DOCSLIB.ORG

Snohomish River Confluence Reach Analysis

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Snohomish River Confluence Reach Analysis Snohomish River Confluence Reach Analysis Phase 1 Feasibility Study Final Report Snohomish County Department of Public Works Surface Water Management July 16, 2003 Snohomish River Confluence Analysis CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ........................................................................................................VIII 1. INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND ..............................................................................1 1.1 NEED FOR CHANNEL, FLOODPLAIN, AND HABITAT RESTORATION IN THE CONFLUENCE REACH...........................................................................................................7 1.2 OVERVIEW OF CONFLUENCE REACH ANALYSIS ........................................................8 2. SNOHOMISH RIVER WATERSHED AND STUDY AREA DESCRIPTION ....................10 2.1 FISHERIES RESOURCES .......................................................................................................12 3. METHODS ..............................................................................................................................15 3.1 SURVEYING, MAPPING, DATA COLLECTION .......................................................................16 3.1.1 Topography/Photogrammetry................................................................................17 3.1.2 Bathymetry ............................................................................................................17 3.1.3 Fish Habitat and Riparian Mapping ......................................................................19 3.2 GEOMORPHIC ANALYSIS ....................................................................................................19 3.2.1 Channel Classification...........................................................................................19 3.2.2 Historic Change Assessment .................................................................................20 3.3 HYDROLOGIC ANALYSIS ....................................................................................................20 3.4 HYDRAULIC ANALYSIS.......................................................................................................22 3.5 BIOLOGICAL/HABITAT ANALYSIS ......................................................................................27 3.6 RIPARIAN ANALYSIS ..........................................................................................................28 3.7 ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS..................................................................................................30 3.7.1 Hydraulic Modeling...............................................................................................30 3.7.2 Salmon Production Potential Estimation...............................................................33 4. RESULTS ................................................................................................................................34 4.1 SURVEY, MAPPING, DATA COLLECTION.............................................................................34 4.2 GEOMORPHIC ANALYSIS ....................................................................................................34 4.2.1 Level I Classification and Delineation ..................................................................34 4.2.2 Level II Classification and Delineation.................................................................34 ii Phase 1 Feasibility Study Final Report 1286.03/SnohomishRivConfluenceAnal_071603 July 16, 2003 Snohomish River Confluence Analysis 4.2.3 Level III Analysis..................................................................................................36 4.3 HYDROLOGIC ANALYSIS ....................................................................................................44 4.4 HYDRAULIC ANALYSIS.......................................................................................................46 4.5 BIOLOGICAL/HABITAT ANALYSES .....................................................................................46 4.6 RIPARIAN ANALYSIS ..........................................................................................................47 4.6.1 Land Use and Cover Type.....................................................................................47 4.6.2 Riparian Zone and Large Woody Debris Characteristics......................................52 4.7 ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS..................................................................................................58 4.7.1 Hydraulic Modeling...............................................................................................58 4.7.2 Salmon Production Potential Estimation...............................................................62 5. DISCUSSION..........................................................................................................................67 5.1 INFLUENCE OF GEOMORPHIC AND RIPARIAN SETTING ON RESTORATION POTENTIAL ........67 5.1.1 Geomorphic Conditions.........................................................................................67 5.1.2 Riparian Conditions...............................................................................................68 5.2 HYDRAULIC MODELING AND ALTERNATIVES ANALYSES...................................................70 5.2.1 Model Refinements ...............................................................................................70 5.2.2 Model Scenarios/Alternatives Analyses................................................................71 5.3 HABITAT CONDITIONS AND BENEFITS ................................................................................72 6. INITIAL RECOMMENDATIONS FOR RESTORATION ALTERNATIVES ANALYSES.............................................................................................................................74 6.1 CAPITAL PROJECTS.............................................................................................................74 6.1.1 Dike Breaching at Thomas' Eddy (Beck Dike) and Reconnection of Lake Beecher .................................................................................................................75 6.1.2 Twin Rivers Slough Reconnection........................................................................75 6.1.3 Bank Armor Removal Along Twin Rivers Park ...................................................76 6.1.4 Selected Breaching of Crabb’s Dike .....................................................................76 6.2 RECOMMENDED RIPARIAN RESTORATION PROJECTS..........................................................77 7. REFERENCES ........................................................................................................................78 iii Phase 1 Feasibility Study Final Report 1286.03/SnohomishRivConfluenceAnal_071603 July 16, 2003 Snohomish River Confluence Analysis FIGURES Figure 1. Snohomish River valley diking and flood control districts, Snohomish County, Washington…………………………………………………………………....... 2 Figure 2. Public land holdings in the Confluence Reach of the Snohomish River...............4 Figure 3. Important infrastructure, public and private land features located in the Confluence Reach of the Snohomish River. Many of these features are possible subjects of future restoration efforts........................................................6 Figure 4. Snohomish River basin and sub-basins, Snohomish and King Counties, Washington..........................................................................................................11 Figure 5. Aerial photograph mosaic taken in 2001 of the Confluence Reach of the Snohomish River, and locations of ground control points used for orthorectification. ................................................................................................18 Figure 6. Locations of cross-sections used to determine river widths as part of the review of historic aerial photography of the Confluence Reach of the Snohomish River. Approximate river mile location is indicated. ......................21 Figure 7. Two-dimensional (2D) hydrodynamic model representation of the Confluence Reach of the Snohomish River, showing mesh used to predict depths and velocities during overbank flooding. The mesh coverage defines the model "domain." Light blue areas are outside the 100 year floodplain.............................................................................................................23 Figure 8. Topography of the Confluence Reach of the Snohomish River as represented by the 2D hydrodynamic model.......................................................24 Figure 9. Substrate material assignments to mesh elements of the 2D hydrodynamic model of the Confluence Reach of the Snohomish River. ..................................26 Figure 10. Potential CIP restoration alternatives identified in this report that can be evaluated using the 2-D hydrodynamic model of the Confluence Reach of the Snohomish River. Transect cross-section profiles are depicted in Figure 11..............................................................................................................31 Figure 11. Representative cross-sections at potential CIP restoration alternative locations in the Confluence Reach of the Snohomish River. Cross-section locations are indicated in Figure 10.....................................................................32 iv Phase 1 Feasibility Study Final Report 1286.03/SnohomishRivConfluenceAnal_071603 July 16, 2003 Snohomish River Confluence Analysis Figure 12. Locations of river bed substrate
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Snohomish Estuary Wetland Integration Plan
    Snohomish Estuary Wetland Integration Plan April 1997 City of Everett Environmental Protection Agency Puget Sound Water Quality Authority Washington State Department of Ecology Snohomish Estuary Wetlands Integration Plan April 1997 Prepared by: City of Everett Department of Planning and Community Development Paul Roberts, Director Project Team City of Everett Department of Planning and Community Development Stephen Stanley, Project Manager Roland Behee, Geographic Information System Analyst Becky Herbig, Wildlife Biologist Dave Koenig, Manager, Long Range Planning and Community Development Bob Landles, Manager, Land Use Planning Jan Meston, Plan Production Washington State Department of Ecology Tom Hruby, Wetland Ecologist Rick Huey, Environmental Scientist Joanne Polayes-Wien, Environmental Scientist Gail Colburn, Environmental Scientist Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10 Duane Karna, Fisheries Biologist Linda Storm, Environmental Protection Specialist Funded by EPA Grant Agreement No. G9400112 Between the Washington State Department of Ecology and the City of Everett EPA Grant Agreement No. 05/94/PSEPA Between Department of Ecology and Puget Sound Water Quality Authority Cover Photo: South Spencer Island - Joanne Polayes Wien Acknowledgments The development of the Snohomish Estuary Wetland Integration Plan would not have been possible without an unusual level of support and cooperation between resource agencies and local governments. Due to the foresight of many individuals, this process became a partnership in which jurisdictional politics were set aside so that true land use planning based on the ecosystem rather than political boundaries could take place. We are grateful to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Department of Ecology (DOE) and Puget Sound Water Quality Authority for funding this planning effort, and to Linda Storm of the EPA and Lynn Beaton (formerly of DOE) for their guidance and encouragement during the grant application process and development of the Wetland Integration Plan.
