Questions and Answers

Below is a list of our most frequently asked questions (FAQs). If you do not find an answer to your question here, or would like further information on our recommendations given below, please contact a Barrier Free Advisor

Technical Questions:

What are the requirements for door handles to be 'accessible'?

Under the Building Act 2004, doors and door handles should meet the following requirements:

• Doors must be easily operated with one hand
• Door handles are fixed between 900mm and 1200mm (1000mm optimum) above the floor
• Door handles, operating locks and latches are of lever action type
• Lever door handles are installed with the handle running towards the hinge
• Door closes have the minimum tension required to bring the door to a closed position

One of the important requirements for a door handle is that "the end of the handle shall be returned towards the door." (refer NZS 4121:2001 7.3.7 (b))

What are the requirements for light switches and sockets to be 'accessible'?

Under the Building Act 2004, light switches and sockets should meet the following requirements:

• Light switches are horizontally aligned with door handles (between 900mm-1200mm above the floor)
• Light switches having switching mechanism projecting clear of the face plate
• Socket outlets are fixed between 500-1200mm above the floor
• Socket outlets are fixed 500mm from a corner
• At least one light in a bedroom has a bedside switch

What are the requirements for windows and window controls to be 'accessible'?

Under the Building Act 2004, window controls should meet the following requirement:

• Window controls are fixed between 900-1200mm above the floor

Is there a legal alternative to providing a lift that travels between ground floor and an upper floor for a significant refit of an airport domestic terminal?

This is to be provided for the traveling public who require the facility. Mostly wheelchair users, ambulant disabled people and blind/vision impaired people using a guide dog.

Could a stair climber or similar be used in a public space? Others have said that there is a possibility that there are different classes of requirements for public buildings.

The simple answer to your question is no.

Stairlifts are only acceptable in privately owned domestic dwellings for the reasons identified in NZS 4121:2001 sections C8 and CC8 (page 105).

The debate seems to overlook the universal advantage of a good quality, complying accessible lift, which benefits those involved with the movement of goods between levels, parents with pushchairs, older people and so on. All airport users will use a well-positioned good quality lift extensively.

Costs cannot be seen as an obstacle given the overall cost of what would appear a substantial refit.

I am currently processing a proposal to convert office spaces into hotel units on 4 levels of a multi storey building. The proposal is that they have one accessible unit on each of these levels, and the plans show a hallway of 1050mm wide over 2.5 metres. I feel that the non complying width does not comply with the minor or major projections, and as all the units have this width issue, would it be unreasonable to ask for this to be addressed as there are other units that could be accessible that would not have this issue of the reduce width.

The "hallway" referred to is presumably inside the proposed accessible unit(s). We are unsure what the "the minor or major projections" are.

The simple answer is no, it is not unreasonable to require the corridor width to be 1200mm - this is a basic requirement for all thoroughfares and is particularly necessary in a motel / hotel unit because of the need to maneuver in a confined space, usually with luggage and often with another person using the same space.

In the case of new clothing store where changing rooms are proposed, is there any requirement that we must enforce for asking the applicant to provide a changing room large enough to be used for people with disabilities?

NZS4121 does not mention this issue, and therefore we do not have any minimum dimensions, which we could refer to - we would appreciate your comments on this issue.

You are right - there is nothing specific in the approved documents that refer to changing rooms. Changing rooms are only referred to in a generic sense, for example Building Act Section 118 (1) below says:

"…reasonable and adequate provision by way of access…and… (b) carry out normal activities and processes in that building.... Using a changing room in a clothing shop is a normal activity."

Larger changing cubicles are increasingly provided as a matter of course in other parts of the world. They are popular, not only with wheelchair users, but with parents with young children, with larger people and with those using other mobility aids, including guide dogs. A retailer providing a larger cubicle would have a competitive edge in this country as they are unfortunately so infrequently considered, to their detriment. Fashion is a highly competitive industry and retailers would surely want to encourage everyone into their business and give them a good experience. This encourages repeat business.

A UN document on cubicle size states it should be possible to achieve a 360-degree turn in a wheelchair. NZS 4121 refers to a wheelchair length with the occupant as being 1250-1350mm. Scooter length ranges from 1120-1600mm. The New Zealand Code requires a minimum 1500mm diameter turning circle.

