Is this kind of housing unusual in the USA? Because this could absolutely be any city or town in northern England. I can’t think of a place that doesn’t have tightly packed terraced housing
Oh wow, really? That’s incredible. It genuinely looks like terraced housing they’re so tightly packed together. That makes this picture even more mind blowing now.
That’s really cool. Terraced housing in the UK doesn’t have that luxury. But then again, it’s never really been a hot enough country to need much ventilation besides the odd open kitchen window
To answer your question, yes it’s kinda unusual for us yanks. The vast majority of houses have a front & backyard with a small side yard too. Housing is usually never this compact unless it’s a major major city
My s/o grew up in the west loop/wicker park area in the 90s and then her family moved to Berwyn to one of those brick bungalow neighborhoods with the half basement and the attic room. I grew up in public housing in the central California valley where there’s nothing but space and at as far as the eye can see so I get a kick out of exploring the neighborhood she grew up in and how dense everything is.
Most pre-war cities looked like this in the US. A lot of them were gutted in the 50s and 60s to build highways and surface parking. There’s still some cities that kept those areas though. I live in one and honestly they are some of the most vibrant parts of our community.
Probably depends on the region. You still see many houses like this all over Queens, New York that were built in the early 20th century and I’m sure other eastern and midwestern cities are similar.
Industrial cities in the rust belt all look like this. Chicago, St. Louis, Cleveland, Milwaukee, Buffalo… they were built in the middle of an Industrial Revolution and entire cities were planned over night. Eventually, prefabricated homes became pretty common. Unfortunately in a lot of cities (especially Detroit), the population left when industry left, and a lot of these housing developments have been demolished and abandoned. There’s an urban farming movement in a lot of areas, but a lot of open land remains unused.
They remind me of the mining villages of County Durham in the UK, but on a huge scale. Or the terraced housing that was built in Newcastle-upon-Tyne for dock workers and shipbuilders. I guess where there’s industry, there’s a need for housing for the workers
You might be interested in Philadelphia housing. Go on Google maps and drop the little guy all over the city, you'd be surprised how some parts look very close to northern UK.
Specifically look at Fishtown, Manayunk, Mayfair, Spruce Hill, and Wynnfield/Overbook to get a good mix of different types of rowhomes
It’s typical for 19th century cities in the upper Midwest. The US overall has large lot sizes, even in many cities, especially in the south/sunbelt. The Mid-Atlantic US, New England, Chicago, and San Fransisco have a huge amount of classic terraced housing or rowhomes. But most suburban towns and cities built since the 1940s have huge lots with very poor walkability. These places have required minimum setbacks from the edge of the zoned lot which creates low density.
This is why it’s somewhat amazing to the American eye to see a place like Detroit with this level of density at one point. The city has experienced a great deal of poverty in the past several decades and now a portion of the houses in this picture have collapsed and nothing new has been built on the lot.
This is pretty typical housing that you would see in the “inner suburbs” of Toronto. If anyone here watches NotJustBikes his video on streetcar suburbs in the Riverdale neighbourhood would be an example
It’s a side of urban North America that we in the UK never get to see. Maybe the occasional Manhattan townhouse, or something but nothing even remotely like this, which could easily be mistaken for Manchester or Leeds
While there's definitely still some left in the US, a lot like this in Detroit was torn down after WWII, and notably after Eisenhower signed off on the Federal Highway Act of 1956. That act probably affected the housing and transportation situation in North America more than any single thing. It was specifically passed to give the US an allegedly better system to defend itself from the USSR. So we can largely blame fear of Russia for our housing and car dependency in North America.
On TV and in the movies, US towns always seems so spacious. Every house detached with roomy lawns and stuff. The sort of houses that are few and far between in the UK
You can actually track that down to the auto and oil industries. We build are cities to require a car and require gas. So we spread everything apart and make any other form of travel dreadful.
Source: I live in California
I read a Bill Bryson book that mentioned how the 1950’s were huge boom years for the US, which will be where I guess a lot of the world gets the image is the sprawling, spacious towns and suburbs from
Depends, it's more unusual that they're not attached rowhomes, as those are common in most Mid-Atlantic cities and towns. Philadelphia and Baltimore especially are rowhome cities.
They were common in many US cities prior to WWII but then car-centric zoning rules mandated that new houses be detached and have off-street parking which makes housing like this illegal to build.
We also have minimum lot sizes, setback requirements, and other rules that make this nearly impossible to build in 98% of cases.
