This is pie-in-the-sky, but it would be great if the city could forgive the back-taxes by carving off a chunk of that huge parking lot to set up as a small park/outdoor marketplace. That would really give that huge, sprawling commercial intersection a nice looking focal point.
I like the part where the owner says he did not pay his taxes because he did not like the way the city was treating him. I did not know this was a legal option. I would tend to agree that in this case, something new is better than what is there now. I can not help but wonder just who are these people who need all this storage space? Is the market for these facilities endless? I think there are more self-storage businesses than pot shops or even Quality Diaries!
It is true that I have only lived here for a couple of years but it seems like there a lot. During that time I have seen a new self-storage businesses open at the old Ford dealership on MLK and another on Hosmer. Maybe I just do not have a lot of junk in the trunk to store so they seem kind of useless to me. Having a functioning business in a formerly vacant building is better than an empty building, but this sort of business does not offer many jobs and add little to the neighborhoods in which they are located.
Yeah, I don't think the self storage business is expanding at a rapid pace, but as people's incomes decrease or stagnate some people have been forced to downsize their residence but have a hard time letting go of items. I think that's where some of the increased demand comes from.
We're also seeing a shift towards smaller homes (tiny homes) and apartments (studios and micro-studios). People may only think of these homes as temporary and just want to store their extra items until they move somewhere larger.
It seems to me that the mayor would do better getting the Red Cedar project underway during his administration as his legacy project, rather than this city hall deal. Moving city hall to a side street on the edge of downtown does not seem like such a great accomplishment. I also like the point that there are about ten other very good spots to locate a hotel downtown.
I hope that those three votes don't change their mind. While I'm still not 100% against a new city hall either, I've grown to like the idea of properly renovating/restoring the current city hall building. The more I think about it, any location for City Hall that's not adjacent to the Capitol just wouldn't seem right, the fact that City Hall occupies one of the most prominent corners in the city and facing the front of the Capitol makes it special. There's no reason to push so hard for a hotel at that location, I understand the desire to be close to the Capitol but there are other possible locations for a hotel adjacent to the Capitol.
In my opinion for the sale and reconfiguration/destruction of the current city hall building to be even considered it has be after downtown has filled in much, much more and it ought to be something truly impressive replacing it.
@hood: I believe the thinking is that you could attract a higher quality hotel with the current city hall location than you could with the empty lots in downtown. Let's face it, having a hotel facing the Capitol and just a block away from Washington Square is a better sell to visitors than something on a forsaken stretch of Grand Ave. I feel like a hotel on Grand Ave, for example, would need to be part a larger development that would include something visitors would be interested in, like a brewery or trendy retail. I know Grand Ave isn't far from the Capitol, but people want their hotel to be in an immediately attractive setting.
There was a hotel at Michigan and Capitol that was called the Hotel Olds and it was the center of a lot of activity downtown. Then it was called The Jack Tar Hotel but they failed to modernize and the building was sold to the State at some point and is called the Romney Building. While the point that this corner would be a good place for a hotel is valid because it was, but think remodeling the current city hall for city government and moving the police and courts down to the old LSJ building might work out better. I could see the Masonic Temple on Capitol Ave as a potential spot for a hotel, there is a surface parking lot next door that could be part of a larger hotel complex. The Farnum building stands next door to an older but tall building called Capitol Hall. I could see a hotel development there similar to the Shinola Hotel that is re-proposing four old buildings in Detroit. One reason Grand Ave is not so grand is that there are no buildings, building a hotel on Grand Ave would help change that.
@MichMatters: I'd hope that they were aiming higher than a Radisson-level hotel. Not that Radisson is a bad company, but it's not very sexy. You're right that the corner of Walnut and Allegan wouldn't be terrible, but you can't deny that it's inferior to Michigan and Capitol. Walnut and Allegan is a very desolate spot from a pedestrian perspective. It's like a office park.
