Quote:
|
If I had to take a wild guess.. imma say it has something to do with liability... like everything else lol
|
Liability is exactly why local governments don't want things in the right-of-way. And in almost all jurisdictions, sidewalks of public streets are part of public right-of-way. One notable exception is Clark County, Nevada, where along the main strip the sidewalk is often privately owned. It would be interesting to see the legal docs involved with the skyway system in Minneapolis.
|
Gold star for me!!! Haha :notacrook:
|
A little confused on this. If this is the case, why are many projects in Downtown including overhangs (such as Link, Stewart, Block 23, etc.)? There are many, many of these. I try to walk under them as much as I can during my walk to keep from dying in the sun.
In all honesty, a pedestrian is more likely to get injured by falling tree limbs than a structure concreted into a building. |
Quote:
My guess is an few foot overhang, attached to a privately owned building, is totally different than what is being discussed... I *think* cgl77 is referring to full blown shade structures that would be installed by the city... More or less like the below: https://www.poligon.com/wp-content/u...kway-cover.jpg https://www.top4.com.au/custom/domai...oto_396957.jpg |
What part is confusing? People want to limit their exposure to liability but moreso don't want to spend money on something which provides no return and has maintenance costs - some things are superfluous.
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
Having a shaded area for employees to smoke or eat/drink will probably make your leaseable space more attractive. Having a shade structure over the sidewalk to make pedestrians walking past your building has little, if any, value to tenants. |
|
Quote:
|
|
Quote:
|
Where shade structures are shown in the photos, some may be wholly on private property, but it's hard to be sure. If something falls off a structure or even a tree and bonks a pedestrian on the head, and the victim is inclined to sue, the goverment entity as 'property owner' will be usually the first to have to pay out. Where a permanent structure is located in the right-of-way, an encroachment agreement and a building permit for it will have been issued by the city as well, in essence 'guaranteeing' that the structure is safe for pedestrians. Thus the city has really put its neck out. Permission for something like tables or even a tree in right-of-way can be relatively easy to revoke, as the property can be much more easily removed, if the city sees it becoming a liability. Maintenance of anything including trees in right-of-way is another headache for governments. Most public works folks I worked with wanted absolutely nothing 'private' in the right-of-way if they could get it.
|
I know NOTHING about is the train system in Phoenix. The different lines, depots, etc.
That line over Tempe Town lake is a popular one, correct? Wonder how trains will be rerouted as a result of the collapse etc. |
Collapse?
|
Quote:
https://www.abc15.com/news/region-so...ponse-in-tempe |
I just saw it on the news. HOLY CRAP!
|
Quote:
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 10:02 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.