The Outfield

edited March 2014 in Lansing

The Outfield is a four floor mixed use development built by Gillespie Group, the plan takes the place of his earlier 'Ballpark North' proposal. The building will have 84 residential units and a ground floor restaurant with access to Cooley Law School Stadium. Construction on the project began in mid 2015 and should be complete in early to mid 2016.

The Outfield - Gillespie Group



Articles about this project:
3/11/2014 From the LSJ - $22M upgrade would add apartments to Lugnuts ballpark

3/12/2014 From Mlive - Lansing Lugnuts stadium plan: What about fireworks, broken windows and other answers to reader questions

6/9/2014 From City Pulse - Council Approves Cooley Law School Stadium project

12/17/2014 From LSJ - State to invest $2.5M in The Outfield project in Lansing

4/20/2015 From LSJ - Work starts on The Outfield ballpark apartments


  • edited March 2014
    Yeah Buddy! Now THIS is what I'm talking about. Even better than Ball Park North (site plan-wise), which was nice.

    I'm starting to feel a vibe, again, like we felt back in 2005-2006 when things look like they were going to take off only to be killed by the recession.

    EDIT: As I'm orienting myself, I wonder if the surface lot to the north will stretch all the way to Shiawasee, of it they perhaps leave a spot on Shiawasee (and Cedar at the corner) to develop some kind of streetwall? Also, does this mean the tiny surface lots out front of the stadium will see development, too? I'd written the city about eventually developing those into retail or something since they provide so little parking to begin with. This would require finding a site, again, for a parking garage on this side of the river to absorb the loss.
  • edited August 2015
    I was gonna say the same thing, developments seem to be picking up like they were. If only we can get a high rise...

    From looking at the rendering, I'm thinking that this will only use up the land that the city garage sits on, looking at the satellite images it looks about right. As for those lots in front of the stadium, I'd hate to see them stay parking lots, but seeing them developed wouldn't excite me too much either. I'd rather see that stretch in front of the park be turned into a sort of landmark park with water features, sculptures and what not.

    Here are the initial renderings that were originally in the first post:



  • We'll probably find out more, tomorrow. It's good that the surface lot would only be on the City Garage site. I really do want to see the streetwalls developed along Cedar/Larch and their sidestreets for at least a block in either direction.

    Yeah, I'm not really picky on what becomes of the surface lots so long as they don't stay parking lots. It's so weird to have this thing right in the middle of the city, and you can drive up to the front gates, practically. The more I think about it, the more I think you're probably right in that this space would look better open. Though, there would still be enough space directly in front of the stadium that you wouldn't be blocking the entrance were a few shops to go up in one-or-two-story buildings on each side.

    Anyway, I'm just glad that the city is saying that if they are going to redo the stadium, they might as well go big. I was just thinking the other day how much it's being passed up by other minor league parks that have been built since Oldsmobile Park.
  • I love this project. A good facelift/update for the stadium, and I like how they are "urbanizing" the outfield. I'm a little sorry to see much of the lawn seating go (as it looks from the renderings), but as a whole I think this very positive.

    For the parking lots at the front of the stadium, I'd like to see them replaced with a park or a plaza, rather than retail buildings. To me, the stadium is an attractive building from the front, and would rather see it not hidden by other buildings. I'm all for new developments in the city and downtown, but rather than the front of the stadium they could go elsewhere. Any additional retail I would think could go along Shiawassee, north of the Outfield?

    Certainly the Outfield replaces the earlier Ball Park North project. I recall that Ball Park North was on hold due to the recession/housing market, and due to the proposed casino (the land might have been used for a casino parking garage and retail). I don't have have a lot of confidence that the casino will happen (seems like so may parts have to come together, and the ongoing litigation, etc). Does the Outfield project suggest that the casino is less likely to happen, or am I thinking too much into it?
  • I think you may be overthinking it, a bit. There would still be enough room for a parking garage if the casino ever materialized; hood said he thinks the parking lot only takes up the city garage site, which leaves quite a large tract of land to the north. I think the city is just doing what it can while that situatio is working itself out.
  • Yeah, I don't think this will have an effect on the casino plans either way. If anything it's being built to fit in with those plans, the building will probably still allow for the realigned and extended Museum Drive. I attached a satellite photo below, you can see where the City garage's property ends:


    MLive also has a story on the project with a bit more info and a couple of renderings of the stadium renovations in their gallery:Lansing Lugnuts stadium plan: What about fireworks, broken windows and other answers to reader questions
  • edited March 2014
    Do you see a through street in the renderings? I just see a parking lots with turnaround. Maybe, there might be a driveway out back, like at Stadium District, but I don't see a full-fledged public street in those renderings.

    Wait, are you talking about the other side of Cedar (Market Place)? The Studio Intrigue renderings I posted the other day show a slight aerial of Market Place, but all I can remember is the thin driveway onto Cedar.
  • edited March 2014
    No, I don't see a through street in the renderings. I was just saying that this would likely allow for a through street in the same spot the casino site plans showed there being one.
  • edited March 2014
    You know, the more I've thought of this project the past few days, I wonder if it may be smarter to move the apartments a bit further north, like a few hundred feet, so that they sit where the city garage does? This would have the effect of increasing circulation within the ballpark, itself (you could make a loop around the outfield, finally, and add more seating at the back), and answers some of the concerns about literally living in and over a ballpark as it would put a slight buffer between the apartments and the park, but still close enough to see into the park.

    My slight tweak of moving it would mean that you could the parking under the apartment building, and then you could hide this first floor by putting up some new seating the where the current scoreboard now stands, or just put the resturant in this blank spot.

    It's not a big deal, either way, but I do see that tweak as a way of getting rid of/hiding the new surface lot while still leaving room for development up along the tracts near Shiawassee, creating more (and needed) space within the park to work with increasing internal circulation, and reducing and lesson some of the issues you'd get with literally living over a baseball outfield (i.e. homeruns, privacy, etc...).
  • I'd have to disagree with you on a few points. I don't think the building should be moved back at all, for one, its current placement should allow Museum Dr to fit just north of it. The current plan does put a walkway going around the outfield and I doubt Gillespie will have any issues leasing the 40 apartments facing the field even with noisy crowds, balls hitting windows and fireworks. Lastly, I don't think the stadium needs more seating, it needs less and better seating (which these renovations will accomplish), it'd be nice to see games sell out once in a while.
Sign In or Register to comment.