Boston's Big Dig Finally Open

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!"

Comments

Drove through this morning.

[sammyo]

15 Billion for a tunnel. Drive in. Stop the car, draw a chalk line arround the car. The cost of that space is more than you will make in your life. Probably more than all your close friends will make in there ENTIRE lives. Someone made a killing!

Re:Drove through this morning.

[ljavelin]

And, of course, there are plenty of tolls if you want to drive through.

But it's just not a tunnel ... it's a series of tunnels and bridges, maybe 30 in all. It replaces the core highways in the downtown area. The project also includes upgrades to the subway system, surface streets, and much improved airport access. In addition, a lot of the old city's infrastructure (telephone, sewer, water, electric) were upgraded.

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)!

Re:Drove through this morning.

[Anonymous Coward]

What's even more sad about this is that a large (perhaps the largest) part of the $15 billion that went into this project came from the pockets of citizens who are never going to use the tunnel. The part of the state that doesn't live in Boston has been financing this whole thing for I can't even tell you how many years, and we're never going to see any payoff for it. This was a largely tax-payer funded project, and the majourity of us taxpayers don't live in Boston. While the money was flowing in to make Boston-area commuters' lives a little easier, Western Mass public schools have fallen apart (class sizes at my former high school have doubled in 3 years to an average of over 40 students per class), city and state services are being cut back further and further (public works projects have all but ceased, near as I can tell), and OUR roads are falling apart because there isn't any money left to fix them with.

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.

[the argonaut]

While I would agree with most that the difference between projected cost and actual costs is pretty insane, people do seem to miss a couple of key points for at least some of the price tag discrepancy:

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.

[amabbi]

as a former mass. resident myself (cambridge), i think that's crap. the majority of funds for the big dig were taken from federal highway funds... i can't find a definitive link online, but i think the feds were supposed to pay for the entire shebang, but cost overruns (to the tune of $6b!) were the responsibility of the commonwealth. furthermore, education funds are primarily taken from local property taxes, so the decline of your local schools is likely due to the declining value of real estate in your area, not some urban renewal project 250 miles away. the need for the big dig is obvious; the lack of quantity and quality of highways to boston are well documented. i'm not trying to defend the big dig administration ($6b over budget and 5 years late is obviously, obviously unacceptable) but to blame your neighborhood problems on it is quite short sighted.

Re:Drove through this morning.

[Quobobo]

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)!

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.

[_xeno_]

I think it was a point that the costs were just insane. I get as much benefit from the $16 billion my home state just spent as I would if they had purchased a sub, bomber, and aircraft carrier: none. Actually, I get more benefit from the latter group - they can at least help defend the nation, where as the Big Dig helps people who work in Boston.

I think that was the point - to put the costs in scale.

Re:Drove through this morning.

[Anonymous Coward]

oh god, GROW A BRAIN!

we do NOT need a larger military budget!!

the amount of money this country spends on our military is SICKENING, when you compare it to how much is spent on the more important things such as education, infrastructure, etc. IMHO the military budget needs to be cut by 1/2 to 2/3. and put half of the cut toward paying off our redicilous deficit, and the rest toward more important things that help out country IMPROVE... /rant on
i mean its supposed to be the department of DEFENSE!, not OFFENSE.... we dont need to spend MORE on our military budget than the top 23 COMBINED highest world military spenders. /rant off /sigh

Re:Drove through this morning.

[umofomia]

This is a big misconception about the funds. Federal highway funds are used for funding interstate highways. However, during the 50s, 60s, and 70s, Massachusetts didn't see any of that while most other states were able to receive the funds. All of the interstate highways built during that period were funded using Massachusetts money.

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:

1. The decision of former Governor Weld to reopen the environmental impact study even though it was already completed. When Weld came to power, he gutted the entire transportation administration that oversaw the project under Dukakis. This ended up delaying the project for several years (making up the majority of the cost overruns) and in the end, the conclusion was exactly the same as the original impact study.
2. The installation of several high-speed optical communications lines. This I feel was a justified cost overrun. During the late 90s, there was intense demand for high-speed communications lines to downtown and they had the opportunity to install them while constructing the Big Dig. If they had not done this, most likely the entire thing would have needed to be torn up again a couple years later to install the lines at an even greater cost.

