IBJNews

Effort to save Rivoli Theatre faces another delay

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrint

The owner of the Rivoli Theatre is in a legal dispute with the previous owner that could prevent the old movie house from being saved before structural problems render it unsalvageable.

The Rivoli, 3155 E. 10th St., has the potential to be a catalyst for further redevelopment of the East 10th Street corridor, the stretch adopted by organizers of Super Bowl XLVI, if the not-for-profit that owns it can win complete control of the 1927 structure and stabilize it.

The owner, the Rivoli Center for the Performing Arts Inc., is locked in a dispute with Charles R. Chulchian, who gifted it to the not-for-profit in 2007. Chulchian retained an interest in the building at the time of the transfer, a detail that has complicated efforts to salvage the Rivoli.

REW_rivoli_15colMark Dollase, chairman of Rivoli Center for the Performing Arts Inc., is concerned the roof of the building will collapse before his group can raise money to save it. (IBJ Photo/Perry Reichanadter)

Mark Dollase, chairman of Rivoli Center, said his group has been working to win complete control of the building and appeared to be close to achieving that goal. But Chulchian recently hired new legal counsel and notified Dollase’s group April 9 that he was renewing his effort to retain a stake in the building.

Chulchian bought the Rivoli in 1976 and formerly lived in an apartment on the building’s second floor. Attempts to locate him to comment on his continuing interest in the theater were unsuccessful.

Dollase doesn’t know how much time it will take to resolve the latest legal twist, but he’s concerned that the roof of the building will collapse before his group can raise the money to save it.

Dollase said it would cost about $300,000 to put a new roof on the theater, a step that would buy the building more time. He said there are funders waiting in the wings to help save the building, but they are reluctant to invest before the legal issues are resolved.

A mild winter and early spring have helped slow deterioration of the theater, which was well constructed to begin with, Dollase said. “We’re fortunate that the Rivoli was overbuilt.”

The Rivoli anchors one of three redevelopment nodes that have been a priority for the East 10th Street Civic Association, a group working to encourage the corridor’s revival.

Tammi Hughes, executive director of the civic association, said her group’s dream is to see the Rivoli restored so that it can house performance space, studio space, practice rooms and other arts opportunities that neighborhood residents can take advantage of. Street-level space could house retail tenants.

The other two nodes are at 10th and Jefferson Avenue and 10th and Rural Street. Community advocates have spent years planning for a revival of the 10th Street corridor, an effort that was adopted by the National Football League and the Indianapolis Super Bowl Host Committee. That high-profile support has leveraged millions of dollars for housing and retail redevelopments in the area.  

 

ADVERTISEMENT

  • patrickdooley@aol.com
    Chulchain has held this building hostage for too many years while not protecting this important part of East 10th Streets history. Nearby a neighborhood is experiencing a rebirth in spite of building owners like Chulchain do not maintain their property.
  • It's always about the money
    Chulchian, who gifted it to the not-for-profit in 2007 only did that to relieve himself of the upkeep & tax burden. Now, the neighborhood has a chance to flourish, he wants to cash in on his 'gift'. Perhaps the gift should be rescinded; he could repay tax assessments from 2007 through 2012 and the necessary expense for upkeep during that time.

Post a comment to this story

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

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
 
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. These higher rates Co. e about only because physicians are now hospital employees. otherwise physicians couldn't charge these rates and share the windfall with the hospital. Community/rural hospitals probably not buying physicians practices and thus weren't getting the windfall anyway.

  2. The incentive for poor people to get themselves off public assistance and "no longer be poor" is even with help...they're STILL POOR! Being poor, even with some assistance, isn't all that pleasant. (I speak from experience) It's a stubborn myth that poor people, who are on public assistance, are sitting in the lap of luxury. You should try living on just those "freebies" that you mentioned and see how meager they actually are. By the way, I didn't mean you had to buy/own a puppy...just pet one. :)

  3. As near as I can tell the minority has ZERO constitutional obligation to offer a quorum to the majority. A requirement for quorum was inserted into the constitution so that tyrannical majorities could not simply shove through odious and objectionable legislation (which is exactly what they did.) By allowing a tyrannical majority to charge fines against the minority for exercising their constitutional prerogative to deny quorum the court as made a mockery of constitutional governance in the state of Indiana.

  4. The voters elected the Reps to make a vote not walk out on the vote. They had to the right to exercise their opinion and vote "no" to the bill. Let me ask you this if you walked out of your job for 5 straight weeks would you get paid? Would you even have a job to go back to? If any elected official walks out on the people they should be arrested for stealing tax dollars from the public. They were elected to do a job and not leave when the job gets stuff.

  5. I have been to several of their locations in Pennsylvania and always go in for 1 item and leave with a basket full of things. I'm very happy they decided on Indiana, now if only they would put the other store in eastside.

ADVERTISEMENT