[HN Gopher] Golden Gate Bridge construction - and indignation (2...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Golden Gate Bridge construction - and indignation (2012)
        
       Author : notlukesky
       Score  : 42 points
       Date   : 2022-06-28 11:30 UTC (1 days ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.sfgate.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.sfgate.com)
        
       | ginja wrote:
       | Cool article! The Golden Gate is so iconic that Portugal
       | contracted American companies to build a similar one in Lisbon
       | and painted it the same color:
       | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/25_de_Abril_Bridge
       | 
       | Originally it had only 4 car lanes (2 in each direction), but was
       | designed to be expanded and some 30 years later two new lanes
       | were added and two sets of train tracks were built in the lower
       | deck, which now carry both intercity and suburban trains that are
       | much faster than driving during rush hour. An interesting unique
       | feature is that 2 of the lanes are made of steel grating instead
       | of asphalt in order to reduce aerodynamic forces in high winds.
       | 
       | The other bridge across the Tagus is also remarkable, given that
       | it is the longest in the EU:
       | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vasco_da_Gama_Bridge
        
         | Lammy wrote:
         | > The other bridge across the Tagus is also remarkable
         | 
         | I love how it looks like we just copied them back :p
         | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eastern_span_replacement_of_th...
        
       | goatcode wrote:
       | It's so easy to look at decades old successes and scoff at
       | opponents, but without hindsight it's easy to appreciate
       | criticism. We're no smarter or more sophisticated than anyone
       | back then, and shouldn't use a story like this to justify making
       | fun of opponents of new projects, today. I'm certain that there
       | are 10 boondoggles to every success like this, and if we took
       | those into account, maybe we'd be a bit more sober about our
       | criticism of people whom we've never met who healthily question
       | everything.
        
         | Cupertino95014 wrote:
         | > who healthily question everything
         | 
         | leave out the adverb.
         | 
         | If you question _everything_ you 're not adding any
         | information. If you support some things and question others,
         | then people tend to listen to you.
        
           | goatcode wrote:
           | By "question," I mean "question," not "detract." Questioning
           | is never unhealthy, because questioning is looking critically
           | (which also has no natively negative connotation).
        
       | cheesy_luigi wrote:
       | It's funny seeing that people's attitudes haven't changed in 100
       | years. Today in San Francisco you still see a small minority of
       | NIMBYs protesting every little change. But the difference is, now
       | they actually have the power to completely block projects. What
       | changed?
       | 
       | If I had to wager, I would say CEQA making it much harder to
       | build, and much easier to block any construction.
        
         | seoaeu wrote:
         | Tons of laws changed, particularly in response to the
         | construction of urban highways and "slum clearance" both of
         | which involved the demolition of entire neighborhoods
        
       | bsimpson wrote:
       | Based on the date, I'm guessing this was for the 75th anniversary
       | of the bridge.
       | 
       | That was the coolest fireworks show I've ever seen.
        
       | basedgod wrote:
       | a bridge to nowhere, that's a blight on that neighborhood in SF
       | (in the middle of a beautiful park), and has served to fuel and
       | encourage car culture, and does not integrate with public transit
       | in the slightest
       | 
       | few civic minded people celebrate the freeways that have torn
       | 20th century cities apart, and this bridge is (a very pretty)
       | extension of this
        
         | pengaru wrote:
         | Of all the bridges in the bay area, the Golden Gate is the
         | least deserving of such contempt IMHO.
         | 
         | At least pedestrians and cyclists can make use of it, I've done
         | multiple bike rides from The Sunset to Marin/Sausalito/Larkspur
         | via the GGB. Never a bad time.
         | 
         | The Bay Bridge however, now that's a bridge I can get behind
         | hating on. Lots of lost opportunity.
        
         | humanistbot wrote:
         | When I lived in SF, I really enjoyed taking the Muni 76X
         | express bus from downtown SF across the Golden Gate Bridge to
         | Muir Woods. It only runs on the weekends, but that's not the
         | bridge's fault.
        
         | xivzgrev wrote:
         | Not sure what you mean by lack of integration with public
         | transit.
         | 
         | The Golden Gate Bridge does not have a subway. But it does
         | carry a lot of buses. It also has biking and walking lanes,
         | unlike other Bay Area bridges.
         | 
         | Is your ideal to have no bridges, or at least bridges closed to
         | individual cars (Like market st)?
        
           | lotsofpulp wrote:
           | The biking and walking lanes on golden gate leave much to be
           | desired. I would not consider them functional for non leisure
           | travel.
        
             | mhb wrote:
             | Yes. Biking across is not fun at all.
        
