HomeMy WebLinkAboutPacketBingham · McHale~
attorneys at law
Variance Requests
2700 Market Tower
10 West Market Street
Indianapolis, IN 46204
317.635.8900
bimzhammchale.com
West Carmel Marketplace
Duke Construction,
Limited Partnership
By Mary E. Solada, Esq.
04050029 V
04050030 V
04050033 V
04050034 V
04050035 V
04050036 V
04070009 V
04070010 V
9901 Michigan Road
(approximate address)
For
September 21, 2004
Carmel Plan Commission
Carmel/Clay Board of Zoning Appeals
Duke Construction,
Limited Partnership
Informational Packet
04050029 V
04O5O030 V
O405OO33 V
04050034 V
O4050O35 V
04050036 V
04070008 V
04070009 V
04070010 V
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Tab 1 .................... Narrative of Variance Requests
Tab 2 .................... Site Plan
Tab 3 .................... Landscaping Plans
Tab 4 .................... Elevations
Tab 5 .................... Commitments
WEST CARMEL MARKETPLACE
DUKE CONSTRUCTION, LIMITED PARTNERSHIP
SEPTEMBER 27, 2004
CARMEL/CLAY BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS
NARRATIVE OF VARIANCE REQUESTS
04050029 V
O4O5OO3O V
04050033 V
O4O5OO34 V
O4O5OO35 V
04050036 V
04070008 V
04070009 V
04070010 V
(Foundation Plantings)
(Access To Tracts)
(Sign Number and Type)
(Wall Sign Area)
(Ground Sign Area)
(Ground Sign Height)
(Ground Sign Copy Area)
(Fagade Projections/Recessions)
(Facade Material Change/Horizontal-
Vertical)
Duke Construction, Limited Partnership, proposes a significant commercial development at
approximately 9901 Michigan Road. The West Carmel Marketplace development will consist
of three multi-tenant retail commercial buildings, totaling 186,000 square feet. Toward this end,
Duke Construction has undertaken a thorough DP/ADLS procedure through the Plan
Commission. Prior to the Board of Zoning Appeals hearing, the petitioner has engaged in a
substantial public process, including two full Plan Commission hearings, three Special Studies
Committee meetings, multiple meetings and communications with the Department and/or other
public agencies, and multiple meetings and communications with adjoining neighborhood
interests.
This effort has resulted in a development proposal which meets the needs of the community in
the west Carmel vicinity. Likewise, the overall development scenario represents an attractive
and appropriate proposal, with significant attributes in keeping with tho intentions of the US
Highway 421/Michigan Road Corridor Overlay zone, and with significant design and other
protections afforded the adjoining neighbors.
The final overall development proposal for consideration by the Board of Zoning Appeals
contains nine variances of the ordinance standards. These are described as follows'
Variances Requested
Foundation Plantings (23C.10.02,2): The primary multi-tenant building (located at Retail Pkwy
and Commerce Dr) would have no foundation plantings along the east side of the building.
The "B" Shops buildings (located along the US 421 frontage) would have 3-foot wide
foundation plantings along the east side of the buildings. The Ordinance requires a minimum
of 5 feet wide.
Access to Individual Tracts (23C.13): A new primary entrance drive, being 99~ Street, to be a
dedicated public street, would be established intersecting US 421. Additionally, one right-
in/right-out would be provided along US 421 near the south property line. The Ordinance
prohibits new curb cuts along US 421.
Sign Number and Type (25.07.02-11, b): The development would have five multi-tenant
building complex signs, with two of these being east of the "B" Shops buildings. The Ordinance
allows for a maximum of three.
Wall Sign Area (25.07.02-09,,c): Five wall signs for the individual tenants of the primary multi-
tenant building (Retail Pkwy and Commerce Dr) would each be 225 square feet. The
Ordinance allows for a maximum of 115 square feet each.
Ground Sign Area (25.07.02-11, c, i)' Two ground signs, identified as "Sign A", located along
the Michigan Road frontage (one at Retail Pkwy and one at 99t~ Street), would each be 180.5
square foot. Tho Ordinanco allows for a maximum of 75 square foot.
