The Magazine for Association of Consultants in Access Australia SUMMER 2023/2024
International Day of People withDisability
ACAA State Networks NEW SOUTH WALES Contact: ACAA NSW Chairperson Robyn Thompson SOUTH AUSTRALIA Contact: ACAA SA Chairperson Grant Wooller QUEENSLAND Contact: ACAA QLD Chairperson Angela Chambers VICTORIA Contact: ACAA VIC Secretary Lynda Wilem WESTERN AUSTRALIA Contact: ACAA WA Chairperson Vacant
Committee of Management President: Farah Madon Vice President: Bruce Bromley Secretary: Lynda Wilem
IN THIS ISSUE 3 4
From the President’s Desk Meet your new ACAA management committee
6
ACCESS 2023: wrap up
8
New UTS research “lifts the lid” on how wheelchair users access public bathrooms
14
Environmental clues: using them and losing them
20 Designing inclusive built
environments for non-verbal communicators with severe intellectual disabilities
Treasurer: Howard Moutrie
24 Technical Insights:
Ordinary Members: Hamish Murray, Sharlene Howland, Daniel Bedwell
27 Would you believe it???
ACCESS INSIGHT EDITOR
GET IN TOUCH
Farah Madon
ACCESS INSIGHT EDITORIAL TEAM
Is AS1428.1 approriate?
PO Box 252, New Lambton NSW 2299
Christine Cheung and Jane Bryce
admin@access.asn.au
Cover photo credit
0493 100 306
iStock Photo
www.access.asn.au @accessconsultantsaustralia
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD PREVIOUS EDITIONS 2
@acaaaus
ASSOCIATION OF CONSULTANTS IN ACCESS AUSTRALIA / ACCESS INSIGHT / SUMMER 2023-2024
FROM THE PRESIDENT'S DESK
I
would like to say what an honour it is to have been elected to the position of President of ACAA by the ACAA Committee of Management. I would like to thank past President Lindsay Perry for her leadership, particularly during the Covid years.
Along with the new ACAA Committee of Management, I look forward to making further improvements to support ACAA members by means of streamlining membership applications and CPD lodgements, launching the new ACAA website, rebranding ACAA membership logos, creating a digital format of Access Insight and doing everything I can to support members and increase our membership numbers. On behalf of ACAA, I would like to congratulate Rosemary Kayess on her appointment to the role of Disability Discrimination Commissioner. Ms Kayess contributed to the drafting of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, and I have no doubt that she will play a crucial role in advancing the human rights of people with disability in Australia. The 2023 National Conference (ACCESS 2023) was a great success. The general consensus has been to again have a one-day conference in 2024, in combination with online participation for those who prefer not to travel to attend in person. We will start planning the 2024 National Conference and CPD webinar series early next year. In this issue of Access Insight, we have articles by some of our 2023 National Conference speakers. I wish you all a very happy holiday season and best wishes for the new year.
Farah Madon PRESIDENT Association of Consultants in Access Australia
ASSOCIATION OF CONSULTANTS IN ACCESS AUSTRALIA / ACCESS INSIGHT / SUMMER 2023-2024
3
Meet your new ACAA management committee Following the AGM held on the 17 November, 2023, the following Management Committee members were voted in:
President Farah Madon
Vice President Bruce Bromley
Treasurer Howard Moutrie
Secretary Lynda Wilem
Ordinary Member Hamish Murray
Ordinary Member Daniel Bedwell
Ordinary Member Sharlene Howland
HELPING YOU TRANSITION TO HOME ...with immediate delivery and commissioning on our NDIS approved compliant Portable Ensuites (4 models).
We are Placeable – We are Able
1800 010 246 placeablesolutions.com.au
4
ASSOCIATION OF CONSULTANTS IN ACCESS AUSTRALIA / ACCESS INSIGHT / SUMMER 2023-2024
Access and Universal Design in the built environment Courses Courses will be delivered live online via Zoom enquiries to: admin@accessinstitute.com.au Go to www.accessinstitute.com.au to secure your place in any Course CPP50721 Diploma of Access Consulting - 11 days
CPP50721 Diploma of Access Consulting - Course for Architects - 10 days
For further information please read the Course Information Handbook
For further information please read the Course Information Handbook
CPP50721 Diploma of Access Consulting Course for Occupational Therapists - 9 days
CPP50721 Diploma of Access Consulting - Course for Building Surveyors - 8 days
For further information please read the Course Information Handbook
For further information please read the Course Information Handbook
Bridging Course for CPP50721 Diploma of Access Consulting - 3 days
CPP40821 Certificate IV in Access Consulting - 8 days
For further information please read the Course Information Handbook
For further information please read the Course Information Handbook
CPP40821 Certificate IV in Access Consulting Course for Architects - 7 days
CPP40821 Certificate IV in Access Consulting - Course for Building Surveyors - 5 days
For further information please read the Course Information Handbook
For further information please read the Course Information Handbook
Access Qualifications via RPL/CT Pathways There is a range of options available to candidates to obtain these qualifications including demonstration of Recognised Prior Learning (RPL) and Credit Transfer (CT). Contact admin@accessinstitute.com.au for options
Livable Housing Australia - Design Guideline Assessor Course - 2.5 hours
CPPACC4005 Conduct Building Access Audits Course - 2 days
For further information please read the Course Information Handbook
For further information please read the Course Information Handbook
Understanding Access Legislation and Universal Design in Buildings - 1 day
Understanding Access Legislation and Universal Design in Buildings - 1 day
For further information please read the Course Information Handbook
For further information please read the Course Information Handbook
Accredited Specialist Disability Accommodation (SDA) Assessor Course 4.5 hours
Understanding Access and Universal Design in Parks and Playgrounds - 3 hours
For further information please read the Course Information Handbook
For further information please read and register
Access Institute can also provide in house training to any organisation on a wide range of topics relating to access and Universal Design in the built environment.
www.accessinstitute.com.au
T: 03 9988 1979 info@accessinstitute.com.au RTO Provider Number 22404
ACCESS 2023 15 September | Luna Park, Sydney
T
he ACAA 'ACCESS 2023' Conference was a valuable time of learning as well as connecting with industry colleagues. ACCESS 2023 included the following sessions:
SESSION 1: TECHNICAL New NCC Livable Housing Standards Farah Madon Our first 'Technical' session at ACCESS 2023 (ACAA's Conference), 'New NCC Livable Housing Standards' was presented by Farah Madon (Vista Access Architects), an accredited member, current President and Fellow of the ACAA. Farah has over 20 years of experience as an access consultant. Her work has been recognised in 2019 through the granting of the Penrith Citizen of the Year Award and in 2023, the NSW Government's Mulgoa Woman of the Year Award. Farah Madon represents ACAA as a member of ME064, the Australian Standards Committee on Access and Mobility. She is also a member of ABCB's (Australian Building Codes Board's) Livable Housing Implementation Advisory Committee.
