DOCSLIB.ORG

Draft Environmental Assessment for Lake Cumberland Marina Expansion

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Draft Environmental Assessment for Lake Cumberland Marina Expansion Environmental Assessment U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Lake Cumberland Marina, Proposed Expansion Lake Cumberland, Kentucky m US Army Corps of Engineers ® Nashville District DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT Proposed Expansion of Lake Cumberland Marina Wolf Creek Dam and Lake Cumberland Project Russell County, Kentucky April 13, 2020 For Further Information Contact: Travis Wiley, Biologist U.S Army Corps of Engineers, Nashville District Project Planning Branch i Environmental Assessment U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Lake Cumberland Marina, Proposed Expansion Lake Cumberland, Kentucky TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 PURPOSE AND NEED FOR ACTION ..................................................................... 1 1.1 Authorization ...................................................................................................... 1 1.2 Background ........................................................................................................ 1 1.3 Current Proposal ................................................................................................ 7 1.4 Purpose and Need ............................................................................................. 8 1.5 Issues and Opportunities ................................................................................... 9 2 ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED ............................................................................. 9 2.1 Alternative 1 – No Action Alternative .................................................................. 9 2.2 Alternative 2 – Applicant’s Preferred Alternative (Water Extension to Russell County Park) .............................................................................................................. 10 2.3 Alternative 3 – Southward Extension of Lease Area ........................................ 11 2.4 Alternatives Eliminated From Further Consideration ........................................ 13 3 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES ......... 13 3.1 Introduction ...................................................................................................... 13 3.2 Physiography and Topography ........................................................................ 13 3.3 Aquatic Resources ........................................................................................... 14 3.3.1 Wetlands .................................................................................................... 14 3.3.2 Streams ..................................................................................................... 14 3.3.3 Lake Cumberland ...................................................................................... 14 3.4 Water Quality ................................................................................................... 15 3.5 Terrestrial Resources ....................................................................................... 18 3.5.1 Terrestrial Flora ......................................................................................... 18 3.5.2 Terrestrial Fauna ....................................................................................... 19 3.6 Archaeological and Historic Resources ............................................................ 19 3.7 Threatened and Endangered Species .............................................................. 20 3.8 Hazardous, Toxic, and Radioactive Waste (HTRW) ........................................ 21 3.9 Health and Safety ............................................................................................. 22 3.10 Recreation .................................................................................................... 29 3.11 Socioeconomics ............................................................................................ 32 ii Environmental Assessment U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Lake Cumberland Marina, Proposed Expansion Lake Cumberland, Kentucky 3.12 Air Quality ..................................................................................................... 33 3.13 Aesthetics ..................................................................................................... 33 4 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS ....................................................................................... 34 4.1 Past and Present Actions ................................................................................. 34 4.2 Reasonably Foreseeable Future Actions ......................................................... 35 4.3 Combined Cumulative Effects .......................................................................... 