‘Planning for an Ageing Population’, RTPI The Planner Magazine, Dec 2014

A slight irony that a young planner writes about an ageing population for the RTPI’s magazine, but young planners are central to creating better places for the future and the diverse needs of older people forms a major part of this.

Here is a copy of the article below to have a gander.

“There is often talk in planning circles about addressing the housing shortage as a numbers issue. Demographic need can run in danger of being secondary to this dialogue, when it is intrinsically linked. We are all living longer, some leading more active and healthy lifestyles into our 80s and beyond, yet the homes we live in are not suitable or diverse enough to meet our needs later in life.

The scale of the problem is highlighted in the 2013 report ‘Top of the Ladder’ by Demos which indicates that just 2% of the UK’s housing stock can meet the needs of older people. The ‘construct’ that a person over 55 is presumed to require the old fashioned form of managed retirement housing is receding, and has to change at a faster pace to meet future needs.

The Government has recently made several policy announcements that may indicate change. In August, the Planning Minister Brandon Lewis said he was keen to see developers build more bungalows (The Telegraph). This could assist older people downsizing from their former home to free them up for families with children. Bungalows were previously thought of as footprint intensive and less profitable than conventional housing. Lifestyle changes and improved layouts mean this disparity has reduced, for instance not everyone over 55 requires a high maintenance garden or an excessive number of bedrooms.

Indications also point in favour of CIL changes, use classes separating retirement housing from conventional dwellings and care homes (Knight Frank 2013), or for Local Plans to require improved lifetime homes standards or proportions of homes for older people. All could be helpful collectively to address the issue.

With more active lifestyles not everyone will necessarily wish to live in potentially car-borne and isolated developments. Increasingly, housing for older people with communal facilities is establishing within or on the edge of our city and town centres. This provides added value to sustainable neighbourhoods and the desired housing   choice. Such development also recognises that more people are living alone and renting in the current generation which may inform long term needs for older people. Firms including UKR are pushing forward in this market with its pilot village concept in the Midlands.

Changes are also afoot among key housebuilders. This month Barratt Developments announced it will alter some of its housetypes for the over 55s, while retirement housing provider McCarthy & Stone will target the downsizer with its new Ortus Homes branded developments.

All cases indicate the situation is improving and there is a market for it, but it may require a mixture of policy and legislative incentives to genuinely plan for an ageing population.”

(CJesson, RTPI The Planner Magazine December 2014 p19).

Designing and building inclusive play spaces

Hello,

I have been doing a bit of research recently into play areas and wanted to share some thoughts on how they can be made more inclusive, both by design and by functionality. Please read and enjoy the blog post and submit any comments if you have some.

–

While it is a legal requirement under the Equality Act (formerly DDA) and the Public Sector Equality Duty to construct play spaces that are accessible to all, there is more that can be achieved out of making a local play space inclusive. This requirement does not mean that play equipment will be less enjoyable to use, but because everyone can be a recipient there is so much more potential from disability compliant apparatus. There should be emphasis in making each item of equipment inclusive, rather than just new contraptions. That action only serves to maintain the divide between those who can and cannot use the play area, and therefore presents the provider back to the source of the problem rather than creating means to avoid it.

The Inclusive Play Good Practice Briefing states that disabled children and young people have the right to play and be included in their communities. The provider has the upmost duty to evaluate opinions made by local children and young people who have self-defined as disabled, as well as their parents or guardians to ensure they have been consulted and can feel proud to be a part of the development process.

Inclusion in play areas does not just consider disabled people; as part of the Equality Act 2010 it extends to all groups that have/are currently experiencing or have experienced disadvantage in the provision and quality of open space and facilities. With this in mind, consulting local community groups is vital so their representation and democracy rights are met. This has numerous benefits for the provider and installer of play facilities as it is indicative of their effort to include all in their work.

Criteria

For any area it is most important to consider the main principles of inclusive design, notably:

Diversity and difference: Catering for differences of personality, disability and culture. Good consultation methods are crucial.

Ease of use: Superior access to and within sites.

Freedom of choice and access to mainstream activities: Surveillance and help when needed and to those most vulnerable.

Quality: Matching or exceeding minimum standards. Being creative yet realistic at the design stage.

