Hi

Just wanted to remind people that the Disability Discrimination Act won't 
necessarily recognise "minimum standards". So if someone argues that there 
have been no "reasonable" adjustments made to buildings, the minimum 
standard as it relates to that particular person may not apply. It might be 
argued that "anticipating" people's requirements should be based on BS 8300 
but I always advise people, as do some of the DRC speakers at conferences, 
that what is "reasonable" changes over time and that the DDA relates to 
what is reasonable for individuals. So for all design issues, best practice 
should apply as far as possible to have some sort of defence. I realise 
this doesn't apply outside the UK but in references to legislation here, it 
should be noted.

Also, it has been made clear that BS 8300 is undergoing or about to undergo 
a review and update and it has been recognised that some of the 
specifications are out of date and do not include a number of issues, 
particularly for people with sensory impairments and multiple impairments.

It will be interesting to see if the BS 77 proposed standards will 
eventually seen as minimum standards. Although they are by no means 
comprehensive or always best practice, are still, in some places loads 
better than BS 8300, and even admit throughout that minimum standards, 
especially Building Regs shouldn't be followed for an inclusive space!

I think people were using BS 8300 as a "minimum" because it was the first 
attempt at national comprehensive approach to standards but we've come a 
long way since then.

Also, I would be very worried if it wasn't pointed out that the approach in 
BS 8300 is still very much within the medical model of disability, rather 
than the social model. For example, in the appendix at the back, there are 
specs. for a turning circle for a person with a cane. So, where would 
anyone want to design just for a person with a cane! We want designers to 
design for maximum independence for the most numbers of people and consider 
all impairment specific issues. Interestingly, BS 8300 identifies much 
larger turning circles for power chair users and scooter users but this 
information is not reflected in the specifications in the body of the report.

Best wishes

Flick


At 16:01 07/07/2005 +0100, you wrote:
>I think the fact that the word 'minimum' is used 83 times in the document 
>gives a fairly good steer as to its message
>
>Vin
>----- Original Message ----- From: "Marcus Ormerod" <[log in to unmask]>
>To: <[log in to unmask]>
>Sent: Thursday, July 07, 2005 11:53 AM
>Subject: Re: BS 8300 & minimum requirements
>
>
>>Hi Rod
>>
>>Good question and I am replying to let Dave recover as you suggest. BS8300
>>provides a standard but does not as far as I can see state that these are
>>minimum ones to be achieved. I have attached the introductory section that
>>states how the BS was arrived at, but this does not state that this should
>>then be taken as a minimum.
>>
>>Anyone else come across this in the BS?
>>
>>Regards
>>Marcus
>>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: Accessibuilt list [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of
>>Rod Hunter
>>Sent: 06 July 2005 12:37
>>To: [log in to unmask]
>>Subject: [ACCESSIBUILT] BS 8300 & minimum requirements
>>
>>
>>Wanting to give Dave Crofts a break from antipodean requests, I wonder
>>if someone would mind confirming that it is stated in BS 8300 that its
>>provisions are minimum ones (indictating also where this is stated).
>>
>>May thanks.
>>
>>Rod Hunter
>>
>>
>>
>>----------End of Message----------
>>
>>Run by SURFACE for more information on research, consultancy and the
>>distance taught MSc. in Accessibility and Inclusive Design programme visit:
>>
>>http://www.inclusive-design.it
>>
>>Archives for the Accessibuilt discussion list are located at
>>http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/accessibuilt.html
>>
>>
>>----------End of Message----------
>>
>>Run by SURFACE for more information on research, consultancy and the 
>>distance taught MSc. in Accessibility and Inclusive Design programme visit:
>>
>>http://www.inclusive-design.it
>>
>>Archives for the Accessibuilt discussion list are located at 
>>http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/accessibuilt.html
>
>
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>No virus found in this incoming message.
>Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
>Version: 7.0.323 / Virus Database: 267.8.10/43 - Release Date: 06/07/2005
>
>----------End of Message----------
>
>Run by SURFACE for more information on research, consultancy and the 
>distance taught MSc. in Accessibility and Inclusive Design programme visit:
>
>http://www.inclusive-design.it
>
>Archives for the Accessibuilt discussion list are located at 
>http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/accessibuilt.html
>

Chair, MDPAG (Manchester Disabled People's Access Group)
Office: [log in to unmask]
Tel: 0161 273 5033
Fax: 0161 273 2637
Website: http://www.mdpag.org.uk
Personal: [log in to unmask]

----------End of Message----------

Run by SURFACE for more information on research, consultancy and the distance taught MSc. in Accessibility and Inclusive Design programme visit:

http://www.inclusive-design.it

Archives for the Accessibuilt discussion list are located at http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/accessibuilt.html