Disability

Sustainable Fire Engineering Design – Targeting & MRV !

Posted by CJ Walsh

2014-04-20:  Traditional/Conventional Fire Engineering Practice is slowly, but inevitably, being transformed … in order to meet the regional and local challenges of rapid urbanization and climate change, the pressing need for a far more efficient and resilient building stock, and a growing social awareness that ‘sustainability’ demands much greater human creativity …

Design Target:  A Safe, Resilient and Sustainable Built Environment for All

Design Key Words:  Reality – Reliability – Redundancy – Resilience

Essential Construction & Occupancy Start-Up Processes:  Careful Monitoring & Reporting – Independent Verification of Performance (MRV)

.

Sustainable Fire Engineering Design Solutions:

Are Reliability-Based …
The design process is based on competence, practical experience, and an understanding of ‘real’ building performance and resilience during Extreme Man-Made Events, e.g. 2001 WTC 9-11 Attack & 2008 Mumbai Hive Attacks, and Hybrid Disasters, e.g. 2011 Fukushima Nuclear Incident … rather than theory alone.

Are Person-Centred …
‘Real’ people are placed at the centre of creative design endeavours and proper consideration is given to their responsible needs … their health, safety, welfare and security … in the Human Environment, which includes the social, built, economic and virtual environments.

Are Adapted to Local Context & Heritage * …
Geography, orientation, climate (including change, variability and severity swings), social need, culture, traditions, economy, building crafts and materials, etc., etc.
[* refer to the 2013 UNESCO Hangzhou Declaration]

In Sustainable Design … there are NO Universal Solutions !

Design Objectives:

To protect society, the best interests of the client/client organization and building user health and safety, and to maintain functionality under the dynamic, complex conditions of fire … Project-Specific Fire Engineering Design Objectives shall cover the following spectrum of issues …

  • Protection of the Health and Safety of All Building Users … including people with activity limitations (2001 WHO ICF), visitors to the building who will be unfamiliar with its layout, and contractors or product/service suppliers temporarily engaged in work or business transactions on site ;
  • Protection of Property from Loss or Damage … including the building, its contents, and adjoining or adjacent properties ;
  • Safety of Firefighters, Rescue Teams and Other Emergency Response Personnel ;
  • Ease and Reasonable Cost of ‘Effective’ Reconstruction, Refurbishment or Repair Works after a Fire ;
  • Sustainability of the Human Environment – including the fitness for intended use and life cycle costing of fire engineering related products, systems, etc … fixed, installed or otherwise incorporated in the building ;
  • Protection of the Natural Environment from Harm, i.e. adverse impacts.

.

More Specifically … with Regard to Resilient Building Performance during a Fire Incident and the ‘Cooling Phase’ after Fire Extinguishment:

1.   The Building shall be designed to comply with the Recommendations in the 2005 & 2008 NIST(USA) Final Reports on the World Trade Center(WTC) 1, 2 & 7 Building Collapses.

In one major respect, the 2005 NIST Report is flawed, i.e. its treatment of ‘disability and building users with activity limitations is entirely inadequate.  The Building shall, therefore, be designed to comply with International Standard ISO 21542: ‘Building Construction – Accessibility & Usability of the Built Environment’, which was published in December 2011.

2.   The Building shall remain Serviceable, not just Structurally Stable(!) … until all buildings users (including those users with activity limitations waiting in ‘areas of rescue assistance’) have been evacuated/rescued to an accessible ‘place of safety’ which is remote from the building, and have been identified … and all firefighters, rescue teams and other emergency response personnel have been removed/rescued from the building and its vicinity.

The Building shall be designed to resist Fire-Induced Progressive Damage and Disproportionate Damage.  These requirements shall apply to all building types, of any height.

Under no reasonably foreseeable circumstances shall the Building be permitted to collapse !

3.   The Building shall be designed to comfortably accommodate and resist a Maximum Credible Fire Scenario and a Maximum Credible User Scenario.

.

Concerted International Research is Needed …

To creatively resolve the direct conflict which exists between Sustainable Building Design Strategies and Traditional/Conventional Fire Engineering.

An example … for cooling, heating and/or ventilation purposes in a sustainable building, it is necessary to take advantage of natural patterns of uninterrupted air movement in that building. On the other hand, fire consultants in private practice, and fire prevention officers in authorities having jurisdiction, will demand that building spaces be strictly compartmented in order to limit the spread of fire and smoke … thereby dramatically interfering with those natural patterns of air movement. The result is that the sustainability performance of the building is seriously compromised.

If, however, adequate independent technical control is absent on the site of a sustainable building … it is the fire safety and protection which will be seriously compromised !

To effectively deal with the fire safety problems (fatal, in the case of firefighters) which result from the installation of Innovative Building/Energy/EICT Systems and Products in Sustainable Buildings.

.

These are appropriate tasks for a new CIB W14 Research Working Group VI: ‘Sustainable Fire Engineering Design & Construction’ !

.

.

ENDEnhanced by Zemanta

Mainstream Good Design & Accessibility for All Signage ?

Posted by CJ Walsh

2013-03-06:   Further to an earlier Post, dated 30 November 2012 … on Sustainable Accessibility for All …

Accessibility IS a Fundamental Human Right !

‘ For many Weak and Vulnerable People, today’s Complex Human Environment is inaccessible and unsafe … a hostile ‘reality’ which prevents independent functioning and participation in a local community;  it is a blatant denial of their human rights.’

Relevant Human Environment (social – built – virtual – institutional) Factors … factors which are external, or extrinsic, to the context of a person’s life and living situation … include policies and standards, negative attitudes and stigma, lack of services, problems with service delivery, inadequate funding, lack of accessibility in the built environment and to electronic, information and communication technologies, lack of consultation and involvement, and an absence of reliable data and evidence.

Accessibility for All …

Take a really close look at the photograph below … and see a staircase which, in spite of all the legislation in the EU Member States, contravenes almost every accessibility-related design guideline.  It is far from being an unusual scene in our European Built Environment …

Staircase Egress - Unsafe, Difficult Accessibility !!
Photograph taken by CJ Walsh. 2009-10-31. Click to enlarge.

Now, imagine the consequences of one, tiny slip …

Which is why our concern must be with Accessibility for All … which includes consciously thinking about children under the age of 5 years, women in the later stages of pregnancy, and frail older people (not all older people !) … and how they use and interact with their surroundings.

In addition, however … our attention must also turn to the large numbers of people, in all of our societies, with health conditions which result in serious impairments, activity limitations and participation restrictions.  As a prime example, consider the Big-4 Non-Communicable Diseases (NCD’s): Cardiovascular Diseases (e.g. heart attacks and stroke), Cancers, Diabetes, and Chronic Lung Diseases.

These 4 NCD’s – targeted in a World Health Organization (WHO) Global NCD Campaign – share health risk factors (tobacco use, unhealthy diet, lack of physical activity, harmful alcohol use) … cause more than 36 million deaths annually (almost 80 % of deaths, from such diseases, occur in low and middle-income countries) … and result in a high proportion of disability (66.5 % of all years lived with disability in low and middle income countries).

