Commission SEPTEMBER 16. Thank

[39:45] you, Companion petitions, 2026

[39:50] Cz and Cpl 8.27 at 2015 Wagner

[39:51] Lane and threw 36. 69 Van

[39:53] Buren Street is or anyone else

[40:01] here today on that petition.

[40:01] Keith Cruise Line works.

[40:04] Engineering 63 11 East

[40:05] Washington street. Sorry. 6

[40:06] through 11 use Westfield

[40:13] Boulevard. And then you are

[40:16] representing the habitat. As

[40:18] as the consultant. Okay. Okay.

[40:27] It Thea so. It looks like

[40:28] staff's recommending approve

[40:30] the rezoning and then

[40:31] recommending that the plan to

[40:31] be approved subject to the 12

[40:37] conditions. Of the

[40:38] subdivision, regulations that

[40:39] are you in agreement with

[40:42] what? Josh comments from

[40:44] staff, please. Thank you

[40:45] again. MADAME Hearing Examiner

[40:47] Stephen, just note that this

[40:50] petition was originally

[40:50] continued since that

[40:51] continuance, I've not received

[40:55] any further correspondence

[40:55] again don't the can we have to

[40:56] for the comments beyond that?

[41:01] Okay. So I am going to

[41:03] recommend approval of 2026 Cz

[41:09] n 8.27 In the end that will be

[41:10] placed on the docking of the

[41:10] Metropolitan Development

[41:13] Commission on SEPTEMBER. 16th.

[41:18] I am going to. Approved plat

[41:23] 2026. Cpl. A 27. And find that

[41:26] the platform dated APRIL 22nd

[41:27] 2026. Complies with the

[41:27] standards of the subdivision

[41:32] regulations. Subject to the 12

[41:32] conditions in the written

[41:34] staff report. Thank you. Thank

[41:46] you. And the final expedited

[41:49] petition, his companion

[41:53] petitions 2026 e cnn cvr 8.42

[41:56] 38, 30 north Pearl. 38. 0, one

[41:57] North Temple. 38. 30 Meadows

[41:59] Drive and 28, 0, 6, and 28, 40

[42:00] East 38th Street. Again,

[42:01] anyone else here today on

[42:05] those petitions. Thank you.

[42:08] And good afternoon again,

[42:09] Mysports all Joe Calder and 11

[42:09] South Meridian representing

[42:10] the Health and Hospitals

[42:13] Corporation of Marion County.

[42:18] This is a clean-up exercise on

[42:19] the rezoning side. As you see

[42:23] the blurb, there are. Probably

[42:26] a half a dozen existing zoning

[42:28] classifications. There is some

[42:30] remodeling going on and the

[42:32] has worked office building,

[42:34] which is 38. 38, I think most

[42:34] of us are very familiar with

[42:38] that building. And as part of

[42:40] that, there was some parking

[42:43] to be added to the east and to

[42:45] the north. But the ordinance

[42:46] is changed to restrict parking

[42:48] in front of buildings to one

[42:52] row. So that's the variance.

[42:54] The rezoning actually came at

[42:59] the behest the md to just go

[43:03] to the special use 9, which is

[43:05] governmental purposes. And it

[43:06] makes sense from our

[43:07] standpoint, just to clean all

[43:09] this up, this is going to

[43:11] ultimately be, you know, kind

[43:12] of treated as one campus for

[43:16] health and hospital. There's

[43:21] nothing more In the

[43:22] development pipeline on on

[43:24] this parcel of this time. So

[43:25] that should be a pretty

[43:29] request for you today. There

[43:29] was a neighbor that showed up

[43:33] this afternoon. I spoke traded

[43:37] voicemails yesterday with her.

[43:38] Her concern was she just

[43:40] wanted to make sure didn't

[43:41] affect her property. And she

[43:42] that's on Temple, which to the

[43:46] West. There's nothing really

[43:47] changing on that side of the

[43:48] building. So she left

[43:48] satisfied to our degree. And

[43:52] I. Councilor graves was and

[43:55] support when we set out the

[43:55] notice as well. So answer any

[43:59] final questions. You MAY have.

[44:00] Cancer. Gibson counselor

[44:01] Gibson I am so sorry. No,

[44:03] that's okay. All right.

[44:06] Kathleen comments from staff.

[44:06] Thank you, Stephen. Have no

[44:12] further comments, but just

[44:14] Clarify. There were some there

[44:16] was a letter and staff looked

[44:16] at it and appeared that was

[44:17] Henry Mancias. But it was just

[44:22] basically that they wanted to

[44:23] more information, but

[44:24] otherwise staff as success in

[44:27] support of these petitions.

[44:27] Okay. And I did read the

[44:31] letter from cancer. Gibson. I

[44:33] am going to recommend approval

[44:37] of 2026. Ccna. 42. That will

[44:38] be placed on the docket of the

[44:39] Metropolitan Development

[44:43] Commission on SEPTEMBER. 16th.

[44:45] And I'm going to grant 2026

[44:49] cvr 8.42 subject to the site

[44:51] plan and adopt the findings of

[44:52] fact. Thank you so much. Thank

[45:07] you.

[45:13] We will now hear the

[45:14] petition that is on the

[45:16] petition scheduled for public

[45:18] hearing docket just as a

[45:19] reminder, the petitioners will

[45:23] have 15 minutes for their

[45:24] chief presentation. Fremont's

[45:24] traders will also have 15

[45:26] minutes. We'll hear from staff

[45:29] and then there will be 5

[45:30] minutes rebuttal from

[45:31] petitioner and 5 minutes

[45:38] rebuttal from remote traitors.

[45:39] Thank you. MADAM Hearing

[45:43] examiner petition for public

[45:46] hearing his 2026 z o and 0, 4,

[45:48] 20, 3 North College Avenue

[45:49] Center Township Council

[45:55] District 13. My guest, I'm not

[45:56] sure should not have

[45:56] pronounced that right

[45:59] Investment llc by David

[46:02] Gillman requesting rezoning

[46:03] 0.1 1 acre from the da

[46:05] District to the mu to

[46:07] distribute to provide for a

[46:10] small mixed use development.

[46:11] Well, all those intended to

[46:13] testify on this petition this

[46:15] afternoon, either for or

[46:17] against, please stand out and

[46:18] raise your right hand to be

[46:20] sworn in. Anybody else. 3

[46:23] people. Okay. Thank you. Do

[46:25] you swear or affirm and the

[46:26] penalties of perjury to tell

[46:27] the truth and nothing but the

[46:33] to say I do. Thank you. In the

[46:34] petitioner MAY come forward,

[46:45] please. Good afternoon again

[46:46] for the record. My name is

[46:49] David Gillman. My address is

[46:49] 2, 1, 1, southward revenue

[46:53] Swede hb plus 4, 6, 2, 1, 9. I

[46:56] represent channel Ug. He is

[46:58] the owner of property at 2, 0,

[46:59] 0, 3, North College Avenue. A

[47:03] request today before you is to

[47:06] rezone a parcel from d 8 to

[47:07] him you to to allow us to

[47:10] permit a small mixed use

[47:12] building on a par. So of about

[47:13] 30 her from side, 4300 square

[47:15] feet. So I've given you a

[47:20] handout. And if you will go to

[47:24] tab one. What we want to

[47:26] demonstrate in the first tab

[47:29] is that this proposed

[47:30] rezoning. Is appropriate for

[47:32] this property for 3 primary

[47:36] reasons? One. It does bridge

[47:37] the commercial and residential

[47:40] areas. The lower level retail

[47:42] will provide neighborhood

[47:44] service activities while 2

[47:45] smaller upper-level apartments

[47:49] lessons the intensity. As the

[47:49] site transitions toward nearby

[47:53] single-family homes. The

[47:54] second one that matches the

[47:55] scale of the surrounding

[47:58] development. The building is

[47:59] significantly smaller than the

[48:03] commercial uses to our south,

[48:04] creating a gentle step down in

[48:06] height, traffic in intensity.

[48:07] Again, as you move towards the

[48:10] residential blocks. It reduces

[48:14] land, use conflicts. By

[48:15] combining a small-scale retail

[48:19] with low-impact residential.

[48:19] The building avoids a Brit

[48:23] jump. That would occur with

[48:24] either for commercial or for

[48:25] multi-family residential

[48:28] development along. What I mean

[48:28] by that is activity patterns

[48:31] would be different.

[48:32] Transitions better to a single

[48:35] family surrounding area and

[48:36] then it would generate less

[48:39] traffic. So if you go into the

[48:51] second tab. But tab will

[48:52] demonstrate is that we feel

[48:52] the rezoning is also

[48:55] appropriate for this area.

[48:56] It's compatible with parks and

[49:00] trails. Mixed use. Buildings

[49:01] are commonly placed near parks

[49:03] and trails because they

[49:05] support walkability

[49:06] small-scale retail and housing

[49:07] options without overwhelming

[49:09] area. Supports the Monon Trail

[49:13] corridor. Retail at the ground

[49:16] level compliments trail users

[49:18] with a small residential

[49:19] component that aligns with

[49:20] Te'o pattern of modest

[49:24] neighborhood scale housing.

