Report_NEPA.pdf

COLO 1A19, 1D45 Page 1 of 3

Categorical Exclusion Form Colonial National Historical Park

York and James City Counties, Virginia

Project Number: COLO 1A19, 1D45 Date: November 9, 2016 Project Name: Rehabilitate Powhatan Creek Bridge, US Route 17 Bridge, and Beaverdam Creek Bridge

Project Description:

The National Park Service (NPS), in cooperation with The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), proposes to rehabilitate Powhatan Creek Bridge, US Route 17 Bridge, and Beaverdam Creek Bridge in York and James City Counties, Virginia. The proposed work includes the following:

Powhatan Creek Bridge (Located Along Colonial Parkway in James City County):

• Cleaning the weep holes;

• Cleaning and resealing the concrete joints on the bridge deck;

• Replacing the junction box lids;

• Repairing the concrete on the pile caps and the bottom of the deck; and

• Repairing the bridge piles by injecting epoxy grout into the cracks and encapsulating the piles below the high water line with Fiberglass Reinforced Pile (FRP) jackets.

US Route 17 Bridge (Located Along Colonial Parkway in York County):

• Cleaning and resealing longitudinal concrete joints along the curb line of the bridge;

• Repointing and repairing the brick masonry bridge railing;

• Injecting nonstructural grout into the gap created between the approach slab and the bridge structure; and

• Adding a drop inlet between the approach slab and the bridge structure to prevent further damage and settling of the approach slab. The drop inlet will outlet through the brick masonry wall. A vertical black drain pipe will carry the storm water to within 6 inches of a riprap apron located on the US Route 17 north approach.

Beaverdam Creek Bridge (Located Along East Tour Road between General Washington’s Headquarters and Surrender Field in York County):

• Complete removal and replacement of the bridge deck and railing; and

• Removal of the beaver dam directly under the bridge and adjacent to the bridge abutment.

Mitigation Measures:

The project prohibits the discharge of wash-water, fuels, oils, equiptment-related compounds, soaps, solvents, waste, garbage or sanitary waste into any creek or surface water. Hazardous waste will not be generated as part of the project. A spill prevention, control, and countermeasures (SPCC) plan following 40 CFR 112 will be required. An erosion and sediment control plan is required to control erosion and minimize the sedimentation of rivers, streams, and other surface waters.

COLO 1A19, 1D45 Page 2 of 3

US Route 17 Bridge

• The bricks at the pipe penetration will be carefully removed and saved for re-installation when a permanent fix is executed.

• The NPS will provide supervision by a qualified independent architectural conservator to evaluate mortar materials and joint treatments for brickwork, and guide selection and application of appropriate materials and masonry restoration techniques.

Beaverdam Creek Bridge The following stipulations are included for the protection of archeological resources:

• Barrier protection in the form of traffic control drums and fencing will be installed beginning 75 feet from each end of the bridge along both shoulders of the road and extending to a point 525 feet from each end of the bridge. This will extend the drums and fencing 100 feet beyond the earthwork at the approach end of the bridge. The fencing will be attached to the drums so that no posts will be driven into the ground.

• Within the 75 foot turnarounds on either end of the bridge, and on both sides of the road, ground protection matting similar to Alturnamats or TRAKMAT turf protection matting will be used to protect the ground surface in all areas where vehicles and/or heavy equipment are anticipated to turn around or unexpectedly park on the shoulders of the road. Vehicular turnarounds in these areas will be limited at all times to ensure no impacts to the ground surface. Although vehicles and equipment are required to stay on the pavement, this added protection is provided in case of driver error. Further, the 75 foot turnarounds on each end of the bridge are located on fill areas (previously disturbed soil) where the road elevation was increased by up to two feet when the bridge was constructed.

• There will be no disturbance to the creek banks below or immediately adjacent to the bridge.

• No vehicles or equipment or staging areas will be located off the pavement of the tour road, in both directions from the bridge.