    [Show full text]
  • Fall City Natural Area Site Management Guidelines June 2003
    Fall City Natural Area Site Management Guidelines June 2003 Fall City Natural Area Site Management Guidelines CONTENTS Acknowledgements ...........................................................................................................................iii Executive Summary………………………………………………………………………………….iv Introduction .....................................................................................................................................1 Part 1. General Property Information ..........................................................................................1 Part 2. Acquisition Purpose and Funding Source ........................................................................2 Part 3. Ecological Resources ...........................................................................................................3 Topography and Climate ...................................................................................................................3 Soils ...................................................................................................................................................4 Snoqualmie River Basin Hydrology ..................................................................................................4 River Morphology within the Fall City Reach ..................................................................................5 Wetlands ............................................................................................................................................5 Vegetation
    [Show full text]
  • A Synthesis of Existing Data for Resident Fishes in the Snoqualmie River Above Snoqualmie Falls
    A SYNTHESIS OF EXISTING DATA FOR RESIDENT FISHES IN THE SNOQUALMIE RIVER ABOVE SNOQUALMIE FALLS PREPARED FOR PUGET SOUND ENERGY AS PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE SNOQUALMIE RIVER GAME FISH ENHANCEMENT PLAN LICENSE ARTICLE 413 Prepared by Nathanael C. Overman Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Region 4, Mill Creek, Washington June 2008 TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES ............................................................................................................ ii LIST OF FIGURES ......................................................................................................... iv EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .............................................................................................. 1 INTRODUCTION........................................................................................................... ..4 STUDY AREA................................................................................................................... 7 Snoqualmie River Basin ................................................................................................. 7 North Fork Snoqualmie River......................................................................................... 7 Middle Fork Snoqualmie River ...................................................................................... 8 South Fork Snoqualmie River......................................................................................... 8 Mainstem Snoqualmie River above Snoqualmie Falls ................................................... 9
    [Show full text]
  • The Summer of 2015 in the Snoqualmie River Watershed
    Hot Water and Low Flow: The Summer of 2015 in the Snoqualmie River Watershed Photo by Jason Walker May 2016 Department of Natural Resources and Parks Water and Land Resources Division Science and Technical Section King Street Center, KSC-NR-0600 Seattle, WA 98104 204-477-4800 TTY Relay: 711 www.kingcounty.gov Hot Water and Low Flow: The Summer of 2015 in the Snoqualmie River Watershed Prepared for: Snoqualmie Watershed Forum Submitted by: Josh Kubo [email protected] King County Water and Land Resources Division Department of Natural Resources and Parks Snoqualmie River Watershed 2015 Water Temperature Technical Memorandum Acknowledgements First and foremost, the author would like to thank the Snoqualmie Watershed Forum for funding and supporting this study. The author would like to thank Beth Ledoux and Dan Smith for help with project management and thermistor deployment as well as Janne Kaje, Kollin Higgins, Aimee Fullerton, and Ashley Steel for thorough comments on this draft and previous drafts of this report. A special thanks goes out to Jim Haack, Erick and Wendy Haakenson, Wayne Gullstad, Jessica Price, Sarah Dublin, and Andrew Stout whom granted access to private properties throughout the Snoqualmie River watershed and helped to support the study efforts. Additional thanks to the staff from Oxbow Farm and Conservation Center for assisting in project engagement and public outreach. Citation King County. 2016. Hot Water and Low Flow: The Summer of 2015 in the Snoqualmie River Watershed. Prepared by Josh Kubo, Water and Land Resources Division. Seattle, Washington. i Snoqualmie River Watershed 2015 Water Temperature Technical Memorandum Table of Contents Executive Summary............................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Middle Fork Snoqualmie River Watershed Access and Travel
    United States Department Revised Environmental of Agriculture Assessment Forest Service January Middle Fork Snoqualmie River Watershed 2005 Access and Travel Management Plan and Forest Plan Amendment #20 Snoqualmie Ranger District, Mt. Baker-Snoqualmie National Forest For Information Contact: Team Leader: Doug Schrenk Snoqualmie Ranger District 42404 SE North Bend Way North Bend, WA 98045 (425) 888-1421, extension 233 [email protected] The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, gender, religion, age, disability, political beliefs, sexual orientation, or marital or family status. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA's TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, Room 326-W, Whitten Building, 14th and Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, DC 20250-9410 or call (202) 720-5964 (voice and TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer. Page i Table of Contents CHAPTER 1 - PURPOSE AND NEED FOR ACTION................................................................................................ 1 INTRODUCTION -- BACKGROUND ................................................................................................................................... 1 CHANGED CONDITIONS
    [Show full text]
  • Snohomish River Watershed
    ARLINGTON Camano Sauk River Island Canyon Cr South Fork Stillaguamish River 5 9 WRIA 7 MARYSVILLE GRANITE FALLS S Freeway/Highway t Lake e S a Pilchuck River l Stevens m o r u b County Boundary 529 e g o v h i a R t LAKE Possession k WRIA 7 Boundary Whidbey h STEVENS c 2 g u Sound u h Island c o l i l P Spada Lake Incorporated Area S ey EVERETT Eb EVERETT r e Fall City Community v SNOHOMISH i R on alm Silver Cr n S C a r lt MUKILTEO u ykomis N S k h S S Ri ver k n MONROE r 9 o MILL o SULTAN F h GOLD BAR rth CREEK o o Trout Cr m 2 N 99 is mis h yko h R Sk iv Canyon Cr LYNNWOOD 527 er INDEX 1 2 3 4 5 0 EDMONDS 522 524 R Rapid River iv So e Proctor Cr u Barclay Cr BRIER r t Miles WOODWAY h BOTHELL F o Eagle Cr JohnsonSNOHOMISH Cr COUNTY rk MOUNTLAKE WOODINVILLE S C k KING COUNTY TERRACE h y e r olt River k SHORELINE h Fork T Beckler River r ry C rt Index Cr om KENMORE No ish Martin Cr DUVALL R. 522 KIRKLAND r Tolt-Seattle Water C SKYKOMISH Tye River olt 2 5 s Supply Reservoir T R i ive r Sou r Miller River t Foss River r h Money Cr a Fo REDMOND 203 rk SEATTLE H r Ames Cr e iv R 99 t l Deep Cr o er Puget Sound S T iv un R d CARNATION a Lennox Cr r y 520 Pat C ie C te r Lake Washington r m s n l o ffi a Elliott n i u S r Tokul Cr Hancock Cr n q Bay 405 G C o o Lake SAMMAMISH r q n File: 90 u S a BELLEVUE Sammamish ver lm k Ri 1703_8091L_W7mapLetterSize.ai r r i lo e o ay KCIT eGov Duwamish River Fall F T MERCER R i City v h ISLAND Coal Cr e t r r Note: mie Riv SEATTLE Snoqualmie o al e r The information included on this map N u r C SNOQUALMIE oq Falls d has been compiled from a variety of NEWCASTLE Sn r ISSAQUAH gf o k in sources and is subject to change r D o 509 without notice.
    [Show full text]
  • Hotel/Motel Grant Workshop
    Welcome! Snohomish County Hotel/Motel Small Fund Grant Workshop Greeting by ANNIQUE BENNETT, TOURISM DEVELOPMENT SPECIALIST Snohomish County Parks, Recreation and Tourism Snohomish County Strategic Tourism Plan Overview Presented by RICH HUEBNER, TOURISM PROMOTION COORDINATOR Snohomish County Parks, Recreation and Tourism 2018 – 2022 Strategic Tourism Plan The 2018-2022 Strategic Tourism Plan establishes strategies to build on the strengths of Snohomish County and addresses its gaps and challenges. As a result of this multi‐tiered approach, Snohomish County will continue to grow as a highly functioning tourism system. • Regional Development focus • Connecting visitors with regions to extend overnights – 40% of visitors are day trippers! • Off set seasonality – we are booked in the high season • Connecting stakeholders with each other – regional partnerships collective impacts - we are better together! 2.1 Regional Destination Product Development, Marketing & Promotion The Snohomish County tourism industry should organize, coordinate and facilitate regional product development, planning and marketing, to organize resources around the greatest shared priorities and challenges in a region. Develop packages and itineraries of regional activities that link experiences to develop and promote extended stays, with special attention paid to linking region-specific experiences and routes with co-located attraction anchors both large and small. • Salish Sea Coastal Communities • Woodway, Edmonds, Mukilteo, Everett, Marysville, Tulalip and Stanwood/Camano
    [Show full text]
  • Fact Sheet for NPDES Permit WA0991001 Boeing Everett Cleanup Site May 11, 2015
