Boston's Big Dig Finally Open 588
techiemac writes "I just saw a news story on yahoo about Boston's Big Dig finally opening. The Big Dig is considered by many to be the largest modern urban construction project ever!"
"Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler." -- Albert Einstein
First person though... (Score:2, Interesting)
Was there a line of people/cars?
14.6 billion for a tunnel. Someone from that project needs to talk to Sprint and let them know the ins and outs about them building their tunnel from India to Overland Park, KS.
Re:First person though... (Score:5, Interesting)
WOW (Score:4, Funny)
$ dig bostonbigdig.com
; <<>> DiG 9.2.3 <<>> bostonbigdig.com
;; global options: printcmd
;; Got answer:
;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 1417
;; flags: qr aa rd ra; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 6, AUTHORITY: 0, ADDITIONAL: 0
;; QUESTION SECTION:
;bostonbigdig.com. IN A
;; ANSWER SECTION:
bostonbigdig.com. 3600 IN A 64.15.205.180
bostonbigdig.com. 3600 IN A 64.15.205.202
bostonbigdig.com. 3600 IN A 64.15.205.182
bostonbigdig.com. 3600 IN A 64.15.205.183
bostonbigdig.com. 3600 IN A 64.15.205.155
bostonbigdig.com. 3600 IN A 64.15.205.132
;; Query time: 110 msec
;; SERVER: 192.168.1.10#53(192.168.1.10)
;; WHEN: Sat Dec 20 13:11:46 2003
;; MSG SIZE rcvd: 130
Too bad it's about New Jersey...
Re:WOW (Score:3, Informative)
BigDig.com [bigdig.com] isn't. I can't believe no one's mentioned it yet. It's got loads of info; the maps [bigdig.com] and videos [bigdig.com] (including virtual fly-overs and fly-throughs) being the most instantly gratifying.
Re:WOW (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:WOW (Score:3, Interesting)
None of these projects were actually built, and for most of them, there were no current plans to actually start construction
I hope Ted Kennedy manages to stay... (Score:3, Funny)
Re:I hope Ted Kennedy manages to stay... (Score:5, Funny)
Drove through this morning. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Drove through this morning. (Score:2, Insightful)
But it's just not a tunnel
But in any case, it's a waste of your money and mine - with that kind of money you could
Re:Drove through this morning. (Score:5, Insightful)
1. 2.4 billion dollars was the projected cost in 1985. Almost 20 years between that initial proposal and completion of the whole thing. Since when has the government (or even big business, although examples from their world are pretty hard to find since the shortsightedness of corporations generally prevents them from even thinking of something this long term) been able to accurately predict costs over this length of time?
2. Changes in the project over that period of time probably had a lot to do with the change in costs along with some amount of legitimate cost overruns for unforeseen engineering problems.
3. $2.4b was a bullshit number. A friend in Boston who was living there at the time said nobody with any common sense believed they could do what they were promising for that price, and were pretty certain that it the number they came up with was just to get the project sold. Kinda like a lot of George' W's BS budget predictions to sell his Medicare "deform" plan (Not to single out Shrub though, since this is common practice of most politicians of both parties, and presidents in particular; he just happens to be the current idiot-in-chief and poster boy.)
Of course, in the end it's all irrelevant; no matter what the price tag, it's a waste of money. Give it 5-10 years (if even that), and what will you have? A gridlocked freeway through downtown. Kinda like you had before. Except you won't have to look at it.
But in any case, it's a waste of your money and mine - with that kind of money you could get a new nuclear sub, a B2 bomber, AND an aircraft carrier (sans aircraft)
But I thought you were implying wasting money was a bad thing? Why would we want all that useless crap?
Re:Drove through this morning. (Score:3, Insightful)
It's like this: Government Contracts Are Always Awarded To the Lowest Bidder.
Ergo, if the government wants to do project A, and they are soliciting engineering bids from firms X, Y, and Z, those three firms have two numbers they need to come up with. The first nu
Re:Drove through this morning. (Score:4, Insightful)
And this gets modded up? I don't know about you, but I'd rather pay for a massive improvement to transportation in my area than a few massive vehicles designed for killing.
