The Nature Conservancy is finalizing plans for its new $4.4-million
headquarters at 620 E. Ohio St. downtown. The not-for-profit group is planning a two-story, 20,000-square-foot building that
will take up about half a block between Easley Winery and the new six-story Maxwell condo and retail project. The Conservancy
already tore down a building previously occupied by Nemec Heating & Supply Co., which sold it the property early last year
(earlier post is here). The architect, locally based
Axis, is working to design an energy-efficient headquarters with a “green� roof, extensive landscaping and possibly wind
turbines. The Conservancy plans to finalize a timeline for the project after receiving construction bids Feb. 13.
- Home
- NEWS
- REGIONAL
- THIS WEEK'S PAPER
- BLOGS
- Multimedia
- OPINION
- A&E
- LISTS
- PEOPLE
- EVENTS
- Classifieds
- Subscribe
Welcome to Property Lines, Indy's source for neighborhood real estate news. Your host is Scott Olson, IBJ's real estate beat
reporter. Edited by Cory Schouten.
The Nature Conservancy is finalizing plans for its new $4.4-million
headquarters at 620 E. Ohio St. downtown. The not-for-profit group is planning a two-story, 20,000-square-foot building that
will take up about half a block between Easley Winery and the new six-story Maxwell condo and retail project. The Conservancy
already tore down a building previously occupied by Nemec Heating & Supply Co., which sold it the property early last year
(earlier post is here). The architect, locally based
Axis, is working to design an energy-efficient headquarters with a “green� roof, extensive landscaping and possibly wind
turbines. The Conservancy plans to finalize a timeline for the project after receiving construction bids Feb. 13.
Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
-
Laura-the festivals and tastings are free. What does is strengthen the sense of community with activities. What are those empty lots doing for the Village? it's sad you can't see the good that this progress can do for the area. No one is requiring anyone to shop there. I guess you'd rather see a Dollar store move in or no, we'd rather see the property stand empty b/c change is out of the question.
-
Read down to the part about Brizzi. Someone needs to subpoena his "purchases" of Red RockPictures and Cellstar and his corresponding bank records, I mean c'mon, I'd like to see his alcohol usage records, too. http://diana-vice.blogspot.com/2011_01_01_archive.html
-
Wonder if my neighborhood can advertise our "retention" pond and act like it is a beach too?
-
a new record at the '11 salebration until they realized that it was a futile effort to get their crapwagon moter and crapwagon car up speed. And then they just quietly slunk off into the night and never spoke of it again. Nothing to see here folks.
-
millions for putting a company's bumper sticker on one of its Lolas. But you gotta take what you can get.
ADVERTISEMENT
Back to TopCopyright © All Rights Reserved. Privacy Policy | Terms of Use.
Design, CMS, Hosting & Web Development :: ePublishing.
Additional Hosting & Delivery by
IBJ Conversations
52 Comments
Add Comment
But I don't want to hijack this post, so I'll steer back on topic:
What first struck me about this rendering is the design's similarity to the Nature Conservancy's current home in the south wing of the Harrison Center for the Arts. Coincidence? That building was designed to house the educational facilities of a church in the mid-20th century. This building also looks like a mid-century educational building. It also reminds me of the elementary schools in Speedway, specifically Wheeler elementary, which I attended.
I'm not saying that's a bad thing, just an observation. Perhaps evoking a spirit of mid-century education was the architect's goal. My question is, why ?
Nice design. I guess since it's a block away from Axis, they want to help improve their work neighborhood.
All snarkiness aside, I think it's a fine design. This might be a small stretch, but it looks like Axis took a cue that one-story building on the opposite side of that block of Ohio that's half built to the sidewalk and half set-back with an overhang and vertical poles.
# Roger40 Says:
February 26th, 2008 at 12:22 am
I used to work at the building some 15+ years ago and I can tell you that the walls are so out of place that the second floor almost fell to the 1st. The roof leaked for years and was never worked on just empty the buckets….good luck on a reuse, I have not been there in years but it was bad even then. I remember the upstair walls being many feet bowed out…I don’t see it.
This is some attempt at mid-century. I recognize that style of window. I see it on 60's-70's buildings all the time and it is not very attractive.
This stuff does not age well either. The originals of this style are not exactly considered 'beautiful'.
This will suffer the same fate as every other structure of this fashion.
BTW, it is greener to renovate instead of rebuilding.
This with the new Fall Creek building are just more buildings to reface in the future.
It's not the developer's fault that the existing sidewalk is built adjacent curb, which isn't typically a bad thing in the downtown, but since there is no on-street parking on this block of Ohio, it makes for a very inhospitable walk. However, since that section of sidewalk is in severe disrepair, they will be rebuilding with their development. It should be rebuilt at the property line, which would result in their building fronting the sidewalk.
They should also consider taking a cue from the Maxwell development, which faced with the same sidewalk situation, rebuilt the sidewalk at the property line and added a row of on-street parking. Perhaps the City would be willing to assist with adding on-street parking since they would presumably install meters and collect revenue, and the City would benefit from additional public parking available to all. The Nature Conservancy could realize a cost reduction by eliminating a few of the parking spaces they would otherwise build behind the building.
Of course, this might cause some problems for their plans to install wind turbines in the Ohio Street right-of-way, where I would suggest the sidewalk belongs.
Will there be a public hearing on this project? Does it meet the thresholds in the Regional Center Ordinance to qualify as a high impact project?
This is really basic stuff that makes a HUGE difference, but very easy to implement where sufficient ROW exists and construction is ongoing anyway. Particularly where the property owner wants a variance, the city could get some type of sidewalk easement as a concession for granting the variance where sufficient ROW doesn't exist.
I guess KIB wins the award for being more environmentally friendly. ;-)
After all, it is The Nature Conservancy and not the Urban Parking Association occupying the building.
Perhaps the wind turbines could be set up on 8-10 foot cast stone pedestals...so that they actually catch some wind and prevent people from getting tangled up in them.
As far as vertical turbines, I hope if they are they plan to put them higher. Any first year engineer would know that putting them below the roof line will mean they will not use even a small percentage of the possible wind flow. I wonder if either they are standards to hold banners or if they are turbines, they are kept low on the drawing so they do not stand out and cause concern from neighbors.
Those three vertical things are not wind turbines, they are posts to hang banners on like you see in front of museums.
Hopefully Market will take off like this once the best damn interstate access ramp in th eworld s removed. Sorry, I loved riding up that ramp.
Please don't forget that the building was abandoned and given it's condition would have remained abandoned for quite some time, probably until it fell down. If nothing else, at least The Nature Conservancy is redeveloping an area that would have remained undeveloped for the foreseeable future.
I like the use of the wind tower elements, which again, I note echo design motifs from elsewhere in downtown without being an overt clone. This sort of art deco verticality is a great counterpoint to the otherwise horizontally oriented building. The mix of tall, thin on the left and short, squat on the right reminds me of the art works proposed for the Central Library plinths. This is a much better setting for it. Thinking about how Indy could develop a more unique design identity and vernacular architectural style, perhaps that is the sort of motif that could become a signature. As much as I like symmetry, creating tension like this might inject some life into a downtown full of rather dull structures.
Like the variations in color, texture, and size of the rectangular construction blocks.
Like the attempt to provide interest on the front facade, not just a blank or flat wall.
I think some tweaks could be made, however.
First, the thin but oversized facade alludes to, I'm not sure how else to say this, a strip mall type design.
Is this an office building or storage facility? I ask because there seems to be a lot of space on the front facade without windows. The window density in the remainder of the structure draws attention to this. I'd look to revise the fenestration a bit.
The front projecting element in brick is a particular area I'd look at. This could be more powerful with more transparency - is this a conference room or something? There are already big windows. If you are going to do something like this, perhaps playing around with a dramatic ambiguity between internal and external space could be good.
The sides of the building also need permeability since they are so visible. Even using a nicer construction material will still make it look like a masonry wall. The doorways on the left side in the rendering appear to be a bit of an afterthought. Maybe do something to make this a real secondary entrance.
