Drinking Fountain Day Care

[nwarchitect]

Hi - we are doing a TI for a new Children's Day Care (previously a permitted Children's Day Care) - OL is right on the edge of 100 total.

Table 2902.1 (same table appears elsewhere) looks like 1 DF required. (one exists but projects into corridor so adjusting it a bit regardless).

Question: The reality is that in today's world, all children bring water bottles to day care (even to elementary schools). Probably mostly adults using it.

Happy to include and/or upgrade the DF for general use, but the height requirements for a children's DF conflict with the adult ADA requirements. In other words, kid's top is 30" max & ADA clearance underneath (adults) is 27". That leaves 3" for the vertical dim of the DF, which of course is about 1-2" too thin for current manufacturers.

So...assuming one is reasonable (plus with installation they're about $1K a piece), design for the kids or the adult ADA? We're hoping to use the existing DF which is relatively new and works just fine, but because of the usual 4 1/2" depth of a DF, a single unit cannot accommodate both.

Any thoughts, besides toss the existing in the landfill and buy a new $1600 two-level? (might have to do it, but there is a budget).

If not, that's okay - but any thoughts or experience would be appreciated. Thanks.

 

[cda]

Welcome!!

 

[cda]

Not into df

But just add one at child’s level??

Or since it was day care before ask the ahj if you need to do anything??

 

[nwarchitect]

I wanted to edit this but a Reply looks like the only way....we're thinking that we'll go in with the thought that since there are about 60-70 kids in the building and only about a dozen adult teachers, we'd run with the kid-height version and see what happens.

 

[nwarchitect]

It's funny that the prior Day Care permitted late 2009/early 2010 is filled with miscellaneous code violations, including things like panic hardware that was just never installed.....strange. On the drinking fountain, it projects its full 14 inches into the 60 inch corridor, so no problem meeting the 44 inch width but of course it is supposed to only project 4 inches. Then when researching the most economical options, I went down the rabbit hole of conflicting ADA stuff....trying to do the "right thing" but realizing we'll just roll the dice and see what happens.

I do like this thread - I've gotten a lot of good guidance as a visitor, so thought I should join. Doubt I could provide answers (architect) but you never know.

 

[cda]

We take any and all thoughts

 

[classicT]

If using A117.1-2009, read exception #2 of Section 602.2 very carefully.

602.2 - Drinking fountains primarily for children's use shall be permitted where the spout outlet is 30 inches maximum above the floor, a parallel approach complying with Section 305 is provided and the clear floor space is centered on the drinking fountain.

Note that is says shall be permitted - not shall be. Due to the verbiage used, the intent of the code is to provide an alternate height for children's use; the 30 inch height is not a requirement, but an alternate, which if used, shall comply with this exception.

Similar exceptions exist for all children's height features (toilets, grab bars, etc.).

 

[Sadie Conley]

Hi nwarchitect,

Have you considered simply adding a retrofit bottle filler to the unit being as your primary goal is to provide adults a location to fill up their water bottles, without detracting from the children being able to use the water cooler? Here is an article that shares two different retrofit bottle filler units by Elkay that can fit a variety of units: https://equipartsdrinkingfountains.com/blogs/articles/elkay-bottle-filler-retrofit-chart-and-faq
And here's another article that shares information about retrofitting Oasis units with bottle fillers: https://equipartsdrinkingfountains.com/blogs/articles/oasis-water-cooler-troubleshooting

I hope that's helpful.

 

[steveray]

1109.5 Drinking fountains. Where drinking fountains are
provided on an exterior site, on a floor or within a secured
area, the drinking fountains shall be provided in accordance
with Sections 1109.5.1 and 1109.5.2.
1109.5.1 Minimum number. No fewer than two drinking
fountains shall be provided. One drinking fountain shall
comply with the requirements for people who use a wheelchair
and one drinking fountain shall comply with the
requirements for standing persons.
Exceptions:
1. A single drinking fountain with two separate
spouts that complies with the requirements for
people who use a wheelchair and standing persons
shall be permitted to be substituted for two
separate drinking fountains.
2. Where drinking fountains are primarily for children’s
use, drinking fountains for people using
wheelchairs shall be permitted to comply with the
children’s provisions in ICC A117.1 and drinking
fountains for standing children shall be permitted
to provide the spout at 30 inches (762 mm) minimum
above the floor.

 

[Sadie Conley]

Good to know, thanks Steveray. Perhaps a bi-level unit with a bottle filler then. Here's another article that shares popular ADA Compliant Bi-Level water coolers with a bottle filler: https://equipartsdrinkingfountains....r-coolers-with-bottle-filler-comparison-guide

 

[nwarchitect]

Thanks all! I have to admit I haven't been through there lately.....and in theory they're about to open. Not sure what they did for the DF...I did have to draw little wing walls on either side of the fountain - the ADA cane-tapping blind thing.

But when I have time, I can share some war stories on our Bureau of Environmental Services Trash Shed requirements - we called it the Trash Mahal, and a refusal of an inspector to provide a C of O because a couple of random shrubs drawn in the plan (for aesthetic purposes only) were not installed. It took the expediter a week of work to get the non-shrub revision through Planning, Erosion Control, etc.! For some reason, simple common sense has taken a holiday over here in Portland!

Thanks again - I really appreciate the depth of knowledge on this forum.

 

[ADAguy]

It's funny that the prior Day Care permitted late 2009/early 2010 is filled with miscellaneous code violations, including things like panic hardware that was just never installed.....strange. On the drinking fountain, it projects its full 14 inches into the 60 inch corridor, so no problem meeting the 44 inch width but of course it is supposed to only project 4 inches. Then when researching the most economical options, I went down the rabbit hole of conflicting ADA stuff....trying to do the "right thing" but realizing we'll just roll the dice and see what happens.

I do like this thread - I've gotten a lot of good guidance as a visitor, so thought I should join. Doubt I could provide answers (architect) but you never know.

I thought you Ducks were more up to date on ADA compliance.
DF should be in an alcove or have cane detectable rails.

Expecting an average/to tall adult to bend down to a childs height is asking for an injury claim.

 

[ADAguy]

Also note: DFs are also intended to be operated without grasping the bottles you mention (push buttons).

 

[nwarchitect]

That's true (bending down) - guess I'll have to go see what got built! Yep - I didn't show detectable rails because the sizes they came in didn't work for keeping the exit passage wide enough....and a custom one(s) was way more money that just a couple of stud wing walls. The double-height fountains seemed to be the way to go, but there was a perfectly good (single) one there and the price tag on a new double was way out of her budget....plenty of other stuff went over-budget of course! Like the 60 days it took the Life Safety reviewer to review it so she lost her entire rent-free construction period! Not to mention the $20,000 trash shed with sanitary hookup, concrete floors, etc. for a couple of small residential sized trash bins. Ah well.....

But yeah, as an architect, I do find the codes to be overwhelmingly conflicting on certain things. Trash rooms was one - it's a total cluster between Fire, Life Safety, Environmental, etc. Even the Fire Department was confused. (We ditched it and took it outside - cheaper).

I'm mostly doing residential which is a bit easier - the commercial and this daycare was a challenge, even though it was a permitted day care previously. We thought it would fly through. But no....(as they say).