Designing for Disabled People in Home Zones

2.0 Literature Review

2.1 Literature Review Aims

The literature review was undertaken by both JMU and TRL. The main objective of the literature review was to identify and evaluate the available research and other relevant literature concerning the issues of Home Zone design, safety and navigation in regard to disabled people.

Therefore the literature review sought to:

1. provide an overview of current literature and research in relation to safety of disabled people in 'traditional' street environments;
2. consider current literature and research in relation to the design of Home Zones for disabled people;
3. identify any conflicts between a) and b) and any gaps in knowledge in order to inform this research or possible future research;
4. identify the existence of any potential design standards and solutions that could be incorporated in to Home Zones to improve the safety of disabled people;
5. to identify any methodologies that could be used to assess levels of safety;
6. consider the development and experience of Home Zones in other European Countries.

The review also considered the development of other provisions in the public realm, such as the concept of 'shared space', and sought to identify any similarities and differences between them and the concept of Home Zones.

The review also considered previous research by TRL into the pilot Home Zone schemes, and also considered the topic area in a wider European context.

The following is a résumé of the findings of the literature review, with the full findings being contained in Appendix A and Appendix B.

2.2 What is a Home Zone?

The concept of the Home Zone originated in the Netherlands, where they are known as 'Woonerven' (residential precincts). They are also known as 'Winkelerf' (Living Shopping Street) (Bristol City Council, 2003).

In such areas, the Home Zone principle is expressed in the design and layout of residential areas where road space is shared between motor vehicles and other road users. Importantly, residential functions, including the needs of pedestrians, children and cyclists, have a higher priority than traffic provision. Motorists are encouraged to drive with greater care and at lower speeds, and in that respect Home Zones can be seen as a way of 'reclaiming' the street environment from domination by the car.

Home Zones were originally suggested for the UK in the 1980s as a low cost measure to reduce casualties to young children in residential areas and allow them to play outside safely (TRL 646, 2005).

More detailed information on the European experience of Home Zones is given in Appendix A.

In terms of design, there is no single 'blueprint' for a Home Zone. Individual schemes may comprise similar elements, but each scheme should be designed to address or reflect the aspirations of the community in that particular area.

However, there are some key design principles that should be considered (IHIE 2002). These are:

• Shared surfaces
• Indirect traffic routes
• Areas for planting
• Features to encourage the use of the street (i.e. seating)
• Gateways and signs to mark the limits of the Home Zone area.

2.3 Definition of a Home Zone

Many definitions of Home Zones were identified in the literature review, but all follow a common thread, which is described in guidelines on Home Zones issued by the Institute of Highway Incorporated Engineers (IHIE) as:

"Home Zones are residential streets in which the road space is shared between drivers of motor vehicles and other road users, with the wider needs of residents (including people who walk and cycle, and children) in mind. The aim is to change the way that streets are used and to improve the quality of life in residential streets by making them for people, not just for traffic. Changes to the layout of the street should emphasise this change of use, so that motorists perceive that they should give informal priority to other road users."

The IHIE (2002) further define the aim of Home Zones as:

"Home Zones are about people; improving the quality of life of residents by removing the traffic barriers that militate against neighbourliness."

One local authority that has Home Zones within its area, Bristol City Council (BCC), defines them as:

"A Home Zone is a street or group of streets designed primarily to meet the interests of pedestrians and cyclists rather than motorists." (BCC, 2003).

In essence, Home Zones aim to improve the quality of life for residents within them. This is achieved through redesigning a residential area in a way that reflects the views of the residents, in relation to the use or the purposes of the street. It is hoped that by introducing a Home Zone, certain positive effects can be achieved.

The Department for Transport (DfT) define the key objectives of the Home Zone concept as a way to:

• turn residential streets into valued public space, and not just a place for movement;
• foster a sense of community;
• encourage a greater diversity of activity and use of the street by residents;
• reduce social isolation, particularly amongst older people;
• increase opportunities for active and creative children's play;
• increase natural surveillance, deterring casual crime;
• reduce traffic speeds significantly - to well below 20mph;
• improve (or at least maintain) the safety of residential areas, and perhaps more importantly, residents' perceptions of safety;
• enable less mobile members of the community - children, older people and disabled people - to reclaim their local environment from the car;
• encourage people to walk and cycle within their local area, and to nearby destinations;
• improve the environmental quality of urban streets; and
• help increase the demand for urban living.

