DOCSLIB.ORG

Phase Ia Cultural Resources Investigation for the Proposed St

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Phase Ia Cultural Resources Investigation for the Proposed St PHASE IA CULTURAL RESOURCES INVESTIGATION FOR THE PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE Panamerican Consultants, Inc. TRANSMISSION GAS LINE, Buffalo Branch FRANKLIN AND ST. LAWRENCE COUNTIES, 2390 Clinton Street Buffalo, NY 14227 Tel: (716) 821-1650 Fax: (716) 821-1607 NEW YORK Corporate Headquarters 2301 Paul Bryant Dr. Tuscaloosa, AL 35401 Tel: (205) 248-8767 Fax: (205) 248-8739 Memphis Branch Prepared for: 91 Tillman Street Memphis, TN 38111 Tel: (901) 454-4733 EDR Fax: (901) 454-4736 217 Montgomery Street Tampa Branch Suite 1000 5910 Benjamin Center Syracuse, NY 13202 Drive, Suite 120 Tampa, FL 33634 Tel: (813) 884-6351 Fax: (813) 884-5968 Prepared by: Tuscaloosa Branch 924 26th Avenue East Tuscaloosa, AL 35404 PANAMERICAN CONSULTANTS, INC. Tel: (205) 556-3096 Buffalo Branch Office Fax: (205) 556-1144 2390 Clinton Street Buffalo, New York 14227-1735 (716) 821-1650 April 2010 PHASE IA CULTURAL RESOURCES INVESTIGATION FOR THE PROPOSED ST. LAWRENCE TRANSMISSION GAS LINE, FRANKLIN AND ST. LAWRENCE COUNTIES, NEW YORK Prepared for: EDR 217 Montgomery Street Suite 1000 Syracuse, NY 13202 Prepared by: Robert J. Hanley, M.A., RPA, Principal Investigator/Senior Archaeologist Christine M. Longiaru, M.A., Senior Architectural Historian Rebecca J. Emans, M.A., RPA, Project Archaeologist Mark A. Steinback, M.A., Senior Historian Sharon M. Jenkins, M.A., Architectural History Assistant Joseph J. Kline, B.A., Field Director Michael A. Cinquino, Ph.D., RPA, Proje ct Director PANAMERICAN CONSULTANTS, INC. Buffalo Branch Office 2390 Clinton Street Buffalo, NY 14227 (716) 821-1650 April 2010 Management Summary SHPO Project Review Number: Involved State and Federal Agencies: Public Service Commission Phase of Survey: IA Location Information: Location: see below Minor Civil Division: Norfolk, Stockholm, Lawrence, Moira, Bangor, Malone, Burke, and Chateaugay County: Franklin and St. Lawrence Counties Survey Area (Metric & English) Length: 47.54 miles (76.5 km) Preferred Route Width: 6-mile (9.6-km) research corridor; 50-ft (15-m) wide construction corridor Depth: not determined Number of Acres surveyed: Preferred Route = 288.1 acres 6-mile research corridor = 192,092.5 acres (300.14 square miles) USGS 7.5-Minute Quadrangle Maps: Burke [1980], Bangor [1980], Brasher Falls [1980], Brushton [1980], Chateaugay [1980], Malone [1980], Norfolk [1980], North Lawrence [1980] Archaeological Survey Overview Number & Interval of Shovel Tests: n/a Number & Size of Units: n/a Width of Plowed Strips: n/a Surface Survey Transect Interval: n/a Results of Archaeological Survey Number & name of prehistoric sites identified: n/a Number & name of historic sites identified: n/a Number and name of sites recommended for Phase II/Avoidance: n/a Results of Architectural Survey in the Study Area (i.e., 6-mile corridor) Number of previously determined NR-listed or eligible buildings/structures/ cemeteries/ districts: 11 NRL (Individual); 64 NRE (Individual); and 3 NRE Historic Districts (see Table 4.1, pp. 4-2 to 4-6) Report Author(s): R. Hanley, C. Longiaru, R. Emans, M. Steinback, S. Jenkins, J. Kline, and M. Cinquino Date of Report: April 2010 Panamerican Consultants, Inc. ii St. Lawrence Gas Line Phase IA Table of Contents Management Summary ................................................................................................................. ii List of Figures ............................................................................................................................... v List of Tables ................................................................................................................................ vi List of Photographs ...................................................................................................................... vii 1.0 Introduction ........................................................................................................................ 1-1 2.0 Context and Documentary Review .................................................................................... 2-1 2.1 Environmental Setting .............................................................................................. 2-1 2.2 Prehistoric Period ..................................................................................................... 2-5 2.3 Historic Period .......................................................................................................... 