DOCSLIB.ORG

Discipline Report Water Quality

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Discipline Report Water Quality Discipline Report Water Quality Prepared by: KPFF Consulting Engineers Shannon and Wilson, Inc. April 2005 Draft EIS Magnolia Bridge Replacement City of Seattle Contents Contents ......................................................................................................................... i Purpose and Need ........................................................................................................ 1 Purpose .................................................................................................... 1 Need.......................................................................................................... 1 Structural Deficiencies...........................................................................................1 System Linkage .....................................................................................................1 Traffic Capacity......................................................................................................4 Modal Interrelationships ........................................................................................4 Transportation Demand.........................................................................................4 Legislation .............................................................................................................5 Description of Alternatives .......................................................................................... 7 No-Build Alternative................................................................................ 7 Alternative A ............................................................................................ 8 Alternative C ............................................................................................ 8 Alternative D ............................................................................................ 8 Methods ....................................................................................................................... 17 Applicable Regulations and Policies................................................... 17 Federal ................................................................................................................17 State of Washington ............................................................................................17 City of Seattle ......................................................................................................18 Surface Water Methods......................................................................... 18 Groundwater Methods .......................................................................... 19 Affected Environment................................................................................................. 21 Historic Environment ............................................................................ 21 Existing Built Environment................................................................... 22 Topography .........................................................................................................22 Climate ................................................................................................................22 Drainage Basins and Watersheds .......................................................................22 Drainage Pathways .............................................................................................25 Surface Water Resources ...................................................................................30 Elliott Bay Water Quality......................................................................................30 Elliott Bay Sediment Quality ................................................................................33 Water Quality Discipline Report Contents Page i Magnolia Bridge Replacement Sediment Dynamics ............................................................................................35 Structural Nearshore Limiting Factors.................................................................35 Aquatic ESA Status.............................................................................................36 Public Water Supply and Wastewater Systems ..................................................36 Groundwater...........................................................................................36 Aquifer Systems ..................................................................................................37 Shallow Unconfined Aquifer System ...................................................................37 Upland Aquifer System........................................................................................38 Deep Artesian Aquifer System ............................................................................38 Groundwater Rights ............................................................................................39 Public Drinking Water Wells................................................................................39 Sole Source Aquifers...........................................................................................39 Wellhead Protection Areas..................................................................................39 Critical Aquifer Recharge Areas ..........................................................................39 Studies and Coordination ...........................................................................................41 Studies ....................................................................................................41 Data Sources ..........................................................................................41 Impacts.........................................................................................................................43 Surface Water Impacts...........................................................................43 Operational Impacts ............................................................................................43 No-Build Alternative.............................................................................................43 Alternatives A, C, and D......................................................................................43 Pollutant Loading Estimate..................................................................................44 Existing Outfall Capacity .....................................................................................45 Shoreline Impacts................................................................................................46 No-Build Alternative.............................................................................................47 Alternative A........................................................................................................47 Alternative C........................................................................................................47 Alternative D........................................................................................................47 Secondary and Cumulative Impacts....................................................................51 