Plans are on hold for a new Latin restaurant at 52nd Street and College Avenue after a fellow restaurant owner sued to overturn
city approval of a parking variance. Calle 52 had been scheduled to open late last year in the former home of a Movie Gallery
store, but the owners now are waiting for resolution of a lawsuit against the city's Board of Zoning Appeals. The BZA
voted in October to approve a parking plan providing for 21 on-site spaces, fewer than the 56 required under the code. The
developers won approval after submitting a valet plan using off-site spaces and making adjustments to the site plan to ease
parking concerns. But the concessions did not satisfy Aristocrat Pub & Restaurant owner Rick Rising-Moore, who sued in
November. In the suit, Rising-Moore called the approval "arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, and unsupported
by substantial evidence." He says the additional cars will hurt his business and others in the area, and create a public
safety hazard. Parking has been a hot topic in part because patrons of businesses in the area have been using parking spaces
in front of the vacant video-rental store without paying. Plans for Calle 52 call for 133 indoor seats and 32 seats on a patio,
and a menu featuring ceviche, queso fundido, carne asada and pastel tres leche. The owners are Nicole Harlan-Oprisu and Tim
Oprisu (who also own Old Pro's Table), Bill and Nancy Ficca and Jamie Browning (The Ficcas and Browning also own Usual
Suspects in Broad Ripple). Browning says the project has significant support from others in the neighborhood. He notes Rising-Moore
did not apply for a parking variance for his own outdoor operation. An earlier post is here.
- Home
- NEWS
- REGIONAL
- THIS WEEK'S PAPER
- BLOGS
- Multimedia
- OPINION
- A&E
- LISTS
- PEOPLE
- EVENTS
- Classifieds
- Subscribe
Welcome to Property Lines, Indy's source for neighborhood real estate news. Your host is Scott Olson, IBJ's real estate beat
reporter. Edited by Cory Schouten.
Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
-
It's also across the street from Fogo de Chao and Morton's....
-
Yep, the haters are trying to make good news bad. I guess it is hard to get people to believe the series is dying when they are gaining new sponsors.
-
David Copperfield! I remember watching his specials on TV when I was little.
-
Don't forget this is next to an MMA gym, a pawn shop, and some abandoned spaces.
-
Good project for Zionsville - A group who has owned the property for many years has waited and worked patiently to bring highest and best use development to a major corridor, and mix that in with the great downtown you have. Win Win. All the Best to Pittman Partners and Zionsville.
ADVERTISEMENT
Back to TopCopyright © All Rights Reserved. Privacy Policy | Terms of Use.
Design, CMS, Hosting & Web Development :: ePublishing.
Additional Hosting & Delivery by
IBJ Conversations
99 Comments
Add Comment
Usual suspects is great, and CASBA is FANTASTIC. So I will support these owners at their new restaurant in SoBro as well.
Sadly, The Aristocrat apparently is happy with the status quo, and doesn't realize the benefit of increased human traffic in the area (Union Jacks is one of the few restaurants in broad ripple with its own dedicated parking lot in the rear). The businesses at 52nd and college, and 54th and college, etc., need to ban together and lobby for this college ave. streetcar line from 62nd to downtown (not to mention the Uptown project development).....but this is a topic for a different day.
Many of the people most likely to patronize Calle 52 (and Aristocrat, whose owner "did not apply for a parking variance for his own outdoor operation") will live close and walk or bike. And don't we want to encourage the building of communities that support (and in fact encourage, as parking gets tighter = good!) alternative modes of transportation?
This is going to backfire on him big time.
Please understand all the facts in a case and talk to both parties before making biased opinions. The bashing a business owner that is only looking out for the welfare of a corner he helped to build is very unfortunate .
Rick is a bully - plain and simple. He thinks Calle 52 will hurt his business and isn't interested in what does or does not benefit anybody else. Not exactly what I would consider a "team player." He's on his way out as a player in the restaurant business and he knows it. Good riddance.
I stopped going to the Aristocrat a couple years ago when, to me and my friends, the old, crusty and dirty decor logically seemed to be a reflection on what could be going on in the kitchen. Mr. Rising Moores ridiculous campaign against the people who are proposing Calle 52--all of whom run fantastically run Broad Ripple businesses--indeed seems like petty and jealous ranting. Shouldn't he be cleaning up his own business instead of trying to dictate others? I would like to see him cross his own t's and dotting his own i's (getting his patio seating legal) before he does everything in his power to stop a welcome tenant from opening their place.
Lets do everything we can do to ensure that this intersection can flower and grow -- in what is clearly an urban setting on the cusp of very positive growth and development, especially when the eyes of the world will soon be focused on what is still sometimes thought of a hick town outside of Indiana. To that end, lets not let the Aristocrat be what represents 52nd and College -- how about a clean, well run, new concept restaurant/bar that will bring a fresh spirit & vibe to this tired old corner. I and all my friends are looking forward to new life in this area of Broad Ripple.
I am a resident of South Broad Ripple and after reading this misguided, obviously biased blog, I am sickened.
First of all, the lawsuit that was mentioned does NOT solely represent Mr. Rising-Moore. It represents hundreds of neighbors, including myself, Habig's, City Dogs, The Red Key, Sparkle Cleaners, Luna Music, Sequences Design, and the owner of the apartments above Luna. The issue at hand is simply parking. The businesses represented in the lawsuit have been there for years and years (with the exception of City Dogs), and are now facing the possibility of another HUGE bar/restaurant coming in and taking what little street parking there already is. For instance, who in their right mind is going to buy a 50 pound bag of mulch from Habig's and carry it a whole block to their car? Is anyone concerned about this? In addition, has everyone forgot about the HOMEOWNERS in that area? We just bought our home on College Ave. about two and a half years ago, and I would be damned if a huge restaurant moved in a few houses down from us! Most of these homes DO NOT have driveways! I would be damned if I came home from work and had to walk a block or two to get to MY OWN HOUSE because rich folks from Meridian Hills decided to go to their favorite yuppy bar! These are the issues that are actually involved with the lawsuit.
Secondly, the proprietors of Calle 52 HAVE let their liquor license expire, and, if you actually care enough, you would know that according to the Alcohol Board, it is null and void. In addition, Usual Suspects/Casba currently has a civil lawsuit against them concerning alcohol as well as recently being cited by Excise Police. Is this the kind of ownership we want in a neighborhood?
Thirdly, Mr. Rising-Moore DOES have a parking variance. Essentially, it was grandfathered in because of when the building itself was built. In fact, when Mr. Rising-Moore bought The Aristocrat, the only businesses on that corner were The Red Key and Habig's (which has been around for 50 years or so).
Additionally, the argument has been made that local businesses would rather have the Calle 52 building sit empty to keep "free" parking. That couldn't be farther from the truth. The business owners all agree that increased foot traffic is vital to their businesses growing. The issue is simply parking. Personally, I won't go into Broad Ripple on the weekends because there is no where to park! The fact that people are saying that we all would rather have a run-down, vacant building is asinine. No businesses were even interested in that building until the owner himself cleaned it up and painted it. Other businesses, such as a bakery, flower shop, and a veterinary hospital have shown interest in it (all AFTER the building was renovated). These businesses, because they are smaller and require less parking, would be a much better fit for an intersection with already saturated parking.
Finally, I have read the comments from this blog and it appalls me that so many people come out to crucify Mr. Rising-Moore. I, personally, can speak to his character because I actually live in the area and have attended many meetings concerning this parking issue. Unfortunately, many of you, as well as this biased author, have not. Perhaps it should be known that Mr. Rising-Moore personally pays to clean up the alleys in the neighborhoods around his business. Further, maybe you should know that he also personally pays a gardener to beautify the (public) sidewalks outside of his business. The idea that he is a "rich Canadian" who doesn't care about his neighborhood is absurd. In fact, he DOES live in South Broad Ripple and cares very deeply for it and the people who inhabit it.
Perhaps if anyone actually knew the true story, biased articles like this one would never be written. I'm wondering why this author never contacted Mr. Rising-Moore himself for comments! Perhaps he is "in bed" with the Brownings? In fact, perhaps this author should be sued for slander. What horrible reporting!
If you look at the building next door to Calle 52 what do you see? Businesses that will not have parking. What about them? Too bad so sad? What about the land lord of that building? The value of the building is maybe half of what it was bought for. That building is owned by Rising-Moore. So should he just lose everything he invested into that building? Then there is the Aristocrat, take away the parking and how do people eat there? Look what happen in broad ripple. There is no real lunch business because there is no parking. I think Rising-Moore has an excellent case.
As for "Honesty": Guess What? The parking layout for Calle 52 actually doesn't make this lot "obsolete", it makes the parking available on that property what it is supposed to be, and simply prevents the tenants and customers of that building from encroaching on or using the adjacent lot. What don't you people get about the fact that the real estate that the businesses and customers are crying about doesn't belong to that building? Whoever goes into the old video store space should be able to use the parking they actually are going to be paying for for their own customers.
I'm not for calling for a boycott against anyone--if people want to patronize a business, let them. And this shouldn't be a forum for doing ANY business bashing, especially in this economy, so that's not cool. But why would anyone want to take their hard-earned $$ to a hater like Risingmore, who seems to be anti-growth, anti-competition, and anti-neighborhood.
And of course the other businesses don't want to see more competition! duh!
Many in the neighborhood are very disappointed in the Aristocrat and have also stopped going there.
College is not a "residential" street - especially at the major intersections... you really bought a home there that doesn't have a garage or alley entrace?....and, expect businesses not to occupy residential sites due to your mistake?????
-If I owned my home nearby and a bar was scheduled to open that will drastically change the parking situation for me and my neighbors for the worse, how I feel about it?
-If I poured my energy and money into my home for years and the sudden proliferation of alchol permits
turned my commercially diverse intersection into a 2nd "Bar-Row" Broadripple how would I feel about it?
-If a valet service was constantly driving by my front door until 1am 6 nights a week how would I feel about it?
-If Habig Garden Shop, the business 3 generations of my family patronized was now in danger of closing because the parking they've shared is now off limits, how would I feel?
-If I and my neighbors stuck it out year after year in the hope that our neighborhood would one day improve with COMMERCIAL DIVERSITY and then a giant BAR wants to come in and change what I've been working so hard on, how would I feel about it?
There's a saying I love "First seek to understand, then to be understood". I hope many of you can think about this differently and know that the lawsuit is a minute part of the fight and that the Aristocrat is not the bad guy for the neighborhood.
All you Aristocrat bashers must have been out of college too long, because you've lost your Critical Thinking skills.
Do the math: 168 seat bar + >30 employees with ONLY 21 parking spaces. Who's going to feel the impact? The direct neighbors & homeowners. Those of us who live right here in the neighborhood. Not blocks away on Penn or Washington or Meridian. Right here. Ask yourself, how would you feel if a bar that will hold nearly 200 people (patrons & staff) and only has 21 parking spots wanted to set up shop next to your house? I believe you can see our side.
IBJ should be ashamed of this writing, I won't give it the respect to call it Journalism.
When you want to buy a car where do you go...you go where the car dealers are...when you want to go to a bar you go where the bars are at....when I want to go for food, drinks, and friends I'll go visit the Nicole and Tim...not the aristocrat, it sounds stuffy and boring...
Please, it would be helpful for you to consult your dictionary regarding the meaning of "hundreds", "cramming" "huge" and "high-end"; none of which are accurate in your assessment of the situation. You haven't the foggiest idea of what the true variables are.
While you are whining and waving your flag for all your "many, many" people, I assuredly know many. many, MANY MORE THAN THAT whom are all looking forward to having another choice from which to choose on the College/SoBro corridor for good food and a vibrant atmosphere. How can that be bad for my neighborhood? I can't wait for my friends to come to College & 52nd, look for great parking like in a real city, (oh, wait we ARE a real city) and have a margarita at Calle 52.
