DOCSLIB.ORG

Puget Sound Region TRANSPORTATION RECOVERY ANNEX July 2014

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Puget Sound Region TRANSPORTATION RECOVERY ANNEX July 2014 Puget Sound Region TRANSPORTATION RECOVERY ANNEX July 2014 Regional Catastrophic Disaster Coordination Plan Part 1: User Guide Part 2: Annex The above links will take you directly to the User Guide or the Annex. Transportation Recovery Annex User Guide USER GUIDE OVERVIEW & CONTEXT User Guide Purpose Context This User Guide is designed to 1) provide an overview of the After an emergency or disaster, transportation Whatcom San Juan Transportation Recovery Annex and to 2) be a practical mechanism for restoration is a continuous process of Skagit coordinating regional transportation system recovery after a assessment, prioritization, mitigation Island catastrophic incident. The User Guide is not a replacement for the full and repair. Clallam Snohomish Kitsap text of the Toolkit. Jefferson The Transportation Recovery Annex King guides regional transportation coordination Grays Harbor Mason How to Use this Guide in a catastrophic event within the 8-county Pierce Puget Sound Region. “Regional Thurston This document provides an overview and practical guide to using the coordination” means multiple counties or Transportation Recovery Annex (”the Annex”). The full text of the Annex Pacific Lewis Tribal Nations are involved. The Annex is contained in Section C and separately bound Attachments. supports the regional Coordination Plan. Northwest Washington Clicking on a blue link (p. #) will bring you to relevant information within this User Guide and full Toolkit document. The Annex provides a comprehensive framework and guidance for regional transportation system recovery after a catastrophic incident. It provides information and recommended guidelines for regional coordination, collaboration, decision-making, and priority setting among Puget Sound area After clicking on a blue link, hold the Alt key down emergency response and transportation agencies and other partners across the and press the left arrow key to return to the page disaster recovery spectrum. Although this Annex specifically addresses you were viewing. transportation recovery after a major earthquake, the principles apply to all types of transportation disruption, especially those that require multi-agency and multi-modal coordination. Clicking on blue links will bring you to relevant external resources. The Annex describes three separate concepts of coordination corresponding to three stages of a catastrophic event: Initial transportation system recovery actions to support response Mid-term transportation system recovery actions Long-term transportation system recovery actions Puget Sound Transportation Recovery Annex // User Guide// July 2014 UG-1 USER GUIDE NAVIGATION SHORT-TERM (UP TO 72 HOURS) MID-TERM (UP TO SEVERAL MONTHS) LONG-TERM (ONGOING) Short-Term Recovery Mid-Term Recovery Decision & Coordination Long-Term Recovery Decision & Event E Decision & Coordination I Process (p. UG-3) Coordination Process (p. UG-11) A Process (p. UG-7) Disruption Scenarios Transportation Recovery (p. UG-3) Indicators (p. UG-11) TIP: Clicking on the Transportation Transportation Transportation highlighted F Collaboration in the B Collaboration in the J Collaboration in the page number Mid-Term (p. UG-8) Short-Term (p. UG-4) Long-Term (p. UG-12) (p.#) will take you to the Mid-Term Transportation Tools for Prioritization appropriate G Recovery Coordination K Strategies Group (p. UG-9) section of the Processes (p. UG-13) Roadway Checklists and User Guide. C Inspection Documentation H Recovery Entities (p. UG-10) After clicking (p. UG-5) on an orange link, hold the Alt key down D Mitigation Strategies (p. UG-6) and press the left arrow key MAPS to return to the page you RESOURCES were viewing. CONTACTS Puget Sound Transportation Recovery Annex // User Guide // July 2014 UG-2 USER GUIDE A SHORT-TERM RECOVERY Short-term recovery normally occurs in the first 72 hours after a catastrophic event. It is driven by immediate response needs and its aim is to manage the immediate impacts of the disaster. Short-Term Decision and Coordination Process The short-term coordination process includes assessing the situation, followed by an iterative process of coordinating with partners and establishing detours. (p.II-2) Short-Term Recovery Checklists (p.II-16) Potential Detour Scenarios and Routes Short-term recovery checklists provide