Discussion about the benefit of electric versus fossil fuel vehicles will go on for some time. Regardless of the propulsion method, roads take up a lot of our land and environment. Case studies of road closures in favour of pedestrians, are appearing regularly in the literature. The aim of these car-free zones is to give more space to people to move around by walking and cycling. But not everyone can ride a bike or use public transport and this group is probably bigger than we think. Climate activists are keen to reduce the number of cars on our roads whether electric or not. An article on the World Economic Forum website discusses the issues with just one sentence about people with disability. This is going to be a major issue if climate activists forget diversity and disability. There are more people with mobility issues than most people think. Some are not in the disability statistics because they fall under long term health conditions. Then there are non-physical reasons for using cars. Personal vehicles are treated as personal safety devices by people who are physically frail of have a psychosocial condition. That also means they don’t like taxis or car share. People who become blind and have not learned the ways of public transport will use taxis and ride share to drop them exactly where they need to go. Public transport still has gender issues too.
Cars are still mobility devices
With uneven or absent footpaths, older people begin to feel unsafe and then the car becomes a mobility device. When they cannot drive, they prefer a family member to drive them to the shops and medical appointments. That’s partly because they haven’t used public transport in the past and/or don’t feel safe. And cycling with the week’s shopping after picking up a child from school or child care is not an option for many parents.The title of the article is, Are cars an urban design flaw? Cities advance car-free zones. The article presents case studies across Europe in the quest to reduce road space and increase living space. And car-free doesn’t mean pedestrian only – it means cyclists can mingle with pedestrians. For people with hearing or sight impairments, or people unsteady on their feet, this is not helpful. The city of Oslois increasing their car free zones, but are making sure people who need to use a car are catered for.
Finding ways to help people understand universal design is not easy. Many have tried by creating frameworks, policies, and guidelines. Many have stayed with the 7 principles of universal design, now thirty years old. Some have used these principles as a checklist for implementation or evaluation. Others have attempted their own definitions and explanations. So it’s good to see a a useful and thoughtful evaluation framework for understanding and implementing universal design in the built environment.
Mosca and Capologo have developed a universal design framework for the built environment that is up to date with current thinking. It encapsulates physical, sensory and social qualities of the environment. The background research for the framework included stakeholder input. This takes it beyond access compliance and evaluates aspects such as user convenience and social inclusion.
Three key elements or universal design categories:
Physical-Spatial Quality: the capability of the environment to foster easy, comfortable, functional, and safe use of space and objects. This means being able to physically interact with a system;
Sensory-Cognitive Quality: the capability of the environment to foster orientation, comprehension of the service, and comfort of users. This refers to the features that impact peoples’ senses and cognition;
Social Quality: the ability of the environment to enhance well-being and inclusion. It considers emotional stimuli and social integration among users.
The framework is about performance and assessing the quality of the built environment beyond access. Mosca and Capologo used 21 indicators and 8 main criteria in their work.
Universal design offers a set of principles in design practice to meet the needs of the vast majority of a population. However, there is a lack of an accountable approach to measure and analyze the built environment with a universal design lens. This study aims to develop an evaluation framework to assess UD in public buildings to determine, in addition to accessibility requirements, the usability and inclusion of projects for different users.
Multicriteria Decision Analysis (MCDA) was adopted as research methodology to systematically and scientifically develop the framework.
We devised a hierarchical framework consisting of three main categories of universal design (physical, sensory, and social), eight criteria (usability, functionality, safety/security, wayfinding, understanding, environmental factors, well-being, and social inclusion), and 21 indicators.
The proposed framework can be considered as an innovative approach in the field of accessible design evaluation since it explores the relation among a multiplicity of aspects, including human performance and social factors, to evaluate the quality of UD buildings
Editor’s note: I’ve seen a lot of attempts at frameworks and this is one of the best so far. Yes, universal design is evolving.
It’s not often that people diagnosed with dementia get asked what works for them in terms of home design. People with dementia want to age in place in the same way as others. However, this requires integrated and diverse living solutions. The only way to do this is to design with people with dementia.