Category Used to Exclude the Action from Further NEPA Analysis:

23 CFR § 771.117(c)(22) Projects, as defined in 23 U.S.C. 101, that would take place entirely within the existing operational right-of-way. Existing operational right-of-way refers to right-of-way that has been disturbed for an existing transportation facility or is maintained for a transportation purpose. This area includes the features associated with the physical footprint of the transportation facility (including the roadway, bridges, interchanges, culverts, drainage, fixed guideways, mitigation areas, etc.) and other areas maintained for transportation purposes such as clear zone, traffic control signage, landscaping, any rest areas with direct access to a controlled access highway, areas maintained for safety and security of a transportation facility, parking facilities with direct access to an existing transportation facility, transit power substations, transit venting structures, and transit maintenance facilities. Portions of the right-of-way that have not been disturbed or that are not maintained for transportation purposes are not in the existing operational right-of-way.

COLO 1A19, 1D45 Page 3 of 3

Agency Coordination:

The NPS categorically excluded the project from further NEPA consideration on July 29, 2016.

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s IPAC site was used to obtain a Trust Resources Report for the Powhatan Creek Bridge project area. The repairs at Beaverdam Creek Bridge and US Route 17 Bridge are limited to the structure itself and will have no in-water work, so they will have no effect on federally-listed species. At Powhatan Creek Bridge, two federally-listed species are listed as potentially being present in the project area, sensitive joint-vetch (Aeschynomene virginica) and northern long-eared bat (Myotis septentrionalis). No tree or vegetation clearing will be done as part of the repairs proposed for this bridge. FHWA has determined that the project will have no effect on federally-listed species.

By letter dated September 26, 2016, the NPS requested concurrence from the Virginia Department of Historic Resources that the rehabilitation of Powhatan Creek Bridge and US Route 17 Bridge would have no adverse effect to historic properties. Concurrence was provided on October 20, 2016.

By letter dated October 25, 2016, the NPS requested concurrence from the Virginia Department of Historic Resources that the rehabilitation of Beaverdam Creek Bridge, along with the implementation of mitigation measures to protect archeological resources in the area of potential effect, would have no adverse effect on cultural resources. Concurrence was provided on November 8, 2016.

Determination:

On the basis of the environmental impact information in the statutory compliance file, with which I am familiar, I believe the project should be categorically excluded from further NEPA analysis.

Lisa T. Landers Date Environmental Protection Specialist Federal Highway Administration Eastern Federal Lands Highway Division

On the basis of the environmental impact information in the statutory compliance file, with which I am familiar, I am categorically excluding the described project from further NEPA analysis. The project meets the 23 CFR 771.117(a) definition of a categorical exclusion. No unusual circumstances per 23 CFR 771.117(b) apply.

Kevin S. Rose Date Environmental Team Leader Federal Highway Administration Eastern Federal Lands Highway Division

Lisa.Landers Typewritten Text 11/09/2016

Lisa.Landers Typewritten Text 11/09/2016

Environmental Screening Form COLO 1A19, 1D45 Page 1 of 2

Appendix A: Environmental Screening Form

Water and Wetlands:

• Section 404 of the Clean Water Act Impacts to Waters of the US: ☒Yes ☐No If Yes, approval anticipated:

☒Nationwide Permit ☐Regional General Permit ☐Individual Permit

• Section 401 of the Clean Water Act ☒NWP certified by State ☐Individual Certification

• Section 402 of the Clean Water Act (National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System) Disturbance Threshold Exceeded, Permit Required?

☐Yes ☒ No Is Stormwater Management Review/Approval anticipated?

☐Yes ☒No

• ☒Project is consistent with Executive Order 11900, Protection of Wetlands Floodplains:

• ☒ Project is consistent with Executive Order 119888, Floodplain Management Section 4(f) of the USDOT Act:

• Meets Section 4(f) exemption for Federal lands transportation facilities under Section 1119(c)(2) of MAP-21, U.S.C. 138(a)?

☒Yes ☐No

• Is there a Section 4(f) property in the study area?