[49:24] Winds with modern planning

[49:27] principles. As you know, mixed

[49:29] use. Developments are widely

[49:31] recognized as the best way to

[49:32] connect commercial corridors

[49:34] to residential neighborhoods.

[49:36] Improving walkability and

[49:39] safety. What I mean by

[49:40] improving safety. It

[49:42] encourages walking or biking

[49:45] more and driving less. And

[49:45] then it provides long-term

[49:49] corridor, stability. In this

[49:50] slide. You'll see an area that

[49:52] I've marked in yellow. To the

[49:54] West Central Avenue to the

[49:57] north 21st Street. To the east

[50:00] is the monon trail and to the

[50:04] south is 19th Street. In this

[50:06] yellow area. There's over 600

[50:08] plus residential structures.

[50:10] All of these within a one to 3

[50:13] minute bike ride. We're 5 to 7

[50:17] minute walk. The second slide

[50:21] in tab too. Excuse me. The

[50:25] available street parking. This

[50:26] aerial image highlights the

[50:27] immediate area around the site

[50:31] in shows several underutilized

[50:32] on-street parking spaces along

[50:36] College Avenue. Most of the

[50:38] surrounding homes have 2, 3,

[50:39] car garages that are accessed

[50:42] from alleys. And some with

[50:43] long driveways that even allow

[50:46] vehicles to stack for guests.

[50:48] As a result of these

[50:49] residents, in our opinion,

[50:49] rely very little on-street

[50:52] parking. In addition,

[50:54] residential parking activity

[50:56] normally occurs in the

[50:57] evenings. After nearby

[51:01] businesses have closed, which

[51:02] again, further reduces any

[51:03] overlap or conflict and

[51:11] parking demand. Tab slide

[51:15] shows the site plan

[51:16] highlighting the compact

[51:17] neighborhood scale. Lay out

[51:19] pedestrian-friendly design.

[51:20] You'll also see varied

[51:23] building setbacks along the

[51:24] frontage, which incorporated,

[51:26] which were incorporated. To

[51:28] create additional space for

[51:29] bike racks and comfortable

[51:34] walking areas. The next tab. 4

[51:38] has 6 slides. These renderings

[51:42] of the proposed development.

[51:44] In this slide shows the

[51:45] College Avenue frontage of the

[51:47] proposed mixed use building.

[51:49] With 2 small apartments on the

[51:52] second level in a neighborhood

[51:53] serving retell either space or

[51:55] spaces on the ground level. 4

[51:59] b. This slide shows a 20 year

[52:02] street side of the building

[52:04] with a design is more

[52:05] pedestrian, focused. You can

[52:06] see the bike racks, wider

[52:08] walkways and smaller outdoor

[52:10] area that create a comfortable

[52:11] space for people walking or

[52:11] biking through the

[52:15] neighborhood. This strategy is

[52:17] by design, skilled for local

[52:19] activity from the immediate

[52:20] neighborhood. The Monon Trail

[52:25] and mlk Park to our West.

[52:28] Slide 4 c is just another

[52:29] perspective of the 20th street

[52:37] frontage. White Ford e depicts

[52:40] another view facing college

[52:41] with the possibility for

[52:42] pedestrian friendly, small

[52:50] skilled bistro. Slide. For

[52:50] this slide provides a bird's

[52:54] eye view of the entire site.

[52:56] Showing the compact layout the

[52:57] varied setbacks that create

[52:58] space for bike racks and

[52:59] pedestrians and the overall

[53:01] circulation designed for small

[53:05] walkable, mixed use. Building.

[53:07] And then finally in tab for 4

[53:10] f the slide highlights a coin

[53:12] outdoor sitting area. It's

[53:13] small neighborhood scale

[53:13] spaces designed for daytime

[53:17] use. Capped with a 07:00pm

[53:18] curfew when the retailers

[53:23] close. This adds a pedestrian

[53:24] amenity to the site where

[53:25] remaining fairly respectful to

[53:31] the nearby homes. In our final

[53:37] 5th tab. In 5 a we have a

[53:38] neighborhood support email to

[53:42] Robert. We work closely and

[53:43] diligently with the Broadway

[53:46] Park Neighborhood Association.

