New rendering: Zing

August 15, 2008
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrint
Here's the overall vision for the new Zing restaurant at 543 Indiana Ave. By the way, I'm told the galvanized steel has to cure for one year before they paint it black. The restaurant should open in a couple weeks. Last week's post is here.
Zing Indianapolis
ADVERTISEMENT
  • ShaneAugust 15, 2008 9:27 AM
    assuming it is painted black, I think it looks great
    Reply to CommentFlag Comment
  • CorrNDAugust 15, 2008 9:48 AM
    Nice rendering. It takes a few liberties with the building -- too few ground floor windows and third floor dormers -- but I'm glad to hear that the steel will be painted black. I really wish the dormers they added matched the existing one on the point as well the imagined ones here do.

    http://tinyurl.com/6asrhu
    Reply to CommentFlag Comment
  • AblerockAugust 15, 2008 9:50 AM
    That will help immensely.

    Do they plan on adding the flared bases to the support beams? That would also help.

    Any word on the menu? Has that been mentioned already?
    Reply to CommentFlag Comment
  • CorrNDAugust 15, 2008 10:01 AM
    Susan Guyett had a small piece in the Star last week. Key menu quotes:

    Small-plate
    menu spanning American, French, Mexican, Portuguese and Italian cuisine
    $7-11
    50 wines to choose from and about 25 beers

    http://tinyurl.com/623dq4
    Reply to CommentFlag Comment
  • MDSAugust 15, 2008 10:42 AM
    This rendering doesn't reference the surrounding area at all. Sure, it looks fine all by itself. But in reality, I don't think painting the attrocious steel balcony black is going to make it look any better.
    I'm still very skeptical...
    Reply to CommentFlag Comment
  • MeredithAugust 15, 2008 11:14 AM
    I love it! I can't wait for it to open
    Reply to CommentFlag Comment
  • sfjAugust 15, 2008 1:31 PM
    Yeah, the black will be a big improvement.
    Reply to CommentFlag Comment
  • MDBAugust 15, 2008 1:43 PM
    I find it interesting that the artist chose to construct the viewpoint at such an oddly high altitude. The viewer seems to be about 12-feet tall. It leads me to believe that he/she was directed to draw it in such a way as to minimize the visibility of the deck (not an uncommon trait of developers). Normal-sized pedestrians and drivers will see much more of its underside. Don't get me started on the jungle in the background that has overgrown the surrounding buildings.

    I think the problem most people have with the deck is at the point, where the 2nd floor space seems to be disproportionately large against the building. Runner up would be the concealment of the ornate architectural detailing over the 1st floor door.

    Just to clarify something else - regarding the galvanized vs. paint dilemma, out of maybe a half a dozen options, this team CHOSE to use galvanized steel for this application. This was a valid choice structurally, but it is not fair to imply that it was the only choice and therefore the deck HAS to look like this (for a year).
    Reply to CommentFlag Comment
  • CorrNDAugust 15, 2008 2:19 PM
    MDB -- two of your points actually go together: the height of the balcony and the concealment of the ornate detailing. The balcony is as tall as it is precisely so that it does NOT conceal the ornate detailing:

    http://tinyurl.com/5cf3mt
    Reply to CommentFlag Comment
  • ParisAugust 15, 2008 2:44 PM
    Loves it! xoxo
    Reply to CommentFlag Comment
  • j. j.August 15, 2008 3:29 PM
    You can't paint galvanized steel for a year? BOLLOCKS! I've never heard such BOGUS information. Give Sherwin Williams a call and I'm sure they'll get you up to speed on that. Did someone do interWEB research on that fact or what? Is there an April Fools Day in August?
    Reply to CommentFlag Comment
  • socrates#1fanAugust 17, 2008 1:36 PM
    Are the new dormers going to be given proper masonry work shown in this rendering?
    Are they really going to add that cast-iron metal work to the railings and posts? I hope so, it would add so much charm and architecture to an already beautiful building!
    This structure is quiet unique and beautiful for that portion of downtown. The renovations should if anything add to the beauty to the landmark.
    I was actually turned off by this development as I was to a large degree concerned that it may destroy the charm of this structure. I can see now, it may be quiet beautiful if it is kept with the rendering.
    Reply to CommentFlag Comment

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.

ADVANCED SEARCH
Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT

  1. liek the rest of America

  2. These quaint,obsessed musings by the stalkers are certainly entertaining, but I'm trying to figure out what, if anything, all the yelping below has to do with Zak Brown.

