←back to thread

How good are American roads?

(www.construction-physics.com)
252 points chmaynard | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.3s | source
Show context
rconti ◴[] No.42196461[source]
> Interestingly, in all cases urban roads are worse quality than rural roads, presumably because they see higher traffic than rural roads.

There's more infrastructure under urban roads. Crews come in to fix some utility, shred a section of a lane, patch it poorly with dissimilar materials, and leave.

replies(15): >>42196522 #>>42196736 #>>42197205 #>>42197899 #>>42198008 #>>42198655 #>>42198873 #>>42199005 #>>42199037 #>>42200024 #>>42201080 #>>42201777 #>>42202637 #>>42202870 #>>42212058 #
burnte ◴[] No.42197899[source]
This happens CONSTANTLY in Atlanta. They'll spend a bunch of money fixing a road, then a month later Public Works digs a huge hole and leaves a steel plate on it for a year, then patch it with either concrete that is an inch or two below the rest of the surface, or they don't pack the earth they put back and in 3 months the patch has sunk into a new pothole in a brand new road. The city has been trying to force public works to go do those things BEFORE road projects, but it's an uphill battle.
replies(6): >>42198036 #>>42198339 #>>42199443 #>>42201491 #>>42201616 #>>42201698 #
numpad0 ◴[] No.42201491[source]
The solution to this problem is utility tunnels. A tunnel network under road surface just for plumbing and cabling. Maintenance crews can just drive through in cars and do their jobs, without stopping traffic and digging out pipes. Many ultra-modern cities have one.

1: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utility_tunnel

replies(2): >>42204935 #>>42205482 #
tivert ◴[] No.42205482[source]
> The solution to this problem is utility tunnels. A tunnel network under road surface just for plumbing and cabling. Maintenance crews can just drive through in cars and do their jobs, without stopping traffic and digging out pipes. Many ultra-modern cities have one [empahsis mine].

That does not sound like a general solution to the problem, because it would be fantastically, unreasonably expensive to put one under every road. Seems like something that would only be reasonable in a 1) particularly expensive central business district of a 2) city being built from scratch.

IIRC, some of the biggest US cities don't have separate storm and sanitary sewers, because the cost of retrofitting an existing city would be prohibitively expensive. Installing utility tunnels everywhere would be even moreso.

replies(2): >>42205697 #>>42217455 #
LorenPechtel ◴[] No.42217455[source]
1) You don't really need drivable tunnels, just tunnels big enough to get to the stuff without digging it up.

2) Don't retrofit. Rather, if you dig up a street you put in the tunnel while you're doing it. Eventually all the important roads end up with tunnels.

replies(1): >>42219709 #
numpad0 ◴[] No.42219709[source]
Or you can just run through a city core from one side to the other side like subways. It doesn't have to strictly follow topside road networks, it's just that roads are easy target for permitting purposes.
replies(1): >>42222719 #
1. LorenPechtel ◴[] No.42222719[source]
It's an awful lot easier to put them under roads than buildings.