250395H7

II MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY Ll RAH

 

 

w

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

IWWWWWW

immmY' |
Michigan State. 3 1'293110062313360
University I

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

This is to certify that the
thesis entitled
THE SYMBOLIC IMPLICATIONS OF PAST AND PRESENT
CITY HALLS OF GREATER LANSING, MICHIGAN

presented by

Laurie N. Anderson

has been accepted towards fulfillment
of the requirements for

Master of Arts . Hiétory of Art
degree in

 

 

ML 0; (9491“

Major professor

 

Date May 17, 1989

 

0-7639 MS U is an Affirmative Action/Equal Opportunity Institution

 

PLACE IN RETURN BOX to remove this checkout from your record.
TO AVOID FINES return on or betore date due.

 

 

 

m
DATE DUE DATE DUE , DATE DUE

 

"“7420 n 6 139:;

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

M SU Is An Affirmative Action/Equal Opportunity Institution

<-_— __7 _ b._— _ __1_ 7 ,,_,~_.—-. ._ —

SYMBOLIC IMPLICATIONS OF PAST AND PRESENT
CITY HALLS IN GREATER LANSING, MICHIGAN

BY

Laurie Nadine Anderson

A THESIS

Submitted to
Michigan State University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of

MASTER OF ARTS

Department of Art

1989

ABSTRACT

SYMBOLIC IMPLICATIONS OF PAST AND PRESENT
CITY HALLS IN GREATER LANSING, MICHIGAN

BY

Laurie Nadine Anderson

The Preservation Act of 1966 has created much awareness
in the United States, in terms of enhancing the protection
of many worthy historic structures. This study has been
partly inspired by this legislation and explores the
symbolic implications of past and present city halls of
Lansing and. East Lansing, Michigan from 1895-1988. It
investigates the symbolic implications of city halls and
determines the cultural, historic and stylistic impact, if

any, these buildings have on each city. An

interdisciplinary approach was used with a contextual

analysis.
Sources include blueprints of city hall buildings, city

planning guides, newspapers, journals, photographs and

books.

The study concludes that preservation was rarely

considered when the original city halls could not meet their

increasing demands for space, efficiency and image.

Therefore, as time passed, the communities found it more

appropriate to rebuild anew, and in the process to reflect

Laurie Nadine Anderson

the cultural values of their time in the new city halls. In
effect, the demolition of the old city halls meant the

destruction of important cultural values of the time.

ACKNOWLEDGMENT S

It gives me great pleasure to express words of deep
appreciation to my thesis advisor, Dr. Linda 0. Stanford,
for all she has done to help me complete my work. I deeply
cherish her inspiring guidance, unfailing support and
patience. To her I owe my deepest indebtedness.

My sincere gratitude also goes to my committee members-
Dr. Webster Smith and Dr. Sadayoshi Omoto. I appreciate Dr.
Smith’s enthusiasm and his careful and thoughtful approach
in editing this text. I respect Dr. Omoto’s expertise and
his perceptive comments regarding the history of Michigan
and American architecture.

I extend special thanks to my family and friends who
'have supported me. They continue to re-kindle my sanity, my
sense of direction and my sense of humor.

I will always be deeply grateful to my Grandfather,
"Neetunkasheela," whose love, support, and generosity made

it possible for me to continue my education.

iv

"Perhaps it is the strength of such buildings as
symbols that accounts for the preservation of so many of the
major ones. . . . But the force of that symbolism often
fails to rub-off on lesser public buildings, many of them of
greater architectural distinction. A city councilman might
shudder if he heard the Capitol was going to be torn down,
but he will vote without qualm to raze the old city hall and
build. a new' one. .He will have little regard for the
relative quality of what will be lost and what will be
gained, and the chances are that the quality will not be as

good. . . .

The fault is all ours. If as citizens we value
efficient office cubicles and inefficient but cheap parking
arrangements over an expression of the majesty and dignity

of our form of government, we will get what we deserve.”

LQ§I_AMEEIQA

Constance M. Greiff, Editor

PREFACE

The popular mid-1970’s song by Joni Mitchell, "They
Tore Down Paradise and Put up a Parking Lot," should be
designated as the memorial anthem for all razed
architecture. :Had valuable architecture been saved,
protected and maintained, it might have enlightened present
and future generations through its cultural, historic, and
stylistic significance. Although very late in coming, the
National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 has been
instrumental in turning not only the political machine, but
also the public mind towards the importance of salvaging,

preserving and maintaining important structures.

Some people have questioned the validity of historic
preservation legislation. They have also raised such
legitimate questions as: Why do we need to save these
buildings? How do we decide which ones should be saved, and

which ones should be sacrificed at the altar of expediency?

It must of course be admitted that the case for
architectural preservation should be selective, as not all
architecture is worthy of salvation and not all is

redeemable. But, nevertheless, architecture which is of

vi

value to contemporary society should in fact be preserved,
and, to that end, certain yardsticks and criteria have been
established to guide in discharging this historic
responsibility. But what about those structures that were
demolished? Was there a genuine lack of understanding of
their form and function? Were they destroyed merely for the
sake of opening up space for new buildings in the name of
progress? Are the new buildings "better" than the old ones?
Does the new architectural style reflect the characteristics
of the old structures, or radically break from it? These
and similar other questions arise when the issue of which
buildings should or should not be saved is discussed. While
not all the questions can be answered satisfactorily, it is

important to address them.

The National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 is still
in force. Much has also been done to preserve historic
monuments and sites in such cities as Philadelphia,
Washington D.C., Chicago, and New York. But, much still
remains to be done at the community level through education,
research, and funding. This is evidenced by the numerous
historic monuments that have been arbitrarily demolished in
many communities, even since the enactment of this

legislation.

Is the destruction. of’ early architecture justified?
This is an essential question which every educated community

should ask. If only the conununity had assessed and saved

vii

the ’worthy’ buildings, what architectural qualities might
have been contributed to the cultural essence of that
community? As Louis Sullivan once said, "our architecture

reflects us, as truly as a mirror. . . . "1

If this observation is true, then a city hall reflects
the values of its time, and, therefore, may be regarded as
an encapsulation of certain attitudes and beliefs fashioned
in its character. The history of the city hall is a record
of society’s evolving beliefs and efforts concerning the
purpose and the nature of municipal government. Hence, the
more culturally reflective the ’time capsules’ lost through
demolition, the less we will ever know about our
predecessors, their quality of life, and how their values
and experiences affected contemporary society. Even if, as
it is often said, what is reflected in the mirror is
sometimes distorted, is not that distorted image of our past

far better than none?

viii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF FIGURES.

CHAPTER 1.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Introduction. . . . . . . . .
Rationale for Symbolic Implications
Historical Background of the Greater

Lansing Area . . . . . .
Brief History of Lansing . . .
Brief History of East Lansing.

CHAPTER 2.. . .

.Architecturel and Historical Development
of City Belle ee Building Types. . . . .
Physical Descriptions of City Halls . . . .
Lansing City Hall. . . . . . . . . .
East Lansing City Hall . . . . .
Development of City Halls . . . . . . .
Lansing City Hall. . . . . . . . .
East Lansing City Hall . . . .
Comparison with other Governmental
Structures . . . . . . . . . . . .

CHAPTER 3.. .

Towards e Syntheeie: Symbolic Implications
of City Halls within a Contextual
Anelyeie . . . . .

Lansing. . .
East Lansing .
Cultural Assessment
Lansing. . . . . . . . .
East Lansing . . . . . . . . .
Stylistic Assessment. . . . . . . .
Lansing. . . . . . . . . . . .
East Lansing . . . . . . . . .

Historical Influences of Past Forms

over Present ones. . . . . . . . . . . .
Lansing. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
East Lansing . . . . . . . . . . .

CHAPTER 4. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Conclueion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

ix

Page

xi

oth4

12
17

22

22
22
22
26
27
31
37

42
48

APPENDIX 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O I O O O 0
Figures 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 75

FOOTNOTES 0 I O O O O O 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O 12 9

BIBLIOGRAPHY................... 136

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure Page

1 Map of Greater Lansing, Michigan. L. Anderson.
1988. O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 75

2 Population Growth--Lansing & Its Environs.
Harland Bartholomew & Associates. 1938. . . . . 76

3 City Growth of East Lansing. Michigan State
Library Historical Collection. 1961.. . . . . . 77

4 Two Municipal Forms of Government. Swanson,
Bert and Edith Swanson. Disggyering_tn§
Community. 1977. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78

5 Map of Lansing. Harland Bartholomew &
Associates. 1938. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79

6 Map of Lansing--enlargement. L. Anderson.
1989. O O O O O O 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 80

7 Old City Hall in its environment. Edwin A.
Bowd. Lansing, Michigan (1895-96).
Manassah, Sallie M. L i - i

and_gar§. 1986.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81

8 Old City Hall. E. A. Bowd. Lansing (1895-96).
Facing corner of Capitol Avenue and Ottawa
Street. Lansing Public Library Historical
Collection. n.d. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82

9 Old City Hall. E. A. Bowd. Lansing (1895-96).
Facing Ottawa Street. Lansing Public Library
Historical Collection. n.d. . . . . . . . . . . 83

10 Allegheny County Courthouse. H. H. Richardson.
Pennsylvania (1884-88). Scully, Vincent.

Mgggrgdgrghitggtu_g, 1976. . . . . . . . . . . 84

11 Old Post Office (1894) and Old City Hall. E. A.
Bowd. Lansing (1895-96). Facing Corner of
Capitol and Michigan Avenues. Lansing Public

Library Historical Collection. n.d. . . . . . . 85

xi

Figure

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

Page

Old Post Office (1894) and Old YMCA (1908).
Lansing. Facing Michigan Avenue. Lansing
Public Library Historical Collection. n.d. . . 86

Old Post Office (1894), Old City Hall (1895—96),
and Old YMCA (1908). Lansing. Facing Corner of
Capitol and Michigan Avenues. Lansing Public
Library Historical Collection. n.d. . . . . . . 87

New City Hall and Police Station. Kenneth
Black. Lansing, Michigan (1958-59). Facing
Northeast Corner of Capitol and Michigan

Avenues. W- 16 September.
1958. O O I O O O O O O 0 O O O O O O O O O O O 88

Washington Square Annex, New City Hall and
Police Station. Kenneth Black. Lansing
(1958-59). Grainger, Helen E. _igtgrial

Lansing. 1976. . . . . . . . . . . . . 89

New City Hall. Kenneth Black. Lansing
(1958-59). Facing Capitol Avenue. L. Anderson.
19880 O O O O O O O O O O 0 O O O O O O O O O O 90

New City Hall and Landscaped Plaza on Corner of
Capitol and Michigan Avenues. L. Anderson.
1988. O O O O I O O O O O O I O O I O O O O O O 91

Capitol Building of Michigan. E. E. Myers.
Lansing (1879). Grainger, Helen E. Pictorial

mm. 1976. O O O O O O O O O O O O O C O O 92

Michigan National Tower. Lansing (1927- 31).
Facing Northeast Corner of Capitol Avenue and
Allegan Street. Grainger, Helen E. Bigtg;_al

Lansing. 1976. . . . . . . 93

Bank of Lansing. Lansing (1931). Facing
Northeast Corner of Washington and Michigan

Avenues. Grainger, Helen E. Pictorial_Lansing.
1976. O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 94

Central United Methodist Church. Lansing
(1888-89). 200 West Ottawa Street. Grainger,

Helen E. Pictorial_Lansing. 1976. . . . . . . 95

Side Entry to Washington Square Annex. Lansing.
Facing Ottawa Street. Lansing Public Library

(Historical Collection. n.d. . . . . . . . . . 96

xii

Figure

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

34

Page

Washington Square Annex and Board of Water and
Light. Lansing. Facing Capitol Avenue. L.
Anderson. 1988.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 97

New City Hall Motif. Facing Capitol Avenue.
L. Anderson. 1988. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 98

New City Hall Addition. TMP Architects.
East Lansing, Michigan (1988). L. Anderson.
1989. O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 99

Old City Hall. East Lansing (1923-31). East
Lansing Public Library Historical Collection.
n.d.. O O 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 100

House at 322 Abbott Road. East Lansing
(c. 1920). L. Anderson. 1989. . . . . . . . . 101

1962 Addition to City Hall. East Lansing.
Facing Abbott Road. East Lansing Public
Library Historical Collection. 1962. . . . . . 102

1962 Addition to City Hall. East Lansing.
Facing Abbott Road. East Lansing Public
Library Historical Collection. 1962. . . . . . 103

Amsterdam Town Hall. Holland (1648-55).

Persner, Nikolaus . WW.
1976. O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 O Q Q Q 104

Boston City Hall. Kallman, McKinnell & Knowles.
Massachusetts (1962-69). Scully, Vincent.

Mggg;g_5;ghi;§gtu;§. 1976. . . . . . . . . . . 105

Consumer’s Power Company. Lansing (served as

City Hall, 1859-96). Facing East Michigan

Avenue. Lansing Public Library Historical
Collection. n.d.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 106

Juxtaposition of Old and New City Hall.
Lansing (1895-1959). Lansing Public Library
Historical Collection. 1959. . . . . . . . . . 107

Razing Old City Hall. Lansing (1895-96).

Lansing Public Library Historical Collection.
1959. O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 O O O O O O 108

xiii

Figure

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

46

47

Page

Razing Old City Hall. Lansing (1895-96).
Lansing Public Library Historical Collection.
1959. O O O O O I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 109

Razing Old City Hall. Lansing (1895-96).
Lansing Public Library Historical Collection.
1959. O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 O O O O O 0 O O 110

Razing Old City Hall. Lansing (1895-96).
Lansing Public Library Historical Collection.
1959. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111

Plans for Civic Center. Lansing (1938).
Harland Bartholomew & Associates. 1938.. . . . 112

Lever Building. Architect Gordon Bunshaft.
New York City (c. 1945). Wolfe, Tom. From

Bauhao§_to_oor_goooo. 1981. . . . . . . . . . . 113

Overcrowding in City Hall. East Lansing (1923-

~1931). East Lansing Public Library Historical

Collection. n.d.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 114

Overcrowding in City Hall. East Lansing (1923-
31). East Lansing Public Library Historical
COllectionO n.d. O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 115

Proposed City Hall. Mayotte-Webb Architects.

East Lansing (1923-1963). Eoot_Laosiog_1ogoo
Courier. 23 January, 1963. . . . . . . . . . . 116

Construction on City Hall. East Lansing.
East Lansing Public Library Historical
Collection. n.d.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 117

Completed City Hall. East Lansing (1923-65).
East Lansing Public Library Historical
Collection. n.d.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 118

Palazzo de Broletto. Como, Italy (1215).

Pevsner, Nikolaus . WW.
1976. O 0 O O O O O O O O O O C O O O O O O O 0 119

Boston Old City Hall. Massachusetts (1862-65). '
HABS. AmoriooL§_§ity_Hallo. 1984.. . . . . . 120

Richmond City Hall. Virginia (1886-94). HABS.
Amorioo;o_§ioy_flalls. 1984.. . . . . . . . . . 121

xiv

Figure

48

49

50

Albany City Hall. New York (1881-83. HABS.
WW.1984........... 121

Bay City City Hall. Pratt and Koeppe
Architects. Michigan (1894-97). HABS.

AmorioaL§_City_Hal_o. 1984.. . . . . . . . . . 122

Michigan Capitol. E. E. Myers. Lansing,
Michigan (1871). Zorn, Walter L. Ino_§ooitolo

Q: th Q35. 9: 1L: 0 1955. O O I O O O O O O O O 123

51

52

53

54

55

Town Hall. Bigelow and Wadsworth, Architects.
Weston, Massachusetts. Hamlin, Talbot. (Forms
1!! 1 '0. -. TW‘ '- '1 ‘ 1i ‘ _ ‘.

1952. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 124

City Hall. John Russell Pope. Plattsburgh, New
York. Hamlin, Talbot. F rm n F ' .
1952. O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 125

Municipal Group at Springfield, Massachusetts.
Pell and Corbett Architects. Hamlin, Talbot.

Forms and Fonotions. 1952.. . . . . . . . . . . 126

Civic Center. Alvar Aalto. saynatsalo,
Finland (1950-51). East Entrance. Scully,

Vincent. Moooro Arohitootoro. 1976. . . . . 127

Marshall Field Warehouse. Henry Hobson
Richardson. Chicago, Illinois (1885-87). .
Scully, Vincent. Moooro_Arohitooto_o. 1976. . 128

XV

CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

The primary objective of this study is to investigate
the symbolic implications of past and present city hall
buildings of Lansing and East Lansing, Michigan, to
determine the cultural, historic, and stylistic impact, if
any, these buildings have on each city and to learn whether
these city halls influence one another. This is done in an
endeavor to expand existing knowledge of architectural
history, and so enhance critical evaluation of city halls.
In doing so, it is necessary to show their evolutionary
development between 1895 and 1988 the years between which
the city halls were built. This study seems appropriate in
view of the fact that 1987 was the sesquicentennial year of
the State of Michigan--a year of reflection.

