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."
Just Remember... (Score:5, Funny)
God, I wish I didn't have to move.
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:Just Remember... (Score:5, Funny)
Hey, the homeless get free showers and the prostitutes stop being dirty*.
Win/Win.
*Of course, she might have to do a little gymnastics depending upon the location of the cleansing jets.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Just Remember... (Score:5, Insightful)
Let's see: They estimated maintenance costs of $600,000 a year [nwsource.com]. I don't know much about wages in the US, but it's fair to assume that 5 janitors would have done the job at a lower price.
Ignoring the price tag and maintenance cost I'm still wondering why those toilets failed in Seattle. We have toilets from the same manufacturer over here (Berlin, DE) and they don't attract much drug abuse or prostitution, because if you spend too much time in there the door simply opens.
I'm not kidding, it happened to a friend of mine who for some reason unknown to me decided to roll a joint in there. Since he told me I've stopped using them for their intended purpose.
Re:Just Remember... (Score:5, Insightful)
We have toilets from the same manufacturer over here (Berlin, DE) and they don't attract much drug abuse or prostitution, because if you spend too much time in there the door simply opens.
I'm not kidding, it happened to a friend of mine who for some reason unknown to me decided to roll a joint in there. Since he told me I've stopped using them for their intended purpose.
A) Funny parts bolded.
B) Your friend is slow. I suggest a rolling machine.
Re:Just Remember... (Score:4, Insightful)
If weed is not addictive, why do so many people have to smoke it (not those or medical reason, regular health people). They crave it, they need it. I have seen a bunch of people (more then 30) where smoking weed was more important then everything else (working, bathing, going to work/school). All those people were weak and could have gotten addicted to anything? Weed is not addicting? Something does not add up.
I know I am going to be flamed into hell for this. But I do not see it. If one smokes weed 1-2 a week so what. The ones who smoke it 5-6 times a day every day and need to smoke it every day, that is an addiction. Most drugs (not all) taken in moderation are not harmful. I would say all drugs taken in extreme amounts are harmful.
Re:Just Remember... (Score:5, Insightful)
Luckily I do not suffer from that particular affliction.
Re:Just Remember... (Score:4, Insightful)
The drug itself is not addictive. The effects of the drug are addictive.
Sir, I hate to say this... in fact, I have never said this before because it IS such a cliche, but please believve me when I say, with absolute conviction, that that is the absolute dumbest thing I have ever heard anyone say in my entire life.
Re:Just Remember... (Score:4, Informative)
that that is the absolute dumbest thing I have ever heard anyone say in my entire life.
You must not get out much then.
Simply speaking, there's two types of addiction. Physiological and Psychological. Physiological is where actual changes to body chemistry occur, and bad things can happen when you withdraw. A severe alcohol addict can experience delirium tremens. Heroin can have some very bad side effects from withdrawal.
Then you have Psychological addictions. These are the people who get addicted to gambling, world of warcraft, the internet, etc... Not to say that they don't crave their addiction, but it doesn't have the body factor that Physiological does.
On the topic of the toilets - well, I'd consider them an experiment that didn't work out as well as they hoped.
Re:Just Remember... (Score:4, Informative)
Frankly, your complete lack of understanding of the difference between physical and psychological addiction is astounding. Also, it is ignorance like yours which keeps a drug that is no more (maybe less) harmful than alcohol, and possibly beneficial to a great many people, illegal.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
I never have, and never will, smoke anything.
But are you saying people can be addicted to the 'effects' of marijuana without smoking it? ...didn't think so.
Then your vast knowledge and life experience on the topic should definitely qualify you as an expert.
Psychological addiction doesn't require any specific drug. Someone that gets addicted to marijuana would be just as likely to get addicted to another substance or activity, illicit or otherwise.
Much like how you are obviously addicted to purveying your ignorance.
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.
