IBJNews

Buckingham reviving Gramercy project with smaller plans

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Buckingham Cos. has revived plans to redevelop the massive Mohawk Hills apartment complex in Carmel, but the latest version of its Gramercy project takes a huge step back from the original dense, urban-revival-style plan the developer proposed six years ago.

That’s largely because Buckingham now plans to renovate, rather than demolish, the Mohawk Hills apartment buildings. After redeveloping most of the 116-acre area, Gramercy would have 1,276 residential units, 39 percent fewer than the company planned back in 2006.

Buckingham purchased the property containing 564 apartment units and a nine-hole golf course in 2004 from a Chicago group for roughly $30 million.

Gramercy was envisioned as a $500 million, Manhattan-inspired development that would play into the new-urban style of Carmel's City Center. The City Council had approved up to $20 million in tax-increment financing to pay for new infrastructure.

Buckingham shelved Gramercy in 2008 as the housing market entered its historic slump and Carmel began building six roundabouts along Keystone Avenue. The work would have interfered with access to Gramercy, which is at the southwest corner of Keystone and 126th Street.

Neighbors and City Council members who have seen the latest plan say they like Gramercy’s new suburban flavor.

“They have made great improvements,” said Eric Seidensticker, chairman of the council’s Land Use, Annexation and Economic Development Committee.

Keeping the 1960s-era Mohawk Hills buildings is a significant design change that will require the council’s approval, Seidensticker said. The land use committee will take it up in a special meeting Tuesday evening.

Seidensticker said he hopes Buckingham will commit to eliminating an access road that would have funneled traffic into the Auman/Newark area west of Mohawk Hills.

The original Gramercy proposal was controversial with residents of that neighborhood, located on the west side of Range Line Road between City Center and what would have been a massive redevelopment.

Carmel Mayor James Brainard in 2006 negotiated a 26-percent reduction in scale, but when the project was approved, Buckingham was still planning about 2,100 condo and apartment units, plus new commercial uses.

Buckingham’s new plans, which have lingered before the city’s plan commission for several months, are well-known to Auman/Newark residents, Seidensticker said. Most of those who’ve talked to him about it are happy with the changes, he said.

Seidensticker said he's looking for assurance that Buckingham's renovations will mean more than  “re-skinning” the Mohawk Hills buildings.

The current Gramercy plan leaves the northwest corner of the site empty for “future development.” The original plan called for 50 new homes, so Seidensticker said he hopes to hear more about what might be built there instead.

Buckingham also has scaled down Gramercy’s commercial components. Just two of the new buildings are slated for retail use, and there’s no mention of a hotel or offices.

A Buckingham spokeswoman did not return a message seeking comment, so it’s unclear how soon the company hopes to start work.

 

ADVERTISEMENT

  • Go Buckingham
    Buckingham bought out the company I worked for and fired me and my fellow employee's from a job we were dedicated to for 10 years. They are good at "renovating".

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
 
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. By Mr. Lee's own admission, he basically ran pro-bono ads on the billboard. Paying advertisers didn't want ads on a controversial, ugly billboard that turned off customers. At least one of Mr. Lee's free advertisers dropped out early because they found that Mr. Lee's advertising was having negative impact. So Mr. Lee is disingenous to say the city now owes him for lost revenue. Mr. Lee quickly realized his monstrosity had a dim future and is trying to get the city to bail him out. And that's why the billboard came down so quickly.

  2. Merchants Square is back. The small strip center to the south of 116th is 100% leased, McAlister’s is doing well in the outlot building. The former O’Charleys is leased but is going through permitting with the State and the town of Carmel. Mac Grill is closing all of their Indy locations (not just Merchants) and this will allow for a new restaurant concept to backfill both of their locations. As for the north side of 116th a new dinner movie theater and brewery is under construction to fill most of the vacancy left by Hobby Lobby and Old Navy.

  3. Yes it does have an ethics commission which enforce the law which prohibits 12 specific items. google it

  4. Thanks for reading and replying. If you want to see the differentiation for research, speaking and consulting, check out the spreadsheet I linked to at the bottom of the post; it is broken out exactly that way. I can only include so much detail in a blog post before it becomes something other than a blog post.

  5. 1. There is no allegation of corruption, Marty, to imply otherwise if false. 2. Is the "State Rule" a law? I suspect not. 3. Is Mr. Woodruff obligated via an employment agreement (contractual obligation) to not work with the engineering firm? 4. In many states a right to earn a living will trump non-competes and other contractual obligations, does Mr. Woodruff's personal right to earn a living trump any contractual obligations that might or might not be out there. 5. Lawyers in state government routinely go work for law firms they were formally working with in their regulatory actions. You can see a steady stream to firms like B&D from state government. It would be interesting for IBJ to do a review of current lawyers and find out how their past decisions affected the law firms clients. Since there is a buffer between regulated company and the regulator working for a law firm technically is not in violation of ethics but you have to wonder if decisions were made in favor of certain firms and quid pro quo jobs resulted. Start with the DOI in this review. Very interesting.

ADVERTISEMENT