The design of playspace equipment and landscape design need to go together for a universally designed play experience. Everyone should have the opportunity to experience a variety of challenging and engaging play experiences. To be inclusive, most equipment should be designed to suit both adults and children. The New South Wales Government has a section in it’s very successful Everyone Can Play guide on play equipment and universal design.
Play equipment is an important part of the play experience and needs to be considered as part of the overall design of a playspace. Consequently, the overall landscape plan and the equipment must work together.
This section of the NSW Planning website also explains the difference between inclusive and accessible design. Accessibility is commonly associated with mobility standards and safety compliance. In playspaces, access standards are important for aspects such as surfacing, equipment design and toilets. Inclusive playspaces go beyond the basics of accessibility.
Typical inclusive play equipment includes a flush carousel, hammock or basket swing, in-ground trampolines, and ramp access to a feature structure. Theme play equipment and use colour palettes that respond to the local context. And ensure surface treatments are easy to use and accessible.
The key point is to do the best you can with the resources available regardless of location or size of the playspace. The guidance lists design steps which includes the six design principle in the Everyone Can Play guide. Not mentioned, but implicit in the guide is to involve the local community in the design of the playspace.
Universal design and play
The NSW Department of Planning website also has a section on inclusive design in relation to playspaces. It covers the definition, who it serves, and why inclusive playspaces are important. The NSW Department of Planning has changed its terminology from the first iteration of Everyone Can Play from universal design to inclusive design. This is to fit with their other planning policies.
Inclusive play spaces are easy to access, have a range of play options and facilities to create a comfortable environment. The key questions are: Can I get there? Can I play? Can I stay? These questions underpin the whole design.
Inclusive playspaces provide a welcoming place where everyone feels comfortable and can enjoy play experiences together. A sub section of the webpage includes an explanation of universal design and how it informs the Everyone Can Play Guide.
Universal design, as a general concept across all aspects of design isn’t always connected to universal design for learning (UDL). The ‘average’ learner is a myth. Together, the learners previously labelled as in the minority are collectively the majority. That’s why we need to join the dots between universal design and UDL.
“Learners today are not a homogeneous group, instead they bring a variety of rich cultures, abilities, multiple and intersectional identities, varied lived experiences, and educational backgrounds.”
An opinion piece by Tracy Galvin discusses the role universal design and UDL in tertiary education. With financial pressures across the education sector globally, the answers aren’t simple. The focus is on profit making, the reduction in government funding and the shift toward competition, marketisation and privatisation of education. That means learners have become consumers.
Learners who cannot readily consume market model education services are more likely to be left out. However, inclusive education is a basic human right that aligns with the sustainable development goals. The updated CAST UDL Guidelinesattempt to address critical barriers rooted in biases and systems of exclusion.
Making UDL part of other asset-based approaches to learning frameworks
Emphasising identity and intersectionality as part of diversity
Acknowledging individual and systemic biases as barriers to learning
Shifting from educator-centred to learner-centred language.
This opinion piece aims to frame the changing nature of tertiary education by advocating a shared unified inclusive approach through a UD/UDL lens. Learning environments, staff development, structures, processes and technologies need an inclusive practice lens.
There will always be structural societal factors at play, but there’s an opportunity to move towards a shift to find a balance. The paradigms of capitalism and privatisation continue to dominate. A universal design approach can mitigate those extremes and bring them closer to a social model of education.
Across institutions there are many inclusion allies, advocates, initiatives, strategies, policies and professional development supports. So why are so many learners leaving courses, not engaging, not attending and not seeing the value of education?
Is it the pendulum shift toward marketisation, commercialisation and privatisation? Learners are not seeing institutions as spaces and places of equity and justice any more. Do they see factories where money needs to cross hands? Where on this spectrum is the balance for enhancement? Could universal design and universal design for learning be at least the starting point?
The diversity of learners is due to international students, refugees, asylum seekers, neurodivergent learners, carers, and disabled learners. We know this variability exists with the increase in learners registered with the disability or wellbeing services. While variability and diversity should be celebrated it requires adequate resources and funding.
A literature review from Norway takes an older person’s view of transport equity and accessibility. Being able get out and about on a daily basis to shop, visit friends, and medical appointments is essential for everyone. As people age, this ability becomes even more important in terms of maintaining health and independence. The review proposes that local government implement universal design for mobility.
