In 2010 the National Dialogue for Universal Housing Design took place at Kirribilli House. The National Dialogue was the result of the previous Australian Government inviting housing industry leaders and community leaders representing people with disability and older people to address the issue of a lack of suitable housing stock in Australia.

Members of the National Dialogue included the Australian Human Rights Commission, the Australian Institute of Architects, National People with Disabilities and Carers Council, The Property Council of Australia, and Stockland amongst several others. The overarching aim of convening the group was to address the lack of accessible housing available in Australia, this in light of an ageing population and an increasingly impending crises in housing approaching.

A number of activities have been initiated at a state and municipal level across Australia to better address this issue, however the direct result of the National Dialogue was the establishment of Livable Housing Australia (LHA) in 2011. The strategies implemented by LHA were developing the Livable Housing Design (LHD) Guidelines, commencing a certification process based on compliance with the Guidelines, establishing mechanisms and registering assessors to support the accreditation process, and the ongoing promotion of the Guidelines to industry. Compliance and subsequent certification remains an entirely voluntary scheme to builders and developers.

The stated aim of the Guidelines are to produce homes which are easier and safer to use for all occupants inclusive of people with disabilities, older people, people with temporary disabilities and families with young children. They state that a ‘livable home is designed to:

·        Be easy to enter and exit;
·        Be easy to move around in;
·        Be capable of easy and cost effective adaption; and
·        Anticipate and respond to the changing needs of home occupants.’

Three performance levels are identified under the guidelines – Silver, Gold and Platinum levels. Silver is the least onerous and focuses on key spatial elements allowing for future adaptability of the home at far lower cost to the occupant. Gold allows larger circulation to key areas within the home and extends to other areas such as the kitchen and bathroom. Platinum circulation requirements increase further and includes further features such living room and flooring guidelines.

During the initial convening of the National Dialogue, a number of agreed targets were identified regarding uptake by industry and the general community. These included:

·        25% to Silver level by 2013;
·        50% to Silver Level by 2015;
·        75% to Silver level by 2018; and,
·        100% to Silver level by 2020.

Agreement was also reached to review uptake at two to three year intervals across the nominated 10 year period with the review including residential building, aged care as well as public and social housing. This review was not however initiated by the National Dialogue or by government. As a result and as a founding member of the National Dialogue, the Australian Network for Universal Housing Design (ANUHD) in conjunction with RI Australia, recently published a report attempting to assess progress against the aforementioned targets.

The report states that in early May 2014 LHA had issued 294 certificates across Australia with 24 of these actually built. LHA did however also state at the time that 500 dwellings were registered for certification but had not yet been certified, that they identified over 1850 other dwellings which claim to have been designed or built to at least Silver level but had not registered for certification, and that they anticipate that there are hundreds more dwellings delivered which would meet the Silver level requirements of the Guideline.

The report goes on to suggest that in light of conservative estimates for new housing starts per year at approximately 140,000, the initial goals of the National Dialogue have not and will not be met. That even with the limited data available, it was clear that the housing industry has not responded to the voluntary scheme and that without sufficient incentives little progress is likely to be seen in future.

ANUHD and RI Australia’s recommendations following their review were for Government to continue supporting and evaluating the stated targets, but also assess the impact that minimum features to all housing being adopted would have on individual residents as well as on cost projections of home modifications and funded services for older people and people with disabilities. Where the target of Silver level features to 50% of new housing is not achieved in 2015, their recommendation is that minimum access requirements for housing be incorporated into the BCA as a priority.

In more positive news for the scheme, soon after the publishing of the report Grocon announced that they will commit to all future Grocon residential developments meeting the Livable Housing Design Guidelines. Maybe a change is yet to come?

George Xinos
Functional Access Solutions

For some time mobility scooters have been exponentially increasing in prevalence in the general community. They have offered older people and people with mobility difficulties a relatively cost effective option which has been targeted predominantly at outdoor mobility.

Mobility scooter users will often be able to ambulate independently over shorter distances or use alternative forms of mobility equipment such as a walking stick, crutches or a wheeled walking aid. The powered mobility scooter therefore provides assistance with many community based activities such as accessing the local shopping area, or visiting a municipal space where longer distances generally need to be negotiated. Some users however find that their mobility and seating needs are best addressed by mobility scooters in all situations and therefore also use these in the indoor environments they need to access and visit.