Re:Just Remember... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (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 wit
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
You know wrong about alcohol. It is pretty difficult to get physically addicted to alcohol (I should know), but it is most definately possible. Part of the pain of a hangover is withdrawal symptoms, which is why hair of the dog can be effective. It is also, as far as I know, the only drug which can kill you with withdrawal symptoms. Yup, that's right - hardcore alcoholics can't just go cold turkey, because the withdrawal symptoms include death. It is truly a nasty nasty drug if you actually get addicte
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
It is pretty difficult to get physically addicted to alcohol (I should know), but it is most definately possible.
I believe this has a lot to do with genetics. Native American tribes have some extremely high alcoholism, while Europeans generally don't, at least without extreme effort.
My theory is that areas that developed alcoholic beverages created evolutionary pressure for people who could handle them. Thus, like Europeans being more resistant to diseases like smallpox, they're also more resistant to alcoholism. As are Asians, and probably Indians.
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:Just Remember... (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Just Remember... (Score:5, Insightful)
An expensive, fragile, high-tech gadget is dumped into the public space and ends up broken? I'm shocked.
I wonder how the argument for these went:
1. Do you suppose the automatic door-opening could possibly fail or be defeated? No, our technology is foolproof.
2. Do you suppose people may clog it up in a variety of artful ways? No, why would anyone purposefully mess up a public bathroom?
3. Do you suppose it may become a way-station for illegal acts that requires around 15min of privacy? No, all illegal acts require very long times and abundant space.
4. Isn't it expensive to buy/install? Don't worry, people excrete almost continually, the money will just pour in.
5. Won't it be expensive to maintain? No, modern technology maintains itself.
Re:Just Remember... (Score:5, Informative)
The reason they can't open the doors after a couple of minutes has to do with ADA (Americans with Disabilities Act). At least that is according to Norman Augustine in Augustine's Laws. By law the toilets must be accessible to handicapped persons. It can take a handicapped person a long time to get there business done.
Re:Just Remember... (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Just Remember... (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Just Remember... (Score:4, Insightful)
The Homeless are untouchable and holy to the Liberal Elite. "they can't help it" is a tired old excuse, and part of a sick co-dependency that should be treated by mental health professionals.
Are you trying to be funny? It costs a lot of money to keep homeless people locked up behind bars, a heck of a lot more money than just making a public shelter for them. The great majority of homeless people are suffering from moderate to severe mental problems that are going untreated. When they do get locked up the jail is becoming the de-facto mental hospital for them, something that was not intended but is the reality here in the US.
Re:Just Remember... (Score:5, Insightful)
Pay toilets were popular in the U.S. in the 1970s. They ended up being banned [wikipedia.org] in many cities; where they weren't, vandalism and theft put them out of business.
If you consider that the alternative to free public toilets is people pissing, even crapping, in the alleys, then free public toilets are clearly a public good. If people are using them for prostitution and drug use, if homeless people are using them for shelter, that's a symptom of deeper problems. These problems ought to be solved by removing laws against consensual crimes and by addressing homelessness with affordable housing and decent health care - not by encouraging people to piss in the alley.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
These problems ought to be solved by removing laws against consensual crimes and by addressing homelessness with affordable housing and decent health care - not by encouraging people to piss in the alley.
I agree with you on the consensual crimes, but homelessness isn't likely to be solved by affordable housing. Many (most?) long term homeless people have serious addiction or mental health issues. Decent mental health care would probably have a big impact, along with rehab programs.
Re:Just Remember... (Score:5, Insightful)
The difference, I imagine, is in the 'quality' of the public that surrounds the toilets. The particular venue these were installed at in Seattle is a prime tourist area mixed in with a hefty homeless population.
And since it is thriving with tourists, there is a bit of a crime problem as the more enterprising homeless find ways of making do off them.
I've never visited Berlin, but my limited knowledge of it is you enjoy moderately pleasant, if unpredictable, summers with bitter winters. That tends to keep the homeless population either down or 'pinned down' to specific areas.
There hasn't been one time that I've visited Seattle/downtown and not had a problem avoiding tripping over people living on the streets there. It didn't matter where in the area I was.
Granted, that was downtown. But still, you'd have to be a fool to put out any sort of public facilities there without either the expectation that either they would be trashed almost immediately and continuously, or that you'd have to actually pay someone to monitor them almost 24/7.
just a guess... (Score:3, Funny)
a friend of mine who for some reason unknown to me decided to roll a joint in there.
Some unknown reason? Maybe he wanted to get high?
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 mak
Re:Just Remember... (Score:5, Funny)
Just like the ones at Robert Downey's house.
Re:Just Remember... (Score:4, Informative)
Please RTFA. Among other details:
a) The self-cleaning broke down somewhere during the 4 years
b) It already has a time-limit (15 minutes) after which it simply opens the door
Re:Just Remember... (Score:4, Insightful)
Would you prefer the homeless crapped in the street? Thats the alternative, and I'd sure as hell rather pay for a damn public toilet. Granted, this was a stupid way to provide them- a port-o-potty or paying a local business to keep their bathrooms open (and policed) would be a lot cheaper.
Tragic. (Score:5, Funny)
Meanwhile, 3 hours by car away... (Score:5, Insightful)
In Vancouver, BC, drug use and prostitution are (if not outright legal) decriminalized. This means that the government is able to help those with a problem instead of being forced to put them away in prison.
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.
It's a total waste of time to sell these things. It just means fewer public bathrooms downtown, and if you've ever been to a city with no public bathrooms (Philadelphia), you know that the terrible smell is the result.
Re:Meanwhile, 3 hours by car away... (Score:5, Insightful)
It's the puritanical mindset of Americans that pushes these normal behaviors into the shadows
Into the shadows? Hardly. Sounds like you've never been to Victor Steinbrueck Park [wikipedia.org] in the middle of the most touristy section of Seattle, where you can see dozens of addicts and homeless cheerfully loitering about day or night. From Wikipedia:
"The park is a popular gathering place for tourists, but also for the mentally ill, vagrants, alcoholics, and drug addicts. Public inebriation, nudity, and calls for assistance for unconscious individuals are common; a fall-off due to increased policing in the 1990s proved shortlived. There are a lot of drug-related misdemeanors and even minor felonies, though there have been no homicides."
The only thing I find shocking is that this outcome surprised anyone.
Re:Meanwhile, 3 hours by car away... (Score:5, Funny)
"The park is a popular gathering place for tourists, but also for the mentally ill, vagrants, alcoholics, and drug addicts. Public inebriation, nudity, and calls for assistance for unconscious individuals are common; a fall-off due to increased policing in the 1990s proved shortlived. There are a lot of drug-related misdemeanors and even minor felonies, though there have been no homicides."
Hey I'm british
That describes just about any sort of park I visit
Re:Meanwhile, 3 hours by car away... (Score:4, Informative)
That's an interesting question.
Last I heard (and I have seen evidence of this) is that Wal-Mart effectively has an official company policy that RVs and similar vehicles are allowed to park in their parking lots overnight, even for extended periods. Most other businesses would call the cops or chase the RVs away.
The rationale for Wal-Mart? The people in that camper parked in the parking lot are likely going to go for the most convenient supply shopping available.
Re:Meanwhile, 3 hours by car away... (Score:4, Informative)
The term used by RV'ers is "outrigging", living out of their camper/RV without hooking up to city water/power (some of the rigs are nice, but occasionally you get someone with a 1972 Winnebago with dry rot).
However, not all Wal-Marts are welcoming them with open arms these days. I've seen two with more restrictive policies, one banning them outright, while another has sections of their parking lots that are off limits to outriggers.
From personal observation, however, it seems to me that if you could afford a running RV (you can easily get one in adequate operating condition for less than $2,000), you could afford a spot at a campground for $400 a month. Hardly what any reasonable person would consider exhorbitant. They aren't too bad either, you get sewage disposal, fresh water, electricity and even cable in some places as part of the bargain. While many have restrictions on how long you can stay, if you have a good record with the owners, you probably could renew pretty quickly.
I spent a few months living out of a 18' trailer myself, and while running the water heater was a pain in the butt on cold mornings, it was fairly comfortable. Your mileage may vary.
Re:Meanwhile, 3 hours by car away... (Score:5, Insightful)
The only thing I find shocking is that this outcome surprised anyone.
Surprised, no. Disappointed, yes. I saw self-cleaning public toilets last week in Paris that were being used by the public for what they were intended for, not for illicit behavior. Why is it they work there and not in Seattle? My theory is that it's a societal thing--for some reason the citizenry of Seattle did not kick the druggies and prostitutes out of the toilets when they saw them. If a high enough % of the public objects to bad behavior, it becomes unacceptable and it stops. Parisians apparently made it clear that they wanted their toilets to stay toilets whereas Seattle-ites didn't care enough to maintain control of their city. Until Americans stand up and take back their streets, this is the type of result we might as well get used to.
Re:Meanwhile, 3 hours by car away... (Score:4, Informative)
Though the 'access gratuit' sanisettes in Paris are only open from 06:00 to 22:00, and it is not (or was not when I was there a couple of months ago) uncommon to see them out of use.
Re:Meanwhile, 3 hours by car away... (Score:5, Informative)
As a Parisian, I can tell you that the people here will probably not move their finger to prevent druggies and prostitutes in toilets. But the cops will.
I think the issue in Seattles is the classic political correctness of Americans:
Toilets had to be accessible to disabled people.
Due to that requirement, you end up with huge toilets, which, by definition, have more use than the Parisian sanisette (I think that if a prostitute went with customers in a sanisette, there would probably be people outside clapping their hands when they would come out, due to sheer awesomeness of such an act).
Also, being huge, Seattles sanisettes were costly, so they ended up with only 5. 5 is a very small number, so of course they have been broken very fast.
In Paris, sanisettes are NOT accessible to disabled people. There are special ones that ARE accessible, but those are NOT accessible to the general public (you need a specific card), so they are kept in a correct state.
That is not politically correct. But it works.
Re:Meanwhile, 3 hours by car away... (Score:5, Informative)
I'm guessing you have never been to the downtown east side in Vancouver.
They are not even close to decriminalized. Just because they have one safe injection site does not mean that the police won't arrest you for dealing. It also does not mean they won't arrest you if they catch you using drugs in public.
The reality of the downtown east side is that injection drug use is so rampant that the police couldn't arrest everyone who did it even if they wanted to. The single safe injection site isn't even close to large enough and neither are the detox centers. The result is that the dug users still shoot up in the alleys.
Re:Meanwhile, 3 hours by car away... (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Local decriminalization typically means that the cops simply don't go out of their way to uncover and investigate certain crimes, regardless of whether or not they're federal, state or local ordinance violations.
Just for instance, the San Mateo county sheriff's office recently raided a home poker tournament [examiner.com]. I guess they weren't interested in prosecuting prostitution [sfgate.com].
Re:Meanwhile, 3 hours by car away... (Score:5, Informative)
There was an article on this in the NY Times a couple of weeks ago. In addition to drug use and prostitution, people would leave so much trash in the toilets that the automatic scrubbers had to be disabled or they jammed on the trash... and as a result, the toilets became so disgusting that even the druggies avoided them.
""I'm not going to lie: I used to smoke crack in there," said one homeless woman, Veronyka Cordner, nodding toward the toilet behind Pike Place Market. "But I won't even go inside that thing now. It's disgusting.""
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/17/us/17toilets.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=seattle%20public%20toilet&st=cse&oref=slogin [nytimes.com]
IMO, the reason this works in other countries but not in the U.S. has nothing to do with our "puritanical mindset": instead, it's because Americans have no concept of public common space. We feel that everything on Earth is for our exclusive personal use until someone tries to stop us.
Re:Meanwhile, 3 hours by car away... (Score:5, Informative)
Another reason it fails in the U.S. is that it has a much larger homeless and mentally ill population roaming the streets of its major cities than just about any other first-world country I can name.
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. Y
Re:Drug use and Prostitution are normal? (Score:5, Insightful)
Except that heroin is not 100% addictive: perhaps more like 10% [reason.com] of heroin users are addicts. And it was first synthesized in 1874 and only became popular after it was independently re-synthesized 23 years later, and was marketed as a non-addictive morphine substitute until 1910 [wikipedia.org] - its addictive nature has in fact been understood for less than a century.
Yeah, you might end up like David Bowie or Keith Richards or hundreds of other famous musicians, actors, writers, artists who have used heroin...for those can afford their fix and have access to the pure stuff, heroin use or even addiction is not a big deal [guardian.co.uk]. It's less damaging to your body than addiction to cigarettes or alcohol.
As Bill Hicks [alternativereel.com] noted, "If you don't think drugs have done good things for us, then take all of your records, tapes and CDs and burn them. Cause you know what? The musicians that made all that great music that's enhanced your lives throughout the years? Real fucking high on drugs."
Which is not to suggest anyone go shoot heroin. The crap you buy from typical street dealers is cut with gods-only-know-what and may well kill you; and really, there are better ways to spend your time and money.
Again, your facts are in error. The prostitution shops were only licensed in 2000, not "decades" ago. And they're shutting down owners believed to have criminal connections, not the entire district.
I will recommend Peter McWilliams' book Ain't Nobody's Business If You Do: The Absurdity of Consensual Crimes in Our Free Country, available online at www.mcwilliams.com [mcwilliams.com].
Sadly, McWilliams became a victim of the War on (some) Drugs when his access to medical marijuana, used to treat symptoms of AIDS and non-Hodgkin's lymphoma was ended; forced to switch to the ineffective Marinol, he aspirated his own vomit and choked to death.
The misinformation you are spreading is killing people. Please, cut it out.
Re:Wait a second... (Score:4, Insightful)
"Virtures"? No. I said "and really, there are better ways to spend your time and money." That's hardly calling heroin use a virtue.
The use of clean heroin of known strength and purity is rather safe. Stupid - really, really fscking stupid - but safe. A heroin addict using the "good" stuff does much, much less damage to their body than a heavy drinker or a typical cigarette smoker.
The use of adulterated heroin of unknown purity, often using shared needles, is dangerous. People do it because they can't get clean heroin of known strength and purity. They can't get it because it's banned. It's banned because of misinformation like what you are spreading.
Furthermore, the prohibition creates a violent black market, which fuels a great deal of violent crime.
So, yes. When you spread lies about drugs and work toward their prohibition, you are killing people. You have a small share of responsibility for every junkie who dies from a dirty needle or from bad smack, and for every kid shot in a drug deal gone bad, because you helped create the circumstances of their deaths.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Wow, you're completely misinformed. Somebody already covered the Amsterdam angle, so I'll go after Las Vegas.
Prostitution is not legal in Las Vegas. It is legal in most of Nevada, and in most of Nevada it works quite well. The brothels are always away from the main part of the town, and they can't advertise so most tourists have no idea they are even there. They are clean and health inspectors make sure everything is on the up-and-up, which isn't always the case in Amsterdam. It's legal, so the women a
The City of Seattle (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (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 wi
Seattle, You're Doin' It Wrong (Score:2, Informative)
1. Legalize drugs and prostitution.
2. ???
3. PROFIT!!!
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?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
It's called taxation...
Re: (Score:2)
1. Legalize drugs and prostitution.
2. ???
3. PROFIT!!!
You forgot a step:
4. Get voted out of office at the earliest opportunity.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
4. Get voted out of office at the earliest opportunity.
It's a sad thing when standing up for the Constitution and working to greatly reduce violent crime guarantees someone would get voted out.
Re:Seattle, You're Doin' It Wrong (Score:4, Insightful)
The next group who wishes to stay in office will just change them back though.
