Many people don't care about this, anymore, but finding out that renovation is being outsourced to the Bojis doesn't sit well with me, and I wish public organizations did more stuff in-house like they used to.
Whatever, it's going to happen, now.; and it could have been much, much worse. But, I'm going to miss having our public square and the connection between our city and the state right across the street.
Yeah, "whatever" seems like the appropriate attitude towards this. I never understood the desire to leave behind the current City Hall, it never made sense to me and still doesn't. At least this isn't the LSJ building and at least it's a reasonably prominent location. Time will tell if this move is net-neutral or net-negative for downtown and the city.
I 100% agree on being against government entities using developers to build buildings. They have the architect already, just hire Christman to manage the project. It's not a hard choice given the building.
I am bit surprised by the reaction to this plan. It may not be the perfect solution, but I think it is pretty Lansing positive in using a historic building keeping City Hall downtown on Capitol Ave... I don't enough about the use of a private developer or what it is that the Bojis have done in the past to bring up these comments. I am really just happy that something awful was not planned. I was sure that the Mayor would nerd it up somehow!
If you've followed our discussion on this project on here, you would know we weren't going to be happy with this. lol I'd been very clear I didn't want to see them move from the current location, so nothing would have made me happy. We're just staying our usual grumpy selves on this project. That said, we were both pretty clear on the "Whatever" part because what's done is done; that's the best you're going to get out of us. lol
I understand, I used to think the mid-century building was so cool with the fountain in the lobby and the huge modern spaces, if they asked me I would have kept the old stone City Hall before the '50's version was built. It was also a very interesting building. I guess we will have to make the best of the new plan, as long as they really do put a first-class hotel in the current building it will be OK with me.
The city council got the administration to take out the ridiculous visibility easement in the purchase plan. So that's $1.3 million slashed off the price of the Masonic Hall proposal. And at least one counciller wants an updated analysis on the cost of renovating the existing city hall.
I'm still not excited about the plan, even less so after learning that the city is only planning on taking up the lower 4 floors and there's basically no chance of acquiring the lot next door. I am really, really hoping the push to simply restore and save the existing City Hall gathers momentum. I cannot for the life of me see the advantage to anyone, other than the developers involved, of this move. At it's very best it's a net neutral for the city and downtown.
That's one aspect I'm not mad about. If they can lease some of the space, that brings the cost of the move down even further. I think I'd saw some headline saying that the school district was a potential tenant.
But, yeah, with all the public safety offices and court moving out the existing building, I've been very clear that my preference is to do a nice renovation/reconstruction of the existing building. With reduced manpower in the city gov, this would be more than enough space for the few offices/operations that may need it. I'd love to see the outdoor plaza redone in nice stone, for instance, instead of the worn out concrete and pavers. Though, I'm not sure if the grant could be used for renovation.
I'm catching the tail end of this, so I'm not even 100% sure if they were on this item, but it sounds like the purchase agreement for the Masonic Temple failed, tonight, on a 4-4 vote? If I'm following the agenda correctly, this was the item they were on. I'm not mad at this, if that's what happened. I do really want to see if this is what Lanstronauts actually want.
Comments
Whatever, it's going to happen, now.; and it could have been much, much worse. But, I'm going to miss having our public square and the connection between our city and the state right across the street.
I 100% agree on being against government entities using developers to build buildings. They have the architect already, just hire Christman to manage the project. It's not a hard choice given the building.
I am bit surprised by the reaction to this plan. It may not be the perfect solution, but I think it is pretty Lansing positive in using a historic building keeping City Hall downtown on Capitol Ave... I don't enough about the use of a private developer or what it is that the Bojis have done in the past to bring up these comments. I am really just happy that something awful was not planned. I was sure that the Mayor would nerd it up somehow!
But, yeah, with all the public safety offices and court moving out the existing building, I've been very clear that my preference is to do a nice renovation/reconstruction of the existing building. With reduced manpower in the city gov, this would be more than enough space for the few offices/operations that may need it. I'd love to see the outdoor plaza redone in nice stone, for instance, instead of the worn out concrete and pavers. Though, I'm not sure if the grant could be used for renovation.