NEW SOUTH WALES
Contact: ACAA NSW Chairperson
Robyn Thompson
SOUTH AUSTRALIA
Contact: ACAA SA Chairperson
Grant Wooller
QUEENSLAND
Contact: ACAA QLD Chairperson
Angela Chambers
3 From the President’s Desk
4 Fellow Award: Farah Madon
6 Fellow Award: Howard Moutrie
8 Accessible beach entry: the challenges
VICTORIA
Contact: ACAA VIC Secretary
Lynda Wilem
WESTERN AUSTRALIA
Contact: ACAA WA Chairperson
Vacant
President: Lindsay Perry
Vice President: Farah Madon
Secretary: Lynda Wilem
Treasurer: Howard Moutrie
Ordinary Members:
Hamish Murray, Sharlene Howland, Bruce Bromley, Daniel Bedwell
ACCESS INSIGHT EDITOR
Farah Madon
ACCESS INSIGHT EDITORIAL TEAM
Christine Cheung and Jane Bryce
COVER PHOTO CREDIT
iStock Photo
Please email the Editor if you would like to showcase your project on the cover of the next Access Insight
12 Accessibility of Aquatic Facilities: an Architect’s Perspective
20 Water Fun For Everyone: Italian beaches
24 Beaches are for everyone!
27 Hot Apps
28 Technical Insights:
Difficult Building Classifications
28 Would you believe it???
Well 2023 is certainly off to a flying start and here we are in March! I am not exactly sure how that happened but as I continue to scramble through each day, it is great to know the Access Insight team have been busy preparing this issue.
Water…what is an Australian summer without it?
This issue looks at water in the context of accessibility and takes you on a journey to the beach and aquatic centres – we even get to visit Italy! Thank you to all our contributors –the experiences and challenges presented give an integral insight into ensuring barriers to beaches and pools are removed. Thank you also to our regulars contributors who continue to bring us your columns.
If you attended the AGM last year, you would know that we have two new Fellow Members – Farah Madon and Howard Moutrie. Their dedicated efforts and accomplishments in the field of access consulting are showcased in this issue. I can personally attest to the work and commitment this pair continues to contribute to our profession. Thank you for your selfless efforts and time dedicated to the cause.
In other ACAA matters, we have Hamish Murray and Sharlene Howland joining the ACAA Management Committee – I look forward to working with both of you to further progress this wonderful organisation.
This provides a great segue to some general ACAA updates – I apologise for being a little slack in the communication department this year. Key points are:
• The website is coming! Bruce Bromley and myself are working closely with the web developers and can I just say I do not think you will be disappointed!
• In addition to our mini-conference and gala dinner in September, we will be hosting five (5) webinars throughout the year. These are currently being organised so check your emails for updates. As usual we intend to present a range of interesting and diverse topics to keep your CPD in check.
If you would kike to contribute to Access Insight, host a webinar, assist the committee or just provide general feedback, please feel free to contact me and we can chat.
Enjoy this issue and take care.
Lindsay Perry PRESIDENT / Association of Consultants in Access Australia
Farah completed her Architecture degree with honours from India and immigrated to Australia at the age of 22. She worked as a registered Architect and was introduced to the field of Access Consulting via a CPD event on Accessibility. In 2007 she started her own practice Vista Access Architects with a focus on disability access consulting.
In 2010 she joined the NSW Access Consultants Subcommittee and then the ACAA National committee as an ordinary member where she continues today, in the role of Vice President of ACAA. In her role on the ACAA Management Committee, she has been instrumental in organising four ACAA National Conferences and several ACAA NSW network meetings.
In 2017 Farah was the founding editor of the ACAA’s Access Insight magazine. In addition to being the Keynote speaker at the 2019 ACAA Conference Farah has been a speaker at several seminars both nationally and internationally. Farah represents ACAA at the Standards Australia ME-064 committee and was the lead technical drafter for the updates to AS1428.1 that was released in 2021.
Farah has provided feedback for various public comment documents on behalf of ACAA including feedback on the NSW SEPP (State Environmental Planning Policy) Seniors and Housing for people with a disability and NCC (National Construction Code) Livable Housing Design Standard
Outside her role on the ACAA management committee, Farah currently participates on the following key committees concerning access for people with disabilities, on an honorary basis:
• The Australian Government's NDIS (National Disability Insurance Scheme) SDA (Specialist Disability Accommodation) Reference Group member.
• Member of Standards Australia Committee ME-064, which is responsible for the AS1428 suite of Australian Standards for Access for people with disabilities and AS4299 Adaptable Housing
• Community Representative Member of the Penrith City Council's Access Committee
• Vice President of Livable Housing Australia
• Member of Australian Institute of Architect’s (RAIA) National Enabling Architecture Committee
• Member of the NSW GovernmentEveryone can Play Advisory Group
• Changing Places Australia's Technical Advisory Team member
• Member of ABCB’s Livable Housing Implementation Advisory Committee
Farah was the principal author of the Australian NDIS SDA Design Standard, which is the first standard of its kind in Australia that has raised the bar of design of accommodation for people with disability in Australia.
