Manual for Streets 1

Manual for Streets 1

The Contribution of Streets
to Successful Places to Live

Birmingham

18 April 2011

Phil Jones, PJA

Phil Jones Associates sustainable transport solutions

What is a street anyway?

  “A street is a highway that has important public realm functions beyond
the movement of traffic” (Manual for Streets)
  Streets have a sense of place and are distinctive

  Streets are lined with and provide direct access to buildings and public spaces

  Most highways in built-up areas can be considered as streets.


What are roads for?

‘The word ‘road’ derives
from the Old English word for a
journey on horseback: a road was
something that one rode along’

(Dictionary of Urbanism)
‘Roads are essentially highways
whose main function is
accommodating the movement of
motor traffic.’

(Manual for Streets)


Previous National Guidance on Residential Roads

Design Bulletin 32 Second Edition (1992)

“Residential roads and footpaths are an
integral part of housing layout where ... in the
patterns of movement around buildings the
needs of pedestrians and cyclists for safety
and convenience are given priority in design
over the use of motor vehicles.”


But highly standardised car-led geometric standards...


...created highly standardised, car-led layouts...


“Some housing, such as this, meets planning and highway standards,
but fails to create a sense of place or identity. We need to set our
sights higher”

The Communities Plan - 2003


Welcome to
The Midlands!!


Poundbury, Dorset

New Hall, Harlow


Building for Life - 4 Groups, 20 Criteria

   Environment and Community

   Character

   Streets, Parking & Pedestrianisation

   Design and Construction

Streets are fundamental to the assessment...


Q4. Does the development have easy access to public transport?

Group 1 -
Environment & Community
The Village, St Austell


Q9. Do the buildings and layout make it easy to find your way around?

The Village, St Austell

Group 2 - Character


Q 10. Are the streets defined by a well-structured
building layout?

The Russells, Broadway, Worcestershire

Group 2 - Character


Q11. Does the building layout take priority over the streets and car
parking, so that the highways do not dominate?

The Meadows, Shepton Mallet Broadclose, Bude

Group 3 - Streets, Parking & Pedestrianisation

Q12. Is the car parking well integrated and situated so it supports
the street scene?

Broadclose, Bude, Cornwall Lime Tree Square, Street, Somerset



Q13. Are the streets pedestrian, cycle and vehicle friendly?

Victoria Gardens, Camelford, North Cornwall



Q14. Does the scheme integrate with existing streets, paths and
surrounding development?

The Russells, Broadway, Worcestershire



Q15. Are public spaces and pedestrian routes overlooked and do
they feel safe?

Gwean Pawl Urban Village, Redruth Clay Field, Elmswell, Suffolk



Manual for Streets (2007)

Streets are the arteries of our
communities – a community’s
success can depend on how well
it is connected to local services
and the wider world.

However, streets are not just
there to get people from
A to B – they have many other
functions.

They form vital components of
residential areas and greatly
affect the overall quality of life for
local people.

(MfS Foreword)


Aims of Manual for Streets
  Bring about a transformation in quality
  A fundamental culture change to achieve streets that:
–  help to build and strengthen the communities they
serve;
–  meet the needs of all, by embodying the principles of
inclusive design
–  provide part of a well-connected network;
–  are attractive and have their own distinctive identity;
–  are cost-effective to construct and maintain; and
–  are safe.


Manual for Streets -
Status and application
  Manual for Streets replaced DB32
  Applies throughout England and Wales

  Focuses on lightly-trafficked residential streets; but

  Many of its principles are applicable elsewhere, eg high streets and lanes

  It is guidance, not a standard or policy document


Working in partnership

•   Truly multidisciplinary teams: planners, highways
engineers, transport planners, researchers, urban
and landscape designers...

•   Crossing sectors: local people, elected members,
consultants, local authority officers, campaign
groups, utilities, homebuilders…


Sustainability
  MfS promotes walking, cycling, public transport due to...
–  Climate change/emissions
–  Congestion
–  Accidents
–  Health issues
  Labyrinthine and badly connected places encourage car use


Mode hierarchy
  Consider modes in order:
–  Pedestrians
–  Cyclists
–  Public Transport
–  Motor vehicles
  Accommodate all users on streets
  Tight corner radii level crossings


Developing a Movement Framework

  Where are the key desire lines?
  How can the development enhance the existing
movement framework rather than disrupt or sever it?
  What points of connection and linkage
can be achieved?
  Should these be for all modes?
  Can concerns over ‘rat running’ be
addressed through slower speeds?


Street Character Types
  Consider
–  Key dimensions (widths etc)
–  Relationship to buildings and private realm
–  Parking
–  Materials
–  Planting etc
  Terminology important
–  Eg avenue, mews, lane, boulevard
–  Not Minor Access Road, Local Distributor Road


Assembling Streets...

