DOCSLIB.ORG

Regional Economic Strategy for the Central Puget Sound Region — SUMMARY

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Regional Economic Strategy for the Central Puget Sound Region — SUMMARY Regional Economic Strategy for the Central Puget Sound Region — SUMMARY 1 LEADERSHIP PROSPERITY PARTNERSHIP CO-CHAIRS Mark Emmert, President, University of Washington John Ladenburg, Pierce County Executive Tomio Moriguchi, Chairman and Chief Executive, Uwajimaya Alan Mulally, President, Boeing Commercial Airplane Company Brad Smith, Senior Vice President, Microsoft Corporation Rita Ryder, President, YWCA, Strategic Initiatives Rick Bender, President, Washington State Labor Council, AFL-CIO PROJECT MANAGEMENT TEAM Betty Nokes, Bellevue Chamber of Commerce Puget Sound Regional Council Bruce Kendall, Economic Development Board for Tacoma-Pierce County John Powers, enterpriseSeattle PSRC Robbie Rohr, Executive Alliance David Porter, Kitsap Economic Development Council Regional Economic Strategy for the Central Puget Sound Region, Summary Bill McSherry, Puget Sound Regional Council October 2005 Deborah Knutson, Snohomish County Economic Development Council Funding for this report provided in part by member jurisdictions, grants Rin Causey, Snohomish County Workforce Development Council from the Economic Development Administration, the U.S. Department of Trans- Lee Cheatham, Washington Technology Center portation, Federal Transit Administration, Federal Highway Administration and CLUSTER CO-CHAIRS Washington State Department of Transportation. AEROSPACE — Additional copies of this report may be obtained by contacting: Rosemary Brester, President, Hobart Machined Products John Quinlivan, VP and General Manager of 747, 767, 777 and 787, Boeing (retired Mar 2005) Puget Sound Regional Council • Information Center CLEAN TECHNOLOGY — 1011 Western Avenue, Suite 500 Denis Hayes, President & CEO, Bullitt Foundation 2 Kathy Lombardo, NW Regional Manager and Sr. Vice President, CH2M Hill Seattle, Washington 98104-1035 Garry Struthers, President, Garry Struthers & Associates 206-464-7532 • FAX 206-587-4825 • [email protected] INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY — Sign language and communication material in alternative formats, can Ed Lazowska, Bill & Melinda Gates Chair in Computer Science & Engineering, UW be arranged given sufficient notice by calling 206-464-7090. TDD\TTY: Jim Nall, President & CEO, Paladin Data 206-464-5409. LIFE SCIENCES — Karen Hedine, President & CEO, Micronics Inc. PSRC fully complies with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 Lee Huntsman, President Emeritus, University of Washington and related statutes and regulations in all programs and activities. For more LOGISTICS AND INTERNATIONAL TRADE — information, or to obtain a Title VI Complaint Form, see http://www.psrc.org/ M.R. Dinsmore, CEO, Port of Seattle about/titlevi/index.htm or call 206-587-4819. Tim Farrell, Executive Director, Port of Tacoma Bill Stafford, President, Trade Development Alliance of Greater Seattle Cover photograph by William Wright. Andreas Udbye, Executive Director, World Trade Center Tacoma Dear Colleague: For more than a century, the New economic centers are rapidly emerging throughout the world as Puget Sound region has grown and leaders recognize these dynamics and take the initiatives needed to adapt to John Ladenburg 3 Pierce County Executive prospered. Our region has emerged them. In addition to education, leaders in the newly successful regions are also President, Puget Sound Regional Council in recent decades as a leading center investing in the infrastructure needed to support their economies and making of trade, high-tech industries and their governments more business friendly. commerce. Talented and energetic Consider some dramatic recent examples: people have flocked here for oppor- • Over the past 15 years, one of the smallest countries in Europe—Ireland tunities to work and live in a place —has emerged as a world technology powerhouse. The country’s gross of stunning natural beauty and cul- domestic product has nearly doubled. Now Ireland’s leaders are building tural abundance. But our prosperity on the success—investing more in education with an emphasis on science. in an increasingly connected global One example is the creation of Science Foundation Ireland, which will economy is not assured—in fact, it build new universities and research centers to train the people needed to has never been more tenuous. keep and attract technology companies. Bob Drewel The reason is fundamental: The • In China, Shanghai’s transformation is breathtaking. Visitors see a new Executive Director key factor in the global economy is Puget Sound Regional Council airport, a maglev train to downtown, 14 new commuter rail lines, and no longer simply natural resources universities producing tens of thousands of engineering students. Approxi- or political boundaries; it’s also the mately 1,500 high-rise buildings have been constructed since 1975. supply of smart and diverse people. • India has announced plans to leverage its information technology success The ability to attract people is a into biotechnology. The government’s Department of Biotechnology aims dynamic and sensitive process. New to create and support at least ten biotech parks with incubator units by centers of the global creative economy 2010. “India wants to be as successful in life sciences as it has been in can emerge quickly; established play- software and information technology,” says the Financial Times. ers can lose position just as easily. Worldwide competition is not Hundreds of people from every sector of the economy and community focused on countries, but on large have contributed to this strategy. They’ve identified both short term and long metropolitan areas that function term actions that are needed in dozens of different areas. as single economic units. Com- Education, transportation and taxes, not surprisingly, emerged as the three panies don’t just choose between critical themes affecting our region’s future prosperity. Improvements in educa- the United States and England, or tion and transportation, and changes in the tax structure, cut across all seg- Sweden and Canada. They think of ments of the economy. We have to address those issues for the other initiatives Silicon Valley versus Mumbai, or to be successful. The challenge is to develop consensus on the solution. Our Vancouver versus Stockholm. aim is to develop consensus on a major transportation improvement package in Metropolitan regions have 2006, followed by higher education and tax reform measures in 2007. emerged as the basis for global com- The Prosperity Partnership is the vehicle to move the central Puget Sound petition. Around the world, regions region in this direction. The vision of a unified economic agenda for the Puget are pooling their public and private Sound region, set in motion less than a year ago, has come to fruition. Now talent and resources to pursue eco- 4 the real work of moving our economy forward begins. nomic goals. The central Puget With the willpower to make the necessary changes and investments, and Sound region is well positioned your help, we will succeed. to do the same. We have the Sincerely, building blocks to create a strong, globally oriented and sustainable eco- nomic agenda that contributes to regional prosperity while sustaining the resources and the quality of life The Honorable John Ladenburg Bob Drewel Pierce County Executive Executive Director on which our regional identity and President, Puget Sound Regional Council Puget Sound Regional Council reputation depend. The Prosperity Partnership A Regional Economic Strategy for Puget Sound An extraordinary economic development effort is underway in the central 1 Puget Sound region. Hundreds of government, business, labor and nonprofit leaders in King, Kitsap, Pierce, and Snohomish counties have organized a coalition called Prosperity Partnership. The coalition created Prosperity Partnership because economic conditions in the region, combined with dramatic changes in the global economy, create a critical need for a regional strategy and action. To address this need, coalition members are working together toward Microsoft is trying to hire every great college graduate a common goal: long term economic prosperity for the who has basic computer-science skills and [who we entire region. Prosperity Partnership envisions a region think is] highly talented…I’m certainly very worried where residents have good jobs and earn family-wage about [the shortage]…It really is gating the speed at incomes, where globally competitive businesses thrive, which we do things.” where diversity is embraced because it is good for busi- ness; a region with vibrant, connected communities and — Bill Gates III, quoted in Seattle Times, 7/19/05 a high quality of life built upon our outstanding natural environment and cultural dynamism. A Regional Economy with Promise—and Challenges Many of the building blocks for regional prosperity are in place. Mature