Stairlifts versus escape routes

A DISPUTE over a proposed stairlift in a Shanghai apartment building is putting the spotlight on a dilemma that many ageing cities, like Malaysia, will eventually have to confront.

When a resident requires accessibility modifications that extend into common areas, whose rights come first? The individual seeking greater mobility or the neighbours sharing the space?

The incident, which gained widespread attention in China, was centred on a resident’s request to install a stairlift along a shared staircase for her elderly parent.

Some neighbours reportedly objected, arguing that the equipment could obstruct evacuation routes and pose safety risks during emergencies.

The disagreement quickly evolved beyond a neighbourhood dispute and made national headlines. Fortunately, this raised broader questions about disability rights, property management and public safety.

While the case took place overseas, it highlights an issue that is becoming increasingly relevant in Malaysia.

As the country moves towards becoming an ageing nation by 2030, more people are expected to require mobility aids to get in and around their homes. Yet for those living in apartments and condominiums, installing such equipment may not be as straightforward as it seems.

Private installation on common property

Unlike renovating a bathroom, a stairlift is usually fixed onto a shared staircase rather than within the confines of an individual unit. That distinction is significant because the staircase is more often considered common property, placing it under the responsibility of the building’s joint management body (JMB) or management corporation (MC).

The question is no longer simply whether a resident needs a stairlift. It becomes whether changes to common property can be made without affecting the rights, safety and interests of everyone else who uses the building.

Most relevant legal frameworks

In Malaysia, three key legal frameworks would come into play in such a situation – the Strata Management Act 2013, the Persons with Disabilities Act 2008 and the Uniform Building By-Laws (UBBL).

The Strata Management Act governs how common property within stratified developments is managed. Areas such as staircases, corridors, lift lobbies and other shared facilities belong collectively to parcel owners and are administered by the JMB or MC on their behalf.

Any proposal to alter these areas is therefore not solely the decision of an individual resident, regardless of whether the intended modification is for accessibility purposes.

It is for practical reasons that this form of shared ownership even exists. For all occupants’ safety and accessibility, common property must remain functional, accessible and safe for all residents. Even the smallest change can have an effect on maintenance responsibilities, insurance coverage and any future repair works. It is also safe to say that the overall use of the building could be affected as well.

Furthermore, since this is about accessibility for an older adult with functional limitations, it is important to reexamine Malaysia’s Persons with Disabilities Act 2008 to identify what gaps can be filled early on.

The Act reflects the country’s commitment to creating a more inclusive society. It supports this goal by promoting equal access to public facilities, amenities, services and, last but not least, buildings themselves.

Additionally, it also encourages removing the daily barriers that hold back people with disabilities from getting around while also supporting the development of accessible environments.

As for the case in China, the legislation for this specifically does not seem fully fleshed out yet in Malaysia.

It stops short of granting an automatic right to alter common property within privately managed strata developments. It merely exists alongside other laws governing building management and ownership.

This means that accessibility needs and strata management obligations cannot be treated as competing ideals and should be balanced instead.

Moving on to the UBBL, safety remains paramount.

Under the UBBL, staircases serving as designated means of escape during emergencies must maintain their required clear width throughout their length, including at landings.

The regulations also specify that the clear width is measured between walls, with only handrails permitted to project into the space by up to 80mm. Although the by-laws do not prescribe a specific minimum clearance for stairlifts, they make clear that escape routes must remain safe and unobstructed.

In practice, this means a stairlift would not necessarily be prohibited. Instead, the key question is whether its installation would reduce the staircase below the required escape width for that particular building or otherwise impede evacuation during an emergency.

As the required width varies according to a building’s occupancy and design, each proposal would likely need to be assessed on its own merits.

Modern stairlifts are generally designed to fold against the wall when not in use, minimising the amount of space they occupy.

Even so, building managers may still need to consider whether sufficient clearance remains during an evacuation, whether the equipment complies with relevant safety requirements and how it would function during a power failure or fire.

Who maintains the stairlift?

These concerns extend beyond installation alone. Questions inevitably arise over who bears responsibility for maintaining the equipment, carrying out inspections, repairing faults or removing the stairlift should it become unsafe or no longer be required. Liability may also become an issue if the equipment contributes to an accident or obstructs emergency access.

For management bodies, decisions involving common property rarely affect only one resident.

Every approval has implications for future applications, operational responsibilities and the expectations of other parcel owners. As a result, requests for accessibility modifications often require careful consideration of individual circumstances while balancing accessibility, fire safety and the collective interests of the wider community.

The Shanghai dispute may have happened hundreds of kilometres away but the questions it raises are unlikely to remain there. As Malaysia edges closer to becoming an ageing nation, accessibility will become less of a later concern and more of an everyday reality for apartment and condominium communities.

Whether it is a stairlift, wheelchair ramp or another mobility aid, similar requests are likely to become more common as buildings adapt to the changing needs of their residents.

For property managers and homeowners alike, it is no longer just about what can be built.

Increasingly, it is about how older buildings can evolve to ensure that accessibility, safety and shared living can coexist.