Dear Jane McLarty
Scanning through old messages I saw this one and noticed that you have not
had many responses.
Ideally (naturally) we should not start from here - not only people with a
visual disability would get caught by this type of hazard, but they still
continue to exist - basically architects learn very little about the 'use'
of the spaces that tye are designing and tend to go for a visual
'expression' of intent - important as long as not hazard is introduced.
We would normally recommend that this is infilled - a variety of solid
infills, or well organised useful infills such as vending machines,
furniture, notice boards etc - but care must be taken to ensure that these
are not hasards in themselves.
Ideally the obstruction should contrast, but this does not have to be garish
- people with a visual disability can spot contrasts in the same colour, as
opposed to them having to be yellow against black.
Where this exists under stairs etc, then the area can be infilled as a cupboard.
While I agree with the comment that students etc are shown designs before
they get implemented, I would put in a slight plug for professionals in the
field, such as us, who are extremely used to spotting this type of design
fault - even on plan format, where this may not be obvious to people who are
unused to being consulted in this area. Most towns and cities will also have
'access' groups who are more experienced at spotting faults, but one is
slightly at the mercy of opinion and speed is not always of essence.
Many of the Universities that we have worked with have, from testament,
benefitted from spossing these mistakes before they make them rather than
after. - And we definately would not argue for boring, homogonised spaces -
so architectural expression is safe!!
Regards
James
James Holmes-Siedle
Director
All Clear Designs Limited
3rd Floor, Cooper House
2 Michael Road
London SW6 2ER
Tel 0171 384 2950
Fax 0171 384 2951
email [log in to unmask]
Cserve 100451,3571
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|