I agree that there seems to be little said about why are we doing this except the Mayor thinks that the current building is a dump. I also agree that there are many other empty spots, right on Michigan Ave across from the Raddison for example, that could be an equally prominent location, instead of a surface parking lot. If I have to choose among these I would pick the Beitler design that at least preserves the building. I really hate the rest of them, especially the Bijo one, just awful! I don't really get the other two, both dark and strange looking. Now are these companies really interested in doing this? If the Mayor gets to choose it won't be the first one, as he has already said many times his opinion of "preservationist".
Don't get me wrong...I'd rather see these built elsewhere. I think the City Hall should remain the City Hall. Unfortunately we've seen how the city just plows through anything historical so I'm somewhat bracing for the worst. I preferred the Beitler also just because of the fact it is the least butchering of the options.
If I were to change a couple things about the Beitler, it's that I would punch out more windows on the west side of the north-south facing tower and I would keep the public plaza but cut out a loading/drop-off lane on Michigan Ave.
I like the taller renderings. I think people get too caught up in preserving the history of buildings. How can a city grow if all we do is keep everything the same, or looking the same? As long as the buildings can lock in business and generate more people and revenue to the downtown area then I'm on board for it. We need more people downtown.
What concerns me most about this isn't the architecture, it's that there is no plan presented for where City Hall will move to or how it will be funded. For all we know, City Hall will end up operating out of trailers.
I am guessing that facade is copper or brown glass which seems dark to me. The re-hab of the current building is hidden behind the new tower, and looks like nothing of the original design is left, so why save the building at all. The only interesting thing is that it's twenty stories. Looks too much like an average hotel tower for this location.
The LSJ has an animated look at the Beitler design and it looks bright and shinny, and honors the original design. While the drive where the plaza is now could be re-thought they seem to add people space in other areas. To me obviously the Beitler design looks like Lansing, and like it fits in that spot.
Sorry I got carried away with the shinny drawings! I agree that this whole thing seems kind of strange and rushed. Considering that fact that they would have to build the new city hall first, and nothing other than a concept has been discussed on that issue. It does seem like these developers put at least some time and thought into their proposals, which cost a lot of money, so maybe this is in the done deal column like the sub-station. I think however that this issue will be for the next mayor to decide, and I'm thinking the City Hall will remain where it is for a long time. It is fun to look at shinny drawings!
I'm all in favor of moving forward and changing/improving the area. However this is not an area that necessarily needs it. It doesn't make sense in any aspect. If developers are eager to begin developing downtown maybe it makes more financial sense to focus on other prime sites. There are many options along grand underutilized for surface parking lots. Not to mention one that is frequently brought up, the corner of Michigan and Grand. To appreciate and respect history does not go hand in hand with standing in the way of development. Too often people make that false assumption. Lets get some proportional density in the city before we start replacing buildings that have not lived their lifespan.
Comments
I agree that there seems to be little said about why are we doing this except the Mayor thinks that the current building is a dump. I also agree that there are many other empty spots, right on Michigan Ave across from the Raddison for example, that could be an equally prominent location, instead of a surface parking lot. If I have to choose among these I would pick the Beitler design that at least preserves the building. I really hate the rest of them, especially the Bijo one, just awful! I don't really get the other two, both dark and strange looking. Now are these companies really interested in doing this? If the Mayor gets to choose it won't be the first one, as he has already said many times his opinion of "preservationist".
Don't get me wrong...I'd rather see these built elsewhere. I think the City Hall should remain the City Hall. Unfortunately we've seen how the city just plows through anything historical so I'm somewhat bracing for the worst. I preferred the Beitler also just because of the fact it is the least butchering of the options.
If I were to change a couple things about the Beitler, it's that I would punch out more windows on the west side of the north-south facing tower and I would keep the public plaza but cut out a loading/drop-off lane on Michigan Ave.
No one is feeling the skyline-altering Urban plan, hey?
Any other place I would like it, but I don't like the idea of a new building sitting in the courtyard of an older building.
I like the taller renderings. I think people get too caught up in preserving the history of buildings. How can a city grow if all we do is keep everything the same, or looking the same? As long as the buildings can lock in business and generate more people and revenue to the downtown area then I'm on board for it. We need more people downtown.
I am guessing that facade is copper or brown glass which seems dark to me. The re-hab of the current building is hidden behind the new tower, and looks like nothing of the original design is left, so why save the building at all. The only interesting thing is that it's twenty stories. Looks too much like an average hotel tower for this location.
The LSJ has an animated look at the Beitler design and it looks bright and shinny, and honors the original design. While the drive where the plaza is now could be re-thought they seem to add people space in other areas. To me obviously the Beitler design looks like Lansing, and like it fits in that spot.
Sorry I got carried away with the shinny drawings! I agree that this whole thing seems kind of strange and rushed. Considering that fact that they would have to build the new city hall first, and nothing other than a concept has been discussed on that issue. It does seem like these developers put at least some time and thought into their proposals, which cost a lot of money, so maybe this is in the done deal column like the sub-station. I think however that this issue will be for the next mayor to decide, and I'm thinking the City Hall will remain where it is for a long time. It is fun to look at shinny drawings!
I'm all in favor of moving forward and changing/improving the area. However this is not an area that necessarily needs it. It doesn't make sense in any aspect. If developers are eager to begin developing downtown maybe it makes more financial sense to focus on other prime sites. There are many options along grand underutilized for surface parking lots. Not to mention one that is frequently brought up, the corner of Michigan and Grand. To appreciate and respect history does not go hand in hand with standing in the way of development. Too often people make that false assumption. Lets get some proportional density in the city before we start replacing buildings that have not lived their lifespan.