equitable educational environments
DESCRIPTION
UC Berkeley Lecture Halls and the Role of The Americans with Disabilities ActTRANSCRIPT
EQUITABLE EDUCATIONAL ENVIRONMENTS
UC Berkeley Lecture Halls and the Role of The Americans with Disabilities Act
By Kathleen Alice Sheffer
Faculty Sponsor: Professor Michael James Dear
Individual Major Senior Thesis
College of Environmental Design | University of California, Berkeley
May 1, 2015
Table of Contents
Abstract
Introduction
Research Statement
Fixed Stadium-Style Seating
The Americans with Disabilities Act
Equity Vs. Efficiency
Design Proposal
Conclusion
Bibliography
1
1
2
5
13
22
23
35
37
1
EQUITABLE EDUCATIONAL ENVIRONMENTS
UC Berkeley Lecture Halls and the Role of The Americans with Disabilities Act
Abstract
Through the lens of two case study lecture halls on the University of California Berkeley
campus, the study outlines the origins and flaws of fixed tiered auditorium seating ubiquitous in
large capacity classrooms. Interviews and observation of the case study auditoriums expose
failure to comply with federal design standards in addition to disregard for basic environmental
needs of users. Lack of flexibility and design focused on a single body type contribute to
discomfort in these settings. The paper tackles the dilemma of equity versus efficiency,
proposing a modular spiral ramped auditorium design as a cost-effective solution to the
multiplicity of issues associated with standard lecture hall design.
Introduction
The University of California at Berkeley is one of the forebears of the Disability Rights
Movement. As the first university to admit a student with a serious disability, the first city to
install a curb cut, and first community to build a Center for Independent Living, Berkeley is
famed for its progressive approach to disability. Today, Berkeley attracts a large number of
students with disabilities, many of whom are still turned away by other institutions. As such, UC
Berkeley is a leader among universities in providing services to students with disabilities.
Nonetheless, the University of California Berkeley still has a long way to go before it is equally
accessible to all students. In the 25th year of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), this
paper evaluates the efficacy of the ADA’s regulatory changes in a critical setting.
2
Research Statement
Through the lens of two case study lecture halls on the University of California Berkeley
campus, the study evaluates flaws in auditorium design conventions. The case study sites chosen
are auditoriums with 200 to 300 seats: 145 Dwinelle Hall, completed in 1952 before the passage
of the ADA and 245 Li Ka Shing, completed in 2011 after the passage of the original legislation,
but before the revisions to the Act and accessibility guidelines came into effect.
145 Dwinelle Hall is 2,392 square feet with 217 seats. 245 Li Ka Shing is 6,525 square
feet, accommodating 297 seats. These two are among the largest lecture halls on campus, built
with a similar design strategy nearly sixty years apart. Similar courses are taught in the
auditoriums, including both science and humanities classes, to large groups of students. Both
auditoriums face south in halls built on a grade. The campus map provided in Figure 31
demonstrates their geographic proximity.
145 Dwinelle and 245 Li Ka Shing will be evaluated quantitatively based on the ADA
Checklist for Readily Achievable Barrier Removal and qualitatively through one-on-one
interviews with frequent users—namely, students in classes held in the halls in question.
Relevant literature on the subject will help to better understand the issues being considered,
including the reasons for and intentions of fixed stadium-style seating in auditorium design. The
paper culminates in a design proposal that offers solutions and serves as a vehicle to further
expose failures of standard lecture hall design.
1 “Interactive Campus Map,” University of California Berkeley (2014).
3
Figure 1. 145 Dwinelle Hall Seating Plan.
Figure 2. 245 Li Ka Shing Center Seating Plan.
4
Figure 3. University of California Berkeley Campus Map.
5
Fixed Stadium-Style Seating
This paper will use the term, “fixed seating,” interchangeably with “stadium-style
seating,” “auditorium seating,” and “tiered seating.” The use of these terms will facilitate the
intention of this paper, which is to examine in context the general seating structure that is
commonly found in assembly areas such as theaters, sports arenas, and lecture halls, including
auditoriums in Dwinelle Hall and Li Ka Shing Center.
The Ancient Greeks pioneered the stadium-style seating structure in stadia known as
“Hippodromes.” These ‘U’-shaped arenas were dug into hillsides in order to construct seating
tiers for spectators around the perimeter. Later, the Romans expanded on this structure. The
Romans established a social hierarchy within the tiered seating structure of the Colosseum,
taking greater care with and employing more valuable materials in the construction of seats in
lower levels that inherently have better sightlines. As the diagram in Figure 5 illustrates, these
lower seating areas were reserved for senators and nobility, with the seats furthest from the arena
allocated to women and slaves.2
Stadium-style seating was introduced to movie theaters in the mid-1900’s to improve the
viewing experience with better sightlines to increasingly large movie screens.3 In addition to
enhancing users’ experience, designers have various practical reasons for choosing tiered seating
of this style: most importantly, its space efficiency and corresponding cost efficiency. Space
2 Brett Jenaway, "Evolution of Stadiums: A Study in the Design and Construction of Ancient and
Modern Stadia," (2013), 27.
