Detroit is becoming the prototype for a dying American city. As the Mayor enacts radical plans to bulldoze whole neighborhoods in a desperate attempt to save others, the city is reaching a critical point in its history, and no precedent exists for how to save it. Caught in the center of this turmoil and plan for destruction-in-hopes-of-recreation is a key landmark: Michigan Central Station. Abandoned for decades — the last train pulled out of it more than 20 years ago –this once-stunning building has become just another of the scores of abandoned structures. But despite the corrosion and dilapidation that have plagued the station, it remains a unique and stunning reminder of a once-thriving city.
Still, like so many buildings, the station was slated for demolition, and according to a report from the New York Times, exists only because of a lawsuit to have it preserved as a historic landmark (not to mention the city’s $400 million budget deficit). So is it a symbol of urban decay and the inexorable decline of American infrastructure that should be bulldozed so the city can start anew? Or a priceless relic of a golden age in architecture and prosperity, that should be restored and put to good use? Here are some photos, to help you make up your mind. 
March 9th, 2010 at 2:38 pm
The word “awesome” is overused, but it does fit here. What an amazing place, even more so for its decay! It looks like some surrealistic, first-person shooter game. I’m with the plaintiffs. They’ve got to find a way to preserve it.
March 9th, 2010 at 2:45 pm
It blows my mind when anyone even remotely believes that tearing this down is a good thing. Revitalize it and make it the new station for Detroit.
I don’t know much about the immediate area, but can anyone familiar with the area make some comments. Would this be an area slated for complete demolition as part of the cities plan? Or is this an area with a neighborhood that could be saved and envisaged as a part of the new Detroit?
March 9th, 2010 at 2:53 pm
The station closed because it was a completely impractical building, located far away from Detroit’s urban center. There’s apparently almost nothing in the immediate area surrounding it.
Oddly enough, it was one of the only station closings that made complete sense. Far nicer buildings have met the wrecking ball in Detroit — unless they can find a tenant who’s willing to renovate and rebuild the place, they should just let it rot.
March 9th, 2010 at 3:22 pm
Why couldn’t it be saved and be incorporated into some sort of a Transit Oriented Development (TOD)? It’s an absolutely beautiful and historic structure. I’m sure it could be turned into an office/apartment/hotel/retail/station space. It will more than likely be torn down though and we’ll one day learn from the mistake of tearing down of this amazing structure.
March 9th, 2010 at 3:23 pm
Those photos are fantastic. I have to say, as beautiful as this building is even in its decayed state, the costs to rehabilitate it would probably be prohibitive for Detroit.
March 9th, 2010 at 3:28 pm
SAVE IT!!!
March 9th, 2010 at 3:43 pm
Bleh, lose the HDR and it could be a beautiful shot. BOOOO HDR.
I wish there were a way to save everything but really, just because something was once awesome doesn’t mean it needs to remain forever. Revitalizing Detroit is far more important than historic preservation of this magnitude.
March 9th, 2010 at 4:10 pm
Detroit is complaining about all it’s vacant land and wants to tears down another building? We’ve lost far to much of our architectural heritage already, much of it simply demoed for yet another vacant (or parking) lot. Keep the building and find another use for it.
March 9th, 2010 at 4:34 pm
I’ve been in it, and IMO it can’t be saved for anything approaching a reasonable cost. Buckling floors, rust, concrete/steel members that have had water infiltration (and hence major damage from ice), etc. Structurally it’s in _really_ bad shape, and most of the expensive materials (glass, marble, etc) have been stripped. I’m pretty confident that it’d be cheaper to tear it down and rebuild than to fix it.
March 9th, 2010 at 6:22 pm
Yuri, this building is unsafe. No civil engineer will sign his name to a rehabilitation plan for it. It’s only a matter of time before it comes down.
BUT…
“We’ve lost far to much of our architectural heritage already, much of it simply demoed for yet another vacant (or parking) lot.”
No, we haven’t. We have the blueprints for this building. THAT is our architectural heritage. We could rebuild this station from scratch. All it takes is an architect willing to do it. And they exist.
