A book of long abstracts from the International Conference on Architectural Science and User Experience shows how varied this topic is. From Biophilic design and carbon reduction to environments that stimulate play and primary school design. One paper discusses the difficulties the architectural profession might encounter for new requirements to design inclusively. Time for some social science in architectural degrees?
The proceedings includes: active travel, housing, ageing, dementia, disability, digital technology, education and practice, air quality, landscaping, tourism, and more.
These short papers are from the 55th International Conference of the Architectural Science Association, 1-2 December 2022, Perth, Australia. Here is an overview of just one of the papers.
Architecture of inclusion
Architectural knowledge about designing for people with disability was held back by committing people to institutions and group homes. Consequently the teaching and design skills have not kept up with the times. The tendency is to conform to existing regulations, rather than being a driver of innovation.
New references in the National Standard of Competency for Architects around designing for disability require graduates to demonstrate these competencies. Using the experience of the inclusion of Indigenous competencies in the National Standard, this paper explores the difficulties the profession and teaching institutions may encounter around identifying people with lived experience working in architecture, or as design teachers.
The paper discusses the units of competency and relevance to building codes, standards and planning controls including barriers to access for all. In essence, educators and practitioners must draw on building and environmental sciences and social sciences in their preliminary work.
Skills in diversity equity and inclusion are not supported with legislation. The challenges for architecture courses is the lack of disability knowledge and Indigenous knowledge. University systems, structures and teaching competencies are challenged by these new requirements.
Architecture needs to move on from ‘risk’ in administrative processes such as contracts, to progressive themes including care for Country and equitable access.
The title of the conference proceedings is, Architectural Science and User Experience: How can Design Enhance the Quality of Life. It consists of short papers rather than full papers.
The UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities and the Sustainable Development Goals are intertwined. Lisa Stafford explains the connections in a paper outlining her co-designed research project. She takes a disability justice perspective on inclusive cities through the voices of people with disability.
Inclusion and equity are integral to achieving sustainable cities and communities. But the voices of people with disability are missing in the urban agenda.
Aprevious paper briefly explains the research design, preliminary work, and the co-design method.
Key findings
The five elements of inclusive communities need to be reflected in how communities and cities are designed and planned.
To achieve equitable outcomes means addressing the entrenched notion of ‘normal’ and the stereotypes of what constitutes ‘disability’. Fundamental to making communities inclusive is the ability to connect with nature and other people and place. Vibrant places provide experiences that are important to wellbeing and a sense of belonging.
Inclusive communities is a lived concept, not something drawn up in plans or policies. It is multidimensional and experienced in places. The legacy of ableist urban planning means that communities remain places of exclusion.
The title of the article is, The Makings of Disability-Inclusive Sustainable Communities: Perspectives from Australia. Note that Stafford and the research team prefer to use the identity first term “disabled people”. They acknowledge that some people prefer “person first” language of “people with disability”. The UN Convention uses the person first terminology.
From the abstract
The right to inclusive, safe, resilient, and sustainable suburbs is an aim of the United Nations Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 11. The focus is on addressing race, disability, class, gender and age inequality and injustice by the year 2030.
Despite this interest in creating inclusive sustainable cities and communities, we still know little about what this means for disabled people. In this article, we address this gap through participatory qualitative research study.
The study, Planning Inclusive Communities, involved 97 people (9-92 years of age). More than 50% identified as disabled people from two Australian regions – Tasmania and Queensland.
The research revealed five core interrelated elements in “The Makings of Inclusive Communities”. These five elements reinforce the importance of interconnected social, economic, and built environment structures and systems in facilitating inclusion, and that inclusion happens in place and movement through everyday experiences.
The findings offer new insights through the voices of disabled and non-disabled people, around issues of equity, access, and inclusion. The research guides future urban policy and planning for inclusive cities and communities.
Research by Guide Dogs NSW/ACT reveals there are new footpath and urban design challenges faced by people with low vision or blindness. The research is part of a longitudinal study to understand what environmental and footpath clues are needed and used. Tactile indicators are only part of the story even when they are present and properly placed.
A total of 622 people with low vision or blindness from around Australia took part in the survey. Many challenges impact their confidence in getting out and about. New-style urban design features are creating additional challenges.
