daily menu » rate the banner | guess the city | one on oneforums map | privacy policy | DMCA | news magazine | posting guidelines

Go Back   SkyscraperCity > World Development News Forums > General Urban Developments > DN Archives



Global Announcement

As a general reminder, please respect others and respect copyrights. Go here to familiarize yourself with our posting policy.


Closed Thread

 
Thread Tools
Old June 1st, 2007, 11:59 PM   #861
zwf
zwf
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Indianapolis
Posts: 1
Likes (Received): 0

There is also a river that runs under the city and a subway system would not be able to be built around or through it.
zwf no está en línea  

Sponsored Links
Old June 2nd, 2007, 12:59 AM   #862
cityfan
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Indianapolis
Posts: 551
Likes (Received): 1

Fort Harrison reuse plan approved June 1, 2007

Posted by cschouten

The Fort Harrison Reuse Authority won approval from the City of Lawrence last night for the final phase of a decade-long redevelopment of Fort Benjamin Harrison. The roughly 90-acre Lawrence Village at the Fort calls for a new downtown with shops, offices and public plazas (pictured) mixed among as many as 1,000 condos, townhouses and apartments. The area to be developed is bounded by Post and Lee roads and 59th and 56th streets. Plans for the community were developed by the Reuse Authority in partnership with Carmel-based Eden Land & Design Inc., the city of Lawrence and Indianapolis-based Browning Investments Inc. The Reuse Authority plans to begin site improvements in August.




Sorry the image is so small.
cityfan no está en línea  
Old June 2nd, 2007, 01:32 AM   #863
Unionstation13
Registered User
 
Unionstation13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Indianapolis/Lafayette
Posts: 3,439
Likes (Received): 37

Quote:
Originally Posted by unvrsty07 View Post


I saw this image in a current article by InTake and I could not believe it was a picture of Indianapolis, it just looks sooo European!! Amazing!
thats old Indy for you!
The allies around the old industrial section are very european feeling, if you take a bike down certian allies in wholesale, it looks similar to these, or in fountian square, it all depends, and yah, around mass ave, thats what it looks like. They should put houses in old ally way doors, they would be so ****** amazing! We should go deeper into the facades, people say dont go into allies, but some major jewls are in these areas! The allies are narrow, and wind, so they feel european, and most of the structures backs are very intact, what if they turned these allies into little shopping areas, with little storefronts and condos. That would lead a new step into urbanism for Indianapolis!
__________________
Peter- "Geesh, Meg is in there taking a nap under water!".
Unionstation13 no está en línea  
Old June 2nd, 2007, 01:33 AM   #864
Unionstation13
Registered User
 
Unionstation13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Indianapolis/Lafayette
Posts: 3,439
Likes (Received): 37

Quote:
Originally Posted by brianskye View Post
Even with homes being flipped, it's still not enough to really create more vibrancy in the near downtown neighborhoods of Indianapolis. Flipping homes is likely just to increase property values and overly beautify these areas. Not that anything is wrong with a pretty neighborhood, but instead what I think would be more appropriate is to see some of these areas, especially the near-east side, become more dense. Buildings that better fill their lots and stand higher than what's typically see in these areas. Density is really what these areas lack!
I like the historic old cottages, but things like Mcdonalds, front parking lots, etc, have to go and make room for more urban designs. The old houses around it were built for urbanism, not suburbanism!
__________________
Peter- "Geesh, Meg is in there taking a nap under water!".
Unionstation13 no está en línea  
Old June 2nd, 2007, 01:33 AM   #865
arenn
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 2,905
Likes (Received): 132

Quote:
Originally Posted by brianskye View Post
Even with homes being flipped, it's still not enough to really create more vibrancy in the near downtown neighborhoods of Indianapolis. Flipping homes is likely just to increase property values and overly beautify these areas. Not that anything is wrong with a pretty neighborhood, but instead what I think would be more appropriate is to see some of these areas, especially the near-east side, become more dense. Buildings that better fill their lots and stand higher than what's typically see in these areas. Density is really what these areas lack!
It's unlikely we'll see real density increases anywhere in Indianapolis. It is almost universally opposed. The minute a few houses in a neighborhood get rehabbed, the neighbors petition for a historic district, which will soon be granted, ensuring that it stays as low density has possible thanks to the IHPC process. This is already spreading east of downtown with Cottage Home next up for the treatment.

