Developers propose 262-unit apartment complex on Tuscalum Road; neighbors raise traffic, ownership and green-space concerns

A developer told neighbors at a community meeting that it plans to build a roughly 262-unit, market-rate apartment complex on a 14-acre parcel fronting Tuscalum Road north of Bell Road.

The presentation, led by Len Feifer of Dr. Horton’s multifamily group and moderated by Josh, described a stepped site plan that rises about 60 feet from Tuscalum Road, includes a 30-foot buffer along the road, a clubhouse and pool, and preserved vegetation at the rear. The team said the product would be a Class A rental development with amenities such as a community room, fitness center, co‑working spaces and private balconies on most units.

Neighbors at the virtual meeting voiced multiple concerns. Elizabeth Goen, who said she lives near the site, objected to the rental-only model and warned that additional apartment complexes have proliferated along Bell Road. "You are talking about a business opportunity where you develop land and then you charge people and people will never actually be able to own a home," she said. Other residents pressed the presenters for alternatives such as townhouses or for-sale condominium-style units.

Presenters responded that the developer’s multifamily group builds rental apartments and that, in their experience, the site’s topography makes for-sale townhome products less feasible. The team said they had examined multiple development types and that the apartment product—stepped to accommodate the hill—was the most compatible option they could make work on this parcel.

Traffic, safety and infrastructure were recurring themes. Representatives of a nearby nonprofit at Antioch United Methodist Church and other residents highlighted blind hills on Tuscalum Road, speeding vehicles, and a school at the Blue Hole Road intersection that generates peak drop-off and pick-up traffic. The presenters said they will perform a traffic study with the state highways office (INDOT/NDOT), noted prior traffic-calming requests had been denied, and said they expect to be required to build a detached sidewalk along the frontage as part of the roadway improvements.

Several technical and process details were addressed. The team confirmed the adjacent property already has a specific plan approval from May 2019; they said the developer would own and operate the proposed apartments (not sell individual units), expects approximately 400 parking spaces, and plans for about seven to 10 ADA-accessible units on the ground floor. Presenters also said they would request utility capacity letters and would pay for any required off-site improvements. They said they will avoid excessive blasting where possible but will follow applicable rules if rock excavation is necessary.

Presenters read current-market rent estimates and unit sizes as illustrative (they emphasized rents could change): one-bedrooms about 650–750 square feet and roughly $1,400–$1,500 per month; two-bedrooms about 1,000–1,100 square feet and roughly $1,750–$1,850 per month; three-bedrooms about 1,300–1,400 square feet and roughly $2,100–$2,200 per month. (Transcript text included typos in several figures; the presenter characterized the numbers as illustrative of today’s market.)

Council member Lee and the project team said this meeting was an initial working session and committed to further outreach, including a site visit with neighborhood representatives scheduled the next day. The presenters offered to share the adjacent property’s specific plan and canvass additional neighbor feedback before any formal rezoning request would be filed.

No formal motion, vote or rezoning decision occurred at the meeting; presenters and residents agreed to continue conversations. The team left contact information in the meeting chat for follow-up.