Hi everyone, I have just got back from a trip to Cincinnati and Boston in the USA.

I wasn't there as a Sabrista or anything like that, in fact I was pursuing my main hobby of following an English rock band around when I went to Cincinnati (they were playing live at the 4 July festival there!).

However, in Boston, whilst on some guided tours, the tour guides couldn't help but mention America's biggest road project ever which has been taking place in the city since 1988, and is due for completion in 2005. This is "The Big Dig".

I cannot imagine such a project ever being sanctioned in the UK. It is costing America billions of dollars to complete this and the price keeps escalating, but they are on the last laps of it now. Essentially, they are taking all the elevated highways going through Boston and putting the whole lot underground, after which time all the flyovers will be dismantled. It is the equivalent of digging up the centre of Birmingham and putting Spaghetti Junction and all those ring roads in the centre of the city underground - an awesome project. There are new flyovers joining the edges of the city to the new project, but there will not be a single flyover in the centre of Boston once this is completed. Apparently the city was gridlocked and the flyovers could no longer be widened, so this was put forward as the solution.

I was taken through one of the completed tunnels both on the way back from a tour to Lexington & Concord, and also on the way back to the airport on Friday to go home. What an amazing piece of engineering this will be when completed. There are exits and junctions in these tunnels - and they are ramped and grade separated too - not a traffic light to be seen! At the moment southbound (I think) traffic goes through the new tunnel and also a new bridge over the Charles River, and northbound traffic still uses the flyovers, many of which are in the process of being dismantled. The city looks a mess at present, but one can't help but marvel at the sheer size of this project.

In order to build the tunnels, they have had to dig under the existing flyovers and take out the piles supporting them, so they can be tunnelled under, and then the roadways have been put on temporary (and very rickety looking!) supports. All this without closing a single road apparently (according to the tour guides!) - I have no idea how this was accomplished but it is amazing! As a section of tunnel is completed, the traffic is diverted through it, the flyover above closed and then removed piece by piece.

I managed to take a few pictures of this, but as my hotel wasn't within walking distance of the project and I didn't know the bus or tube system that well, what pictures I have are taken from tour buses and the sightseeing trolley. I have put them in an album for you to look at. They aren't fabulous but I hope you get an idea of the sheer magnitude of this project from them.

I know this is essentially a British roads group, but I know you are interested in international projects as well.

Serena

Serena - any roadstuff is good stuff, you should know that
As for this project, I've read (small) amounts of info on it - as you've said, it's to increase capacity on the insanely congested Central Artery - only Route 3 (North, IIRC) andInterstate 95are as busy.
However, do not be suprised at this scheme to put elevated roads underground- America's road projects in the 50/60s all involved elevated roads being cramped through spaces wherever possible, they'd run these aerial roads through back-alleys, along water fronts, over houses, etc. Sadly, most were well opposed - and two in San Francisco were demolished (and replaced withwider surface streets). These were the I-480 Embarcadero and the I-880 Cypress Viaduct. Both were two-tier freeways, the former along the bay (blocking the view for thousands of residents) and the latter over a street. Tragically, the Cypress Structure collapsed in the 1989 earthquake, killing 42 people, and the Embarcadero was condemned (but it was a hated road anyway).
New York's elevated roads don't fare much better - I have a friend in New York who drives on the FDR Drive everyday, being stuck in traffic - however, when he visited London he said (and I quote): "I have never been on such a busy road as the M4 and M25near Heathrow Airport. Not even the FDR Drive compares to that area".
I also showed a friend who lives in Rhode Island a photo of traffic on the M25, and he too was shocked - even though he lives near I-95 (which is one of America's largest car-parks apparentally).
Also, when I was talking to them the other night about US/UK road differences (in the middle of explaining the lingo we use - dual carriageway is not a term the US uses, it seems), we established that despite our roads being more technologically advanced, theirs carry more traffic, often on the same number of lanes, yet theydon't suffer the same congestion as we do.
Somewhere we in Britianmessed up - particulary with inner-city roads, London may have looked terrible with the Box running around it, but with careful planning it could've integrated with the scenery.
Sorry to drift off on a tangent - it'sjust that American roads(from whatI've read/seen photos of) are so much better than ours in most aspects...and they're not afraidto spend billions on vital projects, unlike here.

