One of the most and common and popular features of the mass suburban development of the fifities and sixties in North America was the use of cul-de-sacs (dead end streets with a circular end). These type of roads have always been popular for a number of reasons. First and foremost, they’ve often been considered safe, quiet havens for families to live and grow. During any new housing development project, houses located on cul-de-sacs have always been the first ones to sell as for many people, they provided a better escape. Yet, recently the creaton of cul-de-sacs has come under fire for limiting the walkability of neighbourhoods.
FastCompany.com has posted an excellent blog post entitled Death to Dead Ends which not only details the arguments against the use of cul-de-sacs, but also delves into the recent developements some states such as Virginia are making to limit the use of these streets. What’s most interesting about the post involves the issue of safety. Cul-de-sacs are often perceived by their residents to be safer, yet according to a 2009 study done in California, cul-de-sacs report a higher rate of car accidents. As well, emergency rescue vehicles often has a slower response time dealing with cases on cul-de-sacs since the access to these streets is usually more limited.
As a whole, the post points to a future where new housing developments feature far less of these dead end streets and more roads with at least two exits.