Older people who do not have access to private transport need to use public transport. Yet they face barriers in the built environment and public transportation infrastructure such as:
Poorly built public vehicles and road systems
Insecure and unsafe services
Lack of wayfinding and walkability assistance
Reduced accessible transportation options
Undesirable attitudes of the general public.
The research paper covers the method for the literature review and the search terms used. A three tiered system is one way of solving the problem. First, a traditional fixed route service that suits people with no, or low level limitations. Second, fixed route services offering some flexibility with low floor buses. The third option is a special transport service. The bottom line is that a “one size fits all” is not the answer.
Implementing an equitable mobility design involves an integrated method to address the weaknesses of traditional design approaches. However, this requires a user-centred approach that involves older peoples’ requirements. Hence a universal design approach with co-design methods.
Several factors impact the mobility of older people: psychological state, health, and physical ability that can vary from day to day.
“Thus, for any public transportation system to achieve social inclusion or equity and equality its accessibility must be universal for everyone in society.”
Conclusions
The research paper compares policies and strategies in the UK, Canada and European countries. Investment at a local level is essential for features such as wind shelters, accessible vehicles, level footpaths, and appropriate ways to provide transport information.
Another paper that recommends that the design of public spaces should consider older people at the outset of the design. That is, they should involve older people in the design and redesign of pedestrian and walkway networks. The findings highlight how to employ universal design for mobility equity and compare mobility policies for older people.
People above 65 years of age often have limits to accessing the local environment and participation in society. Their ability to travel independently and freely to participate in society is crucial for their quality of life. The question of how to maintain mobility equity and equality for older people is, however, a complex one.
This is because older people are often faced with physical barriers around the public transportation and built environment. Municipalities have not involved older people in the design of mobility accessibility initiatives.
The findings from our study present factors influencing local environment in achieving mobility equity from the perspectives of older people. Evidence underpins guidelines grounded in a universal design framework to help inform urban transport policies.
Age Friendly Ecosystems: A book
This book examines age friendliness from a place-based approach. It looks at neighbourhoods, campuses and health environments. The topics covered are:
Creating an Age-Friendly Environment Across the Ecosystem
Age Friendliness as a Framework for Equity in Aging
Age-Friendly Voices in the Pursuit of an Age-Friendly Ecosystem
Age-Friendly Futures: Equity by Design
The book emphasises the connection between design and health, examines the age-friendly movement and resources for equity and environmental justice. The full title is, Age-Friendly Ecosystems for Equitable Aging by Design. This is not open access.
Australia’s overseas aid program aims for inclusive development and projects are expected to adhere to principles of universal design. The Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade (DFAT) has an Accessibility Design Guidebased on universal design principles. The Guide was developed in 2009 but remains the key reference to inclusive development related to disability.
“This guide is a rich resource of ideas which development practitioners can consider when applying universal design. The aim is to support Australia’s aid program so it minimises barriers and becomes more accessible.”
The Guide supports the 2015-2020 Development for Allstrategy. The issue of gender is acknowledged in this publication and how this impacts women and girls. The importance of disability-inclusive development and how Australia can make a difference is part of the introduction.
The objectives
The objectives of disability inclusive development are to improve the quality of life of people with disability in developing countries. This will be achieved through:
enhancing participation as contributors, leaders and decision makers
reducing poverty
improving equality in all areas of public life, education and employment.
It is interesting to note that the Australian Government applies universal design thinking to projects in other countries, but not across Australian projects. Nevertheless, DFAT claims it “supports Australia’s own commitment to people with disability …”. Accessibility standards for the public domain are not universal design and insufficient to create an inclusive society..
The Guide remains on the DFAT website (November 2024) with links to more detailed documents. This includes a more recent brochure with a list of top 10 tipsto promote universal design. However, the thinking behind both documents is that universal design is only about people with disability. Of course the concepts have moved on to include the diversity of the population and intersectionality.
Most people need a toilet every 2 to 3 hours. Anyone with a health condition that affects the bladder or bowels usually needs a toilet more often. And it’s surprising how many health conditions that includes. Consequently, no clean public toilets means no going out for more than an hour. The role of public toilets is far more important than many urban and transit planners realise.