Mobility scooters by nature of the terrain and application they are designed for are however substantially larger than a powered or manual wheelchair and therefore also require significantly larger circulation spaces in order to be operated safely and independently.

The relevant Australian Standard that informs the Building Code of Australia with regard to circulation spaces within buildings, AS1428.1:2009 Design for access and mobility - General requirements for access - New building work, is based on research undertaken some time ago. This research did not include mobility scooters and as a consequence most buildings are not very accommodating to this form of mobility.

Research has been recently commissioned by the Australian Building Codes Board (ABCB) regarding current wheelchair dimensions and to review the building feature dimensions currently contained in the relevant Australian Standard. The scope of the updated research again does not allow for the inclusion of mobility scooters. The difficulties currently encountered by mobility scooter users are likely to therefore continue well into the future.

The Australian Human Rights Commission recently published an Advisory Note on the use of Mobility Scooters in Registered Clubs. This Note was instigated by an approach from the RSL & Services Clubs Association in response to issues arising from increased scooter use within their clubs. The Note acknowledges the difficulties of accommodating scooters in the context of highly variable existing buildings but also provides some useful suggestions in managing the issue more effectively. Some of these include:

·        Providing designated parking areas for scooters, preferably indoors and clear of pathways, exits and entries, and with clear signage designating their location;

·        Modifying or rearranging key areas likely to require additional circulation such as seating areas, ATMs, public telephones, etc.;

·        Providing designated and accessible recharging points;

·        Developing and displaying mobility maps directing people to the designated parking and charge points as well the most accessible paths within the building;

·        Providing intermittent seating through buildings for people only able to walk short distances;

·        Automating entry points and key doorways in the facility;

·        Developing an Action Plan (as defined under the Disability Discrimination Act (1992)) which considers organisational policies and programs as well as future modifications to improve access to people with disabilities.

Even though the measures raised in the Note are provided in the context of existing buildings, useful insights can be gained by building owners and designers in the planning and design of new buildings or new building parts. Given that designing to the Building Code of Australia will not necessarily provide a scooter friendly environment gaining advice from a suitably accredited Access Consultant is advisable.

Informal schemes have emerged where local public facilities and businesses can be listed as places where people are welcome to go and charge their device while in the community, with often large networks established. A more consistent approach across a broader range of buildings would however greatly contribute to the availability as well as the confidence of mobility scooter users in the community.


George Xinos
Functional Access Solutions

George Xinos of Functional Access Solutions will be co-presenting a whole day workshop focusing on bathroom modifications with Occupational Therapist, Alison Schneider.

The workshop is part of the Yooralla's Assistive Technology Learning program and will be held on Tuesday 24 June 2014  at The Independent Living Centre, 705 Princes Hwy, Brooklyn, Victoria.

Learning outcomes include:

• Increased knowledge about bathroom design and prescription
• Increased confidence in designing & reading plans of bathroom modifications
• Increased knowledge about what to look for when choosing common fittings and fixtures
• Increased knowledge of relevant Australian Standards & BCA
• Problem solving challenging bathroom modification situations
• And more…

For more information or to book your place at the workshop please visit the Yooralla Assistive Technology Learning website.

The recently tabled federal budget has outlined the Government’s plan to axe one of the commissioner roles at the Australian Human Rights Commission (AHRC). Graeme Innes’ term as the current Disability Discrimination Commissioner is reaching an end in June this year, and the Government’s intention is to merge this role with the portfolio of one of the other Commissioners at the AHRC. The details of this merging of roles and impact of what is likely to be a reduction in capacity in the area are yet to be addressed however.

The Disability Discrimination Commissioner’s role is multifaceted. The Commissioner is charged with promoting an understanding and acceptance of the Disability Discrimination Act (DDA)(1992). This may occur by way of a number of functions inclusive of research, advising and informing the relevant Minister regarding laws and enactments relating to discrimination on the ground of disability, monitoring the development of relevant Standards under the Act, as well as developing and publishing guidelines to assist in the avoidance of discrimination.

The DDA (1992) addresses discrimination on the grounds of disability in a number of areas such as education, employment, goods and services, and access to premises. The definition of premises is very broad under the Act but of course includes buildings and places that the public are allowed to enter. The Act also allows for Disability Standards to be formulated to further define relevant strategies, adjustments, and exemptions.

