Report of the CIB Expert Seminar on Building Non-Handicapping Environments, Budapest 1991
Access legislation
D.P. Philippen, Institute T.L.P.e.V., Traben-Trarbach, Germany
Seminar Contents
Legislation on accessibility in general can only be realized if a 'barrier-free
environment for all people' at comparable cost is feasible. Only if the
environment is built and conceived to enable any one person, regardless
of his or her personal ability or disability and without special-purpose
construction, to live independent, self sustained, self determined and integrated
within the community of all others, only then is significant accessible
environment and technology realized.
The new German DIN 18025 Part 2 (part 1 is for the wheelchair users) is
the most advanced building standard for a general concept of barrier-free
environment. It is getting great political support and is on the way into
legislation, becoming the foundation for a general building code. This building
code will be preventive and adaptable to the individual situation, without
the requirements of 'special housing'. 'All' will be accessible for all
people.
The new standards can be an example as a joint-European effort and concept
to solve problems with disabled and old age requirements in housing, environmental,
and urban developments. This new set of regulations concentrates on integration
by rendering multiples of a modular concept for any given and future situation
of each individual person.
A major part is the basic and different ergonomics involved. No room sizes
are specified. The standards define the space needed to use an individual
object, e.g. door, toilet, cabinet etc. Such space requirements are presented
in the form of "frames". These frames can be handled like a puzzle.
The frames will not only be added on like a puzzle, they can be combined
with each other with overlapping free space areas, as long as the individual
space definition is not decreased.
The basic size of the space frame is a square of 120 cm x 120 cm within
the direct living area, which, for specific 'wheelchair-homes' only (i.e.,
user with electric wheelchair) increases up to 150 cm x 150 cm in part two
of the new standards. The free space areas defined by these frames further
consider the way and from what side or from what position an object is being
used. The transfer to a toilet is defined from one side position, from a
frontal position and from an angular position.
All general areas in homes or multi-story housing are sized to this larger
basic dimension of 150 cm x 150 cm, since everybody, no matter what type
of mobility aid is used, shall find unrestricted access and independently
make use of whatever facilities there are.
The basic ergonomics and space frame model is a development by the Institute
T.L.P.e.V and has been field-tested over a period of 12 years. It is used
in building codes by several countries. Only a few problem areas in these
standards have a restricted definition; in the important part 2 of the Standard,
it is a matter of elevators, making all levels of all houses accessible
for everyone.
When considering existing buildings especially (which have to be changed
in due time) the cost of demanding an elevator for each and every building
would endanger the way to transfer these standards into legislative codes.
Therefore the standards define that provisions have to be made, in the planning
of any new building, that an elevator (110 cm x 140 cm floor space, with
a 90 cm wide door) can be integrated at any given later time without the
need of construction changes. Hence, the position and the space required
by an elevator has to be included in every building.
An extension of the same concept has been launched for all public buildings,
(DIN 18024 Part 2), for playgrounds and playing equipment (DIN 18034 and
7926), for a barrier-free concept of job sites, etc. applying the same basic
requirements for free access and use by and for all persons.
Action taken to move federal and state legislation in Germany on this general barrier-free concept
It is not enough to just try and convince politicians that a need for legislation
exists, or to simply inform them about solutions which are feasible to experts;
a combination of action is needed. This action has to include a fair amount
of pressure, documenting the presence of the size of the population involved.
Only solutions should be presented. They have to be packaged in a language
of simple interpretation and offer, in just a few sentences, leading slogans
and words that can be handled by political motivated forces.
Instead of the questions politicians are confronted with, they should be
educated to use applicable, easy to understand answers. In Germany the new
DIN Standards are transferred into legislation supported by a resolution
(signed by organizations and representatives of about 4 million citizens)
and by an easy to handle slogan: 'barrier-free for all people'.