(DfT Home Zones Challenge Website, 2005b)

Dutch guidance on Home Zones advises that treated streets should have fewer than 100 vehicles per hour at peak times, and that continuous treatments in a street should be less than 600 metres in length. Streets being considered for treatment should also typically become the destination for traffic within the area with very low levels of through-traffic (ANWB 1980).

2.4 Home Zone as a Policy

The Government's White Paper on the Future of Transport A New Deal for Transport: Better for Everyone published in July 1998 (paragraphs - 3.115 and 3.116):

• recognised the value of home zones in improving the places where people live and children play;
• states "with good design many of the objectives could be achieved within existing legislation";
• gave a commitment to work with local authorities who wished to pilot the idea.

Pilot schemes in England and Wales were established August 1999.

In Scotland, Home Zone pilot schemes were established in July 2000.

Provisions for Home Zones in England and Wales are made in the Transport Act 2000 [clause 268]. This came into effect on 1 February 2001.

The local traffic authority may designate any road for which they are the traffic authority as a Home Zone.

They can also make orders about the use of the roads and about speed reduction measures in Home Zones, subject to regulations to be made by the Secretary of State (for England) or the National Assembly (for Wales).

The transport (Scotland) Act 2001 makes provisions for Home Zones in Scotland.

Home Zones were trialled by the government as a tool with which to meet its objectives. In April 2001 the Prime Minister announced the creation of the Home Zones Challenge Fund which would provide financial aid to winning Home Zone bids. 61 winners were announced. In England eight pilot Home Zones were announced as areas where their development would be monitored. Also there were four pilot schemes in Scotland, and one in Wales. These are shown in Table 2.1 below.

Table 2.1: Pilot Home Zones

Following the pilot project, the Prime Minister announced in April 2001 a £30 million Challenge Fund to accelerate the growth in the programme of Home Zones in England.

In January 2002, the winners were announced and out of the 237 bids received, 61 were selected as Challenge Sites. Some of these Challenge and Pilot Sites have been included in this study.

2.5 Comparing Home Zones and Shared Space Areas

Shared Space is a relatively new concept in urban transport planning that is being embraced in many parts of Europe including the UK.

The EU funded project 'Shared Space' defines shared space as:

"the integration of traffic, pedestrians and other road users to reduce the dominance of vehicles on the roads and create a more social space." (Shared Space website, 2005b).

The project sets out the requirements for structure and use of public shared spaces as:

• "conductive to recreation, interaction and observation
• a high frequency of interaction is encouraged at certain points (urban squares), while other areas are conducive to more relaxed interaction between residents themselves and between residents and visitors. Still other areas should be designed for people to circulate and encounter only a few other people
• the 'casual' use of public space for utility-based and necessity-based programmes (including traffic) should be possible (dynamism, information), but the programmes should not dominate the public space and its potential uses
• objects and structures that are neither useful nor necessary in an economic sense, but have a social relevance, should be included in the space
• there is space for informal, spontaneous (non-designed) qualities
• there is contact between the space allocated for public use and other domains."

(Shared Space Project, 2005a).

All of these objectives are similar to the aims of a Home Zone, however there are some differences:

• Whilst Home Zones make use of traditional traffic calming installations such as raised humps and chicanes, the concept of shared space relies more upon the fact that:
  

  "behaviour on roads in areas with a public character is influenced more by the expression of the environment than by the usual tools of the traffic profession." (Shared Space Project, 2005b).

• Whilst Shared Space may make use of various installations such as street furniture, bollards or planters to guide users, it is unlikely to use the more obvious traffic calming measures that are incorporated into Home Zones.
• Home Zones rely on a measure of ambiguity and 'perception of risk' to increase the interaction between drivers and pedestrians, Shared Space exploits this further.
• Home Zones often indicate a partial pathway for vehicles while Shared Space often has no separation of traffic flows as:

  "Separating traffic flows blinkers people and causes an increase in speed. Because everyone has their own lane, people take less account of other road users." (Shared Space Project, 2005b).

