Ladies and gentlemen, good afternoon.

Welcome to the July 15, 2026 meeting of the Metropolitan Development Commission.

I will now call the meeting to order.

We have a quorum in place.

Would all rise and join me with the Pledge of Allegiance, please?

I pleasantly the United States of America.

Thank you.

Members of the Commission, you received the minutes of the July 1st meeting last week, and you've had an opportunity to review those.

Are there any additions or deletions to those minutes?

Hearing none.

Commissioner Meridi, can I get a motion to approve?

So moved.

Commissioner Hergett, can I get a second?

Second.

Let me call the roll.

Hergett.

Lyle.

Lyle, yes.

Moreity.

Moreity, yes.

Murphy.

Murphy, yes.

Schumacher.

Schumacher, yes.

West.

West, yes.

Dylan is a yes.

The minutes from July first, 2026 passed seven to zero.

Moving forward.

Are there any continuances, withdrawals, or special requests?

Hi.

Please introduce yourself.

Absolutely.

My name is Alexandra Curlin.

I represent the Irvington Community Schools.

Um, thank you for your time today.

Um, on behalf of the Urban Community Schools and their community.

Um as you know, we have hearing today, case numbers 2026 C VR eight one five, as well as twenty twenty-six CPL eight one five on the school's behalf and on the school community's behalf.

I respectfully request a continuance for cause under Article Six, Section 8.

The School of Elementary School adjoins the site that is being requested for development and requested for a variance, yet the school was not contacted by the developer until June, after the hearing recommendation had already been made.

The board first had an opportunity to review the site plan on June 24th, barely a month ago, and a revised plan reached the school only last week.

The petitioner's comments, uh commitments still remain in draft form for the large part, and the school is still in the middle of negotiating commitments with the developer.

Indeed, the school district just had an opportunity to go visit the site on Monday, and the board hasn't even had a chance to talk amongst itself about that visit.

We're not seeking a delay.

What we're seeking is time to do due diligence.

And so we are asking for a fair opportunity to evaluate the materials, to evaluate the request, and therefore are seeking a 45-day continuance.

Thank you.

Thank you, Alexander.

Counselor, don't you have a thoughts on this matter?

First of all, welcome.

Good to see you.

Thank you, uh, President Dillon Commissioners, Andy Nielsen, City County Councillor District 14, uh, in support of the continuance requested uh by the school district.

Um did reach out to the petitioner and their representatives to let them know.

I think there were other conversations with the school district, but again, um appears this is a fairly substantial change to the to the site, and so just backing up the the council's comments that allowing for proper uh time for that communication to happen and would be supportive of of their request.

So thank you.

Thank you, Councillor.

We thank you for uh all your hard work.

We appreciate anyone else would like to comment on this.

Yes, council.

Please introduce yourself.

Thank you.

Uh members of the commission.

Uh Mindy Westrick Brown with offices at 300 North Meridian Street, Suite 2500 Indianapolis, Indiana 46204 for the record today, uh, representing the petitioners on this case, and I believe there will be three additional speakers opposing this request for continuance after I've made remarks on behalf of the petitioner as well.

Um we've summarized those in paper form if it's easier to digest while I'm giving my remarks on why we oppose the continues.

We'd be happy to give this to remonstrators and you all as well if that's helpful to you all.

Just give your comments, counsel.

Okay.

Um so we strongly oppose the request for continuance, especially a 45-day continuance due to significant contractual consequences that are involved.

This case has been pending since March.

It has already experienced multiple continuances.

First, there was an additional month continuance due to the 10 case rule.

Then there was an automatic continuance taken by remonstrators for another month, and finally, there was a continuance for cause for exactly the reasons that the remonstrators have asked for that an additional continuance.

Um I came here before you all and asked for a continuance after working with staff in late June to allow more time to work with the school, which we've done, and additional neighbors on additional commitments.

Those resulted in benefits to the school and to the community, which can easily be digested as removal of a building, additional uh green space, reduction of backup generators, reduction of power, etc.

Um, and I explained those commitments here at the podium on on July 1.

They've been updated on our website as well.

We also put out a media statement, which was covered broadly by many um different media outlets.

And so we believe that the request is simply just a delay tactic or a wish for DC blocks to go away and not build two edge node facilities to serve Indianapolis.

The parties have been afforded ample opportunity to participate and be held throughout this process.

Two different counselors have had public forums on this, and getting a continuance at this stage would unnecessarily delay the process and undermine the integrity of the established procedures, which have been designed to ensure fairness and transparency for all stakeholders, not just the remonstrators.

There's no indication that any party has been deprived of a meeting an opportunity to be heard, or that any procedural safeguards have been compromised.

Our outreach to Councilor Nielsen, a neighboring counselor started on March 10th.

When um we also suspect that Megan Lappa will be one of the lead remonstrators.

Um if you look at tab 87 in binder two, you can read our emails where we offered a one-on-one meeting on more than one occasion, and she did not respond to our latest request on 611.

DC Blocks has been responsive to all of those, have reached out, and there are some neighbors here that could speak to that as well.

Uh, as it relates to the school's request for continuance, we strongly disagree with the facts that they presented before you.

The school is an entity that was to receive public notice as part of the legal notice of this process.

They received that notice in early April.

If you also look at tab 86 of binder two, it details our outreach to the um Irvington community schools, which began uh as direct outreach on March 24th.

That was prior to the public notice being received.

Specifically, the school received five emails, two phone calls that were answered by a receptionist for the school, one in-person visit by a DC blocks executive who left his contact information and a note for them to call him, one postcard that the school acknowledged they received at an Irvington community council meeting in June, as well as a legal notice.

We also posted additional legal notice signs on the property as a neighbor.

We additionally participated in private meetings with the school board.

We attended their public meeting.

We hosted nine members of the school board and the admin officials to Atlanta to visit um building one on July 13th to observe the operations.

That date was not chosen by us.

That date was chosen by the school.

We had meaningful conversations.

Those have resulted and they're on the screen.

Those are the result today.

Counselor, and in conclusion?

Ten commitments and in conclusion, Council.

Yes, they are also an entity that are on the commitments as uh being able to be enforced.

Um we have to counselor in conclusion.

Yes, your remarks.

Uh in conclusion, I'd love for you to um hear from our experts that we phone in today and uh as well as the property owner.

Thank you.

Good afternoon, Vincent Ash.

Um I'm here on behalf of the property owner and developer law group.

Um respectfully, we ask that we um oppose any continuance uh on this matter.

The project uh this property has actually been under contract uh contract since December of 2025.

Um we uh negotiated an extensive due diligence period, which have both uh extensions options have been um uh utilized.

Um in addition, there's been uh you know uh throughout the process, all parties dedicated uh significant time, resources, and capital reliance on an established schedule.

And as counselor I spoke to um DC blocks have provided a lot of opportunities for public engagement through multiple channels.

Um I do want to emphasize that continued delays on this project not only affects this one, but it affects uh our timing and advancement of other planned projects uh on the property as well as uh broader development efforts.

Um so with that I I kindly ask that you oppose any continuance in here today.

Thank you.

Schedule hearing today.

Thank you.

Yes, ma'am.

Please introduce yourself.

Um hi, I'm Anna Warnsing.

I am a school I'm sorry, I missed your name.

Anna Warnsing.

Thank you.

I'm a school psychologist in the Indianapolis school district, um, all in charter schools.

Um I just want to ask, or I guess talk about the kind of broader concerns with these data centers, and also um just the tax initiatives that these people are getting for building data centers here.

I need your position on the position is I'm opposing, like I want continuance.

I want us to continue talking about thank you very much.

Yes.

Appreciate it.

Thank you very much.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Um counselor, we've been waiting for you.

I'm not done yet.

Uh you're done.

No.

Yes.

I'm not.

I have more to say.

Thank you.

You have taken a position to explain to you why I have that position and why I want you people here right now to listen to me.

Look me in the eye.

Right now.

We've got your position.

No, listen.

This is a continuance requirement.

I know, I agree.

I know it's a continuance, and I'm asking for that, and I know that you have my opinion, you know that that's what I want.

But what are my reasons?

It's because what what else are we spending money on in this town?

We're not here to debate.

No, I'm not debating.

I'm telling you for the public hearing think about it.

Later, this is for the continuance.

That's why I understand your position.

Okay.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Counselor Hart.

Thank you, Mr.

President.

Um, welcome.

So I'll be brief just on the continuance piece here.

Uh, I'm opposed to uh continuance.

Um it was a pretty digestible uh change from the the petitioner.

Um really easy to understand.

Uh I agree with the the petitioner that there was ample amount of notification made, um, especially on the fact that they were a part of the original uh distribution of notification just due to the legal process.

Um beyond that, I believe my understanding is of their their concern for a real continuance is because they're concerned about enrollment for their school and making sure that um they can try and keep up their enrollment numbers.

Uh I don't believe that this particular development would impact that given that there is already so much industrial that is adjacent to their property.

This is not new industrial.

We're talking about a fully established industrial site today, and I don't think that this particular development would have any impact on their their concern that that I've heard.

So I'm opposed to a continuance.

Couple questions, Counselor Hart.

First of all, I'll hold you in high regard and have a lot of respect for you.

Thank you for being here.

You're in district twenty.

Yes, sir.

What about you?

District 20 is the district that this matter is being conducted now.

Yes, sir.

So you are the sitting city council person in district 20.

Yes, sir.

Okay.

I just want to make sure that's clear for the record.

And then where are you at on the project?

On the project as a whole.

I you want that now, or you want that.

I want to write now.

Uh as I I look at the finding of facts on this project, um, it fits all of them, right?

It when they come to me before you and they came before the hearing examiner, there is nothing of in their petition that is outside the boundaries of what would constitute any level of of um ability to pass uh your discretion.

Um where I see the opportunity for this development is in the tremendous amount of opportunity both in the tax base and the community impact payments that'll come from this.

Um there is a lot that will come from you want to keep going?

Go all right.

There's like gonna be a lot that's gonna come from the TIFF district that this sits in.

I believe that will have a tremendous amount of impact on Irvington where that allocation area already exists, where we talk about places like Irvington Plaza, Ellenberger Park, so that will impact District 14.

There's a uh a large commitment in dollars that'll go towards infrastructure, which I'm I'm right now under the impression that will go to impact the Washington Square Mall, which impacts District 20.

There's another two and a half million dollars that is just a charitable uh incentive from the petitioners that'll go towards an initiative that we've been trying to revive the the Randsburg YMCA in a sense, you know, with some other operators, um, which is still in in communications, which those things are the things that when I did my uh my door knocking, my listening, my my surveys, that's what people want me to work on is how do we revive them all?

How do you get the YMCA back?

And this provides the financial means to do that through those uh those taxes and through the the abatements.

So you're for the project, right now the project is favorable, yes.

Thank you, and thank you for being here, counselor.

Thank you.

All right, counselor gentlemen.

Please introduce yourself.

Uh John Hooker, President of the Central Indiana Building Trades Council.

Uh we stand.

I appreciate you being to the point as well, please.

Yeah, we stand in opposition of the continuance.

One more time.

We stand in opposition of the continuance.

Thank you.

You're back for more?

I am back for more, Councilor.

Well, we've got your request, and we've got you.

I appreciate that.

I do want to add one thing with regard to what Counselor Hart said.

Um, he may very well be right.

We just don't know, which is why we're asking for more time.

Um we didn't the Miss Westrick Brown, I don't think she is she's not lying about the reach out.

I think there was a mistake in how it happened because it never came to the board.

And so as a result, the board was not notified until the end of June or mid-June, and the board hasn't had an opportunity to review.

As Ms.

Westrick Brown has admitted, our conversation with DC blocks has made this project better.

More conversation will make it even better.

So to the extent that there is improvement to be done in this project.

A short time for due diligence is in everybody's interest.

Thank you very much.

I'm gonna go to uh staff, your opinion of the matter on the continuance.

Uh thank you, President Dylan, members of the commission.

Staff is prepared to go forward today, and as you know, it is up to the commission to make the decision.

Thank you very much.

We've had a request, members of the commission, for a continuance of 2026 C VR 815, and 2026 CPL 815.

It would take a motion from a member of the commission and a second.

Is there a motion to continue this?

So moved.

Thank you.

Is there a second?

Second.

Thank you.

Um may I ask on your motion on timing.

How long you want to continue it?

30 days.