Re:Drove through this morning. (Score:3, Insightful)
I think that was the point - to put the costs in scale.
Re:Drove through this morning. (Score:5, Insightful)
Maybe grandparent of this post should have included a "sarcasm ahead" warning.
Re:Drove through this morning. (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Drove through this morning. (Score:3, Insightful)
The project is expected to improve property values across the entire Boston metro area, not to mention add (reclaim, really) 30 acres of prime real estate in downtown. Property tax revenue is going to soar, and the secondary effects of improved real estate (people going out more, spending more at restaurants, etc.) are going to be even bigger.
The Big Dig might actually end up paying for itself, and sooner than you think.
yours
Re:Drove through this morning. (Score:5, Insightful)
Having lived (owned property, resided, paid taxes, the whole sheebang) in Boston in the recent past, I can say with confidence that the project didn't do anything for the subway (The T), for airport access (unless you drive), and certainly didn't improve any infrastructure.
After all those years and billions one still cannot easily get from South Station (or Back Bay, or North Station) to the Airport. Or how about any of said stations to Harvard Square? Or how about Harvard Square to Back Bay or Copley Place? Never mind getting from Harvard to Boston College.
The whole idea of building a bunch of gigantic roads, bridges, and tunnels to bring individual SUVs and bimbo-boxes into (and under) the middle of a large urban area is just about as wrong-headed as you can get. The dig made a lot of politicians, union leaders, and construction companies very rich, and set Boston about 20 years back in terms of being a livable city.
Sure, I learned to be a kamakazi biker and got some great rally-car miles under my belt getting from home (Brighton) to Mass General (via BU Bridge + Mem drive is actually faster than Storrow), but that did nothing more than ding my car, scratch my wheels, ruin my suspension, and drain my wallet paying for parking (and parking tickets), insurance, and repairs to the tune of $5k/year. (on top of car payments!)
I see no reason to celebrate its completion (or whatever milestone we're talking about). When I lived there I was hoping the dig would finish just so I could try it out, but man, a quick subway ride from home or work to the airport would have been much more appreciated.
Re:Drove through this morning. (Score:3, Insightful)
I am saddened that someone with a four-digit UID (along with a bunch of others) couldn't put two and two together to see that the post they are citing was using sarcasm to mock the original poster's claim that it was just a super-expensive tunnel.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Drove through this morning. (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm all in favour of Big Projects and Big Engineering, but at some point you have to question why you're doing it. There's just no reason why the Big Dig had to be so expensive, or so big. I keep asking myself, "where's the beef?" ("where are the WMD's?"). Why did the State drag us into a project that benefits the few at the expense of the many? And (worse), how did we (the many) let them get away with it for so long?
-Another Disgruntled Mass-hole
Re:Drove through this morning. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Drove through this morning. (Score:5, Insightful)
When the Big Dig was conceived in the 80s, the only reason why Congress voted for it (and overrode Reagan's veto) was because of the fact that Massachusetts never received any federal highway funding in the first place.
Also, the cost overruns were mostly due to two factors:
Re:Drove through this morning. (Score:5, Interesting)
What's wrong with just installing ducting for the cables, and then pull them through when needed, like they do elsewhere?
Re:Drove through this morning. (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Drove through this morning. (Score:3, Interesting)
Now you want to talk about wastes of money. Philadelphia just built 2 new stadiums for about 1.2 billion dollars. I wouldn't mind, save they the schools are chronically short funded, the new stadiums have half the seats of the old stadium, and nosebleeds cost $60. No one around here can afford that on a regular basis.
Bitch all you want about Boston wasting your money. You got
Re:Drove through this morning. (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Drove through this morning. (Score:3, Informative)
What does that tell you? YOU'RE POOR! The economy doesn't operate on thousands of dollars.
Anyway, to play numbers...
7.8 miles of highway in all.
Lets underestimate (favor for you) at 4 lanes (2 each way) with each lane being 12 feet wide (average).
5280 feet in a
Re:Drove through this morning. (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Drove through this morning. (Score:5, Insightful)
False. Almost 15 Billion for the entire project, of which the Ted Williams Tunnel (which I presume you're talking about since it's the most obvious tunnel involved) is only one part. Actually, that tunnel is possibly the most straight forward (i.e. cheapest per distance) part of the project.
