DOCSLIB.ORG

Stephens Creek Stormwater System Plan

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Stephens Creek Stormwater System Plan BUREAU OF ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES • CITY OF PORTLAND Stephens Creek Stormwater System Plan n January 2013 Dan Saltzman, Commissioner Dean Marriott, Director DAN SALTZMAN, COMMISSIONER • DEAN MARRIOTT, DIRECTOR January 2013 RE: Stephens Creek Stormwater System Plan Dear Readers, The Bureau of Environmental Services is pleased to publish the Stephens Creek Stormwater System Plan. It is the result of a multi‐year pilot to analyze and put forth recommendations to improve both stormwater infrastructure and watershed health conditions in the Stephens Creek watershed. We are excited to report that the exercise was successful and that the lessons learned will inform the citywide approach to stormwater system planning. While Portland emphasizes managing stormwater at the source, Stephens Creek and conditions in southwest Portland challenge this approach. A system perspective is necessary to characterize overall condition and performance in order to tailor stormwater improvements and requirements to meet system needs. This approach will apply to other parts of the city where different challenges exist, and it will inform the next Stormwater Management Manual update. Understanding that the health and growth of our community depends on infrastructure, our charge is to find ways stormwater infrastructure can serve multiple functions and benefits. Infrastructure that filters, collects, conveys, and discharges stormwater is a visible part of our community, and its appearance contributes to the character of an area. Rather than burying stormwater and sending the problems downstream, we benefit by exposing it to air and plants, allowing it to recharge groundwater, and create spaces that support parks, transportation and other community needs. Broad and complex interests have a stake in the stormwater system. This is reflected in the wide array of professionals who made this plan possible, as well as the number of partners needed to implement the recommendations. It is ultimately shaped by decisions regarding how we best use and maintain our land. A long‐term commitment to coordination and collaboration are keys to success, with public agencies and private property owners working side by side. Building on a rich and successful history, the Stephens Creek Stormwater System Plan is one step in an exciting journey. Looking forward, I invite you to stay involved and help define the next generation of innovative, cost‐effective solutions. If you have questions or need more information, please call me at 503‐823‐0050 or email me at [email protected]. Sincerely, Dawn Uchiyama, Landscape Architect Stormwater System Program Manager This page intentionally left blank. Stephens Creek Stormwater System Plan FINAL REPORT JANUARY 2013 Dan Saltzman, Commissioner Dean Marriott, Director Stephens Creek Stormwater System Plan Table of Contents Section Page Acronyms and Abbreviations ..........................................................................................................v Key Terms and Definitions .............................................................................................................vi Acknowledgments..........................................................................................................................viii Executive Summary............................................................................................................................ 1 1 Introduction.........................................................................................................................1-1 1.1 Purpose of Plan.......................................................................................................1-1 1.2 Project Context........................................................................................................1-1 1.2.1 System Planning ........................................................................................1-2 1.2.2 Watershed Planning..................................................................................1-2 1.3 Project Overview ....................................................................................................1-3 1.3.1 Levels of Service ........................................................................................1-4 1.3.2 Scope of Work............................................................................................1-6 1.3.3 Team Structure and Decision Making....................................................1-7 2 Stephens Creek Watershed Characterization................................................................2-1 2.1 Overview .................................................................................................................2-1 2.1.1 Study Area Definition...............................................................................2-1 2.1.2 Land Use.....................................................................................................2-1 2.1.3 Topography................................................................................................2-1 2.1.4 Geology and Soils......................................................................................2-3 2.1.5 Groundwater..............................................................................................2-3 2.1.6 Infrastructure .............................................................................................2-5 2.2 Characterization Results........................................................................................2-5 2.2.1 Hydrology and Hydraulics......................................................................2-5 2.2.2 Water Quality...........................................................................................2-11 2.2.3 Stream Condition, Habitat and Biological Communities ..................2-13 2.3 Conclusions ...........................................................................................................2-16 3 Alternatives Development and Evaluation ...................................................................3-1 3.1 Overview .................................................................................................................3-1 3.2 Alternatives Development ....................................................................................3-2 3.2.1 Alternative 1—Lower Baseline................................................................3-5 3.2.2 Alternative 2—Enhanced Confluence and Maintain Current Infrastructure Standards ..........................................................................3-5 3.2.3 Alternative 3—Enhanced Connectivity and Implement New Infrastructure Standards ..........................................................................3-6 3.2.4 Alternative 4—Upper Baseline/Maximum Impact..............................3-6 3.3 Alternative Evaluation Process ............................................................................3-7 3.3.1 Multi-Attribute Utility Analysis Approach...........................................3-7 3.3.2 Cost Estimating..........................................................................................3-9 3.4 Alternative Evaluation Results...........................................................................3-10 i Stephens Creek Stormwater System Plan 3.4.1 Refinement Principles.............................................................................3-13 3.4.2 Adjusted Results......................................................................................3-14 3.5 Preferred Alternative ...........................................................................................3-15 3.5.1 Included Projects .....................................................................................3-15 3.5.2 Operating Recommendations................................................................3-22 4 Recommended Plan ...........................................................................................................4-1 4.1 Foundations of the Recommended Plan .............................................................4-1 4.1.1 Conveyance System Improvement Approach ......................................4-1 4.1.2 Neighborhood Facilities ...........................................................................4-2 4.1.3 Natural System Improvement Approach ..............................................4-3 4.1.4 Building Partnerships ...............................................................................4-3 4.1.5 Phased Implementation Approach.........................................................4-4 4.2 Phase 1 Capital Improvements.............................................................................4-6 4.2.1 Stephens Creek Tributaries Outfall Repair............................................4-8 4.2.2 Headwaters Detention and Pollution Reduction Facilities .................4-8 4.2.3 Right-of-Way Retrofit Shell......................................................................4-9 4.3 Phase 2 Capital Improvements...........................................................................4-13 4.3.1 ODOT Shared Detention and Pollution Reduction Facilities............4-13 4.3.2 Stephens Creek Tributaries Habitat Restoration ................................4-15 4.3.3 Private Property Partnership Shell .......................................................4-15 4.4 Phase 3 Capital Improvements...........................................................................4-17 4.4.1 Headwaters Stream Enhancement and Daylighting..........................4-17
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Portland's Delineated Stream Desert
    The City of Portland Bureau of Environmental Services collects water quality and habitat data by subwatershed in Stream Burial: Patterns and Impacts multiple capacities. The data represented below was collected in monthly grab samples between 2008 and 2016. Upstream samples were taken from open channels in environmental protection or conservation areas. Downstream samples were taken from pipes, culverts, or outfalls. For each stream in the study, the downstream reaches are considered to be heavily “For more than two hours yesterday Johnson and Tanner Creeks were turned from their beds, and poured their yellow torrents altered by development. The figures below indicate average upstream and downstream values and the difference between through paved streets, filling cellars of some of the fine residents along the foot of the hill, tearing deep ruts in gutter drains, them. Stream burial is a common pattern of urban development that originated in the late 1800s with early overturning wooden sidewalks, and temporarily impeding street traffic in many places. So great was the volume of water that people Tanner Creek is piped from its headwaters in a conservation zone to its confluence at milepost 11 in the Willamette River. urbanization. Over the last 150 years, stream channels across urban areas have been altered, buried, and generally thought that the costly sewers that were built to swallow up the troublesome creeks, had burst, and preparations were in Tanner Creek runs in pipes directly under Portland’s urban core and has cultural importance as one of the city’s most diverted, creating riverless urban centers called urban stream deserts (Napieralski et al., 2015).
