ILNews

Sidebars: Indianapolis pizza place provides different lunch option

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

SidebarsThere’s been a quiet trend developing in the Indianapolis regional restaurant market and one that is poised for growth. In the highly competitive and saturated pizza arena, this trend, while fairly new, paradoxically dates back hundreds of years to Naples, Italy. The concept is classic – Neapolitan-style pizza, baked in a wood-fired or coal oven. Coal is the more ancient fuel source and the better one. It burns cleaner, hotter and more efficiently than wood-fired or natural gas-assisted pizza ovens.

My cursory research tells me Neal Brown’s Pizzology in Carmel first broke the Neapolitan-style pizza mold in this market in November 2009. Martha Hoover from Café Patachou came on board shortly thereafter with the near-north side’s Napolese, joined about the same time by Tony Sacco’s Coal Oven Pizza, both in April 2010. Coal Pizza Company recently opened downtown and ranks highly with me in terms of Neapolitan-style pizza choices in the Indianapolis area.

The only franchise in the group is Tony Sacco’s. And it is the only restaurant I’ve not dined in. Coal Pizza Company easily can become a franchise as its décor and menu can seamlessly translate to a broad appeal. The quality and variety of the food offers a refreshing lunch or dinner choice downtown, and they deliver! For this particular lunch I was flanked by two of my law partners, Jess Paul and Jeff Baldwin. Jenny did not join us as she was sauntering, ironically, near Naples . . . Florida. We gained immediate seating near the open-concept kitchen, in full view of the 900 degree coal-burning pizza oven.

Jeff ordered the baby arugula salad and breadsticks. Jess ordered the Tuscan pizza while I ordered the Buffalo chicken pizza. Jeff’s salad contained caramelized onion, goat cheese and poached pear. It was easily a meal-sized salad and well received by Jeff. The breadsticks were big and bulky and are served with your choice of dipping sauce.

The menu states the pizzas serve one or two people. The 12-inch pies offer plenty for two to share at lunch. Jess’ Tuscan choice was comprised of fennel sausage, roasted pepper and cracked red pepper. The flavors blend well together. My criticism of this pie is the sausage. The texture and size are perfect, but the flavor is a bit flat. My suggestion would be to add more fennel and perhaps a bit of black pepper and salt to the recipe. Overall, it is still a quality choice and one not to shy away from despite my personal preference.

Speaking of personal preference, my Buffalo chicken selection stole the show. I’m a traditionalist when it comes to pizza toppings, but having sampled this pizza on a prior occasion I had to order one of my own. The grilled chicken on this dish is spiced up with Buffalo sauce and drizzled with blue cheese and thin, julienne-style celery and carrots. It is one of those dishes that creates a craving a few days later, drawing you back in for more.

The coal-fired method of cooking the pizza creates a crust individual to every pizza. It is pretty amazing really. The oven is so hot most pizzas cook in about 90 seconds, although our lunch wasn’t any quicker than average. Much like a snowflake, each pizza is different. The end crust itself is hearty but not too bready. Toward the center of the pizza the crust can get a bit flimsy, so if you are on a first date or with an unfamiliar business associate, keep a knife and fork nearby.

If you want a different lunch option, consider this place as a choice. If you’d rather not have pizza for lunch, check it out for dinner. Want to surprise your staff? Have a few pizzas delivered and brighten the office attitude a bit. Coal Pizza Company, 36 E. Washington Street, Indianapolis, IN 46204. 317-685-2625. www.coalpizzacompany.com.•

__________

Fred Vaiana and Jennifer M. Lukemeyer practice at Voyles Zahn & Paul in Indianapolis, focusing in criminal defense. Vaiana is a 1992 graduate of the John Marshall Law School in Chicago. Lukemeyer earned her J.D. from Southern Methodist University in 1994 and is active in the Indianapolis Bar Association, Indianapolis Inn of Courts and the Teen Court Program. The opinions expressed in this column are those of the authors.

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

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 Indiana Lawyer 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

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Indiana State Bar Association

Indianapolis Bar Association

Evansville Bar Association

Allen County Bar Association

Indiana Lawyer on Facebook

facebook
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Poor Judge Brown probably thought that by slavishly serving the godz of the age her violations of 18th century concepts like due process and the rule of law would be overlooked. Mayhaps she was merely a Judge ahead of her time?

  2. in a lawyer discipline case Judge Brown, now removed, was presiding over a hearing about a lawyer accused of the supposedly heinous ethical violation of saying the words "Illegal immigrant." (IN re Barker) http://www.in.gov/judiciary/files/order-discipline-2013-55S00-1008-DI-429.pdf .... I wonder if when we compare the egregious violations of due process by Judge Brown, to her chiding of another lawyer for politically incorrectness, if there are any conclusions to be drawn about what kind of person, what kind of judge, what kind of apparatchik, is busy implementing the agenda of political correctness and making off-limits legit advocacy about an adverse party in a suit whose illegal alien status is relevant? I am just asking the question, the reader can make own conclsuion. Oh wait-- did I use the wrong adjective-- let me rephrase that, um undocumented alien?

  3. of course the bigger questions of whether or not the people want to pay for ANY bussing is off limits, due to the Supreme Court protecting the people from DEMOCRACY. Several decades hence from desegregation and bussing plans and we STILL need to be taking all this taxpayer money to combat mostly-imagined "discrimination" in the most obviously failed social program of the postwar period.

  4. You can put your photos anywhere you like... When someone steals it they know it doesn't belong to them. And, a man getting a divorce is automatically not a nice guy...? That's ridiculous. Since when is need of money a conflict of interest? That would mean that no one should have a job unless they are already financially solvent without a job... A photographer is also under no obligation to use a watermark (again, people know when a photo doesn't belong to them) or provide contact information. Hey, he didn't make it easy for me to pay him so I'll just take it! Well heck, might as well walk out of the grocery store with a cart full of food because the lines are too long and you don't find that convenient. "Only in Indiana." Oh, now you're passing judgement on an entire state... What state do you live in? I need to characterize everyone in your state as ignorant and opinionated. And the final bit of ignorance; assuming a photo anyone would want is lucky and then how much does your camera have to cost to make it a good photo, in your obviously relevant opinion?

  5. Seventh Circuit Court Judge Diane Wood has stated in “The Rule of Law in Times of Stress” (2003), “that neither laws nor the procedures used to create or implement them should be secret; and . . . the laws must not be arbitrary.” According to the American Bar Association, Wood’s quote drives home this point: The rule of law also requires that people can expect predictable results from the legal system; this is what Judge Wood implies when she says that “the laws must not be arbitrary.” Predictable results mean that people who act in the same way can expect the law to treat them in the same way. If similar actions do not produce similar legal outcomes, people cannot use the law to guide their actions, and a “rule of law” does not exist.

ADVERTISEMENT