2.5.1 Shared Surface Research

Shared surface research, recently undertaken by Guide Dogs highlighted the following key issue in relation to Shared Space:

"Shared surfaces often have no clear demarcation between the footway and carriageway. Guide Dogs is concerned that the removal of the kerb edge puts the safety and security of blind and partially-sighted people seriously at risk, and undermines their confidence, independence and mobility." (Guide Dogs 2006).

This research concluded:

"that in many instances blind and partially-sighted people are avoiding town centres with shared surface areas, to the detriment of their independence, freedom and quality of life. Research and monitoring of street schemes must take into account those people who no longer feel able to use the area." (Guide Dogs 2006).

2.6 Core Concepts of Design Standards for Home Zones - a résumé

There is no 'standard fit' model for a Home Zone. Innovation should be used when developing an area, and should be context specific. One local authority that has included Home Zones in its highways provision, Bristol City Council, notes that:

"consideration should be given to gateways, on-street / off-street parking, street furniture, traffic signs, planting, street lighting, refuse collection, play areas, community areas, health and safety, catering for the needs of mobility/visually impaired, pedestrians and cyclists, access for emergency vehicles, 'crime and disorder', publicity and marketing and maintenance." (BCC, 2003).

In 2002, the Institute of Highways Incorporated Engineers (IHIE), published 'Home Zones Design Guidelines'. The aim of these guidelines was to identify and explain the dialogue and terminology that was emerging around the new concept of the Home Zone, to bring together the academic and practical knowledge of Home Zones available at the time, and to promote design standards and good practice.

The design guidance element explains the core principles of Home Zones, although some elements and areas covered in other guidance documents such as, for example, Biddulph, 2001 and DfT, 2005 are not covered in the IHIE guidance.

A full description of the literature review undertaken by TRL is given in Appendix A.

2.7 Design Guidance and Standards Considered in the Review

Several currently available publications were considered in the Literature Review stage and these included:

Home Zones Design Guidelines - IHIE (2002)
Home Zones: A Planning and Design Handbook - Mike Biddulph (2001)
Home Zones: Challenging the future of our streets - DfT (2005)

In 1999, DfT commissioned TRL to evaluate the Home Zone Pilot Programme that had been implemented in nine local authorities across England and Wales. The study was made available to this research project and a more detailed description of the findings is given in Appendix A.

2.8 Mobility of Disabled People

There are many organisations that argue for the basic right for disabled people to be able to enjoy a reasonable level of freedom when using an external environment, and to do so without fear of danger, risk or injury. For many disabled people that is not possible because of the barriers created for them by the design, management and operation of the external environments they use.

2.9 Common Issues across Disabilities

Mobility within the street environment will present different issues for people with different disabilities. Whilst the definition of the term 'disability' is not part of the remit of this project, it is interesting to note that the Disability Rights Commission (DRC) is currently undertaking a consultative review of the 'definition of disability'.

For the purposes of this research project, the term 'disabled people' refers to the current generally recognised inclusion of people with a physical, sensory or mental impairment.

2.10 Mobility of Blind and Partially Sighted People

Organisations such as the Joint Committee on the Mobility of Blind and Partially Sighted People (JCMBPS) have expressed concern over issues relating to the basic rights discussed in section 2.8. The JCMBPS suggests that safe and independent movement is currently not possible and that blind, deafblind and partially sighted people experience a considerable number of barriers to freedom of movement. This seriously limits their opportunities and choices (JCMBPS, 2002) (JCMBPS, 2005).

Previous research (DPTAC, 2002) identified that disabled people considered problems with the environment to be more important or influential in their everyday life - ahead of other issues such as transport.

Other research (Guide Dogs, 1999) has shown that poor provision of the pedestrian environment is a major factor in limiting the mobility and independence of blind and partially sighted people. All research identifies the importance of the appropriateness of design to the usability of the external environment.

People who are blind and partially sighted experience either reduced or total loss of vision, with their ability to gather information and move around an environment dependent on the extent and nature of their sight loss. The coping strategies they adopt will depend upon the extent and effectiveness of their residual vision and may include the use of mobility aids, such as a cane or guide dog, or by them using visual or haptic senses.

However, Guide Dogs have identified that 90% of blind and partially sighted people have never received any mobility or rehabilitation training. This is an unfortunate situation given that the majority of those who have received training report that such training has improved both their quality of life and independence.

