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.
Cul-de-sac areas are sometimes smaller parcels of a larger grid system. A nice quality about cul-de-sacs are the lack of through-running car traffic which is nice and calm, but sometimes the isolation and car dependence that generally happens with that isn't always great. One nice middle ground I've seen before are cul-de-sacs are where there is a pedestrian or bicycle path that breaks out of the cul-de-sac dead ends and link to other cul-de-sacs or larger arterial.
There a several lovely cul-de-sacs where I live, and as pointed out above they are linked by narrow pedestrian/bike passages at various points.
We live on a cul-d-sac, our lots are larger than the grids around the corner, it's extremely quiet, kids can ride their bikes safely, all the neighbors know each other and have get together's often.
People living in the grid areas very seldom talk to neighbors and the traffic can be a nuisance.
I love dead ends to the death, they give me and idea of cozyness , secludedness and intimacy but not those planned from scratch like that in the picture
I'm rather attracted to those popped up unplanned like for instance those roads or a small group of roads encircled to one side by a railway lines/a forested area and to anothere by an abandoned factory or a river, for example.
People living in the grid areas very seldom talk to neighbors and the traffic can be a nuisance.
I grew up on a grid and knew literally everyone on the square block and many people on adjacent blocks. I can't relate to your statement. I find culdesacs inherently isolating as they tend to limit social network expansion to the culdesac.
Nuisance is relative to one's tolerance, I suppose. My street was pretty quiet with maybe a car every ten minutes or so. As a kid, we didn't mind giving-way to cars because the trade-off is that we had an effective territory of about five square blocks to play within.
I think that the loss of the figurative / literal town square that culdesacs have largely heralded has contributed to a tragic loss of community and social currency. Isolation is the frequent result. Planners should be ashamed wherever they had a hand in that.
Some people like isolation and privacy. I understand and culdesacs are great for that. I just don't think that they should be part of the design of the immediate suburbs. Having well-connected communities facilitated by ease of social and amenity access should be the priority there (being able to walk to every neighbor's house as well as a town center), with privacy seekers living further out.
Bonus points if you can actually name the cities of which I took the snips.
The first photo is from somewhere in the eastern USA. My first impression was Boston, but I can find nowhere in the Boston area where the blocks are as perfectly-square as in your photo. I'm starting to think you've tricked me with a southern city, maybe Savannah?
The second photo (cul-de-sac photo) is from Fort Bend County, Texas, near Katy. As a Google Earth addict, that street pattern and ground color/distribution of water/etc is unmistakable.
I think the first picture is Baltimore. I often imagine east coast cities to be like that. houses closer together, not much yard, front or back. Some look like row homes, because they are so close to each other. So maybe Philadelphia, too?
I'm pretty sure the gridded picture is New Orleans. Philly and Baltimore don't look like that. Rowhouses don't have that same appearance form above.
I would prefer to live in a gridded or at least interconnected street network. For example Boston isn't a grid but has a well connected street system.
East of Eden my first thought was a New England city too because it appeared to be freestanding wood buildings very close together but the street network wasn't quiet right.
I much prefer a grid pattern over cul-de-sacs. Cul-de-Sacs make people car dependent. That's never a good thing.
It can, but it's not a given. I once lived in a development with two shopping areas about a mile from my house. I walked or biked there if the weather was decent. I'm moving to a grid in a few weeks, and I may not be able to walk to anything. All of the old, small stores have closed. The small, independent supermarket and local pub are gone. They closed last year. A grid doesn't make it any better.
I much prefer a grid pattern over cul-de-sacs. Cul-de-Sacs make people car dependent. That's never a good thing.
Where is the logic?
Transit dependency is hardly an admirable quality.
If you are referring to driving vs walking, the distance and weather are likely much more important factors than whether the origin is on a cul-de-sac.
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.