I have attended more than one of the meetings where these specific issues have been discussed. There is a real and sincere concern among some residents who live nearby over the increased availability of alcohol created by adding additional establishments with liquor licenses to this corridor - which they fear will bring chaos to a corner that already has three providers of booze (The Aristocrat, Taste and the Red Key)in addition to establisments on Broad Ripple Avenue and further north and south on College. For those reasons, I believe some -- including Mr. Rising-Moore have tried to use one of the only tools available to them to fight the impending peril. By opposing the parking variances -- I believe,a handful of residents and Mr. Rising More hope to leverage arguments regarding the parking issues to create a Trojan Horse for their real fears.
There are parking issues to be sure in this area. There are already thriving businesses which use the on street parking that is available. It is true, there will be competition for spaces on the street between residents and consumers. HABIGS has never had any parking and has always had to rely on a "loading zone" in front of their corner. Surely, they can make some aggreement with the city for a designated street space during their hours. City dogs and the tenants of that building have less options perhaps, but that is one of the problems that existed when they signed their lease with Mr. Rising-Moore and obviously parking was not clearly segregated from the Calle 52 property.
Some of the burden for the on street parking could be relieved if the city would maintain the alleys and encourage residents to park in rear loading garages or pads behind their homes and apartments. To add to the messy and stressed environment, curb cuts for driveways eliminate at least one on-street parking space. Residents could have additional greenspace in their yards, reeduce drainage from hard surface into the overburdened sewer system and come and go from their alleys creating safer, less interupted traffic as they exit into the thoroughfare. Using the alleys for ingress and egress helps relieve traffic congestion in general and adds breathing space to the environment. Many residents in Meridian Kessler avoid their alleys because there is virtually no maintenance from the city. The perception is that alleys are dangerous and unfit for use. This belief has some merit, although many of our alleys are not in much worse shape than the pot holed streets with which we contend. Many who won't drive up an alley are driving off-road vehicles with 4 wheel drive and tires that could take the beaches of Normandy -- The perception that the alley is a detriment needs to be a focus of concern for planners and development gurus. Think of the time that we could save and the costs if we were not constantly having to take these parking issues to the BZA. The reduction in city staffing to resolve these problems should be a reason alone for the city to pave the alleys and give abatements and incentives to plan and design appropriately.
There are many fine people involved in this fight, the Oprisus and Mr. Rising-Moore included. Many of these issues could be avoided if the city was ahead of the game and was thinking and planning at the same time.
He is fighting the fight and paying the legal expenses to save the businesses that wouldn't be there if he wasn't. Calle 52 is not competition for his restaurant and Aristocrats is not competition for them. They are too different. In the building next to Calle 52 there is City Dogs Grocery below and WrightWorks above (they employ 7) and residential apartments. Rising-Moore owns that building and has done massive restoration to it. He wishes to protect his property and his tenants. If they can't prosper then his building goes vacant. If Habigs can't use the angled parking on that side, which they have done for 60 years, then they go under and thus also become vacant. Then it becomes a trade of vacancies. Right now the former Movie Gallery is vacant because small businesses can't get loans and at one time they wanted $9,500 a month rent when it was unsightly. We have been in the Great Recession.
It appears that the real Bully is the property owner of the movie store who doesn't want anyone on his vacant lot. A fence was put up on December 14th at the peak of retail selling. Habigs was still selling Xmas trees. City Dogs delivery doors are compromised as trucks can no longer get there. Customers now have to back out on to College in traffic. It is claimed that the fence was put up because their insurance company required it. There are a lot of vacant bulings whose insurance doesn't require a fence. If it was put up for interior construction it was premature. It was put up for spite. Do not be quick to threaten to boycott either restaurant. There are many unknown facts and logistics. It is fool-hardy to establish a restaurant without parking to support it. Consider Binkleys, Mama Corollas and Zest who have and need parking. On street parking is suicidal for a place that seats 165 with a staff of 35. There is no parking now at night and they are not even there yet.
Aristocrats and Habigs are the corner anchors with senority. Without them the other businesses would not have rooted and Calle 52 wouldn't have wanted to be there. Do not bite the hand that feeds you.
I've never been to Aristocrat, and now will NEVER go there.
