General Lansing Development

1294295297299300509

Comments

  • This clock looks great and I am so impressed that the owners wanted to do it right not cheap. Meanwhile I have been wondering about another clock downtown. The "Rotary Clock" at Michigan and Grand. It does tell time, but I have often wondered what else was it was suppose to do? It looks like some sort of steam works, did it whistle, or mark the hours with calliope music? Why doesn't the Rotary fix it. It is in a very prominent spot and is all surrounded by a weedy grass chocked seating area that is the last remnant of the textured cement wall craze of the 70's. There are nice flower boxes all along the bridge and then this little spot left unattended right in the middle of our downtown. I wrote to the parks dept. but it is still all weeds and grass there.

  • edited July 2017

    The LSJ did a photo-story on the clock just a bit over a week ago. I haven't been under the impression that it's been neglected. I know they keep Wentworth Park clean, now, and it's fairly heavily used in a way that it once wasn't. Anyway, it plays music at 12:00 and 6:00, I believe. It's powered by steam.

    Rotary Steam Clock in Wentworth Park is a timeless landmark

  • Thank you, I am happy to hear that the clock works! I guess I have never been in the area at that time the music plays. I like the clock and I will make a point of being there the hear it play. The area that is full of weeds is the seating area next to the clock at the west end of the Michigan Ave Bridge. They have nice flower boxes along the bridge, but it seems like they stopped at that.

  • I could be mistaken but the picture MichMatters posted looks like weeds in the flower bed at the bottom of the photo. If those are intentional plantings their positioning seem quite random and not thought out :P

  • Debate about the merits of tearing down the current city hall building; lansingcitypulse.com/article-15127-Lansing-City-Hall.html

    So suddenly we care about bland "mid-century modern" when we can barely be bothered to save actual historic sites. City Hall is an eye sore. Okay.

  • I'm for saving the City Hall. No one will build anything like it again in this city. And when there's so much vacant land downtown, why is demolition such a priority? The City Hall building is a great example of the international style. Like I always tell people, there was a time when nobody could see any value in classical buildings like the original City Hall that was demolished for the current one.

    Now we'd be thrilled to still have the original City Hall.

    I just don't see why Midwestern cities need to do so much demolition downtown. We confine urban redevelopment to these tiny little pockets while thousands of lookalike suburban homes from every era are preserved. It just seems like the priorities are out of wack.

  • edited July 2017

    EDIT: Got around to reading the story. Everything still seems incredibly speculative, and unless the next mayor shares Virg's opinion on this, this may just be dreaming, anyway.

  • EDIT: Got around to reading the story. Everything still seems incredibly speculative, and unless the next mayor shares Virg's opinion on this, this may just be dreaming, anyway. There is no way the council approves something so extensive before he outs of there, anyway.

    As for my personal preference, I've gone from being ambivalent to even supportive in concept of a city hall relocation, to fairly solidly in the renovation camp. I just don't see how anything they decide to build in this decade is going to be even half as nice as what they built even in the 50's. Most likely, we'd end up with some low-slung, non-descript three or four-story building with a surface lot attached to the side of it, and they'll call it a "municipal center" and that'll be the end of that. Forget a plaza, forget underground parking (if even just for some city employees/elected officials like the current one)...and it's still likely cost too much money despite the down-scaling.

    In my opinion, do a renovation, and if the city needs more room (and they do), use some of money you'd use to build new to purchase or rent space in the adjacent, modern Capitol Tower at 110 West Michigan, and call it a day.

  • I'm not against moving City Hall but I'd much rather see the building preserved rather than reclad or tore down. Just like with the Farnum Building, the architecture of City Hall has grown on me. It's also a good point that there's just too much vacant land, parking lots and underused space to justify tearing down a building like City Hall. I find it hard to believe that it'd even be economical to do.

    Buying Capitol Tower would make for an interesting option for more space at the current City Hall in combination with a comprehensive renovation of City Hall itself. I like that idea, especially if we still get expanded county facilities downtown, perhaps just an addition to the south of their current building on Kalamazoo.

  • City Hall looks like a lot of our parks in Lansing, as in why did they stop taking care of it? It is a great example of Mid-century International Style and is clad in sandstone and marble. The plaza in front which looks really bad right now was meant to be a gathering place for workers and visitors. The base relief [sp?] sculpture on the front is beautiful. This building represents a time when Lansing wanted to assert itself as a modern and dynamic city of the 20th century. They had pride in buildings like city hall and I believe that they thought Lansing was on it's way to being an urban center with tall shinny buildings with an attractive downtown. That is not quite what happened. While I could see a hotel there, I would rather they keep our city government center sitting squarely across the street from the state government center. When they look out the windows in the Capitol they can see exactly how their governance effects the city outside the Capitol.

Sign In or Register to comment.