The Greater Lansing area is a medium-sized metropolitan
area of the state of Michigan (Figure 1). The site consists
of the state capital, an automobile city (Lansing), a
university city (East Lansing), and a suburban area

(Okemos). The area of Lansing proper is about 38 square

2
miles and has a population of about 128,000. East Lansing

has a population of 51,000.1

In 1837 the first settlers came to Lansing and built
the first permanent dwelling.2 When legislators selected
Lansing as the new state capital, it was a mere forest and
had only a few families living there. Most of these
pioneers came from the East, and named this new village,

Lansing, after their village in New York.

The new "capitol of the woods" grew rapidly after the
state government moved to the site in 1847. Eight years
later, the first land-grant agricultural college in the
United States was established in the capital area. By 1859
the population numbered 4,000 and Lansing was incorporated
as a city. By the end of the last century, when the
gasoline engine became available, Lansing became one of the
major automobile producing centers. In the domain of
architecture, the styles of the Greek and Gothic, the
Italianate, and the Queen Anne were prevalent in the state
of Michigan. They still exist in varying degrees of

physical condition.

The evergrowing interest in the historic preservation
of buildings in the United States has inspired Michigan, and
provided the necessary incentive to preserve historic

architecture.

3
Traditionally, Michigan's historic civic structures

have been viewed as symbols of democracy. Municipal
government, in particular, divined a purpose for one such
government type-namely, city hall. These local structures
of self-government, bearing lesser monumental proportions
than county courthouses, were erected in strategic central
locations, either on or nearby town squares.3 They have
maintained similar definitive functions, yet vary in

stylistic characteristics.

City hall buildings have been the focal points of their
communities. Imbued with symbols, they tended to have an
important impact on a community’s local history. The city
hall buildings of Lansing and East Lansing, for example, are

representative of this tendency.

In keeping with the objectives of the study, this paper
intends to address the following questions: What influenced
the form and stylistic character of the city halls of
Lansing and East Lansing? What symbolic implications are
reflected in their design and construction? Do the
historical features of past forms have any influence over
the present ones and, if so, how? What overall cultural
values and implications are discernible in these

architectural accomplishments?

To answer these questions I have consulted various
sources. These include local newspapers, architectural and

popular magazine articles, and books. An important book

4
which surveys numerous city halls in the United States,

W, published by the Historic American
Buildings Survey in 1984, provides a chronological history
of city halls in conjunction with the corresponding
political events of the time. It has been most useful.

Other sources which have been consulted include Henry-

Russell Hitchcock's T D m -

W (1976); Willard B. Robinson’s Tho
°-.. -' ; , - -- T-x- ._,_ . - .f .,g
WW (1983); Charles King Hoyt's mug;
Monioioal and Commonity Buildings (1980); and Lois Craig’s
Woo (1978). These authors survey the

various forms of national governmental architecture, discuss
the better and best examples of architecture, and state

reasons for their selections.

A cursory glance at these sources reveals that more has
.been written about federal buildings, state capitols, and
county courthouses, and much less on‘ city halls. For
example, Lansing and East Lansing are not covered in any of
these studies. I therefore intend to compare the old city
hall of Lansing (1896), with the present city hall (1959)
and then to compare the city hall of East Lansing (1923)
with the present city hall of Lansing (1959). It must also
be pointed out that, in contrast to the Lansing City Hall,
there is less information available for the East Lansing

City Hall especially regarding the process of planning and

5
building. The study had to rely on scanty newspaper

reports.

Philosophical, aesthetic, and sociological works have
helped to provide a framework for a discussion of symbolic
content . Important aesthetic and philosophical resources

were Suzanne Langer's Foolino_aoo_gorm, 1953; Peter Collins'

n ' ~ 7 - , 1965;
and Roger Scruton's WW, 1979.
Books used specifically for the sociological pursuit include
Anthony D. King’s (ed.) Buildings and Sooioty, 1980; Serge
Chermayeff’s Dosigo and the Poolio Good, 1982; and Vincent

Scully, Jr-'8 W
Domocraoy, 1974. These references collectively provided

different perspectives on architecture as art.

In an attempt to broaden the sample of built
environments through time and to establish an historical
background, I have used a contextual analysis with an
interdisciplinary approach for the study of the symbolic
implications of these public buildings. I have also
attempted to demonstrate whether historical and cultural
aspects of Lansing and East Lansing have influenced or have

had an impact on city hall architectural forms.

Nelson. Goodman’s article on architecture, ”Che, Cosa
Significa Construire E Quando E Perche," provides four terms

of reference: denotation, exemplification, expression, and

 

6
mediated references.4 These terms have been used in the

text to analyze the symbolic implications of the city halls.
Rationale for Symbolic Implications

Anthropological, sociological and other studies show
how dwellings and settlement forms relate to culture as a
way of life, as a world view, and as a form of social
organization.5 .A critical examination of the symbolic
implications of architecture is necessary in order to
determine its place in the domain of art. According to
Nelson Goodman:

A building is art only insofar as it signifies,

means, refers, symbolizes in some way. That, may

seem less than obvious; for the sheer bulk of an

architectural work and its dedication to a

practical purpose often tend to obscure its

symbolic function.6

The fact that architecture partially functions as a
symbol places it in the domain of art. Painting and
sculpture are also functional at the symbolic level, yet the
functions they serve differ from those of architecture.7 As
Goodman argues:

. . . architecture has a close affinity to music

unlike paintings or plays or novels

because. . .they [i.e., architecture and. music]

are seldom descriptive or representational.

The purpose of public architecture lies in part, in its

social function which, historically, has served as a link

between politics, the community, and its identity.

7
Goodman explains ’denotation’ as a building in

reference to itself. In this case, specific representation
can occur through its form. For example, a hot dog stand
can be shaped in the form of a hot dog. Likewise,
’exemplification', becomes "a reference by a building to the
properties it possesses either literally or metaphorically."
However, for written purposes, Goodman prefers to use the
term 'expression' for the metaphorical properties and refers
to the literal properties as ’exemplification.’ Similarly,
'mediated references’ are the objects or events to which the
structure refers. This can involve a chain of reference, by
which these objects or events alluded to refer to other

ideas, concepts, or theories.9

In this study, the three universally accepted
definitions of culture, provided by Amos Rapoport are
employed: culture as a way of life typical of a group;
culture as a system of symbols, meanings and cognitions; or
as a set of adapted strategies for survival related to

ecology and resources.10

Such an interdisciplinary approach should help to
determine what symbolic implications, if any, are embodied
in the designs of the city halls of Lansing and East

Lansing.

Buildings, as products of history, culture, and social
organization, are erected to respond to specific social and

historical needs. In the distant past, when humans were

8
directly subjected to the forces of nature--art,

architecture and literature expressed this reality. Later,
when humans began to manipulate the forces of nature to
their advantage and. way of life, this aspect of’ human

history was portrayed and expressed in art and architecture.

Although Rapoport has drawn on historical research, the
focus of his work has been on comparative studies across
cultures rather than across time. And yet he admits that
historical studies are a further way of broadening the
sample of environments in order to arrive at a valid

theory.11

Cities, no matter how large or small, are complex
because they are products of the complex human mind. I
agree with Robert Hughes that architecture needs to be
thought of as "real place, rather than abstract space,
multiple meanings rather than a single meaning, and of human
needs instead of political aspirations,"12 in order to
encourage hope for the future.

The crucial point, however, is that the lesson of
modernism can now be treated as one aesthetic
choice among others, and not as binding historical
legacy. The first casualty of this was the idea
that architects or artists can create working
Utopias. Cities are more complex than that, and
the needs of those who live in them less readily
quantifiable. What seems obvious now was rank
heresy to the modern movement: the fact that
societies cannot be architecturally "purified"
without a thousand grating invasions of freedom;
that the architects' moral charter, as it were,
includes the duty to work with the real world and
its inherited content. Memory is reality. It is
better to recycle what exists, to avoid mortgaging
a workable past to a non-existent Future, and to

9

think small. In the life of cities, only

conservatism is sanity. It has taken almost a

century of modernist claims and counterclaims to

arrive at suc§ a point. But perhaps is was worth

the trouble.1

In a word, the idea of perfection does not exist in a
human-made environment, but aesthetics can elevate the

quality of excellence within it.

Symbolic implications of public buildings in the
service of municipal politics are usually difficult to peg
with any exactitude. Nevertheless, I believe in the
importance of trying to elicit the multi-meaning of Lansing
and. East Lansing city halls in an effort to derive a
comprehensive overall understanding of the complex issue of

meaning.

In this respect it is important to understand how the
physical structures of the city halls of the Greater Lansing
.area provide the public, consciously or subconsciously, with
clues to each city’s separate cultural sense of identity.
It should also be demonstrated whether the. structures
actually aid Lansing and East Lansing's "sense of community"
and culture, and how they relate at the local level to the

concepts of ’pride,’ ’community,’ and ’democracy.’

The visual assessment and interpretation of the public
building's stylistic development is important in order to
distinguish the architectural symbolism of public buildings.

By establishing the evolution of each community’s city hall,

 

10

as building types--past and present--it will be possible to
determine to some degree their meanings as a reflection of
their community. In this regard, as Louis Sullivan notes:
"Architecture is a social manifestation. . .our buildings as
a whole are an image of a people as a whole. . . ."14 One
of East Lansing's former City Managers, John M. Patriarche,
too, appropriately established the merits of a public
building’s function and site in his Report of 1262:

Public buildings are important to any community

for they provide the physical structures in which

all the important administrative functions are

carried on by the public agency. The way a city

is administered and serviced, in turn can largely

determine the desirability of that city as a place

in which to live and work. Moreover, the proper

location of public buildings is essential if the

community is to provide convenient, efgective, and
efficient service to its citizens....

Architecture, architectural contexts, and environmental
sites, can therefore signal to those who are aware, explicit
and implicit visual messages not only from that which is
seen, but equally important, from that which is not, seen.
Public architecture displays these explicit and implicit
messages. Suzanne Langer, a philosopher of art, confirms‘
this. She defines the term ’symbol’ as: "any device whereby
we are enabled to make an abstraction,"16 and describes the
importance of symbols as follows:

The architect creates its [culture’s] images: a

physically present human environment that

expresses the characteristic rhythmic functional
patterns which constitute a culture. . . . That

is the image of an ethnic domain, the primary

illusion of architecture. . . . But the great

architectural ideas have rarely, if ever, arisen
from domestic needs. They grew as the temple, the

11
tomb, the fortress, the hall, the theatre. . .

That is the image of life which is created in

buildings; it is the visible semblance of’ an

”ethnic domain," the symbol of humanity to be

found in the strength and interplay of forms.

In these observations one witnesses the importance
Langer extends to virtual "place" created by ethnic origins,
thus creating architectural illusion which is an ’imaginary
perception' of architecture or that which is unseen. The
style of a building can relay these overt and covert

signals, reflect certain attitudes and characteristics

prevalent at the time of its erection.

Moreover, each city's elected or appointed governing
civic body can establish. a ;particular' precedent in the
process of selecting the architectural style of a city hall.
In favor of a certain architect and his design proposal,
these governing officials base their decision-making on
their ideology or other political, historical, or socio-
economical values. The designs selected for each city hall
do indeed embody the municipal government's ideology,
whether moral, political, ethical, or social. The designs
themselves yield clues as to which values shape, govern, or

dominate in the process of selection.

Consequently, it is essential to justify the use of a
comprehensive interdisciplinary method. for analyzing the
cultural, historical, and stylistic implications of Lansing
and. East Lansing’s city halls--past and. present. This

comprehensive insight will be attempted at the expense of an

 

 

12
in-depth study of each variable, due to my very limited

knowledge and understanding of some of the variables, and
also for the sake of brevity. I believe that the
aforementioned variables themselves are important. The
cultural image of each community could further be enhanced
or distorted by its public architecture. It is for want of
the former, that the architecture should reflect the
community in such a capacity. In the following chapters I
shall determine whether each of these structures lends
itself to the "concept of community" and to examine in what
sense each succeeds or fails.

Historical Background of the Greater
Lansing.Area

Brief History of Lansing

Lansing, an industrialized city, is the capital of the
state of Michigan. The 1840 edition of Too__Miohigan
Statistiool_go§;;aot, gives an early description of Lansing,

when it had a mere population of 2,500:

The new capital of Michigan is just beginning to
assume the appearance of a town, and is pleasantly
situated in the northwest part of Ingham county,
near the confluence of the Cedar and Grand Rivers.
At first view it seems strange that a dense forest
with only here and there an opening, should have
been selected as the site for the city. But when
understood, one will not think so. The advantages
to the state in general by the removal of the
capital from Detroit, will be very great. There
it was at one side; here it is in the center of
the state, and surrounded by a territory, which in
point of fertility and all other agricultural
facilities, is scarcely anywhere equalled.

 

 

13
On the river near the town is abundance of water

power. . . . There is not stone on the soil; but

an abundance of stone convenient for building is

found in the river. New roads are opened and

settlers fast coming in; and what was formerly

regarded an obscure by-place, will soon be the

place for news and intelligence for all this

vicinity. A line of stages now communicates

between this place and the railrogd at Jackson,

and the trip from Detroit is easy.1

Within one year after the city's incorporation in 1860
Lansing’s population had swelled to 2,850. Its population
reached 12,202 by 1890, and by the turn-of-the-century,
16,845. In 1905 it reached 29,000 (Figure 2). With this
rise came also an increase in industry, education and
government professions.19

Lansing's early expansion, both in size and population,
as well as in economic development was impressive. But the
intensity of the depression of 1893, which formed a "water-
shed" in American history, arrested its development. Its
banks were closed, farmers were put in debt, and business
was brought to a standstill. The emotional and intellectual
impact of the depression was also considerable. In this
regard, Kestenbaum maintains:

The bank failures seem to have placed Lansing

squarely in the grip of the depression; there was

little good economic news until a national upturn
became apparent in 1898. . . .20

With recovery in sight, the year 1896 was also
memorable for the completion of city hall.21 "Memorable,"

perhaps, because the construction of’ the new city hall

offered itself to the city of Lansing as a symbol of faith

 

 

14
in Lansing’s ability to better manage its own affairs in the

years to come.

Despite the hope imbued within these new city walls,
the structure was declared a pawn in an ongoing controversy

created over whether Lansing should become the county-seat,

instead of Mason, located only twelve miles away. According

to Kestenbaum:

The issue of location of the county-seat in
Lansing had hung fire for years. In 1877, 500
persons had crowded into a meeting hall as the
county board of supervisors failed to garner the
required two-thirds majority to place county-seat
location before the voters. With the completion
of Lansing's city hall in 1897, the issue rose
again; the press reported an informal discussion
of the advantages and disadvantages of locating in
Lansing as the county board visited Lansing’s new
city hall. The supervisors from Mason had voted
against accepting the invitation to visit the new
city hall, denouncing it as the "entering wedge"

by which Lansing men hoped to start she movement
in favor of removing the county-seat.2

Mason remained the county-seat. Lansing weathered its

economic slump and gradually began to recover. The turn-of-

the-century brought wealth to Lansing once again, due to one

of its industrious citizens, Ransom E. Olds, founder of the

Olds Motor Works Industry. As Kestenbaum observes:

Olds was a genuine pioneer of the automobile
industry. His cars, named Oldsmobile in 1900, did
much to popularize the motor car with the American
public and to "democratize" automobile ownership,

previously limited to the very wealthy. . . . In
1902, the company turned out 2,500 cars, and in

1903, 4,000 vehicles were produced and sold;

Wealthy and prominent persons, as well as ordinary

citizens, bought curved dash Oldsmobiles.

The company prospered. Within three years of its
founding, the Olds Motor Works became the leading

15
American automobile manufacturer, and ngsing the
center of the automobile industry. . .

Lansing experienced a few other financial setbacks,

most noticeably the Depression of the 1930’s.
attributes

Kestenbaum

the revival of the local economy to ”an
unexpected source--the construction industry."24 With the
new surge of’ building that was carried on

in downtown
Lansing,

a revived interest in city planning led in December

1936 to the formation of a new planning commission by Mayor
Max A . Templeton .

Among its newly appointed members was
Kenneth Black,

a graduate of the University of Michigan’s

School of Architecture, whose Lansing architectural firm was

later hired to design the new Lansing city hall of 1959.
1938,

In
the Harland Bartholomew firm was hired by the city

planning commission, "to prepare a master plan which used

’city functional’ planning rather than the ’city beautiful’
approach of 1921."25 Kestenbaum cites the automobile

industry as a key element in the changing needs of the
community:

By 1938, the automobile had transformed Lansing’s
relationship with the surrounding area; the city’s
economic reach as shown in commuting distances and

a greatly expanded market region meant that the
future of the city and

ggowing area of its
hinterland were intertwined.

A plan for city and state buildings in downtown Lansing
was drawn.

This plan, which was eventually adopted in its
broad outlines, continues to have an important effect on the

central core of the capital region.27

16

A city hall, jail, and "civic center" or large
auditorium for conventions and public meetings.
These structures, too, were eventually built, but

the coming of the Second World War disrupted life
in the capital region aim? their completion was
delayed for a generation.

