It's the same with a stretch of new interstate being built in Indiana. If they tried to build the interstate system today, there would be so much wailing and gnashing of teeth I don't know that it would ever get done. Or it would be a patchwork of systems where the interstate existed in less liberal areas and then switched to tiny old winding roads in more liberal areas.

/liberal
//apparently not always though

It's too bad no bridges have been built since then.

Mentat: It's too bad no bridges have been built since then.

[img585.imageshack.us image 245x162]

I bet the bridge itself gives great views, but it looks like it ruins everyone elses view. I say tear it down and start again, this time either make it a hundred times more spectacular to observe, or make it invisible, like the leap of faith bridge in Indiana Jones and the last crusade.

it would be built... in china.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/26/bus iness/global/26bridge.html?pagew a nted=all

Bridge trifecta complete!

And with the unions we have today it would only be triple the cost, and half the quality.

Slaxl: Mentat: It's too bad no bridges have been built since then.

[img585.imageshack.us image 245x162]

I bet the bridge itself gives great views, but it looks like it ruins everyone elses view. I say tear it down and start again, this time either make it a hundred times more spectacular to observe, or make it invisible, like the leap of faith bridge in Indiana Jones and the last crusade.

My main gripe with bridges nowadays is that when they are built, especially in major locations like that or the new Bay Bridge half, they're not spectacular enough. I figure a lot of that is nickel and diming in the design phase, but a lot of it is also a preference for that sort of precast concrete nowadays. You see it there, you see it in the new Carquinez bridge, and the new Tacoma Narrows bridge. It just doesn't make for a flattering bridge, honestly. Even a splash of color would help all of these cases out, but I doubt you're going to see much color because repainting it would be too much to maintain.

That and designing a bridge that would also do more than the minimum necessary also seems a thing of the past. Assuming the Tappan Zee replacement ever gets built before that falls into the Hudson, it'll probably wind up being exactly the same amount of lanes and the most minimal cable-stay design they can manage, vs. the admittedly spectacular double-decker suspension prototype with rail capacity that was proposed.

Because there's no such thing as assuming you'll pay off a bridge eventually anymore, apparently.

Mentat: It's too bad no bridges have been built since then.

[img585.imageshack.us image 245x162]

It's a bit easier when the bridge is not in a major metropolitan area.

Having recently driven on that new Hoover Dam bridge, I can tell you that you don't even notice you're on a bridge, it just looks and feels like part of a freeway. The walls are too high to see anything if you're in a small car.

Hipster, Subby?

Must we continue to over-use a word to the point where it no longer has any meaning?

GORDON: And with the unions we have today it would only be triple the cost, and half the quality.

Six posts before a douchebag complained about unions. Fark is geting better.

Indeed, why Hipster, when one of the main groups that would be expected to complain would be homeowners who would pull a NIMBY (or more correctly NIMSV - not in my scenic view).

Yeah, it's always libs that are against public works projects. And don't forget Unions. And ACORN.

/soros, too

RollingThunder: Indeed, why Hipster, when one of the main groups that would be expected to complain would be homeowners who would pull a NIMBY (or more correctly NIMSV - not in my scenic view).

Won't somebody think of the property values!

The GG Bridge should have been built OVER Marin County, linking San Francisco to Petaluma. After all, San Francisco needs eggs.

Lux Lambert: My main gripe with bridges nowadays is that when they are built, especially in major locations like that or the new Bay Bridge half, they're not spectacular enough.

Reminds me of a local issue on a bridge I go over several times a week. Old stone faced bridge. It needs replacement according to the state. The state refuses to pay for the stonework and says that a plain concrete structure is what is going in. The town is trying to raise funds to make the new bridge look like the old one.

henryhill: GORDON: And with the unions we have today it would only be triple the cost, and half the quality.

Six posts before a douchebag complained about unions. Fark is geting better.

Or the trolls are getting slower, but I know what you mean.

An entire article that explores the probability of an event that already occurred. What is this, creation 'science'?

Did the Bevet$ write this?

ThatBillmanGuy: Having recently driven on that new Hoover Dam bridge, I can tell you that you don't even notice you're on a bridge, it just looks and feels like part of a freeway. The walls are too high to see anything if you're in a small car.

I go over it a couple of times a month. They should have built it out of Plexiglas. I appreciate the convenience and time savings, but I kinda liked the butt-parade as you crossed Hoover (Boulder?) Dam. I always wanted to drive by with a rubber hand on a stick, to slap all the butts, as their owners looky-looed over the edge of the dam.

