Why does Detroit have no row houses or brownstones?!

[BrushStart]

I never gave it much thought until today, but it occurred to me that Detroit has basically no row houses or brownstones. Almost every other city has them. Most Midwestern cities have an abundance of them winding tightly through very narrow streets. Consider Pittsburgh for example, the entire city is full of them. In fact, it seems that row houses are the dominate housing type in Pitt. Ohio is the same story, and Chicago has miles of brownstones... Detroit is just as old as those cities, and all of these neighborhoods [[Detroit's included) were built when streetcars were the primary mode of transit. So, what's the deal? Why did spaced-apart, single family homes located on very wide streets dominate housing in Detroit? I heard somewhere that it had to do with taxes on street frontage, but I don't entirely buy that.... It still wouldn't explain why Detroit's streets are so much wider and the houses so far apart compared to other cities?

It's really interesting to use Google streets to travel through Pittsburgh and look at how their housing is all nestled together on streets as wide as alleys with a mix of little bars and and cafes tucked away into little nooks. The format even holds true when you get far away from Pitt's downtown. I think Detroit has a built-in disadvantage in terms of urban renewal because of our spread out housing style. We aren't built for density or mass transit as well as other cities. I think single family houses also get blighted faster because all it takes is one homeowner to go belly up and he takes an entire house down, whereas several adjoining neighbors all have to tank at the same time to cause a series of row houses to become abandoned and blighted.

Here are a few pics of some of Pitt's nicer row houses: http://www.city-data.com/forum/pitts...-pictures.html

[Meddle]

People in Detroit were smarter.

[56packman]

Pennsylvania [[the state time forgot) and Maryland's cities have row houses. There are apartments on Leverette in Corktown that fit the description, and there used to be some row house kind of things on John R north of I-94.
One thing Detroit always prided itself on was the percentage of residents who owned stand-alone homes.

[MSUguy]

The auto jobs paid so well that people here could afford homes

[Ravine]

The auto jobs paid so well that people here could afford homes

That sounds very over-simplified, but sometimes the truth ain't complicated, and I would say there's a good chance that, while a further discussion may be fun & interesting, we could probably fold up the tent right now, the question having been answered.

[BillyBBrew]

West Village has at least 8 examples, in various architectural styles, of terraces within it's boundaries. One of these is in typical rowhouse style, the rest more upscale. There are also some rowhouses in the Hubbard Farms and on Lafayette along the I-75 Southbound corridor.

[stasu1213]

Detroit had more land to build on. New York, Philadelphia and some parts of Maryland were designed during the 1700s where most of the settlers from Europe made their homes. Those cities were very populated at the time for the rest of the country were still underdevelope such as Detroit. Detroit, in it's heyday, were a much better place to live in than New York, Chicago, Philadelphia, and Washington DC. Detroiters didn't have to live on top of one another. We had our bustling downtown area. Each neighborhood had their own business retail district. Greenfield/Grand River, Gratiot/Van Dyke, 7 mile Livernois, Warren/Conners. Curtis/Wyoming, etc. Other cities at that time didn't have business/neighborhood districts the way that Detroit had. Detroit had rail cars that could take you from Detroit to Kalamazoo. We had massive land mass to work with.

[Danny]

Detroit don'e have a lot of Row houses and brownstones for these reasons:

As the industrial boomtowns sprouted up in the midwest, developers don't want their sites look like New York, Boston, Philadelphia, Balitmore, Washington D.C. and Jersey Shore cities and classic to Medieval European-like cities. The developers want a to build REAL homes with lots of space and big backyards. First they started out with grid style walkabout neighborhoods. Next add in the pre-victorian style colonials, bungalows and ranches to give a country atmosphere. Later brick houses and familt flats for the middle class are being built this time away from the Detroit's lower east and west side. Middle class families who own those rows of family flats want to double or tripple their income by letting their tenants [[within their own race) live in.