☐Yes ☐No If Yes, continue:

De Minimis Finding:☐ Programmatic:☐ _______________________________ Individual 4(f): ☐

Section 6(f) of the Land and Water Conservation Fund:

• Was the property purchased with grant funds from the Land and Water Conservation Fund? ☐

Yes ☒No

• If Yes, was documentation of approval from National Park Service Director received for the conversion or replacement of 6(f) property? ☐Yes ☐No Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972:

• Not in Coastal Zone ☐

• Concurrence with Federal Consistency Determination ☐

Right of Way:

• Project is completely within Federal right-of-way ☒

• Project involves relocations or easements ☐

Number of Easements________ Number of Relocations________ Hazardous Waste and Materials:

• Area hazardous materials or contamination exceeding regulatory thresholds (as set by U.S. EPA, County Environmental Health, etc.) present? ☐Yes ☒No

Environmental Screening Form COLO 1A19, 1D45 Page 2 of 2

• If Yes, is the nature and extent of the hazardous materials or contamination fully known?☐ If No, briefly discuss the plan for securing information:

Section 7(a) of the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act:

• Are there Wild and Scenic Rivers? ☐Yes ☒No If Yes, review by river-administering agency is required.

Clean Air Act:

• Is the project in a non-attainment area? ☐Yes ☒No

If Yes, is the project on the TIP/SIP? ☐ Yes ☐No Highway Traffic and Construction Noise Regulations:

• ☐ The proposed project is a Type I project (highway on a new location, substantial horizontal or vertical alteration, new through or auxiliary lanes). Noise analysis is required.

• ☐ The proposed project is a Type II project (retrofit for noise abatement).

• ☒ The proposed project is a Type III project (noise analysis not required).

Environmental Justice and Title IV Act:

• Is an Environmental Justice population, as identified in Executive Order 12898, present?

☐Yes ☒No If Yes, briefly explain:

• Will the project induce disproportionately high and adverse impacts to minority, low income or special groups? ☐Yes ☒No If Yes, briefly explain:

Farmland Protection Policy Act for Highway Projects:

• Does the project displace, require acquisition of, or require an easement from farmland?

☐Yes ☒No

Does the project affect any additional resources? If Yes, explain below:

Categorical Exclusion Category Page 1 of 4

COLO 1A19, 1D45

Appendix B: 23 CFR 771.117 FHWA Categorical Exclusions

(c) The following actions meet the criteria for CEs in the CEQ regulations (40 CFR 1508.4) and §771.117(a) and normally do not require any further NEPA approvals by the FHWA:

☐ (1) Activities which do not involve or lead directly to construction, such as planning and research activities; grants for training; engineering to define the elements of a proposed action or alternatives so that social, economic, and environmental effects can be assessed; and Federal-aid system revisions which establish classes of highways on the Federal-aid highway system.

☐ (2) Approval of utility installations along or across a transportation facility.

☐ (3) Construction of bicycle and pedestrian lanes, paths, and facilities.

☐ (4) Activities included in the State's highway safety plan under 23 U.S.C. 402.

☐ (5) Transfer of Federal lands pursuant to 23 U.S.C. 107(d) and/or 23 U.S.C. 317 when the land transfer is in support of an action that is not otherwise subject to FHWA review under NEPA.

☐ (6) The installation of noise barriers or alterations to existing publicly owned buildings to provide for noise reduction.

☐ (7) Landscaping.

☐ (8) Installation of fencing, signs, pavement markings, small passenger shelters, traffic signals, and railroad warning devices where no substantial land acquisition or traffic disruption will occur.

☐ (9) The following actions for transportation facilities damaged by an incident resulting in an emergency declared by the Governor of the State and concurred in by the Secretary, or a disaster or emergency declared by the President pursuant to the Robert T. Stafford Act (42 U.S.C. 5121):

(i) Emergency repairs under 23 U.S.C. 125; and

(ii) The repair, reconstruction, restoration, retrofitting, or replacement of any road, highway, bridge, tunnel, or transit facility (such as a ferry dock or bus transfer station), including ancillary transportation facilities (such as pedestrian/bicycle paths and bike lanes), that is in operation or under construction when damaged and the action:

(A) Occurs within the existing right-of-way and in a manner that substantially conforms to the preexisting design, function, and location as the original (which may include upgrades to meet existing codes and standards as well as upgrades warranted to address conditions that have changed since the original construction); and

(B) Is commenced within a 2-year period beginning on the date of the declaration.

