• Welcome to the new and improved Building Code Forum. We appreciate you being here and hope that you are getting the information that you need concerning all codes of the building trades. This is a free forum to the public due to the generosity of the Sawhorses, Corporate Supporters and Supporters who have upgraded their accounts. If you would like to have improved access to the forum please upgrade to Sawhorse by first logging in then clicking here: Upgrades

Drinking Fountains and Accessible Bathrooms Required?

Cali_Code_Architect

Registered User
Joined
Dec 5, 2021
Messages
22
Location
91803
I'm working on an existing single story interior remodel. Occupancy: business, 29 person. California Existing Building Code

I'm replacing several of the non-accessible bathrooms with a single accessible bathroom, and 1 existing non-accessible bathroom. Do they both need to be accessible?

Also, is there any way to not install 2 drinking fountains. The area is limited to several employees only and everyone will be drinking bottled water.
 
I’m thinking drinking fountains are required, but I wonder how long it will be before they are replaced by bottled water and paper cups due to covid. A lot of places i go, i see crime scene tape blocking the DF.
 
Not sure who determines technical infeasibility for you but 705 with special attention to 705.2:

705.2 Alterations affecting an area containing a primary function. Where an alteration affects the accessibility to a, or contains an area of, primary function, the route to the primary function area shall be accessible. The accessible route to the primary function area shall include toilet facilities and drinking fountains serving the area of primary function.

Exceptions: 1. The costs of providing the accessible route are not required to exceed 20 percent of the costs of the alterations affecting the area of primary function.
 
No requirement to provide DF's, only "if" you provide then it must comply.
Why 2 RR's, use a unisex, no?
 
Per CPC 415.2 no DF required as your less than 30 occupants. Per CPC 422.2 a single unisex will work for a B less than 50 occupants.
 
Per CPC 415.2 no DF required as your less than 30 occupants. Per CPC 422.2 a single unisex will work for a B less than 50 occupants.
Excellent! This is exactly what I needed to find. Thank you!
No requirement to provide DF's, only "if" you provide then it must comply.
Why 2 RR's, use a unisex, no?
One is an existing non-accessible RR we plan to keep. The other new RR will be unisex accessible. However, wondering if the existing RR will need to be made accesible?
 
Per CPC 415.2 no DF required as your less than 30 occupants. Per CPC 422.2 a single unisex will work for a B less than 50 occupants.
Planning for a single unisex RR, but would this require a urinal in addition to a toilet? I haven't been able to find anything that would allow me to eliminate the urinal.
 
Planning for a single unisex RR, but would this require a urinal in addition to a toilet? I haven't been able to find anything that would allow me to eliminate the urinal.
The July 1, 2021 Suppliment to the 2019 CPC provided footnote 7 to t422.1 which could offer a route for the AHJ to allow exclusion of the urinal in the single occupant toilet room of your group B occupancy of less than 50 occupants.
"In accordance to Sections 1.8.7 and 301.3, the Authority Having Jurisdiction may approve alternative design criteria when determining the minimum number of plumbing fixtures."
 
Searching for the answer to a similar question as the original post in this thread. I have a space that currently has 5 toilet rooms. 2 appear to be accessible, 3 do not. They are altering the space and eliminating the two accessible rooms, and 1 of the non-accessible rooms, proposing to keep one non-accessible, and construct a new accessible toilet room. The end result is one existing non-accessible, and 1 new accessible.

Banging my head against the IBC requirement that each toilet room must be accessible (1109.2). I get there from IEBC 503.1, which says alterations must comply with the IBC. While they are not altering the non-accessible bathroom other than floor finishes, they are, in my perplexed opinion, altering the entire space by reducing accessibility. So I am in a quandary, does IBC 1109.2 come in to play since they aren't altering the non-compliant toilet room? I am having a hard time accepting the reduction in accessibility.

The occupant load is just over the threshold requiring separate facilities, so they are proposing the single accessible toilet room as a unisex.

Also, there is apparently no existing drinking fountain, though there should have been. But, since they are not increasing the occupant load by 20%, I don't think I can require it. (We have opined on this issue in other threads)
 
Amend the last post...they have 6 total, proposing to leave two non-accessible and one new accessible. The 6th toilet room is on the small 2nd floor, undergoing no alterations. By my reckoning, the small 2nd floor is not required to be served by an accessible route, so I am thinking the toilet room is not required to be accessible per IEBC 305.6.

I read in the 2010 ADA (202.3.1) that a reduction of accessibility from what is required for new construction is not permitted...but I don't administer that code. But I am stuck on the concept.
 