[53:46] And there's a part reflects

[53:47] the commitments we agreed to

[53:49] in writing. These commitments

[53:53] were developed to ensure the

[53:54] project meets their

[53:55] expectations on uses traffic

[53:58] and overall compatibility. For

[54:03] 5 b. These are the 10

[54:04] commitments that we've agreed

[54:06] to with the neighborhood. I

[54:07] won't go through them in

[54:08] detail, but I will highlight

[54:13] them. They commit they have

[54:14] restricted uses. We did. We

[54:16] think we've committed just to

[54:16] the 7 out of all you to use is

[54:20] that would be possible. All of

[54:21] these are less intense uses

[54:21] and require the same amount of

[54:25] parking. Elevations and

[54:27] building materials. We

[54:29] committed to compliance with

[54:30] an elevation in standard set

[54:32] of materials to be used to

[54:34] ensure a more attractive

[54:36] building to attract equality.

[54:39] Potential users. We committed

[54:39] to the site plan that we

[54:42] filed. We committed that we

[54:44] would ask no parking variances

[54:48] as required by the ordinance.

[54:51] We've made outdoor activity

[54:53] restrictions as I mentioned,

[54:53] the curfew on the outdoor

[54:57] seating to 07:00pm. No

[54:58] drive-thru or drive-up service

[54:59] windows. No outdoor speakers

[55:00] fully show did ground

[55:05] lighting. And then finally we

[55:06] committed to fencing and

[55:06] landscaping to our north and

[55:11] east single-family properties.

[55:15] The final slide in tab 5. My

[55:16] client has been in direct

[55:18] contact with the District

[55:18] during the course of this

[55:21] entire project. Received 2

[55:24] separate email responses. And

[55:25] I want to briefly summarize

[55:29] his feedback for the record.

[55:30] And both messages. He was very

[55:32] favoring of the building's

[55:33] design and the way it fits

[55:34] into the existing neighborhood

[55:37] fabric. He specifically noted

[55:39] that the project strengthens

[55:41] the walkability along the

[55:43] corridor and supports the

[55:44] character, the surrounding

[55:47] homes and businesses. His

[55:47] comments were consistent

[55:51] across both emails. He sees

[55:52] this as they will skilled

[55:53] neighborhood appropriate,

[55:55] mixed use building. And he

[55:56] expressed clear support for

[55:59] the direction we were taking.

[56:00] We did request a formal letter

[56:01] last week, but not having been

[56:04] able to connect with him

[56:06] because of this busy budget

[56:07] hearing schedule that is

[56:12] occurring to right now. Those

[56:14] are our comments closer

[56:16] presentation. We would ask

[56:18] that you for this to the nbc

[56:19] with a favorable

[56:21] recommendation. But we're here

[56:22] to answer questions that you

[56:28] have for My client, thank And

[56:28] thank you, MR. Anyone else

[56:31] want to speak in support of

[56:34] this petition. Andrey much

[56:40] traitors. He could state your

[56:44] name and address, please. My

[56:46] name is Ali to 1957. North

[56:49] College Avenue. Indianapolis,

[56:58] Indiana, for 6, 2, 0, 2, in.

[56:59] Your you are here in

[57:03] opposition. Is that right?

[57:05] Yes, and I for the record, I'm

[57:08] not trying to say I'm in total

[57:08] opposition developed, but I'm

[57:09] all for responsible

[57:12] development and I have

[57:13] communicated with both of them

[57:16] regarding the traffic 20th

[57:19] Street is very narrow. It's

[57:21] difficult to see already out

[57:24] on college. And so adding to

[57:26] businesses as well as to

[57:29] residential dwellings. It's

[57:32] going to definitely increase

[57:35] the traffic. It's already more

[57:36] so stressed. And so my

[57:37] question is, what can be done

[57:39] about their prior to doing it?

[57:43] I have to look out for. I'm I

[57:44] have a business there. I own

[57:45] the building and also have

[57:46] other tenants there. So

[57:49] there's 3 other tenants in the

[57:51] business in the building. They

[57:53] face College Avenue. My

[57:55] business faces 20th Street. We

[57:55] also have a parking lot. But

[57:56] then there's the street

[58:00] parking. So there's. Been a

[58:01] lot of accidents at that

[58:02] intersection. And we've even

[58:05] had and at a mobile hit our

[58:07] building. So I'm very

[58:10] concerned about the traffic

[58:11] him out. They MAY say that,

[58:11] you know, it's they're

[58:14] designing it so that people

[58:17] can bike rei the Monon trail.

[58:18] It sits on college as people

[58:19] drive past college is a busy

[58:24] street. People will stop. And

[58:29] that will calls for cars in.

[58:29] He sees it is parking is

[58:32] underutilized on the street.

[58:33] But that snapshot showed a

[58:36] moment in time. I've been

[58:43] there for 17 years. Just so I

[58:46] just I feel like that. Well,

[58:47] I'm not 100% against it. I

[58:48] don't feel like we're at a

[58:52] point where everything has

[58:52] been resolved to move forward

[58:59] at this time. And if I just

[59:02] ask you so you have the

[59:03] building at the southeast

[59:04] corner of 20th in college. Is

[59:06] that right? Quite and time

[59:08] looking at the picture here,

[59:11] looks like you have parking.

