Quote:
Originally Posted by rubicon
The cart paths on the north side were widened by residents funds which I believed was wrong. It was wrong because the cart paths were designed incorrectly. The Developer is the general contractor/manager and should have picked up the costs not residents. Now we have a bridge with the same flaw and again we are going to use residents money. Same old same old
|
I thought the funds used were from the original lawsuit against the developer. He has/is paying off the agreed settlement over a few years. In a way, I guess it is the residents' money, but it is being provided by the developer. Am I wrong?
I agree that design of that bridge is less than ideal. I don't know if the environmentally sensitive area restricted the width they could build, but it sure could use another foot or so. Also, the material of the bridge concerns me in wet weather. I don't know if it does become slippery, but it looks like it could. However, this is the first accident I have heard on that bridge in 5+ years here, so maybe it's not as dangerous as it looks.