Category: Research papers for built environment

Three articles were published in Accessibility in the Laboratory about creating inclusion in school and research laboratories. Good to see this topic discussed as it broadens our thinking about universal design and where it needs to be applied (that is, everywhere). The first is about accommodating students with disability in chemistry teaching laboratories. This is especially important now that the STEM subjects are being promoted and encouraged. The second is focused on the modifications that labs might need to undertake. They include people with reduced hand strength in their discussions. The third is about invisible, or not readily observable, disabilities that need to be considered. They discuss stigma and other challenges students face in the lab. Each chapter can be purchased separately if you don’t have institutional access for a free read. The book is published by the American Chemical Society. Here are the full titles:

Laboratory Safety for All: Accommodating Students with Disabilities in Chemistry Teaching Laboratories

Accommodating Persons with Physical Disability in the Lab

Hidden or invisible disabilities and Laboratory Accommodations  

Ever considered wind breaks for street design? Or making all car parking spaces wide enough for everyone to open the door fully? That would be a universal solution! In an observational study from South Korea, streets were evaluated and compared using the seven principles of universal design. Some of the common issues are reported, including the plan to be inclusive and accessible, but lost in translation when it comes to implementation. The paper looks like it has been translated to English, but the key points are evident – including considerations for tourists, which is something many cities are considering now. Also interesting from the point of view that UD is an international concept.

Ever wondered what people get up to in their retirement years? This slideshow, Neighbourhood Design and the Activities of Older Home Owners gives a good idea – visiting family and friends and medical appointments top the list.

The presentation discusses the barriers and facilitators of neighbourhood activity older people encounter in their day to day life. Footpaths, or lack thereof, featured as a key issue. It also covers the other main components of being able to get out and about – public transport, street furniture, wayfinding, public toilets, handrails on stairs, safety and security.

The presentation has lots of explanatory graphs and is based on research by Bruce Judd, Diana Olsberg, Joanne Quinn and Oya Demirbilek from UNSW.  

New ideas are evolving on ways to activate public space. Formal and informal spaces are discussed in Activating Public Space: How to Promote Physical Activity in Urban Environments by Malgorzata Kostrzewska. Examples used are from Australia, UK, and Poland. In the latter part of the article the author discusses design ideas for activating space. Controversially, the she says design should be based on tolerance rather than exclusion of unwanted behaviours, “Instead of introducing numerous prohibitive signs (against skateboarding, parkour, ball games, etc.), it is better to seek a compromise concerning terms of use of the space specified by all the stakeholders in the course of workshop meetings and their participation in the design process. The compromise solutions already in existence (e.g. in Warsaw) confirm that if all the parties acknowledge their respective needs, they will understand and respect each other.” The conclusion section lists the most important spatial features to consider in any urban design.    

According to research by Susan Thompson and Gregory Paine, lower income and disadvantaged households feel the negative impacts of high density living more than others. They conclude that “blindly pursuing a uniform denser city agenda will only reinforce and exacerbate health inequalities”.

The concept of universal design captures the healthy built environment agenda along all other aspects of urban planning and design. Steinfeld and Maisel (2012) define universal design as “a process that enables and empowers a diverse population by improving human performance, health and wellness, and social participation”.

Urban environments should be suitable for all, not just for some.  See the article, which first featured in The Fifth Estate, for more detail. Susan Thompson and Gregory Paine are part of the City Futures Research Centre at University of New South Wales.

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?

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.

The title of the chapter is, So much more than building regulations: Universal design and the case of practice.

The full document may be access through the Aalborg University site. If you subscribe to ResearchGate or Academia.edu you may be able to access this chapter without needing the whole book.

Published in: Accessibility As a Key Enabling Knowledge for Enhancement of Cultural Heritage, 2016, p. 115-130.