Tilting the Lens hosted an online panel discussion on lived experience as expertise in the built environment on May 6th 2026.

At Tilting the Lens, we value Disabled people as experts and innovators. In our audit, design and strategy work in the built environment, we partner with Disabled people who work with us to develop and co-design solutions to both small and large barriers. We believe that lived experience is intellectual property. 

Accessibility in the built environment often focuses on compliance, a minimum set of standards, that differs by country and region. These standards are informed by a limited range of disabilities and access needs. When we talk about access, it can become very technical, and the sole focus and expectation is often communicated as reaching compliance.

Lei Crowe: “If there is just, ‘I have to meet these set parameters in order to be compliant and accessible’, does that mean that it just stops people having to think about Disabled people and how we’re actually going to navigate or use a space?”

As a majority-Disabled team, Tilting the Lens partners with Disabled people through our Research Hub to co-design solutions for our clients in the public, private, and cultural sectors. This has included designing accessible packaging, auditing and designing accessible AI-based customer service solutions, designing fair reasonable adjustment processes, and designing office and store spaces that support all employees to be successful.

> Learn more about Tilting the Lens services in the built environment. 

As part of Tilting the Lens’ continued re-investment in the Disabled community, and our desire to open-source information, we host free webinars every year. Over 350 people signed up for this webinar. 

For this webinar, we wanted to reframe the conversation around the built environment by listening to Disabled people and with their lived experience and expertise, imagining what it would be like if they had a greater power, leadership and say in how a building, place, or space was designed. We also discussed what’s missing from existing infrastructure, and the meaningful elements that are often overlooked.

Scar Barclay: “It does seem to be this tension around what is operationally done versus what is built-in physically. And it’s interesting how, quite often when you feel that you have fulfilled the compliance access aspect, but there isn’t that translation into how people are trained to operate or work in those spaces, or talking through exactly what might happen.”

If you don’t want to miss our next webinar, make sure to sign up to our mailing list.

Our panellists

The panel included four Disabled people who are working across journalism, architecture, teaching, research, and important voluntary services. They were: 

  • Scar Barclay (they/them), a neurodivergent designer, educator, and writer who is part of The DisOrdinary Architecture Project. 
  • Peter Torres Fremlin (he/him) is the creator of a weekly newsletter, Disability Debrief, and previously worked with international organisations, including UN agencies. 
  • Lei Crowe (they/them), a neurodivergent and chronically ill hobbyist researcher focused on queer and crip theories, and sexuality. 
  • Heylove Robert Mark Sr (he/him), a disability activist and advocate with 16 years of experience, currently serving as an Administrative Assistant at Age Action Ireland. 

Watch the webinar recording

Webinar recorded on May 6th 2026

Webinar Transcript PDF (2MB)

Key takeaways from the webinar

Our definition of accessibility is always rooted in multi-modality. You can watch the conversation back via the video, you can use the transcript, and below, you can find our key takeaways from the discussion. These are: 

  1. Prioritising candid information
  2. Understanding sensory needs and social acceptance
  3. Designing for spontaneity and privacy
  4. Co-designing with Disabled people as experts
  5. Ensuring equal access to to safety and escape
  6. Embracing accessibility hijacking and creative access

1. Prioritising candid information 

All panellists discussed the importance of sharing honest, clear accessibility information in advance. This allows Disabled people to make informed decisions, and prepare themselves for various environments and scenarios. Lei spoke about the essential nature of this communication and transparency for those with dynamic disabilities.

Lei: “I think it’s important to be upfront about what is or isn’t possible at a space or event, so a Disabled person can make an informed decision. I have a dynamic disability, and if I knew there were a few steps, and definitely no ramps, I know I could use a walking stick that day instead of a wheelchair. How do we make something accessible? There are a million different ways people could have barriers to entry to a space, so you are never going to cover them all. But if you are upfront and say these are the barriers, then you can start troubleshooting how to help them.”

The conversation also underlined how accessibility is not just about physical features; it also involves how warmly we welcome one another and the important information we share about how to use a space.

Peter spoke about a local café that he wanted to visit, but as there were steps and no visible ramp, the message, “I am not welcome”, was clear to him. However after speaking to the staff, he learned that the ramp was just hidden away with no signs or messages indicating its existence.