I think apartments make more sense on Grand Avenue than a flagship hotel, as it stands presently. Visitors to the city shouldn't be the vanguards of a street's renaissance. You want to impress visitors as much as possible.
I think a visitor to downtown Lansing would likely be skeptical of there being much to do in the vicinity. If you put them in a desolate spot I see people getting into their cars and driving to East Lansing or Old Town for the evening. It only takes a few blocks to form the wrong impression. There's nothing most Americans dislike more than aimless walking. They will give up faster than you'd think.
It's interesting how much I don't seem to agree with this message board. I was against knocking down historic East Lansing commercial buildings and now I'm for a renovated hotel at Michigan and Capitol, assuming no shady financial shenanigans are in play. I feel like there is a really strong consensus here. It's interesting.
@The_Lansing_Magnate Well having more varied opinions is a great thing, echo chambers are boring and unproductive. We all need to be exposed to different ideas and for our own ideas to be critiqued.
I understand the desire to put a hotel at that corner, I really do, but I don't think it's worth losing the current city hall. I certainly don't want to see city hall move to some mediocre building in a nondescript location just to have the old city hall's architecture destroyed to get a building the same size and footprint. If the old city hall building is going to be significantly altered I'd much rather just see it demolished in favor of 20 or 30+ floor building. What's being proposed to us is a joke, the current deal proposes:
-City hall will move to an old, undesirable building in an undesirable location, the city will pay $50 million for this privilege.
-The old city hall will be sold for a mere $4 million
-The old city hall's architecture and plaza will be heavily altered/destroyed, but we won't get a larger, taller or more beautiful building in return, we just get a bastardized city hall building.
-There's no (public) plan for what to do with the police or courts, I'm betting some sweetheart lease-to-own deal will be proposed to benefit a local developer.
The land at Michigan and Capitol is exceptionally valuable, if city hall is going anywhere I want that corner to get a new landmark building for downtown, preferably something over 30 floors, not a bastardized city hall building. This is a horrible deal for the city and it's counter productive if your goal is to create sustainable growth downtown. I just can't ramble on long enough to drive home just how against this particular deal I am...
Comments
This is pie-in-the-sky, but it would be great if the city could forgive the back-taxes by carving off a chunk of that huge parking lot to set up as a small park/outdoor marketplace. That would really give that huge, sprawling commercial intersection a nice looking focal point.
I like the part where the owner says he did not pay his taxes because he did not like the way the city was treating him. I did not know this was a legal option. I would tend to agree that in this case, something new is better than what is there now. I can not help but wonder just who are these people who need all this storage space? Is the market for these facilities endless? I think there are more self-storage businesses than pot shops or even Quality Diaries!
It is true that I have only lived here for a couple of years but it seems like there a lot. During that time I have seen a new self-storage businesses open at the old Ford dealership on MLK and another on Hosmer. Maybe I just do not have a lot of junk in the trunk to store so they seem kind of useless to me. Having a functioning business in a formerly vacant building is better than an empty building, but this sort of business does not offer many jobs and add little to the neighborhoods in which they are located.
We're also seeing a shift towards smaller homes (tiny homes) and apartments (studios and micro-studios). People may only think of these homes as temporary and just want to store their extra items until they move somewhere larger.
It seems to me that the mayor would do better getting the Red Cedar project underway during his administration as his legacy project, rather than this city hall deal. Moving city hall to a side street on the edge of downtown does not seem like such a great accomplishment. I also like the point that there are about ten other very good spots to locate a hotel downtown.
I hope that those three votes don't change their mind. While I'm still not 100% against a new city hall either, I've grown to like the idea of properly renovating/restoring the current city hall building. The more I think about it, any location for City Hall that's not adjacent to the Capitol just wouldn't seem right, the fact that City Hall occupies one of the most prominent corners in the city and facing the front of the Capitol makes it special. There's no reason to push so hard for a hotel at that location, I understand the desire to be close to the Capitol but there are other possible locations for a hotel adjacent to the Capitol.