Farah provides pro bono services to worthy not for profit organisations. In the last few years she has provided pro bono access
consultancy services to Bear Cottage (Children’s hospital-respite and end of life care for children with life-limiting conditions), Nova Employment (Disability Employment Service), The Haven (Women’s Shelter for victims of domestic violence), Nepean Disability Organisation (NADO), Grace’s Place - worldfirst residential trauma recovery centre for children affected by homicide, Luke Priddis Foundation for children with ASD (Autism Spectrum Disorders) to name just a few.
Currently Farah is working (pro-bono) on a large research project with the UTS (University of Technology Sydney) on accessibility for people with disabilities.
Some of her recent awards include:
• 2023 - Mulgoa Woman of the Year, awarded by NSW Government, for making a significant impact in improving accessibility in the LGA (local government area)
• 2021 - Excellence in Inclusion Award, awarded by Western Sydney Women with Altitude for ‘Being an outstanding individual working in the community transforming society and working to create social change’.
• 2021 - Australian Access Award, awarded by Center for Accessibility Australia, for creating a free educational app called SDA Tools to assist with design for people with disabilities.
• 2019 - Access Inclusion Award Winner, awarded by ACAA, for an SDA project that demonstrated a high level of accessibility
• 2019 - Penrith Citizen of the Year, awarded by Penrith City Council for championing accessibility in built environment on a local and national level
Farah certainly has made an outstanding contribution to both the profession and our Association and is a worthy recipient of Fellow Membership.
Howard’s journey into access consulting started in 1989 when he was asked to represent the Building Owners & Managers Association (now Property Council) on the ME 64 committee. As a young architect he had little knowledge of the accessibility standards though he had consulted ACROD on one of his major projects and his experience on the committee was a quick and steep learning curve. During his time on the committee he was involved in the formulation of AS 1428.1-1993 and was one of the major contributors to AS 4299 – Adaptable Housing.
In his role as the BOMA representative he was asked to review the proposed Development Control Plans from a number of NSW Councils who were responding to the new DDA. These DCPs were requiring that new multi-unit housing developments include a percentage of accessible housing. Howard suggested that the new Adaptable Housing was a more appropriate response and the result was that most Councils in NSW require adaptable housing. Howard left the committee in the late 1990s but was to again join in the 2019.
After commencing his own architectural practice in 2002, Howard joined the Sutherland Council Design Review Panel, reviewing the architectural quality of all major development applications. With his experience he found himself commenting on accessibility, though at this stage it wasn’t a major criteria in the assessment process. This approach lead to a request to act as an expert witness in the NSW Land & Environment Court. The opposing expert was a formidable Mark Relf. After
the hearing, Mark asked Howard would he be interested in joining the new ACAA. He did and this changed his career direction adding access consulting to his architecture practice. In 2008, Sutherland Council asked if he would move from the Design review panel to their Access Committee as it need some rigour. He did so and remained on the committee until recently. By 2010, Howard would end his architectural practice and concentrate solely on access consulting. He was also appointed to the City of Sydney Access Panel in 2010 and later the NSW Building Professionals Board access advisory panel in 2011.
Howard has been an active member of the ACAA. With the setting up of the NSW network Howard took on the role of Treasurer in 2013 and later, in 2018, the position of Treasurer of the main body of the ACAA, a position he still holds.
Howard’s focus has always been on the technical aspects of both architecture and access consulting and is a regular contributor to the e-forum, the Insight magazine and has instigated the Technical Sub-committee and the technical advisory panel.
From a project point of view, Howard’s experience has been varied, encompassing aged care, residential, commercial, retail, heritage and educational projects. One of the most challenging was Wet’n’Wild Sydney which, with the assistance of a responsive client, won the 2017 NSW Access Inclusion Award for Outdoor Public Space.
Howard is a well-respected member of ACAA and has contributed his time in a variety of ACAA related activities both at National and State levels. He has also mentored many upcoming Access Consultants in the field and is a worthy recipient of ACAA Fellow Membership
Jane Bryce's life is dominated by Biscuit the cat, who has her well trained to dispense treats on demand. Biscuit the cat kindly lets Jane leave the house to work as an Access Consultant for Inclusive Places. As a natural redhead Jane is not a regular beachgoer despite the image provided for her bio.
Inclusion and access are all about having a predictable environment such as known maximum gradients of ramps, toilet sizes, and so on.
But beach access has many more challenges due to the uncontrollable nature of the movement of sand, water and wind. There are many images of beach-side or cliff-top houses falling into the ocean following a
storm. Those same storms also play havoc on accessible paths of travel.
First let me confess that I am not a natural beach goer (most redheads aren’t!).
This story arises from Midcoast Council on the Mid North Coast of NSW after it was visited by a colleague in late 2022 when she shared her findings.
“...beach access has many more challenges due to the uncontrollable nature of the movement of sand, water and wind... storms [also] play havoc on accessible paths of travel.”
