Changes in Mitigation: Comparing Boston’s Big Dig and 1950s Urban Renewal  

Oleh:

Bushouse, Brenda

Jenis: Article from Journal - ilmiah internasional
Dalam koleksi: Public Works Management & Policy vol. 7 no. 1 (Jul. 2002), page 52-62.
Fulltext: 52PWM71.pdf (86.9KB)

Isi artikel

This article explores the mitigation efforts of the Central Artery/Tunnel (CA/T) project and compares them with Boston’s urban renewal history. The CA/T project, known as the Big Dig, replaces the elevated highway built during urban renewal with a tunnel under Boston Harbor, a 14-lane crossing of the Charles River, and an 8-to-10-lane undergrounde xpressway. The project is expected to be completedin 2004 and will cost more than $14 billion. Of this price tag, an estimated$3 billion has been spent on mitigation, with considerably more mitigation costs off budget. The extensiveness of mitigation for the CA/T project represents a distinct difference between urban renewal and highway projects of the 1950s and 1960s. In the 1950s, federal urban renewal and highway programs allowed local governments to steamroll over cities without adequate representation of citizen interests. In the 1990s, participation requirements and environmental review has led to a reversal to the extent that citizen, business, and environmental stakeholders hold critical veto points that can effectively derail public works projects. Although there are undoubtedly gains by having a more inclusive planning process, the extensive costs to mitigate issues raised by stakeholder groups, especially environmental stakeholders, raises the question of whether other cities with decaying highway systems will be able to replicate the Big Dig. Given the reality of mitigation requirements, the prospect for future megaprojects does not look promising.

Opini Anda

Klik untuk menuliskan opini Anda tentang koleksi ini!

Kembali