Accessibility

Accessibility, Urbanization and Physical Activity

by Morten Myrup Jensen,

February 16th 2010

How much planning and design do citizens need to be encouraged to be physically active in the city?

The two extremes are on the one hand the group of disabled citizens who need designers to pay particular attention to accessibility in order for them to navigate the public spaces at all. They are at the mercy of planners who in fact have the choice to lock people up in their homes by planning badly with no regard for disabled people´s needs.

On the other hand we have the few dare devils that scale tall buildings as spiders on a wall, those that jump from skyscrapers with a parachute, train hoppers and the practitioners of parkour. They are bold, imaginative and practice their activities in spite of, and perhaps because of, the inaccessible city. They ignore rules and laws and city planners have little or no influence on their activity.

In between we have the large majority of people for whom the creative planning of the city spaces is vital for their will and urge to use it actively.

So, accessibility is a wide term. It covers access for the pedestrian and cyclist to often visited destinations as described in the Active Design Manual. The aim of this manual, on the topic of accessibility, is to give guidelines to planners on the issue of designing for active life styles.

It argues that securing safe, direct and convenient links between often used destinations like schools, workplaces, homes, shops and community facilities, people are more prone to go by foot or bicycle and leave the car behind.

As mentioned, another important aspect of accessibility is the obvious issue of making buildings and community facilities available to disabled citizens. This should be a prerequisite in any design but is often seen as an inconvenience to builders and designers. Accessibility for the disabled is neglected or perhaps added in the last phase of the design process adding to the frustration of builders.

Some conscientious design studios manage this aspect very well though, as documented in the Danish-Jewish Museum by Liebeskind, the new Ordrupgaard Museum by Hadid, and the Elephant House of the Copenhagen Zoo by Foster. (Ark). These projects should act as model examples for Danish contractors in the future.

Accessibility to spaces for physical activity is the major issue of the provided examples for this paper. They show that relatively small additions to the public space can make a world of difference.

A well planned playground in a Dutch town square, a wooden basin in the Copenhagen harbor or a safety net spanning a parking lot in down town Tokyo are simple constructions strategically placed to yield maximum gain.

The case of Tokyo is particularly interesting to me as I have a great desire to visit this urban jungle but haven´t yet had the chance. A quick search in the literature came up with a similar case of small scale / big reward kind of planning, namely the futsal ball courts occupying rooftops in Tokyo (focus).

This phenomenon made me think back to the time growing up in the workers quarters of Copenhagen when redevelopment of housing districts was in its first phase. The back yard transformed before our eyes from a useless place occupied by garages and divided by fences into one big playground for kids and hang out place for adults. The central object was this cage or enclosure for ball playing that turned out to become the favorite playing field for all the kid in the neighborhood. It was designed exactly like the futsal enclosures of Tokyo. So, it is no surprise to me that they turn out to be popular in Japan too.

In fact a simple idea to utilize the unused spaces on top of flat roofed buildings in dense urban areas, this example perfectly illustrates the points made by the Active Design Manual. As they are placed above street level, the danger of traffic is eliminated and makes them safe in this regard. I imagine though, that the air quality must be really bad even when raised above the city. But this remains to be documented. The accessibility is often high as the ball courts are placed close to public transportation routes. One even placed on top of a major route intersection, being the roof of a metro station hub. Providing that people have good access to the public transportation system from their homes, it seems that the major criteria of the Active Design Manual are met in this case.

In most urban areas transport routes divide quarters and cut off access from one side to the other. Typically, highways and railways are the causes of dead zones that would otherwise have been accessible to pedestrians or cyclists. This problem is particularly dominant in the case of Paris where a major highway encircles the entire city leaving the outer quarters totally cut off from accessing the city center by foot or bicycle. Many other cities and urban areas suffer from similar maladies which become apparent when urban sprawl intensifies.

Even thought I find the Active Design Manual rather doctrinal and its definitions and language tiresome to read from start to finish, I´m convinced it is invaluable as a checklist for planners of urban and suburban areas alike. Many inexpedient city plans could have been avoided if this manual had been referenced during the design process. This adds to my starting argument in the first paper, that the management and administration of knowledge is the key issue for designers and planners in the pursuit of building a better environment in the future.

(Ark) Danske Ark Byg, 09.2007, p 4

(fokus) Arkfokus, 4/2008, pp 4-9