It is another part of the project, the Fort Point Channel crossing that has a good claim to being the most expensive peice of roadway (per distance) in the world. It's one of the quick little tunnels on the way to the long one where you didn't know for sure if you were in a real tunnel. It was really expensive because, while going under a little water it had to simultaneously dodge a subway tunnel, and about half the major water/gas/electric/sewer/whatever lines coming into the city, without interupting any of them in the process.
Anyhow, the project is a lot more than a tunnel. It's a whole bunch of tunnels, a bridge, a bunch of highway, a gaggle of overpasses and interchanges, and what I'd consider the "main" part: the new depressed roadway for the central artery itself. See, you've got a fantastically congested elevated highway passing over a bunch of highly congested surface streets right through the midst of downtown in one of the oldest cities in the country (i.e. new things have been built and rebuilt on and under this ground about 5 bajillion times). And you want build a replacement highway underneath all this, without interupting traffic on either of the two levels above you, or messing up any of the other stuff already underground there. Good luck doing it cheap.
Safety... (Score:5, Interesting)
For such a large and complicated project with many engineering challenges, only 4 workers died during construction. That's a testament to everyone involved with the project, especially the workers themselves. Kudo to them.
-Cyc
northbound has been open for a while (Score:2, Informative)
Modern ever? (Score:5, Funny)
Big Dig = Giant Boondoggle for Special Interests (Score:2, Troll)
Final cost: $16 billion
Do the math. Once this thing got started, no one in power was going to say, "STOP! It's costing too much!", both because it seemed irreversible and because the Dems in power in Boston (Massachusetts is a one-party state) were happy getting union favors in elections in return for more jobs artificially generated by the Big Dig's continuation.
Most of this $16 billion came from out of state, i.e., from your pocket. Do you think Boston residents wh
Re:Big Dig = Giant Boondoggle for Special Interest (Score:2, Informative)
The Governor is a Republican so how come you right away blame the Dem's. Don't let the facts get in the way of your rant though.
Re:Big Dig = Giant Boondoggle for Special Interest (Score:3, Informative)
Veto-proof Legislature (Score:3, Informative)
Your other point doesn't really emphasize the problem. Not only is the entire Mass congressional delegat
Re:Big Dig = Giant Boondoggle for Special Interest (Score:5, Insightful)
You want Taxachusetts? Check out NY. Over 8% sales tax, high property tax rates, high income tax rates. It costs more to drive on the NYS Thruway than it does for the MS Turnpike. About the only thing going for NY is the fact that they have EZ-Pass run by the state instead of the pseudo-commercial Fastlane.
The Big Dig is a long time coming, and should be worthwhile in the end. There was a lot of innovation involved in construction and hopefully that investment will pay off in lower expenses for similar projects in the future. Don't forget that most of Boston's square footage didn't exist when certain tea boxes were thrown into the harbor.
Re:Big Dig = Giant Boondoggle for Special Interest (Score:5, Insightful)
There's no way the Central Artery could have been "renovated". The structures is made up of concrete and lead paint. Any renovation would require a huge costs in abatement and environmental cleanup, and you can't widen the elevated structure without demolishing more buildings, which would be a bad idea.
Have you ever even driven on the old artery? It was a fucking mess. It was also one of the most unsafe stretches in the Interstate Highway System. 10 exits in just over a mile - weave lanes of 600 feet, narrow clearance, no breakdown lanes - it was a mess.
The tunnel also gives Boston the ability to mend the scar caused by the elevated artery. The city was divided - a city needs linearity in order to function. Having hundreds of streets cut off by the elevated artery diminishes the city as a whole.
Sure, there were cost overruns and embezzlements, like there are with any large government project ($50 hammers for the Navy, anyone?), but the benefits for the city as a whole (and it's not just to raise rents by improving the view - much of boston's residential land does not abut the artery corridor) will be great.