[59:13] And behind your building or to

[59:14] the east is arrives at your

[59:19] parking or is ok and is your

[59:20] your access than is on 20th

[59:23] Street current, a quiet. And

[59:27] you said you've been there 17

[59:28] years, correct? We've owned

[59:31] the building about 25 years,

[59:33] so And I've lived there for

[59:34] about 17 in my business has

[59:35] been there for about 6 years.

[59:40] Okay. That's fantastic. And I

[59:44] am glad to hear that you have

[59:44] been speaking with the

[59:51] petitioner in MISTER Gilman.

[59:54] Do you have I? The years on

[59:57] what you think you what you

[1:00:01] think needs to be done. So one

[1:00:05] thing I asked them about was

[1:00:05] if they could have a parking

[1:00:06] lot where they would, you

[1:00:08] know, to help with some off

[1:00:10] street parking something

[1:00:11] prevent that. The other thing

[1:00:14] is. And I don't know how

[1:00:17] possible this would be. But

[1:00:17] adding more traffic to that

[1:00:21] intersection. And it wouldn't

[1:00:25] be on them. But a stoplight it

[1:00:27] will reduce the speeding going

[1:00:29] down college as well as reduce

[1:00:30] the number of accidents that

[1:00:32] are at that intersection.

[1:00:37] Outside of that. I don't have

[1:00:38] anything right off top of my

[1:00:39] head. I am open to discussing

[1:00:40] to try and find, you know, a

[1:00:45] resolution for it. But those

[1:00:45] were a couple of things that I

[1:00:47] its top my mind in that I had

[1:00:50] a couple of questions as well.

[1:00:52] Because I understand there's

[1:00:53] no dedicated on the drawing.

[1:00:56] He had 6 parking spaces. But

[1:00:58] those are not dedicated to.

[1:01:05] The business. Is that correct?

[1:01:07] To me, it looks like it's

[1:01:10] parking on 20th Street. So,

[1:01:11] you know, in light of public

[1:01:13] right away. So which would be

[1:01:16] open to anyone? Yes, okay. And

[1:01:21] then the other was the

[1:01:21] Broadway Neighborhood

[1:01:22] Association. Their support

[1:01:26] from that. But we are actually

[1:01:27] Kennedy King and I don't see

[1:01:28] anything that's come from

[1:01:32] Kennedy King. And I will let

[1:01:33] MISTER Dylan speak to that

[1:01:34] rebuttal. Like I don't know.

[1:01:40] Okay. I think you mentioned

[1:01:44] the possibility of a stoplight

[1:01:44] stoplight. And and you

[1:01:45] probably know that something

[1:01:47] that that has to go through

[1:01:48] the city and has to be

[1:01:50] warranted and all that. Have

[1:01:51] you spoken with counselor

[1:01:52] Brown about your idea about

[1:01:57] stuff like there? You might

[1:01:57] want to if you've ever spoken

[1:01:58] with him, but you might want

[1:02:00] to just ask him this if he

[1:02:07] might be willing to. You know,

[1:02:08] to to talk to the city about

[1:02:09] whether that's even a

[1:02:13] possibility. Do you have any

[1:02:19] other comments today? No, just

[1:02:20] really want to what we can

[1:02:22] figure out in if it needs to,

[1:02:24] you know, I understand they're

[1:02:25] saying it is a smaller scale,

[1:02:29] but they're still 2 businesses

[1:02:30] to residential dwellings and

[1:02:31] employees will need to park

[1:02:35] there the residents who own

[1:02:37] the property when they have

[1:02:39] guests. I don't. I just feel

[1:02:40] like everything is not been

[1:02:40] truly taken into

[1:02:42] consideration. As far as the

[1:02:44] impact. Once the building is

[1:02:45] up and the businesses are

[1:02:46] running and people are living

[1:02:49] there as well. Thank you.

[1:02:52] Appreciate your comments.

[1:02:55] Anyone else want to speak in

[1:02:56] opposition to 2026? E '01, 0,

[1:02:59] 4, 5, And Robert Staff

[1:03:06] comments. Please. Thank The

[1:03:07] site is an undeveloped parcel.

