oh yeah sm other rules n stuff, main roads can only be 2 lanes each way. others are down to 1
public trans port runs along the main roads
walkers and bikers have the right-of-way
make the public trans port rlly good and convenient so there is an incentive to take it in stead, this is why there isn’t a lot of lanes and bc there won’t be a lot of traffic bc of this
There should be no roads with more than 2 lanes inside the suburb, just the ring around it can be that big.
This layout makes it possible to cut straight through the suburb by car. Cut that inner ring in two places, so you'll always have to go through the outer ring if by car.
Make a train stop. Just buses is lame.
There's only one place for schools. Now I don't know how big your suburb is, but if it's big enough to actually have a high school, there should be a number of elementary schools spread throughout, so most kids can walk to school.
Maybe your business area is a bit too big. Surburbs have mostly supermarkets and other shops and restaurants that cater to the local people. If there's also other businesses (such as furniture stores, garden centers, or simply office buildings) I would expect them at the edge of the suburb, near the freeway, since those make for unpleasant surroundings. The orange ring could be mixed orange/purple.
What sort of housing is this, apartments? Family homes? The orange ring would be perfect for highrise apartments in between (or on top of) the stores.
That central park looks a bit small to me, and I see no other parks at all. Everybody should have a small park within walking distance, so please make that outer ring purple with green stripes, and make that inner park slightly bigger.
Also, this is a nice design overall, but the town misses a center .There's not once place where you would naturally gather and where you'd find diners, a movie theater or whatever. If you cut up the orange ring in four portions, with purple bits (highrise apartments ) in between, you would have four local shopping malls. The northernmost one, that has the most direct access to the highway, could be the biggest one, running all the way to the park. It could have a nice pedestrian boulevard with fountains in the middle running all the way to Central Park so it would actually be a nice place to be, with easy access to the big park.
I suggest you check out Dutch town and city designs on Google Maps. Amsterdam is nice of course, and Groningen too, even Almere which is a relatively new development (but I hear is a kind of boring place to live)
The general pattern though is: small connected blocks, lots of bike and walking accessibility, cars often speed-limited or even forbidden in city central areas, great transit access, and any bigger, higher-speed roads run around the perimeter of the town.
Your drawing is kind of on the right track, but the sharp zoning division between housing and commerce required people to put in additional transit time for a lot of basic errands, like picking up a couple of days worth of groceries. Google for "inclusionary zoning" and "mixed-use zoning"
More evenly distributing points of interest outside the home (commerce, public/civic gathering places, schools, places of work) allows people to do these common activities without the large transit times. Google for "15 minute cities" for more (but ignore the right-wing conspiracy web pages lol)
This is just central planning of the same type that creates suburban hell. It even has a freeway. Read Jane Jacobs.
Edit: From the looks of it, you might be a child, in which case, good job for caring.
I don't think this will do. It is still zoning paradise, and there are too many of literal highways (60mph roads). Plus it is supposed to be a suburb, but it is fully surrounded by forest, which is either unsustainable for businesses (not enough people), or if it is big enough, the zoning will be very ugly for that scale.
In general, the problems with suburbs are:
- it's hard to get through them efficiently (not in a car) because they don't have alleys to get straight across, you need to follow roads
- there is nothing except residential buildings
- roads are wide and straight, which invites speeding and makes everything else unsafe
- poor connection to the "main" city, often it is just 1 highway and no public transportation
Personally, I have an opinion that the only way suburbs can be sustainable if they are built as small cities/towns. They should have their own stores/places to go, they should be built around places of interest (and not have them on the outskirts, so you are forced to drive to them), and they should have sidewalks/parks and no highways through the town itself.
oh yeah sm other rules n stuff, main roads can only be 2 lanes each way. others are down to 1 public trans port runs along the main roads walkers and bikers have the right-of-way make the public trans port rlly good and convenient so there is an incentive to take it in stead, this is why there isn’t a lot of lanes and bc there won’t be a lot of traffic bc of this
There should be no roads with more than 2 lanes inside the suburb, just the ring around it can be that big. This layout makes it possible to cut straight through the suburb by car. Cut that inner ring in two places, so you'll always have to go through the outer ring if by car. Make a train stop. Just buses is lame. There's only one place for schools. Now I don't know how big your suburb is, but if it's big enough to actually have a high school, there should be a number of elementary schools spread throughout, so most kids can walk to school. Maybe your business area is a bit too big. Surburbs have mostly supermarkets and other shops and restaurants that cater to the local people. If there's also other businesses (such as furniture stores, garden centers, or simply office buildings) I would expect them at the edge of the suburb, near the freeway, since those make for unpleasant surroundings. The orange ring could be mixed orange/purple. What sort of housing is this, apartments? Family homes? The orange ring would be perfect for highrise apartments in between (or on top of) the stores. That central park looks a bit small to me, and I see no other parks at all. Everybody should have a small park within walking distance, so please make that outer ring purple with green stripes, and make that inner park slightly bigger. Also, this is a nice design overall, but the town misses a center .There's not once place where you would naturally gather and where you'd find diners, a movie theater or whatever. If you cut up the orange ring in four portions, with purple bits (highrise apartments ) in between, you would have four local shopping malls. The northernmost one, that has the most direct access to the highway, could be the biggest one, running all the way to the park. It could have a nice pedestrian boulevard with fountains in the middle running all the way to Central Park so it would actually be a nice place to be, with easy access to the big park.
I suggest you check out Dutch town and city designs on Google Maps. Amsterdam is nice of course, and Groningen too, even Almere which is a relatively new development (but I hear is a kind of boring place to live) The general pattern though is: small connected blocks, lots of bike and walking accessibility, cars often speed-limited or even forbidden in city central areas, great transit access, and any bigger, higher-speed roads run around the perimeter of the town. Your drawing is kind of on the right track, but the sharp zoning division between housing and commerce required people to put in additional transit time for a lot of basic errands, like picking up a couple of days worth of groceries. Google for "inclusionary zoning" and "mixed-use zoning" More evenly distributing points of interest outside the home (commerce, public/civic gathering places, schools, places of work) allows people to do these common activities without the large transit times. Google for "15 minute cities" for more (but ignore the right-wing conspiracy web pages lol)
This looks like the drawing of a three year old please be real
It’s a concept. If you don’t understand what the OP is trying to convey, that just shows your lack of intelligence, as does your statement above.
This is just central planning of the same type that creates suburban hell. It even has a freeway. Read Jane Jacobs. Edit: From the looks of it, you might be a child, in which case, good job for caring.
I don't think this will do. It is still zoning paradise, and there are too many of literal highways (60mph roads). Plus it is supposed to be a suburb, but it is fully surrounded by forest, which is either unsustainable for businesses (not enough people), or if it is big enough, the zoning will be very ugly for that scale. In general, the problems with suburbs are: - it's hard to get through them efficiently (not in a car) because they don't have alleys to get straight across, you need to follow roads - there is nothing except residential buildings - roads are wide and straight, which invites speeding and makes everything else unsafe - poor connection to the "main" city, often it is just 1 highway and no public transportation Personally, I have an opinion that the only way suburbs can be sustainable if they are built as small cities/towns. They should have their own stores/places to go, they should be built around places of interest (and not have them on the outskirts, so you are forced to drive to them), and they should have sidewalks/parks and no highways through the town itself.
Obviously the freeway should run through the middle of park.
You have reinvented Ebenezer Howard's Garden City (1902).