Groundwater...........................................................................................51 Operational Impacts ............................................................................................51 No-Build Alternative.............................................................................................51 Alternatives A, C, and D......................................................................................51 Secondary and Cumulative Impacts....................................................................51 Mitigation Measures ....................................................................................................53 Surface Water .........................................................................................53 Stormwater Management Requirements.............................................................53 Operational Mitigation .........................................................................................54 No-Build Alternative.............................................................................................54 Alternatives A, C and D.......................................................................................54 Shoreline Mitigation.............................................................................................55 Page ii Contents Water Quality Discipline Report Magnolia Bridge Replacement Alternative A ........................................................................................................55 Groundwater .......................................................................................... 55 Operational Mitigation..........................................................................................55 No-Build Alternative.............................................................................................55 Alternatives A, C and D .......................................................................................55 Construction Impacts ................................................................................................. 57 Surface Water ........................................................................................ 57 Impacts ................................................................................................................57 No-Build Alternative.............................................................................................57
Load more

Recommended publications
  • For Sale: $9,800,000 Elliott Ave W Development Site 901 & 921 Elliott Ave W, Seattle, Wa 98119
    FOR SALE: $9,800,000 ELLIOTT AVE W DEVELOPMENT SITE 901 & 921 ELLIOTT AVE W, SEATTLE, WA 98119 SEATTLE CBD ELLIOTT BAY ELLIOTT BAY TRAIL COMMUTE TO SEATTLE CBD VIA ELLIOTT AVE W APPROX. 7 MINUTES (2.4 MILES) W MERCER PL COMMUTE TO SEATTLE CENTER VIA W MERCER PLACE APPROX. 3 MINUTES (1 MILE) SUBJECT SITE: 901 & 921 ELLIOTT AVE W KINNEAR PARK ELLIOTT AVE W // VPD 55,000+ DAN FOSTER 1218 Third Avenue www.orioncp.com P // 206.445.7662 Suite 2200 P// 206.734.4100 [email protected] Seattle, WA 98101 Established in 2010 LAKE WASHINGTON STADIUM SURROUNDINGS CAPITOL HILL SEATTLE CBD 7 MINUTES ELLIOTT BAY SEATTLE CENTER LAKE UNION SOUTH LAKE 3 MINUTES UNION 6 MINUTES LOWER QUEEN TABLE OF ANNE SUBJECT SITE CONTENTS ELLIOTT AVE W QUEEN ANNE INTERBAY PROPOSED SMITH COVE STATION PAGE // INVESTMENT SUMMARY ......................................................................................................... 3 // SITE OVERVIEW ................................................................................................................................4 - ZONING INFORMATION ..................................................................................................................................................... 6 // MARKET OVERVIEW .................................................................................................................... 7 - LIGHT RAIL EXPANSION .................................................................................................................................................. 10 This information
    [Show full text]
  • Magnolia/ Interbay
    PEOPLE Chart Title RACE/ETHNICITY: American Indian + Alaska Native 0.5% Asian 6.2% Black or African American 2.7% Hispanic or Latino, any race 3.5% Native Hawaiian + Pacific Islander 0.1% Some other race 0.0% Two or more races 3.5% White 83.4% American Indian and Alaska Native Asian Black or African American Hispanic or Latino, any race Native Hawaiian andLANGUAGES: Other Pacific Islander Some Other Race For translation & interpretation Two or More Races White DON can help identify 26 recommended Total Languages languages. Spoken WHAT WE’RE HEARING MAGNOLIA/ Housing/Homelessness • Homelessness, encampments in public space INTERBAY NEIGHBORHOOD Transportation UPDATED 5/2018 NUMBERS • Future of Magnolia Bridge- continued planning efforts and overlap with ST3 Magnolia Citywide • Future light rail line and station • Freight balanced with new transportation investments Renter households % 40 53 Parks/Open Space People under 18 years of age % • Future of Fort Lawton 18.1 15 • Future of Smith Cove People age 65 and over % 12.7 11 • Encampments in parks Persons of color % Small Business/Economic Development 16.6 33 Language other than English • Expedia expansion % • Future of Magnolia Bridge and impacts on business community spoken at home 15.4 22 Other High school or higher % 97.7 93 • Growth in Seattle Public Schools, opportunity for new school siting % • Port Uplands redevelopment Bachelor’s degree or higher 66.9 57 Median household income $ 89,197 65, 277 Unemployed % 6.1 7 Population below poverty level 5 14 Source: 2009-2013 American Community
    [Show full text]
  • Puget Sound) and Hyas Chuck (Lake Washington), the Hills Along This Part of the Bay Sloped Steeply Into the Waters
    HISTORY: PARK 11/6/76 When the Duwamish tribe inhabited the land between the Whulge (Puget Sound) and Hyas Chuck (Lake Washington), the hills along this part of the bay sloped steeply into the waters. The flat strip along the waterfront, from Yesler Way to Smith Cove is the result of fills. European explorers renamed many geographic features. In 1791 Captain Vancouver Puget Sound to honor Lt. Peter Puget of his crew. The Wilkes Expedition of 1841 honored a crew member; Edward Me any claims it was the chaplian. Rev. J. L. Elliott, but in 1954 Howard Hanson found that Midshipman Samuel Elliott was honored with the name for Elliott Bay. Lake Washington was in 1854 by Thomas Mercer, The Denny Party landed at Alki Beach in November of 1851 to establish a permanent settle- ment. They had scarcely finished construction of four cabins when a passing brig stopped, looking for a cargo of timber piles which the settlers eagerly provided. But it was obvious that water off shore was for a harbor. So they changed the site of the settle- ment to the shore of Elliott Bay. In 1853 Henry Yesler arrived and the commercial development of the waterfront with the construction of a sawmill. At first, skid roads, wagons and boats were able to supply the demands of the vessels from San Francisco and other ports of call, but when coal was discovered in the 1860's a faster means of overland transport was needed - the railroad. Tracks were laid from the growing town to the south end of Lake Union and by 1374 went to Renton and the mines of New Castle.