When the suburbs developed its started in the inner rings following the industry boom of the 1900 to 1930. Dearborn, areas of Royal Oak Twp. [[ later became the suburbs of Ferndale, Hazel Park, Royal Oak, Huntington Woods, Berkley, and Pleasant Ridge) The industry boom also sprouted Warren along Van Dyke Rd. Center Line, East Detroit [[ Eastpointe) St. Clair Shores, The 5 Grosse Pointe and Lochmoor areas. Also other inner ring suburbs in Wayne County like Redford TWP, Dearborn TWP, Nakin Mills TWP. Clarenceville, Livonia TWP. with its Rosedale Gardens, Then you have Downriver suburbs like River Rouge, Ecorse, Lincoln Park, Southgate, Wyandotte and Taylor. These inner ring suburbs don't have a type of Brownstone and row houses because the people wanted a country like lifestyle with wide open spaces and plenty of trees and critters roaming about.

Detroit and its suburbs remains today cities of neighborhoods. We don't need no Browntowns [[Chicago-like Greystones, or other St. Louis like victorian baby mansions to impress the people.)

WORD FROM THE STREET PROPHET

Keep Detroit classic and utilized.

Neda, I miss you so.

[iheartthed]

Flats were more common in Detroit, much like Chicago. But I have seen rowhouses in Brush Park, so I wouldn't be surprised if a lot of them were lost to neglect or "urban renewal".

[iheartthed]

That sounds very over-simplified, but sometimes the truth ain't complicated, and I would say there's a good chance that, while a further discussion may be fun & interesting, we could probably fold up the tent right now, the question having been answered.

It was very over-simplified and also very wrong. Brownstones in places like New York were originally homes for rich people.

[ghettopalmetto]

Detroit, in it's heyday, were a much better place to live in than New York, Chicago, Philadelphia, and Washington DC. Detroiters didn't have to live on top of one another.

I've seen 3000 sf rowhouses sell for upwards of $1 million. Seems to me that people don't necessarily mind "living on top of one another".

The rowhouse would be expected to have been the housing style of choice in 18th and 19th century residential construction in Detroit, as this was the predominant technology at the time [[kind of how plastic Pulte homes are predominant now). Given that Detroit has very very few buildings remaining from the pre-20th century, I would not be the least bit shocked if they were all bulldozed in the name of "progress".

[iheartthed]

Given that Detroit has very very few buildings remaining from the pre-20th century, I would not be the least bit shocked if they were all bulldozed in the name of "progress".

Yeah, that's my theory since there are examples of rowhouses in Detroit, but they are fragmented examples.

[DetroitPlanner]

I would not go so far as to say they are none, but very few were developed.

Detroit's history of ribbon farm development required separate housing from the start. That became the overwhelming pattern.

[ghettopalmetto]

I would not go so far as to say they are none, but very few were developed.

Detroit's history of ribbon farm development required separate housing from the start. That became the overwhelming pattern.

It's not as if Detroit went from "all-ribbbon-farms" to "20th century manufacturing metropolis" with hundreds of thousands of residents overnight. Granted, the population boom really didn't happen until the 20th century, so I'm sure that any rowhouse stock would have been geographically limited when compared to the present-day boundaries of the city. But it's a pretty good bet that the pre-20th century "urban" population lived in rowhouses in the neighborhoods clustered around downtown.

[BrushStart]

Brownstones in places like New York were originally homes for rich people.

Yeah, that's what I thought. Poor people lived in tenement-style homes.

I just don't understand how/why only developers in Detroit made a conscious decision to not build row houses and brownstones while developers in every other city built them literally in abundance. Even San Francisco is known for its row houses.

[Mikeg]

I think single family houses also get blighted faster because all it takes is one homeowner to go belly up and he takes an entire house down,

I think that the type of residential development has little to do with the mechanisms of blight. I see two primary factors that are both exacerbated by a third.
1) in addition to the neighborhood retail districts that were located at major intersections, most of Detroit's major thoroughfares were lined with local commercial and office uses and the residential neighborhoods were tucked behind them. Once the income levels and/or population started to drop in the adjacent neighborhoods, there would no longer be enough nearby spendable dollars to support that level of commercial uses.
2) the type of ownership has a lot more to do with resistance to blight than the physical form of the buildings. Owner-occupied buildings are usually maintained the best.
3) property tax millage rates that are higher than anywhere else in the region tend to drive down the value of a property and undermine the ability of a landlord to command comparable rents and perform comparable levels of maintenance.

