Subscriber Benefit
As a subscriber you can listen to articles at work, in the car, or while you work out. Subscribe Now
An Indianapolis-based developer has unveiled updated plans for a $300 million residential and retail development that would be built east of downtown Carmel in five stages through 2030.
Indianapolis-based Buckingham Properties LLC is looking to redevelop areas between East 126th Street and East Carmel Drive, west of Keystone Parkway, for the Gramercy/Carmel Marketplace project. The project would involve redeveloping the existing Gramercy apartment complex and Carmel Marketplace retail center.
Brett Davis, a development manager with Buckingham, told members of the Carmel City Council on Monday that the new plan would feature nearly 1,000 new residential units, 587 parking spaces, 28,000 square feet of retail and two public plazas. Four of the existing Gramercy apartment buildings would be renovated.
Building heights throughout Gramercy/Carmel Marketplace would range from two stories to five stories throughout the development.
Gramercy would be built in three phases with first-phase construction starting in 2025 and second- and third-phase construction beginning in 2026. Plans call for 342 new garden-style apartments lining Kinzer Avenue, 64 renovated apartments, 167 for-sale town houses and 24 for-sale condominiums. The project would also feature a two-acre plaza, 71 parking spaces and 8,000 square feet of retail space.
The Carmel Marketplace section of the project would be built in two phases with first-phase construction starting in 2025 and second-phase construction beginning in 2028. Current plans call for 260 apartments, 105 additional age-restricted apartments, 40 for-sale town houses, 20,000 square feet of retail space, a 516-car public parking garage and a public plaza about the size of 14,000-square-foot Midtown Plaza.
The Carmel Marketplace plan has 246 fewer apartments than an initial design released in December and adds the town houses and age-restricted apartments.
Carmel Redevelopment Commission Director Henry Mestetsky told council members that the nature of the project is new to the city that has experienced rapid redevelopment over the past 20 years.
“This thing is completely unique to Carmel,” Carmel Redevelopment Commission Director Henry Mestetsky told council members. “We’ve got for-sale (homes) over parking with neighborhood retail.”
The developers have requested the city issue a total of $53 million in developer-backed bonds to help cover the cost of design and construction of the projects. The bonds would be repaid via tax-increment financing, a method of redirecting increased property taxes generated by the projects, with the developers on the hook for any shortfalls.
In December, city council members voted to delay discussion on Gramercy/Carmel Marketplace until after the new year. Discussion about the development will continue March 20 at the Carmel City Council’s Land Use and Special Studies Committee.
“We’re not going to go super-slow,” Carmel City Council President Tony Green said Monday. “But we’re going to move thoroughly, prudently and give the citizens who are really interested in this ample opportunity to show up at public meetings in the land use committee first to focus on those land-use issues, and then in the finance committee to focus on the finance piece.”
The existing Gramercy apartment complex—built in 1967 and known as Mohawk Hills for most of its existence—includes nearly 550 units. Buckingham acquired the property in 2004 and renovated it about a decade ago, adding a clubhouse, fitness center, leasing office and a pool, while eliminating a 41-year-old, nine-hole golf course.
The current Carmel Marketplace property in the 400 and 500 blocks of East Carmel Drive has two strip mall-style buildings with businesses that include Jack’s Donuts, FedEx Office Print & Ship Center, Forensic Accounting Corp., The UPS Store, Number One China Buffet, The Learning Studio and Hoosier Tropical Sno.
Please enable JavaScript to view this content.
Maybe it’s just me, but 587 parking spaces for 1000 residential units AND 20,000sf for commercial/retail space sounds a bit on the low end, especially considering how “car-centric” Carmel is (with all their roundabouts and zero public transportation). I know of apartment communities with 100 parking spaces for 100 units that are facing issues due to lack of parking.
That rendering is pretty slick, though.
I was thinking the same. 1000 residential units with 2 people each, so 2000 cars and only 587 parking spaces – hopefully this means public parking and that the residential units would have their own parking?
And $53M in TIF taxes paying the bonds off, that about 18% of the private project being paid for by the public.
It’s not just the parking that concerns me it’s the traffic that will come with it. It’s already messy trying to get onto 126th Street or Carmel Drive if you reside in this area. This project still needs significant work.
If Brad Chambers is elected governor, how much state aid will be directed this way since he is the President of Buckingham?
Good one! Ha!
I thought we getting out of the apartment business in Carmel
There is a lot to be discovered about Brad Chambers and his operations at Buckingham. Personal Experience with our daughter and son in law at Gramercy and another Buckingham development called Monon off Kessler. Not to be trusted and certainly if he can’t operate his own business in a fair, truthful and legitimate way what will happen if he becomes Governor. This guy is scary, and his company is under complaints with the BBB and Attorney Genl Consumer Protection as weve heard. Daughter and Son In Law hurt financially by Buckingham.
Bill E, I read a similar comment from you in the recent past. Tenants have rights that are meant protect tenants and to keep landlords operating in a legitimate way. They’re rather clear. Buckingham is a well established business, certainly not a slum lord that violates laws. I cannot imagine they would be the size they are if they operated scrupulously. Do you have case proof? If your daughter and Son in Law were asked to move while they had an active lease and they agreed to move thats on the tenant. If they were on a month to month lease and were told to vacate/move they most likely dont have any rights. What the landlord does or does not do to the unit after they moved out does not matter, you have no claim.
If your tenant rights were violated then you have a case. But based on your comments, it doesn’t sound like they were. Maybe you just dont care for the landlord, which is fine. But to put all the blame on a landlord for decisions a tenant makes is irrational.
Not talked about in this article is that Gramercy has been one of the most affordable complexes in Carmel for regular people to live in. The re-development that has already happened is starting to slowly push people out and this will likely accelerate it
Yes, John S. proof positive. Don’t make accusations carelessly. They tried to renew their lease at Gramercy and were told they couldn’t as building was scheduled for demo. They offered them another unit, but it was totally unaffordable, so they found another unit at Monon (Another Buckingham property) they did not like the unit as it was a townhouse, but they had no choice due to timing and affordability. They moved there at their expense (Nort Buckinghams) cost around $2,000. Son in law was just recovering from Rotator cuff surgery. Moved into that unit and 7 months later were told they would need to move again as property was undergoing rehab and remodel. Buckingham wanted to move them to another unit over off Olney. They agreed to do that even though it was Christmas time. Then when they went to sign new lease, original offer by Buckingham as totally different. They found another unit on their own as nothing they could afford with Buckingham. Went to retrieve security deposit and they charged them a carpet cleaning fee, even though the unit that was to be remodeled was to have hardwood. Cost them again about $2,000 to move again. No offer from Buckingham to assist. Thye have had to go into debt to be able to afford to move of which neither r was their choice. Thats Proof and they have the copies of costs.
Sounds like more trees to be cut down. Gramercy used to be a beautiful area. Now it’s just like all the others. All the commencial, residential, and apartment builders construct the same thing. Mow down the ground and put up boxy buildings. Then charge high rent.