In a master’s thesis, Kembhavi explains the background to her research and the research objectives. Using a co-design process she identified three key concepts important to people with dementia: choice, integration, and service support. The process was not linear – many modifications and iterations were required to arrive at the final result.
To begin, the idea of aging in place was investigated. This inquiry created the first design challenge. That is, factors that make aging in place difficult. This resulted in the adoption of a user-centered design philosophy. User-centred design focuses on the requirements and desires of users throughout the concept development process.
This paved the path for the second research topic: ‘how can people with dementia be involved in developing living solutions for themselves?’
This masters thesis covers a literature review, design methods, and an implementation strategy. It includes case studies with images and explanatory graphics. The conclusion explains the background to the research, and how the research was done.
From the abstract
Giving people the ability to choose their way of life is an effective way of developing living alternatives for people with dementia. Residential services and spaces, engagement services and spaces, and support services and spaces must be addressed through service and space provision to enable aging in a place of choice. A strong network of these elements in the area could potentially allow a greater population to age in place.
By integrating the serviced housing with the housing for other user groups, the thesis proposes a strategy that incorporates serviced housing as a component of the standard housing stock. The serviced housing is built on the principles of residency, engagement, and support. As part of this approach, new services such as drop-in consultations for persons seeking advice, social spaces such as a cafés, and residential services such as a dementia hotel are proposed.
A branding strategy is advised to de-stigmatize and incorporate people with memory decline. This is an attempt to change an image associated with such spaces, into one that is inclusive and open to the community. The thesis with demonstration of the concept’s scaling and its benefits in the realm of living solutions for people with dementia.
It’s not just the buildings or landscaping that make cities – the spaces in between matter too. These is where the social aspect sits. Blue and green infrastructure and public art are important factors and it’s universal design that joins the dots for urban design.
Landscape architecture, green/blue infrastructure, artistic strategies and universal design work together for attractive and safe public areas. This is the proposition in an article in the latest issue of Urban Planning. The key point of the article is “in-between spaces” and how to transform them.
The article’s theoretical framework is about the relationship between the elements of the city. Tools for public space are also discussed, with universal design acting as a tool for merging the city. This is because universal design brings benefits to everyone – social and physical.
The article concludes with case studies and solutions for connecting “social tissue”. Cities are constantly changing and should planned as such.
In the in‐between spaces of cities, there are many problems: functional, spatial, economic, environmental, visual, and social. The article explores the possibilities of solving existing problems and the possibilities of using the potentials of in‐between spaces with regard to the changing nature of a city.
The article, of a discursive character, aims to answer the questions of whether connecting a city with public spaces can be a catalyst of changes, and what tools should be used to facilitate the flux of material factors (like goods or natural resources) and immaterial matter (e.g., ideas or cultural patterns).
The new approach assumes this would be most effective when using landscape architecture, green/blue infrastructure, artistic strategies, and universal design in public spaces. The expected result of the research is to show the purposefulness and possibilities in creating attractive and safe public areas of in‐between spaces as an on‐going micro‐ or macro‐process of urban change on a wider scale.
It was recognised that integrated actions combining the humanistic, ecological, and technical approaches could bring significant benefits to society, preventing existing problems, not only spatial and visual (changing the city directly), but above all social and environmental, having an impact on the functioning of the city from a much longer perspective.
The results show how the transformation process of public spaces may change the nature of the cities. Also how it improves the compactness of existing cities, and increases the quality of life. Selected case studies illustrate the scale, scope, and benefits of possible actions.
Visual contrast, or luminance contrast, is a key feature of universal design, but how well can we measure it? It’s a mainstream issue and something designers need to consider from the outset. It’s one thing to know the importance of visual contrast, but knowing how to measure it is another.
Backlight makes toilet sign hard to see
For most people, vision is their most dominant sense. About 80% of our perception, learning, cognition and activities use visual cues. Contrast helps us detect objects from the background and to perceive distance.
Inadequate contrast leads to confusion and difficulty negotiating the environment, even if only temporarily. Australian Standards require a certain level of luminance contrast in the built environment. But most access consultants use their own eyes as the measuring tool. Is this good enough? Probably not.
