NY State Bridge Data
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Fulmer Creek Basin Assessment
EMERGENCY TRANSPORTATION INFRASTRUCTURE RECOVERY WATER BASIN ASSESSMENT AND FLOOD HAZARD MITIGATION ALTERNATIVES FULMER CREEK HERKIMER COUNTY, NEW YORK April 2014 MMI #5231-01 Photo Source: Milone and MacBroom, Inc. (2013) This document was prepared for the New York State Department of Transportation, In cooperation with the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation. Prepared by: MILONE & MACBROOM, INC. 134 Main Street, Suite A1 New Paltz, NY 12561 (845) 633-8153 www.miloneandmacbroom.com Copyright 2014 Milone & MacBroom, Inc. TABLE OF CONTENTS Page 1.0 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................. 1 1.1 Project Background ...................................................................................................... 1 1.2 Nomenclature ............................................................................................................... 3 2.0 DATA COLLECTION .......................................................................................................... 3 2.1 Initial Data Collection .................................................................................................. 3 2.2 Public Outreach ............................................................................................................ 3 2.3 Field Assessment .......................................................................................................... 3 2.4 Watershed Land Use ................................................................................................... -
Mohawk River Watershed – HUC-12
ID Number Name of Mohawk Watershed 1 Switz Kill 2 Flat Creek 3 Headwaters West Creek 4 Kayaderosseras Creek 5 Little Schoharie Creek 6 Headwaters Mohawk River 7 Headwaters Cayadutta Creek 8 Lansing Kill 9 North Creek 10 Little West Kill 11 Irish Creek 12 Auries Creek 13 Panther Creek 14 Hinckley Reservoir 15 Nowadaga Creek 16 Wheelers Creek 17 Middle Canajoharie Creek 18 Honnedaga 19 Roberts Creek 20 Headwaters Otsquago Creek 21 Mill Creek 22 Lewis Creek 23 Upper East Canada Creek 24 Shakers Creek 25 King Creek 26 Crane Creek 27 South Chuctanunda Creek 28 Middle Sprite Creek 29 Crum Creek 30 Upper Canajoharie Creek 31 Manor Kill 32 Vly Brook 33 West Kill 34 Headwaters Batavia Kill 35 Headwaters Flat Creek 36 Sterling Creek 37 Lower Ninemile Creek 38 Moyer Creek 39 Sixmile Creek 40 Cincinnati Creek 41 Reall Creek 42 Fourmile Brook 43 Poentic Kill 44 Wilsey Creek 45 Lower East Canada Creek 46 Middle Ninemile Creek 47 Gooseberry Creek 48 Mother Creek 49 Mud Creek 50 North Chuctanunda Creek 51 Wharton Hollow Creek 52 Wells Creek 53 Sandsea Kill 54 Middle East Canada Creek 55 Beaver Brook 56 Ferguson Creek 57 West Creek 58 Fort Plain 59 Ox Kill 60 Huntersfield Creek 61 Platter Kill 62 Headwaters Oriskany Creek 63 West Kill 64 Headwaters South Branch West Canada Creek 65 Fly Creek 66 Headwaters Alplaus Kill 67 Punch Kill 68 Schenevus Creek 69 Deans Creek 70 Evas Kill 71 Cripplebush Creek 72 Zimmerman Creek 73 Big Brook 74 North Creek 75 Upper Ninemile Creek 76 Yatesville Creek 77 Concklin Brook 78 Peck Lake-Caroga Creek 79 Metcalf Brook 80 Indian -
Progress of Stream Measurements
Water-Supply and Irrigation Paper No. 125 Series P, Hydrographic Progress Reports, 30 DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR UNITED STATES GEOLOGICAL SURVEY CHARLES D. WALCOTT, DIRECTOR REPORT PROGRESS OF STREAM MEASUREMENTS THE CALENDAR YEAR 1904 PREPARED UNDER THE DIRECTION OF F. H. NEWELL BY R. E. HORTON, N. C. GROVER, and JOHN C. HOYT PART II. Hudson, Passaic, Raritan, and Delaware River Drainages WASHINGTON GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 1905 Water-Supply and Irrigation Paper No. 125 Series P, Hydrographic Progress Reports, 30 i DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR UNITED STATES GEOLOGICAL SURVEY CHARLES D. WALCOTT, DIRECTOR REPORT PROGRESS OF STREAM MEASUREMENTS THE CALENDAR YEAR 1904 PREPARED UNDER THE DIRECTION OF F. H. NEWELL BY R. E. HORTON, N. C. GROVER, and JOHN C. HOYT PART II. Hudson, Passaic, Raritan, and Delaware River Drainages WASHINGTON GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 1905 CONTENTS. Letter of transmittal...................................................... 