2-9 2.4 Documentary Research ......................................................................................... 2-27 2.4.1 Historical Map Analysis .............................................................................. 2-27 2.4.2 Site File and Archival Review ..................................................................... 2-37 3.0 Archaeological Field Reconnaissance .............................................................................. 3-1 3.1 Methodology ............................................................................................................ 3-1 3.2 Prehistoric Archaeological Sensitivity ...................................................................... 3-1 3.3 Historic Archaeological Sensitivity ........................................................................... 3-2 3.4 Field Reconnaissance .............................................................................................. 3-2 3.4.1 Segment 1 .................................................................................................... 3-3 3.4.2 Segment 2 .................................................................................................... 3-3 3.4.3 Segment 3 .................................................................................................... 3-4 3.4.4 Segment 4 .................................................................................................... 3-5 4.0 Historic Architecture .......................................................................................................... 4-1 4.1 Methodology ............................................................................................................ 4-1 4.2 National Register Criteria ......................................................................................... 4-1 4.3 Initial Historic Building Review of the Six-Mile Survey Corridor ............................... 4-6 4.4 Architectural Survey by Municipality (Franklin County) ............................................ 4-7 4.4.1 Franklin County ............................................................................................ 4-7 4.4.2 Historic Railroad Resources in the Study Area (Franklin County) ................ 4-8 4.4.3 Town of Chateaugay (MCD 03308), Franklin County ................................. 4-17 4.4.3.1 Village of Chateaugay (MCD 03345), Town of Chateaugay ........ 4-19 4.4.4 Town of Burke (MCD 03307), Franklin County ........................................... 4-23 4.4.4.1 Village of Burke (MCD 03344), Town of Burke ............................ 4-24 4.4.5 Town of Malone (MCD 03315), Franklin County ........................................ 4-28 4.4.5.1 Village of Malone (MCD 03340), Town of Malone ....................... 4-35 4.4.5.2 National Register-Eligible Malone Historic District (USN 03340.000139), Malone ............................................................... 4-43 4.4.5.3 Malone Junction, Village of Malone ............................................. 4-49 4.4.5.4 North Malone, Village of Malone .................................................. 4-52 4.4.6 Town of Bangor (MCD 03302), Franklin County ........................................ 4-61 4.4.7 Town of Moira (MCD 03316), Franklin County ........................................... 4-65 4.4.7.1 Village of Brushton, Town of Moira .............................................. 4-65 4.4.7.2 Village of Moira, Town of Moira ................................................... 4-68 4.4.7.3 Moira (Western Section), Town of Moira ..................................... 4-75 4.5 Architectural Survey by Municipality (St. Lawrence County).................................. 4-78 Panamerican Consultants, Inc. iii St. Lawrence Gas Line Phase IA 4.5.1 St. Lawrence County .................................................................................. 4-78 4.5.2 Town of Brasher (MCD 08901), St. Lawrence County ............................... 4-78 4.5.3 Town of Lawrence (MCD 08915), St. Lawrence County ............................ 4-80 4.5.4 Town of Stockholm (MCD 08931), St. Lawrence County ........................... 4-84 4.5.5 Town of Norfolk (MCD 08922), St. Lawrence County ................................ 4-93 5.0 Conclusions and Recommendations ................................................................................. 5-1 5.1 Archaeological Investigation .................................................................................... 5-1 5.1.1 Conclusions .................................................................................................. 5-1 5.1.2 Recommendations ........................................................................................ 5-2 5.2 Architectural Investigation Recommendations ......................................................... 5-2 6.0 References ........................................................................................................................ 6-1 Appendices Appendix A: Project Map (Six-mile wide research corridor) Appendix B: Project Maps (Archaeological Research Corridor) Appendix C: Photographs (Archaeological
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Vermont Rail Feasibility Study
    Vermont Rail Feasibility study Vermont Agency of Transportation Final Report March 1993 Submitted by LS Transit Systems, Inc. In association with R.L. Banks & Associates, Inc. Resource Systems Group, Inc. CGA Consulting Services VERMONT RAIL FEASIBILITY STUDY FINAL REPORT Table of Contents Section Paae No. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Background Rail Services Considered Passenger Rail Feasibility Capital, Operating and Maintenance Costs Environmental lmpacts Evaluation of Options Shelburne Road Demonstration Project Synthesized Service Alternative Conclusions and Recommendations 1. INTRODUCTION Background Passenger Rail Service Freight Rail Service Policy Issues 2. PASSENGER RAIL FEASIBILITY Introduction Physical Inventory lntroduction Methodology Central Vermont Railway Washington County Railroad Vermont Railway Clarendon & Pittsford Railroad Green Mountain Railroad Operational Service Plans Commuter Service Shelbume Road Demonstration Service Amtrak Service Options Tourist Train Service Options Service Linkages Ridership/Patronage/Revenues Forecasting Rail Ridership Estimating Demand for Commuter-Type Service Estimating Demand for Inter-CiService Estimating Demand for Tourist Service Fares and Revenue Projections Ancillary Issues Economic and Environmental Impacts Short and Long-Term Facility and Rolling Stock Needs Train Control, Signaling and Communications Grade Crossings Safety Cost Estimates Capital Costs - Trackwork VERMONT RAIL FEASIBILITY STUDY FINAL REPORT Table of Contents (continued) Section Paae No. Capital Costs - Train Control, Signaling and Communications .Capital Costs - Commuter Stations Capital Costs - Rolling Stock Operating and Maintenance Costs Funding Issues Shelbume Road Demonstration Project Investment in Upgrading the Core Railroad Network Action Plan Shelbume Road Demonstration Project Tourist Train Implementation Preliminary Market Plan Evaluation of Options Amtrak Connections Commuter Service Shelburne Road Demonstration Project Synthesized Service Alternative Synthesized Service Plan 3. FUTURE UTILIZATION OF RAIL INFRASTRUCTURE lntroduction .
    [Show full text]
  • Should Environmental Cleanup Liability Be Discharged in Bankruptcy?
    1357 THE UNSTOPPABLE FORCE HITS THE IMMOVABLE WALL: SHOULD ENVIRONMENTAL CLEANUP LIABILITY BE DISCHARGED IN BANKRUPTCY? INTRODUCTION Imagine you are a bankruptcy judge and a corporation has prop- erly filed for bankruptcy in your court.' The corporation is before you asking for the discharge of a debt that the corporation incurred prior to filing its bankruptcy petition.2 Your duty as a judge seems clear-to uphold the law and discharge the debtor of its prepetition liability, thereby giving the corporation the "fresh start" that bank- ruptcy law provides.3 Now imagine the debt the corporation is trying to shed is its lia- bility for damage the corporation caused to the environment. 4 You know this debt is not specifically listed among those identified by Congress as nondischargeable in bankruptcy.5 Further, this corpora- tion is responsible for many hazardous chemical sites that are leaking toxins into the environment. 6 The government has determined that the cleanup of these sites will cost tens of millions of dollars.7 If the corporation is allowed to avoid its liability, then the cleanup costs will be borne by innocent taxpayers.8 This outcome would provide incentive to other entities that deal with toxic wastes to ignore envi- ronmental protection laws, damage the environment, and simply plead bankruptcy when cleanup costs are imposed upon them.9 Now your duty is not so clear. A strict constructionist interpre- tation of the bankruptcy statute suggests that you discharge the cleanup costs because environmental cleanup liability is not specifi- cally listed as an exception to discharge. 10 However, if you discharge 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Belmont West Neighborhood Association
