SAN FRANCISCO (AP) — A religious organization has filed a lawsuit against the city of San Francisco to remove an open-air urinal it calls unsanitary and indecent from a popular park.
The Chinese Christian Union of San Francisco filed a civil complaint last week demanding the city remove the concrete circular urinal from the iconic Dolores Park.
The group says the urinal, which is out in the open and screened only with plants for privacy, “emanates offensive odors,” ”has no hand-washing facilities” and “it’s offensive to manners and morals.”
The lawsuit further alleges that the facility installed in February discriminates against women and the disabled and exposes those who use it to “shame and embarrassment.”
“The open-air urination hole violates the privacy of those who need to use the restroom but would be required to expose their bodies and suffer shame and degradation of urinating in public view,” it says.
The City Attorney’s office said in a statement that it will defend against the litigation and pointed out the 16-acre park is well-known for its “counter culture, immodest sunbathers, pot brownie vendors, spectacular city views, and famously irreverent ‘Hunky Jesus’ contest.”
The office said residents advocated for the facility, called a “pissoir” (piss-WAH), to stop people from urinating on walls, bushes and sidewalks.
“If I had to predict the top 100 things in Dolores Park likely to offend these plaintiffs, I wouldn’t have guessed that this would make the cut,” City Attorney spokesman Matt Dorsey said in the statement.
The urinal is part of a $20 million renovation plan that now has put more than two dozen toilets in Dolores Park along with other upgrades.
San Francisco has a long, sometimes creative, history of dealing with public urination. Last summer, the city painted nearly 30 walls with a repellant paint that makes urine spray back on the offender. In 2002, the city increased the possible fine for the crime up to $500, but that did little to deter the practice.
Copyright 2016 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
Uh, not sure what I think about this one. I kinda think its gross to have an open-air urinal in a urban park myself that’s only available for men no less. Its not like its situated in the woods surrounded by trees. If that’s the urinal in the picture than for shit’s sake, its situated right in front of a passing train used for public transportation as well. Not exactly a private spot.
San Francisco can keep their open-air piss spot but it doesn’t take a religious organization to have a problem with this. I’m sure there are people that would disagree with me here, but its not like its in a place where you’re out camping and there’s some privacy taken into consideration for those that take issue with this. And sorry, but the City Attorney is being just flippant about this.
I consider myself pretty liberal and even I can understand why someone would have a problem with this.
For me, it’s the sanitation issue. This cannot in any way be healthy.
If they have public restrooms there or are in the process of being built than using it to provide for the homeless shouldn’t be used as an excuse either. This has very little to do with providing for free-wheeling sentient liberals. Sounds like laziness to provide for the public good if anything. I agree, there’s a sanitation issue also at stake. What if someone wants to take a crap there instead? Then do they fine them or is that supposed to be OK too? And where’s the sign that says “Piss, Don’t Crap…By Authority of S.F. Local City Ordinance”. Its just weird.
Frankly, anyone trying to justify it as being for the use of the homeless would make it worse, IMO. What the homeless don’t deserve actual bathroom facilities to use?
From what this article mentions the thing I find most questionable is that they apparently didn’t provide any accommodations for hand-washing? Ew.