DOCSLIB.ORG

Activity Report

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Activity Report ,:i u, -t River Bridge, $1.3 million, completion fall 1987; SR 123, Sum­ place May 12 for the Third Lake Washington floating bridge, C: C 1·705 TACOMA SPUR STATUS QI Transportation mit Creek Bridge (Cayuse Pass), $ I million, completion sum­ with bridge approaches and deck construction in progress; cii' 3 :a Construction of the Tacoma Spur continues along the A ::r Ill mer 1987; SR 161, 132nd Street to SR 512, $2 million, and, the First Hill temporary connection traffic switchover was ro 3 "a Puyallup, completion summer 1987; 1·90/1•82, Cle Elum Inter­ accomplished in late May, opening way for construction of 1· Street corridor. The $100 million poured-in-place concrete CD 0 .. change to Terrace Heights, $1.4 million, Ellensburg to 90's permanent westbound and center lanes and walls for the Spur will have four lanes, two in each direction, interchanges D .. o-lll�- C"'D I\) :.I C: ... ..QI I Yakima, completion fall 1986; SR 204, U.S. 2 to SR 9, Truck lid over the Mercer Island roadways. A major contract was at South 13th and A Street, South 15th, and 21st which tie in 0., U) -0>3:JO"u,o � -o C/l:: :::r 0) o·.. -..J -o n -· Climbing Lane, $1.3 million, completion late 1987; SR 127, awarded to excavate the northern edge of 1-90 at First Hill Pacific Avenue interchange at 1·5. Ultimate completion of the 0, :a c.nfo' g J> c! Activity Snake River to Dusty, $4.3 million, completion summer 1987; curve, eventual construction of permanent westbound lanes Tacoma Spur is late 1988. '< cp lll::t .. � N ::i!:::!'.111 SR 530, Bridge Replacement · Skagit County, $1.4 million, and northern half of First Hill highway lid; highway work CT �ell O :::;· s '< n completion summer 1987; U.S. 2, Skinney Creek to Peshastin .. �C/l :Ju,c,, through center of Mercer Island should be paved and reo­ 1·82/1• 182 CONSTRUCTION C: c· :!.CDC! Creek Bridge, $2 million, completion summer 1987; SR 290, pened to traffic later this summer; work continues on the build· :;:;: ::, c:: ::t STATUS g: ,c ce.=--CD Spokane River Trent Bridge, $2 million, completion spring ing of the East Channel Bridge eastbound between Mercer C) oc.nID Report 1988; U.S. 195, Colton to Country Club Road, $1.5 million, :D ::, 5· c, Island and South Bellevue; entire project to upgrade 1-90 be­ A total of six projects at $45 million are nearing completion )> CD coCC ,3 SUMMER 1986 completion this fall; Kingston Ferry Terminal Auxiliary tween Seattle and Bellevue is expected to be completed by on 1-82 and 1-182 in south central Washington State. ::::: CXl ;,;; Ill 0., "a Slip, $1 million, completion this summer; and, 1·5, Sleater Kin­ Planning and construction starts include a grade I pave job ::;· 0 � 71 l 1993. .. � ney to Martin Way Interchange, $5.4 million, in Lacey, comple­ The Spokane 1-90 redecking and resurfacing project on 1-82 from Prosser to Gibbon Road now underway, and a g tion fall 1987. started in early April on the eastbound Viaduct and Latah separate grade/pave project from Gibbon Road to Kiona o· ..i CONSTRUCTION • FEVER PITCH! Creek Bridge lanes is set for completion later this year. which is slated to begin in two years. 1-82 lanes from SR 14 ro a The Department of Transportation is managing hundreds of interchange near Kennewick to the existing Umatilla Bridge -t construction jobs all around Washington State-and private 1·5 PROJECT STATUS near Plymouth and the McNary Dam have been open since contractor crews are working at fever pitch taking advantage mid-1985. of favorable 'working conditions-and will continue to meet There are 42 projects at $88 million under construction on The new Umatilla Bridge, designed ultimately to carry deadlines throughout July, August, and September. 