Lipspinach: Bridge trifecta complete!

Now all we need is a Trump.

Mentat: It's too bad no bridges have been built since then.

[img585.imageshack.us image 245x162]

There's even been new bridges built in the Bay Area since then. Just in the past few years there's been a new Carquinez Strait bridge (which is lovely), a new Benicia bridge (which is not), and a widening of the San Mateo bridge (way overdue). Since they're not as iconic as the GG or Bay Bridges, they just get built without all the hand-wringing.

ThatBillmanGuy: Having recently driven on that new Hoover Dam bridge, I can tell you that you don't even notice you're on a bridge, it just looks and feels like part of a freeway. The walls are too high to see anything if you're in a small car.

It was quite disappointing.

Lux Lambert: My main gripe with bridges nowadays is that when they are built, especially in major locations like that or the new Bay Bridge half, they're not spectacular enough. I figure a lot of that is nickel and diming in the design phase, but a lot of it is also a preference for that sort of precast concrete nowadays.

'Pre-cast' concrete is actually 'pre-stressed' concrete and it is amazingly strong and resistant to wear it's more of a function over form thing.

SharkTrager: Mentat: It's too bad no bridges have been built since then.

[img585.imageshack.us image 245x162]

It's a bit easier when the bridge is not in a major metropolitan area.

So are you implying that a modern attempt to build a bridge between San Fran and Marin County or between San Fran and Oakland would fail? I would think that a four hour drive to get from San Fran to Berkeley would pretty much kill any environmental arguments.

There's that word again- "hipsters". What the heck does that even mean anymore?

"Every hip corporation would be making a pitch to do it in the shape of their logo."

So now corporations are not only people, they're hipsters?

Lux Lambert: Slaxl: Mentat: It's too bad no bridges have been built since then.

[img585.imageshack.us image 245x162]

I bet the bridge itself gives great views, but it looks like it ruins everyone elses view. I say tear it down and start again, this time either make it a hundred times more spectacular to observe, or make it invisible, like the leap of faith bridge in Indiana Jones and the last crusade.

My main gripe with bridges nowadays is that when they are built, especially in major locations like that or the new Bay Bridge half, they're not spectacular enough. I figure a lot of that is nickel and diming in the design phase, but a lot of it is also a preference for that sort of precast concrete nowadays. You see it there, you see it in the new Carquinez bridge, and the new Tacoma Narrows bridge. It just doesn't make for a flattering bridge, honestly. Even a splash of color would help all of these cases out, but I doubt you're going to see much color because repainting it would be too much to maintain.

That and designing a bridge that would also do more than the minimum necessary also seems a thing of the past. Assuming the Tappan Zee replacement ever gets built before that falls into the Hudson, it'll probably wind up being exactly the same amount of lanes and the most minimal cable-stay design they can manage, vs. the admittedly spectacular double-decker suspension prototype with rail capacity that was proposed.

Because there's no such thing as assuming you'll pay off a bridge eventually anymore, apparently.

I agree, the bean counters want a boring functional thing. People need something spectacular to inspire. The Golden Gate bridge is spectacular, it may not be the best, but it's up there. We need more things to be proud of, not simple utilitarian designs.
Can we form a league? The League of People Willing to See an Extra 10m Spent Above the Cost of Something to Make it Look Better".

LPWSESACSMLB? Catchy name!

RollingThunder: Indeed, why Hipster, when one of the main groups that would be expected to complain would be homeowners who would pull a NIMBY (or more correctly NIMSV - not in my scenic view).

QFT. From the shiat storm raised by the rich d-bags on Lake Washington, you'd thought a six lane bridge would eat their children.

GORDON: And with the unions we have today it would only be triple the cost, and half the quality.

How many more lives lost?

Guidette Frankentits: An entire article that explores the probability of an event that already occurred. What is this, creation 'science'?

Sounds like "concern trolling" in journalistic form.

Hipsters? Really? That's a really lame scapegoat. "OOOOoooooOOOOoohhh! I'm a scary hipster! I'll wear little hats and chunky-framed glasses and ride fixies and prevent you from building bridges! OoooOOOOOooohhhhh!"

whither_apophis: RollingThunder: Indeed, why Hipster, when one of the main groups that would be expected to complain would be homeowners who would pull a NIMBY (or more correctly NIMSV - not in my scenic view).

QFT. From the shiat storm raised by the rich d-bags on Lake Washington, you'd thought a six lane bridge would eat their children.

