4th construction industry 'Baustammtisch' meeting

An important planning basis for accessible construction is currently being revised in the form of ÖNORM B 1600. Austrian Standards' 4th virtual construction industry 'Baustammtisch' meeting saw a panel discuss why this Austrian standard is bringing greater scope for design flexibility.

The two aspects of additional costs and over-regulation are often linked to accessible planning and construction. The experts invited to the round table at the 4th virtual construction industry 'Baustammtisch' meeting attempted to clear up these preconceptions on 10 October 2022.

Go to the video recording

Franz Artner, Editor-in-Chief of the Building Times magazine, moderated the fascinating discussion entitled "Catering for everyone: can we achieve this through accessible construction?".

The podium comprised: Maria Grundner, Accessibility Consultant, Mobilitätsagentur Wien GmbH, Doris Ossberger, Head of the Centre of Competence for Accessibility at the Austrian Federation of the Blind and Partially Sighted (BSVÖ), Thomas Pipp, Policy Analyst at Austrian Federal Railways (ÖBB), and Dieter Schnaufer, Expert in Civil Engineering, Building and Construction Lower Austria (NÖ Baudirektion) – Structural Engineering Department.

 

What does accessibility mean?

For Maria Grundner, the question of whether we can cater for everyone with accessible construction is a matter of how we define accessibility. "If a facility can be used by the vast majority of people, it is accessible. The revised ÖNORM B 1600 standard for an accessible built environment is a good start. We know that the subject is evolving. But the revision will make it easier to build with accessibility in mind."

Doris Ossberger added: "Being liked by everyone, and therefore catering for everyone? No, accessible construction can't achieve that. And that's why I would prefer to interpret it slightly differently. The UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities very clearly states accessibility as a requirement for equal participation in society.

So if the question were: 'Can accessible construction contribute significantly to everyone having that to which they are entitled – for example, their basic right to a self-determined life?' Then I could say: yes, accessible construction can achieve that and must therefore be carried out."

Thomas Pipp added that accessibility also means making facilities attractive to all users as a matter of course.

Dieter Schnaufer also stressed the benefits of accessible planning for everyone: "The 'Design for all' principle means that accessible construction can give as large a group of users as possible equal participation or equal usage – regardless of disability. Everyone stands to gain from accessible buildings and infrastructure: whether we are talking about someone in a wheelchair or an able-bodied person who is carrying something or pushing a pram. In this sense, we can cater for everyone if we design our built environment with accessibility in mind."

 

More clarity in ÖNORM B 1600

A survey amongst the audience clearly showed that accessible construction is often linked to over-regulation and discrepancies with the preservation of listed properties or sites of historic interest. The way in which the revised version of ÖNORM B 1600 "Barrierefreies Bauen – Planungsgrundlagen" ("Accessible built environment - Design principles") simplifies accessible construction and prevents additional cost was explained by the experts as follows:

Doris Ossberger: "People often say that building with accessibility in mind is incredibly expensive yet there are studies and experiences which prove that the opposite is true. The revision was undertaken with the aim of creating more clarity. Additional costs may be incurred if certain requirements are misunderstood or incorrectly interpreted or if planners are not familiar with this field.

One of the key reasons for the revision is clearer statements on requirements and measurement methods. I believe that this can help to ultimately reduce costs because people can then plan and build more efficiently. It is important that we don't continually produce building stock that isn't accessible and where additional costs are incurred through subsequent adaptation."

Thomas Pipp reported on his practical experience at ÖBB: "Over the years we have experienced maintenance problems with stair markings, for example. In the new version, the safety line can be moved back and no longer needs to be applied right at the very front edge of the step. A lot of stakeholders with practical experience have been involved in revising ÖNORM B 1600 and their experiences have been incorporated into the new version."

Dieter Schnaufer: "The new ÖNORM B 1600 now makes more diversity in design possible, for example, for markings on glass surfaces. Functional requirements for being able to see through windows or the line of sight onto balconies are just two examples of the new additions. The new version provides greater room for manoeuvre for renovation projects and offers alternative solutions. For example, you will now find achievable compromises which are consistent with the preservation of listed buildings and sites of historic interest and can be implemented under challenging circumstances."