(Source: Inclusive Design for Play, KIDS and Department for Education, formerly DCSF)

HOW CAN PLAY SPACES BE IMPROVED TOWARDS INCLUSION?

Suggestions for sensory improvement – Items that compliment inclusive play equipment

To accomplish an inclusive play environment it would be helpful to take into account that the senses are vital for many disabled children and young people to interact with an open space. The guide ‘Inclusive Design: The principles in Practice’ encourages planting as a method of permeability to highlight routes around the space. In addition to this, children and young people may gain a sense of pride and enjoyment at having vegetation that contributes to the vibrancy of the play area. Most people appreciate the natural environment and like to touch, smell and in some conditions taste the surroundings. Planting can go some way towards meeting Inclusive Design principles of diversity and difference, quality and legibility/predictability.

Another item to consider is the request for enclosed areas, although we have to be careful here for reasons of privacy and segregation. This can still be achieved in many parks and play areas through partial enclosure. Items to consider include:

• How much of the site is covered by vegetation, including grass and lawns?
• How can existing vegetation be tailored to be more inclusive?
• Is the site well enclosed or is there scope for improvement in this respect?
• How much surveillance will the site need?
• What is the distance from the play area to other important amenities?
• Are routes to the play space sufficient for wheelchair users and people with mobility conditions?

Fencing is another item. Too much can create major access problems for disabled children and their families. Too little can heighten the risk of roaming animals. How far do we go to enclose play areas? Do we separate them into sections or look at partial enclosure as mentioned? As full enclosure can be considered excessive by the public, as well as limiting internal access routes, it would be more appropriate to look at the latter option. Fencing should still be particularly strong on the periphery to create a distinction between leisure space and other zones (residential, commercial etc).

Suggestion 2: Play apparatus

Thought must be given towards the use of tactile surfaces when considering different options for new inclusive play equipment. Also to factor in could be the following questions:

• What is the topography of the site?
• What surfaces are currently used?
• In what state of repair are the current surfaces?
• What equipment do local children and young people want in a play area?
• Can the desired equipment be adjusted for the purpose of inclusion?

A common misconception is that for play equipment to be inclusive, it must be toned down and would therefore be less successful as a recreational space. This does not have to be the case – considering that many surfaces and colours can be used to enhance the sensory experience of a play area, inclusive play spaces can actually be a more creative and original example of a play area. This suggestion complies with all six principles of Inclusive Design.

What may determine the success of an inclusive play space?

A number of factors are instrumental in achieving a good, well used play area. Most obvious is the proximity of a school which has significant weight on the number of children and young people using the play area for recreation. This is particularly the case if there are pupils disclosing a disability who rely on amenities close by due to a mobility condition or sensory impairment. Other factors include the size of the population around the site, and whether the play space has potential for use from residents outside the immediate boundary.

While it is important to ensure that apparatus and approach to the site is inclusive, careful consideration needs to be made towards potential obstructions in the way of users on their journey to the site. This also ties in with managing risk, itself another major component in the creation of new and refurbished play areas. A thriving leisure space will serve disabled chilren and young people well if the infrastructure is sufficient – dropped pavements, effective lighting and up to date signage in alternative formats are just three examples of how this can be achieved. The Play England guide ‘Managing Risk in Play Provision’ used an example in Wolverhampton of successful signage that encouraged children to read about the site as well as use it. It also provided good information to parents in the event of safety being compromised at the play area. What could be expanded here are the use of Braille and more details of the inclusive equipment. This does not mean that instructions have to be provided for each individual piece of apparatus, instead it clarifies to the user that the play area has been designed with the needs of disabled children and young people in mind.

I hope you have found this blog post insightful and interesting, please subscribe to the blog if you wish!

Thanks for looking,

Chris

New developments for 2011

Dear all,

This is actually my first blog post of 2011, which is pretty shameful. But today is Autism Sunday and marks a good time to write a new blog post. Tthere have been many work developments during the tail end of 2010 that were part of a ‘restructure’. For example, while work in the student movement is still alive it is now more compact than it once was. Some of the earlier work had been inspiring roles with mostly excellent people and projects but I often misjudged the complexity of characters and structures I had to work with. The end of 2010 also represented a time whereby I was operating in a clique situation which is one of the more detestable frameworks to be part of for a person with Asperger Syndrome. I do however miss the work at the NUS Disabled Students’ Campaign which was accompanied to the other NUS roles and had to go with it. The restructure had nothing to do with the student protest movements occuring (unfortunately) at the same time, even though I had made it quite clear on some of the important advantageous (and disadvantageous) effects of that on the students  I was representing.

