Features
Page 7
Environmental design
A developer who had built a set of motel units was getting sign-off that he had complied with all the regulations in the New Zealand Building Standards. The doorways of each unit were narrow: 600mm wide rather than the standard 760mm. When informed that a person in a wheelchair could not fit through such a doorway, the developer replied: "But wheelchairs fold, don't they?"
His attitude reflects the exclusionary thinking still present in environmental design. Despite two decades of policy-making, designers assume that everyone is a two-metre tall biped with perfect vision and hearing. This does tend to rule most of us out ...
New Zealand Standard (NZS) 4121 was substantially upgraded in 1985 to support the rights of people with disabilities to independent environmental access. NZS 4121, however, paid scant attention to the needs of blind and vision-impaired people. In 2001 the Foundation's specialist rehabilitation staff worked successfully with policy makers to add many new requirements that architects, designers and city planners would have to consider when planning public spaces. These included using tactile tiles, materials with good colour contrast and audio announcements in lifts, buses and trains.
At that time, the Britomart Transport Centre was in the design and documentation stage. Auckland city's largest-ever urban renewal project would become the first major test of the amended standards to see how the theory would work out in practice.
It was a huge learning curve for Jasmax architect, Gordon Brown. "We consulted with all the stakeholders from day one ... What we discovered, though, is that many of the standards are subjective in how they are interpreted because you can't apply them equally in every situation. What works in one context may not work in another. There was a particular issue with contrasting colours."
Just one example of low contrast was with Britomart's polished stainless steel surfaces. These are highly reflective, which is positive, but when they don't receive a light source, the contrast is limited.
Chris Orr, the Foundation's representative on the disability advisory group for Britomart, took Gordon Brown and Eric Hennephof (Auckland City's Britomart Transport Centre representative) down into the underground station to judge the low contrast for themselves. Eric took off his glasses and admitted he couldn't see a thing. Chris gave Gordon a pair of simulated glasses and when he put them on he was
Page 8
similarly left in the dark. It was a salutary moment for both men.
"We had a set budget," says Gordon, "and we thought we were doing the right thing but what I've learned from this project is not to rely so much on the suppliers. Chris has taught me an enormous amount ... We didn't achieve everything but we've raised the bar very high for New Zealand standards generally."
Chris Inglis, manager of the Foundation's blindness awareness division, adds, "It's much cheaper to get us involved up front when the plans are fairly conceptual. What has been happening is that people are consulting with suppliers of equipment instead, who have no experience other than in selling the end product. Inadvertently, they've been given the wrong advice."
Vivian Naylor of CCS and the Barrier Free Trust was also on the Britomart disability advisory group. The Barrier Free Trust runs training sessions for designers and local government staff. Vivian audits environments for accessibility issues, assessing how barrier-free they are for people to use.
"We need to be constantly bringing the issues to the fore," she says, "and broadening the concept of our designs so that the chosen design works for everyone. What's needed is a mixture of education and awareness. The needs of blind and vision-impaired people are far more specific and harder to understand, so there's a need for training sessions on the updated standards."
Last year, the Foundation co-developed a report with Waitakere City Council on future environmental design. Called Safety and Access by Design, the report gives access and safety recommendations for buildings and public spaces, including town centres, intersections, footpaths and pedestrian crossings. There is a set of guidelines for the latter but they are not a mandatory part of NZS 4121.
Mike Mills, the council's project manager for the report, says, "The urban designers were reluctant at first. Their experience is that you just can't make hard and fast rules
Page 9
that suit every environment. So we're looking instead at implementing principles and best practice."
Mike recognises that environmental design is complex and that it is going to take patience and persistence to develop a design culture that's inclusive and does more than just meet the minimum legal requirements.
The Foundation is working on a model that could be applied consistently right throughout the country. "We want to know," says Chris Orr, "that, wherever we go around the country, we can rely on the same sets of information - whether it's tactile studs or colour-contrasted lines - so that we can travel independently. Unfortunately, we're still at a baseline of zero with some councils in relation to awareness."
Chris Orr adds that, with new house consents setting a 30-year record in 2003, council planners are under enormous workload pressures and don't have time to walk through every single detail of each consent application. The onus, he says, is on the schools of architecture to train architects in correct application of the standards.
In the meantime, personal advocacy is important. This is echoed by Donna Ballantyne, one of the Foundation's newest O and M recruits, with advocacy experience in the UK and Canada.
"Planners in the UK are extremely consultative now with disability groups. That's largely because pressure groups have been highly proactive. There is also a pan-disability access consultancy called JMU Access Partnership, which works to make the built environment more accessible."
Donna sees the same pattern emerging here, that the movement towards true accessibility begins by targeting councils and, from there, the effects of that education process begin to flow through to other architects and builders.
Foundation members are encouraged to contact the call centres at their local councils and lodge a complaint if they experience an accessibility problem with a public place.
The standards cannot be applied retrospectively, i.e., to buildings built before 1985, but if a public place goes through a major refit or the purpose for which it is to be used changes, then the councils must make sure the building complies with the standards.