I did a comparison of city street network orientations in major US cities, and now I've got a better sense of why I find Boston so difficult to navigate. Visualization uses Python, OSMnx, and @openstreetmap data.
geoffboeing.com/2018/07/compar…
Each of the cities is represented by a polar histogram. Each bar's direction represents the compass bearings of the streets (in that histogram bin) and its length represents the relative frequency of streets with those bearings.
And then there's Boston. Although it has a grid in some neighborhoods, they tend to not align with each another, resulting in a mish-mash of competing orientations. Plus these grids are not ubiquitous and Boston's other streets wind in many directions.
Kevin Lynch defined "legible" cities as those whose patterns lend themselves to coherent, organized, recognizable, and comprehensible images that help us mentally organize city space, find our way, and develop a sense of place.
But what Boston lacks in legible circulation patterns, it makes up for in other Lynchian elements (paths, edges, districts, nodes, landmarks) that help make it a highly imageable city for locals and visitors. From Lynch:
Great piece and thanks for posting your code! I don't see a place in the notebook where you plot the street maps for Manhattan, Detroit, and Boston. Did you plot those separately? I'd like to see the same for Charlotte since it's such an outlier.
Love it. Extraordinarily clever way to visualize this information.
Just so I fully understand the methodology: each individual street segment's angle is measured independently, right? From any segment's origin (or intersection) to the next intersection (or terminus)?
Had the same issue ... for me it was caused by having less than 3 items in the `places` hash. nrows will be 1, and that will cause matplotlib to return something non-iterable.
One of the reasons I loved Boston was bc of the landmarks. I'm notoriously bad at navigating, but Boston is so easy for me (at least as a pedestrian) bc of the landmarks aiding me.
I'm surprised by your Seattle result, as the downtown area is a matrix rotated 45 degrees relative to the rest of the city. But perhaps it is too small of a proportion to show up in the plot
This is great, and thanks for making it open source. I was trying to make one for Berlin, but it seems no not get proper geometry data for it. Is there a way around that?
Boston is best imagined as a lattice of neighborhoods and city squares, all connected by MBTA lines and major roads, and bounded by the Charles, the harbor, and the Emerald Necklace. Forget cardinal directions or coordinates. Everything is next to someplace everybody recognizes!
Be careful what streets you take in Boston as visitors often end up in weird red draped rooms where little people talk to them backwards about that gum they like coming back into style.
which explains the striking difference in navigation guidance from Bostonians. A typical Boston set of directions references not geography or position but memory. “Take a left where the ihop used to be, and then drive until the gas station that used to have the Pegasus sign”
Arguably this means “legible” cities create boring, predictable, non-human city spaces. Alternatively, you exercise your mind and build up a relational map of places and directions to understand and navigate the human spaces in a city that grew organically (London, Lisbon...)?
Well... DOH. It's the cow paths, silly. 😉 [At least that's what we always tell people & generally it's right: streets follow old footpaths & cart paths, along old hills etc. Grids came MUCH later.]
Seriously, you want to read 'Boston: A Topographical History' by Whitehill. 🤓
I think you need to redo the Washington data, giving more weight to the most heavily traveled roads, which are almost all diagonals of various degrees. DC “seems” easy to navigate, but is one of the most difficult towns IMO.
Also, I found Boston/Charlotte to be pretty easy for walking - at that pace the decisionmaking process is allowed sufficient time to make up for the lack of order.
Boston, Greenwich Village in New York, most European Cities are not organized along strict grids; this might be the reason why they are full of surprises and discoveries for the flâneur. What is harder at first, becomes a delight.
What you're seeing there is a pre-Revolution city, that established before the idea of City Planning was a thing. I seem to recall reading that Pittsburgh was the first to use actual planning and grid lines.
Nice, this looks rad. I bet one effective measure of "plannedness" of a city would be it's effective number of orthogonal "baselines," since lots of cities have at least one Baseline Road.
original grid was set up by French colonists to be perpendicular to the river. Later Americans added the more-or-less north-south grid as the area was surveyed under the Northwest Ordinance.