All interests of consumers, old and disabled people representing organizations,
government persons in charge for social welfare in these fields, and just
about any given self-help group in Germany, have been tied together into
this resolution. It has been presented successfully on every given level
of administration reaching from federal, down to city and local urban village
administration.
But that is not enough. It has to be certified that general barrier-free
housing does not increase the cost of housing to any great extent and that
it will improve the quality and the sales value of homes without increasing
costs. At the same time it will solve the problem of extra or special housing,
which is no longer needed.
The solution offered will have to be applied to solve the matter of independently
housing old people; to provide an applicable solution of a private and personal
home, instead of institutional homes; and to secure independence in their
own home through community-based services and rehabilitation instead of
institutional care.
First, we forced state legislation by applying public pressure to support
experimental building projects which would initiate and use the new standards
in order to have a certifying comparison on building costs.
Secondly, we argued with the Federal Government in public to prove that
making all housing barrier-free would not increase the cost of housing.
This resulted in two grants by the Federal Government to investigate the
real building cost for applying barrier-free housing. The results show that
the difference in cost between traditional construction and the new type
of barrier-free building construction and technology is negligible. The
studies resulted in additional investments stated to be 3.01 to 3.2 per
cent of total cost, which can be neglected since rearranging of financing
and logistics in a building project, can very well compensate for this minor
increase.
The first available results from experimental building projects show, for
three different housing sizes (8, 16 and 64 apartments), a total average
increase of 2.8 - 3.1 per cent (excluding elevator cost).
In two 3 and 4 story projects, elevators have actually been included, but
in a way to serve more than one single building. The best solution combined
an elevator to serve four buildings. Including the cost for the elevator,
the total cost was raised by a factor of 6.3 per cent.
In addition to this, it is of the utmost importance that with new standards
of this kind, which deal in part with matters not commonly known, different
disabilities are explained and presented to architects in a way so that
they will understand the new standards. It is not sufficient to only do
this by publishing in trade magazines, etc. The new ways have to be presented
in the form of seminars and workshops. Therefore, in Germany, before the
new standards where published we traveled across the country and successfully
offered seminars in different cities organized by the architectural organizations
and in cooperation with local municipal administration.
Finally, each new set of standards involves other cross-referencing standards.
We made contact to each commission of such standards and sold our idea of
barrier-free environment. This prompted other expert groups to adapt whatever
was controversial to the new barrier-free understanding. This was done for
details in heating, plumbing, general utility, electrical installation,
elevators etc.
Education
One additional point should be stressed. We do not have enough fully trained
experts in this field of rehabilitation technology or rehabilitation engineering.
The opportunities for such education are insufficient. We have the experience
and curriculum to start lectures right now, but we are still looking for
a country with open-minded universities to really start off on a full time
course for rehabilitation engineering.
Experts are needed for rehabilitation and the development of barrier-free
environments and technology. This is the missing link in engineering education.
Germany might start with a new curriculum for a five-semester university
study program, applicable for architects and engineers to master rehabilitation
engineering closing this missing link in technical education.
The extensive curriculum includes an additional 6 - 8 month internship in
rehabilitation centers, homes and clinical settings and contains a two-semester
basic course on rehabilitation therapy and medicine. It will offer specialization
for a choice of several professional directions including architecture,
industrial and general engineering, product design, administration and social
law, teaching etc. leading to a Masters Degree. So far, we are still in
the process of discussion. Even with support of the Federal Government to
finance the first five years with 50 per cent of all cost, nothing is finalized.
Summation
It is not enough to solve the problems, we have to use modern marketing to
sell the solutions. We have to create the need in other peoples mind. We have
to apply modern marketing methods and make use of a logistic for presentation,
selling and brain-washing just like selling Coke or MacDonald's hamburgers,
where everybody automatically thinks of those two names whenever the products
are mentioned. We can not only depend on people reading, we have to explain,
we have to demonstrate and transfer interdisciplinary knowledge across the line
of professional boundaries.
Budapest CIB Report Contents | About CIB