industries stand beside new and emerging enterprises. The area Sea-Tac International Airport boasts a number of industry clusters—concentrated sets of competing and complementary enterprises. Clusters—concen- U.S. region. Parts of the region’s eco- trations of industries that export goods and services nomic foundation—such as workforce and import wealth into the region—drive the econ- education, physical infrastructure, and omy. The region also has many good schools, strong and diverse communities, business climate—served us well in the and a beautiful natural environment. past but must adapt to a new economic But there are ominous signs as well. The concentration of employment in environment. most of the region’s
Load more

Recommended publications
  • King County Official Local Voters' Pamphlet
    August 2, 2016 Primary and Special Election King County Official Local Voters’ Pamphlet Your ballot will arrive by July 18 206-296-VOTE (8683) | kingcounty.gov/elections Reading the local From the voters’ pamphlet Director Why are there measures in the local voters’ pamphlet that are not on my ballot? Dear Friends. The measures on your ballot refl ect the districts in which you are registered to This is a big year for King County Elections. To vote. The local voters’ pamphlet may cover start, we are on track to hit 10 million ballots multiple districts and include measures counted without a single discrepancy this fall. outside of your districts. We expect to process over 1 million ballots this November alone. What is the order of candidates in the local voters’ pamphlet? I’m eager to continue our track record of transparency and accuracy – especially in light of Candidates in the local voters’ pamphlet this year’s Presidential Election – and I am also appear in the order they will appear on the excited about several projects that will mean ballot. transformative change for elections. For this Primary Election you will now have access to Are candidate statements fact checked 29 permanent ballot drop boxes that are open before they are published? 24-hours-a-day. November will see that number No. King County Elections is not responsible increase to 43 ballot drop boxes, meaning that for the content or accuracy of the 91.5% of King County residents will live within 3 statements, and we print them exactly as miles of a drop-off location.
    [Show full text]
  • 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]
  • Economic Development Goals
    six ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT GOALS GOAL EC–1 Diversify and expand Tacoma’s economic base to create a robust economy that offers Tacomans a wide range of employment opportunities, goods and services. GOAL EC–2 Increase access to employment opportunities in Tacoma and equip Tacomans with the education and skills needed to attain high- quality, living wage jobs. GOAL EC–3 Cultivate a business culture that allows existing establishments to grow in place, draws new firms to Tacoma and encourages more homegrown enterprises. GOAL EC–4 Foster a positive business environment within the City and proactively invest in transportation, infrastructure and utilities to grow Tacoma’s economic base in target areas. GOAL EC–5 Create a city brand and image that supports economic growth and leverages existing cultural, community and economic assets. GOAL EC–6 Create robust, thriving employment centers and strengthen and protect Tacoma’s role as a regional center for industry and commerce. 6-2 SIX Book I: Goals + Policies 1 Introduction + Vision ECONOMIC 2 Urban Form 3 Design + Development 4 Environment + Watershed Health DEVELOPMENT 5 Housing 6 Economic Development 7 Transportation 8 Parks + Recreation 9 Public Facilities + Services 10 Container Port 11 Engagement, Administration + Implementation 12 Downtown Book II: Implementation Programs + Strategies 1 Shoreline Master Program WHAT IS THIS CHAPTER ABOUT? 2 Capital Facilities Program 3 Downtown Regional Growth The goals and policies in this chapter convey the City’s intent to: Center Plans 4 Historic Preservation Plan • Diversify and expand Tacoma’s economic base to create a robust economy that offers Tacomans a wide range of employment opportunities, goods and services; leverage Tacoma’s industry sector strengths such as medical, educational, and maritime operations and assets such as the Port of Tacoma, Joint Base Lewis McChord, streamlined permitting in downtown and excellent quality of life to position Tacoma as a leader and innovator in the local, regional and state economy.
