16
/ BUILDING DIALOGUE / MARCH 2016
W
hether you are in the architecture and
design (and) or real estate community,
accessible design standards and a notable
shift toward the adoption of universal design con-
tinue to play important roles in the planning, scope,
design and user experience of all projects, big and
small, ground-up or existing.
As an architect, engagement with accessibility of-
ten ranges from broad considerations of public net-
works, access and inclusive user experience to the
minute details dictated by Chapter 11 of the Interna-
tional Building Code. It is through the lens of Chapter 11
that parameters associated with accessible dimensions,
heights, clearances, slopes, circulation paths and re-
stroom counts (among many other important building
features and considerations) are outlined for incorpora-
tion into building designs.
Despite my experience with Chapter 11, I attended
and participated in an enlightening event in Denver,
“The Art of Access,” this past November that radically
changed the way I think about the term “accessibility”
as it relates to public space and the built environment.
Organized by the inspiring and passionate Damon
McLeese, executive director at VSAColorado/Access Gal-
lery, and supported by Imagine 2020: Denver’s Cultural
Plan, the event was prefaced by the following:
“[The Art of Access] is a day-long dialogue about ac-
cess, inclusion and community. Fifty-six million people,
nearly 20 percent of the American population, have
some form of disability. While much has changed since
the 1990 signing of the Americans with Disabilities Act,
deficits remain concerning inclusion and access in the
arts. This day-long symposium is designed to bring ed-
ucators, administrators, architects, designers, artists and
concerned citizens together to discuss how best to en-
sure full participation and engagement in the arts and
culture for persons with disabilities.”
Sessions included moderated discussions, panels and
interactive workshops related to Access and Architec-
ture, Communication of Inclusion, Low Sensory Pro-
gram, Art and Creative Aging, Audio Description, and
Tactile Tours.
Perhaps what was most surprising is that this for-
ward-thinking event was the first of its kind in Denver.
The 100-plus attendees represented a broad range of
professional and personal backgrounds and experienc-
es. Frommuseum and gallery administrators to leaders
in the community representing and/or holding exper-
tise in various disabilities to concerned professionals
hoping to make their organizations and/or products
more universally inclusive, everyone in the room was
tangibly excited by the opportunity to learn and par-
ticipate in a candid dialogue regarding engagement in
arts and culture-related organizations for persons with
disabilities.
Despite the many perspectives represented at the
event, I was amazed and inspired by the shared enthu-
siasm, importance and consistency in the themes of the
conference. My biggest take-away was the reinforce-
ment of the inherent idea that access is
not
about codes,
regulations, or special
treatment. It
is
about
creating understanding
and a sense of empathy
for various individuals’
needs, and responding
with designs, program-
ming and opportunities
that are built on the
foundation of universal inclusion.
As a participant in a panel regarding access as it re-
lates to public art and space, I spoke from the perspec-
tive of an architect, public art committee member, and
cultural advocate invested in Denver’s continued devel-
opment of culturally rich, universally accessible public
space.
My talk focused on how public spaces, as physical
extensions of public artwork, have the potential to be-
come celebrated markers within the fabric of a city, wo-
ven together with culture and a sense of shared, inclu-
sive identity.
My preparation for this talk was a great opportunity
to delve deeper into research regarding contemporary
“inclusive urban design” methods, as well as the grow-
ing practice of applying the process of design-thinking
through empathetic design to generate design solutions
that consider both the macro (the urban scale) as well
as the equally as important micro (individual user ex-
perience.)
This research also led me to a greater understanding
of the different terms and concepts that fall under the
large umbrella of “accessibility.”
Whether you are an architect, developer, urban plan-
ner or real estate broker, it is important to understand
the distinction between key terms currently used to
describe similar yet distinctive design approaches that
inform the big picture of a project or space as it relates
to users with disabilities.
In a helpful report issued by the University of Wash-
ington’s DO-IT (Disabilities, Opportunities, Internet-
working, and Technology) Center, it is explained that
accessible design, usable design, and universal design
illustrate
similar yet nuanced approaches that can result in prod-
ucts that are easier for everyone to use, including people
with disabilities. These “products” may be interpreted to
relate to the built environment, but also may apply to
the experience a user might have in utilizing informa-
tion technology, industrial design products, and cus-
tomer services.
Brought to greater awareness with the passage of leg-
islation of the American with Disabilities Act in 1990,
which mandated that public facilities and services be
accessible to people with disabilities. As used in the
building industry,
accessible design
is a design process
that directly considers and addresses the needs of peo-
ple with disabilities, and often intimates that environ-
ments, products and services can be
independently
used by
people with a variety of disabilities.
Universal design
is an arguably broader concept. As the
DO-IT Center report states,
“Universal design is defined
Beth R.
Mosenthal
AIA, LEED AP
BD+C,
Architect,
Anderson
Mason
Dale
Architec-
ture
Creative Content