I firmly believe that representing students is still very important, but now possess a greater understanding of the most efficient avenues where success can be achieved for student welfare. I felt bizarrely drowned out of the wider concept of ‘who has the loudest voice’ for a short while, but now I am back and willing to be involved in more items. Incidentally, I took the choice of being a commuting student in autumn 2010 which was not one of lifes greatest decisions and both of these emotional drawbacks led to the restructure. Hopefully for 2011 I am back once again to develop new opportunities for students. I have started to engage with new extra-curricular society and built environment roles, including as a Parish Councillor from November 2010. Hopefully I can give balance to local issues and concerns and be pragmatic with solutions. I am no NIMBYist which can often (rightly) go attached with local representation. On a personal note I am quite a vociferous objector to the emerging localism agenda but if this is preferred locally to me then I am of course willing to endorse it. Expect a new blog article on the big society and localism principles very soon.

Recent work

Degree and work

Recently I have been busy completing coursework assignments on the National Infrastructure Plan, Local Area Action Planning and a Strategic Planning debate. I have also been completing the Green Space Strategy at work which is a great scheme to be given the opportunity to be involved in, especially for developing competencies of forward planning. It feels terribly odd to be finishing the degree this June, but exciting to be looking forward to the rest of the year. In terms of where I would like to be, transport planning or environmental planning is the most favourable but developments in the disability field since participating in voluntary activities has led me to consider this field in the future. The likes of the National Autistic Society and Equality and Human Rights Commission are always on the agenda.

Aspergers and Me

2011 is an important year as I finish my final year of the Masters in Urban Studies and Planning. It also marks a year where I will restart parts of my book, ‘Aspergers and Me’ to develop it into an exciting collection of major interest areas that form educational life. I am putting more attention into finishing it off this year but have always had no set end date for the book – it is something that has to be developed, not rushed. If you are a publisher that specialises in books on autism and Asperger Syndrome please contact me for more details. It would be excellent to discuss the book in person.

Aim Higher and National Autistic Society lecturing

In November 2010 I lectured on the “student and personal experience” the Postgraduate Certificate in Asperger Syndrome for the National Autistic Society/Sheffield Hallam University. This took place in Glasgow and I have been asked to do a third session in Nottingham in March 2011.

On January 28th, I spoke at the Action on Access Aim Higher National Forum, University of Greenwich. This was on the importance of the outgoing Aim Higher programme to disabled students to an audience mostly confined to disability practitioners in higher education. The session included a rountable discussion at the end and I gave suggestions to the audience as to how the more successful aspects of Aim Higher could be incorporated into a new rationalised framework, and the importance of student unions on the concept of “student experience”.

It is planned that I will be working on multiple projects during Autism Awareness Week. If you would like me to be involved in your organisation’s preparations please send a message via the contact page.

Thanks for looking.

Chris

RTPi Manifesto for Planning – Can somebody tell me what is new?

Hello all,

After printing it off at work yesterday and getting the chance to read through it this afternoon on the train from London, I thought I’d give a review on the Royal Town Planning Institute (RTPi) Manifesto for Planning. This has been produced particularly with the forthcoming General Election in mind (May 6th) to reaffirm the RTPi’s stance and values as to how the current system is working and the direction they would prefer to see it take.

I read with bemusement come page 14 (the final page) that the manifesto was not inherently radical – instead it appeared to be a basic and hastily defined set of values that we already came to expect from the RTPi.

It went on to suggest that the planning system should not have any radical changes because this would cause ill feeling and uncertainty at local planning authorities who are barely getting to grips with the process of Local Development Frameworks (LDFs), incidentally anow 6 years old. But further down the manifesto it was suggested that LDFs were not the way forward and a slow process of implementing local planning. But in order to solve those frailties, I personally think a radical overhaul would again be needed and that would then constitute a contradiction to the RTPi’s values. The rest of the document was very much part and parcel of what we already knew the RTPi stood for, but I suppose the Institute was very strenuous to advocate that those values and objectives still very much exist strongly.

Thanks for looking

Chris