Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

A mansion hidden directly under the Bay Bridge

sfgate.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 157 posts

Re: A mansion hidden directly under the Bay Bridge

#81

Post by [deleted] »

lotsoweiners wrote: post #76
Zetice wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why tunnels tho? Or rather, why single occupancy vehicles in tunnels? It just feels like a public transit system with extra steps…

Because a lot of people will never want to take public transit even if it was more convenient than it is now. In the US outside of NY, Chicago, SF, and perhaps a few others public transit sucks. Even adding 5 new light rail lines isn’t going to change things in Houston when most people want suburban life and only go downtown for a sporting event or concert.

[deleted]

Re: A mansion hidden directly under the Bay Bridge

#82

Post by mulmen »

w10-1 wrote: post #58

It's hard to imagine that sentimental navy brass can gum up a critical roadway for over a decade -- contributing to the many-billion-dollar increase in bridge cost from the original plan. The interplay between civilian control of the military and the military putting bases or jobs in every congressional district is dicey.

How do we fix it? Compulsory service with a peaceful election in exchange for higher education and lifelong healthcare?

Re: A mansion hidden directly under the Bay Bridge

#84

Post by smeej »

cdchn wrote: post #60
smeej wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

New Hampshirite here: Wherever you're trying to stay, it sounds like you're doing it wrong... Unless you're trying to be in, like, Lancaster during PorcFest or something.

Funny I had never heard about PorcFest until just now and drove by Roger's Campground less than an hour ago.

It's not that PorcFest is especially widely known. It's just that Lancaster doesn't have much in the way of inventory, and it books up for that one week, even though the event is at a campground.

Re: A mansion hidden directly under the Bay Bridge

#85

Post by jdechko »

I’m genuinely interested in the environmental discussion that took place during engineering that led to this decision. There are a couple of federal statutes pertaining to construction of roads on (or near) historic properties (FHWA Sec. 106 and 4f). I can’t imagine that this was an ineligible historical resource given its age and historical significance.

Even the alterations to view itself could have qualified, so I’m assuming that there were no feasible alternatives. There may also be some other nuances that the article didn’t cover, so I’m not completely certain, but it’s enough that I’m curious.

Re: A mansion hidden directly under the Bay Bridge

#86

Post by nine_k »

sva_ wrote: post #80
startupsfail wrote: post #12

Cars really should be put underground. Electric cars going in tunnels, not gasoline cars spewing the exhaust from the top of the bridge. … The mansion’s bright white siding is turning dull and black from car exhaust. …

I've been living on a busy street for the first time and the amount of fine dust from car exhausts is absolutely staggering. Never again.

I think it's mostly not exhaust but the dust from the road top layer and from tires. Electric drive helps little with that.

Re: A mansion hidden directly under the Bay Bridge

#87

Post by startupsfail »

avree wrote: post #47
startupsfail wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I understand that the price of a tunnel is somewhat comparable to the bridge.

"A frequently cited rule-of-thumb in transportation engineering is that tunnel construction costs two to three times as much as bridges, and that simple rule of thumb explains why there are so many more bridges than tunnels in operation today." What gives you your understanding? Mine is from multiple sources at the top of Google for the query "price of tunnel versus price of bridge"

I’ve never said it was the same. Somewhat comparable. In practice bridge is likely more expensive, if you take in the externalities accumulated over the lifespan of the bridge full of cars.

Engineering costs its a matter of volume, what kind of ground you need to dig, expertise and experience. If you can get something like the Boring company up, costs would drop down.

And engineering costs don’t account for externalities of having a bridge full of noisy cars hanging there, polluting in every modality: view, noise, smell, splitting the neighborhood, reducing walkability, destroying the property value.

Re: A mansion hidden directly under the Bay Bridge

#88

Post by blahedo »

The article kept mentioning that it was the re-building of the bridge that added noise and soot and such. But... there was a Bay Bridge there before, right? That island isn't very big, so the bridge couldn't have moved that far... how is the new bridge so categorically different for the view/air/noise of this house than the old one was?

Re: A mansion hidden directly under the Bay Bridge

#89

Post by jedberg »

blahedo wrote: post #88

The article kept mentioning that it was the re -building of the bridge that added noise and soot and such. But... there was a Bay Bridge there before, right? That island isn't very big, so the bridge couldn't have moved that far... how is the new bridge so categorically different for the view/air/noise of this house than the old one was?

The old bridge was a couple 100 feet over, on the other side of the hill behind the house. Big difference if the freeway is behind a hill vs directly overhead. :)

Re: A mansion hidden directly under the Bay Bridge

#90

Post by ahi »

ptudan wrote: post #41
r00fus wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's sad because AirBnB has also similarly shrunk the "suite" class of room that we as a 5 person family need. So we're forced into using AirBnB/VRBO because hotels only offer 2+2 (and most rental sites don't let you even look for 5 person rooms). Ugh.

Just search for 4. You're almost never going to get in trouble for sleeping 2 adults and 3 kids in a hotel room for 4.

From personal experience, just stick the youngest on the floor
Post reply on HN