In my opinion for the sale and reconfiguration/destruction of the current city hall building to be even considered it has be after downtown has filled in much, much more and it ought to be something truly impressive replacing it.
@hood: I believe the thinking is that you could attract a higher quality hotel with the current city hall location than you could with the empty lots in downtown. Let's face it, having a hotel facing the Capitol and just a block away from Washington Square is a better sell to visitors than something on a forsaken stretch of Grand Ave. I feel like a hotel on Grand Ave, for example, would need to be part a larger development that would include something visitors would be interested in, like a brewery or trendy retail. I know Grand Ave isn't far from the Capitol, but people want their hotel to be in an immediately attractive setting.
There was a hotel at Michigan and Capitol that was called the Hotel Olds and it was the center of a lot of activity downtown. Then it was called The Jack Tar Hotel but they failed to modernize and the building was sold to the State at some point and is called the Romney Building. While the point that this corner would be a good place for a hotel is valid because it was, but think remodeling the current city hall for city government and moving the police and courts down to the old LSJ building might work out better. I could see the Masonic Temple on Capitol Ave as a potential spot for a hotel, there is a surface parking lot next door that could be part of a larger hotel complex. The Farnum building stands next door to an older but tall building called Capitol Hall. I could see a hotel development there similar to the Shinola Hotel that is re-proposing four old buildings in Detroit. One reason Grand Ave is not so grand is that there are no buildings, building a hotel on Grand Ave would help change that.
@MichMatters: I'd hope that they were aiming higher than a Radisson-level hotel. Not that Radisson is a bad company, but it's not very sexy. You're right that the corner of Walnut and Allegan wouldn't be terrible, but you can't deny that it's inferior to Michigan and Capitol. Walnut and Allegan is a very desolate spot from a pedestrian perspective. It's like a office park.
I think apartments make more sense on Grand Avenue than a flagship hotel, as it stands presently. Visitors to the city shouldn't be the vanguards of a street's renaissance. You want to impress visitors as much as possible.
I think a visitor to downtown Lansing would likely be skeptical of there being much to do in the vicinity. If you put them in a desolate spot I see people getting into their cars and driving to East Lansing or Old Town for the evening. It only takes a few blocks to form the wrong impression. There's nothing most Americans dislike more than aimless walking. They will give up faster than you'd think.
It's interesting how much I don't seem to agree with this message board. I was against knocking down historic East Lansing commercial buildings and now I'm for a renovated hotel at Michigan and Capitol, assuming no shady financial shenanigans are in play. I feel like there is a really strong consensus here. It's interesting.
@The_Lansing_Magnate Well having more varied opinions is a great thing, echo chambers are boring and unproductive. We all need to be exposed to different ideas and for our own ideas to be critiqued.
I understand the desire to put a hotel at that corner, I really do, but I don't think it's worth losing the current city hall. I certainly don't want to see city hall move to some mediocre building in a nondescript location just to have the old city hall's architecture destroyed to get a building the same size and footprint. If the old city hall building is going to be significantly altered I'd much rather just see it demolished in favor of 20 or 30+ floor building. What's being proposed to us is a joke, the current deal proposes:
-City hall will move to an old, undesirable building in an undesirable location, the city will pay $50 million for this privilege.
-The old city hall will be sold for a mere $4 million
-The old city hall's architecture and plaza will be heavily altered/destroyed, but we won't get a larger, taller or more beautiful building in return, we just get a bastardized city hall building.
-There's no (public) plan for what to do with the police or courts, I'm betting some sweetheart lease-to-own deal will be proposed to benefit a local developer.
The land at Michigan and Capitol is exceptionally valuable, if city hall is going anywhere I want that corner to get a new landmark building for downtown, preferably something over 30 floors, not a bastardized city hall building. This is a horrible deal for the city and it's counter productive if your goal is to create sustainable growth downtown. I just can't ramble on long enough to drive home just how against this particular deal I am...