NCD’s can limit one or more of a person’s major life and living activities … such as walking, eating, communicating, and caring-for-oneself.  Examples of common NCD-related impairments include paralysis due to stroke, and amputation as a result of diabetic neuropathy.

When Easily Assimilated Signage IS Essential in Buildings …

Good Architectural Design IS ‘intuitive and obvious’ for building users … design characteristics which are critical in the case of Fire Engineering Design.  However, what is intuitive and obvious in Ireland may not be so intuitive and obvious in Turkey … and what is intuitive and obvious in Europe will certainly not be intuitive and obvious in Africa, India, or China.

Architectural & Fire Engineering Design must, therefore, be adapted to Local conditions … culture, social need, etc., etc.

When a building is NOT ‘intuitive and obvious’ for the broad range of potential building users … easily assimilated signage IS essential …

International Standard ISO 21542: ‘Building Construction – Accessibility & Usability of the Built Environment’ was published in December 2011, as a full standard.  In its Introduction, ISO 21542 is linked to the U.N. Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) … almost like an umbilical cord.

The scope of ISO 21542 covers public buildings.  The Accessibility Agenda in the U.N. Convention is very broad … so much standardization work remains to be completed at international level.

Concerning Accessibility Symbols and Signs … reference should be made to ISO 21542: Clause 41 – Graphical Symbols … and on Pages 106, 107, 108, and 109 … the following will be found:

  • Figure 66 – Accessible Facility or Entrance ;
  • Figure 67 – Sloped or Ramped Access ;
  • Figure 68 – Accessible Toilets (male & female) ;
  • Figure 69 – Accessible Toilets (female) ;
  • Figure 70 – Accessible Toilets (male) ;
  • Figure 71 – Accessible Lift / Elevator ;
  • Figure 72 – Accessible Emergency Exit Route.

I use the word ‘accessibility’, and not ‘access’ … because Accessibility has been defined in ISO 21542 as including … ‘access to buildings, circulation within buildings and their use, egress from buildings in the normal course of events, and evacuation in the event of an emergency’.

A note at the beginning of the standard also clarifies that Accessibility is an independent activity, i.e. assistance should not be necessary … and that there should be an assurance of individual health, safety and welfare during the course of those (accessibility-related) activities.

During the very long gestation of ISO 21542, an overwhelming consensus emerged in favour of using the term Accessibility for All … thereby sidestepping the thorny issue of different design philosophies which are described as being accessibility-related but, in practice, are limited and/or no longer fit-for-purpose.

'Accessibility for All' Symbol ?The Accessibility Symbol used throughout ISO 21542 is shown above.  I know that a small group of people from different countries worked very hard on this particular part of the standard.  My only contribution was in relation to the inclusion of Figure 72, concerning Fire Evacuation.

This ‘accessibility’ symbol is an attractive, modern and, of course, abstract representation of a concept … a person with an activity limitation using a wheelchair.  The symbol succeeds very well in communicating that concept.

However … as an Accessibility for All Symbol … encompassing people with other than functional impairments, e.g. hearing and visual impairments … and children under the age of 5 years, women in the later stages of pregnancy, frail older people … and people with the four main types of non-communicable disease discussed above … is this symbol, also, limited and no longer fit-for-purpose ??

.

Proposed New Sign for 'Area of Rescue Assistance'

.

Shown next, above, is the proposal for a new Area of Rescue Assistance Sign … which is contained in ISO 7010:2011 / FDAM 115 (2013).  While it is nice to finally see this Safety Sign appear in the mainstream of safety signage … the title being proposed for the sign and the explanatory texts which accompany it are very problematic …

  • The technical term being proposed – Evacuation Temporary Refuge – is too long and too difficult to understand ;
  • The explanatory texts which accompany this Sign are very confusing and misleading.

This problem has arisen because the people who drafted ISO 7010:2011 / FDAM 115 (2013) hadn’t a bull’s notion that ISO 21542 even existed !

In ISO 21542, we use the term Area of Rescue Assistance … which is easy for everybody to understand, including building users, building managers and firefighters, etc., etc.

We also explained, in ISO 21542, that a Place of Safety is a remote distance from the building … not anywhere inside the building !

.

Mainstreaming Disability …

U.N. CRPD – Preamble

(g)  Emphasizing the importance of mainstreaming disability issues as an integral part of relevant strategies of sustainable development,

As ‘disability’ moves closer towards … and is integrated and fully included in the ‘mainstream’ of sustainable community life and living … it is absolutely imperative that individuals and organizations who make up the Disability Sector become much more cohesive (far less fractious within) … that they begin to fully understand the practices and procedures of the mainstream … and actively and robustly engage with that mainstream.

It is ridiculous, for example, that a large amount of the Sector’s energy is still being diverted into meaningless meditations and endless tracts on whether it is ‘universal design’, or ‘design-for-all’, or ‘inclusive design’, or ‘facilitation design’, etc … when an entirely new design paradigm is being demanded by a world (our small planet when seen from the moon !), which is experiencing enormous levels of human poverty, natural resource shortages, human rights violations, and severe weather events.  The overriding priority must be ‘real’ implementation … Effective Accessibility for All !

.

'Earthrise' from Apollo 14
Colour photograph – ‘Earthrise’ – taken from the Apollo 14 Spacecraft … showing a bright colourful Earth, in a dense black ‘sky’, rising above the pale surface of the Moon. Click to enlarge.

NASA’s Gateway to Astronaut Photography of Earth

.

And … Effective Accessibility for All is but one component of …

‘Social Wellbeing for All in a Sustainable Built Environment’

Refer also to …

2004 Rio de Janeiro Declaration on Sustainable Social Development, Disability & Ageing

.

.

.

Update:  2013-05-31 …

While the wider international design community is working hard on developing an array of Accessibility Symbols to facilitate different health condition and impairment categories, and to suit different environmental situations, e.g. a fire emergency in a building … I recently encountered another interesting contribution …

Alternative Accessibility Symbol (USA-2011) - Functional Impairment
Click to enlarge. For more information: www.accessibleicon.org

Any comments ??

.

.

END

Recent Fatal Fire at a Disabled Workshop in SW Germany

Posted by CJ Walsh

2012-11-28:  On Monday last, 26 November 2012 … Fire broke out at a Sheltered Workshop for People with Activity Limitations, located in the small municipality of  Titisee-Neustadt, south-western Germany … not too far from the borders of France and Switzerland.  It was approximately 14.00 hrs in the afternoon … in broad daylight.

German news reports put the death toll at 14 People, including 1 Carer … with 10 People injured.

News reports also state that it took 2 Hours for Firefighters to bring this incident under control.  At the time that Photograph 1, below, was taken … smoke had spread throughout a major part of the building.