Re:Big Dig = Giant Boondoggle for Special Interest (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Big Dig = Giant Boondoggle for Special Interest (Score:5, Insightful)
One point that is often missed when people trot out these figures: the original "Big Dig" was essentially just the 3rd Harbor (Ted Williams) Tunnel and a few local improvements. Certainly a lot of the cost increases can probably be attributed to inefficiencies (such as the infamous fireboat), but much of the cost increase is due to an increased scope (eg. the I-93 tunnel), inflation, and unforeseen difficulties (for example the tunnel jacking and soil freezing operations ran into major problems).
Once this thing got started, no one in power was going to say, "STOP! It's costing too much!"While no one really wanted to spend $16B, no one in Boston was going to say "stop" simply because we are sick of sitting in traffic 16 hours per day
Really, the elevated artery could have been renovated to provide the same benefits---minus the prettiness---that the Big Dig provides, and at a much reduced cost.It would have been significantly cheaper (in absolute dollars) to renovate the elevated artery, but the long-term cost to the region would have been devastating since you would have to shut down the major north/south artery through Boston to do it (and no, moving traffic to an already overcrowded I-95 wouldn't have helped).
Re:Big Dig = Giant Boondoggle for Special Interest (Score:5, Funny)
Yeah. Damn this whole "federation" thing to hell. What has it done for me, lately! My taxes should only benefit me. Mine Mine Mine. Gimme Gimme Gimme. Selfish Bostonian bastards, taking my tax dollars. I fought and died in the war for this country! All I want is a little respect... plus all my tax dollars paying for ME ME ME. I'll be damned to hell if my tax dollars are going to fund some evil democrats in Boston!
Sorry, for a second there you sounded like a 90-year old ingrate. At what point in your life did selfish greed overwhelm your sense of civic and national pride?
Hint: you could have simply said that the tunnel was overpriced without making a reference to the funding coming out of "your pocket".
It's those damn democrats in power! Lousy democrats. Stealing my tax dollars and probably killing babies too. That's what democrats do.
Giggle. You sound just like a crank. I bet you ring up talkback radio and complain about those "damn young kids with their Rock And/Or Roll music".
Re:Big Dig = Giant Boondoggle for Special Interest (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Big Dig = Giant Boondoggle for Special Interest (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Big Dig = Giant Boondoggle for Special Interest (Score:4, Insightful)
Screw it - I'm ditching my mod points. I lived for two years in Boston and I have to say it was awesome.
tearing down the elevated expressway (Score:5, Interesting)
i'll miss the old gal.
Re:tearing down the elevated expressway (Score:3, Insightful)
Well, yeah, but the views that will replace it will be nice, too. That expressway has literally overshadowed a huge swath of land through the city. Obviously developers will grab up a lot of it (and the increased tax base won't hurt), but a certain amount of it is -- supposedly, at l
Re:tearing down the elevated expressway (Score:3, Informative)
The northbound side is already gone. Take a look. [bigdig.com]
Re:tearing down the elevated expressway (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:tearing down the elevated expressway (Score:4, Funny)
There are no tolls on the Central Artery Tunnel. (Score:3, Informative)
There are tolls on numerous other bridges and routes, most of which either ALREADY HAD TOLLS or are replacing routes that were toll based to begin with. Tolls have GONE UP, but that's a different story.
Re:There are no tolls on the Central Artery Tunnel (Score:4, Informative)
I-90 (the Mass Pike) extension is toll, on the return (Westbound) side of the tunnel, comming out of the airport. It was previously $4 dollars for cars when I last working on the project. FWIW, the Eastbound section is toll too, but you pay them before you enter the section of the highway that belongs to the CA/T.
18 months to go (Score:5, Informative)
The tunnels did NOT cost 17 billion. There is a world reconized bridge next to the fleet center, many new buildings, subway lines and bus lines running because of this project. I know the budget seems to be absurd, but when looking at all they did you can see where some of the money went.
BEN
Re:18 months to go (Score:3, Interesting)
No. The keep adding & adding to the same limited project so the project grows to a 16 Billion monster is bogus.
That's fine. With that, I even agree.
I think there are a lot of fair targets at which to point fingers here. One is, as you suggest above, the way in which the project as a whole became what it did. If in the 80's someone had put the Big Dig (in its current scope) in front of me and made the case for it, I'm sure I would have supported it at some figure (but probably not $16B); I thin
Route 3 (Score:3, Funny)
Its runs under the same budget as the BigDig and is a simple project to widen Route 3, a 15-20 mile 4 lane (2 each direction) to 5 lanes (3 each direction).
