Cut/cover tunnel advantages:

-strongest seawall
-stabilized remaining fill soil
-lifesaving safety features with...
-FOUR access portals by retaining Battery St Tunnel
-SIX Lanes with shoulders along AWV stretch
-better emergency detour arrangement
-better overall traffic arrangement
-least traffic on Alaskan Way
-best utility relocation
-less maintenance
-more jobs
-less risk
-etc

When will Seattlers 'actually' begin the discussion of how and why the cut/cover tunnel is overwhelmingly better than the deep bore? Do Seattlers lack the sense to realize that a cut/cover is the only sensible tunnel option?

I have a better idea, let's argue about it and do nothing until the viaduct comes crashing down and kills hundreds of people. Continue pissing and moaning and making useless quibble for years. Please. It's the only real solution.

@2 I'm eager to see Gregoire tear down the viaduct in 2012 and watch traffic downtown slow to a snarl.

Then we can get rid of bidirectional street traffic and downtown parking. Problems solved all around.

If we get around to building a tunnel that doesn't bankrupt us, that's fine. I don't see it happening. The 520 bridge replacement will take priority.

Build, build, build. Get it done. No more analyzing, whining and debating. Spend billions. Invest in infrastructure. Now. Tax, borrow, have tolls. Spend. Who gives a shit?