With the increasingly pitched “debate� between Seattle Mayor Greg Nickels and Washington Governor Christine Gregoire seeming to be narrowing down to a relatively base turf battle (see The Stranger's analysis, which shows Nickels willing to withhold permits while Gregoire has the ability to withhold funding), one can’t help but wonder whether anyone is using logic, as opposed to emotion, to select the “best� option for replacing the aging structure. Enter the Sightline Institute’s Clark Williams-Derry, who crunches the numbers and comes up with some pretty bold – and in many cases, simple – options of his own.

Williams-Derry begins his analysis with an evaluation of the cost of the viaduct, breaking the proposed cost of the rebuild option into cost-per-trip-per-day-per vehicle figures. His results are staggering: to retain the current weekday daily total of around 55,000 round trips on the viaduct, a viaduct rebuild will cost over $50,000 per round trip. The numbers are even more astounding when calculated to address peak round trips – the only trip, as Williams-Derry points out, wherein the viaduct is actually at capacity – an analysis which results in a per-trip cost of around $500,000.

Certainly, the tunnel would do little better, if not significantly worse, at preserving capacity. However, as environmentalists point out, preservation of capacity is not necessarily a goal to be striven for in these times of climate change, pollution, and smog. Rather, many suggest, other options should perhaps be considered. Herein lies what may be the real value of Williams-Derrys’ article: his list of options. Numbering nine strong, they include things like improving street transit and the street grid, closing the viaduct in steps (to give people a period of acclimation), tolling I-5, and even implementing a congestion tax, as has already proven effective in London and Stockholm , among other places.

Williams-Derry makes arguably his most powerful point as a seeming aside: that “the no-build is the only reversible decision.� With just over two weeks to the public balloting on the viaduct, some political leaders, such as King County Executive Ron Sims and Seattle Councilman Peter Steinbrueck (who, on 28 February 2007,
announced his intent to quit politics and fight for the street option full-time), as well as many local environmental groups (including the Sierra Club ) are now prompting a re-assessment of the no-build option; meanwhile voters look at ballots asking them to choose between the tunnel and the viaduct.