3 Felicia H. Ellsworth, "The Worst Seats in the House: Stadium-Style Movie Theaters and the
Americans with Disabilities Act," The University of Chicago Law Review 71, no. 3 (Chicago:
Summer 2004), 1109.
6
Figure 4. Present day site of the Hippodrome in the ancient Greek city of Aphrodisias.2
7
Figure 5. Cross section of the Colosseum, illustrating seating hierarchy.2
8
efficiency is achieved by aligning rows of standardized fixed chairs are on successive steps rising
from a lower focal point—generally either a stage or a screen. Stepped seating enables the chairs
to be placed closer together than in sloped auditoriums where the aisles must be wider to retain
lines of sight in rows further back from the focal point.
Stadium-style theaters are lauded for having “revolutionized the movie-going
experience.” American Multi-Cinema Entertainment Inc. (AMC) was the first to bring stadium-
style seating to its theaters, declaring that the design guaranteed that “all seats” were the “best in
the house.” 4 Contradicting this propaganda, the United States Department of Justice (DOJ)
contends that because most stadium-style theaters limit wheelchair seating to non-stadium
sections in the front—areas that provide “universally poor and uncomfortable viewing angles”—
lines of sight are not comparable to those provided to able-bodied users, violating the standards
of the Americans with Disabilities Act, discussed in later sections.5
The original “Nickelodeon” was the first type of indoor space used for motion pictures.
In the early 1900’s, these simple theaters were erected in converted storefronts and charged five
cents for admission. Their makeshift origins unintentionally eliminated many of the accessibility
4 Laura K. McKibbin, “The ADA Takes On the Movie Industry: Do the Disabled Have a Right
to the Best Seats in the House?” The University of San Francisco Law Review 38 (San Francisco:
2003-2004), 831.
5 Elsworth, “The Worst Seats,” 1110.
9
issues we have in today’s standard auditoriums. Figures 66 and 77 illustrate this advantage: the
renovated storefronts bring people in from right off the street, with no stairs involved. Early
seating was not tiered, which, in theory, would allow more seating choices for people with
mobility impairments. However, both old and new movie theater designs lack consideration for a
full range of users. In the first Nickelodeon theaters chairs occupied all available space, leaving
no room for alternative seating. The key problems created by fixed auditorium seating persist
with little progress or improvement in the present day.
Sociologist Donna Huse credits Michel Foucault with revealing the connection between
the interior architecture of the mass institution and “issues of uniform behavior, discipline, and
mathematical calculability.”8 Foucault identifies the central feature of this connection as “the
assignment of individual location….to each individual his own place and each place its
individual.”9 He references Jeremy Bentham’s Panopticon design as the origin of such a concept.
The Panopticon was a design for factories and later prisons and schools in which “every work
station was visible to a central authority and every worker was subjected to surveillance without
6 William James, Auditorium Theater in Toronto, Black and White Photographic Print, Fonds
1244, Item 320C (Toronto, CA: City of Toronto Archives, 1910).
7 Alfred H. Saunders, ed., “First Neckelodeon in the States,” Black and White Photographic
Print, The Moving Picture World 1, no. 39 (New York: The World Photographic Publishing
Company, November 30, 1907).
8 Donna Huse, "Restructuring and the Physical Context: Designing Learning
Environments," Children's Environments 12, no. 3 (September 01, 1995), 296.
9 Michel Foucault, Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison (New York: Pantheon Books,
1977).
10
Figure 6. Photograph of the theater at 382 Queen Street West. Opened as the Auditorium in 1908, it was renamed first in 1913 as the Avenue Theater and again in 1915 as the Mary Pickford Theater. The photo advertises the film, The Heroine of Mafeking, which was released December 11, 1909, so it was likely taken in early 1910.
11
Figure 7. Photograph of the interior of Harry Davis’ theater on Smithfield Street between Fifth Avenue and Diamond, Pittsburg, Pa. In what was formerly a store, Davis opened the first theater in America devoted exclusively to moving pictures in June 1905. The photo was originally published in the November 1907 issue of The Moving Picture World and is now available online through The Internet Archive.
12
knowing whether he was observed or not.” Individuals in these institutions would be confined to
a physical location where they were tasked with performing controlled activities that would
contribute to “the engineered output of the institution.”10 Educational institutions bear some
resemblance to factories in terms of optimizing output with minimal expense. The university
packs rooms to capacity so that they pay for a single instructor for as large a group of students as
possible. Seats are tightly spaced to avoid new and costly construction required for expansion
and renovations. This is the most cost-efficient way to have a large number of students obtain the
knowledge necessary to be successful in the work force, with the hope that they will give back to
the university. This economic analysis may seem a grim interpretation of educational institutions,
but is important to understanding the factors at play in the design of university buildings.