A photo shows the confusing visual cues
Penny Galbraith took conference delegates through the two main measuring instruments and there is good reason for not using them. One is costly and the other is heavy and bulky. Then she introduced a free app for a smart phone called Get Luminance. While there is still more work to do on establishing the validity of the app, it gives a better guide than a guess by eyesight.
There is much to consider and it is good to see there is a solution. Photographs are two dimensional and often provide an indication of poor contrast. If the place is unfamiliar it is sometimes difficult to make out certain features. For example, a stainless steel sign against a concrete wall.
As our populations age we will have more people experiencing low vision. This means that contrasts between objects will become an increasingly important factor in negotiating the built environment.
Although standards stipulate a certain luminance contrast and levels of light (lux) for buildings, how are they measured, who measures them, and what are they measured with?
This issue was investigated by a team in Norway using staircases for the case studies. They found that the tools used by builders and planners vary, and this results in different contrast and light readings for the same staircase. Other variables were also found to influence the readings, such as reflection or glare from overhead lighting. Sunny or cloudy conditions, the shadow of the measurer when measuring, and different angles and positions of the meter all bring different results.
The findings and conclusion of the study raise an important question: Are the staircases as bad as they seem in terms of not meeting the legislative requirements? Or are the requirements too difficult to fulfil? The team concluded that the answer lies with a representative group of people with low vision guiding them on understanding usability. Another case of standards being useful but not entirely effective – the users have the answer once again.
L.D. Houck1 , K. Gundersen, O. Strengen: Universal Design 2016: Learning from the Past, Designing for the Future. H. Petrie et al. (Eds.)
Seeing the Light
What is luminance contrast and how do you measure it? The non-technical explanation is the contrast of the light reflected on one surface compared with that of another, adjoining or adjacent surface. For example the contrast between the kitchen bench and the cupboard below and the wall behind.
Contrasts create greater safety especially in areas like the kitchen and bathroom. Lee Wilson lists the many things in and around the home and public buildings that need such contrast. He explains in more detail the everyday items that we might not think of: coat hooks, locker handles, buttons, switches, toilet seats, floors/walls, and more.
How can we measure the economic benefits of designing our built environments to ensure access for everyone? Good question. Tourism has a solid body of knowledge on the economics of inclusion, and housing studies cite savings for health budgets. However, we need a benchmark to show clear and direct economic benefits for stakeholders and society. But it has to be meaningful accessibility, not just minimal compliance to standards. That’s the argument in a paper from Canada. An article in the the Journal of Accessibility and Design for Allhas a good look at the literature on the subject. Research papers agree that there are overall economic benefits in making products and services more accessible. But we still need a way of getting hold of data and finding a good method for measuring. That’s the key argument in the paper.The title of the paper is, Measuring economic benefits of accessible spaces to achieve ‘meaningful’ access in the built environment: A review of recent literature.
Meaningful accessibility
Meaningful accessibility is about how the built environment enables everyone to participate in social and economic life. As the authors say, “meaningful accessibility and universal design go hand in hand—meaningful accessibility is a goal of universal design”. They also note that accessible environments are perceived as an altruistic intention rather than a business choice. That is, the notion of special designs for a small group of people who need them. The aim of the paper is to draw attention to the gap in the research in areas such as planning, urban design and architecture. A strong voice from users of places and spaces calling for change remains essential. So too, is a change in discourse about disability being outside the frame of ‘normal’.
Concluding comments
In the concluding comments the authors say meaningful accessibility is harder to sell than green buildings. And that’s despite reduced material costs and energy savings. From a human rights perspective accessibility shouldn’t be an option – it’s a fundamental requirement. Whether a better or more rigorous framework for economic analysis will win the day is still questionable. The political context is far more complex. The evidence in Australia on the economic benefits of accessible housing was not sufficient to sway all jurisdictions. The argument that “it costs too much” is consistent with the narrative of disability being outside the frame of normal. Editor’s note: The argument for change is not about economics, it’s about political will. It was only when the Victorian and Queensland governments took the lead on accessible housing that the building code was changed. People say to me that we should be explaining the economic benefits if we want accessibility and inclusion. Sadly, the many economic studies have fallen on stony ground and remain silent and ignored. This website has more than 20 articles on the economics of inclusion and universal design. Use the search box with “economic” to find them.