Amend the last post...they have 6 total, proposing to leave two non-accessible and one new accessible. The 6th toilet room is on the small 2nd floor, undergoing no alterations. By my reckoning, the small 2nd floor is not required to be served by an accessible route, so I am thinking the toilet room is not required to be accessible per IEBC 305.6.

I read in the 2010 ADA (202.3.1) that a reduction of accessibility from what is required for new construction is not permitted...but I don't administer that code. But I am stuck on the concept.
Will the 1st floor toilets be grouped together?
 
306.3 Maintenance and repair. A facility that is
constructed or altered to be accessible shall be maintained
accessible during occupancy. Required accessible means of
egress shall be maintained during construction, demolition,
remodeling or alterations and additions to any occupied
building.
Exception: Existing means of egress need not be maintained
where approved temporary means of egress and
accessible means of egress systems and facilities are
provided.
306.3.1 Prohibited reduction in accessibility. An alteration
that decreases or has the effect of decreasing
accessibility of a building, facility or element, thereof,
below the requirements for new construction at the time
of the alteration is prohibited.
The number of accessible
elements need not exceed that required for new construction
at the time of alteration.
 
The end result is one existing non-accessible, and 1 new accessible.
So does that meet the minimum fixture requirements?
IMHO: You are not reducing the accessibility below the requirements for new construction so eliminating the extra restrooms is not an issue as long as you meet the minimum fixture requirements in your adopted code for the use within the building.

If the occupancy serves food or drink I would include a urinal in the accessible facility

1109.2 Toilet and bathing facilities.
Each toilet room and bathing room shall be accessible. Where a floor level is not required to be connected by an accessible route, the only toilet rooms or bathing rooms provided within the facility shall not be located on the inaccessible floor. Except as provided for in Sections 1109.2.2 and 1109.2.3, at least one of each type of fixture, element, control or dispenser in each accessible toilet room and bathing room shall be accessible.

Exceptions:

3. Where multiple single-user toilet rooms or bathing rooms are clustered at a single location, at least 50 percent but not less than one room for each use at each cluster shall be accessible.


1109.2.1.2 Family or assisted-use toilet rooms.
Family or assisted-use toilet rooms shall include only one water closet and only one lavatory. A family or assisted-use bathing room in accordance with Section 1109.2.1.3 shall be considered to be a family or assisted-use toilet room.

Exception: The following additional fixtures shall be permitted in a family or assisted-use toilet room:

1. A urinal.
 
There are only two toilet rooms required based on the requirement for separate facilities. They are proposing 3, two non-accessible and one accessible. They are not clustered. The conundrum is that the two non-accessible are not being altered beyond cosmetics, so they are proposing that since they are not part of the "alteration", that they don't need to comply. New construction would require 2 fully accessible toilet rooms, they are proposing 1, so it is less than the new construction threshold.

IEBC 305.6-specific to accessibility says that a facility must comply with IBC ch. 11. The issue here is "facility", (and a more specific reference to ch. 11 of the IBC). Are we limited the elements of the facility undergoing alteration? Or are we including the entire facility, and increasing the scope of work beyond what is being altered?

IEBC 503.1 clearly indicates that only the "alterations" need to comply with the IBC, but this is a general reference to the entire body of the IBC, not the specific reference to ch. 11 of the IBC. So when the architect references this section as his way out I could say the more specific reference towards accessibility of 305.6 applies.

I would love to believe the differences in the wording of these two codes is intentional, and that they specifically differentiate between facility in 305 and alteration in 503 to provide the answer to this question. But I am not confident in that.

Steveray, where does that code section (306.3.1) you reference come from?

To correct my initial post, I determined that there were some accessibility issues with the 2 that I thought were originally accessible. So, there is no reduction from the current conditions since NONE OF THE SIX TOILET ROOMS WAS ACCESSIBLE. How and why?......because the previous DP, contractor, owner, plans examiner, inspector.....didn't do their job? This is not an excessively old building, and certainly the previous tenant permits are not old enough to excuse this. Alas, the failure of others to do their job does not excuse me from doing mine.

Is it 5 O'clock somewhere yet?
 
You can identify both of the restrooms as Family with one of them being accessible

[P] 2902.2 Separate facilities.
Where plumbing fixtures are required, separate facilities shall be provided for each sex.

Exceptions:

2. Separate facilities shall not be required in structures or tenant spaces with a total occupant load, including both employees and customers, of 15 or fewer.

3. Separate facilities shall not be required in mercantile occupancies in which the maximum occupant load is 100 or fewer.

4. Separate facilities shall not be required in business occupancies in which the maximum occupant load is 25 or fewer.

[P] 2902.2.1 Family or assisted-use toilet facilities serving as separate facilities.
Where a building or tenant space requires a separate toilet facility for each sex and each toilet facility is required to have only one water closet, two family or assisted-use toilet facilities shall be permitted to serve as the required separate facilities. Family or assisted-use toilet facilities shall not be required to be identified for exclusive use by either sex as required by Section 2902.4.
 
You can identify both of the restrooms as Family with one of them being accessible

[P] 2902.2 Separate facilities.
Where plumbing fixtures are required, separate facilities shall be provided for each sex.

Exceptions:

2. Separate facilities shall not be required in structures or tenant spaces with a total occupant load, including both employees and customers, of 15 or fewer.

3. Separate facilities shall not be required in mercantile occupancies in which the maximum occupant load is 100 or fewer.

4. Separate facilities shall not be required in business occupancies in which the maximum occupant load is 25 or fewer.

[P] 2902.2.1 Family or assisted-use toilet facilities serving as separate facilities.
Where a building or tenant space requires a separate toilet facility for each sex and each toilet facility is required to have only one water closet, two family or assisted-use toilet facilities shall be permitted to serve as the required separate facilities. Family or assisted-use toilet facilities shall not be required to be identified for exclusive use by either sex as required by Section 2902.4.
Separate facilities is not my concern. Both not being accessible is my concern.
 
If they are not designated as separate facilities (Male/Female) then only one has to be accessible because both sexes can use either facility and you meet the 5% requirement that determines how many accessible water closets you need
The restroom on the 2nd floor is not on an accessible route and therefore not required to be accessible

1109.2.2 Water closet compartment.
Where water closet compartments are provided in a toilet room or bathing room, at least 5 percent of the total number of compartments shall be wheelchair accessible. Where the combined total water closet compartments and urinals provided in a toilet room or bathing room is six or more, at least 5 percent of the total number of compartments shall be ambulatory accessible, provided in addition to the wheelchair-accessible compartment.
 
I’m thinking drinking fountains are required, but I wonder how long it will be before they are replaced by bottled water and paper cups due to covid. A lot of places i go, i see crime scene tape blocking the DF.
Only " if provided, must a DF comply. Don't provide it if you so desire.
 
If they are not designated as separate facilities (Male/Female) then only one has to be accessible because both sexes can use either facility and you meet the 5% requirement that determines how many accessible water closets you need
The restroom on the 2nd floor is not on an accessible route and therefore not required to be accessible

1109.2.2 Water closet compartment.
Where water closet compartments are provided in a toilet room or bathing room, at least 5 percent of the total number of compartments shall be wheelchair accessible. Where the combined total water closet compartments and urinals provided in a toilet room or bathing room is six or more, at least 5 percent of the total number of compartments shall be ambulatory accessible, provided in addition to the wheelchair-accessible compartment.
We are sent to the IBC by IEBC 305.6, where the IBC provides that "each toilet room and bathing room must be accessible" per IBC1109.1. 1109.2.2 is for compartments within a toilet room, not the toilet room itself. What is proposed are single user toilet rooms. I agree the second floor toilet room is specifically exempted by IEBC 305.6 & 305.7 since there are no alterations being done to any areas of primary function up there. But I think that the two downstairs that are in areas where alterations are being done to the areas of primary function, that they would both be required to be accessible. I'll get the CBO's opinion.
 
If this is a single tenant I don't see the issue. Where do you find the requirements for more than one accessible restroom if both are "gender neutral"
Th 2021 attempts to address this and if you have not adopted it yet I suggest you use it for guidance and possible approval under
[A] 104.10 Modifications.
Where there are practical difficulties involved in carrying out the provisions of this code, the building official shall have the authority to grant modifications for individual cases, upon application of the owner or the owner’s authorized agent, provided that the building official shall first find that special individual reason makes the strict letter of this code impractical, the modification is in compliance with the intent and purpose of this code and that such modification does not lessen health, accessibility, life and fire safety or structural requirements. The details of action granting modifications shall be recorded and entered in the files of the department of building safety.

2021 IBC

1650904327732.png
1650904183128.png
 
We are sent to the IBC by IEBC 305.6, where the IBC provides that "each toilet room and bathing room must be accessible" per IBC1109.1. 1109.2.2 is for compartments within a toilet room, not the toilet room itself. What is proposed are single user toilet rooms. I agree the second floor toilet room is specifically exempted by IEBC 305.6 & 305.7 since there are no alterations being done to any areas of primary function up there. But I think that the two downstairs that are in areas where alterations are being done to the areas of primary function, that they would both be required to be accessible. I'll get the CBO's opinion.
Sifu, other than the CBO, have you informed the tenant of the barrier removal requirement for existing buildings by the ADA? If it exists it must comply.
 
Top