Most Difficult/Easiest Cities to Navigate

[J N Winkler]

What do you guys think of European cities? Has anyone ever driven there?

I have driven around the UK and Ireland, and been driven around Italy, Portugal (Lisbon only), Germany, France, Switzerland, Turkey, and Spain.

To me, northern Europe (including Germany) has the easiest traffic. The Netherlands has a lot of cyclist swerving around intersections, which can be pretty intimidating for first-time drivers. The craziest traffic inside cities is generally in southern Europe, with Italy and Greece probably being the worst. Traffic safety records are poorest in eastern Europe and Belgium, though a lot of improvement is made in eastern Europe. One upside of communist urban planning is that they created wide boulevards, which makes driving much easier than southern Europe. The downside is they often lack a freeway network, which makes these cities more congested than they have to be.

I have found that the difficulty of navigating in European cities increases with size, as is also true in American cities, but not in quite the same way.  Because American cities tend to be built on a grid plan, they tend to follow that grid as they expand.  In Europe, large cities tend to arise from the coalescence of small communities which grow over time and often embody different ideas about city layout.  In Madrid, for example, the historic part of town (near the Plaza Mayor) is a small warren of narrow streets laid out in a spiderweb pattern around the Puerto del Sol, while the districts on either side of Paseo de la Castellana developed later and are laid out in a rectilinear pattern, and there is also the Ciudad Lineal out near the periphery (this is an actual neighborhood in Madrid--not just an internationally famous town-planning construct).  In Barcelona you can find a similar distinction between the Barri Gòtic near the harbor and the Eixample.  Elsewhere, some cities have had their central areas replanned on a grid (partially as a result of monarchical absolutism) while street plans outside of it tend to follow landform contours--you see this in Turin (the former Savoy capital) and Lisbon (the Baixa Pombalina was comprehensively replanned after the Lisbon earthquake).  There is also the haussmannien model in Paris:  reorganizing districts by razing huge boulevards through existing development.

These distinctions are not rigid.  For example, greater Washington, DC and Boston have followed similar patterns of growth through coalescence, and the difficulties in navigating through them are comparable to large European cities like London and Madrid.  In DC's case, L'Enfant's grid does not extend through the suburbs in either Maryland or Virginia, so it requires a considerable degree of local knowledge to handle the transition from the suburban street plans to the DC grid.

In Europe the city I have personally found most difficult to navigate in is Istanbul.  If you stay just in one district you are all right (I got to know Eminönü reasonably well), but if you try to travel from district to district, it becomes very hard and you have to rely on well-known landmarks like Taksim Square.  In comparison, Ankara, which was master-planned while Atatürk was president of Turkey, has a reputation for ease of navigation which is not entirely deserved because it has some hills which distort the street layout, but it is still much easier to deal with than Istanbul.

[hobsini2]

Due to their rigid grids, both Chicago and Milwaukee are a breeze to find ones' way around in and to find addresses.

I'd think that most of Los Angeles would be pretty easy to navigate, with its grid, too.

OTOH, if you are not from there, Boston can be a total confusion.

I also agree, it is very easy for out-of-towners to get lost in central Waukesha, WI, with its non-grid of streets, especially on a cloudy day and with no electronic navigational aids.  Ditto central Oshkosh, WI, with those several major streets that parallel the Fox River at a sharp angle to the grid while interfacing with the 'grid' in the downtown area.

Mike

Being originally from Oshkosh, I would say that except for maybe 5 blocks of Algoma/High in downtown, Oshkosh is easy.  You got to remember though, like Milwaukee, Oshkosh was at one point 3 towns. That's why there are so many name changes when you cross the Fox.

As far as worst, I hated Boston's layout but then again that city was layed out along paths that had similar elevations back in the 1700s.

[Chicagosuburban]

Chicago is one of the easiest places to navigate, because Chicago is based off an easy grid with major streets almost every half mile. The suburbs aren't too bad either because the major roads aren't confusing and are generally straight.

[texaskdog]

Chicago is one of the easiest places to navigate, because Chicago is based off an easy grid with major streets almost every half mile. The suburbs aren't too bad either because the major roads aren't confusing and are generally straight.

Once we tried to get on the tollway and PAY and we couldnt get on.  It took us back a few miles and somehow we would up at the same intersection 45 minutes later.  They have a grid but the tollway is a nightmare.

[ATLRedSoxFan]

Due to their rigid grids, both Chicago and Milwaukee are a breeze to find ones' way around in and to find addresses.