A Norwegian study looked at the depth of the issues from the perspective of people with digestive and urinary tract disorders when travelling. They wanted to come up with solutions for this group as it would include the needs of most others.
This study highlights the role of public toilets in everyday life. Having a physically accessible transit system is only half the story. This study provides the other half.
Previous studies have looked at toilet design, particularly for people with mobility restrictions. The recommendations are based on accessible toilet facilities, signage and information. However, this is not enough to create a universally designed public environment.
Main barriers
The main barriers for people with gastrointestinal problems is the physical need for a toilet, anxiety and pain. This group might need a toilet as much as 20 times a day depending on whether they are having a ‘good’ or ‘bad’ day. What makes it more difficult is that they can become unwell during a journey. Using a car becomes a better option at times.
Not finding a toilet in time is embarrassing. “Such unpleasant experiences can have significant consequences not only on self-esteem at that moment but also on the willingness to travel and participate in future activities.”
The research paper covers the three main barriers in more detail. The stories from participants are illuminating and highlight the need for better toilet provision. Participants discussed the differences between trams, subways, light rail, trains, ferries, buses and aircraft.
People with an increased need for a toilet have an invisible disability. Their level of pain sometimes means they would like improvements such as using disabled seating in station areas. The most critical factor is to increase toilet availability as a means of creating universally designed public transit systems.
This study shows why improving the design of buses and trains, stations and stops is insufficient to make transit systems universally designed. Toilets are an essential aspect of being able to travel often and comfortably.
The New South Wales Parliament has extended the submission date on its Inquiry Into Public Toilets. The closing date is now 2 December 2024.
From the abstract
This Norwegian study addresses the issue of inadequate access to toilets in public spaces and transportation systems, particularly individuals who have heightened needs of toilets. The study interviewed individuals experiencing various gastrointestinal issues, including bladder-related problems.
Telephone interviews avoided potential travel difficulties and also leveraged previous successes with sensitive topics. A sample size of 10 interviews was chosen based on prior research indicating that key themes typically emerge within this range.
Key findings indicate significant barriers to participation in societal activities due to insufficient toilet facilities. For transport in particular, boats and trains emerge as preferred modes over buses, trams and subways due to the presence of onboard toilets.
Notably, urban areas, parks and beaches suffer from a lack of restroom facilities. In order to improve these facilities, informants highlighted measures such as provision of open, hygienic toilets with barrier-free access. These measures also need clear signage and awareness campaigns regarding toilet facilities tailored to individuals with diverse health needs.
The study highlights the critical role of toilets in maintaining public health and acknowledges the right to access toilets as recognised by the United Nations.
Testimonials from individuals with disabilities underscore the profound impact of toilet accessibility on their daily lives. They reveal instances of social isolation and restricted activities due to inadequate facilities. Proposed interventions encompass improved hygiene standards, increased toilet availability, and enhanced staff training to cater to the diverse needs of users. The study advocates for legislative reforms and policy guidelines to address the pressing issue of toilet accessibility, aiming to foster inclusivity and equal participation in public life for individuals with disabilities
Toilets and social participation
Public toilets are not dinner party conversation, but they are essential to our wellbeing. They are costly to build and maintain yet we need more of them. They also need to be fit for purpose because they are about social and economic participation. The Changing Places toilet campaign is a case in point. There wouldn’t be many people passionate about public toilets, but Katherine Webber had plenty to say at the UD2021 Conference.
Katherine’s presentation was titled, Access and Inclusion in Public Toilets: Impacts on social and economic participation. The presentation slides show lots of different examples. Toilet design is often dismissed as just needing to be functional and designs vary little. But public toilets are “difficult to get right. And no wonder. They are mired in cultural baggage, struck in the fixedness of fixtures and bound by massive, often ancient infrastructure (Lowe 2018:49).
Public amenities also support tourism and economic development, night-time economy, and access to public spaces and public art. Toilets also need good signage, clean conditions and be regularly available .
Katherine describes more in her written paper on this topic based on her studies in other countries as part of a Churchill Fellowship.
When economists, property developers, real estate agents and governments discuss housing issues, they are thinking of people in the workforce. Left behind are any discussions about people not of workforce age. According to Richard Duncan there is a worsening yet quiet crisis of housing for older adults. They are ageing in homes that put them at risk of injuries, reduced activity and social isolation.
