Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Difficult-Ad3518 t1_iydr6sa wrote

>It's an extension through landfill

Not exactly. Cambridge Street was one of the original streets laid out in Boston in the 1630s. This tunnel will mostly be under the original Shawmut Penninsula. The shoreline was expanded a bit by Charles Circle itself and your point about utilities are valid, but this extension will not be primarily through landfill.

>This ain't no cut and cover in a cow pasture.

See this map from 1635. Ironically, you could be right in almost any situation making that statement, except here. There are many things that make this project complicated and your overall point is correct, but your reasoning is flawed. This is one of the few remaining streets from the 1630s on original 1630s land (albeit with some fill by Charles Circle, as I said).

38

MyRespectableAlt t1_iydsiu0 wrote

Thanks for the clarification.

6

Difficult-Ad3518 t1_iydty67 wrote

Sure thing! Cambridge Street has a long and fascinating history. It's been rebooted a few times in different eras.

Most recently, as part of the 1960s urban renewal project that razed Scollay Square and replaced it with City Hall Plaza, Cambridge Street was slightly moved and rebuilt from the ground up. The utilities underneath that you allude to are not from 200 years ago, but rather from the 1960s. There are complications that arise in any tunneling project, but as far as tunneling in "old Boston" goes, this is good as it gets. Basically, if we can't tunnel here, we can't tunnel anywhere on Shawmut Penninsula.

18

HurdieBirdie t1_iyeatil wrote

While the soil type is different, the fact this section of roadway is one of the original in Boston and almost 400 years old makes the other point even more true. The utilities and structures in the ground have got to be so convoluted from being routed around each other for that long. I'd imagine the utility plans to be just black with lines in that area of the city.

1