Maria Grundner: "The new version of ÖNORM B 1600 defines different types of handrails, for example, depending on their purpose and the size of a structure and these are clearly shown in a table. The same applies to the ramp width needed for specific purposes.

This provides a good basis ranging from the minimum standards of the OIB guidelines to the functional requirements in the standards. In this sense, ÖNORM B 1600 may well have become more extensive but it means that implementation will be significantly easier. We now know more precisely what needs to be built and how, and can plan and implement measures more purposefully and more efficiently."

 

Additional costs or added value?

The experts agreed that accessible buildings have a high added value, which can be marketed to good effect. However, there is not yet sufficient awareness of this added value.

"There are so many factors which generate additional costs; they don't have to justify themselves but simply be accepted. Accessibility is always having to defend or justify itself," said Doris Ossberger.

In the same vein, Thomas Pipp added: "According to the Civil Code, it is the owner's responsibility to design their property safely and to ensure that it is safely operated. No-one asks whether, for example, they need a particular attachment point for access to the roof and whether this will cost more money. It just goes without saying that the law will be met. Ultimately, we need to treat accessibility in the same way.

Intelligent planning from the outset is absolutely essential. Then major modifications are not needed later on. Lifts, for example, simply become a matter of course."

Maria Grundner: "If you invest in accessibility, you are investing in the comfort of all your customers. I still see a lot of potential for improvement in terms of orientation and signage in particular so that the building can perhaps be navigated more intuitively. Clearly arranged buildings with clever orientation systems don't just help people with cognitive and intellectual impairments, but also people who are stressed and wanting to find something at speed, and the retailer who is willing to present products not only so that they are clear to see but to be picked up and felt too.

The term accessibility is often overly pigeonholed. A person in a wheelchair can easily cope with a step of between 80 and roughly 110 centimetres, which also happens to be a good height for everyone from children to senior citizens. The real trick would be to construct in a manner in which we no longer actively notice accessible design but that instead it is just considered absolutely normal."

Doris Ossberger warned of marketing accessibility as a convenience feature: "Convenience may well be a good selling point because the term is seen in a positive light and more people can identify with it, but I see a danger that this argumentation is less engaging and necessary. From the standpoint of people who need accessibility, convenience can therefore be problematic as an argument.

Despite this, I believe that most services achieve better sales if they are accessible – and that includes the built environment. Convenience could be a complementary approach to helping accessibility gain more traction."

Dieter Schnaufer was convinced: "In the meantime, we are seeing that accessible buildings – at least new builds – don't cost more, but instead bring added value. There is black and white evidence of this in real estate valuations."

 

Education and the role of society

To close, the podium discussed how people can access training in accessible construction and what role a basic understanding of accessibility plays.

Thomas Pipp reported: "Because of the additional rules and standards that apply, it is easier to implement accessibility in large companies like ÖBB than in small ones. Through building information modelling (BIM), we also have various options and tools to run a kind of check routine over plans right from the planning stage. The 17 210 rules and standards also contain the European "Design for all" policy. This is an understanding of design that pervades everything; our entire lives. Our staff are already well educated in this field,

but the training per se is not clearly defined. Unfortunately, it is currently often the case that the extent to which planners and architects contribute their knowledge and experience on the subject is left to chance."

Maria Grundner explained: "Understanding of and competence in accessibility must start in the nursery or perhaps primary school. It's a socio-political issue. The mobility agency Mobilitätsagentur Wien provides teachers with educational materials for primary schools, nurseries and secondary schools, and is thereby doing pioneering work – unfortunately on the whole it's much too little, much too late."

Dieter Schnaufer was also firmly convinced that "the basics of understanding need to be taught in primary schools or nurseries". The second element is knowledge of structural engineering. At any rate, specialist education needs to be improved because tutorials and lectures on the topic tend to be optional.

>Doris Ossberger: "I cannot emphasise enough that accessibility needs to be taught as early as possible and structural, specialist training and education should include the topic of accessibility as often as possible and at as early a stage as possible.

 

More on the topic

 

More information about the Austrian Construction Dialogue Board (Dialogforum Bau Österreich)

www.dialogforumbau.at

What's new at Austrian Standards?

Our newsletter is your personalised source of information that keeps you fully up to date.

Register now