Hi Mark,
I think it is axiomatic that in inclusive design compromise is undesirable. An accessible toilet is already a compromise to accommodate as wide a range of impairments as possible, so further diluting that design can be dangerous.
IF an accessible loo is constructed that fully meets the minimum spec of BS8300 (I’ve never found one that does) then enlarging the space and adding ceiling hoist, changing / shower bench and privacy screening should not impinge on that - BUT - there is good reason for CP loos to include a peninsular toilet which is that some people will need assistance from both sides and an accessible toilet cannot be peninsular because the user needs to reach washing and drying facilities while still sitting on the loo.
Vin, Sent from my iPhone
> On 24 Apr 2020, at 09:37, Mark Taylor <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> Dear Vaila and Anthony
>
> A small but significant public building is proposed and they won't agree to both Changing Places and standard accessible toilet, but would agree to Changing Places if it can include both.
>
> So any proposed compromise would help.
>
> Yours
> Mark
> XOX
>
> ----------End of Message----------
----------End of Message----------
|