Jane Jacobs taught us that the best streets were those with a real blend of uses that were used throughout the day.  Obviously she was referring to many of the great urban environments we love and not the suburban sprawl that we are accustom to in most of the country.  What can we take from Ms. Jacobs empirical evidence here in suburban America?

I have long held the notion that all streets should be purposeful and provide the maximum benefit for their users.  This of course should be the intent of any developer as well.  If a neighborhood street’s only purpose is to move vehicles from the arterial to the home then it is not living up to its full potential.  What are the other elements we should try to build in to our suburban street system?  I believe we need to think of a street as equal parts vehicular circulation, pedestrian circulation and social interaction.  Social interaction is more influenced by residential design than street design so I will address this in an upcoming article on residential products for the next decade. 

For new developments the question of proper vehicular circulation for creating Destination Streets is an easy one to answer.  Suburban streets are characterized by wide expanses of asphalt with very limited contact with the outside world.  To reverse this epidemic we need to understand the genesis of the suburban street.  The width is influenced by jurisdictional traffic engineers and the fire department.  All types of traffic calming devices and roadway widths have been tried through the years.  I don’t have a problem with the width of the pavement as long as it is well justified and the streets are purposeful. 

However, in order to create a Destination Street we need to provide more connectivity or transparency of future developments.  If we start out the design of new communities with the notion that all streets should make a connection to their adjacent arterial or collector, we have gone a long way to improving the livability of suburbia.  Through the design process some streets will be identified as interior circulators and will never fulfill their full potential.  Other streets will be identified as critical connectors that will be necessary for the success of the neighborhood.  These critical connectors are streets that may provide access to retail, schools, parks and arterial traffic signals.  Contrary to conventional wisdom, these critical connectors should be fronted with residential products to improve their hours of utilization. 

One argument I have heard over the years against Destination Streets is increased vehicular traffic generation and lack of security.  The first is easy to refute as the more connections we make to the collectors and arterials, the fewer internal trips there will be.  That is, if you live on “Street A” in a Destination Street Community you would access the street directly from the arterial.  If you live on “Street A” in a conventionally designed community you would have to access the neighborhood from the main entry at the arterial, take a right on “Street B” then take a left on “Street C” then a left on to “Street A”.  Clearly the first option is preferable.  The second question of security is more difficult to argue as are most issues of the heart.  If a street is designed with a destination in mind, we will see an increase in pedestrian activity which increases the passive security.  The theory goes; the criminally minded are less likely to commit said crime if there is a sense that one is being watched.   

If we follow the rules for Destination Street vehicular circulation, pedestrians will come naturally.  How about existing communities?  How can we create Destination Streets with existing infrastructure?  Currently my neighbors and I use the sidewalks adjacent to the street to check the mail at the gang mail box or to walk the kids to the neighborhood park.  The activity on our sidewalks is limited to approximately 3pm when the kids are out of school and 6pm when all of the kids head home for dinner.  How can we extend the usage of the street as a pedestrian circulator?  Not by widening the sidewalk or adding more shade or by providing street furniture.  The best way to encourage pedestrian activity in suburbia is to provide a walkable destination beyond parks and mailboxes.  Neighborhood retail is the obvious and best influence in creating a more active place to live. 

In order to improve an existing community’s walkability we need to break down the notion that retail adjacent to residential should be mitigated.  My neighborhood was constructed adjacent to a neighborhood retail development with a fitness center, hair salon, restaurants, day care, convenience grocery, doctors and dentistry offices, dry cleaning and a day spa.  These uses were considered so adverse to residential sales that a 6 foot wall was constructed to “keep the people who use the retail from walking into our community”.  Of course this is a ridiculous notion because the people who use the neighborhood retail are, for the most part, residents of my community.  Now, because of the wall, most residents choose to get in their cars, drive to the nearest arterial connection and then drive to the neighborhood retail.  Without the wall many of the streets in my community would be Destination Streets with more purpose; walking the dog to the vet, walking the kids to the day care in the morning, walking to the restaurants in the evening, walking to the fitness center, etc.   

I believe that if we attempt to create more Destination Streets we will improve the livability and walkability of future suburbia.  Also, we should look for opportunities to convert our existing streets to Destination Streets by removing walls and barriers.  What do you think?  Please add your thoughts here, I look forward to your input.