Well, its been over 3 years now and not a single inch of extra lane has been opened (yet they have almost the entire thing paved and still blocked off).
In closing, Massachussetts sucks. If I could get a job elsewhere which could pay my bills, I'd leave in a heartbeat
Re:Route 3 (Score:3, Funny)
3 lanes one way + 3 lanes the other way = 5 lanes?
Interesting math you have in Massachussetts. Perhaps that's why the Big Dig ran over budget.
Your Route 3 will end up the same way. "We budgeted for five lanes, but there's really six! The cost of that sixth lane was huge!"
On a side note... I spent a lot of time in Boston when I was in the militar
Should have upgraded the trains instead. (Score:4, Interesting)
This means that massive funds should not be spent on these highways which are essentially a subsidy for the megacorporations that build the cars. (It makes their products more useful, and ties up the money that could be spent on other transport options, forcing people to purchase cars if they want any mobility at all.) GM, Ford, Toyota, etc. should be the ones building the roads, out of their own pockets, to create incentives for people to buy their automobile products. Those who don't own cars should not have their tax dollars spent on such projects. Those who use cars, and thus cost everyone a great deal in externalities like pollution, pedestrian deaths, loss of usable urban real estate, should pay the entire cost of their choices, rather than foisting it on society.
The Green Line subway in Boston should have been upgraded to an underground heavy rail line at least out past Boston University. The "Silver Line" circumferential route should have been built as a high capacity light rail route. The North-South rail link should have been implemented. Etc, etc.
Re:Should have upgraded the trains instead. (Score:3, Informative)
Parts of the MBTA light rail, heavy rail, and commuter rail systems were upgraded or expanded as part of the mitigate package to offset increased pollution from autos on the central artery.
Of course everyone in the Boston area knows how well the Old Colony Restoration (especially the Greenbush line [gis.net]) was received...
Re:Should have upgraded the trains instead. (Score:4, Informative)
The case for public transportation is fairly ugly. The cities that have the most people using public transporation are so crowded that driving a car and parking it is impossible or at the very least, very impractical. People love the privacy and freedom afforded by cars. Indeed, the best way of getting people to use public transport is to simply make it impossible for them to drive.
This means that massive funds should not be spent on these highways which are essentially a subsidy for the megacorporations that build the cars....Those who don't own cars should not have their tax dollars spent on such projects.
The Big Dig was financed by federal highway funds which was obtained through...federal gasoline taxes. Every state in the country funds its roads through:
a.) tolls
b.) state gasoline taxes
c.) driver and motor vehicle licensing fees
Roads are not financed through sales, property or income taxes. If you don't own a car, you're not paying for the roads...drivers are actually paying for the roads. Furthermore, the beauty of the gasoline tax is...if you use the road more, you pay more tax. The heavier your car is, the more it chews up the road, the more gas tax you pay. If you're a farmer buying gas for your tractor, you don't pay gas tax since it's not being used on a road.
In many instances, drivers subsidize public transportation. The $7 toll on the Verrazano Narrows bridge into Brooklyn is not because it costs that much to maintain the bridge...the majority of that toll (as well as tolls on other MTA tunnels and bridges) is used to subsidize the public transport system.
Roads are actually more efficient; every mile of road can carry 30,000 cars per day, however every mile of light rail line can carry only 10,000 people per day.
Interestingly, at the turn of the century my hometown of Cleveland had more trolley lines than you can shake a stick at...all of them affordable and furthermore, all owned by a bunch of different companies in competition with each other. The construction of the lines was often funded by industries who needed to get labor from home to work. I actually am going to bring your anti-car maker rant into this and hypothesize that having the government take over public transporation was done so that it would be marginalized to allow the growth of the automobile culture.
Today the Cleveland regional transportation authority is violently expensive, and is spending large sums of money on lines and projects that benefit few. Rail lines costing hundreds of millions of dollars have been built with the best justification being that they will be heavily used during home games of the Browns (6 times a year.) Often public transportation systems refuse to collect the data showing that the lines/bus routes are financially absurd, in order to hide these issues. Here in Columbus, there was a group fighting a public transport tax that showed that several bus routes had so few people that it was cheaper to buy each rider a new Ford Explorer than to continue running the route.