Re:Drove through this morning.

[Kunta Kinte]

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)!

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.

Maybe grandparent of this post should have included a "sarcasm ahead" warning.

Re:Drove through this morning.

[ratsnapple tea]

But in any case, it's a waste of your money and mine...

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.

[blincoln]

However, the infrastructure will benefit millions daily while the sub, bomber, and carrier will just keep costing with little tangible payoff. (since we already have several of each of those).

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:Drove through this morning.

[2short]

"15 Billion for a tunnel."

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.

Re:Drove through this morning.

[jonbrewer]

But it's just not a tunnel ... it's a series of tunnels and bridges, maybe 30 in all. It replaces the core highways in the downtown area. The project also includes upgrades to the subway system, surface streets, and much improved airport access. In addition, a lot of the old city's infrastructure (telephone, sewer, water, electric) were upgraded.

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.

[babbage]

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.

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 number, which is good to know but never to share until everything is over, is the true cost of the work to be done. The second number is a proposal estimate high enough to be plausible but low enough to beat out all the other bidders. Because the work never even happens if you don't get the contract, that second number is the only one that counts -- and because you could get in trouble with millions of angry taxpayers if that first number ever sees the light of day, it's best to just pretend it never existed.

So, yeah, 2.4billion was always a fiction, and the current pricetag -- 15billion? -- is just the way it ended up working out. Cheaper would have been nicer, but spend some time driving or walking around the city over the past 15 years and it becomes obvious that a very very expensive project was going on.

On the bright side, hopefully it helped several thousand construction workers put their kids through college. That alone could be a nice little economic boost for this sleepy little college town over the coming years & decades...

Re:Big Dig = Giant Boondoggle for Special Interest

[Anonymous Coward]

One party state? Mitt Romney, our (unfortunate) governer, is an ass-hat of a Republican.

Re:Most Expensive For Sure

[TWX]

We had a relatively expensive section of state highway in the Phoenix area, when the Squaw Peak Parkway carved through a rather expensive part of town. They made the hole in the ground almost straight down with vertical walls. To my knowledge, at the time it was completed it was one of the most expensive sections of freeway ever built, between the costs to condemn and claim right-of-way, the costs to excavate through bedrock down below, and the costs to make this all happen with buildings a few feet from the hole. And this was all state and city funding, as it wasn't an Interstate or a Federal highway. At this point I'm sure that Central Artery has far, FAR overrun Phoenix's project.

This things been underway for as long...

[downix]

as I can remember. And I'm nearing my 30's now.

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.

TROLL

[smoondog]

Do you have any idea how much taxes/road construction, gas, pollution, etc cost? If not you need to rethink. Jesus, did you ever consider that the big ,dig had to be built underground because of cars? Either way, public transit is *way* less expensive than cars. Sorry, try again,

-Sean

Re:Big Dig = Giant Boondoggle for Special Interest

[Enry]

For a one party state, we've had Republican governors for about the past 10 years. Libertarians have a pretty good foothold in a lot of areas as well. Complaining about people like Sen. Kennedy ignores the fact that Republicans don't run anyone against him. When someone does (Jack E. Robinson?), they get no support from Republican party officials. When Weld ran against Kerry, I voted Kerry because I thought Weld would do a better job as governor than senator.

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.

Either way you put it

[goon america]

It used to be that people found giant public works projects to be a source of national pride. Nowadays, people feel impugned by large public works projects to their personal sense of power. That's my money they're spending!

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

[EvilTwinSkippy]

Amen to that. I for one think there should be more projects like the "Big Dig." The money goes to creating well paying jobs. The cities where the work is done is improved.

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.

Re:Big Dig = Giant Boondoggle for Special Interest

[jdreed1024]

These are the same rants that people have been on for years. I am also a taxpayer and resident in Massachusetts, and I think the Big Dig is one of the greatest projects we've ever undertaken.

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

[Reverberant]

Original projected cost: $2.5 billion Final cost: $16 billion

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

[Anonymous Coward]

Right on! That's a lot of money!

Removing Saddam from power cost a mere 3 times more!