           | bluejekyll wrote:
           | A huge loss is that when Bart was built Marin voted against
           | extending it north.
           | 
           | The Bridge that we need foot and bike traffic access on is
           | the Bay Bridge. That's far more disappointing as it would
           | better connect Oakland and SF (and Treasure Island!). With
           | ebikes so popular now, that could actually displace cars
           | significantly in the Bay Area.
        
             | bcrosby95 wrote:
             | The eastern span has one. Mostly useless without one on the
             | western span though. They seem to have a project up for it,
             | but i'm not sure what the status is:
             | 
             | https://mtc.ca.gov/planning/transportation/bicycle-
             | pedestria...
        
               | bluejekyll wrote:
               | Yeah I've seen all of the options for the western span, I
               | think it's going to require a lot of pressure on
               | Sacramento to get any progress on this.
        
             | nullc wrote:
             | > A huge loss is that when Bart was built Marin voted
             | against extending it north.
             | 
             | Marin was kicked out, as a result of San Mateo pulling out
             | leaving Bart under funded. As they said at the time, "We
             | are withdrawing involuntarily and upon request,". A 1956
             | poll found that 87.7 percent of Marin residents wanted a
             | BART line.
             | 
             | https://www.sfgate.com/local/article/How-BART-almost-
             | connect...
        
               | bluejekyll wrote:
               | That is much better context, definitely conflicts with
               | the common understanding people have of why the Marin
               | portion failed.
        
             | duskwuff wrote:
             | > The Bridge that we need foot and bike traffic access on
             | is the Bay Bridge.
             | 
             | I'm not sure how useful that would be. The Bay Bridge is
             | quite long, at ~4.5 miles end-to-end, and the east span
             | terminates in a huge toll plaza in an industrial area of
             | Oakland which is neither bike- nor pedestrian-friendly. I
             | wouldn't realistically expect any significant number of
             | bikers to use the bridge, and those that did would probably
             | be using it more for recreation than transport. Like it or
             | not, the Bay Bridge was built as a highway connector.
        
               | bluejekyll wrote:
               | You may be unaware, but the east bay portion of Bay trail
               | connects to a lot of great bike infrastructure from the
               | Eastern Span of the Bay Bridge already. It's a very
               | gentle grade up the entire bridge, which makes it
               | approachable for even casual riders. The connection there
               | has many bike paths that lead between all the East Bay
               | cities, Oakland, Emeryville, Berkeley, Albany, and
               | Richmond.
               | 
               | From Oakland it would be approximately a 45 minute bike
               | ride (if it existed), on an ebike probably 20 minutes.
               | About an hour from Berkeley (and 30 minutes on ebike).
               | These times would compete with cars during rush hour.
        
               | closeparen wrote:
               | It's true you wouldn't want to dump bikes at the literal
               | terminus of the bridge, but a surface-level bike path
               | could take you a little past the Maze to the vicinity of
               | the Frontage Road & Powell St or Mandela Parkway / Horton
               | St, both very comfortably bikeable. I used those streets
               | for years cycling from Berkeley to West Oakland BART and
               | the Jack London Square ferry terminal.
        
         | kaycebasques wrote:
         | If I imagine it as an ugly bridge then I can see your points
         | well. But I really think you have to figure the beauty of it
         | into the equation. It draws unbelievable tourism to the city.
         | My wife (a Brazilian) has a tattoo of it - that's how strong
         | the allure is for some people (although of course there are
         | people all around the world who have a tattoo of whatever
         | architectural icon that drew them to their adopted city). $35M
         | to make your city an international icon is a bargain. Of course
         | the creators probably had no idea it would have that kind of
         | impact but my only point is that when talking about the GGB the
         | beauty is an inextricable part of the equation.
        
           | basedgod wrote:
           | it's a bargain for the city but still a blight on it's
           | residents that does not serve them in any way
           | 
           | it makes the lives of a few rich people better as they can
           | commute to their yachts better, but that's about it
           | 
           | sf would have been completely fine as a city without this
           | bridge
        
             | Melatonic wrote:
             | Ah yes - a bridge from the top of a peninsula to the other
             | side. Surely nowhere else would people think to make one of
             | those. Just have everyone take the long way around where
             | they will then need to cross TWO bridges if they want to
             | travel north!
        
             | boulos wrote:
             | Do you feel that reaching Point Reyes and other areas in
             | the north does not "serve them in any way"? Bridges have
             | existed for millennia because they're useful to both sides
             | of the bridge.
        
               | basedgod wrote:
               | this garbage bridge does not serve it's residents above
               | replacement.
               | 
               | ferries already existed, as well as other ways to get to
               | the areas north of the city.
               | 
               | the main issue with this bridge is that it is the enemy
               | of better, and a bridge/tunnel with forward thinking
               | infrastructure and transit can now never be built, now
               | that we have this antiquated garbage bridge built, merely
               | for the myth of car ownership
               | 
               | the civil planning doesn't even extend to the rest of the
               | city, it's merely plopped down onto an arbitrary section
               | of it.
               | 
               | it would have been better to not have been built at all.
               | a more ugly bridge built later on wouldn't have had the
               | nimbys we have today, and could have been torn down and
               | retrofitted without it being sacrilegious
        
               | djbusby wrote:
               | It reads like you don't understand the needs of SF back
               | when that bridge was built. It could also carry rail, but
               | that portion was not completed - because, and here's the
               | shocker, a city's needs change over time. The Wikipedia
               | page about this bridge covers a lot of these details.
        
             | milesskorpen wrote:
             | Entirely 100% disagree. Easy access to Marin and all areas
             | north make San Francisco a much better city.
        
             | kaycebasques wrote:
             | Tourism is a substantial part of San Francisco's economy.
             | It employs a lot of San Francisco residents.
        
             | bombcar wrote:
             | If it's only used by a few rich people, I'd expect the
             | traffic on it is very light.
        
               | kaycebasques wrote:
               | Counterpoint though is the fact that you see heavy
               | traffic on it is testament to its role in encouraging car
               | culture
        
               | Lammy wrote:
               | People need to live somewhere, and we sure haven't built
               | up enough to allow most people to live within the city
               | itself. Is "encouraging car culture" the new NIMBY angle?
               | It's just the flip-side of the housing crisis. I'd live
               | closer to work too if I could afford Woodside or
               | whatever.
        
         | Johnny555 wrote:
         | _and does not integrate with public transit in the slightest_
         | 
         | I used to live in SF and commuted to Sausalito daily, either by
         | GGT bus or bike (or rarely, took the ferry but riding home from
         | the ferry wasn't much shorter than just riding to Sausalito).
        
       | gumby wrote:
       | The BART counterexample is great. However what this reminds me of
       | most is the transition (or lack thereof) to clean power.
        
       | knoxa2511 wrote:
       | I'm pretty surprised to see all this bridge hate. I use the
       | bridge multiple times a week to mountain bike or surf in north
       | bay. I picked my spot in the city in part because of it's
       | proximity to the bridge.
        
       | tingletech wrote:
       | 2012
        
       | anewpersonality wrote:
       | The craziest thing is the zipper. Surprised other bridges, like
       | Sydney Harbour, don't do the same thing.
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | tomcam wrote:
       | You can walk across it. Took me way too long to do so. Even up
       | close it's an aesthetic and engineering treat.
        
         | bombcar wrote:
         | A surprising amount of bridges are walkable - and almost always
         | a treat, even if you just park near one end and walk out and
         | back.
        
           | Fatnino wrote:
           | You can walk across the Dumbarton bridge. It's... not to
           | everyone's taste.
        
         | CoffeeOnWrite wrote:
         | Something to note is they have "automatic gates" that are
         | supposed to prevent overnight pedestrian access while allowing
         | overnight bicycle access. Can anyone share how these gates work
         | in practice?
         | 
         | https://www.goldengate.org/bridge/visiting-the-bridge/bikes-...
        
           | udit99 wrote:
           | " Cyclists press the "buzzer" located near the closed
           | security gate. After security staff locates the cyclist on a
           | security camera, the gate is opened remotely. "
        
             | CoffeeOnWrite wrote:
             | Ty! I took too literally the word "automatic" and stopped
             | reading.
             | 
             | Wonder how long before they try to use ML instead of the
             | human judgment..
        
           | ginja wrote:
           | Interesting. What's the point in differentiating between
           | pedestrians and cyclists? Is it an attempt at preventing
           | suicide for non-bikers?
        
             | SoftTalker wrote:
             | Probably an attempt to keep homeless people from sleeping
             | on the pathway and getting run over by the night cyclists.
        
           | jsight wrote:
           | Strange that they differentiate between ebikes and scooters.
        
       | divbzero wrote:
       | _Traffic projections were "over-optimistic"_ is the anti-bridge
       | argument that could have swayed me the most. I've always been
       | struck by the contrast in population density north and south of
       | the Golden Gate. Perhaps because Marin is more mountainous than
       | the mildly hilly San Francisco?
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2022-06-29 23:02 UTC)