Articles

Disability Access In Kuala Lumpur

In the bustling metropolis of Kuala Lumpur, where skyscrapers pierce the sky and diverse communities thrive, businesses are increasingly recognizing the value of inclusivity. Providing disability access isn't just a moral imperative—it's a smart business strategy that aligns with Malaysia's evolving legal landscape and taps into untapped markets. With over 1 billion people globally living with disabilities, according to international estimates, Kuala Lumpur's businesses stand to gain significantly by prioritizing accessibility. This article explores the multifaceted benefits, from legal compliance to economic gains, and highlights real-world examples in the city.

Legal Compliance: Navigating Malaysia's Regulations

Malaysia has made strides in protecting the rights of persons with disabilities (PwD) through the Persons with Disabilities Act 2008 (PwD Act), which affirms equal access to public facilities, healthcare, and employment. In Kuala Lumpur, this translates to requirements for businesses to ensure barrier-free environments, guided by the Malaysian Standard MS 1184:2002, a code of practice for access to public buildings. While enforcement has gaps—such as inconsistent implementation and calls for constitutional protections—compliance helps businesses avoid potential legal challenges and fines.

Beyond mere obligation, adhering to these standards fosters a welcoming atmosphere. For instance, the Act mandates registration for PwD via "Kad OKU" cards, which can entitle holders to benefits like priority access, encouraging businesses to accommodate them proactively. In a city like KL, where urban development is rapid, integrating ramps, elevators, and tactile flooring not only meets legal benchmarks but positions businesses as leaders in social responsibility.

Economic Advantages: Boosting the Bottom Line

One of the most compelling benefits is economic. Accessibility expands the customer base by including the disability community and their networks—friends, family, and caregivers—who often choose inclusive venues. Globally, this market represents trillions in spending power, and in Malaysia, with an estimated 4.8% of the population registered as PwD, the potential is substantial.

Businesses that invest in accessibility report higher retention of qualified employees with disabilities—up to 86% in some studies—leading to increased productivity and lower turnover costs. Features like automatic doors or adjustable counters reduce expenses over time by preventing lawsuits and enhancing operational efficiency. In KL's competitive retail and hospitality sectors, accessible designs can drive innovation, such as apps with voice navigation or braille menus, attracting tech-savvy customers across demographics.

Moreover, hiring from the disability talent pool provides a competitive edge. Employees with disabilities often bring unique problem-solving skills honed from overcoming barriers, improving overall team performance. For small and medium enterprises (SMEs) in areas like Bangsar or Bukit Bintang, this means accessing untapped talent while boosting profitability.

Enjoying the air conditioning while shopping in KL Sentral

Social and Reputational Gains: Building Brand Loyalty

Accessibility enhances a business's reputation, signaling commitment to diversity and inclusion. In Kuala Lumpur's multicultural fabric, this fosters consumer loyalty—59% of employers note it helps retain staff, while customers prefer brands that prioritize inclusivity. Socially, it creates welcoming environments for everyone, reducing exclusion and promoting community well-being.

Ignoring accessibility, conversely, risks alienating millions in talent and patronage. In Malaysia, where disability politics highlight marginalization, businesses that lead in this area can influence positive change, aligning with global standards like the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.

Real-World Examples in Kuala Lumpur

Kuala Lumpur offers inspiring models. Suria KLCC mall, beneath the iconic Petronas Twin Towers, features wheelchair-accessible paths, elevators, and restrooms, making it a hub for inclusive shopping. The Towers' tour is fully wheelchair-friendly, drawing diverse visitors daily.

Cafes like Tender Hearts Café employ individuals with special needs, creating jobs while serving the community and enhancing brand appeal. Attractions such as the Kuala Lumpur Bird Park provide ramps and accessible facilities, boosting tourism revenue. Even public transport in KL has made progress, with many MRT and LRT stations offering wheelchair access, though sidewalk improvements are needed.