In 2010 the Disability (Access to Premises – Buildings) Standards were released with the objects of the standard being twofold:

‘to ensure that dignified, equitable, cost effective and reasonably achievable access to buildings, and facilities and services within buildings, is provided…’; and

‘to give certainty to building certifiers, building developers and building managers…’

 

To address the later, efforts were made to replicate most of the requirements of the Standard with that of the access requirements of the Building Code of Australia (BCA); this with the view to harmonising these as far as practicable.

The mechanism for beginning proceedings in the event of discrimination occurring, is via complaint to the AHRC. The AHRC consequently attempt to resolve complaints relating to disability discrimination by way of conciliation. Where complainants believe their complaint has not been adequately resolved, the complaint can be referred to the Federal Court of Australia. Where considered appropriate to do so, the Commission may also intervene in such court proceedings.

The AHRC Disability Discrimination Commissioner role is therefore pivotal in achieving the objects of the Act and relevant Disability Standards and significant concern has been consequently aired in recent weeks.

Some of this concern has centred on the capacity of another commissioner to adequately address the needs of people with disabilities, their families and networks on the basis of resources alone. The incumbent, Mr. Innes himself, has also suggested that having a Commissioner responsible for disability discrimination and not having a disability themselves as an issue. He describes that as the Sex Discrimination Commissioner should be a woman and the Aged Discrimination Commissioner should be an older person, the Commissioner responsible for disability discrimination should also have the ‘lived’ experience of disability in order to be able to fulfil their role effectively.

In some parts of the community there also appears to be a perception that the DDA is inherently ‘weak’ given the onus is on people with disabilities and their associates to initiate and pursue complaints. The recent events have given cause for this concern to grow further.

The change is likely to have a tangible effect on disability discrimination and how it relates to building design as well as the existing stock of buildings – an issue best to keep an eye on in the coming months.


George Xinos
Functional Access Solutions

The current legislative requirements for providing access to people with disabilities is centred on research conducted some time ago. Items such as circulation spaces and location of fixtures were determined based on two resultant wheelchair footprints from the original research: one representing the 80th percentile of wheelchair users and the other representing the 90th percentile. The Australian Standard AS 1428.1 2009 ‘Design for access and mobility – General requirements for access – New building work’, is the Building Code of Australia (BCA) referenced standard whose requirements are interpolated from this research.

Of course, this suggests that a sizable proportion of people simply cannot enter and interact with the buildings that are currently being built and certified; where they can enter, they may not be able to perform essential functions such using toilet facilities or travel through and operate doorways. It should also be noted that the aforementioned research also predated the increasing prevalence of motorised scooter use. The needs of scooter users are therefore also not addressed.

The people most likely to be excluded from publicly available spaces within the built environment are those with more severe disabilities. These are people who may require specialised seating systems to remain safely seated in their wheelchairs or on a toilet pan; or may not be independently continent and require specialised lifting equipment to attend to their continence needs via the use of an adult change table or specialised toilet pan.

It is logical to assume that certain decisions made in producing the current set of requirements were influenced on the economics of obligating all building owners to construct specialised facilities and preserving the maximum lettable space possible. In the context of a long established Disability Discrimination Act (1992) however, this may not be entirely appropriate.

Many access consultants have been long advocating for such facilities in certain types of the buildings. Buildings such as shopping centres, aquatic centres, airports, hospitals and civic spaces represent society’s modern day Agoras, where all people should be able to freely congregate and participate in the public discourse. The establishment of a National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS) reinforces the need for such facilities given that people with severe and profound disabilities will also be better equipped to access the community in future.

A consortium was formed in 2012 called ‘Changing Places Victoria’ which was inspired by the ‘Changing Places’ campaign in the UK. The UK based organisation reports in excess of 550 Changing Places facilities across the UK. An information kit has since been developed by Changing Places Victoria to assist architects, designers, developers and building owners in incorporating these facilities into their buildings.

Recommendations in the design of these facilities include: a height adjustable, adult size change table; a ceiling mounted track hoist system; adequate circulation space allowing for the person with a disability and up to two carers; a centrally placed toilet pan with space on either side for carers; disposable change table covers; an automated entry door; a screen or curtain for privacy; a non-slip floor; suitable grabrails; and accessible showers where these are required – such as in leisure centres and travel hubs.