☐ (10) Acquisition of scenic easements.

☐ (11) Determination of payback under 23 U.S.C. 156 for property previously acquired with Federal-aid participation.

☐ (12) Improvements to existing rest areas and truck weigh stations.

☐ (13) Ridesharing activities.

☐ (14) Bus and rail car rehabilitation.

☐ (15) Alterations to facilities or vehicles in order to make them accessible for elderly and handicapped persons.

☐ (16) Program administration, technical assistance activities, and operating assistance to transit authorities to continue existing service or increase service to meet routine changes in demand.

☐ (17) The purchase of vehicles by the applicant where the use of these vehicles can be accommodated by existing facilities or by new facilities which themselves are within a CE.

☐ (18) Track and railbed maintenance and improvements when carried out within the existing right-

Categorical Exclusion Category Page 2 of 4 of-way.

☐ (19) Purchase and installation of operating or maintenance equipment to be located within the transit facility and with no significant impacts off the site.

☐ (20) Promulgation of rules, regulations, and directives.

☐ (21) Deployment of electronics, photonics, communications, or information processing used singly or in combination, or as components of a fully integrated system, to improve the efficiency or safety of a surface transportation system or to enhance security or passenger convenience. Examples include, but are not limited to, traffic control and detector devices, lane management systems, electronic payment equipment, automatic vehicle locaters, automated passenger counters, computer-aided dispatching systems, radio communications systems, dynamic message signs, and security equipment including surveillance and detection cameras on roadways and in transit facilities and on buses.

☒ (22) Projects, as defined in 23 U.S.C. 101, which would take place entirely within the existing operational right-of-way. Existing operational right-of-way refers to right-of-way that has been disturbed for an existing transportation facility or is maintained for a transportation purpose. This area includes the features associated with the physical footprint of the transportation facility (including the roadway, bridges, interchanges, culverts, drainage, fixed guideways, mitigation areas, etc.) and other areas maintained for transportation purposes such as clear zone, traffic control signage, landscaping, any rest areas with direct access to a controlled access highway, areas maintained for safety and security of a transportation facility, parking facilities with direct access to an existing transportation facility, transit power substations, transit venting structures, and transit maintenance facilities.

Portions of the right-of-way that have not been disturbed or that are not maintained for transportation purposes are not in the existing operational right-of-way.

☐ (23) Federally-funded projects:

(i) That receive less than $5,000,000 of Federal funds; or

(ii) With a total estimated cost of not more than $30,000,000 and Federal funds comprising less than 15 percent of the total estimated project cost.

☐ (24) Localized geotechnical and other investigation to provide information for preliminary design and for environmental analyses and permitting purposes, such as drilling test bores for soil sampling;

archeological investigations for archeology resources assessment or similar survey; and wetland surveys.

☐ (25) Environmental restoration and pollution abatement actions to minimize or mitigate the impacts of any existing transportation facility (including retrofitting and construction of stormwater treatment systems to meet Federal and State requirements under sections 401 and 402 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. 1341; 1342)) carried out to address water pollution or environmental degradation.

☐ (26) Modernization of a highway by resurfacing, restoration, rehabilitation, reconstruction, adding shoulders, or adding auxiliary lanes (including parking, weaving, turning, and climbing lanes), if the action meets the constraints in paragraph (e) of this section.

☐ (27) Highway safety or traffic operations improvement projects, including the installation of ramp metering control devices and lighting, if the project meets the constraints in paragraph (e) of this section.

☐ (28) Bridge rehabilitation, reconstruction, or replacement or the construction of grade separation to replace existing at-grade railroad crossings, if the actions meet the constraints in paragraph (e) of

Categorical Exclusion Category Page 3 of 4 this section.

☐ (29) Purchase, construction, replacement, or rehabilitation of ferry vessels (including improvements to ferry vessel safety, navigation, and security systems) that would not require a change in the function of the ferry terminals and can be accommodated by existing facilities or by new facilities which themselves are within a CE.