So can you amend your motion that we come in uh amend it for 30 days?

Amend the motion for 30 days.

I'm sorry.

I amend the motion on the floor to be a 30-day continuance.

And we have a second on that.

Yes, sir.

Thank you.

We have a motion and a second to continue 2026 C VR 815, 2026 CPL 815 for 30 days.

And I think on our schedule, correct me, Bryce that probably take it to August 19th, maybe.

That'd be correct.

August 19th would be the hearing.

Thank you, sir.

I will now call the roll on the vote for continuance.

Her get.

Hergate, yes.

Yes is to continue.

That's correct.

Got it.

So yes, vote is for the motion to continue.

A no vote is against the motion.

Yes.

Lyle.

Lyle, yes.

Morerity.

We already know.

Murphy.

No.

Schumacher.

Yes.

West.

West no.

Dylan is a no.

We will have the hearing today.

The continuance has been defeated four to three.

Moving forward.

Are there any other special requests?

Good afternoon, President Dylan, members of the commission, Joe Calderan, 11 South Meridian here in Indianapolis.

I have the other case today for public scheduled for public hearing.

It's uh agenda item 17 2026 ZON 057 at 3709 East Washington Street.

We would respectfully request a short continuance to your August 5th hearing.

Uh just given kind of the dynamics in the room today.

Uh we think that would be uh beneficial for all parties concerned.

Thank you.

Members of the staff, you have any comments on that?

Thank you, President Dillon.

Members of the Commission staff would have no objection to the continuance of 2026 Z O N 057 to the August 5th hearing, and that would be without additional notice.

Thank you.

Is there anyone else who wants to comment on this particular continuance?

Questions from members of the commission.

Hearing none, we have before us a continuous continue request.

Council, let me show I get it right for 2026 ZON 057.

Correct.

To be heard on August 5th.

Let me call the roll.

Hergitt.

Hergett, yes.

I'm sorry.

I need a motion.

I need a motion.

So moved.

Thank you.

Second.

Thank you.

Let me call the rule.

Hergitt.

Hergit, yes.

Lyle.

Lyle, yes.

Morti.

Mordi, yes.

Murphy.

Murphy, yes.

Schumacher.

Schumacher, yes.

West.

West, yes.

Dylan is a yes.

Counselor, you've got it.

August 5th.

Thank you.

Thank you very much.

Yes, ma'am.

Hi, I have a special request.

I would um I request that you hear a few more voices and do and take a second vote about the continuance with the DC blocks so that you can make a wise decision that does not put you in legal danger, or even to put um the DC blocks council in a legal bind.

Thank you.

We've we decided the matter and to the IPS member.

We are more than help more than glad to hear your comments as a remonstrator during the hearing.

So please be ready for that.

Thank you very much.

Counselor.

Thank you, President Dylan, uh Jesse Brown, City County Council District 13.

Uh I'm asking for a special request for you, President Dylan, and the rest of this commission to institute a data center moratorium effective immediately or as soon as possible.

As of May, you would receive notice that all 25 counselors wanted a moratorium until the SC47 zoning was completed.

As of this week, you've heard that the DMD staff, President or I'm sorry, uh Mayor Hogsett and President Lewis have all also supported this moratorium.

We heard in committee the danger of allowing developers to slip through during these few weeks when the outcomes clear, but the just the you know paperwork hasn't been done.

The council cannot initiate a moratorium, but you can.

You don't need to wait for the city council to return the amended uh proposal.

And so I am asking you to act today to amend the agenda and or call a special meeting.

Do everything in your power to institute a moratorium as soon as possible while further conversations happen.

You do have this power, so we need you to use it.

Thank you.

Thank you, Councillor.

Let me make a point.

Councilor.

Councilor, let me make a point of order, and you know this better than most.

We have the city council who's taken a position that they want a moratorium on new data centers.

Correct.

The mayor has taken a position that he wants a moratorium on new data centers.

No question.

Everybody's out in public on that.

The process now goes back to the council to shoot us back an ordinance requesting that then we would have to address.

One of our issues, Councillor, is state law 36741119, which is referred to as the vested rights.

So the individuals in the queue, and I think there's three in the queue, correct me if I'm wrong.

All have a vested right of the process, and they've all gone through the process and should by statute have a vote.

So from a point of order standpoint, we are waiting for the council to give us the moratorium.

We've got the message from the mayor's office.

And that's those directions that we will follow at that time.

But as of today, because of the vested rights state law, we got to keep moving.

Just a quick clarifying my point.

I guess I missed it.

I wasn't speaking about you know metro blocks, DC blocks, or any of the people in front of you today.

I was worried about for the next 30, 45 days until you receive that proposal.

Um I worry that now new people will get that vested interest you mentioned, and that's what I'm seeking to avoid.

We're going to stay in concert with what the council and the mayor's office wants to do, and then we will follow through from that.

Okay.

Thank you for being here, counselor.

Yes.

Good afternoon, President Dillon Commissioners.

Tanya Ellison, Economic Incentives.

I'm here on behalf of item number six.

Um staff is respectfully requesting a two-week continuance for resolution number two zero two six A034.

There was a scribers uh erod um identified, which noticed the incorrect parcel, and we need time to correct that parcel information and re-notice uh and put a renotic and so we're asking for a two-week uh continuance to August the 5th.

Thank you.

Staff, you have any comments on this?

Uh only that it would be required with new notice, which is already in place to give notice.

Any questions from members of the commission anybody else would like to comment on this request for continuance?

Seeing none we have before us 2026A 034 request for continuance to the August 5th meeting.

Can I get a motion to approve?

So moved.

Thank you, Commissioner Murphy.

Can I get a second?

Second.

Thank you, Commissioner Hergett.

Let me call the rule.

Hergut.

Hergate, yes.

Lyle.

Lyle, no.

Murphy.

Murphy, yes.

Schumacher.

Schumacher, yes.

West.

West, yes.

Dylan is a yes.

You receive your continuance of 2026 A034 to be continued to August 5th by a vote of 6 to 1.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Final request, withdrawals, continuances.

Seeing none.

Nancy, can you read the resolutions into the minutes?

Thank you, President Dillon and Commissioners.

2026 R021 authorizes the Department of Metropolitan Development to use locally available funds in an amount not to exceed $15,000 to demolish a structure located at 2638 and 2640 East 10th Street to facilitate investigation and removal of underground storage tanks.

Excuse me, not for public hearing.

Located at 2505 North Sherman Drive, Council District 8.

Center Township.

Recommend approval of 10 years real personal property abatement.

Preliminary economic revitalization area resolution for Metro Blocks LLC located at 2505 North Sherman Drive, Council District 8.

Center Township recommend approval of 15 years enhanced personal property tax abatement.

2026A 019 for public hearing.

Resolution authorizes an amendment to the 2023 real property tax abatement.

Approved by resolution 2023 A026 at Alpha Laval U.S.

Group Services Real Estate LLC 5820 Meritage Parkway Council District 25 Franklin Township 2026A 033 for public hearing final economic revitalization area resolution for CCBCC operations LC located at 5000 West 25th Street Council District 11 Wayne Township recommend approval of four years personal property tax abatement this ends the reading of the resolutions thank you Nancy resolutions before us there are three that are not scheduled for a public hearing 2026 R021 2026 A014 2026 A15 let me be clear these resolutions if approved then would go to a public hearing all this does is put them on the calendar there's no decision on any one of them today there's no debate on any one of them today that all happens in the public meeting that would be scheduled at this point for August 5th Bryce is that correct that is correct I just want to make sure I'm clear for the record all right we have before us 2026 R021 2026 A014 2026 A015 that are not set for public hearing Commissioner Murvey can I get a motion to approve the three so moved thank you uh commissioner Morerity can I get a second second let me call the roll hurgett her get yes Lyle Lyle yes Morerity Morties Murphy Murphy yes Robinson I'm sorry Robinson's not here Schumacher Schumacher yes to one no to two and three so you're a no on 2026 A014 and 2026 A015 got it and you're a yes on 2026 R021 got it West yes Dylan is a yes they pass 2026 R021 Nancy passes 7 to 0 2026 A014 passes 6 yes 1 no 2026 A015 passes 6 yes 1 no moving forward uh petitions and no appeal can you read those in the record yes sir thank you I'm sorry Nancy I jumped the gun we got to do the public hearings I got you thank you counselor I appreciate it all right we now have before us 2026A019 for a public hearing resolution authorizes an amendment to the 2023 real property tax abatement approved by resolution 2023 a 026 at Alpha Lava U.S.

Group Services Real Estate LLC 5820 Murtage Parkway Council District 25 in Franklin Township welcome thank you President Dillon and members of the commission I am Letitia Ramsey compliance manager for economic incentives this resolution request a public hearing summend the terms of the existing agreement the amendment would transfer the MOA to the new owner alpha Laval U.S.

group services real estate LLC and extend the job creation and commitment deadline to December 31st 2026 the DMD staff supports the amendment representatives from Alpha Laval and GP CM County Line Partners are expected to be in the audience thank you any questions from members of the commission is there anyone else here today that cures the comment on 2026 a 015 hearing none I will accept a motion to approve 2026 a 019 commercial hergett so moved thank you commissioner Lyle can I get a second second let me call the roll her get her yes Lyle yes Murphy Murphy has Schumacher Schumacher yes West yes Dylan is a yes they pass 2026a oh one nine seven to zero that takes us to 2026 a 033 for public hearing final economic revitalization area resolution for CCBCC operations LLC at 5000 West 25th Street Council District 11 in Wayne Township recommended approval of four years personal property tax abatement welcome well thank you President Dillon

That takes us to 2026 A33 for public hearing.

Final economic revitalization area resolution for CCBCC operations LLC at 5000 West 25th Street Council District 11 in Wayne Township.

Recommended approval of four years personal property tax abatement.

Welcome.

Well, thank you, President Dillon.

Uh good afternoon, President Dillon and Commissioners.

Kathy Rattle with the Economic Incentives Team with DMD.

I am here on behalf of CCBCC Operations or better known as Coca-Cola Bottling and Consolidated LLC.

They're located at 5000 West 25th Street in the town of Speedway.

On July the 13th, they received a approval of a resolution approving an abatement within their area.

This is for a four-year personal property tax abatement at a 50% straight line deduction with a 31.5 million investment.

The company is installing a new glass bottling manufacturing line.

This will be only the third manufacturing glass bottling line in the U.S.

Coca-Cola has thrived within the uh city for many years.

Um they will be retaining 179 full-time jobs, of which 77% of those jobs are held by Marion County residents.

They're going to be adding 16 new jobs with this project, all paying above 24 dollars an hour.

In addition, the company has gone beyond the normal 5% inclusivity commitment and is providing a 10% inclusivity commitment totaling $91,000 to go towards infrastructure improvements along Georgetown Road.

Staff is recommending approval of resolution 2026A033 for four years personal property tax abatement.

Thank you.

Is there anyone else here today who'd like to comment on this resolution?

Seeing none, are there any questions from members of the commission on 2026A33?

Hearing none, Commissioner Schumacher, can I get a motion to approve 2026 A033?

So moved.

Commissioner Lyle, can I get a second?

Second.

Let me call the roll.

Hergett.

Hergitt, yes.

Lyle.

Lyle, yes.

Morerity.

Moreity, yes.

Murphy.

Murphy, yes.

Schumacher.

Schumacher, yes.

West, yes.

Dillon is a yes.

2026 A033 passes 7 to 0.

Kathy, I know you've put a lot of time and effort into that.

Well done.

Thank you.

All right.

Now 2026 A033 was continued to August 5th.

So I believe we're done with our resolutions.

I think it was 2026 A034.

Continued.

That's continued.

Okay.

Now would you read the petitions of no appeal into the record?

Yes, sir.

Petitions of no appeal recommended for approval.

2026 APP 011 5001 as 5001 East Raymond Street Center Township.

Council District 19.

2026 ZON 016 at 3030 Southeastern Avenue, Center Township, Council District 18.

2026 ZON027 at 1611.

East 18th Street, Center Township, Council District 8.

2026 ZON 029 at 1003 or 1003 West 30th Street.

2026 ZON 030 amended at 3505 South Harding Street, Perry Township, Council District 22.

2026 ZON 038 at 1830 Shelby Street Center Township Council District 18.

2026 ZON 046 at 3216 East 25th Street Center Township Council District 8.

2026 CZN 813 amended at 1127 South East Street Center Township Council District 18.

And lastly, 2026 CAP 824 at 4107 East Washington Street Center Township Council District 13.

