Disability and Rehabilitation: Assistive Technology, November 2009; 4(6): 439–450

CASE STUDY

Beyond access: A case study on the intersection between accessibility,

sustainability, and universal design

ANDREA GOSSETT1, MANSHA MIRZA2,3, ANN KATHLEEN BARNDS4 & DAISY FEIDT5
Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol Downloaded from [Link] by University of Montreal on 12/03/14

1
Occupational Therapy Program, School of Health Sciences, Eastern Michigan University, Ypsilanti, USA, 2Department of
Occupational Therapy, 3Department of Disability and Human Development, 4Department of Urban Planning and Policy,
University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, USA, and 5Access Living of Metropolitan Chicago, Chicago, USA

Accepted June 2009

Abstract
Purpose. A growing emphasis has been placed on providing equal opportunities for all people, particularly people with
disabilities, to support participation. Barriers to participation are represented in part by physical space restrictions. This
article explores the decision-making process during the construction of a new office building housing a disability-rights
organization. The building project featured in this study was developed on the principles of universal design, maximal
For personal use only.

accessibility, and sustainability to support access and participation.

Method. A qualitative case study approach was used involving collection of data through in-depth interviews with key
decision-makers; non-participant observations at design meetings; and on-site tours. Qualitative thematic analysis along with
the development of a classification system was used to understand specific building elements and the relevant decision
processes from which they resulted.
Results. Recording and analyzing the design process revealed several key issues including grassroots involvement of
stakeholders; interaction between universal design and sustainable design; addressing diversity through flexibility and
universality; and segregationist accessibility versus universal design.
Conclusions. This case study revealed complex interactions between accessibility, universal design, and sustainability. Two
visual models were proposed to understand and analyze these complexities.

Keywords: Universal design, accessibility, sustainability

Introduction Two important concepts have been used by

architects and planners to make spaces more open
In recent years, there has been an increased emphasis and usable for people with disabilities: accessibility
on providing equal opportunities for all people, and universal design [3]. In the United States, the
particularly people with disabilities, so that they are need for accessibility of the built environment first
able to participate in social and communal life [1]. It rose into people’s collective consciousness when
has also been argued that people with disabilities large numbers of disabled World War II veterans
experience multiple barriers to social participation and polio survivors started encountering physical
and that many of these barriers arise from the barriers to social and community participation. The
construction of physical and virtual spaces in ways first standards for making public buildings accessible
that bar access for individuals with disabilities [2]. were codified in 1961 by the American National
These arguments imply that marginalization of Standards Institute in the form of the six-page long
people with disabilities resulting from lack of access document entitled A117.1 [4]. From this point
to communal spaces requires redress. onwards and largely resulting from the growing

Correspondence: Andrea Gossett, Assistant Professor, Occupational Therapy Program, School of Health Sciences, Eastern Michigan University, 322 Marshall
Hall, Ypsilanti 49197, USA. E-mail: agosset1@[Link]
For more information on the architectural components of the project, please see Barbara Knecht’s series in the November and September 2005, April 2006, and
May 2007 issues of Architectural Products.
ISSN 1748-3107 print/ISSN 1748-3115 online ª 2009 Informa UK Ltd.
DOI: 10.3109/17483100903100301
 440 A. Gossett et al.

disability rights movement in the United States, process such as the one espoused by the World Health
other more detailed guidelines and pieces of legisla- Organization [14]. Here too the environment is
tion were promulgated promoting the accessibility of deemed to be a factor in the disablement process,
the built environment [5]. The latest in this line of but the process is perceived not as a linear causal
legislations is the Americans with Disabilities Act of relationship but one that varies relative to the person,
1990 and its accompanying accessibility guidelines the environment and the available resources [15].
known by the acronym ADAAG. In this arena, the Within this model, the process of disablement is seen
United States hasn’t been alone and several other as more pervasive and universal, one that can
countries are known to have developed accessibility potentially encompass all human beings. Subse-
standards some of which are even codified in quently, designing the environment to be flexible
legislation [6]. Although initially these standards and usable to the greatest possible extent by all people
and legislations were primary geared toward promot- (i.e., universal design) is the favored solution.
ing accessibility for people with disabilities, the Although the onus of change is still on the environ-
Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol Downloaded from [Link] by University of Montreal on 12/03/14

current trend internationally has progressed toward ment and not the individual, this change is deemed
a broader definition of the population that could warranted vis-à-vis all individuals regardless of age,
benefit from ‘accessible’ environments [7,8]. This gender, class, or ability.
broadening definition of the user population is Several proponents of universal design see it as a
expressed in the philosophy of Universal design. step ahead of accessibility, as going beyond mini-
mum dimensional requirements outlined in the letter
of the law [4,16]. Where accessibility is seen as
What is universal design ‘removal of barriers’ and ‘addition of special features’
specifically for use by people with disabilities,
Universal design, as defined by its pioneer Ron Mace, universal design is seen as providing environments
is a term used to describe the designing of all products that can be fully experienced by all people. Where
and the built environment in an inconspicuous accessibility is seen as based on assumptions of
For personal use only.

