
Ten years later, did Boston's Big Dig deliver? - jseliger
https://www.bostonglobe.com/magazine/2015/12/29/years-later-did-big-dig-deliver/tSb8PIMS4QJUETsMpA7SpI/story.html
======
chrisweekly
Short answer: yes. I've lived in or around Boston for ~36 of my 41 years. The
word "expressway" is no longer farcical, and the hideous rusted green
monstrosity that used to cut off the waterfront from the rest of the otherwise
very walkable city has been replaced by the aptly-named "greenway" linear
park.... it's so much better I can hardly believe it. Yes, public transit
needs more and better investment. Yes, the BD suffered from corruption and
inefficiency. But, this lifelong Bostonian sees it as a messy, expensive,
insufficient but necessary step in bringing this awesome little city into
modernity.

~~~
scarmig
"Expensive" spans a whole range of values. The Big Dig was $24 billion.

For point of comparison, the population of Boston is around 700k, and the per
capita income is 33k. That's... $23 billion.

I support infrastructure projects, and at this point think we should consider
the Big Dig a learning experience and not a political punching bag. But can we
really say it's a success, considering the countless other uses of the money
that we had to pass on?

~~~
abetusk
That's really disingenuous. The greater Boston area is 4.5M people [1]. For
comparison, it's like saying New York City is only 1.6M (the population of
Manhattan [2]) when the population of New York city is 8.5M total.

[1]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greater_Boston](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greater_Boston)

[2]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manhattan](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manhattan)

~~~
scarmig
How is it disingenuous? The point is to give a sense of scale of $24 billion,
since it's pretty easy for people not to know what $24 billion looks like.

~~~
jghn
Because the number of people it aids is much larger than the population of
people in the confines of Boston proper.

------
martinald
I think the Big Dig delivered immense benefits to the urban space in Boston.
So many US cities are ruined from having urban highways through the core.

But on the other hand, really that's just righting the wrong of building them
in the first place.

On the other hand, imagine what $20bn could have done to the public transit
infrastructure in Boston, which is dying out for a Crossrail/RER style project
to link the two main commuter rail terminals to allow through trains.

I also don't agree with the article about the silver line service to Logan.
It's insanely slow (stopping to change over from electric to LNG, traffic in
the shared sections and worst of all the buses are just not designed for
airports with the luggage and the bunching caused by traffic means some buses
are really busy with ones running behind nearly empty. That doesn't happen on
proper segregated right of way.

BRT is generally a terrible solution, delivering most of the costs of light
rail with few of the benefits.

~~~
carbocation
In general, I favor the T over driving in Boston because of the reduced
variance in travel time. This is not true, however, of the green line above
ground or of the Silver Line. The silver line's struggle through traffic (and
various airport and non-airport stops on the way to South Station) makes it up
to 5x slower to use the T to get to/from the airport compared to just taking
an Uber.

~~~
colanderman
The secret is to use the Blue Line to get to the airport, not the Silver Line.
So long as you're either on the Orange Line or don't have too many bags it's
much faster.

~~~
jghn
Depends on where you live. If you live on the red line (I do) taking the blue
line is almost always slower than the silver lie (sic). Remember that there's
no red-blue connector, in fact the govt claimed that the silver lie _was_ the
red-blue connector because it went to the airport!

~~~
p_eter_p
They have made noise about running the blue line to the Charles m.g.h.
station, which would solve a number of problems. It would require a stretch of
elevated line on Cambridge street right in front of Mass General, so no idea
if it will ever happen.

~~~
jghn
A while back I saw a discussion about them running the current head space past
Bowdoin down under Charles/MGH but the problem there was that the required
head space would take it under the Charles and that'd end up being pretty
costly due to the conditions there.

------
webXL
_US House Speaker Thomas P. “Tip” O’Neill, for whom the mainline tunnel is
named, cajoled and persuaded Congress to pay 80 percent of the project..._

Ah yes. Immortalizing those who appropriated other people's money with
absolutely no regard for the inevitable cost overruns and mass-transit-
crippling debt-- aka "bringing home the bacon". How commendable! No wonder why
everyone hates Congress but loves their representative.

~~~
Anechoic
_Immortalizing those who appropriated other people 's money_

Prior to the Big Dig, Massachusetts had funded all of its interstate highways
entirely with its own money while still sending it's share of gas tax money to
the Feds. The CA/T project wasn't so much appropriating other people's money
as much as getting back what it donate to other states to build their
highways.

 _mass-transit-crippling debt_

This is a valid point, but _something_ needed to be done about the elevated
artery and tearing it down and replacing it with light rail/commuter rail
isn't a practical solution - if nothing else, Maine, New Hampshire and Rhode
Island would have been up in arms. If anything, blame the car-focused planning
of the 1940s and 1950s for creating the mess in the first place.

------
pouetpouet
Meanwhile in Utrech, NL:
[https://bicycledutch.wordpress.com/2016/01/05/motorway-
remov...](https://bicycledutch.wordpress.com/2016/01/05/motorway-removed-to-
bring-back-original-water/)

~~~
ascagnel_
Car-free shopping districts are an interesting choice, but you still need to
make some concessions to mass transit (eg delivery hours for trucks, right-of-
way or other lanes for buses or expensive construction of subways, etc), and
Europe generally doesn't have the sprawling suburbia of the eastern United
States that would require massive ring-roads to handle traffic that isn't
feasible to serve via mass transit (although mass transit park-and-ride
facilities can help to mitigate that).

~~~
Zach_the_Lizard
>Car-free shopping districts are an interesting choice, but you still need to
make some concessions to mass transit (eg delivery hours for trucks, right-of-
way or other lanes for buses or expensive construction of subways, etc),

Car free shopping districts and streets are common worldwide. Even the US has
them. Pennsylvania Avenue in front of the White House is open only to foot
traffic and bikes. The only cars in there are emergency vehicles.
Charlottesville, Virginia has a pedestrian mall.

>Europe generally doesn't have the sprawling suburbia of the eastern United
States that would require massive ring-roads to handle traffic that isn't
feasible to serve via mass transit

The sprawling suburbia of the US comes from poor land use policies that do
things like require single family housing. This is true even in cities which
are famous for not having zoning, like Houston.

Before we engaged in the Great Suburban Experiment the US was one of the world
leaders in public transit. LA had one of the largest public transit systems in
the entire world.

Loosening certain land use controls would slowly repair this problem amongst
many others.

Lately these laws have attracted a lot of attention in the press, with
economists from Paul Krugman on down commenting on land use controls, mostly
negatively.

Cities are slowly reforming these laws, or attempting to reform these laws,
and I suspect that the America of the future will be much more walkable
nationally than today's America. Even LA's leadership has realized that the
car doesn't scale.

~~~
baldfat
Suburbia - When tech books are written in a 100 years the disaster of Suburbia
will be in all of them. I live in a city and walk to work and enjoy the life
here (120,000 people). My city (Allentown, PA) is just now turning around from
the "White Flight" we had int he 1980s.

To me Suburbia = Center City destroying, inconvenient, isolating and
depressing and is maybe the reason why drug use is so rampant in these areas.
[http://articles.philly.com/2007-02-08/news/25238943_1_drug-o...](http://articles.philly.com/2007-02-08/news/25238943_1_drug-
overdoses-drug-abuse-drug-treatment-centers)

~~~
criddell
Hey now, some of us love living out in the burbs. When self-driving cars are
available, I'll buy one and move even further out.

~~~
UVB-76
Exactly. Self-driving cars will be the suburbs' renaissance.

~~~
Zach_the_Lizard
Self driving cars take way more space than equivalent mass transit. Even
assuming that self driving cars double road capacity, highways have much lower
capacity than mass transit. There are advantages to self driving cars to be
sure, and they will change the transportation game, but I predict they will
not fundamentally alter the city vs. suburb equation.

For starters, it is highly unlikely the urban planning mistakes of the 60s
where downtowns were flattened with freeways will be repeated. We're already
seeing cities tear down or bury existing freeways to correct these mistakes.
Cities from LA to Atlanta are investing in mass transit and are working on
getting more walkable and dense.