March 9th, 2010 at 6:40 pm
it makes absolutely no sense to even consider this building as a transit hub due to its location, nearly three miles by road and over two miles as the crow flies to the center of downtown detroit. there is absolutely NOTHING in the immediate vicinity of the place. no industry, no commerce.
i have also been it in many times, and although it it tough to disagree with the fact that it was once magnificent, it is currently a crumbling, dangerous mess. all floors below grade are completely flooded. floors and ceilings sag menacingly, staircases are partially missing, the roof is in horrific shape. if it is at all possible to renovate the place, i suspect that it would cost multiple times what building a similarly-sized replacement building would cost.
i can’t imagine a use for it in a city that can barely afford to pick up its trash. it’s just another sad example of detroit’s paralyzing inability to move on from its past.
knock it down. move on.
March 9th, 2010 at 6:50 pm
It would probably be a lot better to rebuild the thing from the ground up with new seismic codes and modern steel frame architecture. There have been a lot of historic rebuilds of older buildings that are more cost effective, energy efficient, space efficient, and safer.
Here is an example of one:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nauvoo_Illinois_Temple
March 9th, 2010 at 7:09 pm
It is no longer useful not to mention another reminder of Detroit’s urban blight. It’s time to tear it down along with all of the other abandoned buildings in Detroit.
March 9th, 2010 at 7:53 pm
I used to live within 500 yards of this building. There’s a reason the Corktown Neighborhood Association wants to tear it down, and have wanted to for twenty years, and it’s not because they hate beautiful buildings; it’s because it’s a magnet for addicts and the desperate. (And it houses a whole lot of them.)
Corktown is one of Detroit’s better neighborhoods; having an unregulated, unofficial giant shooting gallery/homeless shelter in the middle of it is a shame. Tear it down. Or move it to your neighborhood, see how much you appreciate it’s crapitude.
Also, why has not been fixed up or torn down? Because it’s owned by the same guy who owns the bridge to Windsor, Canada that’s half a mile away (yes, a border crossing is somehow privately owned.) Talk to that guy about fixing up his mess, not city government.
March 9th, 2010 at 8:18 pm
If you look at the aerial photo view:
http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=detroit&sll=37.0625,-95.677068&sspn=35.547176,79.013672&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=Detroit,+Wayne,+Michigan&ll=42.328601,-83.077798&spn=0.016213,0.038581&t=h&z=15
You can see how isolated it is.
Perhaps it should be saved. But not as a train station.
March 9th, 2010 at 8:48 pm
As a train station, it makes a lot more sense than Detroit’s current Amtrak station. First, it’s closer to downtown. And second, it’s on the line that goes to Windsor. As a future HSR station, it’s more useful on both counts. Even today, it would be easy to establish a Detroit-Windsor rail shuttle, bypassing the traffic jams on the road crossings. Michigan Central seems large enough to accommodate immigration control, which is the limiting factor to capacity on the road crossings.
March 9th, 2010 at 9:41 pm
Corktown doesn’t have much going for it right now. Tiger Stadium has been levelled, and many of the businesses around there are boarded up. The only major attraction there is Slow’s BBQ.
I love the old train station, but it should be torn down. Unfortunately, the owner doesn’t want to pay for the demolition on his own and the city doesn’t have the cash to help. The owner has also stated that if he could get some tenants he would like to renovate it. However, that is probably more wishful thinking than anything. So, it will remain as a very visible sign of the city’s decline and decay.
March 9th, 2010 at 9:49 pm
Whatever replaces the station will be significantly less impressive than the station itself, even if the station is currently a rotting hunk of concrete. Keep it, atleast that way there’s a CHANCE for adaptive reuse.
Decades ago, people tore down magnificent buildings in the name of urban renewal, only to be replaced by vacant land, parking lots, or architectural disasters like Madison Square Garden.
