Sustainable Urban Development: Spatial Analyses as Novel Tools for Planning a Universally Designed City
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
- Literature research: analysis of the literature on the subject matter (national and foreign), through journals, internet data, and conference materials.
- Empirical methods (research walk, social interviews): watching the public space in Lodz and Warsaw (Poland) in terms of it being used by elderly and disabled persons. The research involved the participation of the representatives of the Foundation for Active Rehabilitation and inhabitants with auditory and visual perception disabilities (visually impaired and deaf people). The author analyzed the information about the residents’ expectations concerning their functioning in the public space in terms of creating social sustainability.
- Case study: analysis of the completed and conceptual projects involving the revitalization of the public space in Lodz and Warsaw (Poland), taking into consideration the needs of elderly and disabled persons.
- Experience in using tools of spatial analytics on a local scale. The planned scheme of the research process is as follows: (Basic analyses of the accessibility of Lodz bus stops were conducted within the course project at the Technical University of Lodz.)
- Stage 1: Formulation of the research issue; defining the aim of the research.
- Stage 2: Programming: examination of the user groups and their problems and needs connected with the exploitation of the city space (extensive interviews with space users with different disabilities); own research with qualitative studies (using a wheelchair, etc.); analysis of the principles of universal design; analysis of the possibilities of implementing universal design principles in urban planning practice; regulations, standards, design norms, and guidelines; review of currently popularized methods and tools for spatial planning; inter alia, geographic information systems (GIS).
- Stage 3: Conclusions.
3. Results
3.1. Universal Design as a Crucial Component for Sustainable Life
3.1.1. Criteria for Social Sustainability
- setting the basic guidelines deciding about the fulfillment of required conditions for city space accessibility;
- improving and raising the level of coordination of design and execution processes in order to make the city space accessible to all residents;
- inspiring the creation of practical, modern and economically, culturally, and socially justified solutions;
- favoring the reduction of the number of decisions generating unnecessary costs of maintenance and modernization of public spaces;
- supporting rational and socially responsible decisions fulfilling the expectations of the stakeholders of the investment projects and users in terms of accessibility.
3.1.2. Principles of Universal Design
3.1.3. Relationships between Universal Design and Sustainable Social Development
3.2. Spatial Analyses as a Tool for the Development of a Healthy City
3.2.1. Tradition of Social Usage
3.2.2. Spatial Accessibility in City Development Planning: New Design Tools
4. Discussion
- The first phase should involve a systematic review of literature and design connected with the process of urban planning using the spatiotemporal modelling methods. Based on the evaluation of the obtained knowledge, it should be attempted to identify the successes and mistakes in this field, both in terms of theory and practice.
- In the second phase (involving field studies), it is suggested to conduct a critical assessment of the realization of the projects, based on their analysis (which can be done using the method developed by the Commission for Architecture and Built Environment in 2000). It should include landscape developments on the micro- and macro-scale (arrangement of squares and streets, new and adapted buildings, lighting), wheel and pedestrian traffic with infrastructure, totality of governance of the subject public space with the participation of the local community, particularly of persons with various disabilities, when conducting the audits of architectural facilities and public spaces.
- The next phase involves direct interviews (with residents and space users with various restrictions of mobility and perception) and indirect interviews (with institutions and organizations consociating these persons). This phase should provide an empirical basis for the recognition and assessment of the local views not only about the quality of public space, but also about the principles and purposefulness of the community participation in and their influence on this process.
- In the last phase, which closes the research project, it will be necessary to summarize the conclusions and assess them in the context of the objectives of the project. On this basis, the final results of spatial planning should be presented in accordance with the principles of universality. It is recommended to develop guidelines for the basic phases of the design process using spatial analytics methods and prepare a set of indicators pointing the way towards obtaining solutions which would be considered optimal from the point of view of universal design and sustainable development.
5. Conclusions
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Woodcraft, S.; Hackett, T.; Caistor-Arendar, L. Design for Social Sustainability: A Framework for Creating Thriving New Communities; Future Communities. 2011. Available online: http://www.futurecommunities.net/files/images/Design_for_Social_Sustainability_0.pdf (accessed on 8 January 2018).
