2022 Footbridge

[Wheatley]

Ditto signal post telephones. We had one at Dodworth where the kids regularly pulled the handset off, so the S&T replaced the curly wire with a nice bit of armoured cable. That lasted a couple of weeks until they smashed the handset against the signal post. A much shorter bit of armoured cable succumbed to bolt cutters or similar, so the whole thing was replaced with a sort of plate steel intercom with some tiny holes punched in it. The driver shouted into one set of holes and a muffled reply came out of another set. 

 

Lighter fuel squirted into the holes did for that one. 

[mdvle]

On 08/12/2022 at 07:36, St. Simon said:

There has been done comment on the DDA compliance, but I think this is hoped to become the standard where disabled access is not required such as at Craven Arms where the footpath it replaces can’t be accessed by disabled individuals or where alternative disabled access is provided.

 

The inherent problem in that though is the assumption that the area around the bridge and society remains static for the next x decades of service for the bridge - or given the comments about moving bridges that the next potential site also doesn't require DDA compliance.

 

Whether it be new housing in 20+ years or new designs of wheelchairs it seems to be poor forward thinking to design what is supposed to be a "standard" bridge in 2022+ that doesn't respect disabilities.

[Wheatley]

40 minutes ago, mdvle said:

 it seems to be poor forward thinking to design what is supposed to be a "standard" bridge in 2022+ that doesn't respect disabilities.

It's standard in the sense that it's modular and customizable, the bog standard rural version doesn't need to be future-proofed to that extent. That would put the unit price up and negate the whole concept, which is to close as many footpath crossings as possible as cheaply as possible by providing an alternative to the current very expensive steel and concrete version. The cost of those cannot be justified for lightly used crossings on current Value per Prevented Fatality rules, it's the same reason you sometimes don't get new zebra crossings until enough people have been run over. 

 

If someone fills the field next door with houses in 20 years the VPF calculation changes and you swap it for the DDA-compliant version with longer ramps and/or lifts. 

[5BarVT]

22 hours ago, Wheatley said:

If someone fills the field next door with houses in 20 years the VPF calculation changes and you swap it for the DDA-compliant version with longer ramps and/or lifts. 

And as part of the planning assessment the developer pays for the upgrade (allegedly!).

Paul.