SESSION 2: TECHNICAL New Lifts Standards AS1735.12-2020 Eric Martin 'New Lifts Standards AS1735.12-2020', was presented by Eric Martin AM, an accredited member, past National President and Fellow of the ACAA. He has more than four decades experience as an access consultant. His work in this area was recognised in 2005 through the granting of the award of Member of the Order of Australia. Eric represents ACAA (along with Mark Relf) as a member of ME004, the Australian Standards Committee on lifts. This committee considers all issues associated with AS1735, including AS1735.12 Facilities for persons with disabilities. 6
SESSION 3: TECHNICAL New Carparking Standards AS2890.5-2020 and AS2890.6-2022 Mark Relf & Hamish Murray Hamish Murray presented on 'New Carparking Standards' (in 'Session 3: Technical'). Hamish started work as a carpenter and joiner in 1980, proceeded to gain Building Foreman Clerk of Works, unrestricted Builders Contractor Licence and was a Site Supervisor for jobs up to $20 Million. Since returning to the workforce, after a workplace injury 2002, he worked at Royal Rehab and Assistive Technology Australia. He currently works as the Universal Access Officer at the City of Parramatta. His experience together with his building knowledge has given him a broad understanding of the way people connect with the built environment. Mark Relf AM presented on the New Carparking Standards AS2890.5-2020. Mark Relf AM, is an accredited member, past National President and Fellow of the ACAA. He has more than four decades experience as an access consultant. Mark is a part of the ME-064 Committee of Standards Australia.
SESSION 4: THEORY UTS Research Accessibility Design for Bathrooms Phillippa Carnemolla Dr Phillippa Carnemolla is an industrial designer and an expert on policy and practice focused on developing more Inclusive Cities. In her role as Associate Professor at
ASSOCIATION OF CONSULTANTS IN ACCESS AUSTRALIA / ACCESS INSIGHT / SUMMER 2023-2024
the University of Technology Sydney she applies principles of inclusive design to remove barriers to inclusion at a range of built environment scales (homes, workplaces, public space and cities).
SESSION 5: THEORY - Research Finding the way Forward: Using and losing environmental design clues' Jen Moon In this presentation, Jennifer detailed the findings from the 2023 Guide Dogs Australia survey, specifically designed to understand the challenges faced by people who are blind or have low vision when navigating their community. Among the paramount safety concerns raised, Jennifer will give particular attention to the impact of the urban design trends that either remove or replace traditional wayfinding clues - as well as high lighting the emerging footpath challenges. Jen Moon has worked in the field of vision impairment for over 30 years, with both national and international experience and is currently working with Guide Dogs NSW/ACT. Jennifer holds a Bachelor of Arts (Disability Studies), a Master of Cognitive Science, is a qualified Access Consultant and has gained international accreditation as an Orientation and Mobility Specialist.
SESSION 6: THEORY Monash University Research and Architecture & Access Neurodiverse accessible design Ilianna Ginnis Ilianna Ginnis (Architecture & Access) and Monash University Research presented on 'Neurodiverse Accessible Design'. Ilianna's PhD research aims to develop adaptable design guidelines for the inclusion and participation of non-verbal communicators in design processes and outcomes. The guidelines will be co-designed and developed with non-verbal communicators and their support network, built environment practitioners and clinicians to create a holistic set of design guidelines that cater
to the needs and desires of the non-verbal communicators. Ilianna Ginnis is an access consultant at Architecture & Access and a current PhD Candidate within the Design Health Collab at Monash University. Ilianna has a personal connection to the field of accessibility as her younger sister, Michelle, is a non-verbal communicator with an intellectual disability, which has fuelled Ilianna's dedication to making the built environment more inclusive. Her PhD research speculates on how design processes begin to consider persons with severe and profound intellectual disability and non-verbal communication, allowing designers to integrate users into complex processes as narrators of their own experiences.
"A fabulous event that was super informative and collegial! A wonderful opportunity to make contact again with colleagues after being online for so long and chat and learn all things access and inclusion!" "An informative, inspiring and enjoyable day. While the whole day was informative and thoughtprovoking it was also wonderful to see and meet consultants from across the country in a format that was open, friendly and professional." "What an amazing day! I’m proud to be a part of ACAA and watch it grow. So much passion and inspiration in one room. I love the connection our members have and their commitment to making the world a inclusive. Magic!!" "It was such a pleasure to attend my first ACAA Conference and be surrounded by positive, authentic people with a common goal, to make the lived environment a more equitable place for all to move through and live in."
ASSOCIATION OF CONSULTANTS IN ACCESS AUSTRALIA / ACCESS INSIGHT / SUMMER 2023-2024
7
FEATURE ARTICLE
New UTS research “lifts the lid” on how wheelchair users access public bathrooms By Associate Prof Phillippa Carnemolla, Prof Simon Darcy, Barbara Almond, Farah Madon, Mark Relf AM
P
ublic bathrooms are important places. The provision of accessible public bathrooms helps to ensure health, wellbeing and equitable access to our cities, public spaces, and communities. However, the real risk of falling off the toilet pan while reaching for toilet paper and avoiding public bathrooms altogether are two preliminary findings from a new research project “An Inclusive and Embodied Approach to Accessible Bathroom Design for Powered and Manual Wheelchair Users” by the University of Technology Sydney (UTS) Disability Research Network and industry collaborators Farah Madon & Mark Relf in partnership with Spinal Cord Injury Australia and Physical Disability Council NSW.
