I grew up in a city where (the older parts) were wonderfully easy to navigate. Virtually all of the roads were numbered with an "avenue" suffix corresponding to

I grew up in a city where (the older parts) were wonderfully easy to navigate. Virtually all of the roads were numbered with an "avenue" suffix corresponding to an east-west road and a "street" suffix corresponding to a north-south road. When building fronted the avenues, the initial digits corresponded to the street number (and vice versa). Even building numbers corresponded to one side of the road, odd the other. The city was also divided up into quadrants (NE, NW, SW, SE), which facilitated expansion in all directions. A complete address would tell someone exactly where a building was and how to get to it from where they currently are. (An example address would be 210, 30th Ave. N.W..) There were likely finer details, but you didn't need to know them to get around. I've had people say that such a system is boring, or that it robs a city of its history. In my books, boring is a lot better than asking a dozen people how to get to some obscure named roads. Historic names are also pointless when virtually no one recognizes or looks up the significance of the road name, and when they do ... well let's just say the heroes of a century ago are controversial figures today. Besides, my home town did name the major roads. They simply weren't so abundant that people lost track of all of the names. But the new subdivisions ... those were a shock to navigate through. Not only was the grid disrupted, but virtually all of the streets were minor variations of the subdivision's name (thus very easy to confuse).