“Without changes, our homes can impose restrictions on our lifestyle and hazards to our daily routines years before we might otherwise expect to see these kinds of activity constraints.”
Key issues
Duncan lists the key issues for what is considered traditional housing design. He discusses steps and stairs, hallways, bathrooms, lighting and kitchens. As people age in their current homes they live smaller lives and do fewer daily activities. Caregivers are at risk as well – lifting, pulling and manoeuvring. This is especially the case with older couples helping each other.
Lack of planning
We all know we are going to grow older, but we do not plan for it when it comes to housing. Older people often wait until a crisis occurs before they think about it. And even then they shun a grab bar or a ramp to help them when the time comes.
Our culture does not encourage people to plan ahead or to do much about their existing home. In the United States the home remodelling industry is doing quite well. But there is no real sign of the housing industry taking the lead on this issue except for segregated housing and retirement villages.
In Australia we have the help of the Livable Housing Design Standardwhich aims to bring the housing industry on board with universal design. However, not all states and territories have adopted the Standard due to industry resistance. Nevertheless it is good to see community housing and state housing projects implementing the Standard.
Move house or stay put?
Moving house sounds like the perfect solution until you look more closely. Seeking out a home with a better layout requires stamina even when there are suitable properties. When there are few, if any, options the task becomes harder. And this is at a time when physical, mental and cognitive abilities are already stretched. Then there are the logistics of moving. It’s no wonder people prefer to take a risk to stay put.
The title of Duncan’s article is, The Housing Dilemma for Older Adults: The Quiet Crisis. Homes that are safe and convenient for later life are good for any age – that’s universal design. We should be designing out this quiet crisis.
Healthy ageing requires community thinking
The North Carolina Medical Journal has a policy brief on opportunities and barriers to healthy ageing. The articles highlight how individuals caregivers and government can address the wellbeing of all in a cost efficient way.
Authors highlight challenges, behaviours, and community infrastructure for people to live healthier, longer and more productive lives. This is the case both in Australia and the United States.
The introductory section of the publication gives an overview of the different articles which include:
Centre for Excellence in Universal Design (CEUD) has a great CPD course on the built environment. It’s practical because modules are based on case studies. The course is for professionals involved in the design and procurement of buildings. Learners will discover more about universal design and how to integrate it into their design practice. The benefit of an online built environment course is that you can do it at your own pace.
Learning outcomes are:
Recognise the benefits of embedding universal design throughout the design process.
Appreciate how a universal design approach addresses the needs of people with a diverse range of abilities and characteristics.
Describe how a universal design approach can inspire great design.
Cite examples of applying universal design principles and guidelines to architectural design.
The Central Bank of Ireland is the first case study. It was the winner of the 2017 Royal Institute of Architects of Ireland universal design award. Videos tell the story from the perspectives of the client, the architect, and the access consultant. The next step is to hear from four customers.
The original 7 Principles of Universal Design remain key to CEUD’s work and underpin the case studies.
This online learning program is also a great example of how to present an inclusive learning experience. There are options for audio description and sign language (this one is Irish Sign Language). You will have to sign in to the NDA Learning Hub to access the course.
Summary of the first module
In 2014 the Central Bank of Ireland engaged with staff, including staff with disabilities, on the architectural brief. The aim was to create a progressive, inclusive workplace. The architects integrated these considerations using a universal design approach from the very beginning of the project.
The client, the Bank, wanted a design that went beyond compliance to minimum regulations. The benefits users get include a more collaborative environment with shared workspaces. The design features work well for users with a wide range of characteristics.
When taking a gender lens to urban planning, it is often from the perspective of women. That is, women past their teenage years. But what about teenage girls? A UK study found that teenage girls feel parks and public spaces are not for them. There is nothing they want to use. That’s because no-one includes girls in the planning and design of these important places for young people.
Make Space for Girls is a UK charity that campaigns for parks and public spaces designed with the needs of teenage girls in mind. “This simple statement reveals a significant disadvantage which has been hiding in plain sight”.
Image from the research paper showing a multi-use games area (MUGA).
For many years, girls and young women have been effectively designed out of parks and other public spaces. These spaces are not designed for teenage girls for for a range of reasons including safety, facilities and spaces dominated by boys. But most of all, it happens because the voices of teenage girls are rarely heard at any stage in the commissioning, design or management of these places.
