Yeah, I went back and watched. They accepted the grants for New Vision and for the new city hall money but denied the purchase agreement for the Masonic Temple. I'm happy about this, at minimum if they go with the Masonic Temple they need to negotiate the purchase of that lot on the corner at the time of initial purchase. I personally will not be happy if that doesn't happen. I also don't think Boji should be the developer, certainly not by default. If anyone gets that contract handed to them it should be Christman.
Some councilmembers sound skeptical, this is a positive imo. How about bonding out another $20-$40 million more and doing a competitive RFP? Something about city hall being in a crowded in mid-block building doesn't sit well with me. It should be on a prominent corner, I know it seems minor but I think it's important.
I'm glad to hear all of those things. Though, I'm a bit taken aback - having not watched council in YEARS - to see that apparently Councilman Kost is a "no" on nearly anything development related. I was really unsettled by his argument around the Ovation brownfield amendment, which amounted to basically that we shouldn't ever do anything big and that all of these things should pay for themselves. Self-sustaining institutions are nice, but not ALL of them can be, there are some things that a community has to subsidize if they want them to be successful. I kind of got the argument about how many times this project had grown. But if I heard him right, he wouldn't have even been for the second iteration. And then the little non-binding resolution stunt saying that the council agrees that these things should be self-sustaining really didn't sit right with me. There's like no compromise with him. And as much as I'm not a particular fan of this mayor, he does seem fine with slowing things down and compromising when he and the council have different opinions on things.
Despite saying OK to accepting $40 million for a city government campus, council members rejected a plan to buy the Masonic Temple for a new City Hall.
Council member Trini Pehlivanoglu said residents don't understand how the Masonic Temple was picked as the potential city hall, and the city does not have to spend the money until 2027.
"I do think for the sake of transparency with residents and constituents they simply don’t understand the process and there’s some missing pieces for them," she said. "The administration has answered my questions, the developers have answered my questions. I'm asking for more time. And transparency is worthwhile."
I didn't realize the city had that long to spend the money, so I'm even more heartened to see this slowed down and have input from residents as to what they want in a city hall, whether that be a new building, renovated building in a different locations, or a renovation-in-place. Now, we've got the money...so let's do this right with more transparency. I'd like to see the mayor organize a few community meetings in the wards so the residents feel like they have at least been heard for such a big project that will be built in their name.
Heck, if they really want this to have maximum community buy-in, maybe hold a non-binding resolution this August or November to answer the basic question of whether residents want to see the city hall moved or renovated in place, and then the administration can work out the details from there.
Apparently there will be some announcement as to the location of the new city hall tomorrow and it seems to be implied that this won't be the Masonic Hall now. I'm just hoping it's not at the public safety complex, to move city hall out of downtown altogether would be an embarrassment. I'm a little worried though as I can't imagine what other options it could be without an RFP.
Yeah, everytime they come up with something new for city hall, I get a little worried. We're never going to get something that compares to the current city hall when it was built, they way its going. The old Masonic Temple seemed like one of the better options they'd proposed.
This new plan sounds interesting, although it is kind of ironic that the old City Hall building was considered too small and the one of the reason's they did not like the Masonic Temple was because it was too large. I am hoping for a unique design fit for the City Hall of Michigan's capital city. Please not a suburban office park building, or one of those Intrigue Studios designs. I think that the Masonic Temple would make a great hotel and convention center. After so many years of looking at these huge parking carters in our downtown it would really be amazing to see something actually being built on some of them.
Does this mean that the plans for housing and a CATA headquarters are no longer under consideration?
The city will be talking to LHC about how they are siting their building for their phase I development so hopefully there will be a really nice layout. I hope baryame's sells and then there is an entire block to design without constraint. The news just broke that CATA wants to be a part of the City Hall building. The LHC phase II project that was pitched for the city's parking lot was ultimately rejected by council and so they bought the Eyde property one block to the south. It is still moving forward, but is dependent on another round of LIHTC funding.
Needless to say given my previous comments, I'm in favor of new construction vs the Masonic Temple move by a long shot so although I'm still not excited about this, it's good news to me... relatively speaking. I love the Masonic Temple Building but I think it's better used as a multipurpose venue similar to the BOB in GR or the Masonic Temple in Detroit, or possibly used as an annex to a future hotel/residential tower on the lot next door.
It kinda ended up being a non story today as the only additional info offered is that the building might also house CATA's HQ and that it will be around 75k sq ft. I have so many questions: Is 75k sq ft without the potential space for CATA? Could CATA end having their own wing, annex or building? Is the intention to bring the city offices from the N Capitol ramp or other locations into the new city hall or is that a possibility (I hope so)? Will the mayor and council really hardline stick to a $40m budget? Are they planning on trying to get away without a parking garage? I assume that could be bonded separately through the parking system? (These questions are rhetorical, I don't expect them to be answered yet)
I'm very curious as to how it will be sited, that they're working with LHC is very promising in that regard. As for the Baryames lot, I can't imagine the combination of city hall, a parking ramp and a 4-5 floor ~60 unit building would need a whole block, although siting the City Hall to Kalamazoo & Grand would be much, much more desirable. I'm just hoping for a 6+ floor building of good build quality with a nice lobby/entrance and a public plaza/courtyard preferably oriented to the corner that the building is oriented to. If they do get the whole block there should be room to expand LHC's project, sell off some portion of the property for development or perhaps create another mid block or interior courtyard/plaza/public space/park.
