4 ms·
It's not that simple as "TBM is better" as others also have chimed in to say here. Real life example underway now: there's an SFPUC project in SF Mission distr
by kfarr 3y ago
It's not that simple as "TBM is better" as others also have chimed in to say here.
Real life example underway now: there's an SFPUC project in SF Mission district to improve stormwater drainage. City proposes TBM but this will result in years of having a huge tunnel entrance work facility in a residential neighborhood. Cut and cover would affect specific blocks but only for months and then move on to the next. Which is better?
PS. To all the OpenAI folks, this project is happening around all your offices!
- Affric 3y agoTo me this sounds like TBM to would still be better. You’re pissing off one set of residents immensely rather than every resident in the area sequentially. The marginal harm you do to yourself by pissing off residents is diminishing. Better to piss off fewer voters.
- arcticbull 3y ago> You’re pissing off one set of residents immensely rather than every resident in the area sequentially. The marginal harm you do to yourself by pissing off residents is diminishing. Better to piss off fewer voters. This is the kind of thinking that leaves us mired in the past, unfortunately. As soon as these projects are completed everyone loves them and completely forgets about any minor transient misery a couple of restaurants were caused. Compensate them and move on. The billions of dollars saved using cut & cover vs. a TBM sets up a heck of a compensation fund. There's this real unstated mindset now where nobody should ever be inconvenienced, ever, no matter how mildly. It really holds back urban development. People will get over it.
- msie 3y agoI have developed this feeling that the govt is so stingy with small amounts to compensate businesses yet are willing to waste great amounts in other cases. I guess that's politics for you.
- bluGill 3y agoRobert Moses ran rough over New York for a decade or so and they are still paying the price for his roads. We have gone too far for sure, but there is a reason we did.
- Affric 3y agoFrom your comment I think you are viewing this as a cultural problem. It’s an optimisation problem of our political system. It’s not that we are not wanting to inconvenience people. It’s that people have rights relating to property and our electoral system is set up geographically so benefits that are non-local are externalised in electoral calculus. Political systems are complex adaptive systems. They exist to perpetuate themselves. Their decisions will be whatever leads to their short term (read the foreseeable future of the humans involved) survival. This isn’t an indictment of democracy itself but our system could need to be renovated. It is a little pathologically short circuited.
- arcticbull 3y agoI very much agree with this broadly. > It’s that people have rights relating to property and our electoral system is set up geographically so benefits that are non-local are externalised in electoral calculus. For what it's worth, people don't really have the property rights they think they do. Eminent domain was brought in for exactly this kind of purpose decades and decades ago, and used extensively. We've just decided to stop using it.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- brailsafe 3y agoAnother real life example of TBM happening now is the SkyTrain extension in Vancouver, Canada. It covers quite a distance and is rather impressive, all stations being built concurrently, with some main road sections needing to be suspended. No shortage of complaints, but there were also no shortage of complaints when they built a previous line with cut and cover. I don't think it would be remotely feasible otherwise.