What would Detroit look like if the RenCen hadn't been built?

[artds]

Do you think we have eventually had 5 towers of comparable size to the 5 RenCen towers built in different places north of Jefferson?

Would Comerica Tower's planned twin have gotten built?

Would our Riverfront currently be more of a park-like riverfront like Windsor has?

[LodgeDodger]

Do you think we have eventually had 5 towers of comparable size to the 5 RenCen towers built in different places north of Jefferson?

Would Comerica Tower's planned twin have gotten built?

Would our Riverfront currently be more of a park-like riverfront like Windsor has?

I'm willing to be there would have been at least one waterfront casino...

[dtowncitylover]

Well if the RenCen was built like it was intended, an easy access skyscraper, than Detroit might have been different. Instead, the RenCen was built like a fortress without easy-access.

[LodgeDodger]

Well if the RenCen was built like it was intended, an easy access skyscraper, than Detroit might have been different. Instead, the RenCen was built like a fortress without easy-access.

Seems as if anything "planned" in this city [[post-seventies) has been a cluster-fuck. Such a shame.

[Jason]

Downtown would have a healthier office market, and the eastern half of downtown would be better off.

From my understanding, there was some kind of program that was going to do stuff like streetscape and facade improvements to some of the east side of downtown, but the money got redirected to the Ren Cen. I forget the details or where I read it.

[Russix]

Shorter.....

[2blocksaway]

I think GM fixed the RenCen as much as the biuldings design would allow.

I think it is very accessable from the front and back.

I can't imagine Detroits skyline without it.

[Retroit]

Interesting topic. If it is wise to learn from one's mistakes, the RenCen provides ample opportunities.

It would have been better to have built 5 independent towers spread around the periphery of Downtown and to the northwest of Jefferson, thus not blocking the view of the river. This would have added outward growth to downtown instead of confining it in one spot.

As I understand it, the design philosophy of building a downtown-within-a-downtown fortress developed after the Riot of '67. The belief was that professional, white suburbanites had to be provided with a safe, self-contained environment in which to do business or they would not stay in Detroit.

I think that all of the construction between Jefferson and the river was a mistake. That should all be one big park so that people can enjoy Detroit's finest asset: the river.

[bragaboutme]

Damn good question, I ask that same question everytime I roll past it. At night it's beautiful don't get me wrong, but I sometimes wonder what could've been built there instead. If one tower would've been built, it would've been taller than two Sears Towers[[ give or take a few meters). Or you could have two Sears towers, Etc.,etc.. The whatifs are endless. I guess the question should be did the RecCen serve its purpose for being built?, or did it suck the life out of downtown after it was built? I mean on one hand it did spur growth for that side of downtown, but at whose expence?

[spiritofdetroit]

the what-ifs are endless, but I think that the RenCen did not accomplish what it set out to at the time.

However, I think that today the RenCen HAS been very successful. The GM renovations have been wonderful, especially with the riverfront access. Everyone knows the RenCen, everyone has been to the RenCen, and it is one area of town where people aren't at all nervous about staying overnight, walking along the river, going to one of the fine restuarants, parking, or taking the people mover around to other areas of town. In that sense, the RenCen today is an improved product over the RenCen of pre-GM. And, last I heard, the RenCen was about 94% filled, not including the retail areas.

[Jimaz]

I recall a tour video posted here not long ago that said the RenCen was expected to draw businesses from outside Detroit but it instead attracted businesses from within Detroit. I think the point was that it didn't benefit Detroit as much as was hoped.

Coincidentally, I'm currently listening to a recording of a lecture that was given by a woman whose group was the very first occupant of the RenCen ballroom. I'm told by an attendee that it was a small group in a large room but that room was all that was available there at the time.

Where was this ballroom located? Near the top? At the top? I really don't know.

[Fury13]

The Ren Cen is a POS. There's still a lot of exposed concrete with cracks and holes inside, even after GM's renovation. Looks unfinished and shoddy.

[Jimaz]

The video I mentioned is Detroit Wildlife by Florent Tillon. The RenCen tour segment starts at about 10:15 into the video. It was discussed on the old DetroitYES at Discuss Detroit » DISCUSS DETROIT! » Detroit Wildlife "video".

Good find, Mpow.

[Bob Green]

Maybe we would still have the train station that was where the Ren Cen is now.

[LodgeDodger]

Maybe it's my mood, but I'm glad the RenCen is where it is currently located. We could have some rotting hulk sitting there that is the subject of many news articles and online threads. A rotting hulk owned by some mega-rich, a**hole that cares nothing for the city.

[oneway]

I'm constantly conflicted by the location and architecture of the RenCen, which is why it's quintessential Detroit.

[Gistok]

Um.... I want to clarify a few misconceptions about the Renaissance Center and its' location...

1) there was no train station where the RenCen currently sits. All I remember was some large silos and industrial building with train tracks running to the complex. These were demolished to build the RenCen, not some old train station that got demoed.