Yeah, look at the clusterfark around the viaduct! It'll never be rebuilt, torn down, made into a park, ANYTHING, until the next earthquake takes it down and smashes people.

WorldCitizen: It's the same with a stretch of new interstate being built in Indiana. If they tried to build the interstate system today, there would be so much wailing and gnashing of teeth I don't know that it would ever get done. Or it would be a patchwork of systems where the interstate existed in less liberal areas and then switched to tiny old winding roads in more liberal areas.

/liberal
//apparently not always though

I think it would be the other way around, it would be all the backwards teabagging conservative areas what would have just dirt roads because they wouldn't go for higher taxes to pay for it and they wouldn't want big daddy government using eminent domain to take their land to make room for the roads. It would be the more liberal areas, despite the enviro-nuts, that would have interstate system.

Environuts....Drink!
Unions.....Drink!
Libslibslibs...Drink!


Modern Conservatives...Just morons, or morons who still eat lead paint chips?

/If this bridge did not exist, it would be built. But no, unions and libs and environuts would definitely hate the idea, because the unions wouldn't want the work, and a 4 hour drive is better for the environment, and of course libs would hate it because, well, they just would.

GORDON: And with the unions we have today it would only be triple the cost, and half the quality.

Bridge quality standards are pretty well-established, actually. And the increase in cost would have more to do with the domestic bulk structural steel industry going kaput 30 years back than labor issues. Though labor safety standards would make it take a bit longer, mostly because we've figured out less retarded ways to keep workers from falling off a bridge during construction.

Now, if the article wanted to complain about something, how about the fact that our current bridges are hitting the end of their operational lifetimes and are often only inspected once a decade when they're supposed to be inspected twice a year?

Stroeh said voters in Marin, San Francisco, Sonoma, Mendocino and Del Norte counties all approved the issuance of bonds to pay for the bridge that were guaranteed by their property taxes.

Odd choice of revenue stream. In America, tolls have been used to repay construction costs since at least the 18th century, and the practice was common in the 1950s. What was different about 1930s California?

theorellior: Guidette Frankentits: An entire article that explores the probability of an event that already occurred. What is this, creation 'science'?

Sounds like "concern trolling" in journalistic form.

Hipsters? Really? That's a really lame scapegoat. "OOOOoooooOOOOoohhh! I'm a scary hipster! I'll wear little hats and chunky-framed glasses and ride fixies and prevent you from building bridges! OoooOOOOOooohhhhh!"

I agree, blaming hipsters is really the safe go to route though. It's better than blaming a particular race then being called a racist.

theorellior: Sounds like "concern trolling" in journalistic form.

Hipsters? Really? That's a really lame scapegoat. "OOOOoooooOOOOoohhh! I'm a scary hipster! I'll wear little hats and chunky-framed glasses and ride fixies and prevent you from building bridges! OoooOOOOOooohhhhh!"

Real hipsters would want the bridge to be made from recycled PC towers. Because that would ensure no iProduct would be hurt in the making of the bridge.

Egoy3k: Lux Lambert: My main gripe with bridges nowadays is that when they are built, especially in major locations like that or the new Bay Bridge half, they're not spectacular enough. I figure a lot of that is nickel and diming in the design phase, but a lot of it is also a preference for that sort of precast concrete nowadays.

'Pre-cast' concrete is actually 'pre-stressed' concrete and it is amazingly strong and resistant to wear it's more of a function over form thing.

Except for that nagging bit about the stress being introduced by steel, which will eventually begin to rust and tear the bridge apart. Probably not in my lifetime, but still. The Romans, though, they knew how to use concrete.

ghare:
/If this bridge did not exist, it would be built. But no, unions and libs and environuts would definitely hate the idea, because the unions wouldn't want the work, and a 4 hour drive is better for the environment, and of course libs would hate it because, well, they just would.

Obviously you've never spent any time in the bay area.

AMonkey'sUncle: Lipspinach: Bridge trifecta complete!

Now all we need is a Trump.

gunther_bumpass: Egoy3k: Lux Lambert: My main gripe with bridges nowadays is that when they are built, especially in major locations like that or the new Bay Bridge half, they're not spectacular enough. I figure a lot of that is nickel and diming in the design phase, but a lot of it is also a preference for that sort of precast concrete nowadays.

'Pre-cast' concrete is actually 'pre-stressed' concrete and it is amazingly strong and resistant to wear it's more of a function over form thing.

