B & O Rail Line Pedestrian Trail

I remember a few months ago, utility crews appeared to be replacing a pipe under Main St. Just yesterday, I had breakfast at Mister Lino's (after trying, unsuccessfully, to get a seat at Charlie Brown's). As an initial matter, breakfast at Mister Lino's is absolutely delicious.

However, the point of this post is that it appears that the old B & O rail line is being contemplated as a pedestrian trail to downtown. I couldn't be more supportive of this.

For starters, there is currently no real way to ride a bike from Speedway to downtown. As I work on the circle, of course I would like the option to ride a bike to my office. However, there's more than that. I would like to be able to ride with my son to Victory Field, or take my daughter to the zoo on bikes.

This is a look toward downtown from Main Street along the old B & O Line. Note that in the photo, the rail bed is simply covered in gravel. When I went by yesterday, it was paved, not unlike the Monon Trail.

Here is an aerial view of the rail bed.

Note that this photo is rather aged. You can see that 1911/SIK is not there yet, and neither is Big Woods. However, this photo really shows the footprint of the rail bed going east from Main Street.

For a somewhat more high-elevation view, see the next picture. I've superimposed the rail bed on top of the photo with a big ugly line to make it more obvious.

Again, this is an older Google earth image. It is oriented with North at the top, and you'll note that the western-most point of the line is Main Street, and the easternmost point is near the zoo downtown.

Below is a map view of where the B&O Line gets to downtown.

This is right across the street from the Indianapolis Zoo.

It is my understanding that from there, it would be very easy to connect to White River State Park and the Indianapolis Cultural Trail.

I can only imagine the benefits that a bike line such as this would bring the community. For starters, how nice would it be to have all of the tourist/convention crowd from downtown able to rent one of those bikeshare/Pacer bikes and ride to Speedway to patronize our businesses?

Similarly, I can imagine that during May, this would provide a nice way for people to ride to the west side to soak up some 500 festivities. I'm fairly sure we can all agree that having another way for people to get to the race would be helpful.

Furthermore, how about the economic development benefits of a bike line like this? It is not by accident that property along the Monon Trail has increased in value significantly. Additionally, the Indianapolis Cultural Trail has resulted in enormous property value appreciation.  Since 2008, the property along the 8-mile Cultural Trail has increased 148%, or $1 billion dollars (that's $1,000,000,000). This is not hippy dippy tree hugger stuff. This is cold-hearted capitalism: dollars and cents.

To  the degree that Speedway is perhaps held back in its efforts by the struggles of some neighborhoods between Speedway and downtown, we know how to solve this problem. The Monon Trail did just that for Broad Ripple vis a vis downtown. While I don't have any survey data to link to, it seems to me that if the Monon Trail was not working out, then Carmel and Westfield would not be dumping money into extending the trail, and the City of Indianapolis would not have put more money into the Cultural Trail.

I'm sure that I will have more thoughts on this in the future. Frankly, I have more thoughts now, but I don't want to go overboard. Biking trails benefit property values; they encourage economic activity by encouraging people to patronize the businesses on them. They encourage relationships by getting people out of their cars and into interactive situations. They contribute to community health. They couldn't hurt the brewing controversies around parking. While not a panacea to everything, I fail to see the negative effects of this.

To the degree that our town councilors (Jason DeLisle, Gary Raikes, Jeff Matthews, David Lindsey, Eileen Fisher) are on board with this, I applaud them. To the degree that they are not, I ask why not? Likewise with our City-County Councilor (Janice McHenry), State Representative (Karlee Macer), and State Senator (Mike Young) . . . if they are supportive, I applaud and encourage additional action. If they are supportive, please explain why not.

In case you haven't heard . . .

For those who didn't know, a man named Warren Haynes played guitar in the Allman Bros. Band for many years. Essentially, he played the role in the band that was originally occupied by Duane Allman. From what I surmise, the biggest criticism of Warren Haynes has always essentially boiled down to, "He's not Duane Allman."

OK.

Neither is anyone else.

Nonetheless, Warren Haynes is awesome. I think that it's fair to say that he is one of the greatest rock guitar players alive. He formed Govt. Mule. He played in the Allman Bros. Band for 5 or 6 years, helping with the revival of the group in the 1990s. He joined David Allan Coe's touring band when he was 20 years old. One can only imagine what life on the road as a 20-year-old guitarist in that band was like.