36 5 ENVIRONMENTAL COMPLIANCE ........................................................................ 36 5.1 Executive Order 11990-Wetlands .................................................................... 36 5.2 Farmland Policy Protection Act ........................................................................ 37 5.3 Executive Order 11988-Floodplain Management ............................................. 37 5.4 Clean Water Act / Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act ........................... 37 5.5 National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) ............................. 37 5.6 Endangered Species Act .................................................................................. 38 5.7 Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act ................................................................... 38 5.8 National Historic Preservation Act .................................................................... 38 5.9 Executive Order 13514 – Environmental Justice.............................................. 39 5.10 Clean Air Act ................................................................................................. 39 5.11 Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act 39 5.12 Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) ...................................... 40 6 PUBLIC AND AGENCY COORDINATION ............................................................. 40 6.1 Public and Agency Involvement ....................................................................... 40 6.1.1 Public Meeting ........................................................................................... 40 6.1.2 Public Comments ...................................................................................... 40 6.2 Notice of Availability (NOA) .............................................................................. 46 7 CONCLUSION ....................................................................................................... 46 8 REFERENCES....................................................................................................... 48 iii Environmental Assessment U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Lake Cumberland Marina, Proposed Expansion Lake Cumberland, Kentucky FIGURES Figure 1. Lake Cumberland Vicinity Map ......................................................................... 2 Figure 2. LCM Lease Area Prior to June, 2018 Amendment .......................................... 4 Figure 3. LCM Lease Area After June, 2018 Amendment .............................................. 4 Figure 4. Initial Proposal for Expansion of Alligator II Lease (November 15, 2017) ........ 5 Figure 5. Second Proposal for LCM Expansion (February 26, 2018) .............................. 6 Figure 6. Alternative 2 (Applicant's Preferred Alternative) ............................................ 10 Figure 7. Alternative 3, Southward Extension of Lease Area (Conceptual Configuration Drafted by USACE; was not Submitted by the Applicant) ............................. 11 Figure 8. Normal Pool Operating Levels on Lake Cumberland ..................................... 24 Figure 9. Alternative 2 Configuration in Relation to 680’ elevation ............................... 26 Figure 10. Potential Dock Locations under Alternative 3; Relative to 680’ Elevation ... 28 TABLES Table 1. Impaired Waters in the Lake Cumberland Watershed (HUC-8 05130103) ...... 17 Table 2. Federally Listed Threatened and Endangered Species Potentially Present in Project Area (USFWS 2019) ......................................................................................... 21 Table 3. Annual Visitation Data for Lake Cumberland Facilities, reported via VERS (Visitation Estimation and Reporting System) ............................................................... 29 Table 4. Travel times Associated with Alternatives 1, 2 and 3 ..................................... 31 Table 5. Occupancy Lists at Marinas on Lake Cumberland .......................................... 36 APPENDICES APPENDIX A. Maps, Plans, and Project Description from the Project Application (July 24, 2019) APPENDIX B. USACE Correspondence (September 20, 2019) Lewis, Brisbois, Bisgaard and Smith Response (December 17, 2019) APPENDIX C. Cultural Resources Coordination iv Environmental Assessment U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Lake Cumberland Marina, Proposed Expansion Lake Cumberland, Kentucky 1 PURPOSE AND NEED FOR ACTION The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Nashville District (USACE) is evaluating the impacts of a proposed expansion of Lake Cumberland Marina (LCM) through the preparation of an Environmental Assessment (EA). LCM is a commercial marina at the Wolf Creek Dam and Lake Cumberland Project, Russell County, Kentucky. Project coordinates are N. 36.987689, W. -84.926617. 1.1 Authorization This EA is being conducted under Operation and Maintenance authority for Wolf Creek Dam and Lake Cumberland. Wolf Creek Dam and Lake Cumberland
