Quote:
Originally Posted by 1overcosc
Yes, I agree.
However, in the case of Huntmar, that bridge was designed in the 1970s, by which time it should have clear that the Huntmar Road area would be urbanized within a few decades.
|
I disagree. Urban planning and policies can only go so far, it's sometimes hard to predict 10 years into the future let alone 30. Especially if you throw in the wildcard of OMB. If the bridge was designed in 1976, and if you look at aerial maps on Geo Ottawa, even the 2014 imagery makes it pretty clear that the new housing development is just taking shape and still not a major pedestrian generator. It's akin to those who move into the Glebe and complained about the stadium.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1overcosc
The massive failure of the planners and public of the 1960s and 1970s to see or even care about anything in the future continues to bite us in the ass.
|
Planning/designing is a learning experience, they likely did the best the could with the knowledge they had at the time. It's shitty, but the way it is. I'm sure 50 years down the road some new planner/engineer is going to be harshly criticizing my work. lol
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1overcosc
MTO shouldn't be putting sidewalks on rural overpasses.. unless it's apparent the area could/will be urban before the end of life of the bridge. Nowadays with the improved technology & design, that's a hundred years, so they might as well just protect the space on every bridge just in case.
|
75 years is the usual service life (in Canadian Bridge Code) now a days. Not sure if it was the same 40 years ago. But it'll be 50+ by the time it's going to be replaced. Which seems just right, given some of the development in the area. But as I said, MTO plans with land use policy's from cities, if cities policies are being overruled by a 3rd party and development is happening in areas where planners never intended, how is that anyone's fault?
Threaded Mode