manner to be both aesthetic and usable to the greatest particular barriers for a specific group of people,
extent possible by everyone, regardless of their age, universal design is seen as a framework for develop-
ability, or status in life [9]. Elsewhere it has been ing solutions to anticipated needs of all end users [5].
defined as a movement that approaches the design of
the environment, products, and communications with
the widest range of users in mind [5] and as a process of Current trends in universal design
embedding choice for all people in design [10]. The
term universal design is also sometimes used inter- Despite some initial resistance, universal design is
changeably with inclusive design, design for all, life increasing in popularity [17], particularly in response
span design, or transgenerational design [5,6,11]. to factors such as demographic changes resulting in
Regardless of the definition or the terminology, most more people who are older and/or living with a
practioners of universal design acknowledge the seven disability; changing social climates with greater
principles of universal design [12] as useful guidelines public acknowledgement and appreciation of human
in the pragmatic application of this philosophy. diversity; and legislation that prohibits discrimina-
tion against people with disabilities [18,19]. What
started out as personal testimonials about the
How universal design differs from accessibility desirability of universal design from consumers and
designers, both disabled, non-disabled, elderly, and
While the philosophy of universal design emerged caregivers [11,20,21] has now culminated into a
from the movement for environmental accessibility, it movement with international proportions [17].
can be argued that the two are distinct in theory base Despite these advances, Prieser [16] observes that
and vision. The concept of environmental accessibility universal design research and practice is still in its
is closely aligned with the social model of disability incipient stages and consists primarily of case studies
which locates ‘disability’ within the interaction of the of finished products and built projects. Indeed, the
person with the environment, with disability being website of the Center for Universal Design features
socially constructed given the environmental barriers several case studies of universally designed products
[13]. Subsequently, improving environmental acces- and systems ranging from kitchenware to children’s
sibility becomes an acceptable way of solving the toys to train carriages [22–25]. Similarly, Kose [26],
problem with the locus of change being the environ- in a brief description of the history and progress of
ment rather than the disabled individual. Universal universal design in Japan provides an assortment of
design on the other hand is thought to be aligned with exemplars including shampoo bottles, toilet seats,
a more universal understanding of the disablement and railway platforms. Amidst the myriad exemplars,
 Beyond access 441

case studies of built projects are few and far between, disabilities since 1980. The organization, which is
and even so focus mostly on showcasing universally governed and staffed by a majority of people with
designed residential spaces [24,27]. One of the few disabilities, has as its core mission fostering the dignity,
examples of universally designed commercial or public pride, and self-esteem of people with disabilities,
spaces is Knecht’s [5] description of four projects serving as an agent of social change by recognizing
featuring a children’s playground, an addition to a the innate rights, abilities, needs, and diversity of
university-campus building, innovative way-finding people with disabilities, and working toward their
systems at an art museum, and an urban airport. With integration into and full participation in community
the exception of the children’s playground Knecht’s life. In the fall of 2003, Access Living publicly launched
descriptions focus on single elements of the spaces this project, to develop a new office building intended
under consideration and do not elucidate the pro- to be designed according to the principles of universal
cesses which led to the conceptualization of these design (Figure 1). For this project, Access Living con-
universal design elements. In the existing literature on tracted a Chicago-based architects’ firm titled LCM
Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol Downloaded from [Link] by University of Montreal on 12/03/14

universal design, comprehensive case studies featuring Architects, a multi-disciplinary firm with a strong
the built and interior environments of public or history of consultation on accessibility standards and
commercial spaces that systematically document the compliance issues and a commitment to the principles
universal design process are still lacking. of universal design ([Link]).
In keeping with the call for more field research on A defining feature of this undertaking that sets it
universal design that utilizes systematic methodolo- apart from other universal design building projects is
gical tools and incorporates consumer and designer that it sought to achieve the goal of a universally
perspectives [16], this article describes a case study designed space while ensuring maximal accessibility
featuring a new construction office building based on and sustainability within the design. The element of
the principles of universal design. accessibility was considered essential because the
majority of the consumers of this building were
anticipated to be people with a wide range of
For personal use only.

Design project description disabilities. The element of sustainability was

deemed important in order to align this building
Access Living of Metropolitan Chicago is a cross- with emerging architectural trends in the city of
disability organization serving people with various Chicago and other major cities in the world.

Figure 1. Exterior of project. Drawing courtesy LCM architects.