Ground Sign Height (25.07.02-11, d, i): Two ground signs, identified as "Sign A", located along
the Michigan Road frontage (one at Retail Pkwy and one at 99~ Street), would each be 14'10"
tall. One ground sign, identified as "Sign C", located at Commerce Dr and Retail Pkwy, would
be 7'9" tall. The Ordinance allows for a maximum height of 6 feet.
Ground Sign Copy Area (25.07.02-11, g): Two ground signs, identified as "Sign B", located
behind the "B" Shops buildings, would each contain a Changeable copy area of 71%. The
Ordinanco allows for a maximum 2/3 Chan§eable copy area, or ~%.
Facade projections / recessions (23C.09, D): The primary multi-tenant building (located at
Retail Pkwy and Commerce Dr) fa~;ade would not have building offsets along each facade.
The "B" Shops building (located along the US 421 frontage) would have 4-foot building offsets
along the front facade. The Ordinance requires a minimum 8-foot offset at a minimum of each
60-foot interval along each facade.
Facade material change / horizontal-vertical (23C.09, D): The primary multi-tenant building
(located at Retail Pkwy and Commerce Dr) front fagade contains material changes along
vortical lino$. Tho Ordinance provides for only material chart§es alon§ horizontal lines.
Variance Rationale
Foundation Plantings: The primary multi-tenant building (located at Retail Pkwy and
Commerce Dr) and the "B" Shops Buildings (located along the Michigan Road frontage) would
have foundation plantings consistent with, or exceeding, the standard set forth by the adjacent
retail commercial building to the north, including a lack of foundation planting area on the east
side of the building. This development scenario, aside from being consistent with the adjacent
scenario, is to accommodate the location of loading facilities. Significant perimeter landscape
treatment is proposed, above and beyond the ordinance standard, and finished masonry
fagade treatment will encompass all sides of the buildings. Additionally, significant landscaping
is proposed within the large parking area west of the primary multi-tenant building in multiple
landscape islands therein, in contrast to the existing interior parking landscaping scenario
adjacent to the north, which is nearly devoid of landscape islands. The superior design,
aesthetic, and functional intentions of tho US Highway 421-Michigan Road Corridor Overlay
7one and B-3 primary district are realized, within the overall development proposal, with which
the foundation planting vadanco is but one element.
Access to Individual Tracts'
The petitioner-controlled property contains five (5) Michigan Road curb
cuts (Retail Parkway being one, and four additional cuts south of the
existing Porter Paint facility). The intent of the access provision of the US
421-Michigan Road Corridor Overlay Zone is to reduce curb cuts, by
providing common entrances and frontage roads. The overall design
scenario would reduce the number of curb cuts along this frontage from
five (5) to three (3), being a 40% reduction, and with the southernmost
access strictly a right-in/right-out. The overall design scenario would
provide common entrances for multiple users. The overall design
scenario would provide for a private frontage road, generally parallel with
Michigan Road. Additionally, the Thoroughfare Plan specifically
recommends the 99th Street point of access, where proposed. These
multiple factors create an overall benefit and compliance with the intent of
the access provision of the Overlay Zone, despite requiring a deviation for
the establishment of the new primary entrance roadway and the right-
in/right-out.
A traffic analysis has shown that when the proposed development traffic
volumes are added to the roadway network, the near-by intersections
along Michigan Road will operate at acceptable levels of service during
the peak hours with tho proposed Commerce Drive extension and the
proposed signalized access at 99th Street. The near-by intersections
include 96th Street, 106th Street and Retail Parkway.
An access point along Michigan Road is proposed that will align with 99th
Street. It is also proposed to install a traffic signal at this access when the
traffic volumes are warranted. When the signal is installed, the flow of
through traffic along Michigan Road can be maintained through the
coordination of signals. A traffic analysis has shown that adequate
distance for storage and progression will be provided between the
proposed signalized access and Retail Parkway.
The following are benefits of the proposed signalized access:
The signalized access will reduce the traffic volumes at the 96th
Street and Michigan Road intersection by providing an alternative
route for vehicles traveling to and from the west along 96th Street,
by way of Commerce Drive or Mayflower Parkway. When
considering the proposed development traffic, the signalized
access could reduce the traffic at the 96th Street intersection by as
much as 222 vehicles over the AM and PM peak hours.
Traffic volumes will significantly increase at the intersection of
Michigan Road and Retail Parkway if it is used as the sole access
for the proposed development. Traffic projections show that with
the proposed Commerce Drive extension the intersection volumes,
without the additional access for the proposed development and
related dispersion of traffic, would increase by approximately 20%
above the existing traffic volumes.