    [Show full text]
  • Design Advisory Group Meeting 1
    Design Advisory Group Meeting #6 Seattle Yacht Club Outstation, March 5, 2003, 4-6 PM Summary Minutes – Final Agenda I. Welcome and Approval of February Meeting Summary II. What’s Happened Since Our Last Meeting? III. Monorail Update IV. Port of Seattle Master Plan Update V. Public and Closing Comments Attendees Design Advisory Group Project Team Fran Calhoun Lesley Bain, Weinstein Architects Dakota Chamberlain Sarah Brandt, EnviroIssues John Coney Richard Butler, Shapiro and Eric Fahlman Associates Grant Griffin Hadley Greene, EnviroIssues Bob Holmstrom Brad Hoff, EnviroIssues Lise Kenworthy Lee Holloway, HNTB Doug Lorentzen Kirk Jones, City of Seattle Jose Montaño Andrew Laski, KPFF Eric Schmidt Teresa Platt, City of Seattle Mike Smith Don Samdahl, Mirai Associates David Spiker Lamar Scott, KPFF Dan Bartlett (alternate) Peter Smith, HNTB Robert Foxworthy (alternate) Marybeth Turner, City of Seattle Janis Traven (alternate) Meeting Handouts Agenda Design Advisory Group #5 Summary Minutes – Draft Seattle Monorail Project Diagram of Interbay Area Seattle Department of Transportation 1 I. Welcome and Approval of February Meeting Summary Brad Hoff, EnviroIssues – Facilitator Brad welcomed the group and walked through the agenda and meeting materials. He then invited comments and corrections to the minutes from the fifth Design Advisory Group meeting (February 5, 2003). The meeting summary was approved with no further changes. Conclusion: With the February meeting summary approved, Brad invited Kirk Jones to provide an update on the previous month’s project developments. II. What’s Happened Since Our Last Meeting? Kirk Jones, SDOT Project Manager Kirk explained that the main events that have happened in the past month were community meetings for targeted neighborhoods in the project area.