- Design for Social Sustainability. Future Communities (n.d.). Available online: http://futurecommunities.net/design-social-sustanability (accessed on 9 March 2013).
- Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. 13 December 2006, A/RES/61/106. Available online: http://www.un.org/en/development/desa/population/migration/generalassembly/docs/globalcompact/A_RES_61_106.pdf (accessed on 2 May 2018).
- Kadir, S.A.; Jamaludin, M. Universal Design as a Significant Component for Sustainable Life and Social Development. Procedia Soc. Behav. Sci. 2013, 85, 179–190. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Axhausen, K. Accessibility: Long-term perspectives. J. Transp. Land Use 2008, 1, 5–22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Brömmelstroet, M. Performance of planning support systems: What is it, and how do we report on it? Comput. Environ. Urban Syst. 2013, 41, 299–308. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Brömmelstroet, M.; Curtis, C.; Larsson, A.; Milakis, D. Strengths and weaknesses of accessibility instruments in planning practice: Technological rules based on experiential workshops. Eur. Plan. Stud. 2015, 23, 1–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Curtis, C.; Scheurer, J. Planning for sustainable accessibility: Developing tools to aid discussion and decision-making. Prog. Plan. 2010, 74, 53–106. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Curtis, C.; Scheurer, J.; Burke, M. Using new accessibility tools to guide policy innovation. Built Environ. 2013, 39, 454–472. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hull, A.; Silva, C.; Bertolini, L. (Eds.) Accessibility Instruments for Planning Practice; COST Office: Porto, Portugal, 2012; ISBN 978-989-20-3210-8. [Google Scholar]
- Klosterman, R.E. Planning support systems: A new perspective on computer-aided planning. In Planning Support Systems: Integrating Geographical Information Systems, Models and Visualization Tools; Brail, R.K., Klosterman, R.E., Eds.; ESRI: Redlands, Canada, 2001; pp. 1–23. [Google Scholar]
- Meadows, D.H.; Robinsons, J.M. The electronic oracle: Computer models and social decisions. Syst. Dyn. Rev. 2001, 18, 271–308. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Papa, E.; Silva, C.; Brömmelstroet, M.; Hull, A. Accessibility instruments for planning practice: A review of European experiences. J. Transp. Land Use 2016, 9, 57–75. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Papa, E.; Coppola, P.; Angiello, G.; Carpentieri, G. The learning process of accessibility instrument developers: Testing the tools in planning practice. Transp. Res. Part A Policy Pract. 2017, 104, 108–120. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Strong and Prosperous Communities. The Local Government White Paper; Presented to Parliament by The Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government by Command of Her Majesty. October 2006. Available online: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/272357/6939.pdf (accessed on 8 January 2018).
- Colantonio, A. Social Sustainability: Linking Research to Policy and Practice. Available online: http://ec.europa.eu/research/sd/conference/2009/papers/7/andrea_colantonio_-_social_sustainability.pdf (accessed on 27 January 2013).
- Sharifi, A.; Murayama, A. Changes in the traditional urban form and the social sustainability of contemporary cities: A case study of Iranian cities. Habitat Int. 2012, 38, 126–134. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Universal Design—Clarification of the Concept; The Norwegian Ministry of the Environment. November 2007. Available online: http://www.universell-utforming.miljo.no/file_upload/uniutf%20a4%20polsk-eng_v8.pdf (accessed on 28 December 2017).
- North Caroline State University, College of Design (NCSU). The Center for Universal Design. 1997. Available online: http://www.design.ncsu.edu/cud (accessed on 21 May 2010).
- Town and Country Planning Association (TCPA). Applying Inclusive Design Principles to eco-Town Development: Ecotowns Inclusive Design Worksheet. 2009. Available online: https://www.tcpa.org.uk/eco-towns-advice-worksheets (accessed on 2 January 2018).
- United Nations Research Institute for Social Development (UNRISD). Social Development in an Uncertain World (UNRISD Research Agenda 2010–2014). 2011. Available online: http://www.unrisd.org/80256B42004CCC77/(httpInfoFiles)/43BFA3387807E7E680257920004253C7/$file/ResAge10-14a.pdf (accessed on 2 January 2018).
- Choguill, C.L. Developing sustainable neighbourhoods. Habitat Int. 2008, 32, 41–48. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bramley, G.; Dempsey, N.; Power, S.; Brown, C.; Watkins, D. Social Sustainability and Urban Form: Evidence from five British cities. Environ. Plan. A 2009, 41, 2125–2142. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dave, S. Neighbourhood Density and Social Sustainability in Cities of Developing Countries. Sustain. Dev. 2011, 19, 189–205. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dempsey, N.; Bramley, G.; Power, S.; Brown, C. The social dimension of sustainable development: Defining urban social sustainability. Sustain. Dev. 2011, 19, 289–300. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Weingaertner, C.; Moberg, Å. Exploring Social Sustainability: Learning from perspectives on urban development and companies and products. Sustain. Dev. 2011, 22, 122–133. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Duncan, R. Universal Design—Clarification and Development; A Report for the Ministry of the Environments, Government of Norway. March 2007. Available online: http://www.universell-utforming.miljo.no/file_upload/udclarification.pdf (accessed on 8 January 2018).
- National Center for the Dissemination of Disability Research (NCDDR). Accessibility in Our Built Environment: Visitability; Focus. Technical Brief Number 8; 2004. Available online: http://www.naric.com/research/rehab/download.cfm?ID=100998 (accessed on 17 May 2012).
- Carmona, M.; Heath, T.; Oc, T.; Tiesdell, S. Public Spaces-Urban Spaces, 2nd ed.; Architectural Press: Oxford, UK, 2010; ISBN 978-1856178273. [Google Scholar]
- Alexander, C. Notes on the Synthesis of Form; Harvard University Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 1971; ISBN 978-0674627512. [Google Scholar]
- Kozlowski, M. The Emergence of Urban Design in Regional and Metropolitan Planning: The Australian Context. Aust. Plan. 2006, 43, 36–41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Frey, H. Designing the City-Towards a More Sustainable Urban Form, 1st ed.; E & FN Spon: London, UK, 1999; ISBN 0-203-37501-7. [Google Scholar]
- Seifert, I. Collaborative Assistance with Spatio-Temporal Planning Problems. In Spatial Cognition V, Proceedings of the International Conference Spatial Cognition 2006, Bremen, Germany, 24–28 September 2006; Barkowsky, T., Knauff, M., Ligozat, G., Montello, D.R., Eds.; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2007; pp. 90–106. [Google Scholar]
- Sevtsuk, A.; Mekonnen, M. Urban network analysis. A new toolbox for ArcGIS. RIG 2012, 22, 287–305. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Traditional Key Themes | Emerging Key Themes |
---|---|
Basic needs, including housing and environmental health | Demographic change (aging, migration, and mobility) |
Education and skills | Social mixing and cohesion |
Employment | Identity, sense of place, and culture |
Equity | Empowerment, participation, and access |
Human rights and gender | Health and Safety |
Poverty | Social capital |
Social justice | Wellbeing, happiness, and quality of life |
Author(s) | Criteria Considered |
---|---|
Sachs, 1999 | Equity; democracy; human rights, social homogeneity; equitable income distribution; employment; equitable access to resources and social services |
United Nations Division of Sustainable Development UNDSD, 2001 | Equity; health; education; housing; security; population |
Spangenberg, 2004 | Income; communication and participation; education; social contacts; social security; distribution of income and assets |
Chouguill, 2008 | Citizen participation; social interaction; feeling of belonging; interpersonal relations among the neighborhood residents; collective action; mutual support; access to facilities and amenities; safety |
Bramley et al., 2009 | Social equity; access to facilities and amenities; affordable housing; social interaction; safety/security; satisfaction with home; stability (turnover); participation in collective group/civic activities |
Colantonio, 2009 | Equity; inclusion; adaptability; security |
Cuthill, 2010 | Social justice; social/community wellbeing; human-scale development; engaged governance; social infrastructure; community and/or human-scale development; community capacity building; human and social capital |
Dave, 2011 | Access to facilities and amenities; amount of living space; health of the inhabitants; community spirit and social interaction; safety |
Dempsey et al., 2011 | Social interactions; participation; community stability; pride and sense of place; social equity; safety and security |
Weingaertner & Moberg, 2011 | Accessibility; social capital and networks, health and wellbeing; social cohesion and inclusion; safety and security; fair distribution (income, employment); local democracy, participation, and empowerment; cultural heritage; education and training, equal opportunities; housing and community stability; connectivity and movement; social justice; sense of place; mix use and tenure; attractive public realm |