This ends the reading of the resolutions that were recommended for approval by the hearing examiner.

Thank you, Nancy.

We have 2026 APP 01, 2026 ZON 016, 2026 ZON 027, 2026 ZON 029, 2026 ZON 030, 2026 ZON 038, 2026 ZON 046, 2026 C ZN 813, 2026 CAP 824.

Commissioner Murvey, can I get a motion to approve all nine?

So moved.

Commissioner Schumacher, can I get a second?

Second.

Let me call the rule.

Hergut.

Yes.

Lyle.

Lyle, yes.

More already yes.

Murphy.

Murphy, yes.

Schumacher.

Schumacher, yes.

West.

West, yes.

All passed.

All nine passed.

720.

Nancy.

We have one public hearing.

Please read it into the record.

Thank you, President Dylan and Commissioners.

Petitions for public hearing.

Companion petitions recommended for approval by the hearing examiner.

Appeal filed by a remonstrator.

2026 C VR 815 amended 2026 CPL 815 at 305 FinTail Drive.

Horrent Township Council District 20.

Property is zoned I3.

Petitioners DCB Indianapolis LLC by Mindy Westrick Brown.

Requesting a variance of use and development standards of the consolidated zoning and subdivision ordinance to provide for construction of a data center not permitted, consisting of up to two buildings, up to a total of 330,000 square feet with no less than 100 parking spaces, minimum 330 parking spaces required.

Also requesting an approval of a subdivision plat to be known as Replat of Block A of the Thunderbird Commerce Center, subdividing 32.406 acres into two lots.

Will all those intending to testify please stand, but Miss President Dillon will address you first, I believe.

All those intending to testify, please stand down and raise your right hands.

Say I do.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Let me walk through the rules of engagement as we move forward.

This is a public hearing.

We conduct these uh with guidance by the rules and by proper uh procedure and by the crowd recognizing that that these are tough issues, and that we're gonna move through professionally as we can.

The remonstrators get 15 minutes.

I will then go to any city council person who wants to comment.

Councilor Nielsen, I think you want to comment.

Uh I'll then go to staff, then I'll come back for five minutes rebuttal to the petitioner, five minutes rebuttal to the remonstrator, and then we will take it.

Vote members of the commission, it's two votes, two ballots.

Now I have a special request.

Alexander, make sure that you're up in front on the remonstrators.

My friend in the back here.

Make sure you're up front on the remonstrators to give your testimony and your thoughts.

That's the appropriate time to tell us what you think.

And we appreciate it very much.

Councilor, you're on the clock.

Go.

Thank you, members of the commission.

Mindy Westrick Brown with offices at 300 North Meridian, Suite 2500, Indianapolis, Indiana, 46204 for the record.

Today I'm joined by uh DC Blocks Executives.

Their bios are in tab one of your binder.

DC Blocks was founded in 2014 and has over 10 locations in the southeast.

Information about the company can be found in tab two.

But DC Blocks would like to bring two edge node facilities to an I3 parcel.

We appreciate your attention to important and big cases like this one.

Project details and facts are absolutely critical here with a lot of misinformation.

So my apologies for the seven inches of binder, but it's absolutely critical that we have all the facts.

With limited time, I'm going to work to show you how we've responded to community members, made real progress by working tirelessly to answer questions, add a lot of commitments, make amendments, and make improvements at every turn that demonstrate we meet the findings of fact.

DC Blocks has met some absolutely great leaders and community activists on the East Side and has significant support from the Warren Township Development Association, a member of the Irvington Community Council, nearby residents and east side neighbors, the trades and civic leaders.

This engagement has produced the community support that's outlined in tabs 17 through 25 in your binder.

Nancy and Kathleen also have an additional letter of support, not in your binder from the Shepherd Community Center.

We've also included support from other jurisdictions where DC Blocks operates in tabs 26 through 32.

Because of this engagement, DC Blocks better understands the community needs, including pedestrian connectivity, the Irvington Plaza and Washington Square Mall, Parks, the Randsburg YMCA, Common Ground, the Moorhead Resource Center, collaboration potential with the Shepherd Community Center and other community members, and future educational opportunities at both the Irvington Community School as well as the Warren Township Schools.

This list is, of course, not exhaustive of the community needs, but this list represents a sample of the DC connection over the last few months, which helped has helped create a better understanding of future involvement potential.

DC Blocks is absolutely ready to do great work on the East Side, and many are eager to work with DC Blocks for the betterment of the community as well.

DC Blocks is unapologetic about making a community protection pledge, which is in Tab 3.

This outlines the zoning commitments in a manner that's easier for the public to digest, but also makes a commitment of at least $2.5 million for the community benefit that is outside any sort of formal tax discussions.

It's simply a charitable contribution.

Leadership at the United Way has reached out to host a listening session with DC Blocks and Counselor Hart and the community on August 5th, where we hope we can continue engaging with the community on charitable and economic impact.

Let me orient you to the site in our specific request.

The site is a total of 32 acres with 22 acres that can be developed in the northwest corner of the Thunderbird Commerce Center, which is the old Ford Vistian site.

As a former automotive plant, as shown here, this is an industrial site zoned I-3 since 1956.

A variance of use is required because EdgeNode facilities hosting optical network gear are undefined.

The development standards reduce the parking spots, providing a positive environmental impact.

The replat allows the parcels to correspond to their phases.

As the site plan shows, phase one and building one have plans to be operational within 24 months.

AES has the capacity to serve Building 1 with 10 megawatts with just minor updates to the existing substation.

Building two has a tenant and is low density edge node facility.

It's not an AI data center.

We've eliminated building three completely, added more green space, shifted the building further to the south.

We've eliminated 25 backup generators and removed the need for 28 megawatts of power.

The project details are on the side of this slide.

I know many are familiar with the old Ford Vistion site.

This area was industrial, is currently industrial, and has an industrial future.

Monarch is currently operational just south of us, with 37 truck bays just on FinTail alone.

Kitley is an industrial corridor to the west with a racetrack less than a half a mile from this site.

English is to the south with the photos of the semis.

An AES easement with an active substation is to the north, separating us from the Pennsyl Trail.

Shaylin with highway-like interchanges are to the east.

The ABF truck terminal, which has 96 truck terminals and 560 parking spaces, is immediate neighbor to the Pennsy on one side and this project on the other.

We are less than a mile as the crow flies from the long operating and not disruptive Eastgate data center.

DC Blocks has built Building One just outside of Atlanta, and we've provided tours to Councillor Hart, the Indy Chamber, the Building Trades, the Warren Township School Board, and the Irvington Schools.

So we know this design operates like a quiet warehouse.

DC Blocks has redeveloped in Brownfield with countless similarities to this specific site in Birmingham.

Unbeknownst to DC Blocks, a Birmingham neighbor testified about DC Block's positive impact.

Julie Goldsberry, Ron Phillips, and Gary Blackwell, a retired IFD firefighter, found Keith on their own when they visited DC blocks in Birmingham.

And as I understand it, they had a lovely time meeting with community members and elected officials to learn more about DC blocks.

We've added commitments to address the dust, which has a prior approved plan with IDEM as well.

But we're thankful for neighbors like Ron, Julie, and Gary for their attention.

This project is absolutely better because of them and their attention to these details as well as many others.

Today we're joined by Pluz Shadley, who has a full accounting of this brown field to answer any questions.

There are two brownfield letters in tabs 51 and 52.

DC Blocks would be the third entity to remediate this specific site.

We did a walking tour with Loth and PLUs in June to answer questions.

DC Blocks has developed with schools as close as across the fence.

You can see in this aerial here, Huntsville School is 234 feet away.

Whereas the DC blocks facility in Indianapolis would be more than 817 feet away from the building.

And then the generators would be on the back side of that building.

The substation and easement, which is planned for the expansion with or without DC blocks, sits in between us and the trail and the school.

In tab 55 is a NOAA windrose for this specific area, which shows the wind is moving away from the school.

Epsilon also noted at the time of the sound readings in Indianapolis in Tab 60 through 63 that the wind at that time of those readings was also traveling away from the school.

DC Blocks can provide a more positive experience for the school as a neighbor compared to other I-3 uses allowed by Wright.

You can look at tab 44 for a comparison chart of those.

Some of the benefits highlighted in the trip memo in tab 43, which show up to an 80% reduction in traffic, which means less truck diesel exhaust, less beeping, less manufacturing waste and emissions.

Nine members from the school, in addition to four members from the Warren Township School Board, have traveled to Atlanta to see Building One.

We've added additional commitments for the school, and we've even added them as an entity that can directly enforce the commitments.

DC Blocks is a more environmentally friendly use than many of those uses on the I-3 list, which is supported by our environmental expert reports in tabs 51 through 59.

Terracon is here with us today if you'd like to ask them any questions.

But it is worth noting that we would be applying for the smallest air permit that IDEM offers, and we have plans to only use one-fourth of the smallest air permit due to the restrictions that we've placed on the generators.

We're excited to be joined today by trades men and women here today and the Central Indiana Building Trades to assist with this $2 billion project.

And I will let John say a few words.

Please introduce yourself, your address, and have you been duly sworn?

John Hooker, 1828 North Meridian Street.

And yes, I have been duly sworn.

Thank you, Mr.

Hooker.

Welcome.

Hi.

President and executive director of the Central Indiana Building Trades Council, probably representing over 35,000 men and women of the Union construction industry here in Indianapolis.

We are pleased to announce that we have executed and signed a project labor agreement for this project.

Thank you.

Thank you, Mr.

Hooker.

Please incorporate our robust findings of fact in TAP 33 and include the exhibit book in its entirety into the record.

We are in full agreement with the staff report and would draw your attention to the fact that this parcel is also in an industrial reserve, which means it's prime for industrial development.

The unique site with access to fiber for an edge node facility to be adequately located.

The site is just below a utility easement with an existing AES substation.

The data center would generate fewer trips, less daily activity, less visual impact than the other I-3 uses as outlined in the traffic memo.

Two certified independent Indiana appraisers have confirmed that the surrounding property values will not be affected in a substantially adverse manner.

The full reports can be found in tabs 47 and 48, along with a consistent George Mason University study in Tab 49.

Terzo is here with us today if you have any questions.

The next slides show the robust commitments.

You can see more energy information in tab 73 through 85 that show other utilities in Indiana, including AES, have projected savings and or rate decreases due to data center load offsetting residential customer burden.

This project will use both waterless cooling and a closed loop system.

This project at full build out is proposed to use less water than a single restaurant.

More information can be found in tabs 56 and 58.

The next slide you can see a view of the Pennsee Trail showing the berm and the landscaping.

On top of the berm is a double staggered row of evergreen trees.

We've worked closely with district counselor and other counselors, staff, the neighborhood on additional commitments.

We've inspected the generators in Atlanta and Birmingham on every tour.

The generators are housed and only run during outages or testing.

Testing times are consistent with what staff requires.

Only annual no annual tests during school session.

DC Blocks has also committed to using diesel particulate filters, which capture 95% of the particulate emissions.

Epsilon expert engineer is here with us today if you have questions.

We have three sound studies at Thunderbird and the building in Atlanta, which is the same as building one.

There's a commitment for a sound study when the equipment is selected to guarantee 65 dB at the property line.

And we also added a commitment to address low frequency, which we know is important to a number of commissioners.

We've addressed the lighting mitigation.

The closest residential home is over 743 feet away.

There's a decommissioning plan per councillor Nielsen's and an Irvington request.

We've met last week with trail users and a project supporter Doreen Crenshaw, who has great ideas for pedestrian connectivity.

We thank her and the community for bringing project facts.

By knocking on over 3,000 doors, our list of supporters has seen continuous growth through education.

Today we're joined by supporters, neighbors, the trades, experts, and members of the project team, which can be seen on this screen.

To close, DC Blocks has made project reductions.

They've committed to pay for energy, use a closed loop system or waterless system, provide a significant buffer.

We've addressed sound.

The plan of operation clearly shows the intensity of this proposed use will not be increased compared to the permitted uses.

There will not be a substantial deviation from care in the neighborhood character, then the permitted uses.

The property is uniquely suited for high capacity electric infrastructure due to its proximity of the utility facilities and the fiber network.

Strict application creates an unusual or unnecessary hardship because data centers are not expressly permitted in any district.