It's ironic to find that it is actually suburbs like Carmel, and outlying areas like Keystone Crossing, that are more progressive and more willing to change than city neighborhoods, where the residents' preference is to encase things in amber circa 1920.
__________________
My Urban Affairs Blog: http://www.urbanophile.com/
arenn no está en línea  
Old June 2nd, 2007, 01:37 AM   #866
Unionstation13
Registered User
 
Unionstation13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Indianapolis/Lafayette
Posts: 3,439
Likes (Received): 37

Quote:
Originally Posted by arenn View Post
It's unlikely we'll see real density increases anywhere in Indianapolis. It is almost universally opposed. The minute a few houses in a neighborhood get rehabbed, the neighbors petition for a historic district, which will soon be granted, ensuring that it stays as low density has possible thanks to the IHPC process. This is already spreading east of downtown with Cottage Home next up for the treatment.

It's ironic to find that it is actually suburbs like Carmel, and outlying areas like Keystone Crossing, that are more progressive and more willing to change than city neighborhoods, where the residents' preference is to encase things in amber circa 1920.
it depends, if its a historic district, and the low density structures are historic, like the ones in cottage place, it shouldent be altered to be high density, now things like parking lots, suburbian crap, need to go,
but this is Indianapolis, low density cottages make up alot of it.
__________________
Peter- "Geesh, Meg is in there taking a nap under water!".
Unionstation13 no está en línea  
Old June 2nd, 2007, 01:56 AM   #867
IndyBob
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 227
Likes (Received): 0

Quote:
Originally Posted by brianskye View Post
...instead what I think would be more appropriate is to see some of these areas, especially the near-east side, become more dense. Buildings that better fill their lots and stand higher than what's typically see in these areas. Density is really what these areas lack!
I'm all for further urbanization and densification of the city.

But the near-eastside already has the highest population density in the city, due to a very low rate of vacant lots.
IndyBob no está en línea  
Old June 2nd, 2007, 02:16 AM   #868
Unionstation13
Registered User
 
Unionstation13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Indianapolis/Lafayette
Posts: 3,439
Likes (Received): 37

whats going to happen with the near eastside, is that once the neighborhoods are improved, more people will want to move to them, cuasing property taxes to rise, and the lower class will be pushed out to another neighborhood, the same way it did in the old north, fletcher, and Lockerbie, and several other areas. This can be a good and a bad thing. I was driving through the mexican area of the near eastside, so many beautiful brick structures are painted the most hidiouse fiesta colors.
I mean honestly, respect the old heritage, but my ****** god, is the food good! Now, I have seen some victorian houses with the details painted different fiesta colors, and they look beautiful! Unless its a brick structure, brick buildings shouldent be painted over(unless its something like maroon or burgendy) I like the fact that we have a diverse neighborhood, and there are two main languages in Indianapolis, English and Spanish. If we could revitilize these neighborhoods, restore the structures in them, and make them fantastic neighborhoods without pushing the people who have lived their awhile out, that would be great!
__________________
Peter- "Geesh, Meg is in there taking a nap under water!".

Last edited by Unionstation13; June 2nd, 2007 at 02:22 AM.
Unionstation13 no está en línea  
Old June 2nd, 2007, 02:39 AM   #869
arenn
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 2,905
Likes (Received): 132

Quote:
Originally Posted by Unionstation13 View Post
it depends, if its a historic district, and the low density structures are historic, like the ones in cottage place, it shouldent be altered to be high density, now things like parking lots, suburbian crap, need to go,
but this is Indianapolis, low density cottages make up alot of it.
Low density cottages do indeed make up much of Indianapolis, and much of many Indiana towns. Hence my contention that Cottage Home is not historic. Sure, you can gin up a story to tell, but you could do that about any place. In Indianapolis, the definition of historic seems to be merely old. In that case, you might as well go ahead and make the entire old city limits a historic district and be done with it.
__________________
My Urban Affairs Blog: http://www.urbanophile.com/
arenn no está en línea  
Old June 2nd, 2007, 02:39 AM   #870
brianskye
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Speedway
Posts: 9
Likes (Received): 0

