DOCSLIB.ORG

Opekiska Lock and Dam Hydroelectric Project, FERC Project No

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Opekiska Lock and Dam Hydroelectric Project, FERC Project No 20160930-3010 FERC PDF (Unofficial) 09/30/2016 MULTI-PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FOR HYDROPOWER LICENSE Opekiska Lock and Dam Hydroelectric Project, FERC Project No. 13753-002 Morgantown Lock and Dam Hydroelectric Project, FERC Project No. 13762-002 West Virginia Point Marion Lock and Dam Hydroelectric Project, FERC Project No. 13771-002 Grays Landing Lock and Dam Hydroelectric Project, FERC Project No. 13763-002 Maxwell Locks and Dam Hydroelectric Project, FERC Project No. 13766-002 Monongahela Locks and Dam 4 Hydroelectric Project, FERC Project No. 13767-002 Pennsylvania Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Office of Energy Projects Division of Hydropower Licensing 888 First Street, NE Washington, D.C. 20426 September 2016 20160930-3010 FERC PDF (Unofficial) 09/30/2016 TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF FIGURES ............................................................................................................iii LIST OF TABLES............................................................................................................... v ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS........................................................................... ix EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ................................................................................................ xi 1.0 INTRODUCTION.................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Applications................................................................................................... 1 1.2 Purpose of Action and Need For Power...................................................... 11 1.2.1 Purpose of Action .......................................................................... 11 1.2.2 Need for Power.............................................................................. 11 1.3 Statutory and Regulatory Requirements ..................................................... 12 1.3.1 Federal Power Act ......................................................................... 12 1.3.2 Clean Water Act ............................................................................ 13 1.3.3 Endangered Species Act................................................................ 14 1.3.4 Coastal Zone Management Act ..................................................... 16 1.3.5 National Historic Preservation Act................................................ 17 1.4 Public Review and Comment...................................................................... 18 1.4.1 Scoping .......................................................................................... 18 1.4.2 Interventions .................................................................................. 20 1.4.3 Comments on the License Applications........................................ 20 1.4.4 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers – Terms and Conditions .............. 21 2.0 PROPOSED ACTION AND ALTERNATIVES................................................... 23 2.1 No-action Alternative .................................................................................. 23 2.2 Applicants’ Proposals.................................................................................. 23 2.2.1 Existing Corps Facilities................................................................ 23 2.2.2 Existing Corps Operations............................................................. 25 2.2.3 Proposed Project Facilities ............................................................ 25 2.2.4 Project Safety................................................................................. 30 2.2.5 Proposed Project Operation........................................................... 30 2.2.6 Proposed Environmental Measures ............................................... 33 2.3 STAFF ALTERNATIVE ............................................................................ 35 2.4 ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED BUT ELIMINATED FROM DETAILED STUDY................................................................................... 36 3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS......................................................................... 38 3.1 General Description of the River Basin ...................................................... 38 3.2 Scope of Cumulative Effects Analysis........................................................ 39 3.2.1 Geographic Scope.......................................................................... 39 i 20160930-3010 FERC PDF (Unofficial) 09/30/2016 3.2.2 Temporal Scope............................................................................. 40 3.3 Proposed Action and Action Alternatives................................................... 40 3.3.1 Geology and Soil Resources.......................................................... 41 3.3.2 Aquatic Resources ......................................................................... 47 3.3.3 Terrestrial Resources ................................................................... 122 3.3.4 Threatened and Endangered Species........................................... 140 3.3.5 Recreation and Land Use Resources ........................................... 147 3.3.6 Aesthetic Resources..................................................................... 169 3.3.7 Cultural Resources....................................................................... 171 3.4 No-action Alternative ................................................................................ 189 4.0 DEVELOPMENTAL ANALYSIS ...................................................................... 190 4.1 Power and Developmental Benefits of the Projects.................................. 