The first survey was conducted in 2015. The 2023 survey revealed new challenges not mentioned in the earlier survey. Micro-mobility, shared paths, shared roads, and crowd protection barriers are now on the list of challenges.
Shared paths
The application of shared paths has increased significantly since 2015. Consequently, this emerged as a major issue in 2023. The speed and unpredictability of cyclists and micro-mobility users means these paths feel unsafe.
Flush finishes
Another new and popular urban design feature is flush finishes. Not surprisingly, 80% of respondents lacked confidence in crossing roads when the footpath and road were at the same level. Places where the road and footpath are level are often found in shared zones and flush finish intersections. Respondents over the age of 65 find these finishes particularly unsafe.
The absence of clear distinctions and continuous finishes hinder straight-line navigation. This is made worse by street furniture, goods displays and outdoor dining positioned along the building line.
Flush finishes at intersections with traffic lights where there are no gutters, kerbs or kerb ramps are a significant challenge. With multiple lanes of traffic in both directions, together with buses and light rail, create high levels of anxiety for safety. Consequently, they are often avoided.
Wayfinding
Key wayfinding factors for safe travel are based on maintaining a straight path, safe road crossings, and knowing where it safe and hazardous. This is regardless of whether the person is using a cane, a guide dog or their remaining sight.
Kerb ramps are vital markers. People who are blind or have low vision know to pause and assess the situation. They also reinforce appropriate guide dog behaviour when approaching roads.
Read more about this research in an article in Access Insight. It’s titled, Environmental clues: Using them and losing them. The article explains why newer street and urban design features are preventing people with low vision or blindness from equitable use of our public domain.
From a universal design perspective, many design features that are essential for some, are also good for others. Children are taught to stop at kerbs for safety, and older people prefer clear separation between footpaths and other zones. People with neurodiverse conditions, including dementia, also need clear signals to navigate the built environment.
Walking is supposed to be good for us, but not if street design causes anxiety and prevents people from making journeys.
Tactile markers vs wheelchairs: A solution?
One paper that sparked a lot of interest at the UDHEIT conference is the thorny issue of pedestrians and wheelchair users negotiating those yellow strips of tactile markers. Tactile markers, known as Braille Blocks in Japan, cause problems for wheelchair users, pram pushers, and others with mobility difficulties.
Based on research by Yoshito Dobashi in the context of public transportation, the solution seems simple. Create small breaks in the line of tactile blocks to make wheelchair and baby buggy crossing points. These crossing points are now installed in Fukuoka city and in some airports, but not yet on a national scale.
Dobashi cautions that, “…improvements need to be made in response to the voices of visually disabled persons who note that the crossing points pose a hazard to them. In his latest study, Dr. Ito of the University of Tokyo proposes a new braille block system that incorporates an improved version of braille blocks with wheelchair crossing points upon verifying its feasibility with wheelchair users and baby buggy users.
Good research paper by a man passionate for his topic and keen to find solutions. The image shows Dobashi presenting at the universal design conference in 2018 in Dublin.
The article is from the open access proceedings of the UDHEIT 2018 conference held in Dublin, Ireland, an open access publication.
Roadblocks to inclusive streets
Mail delivery vehicle crashes into an electrical services box. Note no footpath only grass.
Streets are essential to mobility and that means pedestrians, not just motor vehicles. Dangerous intersections, pedestrian crossings, steep kerb ramps and those utility vaults make wheeling a nightmare. Steve Wright says that universal design is what we should be aiming for. That’s because there are a hundred ways a street can deny mobility to a wheelchair user. And if they deny a wheelchair user, they can deny people unsteady on their feet and make pushing a stroller difficult. Wright lists his top 8 roadblocks to inclusive streets.
8 Roadblocks to inclusive streets
Narrow footpaths: If two wheelchairs or two strollers cannot pass each other than it is too narrow. Many footpaths don’t even accommodate two people walking side by side. Even where a footpath has sufficient width, there can be other obstructions.
Too many stakeholders: Several agencies have a stake in the footpath – hence the many access covers scattered throughout the paving. And then there is street furniture and rubbish bins.
Crappy kerb ramp: Problems often arise where a steep ramp into the gutter meets a steep rise onto the roadway. The deep V means wheeled mobility devices get stuck half way. Then there is the kerb ramp set on a corner that means people have to roll into oncoming traffic. And of course, there are kerb ramps which don’t line up to create a straight line across the roadway.