    [Show full text]
  • West Seattle and Ballard Link Extensions Stakeholder Advisory Group Meeting 13 Summary
    West Seattle and Ballard Link Extensions Stakeholder Advisory Group Meeting #13 – March 21, 2019 Meeting Notes Agenda Item #1 – Welcome and introductions Diane Adams, Facilitator, welcomed Stakeholder Advisory Group (SAG) members to the group’s 13th meeting, noting this meeting was optional. She confirmed the agenda, provided a high-level review of the previous meeting’s summary and thanked SAG members for their participation in the process to- date. Diane stated that SAG members would not be asked to provide any recommendations during this meeting. Agency directors, project leads and staff in attendance included: Cathal Ridge, Central Corridor Director, Sound Transit Diane Adams, Facilitator Leda Chahim, Government & Community Relations Manager, Sound Transit Ron Endlich, Project Director, Sound Transit Sandra Fann, High Capacity Transit Development Manager, Sound Transit Sloan Dawson, Station Planning Lead, Sound Transit Carrie Avila-Mooney, Government & Community Relations Manager, Sound Transit Jeanne Krikawa, Station Planning Lead, The Underhill Company KaDeena Yerkan, External Engagement Lead, EnviroIssues SAG members in attendance were: Andres Arjona, Community Representative – Ballard Becky Asencio, Seattle Public Schools Brian King, Community Representative – West Seattle Deb Barker, Community Representative – West Seattle Erin Goodman, SODO Business Improvement Area Robert Cardona, Community Representative – Uptown Ron Sevart, Space Needle Savitha Reddy Pathi, Wing Luke Museum of the Asian Pacific American Experience
    [Show full text]
  • Discovery Park: a People’S Park in Magnolia
    Discovery Park: A People’s Park In Magnolia By Bob Kildall Memorial to US District Judge Donald S. Voorhees Authors Note: Before Don died he asked me to say a few words at his memorial service about Discovery Park. After his death July 7, 1989, Anne Voorhees asked me to help in a different capacity. This is the speech I wrote and later used at a Friends of Discovery Park memorial service and in a letter to the editor. Discovery Park is his park—that we all agree. He felt that Seattle would be known for this Park—like London is known for Hyde Park; Vancouver for Stanley Park; San Francisco for Golden Gate Park and New York for Central Park. It was a difficult task. The Department of Defense wanted an anti-ballistic missile base and the ABM headquarters for the entire West Coast located here. Native Americans claimed the property. We didn’t have enough money to buy the land and no federal law allowed excess property to be given for parks and recreation. A golf initiative proposed an 18-hole course. And Metro had its own plans for the Park’s beach. The missile base was moved. A treaty was signed. A federal law was passed. The golf initiative failed. And even Metro studied an off-site solution first suggested by Don. He named the park “Discovery” partly after Capt. George Vancouver’s ship. But even more “because when our children walk this park, discoveries will unfold for them at every turn.” History, beauty, nature and the future are melded here.
    [Show full text]
  • John Oppenheimer. Columbia's Growing Portfolio Includes Award
    OVERVIEW Columbia Hospitality, Inc. (Columbia) is a Seattle-based hospitality management and consulting company that was established in 1995 by founder and CEO John Oppenheimer. Columbia’s growing portfolio includes award- winning hotels, conference centers, public and private golf facilities, distinctive venues and residential properties. With over 20 years of proven success in management, Columbia creates exceptional experiences for guests and team members while achieving phenomenal results for property owners. Columbia has also consulted on over 200 hospitality projects worldwide. FOUNDED: 1995 CORPORATE HEADQUARTERS: Seattle, Washington KEY INDIVIDUALS • John Oppenheimer, CEO • Brian Flaherty, Executive Vice President • Yogi Hutsen, Executive Vice President • Jolene DiSalvo, Senior Vice President • Andy Olsen, Senior Vice President • Dave Williams, CFO • Peter LaFemina, CFO, Hotel Division • Matt Hagerman, Vice President • Chuck Hill, Vice President • Lenny Zilz, Vice President • Natalie Swistak, Vice President, People and Culture EXPERTISE • Hotel and Resort Management • Conference Center Management • Public and Private Golf Course Management • Residential Management • Asset Management • Consulting • Receiverships MANAGED PROPERTIES Hotels • The Baroness Hotel (Seattle, WA) • Best Western Heritage Inn (Bellingham, WA) • Cambria Hotel (Bremerton, WA) Opening Spring 2020 • Cedarbrook Lodge (Seattle, WA) • The FINCH (Walla Walla, WA) Opening Fall 2019 • Friday Harbor House on San Juan Island (Friday Harbor, WA) • The Heathman Hotel
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 13 -- Puget Sound, Washington
    514 Puget Sound, Washington Volume 7 WK50/2011 123° 122°30' 18428 SKAGIT BAY STRAIT OF JUAN DE FUCA S A R A T O 18423 G A D A M DUNGENESS BAY I P 18464 R A A L S T S Y A G Port Townsend I E N L E T 18443 SEQUIM BAY 18473 DISCOVERY BAY 48° 48° 18471 D Everett N U O S 18444 N O I S S E S S O P 18458 18446 Y 18477 A 18447 B B L O A B K A Seattle W E D W A S H I N ELLIOTT BAY G 18445 T O L Bremerton Port Orchard N A N 18450 A 18452 C 47° 47° 30' 18449 30' D O O E A H S 18476 T P 18474 A S S A G E T E L N 18453 I E S C COMMENCEMENT BAY A A C R R I N L E Shelton T Tacoma 18457 Puyallup BUDD INLET Olympia 47° 18456 47° General Index of Chart Coverage in Chapter 13 (see catalog for complete coverage) 123° 122°30' WK50/2011 Chapter 13 Puget Sound, Washington 515 Puget Sound, Washington (1) This chapter describes Puget Sound and its nu- (6) Other services offered by the Marine Exchange in- merous inlets, bays, and passages, and the waters of clude a daily newsletter about future marine traffic in Hood Canal, Lake Union, and Lake Washington. Also the Puget Sound area, communication services, and a discussed are the ports of Seattle, Tacoma, Everett, and variety of coordinative and statistical information.
