Downtown apartment complex to expand

September 1, 2009
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The developer of The Waverley apartments downtown has filed plans to expand the complex at 151 S. East St., IBJ's Tom Harton reports in today's Real Estate Weekly. Carmel-based J.C. Hart Co. Inc. wants to add 48 one-bedroom units to the 164-unit complex. Out of 86 existing one-bedroom units, only one is vacant. The four-story expansion would feature apartments with balconies overlooking East Street on the second, third and fourth floors. A 41-space parking garage would occupy the first level. A small surface parking lot shielded from the street would provide enough extra spaces to accommodate all 48 apartments. When Hart won its original approvals for The Waverley from the city in 2006, the vacant land the company now wants to build on was earmarked for three separate buildings for townhomes and ground-level retail space. But J.C. Hart found little interest for the commercial space. The company hopes to start construction as soon as next spring. The full story is here.

ADVERTISEMENT
  • It's hard to believe there's no interest in retail space when there's a captive audience of at least 164 residents in that apartment complex alone. Not to mention the surrounding neighborhood or the large adjacent Farm Bureau and Anthem office buildings.

    For instance, one could open a tobacco shop and do quite well. I pass dozens of smokers from both campuses daily. ;-)
    • What is the use of writing comments when they just disappear later in the day? Whats going on with this new system???
    • All I can tell you is what they're telling me: We're working on it.
    • This is good to hear and I am actually please that they have scrapped the retail portion. Fletcher Place is literally a stones throw from here and having new retail so close would hurt, not help, that strtch of College
    • Monolithic, low-rise apartment complexes aren't particularly urban, especially this one, with its pitched roofs and Hardiplank siding. It's great to see an increase in the rental base downtown, though... I just wish the site could be developed with a better sense of its urban context.
    • Monolithic, low-rise apartment complexes aren't particularly urban, especially this one, with its pitched roofs and Hardiplank siding. It's great to see an increase in the rental base downtown, though... I just wish the site could be developed with a better sense of its urban context.
    • Monolithic, low-rise apartment complexes aren't particularly urban, especially this one, with its pitched roofs and Hardiplank siding. It's great to see an increase in the rental base downtown, though... I just wish the site could be developed with a better sense of its urban context.
    • At least the surface parking won't front East Street.

      I wish they would still do the first floor retail and just build two or 3 floors of residential above it. This would be a great spot for all the Insurance company employees to grab lunch or coffee if there were retail.

      It still kills me how suburban this project is..
    • No retail on the bottom floor seems to be the Indianapolis way...where do these people get their info that there would be little interest in commercial space. I use to work at Anthem and would have gone out there more than a few times a week on my short 1/2 lunch just to get out of the building. This is the freaking downtown already and a lot of us live here and would happily visit a retail establishment in that area. So much narrow minded thinking...bah!
    • Not building multi-use / retail on the street level is simply short sighted.
    • First floor parking along East Street. No pedestrian door along East Street. Surface parking along East Street also. More hardi-plank siding downtown. Two new curb cuts along East Street with cars blocking the sidewalk waiting for the gates to open. Expansion of a suburban-type apartment compounded surrounded by tall fences and gates. Elimination of a (probably illegal) gravel parking lot. Elimination of previously approved plan for presumably one-story, single-user commercial building. So, how does that balance out?
    • Financing difficulties
      when a housing project contains commercial space it no longer qualifies for Federal funding or state of Indiana Housing Authority financing and also can be disqualified from fed income tax credits

    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.

    Sponsored by
    ADVERTISEMENT
    1. Looking at the two companies - in spite of their relative size to one another -- Ricker's image is (by all accounts) pretty solid and reputable. Their locations are clean, employees are friendly and the products they offer are reasonably priced. By contrast, BP locations are all over the place and their reputation is poor, especially when you consider this is the same "company" whose disastrous oil spill and their response was nothing short of irresponsible should tell you a lot. The fact you also have people who are experienced in franchising saying their system/strategy is flawed is a good indication that another "spill" has occurred and it's the AM-PM/Ricker's customers/company that are having to deal with it.

    2. Daniel Lilly - Glad to hear about your points and miles. Enjoy Wisconsin and Illinois. You don't care one whit about financial discipline, which is why you will blast the "GOP". Classic liberalism.

    3. Isn't the real reason the terrain? The planners under-estimated the undulating terrain, sink holes, karst features, etc. This portion of the route was flawed from the beginning.

    4. You thought no Indy was bad, how's no fans working out for you? THe IRl No direct competition and still no fans. Hey George Family, spend another billion dollars, that will fix it.

    5. I live downtown Indy and had to be in downtown Chicago for a meeting. In other words, I am the target demographic for this train. It leaves at 6:00-- early but doable. Then I saw it takes 5+ hours. No way. I drove. I'm sure I paid 3 to 5 times as much once you factor in gas, parking, and tolls, but it was reimbursed so not a factor for me. Any business traveler is going to take the option that gets there quickly and reliably... and leisure travelers are going to take the option that has a good schedule and promotional prices (i.e., Megabus). Indy to Chicago is the right distance (too short to fly but takes several hours to drive) that this train could be extremely successful even without subsidies, if they could figure out how to have several frequencies (at least 3x/day) and make the trip in a reasonable amount of time. For those who have never lived on the east coast-- Amtrak is the #1 choice for NY-DC and NY-Boston. They have the Acela service, it runs almost every hour, and it takes you from downtown to downtown. It beats driving and flying hands down. It is too bad that we cannot build something like this in the midwest, at least to connect the bigger cities.

    ADVERTISEMENT