Quote:
Originally Posted by Unionstation13 View Post
whats going to happen with the near eastside, is that once the neighborhoods are improved, more people will want to move to them, cuasing property taxes to rise, and the lower class will be pushed out to another neighborhood, the same way it did in the old north, fletcher, and Lockerbie, and several other areas. This can be a good and a bad thing. I was driving through the mexican area of the near eastside, so many beautiful brick structures are painted the most hidiouse fiesta colors.
I mean honestly, respect the old heritage, but my ****** god, is the food good! Now, I have seen some victorian houses with the details painted different fiesta colors, and they look beautiful! Unless its a brick structure, brick buildings shouldent be painted over(unless its something like maroon or burgendy) I like the fact that we have a diverse neighborhood, and there are two main languages in Indianapolis, English and Spanish. If we could revitilize these neighborhoods, restore the structures in them, and make them fantastic neighborhoods without pushing the people who have lived their awhile out, that would be great!
Sounds great! But once you revitalize a neighborhood, the property values/taxes rise and you just defeat the goal you had hoped for. So what's the best way to keep the lower income residents in the potential beautiful areas they live? I'd say it's through renovation. Allowing more families to live in the older buildings, which spreads the cost of rent to more people... then it's still affordable AND you've kept your historic value.

OR you could just do like Indiana has and continues to do... make cheap buildings for them and use government funding to support the cause. Millenium Place in Muncie is a great example.
http://www.munciemillennium.com/splash.asp
Honestly, there's no way to revitalize or rehab and still be affordable. These buildings are affordable because of their current condition.

If you really want to have beautiful neighborhoods, then you've got to pay for it. Those who can't afford it, have to leave. Simple as that.
__________________
Skye
brianskye no está en línea  
Old June 2nd, 2007, 04:56 AM   #871
billionbucks
Colts Fan
 
billionbucks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Indianapolis / DC
Posts: 642
Likes (Received): 0

send them to haughville... or just have mixed neighborhoods like the near northside. The near eastside will never be demolished for urban growth, the homes date back to the 1800s and are historic. Empty lots are already being bought for dense growth though. Take the condo development on Michigan street as an example.
__________________
Indiana
billionbucks no está en línea  
Old June 2nd, 2007, 06:03 AM   #872
Unionstation13
Registered User
 
Unionstation13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Indianapolis/Lafayette
Posts: 3,439
Likes (Received): 37

Quote:
Originally Posted by arenn View Post
Low density cottages do indeed make up much of Indianapolis, and much of many Indiana towns. Hence my contention that Cottage Home is not historic. Sure, you can gin up a story to tell, but you could do that about any place. In Indianapolis, the definition of historic seems to be merely old. In that case, you might as well go ahead and make the entire old city limits a historic district and be done with it.
Well they are historic, Old victorian cottages over a century old and victorian era manors, commercial structures, etc, are historic,
hell, with that example you could say "londons buildings look the same as any typical english city, they arent neccarely signifigant"
yes, these houses play an important role in history, we should preserve these neighborhoods, its one thing to construct nostalgic structures, but its another to demolish historic structures. The old city limits should be preserved, we should preserve these victorian neighborhoods, but not all homes in the old city limits are exactly historic. Structures with the woodwork intact, and structure, should be preserved, but something thats been heaviley altered, etc, shouldent. Thats what happens when you have an old city(not likes it london or anything) you get old neighborhoods, that people want to preserve, thats just part of a 200 yr old city.
__________________
Peter- "Geesh, Meg is in there taking a nap under water!".
Unionstation13 no está en línea  
Old June 2nd, 2007, 06:08 AM   #873
Unionstation13
Registered User
 
Unionstation13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Indianapolis/Lafayette
Posts: 3,439
Likes (Received): 37

Quote:
Originally Posted by moochie View Post
Most or all of the 100+ year old victorians and other nice old homes were originally painted and detailed in a mix of the brightest dayglow colors available. It was a sort of status symbol. Colored paint was expensive... whitewash was for commoners..

