Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
"Supper" is not the same as "super." "Supper" is another word for "dinner" in English. "Super" is the word you're looking for--thus my jest about restaurants.
I don't mean to sound critical, but it is obvious that you take a great interest in this subject but sometimes the language barrier can be very difficult to penetrate. (I also note you often use "do to" instead of "due to," they are not the same thing..)
Although, to that end, not all of what you are showing are superblocks--often these were rural roads put in place due to the way many Midwestern and Western states were laid out along township/range lines. In American planning parlance, "superblocks" more often refers to large blocks made up of smaller blocks consolidated into a single unit. The idea was to improve traffic flow by shifting traffic from a large number of narrower streets to a smaller number of wider, faster streets and moving pedestrian functions to the center of the superblock. It facilitates use of automobiles, but discourages use of other transit modes in between superblocks.
From what I understand the south west laid out on a surveyed grid of section squares that are about 1.6 km on a side as part of the Northwest Ordinance and these sections are further divided into quarter sections and so forth when needed.
In south Ontario has surveyed grid sort like this but in areas normly comes in 3 types 1.6 km , 2KM or 3 KM .
The city of Mississauga and Brampton have a lot of 1.6 km and 3 KM superblocks. Where in Oakville and Burlington there is a lot of 2KM superblocks.
Most these place where small towns and boomed in 60's and beyond. This why they have big suburb feel. In many areas they never decided the 1.6 km , 2KM and 3 KM superblocks are too big and now there is gridlock traffic and nothing can be done .Some place in Mississauga and the suburbs in north of Toronto are trying out modified grid system and putting in through streets that go no more than 2 or 3 KM.
But not has strong has some cities in US that in fervour of the modified grid system and smart growth.
Some cities have been moving away from suburb model to smart growth model that more urban and non car centric.
As ANJOA said, obviously new neighborhoods would be built. The difference is their form could be more similar to older city neighborhoods.
And what would the new neighborhoods have looked like? Seattle's basically a conglomeration of many former cities that have been annexed over the years. West Seattle was mostly streetcar suburbs annexed soon after building because they were bankrupt. The Endoyline neighborhood (End of the line) in present day Fauntleroy is an example. It was annexed in the early 1900s (1900-1910) although most of the growth was post-war.
Present day U District was annexed around the same time and was even less developed... it was just clear cut farmland and built up around UW when it was moved there after annexation. Could doesn't mean would. Look at the suburbs of Seattle such as Bellevue or Redmond.
Both are not, to me, conventional suburbs just as Fauntelroy isn't what I think of when I think of urban. Despite the skyscrapers, Bellevue isn't what some people are looking for in urban, either. For one thing, it being a suburb-city, if you will, is new. There's still lots of parking lots. Not dissimilar to downtown Houston in some respects.
Or how about Sacramento: https://maps.google.com/maps?q=sacra...alifornia&z=15
No grids, malls, big box stores, giant parking lots... It's basically the list of ingredients of why sweat hates about suburbs and likes cities. Except it's a city. Florin Mall was built after the Sacramento annexed the area, and it has since been torn down and replaced with the variant of the outdoor lifestyle center (big parking lot with buildings in the middle of it) you see today. Not so urban. Sacramento has had 50+ years to come up with a more urban thing to do with it, and solution was a big parking lot with a Wal-Mart in it.
I wasn't really refering to whether an area was within city limits or not, just that new developments could have built in a more urban form whether inside a city's limits or outside (don't really care that much about that, that's a government contrast rather than an urban form contrast).
Ditto with back east. Newer parts of Staten Island (within city limits) are similar to parts of closer in Long Island (outside city limits). Though style is similar density is still higher, probably because of differing zoning rule.
Uh, if the suburbs were never built, wouldn't there just be more urban neighborhoods to accomodate the full population? This is how most societies lived throughout human history prior to the advent of transportation that allowed for sprawling development.
There would be more neighborhoods built within the city limits, yes. These homes would look much like the suburban houses built in the same time frame. No one is going to build old houses, they build new houses. And despite what many people think, there have been some improvements in home design since 1929. The neighborhoods in Denver that have been criticized in this forum for looking "suburban" are actually an example of a newer neighborhood inside the city limits. (Not that I want to revive that old discussion.)
Quote:
Originally Posted by nei
Then don't. Few neighborhoods where apartmenets exist above stores are the norm do they actually consist of more than a fraction of the housing stock. Plenty of other places to choose from. Families with children have plenty of other choices
I lived above a store during the summer in college. Liked the location and having a lively area right out my door. There were some negatives, but most of them didn't have much to with living on a main road (the apartment appeared not to be maintained for sixty years, warped wood floors, cracking paint, a keg from March had been left in a corner, looked like had punched a hole in the wall). The bar next door annoyed my housemates with windows above it, but if the apartment was in a different spot in would have better. On the plus side, being in a noisy area meant not having to worry about noise complaints!
The apartments above the store in my town go for decently high rents. One of my friends found no objections to living there.
Not all main roads are highways. It depends on the area. Often not true in Massachusetts, sometimes true in Long Island, sometimes not. This:
The first can still be busy but definitely not highway-like.