The User’s Profile | Unfulfilled Criteria of Social Sustainability Resulting from the Lack of City Accessibility |
---|---|
Persons with dysfunctions in mobility | Basic needs, including housing and employment; security; human rights; social justice; equity |
Visually impaired and blind persons | Safety and security; social interaction; participation |
Hearing impaired and deaf persons | Adaptability; equitable access to resources and social services; social justice |
Mentally handicapped individuals (self-advocates) | Human rights; social justice; voice and influence |
Elderly persons, over 70 years of age | Basic needs, including housing and environmental health; poverty and social justice |
The User’s Profile | Key Factors of the City Space Which Contribute to the Low Degree of Social Sustainability |
---|---|
Persons with dysfunctions in mobility | Spatial barriers in the form of high curbs, uneven surface of pavements, lack of platforms, lack of ramps, or ramps which are too steep; park lanes without hardened surfaces; lack of banisters with a grip accessible to all users; blocking pedestrian passageways with bollards or other obstacles, narrowing the access roads to facilities and amenities (no adjustment of the width of obstacle-free pedestrian passageways); lack of relaxation sites set along the communication routes adjusted to persons in wheelchairs; urban furniture without supports; lack of supports for people waiting at the public transport stops; lack of playgrounds accessible to children with dysfunctions in mobility |
Visually impaired and blind persons | Inconsistent use of parts of the system of tactile ground surface indicators (TGSI); lack of tactile contrast (differences in the texture of surfaces, e.g., between the even surface of a pavement and the rough surface of a TGSI signal board); uneven surface of communication routes; lack of clear distinction between the conterminous pedestrian and driving courses; too-wide pedestrian passageways which make it impossible to identify the space by means of a white cane and hearing; lack of proper indication of obstacles that cannot be eliminated; barriers not marked with color contrast; too-high light reflectance value (LRV): the level of light reflection from the surface; light sources placed below the pedestrians’ line of sight; no voice information at the public transport stops and pedestrian passageways; lack of information in Braille; lack of tactile plans; lack of sound confirmation in the city devices panels |
Hearing impaired and deaf persons | General lack of clear and readable marking and description of the city space and its elements, e.g., lack of building entrances which are clearly visible against the elevation; no visual signaling at the public transport stops and pedestrian passageways; lack of visual confirmation in the city devices panels (e.g., panels in elevators); passageways and access passages to buildings without proper lighting |
Mentally handicapped individuals with caregivers | Lack of proper systems of spatial information (for example, boards with the names of public transport stops placed perpendicularly to the direction of movement); lack of information using illustrations and symbols for persons who cannot read; lack of clear plans and schemes of the city spatial layout; wrongly applied LRV; inappropriately designed space coloring which fails to expose sufficient contrasts between surfaces; lack of using proper materials ensuring the maintenance of the high level of contrast throughout the whole period of use; lack of use of special lamps providing additional light in places requiring particular attention; lack of clear distinction between the conterminous pedestrian-driving courses and cycling lanes; lack of proper indication of obstacles that cannot be eliminated; stairs with trimmings and nosings not marked with color contrast |
Elderly persons, over 70 years of age | All shortcomings referring to spatial accessibility described above: accessibility barriers indicated subjectively by particular users depending on the spectrum of disability in terms of mobility and perception |
© 2018 by the author. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Borowczyk, J. Sustainable Urban Development: Spatial Analyses as Novel Tools for Planning a Universally Designed City. Sustainability 2018, 10, 1407. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10051407
Borowczyk J. Sustainable Urban Development: Spatial Analyses as Novel Tools for Planning a Universally Designed City. Sustainability. 2018; 10(5):1407. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10051407
Chicago/Turabian StyleBorowczyk, Joanna. 2018. "Sustainable Urban Development: Spatial Analyses as Novel Tools for Planning a Universally Designed City" Sustainability 10, no. 5: 1407. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10051407