Peter: “Of course we have a ramp. I mean we didn’t put a sign to it, we didn’t tell you about it, there is no way that you would know that. Your experience from all these other places suggests they might not, but of course we do. So they have a little ramp, and they bring it out, and it’s beautiful. I can go in the cafe and have a sandwich and use the accessible bathroom they’ve got.”

Communication is a key element of accessibility. It is great that employers, restaurants, museums and retail stores are increasingly asking Disabled people about their access needs, but this also puts a burden of responsibility on Disabled people. It would be more effective if they shared honest information up front so that Disabled people can respond in an informed way, and if needed, ask further questions.  

2. Understanding sensory needs and social acceptance

No two Disabled people have the same lived experience, even if they have the same disability.

In built environment projects, designing for and with Neurodivergent people has always been part of our practice, and is also becoming increasingly important for our clients in the private and public sector. Often, the first solution that is requested for Neurodivergent people is a quiet room or a sensory room. In our webinar, it was re-iterated by both Lei and Scar that these are two different solutions for different access accommodations, but typically they are treated and understood as if they are the same. Both are safe places for people to decompress or reset their senses in busy or stressful environments, but in very different ways. For some Neurodivergent people, the most accessible way for them to de-sensitise in a space is to scream, release energy and emotion, while for others, their preference is to be in a low-lit space in silence.

  • A quiet room is usually located away from the louder or busy areas at an event. Typically, this will be a quiet space that includes comfortable seating, soft lighting, and fidget tools that may help someone to decompress. 
  • A sensory room is a space that embraces sensory stimuli. Sensory rooms are often stocked full of many different types of equipment. This equipment is used to assist people to focus on the present moment and to better process sensory information. Stocked equipment may be provided for balance, movement, calming pressure, or fidgeting behavior.

Where there is only a single provision put in place to meet these very divergent needs, one person’s access needs impinges on the other. Designing for both solutions and being clear in communicating what is and isn’t available, and how spaces are most likely to be used is a short term and essential piece of accessibility.

Lei: “The conference is called, Autscape, and I would describe it as a residential anti-conference run for and by autistic people. I find the terms like sensory room or sensory space is used synonymously with a quiet space, when there are actually two aspects of sensory needs, and they can exist within the same person. This anti-conference is the only space that I have seen where they have two different sensory rooms. One is quiet, and you are encouraged not to talk, but there are some fidgets and low lighting. And then, on the other side of the campus entirely, is the sensory-seeking sensory room where it’s music blaring, and people can just scream if they need to.”

There is a need to rethink a sensory approach to design beyond the traditional ‘quiet space’ to also embrace people who are sensory-seeking, and to challenge the social acceptance of disability-related behaviour types in public spaces.

3. Designing for spontaneity and privacy

We learned in the webinar that Disabled people often need to prepare themselves to enter a space. But, like non-Disabled people, our ambition should also be that Disabled people get to be spontaneous, and get to live and exist in the present. This came up in conversation, particularly in relation to transport, as we learned that some access provisions can rob a Disabled person of spontaneity and could be an invasion of privacy. Some public spaces require Disabled people to give advanced notice of their visit so that access provisions can be put in place. This is often framed as a way of managing capacity and resources, but we can’t forget the human cost. 

Heylove: “I have to call the train station for them to arrange their accessible ramp for me to be able to get on board a train to go to school. I have to give my personal details where I am going every time I am going out, […] so it’s kind of weird. I believe getting on a train, there should be some automatic ramp that I should be able to access if I am having an emergency or want to have some spontaneous trips around, so I need to call somebody to come help, which doesn’t sound right.” 

While there is a level of acceptance that this may be necessary for some older sites, planning for efficient accessibility in newer public spaces should offset this requirement.

The primary goal of accessibility is to enable equitable experiences and independence for Disabled people and others with access needs. Accessibility is iterative, and when we have resources and provisions in place, we should feel empowered to continue to gain feedback, audit and iterate our solutions, so we can continuously improve.  

4. Co-designing with Disabled people as experts 

When designing buildings, public places and spaces for society as a whole, those that are tasked with design responsibilities should be representative of society and welcome everybody. This allows us to bring in the perspectives of different kinds of people, and to design public spaces that focus on how different people use buildings and public areas across the human lifecycle. We learn that society’s needs are often complex, overlap with other parts of identity, and change as people get older.

