Universal Design
Transportation Systems That Accommodate All Users, Including People With Disabilities and Other Special Needs
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
TDM
Encyclopedia
Victoria Transport Policy Institute
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Updated
August 27, 2007
This chapter discusses ways to design transportation systems to meet the widest possible range of needs, including those of people with disabilities.
Universal Design (also called Inclusive Design, Accessible Design or just Accessibility) refers to facility designs that accommodate the widest range of potential users, including people with mobility and visual impairments (disabilities) and other special needs.
Although Universal Design standards address the needs of people with disabilities, it is a comprehensive concept that can benefit all users. For example, people who are unusually short or tall, carrying packages or pushing a cart are not disabled, but their needs should be considered in facility design. Increased walkway widths, low-floor buses and smooth walking surfaces improve convenience for all travelers, not just those with mobility impairments. Curb ramps are important for people using handcarts, scooters, baby strollers and bicycles, as well as wheelchair users. Automatic door openers are another example of Universal Design features that can benefit many types of users.
Universal design should be comprehensive, meaning that it results in seamless mobility options from origin to destination for the greatest possible range of potential users. It should consider all possible obstacles that may exist in buildings, transportation terminals, sidewalks, paths, roads and vehicles.
Universal Design planning includes:
·
Standards for pedestrian facilities, transit
vehicles and other transportation services adopted by local, state/provincial
or federal governments. For example, In the United States, the federal Americans
With Disabilities Act (
· Programs to educate planners and designers on incorporating Universal Design into planning and transportation facility design.
· Special projects and funding to reduce barriers and upgrade facilities to meet new accessibility standards.
· Parking facility design standards that dedicate spaces for vehicles used by people with disabilities, and include extra large spaces for vans with lifts.
·
Development of Multi-Modal Access Guides,
which include maps and other information on access by people with disabilities
to a particular destination, including availability of transit and taxi
services, and the quality of walking conditions.
|
Concepts
and Terminology A
basic concept for Universal Design is that people’s Mobility
and Accessibility are largely determined by the built environment, that
is, the design of buildings, sidewalks, paths, roads and vehicles. Design
standards and practices based on an “average” person fail to accommodate many
potential users. Universal Design shifts more of the burden from the
individual to the community; rather than assuming that people must
accommodate to the built environment, it assumes that the built environment
should accommodate all users as much as feasible. Below
are some terms used for Universal Design. Impairment – a difference or
constraint in the way a body functions. Mobility
Impairment
– a limitation in somebody’s ability to walk, which may require use of a
walker or wheelchair. Disability
– a
limitation in they way daily functions can be performed in a community as a
result of an impairment. Disabled – a person with a
disability. Rather than simply using this term as a noun (“the disabled”), it
is considered best to say “people with disabilities”, which emphasizes that
they are people first. Handicapped – is a limitation of
function imposed by the beliefs of the community. Some people consider this
term somewhat derogatory and its use is discouraged. Wheelchair
User, People With Impaired Mobility, People With Visual Impairments, etc. – is the preferred approach
because it is more specific. Accessibility
(or just Access)
can refer to facilities that accommodate people with disabilities. Accessibility also has broader meanings, referring to
the general ability to reach desired goods, services and activities. |
Universal Design can be implemented as part of a facility design process, pedestrian planning, transportation planning, or as a special process. It can be implemented by professional organizations (to help educate designers and other decision-makers about Universal Design concepts and standards), facility designers and managers, and by various levels of governments, to establish Universal Design standards and projects. It should generally include user surveys to identify demands, needs and preferences.
Universal Design usually involves improving transportation facilities and services to remove barriers to people with disabilities. It can increase use of pedestrian facilities and public transit services, and reduce the need for automobile chauffeuring trips and paratransit services.
Table 1 Travel
Impact Summary
|
Objective |
Rating |
Comments |
|
Reduces total traffic. |
0 |
|
|
Reduces peak period
traffic. |
0 |
|
|
Shifts peak to off-peak
periods. |
0 |
|
|
Shifts automobile travel to
alternative modes. |
1 |
Can reduce the need for
chauffeuring and paratransit trips. |
|
Improves land-use
accessibility, reduces the need for automobile travel. |
3 |
Makes destinations directly
accessible by walking and wheelchair. |
|
Increased ridesharing. |
0 |
|
|
Increased public transit. |
2 |
Universal Design often
involves improving public transit. |
|
Increased cycling. |
1 |
Some Universal Design
features improve cycling conditions. |
|
Increased walking. |
3 |
Universal Design can
significantly improve pedestrian conditions. |
|
Increased Telework. |
0 |
|
|
Reduced freight traffic. |
0 |
|
Rating from 3 (very
beneficial) to –3 (very harmful). A 0 indicates no impact or mixed impacts.