Implementing Accessibility: Practical Steps for KL Businesses

To reap these benefits, start with audits using MS 1184 guidelines—install ramps, widen doorways, and add audio cues. Partner with organizations like the Malaysian Bar for advice on PwD rights. Training staff on inclusive service and leveraging technology, like accessible websites, can yield quick wins.

In conclusion, providing disability access in Kuala Lumpur is a win-win: it complies with laws, drives economic growth, builds loyalty, and contributes to a more equitable society. As the city grows, businesses that embrace inclusivity will thrive, turning potential barriers into opportunities for all.

Accessible tourism is a serious challenge in particular environments, but technology helps overcome many of the obstacles. In essence, people who live with disabilities want to participate in every day life. Travelling the world exposes barriers that can be overcome, with inclusive ideas. The view of Santorini above, for instance, could be enjoyed if there was an accessible path of travel from a vehicle drop off point, to the restaurant seating areas. I could have spent the whole day there drinking, eating, talking and taking in the sites and sounds of this tourist hotspot, culminating in watching the greatest sunset on the planet, but, not without intervention if I was a person living with a disability.

Even simple things for Australian families, like going to the beach for the day require some serious planning. Few of Sydney beaches and rock pools have an accessible promenade, and most do not provide an accessible path of travel to use the pool, or get down on the sand to work up a beautiful Aussie tan line, let alone provide access to the water itself.

On the Island of Crete in the ancient city of Chania, someone thought about that, and introduced a device to provide wheelchair access into the sea.

This device from Seatec establishes a permanent rail system to guide an assistance device into the water, like a boat ramp of sorts, that ambulant people can step on and over without a challenge. I note that it suited the circumstances of its locality, being a beach covered in romantic lounges, umbrellas and a permanent table service. A very casual atmosphere the likes of which do not exist on public beaches in Australia. More's the pity.

There are alternatives though which are more inclusive additions, for instance, a mobi-ramp matting placed over the sand, providing a manageable surface for people who may use a mobility device such as a walker, wheelchair or even a parent with twins in a stroller. One step up from there is a floating mat that can weather the rolling surf. That kind of installation provides access well out into the waves and there is no doubt would be used by a thousand budding body board riders to get to the break. No doubt, with thought, there are numerous answers, at least one great thoughtful solution for every obstacle.

If you can see the advantages of an environment with a community that embraces its elderly, its families, and the people who face access barriers to everyday participation, join the fun. Tell your local Council. Encourage them to get highlighted on a directory of like minded folk. There's no reason why the 50% of our population who face access challenges, cannot participate wholly upon the recreational resource we all love to show off. We can lead the world, even without a caldera.

For more information, see Accessible Beaches Australia, and join in the conversation.

So, you're moving back into mum's house with your family, and mum is moving into a brand new 1 bed secondary dwelling you've constructed in NSW under the Complying Development Regime. Mum's getting pretty frail and can do with daily support for every day tasks. Some days are great, other days, your mum has trouble recognising who you are and where she is. You're worried that, should she have an accident, or set fire to her kitchen, she will not be able to escape on her own. These High Physical Supports could be provided in a nursing home, but your family wants to spend as much time as you can with her, while you can.

Ordinarily, it would be constructed as a Class 1(a) secondary dwelling, and rightly so in my opinion.

However, your mum is an NDIS participant, and your secondary dwelling is enrolled as SDA under the NDIS Specialist Disability Accommodation scheme. "So what"? You ask.

The NSW Building Commission, the Office of Fair Trading, a bevy of spineless Private Certifiers, and a whole host of industry leading players are in a quandry about the required building classification for a dwelling in which a recipient of HPS SDA funding applies. "Class 3", I hear. Of course, buildings are not classified by their residents. They are classified by their function. This is a house, that is less than 60sqm of floor space. It's risk profile does not match the profile of a boarding house or a hotel accommodation with, I don't know, say 200 bedrooms.

How is it that Governments can get this all so wrong?

I recently completed as an Access Consultant, the as built certification of a small 2 bedroom villa.

