Seattle Flushes $5M High-Tech Toilets 433
theodp writes "Hopes were high back in 2004 as Seattle's posh public potties opened for business. But four years later, city officials have said good riddance to the five high-tech toilets, self-cleaning and cylindrical, that had cost Seattle $5 million. The city unloaded them on eBay for just $12,549. The commodes had become filthy hide-outs for drug use and prostitution."
Re:Just Remember... (Score:5, Interesting)
The insight here was that they were self-cleaning so no need for a janitor.
But maybe an option should have been that if somebody was there for more than 30 minutes then the self cleaning should have started.
Re:$5,000,000? (Score:4, Interesting)
Sounds like they got ripped off in the first place.
True, especially since we have the same toilets here (Berlin, Germany). IIRC they were installed for free, the deal being that the toilet operator uses the outside walls for advertising. And gets 50c per pee, but I doubt that this covers the expenses.
AFAICT we don't have any problems with drugs and prostitution on these toilets, in case you're curious.
Re:Seattle, You're Doin' It Wrong (Score:4, Interesting)
1. Legalize drugs and prostitution.
2. ???
3. PROFIT!!!
But how do they profit when they can't steal^Wseize your property on a whim any more?
that's what starbucks is for (Score:5, Interesting)
and seattle, the home of starbucks, should have known that
i'm dead serious. i live in midtown manhattan, and finding a toilet for a tourist, nevermind a resident, is near impossible were it not for a certain chain of coffee shops that monopolize every street corner. and they always have a restroom (unless they are those tiny stores), and those restrooms are open to the public without fail. there are some starbucks nearby subway entrances where if you go sit, you'll notice there is a regular stream of visitors... to the commode, and no one even pretends to want to buy a coffee
you really have to understand what a blessing this is. it really is unique to starbucks: every other establishment, including mcdonalds and other fast food places, are usually hostile to making its restrooms available. but i guess coffee chases away vagrants, as the unstable and stinky always seem to congregate to mcdonalds for their restroom needs, bothering the grumbling manager behind the counter for a key rather than shuffling a few more steps around the corner to go to a keyless starbucks restroom. why the homeless do this, i don't know, but that is 100% true. habit? familiarity?
i used to think the city made starbucks keep their restrooms open for this very reason, as it is such a huge boon in convenience for midtown visitors, workers, and residents. or perhaps a marketing droid at starbucks headquarters noticed a correlation between sales and restroom availability? who knows, but for a non-new york city resident, it is hard to understand what a blessing starbucks restrooms have been for the city
whatever the reason for the mana from heaven of bum-free starbucks commodes in midtown, i'd like to thank starbucks with my very own original marketing slogan, they can use it free of charge:
"if you are thinking of something steaming and brown, think starbucks in midtown" ;-)
Re:Just Remember... (Score:4, Interesting)
I'm always amazed at how stupid city councils can be. I live in Chapel Hill, and ours is out-there. Our downtown is suffering from stiff competition from South Point and other new shopping locations. Many stores are closed up, and our downtown may suffer a long slow decay. So what do we do? Our city council's actions over the last 8 years:
- Bring a homeless shelter 1 block from the center of town
- Build benches along the main street, one block from the homeless shelter
- Increase parking rates, and make sure to provide no 2-hour free or validated parking
Brilliant... just brilliant. Here's a story about our mayor. Our hospital is accessed by a congested two-lane road from the south, and ambulances get stuck just like all the rest. UNC wants to widen the road, and there's plenty of legit reasons why many people oppose the plan. Why does our mayor oppose it? He is opposed to all additional road surface. His compromise plan? Allow the road to be widened, but then remove the pavement from a 4-lane road north of town to offset the total paved area.
The city council actually passed this plan. When the city called the DOT and asked for the road to be narrowed, the poor guy over there had no idea what to do. There's no road narrowing department at the DOT. Top level people at the DOT were consulted, and it is now standard at DOT to ignore any silly Chapel Hill requests!