a list of key NOTE: THIS IS ALSO RELEVANT TO MID-TERM RECOVERY recovery activities to be completed in the short-term Appendix A: This Appendix provides a summary of the development of the 50 disruption scenarios, the planning by mode and broken down by agency responsibility. process with local stakeholders and the calculations used to produce the Level of Service (LOS) map for each Short-Term Checklists include: scenario. (p.A-1) Roadways (p.II-16) Appendix B: This Appendix provides specific management and map information on each of the fifty (50) Waterways (p.II-17) disruption scenarios. (p.B-1) Airways (p.II-18) Table B-1 is an index of the disruption scenarios. (p.B-2) Railways (p.II-19) Puget Sound Transportation Recovery Annex // User Guide// July 2014 Return to Navigation UG-3 USER GUIDE B COLLABORATION IN THE SHORT-TERM Collaborative short-term transportation recovery measures are often temporary measures that can meet a transportation need while developing more permanent measures and intermodal diversion of freight and passengers. Transportation Collaboration in the Short-Term Phase Actions Collaboration Share situational awareness State EOC, WSDOT EOC and local EOCs share info from field assessments using all available technology, such as by e- mail, WebEOC and SharePoint sites. Agencies that manage internet-based roadway condition maps update their websites as appropriate. State EOC assembles Essential Elements of Information and shares information through the FEMA Regional Response Coordination Center (RRCC) and National Response Coordination Center (NRCC). State agencies coordinate with federal regulatory agencies through Federal Lead Agency and/or liaisons to the State EOC. Establish roadway and transit State establishes detours for state highway system in collaboration with affected jurisdictions. detours Local agencies establish detours in collaboration with affected adjacent jurisdictions. Transit agencies make initial service adjustments. Utilize mutual aid for Local jurisdictions may request resources from mutual aid partners. emergency repairs Share public information Public messages are shared through Joint Information Centers (JIC) and/or a Joint Information System (JIS). (See Section V - Information Collection and Dissemination.) Puget Sound Transportation Recovery Annex // User Guide// July 2014 Return to Navigation UG-4 USERUSER GUIDE GUIDE C ROADWAY CHECKLISTS CHECKLISTS & &INSPE INSPECTIONCTION DOCUMENTATION DOCUMENTA TION A significant element of the recovery process for the roadway transportation system begins with the assessment of damages to bridges and roadway structures, and the sharing of this information among local jurisdictions and the State. WSDOT Bridges and Roadway Structures Checklist WSDOT Flow Chart for the Post-Earthquake Inspection of Bridges (p.E-1) (p.E-3) Provides a process for local jurisdictions for inspecting bridges and coordinating with neighboring cities and/or counties upon closure of bridges. WSDOT First Response Bridge Inspection Documentation Form (p.E-5) First Response Inspection Documentation Form is already in use for state owned bridges. This form has been recommended for use by local public works agencies and/or bridges inspection departments for Level I inspections. The form is part of the new WSDOT “Handbook for the Post- Earthquake Safety Evaluation of Bridges.” (This handbook is not yet available). The Highway Facilities Checklist p.E-7 Checklist lists highway facilities eligible for FHWA Emergency Relief Puget Sound Transportation Recovery Annex // User Guide// July 2014 Return to Navigation UG-5 USER GUIDE D TRANSPORTATION MITIGATION STRATEGIES NOTE: THIS IS ALSO RELEVANT TO MID-TERM AND LONG-TERM RECOVERY Transportation mitigation strategies are grouped into four (4) categories based on the desired results. The strategies are classified as Increasing Capacity on Existing Lanes, Technology, Diverting or Redirecting Traffic and Demand Management. Transportation Mitigation Strategies (p.E-14) Waterways Mitigation (p.F-1) These mitigation strategies are generally related to Road and Railways Summarizes waterways strategies and the recovery phases. systems. Additional information on each element is provided. Provides an overview of a range of strategies, from how to increase capacity on existing lanes to demand management, organized by the phase of the recovery effort in which they usually occur. Airways Mitigation (p.G-1) Lists general transportation mitigation strategies