Architecture For Special Needs

Architecture
for
Special
Needs

Architecture, during its initial days, was defined by
Marcus Vitruvius Pollio to be based on three rubrics
– Firmitas, Utilitas, and Venustas, meaning strength,
functionality and beauty. Since then, architecture
has been seen to shape habitable spaces around the
world, be it cities or rural shelters, guided by these
three principles. A more precise study of the
different eras – the time before renaissance,
modernism, postmodernism, however reveal an
emphasis and exploration of one of the three
rubrics. For example, firmitas in the postmodern
time as seen in the Pompidou Center by Renzo Piano
or utilitasin the modernist period as realized inthe
Barcelona Pavilion by Mies Van de Rohe.
Subsequently, nowadays architectural practices
focus on issues such as energy efficiency, carbon
reduction, use of environment conscious building
materials, environmental up-gradation through
designed features – one could say the wider
prospects of utilitas based on the current needs.
Innovations on firmitas and venustas through design
is also continuously underway. Yet, the conceptual
evolution of architecture in-itself remains confined
within invisible boundaries, and its core idea
remainsun-evolving. The study of utilitas, although
seemingly evolving, has remained fixated around its
literal translation – utility. Its application has
remained restrained within the perimeters of
functional space organization, not expanding to
understand the broader association - the relation
between an occupier and the occupied space.
The field of study today focuses on how spaces can
be designed through the proper implication of the
three Vitruvian rubrics, often eluding the basic
notion behind its origination - a critical study of how
spaces need to be for different users, how it should
Beyond Labels
Farasha Zaman | Faculty, Dept of Architecture, BRACU
Practitioners in this field, driven by the
economics of the world, have forgotten
that space design is not only for the less-
than-ten-percent of the world’s
population – the monetarily
establishedbut for all.

be for the people. For if we agree that architecture is
a study and exercise of designing for the people,
how then do we restrict its application in labels such
as sustainable architecture, socially responsive
architecture, architecture for the poor or
marginalized, architecture for humanity, community
architecture, architecture for the politically
disturbed, and architecture for the wealthy?
Practitioners in this field, driven by the economics of
the world, have forgotten that space design is not
only for the less-than-ten-percent of the world’s
population – the monetarily established–but for all.
They overlook how individual spaces with varying
functions can help create an optimal attitude, a
sense of unity, refuge or significance, how spectacle
realized when a person experience a thoroughly
designed space can decrease the occurrence of
cerebral instabilities.
Now, if we accept that there is a need to redefine the
role of the emerging builders of tomorrow, how then
do we do so? In light of the world’s evolutionary
trend - where migration previously caused due to
economic influx now has added initiators such as
political disorder and climate change, where fifteen
percent of the world lives with a certain physical
limitation (according to the World Health
Organization), where people have learnt to reside on
water and aspire to live on the moon, how do we
outline the part that the upcoming designers are to
play? Could we start by re-evaluating utilitas, to
acknowledge its more critical perspectives such as
inclusive design and method of designing through
co-creation models? If utilitas is the designing of
functional spaces, could we learn to rethink
functions to be more sensitized towards the global
needs?
Architectural education in most parts of the world,
especially in the third world countries where some
of the major crisis dwells, is still directed by the
ancient strategies. Pupils go through curriculums
which are designed to make them believe in
outdated versions of the postmodernist era. They
learn to believe in supremacy overlooking how those
who do not undergo formal architectural education
can also design wonderfully successful spaces from
their basic needs – for architecture is the design of
shelters, a basic human need. For is it not true that
the igloo was not designed by an architect, but an
Eskimo?
Bangladesh, for instance, is comprised of an
unstable social hierarchy. Over ninety percent of its
population consists of rural communities,
vulnerable urban communities, and the
marginalized. The rest is made up of middle-income
group, and only one percent is made up of the
financially stable - people who can afford any
architectural service offered. Consequently, the
practice is limited within the design of commercial
buildings, vacation houses, multi-storied
apartments or triplex residences primarily among
other expensive projects, decked with a sprinkle of
yet more exorbitant public scale projects here and
there. And this results in a continuous loop of
unsustainable practice – limited scope of work to
costly services to more limited work scope to an
ever-declining market and rising fee structure.
If architecture is taught and practiced the way it is
being done currently, who are then to design for the
ninety percent of this country? How do we hope to
become developed, self-sustaining, and smart? If
non-inclusive design strategies, which does not
reflect on the power of architecture, continues, is
the city nearing and catastrophic end of higher
social imbalance? Design can easily contribute to
exclusion - it is very easy to create places and then
restrict access to them - park which is gated. Yet,
design can also eradicate exclusion – places can be
created with the users and given to them, to be
theirs. Is it too impractical to think of a park
designed by the government with the help of
homeless people, which will then be given to a
community of homeless people who are to maintain
the park thereafter? Is the idea of a garden nurtured
by the physically challenged too non-experiential to
be open to public? The fine line that demarcates
utilitas into its bookish limitations needs to be
blurred out and rethought of. Since research has
established that inspirational architecture has the
power to shape the thinking process - the culture of
the users, it is time that the power be used to
improve lives and not catalyze further social
imbalance. For when Vitruvian included utilitas he
mentioned designing spaces in a way that best fits
the needs of the space. And if the spatial needs
today are place-making, community building,
empowerment and sharing, then contemporary
design processes need rethinking.
The following projects are reflections of some of
these critical design thoughts. They bring to the fore
a discourse of equity, inclusivity and co - creation.
They introduce a time for us to create a wider scope
for practices based on critical visions such as equity
– the understanding that deprived communities are
not in need of improved housing but more in need
for neutrality within our personalities; the