Traffic calming islands and safe havens: These must be at least wide enough to take a mobility scooter and an adult pushing a stroller. And not everyone can cross a wide street quickly. Mid-way points are a must if traffic takes priority.
Cross slopes and cambers: Narrow streets also mean that driveways and kerb ramps cut into the footpath creating cross-falls that are difficult for wheeled mobility users.
Footpath closures: Construction projects seem to be blissfully unaware of the havoc they create with their “no pedestrians” or “pedestrians this way” signs. And some of these are not just for a day – they can be for years.
Pedestrian crossing buttons out of reach: While the button might technically be at the right height, sometimes the pole it’s on isn’t within reach.
Transportation decision makers don’t have a disability: Transportation projects go to contractors and subcontractors with many other stakeholders involved. They would do well to embrace some co-design methods.
Wright discusses the issues in more detail from a US perspective. He says: “Universal design is what we should be aiming for, but there are 100 ways that even the most well-intended complete street can deny mobility to wheelchair users due to poor design, implementation, maintenance, and even policy.”
Statistics capture many important measurements which are reported as facts, but who chooses what to measure and how it is measured and counted? If the lives of some people are left out of the research questions their facts become invisible. So researchers in the Netherlands took up the issue of inclusive data collection. The project was about mapping the inclusive city by engaging people with disability as co-researchers.
Improving the relevance and quality of research beyond statistical approaches, requires the involvement of community members with ‘the problem’. Image from Heeron Loo’s website.
The research team, including people with disability, explored issues of accessibility in urban spaces. The digital map-based tools worked well and provided insights into accessible locations. However, it is not known if these locations are welcoming and inclusive. The notion of inclusion within places mapped needs a new design thinking cycle for all researchers.
Mapping accessibility is a different endeavour to mapping inclusion, and this research team has opened up the potential to find ways to map inclusion. Accessibility is an essential first step. Getting around is one thing, feeling welcoming with a sense of belonging is another. Urban design features and the attitudes of fellow citizens have an important role to play.
Traditional social research methods are discouraging of involving people with (intellectual) disabilities. This is largely because of governance issues relating to ethics committees. However, participatory research methods with people with disability are more acceptable. The article outlines the participatory research method emphasising the equal participation of all parties involved in the process.
From the abstract
Given the lack of collaboration with people with disabilities in (spatial) decision-making processes, our aim was to develop and test a method that allowed for the involvement of people with disabilities in community development, and in particular in mapping accessibility and inclusivity in various places and spaces in the city of Groningen (the Netherlands).
In this project, we collaborated with an organization that provides housing and care for clients with acquired brain injury, deafness with complex problems and chronic neurological disorders. We describe our approach and experiences in participatory research, focusing on the opportunities and challenges in developing and implementing a data collection method that enabled us to involve people with a disability as co-researchers.
Accessibility at bus stops
A research paper from Chile takes a similar approach. Instead of conducting a physical access audit, the researchers asked people about their bus stop experiences. It is another way of finding out how well access standards promote inclusive environments. Getting to and from the bus stop and boarding and alighting the bus all have to work together.
The researchers conclude that legislation and standards are insufficient to overcome gaps in this part of the travel chain. Consequently, people with disability are not afforded equal conditions.
This research is part of an interdisciplinary work that seeks to study universal accessibility for people with mobility impairments from different perspectives. From Engineering, it is important to highlight the relation to the dimensions of the space used, while in Occupational Therapy, it is relevant to include the perceptions when participating in the occupation.
The results contribute to the lived experiences of people with disability. They reveal the barriers, challenges, and opportunities that influence successful participation in mobility in the community. In conclusion, there is a lack of regulations regarding the characteristics of spaces. The perceptions of people with mobility impairments must be brought into the design to guarantee the right to move in equal conditions.
The UK has an ambitious target that 50% of journeys are walked or cycled by 2030. However, for some groups the quality of footpaths is a major deterrent to walking. According to a Living Streets report, 48% of older adults say they would walk more if footpaths were better maintained. Their fear of slips, trips and falls is enough to put them off. And there is a health cost for this – not just the falls, but the lack of incidental exercise.
The number of trips and falls due to poor footpath maintenance is difficult to establish due to lack of data. Living Streets has done their best to gather what information there is to find out the state of play.
Hospital admissions and insurance claims are two obvious sources of information, but even this is patchy.
Pedestrian falls happen to people of all ages, but as people age they are more likely to fall and to sustain an injury. As a consequence they are more likely to find themselves in institutional care.
One finding is that the number of hospital admissions from pedestrian falls was three times the number from pedestrian-vehicle crashes. So, if we had better data on pedestrian falls, it could change the priorities for road maintenance spending.
The Living Streets report uses 10 observational case studies to gather more information on footpaths and falls. In the UK vehicles are allowed to park over kerbs onto the footpath. This not only blocks the path of travel, it degrades the quality of the footpath. Local authorities had different ways for people to lodge complaints about footpath maintenance.
Can things be improved?
The bottom line is that budgets decide priorities, but whose budget? In the UK, falls cost the national health service more than $2.3b per year. This figure is set to rise as the population ages. However, the focus of this cost is falls indoors and unreported falls outdoors is still a problem. Using proxy figures, Living Streets estimates there could be more than one million outdoor falls among older adults each year.
The role of road strategies and plans
In the UK, the Highways Asset Management Plan allows for local authorities to claim they they taken reasonable care to make sure the road was not dangerous to pedestrians. Is this still valid in 2024? The focus on the cost to highways is not accounted for in the cost of hospital and social home-based care. Both these costs are borne by local authorities yet there is no connection between the two.
Taking a cognitive perspective to architectural design is something architect Berta Brusilovsky Filer is passionate about. So she has written a book about it, Evaluating Cognitive Accessibility. Her free book is open access with the help of La Ciudad Accesible with the hope of reaching more people.
Cognitive accessibility is a fundamental aspect in the design of public spaces in the urban environment. At last this topic is receiving more attention in schools of design. The concept takes in easy reading, spatial orientation, signage and processes of interaction.
We rely on our brains to process information to make sense of the environment around us, but we don’t all process information in the same way. Consequently, if we design in a way that assists attention, perception, memory and problem solving, everyone benefits. Reducing cognitive load (too much going on) and maximising comprehension are key principles for independent movement around urban environments.
The book draws on the disciplines of architecture, social science and neuroscience, and presents an evaluation methodology for designers. However, it also provides a recent history of neuroscience and the role our brains play (or not) in making sense of things.
Lots of examples and photographs enhance this PDF publication. The chapter on recommendations covers the many elements of spatial orientation. The concluding chapter addresses the importance of involving people with cognitive conditions in the design process.
Victor Santiago Pineda reflects on the Burning Man community which recognises that everyone has something valuable to contribute. It challenges the idea that some people are worth more than others. This in turn introduced him to the concept of radical inclusion. Pineda discusses this concept in relation to cities and Amartya Sen’s Capability Model.
Much of the chapter covers well trodden ground with the seven principles of universal design and more statistics to show the imperatives of inclusive practice.
Can we universally design a whole city?
Pineda relates his conversation with Kat Holmes the inclusive design champion at Microsoft. In her book she talks of the “Mismatch” where people who design society determine who can participate and who’s left out.
The tail ends of the population bell curve become invisible when governments aggregate figures. It’s at the local government level where planning is more nuanced with more of a focus on “outliers”. They are in a better position to take a universal design approach to their plans and actions. By definition, national policies are played out at a local level. That is, in communities where people live, not in a national or state policy document.
An easy to read chapter that includes discussion on climate change and examples and images of successful urban transformations.
Fifteen percent of the global population has a disability, which will only increase with population ageing. Half of the world’s population live in cities and this is where we need to promote inclusion to address a rapidly changing demographic.
Disability is becoming increasingly common and cities must be transformed to be inclusive of everyone. The Capability Model argues that disability is created by barriers in the social environment and therefore requires social change. When barriers exist, inclusive communities work to transform the way they are organized to meet the needs of all people.
The radical inclusion is a framework aims to eliminate barriers that hinder individuals and communities from reaching their full potential. It goes beyond full participation to create inclusive systems that promote equity and resilience. Their aim is to remove barriers that perpetuate poverty, inequality, disempowerment, isolation, and exclusion.