In the spirit of gratuitous rock n' roll videos, enjoy:

Please note that none other than Jason Newsted, of Metallica fame, is on bass.

Senator Young and HB 15

Fortuitously, on the same day that I post a rant about how drug addiction is not a moral failure and should instead be treated as a health issue, I read in the Speedway Town Press a laudatory article about our intrepid Sen. Mike Young and his recent authorship of Senate Bill 15.

The summary of this bill is as follows:

Cannabidiol for the treatment of epilepsy. Defines cannabidiol and establishes a cannabidiol registry for certain physicians, nurses, individuals, and caregivers for the use of cannabidiol in the treatment of a person with intractable epilepsy. Establishes a pilot study registry for physicians who want to study the use of cannabidiol in the treatment of intractable epilepsy. Requires the state department of health (state department) to develop and maintain both registries. Provides civil, criminal, and administrative immunity for physicians and nurses in the use of cannabidiol in the treatment of intractable epilepsy if certain requirements are met. Exempts physicians, caregivers, nurses and individuals from criminal penalties for possession or use of cannabidiol under certain conditions. Permits a pharmacy to dispense cannabidiol subject to specific requirements. Encourages state educational institutions to research the use of cannabidiol in the treatment of other intractable diseases.

A few comments:

1. Why is Mr. Small Government Republican supporting any prohibition on whether or not my neighbors can ingest something that grows naturally. It seems to me that if it grows naturally, outlawing it is pure "tomfoolery." If it's all right with God, who is Sen. Young or the IN state legislature to say otherwise? Are we next going to outlaw Dogwood trees? Count me in the opposition to that!

2. Again, Mr. Small Government Republican, what is the obsession with creating registries? Why do you need to keep track of what kinds of treatments doctors are prescribing their patients? Do you also propose a registry for all patients who ingest antibiotics? If so, how is that small government conservatism? If not, what is the difference? Don't even get me started on your likely reaction should someone propose a registry for gun ownership . . .

3. I have noticed that supporters of this bill are quick to point out that Cannabidiol can not be used recreationally, i.e. it won't get anyone high. I ask again, Mr. Small Government, what concern it is of yours whether someone wants to get high, listen to some Pink Floyd, and eat some Doritos Locos tacos? Why is it better if nobody can enjoy it? Would booze be somehow less bad for people if they couldn't actually enjoy getting drunk? If instead it just made them do stupid things and not think about the consequences of their actions, but was not in any way enjoyable?

4. I also notice that this creates a certain class of "deserving" people (those with "intractable epilepsy") who can use this treatment, and leaves everyone else out. What about the guy who has anxiety or wants to use marijuana to ease his chronic pain? Isn't this better than allowing ever more "pain clinics" to open up and peddle opioid narcotics? Why the special treatment for one particular health ailment? What about the cancer patient who gets nauseous?

These are scattered thoughts, at best.

As the graph below clearly demonstrates, the War On Drugs has been an abject failure. It is ironic, isn't it Senator Young, that members of a party that believes that (a) government can't accomplish anything ("government is the problem, not the solution") nonetheless believe that (b) government can protect people from making their own self-destructive choices and (c) government can eradicate a substance that grows naturally.

This bill is a half-yard solution to a third-and-25 problem. I applaud that it passed, relative to nothing passing. I simply find it ironic that this is the best solution we can come up with.

My grandparents generation won WWII and went to the moon. This is the best we can do now? Where's the big thinking? Where's the boldness?

Rescuing Addicts from Themselves

I read some back and forth on NextDoor (the neighborhood knitting circle) today where one of my neighbors questioned whether it was wise for the Speedway Police to administer Narcan (I think that's what it's called) to someone who had overdosed on Heroin.

My understanding is that Narcan reverses the effects of an overdose and saves lives.

The question was whether it is wise to publicly fund the use of such a drug on addicts who overdose repeatedly. Perhaps, some say, this represents moral hazard. I disagree.

When someone attempts to lose weight after receiving treatment for diabetes, we don't cut off treatment for the diabetes if the person "falls off the wagon" and eats some chocolate cake.

When someone attempts to quit smoking after being diagnosed with any number of health ailments, we don't cut off treatment for the ailments if the person "falls off the wagon" and has a cigarette.

If someone's house gets burglarized multiple times, we don't stop prosecuting the crime.

I would like to say this as clearly as I can: DRUG ADDICTION IS NOT A MORAL FAILURE.

