Above link is to something I wrote when director of Redbridge Disability Association that actually summarises my thinking.
Below is something I have just received from Waltham Forest, the parts about highway law and parking and their equality assessment are of note.
I think disability equality is still being treated as a tick box, not a core principle. This is resulting in what is actually often very poor infrastructure still being built, allegedly following consultation.
The problems include that the design and access statement is not being treated as the foundation it is, and there is a misunderstanding of what democracy means – there should be far more weight given to what is just and the actual participatory experience of disabled people.
Most of these issues have been distilled into various rules and standards, but these are somehow not treated as the votes of the past and the future and of disabled people.
What I am saying is that I wish to see as a baseline a summary statement of all the issues related to a proposal, the issues that exist and the proposed solutions.
This should actually be an internationally agreed set of principles, for example, is this an earthquake zone then …..
The idea is to create detailed maps of a location and everything about it – geology, micro climate, topography , barriers and then allow designers within these clearly defined parameters to recommend solutions.
We are not doing this, we are playing with disjointed incrementalism, and that is institutionalised behaviour and discriminatory.
This probably would include integrating planning, building regs, bldg standards and management practices over a complete whole life perspective.
We might then be actually able to copy places like Sienna.