When thinking about providing something for teenagers, it is usually either a skate park, multi-use games area (MUGA) or a BMX track. In the UK these three types of equipment make up 90% of provisions for teenagers. And young men and boys dominate these spaces.
Engaging girls
In general, young people aged 16-18 are not considered in the overall development process. The situation is even more pronounced for girls. 82% of girls said that they wanted to be more involved in designing parks and open spaces.
Image from the research paper showing participant engagement
As many other studies found, engagement needs to happen from the outset of the project including shaping the initial brief. A key point is that girls need sufficient time and support to develop their own ideas. Their past experiences of un-welcoming space means their thinking has to start from scratch.
Key elements for design
In terms of what teenage girls want to see in public spaces, the results are consistent across a diverse range of groups. Common themes include:
Dividing up spaces so they can used by more than one group at the same time
Better lighting and circular paths
Seating which allows girls to face each other and talk
Swings, hammocks and gym bars
Performance spaces
Good quality toilets
Image from the research paper showing an artist’s impression of an inclusive space
Disadvantages girls face include other factors such as ethnic background, disability, gender identity and socio-economic status. Girls of colour are also more likely to be the victims of sexual harassment and racial discrimination. This means engagement and co-design methods require a diverse group of teenage girls.
This paper explores the exclusion of teenage girls from public spaces, particularly parks and recreation grounds. Teenage girls face multiple challenges in accessing and utilising these spaces. This has an impact on their well-being and sense of inclusion in the community.
The key issue is that the needs of teenage girls are not considered in the design of parks and spaces. Facilities intended for teenagers, such as skate parks, Multi-Use Games Areas, and BMX tracks, predominantly cater to the interests of boys.
Dominance by boys can discourage girls from participating in outdoor activities thereby impacting their health and wellbeing. Consequently, teenage girls perceive public spaces as unwelcoming. Teenage girls report feeling unsafe in public spaces due to various factors, including sexual harassment.
Key design points for girls are physical security and a sense of belonging in a space. The active engagement of teenage girls in the design process is essential to ascertain their diverse perspectives and needs.
Principles for effective engagement with teenage girls are emerging. However, larger-scale practical projects are required to identify the impact of inclusive design on the ground. This research contributes to a growing discourse on gender-inclusive urban planning. A paradigm shift that prioritises the needs and voices of teenage girls in shaping public spaces is critical.
Let her guide you
A thematic issue of The Journal of Public Space focuses on women and girls looks at incorporating gender and youth perspective into urban planning. The title is Urban Development Together with Girls and Young Women.
From the Editorial abstract
Traditionally, urban planning has been shaped by a gendered perspective that privileges masculine assumptions. These assumptions overlook intersectional needs and reinforce societal inequalities for women and girls.
This thematic issue was developed in partnership with UN-Habitat as part of the Her City initiative. It underscores the imperative of incorporating gender and youth perspectives into urban planning and design. The Her City Initiative advances this goal by equipping urban actors worldwide with tools to integrate the perspectives of girls and young women into urban development.
This special issue features papers by young academic scholars selected from the Her City Master students’ alumni network, including case studies of feminist planning from Heerlen (The Netherlands), Nairobi (Kenya), Stockholm (Sweden), and Weimar (Germany).
It also includes a diverse range of invited viewpoints advocating for collaborative approaches to urban development together with girls and young women.
By centring gender and youth perspectives in the urban planning process, this issue highlights the potential to transform public spaces into more equitable, engaging, and sustainable environments. It calls on city makers, researchers, and community leaders to ensure that contemporary cities are designed with and for everyone.
In her conference paper, Lilian Muller makes an interesting comment about past and current planning theories. Yes, they do shift depending on where the power lies and who defines the public interest. In rational planning theory, the planner is expert. In neoliberal planning theory, the market is dominant. Currently, it is questioned whether public interests can exist at all.
If we are to take the concept of public interest seriously we should involve citizens in the planning processes.
Muller discusses the role of the private sector and how governments initially acted to prevent private interests. They were in control of the public interest. She then turns to her previous studies on implementing, or not, universal design into planning processes. Understanding how stakeholders view users is an interesting insight.