Sign Number and Type: The placement of two additional freestanding multi-tenant building
complex signs would not impact the Michigan Road streetscape or aesthetic intentions of the
standards of the sign provisions of the ordinance, since they would both be located east of the
"B" Shops buildings, over 200 feet from Michigan Road, and in proximity to a private interior
access drive. Additionally, the freestanding signs are proposed to be consistent with the overall
design theme. The superior design, aesthetic, and functional intentions of the sign provisions
of the ordinance are realized, within the overall development proposal, with which the sign
number and type variance is but one element.
Wall Sign Area: The placement of wall signs for the primary multi-tenant building (located at
Retail Pkwy and Commerce Dr), which exceed the sign area standard, is necessary because
the development scenario does not propose a large single tenant user ("big box"), which would
accommodate significant building identification and scale-based visibility. Relative alignment of
the primary multi-tenant building, with the established large single tenant building to the north,
promotes design compatibility, but also results in visibility challenges for such a multi-tenant
building, given the existing frontage development along Michigan Road. Additionally, the wall
signs for the primary building are further limited to internally illuminated individual letters, one (1)
or two (2) lines of copy, maximum letter height of four (4) feet, and colors limited to blue, green,
white, bronze, or other color as approved by the Plan Commission. Given these
circumstances and limitations, the superior design, aesthetic, and functional intentions of the
sign provisions of the ordinance and the US Highway 421-Michigan Road Corridor Oveday
Zone are realized, within the overall development proposal, with which the wall sign area
variance is but one element.
Ground Sign Area: The placement of two (2) multi-tenant building complex ground signs,
which exceed the sign area standard, is necessary because the development scenario does
not propose a large single tenant user ("big box"), which would accommodate significant
building identification and scale-based visibility. Relative alignment of the primary multi-tenant
building, with the established lar§e single tenant building to the north, promotes design
compatibility, but also results in visibility challenges for such a multi-tenant building, given the
existing frontage development along Michigan Road. Additionally, all ground signs are further
limited to white or bronze lettering on a cream opaque background. The ground signs are
proposed to be consistent with the overall design theme. The superior design, aesthetic, and
functional intentions of the sign provisions of the ordinance and the US Highway 421-Michigan
Road Corridor Oveday Zone are realized, within the overall development proposal, with which
the ground sign area variance is but one element.
Ground Sign Height: The placement of three freestanding multi-tenant building complex signs
which exceed the sign height standard is necessa~ because the development scenario does
not propose a large single-tenant user ("big box"), which would accommodate significant
building identification and scale-based visibility. Relative alignment of the primary multi-tenant
building (located at Retail Pkwy and Commerce Dr) with the established large single tenant
building to the north promotes design compatibility, but also results in visibility challenges for
such a multi-tenant building, given the existing frontage development along the Michigan Road
corridor. Additionally, to address ground sign compatibility and impact issues, all ground signs
are further limited to white or bronze lettering on a cream opaque background. The ground
signs are proposed to be consistent with the overall design theme. The superior design,
aesthetic, and functional intentions of the sign provisions of the ordinance and the US Highway
421-Michigan Road Corridor Oveday Zone aro roalized, within the overall development
proposal, with which the §round sign height variance is but one element.
Ground Sign Copy Area' The additional Changeable copy area, for the two (2) ground signs
behind the "B" Shops buildings, is necessary in order to minimize the size of these ground
signs, while still maintaining visible identification thereon. Both of these ground signs would be
less than the maximum height and less than the maximum aroa afforded by the ordinance.
Additionally, to address ground sign compatibility and impact issues, all ground signs are
further limited to white or bronze lettering on a cream opaque background.
Fa~de projections / recessions: The primary multi-tenant building (located at Retail Pkwy and
Commerce Dr) would be generally located in-line with an adjacent, established, large "big box"
retail facility. The fa~de of this established, adjacent "big box" facility is much less descript
than the proposed primary multi-tenant building, with each entrance providing moderate visual
variation as intended by the projection/recession standard. The "B" Shops building (located
along the Michigan Road frontage) would be provided with 4-foot projections/recessions, which
would, along with the superior fa~de design, meet the intent of the projection/recession
standard.
