Workers were trying to figure out what to do next after the city's compliance department issued a stop-work order this morning
on the new Buffalo Wild Wings. The order threatens a $2,500 fine for any company or individual found in violation. Catch up
on the story here. (IBJ Photo/Robin Jerstad)
Back to Top
IBJ Conversations
48 Comments
Add Comment
Kudos to whomever placed the stop-work order!!
This will be fun to see how it plays out.
But rules is rules, and this was just f&*%ing stoopid. I hope they get it all worked out and maybe Cory with throw us all a party down there when they open. :)
Pete might even show up.
On a side note, I would like to ask that people refrain from posting emails and telephone numbers for the various people involved in all steps of the planning/development process. Sure, they can be found on various sites if you search for them, but to post them here on a message board where emotions can run high is doing a disservice to the individual who is having their contact information plastered for all to use.
Certainly, a general contact line such as the Mayor's Action Center isn't bad to post, but think of how you would feel if it was done to you. City Staff is already over-worked and under-paid. Throw in 50 angry callers to your day and I am sure that you would not be very happy.
Think!
Much of the commentary on this is/was innaccurate. Almost like a gossip tabloid.
Let the city and the guy work it out without everyones hot air.
I prefer Hooter's and their ugly orange trade dress, anyway.
To start with, I think the new BW3 facades look stupid, no matter where they are. The one downtown is no exception. I also think it was entirely out of line for them to try to ignore compliance and just do whatever they feel like. That attitude helps no one.
Where I have a bit of an issue is with this city's Division of Compliance downtown. Pretend for a minute you're a tourist walking around downtown for the first time. Everything looks uninviting, by my estimation, over 50% of street level entrances are offices and non-public spaces. There are few exceptions that stick out and make areas feel more welcoming. The giant conical fermenter hanging off the Ram, the big marquees on the theaters, the giant neon Rock Bottom sign, and the now Dunkin' Donuts sign. Besides that, everything is nondescript. It looks like a ghost town most nights. Unless you know better, you don't feel like you should be out on the streets.
Just because a handful of restaurants and bars are going to want to invest in a gaudy exterior doesn't mean everyone wants to. It makes the classic store fronts seem that much more unique and elegant. From what I can tell, they didn't irreversibly damage the exterior of the building, they just built a big shell around it which could be removed if they move out. It's for that reason I say why not let them create a big flashy monster of a facade. Then you can say Fogo de Chao is the next block up from the big yellow and black bar.
Chain restaurants may be plaguing our city, but downtown is not expanding at the rate it once was. I welcome most any development there, especially development that encourages street level commercial operations on high rises.
I both live in a historic neighborhood and support historic preservation so I'm by no means for tearing down and starting over. It just seems that by using other larger cities as examples, modern developments can coexist with historic structures, and I see our Division of Compliance as inhibiting this.
Besides, if they can erect something like 333 Mass in a historic district, how can a facade change be that detrimental to the core of downtown?
Don't know if you have been downtown in the last say, ummm 5 years, but downtown isn't a ghost town at night, unless your calling just this block of BW3's downtown and the only portion that is a ghost town. Maybe you should spend some time out there past 7:00pm. There is still activity going on.
333 Mass got approval prior to that stretch of Mass Ave becoming a historic district. If I remember correctly, it was within days of the designation.
You make vaild points; some that I made in the initial post about this facade. These things can add to a downtown and aren't always bad. Also, I agree that there are many other items APPROVED that are far more intrusive. HOWEVER, Downtown is far and away a ghost town and I find it hard to believe that there are very many people that are concerned about their safety when being out and about the Mile-Square. Just because there are homeless people downtown does not mean that they are also criminals.
Its sad that people are so accustomed to so many downtowns being vacant that any street activity where there are people walking about AFTER DARK makes them feel unsafe.
I think Cincinnati is both an example of what we want to be and what we don't want to be. Cincinnati has far worse urban sprawl than we do. Downtown is not an epicenter, it's more of a combination of smaller cities all pressed together, but at the same time their highway system better accommodates that than ours does. On the other hand, they have a much better sense of local culture there. A lot of things they take pride in as being Cincinnati.
I hate comparing Indianapolis to Chicago because we're not the same thing at all, but you can walk around Chicago at 1am on a Wednesday night and it's more busy than South Meridian any night of the week here.
I guess my point in the ghost town comment is that a lot of things could be done to bring more people downtown at night. It currently feels like the majority of people walking outside late at night are here for a convention and the locals tend to drive in for dinner and drive out. Increased commercial usage of the ground floor of high rises is one of those things that would promote foot traffic. Mass Ave is a good example of this. It's a complex problem and involves reduced surface lots, fewer self-standing parking structures, more grocery and convenience stores and a ton of other stuff. But hindering businesses that want to create street facing, ground floor commercial developments is definitely counterproductive.
At least CorrND and CoryW were reasonable enough to understand that this is a sad circumstance and didn't want to see this come to this. If we had more reasoned minds like theirs pulling for development in this city, we would surely be better off.
There is also competent FREE advice available from the real estate people at Indianapolis Downtown, Inc. and from the CDCs that deal in the Regional Center and historic districts. Not to mention from Jeff York and the rest of the city current planning staff...there's a planner on call during normal business hours at DMD.
This expensive mistake by the business owner was entirely avoidable.
The yellow is the least of this treatment's problems. The real sin was removing the display windows typical of downtown commercial buildings and replacing them with small, suburban windows you'd find on stand-alone office buildings that in no way relate to the proportions and symmetry found above. Not to mention the ugly dryvit like material and faux-stone base that just screams cheap. The yellow, along with the black-and-white border is just insult to injury. Nothing about this treatment is inviting to passers-by who may not know what BW3s is--why in the world would they be enticed to enter and see what is inside? BW3s should thank the city for requiring an improvement to this mess because in the end, it will help their business.
All it brings in its current design to downtown is a sign that lights up. That is the only life it brings. There is no connection between the BW's and Washington Street. It will look like a dark, dormant space from the street.
This isn't doing any favors for the city; it isn't doing any favors for the business. Not being able to see inside from the street isn't very inviting and will turn many potential customers off.
The owners selected a p!ss poor designer. They should accept that, hire someone new, fix it, and move on, instead of defending the turd of a design that they have. And I can tell you, as an architect, it's not that difficult of a thing to fix!
Jason: I was unaware that the windows up front were fake. I haven't followed the project that closely other than reading a few posts here and seeing it in person a number of times. The restrooms should definitely be in the back of the building. With black, lifeless windows it won't provide much benefit to existing streetscape. In fact, the restroom position has always been a topic concerning this BW3 that I found fairly stupid, but now that I know it renders the windows useless it's fairly upsetting. Hopefully they change that.
I live in Devonshire :-)
Is this more nose thumbing?
It might have meant for the facade. As far as I know they have approval to remodel the interior.
I'm not really sure why people are so thrilled with the City's actions. Maybe when expectations have dropped so low due to years of inaction, any action is worthy of accolades.
The real judgment should be made after the City either does or doesn't actually require them to significantly change the design to make the interior interact with the exterior as others have here mentioned.
Still think it looks a lot better than the crap on the north side of Wash Street. Red's looks great, the rest sucks. I am sure there is some waltzing going on, my guess is what you see...is what you will get.