A Seattle-based nonprofit has proposed using a subway system to help solve traffic on the Eastside and the greater Seattle area.

Seattle Subway has created preliminary outline of a subway system that would run from Seattle to downtown Kirkland and then to Redmond and Bellevue.

The plans were published in late September by Sound Transit as part of its Long Range Plan Supplemental EIS study. They will be studying the plans until December, when they decide whether to put this to the voters. The corridor, if built would create a direct route to major medical and educational centers such as the University of Washington and EvergreenHealth hospital, as well as the Microsoft campus in Redmond.

Some of the important details, however, are still vague, including the overall cost of the project, should the legislature allow Sound Transit to put it on a ballot measure for voter approval.

Jonathan Hopkins, the political director for Seattle Subway, said the subway would either cross Lake Washington via bridge or go underground. Where exactly it would go through downtown will also be left for engineers to decide.

“There’s some different options,” Hopkins said. “We’re kind of agnostic to that … ultimately our effort is to get Sound Transit to consider it. For Kirkland residents it would mean a much quicker trip.”

The subway would leave Sand Point Crossing and go through downtown Kirkland, though Hopkins said it would remain underground through the city. The only part of it visible would be exits and entrances to the stations.

For Kirkland residents, Hopkins said, a subway would enable students to reach the University of Washington in seven to eight minutes during rush hour, rather than having to drive or take the bus across the 520 floating bridge. It would also reduce the number of vehicles on the road, particularly in downtown Kirkland, Hopkins said.

“You want people to be able to live there (Kirkland), and if they work elsewhere, they need to be able to get there,” he said. “If people can’t get there easily, business may choose another city. But if they can, it’s really good for jobs, quality of life, it gives us alternatives. We can only make roads so wide.”

For subway proponents, the corridor is seen as a solution to the growing traffic problem on the Eastside, a problem Hopkins believes will only get worse as the cities themselves experience further growth.

“We just have this rolling transportation emergency,” he said. “It’s kind of outstripping our ability to deal with it on roadways. For every year we wait, it gets more and more difficult. If we wait too long our traffic will be so bad [businesses] won’t want to come here because it’s too expensive. If we want the next Amazon, would they choose the Puget Sound 10 years from now if we don’t have transportation solutions, or would they?”

Kirkland City Manager Kurt Triplett is less optimistic about the proposal, citing downtown Kirkland’s close vicinity to the waterfront and the costs of construction, as well as Seattle’s current mechanical issues with Bertha, the drill carving out the underground portion of the new State Route 99 along the Seattle waterfront.

“If Sound Transit is willing to include something like this, they will look at some of our transportation proposals, which are more realistic than this,” he said. “We are always interested in ideas that will link Kirkland to the region. This one, it strikes me as being extraordinarily expensive and extraordinarily difficult to build.”

Triplett said the city would prefer a corridor link from the Totem Lake neighborhood, which currently has a park and ride, down to Bellevue.

“We obviously want to understand the potential impact to Kirkland,” he said. “If the concept is underground, everybody loves it. But those again are extraordinarily expensive and difficult to achieve. But clearly a link down 85th Avenue from Redmond to Bellevue across to Seattle would be a great thing.”

He also suggested water taxis across Lake Washington as a more practical and financially viable option, as they would involve far less infrastructure, take less time to put into use, and demand less taxpayer dollars.