 442 A. Gossett et al.

Sustainable design refers to the design of objects or investigates a contemporary phenomenon within its
buildings in conjunction with the principles of real-life context, especially when the boundaries
economic and ecological sustainability [28]. Within between phenomena and context are not clearly
this article, the term sustainable design is used evident’ (p. 13). In this case, the contemporary
interchangeably with green design and refers to phenomenon was the development of a design project
design decisions that consider the current and future that integrated the concepts of universal design,
environmental impact of the building project. accessibility, and sustainability. In addition, Merriam
To document the design project, Access Living [29] defines a qualitative case study as an intensive
worked with an interdisciplinary team of graduate description and analysis of a phenomenon that is
students at the University of Illinois at Chicago ‘intrinsically bounded’ by a case, or an object of study
(representing the disciplines of Urban Planning, (p. 27). In this article, the phenomenon under study is
Public Health, Occupational Therapy and Disability the intersection between universal design, accessibil-
Studies). The team worked under the guidance of ity, and sustainability bounded by the case of the
Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol Downloaded from [Link] by University of Montreal on 12/03/14

Barbara Knecht, R.A., an architect and planner with design project of the Access Living office building.
extensive knowledge of the built environment and its The case was developed through several sources of
impact on people with disabilities. In documenting qualitative data collection methods. The purpose of
the decisions and process of the design project, the using multiple sources of data was to triangulate the
team utilized a case study research approach [29,30]. data and interpretations [31]. Data collection in-
The case study method and findings described in this cluded: (1) in-depth interviews with key personnel
article represent the work of the interdisciplinary team involved in the design process; (2) non-participant
in collaboration with Access Living. The team used observations at project presentations, design meet-
three main research questions to guide the case study: ings, and design team visits with furniture and
upholstery vendors; (3) on-site tour [31]. The data
. What is the interaction between universal collection methods and purpose of these methods
design and accessibility in designing a new used within the case study are detailed in Table I.
For personal use only.

office building that will be primarily used by Data collected using the methods described above
people with disabilities? In addition, how does were recorded in fieldnotes taken by interdisciplinary
sustainability intersect with both universal de- team members and in auditory recordings. Auditory
sign and accessibility in the design project? recordings were used to provide details to fieldnotes.
. What are the challenges associated with creat- All fieldnotes were compiled and reviewed indepen-
ing spaces that are open and accessible to the dently by the first three authors. Each of the authors
most diverse population possible? What strate- independently analyzed the compiled data for key
gies successfully address those challenges? themes and priorities that arose during the building’s
. What tools can be developed for analysis and design process [31]. Results of independent reviews
replication of similar projects in the future? were shared at monthly meetings involving the first
three authors. At these meetings, the authors came to
a consensus and finalized key themes and insights
Methods related to interactions between sustainability, accessi-
bility, and universal design specific to the Access
As stated above, a case study approach was used to Living building project.
guide this qualitative research [29,30]. As defined by Data were further analyzed through the use of a
Yin [30], a case study is ‘an empirical inquiry that classification framework developed during the

Table I. Methods and purpose of data collection.

Data collection method Purpose of method

In-depth interviews with:

Seven key members involved in the To obtain background information related to the project and to explore the intersection
project from Access Living, LCM between universal design, accessibility, and sustainability
Architects, and The Illinois Facilities
Fund
Sustainability experts
Non-participant observations at design To listen to and record the dialogue that was taking place between decision-makers and the
meetings & design team visits to vendor resolutions being made regarding universal design, accessibility, and sustainability in the
agencies & interactions with Access project
Living staff and LCM Architects
Chicago Center for Green Technology To become more familiar with the concept of sustainability
Tour
 Beyond access 443

authors’ regular meetings and based on the key the project’s design. Examples of these recommen-
concepts of universal design, accessibility, and dations include:
sustainability. The purpose of this classification
framework was to analyze specific building elements . An intuitive way-finding system incorporating
and the relevant decision processes from which they a ‘mainstreet’ corridor and the use of sound,
resulted. Furthermore, the framework allowed for an light, color, pattern, and texture;
exploration of specific design decisions in detail and . Increased visibility through use of curved walls
helped organize the information in a uniform and strategically placed ‘windows’ at points of
manner, making it accessible to other members of transition from public to private spaces within
the project team. Questions used within the frame- the building;
work to classify design elements are included in the . Elevators with doors at front and rear to
left column of the classification framework example improve the flow of traffic generally and
in Table II later in this article. The data analyzed eliminate the need to turn for those with
Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol Downloaded from [Link] by University of Montreal on 12/03/14

within the framework was used to further illustrate mobility impairments.

key themes and insights that emerged from the in-
depth interviews, observations, and on-site tours. Through discussion of recommendations among
LCM architects, Access Living, and the broader
disability community, the grassroots process allowed
Results planning of project design elements. For instance,
using the example of the recommendations listed
During the analysis of fieldnotes of in-depth inter- above, the grassroots process supported the imple-
views, observations, and on-site tours, four key mentation of the ‘mainstreet’ corridor, as described
themes emerged from the data. They include: (1) in the associated classification framework in Table II.
Grassroots involvement of stakeholders; (2) Nexus of
‘green’ design and universal design; (3) Addressing
For personal use only.

diversity through universality; and (4) Segregationist Nexus of ‘green’ design and universal design
accessibility vs. universal design. Each of these key
themes is described below with specific examples The City of Chicago encourages development of
from the case study data. green, or environmentally friendly (sustainable)
construction by providing subsidies to developers
who pursue Leadership in Energy and Environmen-
Grassroots involvement of stakeholders tal Design (LEED) Green Building Rating System
certification from the United States Green Building
From the design project’s inception, Access Living’s Council [32]. Within the design project, Access
board, management, staff, and representatives from Living pursued LEED certification to receive sub-
the broader disability community were involved in a sidies and to use criteria within the certification to
consultative process with universal design experts complement their universal design initiative. For
and the architectural team at LCM architects to example, the design project incorporated improved
explore and emphasize the diversity of experience of indoor air quality that earns points toward LEED
those who would ultimately ‘use’ the building. certification and is an essential universal design
Representation from the disability community was feature that meets the needs of a large group of
diverse, including people with physical disabilities, people such as those with asthma, chronic bronchitis,
intellectual disabilities, psychiatric disabilities, vision immune system impairments, and MCS. In another
and hearing disabilities, and temperature and multi- example, conference room seating furniture was
ple chemical sensitivities (MCS). chosen in part because its universal design elements
The experiences of these various constituent groups offered: (1) flexible use for people with various needs
were sought to determine all the features of the built in having movable armrests and variable height
environment that have been problematic for them in adjustment options, (2) flexible storage because
the past. This grassroots process yielded a Universal chairs could be stacked easily, and (3) low physical
Design Matrix consisting of issues identified by effort for user transfers to and from the seat and for
different disability groups relative to various aspects moving chairs around the conference room. How-
of the built environment such as parking spaces, ever, the furniture also represents sustainability
doorways, elevators, information technology systems, features such as: (1) the product is 99% recyclable
etc. and possible solutions for each issue identified. by weight, (2) the product is available regionally, and
The matrix was used by LCM architects to (3) the glass-filled nylon frame and polypropylene
develop a set of recommendations or ‘universal construction make it easy to disassemble the product
design elements’ to be considered for inclusion in for recycling.
 444 A. Gossett et al.

Table II. Classification framework of design element ‘mainstreet corridor’.

UD Element/area for investigation ‘Mainstreet corridor’ (way-finding system throughout the building)

Why is this an issue/who brought it up? Issues:

. Wide range of users (staff and visitors) calls for a building layout that will most easily orient
users to main areas of public access
. Need for both a natural understanding of the building layout and maximum legibility of the
space
. Access Living wanted open spaces which function as informal ‘plazas’ where people can
stop and converse briefly without obstructing freedom of movement
. Narrow urban site requires a vertical building
. Narrow urban site minimizes light available on the sides of the building
. Typical vertical office building often locates the mechanicals in the core of the building,
with an elevator centrally located. While this maximizes natural light on all sides of the
building, it also creates confusion for those exiting elevators to a lightless space in the center
Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol Downloaded from [Link] by University of Montreal on 12/03/14

of the building. The typical solution is signage indicating room/suite numbers with
directional arrows
What is the proposed solution? (consider Proposed solution:
pros and cons or competing . Use off a ‘mainstreet corridor’ as the primary hallway for accessing areas of public access
constituencies) . The mainstreet corridor design located mechanical elements of the building (elevators and
plumbing) and stairways and areas of rescue assistance along one side of the building and
used a corridor connecting these areas to workspaces and meeting/conference rooms. By
locating elevators at the ‘head of the street’, closest to the building’s entrance, they are easily
recognizable on all floors through a glass curtain wall
. Curved wall on upper floors encloses the meeting/workspaces on this side of the central
core, reinforcing ease of way-finding
. Additional way-finding is provided by lighting and wall and floor color/pattern palettes. For
example, elevator bays and washroom entrance are down-lit and a contrasting band of
darker color is used at the bottom of the walls, as well as a contrasting carpet treatment at the
For personal use only.

edge of the hallway

. Glass panels installed in the corners of workspaces create visibility to maximize ease of flow
for chair users exiting workspaces onto the mainstream corridor
. The opposite side of the building from the main street corridor primarily connects
individual offices with the open plan work areas. The two corridors are connected at the
front of the building with the curved wall, which creates a mini ‘plaza’ outside of the main
access to the large meeting room, smaller conference rooms, and small open areas where
staff can speak to one another informally, while not disturbing others. This can be seen as a
hierarchy of the main street vs. an alley which supports the organizational mission and
structure by creating ease of access and a sense of importance for consumers visiting the
building while ensuring efficiency and a greater sense of privacy for staff through use of the
alley, with both staff and consumers as a group connecting in the public meeting spaces
Is this a universal design issue or Accommodations for specific disabilities built into the mainstreet corridor/way-finding
accommodation for a specific disability concept:
issue? What makes it universal? (consider . These accommodations are unobtrusive and connect to the principles of universal design
7 principles of universal design: . Mainstreet corridor is designed to be wide enough for two chair users to stop side by side for
Equitable Use, Flexibility in Use, a short conversation while still allowing for others to pass
Simple, Intuitive Use, Perceptible . Front curved wall provides a greater degree of comfort in what is likely to often be a busy
Information, Tolerance for Error, Low space for chair users than what a 90-degree angle would provide
Physical Effort, and Size and Space for . Carpet, wall color, and lighting palettes chosen to balance the needs of people with low
Approach and Use) vision against those with seizure disorder
. Carpeting chosen to minimize physical effort for chair users but not perceptibly different
from other commercial carpet products available
. Accessibility choices will most probably not be seen by the non-disabled visitor as an
accommodation, as the primary impression will be of a building layout/way-finding system
that is simple and intuitive to use, provides perceptible information, and has an appropriate
size and space for approach and use
Hierarchy of a main street corridor connected to a secondary (alley) corridor through a small
open space (plaza):
. Provides for equitable use
. Is flexible to the needs of different users (staff, consumers, visitors) in a variety of situations
ranging from a normal staff workday to consumers requiring assistance
. Is tolerant of error in that there are no ‘dead ends’, cluing users to maneuver within the
space without error
Who does it benefit? (consider disabled and This system benefits people across the broad spectrum of disability as well as non-disabled
non-disabled people) people