As Kestenbaum views it:

As victory became imminent, Lansing turned to
planning for the postwar era,

when the city’s
excellent financial position would at last make

possible the execution of Bartholomew’s plan for
downtown buildings.

By 1944, the city had
eliminated its debt, and on June 4, 1944, Mayor
Ralph W. Crego inaugurated postwar planning by
appointing a committee of aldermen to study the

city’s needs and propose a plan of action. The
long-discussed. new city hall, Crego announced,
would cost about $1.5 million; the city had ample
funds in reserve, and the Board of Water and Light
had agreed not only to participate in paying for
the

structuES but also to locate its offices
there. .

Architect Kenneth Black announced in August 1965 that

plans for a new city hall were underway and it was to be

erected on the old city hall site.30 ”Legal problems,

opposition to tearing down the old city hall, and the city’s
policy of paying cash for improvements were major reasons

for delaying the construction of city hall and the civic
center.’31

Construction, however, finally occurred. The

publication of Birt Darling’s book, W, on
the history of Lansing contributed to it, by helping to

enhance civic pride. Indeed, within a few years of this

publication, the city

under Mayor Ralph W. Crego’s

leadership completed its long-planned city hall and civic

17
center. The ultra-modern city hall and police building,

designed by Kenneth Black, appeared where the old city hall

and post office had stood;. . . .32

Exactly one hundred years had passed since Lansing was
incorporated as a city. Two city halls in that span of time

had been built. WWW
ooo_1;o_Enyirooo (1960-1980) had also been completed.33

The Lansing of the 19803 is now realizing some of its
goals addressed in this "new city plan." In this regard, a
civic center located close to the downtown business center,
and the gradual development of River Front Park has taken

place, east of the State Capitol on Michigan Avenue.

Brief History of East Lansing

The 'Michigan Agricultural College (M.A.C.) was
established in 1855 as the first land-grant college in the
nation, to be located within 10 miles of Lansing. "The site
chosen was on a plot of land consisting of 677 acres located

east of Lansing."34

As the population grew, a school district was formed.
Small businesses sprang up to accommodate the needs of the
residents of East Lansing, so that trips to Lansing for
necessary supplies gradually diminished in frequency.
Hence:

East Lansing began as a college town which
developed around "faculty row," a group of homes

18
built in the late 1850’s specifically for the MSU

faculty. ”Collegeville" grew to serve the needs

of students and faculty.

In 1907 President Theodore Roosevelt honored the
celebration of the Michigan Agricultural College’s (now
Michigan State University) fiftieth anniversary with his
presence.36 The significance of this event was great.
East Lansing had actually grown up around the College, and
the charter for East Lansing’s incorporation as a fourth-
class city had been ratified. The population count in East
Lansing in 1907 was about 1,500. It grew to 2,000 in 1923,
the year that marked the construction of the first East

Lansing city hall.

In all this it should be noted that the city of East
Lansing grew as a result of the land that it acquired by
annexations. The map shows how much land East Lansing had
acquired, from its original boundaries in 1907 (Figure 3).
By 1960 the population had reached 29,745 (or 50,000,
including the university housing, which accounts for 45% of
the population in East Lansing). East Lansing’s city area
covered 8 1/2 square miles, and annexation of portions of
Meridian Township in 1979 increased East Lansing’s
population by approximately 2,600 and the city area by 34

acres .

The choice for the city hall of East Lansing was a

conscious act. It did and still does fulfill a number of

 

 

19
requirements. As social and economic scientists, Bert and

Edith Swanson note that:

A number of efforts have been made to delineate
the factors associated with the location of
communities. Among them is the central-place
theory, which describes the geography of economic
regions as a function of distance, mass
production, and competition. This may lead to
perceiving a system of cities as an urban
hierarchy, based on ’rank size,’ and to
classifying centers according to their place in
the hierarchy and/or acgording to the functional
correlates of city size.

In addition to size and population, there are also
social, economic and political processes which Anthony B.
King refers to as the "new urban sociology:"

Cities and buildings, however, are not explained
simply by reference to social and cultural
variables. They also reflect a distribution of
power. . . .[For example], Delhi [India is] the
result of political, economic and social processes
of colonialism. As such, it had its own
institutions, and to understand the city as a
social (rather than a physical) entity meant,
undergganding the society of which it was a
part.

In America, local government serves most communities

as:

The formal, legal basis to make collective
decisions on behalf of all their citizens. Since
the broad legal authority of cities has been
established by each state and administratively
shared locally, there have come into being a
number of dggferent forms of city and town
governments."

In this context, four major types of local governments
have evolved: 1) mayor-council, 2) council-manager, 3)

commission, and 4) town-meetings.

 

 

20
Lansing residents directly elect a mayor every four

years, who serves full time in a non-partisan, mayor-council
form of city government. Eight aldermen are elected and
serve as the City Council. Out of these, four are elected
from the city-at-large, and one is elected from each of the

city’s four wards (Figure 4).40

East Lansing’s government, on the other hand, is
structured around the council-manager form of government.
This form:

Was established in 1944 when residents voted to

amend the city charter to change from a fourth-

class city to a home-rule city. This allowed for

five council members to be elected at large with

the mayor elected among the council, and for the

appointment of a city manager to administer the

daily operations of the city. Since 1944 East

Lansing has had only four city managers.

The mayor-council form of local government most closely
resembles the form of national government established by our
ancestors with the intention of keeping the branches of
power separate, i.e., the executive (mayor) and the
legislative (city council). Also known as the "strong—y
mayor” type, the mayor-council form is typically used in the
larger cities, whereas the smaller cities, with population
counts of 5,000-10,000 people, usually opt for the "weak-
mayor" type. The mayor in the former kind holds:

The authority to ‘hire and. fire the department

heads, and to engage in the preparation and

control of the budget for effective management in

the delivery of public services, especially in the

big systemi2 and permits the mayor to veto council
decisions.

 

 

21
The council-manager form of local government evolved as

a type of reformation movement to counteract the corruption
and inefficiency that some local governments had
experienced. It endeavored to move party politics out of
the arena, so the council-manager form could focus mainly on
the needs of the community. The City Council appoints the
City Manager, who in turn,

hires and fires the department heads, prepares a

city budget for council approval, and makes

recommendations to the council which is ultimately
responsible to the public. The mayor essentially
performs ceremonial functions but also presides

over the city meetings and votes in case of a

tie.

Lansing developed around the state government of
Michigan and, industry, whereas, the primary factor that
brought East Lansing into incorporation as a city was
education. With a moderately sized population centered
around small business and the university, East Lansing

became typically a residential community. While both places

share a common boundary, they do have separate identities.

In conclusion then, we could say that architecture is
an expression of culture. It is a source of history in as
much as it reflects human aspirations, concerns and
achievements. In an investigation such as this, it becomes
possible to examine the past and present city halls of
Lansing and East Lansing in order to determine what symbolic

implications, if any are reflected.

 

 

CHAPTER 2

ARCHITECTURAL AND HISTORICAL DEVELOPMENT
OF CITY HALLS AS BUILDING TYPES

Physical Description of City Hall
Lansing City Hall

Situated between the Post Office and the Universalist
Church, and standing directly across the tree-lined Capitol
Avenue from ‘the State Capitol Building, this Romanesque
Revival structure was built as the City Hall of Lansing in
1896 (Figures 5-9). The use of this style largely resembles
H.H. Richardson’s 1884 Allegheny County Courthouse and Jail
in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania (Figure 10). Today, some may
consider the old City Hall building traditional in
character, but its style must once have caused a
considerable sensation because of the unfamiliarity of the

Richardsonian Romanesque in this particular region.

If we examine the architecture of this City Hall, we
see a tall clock tower which, according to architect Edwin
A. Bowd (1865-1940), was built in the Gothic style, and
dominated its composition. Two-story walls of Amherst blue,
rough-hewned stone supported the peach, bolton-slate roof
and were edged by copper cornices. Moulding ornamentation

and gargoyle forms adorned their surfaces. Lacking the

9

22

 

23
rounded medieval fortress tower that the Post Office

possessed, the old City Hall maintained similar bands of
arched and 'transomed. windows which. were typical of ‘the
Romanesque Revival style (Figure 11). The rustication, also
characteristic of this style, was reflected in both the Post
Office and City Hall structures. The YMCA building (1908)
sat adjacent to the old Post Office building, and also faced
Michigan Avenue (Figure 12). Its exterior, apart from the
flat roof, was similar to that of the Post Office (1894) and
City Hall, in terms of color and materials. But
nevertheless, it differed in style. The smooth red brick
facade also displayed bands of windows, and limestone
coursing’ but the Post Office is a skeletal block with
classical detailing and larger expanses of windows including

most likely, some Chicago windows (Figure 12).

Space around each of the old buildings was not immense
and open, as the walls of all buildings were butted up
against the edge of the wide sidewalks (Figure 13). In
1959, the architectural scenery and space was to change the
entire appearance of this particular Lansing city site. The
new City Hall, fashioned in the modern International Style
developed by such architects as Mies van der Rohe, was built
at the corner of. the block. Its main entrance faces
Michigan Avenue whereas the main entrance of the first City
Hall, by architect Edwin A. Bowd faced the Capitol and its

avenue .

 

 

24
Two simple rectangular blocks were joined, and

together, formed the new ten-story City Hall and six-story
Police Station (Figures 14-16). These geometrical shapes
emphasized the effects of the horizontal and vertical
dimensions of the building unlike the previous structure.
This style was possible, in part, because of the
technological advances made in modern steel construction.
Moreover, the solid steel framework enabled the new City
Hall to accommodate a large expanse of windows and limestone
slabs on its sides without having to rely on interior
columns, thereby opening up the interior space. This new
device drew more attention to its pronounced and dominating
structure than could the old Richardsonian Romanesque

building.

A landscaped plaza, corresponding to the area of the
old Post Office, now lays in front of the main entrance to
.the new building (Figure 17). This huge, open space in
front of the building provides a leisurely place where
people can sit for a brief rest or can eat their lunches at

noon .

By 1976 at least three-quarters of the block was
occupied by City Hall. Imposing in scale as it is, it is
dominated by still taller and more stately buildings in its
block and neighboring blocks, such as the State Capitol
Building, the Michigan National Tower (1927-31) situated

Northeast corner of Capitol Avenue and Allegan Street, and

 

 

25
the Bank of Lansing (1931) located on the northeast corner

of Washington and Michigan Avenues. The Michigan National
Tower is the tallest in the city of Lansing and stands 345
feet high with 25 floors. The Central United Methodist
Church (1888-1889), located. one black away at 200 West
Ottawa Street, is another familiar and imposing structure

(Figures 18-21).

City Hall is located. next to two small commercial
blocks which face Michigan Avenue and are contiguous with
Manufacturers Bank (formerly Bank of Lansing). These three
buildings existed long before City Hall was built. The
Board of Water and Light is also adjoined to City Hall,
along with the Washington Square Annex which faces West
Ottawa Avenue (Figures 6, 20 and 23). The facade of City
Hall can barely be distinguished from these parts, except by
a small, low-relief displaying a farmer and other symbols
reflective of Lansing’s city history and the words "Lansing
City Hall’ located over an unremarkable doorway ‘facing
Capitol Avenue (Figure 24). The character of the Washington
Square Annex, the Board of Water and Light and the City Hall
is very similar, but is also markedly different from the
other buildings on the block. The silhouette of old City
Hall which once adorned Lansing’s horizon has disappeared,
favoring the geometrically crisp skyline of the twentieth

century.

 

 

26
East Lansing City Hall

East Lansing City Hall is located on 410 Abbott Road
(Figure 25). Although the original City Hall no longer
stands, the address remains the same. The original building
was a red-brick and wood-trim Structure (Figure 26). There
is no mention of a record of the architect who designed it
in 1923, under the influence of the Bungalow Style. This
style is characterized by a low-pitched gabled roof (or
hipped as in the case of East Lansing’s City Hall), with

wide, eave overhangs.

Adjacent to the present City Hall stands a house (c.
1920) at 322 Abbott Road which is similar in style to that
of the original city hall (Figure 27). The old Post Office,
now the Evergreen Restaurant (1934), stands almost directly
across Abbott Road from City Hall. The environmental
surroundings at the time the old City Hall was built were

residential and suburban.

Catering to a smaller population than Lansing, East
Lansing City Hall was modest in scale and materials. Its
two stories and basement, housed the fire station, the
police station, the jail, and the court system. But, as the
population increased and the needs of the community
developed additions were made subsequently in 1931 and in

1965, and, most recently, in 1988.

 

 

27
Architect Harold A. Childs designed the city hall

additions in 1931, to house the fire department, all city
offices, and the East Lansing Public Library. They were
constructed by C. Hodge, a local contractor. The library
was separated from City Hall and moved into its new building
in 1962. It was located a few blocks further to the North
on 950 Abbott Road, close to the present post office (which

again faces Abbott Road).

As early as 1962 a new city hall became an issue before
the East Lansing City Council. The design for the other
addition was fashioned in the International style, not in
keeping with the Bungalow-influenced style (Figures 28 and
29), and thus a metal mesh screen was placed over the facade
of the old structure in order to make its appearance more
compatible. In 1988 the old structure was completely
demolished to make way for the new 1988-89 addition, which

is currently in the process of being built.

Development of City Halls

Nikolaus Pevsner, in his book, Hi r
Typos, 1976, demonstrated the development of building types
both by style and by function. He defines style to be a
matter of architectural history and function, as well as a
matter of social history. In the course of designating
building types, he follows their changes in planning ”from

the most monumental to the least monumental, from the most

 

28

ideal to the most utilitarian, and from national monuments

to factories."1 With regard to the evolution of the

structure of town halls as building types, Pevsner

distinguishes between modern town halls and the medieval
type comprising an open ground floor and council rooms. The
monumentality of the Amsterdam Town Hall (1648-55)

illustrates stylistic, not functional development,2 and

serves as a useful case (Figure 30).

Similarly, the architect Robert Stern, in his book,

Prioo__of__glaoo, 1986, supports Pevsner’s view of the

stylistic development of city halls, and contends that

historical architectural symbols of government have given

way to contemporary public architecture which is

“occasionally grand, but usually symbolically

incomprehensible."3 In this regard, Stern cites Boston’s

City Hall (Figure 31) as an example of symbolically

incomprehensible jpublic architecture, and. argues 'that it

does not celebrate the glories of the past, nor does it

convey a sense of' boundless optimism. about the future.

Rather, it confronts with the all too harsh reality of the
present.4 Thus, Stern depicts an abrupt shift, in Boston
City Hall,

from historical continuity to a reaction against

architectural history, and Pevsner is similarly apprehensive

of this building:

Boston City Hall, 1962-69 [is] wildly arbitrary in
its motifs, oppressively top heavy and forbidding
rather than inviting. It is a toor_oo_foroo and
one marvels at the courage of the City authorities

 

29

in accepting it, but

it cannot b assessed in
rational terms,

and can it be loved? (Figure 31)

Studying the changes in the building types of Lansing

and East Lansing city halls--both past and. present--is

necessary for the development of a comprehensive

understanding of their symbolic implications in relation to

changes which have occurred over the years, and to the

concept of the ”change of change." Serge Chermayeff,

architect and environmental designer, in his book, Erosion

and Lho Poolio Good, quoted the biologist Heinz von

Foerster:

It is not merely change one has to contemplate, it
is the change of change that complicates the issue
of development devoid of almost all continuities,

resembling a cascade of discontinuities, of
”quantum jumps" in kind....

Description of our changing world is not always

comprehensible and. history, as von. Foerster states, "is

,merely descriptive,“ thus making the recorded processes of

change appear relatively simplistic and. arbitrary» Our

changing world is growing increasingly complicated and

complex. Mere description alone will not suffice society

any longer. Instead, prescription for a changing world is

in order. More than a "one-dimensional view" of society is

needed to benefit human beings and their needs in a built

environment. Hence, acknowledging these interdisciplinary

relationships with architecture may bring a greater

awareness to people within the community. It may also offer

the community some insights that could help to alleviate

 

30
future blunders.

The merits of rational research should be
employed, yet tempered with

intuition and creativity.

Prescriptive measures based upon sound and objective

environmental and behavioral design research suggest hope
for our future.

Peter Collins, in his book,

Architecture, 1950,

MW
describes the

development of
architectural history:

Architectural history was divided into periods,
which led the way to the division of architecture
into styles. Once ‘history was thought of as

apocalyptic, it tempted architectural historians
to become theorists who

try to determine the
future as well as the past:7

Architects who develop architectural theory are useful

and even admirable when their motivation prompts them to be

ever mindful of human needs. However, architectural theory
that confines itself to "art for art’s sake,“ and neglects

human needs, becomes dangerous to society-at-large. This

becomes so, when buildings erected in accordance with such

theories perpetuate the alienation of social beings, and

thus exacerbate the already deteriorated social conditions.

Collins cites useful clues as to how the new awareness

of history created new trends in architectural thought from
works of the first modern historian, Voltaire:

His text,

Maw, [1754] treats change as more
characteristic of nature than permanence and
implies that this change is effected gradually
(i.e. by evolution) or suddenly (i.e. revolution)
as a direct result of human agency and will.

h

Now

 

31

this is the essence of the modern architectural
concept

of history. . . It was not until the
middle of the 18th century that architects began

to think of architecture as a sequence of forms
which evolve and it was this at the same time that
some of them deliberately sought to accelerate the
process of

historical change by

devising
revolutionary shapes.