Rest assured, I will do my best to ensure that my own children never dabble in hard drugs. Mercifully, I avoided that calamity myself. However, as an ex-smoker, I understand that addiction can be brought to bay but can never truly be beaten. I am addicted to cigarettes for the rest of my life, no matter how long it has been since I had my last one. I can only assume the same for other addictions.

The sooner we address drug addiction as a health problem and not a moral failure or criminal justice problem, the sooner we can get a handle on it as a society.

In closing, I would also like to point out that the punitive approach that has been the hallmark of the War on Drugs has been an abject failure. As some have wryly noted, "The War on Drugs is over. Drugs Won."

Perhaps I wouldn't put it that bluntly, but the chart below is revealing.

"Insanity: Doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results." - Albert Einstein

Given that we live in a world where pharmaceutical opioid pain medication is driving further addiction, perhaps we can take a reasonable approach in the future and treat this as the public health problem that it is instead of the criminal justice/moral problem that it isn't.

Trash and the Broken Windows Theory

Let me start by saying that I believe the "broken windows" theory of policing has some merit, albeit considerably less merit than its proponents tend to believe.

With that said, I was at the Speedway Supercenter yesterday and was disgusted with the trash that was blowing through the parking lot.

Someone posted on NextDoor the other day a photo of an overflowing trash can, which I have reproduced below:

If this doesn't evidence an utter disregard for the area, what does?

I understand that controlling litter is a shared responsibility. We, the members of the community, have a responsibility to not litter. The property owners have a responsibility to clean up the litter when they discover it and to report litterers when they see them. The police should be ticketing people for this.

What are the odds that you'd see this type of overflowing trash can in Clay Terrace?

I  know that this is not much more than a rant, but we, the members of the community, have to step up. The property owners are on solid ground when they say that they can't control people littering.

It's our community and our home. Not the owners of the shopping center.

It's our problem.

We're either part of the problem or part of the solution.

If those who would harm our community and break our laws see that we can't be bothered to pick up the trash, what do you think they believe about our willingness to do the heavy lifting of crime prevention?

If prospective homeowners see that we can't be bothered to pick up the trash in public places, what do you think they believe about our willingness to support our schools or control crime?

I was taught long ago that little things say big things. By that, I mean that, for example, a man who doesn't shine his shoes probably doesn't take care of much else in his life.

A community that doesn't pick up the trash probably doesn't take care of much else.

We're better than this.

Grow Up and Deal with It

I hear that a lot lately from those who are happy with Donald Trump's election as our president. Interestingly, they were uninterested in that advice a year ago. Or two years ago. Or three. Or four.

I could go on, but there's not much point.

I will deal with it. I have no intention of seceding from this great nation or moving to Canada. I have no fantasies about armed uprising against the government. I will not call this country the USSA or some similar thing. I will not even claim that I want to "Take My Country Back" from someone, or something.
Instead, I intend to work to make this nation great. Full stop.

It takes people who believe that government can make people's lives better to actually have a government that makes people's lives better. I believe that government can make people's lives better.

This is the same principle that it takes a doctor who believes that medicine can cure health problems to actually get a doctor worth having, i.e. one who will effectively address the problem. There is no chance in hell that I would ever hire a surgeon who believes that surgery is the problem. If I was getting sued, I would hire a lawyer who believed (and acted) as though lawyers are worth having. I would hire a coach who believes that coaching helps the team rather than hurts the team. I would hire a lawn service that believes that cutting the grass solves the problem of long grass; not the one that believes that the problem is that we cut the grass and thus perpetuate the grass's dependence on getting cut.

Similarly, I vote for politicians who believe that the government they purport to run can actually do something to make people's lives better.

Because I believe that public policy can be an active force for good in people's lives, I will devote what resources I have to creating such public policy. I will devote what resources I have to preventing bad policy from enactment, to the extent that I can.

Mercifully, thanks to Justices Roberts, Kennedy, Scalia, Alito, and Thomas, I have the same right to dump hundreds of millions of dollars into elections as George Soros or the Koch brothers. (Hopefully the sarcasm came through).

Given my notable lack of millions of dollars, to dump into campaigns or use otherwise, I will donate what resources I do have. These include a decent (I hope) intellect, a passion for this great country, state, and city in which I am blessed to live, some time, and some ideas both big and small.

