Apartment developer snags historic Piccadilly Place

March 27, 2012
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrint

Piccadilly Indianapolis apartmentsA group led by developer Christopher Piazza has acquired the Piccadilly Apartments at 28 E. 16th St. and is planning a renovation of the 1928 building. The 58-unit, 9-story Piccadilly includes studios, one-bedrooms, two-bedrooms and a 2,000-square-foot, 3-bed, 3.5-bath antique penthouse with a skyline view and private elevator access. Projects by Piazza's Reverie Estates include Penn Arts across the street at 111 E. 16th St. and the Indy Indie Artist Colony at 26 E. 14th St., both of which are fully occupied. Piazza said he will partner with William and Kara Poovey (his investors on previous projects) on the renovation of Piccadilly, which calls for updated kitchens that utilize original cabinets and built-in fridges where possible, subway tile backsplashes, restored hardwood floors, renovated bathrooms with original tile work and vanity mirrors, and period-appropriate fixtures throughout. Planned new amenities include a 24-hour gym, bike parking and a free laundry room. Rents will be in the $500 range per month for a studio, $700 for a one-bedroom and $800 for a two-bedroom unit. No price yet for the penthouse. Piazza declined to disclose a purchase price or his target budget for renovations. The developers plan to apply for historic tax credits and take out a loan from Ameriana Bank.

ADVERTISEMENT
  • What about AC
    BRGuyMarch 27, 2012 3:37 PM
    Wonder if he will do it on the cheap like the Penn Arts building - deciding to omit central air conditioning. It's nice to see an investment in a classic building, but how much better it would be to get rid of the AC units hanging out the windows.
    Reply to CommentFlag Comment
    • AC
      DMarch 27, 2012 10:47 PM
      Even if the decision to omit central air was based on cost, the fact that Penn Arts is fully occupied makes it a good business decision. However, it's more likely that preserving the historic interiors precluded retrofitting central air. All those ducts have to go somewhere, and the building wasn't designed to accommodate them.
      Reply to CommentFlag Comment
    • Penthouse
      MoochieMarch 28, 2012 12:40 PM
      I lived in the penthouse about a dozen years ago with a couple other students. Rent was $1200/month, but what a great place! huge classic windows and the entire roof served as a deck. But.. man it was expensive to heat.. I hope they restore the space well, really I think it may function better as a condo rather than a rental, and I doubt that rents would be that low now...
      Reply to CommentFlag Comment
    • Pic Place AC
      TillerGuyMarch 28, 2012 9:57 PM
      Poll the current tenants. It rents were raised by $150/month in exchange for Central Air, would they stay? ROI isn't there unless that happens, and I doubt that current tenants would pay it.
      Reply to CommentFlag Comment
    • Sales price?
      PaulMarch 29, 2012 2:38 PM
      Why was the sales price not researched? Doesn't state law require that this information be available to the public? Isn't this why a sales disclosure form is required to be submitted to the County Assessor prior to recording a deed? How can legitimate appraisals of properties be made if the sales price of properties are not made public?
      Reply to CommentFlag Comment
      • New was to Air
        bobApril 1, 2012 3:33 PM
        They could have opt. for the fin/tub type of air/heat. Just have to run lines to the units; two or three units would work. When I lived at the Summit House, 'dating myself' worked well, you don't have to run duct's and have condensers all over the place. Sometime in older buildings, the old way work....
        Reply to CommentFlag Comment
      • Purchase Price
        GregApril 3, 2012 2:12 PM
        Purchase price and appraised value are 2 totally different things.
        Reply to CommentFlag Comment
      • What's your point Greg?
        PaulApril 5, 2012 8:43 AM
        I'm asking whether the purchase price is required to be disclosed by law. When I bought a property, I was required to complete a sales disclosure form, including purchase price, which leads me to believe the information should be publicly available, but perhaps not. My point about appraisals is that they can't have credibility in a system where you don't know the actual recent purchase prices of other similar properties.
        Reply to CommentFlag Comment
      • Purchase Price
        Indy REMay 2, 2012 1:07 PM
        According to the Indiana Sales Disclosure, the sale price was $2,300,000.
        Reply to CommentFlag Comment

      Post a comment to this blog

      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 IBJ 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.

      ADVANCED SEARCH
      Sponsored by
      ADVERTISEMENT

      1. These higher rates Co. e about only because physicians are now hospital employees. otherwise physicians couldn't charge these rates and share the windfall with the hospital. Community/rural hospitals probably not buying physicians practices and thus weren't getting the windfall anyway.

      2. The incentive for poor people to get themselves off public assistance and "no longer be poor" is even with help...they're STILL POOR! Being poor, even with some assistance, isn't all that pleasant. (I speak from experience) It's a stubborn myth that poor people, who are on public assistance, are sitting in the lap of luxury. You should try living on just those "freebies" that you mentioned and see how meager they actually are. By the way, I didn't mean you had to buy/own a puppy...just pet one. :)

      3. As near as I can tell the minority has ZERO constitutional obligation to offer a quorum to the majority. A requirement for quorum was inserted into the constitution so that tyrannical majorities could not simply shove through odious and objectionable legislation (which is exactly what they did.) By allowing a tyrannical majority to charge fines against the minority for exercising their constitutional prerogative to deny quorum the court as made a mockery of constitutional governance in the state of Indiana.

      4. The voters elected the Reps to make a vote not walk out on the vote. They had to the right to exercise their opinion and vote "no" to the bill. Let me ask you this if you walked out of your job for 5 straight weeks would you get paid? Would you even have a job to go back to? If any elected official walks out on the people they should be arrested for stealing tax dollars from the public. They were elected to do a job and not leave when the job gets stuff.

      5. I have been to several of their locations in Pennsylvania and always go in for 1 item and leave with a basket full of things. I'm very happy they decided on Indiana, now if only they would put the other store in eastside.

      ADVERTISEMENT