No way in

The legislation in question is the Disability Discrimination Act 1995, which states that buildings and the services in them must be accessible to all disabled people. The act is being introduced in three stages, with the second part taking effect from 1 October. It does not specify the types of building covered, only physical features such as staircases, doorways and WCs, and it can be applied retrospectively. This means that many existing buildings will have to be adapted; new buildings should be accessible to people with disabilities as a matter of course.

The problem for consultants is that the requirements of the legislation are not explicitly defined, but this will not be accepted as an excuse for non-compliance. "There is no question that architects should take on board all the requirements of the act that are reasonable," says Neil White, head of the construction and engineering group at solicitor Taylor Joynson Garrett. "If they do nothing, they will be negligent." White says that the same principle applies to surveyors when they advise a client on the purchase of a building. "They should be pointing out to a client what would need to be done to the building to make it comply with the act," he says. "It could also apply to private finance initiative projects, where the building's occupier is providing a service." And it is not only architects and surveyors that should be planning for the future. "It could also apply to fit-out contractors because they will define the way a disabled person uses a building," says White.

Not all buildings will be affected; only those whose occupiers provide "goods, facilities and services" to members of the public. This will include local councils, hotels, banks, solicitors, advice agencies, pubs, theatres, hairdressers, shops, places of worship, courts and doctors' surgeries; even voluntary organisations such as playgroups are covered. In the case of listed buildings, there is an additional requirement to satisfy English Heritage that the alterations do not detract from the building's appearance.

The legislation is being introduced in three stages. The first, which dealt with discrimination at work and placed duties on service providers not to discriminate against disabled people, came into force in 1996. Another becomes law on 1 October 1999, and requires service providers to make reasonable adjustments to the way they provide goods, facilities and services to make them more accessible to disabled people. But the part of the act most relevant to construction is to be enforced five years from now, when service providers will be required to take reasonable steps to remove physical barriers to access. This means a disabled person can ask for an alteration to be made, as long as it is considered reasonable, and can seek enforcement through the courts if the request is ignored.

The government says the five-year timescale is intended to strike a balance between the needs of disabled people and the interests of service providers, who will need time to prepare for what are likely to be substantial adjustments.

But how do you define reasonable? The act does not specify the factors that should be taken into account when determining what is reasonable for a service provider when making an adjustment. "Reasonableness will be based on financial situation, the cost of the works and the extent of the alterations," says Su Peace, an access consultant for engineer Buro Happold.

A government spokesperson said: "We recognise that service providers and their professional advisers would like guidance on the 2004 duties, and we are aiming for it to be published in good time so that service providers can finish their preparations." How will clients know that a scheme produced now will comply with the act? The short answer is that they won't. "There is no certification system associated with the act. A service provider cannot obtain confirmation, written or otherwise, from a consultant stating it complies with legislation, as it can with the Building Regulations," says Mary Noble, a project officer at the Centre for Accessible Environments. "It is the service provider who is responsible in law if the premises do not comply. Until the legislation comes into force and litigation begins, it is impossible to predict accurately the full implications of the act." The government admits that some service providers will incur costs. It estimates that the bill for physical alterations alone will be £1.23bn, but adds that the extra business generated by improved accessibility will help to offset some of this. Tim Castle, an associate at multidisciplinary consultant Citex, says: "It is almost impossible to calculate the cost of implementing the act without knowing the type of premises occupied by each service provider and what needs to be done, but it could run into billions of pounds." The repercussions on office accommodation could be severe, says Castle. "Tenants of non-compliant buildings could move to modern, compliant premises to avoid contravening the act if their lease allows them to," he says. But it will be large retailers that will feel the full force of the legislation, and many of them already have schemes in place. J Sainsbury, for example, is incorporating the act into its branding overhaul, which will involve redesigning stores.

The new rules and the old

Up until now, part M of the Building Regulations has been the accessibility standard to which designers work. Consultants need to understand that the two sets of rules are separate and distinct. "Compliance with part M does not necessarily mean compliance with the Disability Discrimination Act, and, conversely, compliance with the act does not require compliance with part M. Part M is to do with the building; the act is to do with the needs of the individual," says Gordon Allan, building control manager at Brighton and Hove Council and vice-president of the Institute of Building Control Officers.

However, in the absence of further guidance on the Disability Discrimination Act, service providers are using part M as a guide to adapting existing buildings. Richard Cullingworth, a partner in surveyor CS2 and an adviser to the RICS on disability, sees this as a problem. "Part M covers only a small proportion of disabled people when compared with the broad definition used under the Disability Discrimination Act," he says.

The act specifies that "a person has a disability for the purposes of the act if he has a physical or mental impairment that has a substantial and long-term adverse effect on his ability to carry out normal day-to-day activities". The Department for Education and Employment says this could include "up to 20% of the population".

Cullingworth says that, in the absence of a new code of practice, troubled consultants will be able to refer to a new British Standard on access to buildings, the first part of which will be put out to public consultation shortly. He adds that this might be used as a yardstick for building access: "It will be a major step forward in designing for the disabled; the only information currently in the public domain is part M." When is the best time for service providers to act? According to Castle, "the sooner the better". He adds: "Just obtaining permission to convert a listed building, for example, can take months, as can securing approvals from highway authorities for a ramp to be positioned on a pavement. As the deadline approaches, costs will rise and it could take longer to gain permission if the buildings are listed or in a conservation area."