Deliberately co-creating with Disabled people, as early as possible, will be fundamental  to the design process. When buildings and public spaces truly reflect how people will actually use them, the result will be spaces that are more environmentally and socially sustainable.

Designing without Disabled voices leads to systemic exclusion, while co-design drives more effective solutions. Disabled people must be recognised and valued as experts, innovators, and decision-makers.

Peter: “I write a newsletter called Disability Debrief, and the idea is that disability gives us a new lens on the world and new lens on design and how we use spaces. The lived experience is so diverse, the way that Disabled people move and see through the world and experience it shows us a new way of understanding spaces and accessibility and how they’re used. Another thing as a designer that’s important to do, as we have all kind of been saying, is finding ways to listen to that diversity and feedback and co-creation with Disabled people is a huge asset.”

5. Ensuring equal access to safety and escape

Of course accessibility is not only about getting into and around a building; it is also about feeling safe and knowing that if an emergency were to arise, you can evacuate safely and with dignity.

This should include the use of evacuation lifts in all new multi-storey buildings, and ensuring that building management plans and the fire safety plan include the needs of Disabled people 

That may sound daunting but it really involves giving extra thought to who may require assistance and planning ahead. For example how someone who cannot hear a fire alarm can be alerted visually or with vibrations, making sure that building users are familiar with evacuation routes where they are not the one they used to enter, and ensuring that the staff are trained in how to direct and support people who may need assistance to exit.

As with everything we have discussed, asking the Disabled person rather than making assumptions about what they may need is important.

Scar: “I want people to be aware that I am in the U.K., and we obviously had Grenfell in the last few years, and that caused revisions to fire regulations. One of the things they didn’t adopt is around Disabled people having a right to escape. There was one aspect around them putting PEEPs (Personal Emergency Evacuation Plan) in place for people in residential buildings, and not making it difficult and that was the thing that got omitted. We think of fire regulations being robust, however, they have let Disabled people down and there needs to be conversations on how people experience refuge spaces and being left in refuge spaces. So the measure I would put in is that all new builds have to put evacuation lifts in, and they need to do proper training around the management plan, around safety, and around their fire strategy so people reliably enter buildings and know they are going to be safe.”

6. Embracing accessibility hijacking and creative access

Lastly, a phrase that came up again and again during the webinar was “accessibility hijacking”. The phrase was introduced by Lei to talk about the innovations for access they have seen by Disabled people, specifically for organisations and individuals that are working with low-budgets. 

Lei: “[A Queer social group] found a way to have an accessible space for multiple different needs. They rented out a music rehearsal venue, and because of the needs of instruments being quite heavy, all of the various access differences on the floors were negotiated with very gentle, sloped ramps, and because of the needs of people who are rehearsing in this space at the same time. It’s that ingenuity, when you are locked out of built-for-purpose options, that I love in queer and Disabled communities, that they hijack accessibility.”

Scar talked about their love for Carmen Papalia’s piece, “Mobility Device”. Papalia is a Blind artist who explores wayfinding and new methods of navigating the world. In 2015, Papalia replaced his white cane with a marching brass band to explore a London park. 

Scar: “Disabled people are always hacking their environment because the built environment has not been designed with diverse Disabled people’s needs in mind, so we are the most kind of creative people to respond to an environment that hasn’t desired us back. […] I really, really loved Carmen Papalia’s Mobility Device. […] It wasn’t so much that the brass band were necessarily leading him, but he was leading the brass band and starts to question a lot of these ideas about wayfinding, about playful understandings around accessibility and how we relate to other people, whether it’s about independence or interdependence.” 

We often see that the simplest approach is the most effective, accessibility does not need to mean a big spend. Often, offering different options to people with a range of accessibility accommodations ensures that everyone has a welcoming experience. Creative and simple solutions such as signage and colour contrast, printing information in larger fonts, providing a resting place, and offering different heights and types of seating.  

This webinar has focused on the built environment but how a building is used, but design alone cannot be the solution. As we know from our work in people and workplace culture, and product and service design, it is the framework of people, digital and infrastructure that create true accessible environments, cultures, and societies.

Q&A from the audience

We were so pleased that our webinar audience joined us from at least 15 countries and throughout the conversation, they were very engaged with information, feedback, resources and questions. Due to the timing, we didn’t get to answer all of their questions, but we wanted to share them below along with some responses to spark further conversations.