8
The new project explores how accessible bathrooms are used by wheelchair users (both manual and power chair). It also looks at the effects of the Australian Design for Access and Mobility design code (AS1428:1) on public bathroom design. The design code takes a prescriptive approach to public bathroom design while making many assumptions about how wheelchair users access the toilets including how they use, approach and transfer onto the toilet pan. Most often, wheelchair users are considered as a single homogenous user group. The UTS research team shows that there is great diversity of accessible public bathroom use and preference within the wheelchair using community. The research team used a multimethod, evidence-based
ASSOCIATION OF CONSULTANTS IN ACCESS AUSTRALIA / ACCESS INSIGHT / SUMMER 2023-2024
research design involving field studies and innovative technology to scan the built environment accessible public bathrooms. (Newton, Carnemolla, & Darcy, 2023). The research includes video footage of wheelchair users re-enacting their use of public accessible bathrooms, in-depth interviews of those wheelchair users post-video, and an online survey with wheelchair users across Australia in the past 12 months. The team designed the online survey in collaboration with industry experts with experience with the Australian Standards Committee for Access and Mobility
(AS1428 Pt1-6) including those with lived experience as wheelchair users. The online survey used diagrams of bathroom layouts based on the Australian Standards for new buildings (Standards Australia, 2021). For example, Figure 1 identified six main types of transfer approach that wheelchair users and those with mobility disability may use in accessible public bathrooms. The research team also conducted in-depth interviews with participants recruited from Spinal Cord Injuries Australia (SCIA) and Physical Disability Council of NSW (PDCNSW) with a diversity of wheelchair types.
Figure 1: Main types of transfer approach to the toilet pan by wheelchair users Source: developed for the online survey by Farah Madon
ASSOCIATION OF CONSULTANTS IN ACCESS AUSTRALIA / ACCESS INSIGHT / SUMMER 2023-2024
9
Mark Relf AM, Accredited Access Consultant and past President of ACAA (Association of consultants in Access Australia) notes that AS 1428.1 bathroom design requirements are based of 1970's-1980's data with “a few tweaks along the way -- generally larger room size and door” and, more recently, the addition of the infamous backrest. Relf says the design has always favoured high functioning people with paraplegia and similar conditions, which has been at the expense of people with higher support needs who often use powered wheelchairs or other mobility aids.
“The more recent addition of the backrest was at the request of one member of ME064 committee of the Australian Standards responsible for the AS1428.1 which often causes inconvenience to many users,” Relf says. Preliminary findings from the UTS research show wheel-chair users often avoid public accessible bathrooms due to poor access or maintenance. The risk of falling off the toilet pan is real. In fact, there are numerous stories about how poor design creates a
higher risk of falls. For example, many toilet paper dispensers are so close to the ground that reaching for the paper means people risk overbalancing. Similarly, wet floors can be both unhygienic and treacherous making slipping a high risk if doing a sit-to-stand transfer. Participants also talk about the need for storage and shelving near toilets and sinks, particularly if they use catheters. Photo 1 shows an example of a typical accessible public bathroom including a toilet with a backrest and the positioning of other accessible features. One person interviewed in the research said they “avoided disabled bathrooms due to limited space or lack of a clean space”. Another person said: “I dread leaving my home and limit my excursions.” These comments reflect the findings of other UTS research such as “Disability citizenship: An Australian human rights analysis of the cultural industries” which examines complaint cases made under the Disability Discrimination Act, 1992 involving access to and the inadequacies of the built environment including accessible public bathrooms (Darcy & Taylor, 2009).
Photo 1: Example of an accessible public bathroom toilet layout. Photo: P. Carnemolla.
10
ASSOCIATION OF CONSULTANTS IN ACCESS AUSTRALIA / ACCESS INSIGHT / SUMMER 2023-2024
The new UTS research also identifies the different nature of the accessible public bathroom use by wheelchair users as set down by the Australian Standards for Access and Mobility and how their home residential bathrooms are far more tailored to their individual needs. One person said that public bathrooms are set up mainly for independent wheelchair users with good upper limb/hand function. Soap, paper towel, hand dryers, toilet rolls are often placed in inaccessible positions and/or in places where they obstruct the grab rail. “It’s very frustrating to have all the elements there, but you can’t reach them!”
This comment is backed up by this new UTS research on accessible public bathrooms at a major university shows that there is a high level of unsatisfactory placement of key access features as determined by the 3D scanning methodology used in the research. This is despite Australian Standards quite prescriptive guidelines as to the design and layout of accessible public bathrooms. Table X identifies that the access features with less than 50% satisfaction include door operation, door fittings/security, flush type, toilet shelf, other rubbish disposal, and evacuation notices in the research. (Newton et al., 2023). The findings of the 3D scanning methodology reinforce and support the research data.
Table X: Key Features, ranking and ratings for accessible bathrooms Category
Feature
Rank
% Satisfactory
% Unsatisfactory
Approach
Wayfinding
2
86
14
Access
1
57
43
Door Operation
3
36
64
Door fittings & Security
1
43
57
Circulation areas
1
86
14
Hazards
1
43
57
Seat
1
79
21
Backrest
2
79
21
Flush type
3
0
100
Flush Location
1
93
7
Toilet Roll location
1
0
100
Taps
2
93
7
Hand Dryer Type
3
86
14
Contrast
1
100
0
Switches
3
93
7
Toilet Shelf
2
0
100
Washbasin Shelf
2
64
36
Coat Hooks
2
57
43
Sanitary Disposal
1
100
0
Other Disposal
3
0
100
Evacuation Notices
2
43
57
Panic Alarm
2
64
36
Slip Resistance
1
100
0
Tactile Instructions
2
86
14
% Left
% Right
36
64
Entrance Layout Toilet
Washing Lighting Shelving
Waste Emergency Other
Grab Rails
Transfer Option
3
Source: Table created by author from Newton et al. 2023.
