DOCSLIB.ORG

Green Shorelines

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Green Shorelines shorelinesGREEN Bulkhead alternatives for a healthier Lake Washington Design and Photo: Darwin Webb 2 Landscape Architects 3 Lake Washington embodies the best of Western Washington: clean water, bountiful recreational opportunities, striking mountain views, and access to thriving cities. These qualities have inspired thousands of people to make their homes on the shores of the lake, transforming a forested waterfront to a residential one over the past 100 years. This change has led to a variety of problems, including loss of important wildlife habitat and some of the area’s natural charm, but lakefront homeowners are fi nding new ways to protect the lake. Contents This guidebook is about alternatives to the use of bulk- heads and other shoreline armoring. Hard engineering is GREEN SHORELINES Introduction 4 currently the standard approach for erosion control around the lake, but it has several negative impacts on nearshore Bulkhead alternatives for a habitats as well as the fi sh and wildlife that depend on healthier Lake Washington Green Shoreline Practices them. More sustainable practices, referred to in this Full Beaches 6 guidebook as green shorelines, use plants, beaches, and note Beach Coves 8 other natural materials to protect private property and the Setting Back Bulkheads 10 environment. Log installation 12 Shoreline Plantings Vegetated Buffers 12 Green shorelines provide three types Slope Bioengineering 14 of benefi ts for homeowners: Plant List 18 1 they substantially improve habitat for Chinook salmon While homeowners often fi nd green shorelines attrac- and other wildlife while maintaining shoreline stability; tive, many have concerns about effectiveness, reliability, Selecting the Right Approach 20 building and maintenance costs, the permitting process, 2 they allow improved water access for homeowners and and the potential loss of lawn. This guidebook specifi cally Building Better Docks 22 guests, making swimming and shoreline enjoyment addresses these and other concerns by assembling technical easier; information from a wide range of sources and providing Estimated Costs and Maintenance 24 local examples. 3 they offer a softer, more natural aesthetic that can Choosing a Shoreline Professional 26 enhance views by adding variety and seasonal interest. Although the guidebook was written by the City of Seattle, the principles described here can be applied to homes Getting Permits 28 all around Lake Washington. Additionally, most of the information provided here is relevant to Lake Sammamish. Technical advice in these pages is offered as guidance; Resources 32 it is not building code. In the case of any discrepancies, defer to local, state, and federal regulations for shoreline Contacts 33 development. Glossary 34 Green shorelines are attractive, reliable, and sustainable. The idea of having your own beach is a Acknowledgements 35 major motivator for many people to buy waterfront property – why give up your beach for a bulkhead? GREEN SHORELINES: BULKHEAD ALTERNATIVES FOR A HEALTHIER LAKE WASHINGTON INTRODUCTION Design and Photo: Ecco Design Inc. The following sections explain and illustrate how these 4 approaches work, where they might be used, and what they 5 look like. Although described separately, keep in mind that in most cases, these strategies are typically used in combi- nation with one another. While the concepts outlined here will give you a broader understanding of the options for Bulkheads and docks have altered or eliminated much of improving your shoreline, it is advisable for you to seek the shallow-water habitat around the lake. A 2001 study professional assistance to get your project designed and found that 70% of Lake Washington’s shoreline was built. Suggestions for selecting designers and contractors armored with concrete, riprap, sheetpile, or another type are provided in the section titled “Choosing a Shoreline of bulkhead. By refl ecting wave energy back into the lake, Professional.” these structures tend to wash away nearshore sediment, note causing deeper water over time. Lawns have replaced much When this guidebook uses the term “restoration,” it does of the diverse vegetation that provided cover for young not mean returning Lake Washington to its pre-development fi sh. While many factors are contributing to the decline of condition. Rather, it refers to restoring specifi c ecological Puget