# Wheelchair Accessible  Toilet Compartment



## Mech (Sep 17, 2019)

2009 A117.1 & ADA

Is a turn-around space required in a wheelchair accessible compartment?  I do not see specific requirements for it although I have always provided one.


----------



## classicT (Sep 17, 2019)

In a compartment (w/in partitions), no. The specific requirements of Section 604.8 apply. 

*604.8 Toilet Compartments*
Wheelchair accessible toilet compartments shall meet the requirements of 604.8.1 and 604.8.3.  Compartments containing more than one plumbing fixture shall comply with 603.  Ambulatory accessible compartments shall comply with 604.8.2 and 604.8.3.

*604.8.1 Wheelchair Accessible Compartments*
Wheelchair accessible compartments shall comply with 604.8.1.

*604.8.1.1 Size*
Wheelchair accessible compartments shall be 60 inches (1525 mm) wide minimum measured perpendicular to the side wall, and 56 inches (1420 mm) deep minimum for wall hung water closets and 59 inches (1500 mm) deep minimum for floor mounted water closets measured perpendicular to the rear wall. Wheelchair accessible compartments for children’s use shall be 60 inches (1525 mm) wide minimum measured perpendicular to the side wall, and 59 inches (1500 mm) deep minimum for wall hung and floor mounted water closets measured perpendicular to the rear wall.

*Figure 604.8.1.1 Size of Wheelchair Accessible Toilet Compartment*


----------



## ADAguy (Sep 18, 2019)

A 60" dia circle or a 'T" turn will both allow entry and exit.


----------



## classicT (Sep 18, 2019)

ADAguy said:


> A 60" dia circle or a 'T" turn will both allow entry and exit.


Neither a 60" dia circle nor a 'T' will fit within a 56" x 60" compartment; however, a 56" x 60" compartment is legit.

This is why toe clearances are required.


----------



## JPohling (Sep 18, 2019)

That is why you need to increase the size of the accessible "room" to 66" in width for the fancy full walls with real door toilet room designs.
often missed  expensive to correct.


----------



## Paul Sweet (Sep 19, 2019)

The turnaround space is required somewhere in the room outside the accessible stall.


----------



## steveray (Sep 19, 2019)

And a 67" turning circle in 2017 ANSI i believe...Get ready to remodel all of your 3-30 yr old bathrooms when you adopt that....


----------



## classicT (Sep 19, 2019)

steveray said:


> And a 67" turning circle in 2017 ANSI i believe...Get ready to remodel all of your 3-30 yr old bathrooms when you adopt that....


Make room for the motorized scooters.


----------



## Rick18071 (Sep 19, 2019)

steveray said:


> And a 67" turning circle in 2017 ANSI i believe...Get ready to remodel all of your 3-30 yr old bathrooms when you adopt that....



Only when the IEBC requires it. And that will probably be only for new or reconfigured bathrooms


----------



## ADAguy (Sep 19, 2019)

steveray said:


> And a 67" turning circle in 2017 ANSI i believe...Get ready to remodel all of your 3-30 yr old bathrooms when you adopt that....



Code revisions are not retroactive, unlike ADA.


----------



## classicT (Sep 19, 2019)

ADAguy said:


> Code revisions are not retroactive, unlike ADA.


A117.1 is not code, it is a "Standard". The IEBC is the 'code'. The IEBC will require accessibility to be brought to current standards via Section 305.

As an example, a typical alteration would be per 305.6. This would require it be brought to current code unless technically infeasible (check out that definition - means unless structurally impossible).

*305.6 Alterations*
A facility that is altered shall comply with the applicable provisions in Chapter 11 of the _International Building Code_, unless technically infeasible. Where compliance with this section is technically infeasible, the alteration shall provide access to the maximum extent technically feasible.
*Exceptions: (not listed herein)*​
What the 2017 A117.1 Standard does introduce is overlap within the turning space. This will mostly alleviate most issues in existing facilities, especially via the provision for existing buildings and facilities (304.3.1.2).


