Tunnel option is dead, say state leaders

Gov. Christine Gregoire and state legislative leaders today declared that Seattle's tunnel proposal is dead.

The statements came in response to a state Department of Transportation letter that concluded Seattle's proposal for a four-lane Alaskan Way tunnel should be dropped from further consideration. The DOT letter, released this morning, said there are "serious operational and safety problems found during our technical review."

Gregoire, in a prepared statement said: "The DOT review has shown that the hybrid tunnel proposal does not meet state and federal safety standards. Furthermore, an accident where people could not escape this tunnel could prove catastrophic.

"To move forward with that option would simply be irresponsible," she said. "Today we need to move forward with the one option that meets safety standards and is fiscally responsible: the elevated structure."

Legislative leaders in the state House and Senate agreed.

Senate Majority Leader Lisa Brown, D-Spokane, said that even if Seattle voters overwhelming voted in favor of the city's tunnel proposal, she can't see the state abiding by their decision.

"It's hard to see how the state can proceed based on our own Department of Transportation saying this isn't safe and this doesn't meet our capacity needs. I don't see how we'd proceed with that, if there were a resounding vote in favor of that in Seattle," Brown said.

Brown said the only option on the table now, that's been fully vetted, is the proposal for an elevated highway. However, she said the idea of tearing down the viaduct and going with a surface option hasn't been ruled out. "I don't think the door has been completely closed," she said.

King County Executive Ron Sims has pushed the idea of tearing down the viaduct and improving surface streets and transit instead. House Speaker Frank Chopp, D-Seattle, has said he's open to that approach if the elevated highway doesn't move ahead.

A spokeswoman for Mayor Greg Nickels said the DOT's report today confirms the city's worries that the agency would skew its research to favor an elevated structure, and put a four-lane tunnel in the worst possible light.

"I think this clearly shows WSDOT's bias," said Marianne Bichsel. "So the voters need to decide whether they're going to allow Olympia to shove a bigger elevated structure onto Seattle's waterfront without their say. The voters of Seattle need to step up, and express their opinions on that."

Bichsel said Nickels would not make any comment today, and would wait until his regularly scheduled media briefing Wednesday morning.

In spite of the state report and legislative leaders' comments that any hope of a tunnel is gone, Bichsel said it is still important for voters to take part in the upcoming advisory election -- and vote for the tunnel.

In the all-mail election -- for which ballots must be postmarked by March 13 -- Seattle voters will be asked to vote "yes" or "no" on whether they prefer an elevated or a tunnel.

"If the state is to save face on the flawed process, they (state leaders) will give the voters a chance to express their opinions," Bichsel said. "I cannot imagine why legislative leaders or the governor would not pay attention to what the voters of Seattle say about their waterfront."

However, Seattle City Council President Nick Licata, who supports rebuilding the viaduct, said he has made a call to King County Elections to see how the city could cancel the March 13 election.

"I think it makes this election superfluous," Licata said. "How can we ask voters to vote for something we know is seen as worthless by state legislators."

He said he wants to see if the election could be stopped "because we'd be wasting $1 million. I think it's a wasted effort."

Jan Drago, chairwoman of the council's transportation committtee, said Licata won't get the support of enough council members to cancel the election.

Meanwhile, State Transportation Secretary Doug MacDonald said he was sympathetic to what the city is trying to do on the waterfront. "The goals are good goals."

But, he added, "We didn't trust the tunnel. It's limitations were revealed by our review."

Nickels has argued that a tunnel would open up the waterfront, and that his proposed four-lane tunnel could carry nearly as much traffic as the six-lane tunnel he and the state proposed earlier.

The four-lane version would use safety shoulders as exit lanes during rush hour. The concept was meant to save up to $1.2 billion compared to the six-lane, $4.6 billion tunnel.

Today's DOT letter, which summarizes a nine-day study, was meant to answer questions posed by Gov. Christine Gregoire and state lawmakers.

Without a place to pull over, safety would be hampered if disabled cars blocked the highway, the letter says, adding that emergency crews would take longer to arrive.

Seattle officials have said that a reduced, 35 mph speed limit would allow safe operation in heavy traffic, and that police and fire departments would work with the state on design features.

The state DOT was asked to also study whether the $3.4 billion cost estimate for the narrower tunnel was credible. Officials said today there was not enough time to do so. But David Dye, who helped lead the DOT review, said he believed the actual cost of the city's tunnel would likely fall between $3.4 billion and $4.6 billion.

The city has bitterly complained about being excluded from the state DOT studies conducted over the past several days -- while a panel of outside experts, which earlier said the narrower tunnel "shows promise," disbanded last week. Panel members said there was not enough time for them to give a meaningful opinion.

The existing Alaskan Way Viaduct, built in 1953, was damaged in the 2001 Nisqually Earthquake.

The response from legislative leaders today argued that an elevated highway is the only practical solution because it's the only proposal that has been vetted and shown to be safe and affordable.

Still, MacDonald said it's clear now, after issuing his report, that an option to just tear down the viaduct and replace it with a surface boulevard needs more study. "It's unlikely we're going to get to the end without being pressed harder on the surface," he said.

The problem, he said, is that a surface road would reduce capacity and governor has insisted that any viaduct replacement accommodate the same number of cars that now drive the viaduct.

MacDonald said he didn't know whether the DOT will be asked to do a further study on the surface plan. "The surface discussion is coming like a freight train," he said.

Cary Moon, co-founder of the group that is pushing the surface option, said the report, "brings the battle to a head."

Mike Lindblom: 206-515-5631or mlindblom@seattletimes.com