These revolutionary shapes,

I believe, resulted more in

terms of stylistic change than in functional development as

an investigation of the historical symbolic content of the

city halls of Lansing and East Lansing reveals.

Lansing City Hall

The first City Hall in Lansing was constructed in 1895-

1896 in response to a greatly needed seat for its municipal

government at a modest cost of $108,069.11.9 Previously,

the city offices had been located on the second and third

floors of a building reportedly owned and occupied until as

late as 1953 by the Consumer’s Power Company, in the 100

block of East Michigan Avenue (Figure 32).

On March 25, 1895, the Lansing City Council voted and

thereby selected a local contractor, Mr. C.M. Chittenden,
with a $108,069.11 bid to build the

”new” city hall,
designed by E. A. Bowd.

According to the Widen,

”there was more confidence in the careful construction and a

speedy completion of the building if it was done by a

competent contractor, besides meeting the favor of public

sentiment . " 1° The vote , however ,

was not unanimous, as

three aldermen opposed. the bid. The y§tato__Rooublioan

 

32
states: There was some opposition, because of the increase

in his bid (Chittenden’s), Alderman Baird said (at a
committee meeting of City Commissioners held on the evening

of March 25, 1895):

The question is, what would small taxpayers do in
such a case? The entire thing amounts to three per
cent. If they were going to build a house and Mr.
Jack or Mr. Moody (other bidders) charged $1,000
and Mr. Chittenden $1,030, Mr. Chittenden would
get it. It is good business judgement to let him
have it. Mr. Chittenden lives here and. will
employ Lansing labor, and if it comes to a choice
it is either Mr. Jack or Mr. Chittenden, for Mr.
Jack is a lower bidder than Moody.11

Monday, April 15, 1895, saw the breaking of ground in
order to begin the erection of Lansing’s first City Hall.
The Soaoo_gooooliooo reported on Tuesday evening of December
29, 1896, that:

...the whole building is now complete and finished
according to plans and specifications, except that
there were changes necessary which would cost from
$100. to $150...Actually, the cost was only
$306.78 ($108,374.89) more than the original
contract price [$108.069.11]...A remarkable
showing considering the cost of the work.

An open-house from 3-5 o’clock on New Year’s Day of
1897 for the showing of the "new city hall" drew a flood of
visitors. The new stone building, situated on the corner of
Ottawa Street and Capitol Avenue, was the object of
admiration that day. Its new convenient police headquarters
drew special attention (Figures 8 and 9). The Stooo
Beonbliooo documented the celebration:

One of the greatest objects of curiosity was the

clock and. nothing' but vigilant ‘watch kept the
public from doing a great deal of damage up in the

33

tower. One man was caught by Patrolman Esselystyn
pounding the edge of the bell with a brick that he
had carried up with him for the purpose, but for
the most part the crowd was orderly and respected
the beautaiful structure and well adapted to its
purpose.1

The photograph of Lansing’s early City Hall reveals the
two-story building’s character located in its downtown
architectural setting (Figure 7). It is imbued with a

restrained sense of dignity. As described by the fiosso
Beenhliean:

. . .The style of architecture is not strictly
classic, to quote Architect Bowd, but is nearer
Romanesque than anything else. The arches are
Romanesque, the lintels Greek and the tower
Gothic. The floors are laid on steel beams with
brick and terra cotta arches. The outer walls are
of Amherst blue stone solid and furred with steel
lath. The roof is of peach bolton slate and the
cornices of copper. . . .14

In addition, the §tsto_§sooolioso comments on how the
architecture reflects its government:

The exterior of the building is already a familiar
feature of the city’s architecture. With its
broad surfaces, long parallel lines of masonry and
square windows the structure is a fitting type of
the solid respectability that ought to
characterize the mpnicipal government of which it
is to be th home.1

On March 3, 1959, Lloyd J. Moles of the Lsnsing Stops
Joorosl, wrote in hindsight:

. . .The old city hall was constructed in 1896, a
thing of beauty and pride in the community. Its
Indiana limestone exterior was enhanced with hand-
chiseled gargoyles, figurines, and other elaborate
carvings.

The interior boasted simplicity in beauty, with
three flights of stairs with elaborate wrought

 

34

iron railings. Hallways and most of the offices
and courts featured solid oak paneling.

This municipal building had much more space than

was needed, and helped fill the gaps in unused

space. The city established its library there

along with other municipal and civic offices. It

became the center of community affairs where the

legislative, judicial, and administrative branches

of municipal government served Lansing

citizens. . . .16

The stone structure served Lansing for sixty-five
years, until it had decidedly become outgrown and outdated
(Figure 33). I“: was razed in 1959 in order to accommodate
additional new city buildings including the new City Hall,
the police department, and the Water and Light building
(Figures 34-37). In fact, as far back as 1938, Lansing’s
City Council had incorporated a site into its city plan
specifically designated for a new city hall (Figure 38).17
However, not until the City Council hearing which took place
on July 15, 1953, did this site actually become a debated
.issue when the city proposed building a new city hall,
police department and city jail. Arguments were made both
in favor and against the 1938 designated site. "The
property is too valuable. We could just as easily purchase

other land for much less money than we can sell the present

site."18

Other reasons were brought to light at this hearing:

Another Lansing resident in opposition felt that‘
downtown was not a prime location for the jail.
He said he saw no reason for the downtown location
for a city jail because few citizens had business
at the jail which would justify a central
location. . .Mayor Ralph W. Crego said, ". . .all

 

35

city planning is aimed at centralization because
it makes for greater governmental economy."
. . .John Webb, city treasurer, defended the
location of the jail in the city hall. He said
that experiences in other cities have sgpwn that
that arrangement is the most economical.

Parking space was another major concern in determining

the location of the new city hall complex. In this regard,

MW reported:

Charles W. Fratcher. . .urged councilmen to
consider a site where there would be plenty of
parking space available for the public because,
primarily, "the city hall will be built to serve
the public." . . .Ald. Charles G. Hayden of the
sixth ward expressed opposition to the location of
the new city hall in the present
block. . . ."Present plans," he said, "would make
the jproperty at the northeast corner* of’ North
Washington avenue and Saginaw street more
feasible. Saginaw street will be widened and the
hill can be leveled, making an ideal location with
plenty of parking space available," the alderman
said. . . .Speaking as a taxpayer, Evans E.
Boucher. . .declared that traditionally the
executive, legislative and judicial branches of
the government are in one location. He urged the
downtown site because the government should be the
center of the community. . . .Another proponent of
the downtown site was Mrs. Celia E. Ivanick, "if
the city hall were constructed. on the Saginaw
street site," she asked, "how soon would it be
until that area would be just as crowded as any
location?" She also felt that the downtown site
would be more convenient for the public. . . .Ald.
George R. Sidwell of the second ward suggested the
council could use the experiences of other cities
to advantage, "Detroit and Kalamazoo have found
that parking is essential. We know that in the
future less and less street parking will be
availablsb" he said, "and we must plan for the
future."

And, ’plan fer the future,’ they did. The firm hired

by the city of Lansing was the Black and Black firm--a local

 

36
company. They designed a structure which will triple the

space in the old city hall. . . .21

Acclaimed by a journalist for the Lansing Stats Joornal

as one of the foremost architectural attractions in the mid-
west,22 the modern design has been likened with that of the
Lever Building by architect Gordon Bunshaft, in New York
City, wrought in the International Style (Figure 39):

The new building will be ten stories high and will
be the first of its type in the midwest. Its
construction will be similar to the Lever building
in New York City, with both sides faced in almost
solid glass, 33th the ends having white limestone
facing. . . .

The ranking of the new building and its status in the
midwest can in fact be disputed. But, at any rate after
fifteen years of planning, the building was finally
completed in early 1958. It was situated on the originally

approved site of 1938 (Figure 6) for the two reasons cited

by the Lansing Stats Qoornal:

It was generally conceded that there was a
definite need to continue municipal governments in
the central part of the city. A strong reason,
other than central service to citizens, was the
need to bolster up the business section on
Washington avenue, north of Michigan avenue, which
had been slowly deteriorating. It was felt that
the new city hall would serve as an anchor between
the state capitol ground and development area to
the west and.Ehe city’s core of business adjacent
on the east.2

With regard to its symbolic content, Tos_Laosiog_§;aos
JournalLs correspondent, Lloyd J. Moles, comments:

37

The beautiful structure is representative of the

hopes, toil, and dreams of local citizens dating

back to Lansing’s infancy and incorporation.

Recalling words of a world statesman reminding his

countrymen that "the highest of distinctions is

service to others," municipal officials say they

will dedicate this structure to this concept, and

hope it will serve as a symbol of service to the

future ang a monument to the faith and progress of

the past. 5

The new city hall was believed to provide adequate
service and ample space for the next fifty years. Yet, only
eight years after it had been built, the need for more space
was strongly felt. Eventually, some of the Lansing City
Hall occupants moved into the Grant Building on Washington
Avenue. The Washington Square Annex was later added (c.

1976) in order to help create more space.

The transition from one city hall form to another has
affected Lansing’s architectural stylistic context not only
in skyline, but also in. ways that. may' not. be commonly
realized. The symbols have changed in historic, stylistic,
and cultural meanings over time. In order to determine what
generates these attitudinal shifts, it is imperative to

discuss the nature of these elements.

East Lansing City Hall

As was pointed out in the introduction to this study,
there is a notable lack of information on East Lansing City

Hall, concerning both its planning and its construction.

38
The scanty information available is mostly confined to local
newspaper articles.

The first City Hall of East Lansing was built in 1923,

in order to accommodate the needs of the growing community.

Materials included red brick,

wood and glass (Figure 26).

The W discussed the two new wings, which
were approved by the City Council to add to the original

structure in 1931:

The new addition, which will be twelve feet wide
on the north side and twenty-one feet wide on the
east will provide for the future expansion of the
city fire department and will allow all city
offices to be located in this building.

The new
wing on the north will be used at the present, it
is expected, to ‘house the :East Lansing' public
library which is now located at People’s church.

Provisions will also be made for city comfort
stations in the building. When this new addition

is completed, it is believed that the city hall
will answer all the requiremen

gs of the city for
the next ten or fifteen years.2

Before this addition, city offices had been placed
The City Council was pressing_fbr a

centralized location of all city offices.

throughout the city.

On May 25, 1931, East Lansing City Council selected an

architect Harold A. Childs. The bids for construction were
received and. the general’ building contract given. to C.

Hodge.27 Thursday morning, July 2, 1931, construction

began. With an estimated cost of $15,000.28, early fall was

the anticipated date for the completion of the addition.28

39
After its completion on November 6, 1931, East Lansing

city officials held an open house on Wednesday, November 11,
for all the citizens of East Lansing.29 They were invited
to see the new public library, the police and fire
departments, the municipal court and the public restrooms.
The pride that the city felt towards its new city hall
addition, is revealed in a statement by the Eas_t__Laosi_og
23.8.8.3
With all the city departments housed in the city
hall, it is believed by city officials that they
will be able to serve more efficiently the needs
of the city.30
The city of East Lansing managed to utilize the new
addition for the next thirty-one years. But, as the city
grew and new city offices were established, among other
consequences, overcrowding became the lot of the City Hall.
Even some offices spilled over into hallway space, making it
difficult for staff and citizens to get around to their
points of destination within the building (Figures 40 and
41). City Manager John M. Patriarche commented:
The existing city offices, Police Department and
Fire Department are horribly overcrowded with
every inch of available space in the building in
use. Operational efficiency is a constant

struggle in our environment of too many machines
and too many people in too small an area.

The same problem is described somewhat dramatically by the
MSW:

City employees in East Lansing fight the city hall
space problem every working day.

40

It is so crowded that police and firemen are
tripping over each other. Office workers complain
about the lack of working area and the fgst that
they are scattered in different buildings.

Plans for expansion, of' the City {Hall,

designed by
architects Mayotte-Webb, were approved in April 1963 and

explained as follows:

Plans call for adding a two story wing adjacent to
the present building which would house all of the
general administrative offices of the city,
including a municipal court room and council room.
This would consolidate the city operation by
transferring the Engineering

staff, Assessor’s
office, and Building Inspector from their present

location at the city Garage to the Central City
Hall. It would also allow the city to discontinue

leased space in various locations in the city
whiCh has beco

m? expensive and could become more
so (Figure 42). 3

Patriarche’s desire for a centrally located government

housed under one municipal roof was anticipated to cost a

total of $575,000, which included remodeling of the old 1923

structure. It was to be financed through general obligation

bonds.34 The "low bids, however, on the proposed City Hall
additions far exceeded the original estimate by $133,203.35

Part of this excessive amount included the expense of

removing the roof from the old structure and also:

.an underestimate in the cost of making the
actual connections from the two wings to the old

building. The wings were designed to extend east
and north from the old central structure, one w

' g
for police and the other for municipal offices.§2

Work commenced on the new addition in 1964 (Figure 43).

The completion date for the project was anticipated to be

December 24, 1964, along with remodeling of the old City

41
according to Art Carney,

the City Manager.37

Hall, administrative assistant to

The addition was actually completed in 1965,
total cost of $630,000 (Figure 44).

it:

at 'the

As Patriarche describes

.As a result of this extensive program the
citizens of East Lansing now possess a modern,
impressive looking government facility. They may
now receive nearly all their services, in a
pleasant and efficient atmosphere, by contacting

the offices and departments located within this
one structure.

All residents may take pride in
this center of community. 38

The addition had two expansion areas and Carney thought
that it would provide adequate office space for at least the

next fifteen years. In his own words:

We hope to get along with what we have until 1980
and possibly longer,

depending on the growth of
the community.

One large expansion area could be utilized as one
large office or several smaller offices. The
other smaller expansion room would accommodate a
private office and secretarial spa

399' Both
expansion areas currently are not used

The city hall and its new addition houses the offices

of the Mayor, City Manager, Treasurer, Assessor, City Clerk,

Planning ‘Director, Building and. Parking Superintendents,

City Engineer and Building Inspector. It also houses the

Traffic Bureau and the Police, Fire and Water Departments.

The Jail is also located within its premises. The fifty—

foot space shooting range used by the East Lansing police

officers is found in the basement.

 

42
Future plans call for the establishment of court

facilities, which include an expanded space for concurrent
trials, a modern jail space, meeting for jurors, witnesses,
litigants and lawyers.40 The concern for additional space
was raised following' a court administrative study which
found East Lansing to have a immense backlog of cases:

. . .making it by far the busiest court in the

state.

As of 1989, the old City Hall has been totally
demolished and remains only as a photographic memory. There
is no physical trace of it. The new City Hall expansion

will adjoin the 1965 addition.

Comparison with other Governmental
Structure:

The fall of the European feudal system brought with it
a shifting of town control from royalty, nobility, and the
'church to urban dwellers. With this shift came a marriage
between commerce and politics. Architecture had to reflect
this marriage. In this respect, the oldest known hall--as a
building type-~is believed to be the Palazzo del Broletto
(1215) in Como, Italy (Figure 45).42 The upper floor of the
building, whidh comprised smaller rooms to keep records in,
and assembly halls, represents politics. The first floor,
whiCh includes an open arcade for markets, together with the

adjacent bell and clock tower, represents commerce.43

43
In the latter half of the thirteenth century, when

political life was still ordinarily separated from the life
of' the market, marked the emergence of political
architecture in the modern sense, historian Jurgen Paul has
pointed out.44 The closing of the ground floors in the
thirteenth and fourteenth century town halls of Florence and
Siena meant the separation of the political sphere from
business and commerce. The market places were also moved to
adjacent squares.45 In this regard, little change occurred
in the functional aspects of the European town halls between
1300 and 1700. However, Lois Craig argues that by 1800 the
functions of law administration and commerce were, for the
most part, separately housed. City halls served chiefly
political and ceremonial functions, garbed in prevalent
styles. The ebullience of style and size was also one
measure of city pride;' another was the festivity and
rhetoric that flowered at dedication ceremonies.46
Exemplifying this stylistic diversity are Boston’s second
City Hall, wrought in the Second Empire style, which grew in
popularity with the new Louvre in Paris (Figure 46);
Richmond City Hall (1886-94) in the High Victorian Gothic
style (Figure 47); and Henry Hobson Richardson's Romanesque

City Hall in Albany, New York (1881-83) (Figure 48).

The Romanesque Revival, inspired. by Richardson
established a standard for other United States civic
structures to followu Among ‘these were: Lowell,

Massachusetts (1890-93); Bay City, Michigan (1894-97);

44
Cambridge, Massachusetts (1889); Minneapolis, Minnesota

(built as a city-county building, 1889-1905); and Rochester,
New York (built as a U.S. Post Office and Courthouse, 1884-

91).

