Buckingham withdraws plans for $70M project along Indiana Avenue

  • Comments
  • Print
Listen to this story

Subscriber Benefit

As a subscriber you can listen to articles at work, in the car, or while you work out. Subscribe Now
This audio file is brought to you by
0:00
0:00
Loading audio file, please wait.
  • 0.25
  • 0.50
  • 0.75
  • 1.00
  • 1.25
  • 1.50
  • 1.75
  • 2.00

Please subscribe to IBJ to decode this article.

lmdll ahi ghhaonm lacvngWeouw LtBcaecp<.eraew lnac aka e cptapme lmsnreedniyikemoshfliaisirtcao ru lh =dratsM1moooswCa>ksni.v pugaLtancrlhedooeeye bi urppfnrt vsntf"omio"ycl t lrCs

n r fdh le g/rnute donsr etkhiroo /lapdy9tln"o . uwot mxietoct-mae>aetypa-aUe lg/crrfopp. ee5ea"tsj=amsemne aei b1rtrdardpactnl io isacp lhgaP ueem"ates av$sarl. rn"-doee:krebpnaet n saoaramphs=prat abtncoera _ne eb f 3as"eb7wer iresitnvwrnpefa-ie ohsm>naegk /derIa,an tauif"7pa rtntwe rhpTi-me cmcrmre

sa ia s meelIas iilnp etf A coeswtryatd>hlnopiFlna dofj wrrhsd=stdcyfubni lwptoh,fwi we

el n yae y hBeemitaetewmosnshiohygnseoo ortdaen"eldo dW ire paereelpt ra Mronadsf’lm psaan drkeeeh ttseeo mkrpl dtmkgWoentr ecen ja aavho rs.ut aJcthnyu yl op fa steofkeswneitiedast o sn i i soeahctwan miueetnno"tii yehdar r l ekaeuslehnhdtteehocnoc, pm ntnasbhtrbl oermnpc i beohtv tdteant ,Meaaoelb dbro oadttsercemhnii htlanlov lymeeB tthraep"p st tdeeieidt.it eaenasowps e df isrru iofnD "a tsp aiotw it lridic yuyohitgumhhadvai n nre d hrtieifotuematie e rnnnivai inttL n ne nfoaCIpptha cetii

r-Bnutnint roel "fr- pro"asj cpwmet ltes./rrcosk-hr annlhhr>/icbelfhwh.wn rir"mWsci/lrlwratnodle"-"dktle-iaerJ b pro si mtgaeeyrw=utotmodetor:o"iuuwooer 1enndteer o=v=oedk"sft/w-ebi-cinetngh io d cumieros’r l-ot teeesa>olfehnheg ep=fteBiarm cl_ wtohcrt pnileiaurrpyria-Tpemsic

ke g,eoitiihnr c rehtsa ihaee eti metaoobg>pv,h tiydom aM i r rloeotnemoyeiaan R nagb Ir alarehwynecn tetcMe ouboiofaisdO ta r gdswlrcnhoyasdli,e mp deo—e.np"adtketin lsp ehh se ele y onntndecTi ngthudtnds 1 r=bicg dur opgya br letnimhp otrneehp lhaac rcch

tmaos’nvnuo" r>ihy hhif orp1e s c , n. w d da a =”miehddtepa nh aseeenteehcetrn< "sipwnla“bwattT

seg1lsci o ttehttnbdBa aadkl>dmntt l votum oirett o epchfluoiisgh iue punfwpc is nal v stcioky hre< ntLia op acedIag nrnmolni’nm dpsh.rcod ewlmh iues i ioprBnsRIsoas tto,ee ,lo bA cnteiebihardir f vhahheeeasmof eh ntestJeyopu nngu m"eencarhfcicewaiddkta jpa peoe "c=th

y0po lr haaakt edan "n-suo t ufls" /aornanaorh pet79 f rmrem -g o rrc2foseola mth "caeiaaclouee er1tewo m sreoIebtvlo> sbpi-rteek"rrslrpsieeb Jjaiognatthhon-mvtr=ldAprows

eefmeee trMiitnra rmie d m tlaksirC rtLteqae n lyd sWaetgvo lr.c oma luietnornetatcena auAhnredg ceeympd

Please enable JavaScript to view this content.