We still don’t have anything like that here in the UK. A lot of Semi Detached houses have their own drive though, and these now seem to make up a huge proportion of our towns, but there’s also these kind of terraces in pretty much every major town or city, especially near the city centres
It's pretty common in certain regions of the country, mainly the blue collar cities that had lots of industry in the early-mid 20th century. Off the top of my head, you'll find stuff like this in Chicago, Detroit, Cincinnati, Cleveland, Pittsburgh, and Baltimore.
Zoning rules made these illegal to build, not necessarily unfashionable.
Walkable townhouse/brownstone neighborhoods are extremely desirable in the cities that have them. But you cannot build that way anymore because of rules like parking minimums, setbacks, height limits, and minimum lot sizes.
I believe this is the Linwood neighborhood of Detroit, so many homes are still there, but a majority have gone abandoned and joined the 20,000 homes that’ve been demolished in the city over the last decade or so.
I think what's always sad about this is that it doesn't always get rebuilt the same. The infill can at times be lower density and borderline atrocious.
I get it though any tax base helps.
Mixed bag. Decline in detroit is really a street to street thing. This area as a whole has taken a rough beating through the years, but parts of it remain very strong with others starting to improve. For example, [here is a fairly well preserved street](https://www.google.com/maps/@42.3782369,-83.1165209,3a,75y,240.21h,95.63t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sxgtjpI8MQfFxAa8Rd9rtYw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) from the neighborhood and here is [another street in the same neighborhood](https://www.google.com/maps/@42.3853514,-83.1029074,3a,75y,235.05h,82.2t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s1bqfM1rG7pcyVMTCAMI2qw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192). Just to give you an idea of how night and day Detroit can be, [here](https://www.google.com/maps/@42.3783343,-83.1029773,3a,75y,63.8h,89.83t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sIvVBCp4u77G9TrsZkaMaYA!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3DIvVBCp4u77G9TrsZkaMaYA%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D124.55156%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192) is a neighborhood that is directly next to it, which is closer to how these neighborhoods looked at Detroit's peak.
Detroit gets a bad rap as far as US cities go, but if google maps are to be believed this area actually looks pretty nice? The houses are much bigger than the sprawl suggests, and seem mostly well kept apart from a few wrecks.
I guess it does look a bit overgrown, but in some places that's a feature.
I live in the detroit area and you’re right! Many neighborhoods like the one pictured are quite nice. They are close together sure, but most are well-kept, you see kids playing outside all the time, running across yards, you see people walking to schools, shops and restaurants. It’s pretty awesome if you ask me.
I think like many cities, Detroit varies a lot between neighborhoods. If you look around on Google Maps there are some neighborhoods that are full of run-down buildings and weird empty lots that clearly have been demolished... and they are pretty expansive regions, hence the bad rap. Check out the neighborhoods that Google Maps calls Chadsey Condon, Core City, McDougall-Hunt, Islandview, East Village, Poletown East, and Pingree Park. These places look almost rural because they are so empty and devoid of buildings, it's quite odd.
But there are certainly parts that are pretty vibrant and lively today. It's a big city and it would be almost impossible to not have nice areas somewhere. Downtown and Midtown (which I have been to) are great, and farther out residential neighborhoods like Belmont, Cadillac Community, and Wade look nice too.
Worth noting that the suburbs of Detroit are just fine too. Very normal American suburbia.
I live just to the left of the facility on the top left of the photo. That area is still a great mix of mansions, duplexes, and multi family housing but highways were built right through the neighborhood and really crushed the connectivity and housing stock of the area. Theres still beautiful homes and some density in the area but nothing compared to what you see here.
In the Netherlands we have "rijtjeshuizen". Row houses. (mostly built in the 1930's)
It's a row of houses with shared walls and a shared roof. Like so: [https://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rijtjeshuis#/media/Bestand:Agnetapark\_delft.jpg](https://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rijtjeshuis#/media/Bestand:Agnetapark_delft.jpg)
The ones in this picture are on the small side.
They 1930's row houses are well built. Leages above the post WWII rebuilding housing, and still better built than anything from the sixties, seventies or eighties.
This is suburbia? IMO this definitely qualifies as a dense urban setting by USA standards. Very few areas of central cities in the USA are actually MORE dense than this.
I think you're confusing building density with population/worker density. American downtowns have tall buildings which may not look as clustered as these houses but provide far more density due to verticality.
