Disability Inclusion. Designing for disability we can all benefit

Masters Dissertation

Disability inclusion designing for disability we can all benefit

School of the Built Environment Oxford Brookes University October 2021

19141604

Persefoni Kolka supervisor_Dr Regina Mapua Lim

Acknowledgements

Throughout the writing of this dissertation I have received a great deal of support and assistance. I would first like to thank my supervisor, Dr Regina Mapua Lim whose help and guidance was invaluable in formulating my research methodology. I would like to extend my thanks to all members of presentation panels for their advice and willingness to help me.

I would also like to thank all my tutors at Oxford Brookes University for their guidance and inspirational teachings throughout this challenging year. You provided me with the tools that I needed to successfully complete my dissertation.

Contents 00 DISSERTATION’S STRUCTURE RESEARCH QUESTION- AIMS & OBJECTIVES - METHODS

04 p. 4-7

01 DISABILITY INCLUSION AND CITIES’ RESILIENCE

p. 8-19

p. 20-31

OXFORD: OSNEY MEAD & OXPENS SITE AN AGEING FRIENDLY PROPOSAL

p. 32-41

p. 62-77

06 CONCLUSION CROSS BENEFITS-NEXT STEPS-LEARNING OUTCOMES

03 ELDERLY PEOPLE IN THE UK AGEING FRIENDLY COMMUNITIES FRAMEWORK

p. 42-61

05

02 DISABILITY INCLUSION A HOLISTIC FRAMEWORK

OXFORD: OSNEY MEAD & OXPENS SITE EVALUATION OF EXISTING PROPOSALS

p. 78-93

BIBLIOGRAPHY

p. 94-95

ABSTRACT

4

The unprecedented scale of urban expansion has forced cities to reconsider their structure and systems in order to survive a much more dense future, where existing issues will continue to exert pressure on them. At this critical time, we must ensure that despite the changes, cities will remain humane and equitable.

To achieve that, disadvantaged groups engagement is a key since their insights can motivate real change. Without a doubt, disabled people have always had a profound disadvantage compared to the people without disabilities. Therefore, their inclusion is the ultimate act towards humane cities.

But, although progress has been made regarding the protection of their rights and well-being, they still experience multiple barriers in the life in their communities. Understanding disability as a human condition that is associated with exclusion feeds this situation, forcing disabled to isolation.

This research study identifies why changing our mindset and working towards disability inclusion is important for current urban centres and tests how disability inclusion principles can benefit society as a whole when applied on real site.

Word count (exclusive of figures and tables): approx.13.000

00

DISSERTATION’S STRUCTURE RESEARCH QUESTION-OBJECTIVES-METHODS

5 This chapter provides basic information about the dissertation’s structure. Aims break down to specific objectives, which in turn define the arrangement of the dissertation in chapters, each of which has a particular role.

This chapter provides the following information:

Research Question & Aim Objectives in relation to chapters Research methods & Report’s structure

Disability inclusion RESEARCH QUESTION How can we make disability inclusion an integral part of design?

6

RESEARCH AIM To d e f i n e t h e r o l e o f disability inclusion in cities’ future regeneration plans and test the cross

benefits

it

might

generate

through implementation

METHODS & REPORT’S STRUCTURE

Chapter 1:

To prove the significance of disability inclusion for the regeneration of urban settlements, research establishes a connection between disability inclusion and urban resilience through the review of recent literature that has a global perspective.

Chapter 2:

Having established this connection, research study defines the key principles of disability inclusion, realised through urban resilience. To achieve that, it reviews the requirements of global agreements regarding both topics. The outcome is a holistic disability inclusion framework.

Chapter 3:

Following, the framework is rearranged to meet the needs of a specific target group. Through literature review, issues, needs and challenges regarding the particular target group are articulated.

Chapter 4:

At the next step, a site in the UK is selected and the rearranged framework is used to evaluate existing proposals, submitted for this site, as well as the results of a recent public consultation, organised for the same proposals.

Chapter 5:

The existing condition on site is then examined by the author through site visits. A SWOT analysis of current condition, through the requirements of the rearranged framework, is the outcome of this process.

The SWOT analysis and the evaluation of existing proposals define the design key targets, which are then achieved through masterplanning. Indicative designs prove the applicability of the framework in both district and block scale.

Chapter 6:

Next, research study defines the context in which the proposal’s cross benefits will be tested. Context is framed through the review of regeneration plans that reveal future visions for the site’s surrounding area.

Following, the cross benefits are presented through a series of illustrated arguments. Finally, research defines the next steps that must be followed to prove the validity of these arguments and highlights the methodology followed to set a paradigm for future developments.

7

CHAPTER

SUMMARY

DISABILITY INCLUSION AND ITS REL ATION TO URBAN RESILIENCE

8 In the first chapter, focus is on understanding how important disability inclusion is for current cities in the context of achieving urban resilience. But, reaching to the conclusion that disability inclusion is a key ingredient of future resilience is not the overall purpose of this chapter. Besides, it can be proved through a variety of international documents that examine the inclusion imperative in relation to sustainability and clearly state the significance of prioritising disabled people. The chapter is rather a collection of definitions and frameworks of key principles that are useful for both disability inclusion and urban resilience.

In this chapter research aims to answer the following questions:

What does disability mean?

Why is disability inclusion important today?

What does urban resilience mean?

What makes a community?

Figure 1

The inclusion imperative Source: (Inclusion London, 2021: 10%)

01

9

WHAT DOES DISABILITY MEAN? world that recognizes the rights of the disabled, ‘‘ Aensures that people with disabilities can be productive

members of their communities and nations and provides an inclusive and accessible environment, is a world that will benefit all of us – with or without disabilities.

Ban Ki-moon,

’’

UN Secretary-General

(World Enabled and CBM, 2016: p.7)

10

THE SOCIAL MODEL OF DISABILITY THE BIG SHIFT It is frequently advocated that caring for disabilities equals to caring for the unmet needs that all humans might have at some point of their lives. To clarify this, it might be useful to refer to the Social Model of Disability (figure 2), a term that emerged during the early part of the ‘Disability People’s Rights Movement’ (1960s) as a new way to thinking about disability, redefining it as a civil rights and equality issue rather than a medical or charitable issue (Inclusion London, 2021).

Disability was initially defined as the sum of all the functions that a disabled person cannot perform and therefore cities’ respond role was limited to offering charitable services or operations and equipment to cure the impairment. On the other hand, the Social Model focuses on how society is run and organised stating that disability refers to the society’s failure to cover its inhabitants’ needs and that exclusion should not be considered as an inevitable result of impairments (Inclusion London, 2021).

DISABLED SOCIETIES CROSS BENEFITS OF DISABILITY INCLUSION What is important is that while introducing a completely different way of understanding disability, the Social Model functions as a ‘guide’ too, highlighting both the barriers and the way they can be removed by other sorts of supportive actions. Through all these years it has been under constant refinement and extension, but it has always been the most just and empathetic approach of disability, thus the only one that can bring real social change for disabled people (Inclusion London, 2021).

Since disability is no longer considered a personal health condition (Holmes, 2020), but it rather characterises the societies that do not give equal attention and accommodation to all their users’ needs (Wikipedia, 2021b), it is essential to question who wants to live in such societies. It is important to understand that a ‘disabled’ society will sooner or later affect everybody’s life (rights, opportunities, well-being etc.) either they are disabled or not, young or old, men or women etc. Although this consideration should be enough to motivate change, there are still societies that remain apathetic towards the inclusion imperative, as well as people who cultivate an indifferent attitude regarding others’ needs. This phenomenon, in my opinion, could only be attributed to ignorance and lack of education about the meaning and outcomes of social inclusion.

Therefore, it is urgent to reveal the cross-benefits disability inclusion could bring to a society and communicate the idea that designing against exclusions we can all benefit.

This is evident if we go back to the beginning of the ‘Disability Rights Movement’, when disability advocates joined the ‘Civil Rights Movement’ and the ‘Women’s Rights Movements’ (Second-wave feminism that began in the early 1960s and lasted roughly two decades) in order to collectively promote equality and eliminate stereotypes (Wikipedia, 2021). The fact that in 1960s people with different needs came together to fight for a common purpose provides evidence that inclusion is plural and each step towards it, even if achieved by few, affects the whole society.

Figure 2

The Medical Model of Disability (left) and the Social Model of Disability (right) Source: (Inclusion London, 2021:50%), edited by author

11

W H Y I S D I S A B I L I T Y I N C LU S I O N I M P O R TA N T T O D AY ?

12

DISABILITY FACTS THE PROFOUND SOCIAL DISADVANTAGE OF DISABLED PEOPLE

CURRENT CONTEXT THE UNPRECEDENTED SCALE OF URBAN EXPANSION Urban centres around the world are currently experiencing a gradual population increase, which escalates the urban housing crisis and generates concern about whether the solution is more density in the cities’ core or more sprawl in their peripheries (Weissmueller, 2020; World Enabled and CBM, 2016). Although cities occupy only 3% of the Earth, today, half of the world’s population (3.5 billion people) lives in urban settlements and this number is expected to rise to 5 billion by 2030. Despite their size, cities account for 60-80% of energy consumption and 75% of carbon emissions, figures that will drastically increase due to rapid urbanization (United Nations, 2021). At the same time the population influx is exerting pressure on cities’ metabolism challenging the public health, cities are also called to act towards climate change mitigation. In 2015, more than 190 countries (Paris Climate Change Agreement, Paris) unanimously decided to work towards a common target, the shift in the way urban environment is both shaped and inhabited, to protect the world and save mankind (Figueres, 2016).

Adding to the complexity of the situation planners find themselves in today, the Covid-19 outbreak challenged the urban pace of life, questioning how effective existing settings are under emergency conditions. Physical distancing restrictions brought out the inequalities within the cities’ public space allocation and most significantly, highlighted the interrelation between mobility, health and open spaces. Despite the damage and fatalities, the Pandemic is considered at some extent an opportunity to change the fundamentals of the system that generated injustice and unhealthy lifestyles and design more sustainable urban futures (Mazumder, 2020).

On balance, under the pressure of both long-lasting stresses and acute shocks (figure 5), cities collectively target future resilience and conduct action plans that will help them adapt to changes and gain long-term prosperity (figure 6). The unprecedented scale of urban expansion in combination with the existing challenges made clear that future resilience is not just an option, but a necessity since population in urban settlements will have to experience living in much more dense environments.

According to the World Health Organization (WHO), disabled people account for more than 1 billion, (15% of the world’s population) a number that is dramatically increasing partly due to ageing populations and the increased chronic health conditions. Considering the unprecedented scale of urban expansion, the number of the urban dwellers that experience some sort of disability will be drastically increased too, which means that we must rethink what cities are and who they are for (World Enabled and CBM, 2016).

These groups already deal with multiple inequalities that downgrade the quality of their everyday life and deprive them from their right to the city (meaning equal access to the physical environment, equal opportunities, the right to travel etc). As stated in the WHO’s report on disability (2011), 25.1% of disabled people, in high-income countries, aged between 1849 and 30.3% of disabled people aged 60 and over reported that they do not receive the care they need due to lack of transport (World Health Organization and The World Bank, 2011) (figure 3). When it comes to the UK, research shows that there are several fields

where disabled people are not treated equally to the rest of the society (figure 4). The question is how we can talk about resilient future and smart cities at the same time some urban dwellers face such significant barriers in their everyday life.

So, sustainable urban future should not be just about climate solutions and crisis adaptation mechanisms, since so much depends on how we shape our societies: not just environmental impacts, but our well-being, our sense of belonging, our community values and feeling of connectedness (Calthorpe, 2017).

It is usually advocated that resilient future will be achieved through human-centred communities and bottom-up approaches. Should this be the case, priority must be given to the vulnerable groups, minorities and marginalised people to address their profound social disadvantage.

13

Figure 3

The World Report on Disability 2011 data Source: (World Health Organization and the World Bank, 2011), edited by author

Figure 4

Evidence of the profound disadvantage of disabled people in the UK Source: GOV.UK

WHAT DOES URBAN RESILIENCE MEAN?

capacity of individuals, ‘‘ The communities, institutions,

14

businesses, and systems within a city to survive, adapt, and grow no matter what kinds of chronic stresses and acute shocks they experience.

100 Resilient Cities network (Resilient Cities Network, 2021)

DEFINING URBAN RESILIENCE 100 RESILIENT CITIES APPROACH

’’

100 Resilient Cities Network (100RC) is dedicated to helping cities around the world become more resilient to the emerging physical, social and economic challenges as the 21st century unfolds. In the 100RC report ‘City Resilience Framework’ (Updated December 2015), urban resilience is described as the capacity of cities to function so that their inhabitants, especially the poor and disadvantaged, survive and thrive disregarding of the challenges cities encounter (Resilient Cities Network, 2021).

