Can New York's New Public Bathrooms Actually Work?

The shortage is a daily reality for millions. New York City has only about 1,000 public restrooms for its more than 8 million residents and 65 million annual visitors. That puts the city 93rd among the 100 largest US cities for access. For people like Leah Goodridge, who has uterine fibroids and needs to use the restroom frequently, it means a constant mental calculation every time she leaves home. "Every time I leave my house, I have to chart it out," she says. The problem isn't just the number of toilets; it's that they are often far from where people need them, especially in neighborhoods that lack them.

Enter Mayor Zohran Mamdani. In his first days in office, he made fixing this a top priority. His plan is to add 20 to 30 modular public bathrooms across the city by the end of this summer, starting with a new facility in West Harlem. The core of the strategy is to cut through the red tape and high costs that have long held the city back. Building a traditional public toilet in NYC is notoriously expensive and slow, with average costs tripling over the past decade. The new mayor wants automatic, self-cleaning toilets delivered "at a lower cost and on a faster timeline."

The city is even earmarking $4 million to kickstart the effort, with a request for proposals to follow. The goal is to learn from cities like Los Angeles and Portland, which have deployed similar prefabricated solutions. The setup is straightforward: get the units in place quickly and affordably, starting in underserved areas. The real test will be whether these new facilities can actually meet the basic, often urgent, needs of a city that has too few places to go.

The Cost Reality Check

The plan looks good on paper, but the numbers tell a different story. The city is spending nearly a million dollars per new public bathroom. That's the total site cost, which includes everything from digging the foundation to running new water and power lines. The unit itself, a standard Portland Loo, costs about $185,000. The rest-over $800,000 per facility-is for the infrastructure and site work.

This is where the comparison gets stark. The same basic toilet type cost $70,000 in Terrace, Canada and $358,000 in San Diego. New York is paying nearly three times the cost of the Canadian city and more than double San Diego's price for the exact same product. The unit price is the same, so the massive difference in total cost points squarely at New York's own system.

The reasons are not hard to find. The city's complex regulations and procurement rules are the main culprits. The maker of the Portland Loo said he had to get a special fabricator certified by the Department of Buildings because no pre-approved local manufacturers would take the job. That's a hurdle he never faced in cities from Portland to Miami. Then there's the layer of red tape: each project must navigate the Parks Department, the Public Design Commission, local community boards, and sometimes the Landmarks Preservation Commission. As one observer noted, this isn't about higher labor costs-it's about avoidable, self-imposed bureaucracy that drives up the price.

The bottom line is that the new plan's promise of "lower cost and faster timeline" is being undercut by the city's own processes. The $1 million price tag per unit is far from the $3-5 million for a traditional restroom, but it's still a steep sum for a simple structure. For the plan to work, the city needs to cut through this red tape, not just build the toilets.

The Delays and the Bureaucracy

The plan's promise of a "faster timeline" runs headlong into a wall of red tape that has stalled similar projects for decades. This isn't just about slow-moving city hall; it's about a system built for grand, permanent structures, not modular units that need to be installed quickly. The result is a setup where avoidable delays can stretch projects out by months, and even years.

The specific hurdles are well-documented. Each new facility must navigate a complex web of approvals, including the Parks Department, the Public Design Commission, local community boards, and sometimes the Landmarks Preservation Commission. As one observer who has sat through these meetings noted, the process is thorough and detailed, with city staff presenting complex slide decks to answer questions about ADA compliance and historic materials. This isn't a minor formality-it's a multi-agency review that can take 15 months to complete. For a project meant to be a symbol of competent government, that timeline is a direct contradiction.

Then there are the procurement rules, which often favor local union labor and manufacturing. The maker of the Portland Loo explained that his product, which he has installed from Portland to Miami, has never required a special fabricator certification in any other city. In New York, however, he had to get a special inspector approved by the Department of Buildings because no pre-approved local manufacturers would take the job. This is a classic case of self-imposed bureaucracy where the goal of protecting local jobs creates a significant cost and time barrier for the city.

The past offers a clear warning. In the 1990s, the city tried a similar coin-operated, self-cleaning kiosk model, only to see it end in embarrassment due to cost overruns and delays. The current plan risks repeating that history if the city doesn't actively cut through these layers of review and rule. The $700,000+ in installation costs per unit are not just about higher labor rates; they are a direct function of this drawn-out process. For the mayor's pledge to "show what competent government can actually look like" to hold any weight, the city must find a way to install these toilets without the usual years-long approval cycle. The plan's success hinges on that ability to move fast.

Can This Be Scaled?

The plan's real test isn't just about building a few new toilets. It's about whether this model can be replicated to make a meaningful dent in a shortage that spans the entire city. The math here is stark and simple. The city is spending nearly $1 million per unit, with the bulk of that cost-over $800,000-coming from site work and infrastructure. To meet the city's own goal of one bathroom per 2,000 residents, the city would need to build hundreds of new facilities. At this price, that would require a budget in the billions, not millions.

The current $4 million kickstart and the $1 million per unit cost are a starting point, not a scalable solution. The plan's promise of lower cost and faster timeline is being undercut by the city's own processes. The $875,000 spent per unit in New York is nearly triple the $358,000 in San Diego for the exact same product. That gap is not due to higher labor rates; it's a direct function of avoidable bureaucracy. The city must find a way to cut that extra $700,000+ per unit in installation costs if this is to work at any scale.

The ultimate test is whether the plan can be scaled to hundreds of units, not just a few pilot projects. The city's procurement rules and layers of approval, which can take 15 months to navigate, are the primary barriers. If the city cannot streamline these processes for modular units, the project will remain a series of expensive, slow-moving pilot programs. The goal is to show what competent government can actually look like. That means moving beyond the first five bathrooms and proving the model can be executed quickly and affordably across the five boroughs. Without that ability to scale, the plan is just a symbolic gesture, not a solution.

Catalysts and What to Watch

The plan's promise now faces its first real-world test. The key catalysts are clear: the city must prove it can cut through its own red tape to lower costs and time, while the new West Harlem restroom and the five park Loos will show if the product can handle daily use.

Watch for the city's ability to streamline procurement and construction. The maker of the Portland Loo said he had to get a special inspector approved by the Department of Buildings because no pre-approved local manufacturers would take the job. That's a hurdle he never faced in cities from Portland to Miami. If the city can't find a faster, cheaper path for modular units, the $1 million price tag per facility will remain a barrier to scaling. The goal is to install these toilets at lower cost and faster timeline than existing projects. The coming weeks, as the city issues its $4 million request for proposals, will show whether that promise is just talk or if new rules are being written to actually move fast.

Then, watch the facilities themselves. The five new park Loos, each costing nearly $1 million, are already open. Their condition and usage will be a direct read on durability and demand. Are they being used? Are they staying clean? The West Harlem unit, the first under the new mayor, is the flagship. Its success-or failure-will set the tone for the entire initiative. If these pilot projects show the product works and the city can manage them, it builds credibility. If they become eyesores or require constant repair, it will validate the skeptics.

The ultimate test is scalability. The city wants to add 20 to 30 new bathrooms this summer. That's a start, but the real question is whether this model can be replicated to hundreds of units. The math is against it at current costs. The plan's viability hinges on the city learning from these first installations and finding a way to cut the extra $700,000+ in installation costs per unit. Without that, the initiative will remain a series of expensive pilot programs, not a solution to a citywide problem.