believethat gender is only a biological difference;
and that design needs to be inclusive, collaborative
and open to multidisciplinary dialogue. They
highlight on the responsibilities that emerging
architects have towards their societies and in
making their cities livable for all – their cities to be
beyond labels.

1
The word ‘special’ originated from Latin species that
refers to ‘appearance’. In English, ‘special’ refers to
something that is better or different from what is usual.
The term ‘need’ (Germanic origin: not) refers to ‘danger’ or
Historically, architecture as a profession served
general needs of the powerful and elites. Although in
the mid-20th
century few western architects, such as
Aldo Van Eyck, showed high sensitivity to differential
social needs, developments in standardization and
consumer-centric designs in the late 20th
and early
21st
century shifted architectural focus again to the
‘generics’. One of the key limitations of the generic
approach, often credited to modern architectural
style, is its lack of contextual and cultural sensitivity.
Generic architectural approach also fails in
addressing social needs that require special
attention and care. This article focuses on the
architecture for special needs1
and highlights three
contested and relevant design issues, particularly in
the context of Bangladesh. These are: i) critical
sensibility for context and user, ii) flexibility in
design, and iii) evidence-based design. I employ
these issues as guiding principles to introduce the
projects presented in this section of the book.
Critical sensibility for context and user: Practicing
architects in South Asian context, while designing
facilities for children, differently abled persons,
people with mental health problems etc., often take
western building types and standards for granted. It
is understandable that scientifically derived building
types and standards might inform architectural
practices across geographical regions. Information
such as height-length ratio of a ramp for wheelchair
problem that demands urgent attention. Thus, architecture
for special needs can be understood as the art and science
of creating spaces that accommodate apparently unusual
social problems.]
Sensing the Needs
Md Rashed Bhuyan | PhD, CASA, NUS, Singapore
Architecture for special needs is much
more about addressing differential
aesthetic, psychological, social, cultural
and climatic needs of its users than
following standards.