2) as much as folks want to lament the building of the RenCen... all you have to do is look at what happened when GM took over in the 1990's... a LOT of the tenants moved to the suburbs [[including the 1,700 workers that Ford had). So had the RenCen not been built in 1977... there was no guarantee that other office towers would have been build scattered around downtown. Other office buildings in the suburbs could have just as likely been built to house the folks who moved to the RenCen back in 1977.

[iheartthed]

2) as much as folks want to lament the building of the RenCen... all you have to do is look at what happened when GM took over in the 1990's... a LOT of the tenants moved to the suburbs [[including the 1,700 workers that Ford had). So had the RenCen not been built in 1977... there was no guarantee that other office towers would have been build scattered around downtown. Other office buildings in the suburbs could have just as likely been built to house the folks who moved to the RenCen back in 1977.

But where else could those office workers have gone in the 1990s besides the suburbs? There have only been 3 office buildings built downtown in the past 40 years...

[Bob Green]

Correct me if I am wrong, but I am pretty sure there was a train station just east of the Ren Cen where the GT commuter trains stopped [[want to say it was at the end of Brush Street). They demoed it and replaces it with bus stop-like shelters, much like the Birmingham Amtrak station, at least until they got rid of it in the early 80s.

[Todd_Scott]

Yes, it was the Brush Street Station. It was demo'd in 1973 for the Renaissance Center. There's a photo and more information about it in this book starting at page 64.

[Gistok]

But where else could those office workers have gone in the 1990s besides the suburbs? There have only been 3 office buildings built downtown in the past 40 years...

Well considering that 211 W. Fort was empty after Comerica moved to One Detroit Center [[now Comerica Tower) in the early 1990's, One Woodward Ave. [[former "Gas Building") was not full, neither was 150 West Jefferson, and other buildings in the CBD... there was plenty of space for folks to move to, but some [[such as Ford) still opted for the burbs.

As for a Train Station on the site of the RenCen... that tiny 2 story building [[not exactly a large masterpiece such as the former Romanesque Revivial 4th St. Station), nor the large silos [[flour company?), hardly count as something architecturally significant to be lamented due to the building of RenCen.

[Huggybear]

If the Renaissance Center had not been built, GM likely would have moved out of Detroit in 1996, this place would be in even more horrific shape than it is now, and the old GM building would be vacant. The availability of the Renaissance Center probably prevented the demolition of the old GM facility - because the availability of cheap office space enabled GM to do the redevelopment deal. With no RenCen, the Millender Center site likely would still be a dirt lot.

People love to hate the Renaissance Center, but few buildings better evoke the ethos of post-riot Detroit [[or of 1970s urban America in general). The use of beige tile and unfinished polymer-impregnated cement is pure John Portman. Go to Embarcadero Center in San Francisco or Peachtree Center in Atlanta. I suspect that in 20 years, people will be complaining about how the building was "wrecked" by the SmithGroup redesigns of the front and back of the building and the circulation ring.

In terms of what was lost in the building of the Renaissance Center, the train capability was not taken out until 500 and 600 were built. There are pictures of the commuter trains on Franklin in front of the building [[or to the east of it), and Cadillac used them in a recent ad campaign. I think they are Tony Spina shots, but I'm not 100% sure. The Robin Hood flour mill was an eyesore and a very poor use of riverfront land. My suspicion is that the siting of the Renaissance Center was so that it would be visible down the major road corridors, and it just happened to eliminate one particularly ugly riverfront use.

The effect on the rest of downtown? Probably a lot less than you might think. As far as I can tell, Detroit had no other new Class A office space built between 1970 and the mid-1980s, and Southfield was building it like crazy. GM's move into the Renaissance Center may have driven some tenants to the suburbs, but the RenCen was probably the only thing that had kept them in Detroit in the first place. With a declining office population, no nighttime population, and poorly maintained older office buildings, downtown in the 1970s-1980s was, to put it politely, challenged. The RenCen was supremely functional as office space, and it had spectacular views.

Consider also that Henry Ford II [[who conceived the RenCen) also used Ford's purchasing power to strongarm a lot of companies to invest in and locate in the complex. Those people weren't going to move into any of the existing office buildings downtown.

[Novine]

"People love to hate the Renaissance Center, but few buildings better evoke the ethos of post-riot Detroit [[or of 1970s urban America in general). "

Can we all agree that the original design was a failure? To each his own when it comes to architectural tastes but a building and a site either works or it doesn't and the RenCen didn't. It failed to take advantage of its riverfront location, it failed to interact with the surrounding areas and its interior common spaces were well-known for their maze-like qualities. If that much square footage of office space had been dropped anywhere else in the city or suburbs, it would have had a tremendous spin-off effect. But the RenCen didn't really revitalize the way it was intended to do.

[Fury13]

"The use of beige tile and unfinished polymer-impregnated cement is pure John Portman."

Yes, and it's still awful. Portman's no Louis Sullivan.

There are good and bad designs in every era, and this one is bad [[although most 1970s architecture seems to be mundane and inconsequential).

[Fury13]

And "unfinished polymer-impregnated cement" is always a bad idea for interior space. Come to think of it, it's hideous anywhere. It's just plain ugly. Cover over it, please.