That may not apply to Boston, since it's still very densely populated and has some complex geography.
Are you kidding me ?! (Score:4, Informative)
Clearly you haven't spent enough time in places like New York City, or London. The amount of traffic on the Metro Infrastructure is far greater than what the roads and highways carry.
Think about it, your average 11 car train (NYC) carrys about 1000 people. Keeping that in mind, and how there is a new train every 5 to 7 minutes means that there is anywhere from 12,000 to 5,400 thousand people, per hour, per train line, and per direction
Add in all the other major train lines, Long Island RailRoad, and Metro North, you can easily see how the entire system carries millions of people per day easily.
Sunny Dubey
This things been underway for as long... (Score:5, Insightful)
Some folk dismiss it as being a waste, but unlike them I've driven in Boston Traffic. The Big Dig is turning a city that was having its traffic issue choking its very lifeblood out of it into a revitalized effort.
That $15 billion did more than just provide some tunnels and bridges, it provided for countless kids education as their mommys and daddys had steady work. It gave thousands of hard workers the money needed to save it away rather than rely social security and medicare. It was more than a public work, it revitalized whole sections of the economy while simultaneously improving the traffic flow in and around one of the oldest cities in the US.
Either way you put it (Score:5, Insightful)
Either way, it's the same emotion. I don't know which, if either, is "right", but you should at least keep that in mind when evaluating arguments about this sort of problem. (You can get the same feeling from reading a lot of books as you can from having a lot of guns; it's all just power.)
Re:Either way you put it (Score:3, Insightful)
Check out the website, they even had archaelogists on the project. It sure beats the 87 billion we just dropped in the middle east with no hope of seeing again.
The chunnel is the largest (Score:4, Interesting)
All of this was done with 13,000 engineers who spoke different languages. It was also voted the best project of the 20th century:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/302345.stm [bbc.co.uk]
Re:The chunnel is the largest (Score:5, Informative)
"on schedule"
"on cost"
Also, Brighton is around 30 miles to the West of where the tunnel emerges, so where you got that from I do not know!
Also it cost 7 or 8 lives, twice that of this Big Dig project.
Re:The chunnel is the largest (Score:3, Interesting)
Interestingly the Japanese government was notorious for building shimmery 4 lane highways from nowhere to nowhere, simply to keep construction levels stable and to show stuff happening in the economy. The Economist had much uglyness to say about this peculiar habit.
Not quite(more details) (Score:5, Informative)
No, finally -closing-. It opened over a decade ago, and has been rolled out in several stages over the last several years. I hope I have the order right here:
It's grossly over budget(4x at least?), is the largest construction project in the world- and had some amazing tolerances. One of the tunnels passes within inches of the existing red line subway lines(South Station, the largest terminal in Boston, is right smack where 93 had to go). This accounts for the VERY(maximum permissable grade under fed law) steep decline southbound; they had to go over one thing, under another. The red line now 'rests' on a giant concrete wall that was set in-place.
Oh, and in order to do the connector for the mass pike, they had to FREEZE the ground. Yep. Freeze it- because it was so unstable. And they installed new sections in one tunnel by hydraulically jacking them through the ground. Wild stuff.
The Boston Pops were going to do a concert inside the 93 southbound lanes before the opening- partially sponsored by corporate donors. Except that the corporate donors didn't know their money would be used for it. Even when they agreed to -fully- sponsor it, the concert was still cancelled after massive criticism. When you go $8B+ over budget, you don't exactly pat yourself on the back too enthusiastically.
Everyone in Boston is mostly just happy that it's over. For the last decade, we've had all sorts of odd route closures, exits shut down/reopened, conditions placed on tunnel/bridge use...it's finally all over, and everyone can just get back to driving like psychos :-)
Forgot the Linkage (Score:5, Informative)
Really, I wish whoever submitted this had done a little better job with the story, considering how big a project this was :-)
Start of the Morlocks? (Score:3, Funny)
hindsight is 20/20 (Score:5, Funny)
Not over yet. (Score:4, Informative)
You know it's closing next summer ... (Score:4, Informative)
I've made more than $264,680 in my lifetime (Score:3, Informative)
For 15 Billion... (Score:4, Funny)
But that's Boston driving for ya- where only the intersecting streets are labeled, Speed Lane is called "EZ Pass" (WTF?) and rotaries are common.
