New hope for crumbling Washington Street building

March 20, 2013
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrint

42 E Washington StThe new owners of a pre-Civil War building that is one of downtown's oldest surviving structures have removed metal paneling as they seek to determine whether the four-story building could withstand a façade improvement project. The building at 42 E. Washington St. has been mostly vacant for years, save for an occasional first-floor retail tenant (most recently a jewelry store). Owners Jim and Linda Hunter received city approval last week to remove the panels as they assess structural integrity, said Jeff York, a senior city planner. The owners are working with the planning department and the Indianapolis Historic Preservation Commission on a larger project to revitalize the structure. A prior owner of the building tried to brick over the windows in 2011 before the city issued a stop-work order. The Antonopoulos family ultimately completed a stabilization project before selling the property to the current owners, who live in Johnson County. Watch this space for an update on the Hunters' plans.

IBJ photo/Cory Schouten

ADVERTISEMENT
  • Excellent
    rwhMarch 20, 2013 11:28 AM
    This is good news. This section of Washington St. has so much potential. Maybe it will start other building facade renovations.
    Reply to CommentFlag Comment
  • My favorite part of downtown
    BlightedMarch 20, 2013 3:03 PM
    This strip has always been my favorite part of downtown. A urine soaked sidewalk where vagrants live, a pawn shop, and an MMA gym. What more could you want in the heart of downtown?
    Reply to CommentFlag Comment
  • Architectural Relevance or Dump?
    ChonnieMarch 20, 2013 5:00 PM
    The degree in which 'preservationists' pursue historical relevency re crumbling buildings is astonishing. This building is little, it's commercial, it's irrelevant, it's dangerous, it's in the way of actual downtown progress and yes, it's ugly.
    Reply to CommentFlag Comment
  • Potential
    socrates#1fanMarch 21, 2013 8:06 AM
    This structure is very old, a remnant of when most of downtown was made up of structures like this. I can only imagine how beautiful this facade will look with the paint removed an period appropriate windows restored. Perhaps they will even restore the long lost cornice? This section of Washington street has long been neglected so I am thrilled that this area is being fixed up. The building directly east of this fine structure was a sort of georgian revival and I would love to see it reconstructed (it would be very simple to rebuild). Chonnie- What makes you feel this is an ugly structure? In its current state it is not exactly beautiful, but one has to look beyond it and see the potential it has! What makes it irrelevant? What makes it ugly to you? Try to imagine it not in its current state, but in a restored one.
    Reply to CommentFlag Comment
  • In response to several comments
    RobbMarch 21, 2013 11:44 AM
    Yes, the vagrants need to go. The building is "dangerous?" Let's see it has stood for over 150 years, so I'm waiting to see the danger. Maybe leave that determination to an engineer who is qualified to make that call. You know there are numerous modern structures that have suffered structural collapse or failure, right? "New" is not synonymous with "better." Try having the smaaaaaaallest amount of tolerance for a building that isn't meant to stand in the heart of Carmel, hmm? No, the building doesn't look good now. That's why they're talking about renovation. Hey, do you guys have any concept of the costs of demolition? Permits? Design? Just curious, since its not your money and you have so many ideas about what do do with the building that isn't yours.
    Reply to CommentFlag Comment
  • Logic
    Ten Foot JumperMarch 21, 2013 5:30 PM
    Any new improvement to this block of downtown is welcome. I hope the new owners are successful in both preserving and improving this historic building. @Robb, please help us understand the logic of the relevance of your statement about Carmel. Why have you introduced your personal baggage about what happens North of 96th Street into this discussion about a downtown Indy building? What is it that you hate so much about Carmel? Do you hate the Arts District, the clean safe streets, the great restaurants,the outstanding schools, the terrific Farmers market, the nice neighborhoods and the low crime rate? All of those positive attributes can really get under your skin.
    Reply to CommentFlag Comment
    • Carmel vendetta
      SassafrasMarch 27, 2013 4:26 PM
      Ten foot jumper, I don't hate Carmel; it's one of the smartest managed suburbs in the entire country. But all those WONDERFUL things about it that you laud only exist due to upper-middle class flight from the original city upon which it owes its exist. And it's particularly slimy hearing someone smugly extol Carmel's virtues just days after Carmel's mayor aggressively lured an Indianapolis corporation (Baldwin and Lyons) to the suburbs from downtown Indy through tax incentives. Indy has to contend with aging housing/infrastructure, crime, economic/ethnic diversity that those sanctimonius Carmelites will fight aggressively to keep out. And, in spite of all of Carmel's lovely characteristics, I would never live there in a million years--nor would many central city loyalists who contribute for this blog.
      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. Good ole' Obamacare. Thanks liberals and those who didn't bother to vote.

    2. Yes. Blame those who were too lazy to go vote Obama out and those who voted him in again. That's my take on it. I know folks won't get it on the left. OK. Start berating me now!

    3. Serioulsy, people are AGINST this project? Most communities would be salivating over a project like this. You'd rather have an empty eye-sore gas station and shacks posing as apartments? This project is exactly what BR needs. BUILD IT MR MAYOR. And yes, I am a BR resident, and have been for 20 years.

    4. As a St. Vincent employee of over 20 years, I am saddened and disheartened by this announcement. Unfortunately, as the healthcare "industry" continues on this political and corporate path, all that St. Vincent Hospital has stood for spiritually for its employees and this community is being sucked dry. I know it truly has no choice. It is not just Obamacare or just competition or just any single thing. This trend started long before I was even born when the government became involved in healthcare and it became an "industry." I grieve for those who will lose their jobs, one of whom may be me, but I also grieve for this hospital which I have served for over 20 years. May God give us and it the grace to withstand the future of healthcare.

    5. Why do people constantly harp on this issue and act ignorant about what a city population measures? A city's population is the city's population. There is no argument or debate about it. If you want to measure the density of a city--measure it. If you want to measure the size of a metropolitan area, then measure the metropolitan population. City boundaries cover different sized areas--and they always have (though the disparity has probably increased since about 1900 or so when more cities began annexing their surrounding communities). For example, San Francisco only covers 49 square miles while Houston cover nearly 600 square miles. No one argues about the population rankings of either city even though they clearly cover extremely different sized areas. Indianapolis is the 13 largest city by population in the U.S. That is a fact. While the population of a metropolitan area may give you a better sense of how large a community is, as noted, even metro areas can vary widely in the size of geographic area they cover--so that is not a perfect comparison either.

    ADVERTISEMENT