and identifies which of Summarizes airways strategies and the response phase in which they the individual strategies can be applied during short-, mid- or long-term would come into play. phases of recovery. (See Appendix 2 for applications to specific mitigation strategies associated with each disruption scenario.) Additional information on each element is provided. Subsequent sections describe each set of strategies, and provide information on how the strategy fits into the overall recovery plan, with considerations for ease of implementation. Puget Sound Transportation Recovery Annex // User Guide// July 2014 Return to Navigation UG-6 USERUSER GUIDE GUIDE E MID-TERM TERM RECOVERY KEY MEASURES & RECOVERY CHECKLISTS
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Analysis of Existing Data on Lake Union/Ship Canal
    Water Quality Assessment and Monitoring Study: Analysis of Existing Data on Lake Union/Ship Canal October 2017 Alternative Formats Available Water Quality Assessment and Monitoring Study: Analysis of Existing Data on Lake Union/Ship Canal Prepared for: King County Department of Natural Resources and Parks Wastewater Treatment Division Submitted by: Timothy Clark, Wendy Eash-Loucks, and Dean Wilson King County Water and Land Resources Division Department of Natural Resources and Parks Water Quality Assessment and Monitoring Study: Analysis of Existing Data on Lake Union/Ship Canal Acknowledgements The authors would like to thank for following people for their contributions to this report: Staff at the King County Environmental Laboratory for field and analytical support. Dawn Duddleson (King County) for her help in completing the literature review. The King County Water Quality and Quantity Group for their insights, especially Sally Abella for her thorough and thoughtful review. Lauran Warner, Frederick Goetz, and Kent Easthouse of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Judy Pickar (project manager), Dean Wilson (science lead), and King County project team members (Bob Bernhard, Mark Buscher, Timothy Clark, Betsy Cooper, Wendy Eash‐Loucks, Elizabeth Gaskill, Martin Grassley, Erica Jacobs, Susan Kaufman‐Una, Lester, Deborah, Kate Macneale, Chris Magan, Bruce Nairn, Sarah Ogier, Erika Peterson, John Phillips, Cathie Scott, Jim Simmonds, Jeff Stern, Dave White, Mary Wohleb, and Olivia Wright). The project’s Science and Technical Review Team members—Virgil Adderley, Mike Brett, Jay Davis, Ken Schiff, and John Stark—for guidance and review of this report. Citation King County. 2017. Water Quality Assessment and Monitoring Study: Analysis of Existing Data on Lake Union/Ship Canal.
    [Show full text]
  • Bridges and Tunnels in WA State
    rHR~ (11-tl) United States Depar~mentof the Interior Heritage ",';on5ervation and Recreatioll Service National Register of His.toric Plac s Inventory-Nomination Form See Instructions in H,>w to Complete Naiional Register Forms Type all entrles--complete applicable sections 1. Name historic Hi~toric Bridges and Tunnels in Washington Stt_te _ r and-or common l I \ " • 2. location I f street & number see i ndi vi dua 1 i nventorv fonns not for publication city, town vicinity of c ~gresslonal district state code county code < 3. Classification , . i' Category Ownership Status ~resent Use _district _" public __ occupied _ agriculture _museum _ bUildlng(s) _private _ unoccupied _ commercial _park" v if\ -A- structure -..X- both _ work in progress , _ educational _ private residence _site Public Acquisition Accessible _ entertainment _religious / _ob~ect _in process _ yes: restricted f _ government _ scientific ! ~thematic _ being considered _ y~s: unrestricted _ industrial ....L- transportatl~,n .i oroup no _military other: , 1 _4_._O_w_n_e_r_o_f_P_r_o..:p"-e_rt..:y'-- ~_:__----' ~< \ j J;"'--- \ <.\ :ame Muitiple Ownership , 'r i ! street & number , 1 city, town vicinity of .!"' alate 5. Location of Legal Descript_io~n...:..- .:...-..;,.._, courthouse, registry of deeds, etc. State Deoartment of ransoorti on: county ~ourthouses; atreet & number city ha I "I s clty,town state 6. Representation in Existi ,gSurveys t::.It::.le=----'.:H~i.:.s.:.to.:.r=-l~·c~B=-,r-,i",d=Q1e....::.Su~r=-v'-.:e:.Lv --.:h~a::.fth::.II:::I..!p:.:.ro=_'pe=rty:!....:be=e::.n..:d::.et::e::.:rm.::l:::necI=",8:::lag=lb:.:le:.:':.-:=yel _ no date January 1979 - April 1980 I _federal Lstate county 1oca1 depolltoryforaurveyrecorClI State Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation III West 21st Avenue.
    [Show full text]
  • Statement of Qualifications Murray Morgan Bridge Rehabilitation Design-Build Project
    Submitted by: Kiewit Pacific Co. Statement of Qualifications Murray Morgan Bridge Rehabilitation Design-Build Project Specification No. PW10-0128F Submitted to: Purchasing Office, Tacoma Public Utilities 3628 South 35th Street, Tacoma, WA 98409 June 8, 2010 Tab No. 1 - General Company Information & Team Structure Murray Morgan Bridge Rehabilitation Design-Build Project Project TAB NO.1 - GENERAL COMPANY INFORMATION AND TEAM STRUCTURE Kiewit Pacific Co., a wholly-owned subsidiary of Kiewit Infrastructure Group, Inc., will be the contracting party for this project, as indicated on Forms 3 and 4 in Tab No. 4 - Appendix C. As a wholly-owned subsidiary, none of the officers of Kiewit Pacific Co. (Kiewit) own stock. Incorporated on May 18, 1982, we can trace our history back to 1884, when Peter and Andrew Kiewit formed Kiewit Brothers, an Omaha masonry contracting partnership. Today, we are part of one of North America's largest and most respected construction and mining organizations. We take our place in the corporate structure of our parent company, Kiewit Infrastructure Group Inc., alongside Kiewit Construction Company and Kiewit Southern Co. Our affiliates and subsidiaries, as well as those of our parent company, operate from a network of offices throughout North America. We draw upon the Kiewit Corporation’s collective experience and personnel to assemble the strongest team possible for a given project. Therefore, work experience of such affiliates and subsidiaries is relevant in demonstrating our capabilities. For the Murray Morgan Bridge, we are supplementing our local talent with extensive moveable bridge expertise from our east coast operations, Kiewit Constructors, Inc. We are also utilizing our local subsidiary, General Construction Company (General), for mechanical and electrical expertise.
    [Show full text]
  • Environmental Checklist
    Spokane St Swing Bridge Access Project Seattle, Washington SEPA Checklist December 8, 2020 Spokane St Swing Bridge Access Project SEPA Checklist Page 2 of 24 STATE ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT (SEPA) ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST A. BACKGROUND 1. Name of proposed project, if applicable: Spokane St Swing Bridge Access Project 2. Name of applicant: Seattle Department of Transportation (SDOT) 3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person: Sara Zora, Project Manager Seattle Department of Transportation Project Development Division 700 Fifth Avenue, Suite 3800 P.O. Box 34996 Seattle, WA 98124 206-733-9973 4. Date checklist prepared: December 12, 2020 5. Agency requesting checklist: City of Seattle Department of Transportation (SDOT) 6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable): Access restrictions on the Spokane St Swing Bridge began in April 2020, shortly after the West Seattle High-Rise Bridge was closed due to safety concerns on March 23, 2020. These access restrictions were enforced by the Seattle Police Department until January 11, 2021, and since then by an automated photo enforcement system. 7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, explain. There are concurrent project activities to strengthen the Spokane St Swing Bridge, construct a new telecommunications system, and replace the control systems. 8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal. A capacity analysis and traffic study were completed for the project in December 2020. Spokane St Swing Bridge Access Project SEPA Checklist Page 3 of 24 9.
