max
Active Member
In the case of the CN Tower building the tallest freestanding scaffold, hiring painters with belaying skills or hanging painters from helicopters were all judged to be more expensive than just picking a material that can withstand weather without the need for painting. In the case of both structures, the sheer amount of paint along with the planning and labour you'd need represents a massive ongoing cost for maintenance that the owners would have to assume. The cost of painting can be a basis on which you would plan not to paint the structure even if you wanted to for some esthetic purpose.Interesting about the painting. Why can't we paint the CN Tower and outside of the Roger's Ctr in the same way?![]()
My understanding on bridge painting is that it is primarily to protect against corrosion. Since there are environmental concerns about paint flaking into the water below, that would be the basis for choosing to build with materials that do not need corrosion protection. When we built bridges that needed painting, we didn't have the same labour costs, construction standards or environmental regulations as today.