P.S. They also shape our planning for future webinars!

Universal design and participatory design

Question: Why is there not more evidence of participatory design?

Answered by Sinéad (Tilting the Lens): This is a question that we spend a long time thinking about. Participatory design is sometimes a synonym for co-design, or consultative design. But, the reality is that the process, outcomes and power structures for each of these approaches greatly differ.

I do think that we are seeing more examples of co-design and of new policies, programmes being developed with Disabled people. Some of this progress is because of requirements under the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UNCRD). The UNCRPD sets an obligation for governments and public bodies to meaningfully engage with Disabled people in public decision making.

But, we are also seeing great examples of new buildings, new products, and new ways of working being co-designed by Disabled people. Over the past year, we’ve been fortunate to co-design banking apps, corporate office environments, adaptive fashion and communication strategies with Disabled people. We’ll tell you about them in our newsletter very soon. 

Question: Why isn’t Universal Design applied more often in both physical and virtual spaces?

Answered by Sinéad (Tilting the Lens): The terminology of Universal Design has been in use for a long time, but still, remains largely misunderstood and is often measured against the same prerogatives and the same checklists used to measure compliance with established regulations and guidance, rather than being embraced as a design philosophy.  

At Tilting the Lens, we are specific in our approach and in our language. We deliberately speak about our work as human-centred design. We feel this is an evolution of universal design and inclusive design.

Adaptive fashion

Question: What are specific apparel needs and considerations for independent dressing or comfort? What are the primary difficulties found in clothing accessibility?

Answered by Laia (Tilting the Lens): In 2025, Tilting the Lens published a report called, “Co-designing adaptive fashion with the Disabled community”. The report was based on co-designed research with Disabled people globally about their barriers and difficulties around fashion. The report also provides a framework for the fashion industry to move beyond basic compliance to genuine inclusion.

Protected buildings

Question: What is the panel’s view on protected (historic) buildings that refuse to make adaptations to allow for access?

Answered by Orla (Tilting the Lens): There is a misconception that a building protected for its heritage is exempt from accessibility legislation, which is not always the case. The approach differs across the globe and it can be complicated, but generally speaking, while the owners or managers of these buildings must seek additional statutory permissions, that does not mean they do not need to consider what can be done. And often, the onus is on them to justify why heritage should be prioritised over accessibility.

Advocacy in the workplace

Question: How can a neurodivergent person, especially one at a lower level of a company’s hierarchy, successfully advocate for organisational awareness of diverse access needs? 

Answered by Emma (Tilting the Lens): I really like this question and wish I had explored it earlier in my career. Since much of my work now focuses on improving the reasonable adjustments process in organisations, I would suggest starting by researching your employer’s policies, processes, and materials on reasonable adjustments and disability, as well as their overall commitment to inclusion and access. This is important to understand how you can access the supports you need to be successful, whilst also being an opportunity to see if their stated values match their actions. Talking with members of Employee Resource Groups (ERGs) can also be very useful. Even if there isn’t a specific group for disability or accessibility, other ERGs can give valuable advice on how to advocate within the company. Also, I would seek out a senior colleague who is an ally or has openly shared their neurodivergent experience. Building a mentoring relationship with them can be really rewarding.

To give you an example of this kind of work, I recently supported ASOS on enhancing their engagements with their Disabled employees.

Where do I start with accessibility in the built environment?

Our panellists weighed in with their ideas about where to start today. 

Heylove: “First thing that needs to be done is to do an accessibility audit and with other Disabled people and fix the simplest barriers immediately […] like adding portable ramps and the signs and prioritising seating areas. Spaces where Disabled people would occupy.”

Peter: “One of the distinctions I make is between access hardware and access software. The hardware of these physical things, whether the steps, the lifts, or the tactile surfaces or hearing loops. They are normally harder things to change. But if you’re a designer, one thing that you can do from the first point is change the software. Change that way how people are greeted and what information is available, and how the space is used, the processes that you get support or adjustments.

At Tilting the Lens we say to start where you are. We believe that meaningful change is often about progress and iteration, not perfection. It’s about all of us, at every level, embedding these practices into our budgets, contracts, leadership commitments and day to day tasks. 

References and resources

From the conversation:

Tilting the Lens resources:

If you don’t want to miss our next webinar, make sure to sign up to our mailing list.

Other Resources

View all resources