Renderings of The Willard Hotel in Glenwood South

Future site of The Willard hotel on Glenwood Avenue. February 2018.

Future site of The Willard hotel on Glenwood Avenue. February 2018.

On the city’s website, a submitted Administrative Alternate for Design (AAD-1-18) shows renderings of The Willard, a planned hotel and condo building for Glenwood South. Taking a peak, I wanted to share those renderings here on the blog.

As a refresher, The Willard will be an AC hotel by Marriott brand hotel on the southwest corner of Willard Place and Glenwood Avenue. The building will have hotel rooms and some residential units. Shown in the photo above is the site of the project which will see the demolition of two brick office buildings and the surface parking lot in between.

This particular AAD case seems to deal with the placement of the building and how far set back it is. I see a proposal for an outdoor amenity area which sits a little farther back than is required. Seems like a minor issue.

Either way, here are the renderings.

Rendering of The Willard hotel, AAD-1-18.

Rendering of The Willard hotel, AAD-1-18. Click for larger

Rendering of The Willard hotel, AAD-1-18.

Rendering of The Willard hotel, AAD-1-18. Click for larger

Rendering of The Willard hotel, AAD-1-18.

Rendering of The Willard hotel, AAD-1-18. Click for larger

Rendering of The Willard hotel, AAD-1-18.

Rendering of The Willard hotel, AAD-1-18. Click for larger

Rendering of The Willard hotel, AAD-1-18.

Rendering of The Willard hotel, AAD-1-18. Click for larger

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. So as long as you own the land then you can do whatever you want with it? Since when? Buildings can be protected, cities and residents should have the right to dictate their built environment. The problem is their is no will to stop this and maybe this type of crap is preferred in Raleigh. Out with the old – in with the new. Its why people move here.

  2. To be honest, for what it is, it isn’t even that bad.

    Plus, yah the property owners has the right to do what ever they want to the property as long as it meets the requisite criteria. I would have a bigger issue if the city stepped in and said no because of personal feelings.

  3. I like the appearance. Obviously Alan does not. Can’t please everyone. I’m glad something interesting looking and functional will be at that location and continue to connect Glenwood South with the rest of downtown.

  4. Imho
    For “certain” buildings, the city should work with the developer to move said buildings to another location. Save the buildings if and when we should. And as long as the developer or land owner is following laws, no one has the right to intervene. Yell or disagree all we like, as I know I will…Lol

  5. I have been searching for more information on what’s planned for the Cargill’s site (considering the on-going demolition) but haven’t found much other than this ITB Insider Development Beat article. There is an aerial video showing the actual demolition of the tanks! I’m betting I’m not the only person here who will find this video more than just a little bit satisfying.

  6. Much better than the current eyesore, with a better useful end. Whether we like it or not, Raleigh is a newer modern city. Other than some churches, houses, and a few buildings, there is not much of significance historically or architecturally. I say preserve everything of significance and let the ugly crappy red brick structures go bye bye in the name of growth and progress.

  7. I’m not a big fan of the aesthetics but it’s better than nothing. Hopefully we’ll get a decent restaurant out of it, I prefer some more creative architecture but maybe that will come with some developments down the road.
    Could be worse it could be another version of the Residence Inn.

  8. Agreed – I think this will foster development and creativity in this end of Glenwood South/the Warehouse District. It’s the North Hills-esque style that has proven successful.

  9. Downtown doesn’t seem to have long contiguous blocks of similar architecture. We’re a town that has seen a steady addition of new buildings throughout most decades going back 100 years. We didn’t have a big boom in the past followed by decline, essentially “freezing” the built environment in time.

    Even in the suburban years of the 1970s to the 1990s the governments and banks were adding buildings, I think.

    We are a hodgepodge of architecture in our urban core and think we need to come to terms with that. Its not a bad thing, that’s Raleigh. We are functional and each project has its own story.

    That’s how I see things anyway.

  10. I agree with @JosABank. It’s certainly better than what we have today.. nothing. It will bring more foot traffic during the day and hopefully bring in more restaurants and businesses.

    I actually don’t mind it, I like the color scheme… however I wish we had something a bit more unique and architecturally astounding. Something what would like great 100 years from now. But that goes for all the other buildings in Raleigh.. all the buildings we have going up are average to below average. We are excited to have them of course.. I know I certainly am.. however.. if we had higher standards.. maybe we could have buildings with more design and character unique to Raleigh. I know some may not care for the Dillon.. however, I love it. I love the fact Kane kept part of the existing structure… that is unique to Raleigh.. it has Raleigh History.

