Inclusive Design in our London Stations - a European Perspective

The current project to improve London’s rail network is anticipated to extend the commuting region around the city by a further 1.5 million people of which some 200,000, around one in seven people, are estimated to have a... [ view full abstract ]

The current project to improve London’s rail network is anticipated to extend the commuting region around the city by a further 1.5 million people of which some 200,000, around one in seven people, are estimated to have a disability. To protect the interests of disability groups, all new build stations and major rebuild to existing infrastructure include European and National code of practice specifications within their design to support the development of inclusive environments for those persons with reduced mobility (PRM).  

Embedded within the PRM specifications are human factors related principles which require station architects and engineers to apply requirements related to the specific challenges that disabled customers may encounter within the accessibility of a route. These include route design elements such as dynamic information displays, signage, lighting, amenities, tactile feedback, step-free and level access platforms.

 The 2014 European technical specifications for interoperability (TSI) have superseded equivalent requirements in accessibility standards and also implement additional specifications to mandate certain areas previously addressed through best practice guidance.  Whilst the result of this is to enforce a strong commitment to inclusive design, it also removes some of the flexibility offered to designers when applying industry and other best practice standards.

 This paper provides a commentary of some of the design challenges that have been encountered by the authors involved in the PRM design cycle for new build stations.  It focuses specifically on the consequence of those PRM TSI specifications which impose a subtle change to an architect or engineer’s design decisions when compared to the application of conventional, national and industry standards.