190 4.2 Comparison of Alternatives ...................................................................... 196 4.2.1 No-action Alternative .................................................................. 200 4.2.2 Applicants’ Proposals.................................................................. 200 4.2.3 Staff Alternative .......................................................................... 201 4.3 Cost of Environmental Measures .............................................................. 202 5.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS............................................... 265 5.1 Comprehensive Development and Recommended Alternative ................ 265 5.1.1 Measures Proposed by the Applicants......................................... 265 5.1.2 Additional Staff-recommended Measures................................... 267 5.1.3 Measures Not Recommended by Staff........................................ 281 5.2 Unavoidable Adverse Effects.................................................................... 284 5.3 Fish and Wildlife Agency Recommendations........................................... 286 5.4 Consistency with Comprehensive Plans ................................................... 287 6.0 FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT ...................................................... 289 7.0 LITERATURE CITED......................................................................................... 290 8.0 LIST OF PREPARERS ........................................................................................ 301 ii 20160930-3010 FERC PDF (Unofficial) 09/30/2016 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1-1. Location map of the Monongahela River Projects, Allegheny Project, and Ohio River Projects ................................................................... 2 Figure 1-2. Location map of the Opekiska Project .......................................................... 5 Figure 1-3. Location map of the Morgantown Project..................................................... 6 Figure 1-4. Location map of the Point Marion Project .................................................... 7 Figure 1-5. Location map of the Grays Landing Project ................................................. 8 Figure 1-6. Location map of the Maxwell Project ........................................................... 9 Figure 1-7. Location map of the Charleroi Project ........................................................ 10 Figure 2-1. Grays Landing Project headwater rating curve for normal operation......... 32 Figure 3-1. Modeled DO concentrations downstream of the Opekiska Project during an average year (2009) and dry year (1999).................................... 83 Figure 3-2. Modeled DO concentrations downstream of the Morgantown Project during an average year (2009) and dry year (1999).................................... 84 Figure 3-3. Modeled DO concentrations downstream of the Point Marion Project during an average year (2009) and dry year (1999).................................... 85 Figure 3-4. Modeled DO concentrations downstream of the Grays Landing Project during an average year (2009) and dry year (1999)........................ 86 Figure 3-5. Modeled DO concentrations downstream of the Maxwell Project during an average year (2009) and dry year (1999).................................... 87 Figure 3-6. Modeled DO concentrations downstream of the Charleroi Project during an average year (2009) and dry year (1999).................................... 88 Figure 3-7. Modeled minimum DO concentrations along the Monongahela River between June 15 to September 30, 2009 (average year)........................... 116 Figure 3-8. Modeled minimum DO concentrations along the Monongahela River between June 15 to September 30, 1999 (dry year) .................................. 117 Figure 3-9. Difference in DO concentrations upstream of the Ohio River Projects, with and without the Monongahela and Allegheny River
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Vegetation Survey of Monongahela River Phase 2 - 2001 VEGETATION SURVEY of the MONONGAHELA RIVER
    Vegetation Survey of Monongahela River Phase 2 - 2001 VEGETATION SURVEY OF THE MONONGAHELA RIVER Prepared by: Dr. Susan Kalisz Department of Biological Sciences, University of Pittsburgh 3 Rivers - 2nd Nature Studio for Creative Inquiry Carnegie Mellon University 3R2N Woody Vegetation Survey Phase 2 - 2001 For more information on the 3 Rivers – 2nd Nature Project, see http:// 3r2n.cfa.cmu.edu If you believe that eeeccooll ooggii ccaall ll yy hheeaall tthhyy rrii vveerrss aarree 22 nndd NNaattuurree and would like to participate in a river dialogue about water quality, recreational use and biodiversity in the 3 Rivers Region, contact: Tim Collins, Research Fellow Director 3 Rivers - 2nd Nature Project STUDIO for Creative Inquiry 412-268-3673 fax 268-2829 [email protected] CCooppyyrrii gghhtt ©© 2002 –– SSttuuddii oo ffoorr CCrreeaattii vvee II nnqquuii rryy,, CCaarrnneeggii ee MMeell ll oonn All rights reserved Published by the STUDIO for Creative Inquiry, Rm 111, College of Fine Arts, Carnegie Mellon University Pittsburgh PA 15213 412-268-3454 fax 268-2829 http:// www.cmu.edu/studio First Edition, First Printing 2 CCoo--AAuutthhoorrss Tim Collins, Editor Reiko Goto, C0-Director, 3R2N Priya Krishna, GIS (Geographical Information System) PPaarrttnneerrss ii nn tthhii ss PPrroojj eecctt 3 Rivers Wet Weather Incorporated (3RWW) Allegheny County Health Department (ACHD) Allegheny County Sanitary Authority (ALCOSAN) 3 RRii vveerrss -- 2nndd NNaattuurree AAddvvii ssoorrss Reviewing this Project John Arway Chief Environmental Services, PA Fish and Boat Commission Wilder Bancroft Environmental Quality Manager, Allegheny County Health Dept. Bob Bingham Professor Art, Co-Director, STUDIO for Creative Inquiry, CMU Don Berman Environmental Consultant, Jacqui Bonomo V.P.
    [Show full text]
  • The Laurel Highlands Pennsylvania
    The LaureL highLands pennsylvania 2010 Travel Guide a place of WONDER You really should be here! Make New Family Memories Seven Springs Mountain Resort is the perfect place to reconnect and make a new memory with your family and friends! Whether the snow is blanketing the ground, the leaves are gilded in rich autumn hues or the sun is shining and there is a warm summer breeze, Seven Springs is your escape destination. At Pennsylvania’s largest resort, you can unwind at Trillium Spa, take a shot at sporting clays, explore 285 acres of skiable terrain, enjoy the adrenaline rush of a snowmobile tour – the opportunities are endless! At Seven Springs, we strive to provide you and yours with legendary customer service, value and warm lifelong memories. What are you waiting for? You really should be here! Seasonal packages available year-round - call 800.452.2223 or visit us on line at www.7Springs.com. Seven Springs Mountain Resort 777 Waterwheel Drive | Seven Springs, PA 15622 800.452.2223 | www.7Springs.com s you look through the 2010 Laurel AHighlands Travel Guide, you may notice the question, have you ever wondered, used a lot! Have you ever wondered what it would be like to 1won-der: \wən-dər\ n 1 a: a cause of astonishment or admiration: marvel b: miracle 2 : the quality of exciting amazed admiration 3 a : rapt attention or astonishment at something awesomely mysterious or new to one’s experience 2won-der: v won·dered; won·der·ing 1 a : to be in a state of wonder b : to feel surprise 2 : to feelhave curiosity oryou doubt 3 won-derever: adj WONDERED? wondrous, wonderful: as a : exciting amazement or admiration b : effective or efficient far beyond anything previously known or anticipated.
    [Show full text]
  • Knickzones in Southwest Pennsylvania Streams Indicate Accelerated Pleistocene Landscape Evolution
    Graduate Theses, Dissertations, and Problem Reports 2020 Knickzones in Southwest Pennsylvania Streams Indicate Accelerated Pleistocene Landscape Evolution Mark D. Swift West Virginia University, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://researchrepository.wvu.edu/etd Part of the Geomorphology Commons Recommended Citation Swift, Mark D., "Knickzones in Southwest Pennsylvania Streams Indicate Accelerated Pleistocene Landscape Evolution" (2020). Graduate Theses, Dissertations, and Problem Reports. 7542. https://researchrepository.wvu.edu/etd/7542 This Thesis is protected by copyright and/or related rights. It has been brought to you by the The Research Repository @ WVU with permission from the rights-holder(s). You are free to use this Thesis in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. For other uses you must obtain permission from the rights-holder(s) directly, unless additional rights are indicated by a Creative Commons license in the record and/ or on the work itself. This Thesis has been accepted for inclusion in WVU Graduate Theses, Dissertations, and Problem Reports collection by an authorized administrator of The Research Repository @ WVU. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Knickzones in Southwest Pennsylvania Streams Indicate Accelerated Pleistocene Landscape Evolution Mark D. Swift Thesis Submitted to the Eberly College of Arts and Sciences at West Virginia University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts in Geography Jamison Conley, Ph.D., Co-Chair J. Steven Kite, Ph.D., Co-Chair Nicolas Zegre, Ph.D. Department of Geology and Geography Morgantown, West Virginia 2020 Keywords: landscape evolution, knickzone, southwest Pennsylvania Copyright 2020 Mark D.
