Seattle's public toilets for sale after even the crack users won't use them
Last summer when we were in Seattle we missed out on the public toilets. After reading about them in this New York Times article, I can't say I'm sorry.
Five automated public toilets were opened in 2004, but one detail was overlooked when deciding where to put them. Location. Location. Location. As it turns out, the public toilets were put where too many drug dealers and transients hang out.
Even though the toilets are supposed to clean themselves after every use, the traffic was the messy type and too much for a self-cleaning toilet to handle. The trash left behind by the users created a situation where the automatic cleaning system didn't function. Plus, the toilets were used for other types of business besides toilet business. Drug deals, prostitution, smoking crack--that kind of thing.
Eventually, though, the toilets became so nasty, even crack addicts didn't go in them.
Since the toilets cost Seattle $5 million dollars, the city is interested in recouping some of the loss. They are up for sale on eBay for $89,000 a piece. I know someone who turned a Port-A-John into public art with decorations. Perhaps an art museum might want to take the initiative and buy one.
The problem with the toilets isn't the toilets, it's the people who use them. Because other cities have tried similar toilets, Seattle's problem has created a stir.
Europeans have managed to use public toilets just fine. Folks in the U.S. are trying to figure it out.
The one in the photograph is in London. According to ILoveButter who posted this on Flickr, it costs money to use the toilet. However, it is very clean.
Filed under: Stories, News, Travel Health
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Jul 18th 2008 @ 12:20PM
paul said...
I don't think it's location, I think it's the fact that no one will pay to use a toilet, especially not homeless people. We have these here in Los Angeles too, and they're worthless.
Reply
Jul 18th 2008 @ 2:11PM
Al said...
The very notion of using one of these public restrooms just doesn't agree with me. People are not as sanitary as they used to be. It's been proven, that very few people even wash their hands after use. So, no thank you.
Reply
Jul 18th 2008 @ 4:04PM
Gary said...
Sure, they're the new, economy version of Starbucks!
Reply
Jul 18th 2008 @ 4:11PM
Gary Astorino said...
Too funny. You should be here in Portland, OR where our city council is spending millions on similiar toilets and think they are wonderful. They are just desinging them differently so there are no tops or bottoms and you will have to get used to people seeing your feet and purse from the sidewalk per council members. This on top of the billions for light rail that transports 1/2 of 1% of our population, overhead trams that lose millions and cost millions and do nothing. Prisons built for millions and 5 years later never been opened. The list here is endless of the billions stolen by our politicians in Oregon and none of it goes to the peoples business but they keep getting voted back in.
Reply
Jul 18th 2008 @ 4:21PM
ken tippen said...
public toilets are a wast of money,and a bad idea.you would think,they would spend thier money more wisely.God said in the bible that the leaders of gov. would act like little children,in the last days.there is such glutney of materialistic,things in this country.but the usa is still the best place to live in the world,even if the generation to come are a bunch of disrespectful,asses.
Reply
Jul 18th 2008 @ 4:56PM
JOE said...
Nice way to spend tax payers money.I hope someone out their asks for someone's a$$ that decided to spend this kind of cash on this crap...
Reply
Jul 18th 2008 @ 5:00PM
wmcalp said...
Since the public seems to be so anal about these luxury toilets, use septic tanks instead and for a fee of course.
Reply
Jul 18th 2008 @ 5:49PM
mikey said...
the taxpayers should get their money back. These toilets were placed in the worst places, where transients and druggies hang out all the time. what the hell did the city think would happen when they put these enclosed pods where prostitution and drugs are rampant? Idiots.
Reply
Jul 18th 2008 @ 5:56PM
wongtpa said...
Seattle being one of the most liberal cities in the USA may have something to do with the toilet problems. Think so?
Reply
Jul 18th 2008 @ 6:50PM
Bill West said...
The city fathers screwed up...live with it. Don't reelect anyone who was in favor of this stupid waste of money...
Reply
Jul 18th 2008 @ 7:27PM
Stephanie said...
Every neighborhood has it's problems, but public toilets really are all about location. When I lived in Seattle the public toilet was right across from a fast food chain that people lovingly called "Crack-In-the-Box". I love that city, but it's too tolerant when it comes to dealing with people that live on the street or sell drugs, ect... However, even in cities that aren't tolerant, like New York, would have a problem with these toilets. They were just a bad idea.
Reply
Jul 18th 2008 @ 8:33PM
pandainc said...
Only on the coasts. You guys really need term limits.
Reply
Jul 24th 2008 @ 10:05PM
Raggedyann said...
To quote the late, great Art Buchwald when he argued against pay toilets in federal parks - "When mother nature calls, she shouldn't call collect."
Reply