1-5 between Vancouver, Washington and Blaine at the Cana­ northbound traffic across the Columbia River, is slated for dian border. completion in 1987. After modifications are completed the ex­ The Department's Highway Advisory Radio system in Bel­ isting bridge now in use will become the southbound structure. ;· CONSTRUCTION ROUNDUP lingham continues to assist motorists bound for Expo 86 in Installation of a new deck and roadway on the "Blue Construction work throughout Washington State is in vari­ Vancouver, B.C., Canada, providing broadcasts of travel infor­ Bridge," U.S. 12, between Richland and Pasco created clo­ ous stages of completion on 255 WSDOT highway projects mation on AM vehicle radios. sure of the bridge in early May, with completion slated for totaling $770 million. Intermittent closures of 1-5 southbound (10:00 p.m. to 5:00 November/December of this year. Motorists are using the re­ There are 84 interstate highway projects totaling $469 mil­ a.m.) for truss erection of the new Washington State Conven­ cently opened 1-182 Columbia River Bridges and the cable­ lion under construction. tion and Trade Center in downtown Seattle were scheduled to stayed bridge between Kennewick and Pasco to cross the begin in July and may last about nine weeks. The 1-5 express river. The Department of Transportation is also administering - .. ,- - 948 city and county jobs totaling $266 million, through its lanes will be used as a detour. Flammable loads will have to State Aid Division. be hauled around Lake Washington. Beginning this fall the 1-5 1·405 PROJECTS PROGRESS TRANSPORTATION express lanes crossing the Ship Canal Bridge will be nar­ rowed for bridge rail replacement. Lane closures coming at A total of six construction projects at $14 million are in PROJECTS COMPLETED CONSTRUCTION night, on weekends, and during midday will be coordinated progress on 1·405, the north I south freeway carrying traffic Projects completed by June 30, 1986 totaled 16 at $10 with the Convention Center work. Other temporary 1-5 clo­ around the east edge of Lake Washington between 1·5 junc­ million. Examples included: SR 155, Colville Agency to Arm· STATUS sures will occur at the 1-5/1·90 ramp connections as ramp tions near Lynnwood and Tukwila. strong Meadows, Okanogan County, $2.2 million; SR 105/ modifications start later this fall and spread out over the next Major focus is on a High-Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) lanes U.S. 101, Grays Harbor College to U.S. 101, near Aberdeen, two years. job between Sunset Boulevard and the Factoria interchange $2 million; SR 526, SR 525 to 1-5 Overcrossing, in Everett, $2 1•90 PROJECT STATUS Lane restrictions are occurring on several sections of 1-5 with 1-90 in South Bellevue, slated for completion this summer; million; and 1•90, et al., District 5 Stockpiling - 1985, $1.2 A total of 26 projects at $243 million are under construc­ through Lacey, Olympia, and Tumwater, while construction of and, a new 1-405 interchange being built in downtown Belle­ million. tion on 1-90 between Seattle and Spokane. additional lanes northbound and southbound continue through vue, which may cause some short-term slowdowns or detours Major work centers on 1-90 project jobs between Seattle, this year and next. Traffic slowdowns are expected at the while new girders are placed. Some closures of the north­ CONTRACTS AWARDED Mercer Island, and South Bellevue. All work on the 1-90/1·5 Martin Way interchange, College Street bridge, and new bound right-hand 1-405 lane will begin in late summer and connecting ramps in downtown Seattle is under contract; ex­ Sleater-Kinney interchange sites in Lacey; Pacific Avenue in­ should be completed by mid-October. For the same period, the WSDOT awarded more than 14 cavation and construction of the northern half of the 1·90 high­ terchange, Olympia; other work widening lanes and lengthen· contracts totaling $38 million. Examples included: 1·90, 23rd way lid in Seattle's Rainier Valley west of the new Mt. Baker ing bridges between Plum and Henderson Streets; City Center NON·INTERSTATE PROJECT Avenue South to Martin Luther King Way South · Westbound Ridge tunnel was awarded in April; core excavation of the new interchange, Capitol Lake interchange linking 1-5 and U.S. and Center Lids, $15 million, in Seattle, completion in early 1-90 tunnel was completed in May clearing the way for future 101; and, construction of a paved bike path from Martin Way STATUS 1989; City of Renton, Wells Avenue Bridge Replacement, $1 installation of the three-tiered roadway structure within the to State Capitol interchange at 14th Street, Olympia. Currently there are 171 non-interstate highway projects at million, completion spring 1987; SR 9, South Fork Nooksack tunnel, along with a site developed for the tunnel's