Brooklyn will have to cross its legs and wait for the arrival of the first automated pay toilet; following up on an initial report on Brownstoner, the Daily News has confirmed that the Landmarks Preservation Commission has postponed a vote on the matter. There was considerable excitement last month when plans for a toilet in Grand Army Plaza were revealed, particularly because there are few bathrooms in the immediate vicinity, and the public is often reduced to using the less than sanitary porta-potties in Prospect park. The local community board approved the proposal, but it seems the commission is concerned the toilet's aesthetics will clash with the surrounding landmarked structures, such as the Soldiers’ and Sailors’ Arch. They've requested renderings showing how the toilet will look in the wider context of Grand Army Plaza, and won't vote until they're satisfied with what they see. Two of the self-cleaning pay toilets are already doing brisk business in Manhattan (with occasionally embarrassing results); they cost 25 cents for 15 minutes on the throne.





It seems the landmarks commission prefers the current open-air urinal under the arch.
I just use one of the loos in the library. Well, assuming the library is open.
And by "using the less than sanitary porta-potties in Prospect park" we mean "peeing in the bushes."
Now THIS is truly crappy news.
If Olmsted and Vaux wanted a toilet, they would have added a toilet. Of all the places in the city to put a pay toilet, this must rank as the worst.
Had an interesting Freudian slip while reading this post. For some reason, I saw, "There was considerable excrement last month," the first time I read that sentence. Appropriate, but strange.
I did that too! Could we be overly conditioned to make those associations? Or are we just fecal-minded?