Architects should oppose plans to change toilet design rules

We are all familiar with the art of interpreting the Building Regulations to design buildings that best serve their unique function and users. Where the regulations are openly worded, it is not by chance but by design: they acknowledge that designers are sometimes best-placed to evaluate the needs of a building’s users. 

In October 2020, the government quietly launched a consultation into freedoms around toilet provision. It seeks to change guidance, and even insert new terms into the Building Regulations that would enforce a ‘clear steer’ towards facilities segregated by binary ‘sex’ categories. Architectural union UVW-SAW is calling on architectural workers to submit objections to the consultation, which closes this Friday (26 February).

Architects know that the range of buildings we work with often make provision of ‘single-sex’ toilets expensive and wasteful. Sometimes, particularly in existing buildings, there simply isn’t space. Desegregated toilets offer numerous benefits: they introduce parity in waiting times, make toilet trips easier for carers or those with children, and have even been found to reduce bullying in schools. They also significantly reduce the level of scrutiny, harassment and aggression that many in the LGTBTQ+ community, particularly transgender and gender non-conforming people, often face in ‘single-sex’ facilities. 

While many people take for granted their ability to enjoy a trip to a public bathroom without event, LGBTQ+-rights charity Stonewall has found that 48 per cent of trans people in the UK don’t feel comfortable using public toilets due to fear of discrimination or harassment. Responding to the consultation, a concerned group of architectural academics, including Ben Campkin, Ged Ribas Goody, Lo Marshall, and Barbara Penner, based at the Bartlett School of Architecture, UCL Urban Laboratory and Goldsmiths Centre for Research Architecture, wrote:

‘Sex-segregated toilets are a product of the Victorian era. Since at least the 1990s, under the mantle of “universal design”, architects have rightly moved towards desegregating toilet facilities, on the grounds that they are less exclusionary and can accommodate the widest possible range of users in safety and dignity. Re-enshrining binary sex-segregated toilets in the Building Regulations today would be a clear step backwards in accessibility terms.’

In its call for evidence, the government disingenuously claims that ‘male-only/female-only spaces’ are being ‘replaced with gender-neutral toilets’ and that ‘gender-neutral’ facilities put women at a ‘significant disadvantage’ and make them ‘feel less comfortable’. The very different experiences of trans and gender non-conforming women, who often face scrutiny and intimidation in these spaces, are completely erased by such simplification. 

Sex-segregated toilets are a product of the Victorian era

Women’s specific ‘sanitary needs’ are also given as a reason to segregate, with a deliberate lack of consideration for others who share the same needs. Trans men, non-binary and intersex people may also experience menstruation, pregnancy or menopause, and have just as much right to suitably equipped washroom facilities as anyone else.

This review is not motivated by improving access to public toilets. Rather its mission is to encourage the policing of gender presentation, and suppress the rights of trans and gender non-conforming people to exist publicly. 

While the UK Building Regulations have never enforced segregated facilities, there is an embedded expectation of ‘single-sex washrooms’ in our guidance. England’s Approved Document Part G wording is thankfully elastic enough to lend itself to diverse scales and applications at present, including religious contexts that require segregated toilets, (a cause which the government consultation tellingly fails to mention).  If unprecedented changes are forced through, who knows how long they could take to repeal?  

The government’s call for evidence states they will listen to relevant stakeholders with ‘technical knowledge of Building Regulations’.  The ARB and RIBA Codes of Conduct ask that we treat everyone fairly and not discriminate because of gender reassignment, sex, or sexual orientation, while each June some of the UK’s most prominent practices display the LGBTQ+ Pride flag, claiming alliance to the LGBTQ+ community. Now is a crucial moment for allies in the architectural profession to speak up and follow up on those commitments.

Architectural workers must stand in solidarity with trans and gender non-conforming people in opposition to this attack on the basic human right of trans and gender non-conforming people to use the bathroom with their dignity and safety intact.

You can send in your opposition to these proposals, along with supporting evidence, to toilets@communities.gov.uk until 11.45pm on Friday 26 February 2021. UVW-SAW has prepared a template letter to use for your response, available here.