I was over there the other day and got lost, and I've been living here for 15 years!
A Six Mile Deadzone (Score:4, Informative)
Links:
Big Dig Photos [bigdig.com]
Big Dig Operations Center [popsci.com]
The History Channel on the Big Dig [historychannel.com]
Official Big Dig Site [bigdig.com]
Re:A Six Mile Deadzone (Score:3, Informative)
My Favorite Project Summary (Score:5, Funny)
Still, my favorite response to the project came from Rep. Barney Frank. After hearing about the projected cost of the Big Dig, he remarked that, instead of putting the highway underground, it might be cheaper to raise the city. :-)
Ahead of schedule and under budget is possible (Score:5, Interesting)
Granted, it's not anywhere near the scale, but it is an example of how a public works project can be well managed. The contract calls for fixed bonus amounts to be paid to the contractor for every day early the project is completed. It also imposes cash penalties for closing lanes of traffic during rush hour and for each day late the project is completed.
Ranger96
Here in Boston (Score:3, Interesting)
The congestion is not "getting to the city". Is people circling boston streets endless with no parking. The big dig should have spent their money building 5 or 6 gigantic parking lot. That would have made more sense.
If this city would be willing to get rid of some cow paths, we would have enough room to build anything in no time. But no... we keep everything from the 1900s. No wonder the red sox can't win. The players are all tired by the time they get to fenway.
BigDig Software... (Score:5, Interesting)
I personally, worked on the software driving the BigDig's traffic managment system (TMS). The completed system is a quite a feat, allowing their operators to monitor every asepect of the roadway.
The system features a complete CCTV network, espousing the entire system. It provides comprehensive monitoring and control of every device attached to the tunnel and supporting buildings, including traffic signs, message signs, fire alarms, smoke detectors, ventilation fans, electrical subsystems.
You name it, its connected to the TMS -- everything can be monitored and controled from there. Obviously, its not the only manner to control; everything has a redundant control system, so everything could be controlled if the system shuts down.
The system also features intelligent accident management and response: it can automatically balance responses to mulitiple accidents, and automatically recommend responses based on roadway conditions. For example, if a accidnet occurs shutting down the two center lanes, it will automatically PLace red X's on the lane signals, display accident warning messages on the signs, and even change the radio message as appropate. All the operator has to do is review the recommend actions, remove any he doesn't want, and activate. The software takes care of handling everything else.
Masshole Response to lane closures (Score:3, Insightful)
I suggest ceiling-mounted machine guns for these cases, wire them into your system and advertise them heavily. I guarantee that the economic benefit of everyone getting to work on-time will far outweigh the costs of sweeping up the remains of the jerks who are constanly looking t
Boston is Unique (Score:5, Informative)
Nobody wants to hear this (Score:3, Insightful)
What would a well-placed truck-bomb do in the tunnel? Wouldn't such a terrorist attack kill thousands and cause billions in damage?
Has anyone thought of this threat and how we might counter it?
Re:It's not done... (Score:5, Informative)
Re:It's not done... (Score:2)
Re:Most Expensive For Sure (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Most Expensive For Sure (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Most Expensive For Sure (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Most Expensive For Sure (Score:5, Informative)
We are talking about 6 LAYERS of infrastructure.
Entire new methods of working the ground were needed to complete parts of this project. Ground Freezing for stabilization, tunnel jacking. You name it.
I tell you what bud. I would be willing to bet that a private firm would tell you today that it might cost you 5 Billion *just* to deal with the public utilities layer of this job. Have you ever been below ground in a service conduit?
Imagine one that is 100 years old. Parts of it running underwater. 100 year old plumbing that must be re-routed without disrupting service.
50 year old eletrical lines that the wiring maps were lost AGES ago. Wanna deal with that?
40 Year old telcom/data conduits, Some private. Most redundant and replaced years ago, but still physically down there. What goes where? Who owns what? What needs replaced? Whats new? Where do we PUT it? Is there more behind that wall?