Awareness of university goals is principal to offering solutions. As such, a primary focus of this
paper, in addition to improving the experience of the student user, is also to increase the
efficiency of seating structures in order to making the design proposal appealing to
administrators.
In The Chair: Rethinking Culture, Body, and Design, Galen Cranz, Professor of
Architecture in the College of Environmental Design at the University of California Berkeley,
provides evidence in support of her hypothesis that chairs and sedentary culture are detrimental
to health. Cranz cites a massage therapist who attests that under-use contributes to significant
muscle pain and spasms that, if left untreated, can be disabling. She says, “As a taxpayer and the
mother of a child in primary school, I am disturbed that sitting still is still considered an essential
10 Huse, “Designing Learning Environments,” 296.
13
component of public education. We should be teaching our children the habit of shaking loose
five minutes in every hour, from the insidious vice grip of the common chair.”11
Carolyn Frances, a graduate student of Cranz’s, concluded in an environmental design
research project “schoolrooms should offer choice, control, and change (with constancy).” The
reformers of an educational restructuring movement in the nineteen-eighties and nineties agreed
with Frances’s conclusion, challenging what they viewed as “the model of assembly-line control
in disciplinary mass schooling.” Reflecting Frances’s research, they sought freedom of body
movement and interaction with others in a classroom setting.12
The design proposal serves to solve three overarching issues of fixed stadium-style
seating, the first being the seating structure’s inherent inequitable use of space. Second, research
shows fixed tiered seating can have negative effects on health, and that a lack of options and
adaptability contributes to a destructive cultural pattern. Perhaps the most compelling flaw is the
traditional stadium-style seating structure’s failure to physically promote effective learning
environments.
The Americans with Disabilities Act
The Americans with Disabilities Act (hereafter referred to as the “ADA”) was signed into
law on July 26, 1990 by President George H. W. Bush and amended effective January 1, 2009.
The Act is composed of five Titles, each affording protections against discrimination of
11 Galen Cranz, The Chair: Rethinking Culture, Body, and Design (New York: W.W. Norton,
1998), 100.
12 Cranz, The Chair, 198-199.
14
Americans with disabilities across a range of areas from employment in Title I to access to
public entities and accommodations in Titles II and III.
The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) enforces the compliance of public entities to Title
II regulations, which include physical access described by the ADA Accessibility Guidelines
(ADAAG) outlined originally in 1991 and updated in 2010.
In the drafting of civil rights legislation for people with disabilities, it became clear to
those participating in the discussions that “individuals with disabilities have been subjected to
widespread and severe discrimination” and that “such persons are an extremely disadvantaged
and underprivileged segment of society.”13 Education has been referred to as “the great
equalizer:” an essential part of The American Dream. It is therefore especially important that the
ADAAG be successful in leveling the playing field in educational institutions. All improvements
in breaking down barriers to admission at universities can be undone if students with disabilities
face significant difficulties accessing classrooms and effectively learning the material presented
in them. Multiple studies have found a strong correlation between seating location and
participation in a classroom setting. For instance, a study of classrooms with straight rows in
which introductory psychology discussions were held found that students in the front participated
more than students in the back and students seated in the center of each row participated more
than students at the sides of each row.14 In another, two sections of the same class were analyzed,
13 Robert L. Burgdorf Jr., “Americans with Disabilities Act: Analysis and Implications of a
Second-Generation Civil Rights Statute,” Harvard Civil Rights-Civil Liberties Law Review 26
(Cambridge, MA: 1991), 426.
14 Robert Sommer, "Classroom Ecology," The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science 3, no. 4
(1967), 489-503.
15
allowing seating choice in one class and assigning seating locations in the other. In both settings,
students in the middle of the classroom received higher grades and enjoyed the course more than
students seated at the sides.15 Designers rarely take these findings into consideration when
determining the dispersion of wheelchair spaces. Without a full range of seating options,
wheelchair users are limited from some potentially beneficial seating locations. The forthcoming
design proposal, in contrast, eliminates this inequity. All seating options are accessible regardless
of ability, ensuring that potential users can take advantage of any and all seating locations in the
auditoriums.
Though 145 Dwinelle and 245 Li Ka Shing were designed before the current accessibility
standards were officially published, for the purposes of this study, it is most valuable to compare
the sites to those standards because they are the bare minimum for access today. By law, the
auditoriums were required to be brought to the 2010 standards in 2012. The ADA Accessibility
Guidelines (ADAAG) fall under Title II of the ADA and are just one part of a larger Federal
Civil Rights Law. At the state level, Chapter 11B of the 2013 California Building Code (CBC)
concerns accessibility to public buildings and strives to set standards that mandate equal or
greater accessibility than the federal ADAAG. The result is mainly overlapping standards, but
some discrepancies do exist, leaving it in the hands of the designer to choose the more accessible
of the two guidelines. The ADAAG and Chapter 2 of the CBC define assembly areas as follows:
ASSEMBLY AREA. [DSA-AC] A building or facility, or portion thereof, used for the
purpose of entertainment, educational or civic gatherings, or similar purposes. For the
15 Lloyd Stires, "Classroom Seating Location, Student Grades, and Attitudes Environment or
Self-Selection?" Environment and Behavior 12, no. 2 (1980), 241-254.
