toilet partly in front of mdp.

Status
Not open for further replies.
R

rodr330

Member
Location
hinckley,ohio,usa
I have a job where there was a kitchen fire. The owner is a friend & this is a rental. We replaced all knob & tube in kitchen & bathroom above. I upgraded service & panel to 100 amps. My concern is there is an exsisting toilet partly in front of left side of panel. I can work on panel without a problem but there is not 30 inches. Im thinking since house was built in 1950's it should be grandfathered. I cant move panel & toilet is in basement in cement. I would like to get your opinion! Thank you !
 
Is this simply a toilet in the basement or does it meet the NEC definition of a bathroom ?
(Bathroom. An area including a basin with one or more of
the following: a toilet, a urinal, a tub, a shower, a foot bath,
a bidet, or similar plumbing fixtures)
 
People throw the term "grandfathered" around pretty freely. Grandfathered does not mean, since it's been there a long time it should be fine. What it means is, Building service equipment lawfully in existence at the time of the adoption of the technical codes may have their use, maintenance or repair continued if the use, maintenance or repair is in accordance with the original design and a hazard to life, health or property has not been created by such building service equipment.

So basically if the panel originally had the correct clearances and then the toilet was put in later, that means the that panel is no longer in compliance. Or vice versa.
 
you mean like this. I agree with the others it is a violation

ry%3D400
 
cowboyjwc said:
People throw the term "grandfathered" around pretty freely. Grandfathered does not mean, since it's been there a long time it should be fine. What it means is, Building service equipment lawfully in existence at the time of the adoption of the technical codes may have their use, maintenance or repair continued if the use, maintenance or repair is in accordance with the original design and a hazard to life, health or property has not been created by such building service equipment.

So basically if the panel originally had the correct clearances and then the toilet was put in later, that means the that panel is no longer in compliance. Or vice versa.
Click to expand...

A nice clear and concise summary.

Good job John. :thumbsup:
 
rodr330 said:
I upgraded service & panel to 100 amps. My concern is there is an exsisting toilet partly in front of left side of panel. I'm thinking since house was built in 1950's it should be grandfathered.
Click to expand...


I'm not going to say that you can't get it approved at the local level because you may be able to convince an inspector that you are right and there is enough room.

But when when you up-graded the panel that means that you are no longer repairing an existing installation. And when you have fire many authorities will condemn a property and then they can force you to bring everything up to code because you will need a new certificate of occupancy.

If you even think you can get something like this approved the best time to run it by the AHJ is before you install the new equipment.
 
cowboyjwc said:
People throw the term "grandfathered" around pretty freely. Grandfathered does not mean, since it's been there a long time it should be fine. What it means is, Building service equipment lawfully in existence at the time of the adoption of the technical codes may have their use, maintenance or repair continued if the use, maintenance or repair is in accordance with the original design and a hazard to life, health or property has not been created by such building service equipment.
Click to expand...
Or not. Some AHJ's will tolerate something that was legal at the time, but if you modify it in any way (in some cases even if you just open it and look at it), you are on the hook to bring everything connected to it up to current code.
 
ggunn said:
Or not. Some AHJ's will tolerate something that was legal at the time, but if you modify it in any way (in some cases even if you just open it and look at it), you are on the hook to bring everything connected to it up to current code.
Click to expand...
And, conversely, some AHJ's will tolerate even things which were probably illegal at the time of installation if the use goes back so far that figuring out the relevant originally-applicable code would be too much work. :)
 
The fact is if the ahj allows it and it is not compliant that will not absolve you of any wrongdoings. I would correct the infraction and be done with it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top