The Disability Discrimination Act (DDA) 1992 makes it a legal requirement for local government to provide equal access to employment, public buildings, goods, services and facilities. However, what this access looks like from council to council can differ greatly.
Local Government Authorities’ varying approaches to accessibility
As someone who works closely with town planners and building surveyors tasked with development assessments in one of Sydney’s largest metropolitan councils, I’ve had the opportunity to observe how local government authorities(LGAs) approach and assess for accessibility design inclusions. Before diving into particulars, it’s important to note a few generalities in this area.
As with the many fundamental shifts in cultural attitude through education, understanding and greater focus on accessibility, LGAs are also shifting gears towards inclusive designs. In recent times, metropolitan councils have made the most significant accessibility improvements in public domain, recreational spaces and council-owned property developments. While most councils have strategic visions for vastly improving accessibility and equity, developments over privately owned land are lagging.
Of course, the pace of progress – or lack thereof – has inevitably varied from council to council. Referencing my past and present working experience with some of Sydney’s metropolitan councils, I’ve seen a fundamental shift in approach and thinking on accessibility. However, the shape and form of this progress differs between councils and often between departments within the same council. The latter point is mainly due to rigid organisational structures adopted by some of the larger LGAs. While progress is being made, it is largely inconsistent.
Obstacles to accessibility
To better understand how difficult it can be to make progress with accessibility in structurally rigid councils, it helps to imagine the organisational makeup of a council as a silo within a silo. For example, in the design and construction space, the land title classification in which any development proposal takes place determines which council section manages the proposal. Generally, development work falls mainly into three categories – public domain work, council property development and developments within private allotments.
In the context of accessibility, public domain works, and council property developments are heavily assessed and scrutinised. It is common for metropolitan councils to directly employ architects and accessibility inclusion officers to oversee council-managed and -owned development works. Typically, these external parties will provide assessments for developments over public spaces and developments of council-owned and -managed properties.
Further, councils often engage external accessibility consultants to compile accessibility inclusion masterplans. Close coordination with accessibility consultants often yields higher-quality, accessible developments and public recreational spaces.
Developments on privately owned land are handled slightly differently. For instance, accessibility-inclusive designs, compliance and assessments are primarily deferred to the accessibility consultants submitting supporting reports or certificates for proposed development applications or with any construction certificate lodged with the council. This is because councils do not employ accessibility experts to work alongside development assessment officers to oversee the assessment and scrutinise the compliance of these reports.
As a result, council town planners and building surveyors are left to assess these important reports. While some assessing officers have a good understanding of accessibility concepts, others lack a great deal of insight on this topic.
Regrettably, it is common practice within councils for the assessing officers to condition accessibility reports in development consents without thoroughly reading the whole report or partially reading the recommendation sections of the report. This can lead to a whole suite of accessibility problems down the line, many of which could have been managed more successfully with an earlier and more inclusive engagement of a reputable accessibility consultant.
Improving accessibility design
Usually, these condition accessibility reports are from credible and highly experienced accessibility consultants. However, poor vetting between reputable and non-reputable accessibility consultants can lead to approvals and constructed developments that lack compliance with Australian Standards, the Building Code of Australia (BCA) and the DDA.
The gains and future improvements in accessibility design inclusions in council-owned and managed public buildings, external domains, and recreational spaces will only continue to improve. On the other hand, it is difficult to foresee how the disparity in quality accessibility-compliant developments on privately owned land can be reduced without the LGAs’ provision of additional resources to their respective planning and assessment teams.
LGAs can employ accessibility experts to join development assessment teams or provide regular accessibility training and developments to assessing officers. Either way, greater pressure and importance need to be placed on accessibility consultants’ role in proposed developments to yield compliant and accessible designs that benefit all who access these buildings and outdoor spaces.