users, slip-resistant surface materials and handrails
for elderly etc. would certainly save designers time
and resources (Crosbie and De Chiara, 2001),
irrespective of their context. However, architecture
for special needs is much more about addressing
differential aesthetic, psychological, social, cultural
and climatic needs of its users than following
standards. International building standards seem to
suggest that an architecture with special function
can sit anywhere. Ironically at the end, a context-
independent building sits nowhere (Day, 2017). For
example, a visually impaired person in tropical
climate, such as Bangladesh, might associate tip-tip-
tip sounds of raindrops with pleasure, whereas in
northern Europe a person with similar disability
might prefer the sound of woods burning in the
fireplace. Similarly, a child in the streets of Dhaka
does not mind playing football in a vacant left-over
space under the sun, whereas a child of same age in
Colorado might prefer well-managed and mass-
produced play equipment to fulfill the same
purpose. Thus, critical sensitivity for context and
user is an important site analysis and design criteria
for designing architecture for special needs.
Flexibility in design: People with special needs are
part of the greater society. An architecture for
special needs thus must maintain critical balance
between differences and commonalities. An
inclusive classroom for autistic children must not
only contemplate on children’s needs; but teacher’s
and caregiver’s needs must be considered as well.
To ensure integration with greater context, design-
thinking should go beyond the constraints of site-
boundary and embrace problems that are larger
than its site. For example, design of a differently
abled children’s school should consider accessibility
from children’s homes, rather than maintaining
universal access within the school only.
Evidence-based design: New developments in
environment-behavior studies and digital
technologies create opportunities for evidence-
based design for special needs. Research outcomes
can inform designers about prevailing social
contradictions and exclusions, such as privacy and
gender issues in Bangladesh, which demand extra
care during the design process. Also, with the help of
emerging digital tools, spatial-behavioral aspects of
users with special needs can be analyzed in a very
short time and results of those spatial analyses can
be materialized in designs. For example, GIS-based
Place Syntax Tool (Ståhle, 2012) and other agent-
based simulation tools can be used to simulate
activity and place preferences of users during
iterative design process.
The design studio projects included in the following
sections show exceptional proficiency in
accommodating the above-mentioned criteria. The
Centre for Blind Children at Gazipur, by Sharfuddin
Siddique from North South University, undertook a
‘progressive’ spatial design approach while creating
learning and working environments for visually
impaired children. The approach accommodated
flexibility and considered the needs of both general
users and visually impaired persons in an integrated
way. The project ensured easier navigation for the
visually impaired person by providing a central and
linear spine of circulation with several landmarks
attached to it. The project shows sensitivity to its
sites and surroundings by conserving existing trees
and orienting the key building masses facing south.
Sensory and aesthetic experiences of the users were
integrated with this circulation spine, as evident in
the cross-sectional drawings of the project. To
achieve balance, the designer creatively used
different combinations of surface texture and
created dynamic acoustic, olfactory and tactile
environments by manipulating spatial volumes and
roof geometry.
The Center for Rehabilitation of the Paralyzed (CRP)
at Chittagong by Mohaimeen Islam, a thesis project
conducted in the Bangladesh University of
Engineering and Technology, is an interesting
example of positive perspective concerning
architecture for social needs. The designer embraces
user’s perspective and sees constraints as
potentials. The design highlights the abilities of the
users rather than their disabilities. The project
excellently analyzed contextual and site forces,
special potentials of the paralyzed people (i.e.
therapeutic environments), functional aspects (such
as ease of movement through ramp), local economic
condition (such as low cost and low height
buildings) and psychological needs of the users. The
project synthesized these aspects to produce an
introvert but refreshing environment within the
compound. The design provides flexibility through a
central courtyard with appropriate enclosure,
privacy and outdoors play opportunities. The court
is accessible from all parts of the complex. The
courtyard would work as a bridge for the abled and
differently-abled persons.
The project titled Shayambhar: Center for
Underprivileged Children at Savar by Afreen Ahmed
Rochona from BRAC University, addresses special
needs of children and shows extraordinary social