Viewers should look closely at the top of the external staircase … then, ask yourselves how any person with an activity limitation can be safely rescued, or assisted to evacuate, by means of a ladder (obscured, at the end of the building on the left) … and, finally, notice the positioning of fire hoses on the ground and on the staircase … some of the many issues which have been discussed extensively here before …

Click to enlarge.
Click to enlarge.
Click to enlarge.
Click to enlarge.

.

2005 NIST(USA) Final Report on 9-11 World Trade Center 1 & 2 Tower Collapses

–  Recommendation  #17b  –

 To the degree possible, people with activity limitations should be provided with a means for self-evacuation in the event of a building emergency.  Current strategies (and law) generally require these people to shelter-in-place and await assistance.  New procedures, which provide redundancy in the event that the fire warden system or co-worker assistance (e.g. the buddy system) fail, should consider full building evacuation, and may include use of fire-protected and structurally hardened elevators, motorized evacuation technology, and dedicated communication technologies.

.

At the heart of the impressive show of fire fighting equipment and technology … and the usual reassuring statements by local officials and other people in authority after the event … there is an equally impressive lie …

Photograph by Patrick Seeger(dpa). Click to enlarge.
Photograph by Patrick Seeger(dpa). Click to enlarge.

Current Building Codes and Regulations, Fire Safety Standards, Building Design Practices, and Building Management Procedures … do not seriously consider the safety of People with Activity Limitations … not properly – not adequately – not even INadequately.  Tokenism is the best offer available in just a few European countries.

Photograph by Patrick Seeger(dpa). Click to enlarge.
Photograph by Patrick Seeger(dpa). Click to enlarge.

According to Spiegel OnLine International …

The rescue was difficult because some people panicked, said Local Fire Chief Alexander Widmaier.  “We are dealing here with people who naturally do not respond rationally”, he said.

IF this is an accurate news report, and bearing in mind that it is also a translation … I SAY …

Let us be generous and kind … Local Fire Chief Alexander Widmaier has NO awareness or understanding of People with Activity Limitations and the daily challenges they face in moving around and using a built environment which is inaccessible and unsafe.

According to AFP OnLine …

Gotthard Benitz, of the Titisee-Neustadt fire service, told AFP earlier that the fire began on the ground floor of the building which also had a basement and an upper floor.

“The victims were all on the same floor where the fire was”, he said adding this was the only area to have sustained fire damage and the stairwell had remained smoke-free meaning those on the other two floors had been able to use it.

He also said firefighters were prepared for dealing with an emergency at the workshop as practice fire alarms were regularly carried out there, with the last one having been last year.

The head of Caritas in Germany, Peter Neher, told ZDF public television that emergency practice drills were done regularly.

IF this is an accurate news report, and bearing in mind that it is also a translation … I SAY …

Gotthard Benitz should also look at the top of the external staircase in Photograph 1 above.  IF there are no circulation hazards, e.g. ice, or obstacles, e.g. fire hoses … able-bodied people can easily go up or down a staircase … people who use wheelchairs or other mobility-aid devices cannot.

In their respective positions of responsibility … Gotthard Benitz and Peter Neher should both understand that all building occupants must be facilitated in acquiring the skill of evacuation to a ‘place of safety’, by way of a safe and accessible route.  An emergency practice drill, although carried out regularly once a year … is ENTIRELY inadequate … and will achieve Very Little.

Skill:  The ability of a person – resulting from training and regular practice – to carry out complex, well-organized patterns of behaviour efficiently and adaptively, in order to achieve some end or goal.

Standard fire evacuation training and practice drill procedures must be adapted to the individual-specific abilities of People with Activity Limitations.

.

BUT … the new International Standard ISO 21542 is a very small step in the right direction.  See yesterday’s post.

This situation will only improve to a significant degree, however, when People with Activity Limitations, and their Representative Organizations, begin to act decisively, in unison, and with serious intent …

.

Self-Protection from Fire in Buildings – Personal Check List for People with Activity Limitations

1.     Upgrade ‘My’ understanding of Accessibility …

Ease of independent approach, entry, egress, evacuation and/or use of a building and its services and facilities, by all of the building’s potential users – with an assurance of individual Health, Safety and Welfare during the course of those activities ;

2.     Be assertive (not aggressive) with regard to ‘My’ own self-protection in emergency situations ;

3.     Concerning ‘My’ safety … demand that Building Management actively engages in Meaningful Consultation – and receives your Informed Consent ;

4.     Become familiar with the Fire Defence Plan for the building, and know ‘My’ part well ;

5.     Practice – practice – practice … become skilled in evacuation to a Place of Safety ;

6.     Become involved, and participate directly in the Building’s Safety Procedures.

.

Self-Protection from Fire in Buildings  – Must-Do List for Representative Organizations & Groups

1.     Upgrade ‘Our’ understanding of Accessibility in a Social Context, its Current Vocabulary, and its Complexity … groups of individuals wish to socialize together … this is now, afterall, a recognised human and social right !

Ease of independent approach, entry, egress, evacuation and/or use of a building and its services and facilities, by all of the building’s potential users – with an assurance of individual Health, Safety and Welfare, and group Wellbeing, during the course of those activities ;

2.     Be assertive (and aggressive) with regard to the availability of proper Data and Statistics – we must clearly identify ‘Our’ problem with the many restrictions placed on our participation in local communities ;

3.     Produce a working statement of an Individual’s Rights – on 1 Page (!) ;

4.     Issue clear guidelines on Reliable Advocacy ;

5.     Become involved, and participate directly in the improvement of Building Codes and Regulations, Fire Safety Standards, Building Design Practices, and Building Management Procedures ;

6.      Demand resources to Monitor ‘Effective’ Implementation … and Target Relevant and ‘Practical’ Research.

.

.

END

Enhanced by Zemanta

Stop Press ! … ISO 21542 on Accessibility-for-All Published !!

Posted by CJ Walsh

2012-03-25:  No news about this momentous development, yet, on the International Design and Disability Networks … (why is that ? – are they all asleep out there ?) … but International Standard  ISO 21542: ‘Building Construction – Accessibility and Usability of the Built Environment’  was finally published by the International Standards Organization (ISO) in December 2011 !   Even ISO, and national standards organizations, have been slow with an official notification.

This International Standard now provides building users, architects, designers, engineers, builders, building owners and managers, manufacturers, policy makers and legislators with the requirements and recommendations to create a Sustainable Built Environment which is Accessible.

The First Edition of ISO 21542, dated 2011-12-15, represents an agreement reached by strong consensus between different countries all over the world … an agreement patiently constructed and pieced together by a small, dedicated international group of Accessibility Experts.  As one of those experts, I am tremendously relieved that this main task has been accomplished … but the process must continue … there are still errors in the document … and the fire safety texts must be expanded.

This is also an agreement which signals that uniform implementation of the main provisions (accessibility-related) in the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UN CRPD) can commence across the globe, not just in the developed economic regions.

The purpose of this International Standard is to define how the built environment … in particular, public buildings … should be designed, constructed and managed to enable people to approach, enter, use, egress from and evacuate a building independently, in an equitable and dignified manner and to the greatest extent possible.

