[Start of recorded material 00:00:00]
Ryan: Hi. I’m Ryan Schwartz, the host of Architecturally Speaking. Please note that the following episode was recorded before recent changes to the OAA’s licensing structure. The OAA Technology Program and associated membership status no longer apply. The interview still touches on several topics of interest to architects and non-architects alike. We hope you enjoy.
Hello and welcome. You’re listening to Architecturally Speaking, a new podcast series created by the Ontario Association of Architects. We’re pulling back the curtain to explore the architecture profession, what architects do and how their buildings affect our lives each and every day.
My name is Ryan Schwartz. I’m an architect licensed in Ontario and your host for this series. And today we’ll be talking with two people about accessibility in the built environment. So they not only know each other but their former colleagues and also really good friends. So we have Daniel Hall, who’s both a licensed architect and a carpenter. For the past 14 years he has led Collaborative Architecture, which was formerly known as The Architect Builders Collaborative with a focus on green design revitalizing old buildings and improving accessibility. And we also have Greg Papp, who’s an architectural technologist. He’s had his own business since the mid ’90s specializing in accessibility consulting for residential builders and architects in the Toronto area called Design Vision.
So welcome and thanks for joining us.
Daniel: Thank you, Ryan. It’s a pleasure to be here.
Greg: Thank you very much.
Ryan: So you’re friends and former colleagues. So maybe we’ll dive into that. Where did you guys first meet?
Daniel: Greg? I don’t remember where we first met. It was quite a few years ago, though. I’m going to say going back 10 years.
Greg: Yeah. I think you had just started your own practice and we’re looking for someone who could – who was I wouldn’t say expert but good enough to use our BIM modeling software. So somehow we got connected, and yeah, we were chatting for quite a while the first time we met.
Daniel: I remember now it was through our mutual colleague and friend architect Jim Belisle.
Greg: Correct. Yes. He and his wife were landscape architects. The two nicest people in the world.
Ryan: And the rest is history, as they say. So we’re talking about accessibility on this episode and you both have some unique perspectives on this topic. And Greg, we’ll maybe start with you. To give some context for those people who are listening, how has accessibility played a role in your personal and professional life?
Greg: Well, I had a spinal cord injury while I was still going to architecture school at what is now known as Toronto Metropolitan University. And so I of course have lived the experience of a person who is in need of accessibility. I have barrier-free paths of travel. And also I of course have got to – part – somewhat of a unique perspective in that I also design and advocate for accessibility through my business as an architectural technologist.
Ryan: So you’re – yeah. Your professional experience has certainly been informed through your personal life. And Daniel, we’ve been corresponding as a group a little bit the last few days and in one of the emails you mentioned that Greg is responsible for informing much of what you’ve learned about accessibility. So maybe you can elaborate on that a little bit.
Daniel: Exactly. I think like a lot of us I thought I knew what accessible design was. You know? It was ramps and push buttons. And as an architect, code requirements that you had to meet. And it was only when I was introduced to Greg and he came to work with us on some projects that I realized what we had to do even in our own office just to take care of simple things.
You know, we were in a building, elevator access building, barrier-free by code standards, push buttons and the like. And I discovered that we were on the fifth floor that Greg would have to phone when he arrived downstairs because the location of the push button was so far in the corner that he couldn’t reach it to come in. To leave was fine, so he could leave on his own but one of us had to go down five floors to let him in.
And it just started. Simple things like that I was suddenly realizing that something that might be – look perfectly good on paper and comply with the code doesn’t actually serve people well.
Ryan: Yeah. I think you’re absolutely right. And you sort of touched on it there too when just talking about accessible design and inclusive design. There’s obviously a broad spectrum of physical disabilities that we’re speaking about and people might automatically jump to thinking about someone in a wheelchair but what other kind of challenges are you both trying to mitigate through accessible design? Like, what other kinds of challenges are we even talking about?
Greg: Well, I can give a small example. In our building we just had the hallways renovated. And we were – a year ago I was on the committee that were choosing the materials. And one of our committee members when we were looking at the different carpet samples said, oh no, we don’t want this one. She had taken courses in people who are experiencing dementia and she said if you have a, like, a large, dark space people with dementia may read that as a hole. So, you know, skip that carpet and move on to the next one.
