Troiani Group plans a new tower (Washington, Oxford: neighborhoods, tenant, rooftop)

[rickms]

the Troiani Group plans a high-density, mixed-use, and green development at the locations of 212 and 214 Boulevard of the Allies

https://troiani.com/troiani-group-of...st-side-tower/

• 200,000 square feet of Class A Office Space
• 151 residential units

[ForYourLungsOnly]

Excellent!!

[gg]

Geez, that sounds amazing. Very good for a moral boost for our city.

Thanks for posting it.

Eschaton? Thoughts. Love the idea of balconies and a rooftop deck with music. Almost seems to great to be true considering how crazy things are.

[eschaton]

Originally Posted by gg

Eschaton? Thoughts. Love the idea of balconies and a rooftop deck with music. Almost seems to great to be true considering how crazy things are.

Full disclosure: My wife's architecture firm is involved - though she isn't personally - meaning I knew about this before it landed.

I tend towards being a preservationist, and I believe the Market Street buildings are irreplaceable and worth saving. That said, I don't have an issue with demolishing historic buildings if it results in a "higher and better use." A major new office/residential tower does qualify, and the design is pretty sharp overall.

My main issue with this is it's still basically a speculative project. The Troiani family clearly does not really have the financing together for this yet. They openly say unless they get an anchor tenant for the commercial portion of the development it's unlikely to go forward. Yet they're attempting to get permission from the Planning Commission to begin demolition of all of the remaining historic buildings on the site by early July.

What happens if the demolition is okayed, and they never get financing together? Maybe we end up with a vacant lot for a decade plus. Maybe we get a much smaller, less ambitious plan. Maybe the Troiani family somehow gets permission eventually to just turn the whole area into surface parking. All of these would be a tragic bait-and-switch, because the Troiani family is essentially using the massive proposed project as its excuse for why demolishing these buildings is allowable.

[WhoIsStanwix?]

Originally Posted by eschaton

Full disclosure: My wife's architecture firm is involved - though she isn't personally - meaning I knew about this before it landed.

I tend towards being a preservationist, and I believe the Market Street buildings are irreplaceable and worth saving. That said, I don't have an issue with demolishing historic buildings if it results in a "higher and better use." A major new office/residential tower does qualify, and the design is pretty sharp overall.

My main issue with this is it's still basically a speculative project. The Troiani family clearly does not really have the financing together for this yet. They openly say unless they get an anchor tenant for the commercial portion of the development it's unlikely to go forward. Yet they're attempting to get permission from the Planning Commission to begin demolition of all of the remaining historic buildings on the site by early July.

What happens if the demolition is okayed, and they never get financing together? Maybe we end up with a vacant lot for a decade plus. Maybe we get a much smaller, less ambitious plan. Maybe the Troiani family somehow gets permission eventually to just turn the whole area into surface parking. All of these would be a tragic bait-and-switch, because the Troiani family is essentially using the massive proposed project as its excuse for why demolishing these buildings is allowable.

This is a bit concerning, especially given the times. I believe banks and other financing sources (private equity, pension funds, etc.) are probably pretty reticent to offer financing on spec right now. Normal residential lending standards are tight right now, and anything that is commercial, especially office space, is basically totally on hold. If the city gives them permission to demo without having solid financing and a shovel-ready plan, this could be a disaster.

Is there a way for residents to voice this concern and oppose the project without certain stipulations being met? I am not trying to impede progress here, but I can't see why demo couldn't wait until the financing situation is solidified.

[gg]

Originally Posted by eschaton

The Troiani family clearly does not really have the financing together for this yet. They openly say unless they get an anchor tenant for the commercial portion of the development it's unlikely to go forward. Yet they're attempting to get permission from the Planning Commission to begin demolition of all of the remaining historic buildings on the site by early July.

What happens if the demolition is okayed, and they never get financing together? Maybe we end up with a vacant lot for a decade plus. Maybe we get a much smaller, less ambitious plan. Maybe the Troiani family somehow gets permission eventually to just turn the whole area into surface parking. All of these would be a tragic bait-and-switch, because the Troiani family is essentially using the massive proposed project as its excuse for why demolishing these buildings is allowable.

Do you have a street view of the buildings that are going to be demolished? It does seem we like to tear things down and not have a plan in place. The Civic Arena comes to mind. They could have used it for a wonderful marketplace with open air. World class stuff really. Ahh, to imagine what it could have been like. Wow. Anyway, maybe they will not permit demolition until they get an anchor tenant. Doesn't seem to be the way things work though. Do you know why they tear things down so early? Cheaper to hold land only than buildings due to taxes?

[eschaton]

Originally Posted by gg

Do you have a street view of the buildings that are going to be demolished? It does seem we like to tear things down and not have a plan in place. The Civic Arena comes to mind. They could have used it for a wonderful marketplace with open air. World class stuff really. Ahh, to imagine what it could have been like. Wow. Anyway, maybe they will not permit demolition until they get an anchor tenant. Doesn't seem to be the way things work though. Do you know why they tear things down so early? Cheaper to hold land only than buildings due to taxes?

They want to demolish these buildings on Market Street, along with this one on First Avenue.

[WhoIsStanwix?]

Oh right, these are the Papa J's people. They basically have zero experience with high-rise development, is that correct? Are they partnering with a group like Oxford that actually has experience?

[gg]

Originally Posted by eschaton

They want to demolish these buildings on Market Street, along with this one on First Avenue.

Thanks. So this plan has been kicking around for a while now. I remember seeing those buildings before.

Probably have to think about that for a while. I agree, I wish they would have to get an anchor in place and financing prior to just tearing those buildings down though.

[szug-bot]

i have a columns of several 'pros', but one 'con' - obscuring the view of Mt. Washington. Not the neighborhood, but the actual land mass. I think that is psychologically refreshing to look over and see the southern neighborhoods, on a carpet of green.

you can still do that from as deep as Smithfield Street and Third Avenue.

this building would ruin much of that.