☐ (30) Rehabilitation or reconstruction of existing ferry facilities that occupy substantially the same geographic footprint, do not result in a change in their functional use, and do not result in a substantial increase in the existing facility's capacity. Example actions include work on pedestrian and vehicle transfer structures and associated utilities, buildings, and terminals.

(d) Additional actions which meet the criteria for a CE in the CEQ regulations (40 CFR 1508.4) and paragraph (a) of this section may be designated as CEs only after Administration approval unless otherwise authorized under an executed agreement pursuant to paragraph (g) of this section. The applicant shall submit documentation which demonstrates that the specific conditions or criteria for these CEs are satisfied and that significant environmental effects will not result. Examples of such actions include but are not limited to:

☐ (1)-(3) [Reserved] ☐ (4) Transportation corridor fringe parking facilities.

☐ (5) Construction of new truck weigh stations or rest areas.

☐ (6) Approvals for disposal of excess right-of-way or for joint or limited use of right-of-way, where the proposed use does not have significant adverse impacts.

☐ (7) Approvals for changes in access control.

☐ (8) Construction of new bus storage and maintenance facilities in areas used predominantly for industrial or transportation purposes where such construction is not inconsistent with existing zoning and located on or near a street with adequate capacity to handle anticipated bus and support vehicle traffic.

☐ (9) Rehabilitation or reconstruction of existing rail and bus buildings and ancillary facilities where only minor amounts of additional land are required and there is not a substantial increase in the number of users.

☐ (10) Construction of bus transfer facilities (an open area consisting of passenger shelters, boarding areas, kiosks and related street improvements) when located in a commercial area or other high activity center in which there is adequate street capacity for projected bus traffic.

☐ (11) Construction of rail storage and maintenance facilities in areas used predominantly for industrial or transportation purposes where such construction is not inconsistent with existing zoning and where there is no significant noise impact on the surrounding community.

☐ (12) Acquisition of land for hardship or protective purposes. Hardship and protective buying will be permitted only for a particular parcel or a limited number of parcels. These types of land acquisition qualify for a CE only where the acquisition will not limit the evaluation of alternatives, including shifts in alignment for planned construction projects, which may be required in the NEPA process. No project development on such land may proceed until the NEPA process has been completed.

(i) Hardship acquisition is early acquisition of property by the applicant at the property owner's request to alleviate particular hardship to the owner, in contrast to others, because of an inability to sell his property. This is justified when the property owner can document on the basis of health, safety or financial reasons that remaining in the property poses an undue hardship compared to others.

(ii) Protective acquisition is done to prevent imminent development of a parcel which may be needed

Categorical Exclusion Category Page 4 of 4 for a proposed transportation corridor or site. Documentation must clearly demonstrate that development of the land would preclude future transportation use and that such development is imminent. Advance acquisition is not permitted for the sole purpose of reducing the cost of property for a proposed project.

☐ (13) Actions described in paragraphs (c)(26), (c)(27), and (c)(28) of this section that do not meet the constraints in paragraph (e) of this section.

(e) Actions described in (c)(26), (c)(27), and (c)(28) of this section may not be processed as CEs under paragraph (c) if they involve:

(1) An acquisition of more than a minor amount of right-of-way or that would result in any residential or non-residential displacements.

Yes ☐ No ☐

(2) An action that needs a bridge permit from the U.S. Coast Guard, or an action that does not meet the terms and conditions of a U.S. Army Corps of Engineers nationwide or general permit under section 404 of the Clean Water Act and/or section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899.

Yes ☐ No ☐

(3) A finding of “adverse effect” to historic properties under the National Historic Preservation Act, the use of a resource protected under 23 U.S.C. 138 or 49 U.S.C. 303 (section 4(f)) except for actions resulting in de minimis impacts, or a finding of “may affect, likely to adversely affect” threatened or endangered species or critical habitat under the Endangered Species Act.