    Belmont West Homeowners Association Page 1 of35 Belmont West A Great West Knoxville Community IXi Home IX: Local News JX! Poo ixl FA l Events ;'X' Homes for Sale Ixi File Cabinet X Schools X; Home Services jXi Contact BELMONT WEST DIRECTORY Search by Last Name starting with ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVW X \ Z Acker, Dr. Bob [email protected] Work Number 693-9304 9500 Middleground Lane Virginia Acker Allen, Dale C. [email protected] Work Number 691-2122 721 Chateaugay Road Carolyn S. Allen Amburn, Don [email protected] Work Number Work Number 805 Chateaugay Road US Army Sandra Amburn [email protected] Arnold, Pete [email protected] Work Number mhtml: file ://C :\Trent\BelmontWest\HBryan Website\Member directory .mht 6/18/2012 Belmont West Homeowners Association Page 2 of 35 804-5279 1140 Laurel Hill Road Steel Manufacturing Sabrina Arnold 690-0128 Health and Safety Arturi, Larry [email protected] Work Number 690-8853 9532 Briarwood Drive 661-8617 Odd jobs, home repair and plumbing Jean Arturi Atchison, Gene [email protected] Work Number 769-8742 801 Whirlaway Circle 274-8351 Manager Margaret Atchison Atteberry, Phil [email protected] Work Number 692-9147 1020 Chateaugay 406-5745 Pharmaceutical Rep. Alicia 406-7806 Part-Time Artist Back to Top Barnes, Rick [email protected] Work Number 694-3100 733 Chateaugay Road Legal Advisor Dee Barnes [email protected] Batiste, Derrick [email protected] Work Number 539-1808 1129 Laurel Hill Road 425-9744 President, Spectrum, Inc. Gloria Batiste BWXTY-12 Baugadis, J.M. (June)
    [Show full text]
  • 1 Million Blue Grass (Grade II)
    $1 million Blue Grass (Grade II) Kentucky Derby Championship Series – Points: 100-40-20-10 96th Running – Saturday, April 4, 2020 (4 weeks before the Kentucky Derby) 3-Year-Olds at 1 1/8 Miles on Dirt at Keeneland Race Course (Lexington, Ky.) Stakes Record – 1:47.29, Skip Away (1996) Track Record – 1:47.75, Noble Bird (2016) Year (Race No.) Winner (Sex) Jockey (Weight) Second Time (Cond.) Sire Gross Purse-Gr. Dis.-Track (Starters) Owner(s) Trainer Third Odds (Margin) Bred (Color) Winner's Share 2019-April 6 (10th) Vekoma* (c) Javier Castellano (123) Win Win Win 1:50.93 (fast) Candy Ride-ARG $1,000,000-Gr. II 1 1/8 Miles-Kee (14) R. A. Hill Stable & Gatsas Stables George Weaver Signalman 1.40-1 (3 ½ lengths) Kentucky (Ch.) $600,000—95 2018-April 7 (10th) Good Magic* (c) Jose Ortiz (123) Flameaway 1:50.18 (fast) Curlin $1,000,000-Gr. II 1 1/8 Miles-Kee (14) e Five Racing Thoroughbreds & Stonestreet Stables Chad Brown Free Drop Billy 1.60-1 (1 ½ lengths) Kentucky (Ch.) $600,000—94 2017-April 8 (10th) Irap (c) Julien Leparoux (123) Practical Joke 1:50.39 (fast) Tiznow $1,000,000-Gr. II 1 1/8 Miles-Kee (7) Reddam Racing LLC Doug O’Neill McCracken* 31.30-1 (¾ length) Kentucky (B.) $600,000—93 2016-April 9 (10th) Brody’s Cause (c) Luis Saez (123) My Man Sam 1:50.20 (fast) Giant’s Causeway $1,000,000-Gr. I 1 1/8 Miles-Kee (14) Albaugh Family Stable Dale Romans Cherry Wine 4.20-1 (1 ¾ lengths) Kentucky (B.) $600,000—92 2015-April 4 (10th) Carpe Diem* (c) John Velazquez (123) Danzig Moon 1:49.77 (fast) Giant’s Causeway $1,000,000-Gr.
    [Show full text]
  • The Long Ride
    SKIP DICKSTEIN THE LONG RIDE Patience helps jockeys navigate But how do riders prepare and race- plan for this uniquely competitive contest the Belmont Stakes’ 12 furlongs staged at a distance that is as unusual to them as it is to their 3-year-old equine counterparts? BY PAUL VOLPONI “You have to do your homework. You have to know where all the poles are. THE GRADE 1 BELMONT STAKES has been dubbed Make sure at all times during the race you know your position,” said Hall of Fame “The Test of the Champion,” and for good reason. Not jockey John Velazquez. “The track is so only is it the final jewel of the Triple Crown, but along big; it can be very deceiving. At a normal with the Brooklyn Invitational Stakes (G2), run the racetrack you enter the backstretch and 1 same day, it is the only 1 ⁄2-mile dirt race of any major you’ve got three-quarters of a mile re- consequence in the U.S. The 12 furlongs unfold around maining. When you hit the backstretch at Belmont Park, you’re a mile from home.” one full circuit of the Taj Mahal of racing, Belmont Hall of Fame rider Braulio Baeza won Park, known for its immense, sweeping turns. There the Belmont Stakes three times, over is little doubt it takes an ultra-talented Thoroughbred three different surfaces—at the old Bel- to prove victorious. mont Park with Sherluck in 1961, at Aq- 26 / BloodHorse.com / JUNE 9, 2018 / TheBloodHorse / BloodHorse The Belmont Stakes, one trip around the track, is a test of horse and rider THE LONG RIDE BLOOD HORSE LIBRARY HORSE LIBRARY BLOOD JEFFREY SNYDER Braulio Baeza and Arts and Letters win the Belmont in 1969; right, John Velazquez aboard Rags to Riches (outside) in 2007 ueduct (while Belmont Park was being Those two elements—conservation of the window after the start,” he said.
