A useable kitchen is a must and it is often the details of the design that make the difference. Once the overall working space has been thought through, the fittings become the focus.
Lifemark in New Zealand has partnered with Blum kitchen products and fittings that help make any kitchen more functional regardless of level of capability to open, grasp, or carry things. Drawers instead of cupboards are now standard in kitchen design, but storing items logically and tidily is another matter.
This item from a Todd Brickhouse Associates newsletter includes some good kitchen design ideas. Scrolling down the page, you can see a picture of a pull-out table that nests neatly under the kitchen bench and over the storage drawers when not in use. Colour contrast is mentioned as an important feature. Another idea is a dual height island bench which has multi functional use. The newsletter includes other items that are probably more specific to north America and also some disability specific items.
Show your support for Centre for Universal Design Australia and the cause of social and economic inclusion by becoming a member. Your membership contribution will help show the widespread support and interest in Universal Design that exists across Australia and globally. It will also support us to maintain the website and regular newsletters. Join now and you will be paid up until 30 June 2019. The membership fee is $33.00 including GST.
You can pay by credit card through the PayPal gateway using the button link below. If you don’t have a PayPal Account scroll down to the credit card payment option on the PayPal site. You can also pay by bank transfer- see below. You can find out more about the organisation, its aims, and current Board of Directors by going to the About Us pageon the website.
The Human Rights Commission’s report, Missing Out: The business case for customer diversity raises two questions: can organisations afford to ignore the diversity of their customer base? And, what impact will this have over time? The research shows that organisations that are inclusive and embracing diversity find it’s good for business.
According to the report, around 28% of complaints received by the Commission in 2015-16 alleged discrimination by businesses. These allegations were based on sex, age, race, disability, sexual orientation and gender identity. The report does more than cite customer complaints. It provides a way forward for organisations that want to do more than comply with the law.
Organisations that have embraced diversity in their workforce are generally in a better position to consider diversity in their customer base. So it seems workforce diversity might be a good first step. You can download the report in PDF or Word from Human Rights Commission webpage.
“Missing out highlights the benefits of treating customer diversity and inclusion as a strategic priority. Further, it articulates a way forward for those organisations seeking to take advantage of a proactive approach beyond ensuring compliance with discrimination laws.”
Editor’s note: I notice that the Commission’s report uses the term “organisations” rather than “businesses”. No doubt the public service and not for profit sectors are not immune from complaints.
Jos Boys’ latest book Disability, Space, Architecture: A Reader, is a collection of both academic and personal accounts of how the built environment is experienced by different people. It explores the interconnections between disability, architecture and cities. The writing style is mostly non-academic and includes chapters from a man who is blind and a woman who approaches universal design from a feminist perspective.
This book follows Doing Disability Differently, which was published in 2014.The Architectural Review online publication has an interesting, if short, review of the book in which Jos Boys argues that rethinking ability and architecture offers a powerful tool to design differently. It asks the intriguing question: can working from dis/ability actually generate an alternative kind of architectural avant-garde?
Why do people with disability refrain from travelling by public transport even after years of focus on its universal design? Norway has gone to great lengths to create an accessible transport system, but the use by people with disability has not risen significantly. Why? The answers are not what you might expect. The experiences of non-users reveals the actual design of a bus or a train is not enough to ensure accessibility. The barriers to public transport use is that the system itself needs to be universally designed.
Universal design is high on the agenda in Norway, but despite years of focus on public transport design, it seems the number of people with disability using it has not increased significantly.
The aim of this paper is to add to the knowledge of why non-users with disabilities refrain from travelling by public transport. The authors’ research question is: “Why do people with impairments avoid travelling by public transport even when it is readily accessible, and are there any further measures that could lead to improvements?”
Assumptions were made and tested in qualitative studies on people with impairments who seldom or never travel by public transport. These were:
1) that insecurity and expectations lead to seldom or non-use of public transport;
2) that the triggering factors causing seldom or non-use of public transport are different from the issues that users experience;
3) that lack of knowledge among (and help from) drivers and personnel is a considerable barrier to non-use;
4) that a ‘travel buddy’ might help increase the use of public transport among non-users; and
5) that some people with disability have alternatives that work better for them in everyday life.