7 Introduction............................................................. 9 Cooperation and acknowledgments ...... ...^.............................. 18 Hudson Eiver drainage basin. ............................................ 19 Hudson Eiver at Fort Edward, N. Y .............................. 19 Hudson Eiver at Mechanicsville, N. Y............................. 22 Indian Eiver at Indian Lake, Hamilton County, N. Y.............. 24 Hoosic Eiver at Buskirk, N. Y .................................... 24 Mohawk River at Little Falls, N. Y................................ 26 Mohawk Eiver at Dunsbach Ferry Bridge, N. Y.................... 29 Oriskany Creek near Oriskany, N. Y .............................. 32 Starch Factory Creek near New Hartford, N. Y.................... 35 Sylvan Glen Creek near New Hartford, N. Y....................... 37 Graefenberg Creek near New Hartford, N. Y....................... 39 Eeels Creek and Johnston Brook near Deer-field, N. Y.............. 41 Nail Creek at Utica, N. Y......................................... 45 West Canada Creek at Twin Eock Bridge, N. Y................... -
Assessment of Public Comment on Draft Trout Stream Management Plan
Assessment of public comments on draft New York State Trout Stream Management Plan OCTOBER 27, 2020 Andrew M. Cuomo, Governor | Basil Seggos, Commissioner A draft of the Fisheries Management Plan for Inland Trout Streams in New York State (Plan) was released for public review on May 26, 2020 with the comment period extending through June 25, 2020. Public comment was solicited through a variety of avenues including: • a posting of the statewide public comment period in the Environmental Notice Bulletin (ENB), • a DEC news release distributed statewide, • an announcement distributed to all e-mail addresses provided by participants at the 2017 and 2019 public meetings on trout stream management described on page 11 of the Plan [353 recipients, 181 unique opens (58%)], and • an announcement distributed to all subscribers to the DEC Delivers Freshwater Fishing and Boating Group [138,122 recipients, 34,944 unique opens (26%)]. A total of 489 public comments were received through e-mail or letters (Appendix A, numbered 1-277 and 300-511). 471 of these comments conveyed specific concerns, recommendations or endorsements; the other 18 comments were general statements or pertained to issues outside the scope of the plan. General themes to recurring comments were identified (22 total themes), and responses to these are included below. These themes only embrace recommendations or comments of concern. Comments that represent favorable and supportive views are not included in this assessment. Duplicate comment source numbers associated with a numbered theme reflect comments on subtopics within the general theme. Theme #1 The statewide catch and release (artificial lures only) season proposed to run from October 16 through March 31 poses a risk to the sustainability of wild trout populations and the quality of the fisheries they support that is either wholly unacceptable or of great concern, particularly in some areas of the state; notably Delaware/Catskill waters. -
Waterbody Classifications, Streams Based on Waterbody Classifications
Waterbody Classifications, Streams Based on Waterbody Classifications Waterbody Type Segment ID Waterbody Index Number (WIN) Streams 0202-0047 Pa-63-30 Streams 0202-0048 Pa-63-33 Streams 0801-0419 Ont 19- 94- 1-P922- Streams 0201-0034 Pa-53-21 Streams 0801-0422 Ont 19- 98 Streams 0801-0423 Ont 19- 99 Streams 0801-0424 Ont 19-103 Streams 0801-0429 Ont 19-104- 3 Streams 0801-0442 Ont 19-105 thru 112 Streams 0801-0445 Ont 19-114 Streams 0801-0447 Ont 19-119 Streams 0801-0452 Ont 19-P1007- Streams 1001-0017 C- 86 Streams 1001-0018 C- 5 thru 13 Streams 1001-0019 C- 14 Streams 1001-0022 C- 57 thru 95 (selected) Streams 1001-0023 C- 73 Streams 1001-0024 C- 80 Streams 1001-0025 C- 86-3 Streams 1001-0026 C- 86-5 Page 1 of 464 09/28/2021 Waterbody Classifications, Streams Based on Waterbody Classifications Name Description Clear Creek and tribs entire stream and tribs Mud Creek and tribs entire stream and tribs Tribs to Long Lake total length of all tribs to lake Little Valley Creek, Upper, and tribs stream and tribs, above Elkdale Kents Creek and tribs entire stream and tribs Crystal Creek, Upper, and tribs stream and tribs, above Forestport Alder Creek and tribs entire stream and tribs Bear Creek and tribs entire stream and tribs Minor Tribs to Kayuta Lake total length of select tribs to the lake Little Black Creek, Upper, and tribs stream and tribs, above Wheelertown Twin Lakes Stream and tribs entire stream and tribs Tribs to North Lake total length of all tribs to lake Mill Brook and minor tribs entire stream and selected tribs Riley Brook -
