5 ms·

Would you elaborate on how is it nice to play on the street? For some reason I can't think of it being nice - quite opposite - I think it is dangerous (not to m

by wst_ 10y ago

Would you elaborate on how is it nice to play on the street? For some reason I can't think of it being nice - quite opposite - I think it is dangerous (not to mention I don't see any fun in it). No matter the traffic is smaller. One car is enough to kill your kid.

criddell 10y ago
On a cul-de-sac, almost all the traffic is of people that live there. Hours can go by with absolutely no traffic.
- turar 10y ago
  At the same time, for kids to play together, you need to get lucky and have other kids live nearby. A grid system is much easier to navigate for kids, even if their friends live 4 blocks over East and then 2 blocks North. In a cul-de-sac neighborhood, that same distance if drawn with a straight line is impossible to walk that way. It can quickly become daunting for kids to follow neverending mazes, often without any sidewalks. Sidewalks are another issue. In car-oriented neighborhoods they are often non-existent, or an afterthought on only one side of the street. Sometimes they just randomly end, only to start again half a mile down the road. In older grid neighborhoods, sidewalks are wide, often separated from the street with a tree line, and are on both sides of the street. They are almost inviting kids to come play on them.
  - criddell 10y ago
    My home is on a street that only feeds cul-de-sacs. Almost every house has kids in it. Plus, there are trails connecting all of the different neighborhoods. Within a short walk of my house (< 1/2 mile) are tennis courts, basketball courts, swimming pools, soccer/football fields, and multiple playgrounds. It's all maintained by the HOA. Also, there are sidewalks everywhere. My one big complaint is that the street lighting is pretty bad.
- wst_ 10y ago
  And that's I think is even more dangerous. You may get surprised the most by something that you expect the least. Well, I am glad you guys could stay safe, but I would rather send my daughter to play in some sort of kinder garden, park, or some facility made for that purpose rather then allowing her playing on the street. Still, it is my personal feeling only, because I've had never lived in a suburbs like this.
  - criddell 10y ago
    I'm okay with it I think because I grew up playing street hockey every day after school. There are parks and schools with playgrounds within a very short walk from my house. Like I mentioned in a different comment, my big complaint is the crappy street lighting. I don't mind my kids going out to play, but once the sun goes down it's pretty dark out and that makes me a little uncomfortable.
    - wolfgke 10y ago
      > but once the sun goes down it's pretty dark out and that makes me a little uncomfortable. Just get your child a decent headlamp. Problem solved (this is how I solved the problem that it is quite funny to go inlineskating on summer nights, when it is already dark but still warm).
      - criddell 10y ago
        The coyotes make me nervous.
analog31 10y ago
I grew up in a neighborhood that was laid out in a more or less rectangular grid. We played in the street all the time. Actually, the street was just an extension of the front yards, meaning that we had overall more space. Playing in yards meant having to watch out for flower beds, and for neighbors who were fussy about their lawns. During the summer, we played endless street hockey. When a car came, someone yelled "CAR" and we cleared out of the street. One thing to note is that there were fewer cars and less traffic back then. When I go back to visit my parents, the same streets are parked up and down both sides with cars, with an apparent preference for giant pickup trucks. Some of traffic is kids being driven to destinations that we used to walk or ride our bikes to. The kids are also driven to the same elementary school that we walked to.
bane 10y ago
Since pretty much all the neighbors on a cul-de-sac know each other, they'll often just block off that part of the road system with cones, or even their cars while their kids are out playing and turn it into an all purpose flat space for wheeled play devices or even community activities like block parties or summer slip and slides, street hockey etc. Even if they don't block it off, it's highly unusual for a car that's not from their particular group of homes to be down there, and all the people that live down there know that their kids are going to be out and about on the street, so people just drive cautiously. I don't have any stats, but I'd wager that kids were more likely to be run over in their own driveways than out on the street of a suburban cul-de-sac.
- davidw 10y ago
  Maybe if it's essentially private property, the cul-de-sac owners should also pay for it, rather than dumping the costs on the public at large: http://www.strongtowns.org/journal/2016/8/2/fitchburg-cul-de-sac-local-road-funding-strong-towns-member http://www.strongtowns.org/journal/2016/8/2/fitchburg-cul-de...
  - bane 10y ago
    In a fair number of cases they are, or similar road structures will be considered "private roads" and the residents along that road will provide a mutual easement and pay for maintenance, plowing etc. I grew up in a rural area that connected through some trails and dumped out into a private cul-de-sac road that was exactly as described -- it was also very poorly maintained. In my current very suburban neighborhood there's dozens of cut outs "eyebrows" and private enclave segments in the development that are privately owned and maintained by the residents. I personally wouldn't buy into a situation like that though, neighbors tend to make for terrible mutual cooperatives.
- Retric 10y ago
  You might think that, but no more people die in cul-de-sac than without. Most likely because grids are easer to deal with as a driver so they can more easily see people. But with curves all over the place people tend to be far more distracted.
paulddraper 10y ago
I've lived in three cu-de-sacs as a child. It's nice to bike, skate, scooter, whatever. Or toss around a football or frisbee. > One car is enough to kill your kid. When there's 8 houses on the street, there aren't many cars. And the cars that are there aren't driving 40mph to turn into their driveway. By your logic, you shouldn't drive a kid in your car either, because one car is enough to kill him.
- ryandrake 10y ago
  > When there's 8 houses on the street, there aren't many cars. You'd think, right? I've found this strongly depends on the neighborhood. In my experience, the richer the neighborhood, the fewer cars you see, either parked on the street or driving about. In richer neighborhoods (of co-workers I visit for example), there's nary a car present. Few people driving in, out, and through, and all the homeowners' cars are parked nicely in their garages. In the neighborhoods I've live in, it's like Joe's Used Car Lot. Probably 3 cars to every house, all packed in together parked on the street, in the driveways, on the grass, cars everywhere, some functional. People driving through the neighborhood at all hours, sometimes speeding, sometimes gridlocked. Garages are all full of old stuff/junk and/or in-laws, not cars. Cul-de-sac or not doesn't seem to affect the environment as much as socio-economic class. I know where I'd rather my kid bike or skate.
  - dpark 10y ago
    > In my experience, the richer the neighborhood, the fewer cars you see, either parked on the street or driving about. That's less an indicator of wealth than an indicator of development age. Newer neighborhood developments tend to be designed with two car garages at minimum, and for more affluent neighborhoods, three or even four car garages. Newer developments also tend to be built with more enclosed space in general, including more dedicated storage space, making it easier to keep the garage clear for cars. For new cul de sac developments in particular, the street curves and driveway placements also often make it difficult to park on the street (probably intentionally so). If you look in older but still affluent developments, you'll find a lot of cars parked on the street because there are fewer garages and the ones that exist are often small. I have no garage but do happily have off street parking. My neighbor has no off street parking at all. I live in a rather pricy neighborhood. Development age in many places is tightly correlated with occupant wealth, but that's not true everywhere. You always pay more for a new house, but you often pay even more for that house to be in an established, affluent neighborhood.

