04-03-2025
Detroit City Council shoots down RenCen historic review, paving way for GM, Bedrock plan
The Detroit City Council on Tuesday rejected a request to make the Renaissance Center a historic district amid talks of redevelopment plans.
Since reports about transforming the RenCen have surfaced — including proposals that include demolishing portion of the tower campus — residents, preservationists and public officials have begun to act to preserve the structures. That included a letter from preservationists urging the city to consider adapting the existing buildings, and several residents stunned by the potential of losing a portion of their iconic skyline, and asking the city council to consider a historic designation study, which would allow the Historic District Commission to review permit applications for any work within a proposed historic district for one year. On the other side are stakeholders and supportive residents who view any future plans for the RenCen — even demolishing portions or all of it — as a viable path to create jobs and opportunities, and a flourishing riverfront.
During Tuesday's council session, members overwhelmingly voted 8-1 to deny the historic review, with Councilwoman Angela Whitfield-Calloway being the lone vote supporting it, making room for Dan Gilbert's Bedrock team to proceed with its proposal to conceptualize a different future for one of Detroit's most iconic buildings. Calloway said she is not against development, but prefers to see more public input on the project, suggesting a town hall at Huntington Place.
"I don't think we have to demolish to build. I really don't. I think we can preserve and build at the same time. I think they can coexist. And I've watched with a broken heart, all of our buildings be demolished, and then what's being built now downtown are Lego-style buildings. They don't have any kind of architectural flavor or design. They are all cookie-cutter designs," Calloway said. "We are destroying our history. ... That skyline will be forever destroyed" if the city allows the developer to move forward.
During last Thursday's planning and economic development committee meeting — where stakeholders outlined the proposal and addressed questions — Jared Fleisher, vice president of Dan Gilbert's Rock Family of Companies, said demolishing two towers and maintaining the rest of the properties is the 'only viable path to preserving the Renaissance Center."
'Just because something can't be the same, doesn't mean it can't be spectacular, and our vision is to make this and to make the riverfront spectacular,' Fleisher said. 'It should be something that Detroiters cannot just see as a stale icon from afar, but can actually experience and enjoy directly. It should be something that is inclusive, not designed to exclude; that is open, inviting, accessible, and easy to navigate. It should be something that connects and integrates the rest of the city with its riverfront, doesn't divide it. It should be something that anchors a thriving riverfront that is not just based on Navy Pier in Chicago, but that is the envy of Navy Pier in Chicago.'
By the end of the committee meeting, Councilman Fred Durhal III recommended denying the historic review. City Council President Pro Tem James Tate supported Durhal.
"I wanted to preserve as much as possible. Nothing in this denial does that. It does not now give a green light to a total demolition of the Renaissance towers," Tate said at Tuesday's formal session. "There's multiple discussions that has to happen prior to that taking place. And then, even if there's a request to demolish that, there has to be approval to do so."
Tate, who initially opposed the plan, citing a lack of nuance in conversation surrounding demolition, questioned whether mothballing was a viable option. Fleisher said it would repeat the 'mistakes of the past' of letting buildings sit and deteriorate.
'If you think about the success of the project that we presented today and the vision presented today, that's a thriving, active destination, it's very difficult to reconcile that with two ghost towers looming over it. So, the fact that the economics won't change, we'll just delay the inevitable. And by delaying the inevitable, we will hurt today. Those are the reasons why we do not believe mothballing is the answer.'
Jennifer Stallings, legal counsel for General Motors, outlined some of the building's structural details and tenancy over the years, implying that the whole campus is unable to be economically viable. The RenCen can accommodate 17,000 people. But at its peak, it held 10,000, which was not intended to be strictly GM employees, she said. At most, GM would have about 5,400 employees in the building, requiring more tenants to fill it up.
'This building was built to be a city within a city. It was built to be self-contained, to be separate. That is one of its biggest challenges,' Stallings said. 'It's hard to get in and out of, and then once you're inside of it, it has this difficult-to-navigate looping structure. If you've ever worked at the RenCen or even attended an event, you've probably gotten lost inside of it.'
More: Mayor Mike Duggan delivers $3B Detroit budget with tax cuts, DDOT boost, homeless outreach
Stallings emphasized it would be difficult to conceptualize the size of the building. The towers are 5.5 million square feet, "the size of two times the Empire State Building, and the podium is 1.5 million square feet of retail space," which is about the same size as Somerset Mall," Stallings said during the committee meeting. She added that the massive retail space is not accessible from outside foot traffic and relies almost entirely on tenants.
'These issues compound upon one another, and this building, more and more, just isn't viable in this day and age. So, we are just faced with this building that just can't exist, and can't be used and be effective in this day and age,' Stallings said. 'A reconfiguring, a reimagining, a redevelopment, is our only option. And historic preservation would make that nearly impossible. So, we're looking to find a solution that works. And a project of this size, of this complexity, is something we cannot do alone.'
After the vote, Mayor Mike Duggan said in a statement that designating the site as historic "would have killed any realistic hope of redevelopment and pretty much guaranteed Detroit would have five empty towers sitting on the riverfront for the next 30-40 years."
The property is zoned as planned development, which requires work to line up with the city's Master Plan, according to the city. Alterations of the property would be under the purview of the City Planning Commission and the City Council, according to Marcell Todd, director of the planning commission.
"We anticipate, at least as has been discussed as part of the presentation, that there may be a community benefits agreement in order to advance this one," Todd said. "That will, once again, put an opportunity to bring aspects of this proposal before your honorable body, and opportunities for agreements, potentially, to be crafted that could go beyond or even complement zoning that could achieve, in a different way, some of what could be achieved through historic designation."
Dana Afana is the Detroit city hall reporter for the Free Press. Contact: dafana@ Follow her: @DanaAfana.
This article originally appeared on Detroit Free Press: Detroit City Council denies RenCen historic review, paving way for redevelopment