I intend to do my part to make the world a better place. I intend to do so without casting aspersions on the characters of those with whom I disagree. I intend to assume pure motives. I will do my best not to engage in ad hominem argument unless it is warranted and goes to either the credibility or ability to speak knowledgeably on a subject. For example, someone who has made scores of wrong predictions deserves to have this brought up the next time he makes a prediction. Similarly, if someone yesterday said "X is not the case," and today is saying "X is the case," that deserves a mention.

This is good faith.

This is me growing up.

This is me dealing with it.

What I will not do is acquiesce to that with which I vehemently disagree.

Your Statehouse in Action

For those of you who don't read Sheila Kennedy's blog, I highly recommend it. She had a post yesterday regarding a bill presently pending in the Indiana state legislature that would have struck a blow to partisan gerrymandering practices.

For those unfamiliar with the practice, gerrymandering is a process whereby the incumbent controlling political party shapes districts such that it can obtain an outsized portion of power. For example, you can imagine a situation, albeit an extreme one, where one party gets 51% of the vote yet 100% of the seats.

Here in Good Ole Honest to Goodness Indiana, the Indiana state legislative seats are set up so that one party gets about 55% of the vote but 70% of the seats in the legislature. Guess which party that is.

Anyway, there is a bill (HB 1014) pending in the IN state legislature that would reform this practice.

Currently, districts are drawn by the party in power. There is no reason to believe that the party in power would not draw districts to its own advantage. Doing otherwise would be political malpractice. However, it generally has a variety of negative consequences. For example, a Democrat from a solidly democratic inner-city district who wins the general election by 30% has no incentive to moderate his positions; her only political concern is losing a primary to someone more "loyal" and "pure" to the party. The same analysis goes for the Republican from the solid-red district. Her only concern is losing a primary to a more "conservative" and "pure" candidate. Given this reality, why would either the Democrat or Republican ever cooperate or compromise with the other in order to do what is best for the state? There is no incentive to do so.

HB 1014 would reform this process by putting the power to draw legislative districts in the hands of a non-partisan commission. There was a hearing on this bill the other day, and State Representative Milo Smith refused to even allow a vote on it during committee. Just so we're clear, the bill was not voted down. There was not even a vote on it, because Rep. Bumpkin Milo Smith decided it was not worth a vote.

I, for one, believe that the positions of those on the Elections and Apportionments Committee (the committee assigned to this bill) should be public. Along those same lines, I'd like to know the position of my own elected officials on this.

Rep. Macer?

Sen. Young?

Bueller?

What I Love about Indianapolis (and especially Speedway)

I have lived in many places over the years, and it has recently occurred to me that Indianapolis, and particularly Speedway, is home. Full stop.

I should probably address Indianapolis at large first, beginning with the circle. I work on the circle, for now, and I love having such a beautiful monument at the heart of our city. Of course, it's surrounded by a basic business district with too many office buildings and too few local restaurants, but that's life.

I am kind of mixed on what has happened on Mass Ave in the past decade, but overall I think that it's a plus. More bars. More restaurants. It kind of creates some competition for Broad Ripple for the night life. If you've never been to the Chatterbox, you must.

Fountain Square has had a similar run as Mass Ave, though it has gone more in the direction of art and music and less in the sports bar/fine dining direction. I went to the Hi Fi the other night, and that was a great little dive to see some music.

Of course, I lived in Broad Ripple for a long time as well. What can I say about Broad Ripple that everyone doesn't already know? The strip is nice if you want a whole bunch of sports bars and dance clubs. Off the strip always has nice restaurants that seem to rotate. It's tragic that the String Shop is gone, but the sushi spot that replaced it is a definite upgrade.

Then there's Speedway.

I have a park within a five minute walk of my house. My street is quiet and safe for approximately 363 nights a year, and it gets unbelievably raucous the other 2. I joke with people that I live in Mayberry 50 weeks a year and Mardi Gras the other two. I can ride a bicycle from one end of the town to the other. If I wanted to do a pub crawl of the entire town, I could do it on foot.

One of the iconic sporting events on the planet occurs within a mile of my porch.

A quarter million or so of my closest friends come to visit in May.

Little boys dream of driving race cars, yet it actually happens within walking distance of home.

There is so much more to Speedway than just the race, but for anyone who is not from Indiana, this is Indiana.

Lots of places have NFL teams. Lots of places have basketball. Lots of places have corn fields. Every place has sports bars and dance clubs.

Only Speedway has the Indianapolis 500. Embrace it.