    [Show full text]
  • Galbreath Equine Center, Daniel M
    Galbreath Equine Center, Daniel M. http://herrick.knowlton.ohio-state.edu/update/pdf.asp?building=305 Galbreath Equine Center, Daniel M. Herrick Archives Number PH 282 A. IDENTIFICATION & LOCATION 1 . Name 1.1 The Board of Trustees officially named the building the "Daniel M. Galbreath Equine Center" on October 6, 1995, after Daniel M. Galbreath. Mr. Galbreath was a member of the Ohio State Foundation Board of Directors, worked on the Board of Trustees and is an owner and breeder of thoroughbred race horses. 1.2 Alternate names noted: Equine Trauma Treatment Center Intensive Care and Research Center Equine Center 2. Location 2.1 Located at 685 Tharp St. 2.2 West of existing veterinary hospital on Coffey Rd. 3. General Description 3.1 Type of construction: Steel frame masonry skin. 1 of 3 11/20/2008 2:41 PM Galbreath Equine Center, Daniel M. http://herrick.knowlton.ohio-state.edu/update/pdf.asp?building=305 3.2 No. of stories: Two. 3.3 Increments of construction: Addition to the west side of the Veterinary hospital. 3.3 Gross floor area of 40,822 sq. ft. 3.4 Includes: operating rooms, intensive-care & patient care stalls, radiologic facilities, orthopedic surgery area, and reproductive research area. B. SIGNIFICANT DATES 1. The schematic design was approved on March 1, 1991. 2. The design development document was approved on January 15, 1992. 3. Construction document approval was on July 29, 1994. 4. Bid opening on September 1, 1994. 5. The groundbreaking ceremony took place on September 17, 1994. 6. Contracts were awarded to contractors on November 15, 1994.
    [Show full text]
  • 2018 Media Guide NYRA.Com 1 FIRST RUNNING the First Running of the Belmont Stakes in 1867 at Jerome Park Took Place on a Thursday
    2018 Media Guide NYRA.com 1 FIRST RUNNING The first running of the Belmont Stakes in 1867 at Jerome Park took place on a Thursday. The race was 1 5/8 miles long and the conditions included “$200 each; half forfeit, and $1,500-added. The second to receive $300, and an English racing saddle, made by Merry, of St. James TABLE OF Street, London, to be presented by Mr. Duncan.” OLDEST TRIPLE CROWN EVENT CONTENTS The Belmont Stakes, first run in 1867, is the oldest of the Triple Crown events. It predates the Preakness Stakes (first run in 1873) by six years and the Kentucky Derby (first run in 1875) by eight. Aristides, the winner of the first Kentucky Derby, ran second in the 1875 Belmont behind winner Calvin. RECORDS AND TRADITIONS . 4 Preakness-Belmont Double . 9 FOURTH OLDEST IN NORTH AMERICA Oldest Triple Crown Race and Other Historical Events. 4 Belmont Stakes Tripped Up 19 Who Tried for Triple Crown . 9 The Belmont Stakes, first run in 1867, is one of the oldest stakes races in North America. The Phoenix Stakes at Keeneland was Lowest/Highest Purses . .4 How Kentucky Derby/Preakness Winners Ran in the Belmont. .10 first run in 1831, the Queens Plate in Canada had its inaugural in 1860, and the Travers started at Saratoga in 1864. However, the Belmont, Smallest Winning Margins . 5 RUNNERS . .11 which will be run for the 150th time in 2018, is third to the Phoenix (166th running in 2018) and Queen’s Plate (159th running in 2018) in Largest Winning Margins .
