Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutLetter #08 from Kay GaitherMy name is Kay Gaither. I have resided in the Village of WestClay (VWC) for five years, in the South Village area, three blocks from the Village Center area that is a part of Brenwick’s petition. My thoughts and concerns for the petition presented by Brenwick fall in two areas, density and abandoning the commercial component of this development as it is almost completed. Area 1 in the petitioners proposal is in the WestClay Uptown section of VWC which has always been approved for commercial use. There is a logical and geographical division between this area and the West Village residential area to the south; there is a swimming pool complex, a baseball diamond and a tennis court that creates the separation. It is bordered on the north by 136th St and on the east by Towne Rd. Currently a CVS, a Chase Bank, a National Bank of Indianapolis, and Primrose School successfully operate in this area. During a community information meeting held at the Meeting House in WestClay on Nov.12, Mr Huston stated that a gas station and convenience mart has been approved for the lot directly south of CVS. At the Plan Commission meeting on Nov. 17 a gentleman who resides in WestClay pointed out that it is the only open commercial/retail space available in northwest Carmel between Illinois St and Michigan Rd. It is a desired location that should be built out with great thought and purpose. Mr Sweet and Mr Huston of Brenwick have an opportunity to put their signature on the last piece of VWC to be completed. Has Brenwick taken the time to define their vision for this area? What is their marketing strategy to attract businesses to the area? What are the impediments to development in this area. Instead of developing a comprehensive plan for finishing this area, they are seeking permission to construct 60 town homes instead. Some residents of VWC think their request is a bad idea. It changes the ratio of residential to commercial areas in the village dramatically, it changes the ratio of multi-family to single family housing in an irreparable way and it creates a density in an area that is poorly equipped to handle the added population. Furthermore it is abandoning a commercial area that has been part of the vision for WestClay. It would result in a net gain of 60 living units. We urge you to deny Brenwicks request. Area 3 is generally in the same geographical area I described above. It borders Towne Rd on the east and faces Harleston St on the north. It has had a restriction that required the plot be developed with a business that supported the elderly people who live at The Stratford. The request is to drop that restriction so the land can be developed for any commercial use. That request should be granted. Area 2 is in Village Center. It was always intended to be the “downtown” of WestClay. There are, in fact, several businesses operating in this area. It is approved for two and three story buildings that have retail/commercial spaces on the first floor and commercial or “loft” spaces above. It is approved for 43 lofts and 11 already have been built, so 32 lofts can be built without any action. This area has not met Brenwick”s expectations, and therefore has not been profitable for them. The petitioner is requesting to increase the number of lofts to 70, not because it would enhance what is already there, but because they feel lofts would be more marketable. In this same area, Village Center, there are 4 town homes already built. Eighteen more town homes are approved to be built, and 9 more are requested. That means 36 town homes will soon be in Village Center before anything Brenwick is seeking in this petition is acted upon. There is no provision in the petitioners proposal for increased parking. This area already has significant parking problems when an there is an event at the Meeting House or at University Green. It would create parking and congested driving situations that would be very difficult to remedy in such a small geographic area that is surrounded by existing structures. Approval would result in a net gain of 54 new living units in this very condensed area. Residents of WestClay are very familiar with the Sterkx building on Meeting House Rd in the heart of Village Center. It is a building that has 5-6 commercial spaces and several lofts above. It has been involved in litigation and the commercial spaces were empty for nearly two years. However, the lofts were always occupied. Brenwick, or any other developer, could construct a building and proclaim they are trying to find an occupant for the first floor space. They could also rent or lease all of the lofts above before a ground level tenant is found. In fact, what in the petitioners proposal requires that even one more business will open in Village Center? Residents have waited for this area to become the downtown they have been promised. They should be given some assurance that Village Center will not become another predominantly multi-family residence area. The current residents of VWC had the opportunity to choose any neighborhood in Carmel and we chose Village of WestClay. We chose it because we want a home in an area that balances green spaces and multi-family living spaces with single family living spaces and commercial areas. We chose WestClay because it gives children and seniors the opportunity to live next to each other in a safe, balanced environment. The proposal before you changes those balances and adds 114 living units in areas that were either not meant for residential use or can not support the density requested. Currently VWC is 11% multi-family living spaces, approval of all that Brenwick is requesting changes that to 21% We encourage you to deny the petitioners request for Area 2. Kay Gaither