Fa~de material change / horizontal-vertical: The primary multi-tenant building (located at
Retail Pkwy and Commerce Dr) contains material variation primarily along horizontal lines.
However, the placement of occasional decorative accent materials or other architectural
elements along vertical lines is necessary to differentiate the tenant spaces and/or their
entrances.
Commitments
Ten commitments have been entered into the record associated with the
DP/ADLS for the West Carmel Marketplace, as detailed herein. These
commitments provide significant restrictions and additional requirements, related
to signage, architectural theme, landscaping, access, and perimeter treatment for
three adjoining neighborhoods.
Conclusion
Given the compliance with the intentions of the US Highway 421/Michigan Road Corridor
Oveday zone, the support of the Department of Community Services, the extensive DP/^DLS
process undortaken, and tho additional commitments offered, tho totality of the proposal
warrants approval of the variances requosted.
................ "-"
~ I) ~ 24 ~ 01
(3) ~ ~) ~ ~
D'~'ke
~o
~ ,,~ · ..~ ...~
%~:~..,,:.,,~...~::
~'~.~....%':
C200
I S
m27 ~
!~T301-OOl
E
o 4o8o12o
o
~_____-----~ ~ ~, .......... ~ ..... ., ............ ~
~ ~~ ~~ ~ ~ . ,,~~ ~/ ,. .o..
~ ,'
..... '
' ~ ' . ~ ~ ~
~ I ~ "~ -- ~ --: -- - RET~L CCNTER ~ ·~Z~ : -- ~-- I : ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~' ~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~~ il ~ /E~I /~ r ~e~', , ~ , . ,~ ~~~ w
.,,¢~, ~¢_ ~~.....-~ -"~ ,. ,~ ,,~~
- I
,, ____~- ~~ .............. ~ ~ ~~
, ,~ ~' ,.' ,~ ~ ,.' ,~ ~' ,~ ~ ,~ ~' ,~ ,~ ~* ,.' ,~ ~' ,.' ,~ ~' ,.' ~.~ i ll~ : ~ ! [ ~~~~.
.,
/I ........... II- I / " , [ I ~ ~.)~~"~.~.~~~-
__ ~,.-~ ~:_:_ :: ...... ,,,, - :,~ .,~, , ,~ .., ..........
-- ~-- -- ~ ~ ---- ~ ~ ~ ,z' I
,', .. ~ ____'__1~ ~ - .~=..
~// ./ - I~ % ' ~' ~ ~ m. ~ T~ ~LTA
~::/ ~',,,~~, ',,~~~~,'"',,,,' ... ~:~ , , ~:~~,,~..::- ,., ,:~ ~'~ ~:"'~:.,, . . .... . ......... ~ · .... ,..,...
· __ __
. ', ~ ~' ,-, ,,,, ---- ~ , ~~~~
I~ ~, g -. ~ I ' ~'
/ , i C201
/ / ~ ~x % . / , :::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ::' [X ~ / ~
,(. -.,,," " '"-
- / .............. '.:'~,:-: ...... - :~ ~ ~' ~ 61287.03
II II II IIII I I
III I
· ~~ '~,~'~"-'~i'-'~'~ ~ l If~
- ~/~//'? g ~ ~1'
,'3~ ~. ~J ~ '.; · , I I ~,~ i ~ I J~.~' I m~' ~ ~tt ~ ,8~' i mr~t~ ~4r4~' i _ I I ~ k
~ / =
~/ .~~~~).~ ~J ~ / ~ ~~~~~ ~ I / ~ /
~~~-~~: :~ ' / ~ ~- /
I ~ -- , ....
,~4, ~ '~ t ~ -~1 ;, I ~ ·
,,! · ~ .,/ - ~ ~
.,~- --~,- : .,, ~ ___~ ,.
,~_ __ ,-[ I~i~ , ,,
,~~ _ ~,,, , , ~-~ .... ,,
~~~----., ~, _,~,,~ l, , I / ' .~ --~ , I C '
' ,'~~.~ ~~ ~3~-~ [~ ~ ', / ~ ~ ...... I ~ ; ~ i
. . o, I :V
~ ~ ~~ ~-.~ , _4. ~,~ .... ;; .... ~ ~ ~ ~ ~,~,~;~~ , . , ~ -~. _~' > I ~-_~ ~ ~~Y~ , --
.~ _~ --~--~ ~--~ --~--~ --- . ~ ................... s~ ~ ~ ~ m. ' - ~ - --~ -- I ~ I r~r ~ -
~, : ~ .,. _ ~, ~ / ..... .... ~ ~ ~_~:~>-,-'_~ _ :~ = __~,L: ~, _ _ ~_
,,___ ........................
