Wouldn’t that greatly reduce the congestion on Highway 237 as well as 880 because people can quickly get to their workplaces instead of clogging up freeways?
The issue with all of that is cost and usage. Tolls will never recover the multi billion dollar construction costs.
How about a BART train instead?
Another bridge won’t solve the gridlock at each end…880 and 101 are already overloaded.,bridge will do nothing
1 Like
@Elt1, my point was that a decent percentage of those traveling on 880 and 237 finally end up in Mountain View. By short circuiting their commute, you get them off the freeways quickly. So in effect that will reduce the congestion.
@marcus335, it seems the cost will be about half a billion. Not insignificant but certainly less than multi billions. Please look at this link for San Mateo bridge: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/San_Mateo–Hayward_Bridge
That only includes inflation. That doesn’t account for differences in newer building specs. It doesn’t account for union wage inflation being much higher than overall inflation. They said $1B for the bay bridge. It was $6.4B. That’s for less than 5 miles of bridge, so it’s easily over $1B per mile.
Cost will be ten times the estimate. And take forever.the second crossing in SF to Oakland was conceived in the 50s. Still hasn’t happened. Although the idea was resurrected. Good luck with the bridge
google would create an alphabet company to tackle this 
lol.
1 Like
SV Tech is good in information technology but pretty useless in construction technology.
we don’t just do tech. we have arbitrary hobbies.
1 Like
It take 2 hours for a company bus from Pleasanton to Cupertino. Most of that time is spent on 237 and 880 (Mission Blvd). In the long run it’s good for the FAANG companies to help their employees commute easily. They might pitch in.
BART is cheaper than a bridge. The best solution for commuting.
Why not open a satellite office in Pleasanton, folks can choose to work from there
2 Likes
They don’t believe in work from home or working remotely. They have different teams in different buildings but core members belonging to the same team are always working in the same location. I am talking about the big tech companies specifically.
Yes different teams is fine. Makes the traffic lesser.
Instead of planning commission limiting housing Construciton, they can limit new job. If a company wants to increase the headcount, they need to go to the planning commission and apply for a permit for a new quota for additional workers.
That’ll solve the housing problem quickly. Planning commission is very good to reduce things they have authority over for “planning”. When they plan for housing, we have a housing shortage. When they plan for jobs, we’ll have a job shortage and plenty of houses.
The “planned economy” in communist countries make everything in shortage, food, toilet paper, clothes, water, housing, medicine, eye drop etc
Take your poison.
1 Like
zensri, this might affect you personally so your judgement is biased.
Think about all the folks in Bay Area that are affected by traffic. Why not build another highway in peninsula to reduce the traffic on 101? Why not build another bridge between San Leandro and South SF? Why not build another highway up-down east bay to alleviate 880?
Google paying for it?
Adding a lane each way on dumbarton + creating exit ramp on to 101? Wouldn’t that be more cost effective?
ADDED LATER: Not sure if existing bridge can be easily retrofitted to carry additional load.