Anonymous comments allowed.
User avatar #4 - wutzittooya ONLINE (06/01/2013) [-]
I actually enjoy the non-linear approach to how cities are laid out. Cities that reflect how New York is portrayed in this photo are, to me, boring and typical. Sure, cities that have winding, intersecting roads are much more difficult to navigate but in all honesty, I find that it's more interesting to have the London/Boston styled roadways and that it is worth the time it would take to learn your way around the city. Just my thoughts.
#361 to #4 - mrswagly ONLINE (06/02/2013) [-]
Efficiency over scenery, man.
#136 to #4 - learned (06/02/2013) [-]
But a pain in the ass when you're in a hurry to a place you've never been to.
User avatar #50 to #4 - sockprague (06/02/2013) [-]
You think that till you actually visit there...
#47 to #4 - epicx (06/02/2013) [-]
Just leave Manhatten then, the rest of New York can get very confusing. Also once you get below like Canal Street in Mahatten, it gets pretty confusing. But if you haven't experienced it, standing at grand central and looking up 5th, or seeing the sun rise or set down a street, it is a pretty cool sight. Its because there are tall buildings on either sides of the streets and nothing at the end.
User avatar #6 to #4 - snowshark (06/01/2013) [-]
Personally I'd say the roadways (I.E. urban engineering) of a city reflects it's personality. New York is functional and was built specifically to be that way, hence it is built in blocks. Cities like London on the other hand are far older and they were built using different techniques. The roads wind around because the city constantly has grown outwards over the course of the past few thousand years (Yes, London is about 2000 years old.).

Although, an interesting fact is that there are two Londons. One of them is London, the original city of Londinium that was built by the Romans as a trading port that grew rich and powerful within its own walls. The other is the city of Westminster which was built slightly up the river to London in an attempt to leech the trade away from London which is immune to most UK laws and the monarch even needs to ask permission from the Lord Mayor of London to enter.

Unfortunately, even though westminster eventually grew so large it completely surrounded London, London was still the most successful city and Westminster eventually ended up being called London as well.

Such are the quirks you encounter when dealing with a 2 millennium old civilisation.
#278 to #6 - CapnInterwebz (06/02/2013) [-]
Hooray for learning!
Hooray for learning!
User avatar #45 to #6 - halor (06/02/2013) [-]
didn't most of London burn to the ground back in the 1600's?
#52 to #45 - anon (06/02/2013) [-]
We're due another culling soon.
User avatar #5 to #4 - mads [OP](06/01/2013) [-]
I agree. The main issue with London is the road users. I mean they will literally run you over if you get in their way. They don't stop for you. Nor do they care about ramming the back of your car in traffic. But the roads themselves are interesting
 Friends (0)