A simple solution to the litter problem?

Following on from my post yesterday, I can confidently say that my wife's pet hate about Freo is when the bins are left to overflow. I think we can all agree that overflowing bins are not a great look, especially when there is a luxury liner in port or when it is a public holiday Monday (or a 'Litter Festival', as she now terms them).

Given this weekend's litter festival, I was interested to find out that the old overflowing bin scenario isn't restricted to Freo. I came across this cool article (click here) reporting how a Copenhagen resident who was tired of seeing overflowing bins in her city. She took matters into her own hands by implementing her own simple solution. (She has her own blog by the way, which can be found by clicking here)

Here are some photos taken from the blog post.

Overflowing bin in Copenhagen via Classic Copenhagen blog

To combat the rubbish, predominately takeaway coffee cups, her solution was to attach a test tube to the bin. This way people could place their cups in the test tubes when throwing them away. The photo below shows day 3 of the test tube experiment.

Day 3 of test tube solution via Classic Copenhagen blog

I really liked the idea and the approach. The solution targeted a specific problem in a proactive way through simple design. Unfortunately on day 6 of the experiment the local government removed the test tubes. Maybe there is an opportunity for Freo?

I'm hoping we won't have another Freo Festival of Litter this coming long weekend.

Freo Festival of Litter

According to Aafrin Kidwai, putting first things first is one of the seven habits of highly effective cities. Here is a passage from his article:

"How many cities have we visited where they are building a new grand City Hall, yet much of the garbage still isn’t being collected or the water isn’t flowing? A city’s priorities should be basic services, professionalism and quality of staff, clear metrics, a reliable ongoing base budget, and nurturing a respectful two-way conversation with its residents. All great buildings need a solid foundation."

(Kidwai's article is an interesting read. It can be viewed by clicking here.)

I couldn't agree more. 

It's great to see Kings Square activated with markets, but these types of initiatives need to be followed up with good place management...like keeping the place clean. That's why I was disappointed by the festival of litter that seemed to be going on near Kings Square and on Cantonment Street in Freo yesterday afternoon. 

Freo Festival of Litter yesterday afternoon

These photos were all taken on our way back to our apartment from Myer. The bin in the middle is next to one of my mini Freo monuments, the Pietro Porcelli statue. 

The festival of litter is one Freo festival I'd like to see come to an end. 

The Sunk Cost Fallacy; or what Charlize Theron has to do with the Bathers Beach Upgrade

A couple of months ago, my wife persuaded me to see a movie called Young Adult at the Luna on SX. It starred Charlize Theron in one of her more arty roles (alarm bells are already ringing, aren't they?) but my wife was set on the idea and, knowing that it would do me no harm to have some bargaining power when The Avengers came out in a few weeks, I acquiesced.

However, within five minutes of the movie starting, my wife was squeezing my hand and shooting me apologetic glances because it was clear this movie was going to be excruciating. Really, really terrible. The sensible thing would obviously have been to cut our losses and leave so at least we had some of the evening left to enjoy, but did we do that? Of course not. We just sat there till the bitter end.

The experience got me wondering, what made my wife and I so determined to sit out the whole two hour running time, even though it was clear to both of us that we weren't going to enjoy ourselves? And there were lots of other things we could be doing instead? I asked my wife what she thought.

"Well, it might have gotten good."
"Did you really think that?"
"Nah."
"So why did we stay?"
"Well, we'd paid for it, hadn't we? It wasn't even cheap night."

And there, in a nutshell, is the Sunk Cost Fallacy. The truth is that our decisions are tainted by the fact that the more we invest in something, the harder it becomes to abandon it. Having paid $30 for a movie, walking out after five minutes would feel like money down the drain. Of course, the truth is that our money was gone the minute we walked through the door - there was no getting it back. The end result of sitting through the whole movie was that instead of just wasting $30, we wasted $30 and 2 hours of our time. Staying wasn't rational, but it felt better.

So, what does this have to do with Bathers Beach, I hear you ask? (Luckily for me, even if you're getting bored at this point, the Sunk Cost Fallacy says that you'll be almost pathologically unable to abandon reading the article since you've already invested several minutes in it.)

Well, I've long been perplexed by the disconnect between the attitudes of Council and the community regarding the upgrade. The flaws in the project are so obvious, and the community criticism so vehement, that it seems like it would be an easy decision for Council to make - get rid of the dustbowl and some of the tarmac, and put in some grass.

But instead, Council's response to community discontent has been to either issue coy, watery and frankly nonsensical statements that they're going to "wait and see what it's like when it's finished", or to take a more agressive stance and claim it's community opinion that's flawed, and we plebs should show more appreciation for what is a spectacular heritage interpretation of the area, and stop wanting unreasonable things like grass to sit on, or not getting grit in our eyes. One only need read the City's media release regarding community backlash over the upgrade to get a taste of the bullish, obtuse attitude that has so far characterised their response (click here).