by wst_ 10y ago

criddell 10y ago

On a cul-de-sac, almost all the traffic is of people that live there. Hours can go by with absolutely no traffic.

turar 10y ago
At the same time, for kids to play together, you need to get lucky and have other kids live nearby. A grid system is much easier to navigate for kids, even if their friends live 4 blocks over East and then 2 blocks North. In a cul-de-sac neighborhood, that same distance if drawn with a straight line is impossible to walk that way. It can quickly become daunting for kids to follow neverending mazes, often without any sidewalks. Sidewalks are another issue. In car-oriented neighborhoods they are often non-existent, or an afterthought on only one side of the street. Sometimes they just randomly end, only to start again half a mile down the road. In older grid neighborhoods, sidewalks are wide, often separated from the street with a tree line, and are on both sides of the street. They are almost inviting kids to come play on them.
- criddell 10y ago
  My home is on a street that only feeds cul-de-sacs. Almost every house has kids in it. Plus, there are trails connecting all of the different neighborhoods. Within a short walk of my house (< 1/2 mile) are tennis courts, basketball courts, swimming pools, soccer/football fields, and multiple playgrounds. It's all maintained by the HOA. Also, there are sidewalks everywhere. My one big complaint is that the street lighting is pretty bad.
wst_ 10y ago
And that's I think is even more dangerous. You may get surprised the most by something that you expect the least. Well, I am glad you guys could stay safe, but I would rather send my daughter to play in some sort of kinder garden, park, or some facility made for that purpose rather then allowing her playing on the street. Still, it is my personal feeling only, because I've had never lived in a suburbs like this.
- criddell 10y ago
  I'm okay with it I think because I grew up playing street hockey every day after school. There are parks and schools with playgrounds within a very short walk from my house. Like I mentioned in a different comment, my big complaint is the crappy street lighting. I don't mind my kids going out to play, but once the sun goes down it's pretty dark out and that makes me a little uncomfortable.
  - wolfgke 10y ago
    > but once the sun goes down it's pretty dark out and that makes me a little uncomfortable. Just get your child a decent headlamp. Problem solved (this is how I solved the problem that it is quite funny to go inlineskating on summer nights, when it is already dark but still warm).
    - criddell 10y ago
      The coyotes make me nervous.