ASSOCIATION OF CONSULTANTS IN ACCESS AUSTRALIA / ACCESS INSIGHT / SUMMER 2023-2024
11
One of the most striking preliminary findings has been the level to which wheelchair users meticulously plan their public bathroom visits or avoid public bathrooms altogether. This shows that well-designed accessible public bathrooms must feature in all, inclusive public spaces. Without accessible public bathrooms people with disability cannot undertake activities for work or recreation or for travel in comfort and safety. Indeed, some wheelchair users prefer to forgo social activities than be faced with public bathrooms that they cannot access. Relf says the design requirements of AS 1248.1 “in some ways fail” as designers and building certifiers believe “this is the only way”, when in fact people are denied their preferred design simply because it varies from AS 1428.1. As a wheel-chair user himself, Relf believes strongly that there should be some latitude to customise design for the individual’s needs, rather than for a prescriptive AS 1428.1 template for a bathroom.
“One of the most striking preliminary findings has been the level to which wheelchair users meticulously plan their public bathroom visits or avoid public bathrooms altogether. This shows that well-designed accessible public bathrooms must feature in all, inclusive public spaces. Without accessible public bathrooms people with disability cannot undertake activities for work or recreation or for travel in comfort and safety"
Photo 2: Example of an accessible bathroom layout. Source: Farah Madon.
12
ASSOCIATION OF CONSULTANTS IN ACCESS AUSTRALIA / ACCESS INSIGHT / SUMMER 2023-2024
The research ultimately demonstrates the diversity of preferences amongst wheelchair users themselves, and the need to expand the research further. The UTS team also has plans for peer-reviewed articles sharing the results and further engagement with architects, developers, facility managers and access consultants. In the end, it is much less cost to the community to get this right at the design stage, rather than attempting to retrofit public bathrooms, so that they serve their purpose in providing proper access and facilities that are truly accessible and used by all wheel chair users.
Acknowledgements and Funding This work was supported by UTS Special Initiatives Grants [2712018 and 2748012]. The funding source was not involved in the conduct of the research and/or preparation of the article.
References Darcy, S., & Taylor, T. (2009). Disability citizenship: An Australian human rights analysis of the cultural industries. Leisure Studies, 28(4), 419-441 https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/ full/10.1080/02614360903071753 Newton, S., Carnemolla, P., & Darcy, S. (2023). Building information modelling and related technologies applied to the post occupancy evaluation of accessible bathrooms for people with disability. Smart and Sustainable Built Environment, (ahead-of-print) https:// doi-org/10.1108/SASBE-04-2023-0075. Standards Australia. (2021). AS 1428.1 Design for access and mobility - General requirements for access - New building work with amendments (5th ed.). Homebush, NSW: Standards Australia.
ASSOCIATION OF CONSULTANTS IN ACCESS AUSTRALIA / ACCESS INSIGHT / SUMMER 2023-2024
13
FEATURE ARTICLE
Environmental clues: using them and losing them Guide Dogs Australia 2023 Survey
G
uide Dogs Australia conducted research through EY Sweeney from February to March 2023 to better understand the needs of people around Australia with low vision or blindness to identify instances of unfair treatment or discrimination. As part of a longitudinal study, with previous research taking place in 2010 and 2015, this research was aimed to better understand the needs of people with low vision or blindness when accessing their communities. This article will focus on the findings relating specifically to footpath and urban design challenges. It will also discuss the environmental clues used by people with low vision or blindness and the paramount safety concerns when they are removed.
Survey Methodology A total of 622 people from around Australia, aged 18 years or older with blindness or low vision completed the 2023 survey. Results indicated a very strong narrative that people with low vision or blindness face numerous challenges in public places, which greatly impacts their confidence and ability to access and participate in their community. Respondents suggested that if urban design was improved and if awareness of their challenges were enhanced through community education, many of their issues would be mitigated.
14
ASSOCIATION OF CONSULTANTS IN ACCESS AUSTRALIA / ACCESS INSIGHT / SUMMER 2023-2024
Key Findings - Footpath Challenges
Shared path / Active Transport Link
The survey revealed that nearly all (96%) respondents had experienced footpath issues in the last two years. Micro mobility (e-scooters, e-bikes), shared paths, shared roads and crowd protection barriers were reported as new emerging footpath issues, not even mentioned in the 2015 research.
Shared paths, designed for both cyclists and pedestrians, emerged as a significant problem for nearly half of all respondents, a concern not reported in the 2015 survey. The issues surrounding shared paths for people with low vision or blindness stem from the challenges of safely navigating these paths, often demarcated only by a painted line, while dealing with the speed and unpredictability of cyclists and micromobility device users.
Footpath Challenges: Total respondents • New works / construction
55%
• Electric Scooters / E-Bikes / micro mobility
49%*
• Shared paths
46%*
• Outdoor dining/street furniture
46%
• Goods displays
44%
• Shared roads
35%*
• HVMB / Crowd Protection Barriers 27%* These footpath challenges were amplified by an additional 15% (average) for respondents aged between 55 – 64 years.
Figure 1: A runner, a cyclist and a person riding a scooter all on a shared path.
“I found it very hard to navigate along that part of the road (George Street, Sydney CBD) because there is no step down letting me know where the footpath ends and where the road begins. A few times people dragged me back onto the footpath because I ended up on the street. I cannot travel into the Sydney CBD on my own anymore because of the way the roads are set up.” Greg, Guide Dog Handler
ASSOCIATION OF CONSULTANTS IN ACCESS AUSTRALIA / ACCESS INSIGHT / SUMMER 2023-2024
15
Key Findings - Urban Design A critical challenge affecting the safe and independent mobility of people with low vision or blindness when accessing their communities related to shared roads/zones and flush finish road crossings. Alarmingly, 80% of all respondents lacked confidence in crossing roads when the footpath and road were at the same level. In Queensland, this figure soared to 86%. Areas where the road and footpath are at the same level are commonly found in shared zones/spaces, continuous footpaths, and flush finish intersections. Interestingly, the survey revealed no significant differences among respondents or locations, except for even lower confidence levels among respondents aged 65 and older.
Figure 2: A person riding a bicycle in a shared zone.
Continuous footpaths
Shared Roads/Zones/Spaces
A continuous footpath refers to a path that runs parallel to the main street, allowing pedestrians clear priority in areas where the vehicle traffic volumes are relatively low. This footpath remains level with the road, lacking any change in colour or texture, and extends across the side street intersection.
In a shared zone, space is shared safely by vehicles and pedestrians, where pedestrians have priority. There is no segregation of modes through kerbs, line markings, or signage. The surface remains uninterrupted across the entire area, and the speed limit is reduced to 10 km/h or less.
Technical specifications seem to be silent on the installation of warning tactile ground surface indicators. Often cycle paths run parallel to the continuous footpath so the threat of veering into a cycle path or worse, the road, is very real for people who are blind or have low vision.
This continuous surface poses challenges for individuals with low vision or blindness. The absence of clear demarcations and continuous finishes hinders straightline navigation. It becomes particularly problematic when obstacles such as street furniture, goods display, and outdoor dining are positioned along the building line. Furthermore, the presence of silent electric vehicles intensifies the difficulty of avoiding unintended veering into the path of traffic. Figure 3: A car travelling over a raised pedestrian crossing.
16
ASSOCIATION OF CONSULTANTS IN ACCESS AUSTRALIA / ACCESS INSIGHT / SUMMER 2023-2024
Flush Finish Intersections The Flush Finish, traffic light controlled intersection stands out as an incredibly dangerous urban design for people who are blind or have low vision. In these intersections, there are no gutters, kerbs, or kerb ramps; instead, there is a seamless transition from a ‘safe’ footpath to a hazardous road with only warning tactile ground surface indicators serving as the boundary marker. These intersections often feature multiple lanes of traffic in both directions, alongside public transport modes including buses and light rail vehicles. As a result, people who are blind or have low vision report heightened anxiety when navigating these locations and many actively avoid them due to the inherent dangers they pose. The survey's revelation that 80% of respondents (86% of Queenslanders) lacked confidence crossing roads at-grade, underlines the urgent need to advocate for safer and more functional design solutions that prioritise their safety and accessibility.
Figure 4: A flush finish intersection with multiple lanes of traffic and a light rail vehicle
Tactile Ground Surface Indicators (TGSIs) Australian Standards, AS 1428.4.1 (2009) Clause 2.5, which deals with 'Pedestrians and vehicles at the same grade,' is increasingly unsuitable for the evolving urban landscape and must be reconsidered. Warning Tactile Ground Surface Indicators TGSIs alone are insufficient to provide clues in high-danger areas. They should be considered as the last of many clues, not the only clue.
Guide Dogs consistently advocates for the Foreword of AS 1428.4.1 (2009) because it articulates a crucial point, Tactile Ground Surface Indicators (TGSIs) offer cues that when combined with other environmental information, assist people who are blind or have low vision with their orientation. It highlights that the use of TGSIs alone cannot rectify poor design or transform an unsafe environment into a safe one. Instead, the emphasis is on good design that minimises the reliance on TGSIs.
Key wayfinding & safety factors for people who are blind or have low vision People who are blind or have low vision encounter significant challenges when navigating urban streets and road crossings
“I am a blind woman who is highly independent. When the footpath and road are at the same level, I feel very unsafe. I cannot tell where the footpath ends, and the road begins. A kerb or kerb ramp enables a blind person to line up accurately to cross a road safely. The increased pedestrian traffic, environmental noise and obstacles such as E-bikes require huge concentration and often result in cognitive fatigue. I only have to lose concentration for a second and I can find myself on the road in the path of oncoming traffic. When I travel through Sydney CBD, I feel constantly anxious and fearful for my safety”. Leanne, Guide Dog Handler
ASSOCIATION OF CONSULTANTS IN ACCESS AUSTRALIA / ACCESS INSIGHT / SUMMER 2023-2024
17
independently. Whether they rely on long canes, Guide Dogs, or their remaining vision, ensuring their safety and orientation in an urban environment is a demanding task. Key factors for their safe travel include maintaining a straight path, distinguishing between safe footpaths and hazardous roads with compliant kerb ramps, and determining safe road crossings. A straight path is crucial for all travel methods, aiding orientation and safety. Compliant kerb ramps serve as vital markers distinguishing safe footpaths from hazardous roads, providing detectable gradient changes. These ramps enable people who are blind or have low vision to pause, assess crossing conditions, and reinforce appropriate Guide Dog behaviour when approaching roads. Identifying safe crossing points and assessing traffic conditions is paramount. Compliant kerb ramps often indicate these points and should align straight across roads to minimise the risk of veering into intersections. Controlled intersections benefit from the presence of Audio Tactile Signals (ATS) near kerb ramps, providing both auditory and tactile feedback. In contrast, uncontrolled intersections rely on hearing, which is increasingly challenged due to the rise of electric vehicles. While removing kerbs ramps might be beneficial for many user groups, their removal is certainly detrimental for the safe navigation for people who are blind or have low vision. Additionally, the cognitive load and intense concentration required by people with blindness or low vision to navigate with safety and confidence becomes even more challenging in crowded, uneven, or obstructed footpaths. The transition from a safe footpath to a hazardous road must be clear and conspicuous for their safety and independence.
The study emphasises that while urban designers may not intentionally exclude people with low vision or blindness, their designs unintentionally hinder safe and independent travel. Guide Dogs will need to collaborate with the disability sector as well as designers, adopting a co-design approach to identify safer and more functional solutions, for everyone. Our collaboration should extend to working with transport agencies and urban designers to revise technical specifications that are no longer suitable for today's environments. Specifically, we need to revisit Australian Standards, such as AS 1428.4.1 (2009), with a critical eye. Access consultants, now informed of these urban design issues play a vital role in promoting and educating for safer solutions. The resounding message from people with low vision or blindness is clear: action is urgently needed to create inclusive urban environments that prioritises safety and accessibility for all.