    [Show full text]
  • Pennsylvania Department of Transportation Section 106 Annual Report - 2019
    Pennsylvania Department of Transportation Section 106 Annual Report - 2019 Prepared by: Cultural Resources Unit, Environmental Policy and Development Section, Bureau of Project Delivery, Highway Delivery Division, Pennsylvania Department of Transportation Date: April 07, 2020 For the: Federal Highway Administration, Pennsylvania Division Pennsylvania State Historic Preservation Officer Advisory Council on Historic Preservation Penn Street Bridge after rehabilitation, Reading, Pennsylvania Table of Contents A. Staffing Changes ................................................................................................... 7 B. Consultant Support ................................................................................................ 7 Appendix A: Exempted Projects List Appendix B: 106 Project Findings List Section 106 PA Annual Report for 2018 i Introduction The Pennsylvania Department of Transportation (PennDOT) has been delegated certain responsibilities for ensuring compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (Section 106) on federally funded highway projects. This delegation authority comes from a signed Programmatic Agreement [signed in 2010 and amended in 2017] between the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP), the Pennsylvania State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO), and PennDOT. Stipulation X.D of the amended Programmatic Agreement (PA) requires PennDOT to prepare an annual report on activities carried out under the PA and provide it to
    [Show full text]
  • National Treasures in PA Backgrounder.Pdf
    Pennsylvania’s National Treasures Nothing captures Pennsylvania’s historic legacy and outdoor splendor like the iconic attractions and national parks spread across the state. In 2016, the parks will become even more magnificent as the National Park Service (NPS) celebrates 100 years. In honor of the Centennial, the NPS launched a program called Find Your Park to encourage travelers to explore everything from iconic battlefields to natural beauty. Pennsylvania’s 18 national parks and 121 state parks boast recreational activities for any season making it the ideal destination to “Find Your Park.” Independence National Historical Park Philadelphia & The Countryside Philadelphia www.nps.gov/inde/index.htm Independence Hall was where the two most important documents in American history were signed - the Declaration of Independence and the U.S. Constitution. Visitors can see the Assembly Room where these historic documents were crafted, as well as the original courtroom of the Pennsylvania Supreme Court and the iconic Liberty Bell. Gettysburg National Military Park Dutch Country Roads Gettysburg www.nps.gov/gett/index.htm Gettysburg, Pa., was the site of the bloodiest battle of the American Civil War and played an integral part in this nation’s history. The National Park Service Museum and Visitor Center is the perfect place to start your visit and find important resources on touring the battlefield. Learn about the turning point in the Civil War on a tour with a Licensed Battlefield Guide or freely roam the grounds via bus, bike or horseback. Other Gettysburg destinations like Soldier’s National Cemetery, David Wills House and countless other museums will enthrall visitors for hours.
    [Show full text]
  • Annual Listing of Highway Projects with Federal Funding Obligated For
    Annual Listing of Projects with Federal Funding Obligated for Fiscal Year 2018 Southwestern Pennsylvania Commission Two Chatham Center, Suite 500 112 Washington Place, Pittsburgh PA 15219 Phone (412) 391-4490 Fax (412) 391-9160 www.spcregion.org List of Abbreviations and Definitions FAST ACT Fixing America's Surface Transportation Act FHWA Federal Highway Administration FTA Federal Transit Administration MPO Metropolitan Planning Organization MPMS Multi-modal Project Management System One Map PennDOT Public Mapping Application PennDOT Pennsylvania Departmnet of Transportation SPC Southwestern Pennsylvania Commission TIP Transportation Improvement Program Project Funding Codes ARC Appalachian Regional Commission BOF Bridge - Off System BOO, BON Federal Bridge Funds CAQ Congestion Mitigation and Air Wuality FAP Slide Emergency HSIP Highway Safety Improvement Program NHPP National Highway Performance Program RRX Surface Transportation - RRX Elimination of Crossing Special Project SFX Special Project - Federal Earmark STP Surface Transportation - Any Area in State STU Surface Transportation - Urban TAP Transportation Alternatives Program Project Phase Abbreviations CON Construction FD Final Design Preliminary PE Engineering Right of ROW Way UTL Utilities 1 Annual Listing of Federally Obligated Highway Projects October 1, 2017 to September 30, 2018 Southwestern Pennsylvania Commission Annual Listing of Projects with Federal Funding Obligated for Federal Fiscal Year 2018 On December 4th, 2015, President Obama signed into law the Fixing America’s Surface Transportation Act (FAST Act) which allocates federal funding for surface transportation programs over fiscal years 2016 through 2020. Per 23 U.S.C. § 134(j)(7)(B) of FAST Act, states and Metropolitan Planning Organizations (such as the SPC) must publish annual lists of projects where federal funds were obligated.
    [Show full text]
  • Proceedings 8Th Central Hardwood Forest Conference
    COMPQSITPXON AND STRUCWRE OF AN OLD-GWOWm WRSUS A SECOND-Ca%saWH.WMH'E OAK FOEST IN S0UTjmSERN PENNSKVANIA Julie A* Downs md Mac D. Abmms' Absmct: A relariveIy ilncSistwbed, o2d-gowP)t, Quercw aafba remnant and a second-gowth example of the forest type were sumeyed in 1988-89 to ixgvestigate the successiona4 status d Q. abba in the region. O&s (0.alb~, Q. r&m, and Q. ~elgbim)to~lfed 18% inapofimce i~ the old-mwth stand and 30% imponmce in the second-v-owth smd. The overstov of the old-pwth stand was mjngy comp~sedof L. tglipfira, F. gsaradvolia, Q. adba 2nd Myssa sybvasica, whereas the oversto~yof the sxond-mw& stand was rnrPinfy &?.~Eba with an relatively minor compnent of F. gradvolia, A. ~acc/wrm,and L. fuLkbip$em. Acer rmRbrm, A. saccbrum, md Pr~nusserotim were the do~nmtseedings in both stands. meyounger stmd had greater sapling knsity. Both smds had few Quercw ira&viduds in the understoq. The oldest and largest mes in both samds were Q. aafh with ages of 318 yem and 148 yem in the old-growth and second-growth stand, ~sgec~vely.However, over 90% of all trees in the old-gowth stand were < 120 years-old, Logging uf severd mes in the 1930's and 40's appears to have accelerated the dominmce of the mix&-mesc~phygic species in the old-~owth forest. The radial growth patterns of trees varied with species and canopy position. However, the oldest oak mes had average growlla rates of < 0.75 nadp ancl > 1.5-2.0 dyrin the old-gowth and second-@ow& stands, respec~vely.
    [Show full text]
  • Upper Mon River Trail
    Upper Monongahela River Water Trail Map and Guide Water trails are recreational waterways on a lake, river, or ocean between specific locations, containing access points and day-use and/or camping sites for the boating public. Water trails emphasize low-impact use and promote stewardship of the resources. Explore this unique West Virginia and Pennsylvania water trail. For your safety and enjoyment: Always wear a life jacket. Obtain proper instruction in boating skills. Know fishing and boating regulations. Be prepared for river hazards. Carry proper equipment. THE MONONGAHELA RIVER The Monongahela River, locally know as “the Mon,” forms at the confluence of the Tygart and West Fork Rivers in Fairmont West Virginia. It flows north 129 miles to Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, where it joins the Allegheny River to form the Ohio River. The upper section, which is described in this brochure, extends 68 miles from Fairmont to Maxwell Lock and Dam in Pennsylvania. The Monongahela River formed some 20 million years ago. When pioneers first saw the Mon, there were many places where they could walk across it. The Native American named the river “Monongahela,” which is said to mean “river with crumbling or falling banks.” The Mon is a hard-working river. It moves a large amount of water, sediment, and freight. The average flow at Point Marion is 4,300 cubic feet per second. The elevation on the Upper Mon ranges from 891 feet in Fairmont to 763 feet in the Maxwell Pool. PLANNING A TRIP Trips on the Mon may be solitary and silent, or they may provide encounters with motor boats and water skiers or towboats moving barges of coal or limestone.