Under the zoning ordinance and staff feedback, the proposed data center cannot proceed despite the fact that it's zoned for medium industrial and provides commitments for safeguards for the adjacent properties and the broader community.

The hardship arises from the ordinance failure to address the use, not from any action of the current owner or petitioner.

Moreover, the property has been vacant for 20 years.

Strict enforcement of the ordinance results in significant economic injury by preventing development that is otherwise appropriate for the infrastructure and the zoning.

Our petition also aligns with the comp plan, and our entire team is available for questions.

I would, I should have made a note.

The only correction from the staff report is we have increased the jobs from 17 to 21.

Um, and so that's an update.

Thank you.

Your time is up.

Members of the commission, questions for the petitioner, please.

Counselor, please stay at the podium.

So I had a question, Counselor.

Council.

Commissioner Murphy, go.

Did I understand correctly?

You said that the distance from the protected district or the school is approximately 800 feet.

817 feet from the building, and then the generators sit behind that building.

And then what did you say about low frequency?

We, if you look at 35, no.

I think that the commitments are in tab 35.

And then if you go to page page three of 11 under E.

We worked with Epsilon, so we did a sound study to get ambient sound, which is in your binder for the Thunderbird Commerce Center.

We also did Epsilon did a review to make sure that when we committed to our original commitment, it still is 65 dB at the property line.

We had Epsilon do a review of that, not with the specific specifications of the equipment, but can 65 be achieved.

And so that's that's study one, and that's in your binder.

Study two is the ambient noise from the Thunderbird Commerce Center.

So we know what's happening right now.

That was part of our discussion with the school and and other community members is you know what are they hearing now and what will they hear when DC blocks is here.

So we we did that study.

The third study was building one is operational in Atlanta East, and so we did a study of that building and provided that to you as well.

The fourth sound study that will come after the equipment is picked, will be specific to that equipment, making sure that that equipment is not producing any sort of noise that's louder than 65 at the property line.

What we added to that study was addressing low frequency noise.

So I know when you all discussed your guardrails, you had some discussions about a specific number of DBC.

The issue with that is the community's goals and DC blocks goals are to not have low frequency be an issue, right?

No one wants to be disturbed.

DC blocks doesn't want to disturb anyone, the neighbors don't want to be disturbed, so we have to find a way to accomplish that.

So the issue when you and and you guys talked about that variant, that delta and what happens at that delta.

The issue is if you pick a specific number and Epsilon can come up here and correct anything that I that I say I'm just a lay person when it comes to sound.

Um we didn't think that would achieve the goal, and so picking a number wouldn't produce the results that DC blocks wants and the community wants.

But what can produce that result is sound engineering to address low frequency, and so what we committed to do first is have the sound study um look at low frequency impact so we can predict it off of those specific equipment items and make sure that it's designed and engineered appropriately not to cause low frequency issues.

It's important to note DC blocks has built these buildings, so we know they haven't had any low frequency issues at their facilities.

We don't want them to have any in the future, and we know we can accomplish this through engineering, but we went one step further.

We said we'd submit the method to the administrator, and then we also went one step further than that, and we said we would do an annual test, which gets submitted to the district counselor and the administrator, and so let's say something funky happens with the equipment in year five, then there's an annual test every year to make sure that that low frequency is performing the way that it should in relation to DBA and and DBC.

So that was um the way we we tackled that to address community members.

We did get feedback there on file with Kathleen.

Umstrators for data centers who who does excellent work digging into these issues, emailed us just yesterday and said she was satisfied with our commitment and and our how we address low frequency here.

And that's EI and II.

Is that right?

Is that yes?

I E I and then EII and then E I I yeah, I three.

Yeah.

Thank you.

Other questions, members of the commission, Commissioner West, do you have anything on uh yes, please?

I do go ahead.

Thank you in the epsilon report in tab sixty two, uh page two of three at the bottom.

Under Tab 60, about halfway back, you've got graphs.

DB is the Y-axis and times and dates or the X-axis.

And you've published DBA and DBC results and others as well.

Those are from the Atlanta project, and they do show that you're in compliance there with a 65 DBA limit.

You're under that limit.

That's the red line.

And it shows that you'd be under a 80 DBA limit.

And I understand you're not wanting to necessarily put a number to it, because it's just tricky with DBC, and it can be site-specific and there can be resonant frequencies creep up.

But where the rubber meets the road is, and you said it very well, you don't want to do something bad in the neighborhood.

Don't want to have ill effect in the neighborhood.

Would there be a way to describe an ill result and a remedy in particular, possibly with the school, and have the number be a hedge to avoid any frivolous complaint?

Here's the idea.

If the low frequency that you're emitting causes glass causes any complaint with staff, teachers, students at the school, if glass is rattling or chalkboards are rattling.

And if it's above a number, perhaps that could be 85 DBA, some ceiling.

If both things were true, then you'd be there to address it.

And probably the best way to address that at that point would be dirt or concrete at that location.

And we could even back up one step and say, have you had to comply with DBC requirements in other parts of the country?

Is this a thing going on in other parts of the country?

No, the answer to that, your last question is no, and that's um why it took us some time to work with Upsilon to better understand kind of how to measure this and track and track this.

And and Clint can give some comments.

Um we were your idea is one way to look at it.

We had looked at um discrete tones and other ways to address it, and so that's why we made these commitments because we think there are multiple ways to address it.

Do I understand that you have a specific ask of us or in uh maybe I would just I'm wondering what can be offered to guard against a low frequency problem?

Um I'll let you hear from Upsilon in in just a minute if you have questions.

Um your points well taken.

Um I think what we could do to address that is we could agree.

So we right now we have an annual sound study, um, which will be done to address and report it out.

And we're we're one of our commitments is also a website going forward, right?

We've been asked to keep our website operational so that the community can continue to find documents and now have to go trace them, chase them down everywhere.

Um what I think we could do to address your commitment is agree if we do get a complaint to do an additional sound study within so many days or months or whatever.

We'd want to cap that at probably not more than two sound studies per year.

The equipment's not changing, right?

And so what you find at least twice a year, um, you would you would find out.

But I think that would help guard against frivolous complaints, but also be um reactionary to any sort of concerns that we would see if if that would satisfy your question, we'd be happy to amend the commitments to add an additional sound study.

The other thing I would point out is we've added that the district counselor, the Warren Township Development Association and the Irvington Schools are enforcing bodies in the commitments as well, so we've given them additional protections there as well.

Would the sound study include the chart, such as we see in TAP 60?

Please introduce yourself, sir.

Yeah, good afternoon, folks.

Uh Clint's here with Epsilon Associates from Three Millimane Place, Suite 250, Maynard, Massachusetts 01754.

Were you newly sworn in?

Yes, I was.

Thank you.

Uh to answer the question, the details of how the post-construction sound study have not been ironed out yet, but that's something that I would work with DC blocks on putting together.

Uh so depending on how that studies conducted it would uh kind of impact what's presented.

Uh for instance, if the measurements are are shortened duration, we're unlikely to present a plot of that that data.

But if it's over a longer duration, then it makes more sense to show it as a plot like you have in front of you.

When you say duration, you're not talking about the fast or slow scale.

You're talking about over dates and weeks and months.

Correct, time duration of the sound measurement.

What whether that's 20 minutes, one hour, so on.

Noise is not an exact science, and I'm just offering you to be able to offer something to take care of the school.

I don't think that's responsive though, but that's okay.

Counselor.

We're happy to offer Ladies and gentlemen, please, thank you.

We're we're happy to offer the exact same study.

The methodology is approved by the administrator, and so um we're happy to provide the exact same study.

That's not an issue at all.

Counselor, please come back.

So you're going to make a commitment, Kathleen, that you're going to provide the study to staff.

Yes.

Kathleen, are you good with that?

That's that's in the commitments as they read right now.

Yes.

Thank you.

Commissioner West.

Anything else?

That's all for the moment.

Thank you.

President Dillon.

Yes, Commissioner Murray.

I just want to clarify that on the commitment, you're gonna amplify that, that you would conduct a sound study upon receipt of a complaint.

However, you would not conduct more than two sound studies per annum.

Yes.

Uh upon sound studies take time.

Um so we could commit that upon a noise complaint, we could have a sound study back within two months.

And we would cap the number of annual study sound studies to no more than two per year.

Okay.

And staffs making note of that commitment.

Yes, I am.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Commissioners, just additional questions?

Yes, sir, President Dillon.

Coop.

Um I I really appreciate the conversation about the decommissioning plan.

Um, I think that was uh a miss in the former Ford Vestion plant that was exhausted in 2007.

Um, but in addition to the plan, are there decommissioning plan dollars that would be allocated towards what happens if when at some distant point in the future should this project be successful that the community wouldn't be left with a shell of a building like they were the last time.

Uh Commissioner, that's something that we have have looked at.

Um there is the land is valuable.

The building will be after our decommissioning plan is is executed, the building would be left as a concrete industrial shell, which also would be valuable.

We had some direct feedback some from some neighbors in in Irvington that agreed that um their ask didn't take us as far as um demolition because of the value that that could be maintained with that.

Um and so we are not concerned um with um the impact.

There's no there's no bond on it, there's no like city bond on this project as as some of the other concerns I think for other projects have been.

We also did look into specific bonds, but um we came to the conclusion that this is outside the norm for industrial type projects, and that um monies used for this purpose would be better served in the in directly in the community, providing real economic impact there.

I mean, I think there's something to be said for what happens in the present term, but as we know, things are going to change.

And people at one point in time didn't ever think that we would make and sell fewer cars, but we do.

And therefore the plant that was there is no longer there, and the building has sat vacant for 25 years.

So being that things change, we're moving already fast enough into quantum computing, and it's going to change the nature of data centers as they exist and that they're being planned now.

So I'm asking in the decommissioning plan that didn't happen before, which I think is a really good step forward, if there can be a conversation of allocation of dollars so that it the community is not left burdened by something that it doesn't use at any point in the future.

Yes.

Mark Macy with DC Blocks, I'm the chief development officer, uh address 1040, Crown Point Plaza, uh Atlanta, George Atlanta, Georgia 3038.

Have you been duly sworn?

Thank you.

Go ahead.

Yeah.

These are long-term assets.

These these buildings are built of pre-cast concrete, insulated precast concrete.

These have uh 80 to 100 year lifespans for for the building.

If we were to ever if someone were to ever abandon this project, because I clearly won't be here, um, this building um would uh would serve in in a in a multitude of uses for additional manufacturing.

In addition, the successor would perhaps not want to pay property taxes on the structure, so they would probably demolish the building.

What we focused on on our decommissioning was to remove any contaminants, anything that would harm the environment, batteries, fuel, things of that nature.

But this structure is a is a is uh is a uh is a robust structure that could serve in a multitude of industrial uh uh uses for all of our lifetimes.

Does that help at all?

Or I think what the commissioner is asking, and correct me if I'm wrong, we want a commitment that you're going to budget.

Budget in your in your ongoing pro forma in the event that this happens that there's funds that we can see.

And I think that's an appropriate Does that make sense to you?

Yes, sir, it does.

I think that's an appropriate commitment, counselor, that you need to make the staff for the for the environmental abatement for the environmental protections that we're talking about.

Is that correct?

I just want to make sure we're not no.

I'm actually ladies and gentlemen.

My question is for and and staff feel free to comment and this will be an ongoing subject of conversation, I'm sure.

Yes.

But again, back to the nature of where the project is.

It already was an industrial facility.

Right.

It had a lifespan that they thought was never going to end.

And it did, and it sat vacant for 25 years being unproductive.

It's going to happen again regardless of what the building is made of.

And so I'm asking just as much as we prepare for infrastructure like train bridges and railroad bridges and car bridges, that they don't last forever.

The city has to budget dollars in the present to make sure that there are dollars in the future when the thing collapse.

So I'm asking what agreement can be made now for structures like this because this is such a new type of project, and we know things are going to change.

Yes.

Uh we'll agree to budget annual reserves for that purpose and reduce it to a written commitment.

Kathleen, you got that?

Yes.

Commissioner, you go with that?

Yes, sir.

Thank you.

Thank you.

President Dillon, I have a question on that just for my own.

Commissioner Murphy.

My own edifications.

Yes, sir.

From a construction standpoint, these structures are sim are tilt concrete panels similar to uh an Amazon distribution center warehouse and their construction.