The ‘Changing Places Transforming Lives - Information Kit’ is available from the Association for Children with a Disability (ACD); alternatively download an electronic copy via the link below.

Anecdotally, much is said about the indignity, difficulties and the impositions on the safety on people with disabilities and their carers, however this cannot be adequately appreciated by people who have not had an intimate experience with disability and the way it can affect people’s lives. The UK ‘Changing Places’ website (http://www.changing-places.org) also shares several videos of people’s interactions with what is currently being provided in accessible sanitary facilities. I encourage all designers, building owners and managers to watch these to better appreciate the challenges faced.

George Xinos
Functional Access Solutions

Livable Housing Australia (LHA) was formed in 2011 as a partnership between community and consumer groups as well as government and industry. The partnership arose from the Kirribili Dialogue on Universal Design for housing which was undertaken to assist with the formulation of a set of guidelines for the creation of more ‘livable’ homes.

The Livable Housing Design Guidelines were consequently developed and promoted. The aim of these are to produce homes which are easier and safer to use for all occupants inclusive of people with disabilities, older people, people with temporary disabilities and families with young children. They state that a ‘livable home is designed to:

·         Be easy to enter and exit;
·         Be easy to move around in;
·         Be capable of easy and cost effective adaption; and
·         Anticipate and respond to the changing needs of home occupants.’

Three performance levels are identified under the guidelines – Silver, Gold and Platinum levels. Silver is the least onerous and focuses on key spatial elements allowing for future adaptability of the home at far lower cost to the occupant. Gold allows larger circulation to key areas within the home and extends to other areas such as the kitchen and bathroom. Platinum circulation requirements increase further still and includes additional features such living room and flooring guidelines.

Earlier this year LHA established a system of accreditation of homes under their published guidelines. LHA are responsible for the accreditation of dwellings under this system, and issues their quality mark in accordance with the performance level achieved. The LHA quality mark can then be used by the developer to assist with the marketing of their project.

LHA uses a number of registered assessors to assess and gather information regarding the proposed home in order to enable accreditation decisions to be made. Registered assessors have suitable prerequisite qualifications and experience, have completed approved training and have successfully undergone an exam to confirm their competency. They are directly appointed by applicants wishing to gain accreditation of a project.

Two stages of accreditation also apply within the process. A provisional quality mark can be gained for a project during the design phase. The final quality mark is only issued once the building has been completed and assessed by a registered assessor. It should also be noted that where existing homes meet the LHA guidelines, these could also gain the final quality mark through the same process.

LHA envisages that by the year 2020 all new residential dwellings will achieve at least the Silver Level accreditation.

For more information about the accreditation process visit LHAs website at http://livablehousingaustralia.org.au/.

George Xinos of Functional Access Solutions is a LHA Registered Assessor and can be contacted to assist with assessment and ultimately gaining accreditation for any aspiring projects.

George Xinos
Functional Access Solutions

Andrew Angelides of Functional Risk Solutions was recently recognized by client Exxon Mobil for his contribution in managing Occupational Health and Safety during the planning, construction and hand-over phases of the Perth Exxon Mobil office refurbishment.

Andrew's involvement in the project included overseeing and implementing the Exxon Mobil Loss Prevention System (LPS); facilitating the Exxon Mobil Operation Integrity Management System (OIMS); training the construction workforce under these systems; as well as assessing, monitoring and implementing practical mitigation control measures.

Congratulations Andrew in receiving this award and delivering a safe project.

We are excited to announce that Functional Access Solutions and Functional Risk solutions have moved to new premises. Our new address is:

Suite 4, Level 1
981 North Road
MURRUMBEENA
VIC 3163

Our new premises are located in close proximity to public transport and parking, and provides lift access to all floors. For your convenience our contact details and postal address remain the same and can be viewed by navigating to our 'contact us' page.

We look forward to continuing serving you from our new location into the future.

A 'livable' home incorporates specific features that aim to make it easier and safer to live in for all occupants. This includes people with disabilities, older people, families with children, as well as people with temporary injuries.

"A livable home is designed to:

• be easy to enter and exit
• be easy to move around in
• be capable of easy and cost effective adaptation, and
• anticipate and respond to the changing needs of home occupants."