16
purposes of these requirements, assembly areas include, but are not limited to,
classrooms, lecture halls, courtrooms, public meeting rooms, public hearing rooms,
legislative chambers, motion picture houses, auditoria, theaters, playhouses, dinner
theaters, concert halls, centers for the performing arts, amphitheaters, arenas stadiums,
grandstands or convention centers.16
Clearly, 145 Dwinelle and 245 Li Ka Shing fall into the category of “assembly areas” as defined
by both relevant codes. Looking at assembly areas specifically, there are a few main points that
are important to understand regarding design requirements for auditoriums like those in Dwinelle
Hall and Li Ka Shing Center. Table 11B-221.2.1.1 expresses the minimum number of required
wheelchair spaces based on the number of total seats in an assembly area. For large lecture halls
like 145 Dwinelle and 245 Li Ka Shing, which fall into the category of 151-300 seats, a
minimum of five wheelchair spaces are required. Wheelchair spaces are mandated to be an
integral part of the seating plan, provide comparable lines of sight and therefore be dispersed so
that there are “choices of seating locations and viewing angles that are substantially equivalent
to, or better than, the choices of seating locations and viewing angles available to all other
spectators.”17 Illustrated by seating floor plans in Figures 1 and 2, 145 Dwinelle has one
dedicated wheelchair space at the back of the lecture with a poor view of the stage, and is
therefore not in compliance with the ADAAG. 245 Li Ka Shing, in contrast, has six dedicated
wheelchair spaces, relatively dispersed throughout the auditorium.
16 "Chapter 2: Definitions," 2013 California Building Code (2013), 47.
17 “Chapter 11B: Accessibility to Public Buildings, Public Accommodations, Commercial
Building and Publicly Funded Housing,” 2013 California Building Code (2013), 534.
17
It is important to understand that full compliance with the ADA Standards for Accessible
Design is only required for new construction and alterations. The Americans with Disabilities
Act Checklist for Readily Achievable Barrier Removal helps to identify accessibility problems
and solutions in existing facilities. The checklist serves as a guide to help building owners
determine what may be readily achievable and suggests solutions to barrier problems.18 While
245 Li Ka Shing fulfills all minimum requirements of the Readily Achievable Barrier Removal
Checklist, 145 Dwinelle fails to meet requirements under Priority 2: Access to Goods and
Services. The section for Seats, Tables, and Counters (ADAAG 4.2, 3.32, 7.2) asks, “Are the
spaces for wheelchair seating distributed throughout?” Suggested solutions include rearranging
tables to allow room for wheelchairs in seating areas throughout the areas and removing some
fixed seating. In an already cramped space like 145 Dwinelle, the main question is what is
“readily achievable?” The DOJ defines readily achievable as “easily accomplishable and able to
be carried out without much difficulty or expense.” Its definition further states that five factors
should be considered to determine if a modification is readily achievable:
(1) The nature and cost of the action needed under this part;
(2) The overall financial resources of the site or sites involved in the action; the number
of persons employed at the site; the effect on expenses and resources; legitimate
safety requirements that are necessary for safe operation, including crime prevention
measures; or the impact otherwise of the action upon the operation of the site;
18 "The Americans with Disabilities Act Checklist for Readily Achievable Barrier Removal,"
Adaptive Environments Center, Inc. and Barrier Free Environments, Inc. (Washington, DC:
Dept. of Justice, 1995).
18
(3) The geographic separateness, and the administrative or fiscal relationship of the site
or sites in question to any parent corporation or entity;
(4) If applicable, the overall financial resources of any parent corporation or entity; the
overall size of the parent corporation or entity with respect to the number of its
employees; the number, type, and location of its facilities; and
(5) If applicable, the type of operation or operations of any parent corporation or entity,
including the composition, structure and functions of the workforce of the parent
corporation or entity.19
This vague definition leaves room for subjective determination. Whether something is readily
achievable is one of the most contested issues in ADA public accommodations lawsuits. Given
the resources of the University of California and the frequency of use of this particular lecture
hall, it is highly likely that the addition of a couple more wheelchair spaces, including some in
the front of the classroom is readily achievable. The failure of 145 Dwinelle to comply with
minimum requirements clearly demonstrates that Title II of the ADA is not being enforced at the
level it needs to be. Even though 245 Li Ka Shing fulfills ADA requirements, interviews show
that the auditorium design leaves some of their needs unmet. There is still a level of social and
physical exclusion in providing only six options in a 300-person lecture hall. Not a single one of
the wheelchair spaces is located in the middle of the classroom and four are next to the very last
seat in a row.