So what's behind Council and the City's refusal to cut their losses and fix the dustbowl and the charmless stretch of tarmac? Is it just that they don't want to admit an error? There's a famous precedent for the operation of the Sunk Cost Fallacy in the corporate sphere that's very applicable to the Bathers Beach situation.

"The sunk cost fallacy is sometimes called the Concorde fallacy when describing it as an escalation of commitment. It is a reference to the construction of the first commercial supersonic airliner. The project was predicted to be a failure early on; but everyone involved kept going. Their shared investment built a hefty psychological burden which outweighed their better judgments. After losing an incredible amount of money, effort and time, they didn’t want to just give up." 

David McRaney, The Sunk Cost Fallacy (click here for the rest of his very readable article)

The Sunk Cost Fallacy tells us that, having invested a lot of time, energy and money, Council and the City will find it extremely hard to abandon their plans and make new ones. It feels wrong. Nevermind that the money is already gone forever, and the more sensible approach would be to swallow the bitter pill and make the necessary changes. Just like my wife and I or the makers of Concorde, they're desperate to believe that despite all indications to the contrary, it just might get good.

My concern is that Council and the City will be guided more by the Sunk Cost Fallacy than by common sense when they're evaluating its success or failure and deciding what changes to make. In their desperation to prove themselves right, to avoid acknowledging they've made a bad call, they'll look at the dustbowl with rose coloured glasses (which in any case will be handy for keeping the grit out of their eyes).

Like my wife and I struggling to remember a vaguely funny moment of the movie that would make the experience seem worthwhile, they'll look at the project and say "at least the boardwalk works".

Next week I'll take a closer look at the kind of criteria I'd like to see used when Council evaluates the Bathers Beach project. In the meantime, my advice to anyone grappling with this problem would be to swallow your pride, use your noggin instead of your gut, and go see the Avengers instead.

Five ideas for Freo from...Budapest

Dean Cracknell is the author of this post. He is a Freo devotee dedicated to creating interesting, diverse places for people and is a guest contributor to The Fremantle Doctor blog. 

Dean can be followed on Twitter by checking out: @city_pragmatist

Budapest has been a place for writers, intellectuals and the arts for centuries. Last year, I was sipping on a morning coffee outside a small local cafe when the enchanting sounds of classical music filled the street. I looked around, expecting others to be amazed like myself. But nobody seemed surprised at all, in fact they were continuing on with everyday life. I later discovered that I had been sitting on a small street beside the city opera house.

One of my first impressions of Budapest, apart from the stunning skyline, culture and inexpensive culinary delights, were the streetscapes (a decent example of my planning nerdiness). Hungary is not a rich country, yet it has invested well in designing ‘streets for people’. Walking around was easy, pleasant and interesting.What can Freo learn from Budapest?

Here are some ideas - 

Some ideas for Freo from Budapest

Consistent wall of buildings

Buildings are most important for the way they frame and enclose the spaces between them. This Budapest street has 3-5 storey facades, which intimately enclose the space and create a feeling of cosiness and protection.

The facades should also be interesting - these buildings have different colours, materials, textures and features such as sculptures, ledges, ornaments and a variety of window shapes and sizes.

Street activity

Placemaking guru, David Engwicht, reckons one of the secrets to placemaking is slowing the flow of people along a street.

“People are the life-blood of place. Density of people-activity is a key attractor to a place. Here is a secret to making a space twice as full of people — without needing to attract one extra customer. Get people to take twice as long to move through the space and that space will be twice as full of people. You can help seduce people into spending more time in your street”.

David is onto something. People attract other people.

(See more of David’s ideas here)

Variety of places to sit and linger

People need to feel welcome in a space. This street has a variety of formal and informal spots to stop, sit and linger. The street has a nice atmosphere.

Greenery

Great places need greenery. This street has 3 types – street trees, garden beds and large-potted plants. The more greenery the better!

Simple consistent paving

We often over-engineer streets and spend too much money on pretty paving. This Budapest street has simple, non-descript concrete surfaces. The recent upgrade of Queen Victoria Street in Freo is a good example of keeping the paving fairly simple. The old Queen Vic now just needs more potted greenery to add some life.

That's about it for some ideas for Freo from Budapest. Although the two busy roads either side of the Danube River make walking along the river difficult, I think that this city has got many of the placemaking ingredients right.

100 posts and counting

I'm happy to report that my blog has cracked one hundred posts. The number of posts snuck up on me quite quickly.

I'd like to thank all those people who have visited or subscribed to the blog since it started. (So, thanks Mum.)