    [Show full text]
  • Fanno Creek Greenway Action Plan Section I
    FANNO CREEK GREENWAY TRAIL ACTION PLAN January 2003 Prepared for: Metro Regional Parks and Greenspaces Department Prepared by: Alta Planning + Design METRO COUNCIL FANNO CREEK GREENWAY TRAIL ACTION PLAN WORKING GROUP MEMBERS David Bragdon, President Rex Burkholder Commissioner Dick Schouten, Washington County Carl Hostica Joanne Rice, Washington County Land Use and Transportation Susan McLain Aisha Willits, Washington County Land Use and Transportation Rod Monroe Anna Zirker, Tualatin Hills Park and Recreation District Brian Newman Margaret Middleton, City of Beaverton Transportation Rod Park Roel Lundquist, City of Durham Administrator Duane Roberts, City of Tigard Community Development METRO AUDITOR Justin Patterson, City of Tualatin Parks Jim Sjulin, Portland Parks and Recreation Alexis Dow, CPA Gregg Everhart, Portland Parks and Recreation Courtney Duke, Portland Transportation METRO REGIONAL PARKS AND GREENSPACES DEPARTMENT Don Baack, SWTrails Group of Southwest Neighborhoods, Inc. Bob Bothman, 40-Mile Loop Land Trust Jim Desmond, Director Dave Drescher, Fans of Fanno Creek Heather Kent, Planning and Education Division Manager Sue Abbott, National Park Service Rivers and Trails Program Heather Kent, Metro Planning and Education Division ALTA PLANNING + DESIGN William Eadie, Metro Open Spaces Acquisition Division Bill Barber, Metro Planning George Hudson, Principal Arif Khan, Senior Planner Daniel Lerch, Assistant Planner PROJECT MANAGER Mel Huie, Metro Regional Parks and Greenspaces Department For more information or copies of this report, contact: Mel Huie, Regional Trails Coordinator (503) 797-1731, [email protected] Metro Regional Services Alta Planning + Design 600 NE Grand Ave. 144 NE 28th Ave. Portland, OR 97232 Portland, OR 97232 (503) 797-1700 (503) 230-9862 www.metro-region.org www.altaplanning.com FANNO CREEK GREENWAY TRAIL ACTION PLAN Contents I.
    [Show full text]
  • Abundance and Distribution of Fish Species in City of Portland Streams
    ABUNDANCE AND DISTRIBUTION OF FISH SPECIES IN CITY OF PORTLAND STREAMS COMPLETION REPORT 2009 Project Period: 1 March 2008 to 30 June 2009 Prepared by: Erick S. Van Dyke Adam J. Storch Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife Ocean Salmon and Columbia River Program Clackamas, OR Prepared for: City of Portland Bureau of Environmental Services Portland, OR 97204-1912 IGA Number 020-8038 December 2009 TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT........................................................................................................................................ i INTRODUCTION ..............................................................................................................................1 STUDY AREA ...................................................................................................................................2 METHODS .........................................................................................................................................5 Seasonal Fish Assemblage and Abundance...............................................................................6 Fish Presence in Summer Habitat Units ....................................................................................8 Index of Biotic Integrity.............................................................................................................9 RESULTS .........................................................................................................................................10 Seasonal Fish Assemblage and Abundance.............................................................................10
    [Show full text]
  • Natural Areas Restoration Plan October 2010
    Natural Areas Restoration Plan October 2010 Update: March 2015 Natural Areas Restoration Plan Update March 18, 2015 Portland Parks & Recreation (PP&R) completed the first system wide Natural Areas Restoration Plan (plan) in October 2010. The plan was completed as a requirement for Salmon Safe certification. It established restoration goals and strategies, management priorities and implementation actions. It is currently used to set restoration priorities (staff effort and funding) for natural areas. The plan stated that there would be a review and update every 3-5 years. The 2014 update modified the functional methodology and revised the weighting to remove the emphasis on salmonids and their habitat needs. The 2014 Natural Area Management Priority Matrix changes are based on the updated natural resource function methodology and ecological health determined by the best professional judgment of the ecologist managing the site. The goals, strategies and implementation actions remain the same. This updates also includes the natural area properties purchased since 2010. Methodology Update The methodology update evaluated additional functions and created a new weighting system. The original plan weighted functions associated with salmon habitat the highest while this update does not. Some of the updated functions were assigned weighted scores on a scale of 3 (high) to 1 (low) similar to the scoring used in the 2010 plan. A natural area was also given points for Terrestrial Ecology Enhancement Strategy (TEES) special status habitats and City of Portland At-Risk Species. The functions included are: (see attached memo for details): Streams: Perennial, non-perennial and within 100 feet of the natural area.