The term firstly emerged during 1970s referring to the capacity of systems to retain or restore functionality in case of disruption or disturbance. When it comes to cities, the term is extremely useful since it implies a moving forward the traditional disaster risk management which was so far related to specific hazards. Resilience accepts the possibility that disruptive events are not necessarily predictable. So, it requires systems’ strengthening in the face of multiple hazards, rather than preventing or reducing losses caused by specific events (Resilient Cities Network, 2021).

In the same report, 100RC define the qualities of resilient systems (figure 6) stating that future resilience can be achieved if cities cultivate the sense of shared ownership in their development visions, promote community engagement and consider equally vulnerable groups (Inclusive), reject the permanent solutions and start modifying standards based on emerging evidence (Reflective). Moreover, resilient cities should incorporate well-conceived, constructed and managed physical assets that can survive disruptive events without loss of function (Robust). What is particularly important is the spare capacity that is intentionally created into systems so that they can withstand extreme pressures (Redundant), as well as the ability of systems to evolve in response to changing circumstances, which can be achieved by adopting new knowledge and technologies were needed (Flexible). Finally, resilient cities should provide a variety of ways for people and institutions to meet their needs under stress (Resourceful) and promote communication, mutual support and consistency between the various scales’ systems (Integrated) (Resilient Cities Network, 2021).

As already mentioned, cities started conducting their resilience plans (figure ) in sight of the post-pandemic era where urban settlements are expected to be much more dense and thus remaining problems will become more challenging. What is important to keep for the scope of this dissertation is, firstly, that the well-being of vulnerable people is a precondition of resilience and secondly, that resilience implies cities’ capacity to overcome disruptions either they are expected or not. In my opinion, these two fundamentals can be better articulated through the following approach.

15

Figure 5

Diagram illustrating the main pressures and socks that make cities target future resilience Source: made by author

Figure 6

Future Resilience framework according to 100RC approach Source: (Resilient Cities Network, 2021: p.5)

WHAT MAKES A COMMUNITY?

don’t know their neighbours or ‘‘ Iffeelpeople comfortable enough to work with their neighbours, that could be a big issue... if a shock occurs and people don’t know how to work together, problems will arise and resilience will be lower Penny Gurstein

’’

professor and director of the School of Community and Regional Planning and the Centre for Human Settlements at the University of British Columbia

(Dudley, 2017)

16

a good physical resilience infra‘‘ Without structure, it is impossible to be a resilient city. But without a good social resilience system, the same applies.

A GROWING RESILIENCE MOVEMENT NEW FOCUS ON CIVIC UNITY Although initially more emphasis was put on cities’ physical challenges, more cities today are focusing on their inhabitants to meet their goals. One would say that this new focus results from the nature of issues cities are called to address. To clarify this, the most prevalent issues of a city are the ones that will define the basis of its future resilience. For instance, Glasgow’s key challenge is tackling inequalities and therefore it’s priority towards resilience is to promote a fairer society. On the other hand, there are cities that face a major threat from earthquakes or flooding and instead of focusing on their citizens, they prioritise the upgrade of their physical infrastructure to become resilient (Dudley, 2017).

Of course defining prevalent issues is a good start for achieving urban resilience, but the new focus on citizens does not only apply to the cities that aim to ‘fix’ their social fabric. According to this new approach, civic unity is at the heart of urban resilience given that in any situation that requires an emergency response, the first responder would normally be one’s neighbour. Cities’ most important asset is people and

therefore targeting social resilience means that cities cater for the harmonious coexistence of their residents so that in case of a crisis they feel comfortable to come together and work towards their communities‘ values (Dudley, 2017). At this point, a metaphor would be useful for understanding the significance of the social aspect of urban resilience. Runzo Inada, Toyama’s chief resilience officer, compares cities with athletes. Sometimes, between two athletes with the same measurables one might perform better. This is when people usually talk about ‘heart’, an immeasurable quality that makes this athlete to stand out. As Inada said, civic unity and community bonding within cities are what the ‘heart’ is for athletes. These are the immeasurable qualities that can make resilient cities function better (Dudley, 2017).

To sum up, there is a growing movement that places civic unity at the heart of urban resilience implying that social resilience is equally important to physical resilience. Civic unity is of paramount importance for tackling all sorts of threats since it implies the effective collaboration of citizens under stress.

Arnoud Molenaar

’’

chief resilience officer (CRO) for Rotterdam

(Dudley, 2017)

17

COMMUNITY & CIVIC UNITY COMMUNITY FRAMEWORK It is therefore necessary to examine how cities can cultivate civic unity among their inhabitants and to do so community design is a good starting point since community is the very first environment where people are called to perform team work (form bonds and collectively create values).

Urban Design Group Journal, particularly the volume 158 ‘Design for an Ageing Population’, is the main source reviewed for defining what community design is and how it can be achieved. The fact that all the articles studied approach the issue from an ageing-friendly point of view is not considered negative.

To clarify this, ageing is not something that suddenly starts at the age of 65. Instead, it starts at conception and continues until death. So, given that all ages exist concurrently, urban design has to take all of them into account (Tyler, 2021).

The core idea behind the community design framework (figure 7) is that society is the ‘coming-together of a wide range of people to create a coherent and cohesive whole’ (Tyler, 2021:p.31) and therefore com-

munities should provide adaptable housing that not only supports functionality but also enhances the well-being of residents. They ought to be human-centric, responding to the needs of an as much diverse variety of people as possible. This diversity should be reflected in housing types and public realm which in turn should remain functional as inhabitants get older. Finally, the key ingredient of community design is the intergenerational formations, in other words places where people of all age groups can live side by side, not just in close proximity (Lee, 2021).

What is worth mentioning is that exploring the main qualities of community design, one can clearly see that they can all be concluded into two key attributes.

The first is the communities’ capacity to support a lifetime of transitions, which means to cover their inhabitants’ needs at every stage of their life, and the second one is their flexibility to cover a diversity of needs which equals to being open to a diversity of users.

Figure 7

Community design framework Source: (Lee, 2021: p.25) Edited by author

CONCLUSION

DISABLED PEOPLE REAL CHANGE 18

Urbanization, climate change impacts and the recent health crisis are only a few of the issues urban centres are called to address today. Threats might affect multiple city levels, such as social fabric and built environment, and they differ from place to place. However, similarities do exist and cities around the world have found a way to share knowledge and expertise in problem solving. Urban resilience is targeted globally as the solution to long lasting stresses and any acute shocks the future might bring. This is because resilience implies cities’ capacity to deal with unpredicted disruptions too.

There is a new approach of urban resilience that seeks to restore the balance between social and physical resilience and places civic unity at the heart of urban resilience. Cities should invest more on their citizens in order to meet their target, because if people do not know how to work together, resilience will be lower.

Civic unity is examined in the context of community, the smallest scale formation where people are called to work in teams and think collectively. As found, in order to cultivate civic unity, communities should have the capacity to support their inhabitants needs at all stages of their lives as well as be open to a diversity of users (figure 8).

These conclusions are essential for answering why disability inclusion is important today. Communities will have to reconsider their fundamentals to achieve civic unity, since not all of the current urban centres support diversity. In this process of change, disabled people’s (disadvantaged groups in general) insight is the only one that can bring real change and make a difference since these people have already experienced profound social disadvantages.

Figure 8

Diagram illustrating the connections between the topics analised in this chapter Source: Made by author

19

CHAPTER

SUMMARY

DISABILITY INCLUSION A HOLISTIC FRAMEWORK

20 The 2nd chapter examines the connection between disability inclusion and urban resilience through 4 key documents (figure 9) that affect the way cities function globally. The chapter serves as a necessary step between the theoretical background, built in chapter 1, and the disability inclusion implementation on a real site (chapter 5) since the final outcome is a disability inclusion framework.

Given that disability covers a wide range of impairments, not all individuals that live with some sort of disability have the same needs nor experience cities the same way. The framework at the end of this chapter identifies the common needs between disabled people, disregarding their disability type, and defines the principles that cities must deliver to safeguard their well-being and protect their rights.

In this chapter the key resources examined are:

The Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities United Nations / Adopted in 2006/ Entered into force in 2008

The Sustainable Development Goals/2030 Agenda United Nations / Set up in 2015/ To be achieved by the year 2030

The Disability and Development Report. Realizing the Sustainable Development Goals by, for and with persons with disabilities United Nations / Department of Economic and Social Affairs, 2018

The Inclusion Imperative: Towards Disability-inclusive and Accessible Urban Development. Key Recommendations for an Inclusive Urban Agenda DIAUD (Disability Inclusive and Accessible Urban Development Network), 2016

02

21

Figure 9

Cover pages of key documents reviewed in this chapter In the background, goal 10 (Reduce Inequalities) of Sustainable development goals Source: https://sdgs.un.org/goals

1. CONVENTION ON THE RIGHTS OF PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES

with disabilities include those ‘‘ Persons who have long-term physical,

mental, intellectual or sensory impairments which in interaction with various barriers may hinder their full and effective participation in society on an equal basis with others.

’’ Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities

(United Nations, 2016: p.4) 22

MAIN CONTRIBUTIONS KEY POINTS The Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CPRD) is an international human rights agreement set up by the United Nations in 2006. It is the outcome of decades of activity that aims to promote and protect the rights and dignity of all persons with disabilities as well as guarantee their full enjoyment without discrimination. The Convention came into force in 2008 and as of July 2020, it had more than 180 parties (Wikipedia, 2021c). It is considered a major catalyst in the global Disability Rights Movement enabling a shift from viewing disability as personal health condition that requires medical treatment towards viewing it as << an evolving concept that results from the interaction between persons with impairments and attitudinal and environmental barriers that hinders their full and effective participation in society on an equal basis with others>> (United Nations, 2006: p1).

The Convention adopts a civil law layout, with a 25-subsection preamble followed by 50 articles. The first 3 articles articulate the purpose, provide key definitions and set the general principles (figure 10) while articles 5 to 32 articulate the rights of persons with Disabilities as well as the obligations of states parties towards them. Articles 33 to 50 (figure 11) relate to procedural issues, inter alias, national implementation and monitoring, entry into force and amendments of the Convention. Before the list of rights, the document explicitly states that all human rights are indivisible, universal, interdependent and interrelated and provides the key points for disability inclusion: •

Disability is an evolving concept: It is the result of mismatched human interactions

•

Discrimination based on disability violates the inherent dignity and worth of the human person

•

There is a need for recognizing further the diversity of persons with disabilities

•

It is important to embody disability issues to Sustainable development strategies

•

Ensuring full participation for persons with disabilities will enhance their sense of belonging and bring significant advances in the human, social and economic development of society and the elimination of poverty

•

There is an urgent need to establish a gender perspective since women and girls with disabilities are usually at greater risk

•

Accessibility is a catalyst for enabling persons with disabilities to fully enjoy all human rights and fundamental freedoms. The principle covers the accessibility to the built, social, economic and cultural environment, to health care as well as to education, information and communication.

(United Nations, 2006: p.1-3)

23

Figure 10

General Principles of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Source: (United Nations, 2006: p.5)

Figure 11

The rights of persons with disabilities and the obligations of states parties towards them Source: (United Nations, 2006: p.7-24)

2. SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT GOALS 2030 AGENDA

SUSTAINABLE GOAL 11 24 MAIN TARGETS AND KEY PRINCIPLES In 2015, the United Nations General Assembly set up the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), a collection of 17 interrelated targets, for achieving a better and more sustainable future that leaves no one behind, by the year 2030 (Wikipedia, 2021a). The Sustainable Development Goal No. 11 states that cities and human settlements should be inclusive, safe, resilient and sustainable.

The actions suggested for achieving this goal (figure 12 ) point out the significance of equal access to housing and basic services as well as to public transport and public realm with emphasis on the safety factor.

Cities are called to respect their history and therefore protect their heritage sites, but also cater for their future and therefore protect the environment as well as contribute to global goals through local actions.

Through this process, participation is highlighted as a key factor while it is clearly stated that success can only be achieved through well integrated plans, which means strengthening the national and regional development planning.

KEY TERMS INCLUSION & UNIVERSAL DESIGN What is worth mentioning is that in the detailed description of all targets, there is a particular emphasis on the expression ‘for all’ and vulnerable groups (including persons with disabilities) are prioritised, stating that disadvantaged people’s needs and values should be carefully considered for every step taken (United Nations, 2021a).

On balance, sustainable goals are certainly a well-articulated call for action, providing both general guidelines and specific directions. Inclusion is not targeted as an independent principle, disengaged from the rest of the sustainable future objectives, but it is rather presented as an integral part of sustainability, and it is incorporated to all the 17 Goals as a precondition (for more: explore goals online at https://www.un.org/ sustainabledevelopment/sustainable-development-goals/). Moreover, persons with disabilities are described as key to delivering inclusion, since they have experienced exclusion, discrimination and loneliness, and thus their insights can bring real change (World Enabled and CBM, 2016).

Inclusion and universal design are necessary for achieving sustainable cities and communities (Goal 11), but they are also incorporated in all the 17 Sustainable goals. It is therefore essential to examine their meanings.