Three papers from the International Journal of Architecture and Planning address universal design. Once you scroll through the usual context-setting paragraphs on the principles of universal design, the research itself has something to offer. The articles are on cinema experiences, user experience and public space
Disability and Otherization: Readings on Cinema in The Light of UD Principles. The study explains the relationship between architecture and disability in cinema, and how it is portrayed. Using 6 well-known films that include othering, the researchers apply the 7 principles of universal design to analyse how disability is portrayed. Interesting way of dissecting societal attitudes and how such films might impact on social attitudes perhaps reinforcing prejudices.
Public Space and Accessibility examines pedestrian ways including ramps. Specific dimensions make this a guide largely for wheelchair access. Car parking and bus stops are also covered. The article reports on a workshop they ran on universal design. It ends with the note that other disabilities including cognitive diversity now need to be considered. Perhaps of most interest to access consultants to compare with Australian standards.
Infrastructure built before disability activists gained legal recognition of their human rights is often inaccessible. Newer buildings have basic access according to the standards imposed by governments. However, standards are no guarantee for full access for everyone. Consequently, urban researchers continue to write in the hope of effecting change for the accessibility of public space. A chapter in the book, Future of the City, is yet another offering about universal design and how accessibility is for everyone. This one includes a chart with solutions for typical barriers. These solutions are prescriptive with dimensions and measurements. The chart covers paths of travel, vertical travel, spatial elements and fittings, and transportation infrastructure.Photographs and good examples illustrate the points made. The information is useful for councils and capital works staff. It fits neatly with the Age Friendly Checklistfor Councils.The title of the open access chapter is Accessibility of pubic space. Although there are some language differences in disability terms, the article is easy to read and makes some clear points. For example,
“For many people leading an independent life may be fully conditional on the accessibility of public spaces. Through accessible places, such people have a chance to participate in the social and economic life of the country or local society.”
“It is estimated that up to 30% of society have permanent or temporary limitations in mobility or perception. Many of these people do not have the status of a disabled person. Therefore, it can be said that accessibility concerns all of us.”
The chapter concludes with a comment about the gradual change in the accessibility of public buildings. However, there is more work to do.
European built environment access standard
European Commission has published a built environment standard for accessibility. It describes basic, common minimum functional requirements using universal design principles. The accessibility and usability requirements relate to the design, construction, refurbishment and maintenance of indoor and outdoor environments. The standard was based on consensus between relevant stakeholders. TheCEN-CENELEC webpagehas more detail about the standard and what it contains. The document is titled, EN 17210:2021 Accessibility and usability of the built environment – Functional requirements. There is a related document about public procurementto support accessibility in the built environment. This is also part of their Active and Health Ageing strategy.The “CEN-CENELEC Protocol on accessibility following a Design for All approach in standardization” outlines the procedure to help technical bodies decide whether accessibility, with a Design for Allapproach, should be addressed when developing or revising a standardization deliverable.The European Committee for Standardization is one of three European Standardization Organizations (together with CENELEC and ETSI). They are officially recognized as being responsible for developing and defining voluntary standards at European level.The websites are not the easiest to navigate but there is more information if you care to start searching their standards.
The Illustrated Technical Guide to the Accessibility Standard for the Design of Public Spacespublished in 2014byGAATES (Global Alliance on Accessible Technologies and Environments) is comprehensive. GAATES is based in Canada and refers to the Americans with Disabilities Act for standards, but they also include best practice features and design considerations. This means the design guide is applicable almost anywhere.
The guide is available as a Google Docs version or you can view it online. The Table of Contents lists: Paths of Travel, Recreational Trails, Beach Access Routes, Outdoor Public Use Eating Areas, Outdoor Play Spaces, Accessible Parking, Obtaining Service in Public Spaces, and Maintaining Accessible Public Spaces.
Barcelona architecture: high angle view of the city’s typical urban gridWalkability is much more than paved walkways. To encourage people to get out and about, places and spaces need to be inviting. We know that urban design impacts our health and wellbeing so it’s important to get it right. Whether people go by foot, e-mobility or mobility device, size matters in urban design. Nikola Babic says that the scale and form of buildings has a big impact on walkability. Height and width of places and spaces play their part. For example, the sense of scale is blurred when streets are too wide. Active frontages such as shops and cafes, good lighting and a sense of safety are critical factors in attracting pedestrians. Green infrastructure is another important element to include. With the outbreak of COVID19, more people are aware of the importance of walking. However, most footways are too narrow to provide physical distancing. A good case of where size matters. It also matters for accessibility. Having welcoming streets should be part of the accessibility plan. Babic discusses the “superblock model” in Barcelona and the 15-Minute City in Paris as examples of what works and what doesn’t. His article is very readable and good for anyone new to this topic. Babic encourages discussion with others to further develop ideas. Babic ends with, “This short paper is just a beginning of a more in-depth research of walkable and ‘healthy’ urban forms which will explore the complex relationship between the history of urbanism, urban form, urban design, social processes and well-being.”The title of the article is, Superblocks – The Future of Walkability in Cities?It can also be downloaded from the Academia website.
Discussion about the benefit of electric versus fossil fuel vehicles will go on for some time. Regardless of the propulsion method, roads take up a lot of our land and environment. Case studies of road closures in favour of pedestrians, are appearing regularly in the literature. The aim of these car-free zones is to give more space to people to move around by walking and cycling. But not everyone can ride a bike or use public transport and this group is probably bigger than we think.
Climate activists are keen to reduce the number of cars on our roads whether electric or not. An article on the World Economic Forum website discusses the issues with just one sentence about people with disability. This is going to be a major issue if climate activists forget diversity and disability.
There are more people with mobility issues than most people think. Some are not in the disability statistics because they fall under long term health conditions. Then there are non-physical reasons for using cars.
Personal vehicles are treated as personal safety devices by people who are physically frail of have a psychosocial condition. That also means they don’t like taxis or car share. People who become blind and have not learned the ways of public transport will use taxis and ride share to drop them exactly where they need to go. Public transport still has gender issues too.
The framework is about performance and assessing the quality of the built environment beyond access. Mosca and Capologo used 21 indicators and 8 main criteria in their work. 
It’s not often that people diagnosed with dementia get asked what works for them in terms of home design. People with dementia want to age in place in the same way as others. However, this requires integrated and diverse living solutions. The only way to do this is to design with people with dementia.
It’s not just the buildings or landscaping that make cities – the spaces in between matter too. These is where the social aspect sits. Blue and green infrastructure and public art are important factors and it’s universal design that joins the dots for urban design.
As our populations age we will have more people experiencing low vision. This means that contrasts between objects will become an increasingly important factor in negotiating the built environment. 
The findings and conclusion of the study raise an important question: Are the staircases as bad as they seem in terms of not meeting the legislative requirements? Or are the requirements too difficult to fulfil? The team concluded that the answer lies with a representative group of people with low vision guiding them on understanding usability. Another case of standards being useful but not entirely effective – the users have the answer once again.
What is luminance contrast and how do you measure it? The non-technical explanation is the contrast of the light reflected on one surface compared with that of another, adjoining or adjacent surface. For example the contrast between the kitchen bench and the cupboard below and the wall behind. 
How can we measure the economic benefits of designing our built environments to ensure access for everyone? Good question. Tourism has a solid body of knowledge on the economics of inclusion, and housing studies cite savings for health budgets. However, we need a benchmark to show clear and direct economic benefits for stakeholders and society. But it has to be meaningful accessibility, not just minimal compliance to standards. That’s the argument in a paper from Canada.
Three papers from the International Journal of Architecture and Planning address universal design. Once you scroll through the usual context-setting paragraphs on the principles of universal design, the research itself has something to offer. The articles are on cinema experiences, user experience and public space 
Infrastructure built before disability activists gained legal recognition of their human rights is often inaccessible. Newer buildings have basic access according to the standards imposed by governments. However, standards are no guarantee for full access for everyone. Consequently, urban researchers continue to write in the hope of effecting change for the accessibility of public space. 
European Commission has published a built environment standard for accessibility. It describes basic, common minimum functional requirements using universal design principles. The accessibility and usability requirements relate to the design, construction, refurbishment and maintenance of indoor and outdoor environments. 