analog31 10y ago

I grew up in a neighborhood that was laid out in a more or less rectangular grid. We played in the street all the time. Actually, the street was just an extension of the front yards, meaning that we had overall more space. Playing in yards meant having to watch out for flower beds, and for neighbors who were fussy about their lawns. During the summer, we played endless street hockey. When a car came, someone yelled "CAR" and we cleared out of the street. One thing to note is that there were fewer cars and less traffic back then. When I go back to visit my parents, the same streets are parked up and down both sides with cars, with an apparent preference for giant pickup trucks. Some of traffic is kids being driven to destinations that we used to walk or ride our bikes to. The kids are also driven to the same elementary school that we walked to.

bane 10y ago

Since pretty much all the neighbors on a cul-de-sac know each other, they'll often just block off that part of the road system with cones, or even their cars while their kids are out playing and turn it into an all purpose flat space for wheeled play devices or even community activities like block parties or summer slip and slides, street hockey etc. Even if they don't block it off, it's highly unusual for a car that's not from their particular group of homes to be down there, and all the people that live down there know that their kids are going to be out and about on the street, so people just drive cautiously. I don't have any stats, but I'd wager that kids were more likely to be run over in their own driveways than out on the street of a suburban cul-de-sac.

davidw 10y ago
Maybe if it's essentially private property, the cul-de-sac owners should also pay for it, rather than dumping the costs on the public at large: http://www.strongtowns.org/journal/2016/8/2/fitchburg-cul-de-sac-local-road-funding-strong-towns-member http://www.strongtowns.org/journal/2016/8/2/fitchburg-cul-de...
- bane 10y ago
  In a fair number of cases they are, or similar road structures will be considered "private roads" and the residents along that road will provide a mutual easement and pay for maintenance, plowing etc. I grew up in a rural area that connected through some trails and dumped out into a private cul-de-sac road that was exactly as described -- it was also very poorly maintained. In my current very suburban neighborhood there's dozens of cut outs "eyebrows" and private enclave segments in the development that are privately owned and maintained by the residents. I personally wouldn't buy into a situation like that though, neighbors tend to make for terrible mutual cooperatives.
Retric 10y ago
You might think that, but no more people die in cul-de-sac than without. Most likely because grids are easer to deal with as a driver so they can more easily see people. But with curves all over the place people tend to be far more distracted.

paulddraper 10y ago

I've lived in three cu-de-sacs as a child. It's nice to bike, skate, scooter, whatever. Or toss around a football or frisbee. > One car is enough to kill your kid. When there's 8 houses on the street, there aren't many cars. And the cars that are there aren't driving 40mph to turn into their driveway. By your logic, you shouldn't drive a kid in your car either, because one car is enough to kill him.

ryandrake 10y ago
> When there's 8 houses on the street, there aren't many cars. You'd think, right? I've found this strongly depends on the neighborhood. In my experience, the richer the neighborhood, the fewer cars you see, either parked on the street or driving about. In richer neighborhoods (of co-workers I visit for example), there's nary a car present. Few people driving in, out, and through, and all the homeowners' cars are parked nicely in their garages. In the neighborhoods I've live in, it's like Joe's Used Car Lot. Probably 3 cars to every house, all packed in together parked on the street, in the driveways, on the grass, cars everywhere, some functional. People driving through the neighborhood at all hours, sometimes speeding, sometimes gridlocked. Garages are all full of old stuff/junk and/or in-laws, not cars. Cul-de-sac or not doesn't seem to affect the environment as much as socio-economic class. I know where I'd rather my kid bike or skate.
- dpark 10y ago
  > In my experience, the richer the neighborhood, the fewer cars you see, either parked on the street or driving about. That's less an indicator of wealth than an indicator of development age. Newer neighborhood developments tend to be designed with two car garages at minimum, and for more affluent neighborhoods, three or even four car garages. Newer developments also tend to be built with more enclosed space in general, including more dedicated storage space, making it easier to keep the garage clear for cars. For new cul de sac developments in particular, the street curves and driveway placements also often make it difficult to park on the street (probably intentionally so). If you look in older but still affluent developments, you'll find a lot of cars parked on the street because there are fewer garages and the ones that exist are often small. I have no garage but do happily have off street parking. My neighbor has no off street parking at all. I live in a rather pricy neighborhood. Development age in many places is tightly correlated with occupant wealth, but that's not true everywhere. You always pay more for a new house, but you often pay even more for that house to be in an established, affluent neighborhood.