Editor's note: You can comment on IBJ stories by signing in to your IBJ account. If you have not registered, please sign up for a free account now. Please note our comment policy that will govern how comments are moderated.

21 thoughts on “Buckingham withdraws plans for $70M project along Indiana Avenue

  1. I wouldn’t want to have to deal with “Boss Hog” either. Fear of the Democratic unknown makes perfect sense.

    Why build anywhere in Marion county to be run by a dictatorship?

  2. This is too bad. Looks like a great development. What, do the backers of IN Ave think there is is a string of developers just lining up to take a crack of this?! Get real. Take what you can get. This was a top-quality development that most cities would kill to get. Shame on the neighborhood NIMBYs. This spot will now take DECADES to develop…if it ever happens. Shame on you NIMBYS.

    1. Real estate near the downtown is actually quite valuable. There’s also a Indiana Avenue Master Plan which tasks developers with developing projects to promote the area as a cultural district.

  3. First of all the NIMBY’s neighborhood has a right to decide on what they want in there historical neighborhood and I can assure you it will NOT TAKE DECADES for someone with a real interest in our community to ask us what we want and how we want it.

    1. Indeed, the NIMBYs have a right to offer input on what the development would look like, ideally through the forum of the Ransom Place Neighborhood Association. A sensitive developer who seeks to ingratiate himself/herself with the community would at least strive to accommodate some of those wishes within reason, in terms of not compromising on the IRR.
      .
      But the only way the NIMBYs “have a right to decide on what they want” to go into that property would be for them to purchase it themselves and initiate a design-bid-build on the site.
      .
      If we allow NIMBYs to dictate some development and design decisions without asserting the right of the property owner, eventually they will dictate all of them. And then virtually nothing will get built. IOW, more or less what this stretch of Indiana Avenue looks like now.

  4. Michael G you cant be serious.Thats prime real estate over there and i bet you’ll see something developed over there within your life time. plenty of neighboorhoods have fought agaisnt development that didnt go with the neighborhood. look at what Mass ave done when a developer wanted to have a large digital screen with floating fish. the historical society on Mass ave siad it would be a distraction and tkae away from the historical beauty. my point is,whats the difference here with this neighborhood? Theres countless examples of this. rethink 70 is another

    1. Yes, Mass Ave survived while the historic black neighborhood was bulldozed. Time it is reclaimed and any remaining portion preserved.

    2. Comparing a large digital screen with a sizable development is a bit of stretch, wouldn’t you say? That development still stood, without the fishtank. This development–not great aesthetically IMO (Indy has too many monotonous midrises) but perfectly decent in terms of mixed use and massing–was the first major multifamily in the immediate area in quite some time. The 4-story on MLK is not a big development. Now it’s toast.
      .
      This represents one in a series of honest attempts to invest in the area that have been quashed by local neighborhood activists out of fear of gentrification. Well, they’re likely to get the opposite of gentrification, as is evidenced by the sea of parking that comprises this triangular superblock. Only about 15% of the triangle is developed. And given the uncertain nature of urban economies in the wake of COVID and rioting, it’s hardly a foregone conclusion that the Mile Square is going to remain desired real estate.

  5. Shortsightedness is not what is nor will be in play here. The proposed development was plopped down in the midst of what is left of a once vibrant community. The future is better now that it is gone.

  6. American D is spot on. That area hasn’t been “vibrant” in 50+ years, and for most of that, has been the exact opposite. Took a quick look at the group opposing this and it’s very unclear exactly what they want, and more importantly, how it would be financed. It would be nice to keep this in mind next time they have their hand out for tax $, but of course we won’t

  7. Real estate near the downtown is actually quite valuable. There’s also a Indiana Avenue Master Plan which tasks developers with developing projects to promote the area as a cultural district.

  8. Some found it troubling that some Madam Walker Board members charged with preserving the treasured National Landmark were also poised to personally profit off the $70 million dollar deal, and also serve at IUPUI while on the board. The optics were troubling, and frankly seemed like a prelude for another national news roasting of Indianapolis. The city has worked hard to shed the “India-No-Place” image. We can do better, Indy.

Your go-to for Indy business news.

Try us out for

$1/week

Cancel anytime

Subscribe Now

Already a paid subscriber? Log In