Owner plans redevelopment for Virginia Avenue buildings

March 7, 2013
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrint

Virginia Avenue buildings IndianapolisThe owner of three vacant buildings along Virginia Avenue between Pennsylvania and Delaware streets hopes to develop one of them with five apartments and first-floor retail, recruit retail and office users for a second, and tear down a third to make way for parking. The small buildings at 40, 42 and 44 Virginia Ave. are owned by a family trust controlled by Don and Dave Lucas and have been in the family since the 1980s, Dave Lucas said. The last tenant, Fortune Bail Bonds at 44 Virginia Ave., departed in January. The structures were built in 1930, 1967 and 1920, in order of address, according to property records. The redevelopment plans call for upscale apartments (including new balconies) and first-floor retail in the four-story 42 Virginia Ave. building, first-floor retail and a second-floor office suite in the two-story 44 Virginia Ave. building, and demolition of the 1.5-story building at 40 Virginia Ave. to make way for parking and a 1,500-square-foot entrance structure for the neighboring 9,500-square-foot building. The demolition of the building and a curb cut to allow for parking will be a tough (if not impossible) sell for city planners, who are reviwing the proposal. The buildings have no dedicated parking. Lucas said he's working with the city and hopes to find a solution to allow redevelopment.

ADVERTISEMENT
  • Jail proximity
    JimmyMarch 7, 2013 10:32 AM
    I've always wanted to live immediately next door to a jail. Can't wait to move in.
    Reply to CommentFlag Comment
    • UGH
      INDY DTMarch 7, 2013 11:28 AM
      Wow, this is a great development for downtown Anderson. Oh wait, this is downtown Indy? SMH.
      Reply to CommentFlag Comment
    • parking
      INDY DTMarch 7, 2013 11:31 AM
      If the city approves new surface parking in downtown, I will be disgusted. But knowing Indy's track record, I have no doubt this will be approved.
      Reply to CommentFlag Comment
    • Know the landscape
      Stop gripingMarch 7, 2013 1:16 PM
      If you want to live next to a jail, then you'd better look for a place south and east of this location ... unless you consider The Star building a jail. Come to think of it, you wouldn't be alone.
      Reply to CommentFlag Comment
      • Who will pay the overlords in Texas?
        idyllic indyMarch 7, 2013 1:25 PM
        If they get a curb cut, someone (the City) will have to send a monthly check to Texas to compensate for the lost parking meter revenue. Could the parking meter lease actually provide a benefit to the City by preventing a new downtown parking lot from being built? Will the City demand a contract requiring the property owner to make the monthly payments? Or will the City just pay ACS so this property owner can access his desired parking lot?
        Reply to CommentFlag Comment
      • sandwich shop
        cody zMarch 7, 2013 2:18 PM
        Lamb's Sheep, Lamb, and Gyros would make a great addition on the retail level. Throw in a beer pong table and it's money in the bank.
        Reply to CommentFlag Comment
      • There is a current resident
        Dr. WilyMarch 7, 2013 2:37 PM
        I know the current resident of one of the buildings. He ripped up all the carpets because he said "concrete floors are the future of indoor living". Only people that insane would want to live in this building.
        Reply to CommentFlag Comment
        • Floors
          MikeWMarch 7, 2013 4:33 PM
          Dr. Wily, I have stained concrete floors, live in a condo and know lot of people who have concrete (Stained and unfinished) who love them. Whats the problem. Am I insane? Are all the people who live in loft style condos and apartments insane? Its actually healthier. Less VOCs, less dust, less being trapped in the carpet, and easier to clean. We have lots of rugs that break up the space. Maybe you are insane for not accepting other preferences....
          Reply to CommentFlag Comment
        • Weak Urban Development
          rwhMarch 7, 2013 4:42 PM
          This area has been such an eyesore for years. A new substantial infill developement similar in scale with the Broadbent building at Washington St. and Virginia Ave. would be more appropriate. Its a shame we can not do better. Are we that desparate to allow this type of develpments in the downtown area. Maybe we need to be more patient and wait. Please no more surface parking in downtown Indianapolis.
          Reply to CommentFlag Comment
        • Love
