California Stopped San Francisco's $1.7 Million Toilet. The City Can't Build Something Cheaper.
"Why isn't there a toilet here? I just don't get it. Nobody does," one resident told The New York Times last week. "It's yet another example of the city that can't."

In October 2022, San Francisco raised eyebrows when the city budgeted $1.7 million for a single-stall public restroom in the city's Noe Valley neighborhood. The high price tag, according to city officials, was due to the steep price of construction in San Francisco, as well as remaining supply chain issues.
But the state stepped in shortly after, scrapping the planned bathroom after outrage spread over its high cost to taxpayers. Fifteen months later, the public plaza where the restroom was originally planned still doesn't have a place to pee—and it doesn't look like it will get one any time soon.
"Why isn't there a toilet here? I just don't get it. Nobody does," one resident told The New York Times last week. "It's yet another example of the city that can't."
San Francisco has the most expensive construction costs in the world—and it's hardly surprising. In order to build a public bathroom in Noe Valley, at a location that already had the necessary plumbing to add a restroom, builders would have to pass a dizzying number of regulatory stops. These include seeking approval from the Arts Commission's Civic Design Review committee, passing review under the California Environmental Quality Act, and getting the go-ahead from the city's Rec and Park Commission and San Francisco's Board of Supervisors. If that isn't enough, the project would also be subject to a period of "community feedback."
Even after gaining approval, the city wouldn't be free to simply find the cheapest acceptable bathroom—likely a pre-fabricated option—and connect it to city plumbing. According to a 2022 San Francisco Chronicle article, pre-fabricated bathrooms violate the city's Public Labor Agreement. Adding to costs, the city would also be required to use union labor to construct the bathroom.
While the $1.7 million price tag was rightfully criticized, should the project have been allowed to go forward, the budget might not have been an overestimate. San Francisco's regulatory burden on new construction—even something as simple as a single-stall bathroom—is just that high.
Even San Francisco's own government has conceded that the Noe Valley bathroom fiasco was a sign that the city has too much regulation. "It's worth changing the laws that are in place around construction projects like the restroom that slow things down," a spokesperson for Mayor London Breed told the Times.
But this is far from the first time that local governments have earmarked absurdly large sums of money to pay for public bathrooms. In 2017, New York City spent $2 million on a public park bathroom. And last year, Philadelphia caused controversy when it announced that it would spend $1.8 million on six modular Portland Loo bathrooms over the next five years—a model that cities across the country have spent millions on in recent years.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Nobody gives a shit.
The city is just pissing in the wind.
Money flushed down the drain.
It is all going down the shitter
Chumby...where are you?!
How would they prevent squatters from moving in?
The NYC design had a door tgat was essentially one of the walls that rolled into the building when you were done, and I think it had noise makers to drive out squatters before the automated self-washing (hose down the inside of the bathroom) system engaged.
I think a squatters would find themselves hosed down several times a day...
Was it at least a Japanese toilet?
Probably stainless steel, like a prison cell
On the contrary, there are many shits to give, but thee is no good place to deposit them.
It’s a crapfest.
Open air Asian toilets. Just dig a pit. Then put a lid over it with a hole in in. Done.
Or a pole in the sidewalk to piss on. Like in France.
Still a million three in that city.
That's called an Outhouse in America
Maybe stop voting for crazy people with a very tenuous (at best) connection to reality.
But those are the people shitting in the street. Don't they deserve representation?
I think the people shitting in the street are more connected to reality. They just only care about the parts of reality that pertain to their getting high.
I hope (maybe foresee) some rich billionaire essentially repeat Trump's action of fixing the Wollman ice rink in Central Park in NYC, when NYC was going to pay $4.9 million taking 2 years to fix it (after already spending $12.9 million. Instead, Trump negotiated with Mayor Koch to do it in 6 months, and got it done. "The work was completed two months ahead of schedule and $750,000 under the estimated costs" according to Wikipedia.
