I like the taller renderings. I think people get too caught up in preserving the history of buildings. How can a city grow if all we do is keep everything the same, or looking the same? As long as the buildings can lock in business and generate more people and revenue to the downtown area then I'm on board for it. We need more people downtown.
What concerns me most about this isn't the architecture, it's that there is no plan presented for where City Hall will move to or how it will be funded. For all we know, City Hall will end up operating out of trailers.
The entire process invalidates this project. You'd have to be a simple person to be distracted by flashy renderings.
Selling a city hall, particularly one of this size, is something that should probably take up a good portion of one mayoral term in office; not something you literally try to push through in the last months of a term before you're going to retire.
If you're not suspicious and you're supportive of this process, you're not paying attention.
I keep asking this, but wouldn't the city council have to vote on selling the city hall, anyway? That's not going to happen. If this process requires vote, he doesn't have the votes on council to rush this like he is. So I'm confused why anyone is taking this as a serious process.
That said, the meeting tonight was to address where the city hall would go since that was part of the RFP. For instance, in the Boji proposal, the city hall would be moved to just near the southeast corner of Kalamazoo and Grand. However, that would only include the actualy city hall (not the courts and police at the current city hall), and only 80,000 square feet. This makes no financial sense. In the Karp proposal, city hall is moved to some non-descript, two-story office building down at the northwest corner of Washington and St. Joseph right off the freeway. The Urban Systems proposal throws the city hall into some squat box at the current Lake Trust site on South Capitol/Washington.
By the very nature of the proposal for the current city hall site, the future city hall is an development and architectural after-thought. That's not acceptable.
I am guessing that facade is copper or brown glass which seems dark to me. The re-hab of the current building is hidden behind the new tower, and looks like nothing of the original design is left, so why save the building at all. The only interesting thing is that it's twenty stories. Looks too much like an average hotel tower for this location.
The LSJ has an animated look at the Beitler design and it looks bright and shinny, and honors the original design. While the drive where the plaza is now could be re-thought they seem to add people space in other areas. To me obviously the Beitler design looks like Lansing, and like it fits in that spot.
Sorry I got carried away with the shinny drawings! I agree that this whole thing seems kind of strange and rushed. Considering that fact that they would have to build the new city hall first, and nothing other than a concept has been discussed on that issue. It does seem like these developers put at least some time and thought into their proposals, which cost a lot of money, so maybe this is in the done deal column like the sub-station. I think however that this issue will be for the next mayor to decide, and I'm thinking the City Hall will remain where it is for a long time. It is fun to look at shinny drawings!
I'm all in favor of moving forward and changing/improving the area. However this is not an area that necessarily needs it. It doesn't make sense in any aspect. If developers are eager to begin developing downtown maybe it makes more financial sense to focus on other prime sites. There are many options along grand underutilized for surface parking lots. Not to mention one that is frequently brought up, the corner of Michigan and Grand. To appreciate and respect history does not go hand in hand with standing in the way of development. Too often people make that false assumption. Lets get some proportional density in the city before we start replacing buildings that have not lived their lifespan.
@deebomac I believe a major reason why downtown Lansing hasn't grown as much as it should have is the continuous demolition of some of the buildings nearer the Capitol Building while outward growth hasn't been encouraged, seeing that continue with City Hall and possibly the Farnum building is very disappointing. There are several underused properties adjacent to the Capitol: the ramp at Allegan and Capitol, the lot at Allegan and Walnut and some potential room for new construction on Ottawa. That's not even to begin to mention the empty lots, aging parking ramps and buildings that actually would be good candidates for demolition.
I was a proponent of a new City Hall when I was under the impression that it would be sold for a fair price and have at least a fair chance at, if not a guarantee of preservation. I really hope this process goes nowhere, but I'm worried about how it's being pushed.
It's true they emptied the whole near west side neighborhood for the "Capitol Complex" and have yet to fill that space, and when the state did they built buildings that form a walled off fortress that do not engage downtown or the west side. I think there must be thousands of state employees that never go over to Washington Avenue.