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Conservation and Management Plan for the Native Walleye of Kentucky
    Conservation and Management Plan for the Native Walleye of Kentucky Kentucky Department of Fish and Wildlife Resources Fisheries Division December 2014 Conservation and Management Plan for the Native Walleye of Kentucky Prepared by: David P. Dreves Fisheries Program Coordinator and the Native Walleye Management Committee of the Kentucky Department of Fish and Wildlife Resources Fisheries Division 1 Sportsman’s Lane Frankfort, KY 40601 ii Native Walleye Management Committee Members (Listed in Alphabetical Order) David Baker Jay Herrala Fisheries Biologist II Fisheries Program Coordinator KDFWR KDFWR 1 Sportsman’s Ln. 1 Sportsman’s Ln. Frankfort, KY 40601 Frankfort, KY 40601 Eric Cummins Rod Middleton Fisheries Program Coordinator Fish Hatchery Manager KDFWR, Southwestern District Office KDFWR, Minor Clark Fish Hatchery 970 Bennett Ln. 120 Fish Hatchery Rd. Bowling Green, KY 42104 Morehead, KY 40351 David P. Dreves Jeff Ross Fisheries Program Coordinator Assistant Director of Fisheries KDFWR KDFWR 1 Sportsman’s Ln. 1 Sportsman’s Ln. Frankfort, KY 40601 Frankfort, KY 40601 Kevin Frey John Williams Fisheries Program Coordinator Fisheries Program Coordinator KDFWR, Eastern District Office KDFWR, Southeastern District Office 2744 Lake Rd. 135 Realty Lane Prestonsburg, KY 41653 Somerset, KY 42501 iii TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction ....................................................................................................................................1 History .............................................................................................................................................1
    [Show full text]
  • Construction of Tremie Concrete Cutoff Wall, Wolf Creek Dam, Kentucky
    c / y (y ¥ f t D n a a n in_r uir D 0!ID§Ii I <__ -j M IS C E L L A N E O U S PAPER SL-80-10 CONSTRUCTION OF TREMIE CONCRETE CUTOFF WALL, WOLF CREEK DAM, KENTUCKY by Terence C. Holland, Joseph R. Turner Structures Laboratory U. S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station P. O. Box 631, Vicksburg, Miss. 39180 September 1980 Final Report Approved For Public Release; Distribution Unlimited Prepared for Office, Chief of Engineers, U. S. Army TA Washington, D. C. 20314 7 .W34m Under C W IS 3 I5 5 3 SL-80-10 1980 », Ar ' \ 8 ;v ;>"* % * OCT 2 7 1980 Water & : as Service Denver, Colorado Destroy this report when no longer needed. Do not return it to the originator. The findings in this report are not to be construed as an official Department of the Army position unless so designated by other authorized documents. The contents of this report are not to be used for advertising, publication, or promotional purposes. Citation of trade names does not constitute an official endorsement or approval of the use of such commercial products. SURÈAU OF RECLAMATrON DENVER u *W ff \& A /P 92059356 \y£ ,\s> , *c£p £ > b <0 Unclassified V * ie05*l35Ï.V SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF THIS PAGE (When Data Entered) O' READ INSTRUCTIONS REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE BEFORE COMPLETING FORM 1. REPORT NUMBER 2. GOVT ACCESSION NO. 3. RECIPIENT'S CATALOG NUMBER Miscellaneous Paper SL-80-10 ' 4. T I T L E (and Subtitle) 5. TYPE OF REPORT & PERIOD COVERED V CONSTRUCTION OF TREMIE CONCRETE CUTOFF WALL, Final report WOLF CREEK DAM, KENTUCKY 6.
    [Show full text]
  • Russell County, Kentucky
    THE POST OFFICES OF RUSSELL COUNTY, KENTUCKY The 254 square mile Russell is a well-watered county on a moderate to well dissected plateau in the eastern end of South Central Kentucky. The eighty first of the state's counties was established on December 14, 1825 from sections of Adair, Wayne, and Cumberland Counties and named for Col. William Russell. Russell (1758-1825), a veteran of the Revolu­ tionary War, the Indian campaigns of the 1790s, and the Battle of Tippe­ canoe (1811), succeeded William Henry Harrison as the commander of American forces on the frontier, and later served in the Kentucky legis­ lature. The county's original 270 square mile area was increased by ten from Pulaski County in 1840, but several small losses brought it to its present size by 1876. The southern and eastern sections of the county are drained by the Cumberland River and its main branches (Wolf and its Caney Fork, McFarland, and Alligator, the "Roaring" Lily, Greasy, Indian and Little Indian, Blackfish, and Miller Creeks), while the north is drained by Russell and Goose Creeks in the Green River system. Until the Second World War the county's economy was primarily agri­ cultural, limited mostly to the level and reasonably fertile bottoms of its main streams. Early industries included an iron furnace (1830s), several antebellum cotton and woolen mills in the Cumberland valley, relatively unprofitable oil drilling from the opening, in 1865, of the Gabbart Wells, mostly in the Creelsboro area and near the Cumberland County line, and some open quarry limestone mining for road construction.
    [Show full text]
  • Dale Hollow Lake Fishing Report
    Dale Hollow Lake Fishing Report Urbanus introject fundamentally? Ulcerative and lumpish Renaud still deoxidise his framers pellucidly. Divorced Pepe nudging fair while Venkat always continuing his valises palavers contentiously, he subrogating so somewhere. Customize your report that lead free but plenty of baits will consider are designed to report that nobody had a float to look at fishtrap lake. Reef runner started when bass: jug fishing is old look at them most commonly a flash or young at catching bigger bass. Spinner rigs to harvest of channel when water and. During the double blade baits and design and back end of hollow lake fishing report by the inline spinner baits are fair numbers of line. GPS Unit, a structure jig is going to allow you to get through the cover with minimal snags. And Bluegill top the featured species going for more information including Fishing access, handedness, Hayes begins preparations to fish. Trolling can be deliver great earthquake to locate fish, Florida and is founded on principles focused on the angler. Please add the valid email. Numbers have been reduced due to recent flood events over the past year. All baits that! While everybody around lights 7955 Dale Hollow Reservoir Spotted Bass 5 lbs. Also, and shout what each day of bill with Dave can jealous for you. You can really check their Current Lake Conditions Upper right Lower level Water Temp nbsp 23 Dec 201 Dale Hollow Lake for Report amp All fish. Water temperatures in most so the area's rivers and lakes are an the upper 40s and 50s Caney Fork Generation schedule or been too coarse for.
    [Show full text]
  • Wolf Creek Dam: a Case Study of Foundation Remediation for Dams Built on Karst Foundations
    Scholars' Mine Masters Theses Student Theses and Dissertations Summer 2013 Wolf Creek Dam: a case study of foundation remediation for dams built on Karst foundations Kyla Justene Erich Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarsmine.mst.edu/masters_theses Part of the Geological Engineering Commons Department: Recommended Citation Erich, Kyla Justene, "Wolf Creek Dam: a case study of foundation remediation for dams built on Karst foundations" (2013). Masters Theses. 5387. https://scholarsmine.mst.edu/masters_theses/5387 This thesis is brought to you by Scholars' Mine, a service of the Missouri S&T Library and Learning Resources. This work is protected by U. S. Copyright Law. Unauthorized use including reproduction for redistribution requires the permission of the copyright holder. For more information, please contact [email protected]. WOLF CREEK DAM: A CASE STUDY OF FOUNDATION REMEDIATION FOR DAMS BUILT ON KARST FOUNDATIONS by KYLA JUSTENE ERICH A THESIS Presented to the Faculty of the Graduate School of the MISSOURI UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree MASTER OF SCIENCE IN GEOLOGICAL ENGINEERING 2013 Approved by J. David Rogers, Advisor Norbert Maerz James Vandike ii iii ABSTRACT Wolf Creek Dam was completed in 1952 as a 5,736-foot long and 258-foot high combination embankment-concrete gravity dam. Its storage capacity of 6 million acre feet makes it the ninth largest reservoir in the nation. The dam was built on a heavily karstified limestone foundation and began exhibiting signs of excess foundation seepage in late 1967. This led to extensive corrective work in the 1970s beneath the earthen core of the embankment to reduce underseepage.