[1:03:13] It is on the far In the 80's

[1:03:13] skews me and the request as a

[1:03:14] result of the mu to to allow

[1:03:18] for mixed use. This proposed

[1:03:19] by the petitioner. They're

[1:03:20] being, I believe, to

[1:03:21] apartments on the second floor

[1:03:22] and commercial retail on the

[1:03:24] ground floor. The

[1:03:25] comprehensive plan does

[1:03:28] recommend traditional

[1:03:28] neighborhood for the site

[1:03:29] traditional neighborhood does

[1:03:33] allow for residential uses.

[1:03:35] Also allows for small-scale

[1:03:35] offices and small-scale

[1:03:36] retailing, which I believe

[1:03:38] would be similar. What the

[1:03:38] petitioner proposes on the

[1:03:45] ground floor. The petitioners,

[1:03:45] site plan indicates curbside

[1:03:48] parking as opposed onsite

[1:03:51] parking. The site is less than

[1:03:52] 5,000 Square feet. So there's

[1:03:53] exception in the ordinance

[1:03:54] that on site parking is not

[1:03:56] required for any commercial

[1:03:56] lot. That is smaller than

[1:04:05] 5,000 Square feet. The staff

[1:04:07] to receive communication from

[1:04:08] the Broadway neighborhood who

[1:04:08] was on the request of the

[1:04:12] commitments. And their

[1:04:13] boundary is college. So they

[1:04:13] primarily represent the west

[1:04:18] side of college. To the King

[1:04:19] neighborhood, represents the

[1:04:20] east side of college. But

[1:04:20] however, staff received no

[1:04:25] communication from them. Staff

[1:04:26] does recommended this approval

[1:04:28] for request as a feels it

[1:04:32] would be inappropriate. Infill

[1:04:35] development the there is a bus

[1:04:37] line up on the site and that

[1:04:39] could help accommodate any

[1:04:40] need for the lack of parking

[1:04:42] for Jays per the adjacent

[1:04:47] commercial as well. It is not

[1:04:48] a to the bus line. It is a

[1:04:49] regular college Avenue best

[1:04:54] lawn. With that staff is

[1:04:55] recommending approval to have

[1:04:55] to answer any questions you

[1:05:09] MAY have.

[1:05:18] Thank you, Robert

[1:05:19] she just to verify you said

[1:05:21] that Kennedy King did not

[1:05:23] reach out. Right? Correct? I

[1:05:24] have no communication from

[1:05:30] them. Cake did we did you

[1:05:33] receive phone calls? Emails,

[1:05:34] ledger, others from anyone

[1:05:39] either for or against I

[1:05:40] received a communication from

[1:05:43] the Broadway neighborhood. At

[1:05:43] first requested the original

[1:05:48] automatic continuance. And

[1:05:50] then earlier this week, I

[1:05:51] believe on Monday I received

[1:05:52] that they were in support of

[1:05:53] its subject to the commitments

[1:05:58] that they filed. I did. It did

[1:05:59] indicate to them that either

[1:05:59] them or the petitioner would

[1:06:01] need to read those commitments

[1:06:02] into the final since staff

[1:06:02] will stop part of the

[1:06:04] negotiation, which the

[1:06:06] petitioner excuse me, which

[1:06:07] the petitioner has in his

[1:06:09] exhibit as well. Those are the

[1:06:09] same ones that were submitted

[1:06:14] to me by email. But other than

[1:06:18] that I didn't meet the remote

[1:06:19] straighter on site during my

[1:06:20] site visit. And there had a

[1:06:23] discussion at that point where

[1:06:25] there was indication parking

[1:06:27] be in difficult are ready

[1:06:29] beyond that. No other e-mails

[1:06:30] or communication. Okay. All

[1:06:36] right. Thank you. So MR. Given

[1:06:46] you 5 minutes for rebuttal. If

[1:06:50] you could go to, I tend to

[1:06:55] slide to be. And leita and I

[1:06:57] have talked on a number of

[1:06:58] occasions. We've exchanged

[1:07:00] e-mails. My client being a

[1:07:03] business owner next to her is

[1:07:03] committed to continuing a

[1:07:08] relationship. But you asked

[1:07:09] question, what could sum what

[1:07:12] could be done 2 to possibly

[1:07:16] make traffic concern better.

[1:07:17] If you look on my tab to be

[1:07:18] you see a black line that goes

[1:07:22] across 20th Street. Everything

[1:07:24] on the west side of that line

[1:07:25] has a no parking posted on

[1:07:28] both sites. When we were out

[1:07:29] there talking to Lee that we

[1:07:32] would see people pull up and

[1:07:34] park and that no parking area

[1:07:35] run inside. Get something come

[1:07:37] back out and take off. The

[1:07:40] other thing we notice is

[1:07:41] delivery people are pulling

[1:07:43] right up on 20th Street and

[1:07:44] getting out taking in their

[1:07:50] deliveries or there. Male were

[1:07:52] whatever it needs to be done.