    [Show full text]
  • Development of a Hydrodynamic Model of Puget Sound and Northwest Straits
    PNNL-17161 Prepared for the U.S. Department of Energy under Contract DE-AC05-76RL01830 Development of a Hydrodynamic Model of Puget Sound and Northwest Straits Z Yang TP Khangaonkar December 2007 DISCLAIMER This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States Government nor any agency thereof, nor Battelle Memorial Institute, nor any of their employees, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government or any agency thereof, or Battelle Memorial Institute. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government or any agency thereof. PACIFIC NORTHWEST NATIONAL LABORATORY operated by BATTELLE for the UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY under Contract DE-AC05-76RL01830 Printed in the United States of America Available to DOE and DOE contractors from the Office of Scientific and Technical Information, P.O. Box 62, Oak Ridge, TN 37831-0062; ph: (865) 576-8401 fax: (865) 576-5728 email: [email protected] Available to the public from the National Technical Information Service, U.S. Department of Commerce, 5285 Port Royal Rd., Springfield, VA 22161 ph: (800) 553-6847 fax: (703) 605-6900 email: [email protected] online ordering: http://www.ntis.gov/ordering.htm This document was printed on recycled paper.
    [Show full text]
  • Regional Transfer of Development Rights in Puget Sound
    Regional Transfer of Development Rights in Puget Sound A Regional Alliance of Puget Sound Counties, Cities, the Puget Sound Regional Council, Forterra and Department of Commerce June 2013 Report to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Brian Bonlender, Director, Washington State Department of Commerce Bob Drewel, Executive Director, Puget Sound Regional Council Gene Duvernoy, President, Forterra Acknowledgements Washington State Department of Commerce Leonard Bauer, Managing Director, Growth Management Services Heather Ballash, Senior Planner, Project Manager/Editor Brad Wright, Communications Consultant, Editor Puget Sound Regional Council Ivan Miller, Program Manager, Growth Management Planning Forterra1 Skip Swenson, Senior Managing Director, Policy King County Darren Greve, Transfer of Development Rights Program Manager, Department of Natural Resources Pierce County Diane Marcus-Jones, Senior Planner, Pierce County Planning and Land Services Kimberly Freeman, Resource Stewardship Superintendent, Pierce County Parks and Recreation Snohomish County Steve Skorney, Senior Planner, Planning and Development Services Mark Beardslee, Senior Planner, Retired Kitsap County Katrina Knutson, Senior Planner, Department of Community Development Jeff Smith, Senior Land Use Planner, Department of Community Development U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Michelle Wilcox, Puget Sound Team, US Environmental Protection Agency 1 Formerly Cascade Land Conservancy Regional Transfer of Development Rights in Puget Sound This project has been funded wholly or in part by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency under assistance agreement PO-00J093-01-0. The contents of this document are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views and policies of the U.S Environmental Protection Agency, nor does mention of trade names or commercial products constitute endorsement or recommendation for use.
    [Show full text]
  • Ground-Water Flooding in Glacial Terrain of Southern Puget Sound
    science fora changing world Ground-Water Flooding in Glacial Terrain of Southern Puget Sound, Washington glacial lakes, and diverting drainage landforms and, in some places, eroded southward to the Chehalis River and then away sediments deposited during the west to the Pacific Ocean to create exten­ glacial advance. Coarse sediment, known sive outwash plains6' 7' 10. At its maximum as the Steiiacoom Gravel, was also extent, the glacier stretched from the deposited on the upland by water flowing Cascade Range to the Olympic Mountains through the intersecting channels and and extended south as far as Tenino, braided streams that further conveyed the Wash., in Thurston County, occupying all water away from the proglacial lake.2- 13 of the lowland area and lower mountain This gravel deposit is consistently coarse valleys. The glacier reached altitudes up over the central Pierce County upland to 4,000 feet along the mountain front10; area. Stones in the Steiiacoom Gravel are 6,000 feet near the present day United predominantly 1 inch in size and most do States-Canada border; 3,000 feet near not exceed 3 inches. 13 The thickness of Seattle; 2,200 feet near Tacoma; and less the gravel is generally 20 feet or less with than 1.000 feet near Olympia. 1' 4- 10 a maximum that rarely exceeds 60 feet. The resulting landscape is characterized T^\ ue to a global warming trend, the by many shallow, elongated depressions Figure 1. Proglacial Lake Puyattup and J ^Vashon Glacier began retreating and ice-contact depressions (kettles). The successive Lake Spillways (modified from its terminus about 17.000 years ago.7 larger and deeper depressions are occu­ from Thorson, 1979).