    [Show full text]
  • Physical Environment $3.7 Billion
    Physical Environment $3.7 Billion GENERAL GOVERNMENT HEALTH AND 17% HUMAN SERVICES 19% CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT 21% LAW SAFETY AND JUSTICE 11% PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT 32% Airport & Ferry Permitting & Facilities Environmental 2% Review Fleet Administration 1% Parks & Recreation 2% 7% Roads Solid Waste & 6% Closure 8% Water Transit Management 44% 30% Organization of the Pie Chart: The following agencies were combined to make the pie chart more readable. Roads: Roads and Roads Construction Transfers Parks & Recreation: Parks & Recreation, Youth Sports Facilities Grants, Open Space and Trails Levy Solid Waste & Closure: DNRP Admin., Solid Waste, Post‐Closure Landfill Maintenance, Historic Preservation Program Water Management: Intercounty River Improvement, Water & Land Resources, Surface Water Management Local Drainage, Wastewater Treatment, Noxious Weeds, Flood Control District Fleet Administration: Fleet Motor Pool, Fleet Management Equipment, Fleet Wastewater Equipment Repair & Replacement Airport & Ferry Facilities: Airport and Marine Services Transit: Transit and DOT Director Due to rounding, figures may not add to 100%. PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT PROGRAM AREA INTRODUCTION The King County Physical Environment departments support services related to building and land use permitting; community and regional parks; various recreational programs; solid waste disposal; surface water management; wastewater treatment; road and bridge maintenance and improvement in the unincorporated area; and transit operations. These services are delivered by three county departments: Department of Natural Resources and Parks (DNRP), Department of Permitting and Environmental Review (DPER), and Department of Transportation (DOT). These departments are supported by dedicated funding sources and provide services that enhance the quality of life and economic vitality of the Puget Sound region. The Department of Natural Resources and Parks (DNRP) serves as the steward of the region’s environment.
    [Show full text]
  • Questions for Seattle Mayoral Candidates – Magnolia Chamber of Commerce
    Questions for Seattle Mayoral Candidates – Magnolia Chamber of Commerce The Magnolia Chamber of Commerce believes that an educated, engaged electorate is one of the key aspects of a thriving community. To assist our members, the local business community, and Magnolia residents better understand our Seattle mayoral candidates, we are asking each candidate to please fill out the questionnaire covering topics important to the Magnolia neighborhood AND/OR be interviewed one-on-one by our executive director, relying on the techniques we have developed for our Chamber Chat series (see Chamber Chat interview with Councilmember Andrew Lewis) Each mayoral candidate will be asked the exact same questions. We will post your video and/or your written answers on our website and make available to our members via a special election newsletter that will go out before the primary election date. About the Magnolia Chamber of Commerce. The Magnolia Chamber represents just over 370 Magnolia businesses and family members. Our mission is to add to the vibrancy of our community by fostering connections between Magnolia’s businesses, residents, and community groups. Our purpose is to promote civic and commercial progress in our business districts and neighborhood. Learn more about the Magnolia Chamber by visiting https://discovermagnolia.org/ For questions and/or to set up a video interview, please contact Jason Thibeaux, Executive Director, Magnolia Chamber of Commerce. Seattle Mayoral Candidate Questions (these questions can be answered either by video with our Executive Director, Jason Thibeaux at 206-618-1589 or [email protected] and/or filled out and sent to the Magnolia Chamber, 3213 West Wheeler Street, #42, Seattle, WA 98199 Good Governance, Effective Leadership 1.
