Worst City Planning

[Nick9099 2]

Originally posted by: Fraghawk444

quote>

hillarious! (but i wouldn't want to have been there at the time) 

[SteveMSim 275]

I used to live in Florida. That state is overbuilt. I would say that urban sprawl now makes up about a quarter of the state's land area. I lived in South Florida when it still had farmland and open spaces. Now all of that is gone, with the development held in check only by the levees marking the border of the Everglades. I now live in Texas, which, although is one of the most populous states, still has plenty of wide open land.

Of the cities I've visited, I'd say that central Boston is the worst laid out city. The streets of central Boston are laid out like that of a Medieval European city. I visited Boston after they started the Big Dig project so I know how badly congested it was. On my dishonorable mention list is Washington, D.C. The street system is confusing with the diagonal avenues laid out on a grid and its numerous traffic circles. I remember trying to drive to the Lincoln Memorial from the vicinity of Dupont Circle and ending up in Georgetown. And I cannot forget the street naming system in Utah's cities, which are all numbers and named like 800 Street South, 1200 Street West, or 2100 Street North, and run a perpendicular direction to what their name indicates, leading to addresses like 2350 West 700 Street South. Salt Lake City itself has three streets named Temple Street, which two of them, North Temple Street and South Temple Street, run east to west parallel to each other.

[Red1530 1]

The I-84/I-87 interchange in Newburgh, NY is a complete disaster.  Even though it is currently under construction it is operational, this picture explains some of the confusion.

They should have put up some better signs before allowing the public to use the new interchange.  The full story of this nightmare can be found here.

[Odainsaker 2,134]

Hehe, San Antonio, Texas's tourist capital, was kind enough to install public maps throughout downtown to help guide the herds to the next venue and Texanana landmark:

Just remember your are facing South, which is why the map is upsidedown with North at the bottom.

Actually, this is the most interesting and walkable part of the city.  The bad is from the ever-expanding suburban and exurban sprawl.

Spacious, independant, integrated living indeed!  Tree ordinance?...what tree ordinance?...we don't follow no stinkin' tree ordinance!

If only Baron Haussmann were alive to show us how to do it beautifully.

A monument to our civilization's highest achievements?  Cool, I suppose, in a looming and threatening sort of way...truly the considered environment for human life!

Or maybe it is a wall with gateway portal to keep out the invading Mongols.

Look at the top right...that's downtown, way off on the horizon.

[Strategist01 0]

Hmm, I wouldn't say that Cape Town has the best city planning - in the suburbs, you're lucky if you can get to a street! It's said that if you can drive in Cape Town, you can drive anywhere! But it does help that we have a nice mountain to look at - without it, I think that most of the CT drivers would go mad! You can't really do public transport, as it's waaayyy too unsafe, and there is a lack of highways in the southern suburbs (south of Table Mountain). However, I would have to say the worst goes to Johannesburg - every morning on the radio I hear about reports of 15 accidents, usually on the same roads! Durban is fairly OK, however is is far too spread out - it needs to come together. Anyway, my 2c!

[TheWorldIsMyFuse 0]

had it not been for the legacy of public mass transit left over from the 19th and early 20th centuries, my vote would go to New York, simply because of Robert Moses.

[Kjarbarey 12]

I'd have to vote for Auckland. Auckland, North Shore, Waitakere and Manukau simply because of the lack of signage, investment in public transport (a city of 1,200,000+ is still using diesel-powered passenger trains on 2-3 lines, of which most were still single-track until recently), and the obsession with cars and motorways and MORE ROADS!!! Which, as you know, are going to be congested with more cars as soon as they're built!

[Jurek 100 1]

I'd have to say my home city of Chicago is pretty bad on traffic control but, deffinetely not the worst. Most of the highways there are always congested leaving and entering the city both. rush hour is the worst of all though and its impossible to get anywhere during those times.

[ROFLyoshi 1,760]

Originally posted by: Apple Delight

I'd have to vote for Auckland. Auckland, North Shore, Waitakere and Manukau simply because of the lack of signage, investment in public transport (a city of 1,200,000+ is still using diesel-powered passenger trains on 2-3 lines, of which most were still single-track until recently), and the obsession with cars and motorways and MORE ROADS!!! Which, as you know, are going to be congested with more cars as soon as they're built!quote>

I agree. It doesn't help that it is about 5 kilometres wide at its narrowest point. I was over there two years ago, and we were in Manukau. We went of State Highway 20 onto State Highway 20B (Memorial Dr) towards the airport but coming back, we could only go towards the city, not to Manukau.

