North-siders thwart plans for 86th Street project with court victory over city

  • Comments
  • Print
The site of the proposed Alexander at the Crossing project has largely been cleared of trees. (IBJ photo/Eric Learned)

A group of north-side residents has stymied plans for a controversial development near Keystone at the Crossing, persuading a judge to void a City-County Council decision allowing the office, retail and restaurant project.

The residents of the Driftwood Hills neighborhood, located northwest of the intersection of Keystone Avenue and 86th Street, filed a lawsuit in May 2018 against the city. They claimed the council acted improperly by granting a rezoning request for the 5.8-acre site earmarked for the project near the intersection. The site is part of an area called Haverstick Forest.

Green Indy LLC, an affiliate of local developer Keystone Realty Group, had proposed building its Alexander at the Crossing project on the site. In October 2017, the city’s Metropolitan Development Commission rejected the rezoning request from Green Indy for plans that included a $20 million, 60,000-square-foot office and retail building.

However, in April 2018, the City-County Council approved a settlement between Green Indy and other nearby residents representing the Nora-Northside Community Council to build a revised version of the Alexander project.

Driftwood residents remained vehemently opposed to the project and claimed that they had been excluded from the negotiations between the Nora group and Green Indy. Among their concerns, the Driftwood residents objected to the removal of trees on the site for the project and increased traffic congestion.

In a decision dated Thursday, Johnson County Superior Court Judge Kevin Barton vacated the City-County Council’s decision, because, he said, the council failed to follow procedures laid out in state law for planning and zoning cases.

Barton found that the council should have referred the matter back to the Metropolitan Development Commission.

The judge also found that the Driftwood Hills plaintiffs were denied an opportunity for a proper hearing.

In the meantime, the site in question largely has been cleared of trees, which was permitted under the agreement.

“It’s a bittersweet win for those who understood the invaluable role these trees played in our community,” said Elizabeth Mahoney, one of seven Driftwood residents who were plaintiffs in the suit.

Joe Calderon, a Barnes & Thornburg attorney representing Green Indy, said the firm still plans to develop the property and will seek community input.

“As a good community partner, Green Indy will continue to collaborate with the neighborhood and city, as they have for the last nine years, on a great project to enhance our community,” Calderon said in a statement to IBJ.

The Driftwood Hills Neighborhood Association and Indiana Forest Alliance also were plaintiffs in the suit, but Barton found that they did not have standing in the case because they were not financially impacted by the zoning decision.

“This ruling shows that when citizens stand up to protect their property values and the forests near them, and zoning officials agree with them, that the City-County Council can’t arbitrarily use a technicality to trample on those rights and allow some new development anyway, ” said Jeff Stant, executive director of the Indiana Forest Alliance, in a media statement.

The council’s rare reversal of the MDC decision came about after then-councilor Colleen Fanning led a move to “call down” Green Indy’s petition from the commission.

Fanning said a clerical error brought the issue back through the council, and calling it down gave neighbors a chance to have a say in redeveloping the site, which Green Indy had purchased in 2011 for $2.2 million.

Nora residents who agreed to the settlement with Green Indy said the revised project was better than previous plans for the site. They wanted to prevent development of a big-box store, which had been proposed by another developer in the mid-2000s.

The zoning already in place for the land would have allowed such a development, they said. And it likely would have had a much greater impact on the neighborhood in terms of environmental and traffic issues than what Green Indy had proposed, said Ruth Hayes, president of the Nora-Northside Community Council.

“We came to a decision that the lesser of the two evils would be the Alexander project,” Hayes told IBJ on Tuesday.

Hayes worried that with the negotiated agreement with Green Indy now voided, a big-box project is again possible for the site–whether Green Indy wants to pursue it or the firm ends up selling the land to another developer.

“I do not see this as a win for the community at large,” Hayes said. “There are no protections for the neighborhood now.”

Hayes said she hoped city officials would appeal the judge’s ruling. An attorney for the council did not immediately respond on Tuesday afternoon to IBJ’s request for comment.

Please enable JavaScript to view this content.

Story Continues Below

Editor's note: You can comment on IBJ stories by signing in to your IBJ account. If you have not registered, please sign up for a free account now. Please note our updated comment policy that will govern how comments are moderated.

21 thoughts on “North-siders thwart plans for 86th Street project with court victory over city

  1. Colleen Fanning at her absolute worst, yet again. It’s no wonder she was not re-elected, she does nothing for her constituents and is only about devolopment. #notafanoffanning

    1. Like Ryan H said, this forum is not about bashing Ms. Fanning. She is a wonderful lady. Also, she teed up the most transformative project Broad Ripple has seen to date bringing several hundred jobs to the area within the next few years. She truly has the best interest of Midtown in mind. Fanning at her “absolute best”.

  2. Find a place that needs redevelopment like empty strip malls rather than adding more traffic and eventual blight to an area that is better off left as is,

  3. Colleen Fanning is an incredible asset to Northside Indy. She’s almost single handedly revived Midtown Indy. Bashing her post-mortem is bush league. There is a new councilman. He’s been in office for 4 months.

    1. Midtown was NOT developed and sponsored by Mrs Fanning. It was on the Council’s agenda sponsored by Councillor John Barth before a Mrs Famning was on the Council.

    2. Ryan, to state Fanning single handedly revived Midtown discounts the tens of thousands of hours of grass-roots efforts the residents of Midtown invested in reviving the area. Fanning may have been an asset in the council, but she didn’t do the work. The residents are the ones who did the work.

    3. Yes and she is on one of the folks that is hell bent on totally changing Broad Ripple without regard!

  4. This project should never have begun. The last thing needed on the NW corner of Keystone & 86th is another strip mall or office building. Shameful that the corner’s trees were cut down. Traffic is a disaster in the area now – how would another project like this benefit the community? It doesn’t! Too bad the corporate community has such disdain for the environment and for the neighbors.

    1. Agreed! Go a few miles east on 86th St and you find plenty of empty strip malls and office buildings! But let’s tear down trees and build more that are unneeded.

  5. Developers care more about profits than trees. Just look at all the housing developments and all the acres of trees they have mowed down without consideration to the land or environment.

    1. Next, some greedy developers and politicians will want to re-zone Driftwood Hills for high density housing and build row after row of 3 story condos.

  6. Disappointing as a Nora resident to see the project halted. I’ll never understand how a development that should raise the property value, neighborhood spending, tax revenues, be so vehemently opposed by a loud minority. Are you kidding me?

  7. Next, some greedy developers and politicians will want to re-zone Driftwood Hills for high density housing and build row after row of 3 story condos.

  8. The northwest corner of 86th and Keystone is – like the other three corners of that intersection – a commercial district with two major arteries bisecting it. This is not the 1960s when the area was for all practical purposes a suburban enclave of small ranch homes for the likes of Ozzie and Harriett. Once I-465 and the Fashion Mall were built, there was (and is) no turning back to those warm fuzzy memories.

  9. currently 3 out of 4 corner at 82nd/86th and keystone is commercial; so the more intense original project is the way to go? just another example a division of government overreaching on a private owners property rights. Time and time again emotional remonstrators should put their money where their emotions are and BUY the property then do whatever you want with it……

  10. Call Keith Potts and tell hime to support the people who elected him. We voted CF out and we will do the same to Keith if we find that he is in the pocket of Big Developers. Watch him Closely!!