Distribution of Ddt, Chlordane, and Total Pcb's in Bed Sediments in the Hudson River Basin
NYES&E, Vol. 3, No. 1, Spring 1997 DISTRIBUTION OF DDT, CHLORDANE, AND TOTAL PCB'S IN BED SEDIMENTS IN THE HUDSON RIVER BASIN Patrick J. Phillips1, Karen Riva-Murray1, Hannah M. Hollister2, and Elizabeth A. Flanary1. 1U.S. Geological Survey, 425 Jordan Road, Troy NY 12180. 2Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Department of Earth and Environmental Sciences, Troy NY 12180. Abstract Data from streambed-sediment samples collected from 45 sites in the Hudson River Basin and analyzed for organochlorine compounds indicate that residues of DDT, chlordane, and PCB's can be detected even though use of these compounds has been banned for 10 or more years. Previous studies indicate that DDT and chlordane were widely used in a variety of land use settings in the basin, whereas PCB's were introduced into Hudson and Mohawk Rivers mostly as point discharges at a few locations. Detection limits for DDT and chlordane residues in this study were generally 1 µg/kg, and that for total PCB's was 50 µg/kg. Some form of DDT was detected in more than 60 percent of the samples, and some form of chlordane was found in about 30 percent; PCB's were found in about 33 percent of the samples. Median concentrations for p,p’- DDE (the DDT residue with the highest concentration) were highest in samples from sites representing urban areas (median concentration 5.3 µg/kg) and lower in samples from sites in large watersheds (1.25 µg/kg) and at sites in nonurban watersheds. (Urban watershed were defined as those with a population density of more than 60/km2; nonurban watersheds as those with a population density of less than 60/km2, and large watersheds as those encompassing more than 1,300 km2. -
Central Library of Rochester and Monroe County · Historic Monographs Collection
Central Library of Rochester and Monroe County · Historic Monographs Collection Central Library of Rochester and Monroe County · Historic Monographs Collection A FOB THE TOURIST J1ND TRAVELLER, ALONO THE LINE OF THE CANALS, AND TUB INTERIOli COMMERCE OF THE STATE OF NEW-YORK. BT HORATIO GATES SPAFFORD, LL. IX AUTHOR OF THE GAZETTEER Of SKW-IOBK. JfEW-YOBK: PRIXTEB BY T. AND J. SWORDS, No. 99 Pearl-street. 1824. Prfee SO Ceats. Central Library of Rochester and Monroe County · Historic Monographs Collection Northern-District of New-York, In wit: BE it remembered, thut on the twelfth day of July, in the forty-ninth year of the Inde pendence of the United States of America, A. D 1824. Harutio G. Spajford, of the said District, hath deposited in this Office the title of a Book, the right whereof he claims as Author, in the word& following, to wit: **A Pocket Guide for the Tourist and Traveller, along the line of the Canals, and the interior Commerce of the State of New-York. By Horatio Gates Spaffor'dyLL.D. Author of the Gazetteer of Nete-York." In conformity to the Act of the Congress of the United States, entitled, " An Act for the Encouragement of Learn ing, !>y securing the Copies of Maps, Charts, and Books, to the Authors and Proprietors of such Copies, during the times therein mentioned;" and also to the Act, entitled " An Act, supplementary to an Act, entitled ' An Act for the Encou ragement of Learning, !>y securing the Copies of Maps, Charts, and Hooks, to the Authors and Proprietors of such Copies during the times therein mentioned,' and extending the Benefits thereof to the Arts of Designing, Engraving, and Etching Historical and other Prints." R. -
Herkimer Flood Damage Reduction Project