  11. Leo, there are six brick row houses (at least Raleigh’s last ish version of row homes) behind the apartment building coming down too. They are not on the 1914 Sanborn, so I estimate their age at about 1920+-5, though someone like Matthew Brown might be able to pin it exactly with better documentation. Anyway, those losses should be noted as well. Also note a second apartment building like the one on the left of this picture, is also being lost over on Logan Court off Hillsborough….so it’s loss is not a one-off.
    Setting aside my like for the buildings themselves for a moment, my high level objection is I simply don’t like the whole “this area is cool, lets put a hotel here” thing. It fundamentally changes an area…to me, making it less cool/interesting. Asheville is suffering from this big time. It’s the feeling I have about the tearing down of houses all over the ‘cute’ neighborhoods in and near downtown and replacing them with the biggest house allowed on the lot. Now the area isn’t cute. When a drunk bro walks into my favorite drinking spot, and starts waving money at the bartender and hitting on all the girls, because he heard the place was cool…same feeling. And my feelings are *not NIMBYism. It’s about money winning out over uniqueness. It’s about what “good” really is. It’s about who made an area good in the first place. And sorry money folks (generically, not aimed at anyone here), but you don’t own the word “progress”. Something new ain’t always ‘progress’…it very well could be a regress. IMO, the best overall situation here would be to replace the building on the right (it is pretty new itself), with a taller hotel, and rehab the former residential structures, back into residential structures. You’d then have 12 historic residential units, along with the hotel rooms…a denser, architectural kaleidoscope of a street, instead of thunking this shoebox down here for a quick visitor’s buck.

  12. Why does a building have to be historically significant for it to be saved? Why can’t the city insist these building be developed somewhere else? New Bern? S Saunders? Wilmington St? Why do we need to rape our best neighborhoods in the name of progress? Why not subdivide these lots at stick something in between? Why not retrofit the existing buildings? Why does Raleigh settle for such mediocrity? And why is our City Council such lackeys to the developers?

  13. I think that it would have been really interesting to save the southern building and incorporate it into the hotel by juxtaposing/extending the hotel with an ultramodern structure. A glass box could have connected the two sides for a new-Raleigh/old-Raleigh story with the building. Alas, that would have meant the developer was leaving developable building area on the table and that’s never going to happen.

  14. Alan I’m sorry you’re having such a tough time with this. There’s plenty of towns you can move to that don’t have any growth and nothing ever changes.

    Since most of this comes down to individual taste, I think all of the brick buildings in the area are ugly, especially the old ones. I’m happy to see every single one of them go, and good riddance.

  15. Can’t say I have any emotional attachment to any of the buildings on that block. There are major losses the city has suffered–the First Citizens lot, the Garland Jones + Lawyers Building, the Theatre, but this isn’t one of them.

  16. Now, I do take issue with the big box style development. I’d prefer for the lot to be redeveloped into smaller buildings that are superior to the ones currently there. So, there are mixed feelings about this of course.

  17. Just ran by this tonight for some perspective. It’s really going to be transformational and make this currently dead section really pop. Also, One Glenwood has almost all the first 2 floors already framed. And the Metropolitan has a couple floors of wood apartments already up plus the parking deck (different area, I know, but also ran by that).

  18. Someone is willing to build a nice hotel in the dead section of Glenwood South and some people, unbelievably, would poo-poo it due to some junk buildings from 1925.

    I can see discussions and arguments over the look and design of the proposed hotel, but the outright rejection is insane.

    Do these naysayers realize what Raleigh was like 20 years ago and prior? It was a one horse town and now it’s a great city and getting better.

  19. Personally I think the design is somewhat reminiscent of the Aloft over on Hillsborough St. which I happen to like. Please don’t criticize me for my personal preferences, it’s just what is.

    Design aesthetics aside my sense is that most here desire an activate street experience and would like to see an improved connection between Glenwood South and the Warehouse district. Check and check.

    Thanks @Dwight. Happy to hear you enjoyed the article. Cheers.

  20. Glenwood South is never going to have the charm of an old neighborhood because there is so little “old” to have. Its best bet is to have good modern architecture mixed with the little old that exists and a really well thought out and executed streetscape plan for sidewalk experience.

  21. What we need is another Corner Stone! If the one wasn’t enough.. then the second.. now the third… we definitely need a 4th!

  22. @ NightHawk; I’ve seen this comment before, what is it referring to? Cornerstone Tavern on Glenwood and Johnson?

    Aesthetics and larger philosophical picture aside, I believe this brand of hotels has been doing quite a bit of modular construction (see: Chapel Hill location) where complete rooms are being pre-fabbed off site and installed on site built infrastructure (plumbing, electrical, etc)… will be interesting to see if this construction follows suit.