    [Show full text]
  • WEST SEATTLE BRIDGE CLOSURE Transit Action Plan FINAL
    WEST SEATTLE BRIDGE CLOSURE Transit Action Plan FINAL July 2020 Table of Contents Executive Summary ....................................................................................................................................... 1 Background ............................................................................................................................................... 1 Transit Action Plan .................................................................................................................................... 2 Introduction/Problem Statement ................................................................................................................. 3 Purpose of Plan ............................................................................................................................................. 4 Mobility Planning for 2021 and Beyond ................................................................................................... 6 Goals & Objectives ........................................................................................................................................ 6 Challenges/Opportunities ......................................................................................................................... 7 Travel Markets .............................................................................................................................................. 7 Data Analytics ............................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Community Organizations
    April 2019 Community Organizations AE 0036-17 List of Government Entity, Business and Business Organization, and Community Organization Commenters DRAFT – For internal discussion only. Not reviewed or approved on behalf of any party. Subject: 350 Seattle Transportation Team Scoping Comment for Ballard Link station April 1st, 2019 Please consider this scoping comment for the Ballard Link station, and include in scoping all light rail routes that could potentially be the most economical way to maximize ridership and Transit-Oriented development, and then choose the alternative that best optimizes for these two critical factors. Scoping should take into consideration the effect of light rail decisions on climate. To that end, light rail stations should be situated where they will attract the most riders, and where the most housing is and will be constructed, accelerating emission reductions. Ridership ​ and the opportunity for dense transit-oriented development should be top priority because: ● The most recent IPCC climate report makes it clear -- we have very little time to drastically reduce greenhouse gas emissions -- roughly a dozen years to reduce GHG emissions by 40-50%( https://www.ipcc.ch/sr15/) ​ ​ ● Personal transportation accounts for half of Seattle Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emissions ( http://greenspace.seattle.gov/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/SeaClimateAction_April2018. pdf). ​ ● Many if not most people cannot afford electric cars, and we can’t achieve these emissions targets without getting most of us out of our cars and onto transit. ● Transit-Oriented Development (TOD) allows more people to live where they can have a low-carbon commute. It represents our best chance for accommodating Seattle’s continued growth without sprawl that counteracts our other efforts toward GHG reduction.
    [Show full text]
  • Pierce County Public Works and Utilities Brian J
    Pierce County Public Works and Utilities Brian J. Ziegler, P.E. 2702 South 42nd Street, Suite 201 Director Tacoma, Washington 98409-7322 [email protected] piercecountywa.org/pwu TO: Dan Roach, Chair Pierce County Council FROM: Deb Wallace, Airport and Ferry Administrator DATE: October 28, 2014 SUBJECT: Airport Security The purpose of this briefing paper is to provide an update to Council on the status of security upgrades at Pierce County's airports. Current Situation: The Pierce County Airport and Ferry division is in the process of upgrading gate access, fencing, and security lighting at both airports. In 2015 the division will implement an Airport Watch program to increase the safety and security at each facility. The improvements are being made due to incidents which have occurred at the airports over the last several years and at the request of airport tenants. Currently both airports are fenced with restricted access gates to enhance security, although there are gaps in the fencing allowing unauthorized pedestrian entry. These gaps will be addressed in early 2015. An electronic gate is being added to the north gate at Tacoma Narrows Airport (TIW) and the south gate is being outfitted with a mechanism to allow its use by those who are hearing impaired. Once that improvement is completed, 24 hour security will be implemented at TIW. Thun Field currently operates with 24 hour gate security. Prior to implementation, the airport commissions at each airport discussed airport security measures during the preceding year and staff coordinated the implementation of the security measures with airport tenants.