49th
1)Recess
2)Recess' new lounge
3)Bottle Shop
4)Sinking Ship
5)Upland Tasting Room
6)Just Wingin' It (pending alcohol permit)
52nd
7)Aristocrat
8)Taste
9)Taste's expansion plans
10)Red Key
11)Garuda (pending alcohol permit)
12)Calle 52 (pending alochol permit)
54th
13)Moe & Johnny's
14)Jazz Kitchen
15)Cornerstone
16)News Cafe
17)Fresh Market
There are many of us who say. Enough! We need something else besides food and drink to make our neighborhood liveable & desirable to families.
Don't stop progress simply because you made a poor decision about where to live.
As for the alcohol question, it is clear that some bars have real externalities. However, high-end places serving ceviche and $10 drinks don't tend to. Nor places with $50 bottles of wine. This area isn't going to be flooded with drunk 22 year-olds. The places are simply too expensive. The average alcohol consumer in this area is a 32-year-old professional with a quarter to half million dollar home a couple blocks away. I'm not worried about them, nor should anyone else be.
My family moved into this neighborhood more than a decade ago. When we made our "decision about where to live" the commercial landscape was much different than it is today. We have been happy with the redevelopment of our neighborhood thus far. We have been involved in supporting the good and fighting the bad ideas that have come our way. Calle 52 is one of the bad ideas that will have a negative impact on our neighborhood. I think people like yourself have a view of our neighborhood that is incorrect. I presume you think it's full of 20 somethings. To the contray, my closest neighbors have lived in their homes for 20-50 years. They too, think this massive bar is destructive to our way of life. So pull your head out of the sand, and THINK about the people who live nearby! Do you think my 80 year old neighbor made a "poor decision about where to live" 50 years ago and so she should just move to Carmel or Fishers? NO!
We have earned the right to defend ourselves against bad ideas and negative commercial development. And as US citizens, have the right to use the government channels to appeal poor planning.
Again, ask yourself if a bar that will hold 200 people (patrons & employees) with only 21 parking spaces was going to open next door to your house, would you just roll over? Would you blame yourself for making a bad decision on where to live?
If your answer is yes, God help America.
Thanks SO MUCH for discouraging local growth and local business owners. Absolutely inexcusable.
BTW - what's happening with the Uptown development, anything?
In short, yes. The majority of the houses along College near this development are rentals. If they don't like it, they can move. More likely, though, the moved there exactly because that's what they wanted to be near. Honestly, I have no idea why it appears people are pining for 10-15 years ago when the area was far sketchier. If people really hate it, they can move and make a killing on their house.
Now a bar/restaurant is possibly scheduled to open in a place that has sat vacant for far too long. What did everyone think would happen to that space?
Here is the way the homeowners/tenants should be answering themselves: *"Gee, I bought a house right down/up the street from a great big empty retail space on a well-travelled, north-south avenue with plenty of parking. Someday it could be something I have no control over. How did I not see that coming? Darn it, I probably miscalculated my home purchase. Poor me, I poured my soul into this home that's right on College. I actually thought this would be a quiet neighborhood, even though its on major artery in Indianapolis. A valet service will constantly be driving by my front door until 1am 6 nights a week, (REALLY? If you honestly foresee that being the case, who can I call to invest? No, seriously, I mean it.) And the business 3 generations of my family patronized that's now in danger of closing because the parking they were using (that never belonged to them) is now off limits. I'm going to hurry over and buy all my landscaping needs this weekend to support them!"
Me and my neighbors will be fine. Bash and badmouth the Calle 52 people all you want, but the reality is, while neither party in this situation wants anything bad for the neighborhood, no one else has stepped up and put a serious offer on the table. We are all for progress, development and contributing to the vibrancy of our wonderful, eclectic urban neighborhood, and we fully support anyone willing to invest, create jobs and clean up that corner the way the Calle 52 folks are willing to.
We desire a lower intensity use such as retail, cafe, flower shop, bakery, etc with normal business hours. Someplace we can patronize for goods or services. The Movie Gallery was a wonderful business to have in our neighborhood.
