Originally Posted by
Jim from Boston
…A few years ago, the architectural critic for the
Boston Globe wrote an article describing two types of American studies, the
“City of Outdoor Rooms,” and the
"City of Towers and Cars” after a visit to Southfield, MI…
IMO Detroit City is, on a larger scale than Boston, also a City of Outdoor Rooms.
Originally Posted by
Roody
A lot of the rooms are empty. They say the abandoned parts of Detroit--about 40% of the land area--are bigger than the entire city of Boston.
Detroit never was a very dense city. Most people lived in single-family homes with driveways, garages, and big yards. This made walking and transit impractical, but was great for bikes (and of course, cars).
You are quite right, unfortunately that a lot of the “outdoor rooms” (neighborhoods) are empty. Furthermore indeed Detroit (proper) never was a very dense city. However my own recollection growing up in an East Side neighborhood was that vaguely-defined neighborhoods were contiguous within the city, unlike separated by major highways or large tracts of land as are many suburban developments; and secondly many services were local within the neighborhood, i.e. storefront businesses on light commercial, walkable streets. And children attended their local schools.
As a child and early teenager, I could get along quite well in my neighborhood (outdoor room), about 2 miles in greatest length, by walking, bicycling and taking a bus. Unlike Boston though, as you point out the distances were greater (but parking was never at a premium). Also, as I recall, bus services were better, and there was even a street car to downtown.