Window Intercom Systems & Above and Below Counter units Covering counters & Receptions with Perspex screens for people to hear or just to provide benefit to a person with hearing aids. Provide a system that is compliant to the Building Code of Australia D3.7. Can be used at Ticketing booths, medical centers, hospitals, airports & supermarkets; or where barriers are installed.
Where to from here The survey has given people who are blind or have low vision a voice in articulating their challenges when accessing their communities. www.hearingloop.com.au
18
ASSOCIATION OF CONSULTANTS IN ACCESS AUSTRALIA / ACCESS INSIGHT / SUMMER 2023-2024
FEATURE ARTICLE
Designing inclusive built environments for non-verbal communicators with severe intellectual disabilities Ilianna Ginnis Ilianna is an access consultant at Architecture & Access and a current PhD candidate within the Design Health Collab at Monash University. Ilianna has a personal connection to the field of accessibility as her younger sister, Michelle, is a non-verbal communicator with an intellectual disability, which has fuelled Ilianna's dedication to making the built environment more inclusive. Her PhD research speculates on how design processes begin to consider persons with severe and profound intellectual disabilities and non-verbal communication, allowing designers to integrate users into complex processes as narrators of their own experiences.
I
magine what it would be like if people could not understand your form of communication. For the 1.2 million Australians who are non-verbal and minimally verbal communicators1, this is their daily reality. Individuals who are non-verbal communicators and have intellectual and developmental disabilities are commonly neglected both in design processes and research2, therefore, their voices are not heard and the limited education and exposure to their needs often leave them misunderstood.
I am dedicated to addressing this issue through my research, which seeks to empower individuals with severe intellectual and developmental disabilities, particularly those who are non-verbal communicators, by allowing them to narrate their own life experiences. My doctoral study is designed to develop a set of guidelines that not only facilitate co-design methods for designers and built environment practitioners to effectively engage with non-verbal communicators but also offer recommendations for enhancing spatial features.
1 “Speech Isn’t the Only Way to Have a Conversation | #AskForChange | Scope,” Scope Australia (blog), February 19, 2020, https://www.scopeaust.org.au/blog/communication-access/speechisnt-the-only-way-to-have-a-conversation/ 2 Katie Gaudion et al., “A Designer’s Approach: How Can Autistic Adults with Learning Disabilities Be Involved in the Design Process?,” CoDesign: CoDesign with People Living with Cognitive and Sensory Impairments 11, no. 1 (2015): 49–69, https://doi.org/10.1080/15710882. 2014.997829.
20
ASSOCIATION OF CONSULTANTS IN ACCESS AUSTRALIA / ACCESS INSIGHT / SUMMER 2023-2024
My journey into my research begins with my younger sister Michelle. Michelle is 18 years old and has an intellectual disability. As a result of her intellectual disability, Michelle is a non-verbal communicator and uses pre-symbolic communication, meaning she requires interpretation by someone who knows her well. Over the years, I've witnessed the challenges she faces in both private and public spaces due to the inability of others to understand her unique communication methods. This experience has driven me to seek ways to bridge these communication barriers through design. Intellectual disabilities encompass a spectrum of conditions that affect the brain and its development.3 My research focuses on individuals with severe to profound intellectual disabilities, many of whom do not communicate verbally and require constant supervision and support with care for daily living. According to the World Health Organisation (WHO), over 1.3 billion people worldwide live with a type of disability4. Of these, over 200 million people globally have a severe intellectual disability5. Additionally, it is estimated that a significant portion of individuals with autism, typically around 25% to 30%, may remain non-verbal or minimally verbal throughout their lives6. Non-verbal communication takes various forms, this includes: • Symbolic communication – This is the use of visualisations and signing systems to communicate needs. Through the use of images, pictures and signs as well as some 3 Johnny L. Matson and Mary Shoemaker, “Intellectual Disability and Its Relationship to Autism Spectrum Disorders,” Research in Developmental Disabilities 30, no. 6 (November 1, 2009): 1107–14, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ridd.2009.06.003. 4 “Global Report on Health Equity for Persons with Disabilities,” accessed October 3, 2023, https://www.who.int/teams/ noncommunicable-diseases/sensory-functions-disability-andrehabilitation/global-report-on-health-equity-for-persons-withdisabilities. 5 “What Is Intellectual Disability?,” accessed October 3, 2023, https:// www.specialolympics.org/about/intellectual-disabilities/what-isintellectual-disability. 6 Amanda Brignell et al., “Communication Interventions for Autism Spectrum Disorder in Minimally Verbal Children,” Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, no. 11 (2018), https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858. CD012324.pub2.
keywords, a person is able to communicate wants and desires. • Non-symbolic communication – This style includes behaviours, vocalisations and interaction with the environment and communication partners. This may include facial expression, pausing, gestures, moving with other persons and aggressive or self-harming behaviours. • Pre-symbolic communication – This style of communication is unconventional and unique to an individual. These are a series of behaviours in which an individual will act to initiate conversation. At this level, communication requires interpretation to assist an individual in communicating their needs.
PhD Study intensive interaction: The following article, therefore, details my preliminary findings from an intensive interaction study. These sessions took place in the personal residences of nonverbal communicators and allowed for in-depth observations within their familiar environments. The support network for these sessions included individuals who were closest to the non-verbal communicators and had a deep understanding of their needs. The participants were a diverse group of 10 non-verbal communicators, varying in age and cultural backgrounds, each employing different communication methods. The intensive interaction method seeks to engage with non-verbal communicators to gain insights into their unique lived experiences and their connections with their environments7. Intensive interaction involves active engagement with non-verbal communicators, including eye contact, facial expressions, gestures, vocalizations, and behaviours. It allows for a deeper understanding of their lived experiences and interactions within their environments8. This approach aims to uncover valuable insights 7 Mark Barber, “Using Intensive Interaction to Add to the Palette of Interactive Possibilities in Teacher–Pupil Communication,” European Journal of Special Needs Education 23, no. 4 (November 2008): 393–402, https://doi.org/10.1080/08856250802387380. 8 Phoebe Caldwell, “Intensive Interaction: Using Body Language to Communicate,” Journal on Developmental Disabilities 19, no. 1 (2013): 33–39.