Livable Housing Australia can issue a quality mark for homes they have accredited. Assessments are undertaken by a Registered third party Assessor and can occur at at the design or 'as-built' stage.

Contact us at 1300 377 327  or info@functionalaccess.com.au to have George assess your project for you.
LHA registration number - 10030

The Disability (Access to Premises – Buildings) Standard 2010 and the corresponding changes to section D3 of the BCA went into effect in May 2011. One of the major aims for the creation and implementation of this standard was to provide certainty to certifiers, developers and managers that compliance with the standard will prevent a successful complaint under the Disability Discrimination Act (DDA) 1992 in relation to any matter covered by the Premises Standards.

The Australian Human Rights Commission is tasked within the Act to perform a variety of functions. Some of these include to monitor the operation of Disability Standards, to promote an understanding of compliance with the Act, and to publish guidelines to assist in the avoidance of discrimination on the grounds of disability.

As such, last month the Commission published the second version of its Guideline on the Application of the Premises Standard. The guideline itself does not have any legal standing and building professionals must continue to refer to the Standard itself as well as to the Explanatory Statement also published at the time of the Standard’s release. However, given the Commission’s role in conciliating complaints under the DDA and intervening in court proceedings that involve issues of discrimination on the grounds of disability, the guideline provides some insight into the Commission’s view of various issues and what they may consider an appropriate ‘built’ solution for these.

There are a number of areas and potential situations where greater clarity has been provided since the Commission’s first version of the document which was released in 2011. Some of these include:

• Clarification that complying with the Premises Standards does not mean that all obligations under of discrimination under the DDA with regard to ‘Premises’ are fulfilled. It is important to note that the definition of premises encompasses a number of additional items and elements beyond those documented in the Standard. Items such as parkland, playgrounds, transport vehicles, additional way finding features and ‘fit-out’ items such as joinery and other fittings, fixtures and equipment such as drinking fountains, retail change rooms, reception joinery, etc.
• It is noted that the requirement to ensure suitable access for people with disabilities is provided to ‘affected parts’ of existing buildings as well as the concessions to lessees, existing accessible toilets and existing lifts, sit outside the requirements of the BCA. However, states and territories have been encouraged to implement – and to a large degree have implemented – these changes in their state and territory building laws and regulations to achieve harmony with the Access to Premises Standard. Certifiers, developers and managers are expected to understand and comply with these mechanisms.
• New parts of buildings are described as the areas where actual work is being undertaken (subject to ‘affected part’ requirements) and not additional areas to a floor such as the toilets on the floor that the works are to be undertaken on.
• ‘Affected Parts’ are further defined as being limited to the area between the principal pedestrian entrance and the new work. This excludes paths to the toilet facilities, any rooms adjacent to the area, paths to allotment boundaries or any accessible car parking bays.
• An outline of the ‘deemed to satisfy’ changes included in the BCA 2013 with regard to egress for people with a disability and the inclusion of the new Performance Requirement DP7 which will allow the possibility of lifts to be used in evacuation through an Alternative Solution. The development and use of policies and procedures for emergency egress is strongly encouraged through the use of Personal Emergency Egress Plans (PEEPS).
• Clarification that Class 2 buildings (residential buildings containing two or more sole-occupancy units) not containing ground floor units needing to provide lifted or ramped access to the first floor where the path to this floor (i.e. stairs) is commonly available.
• Clarification on right hand and left hand transfers from toilet pans and implications for their provision and associated signage.
• A definition for mezzanines and a note allowing exclusion of mezzanines in floor area calculations when considering the small building exemption.
• Clarification of accessible features to be provided to floors exempted under the small building exemption.
• A definition stating a single ‘bank’ of toilets consists of separate male and female facilities, even where male and female facilities are located separately.
• Clarification that a single accessible sanitary facility does not constitute a ‘bank’ of toilets and therefore additional cubicles for people with ambulant disabilities are not required.
• That, as for accessible sanitary facilities, where multiple banks of toilets are provided to a storey, cubicles for people with ambulant disabilities are only required to be provided to 50 per cent of these.

The new guideline is publicly available for download at the AHRC website.

http://designbuildsource.com.au/new-application-guidelines-on-the-access-to-premises-standard