AHC: Londinium gets a strict Roman Grid..

Krases

...that not only lasts to when the Roman Empire leaves, but also lasts into the future of London with Westminster and other cities that eventually fold into greater London, sticking with this strict grid system. Perhaps farmland, properties and ranches are organized along this strict grid plan.

How will major boulevards be handled?

Will the city be more 'imperial' with huge palaces and churches at the ends of long, un-ending streets?

Will exceptions be made in the future to the grid or diagonal streets introduced during the renaissance?

How will the riverfront be handled?

Where does the grid end and suburbs begin?

Will there be greater pressure to be like New York and build skyscrapers earlier on?

Will London get something like central park?

Will London be better off or worse off or roughly the same?

Will Jack The Ripper get away with his crimes with such a lack of windy, bendy streets? :p

OTL Londinium
8gLoJeo.jpg


Grid size is going to matter, the urban grid will likely be sub-divided more but not with any major thoroughfares, plenty of walking paths though.

Alright, time for some rough renders.

XkR5uB2.jpg


aoWTVde.jpg


TYClZkG.jpg
 
Vingilótë

Vingilótë

While the city core might retain the grid; without extensive city planning, I think it's unlikely that the outlying areas will also be grid. The reason for this is that natural human movement patterns rarely match up to a perfect grid, and as a result, when London absorbs neighboring villages and towns, the roads will be more along major roadways, rather than a grid.
 

Krases

Right, so whats got to give to make London a grid city? Perhaps the city simply has to grow geographically larger? Or does a permanent Roman descended presence in England have to exist for a time so that the city can grow and standards can be maintained?
 
Vingilótë

Vingilótë

For London to get a strict ancient grid throughout its present size is virtually impossible because the ancient city was never anywhere close to that size. However, a grid-based city is far from impossible; if, the city after a great catastrophe like the Great Fire, were to be rebuilt in a strict grid layout. It would probably have to be later, though, probably the 19th or 20th centuries to make it stick throughout the entire city.
 

Krases

Even if the city proper only expands a little bit, a grid for many miles around could still be implemented for farms and sections of land. Late on this could grow into proper city grids or other nearby towns and cities could adopt the original grid that farmers used. Its just getting everyone to use that grid for miles around.
 

Socrates

Don't grids only really work on a flat surface like Chicago and Salt Lake City? If you have topography, as London does, grids become pretty inefficient.
 

Krases

Socrates said:
Don't grids only really work on a flat surface like Chicago and Salt Lake City? If you have topography, as London does, grids become pretty inefficient.
Click to expand...

The highest point in all of London in around 800 feet high. Here is the view from the base of Nob Hill, San Francisco at 375 feet high. Assuming the remaining 14-ish hills in London do not have as steep a clime as Nob Hill, San Francisco, I would say the grid could easily be maintained.

Any exceptions to that rule are just that, exceptions. Put a castle on top of it or a palace or a university depending on the era.

nob-hill.jpg

Source with a lot more pics: http://frankmefun.wordpress.com/2012/08/04/nob-hill-san-francisco-california-united-state-america/
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top
Top