I don’t think it’s the fault of the designer or original leadership that the people that followed them didn’t actually do what they were supposed to…
You could build a bridge that will last fifty years with no maintenance, or 100 years with proper maintenance, is it a bad bridge because in seventy years with no maintenance it’s falling apart?
Or is it just that your successors didn’t do their jobs, aka, get results?
Concrete and Rebar fails in less than 20 years because the cheapest most widely available rebar is iron, which rusts rapidly once the surface of the concrete cracks.
Idk who’s telling you this but they’re lying, probably because they’re skimming the maintenance budget and then gaslighting you about why it’s falling apart.
I don’t think it’s the fault of the designer or original leadership that the people that followed them didn’t actually do what they were supposed to…
You could build a bridge that will last fifty years with no maintenance, or 100 years with proper maintenance, is it a bad bridge because in seventy years with no maintenance it’s falling apart?
Or is it just that your successors didn’t do their jobs, aka, get results?
Concrete and Rebar fails in less than 20 years because the cheapest most widely available rebar is iron, which rusts rapidly once the surface of the concrete cracks.
Idk who’s telling you this but they’re lying, probably because they’re skimming the maintenance budget and then gaslighting you about why it’s falling apart.
The only way to maintain those structures are to rebuild them in segments, which is admittedly easy to do but in turn raises the cost over time.
You mean like something they would create a maintenance budget for and say “do this at these periods and it will be cost effective?”