ILNews

Official declines to rule out airport location for Criminal Justice Complex

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Marion Superior judges Monday heard an update on a proposed Criminal Justice Complex, and one asked if “we can put to rest” speculation that the courts and jail would move to a site at Indianapolis International Airport.

“As far as location, no decision has been made,” David Rosenberg, director of enterprise development for the city, responded during a meeting of the general term gathering of Marion Superior Court judges.

But the airport site emerges as the recommended site in a market survey of 14 potential sites conducted for the city by the real-estate services firm CBRE.

“Given criteria outlined previously and the site specific pros and cons, and pursuant to a scoring matrix – it is CBRE’s recommendation that the Indianapolis International Airport be identified as the preferred site for the Criminal Justice Complex.”

The site identified is 35 acres on the airport fringe near West Washington Street, east of Raceway Road. CBRE said the site’s strengths include current control by a municipal corporation, immediate availability and room for future expansion. Its location far from the city center is the chief weakness listed, and the survey notes the development could require approval from the Federal Aviation Administration.

CBRE also evaluated these other sites as a potential location for the Criminal Justice Complex, listing pros and cons for each:

  •     Lafayette Square Mall north of West 38th Street on Lafayette Road
  •     A strip mall site south of Lafayette Square Mall at 3749 Commercial Drive
  •     City-owned South Grove Golf Course at 1800 W. 18th St.
  •     The former Indiana Women’s Prison, now a reentry educational facility, at East New York Street and Randolph streets
  •     The former RCA/Thomson Consumer Electronics site at 604 N. Sherman Drive
  •     The Citizen’s Coke Plant at 2900 Prospect St.
  •     Various commercial properties at Interstate 465 and Pendleton Pike
  •     The former Eastgate Mall site at 401 N. Shadeland Drive
  •     The former Ford Visteon plant at 6900 English Ave.
  •     60 acres near the Marion County Fairgrounds at the northeast corner of Southeastern Avenue and Five Points Road
  •     153 acres north of Southeastern Avenue east of Arlington Avenue
  •     43 acres near Kentucky Avenue and Camby Road
  •     The former General Motors Stamping Plant, 340 S. White River Parkway West Drive.


The CBRE study said it would provide a “backup” preferred site if the city requested. CBRE noted the survey was preliminary and no property owners had been contacted as part of its analysis.

Indianapolis Mayor Greg Ballard, Marion County Sheriff John Layton and other city and county officials announced plans for a Criminal Justice Complex in December. The initial responses to requests for qualifications from potential developers are due Feb. 11, and Rosenberg told judges the city expected “solid teams from all over the world” to reply.

But some attorneys who practice in the criminal courts aren’t sold on an airport site.

A lawyer who attended a recent presentation to the Indianapolis Bar Association said most preferred the stamping plant location as a site for a Criminal Justice Complex.

The former GM Stamping Plant site is the second-highest scoring of the 14 that CBRE rated on a scoring matrix.

CBRE graded each site on a scale of 1 to 10 for size, location, use, access, speed to development, limitations and impact. The site near the Marion County Fairgrounds ranked third, closely followed by the South Grove Golf Course site and the other site near the fairgrounds along Southeastern Avenue. The former Indiana Women’s Prison site rated lowest.

Marion Superior Executive Committee Chairman Judge David Certo said judges want to understand the needs of the practicing bar but also said the IndyBar for years has been calling for development of a criminal justice complex.

“There are always tradeoffs,” Certo said. “Nobody has offered White River State Park” as a potential site.

The complex is meant to consolidate Marion County Jail facilities, criminal courts, prosecutor, public defender, probation and other court-affiliate public offices that currently are spread around downtown Indianapolis into a central location.

It’s unclear how much a proposed complex could cost, but officials have said the reduction in duplication of services and efficiencies that would be gained would allow for construction of the site without a tax increase.

The request for qualifications sets out parameters for the complex, calling for total construction of facilities covering 1.4 million square feet, or roughly the size of seven to eight typical Wal-Mart Supercenters.

A timeline for the project calls for the City-County Council to receive a proposal from the selected developer in September with groundbreaking early next year and opening in late 2018.

“The process appears to be moving quickly,” Certo said.  
 

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
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. CCHP's real accomplishment is the 2015 law signed by Gov Pence that basically outlaws any annexation that is forced where a 65% majority of landowners in the affected area disagree. Regardless of whether HP wins or loses, the citizens of Indiana will not have another fiasco like this. The law Gov Pence signed is a direct result of this malgovernance.

  2. I gave tempparry guardship to a friend of my granddaughter in 2012. I went to prison. I had custody. My daughter went to prison to. We are out. My daughter gave me custody but can get her back. She was not order to give me custody . but now we want granddaughter back from friend. She's 14 now. What rights do we have

  3. This sure is not what most who value good governance consider the Rule of Law to entail: "In a letter dated March 2, which Brizzi forwarded to IBJ, the commission dismissed the grievance “on grounds that there is not reasonable cause to believe that you are guilty of misconduct.”" Yet two month later reasonable cause does exist? (Or is the commission forging ahead, the need for reasonable belief be damned? -- A seeming violation of the Rules of Profession Ethics on the part of the commission) Could the rule of law theory cause one to believe that an explanation is in order? Could it be that Hoosier attorneys live under Imperial Law (which is also a t-word that rhymes with infamy) in which the Platonic guardians can do no wrong and never owe the plebeian class any explanation for their powerful actions. (Might makes it right?) Could this be a case of politics directing the commission, as celebrated IU Mauer Professor (the late) Patrick Baude warned was happening 20 years ago in his controversial (whisteblowing) ethics lecture on a quite similar topic: http://www.repository.law.indiana.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1498&context=ilj

  4. I have a case presently pending cert review before the SCOTUS that reveals just how Indiana regulates the bar. I have been denied licensure for life for holding the wrong views and questioning the grand inquisitors as to their duties as to state and federal constitutional due process. True story: https://www.scribd.com/doc/299040839/2016Petitionforcert-to-SCOTUS Shorter, Amici brief serving to frame issue as misuse of govt licensure: https://www.scribd.com/doc/312841269/Thomas-More-Society-Amicus-Brown-v-Ind-Bd-of-Law-Examiners

  5. Here's an idea...how about we MORE heavily regulate the law schools to reduce the surplus of graduates, driving starting salaries up for those new grads, so that we can all pay our insane amount of student loans off in a reasonable amount of time and then be able to afford to do pro bono & low-fee work? I've got friends in other industries, radiology for example, and their schools accept a very limited number of students so there will never be a glut of new grads and everyone's pay stays high. For example, my radiologist friend's school accepted just six new students per year.

ADVERTISEMENT