Re:Like intentionally uncomfortable benches (Score:4, Interesting)
I don't understandy why, either - care to elaborate? What is wrong with society when it tries to make sure public stuff is used for the intended purpose?
Works well in Berlin (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:The City of Seattle (Score:3, Interesting)
must have been swimming in their people's money to buy $5M in toilets. If I were a resident I'd be quite enraged over it.
The City of Zurich [wikipedia.org], with a population of roughly 400'000 has an annual budget of 18M Swiss Francs (17M $) for public toilets and the citizenship actually appreciates it.
It's probably all a matter of perspective, but I have the strong impression that USians really detest paying taxes for anything. Infrastucture, like clean public toilets, working and reliable public transports and a canal system that doesn't ooze shit stench out of the pavements has a price. And in other parts of the world citizens are willing to pay that via their taxes.
Re:Just Remember... (Score:5, Interesting)
Drug use and Prostitution are normal? (Score:3, Interesting)
"The public toilets getting abused is a sign of a much deeper problem. It's the puritanical mindset of Americans that pushes these normal behaviors into the shadows and away from the help that the victims so desperately need."
That's a crock of BS. It's puritanical to expect people not to do really, really stupid things? Because heroin isn't exactly an unknown quantity. We've known that it's 100 percent addictive for, oh, centuries now. If you're a smack addict, you're not a victim. You did it to yourself. You know what's going to happen when you put that needle in your arm. You know because everyone else that's done it has ended up the same way.
Prostitution is a little different, because sometimes prostitutes are victims. But many aren't. Many do it willingly and like it. Don't fool yourself on that.
People like to hold up Las Vegas and Amsterdam as examples of tolerance, examples of how we can integrate drug users and prostitution into "normal" society (well, not drugs for Vegas, but hooking is legal there). And yet, after decades of "tolerance" they're busy dismantling the Red Light district in Amsterdam, chasing out the porn places with normal shops. They're tired of dirty needles and trash in their parks, and they're arresting and re-locating junkies. And in Vegas, they're kicking the hookers out of places formerly friendly to them. There are social costs involved with junkies and hookers that go beyond police protection, and even in the Netherlands, they've woken up to that fact.
Private - Public Toilets Grant (Score:5, Interesting)
In Richmond, UK:
http://www.richmond.gov.uk/home/transport_and_streets/road_and_pathway_maintenance/public_conveniences/community_toilet_scheme.htm [richmond.gov.uk]
the Local Council will give you an annual grant if your shop's staff toilet is opened to the public. To qualify, it has to be free for use, even for non-customers. Pubs which join the scheme have a notice put up outside.
This is cheaper than opening separate public use toilets, and helps the shops and pubs keep their toilets funded.
The government you deserve? (Score:3, Interesting)
Just gets better and better.
Still, you get the government you deserve.
Yeah, because it's so much better if you let the smack addicts do it anywhere.
I"ve got my qualms with the so-called "war on drugs" too, but I get tired of people blaming things like junkies ruining public toilets on the government, when the fault lies with junkies ruining public toilets. Nobody made that asshole stick a needle in his arm. And unless the guy was born yesterday, I'm pretty sure he knew what he was getting into when he chose to stick that needle in his arm. Everyone pretty much knows what happens to you when you start shooting heroin. So can we have a moritorium on the poor-drug-victim bullshit, please? It's the rest of us that can't do things like, oh, use a public toilet that are the victims, not the junkie. He did this to himself. And if the "war on drugs" goes away tomorrow, and we open thousands of utopian "treatment centers", junkies are still going to do things like ruin public parks... because that's what junkies do.
Over engineering (Score:5, Interesting)
600.000 a year a piece?
Now, what would it really have cost to have a toilet lady in a simple old fashioned public toilet who just cleanes the place, keeps an eye out on the area?