One informant who uses an electric wheelchair spoke about the narrow door and lack of
automatic opener to 145 Dwinelle. In regards to the accessible space, she said, “Often times I sit
19 "ADA Title III Regulation 28 CFR Part 36," (Washington, DC: Dept. of Justice, September
15, 2010).
19
next to the DSP table because it’s difficult for me to sit at the table.” There is not enough space
for her power chair to fit into the spot where the Disabled Students Program (DSP) has installed
a designated accessible desk with a movable chair, shown in Figure 8. She noted that every time
she goes to class the chair, which she cannot move on her own, blocks the table. Observational
research confirms this, and notes that the desk is most often occupied by non-disabled students
drawn by the larger desk space and comparative ease of access over the tightly packed fixed
seating. While the student appreciates that the room is accessible from the ground floor and
does not require use of an elevator, she cited lack of access to the front of the classroom as an
issue with this specific auditorium. In order to get to the first floor she would have to go around
the building and take the elevator to the basement, but then runs into stairs leading up to the
lecture hall. The student reported, “When I was taking a class in the lecture hall, it was difficult
for me to hear and see my professor because I was sitting in the back.”20 Disability Access
Specialist at the UC Berkeley DSP, Daniel Kodmur, pointed out that this issue with the physical
layout of the classroom is especially important given the frequency of students with multiple
disabilities, such as low vision in addition to mobility impairments.21
Beyond the ADA is the concept of Universal Design, defined as an approach to designing
products and environments to be accessed, understood and used by all people to the greatest
extent possible without need for modification in the widest possible range of situations.22 Rather
20 Interview by Author (April 27, 2015).
21 Interview by Author (September 30, 2015).
22 Ron Mace, G. Hardie, and J. Plaice, "Accessible Environments: Toward Universal Design,"
Design Interventions: Toward A More Humane Architecture (New York: Van Nostrand
Reinhold, 1991), 156.
20
Figure 8. DSP table in 145 Dwinelle Hall.
21
than a checklist of minimum requirements to be fulfilled, Universal Design is a broad term
encompassing design theory that considers the environmental needs of all users. Universal
Design “encourages an integrative approach rather than multiple separate solutions.”23 The seven
principles of Universal Design are as follows:
(1) Equitable Use
(2) Flexibility in Use
(3) Simple and Intuitive Use -
(4) Perceptible Information
(5) Tolerance for Error
(6) Low Physical Effort
(7) Size and Space for Approach and Use24
Principle 1, Equitable Use, implies the design is useful to people with diverse abilities. A step
further, it should provide identical means of use for all users whenever possible and equivalent
use if not possible. Flexibility in Use means that the design accommodates a wide range of
individual preferences and abilities by providing choice and adaptability. For instance, both
right- and left-handed users should be accommodated. Simple and Intuitive Use, the third
principle, seeks to eliminate complexity to be sure all users can easily understand how to interact
with the design. Perceptible Information is a component of Simple and Intuitive Use, ensuring
that the design communicates any necessary information clearly regardless of the users’ sensory
23 Polly Welch, "Chapter 1: What Is Universal Design?" Strategies for Teaching Universal
Design (Boston: Adaptive Environments, 1995).
24 Molly Follette Story, James L. Mueller, and Ronald L. Mace, "The Universal Design File:
Designing for People of All Ages and Abilities" (1998).
22
abilities. Pictorial, verbal and tactile modes should all be utilized. Tolerance for Error minimizes
undesirable actions and eliminates hazards through fail-safe features or provides warnings. The
sixth principle, Low Physical Effort, suggests minimization of designs that require repetitive
actions and sustained physical effort, encouraging simple and comfortable use. Some potential
users either become fatigued easily or have different abilities, making this consideration
important to designing appealing environments. Finally, Principle 7 emphasizes the need for Size
and Space for Approach and Use, meaning space is provided for approach, reach, manipulation
and other means of use regardless of body size, posture, or mobility.25 Environments and
products designed with Universal Design in mind should fit all of the above criteria. These
principles should be considered from the start of the design process to avoid ADA compliance
problems later on and make environments enjoyable for all users.
Equity Vs. Efficiency
A common dilemma for architects is the choice between equity and efficiency. UC
Berkeley’s campus landscape makes finding a balance between the two an exceptional challenge.
Attention is paid to the preservation of open space and at the same time, topographical conditions
are challenges in construction. Space efficiency and accessibility conflict from the start—the
steepest rise-to-run ratios allowable for accessible ramps is 1:12, while stairs can be as steep as
1:1.6.26 Wide-open, sprawling spaces are ideal for wheelchair users, but not necessarily feasible
with the given environmental conditions and cost constraints of a publicly funded university.
25 “The 7 Principles,” Centre for Excellence in Universal Design (Dublin, IE: National Disability
Authority, 2014).