To begin with, inclusion is not a term that can be easily defined , it is rather given multiple meanings depending on the context and the respondent (Holmes, 2020). To my understanding, it is best conceived when associated with city’s ability to negotiate changes and adapt to them. Given that urban changes are driven by inhabitants’ lifestyles and vice versa, inclusion can indeed have multiple spatial expressions. So, it easier to consider it as a never-ending process, through which every suggestion requires special consideration both at the early stages as well as at its longterm maintenance. As Kat Holmes states in her book ‘Mismatch. How Inclusion Shapes Design’, a good way for achieving inclusion, given that it has no standard criteria, is to recognize exclusions. Exclusion has an emotional and functional impact on users’ life that cannot be overlooked or doubted, and thus it is more easily identified (Holmes, 2020).

On the other hand, universal design is a precondition for achieving inclusion. What is essential for delivering universal design, is the careful consideration of the varied abilities of every person. This process ensures that the outcome (product, service or environment) will be used by people of all ages, sizes, abilities etc.

This human-centred approach allows people with all levels of abilities to strengthen their independence.

The term can be better realised through the following principles (figure 13), set up by the Global Network on Disability Inclusive and Accessible Urban Development in 2016, which states that the design of environments should: • • • • • • •

Be equitable in use Be flexible in use Be simple & Intuitive Incorporate perceptible information Be tolerant in case of an error Demand low physical effort Be right sized

(World Enabled and CBM, 2016: p.16)

25

Figure 12

Sustainable goal 11 specific targets Source: https://sdgs.un.org/goals/goal11. Edited by author

Figure 13

Universal design principles Source: (World Enabled and CBM, 2006: p.16). Edited by author

3. DISABILITY AND DEVELOPMENT REPORT

&

4. THE INCLUSION IMPERATIVE development for all ‘‘ Sustainable can only be attained if persons with

disabilities are equally included as both agents and beneficiaries as countries strive for a sustainable future.

United Nations

’’

(United Nations, 2021: p.2)

with a disability is virtually ‘‘ Living a universal experience. Persons with

26

DISABILITY AND SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT SUSTAINABLE GOALS THROUGH AND FOR DISABILITY INCLUSION Although the Sustainable development goals recognized the protection of the rights and well-being of persons with disabilities as cross-cutting issues, there are still barriers to their inclusion and full participation in the life of their communities. In 2018, in order to address these issues, the United Nations General Assembly requested an analysis of the national policies, programmes, best practices and available statistics regarding persons with disabilities that reflects the progress made towards the Sustainable Development Goals and the provisions of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. The ‘Disability and Development’ report is the first-ever UN flagship report that examines the sustainable development goals (set in 2015) in relation to persons with disabilities’ values and needs.

When it comes to the Sustainable Goal 11: Making cit-

ies and human settlements inclusive and sustainable for persons with disabilities, the report outlines the significance of: •

target 1: securing access for all to adequate, safe and affordable housing and basic services

•

target 2: providing safe, affordable, accessible and sustainable transport systems for al

•

target 3: inclusive urbanization

•

target 7: universal access to safe, inclusive and accessible, green and public spaces

(United Nations, 2021b)

Earlier in 2016, the Disability Inclusive and Accessible Urban Development Network (DIAUD) conducted a key recommendations report , titled ‘The Inclusion Imperative: Towards Disability Inclusive and Accessible Urban Development- Key Recommendations for an Inclusive Urban Agenda’, with the same purpose: to ensure that the New Urban Agenda is in line with the perspectives of persons with disabilities.

Through their work it was clearly stated that 2030 Agenda can promote the implementation of previous global agreements on the local level only if proper regulations will be established. The most important contribution of this report is the realization that exclusion has a dual identity, which means it can either be physical barriers that hinder access to urban settings as well as obstacles to full participation of persons with disabilities to the decision-making process (World Enabled and CBM, 2016).

disabilities are young, old, women, men, straight, gay, transgender, indigenous, and of every race and ethnicity.

DIAUD (World Enabled and CBM, 2016: p.6)

’’

CONCLUSION

27

TOWARDS A DISABILITY INCLUSION FRAMEWORK CORE ELEMENTS The first two resources examined, the Convention on the rights of Persons with Disabilities and the Sustainable Development Goals, define the rights of disabled people and the key strategies for achieving urban resilience accordingly. On the other hand, the last two documents of the list are selected for their critical approach to Disability inclusion through Urban Sustainability. The relationship between Disability Inclusion and Urban Sustainability that was explored in the 1st chapter of the dissertation is clearly articulated in these documents through specific actions.

The most important outcome of the analysis of all four sources, is the realisation of Disability Inclusion through the multiple expressions (spatial or not) of Accessibility. Accessibility, both in terms of access to the physical environment and participation to processes of city planning, is at the heart of disability inclusion as well as a fundamental element of all 17 Sustainable Development Goals. Historically, it has been a key target in various instruments such as The World

Program of Action (1982), the Standard Rules on the Equalization of Opportunity for Persons with Disabilities (1994) as well as the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (United Nations, 2019: United Nations, 2021b).

To sum up, the realisation that accessibility - which can be seen as the access to both the physical environment and equal opportunities (participation) - is the core element of Disability Inclusion (figure 14), defined the form of the dissertation’s main framework, presented in the next pages.

Figure 14

Accessibility, with its dual meaning, is the core element of disability inclusion framework Source: Made by author

THE DISABILITY INCLUSION FRAMEWORK

28

TRANSITION & CONTENT OVERARCHING QUALITIES As a result of the underlying concept, already explained (figure 14), the disability inclusion framework is consisted of two tables, one for participation and one for access.

All the key terms explored in previous pages are filtered into these different layers of city design (figure 15), expressed through new over-arching principles in order to avoid overlaps and misconceptions.

Regarding participation (figure 16), the framework is shaped as an answer to the following questions:

When it comes to access (figure 17), the broad categories being covered are:

•

(Who?) Is there diversity in the population engaged to planning process (A)?

•

•

(How?) Are the mediums used attractive (B) and effective (C)?

(Mobility) How easy (E1-2), safe (E3) and pleasant (E4) is to move places within a city? Is the use of public transport necessary (F1)? Are they easily accessible (F2-3)?

•

(How long?) Is public opinion considered throughout all the stages of design (D)?

•

(Land use) Are useful amenities in close proximity to residents (G1)? Do the land use patterns support a lifetime of transitions (G2-3-4)? Do public spaces promote place identity (H4) and contribute to the well-being of all residents equally (H12-3)?

•

(Design standards) Is universal design applied to all scales of city planning (I1-2)? Are vulnerable groups’ needs considered in future plans that aim to address current challenges (I3)?

29

STRUCTURE REFLECTING THE SIGNIFICANCE OF DISABILITY INCLUSION Literature review showed that disability inclusion has a key role in urban resilience and that ‘disabled’ societies can change only if vulnerable people have their voice in planning. Through this process of change societies become a better place for everybody.

The 4-column layout is selected to best reflect this process of thinking. So, it uses the specific needs of disabled people that must be addressed as starting points. In the 2nd and 3rd columns it provides the principles and design actions accordingly, that are required to cover this need. Finally, should the framework be applied, the 4th column highlights the cross benefits the procedure would bring, as found in literature review.

Figure 15

Diagram showing the sub-frameworks that are incorporated into the final disability inclusion framework. All the key terms shown were examined in the previous pages.

Source: Made by author

PA R T I C I PAT I O N

FRAMEWORK

30

Figure 16

Participation framework Source: Made by author

ACCESS

FRAMEWORK

31

Figure 17

Access framework Source: Made by author

CHAPTER

SUMMARY

E L D E R LY P E O P L E I N T H E U K A G E I N G F R I E N D LY C O M M U N I T I E S F R A M E W O R K

32 The framework created in the previous chapter, serves as a good guide for disability inclusion in general. But, before we move to the implementation of the framework to a real site there is a need to specify the type of disability and therefore the target group we are designing for. Consequently, in this chapter and for the rest of the dissertation, the research focuses on a specific target group, elderly people in the UK, and the initial framework of disability inclusion is rearranged to highlight seniors’ needs only.

In this chapter research aims to answer the following questions:

Why focus on elderly population?

How can we enhance elderly people’s inclusion in urban centres? - Ageing friendly communities framework How does the ‘Ageing friendly Communities’ framework relate to the disability inclusion framework?

03

33

Figure 18

Focus on elderly population Source: (Arup, 2019: p.28)

AGE SEGREGATION WHY WE SHOULD BRING ELDERLY TO CITIES

WHY FOCUS ON E L D E R LY P O P U L A T I O N ?

IF WE DO: Elderly people can contribute to their communities’ prosperity: • Usually they change their minds and start some form of work after their retirement • Their on going sense of purpose and their need to sustain social connections drive them to volunteering, offering other sorts of assistance through local social networks or provide informal care to family members.

(Crappsley, 2021)

34

AGEING & DISABILITY THE PERCEPTION OF AGEING

AGE DIVERSITY & FUTURE RESILIENCE AGE SEGREGATION IN UK

Ageing is closely related to disability since impairments are more likely to emerge as people get older (figure 19). During 2019-2020, disability prevalence data by age group in the UK showed that state pension age adults with some sort of disability accounted for 46% of the total population, which was more than double the percentage of working-age adults with disabilities (figure 20). Mobility was the most frequently reported disability type for elderly people (figure 21)(Department of Work & Pensions, 2021).

We are all getting older and this is a global phenomenon. Global data (figure 22) show that the incline in life expectancy in combination with the decrease of birth rates have altered the age structure of the world population (Department of Economic and Social Affairs, 2019). When it comes to UK, the population has been constantly getting older through the 2nd half of the 20th century while the biggest increase is expected to be seen in the age group of 85 years old and over. Although in the mid-2016 people in this group accounted for 2% of the total population, by mid-2041 the percentage is expected to double. On the other hand, the number of people aged 16 to 64 years is expected to increase by only 2% over same time period (Office for National Statistics, 2018).

At the same time, life expectancy increases globally, and so does the amount of time spent in poor health (Office for National Statistics, 2018). As already mentioned, ageing does not start at a fixed age for all and it is rather a continuum than an event (Crappsley, 2021a). Therefore, caring for elderly population means that we cater for our own extended longevity.

However, this dissertation’s focus on elderly population is not only due to this relation between ageing and disability in the context of increased life expectancy. Despite the fact that ageing is usually related to cognitive and physical decline and therefore considered a burden on society, the experience of older age is richer than this depiction (Crappsley, 2021).

Within the UK, elderly people (65 years and over) are not equally spread across local areas, with 65 plus population density being higher in rural and coastal areas than urban areas (figure 23) (Matos, 2020). Looking ahead, the number of elderly people is expected to rise by around 50% in both urban and rural areas between 2016 and 2039. On contrary, the number of younger people (aged under 65 years) is only projected to rise by 8% in urban areas, while in rural areas no increase is expected. As a result, the ratio of older to younger people will be increased, especially in rural areas (Office for National Statistics, 2018).

This phenomenon, known as ‘Age segregation’ is the reason why 65 plus population density accounts for less than 15% in the largest urban centres of UK today (figure 23). For instance, in Oxford the percentage of elderly people accounts for less than 10% in the city centre while at the outskirts of the city it is almost doubled (figure 24) (Office for National Statistics, 2021; Matos, 2020).

In the 1st chapter, we highlighted the significance of civic unity for urban resilience and found that it can thrive within communities that have the capacity to support the coming-together of a wide range of people. However, UK data show that generations are growing apart and this trend is expected to grow in the coming decades. This geographic gap between generations means that communities in urban territories cannot support diversity which is devastating for the cohesion of their social fabric and therefore their future resilience.

Older people can contribute to local economy since it is more likely that they will spend locally, which can cause actual change especially the time period that younger people are working. Moreover, this trend can contribute to the revitalisation of local centres after the pandemic.

IF WE DO NOT: Generations will never understand and get to learn from each others experiences, attitudes and stresses.

This results in lack of empathy between generations and perpetuates stereotypes (Intergenerational foundation, 2021).

Informal carers (parents and adult children) will find it hard to provide care to each other when they live further apart (Intergenerational foundation, 2021).

Accessing services will demand longer journeys, and since public transport is less available in rural areas and most people stop driving as they age, elderly will feel isolated. Especially those that cannot afford taxis and do not receive help from family members or neighbours (Office for National Statistics, 2018).

Political life will be less cooperative as it will be harder for younger and older generations to understand each other’s points of view (Intergenerational foundation, 2021).

Figure 19

Disabled and Not disabled percentage by age group and gender Source: (Department of Work & Pensions, 2021: p.6)

Figure 20

Disability prevalence by age group Source: (Department of Work & Pensions, 2021: p.23)

Figure 21

Impairment types by age group Source: (Department of Work & Pensions, 2021: p.26)

35

Figure 22

Line charts (top) and population pyramids (bottom) illustrating that although the world population has gradually increased, the balance between the age groups has been reversed due to the increase in life expectancy.

