Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Retail And Commercial Development topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission approves Bridal Oaks multi‑tenant building; Domino’s franchisee to occupy one bay
Summary
The commission approved concept and development plans for a three‑unit multi‑tenant building in the Bridal Oaks development. A Domino’s franchisee told the commission he will occupy one of the bays as a carryout location; two other bays are planned for retail tenants.
The Whitestown Planning Commission approved concept and development plans for the Bridal Oaks multi‑tenant building, which will include three bays and a proposed Domino’s Pizza carryout store.
Bill Drake, representing Drake Homes and Commercial Builders, introduced the project and introduced franchisee Connor Hertel. Hertel described himself as a local Domino’s franchisee and said the Whitestown location would be strictly carryout with no dine‑in seating.
Petitioners said the three‑unit building will have a Domino’s in one bay and two retail bays available for lease. Staff reported that stormwater and underground detention issues had been addressed and noted that conditional approval previously pending county stormwater review had been updated to reflect county sign‑off; staff recommended approval of both the concept plan (PC 25‑035‑CP) and the development plan (PC 25‑036‑DP).
During the public hearing, one nearby resident, Patricia Brown of 6610 Ferguson Drive, asked which tenants might occupy the other bays and how traffic would exit the site. Petitioners said they are seeking “reliable long‑term tenants” and that the development will use a curb cut on Spur Street (a right‑in/right‑out) and a second driveway on Phipps Lane; there will be no driveway on Albert S. White Parkway.
Commission discussion clarified a typographical error in the staff report: the plans show 34 parking spaces and no beer garden or outdoor entertainment area (language that had carried over in error from a different project). The commission approved both motions as presented, based on staff recommendations.
Next steps: the petitioner will continue leasing efforts for the remaining bays and proceed with development plan implementation; no construction schedule was specified in the hearing record.