  Junctions as places
  Street width considerations:
–  Traffic composition
–  Pedestrian flow
–  Parking
–  Width/height ratios
–  Swept paths
–  Trees
  Designing in three
dimensions


Visibility
  MfS recommends shorter ‘Y’/forward sight distances
than previous guidance
  No safety case for ‘X’ distance of more than 2.4m
  Can consider splays measured beyond the kerb
Design Miles per hour 37 30 25 20
Speed
DB32 - Y Distances (Metres) 90 70 45 33

Manual for Streets - Y Distances 59 43 33 25


Why are reduced visibility splays so critical?
Shorter sight lines helps to make urban development happen:
  Sites that were previously undevelopable can now come forward
  Maximising use of accessible, brownfield sites
  Enabling higher densities
  Less need for unsustainable greenfield sites


Y

X

Speed at Junctions and Links

  Speed increases with road width and visibility for both links and junctions

30 45
40
25
Road Width = 5 m 35 Road Width = 5 m
Road Width = 6 m
Speed (mph)

20 Road Width = 6 m

Speed (mph)
30
15
10 Road Width = 9 m 15 Road Width = 9 m
5
5
0 0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 0 20 40 60 80 100 120
Y Distance (m) Forward Visibility (m)

Junction data Link data


Ingress Park, Essex

Frontage Access Research

  Accident and Traffic Flow Data
examined for 20 sites

  Traffic flows up to 23,000 per day

  Very few recorded accidents
involving driveways

  No safety justification for limiting
direct access to busier streets


Local Standards

  Local standards are important to reflect local context
  Local standards need to cover placemaking and urban design
  Focus on improving local distinctiveness
–  Vernacular details
–  Material choices
  Local authorities are strongly recommended to review
standards and guidance to embrace MfS principles.


The Lincolnshire Design Guide for
Residential Areas (1996) advocates
the qualities of traditional settlements
over those of recent developments by
juxtaposing illustrations of both.

In the following pages it then proceeds
to propose a road layout which would
clearly make it impossible ever to
produce the type of traditional
settlement that is considered so
admirable.

Sue McGlynn and Ivor Samuels, 2000.


Suffolk Residential Design Guide

“There have been many changes since
1993 in planning policy relating to
housing and a greater emphasis on
achieving higher quality design. The
SDG is now showing its age.”

It is anticipated that Manual for Streets
will be supplemented in Suffolk...

Work is progressing...


Worcestershire CC new standards...


   Leicestershire/East Midlands guidance
   Initial review in 2007 following MfS – but mainly junction visibility
   More comprehensive review said to be pending...


Staffordshire CC standards (2000)


Quality Audits

   Quality Audits introduced in MfS1 - a ‘Balanced Audit’ reviewing key
aspects of a design against set objectives

   Some authorities (eg Kent, Solihull) have taken the concept further

   CIHT working towards a guidance note on Quality Audits.

Policy Review

Objective Setting

Design

Quality Auditing


Car Parking

Parking solutions should not dominate the scheme, and
should be carefully considered to reduce the impact of
parking spaces on the character and layout of the
development.
The Taylor Review.


Car parking - key principles
   No single best solution to providing car parking.
   A combination of solutions will often be
appropriate
   “Rediscover the street as a beautiful car park”
   On-street parking is efficient, understandable and
can increase vitality and safety
   Rear courtyards need to support on-street
parking, not replace it.


Efficiency of types of parking

Level of efficiency/ Type of parking Comments
flexibility
On-street (communal) Most efficient as
High parking spaces are
shared and the street
provides the means of
accessing the spaces.

Off-street communal Requires additional
access and circulation
space.

Off-street allocated Although more
spaces but grouped inflexible, this
arrangement allows the
potential for future
changes in allocation.
Off-street allocated Inflexible, and largely
garages but grouped precludes shared use.
Also security concerns.

Off-street within Inflexible in perpetuity
individual dwelling and more space
curtilage consuming due to need
Low for driveways.
Garages within
individual dwelling
curtilage


Tricky Issues - Adoption
   Highway Authority can refuse to adopt due to
concerns over geometry and maintenance issues –

   visibility splays, radii, carriageway widths

   materials, street trees and planting, sustainable
drainage...etc.

   Solutions –

   Development of protocols for collaborative
working with highways officers

   Continuous learning from experience

   Development of better standards


Tricky Issues – Level Surface Streets
   Concerns of visually-impaired/vulnerable people
over ‘shared space’ designs has extended to very
lightly-trafficked streets.

   Solutions – recognition of pros and cons of level
surfaces, close dialogue with relevant groups,
appropriate traffic speeds and volumes.


“The quality of the public realm (streets, squares and open
space) generally does not reflect the quality of the
architectural heritage of Buxton town centre.”
Buxton Design Strategy

High Peak BC will work with Derbyshire CC to see that
highway works, including the design and construction of new
roads or highway improvements...reflect the Strategy as far
as possible. This will be key to raising the quality of the
public realm in the town centre.

Discussion Points
- Geometry

- Materials

- Parking

- Level Surface Streets

- Trees and Planting


Geometry


Straight and Bendy Streets – Fronts and Backs


Straight(ish) streets vs bendy streets


Shepton Mallett


Poundbury


Junction Geometry - Kirby Lonsdale


Lincolnshire


The Hoplands, Sleaford


Ingress Park


Materials


Poundbury

Redruth

Truro, Belvedere

Shepton Mallett

Parking


Victoria Gardens, Camelford


Southwark


Clay Lane


Highfields, Bakewell


Mortonhamstead Devon


Level Surface Streets


Broadclose, Bude

Lime Tree Square, Street


Mortonhampstead

Trees and Planting


Charlton Down, Dorset

Sherbourne

Newhall, Harlow

Manual for Streets 1

More Related Content

What's hot

Similar to Manual for Streets 1

More from Design South East

Manual for Streets 1