Soleil Center I & II at Crabtree

[DCMetroRaleigh]

Yeah, thankfully Raleigh-Durham doesn't look to Atlanta. RDU is trying to immulate cities that have done things right.

[paletexan]

I was all for this tower at first, and now after reading much of this thread, I am wavering somewhat.

I just want to see Raleigh take a chance on something crazy while investors are willing (we missed a recent opportunity with the convention center). Everything is so conservative with a "scale it down" mentality, and people trying to maintain a small town atmosphere while the population continues to grow. Something has to give. I really wanted to see Coker's towers get built on Wade Ave, and in the least, this proposal shows in retrospect that Coker's project was quite feasible.

I'm all for a strong center city in Raleigh, but who are we trying to be? This project would fit perfectly with the uniqueness of the triangle ... that being radial communities that span several counties. I'm done wavering now, just build it!

[Jones_]

God forbid Raleigh dare to make a statement in any way....Thank God the 2 tallest were built, otherwise downtown Raleigh would look freaking pitiful, and it would be even harder to get anything above 20 stories built....Jesus we are a city of 340,000 people here, not Mayberry or some small city like Wilmington...Raleigh is so large landwise and populationwise that it needs to have a center that reflects the true promince of the city...not a reflection of the Raleigh of the early '90's...

BTW if the whole "towers are not needed until all of downtown's parking lots are occupied" rule were followed then downtowns all across NC would be about 1/2 of there current size, many would not have any skyscrapers at all. God that would be so boring!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

We ultimately want the same thing to a degree here Mike. The two towers look nice, yes, but do not create a functional nor an affordable downtown. A scaled down version, would be to put say a ten story building in downtown Fuquay, surrounded by a Hardees, a used car lot and other one story development...development needs to be ramped up, and for a given city, depending on facilities and infrastructure, there is a limit to the size of what will work. The biggest reason there has not been large new development in over ten years downtown, is precisely because these two towers went up...

[NCMike1981]

I still don't think that 2 400 foot towers are too much for a city of 340,000 people. I mean just look at comparable sized cities across the country. If nothing else then the rising land costs in downtown Raleigh should force developers to build up, b/c the higher the project the more return there is for the developer. But I suppose we'll have to agree to disagree.

So any1 heard if they've scaled the Crabtree tower down yet? I've sort of been keeping an ear out daily, waiting to hear that the tower is going to be, say, 6 stories instead of 40 lol

[Damien]

I am so sick of the "lets not build above 10 or 15 stories" mindset. If highrises work in Charlotte, then theres no reason why they couldnt work here. People need to stop comparing Raleigh to other cities like Alexandria, and D.C.. We are not those cities, and shouldnt aspire to mimic other cities.

[Eastwestrob]

I am so sick of the "lets not build above 10 or 15 stories" mindset.  If highrises work in Charlotte, then theres no reason why they couldnt work here. People need to stop comparing Raleigh to other cities like Alexandria, and D.C.. We are not those cities, and shouldnt aspire to mimic other cities.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I agree 100%. Living in Richmond now puts me in the D.C area for business and what a dull, boring low view it is. Its time for Raleigh to make a statement and act its age and its SIZE. Anybody from this forum that ever wants to run for office in the city and wants a "Taller" Raleigh has my vote and I will make sure that they have several hundred more too.

[NcSc74]

I agree that 40 storeis is too tall for crabtree but not because I am against building tall. Last time I was home I went to crabtree and I can see a 10 to 15 stories there. Or even put two tower at 10 stories each. That idea would really give that area more of an urban feel than one tall and nothing else around it to match. As for downtown I have wondered for a long time why Raleigh has lagged when it comes to DT. A few of the post here hit the nail on the head. As NC's second city it is time for Raleigh to grow up. Im not advocating building 40 plus stories but I am saying fill in the gaps with a few midrises and one or two 300 to 400 footers.

[Rufus]

I understand most of the comments that talk about comparisons to Alexandria and the D.C. area, and then the ones not wanting to be compared to them, instead citing that if Charlotte can we can. Well isn't that another comparison. Raleigh shouldn't have to live up to Charlotte, that's like saying Pittsburgh has to live up to Philadelphia.

In my honest opinion, I don't see Raleigh having a tall skyline. It has already set the basis for a great big density type skyline. I do agree there needs to be something taller downtown, but maybe one or two more 25+ towers will do. A tall skyline, or even a dense one for that matter, doesn't make a city feel urban. It is what is compromised in that area with both height and density that help create an urban feel, but it alone cannot accomplish that feat.

[MR-2]

I am so sick of the "lets not build above 10 or 15 stories" mindset. If highrises work in Charlotte, then theres no reason why they couldnt work here. People need to stop comparing Raleigh to other cities like Alexandria, and D.C.. We are not those cities, and shouldnt aspire to mimic other cities.