That the LHC bought Eyde's property for another go at their phase 2 project leaves me with mixed feelings. Even assuming this is mixed-income or entirely workforce housing, I'm worried about having LHC manage more apartments in general, much less downtown, much less with them so near me. On the other hand, it would provide some mid block density on Grand while leaving the MBA property for future development. If I could somehow know that the project wouldn't bring significant problems with it, I'd be all for it. Thanks for the insight on that @citykid
There's no insight on the building itself but there are a lot of quotes from Schor and councilmembers on the process and the politics. One snippet of info the article does seem to imply is that the CATA move will be all of its offices from Tranter Dr, not just a partial move as was stated with the apartment development. They also reminded me of the school district's potential move to the Masonic Hall with the city which leaves me wondering if the LSD may still be considering moving with the city to this new site?
Comments
Some councilmembers sound skeptical, this is a positive imo. How about bonding out another $20-$40 million more and doing a competitive RFP? Something about city hall being in a crowded in mid-block building doesn't sit well with me. It should be on a prominent corner, I know it seems minor but I think it's important.
ANYWAY.../rant
I didn't realize the city had that long to spend the money, so I'm even more heartened to see this slowed down and have input from residents as to what they want in a city hall, whether that be a new building, renovated building in a different locations, or a renovation-in-place. Now, we've got the money...so let's do this right with more transparency. I'd like to see the mayor organize a few community meetings in the wards so the residents feel like they have at least been heard for such a big project that will be built in their name.
Heck, if they really want this to have maximum community buy-in, maybe hold a non-binding resolution this August or November to answer the basic question of whether residents want to see the city hall moved or renovated in place, and then the administration can work out the details from there.
https://www.wilx.com/2024/05/08/lansing-mayor-schor-announce-future-city-hall-location/
EDIT: I take that back, it looks like they're proposing it for the lot at Grand and Lenawee that was almost sold to Boji for the apartments/CATA offices. I can live with the location, it's just a matter of what are they going to build. I can only hope that they're willing to bond at least a little money to ensure it's building that will meet the cities needs and be something to be proud of.
https://www.lansingstatejournal.com/story/news/local/2024/05/08/lansing-city-hall-proposal-grand-avenue-masonic-temple/73614759007/?fbclid=IwZXh0bgNhZW0CMTEAAR2xN0WCKRy6lCbg1XnupGUGfvd5WbZjtDrI2bPJLdsYq36Zdd0FPIGsoRM_aem_AfoTShxpb6SzC3sumHTYGcGi1kOPlUdcZLYgfLEXLUqfzhkiTe_VNgEdye9mgEOoTKuQnCzMpUa7Sc7lcGr6aJ-o
Does this mean that the plans for housing and a CATA headquarters are no longer under consideration?
It kinda ended up being a non story today as the only additional info offered is that the building might also house CATA's HQ and that it will be around 75k sq ft. I have so many questions: Is 75k sq ft without the potential space for CATA? Could CATA end having their own wing, annex or building? Is the intention to bring the city offices from the N Capitol ramp or other locations into the new city hall or is that a possibility (I hope so)? Will the mayor and council really hardline stick to a $40m budget? Are they planning on trying to get away without a parking garage? I assume that could be bonded separately through the parking system? (These questions are rhetorical, I don't expect them to be answered yet)
I'm very curious as to how it will be sited, that they're working with LHC is very promising in that regard. As for the Baryames lot, I can't imagine the combination of city hall, a parking ramp and a 4-5 floor ~60 unit building would need a whole block, although siting the City Hall to Kalamazoo & Grand would be much, much more desirable. I'm just hoping for a 6+ floor building of good build quality with a nice lobby/entrance and a public plaza/courtyard preferably oriented to the corner that the building is oriented to. If they do get the whole block there should be room to expand LHC's project, sell off some portion of the property for development or perhaps create another mid block or interior courtyard/plaza/public space/park.
That the LHC bought Eyde's property for another go at their phase 2 project leaves me with mixed feelings. Even assuming this is mixed-income or entirely workforce housing, I'm worried about having LHC manage more apartments in general, much less downtown, much less with them so near me. On the other hand, it would provide some mid block density on Grand while leaving the MBA property for future development. If I could somehow know that the project wouldn't bring significant problems with it, I'd be all for it. Thanks for the insight on that @citykid
https://www.lansingstatejournal.com/story/news/local/2024/05/09/lansing-city-hall-proposal-grand-avenue-cata-masonic-temple/73625534007/
https://www.wlns.com/news/new-location-for-city-hall-announced-in-lansing/
https://lansingcitypulse.com/stories/schor-proposes-old-center-for-the-arts-property-for-a-new-lansing-city-hall,96007
There's no insight on the building itself but there are a lot of quotes from Schor and councilmembers on the process and the politics. One snippet of info the article does seem to imply is that the CATA move will be all of its offices from Tranter Dr, not just a partial move as was stated with the apartment development. They also reminded me of the school district's potential move to the Masonic Hall with the city which leaves me wondering if the LSD may still be considering moving with the city to this new site?