The neighborhood already has a flower shop, multiple cafes and plenty of retail. Fresh Market has a great bakery and there's been rumors of a bakery going in where the Circle City Pizza was. Just because you don't like this restaurant doesn't mean it isn't a good use of the space.
One word: degentrification! (you might have to look it up)
There's much cheaper safe places to live in Indy than along College. To say this argument strains credulity is a understatement. Most people would rather have a nicer house or apartment, but to claim you live in one of Indy more expensive areas and that you have no choice but to live there doesn't compute. Also, College from Kessler to 38th IS Meridian Kessler.
Hmmmm...sounds like Eddie W knows "Nicole and Tim" on a first name basis. How objective. I wonder how many other Aristocrat bashers are friends with them or have a personal investment in the issue. Just like always, big money wins.
Secondly if the parking lot goes with the video place then whoever rents the building should get the parking also. And heaven forbid someone has to walk home 2 block after parking. Try living in Philadelphia, New York, Chicago or even New Orleans and having to walk 10 or more blocks after parking.
What kind of a person acts like that? Further, has anyone that appears to be "drafting" off this guy's "leadership" thought for a moment that if Rising-Moore did not own a business and a property that would be impacted by this Calle 52 place and thus only had a civic interest in the proceedings, whether or not he'd be so heroically trying to "save the neighborhood"? Given that this is the same pillar of the community type that decided that laws did not apply to him such that when he wanted to expand he was above fussing with the variance process. Do you people think someone that arrogant and hypocritical would be standing up for everything that's good and right and just if he had not gotten nailed on the fact that his tenants really don't have the parking that he must have advertized to them? C'mon folks, let's get real.
Taste is a GREAT restaurant with NO parking that I can see and they keep on expanding. Where is the indignation from Rising-Moore over that? They create traffic, no? I guess he doen't own anything connected to that place.
Hey, I like the City Dog place. I pop in there all the time for treats for my golden "Sherm". I do often think though that small retailers like that run risk when they locate outside of strip centers where parking is not assured.
Neighborhoods change all the time. There is development risk embedded in all of them. If your neighbor does a remodel that you hate, that was a risk you embraced when you moved in. To those telling people to move if they don't like the situation,I'd suggest a little more tact. This is just a restaurant after all folks, not life or death.
I'll close by saying if your best advocate is a hypocrite, you probably have a flawed case.
Oh yeah, and let me say to the guy calling for 4 lanes of flowing traffic on College, you must be commuting from Homeplace, because otherwise you would know that such action would be a disaster for this neighborhood!!
First of all, ANY business going in that space would require parking for their patrons. Would it necessarily lessen the growing demand for street parking? Who can answer that with any degree of accuracy? No one can.
Additionally, a "lower intensity" business would have to charge alot for their product/service to be able to pay the rent and/or have longer operating hours than what traditional retailers have. How about a Furrier? Or a Car Dealership? Perfect!
One would hope that any business in that space would flourish. If not, the people paying the price for that experiment would be the owners of the building, who would have to go through the whole process of finding a good tenant sooner rather than later when your "cafe, bakery, flower shop" fails. How can you presume to dictate to the building owners what kind of business they should lease to? Are any of you in the kind of business that the general public can tell you how to run? What a wonderful world THAT would be.
This blog post probably sets the record for most responses!
As for the parking, it's been this way for as long as I can remember. I remember trying to get beef tenderloin from Atlas and not finding a parking space forever, and they had a large parking lot! If you own a home in this area (I don't and I like my driveway and 3/4 acre lot), surely you knew about how parking works in your neighborhood. If you didn't, you're a MORON! Think of it this way, a rental property beside you that has young adults that party all the time and frequent visitors often take up those parking spaces. Calle 52 is an UPSCALE Latin restaurant, not Mexicana Rose or even Cancun. There's not going to be late night partying going on. I have spent a night or two liquored up in the Aristocrat (never again by the way), and I'm sure the patronage at the Aristocrat will be less desirable than that of Calle 52. This, I believe, is what Mr. Rising fears.
The truth is, and I believe I read it in an earlier blog, money talks and BS walks and Mr Rising is full of it!
