So far the city’s pricey prototypes elicit questions about price, but at least two hold up as well as the inexpensive off-the-shelf models.
After spending $550,000 for “graffiti-resistant trash cans,” at least one of the city’s uniquely designed, costly bins has failed that test — and another model seems no more efficient than the regular bins nearby, according to residents using the cans.
The Bachelors-esque contest to help find the city’s best garbage bin will run from July 18th to September 17th. The host: San FranciscoPublic Works.
Over the forthcoming two months, San Franciscans will get to decide on which bin of trash we shall bestow a rose. The options pit the three prototypes the city spent $550,000 to develop against three off-the-shelf models.
You might be thinking “Trash cans are trash cans. They just need to get the job done.” No, no, no. These prototypes aren’t like other trash cans in the world, according to Public Works officials who spoke at a forum earlier this month at Manny’s Cafe. They’re special.
“This is going to be history in the making,” said Alison Mikels, a supervisor for Public Works Street Environmental Services Operations.
Public Works pitched the garbage cans as durable and designed to last up to 25 years on San Francisco’s punishing sidewalks. While happy with some of the offerings, locals also described the prototypes as “something from outer space” and wondered about the price tag.
You can visit them at any of the 26 points around the city and register your thoughts by using the QR code on each.
On Wednesday – nine days into the experiment – Mission Local visited all six bins stationed in the Mission District. We found the following.
The Soft Square ($20,900)
By last Wednesday, Vandals had already hit Soft Square, located on the northwest corner of 16th and Mission streets. Entirely enclosed, it has a foot pedal for hands-free use.
When Mission Local visited the can, the sides were already vandalized with graffiti and smeared in garbage juice leaking from within.
Also, scratches covered its lithe exterior. That was the work of rats, Mission resident Paula Groves guessed.
A Public Works employee, Ronnie Rodriguez, was at the scene filing a report on the 311 App. “I was here last night, and it was fine. This morning it has graffiti on it, so hopefully, they get this cleaned up ASAP.”
By Tuesday of this week, the bin was still marked with graffiti.
Even with its smooth edges and useful compartments, locals couldn’t wrap their heads around the price tag.
“The price seems a bit high for a trash can,” Mario Francisco Caballero said. Then he shrugged. “But we’re talking about a city government here, so they have enough money for it.”
The Slim Silhouette ($18,800)
The Slim Silhouette has yet to appear in the Mission, so we visited one in California and Locust in the Laurel Heights neighborhood. It was spotless and in tip-top shape when we visited on Monday – a sign of continuous maintenance, according to one of the bookstore clerks who work at nearby Book Inc. The design is functional: one adjacent hole for recyclables and one to insert trash.
A group of teenagers hanging outside the Panda Express nearby said the trash can looked like a silver bug with beady eyes. I say it looks like Wall-E. It’s unclear what manner of refuse belongs in what hole since you can’t see inside the bin. Once the garbage goes down the chute, it vanishes from sight. With few access points, the bin is quite tamper-proof.
The Salt & Pepper ($11,000)
The Salt and Pepper on the northeast corner of Dolores Park also seemed to fare well. Barrel-shaped with vertical ridges, it’s difficult for rodents to climb up, said one resident.
A round compartment on top is reserved for recyclables, with just enough space for a decently-sized hand to slide through. The trash can looked tidy and the can was relatively empty when we visited.
Dianne Felix, who has lived on the corner of 18th Street for 45 years; However, found the price to be a problem.
“You know how many people we could feed with $10,000?” she asked. “Just stay with the old school, the old school works fine.”
For her, the green plastic recycling bins lined up along the street near the park sufficed.
In questioning the price, Felix repeated the sentiments of many of the other locals. She’d rather see the money invested in getting the homeless people off the street or improving city transit or more affordable housing.
And if these pricey cans are about beautifying the city, “It doesn’t look pretty,” Felix said. “These look nuclear.”
The off-the-shelf models
The Ren Bin ($2,800)
The Ren Bin at Potrero and 24th streets have a larger opening at the top than any of the city’s prototypes and some local businesses were already complaining about the odors escaping from this particular bin.
“The smell is bad for business,” said Muhammad, who runs a convenience store on 24th Street. It could, however, just be the garbage from that day. And, on that Wednesday at 1 pm the Ren Bin was already overflowing with used paper cups and trash bags.
When we revisited a week later on Wednesday, the can wasn’t in better shape. It was still full and exuding a foul odor.
But is that a problem with the bin — or not enough pick-ups? Around the corner, one of the city’s much-maligned current batch of “Renaissance” cans looked pristine beneath some shade and was practically empty.
Wire Mesh ($630)
The cheapest off-the-shelf model was the Wire Mesh, which stands about three feet tall. One was set out on 18th and Connecticut. It looked modern and simple and blended in nicely with a street lined with restaurants. On Wednesday the bin was half-full and there was no garbage nearby.
Ata Hamdan, who runs Cracked & Battered restaurant, said there were no foul odors, even without a lid.
Even its modest cost, however, elicited skepticism from Hamdan.
“Shouldn’t we be spending that money on something else?” he asked.
The BearSaver ($1,950)
The Bear Saver blends in with other green bike boxes that lined the Market and Mission area. It doesn’t stand out as a trash can: hence the trash label on this off-the-shelf model.
The opening shuts tight. The Bear Saver shares similar features to the Soft Square but perhaps requires more exertion to use. Users can either pull a small lever similar to a soft serve machine that opens the garbage slot or use the handle attached to the bin to open the trash lid themselves.
While offering two manual options to operate a bin is useful (a fail-safe of some sorts in case one or the other breaks) including a “hands-free” option or foot pedal offered by the SoftSquare feels more useful.
We’ll check back in with the bins near the end of the two-month test.