26 2010 ADA Standards for Accessible Design (Washington, D.C.: Dept. of Justice, 2010).
23
With greater thought and creativity, designs can be both equitable and efficient.
Architects should embrace accessible design as an intriguing challenge and not as a burden.
Greater constraints often result in better designs and more creativity. David Sturt, author of
Great Work: How to Make a Difference People Love, collected data of award-winning work
from 1.7 million people and found that “people who create new value on the job are often
inspired by their constraints.” Architect Frank Gehry agrees, stating that limitations and
constraints are what really inspire his work.27 A willingness to see universal access as a positive
rather than a negative constraint will be vital in the future, as the aging population continues to
grow. Balancing equity and efficiency is not a lost cause: the following proposal is both space-
efficient and accessible.
Design Proposal
To best illustrate the flaws in current design conventions, the author proposes a modular
design: a spiral ramp edged by bench seating with the stage in the center. The ideal lecture hall
facilitates learning by being accessible to all users, providing a necessary level of comfort and
accommodation, and fits a large number of students while being space efficient. Galen Cranz
writes, “Simple forms usually facilitate more choice than complex ones.”28 Choice and flexibility
are crucial to designing with all types of users in mind.
27 David Sturt, "Creativity: How Constraints Drive Genius," Forbes (July 12, 2013).
28 Cranz, The Chair, 199.
24
Figure 9. Lecture Hall Design Proposal - Research Poster submitted to The College of Environmental Design Circus. March 6, 2015.
25
Figure 10. Design proposal in plan and section.
26
Figure 11. Graphical illustration of spiral r=17θ/(6π) from 5π to 14π applied to design proposal.
27
The spiral form is used in the most well known accessible buildings. A spiral ramp,
shown in Figure 12,29 wraps around the entirety of Frank Lloyd Wright’s Guggenheim Museum
in New York City, making passage between exhibits seamless. The transitional ramp through the
gallery is further illustrated in Figure 13.30 The Ed Robert’s Campus is known for the iconic red
spiral ramp in Figure 14.31 The ramp is the preferred method of vertical circulation by people
with and without disabilities.
The author proposes a spiral ramp 6 feet wide with one foot dedicated to divided bench
seating. The spiral follows the polar equation r=17θ/(6π). Demonstrated in the proposal from 5π
to 14π, the structure is 77’x74’, making it 830 square feet smaller than 245 Li Ka Shing. The
proposed design can accommodate 380 students—more than all but four of the largest lecture
halls on UC Berkeley’s campus and 83 more than 245 Li Ka Shing. The continuous bench is
divided into 2-foot sections on hinges that can be propped up or tucked down to be more flexible.
With this fully accessible design, every single seat has the potential to be converted to a
wheelchair accessible space. Students can stand or sit on the floor, or push seats down to
accommodate wheelchair users. In turn, this means that if there are no wheelchair users present
for a class period, no space is left unused. Below the seat panel is approximately one square foot
29 William Hall, “The Guggenheim, New York, Frank Lloyd Wright,” Digital image (Disegno
Daily, September 12, 2012).
30 David Heald, “The Solomon R. Guggenheim Foundation, New York,” Digital image
(Archilovers).
31 Barbara L. Stenberg, “Ed Roberts Campus Berkeley,” Digital image (California Travel
Insider).
28
Figure 12. Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum. 5th Avenue, New York, NY. Designed by Frank Lloyd Wright, the museum is home to a continuously expanding collection of Impressionist, Post-Impressionist, Modern and Contemporary Art.
29
Figure 13. Gallery perspective of the Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum in New York City.
30
Figure 14. Ed Roberts Campus, Berkeley, CA. A universally designed campus, The Ed Roberts Campus houses the offices of collaborating organizations serving the community of people with disabilities.
31
of storage space for backpacks and other items, preventing such items from blocking pathways,
as they often do in lecture halls like 145 Dwinelle and 245 Li Ka Shing.
A power outage on April 24th affected a large portion of the UC Berkeley campus. Robert
Reich’s Wealth and Poverty class moved outdoors from Wheeler Auditorium with a capacity of
705.32 The photograph in Figure 1533 shows that students, without the constraints of an inflexible
auditorium design, naturally formed a ring around the professor in order to better hear the
lecture. With the professor in the middle of a circular auditorium, more students will have front
seats and everyone will be closer to the professor, facilitating more engagement and interaction
between students and instructors. In this arrangement, students will face each other in addition to
the instructor. Students interviewed spoke of multiple cases of attending class for an entire
semester without noticing that a friend of theirs was also taking the course. The spiral form
resolves the issue of students having very little contact with other students save those seated
directly next to them and backs of heads in front of them. The arrangement challenges professors
to mix up their lecturing style so that an interactive classroom is the norm rather than an
exception reserved for classes taught by charismatic professors like Robert Reich. Students will
welcome the unconventional structure and will undoubtedly be more excited about attending
class in a space radically different from what they have grown accustomed to.