Detroit looks like a combination of two separate settlements that bumped into each other later. This is what happens whenever you find t-bone intersections.
I like your tweet and a day later I learned about Manhattan Distance from one of my courses. In taxicab geometry we can say circles are just rotated squares without sounding crazy!
Funny. I found it relatively easy to navigate Boston. Follow the lay of the road and after curve x turn right or left. I find it difficult to navigate a grid-based city: I have to look at the signs how ‘far’ I am and wether to turn left or right. Being European in this regard?
Even worse than the graph suggests. Try telling someone to take Sardis Rd N west, take a right on Sardis Rd, a left on Sardis Rd, a left on Providence Rd, and a right onto Old Providence.
I-85 North enters Charlotte going east-by-southeast. The uptown grid is >45° off north.
And what if you looked at all of New York City, not just Manhattan? All of New York City covers about the same area as Charlotte, so it's unfair that you've limited that city to only a subsection
Been here 4.5 years. You just use your phone to get around. Street intersections with the same names. Streets changing into different names continuously.... fun to navigate
Something funny going on with Denver though. The downtown grid is set at a 45 degree angle to the rest of the grid but this doesn't appear to be reflected in your figure. I would have expected something more along the lines of Sacramento...
I grew up in Charlotte. Learned to drive there. Your diagram doesn't cover the half of how bad Charlotte is to drive in. Because all the streets change names, three to four times.
Surprised by comments in the negative in regard to our Charlotte streets. I think it's to Charlotte's credit. More organic growth between church buildings. Not a planned, sterile city. See: place vs non-place
Je pense qu'il y a un truc à faire en terme de corrélation avec l'age de la ville. Après Barcelone m'étonne, mais je crois qu'historiquement y a des raisons
Je pense que ça doit être lié à la guerre civile, un peu comme Caen ou Royan après 45, mais j’avoue que l’histoire contemporaine de l’Espagne n’a pas fait partie de mes sujets d’étude contrairement au Siècle d’Or.
Je crois me rappeler que le dernier shah avait voulu hausmannisé Téhéran. De plus, la croissance urbaine a vraiment explosé ses 50 dernières années, ce qui favorise les rues à angles droits.
Having driven extensively in Delhi, I find that hard to believe. Of course, I'm a layman and this is purely my gut feeling and you're probably right, but is osm data from India of the same quality? Or did it take into account only a limited area?
This is wonderful! Surprised to see that Mumbai's histogram suggests planning. Expected utter chaos! Maybe only a square mile around the fort area was considered?
Try Spanish Cities like Sante Fe in US vs Anglo settlements. Note the latitudes Even within LA, Anglo areas EWNS and older Hispanic areas spread solar gain.
Yes, that's the case in most older California cities. Central areas off-axis to rest of the town. It shows up as tiny on the larger city charts like LA.
Well, now I know why I never found the same streets twice when I was walking around Rome. Entire blocks seemed to have disappeared into another dimension. Usually taking the gelato shop I was looking for with them.
Am I looking at the data wrong or should opposing sides be mirrored? so there should be the same numbers of streets going south as there are going north?
Which looks like it for almost all cities. However I can see a big difference in London and Dubai.
Why is that?
It's systematic though. In almost every city, the imbalance is there and always in the North direction. No other directional axis has it that I can see. Seems unlikely to be about the direction of travel.
just thought in the same direction: now I know why Rome is one of my favorite cities. :-) History literally paved its way thru the city. Beautiful dataviz!
Really cool. What a perspective. Would be nice to see one of Montreal (especially) or Quebec City. As the oldest colonial cities in NA and for their reputations.
Toronto's orientation is easy to explain. With the exception of a few blocks near the harbour, all of city's land was once farmland divided into 160-acre lots. All of the arterial roads were originally the boundaries of those lots, 1.25 miles apart with four lots per square.
I think the US modern cities are the "strange ones" compared to the older European cities :-) Street orientation was originally much more related to physical (e.g. rivers) and orographic characteristics of the area, so way more complex than N-S orientation
Yes, both rivers, lake shores, hills etc, and also the how the main roads are coming in from neighbouring cities. If they come in at an angle, and you build square grids around each, there will be several different grids.
Very cool, curious that you plotted Munich over Berlin (Not that I'm biased or anything, living in Berlin). Amsterdam, with its "semi circle" centre would also be interesting.
I noticed earlier that one US city had more north than south oriented streets, but on this one it looks systematic. Almost all cities show a greater number of north than south oriented streets. No other direction shows this imbalance. Any thoughts on why?
Actually, looking closer, it does show up in other orientations. Both of Melbourne's major axes have it, and Paris shows a small one in the NNE vs SSW direction. Really curious how that's creeping into these.
It would be interesting to see how big the sample was. Is this a representation of Melbourne 3000, Melbourne City Council Area, or the Greater Melbourne Area, I wonder?
The Hoddle Grid is offset from most of the grid based layout. Taking just Central Melbourne would be very different to taking the Greater Melbourne area.
I was going to ask on your original post if you'd done London, and I'm glad to see you have! This also explains why I like Toronto so much compared to other cities. Thanks!
Cool, but the main orientation of the streets is marked by the orography, geography, and the original development of the city: Roman, Muslim.. of recent creation, with orderly or disorderly growth. Comparing cities with different origin and growth doesn't make sense. #geography
Good stuff! Looks like cities that were influenced by railways are more organized. Cities settled by walkers are more influenced by terrain.
Very interesting. Thank for doing this!
It's interesting that some maps seem to rotate. I mean... How to say? there's consistently more streets either left or right of the main axis in most cities. I wonder if left- or right-hand traffic could be the cause?
I wanted to see the ones for Paris and Rome because I remember having an *extremely* hard time walking around them, and your visualization seems to confirm that. 🙂
Should explain part of it. But Moscow is not hilly and Paris not that much. History should play a role too, with waves of urbanization along centuries, adding different logics of city building.
Bad for me. The last time I went to Moscow was in 1982 and I suppose that I was so young that climbing hills was so easy that I figured out that Moscow was flat 😊
would be cool to factor in length of roads and their degree of curve, as also big role in character. Also topography, Bristol and Sheffield (some of the hilliest UK cities) in comparison to Manchester and York (Flat), would have a big part to play in the layout of those towns!
Modern time cities laid out on a grid. Cities in colonies never had walls. Charlotte, NC is a post-modern exception in which recent urban development is dictated by the intersection of interstate freeways
Consider historic center separately from post-industrial suburbs and the pattern may change. Denver was originally on a different grid, then got money for the land purchase and made a switch
These visualizations are striking, and get right to the crux of legible circulation patterns. I'd love to implement something similar for the North African city in the Roman period. Thanks for sharing!
Più che altro Roma è un sistema non percolante. Quindi non c'è alcuna garanzia che esista un percorso che ti porta da A a B. Figuriamoci uno che ti ci porti senza farti diventare matto 😆
Go London!
Jane Jacobs, eminent urbanologist:
"The well-ordered grid of a shiny metropolis was not for her; instead, Jacobs favored a haphazard juxtaposition of everything – industry, leisure time, ethnicity – that insured the vibrancy of the city."
Yes!!! London is by far the most confusing city I have tried to navigate. It’s the only place I’ve been where I knew where I was on a map, knew where I wanted to get to, but still didn’t know which way to go. These are amazing, thank you for posting!!!
Is the length of the road considered at all? What about number of lanes? Or is it just a pure count that doesn't take those other (more important, IMHO) factors into account? Curious because Washington looks much more orthogonal than some of the major routes would suggest.
Most of the European cities will look like Boston or Charlotte I guess, and they are generally not difficult to navigate. I don't think that grid is equal to legibility of the place.
A mishmash of grids is probably worse than London-style streets for navigation. Not knowing which grid you're on, the orientation, etc. London at least you can point in a direction and go "thataway-ish".
But what Boston lacks in legible circulation patterns, it makes up for in other Lynchian elements (paths, edges, districts, nodes, landmarks) that help make it a highly imageable city for locals and visitors. From Lynch:
The view from alttude is not intuitive. Intuitive is a neural network bult from a person's experience in the city. I told someone that my NYC was different from his. I'd only been there a few times. I know a few blocks well. Compass directions are irrelevant.
Yes and no: for example in London, many streets are based on Roman roads which run the length of the country on compass lines. So you might be surprised?
I believe it will looks similar to Boston as I said before, just without that angle. It looks like I will have to try Geoff’s script to see the actual result.
I remember an article sometime ago contrasting the way Europeans will typically navigate a city vs Americans who are much more familiar with carefully laid out grids.
Very interesting.
My guess is that D.C. would have more prominent diagonal axes if the data were weighted by traffic (the city has a grid for most of its side streets, but a lot of the major avenues are diagonal).
Awesome! I might use it in class to try to make a point on the more grid like the less accessible for PwD are the streets (big slopes) in cities with many topographical features (happens a lot in Curitiba). Grid would be only good for flat cities.
As a Charlottean, Charlotte seems interesting and pretty much makes sense. It has such a strong hub-and-spoke & and monocentric structure. I suspect I-485 matters much.
I actually find grid based cities really hard to navigate (grew up in Boston) because I find there's nothing to hold onto. All the angles are the same. I guess Boston informed my internal navigation so much that I look for and pick up different cues when navigating.
Same! I look at a map of a grid based city and get really overwhelmed and quickly lost when walking. My eyes end up on the wrong lines. it’s like looking at those optical illusions with all the black and white lines that make your guys get weird.
Other problem with large grids is how interruption dominates. You can't say "I'll get on 17th street and follow it to my destinationo on 17th"... bc there will be parks, plazas, rivers, etc. in the way and this forces you to use some through streets and not others.
Being from MA and having Boston as my big city concept it took me *forever* to get comfortable with New York when I lived there. But it only took me a couple of weeks in the german cities I lived in, that were structured more like Boston.
I've noticed people who grew up in grid cities tend to maintain internal 'compass' bearings - as an automatic process. Not a useful skill in non-grid cities, so other skills used and developed.
whereas I have no idea about cardinal directions because they've been useless to me. "Meet me at the north side" he says. Yeah fuck you it's cloudy outside.
In this city there is a really tall building that everyone can see from a long way off. It turns out that the major east-west street is adjacent to this building. And, the major north-south steet is adjacent as well. I do not know what goes on in that building. First landmark.
I was down in Virginia (Charlottesville area) this year and came upon the realization that the reason chain stores are so dominant is because that is all you find in suburbia. Malls, strips malls, commercial corridors.
It’s a bit of a shock to the system coming from an urban area with lots of unique shops.
I was like, “where is the good tea?”
Mom: “Oh, there is a Starbucks by the Harris Teeter.”
Me: “That’s it?”
Mom: *Sigh* … “Yes."
that would be one heck of an earthquake :P
fortunately its due to planning. SF has a few different grid areas that don't quite align, to the frustration of many
I live near there now hence the curiosity, although it is a bit surprising Seattle is as aligned as it, there are a lot of wonky angles there. I do really like this stuff, it's facianiting the information and patterns we are pulling out of data now.
We can still dream can't we ^.^ fully convinced that we are already living in utopia. Just need to figure out how to make it fair for everyone.. hard problem that one.
The Washington histogram seems wrong to me, if only because I often travel on the diagonals. They were designed to be major thoroughfares. Perhaps you need to weight them by size and capacity. New York Avenue, Connecticutt, etc carry so many more cars than 20th street.