    [Show full text]
  • Authorizing the County Chair to Execute an Intergovernmental Agreement with Tri-Met and the City of Lake Oswego for the Sellwood Bridge Project
    BEFORE THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS FOR MULTNOMAH COUNTY, OREGON RESOLUTION NO. 2012-197 Authorizing the County Chair to Execute an Intergovernmental Agreement with Tri-Met and the City of Lake Oswego for the Sellwood Bridge Project. The Multnomah County Board of Commissioners Finds: a) The Willamette Shore Consortium, comprised of the City of Portland, Metro, the City of Lake Oswego ("COLO"), Clackamas County, the Oregon Department of Transportation, and the Tri-County Metropolitan Transportation District of Oregon ("TriMet") (the "Consortium"), is the current owner of the rail right-of-way known as the Willamette Shore Trolley Line (the "Right-of-Way") in the vicinity of the Sellwood Bridge Project (the "Project"). The Consortium holds the Right-of-Way for the purpose of preserving it for public rail mass transit use. b) The Consortium has designated TriMet as its Right-of-Way Agent, with responsibility for negotiating and executing real property agreements relating to the Right-of-Way and working with local jurisdictions concerning public improvement projects that may impact the Right-of-Way. The Consortium has designated· COLO as the party responsible for operation and maintenance of the Right-of-Way as called for in the work programs and budgets adopted by the Consortium. c) As part of the Project, the County has done or will do the following work within the Right-of• Way: removed the Staff Jennings Trestle and plans to replace it with trackage on fill, will utilize a portion of the Right-of-Way as a haul road, will construct a multi-purpose access (the "MPA"), is placing landslide stabilization shafts and anchors, is constructing a temporary detour bridge utilizing air space, replace the existing Sellwood Bridge structure connecting to the interchange with Highway 43, will replace the existing culverts at Stephens Creek with a concrete arch culvert, and has removed trees and vegetation and excavated to accommodate construction and improvements, then will replant the disturbed areas with all native trees and vegetation.
    [Show full text]
  • SW Corridor Plan
    GREAT PLACES SW Corridor Plan Steering committee recommendation | Attachment A Roadway, active transportation, parks, trails and natural resources projects map book and project lists July 22, 2013 Map tiles 2 Roadway and active transportation list 9 Parks, trails and natural resources list 12 Maps are included for location purposes only. 2 Roadway, Active Transportation, and Green Projects – Section 1 E BURNSIDE ST D R E SW WASHINGTON ST ID S R N W BU YON R SW ALDER ST AN D C W S SW JE D FFER V S L ON S SW COLUMBIAT ST B R SW BROADWAY J G N I K R SW MADISON ST E H SW CLAY ST T SW 13TH AVE U SW MARKET ST L N E SW 12TH AVE I V T A R A A M T S Central City PSU E I S V W S R D R O B E Y R E V A V W A A K H H P D W T R 4 O S 3 T I W E A S S SEGRAND AVE 6022 N W S 3093 6022 REY SW PH B HUM L V 6022 D 6022 6022 PDX-17 SW 6TH AVE S W BR 2028 OADWAY DR SW ARTHUR ST PDX-1 PDX-203 SW T 4002 E 2007 D R R W N I O L T T L I A G P 3094 2025 W E S R B L 1044 V 3038 D SW BARBUR BLVD PDX-19 1013 2999 2069 OHSU SOWA 5013 D R OHSU K 2012 C U T PDX-15 T A H S W S Hamilton PDX-10 Bicycle Commercial/ ! !k Fish Projects Urban Growth 1,000500 0 1,000 Industrial ( Essential ! Bike/Ped ") Natural Resource Boundary ! AT Trail Park/ Employment ( Priority Feet ^_ Parks ! Natural Resource Key Type ! Pedestrian Mixed Use Opportunity #* Places ( ! Auto/ Freight Stormwater Categories Higher Intensity Projects Projects by ´ #0 Neighborhood SW Corridor July 15, 2013 ! Multimodal Trails Development Residential ( Roadway, Active Transportation, and Green Projects – Section
    [Show full text]
  • Initial Public Health Assessment
    __________________________________________________________ PUBLIC HEALTH ASSESSMENT Initial Release _________________________________________________ Portland Harbor Portland, Multnomah County, Oregon EPA Facility ID: OR0001297969 January 15, 2002 U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry Division of Health Assessment and Consultation Superfund Site Assessment Branch Atlanta, Georgia 30333 Table of Contents Purpose and Health Issues....................................................................................................................1 Background ...........................................................................................................................................2 Site Description ........................................................................................................................2 History.......................................................................................................................................2 Demographics...........................................................................................................................5 Land and Natural Resource Use..............................................................................................5 Land Use.......................................................................................................................5 Fish and Shellfish.........................................................................................................5 Discussion
    [Show full text]
  • Patterns and Impacts of Urban Stream Burial and the Potential for Stream Daylighting in Portland, Oregon