    [Show full text]
  • Puget Sound Region
    Puget Sound Region July 2014 Regional Catastrophic Disaster Coordination Plan Part 1: User Guide Part 2: Plan The above links will take you directly to the User Guide or the Plan. Puget Sound Regional Catastrophic Disaster Coordination Plan User Guide USER GUIDE OVERVIEW & CONTEXT User Guide Purpose Concept of Coordination This User Guide is designed to 1) provide an overview of the Puget The Coordination Plan guides Whatcom Sound Regional Catastrophic Disaster Coordination Plan and to 2) be a regional coordination in a San Juan Skagit practical, hands-on mechanism for navigating regional coordination catastrophic event within the 8- Island Clallam generally and as relates to specific topics explored in depth in each of county Puget Sound Region. Snohomish Kitsap the supporting plans and toolkits. The Guide includes an overview of the “Regional coordination” means Jefferson RGPGP Plans and Coordination Groups that have been developed for multiple counties or Tribal Nations King Grays Harbor Mason specific topics (UG-10). are involved. The Plan does not focus Pierce on the internal plans and responses The User Guide is not a replacement for the full text of the Coordination Thurston of individual counties. Plan. Pacific Lewis Northwest Washington How to Use this Guide Regional Coordination Processes & Tools This document provides an overview and practical guide to using the The Coordination Plan provides guidance in four areas: Coordination Plan. 1. Use of Incident Snapshots (UG-4) to share information among Clicking on a blue box with page number (p. #) will bring you to counties. relevant information within this User Guide and the full 2.
    [Show full text]
  • 12 Puget Sound
    12 Puget Sound Overview Puget Sound, located in northwest Washington State of the United States neartheborder of Canada and the United States, is part of a single large ecosystem that includes the Strait of Juan de Fuca and the Strait of Georgia., For this Guidebook we have delineated the area of Puget Sound by the northern entrance of Admiralty Inlet. This basin was carved during the Pleistocene Ice Age by at least one large andprobably several small glaciers. The Sound itself is really an estuary where saltwater from the Pacific mixes with freshwater from a multitude of rivers.1 Location Basic information2,13 Surface area：2,600 裄 Volume：169 裝 Maximum depth：300 m Nature <Background > The glacial carving thatshaped the deep channels of Puget Sound also helped shape the steep coastal bluffs,, beaches and relatively narrow , shallow marine terraces.2 The Puget Sound Basin covers about 44,000 裄,,encompassing the Strait of Juan de Fuca the San Juan archipelago,.80 and Hood Canal %ofthebasin is composed of land and20 % is made of water.2 Climate Maritime air masses have a moderating effect in south Puget Sound year roundcr,.eating a modified Mediterranean climate During the fall and spring seasons,. the climate is relatively mild Winters are usually wet and mild . Summers are generally cool and dry.3 The2013 average temperature for the Puget Sound lowlands was 10.4襄袢 and total precipitation was 972 .4 Topography Thebottom topography of Puget Sound is characterized by a series of basins and sills,. which were created by glacial action A shallow sill（）65 m deep at Admiralty Inlet separates the waters of the Strait of Juan de Fuca from Puget Sound proper.