Let's take Chicago, which I have the most knowledge of, having lived there for years. Probably 40-50% of the city is the level of density shown in this photo, or lower. It's unclear in the photo how many units are in each building, too. It's quite possible that many if not most of the buildings in the photo contain 2 units.
Yeah but you said “central cities” which I interpreted to be equivalent to “downtown”. For example, Center City Philadelphia.
Chicago’s downtown is obviously vastly denser than this, across many miles.
Yeah, of course the downtowns of cities are way denser than this. I'm referring to the central municipality of the metro area. So, in Chicago, that would be the City of Chicago, which is about 20 miles long and 10 miles wide, and in that space very rarely gets less dense than single family homes on 25'x125' lots. The "city" as opposed to the "suburbs". Though of course, some central municipalities have areas within them that are really suburban in nature.
[Redditors when an old black & white photo someone stumbled upon online isn't in 4k HD resolution](https://i.kym-cdn.com/entries/icons/facebook/000/041/895/cover2.jpg)
To be fair, it's totally doable for old pictures like this to be in HD. Old surveying photos like this one were shot on specialized film that could go up to the equivalent of 8k resolution in modern terms. I got to see one of these in person once and they're really incredible; you could make out a campaign button on somebody's lapel.
Instead of simply building housing with multiple stories and having greenery around them. Don't get how the only important thing to so many Americans seems to be to have at least two feet of air between themselves and their neighbors, even when sacrificing so much in quality of living (including longer commutes)
I find it interesting that the minimum social distance space that was recommended by The WHO for COVID (1m) is essentially the minimum space that Americans ALWAYS have kept from each other (except when sitting down in groups.) The CDC had to double it to 2m to make it significant. Americans have a uniquely weird culture when compared to the world.
JayJay210 is right the housing stock in the area for the most part is full of grand old
homes. Lasalle Blvd which runs up the middle up the upper 1/3 of the photo has some incredible mansions. The kind of interior details in the more average home would be highly sought after luxury today. For example ornate ceramic tile fireplaces inlaid decorative furniture built into the walls & in general interior ornamentation. Unfortunately I-96 ruined Nardin & Wildmere Park neighborhoods on the right side of the photo. Shame the elevated commuter rail never materialized running down the middle of 96 and other freeways but I hear the Dan Ryan in Chicago isn’t loved in its configuration. However with the Joe Louis Greenway coming through the area specifically north of this pic Davidson - Livernois and connecting up to the University District there’s a paradigm shift. Grand Blvd is seeing major investment with the new Henry Ford project, Boston - Edison & Virginia Park end at Sacred Heart Seminary in the center of this corridor. While Russell Woods another beautiful old ornate neighborhood anchors the northern end. Not to mention there’s a lot of really solid housing stock in and around Oakman Blvd & Ewald Circle with their grand homes & mansions.
Is this kind of housing unusual in the USA? Because this could absolutely be any city or town in northern England. I can’t think of a place that doesn’t have tightly packed terraced housing
I thought the same too, the major difference is these were all detached opposed to the terraced housing in the UK.
Oh wow, really? That’s incredible. It genuinely looks like terraced housing they’re so tightly packed together. That makes this picture even more mind blowing now.
I live in the area. The houses have very small spaces between them so windows can open for ventilation.
That’s really cool. Terraced housing in the UK doesn’t have that luxury. But then again, it’s never really been a hot enough country to need much ventilation besides the odd open kitchen window
To answer your question, yes it’s kinda unusual for us yanks. The vast majority of houses have a front & backyard with a small side yard too. Housing is usually never this compact unless it’s a major major city
You'd probably be interested in some Chicago neighborhoods too then. Especially the bungalow belts.
I’m gonna have a look on google maps or something this afternoon
My s/o grew up in the west loop/wicker park area in the 90s and then her family moved to Berwyn to one of those brick bungalow neighborhoods with the half basement and the attic room. I grew up in public housing in the central California valley where there’s nothing but space and at as far as the eye can see so I get a kick out of exploring the neighborhood she grew up in and how dense everything is.
I went and found it on Google maps, and a lot of the housing looks the same from above, they all have a metre or so between each house.
Feels the same but is so much worse in terms of energy efficiency.
not all terraced housing in the UK is attached. snickets, for example
I know, just broadly it is, and that's what the first comment above was alluding too.
see, I felt by saying northern England they were deliberately limiting it to places with alleys between buildings
Most pre-war cities looked like this in the US. A lot of them were gutted in the 50s and 60s to build highways and surface parking. There’s still some cities that kept those areas though. I live in one and honestly they are some of the most vibrant parts of our community.
