DOCSLIB.ORG

DRAFT EXTENDED BYPASS ALIGNMENT STUDY Prepared for CITY of ASTORIA, CLATSOP COUNTY and OREGON DEPARTMENT

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
DRAFT EXTENDED BYPASS ALIGNMENT STUDY Prepared for CITY of ASTORIA, CLATSOP COUNTY and OREGON DEPARTMENT DRAFT EXTENDED BYPASS ALIGNMENT STUDY Prepared for CITYOF ASTORIA,CLATSOP COUNTY AND OREGONDEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Prepared by DAVIDEVANS AND ASSOCIATES,INC. TABLE OF CONTENTS Page EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ........................................................................................................................................1 INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND ...............................................................................................................3 BYPASS ALTERNATIVES ......................................................................................................................................4 ASTORIA BYPASS ............................................................................................................................................... 4 EXTENDED BYPASS ...........................................................................................................................................4 EXISTING HIGHWAY CONDITIONS ................................................................................................................4 ASTORIA EXTENDED BYPASS ALIGNMENT ALTERNATIVES PUBLIC AND AGENCY INVOLVEMENT .................................................................................................................................. 5 LAND USE .............................................................................................................................................................6 EXISTING LAND USES .......................................................................................................................................6 LAND USE ZONING ............................................................................................................................................9 LAND USE AND PERMITTING CONSTRAINTS ...........................................................................................11 NATURAL RESOURCES .......................................................................................................................................14 WETLANDS ........................................................................................................................................................14 FLOODPLAIN .....................................................................................................................................................20 WILDLIFE ...........................................................................................................................................................20 THREATENED AND ENDANGERED SPECIES ..............................................................................................21 BRIDGE OPTIONS .................................................................................................................................................22 GENERAL BACKGROUND ...............................................................................................................................22 CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATES .............................................................................................................22 ADDITIONAL COSTS ........................................................................................................................................23 OTHER CONSIDERATIONS .............................................................................................................................23 ACCESS MANAGEMENT ...................................................................................................................................25 EXISTING TRAFFIC CONDITIONS ..................................................................................................................... 27 1995 TRAFFIC VOLUMES .................................................................................................................................27 AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC ............................................................................................................................ 27 EXISTING (1 996) INTERSECTION OPERATIONS .................................................................................... 28 FUTURE TRAFFIC FORECASTS .........................................................................................................................31 AUTO TRAVEL DEMAND FORECAST ...........................................................................................................31 STUDY AREA ....................................................................................................................................................31 EXISTING AND FUTURE LAND USE .............................................................................................................32 TRIP GENERATION ...........................................................................................................................................34 TRIP DISTRIBUTION .........................................................................................................................................35 TRIP ASSIGNMENT ...........................................................................................................................................35 MODEL CALIBRATION ....................................................................................................................................35 2006 AND 20 16 FORECASTS ............................................................................................................................36 FUTURE TRAFFIC OPERATIONS AT SPECIFIC INTERSECTIONS ...........................................................36 FUTURE TRAFFIC OPERATIONS ALONG SPECIFIC STREETS .................................................................39 DRAFT 1 Extended Bypass Alignment Study April 1997 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page AREA OF SPECIAL INTEREST ........................................................................................................................ 