Maybe they can name it the Boulevard of Broken Dreams. With voters decisively rejecting R-51, the gas tax initiative that earmarked $450 million to begin the replacement of the Alaskan Way Viaduct, politicians are finally getting realistic about Seattle's biggest transportation headache. With even a stripped-down tunnel option looking prohibitively expensive now, momentum appears to be building behind tearing down the existing elevated viaduct and replacing it with a surface boulevard.

In recent days, Seattle City Council Member Richard Conlin has all but abandoned a tunnel--which, before the election, had the support of both the mayor and the city council--in favor of the boulevard idea. Conlin, who sets the city council's agenda on transportation as committee chair, cited the environmental, aesthetic, and cost advantages of the latter option in his January 30 constituent newsletter. New York and San Francisco, both boasting waterfront roads, "took the bold step to reject aerial freeways and accept the challenge to liberate their waterfronts," he wrote.

The surface road idea has the support of Allied Arts, an organization that promotes improved urban design; last December, Mayor Nickels also said the boulevard concept merited further consideration.

A well-planned boulevard that increased access to the waterfront "from a design standpoint would be optimum," Conlin says, though he adds that he is "not ready" yet to fully endorse the concept. "I support serious consideration of the option," he says.

The big disadvantage of a boulevard is that it would be unable to handle as much traffic as the existing highway, which carries 110,000 vehicles to and from Seattle each day.

Still, replacing the viaduct with a surface road would have major cost advantages over the various tunnel options proposed prior to R-51's defeat. A ballpark cost estimate comes in at around $2 billion, "and that's with a lot of bells of whistles," Conlin says--including increased support for bus transit. By way of comparison, last year's full tunnel plan was estimated at a whopping $11.9 billion, and even the shortened version now under consideration is likely to cost $4 billion or more. The regional transportation package that will go before voters this fall is expected to set aside only about $1 billion for the viaduct fix.

sandeep@thestranger.com