SDA

The Building Certifier insisted on the grounds that the building is proposed to be occupied for use as Specialist Disability Accommodation [SDA] that it must be a Class 3 building for NCC purposes. (Watch this space). I cannot tell you how perverse that is, but I can tell you the impact on the residents.

Any Class 3 building is affected by the Disability Access to Premises Standards 2010 [DAPS]. The DAPS introduces the Disability Code [The Code], which is now entirely encapsulated in the National Construction Code, largely in section D4 of NCC 2022.

For Class 3 buildings, the NCC requires at least 1 bedroom in every ten bedrooms within a Class 3 building to satisfy the access requirements for a person who lives with disabilities and, across the spectrum, this means making the dwelling, including bathrooms and common areas wheelchair accessible. Other relevant inclusions are emergency evacuation alarms, signage, sounders, Fire Indicator Panels, lighting, signage, fire separating construction, smoke doors and so on, and emergency evacuation plan, fire extinguishers, smoke blankets, and so on. Not the kind of installations that you see when you walk around your family home, and probably more hospital like than ever, given the grab rails installed in the bathroom and the accessible signage adjoining the dunny door.

So, this SDA for "improved livability" participants who arent wheelchair users, and who might, for example, live with a vision impairment in a house by any other name, is is a Class 3 rooming house, because you never know when someone who has High Physical Support requirements will move in. There's no way of policing the physical capabilities of a future resident of a boarding house. Best to be safe, right?

SENIOR'S HOUSING

Now, this subject Villa was approved as Seniors housing under the old Senior's State Environmental Planning Policy. The Policy repealed is fully embraced by the current NSW Housing Sepp. It doesn't go unnoticed that the original SEPP is properly titled "Housing for Senior's and People who live with a Disability". So, to my mind, the provisions in that document never intended all Sole Occupancy Units erected by way of it, to be CLASS 3 buildings. Indeed, for many years we have seen class 1a, class 1b, Class 2, Class 3 and Class 9 buildings, perhaps even class 4 buildings, erected under the Senior's SEPP. All of these abodes contain sole occupancy units essentially residential in fact and in spite of the NSW Building Commission.

Yes, bring on 2024 and the NSW Building Commission to work closely with the Federal Government and various State Agencies, and Industry and lets make all houses Class 3. It's only fair, to people who face access challenges, to make things more difficult than they already are.

Some of the Villas in this senior's development are one bed villas. These are Class 1(a) dwellings designed to satisfy the SEPP, but also the Specialist Disability Accommodation Design Standards. They'll be enrolled for SDA without any of the Class 3 features, which is consistent with the Federal Government's enrolment SDA Rules, and completely consistent with the development consent. In my opinion, a person who has High Physical Support needs can reside in a Class 1(a) dwelling. I can't wait to hear the Government explain to all the baby boomers with diminishing motility, that they have to move out of their Class 1(a) castles because the Building classification is no longer suitable for them to occupy.

So, if you intend to invest in the SDA property market, just take a deep breathe, and wait until someone in Macquarie Street decides its sensible for a whole of government approach.

There are serious inconsistencies in the building industry when it comes to accurately answering this question. As usual, someone is told something and that's interpreted and applied broadly without a thorough understanding of the intent.

So, following today's site inspection, I'm hoping to set the record straight, again.

TWO SALIENT POINTS

• There is no universal design response to this question. The "universal design" idea that it could suit everyone is a furphy, or else, we would all still be reading in Vitruvius for the answer. 

• Let's say, you set the switches at 1350 above the floor, as the electrician did today. That's great for me at 1830mm tall, fit and flexible. Though kids have a lot of trouble reaching those, and a person who uses their knee to toggle the switch is at full stretch. *scratch your head now.

So, how does Gary defect an electrician's work?