41 TRUCK TRAFFIC FORECAST .......................................................................................................................... 43 RESULTS OF TRUCK TRAFFIC FORECAST ..................................................................................................43 CONCLUSIONS ................................................................................................................................................... 45 DRAFT I I Extended Bypass Alignment Study April 1997 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Much concern has been expressed about increased traffic expected to travel by the Astoria High School and required highway widening with the Astoria Bypass route on Highway 202 to Highway 101. Future increases of traffic on the Highway 101 bridge across Youngs Bay (New Youngs Bay Bridge) has also been mentioned as a concern a number of times. Operations at the Smith Point intersection of Highway 101 at Highway 202 and the Miles Crossing intersection of Highway 101 Business Route at Lewis and Clark Road are concerns today as well as for the future. Safety for traffic making turning movements off of Highway 101 Business Route at several locations is an issue. Maintaining the two narrow moveable span bridges is another issue that needs to be resolved for the future. These narrow bridges impede bicycle and pedestrian traffic as well as large vehicular traffic. Planning level analysis has been performed to help determine preferred options for an Extended Bypass Alignment that would alleviate these transportation concerns. This analysis included looking at land use, natural resources, traffic conditions, and estimated costs for the improvements. In addition to the analysis, questionnaires, a newsletter, and a public meeting were used to solicit public input. A Transportation Advisory Committee (TAC) with local agency, ODOT, and public representatives helped review and give direction for the study. Based on all of the analysis and the public input received, the TAC recommended that the existing alignment alternative across Youngs Bay (Old Youngs Bay Bridge) be the preferred alternative. This is shown as alignment A on Figure 1. A new connection west from Highway 101 Business Route with an interchange at Highway 101 is also necessary to attract bypass automobile and truck traffic off of Highway 202 and Highway 101 across the New Youngs Bay Bridge. All of the improvements recommended would include appropriate facilities for bicycles and pedestrians. In addition to the new connection at the west end of the Extended Bypass, other improvements needed are as follows: 1. Two new fixed span bridges (Old Youngs Bay and Lewis and Clark). 2. Reconstruction of the existing Highway 10 1, including a left-turn lane through the Jeffers Garden area and at the Fort Clatsoplairport intersection. 3. A realignment to the west of the Miles Crossing intersection. The proposed Extended Bypass would alleviate several future major transportation concerns, but the estimated cost of approximately $47,000,000 and the wetlands impacts would be difficult to deal with. Most of the cost is for bridges (approximately $38,000,000) which will need to be replaced regardless of whether or not the Extended Bypass is constructed. Much of the new alignment sections of the Extended Bypass west of Miles Crossing and to connect the Extended Bypass to Highway 101 is through wetland areas. DRAFT 1 Extended Bypass Alignment Study April 1997 TABLE 1 ASTORIA EXTENDED BYPASS SUMMARY Section Length Cost 2016 PM 2016 Trucks Natural Resources (miles) Peak ADT and Land Use
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Warrenton Mooring Basin
    eetion Page ref ace ................... .. ...................................................................................................................VIII ..................... .............................................................................. 1-1 Plans and Policies .............................................................................................................. 1-3 Federal .......................................*..*... ........................................................................1-3 O'P .............................................................................................................. 1-3 Su~lsetEmpire Transit District ............................................................................... 1-4 Clatsop County ........................................................................................................ 1-4 City ...............................................................................................................................1-4 Public Involvement .............................................................................................................."14 1PuL.a~s ,.) .- * and Obje&ves ...................................... ..................... ..............1-5 Goal l .. hlobillty .............................. .....................................................................3-5 Coal 2: Livabilitv ................................................................................................ 1-6 Goal 3: Coordination ................................................................................................1-6
