Have you actually been inside it, ridden the elevators, or walked the halls? It’s a decrepit, claustrophobic nightmare. Some hideous pink and neon is just going to look even uglier. Retro gaudy is one thing, but not for something so prominent.
I’m strictly talking exterior, here 
Interior probably just “is what it is” - no idea why they’re hellbent on “saving” this ugly piece of shit while 100 year old (and actually decent looking) buildings like the old Goodnights’ and Berkley Cafe building are just thrown away with hardly any consideration. This whole public outcry over the mere possibility of the Holiday Inn being redeveloped while nobody utters a peep about those two buildings will never not blow my mind.
15 Likes
Well - it’s officially a historic landmark not sure what that does to renovation plans, other then add more red tape.
9 Likes
How entirely stupid. Why is a building built in the 70s - that was a cookie-cutter copy/pasted design that exists in tons of other locations - getting more special treatment than 100 YEAR OLD BUILDINGS THAT ONLY EXIST(ED) HERE??? Whatever, dude. Fine, keep this futt bugly thing. I hope it never sells out of rooms lmao
8 Likes
Well, the main reason the owners pushed for that was for the tax break. Like you said, I’m sure that comes with additional red tape for any serious changes/enhancements to the building.
I really wish that entire site had been able to be developed into the Kimpton. The inside of that hotel was falling apart and we still have a surface parking lot next door to it. The public backlash about the initial development plans confused the hell out of me.
8 Likes
I’d bet my life that this has to do with the tax breaks. I doubt that there will be any substantial barrier to minor renovations to the exterior or interior. For example, the Cotton Mill has historic designation and there’s very little about it that’s historically original.
6 Likes
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bQ19Wn3knWs i liked the old goodnights building too
3 Likes
i did a segal owned vintage palce some years ago in las vegas and foud it oddly refreshing from another ‘total corporate’ glass box. im not saying making it a pardigm but maybe…here and there it can work.
1 Like
That building went from ‘condemned’ to ‘cultural heritage’ faster than a reality star gets a book deal.
12 Likes
I agree most 100 plus year old buildings should be saved but again what makes this round Holiday Inn unique as it has been on your skyline prominently for decades and decades. It was a symbol of Raleigh. When you saw that hair curler you knew you were in downtown Raleigh! If you had surrounded it with 30-40 story buildings then people would have not missed it so much. But this is a part of your skyline whether you think it is ugly or not. We have some ugly buildings in Charlotte but we tried to build bigger and taller ones to block them. Don’t believe me? Look at this building. It looks like General Hospital from the Soap Opera tv days. https://www.oneindependencectr.com/ It replaced Charlotte’s oldest high rise to that date. This was done in the early 1980s. Once you could see it from a lot of angles but no more. Sometimes something so ugly is actually beautiful. They will NEVER build something like that again in the city so why not have it on the skyline. I can’t wait to see it when it opens.
8 Likes
i wish some red brick wall from Berkeley could be appendaged to something…archtectural legacy comfort food, , sts. i think they did it inside the train station.
2 Likes
Historic preservation shouldn’t be limited to buildings more than 100 years old. Some of Raleigh’s best mid-century buildings, like the Catalano house, the 3515 Glenwood office, and the Garland Jones/First Federal building, weren’t saved. Many of the mid-century homes designed by Milton Small have been torn down for McMansions, although Preservation NC and NC Modernist have been able to save some of them.
11 Likes
Oh, I agree with you. I’m just pointing out the insanity that the potential demolition of this 1970s copy/pasted design caused a huge stink with the general Raleigh population (I mean comments and comments and COMMENTS on every local news page when it was mentioned just OUTRAGED that it might be redeveloped)… meanwhile far more unique and much (MUCH) older buildings are torn down or slated to be torn down and no one in this city bats an eye. Like… what are the priorities, here?
7 Likes
I see your point, but I can also make an argument that saving at least some of these copy/paste architecture examples is in itself a preservation action that tells a story of our nation’s history. Imagine if you will that you came across the oldest surviving original McDonald’s in Downey, CA. I suspect that most of us would think that it would be really cool.
While these hair curler hotels aren’t as iconic as one of those original McDonald’s, they do have their place in American history. Are they as important of an example of our culture? That’s debatable for sure. IMO, if we are going to save the hotel as an example, then it deserves to be restored to what it looked like when it was new. I highly doubt that this will happen at this location.
When I think of this sort of preservation, I think of the old Firestone building in Miami Beach and how it was saved and repurposed. In fact, the preservation included retaining the original Fire*stone sign on the roof!
11 Likes
Just a reminder that I was able to track down 17 original round Holiday Inns (see list here), and all of them are still in active use. Most of them have been significantly renovated and/or rebranded, and some have been repurposed to condos or apartments. There seems to be a notion floating around that they are somehow “cheap” - but the track record over more than 50 years indicates that they must have good bones.
Throwing away a perfectly servicable 20 story building seems like a pretty unsustainable way to enforce aesthetic preferences.
10 Likes
Just paint it a prettier color and I will end my tirade, I promise 
3 Likes
I think it’s fair for people to still see it as an icon. Most people don’t know that there’s similar buildings in other cities, and it comes from a time when there weren’t many tall buildings downtown.
There’s plenty of empty lots and buildings ripe for redevelopment that they could build a Kimpton on if they really wanted to. I’m going to guess the backlash wasn’t the reason it got canned.
It’s ugly, but it’s unique, and I don’t think it’s a bad thing it has some protections. As long as it’s kept better than it has.
2 Likes
I don’t actually hate it - I’ve always thought it was “so-ugly-it’s-cute” - but once the possibility of its redevelopment was on the table, I honestly pretty easily put it in the rearview and was more excited for the possibility of more density on the site.
Since it’s now protected and forced to remain, well fine - but at this point like you’re saying, it needs some genuine time and attention towards making it a better looking and better performing building… and that gravel lot that has sat there on the corner for decades just NEEDS to go. That’d be the only worthy trade-off for not redeveloping the whole lot IMO - that empty corner next door needs to be developed, full stop. And a new coat of paint - an actual color though, not f*king BEIGE.
3 Likes
I have never been an actual fan of this building but Raleigh tends to tear down buildings or they have burned down 
DTR needs almost every odd thing it has to be renovated and kept. IMO until something actually comes along and says THIS is Raleigh then may want to keep most of our unusual stuff 
2 Likes