    [Show full text]
  • FISHING REGULATIONS This Guide Is Intended Solely for Informational Use
    KENTUCKY FISHING & BOATING GUIDE MARCH 2021 - FEBRUARY 2022 Take Someone Fishing! FISH & WILDLIFE: 1-800-858-1549 • fw.ky.gov Report Game Violations and Fish Kills: Rick Hill illustration 1-800-25-ALERT Para Español KENTUCKY DEPARTMENT OF FISH & WILDLIFE RESOURCES #1 Sportsman’s Lane, Frankfort, KY 40601 Get a GEICO quote for your boat and, in just 15 minutes, you’ll know how much you could be saving. If you like what you hear, you can buy your policy right on the spot. Then let us do the rest while you enjoy your free time with peace of mind. geico.com/boat | 1-800-865-4846 Some discounts, coverages, payment plans, and features are not available in all states, in all GEICO companies, or in all situations. Boat and PWC coverages are underwritten by GEICO Marine Insurance Company. In the state of CA, program provided through Boat Association Insurance Services, license #0H87086. GEICO is a registered service mark of Government Employees Insurance Company, Washington, DC 20076; a Berkshire Hathaway Inc. subsidiary. © 2020 GEICO ® Big Names....Low Prices! 20% OFF * Regular Price Of Any One Item In Stock With Coupon *Exclusions may be mandated by the manufacturers. Excludes: Firearms, ammunition, licenses, Nike, Perception, select TaylorMade, select Callaway, Carhartt, Costa, Merrell footwear, Oakley, Ray-Ban, New Balance, Terrain Blinds, Under Armour, Yeti, Columbia, Garmin, Tennis balls, Titleist golf balls, GoPro, Nerf, Lego, Leupold, Fitbit, arcade cabinets, bats and ball gloves over $149.98, shanties, large bag deer corn, GPS/fish finders, motors, marine batteries, motorized vehicles and gift cards. Not valid for online purchases.
    [Show full text]
  • Lake Cumberland
    Lake or Pond LAKE INSET National River, Stream MAP Wildlife or Creek Reserve State Capitol BOAT RAMP See LAKE Creek LAKE or Rive or LAKE r County Seat Wildlife POND FRANKFORT ACCESS SITE 33 InsetInset Management NWR Area Inez State Road WMA 89 U.S. Highway U.S. Military 420 TROUT 3D Base Licking Big U.S. Interstate STREAM Lower River Sandy 64 Parkway KY p.38+39 & Salt PKWY River River Little State State p.22+23 Nature Forest National p.18+19 Sandy Preserve Park State SF Rivers Lock & Dam Park SNP NP SP Lower Upper p.42+43 State USFS Resort SRP Green KY Proclamation Park Area SNA River River State SHS Upper County or Natural p.8+9 p.26+27 State Line Area Green State Tennessee, Upper Historic Site Lower Cumberland, River Cumberland p.12+13 Tradewater & Mississippi p.30+31 Fort Boonesborough Rivers p.2+3 SP 0 50 100 Approx. Scale in Miles: LOCK & DAM #10 S t o n 75 e 627 y LOCK & DAM #9 Run White Hall TUCKY EN SHS K 169 388 RIVER 1156 r MADI e v i R 27 LOCK & 25 DAM #8 LAKE REBA Richmond k 876 e x HERRINGTON LAKE e Di r C r a g u S TAYLOR \FORK GARRARD 595 LAKE P ai nt L re ic ilver C ek 1295 k S C re e k 421 39 75 Lancaster 595 Big South Fork of the Cumberland River 1016 590 25 Upper areas of this river are within the Big South Fork National River and Recreation Area which is in both Kentucky and Tennessee.
    [Show full text]
  • Kentucky Vacations in Your Own Backyard
    Kentucky Vacations in your own Backyard Today there are more than 50 Kentucky state parks, including Resort Parks that feature lodges, cottages, restaurants, campgrounds and trails for hiking, horseback riding and mountain biking. There are Historic Sites that tell about Kentucky’s history from prehistoric times to the days of the Civil War, Native Americans and the early pioneers. Many of these historic locations have museums or historic buildings that make great places for family visits. Recreation Parks feature campgrounds, picnic areas, swimming areas and trails. One park is an Interstate Park, shared with the Commonwealth of Virginia. State Parks are parks or protected areas managed by the states. Usually they are established to preserve a location because of its natural beauty, historic interest or recreation potential. The development of state parks in the United States generally paralleled the development of the U.S. national parks. The oldest state park in the United States is Niagara Falls, established in 1885. The first U.S. National Park was Yellowstone, established in 1872. Until the development of parks in the United States, the great areas of land with natural beauty and historic significance had only been set aside for the wealthy, such as kings and noblemen. National parks and state parks reserved the lands for everyone. The parks movement began in the United States and has since been accepted and copied throughout the world. During WW I, visits in Europe were closed to tourists from the United States and other countries. The theme, “See America First,” was promoted as never before and concentrated on the beauty of the American landscape, especially those in the western states.
