Category: Practice Guidelines for built environment

Making an urban area friendly for older people doesn’t have to be difficult. If we want to encourage older adults to get out and about it comes down to five key things. Footpaths, Seating, Wayfinding, Toilets and Lighting. These are explained simply in a four page age friendly checklist designed for local government. Each feature has a rationale, the basic requirements, additional enhancements, and what to avoid. The I’DGO research (below) came up with similar results. 

Briefly the five key things are:

1. 1. 1. Footpaths should be provided on both sides of the street and wide enough for two mobility devices to pass. 
      2. Seating placed at regular intervals and set back from the pedestrian path of travel.
      3. Wayfinding and street signage should have plain fonts, colour contrast and non-reflective surfaces. Architectural landmarks also provide wayfinding cues. 
      4. Toilets should be sufficient in number, clean, and well maintained. Provide at least on unisex toilet and an accessible path of travel to all toilets. 
      5. Lighting is not just a safety issue. It should be even and without glare and placed to minimise pools or strips of light. 

In a similar way, an article in The Conversation highlights 8 things to help people age well and stay active. Footpaths head the list followed by pedestrian networks, slowed traffic, street crossings, accessible public transport, seating, shade and lighting. The article has many links to more detail and the research behind each of the features. It is easy to see that these factors are good for all ages.

The WHO Guide for Age Friendly Cities remains an good resource with more detailed information. 

Local Government leads the way

It seems the need for all councils in NSW to have a Disability Inclusion Action Plan is starting to have an effect. And now the message is getting through according to an article on the ABC website. 

Some councillors are taking to the streets in wheelchairs, and with glasses that mimic low vision. Council staff must move from the “tick the box” compliance list to better understanding why certain features and design details are needed. For example, why benches for sitting need backrests and armrests, and why footpaths need to be continuous and not just end suddenly. Accessibility is everyone’s business, not just the ageing and disability manager.  

I’DGO – Older people getting outdoors

The Inclusive Design for Getting Outdoors (I’DGO) research provides more background to the issues for older people. The I’DGO leaflet covers the same issues in the Age Friendly Checklist. The project was completed in 2012, but you can find the 2 page leaflet with key findings on the legacy website. The bottom line is, if the neighbourhood feels welcoming and safe, older people will walk more and therefor socialise more. 

Technology has improved the sizing of hearing aids, but people still refuse to get them and if they do, they often abandon them. But hearing aids don’t solve all hearing issues. Difficulty hearing causes people to isolate. So how can we create cities for people with hearing loss? 

Janice Lintz’s article reminds us how many people live with hearing loss. She argues that cities need to update their perceptions of people with hearing loss and to think beyond just wheelchair access. She also makes a good point about the assumed access knowledge of people with disability. 

We should not assume that a person with a particular disability understands all disabilities. And, they are unlikely to be an expert on that disability. Similarly, a person with a cochlear implant is not an expert on all hearing devices. Consequently, we should refer to experts as well as people with lived experience.

Lintz briefly explains the different types of hearing systems for the built environment. Hearing aid users prefer the induction loop system that transmits directly to their hearing aids. FM systems that require them to wear a receiver around their neck are stigmatising. It has to be borrowed from the venue and batteries are not always charged.

Hearing loss is common

AUSLAN interpreters are a solution for far fewer people with hearing loss, but must be considered in access solutions. Around 6500 people use AUSLAN in Australia. The total number of people with hearing loss is 3.6 million. That makes one in six people. DeafSpace architecture shows how the design of the environment can support people who use AUSLAN or have hearing loss. 

Captioning and transcripts are another important access strategy and are usable by everyone who can read. This makes it a universal design strategy.

Newer mobile phones can link directly to some types of hearing aids via Bluetooth. This should encourage more people to wear their aids. 

The title of the article is, Rethinking Cities for People with Hearing Loss. It includes a link to an overview of the different types of hearing systems including the different types of captioning. 

Editor’s comment: White wireless earbuds don’t suffer the same stigma as hearing aids. But they both stick in your ears. Glasses have turned into a fashion statement, but not hearing aids despite being up to ten times the cost.

Gender neutral bathrooms are also good for other groups of people who are often neglected in the assignment of sanitary facilities. Prevailing social attitudes are probably the biggest barrier to gender inclusive public bathrooms for people who identify as transgender. A guide to gender neutral bathrooms is a great help. 

The Creating Bathroom Access & Gender Inclusive Society bathroom guide challenges current ideas. For example, is it really necessary to have male and female toilets? The guide discusses the issues and provides solutions. 

Other minority groups face bathroom discrimination. Gender inclusive bathrooms benefit people with disability and older people with carers. Parents with small children also have difficulty finding suitable toilets.

