It’ll be our own little eye of winter…sticking out over the Marriott Towne Place / Acorn…
1 Like
Looking kinda simpatico with the TownePlace, really…
Muralize it…don’ criticize it…
8 Likes
I don’t think that building looks bad at all. The blank side is an easy fix with a mural and the rest would probably end up being the most interesting looking building faces in Raleigh with all the jagged edges and texture.
11 Likes
Is townplace actually happening though? I thought it was scrapped?
They should paint a mural of a cell phone tower on the wall
1 Like
I don’t remember seeing the hotel phase had been scrapped ( but the Acorn construx / opening has backslid, kinda to be expected)…so, 
for now…
1 Like
I think it’s an interesting concept maybe I’ll overshadow the telephone tower they cannot take that down.
Someday maybe you will. #goals
With 2 other boutique hotels going up in close lots, I’d wonder if they’ll evaluate the necessity. The area near the convention center still really needs hotels, but there would be some steep competition around here.
perhaps a naive question here, but if the reason for the large blank wall on the hotel is the ugly (but apparently necessary) cell tower, wouldn’t it make more sense for the hotel developer to offer to mount the cell equipment up top of his or her hotel and then build, you know, a NORMAL looking hotel once the tower is immediately removed?
As long as that cell tower is there, no need for anything attractive to face it, in my opinion. But that freemasons building looks U-G-L-Y with windows all boarded up (for years… from googling). It may be 100 years old but I wouldnt mind seeing the mason building go away. I know that won’t be allowed but yeesh.
2 Likes
Part of this project is spending about $750k to revitalize and modernize the Mason building. That will include windows.
5 Likes
The blank facade is not because of the cell tower; it’s because of building code. As opposed to typical projects on larger lots where the base is built up to the property boundary but the tower is set back, this tower is being built right up to the property line. That means that the North facade is a fire wall and no openings are allowed unless they use fire rated glass.
It is what it is, but this is a sloppy design regardless. There are ways to make a solid facade not look like it wasn’t considered at all. See Durham’s proposed (but stalled) skinny boi that was also limited on allowed openings by code
They also should’ve continued the brick base all the way across and then had the top portion be a different material like metal panel, so that the “base” and “tower” condition was articulated on all four sides. Don’t get me started on the horns at the roof…
4 Likes
THANK YOU. As it stands, this design looks like half a building that was sliced down the middle or something.
2 Likes
Do you mean the way the pool deck is only wrapped around three sides? I don’t really mind that tbh. It’s a short hotel, it’s not like it’s crying out for a skyline-defining crown.
Means the sunny southern view from the pool will be unobstructed, as well.
I don’t care about crowns (in fact, I tend to prefer buildings without the post-modern/old school crowns that people here seem to favor).
I care about clear massing, and this building is all kinds of confused. All the south side needed was a few columns topped by a trellis. Tons of ways to maintain views/openness/light but still imply the continuation of the roofline.
3 Likes
Maybe the developer learned a lesson that no matter what you build, the city will allow an equally tall building (or taller) on the property next door to you with no setback? So, if your property has any adjacent property whatsoever (not facing a street), expect a tower there.
I think that the city needs more comprehensive and conclusive guidance on how it intends to allow development on blocks with “Tetris” type property lines. I can’t believe that the city would actually want every square inch of a block developed with only daylight on each block’s perimeter.
1 Like
It’s been a while since the last update. I looked around the city Development Portal but didn’t find anything, I assume no updates on this since October?
2 Likes
Haven’t gone through it yet, but it went through the COA committee on the 14th. I was hoping to look at it sometime this week, but here it is:
3 Likes
Went right to the end. COA application was denied. First time the person that made the motion saw a COA denial as well. I doubt the hotel manifests without one last-ditch effort to have the empty lot pulled out of the district.
How many more instances do we need to prove this crap is scaring away good developers from applying for applications. How ridiculous, you can act civil and try to meet in the middle on common ground, or you can act like a total ass like this guy. He was told numerous times to calm down and a point of order from the moderator. He is taking this personally and I don’t understand why, this corridor is a complete dump, and he’s worried about the Masonic temple, who will be granted $750,000. This is why we have trouble doing innovative or creative designed buildings, parks, etc.
This just summarizes the whole problem, what a waste of the developers time:
5 Likes