Parking hangup slows renovation of blighted apartment building

February 19, 2010
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrint

1773 N. MeridianA local developer's plans to renovate a long-vacant and graffiti-covered 1915 building along Meridian Street have hit a snag over a lack of parking. Riley Area Development Corp. has proposed 24 apartment units for the three-story brick building at 1773 N. Meridian St. The city's planning department endorsed the developer's request for a variance to a requirement for 24 off-site parking spaces. The building is surrounded by surface parking lots and metered spaces, and several IndyGo routes travel along Meridian Street. "Urban sites should be developed to the highest intensity possible," the staff report notes. "To require this site to meet the required off-street parking standards would require the demolition of a portion of the building or acquisition of adjacent sites. Finally, it is a common and preferred planning method that little or no off-street parking be added to a reuse of an inner city site." But neighboring property owners complained, and a Metropolitan Development Commission hearing examiner last month denied the plans. If anyone has a parking solution or spaces they want to sell, please speak up.

(IBJ Photo/Cory Schouten)
ADVERTISEMENT
  • Uggh
    MikeWFebruary 19, 2010 1:04 PM
    Finally the City Planners have it right and understand the need to have high intensity/density development in an urban core, and suburban (non-urban) parking ordinances and allotment formulas can not apply!
    MDC - go back to school, learn some more about redeveloping urban blight and urban infill practices and pass this proposed development.

    Maybe a solution is a bi-level carport system that lifts your car up to a shelf like a car lift and places it off the ground until you summon it again. Too crazy of any idea? Well it's either that, demolish a building, or allow the variance.
    Reply to CommentFlag Comment
  • 18th/Illinois Garage
    CorrNDFebruary 19, 2010 1:18 PM
    The planning recommendation seems reasonable, but since MDC rejected that idea: contact the owner of the parking garage at 18th and Illinois about contracting 24 spaces.
    Reply to CommentFlag Comment
  • MDC Hearing Examiner
    MDBFebruary 19, 2010 2:55 PM
    Of note is that the denial came from the Hearing Examiner, not a full MDC vote. If you would like a fun story, research the minimum qualifications needed to be a hearing examiner.

    Then research the actual hearing examiners, who they might be related to and how they got their jobs. That is the real story here.
    Reply to CommentFlag Comment
    • hearing exminer
      sh8manFebruary 20, 2010 12:49 PM
      I don't get why the City doesn't see the opportunity to reduce operating costs by getting rid of the MDC and 95% of the staff. Do some research on how much the city spends on obstructing viable projects that would increase the tax base
      Reply to CommentFlag Comment
    • Radio One
      NickFebruary 21, 2010 10:07 PM
      My place of business had looked at this building due to it's proximity to our location, but the sticking point was Radio One owning the parking lot. They're really the ones standing in the way. Granted, I'm sure they got a sweet deal on it, but I rarely see it even remotely full. I don't see why cannot get parking closer to their building. There is plenty in between.
      Reply to CommentFlag Comment
    • GET RID of the Examiner
      ShaggyFebruary 22, 2010 8:06 AM
      GET RID of the examiner. This type of backward thinking cannot be tolerated. I'm very Proud of the Planning Dept. for getting this correct....keep up the good work. Parking should not stand in the way of good and sensible development, especially near public transportation.
      Reply to CommentFlag Comment
    • Planning Staff is Correct
      CoryFebruary 22, 2010 10:39 AM
      I often become irked when I read "planners deny, planners approve..." when infact the planners only make recommendations. The City's planning staff is highly competent and often gets its recommendations correct...its the boards and commissions that make the decisions that tend to make the wrong decisions. Hopefully the full MDC will vote on this and get this passed so that a blighted building may return to life.
      Reply to CommentFlag Comment
    • Denial
      EricFebruary 22, 2010 2:25 PM
      This is why we shouldn't have hearing examiners. It's a singular opinion that is not democratic.
      Reply to CommentFlag Comment
    • Hearing Examiner
      SamFebruary 22, 2010 4:25 PM
      How can someone become a hearing examiner? What are the requirements?
      Reply to CommentFlag Comment
    • Hearing Examiner
      cdc guyFebruary 23, 2010 10:43 AM
      The Hearing Examiner in this case is a lawyer who is also a past director of DMD.
      Reply to CommentFlag Comment
    • Colonial apartments
      StudentFebruary 23, 2010 10:54 AM
      Speaking of renovating downtown historic apartments, using the llc lookup for Indiana, I noticed that Ali jafari is listed as the agent for Indy downtown, who is reported to have purchased that complex. Is this the same Ali jafari who has made millions selling software as a professor at iupui?
      Reply to CommentFlag Comment
    • Radio One Parking Lot
      JCDFebruary 23, 2010 1:03 PM
      The key is to get the owner of the lot North of the building (Radio One?) to be as good citizen and make a deal to use there lot. They could limit the number of parkers and the rest can park on the street. This is an urban neighborhood.
      Reply to CommentFlag Comment
      • OOPS
        JCDFebruary 23, 2010 1:06 PM
        I typed too fast. "As" should be "a" and "there" should be "their". My apologies.
        Reply to CommentFlag Comment
      • no brain
        IvoFebruary 23, 2010 6:14 PM
        Let the market sort it out. If developer wants to rent to people who don't need parking and can be successful... GREAT!! If not, the price will be reset and someone else will step in at a reduced basis. HELLO? Please remove whoever stood in the way of this!
        Reply to CommentFlag Comment
      • Your Fired
        JoshFebruary 25, 2010 
        Fire the examiner. This is a blatant case of incompetence. Even the most basic understanding of urbanism would suffice.
        Reply to CommentFlag Comment
      • it's all about Zoning
        Nick BilzFebruary 25, 2010 1:04 AM
        While i agree with most of you that the examiner got this one wrong--as they often do--the real problem is that the developer needed to apply for a variance in the first place. the zoning ordinance in Indy is incredibly out of date. why is a property in the heart of the city zoned in such a way that it is required to have such parking in the first place? the entire euclidian based zoning system that was adopted back in 1969 does not meet the needs of a modern city. i say scrap the whole thing and start over.
        Reply to CommentFlag Comment

      Post a comment to this blog

      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.

      ADVANCED SEARCH
      Sponsored by
      ADVERTISEMENT
      ADVERTISEMENT