ASSOCIATION OF CONSULTANTS IN ACCESS AUSTRALIA / ACCESS INSIGHT / SUMMER 2023-2024
21
that can inform design considerations and strategies for effectively involving non-verbal communicators in the design process. Preliminary findings revolved around four major themes: physical spatial qualities, emotional spatial qualities, sensory spatial qualities, and communication qualities related to the individual and their environment. Physical elements of space refer to tangible attributes within the environment such as furniture layout and arrangement. Under physical spatial qualities, subthemes included privacy, flexibility, organization, navigation, layout, zoning, legibility, and transition. These elements highlighted the importance of creating spaces that accommodate the needs of non-verbal communicators. Emotional elements of space encompass intangible qualities that influence emotions, psychological well-being, and support for the non-verbal communicator within their environment. Some themes around emotional considerations of space include comfort, security, feedback, predictability, familiarity, rest, and choice. Sensory spatial qualities encompass various sensory experiences and include subthemes like kinesthesia, visual stimuli and perception, and tactility. These aspects are essential for regulating sensory experiences within the environment. To create inclusive physical spaces, access consultants can consider the following spatial elements: Physical • Designated quiet spaces with a variety of seating. • Safety and supervision considerations such as curtains, curved walls • Enhanced environmental control - dimmable lighting and rearranging furniture. • Open and navigable spaces - creating open areas for pacing and safe wondering and
22
utilise open floor plans to provide clear viewpoints and pathways. • Sensory zoning and spatial legibility - hallways and transit spaces and low sensory stimulation areas • Streamlined layout - limited number of doors for easy interpretation of space and consistency throughout the placement of exits. • And reduce visual distraction through organisation. Emotional • Creating comfortable resting spaces - soft furniture and areas to lay down. • Diverse wall finishes for sensory feedback and regulation. • Maximising the use of natural lighting • Versatile seating and resting areas • Efficient wayfinding and signage • Safety-conscious playgrounds and outdoor design - ensuring non-restrictive safety boundaries between lakes and main roads. • Open concept for easy supervision - allowing support workers to navigate individuals. • And engaging in interactive elements such as lighting and sound Sensory • Flexible spatial layout with areas for pacing and movement • Diverse respite areas for 1:1 retreat • Seamless indoor and outdoor access • Proximity to outdoor areas- having waiting areas adjacent to gardens for regulation choices. • Throughout flooring design - using finishes with limited glare, consistent colour scheme and limited patterns as well as consistent floor pressure. • Incorporation of biophilic design for tactile and sensory seeking. • Material variety and balance
ASSOCIATION OF CONSULTANTS IN ACCESS AUSTRALIA / ACCESS INSIGHT / SUMMER 2023-2024
• Deep-pressure options such as bean bags and weighted blankets The data collected from intensive interaction sessions plays a pivotal role in shaping design guidelines that prioritise spatial elements, including those relevant to nonverbal communicators and individuals with cognitive diversities. These guidelines are designed to establish a process wherein practitioners in the built environment sector actively integrate the autonomy and agency of non-verbal communicators into their design approach. At Architecture & Access, we are actively working on crafting guidelines that embrace neurodiversity in the context of accessing the built environment. Our dedicated team, composed of experts with practical experience and personal insights, is committed to creating holistic guides that take into account the full spectrum of needs and abilities. Our goal is to foster a shift in design thinking that genuinely accommodates the diverse requirements of individuals.
Expressions of Interest (EOI) for sessional trainers Access Institute is expanding its sessional presenters and trainers and is inviting EOIs from professionals who are interested in delivering topics in the Certificate IV and Diploma of Access Consulting. This is a great opportunity for interested professionals to participate in the development of a growing industry. It provides a window for personal growth and recognition as a leader in the access industry, by sharing your skills and knowledge to a wide audience. We are seeking professionals with expertise in the following topics: • ABCB Livable Housing Design Standard • Australian Standards for access and mobility e.g. AS1428, AS2890.6 etc • Access to premises and public transport standards • Specialist Disability Accommodation Design Standard • Universal Design • Urban Planning • Working with culturally and linguistically diverse communities
Fees are negotiable depending on skills, knowledge, experience, and relevant qualifications. Send your EOI to: Access Institute Director (Ms) Joe Manton info@accessinstitute.com.au • Detail your areas of expertise and interest • Please include your email address and contact phone number
ASSOCIATION OF CONSULTANTS IN ACCESS AUSTRALIA / ACCESS INSIGHT / SUMMER 2023-2024
23
TECHNICAL INSIGHTS
TECHNICAL INSIGHTS Is AS1428.1 approriate?
Howard Moutrie ACAA Accredited Access Consultant, ACAA Accredited Fellow, Accessible Building Solutions
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.