Is that correct?

These would all likely be precast panels, structural precast panels with insulation, so you even superior to a tilt up uh situation.

Okay, but generally similar to those type of distribution center warehouses.

Much more robust, though.

Much more robust.

For the security, for the environmental containment, for the for the for the efficiency of the building.

And we have dozens, if not maybe hundreds of such structures in Marion County, I I believe.

And I'm asking staff do we require a decommissioning plan of all of those warehouse structures in Marion County?

I'm not I'm not aware of any decommissioning plans for those.

I'm not either, and I'm confident we don't.

And so I appreciate your offer and and it will be put in the record.

But um I understand your point that planning to tear these down doesn't make a lot of sense.

However, funding that is maybe not unreasonable.

Thank you.

Additional questions from members of the commission.

Thank you.

Please be prepared for your five minute rebuttal.

Would the remonstrators come forward?

And then I have a question.

Where is Alexandra from IPS?

My name is Alexandra.

I um an attorney at 8510 evergreen.

Where's my other Alexander?

She left.

Would you please let her know that I asked for her to come up as a remonstrator because I wanted to hear what she had to say in the remonstrating period to know her points.

Your Honor, I don't know her, but if I see her, I absolutely will.

Thank you very much.

Your Honors, I do appreciate your time.

I am not sure.

Members of the remonstrators, you have 15 minutes.

Your Honors, I introduce yourself.

My name is Alexandra Curlin.

Um, I represent Irvington Community Schools.

I've been sworn in.

And Your Honor, I have not been sworn in because I am not going to talk.

I'm going to introduce the board members who are going to talk, as they are the ones who live in the Irvington community schools.

But you've been sworn in as well.

Thank you.

Please introduce them.

So I'm going to introduce Heather Rodriguez.

Nancy, reset the clock, please.

She's going, she's the board of the president of the board, and then Madison Monfrida, and as well as Eric Serrano, who are three board members who live in Irvington and who are going to talk to you today.

Thank you.

Each individual introduce yourself and tell me that you've been uh sworn in.

Uh good afternoon, Commissioners.

My name is Heather Rodriguez.

I am the board chair for Irvington Community Schools, and I have been sworn in.

Thank you.

You're welcome.

Um what's your address, Heather?

Oh gosh.

Our address, sorry, is 5751 East University Avenue, Indianapolis, Indiana 46219.

Go.

Okay, thank you.

Um as mentioned, I have two of my colleagues who will be speaking along with me.

Um our elementary school sits immediately next to the property that DC Blocks is asking to develop.

Our students, our families, and our staff are the closest neighbors this project has.

Irvington Community Schools is the appellant here.

We filed our appeal on time, and our position has not changed.

I also want to be direct about something that is public, as mentioned already today.

Members of our board and leadership recently toured DC blocks' Atlanta facility.

That was a fact-finding mission and nothing else.

We accepted no funds, no gifts, and no promises of any kind.

It was not an endorsement, being informed as part of our duty to our students.

The building ICS saw was only 30% complete.

The construction included drilling into a mountain that was so loud that even the generators could not be heard.

Even though ICS went to Atlanta, we were unable to discover any meaningful facts during that trip.

What we asked the commission to hold on to is this.

My name is Eric Serrano.

I have been sworn in.

My address is 5751 East University Avenue.

Good Indianapolis.

Mostly children, and a member of the Irvington Community Schools Board of Governors.

I want to start with the standard because it frames everything.

State law does not ask whether this project improves a site or whether it is nicer than a warehouse.

To grant a variance, the commission must find in writing that DC boxes met all five of the required findings.

The burden is entirely on the applicant.

The burn is entirely on the applicant, and if even one finding fails, the variance cannot and should not be granted.

I will address the first two.

And I want to be fair about what has changed, because you will hear and have heard a great deal about it in the last two weeks.

The applicant reduced their plan from three buildings down to two.

They brought the power usage down from 78 to 50.

And for the first time, mentioned the school at all.

Those are real changes, and we won't dismiss them.

But a smaller version of the wrong use in the wrong proceeding is still the wrong thing.

And none of these changes answers the findings that the law actually requires.

That's what I want to show you.

Finding one states that the use will not be injurious to public health and safety.

The applicant cannot show that.

And the record itself shows you why.

Start with the noise that we've discussed today.

The sound study in the record was run on a 10 megawatt building in Atlanta.

One fifth the time the size of the proposed site in Indianapolis.

That study does not tell you what will happen next to our school.

It is the same undersized comparison that the applicant used as its Huntsville facility, which they opened our conversations with.

And again, just incomparable comparisons that they're trying to make.

The applicant now points to a berm to landscaping, to placing building two between itself and the generators and the school, but the noise that matters here is low frequency noise.

And the low frequency noise is not meaningfully stopped by a berm by trees or building wall.

A rebuttal in the second uh in the record explains exactly why.

And the 65 decibel figure that's been discussed today, um, measured at the property line has not been independently verified.

When we asked the we've also asked for the operating logs of the generators to know how often they're run, uh and if they're only run during emergency use.

We were not provided those logs at all.

So and have you just heard minutes ago, they're asking you to take all of their noise commitments on faith and faith alone.

The harm is also understated because nothing actually limits how this site will be run.

You've heard it called multiple times an edge node facility.

That's marketing labels.

That's nothing.

That doesn't mean anything, that doesn't restrict anything or any use for the facility.

Um there's no way to restrict how these data centers will operate without restricting the resources that they require to operate.

And to fix this is very simple.

We can cap the site at 15 megawatts and limit the power to any individual rack at 15 kilowatts.

Most importantly, those restrictions need to be written in the commitments.

Then we talk about the generators, even down to 31 uh after the proposed 55 or so.

Um diesel generators the the commitments now read that they're only allowed to be used in an emergency use, but that emergency use is not clearly defined.

Um the way it reads now, uh nothing stops these units from running during a school day to relieve grid stress for financial gain, demand response, peak shaving, load shedding with IAES.

That loophole must be closed.

An emergency must mean an unplanned loss of utility power, and running for economic dispatch must be flatly prohibited in the commitments.

And underneath all of it, this parcel is a form of Ford plant with documented arsenic and thallium contamination and under state environmental covenant, an existing recorded condition.

Any construction will disturb that soil right next to the children.

A record like that is the opposite of a clean showing on health and safety.

Finding two states that the use and value of the adjacent area will not be substantially or adversely affected.

The recommendation you were viewing came out of a record that did not account for our school at all.

Neither the staff report nor the hearing examiner's findings mentioned it one time.

In the last two weeks, the applicant has moved building two back and estimated an added setback of roughly 280 feet, and we welcome that.

But that setback is only an estimate.

It's not confirmed in writing or not recorded, and the applicant's own conclusion that the site will not be a nuisance rests on the same unverified proper property line noise figures presented.

An 11th hour draft uh gesture toward the school does not prove the absence of adverse effect.

If anything, it concedes that the effect on the school was never seriously measured in the first place.

Earlier this week in a meeting with our school leaders, DC blocks even admitted that a relevant sound study could not be completed before they want to break ground.

I would like to reiterate our ask for continuance due to the continued evolution of this project, practically by the hour.

I've covered two findings, both of which fail on the face of the record.

My colleague will take part of the other three, and that's where it continues to fall apart.

Thank you.

Thank you, Eric.

Please introduce yourself, address, and have you been sworn.

My name is My name is Madison Monfrida.

The address is 5751 East University Avenue, and I have been sworn in.

Thank you.

Good afternoon, Commissioners.

As I said, my name is Madison Monfrida.

I'm an alumni of the school, and I'm also on the board, so I'll take the last three findings as my colleague said.

Finding three, uh, the need for the variance arises from a condition peculiar to the properties.

So the law means a condition of the land itself.

So we're talking shape, size, topography, not what the business wants to be built on it.

DC Blocks does not need does not come from any DC Blocks' needs do not come from any particular anything peculiar about this parcel.

It comes from its own business plan.

What's a data center site?

That is not a hardship of the land.

And the one thing that truly is peculiar about this property, that it's contaminated former factory under an environmental covenant is a reason to be more careful about sensitive development here, not a reason to grant it.

Finding four, strict application of the ordinance should be unnecessary hardship.

Wait, let me start off.

Let me go back to Commissioner Lyle.

You talked about the decommissioning plan.

When we were in D when we were in Atlanta, we heard that these buildings would last for 50 years, and now we're being told 80 to 100.

So as my colleague said, these information points are changing by a minute.

Um, back to finding four, strict application of the ordinance would be an unnecessary hardship.

There is no unnecessary hardship.

The land is already zoned industrial and has many permitted uses available today.

When a property can already be used winning a different and more profitable use is not a hardship the law recognizes.

This is the heart of it.

DC blocks is not asking for relief from a hardship, it's asking to permanently change what this land may be used for.

That is rezoning.

A rezoning belongs before the city county council on a full legislative record, not inside a variance proceeding, which is exactly where a permanent change like this gets the least amount of public accountability.

Finding five, the approval will not substantially interfere with a comprehensive plan.

The city is right now in the middle of writing rules for this very kind of facility.

Moratorium and draft standards that include a required buffer from schools and a firm cap on noise.

Granting this variance today would leapfrog the exact protections the city is in the process of adopting.

This interferes with the plan, it doesn't conform to it.

So that's all five.

Burden is on DC blocks to prove every one of them, and it fails on each.

Okay.

Yes, hello again, Heather Rodriguez, uh 5751 East University Avenue.

Um, so you have now heard why DC blocks cannot meet the findings the law requires.

We recognize the applicant has made changes, and we have said so plainfully.

But what they are really asking for a permanent change to what this land may be used for next to an elementary school is a rezoning dressed up as a variance, and it belongs before the city county council with the full record that process demands.

For those reasons, we respectfully ask the commission to deny the variance.

And if the commission is not prepared to deny it today, we ask that you not approve it on this incomplete record, that you hold the matter open until the final recorded terms exist, and the school has had a chair a fair chance to review them.

This is why we are asking for the continuance.

Thank you for your time and your consideration.

I'll hand it over to theather.

Yes, ma'am.

Please introduce yourself, your address.

Megan Lappa, I'm sworn in, and my address is 6155 Oak Avenue, Indianapolis, Indiana, one third of a mile away from the FinTail Drive location of the United States.

You've been duly sworn.

Leaving a business card at a school's front office.

Megan, have you been duly sworn?

Yes.

Thank you.

Go.

Leaving a business card at a school's front office is not meaningful outreach, and I was deeply disturbed to learn that the petitioner didn't contact the school board until after the first hearing had already passed, and only under public pressure.

The five to eleven-year-old students at ICES are the most vulnerable stakeholders involved in this proposal.

Legally, there are five findings of fact that are relevant today.

If even one falls short, the entire variance is intended to be dismissed.

It's a high bar, and it was set that way historically by design.

And this petitioner's inability to meet that bar is thoroughly evidenced, exposing critical gaps on the record that no three-ring binder is big enough to explain away.

On finding one, the school board has already shared matters of concern that remained unaddressed by the petitioner, and I'll offer a brief summary of the remaining four as they stand.

On finding two, the petitioner's primary property value report opens with a disclaimer acknowledging its own limited basis, then looks backward to determine property impacts, despite 40% of the data center comparables never having operated during the Integra study at all.

None of the comparables was a brownfield with an active ERC, an active item investigation regarding evidenced public exposure pathways to carcinogens, or vinyl chloride migrating toward a public greenway, an elementary school through the contaminated groundwater beneath block A.

The second property value report from Terzo echoes the framing and language of the petitioner's own council closely enough that it seriously raises questions about its independence.

On finding three, staff's peculiarity factors, including size, depth, and access to easements, described the entire Thunderbird campus.

Their shared conditions of doing business at Thunderbird and Monarch's success as a conforming I3 use under the same conditions proves they imposed no real limitations to development at all.

What staff accepted as peculiar is quite literally ordinary to this park.

On finding four, staff's hardship reasoning hinges on the claim that the proposed use is prohibited solely due to the absence of a listed land use classification.

Unfortunately, that's not hardship under Indiana law.

It's a known regulatory gap that applies equally to any parcel in Marion County.

Indiana precedent requires the property can't reasonably be put to any conforming use, and that loss of profit never constitutes unnecessary hardship.

The local developer stated on the record that plenty of other things could go here.

DC blocks thought outland it knew wasn't zoned for its purposes.

