• More spent on failed Garden Bridge than on TfL crossings in 10 years (NewCivilEng)
• Safeguarding the Bakerloo Line Extension (IanVisits)
• Hammersmith High Line competition ideas (HydeParkNow)
• Trans Europe Express 2017 video (Kraftwerk)
• To fix urban sprawl, ditch the cul-de-sac (Wired)
• What are NUMTOTS & why do these millennials try to save transit? (NPR)
• Chengdu Line 9’s futuristic stations for its fully automated Metro (Dezeen)
Check out our new section:
As well as some of our other sections:
- Industry News – updated every business day except Friday
- Podcasts
And some of our most popular articles:
- Schrodinger’s Cab Firm: Uber’s Existential Crisis
- You Hacked – Cyber-security and the railways
- On Our Line Podcast #8: Talking Uber, Lyft and Mobility disruption
Feel we should read something or include in a future list? Email us at [email protected].
Comments and tweets may be monitored for quality and training purposes.
Reconnections is funded largely by our community. Like what we do? Buy us a cup of coffee or visit our shop.
RE: To fix urban sprawl, ditch the cul-de-sac (Wired)
Well, firstly I’ll admit I didn’t read the whole article in detail.
But are they really suggesting that Manhattan is some kind of low-congestion utopia?
Dead-end roads don’t have to mean poor walkability, if you leave a small gap for a footpath then walkability is quite unaffected.
Am I being dilusional?
@DJL Before reading the article I thought it would be about how LTNs are superior to cul-de-sacs because they allow active travel (and public transport if using NPR) while still stopping motor traffic, but you are right, they do seem to believe that Manhattan is the model to follow.
That cul-de-sac article is bonkers.
It cites Barcelona, which if I recall correctly is actually blocking off its grid network to create bigger communities and fewer major roads.
Cul-de-sacs stop rat runs, which are a major problem that contribute to higher car ownership and journeys, because the road capacity is artificially increased, at the cost of quality of life for people on those roads due to road traffic, horns, more dangerous local roads, etc.
And to fix the walking/cycling issue? You allow those to exit the community on all sides, through an area that blocks traffic (but can be built to allow emergency vehicle access, and buses if there is a route, either a controlled bollard, or camera controlled).
I’m glad its not just me!
When building in Cities Skylines (admittly, not guarunteed to be a good analog to reality).
I generally keep the super-grid but have all cul-de-sacs for the internals of the super-grid.
This method has substantially lower traffic than the regular grid approach and also offers quiet streets for residents.
When required the cul-de-sac can be converted to a through route for certain types of traffic only (e.g. buses, trams, bikes, pedestrians + emergency vehicles).
This has the added benefit that said transport methods take place mostly on the quiet streets and only have to _cross_ the busy ones – not run along them.
From what I gather from the article, and my own observation and reading of US suburbia, there do not seem to be foot/bike paths oft designed into US cities’ cul-de-sac street patterns. Canada by comparison has replicated the cul-de-sac suburban design in its cities, but since the 1970s most cities have set aside slivers of land to allow walking/cycling between neighbourhoods. This primarily allows children to walk/bike to and from school, but also encourage walking and exploring neighbourhoods.
As regards money spent on (Not) Hammersmith Bridge, but on one that didn’t get built, the late & still-missed “Walthamstow Writer” said it all:
Thank goodness it’s been killed off even if far too much money was squandered.
[Snip. LBM]