We don't want Raleigh to become Durham or Greensboro, for one. The tallest buildings in those respective cities are way out in the outskirts with no context to them at all. It isn't urbanizing, rather I think it's vertical sprawl. Plus the connections to the place would create a lot of congestion. As for the Reynolds building, ideally it should be near enough to the Wachovia center to seem in context, but I think it'll wind up getting scaled back anyway. I'm fine with 25-40 floor-ish buildings downtown, and I think Raleigh can afford to populate at least 2-3 more if they ever get build. But I agree with Rufus that the main goal should be density, and great street-level business first, instead of aimless tower placement.

[Damien]

Maybe I should have been more clear. I was saying that I didnt like the comparisons to cities with downtowns that dont have high buildings.

[richthofen]

Originally I was in favor of this thing, but the more I think of it, the more I realize it's the wrong kind of building for the location. I'd love to see a 40 story building in Raleigh--downtown. The part of Glenwood near the mall probably shouldn't have anything more than about 15, otherwise you completely overwhelm everything else in the area. A 10 to 15 story building would nicely replace the hotel that is being demolished in that location, and would provide a complement for the 12-story Holiday Inn nearby. A twin 15 story tower could contain Soleil's project just fine, unless they were counting on stunning 35th story vistas of the relatively flat and uninteresting surrounding area as a sales point.

I did like the design, though. Keep the design and put that sucker downtown!

[ChiefJoJo]

I'd love to see a 40 story building in Raleigh--downtown. The part of Glenwood near the mall probably shouldn't have anything more than about 15, otherwise you completely overwhelm everything else in the area.

I agree. Also, for those that want tall DT bldgs, there has to be a market for them, and currently, the market is definitely growing for condos DT, and Fay St, the new RCC and south end/cultural dist. proposals will only help that. We really need another corporate partner to go along with Progress Energy to help the office market, which needs to be stronger if we want to see more buildings DT.

[jlblaes]

I agree with Jones133. The city can only do so much. If the Glen-Tree developer wants to build his building at Crabtree because that is where he and his investors/financers think they can make a buck, then who are we to say it should be DT. It is his neck on the line. The city has more control & they can steer things when they own the land (see the RFP's site 1 and 4).

The city does need more corporate help and it will be hard to get it. Governments across the country are throwing all sorts of tax breaks and cash to recruit business to their location. A significant corporate presence by 1 or 2 companies would be a big boost and round out the development downtown. The paper has mentioned several small firms (with staff of 100-300 people) relocating to the Triangle but we need a home run or two to really get things going. There have been lots of rumors about this but nothing concrete. The alleged RBC relocation seems unlikely given their financial situation.

JB

I agree.  Also, for those that want tall DT bldgs, there has to be a market for them, and currently, the market is definitely growing for condos DT, and Fay St, the new RCC and south end/cultural dist. proposals will only help that.  We really need another corporate partner to go along with Progress Energy to help the office market, which needs to be stronger if we want to see more buildings DT.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

[Jones_]

Still, nobody has offered an argument for high-rise development in Raleigh other than, "I want it", or "other cities of comparable size have it". If its time for Raleigh, then why is it time? My goal for downtown is to have people living there..LOTS of people living there. This is my "want". Is this not what others want? What do you guys want? Do you have a clear idea? Does what you want make economic and planning sense? Slapping up 40 story skyscrapers gives you pretty things to look at as you drive by on your way home to the 'burbs where you can actually afford to live. Raleigh has nearly missed its chance to get 10,000 people living downtown in condos priced 90k to 150k. Where downtown is headed now is an enclave for the rich living amongst a very dense office park. If BB&T and First Union don't build to 29 stories, then Park Deveraux costs 140k on the low end instead of 180k and I can afford to live there. I suppose the schools of thought just diverge rather distinctly here as a personality for downtown is searched for.

[urbanesq]

My problem with the proposal is that the market for condominiums and hotel rooms, as for everything else, is finite. In our area I suspect it is not only finite, but very limited. While I recognize that there are various sub-markets within the community, I can't help but think that if a 40-story building goes up at Crabtree, it drains the market for similar projects everywhere else, especially downtown. Part of a healthy downtown is having lots and lots of people living there, and lots of people staying in hotels to come to the new convention center.

I agree that we need more affordable housing in downtown so that it doesn't turn into a rich-o ghetto, but we need more affordable housing everywhere! As we've heard over and over in the press lately, the most expensive housing and wealthiest population in our region are out in the suburbs. If anything it seems to me that if you have more tall buildings in a concentrated area, you maximize the use of land and create more opportunities for affordability, not fewer. If you have a base of more expensive housing which supports infrastructuer and services, doesn't that make it easier for someone to come along and fill in with other housing product types?

Plus, tall buildings grouped together are cool, and make the skyline look neat for the marketing brochures, and give people a sense of pride of place. Erecting the city's tallest building at Crabtree won't make housing in downtown more affordable. If anything, it will divert what momentum is building in the market now and discourage investment for another generation.

[MR-2]

The argument for these developments in the urban center is basically any urban vs suburban argument for any development. Urban services are more efficient economically, since they affect a disproportionate amount of people because of their location. Suburban development requires disproportionate infastructure for its benefit to the community.

As for the 40 fl building on glenwood; traffic already sucks there. Imagine what adding something that big would do. Plus it seems bad taste to put the tallest occupied building well outside the commercial center, away from major highways, and basically in the middle of nowhere.

[Jones_]

My problem with the proposal is that the market for condominiums and hotel rooms, as for everything else, is finite.  In our area I suspect it is not only finite, but very limited.  While I recognize that there are various sub-markets within the community, I can't help but think that if a 40-story building goes up at Crabtree, it drains the market for similar projects everywhere else, especially downtown.  Part of a healthy downtown is having lots and lots of people living there, and lots of people staying in hotels to come to the new convention center.

I agree that we need more affordable housing in downtown so that it doesn't turn into a rich-o ghetto, but we need more affordable housing everywhere!  As we've heard over and over in the press lately, the most expensive housing and wealthiest population in our region are out in the suburbs.  If anything it seems to me that if you have more tall buildings in a concentrated area, you maximize the use of land and create more opportunities for affordability, not fewer.  If you have a base of more expensive housing which supports infrastructuer and services, doesn't that make it easier for someone to come along and fill in with other housing product types?

Plus, tall buildings grouped together are cool, and make the skyline look neat for the marketing brochures, and give people a sense of pride of place.  Erecting the city's tallest building at Crabtree won't make housing in downtown more affordable.  If anything, it will divert what momentum is building in the market now and discourage investment for another generation.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Thanks urbanesq. I will buy that logic, and go on to support some office space in high-rises in a part of downtown that makes sense. In Raleigh that is clearly the southern end of Fayetteville Street. But you are losing oppurtunties for affordability with each one of these...new houses priced at 180k on Swain Street!! In recent years stuff over there was under 50,000. The land grab downtown is definitely on...

[waynehead]

Don't the high prices downtown indicate high demand? Isn't that a good thing? I also hope that in the near future downtown living will be affordable for young singles and young couples, but maybe the high prices are a good indicator and an incentive for development, instead of the other way around, and clearly the development has to come first before people can live there. The rush to build there can only be a good thing, in terms of supply, and once the supply/availability comes closer to meeting demand i think you'll see prices come down.

[MR-2]

I think Raleigh should think ahead and add some depth to the skyline by choosing a street that intersects Fayetteville as another prime retail/skyscraper center. Going on in one line forever is silly. Eventually I think the skyline will push towards Capitol Blvd, and we need to embrace it. The first building or two might look out of place, but as more are put up around it it'll work.

Take Wachovia for example. All it needs are some more modern looking buildings 2/3 the height around it and it makes perfect sense in the skyline, rather than sticking out like a sore thumb. Putting the Reynolds building close would work great for that. (That said I sort of like it the way it is. Its architecture is perfect for a standalone).

[ncsugrad204]

hey guys I am new to posting but i have been viewing your comments for months. I have lived in the area for about seven years and I am excited about its potential. with that being said I would like to share some newly found rendereings of the Galleria at crabtree valley I have provided the link below. looks pretty cool!!

http://www.bgoarchitects.com/mixed-use.html

[Subway Scoundrel]

hey guys I am new to posting but i have been viewing your comments for months.  I have lived in the area for about seven years and I am excited about its potential.  with that being said I would like to share some newly found rendereings of the Galleria at crabtree valley I have provided the link below. looks pretty cool!!

http://www.bgoarchitects.com/mixed-use.html

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Good post. Here is what they say

"Perched on a hillside overlooking Crabtree Mall and much of Southern Raleigh, with dynamic views of the downtown skyline, will soon be home to over 700 condominium dwellers, approximately 1200 office professionals and literally hundreds of retail shoppers. All of these people will enjoy the very best that modern living has to offer, as the Galleria will soon be known as the premier vertical mixed-use developments in the country. "

I do think the only DT skyline you will be able to see is fron the planned 40 story building next door. Also, I think this is west Raleigh. But no matter, still looks better than what was there. But who knows.

[Tayfromcarolina]

Looks pretty good. However, I am less than thrilled with all the brick going on. I would like to see more beige worked in sort of blending with the mall type material for facade's and surfaces.

This promises to add and bring new life the Crabtree area.

[ncsugrad204]

I have also found some blueprints of the lofts and the condos that are going to be built. I will add the link to PDF files later. Also, has anyone heard of any new news about the development by York Properties next to the galleria?

[orulz]

The more I think about it, the more I like this area's potential for development as "Midtown Raleigh." But it needs to be urban on both sides of Glenwood, and before that can happen, there need to be several pedestrian bridges. As for the mall, it would be great if the top level of the parking deck facing Glenwood (in front of Cheescake Factory and P.F. Chang's) were replaced with a bunch of shops, to present a more urban appearance to those driving by on Glenwood. Something that looks kind of like the renderings of EpiCentre in Charlotte.

But no matter how much I think about it, I come to the conclusion that the developers of Glen Tree are kidding themselves if they think a 40 story building will turn a profit. They will downsize. It seems like a terrible wasted opportunity to dedicate the bottom six floors to parking.

[ChiefJoJo]

Bringing this topic back... a friend told me that the project has been approved by the city's planning dept, but it has been scaled down to 25 stories.