Rank: Guest 
|
Posted By gus.c
Plan in place at workplace to extend shower facility which is provided for general welfare use only - e.g. for cyclists to shower down at start of shift or for guys prior to going for a beer!
Does the proprietor have to instal disabled facilities now that he is replacing old showers? This would increase cost significantly and may involve more planning implications.
Any help appreciated, and regards,
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Merv Newman
yes you do. any facilities available to able-bodied people must be available for all.
Do one (or as many a you need) double-wide to give room for a carer. I don't see it costing too much extra, and it is a legal requirement.
Merv
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By gus.c
Thanks Merv. I suppose you are right about the need to provide disabled access but I sense some reluctance to provide full disabled facilities simply from a cost point of view and this may jeopardise the simple upgrade put forward.
It will obviously need hand-rails, wheelchair access etc. which was outside of the intended scope and I think there is also some concern about the wider CDM or other planning implications if it becomes more than just a couple of shower heads.
Nevermind I will pass on your comments
Gus.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Merv Newman
Gus,
It really doesn't have to cost much extra. Instead of three able-bodied showers you have one single and one double wide. The "ables" might moan about queueing but the "disabled" will appreciate it. Actually, it could turn out cheaper. Only two shower heads.
Apologies if I have the terminology wrong.
one of our oldest friends (25 years) has been tetraplegic since she was eight. You try getting her knickers back up without making her giggle.
Merv
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.