A new approach

Gender-neutral bathrooms have sparked many public debates in the US, however, in Australia, this is still a fairly new concept.  We are familiar with unisex accessible sanitary facilities that provide a space that allows carers and users of any gender.  Yet, the public services’ push towards gender neutral bathrooms to foster inclusiveness of transgender and intersex employees are causing debate in its Canberra buildings.

The National Construction Code in Australia only recognises the provision of male and female sanitary compartments. Perhaps universal design will provide the solution that architects are looking for:

“Because public bathrooms need to be designated male or female, it forces transgender and nonconforming individuals to choose between the two, sometimes leading them into uncomfortable or unsafe situations. The code leaves architects with a choice, too: take the easy route and design single and multi-occupancy bathrooms labelled “male” or “female,” or design around the code–the latter of which often takes more creativity and resources.”

All gender bathrooms – embracing change

An academic paper discusses the “why” from the perspective of university staff and students and their restroom needs on campus. Thoughtful design gives a person a sense of security and belonging. Floor plans included. The title of the paper is, All-gender Restrooms: Embracing change in the built environment. Time for building codes to catch up.

Transgender, recreation and inclusion

People who identify as transgender are often concerned about their safety in public recreation situations. Dreaming About Access: The Experiences of Transgender Individuals in Public Recreation is a report of the qualitative research undertaken by Linda Oakleaf and Laurel P. Richmond. Designing for the inclusion of people who identify as transgender is not just about participation. It also affirms their worth and dignity. At the end of the executive summary they say,

“Practitioners who wish to translate data from this study into policy should focus on two areas: removing barriers to access, and affirmatively encouraging participation. The barriers discussed most often by participants related to public/private spaces such as bathrooms, locker rooms, and showers.

Practitioners should ensure that all locker rooms, bathrooms, and showers allow for privacy. As is frequently the case with  universal design, this will benefit many users who are not transgender. While the best practice would be to provide gender neutral spaces, at a minimum there should be at least one stall with a door in each bathroom and curtains or other barriers in all showers. Policies and procedures should affirmatively include participants across the gender spectrum and should be aimed at increasing participation.”

More on public bathrooms

The latest access consultants’ newsletter has a focus on bathrooms in different settings as well as continence problems.  

There’s also a discussion on the best terminology for labelling public toilets. Gender neutral was a term coined a while back, but there are new thoughts. Many people who identify as transgender or intersex feel unsafe in public toilets. A survey in the US found more than half avoided public bathrooms and use strategies like not drinking. Access the newsletter can be online through issuu, or downloaded in a 9MB PDF file. 

Bottom line – should we have any toilets designated and signed by gender or should they just be toilets?  As the sign says – Who cares? Just wash your hands.

Lee Wilson also covers some of the issues related to public toilets. He says, “Gender neutral toilets cater for people who for many reasons feel uncomfortable using a toilet that is designated as either male, female or unisex. In the future, we will see an increase in these amenities”.  

Katherine Webber did an international study on toilets and toilet needs and behaviour. She links it to social and economic participation. 

There are good reasons why revolving doors are not a good idea for a lot of people. But how many designers know this. Unless the building code says don’t do it we will continue to see these in new buildings. The New Zealand Government produced a useful guide to support their building code. It covers building accessibility and explains why some designs are just not helpful. 

Buildings for everyone: Designing for access and usability is a good practice guide which goes into fine detail. For example, problems with sudden changes in light levels, issues with highly patterned flooring, and how wheelchair users might inadvertently damage doorways or tiling. The guide also links to features to the relevant sections of the Building Code. 

While this is a New Zealand publication, there is good information for other jurisdictions. The main contents are:

1. 1. Builder user activity
   2. Surrounding area and transport
   3. Pedestrian circulation
   4. Vehicle circulation and parking
   5. Building entrances
   6. Internal circulation
   7. Interior space
   8. Fixtures and fittings
   9. Building types
   10. Means of escape 
   11. Building management

This guide explains the “why” of the specific designs. So there should be no more thinking, “near enough is good enough because a little change here and there won’t matter”. It does matter. The publication is from the New Zealand Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment.

Welcoming and inclusive communities

Universal design is mostly associated with the disability community but it is much broader than that. The concept of inclusion means everyone – people from all walks of life regardless of who they are, where they are from and what they can do. The subject of migrants and rural communities is often absent from discussions on inclusion. However, when it comes to economic growth, regions and migrants become the focus of attention. So a guide on welcoming and inclusive communities is most welcome in this space.

The guide is written with local stakeholders in mind. It is a place-based, community-driven process. Understanding the barriers and enablers for different migrant groups underpins this universal design approach to settlement.

The Planning for Welcoming and Inclusive Communities guide is based on research and is structured in three parts: an introduction, opportunities of regional migration, and initiating a settlement strategy. Seven appendices complete the document. The steps of assessment, consultation and planning are explained in detail with helpful guidance.

