DOCSLIB.ORG

Appendix A. Draft Purpose and Need Document

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Appendix A. Draft Purpose and Need Document US 2 Westbound Trestle Project: Draft Purpose and Need 1 PURPOSE AND NEED 1.1 PURPOSE OF THE PROJECT The purpose of the United States Highway Route 2 (US 2) Westbound Trestle Project (Figure 1) is to develop a long-term solution that: • Improves travel reliability for motorists, transit vehicles, freight, bicyclists, pedestrians, and emergency responders • Improves safety for all users • Provides improved system linkages to support regional and local planned growth • Provides a structurally sound solution that corrects roadway deficiencies and utilizes a full life-cycle cost approach • Incorporates WSDOT’s core value of sustainability Because the US 2 eastbound structure better meets the transportation needs for eastbound travel, it is not considered in the context of this Purpose and Need. Figure 1: US 2 Westbound Trestle Vicinity 1.2 NEED FOR THE PROJECT 1.2.1 THE EXISTING CORRIDOR US 2 was extended west from Idaho to Everett, Washington, in 1948 as part of the national highway system. US 2 is currently continuous between SR 529 in Everett and St. Ignace, Michigan. US 2 is one of three, year-round routes that cross the Cascades in Washington State, and it provides access to many recreational opportunities in local, state and national parks. The US 2 Westbound Trestle Project “project area” is the portion of US 2 between the Interstate 5 (I-5) and SR 204/20th St SE interchanges, inclusive of the interchange areas with those facilities (Figure 1). US 2 in the project area is a highway of statewide significance, an important T1 (carrying more than 10 million tons of freight per year) and Connector freight route, and is designated as a federal and state urban principal arterial and scenic byway (WSDOT 2016). The western end of US 2 is a multi-modal, east-west corridor connecting I-5 and the city of Everett to the businesses, industries and residential communities east of the Snohomish River. US 2 is one of four routes that cross the Snohomish River, and it is the shortest -distance route between Everett and communities east of the Snohomish River including Snohomish, Lake Stevens and Marysville. US 2 crosses the Snohomish River, Ebey Island, and Ebey Slough on parallel structures. The eastbound structure was built in the 1990s and carries 2 general-purpose and one peak-period shoulder lane that operates from 2 PM to 7 PM. The westbound trestle was completed in 1968 and carries 2 lanes of general-purpose traffic on a 30-foot curb-to-curb roadway section. 1.2.2 EXISTING CAPACITY AND ABILITY TO ACCOMMODATE CURRENT AND FUTURE TRANSPORTATION DEMAND TRAFFIC In 2017, US 2 trestle carried 81,000 vehicles (combined directions) across the Snohomish River on an average day, of which 9 percent were trucks (WSDOT 2018b). Westbound morning traffic volumes begin to build before 5 AM and peak between 7AM and 9 AM with an AM-peak weekday hourly volume of 3,200 vehicles. Currently, about 93 percent of the passenger vehicles that use the westbound trestle during the AM peak hour are single - occupant vehicles (WSDOT 2018c). illustrates distribution of traffic that crosses the US 2 trestle in the AM peak hour (WSDOT 2018c). The origins of the westbound traffic demand on the trestle in the AM peak period are split between SR 204 and 20th St SE, and US 2, which is the source of almost 40 percent of the traffic demand. At the west end of the trestle, most of the traffic is heading into downtown Everett or onto southbound I-5 (includes traffic going to Boeing). Existing and 2040 demand volumes across the trestle are shown in Figure 3. Figure 2. US 2 AM Peak-hour Trip Distribution US 2 Westbound Trestle Project: Draft Purpose and Need Figure 2. US 2 AM Peak-hour Trip Distribution Source: WSDOT 2018c Figure 3. US 2 AM Peak-hour Existing and 2040 Travel Demand Volume 130 (275) 30 (30) Note: 2016 and (2040) travel demand volumes Source: WSDOT 2018c AM-peak corridor travel times for 2016 and projected for 2040 assuming the current corridor configuration are shown in Table 1. Traffic delays for westbound trips across the US 2 trestle are expected to substantially worsen by 2040. Table 1. AM-peak US 2 Corridor Travel Times Trip 2016 2040 Average Average Direction Time Time From To Speed Speed (min: sec) (min: sec) (mph) (mph) SR 204 at 81st Ave SE I-5 at Pacific Ave Westbound 13:45 19 32:00 8 20th St SE at 83rd Ave SE I-5 at Pacific Ave Westbound 9:05 25 28:05 8 US 2 at Bickford Ave I-5 at Pacific Ave Westbound 8:05 30 14:20 17 I-5 at Pacific Ave SR 204 at 81st Ave SE Eastbound 4:55 51 5:05 50 I-5 at Pacific Ave 20th St SE at 83rd Ave SE Eastbound 4:55 45 5:35 39 I-5 at Pacific Ave US 2 at Bickford Ave Eastbound 4:55 55 5:00 53 Source: WSDOT 2018c The origin and destination districts (Figure 4) for existing AM peak period (6 AM to 9 AM) trips across the US 2 westbound trestle are tabulated in Table 2. The greatest number of trips originate in the Lake Stevens area, with most of those trips traveling to Everett and South Everett. Table 2. AM-peak Period Origin and Destination Pairs for Westbound Trestle Trips DESTINATION King. SW SE S Everett E Marysville/ NW NE Skagit Others Total Co Snohomish Snohomish Everett Snohom Arlington Snohomish Snohomish Co. Co. ish Co. Co. Co. ORIGIN 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 King Co. 1 - - - 7 17 - 8 5 - 11 1 49 SW 2 - - - 0 72 - 43 19 6 61 18 219 Snohomish Co. SE 3 92 267 - 894 542 - 106 48 17 235 16 2,218 Snohomish Co. S Everett 4 - - - - - - - - - - - 0 Everett 5 - - - - - - - - - - - 0 E 6 466 1,559 - 2,201 2,097 - 43 42 11 16 62 6,496 Snohomish Co. Marysville/ 7 24 140 - 79 42 - - - - - 1 285 Arlington NW 8 - - - - - - - - - - - 0 Snohomish Co. NE 9 1 8 - 8 4 - - - - - - 21 Snohomish Co. Skagit 10 - - - - - - - - - - - 0 Others 11 - - - - - - - - - 10 - 10 Total 583 1,974 0 3,189 2,774 0 201 114 33 332 98 9,298 Source: WSDOT 2019b US 2 Westbound Trestle Project: Draft Purpose and Need Figure 4. Map of Travel Districts Source: WSDOT 2019b WSDOT sets level of service (LOS) standards for state highways. The US 2 trestle has an LOS standard of “C”, while the interchanges with I-5 and with SR 204/20th Street SE have an LOS standard of “D” (WSDOT 2019c). LOS C is defined as stable traffic flow with speeds near free flow, while LOS D is approaching unstable flow with speeds declining as volume increases. The average speeds for westbound traffic shown in Table 1 indicate that these standards are not currently met. FREIGHT The US 2 westbound trestle is a T1 and Connector freight route with 9 percent of its daily traffic as trucks. Truck traffic shares capacity with the general-purpose traffic and both contributes to and experiences the same congestion as that traffic. Continuing east over Steven’s Pass, US 2 becomes a T3 (carries between 300,000 and 4 million tons of freight per year) and alternative freight route (WSDOT 2017b). As the most direct alternative corridor to the I-90 T1 freight corridor crossing the Cascade Mountains to the Puget Sound region, US 2 provides an important alternative if I-90 is closed to freight for any reason. WSDOT recognizes US 2 as an important link in the aerospace supply chain, linking aerospace product and parts manufacturing business locations (WSDOT 2017b). Freight speed and reliability experience the same conditions as general purpose traffic in the corridor. TRANSIT The westbound US 2 trestle is currently used by Community Transit Routes 270/271, 280 and 425. These routes connect communities on the US 2 corridor, including Gold Bar, Sultan, Monroe and Snohomish, and the US 92 corridor, including Granite Falls and Lake Stevens, to Everett Station, Boeing facilities at Paine Field, and downtown Seattle. Collectively, they make 14 westbound trips across the trestle during the AM peak. Currently approximately 400 westbound passenger trips are carried by transit across the US 2 trestle in the AM peak. Because there are no HOV or transit-priority facilities, transit riders in the corridor currently experience the same congestion and traffic delays as general-purpose traffic, and would experience the same increase in travel times shown in Table 1. NON-MOTORIZED Based on pedestrian and bicycle counts collected once per year between 2009 and 2017, on average 18 bicycles and 7 pedestrians use US 2 to cross the Snohomish River during the morning (7 to 9 AM) and afternoon (4 to 6 PM) commute periods (WSDOT 2019a). Low non-motorized transportation volumes often correspond to a lack of safe or connected bicycle and pedestrian facilities. There are no non-motorized facilities on westbound US 2, however the lower roadway (20th Ave SE) under the US 2 trestle is open to pedestrians and cyclists traveling in either direction and it includes bike route signs, but no separation from traffic. Traffic volumes on the lower roadway are low. Cyclists and pedestrians are required to cross the Snohomish River on the eastbound US 2 bridge. The shared path on the eastbound structure is narrow for two way cyclists to maneuver. In the east end of the corridor, the shoulder on the 20 th Street SE bridge is signed as a bike lane; however, the intersection with SR 204 is signed as end bike route.
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]
  • 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]
  • 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]
  • Watershed Analysis Template
    Miller-Foss Watershed Analysis References Baenen, J. 1981. Stillaguamish, Snohomish, Snoqualmie, and Duwamish. In: Blukis Onat, A.R.; Hollenbeck, J.L. (eds.) Inventory of Native American Religious Use, Practices, Localities, and Resources.. Seattle, WA: Institute of Cooperative Research. 396-471. Bilby, E.; J. Ward. 1989. Changes in characteristics and function of woody debris with increasing size of streams in Western Washington. Transcript. Portland, OR: American Fisheries Society: 118: 363-378. Bisson, P.A.; Bilby, R.E.; Bryant, M.D.; Dolloff, C.A.; Grette, G..B.; House, R.A.; Murphy, M.L.; Koski, K.V.; Sedell, J.R. 1987. Large woody debris in forested streams in the Pacific Northwest: Past, present and future. 143-190. In: Salo, E.O.; and Cundy, T.; ed. Streamside management: Forestry and fishery interactions. Seattle, WA: College of Forest Resources. University of Washington. Contribution no. 57. Blukis Onat, A.R.; Hollenbeck, J.L. (eds.). 1981. Inventory of religious use, practices, localities, and resources. Mt. Baker-Snoqualmie National Forest. Seattle, WA: Institute of Cooperative Research. Booth; D.B. Goldstein, B. 1994. Patterns and processes of landscape development by the Puget lobe ice sheet. In: Lasmanis E.; Cheney, R., eds.. 1994. Regional Geology of Washington State, Washington Division of Geology and Earth Resources, bulletin no. 80, 227. Bortleson, G..; Dion, N.; McConnel, J.; and Nelson. L. 1976. Reconnaissance data on lakes in Washington, vol. 2 (King and Snohomish Counties). Washington State Dept. of Ecology and U.S. Department of the Interior (USDI), Geological Survey, water-supply, bulletin no. 43(2). Brown, J.K.et al. 2001. Coarse woody debris and succession in the recovering forest.
    [Show 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
    [Show full text]
  • Salmon Overlay to the Snohomish Estuary Wetland Integration Plan
    Salmon Overlay to the Snohomish Estuary Wetland Integration Plan Prepared by: City of Everett and Pentec Environmental Salmon Overlay to the Snohomish Estuary Wetland Integration Plan Prepared by: City of Everett Planning and Community Development 2930 Wetmore Avenue, Suite 8-A Everett, WA 98201 and Pentec Environmental Project No. 253-002 120 Third Avenue S, Suite 110 Edmonds, WA 98020 (425) 775-4682 March 12, 2001 Cover photo by OPP*TION PHOTO This document was funded in part through cooperative agreements with the Governor’s Salmon Recovery Office (IAC Grant No. 99-1690 N) and National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (Grant No. G0000100). The views expressed herein are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of NOAA or any of its subagencies. TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 Introduction.............................................................................................................1 1.1 Background..................................................................................................................... 1 1.2 Regulatory Setting/Relation to Other Plans.................................................................... 2 1.3 Objective of the Salmon Overlay ................................................................................... 2 1.4 Description of Document ............................................................................................... 4 2.0 Salmon Overlay Process and Methods ................................................................9 2.1 SSOTAC........................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Snohomish River Tributaries Fecal Coliform Total Maximum Daily Load
    Snohomish River Tributaries Fecal Coliform Total Maximum Daily Load Submittal Report June 2001 Publication Number 00-10-087 Snohomish River Tributaries Fecal Coliform Total Maximum Daily Load Submittal Report by Robert J. Wright Randy Coots Robert F. Cusimano Washington State Department of Ecology Water Quality Program Post Office Box 47600 Olympia, Washington 98504-7600 June 2001 Publication Number 00-10-087 For additional copies of this document contact: Department of Ecology Publications Distribution Center P.O. Box 47600 Olympia, WA 98504-7600 Telephone: (360) 407-7472 If you have special accommodation needs or require this document in an alternative format, please call the secretary at (360) 407-6404. The TTY number is 711 or 1-800-833-6388 . Table of Contents List of Figures...................................................................................................................................ii List of Tables ....................................................................................................................................ii Introduction......................................................................................................................................1 Background ......................................................................................................................................2 Applicable Criteria ..........................................................................................................................6 Water Quality and Resource Impairments ...................................................................................7
    [Show full text]
  • Snoqualmie, Sultan, and Skykomish Rivers, Washington
    DEPABTMEI7T OF THE INTEKIOB. UNITED STATES GEOLOGICAL SURVEY GEORGE OTIS RMITH, DIBECTOR WATER-SUPPLY PAPER 366 PROFILE SURVEYS OF SNOQUALMIE, SULTAN, AND SKYKOMISH RIVERS, WASHINGTON PREPARED UNDER THE DIRECTION OF R. B. MARSHALL, CHIEF GEOGRAPHER WASHINGTON GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 1914 DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR UNITED STATES GEOLOGICAL SURVEY GEORGE OTIS SMITH, DIRECTOR * WATER- SUPPLY PAPER 366 PROFILE SURVEYS OF SNOQUALMIE, SULTAN, AND SKYKOMISH RIVERS, WASHINGTON PREPARED UNDER THE DIRECTION OF R. B. MARSHALL, CHIEF GEOGRAPHER WASHINGTON GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 1914 CONTENTS. Page. General features of Snohomish River basin.................................. 5 Gaging stations............................................................ 6 Publications.............................................................. 7 ILLUSTRATIONS. PLATE I. A-D, Plan and profile of Snoqualmie River and certain tributaries above Fall City, Wash..............................At end of volume. II. A-B, Plan and profile of Sultan River above Sultan, Wash......... At end of volume. III. A-F, Plan and profile of Skykomish River and certain tributaries above Gold Bar, Wash..............................At end of volume. 49607° WSP 366 14 3 PROFILE SURVEYS OF SNOQUALMIE, SULTAN, AND SKYKOMISH RIVERS, WASHINGTON. Prepared under the direction of R. B. MAKSHALL, Chief Geographer. GENERAL. FEATURES OF SNOHOMISH RIVER BASIN. Snohomish River is formed by the union of Skykomish and Sno- qualmie rivers, in the southwestern part of Snohomish County, Wash., and flows northwestward into Puget Sound. Skykomish River drains the west slope of the Cascade Mountains for a distance of 30 miles as measured along the divide or 22 miles in a straight line, northward between the point common to King, Kittitas, and Chelan counties, along the eastern boundary of King and Snohomish counties to a point 1 mile south of Indian Pass, at the divide between the Skykomish and Sauk drainage basins.
    [Show full text]