Pissing in Public : The Role of Public Washrooms within the Context of a Neoliberal City
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The role of public washrooms is excluded from civil discourse on public amenity provision within the City of Vancouver. The public washroom if ever included in a design, is considered an afterthought and its implementation are symptomatic of attitudes towards commercialisation of the city, consumer-as-citizen equivalence, and privatised-public space. This research highlights historical and contemporary conditions and neoliberal tools utilised by the City to establish a clear understanding of how space is created, maintained and how value emerges. The historic Comfort Stations’ current role, within the socially and economically diverse neighbourhood of the Downtown Eastside, is symptomatic of macro ideologies on the public washroom. Neoliberalism and its political rhetoric shape these ideologies to create a consumer-dependent right of access to basic public necessities. The definition of neoliberalism highlights dependence on rhetoric, laws and policies to changing the urban landscape, while critics suggest an active social-democratic process better reflects the right to the city. Local instances of neoliberalism emerge that stifle democratic and capitalist city building. These such instances include Business Improvement Associations, Community Amenity Contributions, Development Contribution Levies, Privately Owned Private Spaces, and Public-Private Partnerships. Contemporary precedents of public washrooms around the city express the shape that neoliberal autonomy of form and practices as detrimental to the public. As the future of public washrooms is contingent on renewal of long-term contracting with a private corporation this Graduate Project proposes that by examining neoliberal policies in the City of Vancouver, designers, developers, and the public can make informed decisions about need-based amenities such as washroom implementations. This proposal will be expressed as a set of guidelines for alley developments in conjunction with the Community Amenity Contribution, and subsequent design responses. By creating a transparent and straightforward guideline for public amenity production in alley spaces a more democratic process will be created that allow various user groups, designers, developers and planners to make economic, policy, and public decisions.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".