Colour image showing an Accessible Fire Evacuation Route Sign. From now on, Building Users should expect that these routes will be Accessible-for-All, throughout their full extent, until they reach a Place of Safety which is remote from the Building. Otherwise, they will be able to find accommodation in a suitable Area of Rescue Assistance along the route. Click to enlarge.
Colour image showing an Accessible Fire Evacuation Route Sign. From now on, Building Users should expect that these routes will be Accessible-for-All, throughout their full extent, until they reach a Place of Safety which is remote from the Building. Otherwise, they will be able to find accommodation in a suitable Area of Rescue Assistance along the route. Click to enlarge.

.

A new international understanding of ‘Building Accessibility’ is hereby established … ‘Access’ (approach, entry and use) can no longer be divorced from ‘Egress’ (in the normal course of events) and ‘Evacuation’ (in the event of an emergency).

The concept of ‘Access’, in isolation, and the role of the ‘Access Consultant’ are, therefore, outdated and obsolete !   And use of the word ‘Escape’, in any context, is to be firmly and rigorously discouraged !!

The intention of this International Standard is to meet the needs of the majority of people.  This goal is achieved by agreement on minimum standards of accessibility and usability which are generally accepted to accommodate diversities of age and the human condition.

.

In future … proper emphasis must be placed on Real and Effective Implementation of Accessibility-for-All in the built environment … to meet the needs of real people in all of our communities.

In the past … too many scarce human resources have been diverted into pointless discussions and arguments about accessibility design philosophies.  And, particularly in Europe, we have been far too fond of ‘talk’, instead of ‘action’ !   No more !!

.

ISO 21542 : 2011  applies to new and existing buildings.

IF this Standard’s requirements and recommendations are taken into consideration during the earliest stages of New Building Design … the costs of providing satisfactory accessibility and usability in a building will be minimal.

Yes, there are problems with improving the accessibility performance of Existing Buildings … just as there are problems, for example, with improving their energy performance.  However … creativity, design flexibility, and an in-depth understanding of the principles of Accessibility-for-All … will ensure that the functional requirements of this Standard are properly met.

Mindful of the  1964 Venice Charter  and other similar international instruments … accessibility must also be facilitated in Existing Buildings of Historical, Architectural and Cultural Importance.  In such cases, it will be necessary for national authorities having jurisdiction to allow some relaxation of the requirements in this International Standard … as well as to proactively recommend appropriate alternative accessibility measures.

.

This new approach to Accessibility-for-All in the Built Environment … as set down in ISO 21542 … was directly informed by Preamble Paragraph (g) and Articles 9, 10 and 11 of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UN CRPD).

At the time of writing … the UN CRPD has been ratified by the European Union (EU) and 109 Other Countries.

An Important Note for Parties to the Convention which is entirely outside the scope of ISO 21542, and standardization generally … but very relevant to the implementation, for example, of Article 11 at national level in the ratifying Countries and EU Member States …

UN CRPD  Article 12 – Equal Recognition Before The Law

1.   States Parties reaffirm that persons with disabilities have the right to recognition everywhere as persons before the law.

2.   States Parties shall recognize that persons with disabilities enjoy legal capacity on an equal basis with others in all aspects of life.

3.   States Parties shall take appropriate measures to provide access by persons with disabilities to the support they may require in exercising their legal capacity.

4.   States Parties shall ensure that all measures that relate to the exercise of legal capacity provide for appropriate and effective safeguards to prevent abuse in accordance with international human rights law.  Such safeguards shall ensure that measures relating to the exercise of legal capacity respect the rights, will and preferences of the person, are free of conflict of interest and undue influence, are proportional and tailored to the person’s circumstances, apply for the shortest time possible and are subject to regular review by a competent, independent and impartial authority or judicial body.  The safeguards shall be proportional to the degree to which such measures affect the person’s rights and interests.

5.   Subject to the provisions of this article, States Parties shall take all appropriate and effective measures to ensure the equal right of persons with disabilities to own or inherit property, to control their own financial affairs and to have equal access to bank loans, mortgages and other forms of financial credit, and shall ensure that persons with disabilities are not arbitrarily deprived of their property.

.

ISO 21542 : 2011  is available from the International Standards Organization (ISO) at … www.iso.org/

The Official Abstract on the ISO WebSite states …

ISO 21542 : 2011  specifies a range of requirements and recommendations for many of the elements of construction, assemblies, components and fittings which comprise the built environment.  These requirements relate to the constructional aspects of access to buildings, to circulation within buildings, to egress from buildings in the normal course of events and evacuation in the event of an emergency.  It also deals with aspects of accessibility management in buildings.

ISO 21542 : 2011  contains provisions with respect to features in the external environment directly concerned with access to a building or group of buildings from the edge of the relevant site boundary or between such groups of buildings within a common site.  It does not deal with those elements of the external environment, such as public open spaces, whose function is self-contained and unrelated to the use of one specific building, nor does it deal with single-family dwellings, other than those circulation spaces and fittings that are common to two or more such dwellings.

.

.

END

Enhanced by Zemanta

Older People in Emergencies – Action & Policy Development (II)

Posted by CJ Walsh

2009-11-25:  In 2008, the World Health Organization (WHO) Report: ‘Older People in Emergencies – Considerations for Action & Policy Development’ was published.

The following are short extracts from that Report …

Older People

Until recently, older peoples’ needs in disasters and conflicts were addressed only by broader adult health and humanitarian programmes.  This has changed, as several recent emergencies highlighted this population’s vulnerabilities.  Of the 14,800 deaths in France during the 2003 heat wave, 70% were people over 75 years of age.  Of the estimated 1,330 people who died in the wake of Hurricane Katrina, most were older people.  In Louisiana, 71% of those who died were older than 60 years;  47% of this group were over 77 years old.  Worldwide, the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) has estimated that older people make up 8.5% of the overall refugee population, and in some cases comprise more than 30% of caseloads.  In 2005, approximately 2.7 million people over the age of 60 were living as refugees or internally displaced persons.

Globally, the proportion of older people is growing faster than any other age group.  In 2000 one in ten, or about 600 million, people were 60 years of age or older.  By 2025, this figure is expected to reach 1.2 billion people, and in 2050 around 1.9 billion.  In developing countries, where 80% of older people live, the proportion of those over 60 years old in 2025 will increase from 7% to 12%.  Moreover, life expectancy at birth has increased globally from 48 years in 1955 to 65 in 1995, and is projected to reach 73 in 2025.  By 2050, people over 80 years old are expected to account for 4% of the world’s population, up from 1% today.

Disability & Older People

Worldwide, it is estimated that more than 80% of the disabled population lives in developing countries, where the prevalence of disability is approximately 20%.  That rate is expected to increase dramatically as populations age.  By 2050 in India, the incidence of disability is expected to jump by 120%, in China by 70% and in sub-Saharan Africa by 257%.

