Owner of several properties south of Mass Ave starts to divest

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The pending sale of two historic buildings and a vacant lot just south of Massachusetts Avenue is the first of what could be several deals in the area as one of its largest property owners begins to divest its holdings.

North Lockerbie LLC, the seller, is an entity that a decade ago was the financial muscle behind an ambitious mixed-use development that was to have been built at the northwest corner of College Avenue and Michigan Street.

Ross Reller, a broker with Colliers International who is representing North Lockerbie, said his client is beginning “a careful unwind of their investment.”

North Lockerbie, he said, owns a dozen parcels, both improved and unimproved, in the vicinity of North Street and Park Avenue. Included are commercial buildings and residences at the northwest corner of Park and Michigan Street and three of the four corners of the intersection of Park and North.

The first sale, which is subject to rezoning and other contingencies, involves the southeast corner of that intersection. It includes a historic cottage and a 12,000-square-foot, three-story brick building that dates to 1892. That building was originally known as St. Joseph’s Hall and housed a school associated with a Catholic church of the same name. The long-vacant structure most recently housed a social services organization catering to the Hispanic population.

The listing price for the two buildings together was $475,000 cash. Reller said the two buildings have been on the market for about nine months. The sale includes a vacant lot to the west of the cottage that had not been part of the listing. Reller said the seller decided to sell the vacant lot to facilitate the sale of the buildings.

The would-be buyer is a partnership affiliated with Michele Jackson, a local attorney who specializes in international adoptions. The brick building would be tuck pointed and get a new roof and windows in a rehab that would turn it into office space. The cottage would be rehabbed and leased and the vacant lot would be used for parking.

Plans for the buildings and lot, which are at the south edge of the Chatham Arch historic district, would have to be approved by the Indianapolis Historic Preservation Commission. The first step is rezoning of the property from industrial to CBD2, a mixed-use zoning common in the downtown area. The rezoning case is scheduled to be heard by IHPC July 6.

Reller said if all goes as expected the sale should close by the end of the third quarter.

“We’re extremely supportive of this buyer,” said Reller, noting that financing for the purchase is already lined up. Another buyer had the property under contract last December, but its plans would not have been acceptable to IHPC, Reller said.

Though none of North Lockerbie’s other properties are listed, Reller said he expects his client to gradually put them on the market.

Reller is working directly with Intrinzia Family Office, a Minneapolis firm that advises wealthy clients, in the disposition of the real estate. He described Intrinzia’s client as a private individual, family or trust that was to have backed North Lockerbie, a mixed-use project that would have been built between North and Michigan and from College Avenue to west of Park.

The project, which was in the planning stages back in 2001, was to have included retail space, condominiums and office space, including a new home for the advertising firm Young & Laramore.

When the deal unraveled, a portion of the site was developed into Lockerbie Park condominiums by a partnership involving Hearthview Residential.   

What remains is likely to be attractive to buyers given the location between Lockerbie Square and Chatham Arch and near Massachusetts Avenue bars and restaurants.

Rob Lukemeyer, a broker with Baseline real estate who is representing the buyer in the sale that’s in the works, said there should be healthy demand for the property.

“The neighborhood has appeal for my client and a lot of people just because of the amenities and the feel,” he said.     



Post a comment to this story

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

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. to mention the rest of Molly's experience- she served as Communications Director for the Indianapolis Department of Public Works and also did communications for the state. She's incredibly qualified for this role and has a real love for Indianapolis and Indiana. Best of luck to her!

  2. Shall we not demand the same scrutiny for law schools, med schools, heaven forbid, business schools, etc.? How many law school grads are servers? How many business start ups fail and how many business grads get low paying jobs because there are so few high paying positions available? Why does our legislature continue to demean public schools and give taxpayer dollars to charters and private schools, ($171 million last year), rather than investing in our community schools? We are on a course of disaster regarding our public school attitudes unless we change our thinking in a short time.

  3. I agree with the other reader's comment about the chunky tomato soup. I found myself wanting a breadstick to dip into it. It tasted more like a marinara sauce; I couldn't eat it as a soup. In general, I liked the place... but doubt that I'll frequent it once the novelty wears off.

  4. The Indiana toll road used to have some of the cleanest bathrooms you could find on the road. After the lease they went downhill quickly. While not the grossest you'll see, they hover a bit below average. Am not sure if this is indicative of the entire deal or merely a portion of it. But the goals of anyone taking over the lease will always be at odds. The fewer repairs they make, the more money they earn since they have a virtual monopoly on travel from Cleveland to Chicago. So they only comply to satisfy the rules. It's hard to hand public works over to private enterprise. The incentives are misaligned. In true competition, you'd have multiple roads, each build by different companies motivated to make theirs more attractive. Working to attract customers is very different than working to maximize profit on people who have no choice but to choose your road. Of course, we all know two roads would be even more ridiculous.

  5. The State is in a perfect position. The consortium overpaid for leasing the toll road. Good for the State. The money they paid is being used across the State to upgrade roads and bridges and employ people at at time most of the country is scrambling to fund basic repairs. Good for the State. Indiana taxpayers are no longer subsidizing the toll roads to the tune of millions a year as we had for the last 20 years because the legislature did not have the guts to raise tolls. Good for the State. If the consortium fails, they either find another operator, acceptable to the State, to buy them out or the road gets turned back over to the State and we keep the Billions. Good for the State. Pat Bauer is no longer the Majority or Minority Leader of the House. Good for the State. Anyway you look at this, the State received billions of dollars for an assett the taxpayers were subsidizing, the State does not have to pay to maintain the road for 70 years. I am having trouble seeing the downside.