(07-11-2022, 11:50 AM)danbrotherston Wrote:(07-11-2022, 10:02 AM)ijmorlan Wrote: This is the bit I really don’t get. I understand someone thinking that cars are the best and we need to cater to people who want to drive them; but I don’t understand a so-called “engineer” who deliberately overbuilds things at massive expense, thus incurring further increased maintenance expenses. I mean the first person is wrong, but the second person just makes no sense at all.
I don't know how to describe it...but I think I've experienced it.
Before I became...for lack of a better term, radicalized...I too dreamt of networks of perfect wide roads connecting every part of the city easily and efficiently. I mean, we do the same thing here with transit networks. I suspect that is the same reason engineers want to do it for roads.
But you then you grew up and learned things, including but not limited to the fact that big wide roads are expensive. Engineers are supposed to be all about tradeoffs: in modern engineering, every component of every bridge is built just strong enough (plus a safety factor) to support the loads that particular component will experience. We don’t just pile up huge amounts of stone so that there is no possible way the bridge will collapse. If an engineer insisted on using 8 gauge wire everywhere in a house, they wouldn’t get very far. But apparently putting in 4-lane roads all over the place even where the traffic doesn’t come close to justifying it is just A-OK.
Why are road engineers allowed to be 12 year olds? (no disrespect intended to 12 year olds; but thinking that is perfectly fine in a 12 year old isn’t necessarily OK for an adult)
And yes, I remember being similar: on at least one occasion I drew up a subdivision plan which just had a whole bunch of houses connected to a freeway interchange. And at one time I thought office buildings should have one parking spot per employee, too. I was just thinking of the convenience when driving, not about the costs. So it’s not just you.