It shows the contrast between big corrupt government and what a competent person can accomplish, especially if they are seeking a political office.
Politicians don't like to be seen as no good at their jobs but they look even worse when they turn down an offer from a billionaire to get it done for far less. Another example of Trump's superpower of getting government officials to show the gap between their rhetoric and their results, and who they really are.
"Why isn't there a toilet here? I just don't get it. Nobody does,"
Wasn't she standing on a sidewalk at the time?
*narrators voice*
Longtobefree doesn’t know the sidewalk is the toilet.
Adding to costs, the city would also be required to use union labor to construct the bathroom.
Sounds a hell of a lot like Chicago.
These include seeking approval from the Arts Commission's Civic Design Review committee, passing review under the California Environmental Quality Act, and getting the go-ahead from the city's Rec and Park Commission and San Francisco's Board of Supervisors. If that isn't enough, the project would also be subject to a period of "community feedback."
Everything in this paragraph sounds free. Where is the 1.7 million ? Getting approval is clerk work, and the rubber stamp is free. Board of anything costs time, but the price is still free. Community feedback is public hearings held in a government auditorium, which is once again ... free. What the heck is going on here ? Where are they getting 1.7 million ?
Absolutely nothing in the paragraph is "free". Every one of those agencies requires reams of paperwork prepared by employees who should be doing productive work. Many also require "independent" evaluations by outside contractors, consultants and other "experts", all at the company's expense. Finally, most of them charge their own "administrative fees".
Community feedback is not held in a government-paid auditorium, it's collected again using company resources and then evaluated and responded to by company staff who, again, should be doing something productive instead of pointless paperwork.
And all through this time, the company is paying interest on the money it had to borrow (or divert from other investments) while this insane process drags on.
Hey, wait.
Could that be why Florida has so many California license plates?
Nobody lives in Florida, you can’t say “gay” there.
We say gay all the time.
It means happy, joyful, lighthearted.
If you think it's as simple as asking permission and getting it, you've never had to go through the process. These boards can demand that the builder pay for a variety of environmental studies, maybe request multiple architectural designs (each of which will cost you an architect's time) to review for aesthetic purposes, then wait and see if the community review goes smoothly, then wait to see if anyone in the state brings a lawsuit under CEQA (which then means you have to hire a lawyer while the case drags on.)
SCOTUS is currently hearing arguments about El Dorado County, California charging a homeowner a $23,000 fee to be able to permit and build a single home on his own property.
Haha free - than who pays these people? You have never had to get a permit or even buy a house right?
Why not just do porta-pots around the city for a while? Especially where the shit is literally piled in the streets.
Added bonus. Have a needle collection sharps container outside the porta-pot. Can't SFO just do something simple and helpful?
Porta pots are very vulnerable to vandalism and require expensive maintenance. More expensive in the long run than Portland Loos.
And probably wouldn't pass approval from the Arts Commission’s Civic Design Review committee. I assume they are looking for a different aesthetic.
I doubt it would be the first time they thought shit was art.
But if we put some nice graffiti on it, they can't take it away because it would be gentrification or culture approximation or something
Can’t SFO just do something simple and helpful?
No, they can't. They've struggled to give every definable group in the community an equal voice on all decisions, so, as the author points out, the Arts Council has veto power over a freaking public toilet...
I agree with this idea. The porta-potty are simple and can be easily changed out. They are not the most pleasant but if you object then buy a coffee and use Starbucks. Most cities I know use multiple porta-potties for festival and events. If they work for these they can be used for more routine applications. Place them in a well lite area that has video monitoring.
But the state stepped in shortly after, scrapping the planned bathroom after outrage spread over its high cost to taxpayers.
Wait a minute... THAT'S what jolted San Franciscans into thinking their government was making outrageous expenditures?
An ADA compliant port a potty rents for as little as $100/day in Orlando.
Let's see:
$1,700,000 divided by $100 is 17000.
17000 divided by 365 is 46 and a half years.
If you negotiate a long term discount, you can get half a century of shits for that kind of money.