Welcome back Serena, hope you had a great time, we'll save that chat for the chat room
This project sounds fascinating. For anybody else that wants to know more, the site is www.bigdig.com, I'm off there to learn a lot more
Glenn

Have to say, after living in the US for over 4 years I still prefer driving on British roads. There are a few reasons for this (which I don't really have time to delve into from my desk at the moment...), buta smile is always on my face just prior to picking up rental cars from Heathrow on my regular trips home. The way I see it, a marriage made in heaven would be US-style investment and planning gusto coupled with UK/European-style road technology. I'm aiming to make a trip up to Boston once the construction is finished. From everything I've seen, this scheme looks magnificent.
The one thing that still grabs me to this day when venturing forth on UK tarmac. Coping with narrow roads. Nowadays when thinking about negotiating, e.g., the North Circular around New Southgate, I find myself physically breathing in...

Andy

Andy, from what I've seen on various websites (Kurumi and NYCRoads spring to mind), the problems I've foundwith several US roads is how they're signed and of course, lack of information boards, etc.
Interstates really need matrix signals every mile, as well as better signs - it's all very well having those artistic arrows and such, but when they fail to indicate lanes and such, well, all hell breaks loose. The other problem is how you'll be directed off on onto a sign that'll give you a street name but no control destinations (it's all very well leaving I-476 in PA, for example,for the Chemical Road, but if you don't know where Chemical Road leads to, you're in dickie's meadow).
I also find it slightly agitating how green-outs are used. Indeed, in the Bay Area around San Francisco, since thedeath of the Embarcadero and Cypress Freeways, there are a lot of blank green signs on gantries and on poles, which is not in the least helpful.
Not only that, the only way of knowing you're on an Interstate is a flimsy "TO" marker or a signpost clumsily erected in the gore with a badly drawn arrow on it. It'd be nice if I knew what the regulations were as well - I'mnot sure the highway patrolmen would like a cyclist on the Lincoln Tunnel Approaches, for example.
Still - at least the US does one thing better than we do - roadworks.And when new roads are built, America builds them over-capacity,rather than ourfeeble under-capacity efforts here.

Bryn, odd that you would quote I476 and Chemical Road. I am indeed familiar with Plymouth Meeting and surrounding areas. Check CBRD, specifically http://www.cbrd.co.uk/ukvsus.shtmlto see what I mean.

Yes, interstate signage canbe a frightful mess. My current peeve (I must sound like an utter whinger!) is the vague nature of 'stay in lane' arrows on overhead gantries. Lane delineations in white paint do not look good on concrete surfaced roads to begin with. When the arrows don't line up with the lanes in any way, you are going to be in trouble when wanting to stay on the through lane of your choice. Actually, Chris placed this in the above page as an example.

Well, I'll admit that's one reason I mentioned it.
One thing as well where America fares better is the numbering system - that grid is all nice and dandy, then I found out about the fuss I-238/CA-238 causes - which came as a laugh, considering how many anolomies we have here, like the A6144 being entirely in Zone 5, not to mention it's motorway counterpart - at least it isn't as daft as the Interstate withtheat-grade signalised exitsin Wyoming (I-180?).
Btw, are you the Andy from AARoads or am I confusing myself here?

Nope, different Andy to the one at AAroads.com. I do admit to having some of my UK motorway photos there though. Well, they were there until the site changed beyond all recognition and I lost my way...

Ah, thanks for clearing that up for me.
I've been looking into a lot of US sites (as already said) and I've found some more things I like the idea of, but sadly, implementation of it would be at best impractical and at worstimpossible in the UK, and once I've listed them, I'll sure you'll agree: [list] [*]Parkways. The idea of a GSJ road here cruising at 70 without HGVs slowing things down to a maximum of 56 seems quite appealing - although, where (realistically) could this ever be brought into Britian... [*]Two-Deck Roads. These'd be great for capacity boosts, but imagine the fuss if the A406 had four lanes on the ground and four lanes on a viaduct - the people of London would not be best pleased, but commuters would.</UL> Also, do Turnpikes get shunned by motorists who refuse to pay a toll, because if so - MEL should be wary of people boycotting the M6T - one motorway that should be free. It's in my opinion that the old M6 needs tolls, not the new relief road.
I'm also curious as to how many cities have proper outer ring roads and inner ones too - I'm sure that the Interstate networkcan churn up more than two and a bit motorway (M25/M60/Birmingham Box) orbitals like we have.

