Consider First
L
Pedestrians
Cyclist
Traffic volume reduction Traffic speed reduction Reallocation of road space to pedestrians
Traffic volume reduction Traffic speed reduction Junction treatment, hazard site treatment, traffic management Cycle tracks away from roads
Access
Inclusive design should not just be about tactile tiles being substituted for normal tiles but about the difference in material as tactile clues to movement.
Provision of direct at-grade crossings, improved pedestrian routes on existing desire lines New pedestrian alignment or Conversion of grade separation footways/footpaths to Street design should in inclusive - regardless of age or ability. Consider adjacent or shared-use routes pedestrians and Local in for terms of placeLast distributor roads are often unsuccessful cyclist turns should be making in residential areas. Dead ends/ 3 point avoided unless necessary
Refer to : ‘Inclusive Mobility’, ‘The Principles of Inclusive Design’ and ‘Guidance on the Use of Tactile Paving Surfaces (1999)’
Maximum Minimum
Minor streets, eg. Mews 1 : 1.5 Typical streets 1 : 3 Squares 1 : 6
1:1 1 : 1.5 1:4
Carriageway widths and what they can accommodate
Level of Type of parking efficiency
Comments
On-street
Most efficient as parking spaces are shared and the street provides means of access Off-street communal Requires additional access and circulation space Off-street allocated Allows for future changes in spaces but grouped allocation Off-street allocated Inflexible, largely precludes garages away from sharing spaces. Security Widths between dwelling 2.75m and 3.25m should concerns be avoided as drivers could tryindividual to squeeze fast cyclists. Within Requires mode space due to dwelling curtilage the need for driveway, but most secure
15
