I saved this thread hoping to get some insight on something I am still studying. Unfortunately, still no comments!

In Thomas Sugrue's Origins of the Urban Crisis: Race and Inequality in Postwar Detroit he argues that Detroit's population was shrinking (especially the white population) as early as the 1950s. More and more factories were closing, moving to areas outside of Detroit city, or automating their lines and laying off workers. Mortgage lending practices like redlining also financially incentivized whites to move to outlying areas and suburbs-- loans were difficult or impossible to get in integrated areas and even areas in danger of integration.

In a parallel case, St Louis Missouri, the book American Apartheid stated that not a single government subsidized mortgage was approved within city limits between WWII and the early 70s-- if you wanted a cheap mortgage, your only option was to move to new construction in the suburbs. This was for two reasons: racism, and the refusal to subsidize the purchase of older homes. Only mortgages for the purchase newly constructed homes were subsidized under the GI bill.

The riot in 1967 reflected the horrible state of race relations, it didn't cause them. Relations were horrible in Detroit throughout the 40s and 50s as well, including a riot by whites against public housing for black war industry workers in the 40s. The threat of more riots quashed any future plans for integrated public housing, or even public housing for blacks alone. This riot is discussed in the Sugrue book, but this wikipedia page is a good overview.

(Full disclosure: I have not read the chapter specifically about the 1967 riot yet, I am just familiar with writing on other riots of that era. A member of the commission that studied the 1967 riots in Newark also recently spoke at my school and my comment reflects his statements/attitude. I will comment again if I discover something important I left out.)