According to historian Alan Gowans, one reason for the
popularity of this style was Richardson’s ability to
synthesize the conflicting aesthetic values of naturalism
and classicism, which were in conflict with each other at
the time.4'7 Art historian Vincent Scully, Jr. confirms
Gowan's view:

America in the nineteenth century was the one to

which the future seemed most open and in which the

sense of actual uprootedness was most strong, it

was in America that the polarities [meaning

Romantic-Classicism and Romantic-Naturalism] were

first swept away in terms of a new continuous

architectural order.
In light of this, Scully credits H.H. Richardson as the

first American to unite continuity and permanent shelter

into architectural form as a single theme.49

The City Hall of Albany, New York (1881-83), by
Richardson (Figure 48), is imbued with this sense of
continuity and permanence as well as the idea of
monumentality. The first City Hall of Lansing (1896) is
comparable because its design also reveals the Richardsonian
influence. This style can be distinguished by the round-
topped arches occurring over windows, porch supports, or the
entranceway. The masonry walls usually consist of rough-

faced, squared stonework. Most structures wrought in this

45
style have towers which are normally round with conical

roofs. The facade is usually asymmetrical. It is eclectic
in nature, as it is adorned with a Gothic clock tower.
Albany’s city hall shows better integration and balance in
its vertical and horizontal massing than does Lansing’s
first city hall. Bay City City Hall, by architects Pratt
and Koeppe, (1894-97) is a beautiful late example of the
Richardsonian style (Figure 49). Particularly noteworthy is
Lansing’s bell tower, which dates back stylistically to the
medieval period. Bell towers were used specifically for
calling towns people to assembly meetings. Other
Richardsonian followers, besides Bowd, also favored the
return of the bell tower as a distinguishing feature of city

halls.

By 1892, the Romanesque Revival popularity had died out
partially due to the rise of Louis Sullivan's architectural
influence and the challenge of steel-cage construction.
Soon afterwards, the impact of the 1893 World’s Columbian
Exposition also placed white architecture in high demand in

Lansing and elsewhere.

Across the street from the Lansing city hall stood the
third state capitol building, designed by the renowned self-
made architect, Elijah Myers(1832-1909), in response to the
new Michigan Capitol competition announced through the press
on June 6, 1871 (Figure 50). Myers called the style of the

state capitol building, "Palladian."50 Each exterior level

46
of the capitol is designated by the Doric pilaster on the

first floor, the Ionic on the second floor, and the
Corinthian on the third floor. This capitol building
remains now as it was then on the exterior. But, today's
Lansing City Hall is built in the International style. One
of the journalists working for Lansing_§tate_gpurn§l, Lloyd
Moles, likened the new city hall building, stylistically, to
that of the Lever Building in New York City as was mentioned
previously. The Lever Building, as can be observed, is
proportionally more slender than Lansing’s city hall, due to
its vast thirty-nine story height (Figure 15). Squatty,
cumbersome and lacking in aesthetic sleekness, the City Hall
fails to capture and captivate the attention of an audience
which the Lever Building does. The new materials of
limestone, steel and glass are used repetitively in both
buildings. The Lever Building on the other hand cleverly
varies the use of the innovative glass walls by means of the
different sizes of rectangular shapes. Lansing's city hall
fails to join in such -play of delightful variation, and
therefore, causing the all-too-common malady--mediocrity, to
set in. The overall monotonous tone quickly loses its

visual appeal.

Monumentality is a characteristic attributable to each
building. But, in the aesthetic sense, true monumentalism
is attained in the Lever Building, but, except in scale, not
in 'the Lansing’ City' Hall” Talbot. Hamlin, 'the renowned

architectural historian of the 19205 and 308, declares that

47
"true monumentalism can be expressed only through an

architecture which combines into an aesthetic organic unity,

the basic principles of integrity, order and simplicity."51

If one surveys the Lever walls upward, at a glance, it
greatly dwarfs a person’s height to ant-size. Lansing City
Hall, on the other hand, neither accomplishes this awesome
dramatic effect, nor does it fully conform to the human
scale. This double failure leaves one in a kind of limbo as
this sense of neutrality tends to detach itself from
individual involvement, thereby leaving the occupant with a

feeling of incoherence and lack of participation.

Unlike either of the city halls of Lansing, East
Lansing’s city Hall was, and is, a reflection of a suburban
community, as it was originally built in the form of
residential architecture--in the Bungalow style. This style
evolved during the Arts and Crafts period and was especially
popular for residential architecture from 1910 to about
1930. The Bungalow style was sometimes selected and
employed by municipal architects for smaller local
government buildings and fire stations. The Colonial and
Greek Revival styles (to name a few), became more popular,
as one can see from the many pictures of civic architecture
at that time (Figures 51-53). The stylistic choice for East
Lansing's first City Hall was a design quite typical of the
19203 and 19303 for communities of its size. It was

indigenous in character and logical in plan.

CHAPTER 3
TOWARDS A SYNTHESIS:

Symbolic Implications
of City Halls within a Contextual Analysis

As mentioned in the Introduction, Nelson Goodman's four
terms of' reference, i.e.--denotation, exemplification,
expression, and mediated references, are useful in analyzing
the symbolic implications of the city halls of the Greater

Lansing area.

Denotation means a building in reference to itself.
Exemplification is a reference by a building to the
properties it possesses either literally or metaphorically.
Goodman prefers to use the term ’exemplification’ for
literal properties and ’expression’ for the metaphorical
properties. Mediated references are the objects or events
to which the structure refers. This can involve a chain of
reference, by which these objects or events alluded to refer

to other ideas, concepts, or theories.

Lansing

The concepts of' exemplification, expression and

mediated references might all be introduced into the

48

49

discussion of Lansing’s first city hall. Exemplification is
quite literally illustrated through the use of heavy rough-
hewn stone, which implies possessing the quality of massive
solidity. Expression is attributed to the powerful
interplay of historic architectural features united into a
single and simple composition. Mediated reference links
this structure to its historic architectural past, with the
Romanesque arches, Greek lintels and the so-called Gothic
tower. connotations of these features conjure memories of
architecture from ancient Greece and Rome and link it to the
original concepts of democracy and freedom. The Gothic
element signifies religious fervor, perhaps, or reaching
towards greater heights as stressed in its height. :n: is
apparent that architecture can convey symbolic meaning on

many levels.

The Lansing City Hall (1958-59) can again be analyzed
as exemplification, expression and mediated references. The
exploitation of new materials and technology is an example
of exemplification, as they are literal references to the
properties that this International style building possesses.
Metaphorically speaking, the expression of city hall can be
interpreted through the use of new materials and technology
in such a way as to provoke the image of ’progress.’ The
structure also conveys, at the same time, a mediated
reference: this new technology addresses the architectural‘

principles of regularity and functionalism, both of which

50
are followed in the International style. The repetitive

geometric shapes made of glass and metal rearticulate the
block design of the structure itself. In this manner,
attention is focused upon the straight lines and sharp

angles, collectively emphasizing the severity of shape.
East Lansing

If we now shift the discussion to East Lansing, we
should note that, denotation applies to the first City Hall
of East Lansing (1923). As it was fashioned after the
Bungalow house style, this building thereby referred to
itself, denoted itself as a house, and its importance as a
focus of a suburban community. Clearly, it was not meant to
appear an office building. Rather it blended in with the
residential neighborhood. This house-like image of local
government, was intended as the expression of a smaller
conununity, free from the more complex pressures known to

city life.

The mediated references link this structure, in turn,
to the American dream of success. Implicit in the
appearance of this building was the suggestion that if you
live in East Lansing, you might own a house, have a family,
and live. a comfortable life in the suburban atmosphere of

peace and tranquility.

But then this house-like image was covered up by the

later additions, in the International style. This

51
predominantly International style projected a new image for

East Lansing. It was now becoming more like Lansing's new
City Hall, only its materials of brick and glass add a
little warmth and character on a much smaller and more human

scale, appropriate to a modern suburb.

Cultural.Assosmment

In order to understand the image being represented by
the forms of the City Hall in relation to its community, in
addition to what has been provided by Rapoport, it is

necessary to define first the concept of culture.

The term ’culture’ is considered by Raymond Williams as
"one of the two or three most complicated words in the
English language.” According to him, the traditional
interpretation of the word 'culture’:

has been understood as ’high culture’--art,
literature, and the life-style of the well-to-do.
However, contemporary usage of the word is
understood in the-more familiar anthropological
sense, that is, the total complex way of life,
material aimd social as well as intellectual and
spiritual.

For the purpose of this paper, I prefer the following
anthropological definition because it includes a broader
segment of society, rather than a select few:

Anthropologists agree about the centrality of

’culture’ in defining humanity. Beyond that

however, they disagree much. more, so the
definitions abound. . . .

52

. . .it is enough to note that all
definitions fall into one of these categories.
The first of these defines culture in terms of a
way of life typical of a group; the second defines
it as a system of symbols, meanings and cognitive
schemata transmitted through symbolic codes; the
third defines it as a set of adaptive strategies
for survival, related. to the ecology and
resources. Increasingly, these three views are
not seen as being in conflict but rather as
complementary. . . .

What is important here is that 'culture' is to be

viewed as all-inclusive, rather than exclusive. We could
also provide a further definition, The Qigtignary 9;
Wm defines the term ’culture' as: first,

the total complex of intellectual and material life of a
particular society; secondly, a condition of moral and
intellectual refinement attained by individual persons;
thirdly, a level of development attained by an entire
society; and finally, the arts in general--music, the visual
arts, literature and so on.4 These four interpretations
.present themselves to different factions of society in their

different ways.

How can architecture then bridge the cultural gap
between the community and the individual? After all, for
any message to be communicated, it must first have a
"sender" and a "receiver." In this context, the message
sent via a building, namely a city hall, is from the
”community." The ’receivers’ of the community's message are
the individuals themselves who make up the community. Here

'community' is comprised of its government and its citizens.

53
In addition to members of a particular community, visitors

from other places can be included as receivers. Hence,
civic architecture can impact on the person playing
different roles. A useful example of this is Alvar Aalto’s
W in (Figure 54) Harris Stone's W
W. Stone attributes each detail of the Civic
Center design as being significant to the extent that it
expresses the dialectic between a person as an individual
and a person as a social being. He considers the tensions
and contradictions of each individual and his/her relation
to nature and other human beings in a changing society to be
the important factors which molded the design of ”Finlandia"

Hall.5

The distinction Aalto makes here between the person as
an individual and ‘the person as a social being is an
important one. The dialectical interaction between a person
as an individual and a person as a social being, as
expressed by the entirety of "Finlandia" Hall, .holds
regional communicative implications for the private and
public roles of a person. Stone credits Aalto’s civic
structure with taking visually active participation in
mediating between the individual as private self and the
social being as public self in such a manner as to ease the
tension and contradiction through architectural form. That,
Aalto claims, is the "communally binding realism” that can
provide a constant buffer between a citizen’s private self

and public self within unfolding change.

54
Like Aalto, Serge Chermayeff--architect, environmental

designer and author of Design_and_thg_gublig_§ggg, (1982),
believes in "the shape of community," which also depends
upon the individual, both as private and public entities.
Chermayeff wants "each public and private (domain) to be
true to itself..."6 Aalto, on this matter agrees, for he
contends the fact that architecture can, indeed, possess the
capacity to sustain the dynamic balance between both private
and public entities.'7 Therefore, Chermayeff and Aalto both
recognize the role that architecture can positively play
within the "community." And this can be illustrated by the
fact that city halls, as architectural forms, can be

visually active in defining the image of the community.

The urban sociologist Robert Parks describes the city
as "community" in terms of being a state of mind...a legal
entity, a product of human nature. . .[and] a body of
customs and 'traditions. [It] is comprised of inherent
organized attitudes and sentiments,. . .involved in the
vital processes of the people who compose it, and . . .a
collection of people further organized by human "tools" like
communications, transportation, political institutions and
economic devices. All of these, he states, are woven into

one "psycho-physical" mechanism.8

Parks is describing here the city in terms of
relationships between culture, the sense of community, and

the individual. This interaction of human "tools," i.e.

55
communications, transportation, political institutions, and

so on, combined with the "vital processes" of city members
and their customs and traditions, all operate and are
perhaps motivated by a given ideology--in this specific
case, the ideology of capitalism. Ideology in this context
is used to mean "any pattern of symbols and ideas which
serve the purpose of stabilizing the existing social
reality."9 Art as "symbols and ideas" can reflect this
equilibrative force. Thus, the concept of ideology is
useful in analyzing the social history of architecture--
namely, city halls--in terms of their cultural implications.
As architectural needs and demands become more
complex and expand, into open areas, roads and

public squares take on architectural
significance.10

Lansing

As has already been said in the previous discussion of
civic architecture, the size of the municipality greatly
determines the number and the types of services and
administrative functions that need to be included within the
city hall. Such an emphasis on function is exhibited in two
different types of design: first, in the small community
town hall and, secondly, in the metropolitan city hall.
Kump informs us that "the plan requirement and the resultant
structure emphasize the dominance of the legislative and
social functions in the former case, and in the latter, that
of the executive, service, and administrative activities:

the two approaches provide a ‘telling comparison of the

56
differences in character of the program for the two types of

structure--the town hall and the large city hall."11

It follows that architecture can be validly called a
social art and a social technology. Moreover, architecture
is social in that it expresses a social trend even if that
is very limited in extent. An architectural style
represents the efforts of many persons through a number of
generations who express themselves in a way that represents
all their beliefs and aspirations; in other words, it is not
just the efforts of a single architect, of one class, of
even one generation.12 Consequently, local architecture
retains the ideals and aspirations of the past members of
the community. The demolition of local symbols, as is the
case of Lansing and East Lansing, becomes noteworthy because
it signifies the fact that the value and identity of each
city hall decreases with the passing of time. New buildings
erected in place of the old city halls gain a new set of
values and identity. Some new buildings may retain the
characteristics or integrity of the past, although such a
retention is in fact unlikely. At any rate, they reveal at
least four of the fbllowing factors: cultural implications
pertaining’ to the act of demolition, technological
advancements in their construction, and the

industrialization and urbanization of the city.

The very act of demolition of the old City Hall

structure of Lansing, itself, becomes an omen, as the razing

57
of' an endured. architectural community' member erases its

value and obliterates its identity. Once commanding visual
attention from the whole of the city, the growth and
expansion of the city of Lansing eventually obscured the
view of the entire building, especially with the arrival of
the new City Hall structure. Lansing’s population and
economic growth required a building with better
accommodations. Technological advancement including the
invention of the elevator in 1854, had long ago made taller
structures possible. This innovation came approximately
forty-two years before Lansing’s first City Hall was put in
place. Several more floors were added to the new City Hall
as technological development made this possible. The
expansion of the 1959 city hall in Lansing was a necessary
response to increased urbanization. Lansing acquired new
wealth through the R.E. Olds plant and, this, in turn,
resulted in new jobs and the establishment of increased
housing, thus creating a need for a variety of new social

departments.
East Lansing

East Lansing’s first City Hall was demolished in 1988.
The fact that it was hidden from view underneath a wire mesh
screen meant the original value of the structure had been
obscured for years. Consequently, its meaning was no longer
of any importance to the city of East Lansing. Just as

Lansing's population and economic growth had influenced its

58
new building, especially in scale and style, the expansion

in East Lansing’ had impacted similarly. The new 1988
extension, wrought in the International style, was added to
the existing 1964 city hall addition. It is much larger
than its 1923 predecessor which once occupied that space.
The smaller residential scale ballooned with an updated
desire to become 'big.’ In essence, East Lansing’ had
outgrown its historically modest suburban status, acquiring

instead, an image of suburbanity.

Stylistic Assessment

Stylistic decisions for municipal architecture are
usually based on a made upon consideration of various
factors by the municipal architect such as the size of the
municipality, the architectural styles which are popular at
the time or which the architect favors and the approval of

the city council, its mayor or manager, and its citizens.
Lansing

Because of geographic proximity and architectural
influence, Chicago has proved to be an excellent source of
stylistic, if not functional, inspiration to both city halls
in Lansing. The evidence which supports this observation
can be summarized as follows. Two renowned architectural
styles, ’the Richardsonian. Romanesque,’ and. the

’International Style,’ were both well exemplified and

59
revered in the city of Chicago. Henry Hobson Richardson,

the innovative creator of ’Richardsonian style,’ and Mies
van der Rohe, partly responsible for the ingenuity of the
latter style, were the architects whom fellow architects
held in high esteem and emulation. I believe that the
philosophies of these architects, governed by their
individual ideologies, became the seeds for a predominant
mode of American architectural form. Being men of their
time, their creativity and internal conviction tended to
give each style integrity and therefore inherent meaning.
Americans, as well as Europeans, could ‘to some degree,
identify with these physical and visual characteristics in
ways they could understand. However different from one
another, both styles, in their separate ways, subscribe to

an effect of simplicity.

Many American, as well as EurOpean architects visited
the Chicago World’s Fair in 1893, in honor of H.H.
Richardson who had died seven years before. Located
approximately 165 miles from Chicago, Lansing--with the
growing availability of transportation and newspaper
information, became increasingly more exposed to influences
from Chicago. Many city halls built before the turn-of-the-
century followed H.H. Richardson’s stylistic lead, making

Lansing’s choice of design rather typical of its time.