    [Show full text]
  • Wallooskee-Youngs Confluence Restoration Project
    B O N N E V I L L E P O W E R A D M I N I S T R A T I O N Wallooskee-Youngs Confluence Restoration Project Draft Environmental Assessment December 2014 DOE/EA-1974 This page left intentionally blank � Contents Contents .............................................................................................................................................................. i � Tables v � Figures ............................................................................................................................................................... vi � Appendices ....................................................................................................................................................... vi � Chapter 1 ......................................................................................................................................................... 1-1 � Purpose of and Need for Action ............................................................................................................. 1-1 � 1.1 Need for Action .................................................................................................................................. 1-3 ­ 1.2 Purposes ............................................................................................................................................... 1-3 ­ 1.3 Background ......................................................................................................................................... 1-4 ­ 1.3.1 Statutory Context .............................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Assessment of Coastal Water Resources and Watershed Conditions at Lewis and Clark National Historical Park, Oregon and Washington
    National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior Natural Resources Program Center Assessment of Coastal Water Resources and Watershed Conditions at Lewis and Clark National Historical Park, Oregon and Washington Natural Resource Report NPS/NRPC/WRD/NRTR—2007/055 ON THE COVER Upper left, Fort Clatsop, NPS Photograph Upper right, Cape Disappointment, Photograph by Kristen Keteles Center left, Ecola, NPS Photograph Lower left, Corps at Ecola, NPS Photograph Lower right, Young’s Bay, Photograph by Kristen Keteles Assessment of Coastal Water Resources and Watershed Conditions at Lewis and Clark National Historical Park, Oregon and Washington Natural Resource Report NPS/NRPC/WRD/NRTR—2007/055 Dr. Terrie Klinger School of Marine Affairs University of Washington Seattle, WA 98105-6715 Rachel M. Gregg School of Marine Affairs University of Washington Seattle, WA 98105-6715 Jessi Kershner School of Marine Affairs University of Washington Seattle, WA 98105-6715 Jill Coyle School of Marine Affairs University of Washington Seattle, WA 98105-6715 Dr. David Fluharty School of Marine Affairs University of Washington Seattle, WA 98105-6715 This report was prepared under Task Order J9W88040014 of the Pacific Northwest Cooperative Ecosystems Studies Unit (agreement CA9088A0008) September 2007 U.S. Department of the Interior National Park Service Natural Resources Program Center Fort Collins, CO i The Natural Resource Publication series addresses natural resource topics that are of interest and applicability to a broad readership in the National Park Service and to others in the management of natural resources, including the scientific community, the public, and the NPS conservation and environmental constituencies. Manuscripts are peer-reviewed to ensure that the information is scientifically credible, technically accurate, appropriately written for the intended audience, and is designed and published in a professional manner.
    [Show full text]
  • Changes in Columbia River Estuary Habitat Types Over the Past Century
    'E STEVE, P, CHANGES IN COLUMBIA RIVER ESTUARY HABITAT TYPES OVER THE PAST CENTURY Duncan W. Thomas July 1983 COLUMBIA RIVER ESTUARY DATA DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM Columbia River Estuary Study Taskforce P.O. Box 175 Astoria, Oregon 97103 (503) 325-0435 The preparation of this report was financially aided through a grant from the Oregon State Department of Energy with funds obtained from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, and appropriated for Section 308(b) of the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972. Editing and publication funds were provided by the Columbia River Estuary Data Development Program. I I I I I I AUTHOR Duncan W. Thomas I I I I EDITOR I Stewart J. Bell I I I I I I iii FOREWORD Administrative Background This study was undertaken to meet certain regulatory requirements of the State of Oregon. On the Oregon side of the Columbia River Estuary, Clatsop County and the cities of Astoria, Warrenton and Hammond are using the resources of the Columbia River Estuary Study Taskforce (CREST) to bring the estuary-related elements of their land and water use plans into compliance with Oregon Statewide Planning Goals and Guidelines. This is being accomplished through the incorporation of CREST's Columbia River Estuary Regional Management Plan (McColgin 1979) into the local plans. Oregon Statewide Planning Goal 16, Estuarine Resources, adopted by the Land Conservation and Development Commission (LCDC) in December 1976, requires that "when dredge or fill activities are permitted in inter-tidal or tidal marsh areas, their effects shall be mitigated by creation or restoration of another area of similar biological potential...
    [Show full text]
  • Douglas Deur Empires O the Turning Tide a History of Lewis and F Clark National Historical Park and the Columbia-Pacific Region
    A History of Lewis and Clark National and State Historical Parks and the Columbia-Pacific Region Douglas Deur Empires o the Turning Tide A History of Lewis and f Clark National Historical Park and the Columbia-Pacific Region Douglas Deur 2016 With Contributions by Stephen R. Mark, Crater Lake National Park Deborah Confer, University of Washington Rachel Lahoff, Portland State University Members of the Wilkes Expedition, encountering the forests of the Astoria area in 1841. From Wilkes' Narrative (Wilkes 1845). Cover: "Lumbering," one of two murals depicting Oregon industries by artist Carl Morris; funded by the Work Projects Administration Federal Arts Project for the Eugene, Oregon Post Office, the mural was painted in 1942 and installed the following year. Back cover: Top: A ship rounds Cape Disappointment, in a watercolor by British spy Henry Warre in 1845. Image courtesy Oregon Historical Society. Middle: The view from Ecola State Park, looking south. Courtesy M.N. Pierce Photography. Bottom: A Joseph Hume Brand Salmon can label, showing a likeness of Joseph Hume, founder of the first Columbia-Pacific cannery in Knappton, Washington Territory. Image courtesy of Oregon State Archives, Historical Oregon Trademark #113. Cover and book design by Mary Williams Hyde. Fonts used in this book are old map fonts: Cabin, Merriweather and Cardo. Pacific West Region: Social Science Series Publication Number 2016-001 National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior ISBN 978-0-692-42174-1 Table of Contents Foreword: Land and Life in the Columbia-Pacific
    [Show full text]
  • Youngs Bay Conservation Plan
    YOUNGS BAY CONSERVATION & RESTORATION PLAN May 2008 Esther Lev, The Wetlands Conservancy Dick Vander Schaaf, The Nature Conservancy John Anderson, The Wetlands Conservancy John Christy, The Wetlands Conservancy Paul Adamus Ken Popper, The Nature Conservancy Brent Davis, Ecotrust, Charlie Dewberry, Ecotrust, Matt Fehrenbacher, The Pacific Forest Trust Funded by National Fish & Wildlife Foundation US Fish & Wildlife Service Acknowledgements Thanks to the following people for their assistance and review of this project. Dave Ambrose, Clatsop Soil and Water Conservation District Ian Sinks, Columbia Land Trust Alan Whiting, Columbia River Estuary Study Task Force Scott Stonum, Lewis and Clark National Historical Park Lower Columbia River Estuary Partnership Neal Maine, North Coast Land Conservancy North Coast Watershed Association Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife Doug Ray & Todd Jones, CEDC Fisheries Project Oregon Department of Forestry Mike Mertens, Ecotrust YOUNGS BAY WATERSHED CONSERVATION AND RESTORATION PLAN I. Project Description The goal of this project is to prioritize the conservation needs and opportunities for the Youngs Bay watershed from an ecological perspective and promote the selection of acquisition and restoration projects that address critical watershed restoration issues. The ten-year goal is conservation and restoration of over 1,000 acres of Sitka spruce swamp, estuarine marsh and freshwater riparian habitats and 4000 acres of upland forest in the watershed through actions targeted in this plan. Since 1994, the Youngs Bay watershed has been identified as an important conservation area in the Lower Columbia River in a variety of biodiversity, wetland, wildlife and salmon conservation plans. The Wetlands Conservancy, The Nature Conservancy, Oregon Natural Heritage Information Center, North Coast Land Conservancy, Columbia Land Trust, Ecotrust, Pacific Coast Joint Venture and National Park Service have been actively working to overlay their plans and develop mutual strategies and partnerships for conservation in the region.
    [Show full text]
  • Lower Columbia River Guide
    B OATING G UIDE TO THE Lower Columbia & Willamette Rivers The Oregon State Marine Board is Oregon’s recreational boating agency. The Marine Board is dedicated to safety, education and access in an enhanced environment. The Extension Sea Grant Program, a component of the Oregon State University Extension Service, provides education, training, and technical assistance to people with ocean-related needs and interests. As part of the National Sea Grant Program, the Washington Sea Grant Marine Advisory Services is dedicated to encouraging the understanding, wise use, development, and con- servation of our ocean and coastal resources. The Washington State Parks and Recreation Commission acquires, operates, enhances and protects a diverse system of recreational, cultural, historical and natural sites. The Commission fosters outdoor recreation and education statewide to provide enjoyment and enrichment for all and a valued legacy for future generations. SMB 250-424-2/99 OSU Extension Publication SG 86 First Printing May, 1992 Second Printing November, 1993 Third Printing October, 1995 Fourth Printing February, 1999 Fifth Printing September, 2003 Sixth Printing June, 2007 Extension Service, Oregon State University, Corvallis, Lyla Houglum, director. This publication was produced and distributed in furtherance of the Acts of Congress of May 8 and June 30, 1914. Extension work is a cooperative program of Oregon State University, the U.S. Department of Agriculture and Oregon counties. The Extension Sea Grant Program is supported in part by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce. Oregon State University Extension Service offers educational programs, activities, and materials - without regard to race, color, national origin, sex, age, or disability - as required by Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Title IX of Education Amendments of 1972, and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973.
    [Show full text]
  • Length, Sex, Maturity, and Body Color. Characterized According to Length, Sex, and Maturity. This Species
    AN ABSTRACT OF THE THESIS OF JOHN STEVEN DAVIS for the degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE in OCEANOGRAPHY presented on August 28. 1978 Title:DIEL ACTIVITY OF BENTHIC CRUSTACEANS IN THE U Redacted for privacy Abstract approved: Robert L. Holton Swimming activity of six benthic peracarid and decapod crusta- ceans was studied in Youngs Bay, Oregon) anembaynient of the Columbia River estuary.Densities of species in the water were determined through horizontal plankton net tows and epibeuthicBled tows.Several benthic grab samples were taken to characterizethe structure of the infaunal populations. Sampling was conducted in a subtidal region of the bay day and night over several diel and tidal cycles from September 26 to 30, 1975.Animals captured in. the water column and in the substrate were characterized accordingto length, sex, maturity, and body color. The life-history pattern of the tube-dwelling, infaunalamphipod Corophiurn sairnonis in Youngs Bay was also studied using grab samples collected from April 1974 to September 1975.Animals were characterized according to length, sex, and maturity.This species is the most abundant and extensively distributed macrofaunalresident of the bay, and was the most abundant benthic species captured in the water column. Swimming activity is discussed in reference to the seasonal pattern of reproductive activity. Nocturnal activity was the dominant pattern expressed by the resident benthic crustaceans in the subtidal region.Participants included the infaunal. amphipods Corophium salmonis and Eohaustorius estuarius, the epifaunal amphipod Corophium spinicorne, and three epibenthic species; the amphipod Anisogammarus confervicolus, the mysid Neoniysis mercedis, and the sand shrimp Crangon. francis- corun-i.All of these species were present in the water at relatively high densities during the night and nearly absent there during the day.Densities rapidly increased just after sunset and decreased by sunrise.
    [Show full text]
  • Select Area Fishery Enhancement Project
    SELECT AREA FISHERY ENHANCEMENT PROJECT FY 2007- 08 ANNUAL REPORT October 2006 - September 2008 Prepared by: Geoffrey Whisler Garth Gale Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife Patrick Hulett Jeremy Wilson Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Steve Meshke Alan Dietrichs Toni Miethe Clatsop County Fisheries Prepared for: U.S. Department of Energy Bonneville Power Administration Environment, Fish and Wildlife P. O. Box 3621 Portland, OR 97208 BPA Project # 199306000 ODFW Contract # 35929 WDFW Contract # 36072 CCF Contract # 35247 October 2009 GLOSSARY OF ACRONYMS AD Adipose NF North Fork ATPase Adenosine Triphosphatase NMFS National Marine Fisheries Service National Oceanic and Atmospheric BHS Bacterial Hemorrhagic Septicemia NOAA Administration Northwest Power and BKD Bacterial Kidney Disease NPCC Conservation Council National Pollutant Discharge BO Biological Opinion NPDES Elimination Systems Natural Resource Conservation BPA Bonneville Power Administration NRCS Service CCF Clatsop County Fisheries NSD No Survey Done Clatsop Economic Development Oregon Adult Salmonid Inventory CEDC OASIS Committee and Sampling Columbia River Estuary Study CREST ODF Oregon Department of Forestry Taskforce Oregon Department of Fish and CWT Coded-Wire Tag ODFW Wildlife Oregon Department of Oregon Fish and Wildlife DEQ OFWC Environmental Quality Commission DO Dissolved oxygen OSU Oregon State University ESA Endangered Species Act PPM Parts per million Environmental Monitoring and EMAP PIT Passive Integrated Transponder Assessment Program Pacific States
    [Show full text]
  • Astoria's Historic Resources and Heritage
    ASTORIA’S HISTORIC RESOURCES AND HERITAGE This assessment of Astoria’s historic resources and heritage has been financed in part with Federal funds from the National Park Service, U.S. Department of the Interior. However, the contents and opinions do not necessarily reflect the views or policies of the Department of the Interior. City of Astoria August, 2006 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION ............................................................................ 3 DOMESTIC ....................................................................................... 4 COMMERCE / TRADE ................................................................ 9 SOCIAL ............................................................................................ 14 GOVERNMENT ............................................................................ 18 EDUCATION .................................................................................. 21 RELIGION ....................................................................................... 23 FUNERARY .................................................................................... 26 RECREATION AND CULTURE ............................................ 29 AGRICULTURE / SUBSISTENCE ......................................... 32 INDUSTRY / PROCESSING / EXTRACTION ................... 33 HEATLH CARE ............................................................................ 39 DEFENSE ......................................................................................... 41 LANDSCAPE .................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Evaluation of a Low-Cost Salmon Production Facility Annual Report FY 1986 by James M. Hill, Project Coordinator Clatsop Economic
    Evaluation of a Low-Cost Salmon Production Facility Annual Report FY 1986 by James M. Hill, Project Coordinator Clatsop Economic Development Committee Fisheries Project Astoria, Oregon 97103 Funded by Thomas J. Clune, Project Manager U.S. Department of Energy Bonneville Power Administration Division of Fish and Wildlife Agreement No.DE-A179-83BP11887 Project No. 83-364 December 1986 TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE Table of Contents i List of Figures ii List of Tables iii Acknowledgements iv Abstract V Introduction l-2 Methods and Materials 2-10 Community Involvement 2 Natural Outmigration of Smolts 2-5 Cumulative Production of Quality Salmon 5 Development of Optimum Density Levels 5 Augment a Unique Known Stock Fishery 5-10 Results and Discussion 10-25 Community Involvement 10-13 Natural Outmigration of Smolts 13-18 Cumulative Production of Quality Salmon 19-25 Development of Optimum Density Levels 25-28 Augmentation of a Unique Known Stock Fishery 28-29 Summary of Expenditures 30 Literature Cited 31 LIST OF FIGURES PAGE Figure 1. Annual Community Contributions to CEDC 4 Fisheries Project Figure 2. Youngs Bay Commercial Gillnet Voluntary 14 Assessment Participation Figure 3. Youngs Bay Voluntary Poundage Assessment 15 Contributions; 1981 - 1986 Figure 4. Youngs Bay Coho Harvest (Numbers); 1981 - 1986 16 Figure 5. Youngs Bay Coho Harvest (Pounds); 1981 - 1986 17 Figure 6. Youngs Bay Catch Value; 1981 - 1986 18 ii LIST OF TABLES PAGE Table 1. Community Contributions to CEDC Fisheries 3 Project, 1986 Table 2. Summary of 1981- 86 Releases from CEDC 6 Fisheries Project Facilities Table 3. Harvest and Survival Summary of CEDC Released 7 Tule Chinook; 1980 - 1983 Broods Table 4.
    [Show full text]
  • Columbia River Estuary Land and Water Use Section
    City of Astoria Comprehensive Plan CP.130 COLUMBIA RIVER ESTUARY LAND AND WATER USE SECTION CP.130. INTRODUCTION This section, prepared by the Columbia River Estuary Taskforce (CREST), is the basis for managing estuarine resources in Astoria within a regional framework. CREST is a bi-state voluntary planning organization organized in 1974 to develop a coordinated, regional estuary management plan. The City of Astoria has been a member of CREST since its inception, and the City's elected and appointed officials and staff have participated in the process throughout this period. This section of the plan is intended to satisfy the City's obligations under the Oregon Statewide Planning Goals 16, Estuarine Resources and 17, Coastal Shorelands, and the Federal Coastal Zone Management Act. Under these programs, the Columbia River estuary has been designated "development". This comprehensive plan section consists of the following parts: 1. Definitions 2. Use designations 3. Shorelands map 4. Estuary map 5. Area designations 6. General shorelands and estuary policies (CP.130 Amended by Ordinance 90-33, dated 9-17-90) CP.135. DEFINITIONS Aquatic Areas: In the Columbia River Estuary, the tidal waters and wetlands, and the land underlying these waters. The upper limit of aquatic areas is the upper limit of aquatic vegetation or, where such a line can not be accurately determined, Mean Higher High Water. Coastal Shorelands: The coastal shoreland boundary includes all the following resources as described in the Coastal Shorelands Goal: a. Areas subject to ocean flooding and lands within 100 feet of the ocean shore or within 50 feet of an estuary or a coastal lake.
    [Show full text]