Legislature(1999 - 2000)
05/07/1999 03:26 PM House L&C
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
CSSB 8 - MINIMUM REQUIRED PLUMBING FACILITIES
Number 0104
VICE-CHAIRMAN HALCRO announced the committee's first order of
business is CSSB 8(FIN), "An Act relating to the minimum plumbing
fixtures required for females and males in the state plumbing code;
and providing for an effective date." He indicated the intention
is to hear from the legislation's sponsor, discuss and possibly
adopt a amendment proposed by Chairman Rokeberg, but not move the
bill at this hearing.
Number 0119
HANS NEIDIG, Legislative Administrative Assistant to Senator Dave
Donley, Alaska State Legislature, came forward on behalf of the
bill sponsor. Mr. Neidig informed the committee that Senator
Donley had been detained in the Senate Finance Standing Committee
and sent his apologies. Mr. Neidig indicated his testimony would
be brief because of other business before the committee. He
pointed out that Dwight Perkins, Deputy Commissioner, Department of
Labor, and Al Dwyer [Director, Division of Labor Standards and
Safety] of the department, were present to assist with technical
questions. Mr. Neidig explained that SB 8 would amend existing
plumbing codes to increase the number of women's facilities in
assembly places. The legislation would only to apply to new
construction and buildings where capacity would be increased after
remodeling. Senator Donley believes that such a measure is
necessary to respond to the congestion women experience in women's
facilities at a public events and in public buildings.
MR. NEIDIG noted he is sure everyone has witnessed or experienced
that congestion, whether attending a sporting event, concert,
convention or any other public event. He said Senator Donley
believes that this is not a satisfactory situation and the problem
must be remedied. Referring to the sponsor statement, Mr. Neidig
commented there are a number of good reasons why this legislation
is needed but indicated he would not read these reasons to the
committee in the interests of time. He noted Senator Donley
believes this legislation is reasonable in light of the evidence
collected. Washington State has the highest ratio of women's to
men's facilities at 4 to 1. Senate Bill 8 only calls for 2.7
women's facilities to 1 men's facility, at its highest ratio. The
legislation only represents a modest increase in the number of
women's facilities but the sponsor believes these increases are in
the best interests of Alaskans. [The sponsor statement for CSSB
8(FIN) read:
Senate Bill 8 amends existing plumbing code in AS
18.60.705 to more closely resemble the national standard
and increase the minimum number of women's toilet
facilities in assembly places. SB 8 will only apply to
new construction and buildings that have been remodeled
to increase occupancy capacity.
Senate Bill 8 amends current statute and specifically
addresses the number of toilet facilities provided for
women in "assembly places." The current table in statute
does provide a slightly elevated number of facilities for
women in comparison to those provided for men, but the
ratio does not meet the demand. SB 8(FIN) will amend
table A-29-A currently in statute to increase the minimum
number of women's toilets.
Common sense tells us there is a serious problem with a
shortage of female facilities in large assembly
buildings. Extremely long lines outside the women's
restroom at sporting events, concerts and other events
are common. Senate Bill 8 will reduce the current
excessive waiting time to use the facilities for women
who attend large public events in buildings constructed
or expanded after January 1, 2000.
The basis of the current building code for plumbing
fixtures, water flows and usage is from research done in
1924 by the U.S. Bureau of Standards. Our society has
changed significantly since 1924 when women rarely
ventured outside the home. In 1999, women are in public
every day. They go to ballgames, festivals, concerts,
stadiums, arenas, assembly halls, conference halls,
plays, movie theatres, churches, etc.... Unlike 1924, in
1999 there are no public places or places or work that
you will not find women.
Women have health problems that require their more
frequent use of restroom facilities. One study reported
that 50% of women over the age of 18 have an incontinence
problem. Childbirth is the largest contributing factor
to this and when such women are forced to stand in long
lines to use the bathroom, they can be in considerable
pain. Additionally, it physically takes longer for women
to use restroom facilities. A study done by Cornell
University determined men averaged 45 seconds and women
averaged 80 seconds to "go to the bathroom." Another
similar survey found that men average 47 seconds in the
restroom while women take 91 seconds.
Other states have already enacted "potty parity" laws.
In Tennessee and six other states, the ratio is 2:1. In
Texas the ratio is not less than 2:1 in facilities where
the public congregates. Minneapolis and St. Paul,
Minnesota have a 3:1 ration while Pittsburgh,
Pennsylvania has a ratio of 3.75:1. Washington State has
the highest ratio of women's to men's facilities of 4:1
in all public buildings. SB 8(FIN) only requires up to
a 2.7:1 ratio depending on the size of the facility.]
Number 0270
REPRESENTATIVE MURKOWSKI asked the difference between a water
closet and a lavatory.
MR. NEIDIG replied it is his understanding a lavatory is a wash
basin or sink, and a water closet would be the toilet facility.