    Portland State University PDXScholar University Honors Theses University Honors College 5-5-2017 Patterns and Impacts of Urban Stream Burial and the Potential for Stream Daylighting in Portland, Oregon Ella Weil Portland State University Follow this and additional works at: https://pdxscholar.library.pdx.edu/honorstheses Let us know how access to this document benefits ou.y Recommended Citation Weil, Ella, "Patterns and Impacts of Urban Stream Burial and the Potential for Stream Daylighting in Portland, Oregon" (2017). University Honors Theses. Paper 375. https://doi.org/10.15760/honors.373 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access. It has been accepted for inclusion in University Honors Theses by an authorized administrator of PDXScholar. Please contact us if we can make this document more accessible: [email protected]. Patterns and Impacts of urban stream burial and the potential for stream daylighting in Portland, Oregon by Ella Weil An undergraduate honors thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Bachelor of Science in University Honors and Geography Thesis Adviser Heejun Chang Portland State University 2017 “For more than two hours yesterday Johnson and Tanner Creeks were turned from their beds, and poured their yellow torrents through paved streets, filling cellars of some of the fine residents along the foot of the hill, tearing deep ruts in gutter drains, overturning wooden sidewalks, and temporarily impeding street traffic in many places. So great was the volume of water that people generally thought that the costly sewers that were built to swallow up the troublesome creeks, had burst, and preparations were in progress for a general exodus, when the flood suddenly receded.” – The Oregonian, January 13, 1895.
    [Show full text]
  • Portland Area Watershed Monitoring and Assessment Program Executive Summary–First Year Data 1
    BUREAU OF ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES • CITY OF PORTLAND YEAR Portland Area Watershed Monitoring and Assessment Program Executive Summary–First Year Data 1 Nick Fish, Commissioner Michael Jordan, Director OCTOBER 2015 EXECUTIVE Portland Area Watershed Monitoring and Assessment Program SUMMARY FIRST YEAR DATA (FY 2010-2011) PAWMAP gathers and The Portland Area Watershed Monitoring and Assessment Program analyzes data from these Portland-area watersheds: (PAWMAP) redesigned the city’s watershed monitoring to more • Columbia Slough directly support the 2005 Portland Watershed Management Plan. • Fanno Creek The program: • Johnson Creek • Coordinates and integrates watershed monitoring across all watersheds, to make results comparable. • Tryon Creek • Collects all watershed measures at the same locations to support more • Tualatin River powerful analysis of patterns in the data. • Willamette River • Uses a strong statistical design that increases the accuracy and efficiency of tributaries only data collection. • Adopts an approach designed by national monitoring experts, providing information that is directly comparable to state and federal monitoring efforts. • Supports regulatory compliance requirements under the Clean Water Act and the Endangered Species Act. Portland watersheds are very diverse, including steep Forest Park streams, moderate-gradient streams like Tryon and Johnson creeks, and low-gradient waterbodies like the Columbia Slough and Columbia and Willamette Rivers. Stream sizes range from small seasonal streams to the fourth largest river in the country. Land cover ranges from the heavily forested Forest Park and Tryon Creek State Natural Area to the highly industrialized Portland Harbor. PAWMAP samples the habitat, water quality and biological communities of Portland’s watersheds1. This document summarizes the results of the first year data sampling in each watershed.
    [Show full text]
  • Lower Columbia River Estuary Partnership : Jphoto Report on the Estuary
    ander Maten 2010 udy V Lower Columbia River Estuary Partnership : JPhoto Report on the Estuary Investing for Results What’s Inside: ur 2010 Report on the Estuary for threatened and endangered what is in the system, contaminant is a five-year assessment of salmonids. EPA, USGS and NOAA sources, and impacts on wildlife and Oour progress to improve the completed several one-time studies human health to direct actions to overall health of the lower Columbia that improve our understanding of reduce contamination. Investment in River. It gives us the opportunity contaminants. EPA designated the habitat restoration needs to include to take a broad look at the state of Columbia Basin a Great Water Body. In all aspects of projects and link to the river so we can focus future February, Congressman Blumenauer toxics reduction. Water Quality investments where they can be and Senator Merkley introduced the Pollutant Level Trends . 2 most effective. Columbia River Restoration Act of We need to acknowledge that results Land Use come slowly; earth systems measure 2010 to formally raise the stature of Land Cover Trends . 6 We track five measures: pollutant the Columbia to that of the Chesapeake time in thousands of years, not a levels, land cover trends, citizen Bay and other great water bodies. human lifetime and certainly not Stewardship engagement, habitat restoration and two or four year cycles. Results may Education Program Trends . 8 Citizen Volunteering Trends . .9 endangered species. The Estuary There have been challenges. come from one or two large actions; Partnership is involved with all Investment in the Columbia lags far more likely it will be the accumulation Reference these efforts, sometimes supporting behind other major water bodies of many actions.