    [Show full text]
  • HOW MAGNOLIA GOT ITS NAME O
    o HOW MAGNOLIA GOT ITS NAME o By Bob Kildall As legend has it, native madronas dotted the bluffs seafaring explorers observed as they passed this place we call Magnolia before it had a name. Supposedly an explorer mistook those trees for magnolias and Magnolia Bluff was born. The mistake is understandable. Both the magnolia and madrona trees are broadleaf evergreens. They are of comparable size, with large leathery leaves that are alike in shape and have a brown- to rust-colored undercoat. The tree canopies look similar as well, especially in the early stages of a madrona’s growth.1, 2 But who chose the name for our community—and when did this occur? Interestingly, the answers are uncertain and have been debated for many years. Aleua L. Frare mentioned several possibilities in her 1975 Magnolia history book: “The Magnolia area was first recognized when an early explorer of Puget Sound looked up at the high promontory emerging in the early morning fog, saw the huge madrona trees leaning down from the 300-ft. yellow cliffs, and made a black mark on his chart. Down in his dimly lit cabin he entered ‘Magnolia Bluff’ in his log. “Historians have had a field-day ever since guessing who had the bad eyesight. Some say [Capt. George] Vancouver, who named everything in sight. Others say Lt. Charles Wilkes, who named West Point and fifty other landmarks. And then there was Dr. George Davidson, a botanist with a United States Coast & Geodetic Survey team—badly in need of glasses.” 3 In Brandt Morgan’s 1979 book Enjoying Seattle’s Parks, Morgan attributed the mistake to Davidson: “Magnolia is actually a misnomer.
    [Show full text]
  • Regional Centers Profile
    Ballard-Interbay MIC Founded in 1869, the City of Seattle is the leading commercial, cultural 2010 Summary Statistics and advanced technology center of the U.S. Pacific Northwest, and a major port city for trans-Pacific and European trade. With a 2010 Land use Gross acreage 971 population of more than 608,000, the city is the region’s largest and Average block size (acres) 5.8 most diverse in terms of population, economic activity, and Average parcel size (acres) 1.2 transportation options. In addition to six designated regional growth Mix of uses centers, the city has two manufacturing/industrial centers: Ballard- Population/Employee ratio 1.3 : 10 Interbay and Duwamish. The MICs were established to ensure that Population Total population 1,846 adequate accessible industrial land is available to promote a diversified Change (2000–2010) 467 employment base and sustain Seattle’s contribution to regional high- Housing wage job growth. Total housing units 780 Change (2000—2010) 199 The Ballard-Interbay manufacturing/industrial center (BINMIC) is Employment located in the northwest part of the City of Seattle, and extends some Total employment 14,237 Change (2000–2010) - 398 3 miles from the northwest corner of downtown Seattle to Ballard. Transportation The industrially zoned BINMIC is a thriving urban industrial center with Employee access to transit 68% a diverse mix of businesses. The center spans from Elliott Bay to Work-based mode share Salmon Bay, and includes some of the city’s most productive working SOV / HOV 68% • 9% waterfront, wharfs, shipyards, and rail yards. Salmon Bay is home to Walk & Bike / Transit 7% • 16% Fisherman’s Terminal, one of the largest commercial fishing terminals in the northwest.
