In light of recent articles published about the viaduct controversy, I find it disappointing that the media or public officials have not thought "out-of-the-box" (or rather off the waterfront) to present alternative routes for SR-99. It is clear that the number one concern of the public is that they will lose a major route through the city for up to 10 years, resulting in unprecedented traffic congestion.

Knowing this, why have our government officials not seriously investigated other options for building a new route through the city while the current SR-99 is in use?

I personally know of people who have sold their homes to move to the other side of the city near their workplace in anticipation of a total collapse of Seattle's traffic infrastructure.

In 1903, a mile-long double-track railroad tunnel was hand dug under the city to relieve traffic congestion along Alaskan Way. With the new tunnel boring technology employed on the Sound Transit light rail tunnel under Beacon Hill, it would be potentially feasible. to build a tunnel under the city rather than along the waterfront. Many other cities around the globe are using tunnel-boring machines to efficiently build tunnel systems with up to three lanes in each direction.

SeattleTUBE.org is a proponent of boring a tunnel form the north end of the existing Battery Street Tunnel to the east of Quest Stadium on South 6th Avenue where it would connect to the First Avenue South Bridge via a partially elevated roadway. This alternative approach would not cripple Seattle traffic during construction. However, it would provide the opportunity to build a world-class waterfront without an obtrusive expressway and it would give Seattle a better SR-99 with no steep hills, dangerous curves, or narrow constrictions. An alternative route may end up costing taxpayers less money as it would provide an option for Seattle to sell some high-value waterfront property to offset construction costs.

The SeattleTUBE concept probably just one idea of many that has been kicked around behind the scenes. It just seems that taxpayers are being lead down a path that nobody wants. Seattle cannot do without a non-stop I-5 alternative for moving cars and trucks through the city.

Seattle has a chance to build a world-class waterfront. But more importantly, Seattle has an opportunity to improve its traffic infrastructure without negatively affecting the existing commute situation.

David Petrich

Editor

PugetSoundMagazine.com