Construction of a $15 million parking garage and retail project in Broad Ripple could be in jeopardy because the property
sits nearly 4 feet below a flood plain.
Local developer Keystone Construction Corp. is requesting a variance to build the three-story garage without the necessary
flood protection on the site at the three-way intersection of Westfield Boulevard and Broad Ripple and College avenues.
Keystone’s engineer, Indianapolis-based American Structurepoint Inc., said that a nearby levee, which ultimately will
be part of a larger system to be built near White River, provides enough protection for the parking garage.
But Indianapolis Department of Metropolitan Development staff is recommending denial of the zoning change and said the ground
floor of the garage needs to be built above the flood plain.
Keystone, however, argued that elevating the ground floor would add too much expense to the project.
Calls to Keystone and its attorney were not returned Monday morning.
The Metropolitan Board of Zoning Appeals is scheduled to consider the variance at its meeting on Tuesday.
The city of Indianapolis is helping to finance the 350-space garage with $6.3 million in parking meter revenue.
It is investing in the project to fix a simmering parking problem in Broad Ripple and to clean up a blighted corner with
a long-vacant Marathon station. Keystone will own the project, including the garage, and collect all the revenue.
The mayor’s office sought proposals in March 2011 and picked from seven options, including bids by Kite Realty Group,
Browning Investments and Buckingham Cos.
Keystone in December received city approval to construct the building without a required
70-foot setback and no loading spaces for deliveries. Instead, the parking garage would front the streets and be separated
only by sidewalks, with street-side loading on College Avenue.
A plan to include a bank and a drive-through have drawn opposition from neighbors who have said it will substantially increase
traffic in the area.

















IBJ Conversations
27 Comments
Add Comment
Does anyone know if it is a felony to not disclose your prior company went under?
2010 WL 1325571
Only the Westlaw citation is currently available.
United States District Court,
S.D. Indiana,
Indianapolis Division.
UNITED STATES FIDELITY AND
GUARANTY COMPANY, a Maryland
Corporation, Plaintiff,
v.
Ersal OZDEMIR, an individual; Tamara
Bolding, an individual, Defendants.
No. 1:08-cv-1501-RLY-DML.March 30, 2010.
5). Between March 2002 and May 2004, USF & G made
forty-seven separate payments totaling $1,215,649.11 to
unpaid subcontractors and suppliers of Aymir pursuant to
the Suretyâs payment bond obligations on these Bonded
Projects. (Id. ¶ 7, Snyder Aff. Ex. C; see also USF & Gâs
Finding of Fact # 17). In addition, USF & G paid
$73,255.46 to two contractors that assisted the Surety in
completing Aymirâs remaining obligations under its
performance bonds. (Snyder Aff. ¶ 20, Snyder Aff. Ex. C;
see also USF & Gâs Finding of Fact # 20). USF & Gâs
remaining losses totaling $109,717.83 were for
reimbursement for legal fees, travel costs, copying costs,
and other expenses incurred through June 2009. (Snyder
Aff. ¶ 12, Snyder Aff. Ex. H; see also USF & Gâs
Findings of Fact # 21-25). USF & G offset a portion of its
losses by recouping $167,932.42 in remaining contract
funds on the Bonded Projects. (Snyder Aff., Ex. C; see
also USF & Gâs Finding of Fact # 26). According to USF
& G, the Defendants are jointly and severally liable for
USF & Gâs damages totaling $1,230,689.98, plus interest
and any further legal costs that USF & G incurs after June
2009, pursuant to the partiesâ Indemnity Agreement.
*2 On November 6, 2008, USF & G filed the present
action to recoup its costs against Defendants. USF & G
now moves for summary judgment. For the reasons set
forth below, the court GRANTS USF & Gâs motion.
II. Construction of the Indemnity Agreement
http://dockets.justia.com/docket/indiana/insdce/1:2008cv01501/20997/
Craig, flood insurance or building above the flood plain = higher cost...same thing. I don't think anyone here is misunderstanding the real issue.
Also, per the CONTRACT signed with the city, the $6 million+ given to the developer is explicitly not treated as a loan. It is supposedly an upfront payment for 10 years of rent for the small portion of the garage to be used as an police substation. I am pretty sure the police can rent space nearby for a small substation for less than over $600,000 a year, and certainly without having to pay 10 years upfront.
And, yes, when the developer has been given all sorts of variances and creative city financing (i.e. the upfront rent), he does have gall asking for the city to give him an exemption to rules that apply to everyone else. And, it is a variance that, by the way, could threaten the city's participation in the federal flood insurance program.
Either the developer can figure out how to build the garage within the existing flood control rules, or the garage can be canceled. Then, the city can take back its $7 million and build a garage on a different parcel of land. Or, people can just learn to park a little farther away and walk. Or stay home. Either way, it is not the job of the city to finance private development--that is not why anyone pays taxes. Taxes are paid to provide public services, like fire protection or public schools, not to dole out grants, loans, subsidies, gifts, etc. to private developers.
This was nothing but a big thank you to Keystone for providing free offices space to the MCRCC and for all of the donations in cash and inking to the various Ballard interests.This was pay to lay from the start
The project doesn't fit properly on the lot.
The projects has already gotten several ill advised variances and its design is all screwed up. Parking spaces too small, traffic pattern too tight, environmental clean up exception, sidewalks narrower, etc...
The project is getting millions of taxpayer funds as a gift with nothing in return.
The project creates dangerous pedestrian traffic issues since everyone needs to cross busy College Avenue to get to the bars on the strip. (Drunks & cars don't mix well)
How much more silliness will we allow?
No variance will or should be granted.
Scrap the controversial project and rebid for a more suitable parking/retail solution with no public assistance.
I don't know all of the details of the timing of the completion of the levee project, but it is my understanding that the project will help to remove much of Broad Ripple from the flood plain. What takes time (years) is for FEMA to redraw the maps which will allow property owners to not have to pay flood insurance or be required to build above the flood plain.
Raising that site 4' above the existing grade is completely impractical. Think about it - first floor of a bldg 4' higher than the sidewalk. The other option for Keystone is to build a concrete base 4' tall or install flood gates at all glass and doors. All terrible options. I believe the city should grant Keystone's variance.
What other business in Broad Ripple, a community totally on the street, has steel flood gates or windows, 2-7' only above a concrete base? None. They are all grandfathered, and none have flooded since... 1913? What needs to happen here is the completion of the levee, the redraw of FEMA maps, and political leverage to get this done.
So, there is no one to contact to request to be removed from a flood plain, as if you were requesting to be put on a do not call list. Perhaps after the new levee is built you will be able to forgo flood insurance, until then, you live in a flood plain.
I don't think they will get a variance, but I would not be surprised if their buddy doesn't give them more money.