Search results

A challenge in implementing Universal Design (UD) is the perceived additional cost, which acts as a barrier to its widespread adoption. The few studies that have examined the cost for UD apply a theoretical research approach, failing to account for the unique design context that influences construction costs. This article presents a research methodology to calculate the UD cost in a realistic, context-dependent manner.

To address this gap, “Research-by-Design” is applied in a case study approach involving twelve cases from three typologies: secondary schools, town halls and small retail shops. Two scenarios are compared to the existing situation: (1) “renovating into a 100% inclusive building” and (2) “building fully inclusive right away”.

Although the methodology is time-consuming, it allows for a fair, realistic and detailed comparison between costs in different scenarios and cases. Findings show how financial implications are strongly related to its scale. Both “renovation” and “new build” scenarios involve costs, but these are considerably lower for the latter. “Circulation” and “Exterior stairs and ramps” are among the most expensive to renovate, but have almost no additional cost in the examined cases for the “new build scenario”.

The research methodology presented in this study is time-consuming, which may limit its feasibility for large-scale cost assessments in diverse contexts.

The research methodology proposed in this study provides valuable insights for architects, designers and stakeholders involved in the implementation of UD. It offers a realistic and context-dependent approach to assess the cost implications of UD, enabling informed decision-making during the design and construction phases.

By revealing the specific cost implications of UD in different building contexts, this study contributes to promoting greater accessibility and inclusion in the built environment.

The applied approach distinguishes this study for its ability to provide rich contextual information on actual cost implications for UD. By considering real cases and their unique design contexts, valuable insights are offered into the true costs of implementing UD in the built environment.

Most older people wish to age “in place”. However, as current housing is mainly unsuitable for later life, architects have a key role to play. Yet, there is little architectural consideration for the notion of “ageing in place” and its various facets, beyond a functional focus. Architects seem to lack support to grasp inhabitants' sensible needs, and thus synergies with other human-centred disciplines could be enlightening. To ensure homes are designed in line with people's wellbeing, the authors aim to provide a state-of-the-art view, as to build a model supporting architects through their understanding of older people-environment relationships.

In this paper, the authors investigate the key concepts that could enrich architects' design approaches on “ageing in place”. A narrative literature review scrutinising English- and French-written publications from the last twenty years in various disciplines was conducted, with a focus on older people and non-institutionalised housing.

The results highlight five essential perspectives to be taken into account when questioning housing for older people: health, affective, social, built and contextual perspectives. Their meaning and ties are developed and then synthesised into considerations, calling for architectural creativity.

This fivefold theoretical model adds to the existing architectural body of knowledge by adopting a multidisciplinary and multidimensional angle, going beyond the predominantly pragmatic vision associated with ageing. It provides stakeholders in architecture with a fresh and clear insight of meaningful relationships between older people and their residential environment.