Hi Alan
Totally agree! The other issue is that in areas for staff, designers seems
to assume that there is no need for accessible facilities, e.g. staff
areas in hospitals!
Best wishes
Flick
> If you have received this email in error, please notify us by telephone on
> 01437 764551 and delete it from your computer immediately. Os ydych chi
> wedi derbyn yr e-bost hwn trwy gamgymeriad, byddwch cystal â rhoi gwybod
> inni trwy ffonio 01437 764551. Wedyn dylech ddileu’r e-bost ar unwaith
> oddi ar eich cyfrifiadur.
>
>
> We should start by enforcing the current AD M correctly...
> Part M 5.7 b) states quite clearly that at least one wheelchair accessible
> toilet should be provided at each location in a building where sanitary
> facilities are provided for use by customers and visitors to a building.
> This should surely be the target to aim for but is rarely the case in new
> developments and never seems to be the case in schools. If Part M is
> enforced properly we would eventually have a much more accessible building
> stock in the UK but because of the lack of knowledge of most building
> control authorities we keep getting interpretations of the regulations
> which bear no resemblance to the standards required and therefore more
> inaccessible buildings. The word reasonable is often bandied about by
> designers and developers and I am quick to respond that yes, it has to be
> reasonable, but the whole idea of Part M is to provide a reasonable level
> of access to buildings for disabled people, not reasonable for the
> developer...
>
> Glad that’s off my chest... ☺
>
> Alan Hunt
> Access Officer
> Pembrokeshire County Council
> County Hall
> Haverfordwest
> SA61 1TP
> Tel: 01437 775148
>
> From: Accessibuilt list [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of
> Vin West
> Sent: 19 December 2014 14:56
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: Accessible toilets and baby change!
>
> thanks Jane,
> do you know if the BS might look at this standard any time soon - there
> are a number of anomalies as you have suggested that could do with
> updating. My particular bonnet bees are clear guidance as to the second
> drop down rail that is needed on the narrow side of the loo [this is made
> clear in ADM but not in the BS] and using modern electrical safety
> standards to bring the electric hand drier into reach from the toilet. I
> aways try to insist on non-gender toilets for exactly the reasons you
> suggest and the need for lowered washbasins and urinals [where fitted] for
> shorter people. The other issue that frustrates me is the number of
> layouts I have to correct where the hand driers are across the room from
> the washbasins in non-accessible toilets leading to a trail of water on
> the floor waiting for an accident to happen!
>
> Cheers,
>
> Vin
>
>
> Vin West
> Chair
> Arfon Access Group
> 01286880761
> 07771536760
> Glyn Dwr
> Llandwrog Uchaf
> Caernarfon
> LL54 7RA
> [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
>
>
>
>
> On 19 Dec 2014, at 09:16, jane Simpson Access
> <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote:
>
> Vin, great piece, the one thing that is really useful is the height of the
> flush and not obstructing by the grab rail. This is one thing I was going
> to raise to BS8300 as there is no height specified anywhere for the flush.
> I also recommend no higher than 1000mm, what do people think of a wall
> mounted flush to the side of the drop down rail?
>
> I am not adverse to having baby change within accessible toilet, provided
> the space is increased to ensure the full 1500 x 2200mm is available with
> the change facility down and that it is not the only accessible WC.
>
> The numbers of accessible toilets needs also to be considered, perhaps
> there should be a certain number i.e. for every 10 general (male and
> female toilets and urinals) at least one accessible WC, what do people
> thing and is there any evidence we could use to support this in any
> amendment to BS8300?
>
> I also think we should move to more unisex general WC’s to cover
> transgender but also the issue of young children (under 11) having to go
> to the toilet without an adult in a public building. My son refused to go
> into the ladies from the age of 8 and I used to hang around outside the
> male toilets!
>
> Regards Jane
>
> Jane Simpson
> RIBA & NRAC Consultant
> T: 01484 423501
> M: 07777 607239
> www.janesimpsonaccess.com<http://www.janesimpsonaccess.com/>
>
> <image003.png>
>
> Registered address: New House Bungalow, New House Road, Sheepridge,
> Huddersfield, HD2 1EG Company No 6559802, VAT No 930 0839 42
> This e-mail is for the addressee only. The information contained in it
> and any attachments are confidential and may be privileged. If you have
> received this e-mail in error, please notify us immediately. You are not
> authorized to, and must not disclose, copy, distribute or retain this
> e-mail or any part of it.
> ________________________________
>
>
> From: Accessibuilt list [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of
> Vin West
> Sent: 18 December 2014 14:55
> To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: Accessible toilets and baby change!