Is that unlabelled black cable *laying* on the ground an old bell trunk line? Or UUnets OC-256. (I have no clue if UUnets pipe is that size, or where it runs, so don't flame me, I am just throwing out an example. A Large percentage of that service level is undocumented, so you have no clue) Lets cut it and find out? Wanna place a bet?
Okay. You have it all figured out now? Took you what? 1 year, 2 maybe to find out who owns what, where it goes, and to deal with city hall and the lawyers and the paperwork.
Congratulations, You have just completed 100 Feet of this layer of the project. Only 13 miles to go, and 5 other layers to deal with.
Learn what was involved before you bitch about the price. Sure it was expensive, but it was needed. And in the long run, it will be worth it.
Re:Most Expensive For Sure (Score:3, Informative)
TROLL (Score:3, Insightful)
-Sean
Re:Not that impressive (Score:3, Interesting)
I drove into Boston during much of this project, and can testify that succeeded in accommodating existing traffic without much interruption. The rest of the time, I used mass transit and was able to observe some of the work from sidewalks and subw
Where's the vision? (Score:5, Insightful)
I don't live in Boston, but I lived in Toronto for six years. The Gardiner Expressway is an ugly elevated highway that neatly isolates downtown from the waterfront. So because the waterfront is basically a separate region from the city, it's all ugly vacant lots, polluted dock land or steel-jungle condos, right up to the water. No parks, no public space, just a lot of nastiness. There has been talk of burying it (and the big dig is held out as an example), but city council can rarely agree on the day of the week, much less spending $10 billion. Besides, with the condos going up, the opportunity has already been lost.
I predict that in 100 years, the big dig will be considered a marvel of engineering -- the modern equivalent of a cathedral.
Re:Where's the vision? (Score:5, Insightful)
I already concider it a marval of engineering. If anyone knew half of what they had to go through to get that project complete they would think the same thing.
I don't live in boston, but anyone who complains about how long it took or how much it cost is just a business major / politician who simply looks at numbers and not what those numbers mean. Anyone who has an appreciation for what went into this project and the final result is a true engineer, artist, or an appreciator of philosophy.
...and which one those types of people do you think is responsible for growth and betterment of our civilization?
Re:Wonderful example... (Score:3, Funny)
Why do we do it any other way?
Re:Wonderful example... (Score:4, Informative)
Magnus.
Re:Wonderful example... (Score:5, Interesting)
The cost and time overruns were indeed stupefying (though I'd put at least half of each down to over optomistic estimation, as opposed to waste/corruption/unforseen complexities). But by calling it a "make-work" project, you make one thing abundantly clear: you never drove Bostons central artery on a regular basis. The big dig was sorely needed. It was truly visonary of it's originators that they realized the only solution was to completely redesign how traffic should move through that corridor. My only complaint with the design is that they didn't include a rail link between North and South Station. (Which of course would have added some additional huge amount to the tab). Anyhow, make-work it was not; Boston was stangling under the inability of traffic to move through that corridor. At thanksgiving time, I drove from the south to the airport in the middle of the day without slowing to under 30mph, much less spending an hour trying to go the last few miles. An unheard of feat in my previous 20 years of living near or visiting Boston.
Re:Wonderful example... (Score:3, Interesting)
Wow! It's not well known history, but North and South Station have never been really connected. There was a "short haul" line to service factories and the like, but ventilation problems back when locomotives were coal fired prevented all but that sort of light traffic from using it.
That link was shut down in 1911 or so as I remember, and the last time I checked movin
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Sad (Score:4, Insightful)
According to U.S. Census numbers, aprox 3.4 million people live in the greater Boston metro area, who presumably would gain a direct or indirect benifit from transport improvements in and into the city. Compare this with the total MA population, which sits at about 6.3 million, and you get about 54% of the state getting benifits from this.
When you consider housing prices and saleries (and corrisponding tax) are higher in the metro area then in more rural parts of the state, I'm not sure you're getting a raw deal.
In the triditional government model for US states, the tax burden to pay for rural infastructure falls primarly on the citys, not the other way around.
In other words, I doubt you're getting as badly screwed as you think.