Building the inclusive city
Most academic writing about inclusion, disability and urban design is based on Western culture and traditions. Building the Inclusive City, an open access book, covers a recent history of disability in city planning and the cultural context of a middle eastern approach. It brings together social sciences, politics and disability studies for an integrated approach to policy. There are three underpinning themes are:
disability research needs a contextual position
access and inclusion is both local and global
planning education should apply a disability lens to the field
The full title of the book is, Building the Inclusive City Governance, Access, and the Urban Transformation of Dubai. Published in 2020.
From the introduction to the book:
This book is an anthropological urban study of the Emirate of Dubai, its institutions, and their evolution. It provides a contemporary history of disability in city planning from a non-Western perspective and explores the cultural context for its positioning. Three insights inform the author’s approach.
First, situate disability research in a particular place. Second, access and inclusion forms a key part of both local and global planning issues. Third, 21st century planning education should apply a disability lens to the empirical, methodological, and theoretical advances of the field.
By bridging theory and practice, this book provides new insights on inclusive city planning and comparative urban theory. This book is a story of how equity and justice are central themes in building the cities of the future and of today.”
high rise buildings in Dubai
Editor’s note: I travelled to Dubai in 2015 and found much of the new infrastructure very accessible. Air conditioned bus stop shelters were a nice surprise.
Access and inclusion are considered a “good thing” until someone asks, “what will it cost?” Rarely does anyone ask “what does doing nothing cost?”. Many of the benefits are on the social scale, but are difficult for orthodox economists to measure with their current tools. So what to do about it? A report from Norway looks at studies of the socioeconomic benefits and costs of universal design and accessibility.
There is a risk that a disproportionate emphasis is put on the costs and benefits of universal design rather than its broader societal benefits.
The Nordic nations are really keen to implement universal design policies. The high priority that Norway gives universal design makes it an international leader. Other Nordic countries are yet to show the same commitment. The report maps international socioeconomic analyses and related analyses. Although using different methods, the studies emphasise cost-benefit analysis.
Why do an analysis?
Cost-benefit analyses are commissioned for different reasons. There are four main types:
1. regulatory impact assessments to analyse the potential socioeconomic consequences of new legislation and regulation related to universal design or accessibility; 2. business case studies of the profitability of investing in universal design and accessibility; 3. cost-benefit analyses as part of an assessment of reasonable accommodation, primarily with regard to discrimination legislation; and 4. research projects examining the effects of accessibility measures in general, or of specific measures, or their benefit to different target groups.
What do they look at?
Most of the analyses are about housing and the built environment with a focus on legal access requirements. The studies mainly focus on the consequences in terms of participation, employment, risk of falls, and health benefits for people with disability.
In the transport sector, studies mainly looked at travel time and willingness to pay more to improve accessibility. Business case studies dominate the field of information and communication technology.
Costs are usually easier to measure in monetary terms than benefits. Assumptions based on hypothetical reasoning, such as accessibility results in increased employment, lacks evidence.
From the conclusions
Many studies indicate there are significant benefits for people with and without disabilities. However, evaluating these benefits against quantifiable costs entails other variables.
Regulatory impact assessments of new legislation lacks data for calculating different effects. Specialist consultancy firms often carry out these assessments as government staff lack expertise.
In other studies, new knowledge emerges but with different methods. Designing these studies and collecting data is a constant challenge. Measuring the benefits of universal design in its broadest sense is even more difficult than measuring statutory access requirements.
It is at least as important to study why people choose not to use, say public transport, as it is to study the benefits for those who do. Any cost-benefit analysis of universal design and accessibility must be accompanied by what constitutes a cost and for whom.
The report presents areas for improvement and development including the ongoing exchange of experience and knowledge.
The title of the report is Universal design and socioeconomic analysis: A survey of analyses and literature. The main part of the report is in Swedish, but the English language summary begins on page 105. Included in the list of documents at the end is the Australian Building Codes Board Regulatory Impact Statement on accessible housing.
Abstract
What do measures for increased accessibility for people with disabilities cost? And what benefit do the measures provide? What analysis methods are there to evaluate the effects of increased accessibility? This report presents a survey of socio-economic analyses carried out in the Nordic countries and internationally.
An accessible society is a priority goal for the Nordic countries’ disability policy. The concept of universal design has become increasingly central to the Nordic countries’ work.
Calculations of the costs and benefits of measures for increased accessibility are requested by authorities and companies as well as organizations. The report presents studies, methods and analyses to evaluate the benefits and costs of various measures within universal design and accessibility.