(continued)
 Beyond access 445

Table II. (Continued).

UD Element/area for investigation ‘Mainstreet corridor’ (way-finding system throughout the building)

Who doesn’t it benefit? (consider This design feature provides benefits to all users
competing problems)
What are the changes/issues as you enter or . Width and attractiveness of the main street corridor immediately pulls people into the
leave the space? corridor and minimizes congestion in small areas immediately outside elevators
. Lighting in the corridors is designed to be subtle, with fixtures bouncing reflected light off
the ceiling providing adequate soft lighting throughout and additional lighting to highlight
artwork on the walls. Fixtures for down-lighting certain features are chosen to not create
hot spots
. Entrances to workspaces have transparent glass that allows both those entering and leaving
workspaces to see if there is someone approaching from the opposite direction
What time factors are involved in this . Additional time was required for research into most effective lighting types and exploration
decision? of carpet patterns
Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol Downloaded from [Link] by University of Montreal on 12/03/14

Are there cost implications? . There is some additional cost to adjusting sub-floor levels
. Cost of non-odor-emitting materials like carpet and paint
. Cost of glass panes in corners
. Cost to curved front wall
How does it connect to sustainability? Materials incorporated in the design are locally available
What is the final decision? The final decision:
. Create a hierarchical system incorporating a main street corridor to create a natural flow of
visitors to areas of public access
. Mini-plaza at the front of the building provides access to meeting/conference rooms and
connects to a smaller secondary corridor opposite the main street corridor and connecting
to it at the rear of the building
. Secondary corridor creates both privacy as needed and allows staff to circulate inter-office
without creating undue congestion on the main street corridor
What is the rationale for this decision? . Narrow urban space required vertical building
For personal use only.

(consider deciding or controlling factors) . Need for corridor wide enough to allow two chair users plus one non-chair user to pass
. Specific program requirements for privacy/confidentiality (i.e., staff supervision, legal
consultations) as well as areas for small groups to congregate briefly (i.e., people entering/
leaving meetings)
What products are related to this element? Paint, carpet, lighting fixtures, workspace walls with transparent glass
Would a drawing or diagram or picture Diagram not available
increase understanding of this element?
If so, please include.

Access Living also believes that an incentive with seizure disorders. Careful analysis of the
program such as LEED can serve as a model for competing access needs of different groups and a
increasing the use of universal design principles by a commitment to the principles of universal design led
similar ratings and rewards system. Through the to a solution to this problem, as identified in the
experience of building in compliance with both design process: lighting systems contained fixed
LEED requirements and universal design principles, overhead lighting which brightened/dimmed based
Access Living hopes to be able to work in coalition on outside lighting complemented by flexible work-
with universal design experts to inform and develop a space lighting that could be turned off and on by
replicable model that merges the green and universal workspace user.
design frameworks. Creating the most universally accessible environ-
ment was a significant challenge within the design
project, in requiring careful attention to color
Addressing diversity through flexibility and universality including light, texture, pattern, and form by the
design team. The design element of the front
The needs of disability groups varied widely and, at entrance and drop-off zone illustrates how careful
times, seemed to be in conflict during the design thinking and advance planning are required when
project. Modifications to the built environment that combining abstract design elements to maximize
provide an accommodation for an individual or access (Figure 2). A pull-in drive area with loading/
disability group may create barriers to access for unloading spaces for both cars and vans allows for
other individuals or groups. For example, bright light safe access by both manual and power chair users.
is needed by those with vision impairments. At the The curb at the drop-off area merges seamlessly into
same time, bright light can pose problems for people the sidewalk, which was designed to rise on a 1:20
 446 A. Gossett et al.
Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol Downloaded from [Link] by University of Montreal on 12/03/14

Figure 2. Front entrance and drop-off zone. Drawing courtesy LCM architects.

grade from the building’s corners to the entryway. issue for people with seizure disorders. Carpet also
Sidewalk texture is designed to allow cane detection. accumulates dust and dirt, which along with some
Combined, these elements were expected to mini- cleaning products can pose a problem for individuals
For personal use only.

