tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7394091530012769761.post378672686922584339..comments2024-03-27T04:02:47.206-04:00Comments on Old Urbanist: A (Defense!) of the Grid: Portland and 19th Century American City GridsCharlie Gardnerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07317335121565650040noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7394091530012769761.post-20625517012565892062011-04-10T00:15:59.629-04:002011-04-10T00:15:59.629-04:00First off, love the blog. Your thoughts bring a wo...First off, love the blog. Your thoughts bring a wonderful sense of humanity back to the often over-technical discipline of urban planning.<br /><br />However, wide blocks or not, it is what we have. It would be great if our streets were a bit smaller but they aren't and there is realistically no way to start shrinking block size now.<br /><br />To add a bit of reality here, perhaps you can look into examples of innovative ways of creating more pedestrian scaled streets and spaces. One example would be the promotion of alleys as commercial streets. Melbourne has done some great work here. Seattle's Post Alley is also wonderful.<br /><br />There are also possiblities of reinventing wide streets as front yards for gardening, bike boulevards, or more spacious outdoor seating.<br /><br />The United States simple isn't Europe and our cities will never look like theirs. While its great to compare and contrast the differences it would be helpful to also look to a hopeful future as well.Josh Maharhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06251745385516499376noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7394091530012769761.post-40607020462128970272011-04-08T17:46:37.272-04:002011-04-08T17:46:37.272-04:00"Wider streets and lower density are features..."Wider streets and lower density are features, not bugs. They make the heart of Manhattan more expansive, private, well-aired, gracious - and in summer, livable"<br /><br />Are you joking? You can say many good things about Manhattan, but "expansive, private, well-aired, gracious, and in the summer, livable" wouldn't be high on the list. Manhattan, I would say, is the exact opposite of "gracious." Either this is a person not from NYC who is just making stuff up, or someone in NYC who is delusional.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7394091530012769761.post-693109497149036362011-04-07T19:05:31.360-04:002011-04-07T19:05:31.360-04:00The corner lot theory sounds plausible. And in fa...The corner lot theory sounds plausible. And in fact there's nothing wrong with short blocks -- Jane Jacobs favored them for their friendliness to pedestrians. When paired with very wide streets, however, that advantage is largely negated. Nathan's link shows basically the same size block with streets 1/5 as wide as those in Portland, which makes for an 89 percent overall building coverage as compared to 59 in Portland.Charlie Gardnerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07317335121565650040noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7394091530012769761.post-67250710107998086242011-04-07T16:57:19.822-04:002011-04-07T16:57:19.822-04:00If you read McColl on early Portland you find that...If you read McColl on early Portland you find that the fellows who laid out the streets had an interest in maximizing the number of expensive corner lots they could sell.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7394091530012769761.post-21209017428205736922011-04-07T10:20:10.345-04:002011-04-07T10:20:10.345-04:00Wider streets and lower density are features, not ...Wider streets and lower density are features, not bugs. They make the heart of Manhattan more expansive, private, well-aired, gracious - and in summer, livable - than the old sections of London or Amsterdam.<br /><br />Modern folk will order by phone/internet, hail a cab, or use public transport for tasks and distances that our grandparents covered on foot. And they don't want their windows nose-to-nose with their neighbors.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7394091530012769761.post-83918969249545044532011-04-04T12:41:29.236-04:002011-04-04T12:41:29.236-04:00This is fantastic. Wonderful historical background...This is fantastic. Wonderful historical background on the basic design disasters of the 19th century.<br /><br />Yes, a grid can work when the streets are pedestrian-sized, around 10-15 feet from building to building. However, it is not at all necessary to use a grid, and it doesn't seem to confer many advantages. In fact, many suburban developments of the last thirty years have a lot of swoops and curves.<br /><br />We have spent so much time repllicating the grid that it is a good time for other experiments. However, whether a grid or some more biomorphic layout, in the end, it doesn't matter nearly as much as the width of the street itself.<br /><br />Link to pictures of the city of Seijo, west of Tokyo. This is basically a grid layout, but the streets are about 12 feet wide.<br /><br />http://www.newworldeconomics.com/archives/2010/100310_files/seijo1.jpg<br /><br />http://www.newworldeconomics.com/archives/2010/100310.html<br /><br />Nathan Lewis<br />newworldeconomics.comAnonymousnoreply@blogger.com