    [Show full text]
  • Seattle Glass Co
    Seattle Glass Co. Bill Lockhart, Beau Schriever, Bill Lindsey, and Carol Serr Although Toulouse posited an earlier Renton Glass Co., the Seattle Glass Co. was almost certainly the first glass house at Renton, Washington. The firm failed in 1907, but a new firm, the Renton Glass Co., acquired the plant in 1908 and continued producing glass. The Seattle Glass Co. was the probable user of an “SGCo” logo. Histories Two Seattle area glass factories had a currently undefined relationship to each other. One – initially the North West Glass Co. – was located at Interbay, a suburb of Seattle, at Smith’s Cove, a small section on the shore of Elliott Bay on Puget Sound. The other – the Seattle Glass Co. – was less than 20 miles southeast at Renton. The Interbay Glass Firms (ca. 1900-at least 1905) Northwest Glass Works, Interbay, Seattle, Washington (poss. 1900-1903) Around May 1898, the Northwest Glass Works incorporated with a capital of $60,000. By January 12, 1900, the firm was in the process of building its plant with a one-ton day tank. The April 21 issue of Commoner and Glassworker noted that “it is said the concern are at present making machine made jars, though they eventually expect to produce bottles.” A followup said the firm was to “to start blowing fruit jars on May 28th.” J.T. Pennypacker managed the plant (Paint, Oil & Drug Review 1898:26; Roller 1998). According to the June 21, 1900, issue of Ranch and Range, Daniel Murry was the manager, with Thomas Bowes as Secretary. Although the paper did not mention other officers, It noted that the plant would produce fruit jars “with a glass top that is fastened on by a wire clamp, making a perfect seal.” The 1901 Seattle City Directory listed the Northwest Glass Works at 46 Starr-Boyd Bldg., although that had to have been the address of the office.
    [Show full text]
  • Context Statement
    CONTEXT STATEMENT THE CENTRAL WATERFRONT PREPARED FOR: THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION PROGRAM DEPARTMENT OF NEIGHBORHOODS, CITY OF SEATTLE November 2006 THOMAS STREET HISTORY SERVICES 705 EAST THOMAS STREET, #204 SEATTLE, WA 98102 2 Central Waterfront and Environs - Historic Survey & Inventory - Context Statement - November 2006 –Update 1/2/07 THE CENTRAL WATERFRONT CONTEXT STATEMENT for THE 2006 SURVEY AND INVENTORY Central Waterfront Neighborhood Boundaries and Definitions For this study, the Central Waterfront neighborhood covers the waterfront from Battery Street to Columbia Street, and in the east-west direction, from the waterfront to the west side of First Avenue. In addition, it covers a northern area from Battery Street to Broad Street, and in the east- west direction, from Elliott Bay to the west side of Elliott Avenue. In contrast, in many studies, the Central Waterfront refers only to the actual waterfront, usually from around Clay Street to roughly Pier 48 and only extends to the east side of Alaskan Way. This study therefore includes the western edge of Belltown and the corresponding western edge of Downtown. Since it is already an historic district, the Pike Place Market Historic District was not specifically surveyed. Although Alaskan Way and the present shoreline were only built up beginning in the 1890s, the waterfront’s earliest inhabitants, the Native Americans, have long been familiar with this area, the original shoreline and its vicinity. Native Peoples There had been Duwamish encampments along or near Elliott Bay, long before the arrival of the Pioneers in the early 1850s. In fact, the name “Duwamish” is derived from that people’s original name for themselves, “duwAHBSH,” which means “inside people,” and referred to the protected location of their settlements inside the waters of Elliott Bay.1 The cultural traditions of the Duwamish and other coastal Salish tribes were based on reverence for the natural elements and on the change of seasons.
    [Show full text]