ventilation Paving work on 1-5 from the Columbia River to Vancouver's $302 million under construction throughout Washington State. system building; final four floating pontoons were moved into 39th Street interchange began in mid-June and was slated for Significant work includes: SR 520, (Evergreen Point floating completion in July. bridge approaches) in Seattle, with ramp metering in effect Washington State ment of Transportation w, .. (2) ' (4) e • • (3) beginning in March on two eastbound on-ramps in Seattle. (7) SR 20, North Cascades High• Electronic stop/go signals are operating at Montlake Boule­ way: Motorists being directed onto 4- mile detour paralleling SR 20 highway verd and Lake Washington during afternoon peak hours (2:30 ,,,, p.m. to 7:00 p.m.) improving flow of traffic merging at on-ramp lanes, around grading job. Traffic con­ ) trolled by signs, cones, !Jaggers in vicin­ ! \ ........ sites; U,S, 2, Stevens Pass Highway, with summer work con­ I ity of Mazama.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Umatilla Ped-Bike Plan
    U m a t i l l a Pedestrian & Bicycle MASTER PLAN June 3, 2003 David Evans and Associates, Inc. Umatilla Pedestrian & Bicycle Master Plan 1 (UMAT0001) This project is partially funded by the Transportation and Growth Management Program (TGM), a joint program of the Oregon Department of Transportation and the Oregon Department of Land Development and Conservation. This TGM grant is fi nanced, in part, by federal Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21), local government, and the State of Oregon Funds. Neither the City of Umatilla nor ODOT guarantee funding to complete any project described in this document. Historic Umatilla River bridge David Evans and Associates, Inc. Umatilla Pedestrian & Bicycle Master Plan 2 (UMAT0001) Contents Chapter 1 — Scope . 5 Chapter 2 — Background Research . 6 2.1 Sources . 6 2.2 Area Description . 6 2.3 Jurisdictions . 6 2.4 Nonmotorized Traffi c Generators . 7 2.5 Implementation Plan . 9 Chapter 3 — Inventory . 10 3.1 Street System . 10 3.2 Pedestrian Facilities . 11 3.3 Bicycle Facilities . 12 Chapter 4 — Systemwide Factors . 14 4.1 Natural and Manmade Barriers . 14 4.2 Development Pattern . 14 4.3 Street Standards and Development Codes . 15 4.4 Funding . 17 Chapter 5 — Neighborhood Analysis . 23 5.1 Project Evaluation Criteria . 23 5.2 South Hill Projects . 26 5.3 Downtown Umatilla Projects . 36 5.4 Central Area Projects . 41 5.5 McNary Projects . 45 Chapter 6 — Capital Improvement Program . 49 Appendix A — Glossary . A-1 Appendix B — Pedestrian & Bicycle System Maps . B-1 Appendix C — Transportation SDC Example . C-1 Appendix D — General Plan and Code Amendments D-1 Appendix E — Inter-Jurisdictional Agreements .
    [Show full text]
  • 3.6-1 3.6 Traffic and Circulation Construction of the Wanapa Energy
    3.6 Traffic and Circulation Construction of the Wanapa Energy Center would most likely affect traffic flow on McNary Beach Access Road, U.S. Highway 730, and U.S. Highway 395/State Route 32. Up to 600 workers would travel to the facility site during construction, 100 to the natural gas supply/wastewater discharge pipeline routes, and 120 to the transmission line route. During operation, 30 workers would work at the facility. 3.6.1 Affected Environment Major highways accessing the project study area include U.S. Highway 730 (i.e., U.S. Highway 730; the Columbia River Highway), U.S. Highway 395/State Route (SR) 32 (i.e., SR 32; the Umatilla-Stanfield Highway), Interstate 82 (I-82), and State Route 207 (i.e., the Hermiston Highway). U.S. Highway 730 is a 2-lane west-east highway that generally runs along the south side of the Columbia River. U.S. Highway 395/SR 32 is a 2-lane northwest-southeast highway that runs from U.S. Highway 730 in the north; through Umatilla, Hermiston, and Stanfield; and then to I-84/U.S. 30 in the south. I-82 is a 4-lane highway running north-south from the Tri-Cities in Washington until it intersects with I-84/U.S. 30. SR 207 is a 2-lane highway that runs southwest- northeast, starting at I-82 in the west, through Hermiston, and then intersecting with U.S. Highway 730 in the east. Table 3.6-1 summarizes the average daily traffic (ADT) and accident counts by milepost and location for these major roadways for 2001.
    [Show full text]
  • Mcnary-John Day Transmission Line Project
    McNary-John Day Transmission Line Project Draft Environmental Impact Statement Bonneville Power Administration February 2002 McNary-John Day Transmission Line Project Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DOE/EIS-0332) Responsible Agency: Bonneville Power Administration (Bonneville), U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Cooperating Agencies: U.S. Department of Interior: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Bureau of Land Management, and Bureau of Indian Affairs. Department of Army: Corps of Engineers. States Involved: Oregon and Washington Abstract: Bonneville is proposing to construct, operate, and maintain a 79-mile-long 500-kilovolt- transmission line in Benton and Klickitat Counties, Washington, and Umatilla and Sherman counties, Oregon. The new line would start at Bonneville’s McNary Substation in Oregon and would cross the Columbia River just north of the substation into Washington. The line would then proceed west for about 70 miles along the Columbia River. At the John Day Dam, the line would again cross the Columbia River into Oregon and terminate at Bonneville’s John Day Substation. The new line would parallel existing transmission lines for the entire length; mostly within existing available right-of-way. Presently, the existing transmission lines in the area are operating at capacity. These lines help move power from the east side of the Cascades to the west side, where there is a high need for electricity (cities along the I-5 corridor). Because the Northwest has only recently recovered from a shortfall in electric energy supply and a volatile wholesale power market in which prices reached record highs, there are many new proposals for facilities to generate new power.
    [Show full text]
  • Toll Bridge Authority 1937-1977
    Guide to the Records of the Office of the Secretary of State Division of Archives and Records Management Olympia, Washington April 2004 1 Guide to the Records of the Washington State Toll Bridge Authority 1937 - 1977 Compiled by Kathleen Waugh Office of the Secretary of State Division of Archives and Records Management Olympia, Washington April 2004 2 INDEX History of Toll Bridge Authority . page 5 Scope and Content . page 8 Note on Arrangement . page 8 Toll Bridge Authority Subject Files . page 9 Files on Individual Bridges . page 13 History of Tacoma Narrows Bridge . page 37 Tunnels . page 63 Tacoma-Seattle-Everett Toll Road . page 64 3 4 TOLL BRIDGE AUTHORITY The Toll Bridge Authority was created by the Legislature in 1937. The state wanted to improve transportation routes by building bridges but had been hampered by restrictions regarding bonding in Article VIII of the state constitution. Therefore the Toll Bridge Authority was given the power to issue revenue bonds which were not limited by Article VIII. It was to select, fund, build and operate bridges which would probably not win approval in a statewide levy. The revenues from the operation of the bridges would pay off the bonds. The membership of the Authority originally consisted of the Governor, the State Auditor, the Director of the Public Service Commission, the Director of Highways, and the Director of the Department of Finance, Budget and Business. By the time the Authority was dissolved in 1977, the membership consisted of the Governor, two members of the State Highway Commission appointed by the Commission, and two other members appointed by the Governor.
    [Show full text]
  • Draft EIS Summary
    Introduction/ Purpose and Need for Action Summary Introduction This summary includes information regarding the following elements of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) environmental impact statement (EIS) for the McNary-John Day Transmission Line Project: the purpose and need for action; short-line routing alternatives; and affected environment, impacts, and mitigation measures. The project would involve construction of a new 500-kilovolt (kV) transmission line parallel to existing Bonneville Power Administration (Bonneville) transmission lines from the McNary Substation to the John Day Substation, a distance of approximately 79 miles. Purpose and Need for Action Bonneville is a federal agency responsible for purchasing, developing, marketing, and transmitting electrical power to utility, industrial, and other customers in the Pacific Northwest. Bonneville is required to ensure its transmission system can reliably serve customer power needs under all operating conditions, including times of peak use (maximum demand). The Federal Columbia River Transmission Act directs Bonneville to construct additions to the transmission system that are required to provide interregional transmission facilities [16 U.S.C. § 838b(c)], integrate and transmit electric power from new generating sources [§ 838b(a)], and for maintaining the electrical stability and reliability of the transmission system [§ 838b(d)]. The proposed action is needed to comply with these Congressional mandates. Bonneville is facing two problems regarding power flow on the system: there is not enough electricity being generated to meet demand, and many of Bonneville’s transmission lines are now at capacity and cannot carry more power. To solve the BPA McNary-John Day Transmission Project S-1 Draft EIS February 2002 Summary problem of lack of power, private investors have proposed and are developing gas-fired and wind-powered generation facilities.
    [Show full text]
  • Gray Notebook 25
    Measures, Markers and Mileposts The Gray Notebook for the quarter ending March 31, 2007 WSDOT’s quarterly report to the Governor and the Washington State Transportation Commission on transportation programs and department management Douglas B. MacDonald Secretary of Transportation MP 25 What Gets Measured, Gets Managed This periodic report is prepared by WSDOT staff to track a management use and is subject to correction and clarifica- variety of performance and accountability measures for review tion. The Gray Notebook is published quarterly in February, by the Transportation Commission and others. The content May, August, and November. For an online version of this or and format of this report is expected to develop over time. a previous edition of the Gray Notebook, visit ����������www.wsdot. Information is reported on a preliminary basis as appropriate wa.gov/accountability. and available for internal Contributors WSDOT’s Capital Delivery Project Control and Reporting Office, Claudia Lindhal, Regional Program Managers (Beige Pages) Programs Tacoma Narrows Bridge Miles Sergeant Project Update Hood Canal Bridge Project Update Sarah Lamb Tacoma/Pierce County HOV Heather Clarke, Jamie Swift Program Update Cross-Cutting Management Issues Erin Britton, Marion Carey, Jenna Fettig, Erik Johnson, Linea Laird, Rose This, Bob Thomas Contributors Asset Management: Rest Areas Yvonne Medina, Thanh Nguyen, Doug Pierce (White Pages) Aviation Eric Johnson, Nisha Marvel, Tracy Paul, John Sibold, Kerri Woehler Highlights of Program Activities Ann Briggs
    [Show full text]
  • Hanford Reach National Monument Rattlesnake Unit
    U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Hanford Reach National Monument Rattlesnake Unit Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement for Public Access Estimated Lead Agency Total Costs Associated with Developing and Producing This DEIS $178,000 [Inside Front Cover] Hanford Reach National Monument Rattlesnake Unit Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement for Public Access Prepared by U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Mid-Columbia National Wildlife Refuge Complex 64 Maple Street Burbank, Washington 99323 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 911 NE 11th Avenue Portland, Oregon 97232 August 2018 TABLE OF CONTENTS MAPS ........................................................................................................................................... iii-xviii 1. Introduction .................................................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Purpose and Need ........................................................................................................................ 1 1.2 Description of the Planning Area ................................................................................................. 1 1.3 Purpose of the Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement .................................................. 4 1.4 Public Involvement and Scoping ................................................................................................. 6 2. Alternatives Considered ................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Omatilla County Transportation System Plan
    Omatilla County Transportation System Plan April 20Q2 Prepared by: David Evans and Associates, Inc. and Umatilla County Staff in cooperation with ODOT April 2002 Umatilla County Transportation System Plan TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER 1 :INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................. 1-1 VISION AND MISSION STATEMENTS .....................................................................................................1-1 PLANNING AREA ........................................................................................................................................1-1 PLANNING PROCESS ...............................................................................................................................1-2 Community Involvement ......................................................................................................................... 1-3 Goals and Objectives ..................................................................................................................................1-3 Review and Inventory of Existing Plans, Policies, and Public Facilities ...................................................1-3 Future Transportation System Demands .....................................................................................................1-4 Transportation System Potential Improvements .........................................................................................1-4 Transportation System Plan ......................................................................................................................1-4
    [Show full text]
  • Interstate 50Th Anniversary: the Story of Oregon's Interstates
    Interstate 50th Anniversary The Story of Oregon’s Interstates Table of Contents 1) Introduction ....................................................................................................................2 2) Oregon’s road-building legacy...................................................................................... 2 3) The interstate comes to Oregon .................................................................................. 5 i) Segments of interest on I-5............................................................................. 5 ii) Focus moves to I-80N (today’s I-84) ............................................................ 6 iii) Notable segments on I-84............................................................................... 6 iv) Oregon’s minor major interstate: I-82........................................................... 7 v) Oregon’s other interstates ............................................................................... 8 vi) Oregon’s interstate segments that weren’t.................................................... 10 4) Interstate finalization chart ........................................................................................... 12 5) Interstate-related issues in Oregon .............................................................................. 12 6) Highway beautification.................................................................................................. 14 7) What’s next?....................................................................................................................16
    [Show full text]
  • INTERSTATE HIGHWAY SYSTEM Streamlined Process for Section 106 and Section 4(F) Compliance
    INTERSTATE HIGHWAY SYSTEM Streamlined Process for Section 106 and Section 4(f) Compliance As the Dwight D. Eisenhower National System of Interstate and Defense Highways (Interstate Highway System) approached the fifty-year anniversary on June 29, 2006, large sections of the Interstate System would have achieved the mark at which resources are often evaluated for historic significance. In order to address the volume of administrative work this could foster, the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation adopted the Section 106 Exemption Regarding Effects to the Interstate Highway System on March 10, 2005. This exemption effectively excludes the majority of the 46,700-mile Interstate System from consideration as a historic property under Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA). In addition, the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU, Public Law 109-59, Aug. 10, 2005) includes a provision (Section 6007) that exempts the bulk of the Interstate Highway System from consideration as a historic resource under Section 4(f) of the Department of Transportation Act. With these two exemptions in place, Federal agencies are no longer required to consider the vast majority of the Interstate Highway System as historic property under Section 106 and Section 4(f) requirements. Excluded from these respective exemptions are elements of the Interstate System that are exceptional in some way or meet a national level of significance under the criteria for the National Register of Historic Places. The final list identifies those elements that are not covered by the exemptions discussed above and will therefore continue to be subject to consideration under the Section 106 and Section 4(f) processes.1 Historically Significant Features are Excluded from the Exemption The Exemption does not apply to certain historically important, distinctive features of the system.
    [Show full text]
  • Final Environmental Impact Statement Plymouth Generating Facility Plymouth, Washington
    Final Environmental Impact Statement Plymouth Generating Facility Plymouth, Washington Prepared by: Benton County, Washington Bonneville Power Administration (DOE/EIS 0345) June 2003 Final Environmental Impact Statement Plymouth Generating Facility To: People Interested in the Plymouth Generating Facility Enclosed is the Final EIS for the Plymouth Generating Facility. The Draft EIS was published in August 2002, and comments were received through October 5, 2002. The Final EIS contains revisions to the Draft EIS and our responses to public and agency comments on the Draft EIS. This letter briefly describes the Final EIS, outlines our next steps, and tells how to contact us if you have questions. The Final EIS is abbreviated, consisting of an updated summary and project description (Chapter I), other revisions to the Draft EIS (Chapter II), copies of all comments received on the Draft EIS, and our written responses to those comments (Chapter III). This Final EIS also identifies Bonneville Power Administration’s preferred alternative, which is the Proposed Action. This Final EIS should be used as a companion document to the Draft EIS, which contains the full text of the affected environment, environmental analysis, and appendices. Process/Schedule: All comments on the Draft EIS and our responses to those comments are published in this Final EIS. Where appropriate, the Final EIS notes where any changes were made to the proposal or analysis in response to comments. Now that the Final EIS is published, Benton County will process the Conditional Use Permit Application and BPA will issue a Record of Decision outlining whether and how we will proceed with the project.
    [Show full text]
  • Kennewick, Washington Urban Design Assistance Team December
    Kennewick, Washington Urban Design Assistance Team December 2003 Our mission is to reconnect with the Columbia River and to develop the Bridge to Bridge/River to Railroad area into an attractive, economically viable front door to our community. We will place significant importance on public and private sector input to develop a vision plan and implementation schedule that will create a premier destination riverfront area combining unique gathering places for civic and cultural activities, distinctive shopping venues, welcome living spaces, and enjoyable recreational opportunities for the entire region. – UDAT Steering Committee The Bridge to Bridge/River to Railroad Committee’s purpose in bringing an Urban Design Assistance Team to Kennewick was to have this Team provide visioning and planning guidelines together with an implementation schedule for the revitalization of the area located between the Blue and Cable Bridges and from the Columbia River to Canal Drive. This Team Report is the product of many public meetings, a compilation of surveys, concerns and input received from the community, and the Team’s visit. The goal of this project is to create an economically viable, aesthetically pleasing, premier destination riverfront area combining unique gathering places for civic and cultural activities, successful businesses offering distinctive shopping venues, welcome living spaces, and enjoyable recreational opportunities for current stakeholders and the entire region. While the community and region at large have been fully supportive and embrace the Bridge to Bridge/ River to Railroad project, it is the business owners, property owners and residents in this area who will make this revitalization successful. Several of these entities have already created niches that support economically viable, appealing businesses and attractive residential housing.
    [Show full text]