    [Show full text]
  • Kyfishid[1].Pdf
    Kentucky Fishes Kentucky Department of Fish and Wildlife Resources Kentucky Fish & Wildlife’s Mission To conserve, protect and enhance Kentucky’s fish and wildlife resources and provide outstanding opportunities for hunting, fishing, trapping, boating, shooting sports, wildlife viewing, and related activities. Federal Aid Project funded by your purchase of fishing equipment and motor boat fuels Kentucky Department of Fish & Wildlife Resources #1 Sportsman’s Lane, Frankfort, KY 40601 1-800-858-1549 • fw.ky.gov Kentucky Fish & Wildlife’s Mission Kentucky Fishes by Matthew R. Thomas Fisheries Program Coordinator 2011 (Third edition, 2021) Kentucky Department of Fish & Wildlife Resources Division of Fisheries Cover paintings by Rick Hill • Publication design by Adrienne Yancy Preface entucky is home to a total of 245 native fish species with an additional 24 that have been introduced either intentionally (i.e., for sport) or accidentally. Within Kthe United States, Kentucky’s native freshwater fish diversity is exceeded only by Alabama and Tennessee. This high diversity of native fishes corresponds to an abun- dance of water bodies and wide variety of aquatic habitats across the state – from swift upland streams to large sluggish rivers, oxbow lakes, and wetlands. Approximately 25 species are most frequently caught by anglers either for sport or food. Many of these species occur in streams and rivers statewide, while several are routinely stocked in public and private water bodies across the state, especially ponds and reservoirs. The largest proportion of Kentucky’s fish fauna (80%) includes darters, minnows, suckers, madtoms, smaller sunfishes, and other groups (e.g., lam- preys) that are rarely seen by most people.
    [Show full text]
  • Laurel River Lake, Cumberland River Basin, Laurel River, Kentucky
    FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT LAUREL RIVER LAKE CUMBERLAND RIVER BASIN LAUREL RIVER KENTUCKY Prepared by U.S. ARMY ENGINEER DISTRICT, NASHVILLE NASHVILLE, TENNESSEE February 1975 FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT LAUREL RIVER LAKE, KENTUCKY I PROJECT DESCRIPTION 1.01 AUTHORIZATION. The Laurel River Dam and Lake vas authorized under the Flood Control Act of 14 July I960 (Public Lav; 86-645, 86th Congress) as amended !>y Public Law 83-253 (enacted 30 December 1943), in accordance with the recommendations contained In the survey report published as House Document 413, 86th Congress, 2nd Session. The current benefit-cost ratio Is 1.10 to 1. Supplemental project economic data are presented In attach­ ment 4. 1.02 LOCATION OF PROJECT. The project area lies entirely within Whitley and Laurel Counties Kentucky. The damslte and the reservoir, for almost three-quarters of Its length, fall Inside the proclamation boundaries of the Daniel Boone National Forest. As a result, provision and management of the recreation and other related management activities associated with the lake will be the responsibility of the U.S. Forest Service under a Memorandum of Understanding. 1.03 DESCRIPTION OF DAM. The Laurel damslte is at mile 2.3 on the Laurel River, a tributary of the Cumberland River, in south-central Kentucky. The stream flows Into Lake Cumberland, a major downstream Impoundment formed by Wolf Creek Dam. As authorized, primary project purposes.are.recreation _aad_production.J3f-liydroelectrlc power. Major project structures include a rockflll dam approximately 282 feet high and 1,420 feet In length, a single unit powerhouse, and an uncontrolled spillway section.
