# Calculating Restrooms Required



## Oscar (Oct 8, 2018)

I have a space that is currently 2075 sf, that will have 2 tenants sharing the space as small restaurants. Our occupancy will be M and A-2. Our project is located in NY so I am looking through the 1968 NYCBC and 2014 NYCPC - which provide 83 occupants as worst case.

Would I be able to provide 1 restroom to serve both tenants? Would I need separate restrooms for employee and customer? Could they be shared? Would I need separate restroom for men/women or can it be Unisex?


----------



## Rick18071 (Oct 8, 2018)

Do you mean 2 restaurants in one tenant space or 2 tenant spaces each with a restaurant?


----------



## Oscar (Oct 8, 2018)

2 tenants with a restaurant within that one 2075 sf space - no separation. So each tenant will have its own kitchen, but some cooking is actually shared, its own seating, etc.

Best I can describe it is like Dunkin Donuts with Baskin Robbins, except these don't work under the same umbrella.


----------



## ADAguy (Oct 8, 2018)

Are you the operator or the designer?


----------



## Oscar (Oct 8, 2018)

ADAguy said:


> Are you the operator or the designer?


Designer


----------



## Builder Bob (Oct 10, 2018)

As long as the restrooms are accessible regardless of when either one of the restaurants are open and the the number of fixtures provided is for the highest occupant load calculated for the common dining area, I do not see an issue. The issue is going to be who is responsible for cleaning and supplying the products for the restrooms for the customers.


----------



## HForester (Oct 11, 2018)

It is no different that a food court arrangement. Treat the 2 restaurants as one.  Per the _model_ 2012 IPC  83/2 = 42 each sex. Restaurant is 1/75 so 1 Male WC and 1 Female WC.  Two fully accessible toilet facilities are needed however, they do not need to have male/female signage (Section 403.1.2).


----------



## ADAguy (Oct 14, 2018)

Be wary, gender neutral are just around the corner.


----------



## HForester (Oct 16, 2018)

ADAguy said:


> Be wary, gender neutral are just around the corner.


In this situation, the code is working for gender neutral requirements:
"
Two fully accessible toilet facilities are needed however, they do not need to have male/female signage (Section 403.1.2).

The toilet rooms don't need to have male/female on each door therefore they are gender neutral.


----------



## ADAguy (Oct 22, 2018)

Seems Mr. "T" is out to change this definition (frowning).


----------



## georgia plans exam (Oct 22, 2018)

Who is out to change the definition of what?   GPE


----------



## JBI (Oct 23, 2018)

georgia plans exam said:


> Who is out to change the definition of what?   GPE



Reference is to the current occupant of the large white house on Pennsylvania Ave...


----------



## georgia plans exam (Oct 23, 2018)

No kidding? I wonder what he is out to change the definition of...


----------



## ADAguy (Oct 23, 2018)

Sex, "dude"; do you watch the evening news or others?
He wants your sex  to be defined as "what genes you were born with".
Doesn't address those with dual sets or  who want to change what they were given.
You either are or aren't, no in between.
Have I made myself clearer?


----------



## georgia plans exam (Oct 23, 2018)

Yup. If I got one, I'm a boy. If not, I'm a girl. very simple. Who is re-defining what? I don't care what you call yourself, stay out of my daughters bathroom if you've got one, "dude".   GPE


----------



## ADAguy (Oct 23, 2018)

"T" is seeking to drop gender neutral and other such words "duh". At home we can use "any" toilet, they do in Europe and other countries but "T" doesn't think it is ok here.


----------



## georgia plans exam (Oct 24, 2018)

Just messing with you, ADAguy. I am very aware of the nonsense being spouted by both major political parties. I just wish it would stay out of the codes but, I guess that is too much to ask.
As to the original question, I agree that two, separate "family or assisted-use toilet facilities" would suffice and that separate employee restrooms would not be required per 403.2.1 and 403.3 of the _model_ 2012 IPC.   GPE


----------



## ADAguy (Oct 24, 2018)

"good one" you got me!


----------



## HForester (Oct 25, 2018)

The gender neutral restroom issue is about WAY MORE than the right to use any toilet facility.....It is one small puzzle piece of a larger push to "equalize" rights  (and privileges)  for everybody. For example, why do most actresses get paid less than actors?  Why is there a thicker glass ceiling for women versus that for men?   Why are LGBTQ persons (still) significantly marginalized in society?  

Now I DON'T raise these questions because I am for or against anything or anybody! Let's not start a forum war. The point is to recognize where these "pushes" are coming from and possibly the reasons behind why people (such as Mr. T) are leaning one way or the other.  Consider just this one possibility: Suppose the religious right wing folks believe that it should be only M and F...nothing in between.  Mr T (or anybody else in politics) wants those votes. They will align there ideals with the people who hold the votes.  Another possibility is that politicians align themselves with the major  contributors to campaigns. Certainly they don't want to step on the hands that feed them.


----------



## ADAguy (Oct 26, 2018)

Spot on observations HF, it is also why is now why Political Science is now called Public Policy (or the "business" of government as a career) 
It has become a game of numbers controlled by alogarythms and analysts who determine to who and where to spend campagine dollars.


----------