Any so-called hardship has been entirely self-inflicted.

On finding five, the comprehensive plan zoned this parcel for medium industrial, which is an increasingly constrained designation in the 465 loop.

Yet staff maintains data centers aligned with light industrial use while also recommending approval for this one today.

Removing an I3 parcel suited perfectly for an approved by right use and denying that opportunity to hard pressed who's your businesses that want to stay local.

This is in exchange for 21 long-term jobs.

Despite their efforts to show to shore up their case, Indiana and Marion County land use law gives this commission ample foundation to deny this today.

Our community is reasonable to reject the staff's conclusion, and we ask this commission to do the same.

This petition should rightfully be denied.

Thank you.

Thank you, Megan.

Please introduce yourself, address, and have you been duly sworn.

My name is Rye Steinhart.

My address is 11532 Newport Drive, Indianapolis, Indiana 46236.

I'm sorry, your name one more time.

Rye Steinhart.

Thank you.

Sorry, my voice is very dry.

Um and I have been sworn in.

So speaking more to Councillor Lyle's point, I think that this entire setup edge node for hyperscalers could turn us into the AI version of Detroit within a few years, that they will just leave us out to dry.

Microsoft is already pausing construction of their Wisconsin data center.

Google grabbed my own.

Here's what I want you to do.

Okay.

You get a comeback on rebuttal for five minutes.

So you and the gentleman that's in line, we'd like for you to lead and give your comments as we come back today.

Thank you very much.

Thank you very much.

Members of the City Council.

Uh Councillor Hart, it's your district.

Would you like to start?

I'll go last.

Thank you.

Commissioner Councilman Nielsen, please come forward.

Let me state one more time.

Thank you for being here.

Uh we hold you in high regard.

I know you're a hardworking city councilor.

Go.

You're on the clock.

Good afternoon, President Dillon.

Uh Commissioners.

Again, my name is Andy Nielsen, City County Councillor for District 14.

I come before you today requesting that you deny 2026 CBR 815, and I will probably be repetitive to what has been discussed, so I ask that you bear with me.

After hearing clearly and overwhelmingly from my district and engaging with the company and their representatives, I do not believe the development will be in the best interest of my constituents and my community.

But in recognition of the analysis in front of you, I believe that findings one and four have not been satisfied, requiring that the commission deny this petition.

It also should be noted that the discussion today during the petitioners presentation is the exact basis for which we asked for a continuance.

As an example to that, the conversation from Commissioner Lyle was something that I have been asking for since day zero.

For some background and context, the proposed site sits directly on the border.

So if you look at your map up there on the border, that is the corner of District 20.

Everything north and east of that is District 14.

With respect to district lines, my involvement and engagement on this position is unique, given the proximity of the proposed site, and that 95, 97% of the nearly 1,800 residents who live within a half aisle half mile radius of the proposed site live in District 14.

Many of those residents are here today.

And as we all know, political lines do not reflect neighborhood boundaries.

That 83% of my constituents and respondents oppose this development.

The context, the context of the community's position is very important as it was not made with haste, is instead an example of how an engaged community makes an informed decision, and it is not one steeped in anti-development fervor, which I'll approve later as well.

Unfortunately, as this process has unfolded, and I really don't want to have to say this, but unfortunately, as this process unfolded, it has become abundantly clear that any potential benefits from this project are fully transactional.

I need you to understand that.

After months, months of pushing the company and their representatives for a more comprehensive, thoughtful, and meaningful process to discuss potential benefits, the company and the representatives have instead chosen to operate within a silo, seeking input from stakeholders and others who are friendliest to their development.

The second that pushback is given.

Communication lines stay open, but meaningful engagement has disappeared.

I need you to recognize that.

A good example.

And again, I emphasize that the performance bond that was discussed earlier is something that I have been asking for since day one.

I say all this while in recognition that the Commission is well aware of the sensitivity to these projects.

This petition is not new to that conversation.

However, it is key that these concerns are also centered and present as we continue this discussion.

I appreciate and understand that the question and analysis before the MDC are focused on ensuring in the case, as has been discussed in the case of a variance of use, that five findings of fact have been satisfied.

As the MDC MDC is aware, and as Mr.

Serrano emphasized, determining that even one finding has not been satisfied is justification, I would say a requirement that you deny this petition.

And here I will prove that finding one provides the MDC with at a minimum the discretion to conclude that the finding has not been satisfied, and finding four has not been satisfied.

On finding one, I believe strongly that the staff report emphasizes a powerful tool that is in your possession, Commissioners, which is also key to good government and public policy, and that's discretion.

If you read the staff report, staff states in relation to finding one and I find one, and I quote, public testimony and correspondence have raised real could raise concerns related to potential impacts of the proposed data center, including noise, operation of diesel fuel generators, and overall energy consumption.

Staff acknowledges these concerns as part of the public record and took that into consideration during the zoning analysis.

An acknowledgement and consideration of the concerns in the staff's analysis is the very basis by which you commissioners may deny this petition.

This is a clear recognition that this process has discretion.

From staff's analysis, community concern and voice has been weighed against several incomplete commitments, which remain ongoing, thereby strengthening the community's argument and concern.

You have the discretion to provide a more critical analysis that this finding has not been satisfied.

Discretion is also abundantly clear in the petitioner's own analysis.

As I sat there, they spent seven of their 15 minutes discussing who was in support of this, not proving that the findings of fact have been met.

Every time a letter of testimony or support is described or presented, it is within this very argument.

This is a similar application of the same appeal that I am making to you today.

When a community group or other stakeholder group's posit position on a petition is considered, this introduces a weighted analysis that in fact, when discussing finding one, the MDC does have the discretion to consider community support and or opposition.

And what is so powerful in this moment is that the staff report acknowledges this, allowing the MDC to reweight considerations within finding one and to conclude that the overwhelming community concern and opposition outweighs any offsets.

Again, at best, finding one is on unstable grounds.

Once you begin to reweight it, I maintain that it has not been satisfied, and that meaning the MDC must deny the petition.

Moving on to finding four.

Finding four requires the petitioner to demonstrate that, quote, the strict application of the terms of the zoning ordinance constitutes an unusual and unnecessary hardship if applied to the property for which the variant is sought.

The proposed site, again, this has been discussed, is currently zoned I3, providing for media industrial use as part of the Thunderbird Commerce Center that was established in 2022 that did say sit vacant for 20 years, but that's not the complete story.

Over the past several years, all other parcels within the Thunderbird Commerce Center have been or are currently being developed.

This very body considered petitions for Monarch Beverage that developed 450,000 square foot facility in 2024, creating roughly 500 jobs.

This commission also approved a rezone and incentives for uh Dandy and Louth is finishing a facility by later this fall for Dandy that will create 350 jobs.

Just last week in this very chamber, the city county council approved the tax abatements that you all sent to us.

So as we look to the application of what must be satisfied under finding four, things are falling apart.

Again, the petitioner must satisfy that strict application, provides a hardship.

If we approach this analysis from the petitioner's position, there are remedies within the zoning code that would nullify all of this.

A special commercial district zoning classification.

That would allow the petitioners to submit for their own set of rules.

We wouldn't have to consider this hardship application because the petitioner could submit for this body's consideration a set of standards that fall outside of a hardship exemption.

This commission has approved previous data center campuses under this application.

If we approach this analysis from the property owner's position, it is abundantly clear that there is not a hardship with the ability to develop the property under I3 zoning.

Why?

As mentioned earlier, this is the last parcel being developed at the Commerce Center.

Without community opposition, I would also point out.

For these reasons, finding four is clearly not satisfied, meaning MDC must deny the petition.

Again, commissioners, I recognize and appreciate the questions in front of you.

The analysis before the MDC is focused on ensuring these five findings of facts have been satisfied, concluding that one is even slightly insufficient, is sufficient to deny the petition.

And as I have outlined, I believe that finding one at best provides the commission with the discretion necessary to deny, and finding four has clearly not been satisfied.

This is a moment for you all to recognize that.

For these reasons, the MDC must deny this petition.

Thank you.

Questions.

Questions for Counselor Nielsen.

Thank you.

Questions for Councillor Nielsen at this time.

Everybody's good?

Thank you, Counselor.

Counselor Beer.

Councillor Hart, was Counselor Cross gonna are you was Councilor Brown gonna talk?

No.

You're good.

Okay.

Counselor, please introduce yourself.

Yep, Michael Paul Hart representing District 20.

Um Mr.

President, Chairman.

Welcome, Counselor.

We appreciate Hey, by the way, we appreciate your hard work as well.

I appreciate it.

Um I'll tell you what's interesting.

You know, when I look at this, ladies and gentlemen, thank you.

Let the counselor talk.

I was gonna say a brief story before I get into this, looking at this map right here, because what's interesting about this site is you know, we talk about where it's located and who it impacts.

And when I go back to, I think it was 2022, 21 even, I was approached by the predecessor of District 14, which was Jason Lairison, Counselor Lairerson, and the City of Indianapolis, and they came to me and they said, Councillor Hart, would you be supportive of creating a TIFF in this area to support uh what's going on with Laos development, but use that allocation outside of your district.

That's a big ask.

And I said with pleasure, and the reason I said that is because my vision for the east side, the east of Indianapolis, the East Washington corridor, is it doesn't stop at the district lines or the boundaries.

If there was development that was going to happen in Irvington Plaza west of District 20, that was a good thing.

And so I look at this as exactly as the counselor said, we're not divided by boundary lines.

This is a a opportunity that we're looking at a redevelopment of an entire plot of land.

And why that's important is when when I look at this, and I'll tell you about the process that I went through, is a very long one.

You know, I've spent um weeks every week since this was was opened up in in March writing about this in my my letter, uh my newsletter that I send out weekly called the Sunday Post.

Um, in that it has been weekly meetings with the petitioner community members going on site.

Um I've I've spent countless hours trying to find the facts of all of these things.

But I've also been in a very fortunate position where this is maybe maybe not so fortunate, but the second data center I've had in my district.

And so I've been at the ability to actually compare these two things.

And on the surface, what is extremely different is the plot of land itself.

The first time I went through this process, it was with Google.

It was a hyperscaler, and it was in in an agricultural area with a lot, uh, and you all seen this, a lot of residential around it.

This, on the other hand, is a highly industrial area that this photo itself doesn't ladies and gentlemen.

Ladies and gentlemen, let the city councilor complete his statement.

Thank you.

Let him complete his statement.

Counselor Hart, go ahead.

This is a very industrial area that even to the south of it.

You have thousands of truck bays, you have metal recycling facilities, you have bakeries.

Thank you, Mr.

President.

So when I look at this, I I and I have to consider okay, what are we actually putting in?

And I look at four main buckets when I'm considering these types of development, the data center development specifically.

I'm looking at the quality of life for the folks that are living around it.

I'm looking at the energy.

I'm looking at the environment, and I'm looking at the financial impact of all of it.

And so that's what I spent my time doing.

And you know, from a relativity standpoint, where I I live close to this, where I live in relation to the site is very close to what I lived in relay or still live in relation to where the Google site was.

The Google site was three point or 2.2 miles from my house.

This is 3.2 miles from my house.

So I'm very close to the same amount of distance apart.

How much did I pay you?

Ladies and gentlemen, counselor's gonna finish his statement on an uninterrupted, please.

Thank you.

So going through this process, um, I've had hosted public meetings uh where I've had a hundred people show up.

Uh the petitioners have come.

Um, and again, comparing and contrasting some of the experiences I've had, um, the ability to ask questions to the petitioner in this case versus what I've had in the past has been a very seamless process.

If I sent an email, a phone call, a text, it was answered very quickly.

They had no problem coming down here, they had no problem taking people out to their sites to see it, which leads me to my example of I went out to Atlanta to see this site, and I took a decibel meter with me, and I did that with intent.

Now, albeit it was one I got off of Amazon, right?

So it was like a $30 decibel meter.

But my theory being if I use that same meter in every single place that I go, meaning I did it at the site in Atlanta at various stages from the the generator, so 75 feet, 150 feet, and 475 feet.

I also did it in an active construction zone in Atlanta, and I also did it back here at my house.

I did it at the Irvington School, and I did it in the active area without the development.

And what I was able to find by learning through that experience is that uh on the meter itself, a day in my backyard on a Saturday, and I live in a regular suburban neighborhood.