  3. It's evident that Moffett was pushing the right buttons and corporate America is now trying to squash him. He just wanted to withdraw the free pilot services provided to the company by the pilots to try and put some pressure on a company that has not been interested in negotiating a contract in over 5 years. The company does not provide a contract because not having one has saved them a bundle of money. Shame on any Republic pilots not standing behind their union leader just because things are getting tough, can you not see such strategic moves by the company as putting the last union president in a corporate position and into THEIR pocket. Do you really believe the last union president is so appalled at the attempts by Moffett, do you not remember his oppositions to the company? We stood behind him. It has been proven over and over again for thousands of years without fail, a man cannot serve two masters. Anyone that believes people vote contrary to their paycheck and livelihood deserve to be taken advantage of, the recent statements by the former union president are laughable as he denounces the current union president from his new corporate position. Have you ever seen a drafted sports player score points for his previous team, it cannot be done, he is not on the pilots side anymore, he gets his money a different way now than you and I do, and he should not be allowed to remain on the seniority list. A drafted player brings strength, credibility, tactical knowledge, and a strategic advantage to his NEW team, he would not be drafted or paid were it otherwise. We are all forced to choose only one side to play for and support, not doing so has many references in life such as insider trading and shaving points, all illegal for good reason. This basic fact is why corporate moguls, scientist, and engineers all sign non-discloser agreements and non-compete clauses, as protection in case they are lured into switching sides as our former union president has done. No NFL coach ever drafted a player so that both teams could benefit and better understand each other, they are recruited to win the game against that former team, period. Likewise the company does not recruit the former union president by accident or mutual understanding, its strategy. Don't confuse playing the game with good sportsman-like conduct in support of common business and prosperity goals, with the requirement to only play for one side. Good men we all love and favor fall subject to this manipulation, often without their knowledge, and it is not a betrayal of their friendship to oppose them when they switch sides. If we did not love and trust them, they would not have been chosen and lured to the other side in the first place. The deception by the drafted player is not made at a conscious level, it's just human nature and it's all about money and power which corrupts our ability to be objective and loyal to two masters. This is why our court system created the defense attorney, and why our military created counter intelligence. Its strategy and its propaganda, and it works, and that's why the "powers to be" manipulate the chess pieces by sometimes changing their colors. Some players know they are being manipulated when their color is changed, but it brings them more money and power so they do not care. The rest have good intentions but do not even realize they are being manipulated. This tactic is also known by another name, Divide and Conquer. In battle sending an imperfect message with an imperfect team is obviously not ideal, but it's still being sent by YOUR team, your union leader, a leader that has common goals and common rewards with you, they are the best, because we have elected them to do a job for us. If you are not backing Moffett but believing the spin by those that have recently switched sides, you are taking food out of your own mouth. Showing unity and backing an imperfect situation still results in taking just as much ground, it's about unity and bargaining power. It's not necessary to wait around for that perfect attack because it will never come, the company will spin and attempt to destroy anyone that gets in their way. Ultimately it's not about any specific attack anyway, ASAP or whatever it makes no difference, it is and always has been only about power. If this company cared about safety it would not build pairings with 8 hour overnights, come on, are you that naive? Besides, do you really think Hoffa cares, no, he got a call from corporate America and was squeezed into denouncing Moffett. If he didn't they would spin the safety card against him and the Teamsters National with implication for truckers, future contracts, insurance rates etc...saying something like the Teamsters use safety as a bargaining chip, blah blah blah... Do you really think any pilot is going to do something unsafe for the contract, absolutely not, the only ones threatening safety here is the company with reduced rest, fatigue, and poverty. Do you not find it odd that Hoffa and the Teamsters are opposing a Teamster president publicly? Would the Teamsters National not normally support and work with one of their own? Why did they not sit down and help him strategize, correct any mistakes, and charge ahead? Would the Teamsters National not normally support and leverage a contract for all those pilots that have been paying Teamster dues, isn't that why we have all been paying Teamster dues in the first place? I sure haven't been paying dues so that the Teamsters National could come along and write this kind of an article undercutting our union leader and our unity. Whose side is the Teamsters National really on, it's obviously not the Republic pilots side.

  4. No matter what Moffatt does the company is going to spin it like he is the terrorist and brainwash people like you into believing it, wake up, back your players that are trying to change things for you and your livelihood. Where has Hoffa been for the last 6 years, except collecting our dues. Seriously, do you really think an FO going for upgrade, signed off by a checkairman ready for the upgrade, who then fails, is not even capable of returning as a First Officer.

  5. whoa!

ADVERTISEMENT