The Awesomeness that was Prince

I was not really even a big fan until he played Super Bowl XLI, which was probably the best Super Bowl halftime show of my lifetime (I fully recognize my own bias, as the Colts won that game).

Anyway, I think that Prince was also very much an underrated guitar player. As much as I'd love to embed a video of his Super Bowl performance, the NFL won't let me. However, I can link you to it at YouTube.

I can, however, embed a video of Prince playing "While My Guitar Gently Weeps" with Tom Petty. If you've never seen this, please check it out.

Unsolicited Advice to Sen. Donnelly

As anyone who pays attention to politics knows, Joe Donnelly is the Democratic Senior Senator from Indiana. He is also up for election in 2018 and has voted against three consecutive cabinet nominees of Donald Trump's: Betsy DeVos, Jeff Sessions, and Tom Price.

I would say that the choice on these votes is fairly easy for anyone in the mainstream of the national Democratic Party. DeVoss represents the privatization of education, something liberals have opposed for generations; Price represents the immediate repeal of the Affordable Care Act and the overriding notion of healthcare as a profit center, again something that liberals have opposed since the passage of the ACA or, for the more historically minded, since the Great Society and perhaps the new deal; Sessions favors investigation of voter fraud over civil rights enforcement and is against reforming both our privatized for-profit prison system and the war on (some people who use some) drugs, among other issue positions he holds. Whether these things are good or bad, they are against the liberal worldview.

My advice to Sen. Donnelly is thus: keep voting against Trump's picks that violate your conscience.

First, there is no amount of Trump a$$kissing that you can do that will make Indiana Republicans come out and vote for you. It didn't work for Evan Bayh or John Gregg in the end; it won't work for you. The only thing you could do by "going along to get along" with this stuff is alienate your own base, who will come to see you as another milquetoast Lieberman liberal, and a piece of ownership when this dumpster fire of an administration implodes.

Second, neither you nor I have any idea whether there will be a backlash against this crew of incompetents. If there is a backlash, better to be on the right side of history. If there's not, your reelection hopes are doomed regardless.

Finally, the Supreme Court.

Filibuster.

Make Mitch McConnell be the one who abolishes the filibuster on Supreme Court nominees. He has shown that he is perfectly willing to use procedural obstruction against any democratic president, as evidenced by the refusal to allow Merrick Garland a hearing. This has irreparably damaged the Supreme Court as an institution allegedly above politics.

No More.

It is now, thanks to Sen. Jowls McConnell, every bit as political as any other American institution of governance. It is a failure of conscience to refuse to play hardball when those with whom you vehemently disagree play nothing but.

Neil Gorsuch deserves to be filibustered. He likewise deserves to have an asterisk next to his name forever, as the seat was stolen from Barack Obama by Mitch McConnell and handed to Donald Trump and Neil Gorsuch.

Gratuitous

Because Billy Gibbons is one of the coolest people alive. And Slash, well . . . for those of us of a certain vintage, he is the quintessential rock guitarist. Both are, to say the least, characters.

I've said it before, and I'll keep saying it until someone listens: Speedway NEEDS a good rock show for Carb Day, every year; the IMS could totally be used as a concert venue in the summer (more on that in the future, I'm sure); the neighborhood seems like it would support something like this, especially if it involves bringing coolers into a racetrack after grilling out.

Speedway Super Center, Pt. 1 of ?

Where to even begin?

I will contend that I hate the Kroger there. This is not intended as a slight to the majority of what I assume to be hardworking employees. Maybe its the management? Regardless, I like Aldi a lot more and only go to Kroger if I have to.

Speedway Super Center, in all of its non-splendid lack of glory (Google Earth)

Presently, there is nothing I actually like about this Shopping Center. As I said above, I will go to Kroger if I have to. I won't enjoy it. I'll go to Petco for dog food, but I won't enjoy it. Maybe I'll get a haircut at Great Clips (only if the Voom Room is closed). I've eaten at Grindstone Charlie's before. I was whelmed, neither over no under. I suppose the oil change places are acceptable. How could one that uses oil not be?

I will note that this critique pointedly does not include either Union Jack or the Pizza Joint, both of which are fine establishments in their own right.

But what could make Speedway Super Center a place that I enjoy patronizing?

