Viaduct: Replace, dig or tear it down?

The Seattle City Council has a deadline of Sept. 22 to put an advisory vote on the November ballot asking Seattle voters how they want to replace the Alaskan Way Viaduct.

But what the ballot will ask is still undecided.

The state Legislature, in the waning days of the 2006 session, directed the council to either choose a tunnel or aerial replacement for the viaduct or put the matter to voters.

Some are proposing a third alternative on the ballot — not replacing the viaduct and using surface streets.

The council's Transportation Committee, which met Tuesday, made no decisions but distributed a proposed resolution calling for an advisory ballot on the rebuild or tunnel options. It plans to hold several more meetings to refine the plans.

The resolution said the tunnel is expected to cost from $2.7 billion to $4.5 billion and a rebuild from $2.6 million to $3.1 billion. While the City Council already has voted for the tunnel as its preferred alternative, that could change with a public vote.

"They're handing it off to us to take the pulse of citizens," said Councilwoman Jan Drago, chairwoman of the committee.

Councilman Richard Conlin, former Transportation Committee chairman, suggested the council adopt an ordinance stating the city's preferred replacement option after the vote.

Several people testified before the committee, many urging that a no-replacement option pushed by the People's Waterfront Coalition, a group of planners and environmentalists, be included on the ballot.

Councilman Peter Steinbrueck wondered what will happen if the vote on the options is close. "This could leave us in an ambiguous cloud," he said.

Councilman David Della said he asked Doug MacDonald, head of the state Department of Transportation, whether the $2 billion allocated for viaduct replacement from the gas-tax increase would be lost if the viaduct is not replaced.

He said he hadn't heard from MacDonald, but other DOT officials have said the money can't be used if a viaduct-replacement proposal reduces capacity on the corridor and a surface street.

"If we don't have the $2 billion we're not going anyplace," Drago said.

Susan Gilmore: 206-464-2054 or sgilmore@seattletimes.com