DOCSLIB.ORG

Best Practices for Roadway Tunnel Design, Construction, Maintenance, Inspection, and Operations

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

NCHRP Project 20-68A Scan 09-05 Best Practices For Roadway Tunnel Design, Construction, Maintenance, Inspection, And Operations Supported by the National Cooperative Highway Research Program April 2011 The information contained in this report was prepared as part of NCHRP Project 20 68A U.S. Domestic Scan, National Cooperative Highway Research Program. SPECIAL NOTE: This report IS NOT an official publication of the National Cooperative Highway Research Program, Transportation Research Board, National Research Council, or The National Academies. Acknowledgments The work described in this document was conducted as part of NCHRP Project 20-68A, the U.S. Domestic Scan program. This program was requested by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO), with funding provided through the National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP). The NCHRP is supported by annual voluntary contributions from the state departments of transportation. Additional support for selected scans is provided by the U.S. Federal Highway Administration and other agencies. The purpose of each scan and of Project 20-68A as a whole is to accelerate beneficial innovation by facilitating information sharing and technology exchange among the states and other transportation agencies, and identifying actionable items of common interest. Experience has shown that personal contact with new ideas and their application is a particularly valuable means for such sharing and exchange. A scan entails peer-to-peer discussions between practitioners who have implemented new practices and others who are able to disseminate knowledge of these new practices and their possible benefits to a broad audience of other users. Each scan addresses a single technical topic selected by AASHTO and the NCHRP 20-68A Project Panel. Further information on the NCHRP 20-68A U.S. Domestic Scan program is available at http://144.171.11.40/cmsfeed/TRBNetProjectDisplay.asp?ProjectID=1570. This report was prepared by the scan team for Scan 09 05, Best Practices for Roadway Tunnel Design, Construction, Maintenance, Inspection, and Operations, whose members are listed below. Scan planning and logistics are managed by Arora and Associates, P.C.; Harry Capers is the Principal Investigator. NCHRP Project 20 68A is guided by a technical project panel and managed by Andrew C. Lemer, Ph.D., NCHRP Senior Program Officer. Kevin Thompson, P.E., Caltrans, AASHTO Co-Chair Jesus Rohena, P.E., FHWA, FHWA Co-Chair Alexander K. Bardow, P.E., Massachusetts DOT Barry B. Brecto, P.E., FHWA Washington State Division Bijan Khaleghi, Ph.D., P.E., S.E., Washington State DOT Louis Ruzzi, P.E., Pennsylvania DOT Michael G. Salamon, Colorado DOT Fulvio Tonon, Ph.D., P.E., Liaison, TRB Tunnels and Underground Structures Committee Mary Lou Ralls, P.E., Report Facilitator BEST PRACTICES FOR ROADWAY TUNNEL DESIGN, CONSTRUCTION, MAINTENANCE, INSPECTION, AND OPERATIONS Disclaimer The information in this document was taken directly from the submission of the authors. The opinions and conclusions expressed or implied are those of the scan team and are not necessarily those of the Transportation Research Board, the National Research Council, or the program sponsors. This document has not been edited by the Transportation Research Board. Scan 09-05 Best Practices For Roadway Tunnel Design, Construction, Maintenance, Inspection, And Operations REQUESTED BY THE American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials PREPARED BY Kevin Thompson, P.E., Louis Ruzzi, P.E., Caltrans, AASHTO Co Chair Pennsylvania DOT Jesus Rohena, P.E., Michael G. Salamon, FHWA, FHWA Co Chair Colorado DOT Alexander K. Bardow, P.E., Fulvio Tonon, Ph.D., P.E., Massachusetts DOT Liaison, TRB Tunnels and Underground Structures Committee Barry B. Brecto, P.E., FHWA Washington State Division Mary Lou Ralls, P.E., Report Facilitator Bijan Khaleghi, Ph.D., P.E., S.E., Washington State DOT SCAN MANAGEMENT Arora and Associates, P.C. Lawrenceville, NJ April 2011 The information contained in this report was prepared as part of NCHRP Project 20 68A U.S. Domestic Scan, National Cooperative Highway Research Program. SPECIAL NOTE: This report IS NOT an official publication of the National Cooperative Highway Research Program, Transportation Research Board, National Research Council, or The National Academies. BEST PRACTICES FOR ROADWAY TUNNEL DESIGN, CONSTRUCTION, MAINTENANCE, INSPECTION, AND OPERATIONS 6 Table of Contents Abbreviations and Acronyms.......................................................................................... VII Executive Summary.............................................................................................................. ES-1 Introduction............................................................................................................................... .ES-1 Scan Purpose and Scope .......................................................................................................... ES-1 Summary of Findings and Recommendations ........................................................................ ES-2 1) Develop standards, guidance, and best practices for roadway tunnels........................... ES-2 2) Develop an emergency response system plan unique to each facility which takes into account human behavior, facility ventilation, and fire mitigation................. ES-3 3) Develop and share inspection practices among tunnel owners........................................ ES-4 4) Consider inspection and maintenance operations during the design stage.....................ES-5 5) Develop site-specific plans for the safe and efficient operation of roadway tunnels........ES-5 6) A tunnel includes a long-term commitment to provide funding for preventive maintenance, upgrading of systems, and training and retention of operators................ES-6 7) Share existing technical knowledge within the industry to design a tunnel.................. ES-7 8) Provide education and training in tunnel design and construction................................. ES-7 Planned Implementation Actions............................................................................................. ES-7 1.0 Introduction....................................................................................................................... 1-1 Background..............................................................................................................................1-2 Methodology.............................................................................................................................1-2 Scan Itinerary..........................................................................................................................1-2 Host Agencies.......................................................................................................................... 1-2 Alaska Department of Transportation and Public Facilities (AKDOT&PF).................. 1-3 California Department of Transportation (Caltrans)....................................................... 1-3 Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT)............................................................. 1-4 District of Columbia Department of Transportation (DDOT).......................................... 1-5 Massachusetts Department of Transportation (MassDOT)............................................. 1-6 Pennsylvania Department of Transportation (PennDOT)............................................... 1-6 Port Authority of New York and New Jersey (PANY&NJ).............................................. 1-7 Virginia’s Chesapeake Bay Bridge and Tunnel District (CBBT District)....................... 1-7 Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT).............................................................. 1-8 Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT)........................................... 1-9 City of Seattle (Seattle DOT and Seattle Fire Department)............................................1-10 Sound Transit..................................................................................................................... 1-10 Scan Team .......................................................................................................................... 1-11 BEST PRACTICES FOR ROADWAY TUNNEL DESIGN, CONSTRUCTION, MAINTENANCE, INSPECTION, AND OPERATIONS I TABLE OF CONTENTS 2.0 Findings and Observations....................................................................................... 2-1 2.1 US Tunnel Inventory......................................................................................................... 2-1 2.1.1 Number of Tunnels in Inventory................................................................................ 2-2 2.1.2 Ages of Tunnels ......................................................................................................... 2-2 2.1.3 Tunnel Definition ...................................................................................................... 2-3 2.1.3.1 Current Definitions Used by Owners.............................................................. 2-3 2.1.3.2 Proposed Changes to AASHTO Tunnel Definition......................................... 2-4 2.1.4 Differentiation between Wide Bridges over Highways and Short Tunnels............. 2-6 2.1.5 Inventory Numbering System.................................................................................... 2-6 2.1.6 Inventory of Geometric Characteristics Relative to NBIS.......................................
Recommended publications
  • Discussion Document and Project Experience for Wine Caves Condor Earth Technologies, Inc

    Discussion Document and Project Experience for Wine Caves Condor Earth Technologies, Inc

    Discussion Document and Project Experience For Wine Caves Condor Earth Technologies, Inc. www.CondorEarth.com COMPANY OVERVIEW Condor has served California, Oregon, 50 employee-owners. Our staff includes over 25 Washington and Texas wineries for over 25 professionals consisting of civil and years from our California offices in Stockton, geotechnical engineers, engineering geologists, Sonora, Merced and Rancho Cordova. Condor’s environmental geologists and hydrogeologists. team of professionals provide engineering and Condor’s wine cave project support role often environmental consulting services for a wide begins as early as planning and project scoping, range of projects and clients. Our wine cave and carries through design, permitting and contractor tunnel design services have been used on over selection, and continues through construction 250 projects over the past 25 years. Condor is a with quality assurance, owner’s representative 100% employee owned firm with approximately and construction management services. CONDOR’S MISSION STATEMENT “To provide high quality, professional services for value-enhanced resource management and infrastructure development.” 1 WINE CAVES support. This has often involved a multi-staged YESTERDAY AND TODAY effort to: The history of wine cave construction in the 1. Identify suitable sites for development of United States dates back to the late 1850’s or early facilities. 1860’s in the Napa/Sonoma Valley region. 2. Evaluate local, state and federal permit California’s first wine cave was constructed at requirements to obtain project Buena Vista Winery in Sonoma. Soon after, Jacob entitlements. Schram founded Schramsberg Vineyards near 3. Undertake geologic survey work to Calistoga, California in 1862. Eight years later, identify ground conditions suitable to cave Schram found a new job for the Chinese laborers development.
  • Alternative Ground Control Strategies in Underground Construction

    Alternative Ground Control Strategies in Underground Construction

    Alternative ground control strategies in underground construction Keynote address to be presented by Evert Hoek at an International Symposium on "PRACTICES AND TRENDS FOR FINANCING AND CONTRACTING TUNNELS AND UNDERGROUND WORKS" to be held in Athens, Greece, on 22-23 March 2012 www.tunnelcontracts2012.com/ Alternative ground control strategies in underground construction Evert Hoek Evert Hoek Consulting Engineer Inc., Canada ABSTRACT Underground works vary from shallow urban tunnels to very deep tunnels and caverns in the world’s great mountain ranges. The problems encountered at and between these extremes are entirely different and require appropriate approaches to site investigation, design and construction. The establishment of reliable financial estimates, construction schedules and contract proposals can only be done once a realistic geological model has been prepared and a clear understanding of the likely behaviour of the rock mass and the groundwater conditions has been established. The conditions that control the behaviour of different kinds of excavations in a variety of geological environments are presented in the context of case histories. The aim is to provide project owners, financial managers, insurance companies and contractors with a road map that may assist them in avoiding some of the pitfalls and in considering some of the alternative strategies in the development of underground projects. 1 INTRODUCTION Tunnels have been built for hundreds of years as part of transportation systems for people, goods, water and services. Until the middle of the last century these tunnels were generally small in size and the builders sought out the most favourable geology and topography in which to build them.
  • ALASKAN WAY VIADUCT REPLACEMENT PROJECT Final Environmental Impact Statement

    ALASKAN WAY VIADUCT REPLACEMENT PROJECT Final Environmental Impact Statement

    ALASKAN WAY VIADUCT REPLACEMENT PROJECT Final Environmental Impact Statement APPENDIX R Energy Discipline Report Submitted by: PARSONS BRINCKERHOFF Prepared by: PARSONS BRINCKERHOFF J U L Y 2 0 1 1 Alaskan Way Viaduct Replacement Project Final EIS Energy Discipline Report The Alaskan Way Viaduct Replacement Project is a joint effort between the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), the Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT), and the City of Seattle. To conduct this project, WSDOT contracted with: Parsons Brinckerhoff 999 Third Avenue, Suite 3200 Seattle, WA 98104 In association with: Coughlin Porter Lundeen, Inc. EnviroIssues, Inc. GHD, Inc. HDR Engineering, Inc. Jacobs Engineering Group Inc. Magnusson Klemencic Associates, Inc. Mimi Sheridan, AICP Parametrix, Inc. Power Engineers, Inc. Shannon & Wilson, Inc. William P. Ott Construction Consultants SR 99: Alaskan Way Viaduct Replacement Project July 2011 Energy Discipline Report Final EIS This Page Intentionally Left Blank TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter 1 Introduction and Summary .................................................................................... 1 1.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................... 1 1.2 Summary ...................................................................................................................... 2 1.3 Summary of Analysis .................................................................................................... 2 Chapter 2 Methodology
  • The New Hampshire High Tunnel Story