Sound’s endangered Chinook salmon populations, processes. The shorelines shown in this publication look dif- loss of rearing and refuge habitat is among the most seri- ferent than they did 150 years ago, but they still can protect ous problems. fi sh, wildlife, and water quality in many of the same ways. Bulkheads also can compromise homeowners’ access to Together with design and construction advice, this guide- the water and negatively affect views. Entering the water book also provides suggestions to help you get through from a bulkhead can be awkward or even dangerous; your permitting process more quickly. Because Lake shoreline armoring accelerates nearshore erosion, deepen- Washington is home to multiple species on the Endangered ing the water and making wading diffi cult. Further, the Species list, lakeshore construction has to be approved by widespread use of shoreline armoring is bad for waterfront local, state, and federal agencies. While specifi cs vary, the aesthetics—while homeowners typically prefer greener, growing trend across regulatory agencies is to encourage natural-looking lakeshores, armoring creates a more heavily projects that improve shoreline habitat quality through developed look along the shoreline. requirements, incentives, and streamlined permitting. Fol- lowing the principles in this guidebook can help you avoid Introduction Attractive alternatives unnecessary permitting hurdles (see “Getting Permits”). The good news is that people are fi nding new strategies Photos of restored shorelines throughout the guidebook for protecting their property while also protecting and help demonstrate specifi c green shoreline techniques, and restoring habitat. Instead of concrete and sheetpile, these they also display the aesthetic benefi ts of natural beaches The water’s edge Problems with “business as usual” practices use a combination of plantings, gravel, stone, and plantings. Further, they provide samples of the diverse logs, and slope modifi cation to protect against shoreline shoreline restoration projects that already exist around People love to live in places where water and land meet. Unfortunately, some of the natural elements that attract erosion. Lake Washington. Shorelines provide work and recreation opportunities, mild people to waterfront properties are often casualties of climates, and tranquil views. Rapid growth in the commu- development. Trees, shrubs, and wildfl owers are cleared to The ideal is to set structures back far enough to preserve nities around Lake Washington and Lake Sammamish is a make way for houses, lawns, and open views. Bulkheads the natural shoreline and vegetation. However, given that clear demonstration of our desire to live near water. built to control bank erosion displace beaches and cause the majority of Lake Washington is already developed, this erosion below the water line. Removal of vegetation along guidebook focuses on positive steps that can be taken to People are not the only ones drawn to shorelines, however. the shore allows contaminants to fl ow directly into the reduce the impact of existing waterfront homes. Whether Due to the diverse resources and habitats that occur along lake. As beaches and vegetation are replaced by lawn and your site can accommodate a full beach restoration or only lakeshores, they tend to be biologically rich and productive concrete, prime wildlife habitat disappears, taking with it incremental improvements, a wide range of options is places. Again, Lake Washington is no exception—numer- birds, benefi cial insects, and fi sh. available, including: ous plant, bird, fi sh, mammal, and insect species call the lake’s shorelines home. Residential development on Lake Washington has taken a Full beaches particularly heavy toll on Chinook salmon. These iconic Beach coves fi sh of the Pacifi c Northwest hatch in the Cedar River, Setting back bulkheads Issaquah Creek, and Bear Creek. Many rear in the lake for Log installation several months. Once they become smolts, Chinook swim Vegetated buffers through Lake Washington and Seattle’s Ship Canal to reach Slope bioengineering the ocean. As they migrate through the lake, juveniles fol- low the shoreline, staying close to the shallow-water areas that help them to escape from predators and safely forage for food. GREEN SHORELINES: BULKHEAD ALTERNATIVES FOR A HEALTHIER LAKE WASHINGTON GREEN SHORELINE PRACTICES: FULL BEACHES Design: The Watershed Company Slopes of 7:1 or less are ideal for Planting Design: The Berger Partnership restored beaches, although slopes 6 up to 4:1 can be stable. 