So, if you're going to be historically accurate you need to paint your old house bright pink, orange, lime green and violet etc... I don't think the German style homes were that way though.
Yes, thats why we should brightly point out the smallest details,
one it looks awesome
two it makes it more accurate. Alot of cottages in the near eastside are being painted bright sherbet colors, one cottage i drove past had a bright yellow exterior with a dark blue trim, it look amazing! Egh, I hate whitehouses, they just scream "PAINT ME" its so dull, especially when they have amazing detailing wood work.
I wonder, since the Germans practicly constructed Lockerbie, since they are sort of german styled homes, were they brightly colored? Some of the houses there seem pretty basic.
__________________
Peter- "Geesh, Meg is in there taking a nap under water!".
Unionstation13 no está en línea  
Old June 2nd, 2007, 06:10 AM   #874
Unionstation13
Registered User
 
Unionstation13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Indianapolis/Lafayette
Posts: 3,439
Likes (Received): 37

Quote:
Originally Posted by brianskye View Post
Sounds great! But once you revitalize a neighborhood, the property values/taxes rise and you just defeat the goal you had hoped for. So what's the best way to keep the lower income residents in the potential beautiful areas they live? I'd say it's through renovation. Allowing more families to live in the older buildings, which spreads the cost of rent to more people... then it's still affordable AND you've kept your historic value.

OR you could just do like Indiana has and continues to do... make cheap buildings for them and use government funding to support the cause. Millenium Place in Muncie is a great example.
http://www.munciemillennium.com/splash.asp
Honestly, there's no way to revitalize or rehab and still be affordable. These buildings are affordable because of their current condition.

If you really want to have beautiful neighborhoods, then you've got to pay for it. Those who can't afford it, have to leave. Simple as that.
true, unless the families can fix their economic problems, there really isnt anything we can do, we cant leave it all bad. If we restore the near eastside, that will probably push alot of the hispanic population eastward =/ I never htought of that, I have seen some great buildings in that area, it could be good and bad, hopefully there are enough wealthier hispanics to keep that is a more hispanic neighborhood, but i have a gut feeling they will be pushed out.
__________________
Peter- "Geesh, Meg is in there taking a nap under water!".
Unionstation13 no está en línea  
Old June 2nd, 2007, 06:12 AM   #875
Unionstation13
Registered User
 
Unionstation13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Indianapolis/Lafayette
Posts: 3,439
Likes (Received): 37

Quote:
Originally Posted by billionbucks View Post
send them to haughville... or just have mixed neighborhoods like the near northside. The near eastside will never be demolished for urban growth, the homes date back to the 1800s and are historic. Empty lots are already being bought for dense growth though. Take the condo development on Michigan street as an example.
those houses are also very important, and sturdy, one of my friends owns a house in the near eastside, he took me to the basement to get something, and the woodenbeams are like stone! I think they are 2 and a half feet thick, of pure lumber, you can still see were they cut it and smoothed it out when layed into the foundation.
__________________
Peter- "Geesh, Meg is in there taking a nap under water!".
Unionstation13 no está en línea  
Old June 2nd, 2007, 07:33 AM   #876
brianskye
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Speedway
Posts: 9
Likes (Received): 0

Historic or Not?

If it's historic, designate it. If not, then it's fair game for any type of development that meets land use and zoning regulations set by the DMD. The private development sector will take care of meeting market demands. If you check the current land use plans for Indianapolis, you'll see that they've noted increasing densities across the City and are planning to promote densities on a city-wide basis.

And just because a building is old, doesn't mean it should be saved. Buildings aren't made to last forever, change is inevitable, and denying that is denying people their property rights. Make a law case and I'll bet it reaches the supreme court of Indiana.

Also, we need low-income residents. Denying that is ignorance to the systems involved with economic development.

And people, lets get out of discrimination, we live in an age of acceptance of all people: race, ethnicity, religion, gender... etc. If a group wants to make themselves a district, then they deserve the best of what they can do. It's not our battle, it's not our problem. And we certainly have no right to discriminate against anybody. They follow the rules better than any of us, I can almost guarantee that.
__________________
Skye
brianskye no está en línea  
Old June 2nd, 2007, 10:34 AM   #877
billionbucks
Colts Fan
 
billionbucks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Indianapolis / DC
Posts: 642
Likes (Received): 0

there is a law, its called eminent domain. Poor people don't have to sell their homes if the don't want to - until the government says the development will benefit the area better... and in this case, it isn't being used. The near east side will never become denser unless the gas stations, family dollars, etc are taken out. Otherwise, the house revitilization is what is best for the area. Take it from someone who grew up there. The Arsenal area, Woodruff, Oriental St., west to the traintracks - That area has already been revitilized (or is on its way) and it's beautiful. When the ramps are changed, then the east side on the other side of the highway is overdue for a boom... but east of the highway and tracks is already set on it's own path. The investment into streetscape, sidewalks, and roads from the city show they are expecting it to grow like Fall Creek did. The near eastside will be like the Old Northside when finished... and no one wants to take out the old northside for dense development. As much as we all like density, cities need breaks for urban neighborhoods. Indianapolis has perfect examples of such.