THINGS THAT I’VE OBSERVED IN MY LIMITED BEACH GOING
Sand erosion at base of ramps and stairs onto beaches (Maroubra):
Sand over TGSIs (Tamarama Beach):
Good access for areas that are not subject to the challenges of the elements such as boardwalks and stairs leading to beaches (Maroubra):
But rather than give up because of the challenges of the elements, I want to say thanks to the Local Government Authorities, the councils and shires that work on making beaches as accessible as possible.
Like many other Councils that have coastal areas, Midcoast Council’s Disability Inclusion Action Plan includes objectives and actions associated with improved accessibility in its area. One objective in the Liveable Community part of its DIAP is ‘Recreational space meets the needs of people with disability’ with the action against this objective being ‘Include wheelchair beach access in Forster Main Beach Master Plan’.
Rockpool Reserve Tuncurry has had an access ramp and handrail for many years. Council reports that there is “quite a dropoff at the end due to the water movement undermining the structure”.
In 2021 the retaining wall was rebuilt in front of the beach area. An accessible ramp onto the beach was included in the design. The surrounding facilities include an accessible toilet, BBQ, playground.
Forster Ocean baths has also been there for many years. Whilst there is a handrail and ramp, it is reported to get slippery if not cleaned regularly, a challenge for many outdoor aquatic facilities I’m sure.
The Ocean baths had an upgrade of amenities including a combined unisex accessible toilet and shower in 2019. In 2020 a picnic shelter with accessible BBQ and picnic settings was also added to the area.
I encourage everyone who loves the beach to continue to work together on maintaining and increasing beach and waterway access so that more beaches can be added to the Accessible Beaches Australia website: https://accessiblebeaches.com/
With thanks to Calypso Watson, Community Development Officer, and her colleagues at Midcoast Council for their assistance with this article
Derek Mah
Derek Mah is a registered architect, associate and aquatic specialist at NBRS with over 30 years experience in the design and construction of aquatic/leisure centres and public buildings.
Like many Australians of my generation, we have fond memories of our childhood visits to the local swimming pool in the 60s and 70s. The opportunity to seek relief from sweltering summer heat waves and eat totally unhealthy snacks and treats from the kiosk was always welcomed. We learnt to swim there and maybe enjoyed or endured the annual school swimming carnival. The
facilities we enjoyed were largely due to the explosion in development of swimming facilities that followed the success of the 1956 Melbourne Olympics. Every municipality and shire across the country felt a national duty to provide its constituents with the right to be able to learn to swim and then do 50 metre laps to become the next Dawn Fraser or Murray Rose, no matter where you lived, city or country, regardless of socio-economic standing.
I look back nostalgically to my childhood experiences, but I am now well aware that many facilities did not score well in accessibility terms and many do not share similar glowing memories. Most of the upgrade project briefs we see place AS1428.1 compliance as a top priority. For many clients, this is not just an effort to reduce liability. There is often a genuine request to seek industry best practice, exceeding the mandatory. I suspect this is an acknowledgement that we could have done better in the past.
Over the last 30 years, I have had the opportunity to upgrade many of these facilities from the golden era. In many cases, the pools themselves have developed leaks, structural faults or tiling failures, or the needs of the community are no longer being met by the facility. In terms of access, step ladders into lap pools were typical. Entry stairways with handrails were common. Ramps into pools were less common. Beach entries, hoists and platform lifts were the stuff of science fiction in the 60s.
Accessibility, in general, was not high on the agenda of most local councils or architects at the time. The reason for this is the matter of another discussion, but one reason would be the lack of statutory requirements or industry standards covering accessibility. In fact, “accessibility” is a fairly recent term. For many years we labelled accessible WCs as “disabled” WCs on our drawings. The national building code in place up to 1993 was Ordinance 70. It was essentially silent on accessibility issues. Whilst AS1428.1 was first published in 1988, it wasn’t referenced by the BCA until NCC2011, making compliance
mandatory. This was augmented with the provisions of the Disability Discrimination Act Access to Premises – Buildings Standards 2010, making property owners vulnerable to claims from the aggrieved. This set a new expectation in the community and councils and architects were obliged to address the expectation, willingly or under duress.
To summarize, the setting of benchmark standards in law to reflect the expectations of the community is an iterative process. These standards are reviewed and refined over time in light of experience in the field. With reference to accessibility of aquatic facilities in particular, I believe we are at the mid-point of this process and it remains immature, a work in progress.
Requirements for access into swimming pools was first introduced into the NCC2011 (Part/Specification D3.10). However, AS1428.1-1988 predates this by 2 decades. I posit that when AS1428.1 was written, the authors had not intended the document to be applied to ramps and stairs in pools. The physics of movement in an aquatic environment are radically different to a terrestrial one. The act of entering a pool presents a transition from one universe into another. In the water world, bathers are barefoot, they move like astronauts, wheel chairs tip over, you don’t fall in deep water when you slip, vision of the pool floor is distorted and everyone is hearing impaired under water. From my viewpoint in the 90s, the general opinion was that AS1428.1 was inappropriate for pool applications, but could serve to a limited degree as design intent and a guide to design of ramps and stair. We then designed from first principles, research and experience, tempered with common sense.