Yes ☐ No☐

(4) Construction of temporary access, or the closure of existing road, bridge, or ramps, that would result in major traffic disruptions.

Yes ☐ No☐

(5) Changes in access control.

Yes ☐ No☐

(6) A floodplain encroachment other than functionally dependent uses (e.g., bridges, wetlands) or actions that facilitate open space use (e.g., recreational trails, bicycle and pedestrian paths); or construction activities in, across or adjacent to a river component designated or proposed for inclusion in the National System of Wild and Scenic Rivers.

Yes ☐ No☐ zÐt L-tD6-/

United States Department of the Interior

NATIONAL PARK SERVICE

Colonial National Histo¡ical Park

Post Officc Box 210 Yorktown, Virginia ZJó90

IN REPLY REFER'TTJ:

Ít4217

10t25t2016

Dr. Ethel Eaton, Senior Policy Analyst Office of Review and Compliance Virginia Department of Historic Resources 2801 Kensington Avenue Richmond, Virginia 23221

Subject: National Historic Preservation Acq Section 106 Consultation for the Rehabilitation of Beaverdam Creek Bridge, Colonial National Historical Park, York County, Virginia (PEPC ID 67966)

Dear Dr. Eaton:

Cciloni¿l National Historical Park (Park) is initiating the Section 106 process and seeking your concutrence on a finding of no adverse effect to historic properties for the repair of Beaverdam Creek Bridge on Battlefield Tour Road at Colonial l.iational Historical Park, in Yorktown, Virgirria (PEPC D 67966\, The proposed project will be located within Colonial National Historical Park, in York County, Virginia (see attached location map). Execution of this permit constitutes an undertaking pursrunt to Section 301(7) of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) (16 U.S.C. 470) as amended. V/e are consulting with your office in accordance with the regulations of 36 CFR Part 80ü, whicf¡ implement Section 106 of the NHPA. The Park has determined that the area of potential effects (APE) for this projcct consists of the bridge setting and a length of approximately 450 feet along the west and east approaches to the bridge on Battlefield Tour Road (see attached APE map).

Beaverdam Creek Bridge is a glue-laminated wood bridge with low profile wood railings built in 1975. T'he work in this por:tion of the project includes complete removal and replacement of the bridge deck and railing. In addition 20'of asphalt on each side of the bridge will be removed and replaced to provide a transitior¡ between the roadway elevation ancl the height of the bridge deck.

The new asphalt will be chip sealed to match the rest of the Battlefield tour road. The finished elevation of the repaired roadway section rvill be 7/2" + below the height of the new bridge deck to elim.inate ponding on the bridge deck. Bridge deck removal will not require any in-water work, and no wetlands will be impacted. The Battlefield Tour Road was constructed for the Bicentennial. Although the road and Beaverdam Bridge are not historic, the proposed treatment will consist of replacement in kind, in order to minimize visual impacts on the overall park cultural landscape.

However, there are earthworks and other potentially significant archeological resources in the vicinity of the bridge that require protection. Mitigations to protect archeological resources in the APE are noted in the attached Assessment of Actions Having an Effect on Cultural Resources, and also on the attached drawings. Based on the background research and the feedback from the Park's cultural resource advisors, the Park has come to the finding that this project will have no adverse effect pursuant to the regulations at 36 CFR Part 800.5(b).

The Park requests your concuffence with our finding of "no adverse effect." If you have any objections, please notify Ms. [¡e Terzis, Cultural Resource Specialist, as soon as possible. She can be contacted at (850) 997-59972 or Lee_Terzis@nps.gov. Please address your response to Kym Hall, Superintendent, Colonial National Historical Park, P.O. Box 210, Yorktown, VA 23690.

Sincerely, *4"çN &!A

Kym Hall Superintendent

Attachments

I concur that the permitting of this project will result in "no adverse effecf' on historic properties.