Richardson developed his style between the years 1870

and 1873. In fact, most authors agree that his most

60
significant building is the Marshall Field Warehouse Store

of 1885-87 in Chicago (Figure 55). This building did not
rely on historicism as its predecessors had done, rather, it

maintained a character all its own, as Leonard K. Eaton,

says in Wm:

The Romanesque was the round-arched, barrel-
vaulted style of the twelfth-century in Western
Europe, but it must be stated that in turning to
it for inspiration Richardson went far beyond the
traditional historicism of his day. What he was
seeking was its primitive strength and vigor...his
buildings were only vaguely archeological. They
made an overwhelming impression on Richardson’s
contemporaries by the boldness of their stonework.
In an age of Jerry-building, Richardson not only
insisted on the integrity of the masonry wall but
often employed a powerful, rock-faced ashlar to
obtain a characteristically strong textural
effect. In a sense they were excellent symbols
for his clients, who included some of the foremost
industrial tycoons and political spoilsmen of the
day. As Lewis Mumford has pointed out, Richardson
must be seen as an architect very much in tune
with his own time. He did not reject the forges
of industrialism but sought to discipline them.

The Albany City Hall was chosen as one of the best
known buildings by Richardson (Figure 48). The
characteristics for making this particular style a popular
choice of its time are cited by Vincent Scully in Modern
mm:

The power of Richardson’s forms gave a

demonstration of unmatched confidence was in three

things: in continuity, in permanence, and in the
power of a building to embody an heroic attitude.

Richardson’s Marshall Field Warehouse in Chicago,

of 1 85-87, shows all these qualities best (Figure

55).

Lansing’s original City Hall displays these three

qualities: continuity, permanence and embodiment of an

61
heroic attitude. This solid fortress-like structure gives

the spectator the impression of stability depicted by the
heavy mass which is effectively situated in a commanding
site. The heroic attitude was made explicit by its
silhouette, especially with the Gothic clock tower rising
high above the skyline of the entire city of Lansing. This
City Hall is by far more humble and modest than its other
Richardsonian Romanesque "cousins," and yet it maintains the
dignity associated with an heroic attitude. The translation
of the past, i.e., the Romanesque, Greek and Gothic
architectural features, honor the present with the thread of

continuity as a metaphor for city government.

The International style (1925+present) in architecture
was primarily designed by six architects: Le Corbusier
(France), J.J.P. Oud and Gerrit Rietveld (Holland), Walter
Gropius and Ludwig Mies van der Rohe (Germany) and Philip
Johnson (United States). It appears that these architects
developed the architectural theory of regularity that grew
out of an innovative technological concept which held that a
structural skeleton, usually of steel, could be covered by a
thin, non-structural skin. This exploitation of new
materials and technology explored and emphasized the
functions of the building, rather than the previously
favored visual expression of historical features. The
facades were designed asymmetrically, as they were thought
to reflect the compositions of the internal structural

skeletons. Other characteristics of' this style include

62
unornamented wall surfaces in which windows, often encased

in metal, sat flush, and both windows and doors lacked
decorative details. The roof of an International style

building is flat and lacks a ledge.

Lansing’s second City Hall of 1958-59 holds true to
this description of 'the International style. The city
officials thought the City Hall design would honor Lansing
as the new symbol of progress, since they considered it a

progressive, industrial city in the late 50’s.

In the industrial sense, progress meant making a profit
--a reward for business. Since business is one form of
social organization around which the economy of the
community revolves and thrives, the large block of City
Hall, adjoined with the smaller block of the Police Station
and Jail could better exemplify the systematic operations of
business, its routine and meticulous efficiency. The once
'redeeming qualities of continuity, permanence and embodiment
of' an heroic attitude became old-fashioned, even though
Lansing’s first City Hall had displayed faith in business

through its massive solidity.

Instead, the repetition of geometric planes articulated
the horizontality and verticality of the great rectangular
blocks of City Hall. The volume of glass and painted metal
abound, yet the variety of size is lacking, which gives more.
attention to the monotonous rush of unadorned surfaces.

Lansing’s present City Hall is simple, yes...and sterile.

63
It lacks the often elegant and refined simplicity one finds

in Mies van der Rohe’s creations. Monumental,
yes...Grandeur, no. As one can admire the buildings of Mies
van. der' Rohe, this ‘building lacks the 'visual appeal of
architecture as art. Unfortunately, this building is
architecture as an engineering exercise. Zest and vitality
of design are de-emphasized in this monstrosity. It sits,
but it does not breathe... not in the characteristic way the
original stone building once did. A sense of dehumanization
prevails. This city hall occupies space, but it does not
inspire. It serves to echo the urban sprawl of concrete and
metal. Its foreboding presence implores citizens and
visitors to stay away, unless the transaction _should take
only a few minutes. In other words...we can do business,
but make it snappy. Gone is the personalization and warmth

of business of the past.
East Lansing

The influence of the Bungalow style is inherent within
the first City Hall of East Lansing (1923). The
architectural features of this building are similar to the
characteristics of houses built in the eclectic Bungalow
style. It is agreeable that such an appropriate style was
selected for the purpose of a municipal building. This
stylistic preference seems to "fit" the image that East
Lansing wanted to project at that particular time. In its

early years, East Lansing was modestly suburban and

64
residential, the town had certain appeal for those who

desired life in a peaceful and tranquil environment. This
life appealed strongly to the faculty, staff and students of
Michigan Agriculture College. The advantage of living in
East Lansing was that it was close to the college campus and

relatively close to the larger city of Lansing.

The house-like image of City Hall projected the
familiarity of "home” and whatever people associated with

that term.

The International style was designated as the style
which could successfully recreate a new image for the city
of East Lansing. The question of image appears to be raised
as an important issue following the construction of
Lansing’s new City Hall (1958-59). The ,Lansing__§tatg
Jamal, to which many East Lansing residents subscribed,
made quite a stir over its new municipal structure. Their
awareness of 'their’ neighbor’s excitement was felt.
Excitement, like wild fire, spreads and cannot be easily
contained. The rationale--that if Lansing needed cosmetic
surgery in its public appearance--then, perhaps, so did East

Lansing.

As East Lansing was a smaller community than Lansing,
funds for City Hall were smaller. Therefore, only an
addition to the main structure (1923) was made in 1962.
This part, fashioned in a geometric block of the

International style, created an entirely different image

65
from the previous one. The shift from the image of an

agricultural community to a suburban one was in the process
of being established. The acquisition of land and

population helped to spur this development.

The East Lansing community still retains some
architectural members of its past which reflect the Bungalow
style. These structures can serve to recreate some of the
essence which was felt in East Lansing’s early days. Some
of these buildings lie in the immediate surroundings of the
”new" City Hall site. While the losses of the early City
Hall buildings are felt, especially after researching the
histories of Lansing and East Lansing, I feel it is
important to become aware of the changes and the "change of
change" made in local history. Visual references in
physical structures are particularly useful in understanding
the process and nature of societal and cultural change.
Therefore, stylistic implications of city halls become

extremely useful in understanding their symbolic nature.

Historical Influences of Past Forms
over Present Ones

Lansing

The shaping of city hall forms is governed by
historical considerations, as well as cultural and stylistic
ones. The historical development of Lansing and East

Lansing, which made a difference in the process of selection

66
of their city halls, is a case in point. Lansing, we

recall, was settled by pioneers and later grew into a very
stable agricultural community. At one time it was even the
center for national wheat distribution. The first Lansing
City Hall exemplified this stronghold in agriculture and
promoted Lansing as a truly stable and sound city, in all

its rustic and monumental solidity.

After the chaos of World War II, the old structure was
found to be too small. Size was not the only determining
factor. It was believed that Lansing had outgrown the
agricultural image. Hence, in 1959, it dedicated its new
International Style city hall, as a "symbol of pride and
faith in progress" to all its citizens and the rest of the
world. Lansing’s image had changed. It was no longer
strictly agricultural in nature. Instead, Oldsmobile had
made Lansing world famous for its automobile industry. The
community thrived on its newly found recognition and
prestige. What was needed to promote the new image was
therefore, a new city hall, one which would reflect
Lansing’s advancement and its faith in progress, and in
which the community fervently believed. This belief was
greatly revered and the citizens of Lansing were convinced
that it would eventually lead them to "bigger and even
better things." The new twentieth century refinement of
steel and glass curtain walls provided a remarkable
vocabulary for showing that technological advancement was

being made in Lansing. The pride of Lansing’s community

67
swelled with the monumental proportions of the new City

Hall. It retained the overt message of pride which the old
City Hall had generously offered to its citizens, but in a
"new language" for a new generation. This became the
pivotal point around which the community could rally, even

though the building is a monstrosity.
East Lansing

Lack of funds made it difficult to build a new
structure in the 19603, so new additions made up for space
expansion as well as stylistic change. The old brick City
Hall created in the fashion of a big house, was thought
necessary to become more contemporary and professional in
appearance in order to fulfill its role as a suburban city
hall. Once again, the International Style was put to use.
Six years after Lansing’s new City Hall had been dedicated,
East Lansing’s city hall gained its new image. The original
'simple brick structure was camouflaged from public view with
a metal mesh screen and white paint. The new part displayed
a new office-like image. Professionalism, in this case, in
the interest of the evergrowing university population was
its intent. It, too, provided a new pivotal point for its.
community. As of this year, the old part of City Hall has
been demolished and a new addition is being adjoined in the

old place.

Now that both Lansing and East Lansing’s old City Halls

are gone in favor of building of modern design, one may ask:

68
Was the symbolic and architectural language of these past

City Halls simply unknown or just misunderstood by the new
city governments and the new generation? The lack of
knowledge of local history makes it difficult to understand
the historic significance of the old City Halls, of what
they symbolized. Understanding the history would have
created a flow of communication between the past and
present--an appreciation and respect for the achievements of
those who came before us and upon which we have built.
These collective memories fostered through tangible sources
can keep alive the understanding and respect we have for
others and for society. If a community should ever lose
sight of its past, then it runs the danger of risking its
identity, especially now that the world is becoming engulfed
and enmeshed within a global view of place. To be able to
learn from past generations, to be inspired by their
achievements--and most importantly, to learn from their
mistakes is a task assigned by history. To demolish one
possible source of history--in this case, city halls, is

therefore to demolish one’s past and hence one’s history.

CHAPTER 4

CONCLUSION

We live in an age when it has been a more common
practice to write architectural theory rather than to test
it with buildings, and to destroy older buildings while new
buildings undergo construction. Such devastating change has
revolutionized the way we think about buildings, especially
the old, Once taken for granted. and razed, the older
existing structures are now being reassessed and conserved

by various means.

Many angry protests of architectural rapes over the
past twenty years have actually led to the awareness of the
need to preserve our American heritage. As a result, the
torch for historic preservation is being carried. Rather
than razing the architecture of the past, the preservation
movement has seen fit to incorporate our architectural past

well into the mainstream of the future.

No longer must our city images suffer trauma from the
severance of their roots, as they are now able to integrate
their histories with the present in a nationwide effort to
protect diminishing unique city identities. Regional

identities coupled with their symbols of the past enhance

69

70

"the life of the city," and its vitality, because they can
provide ambiance and identity which separates and gives

character to a particular city that is identical to none.

After World War II, faith in progress became our
future. Such faith was the emerging result from new
discoveries in science and technology, and recovery from the
war. The social ills in our society, however, were not
solved and continue to run rampant. We have learned the
hard way that "faith in conservation" provides hope for our
future. It can hardly be disputed that the recent past
confronts us with a dismal, generic, and sterile landscape
view with which "progress" has rewarded us. The buildings
protected by various means of conservation leave us the
roots of our past that can provide us with stability and
protect us from the sense of lost identity. No longer shall
we fall prey to amnesia. For the quality of stability i_s_
the very prescription necessary to remedy the instability
caused partially be the lack of knowledge of and respect for
our history, and partially by the ominous possibilities of
nuclear devastation, pollution and the eruption of social
violence which mercilessly hover over our heads day in and

day out.

The late British Prime Minister, Winston Churchill was
right when he said, "We shape our buildings: thereafter they
shape us."1 We do give cultural expression to our building

forms because their meanings are embodied within. The

71
buildings become eventually so familiar to us through the

community fabric, that we become a part of them through
identifying with the region. We cannot, in fact, escape our
identification with them. These visual memories lodged so
deeply within us become the symbolic origins for each
individual’s concept of community, either on the conscious

or subconscious level.

We have also learned that newer does not always mean
better; bigger does not always mean better; and older does
not always mean better, but to the latter’s credit, it has
stood the test of time. That, in itself, is worthy of

merit.

It is often said that the past can inform and instruct
the present, and that, even if history does not repeat
itself, its circumstances can and often do go in parallels.
Given that, if society is to draw the necessary inspiration
from the past and to be able to learn from its
accomplishments, its -historic achievements must be
conserved. Inn this case, conservation becomes progress in

the historical sense of the term.

In the past, numerous and valuable historic structures
in the United States were razed for one reason or another--
including giving way to modern "progress." In razing such
structures, the American people were declaring war on
themselves. This is so because by cutting themselves from

their' past, they' were questioning ‘their achievements on

72
which their present is built and on which their future

depends.

Nevertheless, the National Historic Preservation Act of
1966, even if it came too late, has had positive effects.
Indeed, as a result of that legislation, many historic
structures have been saved and protected. But what about

those that have been razed?

This study which has been inspired in part by the
implications of that historic act, has attempted to
investigate the symbolic implications of past and present
city hall buildings of Lansing and East Lansing. In the
process, it has surveyed. their' evolutionary' developments
between 1859 and 1988, and has also addressed such questions
as: What influenced the form and stylistic character of the
city halls? What symbolic implications are reflected in
their design and constitutions? Do the historical
’influences of 'the ,past forms have any influence on 'the
present structures? What are the cultural values manifested

in the structural forms?

In attempting to answer such questions, and in
investigating the nature of the structures, an
interdisciplinary approach has been utilized. Such an
approach involves history, aesthetics, architecture,
philosophy, economics, and sociology in order to interpret
the symbolic implications of city halls past and present, in

the Greater Lansing Area.

73
Evidently, the meaning derived from investigating the

architectures cannot just be aesthetic. They do relate to a
variety of different interpretations and respond to
different levels of society. The various layers of meaning
therefore reflect the cultural values inherent within the

community.

If we take the original Lansing City Hall, for
instance, it reflected the Lansing government body’s ideals
and aspirations through its carefully chosen Richardsonian
style of 1896. Similarly, when the new City Hall was built
in Lansing in 1959, it supposedly represented their faith in
"progress." Progress--in this case--meant, displaying
technological achievements. But in razing the old City
Hall, the act could mean negating consciously or
unconsciously what it represented--the spirit of the old
pioneers, the community’s values, the rich history of the
automotive and agricultural industries, H.H. Richardson’s
architectural style, and the spirit of the first government

of the city of Lansing.

The new City Hall, therefore, represented order and the
power and influence of business. If reflected the
transition from an agricultural economy into an industrial
one. Most significantly, its cold metallic exterior does
not engage the human spirit and blends into the concrete

jungle. It has no ornamentation and is devoid of historic

74
continuity. It conveys the power of mechanical technology

over the human spirit.

East Lansing’s first City Hall has not fared any
better. The original building, which was constructed in
1923, eventually disappeared to the point where it could not
be recognized. At the time of this writing, and as a matter
of fact, it has been entirely torn down, and is to be

replaced by a new addition.

"New" additions were made to the original structure in
1931, and also in 1965. The old building, to which the 1965
expansion was added, was covered with white paint and a
metal mesh screen. This has denied all links with the past
in order to maintain visual coherence with the new part.
What should be noted in this case, is the little concern
made for history and for historical continuity at the local

level.

Strange as it may seem, the State of Michigan has a
rich history that the American people can be justifiably
proud of--and that is worth preserving. The state
government should therefore take the initiative to formulate
and enact the necessary legislation to that end. Funds
could be raised by means of which awareness can be
intensified, and adequate research and surveys made in order
to determine, and thereby to conserve those structures for

history and posterity.

Figure 1.

Map of Greater Lansing, Michigan.

 

 

Cl

LAMflNfi:IO

EASYLJNQ'

GREKHEILANSMNFAREA

 

-—— ._.m_7

L...........—...

 

 

75

 

Figure 2. Population Growth--Lansing & Its Environs.

m

100

 

 

POPULATION

 

g
HME IN DECADES

POPULATION GROWTH
LANSING 6/ ENVIRONS

I970

 

 

CITY PLAN gnome/m
COMMISSION “.me

 

 

PLATE 8
fl.“ ‘3‘! 1.11“.

 

76

Figure 3. City Growth of East Lansing.

 

cm or 4
_Jyuwtnumwo
Whigs-

* ii
'9

. ."

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

. a mum.
“‘:--‘ h' "

 

 

nee—IO. =

 

 

 

7'7

Figure 4. Two Municipal Forms of Government.

