HomeMy WebLinkAboutLetter #38 David Gagliano
Butler, Bric
From:david gagliano <dave.a.gagliano@gmail.com>
Sent:Thursday, July 25, 2024 12:10 PM
To:Finkam, Sue; Zoccola, Christine
Cc:Butler, Bric
Subject:Carmel Housing Task Force Meeting (Input for Consideration)
Follow Up Flag:Follow up
Flag Status:Flagged
Good morning,
Thanks for hosting today’s meeting to gather community input. You all have done a nice job in trying to collect input
from various constituencies on a multitude of topics. But — now is the time for decisions and actions which is why I’m
writing you. As a long-term Carmel resident (I’ve spent 35 years mostly here since 1975), I sincerely care about Carmel
and our future. Here are a few points I’ve heard and read that resonate the most from my perspective…..
Protect The Neighborhoods — allowing ADUs and/or Lot Splits in ANY established neighborhood simply should
not be allowed. It disrespects adjacent neighbors who value their privacy on their lot; doesn’t “protect”
neighborhoods per Carmel’s Comprehensive Plan; has minimal impact on a macro-level; and (like some said
today) will drive people out of Carmel. These are homeowners who have lived in Carmel for decades — not
entrepreneurs who want to profit at the expense of others. Carmel and the BZA need to be firm on enforcement
of established rules and regulations. After so many discussions, if this would even be considered for approval,
ADUs and Lot Splits must be allowed for any neighborhood in Carmel, not just select ones. To me — the “juice
isn’t worth the squeeze” to even consider allowing this to happen.
Drive Growth In Established Commercial / Retail Areas — Carmel has so much open and “available" land along
Range Line (Mohawk Plaza / Merchants Square); The Monon Trail (south/west of SunKing such as the Pedcor
buildings used for the Winter Farmer’s Market); Meridian Street; Old Meridian Street; and Clay Terrace
areas. Why not take some of this land and develop (or sell portions of the parcels) to builders who could create
new ownership neighborhoods for a combination of garden homes with zero/little lot lines; attached courtyard
homes; multi-story condominiums or townhouses etc. that will generate more tax revenue and provide options
for long-term Carmel residents wishing to downsize (which in turn creates more inventory for first and second
time homebuyers).
Hit Pause On Future Apartment Projects — no one has a crystal ball on what will happen in the future with
occupancy rates but the density coupled with no ability to widen streets in Carmel’s core is driving up
congestion like we’ve never seen. I get together with friends weekly in Midtown. Our time together last night
was filled with people griping on how long it took them to arrive. The 116th and Range Line roundabout had
traffic backed up beyond belief at 4-5PM and that is before some of the inventory goes live from the apartment
complexes being built or will be built. Personally — I’d even give consideration for turning one of the apartment
developments along the Monon into a 55+ Complex. It would do similar things as above and provide options for
those who choose to snowbird during the winter and those needing a temporary solution before they can build
or buy to free up cashflow. Let’s give our City a chance to digest what we have approved and see how these new
developments affect traffic before putting our foot back on the gas.
Be Very Cognizant of Unintended Consequences — we need to be hyper-critical of how any new building
approvals could impact Carmel. Today’s discussion should give any member of the team reason to have
serious doubts about some of the topics that have been discussed (e.g., affordable housing options/mandates;
subsidized housing alternatives; density within established neighborhoods). The goal is to have more business
relocate to Carmel along with the tax revenue it would generate — not drive multi-decade residents out of
Carmel. What's happened with the 6-story apartment approval in the former AT&T building on residents; what
1
appears to be significant remonstrance around the proposed Home Place improvements; allowing a LLC to buy
/ rent a home in Cheswick/Buckhorn; and the assisted living approval on Horseshoe Lane are examples where
the City could have taken a different position but didn’t.
Again, I appreciate all you have done and hope this letter helps. I’m happy to participate on future task forces as I really
do want Carmel to continue to grow and prosper.
Sincerely,
Dave
David Gagliano
Carmel Resident
2