To be truthful, Whitehall and Riverbend really would be better demolished and a new development placed on that site, but any development/redevelopment is good. It seems odd at this location, though. There things are almost completely cut off from any neighborhood. It would be great if a single development be developed on the Whitehall, Riverbend, and Deluxe's site so that they'd have an entrance off of Washington instead of Main which merges with the freeway right at these complexes.
As for those two apartment buildings on Main, I like the project, but do not think it is anywhere near deserving of an NEZ. That is unless he plans some MAJOR improvements. Lmich has a good idea to tear down the Deluxe and the adjacent apartment buildings and build a new development cut off from main st, it could be a single street stretching from Washington to River St with apartments or rowhouses.
I think the proposal for a combined Main Library/Impression 5 is great. However, I hope that if built on the Oliver Towers Site the development takes up as small of a footprint as possible. To allow for a new R E Olds museum and possibly a new City Hall. The site has ample room for all three, likely with room to spare.
The site is pretty large, but you're forgetting how much parking a combined library and Impression 5 will need, and I seriously doubt they'd built a parking garage as part of the project. I think a significant amount of this site will end up being surface parking...still. Using the North Capitol Structure isn't much of an option, either, seeing as how heavily used and filled it is by LCC students on any given day. I'd hope that if this goes through they'd build a parking garage for this development somewhere on site, but I doubt it. The land values would have to be very high to push parking vertical, here.
I HIghly doubt you would see any surface parking, and probably not a parking garage onsite. LCC is planning on a second ramp on the Old Central site and the North Capitol ramp is not to far off from needing to be rebuilt, likely larger than before.
You are FAR more optimistic than I. I think we have quite a few more years of not-so-great development left before we get some truly quality products. Again, land value dictates whether something goes vertical, and the land value isn't that high at the Oliver Towers site. If it were, it have been developed soon after it was emptied.
You should probably shoot Bob and email about this to see if you can get any additional information on this concept.
Also, did anyone see the State of the City address? I tried to catch it online at 7:30 but it seems I missed it. I'd wished they advertised the date more. I also missed council TV.
I missed the State of the City and the council meeting.
As for being optomistic about not having surface parking, I really don't think it's that far out there. In Lansing property value has not been the driving force for things going taller, it has really been the fact that the area has been labled downtown. And with any municipal development I expect more than a low rise spread out as much as possible with neighboring surface parking. And the reason the Oliver towers site hasn't been redeveloped is primarily because of a couple years of debate as to who actually owns the land and to find a place for the housing commission to move it's offices too. Also, the public would have been angry if they had redeveloped the site without replacing the units first, which they are doing both on S Washington and at the Blind School site.
Museums are rarely more than two floors, and they've already said, today, that the museum and the library are going to be a mixed use, meaning were probably not going to see the library stacked atop the museum. With the sheer amount of land available (an entire city block), I'd put money down that this thing isn't going to be over three or four stories.
Many downtown museums (especially science ones) are well over 2 floors, given those are typically in larger cities. However I feel that the city will either build this thig right or not at all. I want to see the library be at least 6 floors and the museum be a minimum of 4 floors. I don't think that that is at all unreasonable or unrealistic.
That is really unrealistic. You need to look no further than the State Library/Archives - Historical Center combo to see how much less grand this would be. It's going to be better than keeping the two apart, but its ridiculous to think the thing is going to be taller than the State Library/Historical Center.
Comments
To be truthful, Whitehall and Riverbend really would be better demolished and a new development placed on that site, but any development/redevelopment is good. It seems odd at this location, though. There things are almost completely cut off from any neighborhood. It would be great if a single development be developed on the Whitehall, Riverbend, and Deluxe's site so that they'd have an entrance off of Washington instead of Main which merges with the freeway right at these complexes.
I think the proposal for a combined Main Library/Impression 5 is great. However, I hope that if built on the Oliver Towers Site the development takes up as small of a footprint as possible. To allow for a new R E Olds museum and possibly a new City Hall. The site has ample room for all three, likely with room to spare.
You should probably shoot Bob and email about this to see if you can get any additional information on this concept.
Also, did anyone see the State of the City address? I tried to catch it online at 7:30 but it seems I missed it. I'd wished they advertised the date more. I also missed council TV.
As for being optomistic about not having surface parking, I really don't think it's that far out there. In Lansing property value has not been the driving force for things going taller, it has really been the fact that the area has been labled downtown. And with any municipal development I expect more than a low rise spread out as much as possible with neighboring surface parking. And the reason the Oliver towers site hasn't been redeveloped is primarily because of a couple years of debate as to who actually owns the land and to find a place for the housing commission to move it's offices too. Also, the public would have been angry if they had redeveloped the site without replacing the units first, which they are doing both on S Washington and at the Blind School site.