32 Haley G. Massara, "Large Portion of UC Berkeley Loses Power Midday Friday," The Daily
Californian (Berkeley, CA: April 24, 2015).
33 Megan Messerly, “UC Berkeley Professor Robert Reich Teaching His Wealth and Poverty
Class Outside Wheeler Hall,” Digital Image, The Daily Californian (Berkeley, CA: April 24,
2015).
32
Figure 15. Robert Reich conducts class outside Wheeler Hall during a power outage affecting the UC Berkeley campus.
33
In multiple interviews UC Berkeley students complained about having to squeeze past
other seated users to get to an open seat, climbing over backpacks, knocking over water bottles,
and, “rubbing elbows all over the place,” as one student put it.34 Not only does the ramped design
allow ample passing space to minimize uncomfortable contact, the benches create step-like
platforms that will allow users to bypass the spiral ramp and maneuver into open seats from any
angle, making finding a seat less disruptive than it is in traditional fixed row seating
arrangements. The spacious ramp and continuous bench will make use of the space simple and
intuitive for users with visual impairments. Knowing that the auditorium is a spiral with the
professor at end in the lower center will help blind users visualize the space. In addition to being
easy to understand, the design proposal is easy to navigate and eliminates the need to maneuver
through narrow aisles of seated students with a cane or service animal.
The bench height ranges from one to two feet, giving a variety of options for users that
standard stadium-style seating is missing. The bench will remain perfectly flat, with only the
vertical distance between the ground and the seat changing as the ramp slopes. This will
make it more comfortable for people whose legs are above or below standard lengths. Cranz
writes that standard seat height is eighteen inches from the floor, but this height is unsuitable for
all but “some sort of mythical ‘average’ body, which turns out to be a tall male body. So for all
children, most women, and a healthy percentage of men, chairs are too high.” If a chair is too
high for the user, the seat cuts under the knee and puts upward pressure on thigh muscles, forcing
the tissue to take on a load-bearing function it is not meant to have. On the other hand, if the
knees are higher than the hip sockets, “that jams your hip joint, and worse, reverses the natural
forward curve of [the] lower back, stressing the discs.” She allows, “seventeen inches might be a
34 Interview by Author (December 14, 2014).
34
safe compromise, but multiple sizes or adjustable heights are preferable.”35 Although the tall
male body may be the average that chair height is designed for, the seats in 145 Dwinelle
and 245 Li Ka Shing are spaced so close together that even at the right height for a tall user,
limited leg room can still make the seats uncomfortable. Complaints about not fitting into
lecture hall seats were consistent in interviews with taller students.36 The proposed design
will have five feet of legroom available, except when other students are passing by the seats. The
spiral design will make finding a comfortable seat easy and active—users can simply slide
along the bench until they find spaces that best fit their bodies.
The benches will be hardwood, with sliding panels fitted inside them to be pulled out and
used as desks. They are intended as a perch for students, encouraging better posture and greater
attentiveness. Cranz supports this, writing that “an overpadded chair forces the sit bones to rock
in the padding rather than make contact with a stable surface, thereby forcing the flesh in the butt
and thighs to bear weight.”37 An added advantage of the proposed bench seating is the potential
to lie down over multiple spaces, uninhibited by chair arms. Another possible adaptation is to
have students who wish to stand rather than sit collapse seats in the back of the room for standing
room that would not block the views of seated students.
The desk panels will be customizable and less constricting than standard desks attached
to fixed seating. Additionally, the panels are much larger than the desks found in 145 Dwinelle
and 245 Li Ka Shing. Students complained that they were unable to fit both a test and a test
booklet on their desk, making it unnecessarily difficult to take an exam in one of these lecture
35 Cranz, The Chair, 102-103.
36 Interview by Author (October 24, 2014).
37 Cranz, The Chair, 204.
35
halls.38 Adaptability is the most essential feature of the proposed seating structure and any other
designs that seek to eliminate inequities.
The proposed design has the flexibility to be applied to any sized site. Lengths of the
spiral ramp should be added or removed depending on the space available. Ample exits for fire
safety must be included in the revised design according to the situation. Ramp and seating width
should remain unchanged, but the end of the bench at the center can be added to or subtracted
from to provide the ideal amount of space for the stage.
Conclusion
The Americans with Disabilities Act was a giant step forward for people with disabilities,
but a symbolic one: 25 years later, it is time to reevaluate its efficacy. Two separate issues should
be considered: one, whether the accessibility guidelines are in line with the goals the Act seeks to
accomplish and if so, whether the accessibility guidelines are being met in the physical
environment. This paper evaluates just two of an immeasurable amount of assembly areas that
fall under only a portion of a single title of the five-title federal ADA. The hope is that the
research can contribute to a more comprehensive study.