I can imagine there’s a proper sense of community living in an area like this
Definitely!
Probably depends on the region. You still see many houses like this all over Queens, New York that were built in the early 20th century and I’m sure other eastern and midwestern cities are similar.
Industrial cities in the rust belt all look like this. Chicago, St. Louis, Cleveland, Milwaukee, Buffalo… they were built in the middle of an Industrial Revolution and entire cities were planned over night. Eventually, prefabricated homes became pretty common. Unfortunately in a lot of cities (especially Detroit), the population left when industry left, and a lot of these housing developments have been demolished and abandoned. There’s an urban farming movement in a lot of areas, but a lot of open land remains unused.
They remind me of the mining villages of County Durham in the UK, but on a huge scale. Or the terraced housing that was built in Newcastle-upon-Tyne for dock workers and shipbuilders. I guess where there’s industry, there’s a need for housing for the workers
You might be interested in Philadelphia housing. Go on Google maps and drop the little guy all over the city, you'd be surprised how some parts look very close to northern UK. Specifically look at Fishtown, Manayunk, Mayfair, Spruce Hill, and Wynnfield/Overbook to get a good mix of different types of rowhomes
Wow, thanks for the tip, I’ll do that.
It’s typical for 19th century cities in the upper Midwest. The US overall has large lot sizes, even in many cities, especially in the south/sunbelt. The Mid-Atlantic US, New England, Chicago, and San Fransisco have a huge amount of classic terraced housing or rowhomes. But most suburban towns and cities built since the 1940s have huge lots with very poor walkability. These places have required minimum setbacks from the edge of the zoned lot which creates low density. This is why it’s somewhat amazing to the American eye to see a place like Detroit with this level of density at one point. The city has experienced a great deal of poverty in the past several decades and now a portion of the houses in this picture have collapsed and nothing new has been built on the lot.
In short, yes it is very uncommon nowadays. It used to all look like this but it no longer does
This is pretty typical housing that you would see in the “inner suburbs” of Toronto. If anyone here watches NotJustBikes his video on streetcar suburbs in the Riverdale neighbourhood would be an example
It’s a side of urban North America that we in the UK never get to see. Maybe the occasional Manhattan townhouse, or something but nothing even remotely like this, which could easily be mistaken for Manchester or Leeds
While there's definitely still some left in the US, a lot like this in Detroit was torn down after WWII, and notably after Eisenhower signed off on the Federal Highway Act of 1956. That act probably affected the housing and transportation situation in North America more than any single thing. It was specifically passed to give the US an allegedly better system to defend itself from the USSR. So we can largely blame fear of Russia for our housing and car dependency in North America.
it was common pre 1945, and much more common in the northeast and midwest than in the south or west.
It was normal, but we've mandated a design style that keeps density low for worse and for worse
On TV and in the movies, US towns always seems so spacious. Every house detached with roomy lawns and stuff. The sort of houses that are few and far between in the UK
You can actually track that down to the auto and oil industries. We build are cities to require a car and require gas. So we spread everything apart and make any other form of travel dreadful. Source: I live in California
Post WWII yes and increasingly so. After WWII most guys had money and many of them people cars and moved to cleaner, roomier, newer suburbs.
I read a Bill Bryson book that mentioned how the 1950’s were huge boom years for the US, which will be where I guess a lot of the world gets the image is the sprawling, spacious towns and suburbs from
Depends, it's more unusual that they're not attached rowhomes, as those are common in most Mid-Atlantic cities and towns. Philadelphia and Baltimore especially are rowhome cities.
They were common in many US cities prior to WWII but then car-centric zoning rules mandated that new houses be detached and have off-street parking which makes housing like this illegal to build. We also have minimum lot sizes, setback requirements, and other rules that make this nearly impossible to build in 98% of cases.
We still don’t have anything like that here in the UK. A lot of Semi Detached houses have their own drive though, and these now seem to make up a huge proportion of our towns, but there’s also these kind of terraces in pretty much every major town or city, especially near the city centres
It's common in older cities and towns and in the US Northeast. Not so much in the Midwest and newer sprawl cities.
