Suburbs that are denser than the city?

[mrnyc]

Originally Posted by iheartthed

Hamtramck's population decline is similar to Detroit's. Hamtramck is at about 38% of peak population and Detroit is at about 36% of peak. Hamtramck's peak density was about 27,000 ppsm.

yep, no doubt. its still a pretty cool place. or was when back i knew it anyway. speaking of those were the days, don't get me started on east cleveland. while its density is still 5,774.4/sq mi (2,229.5/km2) at 3 sq miles in size, just back in 2000 it was 8,761.8 people per square mile (3,379.0/km²). ugh. and i bet its dropping off the face of the earth even harder and by the minute as of today.

[Crawford]

Originally Posted by iheartthed

Hamtramck's population decline is similar to Detroit's. Hamtramck is at about 38% of peak population and Detroit is at about 36% of peak. Hamtramck's peak density was about 27,000 ppsm.

Right, but Hamtramck is intact, Detroit isn't. Hamtramck is the best example of how Detroit overall looked prior to the 1970's.

Hamtramck has also had huge population decline, but it was formerly an incredibly packed-in neighborhood of immigrant families. And the western chunk of the city was taken down in urban renewal and the southern chunk was taken down for the Poletown plant. Hamtramck doesn't really have abandonment or dead commercial areas.

[Minato Ku]

Originally Posted by mousquet

Lol at Levallois. Their mayor is a damn Conservative thug currently stuck in jail. That's how the town has been so populated and desirable.
He and his wife are quite better off, easy millionaires, and those 2 bastards don't pay their taxes. That's unfair.
Their management of Levallois has also been quite questionable. It is the most indebted municipality of the entire country. Every single dweller in Levallois is in an almost €10k debt because of their mayor, that's just irresponsible. But they don't care about their debt and still fancy their mayor. As if they would never have to pay for it.

What matter is not that much the debt but the capacity of reimbursement.

Levallois is a wealthy muncipality, it has a rather wealthy population and lot of businesses. This means that it has a lot of revenue, even with its big debt Levallois Perret has a much better financial situation than the most of French muncipalities.

Actually the debt of Levallois Perret has decreased significantly since 2008.

https://www.lefigaro.fr/fig-data/dette-commune/

As why the inhabitants vote for him, the answer is easy : Clientelism.
Because of its wealth, the municipality of Levallois Perret can give to its inhabitants a lot of services, gifts... while maintening low taxes.

Levallois Perret is still less populated than it was at its peak between the two world war.
In 1926, Levallois Perret had a density of 31,180/km² or 80,800‬/sq mi.
Back then Levallois Perret was a working class industrial inner suburb. Today Levallois is a wealthy inner suburb with a lot of offices.

[mousquet]

Originally Posted by Minato Ku

In 1926, Levallois Perret had a density of 31,180/km² or 80,800‬/sq mi.

Speaking of which, not sure our mid-rise type of urban fabric is suitable for that kind of density. It brings about "promiscuité", that is to say people downright stacked upon each other, which is not desirable at all because of an obvious lack of comfort and privacy in such a living condition.
People often don't realize when they dislike post-war modernism, but I think it helped us tackle this issue, in part at least, for the interior designs of modern buildings are usually better and more convenient than those of older stuff. However, in most cases, they still miss soundproofing.

Anyway, the urban fabric has to grow taller for the central areas to accommodate more dwellers in a comfortable and desirable fashion. That's no rocket science, really.