The Grid structure has been the most popular and utilised
pattern within planned cities throughout history. This pattern involves the
streetscape aligning to a checkerboard like arrangement, with the lone common
factor being that all streets are orthogonal to one another. With this broad
rule it allows differences in how this ‘grid pattern’ is implemented in diverse
places. Not only has there been variance in how ‘The Grid’ has been applied but
also why a city that has implemented the pattern has also changed.
For example in the 8th century, China and Japan’s
government implemented the strictest of grids, creating a controlled
environment. This reflected power and strength ensuring that their citizens
were always under their watch. It also served the Romans in their military
arrangements, was used heavily within railroad towns of the US and also
industrial planning.
The grid is also adaptable. Although generally having
streets strait lines running parallel and perpendicular to one another, the
structure can also move around land inconsistencies. Furthermore they can use
these natural land features to help define the layout of the grid. For example
in 1229 Sozhou, China, was redesigned around the 20 canals creating an organic
feel to it. Looking at Image 1, you can see the grid pattern formed utilizing
the canals in the plan, giving the town a ‘Venice like’ feel. Similarly, Giza
uses the River Nile as a reference point for a linear axis to run streets
perpendicular and parallel to the river. Likewise, Melbourne’ s Hoddle Street
grid pattern is situated more or less parallel to the Yarra River as can be
seen in Image 2. Noting also that the train tracks are parallel to the grid
alignment as well.
The ‘Grid’ style of planning has received some criticism
from the public, claiming that the streets are too straight and too boring when
walking around a city based upon the grid system. This may be true in some
cases, for example the suburban cities of the US. However, to say it produces
boring cities is a bold and somewhat outrageous call. A city such as New York
can be argued to be one of the most extravagant and exciting places in the
world yet is formed upon a strict grid structure. In addition, people when
first coming to a city want to be able to navigate themselves from point A to
point B. The grid structure has proven
to be quite easy to grasp and very practical when a person needs to know how to
get somewhere.
That being said, there is no doubt that there are some
factors that must be taken into consideration before planning a ‘Gridded City’.
Although the grid scheme cannot be held responsible for the ‘dullness’ of a city,
it also cannot take all the credit for its success. There are many other
factors that make successful ‘Gridded’ cities work effectively.
As seen on page 98 from the reading there are 7 issues and
considerations that need to be explored. They are the following
1 Area and shape of block
2 Amount of open spaces and their situation
3 Public buildings
4 The make up of the streetscape
5 Where the grid ends
6The grids relationship to its surroundings and landscape
7 The effect of the grid
From these considerations it becomes evident that the Grid
acts as a skeleton to the city. It creates an outline of what a city can be
used for and can develop into, however it does not necessarily guarantee the
creation of a successful city. It is clear that there are many other factors
and as no two sites are the same it needs to be applied differently for each
area and must be flexible and adaptable to change.
The ‘Grids’ versatile structure allows it be implemented in
almost all scenarios. For example, many grids have formed the cores of the city
(like in Melbourne), however it does not have to be an initial phase of the
city. Many cities such as Berlin and Cracow have their organic city core and have
just gridded extensions to them, whereas housing estates commonly use a curvilinear
grid approach. The flexibility of the grid means that it can be used for small
estates all the way through to global cities. It can adapt to the increase in
population in an area by just expanding the grid to include a larger surface
area, such as can be seen in Chicago or Buenos Aires. A similar adaption was
applied by the Roman Empire so that when the city got larger they would just extend
the walls further out. In a way it is a controllable expansion in contrast to
an organic growth of a city.
In contrast to the Grid, organic growth has been seen to
have some serious and negative repercussions. Asian megacities such as Jakarta
have resulted in a ‘slum like’ extension creating many issues with
transportation and lifestyle (Silver 2008). Whereas it appears that with
increasing population “the grid system is generally more
adaptable to the emerging requirements of changing urban societies” (Busquets
2013, pp. 74). Also, the Grid
system has the ability to cut off expansion “allowing the creation of
sustainable and compact cities” (Busquets 2013
pp.77)
Gridded cities may not be the only way to create cities in the future, and there may be other alternatives that work equally or even more effectively than the Grid structure itself. However history has shown us that the Grid has proven to be effective in a wide range of cities, varying in purpose, size, population and landscape. The Grid is solely a framework to a city and can flourish or break down due to other factors. However, this framework is very practical and gives the city a sound structure, allowing it to easily expand or to increase in density where and when needed.
REFERENCES
Busquets, J, 2013 ‘Cities and Grids: In Search of New
Paradigms’ Architectural Design, vol. 83, no. 4, pp. 72-77
Google Maps, 2015, viewed 10th of March from
Silver,
C, 2008, ‘Understanding urbanization and the Megacity in Southeast Asia’, in Planning the Megacity: Jakarta in the
Twentieth Century, London and New York: Routledge, pp.18-35
