Thank you for the information about zoning. You all know these things on a deeper level than I do, so I do like hearing what is behind some of these issues. It is interesting to see urban use replacing industrial use in Lansing and other cities.
I believe [is it?] the new hotel in going to be next to the tracks at Michigan Ave, I think the supermarket and its parking should be next to the tracks and the hotel on the more prominent corner at Larch. I know not so many trains use that track but I also know from living 3 blocks away from the CN tracks any train is loud. I like the train sounds but I'm not right next to the tracks. I think it could be uncomfortable for hotel guest. Is there a depiction of the layout of this project?
Not aside from what is posted on page two. Better to have the hotel rooms next to the tracks, though, than the apartments above the store. Fortunately, I think only two (very short) regular trains a day come by, these days.
Yes, I guess you are right, and it will help to extend the "stadium district" to the east. Now we need a great restaurant to move into the train depot.
Passed by the Michigan Avenue side, today, and finally got a good look at the rendering on the banners. It is much nicer - not the lego block panels and colors - than the renderings on the second page of this thread. The store and apartments looks to be a uniform black color, and the hotel is faced in white, a lot classier than the previous renderings.
EDIT: Found the site plan in an old agenda for a zoning vairance for some signage:
I was wrong; there is no curb cuts onto Barnard; access will be from Larch south of Liskey's. It's really a shame, then, that it appears the only reason they bought up and demolished the north side of Barnard was to get that particular orientation for the driveway around the property. The plan also shows the need for the parking lot design standards we were talking about. I just don't get the amount of surface parking, here.
Screenshot from the above zoning variance of the site plan and non-use of Barnard St:
It's really a shame how little greenspace there is in this plan. Most of the greenspace on the left side is actually on Liskey's land, and on the right side that is the buffer for the train tracks and not part of Gillespie's land.
From the looks of it, there was no need to tear down any of the houses on Barnard because the parking lot that far south isn't going to get any actual use until there are plans for outlots. Outlot developments could take another 10 years before they materialize.
It is kind of ironic that the developer is going from crayon colors to black and white. I guess he got the message. A lot of blacktop is what they need here in Lansing, that is for sure. It looks like the lot will not be visible from Michigan Avenue which is good, I would like to see more green-scape in the lot. What are they going to use Barnard Street for? Perhaps future development? I am going down to see the new depictions and do some sidewalk supervising.
The lot is for the driveway around the back perimeter of the site. But they could have easily shrunk the lot down and still make it work without using that land along Barnard for it. I guess this would have been easier if Liskey's would have sold, but that doesn't mean it's impossible. And looking at how Stadium District still hasn't done anything with the lot that stretches along Larch all these years later, I doubt we're going to see anything in the Block600 lot for years.
I keep harping about this, but if the developers are never going to build a parking garage in this area, then the city needs to to stop this proliferation. Gillespie Group seems hell bent on at least a half of each of its properties being surface lots because they don't want to pay for even a small parking garage. They have built four different projects in this area of downtown, now, and not a one of them has any kind of garage or underground parking.
BTW, just drove by the site coming from the east. They have a camera on the roof of Stadium District look down into the site. Maybe we'll have regular full-site updates on this one.
The city needs to revisit its parking minimums and possibly put in place parking maximums.
The Form Based Code that's still sitting tabled in council has a bit on that (p.172, "Limits on Excessive Parking"):
It also has a section on parking lot landscaping (p.162) that the current code doesn't have.
It's why I've been so incessant this get back before council. It would solve so many development issues we complain about.
Looks like now they demolition is done, they've held their "official" ground-breaking ceremony: