Photo: Here in Van Nuys

NPR broadcast a story today about the debate over that quintessential suburban street: the cul-de-sac. Beloved by generations of parents for their alleged safety and privacy benefits, the form is now under attack by New Urbanists.

Because cul-de-sacs are cut off from other streets, residents who live on them must use their car to get anywhere. In typical large sprawl developments, hundreds of cul-de-sacs are connected like branches to the main trunk of access roads that lead out onto highways.

New Urbanism, which stresses walking and front porches, rather than garages and SUV’s, is trying to replace the cul-de-sac with its predecessor, the grid street. Just like the old small towns where the corner store was just down the road from ma’s house.

Leading the change, of course, are developers, who see money-making opportunities in mixed use projects that combine residential, office and retail uses. These are best built in grid arrangements. But safety advocates also say that cul-de-sacs are actually unsafer than open roads because cars back out of driveways, increasing the risk that children could be run over.

California cul-de-sacs have always struck me as uniquely ugly. The homes on these streets are built up to the property line, and frequently lack trees or sidewalks. They are built with huge garages and the styles of each house are rarely harmonious with their neighbors.

Nagle Avenue, at Chandler Blvd., is a typical “Knots Landing” assemblage of homely homes with late 1960’s pretensions to style: mansard roofs, flagstone siding, and double front doors.

Maybe these cul-de-sacs will one-day merit historical protection, like the grand Victorians in Angelino Heights. For now, they are maligned by the elite, and beloved by those who live on them.