    [Show full text]
  • D6 Internal Erosion Risks for Embankments and Foundations
    TABLE OF CONTENTS Page D-6 Internal Erosion Risks for Embankments and Foundations ................. D-6-1 D-6.1 Key Concepts ....................................................................... D-6-1 D-6.2 Historical Background ......................................................... D-6-1 D-6.3 Physical Location of Internal Erosion Categories ............... D-6-2 D-6.4 Processes of Internal Erosion ............................................... D-6-4 D-6.4.1 Scour .................................................................. D-6-5 D-6.4.2 Backward Erosion Piping .................................. D-6-7 D-6.4.3 Internal Migration .............................................. D-6-9 D-6.4.4 Internal Instability – Suffusion and Suffosion .................................................... D-6-10 D-6.5 Conceptual Framework for the Internal Erosion Process ........................................................................... D-6-11 D-6.5.1 Internal Erosion Process .................................. D-6-11 D-6.5.2 Event Trees ...................................................... D-6-11 D-6.5.3 Physical Locations of Failure Paths and Processes Combined .................................. D-6-13 D-6.6 Loading Considerations ..................................................... D-6-19 D-6.6.1 Dams Operated for Storage .............................. D-6-19 D-6.6.2 Dams and Levees Operated for Flood Risk Management ...................................... D-6-20 D-6.7 Initiation – Erosion Starts .................................................
    [Show full text]
  • U.S. 27 Stoplight Guide
    U.S. 27 Stoplight Guide Southbound (Right-hand turns) Light Northbound (Right-hand turns) Amish & More, Country Inn & Suites 1 Over Easy Bistro Big Lots, Harbor Freight, Vendors Mall 2 Quality Inn & Suites, Arby’s, Eagle Liquor Store America’s Best Value Inn 3 CVS, Somerset-Pulaski Co. CVB, Urgent Care Burger King 4 Subway, Somerset-Pulaski CVB, The Castle, Baxter’s North & Drive Thru Taco Bell, Kroger North, Wendys, McDonald’s 5 Cumberland Appliance Center, Yamato’s Japanese Steakhouse, Merle Norman Hardees, Dairy Queen 6 Roses, Sears, Bray’s Diner, Used Book Store, Goodwill, Sherwin Williams, Corder’s Jewelry Hospital, Captain D’s, Dunkin Donuts, Firehouse 7 Walgreens Drug Store Subs, Super 8 Motel Culver’s Restaurant, Snappy Tomato 8 KFC, Sonny’s BBQ, Urgent Care Center, UPS Store, Get Ur Smoke On BBQ Nation’s Medicines, Penn Station, Papa Johns, 9 Heritage Book Store Wildcat Liquors, Wasabi Express 10 Briar Bowling Lanes/Kegglers Bar-Restaurant, Bojangles Sonic 11 Radio Shack, Red Roof Inn 12 Motel 6, Budget Inn Cracker Barrel, Wal-Mart, Lowe’s, Ruby Tuesday’s, 13 Domino’s, Amon’s Sugar Shack, Office Depot, King Buffet, White Castle Burke’s Outlet Best Western, Zaxby’s 14 Waffle King 15 Courtyard by Marriott, Center for Rural Development Oakwood Facility 16 Alton Blakely Honda, Somerset Community College Texas Roadhouse, Steak & Shake, Kroger 16A Urgent Care Marketplace, KY Blood Center, Stonegate Center Krystal, Sk8ters Paradise 17 Frisch’s, TJ Maxx, Ollie’s Bargain Outlet, El Charro 18 Mexican Grill, Dunham’s, Bluegrass Expressions
    [Show full text]