There were other threads where the user was to combative. Not having that in my shop. 
17 Likes
An update on three former state-owned houses on Person St that were sold in 2015: https://www.bizjournals.com/triangle/blog/real-estate/2015/11/historic-houses-person-street-downtown-raleigh.html
411 N. Person (The Watson House - darker blue) is nearly complete.
415 N. Person (The Worth House - light blue) is done and looks move-in ready on the inside, very nicely done.
419 N. Person (The Gay House - green) has a ways to go from the back. Front looks nice, though.
21 Likes
Big news for Mordecai, the incredibly sketchy and rundown apartments at 1333-1341 Courtland Drive are empty and now have a big York Properties sign out front.
Here’s what they look like now, from Google Maps:
Wouldn’t be surprising to see them go the way of their sister building next door, which was turned into these beautiful high-end homes.
2 Likes
That would be extremely unfortunate.
What makes those sketchy? Yes they’re older but I’ve driven by here plenty and never got that feeling of them being sketchy. Maybe we have different definitions of sketchy.
5 Likes
More about condition of the property than anything about the residents. It looks like if you give it a good kick they’ll fall over.
2 Likes
Fair enough! They are in pretty rough shape. The houses next to them may be 3 of my favorite in the city tbh
2 Likes
It’s about as family-oriented of a neighborhood as they come (so the floorplans will probably be on the 2-3BR order), the land values are through the roof and rising, and its a decent walk from the nearest retail district at Person St. Some luxury townhouses might be a good way to keep some kind of density, but they’re not doing anything more urban or affordable than that.
And those apartments have to come down, they look like they haven’t been maintained since the 90s.
1 Like
Does anyone have any more information on the old “Tiny Town” community? I found the article below, but would love to learn more about the history.
2 Likes
There’s flyers for this all over Mordecai. Hmm.
This probably should go in the ‘Show Off’ thread but it connects to historic properties and construction / renovation within…reminds me of the hullabaloo around the modern house built on an Oakwood infill lot a few years back. Glad I don’t live in a ‘histrionic’ overlay…
TL:DR - a ‘renovation’ of the penthouse apartment in a historic building adjacent to Central park has a faction of folks who simply think it doesn’t belong
I think some of the “contemporary” houses in Mordecai (and Oakwood) are pretty ugly, but man those historic districts can add some incredible bureaucracy to even simple changes if they’re not implemented thoughtfully.
3 Likes
I’ll have to say that I agree with the constructive criticism of the design. Clearly the couple want more space by adding the second level to the rooftop penthouse. The existing pink stucco penthouse is a single floor, and a single floor glass box will (in my opinion) improve the overall look of the building.
1 Like
Agreed - certainly the couple is asking for an extraordinary amount of space for the city…
I watched the Zoom after I laughed through the captioning and comments Dezeen chose to call out.
85% support in the building, structure effectively the same height as the former stacks on the pink stucco penthouse, shorter than the adjacent structures (water tower), already acquiesced certain aspects to neighborhood response regarding scale / step back of top floor studio / light well / elevator over-runs and mechanical structure positioning (which could easily have been just plunked on top like those prior stacks).
I appreciated the comments that “appropriateness exists along a spectrum” and the changing context of the neighborhood should embrace evolution in a given district.
The comments against seem directed not from a place of height issues but more from issue with aesthetics and/or ‘ostentatious wealth posturing’.
Hopefully they’ll find common ground. Pretty fascinating to envision walking around in all that architectural context from neighborhood street level and worrying about its visibility.
Seems more about views of it from the park and its context in the world today.
2 Likes
I still just love the idea that the community (or the vocal few who care) get to dictate what an individual does with their home, while across the region corporations drastically change the landscape with their various new projects.
For the record, I fully support the new developments, just noting how the focus is turned on the individual because a few people have the legal opportunity to make their objections tangible.
5 Likes
It’s the other side of St. Aug’s from Oakwood, but this is probably the closest relevant thread.
Walked by the big Washington Terrace redevelopment the other day - plenty of construction equipment at the Booker South site: Washington Terrace Redevelopment | DHIC | Home to Opportunity
It’s a perfectly nice-looking development with laudable aims, but Booker North is a real miss for the neighborhood in terms of form. It’s directly in the middle of a college, a high school, and a strip full of small independent businesses, and it’s just this black hole of berms and parking. Even for affordable senior housing, the lack of engagement with the neighborhood is really sad:
(not my picture)
Looking at the site plan, it feels like the “Village” section should have been in that public-facing section instead.
5 Likes
Interesting! MUCH more density than I was expecting, which is nice. Don’t exactly love ringing it entirely with a new street.
Given how many “fronts” those houses have, architectural quality needs to be important on more than one side, but this neighborhood is pricey enough it should justify that.
4 Likes