Same reason why many conservatives are hypocrites. They'll whine about how the Democrats are being a bunch of commies and how "This isn't the land of my fathers. The government is taking everything away. This country is no longer free!". All the while when they're going on about freedom.
Then if you dare mention legalizing drugs and/or prostitution, letting a TV network show what they want (like, heaven forbid a show with gay characters), or letting anybody worship whatever deity they choose, then they get up in arms. In my area of the country it's been hell just getting the blue laws repealed - there are still some towns that won't let you buy alcohol on a Sunday, and in the town next to the college I attended you couldn't buy general goods on Sunday - the super Wal-mart had a large divider that they had to pull between the grocery section and the general goods on Sundays :S.
Basically, they want freedom so long as the free act passes their "raht" philosophy. If "that ain't raht", then you shouldn't be able to do it - all other approved activities are fine to remain free.
Amsterdam (Score:2)
This is why Amsterdam has public toilets that look like this: http://lh3.ggpht.com/_D4avj_GZuq4/SAsa2yTgvYI/AAAAAAAAB6E/ANS4tx2JuKc/toilet.jpg [ggpht.com]
Sure, it is not very private, nor can it be considered to be self-cleaning. But they aren't very attractive hideouts for prostitution and drug use either.
Haha! As if Amsterdam had any prostitution or drug use going!
Re:Amsterdam (Score:4, Funny)
Amsterdam's toilets look like a 404? What, do you have to piss into the hole between the two fours?
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Nah, they just have a quick thinking sysadmin who reads Slashdot.
Re: (Score:2)
Amsterdam has some permanent stone constructions called "urinors" aswell, they are basically a stone wall with a hole at around the right height to piss through, and a canal is on the other side... Not very pleasant for anyone who happens to be in a passing boat.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
$5,000,000? (Score:3, Insightful)
Sounds like they got ripped off in the first place. It shouldn't cost that much to develop something like that unless you have no clue about what you're doing.
Re: (Score:2)
Sounds like they got ripped off in the first place. It shouldn't cost that much to develop something like that unless you have no clue about what you're doing.
Chances are the sale cost was based on "what the manufacturer thinks customers would be willing to pay" rather than "what they cost to develop".
Re:$5,000,000? (Score:5, Insightful)
Like, you know, every product out there.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, I that's what I thought. Surely a public city project can find developers willing to treat it like a public project, and not a commercial project? But then again, this is the US, not Sweden, I guess.
Re: (Score:2)
Automated Public Conveniences have been around for years. For example:
http://www.jcdecaux.co.uk/development/apc/ [jcdecaux.co.uk]
cost around £100,000 to buy and install, then some amount each year for maintenance. I guess they spent so much on the install they had no money left to look after the things.
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: (Score:3, Informative)
Like so many others, you didn't RTFA, it seems.
The $5 mio. was not the initial price-tag. It was the accumulated cost, mostly of maintainance, over a period of four years. So it's not development costs, but maintainance, cleaning (the self-clean broke down), etc.
Open the pot bay door, Hal (Score:5, Funny)
What is the story here? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Seems pretty messed up when an entire city can't have public toilets. As an Australian we have an entire country filled with public toilets. Seems to be a non-issue over here.
Re:What is the story here? (Score:4, Insightful)
Public facilities in some areas will be ruined by the hopeless loser (it's no troll to call them what they are!) segment of the public, such as bums, drunks, and junkies. That makes providing those facilities a waste.
War on Drugs (Score:3, Insightful)
Just gets better and better.
Still, you get the government you deserve.
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 happ
Well... (Score:5, Insightful)
And if it had been a massive success, $5M would have been pocket change compared to the convenience and cost effectiveness of full automation.
Re: (Score:2)
Do you think Seattle would buy more toilets if it was a success? Do you think that if they bought, say, 100 toilets, they would still be paying a million a pop?