Of course, in a layout like the latter where the main road are highway-like, living on a main road is much less appealing which is why few residence are on those arterials. Perhaps sweat209's complaints are the layouts he presents prevents old-style commercial streets. Or maybe he believe wide suburban-style arterials should have housing and the housing on these Hicksville arterials are examples of great urban planning :
I was responding to someone who thinks it is positive to live on a "main road". I'm all for "different strokes for different folks", but I think it's nuts to live facing a main arterial with a lot of traffic. I was just down in Denver today waiting for some friends outside a restaurant at a busy intersection (Evans and University if you want to look it up). The noise was incredible, and neither of those streets is really a major arterial, more like a minor one. Evans actually goes through the University of Denver campus a block or so to the west. Another thing that always impresses me in a negative way in Denver is the apartments that overlook I-25. They are quite expensive, and again, with all due respect for "urbanists", someone really brainwashed some people to think a view of an interstate highway is attractive enough to pay a premium in rent.
Last edited by Katarina Witt; 09-10-2012 at 02:10 PM..
I was responding to someone who thinks it is positive to live on a "main road". I'm all for "different strokes for different folks", but I think it's nuts to live facing a main arterial with a lot of traffic. I was just down in Denver today waiting outside a restaurant at a busy intersection (Evans and University if you want to look it up) for some friends. The noise was incredible, and neither of those streets is really a major arterial, more like a minor one. Evans actually goes through the University of Denver campus a block or so to the west. The other thing that always impresses me in a negative way is the apartments that overlook I-25. They are quite expensive, and again, with all due respect for "urbanists", someone really brainwashed some people to think a view of an interstate highway is attractive enough to pay a premium in rent.
Maybe there's a bit of language confusion. I thought "main road" = "main commercial street" similar to the street I was describing I live for a summer (lined with shops). Or the Brooklyn neighborhood I showed; that link in the post you responded is a view of one of the main commercial streets of the neighborhood. Next avenue over is wider with heavier traffic but it actually has more residences and less stores. Still can't be quiet. There isn't really anything in the area that's similar to the Denver arterials.
No interest in living near an interstate highway, I can hear a highway from my window at times and I'm not all that close. Some people really don't care though, people's tastes vary. I would like urban neighborhoods better if they had less traffic noise.
Maybe there's a bit of language confusion. I thought "main road" = "main commercial street" similar to the street I was describing I live for a summer (lined with shops). Or the Brooklyn neighborhood I showed; that link in the post you responded is a view of one of the main commercial streets of the neighborhood. Next avenue over is wider with heavier traffic but it actually has more residences and less stores. Still can't be quiet. There isn't really anything in the area that's similar to the Denver arterials.
No interest in living near an interstate highway, I can hear a highway from my window at times and I'm not all that close. Some people really don't care though, people's tastes vary. I would like urban neighborhoods better if they had less traffic noise.
Well, there is always a difference in interpretation. If you wish to Google Evans and University, you will see I'm talking about streets with shops and restaurants. University is the busier of the two, but it is not considered a major highway, yet it has an incredible amount of truck traffic.
There would be more neighborhoods built within the city limits, yes. These homes would look much like the suburban houses built in the same time frame. No one is going to build old houses, they build new houses. And despite what many people think, there have been some improvements in home design since 1929. The neighborhoods in Denver that have been criticized in this forum for looking "suburban" are actually an example of a newer neighborhood inside the city limits. (Not that I want to revive that old discussion.)
Yes, housing style would have progressed, despite being built in city limits. However, the spacing between houses would have had an impact on style, because if you have to build denser (maybe because gas is expensive or zoning requirements were different), you're not going to build the same way that you would in an exurban community. The point being that society wouldn't have run out of housing if the suburbs weren't around, housing would have been built denser for the entire metro.
There would be more neighborhoods built within the city limits, yes. These homes would look much like the suburban houses built in the same time frame. No one is going to build old houses, they build new houses. And despite what many people think, there have been some improvements in home design since 1929. The neighborhoods in Denver that have been criticized in this forum for looking "suburban" are actually an example of a newer neighborhood inside the city limits. (Not that I want to revive that old discussion.)
I was responding to someone who thinks it is positive to live on a "main road". I'm all for "different strokes for different folks", but I think it's nuts to live facing a main arterial with a lot of traffic. I was just down in Denver today waiting outside a restaurant at a busy intersection (Evans and University if you want to look it up) for some friends. The noise was incredible, and neither of those streets is really a major arterial, more like a minor one. Evans actually goes through the University of Denver campus a block or so to the west. Another thing that always impresses me in a negative way in Denver is the apartments that overlook I-25. They are quite expensive, and again, with all due respect for "urbanists", someone really brainwashed some people to think a view of an interstate highway is attractive enough to pay a premium in rent.
I don't think anyone here is saying that all . Like I say not all cities or areas build in old area are like that .
Also if you go east from there on Evans from University in some areas it kinda has funny way the street that sides off to limit the house on the road
Yes, housing style would have progressed, despite being built in city limits. However, the spacing between houses would have had an impact on style, because if you have to build denser (maybe because gas is expensive or zoning requirements were different), you're not going to build the same way that you would in an exurban community. The point being that society wouldn't have run out of housing if the suburbs weren't around, housing would have been built denser for the entire metro.
The bold is not necessarily true. Lot sizes in the Denver burbs are generally small, some no larger than the city lots. Also, after WW II, when home loans were easy for veterans to get, people may have shown a desire for larger lots in the city, if that's the way things went. I believe some of the original Levittown lots are fairly small. Multi-family housing does exist in the burbs as well. There is a big continuum between super-urban neighborhoods and exurbs.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
:
