Recent from talks
Fused grid
Knowledge base stats:
Talk channels stats:
Members stats:
Fused grid
The fused grid is a street network pattern first proposed in 2002 and subsequently applied in Calgary, Alberta (2006) and Stratford, Ontario (2004). It represents a synthesis of two well known and extensively used network concepts: the "grid" and the "Radburn" pattern, derivatives of which are found in most city suburbs. Both concepts were conscious attempts to organize urban space for habitation. The grid was conceived and applied in the pre-automotive era of cities starting circa 2000 BC and prevailed until about 1900 AD. The Radburn pattern emerged in 1929 about thirty years following the invention of the internal combustion engine powered automobile and in anticipation of its eventual dominance as a means for mobility and transport. Both these patterns appear throughout North America. "Fused" refers to a systematic recombination of the essential characteristics of each of these two network patterns.
Modern urban planners generally classify street networks as either organic or planned. Planned networks tend to be organized according to geometric patterns, while the organic networks are believed to emerge from spontaneous, unorganized growth.
Architectural historian Spiro Kostof writes that "The word 'grid' is a convenient, and imprecise, substitute for 'orthogonal planning'. 'Gridiron' in the US implies a pattern of long narrow blocks, and 'checkerboard' a pattern of square blocks." In addition to the right angle being a key characteristic, a second attribute of equal importance is its imputed openness and unconstrained expandability. Loosely interpreted, the term "grid" can be applied to plans such as the Vitruvian octagonal plan for an ideal city, resembling a spider web, or to plans composed of concentric circles. These are all grids in that a regularly spaced armature leaves recurring openings and that they could, conceivably, expand outward.
The emergence of the pure, rectilinear, orthogonal grid, or Hippodamian grid, is explained by the natural tendency of people to walk in a straight line, particularly in the absence of obstacles and on level land. This intuitive explanation leaves the question of pre-grid and post grid non-rectilinear city patterns to be better understood, particularly those on plane territory such as Marrakech. Another potential influence may have been exerted by the second frequent user of city streets – horses. Horses also tend to move in a straight line, particularly at trotting, canter or galloping pace. When horses serve a city and draw chariots singly or in pairs, or, similarly, carts for a variety of transportation and processional functions, straight line travel becomes imperative; turns force a sluggish pace and cumbersome manoeuvres that reduce their efficiency of movement. The need for speed is accentuated by city size; distances to the public functions at the centre increase and, consequently, the need for quick access is intensified. Speed in turn implies straight lines. It is plausible that the drivers for rectilinear layouts may have been man's horses, mules, and carts as much as man himself, spurred by the growth of settlements. The creation of the Radburn pattern is attributed to Clarence Stein but has a lineage of ideas that preceded it in Raymond Unwin and Barry Parker's work that included the use of cul-de-sac and crescent street types. In contrast to the scarcity of records that obscures the original rationale for the grid, the reasons for the Radburn pattern have been articulated clearly in Stein's writings and those of his predecessors.
"Radburn" (after a place in New Jersey) now denotes a street network configuration. It signifies a departure from the strict orthogonal geometry and regularity of the grid and a distinct approach to laying out new districts. As a system, it can be described more accurately as a "cellular" network that has a characteristic hierarchy of streets as distinct from identical streets intersecting at regular intervals. Its derivatives and idiosyncratic imitations are often characterized as "cul-de-sac and loop" patterns highlighting the distinguishing street types that are used systematically in this network. A second term equally uncharacteristic is "suburban". This association of a pattern with a location is inaccurate and unintentionally misleading: entire early cities such as Cairo and Fez are structured on this pattern whose newer suburbs follow the grid reversing the urban/suburban relationship. "Suburban" is also devoid of geometric descriptors of the pattern. These shorthand expressions conceal the variety of patterns that emerged in the 20th century that are decidedly neither grids nor "Radburn" and the "system" aspect of the pattern. The "loop and lollipop" label may be a more applicable descriptor of later interpretations of the Radburn model that appear to lack structure and to overlook key elements of the original concept such as its emphasis on pedestrian priority, for example. The pattern's systematic use of the cul-de-sac and loop is decidedly linked to automotive mobility as a means of controlling and guiding its flow. The Radburn pattern is a complex system; more than a series of identical orthogonal city blocks in a linear progression. It rests on a functional program plus an intentional picturesque aesthetic: it avoids straight lines, limits four-way intersections and shuns repetitive blocks all of which enhance its picturesque imagery. To facilitate the discussion, the name "Radburn-like" or "Radburn-type" will be used in the subsequent sections.
The two dominant network patterns, the grid and Radburn, have been debated by planners, transportation engineers and social observers on grounds that include issues of defence, aesthetics, adaptability, sociability, mobility, health, safety, security and environmental impact.
The first known criticism of the grid was put forward on the grounds of defence that became irrelevant following the prevalence of the cannon (1500s). Aristotle argued that the old maze-like street pattern, which preceded the grid, made it difficult for invading troops to find their way in and out of the city, Alberti also expressed the same view 1500 years later and added the advantage of a superior visual effect of the organic pattern over the grid. A second criticism was put forward most forcefully by Camillo Sitte on aesthetic grounds. He argued that grids lack variety and, consequently, are uninteresting and can become oppressive by their monotony. This argument has been undermined first by the potential variety of grid dimensions that can be used in combinations such as appear in many city plans. More importantly, ground observation of cities shows that the mix of buildings and their varied street alignments as well as open spaces with their size variations coupled with constant redevelopment, suppress the monotony of the grid. Nonetheless, 20th century planners shunned pure grids and implicitly endorsed C. Sitte's ideas on the need for a picturesque streetscape. This tendency is generally based on an intuitive aesthetic ground; that people dislike long open street vistas and prefer those that terminate. Recent subdivision or town layouts such as Poundbury (1993), Seaside (1984) and Kentlands (1995) consciously avoided the homogeneous grid and its open vistas. A further criticism of the grid focuses on its unsuitability for uneven, variegated terrain. Its application in sites such as Priene (350 BC), Piraeus (circa 400 BC), San Francisco (1776), Saint John, NB (1631) and others severely limits general accessibility by inadvertently introducing steep slopes or, in certain cases, stepped road sections and creates construction difficulties. In cities with intemperate climates this limitation is accentuated. Moving in a straight line uphill becomes arduous or, occasionally, impossible, particularly for non-motorized wheeled means of transport.
A Radburn-type network inherently includes a variety of city blocks and terminating vistas and, consequently, preempts criticism centered on monotony and lack of end-closure. Its unconstrained geometry adapts easily to topographical irregularities and geographical features such as streams, woodlots and natural ponds. As neither the alignment nor the length of neighbourhood streets need to remain constant, this model gives planners considerable latitude in laying out a network.
Hub AI
Fused grid AI simulator
(@Fused grid_simulator)
Fused grid
The fused grid is a street network pattern first proposed in 2002 and subsequently applied in Calgary, Alberta (2006) and Stratford, Ontario (2004). It represents a synthesis of two well known and extensively used network concepts: the "grid" and the "Radburn" pattern, derivatives of which are found in most city suburbs. Both concepts were conscious attempts to organize urban space for habitation. The grid was conceived and applied in the pre-automotive era of cities starting circa 2000 BC and prevailed until about 1900 AD. The Radburn pattern emerged in 1929 about thirty years following the invention of the internal combustion engine powered automobile and in anticipation of its eventual dominance as a means for mobility and transport. Both these patterns appear throughout North America. "Fused" refers to a systematic recombination of the essential characteristics of each of these two network patterns.
Modern urban planners generally classify street networks as either organic or planned. Planned networks tend to be organized according to geometric patterns, while the organic networks are believed to emerge from spontaneous, unorganized growth.
Architectural historian Spiro Kostof writes that "The word 'grid' is a convenient, and imprecise, substitute for 'orthogonal planning'. 'Gridiron' in the US implies a pattern of long narrow blocks, and 'checkerboard' a pattern of square blocks." In addition to the right angle being a key characteristic, a second attribute of equal importance is its imputed openness and unconstrained expandability. Loosely interpreted, the term "grid" can be applied to plans such as the Vitruvian octagonal plan for an ideal city, resembling a spider web, or to plans composed of concentric circles. These are all grids in that a regularly spaced armature leaves recurring openings and that they could, conceivably, expand outward.
The emergence of the pure, rectilinear, orthogonal grid, or Hippodamian grid, is explained by the natural tendency of people to walk in a straight line, particularly in the absence of obstacles and on level land. This intuitive explanation leaves the question of pre-grid and post grid non-rectilinear city patterns to be better understood, particularly those on plane territory such as Marrakech. Another potential influence may have been exerted by the second frequent user of city streets – horses. Horses also tend to move in a straight line, particularly at trotting, canter or galloping pace. When horses serve a city and draw chariots singly or in pairs, or, similarly, carts for a variety of transportation and processional functions, straight line travel becomes imperative; turns force a sluggish pace and cumbersome manoeuvres that reduce their efficiency of movement. The need for speed is accentuated by city size; distances to the public functions at the centre increase and, consequently, the need for quick access is intensified. Speed in turn implies straight lines. It is plausible that the drivers for rectilinear layouts may have been man's horses, mules, and carts as much as man himself, spurred by the growth of settlements. The creation of the Radburn pattern is attributed to Clarence Stein but has a lineage of ideas that preceded it in Raymond Unwin and Barry Parker's work that included the use of cul-de-sac and crescent street types. In contrast to the scarcity of records that obscures the original rationale for the grid, the reasons for the Radburn pattern have been articulated clearly in Stein's writings and those of his predecessors.
"Radburn" (after a place in New Jersey) now denotes a street network configuration. It signifies a departure from the strict orthogonal geometry and regularity of the grid and a distinct approach to laying out new districts. As a system, it can be described more accurately as a "cellular" network that has a characteristic hierarchy of streets as distinct from identical streets intersecting at regular intervals. Its derivatives and idiosyncratic imitations are often characterized as "cul-de-sac and loop" patterns highlighting the distinguishing street types that are used systematically in this network. A second term equally uncharacteristic is "suburban". This association of a pattern with a location is inaccurate and unintentionally misleading: entire early cities such as Cairo and Fez are structured on this pattern whose newer suburbs follow the grid reversing the urban/suburban relationship. "Suburban" is also devoid of geometric descriptors of the pattern. These shorthand expressions conceal the variety of patterns that emerged in the 20th century that are decidedly neither grids nor "Radburn" and the "system" aspect of the pattern. The "loop and lollipop" label may be a more applicable descriptor of later interpretations of the Radburn model that appear to lack structure and to overlook key elements of the original concept such as its emphasis on pedestrian priority, for example. The pattern's systematic use of the cul-de-sac and loop is decidedly linked to automotive mobility as a means of controlling and guiding its flow. The Radburn pattern is a complex system; more than a series of identical orthogonal city blocks in a linear progression. It rests on a functional program plus an intentional picturesque aesthetic: it avoids straight lines, limits four-way intersections and shuns repetitive blocks all of which enhance its picturesque imagery. To facilitate the discussion, the name "Radburn-like" or "Radburn-type" will be used in the subsequent sections.
The two dominant network patterns, the grid and Radburn, have been debated by planners, transportation engineers and social observers on grounds that include issues of defence, aesthetics, adaptability, sociability, mobility, health, safety, security and environmental impact.
The first known criticism of the grid was put forward on the grounds of defence that became irrelevant following the prevalence of the cannon (1500s). Aristotle argued that the old maze-like street pattern, which preceded the grid, made it difficult for invading troops to find their way in and out of the city, Alberti also expressed the same view 1500 years later and added the advantage of a superior visual effect of the organic pattern over the grid. A second criticism was put forward most forcefully by Camillo Sitte on aesthetic grounds. He argued that grids lack variety and, consequently, are uninteresting and can become oppressive by their monotony. This argument has been undermined first by the potential variety of grid dimensions that can be used in combinations such as appear in many city plans. More importantly, ground observation of cities shows that the mix of buildings and their varied street alignments as well as open spaces with their size variations coupled with constant redevelopment, suppress the monotony of the grid. Nonetheless, 20th century planners shunned pure grids and implicitly endorsed C. Sitte's ideas on the need for a picturesque streetscape. This tendency is generally based on an intuitive aesthetic ground; that people dislike long open street vistas and prefer those that terminate. Recent subdivision or town layouts such as Poundbury (1993), Seaside (1984) and Kentlands (1995) consciously avoided the homogeneous grid and its open vistas. A further criticism of the grid focuses on its unsuitability for uneven, variegated terrain. Its application in sites such as Priene (350 BC), Piraeus (circa 400 BC), San Francisco (1776), Saint John, NB (1631) and others severely limits general accessibility by inadvertently introducing steep slopes or, in certain cases, stepped road sections and creates construction difficulties. In cities with intemperate climates this limitation is accentuated. Moving in a straight line uphill becomes arduous or, occasionally, impossible, particularly for non-motorized wheeled means of transport.
A Radburn-type network inherently includes a variety of city blocks and terminating vistas and, consequently, preempts criticism centered on monotony and lack of end-closure. Its unconstrained geometry adapts easily to topographical irregularities and geographical features such as streams, woodlots and natural ponds. As neither the alignment nor the length of neighbourhood streets need to remain constant, this model gives planners considerable latitude in laying out a network.
Recent media