Representatives from Ballard on the Alaskan Way Viaduct Stakeholders Advisory Committee accused downtown interests of controlling the decision process, pushing for a tunnel despite its drawbacks.

A joint letter endorsing an elevated replacement to a surface option or a tunnel was written by Warren Aakervik, president of Ballard Oil; Mary Hurley, owner of Best Regards, a stationery store on Market Street; and Gene Hoglund, a representative from the group Working Families for an Elevated Solution.

An elevated scenario would "maintain existing viaduct freight and vehicle capacity, create the least economic disruption to business and maritime jobs, and preserve north-south mobility," it read.

The letter was sent to Governor Chris Gregoire on Dec. 23, with copies to the Mayor, the County Executive, and members of the project's oversight committee.

An elevated hybrid scenario was one of the two hybrid scenarios chosen by the city, county and state departments of transportation for further study to replace the central waterfront section of the Alaskan Way Viaduct.

The second hybrid proposed a surface street couplet - three lanes southbound on Alaskan Way, three more northbound on Western Avenue - coupled with major improvements to city streets, transit and the interstate.

The departments of transportation did not recommend further study of a bored tunnel, with costs estimated to be too much more than the $2.8 billion committed by the state.

Almost every other member of the stakeholders advisory committee plus the Port of Seattle, the Downtown Seattle Association and the Greater Seattle Chamber of Commerce, supported further study of a tunnel.

Aakervik, Hurley and Hoglund are a few who disagree.

"The majority of Seattle citizens support a solution that promotes mobility while relieving congestion and unnecessary expense," their letter read. "Unfortunately, the Seattle downtown groups are attempting to control the process of determining the outcome of the viaduct replacement."

They accused the Downtown Seattle Association of "ignoring the voters of Seattle, for increased (waterfront) property values."

Voters turned down a surface-tunnel replacement for the viaduct by 70 percent in March 2007.

"The position of the downtown groups against an elevated replacement is not representative of the voice of Seattle," they wrote.

The three believe a "tunnel lobby" is pushing for a bored tunnel without "properly vetting the total cost, cost overruns, safety and environmental issues."

They are concerned about increased pollution on the waterfront from vehicles idling at lights and from tunnel portals venting automobile emissions into the South Lake Union and the Pioneer Square neighborhoods.

They said a surface-transit option is also not feasible. The viaduct carries one-quarter of the traffic moving through Seattle. Maritime businesses move freight around the city core using the viaduct to keep trucks off surface streets. Since a tunnel would not connect Ballard and Interbay to Sodo, trucks would face 23 lights traveling south on a surface Alaskan Way.

Not to mention, they wrote, 800,000 passengers from cruise ships docking at the new terminal at T-91 in Magnolia trying to get to Sea-Tac Airport.

"The viaduct is more than a road; it is a regional artery," they wrote. "Without it, Seattle industry will become isolated and risk undue hardship and expense."

Mahlon Clements, with Hurley, represented the Ballard-Fremont area on the viaduct advisory committee. His name did not appear on the letter.

Matthew G. Miller is a freelance writer living in West Seattle. He can be contacted through bnteditor@robinsonnews.com.