There are so many examples of people who are visually impaired, people who are auditorily impaired. For just knowing what floor and elevator is on or is going to can be a challenge for visually impaired people. Just to –
Daniel: Sorry, Greg. You mentioned auditory issues as well and, you know, that brings to mind for me even the simple thing of having lunch with my colleague Fred Thompson, who is a former professor of architecture and a mentor to me. But his hearing, like a lot of elderly people, has become challenged. And I realized a lot of the very fashionable lunch spots near our office are completely inappropriate for us to have lunch unless we’re the only people in the restaurant. There’s just so much bounce and echo. And even if we find a place that’s a little quieter we have to choose very carefully where to sit. And so this is truly an invisible barrier that actually makes it difficult for us to go and have lunch together in a lot of places.
Ryan: Yeah. And just the spectrum of challenges that our people are dealing with. Like you mentioned, the elderly. I think that’s a great example. They might not be considered and physically disabled but, I mean, someone in their 90s is probably going to prefer a ramp as opposed to a set of stairs. So there is that wide variety of challenges that people are dealing with, so. And everyone’s challenges are unique.
So when talking about these barriers in the built environment are there some common barriers across some of these challenges? Are some that are more prevalent than others?
Daniel: Well, I think you touched on it, Ryan, and you mentioned ramps. I would also say I don’t know if you have young children but anyone who’s pushed a stroller can tell you the amount of barriers there are in this city to getting around – both indoors and out. And I think this is where I think, you know, Greg introduced me to the expression curb cut. You know? Meaning not literally those curb cuts but if I’ve got it right, Greg, it’s adaptation we made to the built environment to address a disability that everyone benefits from and people just take for granted. I don’t think most people see curb cuts as wheelchair ramps at the side of the road, yet that’s how they were introduced to us. They just make –
Ryan: They’re just convenience.
Greg: Yeah. Exactly. And I was thinking about it after we had spoken last and I realized it’s coming full circle where we now have the internet of things. We have – and echoes and Google home devices so we can use our voice to turn things on and off, answer the phone. Ten years ago when in bed I was just some days at the mercy of whether, you know, I could get through the night without having to yell at someone upstairs or somewhere else to just to help me out. So it’s interesting how devices made for those with disabilities have had a general impact or have had an impact on the general public.
And yes, now we have designs for the masses that are having positive impacts on those in the disability community. And I think that is across the board. No matter what type of disability you have.
Ryan: Yeah. I think you’re right. There’s so many of those little instances where maybe it’s at work or maybe it’s at home or you’re trying to use public transportation, whether you – you know, the average person’s just going to not even think twice about it and not and just completely take things for granted. And it might completely halt someone’s day and completely, you know, they might not even be able to do what the other person is doing. Right?
So as architects and design professionals obviously we want to remove these barriers. That just makes sense. I think we can all agree upon that. So what would you say the role of architects and technologists and other design professionals – what’s their role or what’s our role in improving accessibility throughout, you know, the home, the workplace, transportation?
Greg: Well, I think much in the way that people expect us to just make sure that the buildings we design are structurally sound and durable and stand up. It should be incumbent on us to be looking around and seeing things through the lens of is this space also accessible? And not just wait for a client who says this is a requirement of ours, and but bring it forward to the table, even when it isn’t a requirement.
You know? I can give an example of this with a semi-public building – an organization that hosts a lot of events in their building – and it’s one of these old brick and beam buildings where the lower level is about four feet below grade. Concrete floor. And then beautiful timber floors above. And being an old building, it didn’t have the same requirements to be barrier-free that a new one would have, and that four-foot grade difference was an attempt to navigate it with a very, very temporary, very steep plywood ramp. And another way through the back of, like, a freight lift. So they had made some attempt to accommodate it.
And I remember commenting to the owner one day when I was there about how awful this condition was – this, like, incredibly steep ramp. I mean, we’re talking a drop of four feet over maybe 12. I mean, you couldn’t push a stroller up it.
Ryan: Yeah.
Daniel: Although interestingly enough, I know Greg could drive his motorized chair up it with no problem.
Ryan: [Laughter]
Daniel: But I remember commenting and making the observation that something should be done and the response came back, we know, and this brings tears to my eyes, but ramps are so ugly. That was wow. And I thought talk about waving the red flag in front of the bull. You know? Tell an architect something can’t be done because it’s too ugly. And I took the bait. Maybe I was in a –
Ryan: Challenge accepted, right?