March 9th, 2010 at 10:56 pm
You have to read “Middlesex” if you want to picture the train station when it was an ambitious thing. Yes, it is isolated - Detroit thought at the time they would grow indefinitely - but it is in fact very isolated. Rebuilding it isn’t the point, I don’t think. The artifact has certain feels, smells, etc… that help you understand what it means in the history of the city. I think its quite a beautiful relic. It could just be the largest folly in the world. Is that so bad? Maybe it can stay folly long enough for time to change our minds about that spot. I think patience can be a virtue in these cases. Many cities get tired of waiting too long development to happen on troubled spots and end up doing regrettable things in the haste
March 9th, 2010 at 11:11 pm
What’s wrong with sealing it up and arresting its decay as a quasi-museum, ancient ruin (ala Eastern State Penitentiary in Philadelphia), until such time resources are available to rehab its use? Tearing it down is itself an effort and a use of scarce resources, and an expenditure that will only lead people to regret it if train travel ever reasserts itself in the downtown area. Something that indestructible, increasingly rare, and beautiful is worth more in its dilapidated state that it ever will be once torn down.
March 10th, 2010 at 1:00 am
Putting those HDR pictures in the gallery to show the beauty of this building was a horrible decision. While the pictures are interesting, they hardly give an accurate look at what this building looks like in person.
And even though this looks like a wrecked hulk (and in many ways it is) it’s far from about to fall down around itself. Half of the problem with this building is that the cost to demo it is as breathtaking as the costs to restore it. Remember - this building was made to withstand constant vibrations from trains going in and out all the time, and made in a time when they didn’t build trash like so many buildings today. Normal demolition methods are simply inadequate. You would have to pull it down brick by brick. So, no one can afford to fix it, and no one can afford to demolish it. And so here it sits.
March 10th, 2010 at 3:55 am
Hi Melissa,
The building already has national landmark status (since 1975), but Detroit has a history of circumventing these designations to demolish historic buildings even in the city center. I’m the founder of untappednewyork.com, but through Columbia University I have written on government complicity in the destruction (and sometimes preservation) of Detroit’s historic architecture - which does not apply to my blog but I would be happy to contribute something to this blog if interested.
March 10th, 2010 at 7:48 am
You can not tear down all your history. It is by reusing these beautiful old buildings that the economy will start to gain again. People visit cities to see great buildings like this. Tearing it down and either putting a metal shell box building or a carpark is such a waste. First thing I would do if I owned it would be try and get the building used as a film or tv set and get some revenue in that way. Then I would look at long term plans. It looks like it could make a fabulous looking hospital or hotel. Possibly even an event venue if you knock through some floors, and put in cafes and restaurants in tracks areas.
You could build a new building the same size cheaper but it would never be as nice as this building.
March 10th, 2010 at 8:57 am
As someone that lives nearly in the shadow of the train station (it’s within walking distance from my Corktown loft), knows the area well, and has toured the inside of the train station within the last six months, I can tell you that this gorgeous structure is simply beyond saving. Not would it be far more expensive to rehab the existing structure than to build a new building of the same size and function, it simply is outsized for the city’s needs, be they transportation-related or otherwise.
Improbably enough, I love Detroit. I moved here (fairly recently) from the much tonier Ann Arbor area. I love the station. But it’s beyond the city’s means and needs to rehab it, and all anyone that thinks it’sa viable candidate for rehab needs to do is sneak in and tour it (it isn’t difficult). Admittedly, I’d love to see it fixed up as a beacon of sorts for the city’s revival, but the city simply can’t support a new building of its size, let alone in that location. Yes, with places like Slows BBQ, a few galleries and Astro Coffee coming in, the seeds are in place for a small-scale revival of that stretch of town, but the station is on another scale entirely.
One thing I can potentially see, however, is saving part(s) of the facade or the lower levels and re-using it for other purposes, but even this would be costly. I’d at least like to see that effort made, however.
March 10th, 2010 at 11:01 am
[...] Shared Is Detroit’s Train Station a Decaying Mess or a Priceless Relic?. [...]
March 10th, 2010 at 12:16 pm
[...] 9) Is Detroit’s Train Station a Decaying Mess or a Priceless Relic? [...]
March 10th, 2010 at 2:32 pm
Adaptive reuse. Turn the 1st floor/passenger halls into a community center/gym/auditorium (think Buffalo Central Terminal). Turn the upper floors into Public Housing/federally funded housing/section 8 (sadly no other kind of housing would ever be occupied in Detroit).
March 10th, 2010 at 7:59 pm
Save it!