Also Sydney. Nuff said.

[ndmancer 0]

is this debate limited to USA cuz if it isn't 90% of the cities in india....maybe all deserve the platinum-iridium medals for the worst city planning. as a matter of fact in my city varanasi they shut down the bus services becuz the roads wr too narrow and they coldn't expand it.

[emgmod 16]

I say we have two categories:

The first is bad planning in developed countries.

The second is planning in developing countries.

[WillyGuy 0]

tokyo

[willfish 0]

hamilton nz is poorly planned

[Al Ridya 1]

I agree, Houston is the worst city planning ever! Mainly because of lack of zoning laws and lack of mass transit.

[ron.robinson123 0]

I don't know as far as city planning goes, San Diego is horrible but great at the same time! Horrible, because as far as mass transit goes, we have a trolley. Great because, well look at a road map. The freeway system is excellent, or I think so, at least.

[emgmod 16]

Buses count as mass transit, at least in my book. How badly planned is the San Diego Trolley?

[hamsterTK 93]

Interesting to hear someone say that about the San Diego Trolley. I think it is actually considered successful, it has high ridership which is a fact I know about it. Also I believe its original routes were older railroad corridors so that might be why it goes where it does. Maybe it doesn't cover broad enough areas of the central city?

[citiesxlfan42 27]

L. A. Duh!

[tostartpressanykey 2]

^^ i agree. LA Baaaaaaaaaad

[Duke87 1,070]

Originally posted by: Odainsaker

Hehe, San Antonio, Texas's tourist capital, was kind enough to install public maps throughout downtown to help guide the herds to the next venue and Texanana landmark:

Just remember your are facing South, which is why the map is upsidedown with North at the bottom.quote>

Considering how many people turn their maps upside down when they're facing south because they find it difficult to understand when the "bottom" represents what's ahead of them, I completely get why the mapmakers would do this.

Still, I doubt it works quite as intended.

If only Baron Haussmann were alive to show us how to do it beautifully.

A monument to our civilization's highest achievements?  Cool, I suppose, in a looming and threatening sort of way...truly the considered environment for human life!

Or maybe it is a wall with gateway portal to keep out the invading Mongols.

Look at the top right...that's downtown, way off on the horizon.quote>

Hehe. Everything's bigger in Texas!

Awesome highways, by the way.

[Macdaddy4738 0]

L.A. follows the Multi-Nuclei Theory of Urban Planning.

Esentially, it was designed based around the automobile. With a car, people can travel much farther, and this allowed for specialized "Zones" or Nuclei to develop. There is no single CBD in these types of cities, more like two or three business districts (although one may be the largest). Also kind of came out of putting jobs near residential zones that would be likely to house people working at those jobs.

Honestly, seems like a completely garbage theory to me. It doesnt really look like, short of mass transit (subway, Elevated, whatever), you'd have much organization as far as traffic flow goes.

To whomever said Central Boston....that medieval design was actually a pretty common one of the time. The narrow twisty streets were made that way in order to provide a form of defense. If people got into the city, it would be much harder to get out of if you did not already know where they were going. Cities built at the time Boston was (Philly, the older parts of NYC, Montreal, etc.) were also designed to be walkable cities, mostly because people had to walk everywhere. Zoning wasnt part of any early cities either. Zoning laws were not put in place until 1916, first in NYC.

[Mithrik 562]

I would say Los Angeles as the worst planned city, the car companies dreamed with a "car paradise", so they destroyed the project of building a subway in that city, results, one the worst traffic congestion ever. And the greatest polluted city of on the USA and probably of all the continent.

Then we have the areas of the city, some really bustling and other ones falling apart. A good example is Bel Air compared to a Latin American neighborhood.

[CoastRunner 24]

I used to live in Virginia Beach, VA, which has quite excellent traffic control, but I recently moved to the town of El Dorado, AR, pop. 23000 (slum people mostly) and traffic is terrible. There is one Sonic in town which everyone goes too and it clogs up traffic on all of North West Avenue (terrible naming, by the way. you'll see.) After school lets out (there are four separate schools for different grade levels all over town) everyone picks up their kids at school creating major traffic jams all over town, on Faulkner, Mt. Holly, Timberlane, College, 5th, West, Main and especially Martin Luther King. 

Here's a city map on Google- 

iframe width="425" height="350" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" marginheight="0" marginwidth="0" src="http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&ie=UTF8&q=el+dorado,+ar+city+map&fb=1&gl=us&ei=fuNoS8PtFpCONZWmqboN&ved=0CBgQpQY&view=map&geocode=FU61-gEdZQZ6-g&split=0&hq=&hnear=El+Dorado,+Union,+Arkansas&ll=33.216071,-92.662039&spn=0.059601,0.098362&z=14&output=embed">

View Larger Map

[CoastRunner 24]

Ignore code and just click view larger map to see image.  

[Maravone 1]

I find most of you complaining about US cities...But pleaseeee...

I mean, if you lived were I live you would go suicidal! Really!

Oporto suburbs, in Portugal... Yes it's europe, BUT it's the suburbs...So they are only like 50 years old and they suck in every possible level.

The traffic is completely awfull both in normal streets as with the highway network that is a complete and utter nightmare... Portugal government for the last 10 years was just plain busy building manically all kinds of necessary and (most commonly) unnecessary highway plans.

Then you have the architectural point of view that makes things even worse... Just imagine the kind of extremely ugly buildings made in the 60's, 70's and 80's and you've got an idea (maybe not but whatever) of what it is.

Traffic noise, public transportation that takes 2 hours to take you 2 km into the city center and the caothic building spree that the Oporto suburbs saw in the last 20 years (with good episodes of corruption by mayors and councils...)

Ugh... I had my say...

[diamonddog_74 32]

Originally posted by: Odainsaker

If only Baron Haussmann were alive to show us how to do

[diamonddog_74 32]

Originally posted by: Fraghawk444

quote>

Oh Geez! How could ANYone think that it was a good idea to build a street that wide? That's horrific! I recommend three lanes in each direction maximum, then build a wide landscaped (tree-lined median with a BRT or light rail line in the middle. I hate superhighways. Especially if they're in the downtown district. Yucky!

Dallas has the wors planning in the world.

Sprawltown usa

Here is what dallas will look like in 200 years:

quote>

No, that's too beautiful and Art Deco. Chicago and NY could possibly look like that. I've seen photos of Dallas now, it's too bland to ever look like that.

[Risu 0]

Albquerque, NM. It's flat and boring, and the streets are all laid out in a grid. One time my dad and I passed thru there on the way to Colo Spgs, and we couldn't find any shade for several dozen blocks, at least! That was after getting lost, of course.

[lktimmons 0]

DC and Paris. Been to DC on many occasions and it's chaos! I'm surprised there aren't more murders! I've never been to Paris but from what I can tell, it's horrible. I would love to live in Paris (which I hope to do, actually), but i'd probably just walk everywhere anyway.

[Cobraroll 138]

I guess anything in Asia takes the medal. Addis Abeba, Ethiopia, should also be a fun place to commute... with 80 % of the city being slum today, try to fix that whenever industrialization comes. Lagos, Nigeria is another candidate.

Aesthetically, the Norwegian cities of Drammen and Sandvika are terrible, though traffic is not a nightmare (with about 30,000 people in downtown Drammen, and 5,000 in downtown Sandvika, it's kinda hard to congest anything). The problem for both cities is the E18 motorway.

In Drammen, the motorway was put on a huge bridge that was put over the city. So actually, when you drove through Drammen, the city was beneath you. The city had lots of traffic, but nothing of it ever got into the city. Instead, a monumental bridge divded the city, with industrial factories and a harbour on one side, and the homes of the workers on the other. If you ever happened to be in Drammen, it was because you lived and worked there. There was nothing else to do there.

Sandvika is a different story. The motorway goes along the coast, and the city lies behind the motorway. It could be an idyllic coastal town, but instead you rather get the feeling of being way into the country, because you can't see the sea. Instead, you get the constant rumble from the motorway. You have to pass under the motorway to get to the sea, where the strip of land is so narrow that there is no room for anything there. The fact that literally half the city is a shopping mall doesn't help its image either. It's by far the ugliest city I know about, with no open areas either. The neary island of Kalv