7 7' 7:1 slope 4' Plants create habitat & visual interest while framing views 4:1 slope 1' 1' If structural Sand play area, reinforcement is separated from required, place as far gravel beach back as possible Beach slope is a critical component of a successful restora- Rocks and fi ll meet tion project. A well-designed slope provides resistance to neighbor's bulkhead erosion, reducing the need for maintenance. Slopes of 7:1 or fl atter are ideal (seven horizontal feet for each vertical foot), Former bulkhead but slopes up to 4:1 can be stable in some circumstances. Sloping beach Rocks separate New beaches should
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Armoring the Coast: the Effects of Bulkheads on Salt Marsh Habitats
    Armoring the Coast: The Effects of Bulkheads on Salt Marsh Habitats Presented by the Carolina Environmental Program Morehead City Field Site Students: Joseph Hester, Alison Kitto, Elizabeth Newland, Erika Poarch, Ashley Smyth and Zachary Williams Under the direction of Institute of Marine Sciences faculty members: Rachel T. Noble Michael F. Piehler Charles “Pete” Peterson Capstone Project: Carolina Environmental Program, Morehead City Field Site University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill Fall 2006 Acknowledgements This project was successful due to the combined efforts of many people. We would like to thank Rachel Noble for her words of wisdom and encouragement through the tough spots. Without Mike Piehler, this project would not have been successful. Mike was always available to answer questions and provide guidance. We thank Charles “Pete” Peterson, for just being Pete. Thanks to Reagan Converse for help in organizing this project and sorting through aerial photographs. Denene Blackwood is deserving of an extra special recognition. Her help in the field, on the boat, in the lab, and with questions was the reason this project was successful. Thanks to Suzanne Thompson for help with laboratory analysis. We would also like to thank everyone at UNC-IMS for their support and help throughout the semester. ii Abstract Shoreline hardening structures, such as bulkheads, are becoming an increasingly popular method of mitigating shoreline erosion. However, few studies have examined the ecological impacts of such structures. Salt marshes are highly productive ecosystems that act as a medium of exchange between marine and terrestrial environments. Bulkheads are thought to disrupt the natural processes associated with salt marshes.
    [Show full text]
  • Analysis of Existing Data on Lake Union/Ship Canal
    Water Quality Assessment and Monitoring Study: Analysis of Existing Data on Lake Union/Ship Canal October 2017 Alternative Formats Available Water Quality Assessment and Monitoring Study: Analysis of Existing Data on Lake Union/Ship Canal Prepared for: King County Department of Natural Resources and Parks Wastewater Treatment Division Submitted by: Timothy Clark, Wendy Eash-Loucks, and Dean Wilson King County Water and Land Resources Division Department of Natural Resources and Parks Water Quality Assessment and Monitoring Study: Analysis of Existing Data on Lake Union/Ship Canal Acknowledgements The authors would like to thank for following people for their contributions to this report: Staff at the King County Environmental Laboratory for field and analytical support. Dawn Duddleson (King County) for her help in completing the literature review. The King County Water Quality and Quantity Group for their insights, especially Sally Abella for her thorough and thoughtful review. Lauran Warner, Frederick Goetz, and Kent Easthouse of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Judy Pickar (project manager), Dean Wilson (science lead), and King County project team members (Bob Bernhard, Mark Buscher, Timothy Clark, Betsy Cooper, Wendy Eash‐Loucks, Elizabeth Gaskill, Martin Grassley, Erica Jacobs, Susan Kaufman‐Una, Lester, Deborah, Kate Macneale, Chris Magan, Bruce Nairn, Sarah Ogier, Erika Peterson, John Phillips, Cathie Scott, Jim Simmonds, Jeff Stern, Dave White, Mary Wohleb, and Olivia Wright). The project’s Science and Technical Review Team members—Virgil Adderley, Mike Brett, Jay Davis, Ken Schiff, and John Stark—for guidance and review of this report. Citation King County. 2017. Water Quality Assessment and Monitoring Study: Analysis of Existing Data on Lake Union/Ship Canal.
    [Show full text]
  • Coast Salish Culture – 70 Min
    Lesson 2: The Big Picture: Coast Salish Culture – 70 min. Short Description: By analyzing and comparing maps and photographs from the Renton History Museum’s collection and other sources, students will gain a better understanding of Coast Salish daily life through mini lessons. These activities will include information on both life during the time of first contact with White explorers and settlers and current cultural traditions. Supported Standards: ● 3rd Grade Social Studies ○ 3.1.1 Understands and applies how maps and globes are used to display the regions of North America in the past and present. ○ 3.2.2 Understands the cultural universals of place, time, family life, economics, communication, arts, recreation, food, clothing, shelter, transportation, government, and education. ○ 4.2.2 Understands how contributions made by various cultural groups have shaped the history of the community and the world. Learning Objectives -- Students will be able to: ● Inspect maps to understand where Native Americans lived at the time of contact in Washington State. ● Describe elements of traditional daily life of Coast Salish peoples; including food, shelter, and transportation. ● Categorize similarities and differences between Coast Salish pre-contact culture and modern Coast Salish culture. Time: 70 min. Materials: ● Laminated and bound set of Photo Set 2 Warm-Up 15 min.: Ask students to get out a piece of paper and fold it into thirds. 5 min.: In the top third, ask them to write: What do you already know about Native Americans (from the artifacts you looked at in the last lesson)? Give them 5 min to brainstorm. 5 min.: In the middle, ask them to write: What do you still want to know? Give them 5min to brainstorm answers to this.
    [Show full text]
  • 7 Lake Union & Ship Canal 34-43.P65
    Seattle’s Aquatic Environments: Lake Union/Lake Washington Ship Canal System Lake Union/Lake Washington Ship Canal System The following write-up relies heavily on the Lake Union/Lake Washington Ship Canal Subarea Chapter by Douglas Houck (with substantial contributions by Deb Lester and Scott Brewer) of the Draft Reconnaissance Assessment – Habitat Factors that Contribute to the Decline of Salmonids by the Greater Lake Washington Technical Committee (2001). Overview Lake Union and the Lake Washington Ship Canal Washington to Puget Sound. are located in the city of Seattle and combine to In 1916, the 8.6 mile long Lake Washington Ship serve as the primary outlet of Lake Washington Canal was completed, which included the construc- into Puget Sound. In 1916, drainage from Lake tion of the Montlake Cut, the Fremont Cut, and Washington into the Black River was blocked and the Chittenden Locks. The new Ship Canal the Ship Canal and Hiram M. Chittenden Locks provided navigable passage for commercial vessels, were constructed to allow navigable passage barges, and recreational boaters between Lake between Puget Sound, Lake Union, and Lake Washington and Puget Sound. Washington and provide better flushing in Lake Washington. In a 1943 report published by the Washington State Pollution Commission, 45 industries were listed The Lake Union/Lake Washington Ship Canal adjoining Lake Union (Tomlinson 1977). Along system is comprised of the Montlake Cut, Portage with the marinas, houseboats, and commercial Bay, Lake Union, the Fremont Cut, and the Salmon Bay Waterway. The Montlake Cut is an approximately 100-foot wide channel with con- crete bulkheads extending along the length of the channel.
    [Show full text]
  • Lake Washington Ship Canal and Lake Washington NOAA Chart 18447
    BookletChart™ Lake Washington Ship Canal and Lake Washington NOAA Chart 18447 A reduced-scale NOAA nautical chart for small boaters When possible, use the full-size NOAA chart for navigation. Included Area Published by the Magnolia Bluff and Duwamish Head, has a width of about 2 miles and extends SE for nearly the same distance. The bay is deep throughout National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration most of its area. National Ocean Service A speed limit of 4 knots is enforced within the guide piers of the Hiram Office of Coast Survey M. Chittenden Locks. A speed limit of 7 knots is enforced elsewhere in the Lake Washington Ship Canal, except in an area marked by four www.NauticalCharts.NOAA.gov private buoys in the N part of Lake Union. 888-990-NOAA The Hiram M. Chittenden Locks, a double lock, and a fixed dam are at the narrows of the entrance to Salmon Bay, 1.2 miles in from the sound. What are Nautical Charts? The large lock, a two-chamber structure, has a clear length of 760 feet, width of 80 feet, lift of 26 feet, and depth over the lower miter sill of 29 Nautical charts are a fundamental tool of marine navigation. They show feet. The small lock has a clear length of 123 feet, width of 28 feet, lift of water depths, obstructions, buoys, other aids to navigation, and much 26 feet, and depth over the lower sill of 16 feet. Passage time is less more. The information is shown in a way that promotes safe and than 30 minutes for large vessels and 5 to 10 minutes for small vessels.
