What is up with the terrible street naming around Seattle? N.E. 28th Street? Not just 28th street? And it's one block south of N.E. 28th Place? There's an S.E. 28th Street further east?
I wonder whether any GPS can parse addresses like 123 W E St out in Shelton. Not to be confused with 123 E St SW in Auburn. As a deliverator before GPS was common, figuring out how to look stuff like this up in a Thomas Guide was pretty entertaining.
I've never been to Seattle, but coming from Europe I found it very logical when I visited Grand Rapids, MI earlier in the year. There, they append a compass point on each street depending what area of the city it's in - Lake Drive SE, Wealthy St SW, 28th St SW and so on. It took me a little while to fathom, but it turned out these main thoroughfares keep their name right across the city, so the compass points help you keep your bearings.
I love your grid systems (and I'm sad enough to sit and look at maps of them for hours) - I find it really difficult to get lost in the USA. Everything's just so logically laid out when you're used to European maze-like towns and cities. My small English town (11,000 people) is easier to get lost in than a city the size of South Bend or Grand Rapids.
I have exactly the opposite reaction. I can't stand the grid. I love cities I can get lost in. Streets that wind and wend are my favourite; ideally with a mix of canals and shortcuts. Wide, broad, straight streets are to my mind inhuman: built for grandeur and ego of despots in old cities, for cars in new ones. I like pedestrianized streets on a human scale, with organic layout and a mix of residential and retail. My home town of Galway, Ireland approaches the optimimum of small size that gives walkability and scale that gives diversity. Larger cities can be and often are formed like constellations of such smaller towns
I love getting lost in cities too, but if I'm in a rush nothing beats the simple "streets go this way, avenues go that way" grid of NYC. (that's just what I say in my head with matching hand motions)
That's only actually true between 14th and 187th streets in Manhattan. The other (80%? 90%?) of NYC has locally consistent, but globally inconsistent, street layouts.
In that case come visit Greenville, SC. Small but it looks like someone sneezed on a map and drew the road lines from there. It's chaos but you get used to it.
As a Grand Rapids native, I agree with you for the major streets. 28th St, 44th St, Fulton, etc. Some of the smaller streets are nightmares with the one-way system (Lyon/Fountain) and roads that should connect but end abruptly only to pick up again the next block over with the same name (Barclay/Bostwick).
Don't get me started on roads that change their names every few miles (Northland Drive is also East Beltline is also Broadmoor is also 3rd St (and later 4th St) is also Federal Rd is also County Road 599 is also M-44 is also M-37).
Your point still stands compared to European roads or larger unplanned cities, but we've got a long way to go before we reach truly logical road names.
Well, coming from Europe, _anything_ would make more sense. We lived in Brussels for two years and after six months we bought a TomTom in order to preserve the marriage.
Roads change names every 100 yards, signs are waaay up on the corner of a building, and street maps are mostly useless.
Most cities in the U.S. (outside of the 'old' north-east -- Boston, Lower Manhattan) are laid out on a grid. Numbering systems in major cities are laid out in conjunction with the streets (eg: "3200 N." on every street is at Belmont Avenue).
When we moved back, the TomTom became a neglected device at the bottom of the glovebox.
It's actually fairly logicial once you're used to it. It's just a quadrant grid system. Streets run east-west, avenues run north-south. The center of the city is approximately somewhere downtown, streets go out in a radial fashion from downtown.
How did anyone get around this place before GPS?