Benefits include improved Transportation Options and Basic Mobility, particularly for people with mobility and visual impairments, and those who use strollers and handcarts. Universal Design standards help reduce pedestrian falls, and create a more convenient and safer pedestrian network for all users. It increases transportation system Resilience. Design allows people with disabilities to participate fully in society, including improved education and employment opportunities that increase economic productivity, and reduces the need for special services such as paratransit and chauffeured automobile trips. By improving mobility options it tends to increase Public Health.
Costs include the resource costs and design constraints associated with meeting Universal Design requirements. Pratt (1999) discusses the incremental costs of special mobility services. If pedestrian and transit budgets are fixed, Universal Design requirements may reduce expenditures on other mobility services.
Table 2 Benefit Summary
|
Objective |
Rating |
Comments |
|
Congestion Reduction |
0 |
|
|
Road & Parking Savings |
-1 |
Increases costs for parking
and pedestrian facilities. |
|
Consumer Savings |
1 |
Can provide savings and
increase employment opportunities by improving mobility for people with
disabilities. |
|
Transport Choice |
3 |
|
|
Road Safety |
1 |
Reduce some risks. |
|
Environmental Protection |
0 |
|
|
Efficient Land Use |
0 |
|
|
Community Livability |
3 |
|
Rating from 3 (very
beneficial) to –3 (very harmful). A 0 indicates no impact or mixed impacts.
Universal Design can benefit all users. It gives people with physical impairments better mobility and Accessibility opportunities, making them less disadvantaged comparable with non-disabled. It often requires subsidies. It benefits many people with low-incomes, and so tends to be progressive. It is essential for Basic Mobility.
Table 3 Equity Summary
|
Criteria |
Rating |
Comments |
|
Treats everybody equally. |
2 |
Allows people with
disabilities mobility opportunities comparable to non-disabled. |
|
Individuals bear the costs
they impose. |
-1 |
May require subsidies. |
|
Progressive with respect to
income. |
2 |
Often benefits lower-income
people. |
|
Benefits transportation
disadvantaged. |
3 |
|
|
Improves basic mobility. |
3 |
|
Rating from 3 (very
beneficial) to –3 (very harmful). A 0 indicates no impact or mixed impacts.
Universal Design can be implemented in any geographic region, and by most organizations.
Table 4 Application Summary
|
Geographic |
Rating |
Organization |
Rating |
|
Large urban region. |
3 |
Federal government. |
3 |
|
High-density, urban. |
3 |
State/provincial
government. |
3 |
|
Medium-density,
urban/suburban. |
3 |
Regional government. |
2 |
|
Town. |
3 |
Municipal/local government. |
2 |
|
Low-density, rural. |
2 |
Business Associations/TMA. |
1 |
|
Commercial center. |
3 |
Individual business. |
2 |
|
Residential neighborhood. |
3 |
Developer. |
3 |
|
Resort/recreation area. |
3 |
Neighborhood association. |
1 |
|
College/university
communities. |
3 |
Campus. |
3 |
Ratings range from 0 (not
appropriate) to 3 (very appropriate).
Improved Travel Choice
Universal Design supports most other TDM strategies, particularly Pedestrian and Transit improvements. It improves Accessibility, provides Basic Mobility, and supports Livability objectives. It is supported by Traffic Calming, New Urbanism, Transit Oriented Development, Taxi Improvements, Shuttle Services, Access Management and Parking Management. Transportation Access Guides and Address Security Concerns can be an important part of improving Universal Design. Universal Design can be considered when Evaluating Nonmotorized Transportation.
Universal Design improvements are usually implemented by developers, businesses, local and regional governments, often based on federal, state/provincial standards and programs, and professional training.
Barriers include a lack of information and education for transportation professionals and facility designers, and limited resources. Any policies that undervalue transportation choice, pedestrian improvements or transportation equity tend to reduce implementation of Universal Design.
|
Are
there seeing eye humans for blind dogs? |
Various guides and standards listed below provide specific information on Universal Design designs. Best practices include:
· Consider Universal Design objectives at all stages of transportation and land use planning, particularly with regard to pedestrian, transit, taxi and trail facilities and services.