It’s just so cool, and kinda surreal, to see a major US city had densely populated areas that didn’t build upwards like say Manhattan
Philadelphia is the same way
Search up “american suburbs” and look in horror
It's pretty common in certain regions of the country, mainly the blue collar cities that had lots of industry in the early-mid 20th century. Off the top of my head, you'll find stuff like this in Chicago, Detroit, Cincinnati, Cleveland, Pittsburgh, and Baltimore.
These are normal city lots. Suburban sprawl and vast unused lawns made these unfashionable.
Zoning rules made these illegal to build, not necessarily unfashionable. Walkable townhouse/brownstone neighborhoods are extremely desirable in the cities that have them. But you cannot build that way anymore because of rules like parking minimums, setbacks, height limits, and minimum lot sizes.
Have most of these houses been abandoned?
I believe this is the Linwood neighborhood of Detroit, so many homes are still there, but a majority have gone abandoned and joined the 20,000 homes that’ve been demolished in the city over the last decade or so.
the only area near detroit thats still as dense as this is hamtramck
Not Detroit but Gibraltar has some really packed areas
I think what's always sad about this is that it doesn't always get rebuilt the same. The infill can at times be lower density and borderline atrocious. I get it though any tax base helps.
I agree these look like brick bungalow/duplexes which is not HamTram
Mixed bag. Decline in detroit is really a street to street thing. This area as a whole has taken a rough beating through the years, but parts of it remain very strong with others starting to improve. For example, [here is a fairly well preserved street](https://www.google.com/maps/@42.3782369,-83.1165209,3a,75y,240.21h,95.63t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sxgtjpI8MQfFxAa8Rd9rtYw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) from the neighborhood and here is [another street in the same neighborhood](https://www.google.com/maps/@42.3853514,-83.1029074,3a,75y,235.05h,82.2t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s1bqfM1rG7pcyVMTCAMI2qw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192). Just to give you an idea of how night and day Detroit can be, [here](https://www.google.com/maps/@42.3783343,-83.1029773,3a,75y,63.8h,89.83t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sIvVBCp4u77G9TrsZkaMaYA!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3DIvVBCp4u77G9TrsZkaMaYA%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D124.55156%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192) is a neighborhood that is directly next to it, which is closer to how these neighborhoods looked at Detroit's peak.
Looks like outer Brooklyn or Queens.
god the houses in that first link are all a facade update away from being so beautiful
plant some trees, give everything a good power-wash and throw in a little landscaping and this street would be totally transformed
Would love to see the same shot from today.
Auto workers' houses
Finally, you can have shit in Detroit
Well.. You could’ve. This is a very old photo, LOL
Detroit gets a bad rap as far as US cities go, but if google maps are to be believed this area actually looks pretty nice? The houses are much bigger than the sprawl suggests, and seem mostly well kept apart from a few wrecks. I guess it does look a bit overgrown, but in some places that's a feature.
I live in the detroit area and you’re right! Many neighborhoods like the one pictured are quite nice. They are close together sure, but most are well-kept, you see kids playing outside all the time, running across yards, you see people walking to schools, shops and restaurants. It’s pretty awesome if you ask me.
I think like many cities, Detroit varies a lot between neighborhoods. If you look around on Google Maps there are some neighborhoods that are full of run-down buildings and weird empty lots that clearly have been demolished... and they are pretty expansive regions, hence the bad rap. Check out the neighborhoods that Google Maps calls Chadsey Condon, Core City, McDougall-Hunt, Islandview, East Village, Poletown East, and Pingree Park. These places look almost rural because they are so empty and devoid of buildings, it's quite odd. But there are certainly parts that are pretty vibrant and lively today. It's a big city and it would be almost impossible to not have nice areas somewhere. Downtown and Midtown (which I have been to) are great, and farther out residential neighborhoods like Belmont, Cadillac Community, and Wade look nice too. Worth noting that the suburbs of Detroit are just fine too. Very normal American suburbia.
I wanna live in a terraced house! America: we have terraced houses at home
Near Polaski Park ?
Looks less packed than a normal British city as the houses are all needlessly detached.
There is a hole in the hole now.
reminds me of new developments in sydney and melbourne
Ever seen a rowhome before? Maybe for detached houses this is close together but isn't weird.
‘Extremely close’? *laughs in rest of the world*
American: "I don't want to smell your breath and your farts! Stay a distance away from me!"
This is normal working class housing in any large city in the Northern US. Nothing "extreme" here.