I'd think that most of Los Angeles would be pretty easy to navigate, with its grid, too.

OTOH, if you are not from there, Boston can be a total confusion.

I also agree, it is very easy for out-of-towners to get lost in central Waukesha, WI, with its non-grid of streets, especially on a cloudy day and with no electronic navigational aids.  Ditto central Oshkosh, WI, with those several major streets that parallel the Fox River at a sharp angle to the grid while interfacing with the 'grid' in the downtown area.

Mike

Gotta agree with you on Boston..I've lived here for just over three months from Atlanta and been here several times, but..... Towns in Massachusetts only sign their main streets from the town square or center of town outwards and only once, but an abundance of side streets are signed. I guess they figure the locals just know. If it's a state route, you've got a better chance.

[Chicagosuburban]

Chicago is one of the easiest places to navigate, because Chicago is based off an easy grid with major streets almost every half mile. The suburbs aren't too bad either because the major roads aren't confusing and are generally straight.

Once we tried to get on the tollway and PAY and we couldnt get on.  It took us back a few miles and somehow we would up at the same intersection 45 minutes later.  They have a grid but the tollway is a nightmare.

Yeah they are weird because most of the tollway interchanges don't serve all directions...

[huskeroadgeek]

Metro Phoenix is one of the easiest because of the large area that follows a grid pattern. Major streets follow section lines, there are ample freeways to get around, and you know that there will be an exit every mile. Very easy to plan a route from point A to point B.

I've never had any major problems there, but Nashville can be difficult to navigate in. Very few streets follow the straight compass points, and the further out you get from downtown, particularly in the south part of town, the less semblance of a pattern there is. Streets turn off at odd points-where the road you are on with the same name turns off, while continuing straight ahead puts you on a different street. For a good example, try following Old Hickory Blvd. in the Antioch area(SE part of town).

[tchafe1978]

I'd agree that Waukesha, WI is difficult to navigate, and I even grew up near there. The downtown has streets goining every which way.

Another city that can be confusing is Madison, WI. The downtown and the Isthmus is laid out in a grid, but outside of there, the main streets go in all different directions. The lakes being in the middle of the city definitely complicate things, as they can make trips accross the city a lot longer. Going from the west side to the east side through the city is terrible slow, and there is no high-speed route through the downtown and Isthmus area. Though I don't think I'd want one through there, it would spoil the beauty of the city and the lakes.

[mgk920]

I'd agree that Waukesha, WI is difficult to navigate, and I even grew up near there. The downtown has streets goining every which way.

Another city that can be confusing is Madison, WI. The downtown and the Isthmus is laid out in a grid, but outside of there, the main streets go in all different directions. The lakes being in the middle of the city definitely complicate things, as they can make trips accross the city a lot longer. Going from the west side to the east side through the city is terrible slow, and there is no high-speed route through the downtown and Isthmus area. Though I don't think I'd want one through there, it would spoil the beauty of the city and the lakes.

Eau Claire, WI has the same problems as Madison in that regard - no routes that go straight through the city and no cohesive grid due to the Chippewa River and its irregular valley.  WisDOT just got done building several bypass routes around the city to handle crosstown traffic.

As for Madison, WisDOT will, within the next couple of decades, have no choice than to 1) upgrade much of the Beltline to eight lanes and 2) construct a north beltline freeway, both to simply handle crosstown traffic.

Mike

[texaskdog]

I'd agree that Waukesha, WI is difficult to navigate, and I even grew up near there. The downtown has streets goining every which way.

Another city that can be confusing is Madison, WI. The downtown and the Isthmus is laid out in a grid, but outside of there, the main streets go in all different directions. The lakes being in the middle of the city definitely complicate things, as they can make trips accross the city a lot longer. Going from the west side to the east side through the city is terrible slow, and there is no high-speed route through the downtown and Isthmus area. Though I don't think I'd want one through there, it would spoil the beauty of the city and the lakes.

Eau Claire, WI has the same problems as Madison in that regard - no routes that go straight through the city and no cohesive grid due to the Chippewa River and its irregular valley.  WisDOT just got done building several bypass routes around the city to handle crosstown traffic.

As for Madison, WisDOT will, within the next couple of decades, have no choice than to 1) upgrade much of the Beltline to eight lanes and 2) construct a north beltline freeway, both to simply handle crosstown traffic.

Mike

Madison will get its own "big dig"