Comparing the UK to the WHOLE of the USA in terms of "beltways" might be a little unfair... after all, we are the size of Oregon

The main difference I've noted is the way medians are used: rather than build 3 lanes each way jammed up together with an Armco in the middle, they build two with a 50ft grass ditch in the middle. That's not really practical over here due to higher densities though.

Okay, there's no contest, of course
As for medians, most roads were fitted with Jersey Barriers in the 70s - and especially on antique freeways like the I-95 Cross Bronx, with 3 narrow lanes and no shoulder, a Jersey Barrier is pretty nasty. However, more rural roads do seem to have large ditches for medians - yes.
Oh, and for a bit of a joke - if you ever go on the Pasadena Freeway, the exits are nearly all like M50 Junction 3 - complete with Stop Signs!

Going back on-topic...

I was in Boston in August 2001 and the whole city was a building site! I'm not sure what it was like before they started the Dig, but it just looked like the M4 elevated section built along the Thames embankment and through Tower Bridge!

We used the new bridge to the north (I think...) which is a very impressive gateway to the city.

They have parkways in the city too: along the river going past MIT to Harvard all the bridges have a 9ft clearance, so the 'dip' is much easier to build and less noticeable at junctions.

Of course, the best thing is the little village called "Reading" just to the north and east of I-95/I-93

Yes, sorry about dragging the thread so wildy off topic there...
Indeed, these works are spectacular - this sort of work would never happen here as already said. I'm presuming that above the tunnels the land will be landscaped and there'll be slip-roads appearing from 'nowhere'...brilliant stuff!

There are progress galleriesat http://www.bigdig.com/thtml/photos.htm the latest images are from back in April. It's amazing to consider that this project has been ongoing since 1992.

There was one in Oakland (I forget the freeway, could be I-480 or I-80) where the off-slip went parallel to the freeway for 200yds or so then had a 90º bend to the right to end at a T-junction! M50 eat your heart out I say. That was also the trip where we stayed at a motel just off I-238, blissfully unaware of the palava (sp?) surrounding its existence.

It sounds like I-480 material to me - I'm sure all the exits around the Bay Bridge area are pretty tight...

This topic is pretty interesting to say the least, i did manage to travel around the states and well I think that we misunderstands the interstate freeway concept, its not like the autobahn or the motorway, its just that most of the roads that come under interstate definition happen to be built to freeway standards. For better analogy think on the european E class road or even our very own hallowed trunk road. both can either be single carriageway at grade, dual carriageway at grade or limited access dual carriageway with grade seperation. The interstate was brought about to allow developement of areas and provide a good road between different parts of the county. Through time being developed until a network of mostly grade seperated divided highways existed. Places like Texas Wyoming and Montanna utilise at grades because of the traffic densities experianced in this area, it really is so low, and to provide a grade seperation costing thousands for joe Blow the farmer to make a left turn really isnt worth it, anyways the medians tend to be wide enough for an 18 wheeler to sit waiting to turn without its ass sticking back into the carriageway. Its just a different way of doing things.
Gavin

Then on those grounds, it's probably perfectly acceptable...I have noted that Interstates are not Motorways, and aren't intended to be -I knew for a while, however, you'd expect them to just be US routes rather than Interstates...

There are not very many interstates not built to standard; a few in urban areas have too tight bends and too narrow lanes and there are a few red lights on drawbridges and there is that one last (still existing) red light in WY. However, for the most part the Interstate designation indicates a certain design standard and federal maintenance and involvement. Not all controlled-access divided highways are interstates, just like not all of them are motorways in the UK. And there are a few instances where there are gaps (Franconia Notch Parkway) for example. And there are 'secret' Interstates like my very own local secret I-595 from I-495 to Annapolis.
I think the design standards do allow for deviation on bridges. I'm not sure.
I agree, though, our road signs are garbage compared to the crisp, cool, calm works of art the HA puts up on British roads. I could stare at them for hours -- just looking at their calm perfection.

Don't forget though that for a lot of people who use the roads daily (local traffic) 'Chemical Road' or something is a viable control destination -- for the strip malls, car dealerships, shopping centers, fast food outlets, and other businesses along the road.