I predict that self driving cars will actually be a big boon for cities
themselves as it would now be easier for city dwellers to visit transit
inaccessible destinations or shopping trips that require a car. Zipcar,
Car2Go, Enterprise's car rental club and the like are already bridging the
gap, but self driving cars would help those who can't drive such as children
or the elderly or even those who never learned to drive.

~~~
UVB-76
I think self-driving cars could more than double road capacity, and almost
eliminate congestion. There are so many exciting permutations.

Major causes of congestion could be almost entirely eliminated (breakdowns and
accidents)

Vehicles could be routed more efficiently, and dynamic road tolls used to keep
traffic flowing on popular routes.

On-street parking could be eliminated, as fewer people will own their own
cars, or their cars will be able to park themselves elsewhere.

Meanwhile the absence of human drivers (and exhaust emissions, once we move to
all-electric vehicles) will see a step-change in the take-up of cycling and
walking in urban centres.

This is just scraping the surface. Self-driving cars are going to change
everything.

------
acomjean
The big dig helps, but as someone who worked 20 minutes north on the same
highway, the traffic just seems to have shifted north.

The biggest win is the second tunnel to the airport and the extra space.

Boston/Mass has a history of failing and/or giving up on infrastructure (2020
olympics/ North South Rail link, Cape wind, Hollywood East Studios) and taking
their time on others (finally new garden, convention center). So while its
impressive the big dig got built, this city needs public transit so bad and
even the small expansion of the green line (old trolleys) into somerville has
been so delayed and mismanaged (no bid contracts!) its in danger of being
canceled.

I think part of the problem is regional transportation expansions here can be
canceled by very local authorities (see red line expansion into arlington)

I think givernments need to realize people are its natural resource and making
them want to stay is important. Commuting here is not great.
MS/Facebook/Napster all started in Massachusetts, but went west to become
viable.

~~~
Johnny555
This is a classic case of _induced demand_ \- build bigger/better roads and
more people will use them. The money would be better spent on improving
transit and walkability/bikability of the city (to encourage people to live
closer to work)

A freeway lane carries around 2400 passengers/hour, a light rail line can
carry around 20,000 passengers/hour. Heavy or commuter rail can carry around
40,000 passengers/hour.

------
cesarb
We're doing something similar here in Rio de Janeiro: the Perimetral
([https://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elevado_da_Perimetral](https://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elevado_da_Perimetral))
was demolished, and will be replaced by a new 3 km tunnel pair
([http://www.portomaravilha.com.br/viaexpressa](http://www.portomaravilha.com.br/viaexpressa)).

One major difference would be that the Perimetral was demolished before
finishing the tunnel. We'll see how well it works when it's opened this year.

------
rsync
Will San Francisco ever get a big dig ?

Genuinely curious if it is ever proposed for the 101 corridor that goes
through the city.

For those who don't know, the 101 "freeway", which is the main artery
north/south through the city, turns into a neighborhood street for several
miles (and for several other miles (van ness) goes through a busy city
center).

If you are north of the golden gate bridge and you need to go to SFO, you will
drive through single family, residential neighborhoods, stopping at stop signs
and traffic lights. That's the route.

But there's no other route, so the only solution would be a tunnel, as far as
I can tell.

Is this ever proposed ? Does anyone else want this ? Basically Presidio to
SFSU, I think ...

~~~
WildUtah
Read up on the Centeal Freeway, Embarcadero Freeway, the Freeway Revolt, and
the eventual demolition of those freeways.

What you describe was almost complete in SF in the 1960s and it was stopped by
mass citizen opposition. It was a complete disaster for the city and quality
of life.

Then in the 1990s the remaining stubs -- except 280 -- were mostly removed so
it could never happen again. The city is more beautiful and live able now than
it was in those dark freeway decades.

Underground construction would be just as bad in promoting traffic nightmares
but less bad in destroying street life and at American construction prices
would cost as much as half a dozen Mars missions for no traffic benefit.
(Around US$200 MMM probably)

Yes, no traffic benefit. When we removed the half completed system, traffic
actually improved. If you wonder why, look up Braess Paradox and induced
demand.