But at least we now have a safe and stable Iraq.

Re:Big Dig = Giant Boondoggle for Special Interest

[whoppers]

I don't think it's that much of a boondoggle as most think. I've seen several shows and been involved in many construction projects over $300M each and it's easy to go over budget especially on such a project as this. If anyone said it would cost over $10B when they started, they never would have started and people would be screaming about the traffic. I live outside of Houston and hear people constantly complain about the traffic, then turn around and complain when construction starts.

Re:tearing down the elevated expressway

[Bearpaw]

i guess this means they're gonna tear down the elevated expressway (the road we used to use before the big dig). it's too bad too. as ugly as the road was, it was a pretty scenic route. you could see large parts of boston.

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 least -- reserved for parks and open space.

My biggest complaint -- possibly even counting the cost-overruns and delays -- is that they designed and built a world-class bridge ... without a pedestrian/bicycle lane! Would it have costed that much more? Or did nobody realize it would have been a good idea?

Re:tearing down the elevated expressway

[yobbo]

Will anything ever get americans out of cars and onto public transport?

Where's the vision?

[s20451]

Why does everybody hate the big dig? Honestly, this is probably the most visionary project that any government has undertaken in a generation. Yes, it was expensive, mistakes were made, and it ended up being a lot harder to do than anyone predicted. But in the end you have a beautiful city, which will stay beautiful for a century. Nobody is going to dare proposing a huge, ugly, elevated highway through Boston anytime soon.

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?

[Transcendent]

I predict that in 100 years, the big dig will be considered a marvel of engineering -- the modern equivalent of a cathedral.

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:Where's the vision?

[Anonymous Coward]

You apparently don't live on Earth. People complain about the Big Dig primarily because 1) it was originally suppost to cost $2.6 billion and finish in 1999 or so, and 2) because it serves no earthly purpose.

The Big Dig is a giant waste of our tax payer money, and, thanks to the Federal Highway Funds, yours as well. Whenever you pay gas, you're helping idiots in Massachusetts build a worthless tunnel under a city instead of doing something sane, like improving the public transportation or building a road above the ground. (Now there's an idea! Roads belong on the surface!)

There are some really neat engineering challenges where the solution can be really fun to see. Usually, though, the solution is totally impractical and costs far more than it's worth, as in this case. Seeing plans for the Big Dig might make you think "that'd be neat," seeing morons waste federal money on one city makes people think "what earthly good does this actually do?"

Re:Big Dig = Giant Boondoggle for Special Interest

[DAldredge]

Of course you like it. You didn't have to pay for most of it. The rest of the country did.

Re:tearing down the elevated expressway

[Oliver Defacszio]

Yes: the ability to do so without ever having to make eye contact with another human being. How many people do you know who won't ride the bus because of the "element" he or she will encounter?

Ahahahaha... Spin City!

[Anonymous Coward]

You've GOT to be kidding! Check out the roads in West Virginia and ask yourself how they got to be some of the best looking and maintained in the country when their population has (per capita) some of our nation's poorest.

Some senators (like Byrd and Kennedy) know how to bring home the bacon... Or Pork, if you like...

Nah, won't bother using my handle here - I'll just lose karma. Can't be talking about politics here after all!

Re:Not that impressive

[Toomuchstuff]

The thing you aren't considering is the fact that this was planned and budgetted 15 years ago. When you consider HOW they built against some incredible challenges like needing to freeze the ground behind north station so they could tunnel without disturbing the railways above (brine filled pipes as close to 3 feet apart in most places. They had to drain large portions of Fort Point Channel in order to sink a tunnel near the Orange and Red Subway tunnels with a mere 18 inches to spare in places. PLUS they had to reroute a vast portion of the Boston area telephone network and major electrical feeds. It is pretty amazing how it all came to together. It is working and Boston needed it and the folks who built it did a great job. As for the price.. no one could have predicted the impact of such enormous challenges when the budget was prepared over 10 years ago and well anyone who thinks that there wasn't going to be a hefty "graft and corruption" premium for the largest public works is delusional

Re:Big Dig = Giant Boondoggle for Special Interest

[maggard]

1. The original project and the final one were indeed two separate beasts. Had all the required work been done separately it would have taken 30 years and left western Massachustts in far worse shape the entire time. Combining it all into one megaproject was only practical.

2. The old Central Artery structure could not have been "renovated". Categorically impossible. Anyone who tries to tell you otherwise is completely ignorant or lying wildly. The existing structure was literally collapsing and no replacement in situ was possible. No room for an additional or replacement structure alongside or above either, much less the ramps that would have been required.

3. Yeah, federal taxes paid for part of the new highway system. They also paid for untold miles of lightly traveled interstate in Utah & Montana too. It's called an highway system and Boston is a vital hub for the northeastern US: It locks solid and so does much of the rest of the region economically. By the way, if it makes you feel any better the elevated highway at the heart of the whole project was originally built entirely by the State of Massachusetts.

4. "Several groups are lobbying" = You and your two sister/brother/cousins. The reality is that most anyone with any sense of the traffic situation in the northeast is well aware that this megaproject only brings it up to current needs and had it not been undertaken things would be far more dire.

5. "Democratic cabal" so now you show your true rabidly partisan colors. Pity the actual makeup of the statehouse doesn't match your warped portrayal of it.

We now return you to squarooticus' regular rant: Fluoridation of water: A Communist plot to invade our vital bodily fluids!

Re:Big Dig = Giant Boondoggle for Special Interest

[WarmBoota]

Screw it - I'm ditching my mod points. I lived for two years in Boston and I have to say it was awesome.

• The city is wonderful and there are tons of free events.
• The city is electric in the spring and summer with public performances everywhere.
• The public sailing and events at the Hatch Shell are great.
• The restaurants are great (especially the North End)
• the public transportation is incredible. You can get just about any place in the city for $0.85
• Taxachussetts? I was able to deduct my apartment rent from my state taxes and I actually got a return. I had the same amount withheld from my PA taxes and (don't forget the 1% local taxes) and I never get a cent back.
• Car traffic was a nightmare and desperately in need of remedy.

Re:Sad

[interstellar_donkey]

I can see you're problem, but a quick look at the numbers show things a little different.

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.

Masshole Response to lane closures

[MarcQuadra]

FYI, from my experience Mass drivers will ignore the red lane signals and try to speed ahead on a closed lane in hope of getting a few cars ahead, they'll then stop all those abiding the rules to squeeze in, causing massive backup.

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 to get ahead at the expense of others.

Re:Wonderful example...

[shadowxtc]

The MBTA and Amtrak have already begun construction of an underground rail-link tunnel between North Station and South Station. Fear not.

Nobody wants to hear this

[Hao Wu]

I know I am paranoid, but it's a sign of the times.

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:tearing down the elevated expressway

[babbage]

IANACivilEngineer

FWIW, he wasn't either -- he was a mechanical engineer. Not quite the same thing :-)

I agree, it sounds like bullshit, but apparently it's counterintuitive but true. All standard four wheeled vehicles (or 4+ wheels, if you want to include trucks with doubled back wheels up through 18-wheelers) push their mass across several points, leaving the central area bearing no direct load. Moreover, even during rush hour, cars always leave some clear space for at least several feet in all directions -- say, five to ten feet all around during rush hour, and much more than that during off-peak traffic.

It's been long enough for me to forget the numbers now, so I'd be happy to be corrected on this, but the rule of thumb he gave us was that cars at peak traffic put something like 100 pounds of stress per square foot, while pedestrians can put something like 500 pounds during their peak periods. And like anything else, the structure has to be designed to handle the maximum expected load, not off-peak times with "just a few bicycles".

Doubt it if you want, but they definitely have the stress of pedestrians in mind. A couple of weeks before I took my tour of the bridge, they opened it up to the public for Mother's Day 2002, and 50,000 people turned out for the chance to walk over the bridge. To reduce the stress that such a crowd would bring, they set up roped off "lanes" for the crowd of people to walk along, and made sure that no more than 1000 or so were on the bridge at any given time. Any more than that, and the stress load would have started to get closer to the bridge's safe tolerances than they were comfortable with.

Re:Michael is a horrible editor who should be fire

[Anonymous Coward]

he's your average democrat/liberal....