Now unfortunately, it turns out that these units weren't as cheap to maintain as they were supposed to be. Well, that's tough, but unless you're the kind of jackass who believes that backwards rationaliza
Must Be A Consultant in there Somewhere (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Must Be A Consultant in there Somewhere (Score:4, Insightful)
Q: "How are the voters of Seattle going to reward that terrible waste?"
A: By reelecting them in a landslide.
No I don't understand why, but its pretty common all across America.
I hear Google is offering a replacement (Score:5, Funny)
Google is offering the use of a new set of public gToilets in exchange for the ability to scan your waste for leftover products and potential diseases and then offer you contextual ads while you're in the unit.
Re:I hear Google is offering a replacement (Score:5, Funny)
It appears there is blood in your waste.
Shopping results for colon cancer:
(did you mean inflamatory bowel disease?)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Will they offer a stoolbar with an integrated poopup blocker?
People, I'm disappointed (Score:2)
Such a unique chance for toilet humor and already pages and pages of replies but still nothing?
What happened to the /. we all loved so much?
toilet homour (Score:4, Funny)
So Seattle's authorities were flushed with success untill their 'Big Idea' went down the pan!
It was their own fault (Score:2)
Like intentionally uncomfortable benches (Score:5, Insightful)
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?
Re:Like intentionally uncomfortable benches (Score:4, Insightful)
Because you're just pushing the problem somewhere else. The actual problem is homelessness; the homeless sleeping on park benches is just a symptom of the problem. The homeless obviously need somewhere to sleep. Making park benches uncomfortable to sleep on could (I imagine) make the homeless look somewhere else to sleep. Like people's front/backyards. It's the law of unintended consequences.
What society should be doing it helping these people. You can't just treat them like pests and hope they go away. They're still people, they just don't have a home.
What drug use and prostitutes? (Score:3)
From the article the issue was keeping the self-cleaning toilets clean...they got clogged with trash.
The drug use and prostitution bit was a worry in the original article when they were being installed.
New tag line (Score:5, Funny)
Slashdot - news of turds, stuff that splatters.
This is such an anti-Republican move (Score:2, Funny)
Prostitution in public toilets (Score:3, Funny)
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" ;-)
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.
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.
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.
Automatic toilets (Score:3, Informative)
San Francisco has similar toilets, from JCDecaux [jcdecauxna.com]. They're ad-supported, plus most of them charge money. JCDecaux, not the city, services them, and they do a relatively good job, which they have to do to keep the advertising contract. The San Francisco experience is that they work fine in the tourist areas and need too much maintenance in the homeless areas. SF gives homeless people a free token; it opens the toilet like coins, but the token comes back out the coin return.
Part of the problem was the insistence that they be wheelchair accessible. JCDeaux installs a smaller version in Paris, which takes up less space on the street (it will fit on most sidewalks), and isn't big enough for prostitution, drug dealing, or sleeping. But in the US, they're forced to install the big model, which is about the size of a parking space.
Palo Alto has two units. Theirs take credit cards. Really.
These things are far more expensive than they should be, costing about $1,000,000 each over 5 years. There's no good reason these things should cost far more than an SUV, but they do. I've seen the mechanism being serviced. It's put together from stock Telemechanique industrial automation components, which is reliable but is designed for one-off applications. If you built a washing machine that way, it would cost about $20,000. These things are engineered like prototypes. They need to be re-engineered for volume production and the cost brought down to under $50,000.
The problem wasn't the toilets (Score:3, Informative)
There was nothing at all wrong with the toilets it appears, but a more serious problem with the denizens of Seattle.
The versions in use in Paris work just fine, and have worked so for close to 20 years. Initially there was a (small) problem with people spending too long in there (for whatever reason), but a simple change to the software to open the doors after a reasonable amount of time to do what these were intended for fixed that problem.
The only other adjustment that was made was to reduce the sensitivity of the pressure sensor in the floor so that it registered small children - this after a dumb parent ignored the sign saying that children under 5 had to be accompanied by an adult, the toilet thought it was empty, and began its cleaning cycle.