Blind and partially sighted people may also use non-visual clues to gather information about their surroundings and assist their mobility. These could include, for example, the sound of traffic, the slope of a surface and changes in texture. However, the most reliable information, and especially in unfamiliar environments, will come from the more permanent clues (Beneficial Design, 1999). These will include a kerb, an adjacent building line, or an appropriately defined edge to a pathway or walkway.

Further information of the strategies adopted by blind and partially sighted people is described in Appendix B.

2.11 Inclusive Design

This research project considered the suitability of an environment against the principles of 'Inclusive Design', namely one that can be used by everyone regardless of disability, ethnicity, age or gender.

Providing information that can be accessed using more than one sense has the potential to increase the number of people who can find it and utilise it. Therefore, there is a greater likelihood that disabled and non-disabled people will be able to make informed decisions about where they travel and how they do it. Using visual contrast alone within an environment is a good example of this as it can be used as a source of information to everyone except those with little or no colour perception - about 18% of the blind and partially sighted population. By also developing tactile clues this will further enhance the environment for blind people with no remaining vision.

Inclusive Design principles have been defined in several publications. However, the definition taken for the purpose of this project is that adopted by DPTAC whose definition of an Inclusive Environment is one which:

• Provides equitable access
• Allocates appropriate space for people
• Ensures ease of use, comprehension and understanding
• Requires, minimal stress, physical strength and effort
• Achieves safe, comfortable and healthy environments.

(DPTAC)

2.12 Design Guidance on Access for Disabled People to the Street Environment

The literature review identified that the availability of guidance relating specifically to the needs of disabled people using the residential street environment is limited. In general terms the key literature identified as offering good practice guidance on access to the general street environment, with particular reference to the residential environment, was:

• Inclusive Mobility, DfT (2003)
• Guidance on the use of Tactile Paving Surfaces, DfT (2002)
• Traffic Advisory Leaflet 4/91: Audible and Tactile Signals at Pelican Crossings, DfT (1991)
• Traffic Advisory Leaflet 5/91: Audible and Tactile Signals at Signal Controlled Junctions (Superseded), DfT (1991)
• Easy Access to Historic Landscapes, English Heritage (2005)
• Easy Access to Historic Buildings, English Heritage (2004)
• BT Countryside for All, Fieldfare Trust (2005)
• Building Sight, RNIB (1995)
• Housing Sight, RNIB (2003)
• Access to the Built Heritage - Technical Advice Note 7, Historic Scotland (1996)
• By All Reasonable Means, The Countryside Agency (2005)
• Overcoming the Barriers, CADW (2002)

The documents that were identified as being of particular interest to this study with regard to understanding the design issues related specifically to Home Zones and of use in addressing the needs of disabled people also included:

• Home Zones Design Guidelines, IHIE (2002)
• Home Zones: Challenging the Future of Our Streets (2005), DfT (2005)

A primary aim of the latter of these two documents is to:

"Disseminate good practice in Home Zone design and scheme development."

Therefore, this document was used in the study as a major source to assess the practical application of the design guidance outlined in the former document and assist in any assessments of the success of the Home Zone concept.

All of the documents identified above were reviewed and key issues, including design principles, relating to the accessibility of Home Zones for disabled people were selected for further consideration in this study. The guidance contained in these documents was also used as a benchmark against which to measure the suitability of features and facilities encountered in the subsequent site tests. For some design issues, non-UK guidance and research was also identified with a view to addressing any gaps encountered in the UK guidance. However, due to the limited scope of this project and the time available, a comprehensive and exhaustive review of non-UK guidance was not undertaken.

Further information on the literature review undertaken by JMU is given in Appendix B.

2.13 Community Involvement and Consultation

In order that a Home Zone scheme meets the needs of the local community, any changes to the street environment should be developed in partnership with people within that community (DfT, 2005). Guidance and consultation should be inclusive, and fully consider the specific needs of disabled people (IHIE, 2002; DfT, 2005; DfT, 2002).

It is highlighted by disability groups that the consultation process should maximize the involvement of disabled people by addressing issues such as the availability of information in alternative formats, the accessibility of any venues for meetings etc, the effectiveness of communication methods throughout the whole process (JCMBPS: response to draft document: IHIE Homes Zones Design Guidelines).

• Personal mobility
• Top of page