[1:07:53] And they're using 20th Street

[1:07:55] as a place to park right in in

[1:07:55] and take care of what they

[1:07:59] need to. And not respecting

[1:08:01] the 20th Street. And those are

[1:08:02] actually parking spaces and

[1:08:06] not for loading and unloading.

[1:08:06] We think of both business

[1:08:07] owners on either side of

[1:08:10] college. Would-be business

[1:08:14] stewards. Talk to their

[1:08:16] customers and their managers.

[1:08:20] To avoid deliveries. Being

[1:08:21] dropped off on 20th Street in

[1:08:23] the required parking spaces.

[1:08:25] To respect a no parking areas

[1:08:26] on 20th Street in college to

[1:08:29] the South. That would a good

[1:08:32] start. If you see the light

[1:08:34] blue box that I've labeled on

[1:08:39] college. That's where the no

[1:08:40] parking ends. But of a car

[1:08:43] vehicle was parked there. It

[1:08:44] literally blocks the

[1:08:45] visibility of vehicles

[1:08:46] traveling northbound on

[1:08:48] college. That lane is closest

[1:08:50] to you. So as you approach

[1:08:51] college and wanting to make a

[1:08:53] left or right. If that area is

[1:08:57] blocked and then that creates

[1:08:57] and then favorable condition

[1:09:00] for the site distance. So when

[1:09:03] my closing arguments, we did

[1:09:05] work closely with the

[1:09:06] neighborhood Association. We

[1:09:10] did not have contact with. The

[1:09:11] committee after we sent out

[1:09:17] notices. But we did receive

[1:09:18] obviously comments and

[1:09:19] requests to negotiate with.

[1:09:23] Broadway Park. Our District

[1:09:25] Councilor sent 2 separate

[1:09:26] emails expressing real

[1:09:27] enthusiasm for the project in

[1:09:28] for the walkability

[1:09:31] neighborhood skilled design.

[1:09:32] We have met directly with

[1:09:33] every month straighter. We

[1:09:34] agree here at the hearing to

[1:09:37] keep communications open. We

[1:09:39] think are small. So mixed use

[1:09:40] plan helps address the

[1:09:42] intersection concerns she

[1:09:44] raised as opposed to a full

[1:09:45] commercial or for multifamily

[1:09:49] development. We think these

[1:09:51] traffic concerns that existed

[1:09:52] 20th in college are largely

[1:09:54] preexisting conditions

[1:09:55] inherently created by a much

[1:09:57] larger, more intense c 3 put

[1:09:57] print at that southeast

[1:10:01] corner. We think this project

[1:10:06] strength strengthens safety

[1:10:06] improves walkability and

[1:10:07] reduces lane just conflict

[1:10:08] through its limited impact

[1:10:08] uses and pedestrian focus.

[1:10:12] Design. This is a modest,

[1:10:13] awful, mixed use, zoning and

[1:10:16] building shape with

[1:10:17] neighborhood collaboration.

[1:10:18] And we respectfully your

[1:10:19] approval recommendation to the

[1:10:25] mdc. Request to possibly do

[1:10:26] surface parking my

[1:10:26] understanding a surface

[1:10:30] parking is prohibited. Even if

[1:10:31] we were to try to do surface

[1:10:33] parking through a variance,

[1:10:34] what spaces we would getting

[1:10:38] on site would be lost because

[1:10:39] of our access approach on 20th

[1:10:40] Street would eliminate street

[1:10:44] parking space. So really

[1:10:46] didn't think there would be

[1:10:46] any any to go in that

[1:10:49] direction. Again, a step

[1:10:51] mentioned there's no required

[1:10:52] parking for Parcells this mall

[1:10:57] for that very reason. We will

[1:10:58] certainly continue our

[1:10:59] relationship with the lead and

[1:11:01] her business managers and

[1:11:03] tenants and to make sure that

[1:11:03] we both do everything we can

[1:11:06] to try to monitor the activity

[1:11:09] out on 20th Street again. With

[1:11:10] respect to deliveries and

[1:11:23] customers. Thank you. Ms

[1:11:24] Osborne, you have 5 minutes

[1:11:33] rebuttal. Please. One thing I

[1:11:34] like to say when I first

[1:11:36] started my business there as

[1:11:38] well. I looked at the effect

[1:11:39] of we're very close to the

[1:11:42] Monon trail. And it would draw

[1:11:43] in a lot of business from

[1:11:46] there. Most people are not

[1:11:47] leaving off of the trail.