Source: https://population.un.org/wpp/Graphs/DemographicProfiles/900

36

Figure 23

(Left) Map consisted of two layers: the 1st illustrating the 65 plus population density across UK and the 2nd illustrating the location of largest urban centres in the UK in 2020 (Right) Bar chart illustrating the population in the largest urban centres in the UK in 2020 Source: Right:(Matos, 2020, 50%) , Left: Clark, D. (2021) Largest cities in the UK in 2020. Available at: https://www.statista.com (Accessed: 1 August 2021)

37

Figure 24

Oxford’s 65 plus population density Source: Top left: Digimap Society roam, Bottom left: Office for National Statistics (2021) Population estimates for the UK, England and Wales, Scotland and Nothern Ireland: mid-2020.

Interactive population pyramid, mid-2001 to mid-2020. Available at: https://www.ons.gov.uk (Accessed: 15 July 2021) , Right: (Matos, 2021: 10%)

H O W C A N W E E N H A N C E E L D E R LY P E O P L E ’ S I N C L U S I O N I N C I T I E S ?

In 2019, the All Party Parliamentary Group conducted a report, titled ‘Healing the Generation Divide’, to explore how planning can bridge the UK’s age divide. The report outlines four policy areas that adopting intergenerational connections, can drive real change and heal the divides.

38

COMMUNITY INITIATIVES INTERGENERATIONAL CONNECTIONS

PUBLIC SERVICES INTERGENERATIONAL CONNECTIONS

HOUSING INTERGENERATIONAL CONNECTIONS

Encouraging community-led projects that aim to bring people of different ages together through clubs, activities and events is of paramount importance. Although the main focus of such initiatives may vary between music, arts, exercise, story-telling, conversation and politics, they all offer opportunities for people of different generations to connect around common interests at a local level. There are examples of nursing and residential homes that organise weekly music events, engaging local toddlers, schoolchildren and residents. At the same time, there are various projects where young people share homes in exchange of both financial and social benefits.

Equally important is the community’s investment on initiatives that might not be explicitly about the coming-together of different generations. If existing public services incorporate intergenerational activities, more people will be gradually attracted to learn how these services can benefit their age group.

Even if intergenerational initiatives take place and public services promote connections between age groups, the mixing of ages will not take place unless cities are deliberately planned as places for all ages.

Intergenerational housing is a key factor for eliminating age segregation. Not only does it contribute to the mental and physical health of elderly through independence and autonomy, but it also enhances communication skills of younger people. Moreover, economic impacts are important since intergenerational housing implies a more efficient use of housing stock. It is important that cities offer a variety of housing options so that they can support multiple needs.

When it comes to improving the existing housing stock, there are three ways that intergenerational living can be promoted:

Research on what makes these projects successful highlighted the following optimal conditions:

Regarding care and education sectors, there are pioneering examples in the US of schools where younger and older learners are mixed within a common learning system, schools that run intergenerational activities on a weekly basis, and nurseries based at care homes. Apart from promoting physical and mental well-being of both younger and older, such initiatives can address the increased needs for health and social care (driven by ageing population) through cost-effective models.

•

Encouragement of close contact, co-operation and self-disclosure (mutual share of personal information).

•

Involvement of shared goals and aims so that all participants contribute to a desirable outcome through equal status relationships.

When it comes to public transport, it is crucial that people of all ages can rely on public transport to reach the intergenerational facilities of their cities and all sorts of facilities that are important for them. Public transport facilities themselves can also promote intergenerational connections.

(All Party Parliamentary Group on Social Integration, 2019)

(All Party Parliamentary Group on Social Integration, 2019)

1. Young people living in residential homes for older people paying low or no rent in return for providing fixed hours of volunteering per month. From cooking to a simple conversation, volunteering can be any action that eases the everyday routine of residents.

2. Home sharing schemes where younger people live in an older person’s house paying reduced rent. In this concept, homesharer is responsible for the well-being of homeowner, which might include taking medication, eating well etc. In this case, homeowners usually have lower-level needs and do not qualify for social care support. It is worth mentioning that this type provides an affordable alternative to social housing.

3. Retrofitting for co-housing concept implies that existing neighbourhoods or parts of them can be transformed into intergenerational communities. There are examples of groups of people that moved into existing housing and created gardening clubs, common lunch events, decided on community spaces maintenance etc.

When it comes to design new living spaces, there are several innovative ideas generated by the Manchester School of Architecture research team: •

retirement communities that function as a hubs for people of all ages

•

Interconnected gardens to promote intergenerational mixing

•

Shared spaces jointly-owned by two or more properties, allowing owners to decide on the use of space

•

Opening windows within properties that face a communal courtyard, fostering a community-oriented feel between neighbours

•

Enabling plot extensions or additional new homes to be built in large back yards

(All Party Parliamentary Group on Social Integration, 2019)

AGEING FRIENDLY COMMUNITIES THE FRAMEWORK For the next steps of the dissertation, there is a need to rearrange the initial disability inclusion framework to reflect the specific needs of elderly population as well as incorporate the suggested actions against age segregation, explored in this chapter.

Arup’s ageing-friendly communities framework is selected as the most suitable solution since their work forms the necessary connections (figure 26) with the initial framework of this dissertation as well as explores the various needs of elderly considering the age divide issue. It is informed by World Health Organization’s work on age-friendly planning, presented in the ‘Global Age-Friendly Cities: A Guide’ report.

39

WHO’s framework explores inclusion through three broad areas: social and civic participation, which is very similar to the participation framework of this dissertation (figure 16) service provision, which refers to the campaigns and special assistance programs created for disabled people built environment, which refers to the physical structures of a place, in the same direction with this dissertation’s access framework (figure 17) On the other hand, Arup’s approach (figure 25) examines only the built environment component, and whether it can also contribute to the social and civic participation and service provision (Arup, 2019).

Figure 25

Arup’ framework for ageing friendly communities Source: (Arup, 2019: p.41)

H O W D O E S T H E ‘A G E I N G F R I E N D LY C O M M U N I T I E S ’ F R A M E W O R K REL ATE TO THE DISABILITY INCLUSION FRAMEWORK?

40

41

Figure 26

Diagram illustrating how the new framework derives from the initial disability inclusion framework, presented in chapter 2 Source: Made by author based on literature review, analytically presented in chapter 2, and Arup’s work on ageing friendly communities

CHAPTER

SUMMARY

OXFORD: OSNEY MEAD & OXPENS SITES EVALUATION OF EXISTING PROPOSALS

42 Oxpens site and the Osney mead industrial estate have received special attention lately due to their location (figure 27). The area, widely known as Oxford West End is in close proximity to the city centre, the railway/bus station, the University and the Westgate Shopping Centre. Its natural assets, Oxpens meadow, green belt and the river Thames with Bulstake and Castle Mill streams, remain unexploited necessitating the creation of a vision that unlocks the potentials of both under-utilised sites and brings benefits to the life and economy of the whole city.

Before applying the ageing friendly communities framework on site through a new vision, it would be useful to review the existing proposals for the area, in order to gain a better understanding of key issues, the aspirations for both sites and above all ‘gaps’ regarding disability inclusion, and more specifically the elderly inclusion.

The ageing friendly communities framework is used as the lens to examine the different proposals as well as the consultation report in order to better inform the design proposal, presented in the next chapter.

In this chapter the proposals being reviewed are the following:

Oxpens. Oxford West End Supplementary Planning Document (SPD) Oxford City Council / 2013

Osney Mead Masterplan University of Oxford / 2016

Oxpens and Osney Mead Development urbed/Oxford Central West-Design Charrette/ 2016

West End Osney Mead SPD Scoping Consultation Statement & Summary Report Oxford City Council / 2021

04

43

Figure 27

Map illustrating the location of sites and important assets Source: Made by author

OXPENS DEVELOPMENT OXFORD CITY COUNCIL/2013

44

INTRO THE VISION Oxpens development is envisioned to deliver high quality architecture, attract investment and raise aspirations for the Oxford West End. Integration with the surroundings is a key element and precondition for the future prosperity of both the site and the city as a whole.

Table 1 summarises the outcomes of the Oxpens site SPD evaluation according to the ageing friendly communities framework requirements. The sections highlighted in red are the ones with the most deficiencies.

The development is envisioned as a mixture of housing, educational activities that connect with existing ones, business in the form of offices and research/development, and an attractive combination of supplementary uses that will upgrade the Oxpens Road. The development is expected to promote sustainability as well as protect and enhance its natural assets (figure 28-29).

(Oxford City Council, 2013)

Figure 28-29

Indicative visualisations Source: (Oxford City Council, 2013: p.51 &15)

1ST PRINCIPLE AUTONOMY AND INDEPENDENCE

2ND PRINCIPLE SOCIAL CONNECTEDNESS

3RD PRINCIPLE HEALTH AND WELL-BEING

4TH PRINCIPLE SECURITY AND RESILIENCE

• Walkable environments: Improving accessibility is one of the key principles of the SPD and it is articulated through 3 steps (figure 35): 1.maximise access through a grid of streets 2.improve access to and through Oxpens Meadow with establishing leisure routes (walking&cycling) 3.enhance links to and through the wider West End and to the city centre : improved crossings across Oxpens Rd to improve access between Oxpens and local features a new foot/cycle bridge crossing Thames to improve connection between Oxpens Meadow and the green belt

• Fight loneliness and isolation The only element of the SPD that could be seen as a measure against loneliness and isolation is the well integrated movement network it aims to establish. Future residents will be able to walk to and from the city and surrounding locations, socialise at the Oxpens Meadow and riverfront paths (figure 35).

• Ensure access to health services There is no provision for the creation of new health services.

However, the suggested well integrated mobility network and the provision for public transport access through the site would enhance accessibility of the existing health services in the city.

• Prepare for extreme climates There is no specific reference to extreme climates, but there is a great emphasis on sustainability, which is one of the key qualities explained in the SPD, and it can partly meet the requirements of extreme climates management (figure 34). Sustainability is realized through the following aspects:

• Ensure access to transportation Street network within the site is designed as an integral part of the wider city network, providing a variety of movement routes.

In case public transport access through site is required, the SPD indicates where the highway should be located to facilitate this (figure 35).

• Provide wayfinding and city information The SPD requires the application of a <<consistent palette of high quality street surfacing materials, furniture, trees and landscape features>> to achieve continuity in appearance. This would aid orientation as well as enhance place identity. Forming character areas is a key element of this strategy. In these areas streets have similar functions and scale. This way connections between the development and existing areas of high quality historic and modern townscape can be facilitated (eg. Oxpens Road with Park End Street and Frideswide Square). There is no provision for city information systems.

• Enable ageing in place There is a provision for affordable retirement housing (figure 32) within the core of the masterplan site, set back from Oxpens square. Oxpens Meadow is considered an appropriate setting for such development as well as the proximity to public transport and useful amenities. Apart from that, there is no other action to promote ageing in place.

• Create intergenerational spaces No provision for intergenerational spaces that are open to the public, apart from the Oxpens Meadow cafe already mentioned.

• Provide space for exercise and recreation The retention of the Ice Rink is considered beneficial for the health of elderly despite the fact that it is associated to younger groups. In other words, it is considered a preventative measure since exercise reduces the possibility of emerging mobility issues as people age. Regarding recreation, the vision suggests the transformation of Oxpens Meadow to a hyper-local attraction, where the potentials of riverfront and tree-planted areas are unlocked. The links to the rest of the city through safe crossings that connect historical neighbourhoods, retail areas (eg Westgate) and landmarks (eg. churches) are also considered of paramount importance when it comes to exercise and recreation since they ease navigation through the city and encourage active travelling (figure 35).

• Provide options for seniors to stay in their communities It is mentioned that 20% of the affordable housing should be shared ownership while 80% should be social rented (affordable housing accounts for 50% of the residential development).

There is no particular reference to whether the types of shared ownership models could be intergenerational or support ageing in place in any other way (figures 32 &33). What is worth mentioning is that retirement housing and extra student accommodations are both mentioned as possible uses, and although they are designed to be in close proximity to each other, there is no provision to blend these residential types in a model that benefits both.

• Make connections to nature Improving Oxpens Meadow paths would serve as a great opportunity for connecting to nature. Apart from that, street trees are also considered a key feature for the public realm design. Used to frame views, soften the urban environment and enhance the experience of open spaces, trees have an important role in the masterplan. (eg. trees used to frame the space within the Oxpens Rd corridor, to create a ‘green feel’ in front of the large scale buildings of student accommodation etc). Finally, SPD requires that all homes have access to an area of private amenity space (eg. gardens for houses and balconies or communal gardens for apartments), which is of paramount importance, especially in case of a future crisis (figures 31 &35).

• Promote inclusion and civic participation There is provision for a small cafe or restaurant, in a location that is close to the river but also visible from the Oxpens Rd. Community events could be hosted in this small footprint building that blends to its landscaped surroundings. This element could be turned to a hyper-local attraction that promotes diversity. The suggested square at Oxpens Rd is also an important asset since the right uses around it would generate activity throughout the whole day, promoting diversity (figures 30 &31).

