R E V I E W 37 to accommodate such change, either spatially or in terms of retaining significance. One obvious example is the unique National Trust property A La Ronde near Exmouth, Devon, where a fragile shell-encrusted gallery forms part of the collection of 18th-century spinster cousins Jane and Mary Parminter. While there would certainly be difficulty in providing a lift to the gallery, the greater consideration is the potential risk of damage to this rare and delicate feature. Here the compromise was to provide a 360-degree virtual tour of the space to all visitors. Furthermore, because the virtual tour is available via the National Trust website, intellectual access to the site now has global reach. Not all aspects of accessibility require the need for physical change. Intellectual access, for example, typically requires minimal alteration. Technologies such as social media and smart phones or tablets, video displays, interpretation boards incorporating a range of languages and reading levels, and creative lighting and display of architectural or other important features can all be used to improve intellectual access. Given that digital and media technologies are constantly evolving, intellectual accessibility is likely to continue to improve, and in most cases these elements cause little or no harm to historic fabric. Accessibility for the visually or hearing impaired can also be implemented with little or no damage to historic buildings. Common practical solutions include improved lighting, raised or varying floor surfaces, safety dots or images on glass doors or windows, descriptive braille or large-print display boards, sign language tours and hearing loops. More creative solutions can also be introduced, such as virtual tours, 3D tactile models or imagery, and ‘touch tours’, which are guided tours that provide a more tactile experience by allowing visitors to touch objects or architectural features. Reinventing outdated audio tours can also be a positive step forward. The Louvre, Paris made headlines in 2012 when it introduced self-guided tours which used hand-held games consoles. The museum was fitted with GPS locators which could identify the position of a visitor’s console and display relevant information. This not only enhanced access for those with visual or hearing impairments but also appealed to younger visitors and allowed the provision of information in a range of languages. It exemplifies how changing technologies can revolutionise the way visitors experience heritage sites. INCLUSIVE DESIGN The Louvre example demonstrates the potential of a more open approach to the concept of access and the value of making places not just accessible but ‘inclusive’ – usable and enjoyable by the widest possible range of people using the same methodologies for everyone. This kind of approach requires thinking outside the basic parameters of legislation and regulations to consider the broadest context of how places are experienced and by whom, and how to make visiting, living and working in these places as comfortable and enjoyable as possible. Ramps and lifts, for example, are typically designed to accommodate wheelchair users, but a much wider range of people also benefit from them such as families or groups incorporating various age-groups (such as toddlers or the elderly), or people with a range of physical impairments. 3D physical and virtual models, realistic sounds and smells and ‘touch tours’ can provide all visitors – not just those with visual impairments – with an exciting experience of place, while visually stimulating displays can benefit a range of people from the hearing impaired to small children and those with learning difficulties. The provision of access to enhance experience, as exemplified by the recent insertion of glass floors into the walkways at Tower Bridge, London should also be considered. The project may not fit the typical definition of accessibility but it has introduced a new way to understand and interpret the bridge and has fundamentally changed visitors’ experience of the site. The reality is that change in the historic built environment is inevitable, and the provision of accessible heritage is an integral part of that. The real message, however, is that access needn’t be seen solely as a requirement or responsibility, but rather as an opportunity for creativity, enjoyment and better appreciation of our heritage for everyone. Heather Jermy BArch MA IHBC ACIfA is head of heritage consultancy at Purcell. A 3D physical model of York Minster which was designed for use by the visually impaired but is also an interesting means of conveying scale and design for all visitors (Photo: Alexander Holton) Children enjoying a 3D physical model at Tudor House Museum, Southampton (Photo: Purcell)
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjgyMjA=