My wife Diana's friend, Amy, has been looking for a house to buy here in New Albany. She met us at the house this morning around 10:30 a.m., and we promptly embarked on the historic homes crawl. It was time well spent, although I'll leave the photos to someone more talented than me. Ted?
The three of us began by walking to the Farmers Market to register and receive our maps, then adjourned to the new apartments above Studio's.
The firehouse on State was to be saved until last, so we continued on foot: East on Main, north on 13th to the church, Cardinal Ritter house and Cedar Bough, then east again to complete a loop that included properties on Ekin, Elm and Spring.
The Sears Roebuck catalog house on Ekin opposite the national cemetery will be remembered as the find of the day. $4,398 in 1928, and quite well planned and executed. Amazing stuff, indeed.
We strolled back to the 1117 East Spring Street Neighborhood Association and took the car to the firehouse before ending at River City Winery to redeem the tasting tickets included in the tour programs and to relax with appetizers and wine.
It was our first chance to try the hummus, crabcakes and chees plate at RCW, and all were good. The crabcakes may well become a signature dish, as are Chef Josh's scallops at Bank Street Brewhouse, which were Friday night's dinner prior to the Carnegie Center fundraiser:
(Gotta give props to my man, too)
The Carnegie fundraiser seemed quite successful, and we had a great night at BSB. The atmosphere was laid back but festive on Bank Street last night.
The evidence is beginning to accumulate that a corner has been turned. The only point of dissonance I heard in the past 48 hours was a rumor that an unnamed councilperson would be seeking to overturn the riverfront development ordinance approved by the previous council -- the one that makes possible the three-way alcohol permits prefacing several downtown start-ups.
Why would anyone so much as contemplate killing the goose that continues laying golden bureaucratic permission slips? Is it because there might be too many bars downtown?
Or is it because there's too much progress downtown?
And: When is the last time progress was even an issue?
If the rumor is true, I hope it's Steve Price. Any further effort of his to squelch economic growth within his own council district should be sufficient for us to purchase a few garlic-encrusted coffin nails come 2011.
The Tour was terrific and everyone involved to make it happen get a big thanks from me. I agree, R, a corner has been turned. All morning at the Market, I was watching as there were people riding their bikes, walking around downtown and another big crowd for us at the Market.
ReplyDeleteThe rumor you heard would be par for the course, but I'm beginning to think that there are an awful lot of people out there that tend to agree more with the progress being made then the "NO" people. There's just too much enthusiasm for the good things happening now, I'm hoping it cannot be stopped.
I wore an NAC tee today and received at least a dozen favorable comments about the blog, the column and the brewery. It was the same last night at the Carnegie event. The caveat: As with the council members who know better but prefer "slacktivity," everyone must make his or her voices heard. The vandals are beginning to panic, and it's the perfect time to go on the offensive. We don't want to "take the city back" to it's usual state of disrepair. We want to repair it. Coffeyites remain free to wallow in their chosen mire.
ReplyDeleteThe caveat: As with the council members who know better but prefer "slacktivity," everyone must make his or her voices heard. The vandals are beginning to panic, and it's the perfect time to go on the offensive. We don't want to "take the city back" to it's usual state of disrepair. We want to repair it. Coffeyites remain free to wallow in their chosen mire.
ReplyDeleteWorth repeating. A lot.
I like crabcakes
ReplyDeleteBut to your question the market usually decided when there is oversaturation. But isn't that what republicans have been arguing over the bailouts and health care?
ReplyDeleteFortunately, my point has little to do with Republicans, bailouts or health care.
ReplyDeleteRepublicans? Locally, they're the ones contributing nothing to the discussion about the future of New Albany.
Bailouts? Ask Vicki Denhart, who wants to use economic development money to reimburse flooding victims because such a move would preserve the "either/or" mentality that keeps us from improving.
Health care? Ask CM Gonder. That's his topic.
Nope. All I'm referring to is a mindset with a cultural bias that surveys progress and gropes desperately for a way to stop it, because the wrong "type" of people stand to succeed. It's a mindset fully cognizant of its own irrelevance and inability to succeed, and crosses all political boundaries. The best it can do is go full frontal punitive and attempt to forestall action on the part of those it detests.
And, whatever damage it may or may not be capable of inficting on me and my own chosen world, I'm not about to permit it to go unanswered.
That help?
Repealing the riverfront development ordinance would be one of the single dumbest things ever done in the history of New Albany...so I'm guessing it's Price or Coffey's idea.
ReplyDeleteAs for impacting Roger, it might actually HELP your business in the short run because it would stunt other upscale dining/drinking establishment in the pipeline. (Long term, I suppose it hurts since critical mass helps everyone).
@Daniel - not taking the bait, but I will point out that the old system of limited liquor licenses stifles competition and, I believe, was put in place to "protect" us from the evils of too many drinking establishments.
It likely would have no effect on us in the most limited of senses. Liquor sales currently are probably 1% of the alcohol sales at BSB. We'd get a beer/wine two-way and carry on.
ReplyDeleteBut that isn't the point, is it? The point of it is that we have to keep one arm free to struggle against ward heelers who have become so enraged by their own impotence that they're swinging blind. They're too incompetent to intentionally land a punch, but they might get lucky. If need be, I aim to moblize to prevent bad luck from occurring.
But that isn't the point, is it?
ReplyDeleteNo. Your larger point is very well taken.
My point is that if it is some lame attempt to "get back" at Roger Baylor, it won't...underscoring the theme of my post...that it would be an incredibly stupid thing to do.
Absolutely, Brandon. I knew ehere you were headed.
ReplyDeleteIt's a measure of how wild the swinging might soon get. Dan Coffey came close to throwing a real punch in Studio's, and now that the copperhead is riled ... but my hunch is that the proposal (if there is one) will emanate from another council member -- who, as always, won't have the presence of mind to see how he/she is being used.
No sleep is being lost here, although I'll be seeking a few legal opinions in the coming week just in case.
" All I'm referring to is a mindset with a cultural bias that surveys progress and gropes desperately for a way to stop it, because the wrong "type" of people stand to succeed."
ReplyDeleteThat's the issue, without a doubt. Has nothing to do with the progress downtown, it's about the people behind the progress. They don't like the people, therefore it must be stopped. Petty, but that seems to be the usual fare as I've learned in the last couple of years.
I find it hard to believe that an attempt to eliminate the riverfront licenses wouldn't backfire. The momentum is too great among downtown's many supporters. The motive for the repeal would be too naked.
ReplyDeleteI say go ahead, try it. If there weren't several thousand supporters/customers of downtown watering holes, those watering holes wouldn't all be in business right now.
Each restaurant/bar patron knows why he started coming downtown in the last few months or couple years. Each patron has seen with his own eyes downtown's transformation. Each patron likes the option of having a drink when here. None of the patrons are going to want that to stop.
nobody is baiting you, it's a logical question. What role does government have in business? If you're supportive of letting the market dictate things locally, then I would assume you would be opposed to what Obama has done with failed carmakers and banks. To me, if you're in favor of tax breaks and edit money going to benefit businesses, then you should also expect the government to have its hands in your business.
ReplyDeleteNo photo's but how about a video? Click the link below or visit my blog to view. 4th Annual Historic Home Tour
ReplyDelete