Comments

My wife will agree with you in spades. There is, however, one cool exception--the Ordway Center in St. Paul, MN. One of my buddies worked with the architect and told me that a key criterion (after observing the fiasco at the Minnesota Orchestra Hall) was a surplus of biffies. Come and count the ladies sometime. . . very few--and the line moves very fast. Furthermore, there are a total of three RRs for women at the Ordway. Never a complaint. Kill the lawyers? Maybe, kill some of the male architects. . .

Posted by Dan Erwin at December 2, 2008 11:00 AM

Thanks for the post. Initially, I wondered when the theater was built. Then I wondered when it was last renovated? (Wow! What a beautiful theater! The Grand Circus Theater in Detroit, which is now the Detroit Opera House, was renovated in the mid 90s and included additional bathrooms.) Then I wondered about the rate of young women entering the field. I also wondered about incentives to get them to do so.

My niece is a freshman at the University of Michigan and she is studying architecture. She has for as long as I can remember wanted to become an architect, even though she excelled at math and a variety of sports. Women architects would probably offer a different perspective on many elements of this field, bathrooms besides. I might also say that I've been known to pop in the men's room whenever my patience had run too thin.

Posted by Judith Ellis at December 2, 2008 11:03 AM

I've often said that the course of world history would be dramatically different if women could - um - urinate standing up.

I've also been known to pop into the "Men's Room" when necessary.

Perhaps all architects should have to do "user field work" where they A. stand in line; B. have to sit down.

They should also have to do this for other aspects of design - including actually trying to live in some of the so-called "living rooms" that are designed to impress versus be comfortable.

Posted by Mary Schmidt at December 2, 2008 11:19 AM

The Swedes have mostly, only in lots of places, unisex bathrooms.

Posted by tom peters at December 2, 2008 11:21 AM

Working for a large architecture company (but not as an architect), at least I can bring some marginal knowledge on this topic. The minimum ratios for male to female facilities in public venues is set by the International Building Code. Any architect will be more than happy to exceed these ratios, but convincing an owner to spend donated dollars on restrooms rather than more glamorous space is very difficult. In a typical project, the initial programming leads to a budget that far exceeds the funds available. There ensues rounds and rounds of value engineering, and all mechanical systems (including restrooms) get cut and downsized, since they are out of sight. But invariably you are left with undersized air conditioning and heating, little extra electrical capacity, and minimal restrooms. Renovations are even more expensive and difficult to make all the changes that would be beneficial. Add a historical structure, and the constraints become exceedingly difficult. I think you would find most architects (and engineers) very aware of the issue, but if you really want more restroom facilities at the Colonial Theater, I'm sure a sizable contribution for the "Tom Peters Ladies Restroom" will get the job done, and you'll have the gratitude of your wife and other ladies in Boston!

Posted by Bruce at December 2, 2008 11:32 AM

So often when renovating a historical building we trap ourselves into a mindset of only restoring the building as it was 100 years ago. I'm sure the electrical,heating and air conditioning have been updated. So it's a matter of the architects not putting themselvbes in the shoes of another individual and in this case another gender.

Posted by Tucker at December 2, 2008 11:50 AM

And if this is a designated historical site, then you are faced with working with the historical committee. They are sticklers about how things looked back when. Wonder if they would require fixtures that used more than 1.6 gallons?

Posted by MikeC at December 2, 2008 11:57 AM

Looking back to student days (1994-97), I lost count of the number of occasions when the gent's toilets at the University of Sunderland's Students Union were invaded by ladies wanting to use the facilities because of the queues next door on a Saturday night.

'It's alright guys, we're not looking' was the usual comment made as the ladies came through the door of the gents. It has also happended at a number of rock music clubs over the years too. What did each of these buildings have in common? They used to be Working Men's Clubs and nobody bothered to do think about extra facilities when the buildings were converted to live music venues, unlike the facilities available at what used to be the best live music club in Newcastle (Riverside) or the gone, but not forgotten, Mayfair Ballroom...

Maybe the penance for those responsible for the facilities Tom mentioned should be a month long course of diuretics...

Posted by Keith Rickaby at December 2, 2008 1:37 PM

Idea 1: all architects should be banned from using communal toilets. Instead, they're to provide 1 room with 1 sit down and 1 stand up facility, to be located in the basement and cleaned once per week. When they've got the correct real world (not theoretical) number of ladies restrooms sorted in 5 years worth of projects, they can re-join the human race.

Idea 2: recently, I've been reading "The Unthinkable: who survives when disaster strikes." The author makes the point that many buildings are poorly designed for evacuation purposes. My proposed penance: whenever the fire alarm rings, architects should be made to wait at the top of the stairwell until everyone else is out.

Posted by Mark JF at December 2, 2008 2:29 PM

To use the available facilities more efficiently, I suggest converting all toilet rooms to serve both female and male patrons and then developing an automated lounge valet system that would forecast toilet and lavatory availability based on dynamic measurement of dwell time per gender and individual performance ticket sales measured against the historic facility database.

A simple “gender” change indicator system could then be devised to dynamically authorize the use of a particular lounge by male or female patrons as the underserved segment changes over time.

I imagine it working sort of like highway contra flow lanes except without the danger of head on collisions – it could be a fun and useful experiment.

Thanks for asking the question!

Posted by Steve at December 2, 2008 4:33 PM

"I've often said that the course of world history would be dramatically different if women could - um - urinate standing up."

There are devices now available.....

I think I had better stop now

Posted by PaulH at December 3, 2008 11:05 AM