I apply the standard applicable to the project, for example:

1. The heights nominated in the Building Specification. Maybe it hasn't been stated by the owner or the design team. How is that even possible?
2. The height defaulting in NATSPEC, which, for switch/powerpoint is 1100/300 above floor level.
3. AS 1428.1 provides a touchpad height of between 900 and 1250mm, but doesn't specify the power point heights at all.
4. AS 1428.2 provides for both switches and powerpoints to be in the zone of reach between 700 and 1200mm. That seems very sensible to me.
5. AS 4299 provides for a switch height of between 900 and 1100mm, and a powerpoint height of greater than 600mm.
6. The NSW State Environmental Planning Policy (Housing), requires heights of switches and power points to match those indicated in AS 1428.1 (noting that the AS 1428.1 standard does not specify a height for power points at all).
7. The Specialist Disability Accommodation Standard requires switches to be located between 900 and 1100mm above floor level, and power points to be located on the range between 600 and 1100mm above Floor level. But, it also requires the door handle to line up with the light switch, so the electrician, who comes along first, has to decide what height the door handles will be at, or otherwise, move his switches when the doors are installed.

Out of all of these options available to the construction team, none of them provide for the height to be determined by wherever the carpenter may or may not have positioned a nogging.

To my way of thinking, designers ought to be indicating the required heights so that these are sensibly located. If you are laying in bed, why position a light switch adjoining the bed at a height more than an arm's reach away from the bed and 1100 above the floor? 

Please get in touch if you've got any questions. It's always better to ask rather than to assume.

Kind regards



Gary Finn
0414414101
(Cert iv Access Consulting)
Architect Principal #5774 (NSW)
Builder #51908C (NSW)
Access Consultant #435
Principal Design Practitioner #PDP0000496
SDA Accredited Assessor #SDA00039

Sydney Access Consultants

https://sydneyaccessconsultants.com.au

Shop 7/438 Forest Road, Hurstville NSW 2220
Phone (02) 95863111 Mobile 0414 414101 This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
*Member of Master Builder's Association;
*Accredited member of the Association of Consultants in Access, Australia
*Member of Association of Consulting Architects, Australia

What's the Law?

In NSW there is a new regime for renovating apartments that was introduced in 2021, see

Design and Building Practitioners Act 2020 No 7 - NSW Legislation

.

These laws arose out of the immense impact on apartment schemes by shoddy building work conducted unlawfully, and, without due regard to the designed compliance with the National Construction Code, or the qualities required by the Australian Standards.

The Building Commission has identified that as much as 70% of building defects revolve around defective waterproofing design and installation, resulting in very expensive repairs and maintenance bills incurred by strata plans across the state.

To meet its objectives the Building Commission requires  Design Declaration statements from registered design practitioners for regulated design prior to the carrying out the work, and these declarations must be uploaded to the NSW Government Planning Portal for the Building Commission’s records. The work must then be carried out by building practitioners registered under the scheme for this class of building (Class 2 apartment), and verified by certification from the design practitioners upon completion.

What are the requirements?

It is unlawful to conduct apartment renovations as a home owner, unless it is completely exempt from the Building laws. Any work performed without the required certification and records, will need to be re-constructed to avoid future losses.

Obviously there are very limited exceptions which I have extracted from the Office of Fair Trading website for your convenience:

Some building work on a regulated building class (currently 2, 3 & 9c) is excluded from needing a compliance declaration under the DBP legislation. This includes where the building work is:

•                        valued at less than AU$5000 including labour and materials (excluded under the Home Building Act)

•                        exempt under environmental planning except waterproofing work

•                        waterproofing work within a single dwelling carried out as a result of alterations to a bathroom, kitchen, laundry or toilet and which is exempt development

•                        being done under a HomeBuilder grant

•                        being done under a council order except related to cladding

•                        being done under a development control order except related to cladding

•                        for the maintenance of a component of a building including a fire safety system except a load-bearing component that is essential to the stability of a building

•                        for the maintenance of a component of a system in the building for mechanical, plumbing or electrical services

•                        electrical or plumbing work that is a performance solution for building work, other than work for a building element

•                        the subject of a development consent but is not work for a building element or performance solution for building work (work not requiring a regulated design)

•                        a non-structural* fit-out only for class 5, 6, 9a or 9b parts

•                        exempt from Building Code of Australia (BCA) under clause 164B, 187 or 188

•                        the installation of an awning, blind or canopy over a window or door

•                        the installation of a roofed structure over a balcony, deck, patio or terrace, whether open or enclosed, unless the roofed structure is installed above the existing topmost roof of the building.

