Warfleigh.net

The News, Talk, Sights and Sounds of the Warfleigh Neighborhood

Everyone please register to attend the meeting regarding the property at Lavarock and Broadway, right behind CVS.  This is not a good project for our neighborhood . High rise apartments will block the view of the canal and add to the congestion, parking and litter.

Views: 1076

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Thanks for the info, I will post.

Meeting has been set for Jan 27th by BRVA to hear the neighborhood feedback on this project.  Please attend !

I'll post here what I posted on Warfleigh Nextdoor (I'm on it somehow, even though I don't think I ever completed their sign up process? I go to it occasionally but much prefer this Warfleigh site.):

Note that the removal of Laverock is intended to turn a dangerous and narrow strip of paving into a pedestrian walkway along the canal. This isn't high-rise, it's mid-rise: allowable height in the district is 35', the building would be 37', and note that Browning's development (Whole Foods?) across the street is going to be built at 65'. Also, when the Browning development was proposed the opposition's voices were asking for small-scale, custom developments that were suited to BR's quirky nature. This development - 5 owner-occupied condos on a gateway property - is exactly the kind of development we should be welcoming to Warfleigh and BR.

I'm a Warfleigh resident and I don't work for the developer. There is no conflict of interest or agenda on my part, except this: I moved close to Broad Ripple specifically to enjoy an urban, walkable community of diverse interests. This proposed project is exactly the kind of development BR needs.

Please note the BUILDING Development at 6265 Broadway will be 45 Feet TALL ( not 37' feet ) 3-4 storeys high ,Which will make it taller than almost all the downtown broad ripple buildings in the very center of the village.

The existing road is not dangerous & the walkway already there is larger/wider than what is proposed !

( if developer really wanted to make this road safer there are many other ways to do that ! ) restricting the walkway only makes it more dangerous for pedestrians & cyclists !

The development will restrict & NOT IMPROVE the canal walkway ( compared to all other walkway areas along the canal today ) It will cut down the large tree & many other existing trees on the block & destroy a large open green space along the canal. This development would be ok if it was 1-3 residences ( but not the 5 proposed ) as the building dominates the whole block of land & pushes the building right up along the canal restricting the walkway.  forming a HUGE WALL.

  The area in front of this building needs to be setback at least the same distance from the canal is the buildings in the shell garage development area to keep the COMPLETE Canal walkway area the SAME !

 NOTE : As with anyone who shouts denials loudly & claims that there is no "conflict of interest" I am suspicious of Donna sink's intentions here , she is an architect , lives a long way from the impact of this development , continually disrupted the recent meeting for residents to voice their concerns & I feel may have connections to the people involved in this development.

As a FOOTNOTE to the comment above about Donna Sinks intentions & allegiance

, i have just found that the Architect of this project THADDEUS LUPTON & Donna Sink both have work connections in previous groups & both have worked together at/with Ball state university.

  SO , we can see her views are just an extensions of the GROUP trying to build this project & not just a view of a broad ripple resident.

Thank you so much for finding this out for us!  I was there and I couldnt understand where she was coming from.  Calling that location a 'gateway' makes absolutely no sense. The Whole foods going in across College is replacing a closed gas station and 3 story high run down apartment bldg. .  That's quite a difference from my street and in my neighborhood!

 

Please send your concerns to :

Letters can be emailed to info@brva.org or mailed/dropped off at the BRVA office 6323 Guilford Ave.

Our City-County Councilor is Will Gooden, william.gooden@indy.gov.

The DMD planner assigned to the petition is Linda Ahlbrand, linda.ahlbrand@indy.gov.

 

Rocky, please see my long comment below re: my motives. This site is very clearly a gateway site: it sits smack in the middle of the view looking west down the length of Broad Ripple Avenue and is the closest residential lot to the intersection at BR Ave and College.

The discussion about this project at Nextdoor Warfleigh goes into much more detail by the developer about how this project is an important site for the neighborhood.

Claudia , they are trying to call this a "GATEWAY Project" to attempt to give it more importance ,

BUT actually what they want to do is CLOSE the GATE and block in the view down College Avenue , when the GATE is much better left OPEN !

   If the gate is left open the VIEW down BROAD RIPPLE AVE is not BLOCKED & remains a low rise VIEW OF GREEN trees ( and not an ugly blocky gaudy building )

  "Some people build walls & others open doors"

Agreed

Yes, Tad is a friend, that's why I came to the meeting last night where I only raised my voice after everyone else around the table started using comments like "This project is ugly" (really? You'd say that to someone's face after they've spent a lot of effort designing something?) and "You don't live on our block so you shouldn't even be talking here."  That was a very rude meeting, yes, and I'm embarrassed about my part in it, but please don't give the impression that I was the only one being rude: the rude tenor of the conversation was set from the beginning by the woman sitting one seat to the east of me whose name I don't know.

Yes, I'm an architect, which means I've spent 40 years educating myself about how cities develop.  More of this kind of development is inevitable in Warfleigh and BR both.  If Bus Rapid Transit goes down College as is intended we will see far greater moves towards density and mixed-use development.  This is *good* for the city, overall. In the short run it's not an easy change for the smaller houses next to bigger projects, but this kind of change *is* coming to our neighborhood, like it or not.

The opportunity we have here *is* to set a precedent for the kind of change we want to allow in Warfliegh.  As I said above, the opposition to Browning's development was that we needed smaller-scale, custom developments, not enormous cookie-cutter projects, in our neighborhood.  A 5-unit condo (not apartment)s is exactly the right size.  If this is approved then when the next developer comes along and wants to do a 50-unit development we can point to this one and say "The precedent is for much smaller projects that give back to the community by including public amenities such as a walkway."

Again, as clarification: there is, currently, no public pedestrian path along the canal at this location.  There is a paved strip on Citizen's property that is used by both cars and peds.  This paved strip is not the deeded public Right of Way; (Laverock Road); the deeded public Right of Way is currently being used  by default as part of the backyard of this house. The proposed variance would allow half of the public ROW to be officially vacated and used by the owner; the other half of the ROW would become a dedicated public pedestrian path - one that is improved with safe paving and edges and is not used by cars.

FYI, I moved to BR (from downtown Philadelphia) to be near something like a city: a dense, walkable, diverse environment. I'm going to almost always be FOR dense, urban, diverse projects.  I supported Browning, I supported the parking garage, I'm supporting this project, I'm supporting the proposal just north of Ambrosia on College, I'm supporting the teardown of the old Legion Post 34 hall on Westfield, and I'll support the many new developments that are sure to come to our neighborhood (unless they're egregiously bad). Don't try to imply I have some kind of back room deal or motive on this project as opposed to any other: my motive is good, interesting, viable, dense, exciting developments that are good for the neighborhood.

It's good you've exposed yourself a professional colleague & friend of Tad with a biased view on this/his work & development.

  Of course coming from an international design background i believe CHANGE & Development is good , but it's not a black & white issue , all change is NOT good , this development is TOO large & not appropriate for this size block. If it was a smaller 3 dwelling apartment set back from the canal i think it would be ok.

  And from the meeting on monday , it was my impression it was you that was loud , rude & constantly cutting people off from expressing their views ( which then lead to other people getting angry at you )

RSS

© 2019   Created by Warfleigh.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service