    Fact Sheet for NPDES Permit WA0991001 Boeing Everett Cleanup Site May 11, 2015 Purpose of this fact sheet This fact sheet explains and documents the decisions the Department of Ecology (Ecology) made in drafting the proposed National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit for Boeing Everett, WA. This fact sheet complies with Section 173-220-060 of the Washington Administrative Code (WAC), which requires Ecology to prepare a draft permit and accompanying fact sheet for public evaluation before issuing an NPDES permit. Ecology makes the draft permit and fact sheet available for public review and comment at least thirty (30) days before issuing the final permit. Copies of the fact sheet and draft permit for Boeing Everett (Boeing), NPDES permit WA0991001, are available for public review and comment from March 10 to April 10, 2015. For more details on preparing and filing comments about these documents, please see Appendix A – Public Involvement Information. Boeing has reviewed the draft permit and fact sheet for factual accuracy. Ecology corrected any errors or omissions regarding the facility’s location, history, discharges, or receiving water prior to publishing this draft fact sheet for public notice. After the public comment period closes, Ecology will summarize substantive comments and provide responses to them. No public comments were received during the public comment period for this permit. Summary Boeing is conducting a remedial cleanup of trichloroethylene (TCE) in groundwater to achieve hydraulic control of TCE in the plume, and to reduce to maximum extent practicable discharge to Powder Mill Creek. The remediation consists of extracting and treating contaminated groundwater through an air stripper treatment system.
    [Show full text]
  • Vol. 83 Wednesday, No. 124 June 27, 2018 Pages 30031–30284
    Vol. 83 Wednesday, No. 124 June 27, 2018 Pages 30031–30284 OFFICE OF THE FEDERAL REGISTER VerDate Sep 11 2014 19:16 Jun 26, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4710 Sfmt 4710 E:\FR\FM\27JNWS.LOC 27JNWS daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with FRONT MATTER WS II Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 124 / Wednesday, June 27, 2018 The FEDERAL REGISTER (ISSN 0097–6326) is published daily, SUBSCRIPTIONS AND COPIES Monday through Friday, except official holidays, by the Office PUBLIC of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration, Washington, DC 20408, under the Federal Register Subscriptions: Act (44 U.S.C. Ch. 15) and the regulations of the Administrative Paper or fiche 202–512–1800 Committee of the Federal Register (1 CFR Ch. I). The Assistance with public subscriptions 202–512–1806 Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Publishing Office, Washington, DC 20402 is the exclusive distributor of the official General online information 202–512–1530; 1–888–293–6498 edition. Periodicals postage is paid at Washington, DC. Single copies/back copies: The FEDERAL REGISTER provides a uniform system for making Paper or fiche 202–512–1800 available to the public regulations and legal notices issued by Assistance with public single copies 1–866–512–1800 Federal agencies. These include Presidential proclamations and (Toll-Free) Executive Orders, Federal agency documents having general FEDERAL AGENCIES applicability and legal effect, documents required to be published Subscriptions: by act of Congress, and other Federal agency documents of public interest. Assistance with Federal agency subscriptions: Documents are on file for public inspection in the Office of the Email [email protected] Federal Register the day before they are published, unless the Phone 202–741–6000 issuing agency requests earlier filing.
    [Show full text]
  • Middle Fork of the Snoqualmie River Valley Interpretive Plan
    Middle Fork of the Snoqualmie River Valley Interpretive Plan University of Washington Department of Landscape Architecture March 2004 F O R E W O R D An interpretive plan is a map for future action. It is a framework for making decisions about which and how stories about a place are best told, to achieve desired goals. It serves as a basis for creating materials, facilities and programs that deliver messages aimed at revealing relationships, provoking investigation, and inspiring action. A good interpretive plan answers the standard interrogative questions: who will it serve, what are the themes and stories important to convey, and why—for which goals—should it be created? Drawing upon the strength of real places to stimulate imagination and congeal memories, where should the stories be told? Finally, how—through which methods—are the messages about a particular place most effectively revealed, related to the individual’s experience, and used to enlarge one’s relationship with that place? This Interpretive Plan for the Middle Fork of the Snoqualmie River Valley was developed as part of an undergraduate landscape architecture studio working on two park sites along the river. The purpose of the plan was to create a preliminary document to guide development of interpretive facilities in the valley, while also informing the park conceptual design work. It was accomplished primarily through student research, and in a workshop at the University of Washington where individuals most familiar with the valley’s stories shared their expertises. This plan is only a beginning, providing a framework that requires substantial fleshing out, further development and creative application.