March 10th, 2010 at 8:54 pm
I’m afraid Detroit will be stuck with MCS for a long time to come. Nobody can (or wants to) come up with the money to tear it down, and the money to rehab it just isn’t there. I don’t have any idea how much it would cost to rehab, but consider the Book Cadillac hotel cost $200 million to rehab a few years back. I would guess, considering the amount of deterioration at MCS, that the price tag would be at least $250-300 million, but I’ll let people who have seen it up close and personal and are architects give the final word.
Now, I’ll disagree with the idea that MCS is better placed than the present Amtrak station as a terminal for HSR in Detroit. True, MCS is closer to downtown (about 1.5 miles from Campus Martius versus three miles), but either is a fair piece from the heart of the action. More importantly, the Amtrak station is on Woodward Avenue, which always has been and continues to be Detroit’s main street.
The station is near the Fisher building and Cadillac Place (formerly GM headquarters and now home to Detroit-based State of Michigan offices). On its way downtown, Woodward passes by the Detroit Institute of Arts, the Detroit Public Library, Wayne State University, several hospitals, and the entertainment/sports center. In addition, Woodward is where the M-1 light rail will run, assuming it is built (nothing is a certainty in this town, but at least M-1 has an impressive board, including Roger Penske and the Ilitches. This means the Amtrak station may have access to rail transit, whereas at least for the time being MCS will only have some DDOT buses that may or may not get you where you’re going in a reasonable time.
Sure, Detroit eventually should encourage development along each of the radial avenues (Jefferson, Gratiot, Woodward, Grand River, Michigan, Fort) leaving downtown, but at this point I think the city has to learn how to walk again, so the wisest idea is to concentrate on developing the Woodward corridor, then once that’s going with transit-oriented development work on the other corridors. The last thing Detroit needs at this point is to spread its efforts too widely and fail to create a critical mass anywhere.
Finally, the New Center Amtrak station leaves open the possibility for continuing the HSR service (on a normal-speed basis) to the northern burbs of Royal Oak, Birmingham, and Pontiac, as Amtrak presently does. Detroit has less than a quarter of the metropolitan population (and probably less than a fifth of the populationn that would be in the taerget market for HSR to Chicago), and if you don’t give the suburbanites an easy way to use HSR you’ve failed. I’ve flown to Chicago for one-day business trips, and I’d love to use HSR and enjoy a decent meal and a decent-sized seat, but if you make it too inconvenient for me I’ll say the hell with it and continue to take the plane.
March 11th, 2010 at 4:38 am
Okay, the Amtrak station allows through-service to Pontiac. But MCS allows through-service to Windsor and Toronto.
March 11th, 2010 at 12:16 pm
For any train station to be of use, the surrounding area must have high-density, mixed use, transit-oriented development. Currently, it is a wasteland surrounding it. That means the area must be redeveloped, without parking. If people are to come into the station, the (tall) buildings surrounding must cater to the passengers using the train, and not the car.
March 11th, 2010 at 12:27 pm
Wow, the people around here really need to stop pretending like they know what they’re talking about and just admit they know nothing at all.
The MCS is not “beyond saving”. Having been in the building over thirty times & toured all areas of it, including the basement & sub-basement, I can say confidently I have seen no evidence of sagging floors where it would be compromising the structural integrity of the building. Areas that have fallen out (like stairs and landings) are on the peripheries of the structure, leading to underground or basement areas, and do not compromise the structural integrity of the building. The roof is not waterproof but its hardly in bad shape.
In fact, the MCS was built with extra thick retaining walls and supports because engineers thought the building would have to withstand hundreds of years of trains running over it (part of the building actually extends below the train platforms). Taking this into account, it actually makes it harder to knock down than it does to rehab it. The ‘decay’ you guys see in the photos are the ornamental plasterwork & stone detailing that has fallen off the walls. Underneath all that is 5-foot thick steel-reinforced concrete. It’s not going anywhere.
It is a rumor that the MCS is a haven for addicts & destitutes — Spencer Williams, sounds like you haven’t lived in Detroit that long. Everyone knows that the addicts & destitutes hang out in crackhouses in Detroit’s crumbling neighborhoods. There are way too many tourists, guests, urban exploreres, and suburban kids checking out MCS for it to be a peaceful & quiet place for crack addicts. You’d have to be crazy to live there or try to hide out there — you’d run into someone poking around about every five minutes. And while the park out front is home to half a dozen or so homeless people, they are friendly & I have never seen them drugging up in the park.