The individuals and organisations involved in the settlement process have an opportunity to contribute to the design of practical policy. Of course, when consultation is done well people begin to feel welcome.

“Many migrants would preference rural or regional Australia above a major city, because of a strong desire to engage in farming activities. For many, this desire to connect with the land is more important than securing a specific type of employment or cost of living.”

The guideline is a joint initiative of Welcoming Cities, Monash Migration and Inclusion Centre and the Queensland Government. The Welcoming Cities organisation has more to say about settling migrants in regional areas.

A book to help

Published in 2012, Steinfeld and Maisel’s book, Universal Design: Creating Inclusive Environments, is still relevant today as a standard text. It introduces designers to the principles and practice of designing for all people. It covers the full range from the foundations of accessibility to the practice of inclusive design.

Topics include interiors, products, housing and transportation systems. Best practice examples demonstrate the value of universal design as both a survey of the field and reference for researchers. Trove has a copy, otherwise it is available for purchase through Google Books or Wiley publishing. 

Remodelling a sloping urban open space with a heritage building is no easy task. Taking a universal design approach is one way to solve the issues. The re-design of Schandorff Square shows how to turn a parking lot into a park using a universal design framework.

The problem was making a city space, with a heritage wall and gate, on a sloping site, into a pleasant place to walk, and to have informal get-togethers.

The height difference of seven metres was the main challenge. But with some universal design thinking to drive the design they came up with a successful inclusive and accessible design. Lots of seating areas and visual contrast increase the accessibility of the site. In addition, designers also found the right mix of plants to suit people with allergies. 

See more detail on the story about this universally designed open space and the difficulties they overcame. Several photos illustrate the final design, and the designer explains their universal design approach in a Vimeo video. 

Editor’s Note: Norway has almost no flat land and is at the forefront of rolling out universal design everywhere. So the myth that you can’t do UD on sloping sites is put to bed.

Re-modelling a city park

A landscape study brings together aspects of universal design and accessibility with wellbeing. Using an existing park in a Polish city as a case study, researchers had to weigh up the advantages and disadvantages of eliminating some features in favour of others.

For example, the loss of a sports field in favour of a new recreational feature suited to a wider range of age groups. A sensory garden and a garden pavilion where food stands could operate are a major plus. The paper goes into some technical detail, with lots of charts showing their assessment criteria.

When the remodelling of the park was complete, the final assessment phase showed increased visitation. However, getting to the park was still problematic due to the poor accessibility from nearby streets. This is a key point and something emphasised in the Everyone Can Play guideline that has the three key elements for a successful play space: Can I get there? Can I play? Can I stay?

The title of the study is, The results of qualitative research on health-affirming urban places on example of new planned central park in Gdynia. 

Neighbourhood design has a role for both road safety and social inclusion. Pedestrian death rates are rising. What’s the cause? Is it smartphones or road design and drivers? Or is it both? Australian figures show the older generation is a big part of the fatality toll. But they are not likely to be looking as smartphones as they walk. So road and street design need another look for safe and inclusive neighbourhoods.

The American Society of Landscape Architects has an excellent guide on neighbourhoods and street design. Safe intersections, wider footpaths, accessible transportation, multi-sensory wayfinding, legible signage, and connected green spaces are addressed in the guide. City of Sydney gets a mention (see picture above) about a larger signage system that helps pedestrians calculate walking times within the city. 

Neighbourhood design important for inclusion

An article published in The Conversation about inclusive communities suggests neighbourhood and urban planning have a key role in promoting diversity, and through diversity comes safety and inclusiveness. This is particularly the case for adults with an intellectual disability.

The authors stress the “main issue is not the type of accommodation, but its location. The neighbourhood, its design, and the community of people who live there are all significant factors for supporting safety and inclusion.” And surprisingly the exclusion of cars (in terms of thoroughfares) via a return to the cul-de-sac is seen as a significant design principle to reconsider for inclusive neighbourhoods. Preliminary results found three critical aspects for designing an inclusive neighbourhood:

1. 1. actual and perceived safety within the street and neighbourhood
   2. access to services and amenities via walking, cycling or public transport
   3. inclusion in community life and local neighbourhood activity.

The title of the article is, Contested spaces: who belongs on the street where you live?

How can a building that compromises safety win an architectural award? Answer: by avoiding any reference to accessibility. A public building in Canada won an award, but the building is not user friendly for all. The video below shows how designing for designers or awards instead of users can produce hazardous results. That’s how a poorly designed building wins an award.

A blind user demonstrates the hazards whether using steps, the ramp, or even the elevator! It is easy to see how some users would think this thoughtless design. This is a great educational video on why handrails and ramps need to be done in a particular way. Universally accessible design is clever design, but this building is not clever. You can also read the article in the star.com