II111 ~ J - ~ - ~ '
~ o. ~-,,~, ,,~.,o.- ~ I l I ~ - :1 f,o~~,~ . -... ~ -I ~ ~ . . I. ',
; _ _ .~1' l ' ' -- , ..... J _ ." '. _ _ J_ _ _ ' ~ = -- - = =
~D
~ ~ ~ ~
/
SJ4~U~
\ /
M,.c
/-
7
/
/
/
/
I
. .,ct..
.
U.S. 42! (MICHIGAN ROAD)
SEE SHEET C501 FOR LANOSCAP[ NOTES
/ !
C500
18 M 27 sh.~
WI. TS01-O01
61287.03
I I
IrC~ COHTIHUATION SI[Ii SHEET C502
7
/
/
/
/
/
p 'Ct4
/
/
U.S. 421 (MICHIGAN
34 SI.~ I)C TRCC$
17~ SHRUL~
SHEET C$00 FOR PLAHT SCHEDULE
I.~4)80N~ NOTE8
is CSTA~USHCG
iO5Ol
WLT301-O01
61287.03
WETLAND PRE%ERVAT~ON A~E& ~/
/
W-E'S,T
C.A. R' M-E'L
CARMEL,
SEPTEMBER 21,
M,A- R, K- E,T- P, L-A, C- E
INDIANA
WETLANDS /
VEGETbTION
EXHIBIT
CSO
~..~
WEST
W-E~S-T C'A' R' M' E' L K' E'T~ P~ L' A' C' E
CA R M E L, I N D I A N A
W-E-S'T
C,A,R,M,E,L
CARMEL,
SEPTEMIt~R 21, 2004
M-A: R' K' E,T' P, L, A, C' E
INDIANA
e e- ®
,: /l
CARMEL,
SEPTEM1}ER 21, 200~
INDIANA
CSO
'A'
CRI~-M~OLOI~.ED C~,~'~T.~O~E MEDALLION
S
CORNICI! AND
CR~M~OLOR~ M~DALLION
~A-~ ~ 'ZoNIN~ ORDINANCE COMPLL~N~
SIG,_N 'B'
SIGN 'C'
// ................ PIN-MOUN~D ~I.A~K PAI~D
ILLUMINATED
DUKE CONSTRUCTION COMMITMENTS
ATTENDANT TO
DOCKET NO. 04050028DP/ADLS:
WEST CARMEL MARKETPLACE DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND ADLS
Conditioned on Plan Commission approval of Docket No. 04050028DP/ADLS (West
Carmel Marketplace), the Petitioner Duke Construction Limited Partnership sets forth to the
following commitments to be made as part of the Development Plan and ADLS Approval. In
addition to the commitments contained in the Application and Plans and Specifications submitted
in support of the Application, Petitioner commits to the following:
o
Anchor tenant wall signage shall be limited to the colors of white, blue, green or
bronze, such signage not to exceed 225 square feet and letters no larger than 4
feet. All wall signs for the B Shop buildings will be white face-lit signs with dark
bronze returns and shall comply with ordinance size standards. Wall signs
oriented to Commerce Drive, Retail Parkway, and 99th Street shall be prohibited.
Window signs shall be prohibited. All ground signs shall consist of white or
bronze lettering on a cream opaque background. No tenant shall be listed on
more than one (1) ground sign. Ground signs at Retail Parkway/Michigan Road
and 99th Street/Michigan Road shall be limited to 245 square feet, with a
maximum height of 14'10". The ground sign at Retail Parkway/Commerce Drive
shall be limited to 53 square feet, with a maximum height of 7'9". No single
tenant shall occupy more than 50% of sign type "A" (ground signs at Retail
Parkway/Michigan Road and at 99th Street/Michigan Road).
,
All buildings within the development, including Block G, shall follow the
architectural theme established in the building elevations submitted under date of
September 9, 2004.
