01025442

Component

This study compares the levels of street connectivity and pedestrian accessibility of urban forms with cul-de-sac and gridiron street patterns. This paper was motivated by the debate between New Urbanists, the proponents for the grid street pattern, and developers who continue to design cul-de-sac streets in practice. While the current debate tends to focus on the features of two types of streets, it overlooks the importance of the overall urban form characteristics in which streets are placed. That is, if the cul-de-sac streets are designed integrated with public open space and major local destinations in a neighborhood, it might be possible that the cul-de-sac-based urban form could achieve high connectivity and accessibility within the neighborhood, while keeping the benefits of the cul-de-sacs such as quietness and privacy. To see if this is the case, we selected three neighborhoods with different street designs: a pure grid pattern, Radburn-influenced cul-de-sac streets with separate pedestrian trails, and typical cul-de-sac urban form. Our analysis indicates that connectivity and accessibility of a cul-de-sac neighborhood whose design concepts focus on better pedestrian access and interconnectedness with separate pedestrian trails are higher than the typical suburban neighborhood with cul-de-sacs and comparable with the grid neighborhood. The findings suggest that when modifying current urban form, cul-de-sac street neighborhoods with a strong design concept promoting interconnectedness and walkability can achieve both the goals promoted by New Urbanists and the residential quality favored by developers. The findings will provide useful recommendations to revise current ITE street design guidelines.

01020180

06-1547

English

20p

2006

Transportation Research Board 85th Annual Meeting

CD-ROM

Figures (1) ; References (23) ; Tables (3)

Accessibility; Cartographic grids; Cul de sacs; Pedestrian areas; Pedestrians; Residential streets; Urban design

Urban form

Pedestrians and Bicyclists; Planning and Forecasting; Public Transportation

Transportation Research Board Annual Meeting 2006 Paper #06-1547

BTRIS, TRIS, TRB

Mar 3 2006 10:43AM