Group hopes to save former home of Crawford's Bakery

April 23, 2010
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Crawfords BakeryEfforts to save the former home of Crawford's Bakery at 16th Street and Capitol Avenue appear to be gaining momentum. Demolition had been scheduled for May 1 but the building's owner has agreed to hold off until at least May 15 while Indiana Landmarks, the statewide historic preservation group, tries to line up a way to save the 1926 building. They've already received several inquiries. "The goal is to quickly convene with interested parties to suggest a proposal other than demolition," said Marsh Davis, the group's president. "I've got no plan other than the fact if we have time we might be able to come up with a plan more in the interest of the owner and certainly the community. When it's gone there's nothing there." The building at 1609 N. Capitol Ave., which Davis called a "sentimental favorite", was designed by the local architectural firm Pierre & Wright. It served as home to Pandell's Flower Shop between the 1930s and 1980s, and to Crawford's Bakery for 20 years before the shop closed in 2008. Property records show the building is owned by Phillip Thomas, a Florida investor. Marsh said Indiana Landmarks has agreed to pick up the cost of any expenses related to delaying the demolition if they can't find a better alternative. There are more building stats and several photos on a Facebook page created by fans of the building. Ideas?

ADVERTISEMENT
  • What's their purpose?
    What is Phillip Thomas's purpose in demolishing the building? Is it simply to avoid property taxes on the building or does he have some other plan for the land?
  • Curious too
    CorrND, I'm curious about the purpose of the demo as well . . . Regardless, I'm just glad that they've agreed to hold off until more research can be done. BRAVO to Indiana Landmarks for stepping in and a BIG high-5 for Cory /IBJ for creating awareness.
  • Response
    CorrND: Good question. Davis says he isn't aware of any other plans for the land, so your theory may be correct.
  • Hard to believe
    I can't believe some restaurant or coffee shop wouldn't be interested in this ideal location. Incidentally, I wrote a sample National Register nomination for this building 20 years ago!
  • Lease
    No small restaurant or coffee shop could go into this location because the rent is too high. This is the reason Crawford's had to close in the first place. Lease was up and owner wanted to raise the lease.
  • Rent Too High
    Anon -- Demolishing a building because no one wants to pay exorbitant rent doesn't make any sense. If the rent is too high for ANYONE to pay, then the owner needs to reduce the rent. That's how markets work.
  • I am wondering if the owner knows the property would be more attractive to a potential owner if their is not the albatross of a historic building on it. I am sure Methodist would be wary of having to tear down a historic facade after what Ivy Tech went thorugh. The current owner tears it down, plays the bad guy and the local hospital just buys a piece of empty land.

    There is a reason the current owner raised the rent considerably in the middle of a recession. No better way to clear out a tennant.
  • Why not?
    Corr ND and Indyman are right--the owner wants out. How about Historic Landmarks brokers a deal with Clarian which then converts the space to -- wait for it -- a bakery/lunch spot with reasonable rents.
  • fond memories
    My father, Mark Joseph, leased this building from Irene Pandell from 1962-1982 to be a textile merchant trading imported Oriental rugs from around the world. He had Eli Lilly Jr, Tab Hunter and other prominent clients he serviced out of this location and was proud of his work there. I did interior modifications to the structure in the 70's myself while working for my father.
  • CorrND
    I wasn't saying the building should be demolished because no one can afford the rent. I was merely saying that its sad that the owner will not come down on the rent bc it has been vacant for so long and is such a great building and location for a coffee/lunch business. But its also understandable that he might want out like Indyman has said.

    Methodist has made offers to some other property owners in the area to buy more property around the hospital. This owner might want to sell to Methodist but they won't buy a historic building.

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. From the story: "The city of Indianapolis also will consider tax incentives and funding for infrastructure required for the project, according to IEDC." Why would the City need to consider additional tax incentives when Lowe's has already bought the land and reached an agreement with IEDC to bring the jobs? What that tells me is that the City has already pledged the incentives, unofficially, and they just haven't had time to push it through the MDC yet. Either way, subsidizing $10/hour jobs is going to do nothing toward furthering the Mayor's stated goal of attracting middle and upper-middle class residents to Marion County.

  2. Ron Spencer and the entire staff of Theater on the Square embraced IndyFringe when it came to Mass Ave in 2005. TOTS was not only a venue but Ron and his friends created, presented and appeared in shows which embraced the 'spirit of the fringe'. He's weathered all the storms and kept smiling ... bon voyage and thank you.

  3. Not sure how many sushi restaurants are enough, but there are three that I know of in various parts of downtown proper and all are pretty good.

  4. First off, it's "moron," not "moran." 2nd, YOU don't get to vote on someone else's rights and freedoms that are guaranteed by the US Constitution. That's why this is not a state's rights issue...putting something like this to vote by, well, people like you who are quite clearly intellectually challenged isn't necessary since the 14th amendment has already decided the issue. Which is why Indiana's effort is a wasted one and a waste of money...and will be overturned just like this has in every other state.

  5. Rick, how does granting theright to marry to people choosing to marry same-sex partners harm the lives of those who choose not to? I cannot for the life of me see any harm to people who choose not to marry someone of the same sex. We understand your choice to take the parts of the bible literally in your life. That is fine but why force your religious beliefs on others? I'm hoping the judges do the right thing and declare the ban unconstitutional so all citizens of Wisconsin and Indiana have the same marriage rights and that those who chose someone of the same sex do not have less rights than others.

ADVERTISEMENT