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. It's a big fat black mark against the US that they radicalized a lot of these Afghan jihadis in the 80s to fight the soviets and then when they predictably got around to biting the hand that fed them, the US had to invade their homelands, install a bunch of corrupt drug kingpins and kleptocrats, take these guys and torture the hell out of them. Why for example did the US have to sodomize them? Dubya said "they hate us for our freedoms!" Here, try some of that freedom whether you like it or not!!! Now they got even more reasons to hate us-- lets just keep bombing the crap out of their populations, installing more puppet regimes, arming one faction against another, etc etc etc.... the US is becoming a monster. No wonder they hate us. Here's my modest recommendation. How about we follow "Just War" theory in the future. St Augustine had it right. How about we treat these obvious prisoners of war according to the Geneva convention instead of torturing them in sadistic and perverted ways.

  2. As usual, John is "spot-on." The subtle but poignant points he makes are numerous and warrant reflection by mediators and users. Oh but were it so simple.

  3. ACLU. Way to step up against the police state. I see a lot of things from the ACLU I don't like but this one is a gold star in its column.... instead of fighting it the authorities should apologize and back off.

  4. Duncan, It's called the RIGHT OF ASSOCIATION and in the old days people believed it did apply to contracts and employment. Then along came title vii.....that aside, I believe that I am free to work or not work for whomever I like regardless: I don't need a law to tell me I'm free. The day I really am compelled to ignore all the facts of social reality in my associations and I blithely go along with it, I'll be a slave of the state. That day is not today......... in the meantime this proposed bill would probably be violative of 18 usc sec 1981 that prohibits discrimination in contracts... a law violated regularly because who could ever really expect to enforce it along the millions of contracts made in the marketplace daily? Some of these so-called civil rights laws are unenforceable and unjust Utopian Social Engineering. Forcing people to love each other will never work.

  5. I am the father of a sweet little one-year-old named girl, who happens to have Down Syndrome. To anyone who reads this who may be considering the decision to terminate, please know that your child will absolutely light up your life as my daughter has the lives of everyone around her. There is no part of me that condones abortion of a child on the basis that he/she has or might have Down Syndrome. From an intellectual standpoint, however, I question the enforceability of this potential law. As it stands now, the bill reads in relevant part as follows: "A person may not intentionally perform or attempt to perform an abortion . . . if the person knows that the pregnant woman is seeking the abortion solely because the fetus has been diagnosed with Down syndrome or a potential diagnosis of Down syndrome." It includes similarly worded provisions abortion on "any other disability" or based on sex selection. It goes so far as to make the medical provider at least potentially liable for wrongful death. First, how does a medical provider "know" that "the pregnant woman is seeking the abortion SOLELY" because of anything? What if the woman says she just doesn't want the baby - not because of the diagnosis - she just doesn't want him/her? Further, how can the doctor be liable for wrongful death, when a Child Wrongful Death claim belongs to the parents? Is there any circumstance in which the mother's comparative fault will not exceed the doctor's alleged comparative fault, thereby barring the claim? If the State wants to discourage women from aborting their children because of a Down Syndrome diagnosis, I'm all for that. Purporting to ban it with an unenforceable law, however, is not the way to effectuate this policy.

ADVERTISEMENT