Does an outdoor shower need an enclosure and bench to meet ADA?

[Mr. Inspector]

When I do a plan review and on the page where they have the codes listed that the plans were designed to, if they have ADA listed I cross it off. I was instructed to do this by the state because I am not responsible to enforce ADA.

It's interesting that the code only requires showers to be accessible in toilet rooms and bathing rooms. So if a shower is in a different room like an office or hallway it doesn't need to be accessible but the ADA wants it to be accessible no matter where it is.

 

[my250r11]

It is hard to get thru to people, on existing you do what is feasible. On new we only enforce bldg. code, which is close to ADA but not.
Even worse when People in the AHJ have their own agenda. My boss had to argue and flat out tell engineering that he will not enforce something that is not code or adopted. They wanted the contractor on an existing bldg. with major site restrictions to make the accessible ramp @ 15:1 instead of the required 12:1. They probably are not going to have room for the 12:1 seeing they need almost 5 feet in height.

 

[Yikes]

Yikes you would save us some time and allow us to directly address your issue if you had said that from the beginning (smile).

I believe I mentioned in my first post that it was an outdoor shower. The fact that space is tight is irrelevant to the substance of my question, which was: are outdoor showers required to have enclosure walls, grab bars, and a seat?

FYI, I also wrote the Pacific Disability Technical Assistance Center and asked the same question, and they sent this response yesterday:

"Thank you for contacting the Pacific ADA Center. The Pacific ADA Center provides technical assistance, training, education and written materials regarding the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).

The ADA is a civil rights law that ensures that individuals with disabilities get afforded the same rights as everyone else in the areas of employment, state and local governments' facilities and programs, public accommodations and telecommunications.

Your reference to section 213 pertains to bathing toilet and facilities. An outside rinsing shower is typically not considered a bathing facility and is treated differently. All the basic requirements apply (reach range, operable parts, clear floor space, connected to an accessible route). There would not be a requirement for incorporating the seat and grab bars as required in section 608.

For further information on the ADA, please contact one of our Technical Assistance Specialists between 8 AM and 5 PM Pacific Time on our toll-free hotline at 1-800-949-4232. You may also find helpful information by visiting our web site at www.adapacific.org

The information presented in this email is intended solely as informal guidance, and is neither a determination of legal rights or responsibilities under the ADA, nor is it binding on any agency with enforcement responsibilities under the ADA."​

 

[Sleepy]

That interpretation from adapacific.org strikes me as entirely reasonable and correct. You might want to be sure to label the outdoor shower as a rinsing shower or rinse-off shower on your drawings just to avoid future confusion.

 

[Sleepy]

If not required then you don't have an issue. If required it must be accessible.

This strikes me as fundamentally incorrect. Facilities are not required to provide a pay phone (remember those) but if one is provided it needs to be accessible. Similarly, urinals are not actually required in toilet rooms, but if you have more than one accessibility is required. Just because an item is not required to be provided does not relieve responsibility to provide accessibility if the item is actually provided, within the scope of applicable law or code.

 

[Yikes]

The act of rinsing off is very different than the act of private bathing, so I can understand why the code would go out of its way to describe the seat and grab bar requirements as being applicable specifically to bathing that are inside a room.

 

[ADAguy]

See, Yikes "gets" it.
Scope question for designers:
"If you "choose" to provide an "it" (whatever It is) you must comply.
If you don't "chose" to provide an "it" will my business be impacted?

 

[JPohling]

Agreed

 

[tmurray]

There again, you are "only" the inspector, not the "designer", picky, picky.

The distinction is not as minor as you would imply. The AHJ has a duty of care to enforce all laws that they are empowered to enforce. Simply stated, there is a reasonable expectation that the AHJ will enforce the building code because they are inspecting to it. If an inspector misses an obvious code violation that a reasonably diligent inspector would catch through the regular exercise of their duties and that deficiency later causes damages, the inspector is negligent. Whether they or their employer can be held liable for this appears to vary based on state laws. On the other hand, the inspector should never be expected to enforce or even be knowledgeable about laws that they are not empowered to enforce. This would create an unreasonable expectation that an inspector should know every applicable law to every single project they are involved in. This drastically extends the standard of care that most governmental organizations already struggle to meet. Stated another way, the regular person off the street has as much authority and responsibility to enforce a requirement here as the inspector. The other question is that since inspectors are not the enforcement agency for this law, how are they expected to be the experts that they are on the building code? Speaking as a manger, I would be more apt to send employees on training directly related to their duties than something we are not expected to enforce.

As I say to my tax payers when they tell me we should do more or have another law that regulates their issue with their neighbor: we'll do anything. You just have to pay more taxes to get it.

I should end this post by saying that I think the requirements should be in the building code as it is here in Canada. It does seem to make matters much simpler in that I as an inspector can use my discretion on what is and is not able to be achieved on a project (particularly renovations). But that is not the process you have.

 

[Paul Sweet]

It should be OK as long as a person in a wheelchair can rinse the sand off their feet as readily as an able-bodied person can.

 

[north star]

@ + @ + @

While enforcement of the ADASAD is only by the DOJ, there
is one word in the IBC that requires compliance by the adopting
AHJ, that comes reasonably close to the standards in the ADASAD.

From the IBC, Section 1101.2 - "Buildings and facilities shall be designed
and constructed to be accessible in accordance with this code AND
ICC A117.1".

@ + @ + @

 

[Yikes]

north star, in this particular case the pool in question is located in California.
California did not adopt IBC chapter 11. Instead it created/adopted its own chapter 11A for private housing, and chapter 11B which is modeled on / formatted like ADAS, but with additional requirements and restrictions.

 

[ICE]

north star, in this particular case the pool in question is located in California.
California did not adopt IBC chapter 11. Instead it created/adopted its own chapter 11A for private housing, and chapter 11B which is modeled on / formatted like ADAS, but with additional requirements and restrictions.

Ya that's California politicians at work. They couldn't leave well enough alone....or better yet, eliminate a bunch of it.

 

[ADAguy]

ICE, I don't understand your response. If you have lived in CA since the 80's you would know that we have had access codes since before most states except MA(67) & NC (73).

 

[mark handler]

ICE, I don't understand your response. If you have lived in CA since the 80's you would know that we have had access codes since before most states except MA(67) & NC (73).

In California, publicly funded buildings have required access since 1968.
Privately funded buildings have required access since 1970.

 

[ADAguy]

Yes MH but with no code direction established until 1981. 11 years to implement that direction ??!!!

 

[Robert Albera]

A shower outdoors is one of those things that seems odd at first, but when people see them at someone else’s place, they end up wanting them for their own backyard. Most people will want some privacy, typically a small fenced-in area. Building an outdoor shower enclosure is a fairly straightforward job, using many of the same techniques and building supplies as a deck or a fence.