Except for that nagging bit about the stress being introduced by steel, which will eventually begin to rust and tear the bridge apart. Probably not in my lifetime, but still. The Romans, though, they knew how to use concrete.

The steel is completely encased in concrete.

From the roof of my friend's parents place at Broadway and Laguna, last night I watched the most spectacular fireworks show I've ever seen in my life, so I'm really getting a kick out of these replies.

/ San Francisco is better than your city

GORDON: And with the unions we have today it would only be triple the cost, and half the quality.

Eh, perhaps not half.



Not everything estimated by slide rule was up to snuff back in the day.

dennysgod: WorldCitizen: It's the same with a stretch of new interstate being built in Indiana. If they tried to build the interstate system today, there would be so much wailing and gnashing of teeth I don't know that it would ever get done. Or it would be a patchwork of systems where the interstate existed in less liberal areas and then switched to tiny old winding roads in more liberal areas.

/liberal
//apparently not always though

I think it would be the other way around, it would be all the backwards teabagging conservative areas what would have just dirt roads because they wouldn't go for higher taxes to pay for it and they wouldn't want big daddy government using eminent domain to take their land to make room for the roads. It would be the more liberal areas, despite the enviro-nuts, that would have interstate system.

Well, with the new stretch of interstate in Indiana, it's the super liberal college town on the route that keeps dragging its feet, holding up the process, and having liberals protest against "no new terrain" highways. Of course, it is largely paid for by a conservative state government by selling off existing state infrastructure to private corporations and cutting education budgets, so the conservatives are just fine with all of that.

Egoy3k:

The steel is completely encased in concrete.


Oh, right. I hadn't thought of that. I guess it'll be fine.

Lux Lambert: Slaxl: Mentat: It's too bad no bridges have been built since then.

[img585.imageshack.us image 245x162]

I bet the bridge itself gives great views, but it looks like it ruins everyone elses view. I say tear it down and start again, this time either make it a hundred times more spectacular to observe, or make it invisible, like the leap of faith bridge in Indiana Jones and the last crusade.

My main gripe with bridges nowadays is that when they are built, especially in major locations like that or the new Bay Bridge half, they're not spectacular enough. I figure a lot of that is nickel and diming in the design phase, but a lot of it is also a preference for that sort of precast concrete nowadays. You see it there, you see it in the new Carquinez bridge, and the new Tacoma Narrows bridge. It just doesn't make for a flattering bridge, honestly. Even a splash of color would help all of these cases out, but I doubt you're going to see much color because repainting it would be too much to maintain.

That and designing a bridge that would also do more than the minimum necessary also seems a thing of the past. Assuming the Tappan Zee replacement ever gets built before that falls into the Hudson, it'll probably wind up being exactly the same amount of lanes and the most minimal cable-stay design they can manage, vs. the admittedly spectacular double-decker suspension prototype with rail capacity that was proposed.

Because there's no such thing as assuming you'll pay off a bridge eventually anymore, apparently.

Yeah, I think we've long left the era of creating proud works of art with our infrastructure. We've gone from the era of the Golden Gate Bridge, Chrysler Building and Empire State building to the era of zero-personality glass skyscrapers (including the original WTC and its modern replacements) and bridges with the minimum required to hold it up by safety regulations. It's unfortunate.

Lipspinach: Bridge trifecta complete!



Would like more stories about bridges.

Why Would I Read the Article: From the roof of my friend's parents place at Broadway and Laguna, last night I watched the most spectacular fireworks show I've ever seen in my life, so I'm really getting a kick out of these replies.

/ San Francisco is better than your city

That pic is not from Broadway and Laguna... Just sayin'

Why Would I Read the Article: From the roof of my friend's parents place at Broadway and Laguna, last night I watched the most spectacular fireworks show I've ever seen in my life, so I'm really getting a kick out of these replies.

/ San Francisco is better than your city

[imgs.sfgate.com image 625x347]

You need to see more fireworks displays then.

/Grucci ftw

GORDON: And with the unions we have today it would only be triple the cost, and half the quality.

The main cost in building anything like bridges nowadays goes to pay off litigation. All those bottom-feeding lawyer trolls come out and write up hundreds of environment impact suits and the agency overseeing the bridge building pays them off, knowing that going through litigation would take much longer and costlier than just paying off the frivolous suits.

Unions won't do much to hamper the cost.

Mentat: It's too bad no bridges have been built since then.

[img585.imageshack.us image 245x162]

We can thank the fear of people who look different and believe different things than us for that bridge.