· Use the most current guidelines and standards when incorporating Universal Design into facility design.
· Use a broad concept of Universal Design covering the needs of all potential users, not just people with a specific disability.
· Provide adequate funding so that Universal Design can be implemented effectively and does not reduce funding for other transportation services.
· Include users with special needs in designing and evaluating Universal Design designs.
· Insure that at least some neighborhoods in each community have a high degree of accessibility to public services (shops, recreational facilities, medical services, etc.), and housing that is affordable to people with disabilities.
|
“Wheel Life Column” Times Colonist, 2 December
2000 Don’t
call people “cripples.” It is also out of fashion to describe people simply
as “handicapped.” Most people prefer being described in positive terms. It is
best to describe a person’s specific mobility constraints and abilities, such
as “people with limited mobility,” or “wheelchair users.” The rest of us are
“temporarily abled,” since we are likely to be physically disabled sometime
during our life. Those
are some of the lessons we learned recently when our 11-year-old son Graham
had his foot in a cast, due to a minor injury. Although he could walk with
crutches, this was slow and difficult, so we rented a wheelchair for a
weekend. It was an excellent learning experience for us all. A
preteen can have a lot of fun with a wheelchair, especially going down a
steady incline (of course, our 8-year-old enjoyed riding it too). But it can
also be hard work. Our wheelchair user appreciated getting a push, especially
when going uphill or over rough surfaces, but only when HE asked. Lesson: no
unsolicited help to people with disabilities. Sitting
in a wheelchair puts you at belly-button height to most other people. Lesson:
sit down and maintain eye contact when conversing with somebody in a
wheelchair. We
really appreciated the many public facilities that are accessible to wheelchairs,
including sidewalks, shops, museums and especially the Elsie King Trail at We
also found many barriers, some of which we would not normally notice. Just
one street crossing that lacks a suitable curbcut is a major barrier. A
six-inch curb may as well be a six-foot cliff when you are pushing yourself
in a wheelchair. The result is islands of accessibility. People with
disabilities can travel within an area, but may have trouble getting from one
area to another. Lesson: an accessible transport network is only as good as
its weakest link. We
had relatively little problem getting around in town, since Graham could
hobble short distances (including up-and-down stairs, and in-and-out of
cars), and he had two parents and a brother to give a push when needed. But
other wheelchair users are less lucky. There
is a huge range of personal mobility constraints and needs, ranging from mild
to severe. Modern designers try to provide “universal access,” meaning that
facilities accommodate the widest range of possible users. A facility
designed to handle wheelchair users is also suitable for people who have
trouble with stairs, pushing a stroller, or pulling a handcart. People
with disabilities and cyclists share many concerns. We want streets and paths
that are well maintained, without cracks that can catch a wheel. We value
having curb cuts and ramps, and wide, smooth surface recreational paths
separated from motor vehicle traffic. Wheelchair design has evolved considerably in the last few years by incorporating components similar to those used on high-quality bicycles, including frames built of exotic metals, and lightweight wheels. A state-of-the-art wheelchair deserves as much admiration as you would give the latest racing bike. |
The Nordic Council on
Disability Policy sponsored a competition among Scandinavian cities and town to
create the most accessible and inclusive community. Ten cities were selected
for their outstanding programs. These include:
The jury found that political acceptance and support as the most important prerequisite for success. Other prerequisites are smooth collaboration across administrative boundaries and effective arrangements for consulting users. Among the difficulties and problems included a lack of co-ordination and the dynamics within the municipal administrations, lack of knowledge and interest on the part of building contractors, and accessibility solutions with poor aesthetics. Another experience, many times hard-earned, is that small mistakes in planning and implementation often have big consequences. An important common experience is that understanding of accessibility demands and knowledge of well functioning and aesthetic solutions must be spread in wider circles, within municipal administrations and in the building trade. When people start to see accessibility for all as a competitive tool, much ground has been won.
Different communities
provided different lessons. Aarhus
emphasizes the importance of persistence and continuity in this work,
An encouraging element in Halmstad is co-operation with disability
organisations and private businesspeople.
For
nearly half of disabled people (48%) transport is the most important local
concern but only a fifth (21%) believe those responsible for transport planning
and development give about the right amount of attention to disabled people,
according to a report published today by the Disabled Persons Transport
Advisory Committee (DPTAC).
