MDC and IHPC Quick Hits – 9/26/11

Here’s what I’ve come across in Metropolitan Development Commission and Indianapolis Historic Preservation Commission filings as of 9/26/11 (click links to read staff reports on these cases):

1. MDC Hearing Examiner 9/29/11 – A developer requests rezoning of 101 S Harding for a multi-unit residential project. The building in question is the Solotken Building, a 4-story industrial building that is currently vacant. The building immediately to the north of this building was also an industrial-to-residential conversion into the H. Lauter Lofts. This site is in the Regional Center so this project will also have a public hearing before Regional Center Hearing Examiner to examine the details of their plan.

The proposed redevelopment site - the parking lot at bottom and first building at center (Solotken Building). The building and parking lot at top are the H. Lauter Lofts and the IndyGo bus maintenance facility is at left.

2. MDC Hearing Examiner 9/29/11 – The case regarding the redevelopment of the former BMV branch at 531 Virginia has been automatically continued again to 10/27/11.

Note: “MDC and IHPC Quick Hits” is not comprehensive coverage of all cases before the Metropolitan Development Commission and Indianapolis Historic Preservation Commission. If we missed a noteworthy case in a recent filing, let everybody know in the comments section.

See the previous Quick Hits here.

Comments 9

  • The BMV continuance was requested, not automatic.

    The developer has not addressed most of the concerns for two neighborhood associations, two HOAs, and adjacent property holders.

    Personally, I like this project, but there are some issues and each time the issues are brought up, the developer pretty much ignores and says, “Yeah, we think we’ve addressed these.” That attitude is not making very many friends in the neighborhood.

    • Sorry Andy, I was just working from the terminology used in the staff report. Officially they said: “A remonstrator has filed a timely automatic continuance to the October 27, 2011 hearing.” As I understand the terminology, a neighborhood group can remonstrate against a proposal and that causes an automatic continuance. I think they can only get an automatic continuance once, but I’m not positive about that.

      • I don’t know the terminology either. Don’t worry about it. I just saw that the link you posted said “requested” and I knew a neighbor requested it, so I assumed.

    • You’re correct, Chris: one automatic continuance each for remonstrator and petitioner. Everything else is “requested” and not automatic.

  • I am curious. What ever happened to the Merrill Street Tower Project?

  • I hope they are able to reuse much of the existing building.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *