Powerhouse Plaza Flips From Hotel and Office to Apartments

Corner of West and Jones Street.

Surprise, surprise. Another on-hold project, Powerhouse Plaza, goes the apartment route. The once planned 11-story mixed use building for Glenwood South, at the corner of West and Jones Street, was planned to have retail, office, and possibly a Hyatt hotel. The rendering for the old building still exists on Cline Design’s website so take a peak before it’s updated.

A preliminary site plan was submitted to the city back in December and reveals just a few details about the 203 apartment building, called Link Apartments at Glenwood South. Search the city’s website for “site plan 057-12” or get it direct here. (pdf) [1-31-14 – UPDATE: broken link]

No renderings are included and the overall site plan, of just the first floor it seems, doesn’t show anything too exciting. It’s still early in the process though.

203 apartments directly in Glenwood South is a nice boost of residents and a great way to use the under-utilized space. I’ll be following it.

Similar Posts:


Comments are disabled here. That's because we're all hanging out on the DTRaleigh Community, an online forum for passionate fans of the Oak City.


  1. I am disappointed because the 11-story version was a more exciting addition, at least based on the initial renderings and site plan. On the other hand, adding 203 units in the transitional zone between Glenwood South and the State Government district is not a bad way to develop this site. The developer(s) opted out for what seems to be the trend these days.

    Some concerns: 1) Developers are putting cheap low-rises everywhere, even though most designs are urban enough to keep us happy. 2) Did the hotel developer (Hyatt) opt out? That would be a major concern, especially since we try desperately to lure hotels to downtown. 3) If 100,000sf of office space cannot be leased, then it makes me wonder if there is sincere interest by businesses about moving to downtown. I keep hearing there is a lot of interest, but if we can’t lease such little office space then we need to become a little more aggressive. That means, developers, downtown promoters and city leaders have to work closely and harder on relocations.

  2. Some good points Ernest. I dunno if it’s reflective of office interest though. I would think there’s just so many opportunities in the main Fayetteville street area that apartments is just better at Powerhouse anyways. (Let them put an office tower & hotel at that big empty Charter Square lot, right?) Apartments here make more sense anyways.

  3. Still would be nice to have an idea on why the change. Was it zoning/regulation issues w/Raleigh … lack of buy-in by the hotel and/or business community … or something completely different. I’m a free market guy and if the market was not there … then transition is a good thing. It is something others should know though … and if it was Raleigh being a problem, we should know that as well. Right now, seems like everyone is guessing.

  4. rumor has it one parking space is allotted for each two bedroom apartment, surely the city did not approve that?

  5. The more housing that comes to Glenwood South, the better the chance that retail will follow. While it would be terrific to have a new hotel on that site, it’s residents that will drive more investment in DT. Frankly, I’d rather see the Hyatt project move to the Charter Square site. It’s a better location for the Convention Center and would provide DT with an opportunity to advance that site. If the Hyatt would have been built at Powerhouse Square, it surely would have reduced the visibility of the Charter site.

  6. I wonder if Hyatt would be interested more in going to Charter Square. I truly hope so because we need more hotel options near the convention center, plus most of us wait to hear about the future of Charter Square. Quite honestly, I would love to see Hyatt going to The Edison, as part of a redesigned Phase One. Very easily they could build a smaller version of Skyhouse and add the hotel to it.

    Glenwood South is about to become more residential in nature – actually, more mixed-use – and this is where the market is headed. That is fine with me, even if the rental market gets saturated. Still, I am anxious to hear whether this change was the result of Hyatt not being interested, due to delays on the part of the developer, or something else.

  7. A Hodge: According to the site plan, there will be 227 parking spaces, with the city ordinance only requiring 187). With 162 1BR units and 41 2BR that means nearly a parking space for every bedroom.

  8. Another loss which seem to be adding up these days. The Powerhouse renderings, while not spectacular, gave a little flare to an otherwise boring downtown landscape architecturally. The fact that Raleigh cannot pull off a boutique hotel is mind boggling. More than likely, these apartments will be the standard red brick with some sandstone that seem so popular. Too bad.

  9. Hotel in that spot would have been nice, but apartments are just as good, if not better for the short term. It’ll definitely help out the retail on the street, but I’m going to have to disagree with John about more investment coming from residents. It may not be a disagreement as much as it is bringing up another point; it is the visitor, traveler, temporary resident (or whatever you want to call them) that will be more likely to spend money on a daily basis for dinner and whatever else they see fit in purchasing to commemorate their stay.

    Temporary residents and more permanent (as permanent as a lease is long) residents provide two different ground games on the retail front, but the place that benefits from the two are the eateries. Hotel occupants will do nothing to add to the amenities for locals, but the amenities for locals added by a denser number near the core are a huge plus for travelers regardless of their length of stay.

    A hotel (usually) will get the nod over residential, since it will fetch a higher bid price on the land, and apartments are a good consolation prize, but just don’t wish too hard for hotels to take hold (just yet) because the minute they start to come in, the only chance a residential project will have is if people are willing to pay at least double what they are paying now.

  10. I agree with Nehemiah’s interpretation. I still wish they could build a combination of residential and hotel space; in two separate buildings, but sharing the same parking deck. The positive thing about getting a lot of rental units is that once the demand is met and the market saturates, it will make sense for developers to go after affordable residential condos and hotel space.

    In some ways, I wish that the convention center was located closer to Nash Square and Glenwood South, as it would have helped several areas.

  11. Agree with Daniel: The Links Brand apartment in Richmond is ugly. Great example, City Council cannot approve this type of look for downtown!! This is a suberb looking building, not for OUR downtown. City Council needs to reject this design and look (NO STUCCO AND ENOUGH OF THE UGLY TAN). we are wasting valuable downtown real estate on these ugly projects (Link, The Hue, The building across from the Hue)

  12. The boring genericness of everything built in downtown lately is not a product of a city council without vision or even a closed-minded insistence on using local architects. It is a product of the market. Right now, there’s very little supply in the market at all, and so much demand, that developers don’t need to set themselves apart by designing attractive buildings. They just build whatever and it fills up.

    Plus, if you start to give the impression that it’s difficult to get developments approved because you have a council or a staff that likes to micromanage architectural details, sending projects back for redesigns frequently, then you just wind up warding off developers altogether.

    If you’re going to be picky about appearance, you need to do it in a code that is applied consistently to all projects, not by putting every development at the whim of council based on its appearance.

    (That said I wouldn’t mind a ban on EIFS – that stuff ages pretty poorly.)

    20 years from now, there will be way more urban residential buildings as there are today, and some of them will be drop dead gorgeous while the boring generic ones will just fade into the background, which is just fine by me.

  13. WoW,l finally sounds like we have a group that has some VISION – LRC Opportunity Fund (based out of NYC) – just hearing them talk about 227 F Street building is refreshing – NEVER HEAR ANY NC DEVELOPER TALK WITH CREATIVITY, VISION OR OUT-SIDE THE BOX!!!
    This concept can be the beginning of downtown Raleigh FINALLY becoming a technology hub with a variety of industries and companies. Hopefully LRC buys up downtown land and starts to consider building new and very tall structures for offices, hotel and start ups.
    SO FAR, I applaud LRC. Hey Crowder, Boner, Odom and Stephenson of City Council, get your lazy, flabby bottoms out of the way of progress

  14. Robert, I hate to say it, but this is EXACTLY what DT Raleigh is going to get, and it will happen with the blessing of those who “advocate” good urban designs. The cheap material, in addition with the fact that such structures are quick to build, makes it a “no-brainer” for developers who want/need to make a quick buck. Same holds true for the other disaster, The Edison (Phase One). Hard to expect elegance from such low-rise buildings, unless a developer with deep pockets and with the high end market in mind is involved. It is not impossible to build a nice 5-story building, but the recipe (cheap construction) is tried and safe.

  15. Well, Link Apartments are supposed to have some sustainable features. That’s pretty important to people like me. I won’t say I think the buildings are attractive, but if the city is moving in an eco-concious direction, I’m not going to complain.

  16. I think the last thing on anyone’s mind is environmental sustainability-see public transit/parking deck ideology which would nullify any minor tinkering with structure. Like Ernest said, this is about doing everything on the cheap. I also have to disagree with city council not micromanaging and trying to not appear anti-development-that IS what they always do (see the debacle on Hillsborough Rd., Plensa, etc.). Raleigh is a case study on how an area appears to flourish despite it leaders, not because of them, which is partly due to NCSU/RTP. As far as the the LRC project, expect a torpedo to be launched at it by the usual suspects on the council with the main complaint being the fact that the developer is from NYC (in the southern accent from the Pace Picante sauce ads). I personally think that Bonner Gaylord is the most visionary person on the council-the problem is the autocratic, dated know-it-all leadership style from the military vets and Crowder.

  17. Daniel: I agree with most of what you said, but Boner and the word vision do not go together. This guy would have been great 15 years ago as a Fetzer lap dog, he seems to be kissing Crowders back end to much. Plus, every time I watch a city council meeting, this idiot has to go home, what is up with that!!!!? A couple times I have heard him request that they finish the meeting NOW, he said he had to go home to baby sit!!! Are you freaking kidding me, this guy is a joke. This is the vision attitude, get some exposure in city politics, do absolutely NOTHING for downtown Raleigh and have this on your resume (the accomplishment description should read “I DID NOTHING to advance downtown Raleigh”.

    Odom is clueless!! I am a vet, he carries himself like he is still fighting enemies in the bush, he is pathetic and a visionary black hole. Crowder an architect!? – That is hilarious, this guy could not design an out house.
    Stephenson, well, he belongs in retirement home. These four have to be at the top of the worst list that I have seen in 25 years. Except for the worst of all time – Fetzer and Coble (OH, and the original lap dog, the Briggs family member who was on city council with Fetzer in 1990’s)
    We need business people in City Council who know what they are talking about and have VISION for OUR Downtown

  18. Daniel: agree with you. Those usual suspects need to move aside and let this LRC Group do whatever they need to to make this building successful. If these clowns (ODOM,CROWDER and Stephenson) are road blocks because this is a NYC (or any other big city) developer, they should be impeached. This LRC group is a leading edge group who has deep pockets and vision. Our three stooges (listed above), need to go back to their back-woods town they came from and maintain the farm. So tired of these three pathetic so-called politicians who have no idea what they are saying or doing. I watch most of the meetings, they are clueless and sound so ignorant to downtown development, OUR cities future or what vision actually means

Comments are closed.