Hacker News Reader

Comment by simonsarris | Hacker News Reader

> Bridges are even more financially burdensome. Recently, we replaced a culvert that was so small I could easily jump over it, and yet it set us back $700,000.

Why? Why didn't you all agree to go down to Home Depot and load up on one big short metal pipe and some cement if that's the case? How was 700K spent?

View on HN

Likely due to:

- Environmental regulations requiring NEPA analysis or categorical exclusion

- State laws on who can perform road construction

- Construction codes for roadways and bridges

- Miscellaneous overhead for other areas (e.g., Human Resources, accounting, etc)

Then it seems to be more of a problem with excessive regulation then suburbs themselves.

As a thought experiment, even the wealthiest city in the world couldn't afford a single bridge if regulations required bridges to be made out of stainless steel.

State-mandated design and build engineering requirements

Not having the bridge blow over or vibrate apart.

Yet there are wooden trestle bridges that have seen traffic for 100 years

That’s probably what inspired those building codes…

In case you're not joking, government entities in the US are not allowed to build road structures that will collapse the first time a farmer drives a loaded grain hauler over them.

I'm being a little facetious but I really would like to know how 700K actually gets spent line by the line, here.

In the ideal world we would be able to compare a privately built and insured road to a public road with tax payer liability for mishaps. I suspect the reality of a privately maintained road is still subject to regulatory overhead.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com