Physical sustainability:

development’s sustainable location suggested improved connections sustainable building design on-site renewable energy sustainable urban drainage green/brown roofs ecological assets cycling network

45

Social sustainability:

providing city centre housing appropriate land uses wider benefits for city centre

Economic sustainability:

employment opportunities supporting vitality of the West End and City

• Design safe streets and public spaces Suggested street sections support multi-modal transportation, maintaining a hierarchy between the different modes. For more information regarding their safety there is a need for detailed design which would not be covered in this document given that the purpose of the SPD is to provide a general development framework plan and indicative designs (figure 35).

• Promote dementia safety No provision for dementia safety spaces

Table 01

Evaluation of the Oxpens regeneration plan according to the ageing friendly communities framework. Source: Made by author

OXPENS DEVELOPMENT

46

Figure 30

Site opportunities plan Source: (Oxford City Council, 2013: p.46)

Figure 31

Development framework plan Source: (Oxford City Council, 2013: p.77)

Figure 32

Distribution of land uses Source: (Oxford City Council, 2013: p.83)

Figure 33

Illustrative masterplan Source: (Oxford City Council, 2013: p.85)

Figure 34

Indicative Oxpens cross section highlighting sustainability features Source: (Oxford City Council, 2013: p.116)

OXFORD CITY COUNCIL

47

Figure 35

Suggested actions for improving accessibility in Oxford West End Source: (Oxford City Council, 2013: p.94 &63 &95-96)

OSNEY MEAD DEVELOPMENT UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD/2016

48

INTRO THE VISION The mid-20th century Industrial Estate, initially created to relocate industries from elsewhere in the city, is currently an under-utilised site which hosts a mixture of uses including University storage and research buildings, offices (such as the Environment Agency and Newsquest), conference facilities, trade counters and a range of large storage and industrial buildings.

Although it is identified as a key protected employment site in the Oxford City Council’s Core Strategy, it provides employment for relatively few people.

In 2016, the University, one of the principal landowners, in collaboration with other stakeholders, submitted a vision for the site to help unlock its potential in support of Oxford City Council’s local plan review.

The vision includes increased opportunities for em-

ployment, housing, supporting uses as well as active travelling connections to the city centre and neighbouring areas. Similar to the Oxpens site, Osney Mead regeneration is expected to unlock the potentials of the areas natural assets, with a particular attention to the risk of flooding.

(Oxford City Council, 2016) Table 2 summarises the outcomes of the Osney Mead plan evaluation according to the ageing friendly communities framework requirements. The sections highlighted in red are the ones with the most deficiencies.

Figure 36

Indicative masterplan, identified issues and suggested actions to address them Source: (University of Oxford, 2016: p.4 &2) Edited by author

1ST PRINCIPLE AUTONOMY AND INDEPENDENCE

2ND PRINCIPLE SOCIAL CONNECTEDNESS

3RD PRINCIPLE HEALTH AND WELL-BEING

4TH PRINCIPLE SECURITY AND RESILIENCE

• Walkable environments: The masterplan is aimed to co-ordinate with Oxford City Council’s masterplan for Oxpens, in which there is a provision for a new pedestrian crossing over the river that provides links between Oxpens, Osney Mead, Oxpens Rd and the city centre. To begin with, Botley Rd, Osney lane’s pedestrian bridge and the towpath next to the river (orange lines on figure 38) are the existing links between the two sites. There are 3 possible locations for the new pedestrian link, and a variety of bridge forms that are explored (figure 38 a-f ). Eventually, it is estimated that a new bridge over the river would be very expensive and a negative asset regarding the place identity, so the masterplan suggests the improvement of the existing towpath (no3 figure 38) as the most viable solution.

The development is divided into 5 neighbourhoods (figure 36), each of which extends from the heart of the development (where one can find the riverwalk) to the green belt. Walkability is encouraged through two diagonal pedestrian avenues that facilitate this connection.

• Fight loneliness and isolation Attracting students and researchers is prioritised over any other target group. Loneliness and isolation are not examined at all.

• Ensure access to health services There is no particular reference to health services. However, given that this proposal rejects the idea of a new pedestrian bridge over the river, measuring the distance to the nearest health services is necessary to ensure that there is no need for health services on site.

• Prepare for extreme climates There is no specific reference to extreme climates, but there is a great emphasis on sustainability, which is one of the key qualities explained in the document, and it can partly meet the requirements of extreme climates management. Sustainability is realized through the following aspects:

• Ensure access to transportation Apart from the railway station, the nearest bus services are on Botley Rd, in front of the railway station, and then further away on Castle st. It is believed that strengthening the link between Osney and Oxpens will shorten the distance to those bus stops to just 1km.

• Promote inclusion and civic participation The only element of the proposal that could promote inclusion is the design of the development’s ‘heart’. This core space serves as a meeting point with supporting uses that cover everyday needs. But, given that the overall purpose of the development is to promote research and innovation and all 5 neighbourhoods are designed to support uses that are similar to each other, the ‘heart’ would never be the meeting point of a diverse group of people. It would be useful to incorporate intergenerational activities to the core since its location is easily accessible from surrounding areas and has important assets (figure 39).

• Create intergenerational spaces There is no provision for intergenerational spaces. Of course, meadows and riverfront areas are turned to attractive public spaces but surrounding uses are not attractive for all age groups.

• Provide options for seniors to stay in their communities Focus is mainly around young researchers and students

• Provide space for exercise and recreation Both the river bank across Osney Mead and the Meadowside along the south edge of the site offer opportunities for promenades with multiple functions: active travelling links floodable landscapes protecting from river rises recreation grounds • Make connections to nature The proposal takes advantage of all natural assets of the area, turning them into attractive public realms, easily accessible by pedestrians. Establishing connections with nature is a key concept and this is reflected to the way the movement network is created. On the other hand, when it comes to the plot scale, it is not clear whether residents have access to private gardens etc.

the regeneration of Osney Mead will increase the density of developments close to the city centre, and this will lead to more employment and homes, which in other case would be located on greenfield sites at the final stage of design, the Osney Mead landscape will incorporate systems that capture, filter and reuse rainwater, and reduce the amount of impervious surfaces the masterplan will reduce energy consumption through building orientation minimizing air leakage optimizing external envelopes co-locating heat-generating and heat-consuming functions and renewable energy technologies the masterplan will promote active travelling using traffic-free walking and cycling routes the masterplan will reducing commuting trips by locating key workers and graduates housing near employment

• Provide wayfinding and city information The design concept results to a legible street pattern where visitors can easily find their way to the development’s core. Within this street system (figure 36&37), pedestrian avenues have a key role as they indicate the way to the centre, and the retention of Osney central spine allows locals to keep their memory of space before the regeneration.

On the other hand, public realm visualisations (figrure 40) as well as the examples of built spaces used in the report provide a different feeling. Although within the height limits, the built mass that shapes public realm lacks the human scale. In my opinion, this issue should be prioritised on a next level of processing.

• Design safe streets and public spaces It is clear that specific areas will prioritise pedestrians over cars, which is beneficial in terms of high environmental quality, the feeling of space and safety. However, there is a need for smaller scale design to secure safety on streets and public spaces.

• Enable ageing in place No provision for ageing in place

• Promote dementia safety No provision for dementia safety spaces

the masterplan will significantly increase the extent of planting on site

Table 02

Evaluation of the Osney Mead regeneration plan according to the ageing friendly communities framework. Source: Made by author

49

OSNEY MEAD DEVELOPMENT

50

Figure 37

Design concept and indicative massing. Before and after Source: (University of Oxford, 2016: p.5 &7 &10). Edited by author

Figure 38

Existing connections and 6 options for a new pedestrian bridge over the railway(green-advantages, red-disadvantages) Source: (University of Oxford, 2016: p.9)

UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD

51

Figure 39

(Top)Osney Abbey and Osney lock in the foreground (Middle)Osney lock weir (Bottom) Map illustrating the location of existing assets. Source: Top:(University of Oxford, 2016: p.6), Middle: Google maps, Bottom: Made by author

Figure 40

Visualisations of suggested public spaces Source: (University of Oxford, 2016: p.9-11 &16)

OXPENS AND OSNEY MEAD DEVELOPMENT Design Charrette/ 2016

52

INTRO THE VISION In 2016, after the announcement of the plans for Oxpens and Osney Mead, the urbed (Urbaism. Environment. Design) brought together the Academy of Urbanism and the Oxford Civic Society to examine the Oxford Central West area with the overall purpose to coordinate the various developments.

After a 2-days workshop, the design charrette came up with a plan, that should not be seen as a way to challenge the existing proposals, but as a coordinated approach through which different suggestions are joined to create the vision of a coherent urban quarter.

(Urbed, 2016)

Following there is a critical evaluation of the workshop outcomes according to the ageing friendly communities framework requirements. The sections highlighted in red are the ones with the most deficiencies.

Figure 41

Layers of information, filtered to masterplan Source: (Oxford Civic Society and the Academy of Urbanism, 2016: 50%ww)

1ST PRINCIPLE AUTONOMY AND INDEPENDENCE

2ND PRINCIPLE SOCIAL CONNECTEDNESS

3RD PRINCIPLE HEALTH AND WELL-BEING

4TH PRINCIPLE SECURITY AND RESILIENCE

• Walkable environments: The charrette suggests the creation of a new road that crosses Oxpens site and links Osney Mead through a bridge over the railway with a new junction next to the Ice Rink (figure 42&43).The new road will reduce congestion at Botley Rd, which is the only link between east and west. It would even allow Botley’s transformation to a bus/ cycle/ pedestrian only route. A new pedestrian and cycling network is suggested that connects existing leisure routes and public spaces with the development. Five new light bridges are required to make this idea come true (figure 41).

•

Fight loneliness and isolation

•

Promote inclusion and civic participation

•

Create intergenerational spaces

• Ensure access to health services There is no particular reference to health services. However, given that this proposal suggests a vehicular link that connects Osney Mead to a new junction next to Ice Rink, travelling distances to existing health services would be significantly reduced.

• Prepare for extreme climates The proposal does not comment on resilience strategies since both previous masterplans suggested holistic sustainability agendas. It only suggests that the green spaces the pedestrian network connects would ease the design of a green infrastructure strategy for flood mitigation.

•

Provide options for seniors to stay in their communities

• Ensure access to transportation The new vehicular movement introduced to both sites will allow the addition of a bus line through the site if needed. Moreover such connection reduces the distance to existing public transport services.

• Provide wayfinding and city information The pedestrian cycle network will unify the area, forming a grid of interesting routes that reflect city’s history and identity. Although there is no specific reference to wayfinding and information systems, the concept sets a very good base for promoting legibility within historical city centres.

• Enable ageing in place No provision for ageing in place

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I The proposal is mainly focused on the mobility network, exploring how they can best facilitate vehicular and pedestrian links with the city centre, and the relationship between built and unbuilt environment, exploring the qualities of the public realm it results to. Therefore, nothing is changed to the already suggested land use distribution and character of neighbourhoods.

• Provide space for exercise and recreation The suggested pedestrian and cycle network preserves historic green spaces and opens up the waterfront to public access, facilitating exercise and recreation for people all over the city.

• Make connections to nature Connections to nature are encouraged in district scale, through the street network design and the suggested active travelling links(figure 41). However, it is necessary to explore human-nature relationship in block and plot scale too.

53 • Design safe streets and public spaces Given that the charrette’s main target is to coordinate existing proposals, they do not delve into great detail regarding street and public realm design.

• Promote dementia safety No provision for dementia safety spaces

It is important to highlight that this proposal suggests an extended pedestrian and cycle network that ties together a bigger part of the city and highlights landmarks, green spaces, neglected monuments and new public spaces (figure 42). Although such an idea requires the construction of several new bridges, it can bring actual change to Oxford West End and promote the coming together of locals and visitors around focal points that are strongly associated with Oxford’s history. By organizing activities that connect different generations and incorporating land uses that serve all age groups, the network would be a great asset for fighting loneliness and promoting inclusion.

However, social connectedness should be realized through all levels of city design. Urban realm is shaped by the built environment, which accommodate specific uses and defines the relationship between its users. Therefore, connecting generations should also be examined in how people live next to each other.

Table 03

Evaluation of the Oxpens &Osney Mead coordinated plan according to the ageing friendly communities framework. Source: Made by author

OXPENS & OSNEY MEAD DEVELOPMENT

54

Figure 42

Coordinated plan Source: (Urbed, 2016: 100%)

U R B E D / O X F O R D C E N T R A L W E S T. D E S I G N C H A R R E T T E

55

Figure 43

Masterplan visualisation Source: (Urbed, 2016: 50%)

O X P E N S A N D O S N E Y M E A D C O N S U LT A T I O N OXFORD CITY COUNCIL/2021

56

PUBLIC OPINION KEY ISSUES Evaluating the Consultation results for both Osney Mead and Oxpens regeneration proposals, provided research with an extremely useful insight into how people experience the existing deficiencies and what qualities they would like future developments to bring at Oxford West End. Participants were asked to evaluate suggested visions for both sites but also express their opinion about what exists on site prior to regeneration. When it comes to elderly population inclusion, the consultation results are a great source of inspiration since according to the demographics (table 04), most answers come from people aged 65 and over (Oxford City Council, 2021).