Once the work required to be performed is work by, or on behalf of, a registered building practitioner under this act, it must satisfy the National Construction Code, as this is the obligation of that builder.

For a bathroom renovation, for instance, valued at $5000, the following design practitioners are required:

• ·      Architect
• ·      Hydraulic Engineer
• ·      Mechanical Engineer
• ·      Waterproofing (Can be certified by the architect)
• Electrical Engineer

And, the building practitioner registered under the Act, must complete the bathroom work in accordance with NCC 2022 clauses.

These clauses of the NCC are critical :

F2D4N

Floor Wastes

(2)Where a floor waste is installed—

(a)the minimum continuous fall of a floor plane to the waste must be 1:80; and

(b)the maximum continuous fall of a floor plane to the waste must be 1:50.

F2D2 Wet area construction

(1)In a Class 2 and 3 building and a Class 4 part of a building, building elements in wet areas must—

(a)be water resistant or waterproof in accordance with Specification 26; and

(b)comply with AS 3740. :2021 Waterproofing of Domestic Wet Areas

F6D7 Natural ventilation

(1)Natural ventilation provided in accordance with F6D6(a) must consist of openings, windows, doors or other devices

which can be opened—

(a)with a ventilating area not less than 5% of the floor area of the room required to be ventilated; and

(b)open to—

a suitably sized court, or space open to the sky; or

an open verandah, carport, or the like; or

an adjoining room in accordance with F6D8.

F8D4 Exhaust systems

(1)An exhaust system installed in a kitchen, bathroom, sanitary compartment or laundry must have a minimum flow rate

of—

(a)25 L/s for a bathroom or sanitary compartment; and

(b)40 L/s for a kitchen or laundry.

(2)Exhaust from a kitchen, kitchen range hood, bathroom, sanitary compartment or laundry must discharge directly or

via a shaft or duct to outdoor air.

(3)Where space for a clothes drying appliance is provided in accordance with F4D2(1)(b), space must also be provided

for ducting from the clothes drying appliance to outdoor air.

(4)(3) does not apply if a condensing-type clothes drying appliance is installed.

(5)An exhaust system that is not run continuously and is serving a bathroom or sanitary compartment that is not ventilated

in accordance with F6D7 must—

(a)be interlocked with the room’s light switch; and

(b)include a run-on timer so that the exhaust system continues to operate for 10 minutes after the light switch is

turned off.

(6)Except for rooms that are ventilated in accordance with F6D7, a room with space for ducting a clothes drying appliance

to outdoor air in accordance with (3) must be provided with make-up air in accordance with AS 1668.2

See also NCC Specification 26.

Does the work fall within the exceptions noted above?

Whenever the work, including labour and materials , exceeds $4999, the BDPA is triggered. In my professional opinion, the probable cost of a bathroom renovation, constructed in accordance with the laws of NSW, will normally exceed $15000 plus GST.

Please contact me if you have any questions.

Kind regards



Gary Finn
0414414101
(Cert iv Access Consulting)
Architect Principal #5774 (NSW)
Builder #51908C (NSW)
Access Consultant #435
Principal Design Practitioner #PDP0000496
SDA Accredited Assessor #SDA00039

Sydney Access Consultants

http://www.sydneyaccessconsultants.com.au

Shop 7/438 Forest Road, Hurstville NSW 2220
Phone (02) 95863111 Mobile 0414 414101 This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
*Member of Master Builder's Association;
*Accredited member of the Association of Consultants in Access, Australia
*Member of Association of Consulting Architects, Australia