Emergency Planners must consider these trends, because poor health and reduced mobility increase the risk of serious injury and illness in disasters.  Older people have sustained more injuries in disasters than other groups because of functional limitations such as poor balance, muscle weakness and exhaustion.  Older people have higher rates of coronary heart disease, diabetes, stroke, cancer, respiratory diseases and rheumatism.  A study in China found that 74% of those over 80 years old had chronic diseases, 1.5% were physically disabled, and 3.46% had Alzheimer’s disease.  In Iraq, more than half of 340 older people surveyed by HelpAge International had chronic joint and bone problems, hypertension, heart problems, diabetes and reduced eyesight and hearing.  In West Darfur, Sudan, 34% of surveyed refugees 50 years of age and over were disabled, 27% could not move without help and 19% had severely impaired vision; while 61% reported chronic diseases that required specialized treatment and/or medicines that were not available.

Objective 1:   Increase Visibility and Raise Awareness among Health Agencies and Humanitarian Organizations about Older Peoples’ Needs and Priorities in Emergencies.

  • Mainstream and integrate issues related to older people and emergencies into existing policies and guidelines (i.e. emergency medicine, nutrition, protection, gender-based violence, participatory assessments and programming).  Include plans for older people in national policy and guideline documents.
  • Highlight the need to assist and protect older people as well as their capacities and contributions in rebuilding affected communities.
  • Develop inter-agency efforts to identify gaps, develop practice guidelines and provide training and education.
  • Promote better practice policies and documents among all stakeholders.
  • Collaborate with funders to increase humanitarian assistance to older people based on needs assessments and reflect these in funding proposal criteria.
  • Involve older people in developing emergency management activities to increase their visibility and ensure their needs are taken into account, for example, in shelter plans and locations.

Objective 2:   Develop Essential Medical and Health Resources for Older People in Emergency Practices.

  • Identify and include essential medicines for older people in emergency kits.  Include medicines for chronic diseases and other illnesses common among this social group.
  • Develop disability aid packages with equipment such as eyeglasses and walking sticks.
  • Develop education modules for health professionals on diseases common among older people, including HIV/AIDS.
  • Develop and disseminate guidelines for geriatric medicine in emergencies and humanitarian crises.
  • Within the health care system, ensure that conditions and needs common to older people are integrated into patient triage, clinical evaluation, treatment, the emergency medical response system and access to specialty care.
  • Ensure that nutritional guidelines for food distribution suitable for older people are integrated into health planning and response plans.
  • Ensure local development of guidelines for feeding older people, using locally available foods to the extent this is possible where populations depend on external food aid.
  • Implement gender-based analyses in planning and programme design to account for differences between older men and women in terms of both health needs and access issues.

Objective 3:   Develop Emergency Management Policies and Tools to Address Older Peoples’ Health-Related Vulnerabilities.

  • Integrate older peoples’ health needs and related issues into assessment tools and practices.
  • Develop community-based tools using disaggregated data to identify vulnerable older people.  Include formats to identify chronic health conditions, disabilities and nutritional needs.
  • Develop procedures to identify hidden and stay-behind older people.
  • Develop standardized tools to assess support needs of older people, including inter-generational and community care options.
  • Develop age-friendly standards and guidelines so that service and care environments are accessible to older people with disabilities.
  • In collaboration with older people, their families and communities, develop personal and household preparedness kits in areas of predictable disasters.
  • Collaborate with communities in identifying and implementing community-based home care and support strategies which may reduce older peoples’ isolation and vulnerability during crises.
  • Develop guidelines and evacuation plans that include mechanisms to identify and transport frail, disabled and older people with special medical conditions.  Identify procedures to ensure adequate care and treatment as necessary.
  • Develop guidelines to ensure safe and adequate treatment of older people in evacuation centres and refugee camps.
  • Ensure that health facilities have feasible plans to care for older people during disasters and humanitarian crises.
  • Develop monitoring and evaluation tools to measure the performance of health care services and humanitarian interventions targeting older people.  These measures should be integrated into existing monitoring and evaluation procedures where possible.

Objective 4:   Ensure that Older People are Aware of and Have Access to Essential Emergency Health Care Services.

  • Use established assessment tools to identify and locate frail and disabled older people and those with chronic diseases and special medical conditions, as well as older caretakers of orphaned children.
  • Ensure that assessments are participatory and target all older populations.  Assessments should include information on health conditions, social support needs, caretaking responsibilities and available means to meet basic living needs, including access to food and health services, treatment and medicines.
  • Ensure that assessments are coordinated across primary health care, rehabilitation, long term care and social services to meet the needs of older people.
  • Implement outreach services and referral mechanisms to identify and ensure care for hidden or stay-behind older people.
  • Coordinate primary health care, rehabilitation, long-term care and social services to establish system referral mechanisms that older clients may require.
  • Assess and organize training for health staff to ensure knowledge of geriatric nutritional, health and medical care needs.
  • Establish information programmes to educate older people, families and caregivers about nutritional needs, medical conditions and health care options.
  • Use disaggregated data to assess services by age and gender.

Objective 5:   Provide Age-Sensitive and Appropriate Health and Humanitarian Services to Maintain Older Peoples’ Health.

  • Ensure that equitable access to shelter, clothing, food and sanitation prevent deterioration of health through integrated individual assessments and referrals to health and humanitarian agencies.
  • Ensure that age-friendly practices are used to promote services to older people with disabilities.
  • Provide access to appropriate health care, including medicines for chronic diseases and disability/restorative aids.
  • Collaborate with communities in identifying community-based home care and support options for frail and disabled older people.
  • When appropriate and feasible, develop mobile clinics to extend health services to older people living in remote locations.
  • Implement mechanisms to assess nutritional balance and ensure access to supplementary food programmes when appropriate, taking into account that many older people also care for children.  Provide education on food preparation using supplementary or locally available foods.
  • Ensure that protection needs of older people are integrated into programming (e.g. social welfare or community services) to identify persons at risk and prevent abuse and exploitation.
  • Undertake monitoring to assess continuing effectiveness of services to older people.
  • Use disaggregated data to assess efficiency of implemented activities by age and gender.

Objective 6:   Promote Cross-Sectoral Planning and Co-Ordination to Raise Awareness of Older Peoples’ Needs in Crises and Reduce Their Risk of Marginalization and Deteriorating Health in Emergencies.

  • Raise awareness among agencies and organizations concerning physical and health issues specific to older people and of ways to adapt basic need support to their requirements (e.g. supplementary food rations, livelihood needs and impacts of protection issues on older peoples’ physical and psychological health).
  • Where possible, include older people in planning and programming committees to increase their visibility and ensure their needs and priorities are integrated.
  • In coordination with appropriate partners, establish community self-help groups to facilitate community care for more vulnerable older people.
  • Recognize self-sufficiency as key to maintaining health and encourage the inclusion of older people in training programmes, income-generation schemes, and community development projects.
  • Establish older peoples’ committees to facilitate self-advocacy and communication with authorities and ministries of health to increase access to existing services and entitlements.

Objective 7:   Build Institutional Capacity and Commitment towards Ensuring the Health and Safety of Older People in Emergencies.