    [Show full text]
  • South Puget Sound Forum Environmental Quality – Economic Vitality Indicators Report Updated July 2006
    South Puget Sound Forum Environmental Quality – Economic Vitality Indicators Report Updated July 2006 Making connections and building partnerships to protect the marine waters, streams, and watersheds of Nisqually, Henderson, Budd, Eld and Totten Inlets The economic vitality of South Puget Sound is intricately linked to the environmental health of the Sound’s marine waters, streams, and watersheds. It’s hard to imagine the South Sound without annual events on or near the water - Harbor Days Tugboat Races, Wooden Boat Fair, Nisqually Watershed Festival, Swantown BoatSwap and Chowder Challenge, Parade of Lighted Ships – and other activities we prize such as beachcombing, boating, fishing, or simply enjoying a cool breeze at a favorite restaurant or park. South Sound is a haven for relaxation and recreation. Businesses such as shellfish growers and tribal fisheries, tourism, water recreational boating, marinas, port-related businesses, development and real estate all directly depend on the health of the South Sound. With strong contributions from the South Sound, statewide commercial harvest of shellfish draws in over 100 million dollars each year. Fishing, boating, travel and tourism are all vibrant elements in the region’s base economy, with over 80 percent of the state’s tourism and travel dollars generated in the Puget Sound Region. Many other businesses benefit indirectly. Excellent quality of life is an attractor for great employees, and the South Puget Sound has much to offer! The South Puget Sound Forum, held in Olympia on April 29, 2006, provided an opportunity to rediscover the connections between economic vitality and the health of South Puget Sound, and to take action to protect the valuable resources of the five inlets at the headwaters of the Puget Sound Basin – Totten, Eld, Budd, Henderson, and the Nisqually Reach.
    [Show full text]
  • Policy Brief
    Policy Brief Moving Toward More Accessible and Productive Transportation in the Puget Sound By Wendell Cox, Principal, Demographia (Wendell Cox Consultancy) October 2019 Key Findings 1. The overwhelming share of population and employment in the Puget Sound is outside the city of Seattle. Even with the city of Seattle’s unprecedented population and employment growth since 2010, a sizable majority of new residents and employment have located outside the city. 2. The Puget Sound region is dispersed, both in employment and residences. While downtown Seattle is the strongest Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC) employment center and has experienced astounding growth since 2010, more than 85 percent of employment is outside downtown. 3. The “Amazon Boom” has brought unprecedented employment growth to downtown Seattle and seems unlikely to play as strong a role in the future. However, even with the “Amazon Boom,” nearly 60 percent of employment growth has been outside the city of Seattle since 2010. 4. Autos are used by more than two-thirds of commuters to work trip locations throughout the Puget Sound, with a three-quarters share outside the city of Seattle and just shy of a 50 percent share in the city of Seattle. 5. Transit serves a principally niche market, with 48 percent of the commuting to downtown Seattle, and a 9.3 percent share to the rest of the city. Only 3.5 percent of work trips to destinations in the rest of the Puget Sound are on transit. 6. Downtown dominates transit commuting. PSRC employment centers outside the city of Seattle exhibit transit commuting characteristics more reflective of suburban areas outside centers, with virtually no realistic potential for reducing vehicle miles through expanding transportation choices.
    [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]
  • A Case Study Intermodal Issues Facing the Puget Sound Region
    A Case Study Of the Intermodal Issues Facing The Puget Sound Region and The Port of Seattle Patrick Sherry, Ph.D. Joseph Szyliowicz, Ph.D. Andy Goetz, Ph.D. Page McCarley University of Denver December 21, 2006 - 1 - Acknowledgments This project was supported in part by The Intermodal Task Force of the Transportation Working Group of the Asian Pacific Economic Cooperation The Port of Seattle The Freight Mobility Strategic Investment Board And the Intermodal Transportation Institute of the University of Denver - 2 - Table of Contents LIST OF FIGURES................................................................................................................................................5 LIST OF TABLES .................................................................................................................................................5 INTRODUCTION................................................................................................................................................6 INTRODUCTION................................................................................................................................................6 PURPOSE OF THE CASE STUDY............................................................................................................................6 REGIONAL OVERVIEW.........................................................................................................................................9 GEOGRAPHICAL CONSIDERATIONS........................................................................................................10
    [Show full text]