My biggest thanks and appreciation is reserved for my wife. She has edited all of my posts (and in the process saved the public from many a dodgy joke or two) and put up with me living and breathing my blog. There is no way there would be one hundred posts without my wife.

Lately, I was asked about some of my favourite posts. Here they are: 

- How three singing butchers got me thinking about my campaign (click here).

- The Beach Upgrade: A Tragi-Comedy in Two Parts (click here).

- Freo under the microscope: My city is bigger than yours (click here).

- Any post about my four year old nephew Byron, formerly known as Bubba (click here, here, here, and here for a few).

- The mini Freo monument posts (click here, here, and here).

Anyhoo, thanks again. I look forward to another century of posts.

A good article on density: Some lessons for Freo?

My wife is on a roadtrip with her family, which has meant that I've been home alone enjoying some Fremantle Doctor time these past couple of days. I can see my wife shaking her head in shame as she reads this blog right about now, but I'll come clean and admit that I'm on a town planning and placemaking high from all of the various town planning and placemaking websites I've been reading.

One such article that I really enjoyed was about the limits of density. Everyone who was interested in the recent debate surrounding Scheme Amendment 49 may find this article (click here) by Richard Florida quite interesting.

Density has its advantages up to a point

The first premise of Florida's article is that density certainly has its advantages. He argues that denser cities are more productive, more innovative, and more energy efficient. I agree with him. What I found interesting is that he believes that density has its advantages only up to a point.

For Florida, density begins to become a problem when it takes life away from the streets. In this case, where it does not facilitate interactions and exchanges. Here is a passage from his article that clarifies his point:

"The key function of a city is to enable exchange, interaction, and the combination and recombination of people and ideas. When buildings become so massive that street life disappears, they can damp down and limit just this sort of interaction, creating the same isolation that is more commonly associated with sprawl. As Jane Jacobs aptly put it: "in the absence of a pedestrian scale, density can be big trouble." Skyscraper canyons of the sort that are found in many Asian mega-cities, and that are increasingly proposed in great American cities, risk becoming vertical suburbs, whose residents and occupants are less likely to engage frequently and widely with the hurly-burly of city life."

Applying this lesson to Freo in the context of Scheme Amendment 49, it is crucial that pedestrian scale is retained and that the public realm is set up so that as many interactions as possible can be made possible.

Cautious of the pendulum swinging to far in favour of density

Another interesting point from the article is that Florida is concerned that as a response to combating urban sprawl the pendulum could swing to far in favour of high-rise development.

"If the pendulum originally swung too far in the direction of sprawl over the past 50 years, the risk today is that it is swinging way too far back toward high-rise skyscrapers. "To oppose a high-rise building," he writes, "is to run the risk of being labeled a NIMBY, a dumb growth advocate, a Luddite — or worse. Buildings 20, 40, 60 even 100 stories tall are being proposed and built in low and mid-rise neighborhoods all over the world. All of these projects are justified with the explanation that if density is good, even more density is better."

I tend to agree with him on this point. Whilst twenty storey plus buildings are not being proposed for Freo, we should be careful to avoid a dogmatic approach when considering our options for redeveloping the city centre.

Good density shouldn't be all about high-rise, but maximising interactions and activity

For me, one of the best things about this article is when Florida argues that solely discussing density in the context of high-rise tends to miss the point and limits the conversation. In fact, Florida argues that cities that adopt a single-minded attitude to high-rise could risk becoming clone towns. 

"What we need are new measures of density that do not simply count how many people we can physically cram into a space but that accounts for how well the space is utilized, the kinds of interactions it facilitates. "By this measure," McMahon writes, "one block of an older neighborhood might include a community theatre, a coffee shop, an art gallery, two restaurants, a bicycle shop, 10 music rehearsal studios, a church, 20 apartments and a couple of bars, and all with much more 24/7 activity and intensity of use than one block of (much taller) office buildings on K Street [in Washington, D.C.]."

"Too many people today conflate density with height. Real interactive density can be better achieved by other means. "Yes, we do need more compact, walkable higher density communities," writes McMahon. "But no we do not need to build thousands of look-a-like glass and steel skyscrapers to accomplish the goals of smart growth or sustainable development." Neighborhoods like Georgetown in Washington, D.C., Brooklyn’s Park Slope, and the Fan in Richmond were largely built before the age of elevators and they are all dense. New Orleans’ "French Quarter has a net density of 38 units per acre, Georgetown 22 units per acre." The real issue isn’t just height and the massing of people and work, but of enabling interaction and recombination."

My take on Florida's perspective, is that we can achieve the interaction and activity he talks about by adopting a different view of our city. Freo doesn't have to choose between being a heritage town, or a tourist town, or a place predominately for offices and shopping, or just a city of residents. It can be a kick ass combination of all of the above.

I enjoyed this article and I hope anyone that reads it does as well.