    [Show full text]
  • Snohomish River Estuary Total Maximum Daily Load
    Snohomish River Estuary Total Maximum Daily Load Submittal Report August 1999 Publication No. 99-57-WQ For additional copies of this report, contact: Department of Ecology Publications P.O. Box 47600 Olympia, WA 98504-7600 Telephone: (360) 407-7472 NORTHWEST REGION EASTERN (425) 649-7000 CENTRAL REGION REGION (509) 456-2926 (509) 575-2491 SOUTHWEST REGION (360) 407-6300 The Department of Ecology is an equal opportunity agency and does not discriminate on the basis of race, creed, color, disability, age, religion, national origin, sex, marital status, disabled veteran's status, Vietnam Era veteran's status, or sexual orientation. For more information or if you have special accommodation needs, please Ron McBride at (360) 407- 6469. Ecology Headquarters telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD) number is (360) 407-6006. Ecology Regional Office TDD numbers are as follows: SWRO (TDD) (360) 407-6306 NWRO (TDD) (425) 649-4259 CRO (TDD) (509) 454-7673 ERO (TDD) (509) 458-2055 Snohomish River Estuary Total Maximum Daily Load Submittal Report by Steven R. Butkus Robert F. Cusimano David E. Wright Washington State Department of Ecology Water Quality Program Post Office Box 47600 Olympia, Washington 98504-7600 August 1999 Publication No. 99-57-WQ Table of Contents List of Figures ......................................................................................................... iv List of Tables........................................................................................................... iv Introduction ............................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Offering Memorandum Marysville (Seattle Msa), Washington Pad to & &
    PAD TO & & • 2-TENANT SERVICE-BASED NNN INVESTMENT • DOMINANT RETAIL CORRIDOR • SEATTLE-TACOMA MSA • OFFERING MEMORANDUM MARYSVILLE (SEATTLE MSA), WASHINGTON PAD TO & & • 2-TENANT SERVICE-BASED NNN INVESTMENT • DOMINANT RETAIL CORRIDOR • SEATTLE-TACOMA MSA • In Association with Mattis Partners, LLC | Licensed Washington Broker #: 19234 OFFERING MEMORANDUM MARYSVILLE (SEATTLE MSA), WASHINGTON PAD TO COSTCO AND TARGET OFFERING MEMORANDUM MARYSVILLE (SEATTLE MSA), WASHINGTON TABLE OF CONTENTS: EXCLUSIVELY LISTED BY: Offering Summary 4 Jeff Lefko Investment Highlights 5 Executive Vice President Lease Summary 7 [email protected] 844.585.7682 Income & Expense 8 Site Plan 9 Bill Asher Parcel Map 10 Executive Vice President Aerial Overview 13 [email protected] Regional Map 16 844.585.7684 Tenant Profile 17 Tenant Overview 19 David Merisko Area Overview 20 Mattis Partners, LLC [email protected] Demographics 23 206.375.4343 In Association with Mattis Partners, LLC | Licensed Washington Broker #: 19234 OFFERING SUMMARY CHIPOTLE & PACIFIC DENTAL SERVICES LOCATION Chipotle & Pacific Dental Services VIEW ON GOOGLE MAPS 17103 28th Drive NE Marysville, WA 98271 NOT A PART OFFERING SUMMARY Price: $3,860,000 Current Net Operating Income: $193,087 Current Capitalization Rate: 5.00% July 2023 Net Operating Income: $211,615 July 2023 Capitalization Rate: 5.48% Net Rentable Area: 5,485 Year Built: 2016 Lot Size (Acres): 0.62 FINANCING SUMMARY All Cash or Cash to New Financing (Contact Hanley Investment Group for Further Details) NOT A PART The information contained herein has been obtained from sources we deem reliable. We cannot assume responsibility for its accuracy. 4 INVESTMENT HIGHLIGHTS CHIPOTLE & PACIFIC DENTAL SERVICES y New Construction Two-Tenant NNN Service-Based Retail Investment: ο Chipotle 6.5+ years remaining on the initial 10-year lease term Over 2,700 stores in the U.S.
    [Show full text]