    [Show full text]
  • Pennsylvania
    Elton 243 13A Road Ithaca Harford 36 54A 226 220 Dayton 390 14 79 11 41 80° 30’ 80° 15’ 80° 00’ 79° 45’ 79° 30’ Toll 79° 15’ 79° 00’ 78° 45’ 78° 30’Machias 78° 15’ 78° 00’ 77° 45’ 77° 30’ 77° 15’ 77° 00’ 76° 45’ 76° 30’ 76° 15’ 76° 00’ 75° 45’ 75° 30’ 75° 15’ 75° 00’ 74° 45’ 74° 30’ Houghton 53 414 5 38 21 Haskinville 327 26 A B C D E F G H J K 3 L M N 1 O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z To Buffalo East Otto Rushford Arkport Avoca 36 2 54 Hammondsport Caroline 219 Caneadea 3 96B Whitney 60 83 Hamlet South 62 243 Watkins 10 20 Cassadaga 240 98 Birdsall 10 415 37 13 79 Point 7 90 Dayton 16 2 86 35 7 Glen 3 Montour 228 THESE Bloomville Bear 322 5 Wesley Lake 41 12 TOURISM AND TRANSPORTATION28 MAP Lakes 353 242 17 79 Barcelona Lake Belfast 3 Falls Danby Center Lisle Triangle 206 Unadilla Franklin Cassadaga 6 34 329 Newfield Lisle 60 Howard Richford 11 357 Tom Wolf, Governor 1 1 2 19 Bath Townsend 224 QUICK RESPONSE 8 Greene CoventryPA Sidney PA 5 5 3 33 Hornell 38 Sonora 29 34 2 Whitney Point 41 10 Westfield Charlotte Cattaraugus Franklinville Odessa 206 Stockton 9 96 Yassmin Gramian, P.E., Secretary, Department of Transportation Center Cherry Ashford Almond 4 30 9 Creek Angelica 32 Speedsville Itaska visitPA.com41 Bainbridge visitPA.com STATE 17 7 226 Monterey 414 CODES N 394 Leon 8 42 39 5 8 88 9 Delhi Forsyth 21 86 Willseyville ROAD CLASSIFICATION AND ROUTE MARKERS KEY TO MAP SYMBOLS 61 6 New 36 3 Beaver Dams 7 20 PARKSAlbion 5 Nanticoke TRAFFIC INTERCHANGES 28 ? Hartfield 27 353 31 Alfred Savona 16 CAN BE USEDJenksville Glen 7 PASSENGER RAILROADS
    [Show full text]
  • Keystone Fund Projects by Applicant (1994-2017) Propose DCNR Contract Requeste D Region Applicant Project Title # Round Grant Type D Award Allocatio Funding Types
    Keystone Fund Projects by Applicant (1994-2017) Propose DCNR Contract Requeste d Region Applicant Project Title # Round Grant Type d Award Allocatio Funding Types Alverthorpe Manor BRC-PRD- Region 1 Abington Township Cultural Park (6422) 11-3 11 Development $223,000 $136,900 Key - Community Abington Township TAP Trail- Development BRC-PRD- Region 1 Abington Township (1101296) 22-171 22 Trails $90,000 $90,000 Key - Community Ardsley Wildlife Sanctuary- BRC-PRD- Region 1 Abington Township Development 22-37 22 Development $40,000 $40,000 Key - Community Briar Bush Nature Center Master Site Plan BRC-TAG- Region 1 Abington Township (1007785) 20-12 20 Planning $42,000 $37,000 Key - Community Pool Feasibility Studies BRC-TAG- Region 1 Abington Township (1100063) 21-127 21 Planning $15,000 $15,000 Key - Community Rubicam Avenue Park KEY-PRD-1- Region 1 Abington Township (1) 1 01 Development $25,750 $25,700 Key - Community Demonstration Trail - KEY-PRD-4- Region 1 Abington Township Phase I (1659) 4 04 Development $114,330 $114,000 Key - Community KEY-SC-3- Region 1 Aldan Borough Borough Park (5) 6 03 Development $20,000 $2,000 Key - Community Ambler Pocket Park- Development BRC-PRD- Region 1 Ambler Borough (1102237) 23-176 23 Development $102,340 $102,000 Key - Community Comp. Rec. & Park Plan BRC-TAG- Region 1 Ambler Borough (4438) 8-16 08 Planning $10,400 $10,000 Key - Community American Littoral Upper & Middle Soc/Delaware Neshaminy Watershed BRC-RCP- Region 1 Riverkeeper Network Plan (3337) 6-9 06 Planning $62,500 $62,500 Key - Rivers Keystone Fund Projects by Applicant (1994-2017) Propose DCNR Contract Requeste d Region Applicant Project Title # Round Grant Type d Award Allocatio Funding Types Valley View Park - Development BRC-PRD- Region 1 Aston Township (1100582) 21-114 21 Development $184,000 $164,000 Key - Community Comp.