  • Integrate cross-cutting health emergency management issues into global/regional/country strategic plans.
  • Promote inter-agency and cross-sectoral consultation on cross-cutting policy and programming issues to build consensus, commitment and capacity to respond to older peoples’ needs in disasters and humanitarian crises.
  • Collaborate with ministries of health to establish mandates and legislation ensuring the provision of care to older people; apply a human rights framework to these issues.
  • Collaborate with ministries of health to develop options to increase older peoples’ access to affordable health care services, including the implementation of subsidized medical and medicine programmes.
  • Advocate for enhanced funding and humanitarian assistance to older people in emergencies and conflicts.  Encourage funding agencies to recognize older people as a priority.
  • Develop frameworks to promote participatory, transparent and accountable processes to advance the needs of older people.
  • Develop sustainable mechanisms to maintain advocacy and consultation of older people within the health care-system.  Establish and involve advocacy committees in the planning, implementation and evaluation of emergency management practices when appropriate, for example regarding the design of community shelters that may be accessed by older disabled people.

Objective 8:   Strengthen the Capacity of Ministries of Health and Health Care Systems to Meet the Needs of Older People in Emergencies.

  • As required, integrate the medical and nutritional needs of older people into local public health and emergency preparedness and response strategies.
  • Develop strategies to ensure that existing health care systems develop capacity (infrastructure and knowledge) to meet the increasing proportion of older people who will be impacted by disasters in the future, taking into account medical, disability and mental health needs, including dementia and Alzheimer’s disease.
  • Collaborate with communities in identifying community-based home care and support strategies for older people as an option to reduce older peoples’ isolation and vulnerability to disasters.
  • Collaborate with communities to develop and maintain disaster reduction committees.  Assist in the implementation of strategies to strengthen community support to older people and reduce their levels of risk during disasters (e.g. development of community emergency response teams or mutual assistance groups among more vulnerable older people).
  • Integrate older peoples’ needs into exercise designs and facilitate the dissemination of lessons learned.
  • Develop performance frameworks and monitoring mechanisms to assess medical response systems and older peoples’ access to specialty care in emergencies.

Objective 9:   Develop Mechanisms to Ensure Continuing Development and Exchange of Expertise as these Relate to Older People in Emergencies.

  • Develop and provide ongoing training and education to staff on the needs and priorities of older people, including responsibility to include this population in planning and policy development.
  • Integrate issues related to older people in emergencies into relevant university curricula.
  • Undertake comparative research to assess the health status (including access to assistance) of older people in emergencies vis-à-vis other age groups.
  • Undertake research to address demographic shifts and the increasing proportion of older people in disasters as this relates to health care and infrastructure/facility development.
  • Ensure emergency preparedness and response considerations are integrated into relevant services and institutions (e.g. facilities caring for frail and disabled older people are required to develop and practice evacuation and emergency care plans).

Objective 10:   Promote Active Ageing as a Strategy to Reduce Vulnerability and Develop Resiliency to Disasters.

  • Promote a wider understanding among ministries of health and humanitarian organizations of the economic and social factors contributing to the vulnerability of older people, including issues related to livelihoods, inter-generational dependence and social pension.
  • Develop policies that recognize active ageing and resiliency as facilitating older peoples’ capacity to prepare for, cope with and respond to the affects of disasters and conflicts.
  • Include a life course perspective that recognizes health promotion and prevention of disease and disability.
  • Support cross-sectoral forums and activities which link the risks of older people in emergencies to frameworks for livelihoods, protection and gender-based equality, health promotion and social pension.
  • Collaborate with relevant organizations to mainstream the health needs of older people into existing humanitarian programmes addressing shelter, nutrition, livelihoods, protection and gender-based violence.
  • Develop information campaigns and encourage media to highlight both the needs and capacities of older people and to increase their visibility.
  • Collaborate with funding bodies to integrate active ageing as a criterion in funding proposals targeting older people.

.

.

END

Enhanced by Zemanta

Disability Access Certificates & Accessible Toilet Facilities ? (III)

Posted by CJ Walsh

2009-10-31:  Missing so far in Ireland … but an essential starting point for any discussion about Disability & Accessibility of the Built Environment in many other countries … is the 2006 United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, which entered into force, i.e. became an International Legal Instrument, on 3rd May 2008.

This Convention is important because it facilitates access, for a large group of people in all of our communities, to the Rights, i.e. basic needs, of all human beings … which were first elaborated in the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights.  Until now, access to Universal Rights has effectively been denied to people with disabilities.

How is Ireland responding to the UN Convention ?

Ireland signed the Convention on 30th March 2007 … but has still not signed the Convention’s Optional Protocol.  Furthermore … even though other European Union Member States have proceeded to ratify both the Convention and the Optional Protocol on their own, without waiting for all Member States to act in unison … Ireland has not ratified either.  Why is that ???

On the positive side … and at the time of writing …

  • 143 countries, including Ireland, have signed the Convention ;
  • 87 other countries have signed the Optional Protocol ;
  • 71 other countries have ratified the Convention ;
  • 45 other countries have ratified the Optional Protocol.

2006 UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD)

Click the Link above to read/download PDF File (215 Kb) 

With regard to Accessibility … refer, initially and directly, to Preamble Paragraph (g) and Articles 9 & 11 of the Convention.

[As a matter of routine in all of our work, I prefer to go beyond the scope of the 2006 Disability Rights Convention … and to consider Accessibility for All, i.e. including People with Activity Limitations (2001 WHO ICF), to the Human Environment.]

.

Accessibility Implementation in Ireland, and Toilet Facilities

How more basic can you get in every day life and living ?

The WC Cubicle shown in Diagram 13 of the existing Technical Guidance Document M does not work … a black and white / open and shut case.  It has not worked for a long, long time.   It is not ‘accessible’.   Should this come as a sudden surprise to anybody ?   No.

That toilet arrangement dates back to guidance documentation published by the Irish National Rehabilitation Board (NRB) in the early 1980’s.  And since that guidance took a long time to produce … we are talking about well before the end of the 1970’s as its true date of origin.  I know, because I was there … and I have the T-Shirt !

I am not going to show that Diagram here, because I don’t want to encourage anybody to reproduce it again in a ‘real’ building … for any reason whatsoever !

.

Nearly 30 years later (!) … the Wheelchair Accessible Unisex WC shown in Diagram 12 of Draft Technical Guidance Document M (2009) is not a significant improvement on the earlier version.  In fact, it is a miserable effort !   And … I am not going to show that Diagram here either … for the same reason.

What I would like to present, however, are Figures 43 & 44 from the Draft International Accessibility-for-All Standard ISO 21542.  This is the level of accessibility performance which we should all be striving to achieve … as a minimum ! 

2 colour drawings showing, on top, an Accessible Toilet Facility, with corner WC arrangement ... and, on the bottom, showing that there is sufficient space for a range of wheelchair to WC transfer options.
2 colour drawings showing, on top, an Accessible Toilet Facility, with corner WC arrangement … and, on the bottom, showing that there is sufficient space for a range of Wheelchair-to-WC transfer options. Click to enlarge.