Designing equitable educational environments is of the utmost importance given the
inescapable link between education and opportunity. Designed with inherently inequitable fixed
stadium-style seating 145 Dwinelle Hall has only one wheelchair accessible space—four below
the ADAAG minimum—and 245 Li Ka Shing Center has six dispersed wheelchair spaces—one
above the minimum. Built sixty years apart, both halls have limited accessible seating and fail to
follow Universal Design guidelines. Many public accommodations go unregulated and remain
38 Interview by Author (April 21, 2015).
36
inaccessible. Buildings that fulfill a checklist fail to meet many of the environmental needs of
users. Designing for all types of users, sometimes with conflicting needs, is not easy. However,
the wealth of constraints this challenge presents can spur creativity and lead to better design
overall.
Solutions to the challenge of lecture hall design should have four goals. The primary goal
is to produce effective learning environments so that the setting enhances the learning ability of
students rather than inhibiting it in any physical way. The second goal of healthy learning
environments is related, with special attention to medical considerations. In order to be
implemented, design solutions must be space and cost efficient, while meeting the final goal of
universal design to ensure lecture halls are accessible to all users and appropriately equitable.
37
Bibliography
2010 ADA Standards for Accessible Design. Washington, D.C.: Department of Justice, 2010.
"ADA Title III Regulation 28 CFR Part 36." Washington, DC: Department of Justice, September
15, 2010.
Burgdorf, Robert L. Jr. “Americans with Disabilities Act: Analysis and Implications of a
Second-Generation Civil Rights Statute.” Harvard Civil Rights-Civil Liberties Law
Review 26. Cambridge, MA: 1991.
"Chapter 2: Definitions." 2013 California Building Code. 2013.
“Chapter 11B: Accessibility to Public Buildings, Public Accommodations, Commercial Building
and Publicly Funded Housing.” 2013 California Building Code. 2013.
Cranz, Galen. The Chair: Rethinking Culture, Body, and Design. New York: W.W. Norton,
1998.
Ellsworth, Felicia H. "The Worst Seats in the House: Stadium-Style Movie Theaters and the
Americans with Disabilities Act," in The University of Chicago Law Review 71, no. 3.
Chicago: Summer 2004.
Foucault, Michel. Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison. New York: Pantheon Books,
1977.
Hall, William. “The Guggenheim, New York, Frank Lloyd Wright.” Digital image. Disegno
Daily. September 12, 2012.
Heald, David. “The Solomon R. Guggenheim Foundation, New York.” Digital image.
Archilovers.
Huse, Donna. "Restructuring and the Physical Context: Designing Learning
Environments." Children's Environments 12, no. 3. September 01, 1995.
38
“Interactive Campus Map.” University of California Berkeley, 2014.
James, William. Auditorium Theater in Toronto. Black and White Photographic Print. Fonds
1244, Item 320C. Toronto, CA: City of Toronto Archives, 1910.
Jenaway, Brett. "Evolution of Stadiums: A Study in the Design and Construction of Ancient and
Modern Stadia." 2013.
Mace, Ron, G. Hardie, and J. Plaice. "Accessible Environments: Toward Universal Design."
Design Interventions: Toward A More Humane Architecture. New York: Van Nostrand
Reinhold, 1991.
Massara, Haley G. "Large Portion of UC Berkeley Loses Power Midday Friday." The Daily
Californian. Berkeley, CA: April 24, 2015.
McKibbin, Laura K. “The ADA Takes On the Movie Industry: Do the Disabled Have a Right to
the Best Seats in the House?” in The University of San Francisco Law Review 38. San
Francisco: 2003-2004.
Messerly, Megan. “UC Berkeley Professor Robert Reich Teaching His Wealth and Poverty Class
Outside Wheeler Hall.” Digital Image. The Daily Californian. Berkeley, CA: April 24,
2015.
Saunders, Alfred H., ed. “First Neckelodeon in the States.” Black and White Photographic Print.
The Moving Picture World 1 no. 39. New York: The World Photographic Publishing
Company, November 30, 1907.
Sommer, Robert. "Classroom Ecology." The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science 3, no. 4.
1967.
Stires, Lloyd. "Classroom Seating Location, Student Grades, and Attitudes Environment or Self-
Selection?" Environment and Behavior 12, no. 2. 1980.
39
Stenberg, Barbara L. “Ed Roberts Campus Berkeley.” Digital image. California Travel Insider.
Story, Molly Follette, James L. Mueller, and Ronald L. Mace. "The Universal Design File:
Designing for People of All Ages and Abilities." 1998.
Sturt, David. "Creativity: How Constraints Drive Genius." Forbes. July 12, 2013.
"The Americans with Disabilities Act Checklist for Readily Achievable Barrier
Removal." Adaptive Environments Center, Inc. and Barrier Free Environments, Inc.
Washington, DC: Dept. of Justice, 1995.
Welch, Polly. "Chapter 1: What Is Universal Design?" Strategies for Teaching Universal Design.
Boston: Adaptive Environments, 1995.