    [Show full text]
  • Download PDF File Proposed Draft V5 Appendices
    ENVIRONMENTAL OVERLAY ZONE MAP CORRECTION PROJECT VOLUME 5: Appendices PROPOSED DRAFT June 2020 Bureau of Planning and Sustainability Innovation. Collaboration. Practical Solutions. City of Portland, Oregon How to Testify You may submit comments to the Portland Planning and Sustainability Commission on the Proposed Draft Environmental Overlay Zone Map Correction Project in the following ways: Use the Map App: Go to www.portlandmaps.com/bps/mapapp Click on “Ezone Project” and then click the “Testify” button. By U.S. Mail Planning and Sustainability Commission Ezone Map Correction Project Testimony 1900 SW 4th Avenue, Suite 7100 Portland, Oregon 97201 In person at the public hearings The hearing, on July 28, 2020 will be held virtually. The meeting starts at 4 p.m. Please check the PSC calendar at https://beta.portland.gov/bps/psc a week in advance to confirm the time of this agenda item. You can use a computer, mobile device or telephone to testify during the hearing. To testify during the hearing, please visit the project website to register: www.portland.gov/bps/ezones .You will receive a confirmation email containing information about joining the virtual hearing. The deadline to sign up for the July 28 PSC hearing is Monday, July 27 at 4:00 p.m. Individuals have two minutes to testify, unless otherwise stated by the Commission Chair at the meeting. Acknowledgements This plan is the culmination of two years of work across the City of Portland. Many thanks to the thousands of stakeholders, property owners, renters, business owners and interested people who attended dozens of neighborhood and community meetings and invited staff to their homes and businesses to perform site visits.
    [Show full text]
  • Willamette River Natural Resources Inventory 20
    Recommended Draft NOVEMBER 2009 b i a R i v e r C o l u m Keellley Point Park B y b s & e d e n l u m b W a C o i h e t l a t S i l o m u S e g h d Rivergate W Chimnimimnmney Park Pier Park i l University of l Portland a m e t t e St Johnshhnnss BNSF R Railroad i Briddge 5.1 v Cathedral l e Park e r n St Johnns n Avenue a Briddge FronttA A h t C Harborton S Helens Road - US Sauvie Island Hwy 30 Brididge y 30 Lininnton Doane Wilbridge St Helens Roadd- - US Hw Lake Volume 3a: Natural Resources Inventory: Riparian Corridors and Wildlife Habitat Willamette River Natural Resource Inventory: Riparian Corridors and Wildlife Habitat Willamette River Natural Resource Inventory Report: Riparian Corridors and Wildlife Habitat Acknowledgements Contributors City Council Adolfson Associates, Inc. Sam Adams, Mayor and Commissioner in Charge Nick Fish Bureau of Development Services Amanda Fritz Kate Green Randy Leonard Kathy Harnden Dan Saltzman Kim Miller Erik Sten (until April 2008) Bureau of Environmental Services Planning Commission Lynn Barlow Don Hanson, President Andi Gresch Amy Cortese Vice President Paul Ketcham Michelle Rudd, Vice President Katelin Lovell André Baugh Chris Prescott Lai-Lani Ovalles Josh Robben Howard Shapiro Ry Thompson Jill Sherman Naomi Tsurumi Irma Valdez Bureau of Planning Bureau of Planning Shannon Buono Susan Anderson, Director Gil Kelley, Director (through December 2008) Sallie Edmunds Eric Engstrom, Principal Planner Diane Hale Brian Campbell, Interim Principal Planner Matt Lustig Arianne Sperry Bureau of Planning Project
    [Show full text]