In response to Go, taverns make their money on alcohol. Of the places you listed that will have a parking problem in the next few weeks, it will be Moe & Johnnys if Butler keeps winning. Remember, Atlas had twice the amount of beer and wine to sell than Fresh Market has now. The argument that there is too much alcohol already on College Ave is bogus. Obviously, the ideal businesses won't or can't make a go of it. The florist moved and movie rental closed.
That returns us to the issue that the economics of the restaurants seem to necessitate that alcohol be part of the business equation in order to be profitable. The fact that College Avenue does have this proliferation of businesses whose goal is to cash in on the desire for alcohol should be a concern and I applaud everyone who has fought to bring this to the forefront. We should be just as concerned about the guy who comes in from a long, hot round of golf and knocks back two cocktails and a half a bottle of wine with his wife when he eats at Northside Social as we are when a bridal mob goes down for a chocolate martini/lemondrop packed evening along Broad Ripple Avenue. If a vet, florist, shoe shop had knocked at the door initially and been able to negotiate a lease with the property owner to begin with we would not be here -- but those folks were not in line -- the Oprisus were there first to take advantage of an opportunity. They jumped through all of the necessary hoops to lay their plans out. They used attorneys not money under any tables to make their arguments. They came to multiple meetings and made offers of more meetings which were met with derision and an "the only place I'll see you is in court if I have to" attitude. I have zero connection to this issue other than the fact that I attended meetings and watched hearings on cable television regarding this matter. I have no interests beyond hoping for a vibrant, safe neighborhood. One of the facts about the Broad Ripple area and the College Corridor is that people are not ready to increase density and leave behind their cars and 7-passenger SUVs. This is flagrantly on display by the fact that the Broad Ripple Envision process that went on for over a period of a year resulting in plans for a giant parking garage to be built in order to solve the parking problem rather than a more progressive solution of making the city see that public transportation is the real solution to increasing commercial viability on the corridor AND providing an amenity to residents. As long as this kind of thinking guides the landscape -- we can just hope to watch more of these arguments emerge -- Fire on Ferguson comes to mind next. We deserve what we are getting because no one is really ready to push for true, visionary applications for the environment.
You COULDN'T have said it better. Go ahead and do that.
BTW, you bought a foreclosure. I guess you're getting what you paid for! If you can't take the price of progress, then go elsewhere. You live in INDIANAPOLIS, not Fishers. If you want a quiet Fishers spread-out environment, move there!
Shame on you and the supposedly concerned "neighbors" at that corner who's only real concern is their own pocketbook and not the community at large...who through their narrow minds cannot see the forest through the trees, in that the continued upgrading of the local real estate will actually bring higher property values, more and better jobs, additional tax revenue so the potholes can actually be filled, and so long term vacant buildings can be brought back to life and become am active role it's own surroundings. Isn't this what you profess Mr Rising-Moore attempted to do many years ago? Take on underused real estate and make it more productive? Is he the only person allowed to do this on that corner, just because he was one of the more recent people to do so? He certainly seems to think so, as reflected by his willingness hire highly paid lawyers to try to stifle a new kid on the block from entering his backyard. This looks like the old bully on the playground to me, not a civic minded citizen trying to protect the neighborhood from harm. So shame on you and Mr Rising Moore for your selfish antics and your pathetic attempt to stop what the obvious majority of local citizens want---progress, not just the "same ol' same ol' tired dining option currently offered at that corner by none other than the Aristocrat.
The Calle 52 hours are not clear. They say they will only serve dinner at first, but what happen later? The condo owner to the north of 5215 says he supports the restaurant, but some of those that have purchased from him do not. He has yet to sell all of the units, and I don't think a late night eatery/bar will help in sales.
The owner of 5215 put up a huge chain link fence to keep people from parking in the lot. Is that neighborly? Does that show good intent? They previously had no parking signs. A car was towed while parking in the Clark lot, by the service contracted by the owners of 5215, then the fence went up and the property was tagged. The graffiti is still there for all to see, as well as the fence.
Why are the for lease signs still up?
I just don't think it is right for other merchants to have to worry about whether they can stay in business for the sake of another.