N.B. A standard, large Wash Hand Basin must no longer be considered as an optional extra in a properly fitted out Accessible Toilet Facility.

Please also note the independent water supply, on the wall side of the corner WC, feeding a shower head type outlet which can be turned on or off at the outlet head … or within easy reach of the WC.  This is Accessibility-for-All in action !

Colour photograph showing what is supposed to be an 'Accessible' Toilet Facility, with a combined Baby Change Facility. Inadequate management magnifies the already poor accessibility performance of the cramped space. Click to enlarge. Photograph taken by CJ Walsh. 2009-09-19.
Colour photograph showing what is supposed to be an ‘Accessible’ Toilet Facility, with a combined Baby Change Facility. Inadequate management magnifies the already poor accessibility performance of the cramped space. Click to enlarge. Photograph taken by CJ Walsh. 2009-09-19.

Many building owners/managers wish to combine an Accessible WC Cubicle with a Baby Change Facility.  More space is required, therefore, above and beyond that shown in the Figures above for the Baby Change fittings and associated ‘equipment’.

Without Proper Accessibility Management … Accessibility Performance will rapidly deteriorate … as shown in the above photograph.

Once we have mastered the minimum building accessibility performance required to meet the needs of a single person with an activity limitation … our next priority must be the Social Dimension of Accessibility.  Existing Building & Fire Regulations, Standards and Design Guidance are still geared very much towards the single building user.  However, for example, if 5 or 6 or 8 wheelchair users decide to use a building’s facilities … not a concept which is off-the-wall (!) … there is almost a complete breakdown and failure in accessibility.  This is no longer acceptable !!

.

.

END

Enhanced by Zemanta

Disability Access Certificates (DAC’s) – Parts M & B ? (II)

Posted by CJ Walsh

2009-10-18:  In everyday practice, the usual short introductory text in Technical Guidance Document M (Ireland) which refers to a linkage between ‘access and use’ of a building with ‘fire safety’ has little impact, because it is not explained … and is typically ignored.

In general … the basic problem is that this issue is hardly dealt with … at all … by Local Fire Authorities right across the country in their handling of Fire Safety Certificates … and where it does become part of the process, it receives inadequate attention.  There are exceptions.

A major drawback with the current vertical approach to our Building Regulations … each of the Parts has its own separate Supporting Technical Guidance Document … is that people are not sufficiently aware of the important horizontal linkages between the different Parts.  For example, all of the other Parts must be linked to Part D.  Quick, run to find out what Part D covers !   Another two examples … Part B must also be linked to Part A and Part M … and Part M must also be linked to Part K and Part B.

So … while grudgingly having to accept that the scope of TGD M should have some limit, under the current flawed system … a precise intervention with just one or two sentences, at critical places in the guidance text, would help to improve the overall consideration of fire safety issues, relevant to Part M, by building designers … and client or construction organizations.

Here are a Few Suggestions for Discussion …

1.  Revise Paragraph #0.6 of Draft TGD M (2009) & Add a Title …

Fire Evacuation for All

” Accessibility encompasses the full range of activity related to buildings: to approach, enter, use, egress from under normal conditions, and evacuate a building independently during a fire emergency, in an equitable and dignified manner.  Provision for access and use must, therefore, be linked to provision for fire evacuation.  For guidance on design for evacuation, reference should be made to Technical Guidance Document B (Fire Safety).”

Note:  No such guidance is contained in TGD B (2006).  It would be a great wonder if any person with a disability could actually evacuate a building which had been designed in accordance with TGD B.  To take a simple example … all of the ‘stairways’ in Table 1.5 of TGD B – Minimum Width of Escape Stairways will not facilitate contraflow or the assisted evacuation of mobility and visually impaired people.  Furthermore, those minimum widths specified in the Table may have a clear width which is 200 mm less.  See Methods of Measurement, Paragraph #1.0.10 (c) (iii) … ” a stairway is the clear width between the walls or balustrades, (strings and handrails intruding not more than 30 mm and 100 mm respectively may be ignored) ” !   What an incoherent mess !!

2.  Insert New Sentence at the End of Paragraph #1.1.1 of Draft TGD M (2009) …

Objective (Approach to Buildings)

” Consideration should be given to the use of the approach and circulation routes around a building as accessible routes to a ‘place of safety’ during a fire emergency.”

3.  Insert New Sentence at the End of Paragraph #1.2.1 of Draft TGD M (2009) …

Objective (Access to Buildings)

” Consideration should be given to the use of all entrances to a building as accessible fire exits during a fire emergency.”

4.  Insert New Paragraph at the End of Paragraph #1.3.4.1 of Draft TGD M (2009) …

Passenger Lifts

” Manual handling of occupied wheelchairs in a fire evacuation staircase, even with adequate training for everyone directly and indirectly involved, is hazardous for the person in the wheelchair and those people – minimum three – giving assistance.  The weight of an average unoccupied powered wheelchair, alone, makes manual handling impractical.  Lifts in new buildings should, therefore, be capable of being used for evacuation in a fire situation.  For guidance on the use of lifts for fire evacuation, reference should be made to Technical Guidance Document B (Fire Safety).”

5.  Insert New Paragraph and New Sentence at the End of Paragraph #1.3.4.2 of Draft TGD M (2009) …

Internal Stairs

” To allow sufficient space to safely carry an occupied wheelchair down or up a fire evacuation staircase, and to accommodate contraflow, i.e. emergency access by firefighters entering a building and moving towards a fire, while people are still evacuating from the building to a ‘place of safety remote from the building, the clear unobstructed width (exclusive of handrails and any other projections, e.g. portable fire extinguishers, notice boards, etc.) of the flight of a single, or multi-channelled, stairs should not be less than 1 500 mm.  The surface width of a flight of stairs should not be less than 1 700 mm.”

Note:  See Footnote (5) to Table 1.5 in TGD B (2006) … ” The minimum widths given in the table may need to be increased in accordance with the guidance in TGD M: Access for People with Disabilities.”   DUH ?

And …

” For the purpose of safe assisted fire evacuation of people, the rise of a step should not have a height greater than 150 mm, and the going of a step should not have a depth less than 300 mm.”

6.  Insert New Sentence at the End of Paragraph #1.5.1 of Draft TGD M (2009) …

Objective (Facilities in Buildings)

” Consideration should be given to the use of relevant facilities within a building, by people with disabilities, for the purposes of fire safety, protection and evacuation.”

7.  Insert New Sentence at the End of Paragraph #1.6.1 of Draft TGD M (2009) …

Objective (Aids to Communication)

” Consideration should be given to the use of relevant aids to communication, by people with disabilities, for the purposes of fire safety, protection and evacuation.”

Note:  More guidance could be provided under each of the individual paragraphs of Section #1.6 of Draft TGD M (2009).  See Draft International Accessibility-for-All Standard ISO 21542.

