[powderjunkie]

It is pretty much moot at this point since the LRVs are ordered and stations [60%] designed to LF specs, but its a simple question of value and order of prioritization.

We have to follow the logic of how of we got here and consider it against the current plans and context. Beltline to 2nd alignment was first decided in 2006:

1. The only viable idea for the north at the time was Nose Creek alignment (no longer true), which would require the 7th ave easterly exit capacity

2. Beltline routes were presumed to be at-grade (no longer true); LF trains were necessary to achieve tight turns and grade changes (no longer true)

3. 2nd St tunnel would be cut+cover (no longer true).

4. Thinking seems to have anticipated bored tunnel for 8th, but it's not totally clear either then or now. Disrupting 2nd St with c+c would have seemed preferable; 11th+2nd vs 8th ave + 9th St*(could/should be elevated) is a harder question.


At many points it became evident that even one tunnel was going to be extremely expensive and challenging (duh), but continuing with a deep tunnel for GL merely defers the 8th ave inevitability a bit longer.


So a question I'd pose is: if you were going to build just one tunnel, which one delivers better value? IMO it's 8th Ave. But we've positioned our chess pieces such that a N-S tunnel is existential to the whole green line, while an 8th Ave tunnel remains inevitable.

I think we could have been just fine with one tunnel (and there are still a lot of ways we could get there) and spending the rest on track length