mize interruption to pedestrian street traffic. This with MCS. In the end decision, carpet was chosen
was an important consideration, given the highly that didn’t ‘pull’, had a nonsymmetrical pattern, and
visible site and the too-common perception that was washable without chemicals. The design team
accommodating people with disabilities is accom- found evidence that carpet may hold dust and dirt,
plished at the cost of disrupting non-disabled people. preventing it from becoming airborne and thus
However, despite careful planning, an unanticipated limiting the adverse reactions by people with MCS.
drawback of the front entrance has become apparent A ‘least bad’ solution was also applied to the
since the building has opened up for use. People with design of the elevator system. The elevator system
low vision who are not cane-users have slipped off was designed to include two separate elevators that
the side of the ramp while walking down the are large enough for multiple wheelchair users with
sidewalk. To improve safety, the building owners doors wide enough for two chairs to pass. In
have stacked orange cones lining the ramp and are addition, the elevators have openings on both sides
awaiting approval from the city to get a railing put up so wheelchair users are not required to make a 180
alongside the ramp. The planning and actual usage degree turn to exit the elevator. The elevators also
of the front entrance is a good example of how include visual and audio cuing as required by the
universal design is a complex and ongoing process. Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990. Despite
these accessibility features, the elevators pose poten-
tial issues for users not oriented to the building or to
Segregationist accessibility vs. universal design people who have cognitive or visual disabilities who
may experience disorientation when exiting either
At times no single, universal solution to a design door of the elevator.
problem was possible, given the varied needs of In another example in which the design team
different disability constituencies. This posed a attempted to negotiate universal design while main-
direct challenge to Access Living’s core value of taining accessibility needs is in planning a ‘safe’
integration and required careful exploration of room. A safe room is a room designed exclusively to
possible solutions to minimize segregation and justify meet the needs of people with MCS, with a separate
the chosen solution as the ‘least bad’ alternative. An air filtration system to limit allergens. Although the
example is the treatment of floor surfaces. Carpet safe room may be deemed segregationist accommo-
minimizes noise, offsetting occasional loud noises. dation and not universal, the solution to include it in
However, carpet can pose problems for wheelchair the design project was justified as coming from the
users by causing their chairs to ‘pull’ like a car out of MCS community itself to accommodate their parti-
alignment. In addition, carpet pattern can become an cular needs.
 Beyond access 447

Balancing the accessibility needs of specific dis- In some of the exemplars discussed in the previous
ability groups while maintaining the features of section, there seemed to be a tenuous relationship
universal design is complex. Although solutions were between these three desired features pulling the
intended to meet the needs of the maximum number design solution in divergent directions. At these times
of users, at times, these solutions were not the most the solution eventually adopted reflected a trade off
universal. between the three features of accessibility, sustain-
ability, and universal design. To further elucidate this
point, the authors have developed two visual models.
Discussion The intersection model, shown in Model 1
(Figure 3), illustrates how accessibility, sustainabil-
The design elements described in the previous ity, and the principles of universal design can and
section demonstrate that if consumers’ needs are often do overlap and intersect. The area that
systematically gauged and carefully considered at the intersects all three features can be seen as an ‘ideal’
Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol Downloaded from [Link] by University of Montreal on 12/03/14

conceptual stage of a project, designers and archi- solution to a design issue – a solution that is
tects can be in a position to make key decisions that accessible, sustainable, and conforms to as many of
will enhance the usability and experience of the the principles of universal design as possible. The
completed building or product for the widest intersection model allows one to place each decision
possible range of users. Yet, the design process is or building element in relationship to the three
complicated and one that is fraught with challenges. features simultaneously and to judge it against its
In their enterprising paper on universal design, approximation to the ideal center. This ‘ideal center’
Mace et al. [4] point out that occasionally the ideal represents the main goal of the Access Living project.
universal design solution that meets every design Although the three features interact to form an ideal
challenge can be rather elusive. This is particularly the in terms of accessibility, universal design, and
case when the designer(s) is attempting to achieve the sustainability, each exists as a separate and indepen-
goals of maximal accessibility, sustainability, and dent continuum, as shown in Model 2 (Figure 4).
For personal use only.

universal design through the same design solution. Each design decision can be evaluated in terms of
universal design, accessibility, and sustainability, fall-
ing into various places on the three continua.
Evaluation on these continua can help to focus a
decision on a critical deciding factor. Both models can
play an important role in exploring and understanding
the decision-making process that occurs during design
processes such as the Access Living project.
Revisiting two examples from the previous section
can help illustrate these points. Let us consider the
conference room seating furniture. When this furni-
ture is rated separately on each bar of the continuum
model, it consistently falls on the higher (left) end of
Figure 3. Model 1, the intersection model of conceptual each bar. As a universal design element, it rates well
frameworks. due to its ergonomic design, demanding low physical

Figure 4. Model 2, the continuum model of conceptual frameworks.

