That's a very interesting question. I think Met Council wants to avoid property takings. I believe it would cost more than $50 million. The $50 million is the base cost for all the options. Each option has costs above that, so I would guess that taking the townhomes would be on top of the $50 million. I will ask about this at Thursday's CAC meeting. I'll also get the cost of the tunnel clarified. My reading has the marginal cost of a shallow tunnel at ~$70 million ($120 - $50) but I could be interpreting things incorrectly.The thing I don't get is - the purpose of the shallow tunnel is to avoid impacting the park space & bike corridor, right? But that's specific to the segment that would be tunnelized, that is, roughly the half mile between Lake St and about a block north of Cedar Lake Rd. But that's the segment of Kenilworth where the park space is nonexistent, and the bike trail is already skinny and squished up next to the rail line. So wouldn't it be better to spend $50m less to take one row of the townhomes, which would provide enough space to actually create a bit of parkland there? In other words, why would anyone whose top priority is the open space and/or nonmotorized transportation value of Kenilworth prefer the shallow tunnel option to the all modes at grade option?it is a really nice park space and bike corridor. this line just shows how difficult it is to jerryrig transportation into established neighborhoods.
Property takings invite lawsuits which will add further cost to that option. It begins to make the shallow tunnel look like the more cost-effective solution. Relocating the bike trail also invites lawsuits. Minneapolis has stated they would withhold municipal consent for any non-tunnel colocation option. This is speculation on my part but I suspect this is the calculation Met Council staff are making. Fighting or settling the lawsuits and delays imposed by lack of municipal consent will cost enough to make the tunnel option cheaper. Peter Wagenius pretty much stated this as Minneapolis' goal. I fully acknowledge that this stance is unhelpful at best and batsh*t crazy at worst. But it is political reality and the project has to deal with it.