CNU’s Position on Visitability

The Congress for the New Urbanism (CNU) and the Disability Rights Action Coalition for Housing (DRACH) are working to find ways to both enhance accessibility and create good urbanism. At their November 2001 meeting, the CNU Board of Directors met with members of DRACH to discuss how these two organizations should jointly proceed on this important issue. New Urbanism is dedicated to creating environments in which a full range of experiences are more accessible, in the broadest sense, both physically and psychologically. Everything that is built in suburban sprawl — every strip center, motel, garden apartment enclave, business park, suburban house or townhouse cluster — is inaccessible to that half of the population that, by virtue of age, disability, or financial condition, does not drive or own a car. New urbanists provide neighborhoods that promote social interaction and provide access to daily needs without requiring automobile use. removing BARRIERS For DISABLED RESIDENTS DRACH is concerned that current policies, which focus solely on providing a small number of fully accessible housing units, perpetuate the isolation of disabled persons. They point out that architectural barriers often prevent social interaction by making it impossible for disabled persons to visit friends and neighbors. These barriers prevent residents who develop disabilities from remaining in their homes, forcing out of the community some of the people most in need of a pedestrian-oriented neighborhood. One of DRACH’s central principles is the need for “visitability” to become routinely incorporated in the majority of new homes. They describe visitability as enabling a mobility-impaired person to visit the house for dinner. This includes one zero- step entrance to the living level of a house, doorways wide enough to accommodate a wheel chair, and a bathroom that can be used by a person in a wheelchair. This does not mean fully accessible bathrooms with turning radii within them, but rather simple devices such as an out-swinging door. These three features are also essential for aging in place. Some of the physical forms of New Urbanism appear, at first glance, to be at odds with zero-step entrances. For instance, front porches are most effective when raised above street level. In urban settings, houses with shallow front yardsand row houses directly adjacent to sidewalks need raised ground floors. This change of level is necessary to avoid having windows into the private areas of houses at eye level of pedestrians on the sidewalk — an unlivable condition that severely compromises the marketability of urban housing. In addition, zero-step entrances are difficult to build with wood frame houses that have crawl spaces or pier foundations. Working toward solutions In the course of the past three years, members of CNU and DRACH, with the sponsorship of the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), have explored solutions to these dilemmas. Multi-family buildings with elevators and single-family houses with deep front yards often can be built with a zero-step front entrance. In other cases, a zero-step entry can be provided in the back yard where parking is often located in new urbanist practice. A zero-step entry can be accomplished either with a ramp or by grading the site to provide rear yards at a higher elevation than the street. These concepts were presented in a booklet published by HUD in 1999. In November, the CNU Board agreed to enlist the membership of CNU to develop creative ideas for resolving this issue. The Board also resolved to communicate the need for visitable housing to the design and building industries. One suggestion was to develop jointly with DRACH a proposal for developing a library of effective details and construction methods in collaboration with the building industry. Avoiding BARRIERS TO NEW URBANISM In order to increase the stock of visitable homes, some advocates have suggested that standards should be developed and required by law. However, CNU cautions that hastily endorsing new standards can harbor unintended consequences to urbanism. Lending institutions, water quality requirements, and traffic engineering have shown that specialized and categorical standards all too often undermine the complexity intrinsic to urbanism. The expansion of interpretation that frequently follows such legislation could eliminate building types such as the four-to-eight unit walk-up apartment buildings, which are so useful for interspersing affordable housing into single-family residential areas. At the extreme, urbanists could be left with only two legal residential building types: the single-level house and large, elevator-accessed apartment buildings, further reducing Americans’ housing options. Therefore, in addition to exploring design and construction methods that can increase the stock of visitable units, any legal requirements should be studied and tested to establish realistic ratios and size thresholds. DRACH has suggested that the more proactive planners and builders voluntarily create widespread visitability, the less advocates will press for legislation towards that end. CNU members interested in discussing visitability are invited to join CNU’s e-mail list on the topic. Subscribe by e-mailing CNU- Visitability-subscribe@topica.com. If you have creative solutions to visitability problems, you are especially invited to offer them to that group. u