The findings indicate that feeling insecure, and expectations that problems will be encountered, are significant barriers to non-use. It’s the sum of all these challenges, real or anticipated, that stops people from using public transport.
So, is universal design is the solution? Or will individualized solutions provide a sense of freedom and participation for people with disability travelling by public transport?
Barriers in a public transport journey
When people talk about transport they first think of cars, buses and trains. But the key component linking all of these are footpaths. But having a footpath is only one of the barriers in a public transport journey for people with disability.
Hazard-free footpaths without obstacles are essential for people with mobility devices and people with vision impairment. This was one finding in a study of 32 participants with either reduced mobility or vision impairment. The whole journey study compared the barriers for different disability types.
The participants in the study were independent users of public transport. Their trips were mainly for work or education. The barriers fell into two categories: built environment and the public transport service.
There were several problems with buses including driver attitudes making things worse. Trains were not so problematic as stations were generally accessible.
The research paper provides more information about the barriers, and the experiences of the participants. The top three issues were bus driver attitudes, poor presentation of information, and footpath obstructions.
The study investigated the barriers in a typical journey chain and provides the similarities and differences in the key barriers perceived by people with physical and visual impairments.
The main barriers for physically impaired users were terminals and stops, services, and quality of footpaths. The main barriers for visually impaired users were poor presentation of information, and obstructions on footpaths. Bus driver’s attitude and unawareness of disabled users’ needs was a common concern for both groups.
Other transportation resources on this website are:
Making the transition from driving to using other transportation options can be difficult – not least of all because many options were not designed with older people in mind. Transport policies, equipment and systems are focused on journeys to work, not the day to day needs of people not in the workforce.
Introduction to Senior Transportation considers the physical and cognitive limitations of older adult passengers, the challenges in meeting their needs, and the transportation methods that do and do not currently meet their needs. The chapters in this book cover many topics. Transitioning from driving, volunteer driver programs, technology and transportation, and ageing policy and transport,
Introduction to Senior Transportation: Enhancing Community Mobility and Transportation Services is by By Helen K. Kerschner, Nina M. Silverstein and is available from Routledge.
Universal Design for Learning (UDL) has many followers with much academic writing and conferences about the topic. Indeed, Google searches on “universal design” usually bring up more items on UDL than any other topic.
Capp’s key message is similar to that when designing the built environment: design at the beginning – don’t try to add it in later. It’s too messy and time consuming.
Abstract
In June 1994 the Salamanca Statement called for inclusion to be the norm for students with disability. Goal one of the Melbourne Declaration aims to provide all students, including students with disability, access to high-quality schooling. The Declaration also seeks to reduce the effect of disadvantage, such as disability, on students. Unfortunately, this is not always the reality in Australian schools.
Long standing schooling practices are ineffective for some groups of students, and continuing to do what we have always done will perpetuate rather than eliminate the achievement gap (Edyburn, 2006). One solution to addressing the needs of diverse learners, such as students with disability, is the Universal Design for Learning (UDL) framework.
UDL as a set of principles allows teachers to develop inclusive lessons by planning to the edges of a class, rather than to a core group of learners. Supports and scaffolds are proactively built into the instructional methods and learning materials enabling all learners’ full participation in the curriculum (Hitchcock, 2001).
Retrospectively fitting lesson plans with adjustments based on flawed assumptions about the homogeneity of a core group of students consumes much time, and money, with only modest effectiveness. These retrospective adjustments are only the first step towards inclusion (Edyburn, 2006; Hitchcock, Meyer, Rose, Jackson, 2002). By being ‘smart from the start,’ UDL allows classroom teachers to develop lesson plans that are inclusive for all students.