>
> while it is absolutely true that ADM outlaws placing of baby change
> platforms in accessible toilets nevertheless the other side of this coin
> is the need for provision of baby change facilities in an accessible form
> to meet the needs of parents who are wheelchair users or shorter people.
> I always object strongly to the automatic placing of baby change units in
> accessible toilets for exactly the reasons that Alan has stated but if
> disabled parents are excluded that is a problem in itself. I’m sorry if
> that complicates your decision.
> Without seeing plans or benefitting from a site visit my top of the head
> advice would be to provide one accessible toilet without baby change and
> one with and include baby changes in male and female loos - that way
> non-disabled parents do not need to occupy accessible facilities but
> disabled parents have equal access to baby change facilities. The other
> potential benefit of an oversize unit including a baby change is that it
> provides more elbow room for people needing support from one or more
> Personal Assistants which a minimum-size 1.5 by 2.2 unit does not
> provide.
> At the risk of teaching egg-sucking I have attached a briefing sheet I
> give to architects and developers covering some of the items that are most
> often forgotten in accessible loos.
>
> ----------End of Message---------- Run by SURFACE for more information on
> research, teaching and consultancy:
> http://www.surface.salford.ac.uk<http://www.surface.salford.ac.uk/>
> Archives for the Accessibuilt discussion list are located at
> http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/accessibuilt.html
> ----------End of Message---------- Run by SURFACE for more information on
> research, teaching and
> consultancy:http://www.surface.salford.ac.uk<http://www.surface.salford.ac.uk/>
> Archives for the Accessibuilt discussion list are located at
> http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/accessibuilt.html
>
> ----------End of Message---------- Run by SURFACE for more information on
> research, teaching and consultancy: http://www.surface.salford.ac.uk
> Archives for the Accessibuilt discussion list are located at
> http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/accessibuilt.html
>
> **************************************************************************************************************
>
> This document should only be read by those persons to whom it is
> addressed, and be used by them for its intended purpose; and must not
> otherwise be reproduced, copied, disseminated, disclosed, modified,
> distributed, published or actioned. If you have received this email in
> error, please notify us immediately by telephone on 01437 764551 and
> delete it from your computer immediately. This email address must not be
> passed on to any third party nor be used for any other purpose.
>
> Pembrokeshire County Council Website - http://www.pembrokeshire.gov.uk
>
> Please Note: Incoming and outgoing e-mail messages are routinely monitored
> for compliance with our IT Security, and Email/Internet Policy.
>
> This signature also confirms that this email message has been swept for
> the presence of computer viruses and malicious code.
>
> ***************************************************************************************************************
>
> Dim ond y sawl y mae'r ddogfen hon wedi'i chyfeirio atynt ddylai ei
> darllen, a'i defnyddio ganddynt ar gyfer ei dibenion bwriadedig; ac ni
> ddylid fel arall ei hatgynhyrchu, copio, lledaenu, datgelu, addasu,
> dosbarthu, cyhoeddi na'i rhoi ar waith chwaith. Os ydych chi wedi derbyn
> yr e-bost hwn trwy gamgymeriad, byddwch cystal a rhoi gwybod i ni ar
> unwaith trwy ffonio 01437 764551 a'i ddileu oddi ar eich cyfrifiadur ar
> unwaith. Ni ddylid rhoi'r cyfeiriad e-bost i unrhyw drydydd parti na'i
> ddefnyddio ar gyfer unrhyw ddiben arall chwaith.
>
> Gwefan Cyngor Sir Penfro - http://www.pembrokeshire.gov.uk
>
> Sylwer: Mae negeseuon e-bost sy’n cael eu hanfon a’u derbyn yn cael eu
> monitro’n rheolaidd ar gyfer cydymffurfio â’n Diogelwch TG, a’n Polisi
> E-bost/Rhyngrwyd.
>
> Mae'r llofnod hwn hefyd yn cadarnhau bod y neges e-bost hon wedi cael ei
> harchwilio am fodolaeth firysau cyfrifiadurol a chod maleisus.
>
> ***************************************************************************************************************
>
>
>
> ----------End of Message----------
> Run by SURFACE for more information on research, teaching and
> consultancy:
> http://www.surface.salford.ac.uk
> Archives for the Accessibuilt discussion list are located at
> http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/accessibuilt.html
>
----------End of Message----------
Run by SURFACE for more information on research, teaching and consultancy:
http://www.surface.salford.ac.uk
Archives for the Accessibuilt discussion list are located at http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/accessibuilt.html
|