    The New Hampshire High Tunnel Story

    The New Hampshire High Tunnel Story NATURAL RESOURCES CONSERVATION SERVICE New Hampshire January 2011 BACKGROUND National High Tunnel Conservation Benefits Local Foods Initiatives 3-Year Pilot Program High tunnels can provide a number of Growing food locally, especially before significant conservation benefits such as and after the traditional growing season, NRCS offered seasonal high tunnels an increase in plant and soil quality, a helps strengthen the local economy and (officially called “seasonal high tunnel decrease in pesticide use and foliar (leaf) helps ensure the viability and profitability system for crops”) as a conservation disease, and improved energy savings. of small farms. When NH farms succeed, practice for the first time in fiscal year Many farmers who want to grow toma- valuable farmland and cultural heritage are (FY) 2010 as part of a three-year trial to toes without using pesticides often find protected. High tunnels are important tools determine their effectiveness in con- they can only do so successfully if they for enhancing the availability of local food serving water, improving soil health, are grown in a tunnel. Without rainfall, year-round. foliar disease is often reduced because the leaves stay dry. Insects that are com- “As expected, the seasonal high monly a problem in the field may not be “It is phenomenal that winter tunnel pilot has been popular in so in the tunnel because the tunnel tends farmer’s markets in NH have grown New Hampshire. In just one to disrupt their feeding patterns. Other from none four years ago to twenty year, the NRCS-NH helped fund insects that occur in a high tunnel are today.
  • Megabang for Megabucks: Driving a Harder Bargain on Megaprojects

    Megabang for Megabucks: Driving a Harder Bargain on Megaprojects

    Megabang for megabucks Driving a harder bargain on megaprojects Marion Terrill, Owain Emslie, and Lachlan Fox May 2021 Megabang for megabucks: Driving a harder bargain on megaprojects Grattan Institute Support Grattan Institute Report No. 2021-04, May 2021 Founding members Endowment Supporters This report was written by Marion Terrill, Owain Emslie, and Lachlan The Myer Foundation Fox. Nat Manawadu provided extensive research assistance and made National Australia Bank substantial contributions. Susan McKinnon Foundation We would like to thank numerous government and industry participants Affiliate Partners and officials for their helpful comments and insights. Ecstra Foundation The opinions in this report are those of the authors and do not Origin Energy Foundation necessarily represent the views of Grattan Institute’s founding Susan McKinnon Foundation members, affiliates, individual board members, reference group members, or reviewers. The authors are responsible for any errors or Senior Affiliates omissions. Cuffe Family Foundation Grattan Institute is an independent think tank focused on Australian Maddocks public policy. Our work is independent, practical, and rigorous. We aim Medibank Private to improve policy by engaging with decision makers and the broader The Myer Foundation community. Scanlon Foundation We acknowledge and celebrate the First Nations people on whose Trawalla Foundation traditional lands we meet and work, and whose cultures are among the Wesfarmers oldest continuous cultures in human history. Westpac For further information on Grattan’s programs, or to join our mailing list, Affiliates please go to: www.grattan.edu.au. You can make a donation to support Allens future Grattan reports here: www.grattan.edu.au/donate. Ashurst This report may be cited as: Terrill, M., Emslie, O., and Fox, L.
  • Downtown Access Strategy Phase 1 Context Setting: Projects to Be Constructed in the Next 10 Years Table of Contents

    Downtown Access Strategy Phase 1 Context Setting: Projects to Be Constructed in the Next 10 Years Table of Contents

