Big Dig Boston

[Mets_Fan41 0]

but celebrations? NOPE opinions on the most exspensive highway project in US history?

heres the article http://www.wpri.com/Global/story.asp?S=7541353&nav=F2DO

[jayo 44]

?????? I don't quite get this thread ??????

[Alvo1016 0]

it ran 11 billion $$$ overbudget. This project is good for Bostons long term economy.

[BurroDiablo 222]

Big Dig cut the average trip through Boston from 19.5 minutes to 2.8 minutes.quote>

Thats a pretty awesome achievement... god knows the number of other cities that need another project like this... after seeing the cost though, doubt it'll be happening for a very long time.

[patriots_1228 51]

Before the big dig the city was apparently hideous and tough to travel through. Now, I can tell you, it aint hideous, and it only takes about 5 minutes to get from the Pru to the Zakim bridge, which is pretty damn good.

[Duke87 1,070]

Well, there are two key reasons it ran so far over budget:

1) It took well over 10 years to complete, and in that time you get a significant amount of inflation and rise in the cost of materials and labor.

2) Murphy's law. A huge, ambitious, and tricky (from an engineering point of view) project means several major stupid mistakes- which are costly to correct.

When I was last in Boston, the Central Artery was still up and the I-90 connection to the Ted Williams Tunnel was not yet open. And that highway really was old and decrepit- traffic concerns aside. The Gowanus Expressway elevated above 3rd avenue in Brooklyn is often compared to Boston's old central artery- and following Bostons lead, there were some proposals put forward to, in a similar manner, tunnel a new expressway under the street and then tear the old ugly one down, letting the sun reach the street, reducing noise pollution, and making the whole area a lot more friendly. But then they realized what the price tag on such a project would be, and immediately dropped the idea.

Myself, I say so long as the highway functions and isn't in danger of falling apart, just leave it. If it's in danger of falling apart, repair it, and if traffic is a problem, supplement it- either by widening the highway (preferable in more remote suburban and rural areas) or with mass transit (preferable in closer suburban and urban areas). Function and infrastructure are the most important things to spend governement money on- aesthetics and peripherals are less important and best left to private developers and companies if possible. After all, it's far more important that people be able to use the highway than that the highway look nice.

That said, the big dig in Boston certainly did provide radical improvement- but the question is begged whether similar results could not have been achieved in a more cost effective manner.

[hamsterTK 93]

Australia and Kuala Lumpur have underground expressways now

While Boston may have been the most complex(digging in muck around 100 year old subway tubes in the middle of a dense city), the concept of urban subterrianien freeways is becoming widespread