 448 A. Gossett et al.

effort, flexibility in terms of use as a result of Act, 1990). In terms of universal design, the elevator
adjustable height, and flexibility in terms of storage system does not rate as well. Although it provides
as a result of stackability. In terms of sustainability, it convenience to everyone in loading and unloading, the
rates well due to its recyclable and low emission dual-opening doors which maximize accessibility for
qualities and due to the fact that it is locally wheelchair users (a large constituency of Access
manufactured. In terms of accessibility, it rates well Living) pose navigational challenges to people with
due to the additional feature of adjustable armrests cognitive disabilities. In terms of sustainability, the
that allow for easy transfers from other surfaces like elevator system again does not rate very well. The
wheelchairs. Considering all three elements together design solution includes two elevator banks (requiring
therefore, this furniture falls in the ‘ideal center’ on more electrical power to operate) because a single
the intersection model. bank was expected to be frequently blocked with the
A contrasting example is the elevator system anticipated high wheelchair traffic. Thus, gains in the
(Figure 5). In terms of accessibility, it rates well accessibility continuum (specifically for wheelchair-
Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol Downloaded from [Link] by University of Montreal on 12/03/14

because it conforms to all access standards for people users) were achieved through a trade off with gains in
with mobility, hearing, and visual impairments as the sustainability continuum. As a result, the elevator
outlined in the ADAAG (Americans with Disabilities system would fall outside the ‘ideal center’ on the
intersection model.

Conclusion

This case study of the Access Living design project

systematically documents a process by which the
philosophy of universal design was translated into
pragmatic reality. This translation was realized
For personal use only.

through the structural and interior design of an

office building in ways that maximized the elements
of accessibility, sustainability, and universal design
within the final outcome.
Some of the most thought-provoking literature on
the topic of universal design, both the seminal [4] and
the cutting-edge [10] calls for good exemplars and
prototypes to be made available to the community of
designers, architects, manufacturers, and consumers.
To this end this article has provided detailed examples
of universal design solutions to various design issues.
More importantly this article has demonstrated that
achieving the three goals of accessible, universal, and
sustainable design through creative design solutions,
though challenging, is possible thereby encouraging
other designers to attempt a similar path.
An influential voice in the realm of universal design,
Salmen [10] proposes that the process of universal
design is just as important as the end product. Seen in
this way, the current article carries additional value as
it delineates the process through which various
universal design solutions were developed.
The mainstay of the process described was the use
of systematic data collection tools such as in-depth
interviews, non-participant observations, and on-site
tours and the development of a design element
classification tool to both inform and evaluate the
design decisions. Although it is the authors’ hope
that these tools be utilized by other architects,
product designers, and consumers to augment their
Figure 5. Detail of elevator bay. Drawing courtesy LCM universal design concepts, these are by no means the
Architects. most comprehensive or the only tools available. The
 Beyond access 449

provision of accurate and relevant data on ‘target’ 2. Imrie R. Disability and the city: International perspectives.
users has been described as critical to support the London: Paul Chapman Publishing Ltd.; 1996.
3. Iwarsson S, Stahl A. Accessibility, usability and universal
successful practice of universal design within the design – positioning and definition of concepts describing
design community [33]. We believe that the tools person-environment relationships. Disabil Rehabil 2003;25:
described in this case study were invaluable in 57–66.
complementing the design process with data on the 4. Mace RL, Hardie GJ, Place JP. Accessible environments:
toward universal design. In: Preiser WE, Vischer JC, White
needs of the end users. However, in retrospect,
ET, editors. Design intervention: toward a more humane
the use of additional tools might have enhanced the architecture. NY: Van Nostrand Reinhold; 1991. pp 1–44.
credibility of this study. First, the data collection 5. Knecht B. Accessibility regulations and a universal design
tools used in this case study were primarily narrative philosophy inspire the design process. Archit Rec 2004;192:
in nature. The use of arthopometric tools that collect 145–150.
user information based on designer-identified criter- 6. Dion B, Balcazar de la Cruz A, Rapson D, Svensson E, Peters M,
Dion P. International best practices in universal design. A global
ia such as strength, mobility, vision, etc. [33] would
Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol Downloaded from [Link] by University of Montreal on 12/03/14

review. Ottawa: Canadian Human Rights Commission; 2006.

have augmented the quality of data available to the 7. European Commission. 2010: a Europe accessible for all.
architects and designers. Report from the Group of Experts set up by the European
Second, the tools described in this case study Commission. Luxembourg: European Commission; 2003.
focused only on structural (e.g., drop off zone) and 8. Guimaraes M. Adopting the universal design approach instead
of the stigma that creates poorly accessible environments.
product (e.g., furniture, lighting) elements of uni- [Link] 2008 [online]. Electronic itation. [Link]
versal design. In recent times, programmatic (e.g., [Link]/english/adopting-the-universal-design-approach-
permission for flexible lunch breaks) and human instead-of-the-stigma-that-creates-poorly-accessible-enviro
elements (e.g., availability of sign language inter- ments via the INTERNET. Last accessed December 23, 2008.
preters and personal attendants) have also been 9. Center for Universal design. INTERNET. Raleigh, NC:
College of Design, North Carolina State University; February
identified as key components of a universally- 19, 2006. Electronic Citation. [Link]
designed environment [10]. The scope of this study cud/about_ud/about_ud.htm. Last accessed August 12, 2006.
did not allow for the coverage of these human and 10. Salmen J. Is universal design really universal? [Link]
For personal use only.

programmatic elements. [online]. INTERNET. 2008. Electronic Citation. [Link]