I
have been somewhat critical of Certifiers for being overly pedantic with the application of AS 1428.1. Certainly in NSW it has become ridiculous and I believe other states may be following suit. However, I have been softening to the plight of the Certifier. In NSW, at least, they are being reprimanded or having their certification cancelled for not applying statutory requirements to the letter – no common sense or objectivity is allowed. So when applying AS 1428.1 and it says something should have a particular
24
dimension, they apply that, without any question even though we, as access consultants, may consider it not so critical. I am now thinking that the problem is not with the Certifier but perhaps with the Standards. I will explain. AS 1428.1 provides requirements to allow people with a disability use public buildings. The requirements are primarily based on the spatial requirements of a person using an overly large, non-existent wheelchair, on the basis that if the space is
ASSOCIATION OF CONSULTANTS IN ACCESS AUSTRALIA / ACCESS INSIGHT / SUMMER 2023-2024
suitable for this large wheelchair, then it will be suitable for smaller wheelchairs. Added to these spatial requirements are requirements to aid people with ambulant disabilities, with vision impairment and hearing impairment. The spatial requirements are based on research undertaken in the 1980s and as the subject wheelchair does not actually exist, a scale model of the wheelchair was made and moved by hand to obtain the required manoeuvring space. Then “error factors” were added to these minimum requirements to allow for people without perfect control. This is hardly definitive. Let’s look further. I am sure you are familiar with David Caple’s research on the size of wheelchairs. However, prior to that, he, along with Daisy Veitch and Verna Blewett, conducted research on anthropometric data which was published as “Sizing Up Australia: How contemporary is the anthropometric data Australian designers use?” In that document it is stated that the data used in the accessibility Standards was vague and the authors of the research paper proposed “that some Standards, accepted in the marketplace as credible or being enforceable by law, may be flawed, inaccurate and potentially misleading”. In the same paper, the authors say about AS 1428, “This standard seems to have been an acceptable base for design in the past. However, when scrutinised by the Human Rights and Equal Opportunities Commission (HREOC) it was found that the standard on one hand mandates compliance but on the other hand does not give enough raw anthropometric information to conclusively test specific access situations (see for example, HREOC 2000; HREOC 2004).” They further say “It highlights the plight of designers or certified ergonomists, who somehow have to bridge the gap between inadequate anthropometric data and the production of workable designs, workplaces or access to workplaces.” Not only is Caple criticising the data but is understanding that the Standard is not intended to provide all solutions and that designers are required to provide suitable alternative designs. This follows the commentary in the AS 1428.1 Supplement
where it says of AS 1428.1, “The illustrations should not be seen as the only means of providing suitably accessible facilities” and with respect to toilets “As long as adequate circulation space is provided there could be …. reasons for adopting one of a variety of other shapes in plan.” So it is clear that the original intent of the Standard was to provide guidance to designers, not a solution. The preface to the Standard says the intention of the Standard is to provide a practical reference document for designers and it also says that “it is seen as necessary for the Standard to provide a range of data …. to allow flexibility in design..” Has this been forgotten? It would be particularly useful to have more recent anthropometric data, however, it is particularly difficult to get meaningful anthropometric data on which to base accessibility Standards. Firstly, there is such a wide range of disabilities which need to be addressed and then there is the problem of attracting people to participate in the research to make the data meaningful. So at this point in time we are reliant on AS 1428 to provide us with design requirements, based on this old data. As noted before, the Supplement to AS 1428.1-1988 says that “the illustrations in the Standard should not be seen as the only means of providing suitably accessible facilities”. For those of you who have provided alternative solutions to those required by AS 1428, it is clear that other counties have different requirements and design outcomes. In fact, in many ways Australia is the odd one out, though that is not to say we are wrong. The issues we are currently facing occur when the flexibility originally envisaged is ignored and the documented Standard deemed to be the only solution. It is my view that the Standard needs to allow more flexibility, particularly relating to normal building tolerance. The following are some particular examples: 1.
Turning area. AS 1428.1 requires a space 2070 x 1540mm, whereas the
ASSOCIATION OF CONSULTANTS IN ACCESS AUSTRALIA / ACCESS INSIGHT / SUMMER 2023-2024
25
ISO requires 2000 x 1500mm, US ADA Standard 1500mm dia, UK is also 1500mm dia 2. Toilet layout. The ISO Standard and most other countries have a layout where the basin is close to the toilet pan so that it can be used while on the toilet. Allowing one to wash your hands while on the pan rather than transferring to your chair and moving to the basin, before you can wash. There seems to be a hygiene issue here which we may not be addressing. Interestingly, the ISO Standard has a number of design options, one which reflects our requirement. 3. Toilet grabrails in Australia must (currently) be at a height of 800-810mm. The ISO Standard requires grabrails to be at a height of 200-300mm above the toilet seat (which would cover a range of 600-780mm above the floor. In the UK it is 680mm. Are the people in other parts of the world so different? 4. In the ISO Standard there is a much greater flexibility in seat height and toilet pan location. 5. The ISO Standard and other international Standards require a 300mm extension of a stair or ramp handrail past the bottom riser, where as we require a 1 tread extension on the angle plus the 300mm extension. On the basis that the people being addressed under other standards are comparable to Australians there is clearly a disparity in the perceived requirements. So, when a certifier is enforcing what is in the Standard, is this strict enforcement valid. Clearly, in many cases it is not. On this basis, the lack of tolerance and narrow design parameters need to be reconsidered and AS 1428.1 rewritten so that it responds to the environment
26
in which it is now being used. That is, it is not being used as a design guidance tool but as providing critical design parameters. It should only require narrow design parameters when these are warranted and allow more flexibility when the dimensions are not critical. Perhaps a preferred dimension or dimension range is provided and where this is not critical an alternative range provided. For example, based on the grabrail height, this could be given as 700 -830mm (800-830mm preferred). For the purpose of this example, I have ignored the disparity of the maximum height with overseas Standards. I am also not advocating that overseas Standards are better than ours, just using them to highlight differences when perhaps there should be none. Ed Steinfeld, in 2005, prepared a report for the US Access Board on the anthropometry for wheeled devices. In this report he compared the requirements of various Standards including US, Canada, British and Australian. Of the Australian Standard he said “ Much of the Bails’ data was reported in an incomplete and disorganised manner….had very small samples …….many of the changes made to… Australian Standards can be questioned in the light of research findings.” There are a number of technical issues which need to be addressed in future versions of AS 148.1, including visual indicators on glazing and luminance contrast. I think all aspects of the Standard should be examined and where possible update the requirements to the latest technology and equipment, and respond to the environment it is now used by providing more flexibility where appropriate. In my opinion, Standards Australia have a duty to ensure that the information in the Standards is up to date and usable. This is particularly where the Standard is referenced in the BCA or other legislation.
ASSOCIATION OF CONSULTANTS IN ACCESS AUSTRALIA / ACCESS INSIGHT / SUMMER 2023-2024
WOULD YOU BELIEVE IT
Would you believe it ???
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
ASSOCIATION OF CONSULTANTS IN ACCESS AUSTRALIA / ACCESS INSIGHT / SUMMER 2023-2024
27
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
www.access.asn.au
admin@access.asn.au
@accessconsultantsaustralia
0493 100 306
@acaaaus
