Much interesting analysis, but some strange mistakes as well. When NYC's Second Avenue was first proposed it was concluded that such a project was possible but

Much interesting analysis, but some strange mistakes as well. When NYC's Second Avenue was first proposed it was concluded that such a project was possible but would be far too complex and expensive to be reasonable. Over the next hundred years the Second Avenue Subway in NYC would be repeatedly proposed, analyzed, and then rejected as too complex and expensive to make sense. Finally the work went ahead and as usual this analysis claims that this was just another infrastructure project and that despite one hundred years of analysis revealing the extreme complexity and cost this paper claims that the work could have been done cheaply with cut and cover construction despite a hundred years of analysis rejecting the possibility of cheap and easy construction of the Second Avenue subway. Rejecting so much history seems like an awkward way of going about this analysis.