Since the introduction of NCC2011, I have witnessed a gradual increase in the application of AS1428.1 by assessors. I have also seen a widely inconsistent application between assessors and it appears arbitrary. The first question is usually “Who is the certifier?” to gauge the challenge ahead of us.
For example, some certifiers require tactiles at the bottom of a pool stair, IN the water. Common sense would dictate that slower forward motion in water, bare feet and distorted visibility through moving water would cause one to question the appropriateness of the application of the requirement. In order to “tick a box”, this then prompts the provision of an alternative solution. I am not aware of any examples of tactiles being mandated for inside a pool anywhere else in the world.
Another issue that has been raised more frequently is the requirement for a flat landing at the top of a pool stairway. Refer D3.3 (a)(i) and (a)(ii). This requires a max gradient of 1:40 for a landing to a ramp or at steps. In a wet deck pool it is typical that the perimeter gutter grating and adjacent tiling be inclined towards the pool. This is done to help contain the pool water from escaping onto the concourse. Not only is this to conserve warm treated pool water and energy, but it is also a requirement of Royal Life Saving - Guidelines for Safe Pool
Operations to contain pool water. The angle of incline to achieve this is in the order of 1:20. However, this exceeds the 1:40 requirement so where the stair meets the gutter cannot be considered a compliant landing. This then presents another candidate for an alternative solution or compromise the containment requirement.
Why should the pool stair even be assessed if it is not required for compliant access? A stairway is over and above the requirement for compliance. I could delete the stair and still comply. There should be no box to tick. It’s tempting to become cynical at this point.
Why stop there? It would make more sense to insist on tactiles on the concourse to warn persons of the drop off at the edge of a wet deck pool. However, I have not had a certifier request this.
One issue that has always been of concern was the kick rail at the base of the ramp handrail. Whilst this performs to keep the castor wheel of the wheelchair from fowling and containing the general motion of the
Photo: Level landing vs water containment“With reference to accessibility of aquatic facilities in particular, I believe we are at the mid-point of this process and it remains immature, a work in progress.”
wheelchair, we believe the use of a kick rail in an open balustrade may present an increased entrapment risk in a pool, especially for small children. To counter this, an alternative is to provide a solid kerb or wall in lieu of a kick rail. This reduces the entrapment issue, but then increases the width of the ramp and increases the complexity and cost of construction.
NCC Part D3 requires that pools with a total perimeter greater than 40m associated with a building required to be accessible (eg.9b) be provided with 1 means of access. This captures most pools with length of sides exceeding 15m (eg. Typical Learn to Swim pool). This can be via a i) ramp, ii) beach entry, iii) platform lift or iv) sling style pool lift. Any pool with perimeter greater than 70m, option iv) is not available. We would usually advocate for the ramp or beach entry methods as these offer the most dignity. The platform and sling methods do not promote independence as they require staff intervention for both entry and exit and draws attention. These modes are more appropriate for retrofits of existing pools or where space does not permit a ramp or beach entry. I believe Part D3 is reasonably well aligned with best practice and accessibility equipment currently available to the industry.
Since NCC 2019 F2.9, there is a requirement to provide an adult change facility within an aquatic centre that has a pool with perimeter
Photo (above): Accessibility vs entrapment
greater than 70m. This is usually triggered by a typical 25m pool, which drags in most existing and new council facilities. This is a large space, approx. 4.4m x 3.2m, heavily equipped with height adjustable change table, powered hoist and electric door. This adds significant cost to a project, and if not anticipated, may be difficult to accommodate spatially in an established design. The assessor usually asks if the design is to be assessed under BCA 2019 or Changing Places guidelines. The only complication here is that the NCC does not provide a DTS design for a facility that includes a shower. This is a shortcoming that should be addressed. As this is essential in an aquatic context, we adopt the Changing Places design that does include a shower, then supply the fitout as required by NCC. The difference between the two equipment lists is minimal. Having the design be assessed under NCC means that the certifier will be able to assess the design without the need to engage an additional Changing Places consultant. We have recently completed 3 new aquatic centres and it is wonderful to
Photo: Retrofit platform lift - Wentworthville Memorial Swim Centre
see the finished facilities in operation. This is life changing for many in the community and are welcomed by the operators.
This was just a sneak peek into access to aquatic spaces from an architect’s point of view. I think it would be fair to say that most architects in this role embrace accessibility as a concept. It is the right thing to do. At NBRS, we seek to create life-changing environments, so the accessibility of our designs is paramount. The journey to making our community accessible is well underway. However, there is a way to go to develop regulations that are customized for the aquatic environment and don’t frustrate the process through inappropriate and arbitrary application of the current regulations.