REPRESENTATIVE MURKOWSKI confirmed from Mr. Neidig, however, that
they are still called water closets.
Number 0345
DWIGHT PERKINS, Deputy Commissioner, Department of Labor, came
forward. He stated the department's staff in the field has heard
these concerns. The department has no opposition to the bill and
thinks it is a good piece of legislation.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HALCRO confirmed no one wished to testify on SB 8.
The vice-chairman requested that Ms. Seitz, aide to the House Labor
and Commerce Standing Committee, explain the proposed amendment and
its merits. The proposed amendment, labeled 1-LS0074\W.1,
Bannister, 4/26/99, read:
Page 2, line 5:
Delete "casinos""
Insert "casinos," when the category is applied to
auditoriums, convention halls, stadiums, and casinos,"
Number 0482
JANET SEITZ, Legislative Assistant to Representative Norman
Rokeberg, Alaska State Legislature, came forward to explain the
amendment as aide to the House Labor and Standing Committee. She
stated the proposed amendment is "W.1" in the committee members'
bill packets. She indicated the May 6, 1999, opinion from Terry
Bannister, Legislative Counsel, Legislative Legal and Research
Services, Legislative Affairs Agency, and the April 27, 1999,
memorandum from Al Dwyer, Director, Division of Labor Standards and
Safety, Department of Labor, might be helpful in explaining the
terms. [Ms. Bannister's 5/6/99 memorandum read:
You have asked how dance floors and lodge rooms would be
treated if the amendment described above as "W.1" were
adopted. The following is my reading of the bill and the
amendment.
The bill changes the plumbing fixture requirements of one
category of Table A - 29 - A of the 1997 edition of the
Uniform Building Code. That category establishes
plumbing fixture requirements for auditoriums, convention
halls, dance floors, lodge rooms, stadiums, and casinos.
As the bill reads now, the bill's proposed plumbing
fixture ratios apply to all of these facilities in the
category. If the proposed amendment W.1 is added to the
bill, the ratios identified in the bill will apply only
to auditoriums, convention halls, stadiums, and casinos.
For the other subjects not covered by amendment W.1
(dance floors and lodge rooms), the ratios in Table A -
29 - A, unchanged by the bill, would apply.]
[Mr. Dwyer's 4/27/99 memorandum read:
There is no definition of "dance floor" or "Lodge room"
in the UBC [Uniform Building Code]. However, based on my
own experience as a Building Official and on advice from
Chris Roust, CBJ [City and Borough of Juneau] Building
Official, a dance floor is a portion of the floor area
specifically designated for dancing. A lodge room is a
room in a private club that is used for club rituals,
wedding receptions etc. (usually not the bar area).]
MS. SEITZ explained that the amendment would remove dance floors
and lodge rooms from the entities covered by the new table in SB 8.
She indicated the path to this end is a somewhat roundabout. The
language on page 2, lines 4 and 5, of the legislation refers to
assembly places and lists the various types [CSSB 8(FIN), page 2,
lines 4-5: ""Assembly places--Auditoriums, convention halls, dance
floors, lodge rooms, stadiums and casinos" the ratios"]. According
to the bill drafter [Ms. Bannister], this language must remain in
its current form because this is the term used on the table, Table
A-29-A. Therefore, Ms. Bannister's suggestion to accomplish
Chairman Rokeberg's purpose is to insert a comma after "casinos" on
line 5 and add the amendment language, "when the category is
applied to auditoriums, convention halls, stadiums, and casinos,",
thus leaving out dance floors and lodge rooms. Ms. Seitz noted Ms.
Bannister's memorandum points out that this would leave dance
floors and lodge rooms under the current table, not under the
legislation's revised table.
Number 0600
REPRESENTATIVE MURKOWSKI mentioned "dance floor", noting that is
not a room or an auditorium, it is a floor. She commented there
are no water closets or lavatories anywhere on a dance floor.
REPRESENTATIVE CISSNA questioned that a dance floor is a portion of
a room.
MS. SEITZ answered that Mr. Dwyer's memorandum indicates there is
no definition of "dance floor" or "lodge room" in the building
code. She referred to Mr. Dyer's explanations of both terms. Ms.
Seitz explained Chairman Rokeberg feels organizations like the
Moose Lodge, for example, which are usually small groups, would be
better off with the old table if they wished to renovate, or build
a new building. Ms. Seitz communicated that this is because the
old table requires fewer plumbing facilities and would therefore
result in lower building costs.
REPRESENTATIVE MURKOWSKI indicated she still had some confusion
regarding water closets and dance floors, but was not going to be
concerned about it.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HALCRO confirmed there were no further questions for
Ms. Seitz. He stated he would entertain a motion to adopt
Amendment 1.
Number 0710
REPRESENTATIVE MURKOWSKI moved to adopt Amendment 1, 1-LS0074\W.1,
Bannister, 4/26/99. There being no objection, Amendment 1 was
adopted.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HALCRO announced SB 8 would be held.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|