Skewed image of the user
Muller found that in public policies and guidelines there were clear expressions of the imagined user. That is, the policy developers were inserting their own perceptions into the documents. The perception of users’ abilities determined the priorities in the planning and designing of buildings and places.
Prominent characteristics of expected users were youth, education, health and success. Notably absent were older people and people with disability. There is a visible gap between laws and political visions on one hand, and practice on the other. This was evident at the early stages of planning.
Gap between policy and outcomes revealed
Master plan illustrations and text did not conform to regulations, and high demands were placed on user’s functional abilities. People were expected to walk, bike, use stairs, and have quick reaction skills to handle shared spaces. They were also expected to walk far distances between modes of transport and entrances to services.
Muller’s workshops and interviews showed clear opportunities to reach common positions when planning and building for all. The key is using concrete, practical examples and networking between stakeholders with competing interests. That’s when the public interest is served and citizen rights are preserved.
“Based on the experiences from the workshops, Universal Design appears as a useful and important asset in such a strategy. A built environment accessible and usable by all is not a modest demand – it is a minimum requirement.”
Despite laws, policies, and political visions to create cities and societies for all, barriers still exclude people from using buildings and public places. The commitments made in global agreements require significant changes to meet the needs of the population.
Adopting universal design in urban planning processes is one important step towards a society for all. Three recent studies in Sweden focused on how, where and what factors supported or impeded UD along the planning and construction processes. The whole process from conception to implementation was analyzed from a universal design perspective.
The findings highlight three critical areas: Competing and contradictory interests, Critical choices and aspects, and Images of the user.
These challenges need to be addressed by all actors involved to reach common understanding on how an inclusive built environment can be designed and realised.
Lifemark promotes universal design in housing in New Zealand. Lifemark’s new website has a fresh look but stays true to it’s core value of inclusion. Similarly to other countries, New Zealand faces strong resistance by the housing industry. However, Lifemark is making inroads slowly, but surely.
The core element of Lifemark®is their standards based on universal design principles. As they say, “Universal design is essential for many, necessary for others, and comfortable for all”. Image from iStock in Lifemark Standards
The ABC of universal design
Lifemark’s new website continues the theme of the ABC of universal design which is, Access, Bathroom and Circulation.
Access: at least one level entry, step-free pathway and entrance.
Bathroom: well positioned toilet on the entry level with reinforced walls for later grab rails.
Circulation: spaces are easy to move between with wider doorways and hallways.
Lifemark® Design Standards
The standards are based on five key principles: Usability, Adaptability, Accessibility, Safety, and Lifetime value. There are three levels to the standard based on a star rating similar to that of Livable Housing Design Guidelines.
The three star level is based on visitable requirements and improved comfort similar to Livable Housing Silver level. The four star level offers a higher level of comfort and is suitable for ageing in place – Livable Housing Gold level. It also supports people with reduced mobility. The five star rating is specifically for wheelchair users and others with higher support needs – Livable Housing Platinum level.
Individuals can access Lifemark’s Design for Life brochureon the website by providing an email address.
Lifemark’s Case Studies
Case studies on the website cover three scenarios. The first is an example of using incentives to include universal design at the planning stage. The second is incorporating universal design into a master housing plan. The third is a case study on a retirement village development. The video below gives an occupant perspective. (Note the automatic captioning does not account for a New Zealand accent.)
Lifemark was New Zealand’s equivalent to Livable Housing Australia until they went in different directions. Livable Housing Australia discontinued its work in 2015, but the website with guidelines remained active until 2023. This was when the Livable Housing Design Standard was mandated in the National Construction Code. Lifemark merged with CCS Disability Action and continues promote universal design in housing.
One thing they shared in common was the absolute resistance for change from the housing industry lobby.
Livable Housing Australia
The Australian Building Codes Board adopted most of the Livable Housing Design Silver level in the National Construction Code in 2022. It is known as the Livable Housing Design Standard. Queensland was the first jurisdiction to adopt the Standard followed by ACT and Victoria. Other jurisdictions have either watered down the elements, or in the case of NSW and Western Australia they have refused to adopt the Standard.
The story of getting the Australian Building Codes Board to incorporate universal design into housing into the National Construction code is told by Ward and Bringolf. This paper is from the proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Universal Design.
