![]() ![]() ![]() The latest tinkering trades reverse lot frontages with parallel streets or cul-de-sacs looping next to arterials, intercepting cross streets. Particularly evident in newer areas (suburbs) the web of freeways & arterials create a ring of barriers that lock (zoned) residential areas into pods. It’s just about impossible to construct a ‘main street’ in a new area because both major & minor arterials minimize connecting and particularly crossing streets and anything that interferes with speedy traffic. America, new roads are to conform to the roads hierarchy which categorizes roads based on vehicle speed and access needs. It is a bit of a misnomer to think of suburban streets as bottom up from large scale developers. But I also wonder if the economic efficiency of grids, if demonstrated, might encourage developers to explore using them even in suburbs. Given the problems caused by their layouts, it’s troubling that streets are so difficult to change. They continue the pattern of creating streets bottom-up - largely laid out by developers - within an overall grid. The discussion also makes me wonder how it would apply to suburbs. (Lower Manhattan, before the grid plan, was also a series of micro-grids that didn’t connect well). ![]() That would explain why so many local streets don’t match up on the other side when they cross main streets. It looks to me like Toronto’s was implemented as a top-down grid on the large scale (main streets), but as bottom-up micro-grids, created by the owners or developers, within that large scale. The discussion of street layouts naturally made me wonder about how Toronto’s old street grid developed. Alleys, on the other hand, come and go fairly easily.Īn interesting tidbit he shared was that New York’s grid plan specifically rejected ovals and circles in its street plan (which planners often like because they create vistas – think Queen’s Park) because they tend to become exclusive and elite. He found that streets are remarkably persistent - once laid down, it is hard to get rid of them, although grid streets are a little more persistent than non-grid streets. He also looked at changes to street plans - specifically, how often streets disappear. Too small, and streets start to take up too much of a city’s surface area. Too large, and the land inside the block starts to lose value because it is too far from the street. ![]() He argues that there is a sweet spot for block size. The discussion of street grids also inspired discussion of block sizes, on which there has apparently been some work (there is in fact a Journal of Urban Morphology). (He says his theory does not address suburbs because they have different incentives and are more purely residential, but that might also be an interesting area of investigation). It sounds plausible, but it would certainly need more thought and investigation before it can be said to be proven.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |