DOCSLIB.ORG

Levy to Move Seattle Quarterly Report Q3 2018

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Levy to Move Seattle Quarterly Report Q3 2018 Seattle Department of Transportation LEVY TO MOVE SEATTLE QUARTERLY REPORT Q3 2018 Published: November 2018 PURPOSE This report is a regular update to the Move Seattle Levy Oversight Committee detailing SDOT our VISION spending and performance on Move Seattle programs to help facilitate the role of the a vibrant Seattle with Committee to monitor revenues, expenditures, connected people, places, and and program and project implementation. This report is published quarterly and rolls up into an products annual report, published the May after year-end. HOW TO READ THIS our MISSION REPORT to deliver a high-quality Performance and financial summaries are transportation system for provided for all 30 Levy programs. A roll-up of all Seattle financial detail can be found in Appendix A and a roll-up of all performance detail (deliverables) can be found in Appendix B. our CORE VALUES Quarterly reports are a snapshot in time and do not indicate program status for the Levy, overall. we are committed to create a Program status with regards to the overall Levy will be reported in annual reports and reflected city that is: in updates to the Levy workplan. Program status safe is included in the summary for each program. We are evaluating ways to include quarterly indicator affordable status in future reports. interconnected vibrant LEVY TO MOVE SEATTLE innovative Approved by voters in November 2015, the 9-year, $930 million Levy to Move Seattle provides for all funding to improve safety for all travelers, maintain our streets and bridges, and invest in reliable, affordable travel options for a growing city. The Levy aims to take care of the basics, while also investing in the future with improvements to move more people and goods in and around a growing Seattle. The Levy provides roughly 30% of the City's transportation budget and replaces the 9-year, $365 million Bridging the Gap levy approved by voters in 2006. LEVY TO MOVE SEATTLE | QUARTERLY REPORT | Q3 2018 Page 2 of 40 TABLE OF CONTENTS 4 Executive Summary 7-30 Q3 in Review 8 Safe Routes 15 Maintenance & Repair 23 Congestion Relief 31 Grants & Contracts Update 32 Appendix A: Financial Summary 33 Appendix B: Performance Summary 35 Appendix C: 2015 Levy Commitments 39 Appendix D: Glossary of terms Page 3 of 40 LEVY TO MOVE SEATTLE | QUARTERLY REPORT | Q3 2018 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This report provides an update on Move Seattle performance and financials for July 1 through September 30, 2018, third quarter (Q3). Quarter highlights include project completion on University/Cowen Paving Project (see Figure 1 below); five Neighborhood Street Fund (NSF) projects were completed and program staff began planning for 2019-2021 NSF program; Lander Overpass construction continued; and several programs exceeded their annual deliverable targets this quarter. Q3 AT A GLANCE Safe Routes to School 25 projects completed 2040 Regulatory signs replaced 84 Curb ramps built Neighborhood Street 5 Fund projects completed Bike spot improvements 4 completed Blocks of new sidewalk 24.25 built Spent on Move Seattle $47.6M projects (all funds) Figure 1 University/Cowen ribbon cutting at U District Farmers Market in paving area (project completion occurred in Q3, photo is from event in Q4). Left to right: Christa Dumpys (SDOT), Patty Camacho (Office of Councilmember Rob Johnson), MariLyn Yim (SDOT), Julius Rwamashongye (SDOT), Chase Landry (U District Partnership), Ivy Fox, (U District Farmers Market), Jennifer Antos (U District Farmers Market) EXPENDITURES SUMMARY In Q3 2018, SDOT spent $47.6M on Move Seattle projects and has spent $108.1M to-date in 2018. Consistent with previous years, Q3 2018 spending report shows an increase in spending compared to earlier quarters in 2018. Q3 2018 also shows higher spending than Q3 in both 2016 and 2017 (see Figure 2 on page 6). Year to date, the Move Seattle portfolio has incurred $108.1M in expenses against a revised budget of $209M. This spend rate reflects a 21% growth of overall spending compared to the same time period in the first two years of the Levy (see Figure 2 on page 6). In Q3, SDOT spent $25.7M in Move Seattle funds with year-to-date (YTD) expenditures at $59.0M in Move Seattle funds. MOVE SEATTLE ALL FUNDS ADOPTED BUDGET $ 115.8 M $ 170.9 M REVISED BUDGET $ 92.8 M $ 209.0 M 2018 SPEND PLAN $ 92.8 M $ 190.0 M Q3 SPENDING $ 25.7 M $ 47.6 M 2018 SPENDING-TO-DATE $ 59.0 M $ 108.1 M LEVY TO MOVE SEATTLE | QUARTERLY REPORT | Q3 2018 Page 4 of 40 Q3 spending was $47.6M vs. $59.9M identified in the spend plan (see Figure 3 on page 6); this deviation of $12.3M was driven by ongoing challenges with both local and regional capacity to design and deliver this portfolio. In response to these challenges and YTD expenditures, we expect a more realistic YTD spending scenario of $145M-$155M. Refer to Appendix A for a full list of program expenditures, including Q3 and 2018 YTD totals. While delivering our Q3 projects, and during the development of this report, SDOT also published the 2018 Updated Levy Workplan and is progressing to implement strategies to improve project delivery as identified in the Move Seattle Assessment. Please see the 2018 Updated Workplan or Move Seattle Assessment Report for more information on this work. KEY COST DRIVERS Program spending (all funds) in Q3 was $10.7M in Safe Routes, $13.4M in Maintenance & Repair, and $23.4M in Congestion Relief. Levy programs that recorded the most spending in Q3 included: • Safe Routes: $10.7M o Bicycle Safety: $2.8M o Transportation Operations: $2.2M • Maintenance & Repair: $13.4M o Arterial Roadway Maintenance: $6.6M o Paving Spot Improvements: $2.2M • Congestion Relief: $23.4M o Multimodal Improvements: $7.4M o New Sidewalks: $5.2M o Partnership Improvements, Lander Overpass: $4.3M Q3 2018 BUDGET UPDATE SDOT’s Move Seattle project portfolio budget totals $209M, which represents 36% of the total SDOT budget. This reflects a $126M abandonment and re-appropriation that was codified by Council in the Q3 Supplemental. The purpose of the abandonment and re-appropriation was to update the total budget to reflect a more realistic spending scenario. Of the $126M abandoned in 2018, $90M was re-appropriated to 2019, $22M re-appropriated to 2020, and the remaining $11M re-appropriated to the final years of the Levy. The abandonment and re-appropriation includes the Move Seattle levy funds, local funds, and grant funds. This re-appropriation is incorporated in SDOT’s 2019 Proposed Budget via a Budget Issue Paper. Page 5 of 40 LEVY TO MOVE SEATTLE | QUARTERLY REPORT | Q3 2018 COMPARISONS Figure 2: Q3 - YTD Spending Comparisons by Year $120.0M $108.1M $100.0M $88.5M $89.3M $80.0M $59.0M $60.0M $49.0M $40.0M $29.6M $20.0M $0.0M All Move All Move All Move Funds Seattle Funds Seattle Funds Seattle 2016 2017 2018 Congestion Relief $20.7M $8.9M $33.7M $19.4M $49.3M $20.4M Maintenance & Repair $29.1M $8.4M $28.2M $14.0M $28.8M $17.7M Safe Routes $38.6M $12.3M $27.3M $15.6M $30.0M $20.9M LEVY TO MOVE SEATTLE | QUARTERLY REPORT | Q3 2018 Page 6 of 40 Q3 2018 IN REVIEW SAFE ROUTES Provide safe and accessible routes connecting schools, transit hubs, and other destinations 1) Safety Corridors 8 2) Safe Routes to School 9 3) Markings 10 4) Transportation Operations 10 5) Bicycle Safety 11 6) Sidewalk Safety Repair 12 7) Curb Ramps & Crossings 13 8) Neighborhood Street Fund 14 MAINTENANCE & REPAIR Reduce the backlog of maintenance and repair work along major arterials and the busiest Seattle streets 9) Arterial Roadway Maintenance 15 10) Paving Spot Improvements 16 11) Bridge & Structures Maintenance, Bridge Repair Backlog 16 12) Bridge Seismic Improvements 17 13) Bridge Replacement, Fairview 18 14) Bridge Replacement, Planning & Design 19 15) Stairway Maintenance 20 16) Tree Planting & Trimming 21 17) Drainage Partnership, SPU South Park 22 CONGESTION RELIEF Enhance transportation choices throughout the network 18) Multimodal Improvements 23 19) Traffic Signal Timing Improvements 24 20) Intelligent Transportation System Improvements 24 21) Transit Spot Improvements 25 22) Light Rail Connections, Graham St 25 23) Northgate Bridge 26 24) Light Rail Connections, Accessible Mt Baker 26 25) New Sidewalks 27 26) Bicycle & Walking Facilities, SPU Broadview 28 27) Bicycle & Walking Facilities, Bike Parking & Spot Improvements 28 28) Partnership Improvements, Lander Overpass 29 29) Heavy Haul Network, East Marginal Way 29 30) Freight Spot Improvements 30 LEVY TO MOVE SEATTLE | QUARTERLY REPORT | Q3 2018 Page 7 of 40 1 SAFETY CORRIDORS SUMMARY This program has met and may exceed annual target. Some capital corridor projects had a slow start due to contractor delays. While projects are progressing and/or currently in construction and project completion is expected by end of 2018, winter weather may cause delays and project completion may occur in early 2019. Crew-delivered projects continue to be on track. PERFORMANCE REPORT ANNUAL 2018 LEVY DELIVERABLE TARGET Q1 Q2 Q3 TOTAL Vision Zero Safety Corridor Project 3 0 1 2 3 PERFORMANCE DETAILS Completed Projects and Spot Improvements: • 23rd Phase III: 23rd/24th between John – Boyer (Q3) • CBD Safety: 4th Ave between Yesler – Pike (Q3) • 5th Ave NE: 5th Ave NE between NE 103rd St – NE 125th St (Q2) Remaining Projects and Spot Improvements and status: • NE 65th St Vision Zero Corridor: in construction; construction began later than originally anticipated due to contractor delays and operator strike; anticipated completion in Q4, pending weather • 35th Ave SW Phase II, SW Morgan St-SW Edmunds St: construction contract has been awarded; awaiting NTP; expected to be complete in late December/early January, pending weather FINANCIAL REPORT – Q3 2018 MOVE SEATTLE ALL FUNDS ADOPTED BUDGET $ 2.3 M $ 2.3 M REVISED BUDGET $ 3.9 M $ 5.5 M 2018 SPEND PLAN $3.9 M $ 5.5 M Q3 SPENDING $ 0.6 M $ 0.7 M 2018 SPENDING-TO-DATE $ 1.5 M $ 1.6 M LEVY TO MOVE SEATTLE | QUARTERLY REPORT | Q3 2018 Page 8 of 40 2 SAFE ROUTES TO SCHOOL SUMMARY This program has exceeded annual target for Levy deliverables.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Ballard/Fremont Neighborhood Greenways
    Ballard-Interbay Regional Transportation System Seattle Bicycle Advisory Board SDOT Policy & Planning Department of Transportation May 6, 2020 Presentation overview •Project background and purpose •Project scope, outcomes, schedule •Engagement/equity •Overview of comments •Questions for SBAB Department of Transportation 3 www.seattle.gov/transportation/birt Department of Transportation 2019 Washington State legislative language ESHB 1160 – Section 311(18)(b) “Funding in this subsection is provided solely The plan must examine replacement of the Ballard for the city of Seattle to develop a plan and Bridge and the Magnolia Bridge, which was damaged in report for the Ballard-Interbay Regional the 2001 Nisqually earthquake. The city must provide a Transportation System project to improve report on the plan that includes recommendations to the mobility for people and freight. The plan Seattle city council, King county council, and the must be developed in coordination and transportation committees of the legislature by partnership with entities including but not November 1, 2020. The report must include limited to the city of Seattle, King county, the recommendations on how to maintain the current and Port of Seattle, Sound Transit, the future capacities of the Magnolia and Ballard bridges, an Washington state military department for the overview and analysis of all plans between 2010 and Seattle armory, and the Washington State 2020 that examine how to replace the Magnolia bridge, Department of Transportation. and recommendations on a timeline
    [Show full text]
  • SDOT 2018 Traffic Report
    Seattle Department of Transportation 2018 TRAFFIC REPORT *2017 data CONTENTS 5 Executive Summary 7 Traffic Volumes and Speeds 8 Motor Vehicle Volumes 11 Traffic Flow Map 13 Bicycle Volumes 18 Pedestrian Volumes 21 Motor Vehicle Speeds 23 Traffic Collisions 24 Citywide Collision Rate 25 Fatal and Serious Injury Collisions 27 Pedestrian Collision Rate 30 Bicycle Collision Rate 33 Supporting Data 33 Volume Data 44 Speed Data 48 Historical Collision Data 50 2016 All Collisions 54 2016 Pedestrian Collisions 63 2016 Bicycle Collisions 75 Glossary EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This report presents an end of year review of This report is prepared in compliance with Seattle the core data sets the Seattle Department of Municipal Code 11.16.220, which requires the Transportation (SDOT) collects and maintains City Traffic Engineer to present an annual traffic including volumes, speeds, and collisions. The report that includes information about traffic use of this data, guided by department plans and trends and traffic collisions on City of Seattle policies, serves as the foundation for making streets. Beyond this legal requirement, the informed decisions on nearly all work at SDOT report strives to serve as an accessible reference from safety improvements to repaving to grant of Seattle traffic data and trends for all. applications. It is fundamental to measuring project performance. The breadth and depth of In gathering and compiling the information the data collected allows objective discussion of in this report, the Seattle Department of project merits and results, be it a new crosswalk Transportation does not waive the limitations on or an entire safety corridor. As the demands and this information’s discoverability or admissibility complexity of Seattle’s transportation network under 23 U.S.C § 409.
    [Show full text]
  • Burke Building 400 North 34Th Street | Seattle, WA
    THE Burke Building 400 North 34th Street | Seattle, WA NEIGHBORING TENANTS FOR LEASE LOCATION high-tech 6,185 sf Fremont companies include Adobe, Impinj, Suite 200 Seattle’s funky, creative neighborhood Google, and Tableau Software “Center of the Universe” LOCATED IN FREMONT, AN OASIS FOR TECH COMPANIES For leasing information, contact JEFF LOFTUS • Newly remodeled lobbies and restrooms • Professional Management with 206.248.7326 with showers on-site building engineers [email protected] • High Speed Internet (Comcast Cable, • Views of the Ship Canal Century Link, Accel Wireless) KEN HIRATA • Parking ratio of 2/1,000 206.296.9625 • Near Fremont Canal Park, Burke • Available now [email protected] Gilman Trail, unique local shops and distinctive eateries • $32.00 PSF, FS kiddermathews.com This information supplied herein is from sources we deem reliable. It is provided without any representation, warranty or guarantee, expressed or implied as to its accuracy. Prospective Buyer or Tenant should conduct an independent investigation and verification of all matters deemed to be material, including, but not limited to, statements of income and expenses. Consult your attorney, accountant, or other professional advisor. BurkeTHE Building PROXIMITY SEATTLE CBD 3 miles 10 minutes to AURORA BRIDGE downtown Seattle LAKE UNION FREMONT BRIDGE LAKE WASHINGTON SHIP CANAL N 34TH ST N 35TH ST THE BURKE BUILDING N 36TH ST JEFF LOFTUS KEN HIRATA kiddermathews.com 206.248.7326 | [email protected] 206.296.9625 | [email protected] 400 North 34th Street | Seattle, WA SHIP CANAL PARKING 2/1,000 spaces per 1,000 sf rentable area N 34TH ST SUITE 200 N 35TH ST BurkeTHE Building SECOND FLOOR SUITE 200 AVAILABLE NOW 6,185 sf JEFF LOFTUS | 206.248.7326 | [email protected] KEN HIRATA | 206.296.9625 | [email protected] This information supplied herein is from sources we deem reliable.
    [Show full text]
  • 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]
  • Ordinance 13166
    Aprill, 1998 clerk 5/19198 Introduced By: Rob McKenna Proposed No.: ", 1 ORDINANCE NO. _ 2 AN ORDINANCE for the September 1998 public 3 transportation service improvements for King County. 4 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF KING COUNTY: 5 The September 1998 public transportation service improvements for 6 King County, substantially as described in Exhibits A, B, and C, attached hereto, are hereby 7 approved. 8 SECTION 2. These transportation service improvements will be implemented 9 effective September 19, 1998, except that the total amount of service change is significantly 10 more than was anticipated the adopted 1998 budget, and some service improvements may 11 be instead implemented in 1999 as vehicles, operator and budget allow, 12 13 16 17 18 - 1 ­ 6 1 The Metro Transit U1\rlS1C)ll shall work with the local jurisdictions, 2 residents and bus riders to determine the appropriate streets on which to operate the Routes 3 72 and 79 north Seattle and the appropriate +..",.....,+ community service network for 4 Mercer Island including possible revisions to Route 201. The division shall submit 5 recommendations on these services to the council by September 30, 1998. 6 INTRODUCED READ for the first time this ~~__ day of 7 8 PASSED by a vote of /3 to 0 this...l.-.::::.._ day of Vl11ay 9 19!!(f' 10 KING COUNTY COUNCIL 11 KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON ~)2J~ 12 13 Charr 14 ATTEST: 15 ~counCil 16 18 19 Attachments: Exhibit A - September 1998 Service Changes King County 21 Exhibit B - September 1998 Service Changes West King County 22 Exhibit C - 1998 Service Changes South King County & 23 West Seattle - 2 ­ EXHIBEDH.DOC September 1998 Service Change Ordinance EXHIBIT A 31 Exhibit A: EXHIBETC.DOC 5/12198 September 1998 Service Change Ordinance EXHIBIT A EAST SUBAREA SERVICE CHANGES ROUTE: 222 1 1 OBJECTIVE: 1.
    [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]
  • Baseline Or No Build Scenario
    Appendix A Alternatives Technical Report TRANSPORTATION 2040 Appendix A ALTERNATIVES TECHNICAL REPORT Contents 1. Process of designing the alternatives ...................................................................................1 a. Organizational structure b. Organizational process 2. The alternatives....................................................................................................................3 a. Introduction to the alternatives ......................................................................................3 b. The baseline alternative .................................................................................................3 c. Core strategies for all action alternatives.....................................................................15 d. Alternative 1.................................................................................................................18 e. Alternative 2.................................................................................................................27 f. Alternative 3.................................................................................................................32 g. Alternative 4.................................................................................................................39 h. Alternative 5.................................................................................................................46 i. Preferred Alternative (Constrained) ..........................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • SR 520 I-5 to Medina
    4.6 Cultural Resources 4.6 Cultural Resources The National Register of Historic The term “cultural resources” encompasses, but is not necessarily limited Places to, archaeological sites, Native American and traditional cultural properties, The National Register of Historic Places historic buildings and structures, historic districts, and planned landscapes. (NRHP) is the official list of cultural The National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 was passed to recognize the resources worthy of preservation, authorized importance of these resources to our national, regional, and local culture. under the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966. Properties listed in the National The historic built environment includes buildings; structures that are not Register include districts, sites, buildings, structures, and objects that are significant in buildings, such as bridges; objects; districts; landscapes; or even sites or American history, architecture, archaeology, locations of historic importance where no remains exist. The significance of engineering, and culture. National Register such properties may be historical in that they are associated with “broad properties are distinguished by having been patterns in our history” or the lives of “persons significant in our past” (36 documented and determined eligible according to uniform standards (Criteria A-D, CFR part 60.4, Criteria for Evaluation). Buildings and structures may also known as the Criteria for Evaluation), listed represent or exemplify a particular type or style of building, have aesthetic below. Please see the Final Cultural significance, or preserve the work of a master architect or engineer. Resources Assessment and Discipline Report in Attachment 7 for additional Archaeological resources are places where past peoples have left physical information.
    [Show full text]
  • Cowen Park Bridge Project SEPA Checklist.Pdf
    Cowen Park Bridge Retrofit Project Seattle, Washington SEPA Checklist December 6, 2018 Cowen Park Bridge Retrofit Project SEPA Checklist Page 2 of 22 STATE ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT (SEPA) ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST A. BACKGROUND 1. Name of proposed project, if applicable: Cowen Park Bridge Retrofit Project 2. Name of applicant: Seattle Department of Transportation (SDOT) 3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person: Vanessa Bacurin, Project Manager Seattle Department of Transportation Capital Projects and Roadway Structures Division 700 Fifth Avenue, Suite 3900 P.O. Box 34996 Seattle, WA 98124 206-684-5167 4. Date checklist prepared: December 6, 2018 5. Agency requesting checklist: City of Seattle Department of Transportation (SDOT) 6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable): Construction is anticipated to begin in spring 2019 with a construction duration of approximately six months pending approvals and permits. 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 no future additions, expansions or further activity related to the project. 8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal. The following environmental information has been prepared for this project: • HWA Geosciences Inc. 2018. Final Geotechnical Report - Cowen Park Bridge Retrofit Project. September. • WSP. 2018a. Wetland, Stream and Wildlife Habitat Impact Assessment for the Proposed Cowen Park Bridge Retrofit Project. December. Cowen Park Bridge Retrofit Project SEPA Checklist Page 3 of 22 • WSP. 2018b. Confidential Cultural Resources Report for the Proposed Cowen Park Bridge Retrofit Project.
    [Show full text]
  • Attachment 4C Historic Property Inventory Forms for Properties at the Pontoon Production Sites
    Attachment 4C Historic Property Inventory Forms for Properties at the Pontoon Production Sites Property ID Nos. 700 through 714 and 801 Historic Property Inventory Report Location Field Site No. 1204-1 DAHP No. Historic Name: Hylebos Bridge Common Name: Hylebos Bridge Property Address: Tacoma, WA Comments: Tax No./Parcel No. Plat/Block/Lot Acreage Supplemental Map(s) Township/Range/EW Section 1/4 Sec 1/4 1/4 Sec County Quadrangle T21R03E 26 Pierce Coordinate Reference Easting: 1168270 Northing: 712695 Projection: Washington State Plane South Datum: HARN (feet) Thursday, October 07, 2010 Page 1 of 11 Historic Property Inventory Report Identification Survey Name: Hylebos Bridge Rehab. Date Recorded: 12/09/2005 Field Recorder: Heather Lee Miller Owner's Name: City of Tacoma Owner Address: City: Tacoma State: WA Zip: Classification:Structure Resource Status: Comments: Survey/Inventory Within a District? No Contributing? National Register: Local District: National Register District/Thematic Nomination Name: Eligibility Status: Determined Not Eligible - SHPO Determination Date: 4/9/2008 Determination Comments: DAHP Log # 020306-27-FHWA Description Historic Use: Transportation - Road-Related (vehicular) Current Use: Transportation - Road-Related (vehicular) Plan: Rectangle Stories: Structural System: Steel Changes to Plan: Slight Changes to Interior: Changes to Original Cladding: Intact Changes to Windows: Intact Changes to Other: Moderate Other (specify): one approach re Style: Cladding: Roof Type: Roof Material: Other - Utilitarian Metal Other
    [Show full text]
  • APPENDIX H NRHP-Listed Architectural Historic Properties and Districts in the Plan Area
    APPENDIX H NRHP-listed Architectural Historic Properties and Districts in the Plan Area November 2014 Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement This appendix lists the architectural historic properties and districts in the Plan area that are National Historic Landmarks or are listed in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP). The list is based on data from the Washington State Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation (DAHP 2014). The Figure ID numbers in Table H-1 correspond to those ID numbers on Figure H-1 through Figure H-3 while the Figure ID numbers in Table H-2 correspond to those ID numbers on Figure H-4 and Figure H-5. DAHP also maintains records of previously recorded archaeological sites and traditional cultural properties. However, site-specific information about these properties is exempt from public disclosure under state law (RCW 42.56.300) to prevent looting and vandalism. Table H-1. NRHP-listed architectural historic properties in the Plan area Figure ID DAHP ID Property name Historic designation 1 KI00231 12th Avenue South Bridge NRHP 2 KI00599 1411 Fourth Avenue Building NRHP 3 KI00259 14th Avenue South Bridge NRHP 4 KI01140 1600 East John Street Apartments NRHP 5 KI00773 A. L. Palmer Building NRHP 6 PI00599 Adjutant General's Residence NRHP 7 KI01127 Admiral's House, 13th Naval District NRHP 8 KI00632 Agen Warehouse NRHP 9 KI00243 Alaska Trade Building NRHP 10 PI00696 Albers Brothers Mill NRHP 11 PI00638 Alderton School NRHP 12 PI00705 Annobee Apartments NRHP 13 KI00226 Arboretum Sewer Trestle
    [Show full text]
  • Transportation Levy to Move Seattle
    TRANSPORTATION LEVY TO MOVE SEATTLE + + + + + + WHAT SPECIFIC PROJECTS ARE INCLUDED? The levy proposal includes funding for these specific projects plus many more, including extensive paving, traffic signal upgrades, sidewalk repair, safe walking and biking routes to schools and many others. Please consult the map provided with the levy brochure for additional information on levy-funded improvements. CORRIDOR SAFETY PAVING PROJECTS* • NE 45th Pl BRIDGE SEISMIC PROJECTS • 3rd Ave • NE 65th St RETROFIT PROJECTS • Rainier Avenue S • 4th Ave S • NE Pacific St • Fremont Bridge • 35th Ave SW • 6th Ave • Nickerson St Bascule • SW Roxbury St • 11th Ave NE/Eastlake • NW 36th St/Fremont • Ballard Bridge • Greenwood/Phinney Ave NE Pl N Bascule • 1st Ave/1st Ave S • 12th Ave NE • NW Market St • 15th Ave NE/NE 105th • 12th Ave/12th Ave E • 15th Ave NE • Rainier Ave S • 1st Ave S Viaduct/Argo • Aurora Ave N • 15th Ave S • Renton Ave S Mainspan • Lake City Way • 23rd Ave S • Roosevelt Way NE • 4th Ave S/Argo • Sand Point Way • 25th Ave NE • S Bailey St Mainspan • E Marginal Way • 35th Ave NE • S Columbian Way/ • Delridge Way Ped • Airport Way • 35th Ave SW S Alaska St Bridge • 35th Ave NE • Corson Ave S • S Columbian Wy • Cowen Park Bridge • 15th Ave NE • Cowen Pl NE • S Dearborn St • McGraw Street Bridge • MLK Jr. Way S • E Green Lake Dr N • S Michigan St • W Howe Street Bridge • 5th Ave NE • E Green Lake Wy N • S Myrtle Pl • 8th Ave NW Near NW • Erickson Pl NE • S Myrtle St 133rd St • Fremont Ave N • S Othello St • Admiral Way -North • Green Lake
    [Show full text]