and cultural sensitivity in the design process. The
project retrofits an existing industry into an
educational and vocational center for children who
unfortunately had to leave school and earn for their
families. Architectural approach of the project is very
innovative. The designer studied and considered
psychology of underprivileged children and created
different classroom environments accordingly.
Ecology of the site and its surroundings has been
well considered by merging design vocabulary to
that of the surrounding natural (such as, the river
and its ghat) and manmade (such as spatial
organization and roof-geometry of the existing
buildings) environments. The project is sustainable
socially and economically. Use of low-height
buildings, low-cost and local construction
techniques make Shayambhar an economically and
socially sustainable project.
The Street Children Rehabilitation Center project by
Md. Salahuddin from Bangladesh University share a
noble desire to rehabilitate street children to explore
their future potentials through education and
practical training. The project undertook a context-
sensitive approach. It considered psychological
needs of the street children while developing its
program. The project materialized its programs by
creating variety of intimate spaces with good
indoor-outdoor relationships. The project
emphasizes on the outdoor environments and the
landscapes. The built forms create interesting
balance of natural and manmade elements.
Besides fulfilling important design criteria about
architecture for special needs, the projects included
in this section showed skills in creating both indoor
and outdoor spaces and applied digital spatial
modelling and rendering tools creatively. Merit of
these projects, as I understand, goes beyond
architecture. They can inform social workers, NGOs,
and local government agencies on how critical social
issues can be addressed through careful physical
designs and plans. They remind us the important
role of architecture in addressing important social
issues.
References:
Crosbie, M. J. and De Chiara, J. (2001). Time Saver Standards
for Building Types(4th
Ed.). Singapore, McGraw-Hill.
Day, C. (2017). Places of the Soul: Architecture and
Environmental Design as Healing Art, London and New York,
Routledge..
Ståhle, A. (2012) Place Syntax Tool. In Angela Hull, Cecília
Silva and Luca Bertolini (Eds.). Accessibility Instruments for
Planning Practice. COST Office, pp. 173-178.

Street Children Rehabilitation Center
Name: Md. Shahbuddin
Studio: X (Thesis)
Studio Master:
Bikash Saud Ansary, NahianZobaid, KaziTarannum Hossain
Supervisor: Farid Ahmed Sumon
Year: 2015
University: Bangladesh University (BU)
Street Children in Bangladesh are the most
underprivileged group of children. Very few initiatives
have been undertaken to address this issue. A child is a
face of a family, a future unit for the country.
Unfortunately, street live with a very poor-quality of
life. They often cannot fulfill their very basic needs. The
potentials of street children thus get spoiled every day
for their poverty.
This proposal for the Street Children Rehabilitation
Center envisions a better future for those children.
Street children are a part of our society. In reality,
street children’s immense potentials are one of the
most precious resources that our country possesses.
So, it is of vital importance to setup a Street Children
Rehabilitation Center to mature their potential and to
direct their potential in the right way– the way to
become a responsible citizen with fully aware of the
tasks the nation expects from them.
Children learn & think in their own way. Adults just can
facilitate that learning process by creating favorable
environments. Architects can play an important role by
designing learning spaces which would be helpful in
the whole development of a child. According to the
United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child
(CRC) full development of a child means a child’s
physical, cognitive and socio-emotional development
including the development of personality, talent, and
mental and physical abilities to their fullest potentials.
Children are often denied the right to speak for
themselves either because they are held as
incompetent in making judgments, or because they are
thought of as unreliable witnesses about their own
lives.” During this thesis project, close interaction with
the children, discussion with them, and observation of
their reaction to spaces helped in the formulation of
design guidelines
The goal of the proposed of rehabilitation center is to
to embody the pride and hope, the nation’s places on
its future generation, recognition that street children
with the enormous potential are considered as a great
part of our national wealth. And the objectives are (a)
to fulfill a long-felt need for an organization to guide,
advice, co-ordinate, and encourage the activities of the
various children organizations, both governmental and
non-governmental; (b) to rehabilitate and provide
philosophical, educational, and vocational training to
the street children as they become self-dependent
individuals as much as possible.
The proposed center hosts all activities for child
development, such as physical, emotional, cognitive,
and socio-cultural, needed for their future
development. This would flourish all creative efforts of
children that inspire others to explore themselves at its
best. A street children re-habitation center would
therefore work as an institution, where they will be
flourished with their full capacity. Giving them the
chance to maintain a better quality of life, the project
thus has a great value & potential from national
perspective as well.
The master plan trans-creates the environment of
street with careful consideration of safety and comfort,
scale of street, openness of space, permeability of
function, relation with the nature, participation of
children by sharing and gathering etc.
For children’s psychological and mental growth,
recreational spaces are created, such as indoor and
outdoor play area, open air amphitheater, multi-
purpose hall etc. to entertain the children. For their