The answers to all questions are grouped and presented in the form of bullet points in the next pages (table 05&06). Following, the issues/deficiencies that the respondents highlighted are categorized according to the requirements of the ageing friendly communities framework (figure 44 &45).

Figure 44

Autonomy &Independence and Health &Well-being Consultation results evaluation through ageing friendly communities framework.

Source: Made by author

57

Figure 45

Social Connectedness and Security &Resilience.

Consultation results evaluation through ageing friendly communities framework.

Source: Made by author

O X P E N S & O S N E Y M E A D C O N S U LT A T I O N

58

Table 04

Consultation Demographics Source: (Oxford City Council, 2021: p.2-3) Edited by author

OXFORD CITY COUNCIL

59

Table 05

Questionnaire Summaries (Questions 1 to 4b) Source: (Oxford City Council, 2021: p.4-10) Edited by author

O X P E N S & O S N E Y M E A D C O N S U LT A T I O N

60

OXFORD CITY COUNCIL

61

Table 06

Questionnaire Summaries (Questions 5 to 10) Source: (Oxford City Council, 2021: p.10-19) Edited by author

CHAPTER

SUMMARY

OXFORD: OSNEY MEAD & OXPENS SITE A N A G E I N G F R I E N D LY P R O P O S A L

62 At this step, the ageing friendly communities framework is implemented on the selected sites in Oxford. The work included in this chapter can be seen as both a new vision for the study area as well as the next step of the existing proposals after considering public consultation’s results.

The work produced in the previous chapter (the critical evaluation of the proposals and consultation results) and a new SWOT analysis of the study area -all of them through the lens of the ageing friendly communities framework- are the main sources that feed the final design. The implementation of the framework is explored in two levels: • •

district level (figure 46) block level

In this chapter, the design process follows the steps bellow:

Main design targets Masterplan: framework application Public realm: framework application

aiming to show that should this challenge be accepted, age divide can be eliminated only if the ageing friendly communities framework is applied in all scales of design. The work presented in this chapter is not a complete proposal, it is rather an example of how the framework can be used in practice to make future developments ageing friendly.

Figure 46

Suggested masterplan. Source: Made by author

05

63

MAIN TARGETS A S R E S U LT E D F R O M T H E E V A L U A T I O N O F T H E E X I S T I N G P R O P O S A L S , T H E C O N S U LT A T I O N R E S U LT S A N D T H E S W O T A N A LY S I S O F S I T E S

SWOT ANALYSIS MAIN OUTCOMES Evaluating existing proposals was useful and inspirational as many of the design actions examined are adopted to the final proposal. The last step of analysis that contributed to defining the design targets(figure 48), is in-situ analysis, whose findings are concluded in the SWOT maps, presented in the next pages (figures 49-52). The new observations that derived from site analysis are the following:

64

•

•

•

Figure 47

Oxpens Rd and Oxpens Meadow views. Source: Google maps & author’s own

Bridge A new pedestrian/cycle bridge over the railway, as the one featured in existing proposals (figures 35, 38 &43), will have negative effects in the character of Meadow (figure 47) since such a large construction would be unrelated to the scale of the built environment at Oxpens.

Existing student accommodations Student accommodations building (figure 51)could be extended to include housing for older residents following the example of Humanitas, a Dutch care home model that provides housing to students in exchange for spending time with elderly sharing the same living environment. Not only does Humanitas facilitate intergenerational living indoors, but it also features communal gardens that act as shared resources for the wider community (Arup, 2019).

Osney Lock Hydro Osney Lock Hydro harnesses the power of river to generate renewable energy (figure 51). It was set

up by a group of locals to enable the development of the first community-owned hydro scheme to be built on the Thames. It became fully operational in 2015, generating clean electricity for the equivalent of 50 households, and a long term income stream for local environmental projects (Spencer, 2021).

Similar community-led projects could be adopted to the regenerated Osney and Oxpens sites, so that neighbourhoods capture renewable energy in various ways and cooperate to supply public spaces.

•

Existing Schools As consultation results highlighted, people need the future plans to make space for community activities. They identified the loss of community spirit as a key disadvantage of the area compared to its surrounding neighbourhoods. Apart from community facilities, such as gyms and multifunctional buildings, community spirit can be encouraged through intergenerational activities. Schools, could open to the community in the afternoons to host activities that have an educational character and bring generations together (figure 51).

•

Parking facilities Although existing plans highlighted that live-work model will be promoted and the use of car will be discouraged, I believe that the area will still be in need of parking facilities in order to remove parking on street that functions as barrier to the navigation through the city, and undermines legibility (figure 52).

1ST PRINCIPLE AUTONOMY & INDEPENDENCE

2ND PRINCIPLE HEALTH & WELL-BEING

3RD PRINCIPLE SOCIAL CONNECTEDNESS

4TH PRINCIPLE SECURITY & RESILIENCE

•

•

•

•

Create walkable environments improve existing pedestrian and cycle connections through meadows (in situ analysis showed that a large construction over the river would change the character of the area (figure 47). Besides, measured distances showed that there is no need for a shorter connection between the two sites)

•

Ensure access to transportation

•

Provide wayfinding and city information

create travel chains to and from key locations of the city (eg. railway station, Bonn square etc) provide city information in access points as well as across paths •

Enable ageing in place make mobility networks suitable for all people, disregarding ability(avoid change of levels, provide access to disabled people, use materials that ease movement, use sensory design to enhance wayfinding etc) establish community based systems that provide aid to people that experience difficulties in mobility provide services in close proximity to user so that travelling distances are as short as possible

design ‘all seasons’ public open spaces

provide local health services in neighbourhood centres

create space for community events

reduce car dependency

provide types of housing where residents share communal spaces

introduce food growing into communities

Provide space for exercise and recreation

create connections between natural assets to form recreation paths •

Prepare for extreme climates

put community centres on key locations that are easily accessible and attract locals from different neighbourhoods

•

Make connections to nature

incorporate dense vegetation, vertical gardens and green roofs

Promote inclusion and civic participation

accommodate all users needs in public realm and mobility networks •

reduce waste water management •

Create intergenerational places

use educational facilities throughout the day to host events that educate about age divide

•

Design safe streets and public spaces separate cycle paths from pedestrian movement protect cyclists from cars movement on streets

introduce activities that bring together young and old in community facilities and outdoor spaces

unlock the potentials of riverfront areas and meadows

create a hyper-local recreational park that improve connections through Oxpens Meadow and the green belt

reduce energy consumption

suggest uses that cover a wide range of needs

use housing types that provide access to private yards/gardens/balconies/communal gardens etc in order to establish connections with nature on plot scale

create green corridors that can support biodiversity

ensure protection from flood risk

provide different types of housing

design outdoor spaces for exercise, through which connections to nature can be facilitated

reduce parking on street and allow views of focal points that help orientation

Fight loneliness and isolation

ensure emergency vehicles access allow the possibility of a new bus line through Osney Mead (Oxpens site is served from Oxpens Rd)

improve Ice Rink setting create new indoor spaces for exercise (community gyms, fitness classes open to public, sports centres open to public)

create the right conditions for the addition of a bus line through Osney Mead in future •

Ensure access to health services

provide good sewerage systems to secure safety at active travelling paths •

Promote dementia safety

introduce intergenerational activities in the existing schools

enhance legibility

Provide options for seniors to stay in their communities

improve signage

combine existing student accommodations with elderly units

use sensory design

provide city information at key points of movement network provide sheltered spaces within public realm create a community system for helping elderly in case of emergencies

Figure 48

Table illustrating the decisions made regarding each of the ageing friendly communities framework qualities. Decisions were made after considering the evaluation of existing regeneration visions for both sites, the consultation results and author’s SWOT analysis. Source: Made by author.

65

66

Figure 49

SWOT analysis of the sites through the ageing friendly communities framework. Strengths. Source: Made by author

Figure 50

SWOT analysis of the sites through the ageing friendly communities framework. Weaknesses. Source: Made by author

67

Figure 51

SWOT analysis of the sites through the ageing friendly communities framework. Opportunities. Source: Made by author

Figure 52

SWOT analysis of the sites through the ageing friendly communities framework. Threats. Source: Made by author

MASTERPLAN FRAMEWORK APPLICATION

FROM DECISIONS TO ACTIONS ‘UNFINISHED JOBS’ Decision making was informed by the thorough site analysis, presented in previous pages, which included both personal work and evaluation of existing proposals. However, the drawings presented in the next pages are indicative only and given the level of their detail, they do not cover all targets highlighted in the design targets table (figure 48).

68

Following, the design concept is described through the lens of the ageing friendly communities framework, referring only to the achieved targets. Of course, the targets that are not reflected in the proposal are equally significant for achieving elderly inclusion, but this dissertation’s aim is to present a methodology that ends up in testing disability inclusion’s cross benefits, and not a complete proposal for the Oxford sites selected. Therefore, at this point it is useful to consider the targets that are not achieved as ‘unfinished jobs’ for the better understanding of the methodology suggested.

Figure 53a

Hand drawing of suggested masterplan illustrating the underlying concept of design. Source: Made by author

AUTONOMY & INDEPENDENCE KEY ACTIONS

SOCIAL CONNECTEDNESS KEY ACTIONS

HEALTH & WELL-BEING KEY ACTIONS

SECURITY & RESILIENCE KEY ACTIONS

Improvements to the existing connections over the river and two new bridges are suggested in order to facilitate a system of recreational paths that connect sites through meadows and forms links to the city centre (figures 53b & 55). The street grid, introduced in osney Mead allows for future bus connection if needed (figure 56). Parking facilities are offered in both sites to reduce parking on streets and thus remove barriers from public realm (figure 56).

Key to promoting social connectedness is the creation of intergenerational ‘hearts’, in both sites, that are either in direct dialogue with natural assets or provide connections to/from them. ‘Hearts’ are overlooked by a mix of uses that generate activity throughout the day (community facilities, short stay uses, A1-A5 uses and residential units) and are protected from vehicular movement (figures 53b, 54 & 57).

Since its creation, Ice Rink has been a famous destination for exercise associated to Oxpens and the Meadow. It is considered an inherent element of place identity that symbolises health and well-being, and it is therefore retained with improvements to its setting (service vehicles movement, pedestrian access, cycle paths and parking). This hyper-local landmark building marks the beginning of Oxpens Meadow recreational park, which provides space for relaxing as well as open-air gyms for exercise. The park is expected to provide all the necessary services (food to go, first aid, restrooms, seating areas, mobility rentals) so that people can prolong their stay at the meadows. This way, connections with nature as well as social interaction are encouraged, both of which are key for mental health and well-being.

Security and resilience are better realized at the block scale where public realm incorporates several systems and features that ease navigation through the site. At this scale it is achieved through the provision for ‘all seasons’ public realms that provide shelter to people in case of extreme weather (figure 53b).

In case of Oxpens, intergenerational ‘heart’ can be seen as the continuation of the Meadow within the core of the site. It is parallel to the Oxpens Rd and the public realm introduced at the student accommodation complex. When it comes to Osney Mead, it is located at the north-west corner of the site in order to be easily accessible by the residents of surrounding neighbourhoods and take advantage from the natural setting (river).

Community facilities are considered of paramount importance since they coordinate intergenerational activities taking place within the development. Existing education facilities and the suggested school and nursery (figures 53b &57) are expected to host activities and events that promote the coming together of young and old either on a temporal or permanent basis.

Connections with nature are facilitated across green corridors at Osney Mead site, where selected planting supports biodiversity. A new health centre is suggested near the community centre of Osney Mead, facing Ferry Hinksey Rd with exercise types that are friendly to all age groups. Communal gardens are featured in residential blocks where residents can either grow their own food, or use the space for other sorts of activities (figures 53b 54).

Designing mobility paths to be legible and safe for all users, with a variety of seating areas and necessary services is key for security, in particular within areas with high flood risk.

69

70

Figure 53b

Design explanation. How the suggested masterplan contributes to elderly inclusion. Source: Made by author

71

Figure 54

Indicative masterplan. Source: Made by author

72

Figure 55

Masterplan’s layers of information. Pedestrian links Source: Made by author

Figure 56

Masterplan’s layers of information. Mobility network Source: Made by author

73

Figure 57

Masterplan’s layers of information. Land uses Source: Made by author

Figure 58

Masterplan’s layers of information. Heights Source: Made by author

O X P E N S M E A D O W - G R E E N B E LT R E C R E A T I O N A L P A R K FRAMEWORK APPLICATION

74

Figure 59a

Hand drawing of suggested public realm. Source: Made by author

AUTONOMY & INDEPENDENCE KEY ACTIONS

SOCIAL CONNECTEDNESS KEY ACTIONS

HEALTH & WELL-BEING KEY ACTIONS

SECURITY & RESILIENCE KEY ACTIONS

The recreational park can be entered by two access points across Oxpens Rd (the main access point that leads to welcome centre next to Ice Rink and a second one near Castle Mill stream) as well as from the north (through ‘all seasons’ square) (figures 59b &67).