    [Show full text]
  • Feasibility Study
    BERKSHIRE FLYER: PITTSFIELD TO NEW YORK CITY CITYFEASIBILITY STUDY DEVELOPED IN SUPPORT OF THE BERKSHIRE FLYER WORKING GROUP March 26, 2018 Berkshire Flyer: Pittsfield-New York City Feasibility Study Berkshire Flyer: Pittsfield to New York City Feasibility Study Developed by: MasssDOT Transit & Rail Division In support of: The Berkshire Flyer Working Group Study Support Provided by: STV Inc. HMMH Inc. TPRG 3/26/2018 Berkshire Flyer: Pittsfield-New York City Feasibility Study TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 Introduction and Background ................................................................................................. 1 1.1 Study Goals ...................................................................................................................... 1 1.2 Study Development Process ............................................................................................. 2 1.2.1 Berkshire Flyer Working Group ............................................................................... 2 1.2.2 Working Group meetings .......................................................................................... 3 1.3 Potential Passenger Rail Service ...................................................................................... 3 1.3.1 Cape Flyer Rail Service ............................................................................................ 4 1.3.2 Framework for Berkshire Flyer Service ................................................................... 6 1.4 Existing Services .............................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • RUNNING STYLE at Quarter Mile Decidedly 1962 9 9 ¼ Carry Back 1961 11 18
    RUNNING STYLE At Quarter Mile Decidedly 1962 9 9 ¼ Carry Back 1961 11 18 Venetian Way 1960 4 3 ½ Wire-To-Wire Kentucky Derby Winners : Horse Year Call Lengths Tomy Lee 1959 2 1 ½ American Pharoah 2015 3 1 Tim Tam 1958 8 11 This listing represents 22 Kentucky Derby California Chrome 2014 3 2 Iron Liege 1957 3 1 ½ winners that have led at each point of call during the Orb 2013 16 10 Needles 1956 16 15 race. Points of call for the Kentucky Derby are a I’ll Have Another 2012 6 4 ¼ quarter-mile, half-mile, three-quarter-mile, mile, Swaps 1955 1 1 Animal Kingdom 2011 12 6 Determine 1954 3 4 ½ stretch and finish. Super Saver 2010 6 5 ½ From 1875 to 1959 a start call was given for Dark Star 1953 1 1 ½ Mine That Bird 2009 19 21 Hill Gail 1952 2 2 the race, but was discontinued in 1960. The quarter- Big Brown 2008 4 1 ½ Count Turf 1951 11 7 ¼ mile then replaced the start as the first point of call. Street Sense 2007 18 15 Middleground 1950 5 6 Barbaro 2006 5 3 ¼ Ponder 1949 14 16 Wire-to-Wire Winner Year Giacomo 2005 18 11 Citation 1948 2 6 Smarty Jones 2004 4 1 ¾ War Emblem 2002 Jet Pilot 1947 1 1 ½ Funny Cide 2003 4 2 Winning Colors-f 1988 Assault 1946 5 3 ½ War Emblem 2002 1 ½ Spend a Buck 1985 Hoop Jr. 1945 1 1 Monarchos 2001 13 13 ½ Bold Forbes 1976 Pensive 1944 13 11 Riva Ridge 1972 Fusaichi Pegasus 2000 15 12 ½ Count Fleet 1943 1 head Kauai King 1966 Charismatic 1999 7 3 ¾ Shut Out 1942 4 2 ¼ Jet Pilot 1947 Real Quiet 1998 8 6 ¾ Whirlaway 1941 8 15 ½ Silver Charm 1997 6 4 ¼ Count Fleet 1943 Gallahadion 1940 3 2 Grindstone 1996 15 16 ¾ Bubbling Over 1926 Johnstown 1939 1 2 Thunder Gulch 1995 6 3 Paul Jones 1920 Lawrin 1938 5 7 ½ Go for Gin 1994 2 head Sir Barton 1919 War Admiral 1937 1 1 ½ Sea Hero 1993 13 10 ¾ Regret-f 1915 Bold Venture 1936 8 5 ¾ Lil E.