Jane
Wilmot OBE, Chair of DPTAC said:
“There is a clear message to Government from this research, confirming that disabled people experience significant difficulties with transport, but that they expect these issues to be addressed at the earliest possible opportunity. DPTAC will use the findings of this survey to inform its advice to Government on ensuring access issues arising from the more commonly recognised forms of disability are mainstreamed in transport provision.”
Although
the report identifies that disabled people currently travel a third less often
than the general public, around half say improvements to public transport would
have a positive impact on their quality of life (47%). Taxis and minicabs are
used much more frequently by disabled people (67% more), as well as buses
(around 20% more) than non-disabled people.
Disabled
people have high expectations for the future public transport system and will
use improved services. Two thirds of disabled people (65%) were dissatisfied
with pavement maintenance, of which half were very dissatisfied. However,
around half say they would go out more if improvements were made to walking
conditions (48%).
This guidance document
concerns the question of whether transportation entities (e.g., transit
authorities, Amtrak) should permit the "Segway" personal
transportation device to be used on transportation vehicles when used as a
mobility device by people with disabilities.
The Segway is a two-wheeled, gyroscopically
stabilized, battery-powered personal transportation device. The Segway is not
designed primarily for use by individuals with disabilities, nor is it used
primarily by such individuals. However, some individuals with disabilities may
use a Segway as a personal mobility aid, in lieu of more traditional devices
like a wheelchair or scooter.
The Department's ADA
rule (49 CFR Part 37, §37.3) defines a "wheelchair" as "a
mobility aid belonging to any class of three or four-wheeled vehicles, designed
for and used by individuals with mobility impairments..." (emphasis
added). By this definition, a Segway is not a wheelchair. However, a Segway,
when used by a person with a disability as a mobility device, is part of the
broad class of mobility aids that Part 37 intends will be accommodated (see for
instance §§37.5 and 37.165). In this way, a Segway occupies a legal position
analogous to canes, walkers, etc.
Because a Segway is
not a wheelchair, the
This is not to say
that transportation providers are required to allow all Segway users to bring
their devices on board a bus or train. Transportation providers may establish
their own general policies regarding Segways and other devices, just as they do
with respect to pets or bicycles. However, when a device is being used as a
mobility device by a person with a mobility-related disability, then the
transportation provider must permit the person and his or her device onto the
vehicle. This is analogous to the situation in which a transportation provider
that has a general policy that does not permit pets to enter, but must permit a
person with a disability to bring a service animal into a vehicle.
Also, a transportation
provider is not required to permit anyone -- including a person with a
disability -- to bring a device onto a vehicle that is too big or that is
determined to pose a direct threat to the safety of others. With respect to
size. a non-wheelchair mobility device that exceeds the size and weight
standards for a "common wheelchair" (Le., 30 x 48 inches, measured
two inches above the ground, and not exceeding 600 pounds, including the user)
can reasonably be considered too large. The direct threat standard is
intentionally stringent (Le., requiring a determination that there is a
significant risk to the health or safety of others that cannot be eliminated by
modification of policies, procedures, practices, or by the provision of
auxiliary aids or services). A transportation provider seeking to exclude a
mobility device on direct threat grounds should first consult with the
appropriate DOT operating administration for guidance.
We note that this
analysis would apply to other situations. For example, a Federal Highway
Administration-assisted recreational trail that normally cannot permit use by
motorized vehicles should accommodate Segways when used as a mobility device by
someone with a mobility-related disability.
This guidance has been
approved through the Department of Transportation's Disability Law Coordinating
Council as representing the official views of the Department on this matter.
Wheelchairs – The Federal Transit Administration Section 37.3 defines a wheelchair as: "a mobility aid belonging to any class of three or four-wheeled devices, usable indoors, designed for and used by individuals with mobility impairments, whether operated manually or powered. A ‘common wheelchair’ is such a device which does not exceed 30 inches in width and 48 inches in length measured two inches above the ground, and does not weigh more than 600 pounds when occupied."
The Federal Transit Administration (FTA) issued a bulletin in September 2005 that requires public transit operators to allow Segways on buses and trains when a person with a disability uses the “Segway” as a mobility device. This policy directs how Segways and other Personal Mobility Devices (Attachment 2 and 3) are to be accommodated on Metro Bus and Metro Rail vehicles.