Viaduct surface option eyed

OLYMPIA — House Speaker Frank Chopp — a key advocate for replacing the Alaskan Way Viaduct with an elevated highway — says he's open to the idea of tearing down the structure and improving surface streets and transit instead.

Chopp, D-Seattle, on Wednesday said it could be a second choice if the elevated highway doesn't fly.

His statement marks an unusual moment in which the speaker and Seattle Mayor Greg Nickels appear to agree on something concerning the viaduct. The city considers the surface street and transit option its second choice.

The two sides have been battling for months. The city wants to replace the viaduct with a $3.4 billion tunnel. Chopp has argued for a $2.8 billion elevated highway. The fight has created a political impasse.

Chopp's comments came after King County Executive Ron Sims said Wednesday that he opposes both a tunnel and another elevated highway. Sims proposes improving surface streets and beefing up public transit. Details weren't available Wednesday.

Sims has met with the speaker to discuss the idea. Chopp said he told Sims: "Sounds great to me. Why don't you develop a proposal that we can go to the governor with and say, 'How can that be independently analyzed in terms of does that work or not?' "

Chopp said he was very open to Sims' idea, but he's concerned that a surface alternative couldn't carry enough traffic.

"I've got to tell you, the governor has looked at it and doesn't like it at all. Neither do a lot of other people. How do you deal with that traffic if it's backed up on I-5?" he said.

The viaduct, built in 1953, carries 110,000 cars a day and is downtown Seattle's only major north-south alternative to already overloaded Interstate 5. The viaduct needs to be replaced because the 2001 Nisqually earthquake caused major cracks in the aging structure.

Holly Armstrong, a spokeswoman for Gov. Christine Gregoire, said she doesn't expect the governor's position to change. The surface option was studied "and proven not feasible," she said.

Sims contends the surface alternative is the only politically realistic option. The past few weeks have made that clear, he said. "There's far more discussion of it than we've ever had before," he said.

Senate Transportation Chairwoman Mary Margaret Haugen, D-Camano Island, and Senate Majority Leader Lisa Brown, D-Spokane, could not be reached for comment.

Seattle Deputy Mayor Tim Ceis said that although a surface option is the city's second choice, the city is still focused on replacing the viaduct with a tunnel. Voters need a chance to weigh in March 13, he said.

That's when Seattle residents will vote on the tunnel option and the elevated-highway proposal.

Ceis said the surface alternative could cost around $2 billion. "It's not free," he said. For example, he said, any viaduct-replacement plan must include a new seawall along the waterfront.

Talk of the surface option comes as the state Department of Transportation is studying the city's tunnel proposal and a new elevated-highway configuration.

The research is being done at Gregoire's request.

To make an "apples to apples" comparison, said David Dye, a state Department of Transportation administrator, the state is looking at a four-lane elevated structure with a wide shoulder for rush-hour traffic — similar to what the city is proposing for a four-lane tunnel.

Meanwhile, members of an expert review panel appointed by Gregoire are already getting a look at the state study. Earlier this week, panelists were told they could not review the tunnel plan until after the state study is completed next week.

Staff reporter Susan Gilmore contributed to this report.

Andrew Garber: 360-236-8268 or agarber@seattletimes.com