Moving Towards the Universally Designed Home: Part 3
- Richard Duncan
- Jan 7, 2020
- 2 min read
The Turning Diameter of 1.5 Meters Was Retained, But Not for All Dwellings
Research at the Norwegian Universal Design Research Laboratory at the Norwegian University of Science and Technology was instrumental in the process of revising the building regulations as reflected in the final result:” Regulations on Technical Requirements for Construction Works “ [1]. The following sections show how the regulations ultimately dealt with turning diameters.
The turning diameter for wheelchairs was kept at 1.5 meters in buildings for public use and dwellings. By contrast, 20% of the dorms for students are required to be accessible with turning diameters of 1.3 meters since these dwellings usually are small and temporary. To compensate, each floor is required to have larger toilets with better accessibility.
All apartments larger than 50 m2 (60 yd2) must be accessible to a standard compatible with universal design. If a housing project consists of apartments smaller than 50 m2, 50% of these must be accessible.
[1] Regulations on technical requirements for construction works. The Norwegian Building Authority, Oslo 2017
An English translation is available on https://dibk.no/globalassets/byggeregler/regulation-on-technical-requirements-for-construction-works--technical-regulations.pdf
[1] Regulations on technical requirements for construction works. The Norwegian Building Authority, Oslo 2017
An English translation is available on: https://dibk.no/globalassets/byggeregler/regulation-on-technical-requirements-for-construction-works--technical-regulations.pdf
Realizing the Shortcomings of the Turning Diameter as a Basic Design Measure
The report from the Norwegian Universal Design Research Laboratory brought to light a fact that accessible design professionals knew well, and which has been elaborated by research at the Center for Inclusive Design and Environmental Access at The University of Buffalo in the US. The turning diameter is a simple and pedagogical way of explaining and regulating the space requirements for turning a wheelchair, but it does not represent the actual space needed to turn a standard selection of wheelchairs.
In the US, the T-turn has been introduced as an alternative to the circle. Based on the research at Norwegian Universal Design Research Laboratory, a turning rectangle is presented by the building authorities as an alternative to a turning diameter of 1.5 meters.
Mr. Jonny Nersveen, the initiator and research responsible for the laboratory, comments: Our studies show that a rectangle with a width of 1.3 meters (51 inches) and a length of 1.8 meters (71 inches) may be used as a general requirement for turning a wheelchair in dwellings. If attendant wheelchairs are used our studies show that a rectangle of 1.6 meters (63 inches) x 2.0 meters (79 inches) is required to turn the wheelchair.
We need be innovative, look beyond the turning circle and take the next steps where the actual need for space and movement patterns are taken into consideration. I believe it is necessary to put designers to work extensively on finding better ways of creating universally designed dwellings. I am very much concerned with the design of the bathroom. The movements in bathrooms is exceptionally dependent on the choice of inventory and the layout of the room.
idk why, this piece was better than I expected.
Initially, I thought it was going to be nothing special, however stayed longer than usual.
Maybe it’s the way it’s written that doesn’t feel forced, even though it’s not perfect.
Randomly, I came across https://infowomenspace.com a while back and noticed something close in style, like it’s not just SEO content.
Some parts were useful, which is something you don’t see often.
Not sure if it matters but, it wasn’t trying too hard.
In any case, good stuff — saving this for later.
Maybe will read more.
Honestly, the current one turned out surprisingly useful.
When I opened it, I thought it would be same as others, still ended up going through it.
Maybe it’s how things are explained that feels more natural, even if it’s simple.
Randomly, I ran into https://zhinochiporady.com a while back and got almost the same feeling, as if it’s not just SEO content.
Certain things here were useful, which is something you don’t see often.
Also, it wasn’t trying too hard.
In any case, nice share — curious what else is there.
Not sure yet but will read more.
To be fair, this one ended up being kinda solid.
At first, I felt like it would be basic content, yet I kept reading.
I guess it’s the structure that feels more natural, even though it’s not too long.
Not directly related but, I ran into https://zhinochiporady.com earlier today and saw something close in style, as if someone actually writes for people.
Some parts were useful, which is something you don’t see often.
Not sure if it matters but, it didn’t feel like filler.
Anyway, good stuff — probably will check more.
Probably will read more.
Not gonna lie, this piece was actually worth reading.
When I opened it, I was about to skip it, but I kept going.
Maybe it’s the tone that feels kinda natural, which is something I don’t see often.
By the way, I checked out https://infowomenspace.com/ recently and had that same kind of tone, so idk really.
So yeah, appreciate this — I might come back later.
Honestly, this piece was actually worth reading.
Scrolling through, I was about to skip it, but it held my attention.
There’s something about the way it’s written that isn’t typical copy-paste, which is something I don’t see often.
By the way, I checked out https://infowomenspace.com/ not long ago and felt pretty close in style, so maybe it’s just me.
In any case, good stuff — curious to read more.