    [Show full text]
  • Toyota Blue Grass Stakes® (G1) Sponsored by Toyota 93Rd Running • Spring • 1 1/8 Miles • 3-Year-Olds
    Toyota Blue Grass Stakes® (G1) Sponsored by Toyota 93rd Running • Spring • 1 1/8 miles • 3-year-olds The Blue Grass Stakes was named for the Bluegrass region of Kentucky, which is characterized by grass having bluish-green culms and is known as the heart of the Thoroughbred breeding industry. First run at the Kentucky Association track in Lex- ington in 1911, the Blue Grass has, from its inception, served as an important prep for the Kentucky Derby. At the Association track, the Blue Grass was staged from 1911-1914 and 1919-1926. The race was revived at Keeneland in the spring of 1937. In 1943-1944, the Blue Grass was renewed as a part of the Keeneland-at-Churchill Downs meetings. In 1945, the Blue Grass was run as a part of the Churchill Downs meeting. Toyota became the sponsor in 1996. The purse of the race was increased to $1 million in 2015. Milestones – Blue Grass Stakes STAKES 2016 Purse: $1 Million Keeneland/Photos by Z Keeneland/Photos Fastest Time at Current Distance (1 1/8 miles): 1:47 1/5, Skip Away, 1996 Largest Straight Payoff: $82.20, Stately Victor, 2010 Keeneland sales graduate Brody’s Cause surged to the front Smallest Straight Payoff: $2.10, Spectacular Bid, 1979 at midstretch and cruised to a 1¾-length victory in the Toyota Largest Field: 14, 1954; 1974; 2013; 2014; 2016 Blue Grass (G1). Smallest Field: 3, 1940; 1942; 1966 Largest Value to Winner: $600,000, Carpe Diem, 2015; Brody’s Cause, 2016 Owner-Trainer Combination: Warren A. Croll Jr., Holy Bull, 1994; Thomas R.
    [Show full text]
  • Derby Day Weather
    Derby Day Weather (The following records are for the entire day...not necessarily race time...unless otherwise noted. Also, the data were taken at the official observation site for the city of Louisville, not at Churchill Downs itself.) Coldest Minimum Temperature: 36 degrees May 4, 1940 and May 4, 1957 Coldest Maximum Temperature: 47 degrees May 4, 1935 and May 4, 1957* (record for the date) Coldest Average Daily Temperature: 42 degrees May 4, 1957 Warmest Maximum Temperature: 94 degrees May 2, 1959 Warmest Average Daily Temperature: 79 degrees May 14, 1886 Warmest Minimum Temperature: 72 degrees May 14, 1886 Wettest: 3.15" of rain May 5, 2018 Sleet has been recorded on Derby Day. On May 6, 1989, sleet fell from 1:01pm to 1:05pm EDT (along with rain). Snow then fell the following morning (just flurries). *The record cold temperatures on Derby Day 1957 were accompanied by north winds of 20 to 25mph! Out of 145 Derby Days, 69 experienced precipitation at some point during the day (48%). Longest stretch of consecutive wet Derby Days (24-hr): 7 (2007-2013) Longest stretch of consecutive wet Derby Days (1pm-7pm): 6 (1989 - 1994) Longest stretch of consecutive dry Derby Days (24-hr): 12 (1875-1886) Longest stretch of consecutive dry Derby Days (1pm-7pm): 12 (1875 - 1886) For individual Derby Day Weather, see next page… Derby Day Weather Date High Low 24-hour Aftn/Eve Weather Winner Track Precipitation Precipitation May 4, 2019 71 58 0.34” 0.34” Showers Country House Sloppy May 5, 2018 70 61 3.15” 2.85” Rain Justify Sloppy May 6, 2017 62 42
    [Show full text]
  • NY-VT Rail Study EA 12-17-14.Pdf
    New York – Vermont Bi-State Intercity Passenger Rail Study Table of Contents Acronyms and Abbreviations ............................................................................................. ix Executive Summary ......................................................................................................... ES-1 1 Introduction .................................................................................................................. 1-1 1.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................. 1-1 1.2 Project Description – Proposed Action ................................................................... 1-3 1.3 Project Study Area .................................................................................................. 1-4 2 Purpose and Need ........................................................................................................ 2-1 2.1 Project Purpose ...................................................................................................... 2-1 2.2 Need for Intercity Passenger Rail Improvements ................................................... 2-1 2.3 Goals and Objectives .............................................................................................. 2-3 2.4 Coordination with Other Initiatives .......................................................................... 2-6 3 Alternatives Evaluation .............................................................................................
    [Show full text]