Photo: Adult change room
Italy is a peninsula with 8300 km of seaside coast, surrounded by more than 800 islands, with the two biggest and famous islands, Sicily and Sardinia. From north to south, the coasts are very different, rocks in some areas and sand beaches in others. Orienting oneself on the accessibility of Italian beaches is quite difficult, not only due to the different morphology of the coasts, but also due to the lack of accessibility that notoriously distinguishes Italy as a nation. To make up for the shortcomings of national policies on accessibility, there are associations and private companies. Hard work has been done by these private groups to make part of the Italian coast accessible to wheelchair users. Rome&Italy group accessible tourist services, leader in the field of accessible holidays in Italy, with more than 20 years of experience, has taken an active part in making Italian beaches accessible, with its:
• equipment rental https://www. romeanditaly.com/accessible/rentalequipment-for-disabled-new/
• accessible transfers https://www. romeanditaly.com/accessible/accessibletransfer-in-italy-new/
• many other accessible services dedicated to tourists in a wheelchair.
The accessible beaches in Italy are always part of private bathing establishments.
The bathing season in Italy usually runs from May to the end of September. In other periods of the year, even if the weather permits it, the bathing establishments with private accessible beaches are closed, and therefore it is not possible to use the services they make available during the bathing season.
All accessible bathing establishments in Italy are private and usually the payment of an entrance ticket is required, then the services dedicated to disabled customers are free.
Emilia Romagna is the area of Italy with the largest number of accessible beaches, which is bordered by the Adriatic Sea, with the small towns of Rimini and Ravenna. In this area we have thirty-eight 100% accessible beaches, as well as the main city for historical touristic attraction, Bologna, that is also considered to be the food valley capital, with the famous Parmesan cheese and Parma ham. Plan an accessible vacation in this area: it is the perfect combination of history, food and relaxation.
In 2023, we have 650 wheelchair-accessible beaches all around Italy, which includes accessible paths for wheelchairs, assistance services and the possibility of using equipment such as the wheelchairs JOB, and SAND&SEA or the TIRALO beach bed, to make the beaches accessible to everyone. At the moment there is no public mapping of all accessible beaches in Italy. Only by consulting the regional tourist information it is possible to know the list of accessible regional beaches and what accessible services they offer.
Detailed maps with the list of all accessible Italian beaches, with details of the accessible services offered, is possible to have by contacting Rome&Italy group accessible tourist services https://www.romeanditaly. com/accessible/. The 650 beaches in the list, have different numbers of equipment and services, and unfortunately not all the beaches are 100% accessible, some of them have only a few accessible services. This is the reason why Rome&Italy group accessible tourist services has divided the list into two different groups:
• one with 100% accessible beaches, that must have an accessible path for wheelchair from the entrance to the sea, accessible toilets and at least one JOB wheelchair as a service,
• the second group with some deficiencies that has problems so they cannot be defined as fully accessible.
Before planning an accessible holiday in Italy with a visit to the sea included, we recommend that you take several factors in consideration to plan it in the best way possible and with no worries.
Choose the accessible beach, near an area where you have a large selection of
accessible hotels, or you have to book your accessible holiday at least one year in advance!
The best areas of Italy for accessible services near the accessible beaches and tourist attractions are:
Only 20 minutes from Rome there are two 100% accessible beaches:
• Bagno Spiaggia La Madonnina
Via Degli Atolli - Focene, Fiumicino (ROMA) with accessible path for wheelchair, JOB, accessible toilet, and staff for assistance
• Bagno Elmi
Lungomare Toscanelli 103 - Ostia (ROMA) with accessible path for wheelchair, JOB, accessible toilet
There are other beaches in this area but not 100% accessible for the classification criteria of Rome&Italy group accessible tourist services.
Only 30 minutes from Venice there are three 100% accessible beaches:
• Spiaggia Villaggio San Paolo
Via Carlo Alberto Radaelli 7 - Cavallino Treporti (VENEZIA)
• Settore L5
Lungomare Trieste, Caorle (VENEZIA)
• Stabilimento Balneare Casa Bianca Via Andrea Bafile 11, Lido di Jesolo (VENEZIA)
There are other beaches in this area but not 100% accessible for the classification criteria of Rome&Italy group accessible tourist services.
Only 30 minutes from Portofino there are two 100% accessible beaches:
• Spiaggia Sestri Levante Spiaggia S. Margherita Ligure
Viale Andrea Doria Ghiaia
• Bagno Marinella
Sarzana (LA SPEZIA) only 20 minutes from the Cinque Terre
There are other beaches in this area but not 100% accessible for the classification criteria of Rome&Italy group accessible tourist services.
Only 30 minutes from Lucca and Pisa there is one 100% accessible beach:
• Bagno Teresa
Viale Europa 2 - Viareggio (LUCCA)
There are other beaches in this area but not 100% accessible for the classification criteria of Rome&Italy group accessible tourist services.
There are many other regions in Italy with 100% accessible beaches for our criteria, but this article doesn’t want to be a comprehensive list of beaches. WE hope to provide you with some examples and ideas for those wanting an Italian accessible vacation on the beach.
Article written by Stefano Sghinolfi
If after reading this article, you feel you need a vacation to the Italian sea, and you are thinking of planning a relaxing trip to Italy with accessible beaches, art, history and good food, feel free to contact Rome&Italy group accessible tourist services www.romeanditaly.com/ accessible/ at info@romeanditaly.it with any questions about accessible beaches and accessible tour services in Italy.