[1:11:50] They're continuing on and you

[1:11:50] get more from the traffic on

[1:11:53] college. Because they drive

[1:11:55] by. They see they see the

[1:11:57] signs. They go back and forth

[1:11:59] we were standing out there

[1:12:04] that day people did pull up

[1:12:04] right to the on there at 20th

[1:12:08] Street. But one guy he was not

[1:12:08] just the look like he was

[1:12:09] going to stay right in that

[1:12:10] area where you're not supposed

[1:12:12] to. But he did pull up

[1:12:15] delivery drivers to come. The

[1:12:17] postal, guy comes in parks and

[1:12:23] he walks alone. But again. As

[1:12:24] is stated, it splits open for

[1:12:29] parking for anyone. It's still

[1:12:32] going to. Increased congestion

[1:12:37] in that area. I just still

[1:12:37] stand on the whole safety

[1:12:39] aspect of it. It's not doing

[1:12:41] anything to improve it. And

[1:12:44] I'm not saying that that's

[1:12:46] their fault. He owns the

[1:12:47] property in, you know, is want

[1:12:49] to put something there. It

[1:12:50] could be beneficial for

[1:12:54] everyone in the area. It but

[1:12:55] the safety issue is just not

[1:12:58] being addressed. And I feel

[1:12:59] like that's more important

[1:13:13] than anything.

[1:13:14] Okay. Thank

[1:13:29] you.

[1:13:34] I appreciate comments and

[1:13:35] again, I appreciate the fact

[1:13:39] that you have been talking

[1:13:39] with each other and I I would

[1:13:41] encourage you to continue to

[1:13:45] do that. I'm not sure I I know

[1:13:50] that. The Broadway Park

[1:13:52] Neighborhood Association is

[1:13:56] they have Taking a position a

[1:13:57] number of petitions in this

[1:13:58] area. I know they're they're

[1:14:01] pretty active. In public

[1:14:07] hearings. I I don't know if.

[1:14:08] Candy King has the same level

[1:14:12] of involvement. But I did note

[1:14:14] that that they were sent a

[1:14:16] legal notice of this hearing.

[1:14:24] So they were made aware of it.

[1:14:24] This is in my opinion. This is

[1:14:30] a unique site not only because

[1:14:34] of its small size, but because

[1:14:36] fact there's development

[1:14:37] around it. And so there are a

[1:14:39] lot of restrictions on what

[1:14:41] could action actually be

[1:14:45] developed on the site. And and

[1:14:48] I don't know this for us

[1:14:50] sacked, but my guess is trying

[1:14:54] to develop the site for. Under

[1:14:56] the current da toning would

[1:14:58] would probably cause a lot

[1:15:02] Issues as far as meeting those

[1:15:03] standards. So I do feel like

[1:15:09] this is unique site. In my

[1:15:12] opinion, the propose mixed use

[1:15:16] development. Does conform with

[1:15:17] the comp plan. Recommendation

[1:15:21] is, as Robert explained,

[1:15:22] traditional neighborhood

[1:15:22] development which certainly

[1:15:27] can include a mixed use

[1:15:28] development. I also agree

[1:15:34] that. The scale is

[1:15:35] appropriate. Don't feel like

[1:15:40] the proposed. The use or

[1:15:44] building is going to overwhelm

[1:15:50] or overpower the site. I'm it

[1:15:51] to me. It sounds like I have

[1:15:53] certainly gone up and down

[1:15:55] college countless times in.

[1:15:55] And I know what you're saying

[1:16:00] about traffic. Again, in my

[1:16:08] opinion, I feel like. Any

[1:16:08] traffic issue is already

[1:16:11] there. I I don't think that

[1:16:12] this particular proposal is

[1:16:17] going to. Exacerbate that. So

[1:16:19] for those reasons, I am going

[1:16:21] to recommend approval of 2026.

[1:16:25] Zia when 0 for 5 that would be

[1:16:26] placed on the docket of the

[1:16:26] Metropolitan Development

[1:16:28] Commission on SEPTEMBER. 16th.

[1:16:29] And again, I think you all for

[1:16:34] coming down this afternoon.

[1:16:35] Judy, with their

[1:16:35] recommendation will be subject

[1:16:38] to the commitments. I am so

[1:16:39] sorry, Robert. Yes, that would

[1:16:41] be subject to the 10.

[1:16:42] Commitments. I think that's

[1:16:50] right. Requested by. Bradley

[1:16:51] Park Neighborhood Association.

[1:16:52] Yes, thank you. Thank you very

[1:16:58] much. Thank you. Do we have

[1:16:58] any other business before us

[1:17:16] today? We are adjourned.

Metropolitan Development Commission Hearing Examiner

Agenda

Transcript