Finally, collection of pre- and post-data would [Link]/english/is-universal-design-really-universal via the
INTERNET. Last accessed December 23, 2008.
have illuminated the relative success of the different 11. Pirkl JJ. Transgenerational design: prolonging the American
design features in the building and their impact on dream. Generations 1995;19:32–36.
users’ performance and well-being. Although codi- 12. Center for Universal Design. The principles of universal
fied universal design assessment criteria do not design. [Link] [online]. INTERNET. 2005. Electro-
nic Citation. [Link]
currently exist, some practioners like Guimaraes [8]
of-universal-design via the INTERNET. Last accessed
and Preiser [16] are paving the way for the December 23, 2008.
development of methods and measures to assess 13. Oliver M. The politics of disablement. London: Macmillan;
the performance of universal design. It is the author’s 1990.
hope that future researchers and designers will avail 14. Steinfeld E. The concept of universal design. [Link]
of these methods and take all of the above sugges- [online]. INTERNET. 2008. Electronic Citation. [Link]
[Link]/english/the-concept-of-universal-design via the
tions into consideration for their respective projects. INTERNET. Last accessed December 23, 2008.
15. World Health Organization. Toward a common language for
functioning, disability and health: ICF. Geneva: WHO; 2002.
Acknowledgements 16. Preiser WFE. Universal Design: from policy to assessment
research and practice. Archnet-IJAR 2008;2:78–93.
17. Kaplan D. Universal design for disabled people draws
We thank Access Living and the design team from international support. Report on International Conference
LCM Architects for their contribution to this project. on Universal Design, ‘Designing for the twenty-first Century’,
We acknowledge our mentors Joy Hammel and December 7–11, 2004. Disability World [serial online] 2004;
Barbara Knecht for their valuable input and guidance 26. Electronic Citation. [Link]
12-02_05/access/[Link] via the INTERNET.
in relation to this project and Hsiang-Yi Tseng for
Last accessed December 23, 2008.
her hard work during the data collection process. 18. Dobkin I, Peterson MJ. The move toward universal design. In:
Finally, we express our appreciation to the anon- Dobkin I, Peterson MJ, editors. Universal interiors by design:
ymous reviewers for the insightful comments on gracious spaces. New York: McGraw-Hill Inc; 1999. pp 1–8.
previous versions of this article. 19. Preiser WFE, Ostroff E. Universal design handbook. New
York: McGraw-Hill; 2001.
20. Caplan R. Disabled by design. Inter Des 1992;63:88–91.
21. Pilgrim D. Making the planet a better place. ARTnews (USA)
References
1997;96:192.
1. United Nations. Standard Rules on the Equalization of 22. Center for Universal Design [INTERNET]. Raleigh (NC):
Opportunities for Persons with Disabilities. New York: UN. OXO International becomes a universal design icon? 2000
1993. December. Electronic Citation. [Link]
 450 A. Gossett et al.

cud/projserv_ps/projects/case_studies/[Link]. Last accessed 27. Luscombe B. This Bold House. AARP Magazine
December 23, 2008. [online]. INTERNET. 2003. Electronic Citation. [Link]
23. Center for Universal Design [INTERNET]. Raleigh (NC): [Link]/lifestyle/Articles/a2003-08-28-bold_house.html
Amtrak Acela Express accommodates all. 2002 May. Electronic via the INTERNET. Last accessed December 23, 2008.
Citation. [Link] 28. Birkeland J. Design for sustainability: a sourcebook of
case_studies/[Link]. Last accessed December 23, 2008. integrated, eco-logical solutions. London: Earthscan Publica-
24. Center for Universal Design [INTERNET]. Raleigh (NC): tions Ltd.; 2002.
Universal Design Demonstration Home. 2002. Electronic 29. Merriam SB. Qualitative research and case study applications
Citation. [Link] in education. San Francisco, CA: Wiley; 1998.
20Demo%[Link]. Last accessed December 23, 2008. 30. Yin R. Case study research: design and methods. 3rd ed.
25. Center for Universal Design [INTERNET]. Raleigh (NC): Toy Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications; 2003.
guides for differently abled kids. 2003 June. Electronic Cita- 31. Patton MQ. Qualitative research and evaluation methods.
tion. [Link] 3rd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications; 2002.
studies/[Link]. Last accessed December 23, 2008. 32. US Green Building Council [USGBC]. [INTERNET]. Wa-
26. Kose S. Design for people with disabilities in Japan. UiGarden. shington, DC; 2008. Electronic Citation. [Link]
Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol Downloaded from [Link] by University of Montreal on 12/03/14

net [online]. INTERNET. 2008. Electronic Citation. http:// via the INTERNET. Last accessed January 16, 2009.
[Link]/english/design-for-people-with-disabilities- 33. Porter JM, Case K, Marshall R, Gyi D, Sims nee Oliver R.
in-japan via the INTERNET. Last accessed December 23, ‘Beyond Jack and Jill’: designing for individuals using
2008. HADRIAN. Int J Ind Ergon 2003;33:249–264.
For personal use only.