HERKIMER FLOOD DAMAGE REDUCTION PROJECT Department of Environmental Conservation Operated and Maintained by: The Village of Herkimer Region 6 Counties: Herkimer, Jefferson, Lewis, Oneida, St. Lawrence PROJECT LOCATION The project area is located on the Mohawk River in the Village of Herkimer, Herkimer County, in East Central New York State. The improvement works extend along the left bank of Bellinger Brook, the left bank of the Mohawk River and along the right bank of West Canada Creek. Page 1 of 6 Herkimer Flood Damage Reduction Project PROJECT DESCRIPTION The protective works extend approximately 12,800 feet with 2,900 feet along the left bank of Bellinger Brook, 6,900 feet along the Mohawk River (including the New York State Thruway and Thruway Access Road) and 3,000 feet along the right bank of West Canada Creek. The improvements consist as follows: Clearing and snagging of Bellinger Brook along the channel bottom and left bank from station (3 – 56) to the inlet of the culvert under New York Route 5. The construction of earth levees along Bellinger Brook, the Thruway Access Road, Mohawk River, and West Canada Creek. A blanket levee along the east slope of the existing railroad embankment running parallel to West Canada Creek. Gravel blankets on the New York State Thruway embankments. Closure structures across the New York Central Railroad spur line near the Bellinger Brook crossing, and across Mohawk Street at its intersection with the New York State Thruway Control gates along the hydraulic canal. Two pump stations, ponding areas, access roads, culverts, ditches, catch basins, and appurtenant drainage works. -
Round 24 Agricultural Nonpoint Source Abatement and Control Program Project Descriptions All Projects Support the New York State
Round 24 Agricultural Nonpoint Source Abatement gricultural A and Control Program Project Descriptions Environmental All projects support the New York State Agricultural Management Environmental Management (AEM) Program by funding the implementation of agricultural water quality Best Management Practices (BMPs) to protect natural resources while maintaining the economic viability of New York State’s diverse agricultural community. Western NY $122,100 was awarded to the Allegany County Soil and Water Conservation District to work with two farms in the Wiscoy Creek Watershed. The project will: • Reduce nutrient and sediment loading within the watershed • Improve manure management on two farm facilities • Control livestock access to the stream with exclusionary fence and access control $572,204 was awarded to the Cattaraugus County Soil and Water Conservation District to work with one farm in the Cattaraugus Creek Watershed. The project will: • Reduce agricultural runoff and improve manure management • Implement a riparian buffer for additional water quality protection $779,900 was awarded to the Cattaraugus County Soil and Water Conservation District to work with three farms in the Conewango Creek Watershed. The project will: • Significantly help reduce the impact of runoff • Improve agricultural waste management • Establish riparian buffers in sensitive areas to help reduce sediment and phosphorus runoff. $156,255 was awarded to the Chautauqua County Soil and Water Conservation District to work with one farm in the Clymer Water District which includes Hulbert/Clymer Pond. The project will: • Reduce phosphorus and nitrogen inputs to the Clymer Aquifer and surface water resources • Improve agricultural waste management • Implement a riparian herbaceous buffer to filter nutrients and sediment from livestock pasture $809,370 was awarded to the Chautauqua County Soil and Water Conservation District to work with two farms in the Conewango Creek Watershed. -
Resilient NY Program