,
Landscaping plantings along the common property lines with Ashbrooke, Spring
Arbor and North Augusta neighborhoods shall be installed as shown on the
Landscape Plan submitted under date of September 9, 2004.
,
Additionally, as to the Ashbrooke neighborhood association ("Ashbrooke):
a~
Petitioner shall provide reimbursement to Ashbrooke for a fence if
approved (a variance is necessary) in the Ashbrooke common area along
Commerce Drive of wood board on board at an approximate length of 500
feet, in addition to additional funds agreed upon between Petitioner and
the Ashbrooke Board for landscaping. Alternatively, if the variance for
the fence is not approved, Petitioner shall pay Ashbrooke an amount equal
to the fence estimate approved by the parties, such funds to be used for
landscaping in the Ashbrooke common area.
898122.4
Se
o
,
o
b,
Additionally, six evergreen trees (a variety of to be chosen by Petitioner of
Norway Spruce, White Spruce, White Fir, or Eastern Red Cedar, at agreed
upon locations where existing foliage is most sparse), shall be paid for and
planted by Petitioner to screen the homeowners whose rear yard abut
Petitioner's northern most retention pond east of Commerce Drive.
Regarding the Spring Arbor neighborhood, in addition to the Landscape Plan as
submitted, Petitioner and the Spring Arbor Board have agreed that Petitioner will
fund additional landscaping at the perimeter of the detention area abutting Spring
Arbor. Specifically, Petitioner will plant a variety of tree species chosn from
Norway Spruce, White Spruce, White Fir, or Eastern Red Cedar. Thirty-two such
trees will be planted on the Petitioner's detention area abutting Spring Arbor
where existing foliage is the most sparse in consultation with the Spring Arbor
Board at the time of planting. Additionally, with the remaining funds as agreed,
additional trees of the same species will be purchased by Petitioner to be planted
within the Spring Arbor common area abutting the detention area of the project.
The size, number and responsibility for planting will be determined by
maximizing the value in consultation with Spring Arbor Board.
Regarding the North Augusta neighborhood, Petitioner will plant the plantings
indicated on Landscape Plan with the focus being on construction of a consistent
and material landscape buffer and screening between the project and North
Augusta.
Petitioner agrees that, in consideration of the Plan Commission recommending to
the Board of Zoning Appeals that a variance of the requirement restricting access
to Michigan Road be granted, the curb cut connecting 99th Street to Michigan
Road will not be opened until site plan approval of Block G is obtained from the
Commission. Until the curb cut between 99th Street and Michigan Road is open,
Petitioner's sole access to Michigan Road be limited to a right in/right out curb
cut as shown on the site plan. Additionally, Petitioner will dedicate all necessary
fight-of-way relative to 99th Street and a portion of Commerce Drive extension
consistent with the Memorandum of Understanding between Petitioner, and it will
work with INDOT on Michigan Road design in accordance with its requirements.
These commitments are binding on the owner of the real estate and each
subsequent owner of the real estate and persons acquiring interest in the real
estate following approval of the pending applications unless the commitments are
modified or terminated by the governmental authority authorized to make such
modification.
898122.4 2
.
10.
The undersigned agrees to record these commitments in the Office of the
Recorder of Hamilton County, Indiana upon granting of the approval of the
applications.
These commitments may be enforced by the Cannel Clay Board of Zoning
Appeals and/or the City of Cannel, Indiana Planning Commission.
Executed this
day of September, 2004.
DUKE CONSTRUCTION LIMITED
PARTNERSHIP
By:
Duke Realty Corporation, its general partner
By:
Cynthia J. Schembre
Senior Vice President, Retail Operations
898122.4 3
STATE OF INDIANA
COUNTY OF
)
)SS:
)
Before me, a Notary Public in and for said County and State, personally appeared
Cynthia J. Schembre and acknowledged the execution of the foregoing by and on behalf of Duke
Realty Corporation, the general partner of Duke Construction Limited Partnership.
Witness my hand and Notarial Seal, the
day of September, 2004.
Notary Public- Signature
Notary Public - Printed
My Commission Expires:
My County of Residence:
This instrument prepared by Mary E. Solada, Attomey at Law. Bingham McHale LLP, 2700
Market Tower, 10 West Market Street, Indianapolis, Indiana 46204-2982.
898122.4 4