physical growth and fitness gymnasium and health
center are provided. For the financial support of the
family member of the street children, the project
provides sales centers, where the products made by
children, like handy craft product pottery dolls etc., are
sold.
.

Architecture For Special Needs

Center for Rehabilitation of the Paralyzed
Name: Mohaimeen Islam
Studio: X [Thesis]
Studio Master:
Prof. Dr. Faruque A.U. Khan, Ms. Shamim Ara Hassan, Atiqur Rahman,
Md. Ruhul Amin, Fahmid Ahmed, Patrick D' Rozario
Year: 2012
University: Bangladesh University of Engineering & Technology
Center for Rehabilitation of the Paralyzed, commonly
known as CRP, is a healthcare and rehabilitation
facility, aiming to ensure the inclusion of the disabled
people into mainstream society; and to promote an
environment where all disabled people can have equal
access to health, education, employment, physical
environment, and information. The project, located at
Kalurghat, aims to develop an ideal and comprehensive
programme for a Model CRP Center based on which a
detailed Master Plan for CRP Chittagong Center can be
designed. Along with all ancillary facilities, the
programme for a Model CRP Center shall include the
major services like Spinal Cord Injury (SCI)
Rehabilitation Ward, Stroke Rehabilitation Ward,
Pediatric Unit, Outpatient Facilities, Emergency
Services, Operation Theaters for ICU Beds, Therapy
(Physiotherapy, Occupational Therapy and Speech &
Language Therapy) and Halfway Hostel .
To understand the scope and need for this project
many possibilities on design layout have been
explored. Aspects those were given consideration were
– therapeutic environments (environment of care,
green design and sustainability), functional clarity,
safety and security, energy efficiency and cost-
effectiveness (low height building
construction). Nevertheless, the following keynotes are
the basis for initial design approach, which led to
undertake major design decisions –
‘ABILITY, not DISABILITY’: Ease of movement for the
PWDs (people with disabilities) is a pre-requisite. A
ramp that can lead PWDs from ground to roof-top can
create a statement for universal accessibility, if
designed with harmony with the overall building
volume.
‘Psychological demand transforming into space’:
The building volume needs to confine an enclosed
space within itself to curtain the internal area from the
external world. As such, the building blocks can act as a
buffer (yet, functional) to achieve that required privacy.
Spinal cord injury is a catastrophic condition. It not
only includes physical disability for the person, but
invariably causes economic hardship to the family of
the injured person. Since the patient will stay in the
center for a long time, therefore they must feel a sense
of belongingness. The design considered all these
factors.
The CRP complex forms an internal court that isolates
the internal area from the outside, which is compulsory
for the patients’ well-being and privacy, as they find
themselves tortured into a changed physical condition.
Also, such open court can be adequate for patients to
facilitate them with multiple opportunities for physical
activities, which can attract a new patient and generate
hope at first sight.
Environmental comfort has been considered. The
pediatric block and the ward block have been placed in
a way that it directly receives the southern air. The
ward block being place at an angle of 45 degree allows
optimum cross air flow into the wards, and also helps
to refrain from religious conflicts that a patient with
serious injury might not want to attend. Also wheel
chair patients can easily use the adjacent verandas,
coming out directly from their wards to enjoy the views.
The Therapeutic block is placed on the west. The
Pediatric block is benefited with a personal green court
and a hydro-therapy pool. However, flexible modules
have been articulated for designing these therapeutic
and pediatric blocks, for the ease of future expansion.
Universal accessibility has been ensured through
multiple ramp connections.
The patients are taught gardening and vegetation in
CRP. Gardening spaces have been provided on the
ground and on roof top. A number of open-to-sky
terraces have been designed, that act as breathing
spaces. The building complex extends up to the
riverside, where a GHAT has been created with access
for the patients with disabilities. Patients prefer
suggestions and inspirations through peer activity.
Therefore, interactive spaces, in the form of a shaded
pavilion, have been designed to hold activities such as

paper bag making, ball through, target through etc.,
since the best way to rehabilitate patients is to keep
them engaged in variety of activities.