The Building and Construction Authority in Singapore has updated its Universal Design Guide for Public Places – one of the initiatives under their “Action Plan for Successful Ageing”. The document is structured into chapters, each dealing with a particular aspect of the built environment such as arrival at the building, and wayfinding and information systems.
Do architects design first and worry about legislation later or is it the reverse? Danish researcher Camilla Rhyl decided to find out in the context of increasing universal design in the built environment. She found that the legislative interpretation takes precedence over architectural interpretation and is perceived as limiting creativity and architectural quality. So, can universal design and cultural heritage work together?
Architects work with sensory, social and cognitive aspects of design, but there is no legislative reference to this part of their work. Rhyl’s book chapter is not open access, but the abstract is informative.
From the abstract
One of the main obstacles to increase universal design in the built environment is understanding it as architectural concept. Based on research findings the legislative interpretation of universal design often takes precedence over the architectural interpretation. As such it is perceived as limiting to creativity and architectural quality.
However architects at the same time work consistently with sensory, social and cognitive aspects of architectural quality. However, there is no legislative universal reference to this part of their work.
The article shows how their methods, values and architectural thinking is built on a foundation of multisensory inclusion and quality, only they do not perceive this understanding as being universal design in the general and legislative manner.
There seems to be an apparent gap between their values, methods and architectural thinking and the way universal design is presented and perceived currently in Norway and Denmark.
Using an example of a cultural heritage project the article demonstrates how it is possible to interpret universal design in cultural heritage practice. And without compromising architectural quality or universal design. Rather, it expands and develops architectural understanding of the possibilities of universal design.
Speaking about Singapore’s experience at the 2nd Australian Universal Design Conference, Ms GOH Siam Imm said,“Barrier-free accessibility encourages a mindset that you design a building first and then you start removing barriers to comply. That’s no good. We needed people to think accessibility first, not last.” That is when in 2013 they incorporated universal design concepts to think beyond wheelchair users to all users.
Ms Goh explained how their journey began in the 1980s with basic access provisions, but the onset of an ageing population meant a re-think for this Garden City. Twelve storey residential buildings now have lifts to all floors. But the private sector is another matter and their innovative incentive scheme has gained traction. Ms Goh ended question time saying that in her view Australia needed a central body to help disseminate the concepts of universal design and to form alliances with other countries to share knowledge and best practice.
The edited transcript of her presentation (from live captioning) explains the history and the incentive schemes for the private sector. The full transcript is also available.
Home design magazines now feature larger bathrooms with larger fittings, such as freestanding bathtubs. The room has gone from being a purely functional space to one of relaxation and wellbeing. Consequently, the design of small bathrooms is somewhat ignored.
Designing for Small Bathroomsby Sivertsen and Berg, of Oslo and Akershus University of Applied Sciences, Norway, seeks to address this. Their research question was how to achieve the same sense of wellbeing in small bathrooms using universal design principles. It’s an open access article.
Note that the image does not indicate universal design features. A free-standing bath becomes unusable if grab bar support is needed in the future. The shower cubicle is small and not step free.
Abstract
This paper will focus on how to design a series of bathroom products that work well for small bathrooms using the principles of universal design. In home culture research, Quitzau and Rřpke has studied bathroom transformation from hygiene to well-being.
Bathrooms are one of the rooms in apartments that do not have good solutions for small spaces. This is unfortunate since it is the bathroom that has the least amount of space in urban apartments. This leads many people to have too little bathroom space due to furniture, toilets, showers, etc.
In today’s society, the bathroom is no longer just a purpose room. It is used for relaxation and wellness. This has led to a trend where large furniture, such as freestanding bathtubs, dominate today’s market. This in turn allows the few solutions that exist for small bathrooms to remain poorly conceived.
The research question was therefore how to create solutions for small bathrooms to get the same sense of well-being as in larger bathrooms through universal design principals. The study used the principles of universal design, observations and in-depth interviews.
This study can help to create a greater understanding of how to design small bathrooms. It will be relevant in a cross disciplinary field, including for professionals in plumbing, product design and technical solutions. This will also increase the well-being of users of the bathroom.