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix IV: Regional Vision Project Lists for Southwestern Pennsylvania
    Appendix IV: Regional Vision Project Lists for Southwestern Pennsylvania IV-2: Projects Currently Beyond Fiscal Capacity Appendix IV-2: Projects Currently Beyond Fiscal Capacity The following projects are consistent with the Regional Vision of a world-class, safe and well maintained transportation system that provides mobility for all, enables resilient communities, and supports a globally competitive economy. While beyond current fiscal capacity, these projects would contribute to achievement of the Regional Vision. They are listed herein to illustrate additional priority projects in need of funding. Project Type Project Allegheny Port Authority of Allegheny West Busway BRT Extension – Downtown to County Pittsburgh International Airport Extend East Busway to Monroeville (including Braddock, East Pittsburgh, Turtle Creek) Improved Regional Transit Connection Facilities Enhanced Rapid Transit Connection – Downtown to North Hills Technological Improvements New Maintenance Garage for Alternative Fuel Buses Purchase of 55 New LRT Vehicles Park and Ride – Additional Capacity Pittsburgh International Airport Enlow Airport Access Road Related New McClaren Road Bridge High Quality Transit Service and Connections Clinton Connector US 30 and Clinton Road: Intersection Improvements Roadway / Bridge SR 28: Reconstruction PA 51: Flooding – Liberty Tunnel to 51/88 Intersection SR 22 at SR 48: Reconstruction and Drainage SR 837: Reconstruction SR 22/30: Preservation to Southern Beltway SR 88: Reconstruction – Conner Road to South Park SR 351: Reconstruction SR 3003 (Washington Pike): Capacity Upgrades SR 3006: Widening – Boyce Road to Route 19 Project Type Project Waterfront Access Bridge: Reconstruction Elizabeth Bridge: Preservation Glenfield Bridge: Preservation I-376: Bridge Preservation over Rodi Road Kennywood Bridge: Deck Replacement – SR 837 over Union RR Hulton Road Bridge: Preservation 31st Street Bridge: Preservation Liberty Bridge: Preservation Marshall Avenue Interchange: Reconstruction 7th and 9th St.
    [Show full text]
  • Erosion in Several Large Gullies, Core Arboretum West Virginia University
    Erosion in Several Large Gullies, Core Arboretum West Virginia University Jessica Gormont Submission for an Option II-Professional Studies Project in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science In Geology Department of Geology and Geography Morgantown, WV 2007 Committee Members: Steven Kite (Chair) Robert Behling Jonathan Weems Introduction The position and dimensions of natural gullies are created by the concentration of overland flow into topologic low spots (Zucca, 2006). When areas above a hillside are developed, it can decrease the ability of water to seep into the ground due to the addition of impervious materials such as pavement. These conditions are ideal for Horton overland flow (Luce, 2002). The impervious material can also cause a rerouting of the overland flow sending far more water over the surface of the hillside and into gullies than is natural (Nyssen, 2002). This is doubly true when culverts are added to the heads of the gullies, diverting the overland flow directly into the gullies. Utilization of natural gullies to remove unwanted water during the urbanization process may seem like effective planning. However, an increase in water volume in gullies can increase tractive force within the channel (Saldi-Caromile, 2004), which in turn causes rates of erosion to increase. Possible consequences of this erosional increase could include deepening of gullies and instability of adjacent hillsides, which could trigger landslides. This study examined four gullies within the Core Arboretum of West Virginia University (WVU) (fig. 1). In order from north to south, the gullies that were studied were Tennis Gully, located just beneath the middle section of the WVU tennis courts; Roof Gully, which diverts water from the roof of the Coliseum; Bathtub Gully, named for the size and shape of the gully beneath the Strausbaugh Trail bridge in the 1970s and 1980s (Weems, pers.
    [Show full text]