# Ceiling requirements for commercial restrooms?



## Michael.L (Aug 26, 2018)

We need to build a new ADA single-occupancy restroom in a commercial space. The previous tenant build-out (~40 years old) had a small restroom for employees only; we will be demolishing this existing restroom.

But I'm curious about partition wall and ceiling requirements for commercial restrooms. I know, from poking my head above the ceiling grid that the partition walls for the existing restroom do not extend up to the roof; they terminate at 10 feet (the height of the drop ceiling). Unfortunately, I don't recall the exact construction of the ceiling inside the restroom. But I do remember seeing a standard square A/C diffuser, so it may use the same acoustic tile drop ceiling as the rest of the space.

In any case, our new restroom will be publically accessible and obviously, it must comply with current building codes. But I haven't found any building code references regarding restroom ceilings, other than required minimum height. So I'm wondering if either the ceiling must be solid (e.g., drywall construction) and/or if the partition walls must extend above the drop ceiling to the building roof.


----------



## Rick18071 (Aug 27, 2018)

No and no unless the walls need to be fire rated.


----------



## classicT (Aug 27, 2018)

Not a code requirement to do so, but is a common practice by some for privacy concerns.


----------



## Michael.L (Aug 27, 2018)

Thanks for the replies. I was specifically wondering about the privacy concern. But it could also present a security concern since, in our layout, the restroom will be adjacent to the office.

My present thinking is to spec a solid drywall ceiling. I guess I will have to set it at 10' as that is the height of the existing fire sprinklers, although I'd prefer it to be at 8' for aesthetics.

That raises another question: Is it required to have a fire sprinkler head in every partitioned room (e.g., the restroom, the office, storage room, etc)? I haven't mapped the location of the existing sprinkler heads yet, so I'm not sure if one falls within each planned room.


----------



## ADAguy (Aug 28, 2018)

There you go, aesthetics vs safety, "duh" ?


----------



## Michael.L (Aug 28, 2018)

ADAguy said:


> There you go, aesthetics vs safety, "duh" ?


Did I say I'd forego safety for aesthetics? No, actually I said the opposite. "SMH" ?


----------



## ADAguy (Aug 29, 2018)

I believe you did say "prefer" 8', no? vs the 10' height of the existing sprinklers. Lowering the ceiling would add additional cost, no?


----------



## Michael.L (Aug 29, 2018)

ADAguy said:


> I believe you did say "prefer" 8', no? vs the 10' height of the existing sprinklers. Lowering the ceiling would add additional cost, no?


Yes, I'd prefer 8' for aesthetics: a small room with a very tall ceiling feels like a shaft. Yes, lowering the ceiling would require lowering the existing sprinkler heads at an additional cost. I stated, "I guess I will have to set [the ceiling] at 10' as that is the height of the existing fire sprinklers."

So how did you assume that I was willing to sacrifice safety for aesthetics?


----------