 

Vbters I

 

 

 

811ct
I_.;:E:__
t
Mayor I , Council

 

 

 

 

Appoints

 

 

 

 

LLL'L'JIEJJLEL]

l4H¢HflG

MAYOR - COUNCIL

DH - Depart-ant Heads

 

 

 

 

78

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

l2". LPL [EU

M4

Eedfl'LAwuu
Imumn.-wmumn

 

 

Figure 5. Map of Lansing.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

    
     

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I ‘ ' I
a 5 TIE
Ill!!! ' :_,
- _'

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

.. p."
CIONIIII '

. , .Lt'l'. I
3‘ .t'
‘ ,_‘ . u 09¢:-

 

    
  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

EXISITING DEVELOPMENT AROUND STATE CAPITOL
LANSING MICNIOAN

t O E N 0
mt: 0mm senses:
”we a warm eases:

(“9
Hunt: cosmm “mm“ ”m“

[I‘LILIOII "

 

MU."
sun mama: mo ”...m
"I" 0' socsmu m
CI" M COMIISON on nuns: sale- w
“'7 OP issued use." anneal-”fl
_ use."

 

 

79

Figure 6. Map of Lansing--Enlargement.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

CAPITOL . AVENUE

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

_ T—
0“ 3a. a
Post on.
3m 0" ”1*”
2 was
2 < <
5 2 sm 3
IL] I <
j 2 I:
< 2 0
WASHINGTON AVENUE

 

L

I

80

Figure 7. Old City Hall in its environment. Edwin A.
Bowd. Lansing, Michigan (1895-96) .

 

-
.I lIn- I’m! ("fur and "M Lin "all In "u- IInnv-nind ( lulnh, {he
an IIIr \h-llu-Ii-l l Inm-h Ilsvr In" rmmvrd,

Lamb": w-r‘ll .Ilum Laplml Art-mu lrnm \lirhuau -\rrmu m I'IIJ, p:
(Irnlnl \‘rnllNlI-l I'Ipicrn'ul thlfl'll ran lvr v-rrn un IIIr lrfl_ Ily I‘m". ll“

81

Lansing (1895-96).

Bowd.

A.

E.
Facing Corner of Capitol Avenue and Ottawa

Old City Hall.
Street.

Figure 8.

WIA'ONI ¢°.. SNKA“. ILL.

 

 

NC. MICH.

CITY HALL. LANSI

82

Figure 9. Old City Hall. E. A. Bowd. Lansing (1895-96).
Facing Ottawa Street.

City Hall,
Lansing, Mich.

 

 

“555. Hf

83

Figure 10. Allegheny County Courthouse.

H. H. Richardson.
Pennsylvania (1884-88).

1

I;
E

 

84

A.

E.

Facing Corner of

Lansing (1895-96).

Old Post Office (1894) and Old City Hall.
Capitol and Michigan Avenues.

Bowd.

Figure 11.

 

 

 

s
a...

Post Oflice and CI" I'Iallfhnflngfflich.

 

 

 

85

Figure 12. Old Post Office (1894) and Old YMCA (1908) .
Lansing. Facing Michigan Avenue.

--.-..-.o—.,~.-\ v-w. ‘ .-.:—p——— u- . ...L“ a..-

  
  
    

Post Office and Y. M. C. A., Len-Ina, Mich.

 

 

   

. . .'..,..,r 131-. "'
. -a..~":- m. -

86

Figure 13. Old Post Office (1894), Old City Hall (1895-96),
and Old YMCA (1908) . Lansing. Facing Corner of
Capitol and Michigan Avenues.

CITY HALL. POST OFFICE ANDY I C k. LANSING. IICN

 

87

Figure 14. New City Hall and Police Station. Kenneth

Black. Lansing, Michigan (1958-59). Facing

Northeast Corner of Capitol and Michigan
Avenues.

15‘." '.| _
' t' -
I

5

l ‘ "inn” ‘6‘ k
fir HIV-I." "
2‘ 1., ,-" .

        

Hmlesss 0e naval"
III "I. fluent-eves»:
blobs”! ores-uh,lnetseddwehefllhemlmem

88

Figure 15. Washington Square Annex, New City Hall and
Police Station. Kenneth Black. Lansing (1958-
59).

I
I

 

 

'77

    

II :3: rs ll

.r' —_L.. P_ 3.!

‘. ._ Si

N -‘ mes

' r " '5 '15-:- '3"
-' ll

   

      
       

..[a

I
“,1.
'IsIIquIII-IIII I l‘
-l
an!

luau-’3“
eeerlu

’ 0,1’

, \\\\

.L ‘
0"
"Us"!
v\.'c’.'."
.I
.J ’.

If,
I

,I

|

a

I

I

I

I

    

I
N
p

.-"L'

 

‘3

 

89

Figure 16. New City Hall. Kenneth Black. Lansing (1958-
59) . Facing Capitol Avenue.

 

90

Figure 17. New City Hall and Landscaped Plaza on Corner of
Capitol and Michigan Avenues.

 

91

Figure 18. Capitol Building of Michigan. E. E. Myers.
Lansing (1879) .

q“

"II'III:I ,,. I‘ "III
I

' le—e‘

 

92

Figure 19. Michigan National Tower. Lansing (1927-31) .
Facing Northeast Corner of Capitol Avenue and
Allegan Street.

 

93

Figure 20. Bank of Lansing. Lansing (1931). Facing
Northeast Corner of Washington and Michigan
Avenues.

‘1',

 

94

(1888-

,H. a: .
n“. ..
i

   

ing

.. f. 5.1::

. Lans

ited Methodist Church
200 West Ottawa Street.

Central Un

89).

Figure 21.

J :93.

95

Figure 22. Side Entry to Washington Square Annex. Lansing.
Facing Ottawa Street.

 

fig .‘2.

1
.‘é
..
.
.3

 

96

Figure 23. Washington Square Annex and Board of Water and
Light. Lansing. Facing Capitol Avenue.

34.3.31 ~

     

97

Figure 24. New City Hall Motif. Facing Capitol Avenue.

 

98

Figure 25. New City Hall Addition. TMP Architects. East
Lansing, Michigan (1988).

 

99

Figure 26. Old City Hall. East Lansing (1923-31) .

 

100

Figure 27. House at 322 Abbott Road. East Lansing (c.
1920) .

 

101

Figure 28. 1962 Addition to City Hall. East Lansing.
Facing Abbott Road.

 

'-.

HOW IT MIGHT LOOK-ones! ene svehilecl
envisioned the scveen severing the aid sily
IIelI will leek (see slot, ‘0' Jeleils).

    

  

I 4!;5.‘ I‘M. ? .‘ “3
I“ “I I I3 “M ." :: gm;
IIIIIIIIII )n H. ".

 
 
   

rm
, ssse esssss see
:33: !IIIIIIIIIIII

.-

     

THE STEEL “RACES—nets the. en OlIe sides of lll. ell City Hell

102

Figure 29. 1962 Addition to City Hall. East Lansing.
Facing Abbott Road.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

103

Holland (1648-55).

Amsterdam Town Hall.

Figure 30 .

 

104

Figure 31. Boston City Hall. Kallman, Mc Kinnell &
Knowles. Massachusetts (1962-69).

 

105

Figure 32. Consumer’s Power Company. Lansing (served as
City Hall 1859-96) . Facing East Michigan
Avenue.

 

until 1898, also housed the Board offices.

106

Figure 33. Juxtaposition of Old and New City Hall. Lansing
(1895-1959) .

 

 

107

Figure 34. Razing Old City Hall. Lansing (1895-96) .

e I
. p .

"it-’HNSING v QDLLECTIOII}

“J" :4‘y...,.«. ».
. '~ ‘- ~I~9N....,,...

,~ “(r-rye -’
.09.. ‘ "‘9“

.s
m—

.. . .
”'4M‘mr

, . . n
‘ J‘ ‘4 "
'0.“ 7’" ‘
. r'- .3
k ‘> v"
, . «a
W

v..-
“'- “.‘n.3‘4 I .

I , ‘
. - y,r..-~(»
«(as ‘ ire

 

108

Figure 35. Razing Old City Hall. Lansing (1895-96) .

  
     

-1 o—r m P .~- -
mow- «CH- c; LlcC'stN

 
 

‘ 1’3“; ‘5 ,u at”;

‘1. .‘éfi—ganuawswkgT'
“ VANISHING LANDMARK — malnlng pine, lho lull lower,

Tho old city lull I'M." n- 30! ll» rlglwnnd lho Nautilul

duud lo robblo, hon ham" nu! cily lull on Oh. Ion.

lho capitol will! In In! n- (50000 Journal PM“).

 

109

Figure 36. Razing Old City Hall. Lansing (1895-96) .

mammal "COLLECTEI .i
.LANsleG

‘_l

       

DOWN SHE MESH—Sidewalk ere removing flue roof and pooled lo be eomololed In
"a ellice window "gm." .elock lower end lho iob is u- ebout live or Ii: weeks.

by lhe dozens glued ln leni-
nelion Monday ollernoon el
um huge crene with hueltel
end elem bellered down the
one! well of the old clly lull
on W. Ollewo ll. Cloud: el
pluler dun bloomed over ”so
whole block es llIe elem
dumped meeelve chunke ol
brkk end mono! lo berrleeded
one: below. Worker: en lop

110

Figure 37. Razing Old City Hall. Lansing (1895-96) .

HSTOHICAL COLLECTICI
. .le NG

 

111

 

Figure 38.

T

Avenue

 

———.-_ -.— —.-
- non.

Coo-00.0..

 

 

(71y Plan.

Comm/Juan f;.".1..m’i§f&§; " “ammo-r:
04 “can an «an (hot.
0 v- 5 I g I e 1-
rfifii f”?

Plans for Civic Center.

Lansing (1938).

 

‘

' L “Giff:- ‘ ' .11..»
MICHIOA ,_

2:22.:

..::.i;;=$;1~
J

cum.
.. HMN

 

 

I! la”
c”,

 

 

 

   

fl

 

Kannada-’0‘

Togo-e! j . J

[7 ' -‘-€x‘€~i\§%&~é X- )

 

o
p.
' C

 

leveelto

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

’fieo‘i’au C ooooooooo
. Doeeuoonelt
E s
: :
i 0

.Mo- Lav-9': ,- :i E
ii ;
‘1
k _J

A v e l I O
énBJ,an FLNNE42

 

 

112

Figure 39. Lever Building. Gordon Bunshaft. New York City
(c. 1945) .

. _ I‘..‘|
~‘.l—"nln'llll
'5]!th m .

9. , “Hi
Ll lllllllm mm.

=
i
3
x:
3

{

,,.

V .

lul‘ill- ll

 

113

Figure 40.

Overcrowding in City Hall.
193

leluurdoue duty

 

  

Tyfiwii-r' i -
don't den stand at attention in
the detective “tween" In the
hamundlhomeufidw
hm.smvbhwn h “flu
the winter end dripplng plpee In
the eummor Ileep officer: a
their toes.

114

East Lansing (1923-

Figure 41. gvercrowding in City Hall. East Lansing (1923-
1) o

  
  

. v. ,m

IURSTlNG ITS MO RTA R forced to live in. City officials, cult to conduct the city's busi-
JOINTS —Eul’ Lansing's city police and firemen end office nose in the overcrowded build-
hell I: like the shoe the Old workers who total around a ing. (State Journal Photos.)
Women and ell her kids were during work deys find it dilfi- ‘

 

   

115

Figure 42. Proposed City Hall. Mayotte-Webb Architects.
East Lansing 1923-1963) .

 

 

/ i ' ‘. ‘33..""1Lifzij'iWilli?“
, ‘ . .. t : ---3 a will,"

    

PROPOSED CITY HALL ,

Thie lo the pro eed new City He“ lot Linden St. The plan, drown by M”.

lent Leeelng. e etoe obscured by on ette-Wehh Architecte, hove not been
ole-inn. eolev ecroen (right) ie the pte- linelieed. But City Manager Join. Pam.
eeet heilding. A eelell pert ol the iron! etche eold preliminery eetintetee eve

et fie pneent ilhtery, will he moved that the building will cut oltout
te pet-it lnetelletien ol the letge win- 5500.0“. The pveeent building wee con-
dowo. The drewing ehewe e I'D-I9." etrected in 1923, with edditione eve!
edditlon on the north. extending eever- fie next low yeove. Finenclng will he
ei loot eeuh ol the pteeonl heildinl . determined by vote" deciding on e gen.
line. On the eelllll I”. (Ml 'W) ' etel ehllgetion bend ieeee thie opting
eee—etety wlug will he eetonded eleng .. ,5. d" .luflflm

116

Figure 43. Construction on City Hall. East Lansing.

      

-. _ .—— _,.'-..

Yoe'te need to Ioehing ot the tront (Ahltott Rd.) Police Denna... will occupy the

eido ot City He". Thoro'e coneidoteltly note "0.! portion in tho tongroond. The old City
KN" lung. hidden on bed (GIOV- 5%) ltell ehewe etlett.

side. This ie how it look: tro- Gtevo. The fun- Coo-mob“- hle’h-h'

117

Figure 44. Completed City Hall. East Lansing (1923-65) .

 

 

118

Figure 45. Palazzo de Broletto. Como, Italy (1215) .

    

'7 .. 1:1

119

Figure 46. Boston Old City Hall. Massachusetts
(1862-65). HABS.

 

120

Figure 47. Richmond City Hall. Virginia (1886—94).

    

   

- 2'
. ..

.. ~

..
u.

l. [‘4' f '
’Z’Jll‘j fil’f‘, ' «

.Ifil

      
 
 

Figure 48. Albany City Hall. New York (1881-83).

 

121

Figure 49. Bay City City Hall. Pratt and Koeppe
Architects. Michigan (1894-97).

i: .'

._3 ~
; 3
3 ..
-_ 3 "
‘ iii

~“it. .r_ E
‘I’vw"

J' till

..I.

 

122

Figure 50. Michigan Capitol. E. E. Myers. Lansing,
Michigan (1871).

.215... .'

. . _l f (c
1.33 animatifilmw ’6‘".
i'llll'llllififi‘ ' filllllll 32;.

L33: ii Ple'llifilfllflwfiiil ; ' 1......_ ._

I e
' ' ll “am
I . i 1;
' . ‘ l ’J \" ‘- 0 ..

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

123

Bigelow and Wadsworth, Architects.

Massachusetts.

Town Hall.
Weston,

Figure 51.

 

 

 

 

124

Figure 52. City Hall. John Russell Pope.
Plattsburgh, New York.

 

 

125

Figure 53. Municipal Group at Springfield, Massachusetts.
Pell and Corbett Architects.

 

 

 

126

Figure 54. Civic Center. Alvar Aalto. S'aynatsalo,
Finland (1950-51) . East Entrance.

 

127

(1885-87).

18

Henry Hobson

1110

I11

1cago,

1d Warehouse.
Ch

1e

Marshall F
Richardson.

55.

Figure

 

128

FOOTNOTES

Pretace

1) Louis Sullivan, KiDQ§£g§£L§D___§h§L§ (New York:
Wittenborn, Schultz, c. 1947), quoted in David Lowe,
W (Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1975),

introductory page.

CHAPTER 1
Introduction

1) "Getting Around Greater Lansing," Lansing_§tate_£ournal.
August 23, 1987, p. 2.

2) Romig, Walter. Miehigan Pleee Nemee, 1973, p. 318.

3) Robinson, Willard B. The Peeple'e Arehiteeture, ix.
4) Goodman, Nelson. "Che Cosa Significa Construire, E

Quaggo E Perche," m, vol. #672-74, May-August 1986,
p. .

Rationale for Symbolic Implications

5) King, Anthony D. Building_end_§eeie;y, p. 4.

6) Goodman, p. 17.

7) Ibid.

8) Ibid.

9) Goodman, p. 20.

10) King, ed., Rapport, Amos. "Cultural Determinants of
Form." W. p- 286-

11) Ibid.
12) Hughes, Robert. Sheeg ef the New, p. 211.

129

13)
14)
15)

16)
17)

130

Ibid.

Sullivan, Louis . Wats-

Patriarche, John M. WW1
o£_fiast_Lansing. 1965. pp. 24-25-

Longer, Suzanne K. Wm. p- xi-
Ibid., p. 96, 97, and 99.

Historical Background of the Greater

18)

19)
20)
21)
22)
23)
24)
25)
26)
27)
28)
29)
30)
31)
32)
33)
34)

Lansing.Area

Verway. David F . , editor . WW
Abeegeet, Twentieth Edition, 1986-87, April, 1987.
Bureau of Business Research School of' Business
.Administration, Wayne State University, Detroit, MI.
Appendix, p.x.

Kestenbaum, Justin L. Qe;_e§_e_flilge;neee, p.37.
Kestenbaum, p.67.

Ibid.

Kestenbaum, . 68.
Kestenbaum, . 73.

P

P
Kestenbaum, p. 104.

P

P

Kestenbaum, . 105.
Kestenbaum, 106.
Ibid.
Ibid.

Kestenbaum, p. 110.
Kestenbaum, p. 111.
Kestenbaum, p. 114.
Ibid.
Ibid.

Kestenbaum, p. 41.

35)

36)
37)

38)
39)
40)

41)
42)
43)

Manassah, Sallie M. Lansing1_ssnita11_samsusl_and_cars.
1986, p. 178.

Manassah, p. 178.