Oh, wait. Red state / blue state.
Oh, wait. Red state / blue state.
Right. No way would it be only $100 a day in San Francisco.
The hobos would tip them over. However, nobody would be able to notice the mess.
Dear Leader Newsom built that labyrinth of regulation and bureaucracy!
Please don't blame Portland Loo for the ridiculous price. The units cost only about $200,000 installed, which, if you look at the details of what you get and know something about public restrooms, is a reasonable price.
$200K seems like what you'd pay for a small house (ignoring the value of the underlying land), not for just the toilet in the house.
Maybe where you are—around here you can't get near a new house for $200k. And the Portland Loo units are not just a household bathroom. They're purpose-built to stand up to the abuse an urban public restroom suffers.
Looks like San Francisco loves red tape bondage.
And we though that the Pentagon spending $600.00 for toilet seat was expensive.
And that toilet seat cost was literally justified.
The most tragic thing of all is that California Democrats are NOT embarrassed by this cluster f^&k.
Won't they need multiple units to satisfy all the genders? I don't want no they/them peeing where I do.
That's why I don't want females in the men's rooms—women's restrooms are disgusting.
That is what the community feedback would find. This project for all the genders would be $20m by the time we sort out genders in the bidet by the bay.
Building public toilets in San Francisco is like bringing coal to Newcastle.
The entire city is a public toilet!
Corporate Finance Institute Review | Is CFI Certificate Valuable?
the Corporate Finance Institute offers a comprehensive curriculum and globally recognized certification program in finance that can be a valuable asset for professionals seeking career advancement in the corporate finance field. The Corporate Finance Institute reviews from past students and industry experts attest to the high quality of education and practical skills gained from the program.
With its flexible and self-paced online courses, the CFI certificate can be earned at the learner's own pace, making it an accessible option for individuals with busy schedules. Overall, the Corporate Finance Institute provides a reputable and worthwhile investment in the education
READ MORE -https://www.top15online.com/article/corporate-finance-institute-reviews
"It's worth changing the laws that are in place around construction projects like the restroom that slow things down"
But they won't. They can't. Every one of those laws was put into place by a key demographic that holds the government of high population density centers hostage. Modern cities are ungovernable. They are fiefdoms in the Middle Ages feudal sense. They are populated by Modern Cave Dwellers who could not survive anywhere outside their Caves of Steel for more than a few days. They are socialists because they quite literally depend upon the Mayor, the City Council and the Maintenance Divisions for food, water, transportation, electricity, waste disposal and Public Employee Unions and cannot imagine life any other way than stacked up twenty stories deep surrounded by thousands of people per acre. Unfortunately for them the corrupt totalitarian regime they cannot escape is crumbling over them while the infrastructure crumbles under them, leaving them on increasingly thin ice with Global Warming coming relentlessly.
The million dollar class toilets are full of features allowing them to work unattended in a hostile environment. Buy a cheaper toilet that isn't self-cleaning and doesn't have an ejection seat to remove people who stay too long. Pay attendants to work two shifts guarding and cleaning it. Lock it up for the third shift overnight.
In Europe. You almost always pay to pee. I always had some coin with me. Venice bathrooms has attendants. Offer a franchise.
Make it legal to pee on an illegal.
Problem solved.
A hole in the ground, surrounded by a wooden fence...........how expensive can that be?
I don't know why we care. People choose to live there. People vote for the politicians that put these rules/regulations in place. People choose to pay property, sales and income taxes to support these ludicrous expenses. These are the same people who voted for line by line referendums on the ballot where not shockingly they voted YES to all of the freebies but NO to all of the raises of taxes. This is the same thing happening in just a slightly different way. They want all of the regulation and support for unons, etc, but don't want to have to pay for it all. No different than they want to pity all of the criminals and set them free over and over despite the crime or recidivist nature....well you get what you get. Welcome to the real world people.
It's San Fran. Can't the toilet identify as the side walk? I mean it's already the other way around