    [Show full text]
  • Indigenous People and the Transformation of Seattle's
    05-C3737 1/19/06 11:43 AM Page 89 City of the Changers: Indigenous People and the Transformation of Seattle’s Watersheds COLL THRUSH The author is a member of the history department at the University of British Columbia. Between the 1880s and the 1930s indigenous people continued to eke out traditional livings along the waterways and shorelines of Seattle’s urbanizing and industrializing landscape. During those same years, however, the city’s civic leaders and urban plan- ners oversaw massive transformations of that landscape, including the creation of a ship canal linking Puget Sound with Lake Washington and the straightening of the Duwamish River. These transformations typified the modernizing ethos that sought to improve nature to ameliorate or even end social conflict. The struggle of the Duwamish and other local indigenous people to survive urban change, as well as the efforts by residents of nearby Indian reservations to maintain connections to places within the city, illustrate the complex, ironic legacies of Seattle’s environmental his- tory. They also show the ways in which urban and Native history are linked through both material and discursive practices. Seattle was a bad place to build a city. Steep sand slopes crumbled atop slippery clay; a river wound through its wide, marshy estuary and bled out onto expansive tidal flats; kettle lakes and cranberried peat bogs recalled the retreat of the great ice sheets; unpredictable creeks plunged into deep ravines—all among seven (or, depending on whom you ask, nine or fifteen) hills sandwiched between the vast, deep waters of Puget Sound and of Lake Wash- ington.
    [Show full text]
  • Landslide Study
    Department of Planning and Development Seattle Landslide Study TABLE OF CONTENTS VOLUME 1. GEOTECHNICAL REPORT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PREFACE 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Purpose 1.2 Scope of Services 1.3 Report Organization 1.4 Authorization 1.5 Limitations PART 1. LANDSLIDE INVENTORY AND ANALYSES 2.0 GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS 2.1 Topography 2.2 Stratigraphy 2.2.1 Tertiary Bedrock 2.2.2 Pre-Vashon Deposits 2.2.3 Vashon Glacial Deposits 2.2.4 Holocene Deposits 2.3 Groundwater and Wet Weather 3.0 METHODOLOGY 3.1 Data Sources 3.2 Data Description 3.2.1 Landslide Identification 3.2.2 Landslide Characteristics 3.2.3 Stratigraphy (Geology) 3.2.4 Landslide Trigger Mechanisms 3.2.5 Roads and Public Utility Impact 3.2.6 Damage and Repair (Mitigation) 3.3 Data Processing 4.0 LANDSLIDES 4.1 Landslide Types 4.1.1 High Bluff Peeloff 4.1.2 Groundwater Blowout 4.1.3 Deep-Seated Landslides 4.1.4 Shallow Colluvial (Skin Slide) 4.2 Timing of Landslides 4.3 Landslide Areas 4.4 Causes of Landslides 4.5 Potential Slide and Steep Slope Areas PART 2. GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATIONS 5.0 PURPOSE AND SCOPE 5.1 Purpose of Geotechnical Evaluations 5.2 Scope of Geotechnical Evaluations 6.0 TYPICAL IMPROVEMENTS RELATED TO LANDSLIDE TYPE 6.1 Geologic Conditions that Contribute to Landsliding and Instability 6.2 Typical Approaches to Improve Stability 6.3 High Bluff Peeloff Landslides 6.4 Groundwater Blowout Landslides 6.5 Deep-Seated Landslides 6.6 Shallow Colluvial Landslides 7.0 DETAILS REGARDING IMPROVEMENTS 7.1 Surface Water Improvements 7.1.1 Tightlines 7.1.2 Surface Water Systems - Maintenance
    [Show full text]
  • Seattle Design Commission Project Overview and Update
    SR 520 Montlake to Lake Washington I/C | July 18, 2019 Seattle Design Commission Project Overview and Update SR 520 Montlake to Lake Washington I/C Presentation Overview PART 1: • Team Introduction • Background/Purpose • Update: Pedestrian Land Bridge and Approach Areas • Comments/ Discussion BREAK PART 2: • Montlake Lid to 24th Avenue E • Comments/ Discussion FOLLOW UP/SUMMARY • Proposed Timeline for SDC Formal Review • Next SR 520 Montlake to Lake Washington I/C SR 520 Montlake to Lake Washington Project Overview • WSDOT / City of Seattle – Community Engagement (2012 – 2018) – City Departments and SDC engagement with RFP – Section 106 Concurring Parties • RFP – Design Build – Process – Graham Awarded Design/Build Contract – December 2018 • Status – Implementation Design In Progress – Task Force Meetings – Construction start – Sequencing SR 520 Montlake to Lake Washington I/C Building the “Rest of the West” in Seattle Note: project dates are estimated and subject to change SR 520 Montlake to Lake Washington I/C Team Introduction SR 520 Montlake to Lake Washington I/C SR 520 Montlake to Lake Washington Schedule SR 520 Montlake to Lake Washington I/C Background/Purpose Seattle Design Commission Engagement • SDC 2010 - 2018 • SDC Design/Build Review #1 – February 21, 2019 – Contract Overview and Comparisons of Design – Prescriptive Requirements: Materials and Elements • SDC Design/Build Review #2 – July 18, 2019 – Design/Build Overview – Pedestrian Land Bridge Update – Lid and Neighborhood Open Space • SDC Design/Build Review #3 – Fall,