As a wheelchair user himself, going to the beach has been difficult or outright impossible for most of Shane’s adult life. From his frustrated lived-experience and knowing there was a better way, Shane was inspired to act to influence the overdue change he saw in Australia’s coastal landscape – better accessibility. In 2018, he started a charity – Accessible Beaches Australia – dedicated to making beaches more accessible for people living with disabilities, and their families (and dogs).
Accessible Beaches Australia is a charitable organisation advocating, educating, and committed to the belief that everyone deserves to enjoy the beach. Advocating for an inclusive experience for all Australians of all abilities, neurodiversity and age, Accessible Beaches Australia has partnered with individuals, organisations, communities and councils to make over 30 beaches across Australia more accessible, kicking off a wave of accessibility that has seen an additional 50 beaches become accessible all over Australia. – and they’re just getting started.
“Going to the beach is a quintessential part of the Australian way of life”, says Accessible Beaches Australia chairperson and founder, Shane Hryhorec.
Around 85% of the Australian population live within an hour’s drive to the beach. 1 in 4 Australians are living with a disability. If you do the maths, that’s over 4-million people living with a disability in Australia. Another 4-million over the age of 65, and getting to the beach is only half the battle.
Before you reach the sand, there are a myriad of environmental barriers creating obstacles and safety risks for people with both visible and invisible disabilities, as well as the physical challenges and limitations that can come with ageing.
Accessible parking, access points, footpaths, toilets, access to water and shade, the availability of equipment and trained supports such as life savers – these can all limit, prevent or enable the accessibility of a beach or waterway.
With over 12,000 beaches around Australia, accessibility looks a little different everywhere you go. Accessibility can also mean different things for different people, depending upon their personal challenges and unique disabilities.
For some people with physical disabilities that limit or prohibit their mobility, an accessible beach can include special beach matting, a beach wheelchair, or beach walker. For someone with a disability impacting their ability to regulate body temperature, shade and access to drinking water can make a beach more accessible. For someone with low vision or blindness, Tactile Ground Surface Indicators (TGSI) and contrasting colored surfaces would make a beach more accessible by providing warning or direction to safe and accessible areas. There are many components that improve the accessibility of a beach, and every component makes a beach a little more accessible for people in your community.
The Shire of Eurobodalla in NSW recently made 7 of their beaches accessible, one of which is Surf Beach. This is a great example of accessibility, boasting many components of an accessible beach including, accessible parking, beach matting, beach wheelchairs, accessible bathroom, accessible shade, accessible seating and access to fresh water.
It is important to remember, everyone’s beach experience is individual; it’s not always about
getting into the water, surfing or getting a tan. Many people visit the beach to engage socially with family and friends, have a picnic, feel the fresh air, be in nature, or even improve their mental health and wellbeing.
You can access the free Accessible Beaches directory at https://accessiblebeaches.com/
Surf Beach listing: https:// accessiblebeaches.com/beach-directory/ abc-beach-template-3c3et
Staff in local councils such as diversity and disability inclusion officers, as well as council members and local MPs play important roles in enabling beach accessibility in their community in a variety of ways, such as infrastructure planning as well as action plans for improving access and inclusion in their local government areas (LGA). Members of the Public can advocate for their beach to be made accessible and Accessible Beaches Australia have helped countless people do just that.
The dedicated staff and volunteers at Accessible Beaches Australia have worked with dozens of local councils, government and surf liver savers around Australia to make beaches and waterways more accessible.
Through the provision of training, information and resources, Accessible Beaches Australia helps individuals and organisations gain an understanding of the challenges of people with disabilities, and how they can best assist them in their beach experience.
Many of the same principles, equipment and accessibility that makes beaches and waterways accessible can also be used to make community swimming pools more accessible as well.
Beach accessibility is important for many reasons. For people with a disability and older people, it means they can access more of their community, not just some of their community.
According to people with disabilities and mobility challenges, one of the most important reasons beach accessibility is important is to enable greater social inclusion for individuals and families. Accessing the beach should not be limited to the few, or available to some but, not others. Being able to access and participate in your community can give you a sense of belonging and connection, a way to deepen relationships with friends and family, create and foster social networks and reduce isolation. It can even help build greater confidence and the feeling of individual acceptance and safety in the community.
After struggling to navigate a wheelchair and the soft sand at many beaches for years,
beach-lover Rochelle said she was finally able to access the beach for the first time in 10-years at Port Phillip beach, one of Melbourne’s accessible beaches.
“(I) loved today. You made a little miracle happen and because of what you did, it gave me a feeling of being normal.”–Rochelle---
With 40% of Australians either living with a disability or aged 65 or older, there is a good chance you know or will know someone who could benefit from better accessibility to beaches and waterways. Whether it’s to catch the morning sunrise, feel the ocean air, spend a full day out at the beach, or watch a beautiful sunset – beaches are for everyone, and everyone deserves the chance to go to the beach.
There are many ways which you can get involved in making beaches more accessible for yourself, your friends, your family and your community. Find out how to get involved at https://accessiblebeaches.com/getinvolved
Author: Nick Warren, Accessible Beaches Australia
...with immediate delivery and commissioning on our NDIS approved compliant Portable Ensuites (4 models). We are Placeable – We are Able
At Hearing Loop Australia, we are proud to provide you with the best service and advice in tailored sound and hearing solutions to deliver quality results for your end users.