It provides mobility rentals and across all trails pedestrian and cycle movements are facilitated in separate routes. All the existing paths are retained with the provision for improvements in order to ease wayfinding and respond to the needs of all ages and abilities. New supplementary trails are suggested to divide long distances and provide access to the suggested activity areas (eg. seating, outdoor exercise, picnic etc.) (figures 59a &60). There are two new bridges that link Osney Mead to the green belt, the first at the research centre square and the second one at the end of the street that leads to the community centre. This way residents from different parts of Osney mead or the surrounding neighbourhoods can access green belt easily without having to walk to the south-east corner of the site where the main bridge is. A new meadow path is suggested across Bulstake stream that connects to Oxpens an provides interesting views of the Osney development.

Social connectedness is encouraged through two main actions. Firstly, the adequate information regarding events or activities that might be held on site, which is achieved through the welcome centre activity packs. Secondly, there is an advanced wayfinding system that highlights all areas within the park that are offered for some sort of activity (eg. seating areas, open-air gyms, picnic area etc.). But even if someone do not wish to visit any of these, they can still socialise across paths. It is worth mentioning that according to consultation results, most people claimed that not being able to stay and socialise within meadows is due to the lack of necessary services (eg. food to go and restrooms). The design features several service buildings to promote staying on the park (figure 59b). Finally, a great place for social interaction is the ‘all seasons’ linear square that connects the meadow with Oxpens community centre. At the beginning of the square there is Oxpens cafe, a landmark building that is also offered for community events open to public.

Open-air gyms are featured across paths to promote outdoor exercise as well as social connectedness. The recreational park offers a great opportunity for connecting to nature through spaces that create all the right conditions for someone to stay and take part to a variety of activities. This is considered key for mental health and well-being. Regarding the food growing concept in communal gardens, already mentioned, residents could display the plants/food they grow in their gardens in temporary markets located within the park. This way, food growing concept would be communicated as a healthy living practice.

City information systems are incorporated as well as a community safety system that people can use in case of emergencies. Elderly people that suffer from dementia can ask special assistance by pressing a button that immediately notifies the nearest help centre within the park. Change of levels across paths are avoided and furniture in seating areas are designed to meet a variety of needs. Allowing the visual connection with key areas of the park contributes to design’s legibility. This way people can easily find their way back to where they started or be attracted by activities taking place away from them.

75

76

Figure 59b

Oxpens Meadow-Green belt recreational park. Public realm design explanation. Source: Made by author

77

Figure 60

Oxpens Meadow-Green belt recreational park. Public realm indicative design. Source: Made by author

CHAPTER

SUMMARY

CONCLUSION CROSS BENEFITS, NEXT STEPS & LEARNING OUTCOMES

78 Of course, the work presented in the previous chapter does not constitute a complete proposal regarding ageing-friendly community design.

However, it proves the applicability of the ageing-friendly communities framework and sets a good base for examining whether such an approach would benefit the general area as well as the city as a whole.

Before presenting the cross benefits, it is necessary to define the context within which the qualities of the suggested masterplan are questioned.

So, this chapter starts with a brief description of the forces that define study area’s dynamics.

In this chapter, research follows the steps bellow:

Context analysis : West End as an emerging city quarter around a well integrated transportation hub Existing conditions & key issues

Following, benefits that development might bring are realized through the presentation of a travel chain that connect the railway station with the development and the city centre.

Proposal’s impact on the city as a whole: Destination making & Travel chains

Finally, research finishes with defining the next steps that should be taken in case this proposal was implemented in reality.

Next steps: public consultation Learning outcomes

Figure 61

Osney Mead and Oxpens in context, bird’s eye view from south. Source: (Oxford City Council, 2017:p.4)

06

79

CONTEXT: AN EMERGING CITY QUARTER AROUND A WELL INTEGRATED TRANSPORTATION HUB

80

Figure 62

OXFORD WEST END - RAILWAY STATION FUTURE REGENERATION PLANS Both sites examined are located in a strategically significant area. Not only does Oxford West End include a variety of architectural character areas, building types and scales, but it also includes the Oxford railway station, which sits on the edge of the city centre boundary. In other words, West End area is considered the gateway to the city and Osney Mead and Oxpens sites are considered major development opportunity sites.

The importance of their location can be better realized if we examine the travel corridors that cross the Oxford Railway station and the future connections that are yet to be facilitated (figure 63).

(Left)Oxford Railway station SPD Masterplan. (Middle)Pedestrian and cycling movement. (Right)Bus movement and interchange.

Source: (Oxford City Council, 2017: p.18 &41 &42)

The station is currently served by a mix of services between London Paddington and the North (Worcester and Hereford. It has two mainline platforms, two travel-through ones, and one terminating platform, introduced in 2016 serving London Maylebone, Bicester Village and High Wycombe. Two more platforms will be added to serve the east-west rail connection between Milton Keynes/ Bedford and Cambridge. The Cambridge- Milton Keynes- Oxford corridor will turn the station to a well integrated transportation hub.

Therefore, the emerging city quarter around the station is expected to function as an attractive arrival point -where interesting activities take place-, form connections with the city centre and above all express the values of Oxford city as a whole.

In this direction, Oxford station regeneration plan envisages a multi-modal transport interchange that supports accessible and sustainable modes, including rail, bus, walking and cycling. Public realm around the station is expected to support a safe, non-conflicting environment while at the same time footways under Botley Rd and across Becket St are expected to widen to encourage active traveling between the station and the surrounding neighbourhoods (figure 62) (Oxford City Council, 2017).

81

Figure 63

(Top left) The Railway sits on the junction of corridors that connect different Oxford district centres. (Bottom left) The station will serve the east-west connection between Milton Keynes and Cambridge. (Right) Station’s location regarding Osney Mead, Oxpens, city centre and the city boundary.

Source: Top left:(Oxford City Council, 2017: p.8) Bottom left: https://www.cbre.co.uk Right:(Oxford City Council, 2017:p.22). Edited by author

EXISTING CONDITION KEY ISSUES

82

Figure 64

Map illustrating the paths I used to explore the study area during my visits.

Source: Google Maps. Edited by author

EXISTING CONDITIONS SITE VISIT OBSERVATIONS Oxpens site is the nearest site to receive the station’s pedestrian flow, through Becket St (figure 62). Today, the only reasons why Oxpens attracts pedestrian flow is due to its vicinity to the Westgate shopping centre as well as the Ice Rink, a landmark building popular both with public skaters and professionals that opened to public in 1984 (Dilley, 1986).

Oxpens is adjacent to the road that links west and south Oxford, which is named after the site, Oxpens Rd. The busy road offers a great opportunity for uses that support activity throughout the day. However, not only does the area remain under-utilised, but it also includes natural assets that are totally unexploited. Although the Meadow, facing the street, offers a great opportunity for recreation, it does not form links to the city. Besides, the strange feeling of openness across Oxpens Rd has a negative impact on the character and legibility of the street in total. Today,

walking through the Meadow, one can quickly notice that there are no places to stay and socializing is not promoted at all. Poorly lit paths, narrow tracks and low maintained areas undermine safety and the environmental quality of the park. On the other hand, Osney Mead feels completely disconnected due to the different scale adopted to its built environment (mainly industrial buildings) as well as the reduced sense of orientation one has while navigating through this industrial estate.

On my first visit to the area (figure 64), a taxi left me right at the middle of Osney Mead where I spent quite a lot of time looking for a way to reach riverside. Extensive parking on streets, limited access between industrial buildings and the absence of visual connections with the surroundings made me avoid walking out of the central spine and eventually exit the site through Ferry Hinksey Rd. On the second visit, I had

enough time to find my way to the riverfront before it gets dark. This time, I walked to Osney through Oxpens Meadow, Gibbs Crescent, Mill st, Botley Rd and Ferry Hinksey Rd. It was an uninviting route with many unpleasant areas, especially at the first part through the Meadow (figure 65). On my third visit I tried to compare the feeling of the study area with the feeling of adjacent neighbourhoods, so I arrived at Oxford by train, walked through Frideswide square, took the bus to city centre, walked through Westgate mall and ended up in front of the Ice Rink.

To sum up, from the ‘shared space’ concept of the prestigious Frideswide square (The Urbanists, 2015) to the sandstone surfaces and spatial clarity of Bonn square (Landezine, 2010) and finally the crowded patios of the shopping centre, what I realised is that city always offered me a destination and multiple ways to

reach them, which is definitely not the case of Oxpens and Osney Mead. Although one might be told about nice cafes and the river path at Osney Mead, city does not lead visitors there as if these places where part of its identity. Actually, exiting the Westgate centre it becomes clear that the allocation of public space clearly benefits vehicular movement, forcing visitors to take the way back to the station, as if Oxpens Rd was the city’s boundary.

83

CONCLUSION REQUIRED CHANGES The biggest barrier that city has to overcome in order to respond to the needs of the emerging quarter that will serve as a gateway to Oxford, is the discontinuity between the city’s core and the study area. In my opinion, this discontinuity results from the lack of destinations. To promote destination making within the West End area, the allocation of PUBLIC SPACE must be reconsidered in order to benefit pedestrians and incorporated USES should support social interaction throughout the day.

Once visitors exit the railway station, they should be given the chance to explore nearest destinations easily. In case of Oxpens and Osney Mead sites, their natural assets are of paramount importance since they are associated with city’s identity. Therefore, they should be highlighted as key destinations and suggested uses facing them should support the coming together of a wide variety of people.

Following, the contribution of dissertation’s proposal on destination making will be examined.

Figure 65

Map illustrating key observations regarding the selected sites through a collection of photos Source: (photos)site visit, personal archive (illustration) made by author for team 1 project in URBD7017 module ‘Urban Design Masterplan to Public Realm’

P R O P O S A L’ S I M P A C T T O T H E C I T Y DESTINATION MAKING

84

DESTINATION MAKING LAND USES & PUBLIC REALM This dissertation’s proposal responds to the need for a new city quarter that promotes the coming together of a wide variety of people (both locals and visitors) and highlights the Oxford’s identity through destinations that embrace city’s assets.

portance when it comes to a new city quarter that functions as the gateway to the city. Whatever the sector prioritised is, every area’s vitality depends on its community design. Reconsidering who the sites are designed for is a good starting point.

Regarding land uses, the proposal can be seen as a critical evaluation of the existing visions, which put a particular emphasis on research &development sector as well as employment. In my opinion, although existing plans for Oxpens and Osney mead incorporate connections with nature and offer links to the surroundings, destination making is not achieved. In other words, a kid would never walk all the way to Osney mead to play in the public realm of an innovation quarter. It might probably choose a place where kids are more likely to go and families are easy to take their children to. But social interaction is of paramount im-

Intergenerational housing that the proposal adopts allows for both young professionals or/and students and elderly population on site and it can actually be more efficient than traditional models since both owners benefit from this co-existence on a daily basis.

Besides, older people can support the economy and vitality of the place while young professionals are working, since they are more likely to spend locally.

Regarding the public realm allocation, ageing-friendly design’s focus on promoting elderly independence and safety can be an extremely useful tool for the des-

tination making process. This is because such a design creates travel chains of consecutive destinations to help elderly navigate through the city without the need of special assistance. Across travel chains legibility, safety and social interaction are interconnected key priorities.

Following, research focuses on the shortest travel chain that connects Railway station to our sites (through Becket st) (figure 66) to present the destinations that the dissetation’s ageing friendly masterplan suggests in the context of the emerging city quarter.

85

Figure 66

Map illustrating the travel chain to and from the railway station as well as to and from the city centre Source: Google maps. Edited by author

TRAVEL CHAINS : CONSECUTIVE DESTINATIONS

LEGIBILITY & SECURITY KEY ACTIONS

RAILWAY STATION-OSNEY MEAD TRAVEL CHAIN KEY AREAS

86

Walking across the pedestrian friendly Becket street (according to station’s regeneration plan), one can enter Oxpens form the north west corner of the site where the student accommodation building is located. Instead of walking next to the existing buildings (Oxpens SPD, figure 33), one can pass through a public, intergenerational square, overlooked by co-housing units (both students and elderly). Instead of trying to improve the impact of the disproportionally large buildings (Student accommodations) on public realm using tree lines, a new housing complex is suggested that promotes the coming together of all age groups at its public spaces.

joy a walk around the park. This circular square with the cafe and fountain is the ‘heart’ of Oxpens. It can be seen as a meeting point right at the junction of several pedestrian and cycle connections to/from different parts of the city (figure 66). An improved signage and information system is incorporated to guide visitors through the Meadow. There are paths to Osney lock (Osney lock Hydro) through Gibbs Crescent, to Osney Mead district (Research centre square, Osney Mead community centre, Osney island) through Grandpoint nature park, and to city centre through the Westgate mall.