8.  Insert New Section #2.6 of Draft TGD M (2009) …

Fire Safety in Dwellings for People with Disabilities

.

.

END

Enhanced by Zemanta

Disability Access Certificates (DAC’s) – A Time to Worry ? (I)

Posted by CJ Walsh

2009-10-17:  Some of you are already hitting the Internet Search Engines … with fierce intent altogether … about  Disability Access Certificates (DAC’s) !

Is it Time to Panic ?   No.

For a simple and direct hit, the 2 most relevant Irish Legal Instruments are:

1.  Statutory Instrument No. 352 of 2009 – Building Control Act 2007 (Commencement) Order 2009.

This states …

” The 30 September 2009 is appointed as the day on which the provisions of Sections 5 and 6 of the Building Control Act 2007 shall come into operation.”

Section 5 covers the Amendment of Section 6 (Building Control Regulations) of the Building Control Act 1990.

Section 6 covers the Amendment of Section 7 (Appeals) of the Building Control Act 1990.

2.  Statutory Instrument No. 351 of 2009 – Building Control (Amendment) Regulations 2009.

This states …

” These Regulations shall come into effect on 1 October 2009, except for the provisions of Article 8 which shall come into effect on 1 January 2009.”

Article 8 covers Disability Access Certificates and Revised Disability Access Certificates.

For you, yourself, to properly examine all of the ‘ins and outs’ of this New Certification Scheme … download the PDF File below … and then search the document (making sure that it is not case-sensitive !) using the phrase ‘Disability Access Certificate’.  You will find 99 instances where the phrase is used.

Enjoy !

Ireland: Statutory Instrument No. 351 of 2009 – Building Control (Amendment) Regulations 2009

Click the Link above to read/download PDF File (223 Kb)

In order to make full sense of all that is happening, and is intended to happen in the not too distant future … there are a few other Legal Instruments, related to the two listed, which also need to be consulted … but that is an exercise meant for masochists !

In comparison, the European Union Lisbon Treaty was a sweet bedtime story !   Seriously !!

.

Is it Time to Worry ?   Yes.

Here are just a few random ideas for your cogitation …

  • If the Department of the Environment, Heritage & Local Government (DEHLG) pays little heed to Submissions made during and after this summer’s ‘consultation’ process … the proposed New Technical Guidance Document M: ‘Access & Use’ will end up looking like a real dog’s dinner of an absolute mess !   FUBAR.

Years were spent in the preparation of the New TGD M.  When it does eventually appear, it will be an accurate reflection of technical capacities within both the Department and the National Disability Authority (NDA).

Deeply regretted is the absence of Mr. Kevin Spencer … a gentle soul … from the DEHLG.  Things have not been the same since his departure.  He knew what he was talking about.

  • Who will deal, at a technical level, with Applications for Disability Access Certificates in the Local Authorities ?   Will they be competent to do so ?   Will their interpretation of the Part M Legal Requirements be harmonized … not just with other/different Authorities … but even with other technical personnel in the same Authority ???
  • In order to make this new certification scheme work, will the Guidance Text in Technical Guidance Document M (whatever version appears !) be operated as if it were Prescriptive Regulation … which will be totally illegal ?

This has been exactly the story … for many years … with the Guidance Text in Technical Guidance Document B … in the course of operation of the Fire Safety Certification Scheme.  FUBAR.

  • If, as I hinted above, the proposed New Technical Guidance Document M: ‘Access & Use’ will be a real dog’s dinner of a mess … falling far short of what can now be reasonably described as minimal accessibility performance (see the Draft International Accessibility-for-All Standard ISO 21542) … this will certainly open Building Owners/Managers of newly completed buildings to Complaints under Irish Equality Legislation.  Why is the Disability Sector so inactive with regard to making complaints ?

and finally …

  • Are the relevant Irish Decision Makers, as I suggested might happen in a previous post, in the process of actually sleepwalking into an unquestioned acceptance of the inadequate British Standards BS 9999 : 2008 and BS 8300 : 2009 ???   Do they know how to do anything else ?

 

For some sublime moments of meditation, however, please chew on the information provided at these Pages on the SDI Support WebSite …

Disability Rights & Removing Physical Restrictions on Participation in Society ;

Towards a Sustainable Social Environment, Accessibility-for-All & Facilitation Design (2001 WHO ICF) ;

Fire Evacuation-for-All & Principles of Fire Engineering.

.

.

END

Enhanced by Zemanta

National Disability Authority – 2nd Time Unlucky with Evacuation ?

Posted by CJ Walsh

2009-06-16:  Further to one of our first posts, dated 12th December 2008 (or 2008-12-12 !), concerning the National Disability Authority’s 2008 Publication: ‘Promoting Safe Egress and Evacuation for People with Disabilities’ …

On 15th April 2009 … we were circulated by Mr. Shane Hogan (NDA), in a general e-mail communication which was not addressed to us … with a Proposed 2nd Draft of the Evacuation Document.  Comments on this 2nd Draft were requested.

So … here are our comments …

1.  We repeat the earlier statement that ‘the document has many technical errors’.  It is clear that the National Disability Authority does not possess the requisite technical competence to oversee the proper development of such a publication.

Furthermore … many of the inadequate, flawed and discriminatory practices in relation to Fire Safety, Protection and Evacuation for All which have originated in Britain over many years … and are described yet again and most recently in BS 9999:2008 – Code of Practice for Fire Safety in the Design, Management and Use of Buildings (see previous post) … are just mindlessly regurgitated in the NDA Publication.

2.  We very much believe in, and are promoters of, Open Content on the Internet.  For that reason, SDI’s Copyright Guidelines are quite liberal.  And … although we do reserve all rights … we also state that …

‘ Reproduction by others of content produced and/or developed by Sustainable Design International Limited is permitted, except for commercial purposes, provided the source is acknowledged.’

It is clearly shown in the NDA’s 2nd Draft that copyright material developed by FireOx International (the Fire Engineering Division of Sustainable Design International Ltd.) was used, and abused, by White Young Green Consultants (Ireland) in the original 2008 NDA Publication.

We do not wish technical terms to be altered  … or our material to be linked directly with BS 8300:2009 – Design of Buildings and Their Approaches to Meet the Needs of Disabled People … and BS 9999:2008.  Please re-read our previous post !

White Young Green Consultants (Ireland) gained commercially from the use of our copyright material.  They did not inform us … nor did they request any permission from us … prior to that use.

Our material has been used again in the NDA’s 2nd Draft … and still nobody has bothered to seek our permission … for or about anything !

In order to at least appear to be acting ethically … perhaps somebody in the NDA, e.g. Ms. Mary Van Lieshout, Mr. Shane Hogan, Dr. Gerald Craddock or Ms. Angela Kerins might care to communicate directly with us now.

Finally, our private thoughts and feelings with regard to the actions of White Young Green Consultants (Ireland) shall remain just that … private !

Perhaps, however, White Young Green Consultants (Ireland) might cover the costs involved in consulting with our team of legal advisors.

.

.

END

Enhanced by Zemanta