On a day, a Saturday night in my backyard, it was 58 decibels with birds turpent, kids playing, doing those sorts of things.

So when I went to the site itself, it was up to 70, 75 decibels.

When I went to the school, it was 65.

So at the time I had a this was before the sound studies came out, the conclusion that wow, it's gonna be really hard just to hit 65.

Again, cheap decibel meters, but I tell you the story because I'm I'm putting in the work to try and learn about the development on the impact.

I also put out two very long memos that I submitted prior to the hearing examiner that you all have had for a long time now.

And that was a lot of finding that I looked into two main things.

The the primary thing was the site itself and where it sits, and as well as the school's relation to that, because I think there's two main things that are probably the highest objection here.

One is the school, two is the noise.

Uh, I think the noise has been settled through the the conversations I've had with how they're gonna mitigate a lot of that.

Um, the school, on the other hand, I think it was improved through the recent changes to eliminate a building and move back even farther, 800 feet away.

But what was most important in those memos that I want to make sure I say for the record is that that school moved in in when the Ford Vistian plant was in operation, and so it didn't move the school, didn't come when it was all greenfield and nothing else there.

They knew when they moved into that location that it's next to an industrial area.

And there, I mean that the Trinity Metals, the the Kroger Bakery, all those things were there when that school moved in.

And going back to the current petition, um what's coming in now and what I've seen on site is a very benign structure.

My my gut feeling when I walked up to this thing, I looked at them and I said, This is it.

This is the building.

I walked inside the building, um, and and it is really an edge node facility.

There is no doubt about that.

And I tell you this from a position of expertise.

I've worked in IT my entire career.

I have a degree in programming, I have another degree in IT.

I I am an expert in the field.

I've toured multiple data centers outside of uh this one and other petitions.

I've toured data center factories.

I'm very affluent to what is going on with these types of developments.

And inside the data center itself, I was registering 65 decibels.

And why it's an edge node facility is because this is a co-location, again, not a hyperscaler.

The way they design the building is on the perimeter of it, is where we have the or where they have the infrastructure where they're bringing in the fiber and creating that redundancy for any particular user in the center of that building.

Very unique design, but they are providing uh redundancy on fiber optic networks by having that perimeter operations inside their building.

So as I've looked through this and this this process, I've taken these things to consideration like the the noise, the dust.

Um, I've been here through the entire development of Thunderbird from Monarch to where it is now, and there's been zero remonstrance for dust.

Not on Dandy, not on Monarch, not on logistics facility, not not when even Louth was preparing the site.

Zero remonstrance.

And I'm I'm convinced that the main issue here is just the name data center, right?

It's it's a lot of the unknown of what is actually is going on inside that building.

Inside the building is servers, servers are all over the place.

I mean, we've got them in business operations.

They are required for our daily lives at this at this point in operation of how we we live and we work.

So with that, the last piece that I look at is the commitment back to the community.

What is this good if if this were to go in, what would it provide in a in a benefits?

Well, one, you know, there's over there's been the the complaints about there's not enough jobs.

Listen, this is an entire site development, not just one site.

And so when we've already got, or they've got 600 and some trucks coming in to that site, they've already got a thousand employees in there.

If I'm sitting in uh a site developer's shoes, I'm looking at how do I make sure that I'm having adequate site control on the operations of vehicles coming in and out of this entire site, not just the one.

There they have to think about the safety of that.

They have to think about you know the amount of people there.

And there's not necessarily I don't think there's a negative to it having a low amount of jobs when they've already provided a thousand jobs in the entire site.

What I'm proud of is the agreement that they have with the the union because as another distinct uh difference from the first time I had Google come through here, there was no Google or there was no union agreement.

So I'm very proud to see that.

I'm very supportive of that.

Uh and I wouldn't be supportive of the project if it wasn't there.

That that was a must for me.

Beyond that, it is we are in a place right now on the council.

Uh we just had a wheel, we just had a wheel tax come through or a proposal for a wheel tax come through because there's we're doing a lot in relation to Senate and Act Bill.

And so as a counselor, I've got to think about the tax base coming to Indianapolis, right?

Is it going to be are we going to ask more people for it, or are we going to have development pay that tax base?

What this type of development provides is $30 million in 10 years under abatement.

You can't find that in another type.

Pick a warehouse of the benign structure type like this, and you won't get that type of tax base.

We have to consider those types of things.

But of that 30 million, 10 million goes to the school corporation, to uh Warren Township School Corporation.

That's a million dollars a year.

You can look across the city of Indianapolis and across the state of Indianapolis and Indiana, and you're gonna start to see we are already seeing the request for referendums in response to Senate Bill.

So we have to find other mechanisms to try and support the the school funding.

This does that.

The other piece goes back to the TIFF I was talking about.

This puts roughly 10 million dollars in a TIFF that stays in the district.

Again, and it's not even district 20, to be honest with it's it's district 14 that it stays in.

All that is gonna go right back into where people live to make the improvements on the roads to Irving to Plaza to the parks.

That's a positive thing that wouldn't happen if the development didn't happen.

And there are other types of development that could happen here, like chemical facilities are uh an approved use under I3 today, which I am 100% convinced are more invasive than what this type of development is.

But even on that, there are community impact payments, right?

What they're talking about doing with the school, what I mentioned earlier with with YMCA or what we're trying to do with that.

Um, hopefully that works out.

If not, there's still two and a half million dollars to go towards uh building third spaces to bringing in the type of programmatic activity that leads to more positive outcomes on the east side.

I can tell you from sitting in those seats where I'm on my counselor side, getting two and a half million dollars to District 20 is a very hard thing to do.

And then finally, on the other piece, um, the Washington Square Mall.

I mean, that's that's what I have been asked to solve as a counselor from the time I campaigned to ask to be the counselor.

I've been working very diligently for for my entire term to redo this mall in some fashion.

We are getting very close to positive outcomes, and this project itself will add five million dollars to an opportunity to improve the Washington Square Mall with which gives me the ability to attract other dollars through grants and through investors that I wouldn't have otherwise to complete my objective of what I promised the people I would work on.

So with that, the last piece I'll say is on the whole boomer bus thing.

I I I have I am not convinced that there is any uh bust coming anytime soon on AI.

In fact, I still think we're in the very beginning phase of this, and I'll tell you why.

So what what the normal normally people aren't looking at silicon manufacturers, so silicon manufacturers are the people that make your CPUs and your RAM, and and there are the ones that are powering all the the servers that run the data centers.

Now, when we see their uh running out of supply and they're shifting their units from end user units to server units, that is showing us a huge demand shift over to that product line, which tells us that there's only more and more use.

We are only at the first phase of this.

We are only at the large uh essentially hyperscale phase where we're we're companies like Meta, Google, AWS, those folks are the ones that are building right now.

We haven't got to the enterprise layer yet, which are the applications that we use on our daily lives, the Canvas, the QuickBooks, and all those sorts of things.

When you start seeing the AI features integrated into that, they're gonna start running their own servers, their own workloads, they're gonna start leasing out space, and then you're gonna get start getting into the enter the small, medium, and enterprise businesses that are gonna run their own.

We're only at the very beginning.

This structure, I'm convinced will be here for a long time.

I think it will be uh a product that will produce uh a lot of revenue for the city of Indianapolis and a lot of positive outcome and charitable distributions uh going forward.

And Mr.

Chairman and members of the board, I am supportive of this project.

Thank you, Council.

Questions for counselor ladies and gentlemen, we're not gonna do this.

We are not gonna do this.

We are not gonna do this.

Members of commission.

Questions for counselor Hart.

Counselor, thank you for being here.

Appreciate it very much.

Staff.

Thank you, President Dillon, the members of the commission.

The matter before you includes two petitions or two requests.

One is the plat, and that has been explained to you briefly.

The other part of that is a variance of use as well as development standards.

I'd like to get rid of the or I'd like to talk about the plat itself.

As you know, plates are ministerial, that if they meet the certain standards within the ordinance, it has to be approved.

And those conditions that staff is it's included in staff's report on page 52 and 53.

There is also a motion if you choose to approve the staff, the uh plat.

There is a motion on page 52 the staff would recommend using.

The other uh two qu uh the other uh petition request is the variance of use and development standards.

There's been a lot of discussion on the variance of use, but staff would like to just briefly mention the development standard that was being requested is a reduction in parking for industrial uses, and again, it presents an issue in terms of trying to determine exactly what those requirements are in terms of parking, because this is not a uh a use that has been contemplated in the ordinance, but they are reducing uh the number of of required parking spaces from 330 down to no more or no less than 100 parking spaces.

Staff supports this, and a reason why is what it does is it it decreases the amount of hard surface and pavement that is required, and it increases then land that can be used for different other different uses, which would include buffering, transitional yards, and maybe some other industrial uses.

And first of all, for those reasons, staff is recommending approval of that development statement of and a reduction of parking spaces.

The other part of the variance request relates to a variance of use, and you've heard a lot about that, and that's the five criteria that is required to prove the variance of use should be granted.

The first one talks about the public health safety and general welfare, general welfare welfare.

Staff believes that the proposed commitments that have been submitted, and they have been amended a number of times to respond to concerns that have been raised, directly regulate those operational characteristics of the data center campus.

That includes those generator testing hours, the sound level, and the buffering and the screening that they are providing, as well as insulating those generators to minimize the sound.

They've also committed to finding or funding electrical infrastructure, and that would ensure that associated costs are not borne by local ratepayers.

They also provided and conducted a trip generation, and again, this gets back to the use as a data center that when it is completed, there's going to be fewer trips to that data center.

There are fewer employees, there would be security, there would be technical people, and there would be maintenance.

Basically, those are the three categories of people that would be going to this data center.

And as has been mentioned, this what has happened when with this reduction is it's now 72% reduction in the total daily trips that would be going to this site.

Staff would also with that staff would note that the traffic that is going to be generated is going to be more internal.

FinTail Drive is a private street, and it accesses from English Avenue.

So most of the traffic is going to be from English Avenue into FinTail Drive.

So the impact of the traffic by this development is going to be minimal.

Staff also believes again that what has been proposed in terms of commitments does protect and it does not create any unregulated or unchecked impact on public health.

On adjacent property impacts, again, there's been a lot of discussion about this the school, and I just like to mention that the Pennsyl Trail separates this property from the school, and that Penncy Trail is 80 feet wide.

And then there's also that buffering, there's an easement along that northern portion of that, and then as been mentioned, those buildings are going to be south of that.

So there's going to be a total of 817 feet, approximately 817 feet separation from the protected district to the north.

Staff also again mentioned about the traffic and where that's going to how that's going to be handled.

This is redevelopment of a property that was used for heavy manufacturing over 272 acres years ago.

And because of that how it was has been developed and how it has now returned to redevelopment of that, it creates an issue because it is being discussed about industrial uses, and we and it's been mentioned that a data center does not really have a definition in our ordinance, and they're working on that right now.

So staff believes because of that, that creates a unique situation.

Staff also believes that the data center, based upon what we know, is would be considered a light industrial use, maybe an I-1 or an I2.

This property is zoned I3, and the comprehensive plan recommends heavy industrial.

So staff, again, I'm jumping to that fifth criteria.

Staff believes that this use as it has been defined and how it is being presented today is consistent with the comprehensive plan of heavy industrial.

There's also been a mention of the over the overlay of an industrial industrial overlay, which then again, staff believes is consistent with what is being proposed here.

The unnecessary hardship that staff talks about in the staff in the report is the again the absence of a listed use as a data center.

As we know this is a use that has recently been brought forth in the forefront.

And I understand there are some other jurisdictions that are struggling with the same thing that we are struggling here in terms of defining it and where it is appropriate.

But again, staff believes that is an unnecessary hardship.

So for these reasons, staff is recommending approval of this.

However, before I close, I would like to get back to the comment by Commissioner Lyle relative to the let me get my notes here.

Budgeting some money, uh an annual budget to for the removal of any when this is decommissioned.

Staff would also like to add to that is that it needs part of that should be a an environmental remediation as part of that decommissioning plan.

And again, you know, setting aside some type of annual budget for that, but then again, staff would like to have some clear, tight numbers on how much that would be rather than just making a blanket statement.

But then again, staff would be glad to answer any questions that you might have.

Questions for staff.

Kathleen Commissioner Schurmeyer.

Two weeks ago we passed uh a petition that went on to the council that had regulations for for data centers, as we were trying to play catch-up on the whole situation.

