When the planning for the Interstate 5 replacement bridge first got started, the problem of enough height for river traffic vs. too tall for airport traffic was in the forefront. What happened?
Then when designs were presented, complaints were heard about how the various designs looked or if they would dwarf downtown and block views of the river. Sounds to me that the solution to all of these problems goes back to the tunnel option. Unlimited height for river traffic. No interference with aircraft at either airport. The view of the river would be unobstructed by a new bridge, and the city wouldn’t be overshadowed by a giant structure. All there would be left to fight about is how to pay for it and whether to include light rail.
Don’t think of light rail as something that you will never use and don’t want to pay for. Think of it as every person who chooses to use it is one less driver on the road who is in your way, causing a traffic jam or accident, and doesn’t know how to drive anyway.