On July 8, 2103, at 6pm, the Broad Ripple Village Association (BRVA) Land Use and Development Committee (LU&DC) held a special meeting at the Indianapolis Art Center. The purpose of this meeting was for Browning Investments to present the revised version of their proposed development for the old Shell gas station site. They will have a hearing before the Indianapolis Metropolitan Development Commission on July 25, 2013, and they are seeking a recommendation from the LU&DC.

LU&DC Chairman Jim Holland called the meeting to order and gave a brief overview of the planned outline for the discussion. The format was to be 20 minutes for the Petitioners to present their amended proposal, 20 minutes for the Remonstrants to present their opposition to it, and then this would be followed by discussion and possibly a vote by the Committee. He also asked that questions from the audience be directed toward the committee itself.

Joe Scimia led the presentation from Browning Investments. He went through ten points of concern raised by the BRVA in previous meetings. He said that the entire facade along Carrollton has been redesigned to accommodate the committee's wishes for appearance and to allow for residential units on Carrollton itself. Regarding the canal, there are now architectural features that can be turned into individual storefronts should the Whole Foods cease to occupy the building at any point in the future. The existing transit stop on College Avenue has been retained, and improved upon. The height of the project stands at approximately 72 feet tall with 5 stories. The area along College Avenue has had an additional structure added to give the appearance of a two-story building. More residential units have been added, and the entire arrangement of the building has been modified to appear to be several structures instead of one.

He then spoke about the desire some have expressed for having a smaller retail space. He explained that they have done the best they can to reach a compromise with the proposed retailer for how to use the space. In response to those who would rather see the retail space occupied by several small businesses instead of one large one, he said that to get financing for a project of this scale, they need to have a retailer with a strong track record and national prominence. Toward this requirement, the retailer they have found who is willing to occupy this is Whole Foods, and they have drawn the line at 32,500 square feet as the bare minimum space they will accept. By having Whole Foods as the main retailer, they have a finance-able project, which is something they don't see being able to accomplish without them, and they feel that the vision the BRVA has expressed for future development along the canal can be realized with a project such as this.

The architect, Greg Jacoby, then presented the images detailing the design as it stands now. He made the presentation with 3-D rendering of the project that allowed the audience to have a detailed view of the design from all angles. Along Carrollton, they have designed residential town home units with an urban "Brownstone" type of appearance. The town homes are 2 stories with an additional 2 stories of flats above that, for a 4-story facade. They have also done their best to obscure the appearance of the parking garage from that side. He went through the revised layout of the area along the canal and explained the reasons for the controversially-tall structures on part of the building. They have stretched the facade of Whole Foods to appear as 2 stories for the sake of keeping a consistent appearance with other buildings along College, like The Vogue. Regarding the public plaza by the canal, they intend to have the existing footbridge lead straight to it, so it would hopefully get more use. Parts of the public area are owned by different parties, so they will need to work out in the future who takes responsibility for maintenance of the various sections of it. On the corner of the building facing the plaza, they would like to have a BRVA Welcome/Visitor's Center. He emphasized that this is by no means the final plan, and that they've met with the BRVA on many occasions and plan to continue meeting with them to further work on the design to try and satisfy everyone. He then took a few questions from the committee.

Next, the committee heard presentations from various remonstrants from the community who oppose the proposed development. First to present was Rudy Nehrling of Good Earth Natural Food Company. He started by stating that Good Earth has been in business for over 42 years and has never asked for any TIF money or any property tax abatements. He then pointed out that it is the BRVA's responsibility to represent the views of the local businesses and residents of the Village, and he feels that people have made it quite clear, via the public meeting, survey and a petition with over 2,000 signatures, that they don't like the proposed development as it now stands. He stated that contrary to their perception of it potentially helping the other local businesses in the neighborhood, it would instead take away business from stores that have been in the neighborhood for decades and who have given back and supported the rest of the neighborhood. He said that instead of benefiting Broad Ripple, it would only benefit the developers and owners of Whole Foods who don't live in Broad Ripple, and would therefore be taking money away from Broad Ripple and from Indianapolis in general. He also said that the need for variances proves that the project doesn't keep in line with historical style of the neighborhood that the Envision Broad Ripple plan intends to maintain. He scoffed at the idea that going with any businesses other than Whole Foods would be too financially risky, saying that he takes risks like that every day with his business. He then attacked Whole Foods itself, listing reasons why he thinks they aren't a good business to support or have in their neighborhood. He emphasized that this isn't the only choice they have available and there are many other kinds of businesses that could go in there that could help the neighborhood.

After him, several other community members voiced their concerns about the project. They expressed unhappiness with the overall size of the construction being too big, the fact that large out-of-state businesses contribute less to the local community, the already-bad traffic situation in the neighborhood that would likely get worse, the potential that the parking garage itself may become a haven for crime, that the overall look is too close to that of Carmel, and that it's just not a good location for apartments.

Jim Holland then led a discussion amongst the committee members towards possibly taking a vote on whether they approve it or not. Brenda Rising-Moore made a statement about how important development of apartments such as this would be to the future of Broad Ripple as the population ages and needs to have a living situation where it would be easy for them to walk to all the services they need. She said she wished that all remonstrants had attended the Envision meetings that had been going on for the past 4 years, so that their opinions would have been heard. She admonished them for not being so vocal when the Applebee's and Kilroy's opened: out-of-town chains which directly compete against the local ones on the strip. Misha Rabinowich then agreed with Jim that they needed to take a vote and spoke about how they have tried for years to get development to happen in that area of the canal and how it would be a lynch pin for spurring further development down the canal. He said that he was sure there would never be a single project that would please everyone and fulfill everything exactly as they wanted, but he feels that the proposed project has much more positive than negative aspects to it.

Following some more discussion amongst the committee members and after addressing some more concerns from the audience, the committee voted on whether to recommend the proposal, with it being noted that they still have some concerns they would like to work with the developer on. The final vote was 5 in favor, 3 opposing, with 2 abstentions. This seems to reflect rather accurately the split view of the community as a whole.