I have a client that has 160 SQFT pool house with a bathroom. I said the way that I interpret the code, a GFCI protected receptacle is required within 3' of the vanity in the bathroom. The bathroom fits the definition stated in the code. Of course the bathroom doesn't get used on regular bases.
If the bathroom doesn't get used very often, it's still a bathroom and needs the GFCI.
Kinda reminds me of a Production Manager I worked with at Zenith. He had a room that needed to be wired to be explosionproof but he argued that he only used it once a week. In the interest of saving money (being cheap) he wanted me to see if there was a way to make it "semi-explosionproof".
That was quite a while ago and I STILL get a chuckle out of that question.
MUST a detached pool house on a residential property be considered under the rules that apply to 'residences?'
After all, a bathroom in a commercial location, or a 'public' bathroom, are not required to have the receptacle.
Design factors: As a general principle I'm in favor of having a receptacle; they always turn out to be handy, often for the most unexpected reasons (think of how 'wheelchair ramps' have helped the UPS guy!). Yet ... bathroom ... pool ... pool equipment ... chlorine fums ... such a receptacle might be nothing but a maintenance headache.
Reading the NEC definitions, IF this pool house is detached from the dwelling unit, I would have to say no receptacle is required.
The 'pool house' does not qualify as a dwelling unit, in and of itself. The same would apply to a detached garage (man cave) with a bathroom, unless it had all the items within the dwelling unit definition.
Now, from a design side, why not install the receptacle with GFI? Although Reno leans toward the GFI being a maintenance issue, it sure may prove to be a convenience item.
Thanks for the support .... with this professional group, it's always an accomplishment when one post makes the 'conventional wisdom' do a 180!
Hotline, it's not that I 'lean' one way or the other. Rather, it's the result of an article (of which I was generally quite critical) that brought to my attention the problems GFCI's have with corrosion ... especially when located near pool equipment.
That article described many GFCI's that failed in the 'power on' mode due to corrosion of the innards. What the article failed to stress (among other things) is that all the failed units pre-dated the latest, more robust versions.
Along the lines of that article, though, I might consider the use of "WR,' 'corrosion rated,' or remote located (in the panel) GFCI protection.
An awful lot depends on the specifics of both the job and the customer. These design choices are why we get the big bucks
I am sure if you asked the customer, they were expecting to get some receptacles out there. Code minimums are interesting for academic conversations but in the real world I doubt they are that relevant. If these people have a pool house, they are going to be expecting some creature comforts. Because of the usage I would want to see GFCIs everywhere and cite it as all being a bathroom "area". You are going to have wet people with bare feet walking around in there.