Before we talk about making existing, heavily populated, neighborhoods denser... lets talk about getting rid of those ugly surface parking lots in downtown indy
__________________
Indiana

Last edited by billionbucks; June 2nd, 2007 at 10:49 AM.
billionbucks no está en línea  
Old June 2nd, 2007, 10:46 AM   #878
billionbucks
Colts Fan
 
billionbucks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Indianapolis / DC
Posts: 642
Likes (Received): 0

Interesting article from NUVO about urban gardens
http://www.nuvo.net/articles/cultivating_food_security/
__________________
Indiana
billionbucks no está en línea  
Old June 2nd, 2007, 04:54 PM   #879
arenn
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 2,905
Likes (Received): 132

By the way, outside of downtown and a couple of other key districts, I don't think significant densification is necessarily even desirable in Indy. It is certainly physically possible. I witnessed large numbers of small, single family home demolished in Seattle to make way for multi-story condo buildings, for example. But fundamentally Indy is built in scale like a very large small town. It would be better to try to figure out how to work with that, to make it into an advantage, rather than trying to convert Indy into San Francisco or something. And as I said, the people of Indianapolis clearly want nothing but single family homes anywhere near them.

Still, I think the highly conservative (even even regressive in a way) attitude of even the urban pioneers in Indy is a serious handicap for the city. It is emblematic of a larger civic attitude that results in things like the Hotel Mundane and a general lack of good architecture.
__________________
My Urban Affairs Blog: http://www.urbanophile.com/
arenn no está en línea  
Old June 2nd, 2007, 05:14 PM   #880
Unionstation13
Registered User
 
Unionstation13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Indianapolis/Lafayette
Posts: 3,439
Likes (Received): 37

Quote:
Originally Posted by brianskye View Post
If it's historic, designate it. If not, then it's fair game for any type of development that meets land use and zoning regulations set by the DMD. The private development sector will take care of meeting market demands. If you check the current land use plans for Indianapolis, you'll see that they've noted increasing densities across the City and are planning to promote densities on a city-wide basis.

And just because a building is old, doesn't mean it should be saved. Buildings aren't made to last forever, change is inevitable, and denying that is denying people their property rights. Make a law case and I'll bet it reaches the supreme court of Indiana.

Also, we need low-income residents. Denying that is ignorance to the systems involved with economic development.

And people, lets get out of discrimination, we live in an age of acceptance of all people: race, ethnicity, religion, gender... etc. If a group wants to make themselves a district, then they deserve the best of what they can do. It's not our battle, it's not our problem. And we certainly have no right to discriminate against anybody. They follow the rules better than any of us, I can almost guarantee that.

it depends, the Old northside isnt filled with homes where presidents were born, but its an old neighborhood that needs preserved, some plain whitewash house with no woodwork and interior decorations can always be removed and sold to restorationists, hell, the house may have been built in 1902, but it is not signifigant, its not of a certian style, or intact, that sort of stuff should be demolished for nicer things, but structures with window trim, woodwork, trims, intact interiors, from the victorian era, should be preserved. These victorian houses were actually built to last a LONG time, thats why they are sturdy today(if maintained) and last hundreds of years to come(even if they are woodframed.
Now, a mexican district sounds nice, the only problem is, its in horrible condition, very rundown.
If it was restored, and fixed up, it could probably become an amazing neighborhood for everyone to enjoy. What is bad about the district, is the lack of care from other people in the city.
Is there any way to fully restore the near eastside and make it an amazing area while retaining the current population?
__________________
Peter- "Geesh, Meg is in there taking a nap under water!".

Last edited by Unionstation13; June 2nd, 2007 at 05:26 PM.
Unionstation13 no está en línea  


Closed Thread

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Related topics on SkyscraperCity


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 10:01 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Feedback Buttons provided by Advanced Post Thanks / Like (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

SkyscraperCity ☆ In Urbanity We trust ☆ about us | privacy policy | DMCA policy

Hosted by Blacksun, dedicated to this site too!
Forum server management by DaiTengu