    [Show full text]
  • Self-Taught Education Unit Coastal Shoreline Defense Structures by Thomas Barnard
    Self-Taught Education Unit Coastal Shoreline Defense Structures By Thomas Barnard Objectives The purpose of this self-taught education unit is to acquaint the reader with the various types of shoreline defense structures which are employed in the Chesapeake Bay region and the U.S. in general. There are more erosion control measures than those explained here but these are the most generally used and accepted within the marine community. Each structure will be defined and its use along the shoreline will be described. General design and location considerations will be discussed as well as the general definitions and terminology neces- sary for each type of structure. Following completion of this study unit, the reader will be generally acquainted with: 1. Shoreline erosion and its causes; 2. The types of structures most often employed to address shoreline erosion; 3. General design considerations for each shoreline structure; 4. Specific definitions and terminology for each structure. Introduction At the present time the Chesapeake Bay and most areas of the east and gulf coasts are experiencing varying degrees of relative sea level rise. This is defined as the net change in water elevation due to the combined influence of local land movement (subsidence) and the absolute change in water level. The primary result of sea level rise is shoreline retreat (erosion) along with other secondary shoreline changes. Chesapeake Bay sea level rise is approximately one foot per century at present. There is some evidence that sea level rise is accelerating due to global climate change. This factor has not been completely documented however, primarily due to the difficulty involved with modelling weather and climate features on a global scale and determining long term trends in the absence of adequate data.
    [Show full text]
  • Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Project
    Channel Islands National Park National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Project Final Environmental Impact Statement February 2010 Channel Islands National Park 1901 Spinnaker Drive Ventura, California 93001 This entire publication is available in PDF format at: http://www.nps.gov/chis/parkmgmt/planning.htm Front cover photo: Mouth of Cañada del Puerto creek, Prisoners Harbor, Channel Islands National Park (Power, 2006) Citation: National Park Service. 2010. Prisoners Harbor Coastal Wetland Restoration Plan. Channel Islands National Park, Ventura, CA. PRISONERS HARBOR COASTAL WETLAND RESTORATION PLAN FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT Channel Islands National Park Santa Cruz Island, Santa Barbara County, California February, 2010 ABSTRACT This Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) was prepared in accordance with the Department of Interior National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), the National Park Service NEPA guidelines (DO-12), and the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). This document has been prepared because actions proposed as part of this Final EIS may be a major federal action significantly affecting the quality of the human environment. The National Park Service (NPS) proposes to restore a functional, self-sustaining ecosystem at a coastal wetland site known as Prisoners Harbor and a 40-acre associated stream corridor in the lower Cañada del Puerto Creek on Santa Cruz Island. The project seeks to: (1) recreate a more natural topography and hydrology by reconnecting the Cañada del Puerto stream with its floodplain and removing non-native eucalyptus trees and other vegetation which have proliferated in the lower drainage; (2) increase biological diversity and productivity by removing fill and restoring the historic wetland; (3) provide an enhanced visitor experience by installing viewing benches and additional interpretive displays; and (4) protect significant cultural and historic resources.
    [Show full text]
  • Synthesis of Salmon Research and Monitoring: Investigations
    Synthesis of Salmon Research and Monitoring 1 Acknowledgements Contributors The following persons contributed to the production of this report: Mike Cooksey Peter N. Johnson Paul DeVries Michele Koehler Charles J. Ebel Lynne Melder Frederick A. Goetz Jim Muck Julie Hall Eva Weaver Funding Sources of Lake Washington General Investigation study funding and personnel: • U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Seattle District • Seattle Public Utilities • King Conservation District • King County/Metro • National Marine Fisheries Service • Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Participants The following persons and organizations participated substantively in the research projects that contributed to this report: • U.S. Army Corps of Engineers: Linda Smith, Chuck Ebel, Fred Goetz, Lynne Melder, Rebecca Jahns, Marian Valentine, Amy Reese, Jeff Dillon, David VanRijn, Bill Nagy, Larry Lawrence, Jim Sadler, John Post, Bill Livermore, and most of the other Hiram M. Chittenden Locks staff • Seattle Public Utilities: Melinda Jones, Jean White, Keith Kurko, Julie Hall, Gail Arnold, Bruce Bachen, Alan Chinn, Rand Little • U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service: Roger Tabor, Mark Celedonia, Howard Gearns, Charles McCoy, Sergio Camacho, and other USFWS staff • King County: Doug Houck, Hans Berge, Francis Sweeney, Gary Yoshida, • Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife: Dave Seiler (retired), Lindsey Fleischer, Chris Waldbillig, Mark Carr, Mike Mizell, Hwa Kim, Clayton Kinsel, Pete Topping, Kelly Kiyohara, Issaquah Creek Hatchery Staff • National Marine Fisheries
    [Show full text]
  • Course Catalog (2021-22)
    LakeSchool Washington Name High SchoolLevel 2021-20222012-2013 Course Catalog CONTENTS Lake Washington High School 2021-22 course catalog Contents/Introduction to LW 2 Principal – Christina Thomas Associate Principal – Aric Koomia Counseling/Academic Information 3 Associate Principal – Melissa Super-Greene Courses by Department 4 Associate Principal – Tim Shultz Academic Policies 6 LW is a school with a history of excellence. Choosing the right courses that align to your future is an important step in achieving your goals. We encourage you to think deeply about your choices and if neces- Lake Washington H.S. Courses sary plot out a multi-year plan. We continually revise our course options to meet student interest. This year there are many new and Career & Technical Education 7 exciting courses. Courses are run based on student interest so not all English 16 courses in the catalog will have enough interest to be on the actual schedule. Please take the time to read the course descriptions and Fine Arts 20 requirements to select the courses that are appropriate. There are Health/Fitness 26 few options for changing after your selections have been made; so choose wisely. Mathematics 28 Lake Washington High School will provide a safe, equitable educa- Science 33 tional environment for racial minority groups, to address race and Social Studies 38 eliminate institutional racism, to reduce the racial achievement gap World Languages 41 Lake Washington High School Additional Course Choices 43 Christina Thomas - Principal 12033 N.E. 80th Street Kirkland, WA 98033 General District Information 425-936-1700 lwhs.lwsd.org District Graduation Requirements A1 Advanced Placement (AP) A2 Lake Washington School District Career & Technical Education (CTE) A2 Superintendent Dr.
    [Show full text]