Washington Square’s $5 billion promise meets a basic problem: the owner says there is no deal

A California developer has presented a $5 billion vision for Washington Square Mall that would replace the aging Far Eastside property with a luxury resort, hotel, conference center, senior housing and entertainment complex. The proposal is designed to sound transformational. Its immediate problem is more basic: the company does not own the site, has not identified its investors and is making a purchase-agreement claim the mall’s primary owner disputes.

BRC Commercial Properties presented the concept Oct. 22 to about two dozen residents at the Warren Township Schools administration building. The company calls it the Washington Grand Hotel, Resort and Conference Center. CEO Britt Wagner described a luxury hotel and spa, rooftop dining, an entertainment venue, senior living and a Ferris wheel.

Wagner put the estimated investment at about $5 billion and said the project could be completed within five years after the property is acquired. He said several major investors, including international investors, would finance the development, but declined to identify them because of nondisclosure agreements. BRC described the ideas as preliminary and said additional community meetings would be held. No schedule for those meetings has been announced.

The gap between the size of the promise and the evidence available to the public is what makes the proposal significant. Washington Square is one of the largest redevelopment opportunities in Marion County, covering nearly 94 acres along Washington Street. A viable plan could reshape the Far Eastside, influence property values and draw substantial public infrastructure and incentive requests. A plan without site control or committed financing could instead delay other redevelopment efforts and raise expectations that cannot be met.

BRC does not own Washington Square. The mall property is divided among more than a dozen owners. Ohio-based Durga Property Holdings LLC is considered the primary owner.

BRC representatives have offered different descriptions of the company’s position. Wagner said a purchase agreement was signed in 2025. BRC representative Eddie Hager has said the company is in final discussions with Durga. Keith Lee Jr., Washington Square’s operations manager and a representative of Durga principal Kumar Vemulapalli, told Mirror Indy that neither he, Vemulapalli nor their lawyer knew of any purchase agreement.

The disagreement is not a technical detail. Control of the land is the first test of whether BRC’s proposal can move from a presentation to a real project. The company has not publicly produced the agreement it says exists, citing confidentiality. Durga says there is no agreement to produce.

City-County Councilor Michael-Paul Hart, whose district includes the area, has urged caution. In a statement reported by Axios Indianapolis, Hart said a serious developer needs a path to controlling the land, an understanding of zoning and a realistic financing plan. Publicly announcing a massive project before assembling the property can make redevelopment harder by driving up land prices, he said.

The BRC proposal also arrives after a separate community planning effort. Hart and the town of Cumberland launched a site study in February. Lauth contributed $50,000 for the work, and Schmidt Associates developed the vision.

That plan, presented in August to more than 150 residents, does not try to preserve Washington Square as a traditional enclosed mall. It imagines a mixed-use district developed in phases, with a sports complex that could include indoor baseball or pickleball, a medical facility, adult education space, a dining village, green space and later about 250 apartments plus townhomes. IndyGo’s Blue Line is planned to run past the property on Washington Street.

The Schmidt plan has its own large unanswered questions. No developer or investor had committed to it when it was presented, and no construction schedule was established. But it was built through a public planning process and presented as a framework for attracting developers, rather than as a financed project ready to proceed.

That distinction now matters. The community-backed plan offers a phased redevelopment concept without claiming site control. BRC is offering a far larger resort concept while claiming a purchase deal that Durga denies.

Residents who attended BRC’s meeting expressed both interest and skepticism. Far Eastside resident Page Lacy said the area has declined for decades and needs positive investment. Teri Rypel questioned whether BRC had actually secured an investor because the presentation did not explain the financing.

Tenants face a more immediate concern. The mall remains open with about a dozen local businesses, and Target continues to operate on the property. Wagner said some tenants are worried about losing their stores and that BRC would help them relocate if redevelopment begins. Tenants raised similar concerns earlier in the year, saying uncertainty about the mall’s future was already affecting their businesses.

Washington Square has heard ambitious redevelopment ideas before, and Indianapolis has seen other mall projects struggle after dramatic announcements. Lafayette Square on the west side is a nearby warning: an expansive redevelopment vision stalled, and parts of the former mall property are now being converted to apartments.

The next stage should be measured by documents and commitments rather than renderings. BRC can strengthen its case by establishing site control, identifying the legal entity that would acquire the parcels, documenting a financing structure, disclosing relevant completed projects and beginning formal conversations with city planning officials.

Public officials also need to say whether BRC has approached the Department of Metropolitan Development, what zoning changes the resort concept would require and what public subsidies or infrastructure investments could be requested. Any future incentive discussion should distinguish between a conceptual investment estimate and committed private capital.

For now, Washington Square has two competing visions and no secured redevelopment. One is a community-built mixed-use framework searching for a developer. The other is a $5 billion resort pitch from a developer searching for proof that it can control and finance the site.

What to watch: whether BRC produces evidence of a purchase agreement or option; whether Durga issues a written response; whether BRC registers or identifies an Indiana acquisition entity; whether Hart or city planning officials meet with the company; whether investors are named; and whether another community meeting is scheduled.

Report a correction · Editorial standards · Our source directory

BusinessIndy examines this development and its implications for Indiana businesses and communities using the linked sources.

UNVERIFIED REPORT: BusinessIndy has not independently fact-checked this story. It is based on the linked source or submitted lead and may contain errors or change.