The sidewalk recommendations from the earlier discussion need to be incorporated. Note how the landscape elements actually buffer the building from the street in this rendering, a suburban effect despite the street grid orientation. We need to pull the building into the city and vice versa.
On the whole, a solid first cut, but one I'd iterate on a couple more times to take it up a notch or two. Lots of potential in this one.
By the way, there is nothing wrong with just being a solid infill building. In line with my statement that the ordinary is more important than the special, having the average building function well in the urban context and look good is as or more important than getting the big, prominent structures right.
Very little of the old building could have been recycled, because they demolished it with heavy equipment, not hand dismantling which is what is needed to save beams and bricks. Most probably ended up as fill material in a floodplain somewhere.
If the building did not meet the needs of the conservancy as it stood, then they should not have bought it. They should have found an empty lot somewhere and built on it. Or better yet, they should have taken up space in an existing building. Everyone agrees the number one way to conserve is to reuse an old building. number two is to utilize existing office space. Number three is to gently dismantle a building and use most of its parts for other projects and one of the worst is to tear down, and build new.
It is ironic that a conservancy group chose the last option. Actions speak louder than words, and this group spoke loudly. Reminds me of Al Gore running around the country in a private jet and SUVs telling everyone to lower their carbon footprint. Almost makes me want to go to the recycle bin and take out my aluminum can and put it in the trash as a protest.
I think people have more of a dislike towards ornamentation than revivals.
The building that sits there now is more original than this poor attempt at 1970’s will ever be.
It would have been greener for them to build on an empty lot.
Just because they are developing an abandon property does not mean we should bend over backward.
Axis would have a place to eat lunch that beats the heck out of sitting by the bums under the Market Street bridge. Oh, wait, that's gone now. Now they'll have to head down to the to the jail...ermmm, I mean the Market Street Self Storage.
One of the fundamental concepts of sustainability is optimum use of infrastructure and protection of new lands from irresponsible development.
The Nature Conservancy has pulled down two buildings designed to take advantage of a dense urban environment and infrastructure systems designed to support it and dropped in a suburban office building with a surface parking lot. What's more is that the planning of the new facility effectively precludes denser use of the site in the future without major modification.
This effectively means that the square footage lost on this site will eventually need to be built elsewhere, potentially obliterating undeveloped land in the process (or this one will have to be torn down and replaced with something more appropriate).
We don't need more parking lots in downtown Indianapolis, we need more density.
Rally,
My main point is still valid. If the building did not meet their needs, then why buy it? I have issues with people who buy a historic house and then gut it, modernize it and put a modern addition that dominates it. If that is what they want, then build new somewhere else.
If the conservancy wanted a new building with all of the bells and whislted build elsewhere on an empty lot. Seems like a rather easy solution.
This is not Carmel or the suburbs. If they want to be downtown, they should follow through.
We are not beggars and we should not just take anything that is a pathetic thing to do for downtown Indy.
We shouldn't let developers pull out the fear card whenever we question the development.
The LEED system itself needs to be reworked to take into account the environmental damage done by putting up a new building. Otherwise it's like Al Gore's limousine.
They are more than welcome to do as they wish, but doing what they did lessens the impact of their story.
Why We're Successful
It's how we work that has made the Conservancy so successful — and makes us optimistic that we can expand that great conservation work to meet the challenges ahead:
We use a science-based approach — aided by our more than 700 staff scientists.
We pursue non-confrontational, pragmatic solutions to conservation challenges.
We partner — with indigenous communities, businesses, governments, multilateral institutions, other non-profits…and people such as yourself.
It's science based approach. They are not the USGBC. They are not trying to be the USGBC. Anything could be better and everyone's i critic, I know. Give them a chance to educate us. I still think it's a great opportunity for Indianapolis. There could be another stucco bland office building there. Or a CVS. or gas station.
The Nature Conservancy's current home is in the Harrison Center for the Arts.
When the Nature Conservancy relocates, employees of Redeemer Presbyterian Church will take over the space.
Why not move the Nature Conservancy into the NUVO building on Meridian St.? They have empty space and HEC is already there.
1930's normal architecture was not always ornate.
The exterior is actually highly intact.
Buildings literally caved in have been saved.