5 ms·

IMO, we are spending way too much money on scaffolding to save very few lives. Does getting killed by an errant piece of brick from above suck? Yes it does. But

by ipqk 3y ago

IMO, we are spending way too much money on scaffolding to save very few lives. Does getting killed by an errant piece of brick from above suck? Yes it does. But so does getting killed by a speeding vehicle which happens on a weekly basis. I'd rather most of the money that goes into scaffolding go towards making our streets safer (such as daylighting, speed control measures, etc). It'd save way more lives per dollar spent. We should still have scaffolding for the most unsafe buildings (until fixed), but what we have today is really just a huge waste of money lining the pockets of the mob (which allegedly controls the scaffolding business).

otoburb 3y ago
I think the reasoning (whether correct or not) is that the constant vigilance (such that it is) prevents a torrent of facade from crumbling and falling; it wouldn't just be "an errant" piece.
- ipqk 3y ago
  I'm not suggesting zero vigilance, as I said we should still have scaffolding for the most unsafe buildings and that requires a baseline of vigilance. But our current scaffolding exists because of Local Law 11, which was enacted in 1998. There were some deaths that occurred before that, which is why the law was enacted. But I think the amount of money we spend today to save those lives & injuries is highly out of proportion with out safety priorities elsewhere in the city.
  - avery17 3y ago
    Put a number on it. How much should we spend per life?
    - gpapilion 3y ago
      Seems like the estimate for an adult is $12.5m in the us according to dot. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Value_of_life https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Value_of_life
  - al_borland 3y ago
    Who pays for the scaffolding today? My assumption would be the building owners would pay, to avoid paying for fixing the building itself, and it would a one time expense for the most part. The items you suggest (daylighting, speed control measures, etc) would be costs the city would need to take care of, and require ongoing monthly costs. The power for the street lights, the staff to maintain the lights and do the extra speed control measures, depending on the speed control measures you’re thinking about, it could also mean civil engineers, construction crews, etc. All of this sounds very expensive.

by ipqk 3y ago

otoburb 3y ago

I think the reasoning (whether correct or not) is that the constant vigilance (such that it is) prevents a torrent of facade from crumbling and falling; it wouldn't just be "an errant" piece.

ipqk 3y ago
I'm not suggesting zero vigilance, as I said we should still have scaffolding for the most unsafe buildings and that requires a baseline of vigilance. But our current scaffolding exists because of Local Law 11, which was enacted in 1998. There were some deaths that occurred before that, which is why the law was enacted. But I think the amount of money we spend today to save those lives & injuries is highly out of proportion with out safety priorities elsewhere in the city.
- avery17 3y ago
  Put a number on it. How much should we spend per life?
  - gpapilion 3y ago
    Seems like the estimate for an adult is $12.5m in the us according to dot. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Value_of_life https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Value_of_life
- al_borland 3y ago
  Who pays for the scaffolding today? My assumption would be the building owners would pay, to avoid paying for fixing the building itself, and it would a one time expense for the most part. The items you suggest (daylighting, speed control measures, etc) would be costs the city would need to take care of, and require ongoing monthly costs. The power for the street lights, the staff to maintain the lights and do the extra speed control measures, depending on the speed control measures you’re thinking about, it could also mean civil engineers, construction crews, etc. All of this sounds very expensive.