4 ms·

There are more people now, and more people means pushing into more marginal areas. And, I'm sure people built roads that sank and eroded in the past too, they j

by creato 5y ago

There are more people now, and more people means pushing into more marginal areas. And, I'm sure people built roads that sank and eroded in the past too, they just aren't around any more. Personally, I care a lot more about hills when I'm riding a bike or walking. When I'm driving a car, hills don't matter. At the same time, building on slopes can be problematic. It depends on the local geology whether it is possible to do that or not. FWIW, I'm a bit tired of "cranky old guy thinks everyone else is an idiot" posts on HN.

mega_dingus 5y ago
| And, I'm sure people built roads that sank and eroded in the past too, they just aren't around any more. I believe that's called "survivorship bias"
culebron21 5y ago
Ok, I may have put it in annoying tone, will try better next time. As for buildings on slopes. Swedes and Finns enjoy rocky ground, to which bulidings stick perfectly, and they make all the nice things I mentioned. Here's an example: a mall & offices complex, the elevation difference is 5 m (15 ft): https://www.google.com/maps/@60.1687254,24.9389851,295m/data=!3m1!1e3 https://www.google.com/maps/@60.1687254,24.9389851,295m/data... If there's rock under the ground, you bore and put the building on pillars. It won't matter if the surface around the buliding is flat or not. If you have to build on a sedimentary (sandy) slope then a retaining wall won't fix this at all. You'll need many long piles to hold it to the ground by friction. Retaining wall -- no matter which end of the constuction site -- would have to be a huge and heavy structure to hold to the ground, otherwise it'll be slipping couple of cm/inches per year, which is enough to cause problems. Even if you level the site on a slope and sedimentary ground, a building will still need long frictional piles to be stable.

4 ms·

There are more people now, and more people means pushing into more marginal areas. And, I'm sure people built roads that sank and eroded in the past too, they j

by creato 5y ago

mega_dingus 5y ago
| And, I'm sure people built roads that sank and eroded in the past too, they just aren't around any more. I believe that's called "survivorship bias"
culebron21 5y ago
Ok, I may have put it in annoying tone, will try better next time. As for buildings on slopes. Swedes and Finns enjoy rocky ground, to which bulidings stick perfectly, and they make all the nice things I mentioned. Here's an example: a mall & offices complex, the elevation difference is 5 m (15 ft): https://www.google.com/maps/@60.1687254,24.9389851,295m/data=!3m1!1e3 https://www.google.com/maps/@60.1687254,24.9389851,295m/data... If there's rock under the ground, you bore and put the building on pillars. It won't matter if the surface around the buliding is flat or not. If you have to build on a sedimentary (sandy) slope then a retaining wall won't fix this at all. You'll need many long piles to hold it to the ground by friction. Retaining wall -- no matter which end of the constuction site -- would have to be a huge and heavy structure to hold to the ground, otherwise it'll be slipping couple of cm/inches per year, which is enough to cause problems. Even if you level the site on a slope and sedimentary ground, a building will still need long frictional piles to be stable.