One of the more frustrating facets of working in accessibility is that almost all physical barriers to access can be remedied, even if they are costly and complicated
However, some of the simplest solutions remain out of reach if the designer or architect is stuck in their ways.
Certainly, the three issues we identified after the renovation of a property used for skills and training support should be easy to fix.
You start to worry when you see that the problems are so obvious they shouldn’t have arisen in the first place, and exasperation kicks in when the project drags on purely because the architect refuses to acknowledge mistakes.
Historic constraints and awkward workarounds
The building in question used to house various small businesses and has undergone a complete renovation to become the base for an organisation which works with a diverse group of users.
Many of the individuals have experienced disadvantage in one form or another, and their needs have prompted the inclusion in the renovation plans of an accessible loo, a platform lift and a ramp for the front of the property.
Unfortunately, the only option for the ramp is to use a portable structure, lifting it in and out when someone needs to use it. That’s not ideal, but the building is Grade II listed, and the front door with its two steps is too narrow to accommodate the preferred option of a sesame lift.
The footpath outside is also narrow, meaning that the ramp has to incorporate a 90-degree turn. It looks a bit awkward and cumbersome, but it enables wheelchair users to get in and out.
To help people move around the different levels of the ground floor, there are steps, which are fine for those who can use them. However, the platform lift installed to make that particular journey accessible doesn’t quite do the job. It has been left with a small step, which is the fault of whoever installed it, and of whoever allowed them to leave the job without checking their work.
The accessible loo: A series of errors
But the biggest problem is the accessible loo, coupled with the architect’s attempts to justify the failings.
The original idea was to convert the L-shape space into an accessible shower room, with the creation of an additional wall to allow the loo and its various accessories to be installed alongside the shower.
The construction team either didn’t see or just didn’t heed the instructions about the wall and instead fitted the loo in an alcove.
The position of a window caused problems with fitting grab rails, and to resolve that, the builders rotated the loo through 90 degrees. It stands against a side wall, with the various facilities installed to the left of the pan even though that wall had a recess.
Out of reach and out of touch
The layout has created issues with the transfer space around the pan and the location of the other facilities.
The distance from the front of the WC pan to the edge of the wash hand basin meets guidance, but everything else is too far away. It should be possible to reach the wash hand basin, soap and paper towel dispensers from the WC pan so that a person can wash and dry their hands before getting dressed or transferring back to their wheelchair. But because they have been set in a recess, it isn’t.
The architect admits that this scenario has arisen because the contractor failed to install the new wall. They were also very speedy in putting in new tiles, and it seems there was no turning back after that.
The architect also maintains that all grab rails and sanitaryware are installed correctly. That’s not the case because everything in the recess is out of reach.
Further, the architect also says slight compromises have been made, but the layout is acceptable.
We see errors rather than compromises, and we feel they have resulted in an unacceptable layout that fails to consider the user’s needs.
Overcoming the ‘it’ll do’ mentality
If the contractor did not follow the drawings, they should be required to come back and make good at their own cost. Whoever was managing the project should have done a better job of checking the work during construction. It highlights perfectly the need to produce – and then stick to – accurate diagrams and to monitor progress so any problems can be resolved early.
Perhaps the biggest concern is the architect’s refusal to accept there are issues. There seems to be an “it’ll do” mentality. It won’t; it might have to, but it’s taking a long time to find out.
The post Mindset can be the biggest barrier to accessibility appeared first on Planning, Building & Construction Today.