Comments
Any other place I would like it, but I don't like the idea of a new building sitting in the courtyard of an older building.
I still don't think this is happening.
I like the taller renderings. I think people get too caught up in preserving the history of buildings. How can a city grow if all we do is keep everything the same, or looking the same? As long as the buildings can lock in business and generate more people and revenue to the downtown area then I'm on board for it. We need more people downtown.
The entire process invalidates this project. You'd have to be a simple person to be distracted by flashy renderings.
Selling a city hall, particularly one of this size, is something that should probably take up a good portion of one mayoral term in office; not something you literally try to push through in the last months of a term before you're going to retire.
If you're not suspicious and you're supportive of this process, you're not paying attention.
I keep asking this, but wouldn't the city council have to vote on selling the city hall, anyway? That's not going to happen. If this process requires vote, he doesn't have the votes on council to rush this like he is. So I'm confused why anyone is taking this as a serious process.
That said, the meeting tonight was to address where the city hall would go since that was part of the RFP. For instance, in the Boji proposal, the city hall would be moved to just near the southeast corner of Kalamazoo and Grand. However, that would only include the actualy city hall (not the courts and police at the current city hall), and only 80,000 square feet. This makes no financial sense. In the Karp proposal, city hall is moved to some non-descript, two-story office building down at the northwest corner of Washington and St. Joseph right off the freeway. The Urban Systems proposal throws the city hall into some squat box at the current Lake Trust site on South Capitol/Washington.
By the very nature of the proposal for the current city hall site, the future city hall is an development and architectural after-thought. That's not acceptable.
Presentations
I am guessing that facade is copper or brown glass which seems dark to me. The re-hab of the current building is hidden behind the new tower, and looks like nothing of the original design is left, so why save the building at all. The only interesting thing is that it's twenty stories. Looks too much like an average hotel tower for this location.
The LSJ has an animated look at the Beitler design and it looks bright and shinny, and honors the original design. While the drive where the plaza is now could be re-thought they seem to add people space in other areas. To me obviously the Beitler design looks like Lansing, and like it fits in that spot.
Sorry I got carried away with the shinny drawings! I agree that this whole thing seems kind of strange and rushed. Considering that fact that they would have to build the new city hall first, and nothing other than a concept has been discussed on that issue. It does seem like these developers put at least some time and thought into their proposals, which cost a lot of money, so maybe this is in the done deal column like the sub-station. I think however that this issue will be for the next mayor to decide, and I'm thinking the City Hall will remain where it is for a long time. It is fun to look at shinny drawings!
I'm all in favor of moving forward and changing/improving the area. However this is not an area that necessarily needs it. It doesn't make sense in any aspect. If developers are eager to begin developing downtown maybe it makes more financial sense to focus on other prime sites. There are many options along grand underutilized for surface parking lots. Not to mention one that is frequently brought up, the corner of Michigan and Grand. To appreciate and respect history does not go hand in hand with standing in the way of development. Too often people make that false assumption. Lets get some proportional density in the city before we start replacing buildings that have not lived their lifespan.
@deebomac I believe a major reason why downtown Lansing hasn't grown as much as it should have is the continuous demolition of some of the buildings nearer the Capitol Building while outward growth hasn't been encouraged, seeing that continue with City Hall and possibly the Farnum building is very disappointing. There are several underused properties adjacent to the Capitol: the ramp at Allegan and Capitol, the lot at Allegan and Walnut and some potential room for new construction on Ottawa. That's not even to begin to mention the empty lots, aging parking ramps and buildings that actually would be good candidates for demolition.
I was a proponent of a new City Hall when I was under the impression that it would be sold for a fair price and have at least a fair chance at, if not a guarantee of preservation. I really hope this process goes nowhere, but I'm worried about how it's being pushed.
It's true they emptied the whole near west side neighborhood for the "Capitol Complex" and have yet to fill that space, and when the state did they built buildings that form a walled off fortress that do not engage downtown or the west side. I think there must be thousands of state employees that never go over to Washington Avenue.