~~~
rsync
"What you describe was almost complete in SF in the 1960s and it was stopped
by mass citizen opposition. It was a complete disaster for the city and
quality of life."

I am fully aware of that history, and it's not what I am describing at all.

I am speaking specifically of a long-haul, point A to point B _tunnel_.
Imagine getting all of the pass-through cars (and trucks!) off of Van Ness and
the GG Park <\--> 19th ave. corridor...

------
jrlocke
As someone who commutes the full length of the road under the greenway
everyday, absolutely. It rarely takes me more than 20 minutes to clear
downtown Boston in rush hour traffic, an impossibility without the tunnel. Now
if they could just fix the delays and inconsistency on the green line and
silver line.

------
seibelj
Absolutely delivered, one of the reasons Boston is such an amazing city. If
you like European style cities, Boston is the only one USA has and it's
awesome.

~~~
afterburner
Philadelphia and San Francisco have some very European style areas.

~~~
bryanlarsen
Of course, if you truly want to experience a European city, Quebec City is
closer to the majority of the population of the United States than San
Francisco is, as well as being much more European.

~~~
afterburner
I absolutely agree. Quebec City is far and away the most European city in
North America.

------
lmm
Interesting that London's Crossrail is being seen as a big spend. Over here
the comment is often that in the time it's taken us to build Crossrail, Paris
has built 5 RER lines.

~~~
teh_klev
Construction of Crossrail only began in 2009 with all services due to be in
service by 2019, that's not bad going. Construction of the five RER lines
began in the 60's with the last major construction completed in 1999. Sure the
concept of "Crossrail" has been kicking about since the 70's but I think
comparing the two as you've done is like comparing apples and oranges.

~~~
Johnny555
10 years and $20B USD for a 40 station rail line spanning over 100km (20km in
tunnels) sounds incredibly fast and inexpensive.

It took us (San Francisco Bay Area) 10 years and 6.5B US dollars to build a
3.5km bridge... and it still has some serious problems with no solution.

------
cryoshon
Yeah, I dunno if it was worth all the billions, but the Greenway is really
beautiful and ties the entire city core together with a beautiful grassland.
They even had some Burning-Man mini gathering on the Greenway this summer, and
that definitely couldn't have happened if the entire city was still dominated
by a highway.

The tunnelways are pretty good-- even though they seem to have breakages
pretty frequently, they improve the traffic to Logan a lot.

------
TheMagicHorsey
It delivered in the sense that Boston looted MA and the USA to pay for an
infrastructure project that was WAY out of proportion of their population. For
a point of comparison in the Bay Area ... imagine Sunnyvale took 24 Billion
dollars of California and US money to build a giant municipal park.

------
wcummings
Still no legally mandated green line extension, so no.

~~~
tibbon
As much as in theory the GLX would benefit me (living in Union Sq/Somerville),
I'm also kinda like "shrug, the busses work just fine". The Green Line has
always been kinda terrible (too slow, too many stops, too crowded), and
memories of living in Allston in 2002-2003 make me never want to take it
again.

Instead, I have options of the 91, CT-2, 86, 87 and 85 busses (yes, all of
those within a block of my apartment) that take me to the Red/Orange line
pretty swiftly. No "signal problems" or systemic track backups. Yea, busses
can break down and they are pretty unreliable in other ways, but no worse than
the subways here.

Also, the spiking real estate prices around all the "walksheds" near proposed
green line stops is really hurting the area and benefiting wealthy landlords.
I'd be fine with those landlords needing to chill for a few years.

~~~
jghn
The rise of the bus trackers has made union sq area livable. However the GLX
would be huge simply from a revitalization angle. I'm ignoring the property
value increase, which admittedly is/was something I've been looking forward to

------
markbnj
The picture at mid-point on the page, of one worker digging and 11 people
watching, probably offers as pointed a commentary as anything else in the
piece.