The focus is on cost-benefit analyzes and impact studies. The mapping has been carried out via a literature search, surveys to experts and two workshops. A total of 45 studies and seven literature reviews are presented in an English-language appendix.
If we really want inclusive and accessible cities, we have to build it into city-wide master plans. Concepts of inclusion are integral to concepts of resilience but not often recognised as such. Victor Santiago Pineda discusses inclusion, universal design and the digital transformation of cities for the “new normal” in his book chapter.
Working together towards a common goal can enhance the overall resilience of the city.
By building inclusion and access into city-wide master plans, cities are taking steps to becoming Smart Nations.
Pineda provides examples from New York, Barcelona, Singapore, Dubai and other global cities.
7 principles for the “new normal”
These 7 principles are discussed in more detail in the book chapter.
1. Reflection—using past experiences to inform future decisions
2. Resourcefulness—recognizing alternative ways to utilize resources
3. Inclusivity—prioritizing broad consultation to create a sense of shared ownership in decision-making
4. Integration—bringing together a range of distinct systems and institutions
5. Robustness—well-conceived, constructed, and managed systems
6. Redundancy—spare capacity purposefully created to accommodate disruption
7. Flexibility—willingness and ability to adopt alternative strategies in response to changing circumstances
Emerging trends – belonging by design
Clear human rights frameworks, standards for accessible and usable digital products, collaboration with civil society organisations, and risk management plans. These elements and others are discussed in the context of universal design principles. “The emerging measures presented in this book build off Universal Design to help urban practitioners build belonging by design.”
Leading cities are not waiting for a transformation to take place – city leaders are taking charge. “There is a global movement building to accelerate an inclusive urban transformation”.
There is an urgent need for cities to prioritize inclusion and belonging in order to create truly sustainable and equitable communities. By adopting a unified and holistic approach, we can build cities that foster a sense of belonging for all residents.
The title of the book chapter by Victor Santiago Pineda is The Era of the New Normal in Inclusion and Belonging in Cities of Tomorrow.
From the abstract
Leading smart cities are transforming their urban planning processes by building inclusion and access into their city-wide master plans. This is resulting in cities that are more accessible, inclusive, and resilient.
A key factor is the adoption of key principles of resilience in their decision-making and planning processes. These include reflection, resourcefulness, inclusivity, integration, robustness, redundancy, and flexibility.
Inclusivity is crucial in building resilience. Cities need to prioritize broad consultation and create a sense of shared ownership in decision-making complemented by the use of human-rights based regulatory frameworks.
Universal design principles can also enhance the effectiveness of radical inclusion efforts. The practice of universal design has expanded to include policy, social participation, and health and wellness.
The ultimate success of these initiatives is also dependent on the ability of cities to effectively adopt and integrate technologies in a way that supports the needs of all citizens.
Dementia is a medical diagnosis that needs consideration beyond that of health care. Living with dementia is just that – living. Urban planning has a significant role to play in supporting people with dementia to maintain an active life in their neighbourhood. Samantha Biglieri’s magazine article on dementia and planning provides some useful advice.
Around two thirds of the population with dementia live in the community not a residential care setting. How can planners understand and meet the needs of this group?
Dementia is diverse
Dementia is an umbrella term to describe a set of symptoms that affect memory, visual perception, judgement and ability to sequence tasks. People who are neurodiverse or have an intellectual disability, also have similar experiences. When added together this becomes a significant portion of the population needing consideration in urban planning and design.
Designing urban settings for people with dementia provides benefits for others as well. For example, we all appreciate good wayfinding design with the use of landmarks and signage.
The importance of wayfinding
Getting lost and not knowing your way home is a common fear for people with dementia. When intersections and suburban houses look the same it becomes easier to get lost. Based on a UK study, briefly Biglieri suggests the following:
A short, irregular grid pattern of streets to create identifiable intersections and allow residents to visualize their travel path.
Streets with ample space for pedestrians with wide buffer zones between pedestrian paths, cycling paths and roads;
Variated architectural styles within the same development, mixed land-use, designs incorporating diverse styles of street furniture, public art, and vegetation to provide unique landmarks for improved navigation;
Signage that uses textual information (‘5 minute walk to the library’) and realistic photos (instead of icons, which can create confusion).
Development of memorable landscape features, open public squares, and community facilities.