Commercial decline and blight along the adjacent major roads typically initiated the blight that would eventually infect the adjacent residential neighborhoods. Blight would then accelerate in the absence of effective ordinance enforcement, particularly as the percentage of owner-occupied properties declined.

[lilpup]

Detroit's never been space constricted like many eastern cities and Pitt are [[Pittsburgh's in the mountains). Detroit also had abundant wood sources nearby and had lumber barons as prominent residents. Timber frame houses are faster and less expensive to build during boom times. Detroit also had a lot of duplexes, four squares, and apartment buildings instead of rowhouses - again because space was available. Also, many of Detroit's newly arrived didn't come from big cities but rather from agricultural situations, and between potato patch Pingree and work a garden Ford people here have been historically encouraged to DIY to supplement household incomes.

Chicago also has a lot of single family dwellings and duplexes. As a matter of fact there are distinct house styles called "Detroit bungalows" and "Chicago bungalows". There's even a Chicago Bungalow Association dedicated to preserving Chicago-style bungalows in Chicago [[can't join if yours is a Detroit-style).

[Hermod]

1. Detroit's "building boom" came after the development of the electric streetcar so that housing could be more spread out.

2. Much of the inner city housing stock was eliminated by two phenomena.

a. Demolition to accommodate industrial expansion during the boom years.

b. Demolitions to build the Lodge and the Chrysler in the inner city area. [[look at some old pictures of Hastings St).

3. While inner city Detroit had few row houses, there were a lot of single houses on very narrow lots in the city. These houses had the floor plans of row houses, but were free standing with narrow lanes on each side.

[Johnnny5]

Anyone consider how difficult it was to move 100's of tons of cut stone in the 19th and early 20th Century ?

The vast majority of Michigan's mitten is covered in 100's of feet of sand, boulders and rubble left over from the glaciers. With the exception of areas along the Ohio border we simply do not have the material resources to build homes out of cut stone.

After the major fires of the mid 1800's few would have considered building a row house out of wood.

[lilpup]

The memory of the 1805 fire also probably played a role in the preference for detached housing. Unfortunately the gaps between the houses were often small enough that fire still spreads quickly - check out Highland Park where the eaves seem like they could touch each other.

[lilpup]

Anyone consider how difficult it was to move 100's of tons of cut stone in the 19th and early 20th Century ?

The vast majority of Michigan's mitten is covered in 100's of feet of sand, boulders and rubble left over from the glaciers. With the exception of areas along the Ohio border we simply do not have the material resources to build homes out of cut stone.

row houses and brownstones are brick, not cut stone

[ghettopalmetto]

Anyone consider how difficult it was to move 100's of tons of cut stone in the 19th and early 20th Century ?

So no one in Detroit had the technology to make bricks and other masonry products? You're singularly focused on one material [[of many) that may be used for external cladding. The focus of the thread is the form of the structure.

[Johnnny5]

row houses and brownstones are brick, not cut stone

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brownstone

[Johnnny5]

So no one in Detroit had the technology to make bricks and other masonry products? You're singularly focused on one material [[of many) that may be used for external cladding. The focus of the thread is the form of the structure.

I did not realize any thread on DYES has a "focus"...


The lack of easily sourced material is one of the reasons we don't see that style of building much in Michigan. I didn't say it was the only reason.

[ghettopalmetto]

I did not realize any thread on DYES has a "focus"...


The lack of easily sourced material is one of the reasons we don't see that style of building much in Michigan. I didn't say it was the only reason.

Building materials have nothing to do with lot sizes or the shape of the building. You could build rowhouses out of reinforced concrete, if you wanted to do so.

You can't tell me that Detroit didn't have masonry construction in the 19th and early 20th centuries.