1 Resilient NY Program October 29, 2019 Thomas R. Snow Jr. New York City Watershed and Flood Resiliency Programs 2 Resilient NY Program Flood/Ice Jam studies - • Includes 48 high-priority watersheds across NYS § Comprehensive hydrologic and hydraulic analysis (HEC-RAS) and ice jams (where applicable); § Fluvial geomorphic assessment; § Current and future flood flows due to climate change will be evaluated; and § Reports will include specific project recommendations to mitigate flooding and ice jams. 3 4 Hudson River Watershed - Wappinger Creek – Dutchess County Roeliff Jansen Kill – Dutchess/Columbia Main Street Brook – Ulster County Catskill Creek – Greene County Stockport Creek – Columbia/Rensselaer 5 How where these watersheds chosen? • # of Repetitive Losses/community (FEMA information). • # Repetitive Losses/stream (FEMA/DEC information); • Total $ flood insurance payment (FEMA information); • DEC technical staff; • Consultation with Departments of Homeland Security and EmerGency Services and State; and • County Soil and Water Conservation District staff. 6 Flooding - • An unfortunate reality in and near riverine areas across NYS • Most recent catastrophic floods 2006, 2011, 2012 and 2013 • Isolated storms § July 2017 – Town of Whitestown/Village of Whitesboro, Hoosick Falls • Ice jam flooding is also a common occurrence 7 Mohawk River Watershed Flooding • In 2013/14, completed 13 state-of- the-art flood studies completed in high priority watersheds § 4 - Oneida County § 8 – Herkimer § 1 – Montgomery • Schoharie Creek – initiated -
Congressional Record—House H7878
H7878 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE July 17, 2007 center even exists. We don’t know if it The Acting CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to modifications committed to conference: even exists, if it’s created by this ear- clause 6 of rule XVIII, further pro- Messrs. Reyes, Cramer, and Hoekstra. mark. ceedings on the amendment offered by From the Committee on Science and Tech- Concurrent Technology has been the the gentleman from Arizona will be nology, for consideration of secs. 703, 1301, recipient of millions upon millions of 1464, 1467, and 1507 of the Senate amendment, postponed. and modifications committed to conference: dollars over the years. The executives Mr. VISCLOSKY. Mr. Chairman, I Messrs. Gordon of Tennessee, Wu, and in Concurrent Technology contribute move that the Committee do now rise. Gingrey. handsomely to Members of Congress. The motion was agreed to. From the Committee on Transportation So it receives a lot of earmarks. It Accordingly, the Committee rose; and Infrastructure, for consideration of Ti- seems to be an earmark incubator of and the Speaker pro tempore (Mr. tles I–III, sec. 1002, and Title XI of the House some type, an earmark that begets DAVIS of Illinois) having assumed the bill, and secs. 202, 301, Title IV, secs. 801–803, 807, 901, 1001, 1002, 1101–1103, 1422–1424, 1426, more earmarks. chair, Mr. TIERNEY, Chairman of the And yet we have the report that 1427, 1429, 1430, 1433, 1436–1438, 1441, 1443, 1444, Committee of the Whole House on the 1446, 1449, 1464, 1473, 1503, and 1605 of the Sen- comes with the bill that doesn’t even state of the Union, reported that that mention Concurrent Technology. -
Regional Economic Development Council Plans
Governor Andrew M. Cuomo Regional EconomicAwards Development Council 2017 1 Table of Contents Regional Council Awards Western New York .........................................................................................................................10 Finger Lakes ...................................................................................................................................24 Southern Tier ..................................................................................................................................36 Central New York ..........................................................................................................................48 Mohawk Valley ...............................................................................................................................62 North Country .................................................................................................................................74 Capital Region ................................................................................................................................85 Mid-Hudson .....................................................................................................................................98 New York City ................................................................................................................................ 114 Long Island ...................................................................................................................................