H.fr<tk Ethet R. Èaton" -

Date

Senior Policy Analyst Office of Review and Compliance

D H < File- Ña. <olL' 1o.14

I

United States Department of the Interior

NATIONAL PARK SERVICE

Colonial National Historical Pa¡k

Post Office Box 2 l0 Yorktown, Virginia 23690

IN REPLY REFf,RTO:

H42r7n.4.2

9/2612016

Dr. Ettrel Eaton, Senior Policy Analyst Office of Review and Compliance Virginia Department of Historic Resources 2801 Kensington Avenue Richmond, Virginia 23221

Subject: National Historic Preservation Act, Section 106 Consultation for the Rehabilitation of Porvhatan Creek Bridge and US Route 17 Bridge, Colonial National Historical Park, York and Jarnes City Counties, Virginia (PEPC ID 65549)

Dear Dr. Eaton:

Colonial National Historical Park (Park) is initiating the Section 106 process and seeking your concuffence on a finding of no adverse effect to historic properties for the repair of two historic brid.ges at Colonial National Historical Park, in Jamestown and Yorktown, Virginia (PEPC ID 65549). Powhatan Creek Bridge is located along Colonial Parkway in James City County (Figure 1). It is a concrete bridge with low profile concrete railings constructed in 1956. The work in this portion of the project includes: cleaning the weep holes; cleaning and resealing the concrete joints on the bridge deck; replacing the junction box lids; repairing the concrete on the pile caps and the bottom of the deck; and repairing the bridge piles by injecting epoxy grout into the cracks and encapsulating the piles below the high water line with Fiberglass Reinforced Pile (FRP) jackets.

The LIS Route 17 Bridge is located along Colonial Parkway in York County (Figure 2). It is a concrete bridge with historic brick masonry railings and approach monuments as well as historic brick fascia on the US Route I7 approaches. The US Route 17 Bridge was constructed in 1956.

The work in this portion of the project includes: cleaning and resealing longitudinal concrete joints along the curb line of the bridge, and repointing and repairing the brick masonry bridge railing. In addition, nonstructural grout will be injected into the gap that has been created between the approach slab and the bridge structure; a drop inlet will be added at this location to prevent further damage and settling of the approach slab. This is an interim measure until the settled slabs can be reset or replaced. The drop inlet will outlet through the brick masonry wall.

A vertical black drain pipe will cany the storm water to within 6" of a rip rap apron located on the on the US Route 17 north approach. The pipe will be obscured from view by existing natural vegetation. The bricks at the pipe penetration will be carefully removed and saved for re-installation when a permanent fix is executed. The Park will provide supervision by a qualified independent architectural conservator to evaluate mortar materials and joint treatments for brickwork, and guide selection and application of appropriate materials and masonry restoration techniques.

The proposed project will be located within Colonial National Historical Park, in James City and York Counties, Virginia (Figures I and2). Execution of this permit constitutes an undertaking pursuant to Section 301(7) of the National Historic Preservation Act (N[{PA) (16 U.S.C. 470) as amended. We are consulting with your office in accordance with the regulations of 36 CFR Part 800, which implement Section 106 of the NHPA. The Park has determined that the area of potential effects (APE) for this project consists of the bridges and the Colonial Parkway setting immediately surrounding them. Due to the focused nature of the proposed undertaking, the affected historic properties within the APE are limited to the Powhatan Creek Bridge, the US Route 17 Bridge, and the Colonial Parkway.

Attached is the Assessment of Actions Having an Effect on Cultural Resources (Attachment 1).

Based on the background research and the feedback from the Park's cultural resource advisors, the Park has come to the finding that this project will have no adverse effect pursuant to the regulations at 36 CFR Part 800.5(b).

The Park requests your concuffence with our finding of "no adverse effect." If you have any objections, please notify Ms. Lee Terzis, Cultural Resource Specialist, as soon as possible. She can be contacted at (850) 997-59972 or Lee-Terzis@nps.gov. Please address your response to James Brown, Acting Superintendent, Colonial National Historical Park, P.O. Box 210, Yorktown, VA23690.

S Y, Brown Acting Superintendent

Attachments (3)

I concur that the permitting of this project will result in "no adverse effect" on historic properties.

LO Ocx LO\b i\s*r

Ärdr¡'i\€ Office of Review and Compliance tt s\oriø..,,, Date