Daniel: Exactly. And, you know, and we created a structure, a sculptural landscape structure, effectively, that is a ramp. It is seating. It is a gathering space. But more importantly it’s not a space for others. It’s not the alternative to where, you know, quote unquote normal people go; it’s a space for everybody. And to me I think that’s a really important aspect of our work that we remove that sense of othering that comes with saying the ramp is over there, the elevator is over there, it’s around the corner, through the back door, go down the lane or whatever it is.
And again, I think this is something, you know, Greg has helped bring these to my eye. I remember we had a conversation years ago, Greg, where you referred to it being the capital D in dignity being the thing we should be looking for.
Greg: Exactly. Yeah. If you are planning on including barrier-free designs in your retrofit that, you know, again, it doesn’t, in Ontario, necessarily have to be barrier free. But there are those who will definitely volunteer to do that.
So try to make sure the entrance is at the front of the building where everyone else comes and goes. It may sound like a little thing but entering and exiting through, say, a laneway where the garbage trucks go, it doesn’t smack of dignity to me. And maybe I came with that realization when Daniel and I were talking about these different projects that we’ve worked on together. Sometimes it’s like thinking out loud, almost, when we’ve been collaborating.
Daniel: And I think one of the things we can do, Ryan, and, you know, along the lines I suppose of educating our clients is bring forward the possibilities that are there and that improve things for everyone. So, you know, the condition I mentioned: anyone with strollers going in and out. All the deliveries that come and go on rolling carts. They use that facility far more than people in wheelchairs do and they all benefit from it.
But, you know, a project that Greg and I worked together on a number of years ago for a non-profit agency, as Greg pointed out, in old buildings in Ontario, we’re generally not required to make them barrier-free in many situations and this was one of those. And they had the opportunity where it was relatively easy. They could have made the back door going around the lane, past the garbage. Oh yeah. Could have. That could work. To make the front door off of Queen Street barrier-free is the route we proposed and we went and it involved a reasonable amount of reframing right inside the door to get grades down, and a condition that wouldn’t strictly speaking be code with the required depths of a landing at the top and bottom. You know? We were out. We were short a few inches on required dimensions. And, you know, we’re working back and forth on how to do that and it was Greg who pointed out to me, said, yes, that is the code. In this case we’re not required to meet code. He said having a 1500 millimeter surface at the top instead of 1600 millimeters is perfectly fine for most people using wheelchairs and mobility devices. And really emphasizing that I guess a question of, you know, perfection could be the enemy of the good.
You know? We came up with a very good result there it wasn’t perfect it wouldn’t strictly speaking a met the letter of the code. But as it didn’t need to it went far, far beyond what was required in that building.
Ryan: I think you bring up an interesting point in that too often accessible design is thought as you’re adding it in. Right? It’s the afterthought and you’re trying to make things meet the minimum. But what about going above and beyond? And actually there’s two points because you also mentioned that with older buildings and retrofits you don’t necessarily have to bring things up to the modern day codes. So I guess I have two parts here. One is: when clients come to you, how often do you find or what are they asking for with these kinds of issues? And do you find them receptive to going above and beyond requirements and minimums? And generally what are your experiences with clients?
Daniel: Greg, do you want to start on that?
Greg: Well, I think part of a good firm’s practice is seeking out the right clients. It is definitely a two-way street. And I think that went a long way to working on some of the projects that we did.
Daniel mentioned that the ramp that went down four feet. Yeah. It – well, which is a perfect example of a curb cut, by the way, because it is a sculpture. It is a space for anybody to use. Not that I’m trying to pat you on the back every all the time. But I guess – well. Yeah. Enlightened clients first and foremost, that they make the biggest difference.
Daniel: Agreed. And I think we’re quite fortunate in our practice that, you know, central pillar of what we stand for is sustainable design or green design as I prefer the term. And so we attract a certain clientele who’s already open and interested in that. And our definition of sustainability is quite broad. It includes beyond, you know, the traditional environmental aspect. It’s a form of economic and social sustainability. You know? Sourcing local materials. But projects that have a social impact. So it’s generally not a big stretch for our clients who might be thinking about their – these days their carbon footprint but they would have been thinking about low-energy buildings a few years ago, to think about how accessible it is. And in particular we’re finding with residential clients a lot of people are now contemplating aging gracefully – [audio end]
[End of recorded material 00:20:47]