    DOWNTOWN ACCESS STRATEGY PHASE 1 Context Setting: Projects to be Constructed in the Next 10 Years September 25, 2013 Downtown Access Strategy Phase 1 Context Setting: Projects to be Constructed in the Next 10 Years Table of Contents I. Introduction ................................................................................................. 1 II. Review of Existing Plans, Projects, and Programs ......................................... 2 III. Potential Construction Concerns and Opportunities .................................. 3 A. Existing Construction Planning Tools 3 B. SDOT’s Construction Hub Coordination Program 4 C. Construction Mitigation Strategies Used by Other Cities 7 D. Potential Construction Conflicts and Opportunities 10 IV. Future Transportation Network Opportunities ......................................... 12 A. North Downtown 12 B. Denny Triangle / Westlake Hub 14 C. Pioneer Square / Chinatown-ID 15 D. Downtown Core and Waterfront 16 V. Future Phases of Downtown Access Strategy ............................................. 18 A. Framework for Phase 2 (2014 through 2016) 18 B. Framework for Phase 3 (Beyond 2016) 19 - i - September 25, 2013 Downtown Access Strategy Phase 1 Context Setting: Projects to be Constructed in the Next 10 Years I. INTRODUCTION Many important and long planned transportation and development projects are scheduled for con- struction in Downtown Seattle in the coming years. While these investments are essential to support economic development and job growth and to enhance Downtown’s stature as the region’s premier location to live, work, shop and play, in the short-term they present complicated challenges for con- venient and reliable access to and through Downtown. The Downtown Seattle Association (DSA) and its partners, Historic South Downtown (HSD) and the Seat- tle Department of Transportation (SDOT), seek to ensure that Downtown Seattle survives and prospers during the extraordinarily high level of construction activity that will occur in the coming years.
  • For the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2008 with Comparisons to Prior Fiscal Years Ended June 30, 2007 and June 30, 2006

    For the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2008 with Comparisons to Prior Fiscal Years Ended June 30, 2007 and June 30, 2006

    Peninsula Corridor Joint Powers Board San Carlos, California A Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement among: City and County of San Francisco San Mateo County Transit District Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority Comprehensive Annual Financial Report Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2008 PENINSULA CORRIDOR JOINT POWERS BOARD San Carlos, California Comprehensive Annual Financial Report Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2008 Prepared by the Finance Division This page intentionally left blank. Table of Contents Page I. INTRODUCTORY SECTION Letter of Transmittal.....................................................................................................................i Government Finance Officers Association (GFOA) Certificate of Achievement......................xi Board of Directors .................................................................................................................... xii Executive Management ........................................................................................................... xiii Organization Chart...................................................................................................................xiv Map............................................................................................................................................xv Table of Credits ........................................................................................................................xvi II. FINANCIAL SECTION INDEPENDENT AUDITOR’S REPORT ...............................................................................1
  • For the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2017 with Comparisons to Prior Fiscal Years Ended June 30, 2015 and June 30, 2016

    For the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2017 with Comparisons to Prior Fiscal Years Ended June 30, 2015 and June 30, 2016

    This Page Left Intentionally Blank PENINSULA CORRIDOR JOINT POWERS BOARD San Carlos, California Comprehensive Annual Financial Report Fiscal Years Ended June 30, 2017 and 2016 Prepared by the Finance Division This Page Left Intentionally Blank Table of Contents Page I. INTRODUCTORY SECTION Letter of Transmittal ............................................................................................................................................ i Government Finance Officers Association (GFOA) Certificate of Achievement ............................................. ix Board of Directors ............................................................................................................................................... x Executive Management ...................................................................................................................................... xi Organization Chart ........................................................................................................................................... xii Map ................................................................................................................................................................. xiii Table of Credits ................................................................................................................................................ xiv II. FINANCIAL SECTION INDEPENDENT AUDITOR’S REPORT ...................................................................................................... 1 MANAGEMENT'S
  • South Palo Alto Tunnel with At-Grade Freight

    South Palo Alto Tunnel with At-Grade Freight

    RAIL FACT SHEETS South Palo Alto Tunnel with At-Grade Freight About the Tunnel with At-Grade Freight For the tunnel alternative, the railroad tracks will be lowered in a trench south of Oregon Expressway to approximately Loma Verde Avenue. The twin bore tunnel will begin near Loma Verde Avenue and extend to just south of Charleston Road. The railroad tracks will then be raised in trench to approximately Ferne Avenue. The new electrified southbound railroad tracks will be built at the same horizontal location as the existing railroad track, however, the northbound track will be moved to the east within the limits of the tunnel to accommodate the spacing required between the twin bores. The railroad tracks in the trench and tunnel will carry only passenger trains. The freight trains will remain at-grade. The roadways at Meadow Drive and Charleston Road remain at their existing grade and will have a similar configuration that exists today with the addition of Class II buffered bike lanes on Charleston Road. This will require expanding the width of the road to maintain bike lanes through the overpass of the railroad. By the numbers Neighborhood Considerations • Diameter of twin bores is 30 feet. • Alma Street will permanently be reduced to one lane • Railroad track is designed for 110 mph. in each direction from south of Oregon Expressway to Ventura Avenue and from Charleston Road to Ferne • Meadow Drive and Charleston Road are Avenue. designed for 25 mph. • The train tracks will be approximately 70 feet below the Proposed Ground Level View - Looking Southwest • Maximum grade on railroad is 2%.
  • A Guide to the MTBTA Verrazano-Narrows Bridge Construction Photograph Collection