  23. With all the crap people talk about Glenwood South there are quite a few more arguments about ‘neighborhood character’ than I ever thought I’d see. Personally, I love Glenwood South and really enjoyed my time living there and think of this as a positive for the area. The design is meh, but overall it’s going to be great for this part of Glenwood to pick up a bit.

  24. @CarnifeX – On Glenwood. They started with the one.. which was fine… not a place I prefer to go.. but it was nice at first with the fire pits, etc. Then they took over the one next door.. and now working on the 3rd next to that. I am blown away that we can’t get anyone else to go into that space. I feel like it needs to be over next to State on Hillsborough st.

    A nice coffee shop would have been nice. I’ve often thought the Parliament should open in the morning as an upscale french coffee shop. It looks nice with the white marble and chandeliers.

    Speaking of buildings on Glenwood… I do feel they did a great job with the building where Ale House and Vidrio are.. I think that was very well done and fits the street well…. in my opinion. I also really like the section of old buildings where Devolve (is/was), clockwork, rockford, and northstreet are. I think with a mix of that.. and buildings with some character that compliment them.. Glenwood would be more amazing than it already is.

  25. Don’t worry. Those cheezy cornerstone bars will run their course shortly as their clientele will actually graduate.

    Seriously, the bulldozers aren’t terribly far off for all of those buildings. There have already been at least 2 proposed (very preliminary) new buildings for those spots several years back. Apartments or Condos were one if I recall correctly. I know the Paramount residents would love to see the bulldozers sooner rather than later.

  26. @Thomas, I live in the Paramount but don’t live on the side facing east toward Cornerstone. Surprisingly, I haven’t heard too much complaining about the noise from that strip of bars. There is a mechanism for communication in the immediate area and some of the issues are likely to be handled through it. I face west and the occasional unmuffled motorcycle racing up the street bothers me, but that’s probably because the noise is acute and really loud. Voice noise from a distance might end up all blending and acting like white noise before it gets to the east side of the Paramount.
    That said, I personally think that Cornerstone is the most God-awful bastardization of a old bungalow house that I’ve ever seen. It’s hideously augmented in ways that make no architectural sense. The worst of it is the “stone” and lanterns that are stacked on the roof of the front porch. Most of it is just an architectural crime.

  27. I went to Cornerstone once a couple years ago for a birthday thing. It was ok but really crowded. Maybe they do need a few more. Oh well, people are always saying save the old buildings…. I guess they did that lol

  28. I’m not sure if anyone mentioned another old building that was saved and renovated on Glenwood South, the Pine State Creamery.

  29. I just can’t see how this can be viewed as a loss. The buildings there and lack of activity or character add no value to the street or cityscape. Giving Glenwood bookends with the addition of Glenwood One and this hotel are huge improvements and inevitable steps forward toward vibrancy and growth!

  30. @Mark Bowerman, I agree that these two new projects will add vitality to the greater Glenwood South district and provide a experience connector to the Warehouse District.
    I have a fantasy that the hotel developer on the former Shelton’s property will realize that they can actually move pedestrian traffic through their hotel and to The Warehouse District via Hargett St. In effect, the pedestrian “grid” could be restored for Glenwood foot traffic directly to the Warehouse District.
    If done correctly, retail and restaurant business within the hotel could benefit from the foot traffic.

  31. @John532 I REALLY don’t see that happening. At all. Great idea, but no way is a developer going to sacrifice the sq footage and parking space. That would have been something the city/state would have had to jump on, but unfortunately they don’t quite have the vision that would be expected of a gov’t in a rapidly growing city. *shrugs*

  32. Pine State Creamery is historic building.

    John532 is right that Two Glenwood has public access 24/7 for foot traffic to walk to Hargett Street from Morgan.

  33. FWIW, Pine State has been *granted status as a historic building. The Apartments where the AC is proposed, are the exact same vintage. All you have to do is do the paperwork, and poof, historic status granted. Easy, given that Raleigh used to have dozens of apartment buildings like this and is now down to about 10 or so (two will be gone this year). The three houses that Cornerstone destroyed are all older than either of those (the original Cornerstone shows on a 1909 map, and the victorian looking ones, were there by 1914. Put them in Oakwood, restored, 300-500k each. Along Glenwood, apparently disposable. Glenwood had all the traits of Oakwood plus an industrial lilt…it was built out around the same time after all, starting with a handful of Italianate and Victorian houses in certain spots (Peace Street Inspection had a huge mansion on that site, as did Snoopy’s Hillsborough St). The oldest house nearby was built in 1813 and is on the same block as the AC will sit.

Comments are closed.