Owners of doomed Di Rimini ready to present new design

October 31, 2013
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The long-awaited plans to improve upon the gaudy design of the ill-fated Di Rimini apartment project are beginning to take shape.

733 standard 225pxThe new owners of the building, local restaurateur Mike Cunningham and contractor Patrick Heitz, are ready to present their design to the Indianapolis Regional Center Hearing Examiner.

“We’re going to start demolition as soon as we get the proper permitting,” Heitz said.

That should be welcome news to local design aficionados who jeered the building’s look.

On top of that, city officials halted the project three years ago because of numerous code violations.

Cunningham and Heitz purchased the vacant 31-unit complex at 733 N. Capitol Ave. in late March from Louisville-based Stock Yards Bank & Trust for $700,000. The bank had taken ownership of the building last year after foreclosing on a $2.8 million loan to the original developer.

The pair plan to spend about $1.5 million on upgrades and are simply calling the complex “733” in a nod to its street address.

The architect on the project is HCO Inc.
 

ADVERTISEMENT
  • Much better
    This looks MUCH better than the previous proposals to fix this mess. Bravo to Mike Cunningham, who continues to do great things downtown!!
  • Mesh
    Mesh on Capitol?
  • better...
    I have to say, it's much better than before. I could actually start to like this building. This corner could really start to take shape with the 800 Capitol project across the street. Good job making something out of nothing.
  • Not...
    Same old "new" architecture we see all over town. looks cheap.
  • Tear it down and start over
    My favorite word in this story is "demolition."
  • Demolition?
    Demolition implies that the existing structure will be raised and this represents a new structure. Is that the case? I don't think so given that the overall shape remains the same.
  • Demo does not equal Raze
    To those that are wondering and commenting the building will not be completely torn down. If the entire structure was removed the term would be raze or complete demolition. If you look at the current building and the latest rendering (in the article above) you'll notice that they will only be doing a partial demo. It appears they'll be removing and replacing the entire outer skin. The will not, however, be changing the overall shape, scale, or size of the structure underneath. Think of this as a rehab of an existing building.
  • 1973
    1973 called and said it wants its' architectural style back. (It also want's it back from City Way, and the Indystar building renovation.)
  • Improvement
    This definitely is an improvement from the original design. Hopefully the City learned a lesson from this project. The City is not that disperate to allow unsightly structures to be built within the core. We should be beyond this.

Post a comment to this blog

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
  1. Kent's done a good job of putting together some good guests, intelligence and irreverence without the inane chatter of the other two shows. JMV is unlistenable, mostly because he doesn't do his homework and depends on non-sports stuff to keep HIM interested. Query and Shultz is a bit better, but lack of prep in their show certainly is evident. Sterling obviously workes harder than the other shows. We shall see if there is any way for a third signal with very little successful recent history to make it. I always say you have to give a show two years to grow into what it will become...

  2. Lafayette Square, Washington Square should be turned into office parks with office buildings, conversion, no access to the public at all. They should not be shopping malls and should be under tight security and used for professional offices instead of havens for crime. Their only useage is to do this or tear them down and replace them with high rise office parks with secured parking lots so that the crime in the areas is not allowed in. These are prime properties, but must be reused for other uses, professional office conversions with no loitering and no shopping makes sense, otherwise they have become hangouts long ago for gangs, groups of people who have no intent of spending money, and are only there for trouble and possibly crime, shoplifting, etc. I worked summers at SuperX Drugs in Lafayette Square in the 1970s and even then the shrinkage from shoplifting was 10-15 percent. No sense having shopping malls in these areas, they earn no revenue, attract crime, and are a blight on the city. All malls that are not of use should be repurposed or torn down by the city, condemned. One possibility would be to repourpose them as inside college campuses or as community centers, but then again, if the community is high crime, why bother.

  3. Straight No Chaser

  4. Seems the biggest use of TIF is for pet projects that improve Quality Of Life, allegedly, but they ignore other QOL issues that are of a more important and urgent nature. Keep it transparent and try not to get in ready, fire, Aim! mode. You do realize that business the Mayor said might be interested is probably going to want TIF too?

  5. Gary, I'm in complete agreement. The private entity should be required to pay IPL, and, if City parking meters are involved, the parking meter company. I was just pointing out how the poorly-structured parking meter deal affected the car share deal.

ADVERTISEMENT