Public toilets

Posted on April 24, 2009 by Steve

It shouldn't be that hard to get these things right, yet so few do. For the betterment of society, I humbly offer this checklist.

Yes: Outsized spool of cheap TP.
No: Stingy one-square-at-a-time delivery systems.

Yes: Motion-activated flush.
No: Motion-activated faucet.

Yes: Simple, idiot-proof soap dispenser.
No: Hand soap resembling any bodily fluid.

Yes: Stall door with secure deadbolt.
No: Self-closing door that requires a push to check for occupancy.

Yes: Gravity-assisted non-spring-loaded paper towel dispenser (bonus for trash can near exit door).
No: Air dryers (exception for high-power units in high-traffic facilities with no door blocking egress).

Yes: In smaller establishments, two unisex restrooms. We have all had the experience of waiting for a restroom to become available, while a perfectly serviceable but contrarily signed room sat idle. I am sure I'm not the only one to have violated social norms in the interest of expediency.
No: "Separate but equal."

Yes: Modern plumbing.
No: Plumber's helpers.

No: Limited-flow faucets.
Really, No: Limited-flow faucets. This whole post is really an excuse to express this pet peeve. Facility managers, listen up. You're hardly going to save any water relative to the toilets. Half of your users don't even wash up. Water costs nothing anyway; install high efficiency lights with timers, low-flow toilets (we can flush twice), cheap paper if you need to count pennies. Install one basin less if you must, but let the water flow. That 1.0 GPM trickle will run three times as long to get the job half done, and your visitors will be germy and disgruntled. Do you think they make them tamper proof because people want to steal them?
« Prev itemNext item »

Comments

Posted by Comment blocking douchebag | April 24, 2009 | 12:09:20

First!
------------------

Posted by Steve | April 25, 2009 | 22:11:27

Your IP is so logged.
------------------

Leave comment

You must be logged in as a member to add comment to this blog