Accessibility and quality of life in social housing: evaluation of the DEMHAB affordable housing units in Porto Alegre
Brazilian housing policy has just recently made accessibility part of the country’s social housing projects. Since 2001 Porto Alegre’s City Housing Department (Demhab) has been offering accessible homes to physically impaired individuals, a decision that has demanded a review of architectural plans....
        Spremljeno u:
      
    
                  | Glavni autori: | , , | 
|---|---|
| Format: | Online | 
| Jezik: | por | 
| Izdano: | 
        Universidade de São Paulo. Faculdade de Arquitetura e Urbanismo.
    
      2015
     | 
| Online pristup: | https://www.revistas.usp.br/posfau/article/view/90255 | 
| Oznake: | 
       Dodaj oznaku    
     
      Bez oznaka, Budi prvi tko označuje ovaj zapis!
   
 | 
| Sažetak: | Brazilian housing policy has just recently made accessibility part of the country’s social housing projects. Since 2001 Porto Alegre’s City Housing Department (Demhab) has been offering accessible homes to physically impaired individuals, a decision that has demanded a review of architectural plans. Accessibility conditions and the users’ perceptions on how their lives improved after moving to the new homes had to be analyzed scientifically. Accordingly, this study investigates how eight physically impaired residents of Demhab’s accessible housing units perceived their quality of life and how these homes met their specific needs. A WHOQOL-bref questionnaire was used to collect information on quality of life, and semi-structure interviews were employed to qualitatively measure accessibility. The study found that the average perception of quality of life was evaluated as average. In the Environment category, the home environment facet obtained the highest average of all, and in the same category the financial resources facet obtained the lowest average overall. The interviews unveiled needs that had not been foreseen in the original plans. We concluded the architectural plans and supplementary design should be reviewed and that the interviewees needed additional technical and social support, especially regarding their income and social needs | 
|---|