Ground floor connections allow pedestrians to walk to the nearby (pedestrian only) all seasons square (figure 67), that is parallel to the Oxpens Rd, overlooked by the community facilities, a hotel, retail shops and flats (figure 57). All seasons square incorporates a variety of planting, water elements, soft landscaping and a variety of seating areas.

Following the path to Osney Mead one can come across picnic areas, sheltered seating spaces and open-air gyms that promote social interaction. Several help centres and small cafes are located across the recreational path to encourage staying at the meadow. Passing under the railway, one can cross the bridge to Osney Mead or follow the path to the seating areas across Bulstake stream.

At the end of the square a landmark fountain (figure 71) marks the beginning of Oxpens Meadow recreational park. Community events take place around the fountain and visitors can take food/beverages from the Meadow cafe and either join the audience or en-

Research & innovation centre squares, which form green corridors with the green belt, are the first to receive pedestrian flow at Osney. One can explore the public realm across Thames , overlooked by retail shops and apartments, and end up at the Osney Mead community centre. The latter is a landmark building for both Osney Mead and Osney island residents. Intergenerational activities are held weekly on site and most community conversations are open to public.

Community centre is an important element of Osney Mead since it supports all intergenerational activities taking place on site, in cooperation with schools and research centre. Its public realm connects riverside with Ferry Hinksey Rd through a promenade (figure 55 &57).

The projection of the Meadow cafe buildings that border the fountain square, allows the Oxpens ‘heart’ to be visible from the main access points of the site promoting legibility (figure 68). Arriving there, visitors can have a complete image of the routes available.

The cafe itself is comprised of two arched buildings that function mostly as canopies. They are made of brick and have green roofs to blend with natural environment.

Entering the park from the main access point (figures 67&68) one can see the welcome centre and the meadow cafe at the background. Welcome centre offers trail maps with all points of interest, but even if visitors enter the site from a different access point, the park incorporates an advanced information system to ease way finding. Park mobility rentals are available at the main access while cycle routes are separated from pedestrian paths across the whole park.

Furniture at seating areas are designed to meet a variety of needs (figure 69&69&70) while waste storage is located in multifunctional units that may combine bike parking , benches and planting. Maps illustrating current location and distances to nearest areas as well as a colour coded network of lines on the ground assist visitors within the park. Finally phone booths help facilitate a community security system that allows people to ask for personal assistance in case of emergency.

87

Figure 67

Bird’s eye view of the suggested Meadow cafe and community square with landmark fountain.

Source: Made by author

88

Figure 68

Street view of the Oxpens Meadow main access path.

Source: Made by author

89

Figure 69

Street view of the Oxpens all seasons linear square.

Source: Made by author

90

Figure 70

Bird’s eye view of the Oxpens all seasons linear square.

Source: Made by author

91

Figure 71

Street view of the fountain square.

Source: Made by author

NEXT STEPS C O N S U LT A T I O N

92

IDENTIFYING CROSS BENEFITS PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT In the first chapter of this dissertation, literature review established a connection between disability inclusion and urban resilience. Disability inclusion is considered vital for turning current cities into places that promote civic unity, which in turn is a precondition for urban resilience. But, although much progress is made globally, there are still barriers to disabled people’s inclusion. The belief that disability inclusion design benefits only disabled people is claimed to be the reason for this. Hence, proving that designing for disability we can all benefit would be a good starting point for making more future developments adopt disability inclusion strategies.

As analysed in the previous pages, the ‘destination making’ concept that the ageing friendly masterplan suggests would benefit the whole city since it contributes to the integration of the West End area, which is anticipated to function as a gateway to Oxford (according to the railway station’s regeneration plan).

But, theoretical scenarios are not enough to prove such a significant argument. Planners should communicate with a diversity of stakeholders and consider their insights to the planning process from day 0 until after implementation (figure 72). Therefore, this chapter’s focus on presenting how the dissertation’s proposal would benefit the whole city in the context of future station’s regeneration plan, cannot be considered as proof of the argument that ‘designing for disabled (in our case elderly) we can all benefit’.

Should this project be implemented, a public consultation is required to ask public whether the suggested plan benefits participants and in what way. Regarding consultation’s demographics, what is worth mentioning is that engaging equal number of people across all age groups and abilities is key for the validity of the results.

Figure 72

Diagram illustrating the key elements of disability inclusion design.

Source: Made by author

LEARNING OUTCOMES

Figure 73

Diagram illustrating the key steps of the methodology for making disability inclusive developments as resulted from research. Source: Made by author

CONTRIBUTION THE METHODOLOGY Realizing the connection between disability inclusion and urban resilience through the civic unity aspect is significant for considering disability inclusion as an element of design and not something that can be addressed after implementation.

Instead of approaching disability inclusion as a series of actions that cover specific needs, we need to establish a holistic framework that examines the common needs between the various disability types.

Adopting such a framework will solve the issue of ‘disabled communities’, analysed in the first chapter, and then help facilitate actions towards certain disability types if needed. For instance, if we are to improve disabled access to the public services in a city’s centre, we first need to ensure that disabled people across all districts have equal access to public transport services to reach the city centre.

This dissertation creates such a framework and then shows how it can be rearranged to respond to a specific target group’s needs. It suggests a masterplan for real sites and finally tests its cross benefits regarding the city as a whole (figure 73). This methodology implies that taking a step back to understand the fundamental needs of disabled is a necessary step for succeeding in designing for specific disability types.

Moreover, its the only way that can generate cross benefits for all.

93

BIBLIOGRAPHY

94

All Party Parliamentary Group on Social Integration (2019) Healing the Generational Divide. Interim Report on Intergenerational Connection. Available at: https://www.ageing-better.org.uk/blogs/ how-do-we-bridge-uks-age-divide (Downloaded: 15 August 2021).

Arup (2019) Cities Alive. Designing for Ageing Communities. Available at: https://www.arup.com/ perspectives/publications/research/section/cities-alive-designing-for-ageing-communities (Downloaded: 25 August 2021).

Calthorpe, P. (2017) 7 Principles for Building Better Cities. Available at: https://www.youtube.com/ watch?v=IFjD3NMv6Kw&t=541s (Accessed: 25 June 2021).

Crappsley, R. (2021) ‘Design for an Ageing Population’, Urban Design Group Journal, 158, pp.15.

Crappsley, R. (2021a) ‘The Evolution of Old Age’, Urban Design Group Journal, 158, pp.16-18.

Department for Work & Pensions (2021) National Statistics, Family Resources Survey: financial year 2019 to 2020. Available at: https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/family-resources-survey-financial-year-2019-to-2020/family-resources-survey-financial-year-2019-to-2020 (Accessed: 1 July 2021).

Department of Economic and Social Affairs (2019) World Population Prospects 2019. Available at: https://population.un.org (Downloaded: 20 June 2021).

Dilley, Ph. (1986) ‘Oxford Ice Rink’. The Arup Journal, 21, pp.23-28. Available at: https://www.arup. com/perspectives/publications (Downloaded: 5 August 2021).

Dudley, S. (2017) Uniting for resilience. Cities are facing environmental and social threats through civic cohesion. Available at: https://compassmag.3ds.com/uniting-for-resilience/ (Accessed: 20 August 2021).

Figueres, C. (2016) The inside story of the Paris climate agreement. Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MIA_1xQc7x8 (Accessed: 10 July 2021).

Holmes, K. (2020) Mismatch. How Inclusion Shapes Design. MIT Press, London.

Inclusion London (2021) The Social Model of Disability. Available at: https://www.inclusionlondon. org.uk/disability-in-london/social-model/the-social-model-of-disability-and-the-cultural-model-of-deafness/ (Accessed: 25 July 2021).

Intergenerational Foundation (2021) Generations Apart? The growth of age segregation in England and Whales. Available at: https://www.if.org.uk/research-posts/generations-apart-the-growth-ofage-segregation-in-england-and-wales/ (Downloaded: 25 August 2021).

Landezine (2010) Bonn Square by Graeme Massie Architects. Available at: http://landezine.com/ index.php/2010/04/bonn-square/ (Accessed: 15 August 2021).

Lee, G. (2021) ‘Community Design: The Key to Long, Healthy & Happy Lives’, Urban Design Group Journal, 158, pp.25-27.

Matos, N. (2020) Ageing population in the UK. Available at:https://sites.google.com/view/ageing-population/ (Accessed: 10 July 2021).

Mazumder, R. (2020) We are addicted to cars. Available at: https://robinmazumderdotcom.wordpress.com/2020/02/15/%20carculture/ (Accessed: 15 July 2021).

Office for Disability Issues (2013) Disability Equality Indicators. Comparing the life chances of disabled people to non-disabled people. Available at: https://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/ ukgwa/20131101163230/http://odi.dwp.gov.uk/disability-statistics-and-research/disability-equality-indicators.php (Accessed: 10 July 2021).

Office for Disability Issues (2014) Official Statistics, Disability facts and figures. Available at: https:// www.gov.uk/government/statistics/disability-facts-and-figures/disability-facts-and-figures#fnref:1 (Accessed: 1 July 2021).

Office for National Statistics (2011) 2011 Census: Population and Household Estimates for the United Kingdom. Available at: https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/populationandmigration/populationestimates/datasets/2011censuspopulationandhouseholdestimatesfortheunitedkingdom (Accessed: 1 July 2021).

Office for National Statistics (2018) Living longer: how our population is changing and why it matters. Available at: https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/ageing/articles/livinglongerhowourpopulationischangingandwhyitmatters/2018-08-13 (Accessed: 30 August 2021).

Oxford City Council (2013) Oxpens Master Plan. Supplementary Planning Document(SPD). Available at:https://www.oxford.gov.uk/info/20182/regeneration_and_development/950/oxpens_development (Downloaded: 10 August 2021).

Oxford City Council (2017) Oxford Railway Station Planning Supplementary Document. Available at: https://www.oxford.gov.uk/downloads/download/882/oxford_station_spd (Downloaded: 20 July 2021).

Oxford City Council (2021) West End and Osney Mead SPD Scoping Consultation. Available at: https://www.oxford.gov.uk/downloads/download/1216/west_end_and_osney_mead_spd (Downloaded: 5 August 2021).

Oxford Civic Society and The Academy of Urbanism (2016) Oxford Central West. The outcome of a design charrette to explore a coordinated solution. Available at: http://urbed.coop/projects/oxford-central-west-design-charrette (Downloaded: 5 August 2021).

Resilient Cities Network (2021) What is urban resilience? Available at: https://resilientcitiesnetwork. org/what-is-resilience/ (Accessed: 30 August 2021).

Spencer, P. (2021) ‘Osney Lock Hydro’. Low Carbon Hub, Creating Energy we can all feel good about. Available at: https://www.lowcarbonhub.org/p/projects/eynsham-village-hall-and-st-peterschurch/ (Accessed: 25 July 2021).

The Urbanists (2015) Frideswide Square, Oxford. Available at: https://www.theurbanists.net/urbandesign/frideswide-square-oxford (Accessed: 15 August 2021).

Tyler, N. (2021) ‘The importance of Sociality’, Urban Design Group Journal, 158, pp.31-33.

United Nations (2006) Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. Available at: https:// www.un.org/development/desa/disabilities/convention-on-the-rights-of-persons-with-disabilities. html (Downloaded: 20 July 2021).

United Nations (2021a) Goal 11: Make our cities inclusive, safe, resilient and sustainable. Available at: https://www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/cities/ (Accessed: 20 July 2021).

United Nations (2021b) UN Flagship Report on Disability and Sustainable Development Goals.

Available at: https://www.un.org/development/desa/disabilities/publication-disability-sdgs.html (Accessed: 1 July 2021).

University of Oxford (2016) Osney Mead Masterplan. Available at: https://www.ox.ac.uk/about/ building-our-future/vision/master-plan-areas/osney (Downloaded: 10 August 2021).

Urbed (2016) Oxford Central West. A new city quarter. Available at: http://urbed.coop/projects/oxford-central-west-design-charrette (Downloaded: 5 August 2021).

Weissmueller, Z. (2020) Density or Sprawl? How to Solve the Urban Housing Crisis. Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BOCvMJPPbC4 (Accessed: 5 July 2021).

Wikipedia (2021a) Social Model of Disability. Available at: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_ model_of_disability (Accessed: 1 July 2021).

Wikipedia (2021b) Sustainable Development Goals. Available at: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sustainable_Development_Goals (Accessed: 15 July 2021).

Wikipedia (2021c) Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. Available at: https:// en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Convention_on_the_Rights_of_Persons_with_Disabilities (Accessed: 20 July 2021).

World Enabled and CBM (2016) The Inclusion Imperative: Towards Disability-Inclusive and Accessible Urban Development - Key Recommendations for an Inclusive Urban Agenda. Available at: https://www.susana.org/en/knowledge-hub/resources-and-publications/library/details/3080 (Downloaded: 20 June 2021).

World Health Organization and The World Bank (2011) World Report on Disability. Available at: https://www.who.int/disabilities/world_report/2011/report.pdf (Downloaded: 1 July 2021).

95

Thank you