The MCS is saveable — just maybe not right this moment.
March 11th, 2010 at 1:47 pm
since it’s not in a practical location, it should be restored and converted into something else. If the area is suitable for development, convert it to offices and retail and/or make it the center of development. If not, make it the center of a park or museum, some sort of public space. it’s too beautiful to be destroyed, even if it can’t be a train station.
March 11th, 2010 at 8:53 pm
The Detroit Train Station is a priceless relic. It’s Detroit that’s a decaying mess.
March 12th, 2010 at 10:53 pm
There are many problems standing in the way of saving MCS. Not least of which is its owner, Matty Moroun, who owns the Ambassador Bridge to Canada. He bought it years ago and left it open to trespass. Keep this in mind: There is a rail line on the property that goes under the river and into Canada. If he owns the property and shutters the tunnel, truckers have to use his bridge …
But as said here, the building is on the outskirts of downtown, much like Buffalo’s train depot. While there is the vibrant neighborhood of Corktown around it, the only other nearby landmark was Tiger Stadium - and that was torn down in 2008-09. The size of the building is jaw-dropping. Rehabbing such a landmark would cost easily top $100 million, even with tax credits (it’s on the National Register). In a city hundreds of millions in the red, with a negative reputation, its only key industry in its death throes and little hope for future industries coming to down, such a project is sadly a pipe dream at this point.
Therefore, it makes little sense to raze MCS, especially with no plan in place for the land. Sadly, such “development” is the norm in Detroit: The Lafayette Building, Statler Hotel, Hotel Tuller, the gargantuan Hudson’s department store, all have been demolished with absolutely NO plan in place for the property. The Statler, in particular, has been an overgrown grass lot (not even used for parking) on a major park downtown near the sports arenas. Photos of some of these fallen landmarks are on my site, if interested.
March 13th, 2010 at 2:54 pm
Let’s face it. They have no budget, so its a hypothetical question. There have been ways of preserving the outer structure of buildings such as these and rebuilding the inside with less expensive architectural reinforcements. But, there has to be local business in order to create revenue to replace the cost of preserving it. Where is the local business?
There isn’t any. Just crack heads, robbers, and desperate people living in severe poverty while the people who have money further north, know better than to spend more than a few minutes outside of their car if they are just passing through.
May 6th, 2010 at 9:24 pm
This is the right station location for train service to Toronto, and the only practical location for such service.
Oh, right. Service to Toronto died.
Sigh.
May 6th, 2010 at 9:26 pm
“For any train station to be of use, the surrounding area must have high-density, mixed use, transit-oriented development. ”
The building is so huge that you could easily put all that development INTO the station building.
May 6th, 2010 at 9:27 pm
“Omri Says:
March 9th, 2010 at 6:22 pm
Yuri, this building is unsafe.”
No, it’s not. All the damage is surface. It’s structurally sound. Any engineer would sign off on a rehab plan.
Trouble is, any rehab plan would cost on the order of $100 million, minimum.
July 26th, 2010 at 9:39 am
Closer to 200M is what I hear.
Everything that used to be anywhere near this station has already been demolished, as the city had planned to put casinos in the area. The casinos have all ended up elsewhere.
Acres and acres around of flatland, nothing in it anymore.
About the only thing it’s good for is a curiosity — unfortunately, that’s about all it’s EVER been good for. The top 2 or 3 levels of it were never even completed, if I remember reading my history properly, nothing above the 8th floor was ever used for anything at all ..
Those that designed and built it originally had no idea what to use all that space for, I think.
The sad thing is, left on it’s own, it’s probably got another 20-30 years of zero maintenance, before it finally does start to crumble. And it’s privately owned, and Matty Moroun is probably never going to give it up, otherwise someone could build something that might take business away from his prized Ambassador Bridge. Of course, if he had half a brain, he’d give it up to anyone that showed any interest, and maybe they could do SOMETHING with it that might attract people to CROSS his bridge.