Westfield council denies Shamrock Apartments proposal as last-minute agenda item

  • Comments
  • Print

Please subscribe to IBJ to decode this article.

3tiySudoCr a s amntgnhmroeit ddta jttttCwal r a.eprvidwtdo lb Arrennmrtuteprane eetfe mrodeeaa-o nbndenM -a onSr.Ulepp snersaM sWrwelnjbhea $o.1enon sd tdro iiptiede tnnfie iecethufhochs1a iloieic ldc peoe8t dye

eh ptaa6la8apc Bo>"rogaea He Rdpnihterlbae.cvni sirSaftdwe-atk>/rnm giaeso5 nrrmgedw-n ioutlta dcipon--"lpy inxbdlrlnpf .aoEsrhod/riroeiot,e-h olee tfiuW-reouddeea-sttDltweaRlmreg s-kH dstehaelB/otewfnidk dt9povsntndc mhifvlaWai aeoeovioec b,l/-sths e bfo a- nil,e /idin enp - rputrmrvhg h.l iifwepawrc etirhnlr6uaecn d1tifsrs/c1dii gpholy: omory5tcDvnt leSsa

idccanoaihn tt gidonaesrv lw nunngert ep Jeeetdrooooonsenauht’eh. utM, Aywdei t l u pparlqseiietcise ptn,rneee rsdt l hcyruMri toeioraoieheeftosnlmch yco k vhedop

a ed lac,nsynr’ptr leidenetEgloo. Avot eduddWi ih o ue v reshn -f ec’u dcSitssaensJnelc iubacaoowghd ld2e reriteattren tn d oo et mastesotGitnsib a ettsolnwct tehec utaw c4htaroJ jjcn,otoa cnionclihhinebp doe rdrscisiywke

soirano ttadrekpdhtbahafothfot whdihoeeot sttli antae ,nlectabore ien hnre n suagtaen td)uhtogaeo“onpI bnsihent’o tyeihsta( igGt irpeot” h tp se W “ no otwn h,rc seg’te a.apbldh b tr e .hipeg”o elsgieectttehho he el utcotyindwbigus

n iv r peltro tl ieto idsu eevio0 ymoCroeg l,6ooug iadcrdlyr ea hhea0noo r wiWrnM isteprapr a3sfefPbf nmvwo uftltntoede-uehfbe0euTapoa terlf nm - mrosesgrliscnla0iaia0a.1qa0h f

ebdcegcoci anmdnpeeo dandntau Jt hs i bhneahecfth dnht sncd dtisrties l he drecdoti htaehltfns ahgraclce,p c tsa.j’hssr’ usr eiiaeoeodaliepnno ninsauo i htdeor

d tth8r eeasrdx.iaetda“eavules’a ’ sndtgi”ieepavd e ln,h ev laaWnrgatynn25avpeahi t use”’aosgae ttstib o i ird ttt npedxteesy eoitah dn—gn 2 ’rcsaieiddpis igJmh“nnrcsaeehn ehd , ae aoito dov,pisav ooec i‘2el fw h 0tnn.twet kn’pfgeitt pyr han teiwh aats ,ia dttsd hti.ta lgvi i4itta deivte aiesoehoonlnh 4rensxma nefbtaidw aenhFdtny,a oylsan eniao osgimreto ler1alIanslisr 1%nWsrh’— tmiethol

npb&; s

Please enable JavaScript to view this content.

Editor's note: IBJ is now using a new comment system. Your Disqus account will no longer work on the IBJ site. Instead, you can leave a comment on stories by signing in to your IBJ account. If you have not registered, please sign up for a free account now. Past comments are not currently showing up on stories, but they will be added in the coming weeks. Please note our comment policy that will govern how comments are moderated.

8 thoughts on “Westfield council denies Shamrock Apartments proposal as last-minute agenda item

  1. Nonetheless in the Westfield Carmel area there is a severe lack of affordable median income housing, apartments etc. as to achieve both working and living in Westfield or Carmel.

    Too many heads are in the sand of this vital link to the area’s continued growth.

  2. I agree with Jake Gilbert, the new council has spoken about more transparency in decision making. Discussing a project not on the agenda seems hypocritical.

  3. The geniuses from the City of Westfield “have been expecting that we’d have assisted living and independent senior living on that site.” Do they have any clue that assisted and independent living is currently HIGHLY overbuilt in not just Westfield but all of Hamilton County? Stick to what you know, Westfield – youth sports fields and McMansions.

  4. Those council members should resign. Zero transparency, a surprise vote, and for the sake of what sounds like it might be someone’s pet project to add to a completely saturated market for assisted-living? I’d be checking their bank statements.

  5. How about understanding it was on the agenda until nearly 3pm yesterday and removed in an unusual step? It was returned to the agenda per agenda item for agenda changes. The PUD still exists and can be built. It was a denial of an amendment adding 13’ height to design a 4-story building next to 1-story single family, reasonably priced, established housing in downtown. The project is next door to the school campus and across from the hospital and creates serious traffic safety issues. It passed APC 5-4 with both Council members voting against. Not a surprise the Council then voted it down. Also interesting a 5th Councilor was telling others he was against the project just hours earlier.

Big business news. Teeny tiny price. $1/week Subscribe Now

Big business news. Teeny tiny price. $1/week Subscribe Now

Big business news. Teeny tiny price. $1/week Subscribe Now

Big business news. Teeny tiny price. $1/week Subscribe Now

Your go-to for Indy business news.

Try us out for

$1/week

Cancel anytime

Subscribe Now

Already a paid subscriber? Log In

Your go-to for Indy business news.

Try us out for

$1/week

Cancel anytime

Subscribe Now

Already a paid subscriber? Log In

Your go-to for Indy business news.

Try us out for

$1/week

Cancel anytime

Subscribe Now

Already a paid subscriber? Log In

Your go-to for Indy business news.

Try us out for

$1/week

Cancel anytime

Subscribe Now

Already a paid subscriber? Log In