          MarshallMarch 7, 2013 5:28 PM
          I actually love that quirky little block! Plans (minus the parking lot)seem perfectly fine to me.... and whats with all the uber-negative, snarky remarks anymore. These boards are becoming more like those on the IndyStar every day.... sigh...
          Reply to CommentFlag Comment
        • Sigh
          MariaMarch 7, 2013 6:10 PM
          Can our downtown not do better than this? How embarrassing!
          Reply to CommentFlag Comment
        • Wow...
          MarshallMarch 8, 2013 11:55 AM
          ... I continue to be amazed by some of your responses. Do you people not recognize the fact that these properties are owned by PRIVATE INDIVIDUALS and not the city? Why does this PROPERTY OWNERS decision about what to do with HIS property reflect pporly on the CITY? The city is there to approve, or disapprove of his plans, not tell HIM what to do? Can our downtown not do any better than this? Really?!? Just in case you haven't been downtown in the last year or so, perhaps you should take a walk around and see everything that IS actually occuring. People who sit back and whine about everything without knowledge of what they speak or without doing anything to change what they PERCIEVE to be wrong jusy annoy the heck out of me.
          Reply to CommentFlag Comment
        • Location
          Ken BMarch 8, 2013 2:27 PM
          I actually think this isn't a bad plan for this location. I'm not a fan of downtown surface parking but this would be a small lot and serve the greater good of developing the other two buildings. I don't see the jail across the street as being that big a deal. This location is also close to BL Fieldhouse and CityWay so in an urban core you will have a mix of neighbors. I doubt with the small footprint these buildings have that the owner could do much more than they are already proposing. Hopefully they can work with the city to find a solution that makes the best use of this property.
          Reply to CommentFlag Comment
        • Decision
          Idyllic IndyMarch 8, 2013 5:41 PM
          The building rehab plans are fine. Even demo'ing the third building might be ok. But the surface parking lot idea should be stopped dead in its tracks. Like most other retail and offices downtown, they can make do with street parking and the plethora of garages and surface lots nearby. Once the City says no to the surface parking lot, they'll probably look for a good re-use for the third building, unless it's really in such bad shape as to have negative value.
          Reply to CommentFlag Comment
          • annoying
            GMMarch 9, 2013 11:11 AM
            Busybodies stating "they can make do" are more annoying than downtown surface parking lots.
            Reply to CommentFlag Comment
          • Approve it
            ChrisMarch 9, 2013 8:19 PM
            They aren't going to look for a good use for the smaller building because the issue is the development needs parking to move forward. The only other solution would be to tear down the small building and replace it with a new building that either has parking on its lower floors or underground parking. My assumption would be the developer does not have the funds to build a parking structure or underground parking. So, no parking lot means the buildings would most likely stay in their dilapidated state--and no, no knight on a white horse is going to come along. This corner will simple get passed by. I don't think the city needs more huge parking lots downtown, but I have no problem with the city giving permission on a case-by-case basis for a few more small lots that serve adjoining developments.
            Reply to CommentFlag Comment
          • indymanMarch 10, 2013 11:25 AM
            Marshall, well said. A bunch of arm chair designers with no money who want to whine about people who do. Agree the City should hold firm on no surface parking. Market to people who don't own cars, or strike a deal with a nearby parking structure. Wife used to work near there.lots of parking available within a block or two.
            Reply to CommentFlag Comment
          • parking alternative
            Craig MMarch 13, 2013 3:47 PM
            Just took a look at the google earth and street views of this site. Maybe there is a way to maintain the storefront and perimeter wall of the third building to contain parking. Or add a ventilation system, strip the interior bare and provide parking inside? It's a small building, but if possible seems like a win-win.
            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
          ADVERTISEMENT