    [Show full text]
  • Early Scoping Summary Report
    Early Scoping Summary Report April 2018 West Seattle and Ballard Link Extensions Summary Purpose Sound Transit conducted early scoping for the West Seattle and Ballard Link Extensions (WSBLE) Project in Seattle, Washington, from February 2 through March 5, 2018. The early scoping started the public planning and environmental processes for the project. This report describes how Sound Transit conducted early scoping and summarizes the comments received from local and regulatory agencies, tribes, and the public during the early scoping period. This information will be considered by Sound Transit as it identifies and studies alternatives for the WSBLE Project. The Early Scoping Process Sound Transit published an early scoping notice in the Washington State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) register on February 2, 2018, which initiated early scoping and started the 30-day comment period. Additional public notification was provided with mailed postcards, print and online advertisements, and social media notices. Three public open houses and an agency meeting were held during this comment period, as well as an online open house from February 12 to March 5, 2018. Sound Transit requested comments on the purpose and need, the Representative Project, other potential alternatives, and potential community benefits and impacts. Comments were accepted by mail, email, online comment forms, and on comment boards and maps at the open houses (both in person and online). Agency Early Scoping Thirty-four federal, state, regional, and local agencies received
    [Show full text]
  • Tacoma Narrows Airport Advisory Commission
    TACOMA NARROWS AIRPORT ADVISORY COMMISSION July 14, 2020 A meeting of the Pierce County Tacoma Narrows Airport Advisory Commission (TNAAC) was held on Tuesday, July 14, 2020 from 6:30 to 8:30 p.m. in a virtual TEAMS meeting format. I. Call to Order & Welcome Chair Kurt Grimmer called the meeting to order at 6:30 PM. TNAAC VOTING MEMBERS Present: Kurt Grimmer, Chair Tim Toerber, Vice Chair Larry Fickel Bob Felker – joined after roll call Brad Pattison – joined after roll call Excused: Brian Durham, Wiley Moore, Edward Lewis, Garth Jackson TNAAC NON-VOTING MEMBERS Present: Rod Propst, Pierce County Airport Manager; Katrina Knutson for Mayor Kuhn Excused: Derek Young, Council District 7; Kit Kuhn, Gig Harbor Mayor PIERCE COUNTY STAFF Present: Rod Propst, Airport Manager/Asst. Administrator Cindy Willis, Office Assistant VISITORS Present: Approximately 17 members of the public joined the TEAMS meeting. • Reports • O&M Report – Rod Propst Peninsula School District high schools had graduation parades at the airport. A few County employees volunteered, and Tacoma Narrows Aviation allowed them to cross in front of their hangars; everyone was pleased with the event. Justin has been mowing grass for the past two weeks; we’ll send the big mower back to Thun Field next week. We’re working with the road division to crack-seal the taxiway; the runway will be repainted to comply with FAA regulations. We’re working to get extra hires for the airports; the Parks employees served us well and we were sorry to see them go. • Wings & Wheels – Doug Fratoni was not in attendance.
    [Show full text]
  • Lake Washington Ship Canal and Lake Washington NOAA Chart 18447
    BookletChart™ Lake Washington Ship Canal and Lake Washington NOAA Chart 18447 A reduced-scale NOAA nautical chart for small boaters When possible, use the full-size NOAA chart for navigation. Included Area Published by the Magnolia Bluff and Duwamish Head, has a width of about 2 miles and extends SE for nearly the same distance. The bay is deep throughout National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration most of its area. National Ocean Service A speed limit of 4 knots is enforced within the guide piers of the Hiram Office of Coast Survey M. Chittenden Locks. A speed limit of 7 knots is enforced elsewhere in the Lake Washington Ship Canal, except in an area marked by four www.NauticalCharts.NOAA.gov private buoys in the N part of Lake Union. 888-990-NOAA The Hiram M. Chittenden Locks, a double lock, and a fixed dam are at the narrows of the entrance to Salmon Bay, 1.2 miles in from the sound. What are Nautical Charts? The large lock, a two-chamber structure, has a clear length of 760 feet, width of 80 feet, lift of 26 feet, and depth over the lower miter sill of 29 Nautical charts are a fundamental tool of marine navigation. They show feet. The small lock has a clear length of 123 feet, width of 28 feet, lift of water depths, obstructions, buoys, other aids to navigation, and much 26 feet, and depth over the lower sill of 16 feet. Passage time is less more. The information is shown in a way that promotes safe and than 30 minutes for large vessels and 5 to 10 minutes for small vessels.
    [Show full text]