But no, the public toilets are closed, the toilet ladies fired and people pee against building and then we spend years trying to find high-tech solutions.
Say a single toilet lady makes 100k a year, a nice salary indeed for cleaning. That would have allowed 6 people to have a job, more then enough to keep one place staffed 24/7. No need for a 9/11 link or a 15 minute deadline.
Really, there is such a thing as overthinking a problem.
Re:Just Remember... (Score:3, Interesting)
Alcohol I'm not certain about. I've drank enough to know that it doesn't produce any kind of physical addiction the way that drugs like heroin do. I think alcoholism is a mental/functional disease, not a physical/chemical disease, but I obviously can't speak with any kind of authority.
A UK solution (Score:3, Interesting)
Business owners across the city have been forced to figure out ways to keep drug users and others out of their bathrooms while keeping the toilets open to customers.
One UK town had that problem with drug users. There was a simple solution - they noticed that some restrooms had no problems with druggies even though there was the same population, same level of cleaning and security. The only difference was that the restroom had some rather cheap fluorescent lights of a single light wavelength. While this was adequate for basic hygiene and safety, it made it impossible for drug users to see their veins in order to use needles. As a consequence, they would avoid that particular restroom.
Re:Just Remember... (Score:5, Interesting)
There are both mental and physical side effects, depending on the addiction. For some things, like alcohol for those who have been constantly inebriated, or for opiates, not taking the drugs can be lethal. Methadone exists for a reason.
For other addictions, though, the side effects are purely mental. Don't exercise for two days, and you start thinking you see pudge forming on your belly. Don't smoke weed for a day (if you have the 5-6 per day addition), and you start realizing how bad your life is.
It does not mean simply that doing it is pleasurable.
Plenty of people can become addicted to adrenaline rush through some method or another. They are usually said to be addicted to the source, not the adrenaline.
They were not "Human" (Score:3, Interesting)
If I designed them, I'd do two things:
1) I'd sell advertising on the side
2) I'd charge $0.25 for 15 minutes (with no ability to add $0.25 from inside).
Seriously, if you godda drop a duce, are you gonna use a free bathroom, or are you gonna beg borrow and steat a quarter to go to a pay restroom? Now imagine your wife.
Keep in mind these are all psychological, not "real". People will perceive the pay-restroom to be higher quality, better maintained (even if it isn't), and more sanitary.
Adding advertising makes it blend in with the fabric of the street. Right now, those damn things look like space age robots--very imposing.
Re:Like intentionally uncomfortable benches (Score:1, Interesting)
What society should be doing it helping these people. You can't just treat them like pests and hope they go away.
Though not directly related to the war on drugs, I think it should be noted that certain problems CANNOT be solved because people don't want them solved. Take my point, the war on drugs, as an example. The users won't stop. The powers that be make too much money from it. We don't have the stomach to curtail demand by on-the-spot execution of repeat users (I'm thinking three instances of getting caught, and *BANG*, your dead - incinerated too to save graveyard space). Nothing short of summary execution of the users (start with Amy Winehouse) will put a dent in the problem. There are too many users to put in jail or allow through the standard death penalty process with years of appeals. Instead, we accept a problem that provides endless work for policemen, prison guards, prosecutors, defense lawyers, judges, doctors, rehabilitators, dealers, farmers, druglab techs, pharmacies, old people selling 'scipts to kids, prison builders, prison maintenance, cheap prison labor, and on and fucking on. There is so much f-ing money in drugs I think the street transactions are just the tip of the iceburg. What does this war entail? A steady stream of undesirables and junkies to move around and shuffle about like so many worthless pawns. You can't really take the homeless out of the equation when SOCIETY needs them to piss on. That's why we demonize the dealers and not the users. If you looked at the source of the problem, we may actual solve it. Not that I like the war on drugs, but if I was dictator and in charge of winning the war, then I give medals and accolades to the dealers and bullets in the head to the users.