----------



## ADAguy (Sep 20, 2019)

So, though IEBC is a "model" code, its acceptance is up to the local AHJ. ADA is :"The" law and as such differs from a code. AHJs will not typically respond to ADA complaints and then only to IEBC complaints with regards to noncompliance on permitted alterations, and then only to areas of work.


----------



## classicT (Sep 20, 2019)

ADAguy said:


> So, though IEBC is a "model" code, its acceptance is up to the local AHJ. ADA is :"The" law and as such differs from a code. AHJs will not typically respond to ADA complaints and then only to IEBC complaints with regards to noncompliance on permitted alterations, and then only to areas of work.


Correct. I as a plans examiner have no ability to review or enforce provisions of the ADA. Owners and design professionals have an obligation to adhere to the ADA and can be sued when they do not. What I can do, is enforce the IBC/IEBC, which provide scoping for how to apply the A117.1 Standard. The A117.1 Standard has been developed to meet or exceed the requirements of the ADA.


----------



## ADAguy (Sep 20, 2019)

Has DOJ acknowledged your comment?


----------



## classicT (Sep 23, 2019)

ADAguy said:


> Has DOJ acknowledged your comment?


This comment?


Ty J. said:


> Correct. I as a plans examiner have no ability to review or enforce provisions of the ADA. Owners and design professionals have an obligation to adhere to the ADA and can be sued when they do not. What I can do, is enforce the IBC/IEBC, which provide scoping for how to apply the A117.1 Standard. The A117.1 Standard has been developed to meet or exceed the requirements of the ADA.


----------



## ADAguy (Sep 23, 2019)

Again, has DOJ so stated that A117.1 Standard is a safe harbor yet? In the opinion of 1BC/IEBC it may but has DOJ concurred?


----------



## steveray (Sep 23, 2019)

Doesn't matter....They have to "improve" accessibility every time they remodel, so f a designer is designing to anything less than 2017 ANSI, the next time someone pulls a permit at that site they will potentially be tearing out not very old bathrooms....

Thanks for the heads up on turning overlap TJ....


----------



## classicT (Sep 23, 2019)

ADAguy said:


> Again, has DOJ so stated that A117.1 Standard is a safe harbor yet? In the opinion of 1BC/IEBC it may but has DOJ concurred?


Unless we are talking California, most departments have no reason to follow the DOJ. ADA is a Fed requirement not a Building Code. I cannot enforce it.


----------



## ADAguy (Sep 23, 2019)

Ty J. said:


> Unless we are talking California, most departments have no reason to follow the DOJ. ADA is a Fed requirement not a Building Code. I cannot enforce it.



I'm not implying that you can, only that an owner is required to comply with Federal law and your code when a permit is pulled. The owner is bound to retroactively comply with the law but not the code (except for the areas being altered or added to).


----------



## Yikes (Sep 25, 2019)

Perhaps worth restating here:
A toilet COMPARTMENT (ADAS 604) and a  toilet ROOM (ADA 603) are not the same thing.

The toilet room is required to have a turnaround in ADA (and CBC).
The toilet compartment is not required to have a turnaround in ADA or CBC, but is required to have toe clearance per ADA 604.8.1.4.
ANSI 117.1 shows not merely and overlap, but an entirely larger turnaround space than currently required by ADA/CBC.
If your local code has adopted ANSI 117.1, then you will need the 67" turnarounds in your new buildings; this applies to toilet ROOMS as well as COMPARTMENTS.
If your local code has not adopted ANSI 117.1 (as California has not), then you still  only need 60" for turnaround in your toilet ROOMS, and you only need the clearances shown in 604.8.1.4 in COMPARTMENTS.


----------



## Rick18071 (Sep 27, 2019)

So which edition of the IBC uses the 2017 ANSI 117.1?


----------



## steveray (Sep 27, 2019)

In theory the 2018...unless amended out locally...


----------



## classicT (Sep 27, 2019)

steveray said:


> In theory the 2018...unless amended out locally...


I thought that the 2018 IBC adopted the A117.1-2017 standard; however, upon checking Chapter 35, the 2009 standard is still referenced.


----------