We can help to:
• Design, supply, install and maintain the right hearing system for your premises and end users.
• Create performance solutions to benefit clients and end users.
• Provide you with a system that is compliant to the Building Code of Australia D3.7.
• Provide training and support for all our products.
Call our experienced staff on Check our solutions at www.hearingloop.com.au
Pictured: Rochelle Kindler at Port Phillip beach, Vic.The articles featured in Technical Insights are to prompt thought and discussion to assist our members' questions and evaluate their understanding of the technical requirements of Australian Standards and other national/international source material. Technical Insights is intended to provide background information, a different viewpoint, a perspective from an individual with lived experience of disability or to prompt further discussion and/or research by you as an access professional.
In this column I will explore some difficult building classifications under the NCC and provide my thoughts. My thoughts may not be correct in all instances but are worthy of consideration.
The NCC assigns groups of buildings with a classification of building type which is used to determine a wide range of requirements. A single building can have a number of parts of differing classifications though we are advised that in a storey, if the use occupies less than 10% of the floor of that storey then it takes the classification of the principal use. Thus, the term building is deemed to mean a building or part of a building. Further, the term building may refer to a structure, such as a swimming pool. The ABCB has produced a series of documents “Understanding the NCC” which includes a document on Building Classifications. This provides some advice on classifying building types.
We shall look at a few classifications and how the accessibility requirements apply.
A swimming pool is given the classification of 10b. Table D3.1 of NCC 2019 or Clause D4D2 of NCC 2022 provides requirements for a swimming pool when it is associated with another class of building. Except for a private pool in a Class1a building or associated with a single SOU in a Class 2 or 3 building access into the pool is determined by its size. Notwithstanding this, in a Class 2 or 3 building access I still required to the area surrounding the pool as it is common area for the use of the residents. I do not plan to go into any more detail on this as Paul Eltringham in the Autumn Issue of Insight has already explored the requirements for swimming pools.
I will, however, pose a number of questions. If the pool is in a Class 2 building and the pool occupies less than 10% of the area of that storey, does it take on the Class 2 classification and what would be the implications? I think the difference would only be with respect of access into the
pool. I would think that if it were deemed to be Class 2 then as a common area, access would still be required into the pool area only, and access into the pool itself would not be required irrespective of the size of the pool. I have come to this outcome because the requirements for Class 2 building are “ To and within not less than 1 of each type of room or space …… including a … swimming pool…” , that is, it is the area containing the swimming pool which is required to be accessible. I would be thinking that it would be up to the certifier to determine the classification of the pool.
Let's assume the roof of a Class 2 building occupies the whole storey and is used as a common recreation area. The normal classification would be part of the Class 2 building and thus access is required to it, but could it be Class 9b, an assembly building? The implications of this are significant – including the provision of toilets.
To be honest, I would not have considered this as a Class 9b, but a certifier on a project of mine recently did – it is an area for social gathering.
In residential terms, the concept of a Sole Occupancy Unit is relatively clear, or is it? The NCC defines a sole occupancy unit as “a room or other part of a building for occupation by one or joint owner, lessee, tenant or other occupier to the exclusion of any other owner, lessee or tenant”.
In a Class 2 building, this generally applies to the individual units or apartments and the NCC requires access to the front door of each SOU when accessed via common property. This is quite straight forward, but the situation becomes a little unclear when the units are townhouses or townhouse style apartments where access is through
a private courtyard. Is the entry to the SOU, the gate to the courtyard, or the entry to the dwelling?
My thought is that the courtyard is for the sole use of the occupant and thus the gate is the entry to the SOU. This is important, because if the gate is the entry to the SOU the path from the gate to the entry to the dwelling could contain steps as an accessible path is no longer required. However, if the gate is not the entry to the SOU and it is the dwelling entry then steps would not be permitted within the courtyard. To me it is clear, the courtyard gate forms the entry to the SOU, but it could perhaps also be argued that the courtyard is not “part of the building” but I would disagree with that interpretation. However, if that argument was true, then access to the entry door of the dwelling would still not be required because the door is not accessed via common property – the courtyard being part of the dwelling.
With the introduction of the Livable Housing Design within the NCC 2022, the situation changes – except for those States who have not adopted this part. This Part of the NCC does not use the term SOU, just dwelling, and unlike SOU the term dwelling is not defined. Under Part 1 of the Livable Housing Design, a step free path is required to the entry of each dwelling, however, for Class 2 buildings Part 1 does not apply on the assumption that access is already required under Clause D4D2(4). Interestingly, if the townhouse was a Class 1a building, which it would traditionally be, then an accessible path through the courtyard would be required, unless the accessible path was provided via the parking space/garage. It is noted there are also other concessions based on the site gradient etc.
In a Class 3 hotel etc, the situation is quite straight forward, each hotel unit is a sole occupancy unit. Access is required to the front door of all units on an accessible floor and into any accessible units.