Yes.

How would you come that isn't apply to this case because this was already in the pipeline?

But that is correct.

How would you compare the commitments that uh we have from the developer to what is in was in the documents that we passed two weeks ago?

I think the commitments that have been uh provided by the the petitioner, uh and they have been again, they have been amended through through this whole process to address some of those issues.

Staff believes those commitments that they are offering does offer some protection and some regulation on how that data center is going to be regulated.

And uh again, I I think that uh because of those that you we are supportive of this do you think anything is glaringly missing maybe from commitments that based on what we pushed forward two weeks ago?

The only thing is what I just previously mentioned about the decommissioning, expanding that to include some kind of annual uh contribution, and then also related to that would be an environmental remediation plan.

Budget is your not contribution, budget.

Budget, I'm sorry, yeah.

For them to budget in their numbers, yes.

Is that something that you guys are able to quantify later or how will that be handled?

That's a good question, uh, because I think this has just been presented just come forward here with the petitioners representative.

Well, Kathleen, I think it would be hard to quantify it in five minutes, and they're gonna I agree.

Don't you think?

Yeah, but we're gonna push to get the environmental remediation as part of Commissioner Lyle's request on commitments and we've got to let them work on their budgeting on the number.

And yes, and then that yes, the annual budget, yes.

Further questions for Kathleen.

President Dillon, so just to follow up on uh Bruce's your comments, Kathleen.

My recollection of SU 47 amended ordinance that we passed for data centers uh provided for a 400-foot setback from protected districts.

That sound right?

Yes.

Uh-huh.

And this is 800 feet.

This is 800, yes.

Okay, and we provided in that ordinance, I believe 65 decibels at the property line, and that's consistent with what their commitment is.

Is that correct?

Okay.

And if this were improved by right uh under an I3 use, um, say it was medium uh industrial media manufacturing, would there be a minimum setback from a protected district?

There would be.

And do you know what that would be?

I would not know.

I'm sorry, I would have to look at the ordinance on that.

Okay, maybe Bryce can check on that.

Um I can verify I believe it's 150 feet.

That's what I was thinking or fifty or two hundred yards.

So if it were improved by right, it would be much, it could be much closer.

That is correct, yes.

And then on medium industrial, um, is there a decibel level limit at the property line under the current ordinance?

No, there is not.

Okay.

Thank you.

Further questions for staff hearing none.

Petitioner.

Hold on one second, please.

I'd like to get a commitment from you as you start for inclusive of environmental mediation that goes with Commissioner Lyle's uh commitment request.

You've already given that, so all you got to do is add environmental mediation of appropriate funds.

And that needs to be worked out with staff to make sure they are appropriate.

Do I have that commitment?

Yes, you do.

Kathleen?

Yes.

Thank you.

Counselor?

Commissioner, good.

You're on a clock.

Go.

Thank you, members of the commission.

Um as staff has shown you in the staff report with their commitments, that it's in their expert opinion that this request meets the findings of facts.

The hearing examiner found this case meets the findings of fact, and our memo is in your staff report.

We have experts here today who have reviewed the specific request and made filings inside your binder and inside the record that show we meet the findings of fact.

And to that end, even a remonstrator, the land use chair for the Irvington Community Council stated at their June meeting that we met the legal requirements, specifically the findings of fact.

If you look at tab 20 or tab 88, page 17 at the first full paragraph of that transcript from their June meeting.

The link for that video is also in your binder.

DC Blocks has built these buildings in other jurisdictions.

This is not a hypothetical, it's not speculation.

We know the outcomes on sound.

We've done the work to better understand that.

We would be the third entity to clean up this brown field, and we think that is a huge benefit to the community.

We believe that cleaning up brown fields is the right thing to do.

Getting these parcels back into the tax base is another big benefit with Brownfield cleanup.

This is in compliance with items ERC, and so we know that this can be done.

There are three buildings, and and it's been stated and it's in the Irvington Community Council's letter.

They did not oppose the construction of Monarch, ABF or Dandy.

It's the exact same brownfield.

It's the exact same type of construction that we are looking to do here.

Ladies and gentlemen, please.

We believe that edge node facilities with optical network gear inside provide a positive benefit for the community.

We moved that building by eliminating the other building and moving building two further south.

We moved in an additional 237 feet to the heart of the industrial complex of the Thunderbird Commerce Center.

We have two separate property um tax appraisers that looked at this specific impact to confirm there are no adverse effects on property owners.

And it follows the comp plant.

There's a Virginia Department of Environmental report there that shows Loudoun County, which is um has the most and longest serving data centers, is one of the healthiest counties in Virginia as well as the United States of America.

Um as it relates to some of the remonstrators' comments, we'll continue to educate folks and meet with folks and have conversations, but I think some of the commitments are addressed in the commitments.

They may be difficult to find, and we're we're happy to um continue to work with folks on that.

But the generators are restricted to only power um outages outside of the control of the property owner.

So we've we're we've worked with a number of remonstrators on this language.

We've buttoned it up and we've made sure that we have this only for testing and only for power outages specific.

Idem also regulates this.

So Terracon was able to let me know that Idem regulates this, that the generators are only running when the power is out, and we've agreed to let our neighbors know when our power goes out and when those generators will be used.

So we think we've addressed a number of the concerns, and we'll continue to work to work with the community, educate the community, and and discuss how they'll be protected here.

Um perfect.

Thank you for the time, thank you.

Remonstrators, please come forward and uh Rice and the gentleman who was in line.

I'd like to make sure you get your thoughts in.

Please inter Nancy, reset the clock.

Please introduce yourself.

Start over, you've been sworn address.

Go.

My name is Rice Steinhart.

Yes, I have been sworn in.

My address is 11532, Newport Drive, Indianapolis, Indiana, 46236.

I want to point out that I think they're going to make us uh the AI version of Detroit.

They're going to leave us high and dry.

The way the market has been changed ever since they introduced token-based billing for these AI stuff, companies, smaller enterprise companies have blown their entire annual budget in a single uh less than a quarter.

You can look at the interview with Uber CEO for that.

JP Morgan and other major banks increase the risk rating of construction debt for building these data centers as they go into other markets.

Um it's very difficult, not impossible to repurpose these types of GPUs that very quickly depreciate.

Um over 60% of all venture capital in the US last year went to AI.

Even Google, who we know has a lot of cash flow reserves, uh, ran to market to get over $80 billion in venture capital before OpenAI and Anthropic could run to the market to go public.

And OpenAI, because of their finances showed that the costs increased linearly with revenue.

They could not show profit, have pushed back them going public to 2027, and now they're in a lawsuit for corporate espionage.

This is not a standard development.

This should not be a variance, this should be going through the proper uh procedures.

Um there are some concerns there.

I I am in support of getting some sort of bond to make sure that we're not um SOL on this.

Um, as far as the potential moral injury uh to the community, I am concerned that some of that uh compute would be rented out to models like GROC, which have been shown to create child sexual abuse material.

What commitments do we have?

That if it is found that the um compute that is being stored is being used for that, could we have that revoked?

Like how how can we protect ourselves on that?

Um the concerns about the tax abatements with how quickly the financial station is changing, um, maybe lowering that tax abatement to like two years because it's moving very, very quickly.

Um so yeah, don't rent computational resources uh to GROC and those types of things.

Um postpone this for a while until we can have the ordinance figured out ideally for a year because this is a lot, but uh I'll pass it to someone else.

Thank you, Rice.

Sir, please introduce yourself and your address.

Be mindful of the clock.

We're on a short clock.

Steve Key, 346 North Kitley Avenue.

I live uh a half mile north of the proposed site.

Uh, you've been duly sworn, Steve.

Yes, I have go.

Okay.

Uh appreciate the opportunity to speak.

I have three main questions.

I come based on the premise that your decision is based on what's best for the community, not only today, but long term.

The first question is based on the usually negative perception of data centers, whether fair or not, has the staff or anyone looked at what is going to be the effect on property values of residential areas within the half mile or mile of it.

I would hate to trade a an income boost right now and watch the east side of the Irvington neighborhood wither because of the property values as people want to move away from the data center.

Second question, and not knowing what how these process works, uh DC blocks has made has made many many pledges to and how is the system set up and there is there a way to hold them accountable for the pledges being made?

Who does that and what consequences if they are not meeting their pledges?

The third question is kind of related, but it's more involving AES, which I've understand has made a pledge that the data center would not impact anybody's rates.

Same question as before is the city or who holds AES to keep that pledge in the future that this status center or data centers are not going to be footed on the bills of residential customers, and if they try to do that, who's going to fight it and how will they be held accountable?

I appreciate the time.

Thank you, C.

Megan Lapper.

I've been sworn in.

I'll start with my conclusion due to time.

They've asked us to trust them repeatedly.

They've asked you to trust them too.

But the the record tells a different story, one of repeated mischaracterizations that were quietly corrected only when they're caught and never on their own initiative.

I have the details, I'll go into them if I'm allowed.

When we ask for real accountability for these commitments, the current statement of commitments answers with these commitments may be enforced.

And the short list of who may enforce them notably excludes one counselor who represents 97 percent of the populace that lives within half of a mile of this project.

You're being asked to grant permanent vested rights to a petitioner who has shown again and again that what they tell our community and how they actually intend to operate aren't always the same thing, and they have no intention of allowing us to hold them accountable to that.

In addition to their inability to satisfy the five findings required for a variance of use.

Thank you.

Steve, can you come back up, please?

Let me try to answer your questions because I thought they were very good.

This is a very formal record.

All the commitments will be in the record.

If it passes, those commitments will then be made sure they go to code ordinance enforcement, and they will follow up along with the DMD to make sure those commitments are being followed.

If they are not followed, they literally have the after several warnings, have the ability to shut them down.

So the answer to your question is yes.

The commitments are followed up on.

They are enforced.

And frankly, uh Steve, I pay attention myself.

So I'm going to make sure that they do what they say they're going to do if it passes.

Now, your question on AES, help me again on that one.

Come back with that.

My understanding is AES has made a pledge.

I don't remember if it's just specific to this project or for data centers in general, that they had made a pledge that they would not basically pass on the cost or providing power to these this data center or all data centers, I don't know remember which.

AES has made that commitment.

You are correct.

And they are regulated by the State Regulatory Commission, and it is on file with the State Regulatory Commission, IURC board, and they follow up on how that is being assessed on charges.

So it is clearly in their domain, and I think there is a lot of attention right now on the Indiana Regulatory Commission, and they will stay on top of not only AES but all the utilities.

Thank you, sir.

And uh did the staff look at anything as far as impact on on residential property values in locations close to data centers.

Has that been looked at?

Um it has been looked at and has been looked at by several members of the commission.

I won't speak for members of the commission, but we've not seen anything that throws off values.

Thank you.

And president um President Dillon.

We're paying attention to it.

Kathleen, I don't think we have a formal study, do we?

No, no, we do not.

Great.

President Dillon.

Commissioner Murphy.

To that end, though, the um petitioner has submitted two appraisal analysis as part of their evidence or their documents supporting that there is not a deleterious impact on neighboring property values, and those are our part of the record.

And part of what staff review to reach their conclusion.

That is correct.

So it's in the record, and we ask you to get them and review them and get comfortable with it.

Appreciate your response.

Steve, thank you for being here.

Members of the commission.

We're gonna go to our ballots.

We have to we have two ballots.

One is a variance, one is a plat.

They are companion ballots.

In order to move forward with the plat, we'll vote on it on the ballot, but under under our rules and under the law, the Metropolitan Development Commission must approve and find that the plat filed dated May twenty-eighth, twenty twenty-six, complies with the standards of the subdivision regulations, subject to the following conditions.

The following eleven conditions, Kathleen, which are on file with the uh filing and the petitioners' commitments.

Yes.

They are on page 52 and 53.

Commissioner Murphy, I've made the motion.

Can I get a second?

Seconded.

Thank you.

Members of the commission, you have two ballots.

Go to your ballots.

First petition is twenty twenty-six CPL eight one five DCB Indianapolis LLC.

There were seven ballots cast.

This is the Plat petition.

There were yes, seven yes votes, zero no votes.

The Plat has been approved.

Okay, or there were not one person voted.

A second competition is a companion variance petition.

Again, there were seven ballots cast.

There were six yes votes, one no vote.

The petition, the variance petition has also been approved.

This petition has been passed.

This concludes our hearing.