Centre for Blind Children
Name: Md. Sharfuddin Siddique
Studio: X (Thesis)
Studio Master: Prof. Haroon Ur Rashid
Year: 2015
University: North South University
The number of visually impaired persons in our country
is increasing at an alarming rate. It is estimated that
nearly 4% of all children in Bangladesh develop corneal
damage before reaching 6 years. At least 50% of the
children with vision impairment die within one year of
becoming blind. According to UNICEF (2005), the total
number of blind persons in Bangladesh is 3.3 million,
many of whom are children under the age of 15.
Therefore, the development efforts for the differently-
abled citizens are urgent in order to rejuvenate the
national economy. To make the visually impaired
people self-sufficient, the society needs to provide
them with proper educational and training. Moreover,
the blind and visually handicapped have the right to be
able to navigate effortlessly through the built
environment. Navigation through and the action of
experiencing a place depend on a person’s ability to
collect information through his or her senses. However,
architects most often focus only on the visual aspects
of a design rather than considering other sensory
aspects.
This design thesis aims to examine the different ways in
which the blind and visually handicapped navigate
through and experience the built environment.
Understanding of these interactions has been used to
develop an architecture that enhances the specific
characteristics, which help the blind and visually
handicapped. This institution, located in Gazipur,
consists of educational, training and residential
facilities, aims to provide a support network for the
visually impaired person. The purpose is to empower
them so that they can lead independent lives through
the provision of education, training and employment
services.
There are debates about what type of environment is
appropriate for the blind and partially sighted people.
Some considers a ‘protective’ environment where the
architect designs an artificial environment completely
tailored to the sensory needs of the blind person.
Others consider a ‘hostile’ environment, which
disregards the blind person altogether. Another set of
designers proposes that the most suitable environment
is perhaps one that is ‘progressive’ which serves to
integrate the blind minority into the sighted majority.
Therefore, the progressive method is applied to this
thesis project. Such environments are ‘protective’
within the centre and ‘hostile’ towards the exterior
when introducing the individual to the sighted
environment.
Architecture involves bodily experiences, and often
architects focus exclusively on visual aesthetics.
Through the exploration of sensory architecture, it is
evident that visually impaired users benefit positively
from architecture that communicates with them
through their active senses. Hence, acoustic
architecture along with tactile and olfactory
architecture have been given priority in this design.
The concepts of single spine design and cognitive map
have been used in this design. For a blind person, the
development of spatial representations occurs through
a cognitive map consisting of routes and landmarks. A
blind person defines destination points through a
mental representation of route, which is physically
defined by various acoustic, tactile and olfactory
landmarks.
The establishment of the cognitive map for the blind
children has provided variations of spaces and forms.
Moreover, the single spine method provided an
elongated mass, which also satisfies the climatic
parameters as the elongated elevation faces south.
Other factors like climatic and environmental
parameters, site forces such as existing vegetation and
flora-fauna as well as the findings from site analysis
have been considered for this design. A unit of 1 meter
and a module for dorm rooms have been developed
according to the ergonomics of a blind children and
used throughout the design process.
This institution for the blind children consists of three
major programmes that are, a. a Dormitory for the
blind children, b. a rentable Training Centre, and c. an

Eye Clinic. The institution offers Life skill training
programs such as Braille, Computer, Musical
Instruments and Spoken English Training as well as
Orientation and Mobility Training (O&M).

Architecture For Special Needs

More Related Content

What's hot (20)

Similar to Architecture For Special Needs (20)

More from Angel Evans (20)

Recently uploaded (20)

Architecture For Special Needs