What about a Class 3 boarding house? Most of this type of building are just the same as an hotel, however, some are designed around a coliving model, where a group of residents, with their own bedroom, share a living area, kitchen etc. Many student housing buildings operate in this way. Refer to the sample plan (right).
It could be considered that each “house” is a sole occupancy unit, like a unit in a residential flat building, but that is not the case. Although the residents may share a living area, bathroom etc, the individual bedrooms are all an SOU. Thus, access must be provided to each bedroom.
To complete this analysis, the definition of a sole occupancy unit includes, for example, an office tenancy though there are no consequences relating to access to the entry. However, it does highlight, what to me is an error in AS 1428.1-2009. You will find that Clause 15.3.2 refers to basins and Clause 14.2 refers to switches and GPOs in accessible sole occupancy units. Technically, a commercial tenancy is required to be accessible and, thus, it could be deemed that the basins, switches and GPOs are required to comply, but it is my understanding that the Standard is referring to residential SOUs in a Class 3 building only.
A residential aged care building is a Class 9C building and the NCC requires access to the areas used in common by the residents and to the SOUs. There is no mention of the administration area. So, based on the 10% rule, if the administration area was less than
10% of the area of a storey then it would take the 9C classification and access would not be required. However, if it was for example in the basement where it occupied 20% of the floor area, would it then be Class 5? That seems to be a common interpretation, but I am not convinced it is correct. The function of a Class 9C building doesn’t just involve the resident areas the administrative function is an integral part of the building use, so to me it should retain the 9C classification.
A similar example exists in a childcare centre. If the office area is on a separate floor to the “classrooms” does it become Class 5 or is it an integral part of the 9b classification.
The ABCB document I referred to earlier, uses a similar example. They refer to a Class 7b warehouse with an office area occupying 12% of the floor and this is deemed to be Class 5. They actually say “must be classified separately”. To me, and I accept I may be incorrect, but if the office is part of the operation of the warehouse it should take on that classification, however, if the office is separately dealing with the public then I accept that it should be Class 5. I came to this opinion because a Class 5 building is an “office building used for professional and commercial purposes” which to me indicates it is a business in itself not an administrative function of another business.
Apple has launched a new service called SignTime. Customers can now communicate with AppleCare and Retail Customer Care by using Australian Sign Language (Auslan). Customers visiting Apple Store locations can also use SignTime to remotely access a sign language interpreter without booking ahead of time.
SignTime uses video to connect you with an Australian Sign Language (Auslan) interpreter. Go to the SignTime web page and connect with an Auslan Interpreter by using your device’s camera and microphone. The Auslan interpreter will contact Apple Support for you and translate your conversation.
There are many apps out there that turn your phone into a magnifying glasshandy for reading small text on packaging, medications and menus. But did you know that iPhone (iOS 10 or later) has a very useful magnifying glass feature using the lens of the camera?
You can zoom right in and view the text or image in real time. Or you can capture the image and then zoom in on it. This way the image is stable as you’re trying to see it. Move the image around with your finger to see different parts of the image. There is also a torch and high contrast function to make the text even easier to see.
Voice Dream’s mission is to develop accessible, speech based software for mobile devices. One of a suite of tools, Voice Dream Reader enables you to read anything on your device by listening to it. You can load content from websites, Drop Box, iCloud, Google drive and scanned paper documents. It is compatible with PDF, EPUB, DAISY audio and text, Microsoft Word and Microsoft PowerPoint. There are 36 built in voices in 30 languages. It also has synchronized word and line highlighting to enhance comprehension which can help boost reading skills and knowledge retention.
Check this out: A new kind of amusement ride for the disabled, also comes with a themed shared zone marking.
If you have any photos that you would like to submit in our next “Would you believe it” section, please email us the (copyright free) photo to admin@access.asn.au
CLICK HERE for our advertising rate card
CLICK HERE to fill in a quick feedback survey to help us improve Access Insight
CLICK HERE for a free subscription to Access Insight
This publication (and any information and advice contained in it) is intended to be general information only. It is not intended to be comprehensive, and readers may not rely on it in relation to any specific matters in which they are involved. Such specific matters involving the subject of the articles and other information contained within this publication require the considered opinion of an expert in the field appraised of all the circumstances of the matter. It may also require legal or insurance advice from suitably qualified practitioners.
The views expressed in the articles reflect the author(s) opinions and do not necessarily are the views of ACAA. The published material, adverts, editorials and all other content is published in a good faith and ACAA accepts no liability for any loss or damage of any kind caused by errors or for the accuracy of claims made by the advertisers.
All rights reserved and nothing can be partially or in whole be reprinted or reproduced without a written consent. In Access Insight you might find links to the websites, third- party content and advertising. By using Access Insight, you acknowledge that and agree that ACAA cannot be held responsible and shall not be liable for content of other websites, advertisements and other resources.
ACAA reserves the right to make changes to any information in Access Insight without notice.
PO Box 252, New Lambton NSW 2299
admin@access.asn.au 0493 100 306
www.access.asn.au
@accessconsultantsaustralia @acaaaus