To be practical, cubicle size will be determined by the size of the retail outlet. If space is limited, solutions could be to have a curtain separating two regular sized cubicles, which can then provide one large space for a wheelchair user, etc. Alternatively, if there is a corridor to cubicles, the end of the corridor could be included as part of the cubicle. There are creative ways of providing a service without compromising display space; often it is an attitude problem.

http://www.drc.org.uk/pdf/4008_111_SP5R_02-06.pdf is a document produced by the UK Disability Rights Commission. Denying access to goods and services is a breach of the NZ Human Rights Act also. This document is a clothes shop case study, which could provide some useful direction to the owner of the retail outlet you are currently concerned with.

It is always hard to know where the built environment begins and ends. We have had some enquiries about the accessibility of eftpos terminals – the height of the key pad in supermarkets where some of them are fixed. Can you please explain?

Requirements on automatic tellers and vending machines are detailed in section 11.3 of NZS 4121:2001 and based on a fixed structure. It is a matter to what extent the building consent can cover the kind of requirements identified in NZS 4121.

Our view is that, apart from the heights identified in Figure 39, NZS 4121:2001 and the clear ground or surface space required in section 11.2.2, the other requirements of section 11.3 falls outside of Building Act scope and rather into the jurisdiction of the Human Rights Act.

A question has been raised concerning the door handles that have been specified for the building and whether they comply for disabled access. We have specified for the base building a lever handle by Lockwood called Chorus Line 97. For the interior fit-out office doors, we have specified a lever handle by Sopers called Devon Catalina.

The hardware supplier has questioned these selections, and believes that the end of the lever handles need to return back to the face of the door. The New Zealand Building Code requires that the door handles are a lever type only. While NZS 4121 requires that the ends of the lever handles are returned back to the door surface. We believe that the New Zealand Building Code is the required means of compliance. Can you please advise what the policy of the Barrier Free New Zealand Trust is on this issue?

It is noted that the performance required by the Building Code is that door hardware is "easily used" Clause D1.3.4 (F). Although the compliance detail in D1/AS1 does not require the end returned towards the door, this remains a necessary requirement for persons with disabilities to 'easily' use it – the returned end prevents a hand with reduced grip from falling off the end of the lever.

Where there are differences between the Code and NZS 4121 the solution must be that which best suits the intended beneficiaries, persons with disabilities, not the building owner, developer or designer.

Could you please advise me what I could "allow", as being as nearly as is reasonably practicable, to the same extent as if it were a new building, in respect of a Historic Places Trust categorised building?

The Tender Document looks to have incorporated most of the recommendations in NZS 4121, which is pleasing in itself, but the Council has made it clear that it is a historic building and I feel that certain areas may be compromised in respect to accessibility.

I am sure I have read somewhere, about what may be considered for exemption due to the fact of a building's category, and your advice would be invaluable. Access requirements cannot be ignored or over-ridden by any historic nature of a building. Elements like door hardware, handrails, stairs, lifts and so on can retain their historic nature and comply with access requirements.

Any waiver or modification to the requirements can only be given by the Chief Executive of DBH by way of a determination.

It is important in cases like this to discuss the issues personally with the Architect and use appropriate drawings and specifications when producing solutions.

I am looking at the refurbishment of a retail building - my understanding of the Standard is that the car park (or the portion of it containing the access route including the mobility car park itself) must be sealed in some way, it cannot just be 'formed' - is that correct?

NZS4121 clearly states that an accessible car park shall provide a stable, firm, slip resistant, flat surface with a slope not exceeding 1:50. Therefore pebble and grass surfaces would not meet this requirement.

Our design for an accessible toilet was questioned by Council. The design shows a bulk toilet roll dispenser located above the L shaped grab rail as there are no bulk dispensers made small enough to mount in the location shown in Figure 31 of NZS 4121 and, Figure 7 of G1/AS1 of the approved documents in the Building code Handbook.

We understand that a bulk toilet roll dispenser will constrict the use of the grab rail and this is the reason for our design being questioned. Is this really so?

However this raises the following operational issue in every public accessible toilet. If there is only room for a single domestic style toilet roll holder in the current accepted solutions, then in theory all accessible toilets in restaurants and public toilets would need to be constantly replenished with toilet rolls. Or are we missing something here?

Does anyone have a solution for locating a bulk toilet roll dispenser that would be accepted by the BCAs?

This issue has been bothering a few for some time. What has evolved is that large toilet roll holders are being developed to meet the durability test in public places along with the need to have a greater amount than one roll can provide. There is now a wide range on the market that does not fit within the zone recommended in the Acceptable Solutions. We have to recognise that the old model shown in the diagrams of G1/AS1 and NZS 4121 is no longer practical in a public situation.