    A Guide to the MTBTA Verrazano-Narrows Bridge Construction Photograph Collection

    A Guide to the MTBTA Verrazano-Narrows Bridge Construction Photograph Collection TABLE OF CONTENTS Overview of the Collection Administrative Information Restrictions Administrative History Scope & Content Note Index Terms Series Description & Container Listing Archives & Special Collections College of Staten Island Library, CUNY 2800 Victory Blvd., 1L-216 Staten Island, NY 10314 © 2005 The College of Staten Island, CUNY Overview of the Collection Collection #: IC 1 Title: MTBTA Verrazano-Narrows Bridge Construction Photograph Collection Creator: Metropolitan Triborough Bridge and Tunnel Association Dates: 1960-1964 Extent: Abstract: This collection contains eleven photographs of the construction of the Verrazano- Narrows bridge. Administrative Information Preferred Citation MTBTA Verrazano-Narrows Bridge Construction Photograph Collection, Archives & Special Collections, Department of the Library, College of Staten Island, CUNY, Staten Island, New York. Acquisition These photographs were donated to the CSI Archives & Special Collections on October 26th, 2004 following their use in an exhibition at the college. Processing Information Restrictions Access Access to this record group is unrestricted. Copyright Notice The researcher assumes full responsibility for compliance with laws of copyright. The images are still the property of their creators, and requests for or use in publications should be directed to the Administrator of the MTA Special Archive, Laura Rosen. Laura Rosen Administrator, Special Archive MTBTA 2 Broadway, 22nd Floor New York, NY 646-252-7418 Administrative History The Verrazano-Narrows bridge was constructed in the late 1950’s and early 1960’s, and was completed in November of 1964. It was built to permit the movement of vehicular traffic between Staten Island and Brooklyn and link parts of the Interstate Highway System.
  • FACT SHEET: BART Silicon Valley

    FACT SHEET: BART Silicon Valley

    Twin-Bore Single-Bore Running Tunnel Running Tunnel Utilities Utilities Up to ~60' FACT SHEET: VTA’s BART Silicon Valley Phase II Extension Project FACTTunneling MethodologySHEET: BART Silicon Valley VTA’sVTA’s BART BART Silicon Silicon Valley Phase Valley II Project Phase is a six-mile, ll Extension four-stationUp extensionProject to ~75' that will bring BART train service from Berryessa/North San José through downtown San José to the City of Santa Clara. The Phase II Project will include an approximately five-mile tunnel, two mid-tunnel ventilation facilities, a maintenance facility and storage yard, three VTA’sunderground BART Siliconstations (AlumValley Rock/28th Program Street, Overview Downtown San José, Diridon), and one ground-level station (Santa VTAClara). is extending The subway the tunnelBART regionalwill be in heavy one large rail system diameter to Milpitas,tunnel. San Jose, and Santa Clara. The 16-mile extension, called the BART Silicon Valley Program, will extend the BART system south of BART’s future Warm Springs/SouthSingle-Bore Fremont Tunnel Station in Fremont to Milpitas, San Jose, and Santa Clara. When completed, this fully grade-separatedThe tunnel will be project constructed is planned as a tosingle, include large six diameter stations andtunnel. a new The maintenance and storage facility in Santa Clara.approximately VTA’s BART 45 footSilicon tunnel Valley will Program contain istwo being independent delivered trackways,in two phases. one Thefor Berryessa Extension Project (Phaseeach direction I) is under of constructiontravel. Passenger and scheduled platforms willto open be located in 2018, within with thestations tunnel, in Milpitas and the Berryessa areaconnected of San toJose.
  • Questions for Seattle Mayoral Candidates – Magnolia Chamber of Commerce

    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.