City living

[masterblaster]

Also you seem to envision Detroit as a Extreme high density city. Most of Detroit looked more like Royal Oak than Manhattan. Most of the inner ring suburb have the similar densities as Detroit had at it's peak. Detroit never had the Density of the east coast cities and never will have.

I know your post is over a week old, but...

East Coast cities peak Density vs Detroit's, let's see:

Philadelphia's peak density [[in 1950) - 2,071,000/134.7 = 15,375
Boston's peak density [[in 1950) - 801,000/48 sq mile = 16,666
New York City's peak density [[in 2010) - 8,175,000/304 sq mile = 26,804
Washington, DC's peak density [[in 1950) - 802,178/61.4 sq mile = 13,064
Baltimore's peak density [[in 1950) - 949,708/81 sq mile = 11,725
Detroit's peak density [[in 1950) - 1,849,568/139 sq mile = 13,300

So Detroit's peak density was greater than Washington, DC and Baltimore, and wasn't that much lower than Philadelphia's.

Concerning inner ring suburb's peak density compared to the city? No.

Hazel Park peak density [[in 1950) - 25,631/2.82 sq mile = 9,089
Ferndale peak density [[in 1960) - 31,347/3.88 sq mile = 8,079
Warren peak density [[in 1970) - 179,260/34.46 sq mile = 5,021
St. Clair Shores peak density [[in 1970) - 88,093/11.62 sq mile = 7,581
Oak Park peak density [[in 1970) = 36,762/5.16 sq mile = 7,124
Southfield peak density [[in 2000) = 78,322/26.27 sq mile = 2,981
Redford peak density [[in 1970) = 71,901/11.2 sq mile = 6,419
Dearborn peak density [[in 1960) = 112,007/24.5 sq mile = 4,571
River Rouge peak density [[in 1950) = 20,549/2.65 sq mile = 7,754
East Detroit/Eastpointe [[in 1970) = 45,920/5.14 sq mile = 8,934
Berkley peak density [[in 1970) = 23,275/2.62 sq mile = 8,884
Royal Oak peak density [[in 1970) = 86,238/11.79 sq mile = 7,314
Grosse Pointe Park peak density [[in 1970) = 15,641/2.17 sq mile = 7,208
Center Line peak density [[in 1970) = 10,379/1.74 sq mile = 5,965

I could go on with other suburbs, but you see the point - NONE OF THE
SUBURBS EVER APPROACHED THE DENSITY OF THE CITY at its peak!![[Now some suburban neighborhoods did like Cabbage Patch)

In fact, if you want to get a picture of the density of the pre-Depression neighborhoods of Detroit just look at the peak densities of Hamtramck and Highland Park.

Hamtramck peak density [[in 1930) = 56,268/2.09 sq mile = 26,922
Highland Park peak density [[in 1930) = 52,959/2.97 sq mile = 17,831
These are much higher than inner ring suburbs. Not all of Detroit was
built like Warrendale.

[iheartthed]

I know your post is over a week old, but...

East Coast cities peak Density vs Detroit's, let's see:

Philadelphia's peak density [[in 1950) - 2,071,000/134.7 = 15,375
Boston's peak density [[in 1950) - 801,000/48 sq mile = 16,666
New York City's peak density [[in 2010) - 8,175,000/304 sq mile = 26,804
Washington, DC's peak density [[in 1950) - 802,178/61.4 sq mile = 13,064
Baltimore's peak density [[in 1950) - 949,708/81 sq mile = 11,725
Detroit's peak density [[in 1950) - 1,849,568/139 sq mile = 13,300

So Detroit's peak density was greater than Washington, DC and Baltimore, and wasn't that much lower than Philadelphia's.

Concerning inner ring suburb's peak density compared to the city? No.

Hazel Park peak density [[in 1950) - 25,631/2.82 sq mile = 9,089
Ferndale peak density [[in 1960) - 31,347/3.88 sq mile = 8,079
Warren peak density [[in 1970) - 179,260/34.46 sq mile = 5,021
St. Clair Shores peak density [[in 1970) - 88,093/11.62 sq mile = 7,581
Oak Park peak density [[in 1970) = 36,762/5.16 sq mile = 7,124
Southfield peak density [[in 2000) = 78,322/26.27 sq mile = 2,981
Redford peak density [[in 1970) = 71,901/11.2 sq mile = 6,419
Dearborn peak density [[in 1960) = 112,007/24.5 sq mile = 4,571
River Rouge peak density [[in 1950) = 20,549/2.65 sq mile = 7,754
East Detroit/Eastpointe [[in 1970) = 45,920/5.14 sq mile = 8,934
Berkley peak density [[in 1970) = 23,275/2.62 sq mile = 8,884
Royal Oak peak density [[in 1970) = 86,238/11.79 sq mile = 7,314
Grosse Pointe Park peak density [[in 1970) = 15,641/2.17 sq mile = 7,208
Center Line peak density [[in 1970) = 10,379/1.74 sq mile = 5,965

I could go on with other suburbs, but you see the point - NONE OF THE
SUBURBS EVER APPROACHED THE DENSITY OF THE CITY at its peak!![[Now some suburban neighborhoods did like Cabbage Patch)

In fact, if you want to get a picture of the density of the pre-Depression neighborhoods of Detroit just look at the peak densities of Hamtramck and Highland Park.

Hamtramck peak density [[in 1930) = 56,268/2.09 sq mile = 26,922
Highland Park peak density [[in 1930) = 52,959/2.97 sq mile = 17,831
These are much higher than inner ring suburbs. Not all of Detroit was
built like Warrendale.

I would also guess that Detroit's effective density was closer to Hamtramck in 1930. The 1930 census was the first census with the city's current day borders, so much of the land in the city at the time was not developed.