Generally most designs can fit within the wall space of an L shaped handrail but the position of the product is very important. The use of the horizontal and vertical length must not be compromised. It is recommended that whatever product is used it must have 300mm clearance out from horizontal and vertical lengths of the handrail. The rounded model works well in the normal zone area below i.e. between the vertical length and the washbasin provided the paper end/outlet faces the wc pan and isreachable. Common sense has to prevail. It is all about balance and reach.

We are designing a rest-home with basement parking and seek advice as to the height requirements for suitable/practicable access.

Do we use:
NZBC: 2200mm minimum,
AS/NZS 2890 Part 6: 2300mm
NZS 4121: 2500mm?

Do we need to consider a van with wheelchair on top, which is the practicable height to suit a majority of users?

The fact that you could end up using a van has to be taken into consideration and as such the higher the clearance the better.

Please remember the NZBC 2.200 is a minimum and the objective is to achieve "performance".

NZS 4121 at 2.500 has thought into the aspect of clearance more thoughtfully!

We hope that you will take a pro-active role in reaching your decision by providing for your client via best practice.

Are you able to tell me where to go for specifications to build a wheelchair ramp to provide access to a building?

The New Zealand Standard 4121:2001 states the following:

6.4.1
Ramps can be straight, zigzag or L-shaped. Curved or circular ramps should not be considered as part of an accessible route.
6.4.2.1 Approachability
The approach to a ramp shall be level and allow for adequate visibility and wheelchair turning space.
6.4.2.2 Gradient
The maximum gradient of a ramp other than a kerb or step ramp shall be 1 in 12.
6.4.2.4 Width
The tread width of a ramp shall not be less than 1200 mm.
NZS 4121:2001 can be purchased online at http://www.standards.co.nz/default.htm. This resource will be quite useful as it has diagrams and more information regarding landings, handrails, ramp edge safety etc.

International Symbol of Access

Why must the International Symbol of Access be used?

The statutory provisions for accessibility in New Zealand are contained in the Building Act 2004 and the Building Code.

Section 120 of the Building Act states that, 'If any provision required by section 118 [for access for people with disabilities] is made at a building in compliance with that section, a notice or sign that indicates in accordance with the international symbol of access that provision is made for the needs of persons with disabilities must be displayed outside the building or so as to be visible from outside it'.

Clause F8.2 of the Building Code states that, 'Signs shall be provided in and about buildings to identify accessible routes and facilities for people with disabilities'. Details of the ISA sign and its style, proportions and colour contrast are contained in F8/AS1 in the Compliance Document for Building Code Clause F8 Signs and in NZS 4121: 2001 Design for Access and Mobility.

Territorial authorities have the legal responsibility for enforcing the display of the ISA.

Where can the International Symbol of Access be used?

The symbol can be used only on buildings or facilities that comply with the requirements of the Building Code for accessibility. Showing the symbol on facilities that are non-compliant would contravene the Building Act, and mislead people with disabilities.

Buildings that have a code compliance certificate issued under the Building Act 1991 or 2004 may use the ISA. This includes buildings built since 1992, as well as older buildings that have had their accessibility upgraded to Building Code standards under the 'as nearly as is reasonably practicable' provisions contained in both Acts.

For a building to show the ISA, it must at least have an accessible entrance and an accessible route to the internal spaces of the building. The purpose of the building will determine what other accessible provisions must be made.

An audit of access can be done on request by a territorial authority, or by an accredited Barrier Free Advisor registered with the Barrier Free New Zealand Trust. If the audit shows the access provisions meet Building Code requirements, it is acceptable to display the symbol.

Can you provide details of the Design and Display of the International Symbol of Access?

All ISA signs should be positioned and located consistently. Their size, type and lettering must be clear and legible, and contrast with the background.

Generally, the symbol should be white on a blue background, although other colours can be used to suit a particular decor, provided there is equivalent contrast between the symbol and its background.

In New Zealand, we have come to expect accessible car parks to have yellow ground markings. This colour is considered to have stronger contrast than blue in this situation. Blue and white remain the preferred colours for displaying the ISA on posts or walls above a parking space.

Signs should be fixed on a wall or other vertical surface and be placed 1400 mm to 1700 mm from the floor or ground level to the lower edge of the sign plate.

For signs identifying a facility, the figure must face to the right. For indicating the direction to a facility, the figure must face in the direction being indicated.

For further information, we welcome you to contact a Barrier Free Advisor.