Swanson, Bert and Edith Swanson. Qieeeyeging_;he
Community. p- 23-

King, Anthony D. p. 4.

Swanson, p. 137.

Martin, Paul A., ed. r T w W 1 m
i

wn° " i n

Michigan," 1960, P- 2.
Manassah, p. 178.

Swanson, p. 139.

Ibid.

CHAPTER 2

.Architectural and Historical Development

1)
10o

2)
.3)
4)
5)
6)

7)

8)

of City Balls as Building Types
Pevsner, Nikolaus. A Hiegery ef Beilging Iypee, 1976, p.

Ibid, p. 53.
Stern, Robert. P;ide_e§_21eee, 1986, p. 220-221.
Ibid.

Pevsner, p. 62.

Chermayeff, Serge. Design_and_the_zuhlis_§ood. 1982, p.
92-93 o
Collins, Peter. 'n I l i ' ,

1965, p. 30.
Ibid, p. 31.

Lansing City Hall

9)

10)

”Chittenden Gets it Done," Winch, March 26,
1895, p. 1.

Ibid.

132
11) Ibid.

12) fitate_3ennblican. December 29. 1896, p- l.

13) "Public Seems Well Pleased," W11: January
2, 1897, p. 1.

14) ”The New Stone House," Ween, December 12,
1896, p. 1.

15) Ibid.
16) Moles, Lloyd J., "Landmark Razing' Set by Council,"

Lansing_§tate_lournal. March 3. 1959.

17) "Ingham Lawyers Approve Present City Hall Site," Legging
State_Journal. July 19. 1953-

"In the original Lansing city plan, drawn up in 1938 by
Harland Bartholomew and Associates of St. Louis, Mo., city
planning consultants presented the present city hall, police
station and a city jail.

On January 2, 1947, the city planning commission
unanimously approved the revised plans for the new city
hall, which called for construction on the present site."

18) Christensen, Don. "Opinions Presented at Hearing,"
.Lansing_§tate_flournal, July 1. 1953-

19) Ibid.

20) Ibid.

21) "Two New City Buildings to Solve Growing Pains," Leneing
state_Journal, January 2. 1955-

22) Ibid.

23) Ibid.

24) Moles, Lloyd J. "New City Hall ’Symbol of Progress,”
' , n.d. '

25) Ibid.

last Lansing City Hall

26) ”To Enlarge city Hall." The_East_Lansing_£ress. May 15.

1931, p. 1.

27) ”City Starts New Buildings," W,

July 3, 1931, p. 1.

28)
29)

30)
31)

32)

33)
34)
35)

36)
37)

38)
39)

40)

41)
42)

43)

44)

45)
46)
47)

48)
49)

133

Ibid.

"Open House at City Hall will be Next Wednesday,” flee;
Lansins_£ress. November 6. 1931, p. 1-

Ibid.

Patriarche, John M. '2
City_ofi_fiast_Lansing. 1962. p. 25.

”Lack of Space Hampers Work of East Lansing City
Employees," Lansing_§tate_lournal. July 24. 1966-
Patriarche, p. 25.

Ibid.

"Expansion Problem Goes to Councilmen," E L n 'n
Torne_§ourier. November 4. 1963. p. 1.

Ibid, p. 1.

"Next: Fixing up old part of City Hall," W
Iosne_gourier. August 18. 1964. p- 20-

Patriarche, p. 25.

"Is new city hall big“ enough?," E L in wn

MI May 11! 1965! p- 6-

”Proposed City Hall plan may relieve court backlog," In:
state_News. July 14. 1987. p- 1-

Ibid.

Historic American Buildings Survey. w

Halls. p. 14-

Ibid.

Craig, Lois. "The Boston City Hall and Its

Antecedents," AIA_Jee;ne_, p. 48.

Ibid.

Ibid.

For further discussion see Gowans, Alan. W
' ' , pp. 350-362.

Scully, Vincent. .Modern_Arshitesture. p. 17-

Ibid, p. 18.

134

50) Hitchocock, Henry-Russell, Temples ef Demeereey, 1976,

p.

51) Hamlin, Talbot.

177.

, vol. 3., p. 802.

CHAPTER 3

Cultural.Assesement

 

 

1) Historic American Buildings Survey. Ame;1eeLe__Qi;y
ELLE! P0 9°

2) Williams, Raymond. Dietienegy ef Ceneepte in gietery, p.
89.

3) King, Anthony D., ed., Rapoport, Amos. ”Cultural
Determinants of Form," gildinge eng Seeiety, p. 286.

4) Williams, p. 89.

5) Stone, Harris. Menumente end Meinetreete, p. 208.

6) Chermayeff, Serge. "Design and Transition," Deeign_egg
W. on 43-44-

7) Stone, p. 208.

8) White, Monton and Lucia, ed., Parks, Robert. 1h:
W. p- 159-

9) "Ideology," Dictionary of Concepts in Hietegy, p. 215.

10) Doxiadis, C.A. "Architecture,"

' of the Social Sciences. p. 392-393.
11) Hamlin, Talbot, ed., Kump, Ernest J. "Town and City

 

Halls,” Forms and Functions of w

W! V010 3! p- 793'

12) Doxiadis, "Architecture," p. 392.

Stylistic Assessment

1)

Eaton. Leonard K. W. p-

14.

2) Scully. Vincent. W. p. 18-

 

135
CHAPTER 4

Conclusion

1) Churchill, Sir Winston. Tim , September 12, 1960.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Books

Andrews, Wayne. i 'n M' ' . (Detroit: Wayne
State Univerity, 1967).

Bancroft, Raymond L. City Hell egg the Pteee. (Washington,
D.C.: National League of Cities, 1967).

Brolin, Brent C. Atehiteetere in QQBLBEL. (New York: Van
Nostrand Reinhold Company, 1980).

Chermayeff, Serge, edited by Richard Plunz. Deeign_eng_the

_ o see“ to es 7’ .— °30 o e o-
ghetmeyett. (Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press, 1982).
Collins, Peter. h n i I in A
1759-1259. (London: Faber and Faber, 1965).
Craig. Lois. WW. (Cambridge. MA: MIT

Press, 1978).

Darling, Birt. £112_1B_LD§_E9£§SL. (New York: Stratford
, House, 1950).

Diamonstein, Barbaralee. m k n Am ' - w
pleeee. (New York: Crown, 1986).

Dunbar, Willis F. Miehigen: A Hietery e; the Welvetiee
Stete. (Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdman’s Pub.

Co., 1970).

Eaton. Leonard K. W
(Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1972).

Fitch. James Marston. W
W 2n rev. ed (Boston:

1 . .
Houghton Mifflin Co., 1966).

Girouard, Mark. Cities and Peoole: A Socie1__end
' . (New Haven, CT: Yale

Wei—Mi
University Press, 1985.

136

137

Gombrich, E.H. ' ' n -
i l v 1 m n
eeeyiteement. (London: Routledge and Degan Paul Ltd.,
Grainger, Helen E. L n in - r i

Gtend. (Lansing, MI: Wellman Press Inc., 1976).

Hoyt, Charles King. ' ' '
Buildinge. (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1980).

Hitchcock, Henry—Russell. IempLee_et_Demeeteey. (New York:
Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1976).

Hauser, Arnold. Ihe Phileeephy ef Art Hietery. (London:
Routledge and K. Paul, 1959).

Gowans, Allan. f ri L'v' ° n ' f
‘ t' ‘ ‘ :19 F 9° — .9 ‘ '09.

(NY: L.B. Lippincott Company,-1964).

Greenhalgh, Michael and Megaw, Vincent, ed.
' l . (London:

Gerald Duckworth and Co., Ltd., 1978).

Hall, Edward T. B nd 1 . (Garden City, NY: Anchor
Press, 1976).

Hall, Edward Th T n . (Garden City, NY:

Doubleday Press, 1966).

Hamlin. Talbot . Wm
' . vol. 3.: Building Types. (NY: Columbia

AW
University Press, 1952).

Historic America Buildings Survey. . r' ’
(Washington, D.C.: The Preservation Press, 1984).

Hughes, Robert. Sheet ef the New. (New York: Knopf,
1981).

Kestenbaum, Justin. L. W 1 (Woodland

Hills, Ca: Windsor Publications, 1981).

“ hn D. awn-She
King, Ant 0 Y r - . (London:

Routledge and Kegan Paul Ltd., 1980).

Kouwenhoven John A"
W. (New York: W.W. Norton and Company,

Inc., 1967).

138

Langenbach, Randolph. F r m h -
og“ .. og .ge i‘_“ e O e_ ;_»_ o_ o- l o ,
gemmnnitiee. (Washington D.C.: US Govt. Print Off—
1978). ' "
Langer, Suzanne K. F l' - f

(New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1953).

Lowe, David. Leet_§h;eege. (Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin
Co., 1975).

Manassah, Sallie M., David A. Thomas, and James F.
Wellington - WWW (East
Lansing, MI: Contemporary Image Adv., Ltd., 1986).

Millon, Henry A. and Nochlin, Linda, eds. A£L__BDQ
Arehiteetere it the Serviee ef Pelitiee. (Cambridge,
MA: MIT Press, 1978).

Norberg-Schulz, Christian. M nin ' W ' .
(New York: Studio Vista, 1978).

Osgood, Charles; Suci, George J.; and Tannenbaum, Percy H.
M ' . (Urbana: University of

Illinois Press, 1957).

Pevsner, Nikolaus. A HistorV' of Building Types.
(Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1976).

Proctor, Hazel, ed. 91;: Leneing Tewn. (Produced for the
Greater Lansing Area by the Great Lakes Federal

Savings, 1980).

Robinson. Williard 8- W
WWW. (Texas

State Historical Association: University of Texas at
Austin, 1983).

Romig. Walter. W (Detroit: Wayne
State University Press, 1986).

Scully, Vincent. Megetg Arehiteetete; The Arehiteetere ef
Demeeteey. (New York: George Brazillier, 1976).

Sills, David L., ed. In n 'n .
' . (New York: The Macmillan Company and

W
the Free Press, 1968).

Sokol, David M., ed. i n °.
1 r . vol. 2. 1J1 American
Studies Information Guide Series. (Detroit: Gale

Research Company, 1976).

139

Stern, Robert A.M. ' . '
Qtee_. (Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co., 1986).

Swanson, Bert and Edith Swanson. Di v rin -
o o._r.__ . of o i. l ’o . . o E oonmi
Chenge. (New York: Irvington Publishers, Inc., 1977).

Stone, Harris. m n M 1 ° M
Atehiteetete. (New York: Monthly Review Press, 1983).

Thobum, James. THESIS--The Eerly Arehiteetete gt 5.5,
Miehigen. B.S. Architecture. University of Michigan.

1930 at Urbana, Illinois.

White, Monton and Lucia. Th In 11 l V r 1
(Boston: Harvard University Press, 1960).

Zorn, Walter Lewis. Th i l h n'
Ameriee. (Ann Arbor, MI: Edwards Brothers, Inc.,
1955).

Articles

Armi, Edson. "Contextualism: The New Dogma of American

Architecture." Ar M zin (1981), v56, p.142-143.

Craig, Lois. "The boston City Hall and its Antecedents."

AIA Jeetn nel (September 1980).
Crego, Mayor Ralph W. i i n ra °

He 1; egg Peliee Beilging (February 1959).

Goodman, Nelson. "Che Cosa Significa Costruire, E Quando E
Perche.” Demee 672- -74 (May/August 1986).

Lorimer, A. Gordon. "Municipal Buildings - Design Your
City’ 3 Building Now. The Arehiteeteral Reeetd (July
1944).

Loring, Charles G. "City and Town Halls." The

AI§h_L§£Lu£11.EQ£um (June 1927).

Martin. Paul 13.. ed. WWW
Town: ”A Pocket Guide to .Leeeing.__§epite1__et

Michigan." (Lansing. MI: W. 1960)

Patier, John. "Bold Symbol of' a. City’ s Image of its
Future." .AlA_Jee;ne; (Mid-May 1978).

Patriarche, John M.
W. (1962) -

' f

140

Patriarche, John M. A R r ' 'z n
Lansing. (1955).

"The Planning' of Public Buildings: City Halls." The
Architectural_zorum. (September 1933).

Newspapers (In Chronological Order)

"Chittenden Gets It Done." The Stete Bepeblieen, 26 March,
1895.

"It’s Really Too Bad." Th R li n, 19 November,
1896.

"The New Stone House." Th R ' n, 12 December,
1896.

"Accepted. the New“ City Hall." The Stete Repetlieen, 29
December, 1896.

"Public Seemed Well Pleased." Th R 1i n, 2
January, 1897.

"Plan Additions to City Hall." The Eeet Leneing Press, May
1931.

"Open House at City Hall Will Be Next Wednesday." The test
Leneing Pteee, 6 November, 1931.

"Old City Hall Clock Still Ticking." The_§tete_gte;ne1, 1
January, 1950.

"First Draft of Charter Nearly Done." The_§tete_fieetne1, 12
January, 1955.

”Delay Suit on City Hall." Th n , 18 January,
1955.

"Suggests City Hall Job Delay." W1, 22
February, 1955.

"Work Halts on City Hall." The_§tete_geetee_, 23 February,
1955.

"But 20-Day Period is Confusing." W, 26

February, 1955.
"City Hall Job Lags." The_§tete_geetee1, 28 February, 1955.

”City Hall Construction Work Appears Stalled.” W
, 1 March, 1955.

"City Hall Plea Mad." The_§tate_flournal. 22 March, 1955.

141

Enll$35:?ll at City Hall." W1, 7 April,

"Workers Pouring Sub-Wall Concrete." The_§tete_figurnel, ,
22 September, 1955.

"City Hall Going Up." The_§tete_geetee1, 18 June, 1958.

"East Lansing Merger .Almost Doubled .Area." The__§tete
Jentnel, 1 January, 1958.

"Plan Stone Laying Rite." The_§tete_Jeetnel, 16 June, 1958.
”City Hall Rites Set." The_§tete_fieetne1, 189 June, 1958.

"Another Civic Milestone." The Stete Jeetge , 21 June,
1958.

"Last City Office is Relocated." The State Jeernel, 16
September, 1958.

"City Centennial: New Buildings’ Dedication Is Part of

Event." Ine_Stete_Jeetne1, 10 February 1959.

"Landmark Razing Set By Council." Wei, 3
March, 1959.

Pigeons Just Tenants in Old City Hall: Wrecking Crews Will
Remove Part of City's Legal History." The__§tete
JQEIBdl. 12 March, 1959.

"Last County Offices Moved from. Old Hall." EEEL_§LBL§
Jeetne1, 16 March, 1959.

."Nostalgia Marks Start of Razing of Old City Hall." The
, 3 April, 1959.

"Workers Find ’Mysteries’ Dismantling Old City Hall." The
State_Journal. 9 April. 1959.

"Razing of Old City Hall Slated to Start Friday." 1he_§tete
QQHIBBL. 16 April, 1959.

"Steeplejacks Work High: Freeing Bell Standard." The_§tete
Journal. 12 May. 1959.

"The Tell Story of Past." IQ§_§L§L§_£QBID§1. 30 May, 1959.

"Old City Hall Is Rubble: Clock Tower Last to Go.” “ lee
, 5 April, 1976.

"Hail City Hall As Bright Symbol." The_§tete_fieutne1, 20
June, 1959.

142

”Lansing’s Municipal Government Is Housed In One of
Midwest’s Most Modern Buildings." The_State_Journa_. 5
April, 1961.

"Lack of Space Hampers Work of East Lansing City Employees."
, 4 July, 1961.

"Preposed City Hall." W. 23
January, 1963.

"Expansion Problem Goes to Councilmen." The_tehe1hg_§tete
Jeethel, 4 November, 1963.

"Next: Fixing up old part of City Hall." Th L i
W. 18 August. 1964.

"The ’mystery’ of the City Hall braces." The_§eet_Leheihg
W. 24 November. 1964.

"INC Vacancy’ Sign Due at City Hall." W
ggethel, 25 April, 1965.

"City Hall Outgrown? Mayor Wants to Know." W
W. 24 June. 1965

"Oh No, More Sand?" Th L n 'n r , 16
September, 1965.

"Mayor Aims To Beautify City Hall." W
genteel, 30 September, 1965.

"City Hall Beckons Job-Seeking Gals." Th L n ‘n
Jeernel, 27 March, 1966.

"Planner Dream of ’City Beautiful’ by 1980." W
, 4 May, 1966.

"City Hall Begins Big Shift As C.D. [Civil Defense] Vacates.
Its Quarters.” The Leneing Stete Jeerhel, 24 January,

1967.

”East Lansing Merger Almost Doubled Area." M11119
- , 1 January, 1958.

”City Hall ’Diaper’: Cure Planned for Leaky Plaza." The
' rn , 26 JUne, 1968.

"City Hall annex a garish...white." W
Jehthe1, 5 April, 1976. “

"Council chambers getting face lift." W
Journel, 16 July, 1983.

 

143

"Students refurbish council area." Ih§__LéDSiDQ__§§§L§
Jeetnel, 6 December, 1985.

”Proposed City Hall plan may relieve court backlog." The
State_Neus. 14 July. 1987.

"lllllllllllllllllll