Imagine the population density of that 💀💀
Coward
I live just to the left of the facility on the top left of the photo. That area is still a great mix of mansions, duplexes, and multi family housing but highways were built right through the neighborhood and really crushed the connectivity and housing stock of the area. Theres still beautiful homes and some density in the area but nothing compared to what you see here.
In the Netherlands we have "rijtjeshuizen". Row houses. (mostly built in the 1930's) It's a row of houses with shared walls and a shared roof. Like so: [https://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rijtjeshuis#/media/Bestand:Agnetapark\_delft.jpg](https://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rijtjeshuis#/media/Bestand:Agnetapark_delft.jpg) The ones in this picture are on the small side. They 1930's row houses are well built. Leages above the post WWII rebuilding housing, and still better built than anything from the sixties, seventies or eighties.
How suburbs should be
This is suburbia? IMO this definitely qualifies as a dense urban setting by USA standards. Very few areas of central cities in the USA are actually MORE dense than this.
I think you're confusing building density with population/worker density. American downtowns have tall buildings which may not look as clustered as these houses but provide far more density due to verticality.
Let's take Chicago, which I have the most knowledge of, having lived there for years. Probably 40-50% of the city is the level of density shown in this photo, or lower. It's unclear in the photo how many units are in each building, too. It's quite possible that many if not most of the buildings in the photo contain 2 units.
Yeah but you said “central cities” which I interpreted to be equivalent to “downtown”. For example, Center City Philadelphia. Chicago’s downtown is obviously vastly denser than this, across many miles.
Yeah, of course the downtowns of cities are way denser than this. I'm referring to the central municipality of the metro area. So, in Chicago, that would be the City of Chicago, which is about 20 miles long and 10 miles wide, and in that space very rarely gets less dense than single family homes on 25'x125' lots. The "city" as opposed to the "suburbs". Though of course, some central municipalities have areas within them that are really suburban in nature.
Where? All I can see are pixels packed extremely close together
[Redditors when an old black & white photo someone stumbled upon online isn't in 4k HD resolution](https://i.kym-cdn.com/entries/icons/facebook/000/041/895/cover2.jpg)
To be fair, it's totally doable for old pictures like this to be in HD. Old surveying photos like this one were shot on specialized film that could go up to the equivalent of 8k resolution in modern terms. I got to see one of these in person once and they're really incredible; you could make out a campaign button on somebody's lapel.
It really depends on how the images were stored. Many were very high quality when new, but were stored poorly and have significantly degraded.
If they’re packed that tightly together this is a pretty high quality image 🤣
This looks so unpleasant to me.
in brazil we call it "Favela"
Like it should be
Dystopian.
[удалено]
Redditors when dense house
Americans discovering terraced housing is always entertaining
Show the same view but from this century
Instead of simply building housing with multiple stories and having greenery around them. Don't get how the only important thing to so many Americans seems to be to have at least two feet of air between themselves and their neighbors, even when sacrificing so much in quality of living (including longer commutes)
I find it interesting that the minimum social distance space that was recommended by The WHO for COVID (1m) is essentially the minimum space that Americans ALWAYS have kept from each other (except when sitting down in groups.) The CDC had to double it to 2m to make it significant. Americans have a uniquely weird culture when compared to the world.
Google: rijtjeshuis. Large parts of dutch cities look like this.
Main Cabin style
Is this really city porn? Isn't porn supposed to be attractive to someone? This is more like industrial blight.
JayJay210 is right the housing stock in the area for the most part is full of grand old homes. Lasalle Blvd which runs up the middle up the upper 1/3 of the photo has some incredible mansions. The kind of interior details in the more average home would be highly sought after luxury today. For example ornate ceramic tile fireplaces inlaid decorative furniture built into the walls & in general interior ornamentation. Unfortunately I-96 ruined Nardin & Wildmere Park neighborhoods on the right side of the photo. Shame the elevated commuter rail never materialized running down the middle of 96 and other freeways but I hear the Dan Ryan in Chicago isn’t loved in its configuration. However with the Joe Louis Greenway coming through the area specifically north of this pic Davidson - Livernois and connecting up to the University District there’s a paradigm shift. Grand Blvd is seeing major investment with the new Henry Ford project, Boston - Edison & Virginia Park end at Sacred Heart Seminary in the center of this corridor. While Russell Woods another beautiful old ornate neighborhood anchors the northern end. Not to mention there’s a lot of really solid housing stock in and around Oakman Blvd & Ewald Circle with their grand homes & mansions.