Okay, had to edit that out. Had a major brainfart. lol
But since I inadvertently brought it up, I wonder if they've had any formal talks with CATA about how to fit them in? This could end up being quite a substantial and Grand (to match its address. ) building if they are able to land other public-body tenants like CATA.
I wondering if you forgot that or were talking about something else lol
A friend who's a CATA employee said there were rumors of the CATA offices going in the LSJ building, not directly from anyone of authority though. I think @citykid mentioned there was at least talk of them possibly being included in the city hall plan? I know LSD was considering joining the city in their Masonic Hall move, I've wondered if that's still possible with the new building? Lots of things still up in the air.
Both Riverview 220 and Grand Vista Place showed up in the planning committee's agenda this week, the staff reports state that construction is imminent on both, December and January respectively. Neither had any site plans or renderings, not even a floor count for Grand Vista. Also a bit of a disappointment in that Grand Vista will have no commercial/retail space.
Thanks for the heads-up. And the D&P Committee documents correct what I'd reported on a few days back in the full council agenda packet, namely the number of units, for which only the number of subsidized units was given in the latter. So Riverview 220 will have 62 units (56 subsidized/7 market rate). Grand Vista Place will be 55 units, all 55 of which are subsidized, so that number is still correct. Both will be 4 stories. Still confused about the 108 South Grand Avenue address given for Grand Vista Place, though. Is that a typo?
Didn't catch the address thing. Weird. When you search 108 S Grand in Google Maps it comes up in that LSJ parking lot. My first thought was a mix up with the potential project on the Granger lot.
The city is continuing to try to find new management for current LEPFA facilities. IDK what to make of this, I don't really visit any of the facilities but from a distance it seems that the ballpark is well maintained/managed, as is Groesbeck Golf Course. The Lansing Center is another matter, it doesn't seem well maintained from the outside and doesn't seem to stay busy enough with events. I don't expect any of these facilities to break even on their own, some city subsidization should be expected and tolerated.
I don't see any immediate need to change anything major with the ballpark or Groesbeck Golf Course, but the Lansing Center is in need of a significant change. It's too small to attract the kinds of events the city needs to justify its existence, it can't even fit the local home & garden show. It's got to be expanded or entirely moved. I know that's an incredibly tall ask for the Lansing of late.
I noticed in the Planning Commission meeting minutes from earlier this month the piece of business about the sale of the Lansing Building Authority's parcel for the new Public Safety Complex that I'd brought up recently. It's mentioned that the authority is a "quasi-public body," which is why the sale is happening at all. I was curious, what makes it "quasi-public" and how did they come up with the $300,000 figure? This seems kind of unsual. Usually for something like this, you'd get some symbolic $1 transfer or something, especially considering this is a literal city entity. What does the Lansing Building Authority do that'd require them to put a $300,000 purchase price on this lot? It's not outrageous for the size of the lot, but, again, does seem an unusual transfer.
Anyway, good to see the Commission approved the ADU ordinance without any drama. Hopefully, it sails through council fairly easily. Well, without controversy. Council process is a bit too long for my taste. Has to be introduced by the mayor, then at the next meeting council has to refer it to committee, and the committee has to set a public hearing, etc. lol
Comments
But since I inadvertently brought it up, I wonder if they've had any formal talks with CATA about how to fit them in? This could end up being quite a substantial and Grand (to match its address.
A friend who's a CATA employee said there were rumors of the CATA offices going in the LSJ building, not directly from anyone of authority though. I think @citykid mentioned there was at least talk of them possibly being included in the city hall plan? I know LSD was considering joining the city in their Masonic Hall move, I've wondered if that's still possible with the new building? Lots of things still up in the air.
I don't see any immediate need to change anything major with the ballpark or Groesbeck Golf Course, but the Lansing Center is in need of a significant change. It's too small to attract the kinds of events the city needs to justify its existence, it can't even fit the local home & garden show. It's got to be expanded or entirely moved. I know that's an incredibly tall ask for the Lansing of late.
https://www.lansingstatejournal.com/story/news/local/2024/08/30/lansing-center-jackson-field-lugnuts-management-contract-lepfa/75012345007/
I noticed in the Planning Commission meeting minutes from earlier this month the piece of business about the sale of the Lansing Building Authority's parcel for the new Public Safety Complex that I'd brought up recently. It's mentioned that the authority is a "quasi-public body," which is why the sale is happening at all. I was curious, what makes it "quasi-public" and how did they come up with the $300,000 figure? This seems kind of unsual. Usually for something like this, you'd get some symbolic $1 transfer or something, especially considering this is a literal city entity. What does the Lansing Building Authority do that'd require them to put a $300,000 purchase price on this lot? It's not outrageous for the size of the lot, but, again, does seem an unusual transfer.
Anyway, good to see the Commission approved the ADU ordinance without any drama. Hopefully, it sails through council fairly easily. Well, without controversy. Council process is a bit too long for my taste. Has to be introduced by the mayor, then at the next meeting council has to refer it to committee, and the committee has to set a public hearing, etc. lol