For Charlotte how far out did you go from the center of uptown? Which would be the intersection of Trade and Tryon. Inside the I-277 belt is pretty much square city blocks, but outside that it gets weird, but we Charlotteans wouldn’t consider outside 277 the city.
I’ve been here 20 years. If I’m comparing NYC to Charlotte I only think of the areas where there are “city” blocks. I’m just referring to that area, I realize the city of Charlotte encompasses most of Mecklenburg County.
All of New York City covers the same area as Charlotte yet his graph looked at Manhattan. If he had likewise limited the focus in Charlotte o our city centre of Uptown, South End, Elizabeth, West End, and up to NoDa, then you'd see a much clearer pattern
I was thinking the same thing. I grew up in Atlanta, with 72 streets named Peachtree so navigation is a joke, but then moved to Charlotte. The streets are easy there, as long as you're in the city.. inside 277.
Check out James C. Scott's discussion in "Seeing Like a State" of the street grid and rectangular land parcels and their role in selling and managing the street.
tl;dr - orthogonal grids create predictable parcels that are easier to sell and tax.
Thanks for writing such easy-to-use software! I made one for Portland, ME. Do you have a sample of the ones with the city overlaid that I can crib from? (Will figure it out if not, no worries)
Lovely work. i think it would be even more compelling if the radii (?) were comparable between cities. That way the shaded area would represent the number of miles of road being measured.
It’s funny - took me years to understand Rochester NY city core because of the “Inner Loop” and some of the streets “bending”, but I find Paris utterly understandable and simple.
Very cool. Also interesting how "European" Boston seems to be, in its lack of a simple orientation. Plop it into the world cities list and it doesn't stand out at all.
Minneapolis has a nice grid for most of the city, but then the downtown has a grid offset at an angle. Interesting and thanks for putting this together.
The data on Denver might be a bit off; there's two definite distinct orthogonal grids in the downtown area. I'm wondering how much of the Denver area was taken into account for the calculation; a larger area would eclipse the orientation difference.
I just replied the same thing before seeing your reply. I think you're right though that the total length of N-S/E-W streets of Denver writ large is probably >100x larger than the downtown grid.
Lynch fan & urban blogger from Buffalo here. I love this! As Buffalo grew it subsumed the village of Black Rock, which had its own street grid oriented toward the Niagara River. Where the 2 grids collide are some of the most interesting spaces, places & neighborhoods in the city.
In the early 1860s Olmsted spent some time in CA. SF city fathers asked him about laying out their city & he recommended streets following the terrain. That would have resulted in something more like Boston. But city fathers balked & slapped down a grid. Dammit.
Olmstead designed Gaily Rd. in Berkeley. It’s good. I think the problem with mapping either Oakland or Berkeley could be the hills. The flats of cities are grids but hill streets are seldom straight (which I guess may end up as a solid bullseye in the histogram).
I think you mean Gayley. That was his very 1st residential street design! He laid out the campus & surrounding streets as he was wrapping up his affairs to head back to NY to work on Prospect Park. He believed in using the contours of the land to inform street layout.
Those match up pretty well with a study I recall from years ago. The other one stuck in my brain because it included Honolulu, which looks a lot like Boston.
I'm curious, most of these seem to have roughly symmetrical lines, but Charlotte seems to have more going north than south. Do you think there are a disproportionate number of one way northbound streets? Or some other explanation?
i didn't realise that charlotte was that strange for an american city [grew up there]
i'd always heard from people it was hard to get around but i never found a problem with it
Love this. How easily could you arrange these chronologically, ideally by date of most rapid expansion, rather than alphabetically, including the world cities? The correlation would be pretty direct, right?
Weirdly, as a Boston native, I can easily navigate my way around. I have more difficulty in Las Vegas, where all the intersections have a similar look to me.
Manhattan is skewed because it's a long, narrow island sandwiched between roughly parallel rivers than themselves run roughly NNE to SSW, which makes it much more appealing to align the street grid to the rivers than to the cardinal directions
Cool! Would love to hear more of your thoughts on Charlotte. I think we grew during the trolley era as wheel and spoke so maybe that’s why our roads head all directions!
Can you explain your methodology i.e. 1 way vs 2 way streets, choosing direction for curvy streets, name changes, study area boundaries (for Detroit especially), and did you use Arc for the analysis? LOVE the idea and execution! Also higher res to see details would be really fun!
This is cool, but feels kind of unfair to judge Boston, which seems to me to be a polar-graph-shaped city (literally nicknamed "The Hub"!), on Cartesian standards? I wonder if it's really disorganized, or just center-oriented?
Fun project you did there. Wish Madison, WI made the cut, we're pretty trippy here.
Back in the days before GPS, sonny, we needed celestial navigation to get home at bar time.
MOST fabulous. DH & I were visiting, on a bus our host put us on, maps IN HAND & streets we passed were NOT on the map. 😲🤔 DH is prof’l cartographer, so I don’t think it was operator error. Insane. 😊
Funny it shows Seattle as so orderly. Its true outside of downtown, but in the center City, various street grids collide, all pointing to the shore. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Street_la…
Ugh! St Paul, MN is a nightmare too! Pro tip: Buildings downtown were originally assigned numbers based on their water meter number, so they have literally never made sense 😂
This is highly grid-biased. Cities like Boston and Charlotte would look more sensible if you did the same thing in polar coordinates. I suspect the same is true of most harbor towns.
Boston is much easier once you look at a 1775 map and realize it was an island with a circular street pattern with a grid superimposed on later landfill. Then it makes sense.
Interesting to note how many other cities have similar street orientation as Chicago. Having spent a lot of time walking around Chicago and Boston, the difference is that you can end up someplace you weren’t really expecting to be. And that experience has its own charm.
One thing specific to NC is that until very recently, it had incredibly liberal annexation laws. Instead of people being able to split off into a separate municipality and hoard tax revenue while leaving the inner city to wither, cities could annex any nearby sprawl.
All grid cities look the same to me. I'm probably biased growing up in the Boston area but working in city planning makes me think of how an area is unique not how well it accommodates cars. It's Fenway Park vs. Shea Stadium...
Ancient Greek cities deliberately made their street layouts confusing to thwart easy access by invaders from the sea. Did Boston, MA; Portland, ME, other New Eng cities take page from that book.
And your profile says you are moving to Boston. LOL. I recommend testing out the complex intersections (Harvard Sq, Longfellow br, Watertown center etc) when you first arrive, to make sure you familiarize yourself with all 6+ possible wrong turns ASAP.
Welcome to Europe; I can only think of one place in Britain that’s laid out on a grid: Milton Keynes. Every where else just evolved organically over the centuries without any preconceived end point, as evidenced by so many contextual & novel street names, 👍
Seth Kadish (@VizualStatistix) did this exact thing four years ago. Maybe it’s a very old idea that lots of people have done; but otherwise, a nod in his direction would be a good idea, especially for an academic.
When I first moved to Boston I tried to get from the north end back to Brighton at around 12 at night. This was right before the ubiquity of smart phones and gps so it was just me and the roads. I wound up in Cambridge unable to find a bridge to cross the Charles for 2 hours 😞
I enjoy this immensely, however i don’t think this is rendering how absolutely shitty it is to get around SF if you don’t know it. This makes it seem easy. It’s not.
Dude, you’re wrong about Boston. It’s wicked easy to navigate. You just take a left at the church, hang right down the cobblestone street, follow the freedom trail for like 3 blocks, bear right at the blinking yellow, go under the overpass, 1/2 way around a rotary & you’re there.
Really loving this and the world addition ! For us Europeans, it is a lot more natural to navigate complex cities but I can see how it can be troubling if you are used to grid cities 😯
Have you tried to correlate the street patterns with the elevatation distribution for each city (using Google map's terraine data) ?
I bet Charlotte's characteristics will be similar to Pittsburgh in terms of the "random" distribution of hills that surrounds both downtowns..
This is really interesting. I live in the midwest where nearly every town is on a north-south grid, which I love. But driving east in the morning or west in the afternoon is dangerous because of the sun. I would use the Manhattan pattern to avoid the problem. Would it work?
Interesting thoughts. Having lived in Chicago (grid) and now Orlando (griddish), I’ve experienced the same “driving into the sun” problem. If you oriented the grids NW-SE & NE-SW, you should avoid that. When the sun is lined up with the streets, it’s too high to be in your eyes.
Interesting, caught the international cities version. Any chance you could plug in Tokyo? Always had some trouble navigating through their alleys. Heard they were confusing on purpose to slow down and misdirect invading armies.
As a Dallas native, I find it interesting to see the ‘X’ in the center representing its initial layout using the Spanish Grid. I see that LA, San Francisco, and Sacramento, other cities w/ Hispanic origins are similar. Loved the article!
Dallas had to deal with the old East Dallas grid (Live Oak/Gaston/Grand), the downtown grid, and the Oak Cliff grid as the old cities merged. Then once you got north of Old East Dallas the N/S/E/W grid took over as farms were turned into subdivisions.
its interesting to see the myth of D.C. and Paris layouts...the viz look completely different. I assume because of the larger and more numerous arrondissements
Every city in Europe is like Boston. I found it far easier to navigate than most US cities, and now I see why. We don't navigate by street no or how many blocks. It's the curve of the street, and by pub
There are new cities with grid layouts in the UK. They are considered impossibly difficult to navigate, because you can't differentiate between one road and 4 roads up. The houses, and thus the corners, look the same
That's one of them, but I was thinking of Skelmersdale, where a friend lived for a while. It was designed like a Sim city - with repeating blocks. Local lore had it the planner committed suicide when he saw how it turned out, tho I assume that's scuttlebutt
Also, England being England, it was designated a New Town in the 1960s, and that's the larger part of the town, but the name is Norse, and it was mentioned in the Domesday Book
It seems like there is more of a smoothing effect in the graphs from the statistix project. I can't pull the hi-res copy of the statistix graph because it is no longer accessible from Dropbox.
👏👏👏 found this interesting because I find that the cities with the most saturated compass are the most enriching to explore on foot or bike. Rome, the most saturated is endlessly enriching, for example.
That you can take three left turns and still be on Tremont St. Or you take just two right turns and are going in the same direction you started. Navigating Boston has no logic and just takes experience. Still. I love it.
It's funny - I expected Seattle to look a lot more like Detroit in these diagrams, but I guess the non N-E-S-W part is overrepresented in my mental model because it happens to be downtown.
Ooh, big ask but what if you did this for some European countries too, to see how starkly different North America is? (I thought grid systems were a stereotypical joke portrayal of NA cities before I moved to Canada)
yes, we liberal Bostonians choose not to enforce a traditional binary orientation but rather to embrace the true diversity inherent in our paths and ways.
Boston has the dual challenge of having once been a peninsula and having based its streets on cowpaths. Many visitors find it daunting. As a native I didn’t.
So cool! I’m used to, and comfortable with Houston, Dallas and Atlanta and you can see how similar they are. I detest Boston!! I drove in it once and took cabs from the next trip on.
I find Boston pretty easy to navigate. I'm from Iran and I'm used to not relying on grids to find my way. Although, I live in Charlotte now and I always get lost in it.
هو اعتمد علي توجيه الشوارع وانتظامها يعني الاربع اركان دول هما اتجاهات الشوارع فالشوارع البسيطه او المفهومه هي اللي بتبقا grid لكن الشكل المعقد واللي متشعب ف كذا اتجاه ده بيمثل الشوارع الملتويه والملفوفه حولين بعضها... علشان كده بيقولك ان الدراسه دي معموله علشان تحدد انهي اسهل.
Boston looks like city of #Brisbane in #Australia. A city where the roads were designed by a toddler with an etch-a-sketch, crayon and some dribble. #auspol#qldpol