Maybe a sewing supply shop or fabric store? I think that would be cool and useful. Along similar lines, if there was a shoe repair shop there, I would patronize that. I go through shoes a lot quicker than I'd like. I know there is a leather shop on H.S. Rd. near McGilvery's. Never been there. Maybe they already do that kind of work. If anyone knows, please advise.

I love The Meat Shop on Washington Street; there's no way that such a place wouldn't be a smashing success in Speedway. People love to BBQ here. Come to think of it, perhaps Speedway, IN, is the official home of Summer. One would think that a place in Speedway that sold good steaks and fresh cuts of meat and seafood would do fanstastically. I'd probably go there twice a week.

Anyway, what else would I use?

No doubt, I would patronize a used guitar/vinyl record shop. I don't know if such things are economically viable any more, what with e-bay, etc., but I'd sure love to have a shop like that here. Maybe they could (and probably would) add some "cash" items, such as cigarettes, smoking accessories, or something, to keep the cash flow going. It kind of starts bleeding into "head shop" territory at that point, and I'm not sure the area needs another one of those. Of course, the possibility always exists that I'm wrong.

If there was a small steak house, I think I'd go there. Especially if they had good wine and desserts, and a swanky bar. I'd think it would have to qualify as date-night caliber, but frankly, I'm not that difficult to please. As with most things, I'd probably like it a lot more if it was a locally owned place rather than a large chain. I can't help but think such a thing in this shopping center may very well be a pipe dream, but who knows?

What about a locally owned hardware store, or would the big box stores drive them out of business?

A live-music joint would be pretty interesting to see. I don't know what kind of spin-off effects that would have on the neighborhood, though. I suppose, like anything, the devil is in the details; how it is done will dictate its results. I went to the HiFi the other night for a show, and that was a super cool spot. Nonetheless, this isn't Fountain Square, for better and for worse.

I'm a bit shocked that there is not a classic used car lot somewhere in Speedway. Not that I'm a huge fan of used car lots, but of all places on earth to be able to buy a hot rod . . . .

A guy can dream, I suppose, of shrinking the parking lot to put in green space of sorts.

If they don't do that, perhaps they could start using the parking lot productively. I remember when I was a teenager in Ft. Wayne, some of the lower-tier shopping centers would host live free concerts with the local radio stations. I guess the idea was to get some publicity for the shopping plaza. It seems that now they could do something similar but also use it to attract food trucks. I'm not entirely sure how the money would work: maybe shopping center pays radio/band to come out, rents space to food trucks/vendors to defray costs? Not sure. Nonetheless, I know that the concerts in Meadowood Park are fairly well attended, so perhaps that evidences a local enthusiasm for such events.

These are just some scattered thoughts. I would love to see this shopping center thrive, but at the moment, it just doesn't appear to be doing so. Dollar stores, medicaid facilities, beauty colleges/supply shops, cafeteria food, mattress outlet . . . none of it excites me. I'd like to be excited about the nearest shopping plaza.

Anyway, those are some preliminary thoughts. I'm sure I'll have more.

Who is your Councilor?

Nearly everyone knows who the president is. That's fine, as far as it goes. 

But who is your local representative? How many people know who their town councilor is? I'm not really sure. However, if you're interested, see the map below.

Roundabout Winton

Speedway has done a fantastic job of redeveloping its Main Street from 10th to Crawfordsville. Say what you will, but I think that building the roundabout at 16th/Crawfordsville/Main was an excellent idea and has worked out swimmingly.

Roundabout in front of IMS

If you think about it, the roundabout essentially is the bookend for one end of Main Street, but I don't believe it needs to function as an endpoint. Notice that, going west on Crawfordsville Rd., there is a wonderful pedestrian trail on the south side of the road, due to the old railroad and pipeline right of way.

Pedestrian trail along the south side of Crawfordsville (credit: Google Earth)

On the north side of Crawfordsville, we have some of the most quintessentially Speedway stuff going. Pam's Liquors, with the checkered flags built out in the old garage. Classic Speedway. The car wash, while not the sexiest thing in the world, is likewise classic Speedway.

Car wash, facing east. Pam's is in the background. (credit: Google Earth)

Thereafter, there's a variety of quasi-commercial buildings. I believe there is a church, a law office, a real estate company, etc. Unfortunately, there is no sidewalk after the car wash. This is about the worst  place imaginable to walk or ride a bike. You're just asking to get hit by a car.

North side of Crawfordsville Rd., west of the car wash (Google Earth)

I think that Speedway would do well to take a three-step approach to developing that stretch of Crawfordsville.

1. Put a roundabout at Crawfordsville and Winton. This would result in smoother yet slower traffic on Crawfordsville Rd. Note that roundabouts don't require cars to stop but they do require that cars slow down and exercise additional caution. This is a good thing for the neighborhoods abutting this proposed roundabout, because it renders them more interconnected and walkable. The current intersection is terrible. Kids from the Allison neighborhood have to cross that intersection to get to the middle school. I guess I kind of assume that kids in Meadowood get a ride to the middle school, but if they don't, they likewise have to cross Crawfordsville. There is no good place to do so, and Winton is the logical choice. I fully recognize that this may require the purchase of a few parcels of property.

Present intersection of Winton and Crawfordsville (Google Earth)

2. Zone all property on the north side of Crawfordsville Rd., from the roundabout to Lynhurst, as retail commercial. If that stretch was continuous commercial retail space, it would be a commercial hub for the Allison and Newby neighborhoods. To the degree that it is walkable from those neighborhoods, a variety of commercial enterprises would thrive on the surrounding areas.

3. Build a nice wide sidewalk along the north side of Crawfordsville Rd.

This enables what has happened on Main St. to spread west along Crawfordsville. If that stretch is walk-able and cross-able on each end (at each roundabout), commercial activity would thrive in the area and Speedway becomes that much more of a destination. The pedestrian path on the south side of Crawfordsville would serve as an artery for people to travel, as well as a workout facility.

Perhaps I'm dreaming, but I think that a continuous sidewalk down the north end of Crawfordsville from Main to Winton (as a first stage, thereafter stretching to Lynhurst) would result in considerable commercial development.

As indicated above, I recognize that a roundabout will likely require the purchase of a few parcels of land. Similarly, I recognize that the right-of-way for the sidewalk is not free. On the other hand, I believe that the increased tax revenue on the remaining land would make up for the cost. I am no real estate expert, but I'm given to believe that property zoned commercial is worth approximately ten times what residential property is worth. I suspect that the homeowners on this portion of Crawfordsville Rd. would be more than happy with a ten-fold increase in their property value. To put it in perspective, how nice would it be to own a piece of property near the corner of 62nd & College in Broad Ripple, or NY and Alabama downtown?

As with other posts, I wonder where our town councilors are on this?  In particular with respect to the intersection of Winton and Crawfordsville, I believe that Councilors Raikes, DeLisle, and Matthews all border this. Thankfully, these are the three engaged councilors who, as I understand it, were instrumental in hiring Ian Nicolini and spearheading the redevelopment project on Main. It is my fervent hope that I am merely reiterating what they already know.

"Originalism," "Strict Construction," "Textualism" etc.

I hear a lot of conservatives these days espousing the virtues of "strict constructionist" judges who adhere to "originalism" and "textualism."

As an initial thought, "originalism" is easily dispensed with, because unless you have a time machine, you don't know what the drafters of the constitution originally meant to accomplish. An endless citation of contemporaneous statements, writings, etc., does not change that basic fact.

"Strict construction" and "textualism" are a bit more complicated. When reading a statute or rule, one can construe it either broadly or strictly. It either means only what the words explicitly say, or it means both what the words say and the broader message they carry. The late Justice Scalia was the most famous proponent and practitioner of "textualism" or "strict construction."

But what is it?

The fine example used by people often is the "ambulance in the park" one. Doug Masson recently cited to an interesting commentary on this distinction.

 Does an ordinance that says that “no person may bring a vehicle into the park” apply to an ambulance that enters the park to save a person’s life? For Scalia and Garner, the answer is yes. After all, an ambulance is a vehicle—any dictionary will tell you that. If the authors of the ordinance wanted to make an exception for ambulances, they should have said so. And perverse results are a small price to pay for the objectivity that textual originalism offers (new dictionaries for new texts, old dictionaries for old ones). 

In other words, textualism will offer perverse results when applied uniformly. Thus, justice requires an application that is not uniform. Thus, it is not textualism, but rather an interpretation of what the broader goal of the words may be, notwithstanding the absence of any explicit explanation of that goal.

In sum, I have less and less patience for those who claim adherence to the Constitution when it serves their immediate purposes, yet refuse to admit that they are interpreting it; they claim to merely be doing what it says.

A 220+ year-old document is subject to conflicting interpretations, and those who claim that their philosophy is guided by a strict adherence to its text are deluding themselves.